HYDRODYNAMIC AFTERBODY DESIGN OF SHIPS

BACKGROUND AND MAIN OBJECTIVES OF AFT-END DESIGN

Increasing design practice considers the separate development of the bow and afterbody
design of a ship. Since they dominate the ship performance in terms of the resistance,
propulsive efficiency and propeller excited vibration (PEV), the Naval Architect should
pay increased attention in the early design stage.

Different shape of aft end forms (eg U-form, V-form, bulbous stern etc.) present different
resistance and propulsive characteristics mainly due to viscous component of the
resistance (Rv) and hull efficiency (h). Therefore, the Naval Architect should aim at
minimising this resistance component while maximising the efficiency in designing an
appropriate aft end. However, perhaps, the main concern in the afterbody design is an
unacceptable level of vibration which could be induced by the propellers. Because a
ship’s propeller operates in a nonuniform flow and close to the ship’s hull, it can be
expected to induce some vibration of the ship. However, this can be kept within
acceptable level provided by properly designed aft end as well as propeller. Inappropriate
design of the aft end and the propeller may induce vibration levels in working and living
spaces which become uninhabitable and fatigue damage could occur in parts of the aft
structure. Although it is possible, the solution to the vibration problems after the ship has
been built is generally more expensive. Therefore, the action should be taken in the early
design stage.

Moreover, the design experience has shown that the above mentioned main objectives of
minimising resistance, maximising efficiency and reducing vibration levels are usually
conflict with eachother. Therefore, the Naval Architect usually seeks a compromise
between these objectives for a favourable aft end design.

AFTERBODY AND PROPELLER TYPES

In such a short course, it is very difficult to cover all the afterbody and propeller types.
Furthermore, it is almost impossible to find established criteria to assess the
hydrodynamic performance of all types. Therefore, the ranges are limited to:

Afterbody Shapes

Single Screws Twin Screws Other Types

Extreme V-Shape (>0.75) Conventional Stern Tunnel Stern
Moderate V-Shape (0.75>>0.5) Twin-Skeg Stern
Moderate U-Shape (0.5>>0.2)
Extreme U-Shape (<0.2)
Bulbous (<0.2)

Propeller Types

Fixed Pitch Propellers Controllable Pitch Propellers Ducted Propellers

1
AFTERBODY DESIGN CONSTRAINTS
The designer expects that alternative aft ends should satisfy the constraints of:
Machinery and cargo arrangements
Resistance and propulsion
Vibratory excitation

Machinery and Cargo Arrangement: As we concentrate on the hydrodynamics design

aspects; this constraint will not be explored here in detail. Generally speaking, the
selection of the aft end form will be affected by the type, size and location of the
machinery system as well as the cargo arrangement. Therefore, these aspects should be
assessed prior to the hydrodynamic design.
Resistance and Propulsion: When the hull lines and propeller details have been decided,
the methods and appropriate software packages are available to estimate the resistance
and propulsion. In general, V-shape afterbodies give low effective power (PE) while the
U-shape aft ends give high PE due to formation of bilge vortices, which result in
increased viscous drag. The interaction effects, which influence quasi-propulsive
coefficient (QPC), for V-shaped afterbodies are usually lower than for U or bulbous aft
ends. Thrust deduction is the result of the propeller generated suction effect acting on the
aft end flow field, thus accelerating the flow and causing a drag force. Propeller
developing high thrust and operating close proximity to the hull can give poor propulsive
performance due to this drag associated with suction effects on the hull.

Vibratory Excitation: High level of vibratory excitation are caused by:

i. Bluff aft end lines presenting high level of nonuniform wake

ii. Propellers with high speed and/or low tip immersion, which display early
inception of cavitation.

The latter (ii) tends to generate significant amount of cavitation while the former (i)
allows cavities to grow and collapse rapidly, thus causing increased excitation of the ship
as a result of pulsating pressure forces (i.e. impulses) impinging on the underside of the
counter in way of the propeller tips. The nature of this oscillatory pressure force is that it
occurs at Blade rate Frequency (BF=propeller revolution x blade number) and its
harmonics (i.e. 2xBF, 3xBF, 4xBF etc). The harmonics contribute to noise and to the
excitation of local vibration, which causes problems in aft deckhouse accommodation.

PROPELLER FORCES AND MOMENTS

A propeller operating in a flow behind the ship generates vibratory forces. The magnitude
of these forces and moments vary as the blades sweep through the changing flow
velocities in the wake. The resulting forces and moments act through the shafting, the
thrust block and shaft bearing. The frequency of the vibratory forces is equal to the
number of blades (Z) multiplied by shaft revolution (N). As defined in the above section,
this characteristic frequency is known as “Blade Rate” (BR) or “Blade rate Frequency”
(BF).

2
Generally, the propeller forces and moments are of no great concern unless their
frequency coincides with the natural frequency of some mode of shaft vibration (i.e.
axial, torsional, lateral) or with the natural frequency of some structural part of the ship.
When it coincides, resonance occurs and even relatively small forces produced by the
bearing forces and moments can result in unacceptable vibration of shaft or structure. It is
important, therefore, at the earliest design stages, Z and N should be compared with the
natural frequencies of the vibration of the shafting system and deckhouses. It may also be
relevant to note that add number of blades results in lower thrust fluctuations but larger
bending moment fluctuations.

