Proceedings Innovsail2013 v3

Proceedings of the
3rd International Conference on Innovation in High Performance Sailing Yachts

Cité de la Voile Eric Tabarly – Lorient - France

Website: http://www.innovsail.com

The Third International Conference on Innovation in High Performance Sailing Yachts, Lorient, France
FOREWORD
On behalf of the organizing committee, it is my great pleasure to welcome you all to the
third edition of the conference INNOV’SAIL. The close cooperation between the Cité de
la Voile Eric Tabarly, Eurolarge Innovation and the French Naval Academy Research
Institute made this conference exist and develop. This time again, INNOV’SAIL has
attracted a great interest worldwide, with a wide range of high quality papers and a large
participation. We are glad to welcome both new and returning delegates, and I am
particularly happy to see the participation of many students, proving that the topic is
attractive.
The event is now well established, and we are very glad to announce that we have
concluded an agreement with the organizing committees of the two other famous
conferences, High Performance Yacht Design Conference in Auckland and the
Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium in Annapolis to coordinate and alternate over the
years the organization of our three conferences. We believe that cooperating and joining
our forces will help develop and amplify the community working in yacht engineering
and research and help fruitful collaborations. This goal to coordinate activities in the
community and help networking has also driven the will to create the International
Association of Yacht Engineering, to be announced during the conference.
I believe that the field of high performance sailing is developing, and as the industry is
growing and the racing competitiveness is increasing, it gives rise to more and more
research activities. Actually, architects, boat builders, sail makers and the whole industry
around sailing require more and more studies and optimising tools to gain performance,
and I think that there are good opportunities for challenging research activities, because
the problems issued from sailing are quite difficult to cope with and to model. Hence,
some really advanced research is done in this field which does not often get the visibility
and the acknowledgement it deserves in the scientific community. Aiming at increasing
the visibility of the high quality research achieved on yachts, we agreed with the high
impact peer-reviewed scientific journal Ocean Engineering to edit a special issue on yacht
research with a selection of high scientific quality papers presented at the conference.
With the huge amount of work needed to organize and run the conference, I would like to
warmly thank all the organizing committee for their fantastic work, and all members of
the scientific committee for their great and necessary help in reviewing the papers,
increasing the conference quality and releasing information about the conference in their
own country. Finally, I would like to warmly thank Lorient Agglomeration, Region
Bretagne, Conseil General du Morbihan, and GIP Ecole Navale for their very much
appreciated support which made the conference possible, as well as our sponsors, North
Sails France, 727 Sailbags and AFM.
I hope you will all have a very informative and interesting conference, as enjoyable as the
previous ones.
Patrick Bot
Conference Chair

MANY THANKS TO OUR SPONSORS

Organizing Committee
- Jean-Marc Beaumier, Cité de la Voile Eric Tabarly
- Patrick Bot, Naval Academy Research Institute, France
- Marie Coz, Naval Academy Research Institute, France
- Yann Dollo, Eurolarge Innovation
- Cécile Ezanno, Cité de la Voile Eric Tabarly
- Christelle Marécaille, Eurolarge Innovation
- Katia Meigney, Cité de la Voile Eric Tabarly
- Sabrina Millien, Eurolarge Innovation
Scientific Committee
- Prof. Christophe Baley, Université Bretagne Sud, France
- Prof. Dario Boote, University of Genova, Italy
- Patrick Bot1, Naval Academy Research Institute, France
- Prof. Richard Flay1, Yacht Research Unit, University of Auckland, New Zealand
- Prof. Fabio Fossati1, Politecnico di Milano, Italy
- Prof. Kaï Graf, Yacht Research Unit, University of Applied Sciences, Kiel,
Germany
- Len Imas, Stevens Institute of Technology, USA
- J.A. Keuning, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands
- Prof. Lars Larsson, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden
- William Lasher, Pennsylvania State University, USA
- Prof. Yutaka Masuyama, Kanazawa Institute of Technology, Japan
- Prof. Marc Rabaud, Université Paris Sud, France
- Ignazio Viola, University of Newcastle, UK
- Prof. Michel Visonneau, Ecole Centrale de Nantes, France
- Sandy Wright, Wolfson Unit MTIA, UK
1
Editors of the special issue in Ocean Engineering

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Session 1: Hydrodynamics
Dagger-Board Evaluation for an IMOCA60 Yacht p. 1

I. Campbell, M. Owen and G. Provinciali
Advancements in Free Surface RANSE Simulations for Sailing Yacht Applications p. 11

C. Böhm, K. Graf
Database Building and Statistical Methods to Predict Sailing Yachts Hydrodynamics p. 23

L. Huetz, P.E. Guillerm
A Simplified Method to Assess Acceleration Loads on Sailing Yacht Masts p. 35

A. Combourieu, F. Faloci, D. Boote, T. Pais
Session 2: Hydrodynamics
Numerical Study of Asymmetric Keel Hydrodynamic Performance through Advanced CFD p. 45

D. Mylonas, S. Turkmen, M. Khorasanchi
Narrow Ship Wakes and Wave Drag for Planing Hulls p. 57

M. Rabaud, F. Moisy
Session 3: Aerodynamics
Conceptual Ideas on a Double Surface Sail Inflated by Dynamic Pressure p. 63

S. Brüns, H. Hansen, K. Hochkirch
Comparison of Full 3D-RANSE Simulations with 2D-RANSE / Lifting Line Method

Calculations for the Flow Analysis of Rigid Wings for High Performance Multihulls p. 71
K. Graf, A.V. Hoeve, S. Watin
A Comparison of Downwind Sail Coefficients from Tests in Different Wind Tunnels p. 85

I. Campbell
Session 4: Structure / Materials
Smart Materials Application on High Performance Sailing Yachts for Energy Harvesting p. 99
S. Turkmen, D. Mylonas, M. Khorasanchi
Long Term Immersion in Natural Seawater of Flax / Biocomposite p. 109

A. Le Duigou, A. Bourmaud, C. Baley, P. Davies
Session 5: Aerodynamics
Wind-Tunnel Pressure Measurements on Rigid Model-Scale Downwind Sails p. 119

Bot P., Viola I.M., Flay R.G.J., Brett J.S.
Delayed Detached Eddy Simulation of Sailing Yacht Sails p. 129

I.M. Viola, S. Bartesaghi, T. Van. Renterghem, R. Ponzini

An Experimental Investigation of Asymmetric Spinnaker Aerodynamics Using Pressure

and Sail Shape Measurements p. 145
D. Motta, R.G.J. Flay, P. Richards, D. Le Pelley
Session 6: Fluid Structure Interaction - Aero-elasticity
Numerical Study of a Fexible Sail Plan: Effect of Pitching Decomposition and

Adjustments p. 155
B. Augier, F. Hauville, P. Bot, J. Deparday, M. Durand
FSI Investigation on Stability of Downwind Sails with an Automatic Dynamic Trimming p. 165
M. Durand, C. Lothode, F. Hauville, A. Leroyer, M. Visonneau, R. Floch, L. Guillaume
Development of Computational Fluid-Structure Interaction Method for Yacht Sails p. 173

F. Bergsma, N. Moerke, S. Zaaijer, H.W.M. Hoeijmakers
Session 7: Fluid Structure Interaction - Hydro-elasticity
Flutter of Racing Yacht Keels and Appendages p. 183

R. Balze and H. Devaux
Dynamic Fluid Structure Interaction of a Foil p. 191

C. Lothodé, M. Durand, Y. Roux, A. Leroyer, M. Visonneau, L. Dorez
An Unsteady FSI Investigation into the Cause of the Dismasting of the Volvo 70
Groupama 4 p. 197
W. Menotti, M. Durand, D. Gross, Y. Roux, D. Glehen, L. Dorez
The Work Achieved with the Sail Dynamometer Boat “Fujin”, and the Role of Full Scale
Tests as the Bridge between Model Tests and CFD p. 205
Y. Masuyama
Estimating a Yacht’s Hull-Sailplan Balance and Sailing Performance using Experimental

Results and VPP Methods p. 215
M.P. Prince, A.R. Claughton
Session 8: Tactics - Meteo - Simulator
Sailing Site Investigation through CFD Modelling of Micrometeorology p. 223

M. Le Guellec, Y. Amice
Optimal Yacht Routing Tactics p. 231

F. Tagliaferri, A. Philpott, I.M. Viola, R.G.J. Flay
Development of an America’s Cup 45 Tacking Simulator p. 239

A.K. Lidtke, L. Marimon Giovannetti, L.-M Breshan, A. Sampson, M. Vitti, D.J. Taunton

Posters
Coupled Open Navigation and Augmented Reality Systems for Skippers p. 249
J.C. Morgere, R. Douguet, J.P. Diguet, J. Laurent.
Lecco Innovation Hub Sailing Yacht Lab Project. A Sailing Research Infrastructure p. 255
F. Fossati, S. Muggiasca, I. Bayati, C. Bertorello.
Study of the Influence of Singularities Created by Automated Fiber Placement on the

Performance of Composite Materials for Naval Structures p. 261
M. Lan, D. Cartié, P. Davies,C. Baley.
Tag Sheperd: a Low-Cost and Non-Intrusive Man Overboard Detection System p. 267
N. Le Griguer, J. Laurent, J.P. Diguet.
Kite and Classical Rig Sailing Performance Comparison on a One Design Keel Boat p. 273
R. Leloup, K. Roncin, G. Blès, J.-B. Leroux, C. Jochum, Y. Parlier.
Advanced Structural Analysis Method for Aeroelastic Simulations of Sails p. 281

S. Malpede, F. D’Angeli, R. Bouzaid.
Fluid-Structure Interaction Modelling on a Sail p. 289

K. Suresh, A.K. Sahoo, A. Tripathi.

AUTHOR INDEX
Y. Amice ........................................... 223 M. Lan ............................................... 261

B. Augier ........................................... 155 J. Laurent ................................... 249, 267
C. Baley . .................................... 109, 261 A. Le Duigou ..................................... 109
R. Balze ............................................. 183 N. Le Griguer ..................................... 267
S. Bartesaghi ...................................... 119 M. Le Guellec .................................... 223
I. Bayati ............................................. 255 R. Leloup ........................................... 273
F. Bergsma ......................................... 173 D. Le Pelley ....................................... 145
C. Bertorello . ..................................... 255 J.-B. Leroux ....................................... 273
G. Blès ............................................... 273 A. Leroyer ................................... 165,191
C. Böhm ............................................... 11 A.K. Lidtke ........................................ 239
D. Boote ............................................... 35 C. Lothode ................................. 165, 191
P. Bot ......................................... 119, 155 S. Malpede ......................................... 281
A. Bourmaud ..................................... 109 L. Marimon Giovannetti .................... 239
R. Bouzaid ......................................... 291 Y. Masuyama ..................................... 205
L.-M. Breshan .................................... 239 W. Menotti ......................................... 197
J.S. Brett ............................................ 119 F. Moisy ............................................... 57
S. Brüns ............................................... 63 N. Moerke .......................................... 173
I. Campbell ...................................... 1, 85 J.C. Morgere ...................................... 249
D. Cartié ............................................ 261 D. Motta ............................................. 145
A.R. Claughton .................................. 215 S. Muggiasca ..................................... 255
A. Combourieu .................................... 35 D. Mylonas .................................... 45, 99
F. D’Angeli ........................................ 281 M. Owen ................................................ 1
P. Davies .................................... 109, 261 T. Pais .................................................. 35
J. Deparday ........................................ 155 Y. Parlier ............................................ 273
H. Devaux .......................................... 183 A. Philpott .......................................... 231
J.P. Diguet ................................. 249, 297 R. Ponzini .......................................... 129
L. Dorez ..................................... 191, 197 M.P. Prince ........................................ 215
R. Douguet ......................................... 249 G. Provinciali ......................................... 1
M. Durand ................. 155, 165, 191, 197 M. Rabaud ........................................... 57
F. Faloci ............................................... 35 T. Van Renterghem ........................... 129
R.G.J. Flay ......................... 119, 145, 231 P. Richards ......................................... 145
R. Floch ............................................. 165 K. Roncin ........................................... 273
F. Fossati ........................................... 255 Y. Roux ..................................... 191, 197
D. Glehen ........................................... 197 A.K. Sahoo ........................................ 289
K. Graf ........................................... 11, 71 A. Sampson ........................................ 239
D. Gross ............................................. 197 K. Suresh ........................................... 289
L. Guillaume ...................................... 165 F. Tagliaferri ...................................... 231
P.E. Guillerm ....................................... 23 D.J. Taunton ...................................... 239
H. Hansen ............................................ 63 A. Tripathi ......................................... 289
F. Hauville ................................. 155, 165 S. Turkmen .................................... 45, 99
K. Hochkirch ....................................... 63 I.M. Viola .......................... 119, 129, 231
H.W.M. Hoeijmakers ........................ 173 M. Visonneau ............................ 165, 191
A.V. Hoeve .......................................... 71 M. Vitti .............................................. 239
L. Huetz ............................................... 23 S. Watin ............................................... 71
C. Jochum .......................................... 273 S. Zaaijer ............................................ 173
M. Khorasanchi ............................. 45, 99

DAGGER-BOARD EVALUATION FOR AN IMOCA60 YACHT

Ian Campbell1, imc@soton.ac.uk, Merfyn Owen2, merf@owenclarkedesign.com,
Giorgio Provinciali, g.provinciali@gmail.com
Abstract. The IMOCA 60 Class has a complicated set of appendages: with canted and tilted keels, cambered dagger-
boards that can be designed to be fitted to the hull in different orientations along with toed-in and twin rudders that can
also be configured in different orientations. Curved dagger-boards and straight boards with positive lift inducing
dihedral angles have been used in number of recent IMOCA 60 designs and in other classes, principally multi-hulls.
These were considered an option by the client for their new Open 60 design and so a research and development
programme was instigated by Owen Clarke Design to compare new curved designs with conventional straight dagger-
boards optimised for upwind conditions. It was felt that the modelling of the trim of the yacht was very important to the
calculation and sharing of loads between all of the appendages, and so our group chose to use a combination of one third
scale high speed towing tanks tests and computational fluid dynamics (CFD), rather than CFD alone to investigate the
relative performance between these dagger-board types.
NOMENCLATURE on these craft has always been complex and the

introduction of tilt has added a further factor. Tilt refers
Ȝ , Leeway angle (degrees) to the fact that at the hull/keel intersection the forward
pivot bearing is placed higher than the aft. The result is
TWA, True wind angle (degrees) that when the keel is canted the fin takes on a positive
angle of attack, inducing lift, reducing righting
TWS, True wind speed (knots) moment, altering hull trim, rudder loading and changes
the proportion of load sharing with the dagger-board
1. INTRODUCTION when it is deployed. This was subject to the previous
paper by the authors [2].
There has been a good deal of discussion in recent
years regarding the pros and cons of curved verses This change of trim induced by the keel foil can itself
straight dagger-boards in the IMOCA 60 class. It was be altered by varying the size, angles and placement of
natural then that as part of the design package for Owen the dagger-boards as well as by boat speed and sail
Clarke’s latest Open 60 that a proportion of budget and selection. Sail selection and reefing has a significant
time should be set aside to evaluate the relative effect on the sail force trimming moment, which itself
performances of straight verses curves boards and to has the affect of driving the bow down and increasing
build on the previous test and CFD work that had rudder load/drag. If this were not complicated enough,
already been undertaken by the group on various board Open 60’s are able (depending on true wind speed/true
configurations, angles and placement. This evaluation wind angle and sail selection) to adjust their fore and
was undertaken as part of a wider study into Open 60 aft trim using up to between 5,000 and 6,000kg of
performance looking at the sharing of loads, affects of water per side and they alter the selected balance not
trim and various appendage designs and built on the just based on wind, but also sail selection and sea state.
one third scale testing undertaken for Ecover 3 in 2006. In addition, when reefed, lower sail centers of effort
and the addition of water ballast increase the side force
Before concentrating on dagger-board selection it’s required to be developed by the appendages and we
important to have an overview of the factors affecting will show why this is important in dagger-board
the appendage design, the forces involved and why the selection and their angles to the yacht’s centerline and
experimental methods used were selected. Owen DWL.
Clarke’s current IMOCA60 design Acciona started with
the known performance of their seven previous designs, There are therefore a considerable number of inter-
including Gamesa (ex Ecover 3), compared to that of related factors that contribute to a matrix of
more recent Open 60’s from other designers. One of the experimental conditions one may look to investigate.
parameters that had changed in recent IMOCA60 Deriving accurately the change in trim of the yacht
designs, including Ecover 3 and her sister-ship Aviva, is caused by these factors and therefore the actual attack
increasing fore and aft inclination of the canting keel angles/lift and drag forces on each of the foils and then
pivot axis to DWL, or as it is sometimes described; keel squaring the circle so that the resulting correct trim is
tilt. The interaction between the multiple appendages
1
Emeritus Fellow, Wolfson Unit MTIA
2
Owen Clarke Design

-1-
derived for each equilibrium condition is a highly with curved daggerboards deployed, in order to test this
complex, crucial problem to solve. hypothesis.
While as a group we have great confidence in the For an Open 60, any vertical force generated by the
ability of CFD to derive foil loadings we felt that a canting keel or by a curved dagger-board has to benefit
combination of the use of CFD and scale model testing the yacht by reducing the drag of the hull in relatively
was likely to provide the best overall understanding of slow conditions and not where light displacements
the problem. Using CFD in parallel with model testing yachts such as the AC72 catamarans or International
would also provide us with data that we could compare Moth dinghies can become fully foil borne.
and so we would not be reliant wholly on one source of
information that might lead us up a blind alley and/or to 2. DESIGN TOOLS
false conclusions. The design team required greater
VPP calculations, based on hydrodynamic data from
confidence in any analysis than it was felt reliance on a
previous tank tests, were performed and some
single methodology (especially one without a long
history of use in this boat type) could provide. The crux adjustments made to match the performance to that of
of the matter being that this was not an academic Ecover 3. This tricky job was performed using the
WinDesign VPP with customised features to match the
exercise, their recommendations would be acted upon
canting keel effects on stability and different flotations
by the client; months of work would be undertaken,
many millions of Euros spent and ultimately one sailor to match the various water ballast configurations for the
boat.
would have to deal with the results.
There was already anecdotal information from some of Detailed output from the VPP was used to provide
Owen Clarke’s competitor’s yachts that indicated; input to the tank tests and CFD calculation. While not
directly relevant to the dagger-board design itself and
whilst increasing keel tilt improved reaching
prior to the appendage development phase, 1:7 scale
performance at say 16 knots, excessive tilt could lead to
control problems when sailing downwind at higher model testing was undertaken over a two week period
speeds and while there was a requirement to improve on the most promising candidate designs based on a
range of representative hull forms from other designers
performance this was not come at the cost of control or
working in the Volvo/IMOCA circuit.
sea-keeping in difficult conditions.
The 1:7 scale tank tests were conducted up to a scale
1. DAGGER-BOARD SAILING CONDITIONS
speed range of 7 to 20 knots using only the canting keel
The dagger-boards are used to generate sideforce without dagger-boards to simplify the test setup whilst
efficiently with low induced drag. It will be seen later enabling differences in hull hydrodynamics to be
that the tank tests reveal the cross-over speed is evaluated. The test programme also included variations
somewhere above 13 knots, where it becomes effective in keel tilt, which helped establish its benefits. Of the
to raise the dagger-boards because the hull and canting six models tested, three were short-listed and the final
keel can produce sideforce with a net drag saving by winning model (a development of the OCD genre) was
eliminating the profile drag of the dagger-boards. then used both to build the 1:3 scale model and the
parallel CFD studies.
In the Vendee Globe race average speeds are:
The problem of load sharing when sailing upwind
11.4 knots with a Vendee record of 11.7 knots between the canting keel, dagger-board, rudder and hull
in the Atlantic heading south with the wind is complex, as illustrated in Figure 1. Whilst the lift
predominantly aft the beam. from the canting keel produces a smaller side force
compared to the straight dagger-board, it produces a
11 knots in the Atlantic heading north with the vertical force that offsets some of the boat’s
wind predominantly forward of the beam. displacement. This can be considerable at higher speeds
when the dagger-board is raised.
12.5 knots in a straight line in the Southern
Ocean with the Vendee record of 12.7 knots
for the Pacific but actually a little below 15
knots over the ground.
Previous experience: computer modelling, tank testing

and on the water in two boat testing had shown that the
speeds of interest for dagger-board development are in
the displacement and semi-displacement speed range
for the yacht of 9 to 13 knots (Froude numbers of 0.35
to 0.50). In the higher speeds of 15 knots, sailing down
the Atlantic and in the Southern Ocean, the dagger-
boards tend to be raised. However, to be sure of this we
would include in our test Matrix runs at higher speeds

-2-
Model tests were performed at 1:3 scale using a hull

selected from the 1:7 scale tests and fitted with a
canting keel and dagger-boards with an arrangement
that allowed different keel tilt and board toe-in and
board tilt angles to be set. These tests were conducted
over a 3 week period and were aimed at running the
model in its sailing equilibrium condition, with the
correct running trim, sailing side force, sail force
trimming moment and associated leeway for the water
ballast configurations appropriate to each speed,
ranging from 9 to 28 knots.
Finally the scaled data from the tank tests was used to
refine the hydrodynamic model in the VPP for use
when conducting the sailing trials on the new boat.
3. VPP CALCULATIONS
The normal VPP output is a polar diagram of boat
Figure 1 – Side force contributions
speeds for a range of true wind speeds (TWS) and
angles (TWA), as illustrated in Table 1, but underlying
Setting the ratio of the side force developed by the
these speeds are the associated equilibrium
dagger-board to that by the keel is a crucial factor in
hydrodynamic and aerodynamic forces and moments
optimising the performance of the boat in any mode
together with the optimised sail configurations.
when the dagger-board is in use. Introducing curvature
Important data for setting up tank tests or CFD
into the dagger-board results in it also producing some
calculations derive from the sail combinations,
vertical force to complement that from the keel at lower
including masthead or fractional headsails and reef or
speeds.
twist settings that affect the centre of effort height. The
water ballast condition affects the stability and
The load sharing and associated variations in induced
combined with the associated sail combinations enable
drag was investigated using a CFD panel code, which
the sailing side force to be calculated. This is used in
had the advantage over RANS codes that it enabled
the tank tests to determine the equilibrium leeway
calculations to be performed for a large number of
angle.
configurations in a cost effective and timely manner.
The calculations over an extensive test matrix were
simplified by performing them at fixed speed and trim.
The CFD work undertaken over several months

resulted in a selection of appendages which were then
narrowed down to a select number which were then
built for the 1:3 scale tests. As importantly using the
results from this stage of the work we were able to
narrow down the test matrix somewhat, discounting
some areas and thereby saving time in the tank that
could be dedicated to other work.
The canting keel has to be a symmetrical section to

operate on both tacks but the dagger-boards are
asymmetric so can be a cambered section to minimise
their viscous drag. The two dimensional code MSES
was used to develop the dagger-board sections used Table 1 – Boat speeds for different wind conditions
throughout the work. The sections used early on in the
preparatory work were developments of those already Models were towed in the tank tests from close to the
used on Ecover 3 and Aviva. At the point where waterline (DWL) whereas the actual boat is driven by
candidate boards had been developed for the 1:3 scale sails with a centre of effort approximately 40% of the
testing Giorgio Provinciali developed sections that sail height above DWL. This difference is compensated
were optimised around the predicted lift forces which in the tank by applying trim moment using a ballast
we were expecting the boards to produce, based on the shift in the model to simulate the bow down trim from
predicted load sharing with the keel. Using MSES, a the thrust of the sails. The hydrodynamic drag increases
small adjustment to the final section used on Acciona significantly between upwind speeds of 11 knots and
was made, post scale model testing, once the final load running speeds of 28 knots the resulting in large trim
sharing and board type selection had been made. moments and it is important to simulate these correctly

-3-
to ensure that the running trim of the model matches

how the boat will actually sail, particularly when reefed
downwind and/or flying masthead or fractional
gennaker.
It can also be seen from the VPP calculations that the

sailing conditions where dagger-boards will be
deployed, at boat speeds of less than 15 knots, are with
true wind angles below 90 degrees and true wind
speeds up to 16 knots.
4. CFD CALCULATIONS
To investigate the upwind performance of a tilted keel
with dagger-boards and as a precursor to further tank
tests a CFD model was set up. This was created from a Figure 3 – CFD model with curved dagger-board
3D Iges file of the hull and appendages, which included
straight and curved dagger-boards. Prior to the 1:7 scale The raw data obtained from the panel code at the three
hull model testing, all CFD was carried out using different sinkages, with fixed trim, were interpolated to
straight boards with differing dihedral angles and find the results at the desired displacements. The results
angles to the centreline in order to develop an initial were then further interpolated for three set values of
understanding of the relative trade off between the total side force appropriate for the upwind sailing
vertical lift force and induced drag. The dihedral angles condition, with the force applied at a distance from the
ranged either side of vertical, as shown in Figure 2, bow to represent the balance with the rig forces, i.e. at a
with the positive angle boards acting in the same fixed value for the yaw Moment.
manner and creating vertical lift equivalent to those of
curved boards.
2
Variation of resistance with siderforce
Vs = 10 knots, tilt 4deg, toe-in 0deg
4.0
3.5
Resistance - kN
3.0
2.5
Figure 2 – CFD model with straight dagger-board
All dagger-boards were cambered and so were 2.0

asymmetric with handed port and starboard boards. 0 200 400 600 800 1000
Thus the dagger-boards would produce side force with 2 2
the hull operating at zero leeway and without any toe-in Sideforce - kN
angle.
The computed drag differences at sailing sideforce Figure 4 – Resistance from CFD calculations
were generally less than 1% for an increase in vertical
force of up to 3% of the displacement of the yacht. Resistance values from the set side force for one
These variations due to dihedral were small enough to appendage configuration are shown plotted in Figure 4
tank test the straight dagger-board at just one dihedral against the square of side force. It can be seen that, just
angle for comparison with the curved dagger-board. as with the tank data shown in Figure 11, this produces
a linear trend.
For later work, creating the foils to be used in 1:3 scale
testing, curved boards were developed, as represented Force and moment values for each individual
in Figure 3, that would more closely model the pressure appendage and the hull were tabulated for variations in
field between the hull and foil. This was considered to keel tilt and dagger-board toe-in angles at two different
be an advantage that the curved foil has compared to a displacements. Also calculated were the leeway angle
straight foil with a large positive dihedral angle. associated with the side force and drag, an example is
shown in Figure 5.

-4-
The upwind resistance variations due to keel tilt with

Variation of leeway with dagger-board angle the dagger-board were considerably smaller than those
Vs = 10 knots due to keel tilt obtained from the 1:7 scale tank tests
Tilt 2 deg without the dagger-board for the reaching condition.
3.0 Tilt 4 deg Care, however, needed to be exercised because the
CFD calculations were run with fixed trim whereas the
Tilt 6 deg
2.0 tank tests were conducted free to trim and the trim
2 deg changes with keel tilt were significant at 16 knots and
Leeway - deg
1.0 4 deg will have affected the resistance.

6 deg
CFD calculations gave the contributions of the
0.0 individual appendages to the total forces and an
example of the side force components with the keel tilt
-1.0 angle at 2 degrees is shown in Figure 7. It can be seen
that approximately 80% of the side force was produced
-2.0 by the dagger-board and when the dagger-board toe-in
0 2 4
angle was increased to 4 degrees the keel and rudder
produced negative side force in order to achieve the
Dagger-board angle - deg required total equilibrium side force. This is considered
to be a bad setting because the appendages are working
Figure 5 – Variation of leeway with toe in angle in opposition rather than load sharing. The hull and
bulb contributed approximately 8% of the side force
It can be seen that the leeway angle decreased as the and this only varied slightly with dagger-board angles.
toe-in angle of the dagger-board was increased and
became negative at higher toe-in angles. Increasing the
keel tilt also reduced the leeway angle and caused it to Variation of sideforce with dagger angle
become negative. In effect the angle of attack of the Vs = 10 knots, keel tilt 2 deg
flow over the keel and dagger-board was determined by
the fixed side force value that was required and this set 100
the hull leeway.
80
The interesting data related to performance was the Rudder
60
Sideforce - %
variation in resistance with keel tilt and dagger-board Keel

toe-in and an example is shown in Figure 6. The 40 Dagger-board
resistance ratios are compared to a base condition of 2 Hull and bulb
20
degrees keel tilts with 0 degrees dagger-board toe-in
angle. It can be seen that increasing the dagger-board 0
toe-in deduced the drag for all keel tilt angles but was
required particularly for the highest keel tilt of 6 -20
degrees. -40
0 2 4
Variation of drag with dagger-board angle Dagger-board angle - deg
Vs = 10 knots
Tilt 2 deg Figure 7 – Variation of side force components with
1.06 Tilt 4 deg toe-in
1.05 Tilt 6 deg
The CFD results also provided the vertical force
1.04 2 deg produced by each appendage. An example is shown in
Drag ratio
1.03 4 deg Figure 8, with the vertical force expressed as a

6 deg percentage of the displacement of the yacht. This
1.02
illustrates two features:
1.01
1.00 i) The vertical forces increase linearly with
sideforce. This is because both are related
0.99 to the pressure distribution over the
0.98 appendages. The sailing sideforce is,
0 2 4 however, determined by the stability of
the yacht and, as is shown in Table 2, this
Dagger-board angle - deg was 12kN for the upwind sailing
condition where dagger-boards would be
Figure 6 – Variation of drag with toe-in angle deployed.

-5-
ii) The keel produced a small vertical force

at the sailing sideforce and the curved
dagger-board significantly more but only
approximately 5% of the yacht’s
displacement.
The horizontal projected area of the keel was

considerably greater than that of the dagger-board and
the ratio of vertical to sideforce was approximately 1.4
from the keel but only 0.5 from the dagger-board. The
higher vertical force produced by the dagger-board is
attributed to its greater share of the overall sideforce.
Variation of vertical force with siderforce Figure 9 - Model with dynamometer

Vs = 10 knots, tilt 4deg, toe-in 0deg
The tank length enabled tests to be conducted at three
12 upwind speeds or two reaching speeds within one run
but the high speed running condition require the full
Verical force % Displacement
10 Keel length of the tank. This enabled good productivity from

the tests
8 Dagger-board Tests were conducted with the model in three
conditions:
6
0
0 10 20 30
Sideforce - kN Table 2 - Model test conditions
Tests were conducted at two or three different leeway

Figure 8 – Variation of vertical force with sideforce angles to enable the resistance to be interpolated at the
sailing side force and the resistance data was plotted as
The CFD results confirmed sailing experience of the shown in Figure 10. This figure contains data from
benefit of increasing the dagger-board toe-in angle, upwind configurations with the same curved dagger-
particularly with the higher keel tilt angle and provided board set with 3 degrees keel tilt and tested with three
the basis for setting the matrix of test configurations for different toe-in angles of 0, 2 and 4 degrees.
the 1:3 scale tank tests. There were also small
variations in the heeling moment associated with the
dagger-board toe in and keel tilt which were included in
the performance analysis.
5. 1:3 TANK TESTS

The tests were conducted in the CEHIPAR Calm Water
Towing Tank at El Pardo Madrid. This tank is 320 m
long, 12.5 m wide, and 6.5 m deep and the towing
carriage operated at speeds up to 10 m/s. The model
was mounted from the carriage using the Wolfson
Unit’s 3post dynamometer as shown in Figure 9. This
had previously been used for testing 1:3 scale
America’s Cup Class yacht models of 24t displacement
but was light enough to enable the light 9t sailing
displacement of an IMOCA 60 hull to be towed and
had suitable load ranges for the high speed runs.

-6-
2 2
Variation of resistance with sideforce Variation of resistance with sideforce
curved dagger-boards with different toe-in 8 with straight and curved dagger-boards
8
7 7
Resistance - kN
6
Resistance - kN
9kts 2 deg toe-in St DB 9kts

11kts 2 deg toe-in
13kts 2 deg toe-in 5 St DB 11kts
5 0 deg toe-in
0 deg toe-in St DB 13kts
0 deg toe-in
4 4 deg toe-in 4 "Cu DB 9kts"
4 deg toe-in Cu DB 11kts
4 deg toe-in
3 Linear (0 deg toe-in) 3 Cu DB 13kts
Linear (0 deg toe-in)
Linear (0 deg toe-in)
2 2
0 400 800 1200 0 400 800 1200
2 2 2 2
Sideforce - kN 3deg keel tilt Sideforce - kN 2 deg toe-in
Figure 10 – Variation of resistance for different toe- Figure 11 – Comparison between straight and
in angles curved dagger-boards
The speed was stepped up in the run down the tank The cross-over boat speed where the curved dagger-
enabling three speeds of 9, 11 and 13 knots to be tested boards can be raised was investigated by testing at 14
at a fixed leeway. This resulted in the increase in side and 15 knots with and without the dagger-board with
force with speed and associated increased values of the results shown in Figure 12.
resistance. Whilst it is an efficient means of testing it
results in a group of data at lower side force values for The increased wetted area of the dagger-board added
the lower speeds and a higher group of values for the form drag, represented by an increase in drag at zero
higher speeds, however the resistance values can be side force but reduced the induced drag, represented by
interpolated from both groups of data for the sailing a lower slope in the linear fit through the data. The
side force, which is constant for all speeds, as given in crossover between the bold lines without the dagger-
Table 2. boards and the feint lines with represents equal drag but
occurred at higher side force values with increasing
The change in toe-in angle produced relatively small speed. When the cross-over side force was greater than
differences in resistance, which was consistent with the the sailing side force the performance would benefit
CFD results. The resistance at the sailing sideforce was from the lower drag without the dagger-board.
interpolated from the tests at different leeway angles to
determine the best toe-in angle.
The effect of toe-in angle on the resistance of straight

dagger-boards was less than on curved boards.
Comparisons were made between the straight and
curved dagger-boards, as shown in Figure 11. These
were made across the speed range and for two different
heel angles of 15 and 22.5 degrees.

-7-
2 2
Variation of resistance with sideforce Variation of resistance with sideforce
with and without dagger-board curved dagger-boards with different toe-in
12 9
K5 14 kts
11 K5 15 kts 8
No DB 14 kts
10 No DB 15 kts 7
Resistance - kN
Resistance - kN
No DB 16 kts
9 6
8 5 0 deg toe-in 0 deg tilt 14 knots
0 deg toe-in 0 deg tilt 15knots

7 4
4 deg toe-in 4 deg tilt
6 3
0 400 800 1200 0 400 800 1200
2 2 2 2
Sideforce - kN Sideforce - kN 3deg keel tilt
Figure 13 – Variation of resistance with side force
Figure 12 – Variation of resistance with side force for the curved dagger-boards with tilt
Results are also included in Figure 12 from tests at 16

knots without the dagger-board. The resistance is The relative loading on the keel and dagger-board was
significantly higher than at 15 knots but this is partly also monitored during the tank tests using strain gauges
due to the higher displacement from the ballast to measure the bending moments and typical results are
condition shown in Table 2. The slope of the linear fit shown in Figure 14.
through the data is however significantly lower than at
15 knots, which represents the reduced induced drag at
higher speeds. This can be partly attributed to the Variation of bending with sideforce
lower lift coefficient on the keel to produce the required With and without dagger-board
side force. The yacht is also operating in a semi- 700
displacement mode at 16 knots, with an associated 600
Froude number of 0.61, and its trim angle increased by K5 bend
500
Bending moment - Nm
approximately 1 degree and it’s heeled asymmetric K5bend DB

waterplane also contributed to the side force, although 400
300 K5 DB bend
with the tilted keel angle the sailing side force was
produced with close to zero leeway, similar to the result 200 K5 bend 16 kts
from the 1:7 scale tank tests. 100
0
The curved dagger-boards could also be tilted, in a
similar manner to the canting keel. This tends to load -100
the curved tip of the dagger-board, increasing its -200
vertical lift in relation to its sideforce. An example of -300
results from these tests is shown in Figure 13 and it can 0 400 800 1200 1600
be seen that increasing the tilt increased the resistance.
S ideforce - N
Figure 14 – Variation of keel bending moment with

side force
The model scale bending moments from tests at 14, 15

and 16 knots are shown plotted against side force and
linear trend lines have been fitted to the data. It can be
seen that the data for 14 and 15 knots is distributed
about a common line, although the leeway angles
associated leeway angles differ. It can also be seen that

-8-
the bending moment in the keel without the dagger- At nine knots of boat speed which would be a very low
board is similar to the bending moment from the speed, associated with 8 knots of true wind as shown in
dagger-board with the keel, indicating that the keel Table 1, for a dagger-board to be deployed there was
generates the side force in the absence of a dagger- little difference between the drag at equivalent side
board. There were negative bending moments in the force and leeway of a curved and upwind optimised
keel at lower values of side force with the dagger-board straight dagger-board. The difference was more
installed, which was similar to the CFD results shown pronounced at higher speeds.
in Figure 6.
Testing was also undertaken at side loads greater than
6. UPWIND OPTIMISED STRAIGHT, VERSES those capable of being developed by an Open 60 at any
CURVED BOARDS reef or ballast condition. In Figure 16, which contains
data from the higher stability condition of 22.5 degrees
The previous sections describe the background
heel, it can be seen only at a sideforces greater than 25
necessary for an understanding of how we undertook
kN or sideforce squared of 625, did the curved dagger-
the tests and how these led to the results related directly board show signs of less induced drag. This could be
to the comparison of straight upwind optimised, verses attributed to the vertical lift from the board causing a
curved boards.
reduction in the resistance of the hull sufficient to
overcome the increased induced drag of the foil and so
Having established from Figure 12 that the additional be more efficient.
drag of the curved dagger-board being used for lifting
the hull for a given required side force was
substantially greater than that of a hull with dagger- 2
board raised at 14, 15 and 16 knots, testing was then Variation of resistance with sideforce
undertaken with an upwind optimised straight board at with straight and curved dagger-boards
9, 11 and 13 knots. The results are highlighted in
Figure 11. 8
22.5 deg heel
The difference in vertical lift between the straight and 7
curved dagger-boards was obtained from model scale
heave measurements made in the tank and an example
6 St DB 9kts
Resistance - kN
is shown in Figure 15. It can be seen that the heave

change from static is negative, indicating that the hull St DB 11kts
has sunk as a result of its wave pattern. The heave 5
St DB 13kts
becomes less negative with increasing sideforce due to
the associated increase in vertical force and it can be Cu DB 9kts
seen that the curved dagger-board reduced the sinkage 4
Cu DB 11kts
of the model by approximately 5mm.
3 Cu DB 13kts
Variation of heave with sideforce

2
with straight and curved dagger-boards
5 0 400 800 1200
2 2
0 Sideforce - kN
-5
Figure 16 – Variation of resistance with side force
between straight and curved dagger-boards at 22.5
Heave - mm
-10 St DB 9kts degrees heel

-15 St DB 11kts
Although the differences in total resistance are small,
St DB 13kts the conclusion was that the straight board, optimised to
-20
Cu DB 9kts develop side force upwind over all wind angles and
-25 Cu DB 11kts wind speeds, was more efficient over a curved board or
a straight board with an equivalent dihedral angle.
-30 Cu DB 13kts
0 10 20 Linear
30 (St 40
DB 11kts) This result has also assumed that boards are of
equivalent weight and so given the requirement that the
S ideforce - kN 2 deg toe-in IMOCA rule requires boards to be in the raised position
when measured, result in the same bulb weight. This is
not the case however. The curved or heavily angled
Figure 15 – Variation of heave with side force dihedral board needs to be longer to generate the same
between straight and curved dagger-boards side force. The increase in board weight related to
length is negligible however compared to the increased
weight of board (and internal structure of the yacht)

-9-
required to allow a board to be used at higher reaching development and acknowledgement is given for their
boat speeds. For example; engineering a board at stall, permission to publish.
at a boat speed of sixteen knots as opposed to a speed
of thirteen knots would require a 50% increase in Thanks are also given to the staff at CEHIPAR and
design load. There are significant drivers therefore, ACCIONA for their assistance in conducting the 1:3
discounting potential damping effects of curved boards scale tests
in waves ,to keep dagger-boards in IMOCA 60’s as
light as the their required performance envelope will References
allow.
1. Ward B. & Cochran C., “Development of the Volvo
7. CONCLUSIONS
Ocean 65”, 21st Chesapeake Sailing Yacht
The combination of tank tests and CFD panel codes Symposium, Annopolis MD USA, March 2013
enabled a wide range of appendage test configurations
to be investigated across a wide range of speeds. The 2. Campbell, I., Owen M. & Provinciali G., “Tuning
1:7 scale tank tests were used to compare hulls but also of appendages for an IMOCA60 yacht”, 4th High
provided information on the beneficial reduction in Performance Yacht Design Conference, Auckland
resistance at semi-displacement speeds due to tilting the
NZ 2012
fore and aft axis of the canting keel.
The CFD panel code calculations provided information 3. Claughton. A R & Oliver C (2004), “Design
on the relative loading of the keel and dagger-board for considerations for canting keel yachts”, 18th
the upwind sailing condition with variations of toe-in International HISWA Symposium on “Yacht Design
angles and keel tilt, albeit at fixed trim. The results of and Yacht Construction”, Amsterdam, 2004
which were used to develop appendages and a test
matrix for 1:3 scale model testing, cross-check/verify 4. Campbell, I., Robinson, J. & Brown, M (2002),
results during testing and refine dagger-board design “The accuracy and repeatability of tank testing from
post testing. experience of ACC yacht development”, High
Performance Yacht Design Conference, Auckland,
The 1:3 scale tank tests produced similar results to the
CFD calculations for the upwind keel and dagger-board New Zealand, RINA, December 2002
combinations, mitigated risk in decision taking and
provide substantial confidence in the decision taken 5. G. Delhommeau (1993) “Wave resistance code
regarding the dagger-board selection and the keel tilt REVA”, Cours de la 19th WEGEMT School, Ecole
angle for the Open 60, Acciona. Centrale de Nantes, Septembre 1993.
Although in ORMA 60’s, where lift producing devices 6. G. Delhommeau (2002), “La simulation mécanique
clearly work well, in IMOCA 60s one is operating at en hydrodynamique : application en ingénierie
considerably lower side forces (proportional to righting navale", Chapitre 9, pp. 277-329, "CAO et
moment) and at higher displacements. The relationship
simulation en mécanique", Editions Hermès,
therefore between additional induced drag from a
lifting foil and the reduction in displacement of the hull Lavoisier, 2002, ISBN 2-7462-0340-5.
are quite different. We were able to show in Figure 16
that only at an unrealistic value of side force were we 7. Maes F. (2006), “An experimental study of the
able to produce a situation whereby an IMOCA 60 hydrodynamics of a yacht with a canting keel and
would benefit in reaching conditions in flat water from forward rudder”, 19th International HISWA
utilising lift inducing dagger-boards. Symposium on “Yacht Design and Yacht
Construction”, Amsterdam, 2006.
That being said, from a practical point of view, the
percentage deltas/differences between dagger-boards
that are designed to provide lift as opposed to boards
optimised for upwind use are not so significant that
they would detract significantly from the performance
of a yacht in a range of conditions. The final conclusion
for the Acciona team was that there appeared to be no
likely performance driven reason to select a heavier
more expensive dagger-board type.
Acknowledgements
The work in this paper was commissioned by Owen

Clarke Design as part of their ongoing research and
development programme into IMOCA60 design

- 10 -
ADVANCEMENTS IN FREE SURFACE RANSE SIMULATIONS FOR

SAILING YACHT APPLICATIONS
Christoph Böhm, Delft University of Technology, NL / Yacht Research Unit Kiel, GER,
christoph.boehm@yru-kiel.de
Kai Graf, University of Applied Sciences Kiel, GER / Yacht Research Unit Kiel, GER,
kai.graf@fh-kiel.de
The analysis of yacht hulls performance using RANSE based free surface simulations has become an
accepted approach over the last decade. Access to this technology has been eased by the development
of user-friendly software and by the increase of computational power. Results are widely accepted as
superior to previous non-viscous approaches and have to compete with towing tank results in terms of
accuracy. However, many practical applications suffer from a numerical smearing of the free surface in-
terface between air and water which can be described as numerical ventilation. This problem occurs when
the intersection between bow and calm water surface form an acute angle and is further pronounced if the
stem is rounded or blunt. It is therefore especially linked to sailing yacht applications. The problem man-
ifests itself as a non-physical suction of the air-water mixture under the yacht hull, causing a significant
underprediction of viscous resistance. While this is the easily observable appearance of the problem, a
second issue is its effect on wave resistance. It can be shown that wave damping is significantly increased,
causing a prediction of wave resistance which is also too low. The paper provides a review of the Volume-
of-Fluid method. It discusses the resultant implications for practical applications. A remedy to circumvent
the problem is described and its impact on the accuracy of the result is shown. Simulations on an identical
appended hull with and without interface smearing are compared. Effects on free surface visualization
and numerical accuracy are shown. The paper finishes with a thorough verification and validation of a
fully appended yacht in accordance with ITTC standards.
NOMENCLATURE δp Parameter error (e.g. iteration num- (-)

ber I , grid size G , time step T )
(1 + k) Form factor (-) δS Simulation error (-)
CF L Courant number (-) δSM Simulation modeling error (-)
CD Drag coefficient (-) δSN Simulation numerical error (-)
CL Lift coefficient (-) ijk Solution change (-)
CT Total resistance coefficient (-) λ Scale factor (-)
Ck Correction factor (-) S Surface vector (m2 )
E Comparison error (-) n Surface normal vector (-)
Fn Froude number (-) v velocity vector (m.s−1 )
Pk Order of accuracy (-) vb grid velocity vector (m.s−1 )
Rk Convergence ratio (-) φ̃C normalized value of central node (-)
Rn Reynolds number (-) w.r.t. face f
S Simulation results (-) φ̃C normalized face value (-)
T Truth (-) rk refinement ratio of parameter k (-)
USN Numerical uncertainty (-)
UP Parameter uncertainty (e.g. itera- (-) Subscripts
tion number I , grid size G , time step f Cell face
T) C Corrected error or uncertainty
V Volume (m3 )
αi Volume fraction of fluid i within a (-)
cell 1 Introduction
δk error estimate with sign and magni- (-)
tude of kth parameter During the last decade RANSE based viscous free surface
simulations around ship hulls have gained a certain degree
of maturity. Their capability to produce reliable data which
can compete with towing tank experiments has been proved, terface, this region should not significantly extend over more
e.g. by the Gothenburg 2010 Workshop on Ship Hydrody- than three cells. Figure 1 clearly shows that this not the case.
namics [5]. The rapidly developing availability of computa- Instead volume fractions are smeared over the complete hull,
tional power has increased the popularity of this kind of CFD expect around the appendages and in their wake. This clearly
technology and the access to it has been eased by software indicates a behavior which is sometimes referred to as numer-
packages which guide the user through the pre-processing ical ventilation but can be shown to be a smeared free sur-
procedure. The once time-consuming procedure of creating a face interface. Due to the nature of the treatment of physical
computational grid has been improved by new meshing tech- properties of flow phase within the VOF (Volume-of-Fluid)
niques which can reliably handle complex geometries and al- model, this will lead to smaller resistance values. It has to
low to tailor the mesh such that it meets the special needs of be highlighted that the interface smearing as described above
ship hydrodynamics. These advances in computational power has only been encountered for specific floating bodies. These
and numerical techniques have changed the challenge in CFD bodies have in common that they share a rather blunt bow
towards achieving results that are within an expected uncer- which forms a small, acute entrance angle with the waterline.
tainty. As mentioned above, verifications and validations for For conventional vessel which normally have sharp bow with
ship hydrodynamics can be found in literature and benchmark a right angle at the water line, this problem does not occur. It
cases including geometries are available. Unfortunately the is therefore kind of yacht-specific.
same does not hold true for yacht hydrodynamics were vali-
dations are rare and usually non-public. This might change in 3 Volume-of-Fluid method
the future since results and geometries of the Delft Systematic
Yacht Hull Series (DSYHS) have recently become publicly The Volume-of-Fluid (VOF) method was introduced by Hirts
available. and Nicols [3]. It is an Interface Capturing Methods with-
out reconstruction and thus does not treat the free surface as
2 Motivation a sharp boundary. Instead the calculation is performed on a
fixed grid, and free surface interface orientation and shape
An attempt of the authors to validate RANSE CFD against is calculated as function of the volume part of the respec-
towing tank results of an America’s Cup Class Version 5 boat tive fluid within a control volume (CV). The VOF method
(ACCV5) [1] showed good results at time of publication. Re- employs the concept of a equivalent fluid. This approach as-
sistance in non-lifting conditions was resolved to -6.2% of sumes that the (two) fluid phases share the same velocity and
the Experimental Fluid Data (EFD), whilst lifting condition pressure fields allowing to solve the same set of governing
proved to be a problem with drag and lift deltas of -2.5% and equations describing momentum and mass transport as in a
19% respective . With the above mentioned advancements in single phase flow. The Volume fraction αi describes to which
RANSE CFD these simulations have been repeated includ- level the cell is filled with the respective fluid. The free sur-
ing more recent free surface modeling and body motion tech- face is then defined as the isosurface at which the volume
niques and a larger and apparently better suited computational fractions take the value of 0.5. It is important to note, that
grid. However, the results did not reflect the expected im- this location is not at the control volume center but rather
provements, indeed they were even worse than before with interpolated to the geometrical value. To simulate wave dy-
differences between CFD and EFD resistance curves of ap- namics, one has to solve an equation for the filled fraction of
proximately -8%. This obviously led to the question why each CV additionally to the conservation equations for mass
these behavior occurred. In general, single phase RANSE and momentum. Assuming incompressible flow, the transport
simulations tend to over-predict drag values if grid resolution equation of volume fractions αi is described by the following
is not sufficiently small. This behavior is not absolutely trans- conservation equation:
ferable to free surface ship flows, were a insufficient resolu-
tion of the wave pattern might also lead to an under-prediction ∂
αi dV + αi (v − vb ) · ndS = 0 (1)
of drag. Nonetheless, under-prediction of drag hints to look ∂t V S
at modeling errors. Figure 1 illustrates the volume fraction The physical properties of the equivalent fluid within a con-
of water values on the hull. Normally one would expect that trol volume are then calculated as functions of the physical
these values are zero in the air region, one in the submerged properties of the phases and their volume fractions. Strict con-
area of the hull and between zero and one in a small region servation of mass is crucial, but this is easily obtained within
around the free surface interface. In the vicinity of a sharp in- this method as long as the sum of all volume-fractions per
cell is 1. The critical issue for this kind of methods is the dis-
cretization of the convective term. Low-order terms like for
instance 1st order upwind are known to smear the interface
and introduce an artificial mixing of the two fluids. There-
fore higher order schemes are preferred. The goal is to de-
rive schemes which are able to keep the interface sharp and
produce a monotone profile across it. Development of dif-
ferencing schemes has been the pinnacle of research in the
Figure 1: VOF fields VOF methods for many years. Consequently a large
number of schemes is available and successfully used in dif-
ferent codes. The vast majority of these schemes is based on φHRIC
f = φ̃∗∗
f (φD − φU ) + φU (6)
the Normalized Variable Diagram (NVD) and the Convection
Boundedness Criterion (CBC) introduced by Leonard [6]. As a consequence of the modifications due to interface an-
gle and local Courant number, the NVD can take different
forms. For the three different blending states depending on lo-
3.1 HRIC Scheme
cal CF L, Figure 2 illustrates the possible forms of the HRIC
The HRIC scheme (High Resolution Interface Capturing scheme with respect to the interface angle θ. The areas shaded
Scheme) is one of the most popular advection schemes and in red represent the possible forms the scheme can take de-
widely used in many CFD codes. It has been developed by pending on the angle factor for the respective local Courant
Muzaferija and Peric [8, 10, 9]. Like most other schemes, number. This kind of blending strategy is more or less the
it is based on a blending of bounded upwind and downwind same for all interface capturing schemes, so care has to be
schemes. The aim is to combine the compressive properties taken when modeling free surface flows to avoid unwanted
of the downwind differencing scheme with the stability of the switching to a lower resolution which is often accompanied
upwind scheme. The bounded downwind scheme is formu- with interface smearing.
lated as:

⎧
⎪
⎪ φ̃C if φ̃C < 0
⎪
⎨2φ̃
C if 0 ≤ φ̃C ≤ 0.5
φ̃f =
(2)

⎪
⎪ 1 if 0.5 ≤ φ̃C ≤ 1
⎪
⎩
φ̃C if 1 ≤ φ̃C

Since the amount of one fluid convected through a cell face

shall be less or equal to the amount available in the donor cell,

the calculated value of φ̃f is corrected with respect to the local
Courant number (CFL).The CFL is calculated by employing

the the velocity at the cell face vf , the surface vector Sf , the

respective cell volume Vf and the local time step size dt as
follows: Figure 2: NVD of High Resolution Capturing Scheme
vf Sf dt (HRIC)
CF L = (3)
Vf
The correction takes the form of (4) and effectively controls
the blending between HRIC and UD scheme with two limiting 4 Theoretical Test Case
Courant numbers CL and CU which normally takes values of
0.5 and 1.0 respective 0.3 and 0.7. The theoretical review of the HRIC revealed that the encoun-
tered interface smearing is most probably related to the use of
⎧ high Courant numbers. A modifier was found which implies
⎪
⎪ φ̃ if CF L < 0 that the HRIC scheme is used for a CF L smaller than the
⎨ f
∗
φ̃f = φ̃C + φ̃f − φ̃C CU −CL CU −CF L
if CL ≤ CF L < CU lower CFL limiter and UD scheme for CFL equal or greater
⎪
⎪ than the upper CFL limiter. Between those values a blending
⎩φ̃ if CU ≤ CF L
C of both schemes is used. From a theoretical point of view,
(4) the sole purpose of the correction of the HRIC scheme for
Effectively this correction implies that the HRIC scheme local CFL is to improve robustness. If unsteady phenomena
is used for a CF L smaller than the lower CFL limiter and like slamming and or seakeeping are of interest, local Courant
UD scheme for CFL equal or greater than the upper CFL lim-
iter. Between those values a blending of both schemes is used.
This correction is applied to improve robustness and stability
when large time variation of the free surface shape is preset
and the time step is too big to resolve it. After this correction
φ̃∗f experiences a final modification based on the interface an-
gle, which is the angle θ between between the normal of the
free surface interface n and the cell surface vector Sf . This
final modification reads:
φ̃∗∗ ∗ Cθ Cθ
f = φ̃f (cos θ) + φ̃C (1 − cos θ) (5)
Here Cθ = represents an angle exponent. Its default value ac-
cording to [9] is 0.05. The final cell face value is calculated
as: Figure 3: Sketch of test case setup
Number should be inherently lower than 0.5 anyway. If ro-
bustness is not problematic then this switch should be of no in-
terest for calculation which seek a steady state solution. Since
simulations mimicking towing tank procedures seek such a
steady state solution, the HRIC scheme is modified such that
the switch is effectively removed. If this assumption is true,
this would remove the necessity to keep Courant number be-
low 0.5 for even the smallest cell. The impact of this on prac-
tical applications is vast because it has the potential to sig-
nificantly reduce computational effort by allowing larger time
step sizes. To control the validity of this assumption a test
case has been constructed. Aim of the test case is to pro-

duce a worst case scenario which makes it possible to judge
if the modified differencing scheme can cope with the situa-
tion. From a theoretical point of view, the case which would
produce the highest amount of numerical diffusion and thus
the highest amount of interface smearing is a flow through a
quadratic grid cell at an angle of 45◦ . Therefore a 2D Carte-
sian grid has been build which consists of 128 x 128 grid cells
with edge length of 0.5m. Total edge length of the domain
is 64m. Initial volume fraction distribution is such that the
lighter fluid (air) occupies the upper left triangle of the do-
main (blue) whilst the heavier fluid (water) is found in the

lower right side (red). Inflow conditions for volume fraction
have been set such that this state should remain within the Figure 4: Impact of HRIC modes on free surface resolution
simulation. Outlet has been set to Neumann conditions. A
sketch of the setup is depicted in Figure 3. Depending on the
local Courant number, the HRIC scheme switches between: lows using higher CFL numbers whilst a sharp interface is re-
tained. This allows the conclusion that the modification of the
1. A pure HRIC scheme if CFL < 0.5 HRIC scheme is well suited to simulate free surface flows at
higher Courant numbers, allowing to converge faster towards
2. A linear between HRIC and UD scheme if 0.5 ≤ CFL ≤ a steady state solution.
1.0
3. A pure UD scheme if CFL > 1.0 5 Validation & Verification against Towing Tank data
The influence of these different states on the sharpness of the In most cases validations are conducted by comparing simu-
interface is tested by varying flow speed and time step size lation results with trusted towing tank data. Deviations from
such that the relevant criteria is fulfilled. First, CFL is set to experimental data are corrected by grid refinements until a
0.3 resulting in a pure HRIC scheme (Figure 4a). Even though acceptable agreement between EFD and CFD is found. How-
the flow direction with respect to cell faces is unfavorable, the ever, this approach can lead to false confidence in the results
HRIC scheme is able to resolve the sharpest interface possible if modeling or grid errors are present. Therefore, validation &
within the VOF method (1 cell). Next the CFL is increased to verification are conducted here with a formal approach which
0.75, resulting in 50% blend between HRIC and UD (Figure allows to draw additional conclusions with respect to error
4b). This blend is also still sufficient to retain the sharp inter- types and error sources. First at all a short definition of the
face and therefore gives a valid solution. An explanation for terms verification and validation is necessary:
this behavior can be found in the blending strategy depend-
ing on interface angle. As depicted in Figure 2, the difference • Verification includes the assessment of numerical uncer-
between the pure HRIC and the blended HRIC is reasonably tainty, magnitude and sign of numerical error (if possi-
small for a cell flow angle of 45◦ which explains the similar ble) and uncertainty in error estimation.
results. Finally, flow speed and time step size of the unsteady
simulation are set to values such that the Courant Number in • Validation is the assessment of uncertainty of the sim-
the entire domain is 3.0. This leads to switching to a pure ulation model by means of experimental data plus the
Upwind Differencing Scheme within the HRIC scheme. As assessment of the modeling error itself.
a result the interface between air and water becomes severely
smeared and is forming a cone-like shape starting from inlet The verification & validation procedure will be carried out
towards outlet (Figure 4c). Now the HRIC scheme is modi- in accordance with recommendations of the ITTC regarding
fied by removing the CFL dependency. The Courant number Uncertainty Analysis in CFD [4]. For a detailed description
is kept at 3.0 and the simulation repeated. Figure 4d illus- see also Stern et al. [11, 12]. The simulation error δS is de-
trates the result which clearly shows that this modification al- fined as the difference between simulation result S and reality
or truth T . It consists of the modeling error δSM and the nu- According to the ITTC guidelines [4], three different cases are
merical error δSN . Unfortunately δS can never be determined distinguished:
exactly since instead of T only experimental results are avail-
(i) Monotonic convergence: 0 < Rk < 1
able which also contain a certain level of uncertainty.
(ii) Oscillatory convergence: Rk < 0i (13)
δS = S − T = δSM + δSN (7) (iii) Divergence: Rk > 1
For some cases magnitude and sign of the numerical error In the case of (i) the Generalized Richardson Extrapolation is
can be estimated, leading to corrected numerical uncertainty used to assess the uncertainty Uk or the error estimate δk and
USC N . For the uncorrected case only the numerical uncer- the corrected uncertainty UkC . For oscillatory convergence
tainty USN is assessed. Therefore the numerical error δSN is (case (ii)) the uncertainty Uk is estimated by determining the
decomposed into contributions from iteration number δI , grid error between minimum and maximum of the oscillation. In
size δG , time step δT and other parameters δP . With uncer- the case of divergence (iii) it is not possible to estimate errors
tainty U as described above this gives the following expres- or uncertainties.
sion:
5.1.1 Generalized Richardson Extrapolation
2
USN = UI2 + UG
2
+ UT2 + UP2 (8)
As stated above, in case of monotonic convergence general-
For validation purpose the comparison error E between the ized RE is used to determine the error δk with respect to re-
benchmark experimental data D and the simulation result S finement ratio rk and order-of-accuracy Pk . Usually δk is es-
is determined in order to asses modeling uncertainty USM . timated for the finest solution of the input parameter m = 1
only. With number of available solutions m = 3 only the
E = D − S = δD − (δSM + δSN ) (9) leading-order term of the error may be evaluated. This gives
the following equations for δk andPk .
To determine if validation of a value has been achieved,
21k
comparison error E is compared with the validation uncer- δk1 = δRE

= pk (14)
tainty UV .
k 1 rk − 1
ln (32k /21k )
UV2 = UD
2 2
+ USN (10) pk = (15)
ln (rk )
If |E| < UV , than the combination of all errors in both Unless the solution is in the asymptotic range, equation (15)
simulation and experimental data is smaller than the valida- only gives a poor estimation of the order-of-accuracy. There-
tion uncertainty. Then validation has been achieved for this fore a correction factor Ck is used to include the effect of
validation uncertainty level. In the case that UV << |E|, higher-order terms priory neglected. Ck is defined as follows:
the modeling error δSM can be used to achieve modeling im-
r Pk − 1
provements. Ck = P (16)
r kest − 1
The corrected error δk1 is defined by combining equations
5.1 Verification Procedure
(14) and (16)
In the course of the verification process a grid convergence
21k
study has to be conducted. In order to do this it is necessary δk1 = Ck δRE
= C k (17)
to use a minimum of three grids which have been uniformly
k1
rkpk − 1
refined with an increment Δxk such that constant refinement Depending how close the corrected error δk1 is to the
ratio rk exits. asymptotic range (how close Ck is to 1) the expression to as-
sess the uncertainties take different forms. If Ck is sufficiently
Δxk2 Δxk2 Δxkm
rk = = = (11) greater than one and lacking confidence only Uk is estimated
Δxk1 Δxk2 Δxkm−1 by the following formula:
√
ITTC Guidelines recommend refinement ratio rk between 2
Uk = Ck δRE
k1
+ (1 − Ck ) δRE
k1
(18)
and 2. Throughout this work ratios of 1.5 and 2 have been
used. Next a convergence ratio Rk is defined to give informa- For Ck being sufficiently smaller than one the ITTC rec-
tion about convergence respective divergence of a solution. It ommends to use expression (19) to assess Uk .
is defined as follows:

Uk = δRE + 2 (1 − C k ) δ
REk1 (19)
21k = Sk2 − Sk1
k1
If Ck is sufficiently close to 1, the error δk can be estimated.

32k = Sk3 − Sk2 (12)
This allows to determine a corrected solution SC and a thus a
Rk = 21k /32k corrected uncertainty UkC .

with ijk as the solution changes for the input parameter k
UkC = (1 − Ck ) δRE
(20)
between three solutions ranging from fine Sk1 to coarse Sk3 . k1
5.2 Validation Procedure 5.3.1 Computational Grids
As stated in section 5, validation is defined as a process to the Grid Convergence studies have been conducted using 3 dif-
model uncertainty USM and, if possible, sign and magnitude ferent combinations of refinement parameters to study their
of the modeling error δSM itself. This is done by using exper- impact on grid densities and computational results. The com-
imental data to compare the simulation results with. Thus the putational grid has been modeled such that it depends on one
error in the experimental data has to be considered, making it base number. This way it can be ensured that a constant grid
refinement ratio rk is used. Two exceptions from this mod-
easier to validate simulations if the experimental error is large.
eling paradigm exist. First the prism layer used to resolve
It must thus be noted that the level of validation is strongly de-
pended on the quality of the comparison data. The validation the boundary layer around hull and appendages is excluded
procedure is based on the relation between validation uncer- from refinement because this would lead to large changes in
tainty UV , predefined programmatic validation requirement dimensionless wall-scale Y + . Most likely this would lead to
Ureqd and comparison error |E|. These three variables may changes in near-wall treatment like using a low-Reynolds ap-
form the following six combinations: proach for one simulations and wall functions for the other.
This would render the simulations incomparable. Therefore
|E| < UV < Ureqd the total thickness of the prism layer, the thickness of the wall
nearest node and the number of prism layers are kept constant
|E| < Ureqd < UV
throughout this verification & validation. The second excep-
Ureqd < |E| < UV
(21) tion concerns the resolution of the free surface. Since free
UV < |E| < Ureqd surface resolution is very important for correct resolution of
UV < Ureqd < |E| ship drag, it has been given its own base number. This way
it is possible to evaluate the influence of different refinement
Ureqd < UV < |E|
ways on both computational grid and solution. The refinement
ways investigated within this work are:
In cases 1 - 3 of (21) the results are validated. Validation
is achieved at the level of validation uncertainty UV . This 1. Global refinement; were only the global grid base num-
means that the comparison error is below the noise level re- ber is refined.
sulting in an impossibility to estimate error due to modeling
assumption δSM A . In the case of 1, the validation level is 2. Free Surface refinement; were only free surface param-
also below Ureqd which makes the validation successful from eters are refined by their base number. Free surface re-
a programmatic point of view. For case 4- 6 the comparison finements consists of a vertical refinement in the whole
error is above the noise level. Sign and magnitude of E can domain at the expected level of the wave pattern and a
be used to estimate δSM A . In the fourth case the validation is second refinement in both longitudinal and traversal di-
achieved at |E| level with respect to the used software. rection in the vicinity of the Kelvin pattern.
3. Overall refinement; were both global and free surface

5.3 Grid Convergence Studies on ACCV5 boat for non- base number are modified as a function of the refinement
lifting cases ratio rk .
Verification and validation is performed on the geometry of For all three cases four grids with constant refinement ratio
Americas Cup Class Version 5 boat (ACCV5) for which ex- rk = 2 have been constructed. Resulting grid sizes varied
perimental towing tank data is available. These boats have from 8.1 × 105 cells for the coarsest grid to 1.2 × 107 for the
a rather complex geometry which besides hull, keel fin and finest.
rudder also includes a trim tab for the keel and a ballast bulb
with wings. Since model scale λ=3, which is rather close to 5.3.2 Verification and Validation of Resistance
full scale compared with tank models for conventional ves-
sels, it was decided that it is possible to do the validation in The verification of resistance has been performed with respect
full scale. Therefore experimental data have been transformed to grid convergence. Iterative convergence has been taken into
to full scale by employing a modified version of the ITTC account, but since it was in the order of 0.05% CT it was
procedures. The modifications applied mainly consist of own considered neglectable. The results of the studies have been
friction coefficients and form factor (1+k) values for yacht ap- summarized in table 1 and 2. Table 1 illustrates the CT values
pendages. The conditions of the calculations are a Froude for the different grids as well as the solution change from a
number F n of 0.403 and normalized Reynolds number Rn of coarser to a finer solution between adjacent grids. Here is
4.75 × 106 . The boat is allowed to sink dynamically, but not defined as:
(Si − Si+1 )
to pitch. The pitch angle is prescribed at ψ = 0.46 bow down = (22)
trim. STAR-CCM+7.02.008 is used as flow code to solve the Si+1
Reynolds-Average-Navier-Stokes equations for the flow field The results show that the changes of CT between the differ-
around the yacht. The simulation is conducted at fully turbu- ent solutions are largest in the case were free surface param-
lent conditions and the k − ω based Shear Stress Transport eters variations are involved (Case 2-3). Verification results
(SST) model has been used to model turbulence. are illustrated in table 2. Here convergence ratio RG indicates
−3

1: −3 Grid convergence study for total resistance Table 3: Validation of total resistance CT ×10
Table for
CT ×10 for ACCV5 ACCV5
Grid Number Nr Grid E% UV % UD % USN %
Nr. Var 4 3 2 1 EFD 1) 1-3 E 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.11
1) CT 6.46 6.33 6.29 6.28 6.32 EC 0.7 3.2 2.0 0.04
-2.0% -0.6% -0.2% 2-4 E 0.4 2.0 2.0 0.26
2) CT 5.87 6.02 6.19 6.28 6.32 EC 0.6 3.2 2.0 0.05
2.6% 2.7% 1.5% 2) 1-3 E 0.6 2.9 2.0 2.04
3) CT 6.06 6.05 6.24 6.28 6.32 E C 0.1 4.1 2.0 1.55
-0.1% 3.1% 0.6% 2-4 E 2.1 - 2.0 -
%SG EC - - 2.0 -
3) 1-3 E 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.25
−3
EC 0.4 3.2 2.0 0.05
Table 2: Verification of total resistance CT ×10 for
2-4 E 1.2 - 2.0 -
ACCV5
EC - - 2.0 -
Nr. Grid RG UG δG SC
%D
1) 1-3 0.34 0.11% 0.07% -0.07%
2-4 0.30 0.26% 0.20% 0.01%
2) 1-3 0.58 2.06% -0.50% 0.5% validation uncertainty UV , experimental uncertainty UD and
2-4 1.08 - - - simulation uncertainty USN as percentage of D for both cor-
rected and uncorrected approaches. It has to be noted that
3) 1-3 0.20 0.25% -0.20% 0.2%
data uncertainty UD has not been specified in the experimen-
2-4 -40.39 - - -
tal towing tank data. Details regarding experimental uncer-
%SG tainties of large towing tank facilities are rarly found in liter-
ature. Longo and March [7] give values between 0.6% - 1.5%
for a systematic investigation of the surface combatant DTMB
monotonic grid convergence of solutions for grids 1-3 for all 5415 model with respect to experimental errors whilst Yan et
three case (RG < 1). For the coarser grid sequence (grids al. [13] give values of 2.8% for the same ship. Similar data for
2-4) only case 1 (Global refinement) shows monotonic con- yacht investigation have not been available. The only source
vergence. For the coarser grid sequence of the free surface found for uncertainties of yacht investigation has been a pre-
refinement study (case 2) RG indicates divergence whilst for sentation given by Frank DeBord at Stevens Institute [2]. The
the same grid sequence of the global refinement study (case data given in this presentation show the long term repeatabil-
3) the solution appears to be of oscillatory nature. However, ity of towing tank tests to be approximately 3%. Also this
the later indicator seems to be misleading, so results for case overview of towing tank uncertainties is by no means com-
3.b are also treated as divergent. It is therefore not possibly plete, it can be concluded that the data uncertainty normally
to estimate error or uncertainty for case 2.b and 3.b. Where should not exceed 3%. It was therefore decided that it is feasi-
appropriate Generalized Richardson Extrapolation is used to ble to take into account a experimental uncertainty UD of 2%

estimate sign and magnitude of the grid error δG and a cor- for validation purpose. By comparing E and UV of table 3 one
rected uncertainty UGC as well as a corrected solution SC can easily see that for all cases in which the comparison error
(equations (14) - (20)). The thus gained corrected solution could be calculated, E < UV is true. Therefore results have
can be compared to the solution SG . This gives an estimation been validated for all cases except case b (grids 2- 4) of both
of the level of verification of the simulation. In all cases were free surface and overall refinement studies. This coincides
an estimation of the numerical uncertainties was possible, the with the findings of the verification study and allows the con-
corrected solution does not differ much from the originally clusion that both verification & validation has been achieved
calculated with differences in the range of -0.07 to 0.5%SG . for all refinement studies except the two cases stated above.
It can thus be concluded that in all those cases the level of ver- The formal validation and verification procedure as conducted
ification is rather good and the results can be considered ver- above only allows to draw conclusion regarding the finest grid
ified. Validation of the simulation results is performed with in the study, in this case grid 1 respective grid 2. Whilst not
respect to the results of the towing tank tests. Therefore the giving the same level of certainty a plot of results deltas over
comparison error is calculated according to equation (9) tak- grid cells is a feasible approach to judge the sensitivity of the
ing into account the simulation result S and the experimental solution to grid changes. Figure 5 illustrates resistance coeffi-
data D. In order to conduct the validation as defined in (21), cient ΔCT over grid points. It is interesting to note that with
the validation uncertainty UV has to be calculated (10). The ongoing refinement cases including free surface grid parame-
corrected comparison error EC is defined as in (9) but using ters show an increasing drag whilst for the general refinement
SC instead of S. Table 3 summarizes comparison error E, case the opposite holds true. The later one coincides with the
widely held doctrine that with ongoing refinement a RANSE
solution gives smaller forces until grid invariance of results is
reached. This investigations suggest that while this certainly
holds true for single phase investigation of deeply submerged
bodies, it is not applicable to free surface flows around float-
ing bodies. The rationale behind this behavior probably is
that a too coarse resolution of free surface leads to increased
wave damping thus altering the pressure fluctuations on the
hull such that a lower wave resistance is predicted. However,
to be sure this theorem would have to be proofed. The distri-
bution of results also illustrates the high impact of free surface
refinement parameters on overall grid density and result accu-
racy. It can be concluded that special attention has to be de-
voted to these parameters in order to achieve reliable results.

Figure 6: wave contours from initial studies (top) and from
!
"
#$
Grid Convergence studies (bottom, grid 1 - finest grid)

stream. For the new approach (figure8) the bow wave is much

more distinctive and the free surface interface is usually cap-
tured over 3-4 cells. This clearly shows an advantage of mod-

ified approach over the old. However, plan view reveals that
the volume fraction achieved with the new approach still is

not perfect. Whilst the improvements between old approach
and new approach are obvious and pleasant, plan view still

reveals some remaining interface smearing. Still the improve-

ment is large since the volume fraction for the old approach
ranges between 0.4 and 1.0, whilst for the new approach the
Figure 5: ΔCT over Grip Points w.r.t to Experimental Data range is between 0.85 and 1.0. It seems that within the VOF
method achieving perfect results without smeared interfaces
for this rather blunt bows is still very hard if not impossible.
Since the correct determination of wave resistance is cru- Nonetheless from an engineering point of view the simulation
cial for reliable results on total resistance of ships, a refine- is absolutely applicable since with respect to the verification
ment study for free surface flows also has to take into account & validation results the error in total resistance is small.
its influence on generated wave patterns. Figure 6 compares
wave resolution from initial studies (top) with results gained
with the modified HRIC scheme.The top picture shows that
the computational domain is too short and the wave patterns
is diffuse and damped. Especially the later suggests an insuf-
ficient resolution of the free surface. The bottom of figure 6
shows the finest grid of the investigation. Obviously there are
large differences between the two simulations, the later one
showing a sharp resolution of primary and secondary wave
trains. Here wave damping seems to be largely reduced.
One of the goal of this investigation was to reduce numer-
ical ventilation caused by the smearing of the free surface
interface. Figure 7 shows the volume fractions of water at
the yacht surface for the old approach with Courant number
dependency whilst figure 8 illustrates the same for the new Figure 7: Numerical Ventilation with Courant Number depen-
approach without. Comparing the two cases one can clearly dency
see from the profile view that the new approach gives a much
sharper interface between air (blue) and water (red). The dif-
ferences are most distinctive at the bow wave which takes
an entirely different shape. The bow wave of the old ap-
proach (figure 7) has a large region over which the interface is
smeared and this smearing is transported significantly down-
trim moments and vertical forces exist as input values. These
values have been used as input data for the CFD simulation
instead of dynamic calculation of these values, which would
also have been possible.
5.4.1 Computational Grids

The grid convergence study has also been conducted accord-
ing to ITTC standards as explicated in section 5.3. The prin-
cipal design of the grids is identical to the one used in sec-
tion 5.3. It includes refinement of the free surface in verti-
cal direction and additionally in horizontal dimensions in the
vicinity of the kelvin angle around the boat. The results of
Figure 8: Numerical Ventilation without Courant Number de- the non-lifting verification & validation study clearly showed
pendency that the major factor towards a grid independent solution is
the refinement of the free surface. Figure 5 illustrates that
5.4 Grid Convergence Studies including Lift surface grid refinement is already sufficient. Therefore only
free surface refinement has been varied for the present grid
After the successful verification & validation of the point vari- convergence study. Grid parameters have been systematically
able CT for the sailing yacht in upright conditions reported in varied according to table 4. In contrast to the grid conver-
section 5.3, a further study has been conducted in order to gence study for the non-lifting case in section 5.3 the constant
proof the feasibility of the approach for heeled conditions of grid refinement factor has been decreased from 2 to 1.5. This
the yacht. Heeled conditions include the generation of hy- has been done to get a more uniform refinement in terms cell
drodynamic lift by the yacht and its appendages. Therefore sizes which enhances the comparability of the results. The
a validation & verification for these conditions cannot be re-
stricted to the evaluation of total resistance CT . Instead it
has to include the lifting component to consider the complete Table 4: Grid Parameter for Grid Invariance Study
state of the yacht. Therefore the two point values total drag Ref. Interface Spacing
coefficient CD and total lift coefficient CL are evaluated to- Factor dz dx & dy Grid Size
gether. The correct evaluation of this forces within towing (-) (mm) (m) (-)
tank experiments or CFD simulations requires the modeling
of aerodynamic forces which a sailing yacht encounters. In 1.0 10.0 0.0625 1.25 × 107
order to correctly simulate the influence of the aerodynamic 1.5 15.0 0.0938 7.07 × 106
force generated by the sails, one has to introduce an additional 3.0 22.5 0.1406 3.57 × 106
dynamic sail trimming moment around the y-axis of the yacht
which is equal to hydrodynamic drag D times the vertical cen- differences of lift and drag coefficient to the experimental data
ter of efforts of the sails V CEaero . derived from the grid convergence study is shown in figure 9.
The figure illustrates that the drag coefficient CD is always
MYdyn = D · V CEaero (23) underestimated, whilst for the lift coefficient CL the contrary
holds true. However, differences to EFD are rather low for
Additionally, the generation of lift by the yacht hull and ap-
both coefficients and in the same order of magnitude. Gener-
pendages introduces a vertical force pointing up. Similar to
ally both coefficients converge quite satisfactorily, giving the
the trimming moment explicated above, this force has to be
first indication of a high quality solution. Table 5 gives the
countered by a collinear aerodynamic vector of equal length
numerical values of the convergence of drag, lift and lift/drag-
and different sign. This sail force has to be modeled during
ratio. The solution change from a coarser to a finer solution
testing as a additional dynamic sink force FZdyn . It is mod-
, as defined in (22), decreases continuously. The results of
eled as heeling force FH times the sine of the heeling angle
the verification procedure (table 6) show that the convergence
φ.
ratio RG < 1 is true for all cases, allowing the conclusion
FZdyn = FH sinφ (24)
that the decrease is monotonic for all values. The biggest un-
Contrary to the upright resistance grid convergence study, this certainty of the computational grid UG is 0.52% for the lift-
study has been conducted in model scale. This approach not to-drag ratio CL /CD which is already very low. Since the
only allows easier comparison between results but also makes convergence is monotonic, it is possible to use Generalized
the appliance of the various additional input parameters eas- Richardson Extrapolation in order to apply a correction for
ier. Whilst for the non-lifting test cases validated in section numerical error. In particular, it is possible to calculate a cor-
5.3 trim was kept fixed and only sinkage was dynamically cal- rect grid uncertainty UGC and a corrected solution SC . With
culated, the present case sets both state variables free. This is a maximum derivation of 0.14%, these corrected values are
a major change since it makes it necessary to account for sim- even closer to the experimental values. It can be generally
ilar trim and sinkage forces in order to compare simulation said that from a numerical point of view the results of the
and experiment. For the towing tank experiment prescribed grid convergence study show a docile behavior and steadily
%
Table 7: Validation of drag and lift for ACCV5
Variable E% UV % UD % USN %
%
CD E 0.4% 2.0% 2.0% 0.19%

% EC 0.3% 2.0% 2.0% 0.08%

CL E -0.9% 2.0% 2.0% 0.44%
% EC -0.6% 2.0% 2.0% 0.15%
CL /CD E -1.3% 2.1% 2.0% 0.53%
% EC -0.9% 2.0% 2.0% 0.11%
&"&
&"' %D
%

only considerably below validation uncertainty level but also
very close to experimental data. Although this formally does
Figure 9: ΔCi over Grid Points not decrease the uncertainty of the results, it still increase the
confidence in the applied methods. It also shows again that the
assumptions regarding free surface interface smearing made
Table 5: Grid Convergence of drag and lift for ACCV5 in the previous sections are correct.
Grid 3 Grid 2 Grid 1 EF Data
CD 8.94 9.00 9.01 9.05 6 Summary
- 0.7% 0.1%
The motivation for this investigation has been a failed first at-
CL 1.89 1.88 1.87 1.86
tempt to correctly determine total resistance of free surface
- -0.7% -0.4%
flow around an ACCV5 hull. A review of the first simulations
CL /CD 2.12 2.09 2.08 2.05 led to the assumption that the problem could be traced back
- -1.4% -0.5% to the occurrence of extensive interface smearing at the yacht
%SG hull. This led to a thorough review of the theory behind the
interface capturing model in section 3. This review showed
that the problems encountered most likely were situated in
converge towards the experimental values with increasing re- the use of Courant numbers exceeding 0.5, thus causing the
finement. This allows the conclusion that the simulation is switch to a 1st order upwind differencing scheme. Since re-
verified. Table 7 gives an overview of the values necessary for ducing the overall time step size such that it would allow the
maximum Courant number to be lower than 0.5 would lead
to undesirable long simulation times an alternative approach
Table 6: Verification of drag and lift for ACCV5
was sought to allow the use of higher order schemes like e.g.
the HRIC scheme within acceptable time step size. It was
Variable RG UG δG U GC
concluded that it might be possible to modify the VOF model
CD 0.21 0.19% -0.12% 0.08% such that it does not switch to upwind differencing even if
the local Courant number would be larger than 0.5. This ap-
CL 0.54 0.44% 0.30% 0.14%
proach seems feasible as long as only a steady state solution is
CL /CD 0.37 0.52% 0.41% 0.11% sought-after. Section 4 shows a numerical test case which al-
lows the conclusion that this approach is feasible. Therefore,
%SG the modified scheme was applied to the simulation of the total
resistance of the ACCV5 yacht. Verification and Validation
the validation procedure. Data uncertainty UD and numerical according to the ITTC guidelines was then conducted against
simulation uncertainty USN are combined to the validation experimental data for lifting and non-lifting test cases. Exten-
uncertainty UV . UV is then compared to the comparison error sive grid studies have been carried out, thus also allowing to
EC which is defined as data D minus simulation result S as judge the sensitivity of the results to the change of various grid
per equation 9. The table list all values both for the uncor- parameters. The results showed a much sharper capturing of
rected solution and the solution corrected by means of Gener- the free surface interface with the new approach. It was also
alized Richardson Extrapolation. Per definition, a simulation shown that the initial differences in overall resistance were
is validated if the comparison error is less or equal the valida- mainly caused by the poor free surface resolution caused by
tion uncertainty. This clearly the case for all six comparison the interface smearing. This interface smearing caused a nu-
cases. The simulation can therefore be considered validated merical damping of the waves resulting in a wave resistance
at validation uncertainty level. which was too small. The grid convergence studies clearly
It can be summarized that verification & validation for lift- showed that the free surface simulations for yachts are more
ing conditions was highly successful. Achieved results are not sensible to free surface resolution and thus to wave resistance
than they are to yacht surface resolution (friction and pressure [11] Fred Stern, Robert Wilson, and Jun Shao. Quantitative
forces). Overall it can be concluded that the use of the higher v&v of cfd simulations and certification of cfd codes.
order scheme which was made possible by the modification International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids,
of the existing implementation led to large improvements and 50(11):1335–1355, 2006.
a successful verification & validation. It has to be stressed
that the new approach with the modified scheme is only valid [12] Fred Stern, Robert V. Wilson, Hugh W. Coleman, and
if one is interested in a steady solution. It was also shown Eric G. Paterson. Comprehensive approach to verifica-
that the simulation still suffers from a small amount of inter- tion and validation of cfd simulations—part 1: Method-
face smearing, however the overall effect on the results may ology and procedures. Journal of Fluids Engineering,
be considered as small. Generally, the error in verification & 123(4):793–802, 2001.
validation was satisfying small. [13] Kai Yan, Feng Zhao, Cheng sheng Wu, and Lei Yang.
Numerical and experimental uncertainty analysis for the
REFERENCES prediction of resistance and wave profile of a surface
ship model. In 8th International Conference on Hydro-
[1] C. Böhm and K. Graf. Validation of ranse simulations dynamics, 2008.
of a fully appended accv5 design using towing tank data.
In International Conference on Innovation in High Per- 7 AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
formance Sailing Yachts, Lorient, France, April 2008.
Christoph Böhm holds a diploma degree in naval architec-
[2] Frank DeBord. Hydrodynamic performance prediction ture from the University of Applied Sciences Kiel. He is
for grand prix sailing yachts. Presentation at Stevens currently working as a flow scientist at the Yacht Research
Institute. Unit Kiel. He is specialized on RANSE simulations of
sailing yacht appendages and hulls as well as subsequent
[3] C Hirt and B Nichols. Volume of fluid (vof) method for
VPP integration. He is currently working towards his PhD
the dynamics of free boundaries1. Journal of Computa-
thesis at TU Delft.
tional Physics, 39(1):201–225, 1981.
Kai Graf is professor for ship hydrodynamics at the Univer-
[4] ITTC. ITTC Recommended Procedures and Guidelines; sity of Applied Sciences Kiel and senior scientist of the Yacht
Uncertainty Analysis in CFD; Verification and Valida- Research Unit Kiel. Kai is working on sailing yacht aero- and
tion. International Towing Tank Conference, 2008. hydrodynamics since 1998, being specialized on numerical
simulation methods.
[5] Lars Larsson, Frederick Stern, and Michel Visonneau.
Gothenburg 2010, A Workshop on Numerical Ship Hy-
drodynamics. Chalmers University of Technology, 2010.
[6] B. P. Leonard. Simple high-accuracy resolution pro-

gram for convective modelling of discontinuities. In-
ternational Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids,
8(10):1291–1318, 1988.
[7] Joe Longo and Fred Stern. Uncertainty assessment

for towing tank tests with example for surface combat-
ant dtmb model 5415. Journal of Ship Research, 49,
No.1:55–68, March 2005.
[8] S. Muzaferija and M. Peric. Computation of free-

surface flows using the finite-volume-method and mov-
ing grids. Numerical Heat Transfer, Part B: Fundamen-
tals, 32(4):369–384, 1997.
[9] S. Muzaferija and M. Peric. Computation of free surface

flows using interface-Tracking and interface-capturing
methods, chapter 2, pages 59–100. Computational me-
chanics publications. WIT Press, Southampton,, nonlin-
ear water wave interaction edition, 1999.
[10] S. Muzaferija, M. Peric, P. Sames, and T. Schellin. A

two-fluid navier-stokes solver to simulate water entry.
In Twenty-Second Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics,
Washington D.C:, 1999.

DATABASE BUILDING AND STATISTICAL METHODS TO PREDICT

SAILING YACHTS HYDRODYNAMICS
Lionel Huetz, Marc Lombard Yacht Design Group, France, lionel.huetz@gmail.com

Pierre Emmanuel Guillerm, Ecole Centrale de Nantes, France, pierre-emmanuel.guillerm@ec-nantes.fr
Abstract. The model characterizing the hydrodynamic forces acting on a sailing yacht hull can be
built using extensive tank testing or CFD computations carried out on the studied hull shape.
Unfortunately, in most cases involving sailing yachts, time and money are limited and testing each
hull at the required speeds and attitudes is impossible. The idea is then to rely on a hydrodynamic
model gathering results on various hulls; able to describe the evolution of the hydrodynamic forces
depending on the hull shape through geometrical variables. The building and calibration of this type of
model requires numerous computations but once the model is built, this approach is very fast.
Furthermore, these models can provide a better understanding of the trends than tests on isolated hull
shapes since they contain the results on a whole database of hulls. This type of approach using meta-
models can be used in various fields to produce lots of results in a very short time and a better
understanding of the phenomena involved. This paper presents a methodology to produce the
database, select the relevant explanatory variables and build the formulations in the context of sailing
yachts hydrodynamics. The regressions allowing the prediction of the running attitude and forces are
presented.
tuning and speed of the yacht fulfilling the equilibrium

NOMENCLATURE
condition between all the forces is even more complex;
ALA Apparent leeway angle (°) so complex that computational time is very far from
AHL Lateral area of immersed part of the hull (m2) matching designer’s needs. Furthermore, a fully coupled
AX Maximum section surface (m2) simulation would be very hard to interpret in a design
BEI Bow entry incidence (°) perspective since very various physical phenomena are
BWL Waterline beam (m) interacting and mixed in the simulation. As a result, the
CB Block coefficient aerodynamics and the hydrodynamics are always treated
CBR Relative camber separately. Velocity prediction programs (VPPs) gather
Cf Friction coefficient the results of each model to find the equilibrium of the
Cflot Flotation coefficient yacht and finally predict its speed and attitude. In the
CP Prismatic coefficient present work, we are dealing with the characterization of
CPfront CP of the hull in front of maximum section the hydrodynamic model.
CX Maximum section coefficient
i
F Non dimensional form of F (N) 1.1 CONTEXT
Fn Froude number Various approaches can be used to define the
LWL Waterline length (m) hydrodynamic model of a yacht. Indeed, the model may
LT Longitudinal position maximum draft (m) characterize directly the behaviour of the appended hull
LX Longitudinal position maximum section (m) or deal with the bare hull and its appendages separately.
LCB Longitudinal position centre of buoyancy (m) Then, the hydrodynamic forces decomposition and their
LCG Longitudinal position centre of gravity (m) coupling with the attitude of the yacht can be dealt with
R Rocker angle (°) in various ways. Finally, a choice has to be made
Roy Running trim angle (°) between a steady or unsteady approach.
SC Static wetted surface of the bare hull (m2) The level of decomposition is one of the main issues
T Draft (m) ruling the equilibrium between accuracy, computational
Trz Running sinkage (m) time and versatility; the higher the level, the faster the
TT Immersion of transom (m) computations and versatility but the more restricting the
hypothesis on the physical effects involved. In fact, each
1. INTRODUCTION time a problem is split into simpler problems, hypothesis
“Is it fast?” is certainly the most common question that on the coupling between the latter are made. This may
arises when observing a sailing yacht at the dock or ship lead to a loss of accuracy but also to a better
lines in a design office. Sailing yachts find their energy understanding of the different separated physical
in the relative motion between air and water. Their phenomena and an enlarged field of application.
behaviour is governed by the equilibrium between Finding the right balance between a direct approach of
aerodynamic forces one side and hydrodynamic forces on complex phenomena and a reductionist approach
the other side. The combined simulation of these forces dividing complex problems into simpler ones is a
is a challenge and finding the three dimensional attitude, recurrent problem in applied science. Choices have to be
made, based on expertise and practice. Several
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

- 23 -
preliminary designs and yacht performance studies as The most famous formulations able to predict the
well as numerical simulations and analysis of the existing hydrodynamics of sailing yacht hulls are based on the
state of the art predictions led to the following Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series [1], [2].
conclusions: The limitations of these formulations have been
− Significant improvements can be made while discussed in a previous paper [3]. These articles showed
remaining in a quasi static VPP approach based on that a more detailed characterization was needed to
the coupling of three separated mathematical models improve the performance prediction, especially the
(hull model, appendage model and aerodynamic influence of heel, leeway and trim.
model). Quasi static refers to the fact that dynamic
effects are not directly included. 1.2 MOTIVATIONS
− Some attitude variables (leeway, running trim and
The goal of the present study is to produce valuable
sinkage) have to be added to the models and the VPP
information for the naval architects involved in the
to improve the overall accuracy by improving the
design of sailing yachts. This encompasses an improved
coupling between the different models.
accuracy and sensitivity of the velocity prediction but
In this context, the accuracy of the prediction relies
also the understanding of the physics involved. Our goal
mainly on the accuracy of the three models
is to make this work as intelligible as possible for the
characterizing separately the hydrodynamic behaviour of
designer, to stimulate the intuition and creativity instead
the bare hull (without appendages), of its appendages and
of trying to replace them. In other words, turn the
the aerodynamic behaviour of the yacht.
question “is it fast?” into “why is it fast?”
The appendages are relatively well described by the
This led to the following conclusions:
lifting line theory implemented in most of the VPPs,
− Build a computational loop that will be as versatile as
especially for high aspect ratio foils used on most of the
possible to generate large databases of numerical
modern yachts. The bare hull behaviour is much more
experiments such as systematic series.
complex to predict. There are two main ways of
− Define a methodology and statistical tools to identify
characterizing the hydrodynamic properties of a hull.
The first one is to carry out some tests on the studied hull the relevant geometrical variables and build new
shape for different values of speed and attitude variables formulations to predict the hydrodynamic forces and
running attitude of yacht hulls.
such as heel and leeway angles. The results of these tests
are stored in a matrix giving the relation between these − Develop a specific VPP to implement the developed
input variables on one side and the forces and running formulations with their additional variables,
attitude of the boat (output variables) on the other side. especially the running attitude of the yacht.
The tests can be carried out on scaled models in towing The previous paper [4] presented the first results of this
tank facilities or using computational fluid dynamic work and we will present here a more detailed
(CFD) tools. These two methods have their advantages description of the key issues of the methodology, much
and drawbacks, but they share one main drawback, they more extended formulations and the first results of the
are so expensive and time consuming that their use is developed VPP.
extremely restricted.
The other method is to use a mathematical model that is 2. TOOLS
able to approximate the matrix described before; each The building of a numerical database involves various
term depending on geometrical parameters describing the types of computations, realized by several modules. The
shape of the hull. Different methods can be followed to different tools that are used in the loop are presented
build this type of mathematical models. hereafter.
Since the flow around a yacht hull is very complex, they
are all based on empirical or semi empirical approaches, 2.1 LOOP MONITORING
using experimental results databases or real scale
measurements on various hull shapes. In some cases, Figure 1 describes the modules involved in the loop used
specific experimental campaigns called systematic series to build the database. DOE stands for design of
are set in order to build mathematical models describing experiments and will be discussed in the next section.
the behaviour of ship hulls.
Despite a lower accuracy, the approach based on
mathematical models presents many advantages. Once it
is built, its use is very fast and cheap, facilitating the
comparison of very various hulls during the design ()&
./*" *
)1!*$
phase. Furthermore, the mathematical analysis of a large * *
*

database can provide a better understanding of the
phenomena involved than isolated tank tests or numerical
simulations since they contain the results on various +,
#
,

&#0
hulls. $- $-
Figure 1: Chart of the loop
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

- 24 -
Input variables are: 2.3.1 Adaptation of classical measurements

− The parameters of the deformation used in the
As we are dealing with asymmetrical wetted shapes, even
CAD module.
the classical measurements have to be redefined.
− The attitude variables (speed, yaw) Once the hydrostatic equilibrium is achieved in the flow
Outputs variables are: referential R0, i.e. LCB=LCG and weight=displacement,
− The hydrostatic coefficients. the apparent leeway angle ALA is computed. This angle
− The hydrodynamic forces. is quoted in green in Figure 4 and defined in the next
section. Once ALA is computed, a new referential R1 is
2.2 MORPHING TOOL defined as a rotation of R0 around Z0 axis. The rotation
A morphing tool is used to generate various hulls and the value is ALA, so that the wetted shape is aligned with the
associated volume meshes by deforming an initial hull X1 axis. All the measurements such as waterline beam
and mesh. It is based on the hull modeller developed by and length, master section area, prismatic coefficient and
HydrOcean as a plug in of Rhinoceros. This approach so on are then carried out in the R1 referential.
Y0 Y1
allows large changes in hull shapes without degrading
the properties of the initial structured volume mesh.
Figure 2 presents a zoom on the boundary layer meshing BEI
of the initial hull in blue and a deformed hull in red.
ALA
X0 = FLOW DIRECTION X1
Figure 2: Initial and deformed meshes Figure 4: Measurements of asymmetrical wetted shapes
Each deformation is defined by its “volume of action”
and spatial functions. Three spatial functions define the 2.3.2 Parameters quantifying the asymmetry
displacement of the hull control points, depending on Three measurements depicted on figure 4 were defined in
their x, y, z position. These functions are defined using 1 order to characterize the asymmetry.
to 5th order Splines. Each transformation is monitored by − The apparent leeway angle, ALA. The points A
the amplitude of the spatial functions, its “volume of and B are defined as the centre of the sections
action” remaining unchanged. Figure 3 shows a function situated respectively at 5% and 95% LWL. ALA is
which modifies the front sections fullness. The original the angle between (AB) and the direction of the
section in the middle is black, negative amplitude leads incoming flow.
to a narrower V shaped section in blue, positive
− The bow entry incidence, BEI defined as the angle
amplitude creates a wider U shaped section in red. More
between the bisectrix of the water plane entry and
details about this tool can be found in [5].
the direction of the incoming flow.
− The relative camber, defined by the deviation of
f(x) g(y) h(z)
1 1 1 the mean line of the water plane divided by LWL.

2.3.3 Additional hydrostatic parameters
0 Loa x Boa/2 0 Boa/2 y zmin zmax z
The pressure field and the hydrodynamic drag of the
tested hulls present a high sensitivity to the longitudinal
shape of the hull. Some measurements such as the rocker
angle R were defined as shown in Figure 5 to
characterize the keel line. Regardless the heel value,
these angles and immersions are always measured in the
vertical plane (X1, Z0) in which the hull has the larger
Figure 3: Definition and visualization of a transformation lateral area.
Transom immersion
2.3 HYDROSTATIC MODULE

Stem immersion
A hydrostatic module has been developed specifically for

this study. In fact, the characterization of the wetted 10% LwL
10% LwL
shape of sail boat hulls under various hydrostatic 5% LwL
LwL
equilibriums is the key of the chosen approach. In fact, as
Rocker ° Forward Rocker °
highlighted in [4], the measurements of the wetted shape Point 1
Point 2
under heel allow significant improvements in the
accuracy of the prediction. Figure 5: Measurements of the keel line
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

- 25 -
2.4. RANSE SOLVER data we will process in the end. In fact, a database made
of numerical simulations is in a way the exact opposite of
ICARE [6] is a RANSE (Reynolds Average Navier-
a real life database. Not only we control most of the
Stokes Equations) free-surface solver initially co-
explanatory variables value of our experiments as in a
developed by Ecole Centrale Nantes under French
laboratory, but we have a 100 % repeatability of the
Ministry of Defence support, and by Hydrocean. It uses
experiments. This does not mean that the result is perfect,
the k-Ȧ turbulence model developed by Wilcox [7]. The
but from a statistical point of view, it is very different
free surface is described by an interface tracking method.
from real life experiments. It is luck, but it is also
General schemes are based on second order (in space and
additional work. The data does not exist, we need to
time) implicit finite differences. Discrete unknowns are
build it and find a satisfying way of building it.
distributed on a hexahedral structured curvilinear grid
fitted to the hull and the free surface.
3.1 DATABASE BUILDING – DESIGN OF
The interface tracking approach allows a very a good
EXPERIMENTS
precision/time ratio and is also very suitable for the
construction of a systematic series. The drawback of this Once the extreme values of the inputs variables are
mesh deformation approach is its inability to describe defined, there are many ways to design the experiments,
breaking waves. This reduces the maximum Froude i.e. define the number of points needed in the database
number to about 0.6 to 1.0, depending on the hull shape. and their spacing with respect to the sensitivity of the
A satisfying validation of the ICARE code on sailing response (outputs) is a complex problem. The aim is to
yacht hulls has been performed. As part of collaboration extract as much of the physics as possible with a
with the Delft Ship Hydromechanics Laboratory, J.A. minimum number of experiments. In our case, the input
Keuning and his team made available the detailed tank variables are the magnitude of the transformations
test results of three different models of the DSYHS. The applied to the parent hull and the computational
length to displacement ratios vary from 5 for model 23 to parameters such as speed, weight and LCG. Once a range
7 for Model 28. Results on bare hull but also on and a step of variation have been defined for each input
appended hulls were available. ICARE computations on variable, the straight forward approach is to follow a full
both bare and appended hull were performed. The factorial design of experiments. In our case, we have at
computations were carried out at model scale, with semi least 10 input variables. If we want to explore at least
captive method. On the three models, the agreement three different values for each variable, this leads to 310 =
between the tank tests and the RANS solver was good, 6.104 computations, which is not realistic in our context.
within the 5% range concerning drag and showing the Several methodologies have been developed to reduce
same behaviour concerning the heave and trim over the the number of experiments needed before the beginning
whole speed range. The results concerning Model 25 are of the experiments and the building of the model. We can
presented in Figure 6. Error bars have been represented quote the following methods: Reduced Factorial, , Box-
with a 0.5 N measurement uncertainty plus a 5% margin Behnken, Latin Square, Taguchi Matrix.
to help the reading of the discrepancies. The general idea is to assume some properties in the data
70 and use them to reduce the number of experiments. Some
methods assume linear or quadratic response in the data;
60 others neglect the interaction between the explanatory
Tank tests
50 variables, etc. A very good overview of the quoted
ICARE
methods and their applications can be found in [9],
Drag (N)
40
dealing with most of the classical statistical methods.
30 Another interesting paper by Astrid Jourdan [10] deals
20 more specifically with the design of experiments applied
to numerical simulations with approaches allowing more
10 flexible responses such as the Kriging technique. In our
0 case, the design of experiments can be adapted as the
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 database grows. We do not need to follow a plan defined
a priori. In fact, the automated post treatment of the
Froude number
solver’s solution makes the results of each experiment
Figure 6 : ICARE solver validation - DSYHS Model 25 immediately available in the database. It is worth to
exploit the information collected about the response in
Satisfying results were also obtained and published in [8] order to figure if there are portions of the experimental
concerning validation of the ICARE solver on an region which could require a denser sampling than
IMOCA 60 hull. others. The design of experiments is realized in two
steps. The first step can be described as exploration and
3. DATABASE AND REGRESSION BUILDING the second one is the refining of the database.
In the field of statistics and data mining, a lot of the 3.1.1 Exploratory design – Sobol sequence
knowledge and tools were developed to process real life
data, such as demographical, economical or medical Several methodologies have been developed to optimize
figures. Here, we have the luck to control most of the the exploration phase. The goal is to provide a first
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

- 26 -
response surface that will be the starting point of the This algorithm highlights one of the main advantages of
refining phase. The response surface has to be defined on a completely numerical approach to build a systematic
its whole range of variation and the points have to be series: the ability of following an adaptable design of
distributed as evenly as possible. A specific structure in experiments, which is more and more relevant as the
the repartition of the variables values may lead to a false database grows. The experiments have no longer to be
interpretation of the response. A random sequence could designed a priori, assuming properties in an unknown
be used but it tends to generate concentration of points in data base.
the same region, leaving other regions empty. Figure 8
shows how the Sobol sequence improves the repartitions 3.2. REGRESSION BUILDING – VARIABLE
of the variables values compared with a random SELECTION
sequence on a simple two dimensional case.
In this section, the goal is to identify the relevant
relations between the predictive variables on one side
(the attitude variables and geometrical measurements
computed by the hydrostatic module) and the dependant
variables on the other side (the hydrodynamic forces and
running attitude). What is a “relevant relation”?
The literature on naval hydrodynamics shows that the
purposes motivating regression analysis may differ
largely; the qualities sought after in the regressions will
Figure 8: 1000 points generated with a random sequence
vary accordingly.
on the left and a Sobol sequence on the right
The regression analysis can be used to build a very
The Sobol sequence has been chosen as initial design of simple model, with focus on the reduction of required
experiments in this study. This sequence is widely used predictors and a low constraint on accuracy, in order to
in the exploration phase, to initiate an optimization reduce the number of required measurements to predict a
process for example. In the present work, the goal is not given quantity.
only to find the optimum of the response surface but to In our case, unlike twenty years ago, the hydrostatic
characterize it as well as possible in a given time lapse. computations and measurements are quasi instantaneous,
the number of predictive variables will therefore not be
3.1.2 Database enhancement – Lipschitz sampling
reduced to avoid fastidious measurements. This number
One of the most promising approaches to refine a will be a compromise between accuracy and robustness.
response surface is called Lipschitz sampling [11]. Once Too few predictive variables will lead to a lack of
a first response surface has been defined, the algorithm sensitivity and therefore to obsolete regressions. If too
computes a scalar called Lipschitz constant quantifying many variables are to be introduced, the regression
the local complexity the surface. This constant is parameterization will be unstable; mainly due to multi
regularly recomputed on the whole surface to readjust the collinearity between the predictors. Multi collinearity is a
choice of the next experiments and the high gradient linear relationship between two or more predictive
zones become more and more well defined as the variables. In the presence of multi collinearity, the value
database is built. Figure 9 shows a typical case of of the coefficient estimates ai associated to the collinear
application. X and Y represent two explanatory variables predictors may change erratically in response to small
and Z is the response variable. From a initial response changes in the model or the data. A small change in the
surface, the algorithm has refined around the break line sample will cause a large variation of ai, which is to be
to allow a very satisfying modelling of the response. avoided as the ai value should give relevant information
The Y vs. X graph on the left of figure 9 illustrates on the effect of the associated predictor.
the behaviour of the algorithm. The original average The choice of the relevant predictors is therefore one of
density of points was 5 points per unit in the X direction the keys of this study.
and 4 points per unit in the Y direction. This density has The multi collinearity has to be avoided above all. The
been increased by the algorithm in both directions up to correlation between the predictors has to be kept as low
20 points per unit in the “break” region. as possible. Each independent variable should have a
non-zero correlation coefficient at a high significance
level (low p-value). It should not be possible to
significantly improve the accuracy of the regression by
introducing extra independent variables. It should not be
possible to exclude a predictor without significantly
reducing the accuracy of the regression.
Several statistical tools have been tested in order to build
multivariate regressions and avoid multi collinearity as
far as possible. A simple and satisfying approach is the
Figure 9: Example of a 3D response surface refined using forward selection algorithm.
Lipschitz sampling (Y vs. X graph on the left)
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

- 27 -
Forward selection algorithm the fore sections of the hull, two other the stern sections.
This algorithm will produce a multiple linear regression Those transformations are modifying the beam, draft and
to explain a dependent variable based on independent fullness of the sections. The longitudinal repartition of
variables that will be selected during an iterative process. each transformation is smoothed using Bezier functions.
The selection methodology is based on partial correlation Every transformation is carried out under hydrostatic
computations. constraints. For example, when the beam of the fore
− It starts with the best linear fit using the most sections is increased, their draft is automatically reduced
correlated variable. to keep the same longitudinal volume repartition.
− Then the partial correlation of the remaining The two last transformations concern solely the
predictors is computed (i.e. their correlation to the asymmetrical hull shapes. They change the leeway and
residuals of the first regression). The variable the longitudinal curvature of the immersed part of the
showing the highest partial correlation is selected. hull in the transverse direction. This allows various
This new variable is added in the regression and combinations of ALA, BEI and relative camber to be
the residuals recomputed. generated. More details about those transformations can
− This is repeated until the p-value of the test of be found in [5]. Figure 11 gives the range of variation
significance of remaining variables is below a and the distribution of some of the main hydrostatic
specified significance level. parameters used in the regressions.
A more detailed description of the variable selection
methodology is available in [5]. min max min max
ALA (°) -12 12 R (°) 1.2 6.2
4. PROPOSED FORMULATIONS BEI (°) -15 15 FR (°) -6.3 -2
In order to provide a representative but synthetic ie (°) 15 54 XT/LWL 0.38 0.65
example of the proposed methodology, a specific CP 0.52 0.66 LWL/ LOA 0.9 1
database has been created around the Volvo 70 rule. CB 0.35 0.48 IS/T 0 -0.45
Cflot 0.62 0.82 ST/SMS 0 0.5
4.1 GENERATION OF THE DATABASE
CM 0.64 0.75 B/L 0.12 0.2
4.1.1 Description of the geometries LCB 0.518 0.64 B/T 3.2 12
From a parent design, two initial hull shapes are 350 260
240
extracted. The first one is the upright hull; the second one 300 220
200
is derived from the wetted shape of the heeled hull (20 250
180
Sample size
Sample size
200 160
degrees heel angle). Figure 10 shows four random hulls 150

140
120
in the series, two symmetrical hulls on the left and two 100
100
80
asymmetrical hulls on the right. 50

60
40
0 20
0.54 0.56 0.57 0.59 0.60 0.62 0.64 0.65 0
0.55 0.56 0.58 0.59 0.61 0.63 0.64 1.0 1.4 1.8 2.1 2.5 2.8 3.2 3.6 3.9 4.3 4.6 5.0 5.4 5.7 6.1
CP R
Figure 11: Range of variation of some geometrical

measurements (top) and distribution of Cp (bottom left)
and Rocker angle (bottom right)

Figure 10: Four random hulls of the Volvo 70 series A Gaussian fit is represented in red on the histograms to
illustrate the gap between the distribution of the
These hulls and the corresponding meshes are generated considered explanatory variable and a normal
using the presented morphing tool. Eight different distribution. It allows a synthetic overview of the
geometrical transformations are defined and applied at distribution of the variables. In the present case, the
various magnitudes to generate 250 different hulls. geometrical transformations cover a wide range of Cp
These transformations must generate realistic hull shapes and Rocker values with a satisfying distribution.
but also maximize the changes in the physics of the flow
to give as much information as possible on the design 4.1.2 Testing conditions
space. The choice of the transformations is guided by the The geometries are tested at three different speeds, 10, 14
experience of designing hulls by hand and by the and 18 knots. The computations are carried out at real
literature which highlighted some relevant hydrostatic scale, with boats of 21.5 m overall length. The boats are
parameters to be varied. In fact, the computer has to free to heave and trim. The sail centre of effort is situated
reproduce what is carried out by hand during a typical 13.5 m above the water plane. The longitudinal position
preliminary design phase, producing a wide range of of the centre of gravity of the boat is varied among three
realistic hull shapes in order to understand as well as different values: 11.2, 11.8 and 12.4 m (i.e.
possible the design trade offs of the project. LCB/LOA=0.52, 0.55 and 0.58). The transition of the
The volume of action of the six deformations includes boundary layer is forced at the bow of the boat, so that
the whole hull. Two deformations concern the shape of the flow is fully turbulent. All the forces are expressed in
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

- 28 -
R0. The moments are computed with respect to the centre The pressure drag is one of the hardest quantities to
of gravity. This database is made of 2250 computations model on a sailing yacht. Several physical effects are
(250 shapes x 3 LCG x 3 speeds). involved and their contribution to the total drag is highly
dependant on the Froude number and the Reynolds
4.2 FORMULATIONS number. This explains why numerous variables are used
in the following expressions; however Figure 13 shows
The formulations are speed dependent; meaning that each
that some variables are not used at every speed, the
speed has its associated set of estimates (or regression
corresponding coefficient being null.
coefficients). All the forces and attitudes are expressed in
2
R0. The trim angle is indeed computed in the water j + b . ALA2 + b .C + b .C 2 + b . LCX + b .§ LCX ·
k = b + b . LWL . Fy .Fy
Fpx 6 ¨ ¸
referential, y0 axis being perpendicular to the incoming 0 1
∇
1
3 Fz
2 3 P 4 P 5
LWL © LWL ¹
water flow and normal to the water surface. LT L T
2
As described before, we use generalized linear +b7 . + b8 . T + b9 . + b10 .C Pfront + b11.C Pfront 2 + b12 .C X + b13 .C X 2 + b14 . R
LWL LWL LWL
regressions to approximate the quantities. This means
that each quantity is expressed as the weighted sum of It is interesting to plot contribution of the CP terms for
explanatory variables or the weighted sum of different values of CP at the three speeds. The
combination of explanatory variables. Once one of the contribution is the value of the sum (b3.CP+ b4.CP2), this
response variables is formulated, it is a combination of sum changes the value of the pressure drag depending on
explanatory variables and thus might be used in the the CP value.
formulation of second response variable. -0.268
Speed = 10 knots
-1.76
Speed = 14 knots
-0.270
On the bright side, this “encapsulation” might enhance -0.272
-0.274
-1.77
the formulation of the second response variable and also -0.276

-0.278
-1.78
Contribution
Contribution
-0.280 -1.79
facilitate the understanding of the physics. On the dark -0.282
-0.284 -1.80
side, this decreases the stability of the formulation, by -0.286

-0.288 -1.81
summing the errors. At this stage, it was felt that a trial -0.290
-0.292
-0.294
-1.82
and error approach would be valuable, in order to have -0.296

0.48 0.52 0.56 0.60 0.64 0.68 0.72
-1.83
0.48 0.52 0.56 0.60 0.64 0.68 0.72
Cp Cp
an overview of the potential gain in accuracy allowed by Speed = 18 knots
the different encapsulation orders compared with no -1.53
-1.54
encapsulation at all. The forward selection algorithm was -1.55

-1.56
run several times for each response variables leaving
Contribution
-1.57
-1.58
access to other response variables or not. The resulting -1.59
chosen order is presented hereafter. -1.60

-1.61
The numerical values of formula’s coefficients are -1.62

-1.63
regrouped in figure 13. 0.48 0.52 0.56 0.60

Cp
0.64 0.68 0.72
A much more detailed analysis and interpretation of the Figure 12: Contribution of Cp to Fpx depending on the
following formulations is available in [5]. Cp value at 10 kts (top left), 14 kts (topright) and 18 kts
4.2.1 Side force generation (bottom)
The following expression gives a good approximation of Figure 12 shows a very consistent behaviour of the
the side force production: pressure drag formulation, being in the trend of what can
be read in the literature on naval hydrodynamics.
j = a ALA + a ALA3 + a BEI + a CBR
Fy At 10 knots, or Fn=0.35, the optimum CP lies around
1 2 3 4
Where: 0.54. At 14 knots, or Fn=0.5, the optimum CP lies around

Fy 0.61.At 18 knots, or Fn=0.65, the optimum CP lies
j=
Fy around 0.64. As for CP, most of the expressions are
1
AHL . ρ .V 2 quadratic with a positive value of the estimates of the
2
squared term. This allows an optimisation process
4.2.2 Pressure drag without ending “in the corners”.
Numerical codes compute total resistance as the sum of 4.2.3 Running trim
the pressure drag (normal forces) and frictional drag
The running trim is defined as the change in trim angle
(tangential forces); it seems therefore natural to use this
between the hydrostatic position at the considered heel
decomposition to build the formulations.
angle and the trim angle reached at the considered
Fx = Fpx + Ffx
Froude number.
As the displacement variations of the hulls in the Fpx L L L T
considered database are relatively small, a simple non Roy = c0 + c1. + c2 . T + c3 . BWL + c4 . CB + c5 . T + c6 .R
Fz LWL LWL LWP T
dimensional form has been used:
This approximation of the running trim is very
k = Fpx . §¨ LWL ·¸
promising. It allows the coupling with an appendage
Fpx model, providing the proper angles of incidence of the
Fz © ∇ 13 ¹
lifting devices fitted on the hull.
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

- 29 -
4.2.4 Running sinkage Fn Speed (kts) a1.10^3 a2.10^6 a3.10^3 a4.10^3 R2

0.35 10 -0.71 -3.88 -0.53 0.99
The running sinkage is defined as the change in sinkage 0.50 14 -2.97 -3.44 -0.24 0.98
0.65 18 -2.87 -6.24 -107 0.98
of the centre of gravity between the hydrostatic position
Fn Speed (kts) b0 b1 b2.10^3 b3 b4 b5 b6 b7
at the considered heel angle and the sinkage reached at 0.35 10 1.88 15.04 0.10 -1.08 0.99 -3.36 2.99 0.18
the considered Froude number. 0.50 14 5.13 6.55 0.52 -5.97 4.88 -7.64 6.92 -0.35
0.65 18 4.19 4.40 0.90 -5.04 3.91 -5.30 4.94 -0.44
j = d + d .C + d .C + d . LBWL + d . ALA2
Trz 0 1 B 2 WP 3 4 Fn Speed (kts) b8 b9 b10 b11 b12 b13 b14 R2
LWL 0.35 10 -0.13 -0.35 -2.60 2.64 0.83
Where j = Trz
Trz
0.50
0.65
14
18
0.33
0.32
6.08
7.28
-4.23 4.20
-3.14 2.54
0.98
0.01 0.99
T Fn Speed (kts) c0 c1 c2 c3 c4 c5 c6 R2
4.2.5 Frictional drag 0.35 10 -2.61 -24.67 0.65 0.85 1.98 0.01 0.00 0.93
0.50 14 -1.33 -8.56 0.32 0.73 1.13 -0.38 0.12 0.91
k = e + e .Trz
j + e .Roy + e .C + e .C 0.65 18 -0.52 -2.05 0.70 0.73 0.22 -0.28 0.13 0.90
Ffx 0 1 2 3 WP 4 Pfront + e5 . ALA Fn Speed (kts) d0.10^3 d1 d2 d3 d4.10^3 R2
0.35 10 -35.95 -0.50 0.26 -0.07 -0.31 0.85
0.50 14 30.49 -0.80 0.31 -0.13 -0.84 0.81
With k= Ffx
Ffx 0.65 18 43.80 -0.63 0.26 -0.15 -1.09 0.87
1
C f . .ρ .V 2 .SC Fn Speed (kts) e0 e1 e2.10^3 e3 e4 e5.10^3 R2
2 0.35 10 1.53 -1.16 9.03 -0.61 0.08 5.43 0.83
Cf is determined using the ITTC 57 extrapolation line; 0.50 14 1.61 -1.19 -99.80 -0.78 0.35 1.90 0.86
0.65 18 1.63 -1.43 -53.27 -0.91 0.43 0.47 0.83
based on the hydrostatic waterline length.
Fn Speed (kts) f0 f1 f2.10^3 f3.10^3 f4 f5 f6 R2
As SC is the static wetted surface of the hull, Ffx 0.35 10 -5.24 217.43 21.62 0.80 7.19 4.00 26.54 0.81
0.50 14 -1.61 58.09 22.63 -0.54 1.13 1.64 13.34 0.84
contains the variations of wetted surface due to the 0.65 18 -0.40 24.52 41.20 -1.76 -1.62 0.76 15.39 0.89
dynamic position of the boat and the free surface Figure 13: Estimates of the presented formulations
deformations. A fraction of the form coefficient is also
, leaving the other fraction in the
contained in Ffx A detailed evaluation of the accuracy of these
formulations is available in [5].
pressure drag.
4.2.5 Yaw moment 4. FORMULATIONS BENCHMARK
The yaw moment is computed in R0, with respect to the In order to evaluate the sensitivity and accuracy of the
centre of gravity. This moment can be split into two presented formulations, a candidate hull which wasn’t
components: part of the systematic series has been characterized with
− A component coming from the drag force, multiplied different tools at two speeds, 3 heel and 4 leeway angles.
by the lever between the centre of gravity and the Four tools are compared:
centre of effort of the drag. − The RANS code ICARE.
− A component coming from the side force, multiplied − The RANS code Star CCM+.
by the lever between the centre of gravity and the − The DSYHS formulations as implemented in
centre of effort of the drag. WinDesign VPP of the Wolfson unit [12].
On most of the mono hulls, the component coming from − The presented formulations.
the drag forces is very small compared with the
component coming from the side force, except when the Due to the limited length of the paper, only two graphs
side force is very small. In this case, the yaw moment is are presented on figure 14. They present the changes in
also very small and its approximation is useless. The side force production and pressure drag of the bare hull
sample used to approximate the yaw moment has been with respect to changes of heel angle with zero leeway
selected using the following criteria: and 14 knots of boat speed. A more extended validation
study is available in [4]. The forces are expressed in
Fy
≥ 5% Newton and the angles in degrees. In the chosen
Fpx referential, a positive side force is a force to windward.
The following expression has been used to determine the
longitudinal position of the side force centre of effort
with respect to the centre of gravity, often called centre %
!
of lateral resistance (CLR).

