Univeersity of Rostock

Facullty of Mechanical En
ngineeringg and Marrine Techn
nology

Ship
S p The
eory I
(ship m
manoeuvrability)

Prof.
P Dr.- Ing. Niko
olai Korne
ev

k
Rostock
2010
Chapter 1. Differential Equation of Ship Motion
1.1 Ship motion equations in the inertial reference system
The ship is assumed to be a rigid body with a constant mass m. The differential
equations of the ship motion in the most general form are derived from the
momentum theorem: The rate of change of the momentum of a body is proportional
to the resultant force acting on the body and is in the direction of that force.
Mathematically this theorem applied both for linear momentum and angular
momentum can be expressed as
d  
PF
dt
, (1.1)
d  
DM
dt
d  
whereas is the substantial time derivative, P and D are respectively linear and
dt
 
angular momentums of the ship, F and M are respectively total hydrodynamic force
and total hydrodynamic torque acting on the ship. The equations (1.1) are written in
the inertial system which is at the rest relatively to the earth (further referred as to the
earth-fixed system). The forces acting on the ship comprise
 hydrostatic (buoyancy) forces,
 gravity forces,
 forces (thrust and transverse force) and moments supplied by the propulsion
system,
 ship resistance including wave resistance and drag caused by viscosity, (1.2)
 additional forces and moments caused by waves (wave-induced forces),
 control forces and moments exerted by rudders or other steering devices,
 transverse force, lift and corresponding moments caused by the viscosity,
 forces and moments caused by wind,
 forces and moments caused by currents,
 forces and moments arising from acceleration through the water (added
mass).
The linear and angular momentums can be expressed through the kinetic energy of
the rigid body by differentiation on velocity components:
  E  E  E
P i k  j k k k ,
Vx Vy Vz
(1.3)
  E k  E k  E k
Di j k .
x y z
       
where V  iVx  jVy  kVz and   ix  jy  kz are respectively linear and angular
velocity of the origin. The kinetic energy of the body is obtained by the integration of
   
the squared local velocity at each body point r  ix  jy  kz multiplied with the
elementary local mass dm:
   2     
2E k   (V    r) dm  mV 2  2V  (  r)dm   (  r) 2 dm (1.4)
m m m
Substituting the vector product
    
  r  i (y z  z y)  j(z x  x z)  k(x y  y x) (1.5)
into (1.4) one obtains
 2E k  (Vx2  Vy2  Vz2 )m 
2[Vxy  zdm Vxz  ydm
m m

 Vyz  xdm Vyx  zdm

m m

 Vzx  ydm Vzy  xdm] (1.6)

m m

y2  z 2 dm 2yz  yzdm z2  y 2 dm

m m m

  x dm 2zx  xzdm   z dm
2 2 2 2
z x
m m m

  y dm 2xy  xydm   x dm
2 2 2 2
x y
m m m

The coefficients I xx   (y  z )dm, I yy   (x  z )dm and I zz   (x 2  y 2 )dm are called

2 2 2 2

m m m

as inertia moments, I xy   xydm, I xz   xzdm and I yz   yzdm are deviation moments

m m m

or products of inertia, Sx   xdm,Sy   ydm and Sz   zdm are static moments. With
m m m

these designations the formula for the kinetic energy of the body E k takes the form:
2E k  (Vx2  Vy2  Vz2 )m
2[VxySz  VxzSy  VyzSx  VyxSz  VzxSy  VzySx ]
(1.7)
x2 I xx  y2 I yy  z2 I zz
2xy I xy  2zx I xz  2yz I yz
Substituting (1.7) into (1.3) and (1.1) one obtains the six coupled ordinary differential
equations
 dVx d y d z dSz dSy
 m  Sz  Sy   y  z  Fx ,
 dt dt dt dt dt
 dVy d z d x dSx dSz
 m dt  Sx dt  Sz dt  z   x  Fy ,
 dt dt
 dVz d x d y dSy dSx
m dt  Sy dt  Sx dt   x   y  Fz ,
dt dt

 d x dVz dVy d y d z
 I xx d t  S y d t  S z d t  I xy
dt
 I xz
dt


 d I xx dSy dSz d I xy d I xz
 x  Vz  Vy   y  z  M x ,
 dt dt dt dt dt
 d y dVx dVz d x d z
 I yy  Sz  Sx  I xy  I yz 
 dt dt dt dt dt
 d I yy dSz dSx d I xy d I yz
 y  Vx  Vz   x  z  M y ,
 dt dt dt dt dt
 d z d V y dVx d x d y
 I zz  Sx  Sy  I xz  I yz 
 d t d t dt dt dt
 d I zz dSx dSy d I xz d I yz (1.8)
z  Vy  Vx   x   y  M z .
 d t d t dt dt dt
The system (1.8)) is the genneral syste
em describing the six
x degree off freedom (6DOF)
motion of the ship
p in earth connected
c reference system.

1.2 Shiip motion equations

s in the sh
hip-fixed reference
r system

The sh
hip motion is sufficieently simpl ified when
n instead of
o the eartth-fixed re eference
system
m the ship fixed
f refere
ence systeem is used. The origin
n of the shhip fixed re
eference
       
m is movving with velocitiess V  iVx  jVy  kV
system Vz and   ix  jy  kz
Advanttage of the ship-fixe
ed coordin
nates is thhat the ine ertia momeents, prod ducts of
inertia a
and static moments are
a constaant in time, i.e. dIij / dtt  0,dSi / dt  0 .

To rewwrite the eqquations (1

1.1) in thee ship-fixedd reference e system it is neces ssary to
establissh the rela
ation betwe
een the lin ear and an ngular mom mentums w written in different
d
referen
nce system ms. This reelation is fo
found unde er conditioon that vecctors of the linear
and angular mom mentums arre kept con nstant in th
he ship-fixe
ed referencce system..

Following to [1] let us consider consequ uently the translatioon with velocity
       
V  iVx  jVy  kVVz and rota elocity   ix  jy  kz . At the
ation with angular ve t time
instant t both sysstems are coincided.
c At the time
e t+t the body is loocated at th
he point
   /
Vt . V
Vectors P and
a D are also shifteed from the t the poinnt O (see Fig.1).
e point O to F

Fig.1 C
Change of the linear and angulaar momenttums due too displacem
ment of the
e origin
/
hip fixed re
of the sh eference sy
ystem from point O .
m the point O to the p

As see en in Fig.1 the linear momentum m vector transferred by the shhip is not changed
c
  
in the earth fixed system m due to translatio on Pa (t  t)  Pa (t)  P . The angular
momen ntum is changed
c due
d to chhange of the arm of the liinear mom mentum
      
D a (t  t)  D a (t)  (Vt)  P  D  (V  P) t . Theerefore, th he contribbution to rate of
change e of the mo omentums due to tran  nslation is:
:
dPa _ tr dD  
 0, a _ tr  V  P (1.9)
ddt dtt
 
t rotation at the anglle t .
Fig.2 Change off the linear and angullar momenttums due to

In the ssecond ste

ep, the mom
mentums vvectors are e rotated du
uring the ro
rotation of the
t ship
   
fixed re
eference syystem with y   ix  jy  kz . The mag
h the angu lar velocity gnitudes
of both
h vectors reemain constant. The eir change in the eartth fixed syystem occu urring in
time tt is
     
Pa (tt  t)  Pa ((t)  Pa  P  (  P)t,
     
(  t)  Da (t)  Da  D  (  D)
Da (t D t.
Therefoore, the co
ontribution to the rate of change e of the moomentums due to rota ation is:
dPa _ root   dD
d  
   P, a _ rot    D. (1.10)
dt dt
Taking (1.9) and (1.10) into o account the mome entum theo orem in sh ip fixed re
eference
system
m is written in the formm:
d    
P P  F
dt
(1.11)
d      
D  V P   D  M
dt
 
Here it should bee noted that the forcces F and moments M have to be dete ermined
n the moviing referen
also in nce system m. The se econd term m in the ffirst equatiion and
secondd and third terms in the second d equation describe the changee of the linear and
angular momentums due to transla ation and rotation of o the shipp fixed re eference
system
m. The righ ht sides area respon nsible for momentum
m m changess due to external
e
forces.

The equations (1.11) were derived

d byy Kirchhoff in 1869.

The sh hip fixed reeference system

s is tthe Cartes sian right- handed ccoordinate system
(xyz) w
with x and y lying in a horizonttal plane and a z vertical, positivve upwardd. The x
axis is the longittudinal coo ordinate, p
positive forrward, y is the transsverse coo
ordinate,
positive
e to the po ort side. Th
he origin iss in the pla
ane of sym
mmetry. Th e vertical location
of the oorigin lies at the leve
el of the u
undisturbed d free surfa
ace when the ship iss at the
rest.

Fig.3 Ske
etch of the
e ship fixed
d coordinatte system.
The ship mass distribution is symmetrical with respect to the plane xz. Therefore, the
products of inertia I xy and I yz as well as the static moment Sy are zero in the ship
fixed system. This is the second advantage of the ship-fixed coordinates. Also, the
third product Ixz is often assumed to be zero. With these simplifications the vector
components are:
Px  mVx  ySz , Py  mVy  zSx  x Sz , Pz  mVz  ySx ,
D x  x I xx  VySz  z I xz , D y  y I yy  Vx Sz  VzSx , D z  z I zz  VySx  x I xz .
(1.12)
Substituting (1.12) into (1.11) results in the general system describing the six degree
of freedom (6DOF) motion of the ship in the ship-fixed reference system:
 dVx dy
 m  Sz  y (mVz  ySx )  z (mVy  zSx  xSz )  Fx ,
 dt dt
 dVy dz dx
m dt  Sx dt  Sz dt  z (mVx  ySz )  x (mVz  ySx )  Fy ,

 dVz dy
 m  S x  x (mVy  zSx  x Sz )  y (mVx  ySz )  Fz ,
dt dt

 dx dVy dz
 I xx dt  Sz dt  I xz dt  VyySx  Vz (zSx  x Sz ) 

y (z I zz  VySx  x I xz )  z (y I yy  Vx Sz  VzSx )  M x ,

I dy  S dVx  S dVz  V  S  V  S 
 yy dt z
dt
x
dt
z y z x y x


z (x I xx  VySz  z I xz )  x (z I zz  VySx  x I xz )  M y ,

 I zz dz  Sx y  I xz dx  Vx (zSx  x Sz )  VyySz 
dV
 dt dt dt
  ( I  V S  V S )   ( I  V S   I )  M .
 x y yy x z z x y x xx y z z xz z (1.13)
This system is integrated numerically using modern numerical 6DOF solvers (CFX,
STAR CCM+, OpenFoam). In this case the hydrodynamic forces are calculated by
direct integration of normal and shear stresses over the ship surface without the
subdivision according to physical nature of forces (1.2).

1.3 Ship motion equations in the ship-fixed coordinates with principle axes

The principle axes coordinate system is chosen from the condition that all off-
diagonal elements of the inertia matrix (products of inertia)
 I xx I xy I xz 
 
 I xy I yy I yz 
 I xz I yz I zz 
 
and the static moments are zero, i.e.,
Ixy  Ixz  I yz  0 (1.14)
Sx  Sy  Sz  0 . (1.15)
The conditions (1.14) and (1.15) can be satisfied by a special choice of the location
of the origin and a special direction of the coordinate system axes. A sample of such
a system for the case of manoeuvring will be shown later.

In the principle axes system the ship motion equations take the form:
 dVx
m( dt  Vzy  Vyz )  Fx ,

 dVy
m( dt  Vxz  Vzx )  Fy ,

m( dVz  V   V  )  F ,
 dt
y x x y z

 (1.16)
I dx    (I  I )  M ,
 xx dt y z zz yy x

 d
 I yy y
 xz (I xx  I zz )  M y ,
 dt
 d
 I zz z
 xy (I yy  I xx )  M z .
 dt
 
The forces F and moments M have to be determined in the moving principle axes
coordinate system.

1.4 Forces and moments arising from acceleration through the water

The physical nature of the forces and moments arising from acceleration through the
water is the inertia of the medium which the body is moving in. Traditionally these
forces are determined using the irrotational inviscid fluid model. This model is
described in details in [2], Chapters 1, 2 and 3. For students who did not attend in the
lecture course “Grundlagen der Schiffstheorie” we give overview of basic principles of
the theory of irrotational flows in the Appendix I.