HULL SURFACE (IMPULSE) FORCES

An operating propeller produces a pressure field at the hull, which is transmitted to the
hull as vibratory force having a frequency corresponding to BR. Even if the propeller
were operating in a uniform wake, this pressure variation would exist at a ship plating
immediately above it. In a good wake, the forces generated by the oscillatory pressure on
the ship are not usually of any concern. Approximately, they are of a similar magnitude
to the above mentioned propeller forces and can be calculated when details of the
propeller and wake are known. When a propeller operates in a nonuniform wake,
excessive cavitation can form on the back (suction side) of the propeller blade. The cavity
volume increases when the blade goes into low velocity region and collapses as the
blades move out of the region.

Depending upon the propeller design and wake characteristics the cavitation may or may
not be stable over a relatively large arc. Stable cavitation is, in effect, an additional blade
thickness and increases the BR pressure amplitudes accordingly. A rapidly changing
volume of cavitation (unstable phenomena), however is capable of generating pressure
amplitude much greater than those caused by blade loading and thickness effect alone.
Such transient cavitation produces large pressure pulses, which have important frequency
component of both BR and multiples of BR’s (i.e. 2xBR, 3xBR etc) as defined earlier.
Lower the BR component can produce unacceptable vibration of aft end and deckhouses
while the components with relatively high frequencies (e.g. 1350 Hz) generally coincide
with the natural frequency of parts of the local structure at the aft end and deck houses
causing fatigue damage in the former and excessive vibration with attendant noise
problems in the latter. One should bear in mind that the prediction techniques for
estimating these vibrations are not accurate yet. Therefore, it is of first importance that
the kind of cavitation associated with excessive nonuniform wake should be prevented if
serious vibration problems are to be avoided.

From the above discussion, we can conclude that the key factor for the PEV is the
distribution of the velocity in the wake. A complementary factor is the propeller. For a
conventional propeller, the important characteristic is its cavitation number, which
depends on the propeller tip speed and depth of immersion. Therefore, PEV can be kept
to acceptably low levels by a proper design of propeller and aft end with good wake
characteristics. The number of blades has little effect on the hull pressure amplitudes.

3
HULL FORM AND WAKE (BMT (formerBSRA) WAKE CRITERIA)
Ideally the flow into the propeller should be uniform. Since this is impractical, it is
necessary to have some means of examining the wake and by comparing its “degree of
nonuniformity” with acceptable values to determine whether or not it may be class as
good or bad. From a comparison of wakes measured behind towed models with the levels
of vibration measured on the corresponding ships, a quantity of data was collected both
by the British Ship Research Association (BSRA) and other research organization. Based
on the analysis of this data, the following wake criteria established at BSRA:

1. The maximum wake wmax inside the angular interval B=10+(360/Z) and in the
range of 0.4R and 1.15R around the top dead center should satisfy
wmax<0.75 or wmax<CB, whichever is smaller,
where Z is the number of blades, R is the propeller radius, CB is the block
coefficient and w is the axial wake given by
w=1-Vx/V
where Vx is the flow velocity relative to the longitudinal ship axis and V the ship
speed.

2. The maximum acceptable wake peak should satisfy the following relationship
_
w.r.t. the mean wake ( w )0.7R (at 0.7R)
_
wmax<1.7 w 0.7R
2π
wrdθ
_ 
where w 0 . (Note: According to some documents this criterion should apply
2π
 rdθ
0
to bulk carriers and tankers with non V-form aft ends. However, in some publications,
there is no such restriction. So you may be flexible in the application of this criterion)

3. The width of the wake peak (max)1.0R at the propeller tip radius should not be less
than B,
(max)1.0R  B
Definition of the wake peak width for two typical wake distributions is shown in
Fig. 9.

4. According to Fig. 10 for a given aft end and accompanying propeller, calculated
(nI ; w) should correspond to the points above the dividing band of Fig. 10,
where nI is the cavitation number for the propeller tip defined as;
p  pv  pI
σ nI  a
1 ρ(πND) 2
2
where pa (N/m2) is the atmospheric pressure, pv(N/m2) the saturated vapor
pressure, pI (N/m2) the hydrostatic pressure at the propeller tip in TDC position
given by;
pI=gHI with HI=TA-(D/2+Zp) where (kg/m3) the water density,
g=9.81 (m/s2), TA (m) the draft at A.P., D (m) the propeller diameter, Zp (m) the

4
 distance between propeller shaft axis and base line, N (rev/s) the propeller rate of
revolution as shown below:

Note that: nI is based on static pressure at the blade tip and dynamic pressure related
to the rotation of the propeller at its tip which is different than Burril’s Cavitation
Number definition.
w is the averaged nondimensional wake gradient (or known as “wake
nonuniformity” parameter and it is defined at the tip radius (r=1.0R) as follows;
 Δw 
wΔ   
 _ 
 1  w 1.0R

As shown in Fig. 10, the lower the nI the more uniform must be the wake, if low
excitation forces are to be retained. However, it is very difficult to achieve w<0.3 for
single screw hull forms. During the initial stages of design, therefore it is
recommended that where alternative combination of N, D, HI cannot result in a value
of nI>0.12 in the load condition consideration should be given either to a multi-
screw propulsive arrangement or to some unconventional arrangement to reduce of
excitation.