Mz
LCLR = %
Fy

The following expression gives a good approximation of
% 2*
the scaled centre of effort position.
+()0

k = f + f . Trz + f . BEI + f .BEI 2 + f .C + f . LCX + f . BWL
L &
CLR 0 1 2 3 4 B 5 6
LWL LWL LWL %
!3)((4

With k = LCOE
L
% % .2
%
CLR
LWL
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

- 30 -
wind angle. An apparent weight of the boat carried by the

"# ! hull is also computed, accounting for the appendages and
5
sails contributions on the vertical axis z0.
This VPP allows a very fast evaluation or optimization of
%
fine tunings such as dagger-boards toe-in or keel tilt

angle. The keel tilt is defined as the angle between the
2*
rotation axis of a canting keel and the horizontal axis
+()0
when the boat is in its hydrostatic equilibrium upright.
&
This tilt angle introduces a coupling between the cant
!3)((4
angle and the keel angle of incidence. A positive tilt
% % .2
% (forward bearing moved upwards) tends to generate lift
on the keel fin (positive side force and upwards lift),
Figure 14: Side force and pressure drag predictions at 14 modifying the running trim and sinkage of the hull as
knots for different heel angles and no leeway. well as the leeway angle and the yaw equilibrium, see
With the exception of the side force at 14 knots, where figure 15.
the discrepancy reaches 25 %, the overall agreement Z0 Z0
between the two solvers is very good, despite very Y0 Y0
different computational methods; finite differences
against finite volumes; interface tracking against Positive vertical force
interface capturing, etc. The discrepancy on side force at Positive side force
14 knots might be related to bow wave effects. In fact,

the bow region has a large contribution to side force and Figure 15: No keel tilt (left), positive keel tilt (right)
the bow wave is the most intense at this pre-planing In order to test the sensitivity of the recently developed
speed. VPP, the influence of the keel tilt on the equilibrium of a
The DSYHS show a 45 % overestimation of the upright Volvo 70 is investigated. The keel is canted 40 degrees to
pressure drag which means a 23% discrepancy on total windward, the leeward rudder 15 degrees to leeward and
drag. These figures confirm the results published in [8], the dagger boards are lifted out of the water. This typical
where the DSHYS are compared with tank tests on an broad reaching configuration is studied with full mainsail
IMOCA 60 and show around 19 % overestimation of and a fractional headsail from true wind angle of 110 to
total drag at Fn=0.6. The influence of heel on side force 140 degrees. Figure 16 presents the boat speed,
production is not taken into account by the DSYS since displacement carried by the hull, running trim and
the asymmetry of the heeled hull is not explicitly leeway angle for 3 different keel tilt angles in 12 knots of
measured. The pressure drag sensitivity to heel is in the true wind speed. On the presented configuration, the keel
right trend, even though overestimated on this hull. fin centre of surface is placed 1.15 m in front of the yacht
The presented regressions give very satisfying results, centre of gravity.
showing the appropriate trends on side force and pressure 16 -200
Keel Tilt = 0°
drag between the different heel and leeway angles. The
Keel Tilt = 2°
absolute values given by the regressions are good, often 15 Keel Tilt = 4° -400
Weight reduction [kg]

under 5% and a maximum of 15 % discrepancy
Boat speed [KTS]
compared to ICARE computations. Further work

includes new series and associated formulations to tackle 14 -600
more various hull shapes, including larger displacement

to length ratios. This will be a step towards more 13 -800
versatile formulations, which will be compared with the VB
DSYHS on some of the models of the Delft series. Δ var
12 -1000
110 115 120 125 130 135 140
5. INTEGRATION IN A VPP – FIRST RESULTS 6
True Wind Angle
1
Keel Tilt = 0°
The current ongoing work concerns the development of a Keel Tilt = 2°
VPP able to take advantage of the presented
Running Trim [>0 bow up]
4 Keel Tilt = 4° 0.8

Leeway [>0 to leeward]
formulations. Two separated models are used in addition

to the presented formulations for bare hulls: an
2 0.6
appendage model based on the lifting line theory [13]
and an aerodynamic model based on the Offshore Racing
Committee model [12]. This VPP finds the equilibrium 0 0.4
between the forces computed by three models on the six Leeway
degrees of freedom of the boat. It solves the equilibrium Trim
-2 0.2
equations to find the heel, speed, leeway, running trim 110 115 120 125 130 135 140
True Wind Angle
and rudder angle fulfilling the best equilibrium between
all the forces. The “best” equilibrium is found when the Figure 16: Speed, weight reduction (top), running trim
boat speed is maximum in a given true wind speed and and leeway angles (bottom) for 3 different keel tilts.
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

- 31 -
The results show a very satisfying sensitivity to the AUTHOR’ BIOGRAPHY

change in keel tilt, showing large changes in the vertical
L. Huetz currently works at Marc Lombard Yacht
and horizontal forces generated by the appendages. The
Design Group. He is responsible for performance studies,
trends are good, high values of keel tilt leading to
hull design and optimization. He obtained his PhD. at
significantly reduced apparent weight and leeway angles.
Ecole Centrale de Nantes in 2012.
The apparent weight carried by the hull is reduced by
500 kg with a keel tilt of 4 degrees compared with no
REFERENCES
keel tilt. The leeway angle is reduced by almost 2
degrees. The resulting changes in maximum boat speed
are not negligible, up to 0.5 knots. The boat speed and 1. JA. Keuning, U.B. Sonnenberg, “Approximation of
true wind angle are expressed with respect to the course the hydrodynamic forces on a sailing yacht based on
of the yacht (water flow referential), not its longitudinal the Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series”. The
axis (boat referential). International HISWA Symposium on Yacht Design
The presented coupling between hull and appendage and Yacht Construction, 1998
models neglects their hydrodynamic interaction. In fact, 2. JA. Keuning, M Katgaert, “The bare hull resistance
the flow around the hull is indeed modified by the
of the delft systematic yacht hull series at high
presence of the appendage and the hull changes the
speeds”. Proceedings of the 1st Innovsail
behaviour of the appendages. The model might therefore
Conference, Lorient, 2008.
be enhanced by introducing corrective terms to take this
interaction into account, based on appended 3. L. Huetz, B.Alessandrini, “Systematic study of the
computations or tank tests. It is part of the ongoing work. hydrodynamic forces acting on a sailing yacht hull
As this interaction is highly dependant on the distance using parametric design and CFD”, Proceedings of
between the appendage root and the free surface, the OMAE,, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2011
running trim and running sinkage formulations presented
in this report will be used to compute the free surface 4. L. Huetz, Y. Andrillon, P.E. Guillerm, B.
proximity. It must be mentioned that this interaction Alessandrini, “Systematic study of the
phenomenon is much weaker on modern yachts than in hydrodynamic forces on a Volvo 70 yacht using
the past mainly due to the high aspect ratio of the parametric design CFD and variable selection, 4th
appendages. Modern appendages present much smaller High Performance Yacht Design Conference,
volume close to the hull and therefore weaker interaction Auckland, New Zealand, 2012.
with hull and the free surface.
5. L. Huetz, “Systematic study of the hydrodynamic
6. CONCLUSION behaviour of sailing yachts hulls“. PhD. Thesis.
Ecole Centrale de Nantes, 2012.
A complete methodology to study the hydrodynamic
behaviour of yacht hulls was presented. First step is the 6. B. Alessandrini, G. Delhommeau, Simulation of
database building: choice of the experiments, generation three-dimensional unsteady viscous free surface flow
and measurement of the geometries, meshing and finally around a ship model”. International Journal for
computation using a RANSE code; second step is the Numerical Methods in Fluids, vol 19, pp 321-342,
statistical methodology to treat the database. An effort is 1994.
made in this article to detail this methodology to allow its 7. D. C. Wilcox, November, “Multiscale model for
application to other fields. New formulations for the
turbulent flows”. AIAA Journal Vol 26, pp. 1211-
approximation of the forces production and attitudes of
1320, 1988.
bare hulls in calm seas have been presented. A specific
VPP has been developed to use these formulations and 8. J. Raymond, “Performance estimation of planing
the first results of the coupling with the appendage and yachts”. PhD Thesis, Ecole Centrale de Nantes,
aerodynamic models are very promising. 2009.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 9. NIST/SEMATECH, “E-Handbook of Statistical

Methods”, http://www.
Gianluca Guelfi from the University of Genoa is itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook, 2012.
gratefully acknowledged for his work on the VPP,
implementing lifting line theory, aerodynamic model and 10. A. Jourdan, “Planification d’expériences
optimization algorithms. Hydrocean is also to be numériques”. Revue MODULAD, 2005.
acknowledged concerning the development of the 11. A. Lovison, “Lipschitz Sampling for Improving
morphing tool used in the database building loop.
Metamodels in modeFRONTIER”. Technical report,
Finally, the authors would like to thank all the members
ESTECO, 2008.
of Marc Lombard Yacht Design Group for their support
and the funding of this research program. 12. ORC VPP Documentation 2012.
13. J. Katz, A. Plotkin, “Low speed aerodynamics”.
McGraw – Hill, 1991.
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

- 32 -
A SIMPLIFIED METHOD TO ASSESS ACCELERATION LOADS ON

SAILING YACHT MASTS
A. Combourieu , Engineer in hydrodynamics, France, adrien.combourieu@innosea.fr

F. Faloci, RINA Services SpA (Italian Classification Society), Italy, flavio.faloci@rina.org
D. Boote and T. Pais, University of Genoa, Italy, dario.boote@unige.it, tatianapais@hotmail.it
The behaviour of sailing boats in open sea is strictly related to their hydro and aerodynamic
performances and to the wide range of loads acting on the hull and rigging system. Their evaluation
could be done only by a careful seakeeping analysis with particular attention to the acceleration loads
caused by hull motions which can create severe problems to mast and rigging up to extreme
consequences such as dismasting. The main reasons of dismasting are related both to human errors
and to the lack of load knowledge; as a matter of fact Classification Societies' Rules are quite poor
about this subject and the structural design if often committed to the designer experience. The aim of
this work is to investigate on the hull dynamic responses which mainly influence the mast and rigging
loads with particular attention focused on the pitching behaviour of the vessel. With this goal in mind
the seakeeping behaviour of a number of sailing yachts, different each other in sizes and typology, has
been investigated. Despite the small size of the database, the achieved results allowed to formulate a
preliminary simplified method to estimate the pitch Ratio Amplitude Operator (RAO), based only on
the boat length. From the pitch RAO knowledge a very rough and quick formulation to evaluate the
longitudinal acceleration in the mast centre of gravity has been obtained.
NOMENCLATURE 1 INTRODUCTION
a Amplitude of wave (m) With regard to sailing yachts, dismasting is considered an

B Breadth (m) impressive and extreme event, very dangerous for crew
Bwl Waterline breadth (m) and for the vessel. Nowadays some Classification
Angle of heading (degrees) Societies have a section in their Rules specifically
Peakness factor dedicated to mast and rigging scantling [1] - [6]. In
D Draught (m) particular, the Italian Classification Society RINA,
Displacement (Kg) recently published a draft of its new Rules in which a
Wave slop (m) specific section for sailing yacht design has been
f Frequency (Hz) introduced [7]. Nevertheless the last word about mast and
g Gravity acceleration (m/s2) rigging design is often left to designers and mast builders
H Wave height (m) and the first step of this activity should be the full
kyy Gyration radius (m) understanding of acting loads. Two kinds of loads can be
Wavelength (m) individuated: aerodynamic loads due to wind action on
0 Wavelength for which the RAO is equal sails and inertial loads due to the yacht motion in waves;
to 0,05 in terms of pitch/wave slope(m) a complete review of all loads to be considered in yacht
1 Wavelength for which the RAO is equal design can be found in [8]. In this paper attention has
to 0,95 in terms of pitch/wave slope(m) been focused on sea loads and, after a first investigation,
Lao Overall length (m) performed also on references made available in literature,
Lwl Waterline length (m) such as [9], [10], [11] and [12], the main hull response
pmax Pitch RAO maximum leading to important acceleration loads on mast has been
RAO Ratio Amplitude Operator individuated on pitching motion.
S Spectrum (m2/s) A comprehensive study on the pitching behaviour of
T Period (s) sailing yachts at sea has then been carried out by means
t Time (s) of the well known seakeeping software HydroStar [13].
U Forward speed (m/s2) This is a linear potential flow solver using panel methods
Phase (degrees) in frequency domain and developed by Bureau Veritas.
Wave pulsation (rad/s) When nothing is explicitly specified, RAO calculations
are carried out with no heel, no forward speed and in
pure head sea.
The analysis has been carried out on a database of seven
modern sailing yacht hulls of different lengths and
typology, from 8 to 30 meters in length.. Basic hull
descriptions have been derived from commercial leaflet
or shipyard web site, where only few information are
available. In most cases, main dimensions (such as
length, beam, displacement, ballast weight) and only top
and longitudinal views are given. A synthesis of the
considered boats is presented in Table 1. Starting from
these information CAO models have been created using
the open software FreeShip [14]. Only the canoe hull
bodies are modelled, assuming that with regard to pitch
motion, the keel effect is negligible. Figure 1: Pitch RAO from HydroStar compared with
experimental results of [10] (red dots).
Table 1: Main dimensions of the seven hulls considered.
7 2.1 WATERLINE LENGTH Lwl

'#) '6 7 & 8 9//
1 4
: ; : ; : ; : ; :<2; :<2; : ; The seven hulls collected in our database are different in
sizes but quite similar in shape. Therefore, the reference
!*

% 5 5 parameter assumed in this study is the waterline length
=:!=;
Lwl. By using potential methods, only the underwater
!6> > >% %5 5 parts of the hulls are taken into account. The seven pitch
#/ > > %
RAOs obtained by HydroStar calculations are displayed
in Figure 2. The waterline length is obviously the most
!6 5 % > > %5 critical parameter driving pitch motion.
!?%
% 55 %5
:;
)40 % 5>
5 % % %
2 IMPORTANT YACHT HULL PARAMETERS
The influence on pitch RAO of different hull parameters

has been deeply analysed in this study. Some of them
have been proven to have a significant impact on the
pitching behaviour of a sailing hull at sea, whereas others Figure 2: Pitch RAOs of the seven yachts obtained by
have been found to have a negligible impact. The most HydroStar calculations.
critical parameters are listed and discussed in the
following subsections.
Before any other activity a comparative analysis has been
carried out in order to set up the various HydroStar 2.2 PITCH GYRATION RADIUS
parameters. The study has been performed on the yacht
called “AME004” on which huge real scale Typically, for modern sailing boats, the pitch radius of
measurements of ship motions have been performed at gyration kyy is in the range [0.25 Lwl - 0.35 Lwl]. For the
sea and published in [10]. considered boats, they have been found to be between
The AME004 hull has been modelled by FreeShip 0.27 Lwl and 0.30 Lwl. As a consequence, the impact of
software and the results obtained by HydroStar pitch gyration radius varying in this range has been
calculations have then been compared with experimental studied.
ones. The comparison of pitch RAO results are plotted in It can be expected that gyration radius will change the
Figure 1 and they show a good agreement. maximum value of the pitch RAO and the value of the
resonance frequency as well. Making the analogy with a
simple spring, it can be expected that with bigger
gyration radius (i.e. bigger inertia) the resonance
frequency should decrease (as it is related to the stiffness
over inertia ratio). On the other hand, the peak at
resonance should be bigger.
Let us define some value that will describe the simplified
RAO:
- Ȝ1: the wave length (m) from which the boat
starts to simply follow the wave and f1 the
corresponding wave frequency. It can be
defined as the wave length for which the RAO
is equal to 0.95 in terms of pitch/wave slope;
- Ȝ0: the wave length (m) up to which the boat
does not respond to the wave and f0 the
corresponding wave frequency. It can be
defined as the wave length for which the RAO
is equal to 0.05 in terms of pitch/wave slope. Figure 5: Influence of the pitch gyration radius kyy on
‘Swan 66’ pitch RAO plotted as a function of
wavelength.
2.3 FORWARD SPEED
Up to now, calculations have been carried out with no

forward speed for sake of convenience and simplicity. In
practice, of course, the yacht has a forward speed. The
best case is to have the polar diagram of the yacht to be
studied to perform a detailed computation at a given
speed and heading.
Figure 3 : three regions of interest on ‘SW’ pitch RAO
Anyway, the effect of forward speed is double:
plotted as pitch/wave slope against wave length.
- first it changes the equations to be solved by
Figure 4 shows the pitch RAOs of the ‘Swan 66’ for
changing the boundary conditions of the
different pitch gyration radius. The resonance does not
potential problem;
seem to change significantly in this range of kyy.
- secondly it determines the encounter frequency.
Figure 5 shows the same results but plotting the RAOs in
-
term of pitch over wave slope as a function of wave
Indeed, if the wave has a frequency "f" the boat
length. It can be noticed that the motion in the “range of
“experiences” and responds at the frequency "fe"
interest” between Ȝ0 and Ȝ1 is quite sensitive to kyy. On

the other hand, out of this range, results are quite similar.
The estimation of the RAO in the range Ȝ0 - Ȝ1 might thus
be refined in the future, using the value of kyy in some
way.
where:
- ȕ is the heading angle (head sea=180°)
- U is the forward speed in m/s
- g is the acceleration of gravity m/s²
The effect of increasing forward speed in head sea for the

yacht ‘SW’ is shown in Figures 6 and 7 respectively for
pitch RAO and longitudinal acceleration at middle height
of the mast.
The forward speed effect on pitch is quite big (+28%
around 10 knots) whereas it is huge for acceleration in
the mast (4.3 times bigger at 10 knots than 0 knot). It
seems logical if thought that, in a way, for a given wave,
the yacht has to make the same pitch but quicker at 10
Figure 4: Influence of the pitch gyration radius kyy on knots rather than at 0 knot.
‘Swan 66’ pitch RAO.
Figure 8: Influence of heading on ‘Swan 66’ pitch RAO.
Figure 6: Influence of forward speed on ‘SW’ pitch
RAO. 2.5 STERN SHAPE
With regard to pitch motion, the shape of bow and stern

is critical. Modern sailing hulls tend to have a flat and
large stern along with a straight bow. This minimizes the
pitch for several reasons. First, it maximizes the
waterline length which decreases pitch motion. Then,
large and wide stern increases the wave damping effect
which, again, reduces pitch motion. On the contrary,
older sailing yacht hulls are narrower and sharper. In that
case, the keel is part of the hull and to neglect it in the
seakeeping calculations may be wrong.
Figure 10 shows the example of the Centurion 32 with
original hull and enlarged stern.
Predicted pitch motion is surprisingly big but, as
expected, results to be reduced by assuming an enlarged
Figure 7: Influence of forward speed on ‘SW’ mast stern.
acceleration RAO.
2.4 HEADING
Till now, only motion in pure head sea (180° heading)

has been considered. This approach is justified by the
fact that the maximum pitch happens when going up sea
(which is generally also upwind). The pure head sea is
not necessarily the worst case in term of pitching, as Figure 9: Mesh of the original Centurion 32 (left) and
shown in Figure 8. with enlarged stern (right)
Nevertheless, around 180 degrees, RAOs are quite close
to each other and they really decrease at around 90
degrees (side sea). Depending on cases, pitch can be
bigger around 140-120 degrees.
For a sake of simplicity, in the following pitch motion is

thus studied in pure head sea by default.
Figure 10: Comparison of pitch RAOs of original

Centurion 32 and enlarged stern model.
Among the tested parameters, the following ones has The regression based on the yacht waterline highlights a
proven to be of great influence on pitch motion: linear correlation between Lwl and both Ȝres and Ȝ0. Then,
- waterline length; the approximated pitch RAO is obtained by:
- pitch gyration radius; - the wave slope for f < f1;
- forward speed; - 0 for f > f0;
- heading; - simple triangulation using the point (fres, pmax)
- stern shape. for f0 < f < f1.
Other parameters have been investigated without A comparison between pitch values calculated by
showing important impact on pitch motion, such as: HydroStar software and determined by the present
- heel angle; simplified method (based on Lwl) has been carried out;
- keel shape; the assumed case study is the sailing yacht "Kiboko"
- water depth; built by "Southern Wind Shipyard" and not belonging to
- centre of gravity position; the seven yachts database.
- beam-draft ratio;
- draft-displacement ratio.
3 SIMPLIFIED METHOD FOR QUICK PITCH

MOTION AND ACCELERATION ASSESSMENT
In this section, a very simple method is proposed to

quickly estimate pitch motion and induced acceleration
on the mast. The driving idea is to provide a fast method
to assess these values by simple formulas, without using
any software. From considerations given in part 2, the
method herein proposed is only based on yacht waterline
length. In addition it can be valid only in case of head sea
and with no forward speed. Figure 11: "Kiboko" sailing yacht during launching and
the corresponding CAO model prepared by FreeShip.
Results can be seen in the following Figure 12.

3.1 SIMPLIFIED PITCH RAO
The starting point of this method is to consider the pitch

RAO plotted in a different way. Usually, the pitch
amplitude for a 1 m wave is plotted against wave
frequency or pulsation. In this approach, the pitch
amplitude divided by wave slope (or steepness) has been
plotted versus the wave length. Indeed, linear wave
theory in infinite water gives a unique relation between
wave period and wave length, through the dispersion
equation:
Ȝ=1.56 T2 = 1.56/f2
Then, the wave slope is given by:
Figure 12: "Kiboko" pitch RAO computed by HydroStar

(green) and estimated by her waterline length (blue).
It’s clear that for long waves, the boat just follows the
wave and its maximum pitch is equal to the wave slope. Table 2: Comparison of computed and estimated pitch
On the other hand, for very short waves, the boat almost RAOs
does not respond.
Now, let us define some values that will describe the
Calculated with HydroStar Estimated with Lwl
simplified RAO: Pitch resonance Pitch resonance
frequency Maximum pitch frequency Maximum pitch
- Ȝres: the resonance wave length (m) and fres the (Hz) (°/m) (Hz) (°/m)
pitch resonance frequency (Hz); 0.215 7.4 0.215 7.9
- pmax: the pitch for one meter wave at resonance
frequency (°/m).
3.2 EXTENSION TO A ROUGH MAST elevation is decomposed in a sum of regular waves. The
ACCELERATION ESTIMATION sea surface profile can be written, making reference to a
fixed axis system, as:
A very important capability of HydroStar software is to
provide accelerations at any point of the vessel, taking
into account different motion coupling. Nevertheless, as
the authors' aim is, it could be of interest to assess
roughly and quickly the mast acceleration without the
necessity of using any software. The idea here is to The dependence from space vanishes if we consider a
assume that the worst case, for what mast acceleration boat with no speed.
Waves are supposed to have random phases ĳi. Then, as
are concerned, occurs at pitch resonance. Moreover, let
the problem is linear and solved for regular waves, the
us assume that the total longitudinal acceleration can be
response for motion xi would be:
approximated by the pitch acceleration only.
Then, starting from the results exposed in part 3.1, the
estimation of the mast acceleration can be derived in the
following way:
- evaluate pitch resonance frequency and The RAO used in this procedure is the one computed for
pulsation (Ȧres) and maximum of the pitch RAO the heading of interest.
(pmax); A fundamental issue of this time domain approach is how
- evaluate the lever arm. For example in the mid to define the sea state. The problem is thus commonly
mast, it can be roughly estimated as ; addressed in the frequency domain. The sea state is often
- evaluate peak acceleration value (for 1m wave described by a Jonswap spectrum.
amplitude) by “deriving” twice the motion value
and multiplying by lever arm:

With ı = 0.07 if f < fp and ı = 0.09 if f >fp

Such a spectrum is completely defined by three
Table 3 shows the estimated maximum acceleration for
parameters:
1m wave compared to the one computed by HydroStar
- the significant wave height Hs. It is linked to the
software. The estimation is made making reference only
area under the curve of the spectrum. It is close
to LOA and Lwl. Here, these values are obtained from the
to the height a human observer would give by
yachts used to build the model.
watching the sea. Parameter Į is adjusted to fit
Hs;
Table 3: Comparison of computed and estimated - the peak period Tp=1/fp. It is the period
longitudinal accelerations at mid mast. corresponding to the peak of the spectrum;
- the “peakness” factor Ȗ. It describes the width of
the peak or how the peak is spread over
accXmast max accXmast max frequencies. Typical values of Ȗ are 1 (fully
Name computed estimated Ratio developed sea) and 3.3 (wind sea).
m/s2/m m/s2/m
SW 3.6 4.29 0.83 Then, the spectrum of the motion of interest can be
Swan 90 6.7 6.24 1.08 obtained:
Oyster 82 9.0 8.75 1.03
Swan 66 10.1 10.09 1.00
From the spectrum, the time series can be reconstructed
Ref2 10.4 13.57 0.76 by:
AME004 10.6 15.11 0.70
J80 27.1 19.39 1.40
4 MOTION IN IRREGULAR SEA STATES With
being the frequency step of discretization.

4.1 THEOEITICAL FORMULATION
Previous results were obtained in regular or harmonic Now, for a boat with forward speed U and a heading ȕ,
waves while, as a matter of fact, sea free surface is the assumption of encounter frequency is made. The boat
irregular. In the linear theory approach the sea surface is supposed to stay at the origin of the axis but what is
changed is the frequency of the waves it “sees”. To a real
wave frequency f it corresponds an encounter frequency
fe :
So, for an excitation at frequency f, the yacht response is

no more at f but at fe:
Figure 13: Comparison of pitch time series measured in

[11] (in black) and computed (Hs = 0.3 m, Tp = 2.25s and
In that case, the RAO to be used is that computed with Ȗ = 3.3, in red).
the heading of interest and at the forward speed of
interest, computed in this work by HydroStar software. However, the longer a yacht stays on a given sea state,
the more likely it is to meet a wave bigger than the
average wave. A value that can be recorded is the
maximum response staying a given time in a given sea
4.2 COMPARISON WITH EXPERIMENTAL state. As even this value will vary by repeating the same
RESULTS experiment, an average over several similar experiments
can be done. This last value would be a bit more robust
Unfortunately a large amount of experimental data to be or “less random”.
compared with this model doesn't exist. In [11], real scale
on board measurements of pitch motion were performed.
The yacht is a J80 sailing yacht. From personal
communication with the authors of this paper, some
information about the test conditions have been obtained: 4.3 IRREGULAR SEA STATE RAO
- boat was going upwind (40 degrees from wind)
at mean speed around 5 knots; As previously explained, the maximum value of yacht
- wave height was visually evaluated to 0.3 m; response at sea during a given duration can be recorded.
- encounter period was deduced from measured A typical duration for a sea state to be considered
pitch period to 1.3 s; constant is 3 hours. This duration is used in the
- measurements have been performed in the bay following.
of Brest, France, which is almost a closed basin. Some computations showed that the influence of the
peak enhancement factor value almost does not impact
Experimental results are given as a plot of the pitch time on the values of this maximum. On the other hand, the
series over 35 seconds (see Figure 13). significant wave height and the peak period/frequency
impact a lot on this value. Figure 14 shows, for a given
It has been chosen to perform the computation with the peak frequency, the influence of the significant wave
following parameters: height on the maximum pitch response.
- in pure front waves (heading of 180 degrees);
- with a speed of 5 knots;
- in a sea state of Hs = 0.3 m, Tp = 2.251 s (which
corresponds to encounter period of 1.3 s) and
with Ȗ = 3.3 (as the basin is closed, the sea was
probably not fully developed);
- no heel angle.
Comparison of time series over 35 s can be seen in

Figure 13.
This comparison shows very good agreement in terms of

amplitude and period between the model and the real
measurements. It must not be forgotten that there is a
random part (the phases) in the computation of these time
series. Results will thus not be the same by running twice
a computation with the same parameters. It means that Figure 14: Influence of significant wave height on pitch
the two curves in Figure 13 will never superimpose but motion.
what matters is the significant height and period of the
response.
As a linear theory has been used, the maximum
responses linearly depend on the (significant) wave
height. The wave height can be considered to be Hs = 2m
(i.e. 1m amplitude). Then, as for regular waves, the
results in term of maximum response in an irregular sea
state can be plotted as a function of the peak frequency
only. It is the definition of a RAO, but here in irregular
sea state. Figure 15 and 16 show an example for the pitch
and the acceleration at mid-mast.
Figure 17: Irregular sea pitching results (Hs=1m, Ȗ=1)

obtained by using the RAO computed by HydroStar ( in
red) and the RAO estimated by the presented procedure
(in blue)
Figure 15: “Irregular pitch RAOs”. Maximum pitch for a 5 CONCLUSIONS

3 hours sailing in irregular head sea, with Hs = 2 m, Ȗ = 1
and no forward speed. The main objective of this work was to investigate on
maximum accelerations acting on the mast and rigging
system of yachts when sailing in severe sea states. In the
preliminary phase of the study it has been verified that
the parameter which mainly affects mast accelerations is
represented by the pitch response of the vessel. In the
second phase the influence of different variables on pitch
motion has been deeply investigated. Key parameters of
the pitching behaviour have been individuated to be:
waterline length, pitch radius of gyration, stern shape,
heading and forward speed. In order to have a wide and
reliable set of results a number of sailing yachts has been
collected in a data base ranging from 8 to 31 meters in
Figure 16: “RAOs of irregular sea acceleration in the
length. The described calculations have then been carried
mast centre of gravity”. Maximum longitudinal
out on all the yachts of the database. For seakeeping
acceleration at mid mast for a 3 hours sailing in irregular
analyses the well known HydroStar software by Bureau
head sea, with Hs = 2 m, Ȗ = 1 and no forward speed.
Veritas, has been utilised.
In the third phase of this work, starting from the gathered
The results obtained for irregular sea RAOs are bigger
seakeeping results, a very quick and simple formulation
than for RAOs in regular sea; this can be explained by
has been proposed to estimate the pitch RAO of a
the fact that in a sea state of 2 m significant wave height
modern sailing hull in head sea, with no forward speed.
(1 m amplitude), the boat can experience to meet waves
This formulation is only based on the hull waterline
of bigger amplitude.
length and it represents a first, rough approach to
Using this representation, the irregular pitch RAO of
estimate the order of magnitude of the acceleration in the
Kiboko yacht can be plotted using both the regular RAO
mast. These estimations are irrelevant with forward
computed by HydroStar and the estimated RAO obtained
speed.
by the proposed method. This is depicted in Figure 17.
In the final phase, a state-of-the art process has been set
The oscillations are due to the random part of the
to get seakeeping results in irregular seas. It has been
irregular wave generation.
successfully compared with real on board measurements
This diagram shows very good agreement in terms of real
performed on the sailing yacht "Kiboko". In case of no
pitch motion in irregular sea. The results using computed
forward speed, pitch motion RAO in irregular sea seems
and estimated RAOs are really similar. It can be again
to satisfactorily match those obtained by the proposed
recalled that the blue curve is obtained without using any
simplified method.
hydrodynamic software.
This work is to be considered as a preliminary study of
mast and rigging response to yacht motions at sea and
many further improvements appeared to be very 6. REGISTRO ITALIANO NAVALE (RINA)
interesting to the authors during the development of the ‘Regolamento per la Costruzione e la Classificazione
performed investigations. In the following some possible delle Barche a Vela da Regata 12 m S.I. e 6 m S.I.’ (in
hints are presented: Italian), Genoa, Italy, 1984.
- improve the simplified formulation proposed by
taking into account the effect of other important 7. RINA, Rules for the Classification of Yachts Designed
parameters highlighted before, such as forward for Commercial Use, Part B, 8.4 Masts and Rigging,
speed; 2013.
- build a much bigger database, get results and
perform a regressions using these key 8. ISSC 2009 Report, V.8 Committee “Sailing Yacht
parameters to better estimate the pitching Design”, Seoul, Korea, August 2009.
behaviour;
- keep comparing results with incoming on board 9. FOSSATI, F., MUGGIASCA, S., ‘Experimental
measurements on Kiboko and other sailing investigation of sail aerodynamic behaviour in dynamic
yachts; conditions’, Journal of Sailboat Technology, 2011.
- investigate the relevance of results out of the
range of the linear model (e.g. in breaking 10. McRAE, B., BINNS, J., KLAKA, K., DOVELL, A.,
waves). ‘Windward performance of the AME CRC systematic
yacht series’, RINA International Conference on the
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Modern Yacht, Portsmouth, UK, March 1998.
The authors want to thank the Italian Classification 11. AUGIER, B., BOT, P., HAUVILLE, F., DURAND,
Society RINA for having made possible this research. M., ‘Experimental validation of unsteady models for
Authors are thankful to Bureau Veritas for providing fluid structure interaction: Application to yacht sails and
HydroStar software together with technical support. rigs’, Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial
Mr Patrick Bot and Mr Benoit Augier are also Aerodynamic, pp. 53-66, 2012.
acknowledged for the valuable data they shared with the
authors about J80 measurements. 12. AUGIER, B., HAUVILLE, F., BOT, P., DURAND,
Finally Southern Wind Shipyards are very much M., ‘Numerical investigation of the unsteady fluid
acknowledged as well for making very unique sea tests structure interaction of a yacht sail plan’, 4th High
by their sailing yachts and making results available for Performance Yacht Design Conference, Auckland, 12-14
this research. March 2012.
This work was developed as a master thesis in the
University of Genoa in the frame of the European Master 13. BUREAU VERITAS, ‘HydroStar for experts user
Course Erasmus Mundus "EMSHIP - Integrated manual’, Paris, 2010.
Advanced Ship Design”.
14. DELFTSHIP FREE, ‘FreeShip Manual’,
Netherlands, 2013.
REFERENCES
1. AMERICAN BUREAU OF SHIPPING, ‘Guide for

Building and Classing Offshore Racing Yachts’, New AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
York, USA, 1996.
A. Combourieu holds the position of R&D engineer at
2. BUREAU VERITAS, ‘Rules for the Classification and Innosea, engineering office in offshore renewable
Certification of Yachts’, Paris, France, 2006. energies. He is graduated from Telecom ParisTech and
EMSHIP, European post-master in advanced ship design
3. DET NORSKE VERITAS, ‘Rules for construction and and hydrodynamics. His current research deals with
certification of vessels less than 15 metres’, Hovik, waves energy converters (WEC).
Norway, 1983.
F. Faloci holds the position of Naval Architect at Italian
4. GERMANISCHER LLOYD, ‘Design and Classification Society RINA. He is responsible for rule
Construction of Large Modern Yacht Rigs’ , Hamburg, development of RINA Rig Guidelines. He graduated in
Germany, 2002. Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering from the
University of Trieste. After three years as ship designer
5. GERMANISCHER LLOYD, ‘Guidelines for the Type at Maierform Engineering he joined RINA as branch
Approval of Carbon Strand and PBO Cable Rigging for office surveyor. His experience includes fifteen years of
Sailing Yachts’, Hamburg, Germany, 2008. surveys and plan approval activity on all kind of boats
and ships, ranging from rowing boats up to passengers
ships. From 2004 he was assigned to RINA head office
in Genoa. He is an amateur yacht designer, as well a
dinghy and keelboat instructor with more than 35 years
of sailing experience.
D. Boote holds the position of Ship Structure Professor

at the Naval Architecture section of the Department of
Electrical, Electronic, Telecommunications Engineering
and Naval Architecture (DITEN) of the University of
Genova. He is the Chairman of the Bachelor and Master
Course in Yacht Design in La Spezia. His initial
experiences include a long research activity in the field
of Ship and Offshore Structures followed, since 2000, by
an intense activity in the field of sailing and motor
yachts. From 2006 to 2012 he has been Chairman of the
V.8 ISSC Committees on "Sailing Yacht Design" and
"Yacht Design".
T. Pais holds the current position of PHD in the Naval

Architecture section of the Department of Electrical,
Electronic, Telecommunications Engineering and Naval
Architecture (DITEN) of the University of Genova. Her
research activity deals with the dynamic behaviour of
hull structures and the analysis of seakeeping
characteristics of ships and motor and sailing yachts.
NUMERICAL STUDY OF ASYMMETRIC KEEL HYDRODYNAMIC

PERFORMANCE THROUGH ADVANCED CFD
D. Mylonas, S. Turkmen and M. Khorasanchi, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK
dimitri.mylonas@gmail.com, serkan.turkmen@strath.ac.uk, mahdi.khorasanchi@strath.ac.uk
The hydrodynamics of an asymmetric IACC yacht keel at angle of yaw are presented using simulations performed
by advanced computational fluid dynamics using state-of-the-art software. The aim of the paper is to continue
working on the improvement of numerical viscous flow predictions for high-performance yachts using Large Eddy
Simulation and Detached Eddy Simulation on unstructured grids. Quantitative comparisons of global forces acting
on the keel and wake survey are carried out. Qualitative comparisons include flow visualisation, unsteady and
separated flow and other features. Star-CCM+ and the trimmed cell method give better forces and wake prediction
compared to the unstructured mesh of ANSYS Fluent. Both solvers give good flow visualisation near and far field
of the keel.
1 INTRODUCTION Reynolds number flow. Additionally, qualitative

data that can provide practical help to those
Recent shift and progress in numerical and involved in yachting is necessary.
computational methods based on Computational Fluid
Dynamics (CFD) has focused on aerodynamic Information about local and global distribution of flow
applications of sails performance, due to the prominent quantities (e.g. pressure, velocities, vorticity and
arrival of the state-of-the-art catamarans ready to turbulence) can be useful to improve the hydrodynamic
compete in the forthcoming America’s Cup. performances of keels. Creating and computing the
flow around the appendages can help understanding the
Free-surface hydrodynamics are also increasingly formation of the main flow characteristics and their
studied, partly due to the boost in computational interaction with the boat components.
resources and partly because of their importance in
competitive sailing concerning flow interactions In this context, CFD simulations of keel hydrodynamics
between appendages and hull in certain sailing have been carried out in various published studies using
conditions (e.g. Volvo Ocean Race). numerical methods based on potential flow codes and
Navier-Stokes solvers with varying level of quantitative
Below the waterline, another area where CFD success but with useful qualitative applications.
simulations play a crucial role is the design and
performance of the appendages. Keel hydrodynamics Ticono et al. [1] showed good agreement between wind
are studied to gain an understanding of effects and tunnel tests of generic keels for the 1992 America’s
interactions occurring in the near and far field flow, Cup campaign and potential flow/boundary layer
depending on the sailing conditions. computations validated against wind-tunnel data. Their
findings concluded that the numerical method was
Keel, bulb, winglets and rudder should be developed suited for induced drag computations of the keel
accordingly in order to guarantee global optimal configurations, but lacked in accuracy in the predictions
performances. The advantage of the numerical of the viscous resistance of the bulbs.
approach relies on the possibility to test several
different configurations and to have a complete picture Werner et al. [2, 3] validated a potential flow code
of the flow behaviour at every time instant. (SHIPFLOW) coupled with a boundary layer code
against the wind tunnel tests on an America’s Cup keel.
The viscous hydrodynamic flow around a keel is The errors in the potential flow code coupled to the
important for several reasons: boundary layer solution results were within the
experimental uncertainty (2% error for both lift and
x The transition from laminar to turbulent flow is still drag), but given that the correct panelisation is used (in
a delicate topic in numerical simulation that some cases, absolute error was as high as 18%).
requires continuous investigation.
x The unsteady & separated flow is also a critical In addition, the same research group also performed
aspect that researchers want to grasp to minimise RANS based calculations with comparisons in terms of
losses and constraints during races. lift, drag forces, and wake survey. The multi-block
x Modelling the flow at key locations such as root- structured approach used grids ranging from 1 million
junction of keel, bulb and winglets helps predicting to 2.6 millions cells; the finest mesh was adding up to
when they occur. 3.6 million. The errors of the RANS code (FLUENT)
x The continuous need for validation of quantitative were found to be a little higher than the experimental
results for CFD codes is important for high uncertainty. The study reported that errors between the
measured values and the RANS computations for a
wingless keel yielded differences of between 0.4% and is simulated. The fin and the winglets have a NACA
3% for lift, depending on the turbulence model, and 0012 profile. The bulb has a flat bottom and a beaver
between 0.3% and 12% for drag. For a winged-keel, the tail tip. This is known to produce minimum drag, by
corresponding discrepancies were around 3% for both extending the effective span of the keel and ensuring
forces. that the wetted area is not increased excessively. The
dimensions of the keel are given in Table 1. The tunnel
Ambrogi et al. [4] performed a RANS simulation of the blockage ratio between the model frontal area and the
flow field around the same keel using a viscous code section area was found to be around 3%, and does not
developed by INSEAN. The study showed differences exceed the recommended 7.5% limit; hence, it is
in terms of pressure contours, velocity fields, vorticity neglected in the study. Several configurations were
and comparisons with experiments in terms of non- tested and a selection of results is presented in the
dimensional global forces and axial velocity. An paper.
overgrid, structured mesh of 7 million cells was used.
The authors reported quite large errors between Table 1: model keel dimensions in metres
numerical results and measured values, of the order of
about 8% in drag and as much as 23% in lift, for both Bulb Chord 1.365
arrangements tested. The differences were put down as Bulb Max Thickness 0.176
modelling errors. Fin Mean Chord 0.216
Fin Max Thickness, Mean Chord 0.026
Thys [5] used Werner’s geometry to test and evaluate Fin Span 0.613
the non-viscous, potential flow CFD code RAPID .One Winglet Mean Chord 0.077
configuration was tested (winglets in aft position). Winglet Max Thickness, Mean Chord 0.009
Forces were found to be within the uncertainty region Winglet Span 0.252
of the experimental measurements; drag was over Winglet Dihedral (deg) 17°
predicted, lift was good for one case, but bad for the Winglet Pitch (deg) 0°
other. Out of the three lift-prediction methods used,
(pressure integration, Trefftz-plane method and wing The asymmetry of the case is represented by an angle
theory) the first was found to be the most accurate. of attack between the undisturbed inlet flow and the
model. Constraints in the experimental wind tunnel set-
Mylonas and Sayer [6] presented initial work based on up of the keel led to a yaw angle fixed around 4
the use of Large Eddy Simulation (LES) and Detached degrees. Moreover, it can be observed that the fin is not
Eddy Simulation (DES) using a commercial CFD code perfectly aligned with the bulb, causing a further gap
with mixed success. Error in forces prediction was (Figure 1). This incurs flow separation at the trailing
found to be high at times, depending on the model used edge of the fin keel and aft part of the bulb, which will
and the mesh size, but qualitative observations were be investigated. In addition, this means that any
found to be useful and relevant to keel flow computational model will have to be meshed entirely,
hydrodynamics. instead of using a half-model, which is common norm
in CFD when dealing with symmetric bodies.
The main motivation behind this research is to continue
on the improvement of previous numerical study on
advanced CFD using a LES and DES approach of keel
hydrodynamic prediction.
In the present study, the hydrodynamics of an

asymmetric IACC keel in idealised upwind conditions
are simulated using advanced computational methods
based on the LES and DES turbulence models inside a
virtual wind tunnel. The problem is further defined in
the next section, followed by an outline of the
mathematical formulation and numerical solution.
Finally, the results are presented and discussed, and
include quantitative & qualitative comparisons between
CFD models.
2 PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
The wind tunnel experiments by Werner et al [2] are

used as a validation case for the numerical study Figure 1: front view of the keel with yaw angle
presented here. The fully appended IACC model keel is
placed in the test section of the wind tunnel where flow
The experiments reported the global forces in the D is the fluid domain and G is the filter function that
undisturbed flow direction along the x-axis and the z- determines the scale of the resolved eddies. Filtering
axis, corresponding to total drag and total lift forces. In the equations in incompressible form, we obtain the
addition to the forces, the following values were following formulation:
provided in the experimental data and were measured at
a plane located at 2.375m from the tunnel inlet zone: w
velocity magnitude, velocity components in x-, y- and (u i ) 0 (2)
z- direction, static and total pressure. The inlet flow
wxi
conditions are summarised in Table 2. The Reynolds
number based on the length of the bulb and the free and
stream inlet velocity is equal to 3.2 x 106, turbulent
flow is expected around the keel. wu i w 1 wp
(u i u j )
wt wx j U wxi
Table 2: inlet flow conditions for CFD simulations (3)
w ª wu i wu j º wW ij
«Q ( )» Si
Atmospheric Pressure (kPa) 100.9 wx j ¬« wx j w xi ¼» wx j
Inlet Velocity U∞ (m/s) 36.27
Dynamic Viscosity μ (kg/ms) 1.84·10-5
where the overbar represents the spatial filtering, called
Turbulent Intensity (%) 0.1
Turbulent Length Scale (m) 0.001 the grid-scale filter. u are the resolved velocity
components, p is the resolved pressure, ρ is the
In addition to validating the numerical results against
experimental data for forces and wake survey, we also density, ν is the kinematic viscosity, S i is the source
present characteristics of the flow linked to the current term and W ij is the subgrid-scale (SGS) stress tensor
case study, in terms of unsteady viscous and separated
flow, investigation of the laminar-turbulent transition defined as:
and observation of junction flow around intersections
between the components of the keel. The commercial W ij ui u j u i u j (4)
CFD codes ANSYS FLUENT 12.1 and STAR-CCM+
v7.02 are used in the study.
Compared with the original Navier-Stokes governing
equations, LES formulation has an additional SGS
3 MATHEMATICAL MODEL
stress tensor W ij . It is a second-order symmetric tensor,
3.1 LARGE EDDY SIMULATION which includes six independent variables, and requires
modelling with different SGS models.
Large Eddy Simulation possesses good application
prospect in research of flow fluctuation for its 3.1.2 Subgrid-Scale Modelling
advantages in capturing instantaneous flow
characteristics and unsteadiness compared to unsteady The subgrid-scale stresses resulting from the filtering
RANS. Using LES to study the instantaneous flow operation are unknown, and require modelling. The
characteristics in engineering becomes more and more SGS turbulence models employ the Boussinesq
widespread, and continues to progress in reaching a hypothesis (or eddy-viscosity assumption) as in the
level of maturity with the help in computational power RANS models, computing subgrid-scale turbulent
increase. stresses from:
3.1.1 Governing Equations 1

W ij W kk G ij 2Q t S ij (5)
The governing equations employed for LES are 3
obtained by filtering the time-dependent Navier-Stokes
equations and the continuity equation. The filtering here Qt is the SGS subgrid-scale stress turbulent
process effectively filters out the eddies whose scales
are smaller than the filter width or grid spacing used in
viscosity, W kk is the isotropic part of the subgrid-scale
the computations. The resulting equations thus govern stresses added to the filtered static pressure term. Sij is
the dynamics of large eddies.
the resolved strain rate tensor defined by:
A filtered variable (denoted by an overbar) is defined
by 1 wu i wu j
S ij ( ) (6)
2 wx j wxi
)( x) ³ )( x ')G( x, x ')dx '
D
(1)
In the Smagorinsky-Lilly model [7], the form of the Smagorinsky type model but with a modified
SGS eddy-viscosity is modelled by dependence on the resolved strain field, which is
supposed to provide improved near-wall behaviour.
Qt (CS ')2 S (7) The difference with the previous models comes in the
way the eddy viscosity is modelled (7):
with S { 2S ij S ij defined as the magnitude of the ( Sijd Sijd )3/2

Qt (Cw ') 2
(12)
resolved strain rate tensor, Δ is the filter length scale ( Sij Sij )5/2 ( Sijd Sijd )5/4
and CS is the non-dimensional Smagorinsky constant,
which is taken equal to 0.1. d
where Sij is a deviatoric part of rate-of-strain tensor.
In the Dynamic Smagorinsky-Lilly model, the constant
CS is calculated dynamically at every time and position The default value of the WALE constant, Cw is 0.325
in the flow based on the Germano identity and the scale and has been found to yield satisfactory results for a
invariance assumption [8, 9]. The new filter width is wide range of flow. The rest of the notation is the same
equal to twice the grid filter width Δ. The dynamic as for the Smagorinsky-Lilly model.
procedure thus obviates the need for users to specify
the model constant CS in advance. 3.2 DETACHED EDDY SIMULATION
The Germano identity is defined as: In the DES method, the unsteady RANS models are
employed in the near-wall regions, while the filtered
Lij Tij W ij (8) versions of the same models are used in the regions
away from the near-wall. The LES region is normally
where Tij is the stress at a test filter scale ' , and Lij is associated with the core turbulent region where large
the resolved stress tensor which can be computed by turbulence scales play a dominant role. In this region,
the resolved scales. the DES models recover the respective subgrid models.
In the near-wall region, the respective RANS models
Applying SM to model the SGS stress at a test filter are recovered.
scale, Tij can be expressed by:
3.2.1 Realizable κ-ε Model
1
Tij Tkk G ij 2[CS (')'] S Sij
2
(9) This RANS model is similar to the well known
3 realizable κ-ε model [11] with the exception of the
dissipation term in the κ equation. In the DES model,
Substituting (9) and (5) into (7), and considering the the Realizable κ-ε RANS dissipation term is modified
scale invariance assumption, we obtain: such that:
1
Lij Lkk Gij 2(CS ')2 S Sij 2(CS ') 2 Sˆ Sîj (10)
UN 3/2
YN (13)
3 ldes
where:
Assuming M ij 2' 2 S Sij 2' 2 Sˆ Sîj , (10) can be
rewritten as: ldes min(lrN e , lles ) (12)
3/2
k
1
Lij Gij Lkk
lrke (13)
3 H
CS (11)
M ij M ij lles Cdes ' (14)
The CS obtained using the dynamic Smagorinsky-Lilly Cdes is a calibration constant used in the DES model and
model varies in time and space over a wide range. To has a value of 0.61 and Δ is the maximum local grid
avoid numerical instabilities, its value is clipped spacing in x-, y- z- direction.
between zero and 0.23. The upper bound limit aims at
preventing the appearance of high CS values that, on 3.2.2 SST κ-ω Model
one hand, are not physical and on the other can lead to
high spatial variations of Cs and destabilize the solver. The dissipation term of the turbulent kinetic energy
from the standard κ-ω model [12] is modified for the
Finally, the third SGS model of interest is the Wall- DES turbulence model as described by Menter [13]
Adapting Local Eddy-Viscosity model (WALE) of such that:
Nicoud and Ducros [10]. The WALE model is a YN UE *NZ FDES (15)
Lt non-structured grids incorporating a prism layer mesh
where FDES max( ,1) , with Cdes and Δ as around the keel and were generated in STAR-CCM+.
Cdes ' The grids were based upon the medium-to-fine density
N (base size between 10-20) size control with additional
above, and Lt . anisotropic volumetric refinement in the relevant areas
EZ*
where the flow is expected to be important (boundary
layer, wake, separated areas, winglets). This approach
STAR-CCM+ employs the following SGS models: SM allows the grid resolution to be increased in the
and WALE for LES and SST κ-ω for DES. ANSYS turbulent wake pattern region only around the keel if
FLUENT also offers the Dynamic Smagorinsky-Lilly necessary.
and the Realizable κ-ε. In the present study, the
different models are used and compared between the
two solvers.
4. COMPUTATIONAL AND NUMERICAL

APPROACH
4.1 COMPUTATIONAL DOMAIN AND MESH
The computational domain was reproduced as an exact

copy of the experimental set-up; therefore, it is
identified as a ‘virtual wind tunnel’. The complete test Figure 3: Computational domain, trimmed cells,
section was modelled from the inlet plane, where the meshed with STAR-CCM+
wind tunnel contraction ends, to the outlet plane, where
the expansion begins. The domain dimensions are The near-wall boundary layers were extruded at a rate
Length (m) x Width (m) x Height (m): 2.5 x 1.8 x 1.25. of 1.1 from the surface of the model, and depending on
The coordinate system was defined at the inlet base of the configuration, comprised of between 5 and 20
the tunnel, x-direction streamwise, y-direction upwards inflation layers in total. The first cell height was kept to
and z-direction transversally. As mentioned previously, a minimum, of the order of 1-10 μm, resulting in a y+
blockage effects were neglected as they are not value of under 5. For the coarsest meshes, this value
influencing the outcome of the simulation results. was increased and wall-function treatments were used
near the model (in DES). The grid spacing, normalised
Two types of mesh were created for the purpose of the by friction velocity and viscosity, at the wall was
study. On one hand, the simulations were performed on (Δx+;Δy+;Δz+)≈(30-80;1-5;20) for unstructured mesh
a single-block adapted unstructured mesh consisting of and (Δx+;Δy+;Δz+)≈(12-110;0.3-1;15) for the cut-cell
prismatic cells in the boundary layer and vicinity of the mesh.
keel, with tetrahedral cells in the outer part of the
volume. Surface mesh on the keel comprised on The simulation grids consisted of between 3 to 8
triangular face elements. This type of grid was million elements. This resolution was reached based on
associated with the ANSYS FLUENT simulations and the mesh specifications defined (near-wall resolution,
developed following the lessons learned and the finding refinement in specific areas …), the experience from
of previous study [6]. A view of the mesh can be seen previous study [6] and using the computational
in Figure 2. The adapted unstructured approach is the resources available for handling such large mesh sizes.
most suitable for this solver, because of the complexity
of the geometry and the flexibility it offers to the user. 4.2 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
A constant velocity condition of 36.27 m/s with 0.1%

turbulence intensity was applied as a boundary
condition at the inlet of the domain. They correspond to
the values used in the experiments and defined in Table
2. At the outlet of the domain, zero static pressure is
imposed. On the surface of the appendage, no-slip
condition was employed. To ease computational time,
the tunnel walls were defined as slipped surfaces.
Figure 2: plane cut of mesh around the winglets, Since LES and DES are unsteady models, the velocity
unstructured grid, ANSYS FLUENT profile imposed at the inlet of the domain must be time-
On the other hand, the automated meshing approach dependent. To model the fluctuating velocity, several
offered by STAR-CCM+ was used. The meshes techniques exist to account for this. In the study, the
employed were predominantly hexahedral trimmed Vortex Method was employed for both solvers [15, 16].
It consists of generating and transporting randomly in the undisturbed flow and the former is taken
the inlet plane a given number (in this study 190) of 2D perpendicular to the wind, along the z-axis.
vortices whose intensity and size depend on the local
value of κ, the turbulence dissipation rate or the The exp uncertainty of the forces was 3.2% for the lift
turbulent intensity, for which profiles are prescribed and 3.1% for the drag and is shown in the graphs in the
based on the experiment. The advantage of this method form of error bars. For clarity sake, the figures have
is that it does not require additional simulation. been refined near the measured force values, so that the
differences between the turbulence models and the
4.3 NUMERICAL SOLUTION CFD solvers can be appreciated. Results shown here
are for grids of around 3.5 million cells for the no
An implicit, segregated solver was chosen as the solver wings configuration, and about 6 million for the
algorithm. Second-order temporal discretization was winglets in forward position.
used. The bounded central-differencing scheme is used
to discretize the convection term in the filtered Exps Fluent Star-Ccm+
momentum equation in FLUENT. In STAR-CCM+, the 49
pure central-differencing scheme is adopted. The flow
velocities and pressures in the domain are calculated 47
using the standard SIMPLE (STAR-CCM+) or
SIMPLEC (FLUENT) pressure correction method. A 45
Lift (N)
second-order upwind differencing scheme was
employed for the solution of the momentum and 43
turbulence equations. An algebraic multigrid method is

41
employed to accelerate solution convergence.
39
The steady state computation was initially carried out
LES SM LES WALE LES DSM DES κω DES Rκε
with the solution of a preceding RANS calculation to
have a convergence below 10-3/10-4 depending on the Figure 4a: Comparison of lift force for CFD models,
case (forces, residuals, surface values were monitored). no-wing configuration
After, the unsteady simulation to model the fluctuating
velocity is superimposed. The time-step value has been Exps Fluent Star-Ccm+
adapted for the computational grids (between 10-4-10-6 4.5
seconds of order of magnitude). One flow-through
time was equivalent to about 0.069s (Tft=L/U∞, where L 4.3
is the domain’s length). LES and DES were run for a
sufficiently long flow-time to obtain stable statistic of
Drag (N)
4.1
flow and turbulence (35-45Tft), and further to gather
relevant data for the results (45Tft). Simulation were 3.9
performed on an Intel Xeon 2 CPUs with eight cores,

3.7
24 GB Ram capacity and of processing power equal to
3.2 GHz. The computations were run in parallel
3.5
processing.
LES SM LES WALE LES DSM DES κω DES Rκε
5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Figure 4b: Comparison of drag force for CFD models,
no-wing configuration
In this section, a selection of results will be presented
and discussed, based on the CFD simulations Exps Fluent Star-Ccm+
performed for this study. The validation consisted of 51
comparing the global loads on the keel, and the
prediction of the velocity magnitude for the wake 49
survey. Other results presented are relevant examples of
the flow encountered in keel hydrodynamics and of the 47
Lift (N)
capabilities of LES and DES to capture the complexity

of the flow. 45
43
5.1 GLOBAL FORCES ON KEEL
41
The results obtained from the present CFD calculations
LES SM LES WALE LES DSM DES k-w DES R ke
are compared to the experimental values of Werner in
terms of time-averaged Lift (L) and drag (D) forces. Figure 5a: Comparison of lift force for CFD models,
The later is measured longitudinally in the direction of forward wings configuration
obtained from experiments. As the two solvers use
different grid topology, observing the wake of the flow
Exps Fluent Star-Ccm+
4.8
is important in evaluating the CFD simulations in terms
of level of accuracy and turbulence models. The
4.6 velocity magnitude was measured in a wake plane
orthogonal to the undisturbed flow defined at x/L: 0.95
from the wind tunnel inlet. Numerical results are shown
Drag (N)
4.4
for grids of around 3.5 million cells.
4.2
Figure 6 shows the comparison of the velocity
4 magnitude contours for DES SST κω (averaged values)
& for LES SM (instantaneous values taken at t =2s) in
3.8 the turbulent wake. Areas of low velocity correspond to
LES SM LES WALE LES DSM DES k-w DES R ke
regions of high vorticity magnitude. Three main
Figure 5b: Comparison of drag force for CFD models, vortices can be identified [3]; they are in the clockwise
forward wings configuration direction (view is looking downstream, leeward side to
the right) from top to bottom: the bulb-tip vortex, the
The results are in quite a good agreement with the bilge vortex and the fin junction vortex.
experimental data and represent a much-improved
performance compared to the previous data published The overall wake shape and position is in fair
with one of the numerical solver by the author [6], for agreement with the experimental data. Vortex shape
both cases with and without winglets. Most of the and intensity in the bulb wake can be considered
turbulence models for both solvers are within the satisfactory; there is some lack of resolution in the
experimental uncertainty. bottom part of the vortex for most but the overall trend
is reasonable.
Comparing case by case, STAR-CCM+ gives the most
accurate results in the non-winged keel computations. The DES predictions of Star-CCM+ are in satisfactory
The main differences are found for the drag prediction agreement with the tunnel measurements. The velocity
of the DES κω model, likely linked to the fact that a is slightly underpredicted as are the bilge and the
Delayed DES model was chosen in the simulation. The junction vortices. General trend is good. If we link to
results with Fluent show a wider range of estimations the force results, then we can observe that refinement is
depending on the model. The highest errors were found needed in the longitudinal to resolve the vortices better
to be about 5.6%. (drag is under predicted). The results from Fluent
results differ in magnitude and resolution of the
For the forces computed in the other configuration, the vortices, and not corresponding to the higher value of
discrepancies in the models are slightly larger than the drag reported in the force comparison.
previous case. The flow is more complex but the results
are still within a range of validity. Again STAR-CCM+ The instantaneous velocity contours show the unsteady
outperforms Fluent on all common models, baring the nature of the flow in the wake, exhibiting a number of
drag prediction of the WALE model, where it is above additional vortices on top of those reported. Depending
the experimental uncertainty and above fluent. on the grid topology, vortices are more developed, but
main contours appear to be in the correct location. The
Differences in the two codes are likely down to the range in Velocity magnitude is slightly underpredicted
different mesh topology, since numerical formulation by both solvers, but within an acceptable range of
was almost identical for both codes; non-structured validity and in agreement with the forces prediction.
hexahedral trimmed cells look to be more accurate than
the tetrahedral unstructured cells of the other solver. A It can be seen from the results that κω SST is
thorough error and uncertainty analysis is required in recommendable for both solvers and mesh type, with
the future though, particularly for advanced numerical preference to hexahedral trimmed cells. Performance is
models. matching that of experiments. For that specific case, the
cell size in the wake region was too coarse. Prediction
5.2 WAKE SURVEY was found to be increasing in details with targeted
refinement and cell size control. Another possible
To assess the accuracy of the methods in terms of explanation may the Vortex Method set at the inlet
velocity and vortex structure at the far field, a boundary and the turbulent intensity, which seem to
comparison of the wake at a given plane behind the work better in one of the solvers.
keel has been carried. Results for the case without
wings are presented. This type of assessment is
instructive in cases when data such as surface pressure,
velocity measurements on or near the body are not
Figure 6a: Contours of velocity magnitude at wake Figure 6b: Contours of velocity magnitude at wake
plane with STAR-CCM+. Top to bottom: Experiments, plane with ANSYS Fluent. Top to bottom:
DES κω SST and LES SM models Experiments, DES κω SST and LES SM models
5.3 UNSTEADY FLOW REGIME comparison, both solvers predict the vortices and the
separation and recirculation on the body.
5.3.1 Vortices and junction flow
Flow past an appended keel is a challenging case for

CFD because of the different flow regimes around the
body; including the laminar boundary layer, transition
region, turbulent boundary layer, separation point, and
separation region as well as wake region. There were
no other formal observations during the experiments of
the flow to report as comparison, but physics of the
flow can be reported.
At the yaw angle of the measurements, separation is

expected to occur at the trailing edge of the suction side
of the model. Although it can be argued that there is no
massive separation to justify the use of LES or DES
(i.e. large angles of attack), the models nonetheless
predict the flow unsteadiness in a characteristic manner. Figure 8: Surface streamlines on the appended keel.
LES is particularly suitable to investigate the
generation and evolution of coherent structures in 5.3.2 Laminar and turbulent flow
turbulent flows. Figure 7 shows the instantaneous flow
pathlines at the intersection close of the fin with the Turbulence is expected around the fin and the winglets
bulb. The vortical structures emanate from the junction over most part of the structures. Based on the inlet
towards the end of the trailing edge and from the bulb. flow, their Reynolds number is equal to Re f = 5.04 x
The rotation in the flow carries on further down the 105 and Rew = 1.80 x 105 respectively, which means
length of the bulb and in the wake; these vortices, move transition will occur sooner than for the bulb. In
towards the starboard side, as expected. computational terms, this means that further resolution
may be necessary near the wall of these lifting surfaces
to fully grasp the unsteadiness and the transition from
laminar to turbulent flow. The flow around the bulb is
laminar over a longer part, whereas the turbulence on
the fin and the winglets is much more pronounced.
As an example, figures 9 and 10 show the instantaneous

velocity vectors in the boundary layer of the fin at the
plane y = 0.61, over a part of the cross section near the
intersection with the bulb. The top picture shows the
trailing edge on the leeward side, and the bottom is the
leading edge on the windward side. A vortex structure
can be identified on the trailing edge, with separation
and turbulence occurring on the viscous sublayer. The
flow then reattaches after the vortex. On the pressure
Figure 7: Pathlines coloured by velocity magnitude side, there is less relevant turbulent effect and the flow
near the fin/bulb junction exhibits a laminar regime over a longer range. It
appears more energized; as a result, the boundary layer
Similarly, the surface streamlines on the keel show the thickness in the pressure side is much thinner than in
presence of a horseshoe vortex when the undisturbed the suction side. The regions of stagnation points,
flow reaches the fin at the junction with the bulb; figure reattachment and separation on the suction side
8. On the trailing edge, reattachment occurs. The flow correspond to changes in the surface pressure of the fin,
remains unsteady and turbulent in the aft part, inducing due to the flow unsteadiness.
further separation down the keel. In the pressure side,
the flow is less disturbed, due to the yaw angle, The streamlines show that the numerical solution
pressure transfers from the windward to the leeward captures the important features of the boundary layer
side. The surface streamlines show that the numerical including separation, recirculation zone and turbulent
simulations capture the important features of the boundary layer. Further insight into these complex
recirculation zone. Similar behaviour is reported for the phenomena is required, with the investigation of
flow near the winglets, but not as pronounced because parameters influencing the turbulence for LES and
the winglets pitch was zero degrees. In terms of code DES, such as intensity and turbulent viscosity at the
inlet.
Figure 9: Velocity vectors in the boundary layer, on the leeward side (TE)
Figure 10: Velocity vectors in the boundary layer, on the windward side (LE)
6 CONCLUSIONS x The hexahedral non-structured grid offered a better

prediction of forces and a more detailed account of
In the present paper the hydrodynamic performance of the wake flow than tetrahedral unstructured mesh
and asymmetric keel at yaw angle is presented using x Characteristics of the flow such as separation,
advanced CFD based on the Large Eddy Simulation vortices, and wakes are correctly predicted and
and Detached Eddy Simulation turbulence models. Two resolved qualitatively.
solvers were tested, with two different grid types. x Likely influence of some inlet parameters
Results obtained were compared quantitatively against depending on the grid topology, the SGS model
wind-tunnel forces and wake plane observation. and the solver.
The following observations and conclusions can be Possible directions of future research and developments
drawn from the results obtained in the current study: in this research topic will consist of the following:
x The forces prediction showed a significant x Introduce the laminar zones around part of the bulb
improvement compared to previous study, with a and fin keel
maximum error of about 6%.
x Investigate the transition models of the solvers Viscosity Model’, Summer Workshop, Center for
further. Turbulence Research, Stanford, CA, 1996.
x Study the influence of winglets’ pitch angles, likely
to influence the separation and exhibit flow 9. LILLY, D.K., ‘A Proposed Modification of the
features Germano Subgrid-Scale Closure Model’, Physics of
x Apply the cut cell method of ANSYS FLUENT Fluids, 4:633-635, 1992.
13.0 to compare with equivalent method used by
STAR-CCM+. 10. NICOUD, F., and DUCROS, F., ‘Subgrid-scale
x Investigate uncertainty and errors of CFD modelling based on the square of the velocity gradient
x Modify and use different inlet boundary conditions tensor’, Flow, Turbulence and Combustion, vol. 62, pp-
(Spectral Synthesizer, turbulent intensity, viscosity 183-200, 1999.
ratio)
11. SHIH, T. H., et al. ‘A new κ-ε eddy viscosity model
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS for high Reynolds number turbulent flows’, Computers
& Fluids 24 (3): 227-238, 1995.
The authors would like to thank Sofia Werner for
kindly providing with the geometry of the model keel 12. WILCOX, D. C., ‘Turbulence Modeling for CFD’,
as well as the experimental data from the wind-tunnel DCW Industries, Inc., 1998.
tests. The authors are also grateful to the Faculty of
Engineering, University of Strathclyde, for accessing 13. MENTER, F.R., KUNTZ, M., and LANGTRY, R.,
the HPC cluster facility for running and post-processing ‘Ten Years of Experience with the SST Turbulence
some of the simulations. Model’, Turbulence, Heat and Mass Transfer 4, pages
625-632, 2003
REFERENCES
14 ANSYS FLUENT, ‘Fluent 12.1 User Manual’,
1. TINOCO, E. N., GENTRY, A. E., BOGATAJ, P., ANSYS Inc, 2009.
SEVIGNY, E. G., and CHANCE, B., ‘IACC
Appendage Studies’, Proceedings of the 11th 15 SERGENT, E., ‘Vers une méthodologie de couplage
Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium, 1993. entre la Simulation des Grandes Echelles et les modèles
statistiques.’, PhD thesis, L'Ecole Centrale de Lyon,
2. WERNER, S., LARSSON, L., and REGNSTROM, 2002.
B., ‘A CFD Validation Test Case - Wind Tunnel Tests
of a Winglet Keel’, 2nd High Performance Yacht 16 MATHEY, F., COKLJAT, D., BERTOGLIO, J. P.,
Design Conference, 2006. SERGENT, E., ‘Assessment of the vortex method for
large eddy simulation inlet conditions’, Progress in
3. WERNER, S., PISTIDDA, A., LARSSON, L., Computational Fluid Dynamics, An International
REGNSTROM, B., ‘Computational Fluid Dynamics Journal, 6(1), 58-67, 2006.
Validation for a Fin/Bulb/Winglet Keel Configuration’,
Journal of Ship Research, Vol. 51, No. 4, 2007. 17 CD-ADAPCO, ‘STAR-CCM+ 6.02.007 User
Guide’, CD-Adapco, 2011.
4. AMBROGI, M.M., BROGLIA, R., DI MASCIO, A.,
‘Numerical Simulation of a flow around an America’s AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
Cup Class Keel’, Proceedings of the 18th International
Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, 2008. D. Mylonas has recently completed his PhD in the
Department of Naval Architecture and Marine
5. THYS, M., ‘Performance Evaluation of a Sailing Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow and
Yacht with the Potential Code RAPID’, ENSTA, officially graduates in July 2013. His research topic
France, 2008. focused on the application of LES and DES in yacht
hydrodynamics. He also holds an M.Eng from the same
6. MYLONAS, D., and SAYER, P., ‘The department. Other interests include ship & marine
hydrodynamic flow around a yacht keel based on LES hydrodynamics, smart materials, yacht design and CFD
and DES’, Ocean Engineering 46: 18-32, 2012. simulations on marine and aerodynamic applications.
7. SMAGORINSKY, J., ‘General Circulation S. Turkmen is a PhD student in the Department of

Experiments with the Primitive Equations. I the Basic Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, University
Experiment’, Monthly Weather Review, vol. 91, 99-164, of Strathclyde, Glasgow. He has been researching on
1963. the topic of smart material application to mitigate noise
and vibration in ships. He is also investigating
8. GERMANO, M., PIOMELLI, U., MOIN, P., and underwater-radiated noise due to the cavitating
CABOT, W.H., ‘Dynamic Subgrid-Scale Eddy propellers.
M. Khorasanchi is a research fellow in the Department
of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering,
University of Strathclyde, Glasgow. Dr Khorasanchi
has carried out several studies on vortex-induced-
vibration (VIV) of marine risers and VIV suppression
devices. His current teaching and research interests
centre on hydrodynamics and marine propulsion. He
investigates the hydrodynamic performance of marine
vessels through full-scale CFD simulation. He also
works on retrofitting technologies to improve the
performance of marine vessels and reduce the fuel
consumption and carbon emission of shipping industry.
NARROW SHIP WAKES AND WAVE DRAG FOR PLANING HULLS
M. Rabaud, Laboratory FAST, Université Paris-Sud, UPMC Université Paris 6, CNRS. Bât.
502, Campus universitaire, 91405 Orsay, France, marc.rabaud@u-psud.fr
F. Moisy, Laboratory FAST, Université Paris-Sud, UPMC Université Paris 6, CNRS. Bât. 502,
Campus universitaire, 91405 Orsay, France, frederic.moisy@u-psud.fr
The angle formed by ship wakes is usually found equal to its Kelvin value, α = 19.47 degrees. However
we recently show that this angle can be significantly smaller at large Froude number [8]. We show how
the limited range of wave numbers excited
√ by the ship explains the observed decrease of the wake angle
as 1/Fr for Fr > 0.5, where Fr = U/ gL is the Froude number based on the hull length L. At such large
Froude numbers, sailing boats are in the planing regime, for which the wave drag becomes a decreasing
function of the velocity. We discuss here the possible connection between the evolutions of the wake angle
and wave drag at large Froude number.
NOMENCLATURE that√the drag is a function of the hull Froude number Fr =

U/ gL, where L is the waterline length. Following the pi-
Symbol Definition (unit) oneering works of Froude [4], Michell [7, 10] and Havelock
[5], the computation of hydrodynamic drag still represents a
B Waterline beam (m) challenge for naval architects. The wave drag or wave-making
cϕ Phase velocity (m s−1 ) resistance RW is the part of this hydrodynamic drag that cor-
cg Group velocity (m s−1 ) responds to the energy radiated by the waves generated by the
CW Wave-making coefficient hull translation. For a displacement hull sailing at large ve-
D Static immersed volume (m3 ) locity (Froude number in the range 0.2 to 0.5) the major part
Fr Hull Froude number of the hydrodynamic drag is given by the wave drag.
g Acceleration of gravity (m s−2 ) In this paper we discuss the possible link between the de-
k Wave number (m−1 ) crease of the wake angle observed at large Froude number and
L Waterline length (m) the evolution of the wave drag for planing sailing boats.
P Pressure (N m−2 )
RW Wave-making resistance (N)
2 WAVE PATTERN
U Boat velocity (m s−1 )
α Half-angle of the wake When a boat sails on calm water at constant velocity U , the
θ Angle (k, U) waves present around and behind the hull are only those that
ρ Density of water (kg m−3 ) are stationary in the frame of reference of the boat. For a
given wave of wave number k propagating in the direction θ
1 INTRODUCTION with respect to the boat course, this condition writes:
A ship moving on calm water generates gravity waves with U cos θ(k) = cϕ (k) (1)
a characteristic V-shaped pattern. Lord Kelvin in 1887 [4]
was the first to explain this phenomenon and to show that the where cϕ (k) is the phase velocity of the considered wave (fig-
wedge angle is constant, independent of the boat velocity. Ac- ure 1).
cording to this classical analysis, only the wavelength and the Because of the dispersive nature of gravity waves, cϕ is
amplitude of the waves change with the velocity and the half- function of the wave number, cϕ = g/k, implying that for
angle of the wedge remains equal to 19.47 degrees. a given propagation direction θ only one wavenumber is se-
In contrast to this result described in many textbooks, we lected by Eq. 1:
g
have shown recently that the wake angle is no more constant at k(θ) = 2 . (2)
large velocity [8] and decreases as 1/U . We have shown that U cos2 θ
this decrease can be modeled by including the finite length of As a consequence, the smallest wave number (i.e. the largest
the boat in Kelvin’s analysis. wave length) compatible with the stationary condition is given
Some years before Kelvin’s work, William Froude, by tow- by kg = g/U 2 , and corresponds to waves propagating in the
ing model boats, observed that the hydrodynamic drag in- boat direction (θ = 0). These so-called transverse waves are
creases rapidly with the boat speed U , and more precisely visible along the hull and following the boat.
In this classical description the boat is considered as a point
I source, generating all the waves with a small constant ampli-
tude (broad band flat spectrum). In reality all the points of the
ct hull are sources and the detail of the amplitude of the wave
H depend of the exact shape, trim, sinkage of the hull and of
the Froude number. For example, for a poorly streamlined
cgt hull at low Froude number, two V-shaped wakes are visible,
k one originating at the bow and the other at the stern. The
g waves generated by the boat are therefore characterized by a
spectrum which cannot be considered as flat, and the resulting
M Ut O
wake pattern may escape from the classical Kelvin’s descrip-
tion.
Figure 1: Geometric construction of the wave pattern and an-
gle definitions for a boat sailing at constant velocity U .
3 WAVE ANGLE FOR RAPID BOATS
Importantly, energy propagates at the group velocity and We recently showed that the commonly admitted result of
not at the phase velocity, and for gravity waves the group ve- Kelvin of a constant wake angle equal to 19.47 degrees is no
locity is equal to half the phase velocity (cg = 12 cϕ ) [6]. It longer true at large velocity for planing boats [8]. This is illus-
follows from this 1/2 factor that the angle α, where waves of trated in figure 3, showing a wake angle significantly smaller
a given wave number are observed (figure 1), is given by [8]: than the Kelvin prediction.

−1 k/kg − 1
α(k) = tan . (3)
2k/kg − 1
This evolution of the angle α with the wave number is shown

in figure 2.
25
20
α(k) (degrees)
15
Figure 3: Photograph of a fast planing motor-
boat exhibiting a narrow wave wake (source:
10 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wake).
5 Analyzing a set of airborne images from Google Earth c

,
we measured the wake angles and the Froude numbers for
boats of various sizes and velocities. Using the scale pro-
0
10
0
10
1
10
2 vided on the images, we measured the overall length of the
k/k boat (assumed to be equal to the waterline length L) and the
g
wavelength of the waves on the edge of the wake. From this

Figure 2: Evolution of the angle α versus the wave number wavelength the boat velocity U is determined using Eq. 2 and
ratio k/kg (Eq. 3), where kg = g/U 2 is the gravity wave the Froude number is then computed. Our data clearly show
number. a decrease of the wedge angle for Froude numbers larger than
0.5 (figure 2 of [8]). Values as small as 7 degrees are observed.
This plot shows that for any given angle α smaller than Wake angles smaller than the Kelvin prediction can be ex-
19.47 degrees there are two possible values of k that corre- plained as follows. The key argument is that, contrary to
spond to two directions θ (Eq. 2). One solution corresponds to the Kelvin assumption, a moving boat does not excite all the
transverses waves (smaller θ) and the other to divergent waves wavelengths with the same energy. In particular it cannot ex-
(larger θ). The angle α takes its maximum value α0 = 19.47 cite surface waves significantly larger than its waterline length
deg for k0 /kg = 3/2, and no waves can be observed be- L. The energy radiated by the boat is therefore character-
yond this angle. This maximum wake angle corresponds to ized by a spectrum which is truncated below the wavenumber
a cusp (a caustic) in the wave pattern, and also to the locus of kmin ∼ 2π/L. At large boat velocity this wavenumber can
maximum amplitude of the waves, since ∂α/∂k = 0, which be larger than the wave number k0 which corresponds to the
implies an accumulation of energy at k0 /kg = 3/2. These maximum Kelvin angle in figure 2. Thus only the wave num-
results correspond to the well known Kelvin angle [3]. bers corresponding to divergent waves, i.e. rightmost part of
figure 2, are of significant amplitude, so the largest visible an- generates. We now know that this ”limit speed” can be over-
gle is given by Eq. 3 taken for k = kmin ∼ 2π/L. This come with light and powerful boats as they reach the planing
model predicts that the wake angle is given by the Kelvin regime. In this regime of large Froude number, hydrodynamic
long as the k0 mode contains energy, i.e. up
prediction as lift becomes significant, decreasing the immersed volume of
to Frc = 3/4π = 0.49, and by a decreasing function the hull. Because of the resulting smaller mass of fluid which
α(k = 2π/L) at larger Froude. For Fr Frc the wake angle needs to be pushed away, a decrease of the wave drag is ob-
decreases as served. During this transition to planing, a significant acceler-
1
α≈ √ . (4) ation of the boat can be observed. We discuss here the possi-
2 2πFr ble connection between this wave drag decrease during plan-
This previously unnoticed Froude number dependence of ing and the decrease of the visible wake angle described in the
the wake angle compares well with the wake angles observed previous section.
from airplane images. This is also consistent with the fact The wave drag RW is the part of the hydrodynamic drag
that at Fr > 0.5 the transverse waves behind the boat (θ = 0), due to the energy radiated by the waves generated by the boat.
which are visible for smaller Froude numbers, are no more In order to compare boats of different forms and displacement
visible (see figure 3), since they fall outside the wave spec- a dimensionless wave drag coefficient CW is usually defined.
trum excited by the boat. Equation 4 is also found to describe Assuming hulls having all the same shape but not the same
very well the wave patterns obtained by numerical simula- size, the wave drag will only depend of the boat velocity U ,
tions (figure 4). More details on the numerical simulation can waterline length L, gravity g and water density ρ. One finds
be found in Ref. [8]. by dimensional analysis:
RW
= CW (Fr). (5)
ρU 2 L2
In reality this coefficient CW also depends on the exact shape

of the boat, and alternate definitions where L2 is replaced by
LB or B 2 (where B is the beam of the hull) are also found in
the literature. Another possibility is to build a dimensionless
drag coefficient by normalizing the wave drag force RW by
the weight of the boat ρgD, where D is the static immersed
volume of the hull. For displacement boat, the wave drag co-
efficient rapidly increases (at least as Fr4 if defined by Eq. 5)
and becomes the dominant part of the hydrodynamical drag
at large Fr. Note that the power law CW ∝ F r4 can be re-
covered by scaling argument, assuming that the amplitude of
the waves scales as U 2 (using Bernoulli relation) and that the
Figure 4: Perspective view of the wave pattern generated by
wavelength observed along the Kelvin angle scales as U 2 (Eq.
an axisymmetric (Gaussian) pressure distribution at Fr = 1.
2).
The measured wake angle is α = 11 degrees.
In order to compute the wave drag, Havelock [5] has in-
troduced a classical simplification which consists in replacing
the boat by an imposed pressure field P (x, y) at the water
4 WAVE DRAG surface. The resulting surface deformation ζ(x, y) can then
be computed as a Fourier integral (see Eq. 2.17b of Ref. [9],
In order to describe the classical result of the increase of the or Eq. 11 of Ref. [1]). From this imposed pressure and cal-
wave drag for displacement navigation (Fr < 0.5) we come culated wave field, the wave drag is then computed by inte-
back to figure 1. We focus here on the transverse waves grating the product of the local pressure by the slope of the
propagating in the boat direction (θ = 0). These waves interface in the direction of the motion:
are the stationary waves observed along the side of the hull
and behind the boat. Their wavenumber is given by Eq. 2, ∂ζ
RW = P (x, y) dxdy. (6)
kg = g/U 2 , and their wavelength λg = 2π/kg can be written ∂x
as λg = 2πL Fr2 . For increasing speed their wavelength in-
creases, up to a particular velocity for which the wavelength On figure 4 we have simulated the wave pattern gen-
is equal to the
√ length of the boat. This velocity corresponds erated by a moving Gaussian
pressure field, g(r) =
to Fr = 1/ 2π ≈ 0.4. For this value the waves generated (2πF0 /L2 ) exp −2π 2 r2 /L2 , where F0 is a normalization
by the bow are in phase with the ones emitted at the stern and force, which corresponds here to the weight of the boat (F0 =
the draught or sinkage of the hull is maximum. This critical ρgD). From this simulated surface height, we have computed
velocity is known as the hull limit speed, because around this the wave drag using Eq. 6 for various Froude numbers. The
Froude number the wave drag increases drastically and the results, plotted in figure 5, are in perfect agreement with the
trim of the boat starts to be strongly affected by the waves it exact result found by Benzaquen et al. [1] for a Gaussian
pressure field: in our analysis, the prescribed pressure P (x, y) does not de-

2 π/2 pend on the velocity, so it does not contain the physics of the
D 1 dθ
CW = 3 8
√ −4
dynamical lift on the hull. This suggests that the dynamics
L Fr 0 cos5 θ exp 2πFr cos θ of the planing and the decrease of the immersed volume are
(7) not necessary ingredients for the decrease of the wave drag at
large Froude number. Note that the decrease of the wave drag
30 at large velocity is often partly hidden by the increase of the
Simulation (N=2048) other sources of hydrodynamic drag, which increase as Fr2 .
Benzaquen et al. (2011)
25
5 CONCLUSIONS
20
CW (L /D)2
At large velocity many racing sailing boats are now planing

3
15
under the action of the strong hydrodynamic lift. The fact
10 that the dynamically immersed volume is smaller than in static
condition provides a reasonable argument for the diminution
5 of the wave drag. We propose here an alternative interpreta-
tion, in which the combined decrease of the wave drag and
0 the wake angle both follow from the finite extent of the wave
0 0.5 1 1.5
Fr spectrum excited by the ship. This interpretation is based on
our simulations of the wave pattern generated by an imposed
pressure disturbance, suggesting that the narrow wake angles
Figure 5: Dimensionless wave drag calculated for a gaussian
at large Froude number can be observed without lift and thus
moving pressure field with our simulated wave field () and
without planing regime. Further investigations are necessary
comparison with Eq. 7 (—).
to better describe the relative importance of trim and sinkage
evolution of planing boat to better understand the relative im-
portance of the finite size of the boat compared to dynamic
lift.
We note that the present description is by construction lim-
ited to stationary motion, i.e. boat translating on a flat sea sur-
face. In real situations, when in planing conditions the wind
and thus the wind waves are usually large, inducing a periodic
motion of the boat at the wave encounter frequency. This non
stationarity increases the hydrodynamic drag when sailing at
close reach but can also decreases the drag when surfing on
swell.
REFERENCES
Figure 6: Dimensionless wave drag for a parabolic strut (fig- [1] M. Benzaquen, F. Chevy, and E. Raphaël. Wave re-
ure 1 of Ref. [11]. sistance for capillary gravity waves: Finite-size effects.
EPL (Europhysics Letters), 96(3):34003, 2011.
This wave drag coefficient is maximum for Fr 0.37, fol- [2] R. B. Chapman. Hydrodynamic drag of semisubmerged
lowed by a decrease as CW 1/Fr4 at large Froude num- ships. Journal of Basic Engineering, 72:879–884, 1972.
bers. Interestingly, this maximum is very close to the critical
Froude number Frc 0.49 at which the wake angle starts de- [3] F. S. Crawford. Elementary derivation of the wake pat-
creasing. Both results are consequence of the finite extent of tern of a boat. American Journal of Physics, 52:782–
the wave spectrum excited by the disturbance: as the Froude 785, 1984.
number is increased, the surface deformation in the vicinity [4] O. Darrigol. Worlds of Flow: A Hystory of Hydrodynam-
of the boat is no longer able to supply energy to the waves ics from the Bernoullis to Prandtl. Oxford University,
of wavelength λg = 2πU 2 /g, resulting in a combined de- 2005.
crease of the wake angle (α 1/Fr) and of the wave drag
(CW 1/Fr4 ). [5] T. H. Havelock. Wave resistance: Some cases of three-
The overall shape of CW computed by Eq. 7 is surprisingly dimensional fluid motion. Proceedings of the Royal So-
similar to the experimental curve of Chapman [2] with com- ciety of London, Series A, 95:354–365, 1919.
putation by Tuck et al. [11] (figure 6). This curve is usually
interpreted as the result of the lift of the hull and the result- [6] J. Lighthill. Waves in fluids. Cambridge University
ing decrease of the immersed volume at Fr > 0.5. However, Press, Cambridge, 1978.
[7] J. H. Michell. The wave resistance of a ship. Philosoph-
ical Magazine, Series 5, 45:106—123, 1898.
[8] M. Rabaud and F. Moisy. Ship wakes: Kelvin or mach

angle? To appear in Phys. Rev. Letters, 2013.
[9] E. Raphaël and P-G. De Gennes. Capillary gravity

waves caused by a moving disturbance: wave resistance.
Physical Review E, 53(4):3448, 1996.
[10] E. O. Tuck. The wave resistance formula of jh michell

(1898) and its significance to recent research in ship hy-
drodynamics. The Journal of the Australian Mathemati-
cal Society. Series B. Applied Mathematics, 30(04):365–
377, 1989.
[11] E. O. Tuck, D. C. Scullen, and L. Lazauskas. Wave

patterns and minimum wave resistance for high-speed
vessels. In 24th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics.
Fukuoka, JAPAN, 8-13 July 2002, 2002.
6 AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
M. Rabaud holds the current position of professor at Univer-

sity of Paris-Sud.
F. Moisy holds the current position of professor at University
of Paris-Sud, and is member of the Institut Universitaire de
France.

CONCEPTUAL IDEAS ON A DOUBLE SURFACE SAIL INFLATED BY

DYNAMIC PRESSURE
S. Brüns, Technical University of Berlin, Germany, soerenbruens@hotmail.com
H. Hansen, FutureShip GmbH, Germany, Heikki.Hansen@gl-group.com
K. Hochkirch, FutureShip GmbH, Germany, Karsten.Hochkirch@gl-group.com
This paper presents conceptual ideas on an unconventional sailing system. It is designed in

principle and compared in terms of performance with two established sailing systems.
The concept is a double surface sail, which is to be inflated by the dynamic pressure at the leading
edge of the profile. The fundamental principle is the same as used by paragliders and kites, where
openings at the leading edge of the wing allow the air to “fill” the profile to give it a beneficial
aerodynamic shape.
For the analysis of the structural mechanics of the sail system qualitative model tests in a wind
tunnel are conducted. A profile segment is exposed to different angles of attack and the trim
mechanism of mast rotation is varied. The resulting profile shapes and the profiles of the comparative
sail types are then analysed to determine their characteristics by conducting 2D flow simulations. Also
the effects of mast rotation to change the profile characteristics of camber and thickness are reviewed.
The double surface sail showed a good-natured behaviour at a wide range of angles of attack and a
competitive performance potential compared to conventional sail sections and a wing sail section.
NOMENCLATURE Modern wing sails are usually split in two or three chord-
wise segments to create an adjustable asymmetric profile
α Angle of attack (effective) (°) shape. The control mechanism of these flaps is complex
αnom Angle of attack (nominal) (°) and therefore maintenance intensive if breakdowns are to
β Mast rotation angle (°) be avoided. It also raises the weight of the system. The
c Chord length (m) thin covering of the wings is not very robust against
CD Drag coefficient (-) physical impacts.
CL Lift coefficient (-)
Re Reynolds number (-) In the past there have been some attempts to build a good
v Wind velocity (m/s) aerodynamic profile from flexible materials, but so far
none of them have been utilised by the sailing
community. They were either too heavy or too
2D Two dimensional complicated to use. Several concepts suggest using
3D Three dimensional vertically arranged inflated battens between two sail
AoA Angle of attack surfaces [1] [2]. Other designs use inflated horizontal
Bft. Beaufort battens where the shape is controlled by varying the
CFD Computational fluid dynamics batten pressure.
DSS Double surface sail
FSI Fluid structure interaction In a literature review on different kinds of double surface
NACA National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics sails (DSS), only two designs utilise dynamic pressure to
fill the sail with air [3] [4]. One is composed of two sail
surfaces, which are attached to the port and starboard
1 INTRODUCTION side of the mast. To set the sail to one tack the mast
rotates a little, that way the leading edge moves towards
Current developments in competitive yachting show the windward side and a special structure at the leech
more and more wing sails being used as they become goes over, so that the high pressure side is shortened and
allowed by class rules. That is because they have a the suction side is lengthened. This flap mechanism
greater performance potential compared to single surface seems to be complex to realise and complicated to use.
sails. The other concept is more similar to the one presented
here. The sail wraps around a rotatable cylindrical
However, there are some disadvantages associated with device, which is positioned behind the mast where the
the better performance; the handling is much more standard sail is normally hoisted. The leading edge is
complicated and difficult. In most cases the sail cannot therefore located in the mast wake, which has a negative
be hoisted nor pulled down on board by the crew. influence on the performance potential.
Reducing sail area is also not possible or complicated.
Besides some patent specification and general ideas, little 2 WORKING PRINCIPLES
supporting academic work or scientific studies in relation
to maritime applications were found. In Marchaj’s ‘Aero- The beneficial aerodynamic profile is created in nearly
Hydrodynamics Of Sailing’ [5] so called lined sails are the same way as done in paragliders and foil-kites, with
introduced where foam material layers are inserted the difference that the system is able to change the side
between two cloth layers. However, wind tunnel tests of the camber. The double surface cloth or laminated sail
showed less potential of these half rigid sails compared wraps around the mast and is attached to the front of the
to single surface sails. mast. At the trailing edge the surfaces run together to
form the leech. The mast can be rotated to regulate the
Research on different types of glider wings by Princeton camber and profile thickness of the sail. Mast and sail
University showed promising results for the performance surfaces have superposed openings on both sides of the
potential of the semi rigid double surface wings [6]. The mast. The sail openings can be controlled by a special
results are compared to this work later in the paper. The valve system.
common ban of DSS and wing sails in most class rules
for professional yachting events in the past might be a Fig. 1 shows the profile of the sail viewed from the top.
reason for the very limited research and development In case of wind coming from the port side the mast is
activities. rotated clockwise. By that the openings on the port side
of the mast and sail come towards the leading edge close
In aviation the idea of wings made from flexible material to the forward stagnation point. The increased pressure in
has developed well, as can be seen by modern parachutes this region passes through the opening in mast and sail
and paragliders. Some kites also work with the same into the DSS. In this position the opposite openings on
principles. the suction side of the sail are closed by the value
system.
The aim is therefore to develop a concept of a flexible
DSS for sailing boats. This requires solutions to let the A special structure inside the DSS is conceived to
DSS be formed asymmetrically to both sides to enable prevent the two surfaces to separate too much from each
sailing on both tacks. other and form bloated shapes. This can be achieved by
strings or membranes between the two surfaces.
A concept has been developed, which tries to address Membranes have the advantage of preventing span-wise
some of the shortcomings of other systems; weight, flow inside the sail, but non-shear resistant material
complexity and usability. The complete device has the should be used to permit chord-wise movement between
purpose to create a stable and favourable aerodynamic the two sail surfaces. Utilising strings allows this
lift-generating airfoil to provide better performance than movement.
conventional single surface sails. At the same time the
device should be light weight and storable to make it Due to the increased pressure between the two sail
more practical than rigid wing sails. The working surfaces and their spacial separation a comparatively
principles, qualitative wind tunnel test results of a two stable and stiff structure is generated. Since this sail
dimensional section and a comparison to other sail types system needs no rigid components apart from the mast, it
sections based on 2D flow simulations are presented in is possible to store and reef it. The only extra effort in
this paper. terms of trimming the sail is controlling the mast rotation
and the valve system for the sail openings. It is
conceivable that the valves can be opened and closed
automatically when tacking.
Figure 1: Section structure of the DSS concept

Through the mast rotation it is possible to adjust the comparable stiffness to full-scale sailcloth [7]. For the
thickness of the profile. mast an aluminium pipe is used. The chord length is
about c=340mm and the mast diameter is 20mm. The
model is fixed to synchronously rotatable disks in the
3 ANALYSIS PROCEDURE floor and ceiling of the testing section. They can be
adjusted to ±40°. The mast pivot passes through the
A common way to analyse a sail system is to conduct tunnel ceiling and can be adjusted from the outside to
model tests and measure the forces. When using any angle.
computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to assess a sail,
which is made from some kind of flexible material like
cloth, a prediction of the distortion due the aerodynamic
forces is needed to obtain realistic results. Nowadays a
complete simulation of the fluid structure interaction
(FSI) is typical for commonly used sail systems.
For this new conceptual design a combination of wind

tunnel tests and CFD simulations is chosen to assess the
concept in a physical hands-on way. Qualitative model
tests are conducted to proof the concept and obtain the
sail shape. CFD simulations for the resulting sail shape
are performed afterwards. In this study the analysis of the
DDS system is conducted for a 2D section. A 3D
investigation is regarded as too extensive for this
conceptual work as many other factors would influence Figure 2: Model in test section
the performance comparison of the different sail types. It
is therefore seen as most interesting and feasible to look
Additionally there are tell-tales along one circumference,
at the sectional behaviour compared to other sail systems
so that separation effects can be detected.
for this initial investigation into the concept.
4.2 TESTING PROCEDURE AND ANALYSIS
First a 2D section model is made and tested in a wind
tunnel to assess the structural behaviour. Afterwards the The wind speed is set to v=3.25m/s, which is equivalent to
achieved profile shapes are analysed by running a 2D
a Reynolds number of about Re=0.8105. At that speed
flow simulation. Thereby only close-hauled courses are
the model behaves consistently and the stiffness is still
considered. To compare the predicted performance
adequate at large angles of attack (AoA). At higher
potential flow simulations of a rigid wing sail profile and
speeds the gaps between the model and the tunnel ceiling
a conventional single surface sail profile are also
and floor increase due to sail cloth stretch, so that the two
performed.
dimensionality of the flow and the pressure inside the
DDS would not be maintained.
4 WIND TUNNEL TESTS FOR PROFILE SHAPE
The rotatable disks are set to nominal angles of attack of
ANALYSIS
3°, 5°, 7°, 10°, 15° and 25°. The effective AoA is always
about 2.5° lower since the trailing edge is not fully
4.1 TESTING FACILITIES AND MODEL
constrained against moving sideways. The test cases are
labelled based on nominal AoA combined with the mast
The deployed wind tunnel is part of the testing facilities
of the institute for dynamics of maritime systems at rotation (e.g.: Dnom=5°, E=30° Æ 05_30). The mast
rotation is varied from β=0° to β=50° in increments of
Technical University of Berlin. The test section has a
10°.
cross section of 0.5m x 0.3m and the maximal wind speed
is v=6m/s.
Through the transparent ceiling of the test section photos
The focus of this investigation is the behaviour of the are taken from above the centre of rotation, so that the
profile shapes in the different combinations of AoA and
profile section. A 3D assessment and comparison to other
mast rotation can be observed (Fig. 3).
sail types is seen as unrealistic as part of this conceptual
project due to the resulting model complexity and
accuracy. A quasi-endless 2D model is used in the wind Altogether there are 36 tested combinations of AoA and
tunnel (Fig. 2). It is assumed that the gap at the top and mast rotation. For closer investigation six cases with
different mast rotation angles at the same AoA and six
the bottom of the model is small enough to prevent
modulations of AoA with fixed mast rotation are chosen.
significant loss of pressure inside the DSS. To account
By that the influence of these two values can be assessed
for scaling effects the model is constructed of very thin
separately. The other combinations show trends, which
and light sailcloth so that the fold ratio shows
Figure 3: Profile section in wind tunnel with digitised shape, αnom=7°, mast rotation angle β=30°
can largely be explained by the two systematic

variations.
The photos of all reviewed cases were digitised in a

computer aided design (CAD) programme by manually
tracing the section shape. As an orientation aid the tell-
tales along the circumference were used. Fig. 3 shows the
digitised section profile in the photo (case 07_30).
4.3 QUALITATIVE MODEL TEST RESULTS
The digitised shapes of the selected section profiles are

shown in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5. In Fig. 4 one case (αnom=15°;
β=30°) is shown where the windward surface shape is
inverted. The pressure inside the DDS is higher than the Figure 4: Variation of AoA with fixed mast rotation
pressure on the windward side so that this convex shape angle of β=30°
occurs. Presumably the openings in the sail at the leading
edge are close to the stagnation point, which creates the
high internal pressure. The same effect can be observed
for the other five test cases at αnom=15° and six further
combinations (03_50, 05_50, 07_50, 07_40, 25_20,
25_10). These shapes are not considered in the analysis
since they are not suitable for lifting devices with a high
CL/CD ratio. This behaviour could possibly be avoided
with an inner structure to limit spacial separation of the
two surfaces, which was omitted due to the small scale
model, or by reducing the size of the leading edge
openings to lower the internal pressure.
Figure 5: Variation of mast rotation angle with fixed

AoA of αnom=10°
The twelve pairs of equidistantly spaced tell-tales show profile for dimensioning the DDS. In order to obtain an
first signs of separation near the trailing edge of the asymmetric profile which can be utilised on both tacks, a
suction side for AoAs greater than αnom=10° and at every flap is introduced at 50% of the chord length. To achieve
case with mast rotation angle of β=50°. This observation the same camber as the DSS and sail emulation, the flap
can be explained by the fact that the suction side is angle has to be 27.3°. The fluid simulation showed
highly curved at these large mast rotation angles. At an excessive separation effects with this profile
AoA of αnom=25° wide areas of separation are visible for configuration. Also it seems not to be practical.
all mast rotation angles. Therefore the flap angle was reduced to 10°. At this
setting no more separation effects are recognised. Hence
By closing all dynamic pressure openings on both sides efficiency lost is reduced. The thickness-to-length ratio is
the sail section model showed a different shape being slightly larger than the DSS, which has to be
flatter immediately behind the mast. Noticeable was the remembered when comparing the results; the NACA
back winding and a less stable behaviour for small AoAs. profile drag is overrated.
5 AERODYNAMIC SIMULATIONS
By conducting 2D flow simulations the aerodynamic

characteristics of the different sail sections are assessed.
The focus is set on the potential performance, expressed
by the lift (CL) and drag (CD) coefficient at the different
AoAs. These coefficients are the dimensionless values of
the lift and drag force affecting the aerodynamic body in
a flow. They are normalised with the dynamic pressure
and chord length [8], which is set to c=1 for all
simulations presented here.
Furthermore a point of interest is the width of the AoA

sector, in which good performance is achieved. This Figure 6: Profiles for comparison (top: sail
characteristic is beneficial to cope with apparent wind emulations, bottom: wing sail profile)
angle fluctuations.
In the flow simulation the effective angle of attack
For the aerodynamic simulation the software XFLR5 1 is
obtained from the photographs is used. Assuming an
used, which is in essence XFOIL extended by a GUI. It
average wind speed of v=6m/s (≈3-4Bft.) and a chord
uses a 2D panel code with boundary layer condition for
length of c=2m the Reynolds number is about
calculation of the profile circulation [8].
Re=0.8106, which is used in the conducted simulation.
5.2 SIMULATION PROCEDURE These values are representative of high performance
sailing dinghies like the moth class boats, on which
To compare the effectiveness of the DSS with prototyping such a sail system is conceivable and
complies with the class rules.
established sails and wings, profile shapes of these types
are analysed as well.
The openings at the suction side are omitted to simplify
For every DSS shape at a tested AoA a sail shape is the simulation. It is supposed that they do not interfere
created. The most important factors influencing the drag with the flow significantly, when the sail is filled with
the stagnation point pressure. Furthermore the flow
of aerodynamic bodies are the thickness-to-length ratio,
inside the sail is not considered. It has yet to be
the position of the maximum thickness and the shape of
determined what the exact effect will be, but it is
the nose [5]. Considering this, the mean profile line of
the corresponding DSS attached to a mast with the same supposed that the dynamic pressure is different at the
dimension is chosen for the single surface sail (Fig. 6). head and the foot of the sail and therefore a flow inside
Thereby camber is not changed and a good comparability the DSS is possible to appear. To avoid that kind of
undesired flow horizontal divisions would be possible,
is achieved. A mast pocket is constructed to emulate a
but they could reduce the ability of the structure to
possible application of a single surface sail on a dinghy.
produce the observed shapes.
For the wing sail section the NACA 0016 profile is
chosen [9]. It has the same nose radius as the DSS and 5.3 SIMULATION RESULTS
the cloth sail emulation since it was used as the reference
5.3.1 Analysis of variation of AoA
1 For the performance comparison exemplarily the five

Deperrois, A. ‘XFLR5 v6.05 beta’, 2011
profiles with the same mast rotation of β=30° and varied
AoA are taken. This way there are five data points each Fig. 8 shows the lift to drag ratio of the three 2D profiles.
for the DSS and the sail emulation. Due to the immutable However, it has to be remembered that the wing sail
profile of the wing section, a finer resolution of AoAs is section is thicker than would typically be used and the
chosen (Fig. 7). flap position and angle is not necessarily set to an ideal
value. The mast of an optimised single surface sail would
be much thinner and may have an aerodynamic shape.
Therefore the characteristics of both reference profiles
are probably underrated.
But even by considering these arguments the DSS shows

a high performance potential. A fluid simulation of a
thinner wing sail profile (NACA 0010) with 10° and 27°
flap angle produced a maximal CL/CD ratio of 70, which
is about the value the DSS achieves. An adjustment was
also made for the single surface sail. The mast diameter
was reduced by 40% for the case 10_30 (αnom=10°,
β=30°) to approximate the rig proportions of an
International Moth. The simulation shows a reduction in
drag coefficient of about CD=0.005. The resulting
maximum CL/CD ratio of about 43 still remains below the
maximum of 69 for the DSS. Consequently the
difference between the DSS and the sail emulation is
about 40%.
A study at the Princeton University on the aerodynamic

characteristics of different glider wings showed
comparable performance differences between a profile
section with an elliptical nose and a single cloth surface,
which resembles the sail emulation, and a profile section
similar to the DSS. Wind tunnel tests were conducted at a
Reynolds number of Re=0.23·106 with 3D wing models
with an aspect ratio of 8.5. The tests showed an
approximately 45% lower CL/CD ratio for the single
surface type [6].
Figure 7: CL and CD comparison (2D sections)
The 2D fluid simulation indicates potential of the DDS

compared to a standard single surface sail and a wing
sail. It can be seen that the lift coefficient of the DSS
decreases and drag rises noticeably between α=4.16° and
α=7.39°, which can be explained by the observed
separation effects. As discussed later less mast rotation
angle could reduce or eliminate this behaviour. The
flapped NACA profile has the smoothest curves and
reaches the maximal lift to drag ratio at the largest AoA,
because it has less mean camber and consists of
symmetrical segments. The low drag of the NACA
profile over a large range of AoAs is due to the general Figure 8: CL/CD ratio over AoA (2D sections)
characteristic of the 4-digit series to have a wide sector
of attached flow [9]. The single surface sail has the Clearly visible in Fig. 8 is a narrow peak of maximal lift
highest drag coefficient because of the presence of the to drag ratio for the sail emulation. This characteristic is
mast. typical and one disadvantage of single cloth sails. The
wing sail on the other hand shows the well-tempered
Generally aerodynamic profiles with a thickness are behaviour followed by the DSS. The CL/CD ratio of the
advantageous over cambered plates above a Reynolds DSS remains nearly constant over a range of 3° in AoA.
number of Re=0.15·106 [5], which would represent a
wind speed of about 2 Beaufort for a conventional sailing Not considered in the context of this project is the
dinghy. variation of the chord length (outhaul tension) to
optimise the profile shape. Although it is an important It also has to be remembered that these effects depend on
trim parameter to change camber, the effect on the single the Reynolds number and respectively the wind speed.
surface sail and the DSS is expected to be similar so that In full-scale when all trim mechanisms can be used
the relative performance should remain comparable. together camber and thickness can be adjusted separately
from each other. This is supposed to be a great advantage
5.3.2 Analysis of the mast rotation angle over single surface sails and wing sails. None of which
has the capability to change their profile thickness.
The DSS has an especial trim mechanisim by rotating the
mast. In the tested condition a rotation of β=70° is
sufficient to pull one side of the sail straight and by that 6 CONCLUSIONS
to maximise the length of the opposite side. A longer
adjustment of foot length would result in less mast The aims of the study were to draw up a conceptual
rotation needed to create this effect. As described in design of a DSS and to analysis its viability in terms of
section 4.2 the mast rotation is analysed in increments of structural behaviour and potential performance.
10° from β=0° to β=50°. In the flow simulation six cases Therefore qualitative wind tunnel tests with a quasi 2D
are exemplarily calculated whereby the AoA of α=7.3° is profile section were conducted and the resulting shapes
constant. were analysed by a 2D fluid simulation.
The qualitative wind tunnel tests showed a good-natured

and stabile standing sail section. The principal
functionality is assured and realisable. The presented sail
system showed good aerodynamic characteristics in the
2D flow simulation and a high performance potential.
It becomes apparent that the trim mechanism of mast

rotation is an influential device by allowing the DSS to
vary its profile thickness. That is a unique characteristic
compared to conventional single surface sails and wing
sails. Considering probable weight and cost no
significant disadvantages compared to already applied
sail systems are expected. The intended simple structure
of the DSS should result in user-friendly handling.
Figure 9: CL and CD at different mast rotation angles
This study investigates the concept for a 2D section.
The lift and drag coefficients at the different mast Further CFD studies in 3D at different Reynolds numbers
rotation angles in Fig. 9 show a decreasing performance and model tests are needed to make reliable statements
with rising rotation angles. This is explained by Fig. 10. about the structural stability and performance. Thereby
It can be seen that the thickness rises while the camber the optimal trim could be detected and a more practical
decreases. The increase of profile thickness is mainly comparison could be made. Moreover downwind
responsible for the increase in drag, while the decreasing conditions should also be investigated.
camber reduces the lift of an aerodynamic profile. [5].
7 REFERENCES
1. Milidragovic, M., ‘WING SAIL AND METHODE OF

USE’, United States Patent Nr: 5868092, 1999.
2. Freistadt, W., Freistadt, O., ‘PROFILSEGEL‘,

Patentschrift Nr: 463701, 1928.
3. Trost, M. D., VARIABLE CAMBER INFATABLE

AIRFOIL, United States Patent Nr: 5671690, 1997
4. Lyngholm, T., ‘WING PROFILE SAIL’, United States

Patent Nr: 6141809, 2000
Figure 10: Geometric variation by mast rotation 5. Marchaj, C.A., ‘AERO-HYDRODYNAMICS OF
angle SAILING’, Granada Publishing, 1979
6. Maughmer, M. D. and Princeton University, ‘A
COMPARISON OF THE AERODYNAMIC
CHARACTERISTICS OF EIGHT SAILWING
AIRFOIL SECTIONS’, Technical report, 1979.
7. Hansen, H., ‘ENHANCED WIND TUNNEL

TECHNIQUES AND AERODYNAMIC FORCE
MODEL FOR YACHT SAILS’, PhD thesis, The
University of Auckland, 2006
8. Drela, M., Youngren, H., ‘XFOIL 6.9 USER GUIDE’,

http://web.mit.edu/drela/Public/web/xfoil/xfoil_doc.txt
(22.04.2013), 2001
9. Abbott, I.H. and Doenhoff, A.E., ‘THEORY OF