1.4.1 Kinetic energy of the fluid surrounding the body. If the flow is

incompressible, inviscid and irrotional (   V  0 ) the kinetic energy of the fluid
surrounding the moving body is

1 6 6
EFl    ViVk mik (1.17)
2 i 1 k 1

where V1  Vx , V2  Vy , V3  Vz , V4  x , V5  y , V6  z are components of linear and

angular velocities, whereas mik are added mass. Generally, the body has 36 added
mass
 m11 m12 m13 m14 m15 m16
m21 m22 m23 m24 m25 m26
m31 m32 m33 m34 m35 m36
m41 m42 m43 m44 m45 m46 (1.18)
m51 m52 m53 m54 m55 m56
m61 m62 m63 m64 m65 m66
Due to symmetry condition mik  mki the number of unknown mass is 21. The
added mass are determined from the formulae (see [2]):
 k
mik      i dS (1.19)
S
n
where S is the wetted ship area,  is the density, i are potentials of the flow when
the ship is moved in i-th direction with unit speed. The potentials i satisfy the
Laplace equation
 2 i  2 i  2 i
 2  2 0 (1.20)
x 2 y z
the boundary condition of the decay of perturbations far from the moving body
i 
r 
0 (1.21)
and no penetration boundary condition at each point (x,y,z) on the ship surface
1   
 cos(n, x); 2  cos( n, y ); 3  cos(n, z );
n n n

4 
 y cos(n, z )  z cos( n, y ); 
n

5  (1.22)
 z cos(n, x)  x cos(n, z );
n 
6 
 x cos(n, y )  y cos(n, x). 
n 

Here n is the normal vector to the ship surface at the point (x,y,z),
  
cos( n, x)  ni , cos( n, y )  nj , cos( n, z )  nk .
When the ship moves arbitrarily the potential of
the flow is the sum of particular potentials multiplied with corresponding components
of linear and angular velocities:
6
   Vk k (1.23)
k 1

1.4.2 Momentum of the fluid surrounding the body. Let us consider the amount of
fluid between the surfaces S (wetted ship surface) and  which is located far from
the ship. The momentum of this fluid is
 
K Fl    VdU   grad dU (1.24)
U U

According to the Gauss theorem

      
K Fl    VdU   grad dU     ndS    ndS  Fh/  Fh (1.25)
U U  S
 
where Fh and Fh/ are respectively the forces acting on the surface S and  :
 
Fh    pndS (1.26)
S
 
Fh/    pndS (1.27)

Since the shear stresses are zero in the inviscid fluid, only normal stresses are
present in formulae (1.26) and (1.27).
From the momentum theorem follows:
  
(Fh/  Fh )dt  dK Fl (1.28)
The temporal change of the momentum reads:
    
dK Fl  d   ndS d   ndS    V(Vn)dSdt (1.29)
 S 
 
The last term considers the fact that a part of the momentum  V(Vn)dSdt is

transported from the fluid volume U through the surface ∑ by the mass  (Vn)dSdt .
From (1.29) follows: 
  dK Fl d  d   
Fh/  Fh     ndS    ndS    V(Vn)dS (1.30)
dt dt  dt S 

Since the surface  is motionless the integral and differentiation are commutative
operators:
d   
dt   ndS   ndS

t
(1.31)

The pressure in inviscid irrotational fluid is determined from the general Bernoulli
equation:
 V2
p  p0    (1.32)
t 2
Substitution of (1.32) into (1.27) brings:
   V2   V 2 
Fh/    pndS    (p0    )ndS    (  )ndS (1.33)
 
t 2 
t 2
With consideration of (1.31) and (1.33) the force acting on the surface S can be
expressed from (1.30) in the following form
 d  d    
Fh     ndS    ndS    V(Vn)dS  Fh/ 
dt  dt S 

d  d     V 2 
    ndS    ndS    V(Vn)dS    (  )ndS  (1.34)
dt  dt S  
t 2
d  V2    
   ndS    ( n  V(Vn))dS
dt S 
2
We choose the surface  located very far from the body. All perturbations decay
according to the condition (1.21) so quickly that the last integral in (1.34) is zero.
Therefore, we have 
 dPFl d 
Fh      ndS , (1.35)
dt dt S
  
where PFl     ndS is the linear momentum of the fluid. The components of the
S

force are (see formulae (1.22) and (1.23))

d d d 6

Fhx    n x dS    cos(nx)dS     Vk k 1 dS 
dt S dt S dt S k 1 x
(1.36)
d 6 1 d 6 d
 
dt k 1 S  k
x
dS   
dt k 1
m1k Vk   PFlx
dt
d d d 6 d
Fhy    n y dS    cos(ny)dS    m 2k Vk   PFly
dt S dt S dt k 1 dt
d d d 6 d
Fhz  
dt S
 n z dS  
dt S
 cos(nz)dS   
dt k 1
m3k Vk   PFlz
dt

Similarly, the moment arising from acceleration through the water can be expressed
through the angular momentum derivative:

 dD Fl d  
Mh      (r  n)dS (1.37)
dt dt S
  
where D Fl     (r  n)dS is the angular momentum of the fluid. The components of
S

moments are (see formulae (1.22) and (1.23))

d   d d 6 d
M hx    (r  n) x dS     (y cos(nz)  z cos(ny))dS    m 4k Vk   D Flx ,
dt S dt S dt k 1 dt
d   d d 6 d
M hy  
dt S
 (r  n) y dS  
dt S  (z cos(nx)  x cos(nz))dS   
dt k 1
m 5k Vk   D Fly , (1.38)
dt
d   d d 6 d
M hz  
dt S
 (r  n) z dS  
dt S   (x cos(ny)  y cos(nx))dS   
dt k 1
m 6k Vk   D Flz .
dt
The relation between the linear and angular momentums of the fluid and the kinetic
energy can be found from formulae (1.36), (1.38) and (1.17)
  E  E  E
PFl  i Fl  j Fl  k Fl ,
Vx Vy Vz
(1.39)
  E  E  E
D Fl  i Fl
j Fl
k Fl
.
x y z
This relation has exactly the same form as the relation between linear and angular
momentums and kinetic energy of solid body (1.3)

1.4.3 Ship motion equations in the inertial reference system. The ship motion
equations in the earth-fixed system (1.1) are rewritten in the form
d   
(P  PFl )  F
dt
(1.40)
d   
(D  D Fl )  M
dt  
Where, in contrast to (1.1), the forces F and moments M don’t account for forces
and moments arising from acceleration through the water.
1.4.4 Ship motion equations in the ship-fixed reference system.
d      
(P  PFl )    (P  PFl )  F
dt
(1.41)
d         
(D  D Fl )  V  (P  PFl )    (D  D Fl )  M
dt
where the forces and moments don’t account for forces and moments arising from
acceleration through the water, since they are explicitly considered on the left hand
 
side of the equation by terms with PFl and D Fl . Substitution of (1.36) and (1.38) into
(1.41) results in the following change of equations (1.13)
 dVx dy d 6 6 6

 m
dt
 S z
dt
  y (mV z   S
y x )   z (mVy   S
z x   S
x z )   1k k y 
dt k 1
m V   m V
3k k   z  m 2k Vk  Fx ,
 k 1 k 1



m dVy  S dz  S dx   (mV   S )   (mV   S )  d
6 6 6

 dt x
dt
z
dt
z x y z x z y x 
dt k 1
m 2k Vk  z  m1k Vk  x  m3k Vk  Fy ,
k 1 k 1


 dV d y d 6 6 6
 m z  Sx  x (mVy  zSx  xSz )  y (mVx  ySz )   m3k Vk  x  m 2k Vk  y  m1k Vk  Fz ,
 dt dt dt k 1 k 1 k 1


 d x dVy dz
 I xx  Sz  I xz  VyySx  Vz (zSx  x Sz )  y (z I zz  VySx  x I xz )  z (y I yy  VxSz  VzSx ) 
 dt dt dt
d 6 6 6 6 6

  m 4k Vk  Vy  m3k Vk  Vz  m 2k Vk  y  m 6k Vk  z  m5k Vk  M x ,
 dt k 1 k 1 k 1 k 1 k 1



 d y dV dV
I yy  Sz x  Sx z  VzySz  VxySx  z (x I xx  VySz  z I xz )  x (z I zz  VySx  x I xz ) 
 dt dt dt
 6 6 6 6 6
 d
 
dt k 1
m5k Vk  Vz  m1k Vk  Vx  m3k Vk  z  m 4k Vk  x  m6k Vk  M y ,
k 1 k 1 k 1 k 1


 d dVy dx
I zz z
 Sx  I xz  Vx (zSx  xSz )  VyySz  x (y I yy  VxSz  VzSx )  y (x I xx  VySz  z I xz ) 
 dt dt dt
d 6 6 6 6 6
  m 6k Vk  Vx  m 2k Vk  Vy  m1k Vk  x  m5k Vk  y  m 4k Vk  M z .
 dt k 1 k 1 k 1 k 1 k 1

(1.42)

1.4.5 Ship motion equations in the ship-fixed reference system along the x-
axis. The system (1.42) takes the simplest form for the case of the straight ship
motion along the x-axis ( Vy  Vz  x  y  z  0 ):
dVx
 Fx (m  m11 ) (1.43)
dt
As seen the fluid inertia results in the increase of the real mass m by the additional
virtual mass m11 . The total mass is becoming larger due to inertia of the fluid. That is
why the mass m11 is called as the additional mass. The effect of the fluid inertia
makes the ship motion milder. i.e.
 dVVx dV
m  Fx  m11 x (1.44)
ddt dt
dVx
If the sship speed is growing  0 the fluiid inertia effect
e deccelerates the ship
dt
dVx
motion and, vice versa, if the
t ship s peed beco omes smaller  0 the fluid
d inertia
dt
effect a
acceleratess the ship motion.
m

Chaptter 2. Equations of ship m

manoeuv
vring.

2.1 Coo
ordinate system
s

Fig.5. Coo
ordinate sys
stem used
d in ship ma
anoeuvring
g

The co oordinate system used

u in sship mano oeuvring is shown in Fig.5.. The
designaations are
x0, y0 C
Coordinates
s in the ine
ertial coord
dinate syste
em,
x,y C
Coordinates
s in ship-fixxed coordinate syste
em,
V  V 2  V 2 Ship
x y
S speed,
β Drift angle, positive if the flow in
D ncomes from the starbboard sidee,
ψ C
Course anggle, positivee if the yaw
wing against clockwisse direction
n,
δR R
Rudder anggle, positivve if the ruudder causes increaase of the course
angle.

2.2 Aim
ms of the ship
s mano
oeuvring ttheory

The ship manoeu uvring theo

ory is intend
ded to inve
estigate the
e ability of ship:
 tto keep the
e prescribe
ed course,
 tto change the coursee to follow a prescribed trajecto
ory and to aavoid obstacles,
 tto change the speed.
Important questions for the specification of ship manoeuvrability may include [3]:
 Does the ship keep a reasonably straight course (in autopilot or manual
mode),
 under what conditions (current, wind) can the ship berth without tug
assistance?
 Up to what ratio of wind speed to ship speed can the ship still be kept on all
courses?
 Can the ship lay rudder in acceptable time from one side to the other?
The characteristics usually used to regulate the manoeuvrability are discussed in the
next sections.

2.3 Main assumptions of the theory

The ship manoeuvring theory is based on the following assumptions:

 the ship motion is occurred only in the horizontal plane xy. Heave velocity,
rolling and pitching are neglected ( Vz  0, x  y  0 ).
 The Froude number is small and the free surface deformation is neglected.
The mirror principle is used to model the free surface effect.
Hydrodynamically the ship is considered as a doubled body.

The doubled body has two symmetry planes that is why the ship has only eight
added mass: m11 , m22 , m33 , m44 , m55 , m66 , m26 , m35 . The static moment of the doubled
body and the product of inertia are zero, i.e. Sz  0 and I xz  0 . The system (1.42) is
reduced to:
 dV
 (m  m11 ) x  (m  m 22 )Vyz  z2 (m 26  Sx )  Fx ,
dt

 dVy d
 (m  m 22 )  (m  m11 )Vxz  (m 26  Sx ) z  Fy , (2.1)
 dt dt
 d z dVy
(I zz  m 66 )  Vx Vy (m 22  m11 )  (m 26  Sx )(  Vxz )  M z .
 dt dt

2.4 Equations in the ship-fixed coordinates with principle axes

The principle axes coordinate system was chosen in Section 1.3 from the condition
that all off-diagonal elements of the products of inertia and the static moments of
body are zero. It simplifies the equation system. However, many terms proportional to
off-diagonal elements of the added mass matrix remain. For example, the system
(2.1) contains terms with m 26 . The motion equations have the simplest form if the
axes are principle axes of the coupled system “body+fluid”. The system with principle
axes can easily be found for the doubled body moving in the horizontal plane from
the following conditions:
 the x axis is along the longitudinal axis of the doubled body,
 the xy and xz are symmetry planes,
 the position of the origin is found from the formula
m26  Sx  0 (2.2)
Remember that the origin in the equation (1.67) was chosen from the condition that
only body static moment is zero Sx  0
Let us consider the sum m 26  Sx     2 (x cos(n, y)  y cos(n, x))dS   xdm . The ship
S m

can be considered as a slender body. The normal vector to the slender body has the
following asymptotic estimations which are valid on the most part of the ship length:
y / L O(),
cos(n, x) O(),
cos(n, y ) O(1),
(2.3)
x / L O(1),
2 O(1).