5. For propellers susceptible to cavitation around the shaded area in Fig. 10, the
absolute local wake gradient per unit axial wake velocity for each radius inside
the angular B and in the range of 07R to 1.15R should be less than 1.0 i.e.,
1 dw dθ
r 1 w
 1.0 θ : rad
R
If it is noticed, in the establishment of the above-defined BSRA criteria, there are
four important parameters used to represent certain hydrodynamic characteristics
of an aft end. These parameters and their functions are defined as follows:
B is a gauge to avoid high vibratory pressure set up by cavitation where the effect
of wake contraction in full-scale wake could be important. nI and w are to avoid
R dw
unsteady cavitation and high level of pressure on hull. /(1  w) is a gauge
r dθ
to check instantaneous cavity volume variations producing impulsive pressures.

Wake Estimation: In order to apply the above criteria, the wake parameters should be
estimated by using appropriate methods (i.e. full scale measurements, model tests,
empirical/semi-empirical, analytical etc.). Among these methods (perhaps) the most
practical approach is based on a regression type of formulae devised from model tests and
full-scale measurements. These formulae can be represented with appropriate regression
coefficients as functions of involving parameter as shown in the following representative
example formulae for w, wmax and w:

w = f (Lb, CB, Cw, Cpv, Regression Coefficients)

5
 (wmax)1.0 = f (Cp, Cpv, azb, V, 1.0, Regression Coefficients)
_
( w )0.7R= f (CB, CM, Db, m, Cw, Regression Coefficients)

where CB, Cw, Cp, Cpv are the block coefficient, water plane area coeff., prismatic coeff.,
vertical prismatic coeff., respectively and they are calculated at various waterline height
and fraction of ship length Lb the beam/length ratio, azb the horizontal clearance/diameter
ratio, V the ship speed,  the sectional form parameter, Db the diameter/beam ratio, m the
angle of run at 0.7R.

Table Representation of Criterion (4): As stated earlier and shown in Fig. 10, the
relationship between nI and w was established at BSRA by broadly associating the
wake variation over the propeller disc with the several types of aft end forms. For
convenience the following table is included which represents Fig. 10 (or criterion 4) in
tabulated format.

Aft end section nI for which section w acceptable

shape shape gives acceptable
excitation forces
Extreme V > 0.19 1.0 – 1.3
Moderate U-V > 0.17 0.75 – 1.0
ExtremeU Bulbous > 0.12 0.4 – 0.75
Twin Screw < 0.12 < 0.4

One should bear in mind that the information presented in Fig. 10 or the above table is
intended only as broad guidance in the preliminary stage. Its main purpose is to indicate
those combinations such as an extreme V-shaped aft end and low nI, which later model
testing would most likely to show unacceptable in the context of propeller excitation.

DESIGN GUIDELINES
Specific Hydrodynamic Guidelines: From hydrodynamic point of view, the principal
requirement (or main objectives of the designer) in the aft end design is to optimize the
propulsive performance (i.e. low effective power, high Quasi Propulsive Efficiency) and
to minimize the vibratory excitation (i.e. low wake nonuniformity and high cavitation
number). Unfortunately, these requirements usually conflict. Based upon the theoretical
and practical design knowledge on the hydrodynamic after body design, the following
parameters are identified the most influential design parameters:

A. Section Shape (Bulbous, U, Moderate U, V, Extreme V)

B. Waterline Shape (Convex, Inflected, Hard Shoulders, Run Angles)

C. Clearances (Society Limits, Large Horizontal, Large Vertical, Tunnel

Systems)

6
Therefore, in the following the effect of these parameters on the above-mentioned
principal requirements (i.e. objectives) will be discussed in terms of:

 Resistance (mainly viscous drag component)

 Hull efficiency (mainly QPC)

 Vibratory excitations (i.e. hull flow and wake)

and separately for the following aft end types:

 Single Screws (S/S)

 Twin Screws (T/S)

 Conventional T/S

 Twin Skeg T/S

and the appropriate design guidelines will be provided.

A. Effect of Section Shape (Single Screws-S/S)

 S/S Bulbous Stern

Resistance: Presents higher resistance (thus PE) than optimum. Also form drag is
increased due to formation of weak vortices, which pass into the upper propeller disc
region.

Hull Efficiency: QPC is high due to increased wake and reduced thrust deduction via
h=(1-t)/(1-w). Open water efficiency (0) reduces but overall QPC is significantly
higher than average.