WING SECTIONS’, Dover Publications Inc., 1959
8 AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
S. Brüns holds a diploma degree in naval architecture

from the Technical University of Berlin. He is currently
working as assistant project engineer at FutureShip
GmbH, where he wrote his diploma thesis on
“DEVELOPMENT OF A DOUBLE SURFACE SAIL
SYSTEM; INFLATED BY DYNAMIC PRESSURE”.
H. Hansen is a team leader at FutureShip GmbH for

aerodynamics, hydrodynamics and performance
prediction of ships and sailing yachts. He has previously
worked on performance prediction and sail development
for America’s Cup teams and on sports car
aerodynamics. Heikki holds a Ph.D. in Mechanical
Engineering from The University of Auckland and a
B.Eng. in Yacht & Powercraft Design from Southampton
Solent University.
K. Hochkirch is Vice President at FutureShip GmbH,

where his department offers naval architecture, software
design and consultancy with focus on parametric
modelling, fluid dynamic analysis and formal
optimization for the shipping and yachting industry. He
studied mechanical engineering and naval architecture at
the Technical University of Berlin from which he
received his doctoral degree in 2000. He realised and
applied the complex measurement system DYNA - the
TU Berlin's sailing yacht dynamometer. At TU Berlin he
lectures aero- and hydrodynamics of sailing yachts.
COMPARISON OF FULL 3D-RANS SIMULATIONS WITH 2D-RANS / LIFTING LINE
METHOD CALCULATIONS FOR THE FLOW ANALYSIS OF RIGID WINGS FOR HIGH
PERFORMANCE MULTIHULLS
K. Graf, Yacht Research Unit - Univ. Applied Sciences Kiel, Germany, kai.graf@fh-kiel.de
A. v. Hoeve, Technical University Delft, The Netherlands, advanhoeve@gmail.com
Simon Watin, VPLP Yacht Design, Vannes / France, watin@vannes.vplp.fr
Abstract: This paper reports about a comparison of a 3D RANS investigation to calculate the flow around wing sails
with a method based on 2D RANS calculations of flow around wing profiles in conjunction with a lifting line method
to account for 3-dimensional flow phenomena. Both methods shown here are of general use for wing investigations,
however in the context of this paper they are used for rigid wings with two elements: a main element with a hinged
flap, as they are currently used on some performance multihulls. Wing sails can well be analyzed using conventional
three dimensional RANS based flow investigation methods; however the computational costs for these investigations
are quite high. In this paper, an alternative approach to 3D RANS investigations is introduced. It is based on planar
flow 2D RANS profile investigations in conjunction with a lifting line method to account for 3-dimensional flow
phenomena and induced drag. The lifting line method uses an iterative approach in order to make use of non-linear
profile lift coefficients. This approach is so computational efficient that it can be combined with constrained
optimization methods in order to optimize performance of the wing. The paper describes the motivation for the
development, the lifting line theory and validation efforts. Some applications of the new method are shown,
demonstrating the ability of the method to be used for wing sail design and operation optimization.
NOMENCLATURE conventional soft sails, wing sails provide extraordinary

performance, in particular very high lift to drag ratios,
AoA Angle of Attack (-)
thus making them particularly interesting for high
AWS Apparent wind speed (m/s)
speed catamarans. Wing sails became popular with the
AWA Apparent wind angle (rad if not defined otherwise)
Little America's Cup, where they are used since a
c Profile Length (m)
while; however the America's Cup with its known high
cD Drag coeffient (-)
level of science and engineering has boosted the
cL Lift coefficient (-)
demand in accurate and efficient flow analysis methods
L Lift (N)
applicable to wing performance prediction.
L |L| (N)
r Vector from point to integrator ds (m)
Typical analysis methods for the three-dimensional
r |r| (m)
flow around such wings are 3D-RANS flow
s vector along filament (m)
simulations. They are well-suited for rigid wings, since
u Flow Velocity vector (m/s)
they are able to take into account the viscous and
v Induced wind speed (m/s)
turbulent flow phenomena that are crucial for the
wFVF Lower free vortex filament weighting (-)
operation of these wings with small gaps between the
x Longitudinal coordinate (m)
elements. However an assessment of the performance
y+ Dimensionless wall distance (-)
of a wing requires the execution of a quite complex test
z Vertical span-wise coordinate (m)
matrix, being defined by the permutation of angles of
zfvf Vertical coordinate of free vortex filament (m)
attack, twist and flap angles to be investigated. With a
zC Vertical coordinate of the panel center (m)
single RANS simulation using finite volume
z 1, z 2 Coordinates of lower and upper bound of wake sheet (m)
discretization of about 10 to 30 million grid cells, the
O Aspect ratio of wing (-)
computational burden for the execution of a full test
* Vorticity (m²/s) matrix for single wing geometry is very large.
'*bound Stepwise change of bound vorticity (m²/s)
*bound Vorticity of bound vortex filament (m²/s) A remedy to this problem are flow analysis methods
*fvf Vorticity of free vortex filament (m²/s) based on the combination of a lifting line method in
*1, *2 Vorticity at lower and upper bounds of wake sheet (m²/s) conjunction with profile lift and drag data generated
U Density (kg/m³) from 2D-RANS simulations. 2D-RANS simulations are
Z Relaxation factor (-) dramatically less computational expensive than 3D-
SI units only RANS simulations and can predict the complex flow
pattern around a multi-element profile with gaps while
1 INTRODUCTION lifting line methods take care of three dimensional flow
With the decision to sail the next America's Cup on phenomena, in particular induced drag. This method
multihulls featuring multi-element rigid wings, these promises to be far less computational demanding than
systems of wind propulsion came into the focus of 3D-RANS investigations.
designers, engineers and scientists involved in the
design of the respective yachts. Compared to
A rough estimate of the amount of computations span is running from root to tip of the wing. Individual
necessary for a full wing analysis quantifies the free vortex filaments and/or wake sheets (in any
motivation behind the work: for an assessment of the combination) are shedding from bound vortex filaments
performance of a wing (for example by a VPP) a into infinity in the direction of incident flow. Discrete
permutation of angles of attack, flap angles and twist vorticities of the free vortex filaments and the
has to be investigated. A small test matrix for a single distributed vorticity per length of the wake sheet are
wing geometry (neglecting Reynolds number changes) calculated conforming to Thompsons rule: (i) a linear
would consist of about 10 angles of attack, each change of vorticity of the bound filament generates a
combined with 2 to 4 base flap angles and let’s say 2 to wake sheet of constant vorticity per span length and (ii)
4 twist angles to cover a minimum range of operational a discontinuity of vorticity of the bound vortex filament
states covering non-linear effects due to separation. A generates a discrete free vortex filament, its vorticity
3D-RANS investigation would thus consist of more being the jump of vorticity of the bound filament at the
than 100 computational simulations of a grid of about location of the discontinuity. Induced wind is calculated
10 to 30 million grid cells as a minimum. In contrast to from the free vortex filaments and the wake sheet using
this a profile investigation will investigate a few 2- Biot Savart's law. The vector sum of induced wind and
element profile shapes in order to account for profile undisturbed incident flow gives an effective incident
variations with span, each shape investigated with a flow. The lift – calculated from Kutta's law – acts
computational grid of about 50000 to 300000 grid cells. perpendicular to it. This effective lift can be
Each profile will be investigated at about 10 angles of decomposed into a flow force perpendicular to the
attack and 2 to 4 flap angles. The effect of twist will be undisturbed incident flow – the nominal lift – and an
taken into account by the lifting line approach. Since additional flow force in the direction of the undisturbed
the computational costs of the lifting line method itself flow – the induced drag. The discrete form of this
is negligible compared to the computational load of method calculates the total drag as integration over
even the smallest RANS investigation, the 2D-RANS – span of the induced drag per span plus the viscous
lifting line approach theoretically reduces the profile drag. In a similar manner the profile lift is
computational burden for the investigation of a wing by integrated over span, taking into account the local
the factor of 100. Even more, a variation of the effective incident flow.
planform of the wing would require redoing almost the
entire test matrix of the 3D-RANS investigations, while The standard inversed lifting line method assumes
in a first approximation no need for additional 2D- constant derivative of lift coefficient over angle of
RANS simulation exists for the 2D-RANS – lifting line attack, see SCHLICHTING and TRUCKENBRODT [1].
method. Consequently the computational burden for the It involves the inversion of a matrix in order to
investigation of let’s say 10 wing planforms for a calculate the discrete spanwise vorticity distribution of
variational study of planform can be reduced by the the bound vortex filament for a given geometry.
factor of 1000. However to take into account nonlinear lift coefficients
with respect to angle of attack, in particular lift
Obviously the accuracy of the 2D-RANS – lifting line coefficient changes due to flow separation, an iterative
method has to be proven and has to provide the same approach is employed here. It is based on an iterative
level of confidence as the 3D-RANS method. The correction of induced wind from the spanwise lift
description of the 2D-RANS – lifting line method and distribution which takes into account the induced wind
the comparison with 3D-RANS results are the main as a correction of angle of attack.
foci of this paper. In addition some practical
applications are shown, making use of the
computational efficiency of the new method.
ent
x filam
This paper focusses on rigid wings and profiles of two

vorte
free vortex filament

elements: the symmetric main element which is
ound
assumed to be completely rigid and a hinged flap,

b
bound vortex filament
*
ity of
which can be rotated around an axis, lying somewhere

Vortic
vortex sheet
on the center line of the main element. The flap is

divided in span-wise direction into a couple of panels,
allowing changing the flap angle with height in order to
twist the wing. Obviously the entire wing can be rotated
around a vertical axis resting on a wing step on the z
catamaran platform.
x
2 THE LIFTING LINE METHOD Figure 2-1: Bound and free vortex filaments on a wing
The lifting line method is based on the following
principal: A bound vortex filament of piecewise linear,
optionally discontinuous, vorticity distribution along
2.1 THEORY * fvf 1
We are using the theorems of Kutta, Biot Savart and v (2-6)
Thompson as follows: 4S z fvf zC
Kutta's Law is used to calculate the lift generated by a A vortex filament sheet generated from a span-wise
vortex filament: change of *bound(z) starting at z1 till z2 induces wind
according to (see Figure 2-2):
L ³ U u * u ds z
1 2 w*bound dz
4S ³z1 wz z zC
span
(2-1) v (2-7)
where L is the generated lift, U the density of flow, u

the incident flow, * the vorticity of filament and ds an
We assume *bound changes linear between z1 and z2
integrator along the filament.
from * to *2:
Biot-Savart's Law is used to calculate the induced wind
generated by a free vortex filament: *2 *1
*bound( z ) *1 ( z z1 ) (2-8)
z 2 z1
1 r u ds
v ³
4S s
* 3
r Introducing the constant
expression:
(2-2) w*bound / wz ( *2 *1 ) /( z2 z1 ) into (2-7) yields:
where v is the induced velocity generated by the vortex
z2
filament of vorticity * and r is a vector from the point, 1 * 2 * 1 dz
where v is generated to the integrator ds along the v
4S z2 z1 ³ zz C
filament. z1
(2-9)
1 * 2 * 1 z z
Free vortex filaments are calculated by Thompsons rule, ln( 2 C )
saying that a vortex filament may only end at a fixed 4S z2 z1 z1 zC
wall or at infinity. Prandl’s concept of horseshoe
vortices is used, saying that any change of the bound free vortex filament
vortex filament results in a free vortex filament. This I ds
results in: r
zfvf P
w*bound( z )
d* fvf dz (2-3) zC
wz
z2 z
For a stepwise change of the vorticity of the bound
z1
vortex filament '*bound, the vorticity of the free vortex
filament at the position of the stepwise change x
calculates from: Figure 2-2: Free vortex filament and wake sheet
generating lift at arbitrary point P
*fvf = '*bound (2-4)
Profile lift per span length L=d|L|/dz is calculated from
A free vortex filament of constant vorticity *fvf (from a a lift coefficient cL, the dynamic pressure 0.Uu2
stepwise change of *bound as to (2-4)) starting at x=0, (density U flow speed u=|u|) and the profile chord
z=zfvf, running at constant z to x=∞, generates induced length c. cL depends nonlinear on angle of attack AoA
wind in P by (see Figure 2-2): of incident flow. For a profile of a wing of finite span
the angle of attack is AoA reduced by induced wind:
* fvf f
dx
v
4S
( z fvf zC ) ³ r3 L 0.5 U AWS 2 c cL ( AoA v / u) (2-10)
x 0
(2-5)
* fvf x
( z fvf zC ) ( ) |fx 0 The induced drag then calculates from
4S ( z fvf zC )2 r
Di L v / AWS (2-11)
This yields (with x / r 1 for x o f ):
N
The bound vorticity of the profile is calculated from the N
lift per span length due to (2-1) N-1
N-1
L
* bound (2-12)
U AWS
Since vorticity of free vortex filament depends on

3
vorticity of bound vortex filament, which in turn 3
depends on lift, itself depending on free vortex filament 2
vorticity due to induced wind, this procedure is iterative 2

1
by nature. 1 z
0
x
For a wing of finite span with varying lift distribution Figure 2-3: Discretization of wing
over span the iterative procedure is:
We assume a bound vortex filament at x=0 aligned with
1. Assume v=0 the z-axis for incident flow aligned with the x-axis. The
2. Calculate profile lift per span from (2-10) for a vorticity * changes linear between profiles, generating
given geometric angle of attack, flow speed a free vortex wake sheet. At bottom profile (root) and
and chord length top profile (tip) discrete free vortex filaments are
3. Calculate * bound over span from profile lift generated in order to satisfy zero bound vorticity for
from (2-12) z<z0 and z>zN. Consequently *bound(z) and *fvf root as
4. Calculate v from (2-6) and (2-9) well as *fvf tip can be calculated from profile definition
5. redo 2.-5. until v converges information:
6. calculate induced drag
7. calculate total drag by adding parasitic profile for 0 <= i <=N:
drag to induced drag vi
*i 0.5 AWS i ci c L i ( AoAi ) (2-13)
2.2 DISCRETIZATION AWS i
The envelope of the wing is discretized with an
arbitrary number of horizontal profiles, numbered for zi < z < zi+1
i=0,1,…,N. Each profile is described by its z-coordinate *i 1 *i
zi, a chord length ci along with leading and trailing edge *bound( z ) *i ( z zi )
zi 1 zi (2-14)
x-coordinates, an individual incident flow speed AWSi,
an incident (geometric) angle of attack AoAi, a lift
coefficient cLi , a parasitic profile drag coefficient c DPPi * fvf root * 0 wFVF (2-15)
and a moment coefficient cMi with respect to a local
origin, for example the leading edge. No profile
geometry is needed since the property of the profile is * fvf tip *N (2-16)
entirely described by the lift coefficient. However
additional parameters can be used to change the flow Here wFVF is a factor taking into account to which
force coefficients, for example the angle of a hinged degree the root free vortex filament is suppressed by a
flap of the profile. The planform area of the wing is wall. If the root of the wing is fixed to a wall without a
defined by trapezoidal panels, number i=1,2,…,N gap, wFVF=0. If no wall is present at all, wFVF=1.
between profiles i-1 and i. Due to the definition by
neighboring profiles, panels can have varying incident
Induced wind is calculated in the vertical center of each
speed and angle of attack and can twist.
panel j=1,2,…,N by summing up the induced wind
generated by any free vortex wake sheet and the
Flow force coefficients cL, cDPP and cM can be provided discrete free vortex filaments at root and tip.
by tabulated data for given AoA and additional
parameters like a flap angle E. This approach allows for 1<=j<=N:
taking into account profile properties from any source,
1 N * i * i 1 z z
being it linear or nonlinear, from inviscid or viscous
calculation methods.
vC j ¦
4S i 1 zi zi 1
ln( i C j )
zi 1 zC j
(2-17)
*0 1 * N 1
wFVF
4S z0 zC j 4S z N zC j
where zC j 0.5 ( z j z j 1 ) is the z-coordinate of angle of attack AoA, usually defined by the angle
between incident wind and a reference line of the
the panel center and vC j the induced wind at x=0, z=zC j. profile (for the profile of a symmetric main element this
is its center line). The angle of incidence AoA is
Linear interpolation is used to calculate induced wind vi calculated from the apparent wind angle AWA and the
at profile vertical location zi: local rotation of the profile, given by wing rotation and
wing geometric twist with respect to the sailing yacht
vi 0.5 (vC i 1 vC i ) for 1<=i<=N-1 (2-18) center line, which is the reference line of the apparent
wind angle. This allows taking into account the
sheeting of the wing, the twisting of the wing and a
At root and tip induced wind is calculated using linear
twist of the incident wind.
extrapolation:
2.3 IMPLEMENTATION
v0 2vC1 v1 (2-19) The method is implemented as a spreadsheet
calculation using MS Excel. The iterative method to
vN 2vC N 1 v N 1 (2-20) predict induced wind is implemented as an embedded
Visual Basic application. Under-relaxation factors
around Z 0.25 are used, which achieve
An iterative procedure has to be used in order to convergence usually after 15 to 30 iteration cycles. The
calculate induced wind. We assume that for any profile runtime on an average PC for a single prediction of
i, the local height zi, the profile length ci , the local flow forces of a two-element wing, discretized with 21
geometric angle of attack AoAi and the local wind speed profiles, was about 1 to 3 sec.
AWSi is given. We also assume that lift coefficient can
be calculated using the above values. Induced wind
then is calculated iteratively starting with a zero guess:
3 RANS METHOD
The commercial RANS solver StarCCM+ has been
(1) Set vi =0 for any profile i=0,1,…,N used for 2D- and 3D- flow simulations around profiles
(2) Predict profile lift coefficient and wings. An introduction of RANS methods is not
given here, for a general introduction refer to
cLi ( AoAi vi / AWSi ) using tabular data FERTIGER and PERIC [2]. An example of application
from 2D RANS profile simulations of RANS methods to yacht flow investigations
(3) Calculate * i for any profile using (2-13) conducted by one of the authors is given in GRAF and
BOEHM [3].
(4) Calculate induced wind in panel center vCi
from (2-17) The method used here is based on the solution of mass
(5) Calculate induced wind at profile height from and momentum equations for incompressible
(2-18), (2-19) and (2-20) adiabatically flow. For external flow at low Mach
(6) Repeat (2) to (5) until convergence, if number the assumption of incompressible flow can be
convergence achieved continue accepted. A finite volume discretization based on
(7) Calculate lift per span for any profile using Cartesian hexahedral cells in the far field and body
(2-10) fitted prism cells in the vicinity of the flow body are
(8) Calculate induced drag per span for any profile used. Turbulence is taken into account using eddy
using (2-11) and add parasitic profile drag per viscosity hypothesis and the SST turbulence model for
span the prediction of turbulence viscosity. For some profile
(9) calculate driving and side force per span from investigations however a Reynolds stress model has
trigonometric relationship been used, see details below. For 3D-investigations,
(10) Integrate over span by trapezoidal integration logarithmic wall functions were employed for the sake
of computational efficiency. For 2D-profile
To achieve convergence, the iterative procedure needs investigations, some cases have been investigated
under-relaxation. If k denotes the current iteration step, employing wall functions, while other resolved the
the induced wind is calculated as a weighted average of boundary layer.
the result of the current and last iteration step:
All of the investigations shown here were executed on a
k 1 Linux-based compute clusters. A maximum of 30
vk
Ci vCiZ v Ci (1 Z) (2-21) partitions/cores have been allocated to a particular 3D-
run, while 2D-runs typically employed four to eight
Calculation of driving and side force is necessary if cores.
undisturbed incident wind angle of attack changes over
height (wind twist). In this case no global lift and drag
can be calculated. Some attention has to be paid to the
4 TEST CASES
The method introduced here has been used for the
design and optimization of a wing, developed within
the Shared Design Package, conducted by the French
yacht designer Van Peteghem Lauriot Prévost Yacht
Design/Vannes and Yacht Research Unit Kiel/Germany
on behalf of America's Cup Race Management. In
addition it has been used within the Swiss Hydros
campaign to develop the wing of a C-class catamaran to
participate in the Little Cup 2013. The results from
these studies, however, are not publicly available.
In this paper it is reported about two additional test

cases, using geometries which are not covered by non-
disclosure agreements:
x A rectangular foil of aspect ratio 4.5 with a 4-

digit NACA profile
x A two-element wing in accordance with the
AC72 class rules, however with some
simplifications and approximations on main
element and flap profile shape in order to
reduce the computational load.
Both test cases have been investigated employing full

3D-RANS investigations and 2D-RANS profile
investigations in combination with the lifting line Figure 4-1: Rectangular wing and computational
method as described above. For the rectangular foil domain
wind tunnel test results have been available for
validation.
4.1 RECTANGULAR WING

The rectangular wing has a span of 1.8 m and a
constant symmetric profile of type NACA 0012 with a
profile chord length of 0.4 m. The root of the wing is
fixed to a flat plate; see Figure 4-1, showing the wing
together with the computational domain as well as the
wing in the wind tunnel.
The wing as well as the profile are investigated at a

Reynolds number of Rn=1.28e5. The turbulence
intensity at the inlet of the computational domain has
been set to 1%, the value known from CTA field
measurements in the wind tunnel. Since the simulations
are carried out assuming fully turbulent flow, the wind
tunnel model was equipped with turbulence stimulators.
A polyhedral grid of approximately 2.2 million grid

cells is used for spatial discretization for the 3D test
case, featuring a cascading refinement of the region
around the wing and downstream of it, see Figure 4-2.
Prism cells are used to resolve the boundary layer.
Dimensionless wall distance of the cells contacting the
wing is about 20<y+<100.
The grid for the 2D-RANS investigation has been

derived from the 3D-grid via a cut at the root of the
Figure 4-2: Polyhedral grid for 3D RANS investigation
wing. The respective 2D grid contains approximately
of rectangular grid
20000 grid cells, see Figure 4-3.
1
cD cL2 ( KPP )
SO
(4-2)
0.075
2(1 k )
(log Rn 2)2
where the frictional drag is calculated using the ITTC

57 friction line, (1+k)=1.22 is the form factor of the
profile and KPP=0.02 accounts for the parasitic profile
drag. These formulas are widely used as empirical
Figure 4-3: Computational grid around NACA 0012 function for the prediction of flow force of rectangular
profile for 2D-RANS simulation wings, see SCHLICHTING and TRUCKENBRODT [1]
and HARVALD [6].
Figure 4-4 shows lift and drag coefficients as the result
of the 2D-RANS investigation. The diagram depicts the The diagram shows fairly well agreement of 3D-RANS
expected results for attached flow condition and flow force coefficients with wind tunnel results at lower
beginning flow separation at an angle of attack of angles of attack. Lift coefficients are slightly over-
approximately 10°. At larger angles of attack it is predicted by the lifting line method. The angle of attack
conspicuous that the lift coefficient recovers and of maximum lift coefficient agrees well for all methods.
increases again, a behavior that shows a well-known It is slightly postponed to larger angles compared to the
deficiency of common turbulence model to properly 2D-RANS results, this certainly the effect of the
resolve flow separation. induced wind, which reduces the effective angle of
attack. Maximum lift coefficient of wind tunnel test
1.5 0.8 result is lower than the respective value from
Lift… simulations and flow separation is less pronounced. A
Drag Coefficient [-]
Lift Coefficient [-]
Drag… 0.6 possible explanation for this may be the turbulence

1 intensity and length scale in the wind tunnel. Large
turbulence intensity is known to have a blurring effect
0.4
on the onset of separation. At higher angles of attack
0.5 drag coefficients from the simulation are lower than
0.2
those from wind tunnel tests. Again this may be
assigned to a lack of existing turbulence models to
0 0
properly resolve separated flow.
10 0 20
Angle of Attack [°]
In general it can be observed that the agreement of 3D-
Figure 4-4: Lift and drag coefficients of the rectangular
RANS simulations with the method based on 2D-
wing profile
RANS simulations in combination with the lifting line
method is rather good.
The lifting line method uses 21 profiles, distributed
evenly over span. The result of the 2D-RANS
investigation is used to calculate lift and parasitic drag
coefficients.
Comparison with 3D-RANS investigations and wind

tunnel result:
Figure 4-5 shows lift and drag coefficients for 3D-

RANS investigation in comparison with the result of
the lifting line method and wind tunnel results. In
addition estimated lift and drag coefficients from
empirical functions are plotted. Here the lift coefficient
is calculated by:
O
cL 2S AoA (4-1)
O 2
where O 2span / chordlength is the effective
aspect ratio of the wing. The drag coefficient is
calculated using:
Soedings Estimate Lift
3D RANSE Lift
Windtunnel Lift
LLM Lift
Soedings Estimate Drag
3D RANSE DRAG
Windtunnel Drag
1 0.25
0.9
Drag Coeffient [-]

0.8 0.2
Lift Coeffient [-]
0.7
0.6 0.15
0.5
0.4 0.1
0.3
0.2 0.05
0.1
0 0
5 0 10 15
Angle of Attack [°]
Figure 4-5: Comparison of 3D-RANS investigations
with lifting line method and wind tunnel test results
4.2 AC72 TYPE TWO-ELEMENT WING

The second test case is a two-element wing designed in
accordance with but not strictly following the rules for
the AC72 catamaran (see AC72 Class Rules[7]). The
wing has a span of 38 m and a planform area of 260 m².
Leech and luff is fixed within the bandwidth given by
the AC 72 rules. Some simplifications are made for the
profile in order to reduce the computational load for the
2D-RANS investigations: the profile of the main
element is a NACA0020 while the second element
profile is a NACA642-010. The chord ratio of main and
second element is 1 over the entire span. This
simplification allows analysing only a single profile
geometry for the 2D-RANS simulations, if Reynolds
number effects are neglected. At zero flap angle the gap
between main and second element is 10mm. The center Figure 4-6: AC72 wing geometry and computational
of rotation of the second element is located at 85% of domain
the chord length of the main element. Some additional
simplifications apply in order to reflect the vertical 4.3 COMPUTATIONAL GRID FOR 2D- AND 3D-
partitioning of the flap into four panels. The root of the RANS INVESTIGATIONS
entire wing is located 0.5 m above a flat plate Intensive grid sensitivity studies have been carried out
in order to get grid-invariant simulation results. Grids
This wing design, see Figure 4-6, by far does not of 5 million to 18 million grid cells have been
suggest being an optimized one. The sole reason for investigated. The final 3D grid uses about 10.2 million
this design is a simplification, which allows restricting Cartesian grid cells in the far field with cascading
2D-RANS investigations to a single shape, assuming refinements in the vicinity of the grid and additional
that changes of flow forces due to moderate changes of local refinements at leading and trailing edge and at the
Reynolds number can be neglected. gap between main and second element, see Figure 4-7.
Figure 4-8 shows that this grid is a reasonable
compromise between accuracy/grid independency of
results versus computational costs. The 2D-grid has
been even finer with about 380000 grid cells. For this
grid the boundary layer has been fully resolved, y | 1 ,
see Figure 4-9
4.4 2D-RANS SIMULATION RESULTS
2D RANS investigations have been carried out
executing the following test matrix:
- 14 AoA with dense distribution of angles close

to maximum lift
- 5 flap angles ranging from 0° to 20°
Some test calculations have been done using the SST

turbulence model of MENTER [4]. The in-stationary
RANS equation has been solved. Flow velocity has
been set to a Reynolds number of about Rn=5e6 and
turbulence intensity at inlet to 1%.
Observations of the results however have shown

conspicuous lift coefficients at higher angles of attack.
In particular after reaching stalled conditions and the
respective drop of lift coefficients the lift recovered and
increased again with increasing angle of attack. This
behavior cannot be found in experiments, suggesting
the lack of the SST- and other 2-euqation turbulence
models to properly resolve stalled flow conditions.
As a remedy the entire range of AoAs and flap angles

has been re-investigated using the Reynolds Stress
Figure 4-7: Computational grid of 3D RANS Model of GIBSON and LAUNDER [5]. For 2D-flow
simulations around wing sail this does not increase the number of unknowns and
consequently the computational workload is the same
104% as for a 2-equation turbulence model. The conspicuous
Lift behavior of lift at higher angle has been avoided at least
to an acceptable degree. The 2D-RANS-results shown
Change in Lift or Drag [%]
Drag
102% here use this Reynolds stress model.
Simulations have been conducted solving the

100%
instationary RANS equation with 1st order time
integration and a time step size of 't=0.015s for 2D
flow and 't=0.15 s for 3D-flow.
98%
5.0E+06 7.5E+06 1.0E+07 1.3E+07 1.5E+07 1.8E+07 2.0E+07 Figure 4-10 shows streamlines for angle of attack
Number of cells [-] A0A=5° and a contour plot of velocity magnitude for
AoA=15°. While the flow pattern looks as expected for
Figure 4-8: Result of Grid Sensitivityy Studyy low AoA, the in-stationary vortex shedding at separated
flow condition can clearly be depicted.
The in-stationary vortex shedding obviously generated

oscillating flow forces at stalled condition. For the
calculation of lift and drag coefficients, some averaging
over a larger number of time steps of the in-stationary
calculation has been employed.
Figure 4-11 and Figure 4-12 show lift coefficient over

AoA and the drag over lift profile polar.
The second diagram shows an unexpected bump of the

drag with increasing lift. The rational for this could not
be completely unveiled within this study, however it
Figure 4-9: Computational Grid for 2D RANS wing can be assumed that this behavior can be linked to the
profile investigation flow mechanics in the gap between main element and
flap.
Earlier investigation of two-element profile clearly beta=0° beta=5° beta=10°
showed, that for each AoA there is exactly one flap beta=15° beta=20°
angle for which the profile is working under optimum 0.07
conditions with respect to lift-to-drag ratio. It can well
be assumed that the very pronounced bump of the 0.06
graph at flap angle of 20° is generated by a flow pattern 0.05
where the gap has a positive impact on the boundary
0.04
Drag coefficient [-]

layer at the trailing edge of main element as well as the
leading edge of the flap, preventing the boundary layer 0.03
to separate there.
0.02
0.01
0.00
-1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0
Lift coefficient [-]
Figure 4-12: Drag over lift for 2D-RANS investigation
4.5 3D-RANS SIMULATION RESULTS AND

COMPARISON WITH THE 2D-RANS – LIFTING
LINE METHOD
Full 3D RANS investigation of the wing have been
investigated for a test matrix of 13 angles of attack
ranging from 0°< AoA < 22°. These have been
combined with flap angles of 0° < E < 20°. A single
twist case has been studied, where the flap angle at the
root of the wing was E =20°, reducing linearly to E =0°
Figure 4-10: Streamlines at AoA=14°, Flap angle 10°, at the tip.
velocity magnitude contour plot at AoA=20°, Flap at
20° Flow velocity was set to 10m/s. SST turbulence model
has been used and turbulence intensity at inlet was set
cL Beta=0° cL Beta=5° to 1%.
cL beta=10° cL Beta=15°
cL beta=20° Figure 4-13 shows flow pattern at angle of attack of
3.0 AoA=14° and a flap angle of 5°. It shows beginning
flow separation at the trailing edge of the main element.
2.5
2.0
Lift coefficient [-]
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-8 -4
4 8 12 16 20 24 0
AoA [deg]
Figure 4-11: Lift coefficient over AoA for 2D-RANS
profiles at various flap angles
for the entire test matrix. However an excerpt of the
results is shown here only.
Figure 4-14 to Figure 4-19 show lift and drag

coefficients from 3D RANS simulations and the lifting
line method over AoA for flap angles of 0°, 10° and
20°, while Figure 4-20 and Figure 4-21 show lift and
drag coefficients for the twisted test case.
1.6

3D RANSe
1.2
LLT
0.8
0.4
0.0
Flap Angle 0°
-0.4
-4 0 4 8 12 16 20 24
Angle of attack [°]
Figure 4-14: Lift coefficient over AoA, Flap angle 0°
0.5
0.4 Flap Angle 0 3D RANSe

LLT
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
-4 0 4 8 12 16 20 24
Figure 4-15: Drag coefficient over AoA, Flap angle 0°
2.4
2.0
3D RANSe
1.6 LLT
1.2
0.8
0.4
0.0 Flap Angle 10°
Figure 4-13: Flow pattern around wing -0.4
-4 0 4 8 12 16 20 24
The 2D-RANS – Lifting line calculations are based on Angle of Attack [°]
21 horizontal profiles evenly distributed along span. A Figure 4-16:Lift coefficient over AoA, Flap angle 10°
free vortex weighting factor of ZFVF 0.375 has been
used. Results of the 2D-RANS profile investigations
have been integrated for the full range of the test
matrix, including very large angles of attack with fully
separated flow. Comparisons of the 3D-RANS results
with those of lifting line method have been generated
0.5

3D RANSe Flap Twist
0.7
0.4 LLT
0.6 Flap Angle 10
0.5 3D RANSe 0.3
0.4 LLT
0.2
0.3
0.2 0.1
0.1 0.0
0.0 -4 0 4 8 12 16 20 24
-4 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 Angle of attack [°]
Angle of attack [deg]
Figure 4-21: Drag coefficient over AoA, Flap 0° (root)
Figure 4-17: Drag coefficient over AoA, Flap angle 10° to 20° (tip)
2.8 4.6 ASSESSMENT OF THE RESULTS

3D RANSe
2.4 A comparison of the 3D RANS results and those of the
LLT
2.0 lifting line method shows a twofold trend:
1.6
1.2
x For small AoAs where no flow separation can
be detected the agreement of the two methods
0.8
is very good. This holds for the lift as well as
0.4 the drag, which in case of the lifting line
0.0 Flap Angle 20 method is calculated as a sum of the induced
-0.4 drag from the LLT and the viscous drag from
-4 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 2D RANS profile simulations
Angle of Attack [°] x For larger angles of attack and small flap
Figure 4-18: Lift coefficient over AoA, Flap angle 20° angles the maximum lift coefficient is lower
for the 3D RANS simulations. The AoA of
maximum lift is predicted lower for the 3D
RANS simulations. Beyond the AoA of
0.6
Flap Angle 20° maximum lift coefficient the lift from LLT is
0.5 generally too large
0.4
3D RANSe x For very large flap angles the lifting line
LLT method is not able to predict a result. Here the
0.3 nonlinearity of the 2D lift coefficient is so
0.2 pronounced that the iterative method of the
LLT fails to converge.
0.1
0.0 It remains to be concluded that the LLT method works

-4 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 well in the attached flow regime. For separated flow the
results show some deviation. This can be traced back to
Figure 4-19: Drag coefficient over AoA, Flap angle 20°
the three-dimensional nature of flow separation. An
analysis of the flow pattern of the separated flow for the
2.4 3D case depicts, that the vortex shedding at the trailing
3D RANSe Flap Twist edge of the main element has a strong vertical
Lift Coefficien [°]
2.0
LLT orientation. This obviously cannot be modeled by the
1.6
RANS profile investigations.
1.2
0.8
0.4
0.0
5 OPTIMIZATION OF TWIST AND
ANGLE OF ATTACK
-0.4
-4 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 Once the lifting line method has been implemented and
Angle of Attack [°]l the results of the profile investigation properly
integrated, the computational runtime to investigate a
Figure 4-20: Lift coefficient over AoA, Flap angle 0°
single wing is almost negligible. LLT calculations can
(root) to 20° (tip)
be carried out on a standard PC and take no more than a
few seconds to calculate lift and drag as well as side
and driving forces and heeling moments for a particular base of the wing to a slightly negative value at the tip.
planform and given settings for flow speed, angle of The lift coefficient at the tip remains positive but small.
attack AoA and flap angle, which may vary with height
in order to take into account wing twist. For an even higher apparent wind speed of
AWS=24m/s this effect of twisting the flap is even
This opens the window for intensive optimizations more pronounced. Figure 5-3 shows lift, lift coefficient
studies of trim settings and planform within the and flap angle over span for this case. Here the flap
preliminary design of a wing. angle has been reduced dramatically and the top of the
wing shows inverted twist, generating some righting
In the following examples the lifting line method has moment. The driving force is Fxmax=11320N at a wing
been combined with a constraint optimization method angle of Alpha=14.6°.
based on conjugate gradient algorithms with penalty
methods to account for constraints. This method is
readily available within the Excel© spreadsheet
calculation program.
In the following example the wing angle with respect to

centerline of the catamaran and the flap angle, able to
change over span, have been predicted for maximum
driving force at a heeling moment constraint of
MXmax=500kNm. The main element twist has been
fixed to 10°, apparent wind angle to 20°.
For an apparent wind speed of AWS=12m/s the

optimizer found the maximum of driving force of
FXmax=7324 N, at a wing angle of D=9.3°.
Figure 5-1 shows flap angle, lift and lift coefficient
over span.
Figure 5-2: Lift, cL and Flap Angle over span,

AWS=18m/s
Figure 5-1: Lift, cL and Flap Angle over span,

AWS=12m/s
Figure 5-2 shows the same calculation for Figure 5-3: Lift, cL and Flap Angle over span,
AWS=18m/s. Here the result gives a driving force of AWS=24m/s
Fxmax=9335 N with a sheeting of the wing which is
eased compared to the case of AWS=12m/s from More results can be derived from the optimization
D=9.3° to D=13.8°. The diagram clearly indicates that calculations which may give hints for trimming the
the optimizer not only eased the main element but also wing. The optimizer tries to minimize induced drag by
twists the flap significantly from an angle E=15° at the maximizing effective span, however at higher wind
speeds effective span is traded in against low vertical find optimized trim settings of the wing for given wind
center of effort with respect to side forces. conditions and hydrostatic constraints with very little
effort. To do this based on 3D-RANS simulations; the
Figure 5-4 depicts vertical center of effort VCE and computational load of such investigation easily can
effective span of the wing over apparent wind speed. exceed any computational resources available to
The diagram shows that any reduction of VCE is costly engineers. In addition 2D-RANS - lifting line method
with respect to induced drag. promises to be valuable for the investigation of wing
design alternatives, such as a planform study, which –
40 once again – can be conducted with very little effort
using conventional tools like a spreadsheet calculation
35
Effective Span [m], Vertical
program.
Center of Effort [m]
30
25
20 REFERENCES
15 1. Schlichting and Truckenbrodt: Aerodynamik des

10 Tragflügels, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 1969
Effective Span
5 2. Ferziger, J.H. and Peric, M.: Computational Methods
Vertical Center of Effort for Fluid Dynamics, Springer, New York 2002
0
15 20 10 25
Apparent wind speed AWS [m/s] 3. Böhm, C. and Graf, K.: Validation of RANS
Figure 5-4: Effective span and VCE for optimum trim simulations of a fully appended ACCV5 design using
towing tank data, Proceedings of the INNOV'Sail08,
6 CONCLUSIONS Lorient, France, April 2008
The results from the two methods compared in the 4. Menter, F.R.: Two-equation eddy-viscosity
study presented here show a clear pattern: the lifting turbulence modeling for engineering applications,
line method is well suitable to predict the performance AIAA Journal 32(8) pp. 1598-1605, 1994
of a two-element wing quite well in the attached flow
regime. While the LLT method as implemented here 5. Gibson, M.M. and Launder, B.E.: Ground effects on
principally can take flow separation into account, the pressure fluctuations in the atmospheric boundary
flow force results generated in this regime diverge from layer, J. Fluid Mech., 86(3), pp. 491-511, 1978
those derived from 3D-RANS simulations.
6. Harvald, S.A.: Resistance and Propulsion of Ships,
While generally the confidence to provide accurate Krieger Publication Company, Melbourne/USA, 1992
results is greater for a full 3D RANS simulation than
for the combination of lifting line method with 2D-
7. America's Cup Properties, Inc: AC 72 Class Rule,
RANS simulations, it has to be understood that the
Version 1.0, Oct. 2010
simulation of separated flow is still error-prone for the
turbulence models available for practical engineering
investigations. Consequently it cannot be claimed that
the 3D-RANS simulations based on the turbulence
AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
models employed in this study are sufficiently accurate
on an absolute scale and agree fully with the reality. It
is left to speculation only if the 3D-RANS results are K. Graf is a professor of ship hydrodynamics at the
closer to reality than the lifting line method results. University of Applied Sciences Kiel in Germany and
Only a rigorous validation and verification study with chief scientist of the university’s Yacht Research Unit.
qualified experimental results may enlighten this in He has been involved in several professional sail sport
more detail. This has been beyond the scope of the campaigns since more than 10 years.
current study. S. Watin is a R&D engineer at VPLP Yacht Design
and responsible for flow and performance predictions.
He has been involved in numerous design projects of
Where applicable, the lifting line method in
VPLP, among them the AC 72 Shared Design Program
combination with 2D-RANS simulation is of high value
and the Hydros C-Class Campaign.
due to its computational efficiency. This holds
A.v. Hoeve is a Naval Architect of Delft Technical
obviously for the 2D-RANS simulations compared to
University who was working at YRU-Kiel as a flow
those in 3D. In addition the principal of the employed
analyst and CFD expert within a scientific exchange
lifting line method allows to be combined with
program.
constraint optimization methods. It can thus be used to
A COMPARISON OF DOWNWIND SAIL COEFFICIENTS FROM TESTS IN

DIFFERENT WIND TUNNELS
I.M.C Campbell, Wolfson Unit MTIA, University of Southampton, UK, imc@soton.ac.uk
Summary: This paper contains results from five different tests on model sailing yacht rigs and sails. The
tests were conducted by the author in four different wind tunnels over a fifteen year period between 1991
and 2007. The tests were conducted as part of development programmes for Whitbread 60 and America’s
Cup Class yachts and for particular racing teams. They were originally subject commercial confidentiality
so have not been published previously.
Although the aim of the original tests was to compare sail designs and develop the performance of the
individual yachts this aim of this study is somewhat different and uses the data to compare wind tunnels.
The paper describes features of the wind tunnels that affect the results together with the test requirements
for investigation of downwind sailing performance. A large number of individual results are presented
from tests over a range of apparent wind angles and curves of maximum lift and drag coefficients from
each tunnel are then compared.
Although the original tests were not designed for benchmarking wind tunnels the sail coefficients from the
different tests showed broad similarity within a tolerance band, which helps validate the technique of wind
tunnel testing of sailing yacht rigs. Conclusions have been drawn from the results about the effect of lift
on the drag of downwind sails and the overall accuracy of wind tunnel tests on rigs.
1. INTRODUCTION
2. WIND TUNNELS
The Wolfson Unit MTIA’s archives contain a large body
of commercially confidential data from wind tunnel and The four wind tunnels used together with the year of the
other tests. The results presented in this paper have been test were:
abstracted from five different wind tunnel sail test
projects, selected to enable results from different wind 1994, Volvo automotive tunnel, Gothenburg, Sweden [1]
tunnels to be compared. Permission to publish the results 1991, former Marchwood Engineering Laboratory
was kindly given by the clients. (MEL) wind engineering tunnel, Southampton, UK [2]
1996 and 2003, University of Southampton (Soton)
Even though only one or two comparable sail aeronautical tunnel, UK
configurations were selected from each of the five test 2006, Politecnico di Milano wind engineering tunnel,
programmes there remained a large amount of data to Bovisa, Italy
condense into this paper, which provides the basis for a
Table 1 Dimensions of the tunnel test sections
reasonably rigorous evaluation of downwind sail wind
tunnel testing.
Tunnel Volvo MEL Soton Milano
The tests were originally conducted to aid the Width m 6.6 9 4.57 14
development of the individual yachts and their sails and Height m 4.1 2.7 3.65 4
relative results between sails were consistent within each Length m 15.8 20 3.7 35
test. The aim of this paper was to examine consistency Model scale
between different wind tunnel tests. ACC 20 18 12.5
W60 15 15
The sail coefficients presented in this paper are the
original values obtained at the time of each test, they The principle features of the tunnels that could affect the
have not been re-analysed or corrected to improve sail tests are given in section 6.
correlation as a result of the analysis performed for this
paper. 3. TESTS
Two of the five tests from which results have been
abstracted were of Whitbread 60 yachts (W60),
developed for Round the World races. The other three

- 85 -
tests were of America’s Cup Class yachts of different between 1.15 and 0.58. The boat speed tends to be
versions; both IACC and ACC. higher than true wind speed in light winds and lower in
stronger wind speeds because of the non-linear
The W60, IACC and ACC yachts were similar, being relationship between hydrodynamic resistance and
single masted sloop rigs with asymmetric gennakers set aerodynamic thrust.
from spinnaker poles. There were differences: fractional
and masthead sails were tested on the W60s and It is therefore necessary to test downwind sails through a
mainsails were developed during the period of the tests wide range of apparent wind angles, although there may
with increasing leech roach leading to squared headed be different sails may be designed for different ranges of
sails. Results are presented from both W60 and IACC angles.
yachts tested in the Soton tunnel so the effect of these Similar apparent wind angles can occur at lower true
differences on the sail coefficients can be seen. wind angles associated with reaching, although they tend
towards 60 degrees and lower. Downwind sailing is,
Table 2 Summary of sails tested
however, characterized by low heel angles, typically less
than 5 degrees for the ACC yachts, whereas reaching
Tunnel Yacht Main Gennaker
performance can cause significant heeling. The
name class Area Code Area maximum driving force is of primary interest for
m2 m2 downwind sail testing, with the heeling moment having
Volvo W60 117 G5 195 little effect on sailing performance. This is different to
G-MH-1B 243 upwind and reaching where depowered sail settings are
MEL IACCv1 197 CC1 423 of importance for sailing in moderate and strong wind
conditions.
Soton IACCv2 215 A1 453
Soton W60 117 ASY73B 300 Downwind sailing at an apparent wind angle of 90
FASY 215 degrees is an interesting condition, which for Americas
Milano ACCv5 212 A2 531 Cup Class yachts sailing arose in a true wind speed of 12
knots - the mid wind range for good sea breezes in
4. DOWNWIND SAILING ANGLES Valencia. At this angle all the driving force was derived
from aerodynamic lift and all the heeling force from drag
The apparent wind angles for downwind sailing vary
so maximum driving force equated to maximum lift.
depending on the course, the size and performance of the
yacht, its boat speed and the true wind speed.
At deeper apparent wind angles the lift force contributed
to the righting moment as opposed to contributing to the
For windward/leeward courses, such as the America’s
heeling moment at closer or smaller apparent wind
Cup races in the IACC and ACC Classes the optimum
angles. The heeling moment tended to zero at an
true wind angles were βtw =150+/-10 degrees, with an apparent wind angle of 135 degrees, where the righting
associated mean gybe angle of 60 degrees. VPP moment from the lift force balanced the heeling moment
calculations provide the optimum true wind angle (βtw) from the drag force or in other terms where the resultant
and associated apparent wind angles (βaw), however aerodynamic force was aligned with the boat axis.
these are obtained from the simple solution of the wind
triangle, as illustrated in Figure 1. 5. DATA REDUCTION
The measured forces can be expressed in various ways
and although a yacht’s performance depends principally
on driving force and heeling moment in the body axis it
6
A
is better to compare sail aerodynamics in conventional

A6
%
lift and drag coefficients in the wind axis. These are

A
6B
used in VPP calculations and show less variation with

6
6 6
A
6 apparent wind angle than forces in the body axis.

@ @ %@
AB%A6 AB%A6 Cd = D 1 (1)

2 ρVaw2 A
(2 )
2
Cdi = ACl
πHe 2
Figure 1 Wind triangle for downwind sailing
(3)
2
Di = L
It can be seen that the apparent wind angle is dependent
1
2 ρVaw2 He 2
on the ratio of boat speed to true wind speed (Vs/Vtw)
and varies between 60 and 120 degrees for ratios

- 86 -
The reduction of measured forces to aerodynamic

coefficients depends on apparent wind speed (Vaw) or The model in the Volvo wind tunnel [2] was
the associated dynamic pressure and sail area (A). approximately 25m downstream from the last corner and
Measurement accuracy of these is discussed in separate approximately 10m from the start of the slotted wall test
sections of this paper but the influence of any differences section. The flow uniformity was very good with
between the tunnels is discussed here. variations in pitot pressure of +/- 0.2%. The boundary
layer į thickness was approximately 80mm.
Relative results between sails tested in one tunnel remain
unaffected by errors in the wind speed measurement, The model in the low speed section of the University of
provided it is taken in a consistent manner. Scaling to Southampton wind tunnel was only approximately 2m
the yacht’s performance depends on the wind speed from the last corner and its associated smoothing screens.
measurement for the yacht as well as that in the tunnel, An additional screen was fitted prior to the W60 tests
which is also problematic since measurements for the with the aim of improving the flow uniformity. This had
yacht are generally obtained from a masthead a static pressure drop of twice the dynamic pressure,
anemometer that is particularly affected by masthead which was suitable for use in wind tunnels. The flow,
downwind sails and by the prevailing wind gradient. however, was not as uniform as the in the Volvo tunnel
and there were consistent variations of dynamic pressure
Both the lift and drag coefficients would appear to be across the model’s location with an rms value of 5%.
affected similarly by differences in wind speed but this The flow in the high speed section, which was
does not apply to the induced drag due to lift. It can be downstream following a contraction with a 5:1 area ratio,
seen from equation 2 that the induced drag coefficient was much more uniform and the reference speed for the
depends on the square of the lift coefficient and the tests was taken from this section. The boundary layer
aspect ratio, which has been expressed as He2/A where was within 150mm from the tunnel floor.
He is the effective rig height – a distance related to the
geometric rig height. The effective rig height is a useful The tunnels at the Marchwood Engineering Laboratory
parameter to derive because, as shown in equation 3, it is and the Politecnico di Milano were designed for wind
independent of sail area but its correct determination engineering work so had long sections used to grow a
relies on the correct measurement of dynamic pressure. stable boundary layer flow to model that of the
This can cause differences when comparing effective rig atmosphere, albeit at a scales at least an order of
heights from tests in different wind tunnels. magnitude smaller than those of sail test models.
6. SAIL AREAS The MEL wind tunnel [1] was open circuit with a bell
mouth intake that drew air from the outside environment
Both the America’s Cup Class Rule and the Whitbread
into the enclosed working section. The inlet was fitted
60 Class Rule had sail measurements designed to
with screens to help isolate the flow in the test section
produce the surface area of the sails. There were
from the external wind environment but some sensitivity
differences in the details of the measurements but the
remained. The air was drawn down the working section
differences between the actual and measured surface by a single 1MegaWatt centrifugal fan and exhausted
areas of the sails will have been relatively small, within a back outside. The tunnel was reported to have suffered
few per cent. Details of the measurements are given in
from a slow oscillation in its wind speed, likened to an
the published class rules.
organ pipe effect, but sail force measurements were
averaged over a period of approximately 1 minute such
The sail coefficients given in this paper are based on the that any oscillations did not affect the results, evidenced
Rule measurements of sail area and not the planform or by good repeatability. The tunnel floor was covered with
projected areas that are sometimes used in the definition
toy lego brick blocks to increase its roughness and create
of lift and drag coefficients of other bodies in different
a boundary layer, which extended to a height of
applications.
approximately 500mm. The flow speed remained
consistent within the boundary layer and was measured
7. WIND SPEED MEASUREMENTS from a pitot tube within the working section.
The four tunnels had different wind circuits that affected
the wind speed profiles and their measurements. Sail The Politecnico di Milano wind tunnel had a closed
tests require relatively large working sections and low circuit, with a bank of fourteen fans driving the air
wind speeds compared to convention aeronautical through the final bend into the low speed section. The
testing. The working test section in conventional tunnel floor was smooth and the boundary layer was
aeronautical wind tunnels is downstream of a larger approximately 300mm thick but there were consistent
section of the tunnel with a contraction, which improves lateral and vertical variations in flow speed and across
the flow uniformity and reduces the turbulence intensity. the location of the model. These were associated with
But there were no contractions immediately upstream of the flow pattern from the individual fans and amounted
any of the sections used for these tests because of the to an rms variation in pitot pressure of approximately
requirement for a large working section. 5%. The tunnel had a high speed section on the return

- 87 -
circuit below the low speed section with a contraction

ratio of approximately 3:1so, to avoid the problems with Tests with a twisted flow device [8] were conducted in
the flow variations, the mean flow speed was taken from the Milano tunnel for the America’s Cup using a true
measurements in this section. wind gradient measured in Valencia for the prevailing
sea breezes. The gradient was curve fitted by a power
law of between 1/20 and 1/30, which was considerably
lower than the conventional 1/7 or 1/10 curves. The
Apparent wind gradient and
associated apparent wind gradients and twist for a 1/20
Tunnel boundary layer measurements true gradient are shown in Table 3 for different ratios of
3.5 boat speed (Vs) to true wind speed (Vtw), which
ACC mast height correspond to racing conditions for downwind sailing at
3.0 a true wind angle of βtw = 150 degrees.
Table 3 Calculated values for the apparent wind gradient
Height ratio Z/Z10m
2.5 Baw=90 1/20 power

MEL 1:20 scale Vs/ Vaw/ Baw Twist Vaw/Vaw10m
2.0 Milano 1:12.5 scale Vtw Vtw 10m Boom Mast Boom Mast
Soton 1:18 scale ratio ratio deg deg deg ratio ratio
1.5 0.6 0.57 118.0 -4.9 3.1 0.88 1.10
0.7 0.53 108.4 -6.5 4.2 0.89 1.09
1.0
0.8 0.50 97.5 -8.0 5.3 0.91 1.08
0.9 0.50 86.1 -8.8 6.1 0.94 1.06
0.5
1.0 0.52 75.0 -8.9 6.5 0.97 1.04
0.0 1.1 0.55 64.9 -8.3 6.4 1.00 1.02
1.2 0.60 56.3 -7.5 6.0 1.02 1.00
0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Speed ratio U/U10m Considerable twist occurs below boom level, where it has
little influence on the sails and its effect on modelling in
Figure 2 Wind tunnel gradients at the time of the tests the wind tunnel is on hull windage. It can be seen that
the twist at the boom was only slightly greater than at the
Examples of the flow measurements taken at the time of masthead. After some adjustments of the vanes in the
the wind tunnels test in way of the model are shown in wind tunnel, similar twist was achieved at the boom and
Figure 2 together with the apparent wind gradient for the mast of +/- 5 degrees.
1:12.5 scale ACC yacht model tested in the Politecnico
di Milano tunnel. Unevenness in the wind profile can be It can be seen from Table 3 that the actual apparent wind
seen in data from this and the Southampton tunnel but it gradient at sea is relatively small at high boat speed
should be noted that the mean test speed was derived ratios, which are associated with light winds. So these
from a grid of measurements taken across the test area conditions are reasonably represented by the uniform
not just those shown in Figure 2. wind speeds in the Soton and Volvo tunnels. The wind
gradient in the Milano tunnel, shown in Figure 2, was
Reduced wind speeds over the lower part of the model representative of medium wind sailing conditions with
sails were most significant in the MEL tunnel. apparent wind angles of 75 to 108 degrees. The deep
boundary layer in the MEL tunnel was less representative
The wind speeds us for the downwind sail tests were of the downwind sailing conditions, which is not
approximately 5 m/s. This was within both the structural surprising as the tunnel was designed to model the true
strength of the model and the power of the remotely atmospheric wind gradient for building work not the
operated sheet winches. It also matched the scale apparent wind gradient produced by a moving yacht.
relationship between the wind pressure and sail cloth
weight, ensuring reasonable modelling of the flown sail 9. BLOCKAGE CORRECTIONS
shapes. The test Reynolds numbers were consequentially
less than full scale by the order of the model scale, i.e. a The most significant correction for downwind sail
factor for at least 12.5 to 20 lower than full scale. This is measurements made in closed jet test sections is the wake
an unavoidable feature of model testing. blockage correction. This corrects for the reduced
pressure, i.e. higher suction, in the wake resulting from
8. WIND GRADIENT AND TWIST the tunnel wall constraints on the streamlines
downstream of the model. The so called Maskell
The apparent wind speed gradient and twist that is correction was applied to some of the tests using the
experienced by the yacht when sailing depends on the method given in ESDU data sheet 80024. The correction
true wind gradient and the yacht’s speed and heading. is based on the drag due to separated flow, obtained by
This involves solution of the wind triangle shown in subtracting of the induced drag due to the measured lift.
Figure 1 with height.

- 88 -
Although the wake blockage is calculated from the blockage could also be retrospectively applied to the
measured drag the correction is of the base pressure Volvo tests.
acting on the sails so is applied to both lift and drag
forces. 10. MEASUREMENT METHODS
The results given in this paper were obtained using test
Wake blockage corrections were studied by the
methods that were evolved by the Wolfson Unit MTIA
automotive industry in the 1980s, when manufacturers
over a prolonged period and numerous projects. They
were vying to produce low drag coefficients for their cars
and the Volvo tunnel was designed with slotted walls in were derived from the methods used by the Yacht
an attempt to overcome the problem. The test section has Research Group at the University of Southampton in the
1960s, described by A J Marchaj in his classic book
similarities with an open jet tunnel, where blockage
Sailing Theory and Practice, but differ considerably due
corrections are applied in the opposite sense due to less
to improved dynamometry, data acquisition, model sail
suction of the wake, but at the time of the tests blockage
construction, remote winch operation and test procedures
corrections were not applied to the sail test results from
this tunnel. [7].
Different dynamometers were used in the different

The MEL tunnel was relatively large compared to the
tunnels but all were calibrated and corrected for
Southampton tunnel so at the time an average estimate of
interactions with an overall accuracy and repeatability of
the wake blockage correction was applied to all results.
the order of +/- 1%. The models were isolated from the
The analysis process was refined for subsequent tests
such that corrections were calculated for individual test wind tunnel turntables to avoid problems with tare
points. The maximum correction factors used for the corrections on roll moments due to wake interactions.
The measurements included the forces due to the hull,
tests in this paper are shown in Figure 3.
deck, mast, rigging and sails.
Variation of blockage with apparent wind for The data acquisition system used for these tests displayed
tests in various tunnels in real time the sail forces, measured on body axes. The
sail sheeting and spinnaker pole adjustment were made
1.50 remotely with the wind on, which enabled the sail
1.45 settings to be optimised and the maximum forces to be
sought. Individual test points were obtained by
Wake blockage correction
1.40 averaging force measurements over a period of time, of

1.35 the order of 30 seconds, and each point represents the
result of several minutes of sail adjustments using the
1.30 real time display.
1.25
1.20
1.15
1.10
1.05
1.00
50 70 90 110 130 150
Apparent wind angle - degrees
ACC M ilano IACC Soton

IACC M EL Poly. (IACC Soton)
Linear (ACC M ilano)
Figure 3 Wake blockage corrections for different tunnels
It can be seen that the wake blockage corrections in the

Southampton tunnel were approximately twice those in
the Milano tunnel, particularly at the wider apparent
wind angles where the lift was lower and the drag due to
separation was higher. In retrospect the wake blockage
corrections applied to the MEL data are low compared to
those applied to the Milano tunnel data. Some wake

- 89 -
Variation of driving with heeling forces

IACC in Southampton tunnel
1.8
1.6
Driving force coefficient Cx
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
-0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Heeling force coefficient Cy
A1M3 50 A1M3 70 A1M3 90
A1M3 100 A1M3 120 A1M3 140
IACC fit
Figure 5 Sails set at two apparent wind angles
Figure 4 Driving and heeling force coefficients
The sails are readjusted at each apparent wind angle and,
Procedures for downwind sail testing, where heel angles as can be seen in Figure 5, the use of the spinnaker pole
are small, were developed to obtain the maximum results in similar sail geometry relative to the apparent
driving force that the rig could produce, since this would wind direction with quite different sheeting relative to
cause the yacht to sail at its fastest speed downwind the yacht.
therefore real time VPP techniques are not required
during downwind wind tunnel tests. Once the sail Although the maximum forces are of primary interest for
coefficients were derived the VPP was used to predict downwind sailing, other useful information on the rig
apparent wind angles for different true wind speeds, performance can be extracted from the lower force
using the wind triangle shown in Figure 1. measurements by plotting the variation of drag
coefficients with the square of lift, as shown in Figure
Typical results are shown in Figure 4 from measurements 12. Linear trends in the data can be seen, particularly at
were made with a number of different sail settings at the lower wind angles of 50 to 70 degrees and these are
different apparent wind angles. The force data was attributable to the variation of induced drag due to lift.
plotted at the time of the tests and although tests were The reduced lift conditions are achieved mainly by
made at discrete apparent wind angles the forces were adjustment of the mainsail sheeting angle, with this sail
presumed to vary smoothly with apparent wind angle so acting like a flap to the highly cambered asymmetric sail
low values could be identified and sails readjusted in the and there is a range of settings where this flap causes
search for the maxima. It can be seen that the driving relatively small changes to any flow separation so of the
force coefficients are greatest at apparent wind angles variations in drag are associated with invicid flow. The
between 90 and 120 degrees. The same force data can be slope of the induced drag line can be used to derive and
transformed from body to wind axes to produce the lift effective aspect ratio and height or span for the rig that
and drag coefficients shown in Figures 8 and 9. In can provide a useful comparison between the tests.
addition the centre of effort height can be obtained from
the heeling moment measurements, as shown in Figure 11. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
13. The curves summarising the maximum lift coefficients
from all the tests are shown in Figure 6 and the
associated drag coefficient curves in Figure 7.
Given there were differences between the tunnels, wind,

yacht design, models and sails over the 16 year test
period, as discussed previously, it is remarkable that the

- 90 -
maximum lift coefficient curves are all similar within a

10% band. All the tests showed the maximum lift Variation of Cd with apparent wind angle
coefficient to occur at apparent wind angles between 50 fits from tunnels
to 70 degrees and to be slightly lower at 90 degrees.
1.2
Variation of Cl with apparent wind angle 1.0

fit from all tunnels
Drag coefficient Cd
1.8 0.8
1.6
0.6
1.4
Lift coefficient Cl
1.2 0.4
1.0
0.2
0.8
0.6 0.0
50 70 90 110 130 150
0.4
0.2
0.0
50 70 90 110 130 150 IACC Soton ACC Milano
Apparent wind angle - degrees W60 Volvo W60 Soton
Figure 7 Summary of maximum drag coefficients
IACC Soton ACC Milano Comparison of lift and drag from the two different tests
W60 Volvo W60 Soton in the Soton tunnel on the W60 and IACC models
produced similar maximum lift and drag curves with
Figure 6 Summary of maximum lift coefficients slightly lower values from the W60. Both these tests
included reduced lift settings, although conducted at
Maximum lift was sought at 90 degrees since this will slightly different apparent wind angles, and the variation
have produced maximum driving force so there is of drag coefficient with the square of lift is shown in
probably something associated with the sail geometry Figures 12 and 20. The effective rig heights from the
and sail interaction that enabled higher lift to be achieved slope of the induced drag lines were very similar, being
at the closer angles and also for the lift to reduce at wider 89% of the mast height above the water-line for the
angles. The side shrouds limit the boom sheeting angle IACC rig and 90% for the W60 rig. These are lower than
to less than 90 degrees to the yacht’s centreline, which the effective rig heights used for upwind rigs, although
may have restricted the lift at deeper apparent wind these have some form of deck sealing.
angles.
The intercept of the induced drag line at zero lift can be
The drag coefficient curves show greater variation than considered to be the base drag, including viscous drag,
the lift curves of approximately 20% and with the windage from the hull and rigging and any drag due to
opposite trend of drag increasing with apparent wind separation that does not vary due to lift. There was an
angle. The factors influencing these differences are apparent increase in base drag to increase with apparent
considered further. wind angle, as can be seen from Figure 12 by the
difference in the parallel lines from the IACC tests at
apparent wind angles of 50 and 70 degrees. This may be
caused by increased separated flow off the gennaker at
higher apparent wind angles.
The drag due to windage of the hull and rig was

measured with the sails removed and is shown in Figures
9 and 12 and it can be seen that it is relatively small
compared to both the total sail drag and the residual base
drag after subtraction of the induced drag.

- 91 -
The W60 fractional and masthead gennakers produced It can be seen that both the lift and drag were lower from
similar lift and drag coefficients but it can be seen from the Milano tests and the centre of effort was slightly
Figure 21 that their centre of effort heights were higher. It is possible that either the wind gradient or
distinctly different. The centre of effort only varied with twist reduced the maximum lift coefficient from the
apparent wind angle by a few percent but it can be seen Milano tunnel with, as discussed previously, an
by comparing Figures 13 and 21 that the IACC tests associated reduction in induced drag. Although different
produced slightly higher centres of effort. apparent wind angles were used in the Soton and Milano
tests it can be seen from inspection of lift and drag data
The IACC tests in the MEL tunnel produced only a few in Figures 12 and 14 that the Milano data matched the
maximum lift points compared to the complete IACC Soton data at comparable values of lift.
tests conducted in the Soton tunnel so the results are
shown plotted together in Figures 8,9,12 and 13. It can The Milano tests were focused on achieving the
be seen that the lift was similar except at the apparent maximum sail force in order to compare different
wind angle of 110 degrees and the drag approximately gennaker shapes, so there were not many reduced lift
10% lower. It is possible that the wake blockage was points to use to compare induced drag and effective rig
underestimated at the apparent wind angle of 110 heights with those from the Soton tests. It is, however,
degrees, as discussed previously, however whilst notable from Figure 14 the concentration of lift and drag
increasing the correction could improve correlation in lift coefficients from tests over a wide range of apparent
it would reduce the drag. The centre was higher from the wind angles compared to the spread of driving and
MEL tests, particularly at the problematic apparent wind heeling forces shown in Figure 4. There is a similar
angle of 110 degrees, and this may be attributed to the concentration of data from the W60 Volvo tests shown in
boundary layer shown in Figure 2. Figure 22, particularly at reduced values of lift. The
effect of the apparent wind angle on the aerodynamic
Data from the W60 tests in the Soton and Volvo tunnels coefficients is secondary to its effect on the
are shown in adjacent Figures 16 to 23 for ease of transformation of the aerodynamic force vector from
comparison. Lift and drag coefficients were similar at an wind axes to body axes.
apparent wind angle of 90 degrees but were lower from
the Volvo tunnel at lower apparent wind angles and Finally, it is possible that higher lift coefficients were
higher at higher angles except for a single test point at an obtained from the Soton tunnel because of the fine scale
angle of 50 degrees. This point has both higher lift and turbulence induced into the flow by the smoothing
drag than the curve fit though the data set but it can be screens immediately upstream of the model, which was a
seen from Figure 22 that the drag is consistent with the unique feature of this tunnel. It is also possible that full
increase in induced drag due to lift. It is therefore scale maximum lift coefficients could be higher than
possible that the sails were not set in the Volvo tests to those measured in any of the wind tunnels but they
produce the maximum lift, except at this single point. It should not be lower.
can be seen from Figures 20 and 22 that the induced drag
from the effective rig height obtained from the Soton 12. CONCLUSIONS
tests at an apparent wind angle of 60 degrees also
Consistency has been found in the maximum lift
matched the Volvo test results at 40 and 50 degrees,
coefficient obtained from the different wind tunnel tests
albeit with lower base drag. It is possible that the
on downwind sails within a band of 10% across the range
absence of any blockage correction to the Volvo tunnel
data influenced the higher lift and drag data at the of apparent wind angles associated with downwind
apparent wind angle of 90 degrees. sailing.
Induced drag is associated with the lift produced by the

Two different sized gennakers were tested in the Volvo
downwind sails with an associated effective rig height of
tunnel and slightly higher drag coefficients were
approximately 90% of the mast height above the water-
measured from the smaller G5B. There centre of effort
heights were similar, although the G5B was recorded to line, which is lower than associated with upwind sails.
be a fractional gennaker, but the height tended to This induced drag accounts for some of the 20%
variation in the maximum drag coefficients obtained
decrease with apparent wind angle, not remain constant
from the different wind tunnel tests.
as from the other tunnel tests. It is possible that there
was a roll moment measurement problem.
There were similar trends in the variation of lift and drag
Data from the IACC tests in the Soton tunnel and the with apparent wind angle from each of the wind tunnels,
ACC tests in the Milano tunnel are shown in adjacent indicating the validity of these trends. These trends
showed a reduction in the maximum lift coefficient with
Figures 16 to 23 for ease of comparison. The Milano
apparent wind angle and an increase in the drag
tests were the most recent and used the largest model in
coefficient, with part of this increase associated with the
the biggest tunnel and were undertaken with great care as
base drag.
part of a comprehensive 14 week test programme.

- 92 -
There were variations in the centre of effort height that

could be attributed to the different wind gradients in the
tunnels.
Lower maximum lift coefficients were obtained from the

Milano tunnel, which may be attributed to the wind
gradient and twist simulated in this tunnel or it is
possible that fine scale turbulence in the Soton tunnel
allowed higher maximum lift to be achieved.
The applied wake blockage corrections appear to have

aided the correlation of sail coefficients obtained from
different wind tunnels.
The effects of apparent wind angle on aerodynamic

coefficients, defined in the wind axes, are smaller than
those on the driving and heeling force coefficients,
defined on the body axes.
The general similarity in the sail coefficients obtained

from the different tests in different wind tunnels helps
validate the technique of wind tunnel testing of sailing
yacht rigs.
13. WIND TUNNEL RESULTS

The following figures contain results from each of the
five different tests of lift and drag coefficients and centre
of effort height.

- 93 -
Variation of Cl with apparent wind angle Variation of Cl with apparent wind angle
IACC in Southampton tunnels ACC in Milano tunnel
1.8 1.8
1.6 1.6
1.4 1.4
Lift coefficient Cl
Lift coefficient Cl
1.2 1.2
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
50 70 90 110 130 150 50 70 90 110 130 150
Apparent wind angle - degrees Apparent wind angle - degrees
MEL 70 MEL 90 MEL 110
A1M3 50 A1M3 70 A1M3 90
A1M3 100 A1M3 120 A1M3 140 A2 60 A2 75 A2 90
IACC fit A2 105 A2 120 ACC fit
Figure 8 Figure 10
Variation of Cd with apparent wind angle Variation of Cd with apparent wind angle
1.2 1.2
1.0 1.0
Drag coefficient Cd
Drag coefficient Cd
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
50 70 90 110 130 150 50 70 90 110 130 150
A1M3 50 A1M3 70 A1M3 90
A1M3 100 A1M3 120 A1M3 140 A2 60 A2 75 A2 90
IACC windage IACC fit A2 105 A2 120 ACC fit
Figure 9 Figure 11

- 94 -
Variation of drag with square of lift Variation of drag with square of lift
1.2 1.2
1.0 1.0
Drag coefficient Cd
Drag coefficient Cd
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
2
lift coefficient squared Cl Lift coefficient squared Cl
2

A1M3 50 A1M3 70 A1M3 90
A1M3 100 A1M3 120 A1M3 140 A2 60 A2 75 A2 90
Windage IACC Cdi Cdi A2 105 A2 120 ACC fit
IACC fit
Figure 14
Figure12
Variation of Ceh with apparent wind angle Variation of Ceh with apparent wind angle
60 60
Centre of effort height above DWL %
Centre of effort above DWL - %
55 55
50 50
45 45
40 40
35 35
30 30
25 25
20 20
50 70 90 110 130 150 50 70 90 110 130 150

A1M3 50 A1M3 70 A1M3 90
A1M3 100 A1M3 120 A1M3 140 A2 60 A2 75 A2 90 A2 105 A2 120
Figure 13 Figure 15

- 95 -
Variation of Cl with apparent wind Variation of Cl with apparent wind

W60 in Southampton tunnel W60 in Volvo tunnel
1.8 1.8
1.6 1.6
1.4 1.4
Lift coefficient Cl
Lift coefficient Cl
1.2 1.2
1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
40 60 80 100 120 140 40 60 80 100 120 140
G-MH-1B 40 G-MH-1B 50 G-MH-1B 70

FASY 60 FASY 80 FASY 100 G-MH-1B 90 G-MH-1B 110 G5B 40
ASY73B 60 ASY73B 85 ASY73B 110 G5B 50 G5B 60 G5B 70
ASY73B 135 Soton W60 fit G5B 80 G5B 90 Volvo fit
Figure 16 Figure 18
Variation of Cd with apparent wind Variation of Cd with apparent wind

1.2 1.2
1.0 1.0
Drag coefficient Cd
Drag coefficient Cd
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
40 60 80 100 120 140 40 60 80 100 120 140
G-MH-1B 40 G-MH-1B 50 G-MH-1B 70

Figure 17 Figure 19

- 96 -
Variation of drag with square of lift Variation of drag with square of lift
1.2 1.2
1.0 1.0
Drag coefficient Cd
Drag coefficient Cd
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
2 2
Square of lift coefficient Cl Square of lift coefficient Cl
G-MH-1B 40 G-MH-1B 50 G-MH-1B 70

Figure 20 Figure 22
Variation of centre of effort with apparent Variation of Ceh with apparent wind
wind, W60 in Southampton tunnel W60 in Volvo tunnel
60
60
55 55
Centre of effort to DWL - %
Centre of effort to DWL %
50 50
45 45
40 40
35 35
30 30
25
25
20
20
40 60 80 100 120 140
40 60 80 100 120 140
G-MH-1B 40 G-MH-1B 50 G-MH-1B 70

G-MH-1B 90 G-MH-1B 110 G5B 40
FASY 60 FASY 80 FASY 100 ASY73B 60 G5B 50 G5B 60 G5B 70
ASY73B 85 ASY73B 110 ASY73B 135 G5B 80 G5B 90
Figure 21 Figure 23

- 97 -
14. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 16. AUTHOR’S BIOGRAPHY

It has only been possible to publish the previously Ian Campbell is an Emeritus Fellow at the University of
confidential results due to the kind permission of Sir Southampton, having previously worked at the Wolfson
Michael Fay, Mr Bruce Farr, Mr Laurie Smith, Dr Peter Unit MTIA for 38 years. He has conducted numerous
Van Oossanen and Sig Patrizio Bertelli. The work was experiments and trials for the development of sailing
originally performed for the organisations they yachts and power craft and was Senior Scientist for the
represented and were instrumental in creating, all with Luna Rossa challenge for the America’s Cup in 2007.
the common aim of winning prestigious yacht races. The Wolfson Unit was awarded, as a group, the RINA
Small Craft medal in 2013 in recognition of its services
The original tests were conducted with the assistance over many years to the small craft industry. Ian
from colleagues at the Wolfson Unit MTIA and the continues to cruise in his own yacht and race his dinghy.
University of Southampton together with that of the staff
from the organisations operating the different wind
tunnels.
Thanks are also extended to the sailmakers associated

with each project for designing and manufacturing the
model sails.
15. REFERENCES
1. A. G. ROBINS, “Plume dispersion from ground

level sources in simulated atmospheric boundary
layers”, Atmospheric Environment Vol. 12, pp. 1033-
1044. Pergamon Press Ltd. 1978.
2. L-U NILSSON AND A BERNDTSSON, “The new
Volvo multipurpose automotive wind tunnel”, SAE
International Congress and Exposition, Detroit
Michigan, Feb 1987
3. TAHARA T, MASUYAMA Y, FUKASAWA AND
KATORI M, “CFD calculation of downwind sail
performance using flying shape measured by wind
tunnel test”, HPYD4 Auckland 2012
4. IGNAZIO MARIA VIOLA, RICHARD G.J. FLAY,
“Sail pressures from full-scale, wind-tunnel and
numerical investigations” Ocean Engineering 38
(2011)1733–1743
5. WRIGHT, S., CLAUGHTON, A., PATON, J. AND
LEWIS, R., “Off-Wind Sail Performance Prediction
and Optimisation”, 2nd International Conference on
Innovation in High Performance Sailing Yachts
(INNOV’SAIL), Lorient, France, June-July, 2010
6. TEETERS, J., RANZENBACH, R. AND PRINCE,
M., “Changes to Sail Aerodynamics in the IMS
Rule”, The 16th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht
Symposium, March, 2003
7. CAMPBELL I.M.C., “The Performance of Offwind
Sails Obtained from Wind Tunnel Tests”, R.I.N.A.
International Conference on the Modern Yacht,
March, 1998
8. ZASSO A., FOSSATI F., VIOLA I.M., Twisted
Flow Wind Tunnel Design for Testing Yacht Sails,
4th European and African Conference on Wind
Engineering (EACWE4), 11-15 July 2005, Prague,
Czech Republic.

- 98 -
SMART MATERIALS APPLICATION ON HIGH PERFORMANCE SAILING

YACHTS FOR ENERGY HARVESTING
S. Turkmen, D. Mylonas and M. Khorasanchi, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK
Serkan.turkmen@strath.ac.uk, dimitrios.mylonas@strath.ac.uk, mahdi.khorasanchi@strath.ac.uk
Piezoelectric patches are bounded on a keel bulb in order to harvest vibration energy by converting electrical output.
Unsteady computational fluid dynamics method is also used to find the structural boundary condition such as the
hydrodynamic pressure fluctuation. Finite element analysis (FEM) is used to find structural and electrical responses.
NOMENCLATURE T Transpose of a matrix (Italic)
Subscripts
Sym Definition [ Unit]
Strain or stress applied in the j-axis and the
δ Variation operator i,j
normal direction of the electrode is i-axis.
F/m or
H The permittivity (IEEE std)
C/(m∙V)
1. INTRODUCTION
Permittivity of vacuum (8.854E-
HR
12)
Piezoelectric (and pyroelectric) materials are types of
I Voltage, electrical potential V/m smart material made from ferroelectric crystals. Curie
Z Frequency rad/s brothers discovered the piezoelectric effect in 1880.
: Surface, area m2 Knowing that the electrification is generated by
U The mass density kg/m3 mechanical pressure, they investigated in what
direction pressure should be applied and from which
Ԓ Surface charge density C/m2 crystal classes the effect is to be expected. One of the
E Electric field V/m early applications was made by Paul Langevin to detect
FP Point force N submarines. He used quart-steel sandwich transducers,
FV Body force N which are called the Langevin-type transducer in
ultrasonic engineering [1].
F: Surface force N
c Mechanical stiffness (IEEE std) N/m2 Piezoelectricity is an electromechanical phenomenon
[C] Structural damping matrix that couples the elastic (dynamic coupling) and electric
d Piezoelectric strain constants C/N (static coupling) fields. In operation, this phenomenon
can be observed when a piezoelectric material is
D Electric displacement field C/m2
adopted in a noise-vibration system or a mechanical
Total potential energy or electric
H Joules force/pressure, cyclic electric field is excited. This is
enthalpy
called the direct piezoelectric effect. Conversely, if an
K Kinetic energy Joules electric charge or field is applied to the material then it
[M] Mass matrix kg is called converse piezoelectric effect [2]. This dual
P Power Watts action of the material has become a tool for vibration
Q Total electrical charge V/m2 control and energy sources for many applications, for
instance sensors and actuators, frequency filters, or
S Strain (IEEE std) m/m high-frequency ultrasonic transducers.
t1 ,t 2 Time s
V Stress (IEEE std) N/m2 If this electric energy is consumed via a suitable
{u} Displacement field vector m resistor as Joule heat, mechanical noise vibration is
significantly suppressed; that is, it acts as a passive
{‫ݑ‬ሶ } Velocity field vector m/s damper. Power generation ability has been studied in
W Total virtual work Joules the past years [3, 4]. Operating wireless electronic
Z Impedance ohm devices without a wired power source has become an
issue so researchers mainly focus on output power,
Superscripts piezoelectric properties, complexity of the system and
cost efficiency [5-8].
T Values taken at constant stress (T=0)
s Values taken at constant strain (S = 0) Studies show that smart materials or intelligent system
E Values taken at constant electric field (E=0) concepts modify the structural properties without
additional materials or mechanisms [9]. Lead Zirconate
Titane (PZT) is one of the piezoelectric materials that Piezoelectricity may be explained as a linear interaction
are used in both actuators and sensors. It is bonded to between electrical and mechanical systems. One of the
the surface of the base structure as a thin film or differences in piezoelectric materials, which make them
laminated [10, 11] smart materials, is that material properties are not
constant. Their values change with external mechanical
Applications of smart materials in sailing yachts are loads (stress), electric field strength and temperature.
limited. Murayama et al. [12] and Shimada et al. [13] Linear interaction between mechanical and electrical
studied the structural health monitoring and damage systems is presented in Figure 1. It is assumed the
detection of IACC yacht hull and keel through fiber- ambient temperature does not vary significantly so
optic strain sensors. Shenoi et al. [14] give a review and thermal properties are ignored in this study. Th e
status of smart materials use in the marine environment, diagram helps to understand how mechanical and
and their potential for application in various fields. electrical properties are mediated by the different
material constants [1, 15]. This shows the constitutive
In this study, the piezoelectric material PZT-5H is used relationships and coupling coefficients in a linearly
to harvest the energy of the flow-induced vibration in a coupled system.
yacht keel. Two numerical approaches are used:
computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to calculate the Electromechanical coupling between the elastic and the
input excitation forces, and finite element analysis electric fields is demonstrated. In this figure, the
(FEM) to find structural and electrical responses. FFT rectangles indicate the intensive variables such as
analysis is done to find vortex shedding frequency (as a forces and the circles show the extensive variables such
dominant frequency) over the keel. Estimate of output as displacements. Thus, the piezoelectric material
power is calculated when the piezoelectric plate is characteristics are the elastic, dielectric, and
excited by a time-harmonic surface normal stress. piezoelectric tensor components [15].
2. INTERACTION BETWEEN
ELECTRICAL AND MECHANICAL SYSTEMS
Figure 1 Piezoelectric effect
The piezoelectric strain constants d ij describe how

In Figure 1, mechanical quantities are {σ} is the stress; much of the electric charge flows through short circuit
{S} is the strain; [c] is the elastic stiffness matrix when the force generating strain is applied to the
(forth-order tensor of elasticity coefficients); and piezoelectric material. In the other words, it is the ratio
electrical quantities are {E} is the electric field; {D} is of charge density to applied mechanical strain:
the electric flux density vector; e is the piezoelectric
tensor; [ε] is the dielectric matrix at constant 1
mechanical strain, d is the piezoelectric strain constant ݀௜௝ ൌ ݇ ௜௝ ටߝ௜௜்‫ݏ‬௝௝ா
matrix.
Where, k ij is the electromechanical coupling factor. It is ͳ
‫ܪ‬ൌ න ൫ߪ௜௝் ܵ௜௝ െ ‫ܧ‬௜் ‫ܦ‬௜ ൯ ݀ 7
a material constant which shows effectiveness of ʹ ୚
energy conversion between mechanical and electrical
energy. There are three different factors depend on the Where, ߪ ் is the stress tensor; S is strain tensor; E is
actuation mode: the electrical field vector and D is the electric
displacement or induction vector. The total virtual work
1. Thickness mode k 33 W done by the external mechanical and electrical forces
2. In-plane mode k 31 =k 32 on the domain boundary ߲ߗ is:
3. Shear mode k 15 =k 24
Then dielectric matrix can be given by substituting ߜܹ ൌ න ܶ௜ ߜ‫ ݑ‬௜ ܸ݀ ൅ න ߷ߜ߶ ݀‫ݏ‬ 8

డ୚ డஐ
those electromechanical coupling factors which are:
Where Ti is the surface traction (=σij n i ); ߷ is the surface
் ா 2
݀ଷଵ ൌ ݇ ଷଵ ටߝଷଷ ‫ݏ‬ଵଵ electrical charge (=Di n i ) on the domain boundary ߲ȳ
and Φ is the electrical potential.
The linear piezoelectric enthalpy function is written as
[2]:
் ா 3
݀ଷଷ ൌ ݇ ଷଷ ටߝଷଷ‫ݏ‬ଷଷ
ͳ
‫ ܪ‬ሺܵ௞௟ ǡ ‫ܧ‬௜ ሻ ൌ ሼܵ௞௟ ሽ் ሾ ܿሿሼܵ௞௟ ሽ
ʹ
4 െ ሼܵ௞௟ ሽ் ሾ ݁ሿ ் ሼ‫ܧ‬௞ ሽ 9
் ா ͳ
݀ଵହ ൌ ݇ଵହ ටߝଵଵ ‫ݏ‬ହହ
െ ሼ‫ܧ‬௞௟ ሽ் ሾ ߝሿሼ‫ܧ‬௞௟ ሽ
ʹ
2.1 GOVERNING EQUATIONS AND FINITE Here, [c] is the elasticity coefficients matrix measured
ELEMENT FORMULATION at a constant electric field; [e] is the piezoelectric
constant matrix; [ε] is the dielectric constant matrix
Very often the solutions to these mathematical measured at a constant strain. It is assumed that
problems are complicated. The behaviours of the isothermal process, thermo-mechanical coupling and
system cannot be seen explicitly and directly from the pyroelectric effects are negligible.
solutions; and numerical calculations have to be made
for further examination of the system. The piezoelectric constitutive equations for the stress V
Hamilton’s principle is used for theoretical derivations and the electric displacement D are derived from the
of the piezoelectric material governing equations of
enthalpy function. These equations were standardized
motion [2]. in 1988 by IEEE association [17]. The linear
௧మ piezoelectric relation of a piezoelectric continuum at a
5 constant temperature and independent variable S and E
ߜ න ሺ‫ ܭ‬െ ‫ ܪ‬൅ ܹ ሻ݀‫ ݐ‬ൌ Ͳ is given as:
௧భ
൛ߪ௜௝ ൟ ൌ ൣܿ௜௝௞௟ ா ൧ሼܵ௞௟ ሽ െ ൣ݁௞௜௝ ൧ሼ‫ܧ‬௞ ሽ 10
Here, K is the kinetic energy and H is the total potential
energy. Kinetic energy and electric enthalpy function
are called Lagrangian work L. W is the virtual work; δ ሼ‫ܦ‬௜ ሽ ൌ ሾ ݁௜௞௟ ሿሼܵ௞௟ ሽ ൅ ሾ ߝ௜௞ ௌ ሿሼ‫ܧ‬௞ ሽ 11
denotes the variation; t2 and t1 are starting and finishing
time, respectively. The total kinetic energy K for The stress tensor ൛ɐ୧୨ ൟhas two effects, mechanical and
volume V of the piezoelectric material is [16]: electrical. The first equation above denotes the
converse piezoelectric effect and the second is the
ͳ direct piezoelectric effect. In the linear piezoelectric
‫ܭ‬ൌ න ‫ݑ‬ሶ ் ߩ‫ݑ‬ሶ ݀ 6
ʹ ୚ constitutive equations, electrical field vector E is
related to the electric potential field Φ given as:
Where, ‫ݑ‬ሶ is the velocity field vector and ߩ is the mass
density. The potential energy H includes mechanical ‫ܧ‬௞ ൌ െ߶ǡ௞ 12
strain and electrical potential energies. It is also called
the electric enthalpy: The strain tensor S kl is given as:
ͳ
୩୪ ൌ ൫୩ǡ୪ ൅ ୪ ǡ୩ ൯ 13
ʹ
௨
Ͳቃ ቄ‫ݑ‬ሷ ቅ ቂ‫ ܥ‬௎ Ͳ ቃ ቄ‫ݑ‬ሶ ቅ ൅ ൤ ‫ܭ‬ ‫ܭ‬௭ ‫ݑ‬
ቂ‫ܯ‬ ൅ ೅ ൨ቄ ቅ 18
An alternate formulation of the linear piezoelectric Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ ‫ܭ‬௭ ‫ܭ‬௏ ܸ
‫ܨ‬
constitutive equations can be obtained when different ൌ൜ ൠ
ܳ
independent variables, i.e. σ and E, are chosen such as:
୩୪ ൌ ୧୨୩୪ ୉ ߪ୧୨ ൅ ୩୧୨ ୩ 14 Here, [M] is the mass matrix; [Cu ] is the mechanical
damping matrix; [Ku ] is the mechanical stiffness ;{u} is
the displacement vector; {F} is the external force
୧ ൌ ୧୩୪ ߪ୧୨ ൅ ɂ୧୩ ୘ ୩ 15
vector. [KZ] is the piezoelectric coupling matrix which
contains piezoelectric constants in either [d] form
The virtual work W done by external mechanical and (strain/electric field) or [e] form (stress/electric field);
electrical loads is then given as [2]: [KV ] is the dielectric permittivity matrix; V is the
electric voltage vector; and {Q} is the externally
ߜܹ ൌ න ሼߜ‫ݑ‬ሽ ் ሼ‫ܨ‬௏ ሽܸ݀ ൅ න ሼߜ‫ݑ‬ሽ ் ሼ‫ܨ‬ஐ ሽ ȳ ൅ 16 applied charge vector.
௏ ஐ௦
ሼߜ‫ݑ‬ሽ ் ሼ‫ܨ‬௉ ሽ െ න ߜ߶߷݀ȳ െ ߜ߶ܳ 3. BOUNDARY CONDITION DEFINITION

ஐம
An America’s Cup Keel developed by Werner et al
Where,ሼ‫ܨ‬௏ ሽ, ሼ ‫ܨ‬ஐ ሽ and ሼ‫ܨ‬௉ ሽ are the body, surface and under the version 5 of the IACC rules is used for the
the point load vectors, respectively. ߶ is the electrical numerical study [12, 19]. Mylonas and Sayer presented
potential; ߷ is the surface charge density; Q is the total the forces acting on the keel model [20]. A good
charge on the surfaces. ߗ‫ ݏ‬is the external mechanical accuracy has been found between CFD results and the
loading surface, and ߗ߶ is the external electrical experimental results. Different keel bulb configurations
loading surface. were used such as with winglets in different location on
the bulb and no winglet in their study. In this study, no
By taking the constitutive equations into account and winglet configuration was chosen.
substituting the other parameters, Hamilton’s principle
Pressure fluctuations on the surface are due to the
yields the governing equations of motion in variational
form [18]: vortices being shed from the body. They may excite the
structure to vibrate and generate acoustic sound [21].
The frequency of excitation force is equal to the vortex
െ න ሾ ߩሾ ߜ‫ݑ‬ሶ ሿ ் ሾ ‫ݑ‬ሶ ሿ െ ሼߜܵሽ ் ሾ ܿ ா ሿሼܵሽ ൅ ሼߜܵሽ ் ሾ ݁ ா ሿ ் ሼ‫ ܧ‬ሽ 17 shedding frequency, which depends on the shape and
௏ size of the body, the velocity of the flow, the surface
൅ ሼߜ‫ ܧ‬ሽ் ሾ ܿ ா ሿሼܵሽ roughness and the turbulence of the flow.
൅ ሼߜ‫ ܧ‬ሽ் ሾ ߝ ௌ ሿሼ‫ ܧ‬ሽ The relation between vortex shedding frequency (fs )
൅ ሼߜ‫ݑ‬ሽ ் ሼ‫ܨ‬௏ ሽሿ ܸ݀ and flow speed (U) is identified by the Strouhal number
൅ න ሼߜ‫ ݑ‬ሽ ் ሼ‫ܨ‬ஐ ሽ ݀ȳ (St).
ஐ௦
൅ ሼߜ‫ݑ‬ሽ ் ሼ‫ܨ‬௉ ሽ ݂௦ ܿ
ܵ‫ ݐ‬ൌ 19
െ න ߜ߶߷݀ȳ െ ߜ߶ܳ ൌ Ͳ ܷ
ஐம
where c is a characteristic length.

The mechanical displacement ሾ ‫ݑ‬ሿ and electric potential
field ߶ are unknown functions. Hence, Finite element
The commercial CFD package STAR-CCM+ was used
method is used to calculate these variables. To defin e to calculate the pressure distribution on the structure. A
finite element formulation the displacement is related to spectral analysis was performed on the results to find
corresponding node values by the mean of the shape the vortex-shedding frequency. The frequency of
function. Similarly, the strain field and the electrical pressure fluctuations was found in the range of 32-40
field are related to nodal displacements and potential by Hz. The corresponding Strouhal Number is in the range
shape functions derivatives. of 0.18-0.20 (Figure 2). This result is reasonable when
compared with open literature [22, 23].
The elementary matrix form of governing equations can
be obtained by substituting the nodal values into the
above equations.
Figure 2 Sound Pressure Level derived from lifting force vs. Strouhal Number
Figure 3 Sound Pressure Level derived from lifting force vs. Frequency
4. ENERGY HARVESTING FROM FLOW-

INDUCED VIBRATION OF KEEL Although pressure that on the surface is imposing in
thickness direction of surfaces total force is bending the
The piezoelectric materials (PZT-5H plate element) are structure. The piezoelectric material data should be set
bounded on the port s ide and starboard side surfaces of up by respect to actuation mode. The elastic
the fin (Figure 4). The thickness h is 1 mm; the top and compliance matrix s; the piezoelectric constant d; and
the bottom surface dimensions are 80x80mm. It is the permittivity matrix ε are given for the PZT poled in
considered the PZT, poled in thickness direction (z or the Z (or x33 ) direction [24]:
x33 axis), is excited by harmonic pressure (p). The finite
element model is shown in Figure 4.The thickness of
the fin is very thin compared with the base structure.
Top and bottom surfaces are electrodes and are
connected by a simple electrical circuit.
‫ݏ‬ ‫ݏ‬ଵଶ ‫ݏ‬ଵଷ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ 4.2 MODAL ANALYSIS
‫ ۍ‬ଵଵ ‫ې‬
‫ݏ‬ ‫ݏ‬ଵଵ ‫ݏ‬ଷଵ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ
‫ ێ‬ଶଵ ‫ۑ‬
‫ݏ‬ ‫ݏ‬ଵଷ ‫ݏ‬ଷଷ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ‫ۑ‬ Maximum benefit of the piezoelectric material can be
ሾ ‫ݏ‬ሿ ൌ ‫ ێ‬ଵଷ
‫Ͳ ێ‬ Ͳ Ͳ ‫ݏ‬ସସ Ͳ Ͳ‫ۑ‬ obtained by installation at correct location with
‫Ͳ ێ‬ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ ‫ݏ‬ସସ Ͳ‫ۑ‬ maximum strain. Therefore, the deformation due to
‫Ͳ ۏ‬ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ ‫ے ଺଺ݏ‬ pressure fluctuations of the surface is investigated
before piezoelectric patch is added. It is expected to
Ͳ Ͳ ݀ ଷଵ achieve higher output voltage at the natural frequency
‫ۍ‬ ‫ې‬ of the structure.
Ͳ Ͳ ݀ ଷଵ
‫ێ‬ ‫ۑ‬
ሾ݀ሿ ൌ ‫Ͳ ێ‬
் Ͳ ݀ ଷଷ ‫ۑ‬
;
‫Ͳ ێ‬ ݀ ଵହ Ͳ ‫ۑ‬ A modal analysis was carried out to estimate the natural
‫ ݀ ێ‬ଵହ Ͳ Ͳ ‫ۑ‬ frequencies of the structure without and with
‫Ͳ ۏ‬ Ͳ Ͳ ‫ے‬ piezoelectric patch. Short circuit electrical boundary
conditions are added for PZT bounded structure. In
ߝଵଵ Ͳ Ͳ other words, top and bottom surfaces of piezoelectric
ሾ ߝሿ ൌ ൥ Ͳ ߝଵଵ Ͳ ൩ materials are grounded (V=0 Volt). The results are
Ͳ Ͳ ߝଷଷ given in Table 1.
Here; s 66 =2 (s 11 -s 12 ); and the superscript “T” is matrix

transpose.ߝ଴ is permittivity of free space. ߩ is the mass
density.
Figure 5 Finite element model of keel bulb bounded by

the piezoelectric patch
Figure 4 Physical model of the keel bulb bounded by

the piezoelectric patches Table 1 Comparison between the natural frequencies
for the keel Bulb vs. the keel Bulb bounded
4.1 STATIC ANALYSIS piezoelectric material
At the beginning, a static analysis is performed to Mode Frequency Frequency with PZT
determine the static capacitance Co . This value will be No (Hz) (Hz)
used to determinate the static impedance. Boundary
1 1.3897 1.5346
conditions are determined as the top electrodes of the
piezoelectric patch are applied 1V and bottom 2 2.4272 2.7031
electrodes are grounded (V=0 volt). 3 9.3596 9.4822
As motion is time-harmonic, output power depends on
the real part of impedance. The value is used to 4 16.917 16.752
calculate impedance Z: 5 36.571 35.79
ͳ 20 6 74.073 79.934
ܼൌ
߱‫ܥ‬௢ 7 80.299 82.15
Here, Z is the rotational frequency (1/sec). The mode shape gives preliminary idea about the
location that piezoelectric material should be laminated
The major surfaces of the piezoelectric patch are on the structure. The result in Table 1 shows the natural
electroded and a circuit with impedance Z (at time- frequency can be shifted when electrical load on the
harmonic motion) connects the electrodes. piezoelectric structure is controlled.
Figure 6 Mode Shapes of the keel bulb
4.3 HARMONIC ANALYSIS Mechanical input power (P1 ) can be calculated by using
velocity ‫ݑ‬ሶ 3 which is in the z (x33 ) axis and at the
A harmonic analysis was performed to find the charge surfaces:
on the electrodes of piezoelectric patch at a frequency
around the range of vortex shedding frequency. The ͳ
structure is excited by the flow and the response is in ܲଵ ൌ ‫ ݌‬ሺ‫ݑ‬ሶ ‫כ‬ଷ ൅ ‫ݑ‬ሶ ଷ ሻ ൌ ‫ ܴ݁݌‬ሼ‫ݑ‬ሶ ଷ ሽ 22
ʹ
the form of electrical output. It is expected to find
higher output at the natural frequency of the structure.
As motion is time-harmonic, output power depends on The asterisk represents a complex conjugate. The
the real part of impedance. efficiency of the piezoelectric harvester is the ratio of
output power and input power.
The average output electrical power per unit plate area
over a period is [25]: ܲଶ
ߟൌ 23
ܲଵ
ͳ
ܲଶ ൌ ȁ ‫ܫ‬ҧȁଶ ܴ݁ ሼܼሽ 21
ʹ
The efficiency of the system at different frequency is
shown in Figure 8. The efficiency is proportional to
The result of output voltage is given in Figure 7. excitation frequency. An abnormal behaviour is
Although dominant frequency due to the vortex observed in the plot. It might be due to static definition
shedding is around 35 Hz, it is clear that the material of impedance in a dynamic problem.
develop higher voltage at structure’s natural
frequencies.
Figure 7 Output voltage versus frequency
Figure 8 Efficiency of generating power
5. CONCLUSIONS Piezoelectric effect occurs under stress and the

direction of the stress. Flow pressure generates load in
The present study proposed a new concept into the the thickness direction, however total pressure deforms
sailing and marine industry to save energy by the structure. The type of forces on the piezoelectric
harvesting unused (waste) vibration energy due to the patch is important for correct selection of piezoelectric
flow around the structure. It can be also called a material. If the dominant forces are imposed in the
technology transfer as this concept has been thickness direction then piezoelectric patch operates
successfully applied for aerospace structures. with thickness-stretch mode and the corresponding
piezoelectric constant d ij is the important property.
A piezoelectric patch was installed on the keel of a Flow causes bending motions on the structure so
yacht. A CFD analysis was carried out to find the piezoelectric material operates with thickness -shear
excitation force and the predominant frequency. Next, a modes. In this case the parameter d 31 plays the
finite element study was performed to investigate the significant role and must be considered.
response of the structure and the generated electricity
by piezoelectric patch. It is also interesting to investigate this concept study
applied to a mast and rigging structure (due to the bluff
It was observed that the output power is dependent on body nature of the mast), and even on sails in certain
real part of impedance which is resistance of sailing conditions as it is expected the influence of the
piezoelectric material. It is expected that piezoelectric flow-induced vortex vibration to be more significant.
system is more efficient at higher frequencies.
Future work will follow and will consist of switching on voltage sources based on LMS
experimentally investigating the piezoelectric effect of algorithm’. Journal of Intelligent Material
PZT bonded on a fin (Figure 9) or flat plate in a towing Systems and Structures, 20(8): p. 939-947,
tank, with measurements of vibration, damping and 2009.
electrical output, seconded by further numerical 7. RAKBAMRUNG, P., et al., ‘Performance
validation at full scale. A closed electric circuit will be comparison of PZT and PMN–PT
attached to piezoelectric patch (called piezoelectric piezoceramics for vibration energy harvesting
shunt damping system) in order to reduce vibration. using standard or nonlinear approach’. Sensors
and Actuators A: Physical, 163(2): p. 493-500,
2010.
8. BADEL, A., et al., ‘Piezoelectric vibration
control by synchronized switching on adaptive
voltage sources: Towards wideband semi-
active damping’. The Journal of the Acoustical
Society of America, 119: p. 2815, 2006.
9. SCHMIT, L.A. and FARSHI, B., ‘Optimum
laminate design for strength and stiffness ’.
Figure 9 A piezoelectric patch on a test fin International Journal for Numerical Methods
in Engineering, 7(4): p. 519-536, 1973.
10. HWANG, W.-S. and PARK, H.C., ‘Finite
element modeling of piezoelectric sensors and
6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
actuators’. AIAA journal, 31(5): p. 930-937,
1993.
The authors would like to thank Prof. O. Turan for 11. KUMAR, N. and SINGH, S.P., ‘Vibration
bringing the idea and opportunity to study this topic,
control of curved panel using smart damping’.
and Prof. S. Day for giving access to test facilities and Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing,
equipment. The authors also acknowledge the 30: p. 232-247, 2012.
experience and discussion shared with Mr. P. Zoet, 12. WERNER, S., ‘Computational hydrodynamics
CEO of PZDynamics. Finally, the authors are grateful applied to an America's Cup class keel-best
to the faculty of engineering of Strathclyde University practice and validation of methods ’. Chalmers
for providing access to HPC facilities. University of Technology, 2006.
13. SHIMADA, A., et al., ‘Damage Detection for
7. REFERENCES International America's Cup Class Yachts
Using a Fiber Optic Distributed Strain
Sensor’. IEICE transactions on electronics,
1. IKEDA, T., ‘Fundamentals of 86(2): p. 218-223, 2003.
piezoelectricity’. Oxford ; New York : Oxford 14. SHENOI, A., WADDAMS, A., and SINHA,
University Press, 1996. A., ‘Smart Materials in the Marine
2. TZOU, H.S., ‘Piezoelectric shells- Distributed Environment – a State of the Art Review’,
sensing and control of continua’. Dordrecht, A.W. Ajit Shenoi, Ashutosh Sinha, Editor,
Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers Materials Knowledge Transfer Network
(Solid Mechanics and Its Applications) 19, (KTN), 2009.
1993. 15. HEYWANG, W., LUBITZ, K., and
3. JIASHI, Y., HONGGANG, Z., and WERSING, W., ‘Piezoelectricity: Evolution
YUAMTAI, H., ‘Performance of a and Future of a Technology’. Vol. 114,
Piezoelectric Harvester in Thickness --stretch Springer Verlag, 2008.
Mode of a Plate’. IEEE Transactions on 16. TZOU, H. and TSENG, C., ‘Distributed
Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency vibration control and identification of coupled
Control, 52(10): p. 1872-1876, 2005. elastic/piezoelectric systems: finite element
4. KONG, N., et al., ‘Resistive impedance formulation and applications ’. Mechanical
matching circuit for piezoelectric energy Systems and Signal Processing, 5(3): p. 215-
harvesting’. Journal of Intelligent Material 231, 1991.
Systems and Structures, 21(13): p. 1293-1302, 17. MEITZLER, A., et al., ‘IEEE standard on
2010. piezoelectricity’. IEEE, New York, 1988.
5. BADEL, A., et al., ‘Single crystals and 18. PIEFORT, V., ‘Finite element modelling of
nonlinear process for outstanding vibration- piezoelectric active structures ’, Université
powered electrical generators ’. IEEE Libre de Bruxelles, 2001.
transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and 19. WERNER, S., et al., ‘Computational fluid
frequency control, 53(4): p. 673-684, 2006. dynamics validation for a fin/bulb/winglet keel
6. JI, H., et al., ‘Semi-active vibration control of
a composite beam by adaptive synchronized
configuration’. Journal of Ship Research,
51(4): p. 343-356, 2007.
20. MYLONAS, D. and SAYER, P., ‘The
hydrodynamic flow around a yacht keel based
on LES and DES’. Ocean Engineering, 46(0):
p. 18-32, 2012.
21. BLEVINS, R.D., ‘Flow-induced vibration’.
Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., Inc, New York,
1990.
22. KRYLOV, V.V. and PORTEOUS, E. , ‘Wave-
like aquatic propulsion of mono-hull marine
vessels’. Ocean Engineering, 37(4): p. 378-
386, 2010.
23. TAYLOR, G.K., NUDDS, R.L., and
THOMAS, A.L.R., ‘Flying and swimming
animals cruise at a Strouhal number tuned for
high power efficiency’. Nature, 425(6959): p.
707-711, 2003.
24. XIE, J., et al., ‘A piezoelectric energy
harvester based on flow-induced flexural
vibration of a circular cylinder’. Journal of
Intelligent Material Systems and Structures,
23(2): p. 135-139, 2012.
25. YANG, J., ‘Analysis of piezoelectric devices ’.
World Scientific, 2006.
AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
S. Turkmen is a PhD student in the Department of

Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, University
of Strathclyde, Glasgow. He has been researching on
the topic of smart material application to mitigate noise
and vibration in ships. He is also investigating
underwater-radiated noise due to the cavitating
propellers.
D. Mylonas has recently completed his PhD in the

Department of Naval Architecture and Marine
Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow. His
research topic focused on the application of LES and
DES in yacht hydrodynamics. He also holds an M.Eng
from the same department. Other interests include ship
& marine hydrodynamics, smart materials, yacht design
and CFD simulations on marine and aerodynamic
applications.
M. Khorasanchi is a research fellow in the Department

of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering,
University of Strathclyde, Glasgow. Dr Khorasanchi
has carried out several studies on vortex-induced-
vibration (VIV) of marine risers and VIV suppression
devices. His current teaching and research interests
centre on hydrodynamics and marine propulsion. He
investigates the hydrodynamic performance of marine
vessels through full-scale CFD simulation. He also
works on retrofitting technologies to improve the
performance of marine vessels and reduce the fuel
consumption and carbon emission of shipping industry.
LONG TERM IMMERSION IN NATURAL SEAWATER OF

FLAX/BIOCOMPOSITE
A. Le Duigou, A. Bourmaud and C. Baley LIMATB- University of South Brittany, Lorient-France, Antoine.le-
duigou@univ-ubs.fr; Alain.bourmaud@univ-ubs.fr; Christophe.baley@univ-ubs.fr
P. Davies IFREMER- Material & Structure group, Plouzané-France, peter.davies@ifremer.fr
The present article gives information on 2 years seawater aging effect on injected flax/PLA biocomposite. Biocomposite
suffer from relatively high moisture absorption which is controlled by vegetal fibre. Simple rule of mixture allows for
flax fibre the determination of a weight gain at saturation around 12% which is close to already published values.
Bundles of fibres and especially middle lamellae influence water uptake. Water alters biocomposites, and flax fibres
since their mechanical properties are reduced (Young modulus and tensile strength) with aging. Linear relationship is
observed between water uptake and loss of mechanical properties. Load-unload cycles highlight damage occuring earlier
as biocomposite undergo aging. These damages can be induced by fibre degradation and washing out of soluble
components especially the fibre bundles cement, by debonding of fibre bundles linked to their swelling.
LIST OF SYMBOLS : degradation is coupled with humidity, temperature and

biological degradation [10]. Basically two kind of
ΔW : Water uptake at saturation degradation appears during immersion in aqueous media
D : Fickian diffusion coefficient : Physical degradation with plasticizing effect and
Dc : Fickian corrected diffusion coefficient swelling and chemical degradation induced by matrix
EfL : Longitudinal fibre Young modulus hydrolysis and fibre degradation [10, 11]. These
EfT : Transverse fibre Young modulus mechanism for natural fibre composites are deeply
EF : Longitudinal composite Young modulus reviewed in work of Azwa et al. [12].
ET: Transverse composite Young modulus It is now established that vegetal fibres have affinity with
water molecules due to their chemical composition
(hemicellulose) and their porous structure [13]. In
1 INTRODUCTION addition to conventional diffusion mechanism through
the matrix, water can diffuse along the fibre/matrix
Plant fibre reinforced composite materials are interface thanks to capillary mechanism and through the
increasingly being studied last years. Indeed fibre [14, 15].
environmental concerns dealing with composite materials Water will be able to establish intermolecular
are clearly identified and appears at each step of their life interactions (hydrogen) with fibre surface reducing
cycle. practical adhesion between fibre and matrix [15]. Water
Development of marine industry and yachting have sorption generally may provoke swelling of fibre
accompanied with wide spread of composite material especially when free volume is available [16]. Many
such as Glass/polyester and nowadays authors claim that differential swelling between fibre and
Glass/Polypropylene composites. Biocomposites (plant matrix generate high level of swelling stress involving
fibre embedded in biopolymer matrix) possess large cracking and delaminating [12, 17]. However no
number of advantages to substitute convention information is available in the literature for flax or hemp
composites materials. First, they come from renewable swelling under constraint which require care for
ressources, have high specific mechanical properties [1- interpretation.
5] to be used for marine application (pulleys… ). Then Then, some components located on fibre surface are
they make possible waste management by recycling [6] washed out of the sample which lead to interfacial
or composting [7]. Overall, biocomposites (natural fibre debonding and interfacial area altering [15, 17, 18].
embedded in biopolymer matrix) such as Some authors [19] claim that enzymatic degradation
Flax/Polylactide use induces environmental footprint occur for long term immersion even if no specific study
reduction compared to Glass/Polyester [8]. have carried out.
However Le Duigou et al. [9] have highlighted that All these phenomena induce a loss of the mechanical
lifetime span of Flax/PLA biocomposites has an properties and by consequence a reduction
influence on environmental impact. The more the of the lifetime span of vegetal fibre reinforced
lifetime is close to usetime, the more the impact is composites. L ife expectancy is most of time
reduced. Therefore increasing use of biocomposite for evaluated by accelerated aging tests as performed on
outdoor applications depends in how the degradation Hemp/PLA [20], on Flax/epoxy [21] and flax/PLA [22].
mechanism is understood and handled. Marine Although these experiments permit time saving,
environment is known to be aggressive as UV rays comparison with natural aging is necessary
The present article proposes to study the effect 2 years where ș is the slope of the linear part of the plot of
natural seawater aging on Flax/PLA biocomposites. weight gain versus square root of immersion time
Weight gain measurements are performed associated divided by sample thickness. However, a correction
with static mechanical characterization and SEM factor is needed to account for the finite width w and
observation. Inverse estimation of fibre properties will be length h of the sample compared to its thickness, Eq.(3):
possible by using micromechanical modeling.
Then, cyclic tensile tests are conducted in order to § d d·
2
(3)
identify damage parameter d and its growing kinetic due Dc = D¨1 + + ¸
© h w¹
to aging [23]. Mechanical characterization will be done
on wet and dried samples to separate reversible from where Dc is the corrected diffusion coefficient. The use
irreversible damage. of a Fickian diffusion model to describe diffusion in a
heterophasic medium such as a biocomposite with very
substantial differences in D for the two phases is
2 MATERIALS AND METHODS questionable, and the water profiles within the composite
are clearly very complex.
2.1 Materials Biological activity (algae, microorganisms…) appearing
on the sample surface (Figure 1) is systematically
Flax fibres, harvested in France have been dew retted removed and water desionised rinsed before weighting.
before being scutched. No chemical treatment has been
added. Poly(L-lactide) (PLLA) supplied by Biomer® is
used as matrix. Initial molecular weight is 220 000g/mol.

Mechanical, thermal properties and ageing behaviour
have been studied previously [24].

2.2 Biocomposite manufacturing

Flax fibres have been cut (2 mm) before being blended
with polymer during extrusion step. Fibre weight content
is around 20% which corresponds to 16% by volume.
PLLA pellets were dried under vacuum at 60 °C for 48 h
prior to extrusion. They were then extruded with flax
fibres 20% in weight. Compounding was achieved in a
single screw extruder at 20 rpm and with the following
Figure 1 Biological development on the surface of Flax/PLA
temperature profile: 175/180/185 and 185 °C in the
nozzle. Compounded pellets were also dried under biocomposite
vacuum at 60 °C for 48 h. Injection moulding was then

carried out on a Battenfeld 210/80 machine. Temperature To get additional gravimetric data, samples are placed in
profile was kept as follows: 165/170/175/180 and 180 °C a 20L metallic bucket where seawater is renewed each
in the nozzle. Materials were injected in a mould week. Good correlation is observed between both set of
designed to produce normalized specimens. The mould samples.
temperature was maintained at 50 °C.
2.4 –Cyclic tensile behaviour : Damage analysis
2.3 Aging conditions
Injected Flax/PLA biocomposites have anisotropic
Samples are 5 m depth immersed in natural seawater reinforcement which can be considered as random in-
during 2 years in Kernevel harbor (Lorient-France) plane dispersed. Analysis of stress-strain tensile curves
where water temperature typically varies from 8 to 19°C. allows rough evaluation of damage threshold (loss of
Samples are periodically removed to be weighted and linearity) corresponding to crack initiation. In the area
characterized. Weight gain is determined as a percentage where reinforcement are transversally oriented compared
of initial weight using equation 1 : to load direction [25]. To perform accurate evaluation of
damage threshold as well as damage kinetic, load-unload
Wt - W0 cycles are applied to our samples. First loading cycle
ΔW = x100 (1)
W0
represent 5% of maximal load observed for static
characterization. Following cycle increase by steps of
The Fickian diffusion coefficient D is determined from 100N (Figure 1A).
Eq. (2) in the range where the values of ǻW(%) are less
than 60% of the equilibrium value ǻW():
2
§ dθ · (2)
D = π ¨¨ ¸¸
© 4ΔW (∞) ¹
60 2.0
B
A
50
1.5 after 2 months, of 3.3% and 1.3 10-4 mm²/s, respectively.

40
These values are higher than those obtained on infused
Stress (MPa)
Strain (%)
30
20
1.0
polyester/glass composites [27] immersed in filtered
seawater at 4 and 20°C, but strongly lower than those
10
0.5
obtained on unprotected wood (around 20%) [28].

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
0.0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
By knowing the incorporated fibre weight into the
Time (second) Time (s) biocomposite, as well as the matrix and biocomposite
weight uptake, it is possible to estimate the fibre weight
Figure 2 A- Example of load-unload cycles- B Example strain
evolution as a function of load-unload cycles uptake and diffusion coefficient, thanks to an additivity
rule. For that, we suppose that the composite porosity
rate is negligible.
The purpose of this characterization method is to
evaluate residual strain due to load-unload cycles and ΔW composite = Δw fibre x fibre content
damage appearance (Figure 1B). Similarly, Davies et al. + Δw matrix x (1- fibre content) (4)
[23] have used for glass/polyester seawater aging a
damage criterion d = 1-E/E0 corresponding the evolution Where ΔW is the water uptake.
of Young modulus as a function of load-unload cycles.
This approach will be applied to follow damage kinetic Dc biocomposite = Dc fibre x fibre content
of seawater aging of Flax/PLA biocomposites. + Dc x (1- fibre content) (5)

2-5 Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) Where Dc is the corrected diffusion coefficient. The
saturation water uptake and coefficient of diffusion
The fracture surfaces were analyzed by scanning electron values, for the matrix, the biocomposite and the flax
microscopy (SEM). The samples were sputter-coated fibres are resumed in Table 1.
with a thin layer of gold in an Edwards Sputter Coater,
and observed with a Jeol JSM 6460LV scanning electron
ΔW () D
microscope. Dc (mm2/s)
(%) (mm²/s)
PLA 0.76 9.7 10-7 2.0 10-6
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Biocomposite 3 6.3 10-5 1.3 10-4
Fibre (estimated) 12 3.1 10-4 6.4 10-4
3.1 Water uptake

Figure 3 shows the water uptake of the pure and 20%-wt Table 1. Equilibrium water uptake, apparent diffusion coefficients D
and corrected coefficients Dc.
flax fibre reinforced PLA. The diffusive behaviour is
close to a Fickian one with a water uptake at saturation
after an immersion time around one month and half. In this case, the saturation weight value is around 12%
for the flax fibre which is clearly superior to the
biocomposite or matrix ones. These values are close to
20 those obtained by Dynamic Vapour Sorption (DVS) [13,
PLA
29] or gravimetric methods [30]. This important weight
Biocomposite
Fibre (estimated)
uptake could be explained by the chemical constitution
15
and the surface properties of flax fibre. Indeed, the flax
Water uptake (%)
fibre exhibit a complex multilayer structure [31] as

10 evidenced on Figure 4.
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Time 1/2 (Hours)
Figure 3. Water uptake behaviour of pure PLA, biocomposite and fibre

(estimated)
The PLA weight uptake is quite low (0.77%) when its

coefficient is 2.0 10-6 mm²/s. Nevertheless, these results
are well correlated with the literature ones [26].The
incorporation of flax fibres into the PLA matrix leads Figure 4. SEM micrograph of two elementary flax fibres
clearly to an increase into the water uptake and the water
diffusion coefficient Dc; they reach some plateau values,
60
The fibre surface could be assimilated to the external
layer constituted by the primary cell wall. This first layer
is around 200 nm thick and its main function is to be
50
A
flexible enough to enable the fibre growing [32]. The 40
Stress (MPa)
main components of this primary wall are pectins 30
(rhamnogalacturonan I, homogalacturonan, arabinan 0
[33]), hemicelluloses (xyloglucans), low crystalline 20 15
30
cellulose [34] and waxes [32]. The hydrophilic character 60
180
10
of this wall is due to the hydroxyl groups of these various 710
components [35]. In this way, the methylesterification 0
degree of the pectins, the chains size and the 0 1 2 3 4
Strain (%)
hemicelluloses polymerization rate, as well as the
cellulose crystallinity rate, influence the water 60
accessibility [34, 36, 37].