Therefore, the asymptotic estimation for the sum m26  Sx for the slender body reads
m 26  Sx      2 (x cos(n, y)  y cos(n, x))dS   xdm      2 x cos(n, y)dS   xdm (2.4)
S m S m

The condition (2.2) can be satisfied by shifting the origin by xg :

  2 ( x  xg ) cos(n, y )dS   ( x  xg )dm  0
S m

 
  2 x cos(n, y )dS   xdm  xg   2 cos(n, y )dS   dm   0
S m  S m 


 xdm    2 x cos(n, y)dS

m S
xg 
m    2 cos(n, y )dS
S
Using the middle value rule   2 x cos(n, y)dS  x // (  2 cos(n, y)dS )  x // m22 and
S S

 xdm  x m
/
the last formula is rewritten in the form
m

x / m  x // m22
xg  (2.5)
m  m22
/ //
Here x is the ship gravity center and x is the hydrodynamic center. If the origin
lies at the point x  xg the system (2.1) takes the simplest form
 dVx
 (m  m11 ) dt  (m  m 22 )Vyz  Fx ,

 dVy
 (m  m 22 )  (m  m11 )Vxz  Fy , (2.6)
 dt
 d z
(I zz  m 66 ) dt  Vx Vy (m 22  m11 )  M z .

The aim of the ship trajectory calculation is also determination of the ship position in
the earth- connected coordinates system x 0 y0 . Two following equations are used for
this purpose (see Fig.5):
 dx 0 dy0
 V cos(   ),  Vsin(   ). (2.7)
dt dt
Here  is the course angle calculated from the equation:
d
z  (2.8)
dt
Combining (2.6), (2.7) and (2.8) we obtain the full system of ship equation in the
horizontal plane:
 dVx
 (m  m11 ) dt  (m  m 22 )Vyz  Fx ,

 dVy
 (m  m 22 )  (m  m11 )Vxz  Fy ,
dt

(I  m ) dz  M  V V (m  m ),
 zz 66
dt
z x y 22 11

 t (2.9)
 x 0 (t)  x 0 (0)  0 V cos(   )dt,

 t
 y0 (t)  y0 (0)   V sin(   )dt,
 0
 t
  (t)   (0)   z dt.

 0

2.5 Munk moment

The second term Vx Vy (m22  m11 ) on the r.h.s in the moment equation is
referred as to the moment of Munk who investigated this moment for
Zeppelins.

The Munk moment appears in the full form only in the inviscid fluid. In the
inviscid potential fluid the flow around the ship hull is shown in Fig.6. In the
bow area on the lower side we have the deceleration of the flow and increase
of the pressure. On the upper side the flow is accelerated and the pressure
decreases. As a result a lift force appears in the bow region. An opposed flow
process takes place in the stern area in the inviscid flow. Here the deceleration
arises on the upper side whereas the flow acceleration appears on the lower
one. The negative down force counterbalances the lift and the total force is
zero according to the D’Alambert paradox. However, these two forces produce
the moment which is exactly the Munk moment,

This moment is called also as the unstable moment. It can be explained at

small drift angles . The velocity components are expressed through the ship speed
and the drift angle:
Vx  V cos  , Vy  Vsin  (2.10)

Since m11 is much less than m22 , the Munk moment is

2 2
V V
M Munk   m22  m11  sin 2  m22 sin 2 . This moment is the moment which
2 2
causess the insta ability. With the oth her words, if a small drift ang gle appea ars, this
moment increasses this angle. Ind deed, the additiona al momentts arising due to
esence off small drifft angle   0 is pos
the pre sitive, i.e. it causess further in
ncrease
of the d
drift anglee:
dM MMunk  m  V 2 cos 2  0
M z   22
2 0
d
In the real visco ous fluid the
t flow in n the sterrn area is changed . This cha ange is
taken into acco ount in th he wing ttheory by Kutta co ondition. T The down n force
doesn’’t appear and the unstable moment is i approximately on nly a halff of the
Munk moment (Fig.6). Very V ofte
en the ya aw mome ent M z iss determiined in
measu urements in real viscousv flluids and capture the Mun nk’s part of the
moment automa atically. Thhat is whyy it is com
mmon to carryc the M
Munk mom ment to
ght hand side
the rig s of the
e momen nt equation and to consider the comb bination
Mz  Vx Vy (m22  m11 ) as a total yaw m moment, i.e.

 (m
m  m11 )(V c   V ssin  )  (m  m 22 )Vz sin   Fx ,
 cos
  sin   V cos  )  (m
(m  m 22 )(  V m  m11 )Vz cos   Fy , (2.11)
 d
 (I zz  m 66 ) z  M z .
 dt

Fig.6. Illus
stration of the Munk m
moment. a))-inviscid fluid,
f b) visscous fluid..

uations in
2.6 Equ n terms of the drift a
angle and trajectory
y curvaturre

Classiccal form off the mano oeuvrabilityy equations are written in non--dimension nal form
in term
ms of the drift
d angle and trajecctory curva ature. This form is veery convenient to
study th
he ship yaw w stability. The time derivative of speed component
c ts (2.10) are:
dVx dV d d 
 cos   V sin   V cos   V sin  ,
dt dt
d dt
(2.12)
dVy dV d 
 sin   V cos    V sin   V cos  ,

dt dt dt
where point over the quantity means the time derivative of this quantity, i.e.
  dV ,   d .
V
dt dt

To derive the non-dimensional equation form one uses the typical force
representations:
 V2  V2  V2
Fx  Cx A L , Fy  Cy A L , M z  mz ALL (2.13)
2 2 2
Introducing the non-dimensional time , non-dimensional angular velocity  and
instantaneous trajectory radius R
VL
  tV / L,   z L / V   L / R, (2.14)
RV
the dimensional time derivatives V  and  are expressed through the non-
V/
dimensional ones ,  / and  / by:
V
 dV V dV V 2  1 dV  V 2 V /
V     ,
dt L d L  V d  L V
d V d V /
     , (2.15)
dt L d L
2 2 2
dz V d  V   V  d  V   1 dV   V   / V/ 
 z     
       
       .
dt L d  L   L  d  L   V d   L   V
dV / d / d
Here V /  ,  ,  . From the second formula in (2.14) follows that
d d d
dimensionless angular velocity is the dimensionless trajectory curvature.

Using dimensionless mass and inertia moments

m  m11 m  m22 I  m66
x  , y  ,   zz . (2.16)
   3
ALL ALL ALL
2 2 2
and substituting (2.12), (2.13), (2.14) and (2.15) into (2.11) one obtains:
 V/
 x V cos    x  sin    y sin   C x ,
 /


 V/

 y sin    y  / cos    x  cos   C y , (2.17)
 V
 V/
    /  m z .
 V

Chapter 3. Determination of added mass.

3.1 General solution

The basis for an exact determination of added mass is the formula

  k
mik      i dS (3.1)
S
n
where i are potentials of the flow when the ship is moved in i-th direction with unit
speed. These potentials can be found from the solution of the integral equation (3.2)
which was derived in [2] from the no penetration condition
1 cos(n, R MN ) q
 Vi  
4 S
qi 2
R MN
dS  i  0
2
(3.2)

Here the component of the inflow velocity is calculated depending on i:

V1  cos(n, x), V 2  cos(n, y ), V3  cos( n, z ),
V 4  y cos(n, z )  z cos(n, y ), V5  z cos(n, x)  xc os(n, z ), (3.3)
V 6  x cos(n, y )  y cos(n, x)
Once the source intensity is found from (3.3), the potential i is calculated according
to the definition
1 q i ( , ,  )
4 S (x   ) 2  (y   ) 2  (z   )2
 i (x, y, z)  dS (3.4)

Substituting (3.4) in (3.1) one calculates all added mass. Nowadays the
numerical solution of the equation (3.2) presents no serious difficulties and can
be performed by any code using panel methods.

For some simple bodies there are analytical solutions. For instance, for an
elliptical cylinder the following analytic formulae are valid

 
2
m1 1    b 2 ; m 2 2    a 2 ; m 6 6  a2  b2 (3.5)
8
where a and b are semi axis of the ellipse (a>b).

The analytic solution which is the most interesting for shipbuilding is the
solution for rotational ellipsoid. Unfortunately, this solution is cumbersome and
contains non elementary functions. The results of calculation using this
solution are presented in Fig.7 for added mass coefficients.
 Fig. 7 Dimens
sionless a dded mas
ss of rotattional ellip
psoid

In the ssimplest approach, the largest axis 2a is

s the ship length,
l 2b is a middlle value
betweeen the width B and the draught T.

3.2 Add
ded mass
s of the sle
ender bod
dy.

Anothe
er way of determinaation of aadded mass is the use of tthe slende er body
assumpption. Let us consiider the a
added ma   2 cos(n , y )dS . Using the
ass m22  
S
slenderr body estimations (2
2.3) the forrmula for th
his mass ca
an be writtten as follo
ows:
L L
m22   /
   2 cos( n, y )dS     2 cos( n, y )dCdL   m 22 dL (3.6)
S 0 C 0

nd m22    2 cos(n, y )dC is thhe added mass

/
where C is the ship frame contour an m of
C
this contour. The
e formula (3.6)
( is eassier than the al one m22    2 cos(n, y )dS
t origina
S
since th
he contourr added ma
ass is calcculated from
m 2D theory. Simila r formulae
e can be
written for the add
ded mass m66 :
L
m666    6 ( x cos(n, y )  y cos( nx ))dS
d     6 x cos( n, y )ddCdL (3.7)
S 0 C
Expresssion for 6 can be found from tthe followin
ng asympto
otic analyssis:
 m 26      2 (x cos(n, y)  y cos(n, x))dS      2 x cos(n, y)dS,
S S

m62  m 26     6 cos(n, y)dS     2 x cos(n, y)dS

S S
(3.8)

6   2 x
Substituting the last result in (3.7) gives
L L   L
m66     2 x cos(n, y )dCdL   x    2 cos(n, y )dC dL   x 2 m22
2 2 /
dL (3.9)
 
0 C 0  C  0
L
m 26      2 (x cos(n, y)  y cos(n, x))dS      2 x cos(n, y)dS   xm 22
/
dx (3.10)
S S 0

Similarly, added mass m33 , m35 and m55 can be found. Unfortunately, the slender body
theory is not capable of simplifying the formulae for mass like m1k , since the effect of
/
the motion in x direction is assumed to be neglected. The mass m 22 can be found
using 2D panel method which is much easier than 3D version of this method.

3.3 Added mass of the slender body at small Fn numbers.

In what follows we use the concept of doubled body assuming the Froude number is
small and water surface deformation effects can be neglected. An effective way to
/
get m 22 is the use of the Lewis theory which became a classical way to determine
the added mass in naval architecture. Lewis used theory of conformal mapping1
which is applicable only for two dimensional flows. According to this theory (see also
chapter 5.8.1 in [2]) the physical plane z  x  iy is mapped into an auxiliary plane
    i . The skill is to find such a mapping function z( ) and inversion mapping
function  (z) so that the flow around the contour is mapped into the flow around a
cylinder. Lewis succeeded in mapping of a special class of doubled ship frames,
called further as Lewis frames, into cylinders. The Lewis frames have the form typical
for ship frames in the middle ship area. In the bow and stern regions Lewis frames
are deviated significantly from the typical frames. Lewis inversion mapping function is
written in general form
a b
  z  , (3.11)
z z3
where a and b are real coefficients. Changing a and b one gets a family of
Lewis frames. Lewis performed a serial calculation for various frames and
presented his results in a form of a resulting diagram shown in Fig. 8. He
introduced the coefficient (referred as to the Lewis coefficient) which is the
ratio of the added mass of the frame to that of the cylinder with radius T
/
m22
C (3.12)
 T 2
Therefore, C=1 for the cylinder. C for different Lewis frames are presented in
Fig.8 depending on H  2T / B and   Asp /(BT) , where A sp is the frame area.