Vibratory Excitation: Weak vortices generated on the turn of the bulb can be
channeled up into the top of the propeller disc by the concave structure, thus energizing
the weak peak near the propeller TDC position. The bulb design at, and below, the shaft
centerline generates high concentric wake contours, thus contributing to an increase in
hull efficiency.

 S/S U-Shaped Stern

Resistance: Because of the stronger bilge vortices generated at the hard shoulders, PE
can be greater than bulbous sterns.

Hull Efficiency: Stronger vortices prevent the recovery of rotational energy by the
propeller. Thus hull efficiency can be lower than bulbous sterns.

7
 Vibratory Excitation: Strong vortices tend to be channeled into the lower part of the
upper disc as well-defined regions of low axial flow. Then, the weak peak at TDC tends
to be not so greatly re-energized and the propeller blades passing through the “eyes” of
the vortices can experience large fluctuating force and moments.

 S/S Moderate U-V Shaped Stern

Resistance: PE can be lower than for the above two stern shapes due to reduced form
drag and large scale vortices being absent from the flow. Separation can occur if angles
of run along the WL are too great.

Hull Efficiency: tends to be average or less average.

Vibratory Excitation: Even if the criterion for the angles of run id being satisfied, the
wake and hull form could create new surprises. Care should be paid to ensure that the
propeller hull clearances are acceptable three dimensionally, and that the WL endings are
not unduly bluff as a result of applying large clearances.

 S/S Extreme V-Shaped Stern

Resistance: Resistance (thus PE) approaches to its optimum due to the virtual
elimination of vortices, hence a reduction in form drag. A reduction in wetted surface
area also reduces skin friction drag.

Hull Efficiency: In spite of higher open water efficiency (0), QPC is lower than
those of the previous shaped sterns due to a reduction in h. This is caused by higher (t)
and lower (w) due to more free flow nature of the wake outside TDC45 region in the
propeller plane.

Vibratory Excitation: V-forms with conventional apertures tend to generate high

wake peaks near the propeller TDC position. Coupled with the relatively free flow
experienced by the blade outer section outside the angular TDC45, the blade
encounters high angle of attack variations. This causes cavitation to flare up violently,
resulting in large vibratory pressure forces to the shell plating. These forces are
efficiently transmitted to the hull because of the close 30 proximity and blockage effect
of the body sections fwd and above the propeller disc location.

Summary of Effect of the Section Shape

From the above analysis one can briefly conclude that the bulbous afterbodies can be,
propulsive, as good or better than V-shape (minimum resistance) sterns. The wake
characteristics of the bulbous forms are invariably more uniform (hence lower vibratory
excitations) than V-shaped sterns.

8
 B. Effect of Waterline Shape

 Convex WL’s with Large Angle of Run Near the Stern Frame and Bluff WL
Endings

Resistance: These features lead to greater flow retardation on the hull form (and in
extreme cases to flow separation). Resistance is increased as a result of energy being
consumed in retarding (or reversing) the flow velocities.

Hull Efficiency: QPC can be reduced. The relative closeness of the hull surface
causes the propeller suction to be more severe and leads increased thrust deduction.

Vibratory Excitation: the propeller experiences severely retarded flow, occurring on

the hull, as severe peaks. These lead to cavitation induced vibratory forces, which can
be 10 to 20 times larger than noncavitating propeller. Angles of run should be
prescribed at the stern frame and projected fwd to merge (say) station 2 12 .

 Inflected WL’s Where the Inflected Point is Near the Stern Frame

Resistance: Resistance increases. Sudden change in the hull surface curvature leads to
more severe flow retardation.

Hull Efficiency: Little effect on QPC.

Vibratory Excitation: Inflected WL’s are the natural outcome of hull design in which
stern bulb introduced. Provided the bulb is carefully designed, the feature should
cause little concern.

 Hard Shoulders

Resistance: Rapid changes in surface curvature lead to increased resistance due to

flow retardation.

Hull Efficiency: If separation occurs, difficulties occur in estimating the wake (w)
and thrust deduction (t) which results in errors in determining (QPC).

Vibratory Excitation: Poor hull form leads to poor wake flow and hence high level of
vibratory excitation.

 Vertical Variation in Angle of Run

Resistance: Large angle of run on WL’s higher than propeller tips can cause
separation and resistance increase.

Hull Efficiency: Thrust deduction can increase.

9
 Vibratory Excitation: The action of the propeller can cause separation of an already
retarded flow, if the hull form is close to the propeller disc.

Summary of Effect of the Waterline Shape

From the above analysis, it is clear that the designer should avoid convex WL’s with
large angle of runs near the stern frame. The sharp curvatures and hard shoulders near
the stern should be avoided as much as possible since they may cause severe flow
retardation and separation as the natural source for vibratory forces.

C. Effect of Clearances

 Classification Society Limits

Resistance: It is not expected that these limits will affect the R&P characteristics of a
ship.

Vibratory Excitations: A constraint aperture (i.e. hull too close to propeller) can
resume from designing to classification society limits. This can cause significant
wake peaks in the propeller disc since the slow moving flow shed from the hull has
too little longitudinal distance in which to mix, and hence re-energize the wake peak.
“Heavy” sections ahead of the propeller worse the quality of the wake.