Some authors [13, 29] underline the influence of micro 50
B
capillarities or lumen into the water diffusion and
40
particularly when the residual water rate is high. Thus,
Stress (MPa)
the water uptake by sorption could be done also by the 30
amorphous polysaccharides accessible hydroxyl groups

20 0
located inside the walls. Moreover, this water could be 15
30
take place into the lumen. 10
60
180
The estimation of the fibre diffusion coefficient from 710
those of the matrix and the composite enables to obtain a 0

0 1 2 3 4
coefficient around 6.4 10-4 mm²/s. This value is higher Strain (%)
than those obtained by DVS by Gouanvé et al. [38] (0.65
10-6 mm²/s at 25°C). This result shows that the diffusion Figure 5. Stress-strain curve for biocomposite as a function of
immersion time- A Wet state, B Dry state
mechanisms inside the plant fibres composites are
complex and could be governed by capillary progression
phenomenons located at the fibre-matrix interfaces [15]
or by capillarity inside the lumen. Indeed, the In the order to visualize this linearity loss, the Young(s
incorporation of rather hydrophilic vegetal fibres into a modulus is drawn according to different deformation
quite hydrophobic matrix [39] could induce an original ranges for each immersion time (Figure 6). Figure 6
water diffusion mechanism. Wang et al. [14] announced shows a decrease into the composites stiffness after a
the notion of percolation phenomenon linked to the 0.1% deformation, corresponding to the first
vegetal fibre loading. In this case, the plant fibres play biocomposites damages.
the rule of bridge, making the water diffusion easier.
7000
3.2 Mechanical properties and tensile behaviour after 6000

A
immersion
Young modulus (MPa)
0
5000 15
Figure 5 shows the evolution of the tensile mechanical 30
60
behavior of the wet (A) and dried (B) composites as a 4000
180
710
function of the immersion time.

We can notice an initial brittle behaviour which becomes 3000
more and more ductile with the immersion time; the
elastic-linear area, where the damages are irreversible, 2000
reduces as a function of the water ageing. The dissipated 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35
Strain (%)
energy until the breakage, obtained from the under curve
area, increases with the water uptake. The Young’s 8000 8000
modulus is calculated from the linear part of the stress-

strain curve. This stiffness is generally evaluated from 6000 6000
Y o u n g m o d u lu s (M P a )
Y o u n g m o d u lu s (M P a )
the tangent method between 0.05 and 0.25% [40]. Some

authors, on UD composites, calculate the stiffness 4000 4000
between 0,025 and 0.1% [41] or 0.05 and 0.1% [42]. 0

30
0
15
2000 15 2000 30
60
B 180
710 C
60
180
710
0 0
0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10 0.11
strain (%) Strain (%)
Figure 6. Young modulus vs strain curve for different strain boundary:

0.05-0.25% (A); 0.025-0.1 % (B) and 0.05-0.1 (C).
The rigidity calculation can’t be done on this entire strength at break decrease of 20% on glass/polyester
range. Between 0.025 and 0.1%, the Young’s modulus composites [44].
seems to increase on most of the immersed samples and
especially until 0.5%. This phenomenon could be due to
Immersion time
the fibre stiffness increase as evidenced by Placet et al.
[43] or to a water desorption during the tensile 0 15 30 60 180 710
experiment. A plateau could be observed between 0.05

Wet Young
and 0.1%. The Young’s modulus will be determined in modulus
6395 5438 4977 4397 4102 4003
± 515 ± 648 ± 278 ± 370 ± 239 ± 189
this area. (MPa)
The drying of the specimen shows the reversible way of
the water ageing (plasticization) as shown on Figure 5.B. Dried
Young 6395 7263 6075 6300 5201 5015
We can notice a partial reversibility of the mechanical modulus ± 515 ± 386 ± 347 ± 603 ± 241 ± 213
behaviour especially high as the immersion time is short. (MPa)
This reversibility indicates that matrix, composite and
fibre plasticization phenomena occur during the water Wet tensile
55± 43 ± 38.4 ± 34 ± 32.2 ± 32.4 ±
strength
immersion. Nevertheless, from an immersion time of 15 (MPa)
1.4 0.4 1.1 1.8 3.6 2.1
days, the dried specimens have a different behaviour of
the native ones, showing irreversible damaging Dried
mechanisms. They exhibit a more tenacious behaviour, tensile 55± 51.4 ± 44.2 ± 43.3 ± 40.9 ± 37.3 ±
strength 1.4 1 1 1.3 1.8 2.1
gradually confirmed with the immersion time and the (MPa)
water uptake are increasing.
Figure 7 shows the properties variation (stiffness and Table 2. Mechanical properties of the wet and dried composites
strength at break) according to the immersion time for
dried and wet specimens. The properties values are
indicated in Table 2. Figure 8 shows the evolution of the mechanical
properties change according to the weight uptake. The
120
obtained values are compared with those of PLA/flax
Wet Modulus
Dried Modulus 30%-wt immersed in filtered sea water at 20°C and 40°C
Wet stength
100
Dried strength [22].
% property retention
80 100
Modulus
Strength
60 80 Modulus BC-30%
Strength BC 30%
Property retention (%)
40 60
20 40
0 200 400 600 800
Time (days)
20
Figure 7. % property change as a function of immersion time- Wet

modulus (black symbol); wet strength (red symbol; dried modulus 0
(empty black symbol); dried strength (empty red symbol). 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Water uptake (%)
Figure 8. Property change (Young modulus and strength) as a function

We can notice a drastic decrease of the Young’s modulus of water uptake.
and the strength at break (-40%) followed by a
stabilization around 200 immersion days corresponding
The evolution of the Young’s modulus and the strength
to the biocomposites saturation time observed by using
at break in natural environment for the 20%-wt
gravimetric method (Figure 3). After stabilization, the
composite exhibits the same trend than those of the 30%-
Young’s modulus and the strength at break are 4000 MPa
wt immersed biocomposite; nevertheless, the ageing of
and 32 MPa, respectively (Table 2).
the 30%-wt seems to be reduced. The fibre loading
The PLA/flax 30%-wt samples, immersed during 18
increases the water uptake of the biocomposite and in the
months in filtered natural water exhibit a similar stiffness
same time, we can notice that the mechanical properties
but a lower tensile strength (around 20 MPa). By
decrease as a function of the water uptake is more
comparison, some polyester/glass composites, immersed
pronounced for the 20%-wt composites.
during 2 years in natural marine environment, exhibit a
The specimens drying highlight the ageing reversibility;
tensile stiffness and strength at break flexure decrease of
thus, for immersion time lower than 60 days, the stiffness
around 10% and 20%, respectively [10]. An exposition at
degradation is reversible. The strength at break is more
the marine air at 20°C during 30 years induces a flexure
sensible to irreversible degradations seeing that from 15
days, the properties degradation is not reversible (Figure longitudinal moduli with the biocomposites immersion
6). Indeed, the composite stiffness is strongly linked to time.
the components properties and therefore, to their
evolution in the case of ageing process; moreover, the 70000
Wet Longitudinal modulus

Young’s modulus is obtained at the beginning of the 60000 Wet Transverse modulus
Dried Longitudinal modulus
solicitation where the damages are lower. The strength at Dried Transverse modulus
50000
break also depends of the breakage properties of each
Modulus (MPa)
component and especially of the interactions between 40000
each other, of the reinforcement’s dispersion and also of 30000
the damages accumulation induced by the ageing.

20000
10000
3.3 Estimation of the fibre properties evolution into the 0

0 200 400 600 800
composite
Time (Days)
Figure 9. Evolution of the fibre longitudinal and transverse moduli
It is possible to estimate the biocomposite Young’s estimated by using the Halpin Tsai equations.
modulus from the components properties and the
reinforcement morphology by using an analytical model
as described by Halpin-Tsai [6]. The following data have The Halpin-Tsai simulations indicate an important
been used to estimate the composite stiffness : EfL = 53.8 decrease of the longitudinal and transverse fibre
± 14.3 GPa [45] and EfT = 7 ± 2 GPa [46], the anisotropy properties with the immersion time and stabilization
ratio is 0.13. The longitudinal modulus EL and the around 200 days. After drying, the biocomposite recover
transverse modulus ET for a ply reinforced by short its initial properties until around 90 days, showing a
unidirectional fibres is given by equations (6) and (7): plasticizing effect of the cell walls. The phenomenon has
been previously showed on wood fibres mixed with a
M 1+ ȟ ⋅ Ș⋅ V (6) PLA matrix [48]. This tendency could explain the
= f
M 1− Ș⋅V mechanical results obtained on immersed specimens.
m f The definitive loss of the properties is certainly due to
M the washing of soluble components ensuring the
f (7)
−1 mechanical integrity of the fibres. Some authors
M
η= n evidenced a slight decrease of the flax fibre Young’s
M
f modulus with the relative humidity (between 30 and 70%
+ξ
M RH) representing 0.39 GPa/% RH [37]. These
m
observations are moderated by other results; for example,
where M=EL or ET, Mf = Efl or Eft and m, f and l
Placet et al. [29, 43] showed an improvement of the
correspond to matrix, fibre, longitudinal and transversal.
hemp fibre Young’s modulus between 10% and 80% of
Vf is the fibre volume fraction and ξ the form factor. For humidity due to a realignment of the cellulose micro
the longitudinal modulus, ξ = 2 L/d where L/d is the fibre fibrils with the solicitation axis. The tensile properties
aspect ratio. For the transverse modulus Et, satisfactory seem to present an optimal value around a humidity rate
results have been obtained with ξ = 2 [47]. The modulus of 70%.
of a ply reinforced by randomly dispersed fibres is given In our case, the immersion time play a major rule on the
by the following expression [47]: fibre ageing due to its action into the washing and the
degradation phenomena induced by micro organisms
3 5 (8) [29].
Emat = E L + E T
8 8
where EL is the longitudinal modulus and ET the 3.3 Evolution of the biocomposite damage process
transverse modulus of the unidirectional ply.
The estimated stiffness of the biocomposite is 6105 MPa Figure 10.A shows the evolution of the cycling
against 6395 ± 175 MPa which could be considered as a biocomposite behaviour before and after a 710 days
correct estimation with an error around 5%. From the marine environment immersion. From the curves and
evolution of the biocomposite Young’s modulus with the imposed cycles, it is possible to draw the evolution of a
immersion time, it is possible to estimate the evolution of damage criterion d as a function of the immersion time
the transverse and longitudinal flax fibre moduli. (Figure 10.B).
The evolution of the PLA Young modulus is assumed to The damage criterion increase more and more with the
be negligible after immersion [24] as well as the deformation and the immersion time. We observe an
anisotropy ratio. Moreover, the fibre matrix adherence is increase of the damage criterion from a 0.3%
supposed to be constant during the immersion time. deformation for the 60 days immersed samples against
Figure 9 shows the evolution of the fibre transverse and 0.6% for the virgin biocomposites. For the 180 to 710
days immersed samples, the d increase appears at the
very low deformations evidencing an early damage present between the matrix and the transverse orientated
threshold. fibre bundles (y-x plane). These fibres bundles could be
considered as favoured breakage areas due to the
heterogeneity of the surrounding stress [46].
60
Finally, some flow oriented fibres breakages could be
50 noticed with low debonding length, evidencing important
A interface interactions between the flax and the PLA
40
matrix [49]. Moreover, cohesive breakages could be
Stress (MPa)
30
observed (red arrow on the right).
After an immersion of 2 years, the breakage behaviour of
20 the matrix changes. In addition to the fibres plasticizing,
0 the PLA breakage becomes ductile as highlighted by
10 710
Figure 12.A. these phenomena could explain the
0 mechanical behaviour of the immersed biocomposites
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
Strain (%)
(Figure 5.A). After ageing, some fibres breakages are
still present with important debonding lengths, compared
0.5 to non-immersed samples. Nevertheless, as shown on
0 Figure 12.A, some fibre breakages with low debonding
15
0.4 30 (red arrows) could be identified, showing the efficiency
60
180
710
of the interfacial stress transfer; moreover, fibre peeling
0.3 are remaining (Figure 12.B). The presence of water
B induces a fibre bundles division (Figure 12.C), inducing
d
0.2 a decrease of the stress transfer and then an early damage

of the biocomposite as shown on Figure 10.B. Indeed,
0.1
Bourmaud et al. [50] shown that a 72h soft water
treatment could facilitate the elementary flax fibre
0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 extraction by degrading the middle lamella pectins.
strain(%) According to Figure 3, the water uptake of the flax fibre
after immersion is around 12%; this phenomenon should
Figure 10. Cycling behavior of virgin and 710 days immersed
specimens (A) and evolution of the damage criterion as a function of conduce to a swelling of the cell walls. The flax fibre
the deformation for several immersion times (B). swelling is isotropic with an axial and transverse
component around 0.05% and 20-25%, respectively [51].
Little information is available on the bundle structure
Next, the damage criterion d increases more quickly on influence and on the rule of the matrix on the fibre
the low immersed samples evidencing a most important properties (residual stresses).
damage kinetic. When the strain increases, a linearity
loss between d and the strain appears, probably due to the
desorption phenomenon, especially for long immersion
times (between 180 and 710 days).
On this kind of specimens with randomly dispersed
fibres, the first irreversible damages occur in the
transverse solicited areas. Figure 11 shows SEM images
of the fracture surface of non-immersed biocomposites.
z z
y y
x x

Figure 12. SEM micrographs of the 710 days immersed biocomposites
fractures.
Figure 11. SEM micrographs of virgin biocomposites
From literature papers summarized by Azwa et al. [12],
The non-immersed biocomposites exhibit complex the fibre swelling induces cracking and overstress in the
damages after tensile test. First, we notice a brittle break surrounding matrix. Nevertheless, the SEM observation
of the matrix well correlated with the Figure 5 on elementary fibres doesn’t enable to clearly identify
observations. Then, the interfacial breaks (red arrow) are these kinds of damages. In the same way as for wood
[52], the flax fibre under stress swelling could induce a 4. Plackett, D., L. AT., B. PW., and L. Nielsen,
stress swelling reduction due to a relaxation Biodegradable composites based on polylactide
phenomenon. Some holes are mainly observed around and jute fibres. Composites Science and
the fibre bundles, explaining the non reversibility of the Technology, 2003. 63(9): p. 1287-1296.
damages. As underlined by Almgrem et al. [53], the 5. Roussière, F., C. Baley, G. Godart, and D. Burr,
plant fibre composites swelling is depending of the Compressive and Tensile Behaviours of PLLA
consolidation and of the available free volume fraction. Matrix Composites Reinforced with Randomly
Thus, the lack of cohesion and the swelling should be Dispersed Flax Fibres. Applied composite
favoured by the presence of fibre bundles (Figure 12.D). Material, 2011: p. 1-18.
Moreover, the surface components dissolution could
influence the interfacial decohesions.
6. Le Duigou, A., I. Pillin, A. Bourmaud, P.
Davies, and C. Baley, Effect of recycling on
mechanical behaviour of biocompostable
flax/poly(l-lactide) composites. Composite Part
4 CONCLUSION A, 2008. 39(9): p. 1471-1478.
7. Kumar, R., M.K. Yakubu, and R.D.
The present article has given information on 2 years
Anandjiwala, Biodegradation of flax fiber
seawater aging effect on injected flax/PLA biocomposite.
reinforced poly lactic acid. eXPRESS Polymer
Biocomposite suffer from relatively high moisture
Letters, 2010. 4(7): p. 423–430.
absorption which is controlled by vegetal fibre.
Simple rule of mixture allows for flax fibre the 8. Le Duigou, A., P. Davies , and C. Baley,
determination of a weight gain at saturation around 12% Environmental impact analysis of the
which is close to already published values.. Bundles of production of flax fibres to be used as composite
fibres and especially middle lamellae influence water material reinforcement. J. biobased.
uptake. Water alters biocomposites, and flax fibres since mater.bioenerg., 2011. 5: p. 1-13.
their mechanical properties are reduced (Young modulus 9. Le Duigou, A., P. Davies , and C. Baley,
and tensile strength) with aging. Linear relationship is Replacement of glass/unsaturated polyester
observed between water uptake and loss of mechanical composites by flax/PLLA biocomposites : Is it
properties. Load-unload cycles highlight damage justified ? Journal of biobased materials and
occuring earlier as biocomposite undergo aging. These bioenergy, 2012. Accepted.
damages can be induced by fibre degradation and 10. Davies, P. and D. Choqueuse, Ageing of
washing out of soluble components especially the fibre composite in marine vessels, in Ageing of
bundles cement, by debonding of fibre bundles linked to composites, R. Martin, Editor. 2009.
their swelling. 11. Gautier, L., B. Mortaigne, and V. Bellenger,
Interface damage study of hydrothermally aged
glass-fibre-reinforced polyester composites.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Comp. Sci. Technol., 1999. 59(16): p. 2329-
2337.
Authors wish to acknowledge ADEME (French 12. Azwa, Z.N., B.F. Yousif, A.C. Manalo, and W.
Environment and Energy Management agency) for
Karunasena, A review on the degradability of
financial support.
polymeric composites based on natural fibres.
Materials & Design, 2013. 47(0): p. 424-442.
REFERENCES 13. Hill, C., A. Norton, and G. Newman, The water
vapor sorption behavior of natural fbers.
Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 2009. 112:
p. 1524-1537.
1. Bodros, E., I. Pillin, N. Montrelay, and C.
Baley, Could biopolymers reinforced by 14. Wang, W., M. Sain, and P.A. Coope, Study of
randomly scattered flax fibre be used in moisture absorption in natural fiber plastic
structural applications? Composites Science composites. Composites Science and
and Technology, 2007. 67(3-4): p. 462-470. Technology, 2006. 66: p. 379-386.
2. Le Duigou, A., P. Davies, and C. Baley, 15. Le Duigou, A., P. Davies, and C. Baley,
Macroscopic analysis of interfacial properties Exploring durability of interfaces in flax
of flax/PLLA biocomposites. Composites fibre/epoxy micro-composites. Composites Part
Science and Technology, 2010. 70(11): p. 1612- A: Applied Science and Manufacturing,
1620. 2013(0).
3. Oksman, K., M. Skrifvars, and J.-F. Selin, 16. Clair, B., Etude des propriéts mécaniques et
Natural fibres as reinforcement in polylactic propriéts au séchage du bois à l'échelle de la
acid (PLA) composites. Composites Science and paroi cellulaire: Essai de compréhension du
Technology, 2003. 63(9): p. 1317-1324. comportement macroscopique paradoxale du
bois de tension à couche gélatineuse. Report fibers. Composites Part A: Applied Science and
thesis- ENGREF, 2001. Manufacturing, 2001. 32(8): p. 1105-1115.
17. Dhakal, H.N., Z.Y. Zhang, and M.O.W. 30. Celinot, A., S. Fréour, F. Jacquemin, and P.
Richardson, Effect of water absorption on the Casari, Characterization and Modeling of the
mechanical properties of hemp fibre reinforced Moisture Diffusion Behavior of Natural Fibers.
unsaturated polyester composites. Comp. Sci. Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 2013.
Technol., 2007. 67(7-8): p. 1674-1683. DOI: 10.1002/APP.39148.
18. Joseph, P.V., M.S. Rabello, L.H.C. Mattoso, K. 31. Hearle, J., The fine structure of fibers and
Joseph, and S. Thomas, Environmental effects crystalline polymers. III. Interpretation of the
on the degradation behaviour of sisal fibre mechanical properties of fibers. J. App Polym.
reinforced polypropylene composites. Comp. Sci., 1963. 7: p. 1207-23.
Sci Technol., 2002. 62(10-11): p. 1357-1372. 32. Bos, H.L., The potential of flax fibres as
19. Chen, H., M. Miao, and X. Ding, Influence of reinforcement for composite materials-Thesis
moisture absorption on the interfacial strength report. Eindhoven, 2004.
of bamboo/vinyl ester composites. Composites 33. Cosgrove, D., Growth of the plant cell wall.
Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, Nature reviews- Molecular cell biology, 2005.
2009. 40(12): p. 2013-2019. 6: p. 850-861.
20. Islam, M.S., K.L. Pickering, and N.J. Foreman, 34. Zykwinska, A., J.-F. Thibault, and M.-C. Ralet,
Influence of accelerated ageing on the physico- Competitive binding of pectin and xyloglucan
mechanical properties of alkali-treated with primary cell wall cellulose. Carbohydrate
industrial hemp fibre reinforced poly(lactic Polymers, 2008. 74(4): p. 957-961.
acid) (PLA) composites. Polym Degrad and 35. Zafeiropoulos, N.E., P. Vickers, C. Baillie, and
Stab, 2010. 95(1): p. 59-65. J. Watts, An experimental investigation of
21. Scida, D., M. Assarar, C. Poilâne, and R. Ayad, modified and unmodified flax fibres with XPS,
Influence of hygrothermal ageing on the ToF-SIMS ans ATR-FTIR. Joural of Materials
damage mechanisms of flax-fibre reinforced Science, 2003. 38: p. 3903-3914.
epoxy composite. Composites Part B: 36. Morvan, C., C. Andème-Onzighi, R. Girault,
Engineering, 2013. 48(0): p. 51-58. D.S. Himmelsbach, A. Driouich, and D.E. Akin,
22. Le Duigou, A., P. Davies, and C. Baley, Building flax fibres: more than one brick in the
Seawater aging of Flax/PLLA biocomposite. walls. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry,
Polymer Degradation and Stability, 2009. 94: p. 2003. 41(11-12): p. 935-944.
1151-1162. 37. Davies, G.C. and D.M. Bruce, Effect of
23. Davies, P., F. Mazeas, and P. Casari, Sea Water Environmental Relative Humidity and Damage
Aging of Glass Reinforced Composites:Shear on the Tensile Properties of Flax and Nettle
Behaviour and Damage Modelling. J Compos Fibers. Textile Research Journal, 1998. 68(9): p.
Mater, 2001. 35. 623-629.
24. Le Duigou, A., P. Davies, and C. Baley, 38. Gouanvé, F., S. Marais, A. Bessadok, D.
Seawater ageing of Flax/PLLA biocomposites. Langevin, and M. Métayer, Kinetics of water
Polym Degrad and Stab, 2009. 94(1151-62). sorption in flax and PET fibers. European
25. Gibson, R., Principle of composite materials Polymer Journal, 2007. 43(2): p. 586-598.
mechanics. 1994, New york: McGraw-Hill 39. Bourmaud, A., J. Riviere, A. Le Duigou, G. Raj,
International Editions. and C. Baley, Investigations of the use of a
26. Yew, G.H., A.M. Mohd Yusof, Z.A. Mohd mussel-inspired compatibilizer to improve the
Ishak, and U.S. Ishiaku, Water absorption and matrix-fiber adhesion of a biocomposite.
enzymatic degradation of poly(lactic acid)/rice Polymer Testing, 2009(1-5).
starch composites. Polym Degrad and Stab, 40. British Standard, B.E.I., Plastics–Determination
2005. 90(3): p. 488-500. of Tensile Properties–Part 4: Test Conditions
27. Boisseau, A., Etude de la tenue à long terme de for Isotropic and Orthotropic Fibre-Reinforced
matériaux composites immergés pour structures Plastic Composites. British Standards
de récupération d’énergies marines. Thesis Institution, London (1997). 1997.
report (In french), 2011. 41. Shah, D.U., P.J. Schubel, M.J. Clifford, and P.
28. Glass, S. and S. Zelinka, Moisture Relations and Licence, The tensile behavior of off-axis loaded
Physical Properties of Wood- General Technical plant fiber composites: An insight on the
Report FPL- GTR. Chapter 4. nonlinear stress–strain response. Polymer
29. Stamboulis, A., C.A. Baillie, and T. Peijs, Composites, 2012. 33(9): p. 1494-1504.
Effects of environmental conditions on 42. Baets, J., D. Plastria, J. Ivens, and I. Verpoest,
mechanical and physical properties of flax Determination of the optimal flax fibre
preparation for use in UD-Epoxy composites.
18 TH International Conference on Composite
Materials, 2011. AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
43. Placet, V., O. Cissé, and M. Boubakar, Influence
of environmental relative humidity on the tensile A. Le Duigou obtained a Master degree in EcoDesign of
and rotational behaviour of hemp fibres. Journal Polymer and Composites in University of South Brittany
of Material Science, 2012. 47(3435-3446). (Lorient) in 2007. He holds PhD thesis entitled
44. GUTIERREZ, J., F. LELAY, and P. HOARAU, “contribution à l’étude des biocomposites” in IFREMER
A study of ageing of glass fibre-resin composites (Brest) and LIMATB. Now he is associate professor in
in a marine environment. Proceedings of the the LIMATB laboratory of the South Brittany University.
International Conference on ‘Nautical His major research topic deals with biocomposites
Construction with Composite Materials, Paris’, systems from durability to interfacial properties
IFREMER, p. 338., 1992. characterization.
45. Bourmaud, A., G. Ausias, G. Lebrun, M.L. A. Bourmaud is Research Engineer in Material
Tachon, and C. Baley, Observation of the Engineering Laboratory of Brittany (LIMATB) in
structure of a composite polypropylene/flax and Lorient, France. His main research topics are the
damage mechanisms under stress. Industrial knowledge of mechanical behaviour of flax or hemp
Crops and Products, 2013. 43(0): p. 225-236. fibers, the recycling and processing of plant fibers
46. Baley, C., Y. Perrot, F. Busnel, H. Guezenoc, composites and the nanoindentation.
and P. Davies, Transverse tensile behaviour of P. Davies is a researcher in the Materials & Structures
unidirectional plies reinforced with flax fibres. group at IFREMER, the French Ocean Research
Materials Letters, 2006. 60(24): p. 2984-2987. Institute, in Brest. He has been working on fibres,
47. Gibson, R., Principles of composite material polymers and composites for marine applications for
mechanics. New-York McGraw-Hill, 1994. over 25 years.
48. Almgrem, K., Wood-fibre composites: Stress
transfer and hygroexpansion. Thesis report- C. Baley is currently Professor in the University of South
KTH Fibre and Polymer Technology School of Brittany. His main research topics are the reinforcement
Chemical Sciences and Engineering Royal mechanisms of polymer natural fibers composites, the
Institute of Technology - SE-100 44 Stockholm knowledge of the vegetal cell walls and the study of the
Sweden, 2010. plant fiber/polymer interfaces.
49. le Duigou, A., A. Bourmaud, E. Balnois, P.
Davies, and C. Baley, Improving the interfacial
properties between flax fibres and PLLA by a
water fibre treatment and drying cycle.
Industrial Crops and Products, 2012. 39(0): p.
31-39.
50. Bourmaud, A., C. Morvan, and C. Baley,
Importance of fiber preparation to optimize the
surface and mechanical properties of unitary
flax fiber. Industrial Crops and Products, 2010.
32(3): p. 662-667.
51. Mussig, J., H. Fisher, N. Graupner, and A.
FDrieling, Testing methods for measuring
physical and mechancial fibre properties (plant
and animal fibres). Industrial application of
natural fibres : Strcture, properties and technical
application- Chichester, United Kingdom, John
Wiley & Sons, 2010: p. 269-309.
52. Virtaa, J., S. Koponenb, and I. Absetza,
Measurement of swelling stresses in spruce
(Picea abies) samples. Building and
Environment 2006. 41: p. 1014-1018.
53. Almgren, K., E.K. Gamstedt, F. Berthold, and
M. Lindström, Moisture uptake and
hygroexpansion of wood fiber composite
materials with polylactide and polypropylene
matrix materials. Polymer Composites, 2009.
30(12): p. 1809-1816.
WIND-TUNNEL PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS ON MODEL-SCALE

RIGID DOWNWIND SAILS
Patrick Bot, Naval Academy Research Institute, France, patrick.bot@ecole-navale.fr

Ignazio Maria Viola, Yacht and Superyacht Research Group, School of Marine Science and Technology, Newcastle
University, UK, ignazio.viola@newcastle.ac.uk
Richard G.J. Flay, Yacht Research Unit, University of Auckland, New Zealand, r.flay@auckland.ac.nz
Jean-Sebastien Brett, Naval Academy Research Institute, France, jean-sebastien.brett@gadz.org
This paper describes an experiment that was carried out in the Twisted Flow Wind Tunnel at The
University of Auckland to measure a detailed set of pressure distributions on a rigid 1/15th scale model
of a modern asymmetric spinnaker. It was observed that the pressures varied considerably up the
height of the spinnaker. The fine resolution of pressure taps allowed the extent of leading edge
separation bubbles, pressure recovery region, and effect of sail curvature to be observed quite clearly.
It was found that the shape of the pressure distributions could be understood in terms of conventional
aerodynamic theory. The sail performed best at an apparent wind angle of about 55°, which is its
design angle, and the effect of heel was more pronounced near the head than the foot.
NOMENCLATURE
Sail pressure distributions can be measured in model-
AWA Apparent Wind Angle ሺιሻ scale from wind tunnel tests and in full scale [11]. The
‫ܣܹܣ‬௘௙௙ Effective Apparent Wind Angle ሺιሻ state-of-the-art experimental technique is based on
c Sail section chord (m) flexible sails – including semi-flexible single-skin
cav Average sail chord (m) fibreglass sails used by Richards and Lasher [9], and
௣ି௣ಮ common spinnaker sailcloth used by Viola & Flay
‫ ݌ܥ‬ൌ Pressure coefficient (-)
௤ಮ [10,12] - where pressure taps are attached to one side of
f Frequency (Hz) the sail and pressures are measured on the other side of
h Yacht model height (m) the sail through holes in the sailcloth. This technique
‫݌‬ Sail surface pressure (Pa) allows realistic sail trims in different sailing conditions to
‫݌‬ஶ Reference static pressure (Pa) be modelled, but is limited by (i) the unknown blockage
‫ݍ‬ஶ Reference dynamic pressure (Pa) effect due to the tubes and pressure taps, (ii) the
௎ ௛
Reൌ ಮ Reynolds number (-) alteration of both the static sail shape and the dynamic
ఔ
௙௖ behaviour of the sails by the mass and stiffness of the
ܵ‫ ݐ‬ൌ Strouhal number (-)
௎ಮ tubes and pressure taps, (iii) the low accuracy in the
ܷஶ Reference velocity ሺ ή ିଵ ሻ reconstruction of the sail flying shape.
x chord-wise coordinate (m)
The observed differences between the pressure
1 INTRODUCTION distributions measured with this technique in the wind
tunnel, and those measured in full-scale or computed
Modern yacht sails are aerodynamically very efficient numerically are expected to be partially due to the
but the flow field around sails is largely unknown. presence of tubes and pressure taps.
Knowledge of the flow features that make sails
aerodynamically efficient will allow the performance of A novel technique is presented in this paper, where the
sails and also the aerodynamic efficiency of sail-like effect of the pressure taps is eliminated and the effect of
airfoils for other applications to be enhanced further. the tubes on the flow field is minimised. Also, the sail is
rigid allowing the flying shape to be detected with high-
The aerodynamics of sails has mainly been investigated accuracy.
with force measurements [1-5] in wind tunnels [6-8],
while only a few authors have recently measured sail This paper describes pressure distributions measured on
pressure distributions [9-11]. The flow field around sails the rigid asymmetric spinnaker in a wind tunnel, which
has been examined primarily through numerical are discussed and compared to pressures measured on
simulations and, therefore, it is very important to validate soft flexible sails, and also to numerical simulation
such simulations with accurate measurements of local results. The pressure profiles along the sail chord on the
quantities such as surface pressure distributions, instead leeward side enable interesting flow characteristics to be
of only comparing them to global quantities such as determined, such as leading edge separation bubble
forces. (sharp suction peak), sail curvature suction, and trailing

- 119 -
edge flow separation (pressure plateau). Helpful insights

into sail aerodynamics are obtained from this a
investigation, which are explained using conventional
aerodynamic and aeronautical knowledge of the
aerodynamics of thin wings. Further details are given in
the subsequent sections.
2 EXPERIMENTAL ARRANGEMENT
A rigid 1/15th scale model of an AC33-class spinnaker

has been tested at the University of Auckland Yacht
Research Unit (YRU) Twisted Flow Wind Tunnel which
has an open jet with a test section 7m wide and 3.5m
high. The tests were performed in uniform flow (without
twisting vanes) with a turbulence intensity of around 3%.
The reference wind speed was approximately ܷஶ ൌ
͵ǤͷȀ giving a Reynolds number based on the average
spinnaker chord cav equal to ܴ݁ ൌ Ͷ ή ͳͲହ . The solid b
spinnaker and mainsail were mounted on a yacht model
(rig and hull), which was mounted on a turntable to
adjust the apparent wind angle (AWA). The model was
mounted on fore and aft bearings to enable the heel angle
to be varied. Figure 1 shows two photographs of the
model during the tests. In particular, Figure 1(b) shows
the tubes carrying the pressures from the sail leech to the
transducers in the cockpit; note also that the rig was
reinforced by a deck spreader to windward due to the
heavy spinnaker model, and the actuator used to adjust
heel angle on the left hand side.
The solid model spinnaker was built as part of a master’s

research project at the YRU by Brett [13], with the flying Figure 1: Photographs of the rigid spinnaker setup in the
shape recorded from a sailcloth model spinnaker wind tunnel; (a) general view from downstream; (b)
previously studied at the YRU [10]. The selected shape close-up view from behind the yacht model.
was recorded for a trim giving the maximum driving
force with a non-flapping sail at an AWA of 55° and 10°
of heel. The geometric parameters of the sail shape are
given in Table 1. Unfortunately the shapes of the rigid
asymmetric spinnaker and the soft sail were not perfectly
identical, and this has implications on the pressure
comparisons discussed in Section 4.
The solid sail is a 5mm thick epoxy fibreglass sandwich Figure 2: Sketch of a pressure tap in section of the solid
where the core is a corrugated plastic material featuring a spinnaker model, and definition of aerodynamic profile
high density of individual pressure-tight flutes, which parameters
provide the pneumatic tubes to carry the pressure signal
from the measurement location to the sail leech. Thin
plastic tubes are connected to each flute on the sail leech Measurement system and experimental procedure
to carry the pressure to the pressure transducers in the
model cockpit. One-millimetre holes were drilled All transducers were pneumatically connected to a
through the sail and tape was used to close one side in reference static pressure measured with a Pitot-static
order to measure the pressures on the other side. A sketch probe located 10m upstream of the model, 0.5m below
of a pressure tap in section of the solid spinnaker model the wind tunnel roof. A total of 175 pressure taps were
is shown in Figure 2. The rigid sail had a mass of about arranged along five horizontal sections located at
10kg, and it was observed that its shape could distort due fractions 1/8, 1/4, 1/2, 3/4 and 7/8 of the mitre height,
to self-weight. The implications of this are addressed which is the line equidistant from the leading and trailing
later in the paper when the results are discussed. edges of the sail. The distance between consecutive
pressure taps ranges from around 10mm near the leading
edge up to around 100mm in the middle of the chord

120
where the pressure gradient is expected to be lower. the trailing edge separated area. The high spatial
There are from 31 to 38 taps per section. resolution achieved due to the numerous pressure taps
enables the very sharp gradients occurring near the
The reference dynamic pressure ‫ݍ‬ஶ was measured by the leading edge to be resolved, which has not usually been
same sensor as described in the preceding paragraph. possible in previously published work on sail pressure
Two other Pitot-static probes were positioned 0.8m distributions. Notice that due to different chord lengths
above the wind tunnel floor (corresponding to a full scale for the different sections, suction maxima at the same
height of 12m) to check the air speed at these locations reduced coordinate x/c are not superimposed in reality.
too.
The piezoresistive pressure sensors used are Honeywell

XSCL04DC transducers, and a calibration was made
before each experimental run with a precision (+/-0.125
Pa) Druck-DPI 615LP pressure calibrator. The accuracy
of the pressure measurements is of order 0.5 Pa.
Pressures were measured on the 175 pressure taps on

each side of the sail, for different AWA and heel angles.
For the mean pressure distribution, pressures were
recorded over 100s at a sampling frequency of 100Hz.
Only the pressure distribution on the sail’s suction side is
shown for clarity. On the pressure side, the pressure was
observed to be nearly constant with a pressure coefficient
Cp ranging between 0.5 and 0.8 depending on the AWA.
Figure 3: Cp on the 5 sections of the spinnaker for 55°
Table 1: Parameters of the aerodynamic profile on each AWA and 10° heel.
section (see definition in Fig. 2)
Section 1/8 1/4 1/2 3/4 7/8 On the highest section, there is a very high suction
Curve [mm] 1490 1510 1380 892 525 (Cp = -3) at the leading edge and then a rapid pressure
Chord [mm] 1260 1276 1203 820 488 recovery with the minimum suction located at 10% of the
Twist [°] 23 27 34 37 40 chord followed by a relatively uniform pressure over the
Camber [mm] 350 346 277 140 73 remaining chord. This pressure distribution suggests that
Camber [%] 28 27 23 17 15 there is a tight leading edge separation bubble (or vortex)
Draft [%] 55 56 52 50 49 at this location. Note that since this section is near the
Entry Angle [°] 63 63 56 48 50 head of the sail, the flow will be very three-dimensional.
Exit Angle [°] 39 40 50 47 45 There is a very flat maximum suction visible around
x/c=0.3-0.4. On section 3/4, downstream of the high
suction at the leading edge, the pressure recovery is
3 MEAN PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS smooth and essentially monotonic.
Figure 3 shows the mean pressure distributions recorded The pressure distributions on the five sections are shown
on the five sections of the spinnaker for an AWA of 55° in Figure 4 for AWAs from 51° to 59°. It should be noted
and 10° heel. that the rigid spinnaker shape corresponds
(approximately) to the flying shape of the equivalent soft
The three lower sections show similar behaviour with the sail recorded at 55° AWA. This frozen shape is expected
following characteristics. A high suction peak at the to perform well over a fairly narrow range of AWAs.
leading edge is followed by a sharp pressure recovery Again, the three lower sections show similar behaviour to
with a minimum suction located around 2% of the chord that described above. When the AWA is increased, the
length. The flow separates at the leading edge producing pressure recovery at the re-attachment location is reduced
a strong leading edge separation bubble giving the strong a little and the trailing edge separation point moves
suction, and the pressure recovery is associated with re- upstream. The pressure distribution on the lowest section
attachment. On upwind sails [14] and on flat plates [15], is the least sensitive to AWA, whereas conversely, the
the maximum pressure recovery occurs just downstream pressure distribution on the highest section is the most
of the point of reattachment. Downstream of this point, sensitive to AWA. It may also be noticed that the
the pressure decreases again due to the sail curvature and pressure plateau in the trailing edge separated area for
thus the associated flow curvature, with a maximum section 1/8 is more pronounced and with a higher suction
suction at around 20%-30% of the chord length. After the (Cp around -0.8) for the highest AWA. The higher
pressure recovery in the region where the sail shape sections are mostly separated and totally stalled for the
becomes less curved, the pressure is nearly constant in highest AWA.

121
Figure 4: Cp for AWA=51, 53, 55, 57 and 59° on the 5 Figure 5: Cp for heel=5, 10 and 14° on the 5 sail
sail sections. Note that the Cp scale is larger for sections sections, for AWA=55°. Note that the Cp scale is larger
3/4 and 7/8. for sections 3/4 and 7/8.

122
Figure 5 shows the pressure distributions on the five

sections for heel angles of 5°, 10° and 14°, for an AWA
of 55°. On the three lower sections, the pressure is
affected only slightly by heel angle, with the trailing
edge separation slightly earlier for the highest heel angle.
On the top two sections, where the flow is mainly
separated, the effect of heel is stronger and the higher the
heel angle, the more stalled the profile. In Figure 6, it is
noticeable that the pressures on the top two sections at 5°
heel for 55° AWA are nearly identical to pressures at 10°
heel for 53°AWA, and that the pressures at 10° heel for
57° AWA are nearly identical to pressures at14° heel for
55° AWA, so that aerodynamically, additional heeling
corresponds to increasing the angle of attack. In
particular, the trailing edge separation point seems to
move upstream when the heel angle increases.
Figure 6 : Cp on sections 7/8 and 3/4 for AWA=55° and

heel angles of 5, 10 and 14°, and for heel angle = 10° and
AWAs of 53, 55 and 57°.
4 COMPARISON WITH OTHER PUBLICATIONS
Figure 7 shows the present results and those achieved

with recent numerical simulations made on the same
Figure 7: Cp measured on the solid spinnaker (present
geometry at 55° AWA using Delayed Detached Eddy
study) for AWA=53 and 55° (measurements from two
Simulation [16], and those achieved experimentally on
distinct experimental runs are shown to assess the
the equivalent soft sail [12]. Also shown on the figure are
repeatability), measured on a soft sail [12] and computed
results of the present study obtained during another
with DDES [16].

123
experimental run, which show the reasonable Figure 8 shows the time series of Cp variations
repeatability of the measurements. On the three lowest (instantaneous Cp – time averaged Cp) on section 1/2
sections, the simulated and experimental results are from four characteristic locations along the chord: near
similar. The general behaviour is well reproduced and a the leading edge just downstream of the reattachment
good quantitative agreement is found. In some cases, the (x/c=0.0428), near the maximum of the curvature suction
simulation result is closer to the pressure recorded for a peak (x/c=0.240), in the separation region (x/c=0.617)
slightly lower AWA of 53° (see sections 1/8 and 1/4 for and in the separated area near the trailing edge
x/c<0.2 and section 1/2 for x/c<0.4). The pressure (x/c=0.889). In the two first locations, the fluctuation
plateau associated with the trailing edge separation is results from the turbulence of the flow. It is noticeable
found to be a little further downstream in the simulation that the pressure amplitudes are much higher in the
than in the experiment. On the top two sections, the separated area and that the maximum amplitudes are
numerical pressures are similar to the experimental result observed where the separation occurs. The separation
for a lower AWA (53°). location is known to be oscillatory in time and the back
and forth motion of the separation point associated with
The results obtained on the soft sail in a different its high pressure gradient gives rise to these high pressure
experiment show general behaviour that is more or less fluctuations. Moreover, as can be seen in the enlargement
compatible with the present results, but the discrepancies in Figure 8, the pressure fluctuations at x/c=0.617
are important. In particular, the peak suction values and undergo rather coherent oscillations at a frequency
locations are rather different. It can be observed that the significantly lower than the pressure fluctuations at other
lower number of pressure taps on the soft sail did not locations. This low frequency ranges between 0.3Hz to
allow the sharp gradients to be resolved. The differences 1Hz, which corresponds to a Strouhal number range
between the soft and rigid sail results are also likely to be ܵ‫ ݐ‬ൌ ͲǤͳ െ ͲǤ͵ͷ. Such a Strouhal number range suggests
due to the differences in shape between them. In fact they that these fluctuations are associated with the large scale
are also slightly different in size. vortex shedding in the flow separation.
Another reason for the differences observed between the

present results and the simulation results may result from
an alteration of the shape of the solid sail. As the solid
sail is quite heavy (around 10kg) compared to the
aerodynamic force, and not perfectly rigid, it was
observed after the tests that the model’s weight altered
the general sail shape by dropping the clew which would
have increased the sail curvature and decreased the sail
twist resulting in higher angle of attack on the highest
sections, which could explain the stall of the top of the
sail. In order to understand this point better, a subsequent
research project is underway to measure both the
spinnaker and mainsail pressures, with additional support
of the solid spinnaker using wires to fix the distances
Figure 8: Time series of the Cp variations on section 1/2,
between the head, tack and clew to the required values.
at x/c=0.0428, 0.240, 0.617 and 0.889, enlargement:
detail for x/c=0.617 and t from 100 to 150s.
5 PRESSURE TIME SERIES
For the particular analysis of pressure time histories,

some tests were done with only 58 pressure taps located 6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
on sections 1/4, 1/2 and 3/4, and with shorter pressure
The paper presents results from novel rigid sails,
tubes, recorded over 300s at a sampling frequency of
manufactured in a sandwich structure made of pressure-
200Hz. The signals were then filtered with a moving
tight flutes, which allows the pressure distributions on
average of span 20 data points to reduce the frequency to
model-scale yacht sails to be measured. This model was
20 Hz. Each tube length was adjusted to the length of
used to measure the pressure distributions on an
each flute inside the sandwich sail in order to have an
asymmetric spinnaker at different AWA and heel angles,
identical total cavity length equal to 2.15m. Such long
and the results were compared with numerical results and
tubes would have provided significant damping to the
another experimental method.
recorded pressure time histories. However, even though
the sensor plus tube transfer function is not known with
The measurements confirmed the general pressure
precision, the recorded pressures show quite different
distributions and trends observed by other authors with
behaviours depending on their positions, and hence
flexible sails [10,12] and numerical simulations [16]. In
according to the region of the local flow, and some
particular, in the optimum trim condition, the pressure
interesting features of the separation were detected.
gently decreases from the leading edge to the trailing
edge on the whole windward side of the sail. On the

124
leeward side (Figure 3), the pressure shows a suction greater blockage effect than with rigid sails. For
peak due to the leading edge separation followed by a instance, when pressures on the leeward side are
partial pressure recovery associated with the turbulent measured with flexible sails, the tubes on the
reattachment. Further downstream the pressure shows a windward side deflect the incoming streamlines,
second smoother suction peak associated with the sail resulting in an increased angle of attack. This can be
and flow curvature, and then a pressure plateau extended seen in Fig. 7, where higher suction peaks were
to the trailing edge when separation occurs. On the measured with flexible sails than with rigid sails.
highest sections, the second suction peak does not occur • On flexible sails, the weight of the pressure taps and
due to the tip vortex at the head of the sail. tubes affect the sail shape leading to local flow
accelerations and pressure changes, while rigid sails
When the AWA increases (Figure 4), the leading edge allow a much smoother surface. For instance, on the
suction peak increases while the trailing edge separation lowest section in Fig. 7, the pressure around 3/4th of
point moves upstream leading to a lower curvature- the chord decreases locally due to a kink (wrinkle) on
related suction peak. When the AWA is increased the sail.
further, the flow fails to reattach and the pressure
gradient decreases until a constant pressure is measured Rigid sails also allow the pressure transducers to be
on the entire sail section. placed very close to the pressure tap, minimising the
displacement of the volume of air between the tap and
Increasing the heel angle has a similar effect to the transducer that affects the frequency content of the
increasing the AWA (Fig. 6). This is expected to happen pressure time series due to the filtering effect of long
only in a limited range of heel angles, such as those tubes. The study of frequencies and phases of the
measured in the present paper. In fact, it was noted by pressure time series may reveal very interesting
several authors (for instance Le Pelley et al. [2]) that information on the flow field. For instance, it may allow
downwind sails may allow larger aerodynamic forces the detection of the location of laminar to turbulent
when the yacht is slightly heeled than when upright. transition, if the positions of separation and reattachment
However, when the heel angle increases, the effective points are stationary, while correlations between signals
angle of attack ‫ܣܹܣ‬௘௙௙ in a plane perpendicular to the from taps located in different places may allow the
mast decreases according to Equation (1). convection of coherent flow structures to be detected.
The paper presents a preliminary attempt to analyse
‫ܣܹܣ‬௘௙௙ ൌ ‫ି݊ܽݐ‬ଵ ሾሺ‫ܣܹܣ‬ሻ ሺ݄݈݁݁ሻሿሺͳሻ pressure time histories at four different locations (Fig. 8).
For the first time it is shown that the position of the
Therefore, it is expected that heeling the yacht to high trailing edge separation point is not steady but oscillates
angles would modify the pressure distribution in a with a frequency corresponding to ܵ‫ ݐ‬ൌ ͲǤͳ െ ͲǤ͵ͷ.
similar fashion to when the AWA decreases. Conversely, Future work in this area is expected to include the use of
for low angles of heel, the reduction of ‫ܣܹܣ‬௘௙௙ with the shorter pressure tubes, or pressure transducers embedded
heel is small. For instance, if the heel angle increases into the sail structure, as is commonly done in
from 5° to 10°, and from 10° to 14°, ‫ܣܹܣ‬௘௙௙ decreases experimental aeronautical research investigations.
by 0.3° and 0.4°, respectively. Therefore, in the tested
In conclusion, the novel experimental methods discussed
range of heel angles (5°-14°), the ‫ܣܹܣ‬௘௙௙ reduction is
in the paper are very promising although further
negligible while other phenomena, which remain to be
enhancements are needed to increase their accuracy.
understood, may prevail. The effect of heel on the
Firstly, the flying shape must be controlled more
aerodynamic force produced by a spinnaker will also
precisely and, secondly, it is desirable that the blockage
depend on whether or not it is re-trimmed.
due to the bundle of tubes at the trailing edge is
decreased further.
This novel model sail pressure investigation allowed
progress beyond the current state-of-the-art method
based on flexible sails [10,11,12] in several areas. In
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
particular:
The authors warmly acknowledge the help from the
• Rigid sails allow better control of the sail geometry Centre for Advanced Composite Materials (CACM) at
(particularly camber and draft) than flexible sails, The University of Auckland to build the solid spinnaker
though the control on the twist of the sails is still model. The support from the YRU and especially David
unsatisfactory. For instance, the comparison with the Le Pelley is gratefully acknowledged, as well as the help
pressures computed numerically by Viola et al. [16] from research students Dario Motta, Francesca
suggests that the sail was under-twisted by about ʹι Tagliaferri and Novella Saccenti to carry out the tests.
on the highest sections during the experiments (Fig. This research has been performed within the SAILING
7). This undesirable sail deflection was probably FLUIDS project, which is funded by the European
caused by its own weight. Commission under the 7th Framework Programme
• On flexible sails the pressure tubes cannot be bundled
together at the trailing edge and thus the tubes have a

125
through the Marie Curie Actions, People, International [11] Viola, I.M., Flay, R.G.J., 2011, Sail pressures from
Research Staff Exchange Scheme. full-scale, wind-tunnel and numerical investigations,
Ocean Engineering, 38(16), 1733-1743.
[12] Viola, I.M., Flay, R.G.J., 2010, Pressure distribution

REFERENCES on modern asymmetric spinnakers, Transactions of the
Royal Institution of Naval Architects Part B:
[1] Richards, P.J., Johnson, A. and Stanton A., 2001, International Journal of Small Craft Technology,
America’s Cup downwind sails - vertical wings or 1512(1), 41-50.
horizontal parachutes?, Journal of Wind Engineering and
Industrial Aerodynamics, Vol. 89, Issues 14–15, pp [13] Brett, J.S, 2012, Downwind Sail Aerodynamics: A
1565-1577. pressure distribution and an Aerodynamic Forces
database for the validation of numerical code, Master
[2] Le Pelley, D.J., Ekblom, P., Flay, R.G.J., 2002, Wind Research in Naval Environment, Research Institute of the
tunnel testing of downwind sails, In Proceedings of the Naval Academy, IRENav, Arts et Métiers ParisTech,
1st High Performance Yacht Design Conference, pp. France. Research project undertaken at the Yacht
155-161, Auckland, New Zealand. Research Unit, University of Auckland.
[3] Fossati, F., Muggiasca, S., Viola, I.M. and Zasso, A., [14] Viola, I.M., Bot, P., Riotte, M., 2013, Upwind Sail
2006, Wind tunnel techniques for investigation and Aerodynamics: a RANS Numerical Investigation
optimization of sailing yachts aerodynamics, In Validated with Wind Tunnel Pressure Measurements,
Proceedings of the 2nd High Performance Yacht Design International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, Vol. 39,
Conference, Auckland, New Zealand. pp.90-101, DOI: 10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2012.10.004.
[4] Hansen, H., Richards, P.J. and Jackson, P.S., 2006, [15] Crompton, M.J., Barret, R.V., 2000, Investigation of
An investigation of aerodynamic force modelling for the separation bubble formed behind the sharp leading
yacht sails using wind tunnel techniques, In Proceedings edge of a flat plate at incidence. In Proceedings of the
of the 2nd High Performance Yacht Design Conference, Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of
Auckland, New Zealand. Aerospace Engineering, 214(3), 157-176.
[5] Fossati, F., Muggiasca, S. and Viola, I.M., 2006, An [16] Viola, I.M., Bartesaghi, S, Van-Renterghem, T.,
investigation of aerodynamic force modelling for IMS Ponzini, R., 2013, Delayed Detached Eddy Simulation of
Rule using wind tunnel techniques, In Proceedings of the sailing yacht sails. In Proceedings of the 3rd International
19th International HISWA Symposium on Yacht Design Conference on Innovation in High Performance Sailing
and Yacht Construction, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Yachts, INNOV’SAIL, Lorient, France (present volume).
[6] Flay, R.G.J., Jackson, P.S., 1992, Flow simulations

for wind-tunnel studies of sail aerodynamics. Journal of
Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, Vol. 44, AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
Issues 1–3, pp.2703–2714.
Patrick Bot, PhD, is associate Professor of Fluid
[7] Flay R.G.J., 1996, A twisted flow wind tunnel for Mechanics at the Naval Academy Research Institute in
testing yacht sails, Journal of Wind Engineering and fluid mechanics and energy engineering. His research
Industrial Aerodynamics, Volume 63, Number 1, pp. interests include yacht dynamics, sail aerodynamics and
171-182. fluid structure interaction. His previous experience
includes hydrodynamic instabilities and transition to
[8] Le Pelley, D.J., Benzie, D., Flay, R.G.J., 2001, turbulence.
Correct simulation of the profiles of apparent wind speed
and twist for testing yacht sails, In Proceedings of the 9th Ignazio Maria Viola, PhD, is Lecturer in Naval
Australasian Wind Engineering Workshop (AWES). Architecture at the School of Marine Science and
Townsville, Australia. Technology of Newcastle University, UK. He has a
background in applied fluid dynamics and a specialist
[9] Richard, P., Lasher, W., 2008, Wind Tunnel and CFD expertise in yacht engineering. His previous experience
Modelling of Pressures on Downwind Sails, In includes a Post Doctoral Fellowship at the Yacht
Proceedings of Bluff Bodies Aerodynamics & Research Unit (University of Auckland), which formerly
Applications, Milano, Italy. was the Scientific Advisor of the America’s Cup team
Emirates Team New Zealand, and a PhD (Politecnico di
[10] Viola, I.M., Flay, R.G.J. (2009). Force and pressure Milano) on experimental and numerical modelling of the
investigation of modern asymmetric spinnakers, aerodynamics of sailing yachts, sponsored by the
Transactions of the Royal Institution of Naval Architects America’s Cup team Luna Rossa. Ignazio is Coordinator
Part B: International Journal of Small Craft Technology, of the SAILING FLUIDS project.
151(2), 31-40.

126
Richard G.J. Flay, PhD, is Professor of Mechanical

Engineering and Director of the Yacht Research Unit in
the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the
University of Auckland. He has had a longstanding
research interest in the wind and sailing. His PhD degree
was awarded for a study of wind structure using field
measurements. His Postdoctoral research as a National
Research Council Visiting Fellow in Canada was focused
on wind tunnel studies in a boundary layer wind tunnel.
He then spent four years as an Aerodynamic Design
Engineer in an Engineering Consultancy in Toronto
where he worked on the design of several wind tunnels
and environmental test facilities. Since 1984 he has
worked at the University of Auckland, and in 1994 he
designed the World’s first Twisted Flow Wind Tunnel.
He has been a member of the YRU since its inception in
1987.

127

DELAYED DETACHED EDDY SIMULATION OF SAILING YACHT SAILS
IM Viola, Yacht and Superyacht Research Group, School of Marine Science and Technology, Newcastle University,
UK, (corresponding author) ignazio.viola@ncl.ac.uk
S Bartesaghi, Mechanical Department, Politecnico di Milano, Italy.
T Van-Renterghem, Yacht and Superyacht Research Group, School of Marine Science and Technology, Newcastle
University, UK.
R Ponzini, CINECA, SuperComputing Applications and Innovation Department (SCAI), Italy.
Wind tunnel experiments on a 1:15th model-scale AC33-class yacht were modelled with Reynolds-
average Navier-Stokes simulations (RANS) and Delayed Detached Eddy Simulations (DDES).
Numerical simulations were performed with two different grids, where the node distance was halved
from the coarser to the finer grid, and with three different time steps, where the smallest one was 1/4th
of the largest one. High-grid-resolution DDES allowed drawing the topology of the turbulent
structures in the sail wake and discovering new flow features, which were hardly detectable with low-
grid-resolution DDES and, particularly, with RANS. It was found that the span-wise twist of the
spinnaker leads to a mid-span helicoidal vortex, which has a horizontal axis almost parallel to the
apparent wind and rotates in the same direction of the tip vortex generated from the head of the sail.
Vortical span-wise tubes are released from the trailing edges of the mainsail and the spinnaker and,
while convecting downstream, these structures roll around the tip and mid-span vortices of the
spinnaker. Vortical tubes are also detached intermittently from the sails’ feet and these break down
into smaller and smaller structures while convecting downstream.
1 INTRODUCTION allow much higher maximum lift and lift/drag ratio than
thick airfoils [2,3]. Sails are very thin airfoils and the
Sailing yacht sails are efficient aerodynamic fins, which flow separates at the leading edge due to the sharpness of
operate at low Reynolds numbers (Re). In particular, full- the edge, leading to a high suction peak [4] (Figure 1).
scale sails operates at Re of the order of ͳͲ଺ (based on The laminar-to-turbulent transition occurs in the
the aerodynamic sail chords) but sails are commonly separated shear layer, leading to reattachment and then to
tested and optimised at Re of the order of ͳͲହ using the development of a turbulent boundary layer. Further
model-scale wind tunnel tests. Traditionally, low-Re downstream along the chord, the sail curvature leads to a
aerodynamics (ܴ݁ ൎ ͳͲସ െ ͳͲହ ሻ has received somewhat second suction peak. Highly cambered sails show
less attention than high-speed aerodynamics (ܴ݁ ൒ ͳͲ଺ ሻ, significant trailing edge separation due to the adverse
though today there is an unmet need for fluid-dynamic pressure gradient correlated with the sail curvature, but
efficiency in emerging applications where fins operate at allow a very high driving force. The sharp leading edge
low Re, such as autonomous underwater vehicles, micro and the second suction peak due to the sail curvature are
aerial vehicles and small renewable energy converters. typical of sails and unusual on airfoils. Figure 1 shows
These applications could benefit from the research on the typical flow and pressure fields when the
sail aerodynamics and, particularly, on the analysis of complementary angle between the true wind velocity and
some characteristic flow features of highly cambered the boat velocity is larger than ͻͲι, leading the boat to
twisted sails leading to good aerodynamic performance. experience a wind coming between roughly Ͷͷι and ͻͲι
from her bow. In these conditions, modern sailing yachts
On conventional thick airfoils at high Re the laminar-to- use a highly cambered foresail, namely the spinnaker,
turbulent transition occurs near the leading edge. and flatter and smaller aft sail, namely the mainsail.
Therefore, the boundary layer is mostly turbulent
allowing large entraining momentum from the outer layer Spinnaker (foresail) and mainsail (aftsail) can be
and making it able to tolerate adverse pressure gradients compared with the two superimposed wings used by
due to the airfoil curvature. Conversely, on the suction biplanes. The chord and span of the fins of an aircraft
side of airfoils at Re between roughly ͷ ή ͳͲସ and ͵ ή ͳͲ଺ and a yacht are of the same order of magnitude but the
[1], a laminar boundary layer develops from the leading thickness and the Re of yacht fins are more than one
edge until separation occurs due to the adverse pressure order of magnitude smaller than those of aircrafts.
gradient; then the unstable separated shear layer triggers Differently from aircraft wings, sails are significantly
the laminar-to-turbulent transition and reattachment twisted and cambered both chord-wise and span-wise.
occurs, leading to the ‘laminar separation bubble’ and to For instance, the spinnaker analysed in this paper has an
a turbulent boundary layer downstream the bubble. At aspect ratio (span/mean-chord) of ͳǤͺሺʹ͵ʹ͸Ȁ
low Re, the performance of conventional thick airfoils ͳʹͻ͹ሻ, a span-wise twist angle (horizontal angle
designed for high Re is poor and thinner airfoils may between the lowest and highest chords) of more than ͳ͹ι,
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

- 129 -
The Third Innternationall Conference on Innovaation in Hig
gh Performa
ance Sailingg Yachts, Lo
orient, Frannce
a chord-wisse camber off of the chord, and a span- neever beer attempted.
a H
However, forcces [5-9] annd
wise cambber of of the spaan. The sail twist prressures [10-16] were meassured in full sccale, though thet
moderates tthe increase of
o angle of attaack due to thee twist no on-controllablle and unmeaasured atmosp pheric boundaary
of the onset flow experieenced by a saailing yacht, nnamely laayer profile liimited the meeasurement acccuracy. Moddel
the apparennt wind. In fact, the app parent wind is the sccale sails are normally tessted in wind tunnels, wheere
ween the true wind and thee boat
vectorial diifference betw flexible sails with
w low thickkness/chord raatio can be used
velocity, aand it increasses and rotattes from thee bow (ffor instance,, [17]). Ho However, PIV V and LD DV
towards thee stern of the boat with thee height (Figuure 2). measurements
m are difficult in wind tunn nels due to thet
The bi-cam mbered (chorrd-wise and span-wise) tw wisted neeed for insem minations annd only unpu ublished smoke
geometry of the sails leadds to a charactteristic wake. ob bservations were performedd. Flow visuallisation is easiier
in
n water tunneels, where unnfortunately th hin models area
-4 ussed with diffiiculty due to tthe very highh hydrodynam mic
Pressure
P
A coeffic
cient
AsymmetricSpinn
naker
-3 lo
oads. A sensible way to study sail wakes w is usinng
nu umerical sim mulations. Pootential flow codes cannnot
-2 model
m viscous effects, whicch are dominaant in the waake
-1 annd, therefore, Navier-Stokees solvers mu ust be used. The
reelatively high Re and the ccomplex 3D geometry maake
Cp 0
Direct
D Numeriical Simulatiions (DNS) unfeasible annd
+1 urbulence musst be modelleed with turbullence models or
tu
Trailingedge
suubgrid modeels. Reynoldds-averaged Navier-Stokkes
separa on siimulations (RA ANS) have beeen performed d since 1996 on o
do ownwind sails [18] and, since then the agreemeent
Lead
dingedge beetween numerrical and expeerimental forcees has increased
bubble
in
n parallel with h the growth of computatiional resourcees.
Leadin
ngedge Th he number off grid cells inccreased by aboout one order of
bubblee magnitude
m every three years rs: Hedges et al. [18] usedd a
nu umber of grid d cells of thee order 103, thhree years latter
Miyata
M and Lee [19] used a number of grid g cells of the t
orrder 104, and ten
t years laterr Viola [20] ussed a number of
S
Spinnaker grrid cells of the order 107. RRichards and Lasher
L [21] annd
Viola
V and Flaay [15] comppared pressurre distributioons
D
Mast Mainsail coomputed with RANS to thoose measured in i wind tunneels.

IN
W
Th hey found go ood numericall-experimentaal agreement on o

th
he mid section ns of the sails but larger diffferences on the
t
Figure 1: Tyypical flow annd pressure diistributions onn sails hiighest sail seections, wheree the suction n peak near the t
leeading edge was under-preddicted by CFD D.
As
A far as kno own by the authors, the present papper
prresents the first publishhed investig gation on saail
aeerodynamics performed with Deetached Edddy
Siimulations (D DES). Howevver, it must be noted thhat
Braun and Imaas [22] statedd that DES was w used in the t
deesign process of an ACC--V5-class yaccht for the 322nd
America’s
A Cupp, though no results were presented; annd
Wright
W et al. [23]
[ presentedd few resultss achieved wiith
DES
D but no dettails were provvided to verify fy the validity of
th
he simulation. In the presennt paper, the wind
w tunnel teest
onn a spinnaker with both RA ANS and DES, using differeent
grrids and time steps, are pressented.
Th he paper is strructured as foollows: in the Method

M sectioon,
th
he experimenttal tests are inntroduced and d the numericcal
siimulations modelling the experiments are describeed,
in
ncluding detaiils of the equuations solved d, the boundaary
Figure 2: TTwist of the apparent
a wind
d experiencedd by a coonditions, the grids and thhe time steps tested, and the t
sailing yachht haardware used d to run the simulations. The proceduure
ussed to asseess the num merical uncerrtainty in the t
The studyy of sails’’ wake can be perfo formed coomputation off forces and ppressures is alsso presented. In
experimentally or numeerically. Full-scale experiiments th
he Results section, the geneeral flow field d computed wiith
are very coomplicated foor wake measurements andd have th
he numerical simulations
s iss presented, annd details of the
t
26TH – 28
2 TH June
e, 2013
130
gh Performa
orient, Frannce
near-wall rregion and ofo the sail wake are discuussed. heeight. The preessure transduucers measured the differennce
Forces andd pressures computed with w the diffferent beetween the saail surface prressure and at 100 Hz.
H
simulationss are compareed with the exxperimental daata. In Prressure coeffiicients, , wwere computeed dividing thhis
the Conclussions section, the key findiings of the ressearch diifference by thhe dynamic prressure, , which
w was tim
me-
are summarrised. avveraged over a period of 770 s and was about 7.5 Pa. P
Foorces were measured
m at 2000 Hz and averaged over the t
2 METHO
OD saame period off 70 s. Uncertaainties in the measurement
m of
were estimaated to be aboout and
2.1 WIND
D TUNNEL TE
ESTS WITH FLEXIBLE S
SAILS fo
or the leeward d and windwarrd sides, respeectively. Severral
phhotographs weere taken duriing the tests and were used to
A 1:15th m model-scale AC33-class
A yaacht equippedd with deetect the flyin
ng shapes of th the two flexible sails in ordder
flexible saills was tested at the Aucklaand Universityy wind to
o make a mathematical m model, which h was used to
tunnel. Figuure 3 (left) shhows the mod del during thee wind peerform CFD simulations and, successsively, to buiild
tunnel test. The tunnel hash a 3.5-m-h high and 7-m m-wide rigid sails for fu
urther tests.
open jet seection, wheree the floor an nd the roof eextend
downstream m for 5.1m and 4.8m, respeectively. The 22.3-m- 2..2 WIND TU
UNNEL TEST
TS WITH RIG
GID SAILS
high modell was placed on o the wind tu unnel floor att 2.7m
downstream m from the open jet seection. A fllexible Th he mathematical model of tthe flying shaapes was used to
spinnaker aand mainsail were
w mounted d on a modell scale buuild a CAD/C CAM woodenn mould, whicch, in turn, was w
yacht, whicch included thet hull and the t rigging, aat ussed to build rigid
r a a sandwich
sails witth fibreglass and
apparent wind angle andd heel anggle. Viola andd Flay sttructure [26]. The sails w were less thaan 4-mm thicck,
reported thee force [24] and
a pressure [25] [ measurem ments. mainly
m due to the
t thickness oof the core, with
w the externnal
Forces werre measured using a 6-ccomponent baalance fibbreglass lay yer of neegligible th hickness. The
placed undeerneath the wind
w tunnel flo
oor, and sail suurface th
hickness/chord d ratio was leess than 1%.. The core was w
pressures wwere measuredd using pressu ure taps attachhed to made
m of extru
uded polyproppylene, resultting in paralllel
the sails. P
Pressure taps were
w 20-mm long, 10-mm m wide sq
quare tubes. These
T were useed to carry thhe pressure froom
and 4-mm hheight, attacheed to the sail ono the oppositte side 1--mm-diameterr holes on the he sail surfacee to the trailinng
to that undder investigation, and a 1--mm-diameterr hole eddge, where 1-mm inteernal-diameterr PVC tubees,
was made in the sail to allow
a pressure transmission to the her along the ttrailing edge towards the sail
gaathered togeth
tap. PVC tubes withh a 1-mm internal diam meter, fo t pressure to the pressu
oot, carried the ure transduceers
suspended from the saiil to the boatt mast, carrieed the lo
ocated on thee boat deck. Figure 3 (right) shows the t
pressures frrom the tap too the pressure transducers loocated model
m during the wind tunnnel tests. Th he same testinng
on the booat deck. Preessure taps were w placed on 5 seetup as the one adopted w with flexible sails was useed:
horizontal ssections at heiights of 1/8, 1/4,
1 1/2, 3/4 annd 7/8 prressures were measured at tthe same sail sections, forcces
of the mitree, which is the line on the sail surface eqqually annd pressuress were m measured witth the sam me
far from tthe leech andd the luff. The T far-field static in
nstrumentation n, at the sam me frequency y and averagged
pressure was computted by the diffference of thee total ovver 70 secondds. Uncertaintiies in the meaasurement of
and dynam mic pressures measured
m by a Pitot static probe were
w estimated to be the sam me as for flexibble sails.
located appproximately 10 1 m upstreaam at the topp-mast
Figuree 3: Wind tunn

nel tests perforrmed with flex
xible sails (lefft) and rigid saails (right).
26TH – 28
2 TH June
e, 2013
131
2.3 COMPUTATIONAL DOMAIN AND BOUNDARY preferred to more accurate two-equations models in order
CONDITIONS to decrease the computational time. The production term
of the modified turbulent viscosity ߥ෤ was computed with
The detected flying shapes of the sails were used to a vorticity-based approach, and at the inlet it was set as
perform the numerical simulations. Sails, mast, boom follows: ߥ෤ ൌ ͵଴Ǥହ ʹି଴Ǥହ ܷஶ ܶ௨ ‫ܮ‬௧ . A SIMPLEC scheme
(horizontal mast at the mainsail foot) and hull were was used to couple velocity and pressure. A second-
modelled with non-slip condition. A prismatic order- accurate centred discretization algorithm was used
computational domain 3-m high, 6.2-m wide and 18.4-m for the pressure, while second-order-accurate upwind
long was used to model the wind tunnel (Figure 4). The algorithms were used for momentum and modified
domain length is equivalent to eight times the boat height turbulent viscosity.
ሺ݄ ൌ ʹǤ͵ m). A smaller test section than the physical one
was modelled (3x6.2 m instead of 3.5x7 m) in order to
avoid solving the sidewall and roof boundary layers. Slip
condition was used on these boundaries from the inlet to
the open jet section, while pressure outlet was used
downstream from the open jet section. The experimental
blockage is almost negligible and mostly due to the wind
tunnel sidewalls which decrease the deflection of the
streamlines upstream the model. This effect is taken into
account using slip conditions, though it has an almost
negligible effect being the open jet section wider than
ͳǤͷ݄ and more than h upstream from the model. The
onset vertical velocity profile measured in the wind
tunnel experiment was used as inlet condition. The wind
direction was uniform on the test section (un-twisted
flow), while the wind speed presented a boundary layer
profile on the floor. Therefore, non-slip condition was Figure 4: Computational domain and boundary
conditions.
used on the floor boundary, which extend ͵Ǥͷ݉
downstream from the model. The mean velocity of the
Table 1: y+ for the two grids computed with RANS and
onset flow was ܷஶ ൌ ͵Ǥͷ݉Ȁ‫ݏ‬ሺ͹Ǥͷܲܽሻ, the turbulent
DDES
intensity was set to ܶ௨ ൌ ͵Ψ, as measured in the wind
Min Max
tunnel, while the turbulent length scale was assumed to
4M RANS 0.58 8.56
be ݈௧ ൌ ͲǤͲͳ݉ሺൎ ݄ΤʹͲͲሻ. The computational domain
4M DDES 0.76 9.05
extended downstream further than the end of the physical
32M DDES 0.19 5.54
roof and floor, therefore pressure outlet conditions were
used on these boundaries.
2.6 DELAYED DETACHED EDDY SIMULATION
2.4 GRIDS
The transient Navier-Stokes equations were solved with a
DES approach. A Spalart-Allmaras turbulence model,
Two non-structured hexahedra grids were build with
with a vorticity-based production term, was used to
Pointwise version 16.04 R1. The coarse grid was made of
model the turbulence in the RANS region. In order to
four million cells (4M). Figures 5 shows the surface grid
preserve the RANS model throughout the whole
on the spinnaker (left) and a grid section at 1/2 of the
boundary layer, the DES length scale was modified as
spinnaker’s mitre height (right). The 4M-cell grid
suggested by Spalart et al. [27] for the Delayed Detached
allowed modelling the spinnaker with about 60 cells
Eddy Simulation approach. A SIMPLEC scheme was
chord-wise and about 64 cells span-wise, with y+ ranging
used to couple velocity and pressure. Second order
from 0.01 to 10. A finer grid was achieved using the
accuracy discretization algorithm was used for the
hanging node function of Ansys Fluent version 13.0.0,
pressure, while second order central difference
which split every cell in eight cells leading to a 32-
algorithms were used for momentum and modified
million-cells grid (32M). Table 1 shows the maximum
turbulent viscosity. The fluctuating velocity components
and minimum y+ computed by the different simulations
at the inlet were computed by synthesizing a divergence-
on the suction side of the spinnaker.
free velocity-vector field from the summation of 100
Fourier harmonics. More details on the numerics can be
2.5 REYNOLDS-AVERAGED NAVIER-STOKES
found in the User Manual of Ansys Fluent [28].
The incompressible steady RANS equations for
2.7 TEST MATRIX
Newtonian fluids were solved with the finite-volume
pressure-based solver of Ansys Fluent version 13.0.0.
A RANS simulation was performed on the 4M-cell grid,
The Spalart-Allmaras turbulence model was used to
while DDES simulations were performed on both the
model the turbulence. This one-equation model was
4M-cell grid and the 32M-cell grid. On the coarser grid,
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

132
three different time steps were tested, 0.001 s, 0.002 s does not necessarily show asymptotic convergence with
and 0.0005 s, in order to estimate the uncertainty due to increasing resolution [29].
the time discretisation, while the maximum number of
iterations per time step was kept constant to 20, allowing The uncertainty at 95% confidence level was computed
convergence at each time step. All these time steps following the guidelines of Viola et al. [30]. For
allowed Courant numbers in the sails’ wake lower than example, the uncertainty ܷ௧ ஼ due to the time step for the
ವ
one. For instance, with a time step of 0.001 s and the 4M- CD were estimated using Equations (1):
cells grid, the Courant number ranged from ͳͲିହ to
ͳͲିଶ . On the 32M-cell grid, only the intermediate time ‫ܥ‬஽ ெ஺௑ െ ‫ܥ‬஽ ெூே
step (0.001 s) was used with 20 iterations per time step. ܷ௧ ஼ ൌ ͳǤͷ ሺ૚ሻ
ವ ͲǤͲͲͲͷ
Table 2 summarises the numerical simulations ͳെ
ͲǤͲͲʹ
performed.
where ‫ܥ‬஽ ெ஺௑ and ‫ܥ‬஽ ெூே are the maximum and the
All the numerical simulations ran until convergence was minimum CD, respectively, between those computed with
achieved for the aerodynamic forces. In particular, lift, time steps 0.0005 s, 0.001 s and 0.002 s.
drag and heeling moment were monitored. Forces,
pressure and velocity fields computed with DDES were The uncertainty ܷ௚ due to the grid for the CD were
஼ವ
averaged over a period of 10 s. For example, Figure 6
(left) shows the convergence of the drag coefficient ‫ܥ‬ௗ of estimated using Equations (2):
the two sails (hull and rigging excluded) for the DDES
‫ܥ‬஽ ெ஺௑ െ ‫ܥ‬஽ ெூே
simulations performed with high grid resolution. ܷ௚ ൌ ͳǤͷ య ሺ૛ሻ
஼ವ
ξͶ
ͳെ య
Table 2: Test matrix of the numerical simulations ξ͵ʹ
Space Time where ‫ܥ‬஽ ெ஺௑ and ‫ܥ‬஽ ெூே are the maximum and the
Method discretisation discretisation minimum CD, respectively, between those computed with
the 4M-cells grid and the 32M-cells grid, respectively.
RANS 4M-cell grid Steady
DDES 4M-cell grid 0.0005 s The convergence uncertainty ܷ௖ was estimated as two
DDES 4M-cell grid 0.0010 s times the standard deviation of the time history of each
DDES 4M-cell grid 0.0020 s quantity ‫׎‬. For instance, Figure 6 (right) shows the mean
DDES 32M-cell grid 0.0010 s (dotted line) and the uncertainty (error bar) of the drag
coefficient: ‫ ׎‬ൌ ‫ܥ‬ௗ Ǥ The convergence uncertainties for
2.8 HARDWARE CD and CL were ܷ஼಴ ൌ ͲǤͲͳ͸‫ܥ‬஽ and ܷ஼಴ ൌ ͲǤͲͳͲ‫ܥ‬௅ ,
ವ ಽ
respectively.
All simulations were performed in double precision on a
64-bit Hewlett-Packard Linux cluster made of 336 nodes The numerical uncertainty was then computed as the L2-
HP 2x220 2xIntel Exa-cores 3.166 GHz — 24Gb RAM norm of the uncertainties due to the time step and due to
per node interconnected with Infiniband QDR and a node the grid, plus the convergence uncertainty, which is not
HP DL980 8 CPU Intel E5420 — 512 GB RAM for post- under the square root because it is not independent from
processing and results visualization. In order to take the other two uncertainties (Equation 3):
advantage of the High Performance Computing system, a
preliminary scalability test using the smallest grid was
performed. According to the scalability results the ܷ‫ ׎‬ൌ ටܷ௧ ‫ ׎‬ଶ ൅ ܷ௚ ଶ ൅ ܷ௖ ‫ ׎‬ሺ͵ሻ
‫׎‬
calculations on the different grid sizes have been
performed using up to 256 computational cores.
The resulting uncertainties for the aerodynamic forces
2.9 VERIFICATION were ܷ஼ವ ൌ ͲǤͳͳ‫ܥ‬஽ and ܷ஼ಽ ൌ ͲǤͲͻ͸‫ܥ‬௅ ; while the
largest numerical uncertainty for the pressure coefficient
Different time and grid resolutions allowed estimating was ܷ஼೛ ௠௔௫ ൌ ͳǤ͸.
the numerical uncertainty for forces and pressures with
DDES. This estimate is only approximate; in fact DDES
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

133
gh Performa
orient, Frannce
Figure 5: Siide view of thhe spinnaker’s grid and plann view on a section at the sp
pinnaker’s midd height.
Figure 6: C
Convergence of for the DDES
D 32M sim
mulation (left)) and examplee of convergennce uncertainty (right)
3. RESUL
LTS 3..1 GENERAL FLOW FIE
ELD
The DES aapproach alloowed the identification off flow Fiigure 7 shows the general flow field arround the yaccht
structures tthat have nevver been solv ved with a R RANS coomputed with h RANS usingg the 4M-celll grid. Pathlinnes
approach soo far. The keyy findings of this
t research aare the arre coloured by y flow velocitty. The two sails behave like
identificatioon of these strructures, and the
t analysis oof their taandem wings where the sppinnaker is laarger and moore
effect on tthe sails’ meean pressures. In the nextt sub- caambered than the mainsaill. The grey scale
s shows the
t
sections, firrstly we provvide an overv view of the ggeneral prressure differrence across tthe sail surfaace. The largger
flow field, then we show w where the flow separatees and deelta pressures on the spinnaaker than on the
t mainsail are
a
reattaches along the sppinnaker surfface, and theen we du ue to the favo
ourable upwassh of the maiinsail, while the
t
discuss the different floww structures in n the sail wakke. We mainsail
m experiiences the unnfavourable do
ownwash of thet
then discusss similarities and differeences betweeen the sppinnaker.
forces andd the pressurre distribution ns computedd with
RANS, DES and measurred experimen ntally. Th
he flow is attached on the leeward (sucttion) side of the
t
pinnaker near the leading eedge, while near
sp n the trailinng
26TH – 28
2 TH June
e, 2013
134
edge separation occurs. Streamlines from the leading Near the leading edge, a laminar-separation bubble
edge converge towards two vortical structures: the tip occurs. In sail aerodynamics the separation is associated
vortex at the head of the sails and a parallel vortex at with the sharp leading edge and it is continuous along all
mid-span height. As far as is known by the present the leading edge from the head to the foot. In
authors, this mid-span vortex, which will be discussed in conventional wings, such as those used in aeronautics,
sub-sections, has never been identified before. It is due to the laminar separation bubble occurs only in the middle
the span-wise camber, which leads to convergence of of the wing and not near the root and the tip. For this
streamlines toward mid-span. Most of the separated reason it is called laminar-separation “bubble”.
flow, downstream of the trailing edge separation, is Therefore, in sail aerodynamics, it may be more
convected into this vortex. appropriate to use laminar-separation “tube”. The
laminar-separation tube (LST) is smaller near the sail
On the windward (pressure) side, the flow is attached and foot and becomes progressively larger towards the sail’s
the streamlines, which are not showed in Figure 7, are head. The flow within the LST has a strong vertical
slightly deflected upwards. This is due to the trailing component, as observed also by Viola et al [15],
edge being somewhat higher than the leading edge. In transferring kinetic energy from the lower sections to the
fact, the lower corner of the trailing edge, namely the tip vortex.
clew (Figure 5), is higher than the lower corner of the
leading edge, namely the tack. Only those streamlines The 32M-DDES results are in very good agreement with
which are near the sail foot are attracted by the suction the visual observations performed in the wind tunnel
on the leeward side and are thus deflected downward with rigid sails. In particular, the position of separation
convecting into the separated flow region downstream and reattachment lines were qualitatively confirmed
the sail foot. using a stick with a wool tail. However, the vertical flow
component of the flow in the region around mid-chord at
1
3.2 NEAR-WALL REGION /8 of the mitre height seemed over predicted.
Figure 8 shows skin friction lines on the leeward surface 3.3 WAKE
of the spinnaker computed with the 4M-cells-grid RANS
(left), the 4M-cells-grid DDES (centre), and the 32M- Figure 9 shows iso-surfaces of Q-criterion [31] equal to
cells-grid DDES (right). Results for the two DDES 500. The higher the Q-criterion, the more the flow
simulations are achieved with a time step of 0.001 s and rotation dominates the strain and the shear of the flow,
we showed the instantaneous solution at 30 s. Mean skin therefore it can be interpreted as an index of the
friction lines for DDES were not computed within the coherency of the flow structure. Iso-surfaces are coloured
timeframe of this research project. Representative skin by the sign of the helicity, red being positive and blue
friction lines, highlighted with a solid red line, show that negative. Helicity is computed with reference to the
the flow is mainly attached in the region near the leading right-handed (positive) Cartesian coordinate system,
edge, while trailing edge separation occurs (dash-dotted where the x, y, z axes are the longitudinal, transverse and
line) somewhere on the second half of the chord. As a vertical axes of the wind tunnel, positive towards the
reference, several fractions of the spinnaker mitre (the inlet, towards leeward and upwards, respectively.
line equidistant from the leading and trailing edge) are
showed on the right-end side of Figure 8. Between ½ and On the left in Figure 9 the results for the 4M-cell grid
¾ of the mitre, the flow is mostly horizontal before solved with a RANS approach are presented. The
trailing edge separation occurs. Conversely, below ½ of leeward side of the spinnaker is mostly covered by an
the mitre, the attached boundary layer is deflected iso-surface with negative helicity. The negative helicity
upwards. In the separated region downstream of the is due to the negative span-wise vorticity of the boundary
trailing edge separation, the flow from the lower region layer. Near the trailing edge, separation occurs leading to
moves upwards and converges towards the trailing edge less coherent flow structures and lower values of the Q-
separation line (dash-dotted line) between ½ and ¾ of the criterion. The tip vortex from the spinnaker’s head is the
mitre. It is interesting to note that the flow field near the larger visible flow structure. It convects along an axis
spinnaker’s clew is computed differently with low and which is almost aligned with the wind direction. A
high-grid resolution. Only DDES with high grid similar vortex develops from the spinnaker’s clew (lower
resolution predicts a clear trailing-edge separation from corner of the trailing edge), and rotates in the opposite
¾ of the mitre to the sail foot, while RANS and DDES direction than the head vortex. Interestingly, the mid-
computed with low grid resolution do not show a span vortex is not visible, meaning that its coherency is
continuous trailing-edge separation line. weaker than those of the visualised structures.
Near the sail foot, the flow from the leading edge is In the centre of Figure 9, the same grid is solved with a
deflected downwards due to the low pressure associated DDES approach. Despite the low grid resolution (4M-
with the highly curved streamlines coming from the cells), LES allows solving these flow structures with a
windward side and rolling over the sail foot. much greater extent than RANS. In particular, we found
that the tip vortex generated from the head of the
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

135
mainsail rolls around the spinnaker’s tip vortex. Also, section A, B, C and D (Figure 10), respectively, are
small flow structures, which become more visible with shown. This sequence allows the visualisation of the
the 32M-cells-grid DDES (right in Figure 9), appear near correlation between the various flow structures in the sail
the sail foot. These are chord-wise-stretched vortices wake. The vertically stretched trailing edge vortex rolls
generated from the spinnaker’s foot and convected around the tip and the mid-span vortices, which both
downstream intermittently, breaking down into smaller have horizontal axes and rotate clock-wise. Therefore,
and smaller structures. the trailing edge vortex, which is a tube parallel to the
trailing edge when detached form the sail, assumes an ‘S’
Span-wise-stretched vortices are generated from the shape while convecting downstream. The ‘S’ shape is
trailing edge with a significantly lower frequency than schematically showed with a solid yellow line in Figure
those from the sail foot. The few periods computed with 12 (right), while dotted lines show the two axes of the tip
the simulations did not allowed an accurate measurement and mid-span vortices. The weaker trailing edge vortex
of these frequencies. Decreasing the Q-criterion from of the mainsail also rolls around the tip and mid-span
500 to 100, it is possible to see that these vortices do not vortices, but due to its windward position with respect to
break down as quickly as those from the foot but, the mid-span vortex, it is broken down into two vortices
conversely, are stretched between the tip vortex and the schematically showed by two white solid lines in Figure
mid-span vortex. Figure 10 shows the same comparison 12 (right).
between different simulations as Figure 9 but with a
different prospective view and decreasing the Q-criterion Figure 12 shows the differences between 4M-RANS,
to 100. In order to allow the spinnaker to be visible, the 4M-DDES and 32M-DDES in modelling the evolution of
iso-surface of Q-criterion is hidden in a near-wall region. the spinnaker and mainsail trailing edge vortices. In
While the mid-span vortex is hardly visible for the particular, the same view as Figure 11(C) is used in
RANS simulation, it appears clearly in the two DDES Figure 12. The axes of the tip and mid-span vortices
simulations. In particular, with low grid resolution computed with high grid resolution are superimposed for
(centre in Figure 10), the mid-span vortex is showed by a comparison on the low grid-resolution RANS and DES,
continuous vortical tube while its complicated structure revealing that the lower grid resolution leads also to
is revealed using higher grid resolution. different directions of the axes. Videos of the
simulations, which are available on the webpage of the
Figure 11 shows four views of the Q-criterion iso- first author [www.ignazioviola.com], show that the
surfaces computed with the 32M-cells-grid DDES. In the directions of these axes are stationary but different for
four different views, only the flow structures upstream of the two DDES simulations.
High Vel High p
Low Vel Low p
Figure 7: Pathlines computed with RANS on the 4M-cell grid.
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

136
7/8
3/4
1/2
1/4
1/8
4M RANS 4M DDES 32M DDES
Figure 8: Skin friction lines on the leeward side of the spinnaker computed by RANS and DDES with the 4M-cell and
the 32M-cell grids.
Figure 9: Iso-surfaces of Q-criterion 500 coloured by helicity computed by RANS and DDES with the 4M-cell and the
32M-cell grids
C C D C B A
32M-cell grids
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

137
A B C D
32M DDES 32M DDES 32M DDES 32M DDES
Figure 11: Iso-surfaces of Q-criterion 100 coloured by helicity computed by DDES with the 32M-cell grid viewed from
four different positions downstream the yacht model.
C C C

32M-cell grids viewed from position ‘C’.
3.4 FORCES computed with DDES are lower than those computed
with RANS, though their trends are to increase with the
The forces measured with the two experiments showed time and the space resolution. However, different
significant differences and the numerical results of the resolutions lead to small differences. In particular,
different simulations are mostly in between the differences are smaller than 1% and 3% for CD and CL,
experimental ranges. Figure 13 show the drag and lift respectively. Interestingly, RANS and DDES with the
coefficients (CD and CL, respectively) experimentally same grid resolution show larger differences than two
measured and numerically computed. Coefficients are DDES simulations where the grid resolution is doubled.
defined as the total aerodynamic force acting on the sails,
rigging and hull, divided by the far field dynamic Figure 14 shows the breakdown of the aerodynamic
pressure ‫ݍ‬ஶ and the sail surface. The experimental CD coefficients for the spinnaker, the mainsail and the two
ranges between 0.52 for the rigid sails to 0.64 for the sails combined but without hull and rigging. For the three
flexible sails, while the CD computed with the different cases, the coefficients were computed using only the sail
DDES simulations ranges between 0.52 and 0.56. area of the spinnaker, mainsail and the two sails together,
Similarly, experimental CL ranges between 1.31 for rigid respectively. These broken-down coefficients, which are
sails to 1.51 for flexible sails, while CL computed with achieved with difficulty with experimental tests, show
the different DDES simulations ranges between 1.43 and that the spinnaker is significantly more efficient than the
1.46. CD and CL computed with RANS show the mainsail, having higher CL and lower CD, despite its
maximum differences with the experimental data. In aspect ratio is about half the one of the mainsail. This is
particular, while CD is between the maximum and largely due to the upwash and downwash experienced by
minimum experimental CD, while CL is 1% higher than spinnaker and mainsail, respectively.
the largest experimental CL (flexible sails). CD and CL
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

138
gh Performa
orient, Frannce
Figure 13: CD (left) and CL (right) for the whole moodel computed
d with the num
merical simulaations and meeasured with the
t
two experim
mental tests.
abbove the ideaal one, a veryy sharp leadin ng edge suctioon

peeak occurs, which
w is cleearly visible on the loweest
seections of the sail. On the hhighest section
n of the sail, the
t
anngle of attack is higher, leaading to a larg
ger leading-eddge
su
uction peak bu ut also to a wiider pressure plateau
p near the
t
trailing edge due
d to trailinng edge sepaaration. On the t
hiighest sectionns, where thee LST fails to t reattach, the
t
su
uction peak iss very close to the leadin ng edge and
dooes not show the
t suction peeak due to the sail curvaturee.
Th he larger diifferences beetween the numerical annd

exxperimental are near thee leading edgee on the higheest
seection. In this region, the diifferences betwween numericcal
siimulations perrformed with different grid d and time-sttep
Figure 14: CD and CL of the two sails computted by reesolutions showed large diffferences. Theerefore, it seem ms
DDES withh the 32M-celll grid. th
hat the spatial and time resoolution used to t model the tipt
voortex is criticcal to the corrrect computaation of the saail
3. 5 PRES
SSURES suurface pressurres. The diffeerent trends of on the 7/8
7
seection are reflected on the 33/4 section, while
w differencces
Figure 15 shows the prressure distrib butions on fivve sail arre small on the t lowest seections. The computed baase
sections of the spinnakerr: 7/8, 3/4, 1/2
2, 1/4 and 1/8 of the prressure of the pressure platteau near the trailing edge is
mitre respeectively. The pressure
p coeffficient is definned as allso quite different frrom the one o measurred
, wheere is the pressures
p meaasured exxperimentally. Both the diff fferences noted d on the higheest
on the sail ssurface. onn both the win
ndward and leeeward seections and tho ose near the trrailing edge su
uggest that floow
seeparation waas under-preedicted by the numericcal
pressure siddes are presennted versus th he non-dimennsional
siimulations.
chord-wise coordinate . On the leeft in Figure 115,
computed w with RANS, 4M-DDES an nd 32M-DDE ES are As
A a confirmattion of the treends showed by b the forces in
presented. The two DD DES simulatio ons are perfoformed Fiigure 13, computed wi with RANS an nd DDES shoow
with a tim me step of 0.001 s. Also, A meaasured
laarger differen nces than computed with differeent
experimentally with booth flexible and a rigid sai ls are
reesolutions. Parrticularly, largger differences occur near the
t
presented ffor comparisoon. Error barss for the 32M M-cells
heead and foot ofo the sail, whhile on the miid section of the
t
grid show tthe estimated numerical un ncertainties. O
On the
sppinnaker differences are sm maller. On the lowest sectionns,
right in Figure 15, computed with 4M-DDES S and
RANS
R predictts a later traailing edge separation
s thhan
three differrent time stepss of 0.0005 s,, 0.001 s and 0.002 DDES
D and thus a larger suct ction peak correlated with the
t
s, respectively, are presennted. saail curvature. On the highhest section, wherew the LS ST
faails to reattachh, the suctionn on the leew ward side of the
t
The pressuure distributions show that sails operatee very saail is quite seensitive to thee different timme steps testted
close to thee ideal angle of
o attack, meaaning that thee flow with
w DDES, leading to highher numerical uncertainty annd
at the leadinng edge is paarallel to the lo
ocal sail surfaace. In hus to larger error bars. U
th Using differentt time and grrid
this condittion, on the leeward sidee of the saiil, the reesolutions, thee same pressurre trend is com mputed near the
t
pressure deecreases graduually from the leading edge to the trailing edge annd on the winddward side of the sail.
point of maaximum sail curvature. At angles
a of attacck just
26TH – 28
2 TH June
e, 2013
139
The experimental tests presented in this paper are the resolution DDES and, particularly, with RANS. A
first of their kind and the large differences between ‫ܥ‬௣ helicoidal tip vortex is generated from the head of the
measured with flexible and rigid sails show that the level spinnaker and convects downstream in the direction of
of accuracy of these tests is still quite poor. The the far field velocity. The tip vortex from the head of the
differences between the two measurements are probably mainsail rolls around the former one. The span-wise twist
due to differences in the sail shapes used during the two of the spinnaker also leads to a mid-span helicoidal
experiments. In fact, on one hand the shape of flexible vortex having a horizontal axis and rotating in the same
sails is measured with difficulty, and on the other hand direction of the tip vortex. It should be noted that the
rigid sails may experience deformations due to their own mid-span vortex has never been reported by previous
weight, being suspended only from the head and tack authors, and its role on the aerodynamic performance of
corners. The numerical simulations are based on the the sail should be further explored. Vortical span-wise
flexible-sail flying shapes, which were also used to build tubes are released from the trailing edges of the mainsail
the mould for the rigid sails. Further investigations are in and the spinnaker and, while convecting downstream,
progress in order to establish if the main source of these structures roll around the tip and mid-span vortices
inaccuracy is the photogrammetric reconstruction of the of the spinnaker. Vortical tubes are also detached
flexible sails or the deformation of the rigid sails. In the intermittently from the sails’ feet and these break down
first case, the geometry modelled numerically would be into smaller and smaller structures while convecting
more similar to the rigid sails, while in the second case it downstream.
would be more similar to the flexible sails.
The comparison between the different numerical models
4 CONCLUSIONS showed that DDES allow a step change in the
understanding of the sails’ wake topology. Importantly,
In the present work, wind tunnel experiments on a 1:15th the more resolved sail wake led to differences on the
model-scale sailing yacht were modelled with RANS pressure distributions on the sails and thus on the global
(Reynolds-average Navier-Stokes simulations) and aerodynamic performances. Forces and surface pressures
DDES (Delayed Detached Eddy Simulations), allowing computed with DDES were in better agreement with the
new insights on the aerodynamics of sails. In particular, experimental data than those computed with RANS,
sails are efficient aerodynamic fins, which operate at low though significant differences between the measurements
Reynolds numbers. The tested configuration foresaw two performed with flexible and rigid sails did not allow a
sails in tandem where the spinnaker (foresail) had larger proper verification of the numerical simulations.
sail area, low aspect ratio and high camber, while the
mainsail (aftsail) had smaller sail area, higher aspect ratio DDES with different time and space resolutions led to
and less camber. Most of the aerodynamic load was similar forces and pressure distributions, while RANS
carried by the spinnaker, which experienced the upwash led to significantly different pressure distributions and,
of the mainsail. particularly to higher suction on the leeward side on the
lowest sections of the spinnaker, leading to larger global
Experiments were performed with both flexible and rigid aerodynamic forces. While the forces predicted by DDES
sails, and both global aerodynamic forces and pressure were between the maximum and the minimum forces
distributions on sails were measured. Numerical measured with flexible and rigid sails, RANS predicted a
simulations were performed with two different grids, lift force 1% and 17% larger than the those measured
where the node distance was halved from the coarser to with flexible and rigid sails, respectively. Therefore
the finer grid, and with three different time steps, where DDES seems to be able to predict sail performance more
the smallest one was 1/4 of the largest one. accurately than RANS. Forces and pressures were almost
independent from the time and space resolutions tested in
The high grid and space resolution allowed modelling the the present work. The largest differences were observed
flow near the sails with high accuracy. An attached on the suction side of the spinnaker in the region of
boundary layer was found on the windward side separated flow: on the highest sections near the leading
(pressure side) of the sails while the flow separates on edge and downstream from the trailing edge separation.
the leeward side (suction side) along all the leading edge
of the spinnaker. Laminar to turbulent transition occurs 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
on the separated shear layer and the flow reattaches on
most of the sail but not on the highest region, creating a This research was supported in part by CILEA
span-wise-axis laminar separation tube. The reattached Interuniversity Consortium (Italy), CFD Technologies
turbulent boundary layer grows along the sail chord for (UK) and ANSYS (Italy), who kindly provided HPC
more than half chord, when trailing edge separation resources, licences of Pointwise and Fluent, respectively.
occurs.
High-grid-resolution DDES allowed drawing the

topology of the sail’s wake and discovering new flow
features, which were barely detectable with low-grid-
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

140
Model and grid-resolution effect Time – step effect

Cp -5 Cp -5
Section 7/8 Section 7/8
-4 -4
-3 -3
-2 -2
-1 -1
0 0
-4 -4
-3 -3
-2 -2
-1 -1
0 0
-3 -3
-2 -2
-1 -1
0 0
-3 -3
-2 -2
-1 -1
0 0
-3 -3
-2 -2
-1 -1
0 0
+1 +1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 10 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
x/c x/c
Figure 15: Cp versus x/c on five horizontal sail sections computed with different simulations and measured with the two
experimental tests.
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

141
6 REFERENCES Design Conference, December 2nd-4th, Auckland, New

Zealand.
1. Hain, R., Kahler, C.J., Radespiel, R., 2009. Dynamics
of Laminar Separation Bubbles at low-Reynolds-number 13. Puddu, P., Erriu, N., Nurzia, F., Pistidda, A., Mura,
Aerofoils, J. Fluid Mech., 630, 129-153. A., 2006. Full Scale Investigation of One-Design Class
Catamaran Sails, Proc. 2nd High Performance Yacht
2. Hoerner, S.F., Borst, H.V., 1985. Fluid-dynamic Lift. Design Conference, February 14th-16th, Auckland, New
Information on Lift and its Derivatives, in air and in Zealand.
Water. Bakersfield, CA, Hoerner Fluid Dynamics.
14. Viola, I.M., Flay, R.G.J., 2010. FullȬscale Pressure
3. Shyy, W., Lian, Y., Tang, J., Viieru, D., Liu, H., 2008. Measurements on a Sparkman & Stephens 24-foot
Aerodynamics of Low Reynolds Number Flyers, Sailing Yacht, Journal of Wind Engineering and
Cambridge University Press. ISBN:9780521882781 Industrial Aerodynamics, 98, 800Ȭ807.
4. Viola, I.M., Flay, R.G.J., 2011. Sail Aerodynamics: 15. Viola, I.M., Flay, R.G.J., 2011. Sail Pressures from
Understanding Pressure Distributions on Upwind Sails, Full-Scale, Wind-Tunnel and Numerical Investigations,
Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, 35 (8), 1497- Ocean Engineering, 38, 1733-1743.
1504.
16. Viola, I.M., Flay, R.G.J., 2012. Sail Aerodynamics:
5. Milgram, J.H., Peters, D.B., Eckhouse, D.N., 1993. On Water Pressure Measurements on a Downwind Sail,
Modeling IACC Sail Forces by Combining Journal of Ship Research (SNAME), 56 (4), 197-206.
Measurements with CFD, Proc. 11th Chesapeake Sailing
Yacht Symposium, January 29th-30th, Annapolis, MD, 17. Claughton, A.R., Wellicome, J.F., Shenoi, R.A.,
65-73. 2006. Sailing Yacht Design: Theory, 2nd revised edition.
University of Southampton, Computing Service,
6. Masuyama, Y., Fukasawa, T., 1997. Full-Scale Southampton, UK. ISBN-10: 0854328297
Measurements of Sail force and Validation of Numerical
Calculation Method, Proc. 13th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht 18. Hedges, K.L., Richards, P.J., Mallison, G.D., 1996.
Symposium, January 25th, Annapolis, MD, 23-36. Computer Modelling of Downwind Sails, J. of Wind
Eng. and Ind. Aerody., 63, 95-110.
7. Hochkirch, K., Brandt, H., 1999. Full-Scale
Hydrodynamic Force Measurement on the Berlin Sailing 19. Miyata, H., Lee, Y.W., 1999. Application of CFD
Dynamometer, Proc. 14th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Simulation to the Design of Sails, J. Marine Science &
Symposium, January 30th, Annapolis, MD, 33-44. Tech, 4, 163-172.
8. Masuyama, Y., Tahara, Y., Fukasawa, T., Maeda, N., 20. Viola, I.M., 2009. Downwind Sail Aerodynamics: a
2009. Database of Sail Shapes versus Sail Performance CFD Investigation with High Grid Resolution, Ocean
and Validation of Numerical Calculations for the Upwind Engineering, 36 (12-13), 974-984.
condition, J. Mar. Sci. Tech., 14, 137-160.
21. Richards, P., Lasher, W., 2008. Wind Tunnel and
9. Hansen, H., Jackson, P.S., Hochkirch, K., 2003. CFD Modelling of Pressures on Downwind Sails, Proc.
Comparison of Wind Tunnel and Full-Scale BBAA VI International Colloquium on Bluff Bodies
Aerodynamic Sail Force Measurements, Int. J. of Small Aerodynamics and Applications, July 20th-24th, Milan,
Craft Tech., RINA Trans., 145(B1), 23-31. Italy.
10. Warner, E.P., Ober, S., 1925. The aerodynamics of 22. Braun, J.B, Imas, L., 2008. High Fidelity CFD
Yacht Sails, Proc. 3rd General Meeting of the Society of Simulations in Racing Yacht Aerodynamic Analysis,”
Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, November 12th- Proc. 3rd High Performance Yacht Design Conference,
13th, New York, NY. December 2nd-4th, Auckland, New Zealand.
11. Flay, R.G.J., Millar, S., 2006. Experimental 23. Wright, A.M., Claughton, A.R., Paton, J., Lewins, R.,
Consideration Concerning Measurements in Sails: Wind 2010. Off-Wind Sail Performance Prediction and
Tunnel and Full Scale, Proc. 2nd High Performance Yacht Optimisation, Proc. 2nd International Conference on
Design Conference, February 14th-16th, Auckland, New Innovations in High Performance Sailing Yachts, June
Zealand. 30th – July 1st, Lorient, France.
12. Gaves, W., Barbera, T., Braun, J.B., Imas, L., 2008. 24. Viola I.M., Flay R.G.J., Force and Pressure
Measurements and Simulation of Pressure Distribution Investigation of Modern Asymmetric Spinnakers,
on Full size scales, Proc. 3rd High Performance Yacht International Journal of Small Craft Technology, Trans.
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

142
RINA, 151 (B2), 31Ȭ40, 2009 (Discussion in Trans. AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY

RINA, 152 (B1), 51Ȭ 53, 2010).
Ignazio Maria Viola, PhD, is Lecturer in Naval
25. Viola I.M., Flay R.G.J., Pressure Distribution on Architecture at the School of Marine Science and
Modern Asymmetric Spinnakers, International Journal of Technology of Newcastle University, UK. He has a
background in applied fluid dynamics and a specialist
Small Craft Technology, Trans. RINA, 152 (B1) 41Ȭ50,
expertise in yacht engineering. His previous experience
2010.
includes a Post Doctoral Fellowship at the Yacht
Research Unit (University of Auckland), which was
26. Bot, P., Viola, I.M., Flay, R.G.J., 2013. Wind-Tunnel
Scientific Advisor of the America’s Cup team Emirates
Pressure Measurements on Model-Scale Rigid
Team New Zealand, and a PhD (Politecnico di Milano)
Downwind Sails. Proc. 3rd International Conference on
on experimental and numerical modelling of the
Innovations in High Performance Sailing Yachts, June
aerodynamics of sailing yachts, sponsored by the
26th– 29th, Lorient, France.
America’s Cup team Luna Rossa. Ignazio is Group
Leader of the Yacht and Superyacht Research Group at
27. Spalart, P.R., Deck, S., Shur, M.L., Squires, K.D.,
Newcastle University, he serves in several international
Strelets, M.K., Travin, A., 2006. A new version of
committees including the CFD Specialist Committee of
detached-eddy simulation, resistant to ambiguous grid
the ITTC, he is Member of the Editorial Board of the
densities. Theoretical and Computational Fluid
Journal of Small Craft Technology, Reviewer for more
Dynamics, 20, 181-195.
than ten international journals and has written more than
50 peer-reviewed publications since 2008.
28. ANSYS FLUENT 12.0/12.1 Documentation, 2010.
ANSYS Inc., Canonsburg, PA.
Simone Bartesaghi, PhD, is a former PhD student of the
Politecnico di Milano (Italy) who joined the Yacht and
29. Spalart, P.R., 2009. Detached Eddy Simulation, Ann.
Superyacht Research Group for an internship of six
Rev. Fluid Mech., 41, 181-202.
months under the supervision of Dr Viola. Simone has a
research interest on Computational Fluid Dynamics and,
30. Viola I.M., Bot P., Riotte M., 2013 (in press). On the
particularly, on its applications to yacht engineering. His
Uncertainty of CFD in Sail Aerodynamics, International
previous experience includes Master in Yacht Design
Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids. DOI:
(110/110) at Politecnico di Milano and Università degli
10.1002/fld.3780.
Studi di Genova. Other projects include consultancies for
the small craft industry and yacht designers. In close
31. Hunt, J.C.R., Wray, A.A., Moin, P., 1988. Eddies,
collaboration with PortoRicerca snc, he was in the design
stream, and convergence zones in turbulent flows. Center
team as CFD RANS analyst for the new design VOR70’s
for Turbulence Research Report, CTR-S88, 193–208.
CAMPER/Emirates Team New Zealand Volvo Ocean
Race 2011-2012 campaign, 2nd overall and 24h-speed
record.
Thomas Van-Renteghem is a former student of the

engineering school Arts et Métiers Paris Tech, who
joined the Yacht and Superyacht Research Group for an
internship of nine months under the supervision of Dr
Viola. Simone has a research interest on fluid dynamics
and, particularly, on its applications to yacht engineering
and aeronautics. Thomas is currently employed by
Airbus (Toulouse).
Raffaele Ponzini, PhD, is a member of the Super-

Computing Applications and Innovation Department of
CINECA, which is the largest Italian supercomputer
centre. Raffaele, who was awarded a PhD in
Bioengineering at the Politecnico di Milano in 2007, has
a specialist expertise in High Performance Computing
and Computational Fluid Dynamics. His research
interests also include multiscale models in
hemodynamics, and scientific visualization.
26TH – 28TH June, 2013

143

An Experimental Investigation of Asymmetric Spinnaker Aerodynamics Using

Pressure and Sail Shape Measurements
D. Motta, Yacht Research Unit, University of Auckland, New Zealand, dmot267@aucklanduni.ac.nz
R.G.J. Flay, Yacht Research Unit, University of Auckland, New Zealand, r.flay@auckland.ac.nz
P.J. Richards, Yacht Research Unit, University of Auckland, New Zealand, pj.richards@auckland.ac.nz
D.J. Le Pelley, Yacht Research Unit, University of Auckland, New Zealand, d.lepelley@auckland.ac.nz
A method for determining the aerodynamic forces and moments produced by sails at full-scale is
investigated in this work. It combines simultaneous on-water pressure and sail shape measurements.
The system has been given the acronym FEPV (Force Evaluation via Pressures and VSPARS). The
experimental pressure and sail shape data were obtained from on-water tests conducted on a Stewart 34
Class yacht equipped with an asymmetric spinnaker. Data were recorded for a range of apparent wind
angles in light winds, in order to check the reliability, accuracy and repeatability of the system. The
flow around the sails is studied qualitatively by analysing the pressure distributions and sail shape. It
was found that the results showed similar trends to the published literature, in spite of the low wind
speeds during the tests. The accuracy of the system was investigated by wind tunnel tests, with
particular reference to the determination of the entire sail shape from the stripe images and the VSPARS
outputs, and was found to be relatively good, even for the foot shape which is outside the camera
viewing region.
NOMENCLATURE Various full-scale techniques for the assessment of

aerodynamic loads have been developed to date for
FEPV Force Evaluation via Pressures and VSPARS sailing applications. The use of sail boat dynamometers
AWA Apparent wind angle (deg) [17 - 19] has been significant in improving performance
CFx Driving Force Coefficient ( ) prediction. Strain gauging the rigging and sails [9] has
CMx Heeling Moment Coefficient ( ) provided useful information on wind/rig/sail interaction.
Fx Driving Force (N) However, the determination of aerodynamic forces by
Mx Heeling Moment (N.m) combining pressure and sail shape measurements at full-
TWS True Wind Speed (m/s) scale enables useful insights into steady and unsteady sail
AWS Apparent Wind Speed (m/s) aerodynamics to be obtained [7, 8, 10] by providing
Vs Boat Speed (m/s) considerable detail on how and where the forces are
developed.
1 INTRODUCTION This paper reports on research on sail aerodynamics

which is a continuation of previous work at the
Sail aerodynamics is commonly investigated by using University of Auckland aimed at developing reliable and
wind tunnel testing [1, 2] and numerical methods [3 - 5]. accurate methods for carrying out full-scale experiments
However, both methods have various drawbacks [6]. on sailing yachts [7, 10, 20]. The system has been named
Full-scale testing is usually required to validate results FEPV (Force Evaluation via Pressures and VSPARS,
from these methods. Moreover, full-scale testing allows where VSPARS stands for “Visual Sail Position and Rig
the investigation of yacht performance in real sailing Shape”). The recording method combines pressure and
conditions, quantification of the actual forces at work [7 - sail shape measurements to obtain the aerodynamic
9] and, for example, studies of the effects of the rigging forces and moments produced by sails at full scale.
on yacht performance [9, 10].
Le Pelley et al. [7] presented the results of the first full-
Several full-scale sail pressure measurements have been scale test carried out using the FEPV system and a
carried out in recent years [8, 11 - 14]. Difficulties in validation of the full system through wind tunnel testing
carrying out pressure measurements include the for upwind sailing. Bergsma et al. [10, 20] describe an
interference of the taps on the sails, the effects of long application of the FEPV system to upwind sailing, where
tubing to connect the taps to the transducers, the the effects of shroud tension on upwind sailing
recording of an undisturbed static reference pressure, and performance were investigated.
zeroing of the pressure transducers [14, 15].
The present study extends the previous research from
Capturing sail shape at full scale is now commonplace on upwind to downwind sailing. The results from full scale
many racing yachts. Many investigators have developed testing in very light winds are presented, and an
their own systems for determining sail shape [8, 9, 16]. assessment of the accuracy of the sail shape interpolation
procedure was carried out in the wind tunnel. On the day
of the scheduled testing the wind strength was lower than yacht racing syndicates to improve their knowledge of
ideal, but testing could not be changed to another day due sail design. Therefore a self-imposed limit of 24 sensors
to the considerable setup and people commitments. The for the mainsail and 44 for the gennaker was used. The
accuracy of the sail shape interpolation procedure was mainsail is equipped with 3 rows of 8 sensors placed at
determined by comparing sail shape predictions from ¼, ½ and ¾ sail heights, while the gennaker is equipped
VSPARS data, with physical measurements. with 3 stripes of 12 sensors plus a 4th stripe of 8 sensors
placed at 7/8 of the height. The additional stripe at 7/8
2 COMPONENTS OF FEPV SYSTEM height was used because previous studies in the wind
tunnel have shown that the chord-wise pressure
2.1 VSPARS AND SAIL SHAPE MEASUREMENT distribution on a gennaker can change dramatically
between ¾ and 7/8 heights. Therefore it was felt that a
The VSPARS system was developed in the Yacht simple interpolation up to the head using the ¾ stipe data
Research Unit (YRU) at the University of Auckland by would not be sufficiently accurate. The sampling
Le Pelley and Modral [16]. It is designed to capture sail frequency for the pressures was 60 Hz, but they were
shape both in the wind tunnel and whilst sailing. It uses averaged over 30 measurements to filter out higher
deck-mounted cameras that look up at several coloured frequency fluctuations and resulted in an effective
stripes on the sails. The camera lens distortion and the sampling rate of 2 Hz. Further details describing the
perspective effects are taken into account by the pressure system can be found in Morris [21].
software, which then produces the global coordinates of
each stripe relative to a fixed datum position on the
yacht, as illustrated in figure 1. 2a
2b
Figure 1: Global coordinates of VSPARS stripes for a

mainsail and jib.
2.2 PRESSURE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM
In order to avoid the issues associated with the use of

long tubing and the recording of a reliable static
reference pressure [15], in the present measurements the
differential pressures across the sails were measured
directly by using double-sided pressure sensors with
transducers placed at the measuring locations as shown
in figures 2a and 2b. The transducers were connected
directly across the suction and pressure sides of the sail.
In order to reduce the interference with the flow, sensors Figure 2: VSPARS images of a) gennaker and b)
on the mainsail were covered with sail-cloth patches, and mainsail, during full scale testing.
sensors on the gennaker were placed into pockets created
by the overlap of adjacent sail panels.
2.3 FEPV DATA ANALYSIS
Although the use of a very large number of pressure
sensors can lead to a highly accurate interpolated The FEPV analysis was coded in Matlab, and uses the
pressure distribution, the FEPV system is intended to be output files from VSPARS and the pressure system to
a cost- and time-effective system that could be used by obtain the aerodynamic forces.
mainsheet and traveller, whilst the jib was left in a
The whole sail surface is created from the known stripe standard trim position. Secondly, the jib was swept from
shapes and the known tack position. The position of the hard sheeted to fully eased using the jib sheet, whilst the
head is estimated by extrapolating a spline curve passing main remained at a standard trim. Finally, both sails were
through the known tack point and each stripe luff point. eased together over 8 settings. The trends shown by the
The head is assumed to be flat with no camber and to FEPV calculations compared well with the force balance
have a small finite length. Similarly, a spline curve results. The driving force and rolling moment predicted
joining the leech points of the known stripes is by the FEPV method were respectively 10% and 5% less
extrapolated upwards to the known head height position than measured by the force balance. This
and also downwards by the known leech length of the underestimation is thought to be due to the additional
sail, to give the head and foot twists respectively, windage from the mast, rigging etc., which is not
together with the first estimate of the clew position. measured by sail pressure integrations.
Unfortunately the foot shape cannot be captured by the

camera as it is out of the viewing area. Therefore an
initial foot shape is estimated by fitting a spline curve
through the known tack and clew positions together with
a 3rd point given by an estimated foot depth and draft
position, obtained by extrapolating the depth and draft
position of the known stripes. This foot shape is then
scaled in both the longitudinal and transverse directions
to match the known foot length.
Starting from the “low resolution” sail shape defined by

the VSPARS stripes and the foot and head positions, a
fine quadrilateral mesh is then interpolated over the sail
surface.
The sail pressure distributions are obtained from the

discrete pressure values recorded by the pressure system
which are interpolated linearly, firstly in the chord-wise
direction, and then secondly in the span-wise direction
towards the head and the foot. The pressures are
interpolated to the centre of each geometrical cell in
order to obtain a pressure map distribution over both
entire sails, as shown in figure 3. The VSPARS stripes Figure 3: Pressure map distribution over the entire
and pressure tap locations are also shown in the figure. surfaces of the two sails.
The choice of linear interpolation in the chord-wise
direction allows the leading edge suction peaks and The pressure system used for the present full scale
separation bubbles to be captured [7]. Forces in specified downwind testing is the same as that used for the upwind
directions are computed by integrating the known sailing tests, and so it was felt that no further pressure
pressures acting over the cell areas taking into account system validation was required. However, a validation of
their surface normal directions. Moment contributions the sail shape generation for downwind sail shapes was
from each cell are calculated about the specified yacht necessary because of the much more highly curved shape
moment reference centre. of gennakers compared with upwind sails. Indeed,
particular attention was needed to assess the accuracy of
3 FEPV SYSTEM VALIDATION the foot shape and the determination of the clew position,
as these positions are obtained from extrapolations rather
In an earlier study [7] the FEPV system was validated for than from direct VSPARS measurements. Wind tunnel
upwind sailing through wind tunnel testing. Results from tests were carried out on a model scale VO70 yacht to
the FEPV system were compared in terms of forces and obtain data for this assessment, as shown in figure 4.
moments to measurements from the wind tunnel force Two different gennakers were tested at AWAs varying
balance, and good agreement was found. from 60° to 120° in order to cover the full range of
AWAs of interest at full scale.
The tests for the upwind validation were conducted at an
apparent wind angle (AWA) of 25° and a heel of 20°. The clew, foot depth, and draft positions were measured
Three types of trim change were investigated. Firstly, the physically during each test, and the sail stripe positions
main was swept through 8 trim settings from hard were also recorded by VSPARS, and used by the FEPV
sheeted to fully eased using a combination of both software to determine the sail shape. The results of this
comparision are shown in Table 1. The moment The results show that the FEPV system can predict the
reference centre is located at the base of the mast, with x clew position with an accuracy of better than ±70 mm
positive forward, y positive towards port and z positive (but usually much less). Fairly good agreement in foot
upwards. Differences in clew positions in the x, y and z shape is obtained as well, with errors within 5% of the
directions are given in Table 1. Foot depth and draft chord length. As a general pattern, the present FEPV
position are expressed as a percentage of the chord analysis software overestimates the foot depth and
length. Average chord lengths of 1400 mm and 1100 mm underestimates the draft position.
for sails 1 and 2 respectively can be used for reference.
It was observed during these FEPV validation tests that
the foot of the sail was constantly moving, probably due
to shedding of the foot vortex, which is a common
characteristic of downwind sailing. Therefore the
physical location of the sail could not be determined to
better than a few cm (3-5 cm) during the tests, and so this
is the validation accuracy.
4 DOWNWIND FULL-SCALE TESTING
4.1 TEST SETUP
A Stewart 34 Class yacht was used for the full-scale

testing. It was decided to equip the yacht with an
available gennaker, which unfortunately was sized to fit a
smaller boat, namely an International Platu25, which is
about 7.5 m long. The gennaker was hoisted from a pole
held against the forestay. Although this setup was not
ideal, the gennaker flew in a reasonable manner, as can
be seen in figure 2a.
Both the mainsail and gennaker were equipped with