1
see, for instance, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conformal_map
 Fig. 8 Lewis co
oefficients dependin d   Asp /((BT) , whe
ng on H  2T / B and ere A sp
is the frame
e area (tak
ken from [1])
[

Lewis ddata are useful

u espeecially in th
he preliminnary ship design
d wheen the exa act ship
form is still unkno
own. Using g Lewis co oefficient th
he formulae (3.6), (3 .9) and (3.10) are
en in the fo
rewritte ollowing forrm:
L L L L
m22   m22
/
dL    C ( x )T 2 ( x ) dL , m66   x 2 m22
/
dL    x 2 C ( x )T 2 ( x ) dL , (3.13)
0 0 0 0
L L
m26   xm22
/
2 dL    xC
C ( x )T 2 ( x ) dL
L
0 0
The sleender bodyy theory off added m ass is a sttrip theory. It means that the resulting
mass is obtained d by integrration of frrame mass along th he ship lenngth. Every y frame
flow is considereed as a twwo dimenssional one correspon nding crosss sections s (strip).
The sleender bodyy theory works
w well in the mid
ddle ship area. In thhe bow an nd stern
areas tthe flow is essentially three dim
mensional. The effec ct of three dimension nal flow
on added mass can c also be e taking in
nto account within thee slender bbody theorry using
Munk ccorrection factors.
f Thhe idea of Munk beco omes obvio ous from foollowing fo
ormulae
m22  R2 (a, b)m222 _ slender , m66  R3 (a, b)m66 _ slennder ,
R2 (a, b)  m22 _ elliipsoid / m22 _ slender _ elllipsoid ,
(3.14)
R3 (a, b)  m66 _ ellip
ipsoid / m66 _ slender _ ellipsoid .
Here R2 (a, b) andd R3 (a, b) arre the Muunk’s correection factoors (see F Fig.9). Agaain, the
largest axis 2a iss the ship length, 2b b is a midddle value between thee width B and the
draught T. The added ma ass m11 cann not be determined since the perturbatio ons in x
directio
on are neg glected witthin the sl ender bod dy theory. To overcoome this problem
p
Munk p proposed to o find m11 in a similarr way like m22 but witth differentt correction
n factor:
m11  R1 (a, b)m22 _ slender . (3.15)
The ad
dded mass m22 _ slender _ ellipsoid and
d m66 _ slender _ ellipsoid are obtained ffrom (3.13
3) taking
the factt into acco
ount, that th
he cross se
ection of th
he rotational ellipsoidd is cylinde
er which
Lewis ccoefficient is one.
4
m22 _ slender _ ellipsoid  ab 2 ,
3
4 (3.16)
m66 _ slender _ ellipsoid  ab3
15

As see
en from (3.16) the hydrodynam
mic mass m22 _ slender obtained uusing the slender
body thheory is exxactly equal to the vvolume of the ellipso oid multiplieed with the water
densityy. If the ellipsoid is in the equilib
brium state
e in the wa ater the maass is equa al to the
volume e multipliedd with the density
d (Arrchimedes law).
 T Therefore, the hydro odynamic m mass m22 _ slender
s obtaiined using the slender body
ttheory is equal
e to the
e the ship m
mass.
This result can be e used for rough estiimation of the mass m22 . The aadded mas
ss m11 is
about ffive, eight per
p cent, whereas
w e mass m66 is about 1.4Izz [1].
the

Fiig. 9 Munk
k’s correcttion factorrs.

With the Munk co

orrections the
t added mass are calculated from form
mulae
L
1
m11  R1   C(x)T 2 (x)dx,
(
2 0
L
1
m 22    C(x)T 2 (x)dx,
R2 (3.17)
2 0
L
1
m66    C(x)T 2 (x)x 2 dx.
R3
2 0
The facctor ½ is in
ntroduced into (3.17)) because the added mass of thhe hull is a half of
that of the doubleed body.
Chapter 4. Steady manoeuvring forces
The forces acting on the ship can be subdivided into steady manoeuvring forces,
propulsion forces, forces arising on control elements, wave induced and forces
caused by wind and current. In this chapter we consider the steady force component.
The steady manoeuvring forces arise on the body moving with steady linear and
angular velocities due to viscosity influence. The physical reason of the inception of
the steady manoeuvring forces is illustrated in Fig. 6. If the ship moves with a steady
drift angle in an inviscid flow, the lift force arises in the bow region whereas the down
force acts on the stern area (Fig.6a). The resulting force is in accordance with the D’
Alambert paradoxon zero. In the viscous fluid the flow in the stern area is changed
due to influence of the boundary layer developing along the ship surface beginning
from the bow. As a result the down force disappears at the stern part and the
resulting force is not zero. This component is referred to as the steady manoeuvring
force caused by the drift angle. The forces and moments appear also if the ship
moves with any steady linear and angular velocity. In the manoeuvrability theory the
steady forces arising due to drift angle and yaw angular velocity are of importance.

4.1 Representation of forces

Using the Reynolds averaged Navier Stokes equations (RANSE) technique, the
steady forces can be calculated by direct integration of normal and shear stresses
over the wetted ship area. This way requires huge computer resources, is time
consuming and the prediction accuracy is often not satisfactory. The experiment is
still remaining a main source of the force data used for prediction of manoeuvrability.

The experimental methodology is based on the representation of forces in form of

different approximations. For instance, one uses a multivariate Taylor series
expansion about the equilibrium condition Vx  V, Vy  Vz  x  y  z  0 :
   
j

1  
Fn (Vx , Vy , Vz , x , y , z )     V k
 Fn  , (4.1)
j 0  j!  x k  
 
Vx  V,Vy  Vz x y z 0 

where Fn (Vx , Vy , Vz , x , y , z ) is the force component2, n=1,2,…,6, ,….,
F4 (Vx , Vy , Vz , x , y , z )  Mx (Vx , Vy , Vz , x , y , z ) ,., V 1  Vx  V, V 2  Vy ,..., V 5   y ,... .

As a rule the force coefficient are calculated through the coefficients

Cx ,Cy ,Cz , M x , M y , Mz
 V2  V2
Fx,y,z  Cx,y,z A L , M x,y,z  m x,y,z
A L L,
2 2
which are represented in the form of Taylor series. The coefficients
Cx ,Cy ,Cz , Mx , M y , Mz are the function of kinematic parameters and similarity criteria

such as the Froude and Reynolds numbers. The derivatives
x k Vx  V,Vy  Vz  x  y z  0

are determined about the equilibrium condition Vx  V, Vy  Vz  x  y  z  0 .

2
For the sake of brevity both force and moment are meant here and further under the term “force”
4.1.1 Hypothesis of quasi steady motion.

Application of the Taylor series implies the hypothesis of quasi steady motion. The
latter means that the forces are fully determined by instantaneous values of kinematic
parameters neglecting the unsteady effects. The motion history influence is
neglected. Strictly speaking the ship hydrodynamics depends on the ship states in
previous times, because the wave surface, boundary layer and wake depend on the
ship trajectory. However, the unsteady effects can be neglected if the characteristic
time scales of the hydrodynamic processes are much smaller than the characteristic
times of the ship motion. With the other words the ship motion is much slower than
the change of the hydrodynamics characteristics. In this case the hydrodynamics is
fully determined by instantaneous ship kinematic characteristics. With the other
words, it is assumed that the hydrodynamic coefficients Cx ,Cy ,Cz , Mx , M y , Mz are
frequency independent. This assumption is not necessary if the motion is modelled
using coupled 6DoF simulation (see chapter 10).

4.1.2 Truncated forms.

In the shipbuilding the maximum order of the derivatives in the representation (4.1) is
three. General forms of (4.1) for different bodies are given in [4]. The representation
(4.1) contains high-order derivatives which are hardly to determine. There are no
reliable theoretical or empirical means to calculate many of the second – and third-
order terms [4]. That is why the expansion (4.1) is used in a very truncated form,
which can be derived by further analysis showing that only a part of the derivatives
has an essential impact on the ship dynamics. Additionally, the expansions (4.1) are
significantly simplified if the ship symmetry is taken into account. In this case
Fx (0, Vy ,0,0,0,0)  Fx (0, Vy ,0,0,0,0) ,
Fy (0, Vy ,0,0,0,0)  Fy (0, Vy ,0,0,0,0) , (4.2)
Mz (0, Vy ,0,0,0,0)  Mz (0, Vy ,0,0,0,0) .
Some of derivatives in (4.1) are zero. For instance, due to symmetry of the drag with
respect to the velocity component Vy and z , the derivatives of the drag on Vy and
on z at Vy  Vz  x  y  z  0 are zero:
Fx Fx
 0, 0 (4.3)
Vy z Vx ,Vy  Vz x y z  0
Vx ,Vy  Vz x y z  0

These facts are used to truncate the expansions (4.1).

4.1.3 Cross flow drag principle.

The Taylor series expansion was also revisited using the so-called “cross flow drag
principle” taken from the wing theory. Let us consider the steady ship motion with
velocity components Vx and Vy . The dependence of the transverse force arising on
the ship is shown in Fig. 10 depending on the drift angle:
Fig. 10
0. Typical dependen nce of the
e transverrse force on
o the drif
ift angle, q is the
nonlineear part of
o the force
e.

ependence of the tran

The de nsverse fo
orce coeffic e drift anglle C y (  ) consists
cient on the c
of two ccomponen
nts:
C y (  )  C y   C y (4.4)

Here C y  is the omponent whereas Cy is the
e linear co e nonlineaar componnent. As
discusssed in the wing
w theorry (see [2], chapter 5.3)
5 the ratiio betweenn two compponents
dependds on the wing aspe ect ratio. T
The ship un nder the drift
d angle is a wing with an
extremely low aspect ratio o AR  2T / L . For such
s a win
ng the noonlinear pa
art q is
essentiial already at small drift angles and overccome the linear compponent
d / d 
dY dM z / d  
C y 
  , m 
  . (4.5)
V 2TL 2 z
V 2TLL2 4
where the linea
ar momen
nt componnent  dM z / d  is calculated a
around th
he wing
e point.
middle

Formaal applica
ation of the
t Taylo he case under
or series expansion for th
consid
deration gives:
3
dC
Cy 1 d Cy 3
Cy ( )     ... (4.6)
d 6 d 3
The nnonlinear compone ent seemss to be proportion nal to  3 . In orrder to
calcula
ate the noonlinear componen
c nt Cy , Be etz consid
dered the wing und der the
cross fflow Vsin  . The ad
dditional t ransverse e force Cy is interp
preted as a drag
causedd by the cross flo ow. Acco ording to Betz the nonlinea ar component is
provedd to be pro
oportional to the driift angle squared buut not cubbed as in (4.6):
(
 2
C y  C y  (4.7)
The result (4.7) was
w confirrmed in m easurements. The problem p noow is the positive
sign off the nonliinear force e both at positive   0 and negative
n   0 drift angles,
althoug ar that Cy (  )  Cy (  ) . To avoid thiss contradic
gh intuitively it is clea ction the
term  2 is rewrittten in the form
f   . Therefore
e,
C y (  )  C y   C 
y   (4.8)
The representation with the second order terms C 
y   is used by Norrbin [13],

SNAME [4], Sobolev and Fedjaevsky [14]. On the contrary Abkowitz [15] uses the
terms of the third order to represent the nonlinear components of forces.

4.2 Representation of forces in the manoeuvrability theory

With considerations of facts discussed above the force representation

proposed by SNAME [4] for manoeuvrability theory reads

1   2 F  2 Fx 2  2 Fx 
Fx (Vx , Vy , 0, 0, 0, z )  Fx (Vx , 0, 0, 0, 0, 0)   2x Vy2    Vyz  (4.9)
z Vy z
z
2  Vy 2


Fy Fy
Fy (Vx , Vy , 0, 0, 0, z )  Vy  z 
Vy z
(4.10)
1   Fy  2 Fy  2 Fy  1  3 Fy
2

  Vy z  V V    z Vy z2
2  Vy z z  6 Vy z
y y z
Vy 2 2 2

M z M z
M z (Vx , Vy , 0, 0, 0, z )  Vy  z 
Vy z
(4.11)
1   2 M z 2Mz 2Mz  1  3 M z
  Vy z  Vy Vy   z z   Vy z2
2  Vy z Vy2 z2  6 Vy  2
z

Usually, the series expansions (4.9) - (4.11) are applied for force and moment
coefficients Cx ,Cy and mz .

In the simplest case the series expansion for the transverse force used in the linear
manoeuvrability theory contains a restricted number of terms:
 V2
Fy  Cy AL
2
C y  C y (  0 , 0,  R )  C y (  0 , 0, 0)(    0 )  C y (  0 , 0, 0) (4.12)
where   a tan Vy / Vx ,   z L / V , V  Vx2  Vy2 ,  R is the rudder deflection. The
expansion is valid in the vicinity of any operation point 0 ,0,  R . As seen in (4.12) it is
common to represent the forces through the force coefficient which is approximated
in the form of the Taylor series expansion on the drift angle   a tan Vy / Vx and the
non-dimensional angular velocity   z L / V .

Abkowitz [13] proposed force representation using terms up to the third orders.
 (4.13)
The moost genera
al form of foorce repressentation is the polyn
nomial reppresentation which
takes n
nonlinearityy into acc
count. A sa ample of such a representatioon is the method
proposed by the Krylov
K Shipbuilding R
Research Institute
I (se
ee section 4.3.3 belo
ow).

4.3 Exp
perimenta
al determin
nation of s anoeuvring forces
steady ma

Despite
e of rapid developme
d ent of num
merical metthods the experimen
e t is still rem
maining
a mainn source ofo manoeu uvring forcce data. Here we discuss thhree experrimental
methodds of force determina
ation.

11 Model test witth PMM in ice pe

Fig. 1 erformed by Oceaanic Con
nsulting
Corporration [5].
4.3.1 The planar motion mechanism (PMM)

The PMM is used in manoeuvring studies conducted in open water and ice (see
Fig.11). This technique has been pioneered in the USA by Gertler (1959) and
Goodman (1960). The PMM allows a model to move in exact, preprogramming
patterns while forces, moments and motion around the model are recorded. The
model is towed in a testing tank and oscillates harmonically around a steady
reference motion. The amplitude of oscillations and the frequency are prescribed by
the PMM. For instance the PMM installed at the Oceanic Consulting Corporation, St.
Johns, Canada [5] produces the sway oscillations with the amplitude of 4 meters, the
sway velocity amplitude of 0.7 m/s and yaw rates up to 60 degree per second in the
towing tank with the length of 200 m and the width of 12 m.