 Large Vertical Clearances

Resistance: No significant effect on resistance is expected.

Hull Efficiency: Thrust deduction is reduced. Too much wake nonuniformity can
result in a reduction in propeller efficiency.

Vertical Excitations: Although large clearances are desirable for reducing the pressure
excitation force transmitted to the hull, excessive clearance can initiate severe flow
problems when too flat sections are introduced into the form above the propeller. The
problem of merging these flat sections into the body forward of the stern frame can
cause excessive bluffness in the waterline endings. This in turn can cause separator
flow and vibration problems.

 Large Horizontal Clearances

Resistance: No significant effect on resistance is expected.

Hull Efficiency: Thrust deduction may be reduced.

Vertical Excitations: Care requires to be taken in adoption of large horizontal

clearances associated with conventional forms (i.e. bulbous stern, extreme V), in
order to avoid bluff WL endings and high angle of runs onto the stern frame. Large
overhangs (to hold spade type rudder) can also affect the rigidity of the structure.

10
  Tunnel Sterns

Resistance: Resistance (and PE) increases due to increased wetted surface area.

Hull Efficiency: QPC can increase due to improved effective wake. Generally,
delivered power is higher than non-tunneled forms of similar body shape.

Vibratory Excitation: Tunnel sterns are used primarily in large diameter, slow revving
propellers and in remedial applications to reduce vibration excitations. Tunnel lines
should follow the streamline directions as far as practicable and should not have tip
clearances in excess of 15% of diameter (D).

Summary of Clearances
From the above analysis one can recommend that the designer should consider the 3D
nature of the afterbody in way of the propeller. This is vital from both the propulsion
and vibration point of view, as propeller-hull interaction can substantially change
“towed” flow properties when the hull form significantly blocks the free flow of
water into the propeller. The clearances recommended by the classification societies
can be relaxed but not so much. Tunnel aft ends may have considerable lower tip
clearances, which are normal practice without adverse vibratory excitation (Fig. 12
for Lloyd’s recommendation for clearances).

A. Effect of Section Shape (T/S)

T/S forms should essentially be regarded as two S/S forms reflected in longitudinal
plane of symmetry. Although there is less specific guidance generally available
relating to the generation and assessment of T/S afterbody lines, the same
hydrodynamic considerations, which are applied to S/S ships, must also be adopted.
Two principal types of T/S forms are in common use:

1. Conventional stern form (Fig. 3a) is characterized by fine body sections

and also by shaft, which are attached to the hull by brackets and/or a shaft
bossing.
2.
3. T/S stern forms (Fig. 3b) are recent forms and characterized by substantial
skegs.
4.
 General Half Body Shape

Resistance: The resistance increases when the bodylines cut severely from mid-ships to
the propeller position.

Hull Efficiency: No specific comment.

Vibratory Excitation: Flow on T/S forms follows the same hydrodynamic principles as
S/S forms. Severe “cut-in” of the bodylines should be avoided in order to forestall
separation.

11
 Conventional Stern Forms

Resistance: Resistance increases if shaft connectors are not aligned with streamlines.

Hull Efficiency: No specific comment.

Vibratory Excitation: From this point of view, brackets should be hydrodynamically

styled, be located at adequate distance fwd of the propeller and aligned to the flow.
Difficulties can be encountered in aligning shaft bossing on forms where the shaft is
heavily raked or where the form is severely cut-in fwd of the propeller plane. In such
cases, the flow is directed more horizontally than in conventional V-shaped bodies, with
the result that a “wake shadow” may occur aft of the trailing edge of the shaft bossing.

 Twin Skeg Stern Forms

Resistance: Similar pattern of resistance characteristics for the S/S bulbous aft end forms.

Hull Efficiency: No specific comment.

Vibratory Excitation: Flow pattern is similar to fine S/S forms.

Summary of T/S Stern Forms

It is clear that for the conventional T/S sterns the designer should be careful with the
orientation of the brackets and shaft bossing. These appendages should be aligned with
the flow directions close to the hull surface in order to prevent added resistance and high
wake peaks being shed into the propeller. Brackets should also be aerodynamically
shaped and their included angles sufficient to avoid chocking of the flow at the roots and
should not be equal to the blade interval angles. The twin skeg sterns are relatively new
forms and they operate hydrodynamically similar to fine S/S forms, since the skeg is
usually is bulbous and substantial. Therefore, the design guidance applicable to S/S forms
applies to twin skeg designs. Additional care should be taken to ensure, as far as possible,
that knuckles formed at the intersection of the skeg and the main hull follow the local
streamlines, in order to minimize the drag.