VSPARS stripes and differential pressure transducers
(figure 2a and 2b). A GPS unit, sampling at a rate of 2.5
Hz, was used to record the speed over ground and boat
location, while the boat instruments logged boat speed,
wind speed and direction at 1 Hz. An Inertial
Figure 4: VO70 model scale yacht used for FEPV wind Measurement Unit (IMU) was placed in the yacht cabin
tunnel validation – comparison of calculated sail postions and logged the boat motion at 10 Hz. The VSPARS
with physical measurements. stripe recording system uses a sampling frequency of
about 0.3 Hz which enabled several images to be
averaged to obtain the shapes of the stripes for the FEPV
Table 1: Comparison of clew coordinates and foot shape calculations.
between FEPV and physical measurements.
Sail 1 Sail 2 A custom-made data acquisition unit recorded all these
60 AWA 80 AWA 100 AWA 120 AWA data, each one at its own sampling rate, and so the data
Coordinate difference [mm] between FEPV and Exp measure
were all time stamped to enable subsequent synchronous
x_clew 27 41 -10 -3
processing of the data streams.
y_clew 4 -63 -27 -34
z_clew 50 16 -36 -46
The measurements were performed in the Hauraki Gulf,
Auckland, NZ, in a fairly constant but very light breeze
Sail 1 between 6 and 8 knots with almost flat water, in an area
with insignificant tidal flow.
60 AWA 80 AWA
[%chord] Experimental FEPV Experimental FEPV
foot depth 16.7 18.1 25 23
In this light breeze the sails were just able to fly. Such
foot draft 34.1 39.4 39 41.2
low wind speeds made it difficult to accurately measure
Sail 2
the pressures across the sails, which varied from 0 to
30 Pa for the gennaker and from 0 to 15 Pa for the
100 AWA 120 AWA
mainsail, due to the sensitivity of the pressure
[%chord] Experimental FEPV Experimental FEPV
foot depth 30.9 27.8 36.6 30
transducers. . More wind would have been preferred, but
foot draft 44.9 50.5 44.7 50.7
the tests were planned for a certain day and could not be
rescheduled, and the wind was light on the day.
Nevertheless, the system proved to be effective and curvature is very small. This can be confirmed by the
provided repeatable results, as discussed in section 4.2 small values of pressure differences, which range
between 10 and 30 Pa. The bottom row (1/4) has similar
The aim of the tests was to check the reliability and chord-wise distributions, with even smaller suctions
accuracy of the FEPV system, the repeatability of the generated by sail curvature, and only for the lowest
tests, and to qualitatively study the flow around the sails AWAs. There is something interesting happening at 25%
by analysing the pressure distributions and the sail shape. of the chord, where the suctions are lowest, but the
The yacht was sailed at its optimum trim on starboard reason for this is unknown – possibly a transducer issue.
tack for AWAs varying from 65° to 115°. A total of 24 Increased AWAs over 100° drastically flatten the
runs were carried out, each about 60 s long. Sail trim pressure distributions in the proximity of the leading
(optimal sail trim with gennaker on the verge of luffing) edge.
was kept constant for each run and the boat heading was
kept as straight as possible to enable the results to be
averaged over the run time (45 – 60 s). Measurements
from the instruments on board (including the pressures
and sail shapes) were averaged over the run time, and the
FEPV code used the average values for the computations.
5 RESULTS
In 2009, Viola and Flay [2] carried out wind tunnel tests
on asymmetric spinnakers. Their results show that on the
leeward side of the spinnaker the pressure has a negative
peak at the leading edge, followed by a slow pressure
recovery up to the trailing edge in stalled flow. In
attached flow the suction peak at the leading edge is
followed by a quick pressure recovery at around 10% of
the curve length followed by a second suction peak due
to the section curvature. Downstream of the second
suction peak, that occurs between 10% and 40% of the
curve length, the pressure becomes less negative, and
then constant due to the trailing edge separation.
Figures 5 and 6 show typical full-scale pressure

distributions for the gennaker and mainsail respectively
at different AWAs plotted against the sail chord
percentage. The suctions are generally higher over the
entire surface for lower AWAs. This trend is confirmed
in terms of driving force determined by integration,
which is higher for the lower AWAs. In all the figures
showing pressure and force coefficients, the dynamic
pressure was calculated based on the apparent wind
speed (AWS), and the pressure differences are leeward-
windward, thus giving negative values. The pressure
coefficient plots have the negative direction upwards, as
is common in showing pressure distributions on wings.
The flow around the gennaker top stripe is stalled for all
AWAs, as can be seen from the lack of pressure recovery
after the leading edge peak, which occurs at around 5%
of the chord length. The rows at ¾ and ½ of the height
show similar behaviour; the leading edge suction peak, Figure 5: Gennaker pressure distributions for AWAs of
occurring at 5 to 10% of the chord length is followed by 72°, 89°, 105° and 112°
a pressure recovery (perhaps due to an intermittent
leading edge separation bubble reattachment), a suction
increase due to the sail curvature, and then a reduction in It is worth noting the consistency of the pressure
suction as the trailing edge is approached. However the distributions obtained in such light airs. When testing at
sail is not able to generate much suction, probably due to full-scale, zeroing of the pressure sensors is not an easy
the very light winds, and therefore the suction due to task because the wind cannot be turned off, and because
of the sensitivity of the transducers to their orientation if
the sail and sensors are put into a bag to obtain a uniform on shore (before and after the tests) and at sea during the
pressure. measurements.
The pressure differences on the mainsail are even lower Taking into account the sensors drift with time and
than on the gennaker, having maximum values of only temperature, the sensitivity of the transducers to their
15 Pa. orientation and the noise during the measurements, the
estimated accuracy of the pressure measurements for the
current test is of about ±2.5 Pa, and thus ±0.3 in terms of
pressure coefficients for the actual wind conditions.
The variation of the driving force coefficient (CFx) with

AWA is shown in figure 7. As discussed above, it was
difficult to achieve significant suction over the sails due
to the light winds. This has given values of CFx that are
quite small (in the authors’ experience) for the whole
range of AWAs investigated.
Figure 6: Mainsail pressure distributions for AWAs of

72, 89, 105 and 112°.
The flow on mainsails is affected by the presence of the Figure 7: Drive force coefficient vs. apparent wind angle.
mast [22] which usually produces a separation bubble Upper graph gennaker and mainsail coefficients, lower
behind it with a low recirculation flow velocity and a low graph sum of gennaker and mainsail coefficients.
pressure core on the front part of the mainsail. This helps
explain the suction peak at 7 to 15% of the chord The results in figure 8 also show that the yacht
exhibited in figure 6, followed by pressure recovery performance varies quite significantly in the range of true
where the flow reattaches. Figure 6 shows 2 further wind speeds (TWS) encountered during the tests (3 to 5
suction peaks at all heights and for all AWAs. The m/s). Figure 8 shows CFx plotted against TWS for runs
reasons for these are not clear, but might be due to the carried out at similar apparent wind angles. The results
sail curvature not being very fair due to the lack of generally show that an increase in TWS results in an
pressure, thus resulting in a wavy sail surface. This will increase in CFx, whereas repeated runs carried out at a
be the object of future investigations by the YRU. similar TWS result in similar values of CFx. Hence it
appears that the sails become more efficient as the TWS
Another atypical behaviour is the presence of positive increases; perhaps they are less prone to separation.
values of differential pressures before and after the For all AWAs the mainsail contributes only a very small
leading edge suction peak. Again, this might be due to amount to the driving force compared to the gennaker
some reverse flow in the separated area. This behaviour (see the upper graph in figure 8). Indeed, the CFx values
is not likely to be caused by incorrect zeroing of the vary between 0.45 and 0.85 for the gennaker and
pressure transducers, as they were zeroed several times between 0 and 0.11 for the mainsail. This is as-expected,
but note that the presence of the mainsail increases the figure 11). The boat speed is generally higher for low
loading on the gennaker due to the upwash it generates. AWAs (giving a higher AWS), and this is associated
with a small increment in heel angle. This is as-expected
since the lower AWAs gave the higher thrust.
Figure 8: Drive force coefficient vs. true wind speed.
The heeling moment coefficient (CMx) generally Figure 11: Drive force vs. apparent wind angle.
decreases with increase in the AWA, as shown in figure
9 (note that the reference length for CMx is the mast
length). The scatter in the results might be due to the
different behaviour of the boat at lower and higher wind
speeds. The values of heel angle are generally low
(figure 10) and increase in an approximately linear
manner with increase in the heeling moment (and thus
decrease with increase in AWA).
Figure 12: Boat speed vs. apparent wind angle.
6 CONCLUSIONS
A method for determining the aerodynamic forces and

moments produced by a yacht’s sails at full scale is
investigated in this work. It combines simultaneous on-
Figure 9: Heeling moment coefficient vs. AWA. water pressure and sail shape measurements.
The sail shape measurement component of the system

has been investigated through wind tunnel testing, and
shown to be accurate.
The system has been used for downwind sailing in low

wind speeds at full scale and proved to work well, and
provided reasonably accurate and repeatable
aerodynamic performance measurements.
The next steps in this project are to use the FEPV system
to investigate unsteady sail aerodynamics at full scale for
both upwind and downwind sailing.
Figure 10: Heel angle vs. heeling moment.
Figures 11 and 12 show the overall drive force (Fx) and The pressure distributions showed similar behaviour to
boat speed (Vs) plotted against the AWA. In this case a other published results.
clear trend of increasing Fx for low AWA can be
identified, as well as the expected increase in Fx for the The mainsail contributed only a small amount to the
runs performed in slightly stronger winds (red symbols in driving force compared to the gennaker.
[11] Viola, I.M. and R.G.J. Flay, "Full-scale pressure
The thrust, Fx and the boat speed, Vs, both decreased as measurements on a Sparkman and Stephens 24-foot
the AWA increased. sailing yacht." Journal of Wind Engineering and
Industrial Aerodynamics 98(12): 800-807
REFERENCES
[12] Viola, I.M. and R.G.J. Flay, "Sail pressures from
[1] Le Pelley, D.J., P.J. Richards, “Effective Wind full-scale, wind-tunnel and numerical investigations."
Tunnel Testing of Yacht Sails Using a Real-Time Journal of Ocean Engineering 38(16): 1733-1743
Velocity Prediction Program”, 20th Chesapeake Sailing
Yacht Symposium, SNAME, Annapolis, 2011 [13] Graves, W., T. Barbera, J.B. Braun, L. Imas,
“Measurement and Simulation of Pressure Distribution
[2] Viola, I.M., R.G.J. Flay, “Force and Pressure on Full Size Sails”, 3rd High Performance Yacht Design
Investigation on Modern Asymmetric Spinnakers”, Conference. Auckland, New Zealand, 2008
International Journal of Small Craft Technology, 2009,
pp. 31-40 [14] Puddu P., F. Nurzia, A. Pistidda, A. Mura, “Full
Scale Investigation of One-Design Class Catamaran
[3] P.J. Richards, W. Lasher, “Wind Tunnel and CFD Sails”. 2nd High Performance Yacht Design Conference.
Modelling of Pressures on Downwind Sails”, BBAA VI Auckland, New Zealand, 2006
International Colloquium on Bluff Bodies Aerodynamics
& Applications, Milano, Italy 2008 [15] Flay, R.G.J., S. Millar, Experimental Considerations
Concerning Pressure Measurements on Sails: Wind
[4] Viola, I.M., “Downwind Sail Aerodynamics: a CFD Tunnel and Full-Scale, 2nd High Performance Yacht
Investigation with High Grid Resolution”, Ocean Design Conference, Auckland, New Zealand, 2006
Engineering, 36 (12-13), 974-984, 2009
[16] Le Pelley, D.J., O. Modral, “VSPARS: A combined
[5] Lasher, W.C., J.R. Sonnenmeier, “An Analysis of sail and rig shape recognition system using imaging
Practical RANS simulations for spinnaker techniques”, 3rd High performance Yacht Design
aerodynamics”, Journal of Wind Engineering and Conference, Auckland, New Zealand, 2008
industrial Aerodynamics, 96 (2008) 143-165
[17] Herman, J.S., “A Sail Force Dynamometer: Design,
[6] Wright, A.M., A.R. Claughton, J. Paton, R. Lewis, Implementation and Data Handling”, Massachusetts
“Off-Wind Sail Performance Prediction And Institute of technology, Cambridge, 1988
Optimisation”, The Second International Conference on
Innovation in High Performance Sailing Yachts 2010, [18] Masuyama, Y., T. Fukasawa, “Database of sail
Lorient, France shapes versus sail performance and validation of
numerical calculations for the upwind condition”,
[7] Le Pelley, D.J., Morris, D. & Richards, P.J., Journal of Marine technologies, 2009
“Aerodynamic force deduction on yacht sails using
pressure and shape measurement in real time”, 4th High [19] Hochkirch, K., “Design and Construction of a Full-
Performance Yacht Design Conference: Auckland, New Scale Measurement System for the Analysis of Sailing
Zealand, 2012 Performance”, Technical University of Berlin, 2000
[8] Lozej, M., D. Golob, B. Vrtic, D. Bokal, “Pressure [20] Bergsma, F., D. Motta, D.J. Le Pelley, P.J. Richards,
Distribution on Sail Surfaces In Real Sailing R.G.J. Flay, “Investigation of shroud tension on sailing
Conditions”. 4th High Performance Yacht Design yacht aerodynamics using full-scale real-time pressure
Conference. Auckland, New Zealand, 2012 and sail shape measurements”, 22nd International HISWA
Symposium on Yacht Design and Yacht Construction,
[9] Augier, B., P. Bot, F. Hauville, M. Durand, Amsterdam 2012.
"Experimental validation of unsteady models for fluid
structure interaction: Application to yacht sails and rigs." [21] Morris, D., “Derivation of Forces on a Sail using
Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Pressure and Shape Measurements at Full-Scale”, ME
Aerodynamics 101(0): 53-66 Thesis, Chalmers University Of Technology, 2011
[10] Bergsma, F., D. Motta, D.J. Le Pelley, P.J. Richards, [22] Viola, I.M., R.G.J. Flay, “Pressure Measurements on
R.G.J. Flay, “Investigation of sailing yacht aerodynamics Full-Scale and Model Scale Upwind Sails”, 17th
using real time pressure and sail shape measurements at Australasian Fluid Mechanics Conference, Auckland,
full scale”, 18th Australasian Fluid Mechanics 2010
Conference, Launceston, Australia, 2012
AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
Dario Motta is a PhD student in the Yacht Research

Unit at the University of Auckland. His research topic is
the investigation of sail pressures and shapes to
understand how they produce forces at full scale.
Richard G.J. Flay, PhD, is Professor of Mechanical

the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the
University of Auckland. He has had a longstanding
research interest in the wind and sailing. His PhD degree
was awarded for a study of wind structure based on full
scale wind data. His Postdoctoral research as a National
Research Council Visiting Fellow in Canada was focused
on carrying out wind tunnel studies in a boundary layer
wind tunnel. He then spent four years as an Aerodynamic
Design Engineer in an Engineering Consultancy in
Toronto where he worked on the design of several wind
tunnels and environmental test facilities. Since 1984 he
has worked at the University of Auckland, and in 1994
he designed the World’s first Twisted Flow Wind
Tunnel.
Peter Richards has research interests in wind

engineering, wind energy and yacht aerodynamics. He
has been involved with the Yacht Research Unit at the
University of Auckland for about 20 years and has
published research papers on CFD, wind-tunnel and full-
scale studies of sail aerodynamics. He is an author of
over 70 journal papers and numerous conference papers.
David Le Pelley is the manager of the Yacht Research

Unit and a director of VSPARS Ltd. Current research
interests include comparison of wind tunnel and full
scale yacht performance.

NUMERICAL STUDY OF A FLEXIBLE SAIL PLAN: EFFECT OF PITCHING

DECOMPOSITION AND ADJUSTMENTS
B. Augier, Naval academy Research Institute, France, benoit.augier@ecole-navale.fr

F. Hauville, Naval academy Research Institute, France, frederic.hauville@ecole-navale.fr
P. Bot, Naval academy Research Institute, France, patrick.bot@ecole-navale.fr
J. Deparday, Naval academy Research Institute, France, julien.deparday@ecole-navale.fr
M. Durand, K-EPSILON company, France, mathieu@k-epsilon.com
Abstract
A numerical investigation of the dynamic Fluid Structure Interaction (FSI) of a yacht sail plan submitted to har-
monic pitching is presented to analyse the effects of motion simplifications and rigging adjustments on aerodynamic
forces. It is shown that the dynamic behaviour of a sail plan subject to yacht motion clearly deviates from the
quasi-steady theory. The aerodynamic forces presented as a function of the instantaneous apparent wind angle show
hysteresis loops. These hysteresis phenomena do not result from a simple phase shift between forces and motion.
Plotting the hysteresis loops in the appropriate coordinate system enables the associated energy to be determined.
This amount of exchanged energy is shown to increase almost linearly with the pitching reduced frequency and to
increase almost quadratically with the pitching amplitude in the investigated ranges. The effect of reducing the real
pitching motion to a simpler surge motion is investigated. Results show significant discrepancies on the aerodynamic
forces amplitude and the hysteresis phenomenon between pitching and surge motion. However, the superposition
assumption consisting in a decomposition of the surge into two translations normal and collinear to the apparent
wind is verified. Then, simulations with different dock tunes and backstay loads highlight the importance of rig
adjustments on the aerodynamic forces and the dynamic behaviour of a sail plan.
NOMENCLATURE structures whose shapes change according to the aerodynamic

loading. The resulting modified shape affects the air flow and
A deg pitching oscillation amplitude thus, the aerodynamic loading applied to the structure. This
C m sail plan chord at za (from head-sail Fluid Structure Interaction is strong and non-linear, because
leading edge to mainsail trailing edge) sails are soft and light membranes which experience large dis-
Cx driving force coefficient placements and accelerations, even for small stresses. As a
C¯x mean value of Cx consequence, the actual sail’s shape while sailing — the so-
Cy heeling force coefficient called flying shape — is different from the design shape de-
dx displacement along x axis at za fined by the sail maker and is generally not known. Recently,
fr flow reduced frequency several authors have focused on the Fluid Structure Interac-
S m2 total sail area tion (FSI) problem to address the issue of the impact of the
T s pitching oscillation period structural deformation on the flow and hence the aerodynamic
VAW m.s−1 apparent wind speed forces generated [5, 22].
VT W m.s−1 true wind speed Another challenging task in modelling racing yachts is to
Vr flow reduced velocity consider the yacht behaviour in a realistic environment [6, 19,
W work associated to hysteresis loop area 14, 9]. Traditional Velocity Prediction Programs (VPPs) used
za m height of the centre of aero. forces by yacht designers consider a static equilibrium between hy-
βAW deg apparent wind angle drodynamic and aerodynamic forces. Hence, the force models
βef f deg effective wind angle classically used are estimated in a steady state. However, in
βT W deg true wind angle realistic sailing conditions, the flow around the sails is most
φ deg heel angle often largely unsteady because of wind variations, actions of
θ deg trim angle the crew and more importantly because of yacht motion due
α deg heading angle to waves. To account for this dynamic behaviour, several Dy-
ρ kg.m−3 fluid density namic Velocity Prediction Programs (DVPPs) have been de-
τ s phase shift veloped, e.g. by Masuyama et al.[21, 20], Richardt et al. [23],
Keuning et al.[18] which need models of dynamic aerody-
1 INTRODUCTION namic and hydrodynamic forces. While the dynamic effects
on hydrodynamic forces have been largely studied, the un-
When analysing the behaviour of yacht sails, an important dif- steady aerodynamic behaviour of the sails has received much
ficulty comes from the Fluid Structure Interaction (FSI) of the less attention. Shoop et al.[26] first developed an unsteady
air flow and the sails and rig [19, 14, 9]. Yacht sails are soft aeroelastic model in potential flow dedicated to flexible mem-
branes but neglected the inertia. In a quasi-static approach, a gives further precisions on the dynamic behaviour.
first step is to add the velocity induced by the yacht’s motion The analysis of pitching motion decomposition in simple
to the steady apparent wind to build an instantaneous appar- translation is given in section 5 and the effects of various dock
ent wind (see [23, 18]) and to consider the aerodynamic forces tunes and backstay loads are presented in sections 6.1 and 6.2.
corresponding to this instantaneous apparent wind using force In the last section, some conclusions of this study are given,
models obtained in the steady state. In a recent study, Ger- with ideas for future work.
hardt et al. [15] developed an analytical model to predict the
unsteady aerodynamics of interacting yacht sails in 2D po-
2 NUMERICAL MODEL
tential flow and performed 2D wind tunnel oscillation tests
with a motion range typical of a 90-foot (26m) racing yacht To numerically investigate aero-elastic problems which can
(International America’s Cup Class 33). Recently, Fossati et be found with sails, the company K-Epsilon and the Naval
al. [10, 11, 12] studied the aerodynamics of model-scale rigid Academy Research Institute have developed the unsteady
sails in a wind tunnel, and showed that a pitching motion has fluid-structure model ARAVANTI made by coupling the in-
a strong and non-trivial effect on aerodynamic forces. They viscid flow solver AVANTI with the structural solver ARA.
showed that the relationship between instantaneous forces and The ARAVANTI code is able to model a complete sail boat rig
apparent wind deviates — phase shifts, hysteresis — from the in order to predict forces, tensile and shape of sails according
equivalent relationship obtained in a steady state, which one to the loading in dynamic conditions. For more details, the
could have thought to apply in a quasi-static approach. They reader is referred to [25] for the fluid solver AVANTI and to
also investigated soft sails in the same conditions to highlight [16] and [24] for the structural solver ARA and the FSI cou-
the effects of the structural deformation [13]. pling method.
In a previous work [4], the aero-elastic behaviour of the ARAVANTI model has been validated. Numerical and
sail plan subjected to a simple harmonic pitching was numer- experimental comparisons with the model ARAVANTI are
ically investigated. This study has shown hysteresis phenom- based on measurements at full scale on an instrumented 28-
ena between the aerodynamic forces and instantaneous appar- foot yacht (J80 class, 8m). The time-resolved sails’ flying
ent wind angle, which were more pronounced in the FSI case shape, loads in the rig, yacht’s motion and apparent wind have
on a realistic soft structure than on a rigid structure. How- been measured in both sailing conditions of flat sea and mod-
ever, in this first work [4], the question of genuine hysteresis erate head waves and compared to the simulation. The code
phenomenon versus simple phase shift between both oscillat- has shown its ability to simulate the rig’s response to yacht
ing signals was not clearly elucidated. Moreover, the energy motion forcing, and to correctly estimate the loads. Thereby,
associated to the hysteresis phenomenon was not determined. ARAVANTI is a reliable tool to study the dynamic behaviour
Hence, the first aim of the present work is to investigate fur- of a sail plan subject to pitching motion. For a detailed de-
ther this hysteresis phenomenon to elucidate the hysteresis scription of the experimental system and the numerical and
versus phase shift issue and to determine the associated en- experimental comparison, see [1, 2, 3].
ergy.
Most of studies about the unsteady effect due to yacht pitch-
3 SIMULATION PROCEDURE
ing have considered a 2D simplified problem and thus ap-
proximated the pitching motion by a translational oscillation The yacht motion in waves induces unsteady effects in the
aligned with the yacht centreline [7, 15]. Then, the usual pro- sails’ aerodynamics. In this paper we will study separately
cedure is to decompose this motion in oscillations perpendicu- one degree of freedom, by applying simple harmonic pitching.
lar to and along the direction of the incident flow, which result The reference frame and the coordinate system attached to the
in oscillations of apparent wind angle and speed respectively yacht are illustrated in Figure 1.
(Fig.7). The second aim of this work is to investigate the ef-
fects of such simplifications in the yacht motion considered
by comparing the results obtained with the sail plan subjected 3.1 Reference steady case
to different types of motion. First, the reference steady case is computed with the follow-
The third aim of this work is to address the effect of vari- ing parameters: true wind speed at 10m height VT W =6.7
ous rig and sail trims and adjustments on the unsteady aero- m.s−1 (a logarithmic vertical wind profile is imposed with a
elastic behaviour of the sail plan subjected to pitching. This roughness length of 0.2mm [8]), true wind angle βT W =40 ˚ ,
is investigated by comparisons of results obtained for realistic boat speed VBS =2.6 m.s−1 , heel angle φ=20 ˚ and trim an-
docktunes and backstay tensions used while racing a 28-foot gle θ=0 ˚ . This first computation yields the converged steady
(8m, J80 class) cruiser-racer. flow, the rig and sails’ flying shape, and enables the steady
An unsteady FSI model has been developed and validated state aerodynamic forces and centre of effort to be deter-
with experiments in real sailing conditions [1, 2, 3]. Calcu- mined. This converged steady state is used as the initial con-
lations are made on a J80 class yacht numerical model with dition for the computations with pitching forcing. The height
her standard rigging and sails designed by the sail maker za =6.26m of the centre of aerodynamic forces is used to de-
DeltaVoiles. The FSI model is briefly presented in section fine the flow characteristic quantities: apparent wind speed
2. The methodology of the dynamic investigation is given in VAW =8.81 m.s−1 , apparent wind angle βAW =29.19 ˚ and sail
section 3. In the continuity of a previous work [4], section 4 plan chord C=6.22m defined as the distance from the head-sail

' $
$
$&&
!" #

Figure 1: Coordinate, angle and motion references for the
yacht. Z axis is attached to the earth vertical.

Figure 3: Time dependent apparent wind speed VAW (a); ap-

parent wind angle βAW and effective wind angle βef f (b) re-
sulting from pitching oscillation at za with period T=3s and
amplitude A=5 ˚ .

parameters being constant and equal to those of the reference
state.

2π
θ = A cos t (2)
T
Figure 2: Dynamic effect of pitching on the wind triangle (top To avoid discontinuities in the accelerations, the beginning
view). V is the wind velocity, BS is the boat speed, z is the
of motion is gradually imposed by applying a ramp which in-
height of the aerodynamic centre of effort, θ̇ is the pitching creases smoothly from 0 to 1 during the first 3s of imposed
velocity, β is the apparent wind angle, subscripts TW and AW motion (see first period in Figure 3). The investigation has
stand for True and Apparent wind been made with variables in the range A=3 to 6 ˚ , and T=1.5
to 6s, corresponding to the typical environmental conditions
leading edge to the main sail trailing edge at za . Corrections encountered, as shown in the experiment of [3]. The unsteady
of the apparent wind angle βAW due to constant heel φ (first nature of a flow is characterised by a dimensionless param-
introduced by [19]) and trim θ are considered through the use eter defined by the ratio of the motion period T to the fluid
of the effective apparent wind angle βef f (see [17] for heel advection time along the total sail plan chord C. Similarly to
effect, and [12] for pitch effect): the closely related literature [13, 15], this parameter is called
the flow reduced velocity Vr (or the inverse: the reduced fre-

quency fr ) defined by:
−1 tan βAW
βef f = tan cos φ (1)
cos θ
VAW T
βef f =27.79 ˚ in the steady state. Vr = = fr−1 (3)
C
The case Vr 1 (fr
1) corresponds to quasi-steady
3.2 Harmonic pitching
aerodynamic conditions. The pitching period values investi-
The unsteady computations consist of a 20s run, with forced gated correspond to a reduced velocity Vr from 2 to 8.5 (re-
harmonic pitching being imposed on the rig, characterised by duced frequency fr from 0.12 to 0.47), which positions this
the oscillation amplitude A and period T (equation 2), other numerical study in a similar dynamic range to the experiments
of [12] where Vr was from 2.3 to 56 (reduced frequency fr 4 Dynamic behaviour
from 0.02 to 0.43) corresponding to typical conditions en-
countered by a 48-foot yacht (14.6m). The computed cases Previous studies [13, 4] have shown that the dynamic be-
are summarised in Table 1. haviour of a yacht sail plan subjected to pitching clearly de-
When the yacht is subjected to pitching motion, the viates from the quasi static approach. Particularly, the aero-
apparent wind is periodically modified as the rotation adds a dynamic forces presented as a function of the instantaneous
new component of apparent wind which varies with height. apparent wind angle show hysteresis loops as illustrated in
Following the analysis of [12], the apparent wind and pitch- figure 4. Different questions have been raised by this result.
induced velocity are considered at the centre of aerodynamic Is this a real hysteresis phenomenon or is this appearance in
force height za . This centre of effort is actually moving due the Lissajous plot only a consequence of a simple phase shift
to pitch oscillation, but variations are small enough to be between the signals? In the former case, can we determine the
ignored, and the reference height computed in the steady state amount of energy corresponding to the hysteresis loop?
is used. This yields time dependent apparent wind speed and

angle, given by:

2
VAW (t) = (VT W sin βT W )
21
+(VT W cos βT W + VBS + za θ̇(t))2

(4)

−1 VT W sin βT W
βAW (t) = sin
VAW (t)

And hence the time-dependent effective wind angle:

−1 tan βAW (t)
βef f (t) = tan cos φ (5)

cos θ(t)

Figure 2 illustrates the dynamic vector composition for

pitching velocities θ̇=θ̇max , 0 and θ̇min , and Figure 3 shows

the resulting dynamic apparent wind velocity and angle com-
puted with equations 4 and 5. As shown in Figure 3, the ap-
parent wind angle variations are in phase opposition with the

apparent wind speed.

3.3 Heeling and driving force coefficients

Aerodynamic forces are calculated by the code at the sail
plan’s centre of effort. Forces are calculated in the boat frame

and written in the inertial reference frame, in order to get Fx
and Fy , the driving and the heeling forces. The transition
matrix RT is defined by RT = Rθ Rφ Rα with:
Figure 4: Driving a) and heeling b) force coefficients versus
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
1 0 0 cos φ 0 sin φ effective wind angle βef f (t).
Rθ = ⎣0 cos θ − sin θ⎦ , Rφ = ⎣ 0 1 0 ⎦
0 sin θ cos θ − sin φ 0 cos φ
⎡ ⎤
cos α − sin α 0
4.1 Phase shift τ
Rα = ⎣ sin α cos α 0⎦
0 0 1 The values of the phase shift τ between aerodynamic forces
Driving and heeling force coefficients are obtained by the and instantaneous wind angle have been determined for each
normalisation with the product of the instantaneous apparent pitching period and amplitude by cross-correlation (Table 1).
dynamic pressure and the total sail area S: The phase delay increases (almost linearly in the investigated
range) with the flow reduced velocity (with the motion pe-
Fx riod) but is not affected by the oscillation amplitude. When
Cx (t) = 2 (t)S (6) forces Cx,y (t) are plotted versus the time shifted wind angle
0.5ρVAW
βef f (t+τ ), the loop area is significantly decreased but does
Fy
Cy (t) = 2 (t)S (7) not vanish (see Fig. 5). Even for different values of the time
0.5ρVAW delay that have been tested, the loop did not collapse into a
In the steady state calculation, driving coefficient Cx =0.379 single line. The ”best” time delay corresponding to the low-
and heeling coefficient Cy =-1.226 are obtained. est area is the one computed by cross correlation. This shows
T A Vr fr τ 2πτ /T W Figure 6 shows the driving force coefficient as a function
s deg s rad of the non-dimensional displacement dx for different pitch-
1.5 5 2.13 0.47 0.1 0.42 -3.38 e-3 ing periods. The area of the hysteresis loop here corresponds
3 5 4.27 0.23 0.3 0.63 -1.38 e-3 to a work which is the amount of energy exchanged by the
5 5 7.11 0.14 0.6 0.75 -7.18 e-4 system. The values obtained for each case are given in Tab.
6 5 8.53 0.12 0.75 0.79 -6.18 e-4 1. The energy increases (almost linearly in the investigated
range) with the pitching reduced frequency and increases (al-
T A Vr fr τ 2πτ /T W most quadratically in the investigated range) with the pitching
s deg s rad amplitude.
5 3 7.11 0.14 0.6 0.75 -2.57 e-4

5 5 7.11 0.14 0.6 0.75 -7.18 e-4

5 6 7.11 0.14 0.6 0.75 -1.04 e-3

Table 1: Reduced velocity Vr , reduced frequency fr ,
phase delay τ between Cx and βef f determined
by cross-
correlation, and non-dimensional energy W= T Cx dx for dif-
ferent pitching amplitudes A and periods T

that there is a real hysteresis phenomenon and not only a phase
shift between the signals.

Figure 6: Driving force coefficient vs. non-dimensional dis-
placement dx for pitching periods T=1.5, 3, 5 and 6s. The
loop area represents the work exchanged W.

The aerodynamic behaviour is now clearly characterised:

an hysteresis phenomenon is evidenced and the associated en-

ergy is computed. The next sections address the various in-

fluences of the yacht motion considered and of different rig
trims.
Figure 5: Driving force coefficient vs. instantaneous apparent
wind angle βef f (t) (blue line with markers), and vs. the time 5 PITCHING DECOMPOSITION
shifted instantaneous apparent wind angle βef f (t+τ ) (red line
without marker), for a pitching period T=1.5s and amplitude
A=5 ˚ Pitch Surge Decomposition
VAW VAW VAW

4.2 Energy exchanged
The area contained in the hysteresis loop of Fig. 4 does not
correspond to a work or energy as βef f is the effective ap-
parent wind angle and its relationship to a displacement is not x
straightforward. To build an energy, the displacement of the
n n
centre of effort dx along the direction of the driving force is
considered, and the non-dimensional work W of the driving
force during one oscillation period is defined by:
Figure 7: Different motions considered: pitching (rota-
tion), surge (translation), surge decomposition into transla-
W = Cx dx (8) tions collinear to the apparent wind Vc and normal to the ap-
parent wind Vn .
za
dx = dθ cos(θ) (9)
C The real pitching motion is modelled here by an angular
oscillation around the y axis (Fig.7 Pitch), normal to the cen-
0.45
treline with a rotation centre located at the mast step. Most of
previous studies on the influence of pitching have considered 0.4
Cx
a 2D simplified problem and thus approximated the pitching 0.35 Pitch
motion by a translational oscillation aligned with the yacht 0.3 Surge
centreline (Fig.7 Surge). Then, the usual procedure is to de- quasisteady
0.25
compose this motion in an oscillation parallel to the appar- 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
eff
ent wind, resulting in an oscillation of apparent wind speed,
and an oscillation orthogonal to the apparent wind, resulting
mainly in an oscillation of the apparent wind angle [15] (Fig.7 0.9
decomposition). Here, we want to test these two hypotheses 1
by comparing the results of the dynamic simulation with AR-
Cy
1.1
AVANTI obtained with different imposed motions, and inves- 1.2
tigate the effect on the specific dynamic features highlighted 1.3
above. Motions are based on the standard pitching motion
with amplitude A=5 ˚ and period T=5s (A5T5). 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
eff

Figure 9: Driving and heeling force coefficients versus appar-

ent wind angle for pitch and surge motion. The motion period
and amplitude at the centre of effort are identical and corre-

spond to a pitching amplitude A=5 ˚ and period T=5s.

5.2 Simple translations decomposition

Figure 8: Time series of the driving and heeling force coeffi-
cients for FSI simulations of the various motions considered:
pitching, surge, translations collinear and perpendicular to the
apparent wind (see Fig.10), corresponding to a pitching am-

plitude A=5 ˚ and period T=5s.

5.1 Surge
The first step is to compare the results with a real pitching

motion (rotation) to the results with a translational surge mo- Figure 10: Wind triangle representation for the surge decom-
tion with the amplitude of motion at the centre of effort height position into 2 translations a) Vc collinear to VAW and b) Vn
while pitching. As shown on Fig 8 the oscillation of aerody- normal to VAW .
namic forces is decreased by 25% and phase shifted (around
T/10) when the pitching is reduced to a surge motion. This The second step is to analyse separately the effects of trans-
result gives the order of the error introduced by considering a lational oscillations parallel Vc (Fig 10.a) and orthogonal Vn
surge motion instead of the pitching motion. (Fig 10.b) to the apparent wind direction. It is observed on
Concerning the dynamic behaviour, it is interesting to no- Fig. 8 that the major contribution to the force oscillation is
tice that the case of surge does not show the same hystere- due to the orthogonal oscillation component, which is associ-
sis phenomenon. Indeed, the aerodynamic behaviour in the ated to the oscillation of apparent wind angle. When the varia-
case of surge is much closer to the quasi-steady theory than tions due to both components of motion are added (not shown
in the pitching case, as clearly shown on Fig 9. The loop of on Fig. 8 for clarity), the result is very similar to what is ob-
Cx,y (βef f ) collapses and is superposed to the quasi-steady tained with the surge motion (maximum of cross-correlation=
line. 0.998), which justifies the linear superposition principle of

this approach. The effect of parallel oscillation —variation of

AWS(t)— is small, but with an important phase shift (about

T/3).

Moreover, one can notice that the oscillation of forces is
not symmetric — the duration of increasing and decreasing
phases are different— for pitching, surge and parallel oscilla-

tion, but it is symmetric for the orthogonal oscillation. This

can be explained in the following way. The orthogonal oscil-
lation is associated to an oscillation of AWA(t), and the effect

of angle of attack in a narrow range is almost linear on the
aerodynamic lift. Contrarily, the parallel oscillation is asso-
ciated with an oscillation of AWS(t), and the effect of wind
speed is quadratic on aerodynamic forces.

6 INFLUENCE OF RIG ADJUSTMENTS

In this section, the analysis of the effects of various dock tunes

and backstay loads on the dynamic behaviour and the energy Figure 11: Driving force coefficient vs. non-dimensional dis-
exchanged is presented. placement dx for different dock tunes, for a pitching ampli-
tude A=5 ˚ and period T=5s. The loop area represents the
6.1 Influence of dock tune work exchanged.
The influence of various dock tunes on the sail plan dy-

namic behaviour is investigated. The same pitching motion W C¯x C¯y
(A=5 ˚ and T=5s) is simulated with three realistic dock tunes dock tune Wtune C¯x tune C¯y
2 2 tune2
used while racing in different wind conditions. Dock tunes are tune1 1.029 1.007 1.006
defined as the number of screw turns applied to the shrouds’ tune2 1 1 1
turn-buckles. Tune2 is the reference dock tune used for the tune3 0.960 0.983 0.987
considered sailing conditions. The three dock tunes are de-
scribed bellow: Table 2: Non-dimensional work W= T Cx dx associated to
hysteresis loop, mean driving force coefficient C¯x and mean
• tune1 : -3 turns on V1 shrouds used in light wind heeling force coefficient C¯y for different dock tunes, relative
to reference case (tune2 ), for a pitching amplitude A=5 ˚ and
• tune2 : reference dock tune
period T=5s.
• tune3 : +3 turns on V1 shrouds used in medium wind
This three dock tunes not only modify the rigidity of the 6.2 Influence of the backstay load
full rigging but have a significant influence on the camber
and maximum camber height of the mast. The sails’ shape The influence of a variation of the backstay tension on the
and more precisely their camber and twist are modified by the dynamic behaviour is investigated. The same pitching motion
dock tune. Before the pitching simulation, the main sail and (A=5 ˚ and T=5s) is simulated with four values of backstay
jib are trimmed in order to ensure that the chord at the centre load: 1000N, 1500N, 2000N and 2500N. The case 2000N is
of effort height has the same angle of attack for the different the reference backstay load used for the previous simulations.
tunes. The centre of effort height za is identical for the three The sail trims are identical for the four backstay loads.
dock tunes. Preliminary steady simulations with the four loads have
Figure 11 illustrates the driving force coefficient evolu- shown the ability of ARAVANTI model to simulate the ef-
tion versus the non-dimensional displacement dx. The loops fect of the backstay: the main twist increases, the main cam-
look similar, however, the exchanged energy computed as de- ber decreases and moves backward when the backstay load
scribed in section 4 shows variations. Table 2 presents the increases.
relative evolution of the mean driving force and exchanged Figure 12 illustrates the driving force coefficient evolution
energy compared to the reference dock tune tune2 . versus the non-dimensional displacement dx. As expected,
The effect of various dock tunes on the mean driving force the mean driving and heeling forces are greatly affected by
and energy inside the hysteresis loop is not very strong, but the backstay load, which changes the main sail camber and
trends can nevertheless be noticed. For the same wind veloc- twist (see Tab. 3).
ity and pitching amplitude and period, the energy associated The backstay load also has a great influence on the energy
to the driving force hysteresis is increased by 3% for the less contained in the hysteresis loop (see Tab. 3). The computed
tight dock-tune (tune1 ) and reduced by 4% for the tightest work decreases when load in the backstay is increased. This
dock-tune (tune3 ), compared to the reference. The effect on interesting observation could be due to the great importance
mean driving force is only of order 1% in the same direction. of the rig flexibility under pitching. The reduction of energy
shifts and hysteresis which increase with the motion reduced

frequency and amplitude.
In this article, it is shown that the loop area is not only due
to the phase shift. After shifting by the phase delay τ , the
hysteresis loop of Cx,y = f (βef f (t + τ )) does not collapse
into a single line.
The energy contained in the hysteresis loop is determined

by integration of the driving force along the back and forth

motion due to pitching at the centre of effort height. The re-
sulting work is shown to increase with the pitching frequency
and amplitude. Further work is needed to better understand
the energy transfer in the system, and to confirm the evolu-
tion of phase shift and amount of energy on a larger motion

parameters’ range.
Pure harmonic surge motion is compared to pitching mo-

tion in order to highlight the importance of a realistic 3D mo-

tion. Oscillations of the aerodynamic coefficients decrease by
Figure 12: Driving force coefficient vs. non-dimensional dis- 25% in the case of surge motion compared to the pitching mo-
placement dx for different backstay loads, for a pitching am- tion case. Moreover, in the case of the surge motion, the hys-
plitude A=5 ˚ and period T=5s. The loop area represent the teresis phenomenon is almost cancelled, so that the dynamic
work exchanged W. behaviour is similar to the quasi-steady theory. When the
surge motion is decomposed into two components, perpen-
dicular to and along the apparent wind direction, it is shown
W ¯
Cx C¯y that the major contribution to force oscillation is due to the
Load W2000N C¯x 2000N C¯y 2000N orthogonal oscillation component, which is associated to the
1000N 1.100 1.087 1.119 oscillation of apparent wind angle.
1500N 0.994 1.038 1.052 Finally, a pitching motion of the structure with various
2000N 1 1 1 shrouds’ dock tunes and backstay tension loads is simulated
2500N 0.938 0.932 0.931 in order to study the influence of the rigging stresses on the
dynamic behaviour. Both mean driving force and work inside
Table 3: Non-dimensional work W= T Cx dx, mean driving
the hysteresis loop are decreased when the stresses in the rig
force coefficient C¯x and mean heeling coefficient C¯y for dif-
are increased.
ferent backstay loads, relative to reference case (2000N), for
a pitching amplitude A=5 ˚ and period T=5s.
Acknowledgements
exchanged with the increase of load in the backstay seems to The authors are grateful to K-Epsilon company for continuous
be due to higher longitudinal stresses on the rigging. With collaboration. This work was supported by the French Naval
more stresses, the rig is getting closer to a rigid structure and Academy.
comparison between FSI and rigid simulation [4] has shown
that the hysteresis phenomenon is significantly lower in the
rigid case. References
[1] B. Augier, P. Bot, F. Hauville, and M. Durand. Ex-

7 CONCLUSIONS perimental validation of unsteady models for Wind /
Sails / Rigging Fluid structure interaction. International
The unsteady fluid structure interaction of the sails and rig of Conference on Innovation in High Performance Sailing
a 28-foot (8m) yacht under harmonic pitching has been in- Yachts, Lorient, France, 2010.
vestigated in order to highlight the contributions of the rig
adjustments and the consideration of a realistic pitching mo- [2] B. Augier, P. Bot, F. Hauville, and M. Durand. Experi-
tion in the dynamic behaviour of a sail plan. The ARAVANTI mental full scale study on yacht sails and rig under un-
model is based on an implicit unsteady coupling between a steady sailing conditions and comparison to fluid struc-
vortex lattice fluid model and a finite element structure model, ture interaction unsteady models. The 20th Chesapeake
and has been previously validated with full scale experiments Sailing Yacht Symposium, Annapolis USA, 2011.
in upwind real conditions [3]. Previous studies [13, 4] have
shown that the aerodynamic coefficients plotted against the [3] B. Augier, P. Bot, F. Hauville, and M. Durand. Experi-
instantaneous apparent wind angle exhibit an hysteresis loop. mental validation of unsteady models for fluid structure
These results confirm that the dynamic behaviour of a sail interaction: Application to yacht sails and rigs. Jour-
plan subject to yacht motion deviates from the quasi-steady nal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics,
theory. Oscillations of the aerodynamic forces exhibit phase 101(0):53 – 66, 2012.
[4] B. Augier, P. Bot, F. Hauville, and M. Durand. Dy- [18] J.A. Keuning, K.J. Vermeulen, and E.J. de Ridder. A
namic Behaviour of a Flexible Yacht Sail Plan. Journal generic mathematical model for the manoeuvring and
of Ocean Engineering, 66:32–43, 2013. tacking of a sailing yacht. The 17th Chesapeake Sail-
ing Yacht Symposium, Annapolis, USA, pages 143–163,
[5] V. Chapin and P. Heppel. Performance optimization of 2005.
interacting sails through fluid structure coupling. 2nd
International Conference on Innovation in High Perfor- [19] C.A. Marchaj. Sail performance: techniques to maxi-
mance Sailing Yachts, Lorient, France, 2010. mize sail power. International Marine/Ragged Mountain
Press, 1996.
[6] T. Charvet, F. Hauville, and S. Huberson. Numerical
simulation of the flow over sails in real sailing condi- [20] Y. Masuyama and T. Fukasawa. Full scale measurement
tions. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aero- of sail force and the validation of numerical calculation
dynamics, 63(1-3):111 – 129, 1996. method. The 13th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium,
Annapolis, USA, 1997.
[7] A. D. Fitt and T. R. B. Lattimer. On the unsteady motion
of two-dimentional sails. J. Appl. Maths, 65:147–171, [21] Y. Masuyama, Y. Tahara, T. Fukasawa, and N. Maeda.
2000. Dynamic performance of sailing cruiser by a full scale
sea reality. The 11th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Sympo-
[8] R. G. J. Flay. A twisted flow wind tunnel for testing sium, Annapolis, USA, 1993.
yacht sails. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial
[22] H. Renzsh and K. Graf. Fluid Structure Interaction simu-
Aerodynamics, 63(13):171 – 182, 1996. Special issue on
lation of spinnakers - Getting closer to reality. 2nd Inter-
sail aerodynamics.
national Conference on Innovation in High Performance
[9] F. Fossati. Aero-Hydrodynamics and the Performance of Sailing Yachts, Lorient, France, 2010.
Sailing Yachts: The Science Behind Sailing Yachts and [23] T. Richardt, S. Harries, and K. Hochkirch. Maneu-
Their Design. Adlard Coles Nautical, 2010. vering simulations for ships and sailing yachts using
friendship-equilibrium as an open modular workbench.
[10] F. Fossati and S. Muggiasca. Sails Aerodynamic Behav-
International Euro-Conference on Computer Applica-
ior in dynamic condition. The 19th Chesapeake Sailing
tions and Information Technology in the Maritime In-
Yacht Symposium, Annapolis, USA, 2009.
dustries, 2005.
[11] F. Fossati and S. Muggiasca. Numerical modelling of [24] Y. Roux, M. Durand, A. Leroyer, P. Queutey, M. Vison-
sail aerodynamic behavior in dynamic conditions. 2nd neau, J. Raymond, J.M. Finot, F. Hauville, and A. Pur-
International Conference on Innovation in High Perfor- wanto. Strongly coupled VPP and CFD RANSE code
mance Sailing Yachts, Lorient, France, 2010. for sailing yacht performance prediction. 3rd High Per-
[12] F. Fossati and S. Muggiasca. Experimental investiga- formance Yacht Design Conference Auckland, New Zee-
tion of sail aerodynamic behavior in dynamic condi- land, 2008.
tions. Journal of sailboat technology, (03), 2011. [25] Y. Roux, S. Huberson, F. Hauville, J.P. Boin, M. Guil-
baud, and M. Ba. Yacht performance prediction: To-
[13] F. Fossati and S. Muggiasca. An experimental investi-
wards a numerical vpp. High Performance Yacht Design
gation of unsteady sail aerodynamics including sail flex-
Conference, 2002.
ibility. 4th High Performance Yacht Design Conference
Auckland, New Zeeland, 2012. [26] H. Schoop and N. Bessert. Instationary aeroelastic com-
putation of yacht sails. International Journal for Numer-
[14] R. Garrett. The symmetry of sailing: the physics of sail- ical Methods in Engineering, 52(8):787–803, 2001.
ing for yachtsmen. Sheridan House, Inc., 1996.
[15] F. Gerhardt, Richard Go Jo Flay, and Patrick Jo AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY

Richards. Unsteady aerodynamics of two interacting
yacht sails in two-dimensional potential flow. Journal Benoit Augier holds the current position of post doc fellow in
of Fluid Mechanics, 668(1):551–581, 2011. Department of Structural Engineering at UCSD, San Diego,
USA. He obtained his Ph.D. at the Naval Academy Research
[16] F. Hauville, M. Durand, and Y. Roux. Aero elastic model Institute, Brest, France in 2012. His research interests include
applied to the deformation of a rig. European Journal of Fluid Structure Interaction, Dynamic behaviour of a soft
Environmental and Civil Engineering, 12(5):549 – 560, membrane, Full Scale Experiment and CFD Simulations.
2008. Frédéric Hauville holds the current position of Associate
Professor at Naval academy Research Institute-IRENav. He
[17] P.S. Jackson. An improved upwind sail model for vpps. is co-responsible of the Voil’Enav project which concerns
The 15th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium, An- activities in the field of fluid dynamics applied to sailing
napolis, USA, 2001. yachts. His current research interests includes, both by
numerical and experimental approaches, problems of fluid
structure interaction applied to the deformation of flexible
surfaces and the hydrodynamic study of the forced moving
foils applied to propulsion and marine current turbines. His
previous experience includes a PhD in fluid dynamic in 1996.
Patrick Bot holds the current position of associate professor
at the Naval Academy Research Institute in fluid mechanics
and energy engineering. His research interests include yacht
dynamics, sail aerodynamics and fluid structure interaction.
His previous experience includes hydrodynamic instabilities
and transition to turbulence.
Mathieu Durand holds the current position of R&D director
at K-Epsilon company. He is responsible for FSI develop-
ments and sails simulations. His previous experience includes
a PhD in fluid dynamic in 2012, but also sailing experience
as match-racing skippers (#40 in world ranking in 2011).
Julien Deparday is a Ph.D. student at the Naval Academy
Research Institute. He is studying the Fluid Structure Inter-
action on soft surfaces applied to sails. He is in charge of the
experimental work.
FSI Investigation on Stability of Downwind Sails with an Automatic Dynamic

Trimming
M. Durand, Company K-Epsilon, Sophia-Antipolis, France, mathieu@k-epsilon.com

C. Lothode, Company K-Epsilon, Sophia-Antipolis, France, corentin@k-epsilon.com
F. Hauville, Research Institute of the French Naval Academy, France, frederic.hauville@ecole-navale.fr
A. Leroyer, Centrale Nantes/CNRS, France, alban.leroyer@ec-nantes.fr
M. Visonneau, Centrale Nantes/CNRS, France, michel.visonneau@ec-nantes.fr
R. Floch, Incidences-Sails, Brest, France, ronan@incidences-sails.com
L. Guillaume, BSG-Développements, La Rochelle, France, lg@bsgdev.com
Gennakers are lightweight and flexible sails, used for downwind sailing configurations. Qualities
sought for this kind of sail are propulsive force and dynamic stability. To simulate accurately the flow
around such a sail, several problems need to be solved. Firstly, the structural code has to take into
account cloth behavior, orientation and reinforcements. Flexibility is obtained by modeling wrinkles.
Secondly, the fluid code needs to reproduce the atmospheric boundary layer as an input boundary
condition, and be able to simulate separation. Thirdly, fluid-structure interaction (FSI) is strong due to
the lightness and the flexibility of the structure. The added mass is three orders of magnitude greater
than the mass of the sail, and large structural displacement occurs, which makes the coupling between
the two solvers difficult to achieve. Finally, the problem is unsteady, and dynamic trimming is
important to the simulation of spinnakers [4].
The main objective is to use numerical simulations to model spinnakers, in order to predict both
propulsive force and sail dynamic stability. Recent developments [2] are used to solve these problems,
using a finite element program dedicated to sails and rig simulations coupled with a RANSE solver.
The FSI coupling is done through a quasi-monolithic method. An ALE formulation is used, hence the
fluid mesh follows the structural deformation while keeping the same topology. The fluid mesh
deformation is carried out with a fast, robust and parallelized method based on the propagation of the
deformation state of the sail boundary fluid faces [3].
Tests are realized on a complete production chain: a sail designer from Incidences has designed two
different shapes of an IMOCA60 spinnaker with the SailPack software. An automatic procedure was
developed to transfer data from Sailpack to a structure input file taking into account the orientation of
sailcloth and reinforcements. The same automatic procedure is used for both spinnakers, in order to
compare dynamic stability and propulsion forces. Then a new method is developed to quantify the
stability of a downwind sail.
1.2 GOALS OF DOWNWIND SAILS

1 INTRODUCTION Sail designers use specific software such as Sailpack to
define the sail shape, called the moulded shape based on
1.1 UNSTEADY FSI ON DOWNWIND SAILS their experience to develop a flying shape. Sail designers
In recent years, CFD computations for sailing yachts and try to optimize the parameters to maximize the
specifically for sails have increased considerably the propulsive force, while keeping the most stable flying
performance of yachts sails. Most publications have spinnaker.
concentrated on upwind sails. Downwind sails, due to
their lightweight and instabilities are more frequently Stability is essential for gennakers, particularly for
treated with experimental procedure (Renzsch [6]). A single-handed boats. Stability can be defined by
few publications try to simulate the complex flow and the sailmakers as the capability of the sail to maintain its
response of the downwind structure [4] [7] [8]. To the trimmed shape. The leading edge of a trimmed gennaker
author’s knowledge, no published numerical unsteady is very light and has a periodic behavior. When the sail is
FSI on downwind sails is available. breaking (i.e. curling) on the luff, a stable gennaker does
not need to have the trim adjusted: it is unfolding on its
own. In the case of an unstable gennaker, a crew member
must adjust the trim or bear away to unfold the gennaker. for example, but sometimes also due to the unsteadiness
Unfortunately, this behavior is very sensitive to wind of the flow itself (vortex shedding, unsteady separation
variations, and to the boat motions. There is no physical location, etc). The problem for downwind sails is even
quantity that directly measures the stability of a more complex because the flow is often detached from
gennaker: it is only indicated by the sailor’s feel. the sails, and the sails are subject to large shape changes.
IRENav, K-Epsilon and the DSPM team of LHEEA have
Stability as a dynamic behavior, requires the use of a jointly developed a coupled computational tool able to
dynamic FSI tool to simulate. We have also developed a compute the fluid-structure interaction characterizing the
trimming procedure, in order to quantify the stability of dynamic behavior of sails in wind.
the gennakers.
This coupled simulation tool is composed of an original
In this study, we investigate two real gennakers built, finite element code ARA [2] developed by K-Epsilon to
tested and used during the last Vendée Globe. Thus, the simulate sails and the rig of sailing boats (mast, shrouds,
two spinnakers are really close in terms of their design, sheets, etc). A wrinkle formulation is included to model
but have different performances. Those differences are the local deformations of sails without having to use too
small, but significant for both sailors and sailmakers. many elements. This code is coupled to the URANSE
These two spinnakers have been digitized and then solver ISIS-CFD [1] (internationally distributed by
compared for one wind condition, taking into account the NUMECA Int. as FINE™/Marine) developed by the
atmospheric boundary layer. DSPM team of LHEEA.
The fluid-structure interaction between sails and wind is

a difficult problem because it is strongly coupled. As
stated previously, the added mass on a spinnaker is
typically three orders of magnitude larger than the mass
2 ARA WITH FINETM/Marine: A COMPLETE of the structure. Adding the fact that the structure has
UNSTEADY FSI SOFTWARE almost no bending stiffness, this makes it a very difficult
problem. The followed approach is based on the use of
an improved strongly-coupled methodology. The
Figure 1 : quasi-monolithic algorithm for fluid- stability of the multi-step procedure is ensured by the use
structure interaction, fluid algorithm in blue, FSI of the Jacobian matrix characterizing the coupling
added procedure in red. between the structure and the fluid; this Jacobian is
approximated with the help of a potential fluid solver
AVANTI, developed by K-Epsilon. Although not
monolithic, this algorithm is very stable, fast and
parallelized.
Figure 2 : Fluid mesh deformation around a main sail
and gennaker, during an unsteady simulation.
Modeling the wind, sail and rig interactions on a sailing

yacht is a complex subject, because the quality of the A new mesh deformation tool has also been developed to
simulation depends on the accuracy of both the structural transmit the deformation of the sails to the fluid domain
and fluid simulations, which strongly interact. Moreover, without having to rebuild a new grid from scratch. This
the sails are subjected to highly unsteady oscillations due method, based on the combination of an explicit
to waves, wind variations, course changes or trimming advancing front method and smoothing is also
parallelized, fast, robust and used to compute the large 3.3 TESTS IN REAL LIFE
deformations of the unstructured mesh around multiple The two sails were tested by sailmakers during full-size
bodies like a spinnaker and main sail interacting together. sessions in real conditions. During tests, and without
measurement, sailors feel that propulsive forces of the
two gennakers were close. The goal of the modifications
The code’s accuracy was verified by an experimental made on the second spinnaker was to get more stability.
comparison performed on a well-controlled test case with In fact, during test session, the luff of gennaker A was
an original experiment developed by IRENav [2] [9], sometimes curling hard, and collapsing. The crew
which consisted of a square of spinnaker fabric mounted therefore had to modify the trim or bear away. This
on two carbon battens which were moved in a forced means that they change drastically the heading of the
oscillation. Finally, applied application is made on an boat, in order to increase the incidence on the sail. These
unsteady sailing spinnaker with an automatic trimming modifications of the trim or boat heading decreased the
algorithm, interacting with a mainsail which was realized performance of the boat.
to illustrate the potential of the present fluid-structure
coupling (show Figure 2 for an example, from [2]). The luff of gennaker B had a different behavior: The luff
curled moderately, and most of the time, no actions were
needed to uncurl the luff.
3 CHOICE AND DESIGN OF THE TWO

GENNAKERS
4 GENNAKERS DIGITALISATION
3.1 CHOICE Sails were designed by another sailmaker soft from the
Shapes of gennakers are widely differing, depending of company Incidences. The real sails were digitized, using
the type of boat, the range of wind and their use. In this the software Sailpack developed by BSG
paper, two very similar gennakers are compared, in order Développements, in order to respect the initial shape of
to estimate the capability of the process to distinguish the the mould.
characteristics of closely related sails.
The design process is as follow:
These sails were designed and used during the Vendée • Design of the sail mould in 3D
Globe 2012-2013 by two skippers. • Definition of seam layouts
• Definition of patche layouts
3.2 DESIGN • Definition of the cloth properties, the doubled or
Once gennaker A was designed, Gennaker B was a small tripled layers and the orientation of the cloth for
evolution with these differences: each panel.
- the luff twist is 1% smaller and the luff roach is 0.4%
smaller From this information, SailPack calculated the 2D panels
- the sail is 1% less twisted that were used to build the real sail. Then a triangular
- the maximum sail camber is 0.7% deeper, and 1% mesh is generated for each 2D panel. The outline nodes
further forward of the meshes were connected to simulate the assembly
The sail areas are identical and the tack, head and clew of the sail. All the nodes were then moved to recompose
points are in the same position for both spinnakers. the sail in 3D, keeping the 2D initial node distances. This
way the resulting 3D mesh is based on the 2D panels that
are used for the real assembly of the sail.
Figure 3 : Top view of the two spinnakers as moulded:
Gennaker A in red, and gennaker B in blue. On the top Stiffness matrices were associated to each mesh element.
is the luff (leading edge), on the left is the leech The cloth, its orientation and the number of layers were
(trailing edge). taken into account (Figure 4). Additional reinforcements
were made with undeformable patches of 20 cm radius
around the three points. The structural model was
composed of about 7000 membrane elements, with 1
wire element for the sheet. The stiffness matrices of each
material used were provided from tests on each piece of
cloth. To simplify the computation, the mainsail and all
rigging were not meshed, and were not simulated.
Figure 4 : Left: View of the stiffness of the gennaker. for an air particle to travel from the luff to the leech was
Right: zoom on the tack point. Arrays symbolize the 3.5s at z= 15m.
direction of maximal stiffness.
5.4 UNSTEADY FSI

The computations are realized on 2 dual-processor hexa-
core Xeon X5670 (24 cores). The computation was
restarted from the converged structure and converged
fluid of the initial computations. The computation was
performed with unsteady RANSE, with the k-omega SST
turbulence model. The simulation time is fixed at 25
seconds. Such a long time is necessary in order to obtain
periodic results.
5.5 TRIMMING PROCEDURE

The trimming algorithm (Figure 5) is defined in order to
give an objective of zero pressure on the leading edge.
This algorithm measures the pressure differential on the
leading edge, and gives a trimming order such that the
leading edge normal velocity is in opposition with the
direction as the pressure force. A signal treatment with
5 SIMULATION PROCESS the leading edge velocity measurement is realized to
obtain the sheet length. This procedure is dynamic: the
The steps of a computation can be summarized: length of the sheet is therefore always changing.
Ͳ Structural computation
Ͳ Fluid meshing Figure 5 : The trimming algorithm.
Ͳ Fluid computation
Ͳ Unsteady FSI with trimming procedure
5.1 STRUCTURAL COMPUTATION

In the first step, a structural computation is made with a
uniform pressure on the sail. The length of the sheet is
modified in order to orient the sail correctly according to
the incoming flow. This first step permits the generation Some tests were needed to adjust PID parameters: too
of the fluid domain. violent of a trimming algorithm work like a “pumping”
trimmer, some waves appears and move on the sail. With
too slow of an algorithm, the luff collapses hard, and the
5.2 FLUID MESHING computation could stop, due to limits of the mesh
In the second step, the meshing around the deformed sail deformations.
is done through HexpressTM, a fully hexahedral
automated mesh generator based on the octree method.
Boundaries are about 120m for the spinnaker in the two
6 RESULTS AND COMPARISONS BETWEEN
upwind directions, 240m in the two downwind
THE TWO GENNAKERS
directions, zmax is 120m and zmin is zero.
Figure 2 shows the result of the trimming algorithm for
Cells are refined close to z=0m to take into account the the two gennakers. During the first five seconds, the
atmospheric boundary layer, and refined near the sail. large amplitude proved that the gennaker is in a bad trim
The entire model is meshed with 1.8 millions cells. position at the start. The length of the sheet then slowly
becomes periodic, and after 17s of simulation, it has
become fully periodic.
5.3 FLUID COMPUTATION
A fluid convergence is required before starting unsteady Four periods of the periodic behavior of the two
FSI simulation. Conditions on boundaries are made to spinnaker are shown in Figure 6. The sheet lengths of the
simulate the atmospheric boundary layer. A boat speed of two gennakers are periodic, and very similar to the
5.92m/s is used in conjunction with a logarithmic behavior of real life gennakers. Those sheet variations of
boundary layer (Z0=0.002m); true wind speed measured gennaker A are much greater than those of gennaker B.
at 30m is 7.72m/s, true wind angle is 150 degrees. The Others results, reported in Table 1, Figure 9 and Figure
apparent wind speed at z= 15m is about 2.6m/s. The time 10, come from an averaging procedure of the two last
periods of the motion. Positions, as well as pressure and
Figure 7 : Top view and aft view of the averaged flying
elongation have been averaged.
shape during computation.
Figure 9 shows the delta pressure between pressure and
suction faces of the sail. The trimming algorithm tries to
obtain a zero pressure difference on the leading edge, this
is accomplished for half of the luff: The upper half has a
zero mean pressure difference. This is indicative of an
attached flow on this part of the sail. In the lower part,
where the luff is not curling, the low pressure on the
leading edge indicates a detached flow.
Global pressure values are quite similar between the two

sails, but gennaker B has a larger difference pressure.
Figure 6 : Result of trimming algorithm on the length

of the two gennakers sheets (red line: gen. A, blue line:
gen. B): variations showing the instability of the
gennakers.
From these results, we proposed a measurement of the

stability, dependent of the triming algorithm, based on
the height of the sail divide by the amplitude of the
trimming:
Stab = H / Amp
Table 1 : Summary of the differences measured

between the two gennakers.
Gennaker A Gennaker B Difference
Propulsive Force [N] 3625 3737 +3.1%
Side Force [N] 1555 1684 +8.3%
Vertical Force [N] 1223 1335 +9.2% .
Stability 34 64 +85%
Figure 8 : Comparison of the behavvior of the luff for
Figure 10 : Front view off averaged deformation on
the two gennakers during 4 stepss of the period.
gennaker A. Yellow represent 0.4% of deformation in
the cloth.
c
Figure 9 : Two views of the averageed delta pressure

(pressure - suction, [P]) during two period:
p gennaker A
on the left, gennaker B on the
t right.
Sailmakers are also interesteed in other results such as the

deformation of the cloth: Figure
F 10 shows the mean
deformation in the cloth. Maaximum deformation of about
0.4% occurs near the lufff, on both sides, near the
reinforcements.
7 CONCLUSIONS
A complete procedure foor the comparison of two
gennakers was described. Thhe procedure integrates CFD
and FEA in a dynamic sim mulation with an automatic
trimming procedure and is a powerful and advanced tool
for the prediction of flyingg shape, as well as the sail
forces and the stability off gennakers. A quantitative
measure of the sail stabiliity has been presented and
gennaker B has been show wn to be more stable with
regards to this criteria.
Further investigations with this tool will be made, such

as modification of the turbulence models for the fluid
part, investigation of the innfluence of the mainsail in
terms of the gennaker desiggn and flying shapes. Other
trimming procedures will be b tested with the help of
sailmakers and professional sailors. Comparisons will be
made with an instrumented gennakers.
g
F. Hauville holds the current position of Associate
REFERENCES Professor at Naval academy Research Institute-IRENav.
He is co-responsible of the Voil'Enav project which
[1] B. Augier, P. Bot, F. Hauville, and M. Durand, concerns activities in the field of fluid dynamics applied
Experimental validation of unsteady models for to sailing yachts. His current research interests includes,
fluid structure interaction : Application to yacht sails and both by numerical and experimental approaches,
rigs, Journal of Wind Engineering problems of fluid structure interaction applied to the
and Industrial Aerodynamics 101 (2012), 53–66. deformation of flexible surfaces and the hydrodynamic
[2] M. Durand, Interaction fluide-structure souple et study of the forced moving foils applied to propulsion
légère, applications aux voiliers, Ph.D. thesis, and marine current turbines. His previous experience
Ecole Centrale Nantes, 2012. includes a PhD in fluid dynamic in 1996.
[3] M. Durand, F. Hauville, P. Bot, B. Augier, Y. Roux, A. Leroyer holds the current position of Associate
A. Leroyer, and M. Visonneau. Unsteady numerical Professor at the LHEEA laboratory of Ecole Centrale
simulations of downwind sails. In the second Nantes. His research topics revolve around the numerical
international conference on innovation in high modelling of the incompressible isothemal flows around
performance sailing yachts (INNOV’SAIL 2010) (2010), complex geometries and are more specifically focused on
57–64. the methodologies to integrate new physical phenomena
[4] K. Graf, H. Renzsch Investigations of Downwind inside a Navier-Stokes solver, as the fluid-structure
Sails and integration into Sailing Yacht Design Processes interaction and the numerical modelling of cavitation. He
2nd High Performance Yacht Design Conference is part of the developer team of ISIS-CFD. His previous
Auckland, 14-16 February, 2006 experience includes a PhD in fluid dynamics in 2004.
[5] J. Wackers, B. Koren, HC Raven, A. van der Ploeg, M. Visonneau born in France in 1957. He obtained the
AR Starke, GB Deng, P. Queutey, M. Visonneau, T. Engineer's diploma in 1980 from Ecole Nationale
Hino, and K. Ohashi, Free-surface viscous flow solution Supérieure de Mécanique (now Centrale Nantes) and the
methods for ship hydrodynamics, Archives of diploma of Advanced Naval Architecture from ENSM in
Computational Methods in Engineering 18 (2011), no. 1, 1981. In 1985, he got a PhD of Fluid Dynamics and Heat
1–41. Transfer of University of Nantes and entered the "Centre
[6] H. Renzsch and K. Graf. An experimental validation National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)" as
case for fluid-structure-interaction simulations of Research Scientist. He became the head of the CFD
downwind sails, Proceedings of the 21th Chesapeake department of the Fluid Mechanics Laboratory (ECN)
Sailing Yacht Symposium, March 2011. from 1995 to 2012. In 2001, he got the Research
[7] D. Trimarchi, Analysis of downwind sail structures Habilitation Diploma and was promoted Research
using non-linear shell finite elements, Ph.D. Thesis, Director within CNRS in 2006. His main research topics
University of Southampton, 2012 are Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), Ship
[8] M. Lombardi, Numerical simulation of a sailing boat: Hydrodynamics and Turbulence Modeling for high Re
free surface, fluid-structure interaction and shape flows. In 1991, he got the 2nd Cray Prize for CFD and
optimization, Ph.D. Thesis, Ecole polytechnique fédérale has been awarded 30th Georg Weinblum Memorial
de Lausanne, 2012 Lecturer (2007-2008) in 2007.
[9] B. Augier, Experimental Studies of the Fluid R. Floch holds the current position of Sail Designer at
Structure Interaction on Soft Surfaces: Application to Incidence Brest. He is responsible of the R&D
Yacht Sails, Ph.D. Thesis, French Naval Academy coordination, and the sails design of Figaro Class, M34,
Research Institute - IRENav, 2012 and Open 60. His previous experience includes two
Olympics preparations with 470 boats.
L. Guillaume holds the current position of R&D
engineer at BSG Développements company. He is
responsible for the development of SailPack sail design
AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY software and other sail analysis software. His previous
experience includes the development of sail vision and
analysis systems for different America’s cup campaigns.
M. Durand holds the current position of R&D director at
K-Epsilon company. He is responsible for FSI
developments and sails simulations. His previous
experience includes a PhD in fluid dynamic in 2012, but
also sailing experience as match-racing skippers (#40 in
world ranking in 2011).
C. Lothode holds the current position of R&D engineer
at K-Epsilon company. He is responsible for FSI
computations and development. His previous experience
includes a M.Sc. in Applied Mathematics.

DEVELOPMENT OF COMPUTATIONAL FLUID-STRUCTURE

INTERACTION METHOD FOR YACHT SAILS
F.M.J. Bergsma, N. Moerke and K.S. Zaaijer, Van Oossanen Naval Architects, Netherlands,
f.bergsma@oossanen.nl, n.moerke@oossanen.nl, s.zaaijer@oossanen.nl
H.W.M. Hoeijmakers, University of Twente, Netherlands, h.w.m.hoeijmakers@utwente.nl
SUMMARY
This paper presents a Fluid-Structure Interaction (FSI) method for sails. In this FSI method the pressure
field around the sail is determined using the Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) package
FINE/Marine using the ISIS solver. This computational method is based on the Reynolds-Averaged
Navier-Stokes Equations (RANSE). The computed pressure field serves as input for a basic structural
model implemented in the Nastran-based Finite Element Analyses (FEA) package Femap which
determines the deformation of the sail subject to the aerodynamic load. In an iterative procedure the
distribution of the surface pressure and the deformation of the sail attain a stable equilibrium. The aim
of the FSI method is to determine the steady flying shape of the sail and to obtain the aerodynamic
forces generated by the sail taking into account the deformation of the sail.
A method is presented for 2D sail sections as well as a method for 3D upwind sails. These methods are
capable of determining the steady deformation of the sail. The results of the method for 2D sail sections
are compared with a set of experimental data. This comparison shows that the deformed shape of a 2D
mast and sail section compares satisfactorily with measured data for various combinations of slackness
and angles of attack.
NOMENCLATURE ߬ന௧ Reynolds stress tensor (N·m-2)

߶ radial basis function (m)
ܿԦ sample point
ܿ chord length (m) 1 INTRODUCTION
‫ܧ‬ elasticity modulus (N·m-2)
݃Ԧ gravitational acceleration (m·s-2) Currently most procedures for sail design, i.e. providing
‫ܭ‬ turbulence kinetic energy (m2·s-2) planform, camber and cloth selection, are based on
݈ cloth length (m) experience. Mostly crude analytical models and models
݊ሬԦ outward bound normal vector (-) based on a regression of previous wind tunnel tests are
݊௦ number of sample points in RBF (-) used to predict the lift and drag forces on sails. In the
‫݌‬ pressure field (N·m-2) analysis of the aerodynamic performance of sail
ܴ݁ Reynolds number (-) designs only a few designers use computational
ܵ control volume surface (m2) methods. These are usually based on potential flow
methods for predetermined shapes. Since the
ܵӖ rate of strain tensor (s-1)
deformation of the sail due to aerodynamic loads can be
‫ݏ‬ slackness (-)
substantial, improvements in the prediction of the
ܷሬԦ velocity field (m·s-1) aerodynamic performance of sails can be achieved by
ܷሬԦௗ velocity of surface ܵ (m·s-1) using Fluid-Structure Interaction (FSI) analysis. FSI is
ሬሬሬԦ
‫ݑ‬Ԣ flow velocity fluctuation (m·s-1) the interaction between a deformable structure and the
‫ݑ‬ሺ‫ݔ‬Ԧሻ deformation (m) flow surrounding it. FSI is regarded as a frontier in
ܸ air speed (m·s-1) numerical methods for sailing [1].
ܸ control volume (m3)
‫ݓ‬௜ weighting factor in RBF (-) The flying shape is determined by the structural
‫ݔ‬Ԧ interpolated point (m) properties of the sail and the pressure distribution on
‫ݕ‬ା dimensionless distance from wall (-) the sail produced by the flow around the sail. A
ߙ angle of attack (°) common approach is the so-called ‘segregated’ or
ߝ excess cloth length (m) ‘partitioned’ approach. This means that first the flow
ߤ air dynamic viscosity (Pa·s) around a given shape of the sail and corresponding flow
ߤ௧ turbulent viscosity (Pa·s) domain is solved using Computational Fluid Dynamics
ߥ Poisson ratio (-) (CFD). This yields the pressure distribution on the sail.
ߩ density (kg·m-3) This pressure distribution is exported to a structural
method (Finite Element Method), which solves for the
߬Ӗ stress tensor (N·m-2)
deformed shape under the specified load.
߬ന௟ viscous stress tensor (N·m-2)
The deformed shape is used to update the flow domain The aim of the work presented here is to develop and
and the flow around the new geometry is calculated. validate a method to predict the flying shape of the sail
This process repeats in an iterative manner until under steady conditions. Results of both 2D and 3D
convergence of the sail shape and the flow is attained. cases are presented. Numerical simulation for 3D FSI
has been performed to investigate the capabilities of the
The first efforts in fluid structure interaction were made FSI method, but crude methods are used for the
by Schoop [2] [3] [4] and Fukasawa and Katori [5]. prediction of the deformation. Three main topics are
Vortex Lattice potential flow models were coupled with covered: the CFD method that is used to predict the
linear elastic models for the sails. The applicability of pressure field around a sail; the structural method used
the used models can be questioned, but more to predict the deformation of a sail; and the
computational power was required to introduce viscous computational procedure that handles the iterative
flow models and non-linear elastic models for the process and the transfer of data between the structural
structural behaviour of the sail [6]. method and the CFD method.
From 2008 on, a new generation of FSI methods was 2 CFD METHOD
introduced. These models are based on viscous flow
CFD solvers, combined with more advanced models for In this section a description is given of the CFD method
the structural behaviour of the sail. In 2008 Renzsch, used to determine the flow. First the governing
Muller and Graf presented a fluid structure interaction equations are given. This is followed by a description
method for downwind sails [7]. A RANSE solver was of the computational domain and the boundary
combined with the self-developed code FlexSail for the conditions, and of the mesh. The geometry and flow
structural behaviour of the sails. A wrinkling model conditions for the 2D and 3D case are given.
was introduced to cope with compressional loads in the
sails [8]. Paton Morvan and Heppel described the 2.1 GOVERNING EQUATIONS
coupling between the RANS method CFX and a
purpose-built code called RELAX for membrane The modelling of the viscous-flow is based on
structures aimed to model the structural behaviour of Reynolds Averaged Navier Stokes equations (RANSE)
sails [9]. In 2011 the same structural model was weakly for the incompressible-unsteady turbulent flow. This is
coupled to the RANSE solvers FLUENT and done using the ISIS solver from the FINE/Marine
OpenFOAM [10]. package [14]. The equation for mass conservation is
given in integral conservation form by:
Trimarchi et al. developed a weak coupling between the
డ
unsteady RANS solver OpenFOAM and a structural ‫׬‬ ሬԦ െ ܷ
ߩܸ݀ ൅ ‫׬‬ௌ ߩ൫ܷ ሬԦௗ ൯ ή ݊ሬԦ݀ܵ ൌ Ͳ
డ௧ ௏
method that uses shell elements instead of the more
common membrane elements. These shell elements are The equation of conservation of momentum is given
able to capture the wrinkling of the sail better [11]. by:
A new approach to the coupling of the structural and డ
ሬԦܸ݀ ൅ ‫ܷߩ ׬‬
ሬԦൣ൫ܷ
ሬԦ െ ܷ
ሬԦௗ ൯ ή ݊ሬԦ൧ ݀ܵ ൌ
‫׬‬ ߩܷ
the fluid model was applied recently by Lombardi, et డ௧ ௏ ௌ
al.. Instead of the commonly used weak coupling, the ‫׬‬ௌ ൫߬Ӗ െ ‫ ݌‬ή ‫ ܫ‬൯Ӗ ή ݊ሬԦ݀ܵ ൅ ‫׬‬௏ ߩ݃Ԧܸ݀
FSI problem is solved using a strongly coupled
segregated approach. This is achieved by introducing a Closure of this set of equations is obtained by defining
sub-iteration cycle for every iteration step. This is the stress tensor:
necessary to prevent numerical instability which occurs
for large deformations [12]. ߬Ӗ ൌ ߬ന௧ ൅ ߬ന௟
Meanwhile, a strong coupling was established between Here ߬ന௧ is the Reynolds stress tensor and ߬ന௟ the viscous
the inviscid flow solver AVANTI with the structural stress tensor. The viscous stress tensor is defined as:
model ARA which uses membrane elements.
ଵ
Validation was performed by comparing numerical ߬ന௟ ൌ ʹߤ ቀܵӖ െ ‫ ܫ‬Ӗ ሬ‫׏‬Ԧ ή ܷ
ሬԦቁ
ଷ
results with the data from full scale tests. Comparison
of the sail shape for the steady case showed good
Here ܵӖ is the rate of strain tensor. The Reynolds stress
correspondence. [13]
tensor is defined as:
തതതതതതത
ሬሬሬԦ
߬ന௧ ൌ െߩ‫ݑ‬Ԣ ή ሬሬሬԦ
‫ݑ‬Ԣ 2.3 MESH
A closure of this term is required to solve the set of Meshes have been generated using HEXPRESS v2.11:
equations. Turbulence viscosity models are used for a top-down mesher for unstructured hexahedral meshes.
this closure. These models are based on the Boussinesq For all cases the mesh near solid surfaces is sufficient
approximation. This commonly used approximation to maintain a y+-value of around 1 in boundary layers.
gives the Reynolds stress as follows:
For the 2D case a mesh study has been performed using
ଵ ଶ the NACA0012 wing section. This section is chosen
߬ന௧ ൌ ʹߤ௧ ቀܵӖ െ ‫ ܫ‬Ӗ ‫׏‬
ሬԦ ή ܷ
ሬԦቁ െ ߩ‫ ܫܭ‬Ӗ
since it has been used for experiments extensively,
ଷ ଷ
making it very suitable for validation purposes. A
The SST-Menter turbulence model is used. This model coarse but characteristic mesh for this geometry is
is most suitable for both upwind and downwind sails shown in Figure 1.
[15].
2.2 DOMAIN AND BOUNDARY CONDITIONS
The size of the domains used for 2D and 3D cases is

tabulated in Table 1. For the 2D case the size of the
domain in spanwise (up-down) direction is set to unity.
For the 3D case the bottom of the domain is placed ½
chord length below the foot of the sail. This represents
the water surface. The size of the computational
domain followed from a study on the effect the size on
the computed forces on the sail. Figure 1 – characteristic mesh for NACA0012 profile,
generated with HEXPRESS v2.11.
Table 1 – Computational domains in chord lengths c.
Domain size (c) The number of elements along the chord was varied by
2D 3D increasing the number of refinements. Lift and drag
Upstream 50 8 coefficients were determined for various meshes. The
Downstream 80 14 results are shown in Table 3.
Transverse 50 8
Table 3 - Lift and drag coefficients for different number of
Up - 12 chord-wise elements. NACA0012, Re = 3·106, ߙ=5°, 19
Down - ½ viscous layers, y+§ 1.
The boundary conditions are applied as tabulated in ܰ௖௛௢௥ௗ ܰ௖௘௟௟ ‫ܥ‬௟ ‫ܥ‬ௗ
Table 2. The development of the earth’s boundary layer 32 22096 0.5150 0.0217
is not incorporated. Instead, a symmetry (slip) 64 27610 0.5212 0.0146
boundary condition is applied, mimicking the presence 128 36872 0.5421 0.0109
of the water surface without generating a surface 256 53064 0.5381 0.0103
boundary layer at the bottom of the domain, which 512 81701 0.5324 0.0101
would complicate the numerical simulation. 1024 135330 0.5352 0.0101
Table 2 – Boundary conditions of computational domain. It shows that good convergence behavior occurs for the
Boundary Condition type drag coefficient, which converges asymptotically to a
2D 3D value of 0.0101 for meshes with 256 chord-wise
Inlet Far field velocity Far field elements and more. The lift coefficient does not appear
velocity to converge monotonically. This is believed to be due
to the unstructured meshing method, but for meshes
Outlet Zero pressure Zero pressure
finer than 512 elements along the chord, the variation
gradient gradient
of the lift is acceptably small (within 0.5%). This
Transverse Far field Far field
makes it possible to calculate the lift and drag of the
Top Mirror Far field
section sufficiently accurate.
Bottom Mirror Mirror
Sail/foil No Slip No slip
A mesh deformation algorithm that is included in the

Fine/Marine package is used to adapt the meshes to the
deformed sail shape. In FSI the flow needs to be solved
for every iteration step taking into account a slightly
deformed geometry. Being able to deform the mesh
without loss of accuracy omits the need to re-mesh the
computational domain every iteration. It was verified that
using mesh deformation does not decrease the accuracy
of the predicted lift and drag forces of the sail.
2.4 2D GEOMETRY AND FLOW CONDITIONS
The geometry used for 2D numerical simulations is

based on the experimental setup by Yam, Karlin & Arieli
[18]. The experimental setup is shown in Figure 3.
In the figure the flow direction is from right to left. The

chord of the sail is 138 mm and the span 350 mm. The
cloth (white) is attached to the leading and trailing edge
with two sleeves. At both ends of the wing endplates are
mounted parallel to the flow (1) to reduce the 3D
behaviour of the flow. The two endplates are connected
by two circular rods (2) of 6mm diameter. One of them
functions as the leading edge. This is used as pivoting
point in order to vary the angle of attack. The trailing
edge (3) consists of a 15 mm blade with a thickness of
1.5 mm that is connected to ball bearings that enable the
plate to rotate freely around its longitudinal axis.
The sail of the experimental setup consists of a freely

rotating trailing edge and a sleeve around the leading
edge that is free to rotate around a rod. Accounting for
these rotations in the numerical simulations is beyond the
scope of the presented research and not relevant for the
purpose of simulating the deformation of yacht sails.
Figure 2 – Typical CFD surface mesh for a sail showing
varying refinements along the height and additional refinements In the numerical simulations the leading and trailing edge
at the edges. are therefore considered rigid and fixed. Deformation of
the cloth occurs between the two sleeves only. The shape
For the 3D case a mesh has been generated with a
and position of the leading and trailing edge are taken
varying number of refinements along the height of the
from the experimental data. This is visualized in Figure
sail. This is necessary because the geometry used has,
4. The blue line shows the geometry as measured for the
roughly, a triangular shape. To maintain the specified
case of an angle of attack of 4.5° and a slackness of
number of cells along the chord, an increasing number of
1.5%.
refinements is required with decreasing chord length of
the sail.
In addition, extra refinements along the edge of the sail

are applied. Wilkinson [17] showed that these are the
regions where flow separation due to high adverse
pressure gradients can occur, which can be captured
more accurately with the locally refined mesh. It was
found that a mesh with 64 elements along the chord and
edge refinements gives a good balance between accuracy
and computational time. An example of a coarse surface
mesh of this type is shown in Figure 2.
Figure 3 - Test rig with a sail as used in the experimental setup

[18] .
The position and attitude of the plate of the trailing edge Reynolds number (-) 2.08Â106
is taken from the measured data and used as input for the
geometry of the numerical simulations. The geometry of 3 STRUCTURAL METHOD
the leading edge is constructed from the diameter of the
mast and lines that are tangent to this mast corresponding Sails are made of thin cloth with anisotropic material
to the cloth of the sleeve around the mast. In the properties. These cloths are exposed to a laterally
numerical simulations this part of the geometry is fixed distributed load. This causes large deflections, i.e.
as well. The attitude of mast and trailing edge vary for deflections that are as large as multiples of the thickness
each case and are therefore adjusted for each numerical of the cloth. This renders the structural problem non-
simulation. linear.
The initial shape of the cloth (red) is constructed from the The code used for the structural analysis is the Nastran-
arc of a circle with a length equal to the length of the based Femap v10.0 package. The sail is discretized using
undeformed cloth between the sleeves in the experiment. plate elements. These elements have resistance against
Please note that this length is not necessarily equal to the bending. Four-noded quadrilateral (CQUAD4) elements
length of the sail shape in the experiment, since the are used to discretize the geometry.
experimental data shows the deformed sail shape. This
becomes clear in Figure 4 from the difference in arc From the mesh study it follows that for the 2D case a
length between the red line and the blue line. mesh with 100 elements along the chord of the sail is
sufficient to obtain a mesh independent solution of the
deformation. For the 3D case a mesh with 20x20
elements was used. This is a very coarse mesh. Literature
recommends at least 15,000 elements in total [9]. Such a
large mesh leads to time consuming interpolations of the
pressure fields, therefore meshes of this size were not
Figure 4 – Deformed experimental result (blue dots) and the used for the actual FSI simulations in the present study.
geometry used for numerical simulations: The deformable part The mesh for the 3D sail should therefore be considered
in the simulation is shown in red (dashed). The fixed leading as crude and further development of the structural
and trailing edge are shown in black (continuous). method is required.
The flow conditions for the 2D case are tabulated in A nonlinear static analysis is performed to solve for the
Table 4: deformation of the plate under uniform lateral load. 75
Table 4 – Flow conditions for 2D FSI simulations.
increments or load steps are adopted with a maximum of
25 sub-iterations per load step. For the 2D case the cloth
Air dynamic viscosity (PaÂs) 1.85Â10-5 has a thickness of 62 μm. An isotropic linear elastic
Air density (kg·m-3) 1.2 material model was adopted. The stiffness of the cloth
Air speed (m·s-1) 20 was varied between E = 73.5·106 N/m2 and 147·106 N/m2
Reynolds number (-) 1.78Â105 and the Poisson ratio was set to Ȟ = 0.3. This is
representative for the nylon spinnaker cloth used in the
2.5 3D GEOMETRY AND FLOW CONDITIONS experiments by Yam et al. For the 3D case the sail has an
-modulus of 1.667·109 N/m2 and a Poisson ratio of 0.3,
The geometry used for 3D numerical simulations has a representative for Dacron sail cloth. The thickness used
span (height) of the sail of 10.5 m. The maximum chord is 5 mm, relatively thick compared to cloth used for sails.
is 4 m at the foot of the sail. The head of the sail is 0.2 m. This was chosen in order to prevent large deformations
the total surface area is 28.07 m2. The angle of attack is that cannot be handled by the mesh deformation
constant with height and has a value of 5°. Commonly algorithm as currently implemented.
sails are designed with twist. However, since the CFD
method does not account for a variation in wind speed 4 FSI COUPLING
and direction with height above the water surface, it was
chosen to maintain a constant angle of attack by Fluid structure interaction covers the coupled system of
removing the twist in the sail. A mast is not incorporated fluid and structural mechanics. The behaviour in the fluid
in this geometry definition yet. This can be added to the domain can influence the behavior in the structural
geometry at a later stage. Flow conditions are tabulated domain and vice versa. The structure can move or deform
below. The value for the Reynolds number is based on due to flow phenomena on its turn. The structure
the maximum chord length. influences the flow behaviour in its turn. The flying
shape of the sail is determined by FSI. The flow field and
Table 5 – Flow conditions for 3D FSI simulations. the structural deformation balance each other. This
balance can be both steady and unsteady.
Air dynamic viscosity (PaÂs) 1.85Â10-5
Air density (kg·m-3) 1.2
Air speed (m·s-1) 8
4.1 PRINCIPLE OF FSI COUPLING
A steady staggered weak FSI coupling is established.

This means that the deformation field on one hand and
the pressure field on the other hand are solved
independently, by specialized solvers. The main
advantage of this approach is that readily available and
optimized numerical methods can be used. For this
approach an exchange of information at the interface
between the domains is required. Iterations are performed
until convergence is reached.
4.2 SCHEME
A schematic representation of the FSI scheme is shown

in Figure 5. This scheme consists of the following steps:
1. With the initial geometry and specification such as

flow properties and structural properties two
numerical simulations are set-up. A CFD
computation is defined in FINE/Marine and a FEA
computation in Femap. For both the application of
the CFD method and the application of the FEM
method a mesh is defined. All parts of the method Figure 5 – Schematic representation of developed FSI method.
that are identical for each iteration are defined in this
step. 4.3 INTERPOLATION
2. Using the initial mesh for the CFD method a CFD
analysis is started for the initial geometry. This The flow solver and the structural solver use different
analysis leads to a pressure distribution on the meshes. To be able to transport quantities
surface of the sail. This part of the numerical (deformations/pressures) over the interface between the
procedure is written in Python. non-matching grids interpolation is required.
3. The FEM method uses the pressure field from step 2
to define a load on the initial geometry and a Radial Basis Function (RBF) interpolation is used for the
numerical simulation is started. This leads to a interpolation of the deformation to the flow domain.
deformation field. This part of the numerical RBFs are functions whose value depends on the distance
procedure is written in VB.NET. from a sample point:
4. The deformation field is compared with the
deformation field of the previous iteration. If the
convergence criterion is met, convergence is
achieved and the final (flying) shape of the sail is Sums of radial basis functions can approximate function
found. If convergence is not achieved the FSI cycle values at random points:
continues with step 5. For the first iteration no
previous deformation field is available so the check
on convergence is omitted.
5. The displacement field is only defined in terms of RBFs have been used for example by Lombardi et al.
the coarse FEM grid. To define the deformed shape [12] for the interface between the fluid and structural
for the finer CFD grid an interpolation is required. domain. According to Smith, Hodges and Cesnik [19],
This is performed using radial basis function RBF interpolation with thin plate splines (TPS) is the
interpolation This part of the numerical procedure is most accurate and robust method to transfer information
written in Matlab. between non-conforming meshes. This is confirmed by
6. The FSI iteration number is increased by 1. De Boer, Van Zuijlen & Bijl [20], who favor RBF with
7. The geometry of the new iteration is written from the TPS over other methods because of the accuracy and the
interpolated displacement field to a so called ITS- simple algorithm of such an approach.
file. This is the geometry definition format for the
input for the CFD method.
8. Using the definition of the deformed geometry step 2
is started again. The CFD method takes care of the
mesh deformation. This step completes the cycle.
This cycle is repeated until the convergence criterion
is met.
The second interpolation is the interpolation of the Cases 1a to 1c show the effect of the variation of the ‫ܧ‬-
pressure data to the structure. A function with which to modulus of the cloth on the flying shape and on lift and
do this is already present in the used code Femap used drag. A clear dependence of the deformed shape on the
for the structural problem. Interpolation is performed via stiffness of the sail is shown. From the three cases the
a “Modified Inverse Distance Weighted Interpolation” flying shape with the lowest value of the E-modulus has
[21]. Locations at which pressures are known, are the best correspondence with the experimentally
provided to the method and interpolated to a data surface observed flying shape. Therefore this stiffness was used
with the pressure data in the FEA domain. for the remaining cases.
5 RESULTS Case 1c to 3 show the effect of the variation of the angle

of attack on the flying shape and lift and drag. The angle
The results of the first FSI calculations are presented in of attack is increased by approximately 2 degrees in each
this chapter. An overview of the performed numerical run. There is no substantial variation in the deviation
simulations for the 2D test case is given and the between experimental and numerically determined flying
simulation capabilities for 3D test cases are shape. This shows the good predicting qualities of the
demonstrated. FSI method within the range of angles of attack
considered. For larger and smaller angles of attack
5.1 2D RESULTS unsteady effects were present in the experimental setup
which cannot be accounted for accurately by the present
Only a selection of experimental cases was steady numerical FSI method. The method can be extended to
enough to serve as test case for numerical simulations cover unsteady simulations if needed.
with the currently developed method. Numerical
simulations have been performed for assessing the effect Cases 2, 4 and 5 show the influence of the variation in
of three parameters: the slackness of the cloth on the flying shape and lift and
drag. The increased slackness causes deformations to
• The slackness ‫ ݏ‬ൌ ߝ Τܿ ൌ ሺ݈ െ ܿሻΤܿ was varied become larger. Generally this leads to a slightly lower
in accordance with the experiments. accuracy in the numerical prediction of the flying shape
• The angle of attack was varied in a certain but the results are still within acceptable accuracy (error
range. less than 1%).
• The E-modulus of the cloth of the sail. Since the
material properties of the cloth are not available, 5.2 3D RESULTS
a sensitivity study has been performed to assess
the effect of the stiffness of the cloth on the Numerical simulation for 3D FSI has been performed to
flying shape of the sail. The used values of the investigate the capabilities of the present FSI method.
E-modulus are based on values used for similar The FEA mesh of the 3D sail is very crude and requires
purposes as found in literature [11] [22]. further improvement to be capable of predicting the
flying shape of a 3D sail more accurately. Since
An overview of the runs with their specifications is experimental data is not available for this case, a
tabulated below. For each run the depth of the sail for the validation could not be performed.
initial (unloaded) and final (loaded) geometry is given.
The last column shows the maximum error between the The deformation field of the sail is shown in Figure 6. In
numerically determined flying shape and the this figure the sail is given by coloured dots and the
experimentally determined flying shape as a percentage deformation field is represented by blue arrows. This is
of the chord length. the deformed shape after 9 iterations. It can be observed
that the leech of the sail stretches and bends away from
Table 6 - Overview of numerical simulations of 2D sail. Re = the wind. This is the location where the largest
1.78·105. deformation occurs. Along the luff or leading edge
ߙ(°) ‫( ݏ‬-) E-modulus Depth Depth Max deformation to windward occurs indicating a too small
(MPa) (initial) (final) error angle of attack. The sail should be sheeted in more. The
1a 4.5 1.5 294 2.04% 3.56% 1.85% top and foot of the sail show large deformations. This can
1b 4.5 1.5 147 2.04% 4.35% 1.05% be due to tip vortices at each end of the foil/sail or due to
1c 4.5 1.5 73.5 2.04% 5.45% 0.46% the coarse FEM mesh.
2 6.4 1.5 73.5 2.69% 5.76% 0.48%
3 8.4 1.5 73.5 2.67% 5.74% 0.45%
4 6.5 2.9 73.5 5.89% 7.81% 0.78%
5 6.6 4.4 73.5 8.55% 9.87% 0.54%
Figure 7 - Ripples at leading edge near tack of deformed shape

of 3D.
6 CONCLUSIONS
The aim of this research was to develop a Fluid Structure

Interaction method for yacht sails. This has resulted in a
method that is capable of predicting flying shapes for
sails for both 2D and 3D cases.
A steady segregated coupling is established to make

optimal use of the available CFD and FEA packages.
Figure 6 – Displacement vectors of deformed shape of 3D sail.
Vectors are magnified for visibility.
The flow field is determined by solving the RANS
equations using FINE/Marine CFD package employing
the SST-Menter turbulence model. A mesh study was
When the deformed shape is examined more closely near presented for the 2D case. Mesh deformation is used to
the tack of the sail ripples are observed. These are deform the mesh according to the deformed shape of the
visualized in Figure 7. The grey sail is the original un- sail. The pressure distributions obtained for deformed
deformed sail and the red sail is the deformed sail shape. meshes are validated with pressure distributions obtained
These ripples are caused by the interpolation of the for un-deformed meshes.
deformation data. This is an indication that more sample
points (and thus a finer FEM mesh) are required for more Comparison of the results of the 2D case with
accurate interpolation of the deformation. experimental values shows good agreement in terms of
deformation. It should be remarked that the application
of a boundary layer method that includes a laminar-
turbulent transition model could improve the prediction
of the drag coefficient.
A coarse FEM mesh for computing the deformation of

the sail under the aerodynamic load has been developed.
The sail is discretized using four-noded quadrilateral
elements. For the material properties linear isotropic
homogenous material properties are chosen.
Interpolation of the deformation field across the non- 7. Renzsch, H., Muller, O. & Graf, K., ‘FlexSail - A
conforming meshes of the fluid and structural domain is Fluid Structure Interaction Program for the Investigation
performed using Radial Basis Function interpolation. of Spinnakers’, Proc. Intl. Conference on Innovations in
Errors in the interpolation can be reduced by using finer High Performance Sailing Yachts, Lorient, 2008.
FEA meshes or increasing the number of sample points 8. Renzsch, H. en Graf, K., ‘Fluid Structure Interaction
near the edges of the sail. Simulation of Spinnakers - getting closer to reality’,
Proc. 2nd . Intl. Conference on Innovations in High
FSI analysis of 2D geometries has been performed and Performance Sailing Yachts, 2010.
has been compared with available experimental data. 9. Paton, J., Morvan, H.P. & Heppel, P., ‘Fluid Structure
Several runs have been performed to tune the unknown Interaction of Yacht Sails’, Proc. Intl. Conference on
material properties of the sail cloth. For several angles of Innovations in High Performance Sailing Yachts, 2008.
attack and slackness of the sail cloth good agreement has 10. Chapin, V.G., de Carlan, N. & Heppel, P., ‘A
been found with experimental data. Differences between Multidisciplinary Computational Framework for Sailing
experimentally and numerically determined flying shapes Yacht Rig Design & Optimization trough Viscous FSI’,
amount to 0.8% of the chord length. The 20th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium,
Annapolis, 2011.
FSI analysis of a 3D geometry has also been performed, 11. Trimarchi, D., Turnock, R., & Taunton D.J., ‘The
showing the capabilities of the FSI method to predict a Use Of Shell Elements To Capture Sail Wrinkles, And
flying shape for this specific geometry. The predicted Their Influence On Aerodynamic Loads’, Proc. 2nd . Intl.
deformation of the sail is in agreement with the expected Conference on Innovations in High Performance Sailing
flying shape, but experimentally obtained flying shapes Yachts, Lorient, 2010.
are not available for validation. When assessing the 12. Lombardi, M., Cremonesi, M., Giampieri, A.,
flying shape it should be taken into account that a crude Parolini, N. & Quarteroni, A., ‘A strongly coupled Fluid-
FEM mesh for the sail was used which should be Structure Interaction model for wind-sail simulation’, 4th
improved to predict the flying shape more reliably. High Performance Yacht Design Conference, Auckland,
2012.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 13. Augier, B., Bot, P., Hauville, F., Durand, M.,
Dynamic Behaviour of a Flexible Yacht Sail Plan, Ocean
The authors would like to thank Maor Yam for providing
Engineering, 66:32–43, 2013.
experimental data on their study to the deformation of 2D
14. Numeca International, ‘Theoretical Manual
sails. The comparison of the results of the present
Fine/Marine v2.3.’, 2011.
method with experimental results would not have been
15. Collie, S.J., Gerritsen, M. & Jackson, P. ‘A review of
possible without his experimental data.
Turbulence Modelling for use in Sail flow Analysis’,
The Numeca support team and Benoit Mallol are thanked School of Engineering Report No. 603. Department of
gratefully for their very quick response on support issues Engineering Sciences, University of Auckland, 2001.
and for providing a pre-release with essential capabilities 16. Abbott, I.H. & Von Doenhoff, A.E. ‘Theory of Wing
for meshing sails. Their enthusiastic reactions to our Sections’, Mineola : Dover Publications, Inc., 1959.
results were encouraging. 17. Wilkinson, S. ‘Static Pressure Distribution over 2D
Mast and Sails Geometry’, Marine Technology, Vol. 26,
REFERENCES 1989.
18. Yam, M., Karlin, B.E. & Arieli, R., ‘Estimation of
1. Fossati, F., ‘Aero-Hydrodynamics and the Two-Dimensional Sail Shape from Single Camera
Performance of Sailing Yachts’. London : Adlard Coles Images.’, 52nd Israel Anual Conference on Aerospace
Nautical, 2009. Sciences, Tel Aviv Haifa, 2012.
2. Schoop, H., ‘Structural and Aerodynamic Theory for 19. Smith, M.J., Hodges, D. H. & Cesnik, C.E.S., ‘An
Sails’. Eur. J. Mech. A/Solids 9(1), 1990. evaluation of computational algorithms to interface
3. Schoop, H. & Hänsel, M. ‘Structural and Aerodynamic between CFD and CSD methodologies’, AIAA paper 96-
Calculation of Sails as Flexible Membranes’, Ship 1400, 1996
Technology, Vol. 44, 1997. 20. de Boer, A., van Zuijlen, A.H. & Bijl, H., ‘Review of
4. Schoop, H., Bessert, N. & Taenzer, L., ‘On the Elastic coupling methods for non-matching meshes’, Computer
Membrane in Potential Flow’, Int. J. For Numerical methods in applied mechanics and engineering. 196,
Methods in Engineering, Vol 41, 1998. 2007.
5. Fukasawa, T. & Katori, M., ‘Numerical approach to 21. PLM, Siemens, ‘Femap Commands version 10.0.1’,
Aeroleastic Responses of tree-dimensional flexible sails’, 2008.
The 11th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium, 22. Trimarchi, D. & Rizzo, C.M., ‘A FEM-Matlab code
Annapolis, 1993 for Fluid-Structure interaction coupling with application
6. Schoop, H. & Bessert, N., ‘Instationary Aeroelastic to sail aerodynamics of yachts’, 13th Congress of Intl.
Computation of Yacht Sails’, Int. J. Numer. Meth. in Maritime Assoc. of Mediterranean, Istanbul, 2009.
Engineering, Vol 52, 2001.
AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
Friso Bergsma M.Sc. is CFD specialist at Van Oossanen

Naval Architects. He is responsible for (hydrodynamic)
optimization and various R&D projects. His previous
experience includes full scale testing of sails at the
University of Auckland.
Niels Moerke M.Sc. B.Eng. is Director/Naval Architect

at Van Oossanen Naval Architects. He is responsible for
the CFD department and small craft design. His previous
experience includes design and optimization of various
award winning sailing yachts.
Sebastiaan Zaaijer M.Sc. is CFD specialist/Naval

Architect at Van Oossanen Naval Architects. He is
responsible for optimization and research projects. His
research focuses on optimization methods for the shape
of the hull and appendages of yachts.
Prof. dr. ir. Harry Hoeijmakers is chairman of the

research group Engineering Fluid Dynamics at the
University of Twente. Among his research areas are fluid
dynamics, aerodynamics of wind turbines, flow control
for various applications and multi-phase flows for
industrial applications.
FLUTTER OF RACING YACHT KEELS AND APPENDAGES

R. Balze and H. Devaux, HDS BREST, France, remy@hds-design.com, hdv@hds-design.com
In the field of aeroelasticity, flutter is a well-known instability phenomenon. Flutter is a synchronized

vibration which takes place in a flexible structure moving through a fluid medium. It occurs when two
regular, rhythmic motions coincide in such a way that one feeds the other, drawing additional energy
from surrounding flow. A classic case of wing flutter might combine wing bending with either wing
twisting.
Flutter appeared for the first time on racing yacht keels with composite fins, so in water, in 2004, on
both the IMOCA 60 POUJOULAT-ARMORLUX, which lost her keel, and SILL. Following these
problems - particularly following the loss of the keel of Bernard STAMM sailboat, accident that could
have dramatic consequences for the skipper - HDS company focused on the phenomenon.
This paper will introduce the strategy of HDS faced to the problem and the analytical and numerical
methods implemented to estimate the flutter critical speed. Our model is based on a truncated modal
basis for the most energetic modes which are generally, for a bulb keel, the lateral bending
predominant mode and the torsion predominant mode. One of our requirements was to make a simple
model in order to integrate the calculation of the flutter critical speed in the first design loops of a
composite or steel keel. Besides, an other requirement was to be able to calculate flutter critical speed
on other type of appendages: hydrofoils, dagerfoils, dagerboards, rudders…This model has worked
well for the two cases of flutter appeared on IMOCA sailboat keels. Besides, to verify the quality of
the model and to complete our analysis of flutter phenomenon on racing yacht keels, a 3 dimensional
multiphysic simulation has been developed using the software ADINA.
Xb, Yb, Zb Boat axis system In September 2004 'Cheminées Poujoulat - Armor Lux'
Xk, Yk, Zk Keel axis system lost her composite keel in mid-Atlantic. Her skipper
x, y, z, t Space and time variables Bernard Stamm recalls: 'I was going down below at the
ux, uy, uz Translation degree of freedom end of a surf at 27 knots when I felt the keel making
șx, șy, șz Rotation degree of freedom horrendous thrashing vibrations, almost immediately the
Ct Torsional center (neutral line position) keel broke and the boat capsized. I just had time to call
F Lift center Mark Turner (race director) before water flooded in and
ȁ Keel sweep angle the boat inverted.' Earlier that year Roland Jourdain on
K Stiffness matrix
'Sill et Veolia' had disturbing vibration problems in the
M Mass matrix
composite keel when sailing at around 20 knots in calm
V Fluid velocity
sea. His experience raised concern for Jean Le Cam
i Incidence angle
A Slice area aboard 'Bonduelle' - an identical sistership to 'Sill et
c Linear lift coefficient Veolia' - although she had never had such problems.
ȡw Water density Because of safety precautions, both pulled out of The
j Complex number j² = -1 Transat race even before it started. An increase of the
ȟi Damping terms torsional rigidity of the foil, by adding to the laminate
Și Damping rates Și =2. ȟi permitted thereafter, on these two boats, to overcome the
Ȧi Eigen frequencies in rad/s problem. But the composite keel flutter phenomenon
Fi Eigen frequencies in Hz remained an open question for yacht designers.
Fiw Eigen frequencies in water in Hz
İi , ȍi Real (imaginary) part of the roots Following the composite keel flutter problems, HDS
Įi Global “damping” rates including flow tried to better understand what are the sailing conditions
Ma Added mass due to bending and the parameters of a keel design that could cause
Ia Added inertia due to torsion flutter. The main questions asked are 'Why are composite
İ Symbol used for a value close to zero keels susceptible to flutter, and is it possible to predict
įii Phase and prevent this behaviour?', then 'Can a fair indication
aii Amplitude of the flutter critical speed be given at low cost and in the
first design loops of a keel?'.
In this paper, we describe firstly the semi analytical 3 HDS’ MODEL PRINCIPLE
model we implemented to predict keel flutter at an early
stage of a keel design. Secondly, we present results HDS’ model able to calculate flutter critical speeds is
obtained with a 3 dimensional multiphysic simulation on based on the equations introduced by R. MAZET in
a keel flutter case and we compare it with the results ‘Mécanique vibratoire’ [1], applied to airplanes’wings
obtained with our semi analytical model. Thus, the vibrations. In our case, hydrodynamic efforts are
multiphysic simulation allows us to confirm some simplified and represented as distributed along the keel
assumptions we take to build our model. Besides, it fin over two-dimensional slices. The systems’ dynamic is
permits to have some estimation of some terms that are represented just by the first two eigenmodes. In fact, the
first eigenmode will mainly represent bending behavior,
important in our semi analytical model to predict flutter
and the second will represent torsional behavior. This
phenomenon in the heavy fluid water is, especially fluid
explains why Mazet assumes that these two modes
damping at zero flow velocity.
represent pure bending and pure torsion respectively.
However, while dealing with IMOCA 60’ keels, the