The idea of PMM in the simplest version can be easily illustrated using the Taylor
series expansion (4.9)-(4.11). Usually the expansions are used to find the forces on
the left-hand side of the formulae assuming that all derivatives on the right-hand side
are known. In the PMM methodology the forces are measured. The right hand sides
of the formulae Fx (Vx , Vy ,0,0,0, z ) , Fy (Vx , Vy ,0,0,0, z ) and M z (Vx , Vy ,0,0, 0, z ) are
known. The kinematic parameters Vx , Vy , z are prescribed by the PMM at every time
instant. Performing tests one obtains, say, M measurement points. The following
conditions are valid for each i-th measurement point:

1   2 F  2 Fx 2  2 Fx 
Fxi (Vxi , 0, 0, 0, 0, 0)   2x Vyi2    V 
yi zi   Fxi (4.13)
z2 Vy z
zi
2  Vy 
Fy Fy 1   Fy  2 Fy  2 Fyi  1  3 Fy
2

Vyi  zi   Vyi zi  Vyi Vyi  zi zi   Vyizi2  Fyi
Vyi z 2  Vy z Vy 2
z 2
 6 Vy z
2

(4.14)
M z M z 1   M z
2
 Mz
2
 Mz
2  1  M z
3
Vyi  zi   Vyi zi  V V     Vyizi2 
z 2  Vy z z  6 Vy z
yi yi zi zi
Vy Vy 2 2 2

 M zi
(4.15)

where I=1,M the measurement point number. Having 16 measurement points, one
can calculate 16 unknown derivatives in the system of linear equations (4.13)-(4.15).
To increase the reliability of prediction, the number of experimental points is much
more than the number of unknown derivatives. The resulting system is over defined
(the number of equations is larger than the number of unknowns). In this case the
derivatives are found from the condition that the optimal set of derivatives provides
the minimum of residuals of the equations (4.13)-(4.15).

The approach using derivatives imply the quasi steady motion. The influence of
unsteady effects, influence of frequencies in harmonic motions is not considered. To
overcome this disadvantage Bishop and Parkinson [7] proposed to represent forces
through the Fourier expansions based on the oscillatory derivatives following to the
experience from the airplane aerodynamics. The PMM equipped with the harmonics
analysis device is capable of determining the oscillatory derivatives as well (see [7]).
 d
For instance, if only the yaw oscillation motion   0 sin  t,    0 cos  t is
dt
studied, the representation of the transverse force looks like
Y(t)  a1V  a 2  a1V0 sin  t  a 20 cos  t (4.16)
Three remarkable points should be noted, considering the last formulae
 there is an explicit dependence of forces on time,
 additional term proportional to  takes unsteady effects (delay of forces
change with respect to kinematic parameters change) into account,
 coefficients a1 , a 2 depend not on the time rather than on frequencies  .
If A and B the coefficients of the Fourier expansion for the force Y(t) provided from
measurements:
Y(t)  A cos  t  Bsin  t  A  a 20 , B  a1V0
From this we obtain unknown coefficients in (4.16):
a 2  A / 0 , a1  B / V0

4.3.2 Rotating-arm basin

The rotating-arm basin is the traditional and well-tried facility to determine the
manoeuvring forces. The rotating arm is installed in a round form basin with
diameters varying from 15 meters to 75 meters. For instance the rotating arm basin
of the Krylov Shipbuilding Research Institute is 70 m with depth of 6.7 meters. The
sketch of the facility is presented in Fig.12. The model installed on the rotating arm
at arbitrary drift angle is free for heave and pitch motions. Changing the distance from
the model to the basin centre allows one to control the model angular velocity. The
frequency of rotation is changed in order to vary the linear speed of the ship motion.
The drag, the transverse force and the yaw moment are measured using
dynamometers. The forces and moments obtained from measurements are
approximated as functions of  and z . Numerical differentiation of these
approximations is then used to determine the derivatives. Unsteady effects are fully
neglected in the rotating- arm basin tests.

One of the difficulties in the rotating-arm tests is the determination of forces at z  0

since z  0 due to restriction on the arm length. This problem is easily solved, if the
rotating-arm tests are supplied by tests in towing tank at z  0 and   0 . Another
way which doesn’t require additional towing test measurements is the utilization of
symmetrical conditions for forces and the moment. Let us consider the figure 13
showing the ship in two turning motions along a circle trajectory at z  0,   0 and
z  0,   0 .

The following conditions can be established just from the analysis of the fig.13:
X(  , z )  X(  , z ),
Y(  , z )  Y(  , z ), (4.17)
M z (  , z )  M z (  , z ).
The conditions (4.17) are applied to find the hydrodynamic characteristics at
z  zmin using the measurements done at z  zmin ,   0 , where z min is the
minimuum angularr velocity which
w can b
be attained
d in the fac
cility. To oobtain the force
f Y
at (  , z ) the measurement is p performed at ( ,z ) . The measured d force
Y( , z ) is then n multiplie
ed by (-11). The forces
f an
nd momennt in the range
z min  z  z minn can be fo polation of forces beetween z min and
ound from the interp
z min aas illustrate
ed in Fig.1 procedure requires measureme
14. This p m ents with positive
angular velocity and
a both po
ositive and
d negative drift angles.

Fig. 12 Sketch
S of the rotatin
ng-arm facility [5].
 Fig. 13 Two
T turnin otions at z  0,   0 and z  0,   0 .
ng ship mo

Fig. 14. Gene

eralization
n of rotatin sts to the range z min  z  z min .
ng-arm tes

4.3.3 Id
dentification method

The me ethod usess the data obtained ffrom the te ests with self-propelleed models s or with
real ships. Duringg these tessts the kine
ematic parameters off the ship m motion, linear and
angular velocitiess as well as the acce elerations are
a measured depennding on tim me. The
motion equation systems
s ca
an be writteen in the fo
orm
 

 1   2 F  2 Fx 2  2 Fx 
Fxi (Vxi , 0, 0, 0, 0, 0)   2x Vyi2    V 
yi zi  
z2 Vy z
zi
 2  Vy 

  (m  m11 )(V  cos   V  sin  )  (m  m )V  sin  ,
i i i i i 22 i zi i

 Fy Fy 1   Fy  Fy  Fyi  1  3 Fy
2 2 2

 V     V   V V    zi   Vyizi2 
z 2  Vy z z  6 Vy z
yi zi yi zi yi yi zi
 Vyi Vy 2 2 2

 
  (m  m 22 )(Vi sin i  Vi i cos i )  (m  m11 )Vizi cos i ,


 M z V  M z   1   M z V    M z V V   M z     1  M z V  2 
2 2 2 3

 Vy yi z zi 2  Vy z yi zi Vy2 yi yi z2 zi zi  6 Vy z2 yi zi

  
 dzi
 (I zz  m 66 )
 dt
(4.18)
where i is the number of measurement. The system (4.18) can be considered as a
system of linear equations for determination of coefficients on the left hand side. The
coefficients are assumed to be constant during the motion apart of the drag
Fxi (Vxi ,0,0,0,0,0) which can be found from any empirical method. Again, like in PMM
tests we have more experimental points and the resulting system (4.18) is over
defined (the number of equations is larger than the number of unknowns). In this
case the derivatives are found from the condition that the optimal set of derivatives
provides the minimum of residuals of the equations (4.18). For that different methods
of optimization theory are used.

4.3.4 Approximations of steady manoeuvring forces

Various series of experimental measurements were performed and approximated by

different shipbuilding research organisations. Empirical methods of determination of
manoeuvring forces are listed in the table 1.
Table 1.
Method Reference
Abkowitz, M. A. (1964) Abkowitz, M. A. (1964). “Lectures on Ship Hydrodynamics -
Steering and Manoeuvrability.” Technical Report Hy-5. Hydro-
and Aerodynamic Laboratory. Lyngby, Denmark
NORRBIN (1971) NORRBIN, N.H.„Theory and Observations on the Use of a
Mathematical Model for Ship Manoeuvring in Deep and
Confined Waters” SSPA, Gothenburg, Sweden, Publication
No. 68, 1971
CLARKE (1983) CLARKE, D. , GEDLING, P. , HINE, G., “The Application of
Manoeuvring Criteria in Hull Design Using Linear Theory”
Transactions of the RINA, London, pp. 45-68, 1983
CLARKE/HORN (1997) CLARKE, D. , HORN, J.R.,“Estimation of Hydrodynamic
Derivatives”Proceedings of the 11th Ship Control Systems
Symposium, Southampton, U. K.,Vol. 3, pp. 275-289, 1997
OLTMANN (2005) OLTMANN, P., “Identification of Hydrodynamic Damping
Derivatives – a Pragmatic Approach”, International
Conference on Marine Simulation and Ship
Manoeuvrability, Kanazawa, Japan, August 25th – 28th,
 20
003
SNAME
E (1993) LE
EWANDOW WSKI E., The
T dynam mics of marrine craft, World
W
sc
cientific, 20
004, 411 p
KSRI Handbook o on ship the
eory, editorr Prof. Voitkkunski,
Le
eningrad, S Sudostroenie, Vol. IIII., 1985

Approx ximation proposed by the K g Researcch Institute. The

Krylov Shiipbuilding
approximation prroposed by y KRSI is advantage use it takees full nonlinearity
eous becau
of force
es and it is valid fo or all drift angles in the wide range froom zero to o π, i.e.
0     . The foorces are subdivide ed in two componen nts. The fiirst compoonent is
causedd by the driift angle, whereas
w the e second one
o arises due to anggular veloc city z .

The firsst compone

ent is repre
esented in the form:

(4.19)
where AL is the lateral area, L pp is th
he ship leng
gth betwee
en two perppendicularrs. The
coefficients are approximate
ed as follow
ws:

(4.20)
Cx0 is the ship drag at zero
z drift a
angle. The
e coefficie
ents in forrmulae (4.20) are
approximated de
epending on the F umber Fn  V / gL ppp , ratios Lpp / B ,
Froude nu
Lpp / Tm ( Tm is the
e draught at the mid y x g and
osition of the center of gravity
dship), po
block ccoefficient of e  x is dettermined frrom Fig.15
o the laterral area  . The angle 5.
 Fig
g.15 Determ e x
mination off the angle

Fig.16 Shape o
of frames in
n the stern
n area

The blo ea is calculated from the formul a

ock coefficient of the lateral are

(4.21)
for fram
mes depictted in Fig.16 . Here e i is the frame
f at which
w the U-shaped frames
become e V-shapeed. If the shhip has U--shaped fraames along the wholle lengths, i is the
frame nnumber wh here the buttock alle eviates in the
t symme etry plane (see Fig.17). The
a AC is illu
choice of the area ustrated in Fig.18.

Fig.17 Determina
D tion of i in the formula (4.21)
 Fig.18 Samples o ce of the area AC .
of the choic

The forrmula (4.21) is valid for ships with conve entional stern shapee shown in Fig.16.
For ships with ciggar shapedd stern (Fig
g. 19 left) and
a well de eveloped ddeadwood (Fig.19
right) th
he following formulae
e have to b
be used:

Fig.19 Frame
es in the ste
ern area: le
eft- cigar-s
shaped stern, right- w
well develo
oped
d
deadwood d.

for fram
mes depicted in Fig.19 left

for fram
mes depicted in Fig.19 right

Here  1 is the trim n of the runnning ship trim  2

m angle of the ship att the rest. Calculation
C
is perfo
ormed acco ording to th
he table 2.

2. Calculation of  2 . x g  x g / L pp
Table 2
Fn 2 xg coefficieents
0.34  F
Fn  0.42 x g  0.015

x g  0.015

0.42  F
Fn  0.46 x g  0.02

0.02
2  xg  0

xg  0

0.46  F
Fn  0.54 x g  0.04

0.04
4  x g  0.0

x g  0.01

The lateral area AL , the bllock coefficcient CB are calculatted from:

The coefficients in (4.20) arre calculate

ed from the
e following
g approxim ations:
Coefficcients are calculated
c according to the table 3.

3. Calculation of a1 an
Table 3 nd b1 .
L/B  co
oefficients
4  L/B 6 0.93    0.95

0.95    0.97

  0.97

6 L/B8 0.93    0.95

0.95    0.97

  0.97

8  L / B  10 0.93    0.95

0.95    0.97

  0.97

Where a3 and b3 are calcula

ated from tthe table 4.
 4. Calculation of a3 an
Table 4 nd b3 .