General Guidelines
Experience has shown that the quality of flow into the propeller has a significant effect
on the magnitude of the forces exciting aft end vibrations. Although palliatives can be
applied to improve this flow (e.g. fitting of fins, partial tunnel sterns etc), these generally
involve considerable expense and can reduce the propulsive efficiency. It is therefore the
nature of the afterbody should be considered at the earliest design stage in association
with the propeller design.
In this context of Propeller Excited Vibrations, whatever type of form is chosen, that the
wake contours should be acceptable. In order to achieve the following general guidelines
have been recommended:

12
 i. Flat sections and near horizontal buttock lines above the propeller should be
avoided, if possible, as they can expose a greater area of hull close to the
fluctuating pressure field of the propeller.

ii. The sternpost half-width (ws) (Fig. 14 for its definition) should be less than
3% of the propeller radius (R) in order to reduce the flow disturbances on the
centerline in way of the propeller.

iii. The maximum half angle (m) of the waterline at a height 0.7R above shaft
centerline and aft of station ¾ should be (Fig. 14):
m<23 for CB<0.7 or >0.5
m<28 for CB>0.75

iv. For buttock flow aft ends, the “cut-up angle” c20 (Fig. 15)

v. The skeg hull width above the shaft centerline should be less than 20% of
propeller radius R and should confirm with above (ii) at the skeg endings.

vi. The specification of propeller-hull clearances much in excess of

recommended by classification societies may not be advised.

vii. In the refinement of the body lines the crucial region for determining the good
flow (uniform flow) into the upper half of the propeller disc is from station 2
½ to station 0, as shown by the shaded area in Fig. 13. The modification in
this region has considerable effect on distribution into the propeller plane.
Therefore, as shown in Fig. 13, smooth transition of the waterlines and body
plan curvatures in the shaded region is required. Forward of the station 3/4,
the angle of run of waterlines in way of the propeller can increase beyond the
recommended limits given in (iii) for bulbous stern or extreme U forms.

viii. The good design practice is to superimpose the approximate streamlines on

the body plan, then adjust the body section and waterlines together paying
particular attention to continuity of shaping in the shaded region of Fig. 13.

Provided that the above general guidelines (i.e. iviii) followed, the wake nonuniformity
parameter w should lie in the region appropriate to the type U, V, bulbous stern etc as
shown in Fig. 10.

CONSIDERATION OF PROPELLER CHARACTERISTICS

Number of Blades: The choice of number of blades must take into account the need to
avoid the natural frequencies of the shafting system and deckhouses. In general,
increasing the number of blades reduces the propeller forces.

Propeller Diameter and Rotational Speed: As shown in Fig. 10, the cavitation number
(nI) should be kept as high as practical. Therefore, the choice of diameter and speed is

13
important in avoiding propeller vibration problems. In the case that the designer does not
have much freedom for changing the engine characteristics and therefore nI is low, he
has to give consideration to less conventional propeller and/or aft end design.
Tip Immersion: Low immersion of propeller tips, in particular for propeller having high
loading, can cause “air drawing” into the propeller disc due to high suction occurring on a
blade as it passes close to the free surface. High levels of aft end vibrations usually
accompany the air drawing.

Other Variables: The remaining variables (can be) considered are Blade Area Ratio
(BAR), skew, rake, blade outline shape, pitch distribution, thickness and camber
distribution.

CONTROLLABLE PITCH PROPELLER (CPP)

The choice of a CPP to a Fixed Pitch Propeller (FPP) is due to flexibility of its control
rather than propulsive efficiency at service condition. The use of a CPP limits the choice
of blade number to a maximum of 4 for commercial ships. It is also expected that they
will experience more cavitation than conventional propellers due to their range of
operation conditions. Based on the limited experience with CPP’s, in the absence of
further, they can be treated as FPP for the purpose of estimating vibration levels from the
BSRA charts as it will be shown in the following sections.

DUCTED PROPELLERS
There is not much data on these propulsors as sources of vibration. Perhaps, it can be
assumed that the presence of the duct would reduce the pressure forces induced on the
hull. In addition to the vibration problems associated with the conventional propellers, the
presence of the duct may introduce the resonance problems caused by the coincidence of
the duct and supporting bracket system with the propeller excited frequencies.

PRELIMINARY METHOD FOR VERTICAL HULL EXCITATION FORCES AND

VIBRATION RESPONSE LEVEL
For the designer, minimum level of excitation is one of the main design objectives.
Therefore, it is important that even in early design stage, some idea of the magnitude and
effect of both propeller forces and fluctuating hull pressure forces should be formed.
Within this context, the BSRA provided useful charts, which have proved to be reliable
for early design considerations. These charts present the Equivalent Vertical Force
produced by a propeller operating in a nominally good wake (Fig. 16) and resulting
Vertical Vibration Level at the stern gland as shown in Fig. 17.
The information presented in these charts is the results of vibration trials carried out by
BSRA in many ships and has proved to be reliable for early design considerations. These
charts should not be used to extrapolate the effect of changes in the basic particulars used.
Also it should not be used for T/S, unconventional or ducted propellers etc. It must be
also emphasized that the charts apply only if the propeller design and the wake are
satisfactory and avoid the extreme effects of cavitation as well as the vibration arising
from the occurrence of resonance. As can be seen, Figs. 16 and 17 are plotted on
P K
axis. From the full scale trials, it was found that as well as the ship’s power (P)
ΔZ c/D

14
and displacement (), the number of propeller blades (Z), the propeller tip clearance ratio
(c/D) and section hull shape above the propeller () had effect on the vibration. In Fig.
17, unless P/ ratio is higher than any encountered for the ships involved in the full scale
trials, the blade rate vertical vibration at the stern gland should not exceed 4 mm/sec and
a level of 4 mm/sec at frequencies generally associated with service speed can be
regarded as acceptable. Once the vibration level at the stern gland is estimated, there is a
reasonably consistent pattern at the wheelhouse top and at the top of the aft peak
bulkhead. Therefore, average ratios can be established for ships with all aft deckhouses
based on the stern gland vibration amplitudes for BR and 2xBR component of vibrations
as shown in Fig. 18.