2 KEEL DESCRIPTION presence of a solid bulb and the possible gap between its
center of gravity to the main fiber of the keel fin, leads to
IMOCA 60’ keels are vertical weighted wings, on the
important coupling between bending and torsion. HDS’s
bottom of the hull. This wing is properly called keel fin
model, takes this coupling into account for the
and the weight on the bottom of it is called 'bulb' because
calculation of bending and torsional displacements
of it shape. before projecting the equations on the truncated modal
basis.
Anti-drift and stability functions are usually dissociated.
Thus the keel fin is more a bulb support than an anti-drift
Hydroelastic vibration’s equations give us the
profile (Daggerboards are actually the anti-drift profiles
movements’ “damping” rates for each speed. Flutter
of the yacht). This allows to increase the maximum phenomenon appears when one of these rates becomes
righting moment using canting keels (Figure 1), which zero (self-maintained vibrations).
means that we can change the keel’s angle to the vertical
axis.
4 DEFINITIONS AND NOTES
We will now only focus on the part of the keel under the
hull. We use the axis system presented on Figure 2.
Keel fin
Hull
Bulb
Figure 1 : IMOCA 60’ Keel description (left) and canting
keel (right)
The main features of an IMOCA 60’ keel are the

following one: keel length is about four meters (m), keel
fin mass about five hundred kilograms (kg), bulb mass
about three tons (T) and bulb inertia about one thousand
two hundred kilograms square meters (kg.m²).
Figure 2 : Useful notes and axis system used in the model
(Profile view on the top, upper view on the bottom)
The keel axis system is defined by a rotation of an angle
ʌ+ȁ around Yb axis. ȁ is the sweep angle and is To calculate the hydrodynamic lift force, we use the slice
generally between 0 and 15°. method. It’s not possible to give a strictly accurate
linearized expression of the resultant of water pressures
In the following sections, we only present the case ȁ=0. on the slice except if the slice is motionless, animated
with a uniform translation or animated with a sinusoidal
vibration. However, an approximate expression of a lift
5 EIGENMODE CALCULATION force can be given, considering that we are in quasi-static
regime.
The calculation of Eigenmodes is done by following the
discretized finite elements method, using six degrees of Thus, for a flow velocity V, this lift force is applied on
freedom beam elements (one translation and two the Lift Center F and can be decomposed into two forces:
rotations by node, representing bending and torsion).
• The first one is related to the incidence angle i
The beam model element used is the bending-torsion between the slice and the flow’s direction:
beam model presented by G. BEZINE in ‘La méthode 1
des Eléments Finis en Calcul des Structures’ [2]. − c × ρw × A ×V 2 × i
2 (2)
We can consider tow type of keel: • The second one is linked to translation speed of
• Cantilever keel the lift center F, orthogonally to flow direction:
• Canting keel: the keel is pinned at the upper 1 y
edge and at the hull bearing, and unable to twist
− c × ρw × A ×V 2 × F
2 V (3)
at the hull bearing.
The global lift force is the sum of the two previous
On the Figure 3, the point N represents the intersection
expressions. The coefficient c is the linear lift coefficient,
between the main fiber of the fin neutral fiber and the
equal to 2.ʌ for a flat plane in linear theory without
bulb axis. The point G represents the bulb’s center of
viscous effects ([3]). For a 3D wing profile with viscous
gravity. We assume that the segment NG is infinitely
effects, this coefficient, averaged on the height of the
stiff and that the bulb’s weight and inertia are transported
keel, is lower and depends on the wing aspect ratio.
to the point N using Huygens theorem. (Segment NG is
not represented in the beam FEA model).
7 RESULTS
uy = 0 uy = 0
șz = 0
Applying the theorem of virtual works on both the two
eigenmodes at each flow velocity, we obtain a system of
two homogeneous second order equations and whose
determinant must be zero. This determinant has four
x G roots, two to two conjugated complexes:
N
− ε 2 ± j.Ω 2
z
− ε1 ± j.Ω1 and (4)
y
Figure 3 : The canting keel beam finite element model The following ratios represent the “damping” rates for a
particular flow velocity V:
We have to solve the following classical system:
ε1 ε2
α1 = α2 =
MX + KX = 0 or ( K − ω M ) X = 0 (1)
2 Ω1 and Ω2 (5)
Flutter phenomenon appears when one of these

This method of eigenmode calculation gives good results “damping” rates becomes zero. In fact, to find the critical
for keels, compared to eigenmodes experimentally speed, we will iterate on the speed until one of these
obtained or calculated with a complete 3D composite “damping” rates becomes zero. On the Figure 4, Į1
finite element model, provided the composite material becomes zero at 18 knots flow velocity.
properties of the finite element beam model are properly
input.
6 LIFT FORCE
The time integration scheme for the structure is a
Newmark one with the classical values ȕ=0.25 and Ȗ=0.5
which permit to conserve energy, so to avoid numerical
damping on the structure.
8.2 FLUID MODEL
Fluid model dimensions are the following: L=7m,

W=2m, H=4m. The 3D CFD mesh used and its close-up
around the profile are shown on Figure 6.
Figure 4 : Curves of the damping rates i versus flow

velocity (knots)
8 MULTIPHYSIC SIMULATION MODEL
To verify the quality of our semi analytical model and to

have an estimation of some of its terms, we built some
multiphysic simulations with the software ADINA. We
present here one of these simulations.
8.1 SOLID MODEL
We have modeled a cantilever keel as follows:

• Keel’s fin with constant profile
• Upper section embedded
• Solid bulb concentrated on a single node (inertia
matrix) Figure 6 : 3D CFD Mesh
The fluid is modeled as a laminar incompressible Navier-

The profile used is a typical keel fin profile and the keel Stokes fluid and is discretized using the ADINA FCBI-C
height is 4m. Besides, the bulb mass is 3.1T and its ([4]) fluid elements. The time integration method is an
inertia is 900 kg.m² as an IMOCA 60’ keel bulb. Euler Į-method in which we make vary the parameter Į
to evaluate the numerical damping. A priori the choice
The 3D keel model is presented on Figure 5. Most of the Į=0.5 allows to avoid numerical damping but causes
elements are hexahedral (8 nodes per elements, 3 degrees convergence problems unless the velocity is extremely
of freedom per node). The material model chosen is small.
composite orthotropic one.
The fluid inlet velocity is a parameter that we make vary
from 8 m/s to 12 m/s (Except for fluid damping analysis
in that the inlet velocity is 0 m/s). The outlet is set to be
traction free and the rest of the fluid boundaries are
modeled as sliding wall boundary conditions.
To generate a time response (damped for the stable

regime or amplified for the unstable regime) of the keel,
a small transverse perturbation load is applied on the
bottom of the keel at the first time step.
Figure 5 : Keel model

9 ADDED MASS ESTIMATION
We placed the bulb at two different positions for
depending on each simulation: To have an estimation of the added mass generated by
• on the torsional center Ct of the bottom the bending and torsion of the fin, we calculated
section of the keel eigenmodes in both cases with and without water around
• behind this torsional center (in the boat axis the keel. The following tables compare the frequencies
system) obtained without and with the water for a bulb placed on
the torsional center of the bottom section of the keel Therefore we can estimate separately the bending
(bending and torsion being decoupled): damping term Ș1 (Figure 7) and the torsion damping term
Ș2 (Figure 8), each damping terms due to fluid model.
• Without water :
F1 (Hz) F2 (Hz)
Bending time response
1.056 2.119
1.00E-01
•
8.00E-02
With water : 6.00E-02
F1w (Hz) F2w (Hz)
Transverse displacement of the bulb

4.00E-02
1.013 2.112 2.00E-02
Simulation results
0.00E+00
Analysis curve
0.00E+00 1.00E+00 2.00E+00 3.00E+00 4.00E+00 5.00E+00 6.00E+00
F1 corresponds to the first eigen frequency (only bending -2.00E-02
here) and F2 corresponds to the second eigen frequency -4.00E-02
(only torsion here). The index w denotes a frequency in -6.00E-02
water. -8.00E-02
-1.00E-01
time
By comparing the frequencies obtained in presence and

in absence of water, we can estimate the added mass Figure 7 : Bending time response of the keel in water for
terms generated by bending and torsion motion of the fin: Euler integration scheme parameter =1 and time
step=0.01. The blue points are from simulation results,
the pink curve is the analysis curve to estimate the
Ma (bending) (kg) Ia (torsion) (kg.m²)
bending damping rate.
252 5.8
Torsion time response
We can note that Ma is about the same order that the 2.00E-02
fin’s own weight (240 kg in this simulation) and

1.50E-02
significantly less the bulb’s own weight. Moreover,
compared to bulb’s inertia, Ia is negligible. 1.00E-02
5.00E-03
Rotation of the bulb
For a bulb placed 0.160m behind Ct (bending and torsion 0.00E+00

Simulation results
Analysis curve
0.00E+00 2.00E-01 4.00E-01 6.00E-01 8.00E-01 1.00E+00 1.20E+00
coupled): -5.00E-03
•
-1.00E-02
Without water :
-1.50E-02
F1 (Hz) F2 (Hz)
1.041 2.148 -2.00E-02
time
Figure 8 : Torsion time response of the keel in water for

• With water : Euler integration scheme parameter =1 and time
F1w (Hz) F2w (Hz) step=0.01. The blue points are from simulation results,
1.000 2.136 the pink curve is the analysis curve to estimate the
torsion damping rate.
10 DAMPING ESTIMATION
Thanks to these time response, we can deduce the
For any vibrating structure subjected to damping, time damping rates Și (%) for each eigenmodes:
response signals to a load impulse can be decomposed on
η1 = 10.6% η 2 = 13.4%
exponentials sums taking damping under consideration. and (6)
If we focus on the two first eigenmodes of the structure,
signal analysis allows to know the damping rates of each These damping rates are not negligible but contain both
mode fluid and numerical damping here linked to time step
choice, Euler integration scheme parameter Į choice and
mesh. We searched to evaluate the influence of time step
10.1 FLUID DAMPING (Figure 9) and Euler integration scheme parameter Į
choice (Figure 10) on these damping rates.
We analyze the time response of the keel after an
impulse. There are two kinds of impulse, a transverse
effort for a bending response of the keel and a torque for
a torsion response of the keel, both applied on the bulb
node. In order to turn the analysis easier, we decouple the
eigenmodes by placing the bulb on the torsional center.
Damping rates evolution according to the Time step estimated using the time response curves of the behavior
40.00%
of the keel after an impulse excitation. We note that these
terms are strongly variable among the different keels;
35.00%
they particularly depend on the chosen materials and the
30.00%
construction method.
25.00%
Damping rates
Damping rates
evolution for bending
20.00%
Damping rates
evolution for torsion
15.00% 11 CRITICAL SPEED COMPARISON
10.00%
In the following two paragraphs, the bulb is placed at

5.00%
0.160m of the torsional center Ct.
0.00%
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06
Time step
11.1 MULTIPHYSIC SIMULATION
Figure 9 : Damping rates evolution according to the time
step with an Euler integration scheme parameter =1 Figure 11 (resp. Figure 12) shows the bulb time response
for a flow velocity of 9 m/s (resp. 10m/s). Blue curves
Damping rates evolution according to the parameter alpha
represent the transverse displacement of the bulb, while
pink ones represent the bulb rotation.
16.00%
14.00%
Bulb time response for a flow velocity of 9m/s
12.00% 3.00E-02
10.00%
Damping rates
Damping rates 2.00E-02

evolution for bending
8.00%
Damping rates
evolution for torsion 1.00E-02
6.00%
Amplitude
TRANSVERSE DISPLACEMENT
0.00E+00
4.00% ROTATION
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
2.00% -1.00E-02
0.00%
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 -2.00E-02
alpha
-3.00E-02
Figure 10 : Damping rates evolution according to the Time
Euler integration scheme parameter with time Figure 11 : Bulb time response for a flow velocity of
step=0.01 9m/s ( =0.6 and time step=0.01).
The evolution of damping rates according to time step Bulb time response for a flow velocity of 10m/s
and to Euler integration scheme parameter Į shows that 6.00E-02
fluid damping rates at zero flow velocity tend to the

values: 4.00E-02
η1 = 4.4% η 2 ≈ 0.2% 2.00E-02
and (7)
Amplitude
TRANSVERSE DISPLACEMENT
0.00E+00
ROTATION
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
These damping rates have to be taken into account in our -2.00E-02
semi analytical model to compare the estimated flutter

critical speed given by both simulation model and semi -4.00E-02
analytical model. However, to avoid convergence -6.00E-02
problems in the multiphysic simulation model, we have Time
to choose a parameter Į>0.5 which implies the Figure 12 : Bulb time response for a flow velocity of
unavoidable presence of a slight numerical damping. We 10m/s ( =0.6 and time step=0.01).
choose the smallest parameter Į for convergence and low
numerical damping and take into account this damping in We note that for a flow velocity of 9m/s, the bulb
our analytical model to allow proper comparison of oscillations are decreasing, while for a flow velocity of
results. 10 m/s oscillation amplitude grows with time; there is
flutter instability. Therefore, with this choice of time step
and Euler parameter Į, Flutter critical speed is between
10.2 SOLID DAMPING 9 and 10 m/s.
This damping term is not taken into account in the It’s also interesting to note that the frequencies of
multiphysic simulation model. However, thanks to keel transverse displacement and rotation of the bulb are
eigenfrequencies measurement, recently imposed by the almost mixed up, that is characteristic of the flutter
IMOCA 60’ rules, structural damping term can be
phenomenon, and that the phase between the two signals ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
is about ʌ/2.
The authors wish to thank Louis Jézéquel and the
11.2 SEMI ANALYTICAL MODEL “Laboratoire de Tibologie et de Dynamiques des
Systèmes” (LTDS) of the Ecole Centrale de Lyon, and
Eigen frequencies calculated with our model are the Marc Le Boulluec and the hydrodynamic laboratory of
following: the "Institut Français de Recherche pour l'Exploitation de
la MER" (IFREMER) in Brest, for their contributions to
F1 (Hz) F2 (Hz) the success of this project.
1.041 2.147
REFERENCES
With a linear lift coefficient of 2.ʌ and with, our model
predicts a critical speed of 15.0 knots, corresponding [1]. MAZET R., ‘Mécanique Vibratoire’, Dunod,
to 7.7m/s. This result takes into consideration damping 1966
rates previously predicted by the multiphysic simulation
model, but it considers added mass as negligible. If we [2]. BEZINE G., ‘La méthode des Eléments Finis en
consider the bending added mass (resp. torsional added Calcul des Structures’, Notes De Cours, Ecole Nationale
inertia) previously computed into the mass (resp. inertia) Supérieure de Mécanique et d’Aérotechnique, 1998
of the bulb, we obtain the following eigenfrequencies:
[3]. ABHOTT I.H. and VON DOENHOFF A.E.,
Theory Of Wing Sections, Dover, 1958
F1 (Hz) F2 (Hz)
1.002 2.140 [4]. BATHE K.J. and al, ‘ADINA online manuels’,
2011.
Therefore the critical speed becomes 15.3 knots,
corresponding to 7.9m/s.
AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
In fact, if we consider the 3D effects (especially aspect
ratio), the average linear lift coefficient will be smaller. Rémy Balze is a Mechanical engineer in HDS Design in
For such a keel, the average lift coefficient is Brest since 2007. He recently finished his PhD in
approximately 5.2. With this lift coefficient and taking studying the field of hydroelastic phenomena especially
into account the added mass, we find a critical speed of composite keel flutter.
16.9 knots, corresponding to 8.7m/s.All main headings
should be in bold capitals. Hervé Devaux is a Mechanical engineer Doctor and the
CEO of HDS Design, in Brest. He has a background in
structural dynamics. He can boast about a beautiful prize
12 CONCLUSION list in the world of racing yachts. Among HDS’ success
stories, the Hydroptere (1 mile distance world speed
In this paper, we presented a rather simple semi record), Banque Populaire 5 (Jules Verne Trophy and 24
analytical model which provides a good estimation of the hours distance record), Groupama 4 winner of the Volvo
flutter critical speed of a bulb keel at low cost. This Ocean Race, IMOCA 60 MACIF recent winner of the
model, based on some strong assumptions, especially Vendée Globe and many others. He was involved in the
concerning structure dynamic and calculation of last revolution of the America’s Cup with multihulls and
hydrodynamic pressure loading, is confronted to a wingsails.
complete 3 dimensional multiphysic simulation and the
comparison shows good agreements in terms of results.
With this semi analytical model, it is possible to calculate

a good estimation of the flutter critical speed of a keel in
about half a day contrary to the full multiphysics
approach which takes several days.
The damping terms – fluid damping at zero flow velocity

and solid damping – are important parameters that must
be well estimated for a good prediction of flutter. We
give an estimation of fluid damping rates to use in the
prediction of flutter critical speed for an IMOCA 60’
keel. We also show that the added mass effects due to the
fin deformation appear to be negligible in prediction of
keel flutter but it’s not the case for other appendages.
DYNAMIC FLUID STRUCTURE INTERACTION OF A FOIL
C. Lothodé, K-Epsilon, France, corentin@k-epsilon.com

M. Durand, K-Epsilon, France, mathieu@k-epsilon.com
Y. Roux, K-Epsilon, France, yann@k-epsilon.com
A. Leroyer, École Centrale de Nantes, France, alban.leroyer@ec-nantes.fr
M. Visonneau, École Centrale de Nantes, France, michel.visonneau@ec-nantes.fr
L. Dorez, Groupama Sailing Team, France, loic@groupamasailingteam.com
In this paper, a dynamic computation of the Groupama 3 foil is performed. Foils are thin profiles, placed
under the hull of a ship, allowing it to provide a lifting force. This study is placed in the context of the
2013 America’s Cup, which will see the appearance of a new kind of high performance multihull.
At high speeds, the foils are subject to intense hydrodynamic forces and to movement due to the sea
state. The deformations are then sizable and there is a risk of ventilation, cavitation or vibration which
could lead to a large modification of the hydrodynamic forces or to the destruction of the foil.
The foil being light compared to the added mass effect, the interaction is a strongly coupled problem.
In this paper, the problem is solved using a segregated approach. The main problems resulting of such a
method are the numerical stability and remeshing. These problems are detailed and some results presented.
As a first test case, the simulation of a vortex excited elastic plate proposed by Hubner is presented.
This case is very demanding in terms of coupling stability and mesh deformation.
Then, the foil of Groupama 3 is modelled in a simplified form without hull and free surface, and then
in a more realistic conditions with free surface and waves.
NOMENCLATURE ables are stored in a cell-centered manner. Volume and sur-

face integrals are evaluated with second order discretization.
μ Kinematic viscosity ( N.s.m−2 ) The time integration is an implicit scheme of order two. At
ρ Density of water (kg.m−3 ) each time step, an internal loop is performed (called a non-
P Pressure (N.m−2 ) linear iteration) associated with a Picard linearization in order
F Force (N) to solve the non-linearities of the Navier-Stokes equations.
M Moment (N.m) The equations are formulated according to the Arbitrary
x, y, z Positions (m) Lagrangian Eulerian paradigm and therefore can easily take
t Time (s) into account mesh deformations. Several turbulence models
are implemented in ISIS-CFD. In this study, we used the SST-
k − ω model [2].
1 NUMERICAL METHOD
The strategy used to solve the fluid structure interaction prob- 1.2 STRUCTURE: ARA
lem is a partitioned coupling between a fluid solver and a
structural solver. The two solvers are described in the fol- The solver ARA was developed by the company K-Epsilon
lowing as well as the coupling algorithm. during the project VOILEnav [3]. The code was initially
aimed at simulating the dynamic behaviour of sailboat rigs
: sails, mast and cables.
1.1 FLUID: ISIS-CFD
A non-linear finite element method with a large deforma-
The solver ISIS-CFD included in FINE/MarineTM is devel- tion formulation is implemented. At each time step, an equi-
oped by the DSPM team of LHEEA laboratory. It solves librium between external and internal forces is sought be-
the Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes Equations in a strongly tween all the elements and forces acting on them. The ele-
conservative way. It is based on the finite volume method and ments receive as an input the position, the speed and the accel-
can work on structured or unstructured meshes with arbitrary eration of each of its nodes. It can contain internal variables
polyhedrons [1]. in the case of elastic deformation, and the element computes
The velocity field is obtained from the momentum conser- the derivatives of forces according to those variables. These
vation equations and the pressure field is extracted from the derivatives are assembled into a mass matrix [M ] = ∂ ẍ ,
∂F
incompressibility constraint. The pressure-velocity coupling damping matrix [D] = ∂ ẋ and stiffness matrix [K] = ∂tx .
∂F ∂F
is achieved through a SIMPLE-like algorithm. All the vari- Elements can be composed of different kind of finite elements
(cable, beam, shell, membrane). It is also possible to use el- The fluid structure interface is entirely defined by the fluid
ements with a penalization method such as contact or sliding faces. Each fluid node is projected onto the nearest beam ele-
elements. In the coupling algorithm, the fluid-structure inter- ments in order to get a parameterized position of the projected
face itself is considered as an element. point as well as a vector linked to the local frame of the beam.
The time scheme used is the Newmark-Bossak scheme When the beam is deformed, the 3D deformation of the neu-
(second order accurate). This scheme has been chosen for tral axis is computed with the variation of the local frame from
its compromise between the necessary filtering of the high one end to the other end of the beam. The local frame evolves
frequencies while maintaining the accuracy of the low fre- smoothly according to a cubic spline law. Therefore, the new
quencies. The scheme is conservative hence avoids numerical fluid node position is computed from the new position of the
energy creation in case of large non-linearities. neutral axis and its local frame (see Figure 1).
1.3 ELEMENT USED 1.4.3 MESH DEFORMATION

While numerous element types have been implemented in the
Following the interface deformation, the whole mesh of the
structural code, in the present study, only beam elements are
fluid domain needs to be deformed. This deformation occurs
used. These elements are Timoshenko elements, with the hy-
at each coupling iteration. The number of call to this pro-
pothesis of small deformations. We therefore have a constant
cedure being non-negligible, the mesh deformation needs to
stiffness matrix in the local frame. Each beam element is de-
be fast. To do this, a new method was developed that propa-
fined thanks to two points (for position) and two quaternions
gates the deformation state to the fluid mesh. The algorithm
(for the tangent directions). More details on the non-linear
is described more thoroughly in [4]. The rigid displacement
algorithm used can be found in [4].
(translation and rotation) of each face of the interface is com-
puted. This displacement is propagated to its neighbours and
1.4 COUPLING so on iteratively until the boundaries of the mesh are reached.
The fluid-structure coupling leads to four problems:
• the continuity of constraints at the interface ; 1.4.4 QUASI-MONOLITHIC ALGORITHM
• the deformation of the interface ;

Time loop
• the deformation of the fluid mesh ;
FSI loop
• the coupling algorithm.
Jacobian Matrix Computation
1.4.1 Continuity of constraints
The perfect continuity of constraints cannot be assured be- Structural Computation
cause of the difference between the fluid discretisation and the no
structural discretisation. Thus, a consistent method is used Conv ?
(see [4]). The method corresponds to an integration of the

forces on the fluid faces : Fluid Computation

FM = (p n + τ · n) dΓ Under-Relaxation
Γ
and then a projection of those efforts on the degree of freedom no

Conv ?
of the closest beam element.
yes
1.4.2 Interface deformation
Figure 2: Dynamic coupling algorithm. In blue, the fluid
solving scheme. In red, the added structural iteration with the
Jacobian computation.
ϭ Ϯ The global solution algorithm is based on a quasi-monolithic

approach. This approach is an implicit coupling adapted to
Ϯ ϭ a partitioned solver while conserving the property of con-
(a) Fluid node projection (red) (b) Fluid node position is com-
on the beam (blue segment) puted according to the neutral
vergence and stability of the monolithic approach. To ob-
axis (cubic spline) and the local tain such a result, the structural computation is performed
frame at each non-linear iteration of the fluid (inner loop). The
fluid algorithm is not modified. The non-linear iterations in-
Figure 1: Fluid structure interface deformation. clude a fluid subiteration and a structural convergence. The
non-linear iterations are performed until convergence, there- According to the data, the Reynolds number is 200. The as-
fore fluid-structure convergence is reached at each time step. sumption of a laminar flow was used. The physical time of the
Furthermore, an ”interface” element is added to the structural computation is approximately 25 s and the time step is Δt =
solver. This element is computed from the Jacobian matrix of 0.001s. The fluid mesh was generated by HEXPRESSTM , the
the interface. In the case of an exact Jacobian matrix, the al- mesher of the software FINE/MarineTM . It has 111452 cells
gorithm is the same as a monolithic algorithm. With the same and 132782 vertices. The structural beam is made out of 100
idea as the quasi-Newton method where a simplified Hessian beam elements.
matrix is used, here a simplified Jacobian is computed.
The Jacobian matrix is not necessary, even for strongly cou- 2e-05 0.06
y force Δy
pled problems. Nonetheless, its use permits the elimination of 1.5e-05
0.04
under-relaxation, implying a significant reduction in the num- 1e-05
ber of coupling iterations required. 5e-06

0.02
With the present method, the ratio between the time of fluid
Fy
0 0
y
structure interaction and fluid only computations is in between -5e-06
-0.02
1 and 2. -1e-05
-0.04
-1.5e-05
-2e-05 -0.06
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
t t
2 TEST CASES (a) y force (N ) (b) y deflection (m)
2.1 HUBNER TEST Figure 4: Evolution of forces and deformation
To start, an academic test was studied [5]. This case is itself

a modification of [6] by changing certain boundary condition The results obtained by Hubner show an amplitude of 6cm
and characteristics of the structure. With the case of Hubner, and correspond to the results obtained by the method pre-
the structure is more bendable and the deformations are larger. sented here. Furthermore, the frequency (3.15 ± 0.05Hz) is
The case is therefore harder to study. also in the range obtained by Hubner and De Nayer (3.22Hz
for De Nayer, 3.10Hz for Hubner).
The parameters of Hubner were studied by Valds et
Vázquez [7] and also by Guillaume De Nayer in 2008 [8]. Figure 5 shows the results of the mesh deformation. The
The later modified the dimensions of the domain which he cell quality and orientation is preserved even with relatively
found to be too small. Those dimensions are used here (c.f. large deformation.
Figure 3a and TABLE 3b). The tip oscillates in phase with the creation of vortices by
the square block. We can see these vortices advected in the
flow in Figure 5b.
Constant Velocity
Constant Pressure
0,24 m
Ux 0,0006m
0,01 m 0,04 m
0,065 m y
Constant Velocity x
0,21 m
(a) Diagram of the simulation domain (a) u
Fluid data
Fluid density ρf 1, 18 kg.m−3
Dynamic viscosity μf 1, 82 × 10−5 P a.s
Inlet velocity Ux 0, 315 m.s−1
Structural data
Square size a 0, 01 m
Length of the tip L 0, 04 m
Tip thickness d 0, 0006 m
Young modulus E 0, 2 MPa
Tip density ρs 2000 kg.m−3
Poisson coefficient ν 0, 35 (b) ωz
(b) Properties of the fluid and the structure
Figure 5: Visualization of the mesh deformation and creation
Figure 3: Description of the benchmark of vortices in established flow
2.2 DAGGERBOARD 0.1 1e+08
Δz Residual
1e+07
A daggerbpard is providing side force to counter the force 1e+06
0.01
produced by the sail. Recently on multihulls, it iss also use to 100000
provide lift force, either as a lift assist foil1 or a fully flighting 10000
|z − zf |
r 2
0.001
foil2 . Most of the time, the influence of the daggerboards can 1000
100
be modified by modifiying their orientation and position. 0.0001
10
The study is done on the foil of Groupama 3, trimaran of 1
105 feet (32 m) and 18 tons. The boat broke the Jules Vernes 1e-05
0 2 4 6 8 10
0.1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
t Niter
record (fastest circumnavigation around the world) in 2010.
(a) Convergence to the solution (b) Initial residual forces (before the
This boat represents a break through in the concept of oceanic structural computation is performed)
racing yachts by being lighter and by including hydrofoils.
The foil used by Groupama 3 is a C foil, which is the shape Figure 7: Convergence
you can see by looking at it by the front side. It also has a
winglet to reduce the induced drag.
The Figure 7 shows the quasi-static convergence. We notice

that the deflection obtained is converged. The initial residual
of the coupling (before computation of the structure) is de-
creasing by an order of magnitude at each coupling iteration.
The solution is convergerd with only 6 quasi-static iterations.
Figure 6: Groupama 3
2.3 VIBRATION STUDY : FLUTTER
2.2.1 QUASI-STATIC CASE OF A FOIL ALONE

Starting from a quasi-static computation, it is possible to study
In this case, a simplified version of the foil is used. The foil is
vibratory behavior such as flutter. Flutter is a self-feeding and
simply an extrusion of a NACA 4512 profile, with a curvature
potencially destructive vibration. If the energy input by the
radius of 3m, without the winglet. Furthermore, we do not
hydrodynamic excitation in a cycle is larger than that dissi-
take into account the free surface.
pated by the damping in the system, the amplitude of vibration
The structural mesh is given by 14 beam elements, with the
will increase, resulting in self-exciting oscillation. The pre-
node at the highest elevation blockfixed in both position and
diction of such phenomenon is done through dynamic fluid-
rotation.
structure interaction computations.
The first step is a quasi-static computation to predict the
equilibrium position of the foil. Fluid iterations are performed
First, a quasi-static convergence is done on a configuration
alone until convergence, then a structural convergence is per-
were the neutral axis is 35cm away from the leading edge
formed. The mesh is updated and a new fluid convergence
(almost in the middle of the chord), with an added momentum
with the new deformed mesh is performed. The quasi-static
at the tip of the foil and with an with an inlet velocity of 10m ·
loop is done until convergence of the geometry. This conver-
s−1 .
gence is assured only if the problem is stable.
The results obtained shows a deflection of 0.595m and a Then, the structure is released (no added momentum at the
change in forces of 1.882 × 104 N (for an initial Fz force tip) and a dynamic computation is performed. The timestep
of 7.434 × 104 N). Those results were obtained with an inlet used during the computation is 10−4 s. It is to be noted that
velocity of 15m · s−1 . only 13 non-linear iterations are required to reach conver-
The gain in lift is big (+25%) whereas the drag is only gence at each time step when 10 are required with the fluid
augmented by a small factor (+3%). By adjusting correctly only (no structure).
the neutral axis and the center of effort, this behaviour can be
optimized. At this speed, for a deformed foil, the lift represent In Figure 8a and 8c, it is possible to notice that the frequen-
50% of the weight of the boat. cies involved are not the same : about 200 Hz for the forces
1 to reduce the drag by reducing the immersed volume of the hull, which whereas the displacement shows a frequency of approxymatly
is the case of most sailing multihulls 10 Hz. It is possible to notice that on this case, the vibration
2 hull out of the water, like the Hydroptre is not self-feeding and a damping occurs on the displacement.
-25000 22000 1e+08 1000
y force Fx frequency Rsidu initial Rsidu initial
z force Fy frequency Rsidu final Rsidu final
-26000 21500 Fz frequency
1e+06
100
-27000 21000
-28000 10000
20500 10
-29000
20000 100
r 2
r 2
-30000 1
Fy (N)
Fz (N)
19500 1
-31000
19000 0.1
-32000 0.01
18500
-33000
0.01
18000 0.0001
-34000
-35000 17500 1e-06 0.001

10 20 30 40 50 60 14900 14920 14940 14960 14980 15000
-36000 17000 Niter Niter
0.7 0.705 0.71 0.715 0.72 0.725 0 200 400 600 800 1000
t (s) f (Hz)
(a) Start of the simulation (b) End of the simulation
(a) y and z forces (b) FFT of y and z forces
Figure 10: Initial residual on the structure
-2.184 -1.338
y position of the tip
z position of the tip
-2.185 -1.34
lift is 56 ± 12kN .
-2.186 -1.342 The foil is very stiff and therefore does not bend very much.
Nonetheless, the amplitude observed in waves is not negligi-
-2.187 -1.344
ble because it induces a vertical velocity that changes the in-
y (m)
z (m)
-2.188 -1.346
cident flow, and thus the lift and drag.
The Figure 10 permits us to conclude on the convergence
-2.189 -1.348 of the coupling. It can be seen that the initial residual de-
creases quickly during the non-linear iterations until conver-
-2.19 -1.35
gence. Furthermore, using the Jacobian matrix of the inter-
-2.191 -1.352
face allows a convergence in 20 subiterations where a classic
0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 implicit coupling with under-relaxation would require about a
t (s)
(c) y and z displacement of the tip
hundred subiterations. A computation without fluid structure
interaction needs about 10 iterations to reach convergence.
Figure 8: Forces in time and frequency domain, and the dis-
placement of the tip with respect to time
3 CONCLUSION
2.3.1 FOIL WITH HULL AND WAVES The results of a partioned coupling between a viscous, incom-
In this section, the real geometry of the foil (including the pressible fluid solver and a structural finite element analysis
winglet) is used and the hull is added. Unsteady fluid structure software are presented for strongly coupled problems. The
interaction computations were performed with the foil fixed at Hubner case permitted the validation of the fluid-beam inter-
the interface of the hull. A free surface is imposed at z = 0 action. The quasi-static and dynamic results for the dagger-
as an initial condition. The hull is fixed and all of the nodes board of a high performance multihull were then presented.
of the beam inside the hull are fixed in both translation and Furthermore, the design scope of this yacht was to do
rotation. oceanic races and therefore it was designed to be both very
At t = 0s, the speed of the boat is 0m · s−1 . The imposed reliable and safe. Thus, the foils used are smaller compared
motion is done according to a 14 sinusoidal law until 15m·s−1 . to what can be used for smaller, 60 foot (18 m) ORMA mul-
The waves are starting at t = 0s, 45m in front of the foil and tihulls of the same generation. To use bigger foils on maxi
reach the foil at t = 6s. The waves are Stokes first order trimaran, it will be necessary to predict the dynamic stability
potential waves with 1m wave height and a period of 3s. of the boat and also to dimension their structure.
Vibratory phenomena such as flutter, which can lead to fail-
ure of the foil were investigated and the ability of the code to
simulate such behavior proven.
70000 1000 0.04 0.04
Force en z Moment en y Δz
0
60000 0.035 0.035
-1000
50000
40000
-2000
-3000
0.03
0.025
0.03
0.025
The boundary conditions for the structure play an important
-4000
role in the determination of the structural deflections, hence it
My
30000 0.02 0.02

Fz
-5000
20000 0.015 0.015
10000
-6000
-7000 0.01 0.01

would be of interest to investigate a freely moving foil inside
-8000
-10000
0
-9000
-10000
0.005
0
0.005
0
the hull with pinned connections at the lower and upper hull
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
t t t
surfaces which corresponds more closely to what is happen-
(a) z force (b) y moment (c) z deflection ning in reality.
Figure 9: Forces and momentum acting on the foil with re-
spect to time ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Figure 9a and Figure 9b show the variation of the lift forces We would like to thank PACAGrid and INRIA for providing
and torsion moment in the foil local frame. The variation of the computational power required to undertake this study.
REFERENCES ISIS-CFD. His previous experience includes a PhD in fluid
dynamics in 2004.
[1] J. Wackers, B. Koren, H. Raven, A. van der Ploeg, M. Visonneau holds the current position of Research Scien-
A. Starke, G. Deng, P. Queutey, M. Visonneau, T. Hino, tist of the CNRS at the LHEEA laboratory of Ecole Centrale
and K. Ohashi, “Free-surface viscous flow solution meth- Nantes. His main research topics are Computational Fluid
ods for ship hydrodynamics,” Archives of Computational Dynamics (CFD), Ship Hydrodynamics and Turbulence Mod-
Methods in Engineering, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1–41, 2011. eling for high Re flows. In 1991, he got the 2nd Cray Prize
for CFD and has been awarded 30th Georg Weinblum Memo-
[2] F. Menter, M. Kuntz, and R. Langtry, “Ten years of in-
rial Lecturer (2007-2008) in 2007. His previous experience
dustrial experience with the sst turbulence model,” Turbu-
includes the head of the CFD department of the Fluid Me-
lence, heat and mass transfer, vol. 4, pp. 625–632, 2003.
chanics Laboratory (ECN) from 1995 to 2012.
[3] B. Augier, P. Bot, F. Hauville, and M. Durand, “Experi- L. Dorez holds the current position of head of the Groupama
mental validation of unsteady models for fluid structure Sailing Team.
interaction: Application to yacht sails and rigs,” Jour-
nal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics,
vol. 101, pp. 53–66, 2012.
[4] M. Durand, Interaction fluide-structure souple et legere,

applications aux voiliers. PhD thesis, Ecole Centrale
Nantes, 2012.
[5] B. Hübner, E. Walhorn, and D. Dinkler, “A monolithic

approach to fluid–structure interaction using space–time
finite elements,” Computer methods in applied mechanics
and engineering, vol. 193, no. 23, pp. 2087–2104, 2004.
[6] E. Ramm and W. Wall, “Fluid-structure interaction based

upon a stabilized (ale) finite element method,” 1998.
[7] J. Valds, J. Miquel, and E. Oate, “Nonlinear finite element

analysis of orthotropic and prestressed membrane struc-
tures,” Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, vol. 45,
no. 67, pp. 395 – 405, 2009.
[8] G. De Nayer, Interaction Fluide-Structure pour les corps

lancs. PhD thesis, cole Centrale de Nantes, 2008.
4 AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
C. Lothode holds the current position of R&D engineer at

K-Epsilon. He is responsible for FSI computations and de-
veloppement. His previous experience includes a M.Sc. in
Applied Mathematics.
M. Durand holds the current position of R&D director at K-
Epsilon. He is responsible for FSI developments and sails
simulations. His previous experience includes a PhD in fluid
dynamic in 2012, and is also a world ranker match racing
skipper (#40 in world ranking in 2011).
Y. Roux holds the current position of CEO of K-Epsilon. His
previous experience includes a PhD in fluid mechanics. He
did multiple study on victorious yacht such as Groupama 3
and 4.
A. Leroyer holds the current position of Associate Profes-
sor at the LHEEA laboratory of Ecole Centrale Nantes. His
research topics revolve around the numerical modelling of
the incompressible isothemal flows around complex geome-
tries and are more specifically focused on the methodologies
to integrate new physical phenomena inside a Navier-Stokes
solver, as the fluid-structure interaction and the numerical
modelling of cavitation. He is part of the developer team of

AN UNSTEADY FSI INVESTIGATION INTO THE CAUSE OF THE

DISMASTING OF THE VOLVO 70 GROUPAMA 4
W. Menotti, Menotti Marine, France, wenceslas@menotti-marine.com
M. Durand, D. Gross and Y. Roux, K-Epsilon, France, mathieu@k-epsilon.com, david@k-epsilon.com, yann@k-
epsilon.com
D. Glehen, GSea Design, France, denis@gseadesign.com
L. Dorez, Groupama Sailing Team, France, loic@groupamasailingteam.com
This paper describes the use of an unsteady fluid-structure interaction (FSI) tool as an investigative tool into the cause
of the dismasting of the VOR 70 Groupama 4. As more than one rig component failed during the dismasting, the cause
of failure was not immediately apparent. The investigation therefore required isolating the cause of failure between two
closely related rig components. The FSI coupling process and the determination of the initial rig loading based on a
steady FSI computation and measured data will be described. The setup for two unsteady failure cases will be discussed
and the results of those investigations will be examined.
NOMENCLATURE the use of the unsteady potential solver for the

డோ determination of aerodynamic loads. The structural
ሾ‫ܦ‬ሿ Damping matrix (N.s.m ) -1
డ௨ሶ model of the rig utilized was developed as part of a prior
డோ study, and hence could rapidly be brought to bear on the
ሾ‫ܭ‬ሿ Stiffness matrix (N.m-1)
డ௨ problem. While failure analysis is most often performed
డோ utilizing normal finite element structural software, this
ሾ‫ܯ‬ሿ Mass matrix (kg)
డ௨ሷ approach has a number of drawbacks. Specifically, the
R Residual force (N) aerodynamic loads at the time of failure must either be
u Position (m) estimated by the structural engineer or determined from
‫ݑ‬ሶ Velocity (m.s-1) an aerodynamic solver separately and then inputted into
‫ݑ‬ሷ Acceleration (m.s-2) the structural solver. Furthermore, as the sail shape will
ܷሬԦஶ Incident flow velocity (m.s-1) change during the course of the failure; a significant
ܷሬԦఝ Doublet induced velocity (m.s-1) drawback of this approach is that it is unable to account
ሬԦఠ for changes in the aerodynamic loads over the course of
ܷ Wake induced velocity (m.s-1)
the rig failure.
ܺԦ௜ Vortex particle position (m)
ሬሬԦ௜
π Vortex particle vorticity (s-1) 2 FLUID SOLVER
1 INTRODUCTION The flow code utilized in the present study, AVANTI is

based on the assumptions that underpin potential flow;
The 2011-2012 edition of the Volvo Ocean Race was namely that the flow is incompressible, irrotational, and
notable for the number of rig failures that occurred inviscid. The code combines a constant-strength, doublet
during the course of the race. The cause of the surface representation of the bodies with a vortex particle
dismasting of Groupama 4 on the leg between Auckland method for the wake [3, 4]. The flow problem is thus
and Itajai in calm seas and moderate breeze was not broken down into two components:
immediately apparent based on examination of the • A lifting body problem based on a boundary
recovered pieces, as more than one secondary structural integral;
member had failed during the dismasting. In particular, • A wake problem in which vortex carrying
it was necessary to determine if the mast failure was due particles in a Lagrangian framework are
to the port side D1 or the port side first spreader failing. advected downstream in the wake.
The determination of the cause of the failure therefore
necessitated that an investigative structural analysis be Hence, AVANTI represents the flow field as the sum of
performed. To perform such an analysis would require the contribution of three components:
that a detailed structural model of the rig and sails be ሬԦஶ , the incident flow velocity;
1) ܷ
utilized in conjunction with an accurate description of the ሬԦఝ , the contribution induced due to the surface
2) ܷ
static and aerodynamic structural loads. ARAVANTI,
the tool utilized, is composed of ARA, an unsteady, finite doublets;
element structural solver capable of being tightly coupled ሬԦఠ , the contribution due to the vortex particles.
3) ܷ
to AVANTI, an unsteady potential flow solver or ISIS-
CFD, an unsteady RANS solver [1, 2]. In the present The vorticity of the individual particles must satisfy the
study, the need for a rapid determination of the cause of Helmholtz equation. The equations for a particle i in the
failure and the sailing angle at the time of failure justified Lagrangian coordinate system, with the position of the
particle given as Xi and the particle vorticity given by region. The stiffness matrix of each element is thus able
i, are therefore: to account for the anisotropic material properties of
competitive sail manufacturing techniques such as 3DI©,
3DL©, and D4© as well as local reinforcement patches.
݀ܺԦ୧ ͳ ሬԦ୨ ൈ ൫ܺԦ୨ െ ܺԦ୧ ൯
ሬπ
ൌ ෍ ଷ ൅ ሬԦఝ ሺܺԦ୨ ሻ ൅ ܷ
ሬԦ 4 FLUID-STRUCTURE COUPLING
݀‫ݐ‬ Ͷߨ หܺԦ െ ܺԦ ห
୨ஷ୧ ୨ ୧
Sails, are light structures where the entrained added mass
ሬሬԦ୧
݀π ͵ ܺԦ୨ െ ܺԦ୧ of the air is of comparable or greater size to the mass of
ൌ ෍ ሬሬԦ ሬሬԦ Ԧ Ԧ
݀‫ݐ‬ Ͷߨ ହ ൬π୧ ή ቀπ୨ ൈ ൫ܺ୨ െ ܺ୧ ൯ቁ൰ the sails themselves. This poses a particularly difficult
หܺԦ െ ܺԦ ห
୨ஷ୧ ୨ ୧ case for unsteady FSI coupling schemes. The strong
π ሬሬԦ௜
ሬሬԦ௝ ൈ π coupling between the fluid and structure requires that the
൅ ሬሬԦ௜ ή ‫׏‬൯൫ܷ
൅ ൫π ሬԦ ൅
ሬԦ஦ ൯൫ܺԦ௜ ൯
ଷ coupling scheme has a tight coupling between the
หܺԦ୨ െ ܺԦ୧ ห structure and fluid solvers. The coupling scheme utilized
is a quasi-monolithic approach. It is based on an implicit,
The principle advantage of using a vortex particle partitioned solver approach, but maintains the
method over a panel wake method is the avoidance of convergence and stability of a fully monolithic approach.
wake panels intersecting one another during unsteady This is achieved by utilizing an additional interface
computations. element in the structural solver derived from the Jacobian
matrix of the interface. In the case of an exact Jacobian
3 STRUCTURAL SOLVER matrix, the coupling matrix is identical to that of a
monolithic approach. In the present approach, a
The unsteady finite element structural solver ARA, was simplified Jacobian is computed. The Jacobian matrix
developed by K-Epsilon as part of the project VOILE- allows the elimination of the use of under-relaxation,
NAV specifically with the aim of simulating the dynamic yielding a significant reduction in the number of
behaviour of sailboat rig [2, 5, 6]. To capture the coupling iterations required. The coupling process is
unsteady behaviour in a time accurate manner, a outlined in figure 1 below. At each time step an FSI loop
Newmark-Bossak second-order accurate time scheme is is started by first updating the wake particle positions and
used. The scheme is utilized because it provides the then computing the Jacobian matrix. A structural
necessary filtering of non-physical high frequencies computation is then performed to convergence and the
while maintaining an accurate description of the low motions are transferred to the fluid solver. This is then
frequencies. The scheme is conservative and hence followed by a fluid computation, after which
avoids the generation of numerical energy in the case of convergence of the coupling is checked. If convergence
very large nonlinearities. At each time step an has not been achieved the fluid forces are transferred
equilibrium between the internal and external forces on back across the interface and the structural computation
all of the elements is required. To achieve this, the is repeated. Hence, fluid-structure convergence is
derivative of the forces with respect to the position, achieved at each time step.
velocity, and acceleration of each element's nodes is
found. The derivatives are then assembled into a mass
matrix [M], damping matrix [D] and stiffness matrix [K].
The assembled matrix system of the form below is then
solved utilizing the Newton-Raphson method after
further rearrangement to be in a form suitable for the
Newmark-Bossak scheme.
ܴ ൌ ሾ‫ܯ‬ሿ‫ݑ‬ሷ ൅ ሾ‫ܦ‬ሿ‫ݑ‬ሶ ൅ ሾ‫ܭ‬ሿ‫ݑ‬
The rig and sails can be represented by membrane, shell,

beam and cable elements. Sliding and contact elements
are also implemented utilizing a penalization method. In
the present study, membrane elements were utilized for
the sails with beam elements for the mast, boom and
spreaders. The beam elements utilized are shear-
deformable Timoshenko beam elements. The membrane
elements utilized are constant strain triangle (CST)
elements suitable for large deformations. The stiffness
matrix for the CST elements is found from the Figure 1: ARAVANTI unsteady FSI loop
summation of the local stiffness properties of each ply
used to fabricate the sail at that location. The local
stiffness of each ply is determined from the density,
orientation and stiffness of the fibres utilized in that
5 STEADY CASE SETUP AND RESULTS initial shape and stresses of the unsteady computations.
In order to model the sudden failure of a rig component,
In order to perform the FSI computation, an accurate the member was made to no longer carry structural loads.
description of both the rig and the loads is required. As This was accomplished for the D1 by changing the cable
mentioned before, the structural properties and geometry length to be very large such that it could no longer be
of the rig and sails were developed before the current under tension. The spreader failure was modelled by
study as part of an earlier study. To replicate the changing the element stiffness to 0, such that it no longer
structural loading at the time of failure, both the static resisted applied loads. Failure of structural members was
and aerodynamic structural loads needed to be imposed. assessed based on the stress exceeding the ultimate
The static structural loads consisted primarily of the strength of the member. As ARAVANTI does not have a
tensions applied to the shrouds. The initial tensions built in capability to represent the effect of the failure of
applied were taken from the measured dock tune a structural element, if an element was determined to
tensions. have failed, the computation was repeated with that
element having its failure imposed at the time it exceeded
The aerodynamic loading was generated by a steady FSI its ultimate strength. The resulting time histories of the
computation based on the measured yacht and wind mast bending moments and deflections were then utilized
conditions at the time of the failure. These conditions are to determine the mast failure point.
given in table 1.
Three unsteady computations were performed as part of
Boat speed 12 knots the study :
True wind speed 21 knots 1. A computation where the port side D1 is made
Heel angle 22° to fail.
Heading Close reach 2. A computation where the port side first spreader
Table 1: Sailing conditions is made to fail.
3. A computation where the port side first spreader
In order to obtain the correct aerodynamic loads, three is made to fail and after which the port side D1
criteria had to be met: is made to fail 0.116 s later.
1) The sails had to be trimmed to a realistic setting
for the given wind conditions and boat speed. The third computation was performed based on feedback
2) The forestay had to have a tension of 10 tons. from the structural engineer, who indicated a failure
3) The heeling moment generated had to match the should occur then. For the present paper, the results of
righting moment. the first and third computations will be presented. It
should be noted that the D1 case also leads to the
To achieve these aims, the jib was first trimmed eventual failure of the first spreader. However, a D1
optimally. The main sail was then used to achieve the computation with an imposed failure of the spreader was
correct heeling moment. The resulting steady loads are not performed as the conclusion as to the cause of failure
given in table 2. had already been drawn and such a computation would
have required a slight modification to the way
Rig Line/Port side Starboard side ARAVANTI stores beam stiffness properties to
component tension tension accommodate such a case. For reasons of confidentiality,
(kN) (kN) the correct failure case cannot be identified, but a number
V1 137.3 65.2 of results related to the two failure cases can be given.
V2 107.1 63.5 Both cases are given with the initial failure occurring at
V3 94.4 63.6 t= 0 s.
D1 49.4 10.0
6.1 SHROUD TENSIONS
D2 31.3 1.8
D3 13.1 0
The time histories of the tensions in the shrouds
D4 94.6 64.0
following the failure of the D1 are shown in figure 2.
Runner - 87.3 The loss of tension in the port D1 is visible at t= 0 s.
Forestay 105.0 - The tensions undergo a rapid change immediately
Main halyard 31.0 - following the prescribed failure of the port D1, with an
Main sheet 29.2 - increase in tension on the starboard side and decrease in
Jib halyard 47.4 - tension on the port side. The tensions then begin to
Jib sheet 21.5 - gradually increase for the port side V1 and D2 while
Table 2: Steady shroud, sheet and halyard tensions decreasing for all of the starboard side elements as the
mast and spreaders continue to deflect. The port D3 and
6 UNSTEADY SETUP AND RESULTS starboard D1 are rapidly unloaded until slack, with the
starboard D2 following soon thereafter.
The resulting sail flying shape and deformed shape of the
rig from the steady computation was utilized for the
F
Figure 22: Timee hisstoryy off thee shhrou
ud teensiionss, D1 caase
SSimiilarlly, the
t ten nsionns for thee sp preaader faiiluree caase in
fiigurre 3 exxhibbit an initial inccreaase in ten nsionn ono tthe
sttarb
boarrd side and d deecreeasee in ten
nsioon on
o th he pportt sidde. Fiigurre 44: M
Maxiimu
um sspreeadeer verticcal ben
ndinng curv
c vaturre,
HHowweveer, unlik
u ke the t D1 D faillure casse, tthe port D22 in nitiaally D case
D1 c e
beco omess coomppleteely slaack beffore thee teensio on bbeggins to
inncreeasee aggainn ass thhe rrig conntin nuess too deefleect. T The
sttarb
boarrd D1D inittiallly ssees a risee inn teensio on, butt thhen
sllack f her rig defflecttion
kenss wiith furth n. T
The port
p t D33 reemaiins
uundeer teensiion. TheT impposed faillure of thee poort D1 is
visibble aat 0..1166 s.
Fiigurre 55: M
Maxiimu um sspreeadeer verticcal ben
ndinng curv
c vaturre,
sppreaaderr caase
F Time hiistoory oof the
Figure 33: T t shroudd tennsio
ons, sprreadder
c e
case 6..3 MAS
M ST BEN
B NDIING
G MOM
M MEN
NT AND
A D DEF
D FLE
ECTIION
N
6.2 SPR
S REA
ADE
ER DEF
D FLE
ECT
TION
N Thhe abillity forr a failluree caase to caus
c se a faailurre of o tthe
ottherr ssusppectted rig eleemennt waas ann impo i ortaant
UUnlik ke tthe shrroud
d tennsioons,, theere is nno infle
i ectiion in tthe coonsiiderratioon ini the
t asssesssmeent of thee faailurre mod
m de.
tiime hisstoryy of thhe spre
s adeer m maxiimuum vert
v ticall beendiing H ever, the
Howe t maast ffailuure loccatio on also o neeedeed to be
cuurvaaturre, as s wn forr thee D
a show D1 case
c e inn figguree 4. T The coorreectlyy loocated. A As men
m ntionned beeforee, A ARA AVA ANTI
ddefleectioons increaase grradu uallyy with
w h tim me. Siigniificaant dooes noot havve a built in cap pabiility
y to reprr reseent
ddefleectioons occcur forr thee fiirst sp preadder andd too a lessser coomp poneent faiiluree. Thherefforee, deter
d rmiiningg whe w n tthe
exxtennt thhe seco
s ond spreeadeer. m firsst reeachhes its ultiimaate sstren
mast w nnecessaary to
ngthh was
deeterrminne wher f ure occcurreed. Thhe tiimee hisstorries of
w re failu
Inn co
ompparisonn to thee D11 caase, thee sppreaaderr faiiluree caase thhe trranssverrse ben m ment forr booth failu
b dingg mom f ure casees aare
cuurvaaturre inn figguree 5 shoows a m
mucch ggreatter defllecttion of prreseented inn figure 6. The T benndin ng mmom mennt iss iniitiallly
thhe secoond spreeadeer. smmalll froom 0 too 0..1 seecondss. T The benndin ng mmommentt then
beeginns too stteaddily increasse both
b h in maagniitude annd extee ent
allongg thhe maast lenngthh. Thhe benndin ng moomeent is
coonceentrratedd inn thhe loweer port
p tion of thee m mast;; theere is
veery litttle defl
d lectiion in thee uppperr poortio t maast.
on oof the
Thhe benndinng mom m mentts are
a conncen ntratted in twoo reegioons
allong m t forr booth cases. Th
g thhe mast he llocaationn off the tw wo
laarge bendinng mom mennt reegioons is locaatedd fuurtheer up
u tthe
m
mast forr thhe spreeadeer case
c e. Th he rregionss with larrge
bend dingg momeentss arre aalso moore extenssivee annd are a of thhe D1
D casse. Th he defflectted shaapess off thhe mas
m st aare
greatter m maggnittudee forr thhe sppreaaderr caase com
c mparred to tthe siignifficaantlyy diifferentt with
w reggard
ds to wher
w re curv
c vatuure
DD1 case
c e. Thee lo ocattionn alongg thhe m l est
mastt off thhe larg occcurrs. Thee tim me histtoriees of
o thhe mast
m t beending mom
m mennts
bend m mentss does no
dingg mom ot cchan nge siggnifficanntlyy ovver foor th
he DD1 case
c e ex xhibiits high
h her bben ndinng mom
m mentts so ooneer,
tiime. Thee grow g wth ratte of thee beendiing momeent is neear thee baase ofo thet maast anda theen laterr fuurtheer up
u tthe
inndiccativve of
o thet ratee byy whic
w ch th he masst iss deeforrminng. m . In conntrast tthe sprreadder casse exhhibitts high
mast. h her
TThe tw wo case
c es exh e hibitt nooticeabble difffereencees in i tthe beendiing moomennts at bbothh loccatioons sim multaneeoussly.
grow wth of thet ben ndinng mmom mentt. In
I ppartiiculaar, tthe low wer
reegio
on oof thet maast for f thee D D1 case
c e beegin ns too have
h e a Thhe time
t e hiistorry of o thhe riig teensiionss shhow a rrapidd drrop in
bend dingg mome
m ent greeateer th han 50 0,0000 N.m
N m byy 0.140 s, poort sidde shro
s oud tennsioons annd incr i reasse iin star
s rboaard
wwhilee thhe uppe
u er largee beend ding mo omeent regiion doees nnot teensio
ons folllow wingg booth failu
f uress. ThisT s rap pid chaangee wwas
reeachh a com mpaarab u l 0.34 s. In conntrasst, tthe
ble leveel until thhen folllow wed by y a perriod d off grraduual chaangge in tthe
twwo largge bend
b ding g mom
m ment reggion ns oof thhe spre
s adeer caase ons wiith the staarbooard
teensio d annd soms me of p t side
o thhe port
acchieeve succh a ben ndinng m
mommennt neearly siimu ultanneou uslyy at shhrou
uds eleemeentss decreeasiing in teensio on as the rrig
0.31 s. Thhe curv c vatuure aand bendin ng defllecttion dynam mic deeflectioons incrreassed. Defle
D ectioons in the sprreadders weere
behaaviours aree theerefforee maarkeedly y diffferrent bettweeen tthe fooundd too inccreaase grad
g duallly with
w h rig g deeflecctionn.
twwo casees. Thhe diffed erennce in i tthe defo
d orm matioon bbehaavioour
iss visiblle inn thhe tiime lappse ima
i agess of thee rig g unnderrgoiing Thhe num merricall appprooachh to
o thhe posst-faailurre stru
s cturral
faailure in fiigurres 7 annd 88. The
T low wer region of curv vatuure innvesstigaation off th
he GGrouupamma 4 mast
m breeakiing hass been
iss moore proonouunceed forf tthe D1D case att 0.1125 s. B By 0.255 s deescrribed. Thhe inve i estiggatiion waas aablee too diistin
nguiish
thhe defl
d ectiionss off thee sppreaader casse hhavee beecom me largger beetweeen thee faailu ure moddes off tw wo cclossely loccateed rrig
t D1 casse. Thee differrencce inn th
reelatiive to the he loocattion of coomp poneentss. The uuse of an un nsteaadyy FS SI appproaach
thhe defl
d lectiionss is cleearlyy visib
v ble. Foor the t D1 case tthe m nt thhat thee aeeroddynaamicc looadss onn th
mean he rrig couuld be
uuppeer high currvatturee reggion n is loccateed close
c e too th he fiirst acccurrately mod
m delleed as thet flyiing shaape chaangged. The
sppreaaderr with
w thee looweer high
h h cu urvaaturre regi
r on muuch FS SI tool
t l AR RAV VAN NTII haas been
b n sh howwn to o bee caapab
ble of
clloseer too thee fooot of
o thhe mmast. Inn co
ontraast, forr thee sprreadder soolvinng casses witth hhighhly trannsieent, large defform matioon
case thee low wer reg gion of high h cuurvaature is loccatedd cllosee to sttructturaal reespoonsees, whhile maaintaaininng the staabiliity of
thhe first
f t sprreadder withh thhe uppeu er reegioon loca
l ated clo oserr to F couuplinng. Thhis capa
thhe FSI c abiliity cann thu a ied to
us bbe appli
thhe secoond spreeadeer. nuumeerouus othe
o er high
h ly trant nsiennt FSI
F pro obleems suuch as
saails undderggoinng wave
w e-inducced m mottionns.
8 RE
EFE
ERE
ENC
CES
S
1.. AUG
A GIE ER, B., B BOT T, P., HAUH UVILLE E, F., annd
D RAN
DUR ND M.., 'E Expperim
menntal vaalidaatio
on oof unssteaddy
m els for fluuid struuctuure intteracctioon', Apppliccatio
mode on to
yaachtt saails andd rig
gs, Jouurna
al oof Wind
W d EngiE neeeringg annd
Inndusstriaal Aero
A odyn nammics 1011, 20012
2.
2.. DU URA ANND M., on ffluide-stru

M 'Innteraactio s ple et
ucturre soup
léégèrre, aappplicaation
ns auxx vo D. thhesiis, Ecoole
oilieers',, Phh.D
C ralee Naantees, 2012
Centr 2 2.
3.. REH
R HBA ACH H, C.,C 'N Numericcal callculatioon of thrree
diimensioonall unnsteeadyy fllow
ws w
withh voorteex ssheeets', 166th
H tsvillle AIAA
Hunt A A PapeP er 788-11 11, 197
78
4.. CH HA
ARV VET, T.,
T H HAU LE, F., HU
UVIILL UBEERS SON N, SS.,
'N
Num mericcal simmulaationn of th
he fflow
w arroun
nd saills in
n reeal
saailin
ng cconditions', JJourrnall off Wind
W d En nginneerring
g annd
Inndusstriaal Aero
A odynnam mics 63, 19996
F
Figure 66: Timee hisstoryy off maast bben
ndingg mom
m ments
5.. HAAUV VIL LLEE, F., D
DUR ND, M.., R
RAN ROUUX, Y., 'MModèèle
7 CO
ONNCL
LUSION
NS aèèroéélasttiquue appl
a liqué à la défform
mation d'unn gréem
mennt',
Europ peaan Joourn nal off Env
E vironmeenta
al and Civvil
R
Resu ults from the t invvestiigatted cases sshow wed oss of
d thhe lo Ennginneerringg 122-5, 20008
eiitheer riig elem
e mentt leaads to mas o of
m st faailuure, butt onnly one
thhe two
t correcctly loccatees th ure poiint. Both casses
he ffailu
exxhib bit ttwoo reggion
ns of
o hhigh h beendinng mom mennts alonng tthe
leengtth oof thhe mas
m t, with
w thee sppreader casse reegioons beiing
loocatted highher on the maast and a of grea
g ater maagniitud de thhan
6. DURAND, M. HAUVILLE, P., BOT, P., AUGIER,
B., ROUX, Y., LEROYER, A., VISONNEAU, M.,
'Unsteady numerical simulation of downwind sails' The
Second International Conference on Innovation in High
Performance sail Yachts, 2010
9 AUTHORS' BIOGRAPHY
W. Menotti holds the current position of owner at

Menotti Marine. He was responsible for the
computations around the sail and rig. His previous
experience includes sail design on various racing boats,
ranging from small dinghies to super yachts.
M. Durand holds the current position of R&D director at

K-Epsilon. He is responsible for FSI developments and
sail simulations. His previous experience includes a PhD
in fluid dynamics. He is also a world ranked match
racing skipper (40th in world ranking for 2011).
D. Gross holds the current position of CFD engineer and

naval architect at K-Epsilon. He has an MSc in marine
CFD from the University of Southampton, where he
specialized in multihull appendage FSI.
Y. Roux holds the current position of CEO of K-Epsilon,

having, founded the company K-Epsilon in 2003. In
partnership with laboratories, he and K-Epsilon develop
numerical tools which are applied to unsteady
aerodynamic, hydrodynamic and FSI studies.
D. Glehen holds the current position of GSEA DESIGN

owner. He is responsible for the mast design and has
worked with numerous French racing teams for the last
16 years. His previous experience includes IMOCA,
VOR70, and MAXI multihull mast design. He was
involved with Groupama Sailing Team for the last
VOR70 campaign .
L. Dorez holds the current position of Head of Design at

Groupama Sailing Team. In partnership with
laboratories, structural design, hydrodynamic, and
aerodynamic firms, he organizes the design and
development of tools for Groupama Sailing Team.
Figure 7: Time lapse of the mast failure, D1 case Figure 8: Time lapse of the mast failure, Spreader case

THE WORK ACHIEVED WITH THE SAIL DYNAMOMETER BOAT

“FUJIN”, AND THE ROLE OF FULL SCALE TESTS AS THE BRIDGE
BETWEEN MODEL TESTS AND CFD
Y. Masuyama, Kanazawa Institute of Technology, Japan, masuyama@neptune.kanazawa-it.ac.jp
The work achieved with the sail dynamometer boat Fujin was reported. At first, the sail shapes and
performance for upwind conditions were measured in steady sailing conditions. The results were
compared with the numerical calculations. The database of three-dimensional coordinates of the sail
shapes was also tabulated with the aerodynamic coefficients. The sail shape database provides a good
benchmark for the validation of sail CFD in full scale level. Then, the aerodynamic force variation
during tacking maneuvers was measured by Fujin, and a new simulation model of tacking maneuver
was proposed. The simulated results showed good agreement with the measured data. Finally, the
scale effect problem of wind tunnel tests was discussed. Wind Tunnel tests using model sails are
performed at the region of critical Reynolds number. Therefore, the wind tunnel test had to be
performed very carefully. On the other hand, the full scale tests using a sail dynamometer boat are free
from scale effect problems and appear more promising.
NOMENCLATURE which were configured to measure all forces and

moments acting on the sails. In his work, the sail shapes
CL , CD Lift force and drag force coefficients (-) were also measured and used for CFD analyses;
CX , CY Thrust force and side force coefficients (-) unfortunately, details of the sail shape and performance
SA Sail area (m2) data were not presented. Hochkirch et al. [2] also built a
UA Apparent wind speed (AWS) (m.s-1) 33-foot dynamometer boat DYNA. The aerodynamic
VB Boat velocity (m.s-1) forces acting on the sail were measured and compared
X, Y Force components along x and y-axis (N) with the results from wind tunnel tests [3]. The measured
K, N Moments around x and z-axis (N.m) data were also used as input to the CFD calculation and a
γA apparent wind angle (AWA) (deg) parametric survey was carried out [4]. However this
ρ Density of water (kg.m-3) work does not provide a database for the relation
ρa Density of air (kg.m-3) between sail shape and performance. Masuyama and
φ Heel angle or roll angle (deg) Fukasawa [5, 6] were encouraged by Milgram’s work,
ψ Heading angle (deg) and built a sail dynamometer boat, Fujin. The Fujin is a
34-foot sailing cruiser, in which load cells, CCD cameras
1 INTRODUCTION and sailing condition measurement system are installed
to obtain the sail forces and shapes, and the boat attitude,
Because the recent advances in computational fluid simultaneously. In this report, the work achieved with the
dynamics (CFD) further motivate the application of sail dynamometer boat Fujin is presented, and the role of
numerical simulations to predict the sail performance, full scale tests in the validation of CFD in full scale level
there is an ever increased need for reliable experimental is discussed.
data for validation. Wind tunnel tests can be performed
relatively easily, but scale effects related both to flow 2 SAIL DYNAMOMETER BOAT FUJIN
and structural aspects, which yield inaccuracy in sail
shape measurements, are always present. Full scale 2.1 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
onboard measurements are free from scale effect
problems and appear more promising, but the challenge The Fujin was built in 1994. Fujin is a 10.3m-long ocean
becomes how to accurately measure the forces acting on cruiser with a sail dynamometer system in the hull.
the sail. Such studies on sail force measurements were Table 1 shows the principal dimensions of the boat and
performed by Milgram et al., Masuyama et al. and Figure 1 shows the sail plan of the Fujin. The sail
Hochkirch et al., who built full-scale boats with onboard dynamometer system is composed of a rigid aluminum
sail dynamometer systems. frame and four load cells. The frame is separated
structurally from the hull and connected to it by the load
Milgram [1] showed in his pioneering work that the sail cells. The general arrangement of the dynamometer
dynamometer boat, Amphetrete, is quite capable. This frame is given in Figure 2(a). The load cells are
measurement system consists of a 35-foot boat with an numbered in the figure. Two of these are 1-component
internal frame connected to the hull by six load cells, load cells and the others are 2-component ones. The
directions in which the loads were measured for each of
Table 1 Principal dimensions of Fujin (a)
HULL
LOA [m] 10.35
LWL [m] 8.80
BMAX [m] 3.37
BWL [m] 2.64
Disp [ton] 3.86
SAIL
I [m] 11.00
J [m] 3.61
P [m] 12.55
E [m] 4.51
(b)
Figure 1 Schematic showing the sail plan of Fujin

Figure 2 General arrangement of dynamometer frame
and directions of measuring components of
each load cell
the load cells are shown in Figure 2(b). Hence, these load
cells form a 6-component dynamometer system, and their
outputs can be transformed to the forces and moments
about the boat axes using a calibration matrix. All rig
components such as the mast, chain plates, winches, lead
blocks, etc. are attached to the aluminum frame through
the deck holes.
2.2 MEASUREMENT SYSTEM
The sail shape was recorded using pairs of CCD cameras.

The lower part of the mainsail was photographed using
the CCD camera pair designated A in Figure 3. These
were located at the mast top, 50 cm transversely from
each side of the mast. The upper part of the mainsail was
Figure 3 Sea trial condition in light wind with 130% jib photographed using a portable video camera from below
the boom. The lower part of the jib was photographed
using the camera pair designated B in Figure 3, which Figure 4 shows the performance variation for the
were located at the intersection point of the forestay and mainsail and 130% jib configuration as a function of
the mast, 10 cm transversely from each side of the mast. AWA. Figures 4(a) and (b) show the variation of lift and
The upper part of the jib was photographed using a drag force coefficients CL ,CD, and thrust and side force
portable video camera from inside the bow hatch. The coefficients CX, CY, respectively. In the figure the solid
original data acquisition system consisted of a single PC symbols indicate the experimental results and the open
which gathered all the data. However, the system was symbols indicate the calculated results using the VLM
renewed later as a distributed system using three single- and the RANS-based CFD. For the experimental results,
chip computers (Hitachi H8-2636) connected with the both data from the starboard (Stbd) and port tack (Port)
Control Area Network (CAN) bus. The CAN is a high- are shown. All of the measured coefficients are plotted
speed, serial bus developed for the automotive with error bars indicating the range of deviation over the
environment and has a high level of noise immunity. averaging period. There are some discrepancies between
the data from each tack. During the experiments, efforts
3 STEADY SAIL PERFORMANCE FOR UPWIND were made to remove this asymmetrical performance.
CONDITION However, the boat speed actually differed on each tack. It
can be concluded that there was a slight asymmetry in
3.1 TEST CONDITION AND ERROR ANALYSIS the combination of the hull, keel, rudder and
dynamometer frame.
At first, the sail shapes and performance for upwind
conditions were measured using mainsail and 130% jib In this figure, AWA ranges from 20.3 degrees to 37.9
in steady sailing conditions[6, 7]. Close-hauled tests were degrees for the port tack. The former is the closest angle
conducted over an apparent wind angle (AWA) range of to the wind that was achieved, and the latter is typical of
20 to 40 degrees, and an apparent wind speed (AWS) a close reaching condition, where the sail is trimmed in
range of 5 to 11m/s. The effect of the AWA, and the the power down mode. There is some scatter in the
draft and twist of the mainsail on the sail performance experimental data because this is made up from
were measured. Data sampling was started when the measurements taken with the sails trimmed in slightly
sailing condition was considered to be in steady state. different ways. The experimental value of CL in Figure
The sampling rate for the data acquisition system was set 4(a) varies with AWA from 0.91 to 1.58. For the close
at 10Hz. Data sampling was continued for 90 seconds, reaching condition, unfortunately, the sails were not well
and during this time the sail shapes were recorded using trimmed to satisfy the power down mode. The calculated
the CCD cameras. The boat was steered carefully during results for CL using the VLM show good agreement with
this time. However it was difficult to keep the variation the experiments at AWA angles less than about 35
in the AWA sufficiently small during the whole of the 90 degrees. Over about 35 degrees, the calculated results are
seconds period. Therefore the steady state values for the lower than the measured ones. This shows that the
aerodynamic coefficients were obtained by averaging the calculated results strongly indicate the effect of incorrect
data over a 30 to 60 seconds period, in which the AWA sail trimming. The results for CL using the RANS-based
was closer to the target value than during the whole 90 CFD show the same trends with the experiments, but are
second period. For these tests if the range of deviation of slight higher than those from the experiments for AWA
AWA exceeded ±5 degrees, the results were discarded. between 20 degrees to 30 degrees and lower for AWA
All of the measured coefficients are plotted with error greater than 30 degrees. In particular, the decrease in CL
bars indicating the range of deviation over the averaging for AWA values greater than 30 degrees is considerably
period. large. The calculated results for CD slightly over predict
those from the experiments.
3.2 NUMERICAL CALCULATION METHOD
Figure 4(c) shows the coordinates of the center of effort
Numerical flow simulations were performed for the of the sails. The x and z coordinates of the geometric
measured sail shapes and conditions. Two numerical center of effort (xGCE and zGCE) are 0.63m aft and 4.80m
methods were used: a vortex lattice method (VLM) and a above the origin, which are indicated by alternate long
Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS)-based CFD and short dashed lines in the figure. It is seen that both
method. A vortex lattice method using a step-by-step the experimental and the calculated coordinates of xCE
procedure developed by Fukasawa [8] was employed to are near xGCE and move slightly forward with increasing
compare with the results of a RANS-based CFD AWA. Unfortunately, there is a wide scatter in the
calculation. The code of the RANS-based CFD method experimental values of zCE. This is thought to be because
was FLOWPACK developed by Tahara [9, 10]. The the measured Ks moment contains a large component
method has an automatic gridding scheme, and complete from the mass of the dynamometer frame and rigging
multiblock domain decomposition feature. (659kg). This moment was subtracted from the
measurement, taking into account the measured heel
3.3 SAIL PERFORMANCE VARIATION WITH angle. If there is a slight error in the position of center of
APPARENT WIND ANGLE gravity of the dynamometer frame, or in the measured
heel angle, the error in the calculated moment will be
(1) (2) Table 2 Sail shapes, measured experimental data and
C L, C D Exp.
three-dimensional coordinates of the sails for
2.0 (P o r t )
the case of numbered point (1) in Figure 4
٨ :C L
‫ ع‬:C D
1.5 (S tb d )
ً :C L
㩿㪈㪀㩷㪐㪍㪇㪐㪉㪊㪊㪌
CL ٟ :C D 㪘㪮㪘㪲㪻㪼㪾㪴㪫㪮㪠㪪㪫㪲㪻㪼㪾㪛㪩㪘㪝㪫㪲㩼㪴㪘㪮㪪㪲㫄㪆㫊㪴㪟㪜㪜㪣㪲㪻㪼㪾㪴㪭㪙㩷㪲㫂㫋㪴
1.0 㪊㪇㪅㪎㪈㪌㪅㪌㪏㪅㪍㪍㪅㪐㪈㪌㪅㪈㪌㪅㪇
Cal. 㪚㪣㪚㪛㪚㪯㪚㪰㫏㪚㪜㩷㪲㫄㪴㫑㪚㪜㩷㪲㫄㪴
(P o r t ) 㪈㪅㪋㪋㪇㪅㪉㪏㪇㪅㪌㪇㪈㪅㪊㪐㪇㪅㪋㪈㪋㪅㪈㪎
(V L M )
㩼㩷㫆㪽㪈㪊㪇㩼㪡㫀㪹㪤㪸㫀㫅㫊㪸㫀㫃
0 .5
٤ :C L 㪿㪼㫀㫋㫏㫐㫑㫏㫐㫑
‫ غ‬:C D 㪄㪊㪅㪎㪏㪇㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪇㪅㪇㪋㪍㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪈㪅㪊㪉㪇
(R A NS) 㪄㪉㪅㪏㪈㪉㪇㪅㪈㪊㪍㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪇㪅㪐㪊㪋㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪈㪅㪊㪉㪇
CD ٧ :C L 㪇㪄㪈㪅㪏㪋㪊㪇㪅㪉㪎㪉㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪈㪅㪏㪉㪉㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪈㪅㪊㪉㪇
‫ ڏ‬:C D 㩼㪄㪇㪅㪏㪎㪌㪇㪅㪋㪇㪏㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪉㪅㪎㪈㪇㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪈㪅㪊㪉㪇
0.0
10 20 30 40 50 㪇㪅㪇㪐㪋㪇㪅㪌㪋㪋㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪊㪅㪌㪐㪏㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪈㪅㪊㪉㪇
ǫA [d eg ] 㪈㪅㪇㪍㪉㪇㪅㪍㪏㪈㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪋㪅㪋㪏㪍㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪈㪅㪊㪉㪇
(a) CL and CD vs. AWA 㪄㪉㪅㪐㪐㪏㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪉㪅㪈㪋㪇㪇㪅㪈㪊㪊㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪊㪅㪏㪉㪇
C X, C Y Exp. 㪄㪉㪅㪊㪇㪌㪇㪅㪋㪉㪐㪉㪅㪈㪋㪇㪇㪅㪏㪏㪏㪇㪅㪈㪎㪍㪊㪅㪏㪉㪇
2.0 (P o r t ) 㪉㪇㪄㪈㪅㪌㪍㪏㪇㪅㪍㪍㪎㪉㪅㪈㪋㪇㪈㪅㪍㪋㪌㪇㪅㪊㪉㪉㪊㪅㪏㪉㪇
㩼㪄㪇㪅㪏㪇㪌㪇㪅㪎㪐㪌㪉㪅㪈㪋㪇㪉㪅㪋㪇㪍㪇㪅㪋㪇㪇㪊㪅㪏㪉㪇
٨ :C X 㪄㪇㪅㪇㪉㪎㪇㪅㪏㪍㪈㪉㪅㪈㪋㪇㪊㪅㪈㪎㪊㪇㪅㪊㪍㪊㪊㪅㪏㪉㪇
㪇㪅㪎㪍㪇㪇㪅㪏㪏㪍㪉㪅㪈㪋㪇㪊㪅㪐㪋㪎㪇㪅㪉㪉㪉㪊㪅㪏㪉㪇
‫ ع‬:C Y 㪄㪉㪅㪉㪈㪌㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪋㪅㪉㪏㪇㪇㪅㪉㪉㪈㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪍㪅㪊㪉㪇
1.5 (S tb d ) 㪄㪈㪅㪎㪎㪈㪇㪅㪋㪋㪉㪋㪅㪉㪏㪇㪇㪅㪏㪊㪋㪇㪅㪉㪉㪎㪍㪅㪊㪉㪇
㪋㪇㪄㪈㪅㪉㪎㪉㪇㪅㪎㪈㪐㪋㪅㪉㪏㪇㪈㪅㪋㪌㪉㪇㪅㪋㪇㪌㪍㪅㪊㪉㪇
ً :C X 㩼㪄㪇㪅㪎㪉㪊㪇㪅㪏㪌㪇㪋㪅㪉㪏㪇㪉㪅㪇㪏㪈㪇㪅㪋㪏㪊㪍㪅㪊㪉㪇
CY ٟ :C Y 㪄㪇㪅㪈㪋㪌㪇㪅㪏㪐㪏㪋㪅㪉㪏㪇㪉㪅㪎㪉㪉㪇㪅㪋㪋㪉㪍㪅㪊㪉㪇
㪇㪅㪋㪋㪏㪇㪅㪏㪐㪏㪋㪅㪉㪏㪇㪊㪅㪊㪎㪈㪇㪅㪊㪊㪈㪍㪅㪊㪉㪇
1.0
Cal. 㪄㪈㪅㪋㪊㪊㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪍㪅㪋㪉㪇㪇㪅㪊㪇㪏㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪏㪅㪏㪉㪇
(P o r t ) 㪄㪈㪅㪈㪏㪍㪇㪅㪊㪊㪉㪍㪅㪋㪉㪇㪇㪅㪎㪍㪈㪇㪅㪉㪈㪏㪏㪅㪏㪉㪇
㪍㪇㪄㪇㪅㪏㪐㪊㪇㪅㪌㪎㪇㪍㪅㪋㪉㪇㪈㪅㪉㪉㪉㪇㪅㪊㪏㪐㪏㪅㪏㪉㪇
(V L M ) 㩼㪄㪇㪅㪌㪌㪉㪇㪅㪎㪈㪌㪍㪅㪋㪉㪇㪈㪅㪍㪐㪐㪇㪅㪋㪎㪇㪏㪅㪏㪉㪇
0 .5
٤ :C X 㪄㪇㪅㪈㪎㪍㪇㪅㪎㪐㪇㪍㪅㪋㪉㪇㪉㪅㪈㪐㪈㪇㪅㪋㪍㪉㪏㪅㪏㪉㪇
‫ غ‬:C Y 㪇㪅㪉㪈㪎㪇㪅㪏㪊㪉㪍㪅㪋㪉㪇㪉㪅㪍㪐㪈㪇㪅㪋㪈㪇㪏㪅㪏㪉㪇
(R A NS) 㪄㪇㪅㪍㪌㪇㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪏㪅㪌㪍㪇㪇㪅㪊㪐㪍㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪈㪈㪅㪊㪉㪇
CX ٧ :C X 㪄㪇㪅㪌㪋㪈㪇㪅㪈㪎㪉㪏㪅㪌㪍㪇㪇㪅㪍㪌㪈㪇㪅㪈㪋㪋㪈㪈㪅㪊㪉㪇
‫ ڏ‬:C Y 㪏㪇㪄㪇㪅㪋㪈㪋㪇㪅㪊㪈㪏㪏㪅㪌㪍㪇㪇㪅㪐㪈㪋㪇㪅㪉㪍㪈㪈㪈㪅㪊㪉㪇
0.0 㩼㪄㪇㪅㪉㪌㪌㪇㪅㪋㪈㪐㪏㪅㪌㪍㪇㪈㪅㪈㪐㪇㪇㪅㪊㪊㪇㪈㪈㪅㪊㪉㪇
10 20 30 40 50
ǫA [d eg ] 㪄㪇㪅㪇㪎㪊㪇㪅㪋㪏㪍㪏㪅㪌㪍㪇㪈㪅㪋㪎㪍㪇㪅㪊㪍㪉㪈㪈㪅㪊㪉㪇
(b) CX and C Y vs. AWA 㪇㪅㪈㪉㪉㪇㪅㪌㪊㪌㪏㪅㪌㪍㪇㪈㪅㪎㪍㪏㪇㪅㪊㪎㪋㪈㪈㪅㪊㪉㪇
Exp. 㪇㪅㪈㪊㪉㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪈㪇㪅㪎㪇㪇㪇㪅㪋㪏㪊㪇㪅㪇㪇㪇㪈㪊㪅㪏㪉㪇
x C E , z C E [m] 㪇㪅㪈㪋㪋㪇㪅㪇㪈㪍㪈㪇㪅㪎㪇㪇㪇㪅㪌㪈㪈㪇㪅㪇㪈㪉㪈㪊㪅㪏㪉㪇
7 (P o r t )
㪈㪇㪇㪇㪅㪈㪌㪐㪇㪅㪇㪊㪇㪈㪇㪅㪎㪇㪇㪇㪅㪌㪊㪏㪇㪅㪇㪉㪊㪈㪊㪅㪏㪉㪇
٨ :x C E 㩼㪇㪅㪈㪎㪊㪇㪅㪇㪋㪋㪈㪇㪅㪎㪇㪇㪇㪅㪌㪍㪎㪇㪅㪇㪊㪊㪈㪊㪅㪏㪉㪇
66 㪇㪅㪈㪏㪐㪇㪅㪇㪌㪍㪈㪇㪅㪎㪇㪇㪇㪅㪌㪐㪌㪇㪅㪇㪋㪉㪈㪊㪅㪏㪉㪇
‫ ع‬:z C E 㪇㪅㪉㪇㪎㪇㪅㪇㪍㪍㪈㪇㪅㪎㪇㪇㪇㪅㪍㪉㪋㪇㪅㪇㪌㪈㪈㪊㪅㪏㪉㪇
zC E
(S tb d )
ً :x C E
44
large. However, though there is a scatter in the measured
ٟ :z C E
data, it can be seen that zCE is decreasing as AWA
G e o m et r ic z G C E Cal. increases. The trends in the movement of both xCE and
(P o r t ) zCE as functions of AWA might be caused by the
(V L M )
22
decrement of force acting on the aft and upper parts of
٤ :x C E
G e o m et r ic x G C E
‫ غ‬:z C E
the sails due to the loosening of main and jib sheets with
xCE (R A NS) increasing AWA. The calculated results for zCE obtained
٧ :x C E using theRANS-based CFD show the same trend as the
00
‫ ڏ‬:z C E experiments. On the other hand, the calculated results
10 20 30 40 50 using VLM are considerably higher than the
ǫA [d eg ]
(c) xCE and zC E vs. AWA experimental ones. This might be caused by over
estimation of the force acting on the upper portion of the
mainsail. In this area, since the jib is not overlapping,
flow separation may occur easily. However, the VLM
Figure 4 Performance variation as a function of apparent
does not take flow separation into account.
wind angle (AWA) for mainsail and 130% jib
The shapes and three-dimensional coordinates of the sails
are given in Table 2. This shows the case of numbered
point (1) in Figure 4. The figure described above the
table shows the sail section profiles at 0, 20, 40, 60 and before the jib was backwinded on the new tack in order
80% of the sail height. The three-dimensional to minimize luffing of the jib and loss of wind power.
coordinates of each section are given in the table. The The curves show the results of 10 tacking cases from
origin of the coordinate of sail dynamometer system is starboard to port tack. It should be noted again that forces
shown in Figure 1. In this table, the positive direction of and moments are shown using the sail dynamometer
the x coordinate is aft. The four lines at the top of the coordinate system. The variations start from close hauled
table are the measured values for the wind and sail trim condition of starboard tack until the boat is on port tack,
conditions, the boat attitude and the sail performance (i.e., from ψ = -45º to 45º). The corresponding AWA,
coefficients. In reference [7], the same tables are shown from γA= 30º to -30º, are also indicated in the second
which are measured at various sail trim conditions. These abscissa in the figure. Figure 6(a) shows the variation of
tabulated data may provide a good benchmark for the X'Sd. When the boat heads directly into the wind, X'Sd
validation of upwind sail CFD in full scale level. becomes about -0.1, (i.e., drag force coefficient). Figures
6(b) to 6(d) show the forces and moments become zero
4 AERODYNAMIC FORCE VARIATION DURING not at ψ=0º, but around ψ=10º, which indicates a delay in
TACKING MANEUVER AND TACKING the variation of forces and moments compared to the
SIMULATION change of heading angle. This could be caused by the sail
filling with wind due to the yawing motion from the
4.1 MEASUREMENTS OF AERODYNAMIC FORCE former tack to ψ =10º on the new tack when the jib sheet
VARIATION DURING TACKING MANEUVERS was released. Inversely, for the case of port tack to
starboard tack, the values of Y'Sd, K'Sd and N'Sd become
Tacking of a sailing yacht is a quick maneuvering motion zero at around ψ= -10º, and the variation of forces and
accompanied by large rolling angle changes in a short moments are almost symmetrical to Figure 6. From this
period of time. To analyze this type of large amplitude result, it can be considered that the bias of the zero
motion, a mathematical model for the simulation was crossing point of the forces and moments at the tacking
proposed by Masuyama et al. [11,12]. The calculation maneuver is symmetrical.
method was applied to a 34-foot sailing cruiser and the
simulated result showed good agreement with the 4.2 MODEL OF SAIL FORCE VARIATION FOR
measured data from full scale tests. However, in these TACKING SIMULATION
research, the modeling of aerodynamic force variation
during tacking was insufficient due to lack of Let us define the model of sail force variation for the
information about the sail forces. In order to clarify the tacking simulation as bold lines in Figure 7 referring to
sail force variation during tacking maneuver, the the measured data in Figure 6. Figure 7(a) shows the case
measurements were conducted using Fujin [13, 14, 15]. of tacking from starboard to port tack. The abscissa
indicates AWA (γA). In the model, the basic sail
Figure 5 shows two examples of the measured data in the performance curves of X's0 and Y's0 are divided into three
time domain for X'Sd, Y'Sd, K'Sd and N'Sd during the stages. Stage A is the range of γA that is greater than 20º.
tacking operation for 20 seconds, from five seconds In this region, the coefficients vary with γA according to
before to 15 seconds after the start of tacking, where X'Sd the basic curves. Stage B is the range of γA= 20º to -10º.
and Y'Sd are the thrust and side force coefficients along In this region, the coefficients are assumed to vary
the axes of sail dynamometer system, and K'Sd and N'Sd linearly along the lines determined from the results of
are the roll and yaw moment coefficients around the Figures 6(a) and 6(b). Stage C is the range of γA= -10º to
same axes. Figure 5(a) shows the case of tacking from -30º. In this region, the basic pattern of the coefficients is
starboard to port tack, and Figure 5(b) shows from port to expressed as basic performance curves. However, it may
starboard tack. The scattering of the data at the crossing take several seconds to recover to the basic curves due to
points of the curves is caused by the crew action on the the delay of trimming the sails for the new tack condition.
dynamometer frame in releasing and trimming the jib Therefore, the coefficients are assumed to increase from
sheet during tacking. In the measured data, the inertia the lowest values to the basic curve values with elapsed
forces and moments due to the mass of the dynamometer time. The recovery time was chosen from 5 to 10 seconds
frame are included. These effects clearly appear at the by taking the simulated heel angle corresponding to the
starting and finishing stage of the tacking maneuver, but measured one. Figure 7(b) shows the case of tacking
are not so significant at the middle stage. Hence the from port to starboard tack. In this case the variation
measured data are indicated only subtracting the forces pattern proceeds in the opposite direction. The sail forces
and moments due to the gravity force acting on the and moments expressed in equation (1) are used for the
dynamometer frame using measured heel angle at every equations of motion in the following chapter.
moment.
4.3 EQUATIONS OF MOTION FOR TACKING
Figure 6 shows the variation of sail force coefficients SIMULATION
during tacking as a function of the heading angle of the
boat ψ, where ψ = 0º means heading in the true wind In order to express the large amplitude motion such as a
direction. During tacking, the jib sheet was released just tacking maneuver of a sailing yacht, the authors
sta rt o f tacking sta rt of ta cking
1.5 1.5
K' S d Y' S d
1.0 1.0
X' S d , Y' S d , K ' S d , N' S d

X' S d , Y' S d , K ' s d , N' s d
X' S d X' S d
0.5 0.5
0.0 0.0
N' S d
N' S d
-0.5 K' S d -0.5
-1.0 -1.0
Y' S d
-1.5 -1.5
-5 0 5 10 15 -5 0 5 10 15
elap sed tim e [se c] elap sed tim e [se c]
(a ) Tac king from starboard tack to port ta ck (b) T ac king from port tac k to sta rboa rd ta c k
Figure 5 Examples of measured sail force coefficients in the time domain during tacking operation
1.0 1.0
P
0 .5
0.5
S P
S
K 'S d
X 'S d
0.0
0.0
-0 .5
-0.5 -1.0
-6 0 -4 0 -20 0 20 40 60 Ȁ -6 0 -4 0 -2 0 0 20 40 60 Ȁ
ǫA ǫA
30 20 10 0 -10 -20 -3 0 30 20 10 0 -10 -2 0 -3 0
(a ) X ' S d vs . Ȁ a nd ǫA (c ) K ' S d vs . Ȁ an d ǫA
1.5 0 .5
1.0
P
S P
0.5
S
N'S d
Y' S d
0.0 0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5 -0 .5
-6 0 -4 0 -20 0 20 40 60 Ȁ -6 0 -4 0 -2 0 0 20 40 60 Ȁ
ǫA ǫA
30 20 10 0 -10 -20 -3 0 30 20 10 0 -10 -2 0 -3 0
(b ) Y ' S d vs . Ȁ a nd ǫA (d ) N ' S d vs . Ȁ and ǫA
Figure 6 Variation of sail force coefficients during tacking operation as a function of heading angle
of boat (tacking from starboard to port tack)
X' S 0 ,Y' S 0 X' S 0 ,Y' S 0
2.0 2.0
Starboard tack Port tack Starboard tack Port tack
Y' S 0 C B A Y' S 0
A B 1.5 C 1.5
Increasing with
elapsed time
1.0 1.0
X' S 0 X' S 0
X' S 0 X' S 0
0.5 0.5
0.0 0.0
50 40 30 20 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 50 40 30 20 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50
ǫ A [d e g ] Increasing with ǫ A [deg]
-0.5 -0.5
elapsed time
-1.0 -1.0
Y' S 0 Y' S 0
-1.5 -1.5
Ȁ =-45 q Ȁ =45 q Ȁ =-45 q Ȁ =45 q
-2.0 -2.0
(a) tacking from starboard to port tack (b) tacking from port to starboard tack
Figure 7 Model of sail force variation during tacking maneuver for tacking simulation
employed equations of motion expressed by the 4.4.1 Results of Fujin
horizontal body axis system introduced by Hamamoto et
al. [16]. The origin of the coordinate system is on the Figure 8 shows the comparison between measured and
C.G. of the boat which is shown in Figure 1. The x-axis simulated results of Fujin. Figure 8(1) shows tacking
lies along the centerline of the boat on the still water from starboard to port tack, and 8(2) shows tacking from
plane and is positive forward. The y-axis is positive to port to starboard tack. The sail force variations in Figures
starboard in the still water plane. The z-axis is positive 5(a) and 5(b) correspond to these cases, respectively. The
downwards. In this coordinate system, the maneuvering indicated results were recorded for 35 seconds, beginning
motion of the boat and aero/hydro-dynamic forces acting 5 seconds before the start of tacking. Figure 8(1)(a)
on it can be expressed in the horizontal plane even shows the boat trajectories. Solid circles indicate the
though the boat heels. Both added mass and added positions of measured C.G. of the boat at each second,
moment of inertia, which are referenced to the body axes while open circles indicate the simulated positions. The
fixed on the boat, can be obtained by the coordinate illustrations of the small boat symbol indicate the
transformation. Then, the equations of motion expressed heading angle ψ every three seconds. The wind blows
in the horizontal body axis system for the motions of from the right side of the figure and the grid spacing is
surge, sway, roll and yaw are derived as follows. The left taken as 15 meters. Figure 8(1)(b) shows the time
sides are forces and moments due to the mass and added histories of rudder angle δ, heading angle ψ, heel angle φ
masses of the boat, and the right sides are fluid dynamic and boat velocity VB. The solid lines are measured data
forces and moments acting on the hull and sail with and the dotted lines are simulated data.
reference to the horizontal body axes.
surge: In Figures 8(1)(b) and 8(2)(b), the patterns of rudder
(m + m x ) U& − (m + m y cos 2 ϕ + m z sin 2 ϕ ) Vψ& angle variation can be considered as standard for tacking
(1) maneuvers. As shown, tacking with a yawing motion of
= X 0 + X H + X Vψ& Vψ& + X R + X S 90 degrees is completed in 7 to 8 seconds. The boat
sway: velocity decreases about 30%, and the boat takes about
(m + my cos2 ϕ + mz sin2 ϕ) V& + (m + mx ) Uψ&
15 seconds to recover to the previous velocity after the
yawing motion is completed. The measured time
+ 2(mz − my ) sinϕ cosϕ ⋅ Vϕ& (2) histories of ψ and φ indicate the delay of zero crossing
point of φ compared with ψ. This might be caused by the
= YH + Yϕ& ϕ& + Yψ&ψ& + YR + YS sail filling with wind due to the yawing motion until
roll: around ψ= 10º on the opposite tack as shown in Figure 6.
(I xx + J xx )ϕ&& − {(I yy + J yy ) − ( I zz + J zz )}sinϕ cosϕ ⋅ψ& 2
The simulated time histories show a slight delay when
(3) compared to the measured data. In particular, the delay of
= KH + Kϕ& ϕ& + KR + KS − mgGM sinϕ the simulated heel angle is relatively large. This might be
caused by the over-estimation of the damping coefficient
yaw: for rolling, K φ& . For this point further investigation might
{ (I yy }
+ J yy ) sin 2 ϕ + ( I zz + J zz ) cos2 ϕ ψ&& be necessary. However, the simulated results of velocity
+ 2{( I yy + J yy ) − (I zz + J zz )}sin ϕ cosϕ ⋅ψ& ϕ& (4) decrement show agreement with the measured results.
This suggests that the model of sail force variation
= N H + Nψ&ψ& + N R + N S proposed in this report is adequate for the tacking
simulation. In Figures 8(1)(a) and 8(2)(a), although the
The derivation of these equations and calculation method simulated trajectories show slightly larger turning
of each term are described in detail in references [14, 15]. radiuses than the measured trajectories, the simulated
results show agreement with the measured values overall.
4.4 COMPARISON BETWEEN MEASURED AND
SIMULATED RESULTS 4.4.2 Results of Fair V
The simulation method was applied to several boats and Figure 9 shows the comparison between measured and
the results showed good agreement with the measured simulated results of Fair V. The contents of these figures
data. In this report, the cases of Fujin and Fair V are are identical to Figure 8. In these cases, the rudder angle
shown in the following sections. The Fair V is a 34-foot variations in the first stage are relatively small. These
sailing cruiser, which was designed by the author and cause the delay of yawing motion of the boat. Hence it
used for the first measurement of tacking maneuver. The takes more than 10 seconds to complete the tacking
Runge-Kutta method was employed to calculate the maneuver. On the other hand, the simulated results show
equations of motion. The rolling and yawing motions a prompt response to the rudder angle variation.
were calculated around the C.G. of the boat. Input data Therefore the simulated time histories vary slightly
for the simulation is true wind velocity and the measured earlier compared with the measured histories. By the
time history of rudder angle during tacking maneuver at same reasoning, the simulated trajectories in Figures
increments of 0.1 seconds. 9(1)(a) and 9(2)(a) show smaller turning radiuses than
the measured trajectories.
meas ured measured
simulated simulated
U T =5 .7m/s sta rt of U T =5.4m/s

tacking
WIND W IND
start of WIND WIND
tacking
15m 15m
(a) Tra je ctory of boat (a) Tra jec tory of boat
sta rt of ta cking [de g] sta rt of tacking

[deg]
70 70
Ȁ : Hea ding Angle
Ȁ Ȁ Ǿ : Hee l Angle
Ǭ : Rudder Angle
35 35
Ǿ Ǿ V B : Boat Velocity
Ǭ
Ǭ Ǭ
[m/s] [m/s]
Ǿ 0 5 Ǿ 0 5
Ǭ
4 Ȁ 4
Ȁ VB
3 VB 3
-35 VB -35 VB
2 2
1 1
-70 0 -70 0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
elapsed time [sec] elapsed time [sec ]
(b) Boat attitude parame ters (b) Boat attitude pa rame ters
(1) From starboard to port tack (2) From port to starboard tack
Figure 8 Measured and simulated results of tacking maneuver of Fujin
measured measured
simulated sim ulated
U T =4.8m/s start of U T =4 .9m/s

tacking
WIND W IND
start of W IND W IND
tacking
15m 15m
(a) Trajectory of boat (a ) Tra je ctory of boat
[deg] start of ta cking start of tacking

[de g]
70 70
Ȁ : Hea ding A ngle
Ȁ Ȁ Ǿ : Hee l A ngle
35 Ǭ : Rudde r Angle
35
Ǿ V B : Boa t V elocity
Ǭ Ǿ
Ǭ Ǭ
[m/s] [m/s]
Ǿ 0 5 Ǿ 0 5
Ȁ 4 Ǭ 4
Ȁ
VB 3 3
-35 VB -35 VB
2 VB 2
1 1
-70 0 -70 0
-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
elapse d time [sec] elapse d time [sec ]
(b) Boat attitude pa ramete rs (b) Boat attitude paramete rs
(1) From starboard to port tack (2) From port to starboard tack
Figure 9 Measured and simulated results of tacking maneuver of Fair V
best tacking procedure. The motions of pitching and
Overall, although the timing of boat motion indicated in rolling of a boat also have a serious effect on sail
the simulated time histories shows a slight discrepancy, performance. For the research of these effects, a sail
the tendency and amount of variation of the boat motion dynamometer boat will provide essential information.
indicate good agreement with the measured data,
including the decrement of boat velocity. When the sail tests were performed using Fujin, it was
difficult to measure the shape of sail such as balloon
5 ROLE OF FULL SCALE TESTS AS THE spinnaker simultaneously with aerodynamic forces.
BRIDGE BETWEEN MODEL TESTS AND CFD However, recently we can easily employ high
performance digital cameras and 3-dimensional shape
Wind Tunnel tests using model sails are commonly analyzing systems. Moreover, the developments of
performed at the Reynolds number (Re) region of around measurement systems such as small gyroscope, GPS
2x105 to 5x105. This region is referred to as the critical sensor, electronics transmitter, etc. can also provide us
Reynolds number range, where the boundary layer flow good opportunities for carrying out sea tests easily. It is
turns from laminar to turbulent, causing the drag and lift worth emphasizing that the tests using a sail
coefficients change drastically. Hoerner [17] shows dynamometer boat can provide the ultimate validation
experimental results of wing sections in this region and data for CFD in full scale level. Now, a new generation
indicates that the maximum lift coefficient varies as a sail dynamometer boat is being prepared by Professor
function of the Reynolds number, camber ratio and nose- Fabio Fossati at Politecnico di Milano. We are looking
radius ratio, and also can be very sensitive to the test forward to the results of this boat from tests at Lake
conditions. From the author’s experience of wind tunnel Como in Italy.
tests [18], the unexpected and unstable deviation on
measured data occurred in particular in the case of 6 CONCLUSIONS
downwind sail. Normally, a spinnaker has a large camber
and a sharp leading edge which works at a high entrance The work achieved with the sail dynamometer boat Fujin
angle. This causes the laminar-type separation at the was reported. At first, the sail shapes and performance
suction side of the leading edge at the low Reynolds for upwind conditions were measured in steady sailing
number region. When this separation area spreads over conditions. The results were compared with the
the surface of the suction side, the drag and lift numerical calculations using the measured sail shapes as
coefficients change drastically. The author sometimes the input data. The database of three-dimensional
experienced that the slight shape change of a spinnaker coordinates of the sail shapes was also tabulated with the
by sheet trimming caused serious deviation on measured aerodynamic coefficients. The sail shape database and
data. Therefore, it should be considered that the wind the comparison with the numerical calculations indicated
tunnel test in this Reynolds number region has to be in this research provide a good benchmark for the
performed very carefully. On the other hand, for the full validation of sail CFD in full scale level. Then, the
scale boat, the sails work in the Reynolds number of aerodynamic force variation during tacking maneuvers
almost greater than 1x106. In this region, although the was measured by Fujin, and a new simulation model of
effect of critical Reynolds number still remains, the tacking maneuver was proposed. The simulated results
effect on the measured data may be less than the case of showed good agreement with the measured data. Finally,
wind tunnel tests. Recently, Viola et al. [19] measured the scale effect problem of wind tunnel tests was
the pressure distribution on the surface of full scale discussed. Wind tunnel tests using model sails are
downwind sails during sea tests using a Platu25-class performed at the region of critical Reynolds number.
yacht. The results were compared with the measured data Therefore, the wind tunnel test in this Reynolds number
by wind tunnel tests, and showed very interesting region had to be performed very carefully. On the other
differences in the pressure distributions near the leading hand, the full scale tests using a sail dynamometer boat
edge. The author thinks this is the first report which are free from scale effect problems and appear more
points out the differences of pressure distribution on the promising.
downwind sails between full scale and scale model. It
can be considered that this fact indicates the importance ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
of full scale measurements for the developments of
downwind sails. A sail dynamometer boat may provide The author wishes to thank Professor T. Fukasawa at
more precise information not only about pressure Osaka Prefecture University and Dr. Y. Tahara at
distribution, but also aerodynamic forces and sail shapes National Maritime Research Institute of Japan for their
simultaneously in full scale level. contributions as co-researchers. The author also would
like to thank Mr. H. Mitsui, the former harbour master of
Investigation of effect on the sail aerodynamic forces by the Anamizu Bay Seminar House of Kanazawa Institute
dynamic motion of the boat is another important research of Technology, for his assistance with the sea trials. Help
target of the full scale test using a sail dynamometer boat. with the sea trials given by graduate and undergraduate
The research of aerodynamic force variation during students of the Kanazawa Institute of Technology is also
tacking maneuver should be broadened to investigate the acknowledged.
and Application of Neural Network Technique,’ 12th
REFERENCES Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium, SNAME, 117-
131, 1995.
1. MILGRAM, J. H., PETERS, D. B. and ECKHOUSE,
D.N., N., ‘Modeling IACC Sail Forces by Combining 13. MASUYAMA, Y. and FUKASAWA, T., ‘Tacking
Measurements with CFD,’ 11th Chesapeake Sailing Simulation of Sailing Yachts with New Model of
Yacht Symposium, SNAME, 1993. Aerodynamic Force Variation,’ 3rd High Performance
Yacht Design Conference, Auckland, 138-147, 2008.
2. HOCHKIRCH, K. and BRANDT, H., ‘Fullscale
Hydrodynamic Force Measurement on the Berlin 14. MASUYAMA, Y. and FUKASAWA, T., ‘Tacking
Sailing Dynamometer,’ 14th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Simulation of Sailing Yachts with New Model of
Symposium, SNAME, 1999. Aerodynamic Force Variation During Tacking
Maneuver,’ Journal of Sailboat Technology, SNAME,
3. HANSEN, H., JACKSON, P. and HOCHKIRCH, K., 2010-02. 2010.
‘Comparison of Wind Tunnel and Full-scale
Aerodynamic Sail Force,’ International Journal of 15. MASUYAMA, Y. and FUKASAWA, T., ‘Tacking
Small Craft Technology (IJSCT), Vol. 145 Part B1: 23- Simulation of Sailing Yachts with New Model of
31, 2003. Aerodynamic Force Variation During Tacking
Maneuver,’ Transactions, SNAME, Vol. 119. 2011.
4. KREBBER, B. and HOCHKIRCH, K., ‘Numerical
Investigation on the Effects of Trim for a Yacht Rig,’ 16. HAMAMOTO, M. and AKIYOSHI, T., ‘Study on
2nd High Performance Yacht Design Conference, Ship Motions and Capsizing in Following Seas (1st
Auckland, New Zealand, 2006. Report),’ Journal of The Society of Naval Architects of
Japan, No.147, 173-180, 1988.
5. MASUYAMA, Y. and FUKASAWA T., ‘Full Scale
Measurement of Sail Force and the Validation of 17. HOERNER, S. F., and BORST, H. V., ‘Fluid-
Numerical Calculation Method,’ 13th Chesapeake dynamic Lift,’ Hoerner Fluid Dynamics, p.4-12, 1975.
Sailing Yacht Symposium, SNAME, 1997. 18. TAHARA, Y., MASUYAMA, Y. , FUKASAWA, T.
6. MASUYAMA, Y., TAHARA, Y. ,FUKASAWA, T. and KATORI, M., ‘CFD Calculation of Downwind Sail
and MAEDA, N., ‘Database of Sail Shapes vs. Sail Performance Using Flying Shape Measured by Wind
Performance and Validation of Numerical Calculation Tunnel Tests,’ 4th High Performance Yacht Design
for Upwind Condition,’ 18th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Conference, Auckland, 38-47, 2012.
Symposium, SNAME, 11-31, 2007. 19. VIOLA, I. M. and FLAY, R. G., ‘Sail Aerodynamics:
7. MASUYAMA, Y., TAHARA, Y. ,FUKASAWA, T. On-Water Pressure Measurements on a Downwind
and MAEDA, N., ‘Database of Sail Shapes versus Sail Sail,’ Journal of Ship Research, SNAME, Vol.56, No.4,
Performance and Validation of Numerical Calculation 197-206, 2012.
for the Upwind Condition,’ Journal of Marine Science
and Technology, JASNAOE, vol. 14, No. 2, 137-160, AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
2009.
Y. Masuyama is a Professor Emeritus and a Research
8. FUKASAWA, T., ‘Aeroelastic Transient Response of Fellow at the Actual Seas Ship and Marine Research
3-Dimensional Flexible Sail,’ Aero-Hydroelasticity, Laboratory, Kanazawa Institute of Technology, Japan.
ICAHE'93, 1993. He graduated from the Department of Mechanical
9. TAHARA Y., ‘Evaluation of a RaNS Equation Engineering, Toyama University, and received a degree
of Doctor of Engineering from Osaka University. He
Method for Calculating Ship Boundary Layers and
learned the yacht design process at the Kumazawa Craft
Wakes Including Wave Effects,’ J. Society of Naval
Laboratory, yacht design office, and has been continuing
Architects of Japan 180: 59-80, 1996. research about sailing yachts at Kanazawa Institute of
10. TAHARA, Y., HAYASHI, G., ‘Flow Analyses Technology. His research interests include sail
around Downwind-Sail System of an IACC Sailing performance, velocity prediction, maneuverability and
Boat by a Multi-Block NS/RaNS Method,’ J. Society of stability of sailing yachts. He had been involved with the
Naval Architects of Japan 194: 1-12, 2003. technical committee of the Japanese America’s Cup
challenge team “Nippon Challenge”. He was a chairman
11. MASUYAMA, Y., NAKAMURA, I., TATANO, H. of the Sailing Yacht Research Association of Japan from
and TAKAGI, K., ‘Dynamic Performance of Sailing 1993 to 2012.
Cruiser by Full-Scale Sea Tests,’ 11th Chesapeake
Sailing Yacht Symposium, SNAME, 161-179, 1993.
12. MASUYAMA, Y., FUKASAWA, T. and
SASAGAWA, H., ‘Tacking Simulation of Sailing
Yachts-Numerical Integration of Equations of Motion
ESTIMATING A YACHT’S HULL-SAILPLAN BALANCE AND SAILING

PERFORMANCE USING EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND VPP
METHODS
M. Prince and A.R. Claughton, Wolfson Unit M.T.I.A., University of Southampton, UK, wumtia@soton.ac.uk
This paper describes an approach to calculate the longitudinal position of the hydrodynamic and
aerodynamic force centres on a sailing yacht, and the resulting rudder angle required to hold a steady
course across a complete range of sailing conditions. The paper discusses the effect on performance, in
terms of boat speed, by means of experimental tank testing to derive the hydrodynamic data; wind
tunnel testing to derive the aerodynamic data; and the use of a 4 plus degree of freedom (DOF) velocity
prediction program (VPP). It highlights the data required to carry out such analysis and is summarised
in a worked example.
The main objective of this paper is to outline a process which is achievable within a design office
environment and skill set, whereby a designer can use generic data derived from experimental or CFD
and amalgamate it with theoretical and regression models for individual components to ensure that the
“balance” question is satisfactorily addressed at a stage in the design and development process where
meaningful changes can be made to geometry.
1 INTRODUCTION
The estimation of the hydrodynamic forces
As sailing yachts are getting larger, 70 metre plus LOA is including centres of lateral resistance; lift and
unexceptional, the achievement of good hull-sailplan drag values
balance across a complete range of sailing speed and heel
The estimation of the aerodynamic forces
conditions become more difficult. This is due to design including centres of effort; lift and drag
features related to their size and operational constraints. properties
Large sailing vessels often have shallow draft relative to
A solution phase, combining the above elements
their length, restricted draft and rudder(s) area and high and other parameters including righting moment
induced drag characteristics leading to large leeway and across a range of sailing conditions to predict
high hydrodynamic drag angles. All of these effects steady state rudder angles and sailing
make coinciding the aerodynamic and hydrodynamic performance.
lines of action more difficult, and the normal “fixes” to
ameliorate the problem, such as altering mast rake and The budget often restricts the quantity of project specific
sail trim, or the sailing trim are not easy to apply on such experimental or computational data points that can be
large vessels. The long established rules of thumb to gathered. The designer can offset this restriction if he has
determine hull-sailplan balance or ‘lead’ can no longer the skills to use limited datasets, or data from similar
be relied upon, highlighted in [1] and [2]. This vessels and casting these into a more complete summary
necessitates the use of alternative approaches to of the yacht’s performance, particularly in relation to
understand and determine the elements that contribute helm balance effects. By incorporating other methods
towards balancing the hull and sailplan. and sources of data more depth is added to the global
yacht model and allows it to be extended beyond the
The majority of large superyachts have multimasted rigs limits of the original data and results in more complete
to meet design and operational restrictions. These and robust performance envelopes.
sailplans can have vastly different longitudinal centres of
effort in comparison to sloop rigs with complex This paper is aimed at the yacht designer, to show an
interactions between the cascade of sails and sheeting approach that combines the use of different data sources
options. This makes the use of techniques such as wind to create a meaningful performance prediction tool that
tunnel testing or CFD invaluable as a means of captures balance effects for large sailing yachts.
determining the aerodynamic centre of effort and how it Additionally the techniques described are relevant to the
changes with apparent wind angle, sail flattening and productive management of a ‘mixed economy’ where
easing. data from physical experiments, CFD simulations and
parametrically based force models can all be woven into
This paper breaks down this balance problem into three the fabric of the design decision process.
main stages:
2 TANK TESTING 0.4
Sailing yacht tank testing is principally used as a means
of estimating a vessel’s resistance and sideforce Sailing Sideforce
generating properties, with limited attention paid to the
impact of rudder use on resistance. This has typically 0.3
been the case in race boat development where changes of
longitudinal centre of lateral resistance (CLR) are
Resistance
reasonably well understood and easily predicted with 7,4
deep keels and rudders taking large proportions of the lift 0.2 5,8
5,6
generation. Large yachts often have comparatively 5,2 5,4
shallow draft appendages which in turn leads to greater
2,4
lift contributions from the relatively inefficient hull. This
Rudder variation
lift generation by the hull induces a Munk moment which 0.1 at set leeway angle
can have a significant effect upon the centre of
resistance. These effects must be incorporated within any
analysis if it is to yield meaningful guidance for the
designer. 0.0
0 1 2 3 4
Sideforce squared
Standard semi captive model sailing yacht testing
techniques adopted by the authors are described in [3] Figure 1: Typical tank testing resistance versus sideforce2
and [4]. Following the completion of an upright plot
resistance curve (zero heel, zero yaw), at each test speed
and heel test condition a sweep of leeway angles will be The rudder effectiveness tests are carried at or close to
tested on both tacks with a rudder set to a plausible helm the leeway setting coinciding with sailing side force
angle. Some judgement must be exercised here, it is (SSF) appropriate to that heeled condition, as can be seen
clearly wrong to test at zero rudder because this means in Figure 1 with the SSF line. Rudder angle changes are
every test point has the “wrong” rudder angle. Therefore made over a range, i.e. 2, 4, 6, 8 degrees. These are then
an angle of say 2 or 3 degrees may be chosen, although used to determine the relative change in CLR with rudder
this will not be the correct angle it does at least mean that angle, which can be seen in Figure 2. This can then be
the test data has captured some of the effects of the undertaken across a range speed/heel conditions with the
pressure field around the rudder. A matrix of speed and CLR change being expressed per degree of rudder angle
heel combinations covering the expected vessel sailing for each condition.
range will be carried out. The major benefit of this style 50
of testing is that it allows for good estimation of the Leeway Variation
different resistance components, robust scaling of the Rudder Variation
model scale results and provides a direct approach to
assimilate the data for into a VPP. 45
CLR (% LWL aft of FP)
5,8
Figure 1 summarises the typical results for one

speed/heel condition, on one tack. The labels show the 5,6
leeway and rudder angle for each data point. The leeway 40
variation sweep was carried out with the set rudder angle
2,4
of 4, after which a rudder sweep was carried out at 5 of 5,4
leeway. 7,4
35
These results here can be used to determine:

Heel drag (drag at zero sideforce) 5,2

Drag at sailing sideforce 30

Effective draft 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Sideforce
The effective draft is determined by applying a least Figure 2: Typical longitudinal centre of lateral resistance
square fit to the standard leeway speed data. This is (CLR) change with sideforce
appropriate for most vessels, however the linear
assumption does not hold when significant lift is taken by The complete set of data will eventually consist of 8-10
the hull or low aspect ratio appendages operating at high data sets like the one shown in Figure 1, and 3-4 rudder
leeway angles as is the case with many large yachts. In variation data sets like the one shown in Figure 2. These
such cases a first order polynomial or similar is used to data are scaled to the full size and submitted to a fitting
fit the data. process which the VPP can interrogate across the entire
range of boat speed, heel and sideforce to yield the
following data:

Resistance as a function of sideforce

Vertical and Longitudinal centre of lateral The data is analysed to apply the blockage corrections,
resistance at standard rudder setting and calculate the sail force and moment coefficients

Sideforce versus leeway relationship which are then used at full scale. The authors use an in-

Rudder angle relationship to CLR and house software ‘WindCorrect’ to carry out this analysis
resistance and create aerodynamic data fit files for each tested sail
set that can be read directly by the VPP.
For direct input into a VPP this is summarised to a table
input of: Figures 3,4,5 show typical results for one sail

Boat speed configuration and three apparent wind angles, Drag

Heel angle coefficient (CD) versus Lift coefficient (CL), non-
dimensional Driving force (Df) versus Heeling moment

Leeway angle
(Hm) and Centres of efforts versus Heeling force (Hf),

Rudder angle
respectively.