Tm / L  0.04

0.04  Tm / L  0.066

0.06  Tm / L  0.088

The paarameter φ is the ra

atio of the block coe
efficient to the block coefficient of the
middle frame m .
It is assumed tha he angularr velocity z does nott contribute
at the rotattion with th e to the
ship resistance Cx and to the orce C y . The
t side fo T contribution to thhe yaw mo
oment is
ated from th
calcula he following approxim
mations:

/ z L
 , / 
1  /2 V

Chaptter 5. Ca
alculation
n of stea
ady mano
oeuvring
g forces using sllender
body theory
The forrmalism off the slendder body ttheory is based
b on the
t potentiial inviscidd theory
and assymptotic estimation
e s (2.3). T he governning equations are dderived us sing the
conceppt of the acctive cross section w ckness x at the absscissa x (s
with the thic see Fig.
20). Firrst, we consider the steady sh hip motion under a positive
p drrift angle. Due to
ship mmotion the e ship frame in th e cross section
s is moved w with the velocity
Vsin  in y direction. The mom entum of the flow in the cross ssection rea
Vy  V ads:
P  m 22 Vy    C(x
x)T 2 (x)V siin  x (5.1)
 F
Fig.20 Acttive cross section along
a the ship
s length
th

According to the momentum m theorem m, the trans sverse force acting onn the frame of the
doubled d body at x is calculated throu ugh the tim me derivative of the m momentum m in the
earth fixed reference system m
d(P)a
Y   (5.2)
dt
The change of the flow mom mentum iss caused by y the chan nge of the fframe in thhe cross
section
n due to motion
m witth the velo ocity Vx  V cos  . TheT time dderivative can be
dx
replaceed by the derivative
d o x coordiinate dx  V cos  dt 
on  V cos 
dt
d( P)a d( P)) dx
Y    (5.3)
dt dx dt
Substitution of the
e equation n (5.1) into (5.3) gives s
d(P) dx d(C((x)T 2 (x)) 2
Y      V sin  cos  x (5.4)
dx dt dx
Herewith the derivative of th he transve rse force on o x coordiinate is:
dY Y 2
dd(C(x)T (x x)) 2
    V sin  cos
c  (5.5)
dx x dx
Since the drift angle is assuumed to be e small sin   , co os  1 , thee last expre
ession
takes thhe form
dY 2 d(C(x)T T 2 (x))
  
V  (5.6)
dx dx
x
Fig.21 x)T 2 (x) an
1 Distributtion of C(x nd of the trransverse force (5.66) along th
he ship
length

ddY
o C(x)T 2 (x) and
The disstribution of along the ship is
s presenteed in Fig. 21.
2 The
ddx
C(x)T 2 (x) has maximum
m in
n the centrral part of the ship where
w the fframe shapes are
full, i.e.. C(x) is maximum.. In the bo
ow and ste ern regionss either C((x) =0 or T2 (x) =0.
d(C(x)T 2 (x))) dY
Y
The deerivative and the force disttribution are maaximal in bow
b and
dx dx
d
stern reegions. In the centraal part alon p length the C(x)T 2 ((x) =const and no
ng the ship
ddY
force =0 arisses within this regio n. This fo
orce distrib
bution is inn accordan
nce with
ddx
the forcce scheme e given in Fig.
F 6.

o the bow x  xB is
The forrce arising within the ship lengtth from x to
xB x
dY B
d(C(x)T 2 (x))
Y( x)  
x
dx
d    V 2 
dx
x
dx
dx   V 2 C(x))T 2 (x)  (5.7)

At x  xH Y(x H )   V2C(x x H )T2 (x H ) is zero because C(x H )T2 (xx H )  0 wh hat is in

accorda
ance with the
t parado ox of d’Alam mbert. On n the contra
ary, the mooment is no ot zero
xB xB 2 xB
dY d(C
C(x)T (x))
x dx xdx    x dx
  C(x)T
xdxV 2   
xH
T 2 (x)dxV 2   m 22 V 2  (5.8)
H H

This m
moment is exactly eq
qual to the
e Munk moment
m
M Munk  V xV y (m22  m11 )  V 2 m22
(5.9)
what iis quite expectable
e e, becausse no oth
her mome
ent can a
arise duriing the
steadyy motion.

Let uss considerr a more complicatted ship motion

m witth the drifft angle and
a the
angulaar velocityy. The ship velocitty V is ke
ept consta
ant. The presence of the
angula
ar velocityy causes additional
a velocity in the eac
ch cross ssection alo
ong the
ship
Y x
x 
x  V (5.10)
R L
which sshould be added
a to th
he incominng velocity due to the e drift anglee
x x
Vy (x)  V sin   V  V( V    )  V (x) (5.11)
L L
where  (x) is the effectiv ve drift ang
gle which is variable along thee ship leng gth. The
formula
ae (5.6)- (5
5.7) have to t be rewri tten takingg variability
y of the driift angle along the
ship
x
d(C(x x)T 2 (x)(    ))
dY d(C(x)T (x))  (x))
2
L 
   V 2   
 V2
dx dx dx (5.12)
 d(C((x)T (x))
2
d(C(x)T 2
T (x)) x 
  V 2     C(x)T 2 (x)) 
 dx dx L L

xB
dY  xB d(C(x)T 2 ((x)) xB
d(C(x)T 2 (x)) x
xx B

Y(xx)  
x
dx
dx    V 2  
 x dx
dx  
x
dx L
dx   C(x)T 2 (x))dx  
xx
L 
 x 
 
 V 2 C(x)T 2 (x)   C(x)T
C 2
(x) 
 L 
(5.13)
Distribuutions of the tra ansverse force co omponents s proporttional to terms
2
d(C(x)T (x)) x
a
and C(x)TT 2 (x) alon
ng the ship length are preseented in Fig.
F 22.
dxx L
Analyzing the up pper picturre, please note thatt the originn is in thee ship cen
ntre, i.e.
2
d(C
C(x)T (x)) x
x B  0 and x H  0 . There efore  is nega
ative both in bow an nd stern
dx L
regionss. As in thet case   0 the full transv ce is zero when   0 , i.e.
verse forc
Y(x H )  0 . Again, like in the
e previous case   0,
0   0 the momeent is not zero.
z

Fig.22 Distribu
ution of thee transverrse force componen
c nts proporrtional to terms
2
dd(C(x)T (x))) x
and C(x)T 2 (x)) along th
he ship len
ngth
dx L
5.1 Improvement of the slender body theory. Kutta conditions

At a glance the slender body theory is not practical because it is not capable
predicting the transverse force. This problem can be overcome in a way similar to the
famous Kutta condition introduced in the airfoil theory (see chapter 5.4 in [2]). As
explained above the force arises due to a drastic change of the flow in the stern area
(see Fig. 6b). This change is caused due to viscosity influence. The boundary layer is
developed starting from the bow. The vortices of the boundary layer shed from the
stern alter the flow. As a result the force acts only on the front part of the ship.
According to the slender body theory it is assumed that the force arises within the
ship section starting from the bow to the widest frame. This choice can be
established using the similarity between the ship and the wing of small aspect ratio.

Let us consider the wing under a small angle of attack  (Fig.23) and   0 .
Because the aspect ratio is small the flow around of any transversal wing section is
nearly two dimensional like it is shown for section AB (see Fig.23 a and b). The
incident velocity is V sin  in each wing section. According to the vortex wing theory
(see chapter 5 in [2]) each section contains transversal bound vortices generating the
lift and free streamwise vortices which are necessary to make the transversal vortices
closed at infinity. The traces of longitudinal free vortices in different cross sections
along the wing are shown in Fig. 23c. To understand the vortex scheme better the
reader is referred to the section 5.9.2.2 in [2]. Both free and bound vortices induce
the downwash to counterbalance the incident velocity V sin  . If the aspect ratio is
small the contribution from the bound vortices can be neglected. Indeed, as said
above, locally in each transversal section the wing acts on the fluid like a plate with
infinite chord. The problem is quasi two dimensional at each x. The bound vortices in
front of the section induce negative downwash velocities whereas the bound vortices
behind the section induce the positive up wash velocity. Since the cross section is
changed slowly the downwash and up wash contributions are nearly equal. The
resulting velocity is zero. On the contrary the contribution of free vortices is
significant. Each free vortex shed from the section at x propagates along the wing
downstream and influences the sections downstream. The total intensity of free
vortices is growing along the wing chord. The no penetration condition is satisfied in
each section.
B(x) / 2
 (y)

 B(x) / 2
y  
dy  2 V sin 
(5.14)


normal velocity component
induced by free vortices
The local span B(x) is changed along the x axis. Let us assume that the no
penetration condition was satisfied at x=x and we proceed to the next section at
x  x  x . The next section has the span from B(x  x) / 2 to B(x  x) / 2
consisting the old part from B(x) / 2 to B(x) / 2 and new winglets
  B(x  x) / 2,  B(x) / 2 and  B(x) / 2, B(x  x) / 2 . The free vortices shed from the
section at x would be able to satisfy the no penetration condition within B(x) / 2 to
B(x) / 2 . But they are not sufficient to satisfy the no penetration condition on the
whole width B(x  x) / 2 to B(x  x) / 2 . New free vortices have to arise at
 x  x  x . According to the fluid mechanics theorem the vortex lines should be the
closed lines. It means that the appearance of the longitudinal vortices leads
automatically to the appearance of the transversal bound vortices. They generate the
lift in the section x  x  x .

Let us consider now two sequential sections HG with the largest span and IJ. The
span of IJ is either the same or smaller. No new winglets arise. It is assumed that the
flow does not follow the wing contour rather than separates at the section with the
maximum width. The free vortices coming from the section HG are able to satisfy the
no penetration condition on the whole span in the section IJ because they were able
to do it on a larger span at x. No new free vortices are necessary. It means no bound
vortices appear in the sections behind HG. Therefore, no lift is generated behind the
section HG.

Generalizing this analysis to a slender body theory, it is assumed that the transverse
force appears only on the ship part in front of the maximum width frame section at
x max . This section can be identified as the section where the product C(x)T2 (x) is
d(C(x)T 2 (x))
maximal. Therefore, the first term in (5.12)   V2
 has to be
dx
integrated from x max to x B .

Let us consider now the case   0,   0 . In this case the no penetration condition
reads:
B(x ) / 2
 (y)

 B(x) / 2
y  
dy  2z x
(5.15)


normal velocity component
induced by free vortices
The force arises due to two reasons. First, like in the case   0,   0 new free
vortices arise in each section downstream due to change of the wing span. Second,
the new free vortices appear because the right side of the equation (5.15) is changed
along the wing chord. The first effect is described by the second term in (5.12)
d(C(x)T 2 (x)) x 
 V 2  , whereas the second effect by the third term C(x)T 2 (x) .
dx L L
2
d(C(x)T (x)x)
The contribution of the term  V 2 / L to the transverse force caused
dx
by the rotation is calculated as follows:
 between x max and x B this term is realized in the full form
d(C(x)T 2 (x)x)
 V 2 / L ,
dx
 behind the x max the second term in
d(C(x)T 2 (x)x)  dx d(C(x)T 2 (x)) 
 V 2  / L   V 2  / L C(x)T 2 (x) x 
dx  dx dx 
 is ze
ero becausse the fram
mes of the modified body
b are not changedd behind x max due
to fflow separration at x max (compa
are section
ns HG, IJ and KL inn Fig. 23c
c). It is
assumed, thatt the oscilla
ations of th
he ship wa glected at ssmall z .
ake are neg

Fig.23 Explanati
tion of forrce appea rance on the slend
der body using sim
milarity
with flo
ow aroundd the wing
g with smaall aspect ratio.

With thhese conssiderations the transsverse forc

ce distribu
ution alongg a slende
er body
takes th
he form:
dY
Y  d(C(x)T 2 (x
x)) d(C(xx)T 2 (x)) x 
   V 2     C(x)T 2 (x)  at x max  x  x B (5.16)
dxx  dx ddx L L

dY 
  V 2 C(x)T 2 (x)) at x H  x  x max (5.17)
dx L
Therefo
ore the tota
al transverrse force a nd the tota al moment are
x
 V 2
x max  max

Y CTmax
2
  CTmax
2
  C(xx)T (x)dx
2
 (5.18)
2 L L xH
xB
dY
Mz   x dx dx
xH
d 


 x B d(C(x)T 2 (x))   B 2 d(C
x
C(x)T 2 (x))
xB 
 V   x
 2
dx    x d   C(x)T
dx T (x)xdx  (5.19)
2

2  x max dx L  x max dx 

  XH
Here, additionally the factor ½ is introduced because the force acting on the ship is a
2
half of the force acting on doubled body. CTmax is the value of CT2 at x max .

Introducing the force coefficients, we obtain from (5.18)

x 
x /L
  x CY
2

CYmax
2



cY  c y   c  

y CT  
2
max  max 2
CT
max  CT 2
d( ) 
AL A L  L L 
xH / L

These formulae take a very simple form for the case C  const,T  const :
 V2
Y  cy LT, c y  c y   cy ,
2
 V2 2
M z  mz L T, m z  m z   m z ,
2 (5.20)
  C    C
Cy  , mz  ,
2 4
 C   C
Cy  , mz   .
4 8
2T
where   . the coefficients in (5.20) are nondimensionalized by use of the ship
L
length L and the lateral area LT . The moment is calculated around the ship
centre. Since mz  0 the moment component mz  is the stabilizing one, whereas
mz  causes the instabiility.