Effect of Resonance: Earlier, we stated that the above design charts exclude the effect of
resonance. No general rules relating the vibration increase due to resonance can be given.
On the basis of the trials carried out, the occurrence of a main hull resonance at service
speed may result in an increase in BR vibration of 50% in several cases.

Effect of Cavitation: As for the resonance effect, the effect of cavitation has been
excluded in evaluating charts (Figs. 16 and 17). Later, based on the analysis of the ship
trials with cavitating propellers, these charts were updated for the effect of cavitation.
Because of this effect, the blade rate increases at a rate which is approximately to the P3
and reached a level about 2 ½ times those produced in the absence of cavitation as shown
in charts (Figs. 19 and 20).

ATHWARTSHIPS BLADE RATE VIBRATION

Athwart ships propeller forces, by virtue of their distance from the ship torsional axis,
excite both artwartships and torsional vibration of the ship’s hull. Therefore, the resulting
level of forced vibration is dependent on many complex factors. The trials carried by
BSRA indicated that athwart ships BR vibration has been problem for only small number
of fine form cargo ships in which natural frequencies of the main hull were excited at
service speed. In Fig. 21, the best application of the available empirical information for
preliminary estimates of athwart ships vibration is given at the aft peak bulkhead. Similar
to the vertical BR vibration, the vibration at the aft peak bulkhead can be related to the
vibration value (BR, 2xBR,etc) at the stern gland and wheelhouse top etc given in Fig.
2.2.

GUIDELINES FOR ASSESSMENT OF VIBRATORY EXCITATION SOURCE

1. Make sure that the main particulars of the ship, engine and propulsion data and
lines plans are available
2. Assess the lines plans/hull form, i.e.,
Read-off and calculate , ws, m, and compare with recommended values given
in before
Read-off propeller hull clearances from the plans and compare with any
classification society rules (Fig. 12)
Evaluate your findings and make comment
3. Assess propeller excitation
By using  value, identify section shape (U, V, bulbous)

15
 Calculate cavitation number (nI)
Assess the level of excitation from BSRA criteria (Fig. 10)
Read-off the blade vertical force from BSRA chart assuming no excessive
cavitation (Fig. 16) and with cavitation (Fig. 19)
Read-off the blade rate vertical vibration at stern gland from BSRA charts (Figs.
17 and 20) without and with excessive cavitation, respectively.
Read-off the blade rate athwart ships vibration from BSRA chart (Fig. 21)
Calculate the blade rate at 100% and 85% of MCR
By using the blade rate frequency via vibration level chart (Fig. 22) evaluate
vibration levels
4. Identify necessary actions to be taken

WORKED EXAMPLE I – WAKE AND PROPELLER EXCITED VIBRATION

ASSESSMENT ACCORDING TO BSRA CRITERIA
Assess the aft end characteristics of 17000 DWT container ship in terms of wake and
propeller excited vibration levels by using BSRA criteria. The necessary input for the
main particulars as follows:
Section shape: V
Draft of A.P. TA=9.38 m
Prop. blade number Z=4
Prop. Rate of rotation N=122 RPM
Shaft CL height above the keel Zp= 3.15 m
Atmospheric pressure – Saturated vapor pressure (pa-pv)=99577 N/m2
Block coefficient CB=0.655
While the necessary equations for the wake characteristics as obtained from the
following hypothetical linear wake plot as follows:
wmax (0.4R to 1.15R) = 0.65
(wmin)1.0R = 0.20
(wmax)1.0R = 0.65
_ _
w 0.7R  0.48 w 1.0R  0.45

Solution:
First, specify angular interval B where high vibratory pressure could be set up by
cavitation. B=360/Z+10=360/4+10=100 B/2=50
180-50=130 and 180+50=230

Shaded area is the critical area where the criteria should be applied.
In accordance with the section above, the first criterion requires that wmax<0.75 or
wmax<CB. From given input data wmax=0.65 in shaded region so wmax=0.65<0.655, i.e.
the 1st criterion is OK.
_
2nd Criterion : wmax<1.7 w 0.7R
0.65<1.7x0.480.65<0.816, i.e. the 2nd criterion is OK.