Resistance (Force along the vessel track)

Sideforce (Force normal to the vessel track) The objective of the tests is to produce a set of data for

Roll moment (Mx) each sailset (e.g. full sail, offwind and reefed

Yaw moment (Mz) configurations) that encompasses a range of apparent
wind angles for input into a VPP. This uses an approach
3 SAIL AERODYNAMICS similar to that of the ORC [8] to model sail easing and
Large superyachts often have multi-masted sailplans due flattening.
to mast height restrictions, ranging from ketches to 3
masted or more schooners. At the design stage, a number In Figure 3, the line fit through the CD versus CL2 data for
of questions are often being asked, such as what is the the apparent wind angle (a) of 30 corresponds to the
overall sail performance in terms of driving force, effective rig height and is used to derive the drag
sideforce and achievable apparent wind angles. Are the associated to the eased/flattened sail settings. This figure
masts in best location and are the separations suitable? shows typical sail trimming effects, at 30apparent wind
Do the sails interact favourably? Do sheeting locations angle the CD versus CL2 line is sensibly linear, the
impact on the deck arrangement? The wind tunnel offers maximum CL2 of 2.5 (2.5=1.58 CL) is achieved by over-
a perfect environment in which to address these trimming the sail so that a little extra drag is incurred,
questions. It often provokes a stimulating discussion then as the sail are eased the lift coefficient can be
between the stylists, sailmakers, Naval Architects, and reduced to 1.0 before sail efficiency is lost. At the wider
designers. apparent wind angles it becomes increasingly difficult to
efficiently de-power the sail.
3.1 WIND TUNNEL TESTING
There are a number of practitioners of scale model This is carried out on as many of the proposed sail plan
experimental sail aerodynamics. Historically, these have options as is possible, covering upwind, reaching and
focussed on driving force, sideforce and roll moment downwind configurations as well as reefed settings.
parameters [5], but in more recent times the importance
of yaw measurement upon absolute yacht performance Figure 4 shows the VPP input file fit applied to the 30 a
has received greater attention [6] and [7]. and the maximum Df values appropriate to each apparent
wind angle.
Sail testing techniques are discussed in a number of other 0.6
sources. The authors adopt the following processes Conf. A - 30
which enable robust analysis and scaling of the results to Conf. A - 36
Drag Coefficient Cd
full scale and facilitates complete datasets for direct 0.4

Conf. A - 45
inclusion into VPPs. Bare hull and mast windage tests

are carried out to assist in the understanding of the
breakdown of forces. 0.2
Whilst maintaining constant wind pressure, each sail

combination at each tested apparent wind angle is 0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
optimised by sheeting all the sails to produce the Lift Coefficient² Cl²
maximum driving force. Having achieved this, other
combinations of sheeting are used appropriate to de- Figure 3: Typical wind tunnel CD versus CL2 plot
powered modes, i.e. maximum drive force (Df) at a
specified limit of heeling moment (Hm) (optimising Figure 5 shows forward and lower shift in centre of effort
Df/Hm ratio). At this stage, the change of longitudinal as the sailplan is eased. As with a majority of rig types,
centre of effort (CEA) with depowering and sheeting can the most significant and efficient easing strategies result
be observed. This process indicates the range of potential to sheeting out the aft most sail, with lesser easing
movement of centre of effort. moving forward through the sailplan.
2.0 extrapolating the effective rig height and the maximum
lift coefficient with its associated drag coefficient across
the apparent wind angle range. By adopting this physics
1.5
based approach valid data can be derived for the full
ND Driving Force
range of wind angles from a relatively sparse set of test

Conf. A - 30
1.0 Conf. A - 36
data.
Conf. A - 45
All this data has been corrected to the upright condition,

0.5 as the VPP will apply the appropriate heel manipulation.
This is a highly appropriate solution in the creation of a

0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100 consistent and robust data set for direct inclusion into a
ND Heeling Moment VPP environment. Other test methods will answer
Figure 4: Typical wind tunnel driving force versus specific questions, i.e. most appropriate sail settings for a
heeling moment plot specific wind condition, vessel stability and wind angle
but will be of limited overall value in creating a
Longitudinal Centre of E
50 systematic or complete dataset for inclusion in a

(% of LWL from FP)
mathematical fitting process such as a VPP. This

analogous to the situation experienced in tank testing,
45 where “sailing dynamometer” systems that generated
Conf. A - 30 data only at conditions where the roll moment
Conf. A - 36
equilibrium of the full scale boat was matched at each
Conf. A - 45
40 heel angle. This system gave instant gratification by
40 capturing stability effects without the need for further
Vertical Centre of Effort
analysis, but it generated data sets that lacked the heeling

force degree of freedom, and in so doing provided data
(% mast height)
35 that was much less easily applied in the general case.
4 SOLUTION PHASE
30 The velocity performance prediction program (VPP) has
0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
the ability to integrate the complete range of
ND Heeling Force
hydrodynamic and aerodynamic elements.
4.1 HYDRODYNAMIC COMPONENTS

Figure 5: Typical wind tunnel CEH and CEA versus non The drag and lift properties associated with
dimensional heeling force plot hydrodynamic components include that of the:

Keel
It is important to maintain similar CEA characteristics as
Bulb
a sailplan is reefed to prevent large changes in rudder

Rudders
angle. This is the stage were alternative strategies can be

Other appendages such as daggerboards
tested to ensure this is the case and highlight reefed
configurations that are not.
The breakdown of hydrodynamic forces on each element
includes:
3.2 FITTING PROCESS
From analysis of the scaled test data, the following data
Viscous drag
are determined for the range of apparent wind angles
Lift and induced drag
tested, this includes:
Wavemaking drag

CL
Interaction between the elements such as

CD downwash angle and wake effects

CEH at maximum Df
4.2 AERODYNAMIC COMPONENTS

CEA at maximum Df
The aerodynamic components include:

Effective Rig Height (He)

Sails, various different types

Function of change of CEH and CEA with CL

Mast and rigging including windage
This data set is then augmented by interpolating and
These are comprised of aerodynamic forces including:
extrapolating for other apparent angles that were not
tested, to create a continuous set of data that can be used
Viscous drag
by the VPP. As with the hydrodynamic data fits the
Lift and induced drag
aerodynamic data are not simply faired surfaces through
Drag due to separation
the test data points, they are derived by interpolating and
Interaction effects such as bi-plane and
blanketing
4.3 VPP used, whereas they each relate to a 3-D vector and as
The VPP used (WinDesign6) can incorporate different such this is what needs representing within the VPP
force models for each component, such as the Delft modelling, and is defined in terms of boat axis Fx, Fy,
Systematic Yacht Hull Series for the canoe body, ORC Mx and Mz.
aerodynamic sail coefficients and built in models based
on theoretical and experimental regressed models. 6 WORKED EXAMPLE
A VPP is a primary tool in the design decision process,
Sections 2 and 3 have briefly summarised the creation of and therefore being able to use a mixed economy of input
models specific to a particular vessel which can be used sources is very powerful. It is possible to use
directly within a VPP. experimentally derived data and with minor adaptations
to replace, or add new appendages. This can allow the
Discussed here is a 4 DOF approach, whereby the VPP user to build a complete hydrodynamic model around
aims to resolve the force and balance equations: limited data, using built-in internal models and their own
regressions.
F driving force resistance 0
x
The worked example in this presentation aims to
M heeling moment righting moment 0
x highlight the possibilities of changing and replacing
F hydro sideforce aero sideforce 0
y rudder configurations. This has been focussed upon
because the rudder arrangement is the primary
M hydro yaw moment aero yaw moment 0
y
longitudinal balancing control for a superyacht.
Changing rudder angle can produce much larger changes
The WinDesign 6 software uses a modified multi- in CLR than alterations to sail trim can make to the CEA.
dimensional Newton Raphson iteration scheme to resolve Also by controlling CEA with sail trim you inevitably
these equations. lose driving force and efficiency. Sails are at their
optimum at a single CEA position, whereas the hull
It must be borne in mind that each of the parameters resistance is less sensitive to change in CLR, as shown in
listed above are functions of a number of variables. A Figures 1 & 2. Relative to rudder usage, sail sheeting
breakdown of the simplified case of a 2 DOF VPP is and setting changes outside a reasonable restrictive range
detailed in [9]. typically result in large losses in driving force.
For direct input of the externally derived hydrodynamic It is based on actual results derived from tank testing and
or aerodynamic data WinDesign 6 uses a thin plate spline wind tunnel sail testing and this scenario applies equally
(TPS) with radial basis function (RBF) which allows the to CFD developed data, where a designer has
program to apply reliable fits to multivariate, irregular commissioned various simulations. Following this
data. In the majority of testing situations the authors programme of work particular features are modified
endeavour to use systematic test programmes that allow which is not uncommon during a project. In the case of a
the creation of well populated datasets covering as much luxury yacht project, various specifications may change.
of yachts sailing performance envelope in terms of Therefore the previous derived yacht data will need to be
speeds, heel, leeway and rudder angles as possible and modified to suit the new design requirements.
ensure that the data is fair and extended to cover the
entire condition range (as per section 2) prior to use A case study was undertaken using Windesign 6 using
within a VPP. experimentally derived hydrodynamic and aerodynamic
data for a very large multi masted schooner rigged
It is often the case in a design environment that the data superyacht. The tank testing was conducted with a single
available to create a hydrodynamic or aerodynamic centreline semi-skeg rudder.
vessel specific fit is relatively sparse and the data points
are not distributed regularly. This often results from The hydrostatic data such as GZ and displacement for
limited results to base a fit upon which is often due to each option is determined directly from geometry surface
budget restraints as each data point comes with a cost files of the hull and appendages, LCG and VCG
implication or time constraints in the project plan, or definition and applied directly in the VPP.
computational constraints if using CFD. This is the case
when using offwind sail data derived from Direct Eddy The design change simulated using the VPP was
Simulations (DES) [10] where a comprehensive matrix swapping the single rudder for a twin rudder
of test results would be prohibitive. The RBF component arrangement. This example presents the results for both
of the spline fit allows the program to interpolate points the single and twin rudder options and the resulting
and develop a smoothed surface across parameter space changes in rig/sailplan location in order to maintain
that is then used as a hydro or aerodynamic force acceptable helm angles and sailing performance.
component.
The original scaled and fitted tank data incorporates the
For ease of understanding the aero/hydro balance combined effects of the canoe body, stub keel and single
problem parameters such as CLR and CEA have been
centreline semi-skeg rudder, with h limited rrudder 20
variation daata. In order to
t build on thiis, it is manipuulated 45
to allow thhe VPP to usse a virtual ru udder that usees the
Boat speed (knots)

internal ruddder model (inn terms of ind
duced drag annd lift) 16
with a preediction of downwash
d nd angle of attack
an 60
effects. Thhe force modell components are shown in Table
1. 12
Componentt Data Souurce Force Daata
Hull Keeel Tank resuults Resistannce, 75
Rudder SF, Mx & Mz 8
Virtual WD 6 intternal model SF, CLR R and
Rudder Induced Drag
Table 1: S Single Ruddeer Hydrodynaamic Force M Model 4 90
Componentts 4 8 12 16 20 24
8
In this wayy the CLR reelationships and a rudder voolume
8 10
contributionn effects in thhe original daata are retaineed, but
12 105
the virtual rudder anglle can be vaaried by thee VPP 14
solution alggorithm to maintain
m the force and mooment 16
balance witth the sails. 12
2
20
120
This is thenn run through the VPP usin ng the experim
mental
derived aerrodynamic daata. The prediicted rudder aangles 16
across a coomprehensive range of true wind speedds and
angles are presented in Figure 6. This shows thhat the 135
rudder anglles for the stanndard single options
o are wiithin a 20
reasonable range across the matrix of o true wind sspeeds
and angles. 150
24 165
180
Fiigure 7: Polaar performancce plot in thee single ruddder

condittion
Th
he predicted rudder
r angles are presented in Figure 8.
Figure 6: R
Rudder angles for single cen
ntreline rudderr.
It also leadds to respectabble sailing speeds as detailled on

the polar pllot of Figure 7.
7
To model thhe twin ruddeer configuratio

on the tank datta was
re-analysedd to remove the viscous drag of the single
centreline rrudder and the force modeel componentss were Fiigure 8: Rudder angles foor twin ruddeers and originnal
adapted as sshown in Table 2. sailplaan
.
Componentt Dataa Source Force Daata Changing direcctly to the twwin rudder op ption shifts the
t
Hull Keel RRudder Re-aanalysed Tan nk Resistannce, CLR 7% of the LWL aft leading to highly h negatiive
resuults SF, Mx & Mz udder angles in the lightt upwind win
ru nd range. Thhis
Twin V
Virtual WD D 6 intern nal SF, CLR R and reesults in part from the inccreased ruddeer effectiveneess
Rudders moddel Induced Drag duue to twin rudders havinng less influeence from keeel
Table 2: S Single Ruddeer Hydrodynaamic Force M Model doownwash, an ngle and waake that the single ruddder
Componentts exxperiences.
It must bee borne in mind
m that thee negative ruudders viiscous drag off the additionaal rudder overr that of induced
presented iin Figure 8 are
a referenced d to boat centtreline drrag differences.
and that thhe local anglle of incidence will reflecct the
actual ruddder loading whhich is a funcction of leewaay and eWindSpeed(kno
True ots)
downwash effects. 8 10 12 14 16 20
60 0..36 0.44 0.36 0.24 0.18 2
0.12
70 0..33 0.33 0.24 0.20 0.16 0.14
4
Wi d A l (d )
TrueWindAngle(deg)
There is alsso a noticeablle reduction in
n boat speed ddue to 80 0..14 0.28 0.23 0.18 0.20 0.12
2
the hull annd keel takingg a greater prroportion of thhe lift 90 0..29 0.30 0.26 0.22 0.22 0.10
0
which is att the expense of greater ind duced drag. A
As can 100 0..29 0.32 0.29 0.26 0.23 0.13
3
be seen iin Table 3, where speeed differencees are 110 0..24 0.27 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.17
7
significant, negative meaans that the tw
win rudder opttion is 120 0..21 0.24 0.26 0.27 0.26 0.24
4
135 0..17 0.21 0.24 0.26 0.28 0.27
7
slower. Thhis highlightss the importaant of maintaaining
T
150 0..20 0.11 0.13 0.15 0.16 0.19
9
good hull saailplan balancce. 160 0..08 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.12 0.14
4
TrueWindSpeed
d(knots)
8 10 12 1
14 16 20
Table 4: Reducction of boat sspeeds (knots)) between singgle
60 0.95 7
1.67 2.71 1
1.82 1.42 0.98
and tw
win rudders wiith aft shifted sailplan
70 1.80 1.87
7 1.33 1
1.12 1.23 0.68
TrueWindAngle(deg)
80 1.39 1.28
8 1.03 0
0.90 1.01 0.52 Thhis process sh
hows that if thhe twin rudderr option is takken
90 1.04 0.99
9 0.87 0
0.75 0.78 0.41 th re rig is necessary in order to
hen an aft shifft of the entire
100 0.71 0.80
0 0.74 0
0.67 0.62 0.42 maintain
m acceptable sailing rrudder angles
110 0.49 0.53
3 0.55 0
0.53 0.49 0.38
120 0.35 0.39
9 0.43 0
0.43 0.42 0.42
135 0.24 0.26
6 0.29 0
0.32 0.34 0.34 6..1 DESIGN SO OLUTION
150 0.28 0.14
4 0.14 0
0.16 0.18 0.21 Experimental testing offers a very cost effective
e way to
160 0.10 0.14
4 0.09 0
0.10 0.12 0.15 geenerate accuraate force and moment charractersitics forr a
saailing yacht hull,
h capturingg the wavemaaking effects of
Table 3: Reeduction of booat speeds (kn
nots) between single liffting surfacess and the Muunk moment from the cannoe
annd twin rudderrs option boody when yaw wed. The typee of analysis described
d show
ws
hoow this data can be usedd as a baseliine to simulaate
The rudderr areas usedd are consideered reasonabble to allternative configurations, uusing either thhe VPP internnal
maintain addequate manooeuvring quaalities whilst under models,
m or speccific CFD testts on individuaal componentss.
motor and sailing condiitions. The remaining optioons to
adjust balannce are: to shhift the CLR by
b moving thhe keel 7 CONCLUSIONS
or longitudiinal movemennt of the rigs and
a sailplan. Thhis paper has highlighted aan integrated approach usinng
xperimentally derived hydrrodynamic an
ex nd aerodynammic
In light off the speed reduction wiith twin ruddders a daata and a 4 pllus DOF VPPP to evaluate the
t yaw balannce
revised saillplan was modelled with th he CEA shifteed aft. an
nd predict steeady state saiiling rudder angles
a and booat
This bringss the rudder angles into a more accep eptable sp
peed optimisation across a complete ran nge of true winnd
range, sligghtly negativee at the low wer upwind sspeeds sp
peed and anglees for sailing yyachts.
ds as can be s een in
moving to ppositive at thee higher speed
Figure 9. Thhe benefits of this approacch to aid the design proceess
an
nd additional versatility too existing daata sources has h
beeen outlined. It also addressses particularr issues relatinng
to
o the study of large sailing yyachts.
REFERENCE
R ES
1.. Keuning, J.AA., Vermeuleen, K.J., ‘On the balance of
laarge sailing yachts’,
y 17th H
HISWA Intl Symp
S on”Yaccht
Design
D and Yaccht Constructiion”, 2002.
2.. Claughton, A.R.

A et al., ‘H Hull-sailplan balance,
b “Leaad”
or the 21st Ceentury’, 22nd H
fo HISWA Intl Symp
S on”Yaccht
Design
D and Yaccht Constructiion”, 2012.
Figure 9: R
Rudder angles for twin ruddeers with sailpllan aft 3.. Campbell, I.M.C. Claughton, A.R.,, ‘The
in
nterpretation of
o results from o 12m yachts’,
m tank tests on
As can be seen in Tabble 4 the rig and sailplann shift 8tht Chesapeakee Sailing Yachht Symp, 1987..
aftward ressults in signifficant less booat speed reduuction
when comppared to the single
s rudder option. This speed 4.. Claughton, A.R., Welliccome, J.F., Shenoi,
S R.A.,, ,
difference is now prim marily related
d to the addiitional ‘S
Sailing Yacht Design: Theoory’, 1998.
5. Claughton, A.R., Campbell, I.M.C., ‘Wind tunnel
testing of sailing yacht rigs’, 13th HISWA Intl Symp
on”Yacht Design and Yacht Construction”, 1994.
6. Campbell, I.MC., ‘The performance of offwind sails

obtained from wind tunnel tests’, Intl Conf on”The
Modern Yacht”, 1998.
7. Le Pelley, D., Richards, P., ‘Effective wind tunnel

testing of yachts sails using a real-time velocity
prediction program’, 20th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht
Symp, 2011.
8. Offshore Racing Congress ‘VPP Documentation’

2012.
9. Oliver, J.C., Claughton, ‘Development of a multi-

functional velocity prediction program (VPP) for sailing
yachts’, RINA CADAP, 1995.
10. Wright, A.M., Claughton, A.R., Paton, J., Lewis, R.,

‘Off-wind sail performance prediction and optimisation’,
Innovsail, 2010.
AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
M. Prince holds the current position of Principal

Research Engineer at Wolfson Unit M.T.I.A.. He is a
consultant engineer/naval architect and his specialist
areas of interest involve sailing yacht performance
evaluation; this in part has involved conducting,
analysing and managing a range of towing tank test and
wind tunnel projects ranging from small cruising boats
up to America’s Cup R&D programmes.
A.R. Claughton holds the current position of Director of

Enterprise at Wolfson Unit M.T.I.A.. He is a consultant
engineer/naval architect and his specialists areas include
experimental aero and hydrodynamics of sailing vessels
and racing yachts, and the development of velocity
prediction software. His previous experience includes
Technical Director of the 2007 Emirates Team New
Zealand America’s Cup Challenge and in 2008 he was
awarded the Royal Institution of Naval Architects Small
Craft Group Medal for contributions to yacht science.
The Wolfson Unit was awarded the RINA Small Craft

Medal in 2013 for its long standing service to the small
craft industry.
SAILING SITE INVESTIGATION THROUGH CFD MODELLING OF

MICROMETEOROLOGY
M. Le Guellec, Fluidyn FRANCE, France, malo.leguellec@fluidyn.com
Y.Amice, Département Météorologie - Institut de Recherche de l’École Navale, France, yann.amice@gmail.com;
To have a prior accurate knowledge of the local wind currents on a water body is of crucial importance for the
performance of the sailing team. In the recent years, Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) has proven itself a
powerful tool in atmospheric modelling. By solving the Navier-Stokes equations and with correct description of
the atmospheric boundary layer and turbulence at the domain boundaries, the local influences of the shore
topography and the obstacles on the wind flows can be investigated in detail. Two examples of the use of CFD
(Fluidyn PANWIND software) are presented here. The first one shows the coastal wind analysis of 2012
Olympic sailing site of Weymouth, UK. The local wind effects due to the harbour and hill have been
determined and compared to observations of wind velocity and direction for several wind conditions. The
second example required to model the wind over the training base of the French Sailing Team in Brest, France.
This landlocked bay, surrounded by two steep hills and linked to the Atlantic Ocean by a strait, emphasizes the
need for a CFD simulation of the wind which provided the patterns of wind around the racing area compared
with empirical observations.
NOMENCLATURE ζ Monin-Obukhov similarity variable = z/L,

dimensionless
C1 k-ε turbulence model constant κ Von Karman constant = 0.41, dimensionless
C2 k-ε turbulence model constant θ potential temperature (K)
CS dimensionless turbulence production factor θ* temperature scale
CE dimensionless turbulence viscosity constant σh turbulent Prandtl number, dimensionless
for the k-ε model σk dimensionless turbulence model constant for the
Cp specific heat of air (J g-1 K-1) k equation
Fg/p force due to: (g) gravitational acceleration, (p) σε dimensionless turbulence model constant for the
interaction with droplets/particles (N m-2) ε equation
g gravitational acceleration (9.8 m s-2) Ψ1/2(ς) similarity profiles
G turbulence production rate by shear = σ∇u (m2 νt turbulent viscosity (m−1 s−1)
s-3)
hm specific enthalpy of species m (J kg-1)
I specific internal energy (J kg-1)
J heat flux vector (W m-2)
k turbulent kinetic energy per unit mass (m2 s-2)
kc thermal conductivity (W m-1 K-1)
L Monin-Obukhov turbulent length scale (m)
Qh rate of specific internal energy gain due to (h)
surface energy budget (J kg-1 s-1)
Ri Richardson number, dimensionless
t time since the start of the release (s)
T temperature (K)
u fluid velocity (m s-1)
u* surface friction velocity (m s-1)
v wind speed (m s-1)
Wp Turbulence production due to interaction with
particles (m2 s-3)
z height (m)
z0 ground roughness length (m)
Greek letters

density of air
μ primary (shear) viscosity of fluid (kg m−1 s−1)
λ secondary (bulk) viscosity of fluid (kg m−1 s−1)
σ Newtonian viscous stress tensor (N m-2)
ε dissipation of turbulent kinetic energy (m2 s-3)

- 223 -
1 INTRODUCTION
Accurate wind field description (wind speed, wind

direction and turbulence) plays an important role for
sailing competitions. The proper wind speed range for
sailing is between 2.5-18 m/s. Traditional in-situ
measurement data obtained are usually insufficient to
characterise fully the flow, as data time series are too
short, and only defined at a specific locations.
Furthermore the interpolation wind flow models using
mass consistent techniques which extrapolate the data
from the point measurements (meteorological stations)
do not provide the required accuracy over the entire
area of interest.
The atmospheric circulation in the lower layers is

particularly dependent on local effects due to complex
Figure 1: Schematic map for sailing events in
terrain. The topography, the transition zones between
Weymouth
land and sea (estuaries, bays,…), the different
roughness surface (urban areas, forests…), contribute to
modify large scale flows and these influences have to
be evaluated in details.
The complex topography in coastal area emphasizes the
need for a complete 3D CFD simulation of the wind.
The wind flow modelling provides the patterns of wind
speed and wind directions around the racing area.
In many wind studies, the objective is to analyse the sea

breeze effect based on the statistics of synoptic and
local weather station measurements. This paper mainly
focuses on the local wind characteristics with a
predefined wind boundary condition assumed constant
and considering topographical and roughness effect.
Two different interesting areas have been studied in the
frame of this project. Figure 2: Area of interests in Brest roadstead
Weymouth, a coastal city in Southern UK hosted the

2WIND FLOW MODELING
2012 Olympic Sailing Events in August. The sailing
competition spots are shown in Figure 1.
2.1 FLUIDYN-PANWIND
Weymouth is a city surrounded by sea and hills. In the
south of the city, i.e., in the south-east of the sailing
Fluidyn-PANWIND is a module of fluidyn-PANACHE
area, there is a hilly island named Portland (130m). The
family which allows a quick and accurate simulation of
topography is complex and consequently the local wind
wind flows around buildings, hills at local or medium
flow can be very difficult to comprehend.
large scale by taking into account all kinds of obstacles,
the topography, the influence of terrain and vegetation,
The second sailing area is located in the well-known
the local meteorological conditions. The software
roadstead (bay) of Brest, in Finistère department of
solves the Navier-Stokes equations (Mass, energy and
France (see Figure 2). It is required to identify the
momentum conservation) with a finite volume method
characteristic of this water body into details to fully
on structured or unstructured mesh.
assess the impact of the surrounding topography.
In this code the mass conservation equation for total
Indeed, it is a landlocked bay surrounded by two very
fluid density is expressed as
steep hills (50 to 80 m) and linked to the Atlantic Ocean
by a strait about 2 km wide with a 240° orientation.
The wind modelling focuses here on two mains areas:
the Quelern Peninsula (2nd sub-domain) and the Cape where is the gradient of the considered quantity.
of Armorique (3rd sub-domain) The momentum conservation equation for the fluid
mixture is

224
wU௨ the sailing area is 25 m (see figure 3) resulting in a total

൅ xሾU‫ݑݑ‬ ൅ Vሿ ൌ ܲ ൅ ‫ܨ‬௦ ൅ ‫ܨ‬௚ ൅ ‫ܨ‬௣
w௧ of 2 million cells. Vertical mesh gets a 2m resolution
from ground level to 12m of altitude. The vertical mesh
where V is Newtonian viscous stress tensor (V=
is then coarser till until 200 m high.
μ[∇u+(∇u)T]+λ(∇•u)i,Pǡ O = first and second
coefficients of viscosity, λ = -2/3μ; T = matrix A large main domain of 43km by 32km was used for
transpose; i = unit dyadic - product of vectors). Brest’s Roadstead case. A first nested domain of 30
The energy conservation equation is: km*28 km has been defined. Two smaller embedded
domains with an area around 80 km² were used in order
wU‫ܫ‬
൅ xሾU‫ ܫݑ‬൅ ‫ܬ‬ሿ ൌ x‫ ݑ‬൅ UH ൅ ܳ௛ to evaluate accurately the wind flows as shown in figure
w‫ݐ‬ 2.The topography was extracted from The NASA
Shuttle Radar Topographic Mission (SRTM) who has
Where ‫ ܫ‬is the specific internal energy, ‫ ܬ‬is the heat flux provided digital elevation data (DEMs) for over 80% of
= kc∇.T + ρ¦[hm∇(ρm/ρ)], ܳ௛ is the rate of specific the globe. The SRTM data is available as 3 arc second
internal energy gain due surface energy budget. (approx. 90m resolution) Digital Elevation Model.
The finest cell size of the unstructured mesh in the two
nested domains is 30m and the averaged size dimension
2.2 GEOMETRY AND MESH
in the sailing area is 50m resulting in a 2.3 million cells.
Vertical mesh gets a 3m resolution from ground level to
15m of altitude. The vertical mesh is then coarser until
200 m high.
2.3 TURBULENCE MODEL, BOUNDARY AND

INITIAL CONDITIONS
The standard k-ε model has been used throughout the

simulations.
The k-ε model is a two-equation linear eddy viscosity
model. The PANACHE implementation of this model is
derived from the standard high-Re form with
corrections for buoyancy and compressibility. It solves
the transport equations for turbulent kinetic energy, k,
and its dissipation rate, ε. The incompressible versions
of the equations are:
∂k § ν ·
(a) + ∇ ⋅ ( Uk ) = ∇ ⋅ ¨ν l + t ¸ ∇k + Pk + Pb − ε
∂t © σk ¹
∂ε § ν · ε
+ ∇ ⋅ (Uε ) = ∇ ⋅ ¨ν l + t ¸ ∇ε + ¬ªCε 1 ( Pk + Cb Pb ) − Cε 2ε ¼º
∂t © σ ε ¹ k
where, Pk=ν t γ&: ∇U , the mechanical production rate

of k
gg∇T
Pb=ν t β , the buoyancy production rate
(b) σh
Figure 3: Weymouth unstructured mesh at ground level of k
((a) full domain (b) nested domain) σk= Prandtl number for turbulent diffusion of k
σε= Prandtl number for turbulent diffusion of ε
For Weymouth case, the topography of the site was μt= turbulent eddy diffusivity
collected from Landform Profile Plus data on a global Cs1,Cs2=k-ε turbulence model dimensionless
domain of 24 km * 25 km. This data has a 15–25 constants
centimetre root mean square error (RMSE) accuracy
and a grid resolution of 2 metres to 10 meters - The eddy diffusivity is computed using:
sufficiently detailed to represent key terrain ݇ଶ
Q ୲ ൌ ୉ ‫ כ‬
features. The harbour and jetties were modelled in finer H
details in an embedded domain of dimensions 5 km *
10 km. The finest cell size of the unstructured mesh in
the harbour is 12 m and the averaged size dimension in

225
Ambient mean wind speed and air temperature profiles

are specified within the model domain and are
represented by logarithmic functions, such that:
௨‫כ‬ ௭
‫ݒ‬ሺ‫ݖ‬ሻ ൌ ሾ݈݊ሺ ሻ<ଵ ሺ9ሻሿ
N ௭೚
T‫כ‬ ௭
Tሺ‫ݖ‬ሻ ൌ V௛ N
ሾ݈݊ሺ ሻ<ଶ ሺ9ሻሿ
௭೚
Where θ* = temperature scale; <ଵ ሺ9ሻ and <ଶ ሺ9ሻ =

similarity profile.
The surface friction velocity, ‫ כݑ‬, the temperature scale
Figure 4: The North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) is
θ*, and the Monin-Obukhov length, L are related by: L
a climatic phenomenon in the North Atlantic Ocean - L
= u*2T / (g κθ*)and θ* = Qh / (ρCp u*).
: Low pressure area in Iceland - H: High pressure area
The micrometeorological parameters ‫ כݑ‬, θ*, and L are in Azores and Northern Africa
evaluated for different atmospheric stability classes.
They have been evaluated for neutral conditions.
3.1.2. Local effect of terrain on the wind flows
In this study, the roughness length has been chosen
equal to 0.001m (typical of water body). The roughness The results of the modelling focus on the wind direction
length for the land has been chosen equal to 0.4m. modification due to the topography around the sailing
area.
2.4 SIMULATION AND SOLVER PARAMETERS The wind directions are SW (225°) and E (90°) and the
simulations were done for a wind speed of 10 m/s at a
In the frame of this study, the solver is a pressure-based height of 10m for both directions.
fully implicit segregated method on unstructured In Figure 5, the white colour arrows and the pink colour
meshes. It is well suited for flows that are steady or contours represent a deviation greater than +15° from
quasi-unsteady (slowly changing). the mean direction and the black colour arrows and the
It solves all governing equations separately. It uses an blue colour contours indicate a deviation greater than -
iterative procedure for both steady state and transient 15°. All the views are voluntarily schematic for an easy
cases. SIMPLE scheme is used for pressure understanding of the wind fields in the area by non-
computation. It uses a formulation valid for flows at all specialist people.
speeds and for any thermodynamic model.

3 RESULTS
3.1 BREST ROADSTEAD CASE ANALYSIS
3.1.1. Climatology
The dominant flux in all seasons comes from west to

west-southwest even if a few nuances exist depending
on the season. The most significant factor is the south
pathway of the low pressure zone. During winter,
stronger west or southwest winds are usually observed
and frequent disturbances which impact the Atlantic
coast.
During the summer, this scheme remains relevant but
strengthening anti-cyclonic depression requires a more
northern flow, which allows the Atlantic coast to
sample light winds and a more conventional summer
time.
The North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) is
a climatic phenomenon in the North Atlantic Ocean of Figure 5: Wind deviation in case of SW conditions
fluctuations in the difference of atmospheric pressure at
sea level between the Icelandic low and the Azores high The wind flow is channelled through the axis of the
(see Figure 4). Through east-west oscillation motions of strait, except where a little deviation is observed near
the Icelandic low and the Azores high, it controls the the tip of Spanish peninsula Quernel. The flow is
strength and direction of westerly winds across the divided in a West-Southwest and a South-Southwest
North Atlantic. part when reaching the peninsula of Plougastel (see
figure 6).

226
Figure 6: Wind direction contours for a wind condition Figure 8: Wind direction contours for a wind condition
225° - 10 m/s (Google Earth view) –In blue color the 90° - 10 m/s on (Google Earth view) - In blue color the
negative deviation and in red color the positive negative deviation and in red color the positive
deviation deviation
The results for the E condition (see Figures 7 and 8)
show that the wind takes a North-East direction in the
area between Brest and the peninsula of Plougastel. The
effect of the tip of Armorique gives a southeast
direction. In this area, the wind speed increases (see
figure 9).
In the strait, the wind takes a stable North-East
direction. This is a classical phenomenon observed by
the sailors in the area.
Figure 9: Wind speed contours at surface level for 90° -

10 m/s – In red colour, the wind speed in higher then 10
m/s and in blue color, the wind speed in lower than 4
m/s
3.2. WEYMOUTH CASE ANALYSIS
Figure 7: Wind deviation in case of E conditions The results of the modelling focus on the wind direction
modification due to the topography around the sailing
area.
The wind directions are WSW (240° to 270°).
The wind keeps its initial direction (boundary
conditions) in the middle of the harbour (zone 1 in
figure 1) and in the middle of the bay (zone 6).
The wind velocity for the WSW direction remains high
in most of the zone 1. Nevertheless, the velocity fields
show low wind speed in the North of the zone 1 if the
wind direction is more than 260°.
In the zone 2 (figure 1), there is a predominant
influence of coastal landforms. The sailing in

227
downwind area of hilly and disparate coast can be Although no quantitative results were yet available on
exposed to various effects within a few degrees of the these two sites, the qualitative assessment show a good
wind direction. agreement between the numerically predicted wind
flows and the sailing team experience on the water.
Further investigations will be carried out in order to
compare measurements of the wind speed and direction.
REFERENCES
1. GRYNING S.-E., BATCHVAROVA E.,

BRUMMER B., JØRGENSEN H., and LARSEN
S., ‘On the extension of the wind profile over
homogeneous terrain beyond the surface layer’,
Boundary-Layer Meteorol., 124, pp251–268, 2007.
2. PEÑA A., ‘Sensing the wind profile’, Ph.D. Thesis,
University of Copenhagen, March 2009.
3. PEÑA A., GRYNING S.-E., ‘Extending the wind
profile much higher than the surface layer’,
European Wind Energy Conference and Exhibition
(EWEC), Marseille, France 16 - 19 March 2009.
4. BURCHARD H., ‘Applied Turbulence Modelling
Figure 10: Wind deviation in case of WSW conditions in marine Waters’, Springer, 2002.
5. BAUMERT H. Z. and PETERS H., ‘Second-
moment closures and length scales for weakly
stratified turbulent shear flows’, J. Geophys. Res.,
105 (C3), pp 6453-6468, 2000.
6. HAN J., ARYA S.P., SHEN S., and LIN Y-L.: An
‘Estimation of Turbulent Kinetic Energy and
Energy Dissipation Rate Based on Atmospheric
Boundary Layer Similarity Theory’, NASA/CR-
2000-210298, June 2000.
7. PETERS H. and BAUMERT H. Z., ‘Validating a
turbulence closure against estuarine microstructure
measurements’, Ocean Modelling, 19, pp183–203,
Figure 11: Wind direction or a 260° - 10 m/s wind 2007.
condition (Google Earth view) - In blue color the 8. DUYNKERKE P.G., ‘Application of the k-ε
negative deviation and in red color the positive turbulence closure model to the neutral and stable
deviation atmospheric boundary layer’, J. Atmos. Sci., 45(5),
pp865-880, 1988.
6 CONCLUSIONS AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
In order to demonstrate the usefulness of CFD M. Le Guellec holds the current position of Project
modelling for the purpose of wind predictions for Engineer at FLUIDYN FRANCE. He is responsible for
sailing teams, two examples of the use of CFD through environment impact studies and consequence
Fluidyn PANWIND dedicated software have been assessment studies. His previous experience includes
presented here. The first one shows the coastal wind the wind field modelling at local scale in complex urban
analysis of 2012 Olympic sailing site of Weymouth, district for pedestrian comfort assessment and wind
UK. The local wind effects due to the harbour and hill energy assessment in hilly region.
have been determined and compared to observations of
wind velocity and direction for several wind conditions. Y. Amice holds the current position of Chief Petty
The second example modelled the wind over the Weather, seconded by the Navy with the French Sailing
training base of the French Sailing Team in Brest, Federation.
France. This landlocked bay surrounded by two steep
hills and linked to the Atlantic Ocean by a strait.
emphasizes the need for a CFD simulation of the wind.
This simulation provided the patterns of wind around
the racing area which are compared with empirical
observations.

228
OPTIMAL YACHT ROUTING TACTICS

F. Tagliaferri, Yacht and Superyacht Research Group, School of Marine Science and Technology,
Newcastle University, UK, f.tagliaferri@ncl.ac.uk (corresponding author)
A.B. Philpott, Yacht Research Unit, The University of Auckland, Auckland, NZ,
a.philpott@auckland.ac.nz
I.M. Viola, Yacht and Superyacht Research Group, School of Marine Science and Technology,
Newcastle University, UK, ignazio.viola@ncl.ac.uk
R.G.J. Flay, Yacht Research Unit, The University of Auckland, Auckland, NZ, r.flay@auckland.ac.nz
When the future wind direction is uncertain, the tactical decisions of a yacht skipper involve a
stochastic routing problem. The objective of this problem is to maximise the probability of
reaching the next mark ahead of all the other competitors. This paper describes a system that
models this problem. The tidal current at any location is assumed to be predictable, while the wind
forecast is based on current observations. Boat performance in different wind conditions is defined
by the output of a velocity prediction program, and we assume a known speed loss for tacking and
gybing. The resulting computer program can be used during a yacht race to choose the optimum
course, or it can be used for design purposes to simulate yacht races between different design
candidates. As an example of application, we compare strategies that minimise the average time to
sail the leg, as opposed to those that maximise the probability of winning, and show how optimal
routing strategies are different for leading and trailing boats.
NOMENCLATURE 1. INTRODUCTION
Scalars Finding a minimum cost route on a set of points is a

݀ Distance between two competitors shortest path problem (SPP) [1]. Specifically the aim is
‫ܦ‬ሺ‫ݏ‬ሻ Delay in finishing under strategy ‫ݏ‬ to find a path between two vertices of a graph such that
versus the perfect strategy the sum of its constituent edges, often representing a
݅௞ Values that a discrete-time stochastic process cost, is minimised. When cost depends on random
can assume at the ݇th time step quantities it becomes a stochastic problem, and the
ܵሺ‫ݏ‬ሻ Time to finish under the strategy ‫ݏ‬ objective is to minimise expected costs (where costs
ܶ Time to finish under the perfect strategy include time) [2].
ܺ௞ Discrete-time stochastic process,
e.g. wind direction at the ݇th time step Many problems fall into the category of SPP and
ܻ௞ ݇th random variable uniform in (0,1) involve routing for emergency response (both civil [3]
and military [4]) and applications in logistics [5] and
Matrices transport [6].
ࡹ௞ǡ௟ Policy matrix at the cross-section k
on the tack ݈, where ݈ is starboard or port When minimising expected costs there is always a risk
ࡼ Transition matrix factor that must be taken into account. Is the best route
the one that allows the average shortest time with a
Set of matrices small probability for a disaster or the one that has a
‫ݏ‬ Strategy, i.e. set of policy matrices higher average time but without the risk for disasters, or
even the one with an even higher average time but with
Operators a positive (even if small) probability of a particularly
ॱ(A) Expected value of (A) high gain?
Զ(A|B) Probability density function
of A conditioned on B Decisions taken by a sailor during a race can be seen as
a stochastic SPP. The speed of a sailing boat depends
Abbreviations on the wind speed and on the angle between boat
BS Boat speed heading and wind direction. It is usually expressed as a
RMP Race modelling program polar diagram like the one shown in Figure 1. The
SPP Shortest path problem numbers around the semicircle represent different true
VMG Velocity made good wind angles, while the radial ones represent the boat
speed. The red line correspond to the plot of boat speed
corresponding for a particular true wind speed. While

- 231 -
no direct course is possible straight into the wind, it is behaving at another point, and to foresee how it will
possible to sail upwind with an angle between wind behave once that point is reached. Some sailors would
direction and sailed course which is usually between prefer to be conservative and stay safely at the centre of
30° and 50°. Sailing closer to the wind direction (lower the course, or in general close to the competitor, while
angle) makes the course shorter, but when sailing at others might prefer to take the risk and explore the
higher angles a boat is faster. The compromise is given corners hoping for a favourable wind shift.
using the concept of velocity made good (VMG), which
is the maximum velocity into the wind direction and is
usually around 40°- 45° (as in this example).
In a polar diagram like the one in Figure 1, it is possible

to find the maximum VMG for a given wind speed by
finding the intersection between the polar
corresponding to the wind speed and the line
perpendicular to the upwind direction.
Figure 1. Example of a polar diagram (velocities in m/s

and angles in deg).
For this reason the common route towards an upwind

mark, or in general towards the direction from which
the wind blows, is a zigzag route. Such a route requires
changes of direction which are called tacks. When
manoeuvring for a tack, a boat points for a few seconds
directly into the wind, therefore causing a temporarily
decrease in boat speed. If the wind is constant during
the race and all over the racing area, trying to do the
minimum number of tacks is the best choice. Figure Figure 2. Example of upwind routes with constant wind
1(a) shows two possible routes, and the one on the left (a) and with a consistent left wind shift (b)
is the faster because it involves just one tack. However,
this situation is very unlikely, and wind can change in One way to compute an exact solution to the problem
many different ways. Figure 2(b) shows a situation in of finding the optimum route between two points is an
which the wind shifts constantly towards the left. The exhaustive search which is computationally impossible.
best choice in this case is to go to the left of the course, In fact, even assuming that a boat travels always at its
and then tack and point towards the mark, while maximum VMG, there are 2n possible routes, where n
beginning a race going to the right, after what can seem is the number of possible tacks. Considering that it is
an initial advantage, results in being the wrong choice. virtually possible to tack at every point of the race this
is a continuum of possibilities, and for each one we
In real races the evolution of the wind can be much have to compute the actual racing time.
more complicated than this example, with temporary
shifts or gusts that a sailor should take advantage of. Dynamic Programming is a popular way of overcoming
While racing it can be difficult to know how the wind is this problem. This technique divides the problem into

- 232 -
smaller sub-problems that are solved in stages. ܲ௜௝ ൌ Զሺܺ௞ ൌ ݆ȁܺ௞ିଵ ൌ ݅ሻ

Moreover, instead of finding a solution for a single
specific wind pattern, it allows computing a solution Interested readers can find more details on Markov
according to a certain probability distribution. We processes in Norris [9].
model the wind using a Markov process, where the
state of the wind at a point depends on the state at the For tactical purposes we are interested in changes in
previous point. In addition to this, we want to include wind direction that significantly affect the racing time.
the attitude towards risk in order to consider more We therefore define the state space to be െͶͷιǡ െͶͲιǡ
realistic behaviour of a sailor during a race. ǥ ǡ Ͳιǡ ൅ͷιǡ ǥ ǡ ൅Ͷͷι, where Ͳι represents the wind
direction at which the upwind mark is set, and the other
The risk that a skipper is willing to take is usually states represent shifts of േͷι from that direction. In
influenced by his position with respect to the opponent. order to obtain a realistic transition matrix we
A common behaviour pattern is to be conservative, or considered a time series of wind measurements from a
risk averse, when in a leading position, while being risk weather station installed on the Newcastle University
seeking when losing. When looking for a solution for research vessel, and then built the matrix P using a
our SPP, we want to also take the risk factor into maximum likelihood estimator. As we use for the
account. model a grid with 15m resolution in the upwind
We developed a race modelling program (RMP) for direction and the decision of tacking is taken every time
simulating races between two boats that can be used, the boat crosses the grid line in the ‫ݕ‬direction, the
for instance, to assess different designs, or as in our Markov model is built assuming a time step of three
case, to compare different tactical decisions. seconds. The wind direction signal was sampled every
The first RMP was developed in 1987 for the three seconds, and the corresponding wind directions
America’s Cup syndicate Stars and Stripes and is were placed in bins of amplitude ͷι. The number of
described in [8]. Since then, RMP have been used jumps from bin ݅ to bin ݆ divided by the total number of
mainly in America’s Cup applications, and mostly to jumps out of bin ݅ corresponds to the value ܲ௜௝ in the
compare different designs. In our case as we are transition matrix. We consider an upwind leg of 6000m
interested in comparing tactical choices, we model two (corresponding to 3.24 nautical miles, which is a
identical boats (i.e. they have the same polar diagram). realistic length for the 2013 America’s Cup course),
divided by 400 lines perpendicular to the upwind
2. METHOD direction. We refer to those lines as “cross sections”.
Each one of those lines is divided in a linear grid of 19
2.1 MARKOV MODEL FOR THE WIND AND segments. It should be noted that the resolution of ͷι
SOLUTION METHOD for the wind shifts and ͳͷሺ͸ͲͲͲȀͶͲͲሻ for the
racecourse can be increased by employing more
A Markov process is a stochastic process used to powerful computational resources. Figure 3 shows a
describe the evolution of a dynamic system in which schematic diagram of the course with the axis
the state at the discrete time ݇ depends on the state of orientation that is used throughout this paper.
the system at time ݇ െ ͳ. ǡ
ǦǦ The solution method is based on the algorithms
ܺ௞ ǡ described by Philpott and Mason [7] and Philpott. [10].
ܺ௞ ǡ It is implemented in a highly modular code written in
ǡ Matlab with some specific subroutines in C. This
ܺ௞ ǣ program computes the policy that gives the minimum
expected time for the completion of the leg of the race.
Զሺܺ௞ ൌ ݅௞ ȁሼܺ௞ିଵ ൌ ݅௞ିଵ ǡ ܺ௞ିଶ ൌ ݅௞ିଵ ǥ ܺ଴ ൌ ݅଴ ሽሻ The output of the algorithm is a policy, expressed as a
ൌ Զሺܺ௞ ൌ ݅௞ ȁܺ௞ିଵ ൌ ݅௞ିଵ ሻ set of 19x19 matrices, ࡹଵǡ௦ ǡ ࡹଶǡ௦ ǡ ǥ ǡ ࡹସ଴଴ǡ௦ ǡ ࡹଵǡ௣ ǡ
ǥ ǡ ࡹସ଴଴ǡ௣ one for each of the cross sections on the
݇ ൐ Ͳǡ݅௞ Ǥ course. The element ‫ܯ‬௜௝௞ǡ௟ represents the optimum angle

at which the yacht should sail when it reaches the ݇ ௧௛
ǡ
cross section, if it is on the ݅ ௧௛ sub-segment of the cross
Ǣ
section, and observing a wind in state ݆. The index ݈ can
ǲǳ
assume the value ‫ ݌‬or ‫ݏ‬, corresponding respectively to
Ǥ
a port or starboard tack. If a boat is on a port tack it

means that its windward side is the left side, while it is
For a system with a finite number of states the
on a starboard tack if the windward side is on the right
stochastic process is uniquely defined with an initial
one.
distribution for ܺ଴ and a transition matrix ࡼ. The
matrix elements ܲ௜௝ represent the probability that the
system at time step ݇ is in state ݆conditioned on the
fact that it was in state ݅ at the previous time step ݇ െ ͳ:

- 233 -
of equation ‫ ݕ‬ൌ ͳͷ݇ǡ ݇ ൌ ͳǡ ǥ ǡͶͲͲ determine the

positions at which the decision is taken.
Wind patterns are generated according to the Markov

y model on states ݅ ൌ ͳǡʹǡ ǥ ͳͻǤ Using a standard
procedure for simulating Markov processes we set
ܺ଴ ൌ ͳ. We then generate a series of random variables
ܻ௞ with uniform distribution in the interval ሺͲǡͳሻ using
6000m
a random number generator.
Given ܺ௞ ൌ ݅ we set ܺ௞ାଵ ൌ ݆ if both the following

conditions are satisfied
௝ିଵ
15m
‫ۓ‬෍ ܲ௜௡ ൏ ܻ௞ାଵ

௡ୀଵ
௝
‫۔‬
෍ ܲ ൒ ܻ௞ାଵ
X ‫ ە‬௡ୀଵ ௜௡
Figure 3. Schematic representation of the course. The y The course of the sailing boat starts from the point
axis is oriented in the upwind direction, and the course (0,0), on a starboard tack. It follows a course
ଵǡ௦
is divided into 400 stripes by lines at 15m spacing. corresponding to the angle ‫ܯ‬ଵ଴ǡ௑ బ
, until the second
cross section is reached. The time needed to go from a
The computation of the optimum angles begins from position to the next is computed according to a polar
the top line and then proceeds iteratively with a diagram like the one shown in Figure 1.
backward procedure according to the description by
Philpott and Mason [7]. 2.4 MODEL VALIDATION
2.2 RISK MODELLING In order to assess the effectiveness of the model in
finding an optimum solution, we use the algorithm to
We modify the transition probabilities used to compute generate a policy by giving as input to the software the
the solution in order to have conservative or risk actual wind realisation. The expected values are then
seeking decisions. In a conservative case we want to computed at each step by assigning a probability of one
model the behaviour of a boat skipper who is winning. to the actual realisation. In this way we simulate the
She will try to behave safely, trying to stay ahead and behaviour of the perfect tactician, who takes her
to minimise her losses in bad wind outcomes. A decision knowing exactly how the wind is going to
probabilistic interpretation of this attitude is to assume behave. In a real situation this is obviously not possible,
that at the next step the wind will transition to a bad but assuming that a very experienced sailor is able to
state with a higher probability than we have estimated fairly accurately predict what is going to happen in a
from the data. In other words the skipper is pessimistic race according to her experience, we want to show that
about the next transition. We implement this by adding our model still allows a good result against this ideal
a transformation in the solver, post multiplying the sailor.
ͳͻ ൈ ͳͻ transition matrix ࡼ by another ͳͻ ൈ ͳͻ matrix
which redistributes the probabilities. The resulting 3. SIMULATION RESULTS
matrix has to be normalised in order to represent again
a probability distribution. Figure 4 shows a graphical Figure 5 shows a graphical representation of the
representation of an example of transformation that can transition matrix for the Markov model obtained with
be applied to a transition matrix in order to obtain a the maximum likelihood estimator as described in the
more decentred distribution. With a notation that is previous section. It can be noticed that the diagonal is
used throughout this paper, we use a grey scale to dominant, meaning that, in general, if the wind is in
represent values in the interval ሾͲǡͳሿ where white state ݅, the most probable state for the next step is to
represents Ͳand black represents ͳ. The effect of this remain in state ݅. Moreover, when the wind has
transformation on the transition matrix is to increase the deviated from the mean, the event of a shift back
volatility of the wind process. towards the mean value is more likely than one in the
same direction.
2.3 RACE SIMULATIONS
The wind for the simulations was generated as
A race simulator based on a simple SPP was developed described in the previous section. When Markov chains
in order to compare different policies. The y-axis is are used, it is common practice to add a noise
oriented in the upwind direction, positive upwind. The component to the generated output in order to avoid a
starting position of a single boat is the origin. The lines step signal. However as in our case we are interested

- 234 -
only in wind shifts of at least ͷǏ, we clustered the

measured wind in steps of ͷǏ, and we found that the
behaviour of the simulated wind signal, achieved with
no additional noise component, was fairly similar to the
original one, as can be seen in Figure 6, with close
values of mean and variance on different sub-intervals.
A wind history of 400 values was generated for each of
the 4000 simulated races.
Figure 7 shows a histogram of the time needed by a

yacht following the policy generated to minimise the
expected time of arrival, according to the wind
distribution previously modelled. The distribution is
asymmetric, and this is due to the fact that even with a Figure 5. Representation of the transition matrix P
very favourable evolution of the wind there is a obtained for the wind model.
minimum time needed to complete the course. On the
Wind deviation from mean [deg]

other hand, even with a policy which is effective in the 40
Artificial wind
majority of the cases, it is possible to be very “unlucky” Recorded wind
and need a much higher time. 20
0
This policy was generated according to the wind
distribution pictured in Figure 4. This policy was then -20
compared with another one, generated according to a
new transition matrix obtained from a transformation of -40
the previous one. As mentioned in the previous 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
paragraph, in order to model the attitude of a sailor who Time [min]
is not in a winning position, we use a transformation

aimed at giving a higher volatility to the wind process, Figure 6. Sixty-minute example of artificially generated
therefore giving a higher probability to unlikely future wind and sixty-minute example of recorded wind.
wind directions.
1500
Simulations were carried out in order to verify the
Number of races
differences between a risk-neutral policy that minimises 1000

expected arrival time at the top mark, and a policy
generated assuming a more volatile wind evolution.
500
Results showed that following this second policy gives
an overall worse performance with respect to the risk-
neutral one. The risk neutral policy led to a win in ͺͲΨ 0
2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
of the cases with an average difference of ͻʹs. Those Time (s)
values were obtained by simulating races independently
for each boat, but using the same ͶͲͲͲwind patterns Figure 7. Distribution of time of arrival needed by a
for all of them. These results confirmed the optimality boat following the optimum policy.
of the policy previously computed.
Figure 4. Example of a transformation used to modify Figure 8. Transition matrix P with increased volatility
the transition probability of the Markov model.

- 235 -
400 of the future behaviour of the wind. In this case we

simulated 1000 races. Obviously the boat with perfect
300
knowledge of the wind scenario always wins and the
differences in arrival time are always positive. The
Number of races
sample average difference in time of arrival is 133s for

200
boat A while for boat B the sample average difference
is 114s. The difference is not significant because of
100 high variance and low sample size. Indeed we show in
the appendix that the expected time difference for boat
0
-400 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1000
A relative to C must be lower than the expected time
Time differnce [s] difference for boat B relative to C.
Figure 9 Distribution of time of arrival differences 4. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK

between boats using the two different policies
In this paper we have presented a method for
However, combining together the two strategies can approximating a solution of a stochastic shortest path
lead to a significant improvement in the chances of problem with applications to yacht racing. We showed
winning. We simulated races between two boats that that with an adequate subdivision of the problem it is
are denoted as boat A and boat B. Both boats start the possible to find a solution that minimises the expected
race at the same time, on two different (random) points time needed to reach an upwind mark during a race.
along the starting line. Boat A experiences the same
wind as in the previously simulated races and always Moreover, we introduce for the first time a model of the
follows the optimum policy. Boat B experiences the risk attitude of the sailor. We showed that if a skipper
same wind as A if their distance is less than ݀௠௜௡ ൌ of a trailing boat has a risk-seeking attitude it enhances
ͳͲ, an independent wind if their distance is greater the chance to win the race. An important result of the
than ݀௠௔௫ ൌ ͳͲͲ, and a linear combination of the simulations run to simulate races was that aiming at
݀௠௜௡ and ݀௠௔௫ wind if their distance is between ݀௠௜௡ minimising the expected time to finish is not always the
and ݀௠௔௫ . At every spatial step, if B is more than 15s best approach: being on average slower might allow a
behind A, she uses the risk-seeking policy, while she bigger probability of winning against an opponent
uses the optimum risk-neutral policy otherwise. Results following a fixed policy.
of those simulated races are shown in Figure 9.
The results presented in this paper underline that, when
The ‫ݔ‬-axis shows the arrival time of boat B minus the trying to optimise a policy in order to win a
arrival time of boat A at the top mark. The average time competition, looking at average values is rarely the best
difference is positive (actually ͵ͻs in this plot). This approach, and accounting for differing risk attitudes
means that B arrives ͵ͻs later on average than A, as might give policies that perform significantly better.
one would expect, since A is using the optimum policy Further work is being carried out in order to validate
to minimise the average time. However about ͷ͹Ψof the model with data registered during America’s Cup
the race outcomes are to the left of the vertical axis, races, and we are developing methodologies for
meaning that B wins ͷ͹Ψ of the time (always by a learning risk parameters that yield maximum win
small margin). Of course sometimes B is hopelessly probabilities.
outclassed, losing by ʹͲͲͲseconds (just around ͲǤͲͳΨ
of the times, and those are extremely unfavourable ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
events) but this is because B takes high risks when
This research has been performed within the SAILING
behind. If we consider ‫ ݌‬ൌ ͲǤͷ win probability as a null
FLUIDS project, which is funded by the European
hypothesis, then the probability of winning more than
Commission under the 7th Framework Programme
57% of 4000 races by chance is the probability that a
through the Marie Curie Actions, People, International
binomial random variable with mean ͶͲͲͲ‫ ݌‬and
Research Staff Exchange Scheme.
variance ͶͲͲͲ‫݌‬ሺͳ െ ‫݌‬ሻ exceeds ʹʹͺͲ, which is about
ͳͲିଵସ Ǥ
REFERENCES
The standard error of the value 0.57 can be estimated
1. Cherkassky, B.V., A.V. Goldberg, and T.
using the central limit theorem to be approximately
Radzik, Shortest paths algorithms: Theory and
0.008. So we can be 97.5% confident that the hybrid
experimental evaluation. Mathematical
policy will win at least 55.4% of the races (i.e. 2
Programming, Series B, 1996. 73(2): p. 129-
standard errors less than 0.57).
174.
2. Bertsekas, D.P. and J.N. Tsitsikilis, An
In order to quantify the tactical improvement on the
Analysis of Stochastic Shortest Path Problems.
policy we compare the results obtained by boat A and
boat B with a third boat C that has perfect knowledge

- 236 -
Mathematics of Operations Research, 1991. AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY

16(3): p. 580-595.
3. Yamada, T., A network flow approach to a city F Tagliaferri is a PhD student at Newcastle University
emergency evacuation planning. International and member of the Yacht and Superyacht Research
Journal of Systems Science, 1996. 27(10): p. Group. She holds a Masters degree with Honours in
931-936. mathematics and her PhD project aims at developing
4. Resch, C., et al. Path Planning for Mine navigation software for yacht races under uncertain
Countermeasures. in SPIE - The International weather conditions.
Society for Optical Engineering. 2003.
Orlando, FL. AB Philpott, PhD, is a Professor in the Department of
5. Fleischmann, B., S. Gnutzmann, and E. Engineering Science and Director of the Electric Power
Sandvoß, Dynamic vehicle routing based on Optimization Centre at the University of Auckland,
online traffic information. Transportation New Zealand. His research interests encompass
Science, 2004. 38(4): p. 420-433. optimisation under uncertainty and game theory with
6. Li, S. Study on routing optimization problem particular application to electricity markets. He has also
of the logistics center. in World Automation applied these technologies to yacht routing and race
Congress. 2012. Puerto Vallarta, Mexico. modeling in several America’s Cup campaigns.
7. Philpott, A. and A. Mason, Optimising Yacht
Routes Under Uncertainty, in Proc. of the 15th IM Viola, PhD, is Lecturer in Naval Architecture at the
Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium2001. School of Marine Science and Technology of
8. Letcher Jr, J.S., et al., STARS & STRIPES. Newcastle University, UK. He has a background in
Scientific American, 1987. 257(2): p. 34-40. applied fluid dynamics and a specialist expertise in
9. Norris, J.R., Markov chains. 1st pbk. ed. yacht engineering. His previous experience includes a
Cambridge series on statistical and Post Doctoral Fellowship at the Yacht Research Unit
probabilistic mathematics1998, New York: (The University of Auckland), which is the Scientific
Cambridge University Press. xvi, 237. Advisor of the America’s Cup team Emirates Team
10. Philpott, A. Stochastic optimization in yacht New Zealand, and a PhD at the Politecnico di Milano,
racing, in Applications of Stochastic sponsored by the America’s Cup team Luna Rossa, on
Programming, W. Ziemba and S. Wallace experimental and numerical modelling of the
(ed.), SIAM, 2005. aerodynamics of sailing yachts.
APPENDIX RGJ Flay, PhD, is Professor of Mechanical

Proposition: Minimising the expected arrival time over the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the
all strategies will give a policy that is slower than a University of Auckland. He has had a longstanding
perfect skipper by the least amount on average. research interest in the wind and sailing. His PhD
degree was awarded for a study of wind structure based
Proof: Suppose a perfect skipper sails races in wind on full scale wind data. His Postdoctoral research as a
that she predicts perfectly. Each race is a random National Research Council Visiting Fellow in Canada
sample of wind and so her time to finish is an was focused on carrying out wind tunnel studies over
independent identically distributed random variable ܶ. topographic models to compare with full-scale
measurements, and for wind energy prospecting. He
Suppose she now sails a strategy ‫ ݏ‬that is not then spent four years as an Aerodynamic Design
clairvoyant in each of these same wind conditions. The Engineer in a Consulting Engineering company in
time to finish under this strategy is an independent Toronto where he worked on the design of several wind
identically distributed random variable ܵሺ‫ݏ‬ሻǤ tunnels and environmental test facilities. Since 1984 he
has worked at the University of Auckland, and in 1994
Now the delay in finishing under strategy ‫ ݏ‬versus the designed the World’s first Twisted Flow Wind Tunnel.
perfect strategy is also an independent identically
distributed random variable ‫ܦ‬ሺ‫ݏ‬ሻ ൌ ܵሺ‫ݏ‬ሻ െ ܶ. The
expected delay from sailing ‫ ݏ‬is then
ॱሾ‫ܦ‬ሺ‫ݏ‬ሻሿ ൌ ॱሾܵሺ‫ݏ‬ሻሿȂ ॱሾܶሿǤ
To minimise this we should minimise ॱሾܵሺ‫ݏ‬ሻሿ as ॱሾܶሿ

is a constant. So the strategy that minimises expected
delay after a clairvoyant skipper is the one that
minimises expected arrival time.

- 237 -

DEVELOPMENT OF AN AMERICA’S CUP 45 TACKING SIMULATOR

A.K. Lidtke, L. Marimon Giovannetti, L-M. Breschan, A. Sampson, M. Vitti and D. J. Taunton,
University of Southampton, UK, akl1g09@soton.ac.uk, lmg2e09@soton.ac.uk, lb2e08@soton.ac.uk,
ajs1g09@soton.ac.uk, mv4g09@soton.ac.uk, djt2@soton.ac.uk
This paper describes the development of an AC45 simulator conducted as a student Master’s project at
the University of Southampton. The main aim was to be able to asses and improve the tacking skills of
the helm and the crew through systematic training. The physical interface of the simulator replicates
the seating position of the helmsman and the main trimmer and the graphical representation provides
the users with visual cues of the simulated boat, boundaries and marks for a sample race course. The
theoretical model uses hydrodynamic manoeuvring coefficients based on empirical formulae and
experimental data. The aerodynamic forces are pre-calculated using a full-scale RANS CFD
simulation. The accuracy of the model is verified against the AC45 racing tracking data to ensure that
the speed loss during a tack, experienced by the users of the simulator, is as close to reality as possible.
The ultimate aim of the project was to study the potential of the simulator to assess and train the crews,
improving their skill in tacking the boat effectively. This has been done by examining the performance
of two groups of users over a series of practice sessions. The simulator could be potentially used for
training the helmsmen of the Youth America’s Cup Red-Bull teams, which have limited budgets,
training days and sailing experience compared to the professional AC sailors.
1 INTRODUCTION The most characteristic feature of the AC45 is its wing-

The design and construction of high speed sailing sails. This not only generates more lift while sailing,
catamarans is going through a very innovative period. but also permits to sail closer to the wind, than a
Since the last monohull America's cup, in 2007, a large conventional sail. Wing sails have better trimming
number of them have been built. These boats have the capability than standard soft sails, as the sheeting angle,
power to attract media interest because of their speed camber and twist may be adjusted. In order to set the
and athletic skills required by the crew. sail, the trimmer needs to adjust a series of sheets and
control lines. Therefore, the crew can be trained with a
Since 2007 one of the most prominent America's Cup
simulator in order to practice the movements they need
teams, BMW Oracle, has developed the 90-foot
to perform and to regulate the sail accordingly to the
trimaran that won the 2010 cup. Following that, the
boat state experienced. Nevertheless, the training of the
AC45 and the AC72 class boats have been designed
helm in a simulator is more difficult, as the virtual
and built. Approaching the next event (to be held in
environment should represent the actual race condition
September 2013 in San Francisco Bay) it is important
closely, taking into account the varying wind intensity,
to acquire the expertise needed to sail the catamarans in
wave direction and height, cloud shapes and all other
the fastest way without damaging them. In order to
variables that may be encountered during a race. The
compete at high level, a catamaran needs to tack in the
real environment needs to be represented not only
most efficient manner. Such a manoeuvre involves a
visually, but also through the physical interface to
change in heading through the wind. During a tack, a
promote the user sensation of the boat motions.
catamaran loses a large part of its speed due to
immersion of the flying hull and the associated increase Sailing simulators have been used in previous works for
in drag, the aerodynamic forces opposing its forward the analysis of tacking [2, 3], the starting manoeuvre
motion and inability to retain momentum due to [4], match racing [5], handicap assessment [6, 7], and
lightweight construction. The present project aims to evaluation of elite athletes [8]. Most of the past work
investigate, through the use of a dynamic velocity related to sailing simulators carried out at the
prediction program (VPP), the possibilities of a tacking University of Southampton has investigated the yacht-
manoeuvre training course for the helm and main sheet crew interaction and the possibility to improve the
trimmer, focusing on an AC45 class boat. It was chosen tactical steering and sail trim [9, 10]. One-design races
over the AC72 because it is a monotype, meaning that stress the attention on the crew making the right
all the catamarans sailing the America's Cup World decision at the correct time, so the abilities of the AC45
Series are the same. This would make it viable for the helm are the key of winning the races.
simulator to be used by all the teams and youth squads Furthermore, flight [11], high speed craft [12] and F1
alike. Another reason of having chosen the AC45 is that simulators [13] have been widely used to assess the
live tracking data is available to be downloaded from performances of the users and to improve their skills
the ACWS (America's Cup World Series) web site, [1]. where the expense and or danger are prohibitive to the
This data presents the race conditions and the boat using the real vehicle. This encourages the application
speeds while racing, hence providing a useful of similar technology in sailing.
validation tool.
- 239 -

2 METHODOLOGY rudder displacement to the simulator. It has been

The project was split up into four main areas: discovered during the testing that mainly due to
interfacing with the user and modelling of the numerical reasons high-frequency oscillations would be
underlying physics which included the overall fed to the users. These were commented on as very
simulation framework development and an extensive disturbing and blurring the actual response of the boat.
CFD analysis of the boat’s aerodynamics. These are A digital low-pass filter was therefore implemented.
discussed in the following section of this paper. The The main sheet actuator was made up of a Microsoft
overview of the established simulator framework is force feedback steering wheel. As the wheel is rotated it
presented as Figure1. responds with a torque and creates tension in the
2.1 USER INTERFACE mainsheet. As well as providing a force to resist the
One of the main deliverables of this project was a user sheeting in it also reels the main sheet back inside
physical interface that would integrate effectively with once the user force is removed.
the computational physics engine and the visual A set of mock-ups was built in the process and the
interface. This partnership was to increase the realism input of a range of potential users was factorised into
of the user experience and hence improve the training the design process. The finalised concept design is
capability of the simulator. The aim of this part of the presented as Figure 2.
project was to facilitate positions for the helm and the
main trimmer who would have to closely cooperate in
the exercises carried out, much as on the real boat.
The concept of creating a moving structure that would
represent the motions of the boat was rejected due to
time, budget and space limitations. A static main
structure was hence designed and built.
Substantial amount of care was taken to make use of
anthropometric data to ensure that the users’ position
would reflect what they would experience in real life,
hence improving the realism greatly [8], [14, 15, 16]. It
was decided that a hiking position, while using the
physical interface, would be encouraged through
designing a bench that simulates a heeled hull surface
and by providing a set of toe straps. Information was
gained on creating a suitable hiking configuration
through analysis of the currently available hiking bench
products.
Due to space limitations the physical interface had to be
dimensioned in such way as to make effective use of an
average size room which was available for the testing.
The main material used was aluminium, given its small
density and the implied portability of the simulator.
This was further encouraged by applying a modular
design with no permanent connections.
Two actuators were required, one to represent the tiller
and one to act as the wing sail sheet. USB game
Figure 1: Overview of the simulator framework.
controllers were used because of its advantages such as
compatibility with MATLAB® Simulink®, minimal
electrical engineering required and the low cost
compared with creating an actuator from the ground up.
It was aimed to enable the controllers to transmit force
to the users and hence give them invaluable cues as to
the state of the boat.
For the rudder, the chosen game controller was the
Microsoft Force Feedback 2 Joystick. Its setup required
minimal effort in the conversion of the primary joystick
axis to the tiller axis. Two motors controlling the x and
y axes were connected to a PCB holding the processing
unit in order to increase the magnitude of the generated Figure 2: Final concept design of the actuators and
torque. By default, each motor was fitted with a rotary seating positions for the crew.
potentiometer which was used to transmit the angular
- 240 -

viscous drag [21]. Given the shallow draught of the Cup series races were analysed. From this data it was
boat the sideforce generated by the hull was neglected. possible to extract the sailing conditions of the
It was decided to use the semi-empirical formulae catamarans (i.e. average wind speed, apparent wind
presented by [22] to determine the forces acting on the angle and the corresponding boat speed). A test matrix
appendages as they were thought to be easy to for the CFD analysis was then completed by analysing
implement, robust and widely accepted for their five different parameters (i.e. apparent wind speed
accuracy. Torque on the rudder stock was also “VA”, apparent wind angle “AWA”, heel angle “̶߮,
calculated in order to provide force feedback to the wing sheeting angle̶ߜଵ ̶, flap sheeting angles ̶ߜʹଵ ̶,
user, as discussed earlier in the paper. ̶ߜʹଶ ̶ and “ ߜʹଷ ̶ , where the subscripts 1, 2 and 3
represent the bottom. Middle and top flap respectively)
In order to determine the forces acting on the headsail and focusing on upwind sailing as only the tacking
the data presented by the ORC for implementation in manoeuvre was analysed.
steady-state VPP was used [23] as this has been widely
recognised as a high-quality source. The flow was modelled to be turbulent as the wing sail
is affected by the presence of the free surface boundary
The most challenging part of describing the physics of layer and the relatively slow speed enhances the
an AC45 class boat was dealing with the forces turbulence interactions between the wind and the sail.
generated by the wing sail. This was done based on an The surface roughness of the sea, constituting the
extensive CFD study described later in this paper. bottom surface of the domain, was also modelled as it
It is worth noting that wind speed and direction affects the wind shear profile.
fluctuations are present in the real environment. In Multiple cases were solved using ANSYS CFX.
practice, this has a significant effect on the performance However, some verification simulations were run in
of the sails and requires constant attention of the crew OpenFOAM using the North Sails software, previously
in terms of trimming the sails for optimum used by the Wolfson Unit for Marine Technology and
performance. Multiple ways of describing this Industrial Aerodynamics (WUMTIA) to calculate the
phenomenon mathematically exist, typically by aerodynamic performance of the AC45 and AC72.
employing a combined set of sinusoidal functions and
by introducing an element of randomness. This was not The geometry of the wing sail was modelled to be
implemented in the current simulator because of the placed at the centre of the domain, with the frame of
possibility that the additional fluctuations will slow reference at the free-surface below the centre of
down the development of the force feedback effects and rotation of the forward wing. It was then necessary to
blur other phenomena taking place. assess the upwind sheeting angle variation. Based on
consultations with Youth America’s Cup sailors these
At the initial development stage it has been discovered were set asߜௐூேீǡଵ േ ʹͲ െ ͵Ͳι(forward wing camber),
that the physics model is prone to oscillations in roll.
ߜௐூேீǡଶ േ ͳͲ െ ͵Ͳι (rear wing camber with respect to
This was believed to have originated from accounting
the forward wing) and the twist angleേʹ െ ͷι.
for hydrodynamic damping components insufficiently
(at that time the only damping terms present were An unstructured mesh was created and a mesh
provided by the varying inflow speeds and angles as a refinement study was developed in order to prove the
result of the roll motion which translated into a aerodynamic results to be independent of the mesh size.
damping force). It has been suggested that an additional The region of the boundary layer was discretised with a
damping term would exist due to the fact that the structured mesh to better represent the flow properties.
windward hull penetrates the water surface when the It was also necessary to avoid a large cell size
heel angle varies. As a result, the GZ arm changes but difference between the inflated layers and the first
also a moment proportional to the demihull heave unstructured elements around the body to retain
damping force is imposed on the entire boat system. As sufficient accuracy. Finally, a mesh refinement in the
the physics model was being refined at a later stage this vorticity region was applied to better capture the tip and
component was accounted for by calculating the heave root vortices.
damping using strip theory based on the solution for Due to its robustness and low computational cost, k-
Lewis sections. epsilon turbulence model, was chosen over the SST k-
2.3 WING SAIL CFD ANALYSIS omega, as in upwind condition only small angles of
The AC45 boats are characterised by a symmetric wing attack were investigated and stall was not reached. The
sail consisting of a main wing rotating about the mast non-dimensionalised wall distance (‫ ݕ‬ା ሻ was set to be in
and three rear flaps rotating at 90% of the chord of the the logarithmic region, so that fully turbulent flow was
forward wing, able to produce lift on both tacks. The expected in the boundary layer, [24].
approach was to obtain the aerodynamic forces and Due to the height of the mast, the wind shear profile,
moments acting on the wing in an upwind sailing described by the log-layer law was added to the
condition and then implement the results in the physics simulations, taking as reference height the weather
engine via interpolation. stations of the AC45 committee boats, [25, 26].
In order to accurately predict the boat speed during a The aerodynamic forces are a function of wind speed,
tack, the available tracking data from the America's direction, sheeting and heel angles. Dependency on the
- 242 -

To complement the physical actuators and provide the A substantial amount of consideration has been given to
user with the necessary information about the boat whether the pitch and heave motions should be ignored
condition a graphical user interface was included in the in the physics engine. Including these would allow
overall system. This was displayed and used via a 10” pitch-poling to be examined, more realistic
touchscreen monitor. One of the main purposes of this hydrodynamic drag values could also be calculated.
was to serve as an external control tool used by the However, the primary aim of the project was to
main trimmer in order to control the twist in the wing, simulate the upwind condition where pitch-poling is not
the flatness of the jib and the position of the an issue. Furthermore, the regattas are sailed in
daggerboards. Secondly, it would display the boat enclosed bays, where the waves encountered are
speed, the wind speed and direction, as well as a chart relatively small. Also, the effort and amount of analysis
plotter with the boat position indicated with respect to required to introduce and validate a full six degree of
ACWS race courses. This aimed to aid in the freedom model were beyond the scope of this project.
navigation and to allow full control over the boat to be Hence it has been decided to exclude the heave and
executed. A sample of the interface window can be pitch motions from the simulation.
seen in Figure 3. The differential equations governing the motion can be
STANAG 3869 AI aircraft ergonomics guideline and integrated with respect to time twice, given a set of
ISO standards (DIN EN ISO 9241-3) were followed in initial conditions, in order to yield the velocity and
order to determine a suitable layout and formatting for displacement in each of the degrees of freedom. The
the interface [17, 18]. most commonly used numerical integration scheme
adopted for sailing yacht simulation is a fixed-step
Runge-Kutta 4th order method which was used for the
purpose of this project with a fixed time-step of 0.1
seconds. It has been found that reducing it does not
yield any noticeable improvement in the quality of the
solution obtained but may slow the simulation down
significantly.
An important task was to accurately estimate the mass
and inertias of the boat. Some of these were calculated
using the 3D model and mass properties of each of the
AC45 principle elements. The added masses and
inertias were calculated using potential flow, assuming
Figure 3: Screen shot of the touschscreen user the hull is a very high aspect-ratio ellipsoid. It is
interface used for control of the boat and recommended, however, to use more detailed estimates
information transfer to the users. as early as possible in the future if sufficient data is
available.
2.2 PHYSICS MODELLING
The flow speed experienced by the appendages and
The principle idea behind a real-time simulation of a
sails will be affected by the roll and yaw motions of the
yacht revolves around constructing a set of equations of
boat. The magnitude of this effect was estimated by
motion describing each of the degrees of freedom. For
calculating the local velocity due to turning motion a
sailing yachts the model originally presented by
distance away from the axis of rotation and including it
Masuyama et. al. in 1995 is the most prevalent across
in the apparent wind or appendage inflow velocity
the literature [2], [6], [9, 10], [14], [19]. It was used in
computation in a vector form. For the adopted approach
this project given that it has been widely tested and
this was done at the centre of effort of each lifting
became an industry standard of describing dynamic
element.
sailboat motions. The full set of equations of motion
used can be written as: In a dynamic VPP it is important to account for the
unsteady effects, such as lift or drag coefficient
changes. However, this was quite challenging for this
application as it was never known a priori when the
user will execute a manoeuvre and whether it will end
in a tack or just a change of course and hence most
known empirical formulae could not be adopted [20]. It
was therefore decided to only account for the dynamic
effects by considering the flow velocity variations.
No towing tank data was available for the AC45 boat.
For this reason an empirical formulation of the
Southampton NPL series was used to calculate the
wavemaking drag, which was complemented by the
standard ITTC ’57 friction line to account for the
- 241 -

latter was assessed and it was found that the following

may be used to reduce the number of interpolation
parameters: and to
define lift and drag as function of heel. From the
simulations the forces, moments, centres of effort, the
lift and drag components were obtained. By analysing
the results it was possible to identify a decrease in drag
with increasing flow speed and a maximum lift
coefficient occurring at a true wind speed of = 14
knots. Also, base drag of was estimated.
Furthermore, a reduction of both lift and drag was
found with increasing main sheeting angle “ ”.
Applying twist to the wing resulted in a relatively small
increase in lift coefficient and a consistent increase in Figure 5: Streamline distribution in the domain:
drag. The latter values may be due to the high induced and TWA=47
drag occurring at the gaps between rear wing elements. 2.4 GRAPHICS ENGINE
The centre of effort was found to be approximately at A detailed graphical model of the boat was created
mid-span and was shown to reduce with increasing using the Rhinoceros 4.0 package. The boat was then
heel. Little variation in the centre of effort height due to exported and used with the VRML program integrated
twist was observed. into the Simulink® package (see Figure 6).
As discussed in [27], the forward foil suppresses the To present a static frame of reference to the users, the
peak pressure at the leading edge of the downstream buoys and laylines were placed in the race area so as to
foil (see Figure 4). This phenomenon, known as slot resemble an upwind leg of a race. Furthermore, a
effect, permits the aft aerofoil to have a boundary layer panoramic view of San Francisco was projected on a
with decelerated flux speed coming from the lee-side of cylindrical boundary to give the users a sense of
the forward aerofoil rather than at the true angle of direction.
attack. Furthermore, the presence of the aft aerofoil
One of the main objectives in developing the graphics
creates a strong upwash in the streamlines of the
was to create a sense of motion of the boat that would
forward foil; therefore increasing the net lift of the
allow the users to estimate the boat speed over water
system. Figure 5 shows the streamlines with the tip and
without them having to make use of the provided dials,
root vortices visible.
much as it is done in real life. Also, emphasis was put
on representing the wind direction in the form of
graphical cues.
Figure 4: Pressure distribution along main wing and

flaps: V T = 10 knots, TWA = 47 , and Figure 6: Screenshot from the simulator VRML
. The pressure distribution is shown at environment showing the boat at the startline on a
three different heights along the wing, namely at starboard tack. Note that the jib model was
polylines evaluated at mid-span of each rear flap, removed from the VRML visualisation due to lack
top “1”, midlle “2” and bottom “3” positions of an appropriate modelling method.
respectively. The effects of both front and rear
wings is shown.
Two possible view configurations were incorporated in
the graphical display: first with the camera located
behind the boat and providing an overview of the entire
catamaran and second with the viewport located on the
windward demihull at the position where the helm
would sit in the actual boat (the viewport changes
- 243 -

automatically after each tack). This setup allowed the speed loss through the tack as it formed a clearer
degree of realism of the simulation to be more closely objective for the participants. Records were held of the
assessed and discussed with the participants. simulation parameters and all contestants were asked to
fill in questionnaires regarding their experience. In
2.5 VALIDATION
order to correctly model an upwind leg of a race, a
Figure 7 shows the velocity plots over a tack compared
number of wind speeds and directions were chosen as
with the data available from the AC45 GPS position
characteristic values in upwind courses using the AC45
tracking system [1]. Two clear differences can be seen:
GPS data.
an overestimation of the maximum boat velocity by
approx. 20% and too slow turning rate resulting in an 3.2 DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS
extended tack time. Almost all participants agreed that the physical
There are two principle reasons for this. Firstly, the interface was very ergonomic and comfortable as well
ratio of the drive-to-lift forces is approximately 35% as realistic. Frequently repeated comments appreciated
larger than expected from the steady-state boat speed. the fitting of the toe straps, overall simulator layout and
This might originate from the hydrodynamic drag being the use of the rudder and main sheet actuators. The key
underestimated by the less-than-ideal for this purpose result obtained from the participant survey was that
NPL series, windage drag not being accounted for nearly everyone felt that they had improved their
sufficiently well or the CFD analysis over predicting sailing and tactical skills over the simulated runs they
the aerodynamic drive force. Secondly, the rotary took part in. Likewise, close to all participants thought
inertia in yaw (and partially in roll) is likely over that with a few improvements the simulator could be an
estimated, hence leading to slower turning rates. Given essential and powerful training tool.
the extremely light displacement of an AC45 boat even A significant proportion of the users felt that the
small discrepancies in this area will have a significant graphics used did not resemble the real world closely
impact on the result obtained. enough. Typical comments pointed out its limited
Speed loss experienced through the tack was ability to create an impression of the boat motion and
significant, however not as great as in the case of actual lack of a sufficient amount of cues regarding the
AC45 catamarans. This might indicate that the heading of the boat with respect to the wind direction.
hydrodynamic resistance under estimation is a primary Moreover, it has been frequently said by the users that
defect of the physics model. Also, substantial incorporating a moving platform instead of the
simplifications of the unsteady effects surely played an stationary set of benches and frames would add greatly
important role in this behaviour. Nonetheless, the to the simulator. Also, the use of hardware push buttons
overall physics and relative trends in the boat behaviour over the touch screen monitor was suggested to have a
resembled reality quite closely. possible effect on the realism of the simulation and
handling of the virtual boat. Certain members of the
In an attempt to estimate the error magnitudes quoted expert group thought that presenting a velocity polar
above the inertias and net drive force were scaled by an diagram would allow them to trim the boat to its full
arbitrary factor and the simulation runs were repeated potential. A single but very important comment
with the recorded rudder and main sheet settings, suggested that use of a realistic set of sound effects
yielding boat velocity also shown in Figure 7. It can be would benefit the simulation realism greatly.
seen that a much closer convergence could be achieved
by relatively small manipulations. The original setup
was used in the human testing phase out of the fear that
any arbitrary changes might influence the results to a
greater extent than using the unmodified but less
accurate version of the simulator.
3 TESTING
3.1 METHODOLOGY
In order to test the simulator two groups of participants
were evaluated: beginners (little to no sailing
knowledge) and experts (over 10 years of sailing
experience with at least part of it on catamaran boats).
Both groups were formed of ten participants. Prior to
the actual tests the participants were given a few
acclimatisation runs to understand how the simulator Figure7: Plot of the boat speed obtained from the
works and each team member’s responsibilities. AC45 GPS data, initial simulation runs and tests
Subsequently, the teams had to complete 5 runs of 5 with the corrected inertia matrix and drive force
tacks each in to travel as much upwind as possible. This magnitude.
was aimed to represent an upwind leg of a race. It was
considered that from the crew training point of view
this would be more quantitative than examining the
- 244 -

different (for instance in the case of a team who kept

bearing away to a broad reach after each tack).
Moreover, the testing was conducted over a period of
two weeks and most of the test subjects were students
from the same department and it is possible that there
was an exchange of information on how to achieve best
results in the simulation which could not have been
prevented.
4 FUTURE WORK
Based on the success of the current simulator it is
planned to continue with further research and
development in order to improve it. This will
principally revolve around enhancing the physics
model, probably by implementing more refined force
estimation methods. An interesting research topic
which has emerged is the development of a 6 degree of
Figure 8: An example of boat parameters for a freedom manoeuvring model for a sailing catamaran
series of tacks carried out using the simulator. which would allow a broad range of phenomena to be
In Figure 9 the mean speed of the boat and the standard computationally studied.
deviation of the main sheet position can be seen for the From the questionnaires it was concluded that the
two groups as a function of the number of test runs simulator might benefit from further development of
each team has accomplished. There is a clear difference the interface hardware so that it resembles the actual
between the average speed achieved by the novice and boat layout more closely. An example of this might be
experienced sailors which indicates that there is an the addition of more realistic controls for the jib.
inherent level of realism in the simulation that causes Modern video games technology allows excellent
the two groups to perform in a distinguishably different graphics to be introduced and this will certainly see
way. The speed achieved by the experts does not increased interest in further development stages to
change significantly. However, there is a noticeable enhance the representation of the boat and the entire
improvement in the velocity achieved by the novices. sailing environment.
For the beginners the deviation in sheet position
changed a lot more during the training session than it The budget allowed only a stationary physical interface
did for the experts. This suggests that the latter group design to be built. A substantially larger budget would
have executed a much steadier control over the boat have been required in order to build a physical interface
from the very beginning whereas the developed their capable of simulating motion in multiple degrees of
skills by practice and experimentation. freedom. Introducing this significant additional cost
would also make it difficult for the Youth America’s
In all of the results it can be observed that the novice Cup teams and other interested sailing groups to access
group’s performance improved much more it. While a movable main platform would introduce an
significantly whereas the experts’ scores were more entire new level of realism and respond to the users’
stable but superior. This indicates that the simulator has feedback, it has been shown that good training results
the capability to teach and improve the users’ sailing can be achieved with just a static one. For these reasons
skills. such a configuration is worth considering in the future
During the test sessions it could be clearly seen that the but the current setup should not be discarded
experienced sailors cooperated much more effectively completely.
than the novices. The latter group would often get
confused and lose focus of the objective. While not
necessarily clearly seen in the data, this very well
resembled what can be observed on real boats in
stressful situations. This indicated that the simulator has
the potential not only to develop purely sailing skills,
per se, but also improve the crew team work in much
the same way as a practice session on the water would.
Errors in the analysis might have arisen due to multiple
reasons. There could have been issues associated with
the accuracy of the physics model and input/output
processing of the actuators. Despite clear instructions
certain teams adopted a different techniques of sailing
around the course and so some of the results had to be
disregarded from the analysis due to being significantly
- 245 -

Figure 9: Standard deviation in the wing sail Figure 10: The final setup of the simulator with a
sheeting angle versus the number of runs (linear fit participants crew executing a tack manoeuvre.
presented for each series).
REFERENCES
5 CONCLUSIONS
1. http://www.americascup.com/about/boats [Accessed
The comparison of the boat speed variations obtained
28 03 2013].
from the simulations with those provided by the
America’s Cup web site, as well as the comments and 2. Y. Masuyama, T. Fukusawa and H. Sasagawa,
performance data gathered from the human testing of “Tacking simulation of sailing yachts - numerical
the simulator, have provided a solid basis for the future integration of equations of motion and application of
improvement and development of a virtual sailing neural network technique”, 1995.
environment to be used for the crew training purposes.
It has been verified and demonstrated that even given 3. B. Verwerft and J. Keuning, “The modification and
limited means and time a successful sailing simulator application of a time dependent performance prediction
can be created and used to develop the skills of the model on the dynamic behaviour of a sailing yacht”, in
crew. The most important conclusion regarding this International HISWA Symposium on Yacht Design and
aspect is that a suitable balance has to be achieved Yacht Construction, 2009.
between focusing on the accuracy of the simulation, be
it the fidelity of the force model or the race 4. J. Binns, K. Hochkirch, F. de Bord and I. Burns,
environment, and ensuring suitable level of realistic “The development and use of sailing simulation for
experience. It has been stated multiple times by the IACC starting manoeuvre training”, in 3rd High
participants that they paid much attention to issues such Performance Yacht Design Conference, 2-4 December,
as details of graphics, minor features of the physical Auckland, 2008.
interface and less so to the actual boat physics.
5. K. Rocin and J. Kobus, “Dynamic Simulation of
Based on the above it can be concluded that although a Two Sailing Boats in Match Racing”, 2004.
substantial amount of further investigation, research
and development would be required in order to create a 6. J. Keuning, K. Vermeulen and E. de Ridder, “A
fully functional simulator that would suit the needs of generic Mathematical Model for the Manouevring and
training future America’s Cup teams. Despite this fact Tacking of a Sailing Yacht”, Annapolis, 2005.
at this stage it appears to be a perfectly feasible and
potentially very beneficial solution. 7. A. Philpott and A. Mason, “Advances in
optimization in yacht performance analysis”, High
Performance Yacht Design Conference, Auckand 4-6
December, 2002.
8. J. Mooney, N. Saunders, M. Habgood and J. Binns,

“Multiple applications of sailing simulation”, in Simtec
2009, Adelaide, Australia, June 2009.
9. M. Scarponi, R. Shenoi, S. Turnock and P. Conti,

“Interactions between yacht-crew systems and racing
scenarios combining behavioural models with VPPs”,
- 246 -

in 19th International HISWA Symposium on Yacht 25. A. Meschini, “Analisi Preliminare di Wingsail per
Design and Yacht Construction, Amsterdam, 2006. Imbarcazioni di America's Cup”, Politecnico di Milano,
2010-2011.
10. T. Spenkuch, S. Turnock, M. Scarponi and R.
Shenoi, “Development of a sailing simulator 26. S. Hsu, “Determining the Power-Law Profile
environment for assessing and improving crew Exponent Under Near Neutral Stability Conditions at
performance”, in Proceedings of 7th ISEA Conference, Sea”, Journal of Applied Meteorology, 1994.
June 2-6, Biarritz, 2008.
27. A. Gentry, “The Application of Computational
11. M. Shafer, “In-Flight Simulation Studies at the Fluid Dynamics to Sails”, in Proceedings of the
NASA Dryden Flight Research Facility”, 1992. Symposium on Hydrodynamic Performance
Enhancement for Marine Applications, November
12. J. Calver, W. Ellison, R. Langdon, L. Mirosevic, A. 1988.
Parker and J. Tate, “High Speed Craft Simulator - GDP
28. M. Young and C. Gorelli, “AC 72 Class Rules”,
Report”, University of Southampton, 2011.
America's Cup Tech. Rep., 2010.
13. http://www.evoteksimulator.com/#home. [Accessed
AUTHORS’ BIOGRAPHIES
20 04 2013].
A.K. Lidtke is a final year student at Ship Science
14. J. Binns, R. Bethwaite and N. Saunders, department at the University of Southampton (Yacht
“Development of a more realistic sailing simulator”, in and Small Craft). Following his graduation he will
The 1st High Performance Yacht Design Conference, commence PhD studies at the same university in the
Auckland, 2002. field of numerical modelling of the influence of
turbulence on propeller noise and cavitation. Up to now
15. W. Karwowski, M. Soares and N. Stanton, “Human his undergraduate work focused on velocity prediction,
Ergonomics in Consumer Product Design”,CRC Press, design search & optimisation and hydrodynamics.
2011.
L. Marimon Giovannetti is currently a Master student
16. www.roymech.co.uk/UsefulTables/Human/ at the University of Southampton (Yacht and Small
Humansizes.html. [Accessed 01 04 2013]. Craft). In the Fall of 2013 she is expected to start a PhD
to research the passive adaption of curved foils such as
17. R. Taylor and J. V. F. Berman, “Aircraft keyboard the ones used in Nacra 17. Her undergraduate work
ergonomics: a review”, Butterworth Co. Ltd., 1983. focused mainly in Computational Fluid Dynamics.
She is also an international sailor, representing Italy in
18. C. Rudolf, “Handbuch software-ergonomie the major World and European championships since
(usability engineering)”, Unfallkasse, 2006. 2007.
19. E. J. de Ridder, K. Vermeulen and J. Keuning, “A L-M. Breschan currently studies Ship Science, with a
mathematical model for the tacking maneuver of a specialisation in Naval Architecture at the University of
sailing yacht”, in The International HISWA Symposium Southampton. Previously she did an internship at RMK
on Yacht Design and Yacht Construction, 2004. in Istanbul in the construction department and she
worked at Seaway Group Slovenia. Earlier education
20. Y. Masuyama and T. Fukusawa, “Tacking included studying Industrial Design at a higher
simulation of sailing yachts with new model of technical college in Ferlach, Austria.
aerodynamic force variation during tacking A. Sampson currently studies Ship Science, with a
manoeuvre”, Journal of Sailboat Technology, SNAME, specialisation in Yacht and Small Craft at the
no. 1, pp. 1-34, 2011. University of Southampton. Previously he worked at
Lloyds’s Register as an intern, and will soon begin as a
21. A. Molland, S. Turnock and D. Hudson, “Ship
Naval Architect at the BMT Group.
Resistance and Propulsion”, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2011. M. Vitti is a final year MEng student at the University
of Southampton in Ship science, Yacht and Small Craft.
22. A. Molland and S. Turnock, “Chapter 5,” in Marine His undergraduate work has focused on control
Rudders and Control Surfaces, Oxfrod, Elsevier Ltd., systems, manoeuvring and testing. His main interest is
2007, pp. 71-94. in sailing yachts.
23. “ORC VPP Documentation 2011”. D.J. Taunton is a lecturer at the Ship Science
department at the University of Southampton. His
24. J. Tu, G. Yeoh and C. Liu, “Computational Fluid research interests include experimental hydrodynamics
Dynamics: A Practical Approach”, Butterworth- of high speed craft, human factors and design methods.
Heinemann, 2008. He received a Bachelor of Engineering with honours
(Ship Science) from the University in Southampton in
1997. A Ph.D. in high speed craft seakeeping from the
- 247 -

University of Southampton in 2001. He has then

worked on two research projects investigating the wash
produced by high speed craft in shallow water. He
worked for BMT SeaTech Ltd, a naval architecture
consultancy company providing bespoke ship
simulation products for two years before returning to
Southampton University in 2006.
- 248 -

Coupled open navigation and augmented reality systems for skippers
J.C. Morgere, Lab-STICC, UBS, France, jean-christophe.morgere@univ-ubs.fr

R. Douguet, Lab-STICC, UBS, France, ronan.douguet@univ-ubs.fr
J.P. Diguet, Lab-STICC, CNRS, France, jean-philippe.diguet@univ-ubs.fr
J. Laurent, Lab-STICC, UBS, France, johann.laurent@univ-ubs.fr
This paper describes a new measurement and vision system for sailboat race. This system is composed
of an open navigation processor and a see-through Augmented Reality (AR) glasses. This open navigation
processor allows to plug most sensors in order to measure wind conditions, boat speed, dynamic motions
and other parameters. Moreover, it is able to implement several wind correction algorithms in order to
improve the true wind computation. On the other hand, the open navigation processor communicates with
a see-through AR glasses through wireless network. The interest of this system is that it is flexible and
can overlay any text, 2D or 3D objects on the true real world view, so the skipper is free to display the
useful data.
1 INTRODUCTION not very convenient on boat and reduces the crew mobility
since you must use one of your hands to hold it. So, we pro-
In ocean racing, several domains such as materials, sails and pose to solve these two problems by using mobile display sys-
yacht design are constantly evolved in order to improve the tem called wearable augmented reality system based on a see
boat performance. In order to study the impacts of the pro- through device that allows the user to view the real world and
posed improvements, we need to acquire data from the system also view objects superimposed. This kind of systems can
by using different kinds of sensors (strain gauges, speedome- display texts, 2D and 3D objects animated or not. The global
ter,anemometer and so on). To achieve these measurements, solution is presented in Figure 1.
most sailboats embed navigation processor that allows us to
plug and to collect all the data from the sensors. Despite the
use of navigation processor, some sensors cannot be plugged
since they uses proprietary protocol or yet the navigation pro-
cessor is too closed to allow plugging sensors that are not pro-
vided by the same firm. For instance is difficult to plug NKE
sensor with B&G navigation processor. So in order to solve
this problem we propose an open navigation processor that
implements analogue to digital converters and several com-
munication protocols as, RS232/485, CAN, Ethernet and so
on in order to be able to plug most sensors (digital or/and
analogue). Furthermore this platform allows the user to im-
plement his own applications as for instance correction algo-
rithms allowing to compute the true wind speed and angle.
Another problem is the display of the information collected Figure 1: System overview
by the navigation processor to the crew because the displays
do not provide the necessary data to analyze the boat per- The first one presents the open navigation processor, the se-
formance. Indeed, due to the poor ergonomics and the few cond the hardware display system and finally the last one an
viewable data it is very difficult to analyze the boat perfor- example of the graphical user interface (GUI). The rest of pa-
mance without an embedded PC. The second problem is due per is organized as follows: Section 2 describes the open navi-
to the fact that the crew needs to be able to view the informa- gation processor. Section 3 and 4 presents the mobile aug-
tion at different places of the boat. mented reality system and an application. Finally the Section
Today, the solution is to deploy several display screens on the 5 concludes the paper and presents the future works.
boat but this leads cost increase. Furthermore, the weather
conditions, as the solar glare or water, can affect the display 2 OPEN NAVIGATION PROCESSOR
reading so even the viewable data, provided by the navigation
processor, could be unreadable. The solutions considered as The open navigation processor is detailed in three parts: the
the use of tablet is still not the best one because the tablet is hardware design (processor, peripherals, sensors), the soft-
ware design (Operating System, scheduling tasks) and the On the other hand, several peripherals are available to get real
wind correction algorithm. time access to data. Indeed, three serial bus are implemented
to communicate with other devices. Two serial bus are di-
2.1 HARDWARE DESIGN rectly used to send real time data to a computer and to stan-
dard displays. But as the STM32f4 microcontroller has not
The hardware is the core of the navigation processor. On the on-board wireless communication, one solution is to add a
one hand, it must be able to receive, to store and to send all standard module to interface UART peripheral to wireless. In
data provided by analog or digital sensors. On the other hand, our case we chose the bluetooth module since it is a wire-
it needs important computing capacities to implement com- less networking widely used in smartphone environment for
plex algorithms in order to correct different measurements. instance smartphone, tablet or computer. Moreover there are
Indeed, these algorithms require a lot of data processing to Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) wireless modules which were
compute Kalman-like filters or other kinds of filters. Con- designed for lowest possible power consumption. The Blue-
sidering applications requirements a 10 Hz sampling rate is tooth module allows to communique between the navigation
enough to process wind measurements. It also represents processor and the see through AR glasses.
an opportunity to save power at the embedded system level.
Actually, considering that during a race the fuel required to
2.2 SOFTWARE DESIGN
recharge batteries must be optimized, it is important to reduce
the energy consumption.
The navigation processor software design is developed and is
To meet these needs, we chose the STM32F407 microcon- implemented through Keil uVision4 Integrated Development
troller, which is based on ARM Cortex M4 Processor. This Environment (IDE). In order to facilitate a possible extension
processor includes a floating point unit (to compute complex of this project we chose to divide this application in several
algorithms) and integrates several communication controllers tasks (or threads) by using a small footprint Operation System
(UART, SPI, ethernet, ADC...) and general purpose input out- (OS). Indeed the navigation processor software is divided into
put in order to plug analog or digital sensors. The hardware 4 main tasks : acquisition task, computation task, storage task
design diagram is shown in Figure 2. This hardware platform and communication task (cf. Figure 3). Other tasks runs in
is also designed for other applications such as, for instance, a background to receive data through interrupts (cf. Figure 4).
databuoy [1].
The selected OS is the FreeRTOS (Real Time Operating Sys-
tem). FreeRTOS is a real-time kernel which is designed for
small embedded system. The interests of this OS are the size
of kernel, which is limited to 5Kb in flash, it is portable on
different supports and it is independent of Keil uVision4 IDE.
It allows Cortex-M4 microcontroller applications to be orga-
nized as a collection of independent threads of execution by
Figure 2: Hardware Design Diagram
On this system, we are able to directly plug the standard

sensors used on sailboats such as speedometer, anemometer-
van, Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) and Global Positioning
System (GPS). But many sensors, analog or digital, can be
add to this platform since the microcontroller has still seve-
ral available communication controllers. Indeed this micro-
controller proposed up 15 communication interfaces : 3 I 2 C
interfaces, 4 USARTs, 2 UARTs, 3 SPIs, 2 CAN interfaces
and 1 SDIO interface. Moreover, this open navigation pro-
cessor allows to record all data at 10 Hz on SD card memory
through the SPI bus. Therefore, these data are available for
post-processing in order that users can analyze boat perfor-
mance. Figure 3: Flow chart of main tasks
and these measurements are disrupted by several phenomena,
such as the boat motions, the drift, the upwash effect and the
wind shear [2]. That ’s why, we have developed our own wind
correction algorithm (cf. figure 5) that we implemented on the
open navigation processor. So one advantage of this platform
is to test differnet wind correction algorithms in order to im-
prove the true wind computation.
Figure 4: Flow chart of handler tasks
using different tools such as mutexes, semaphores or queues

to synchronize these threads.
2.2.1 Acquisition task

This task converts the analog inputs and updates all data pro-
vided by the different peripherals. It is executed periodically
with a frequency to be specified in the configuration file. This
frequency is set to 10 Hz for navigation processor.
2.2.2 Computation task

The computation task allows to calibrate, compute and filter
all received data. Currently, it corrects and filters the wind
measurement (cf. Section 2.6 for details).
2.3 Storage task

This task allows to store all selected data in the file on the SD
memory card. These data are logged in the CSV file in order
to facilitate their analysis of Matlab, Excel or other softwares.
2.4 Communication task

Figure 5: Wind Correction Flow
In the communication task, data are sent to several devices
through three peripherals. The information sent via UARTs
allow to communicate with a computer and with standard dis- 3 MOBILE AUGMENTED REALITY
plays. Moreover, another UART coupled with a bluetooth
module allows to send data to different devices such as smart- 3.1 HARDWARE DESIGN
phones, tablets and laptop and more specifically in our case to
the see-through AR glasses. The augmented reality device is composed of two parts, the
first one is the display and the other is the embedded proces-
2.5 Handler Tasks sor. The display is a see-through ski mask [3] which includes
an electronic and optic system that diffuse frames in front of
The handler tasks are synchronized by a semaphore with the an eye (monocular system). In order to facilitate the reading
interrupt functions. They allow to receive the data provided information, the display system has the following features:
by sensors with serial communication. For example, when
the processor receive a GPS packet, a semaphore is given in • The resolution of the mask is 800*600 pixels with a re-
the GPS interrupt function and then the GPS task is unblock fresh rate at 60Hz
in order to parse the GPS packet.
• The equivalent screen size is 97.5 inches at 2.7 meters so
2.6 WIND COMPUTATION a large amount of data can be displayed and readable
Usually standard wind corrections are handled by navigation • The light intensity is 5000 candela/m2 in color mode
processors on sailboats where true wind is required. Indeed, (greater in monochrome mode) so the information dis-
the wind sensor is placed on the masthead most of the time played will be able to be visible even in outdoor.
The second part of the system is the embedded processor. In our case, we use MEMs sensors: one magnetometer, one
For the mobile augmented reality, this processor can be AR- accelerometer and one gyroscope for the head tracking. De-
specific embedded and reconfigurable systems [4]. This is a spite the use of these sensors, we must, in addition, execute
low consumption and small size architecture (due to the num- a correction algorithm (usually an extended Kalman filter) in
ber of components needed) and it is dedicated to augmented order to obtain a precise attitude. Some information, as GPS
reality systems with head tracking and using very small defini- localization, are also required so in most case we will have to
tion objects. Head tracking is employed to place objects in the discuss with the navigation processor to obtain this data; this
user field of view, for this step MEMs are often used with cor- will be done by using a wireless communication (WiFi, Blue-
rection algorithm to compute the system attitude. For better tooth). For low energy consumption criteria, we chose to use
performance and consumption it would be necessary to pro- Bluetooth communications. To store the data, the applications
duce and use Application-Specific Integrated Circuit (ASIC) and the OS we need memory capacities thus in our system we
but this technology is very expensive and not interesting for have eMMC, DDR2 and SD-Card; eMMC and SD-card are
few units. But today this kind of solution is not usable since non volatile memories so applications and OS will be able to
we need to offer to the user a large amount of objects that can be implemented into one of these memories. Although the SD
be simple key arrow or text but also more complex objects like card is bigger than the eMMC, this last would be used in or-
3D texturing sailboats. So the AR-specific architecture per- der to increase the execution time, indeed the eMMC is faster
formances are not sufficient this is the reason why we chose a than the SD-card. Finally, as the embedded processor has to
classical SoC solution used for instance in commercial tablets be connected to the ski mask, it’s necessary to use a video
or smartphones; the system architecture is shown in Figure 6. connection in order to display the virtual objects on the mask.
Today the ski mask uses an analog video stream (VGA) so
as the SoC system generates a digital one (HDMI), we must
convert the HDMI stream with a converter (will be change in
future works).
3.2 SOFTWARE DESIGN
The software part of the system requires to manipulate differ-

ent levels of abstraction from the physical level (sensors) to
application level (3D objects for instance) so in order to facil-
itate the programming scheme, we implemented an EOS (Em-
bedded Operating System) called Android. This EOS, thanks
Figure 6: Architecture SoC A9500 ST-Ericsson for Mobile to the many APIs available like OpenGL ES 2.0 for GPU in-
Augmented Reality device structions, sensor manager for MEMs, location manager for
GPS, and WiFi manager and Bluetooth adapter for wireless
This architecture is a System on Chip (SoC) designed for connectivity, allows us to rapidly develop our augmented rea-
mobile applications running on embedded operating system lity application. Furthermore we can develop the application
(EOS) and composed of: by using JAVA and/or C/C++ (for native applications) so in
the same application, some parts can be realized in JAVA and
• General Purpose Processor (GPP) that executes the
communicate with others developed in C/C++.
operating system (android in our case),
• Graphical Processor Unit (GPU) that allows us to The software architecture is composed of four parts, a time
generate and manipulate the graphical objects, service to read and control number of frames per second of the
application, graphic service to send commands to the GPU,
• Image Specific Processor (ISP) that manages the video an input service to read sensor and wireless events and the
stream (does not us in our case), last one is orientation service to compute position and orien-
tation objects. Graphics service must read and load texture
• Video that performs some decode step for compres- and shader objects, configure OpenGL ES parameters and
sion/decompression algorithm, send a draw command to the GPU. Input service is used to
• Peripherals that allows us to connect our system with read and write data to the Bluetooth connection in a dedicated
others task whereas another task (looper task) is used to read sensor
events and saves data. If head tracking added for geographic
The GPP is composed of two ARM Cortex A9 whose the positioning, input service could add a special task for orien-
internal frequency can vary from 200 MHz up to 1.0GHz so tation computing with a filter (Gradient descent, Kalman, Ex-
it’s very interesting for power/energy management. The GPU tended Kalman filter and so on) to correct MEMs data and
[5] can process about 1.1 Gpixels/s so these performances are compute attitude. The orientation service updates orientations
sufficient for our target applications. However, to be able to and positions of all objects, it can delete or add new objects
place the virtual objects for the augmented reality system, we (depends of the application) and can compute AIS data ( boat
need sensors allowing to acquire 9 degrees of freedom (DoF). position, heading, and name) to collision detection.
TWS kt TWA deg
12.3 43.0
BSP kt HDG deg
10.0 135
Figure 7: Prototype
4 APPLICATION application can display the boat polars so that everyone on

the boat can have the boat performance to check and validate
The aim of our application is to help crews during the ocean the sail choice and adjustment.
races or inshore. So the first application is dedicated to the
skipper thus we display only text which gives him three kinds Finally the last application (Figure 8 example D) can be ded-
of data. The first one concerns the boat and gives the heading, icated to the tactician since during inshore it can be precious
speed, heel and drift. The second gives information about the to be able to see the buoys and the positions of the other boats
wind; for both the apparent and true wind, we gives the speed in order to take decisions. All the necessary data can come
and angle. Finally, we display various data come from GPS from the navigation processor (GPS and AIS data) via a wire-
as the position, the time and so on. Each data are differentia- less communication as Bluetooth for instance. With our open
ted by a different color in order to respect the readability and navigation processor this application is very easy to develop.
ergonomic; this solution is shown in Figure 8, example A.
5 CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, we present a new open solution to measure and

visualize the sailboat performances. Our system has the ad-
vantage of flexibility since the navigation processor allows to
plug most sensors and to easily implement new computations
(by adding new tasks). On the other hand, the glasses dis-
play is totally flexible and allows to visualize all data or map
navigation according to the skipper choices.
Currently we have a prototype as illustrated in Figure 7. A
box (Pelicase) contains the embedded system for the navi-
gation processor and standard sensors such as anemometer-
van, speedometer, GPS and IMU can be directly plug it. All
data are sent to the see-through AR glasses through a blue-
tooth link and we can visualize them in real-time.
Figure 8: Examples of displays The next step of the project is to improve the see-through AR
glasses by integrating all the embedded system (electronic
The second application allows us to provide for each crew board and battery) in this display device. This is, we study
members information in function of his job on the boat for ins- the energy consumption of this board to optimize power con-
tance for the wind presentation, we display a disc with sailing sumption in order to reduce the battery size and weight.
boat textured and arrow keys moving around it according to
the wind angle; for the wind speed we use text form (Figure 8 REFERENCES
example B). Another way to display the information can be
the use of 3D boat in order to represent the heel, the trim and [1] R. Douguet, J.P. Diguet, J. Laurent, Y. Riou “Open Data
the heading and the use of key arrows for showing the appa- Buoy to Analyze Weather and Sea Conditions for Sailing
rent and true wind angle (Figure 8 example C). The second Regattas”, OCEANS’13 MTS/IEEE, Bergen, NO, 2013.
[2] R. Douguet, J. P. Diguet, J. Laurent, Y. Riou “A New
Real-time Method for Sailboat Performance estimation
based on Leeway Modeling”, The 21 Chesapeake Sail-
ing Yacht Symposium, Annapolis, MD, March 2013.
[3] Laster Technologies, http://www.laster.fr
[4] J. P. Diguet, N. Bergmann, J. C Morgere,“Embedded

System Architecture for Mobile Augmented Reality
(sailor case study)”, PECCS13, Barcelone, ES, 2013.
[5] ARM, Mali-400 MP, http://www.
arm.com/products/multimedia/
mali-graphics-hardware/mali-400-mp.
php
[6] A. Pons, D. Asiain, F. Quero, J. Cuevas, “Racing

Bravo. Un sistema de navigacion para alta competicion”,
Madrid Diseno de Yates 2004, Madrid, ES, 2004.
6 AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
Jean-Christophe Morgère is a PhD student at Lab-STICC,

Université de Bretagne Sud, he obtained his Master degree
in Electronics. He is now working on design of a mobile
augmented reality embedded system: multiple sensors, low
consumption and prototype in marine domain.
Ronan Douguet is a PhD student working between the

Groupama Sailing Team and the Lab-STICC laboratory in
Lorient, he obtained his Master degree in Electronics. His
work concerns the sailboat performance analysis and more
specifically the improvements in wind measurements.
Jean-Philippe Diguet is a CNRS Research Director at

Lab-STICC. He has multiple research activities which re-
ferred to modelling and electronic development in embedded
platforms. His previous experience includes several thesis
supervising in embedded systems and some marine specific
topics about sailing performance or on-board mobile aug-
mented reality.
Johann Laurent works as an Associate Professor at Lab-

STICC, Universite de Bretagne Sud. He is in charge of
teaching in a Master degree in electronics and have research
activities which deals mainly with the power energy con-
sumption in embedded systems. He supervises several works
around electronic research for sailing including thesis and
internships with manufacturers and sailing teams.
LECCO INNOVATION HUB SAILING YACHT LAB PROJECT

A Sailing Research Infrastructure
F. Fossati, Politecnico di Milano, Italy, fabio.fossati@polimi.it

S. Muggiasca, Politecnico di Milano, Italy
I. Bayati, Politecnico di Milano, Italy
C. Bertorello, University of Naples Federico II, Italy
The present paper presents an overview of the Lecco Innovation Hub project and in particular of the Sailing Yacht Lab
project which aims to be a full scale measurement device in the sailing yacht research field. A description of scientific
frame, measurement capabilities as well as of the principal design, building process, project management and
committing are provided.
1 INTRODUCTION vessel’s design will be given, along with a description of

principal design and performance criteria.
The present paper presents an overview of the Lecco Scientific frame, measurement capabilities as well as the
Innovation Hub project and in particular of the Sailing design, building process, project management and
Yacht Lab project which aims to be a full scale committing will be described in the following.
measurement device in the sailing yacht research field.
Lecco Innovation Hub (LIH) is a dedicated nautical 2 THE SAILING YACHT LAB PROJECT
research and training centre at the Lecco Campus of the
Politecnico di Milano university. 2.1 THE SCIENTIFIC FRAME
The project is part of a series of activities shared with the
territory to relaunch the Lecco economy, and aims to Nautical design, which originally used design methods
encourage the transfer of technology to and from the coming from the naval sector and basically craft
nautical and related sectors. approaches to construction technologies, in recent years
Lecco Innovation Hub consists of two basic entities: has undergone evolution drawing on the aeronautical,
energy and automotive sectors and on applied fluid
o The Sailing Yacht Lab, a 10 m length sailing yacht dynamics. Most of the research done by the scientific
fitted with instruments for acquiring data on the community in the nautical sector is currently orientated
behavioural variables of the boat and its towards developing methods for defining the loads acting
components at full scale to support a scientific on the various structures of the boat, with a degree of
approach to design and research activities related to accuracy higher than has so far been available. This
sailing yachts design and their performance implies significant spin-offs for construction and design
o The S.Ma.R.T. (Sustainable Marine Research and methods, with a more appropriate use of innovative
Technology) laboratory designed to support nautical materials.
industry in meeting the increasing pressing
demands for innovation and sustainability. Specific
lines of research are the analysis and management
of the entire life cycle (LCA) of nautical products,
design for disassembling, experimentation with new
materials for construction and fitting out,
ergonomics, safety and comfort on board, interior
lighting and the improvement of the quality of air.
In addition to these are the research infrastructures

present in other sites of the Milan Polytechnic, such as
the Wind Tunnel – Europe’s largest – on the Milan
Bovisa campus [1].
This paper focuses on the Sailing Yacht Lab project: a
brief summary of the origins and early evolution of the Figure 1
The scientific data currently available to designers and
builders derive from studies on scale models, prototypes
or material samples analysed in artificial environments,
such as wind tunnels, towing tanks or test benches
(figure 1). The ambition of the Sailing Yacht Lab is to
allow these data to be measured at full-scale and in real
boat use conditions.
The Sailing Yacht Lab project was strongly inspired and
encouraged by the previous experiences (figure 2)
developed at MIT [2], Kanazawa Institute of Technology
[3] and Berlin TU [5].
Figure 4
Another feature offered by the Yacht Lab, is the

possibility of acquiring data on the geometric shape
assumed by the sails when under way (flying shape),
which differs considerably from the so-called design
shape, the geometrical shape imagined by the sailmaker
when designing and making the sail. The experience built
up in this field by the Department of Mechanics at the
Milan Polytechnic in several measurement programmes
in the wind tunnel of the Milan Bovisa campus for some
of the leading America’s Cup syndicates over the past
decade, has supplied the know-how needed to create a
Figure 2 measurement system that can be used when under sail.
In order to acquire sail shape data in dynamic situations a
measurement system based on laser scanner technique
The Sailing Yacht Lab (figure 3) is designed to function
which has great measurement accuracy and speed has
as a dynamometric balance that can acquire precious data
been developed (figure 5).
on the aerodynamic and hydrodynamic loads acting on
the main components of the yacht. The heart of the
system is a framework inside the hull that allows the
entire rig and sail plan to be connected to a system of
load cells to measure the overall forces and moments
transmitted by the sail plan to the boat when under sail.
Figure 5
Sail shape data can be used in real time to compare sail

trimming parameters with boat performance using in
house developed algorithms and software.
An important aspect of the project is the availability of
systems for measuring the loads acting on the sails. The
possibility of knowing the effective pressure distribution
Figure 3 over the sailplan is of great interest for the aerodynamic
and structural design of sails, and also for the selection
The added value of the Sailing Yacht Lab is thus the and optimal use of materials and production techniques.
possibility of taking measurements in real scale and use Integral measurements alone may not be sufficient for an
conditions, taking account of trimming by the crew. understanding of how to use a sailplan if it is not possible
The Yacht Lab also includes the installation of direct to determine the complex interactions they provoke. On
measurement systems on the various components of the the Sailing Yacht Lab, the distribution of pressure on the
rig (shrouds, winches and blocks) to obtain valuable sails will be mapped using MEMS sensors (an excellent
information for their design). compromise between size, performance, costs and
As an example figure 4 shows strain gages mounted on a operational conditions) installed on the sails in horizontal
conventional winch housing allowing for foresail sheet lines so as to measure different sections of the sailplan.
tensile measure. Wireless transmission of the pressure data will be a
fundamental aspect given the characteristics of the work
environment. All the information acquired directly under lines from a well-known and widely tested production
sail, whether it be mechanical and structural or boat have been used.
aerodynamic and hydrodynamic, will then be correlated Hullform has to guarantee adequate sailing performance
with the dynamics of the boat to evaluate the incidence as well as a fair behaviour in term of form stability and
of the yacht motions on the measurements carried out. seakeeping. While the choice to use lines from Comet 35
The dynamics of the boat are themselves an extremely of COMAR YACHTS (figure 7) is related also to GRP
interesting set of information for developing and bare hull shell availability the project has not suffered
validating numerical methods of performance prediction. any constrain due to the use of an existing boat.
This is why the Sailing Yacht Lab is equipped with a
specially designed and optimised system for measuring
the motions of the boat, integrated by a GPS system and
a trim measurement system.
2.2 CONCEPT DESIGN
The Sailing Yacht Lab project was entirely developed

and managed by a team of researchers in the Mechanics
Department of the Politecnico di Milano.
Yacht design is a complex process in which the designer,
starting from a certain amount of given information and
available resources, deals with the problem of generating
proposals able to meet specified functional requirements.
The most common way of facing this problem has been,
so far, to make use of an iterative approach in which the
different design aspects as e.g. powering, strength,
stability and seakeeping are considered in sequence as
separate design moduli. This approach is quite intuitive
and rather effective in most of cases, but requires much
guess work to the designer when looking for the best
compromise of counteracting features.
Moreover the design moduli are not independent and
have to be matched together by designer experience and
skills. To get the best results from this conservative and
subjective design approach the right choice of design
moduli is of paramount importance; they have to be
adequately detailed to cover any design feature but their
number has to be reduced to allow quick iterations and
easy result updating.
1-HULL
11-ON SHORE 2-FRAME
TEST
SET UP
BACKUP Figure 7
10-RIG
AND SAILS 3-DECK Plating stiffeners, both transversal and longitudinal have
been completely redesigned according to the identified
9-DECK
SAILING
YACHT LAB 4-HULL load cells position (figs. 8-9).
H/WARE APPENDAGES
5-AUX
8-ACCOM- PROPULSION
MODATION
7- SYSTEM 6-
HW & SW ELECTRICS
Fig. 6 design moduli for Sailing Yacht Lab
In figure 6 the design moduli for LIH Sailing Yacht Lab

design are reported. Some of them are within standard
yacht design procedure while 2, 7 and 11 are peculiar of
the boat mission profile.
In this project in order to avoid costs related to moulds
building an already available mould was considered as a
starting point: therefore hull has not be designed, but Figure 8
The light alloy frame has been designed to take loads
from the standing and running rig and to transfer them to
the hull through the six points where load cells are
located assuring negligible deformations and
misalignments. To this aim a 5083 H111 light alloy
structure has been chosen and preferred to carbon fibre
one for lower cost and easier load cell connections
(figure 12).
Although load cells and relative fittings assure a
permanent rigid connection between hull and frame, a
backup system to allow cell removing or to assure safety
in case of cell structural failure has been provided. This
system does not interfere during load acquisition but can
be easily adjusted to lock any relative motion between
hull and frame.
Figure 9
Deck lines have been custom designed due to the strong

interactions of deck lines with the light alloy frame and
to the necessity of a very large open cockpit.
The production boat deck layout was obviously very far
from that. Deck, cockpit and doghouse have been
laminated in a single piece of sandwich GRP using a
one-off plywood mould
Figure 12
The last peculiar design feature of this project is related

to the internal waters where the boat will be used.
The Sailing Yacht Lab is a sustainable, non-invasive
project that is compatible with the ecosystems in which it
will operate. A zero emission electric auxiliary
propulsion has been designed using standard production
elements, to allow three hours range at five knots
cruising speed in calm water (figure 13).
The Sailing Yacht Lab will also be a testing ground for
the further development of electrical propulsion in the
Figure 10 nautical sector, especially as concerns the storage of
electrical energy and the use of renewable sources.
A ballast keel case similar to that used on old AC
monohull has been designed and fitted to the hull bottom
allowing a very thin keel profile and most important a
200 mm keel longitudinal shift in case of different sail
plan to be tested (figure 11).
Figure 11 Figure 13
Also the construction has been entirely carried on by the preferable for this project where almost no reference was
Department of Mechanics staff (figure 14) within LIH available.
facilities (figure 15). The general policy of building process has been to
manage separately the different subcontractors and to
merge them according to identified steps in which partial
results could be checked. This approach is very sound
when the quality of the results is the primary target but
will hardly comply with sharp deadlines.
In the following Table 1 the most important prefabricated
elements and the considered check points are reported.
PURCHASING/PREBUILDING CHECK POINTS

Hull shell purchasing Hull aligned
Cradle construction
Deck mould Deck completed

Deck laminating
Frame components CNC Frame completed

cutting
Frame welding
Frame geometry check
Figure 14 Engine-sail drive coupling Engine installed

Engine installation
Hull transversal framing Frame-cells-structures alignment

Load cells fittings check
Hull longitudinal stiffners Frame mounting - cell alignment

Hull transversal framing check
Deck custom hardware Preliminary deck check- deck

removed
Accommodation
Battery installation
Genoa Boat Show
Hw and Sw installation Load cell system preliminary check

with boat upright and heeled
Deck mounting Hull and deck completed

Outside decoration
External- Internal-Finish
Rudder shaft - Rudder blade Rudder and keel set

Keel structure - Keel fairing
Ballast model - Ballast cast
Rig and Sails set up Ready to sail
Table 1
The hull shell has been bolted to a dedicated cradle, (Fig.