The forces, obtained using the slender body theory, contain only the linear
components. The nonlinear components should be added additionally.

Chapter 6. Forces on ship rudders

The ship rudders are wings with the small and moderate aspect ratio which is varied
in the range between 0.5 and 3.0. The relative thickness of rudders is between 10
and 30 per cent. The rudder area A R is chosen from the following two conditions:
 stability of the motion (see chapter 7),
 required ship manoeuvrability.
The rudder design is performed in two stages. In the first design stage the rudder
area is chosen from the conditions of the motion stability and required
manoeuvrability. In the second stage the structure of the rudder and the torque
moment on the rudder stock are calculated. Typical ratios of the lateral ship area LT
to the rudder area A R are presented in table 2.

Table 2. The ratio of the lateral ship area to the rudder area
Ship type LT / AR
Cruise liner 85
Merchant ships 40-60
Sea tugs 30-40
River ships 12-22
Small boats 18-25
 AR
Det Norske Veritas (see [3]) recommends the following estimation for the ratio :
LT
AR  B 
2

 0.01 1  25   
LT   L  

The following aspects should be taken into account when hydrodynamics of the
rudder is considered:
 To increase the rudder efficiency a part of the rudder is located in the propeller
slipstream. In this case the rudder is also efficient at small and zero ship
speeds.
 The slipstream induces not only the additional axial velocity but also additional
transverse velocities on the rudder. As a result the local angle of attack of the
rudder is varied between zero and 15 degrees even for a non- deflected
rudder in the propeller slipstream.
 The rudder is located in the ship wake. Its hydrodynamics is strongly
influenced by the wake.
 The upper side of the rudder is located close to the ship hull.
The ship hull has a positive effect on the transverse force arising on the rudder. If the
gap between the hull and the rudder is zero, the effective aspect ratio of the rudder is
twice the nominal value. The transverse force and the lift to drag ratio is getting
larger. The explanation of this fact is illustrated in Fig.5.17 of the manuscript [2]. Is
the gap getting larger the positive effect quickly disappears. For customary gaps,
the increase of the transverse force due to hull influence is only from five to ten per
cent.

The second fact motivated the engineers of the firm Becker Marine Systems [9] to
invent the twisted rudders (see Fig. 24): “Conventional rudders are placed behind the
propeller with the rudder cross section arranged symmetrically about the vertical
rudder centre plane. However, this arrangement does not consider the fact that the
propeller induces a strong rotational flow that impinges on the rudder blade. This
results in areas of low pressure on the blade that induce cavitation and associated
erosion problems. To avoid cavitation and to improve the manoeuvrability
performance of a full spade rudder, Becker has enhanced the development of twisted
leading edge rudder types”,
Figure
e 24: Twis
sted leadin
ng edge ru
udder inve
ented by Becker
B Maarine Systtem [9].

The larrgest rudde

er deflectio
on angle is customary
y 35 degre
ees.

Variouss rudder types hav ve been d developed over the e years. A comprehensive
overvieew of rudd der types iss given in [10]. Figu ure 25 a) shows
s thee simplex balance
b
rudder which is mounted on the clo osed framme (marked d by the ggrey colou ur). The
rudder is rotated around the stock be eing the paart of the frame.
f Thee rudder with
w heel
bearingg (simplex)) (Fig. 25 b)b belongss to the ch heapest and the mosst common n rudder
type fo
ormerly buiilt. Since th he heel in creases th he non-hom mogeneity of the shiip wake
what inn its turn in
ncreases thhe propelle er induced vibration, this type oof rudders is used
rarely, mostly it isi applied for small boats and some fish hery vesseels. Spade e rudder
(Fig. 25
5 c) is popular for ferrries, ro- ro
o ships andd special craft. Semi--balanced rudders
(Fig. 25
5 d) are ussed to reduuce the ben nding mom ment actingg on the ruddder. To thhe most
modern n rudder tyypes is the flapped ru udder designed by Becker Marrine System ms. The
side forrce on the moving rudder can b be sufficien
ntly increas
sed using tthe flap de
eflection
(see Fig. 26).

Size and costs of o the rudder engin e are dete ermined byb the neccessary ma aximum
torque at the rud dder stock. The stocck momentt is zero iff the centrre of effortt for the
transveerse rudder force liess on the ru dder stock
k axis. Thaat is why thhe rudder stock is
usuallyy displacedd from the leading ed dge. The ratio
r of the
e rudder arrea in fron
nt of the
stock too the total area varies in the ran
nge betweeen 0.05 annd 0.35.

Typicall profile shapes of shhip rudderss are prese ented in Fig. 27 [9]. T
The rudder profile
is usua
ally chosen n from the following
f cconditions
 the flow iss non cavitating,
 The critica al angle crit
c corresp onding to the
t stall effect is as laarge as po
ossible,
 the drag to o transvers
se force ra atio is minim
mal.
 a) b) c) d)

Figure 25: Various ru

udder type
es.

Figure 26: Flapped b Becker Marine Syystem [9]..

d rudder iinvented by

Fig
gure 27: Typical
T pro
ofile shap
pes of ship
p rudders [9].

6.1 General reprresentation of force

es on the rudder
r

The forrces on thhe rudder are a calcula

ated using
g the comm
mon repre sentation through
the coe  
efficients C XR , C YR , m Z :
 ZR
   Veff2
X R  CXR AR ,
2
  Veff A ,
2
YR  C yR R (6.1)
2
 Veff2
M ZR  m  ZR A R C.
2
where Veff is the effective velocity at the rudder location and A R is the rudder area.
To be substituted into equations (2.17) the transverse rudder force has to be made
non-dimensional with respect to the ship velocity V and the lateral ship area A L :
C  Veff A
2
2
YR yR
2
R
  Veff  A R
C YR    C yR   (6.2)
 V2  V2  V  AL
AL AL
2 2

 is the transverse force coefficient referred to the rudder area and efficient
Here C yR

flow velocity around the rudder. A similar formula is used for the rudder drag
coefficient:
C  Veff A
2
2
XR XR
2
R
  Veff  A R
C XR    C XR  (6.3a)
 V2  V2  V  A L
AL AL
2 2
and the moment:
 Veff2
m ZR
 ARC 2
M ZR 2  Veff  A R C
m ZR   m  ZR  (6.3b)
 V2  V2  V  A L L
ALL ALL
2 2
One of the important problems of the rudder design is the minimisation of the ratio
CXR / CYR .The transverse force coefficient is taken from measurements or
calculations performed for the wing under the angle of the attack  which is equal to
the efficient rudder deflection angle    R,eff . Since the lift coefficient is always
positive at the positive  whereas the transverse force is negative at the positive
rudder deflection angle  the negative sign is additionally introduced in (6.2) to use
C YR directly from the wing measurements:
2
V  A
C YR ( R )  C YR  eff  R (6.4)
 V  AL
The rudder is used to create the control moment M ZR . If there is no other information
the arm of the rudder transverse force can be approximately estimated as the half of
the ship length:
L
M ZR ( R )  YR ( R ). (6.5)
2
The moment coefficient reads then:
1
m ZR ( R )   CYR ( R ). (6.6)
2
The moment (6.5) is calculated about the ship centre.
The rud
dder is loccated in the e region w hich is stro
ongly influe
enced by tthe ship hu ull. The
ship hu
ull influence
e is expres ssed througgh the follo
owing effeccts:
 tthe incoming velocity y is not eq ual to the ship velocity V ratheer than it eq
quals to
an effectivve velocity Veff  V . The differrence betw
a ween V annd Veff is due d two
e
effects:
o the
e velocity is
s deceleratted becau use of the wake
w effecct (1  w)V ,
o the
e velocity on
o the rudd der is accelerated by the propelller.
 tthe angle of attack is less th han the an ngle of attack deterrmined fro om pure
g
geometric point of vie ew.

Figure 28: Ang gle of atta ack of the rudder at a differentt distancees from thhe ship
hull mooving withh the driftt angle  : I- the rud
dder is verry close to
o the hull,, angle
of atta
ack is zeroo, II- intermediate pposition ofo the ruddder, the a ngle of atttack is
betwee nd  , III- the rudde
en zero an er is far fro
om the hu
ull, angle oof attack is
s equal
p drift angle .
to ship

The firsst effect iss discussedd in the su ubsection 6.3. 6 The se econd effeect is illustrated in
Fig. 288. If the rudder
r is very
v close e to the hull,h it is located in the area a of the
hydrodynamic sh hadow. The e effective angle of attack a is ze
ero. If the rudder is far
f from
the hull the influe ence of thee hull can be neglec cted. The rudder
r is m
moving in the
t free
stream. The angle of attack k is equal tto the ship drift angle e . In the iintermedia ate case
the anggle of attacck is betwe een zero a and . The hull influ uence on thhe angle of o attack
is takenn into acco ount by the
e coefficien nt . The rudder
r anggle withoutt the hull in
nfluence
is:
x
 R,eeff   R  (   R ) (6.7)
L
The efffective rudd der angle with
w accou unt for the hullh influen nce reads:
xR
 R,efff   R   (   ) (6.8)
L
The sh hip hull in nfluence coefficient  can be e found fro om the foollowing empirical
estimattions:
 =0.3 if th he rudder isi located at the dis stance less s than the half of the e chord
ffrom the deadwood,
 =0.3 if the rudders are locate ed on ship boards an nd its projeection on the
t side
vview is croossed with the deadw wood,
  =0.5 if the rudders are located at the distance larger than the half of the
chord from the deadwood,
 =1.0 for ships without deadwood.

6.2 Determination of the force coefficients

The force coefficients can be determined in wind tunnel tests, from RANS
computations or from empirical formulae. The rudder is considered as a wing under
the angle of attack  which is equal to the effective rudder angle  R,eff (6.8). The
effective velocity of flow to the rudder Veff is determined in the next subsection. The
angle of attack and the velocity Veff are assumed to be constant on the whole rudder.
For the angle of attacks less than the critical angle of attack  crit corresponding to the
stall effect, the force and moment coefficients can be calculated from the
approximation of the series of measurements performed by different authors (see
[3]):
  2  (  0.7) sin   C sin sin  cos  ,
C
(  1.7) 2
YR Q

2
  C YR  C sin  3  C ,
C XR
 Q D0
(6.9)
  (  0.7) 2
C     2 
 ZR    2
m sin  cos   YR sin     0.47  
 (  1.7) 2
   4(  1) 
3
0.75(CQ sin sin  cos 2   CQ sin  sin  ).
The first term in the approximation for CYR takes the linear part of the force into
account, whereas the second the nonlinear one. The coefficient CQ is around 1.0
(CQ  1) for the rudders with sharp upper and lower edges. The first term in the
approximation of CXR is derived using the lifting line theory and the concept of the
optimal wing with elliptical load distribution along the span. The second term takes
the contribution of nonlinear effects arising due to the cross flow with the velocity
V sin  (see the subsection 4.1.3). The coefficient CD0 is the surface friction
0.075
calculated from the approximation CD0  2.5 . The moment coefficient is
(log Re 2)2
calculated with respect to the leading edge of the rudder. If the leading edge is not
vertical the position at the mean height of the rudder is used as a reference point.
The aspect ratio is calculated as the chord c at the rudder mean height b/2 divided by
the rudder area A R , i.e.   c(b / 2) / AR . The Reynolds number uses the velocity, the
mean chord C and the kinematic viscosity as the characteristic quantities:
Re  Veff C / . The formulae are valid only up to the critical angle of attack  crit .

6.3 Interaction between the rudder and propeller

Since the rudder is located in the propeller slipstream, the flow around the rudder is
accelerated (see Fig. 29a). The axial velocity is increased from the point A in front of
the propeller to point D in the rudder region being continuous. Because of the flow
acceleration the slipstream propeller experiences the contraction (see Fig. 29b).. The
pressure sinks in
n the front of the pro
opeller duee to the su uction effeect caused
d by the
propelle
er (see Fig
g. 29c). Th
he pressurre in the prropeller dis
sc jumps ffrom the vaalue pB
to the value pC , pC pB . The proopeller actts on the fluid as thhe energy source
raising the presssure from pB to pC . The thrusst on the propeller
p iss T  A0 (p
pC  p B ) ,
where . A0 is the propeller disc
d area.

Figure
re 29: Disttribution of
o the axia
al velocity
y (a), slipsttream con
ntraction (b),and
(b
the press
sure distri
ribution (c)
c) in the sliipstream.