16
 3rd Criterion : requires that width of wake peakB. From the input linear wake data,
half width of the wake peak is read-off as 180-130=50. Therefore, the full width
50x2=110>B=100 i.e. 3rd criterion is OK.
p  pv  pI
4th Criterion : requires calculating nI and w. σ nI  a
1 ρ(πND) 2
2
where pI=gHI=g(TA-D/2-Zp)=1025x9.81(9.38-6/2-3.15)=32478.46 N/m2
nI=(99577+32478.46)/(0.5x1025(x122x6/60)2)=0.175
w w 0.65  0.20
w Δ  ( max _ min )1.0R   0.82
1  0.45
1 w
(w;nI)(082;0.175) falls in zone of moderate excitation which represent acceptable
level of excitation forces (Fig. 10) as well as satisfying the BSRA wake criteria at the
given design condition.

WORKED EXAMPLE II – ASSESSMENT OF VIBRATORY EXCITATION

SOURCES
This example is to illustrate the application of the prediction methods outlined in these
lecture notes to assess the severity of the major vibratory excitation forces to which a ship
is subject. The ship chosen is a 17500 DWT container ship. The assessment procedure,
outlined below, follows that summarized in section before of the lecture notes and covers
the concept-preliminary design stages where data and time is limited.

Description of Ship and Input Data Available: The ship is a 17500 DWT container ship
with the following main particulars:
LOA=168.8 m, LBP=160.0 m, B=25.15 m, D=15.7 m, TL(Loaded Draft)=9.38 m,
L(Loaded Displacement)=25332 t, CB=0.655, V(MCR)=21.5 kn, PE(MCR)=15150 kW,
N(MCR)=122 RPM, Z=4, D=6 m, Engine Type=Sulzer TRND90. Also available
preliminary general arrangement plan Fig. 23.

Assessment of Lines/Hull Form: Lines and body plans are shown in Fig. 24. Comparison
of the recommended hull factors and the factors lifted from the drawing as follows:
Hull Factors Read-off from Lines&B/plan Recommended Values
 69 low value of 
ws 0.3 m=%10 of D <%3 of D
m 21 <23
 0.8 (Extreme V)

Propeller Clearances: The propeller in its aperture is shown in Fig. 25. The comparison of
the clearances recommended by Lloyds as follows:
For this vessel from Fig. 26:
K=(0.1+L/3050)(3.48CBP/L2+0.3)=0.251
The recommended clearances are:
No of Blades 4 5 6_____
a 0.251d 0.213d 0.188d
b 0.377d 0.320d 0.282d

17
c 0.120d 0.120d 0.120d
On the other hand, the clearances obtained from the present aft end data and 4 bladed
propeller with 6.0 m of diameter correspond to a=0.256d, b=0.4d, c=0.23d

Evaluation: By analyzing the data so far, it is noted that sternpost half width (ws) is too
large. Waterline angle m and propeller clearances are acceptable.

Assessment of Propeller Excitation:

Cavitation: From Fig. 27, the section shape factor =0.8, which corresponds to an
p  pv  pI
extreme V form of aft end. The cavitation number σ nI  a
1 ρ(πND) 2
2
pa- pv=99577 Pa, pI=gHI=g(TA-(D/2+Zp))=1025x9.81x(9.38-6/2-3.15)=32478.46 Pa
nI=(99577+32478.46)/(0.5x1025x(3.1415*122*6/60)2)=0.1754
According to Fig. 27, this combination of hull form and cavitation number lies in the
zone of high excitation forces. This implies high oscillatory pressures generated at the
hull by the propeller at BR frequency and multiples of BR frequency.
Excitation Forces: From Fig. 28, assuming no excessive,
3
(P/Z)(K/(c/D))x10 =(15150/4)(0.65/(1.536/6))=9x10 3

The blade rate vertical force is 95kN (with excessive cavitation the force can be as high
as 240 kN).
From Fig. 29, assuming no excessive cavitation, for
(P/(Z))(K/(c/D))=(15150/(25332x4))(0.65/(1.536/6))=0.379
The blade rate vertical vibration at the stern gland is read-off as 2mm/sec. From Fig. 30
athwart ships vibration is found 3.1 mm for P/=15150/25332=0.59.
Frequencies of excitation from propeller are:
MCR : 122RPM %85MCR=115.5 RPM
BR : ZxN=4x122=488 c/min 4x115.5=462 c/min
2xBR= 2x488= 976 c/min 2x462=924 c/min
Evaluation: Extreme V-form hull and nI number will result in excessive vibration. Blade
rate vertical and horizontal vibrations at stern gland will be acceptable as marked on Fig.
31 at the BR and 2xBR frequencies, if excessive cavitation is avoidable and the hull,
deckhouse and shaft torsional resonances are not excited at service speed.

Actions:
1-) Redesign aft end hull form. In order to avoid cavitation with the selected propeller, a
bulbous or extreme U form is desirable as defined in the notes.
2-) By using appropriate methods (which are beyond the scope of these lectures) an
estimation of main hull natural frequencies and vibration amplitudes may be necessary is
resonances are excited.
3-) By using appropriate methods (which are beyond the scope of these lectures) an
estimate of deck house natural frequency and check on this frequency against blade and
engine excitation may be necessary.

18