X) to get a permanent reference during the whole
Figure 15 construction.
3 BUILDING PROCESS, PROJECT MANAGEMENT

AND COMMITTING
One off construction is very common in yachting. The

most of large racing yachts are built this way. The
options for a successful and effective building are
basically two. The most common is to identify a main
contractor that will take care and responsibility of the
whole construction although allowing external
contributes for specific yacht features. The second is to
manage several contractors one for each yacht feature Figure 16
and merge these contributes together to get the final
result. The frame geometry and mass properties have been
Although more risky and complex this last one is more controlled before mounting it as well the load cell
flexible to design changes and has been considered alignments with the relative hull structures (figure 17).
5. Hochkirch H., Brandt H. Y., ‘Full Hydrodynamic
Force Measurements on the Berlin Sailing
Dynamometer’, Proceedings of the 14th Chesapeake
Sailing Yacht Symposium, 1999.
AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
Fabio Fossati Mechanical Engineer, PhD in Applied

Mechanics and Full Professor of Applied Mechanics. He
is scientific co-ordinator of wind tunnel testing of sailing
yachts at the Wind Tunnel of the Milan Polytechnic. His
research work is mainly concerned with numerical and
experimental fluid dynamics applied to sailing yachts
with special reference to sail plans aerodynamics and
Figure 17 hull appendages. He was in charge of testing carried out
in the Wind Tunnel for the PRADA Challenge America’s
The whole load acquisition system has been tested before Cup team in 2003, for the Luna Rossa team in 2007 and
deck mounting. for the BMW ORACLE Racing America’s Cup
syndicate. He is currently Research Associate of the
International Technical Committee of the Offshore
6 CONCLUSIONS Racing Congress deeply involved in the ORC
International VPP development.
In the present paper an overview of the Lecco Innovation
Sara Muggiasca Mechanical Engineer, PhD in Applied
Hub project has been provided with particular reference
Mechanics, holds the current position of researcher at
to the Sailing Yacht Lab project which aims to be a full
Politecnico di Milano Department of Mechanics. Her
scale measurement device in the sailing yacht research
researches are in wind engineering field with particular
field.
reference to aeroelasticity and sailing yacht testing
A description of scientific frame, measurement
capabilities as well as of the principal design, building Ilmas Bayati Mechanical Engineer, PhD candidate in
process, project management and committing has been Mechanical Engineering under the area of Dynamics and
provided. Vibration of Mechanical Systems and Vehicles. In
Sailing Yacht Lab us a very challenging project aimed at particular he is a component of the Wind Engineering
providing, together with Politecnico Wind Tunnel, an groupwork at the Wind Tunnel of the Milan Polytechnic.
available tool for research, and design development in His research work is mainly concerned with numerical
the yachting field. and experimental fluid dynamics.
At the moment this paper is going to press Sailing Yacht
Lab is ready to be launched. Carlo Bertorello Naval Architect, Ph. D., Researcher at
University of Naples Federico II from 1999 where he is
actually Professor of “Ship Design”. Professor of Naval
REFERENCES Architecture and Marine Construction at Master Course
of Yacht Design at Politecnico di Milano from 2001.
1. Fossati F. et al., ‘Wind Tunnel Techniques for Member of Italian Delegation at IMO SLF Sessions in
Investigation and Optimization of Sailing Yachts 2000 and 2003. Author of scientific papers on: HSC hull
Aerodynamics’, 2nd High Performance Yacht Design forms and performance optimization, multihull ship
Conference Auckland, 14-16-Feb. 2006 stability, multiattribute design procedures, composite
materials. At present involved in research programs
2. Milgram J.H, Peters D.B., Eckhouse D.N., ‘Modelling concerning non-monohedral planing hull forms,
IACC Forces by Combining Measurements with CFD’, experimental assessment and optimization of HSC
11th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium, 1993. seakeeping characteristics, aerodynamic resistance of
HSC
3. Masuyama Y., ‘Full scale measurements of sail forces
and the validation of the numerical calculation methods’,
Proceedings of the 13th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht
Symposium, 1997.
4. Masuyama Y. et al. ‘Dynamic performance of sailing

cruiser by full scale sea tests’, Proceedings of the 11th
Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium, 1993.
STUDY OF THE INFLUENCE OF SINGULARITIES CREATED BY

AUTOMATED FIBER PLACEMENT ON THE PERFORMANCE OF
COMPOSITE MATERIALS FOR NAVAL STRUCTURES
M. Lan, LIMATB, University of south Brittany, France, marine.lan@univ-ubs.fr,
D. Cartié, Coriolis Composites Technologies SAS, France, denis.cartie@coriolis-composites.com
P. Davies, IFREMER, France, peter.davies@ifremer.fr
C. Baley, LIMATB, University of south Brittany, France, christophe.baley@univ-ubs.fr
The Automated Fiber Placement (AFP) process shows great potential for efficient production of large
composite materials structures, in the construction of racing yachts. However, during the manufacturing
of complex shapes, unavoidable singularities are induced on the entire structure manufactured. The
lack of knowledge concerning the influence of these defects on the performance of composite
materials led us to study the effects of two main singularities, the overlap and the gap. Ultrasound
inspection and Scanning Electronic Microscopy have been performed to compare the microstructures of
a plate without defects with plates containing these singularities. This study also compared the
mechanical properties of a plate made by manual layup with those of a plate made by automated layup,
by tensile tests on carbon / epoxy specimens.
1 INTRODUCTION the part. This is open to discussion, as it will depend on

other parameters described below. However, above this
Composite materials are widely used in the construction value, the mechanical properties of the part can be
of racing yachts. Manufacturing is often by hand layup of significantly affected. Indeed, the interlaminar shear
pre-impregnated carbon/epoxy plies in a mould. The strength (ILSS) is very sensitive to the presence of these
prepreg is a semi-finished product initially developed for voids [1]. The porosity also affects the mechanical
aircraft parts. During the manufacture of boat hulls, and properties in tension, compression and in-plane shear but
other structural elements, it is necessary to control the to a lesser extent [2]. Generally, an increase in porosity
orientation of the fibers in the plies at all points and to leads to a decrease in the mechanical properties of the
obtain composites with a very low level of porosities. material. In the aeronautical industry, a part with porosity
The aeronautical industry has the same constraints, and greater than 2% should be scrapped. This value is still
aircraft manufacturers are equipped with sophisticated often far from those being achieved in the marine
means of production, in particular Automated Fiber industry, where a porosity of around 4% is common with
Placement (AFP) machines. We are interested in the use the methods currently used [3].
of this technology to manufacture naval structures.
2 POROSITIES OF COMPOSITE PARTS IN THE

CONSTRUCTION OF RACING YACHTS
Several methods of implementation are used to transform

high performance composite parts in the field of
shipbuilding, mainly for sailboats and racing vessels.
Parts of larger sizes such as hulls and link arms are made
of prepreg, and processed in a vacuum oven. The
autoclave is used very little considering the dimensions
of rooms and resources, with the exception of masts, and
booms. Boat hulls can also be made by resin infusion.
The assembly of the components is done in turn by
stratification and/or wet processing.
During the manufacture of parts with composite

materials, various types of defects can affect the
mechanical properties. The main defect is the appearance
of porosity in the ply or between the plies of prepreg.
Some examples of pores present in the hull of a racing
yacht are illustrated in Figure 1. It is often considered
that below a certain volume percentage such as 1%, the Figure 1: micrographs of porosity present in hulls made
presence of porosity will not influence on the behavior of of pre-impregnated carbon /epoxy [3]
Specifying only the volume fraction of porosity is not In the manufacture of parts with complex shapes or with
enough to predict the mechanical behavior of a laminate. varying thicknesses, misalignments may be induced at
Indeed, not only the location of the voids in the thickness the edges of the tows. To remedy this problem, the AFP
of the part, their dimensions and their shapes, but also technology allows individual control of prepreg tape that
their distribution can influence mechanical properties of is to say, their routing and cutting, according to the
the manufactured parts. The different process steps also desired layup during the placement. However, the cuts
play a role. Thus, in the case of composite parts made are made perpendicular to the fibres which therefore
from prepreg, porosity may occur during the draping introduces gaps or overlaps (Figure 3.a). The strategy
phase by trapping air between the plies but also during chosen for draping is that fibers can be cut either before
the curing phase that promotes the evaporation of steam the limit of area, leading to the creation of a gap, that is
and reagents trapped in the laminate. It is therefore to say, resin-rich areas, or after reaching the trajectory,
essential to ensure that compaction is closely controlled creating a superposition of the fibres, either partial or
and to adopt temperatures adapted to the material so that complete which results in fiber-rich areas and promoting
polymerization of the resin can proceed under the best thickening of the ply. The appearance of these
conditions, in order to reduce the influence of these singularities, specific to the fiber placement process, will
defects. directly impact on the mechanical properties of the
manufactured parts. Croft [7] has shown that the absence
3 THE AUTOMATED FIBER PLACEMENT of such overlaps achieved the best structural
configurations.
3.1 PROCESS DESCRIPTION
A singularity of steering (Figure 3.b), which consists of
The AFP machine developed by the Coriolis Company depositing a tape on fibers on a curved path, can also be
consists of an automated robot arm, controlled by a created during the draping of a composite part. The
computer, on which is fixed a placement head which trajectories followed by the deposition head may have a
makes it possible to drop off bands of pre-impregnated small radius of curvature (by choice or due to
with precision onto a mould (Figure 2). The width of a geometrical constraint of the part) causing misalignments
band is 6.4 ± 0.25 mm. The robotic head allows the and fibre buckling can then occur due to the undulations
removal of 8-32 tapes simultaneously positioned next to of deposited fibers. Many studies on this singularity have
each other respecting the orientation of plies and defined models to reduce its impact on the mechanical
ensuring repeatability of parts manufactured during the properties of draped structures [8].
layup. These parts are then placed in an autoclave to cure
the resin and promote the consolidation of the plies to Another possible singularity is the formation of a tow-
obtain high quality mechanical properties. twist that can appear when a tape prepreg turns
accidentally when making a ply (Figure 3.c). This creates
This technology has the advantage of making parts of a misalignment and increased local thickness in the
complex curvilinear forms, with single or double laminate.
curvature, in order to optimize the composite structure.
This technique has proven effective in improving the
buckling load [4], reducing the effect of stress
concentrations [5,6], and also decreasing the notch
sensitivity of the part [7].
b)
a)
c)
Figure 3: Illustration of singularities created during layup

by AFP process: a) gap and overlap, b) steering, c) tow-
twist [9]
4 MATERIALS
Figure 2: Coriolis placement head 16 fibers 1/4''
The material used in this study is a pre-impregnated
3.2 LIMITATIONS carbon fiber composite and epoxy matrix from Hexcel
and referenced under the name Hexply®/8552/AS4. This
material contained 57.4 % fiber content by volume, the
size of the tows was 12K (12,000 carbon fibres per tow)
and the laminate density is 1.58 g/cm3.
In the case of a hand layup, the prepreg is used directly in

its original configuration as unidirectional bands. In the
case of draping with the fiber placement process, the
prepreg is presented as a fiber width 6.35 ± 0.25 mm
from the mother band. These tows have been split to be
implemented.
Once the layup is finished, an autoclave cycle is applied

with the presence of a backing mould, as generally used
in the polymerization of aerospace parts. The cycle is as
follows: the temperature increased to 110°C, this
temperature is maintained for 60 minutes with an applied Figure 4: Illustration of singularities configuration: a)
pressure of 7 bars. Then, the temperature is increased to without singularity, b) with gap, c) with overlap
180°C and held for 120 min. The temperature then
decreases with release of pressure at 60°C or less. All the 5.2 ULTRASONIC INSPECTION
plates produced in this study have been polymerized
together in the same vacuum bag. All plates were inspected by ultrasound (C-scan) to
determine the presence or absence of defects. The
5 STUDY OF GAP AND OVERLAP observations were made using a device equipped with a
SINGULARITIES transmitting and receiving 10 MHz ultrasonic probe
immersed in water. The comparison between the
5.1 DRAPING PLATES amplitude of the input signal and the output signal is
used to locate defects. However, this method does not
To study the singularities created by the process of provide an indication on the distribution of these in the
automated fiber placement, plates were draped with a thickness of the plate or their morphologies.
robot at Coriolis Composites. The placement head can
deposit 8 carbon fibers at the same time. To get the plates
with the desired singularities, the draping program is
modified to allow adding, deleting or overlaying
deposited fibers.
Each plate consists of 7 plies in the configuration

[0°/90°/90°/90°/90°/90°/0°]. This configuration was
chosen to study the most critical situation and exaggerate
the morphology of singularities, that are only positioned
and superimposed in the plies oriented at 90°. It is
important to note that each of the plates has been draped
with gaps between the bands based on the tolerances on a) b)
the width of the fiber. Indeed, aircraft manufacturers
impose a maximum shift of 0.5 mm, which is however
not considered a defect, but as a rule of draping.
Three plates have been draped:
- A first plate free of singularity;
- A second plate draped with a gap the width of a fiber,

6.35 mm (this singularity is only located in the center of
the plate in the 90° plies). This means the absence of a c)
fiber equivalent to each of the plies at the same location
(5 plies) corresponding to an extreme case; Figure 5: C-Scan Images of plates: a) plate free of
singularity, b) plate with a gap-type singularity (6.35
- A third plate draped with an overlap half the width of a mm), c) plate with an overlap-type singularity (3.175
fiber or 3.175 mm (the singularity is only located in the mm)
center of the plate in the 90 ° plies).
The results obtained from this analysis are shown in the In the case of a defect-free plate, it is difficult to make
form of maps as illustrated in Fig.5. No defect is visible out the five central layers oriented at 90°. Indeed, the
in the plate free of singularity since the reflected signal is presence of a backing mould during the autoclave cycle
uniform (except at the supports of the plate homogenized all layers. We further observe that there is
corresponding to the black spots on the map). In the case no porosity across the sample. In the case of a plate with
of the plate with a gap defect type, a line appears where a gap, the presence of a backing mould favours the
the observed output signal is lower, which means the mixing between plies and helps to fill the defect.
presence of large defect at the location area of the However, we still see the resin-rich areas and large
singularity created. In the case of the plate with an porosities. The presence of the defect in the plate width
overlap defect, we also see a line in the center of the of a fiber leads to a decrease fiber fraction relative to the
plate at the singularity, where the output signal is slightly previous plate which may explain this analysis. We also
weakened. note that the thickness of the plate is less than that
obtained for a plate draped without defects (respectively
5.3 SEM ANALYSIS thickness of 1.18 mm and 1.30 mm). On the third plate,
we see the same homogenization of plies as in previous
We focus now on the morphology of singularities in plates. We also note that there is no presence of porosity.
order to compare and observe the organization of plies. However, the thickness of the plate is slightly greater
For this, we removed samples at the centre of each plate (thickness of 1.38 mm) than in the case of defect-free
where defects were introduced. These samples were cut plate due to higher fiber density.
with a diamond disc and then polished to obtain clean
surfaces. We then made observations in the Scanning To conclude this analysis, we can highlight that the
Electron Microscope (Figure 6). presence of one backing mould during the autoclave
cycle has achieved consistent plates, that is to say the
central layers of the same orientation are mixed to create
uniform plates. So there is a movement of the rovings
during the polymerization of the resin. We note that the
large gap (the width of a fiber) is thus filled despite the
presence of resin-rich areas and large pores. In the case
of an overlap-type defect, fiber concentration slightly
favours an increase in the thickness of the sample.
6. COMPARATIVE STUDY OF HAND LAYUP

AND LAYUP BY AFP
a)
6.1 DRAPING PLATES
For this study, we produced two plates (one hand layup

and the other with AFP) consisting of 7 plies in a
[0°/90°/0°/90°/0°/90°/0°] configuration. The conditions
of manufacture and the cycle in the autoclave are
identical to those used in the previous study.
6.2 SEM ANALYSIS
b) Before performing tensile tests, we are interested in the

structure of the two types of layup. Samples were
prepared for SEM micrographs as illustrated in Figure 7
below.
When comparing the microstructures of a hand layup and

an automated layup plate, we see very little difference.
The impregnation of the plies is complete and the few
pores visible have a diameter equivalent to a carbon fiber
(micro-porosities) and are mainly located in the inter-ply
region for both types of draping. We note, however, in
the case of draping by AFP, a distinction between the
c) tows (area slightly resin rich) due to the presence of a
gap of 0.5 mm imposed by the aircraft manufacturers.
Figure 6: Micrographs of plates: a) plate free of
singularity, b) plate with a gap (6.35 mm), c) plate with
an overlap (3.175 mm)
Ultimate strength (MPa)
Number of
Hand layup AFP layup
sample
1 1120 /
2 / 1180
3 1155 1109
4 1163 970
5 1093 /
a) 6 / 1140
7 1069 /
Mean value 1120 1100
Standard
31 65
deviation
Tab. 1. Results of tensile tests with a break in the central

part of the test for a hand layup and a layup by AFP
Tab.1. shows that the mean stresses at break are almost

identical for manually draped and AFP draped tensile
b) specimens, with a slightly higher variability for the latter.
Figure 7: Micrograph images of plates: a) hand layup The very small difference in tensile strengths may be due
plate, b) automated layup plate
to the material used. Indeed, the AFP tape is a prepreg
after a unidirectional sheet slitting operation. The
6.3 TENSILE TESTS
material thus undergoes an additional processing step
when cutting ribbons in the mother sheet. In contrast, for
6.3.1 Method manually draping, the prepreg is directly used in its form
of unidirectional sheet. This is an additional feature
To perform tensile tests, rectangular specimens were cut
specific to the process of automated fiber placement.
from the plates in the direction of the plies oriented at 0°
in accordance with the dimensions given in the ISO 527-
7 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
4 standard (dimensions of 25 x 250 x 1.30 mm) using a
diamond disc. The specimen edges were then polished to The process of fiber placement today has great potential
remove traces of the cutting disc, thus reducing possible
for the manufacture of complex structures. However,
areas of damage.
there is still a lack of knowledge about the influence of
the singularities specific to this process on the
In order to avoid spurious constraints that may be caused performance of composite materials. The objective of
by the clamping system of the tensile testing machine this study was to investigate the morphologies of the two
and avoid causing premature failure of the samples, main singularities, overlap and gap. We also compared
glass-fiber/epoxy oriented +/-45° tabs of approximately 1
the mechanical properties of an AFP plate to those of a
mm thickness were bonded to each end using a two-
hand draped plate.
component epoxy adhesive .
The analysis of micrographs of gap and overlap
Tensile tests were performed on an Instron hydraulic singularities has highlighted the important role of the
tensile machine with a load cell of 50 kN. The tests were backing mould during the autoclave curing of
performed under displacement control at 2 mm / min.
carbon/epoxy plates. Indeed, we found a reorganization
of plies which took place before the polymerization of
6.3.2 Results
the resin, thereby reducing the size of singularities. Thus,
even when a gap defect of width of a strand is present in
The majority of the specimens broke in the central the plate, the reorganization of plies can still fill the
section, away from the end tabs. Results from specimens
empty space created when draping. However, there are
which failed in the tabs are excluded from the analysis.
still some areas rich in resin and higher porosity
compared to a plate without the gap defect. In the case of
Table 1 presents the values of tensile strength determined a plate with an overlap singularity of a half-fiber size, we
during testing for the two sets of samples. also find a reorganization of plies with a slight thickening
of the plate due to the increased density of fiber.
Regarding the comparison of the types of draping, we Engineering, Vol. 43, n°3, pp. 997-1009, April
found that the mechanical properties of a laminate draped 2012.
manually were virtually identical (within 2%) to those of
a laminate draped by AFP. This suggests that for this
type of tensile loading the additional slitting step
required for AFP does not affect properties significantly.
Further work is ongoing to examine these defects under
other loadings (compression, shear).
The use of AFP technology for the construction of racing

yachts request to adapt the available robots for draping
large hull. It will also require the development of prepreg
tape with a feature specific of this industry and thus to
lower that those of aviation costs. Another solution is to
use this technology for the removal of powdered fibers
for making preforms that are subsequently infused.
REFERENCES
1. M.L. Costa, S.F. Müller de Almeida, M.C.

Rezende, ‘The influence of porosity on the ILSS of
carbon/epoxy and carbon/bismaleimide fabric
laminates’, Composites Science and Technology,
Vol. 61; pp 2101-2108; 2001.
2. L. Liu, B. Zhang, D. Wang, ‘Void content in
carbon/epoxy composites and its effects on flexural
properties’, 49th International Sampe Symposium
and Exhibition, pp. 254-261, 2004.
3. R. Maurin, « Contribution à l’étude des facteurs
limitant l’usage des matériaux composites pour la
réalisation de bateaux de course », Thesis of
LIMATB, University of South Britany, 2010.
4. Z. Gürdal, B. Tatting, C.K. Wu « Variable-stiffness
composite panels: Effects of stiffness variation on
the in-plane and buckling response », Composites
Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, Vol.
39, n°. 5, pp. 911-922, Mai 2008.
5. C.S. Lopes, Z. Gürdal, P.P. Camanho « Tailoring
for strength of composite steered-fiber panels with
cutouts », Composites Part A: Applied Science and
Manufacturing, Vol. 41, n°. 12, pp. 1760-1767,
December 2010.
6. L.E. Turoski, « Effect of manufacturing defects on
the strength of toughened carbon/epoxy prepreg
composites », Thesis of Montana State University,
2010.
7. K. Croft, L. Lessard, D. Pasini, M. Hojjati, J. Chen,
A. Yousefpour, « Experimental study of the effect
of automated fiber placement induced defects on
performance of composite laminates », Composites
Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, Vol.
42, n°. 5, pp. 484-491, May 2011.
8. A. Beakou, M. Cano, J.-B. Le Cam, V. Verney,
« Modelling slit tape buckling during automated
prepreg manufacturing: A local approach »,
Composites Structures, Vol. 93, pp. 2628-2635,
April 2011.
9. D.H.-J.A. Lukaszewicz, C. Ward, K. Potter, « The
engineering aspects of automated prepreg layup:
History, present and future », Composites Part B:
TAG SHEPERD: A LOW-COST AND NON-INTRUSIVE MAN OVER-

BOARD DETECTION SYSTEM
Nicolas Le Griguer, Lab-STICC, Universite de Bretagne Sud, France
Johann Laurent, Lab-STICC, Universite de Bretagne Sud, France
Jean-Philippe Diguet, Lab-STICC, CNRS, France
This paper presents a man overboard detection system based on the monitoring of a group of sailors. It
introduces a set of existing solutions proposed to track and rescue a person falling into the water. Based
on the state of the art, it describes our original solution which is low-cost and low footprint compared to
the other ones. It was developed to be a plug-n-play system that can be generalized for every sailor to
detect a man overboard.
1 INTRODUCTION The rest of the paper is organised as follows:
Many fatal sea accidents still occur and most of them are over- • Section 2 presents the different existing solutions already
board falls. For example, for the 2012 year, 15% of the rescue available on the market.
operations performed by the SNSM (the rescue team for the
• Section 3 describes our solution, including hardware de-
French coastline) was for a man overboard as we can see in
tails for the different parts.
figure 1 (just behind broken motors). The life expectancy of
a sailor, who fell into the sea, is about 30 to 60 minutes for a
4 to 10 Celsius degrees water. The necessity to decrease the 2 EXISTING SOLUTIONS
time to detect a man overboard is the key factor to save life.
Furthermore, more the detection time is important and less is The improvement of the security on board is a real challenge
the chance to rescue an overboard sailor even if weather con- for the manufacturers in the world of sailing, it’s for this rea-
ditions are good. son that many distributors sell different solutions. There are
different levels of complexity which result in different price
ranges. There are 3 main categories, from the most complex
to the simplest one, resulting in different options and tech-
nologies, for instance the use of the AIS signal, the possibil-
ity to get the position of the Man OverBoard (MOB) or to
connect the system to an automatic pilot for a rescue maneu-
ver. The next section discusses AIS-based devices with GPS
positioning of the person in danger.
2.1 AIS-based devices

The Automatic Identification System (AIS) is a communi-
cation protocol used to locate and identify ships on the sea
but also some navigation elements like lighthouses or buoys.
This protocol transmits many informations about the emitting
vessel, like its position, course, speed, name and type for in-
Figure 1: SNSM Statistics stance. This system is required to be fitted on board when the
vessel tonnage is more than 300 tons but many lighter ships
As we will see in the next section, some solutions already are equipped because of the security gain it offers. Indeed, it’s
exist, as distress beacons integrated to a life-jacket; when the used to perform many actions like:
sailor falls overboard, the transceiver is powered on and alerts
• Collision Avoidance: by computing the different naviga-
the other sailors on the boat. This solution supposes that ev-
tion data of each ship, it can alert about a collision.
erybody wears a life-jacket (the French SNSM statistics show
that is rarely the case), and the boat must be fitted with bulky • Check the vessel traffic: used in some maritime roads
equipment that implies an expensive deployment cost. Others with a high traffic density to perform a regulation.
solutions exist but are not very suitable and so not used due
to the size, cost or response time constraints. To offer the ex- • Help for navigation: by giving some information about
pected security with a reduced cost and a simple integration the traffic and the navigation assistance. (lighthouses and
in the boat, we developed a low-cost and plug-n-play solution. buoys for instance).
• Search and rescue: used to coordinate the marine Search 2.2 RF-based devices
And Rescue (SAR) operations by giving position infor-
Another way to detect a MOB is to put a RF transmitter on
mation of a damaged vessel that can be checked with
every sailor and check the signal with receiver positioned into
another ship or an aircraft.
the boat. When someone falls into the water, the RF link is
broken and an alarm is switched on informing the danger.
Generally, these products have a monitoring range which is
It is this last usage, which is employed by some manufactur-
about 10 to 30 meters, it means that when a beacon is far away
ers to build some rescue beacons. When a sailor falls into the
of this range, the alarm is switched on. Some repeaters can
water, the device is switched on and an AIS-SART (Search
be used to increase the monitoring range like in the Rayma-
And Rescue Transmitter) signal is broadcasted. In this case,
rine LifeTag MOB System [2]. Indeed, if the reception range
the ship where the MOB comes from can rescue him, but the
of the base station is not enough compared to the size of the
others vessels sailing near the MOB, lifeboats and rescue air-
boat, some repeaters can provide a more important monitor-
craft have also access to the signal. The illustration 2 shows
ing range. The figure 3 shows the functional scheme of this
the principle of an AIS-based MOB detection system.
kind of solutions.
Figure 3: Illustration of RF-based MOB detection

Figure 2: AIS-based MOB detection
This is a basic two-way radio based device that can be
paired with the automatic pilot of the boat. Indeed, the au-
These types of beacon have an integrated GPS chip to send
tomatic pilot can be used to stop the boat when the sailor is
the coordinates of the MOB, so it’s possible to locate the per-
alone on board, or in the case of a sailing team, the naviga-
son with a high precision and the signal is visible in a circle
tion routing devices can give the direction to rescue the MOB.
of around 4 nautical miles. The main problem of this type of
Each beacon emits continuously, it means that the battery is
equipment is its price, for example a Kannad R10 AIS emitter
more stressed so the battery life will be altered. To give some
[1] is around 240e and a receiver (needed to get the signal
examples, the systems based on the 2.4Ghz technology have
from the boat) is approximately the same. So this kind of
a battery life about 200 operational hours (Raymarine Life-
product is not intended to be used on a pleasure boat or in a
Tag MOB System [2]) to 2000 hours (MOB Dolphin 600 [3]).
small company due to its deployment cost.
This type of device is smaller than the AIS-based one, indeed
The main advantage of this kind of product is its good bat- the Raymarine [2] and the Dolphin [3] beacon are approxi-
tery life, for example the Kannad R10 [1] distress beacon can mately the same size, they can be carried on the arm but re-
emit the MOB position during 24 hours after that he falls over- mains quite big with a size of 60x45x25mm. The price range
board. It’s because the system is powered on only when the of these devices is around 550e for the base station and 150e
people wearing it falls overboard, the rest of the time the bea- for each personal beacon. We can see that the price remains a
con doesn’t consume any power. At least, another problem problem to generalize a large adoption.
of this solution is the portability of the device, this beacon Another device, similar to this one, is the MOBi from
must be fitted into a life-jacket to be activated with the infla- NASA Marine Instruments [5]. It’s composed of a base sta-
tion (or activated manually if it’s not paired to a life-jacket). tion which is monitoring some beacons like in the others sys-
The observation of the sailors behaviour shows that people tems. Each signal delivered by the emitters is displayed on the
are rarely wearing life-jackets, it’s true on the trade vessels, screen of the base station and when beacon signal falls over a
fishing boats and even pleasure boats. It is for this reason that selected threshold, an alarm is activated to indicate the MOB.
another type of product was developed by others companies The most disadvantage of this solution is its size, each per-
to detect a man overboard more easily, and to get a low-cost sonal beacon measures 77x44mm. Since it needs to be pow-
and hand-held device. ered with 3 AAA cells, its weight is also a problem and its
battery life does not exceed some weeks in a continuous us- tween the sailors and the base station. A small device plugged
age. Finally, the price is about 350e for the base station and into the boat (receiver), performs a continuous radio scan of
50e per tag, which is the cheapest MOB detection system in the transmitters located in its field of action. These transmit-
the market usable with many beacons. ters are based on longlife active RFID tag that are fitted into
small package and can be carried as a key ring or putted into
2.3 Water-detection based device a pocket, a jacket or other clothing items. Each beacon emits
its unique identifier with a given frequency (e.g. 1Hz) that can
This last kind of device is a simplified version of the previous be tuned according a tradeoff between life time and reaction
one. It’s a two-way radio principle very minimalist without time. The receiver is configured to only monitor a set of se-
options like the coupling to an autopilot. The most simple one lected beacons, when one of them is not emitting, it means
is the HawkEye SA500SP [4], which is composed of a base that someone is out of a safe perimeter corresponding to the
station and an unique emitter. The alarm is activated when boat area. In this case an alarm notifies this event, and the
the beacon enters in contact with water, this detection is made crew can perform a rescue operation. In addition, this secu-
through water sensor positioned on the surface. It means that rity central unit can be connected to a navigation processing
this sensor must not be in contact with anything, the manufac- unit to provide some useful information like the GPS posi-
turer says that this emitter is very sensitive and recommends tioning in order to guide the crew during the rescue maneu-
to not place it in a pocket or in another place where the water ver. The maximum delay for considering the accident is about
sensor could be in contact with something. The main problem 4 seconds, with an optimal setting for the beacon emitting
of this device is that it could be activated easily by anything frequency, it garanties a one-year battery life; it is obviously
with a contact even if there is no danger, but also with a water much more efficient than a visual check by a busy crew.
projection. On the other hand, the main advantage of this so-
lution is its cost since the complete device cost is about 49$.
It’s the cheapest system available on the market, but currently 3.1 Hardware
it cannot be used to detect a man overboard in sailing condi- Our solution is based on a simple link between some trans-
tions (wet environment and many actions making contact with mitters and a receiver. Each beacon worn by the sailors are
the sensor) and with more than one sailor. transmitters and receiver checks the signal of each beacon,
when some people falls overboard, the RF link is broken and
2.4 Conclusion the receiver puts an alarm on to forewarn the danger. The at-
tention has been focused on the battery life of the beacons,
Comparing these different solutions, we show that more the
their size and price but also on the small bulk for the base
complexity is high, more the technical constraints are high
station in order to integrate the system easily in any boat.
and so the price too. On the contrary, a low-cost system is
generally composed of some basic emitters and a monitoring
base station, which waits for a missing signal, reducing the 3.1.1 Transmitter
cost and improving the battery life even if it doesn’t exceed Each sailor is equipped with a personal distress beacon which
some weeks in a continuous usage. The table below summa- is in fact a RF transmitter. The beacon is like an RFID ac-
rizes the different pros and cons of the different products. tive tag, each of them have a unique identifier which is broad-
Cost Battery Life Size casted through a RF link. The frequency selected is 433.92
MHz, it’s a good tradeoff between emitting range and power
AIS-based
+ +++ + consumption. Indeed, it consumes less power than a wire-
devices
less solution using higher frequencies like we saw previously
RF-based
++ + ++ with the 2.4 GHz frequency. For example, an Xbee module
devices
transmitting a data consumes 50mA at 3.3V, it’s two times
Water-
more than our solution. An ultra low-power microcontroller
detection +++ + ++
is paired to an RF transmitter and periodically wake-up the
based devices
system, broadcast its unique identifier and return into sleep
Table 1: Comparison between different types of MOB detec- mode. In that case, the power consumption is reduced to the
tion minimum required to keep the system in the sleep mode and
the peak of current consumption occurs only when the identi-
Considering this situation and the user requirements based fier of the beacon is sent.
on real-life behaviours, we worked to find a better compro- This power management offers the possibility to keep a
mise to reduce the size of the beacons, increase the battery beacon emitting at 1 Hz during one year and three months
life and reduce the cost of both the base station and the emit- (this value was first estimated and validated with a prototype
ters. in real conditions). Depending of the conditions of usage, this
period of emitting can be augmented to increase the battery
3 OUR SOLUTION life. For example a racing boat needs a shorter detection time
than a pleasure boat sailing slowly. The maximum detection
Starting from the constraints that we identified, we tried to time is equal to two periods of emission, so depending of the
design smaller and cheaper product based on the RF link be- boat speed and the response time needed, we can increase the
delay between two emissions, and so increase the battery life. the base station realizes a scan of the emitting beacons and
Finally, we can tune the power amplifier of the RF device in put them into its list of monitoring. Then continuous scans
order to increase the transmission range according to both the are performed in its range of monitoring. When a signal is
boat size and the perimeter of detection (larger is the transmis- lost (corresponding to a falling into the water), an alarm is
sion range, lower is the battery life). So, with these different activated to prevent the rest of the crew. If the boat disposes
settings and in function of the boat specifications and of the of a set of beacons, and one of them is not used then it can
response time needed, the battery life can be increased up to be placed in a small box acting as a Faraday shield. In this
several years. The figure 4 shows an example of battery life way, when the captain will perform the detection of the emit-
for a detection range up to 15 meters. The emitting period is ting beacons available, the system will only see those worn by
computed in order to have a MOB alert before the distance the sailors. Currently, the base station is just emitting a high
between the boat and the MOB is higher than 15 meters. The acoustic signal and displays a flashing light, but it can also be
figure below shows also the theoretical value of the battery connected to a navigation processor unit to keep the position
life depending on the emitting period. when the man falls overboard and help during the rescue step.
Our solution has been validated, including radio, hardware
and software aspects.
3.2 Functional Diagram

The figure 6 shows the system implemented in a boat with
3 sailors, we can see the receiver performing its scan of the
different beacons. When there is a MOB event, the distress
signal is emitted; in this figure we can also see an additional
feature consisting of connecting the base station to the boat
navigation processing unit.
Figure 4: Battery life VS emitting period
The size of the beacon is mainly determined by the battery

size. Thus as shown before, several efforts are made in order
to reduce the battery size while preserving a reasonable oper-
ating time. Currently, the transmitter prototype can be carried
into a pocket or worn as key ring due to its small size (cf fig-
ure 5); this size still could be decreased by using a smaller
battery.
Figure 6: MOB detection system
3.3 About marketing

Each beacon is composed by one RF transmitter, one micro-
controller and one battery. So as these devices are cheap, we
estimate that beacon could be proposed twice cheaper than
the MOBi from NASA MARINE INSTRUMENTS [5](price
around 25e for a tag). The main station, which is also com-
posed of the same type of components, could be also indus-
trialized with a low-cost. In order to adapt the solution for
different types of consumers, we have chosen to propose two
alternatives for the product :
Figure 5: Prototype picture
• Smart solution: Composed by the base station and a
number of beacons needed by the client that can be con-
nected to the boat just by powering it. It’s a plug-n-play
3.1.2 Receiver
solution, ready for use without any other connection than
The receiver, called base station, monitors a set of beacons se- the electric one. This solution, which is the cheapest one,
lected by the user. When the user press the appropriate button, is adapted for pleasure boating or small fishing boat.
• Full solution: Same solution than the smart one but with and software developments for the Groupama Sailing Team
the possibility to connect the board to a computer to to prepare the Volvo Ocean Race and building prototypes for
check the different beacons and set the different options on board security based products for Lab-STICC projects.
(receiving range of the base station, delay for alerting, He’s now in charge of electronic development for the Voilier
setting of the monitored tags, ...). This solution is more du Futur project which aims to create a demonstrator cruising
parametrizable, but also more expensive is made to be yacht which will incorporate eco-innovations in the areas of
used in bigger boats than the previous one and could be materials, energy, waste-water treatment, rigging components
deployed on big fishing vessels or race boats for instance. and fittings, ergonomics and safety.
Johann Laurent works as an Associate Professor at Lab-
4 CONCLUSION and PERSPECTIVES STICC, Universite de Bretagne Sud. He is the head of
the Master degree in electronics at the UBS. His research
Assuming that the security is a real challenge in any type of activities deals mainly with the power energy consumption
sailing, we saw that many manufacturers propose solutions in embedded systems. He supervises several works around
based on different technologies. In the objective of a mass electronic research for sailing including phD and internships
deployment, we need a low-cost, small and easy pluggable with manufacturers and sailing teams. He is responsible for
system So we designed our solution to respect these consider- the electronic and safety part of the Voilier du Futur project
ations and finally we obtain a low power and size system that with Jean-Philippe Diguet.
can be worn as a keyring or integrated in sailing clothes. In Jean-Philippe Diguet is a CNRS Research Director at
addition, the complete solution is low-cost, so it can be pur- Lab-STICC. He had multiple research activities which
chased by many pleasure sailors or small fishing companies, referred to modelling and electronic development in em-
improving their security and the chances to rescue a MOB. bedded platforms. His previous experience includes several
The next development consists of connecting the base sta- thesis supervising in embedded systems and some marine
tion to the main navigation system of the boat in order to specific topics about sailing performance or on-board mobile
take into account the GPS position of the boat to improve augmented reality.
the rescue step. Another improvement would be the use of
triangulation-based process to locate the sailors on board in
order to improve the crew displacements on the boat (very
useful for sailing teams).
REFERENCES
[1] Kannad Safelink R10, http://www.

kannadmarine.com/en/safelink-r10
[2] Raymarine LifeTag Man Overboard System,

http://www.raymarine.com/view/?id=157
[3] Alltek Marine Dolphin, http://www.

alltekmarine.com/products_detail.
php?bgid=8&gid=21
[4] HawkEye SA500SP, http://www.

hawkeyeelectronics.com/
SA500SP-water-sports-communication-system/
[5] Nasa Marine MOBi, http://www.nasamarine.

com/proddetail.php?prod=Mobi
5 AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
Nicolas Le Griguer holds the current position of Research

Engineer at Lab-STICC, Universite de Bretagne Sud. He is
responsible for developing prototypes and demonstrators for
research projects. His previous experience includes electronic

KITE AND CLASSICAL RIG SAILING PERFORMANCE COMPARISON

ON A ONE DESIGN KEEL BOAT
R. Leloup, K. Roncin, G. Blès, J.-B. Leroux, C. Jochum, LBMS (EA 4325), ENSTA - Bretagne, France,
firstname.name@ensta-bretagne.fr
Y. Parlier, OCEA, rue des Terres Neuves, BP 21, 33322 Bègles Cedex, yves.parlier@parlier.org, www.parlier.org
Abstract
An implementation of a kite modelling approach into 6 degrees of freedom sailboat dynamic simulator
is introduced. This enables an evaluation of kite performance in comparison with classical rig sailing.
A “zero-mass” model was used to model kite forces. Influence of the wind gradient was properly
taken into account which led to significant modifications in the calculation of the relative wind, both
in magnitude and in orientation. The modelling is performed with real aerodynamic characteristics
given by experimental data. An optimization is done to determine the best kite flight configuration in
terms of performance.
Validation steps of the sail yacht simulator are performed for a classical rig on the example of an 8
meter one design yacht. The experimental setup is described and validation results are discussed. An
interpolation technique in space and time of the wind mesh was used, based on measurements made at
four different locations of the navigation spot. Boat motions were recorded by high resolution GPS
and inertial unit systems.
Speed polar diagram results, reached by kite propulsion, were predicted versus true wind angle. At last
a comparison is made for upwind and downwind legs in sea trials conditions, between simulations
with the classical rig and the kite. It is shown that the boat towed by kite would achieve much better
sailing performance.
1 INTRODUCTION Velocity Prediction Program (DVPP) [2] for an 8 meters

one design yacht, the Beneteau First Class 8. Validity of
Regarding world speed records, kite surfers demonstrated the DVPP was assessed by sea trials comparisons that are
the performance efficiency of kites. In this context, taking presented and discussed. Furthermore, to ensure the use of
advantage of wind using kites as propulsion systems for real validated data, kite aerodynamic parameters were
yachts can be an alternative to conventional sails. This taken from Dadd [3,4] experiments. A comparison
study takes place within the project "Beyond the Sea®" between classical rig and kite propulsion is presented in
launched by Yves Parlier and is managed in partnership the last section, based on velocity polar diagrams and on
with the LBMS laboratory of ENSTA Bretagne and the upwind and downwind legs.
French ministry of defense.
2 MODELLING APPROACH OF A FLYING KITE
A methodology for kite propulsion efficiency analysis
regarding a classical rig sailing yacht is presented in this This section presents the setting technique used to
paper. The aim is to highlight and to explain differences describe the kite within the flying window. This enables
between the two propulsion technologies applied to the kite velocities descriptions which are the main input data
same yacht. A modelling approach for a flying kite is for the velocity comparison strategy with a classical
sailing rig presented in this study.
presented in the first part of the study which takes into
account the wind gradient linked to atmospheric boundary 2.1 WIND WINDOW REFERENCE FRAMES
layer. Analytical expressions for apparent wind velocity
seen by the kite and for kite velocity at each position An illustration of the kite within the half sphere wind
within the wind window are presented. An optimization window is shown in figure 1. In this figure O denotes the
technique for best flight configuration is proposed. attachment point of the tethers to a reference point
Especially, the optimization technique proposed differs (ground or deck of a ship for instance)
from the literature [1] namely by the analysis of vertical
“8 shaped” trajectories which enable significant upwind
benefits, as shown in the results section. The kite
modelling approach was implemented into a Dynamic
Wind window edge
2.2 WIND GRADIENT DESCRIPTION
The wind friction with the sea surface (or ground) leads to
a zero wind velocity at sea level. Therefore the true wind
velocity VWT decreases when altitude decreases. This
phenomenon is called wind gradient and was introduced
yWR xWR
in the modelling instead of a constant wind velocity as a
Vs zWR yF
Vk function of altitude. According to ITTC 2011 [5], the wind
yk0 K xvk xF O velocity as a function of altitude can be calculated using
zk0 VWR
F
the formula:
xk0 vk zF n
T
VWT = U10 § ·
z (1)
Kite trajectory ©10¹
I Where U10 is the wind velocity at standard altitude 10 m
Figure 1: Flying kite within the wind window. (m.s-1)
z is altitude above sea level(m)
In case of a boat, the wind window is oriented by the n is a coefficient which is equal to 1/7 for the sea
relative wind velocity vector VWR at each point. Pay surface according to ITTC 2011 [5]
attention to the fact that relative wind is used to be called
apparent wind for the sailing boat. The notation adopted The wind velocity according to altitude is plotted in figure
here is the ITTC Standard notation [5] that allows, in the 3. One can see that the wind velocity increases when
case of kite, to clearly distinguish the relative wind seen altitude increases. Therefore, it can be more favourable to
by the boat and the apparent wind seen by the kite. Figure use a kite which flies at high altitude where the wind
1 shows the kite in the wind window bounded by the velocity is higher.
“wind window edge”. The kite is represented by point K,
which is located at the quarter chord in the symmetry
plane of the kite. The reference frame Rk0, which is
attached to point K, is obtained by rotating about zWR by
the azimuth angle I, and then by the elevation angle (θ –
π/2) around yk0. Unit vector xvk is oriented along the
direction of the kite velocity and is obtained by rotating
vector xk0 about zk0 by angle χvk. Rb is the body reference
frame, attached to the kite as presented in figure 2. The
aerodynamic reference frame Ra is oriented in accordance
with the kite apparent wind velocity Va. Reference frame
RF is fixed in relation to the flow so that xF axis is in the
course direction along the ship velocity Vs.
Fa
L
Figure 3: Wind velocity according to altitude.
2.3 KITE VELOCITY BASED ON THE ZERO MASS

H MODELLING APPROACH
This section presents a review made on the common “zero

mass” model [3,4,6] which was rewritten to enable an
αgeom xb D
(xk0,yk0)
analytical and easy to use expression of the velocity of the
kite.
-H xa plane According to the Newton's laws applied to the kite at point
Va zb z z a K, assuming that the mass of the kite is neglected,

equilibrium equation is as follows:
k0
Figure 2: Aerodynamic forces vector decomposition in the T + Fa = 0 (2)
kite symmetry plane.
The aerodynamic resultant, Fa, compensates the tethers
However, tethers length can usually be around several tension, T, at any time and these two forces are aligned on
hundred meters to facilitate high wind capture. This makes the same axis that goes from attachment point O to the
sense to take wind gradients effects with altitude into point K of the kite. The second equation which governs
account. the kite motion is the apparent wind equation:
on the yF axis, we obtain the drift force. These forces are
Va = VWR - Vk (3)
integrated with respect to time along the flight trajectory
With VWR = VWT – Vs, where Vs denotes the ship velocity. of the kite, in order to obtain their average values for a
According to the definition of the aerodynamic resultant, given trajectory. This enables comparison of the
we have: trajectories efficiency based on average propulsive force.
Fa = L + D (4) xWT βWT
The apparent wind velocity vector Va is assumed to
Wind
window at a yWT
remain in the symmetry plane of the kite. This leads in the Vs U10
plane (xa,za), to the configuration shown in figure 2. As given
βWR VWR
demonstrated by Leloup [7,8] the projection of equation altitude xWR
(3) onto the corresponding axes and by scalar product with xF
zk0: yWR
Wind window at
O yF
Va = - VWR xWR.zk0 (5) 10m
sin H
Moreover, using the scalar product properties equation (3)
leads to:
|Va|2 = |VWR|2 + |Vk|2 - 2 |VWR| |Vk| (xWR.xvk) (6)
Combined with equation (5), equation (6) can be seen as a

second order equation of the velocity of the kite Vk
Figure 4: Kite flying wind window 10 m above sea level
leading therefore to:
and at a given altitude higher than 10m.
Vk = VWR ªxWR.xvk + (xWR.xvk)2 + xWR.z -1 º
2
k0
(7)
¬ sin H
2
¼ As shown in figure 4, true wind velocity VWT variation
The velocity of the kite is real only if with altitude modifies the relative wind angle βWR
2 observed at 10m (ship level for instance). The orientation
|xWR.xvk| t °1 - ((xWR.z2 k0) )° (8) of the wind window is therefore varying with the altitude
° sin H ° leading to a twist of the wind window edge as shown in
Condition (8) shows that the existence of the velocity of figure 1. Especially, it is pointed out that the wind window
the kite is only defined for a given flying area so-called orientation is modified with increasing altitude. The wind
"manoeuvrable area" below the red limit line shown in window is oriented by the relative wind angle EWR at the
figure 1. In this area the kite can move in all directions. altitude of the kite. As the kite altitude increases, the
Above the red limit line, the kite cannot fly. It corresponds relative wind angle EWR progressively increases as well,
to the "wind window edge". leading therefore to more efficient towing force in
direction. This is a key point that has to be considered for
2.4 AERODYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS kite propulsive force optimization strategy presented in
next section.
A sail area of 35 m² was used during sea trials with a one
design sailboat settled with a classical rig. To make a 2.6 MAXIMUM PROPULSIVE FORCE POLAR
meaningful comparison the same area was taken for the ALGORITHM
kite. A typical tethers length of 100 m was considered in a
first approach. Aerodynamic characteristics of the kite For a given ship and wind velocity, the polar plot of the
were taken from Dadd experiments done on a ram-air kite maximum propulsive force can be done according to the
[3,4]. Thus, the lift coefficient CL and glide angle H are true wind angle βWT (relative to ship course). For each βWT
0.776 and 9.55 ° respectively. value a kite flight optimization loop was developed
testing, for a given elevation angle θ, both static and
2.5 PROPULSIVE FORCE GENERATED BY THE dynamic flight cases. In case of a static flight, which
KITE corresponds to a given elevation angle, the azimuth angle
I was computed in order to put the kite on the wind
Once apparent wind velocity of the kite Va is known at window edge which is the only location to keep the kite
each position within the wind window, the tethers tension into a static position according to condition (8). The
resultant T, which is opposite to the aerodynamic resultant corresponding propulsive force given by equation (9) is
Fa according to equation (2), can be expressed as follows: then compared with the dynamic flight case. Note that
2
T = 1 CL ρair Ak Va zk0 (9) azimuth angle I, according to figure 1 can be expressed as
2 cos H follows:
The projection of the tethers tension on to the axis xF,
sin(H) (10)
directly gives the propulsive force generated by the kite. It cos(I) = r
depends on the relative wind angle βWR (relative to ship cos(T)
course) at kite altitude as presented in figure 4. Projecting
This leads to two solutions, one positive and the other Company. All data feed the central unit to be
negative, which only one can be remained as propulsive. synchronized and stored in memory. All data are
On the other hand, the dynamic flight case was transmitted in live to a base onshore by the mean of an
investigated for an horizontal and a vertical “8 shaped” Ultra High Frequency signal.
trajectory. At a given elevation, a variation of the azimuth
angle of the trajectory was conducted in order to grasp the 3.1.2 Wind measurements
best average propulsive force obtained during one period
of the flight. This loop is done up to the maximum The wind was measured by ultra sonic wind vane CV3F
elevation. Finally, identification of a maximum propulsive by LCJ sensors. This kind of technology guarantees a
force is reached, which corresponds to a given trajectory good independence between wind measurement and
within the wind window. Comparison between maximum platform motions. Four wind sensors were set around the
static and dynamic propulsive forces is done. sailing area on fixed KL15 catamarans. This enables a
Corresponding ship transverse and vertical components of mesh of the wind field that covers all the sailing area as
the tethers tension can be deduced. shown in figure 6.
3 YACHT DYNAMIC SIMULATIONS SET-UP
The dynamic velocity prediction program set by Roncin

[2] was used in this section which particularly highlights
the experimental set-up and corresponding validation. The
Boat is an 8 meter one design, the Beneteau First Class 8.
Hydrodynamic forces were deduced from towing tank
extensive tests studies performed with the design of
experiment method principle. The aerodynamic model for
the classical rig developed by Claughton [9] was
considered. Claughton took also the waves into account Figure 6: Example of KL 15 wind sensors platform
and his formulation was used to calculate the added location for wind field meshing.
resistance in waves.
The wind at boat location was obtained from a simple
3.1 EXPERIMENTAL SET-UP linear interpolation in time and space. This technique
takes advantage from a simple wind vane settled on the
The validation of the simulator was performed by sea boat since it is far less disturbed by the air flow deviation
trials conducted in collaboration with the Centrale Nantes around the sails or by the motions of the boat or the
(ECN) graduate school of engineering, the French national deformation of the mast and rig. Relative wind angle is
school of sailing (ENV) and the University for applied deduced from the wind interpolation at boat location and
Technology on the Nantes campus [10]. from the boat speed given by the GPS measurements.
Note that sea current was taken into account from public
data provided by the SHOM, (French hydrography and
3.1.1 Yacht positioning data
oceanography service), and was interpolated in time.
Wind interpolation was validated by comparison between
measured wind and predicted wind done for one of the
four sensors thanks to data provided by the three others.
Results displayed in figure 7 are almost satisfying since
they are mostly below sensors accuracy.
280
interpolation
measurement
Wind direction (°)
275
270
Figure 5: Sea trials on the 8 meter one design yacht.
The boat and the measurement system can be seen in

figure 6. Speed and position were measured by a high 265
0 500 1000 1500 2000
resolution GPS DG16 from Thales, which give accuracy Time (s)
below the meter. Rudder angle was measured by a Figure 7: Example of interpolated wind direction
potentiometer. Attitude and rates in rotation are given by compared with experimental wind measure, for the same
an inertial unit from Xsens provided by the Cadden location.
The same interpolation technique was conducted for wind triggered by the pull phenomenon of the rear side of the
velocity. A relative gap of 13% was found between yacht at the beginning of the tack which accelerates the
measurements and interpolation results which is GPS sensor. As GPS sensor positioning was taken into
reasonably satisfying at this stage. account for the simulation, the pull phenomenon on
velocity could be predicted. However, velocity loss
3.2 DYNAMICS SIMULATIONS VALIDATION predicted at tack exit is lower than what was observed. At
STEPS this stage it is difficult to explain this difference by team
motion effects, swell effects, manoeuvrability or
The leading idea of the validation step is to perform aerodynamic models set into the simulation. Note that
comparisons between simulations and measurements with flapping of the sails is not modelled and virtual crew trim
the same initial conditions. Thus, initial location, attitude, the sails instantly in the simulation.
angular rate and velocity measured by the high resolution
GPS DG16 sensor and the inertial unit MT9 from Xsens
were taken as input data for the dynamic simulation.
3.2.1 Turning tests without sails
The yacht without sails was towed at a given and constant

velocity between 5 and 6 knots before towing release.
Once released, rudder angle was set to 50 ° till end of the
turning test. Turning results between simulation and yacht
trajectory are shown in figure 8.
Figure 9 : Yacht velocity prediction during a tack.
3.2.3 Sailing trajectory tests
Turning and tack tests have demonstrated a rather

satisfying prediction ability of the simulator, in agreement
with the physics observed. The next and final validation
step was to perform comparisons between simulation and
data collected on a typical sailing trajectory. Figure 10
shows results obtained for a trajectory composed by
classical upwind and downwind legs.
Figure 8: Turning test results, without sail.
Note that the yacht velocity decreases quickly once

released and that the trajectory is strongly impacted by the
current of the sea and the windage. These kinds of effects
were taken into account by the simulation that exhibits a
very satisfying prediction for the first 360 ° turn.
However, prediction of the second loop is much less
satisfying. This mismatch was unfortunately predictable in
case of very slow velocities since the yacht can, in that
case, easily be disturbed in a chaotic manner by the waves Figure 10 : Sailing Yacht trajectory prediction.
for instance. As these disruptions are random phenomenon
they were not taken into account in the modelling. The pilot of the simulated boat is only controlled by the
measured relative wind angle at each time step.
3.2.2 Tack tests Trajectories for sailboat with a classical rig between the
simulation and the measurements are in a very close
Simulation capability was checked on real tack tests. agreement during the first upwind port leg and, after the
Same initial conditions as for the sea test were used for the first tack, during two thirds of the second upwind
simulation and the only governing parameter was the starboard leg. After that, the real boat suddenly loses
rudder angle. As shown in Figure 9, velocity predicted by speed for an unknown reason. Therefore, the simulated
the simulation appears to be in good agreement with the trajectory deviates significantly from the measured one.
data. Especially, the increase of velocity at the beginning Indeed, since the simulated boat is controlled by the
of the tack was almost well predicted. This increase is measured relative wind angle, the loss in velocity
necessarily results in an increase of the true wind angle to
maintain the same relativewind angle. At the beginning of
the third leg, a gap is observed and stays almost constant
up to the end of the upwind leg.
At the first, and at the last downwind leg, the simulated

Yacht is faster than the real one. These phases correspond
to the hoisting and the lowering of the spinnaker.
Nevertheless one can reasonably consider that simulation
results are in rather satisfying agreement with real sea
trials. This enables therefore an acceptable validation of
the simulator. Consequently, the simulator was extended
to the case of kite propulsion and results are discussed in
next chapter.
4 RESULTS
4.1 VELOCITY POLAR DIAGRAMS VS(βWT)

Figure 11: Velocity polar diagrams versus true wind angle
The performance of a boat towed by kite can be assessed
with U10 = 3 m.s-1.
by its velocity for each true wind angle. Consequently, a
boat velocity is first postulated which enables the required
tethers tension calculation. Corresponding flying An additional explanation about performance differences
configuration is searched thanks to the optimization loop. between classical rig and kite static flight might be given
Especially, boat drag and lift norms are equal to the by the lift coefficient that, according to IMS [9], can reach
projection of tethers tension T on xF and yF respectively. values of 1.5 to 1.7 for sails whereas a value of 0.776 was
At this stage, corresponding new boat velocity and drift measured by Dadd [3,4] on the kite. On the other hand the
angle are calculated. The velocity is injected at the kite provides a better lift to drag ratio that allows to reach
beginning of the optimization loop until convergence. The closer hauled true wind angles and probably a better
polar curve of the boat towed by a kite was obtained for upwind performance in stronger wind conditions. In
static, vertical and horizontal dynamic flights as presented addition an optimization on the trim angle of attack which
in figure 11. The use of these polar diagrams enables the is not achieved in the present study could be done to make
determination of the flight configuration that provides the better results in light wind condition or wider true wind
best upwind and downwind Vmg with corresponding true angles. However, figure 11 clearly demonstrates that in
wind angles. Two optimal flight trajectories correspond to case of a dynamic flight kite propulsion definitely
these two angles: a vertical dynamic flight for the upwind performs much better than the classical rig, even with a
case (shown in figure 1) and an horizontal dynamic flight spinnaker and a doubled total surface of 70 m².
for the downwind case as shown in figure 11. The upwind
Vmg is equal to 1.62 m.s-1 with a true wind angle of 49 ° 4.2 COMPARISON BETWEEN CLASSIC RIG AND KITE
and a boat velocity of 2.47 m.s-1. The downwind Vmg is PROPULSION
equal to 2.91 m.s-1 with a true wind angle of 170 ° and a
boat velocity of 2.95 m.s-1. Only these two optimal The same configuration as for validation of the classical
configurations were calculated and the best was retained. rig yacht simulation was used for the comparison between
This allows the plot of final velocities polar diagrams for a kite towed boat and the same boat with a classical rig.
the kite towed boat as displayed in figure 11. The aerodynamic module for a classical rig boat
developed by Claughton [9] was replaced by the module
It can be seen in figure 11 that, excepted for very small
true wind angles, the classical rig performed better than for propulsive force generated by the kite presented in the
the kite static flight. This can be explained by the fact that second chapter.
the trim of a classical rig allows to reach more important
forces by increasing the draft of the sails. The
discontinuity observed on the classical rig plot is due to
the use of a spinnaker for relative wind angles of more
than 80 degrees (i.e. approximately 110 degrees in true
wind angle). In this configuration the classical rig surface
is about 70 m2 while the kite surface remains 35 m2.
during sea trials). In a same manner, the analysis of the
distance elapsed between 990 seconds and 1820 seconds
shows that the downwind Vmg reached is 3.24 m.s-1 by
kite instead of 2.02 m.s-1 by the classical rig (1.94 m.s-1
during sea trials). These results are consistent with figure
11 polar diagrams according to the fact that average wind
speed during sea trials was 3.6 m.s-1.
5 CONCLUSION
Results have clearly demonstrated the significant benefit

that would be provided by kite propulsion. As shown in
Figure 12: True Wind angle for kite and classical rig
figure 11, the most important benefit is provided by
simulations.
dynamic flight cases for the kite. In accordance with Dadd
[3,4] initially proposed idea, this study demonstrated the
Relative wind angle βWR measured during sea trials
advantage of vertical flight for upwind conditions. This
appears to be not relevant to pilot a kite towed boat.
interesting configuration seems to have been forgotten
Indeed, since boat velocities differ significantly, optimum
probably because of few kite towed ship studies existing
working points have very different relative wind too. It
in the literature in comparison with kite powered
was therefore chosen to pilot the kite towed boat
electricity supply studies [11]. This study has also
according to true wind angle, in order to have similar
highlighted the benefit of static flight case for small wind
trajectories. Manoeuvres were synchronized with sea trials
angles. Although this configuration does not match with
ones. True wind angle orders given for the kite towed boat
an optimal working point for the sailing yacht investigated
are shown in figure 12 and were deduced from velocity
here, its benefit should be more visible for merchant
polar diagrams (figure 11) data for upwind and downwind
vessels using kites as auxiliary propulsion device. The
Vmg. The dotted line exhibits sometimes some small gaps
static flight case would also ensure benefits for reinforcing
which are related to tack simulation. The green dotted line
wind conditions and vessel stability issues. In such cases,
denotes the true wind angle seen by the classical rig boat.
the use of kite static flights should avoid issues related to
The rough shape observed is related to wind measurement
kite size changes maneuvers which are weak points for
dispersion. Furthermore, if upwind angle reached by the
kite towed systems.
kite towed boat and the classical rig boat are close, it is
absolutely not the case for downwind condition since kite
Although results were set on experimentally validated
propulsion enables a higher downwind efficiency thanks
models, they are subjected to control command units that
to the dynamic flight mode.
must be able to ensure reliable optimal flight trajectories.
Required electrical supply for such control command units
must still be estimated. Questions about woven fabrics
durability and aerodynamic characteristics changes in
tight turns remain open ended.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors of this paper are grateful to the French

ministry of defense and Yves Parlier for their financial
support.
REFERENCES
Figure 13: Classical rig and kite comparison.
1. NAAIJEN, P & KOSTER, V. ‘Performance of auxiliary
A trajectory comparison is shown in figure 13 where
markers were put each 100 seconds to highlight time wind propulsion for merchant ships using a kite’. In : 2nd
evolution of each boat. It is clearly demonstrated that kite International Conference on Marine Research and
propulsion enables a significant upwind performance Transportation, 2007, p. 45-53.
benefit which is even higher in downwind condition. The
analysis of the distance elapsed within 961 seconds shows 2. RONCIN K., KOBUS J.-M., ‘Dynamic simulation of
that by kite propulsion the upwind Vmg reached is 1.86 two sailing boats in match-racing’, Sports Engineering,
m.s-1 instead of 1.57 m.s-1 by classical rig (1.54 m.s-1 2004, Vol.7 no 3, p. 139-152.
computational tools for kites sails kinematics and
3. DADD, G. M., HUDSON, D. A., SHENOI, R. A. strengthening issues.
‘Comparison of two kite force models with experiment’,
Journal of Aircraft, 2010, vol. 47, no 1, p. 212-224. Kostia Roncin is Associate Professor of Naval
Hydrodynamics at the graduate and post graduate school
4. DADD, G. M., HUDSON, D. A., SHENOI, R. A. of engineering, Ecole Nationale Supérieure de Techniques
‘Determination of kite forces using three-dimensional Avancées Bretagne (ENSTA Bretagne), Brest, Brittany,
flight trajectories for ship propulsion’. Renewable Energy, France. He is currently the head of the Master of Science
2011, vol. 36, no 10, p. 2667-2678. in Naval Hydrodynamics and gave during several years
specialized lectures in naval construction and design. He
5. ‘ITTC Symbols and Terminology List’ International received his Ph.D. degree (2000) with Honours from the
Towing Tank Conference, Version 2011. University of Nantes, France. His research skills cover
seakeeping, manoeuvrability and sail yacht dynamics.
6. WELLICOME, J.F., WILKINSON S. ‘Ship Propulsive
kites – an initial study’. University of Southampton, Guilhem Blès is Associate Professor of Mechanical
Department of Ship Science, Faculty of Engineering and Engineering and Materials Science at the graduate and
Applied Science, Tech. Rept. SSSU 19, 1984. post graduate school of engineering, Ecole Nationale
Supérieure de Techniques Avancées Bretagne (ENSTA
7. LELOUP, R., RONCIN, K., BLÈS, G., LEROUX, J.- Bretagne), Brest, Brittany, France. He is currently in
B., JOCHUM, C., PARLIER Y. ‘Estimation of the effect charge of Naval and Offshore design courses. He received
of rotation on the drag angle by using the lifting line his Ph.D. degree (2002) with Honours from the University
method: application to towing kites for auxiliary of Grenoble, France. His research skills cover woven
propulsion of vessels’ In: 13èmes Journées de fabrics and polymeric materials constitutive behaviours at
l’Hydrodynamique, Chatou, France, 2012. large strain transformations.
http://website.ec-
nantes.fr/actesjh/images/13JH/Annexe/13jh-s04.htm Jean-Baptiste Leroux is Associate Professor of Naval
Hydrodynamics at the graduate and post graduate school
8. LELOUP, R., RONCIN, K., BLÈS, G., LEROUX, J.- of engineering, Ecole Nationale Supérieure de Techniques
B., JOCHUM, C., PARLIER, Y. ‘Estimation of the lift-to- Avancées Bretagne (ENSTA Bretagne), Brest, Brittany,
drag ratio using the lifting line method: application to a France. He is currently in charge of fluid mechanics
Leading Edge Inflatable kite’, Airborne Wind Energy, courses. He received his Ph.D. degree (2003) with
Springer, Ed. AHRENS, U., DIEHL, M., SCHMEHL, R., Honours from the University of Nantes, France. His
2013, ch. 22. research skills mainly cover cavitation and hydrodynamics
instabilities.
9. CLAUGHTON, A. ‘Developments in the IMS VPP
Formulations’, In : Fourteenth Chesapeake sailing yacht Christian Jochum is Associate Professor of Mechanical
Engineering and Materials Science at the graduate and
symposium, Annapolis, Maryland, 1999, p. 1-20.
post graduate school of engineering, Ecole Nationale
Supérieure de Techniques Avancées Bretagne (ENSTA
10. RONCIN, K., KOBUS, J.-M., IACHKINE, P., & al. Bretagne), Brest, Brittany, France. He worked several
‘Méthodologie pour la validation du simulateur de voilier years in the Industry as head of the research department
par des essais en mer, une première tentative’, In : for a French supplier of track maintenance and
Workshop Science-Voile, 2005, p. 1-10. construction equipment, involved in rigid body mechanics
and structures design. He received his Ph.D. degree (1999)
11. LOYD, M. L. ‘Crosswind Kite Power (for large-scale with Honours from the University of Metz, Lorraine,
wind power production)’, Journal of Energy, 1980, vol. 4, France. His research skills cover thermosetting composites
no 3, p. 106-111. from multiphysics couplings and internal stress issues to
dynamical behaviour and strengthening.
AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
Yves Parlier has succeeded brilliantly in all the major
nautical races and has strived throughout his life to
Richard Leloup is currently following a Ph.D. Degree at
promote respect for man and the environment. He has a
the graduate and post graduate school of engineering,
graduate degree in composite materials and launched
Ecole Nationale Supérieure de Techniques Avancées
several innovations in sail yacht design. We remember the
Bretagne (ENSTA Bretagne), Brest, Brittany, France. He
Vendée Globe 2000 when all alone, near an island off
graduated at ENSTA Bretagne in 2011 in naval
New Zealand, he successfully rebuilt and erected a new
architecture and offshore engineering. He is a member of
mast and finished his round the world voyage. Taking
the team which was launched in 2011 to work closely with
advantage of wind energy by using kites as auxiliary
the French sailor Yves Parlier on his “Beyond the Sea”
propulsion device is the aim of the “Beyond the sea”
project. His research focuses on modelling approaches and
project launched by Yves Parlier.
ADVANCED STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS METHOD FOR AEROELASTIC

SIMULATIONS OF SAILS
S. Malpede, SMAR Azure Ltd, United Kingdom, sabrina@smar-azure.com
F. D’Angeli, SMAR Azure Ltd, United Kingdom, fabio@smar-azure.com
R. Bouzaid, Doyle Sails, New Zealand, rbouzaid@doylesails.co.nz
This paper presents an advanced method to predict the structural behaviour of modern fiber-
membrane sails and its validation by on-board sail photographic survey. The presented structural
analysis method is an improvement of a direct stiffness method that shows good numerical stability
and is able to treat nonlinearities with the same level of performance of a dynamic method, but less
time consuming. In order to achieve this performance, a damping-like force has been added to the
structural system. By tuning a damping factor, the behaviour of the structural analysis code can be
switched from a classical static method to a dynamic-like one. Thus, this method allows running
accurate analyses of fiber-membrane sails with battens by taking into account both the geometric non-
linearity and wrinkling behaviour of membrane structures in a timely manner. Furthermore, it is also
very effective when sails are coupled with rigging elements, e.g. when the luff sag calculation is
required. This advanced structural analysis method is coupled with a nonlinear vortex lattice method
to enable a proper aeroelastic simulation of sails in upwind conditions, within the SMAR-Azure
technology. The SMAR-Azure fully integrated aeroelastic analysis method has been extensively
validated using on-board photographic survey. In this paper, the comparison between the calculated
and the real flying sail shapes of the fiber-membrane sail plan of the 55ft race boat “Living Doll” is
presented.
C Stiffness tensor (N.m-2) This paper presents an advanced structural analysis

D Damping factor (N) method used within the aeroelastic analysis tool
FD Damping loads (N) developed by SMAR-Azure Ltd for the simulation of
FE External loads (N) the structural behaviour of fibre-membrane sails.
FI Internal reaction loads (N) The structural simulation of sails is one of the
I Identity matrix ( ) challenging problems of the current marine engineering
KE Elastic stiffness matrix (N.m-1) due to its strong nonlinearities. The aim of the work
KG Geometric stiffness matrix (N.m-1) shown in this paper is the development of an accurate
Displacement (m) solution method that could be easily used in a timely
Strain vector ( ) manner in the everyday work of the sail designers.
İ1 Principal Strain 1 ( ) The paper describes the innovative theoretical approach
W Wrinkling strain correction vector ( ) to solve the finite element analysis for membrane sails
Stress vector (N.m-2) and its validation via on-board photographic survey.
ı1 Principal stress 1 (N.m-2) The full fluid-structure interaction (FSI) solution turns
ı2 Principal stress 2 (N.m-2) out to be very robust and accurate. The code is able to
Wrinkling direction (rad) solve even large sail-plan FSI problems in a reasonable
N Total Number of degrees of freedom time and is able to deliver the full optimization
NR Newton-Raphson processes of sails on a simple Windows based personal
FSI Fluid-Structure Interaction computer.
FEM Finite Element Model Specifically, Chapter 2 describes some of the main
LOA Length Over All (m) enhancements included in the SMAR-Azure structural
LWL Waterline Length (m) code. The addition of a damping factor to the structural
AWA Apparent Wind Angle (deg) system increases the robustness of the code itself. The
AWS Apparent Wind Speed (knots) implementation of a robust wrinkling model increased
TWA True Wind Angle (deg) the accuracy of the results. Furthermore, the possibility
TWS True Wind Speed (knots) to include rig elements into the analysis make the
BS Boat Speed (knots) SMAR-Azure analytical code able to take into account
important aspects of the sail-rig system, like the
influence of the forestay tension on the flying sail shape
of headsails.

- 281 -
Chapter 3 describes the experimental testing campaign FD = D (2)

carried out in conjunction with Doyle Sails New
Zealand in order to validate and improve the code.
where D is a damping factor. Considering the ith row of
2 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS METHOD the system of equations (1) and adding the damping
force we obtain:
2.1 OVERVIEW
N
The structural analysis code developed by SMAR-
Azure Ltd to evaluate the flying sail shape of fiber- (K ) = F + D
ij j i i (3)
j=1
membrane sails is a nonlinear finite element method. In
particular, a direct stiffness method is used to solve the
structural problem [1][2][3]. Since a nonlinear problem
is solved, the Newton-Raphson’s method is used to find Extending the concept to the whole system, the
the deformed equilibrium state of the structure. equation (1) becomes:
Geometric and wrinkling nonlinearities are taken into
account. The stress-strain relation of the sailcloth
material is considered as linear instead. Considering
(KE + KG + D I ) = ǻF (4)
one step of the Newton-Raphson’s (NR) algorithm, the
structural system is linear and its behaviour is described
The addition of the damping diagonal matrix avoids the
by the equation:
global stiffness matrix to become singular. Moreover,
tuning the damping factor maintains the analysis stable.
(KE + KG) = ǻF = FE - FI (1)
Indeed, increasing the damping factor D makes the
analysis more robust but increases the number of
Newton-Raphson iteration needed to get the
The global stiffness matrices KE and KG are assembled
equilibrium of the system. For that reason, it has been
adding the contribution of every finite element. CST
implemented an automatic adaptation of the damping
(Constant Strain Triangular) membrane elements are
factor during the analysis in order to get the best
used to model the sailcloth. The sailcloth can be
compromise between numerical stability and
modelled as made of an isotropic, orthotropic or
computational time. In Figure 1, the effect of the
anisotropic material. In case the real fiber layout has to
damping on the Newton-Raphson algorithm is
be taken into account, a stacking procedure (classical
explained. In that graph (Fig. 1), the slope of the
lamination theory) is used to compute the anisotropic
tangent to the thick curve is proportional to the stiffness
stiffness matrix of the laminate. Battens can also be
of the analysed structure. If that slope is almost
included as beam elements. The wrinkling behaviour of
horizontal, the system tends to be singular and the
the sailcloth is taken into account by a dedicated model
displacement would be unreasonably large. Adding the
that avoids compression stresses. The entire structural
damping force increases that slope, avoiding the
analysis can be coupled with a nonlinear vortex lattice
singularity of the linear system.
method in order to obtain a proper fluid-structure
interaction (FSI) simulation.
2.2 DAMPING-LIKE FACTOR
One of the main issues of using a direct stiffness

method with sail structures is its small robustness when
the stiffness of the system becomes negligible. Indeed,
the geometric stiffness KG is null at the beginning of the
analysis because the sailcloth internal stresses are null.
The elastic stiffness KE could have some zero-stiffness
points as well because the out-of-plane stiffness of a
membrane is negligible. For these reasons, the system
of equations (1) could easily become singular and the
solution diverges. In order to avoid diverging solution
and improve the robustness of the code, a damping-like
force has been added to the external loads. If we
consider a step of the NR algorithm as a time-step, a
damping force can be considered proportional to the
incremental displacement of that particular step. Figure 1: Newton-Raphson algorithm with (red lines)
Thus, for each FEM node, a damping force would be: and without (black lines) damping

282
In addition to the increased robustness of the code, this points with the rig are applied on the rig finite element
technique is also very effective when strong model. Once the rig analysis is performed, the
nonlinearities, like wrinkles, has to be taken into displacements at the connection points are applied to
account. the sail structure as imposed displacement constraint
and the next NR iteration starts. A flowchart of the
2.3 WRINKLING MODEL sail-rig coupling is shown in Figure 2.
Since the stress-strain relation of a membrane element

is linear, its stiffness under tension or compression is
the same. This is not a realistic assumption because the
sailcloth, having a negligible bending stiffness, cannot
resist to a compressive load and it wrinkles. In order to
predict that behaviour, a wrinkling model has been
implemented [4]. At the end of each NR step, the strain
state is evaluated for every membrane element and the
related stress state is computed from the stress-strain
relationship:
=C (5)
Figure 2: Sail-Rig coupling process
At that stage, a wrinkling state is evaluated according to Specifically, when computing the foresails luff, the
a mixed stress-strain criterion: forestay is modelled as a series of cable elements
pinned at the ends. The internal tension of the forestay
Taut: ı2 > 0 is considered constant during the whole analysis. The
Slack: İ1 0 value of the sailing forestay tension is an input of the
Wrinkled: İ1 > 0 and ı2 0 analysis. As a result, the converged forestay sag is not
dependent on the mechanical properties of the forestay.
If a slack or wrinkled state is detected, a strain
correction is computed and applied to the membrane 3 VALIDATION
element. Under wrinkling condition, the strain
correction values satisfy the following relationship: The SMAR-Azure has carried out a broad testing
campaign in order to validate the structural and
aeroelastic analysis code implemented for the solution
ı1 of the sail-membrane structure as well as for the rig-sail
[ ] 0
0
=C

( + w ) (6) structure. Specifically, the validation campaign has
involved numerical simulations as well as experimental
tests on-board. The present paper describes a specific
experimental test carried out in collaboration with Mr.
Indeed, when the sailcloth is wrinkled, only the stress Richard Bouzaid, head designer of Doyle Sails New
along the wrinkling direction is positive (ı1). All the Zealand. The following sections describe the results of
other components of the stress tensor have to be null. experimental tests carried out on a sailplan designed
In order to make the convergence of the analysis easier, and optimised by Mr. Bouzaid using the SMAR-Azure
a relaxation factor is applied to the wrinkling strain technology for the boat Farr 55ft ‘Living Doll’ (Fig. 3).
correction. The wrinkling model works well with The specifications of the boat Farr 55ft ‘Living Doll’
isotropic, orthotropic or anisotropic materials. In case are shown below.
of non-isotropic materials, equation (6) is solved upon
the numerical computation of the wrinkling direction. LOA = 16.76 m
LWL = 15.78 m
2.4 RIG COUPLING – LUFF SAG Beam = 4.57 m
Draft = 3.50 m
Within the SMAR-Azure technology, the sail structure Displacement = 8980 kg
can also be coupled with the rig structures. An example
of the coupled analysis features is the computation of It is important to say that one of the major problems of
the luff sag for headsails, which forestay bending has to the testing campaign has been the retrieving of the
be computed. When running rig-sail coupled analyses, flying sail shapes from the picture in known sailing
the structural equilibrium for sail and rig are solved conditions.
independently within each iteration. Two independent
systems of equations are built and solved. From the sail
analysis results, the reaction forces at the connection

283
Figure 4: Flying shape of the Mainsail
Figure 3: Photo of the Farr 55ft "Living Doll" Figure 5: Flying shape of the Jib 2
3.1 ON-BOARD DATA 3.2 NUMERICAL SOLUTIONS
The on-board photographic survey of the sail set A full aeroelastic analysis of the sail plan and relative
Main+Jib2 (MJ2) is reported in this paragraph. forestay interaction has been run. The sail plan FEM
Table 1 reports the wind condition of the sea trials. was built by 5143 membrane elements (3045 for the
Table 2 reports the sails trimming conditions used in mainsail and 2098 for the jib), which was taking into
that wind condition. account the real fiber layout, scrim and fill, as designed
by Mr. Bouzaid.
MJ2 In order to carry the aerodynamic analysis out, wind
TWS [Knots] 14 data recorded on-board are used to define the boundary
TWA [deg] 38 conditions (as from table 1). A logarithmic profile of
AWS [Knots] 21.4 the true wind speed is used to take into account the
AWA [deg] 23.7 atmospheric boundary layer and the twist of the
BS [Knots] 8.6 apparent wind direction. Sails were trimmed as in the
HEEL [deg] 20 sea trials (as from table 2), by moving the clew in the
LEEWAY [deg] 4 correct position. Some of the aeroelastic analysis results
are described heretofore. In order to get the numerical
Table 1: Wind data solution of the flying sail shape, 8 aerodynamic and
MJ2 structural analysis iterations (FSI) were carried out. The
Main [deg] 1 resulting maximum displacement, which means the
Jib [deg] 6.5 maximum difference between design and flying sail-
shape was 8.2cm for the mainsail and 15.4 cm for the
Table 2: Sails sheeting angles jib.
The forestay tension measured was 42000 N. Figure 6 shows the aerodynamic pressure and the flying
During the sea trials, photos of the sails were taken. sail shapes compared with the design shape. From those
Figure 4 and 5 show the pictures of the ‘Living Doll’ two pictures, it is possible to note that the aeroelastic
flying sails shapes used for the validation test described simulation is able to get a typical effect of the mainsail-
heretofore. The flying sail-shape was measured by jib aerodynamic interaction: the jib makes the pressure
evaluating the geometric characteristics of the sail on the luff of the mainsail to become negative (defined
sections at the draft stripes. The draft stripes are placed by the blue region in the pressure plot) and the cloth of
at 25%, 50% and 75% of the sail height. the mainsail moves windward (defined by the green
area in the flying sail shape plot).

284
Figure 7: Aeroelastic analysis results of the Mainsail.

From left to right: principal stress 1 [Pa], principal
stress 2 [Pa], principal strain 1 [%]
Figure 8: Aeroelastic analysis results of the Jib2.

From left to right: principal stress 1 [Pa], principal
stress 2 [Pa], principal strain 1 [%]
Figure 6: Aerodynamic pressure (top) and deformed

structural mesh (bottom) after the full aeroelastic
analysis (or FSI)
Figure 7 and 8 show the principal stresses and strains

on respectively the mainsail and the jib. The structural
analysis takes into account the real fiber layout and
finishing material of the sails thanks to the anisotropic
formulation of the membrane elements. Thanks to the
wrinkling model, the thermal plot of the principal stress
2 shows no negative stress in the sailcloth. Some
wrinkled elements are shown in Figure 9, where
direction and density of the lines plotted in each Figure 9: Wrinkled elements
triangular element identify respectively the wrinkling
direction and its amount.

285
The structural analysis of the jib has been coupled with - the top section shapes are difficult to evaluate
the forestay, tensioned as measured during the sea from the pictures, because of the smaller sail
trials. The resulting sag is shown in Figure 10. sections (they are actually flat)
Figure 12 shows the comparison among the designed
mainsail, the numerically calculated one and the real
flying sail shape. From top to bottom, the camber, draft
and twist measured at the draft stripes are plotted.
Figure 13 shows similar comparisons for the jib 2.
Considering the mainsail, it is possible to note that the
SMAR-Azure code is able to evaluate the sail structural
behaviour in a very accurate way. Indeed, both the
numerical and the real flying sail shape indicate that the
mainsail shape, when compared with the designed one,
tends to be fuller (camber increases), the draft moves
backward and the leech opens slightly in the middle
and closes at the top (as shown from the twist graph).
Considering the numerical and real mainsail flying
shape, it is possible to note that camber and twist
Figure 10: Forestay sag distribution along the sail vertical profile is accurately
evaluated, while the draft shows a slightly higher
3.3 COMPARISON discrepancy, which it is believed due to the difficulty to
evaluate it using a graphical approach. As expected, the
higher discrepancies are at the head section, because of
The experimental validation test was carried out by
the difficulty to measure it from the pictures.
comparing the flying sail-shape as evaluated by the
SMAR-Azure aeroelastic code (FSI) with the one
measured during the sea trials (see figure 4 and 5).
Specifically, the main geometric data of the sail
sections (camber, draft, twist) were extracted by
analysing the draft stripes on the pictures taken during
the sea trials. In order to compare the numerical flying
sail shape with the one measured when sailing, it was
necessary to extrapolate the same data from the
numerical flying sail-shape (FEM mesh). Figure 11
shows the draft stripes on the numerical mesh and the
draft stripes on the real sail shape.
Figure 11: Mainsail qualitative comparison.
It is important to say that discrepancies between the

two measurements are expected for a number of
reasons:
- the computed flying sail shape is a discrete Figure 12: Flying sail shape comparison of the
model formed by small flat triangular Mainsail: from top to bottom, camber, draft and twist at
elements, although a fine granularity is used; the draft stripes.
- for the jib, the real luff sag is unknown

286
Considering the Jib2, it is possible to note that both the sailmakers and yacht designers. The extensive work of
numerical and the real flying sail shape indicate that the enhancement and validation carried out in conjunction
J2 shape, when compared with the designed one, tends with Doyle New Zealand led to excellent results.
to be fuller (camber increases), the draft moves Further developments will concern the extension of the
backward and the leech opens. Looking at the flying sail-rig coupling to the entire sailplan. Indeed, the
sail-shape picture it is possible to note that the jib luff whole rig could be included in the aeroelastic analysis
moves backwards (sags) causing an increase of the and coupled with mainsail and headsails. It would
camber in the forward area. allow taking into account the stiffness of the rig and the
Considering the numerical and real mainsail flying influence of the tuning of shrouds and stays.
shape, the results are very positive. Unfortunately, as
the luff sag was not measured for the Jib2, it is difficult
to appreciate the reasons for the higher discrepancy on 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
the draft evaluation on it. Indeed, the twist and camber
evaluated are almost identical. Special thanks to the technical team of SMAR-Azure
Ltd, Dr. Donald W. MacVicar and Mr. Stephen Jordan,
for their continuous and pro-active contribution to the
development of the method and graphics presented in
this paper.
And thank you to Mr Michael Hyatt, owner of the
‘Living Doll’.
6 REFERENCES
1. MALPEDE, S, BARALDI, A, ‘A fully integrated

method for optimising fiber-membrane’, Proceedings
of the 3rd High Performance Yacht Design Conference,
2008
2. MALPEDE, S., NASATO, F., “A fully integrated
sail-rig analysis method”, Proceedings of the 2nd
InnovSail Conference, 2010
3. LEVY, R., SPILLERS, W.R., ‘Analysis of
Geometrically Nonlinear Structures’, Springer, 1993
4. RENZSCH, H, GRAF, K, ‘Fluid structure
interaction simulation of spinnakers – getting closer to
reality’, Proceedings of the 2nd InnovSail Conference,
2010
7 AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
Dr. Sabrina Malpede is the co-founder and Managing

Director of SMAR Azure Ltd. Since 1997, she has been
Figure 13: Flying sail shape comparison of the Jib 2: involved in developing a scientific approach for sail-
from top to bottom, camber, draft and twist at the draft design, firstly during her doctorate and then within
stripes. SMAR Azure Ltd for the development of products and
services required by the Industry. She is a graduate with
honours in Aeronautical Engineering at the University
4 CONCLUSIONS of Naples (Italy), has a Ph.D. in Sail Design from the
University of Glasgow (UK).
A fully aeroelastic analysis tool (or FSI) for fiber-
membrane sails has been presented. The emphasis has Fabio D’Angeli currently holds the position of
been placed on the enhancement of the structural Research and Development Engineer at SMAR-Azure
analysis code and its validation via on-board Ltd. He is involved in the development of the
photographic survey. The increased robustness of the aerodynamic and structural analysis methods of the
code due to the damping factor (section 2.2), the SMAR-Azure Ltd technology. He graduated with
implementation of a robust wrinkling model (section honours in Nautical Engineering at the University of
2.3) and the possibility to run sail-rig coupled analysis Genoa (Italy).
(section 2.4) made the SMAR Azure technology to
become an effective and accurate analysis tool for

287
Richard Bouzaid is a director of Doyle sails NZ,

manufacturers of Stratis membranes for the Doyle
group of sailmakers. He has been involved with many
significant sailing programs; he has been a sail trimmer
on board Alinghi winning the Americas Cup in
Auckland in 2003, and sail trimmer and coordinator on-
board Whitbread Race’s winning Yamaha. Richard
designs for many international race projects including
Hugo Boss, Leopard and Team Korea

288
FLUID-STRUCTURE INTERACTION MODELLING ON A SAIL

K. Suresh, A.K. Sahoo, Fluidyn Software and Consultancy, India, suresh.krishnamurthy@fluidyn.com
A. Tripathi, Fluidyn France, France, amita.tripathi@fluidyn.com
SUMMARY
Sail-wind interaction belongs to the category of fluid-structure interactions of multiphysics, where
structural deformation and fluid flow influence each other. The objective of this paper is to
demonstrate the capability of Fluidyn-MP, a multiphysics simulation code, in analyzing the behavior
of sail under wind loads. Finite Volume based scheme is used to simulate fluid flow (CFD solver ) and
a Finite Element based scheme employed to analyse the structural behaviour (CSD solver). Coupling
between the two codes involves data transfer across the interface, as also updating the fluid mesh in
case of significant structural deformation. Fluidyn-MP, an integrated code that handles the two solvers
and coupling automatically, is employed to study the behavior of sail under wind load. The example
shown highlights the features and capabilities of the code.
NOMENCLATURE influence of the wind on the sail (and hence on the

movement of the yacht) is necessary to be able to design
ALE Arbitrary LagrangianEulerian and deploy sails to control the motion. Modern sails are
CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics made of thin, high strength fabric and are fastened to the
CSD Computational Structural Dynamics yacht using flexible ropes. Because of the large
CST Constant Strain Triangle deformation involved, the structural analysis of the sail
ρ Density requires use of membrane and cable elements to model
σ Stress vector
geometric nonlinearity of sail and ropes. Large
displacement of the sail significantly affects the flow and
Δε n Incremental strain ensuing load on the sail. Simulation of this phenomenon
Δσ n Incremental stress
necessitates an efficient fluid-structure interaction
scheme [1].
α,β Rayleigh damping coefficients
a 2 FLUIDYN -MP-MULTIPHYSICS CODE
Nodal displacement
b Body force 2.1 GENERAL CODE FEATURES
B Coefficient matrix relating strains to
nodal displacements Fluidyn-MP is a multiphysics code for coupling various
physical phenomena – fluid flow, structural dynamics,
Bn Strain matrix heat transfer, electromagnetic, acoustics - together. In
C Damping matrix this study of fluid-structure interaction, fluid flow and
structural dynamics are involved. Interaction is based on
d Displacement at any point in an ALE formulation of the equations of motion and
element Lagrangian description of the structure. The emphasis of
Fext External nodal force vector this paper is placed on developing techniques that can
study the dynamic behaviour of sails.
Fint Internal nodal force vector The CSD module of the code has the capability for static,
K Stiffness matrix dynamic, transient and thermal analysis of structures
using Finite Element approach. Several 1D, 2D and 3D
M Structural mass matrix elements are available for linear and nonlinear material
N Element shape functions and geometric analysis. Structural analysis of the sail
τ Traction at the boundary fabric is done employing linear membrane element
u model in explicit transient analysis. Geometric nonlinear
Nodal displacement vector
analysis for membrane and cable elements in Fluidyn-
Δun Incremental displacement MP is based on corotational formulation [2], [3]. Linear
CST elements are used to model the sail fabric both for
1 INTRODUCTION its simplicity and computational efficiency.
The role of sails on a yacht is to use wind energy to move The CFD module of Fluidyn-MP simulates fluid flow in
the yacht. Proper understanding of the behavior and and around complex geometries employing high-order
7+²7+-XQH
- 289 -
numerical schemes. The Navier-Stokes equations are be achieved by allowing nodes on the boundary to slide
solved for compressible or incompressible flows using on the boundary planes.
the best suited numerical schemes and physical models.
The flow can be inviscid or viscous, laminar or turbulent. 3 GEOMETRY AND MESH
A finite-volume approach on structured, unstructured or
hybrid stationary or moving meshes is used to solve the 3.1 MESHING TOOL
resulting algebraic equations. The code solves general Fluidyn-CAE, a module of the Fluidyn-MP suite, is used
convection-diffusion equation for any scalar quantity to create the model of sail with attached ropes and
associated with flows. Ref [4] gives detailed description creating the triangular mesh for the sail fabric. The
of the code capabilities. unstructured surface meshing capability in the code is
used to create the triangular mesh for the sail fabric. The
2.2 COUPLING SCHEME unstructured tetrahedral mesh generator (TGN) in the
code generates tetrahedral mesh for a given boundary
There are two main coupling strategies commonly surface mesh. A sufficiently large rectangular domain is
employed in simulation of fluid-structure interaction [4], considered for the fluid surrounding the sail. To create
[5], [6], [7]. In the strong coupling scheme, coupled set the fluid mesh, a triangular mesh is first generated for the
of equations are solved together for all field variables, outer boundary of the fluid domain. To facilitate creating
where the nonzero off-diagonal blocks take care of a finer mesh region near the sail, the sail model is
coupling. This is a monolithic scheme, accurate but enclosed in a surface mesh of a smaller box. An integral
prohibitively expensive, besides requiring the use of a tetrahedral mesh is generated in the fluid domain with the
common solution scheme for both the fluid and structural constraints of the inner box domain and the sail surface
parts, which puts a severe constraint on the solution mesh. Code allows the fluid mesh to be automatically
strategy. In the loose coupling (sequential) scheme the ‘parted’ at the location of the sail surface mesh to create
two sets of equation are decoupled but the coefficient the interface boundary for the fluid domain.
matrix and load vector of each field is a function of both
field variables. This allows solution to be sought 3.2 SAIL GEOMETRY
separately. Iterative method is usually employed to solve
the system of uncoupled equations. A simplified geometry of the sail is considered for
Fluidyn-MP employs an alternate solution [8] to these modelling by taking a sector of a spherical surface of
two main coupling strategies which requires that the radius 1m, a horizontal span of 600, a vertical span of 960
boundary condition data be transferred across the in correspondence of the leading edge and of 760 at the
interface in both directions at each time-step, linking trailing edge. The diameter of rope is taken as 11.3mm.
effectively the two computations in an intimate manner. Figure 1 shows the sail supported by ropes, in fluid
The wind load on the interface is transferred to the sail domain.
surface as nodal forces. The resulting structural
deformation is transferred to the fluid boundary at the
interface as boundary deformation and velocity. An
efficient load transfer scheme is employed in the code
that ensures conservation of energy. The coupling code
allows data transfer across dissimilar fluid and structural
mesh at the interaction zone. In this case the interpolation
matrix for load transfer is a non-square matrix.
2.3 REMESHING SCHEME Figure 1: Sail supported by ropes in fluid domain
The ALE formulation requires an efficient scheme for 3.3 MESH

smoothing the fluid mesh as the domain boundary
undergoes significant deformation or displacement. This Two cases are considered. In the first case, only the
is a crucial phase in the fluid-structure interaction fabric is modelled without ropes and a fine mesh (230291
problem. The sail supported by ropes undergo large tetra and 359748 wedge) considered for the fluid domain.
displacement that calls for efficient smoothing of the In the second case, the sail fabric is attached to ropes and
fluid mesh. The remeshing scheme in Fluidyn-MP uses a somewhat coarser mesh (68839 tetra) is selected for
Laplacian smoothing while maintaining the same mesh fluid domain. In both cases 1010 triangular membrane
topology. Fluid domain remeshing is done using Gauss elements were considered for the sail. Figure 2 shows the
Siedel iteration. Efficiency of this iteration depends on triangular mesh considered for the sail membrane and the
the order in which the equations are solved. The code 1D cable elements used for modelling the ropes. Both
offers two choices for ordering – Serial (by node membrane and cable elements do not offer bending
numbers) and Frontal (remeshing starting from fluid stiffness. Figure 3 shows the fixing conditions on the sail
nodes at the interface). Frontal methods results in faster and ropes (deformed shape of the sail and ropes shown at
convergence. Smoother mesh and faster convergence can 0.5 sec). Figure 4 shows the cut view of the coarser
7+²7+-XQH
- 290 -
tetrahedral mesh used for fluid with finer zone near the molecular weight 28.97 and Gamma = 1.4. Viscosity is
sail. constant at 1.15e-5 Pa-s. K-e model is used for
turbulence.
4.2 BOUNDARY AND INITIAL CONDITIONS
The sail is fixed at 4 corner points. The loading across

the sail surface due to wind, varying both spatially and
temporally, is automatically evaluated from the fluid
pressure at the interface and transferred to structural
nodes at the interface. The sail is initially at rest. The
fluid domain is subjected to inlet velocity of 5.2 km/hr at
the inlet boundary.
Figure 2: Triangular mesh (membrane elements) for the 5 SIMULATION AND SOLVER PARAMETERS
sail fabric and cable elements for the rope
Explicit transient analysis is used for the structure to
capture the large deformation (geometrically nonlinear
analysis) of the structure. Linear CST elements are
employed in the code for its great computational
efficiency. Rayleigh damping is employed with 10%
damping.
Second order, six stage UDS scheme with Vanleer
limiter is selected for fluid flow analysis. The time step
for integration in fluid is taken as 1e-3 sec.
5.1 TRANSIENT ANALYSIS
The basic system of governing equations for transient

dynamic structural problems is
Mu + Cu + Ku = Fext (1)

Figure 3: Fixing conditions: two corners of sail (top) and
where the over dot denotes differentiation in time, u is
the two ends of rope (bottom) fixed
the vector of generalized nodal displacement
components, M is the structural mass matrix, C is the
damping matrix, K is the stiffness matrix and Fext is the
vector of external nodal forces.
Using the principle of Rayleigh (proportional) damping,

the damping matrix C is represented as
C =αK + βM (2)
Using (2) in (1) we get,
Figure 4: Cut view of fluid mesh around the sail.

Mu + α Ku + β Mu = Fext − Fint (3)
4 PROBLEM DATA where

Fint = Ku (4)
4.1 PROPERTIES AND FLOW CONFIGURATION
For problems involving geometric and material
Sail fabric is 0.5 mm thick. The material is considered
linear elastic with elastic modulus 188 MPa, density nonlinearity, Fint is calculated from the stress distribution
1150 Kg/m3 and poisson’s ratio 0.4. as
The flow is considered compressible, viscous and
turbulent. Perfect Gas equation of state is used with
7+²7+-XQH
- 291 -
Fint = ³ BT σ dv (5)
Rayleigh damping. Membrane and cable elements
employed in the code have been tested for its
v
applicability in modelling large displacement. Prior to
where σ are the stresses and B is the coefficient matrix performing the coupled analysis, the membrane and
relating strains to nodal displacements. Linear elements cable model used for sail and rope is tested by fixing two
are considered so that the displacement d at any point in points on the sail top and rope ends and subjecting the
an element is expressed as a linear combination of nodal sail to a constant pressure. Figure 6 shows the deformed
displacements. position of the sail at 20 sec. As expected, the bottom of
the sail experiences the largest displacement due to the
d = Na (6) presence of cables attached to the sail.
The trace plot in Figure 7 shows that the deformation has
where N are the element shape functions. reached a steady value.
In the equations that follow, variables at time t are Figure 8 shows the location of horizontal and vertical
subscripted by n and at time t + Δt by n + 1. sections in fluid domain. The near zone of finer mesh is
The incremental strains are related to the incremental easily identifiable. Figure 9 shows flow field around the
displacements by; sail at 20 sec in a horizontal section. The outline of the
deformed sail is shown (blue line) for clarity. The flow is
Δε n = Bn Δun (7)
seen to be steady, and two vortices are noticed behind the
sail. Figure 10 shows velocity field in a vertical section
through the sail. Here too two vortices are observed one
where Bn is the strain matrix. above the other behind the sail. The vortex at the bottom
is larger due to the large deformation of the bottom of the
The incremental stresses are related to the incremental sail.
strains by
Table 1: First 20 modes for the tri-shell mode analysis
Δσ n = Dn Δε n (8) Mode Frequency(Hz)
1 42.4
The displacements and stresses at time t are given by
2 47.4
un = un −1 + Δun (9) 3 52.8
4 72.6
σ n = σ n −1 + Δσ n (10) 5 114.3
6 127.1
The matrix M and vectors Fint and Fext are given by:
7 150
M = ³ N T ρ Ndv (11)
8 151.8
v 9 178.5
10 183.8
Fext = ³ N T bNdv + ³ N Tτ ds (12) 11 198.6
v s
12 206.8
Fint = ³ BnTσ n dv (13)

13 231.1
v 14 234.5
15 237.2
where ρ is the density, b denote body forces and τ
denotes boundary traction’s. 16 250.4
17 253.0
6 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
18 277.6
An eigenanalysis of the sail membrane is carried out to 19 287.6
understand the behavior of the structure. Table 1
represents the first 20 modes for the tri-shell mode 20 296.2
analysis. Figure 5 shows selected eigenmodes of the sail
for which the deformation is predictably large near the
edges due to the membrane behavior. The first frequency
(42.36 Hz) is used to calculate the parameters for
7+²7+-XQH
- 292 -
Figure 9: Flow field in horizontal section around the sail

Figure 5: Modes 1, 6, 14, 18 and 20
Figure 6: Deformation of sail under wind load

Fi
gure 10: Flow field in vertical section around the sail
7 CONCLUSIONS
The integrated code Fluidyn-MP is employed for the

complete process in the analysis cycle – model and mesh
creation, preprocessing, simulation and postprocessing.
Though the mesh at the F-S interface is matching in the
cases studied, the code allows dissimilar meshes for the
structure and fluid at the junction. This offers great
flexibility in meshing the two domains independently.
Fluidyn-MP allows an inexpensive ‘what-if’ analysis to
be undertaken in a semi-coupled way. A one-way
coupling analysis can be undertaken (fluid to structure)
for a different structure mesh or for different properties
Figure 7: Maximum displacement of the sail of the structure. This uses pressure data on the fluid
boundary at the interface saved at discrete times in an
earlier FSI simulation. The analysis is inexpensive since
it is done only for the structure using time varying fluid
pressure data at the interface. This can be used to get a
quick estimate of the behavior of sail of different
thickness or material or fixing conditions.
REFERENCES
1. TRIMARCHI, D., TURNOCK, S. R., CHAPELLE,

Figure 8: Location of horizontal and vertical sections in D. and TAUNTON, D. J., 'The use of shell elments to
fluid domain capture sail wrinkles, and their influence on aerodynamic
7+²7+-XQH
- 293 -
loads', Proceedings of the Second International 7. BARONE, M.F. and PAYNE, J.L., 'Methods for
Conference in High Performance Sailing Yachts, 2010. Simulation-based Analysis of Fluid-Structure
Interaction', Sandia Report, 2005.
2. KENNEDY, J.M., BELYTSCHKO, T. and LIN, J.T.,
'Recent developments in explicit Finite Element 8. CEBRAL, J.R. and LOHNER, R. 'Conservative load
techniques and their application to Reactor Structures', projection and tracking for fluid-structure interaction
Nuclear Engng and Design, 1986. problems', AIAA J, 1997.
3. BELYTSCHKO. T., LIN, J.T. and TSAY, C.S., AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY

'Explicit algorithms for the nonlinear dynamics of shells',
Comp.Meth.In App. Mech.And Engng, 1984. K. Suresh is General Manager at Fluidyn Software and
Consultancy. He is responsible for CSD and FEM code
4. Fluidyn-MP User Manual, ver 5.2.1, 2012. development.
A.K. Sahoois Research Engineer at Fluidyn Software
5. FELIPPA, C.A., PARK, K. C. and FARHAT C., and Consultancy.
'Partitioned analysis of coupled mechanical systems', A. Tripathiis Technical Manager at Fluidyn France.
Methods Appl. Mech. Engng., 2001.
6. FELIPPA. C.A. and PARK, K.C, 'Stagggered transient

analysis procedures for coupled mechanical
systems:Formulation', Comp. Meth .Appl. Mech. Engng,
1980.
7+²7+-XQH
- 294 -

Proceedings Innovsail2013 v3

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Proceedings Innovsail2013 v3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

3rd International Conference on Innovation in High Performance Sailing Yachts

MANY THANKS TO OUR SPONSORS

Dagger-Board Evaluation for an IMOCA60 Yacht p. 1

Advancements in Free Surface RANSE Simulations for Sailing Yacht Applications p. 11

Database Building and Statistical Methods to Predict Sailing Yachts Hydrodynamics p. 23

A Simplified Method to Assess Acceleration Loads on Sailing Yacht Masts p. 35

Numerical Study of Asymmetric Keel Hydrodynamic Performance through Advanced CFD p. 45

Narrow Ship Wakes and Wave Drag for Planing Hulls p. 57

Conceptual Ideas on a Double Surface Sail Inflated by Dynamic Pressure p. 63

Comparison of Full 3D-RANSE Simulations with 2D-RANSE / Lifting Line Method

A Comparison of Downwind Sail Coefficients from Tests in Different Wind Tunnels p. 85

Session 4: Structure / Materials

Long Term Immersion in Natural Seawater of Flax / Biocomposite p. 109

Wind-Tunnel Pressure Measurements on Rigid Model-Scale Downwind Sails p. 119

Delayed Detached Eddy Simulation of Sailing Yacht Sails p. 129

An Experimental Investigation of Asymmetric Spinnaker Aerodynamics Using Pressure

Session 6: Fluid Structure Interaction - Aero-elasticity

Numerical Study of a Fexible Sail Plan: Effect of Pitching Decomposition and

Development of Computational Fluid-Structure Interaction Method for Yacht Sails p. 173

Session 7: Fluid Structure Interaction - Hydro-elasticity

Flutter of Racing Yacht Keels and Appendages p. 183

Dynamic Fluid Structure Interaction of a Foil p. 191

Estimating a Yacht’s Hull-Sailplan Balance and Sailing Performance using Experimental

Session 8: Tactics - Meteo - Simulator

Sailing Site Investigation through CFD Modelling of Micrometeorology p. 223

Optimal Yacht Routing Tactics p. 231

Development of an America’s Cup 45 Tacking Simulator p. 239

Study of the Influence of Singularities Created by Automated Fiber Placement on the

Advanced Structural Analysis Method for Aeroelastic Simulations of Sails p. 281

Fluid-Structure Interaction Modelling on a Sail p. 289

Y. Amice ........................................... 223 M. Lan ............................................... 261

DAGGER-BOARD EVALUATION FOR AN IMOCA60 YACHT

Giorgio Provinciali, g.provinciali@gmail.com

NOMENCLATURE on these craft has always been complex and the

Previous experience: computer modelling, tank testing

Model tests were performed at 1:3 scale using a hull

The CFD work undertaken over several months

The canting keel has to be a symmetrical section to

to ensure that the running trim of the model matches

It can also be seen from the VPP calculations that the

All dagger-boards were cambered and so were 2.0

The upwind resistance variations due to keel tilt with

1.0 4 deg will have affected the resistance.

variation in resistance with keel tilt and dagger-board Keel

1.03 4 deg Figure 8, with the vertical force expressed as a

ii) The keel produced a small vertical force

The horizontal projected area of the keel was

Variation of vertical force with siderforce Figure 9 - Model with dynamometer

10 Keel length of the tank. This enabled good productivity from

Tests were conducted at two or three different leeway

5. 1:3 TANK TESTS

9kts 2 deg toe-in St DB 9kts

The effect of toe-in angle on the resistance of straight

8 5 0 deg toe-in 0 deg tilt 14 knots

0 deg toe-in 0 deg tilt 15knots

Results are also included in Figure 12 from tests at 16

approximately 1 degree and it’s heeled asymmetric K5bend DB

Figure 14 – Variation of keel bending moment with

The model scale bending moments from tests at 14, 15

is shown in Figure 15. It can be seen that the heave

Variation of heave with sideforce

-10 St DB 9kts degrees heel

The work in this paper was commissioned by Owen

% EC 0.3% 2.0% 2.0% 0.08%

wind angle. An apparent weight of the boat carried by the

7 2.1 WATERLINE LENGTH Lwl

5 % % %