To findd a simplee estimatioon of the flow spee ed, it is asssumed thhat the vellocity is
constannt over thee whole ru
udder area a. Let us consider
c th
he Bernouulli equation along
the stre
eamline coonnecting four
f points A, B, C an
nd D (see Fig.30). A direct app plication
of the equation is not allowed be ecause the e equation n is valid if no en nergy is
nally put along
addition a the line. Since the propeller is the energy
e souurce, the Bernoulli
B
equatioon can be applied
a separately be etween points A and B
 VA2  VB2
p  pB 
2 2 (6.10)

  
point A poi nt B
and between C and D
 VD2  VC2
p  pC 
 2 
  2 (6.11)
point D poi nt C
 Fiigure 30: The stream
mline ABC
CD

Velocities VB an nd VC are equal VB  VC sin nce the ve elocity is ccontinuous on the

propelle
er disk. Thhe velocity y at the po oint D is la
arger than the velociity at the point
p A:
VD  VA  u , where u is the additional velocity in nduced by the propel ler (see Fig. 29a).
Subtraccting (6.10
0) from (6.1 11) one obttains:
 VD2  VA2  2  (VA  u) 2 
pC  pB    VA   1 (6.12)
2 2 2  VA2 
The proopeller loading coefficient is:
T
cS  (6.13)
 2
VA A 0
2
Remem mbering tha at T  A 0 (p C  p )
B an nd use of (6.12)
( results in
T pC  pB (VA  u))2
cS    1 (6.14)
 2  2 VA2
V A0A V A
2 2
ocity Veff  VA  u aro
The efffective velo ound the ru
udder is ob m (6.14)
btained from
Veff  VA  u  VA 1  cS (6.15)
The ve elocity in tthe front of
o the prop peller is calculated
c with accoount for the wake
influencce:
VA  (1  w)V (6.16)
where w is the wa ake numbe er. Herewitth the final formula fo
or the effecctive velociity is

Veff  (1  w) 1  cS V (6.17)

Formulae (6.1), (6.8),(6.9)

( and (6.17
7) are sufficient to calculate thhe forces and
a the
momennt arising on
o the ruddder.

Exerc
cises.

1. Thhe body has

h the sym mmetry pllane xy. Which
W adde ed mass aare zero?
Ansswer: m13  m14  m15  m24  m255  m36  m46  m56  m23  0
2. Thhe body has
h the sym mmetry pllane xz. Which
W adde ed mass aare zero?
Ansswer: m12  m14  m16  m23  m225  m34  m36  m45  m46  0
3. Thhe body has
h the sym mmetry pllane yz. Which
W adde ed mass aare zero?
 Answer: m12  m14  m13  m25  m26  m35  m36  m45  m46  0
4. The body has two symmetry planes xy and xz. Which added mass are not
zero?
Answer: m11 , m22 , m33 , m44 , m55 , m66 , m26 , m35
5. The body has three symmetry planes xy, yz and xz. Which added mass are
not zero?
Answer: m11 , m22 , m33 , m44 , m55 , m66
6. Equations of ship manoeuvring.

The ship manoeuvring theory is based on the following assumptions:

 the ship motion is occurred only in the horizontal plane xy. Heave velocity,
rolling and pitching are neglected ( Vz  0, x  y  0 ).
 The Froude number is small and the free surface deformation is neglected.
The mirror principle is used to model the free surface effect.
Hydrodynamically the ship is considered as a doubled body.

Let us derive the equations of ship manoeuvring.

Solution.
The doubled body has two symmetry planes that is why the ship has only eight
added mass: m11 , m22 , m33 , m44 , m55 , m66 , m26 , m35 .
The static moment of the doubled body Sz  0
Let us choose the origin along the ship from the condition Sx  0
The product of inertia is zero I xz  0
 dV
 (m  m11 ) x  (m  m 22 )Vyz  m 26z2  Fx ,
dt

 dVy d z
 (m  m 22 )  (m  m11 )Vxz  m 26  Fy , (1.67)
 dt dt
 d z dVy
(I zz  m 66 )  m 26  Vx Vy (m 22  m11 )  m 26 Vxz  M z .
 dt dt

7. Equations of ellipsoid motion in the vertical plane.

Derive the equations of ellipsoid motion in the vertical plane.

Solution.
 dV
 (m  m11 ) x  (m  m33 )Vzy  m35y2  Fx ,
dt

 dV d y
 (m  m33 ) z  (m  m11 )Vxy  m35  Fz ,
 dt dt
 d y dV
(I yy  m55 )  m35 z  (m11  m33 )Vx Vz  m35 Vxy  M y .
 dt dt
8. Equations of rolling ellipsoid in longitudinal direction.

Derive the equations of ellipsoid motion when it rotates about the longitudinal axis
and moves in longitudinal direction.

Solution.
 dVx
 (m  m11 ) dt  Fx ,

(I  m ) dx  M .
 xx 44
dt
x

9. Derive the motion equations for ship moving along the turning circle with the
constant speed, drift angle and angular velocity, i.e. V  const, z  const,   const.

Solution:
 (m  m 22 )Vz sin   Fx ,

(m  m11 )Vz cos   Fy ,
 0  Mz.


  y  sin   C x (  , ),

 x  cos   C y (  , ),
 C n (  , )  0.


10. A submarine with the length of 100 m and diameter of 10 m has the velocity of 1
m/s. Determine the added mass of the submarine. Calculate the submarine
acceleration if thrust is 10 ton.

Answer: +0.001m/s2

11. The thrust has been doubled. What is the increase of the ship motion speed?

Lecture 7. Yaw stability

The aim of this chapter is the study of the ship ability to perform the stable motion.
The ship moves with constant speed at zero drift angle and zero angular velocity. At
the time instant t=0 the ship experience perturbations
  * ,
(7.1)
  * .

If the drift angle and angular velocity after perturbations increase the ship motion
becomes unstable. If  and  decay the ship motion is stable. The analysis of the
perturbation evolution is performed under assumption that the drift angle β, angular
velocity Ω and change of the speed are small, i.e.:
 O( ),  O( ), V / / V O( ) (7.2)
Please note that speaking about the stability we assume that the rudder and other
control devices are not active.

7.1 Linearization of the motion equations

The analysis is based on the linearized form of the equations (2.17)

 V/
 x cos    x  / sin    y  sin   C x ,
 V
 V/

 y sin    y  / cos    x  cos   C y , (7.3)
 V
 V/
    /  m z .
 V
Asymptotic analysis of the left hand and right hand sides of (7.3) yields
V/
x cos   x  / sin   y  sin   C x  2  C
x   ....
2

V       

 2
O( ) O(  2 )
2
O(  )
O(  )

V/
 y sin   y  / cos   x  cos   Cy   Cy   C
y    C y    .... C YR


V        

   O(  ) O( ) O(  ) O(  2 ) O(  )
O(  2 )

V/
 
  /  m z   mz   m z    m
z    .... m zR
V      
 O( ) O(  ) 2
O(  ) O(  )
O( 2 )

Neglecting terms proportional to  2 the system (7.3) is reduced to

 V/
  x cos   0,
 V

 x    y   C y   C y  ,
/ 
(7.4)
  /  m    m .
 z z


From the first equation follows that the ship speed remains constant if
 O( ),  O( ) .
V  const (7.5)
The system (7.4) is then reduced to two equations:
 y  /  C y   C*y   0,
 
(7.6)
   m z   m z   0.
/ 

where C*y   x  C y . The equations can be decoupled. The angular velocity and its
time derivative are found from the first equation
1 1
  
  *  y  /  Cy    /  *  y  //  Cy  /
Cy Cy
 (7.7)

The result (7.7) is then substituted into the second equation (7.6)
  m z
*  y
  //  C y  /   *  
 y  /  C y   m z   0
Cy Cy

 C y    y m z
  C y m z  m z C*y 
  
// /
       0
  y  y
   

  2a /  b  0
//
(7.8)
   *
C    ymz
 
Cy mz  mz Cy
where 2a  y ,b   . Similar operations are performed to get
 y  y
the differential equation for :

//  2a/  b  0 (7.9)

7.2 Evolution of perturbations

The solutions of differential equations (7.8) and (7.9) are seeking in the form
 ( )  1e p1   2 e p2 ,
(7.10)
( )  1e p1   2 e p2 .
The time derivatives are calculated by differentiation of (7.10)
 / ( )  1p1e p1   2 p 2 e p2   // ( )  1p12 e p1   2 p 22 e p2
(7.11)
 / ( )  1p1e p1   2 p 2 e p2   // ( )  1p12 e p1   2 p 22 e p2
The solution (7.10) should satisfy the initial conditions (7.1) at   0
  (0)  1   2  * ,
 (0)       ,
 1 2 *
 / (7.12)
  (0)   p
1 1   p
2 2  0,
 (0)  1p1   2 p 2  0.
/

Substituting (7.10) and (7.11) into (7.8) results in

 e p1 (p12  2ap1  b)   2 p 22 e p2 (p 22  2ap 2  b)  0
, 21 (7.13)
p1  2ap1  b  0, p 22  2ap 2  b  0.
and in (7.9)
1e p1 (p12  2ap1  b)   2 p 22 e p2 (p 22  2ap 2  b)  0,
(7.14)
p12  2ap1  b  0, p 22  2ap 2  b  0
p1 and p2 are found from the algebraic equation
p2  2ap  b  0
p1,2  a  a 2  b (7.15)
The system (7.12) along with the solutions (7.14) is now closed and can be used to
find the coefficients 1 , 2 , 1 and 2 . The coefficients p1 and p2 are real since the
product m z C*y and the expression a 2  b are always positive:
  C     m 
2 2

y y

z  2C y  y mz  4 y C y mz  4 y m z C*y
a 2
b  
4(  y )2
(7.16)
 C     m  C 
2 2 2
    
y y

z  2C y  y m  4 y m z C

z
*
y y   ym 
z  4 y m z C*
y
  0
4(  y ) 2
4(  y ) 2
C y    y m z 
The coefficient a is for conventional ships positive 2a   0 since mz  0
 y
and other coefficients in the formula for a are positive. Two following cases are to be
considered
 Case 1: b is positive, p1  a  a 2  b  0, p 2  a  a 2  b  0
 Case 2: b is negative, p1  a  a 2  b  0, p 2  a  a 2  b  0
In the first case
 (  )  0,
(7.17)
(  )  0.
the perturbation go to zero and the ship motion is stable. In the second case
 (   )  2 e p2  ,
(7.18)
(   )  2 e p2  ,
the solution diverges and the ship motion is unstable.

7.3 Criterion of the stability

Therefore, the stability condition reads: the coefficient b should be positive

C y m z  m z C*y C y m z  m z C*y
 0  0  C y m z  m z C*y  0 (7.19)
 y  y
Therefore, the condition of the yaw stability can be written in one of the following
forms:

m z C*y  C y m z  0 (7.20)

m z C*y  C y m z (7.21)

m z m z
  (7.22)
C*y C y

Since m z is negative for common ships the last inequality takes the form:
mz mz
  (7.23)
C*y Cy
or
X  X  (7.24)

The centre of effort of the force arising due to the angular velocity should lie in front
of the centre of effort of the force arising due to the drift angle.
7.4 Influence of ship geometric parameters on the stability

 C  C  C  C
Using estimations (5.20) Cy  , mz  , Cy  , mz  
the criterion
2 4 4 8
(7.20) can be written in the form with explicit dependence on geometric parameters
 C  B  C   C  C
 CB    0 (7.25)
4  T 4  8 2
The following estimation for C*y was taken into account
m  m11 m B
x    CB 
  T
AL L ALL
2 2
The final form of (7.25) reads:
1 CB B
 (7.26)
2  CT

The influence of the ship geometry on the stability is summarized in the table below

Increase of Influence on the stability

B negative
T
CB negative
C positive

7.5 Trajectory of a stable ship after perturbation

A stable ship after perturbation is moving along a new straight path with new course
angle  (  ) . The trajectory of the ship in the earth-fixed system is:
 
1 p1 
 ( )   d   (1e p    2 e p  )d 
1 2
(e  1)  2 (e p2  1) (7.27)
0 0
p1 p2


x0
L 0
 cos(   )d   ,

 
y0
L 0
 sin(   )d   (   )d  (7.28)
0

      
   1  2   21 (e p1  1)  22 (ep2  1)  1 (ep1  1)  2 (e p2  1)
 p1 p 2  p1 p2 p1 p2

At large time    the formulae (7.27) and (7.28) are reduced to

 x0
,
L
(7.29)
y0        
   1  2    21  22  1  2  .
L  p1 p 2   p1 p2 p1 p 2 
  
 (   )    1  2  (7.30)
 p1 p 2 
The ship trajectorry is presented in Figg. 7.1

Figure 7.1: The trajectory

t of the sta
able ship after
a pertu
urbation

7.6 Ste
eady ship motion in turning c
circle

In this subsectionn we give simple esttimations ofo the radiu us and thee drift anglle when
ship pe erforming a steady turning ccircle. The e estimatio ons are dderived us sing the
assump ptions (7.2
2). Stable ship motio on along th
he turning circle trajeectory is deescribed
by two last equations in the system (7 7.4) taking two following facts innto accoun nt:
 ssince the motion
m vatives are zero  /  0, /  0 ,
is steady, the time deriv
 tthe turningg circle maanoeuvre i mplies app plication of the ruddeer. Therefo ore, the
additional force - CYRR should b
a be added tot the r.h.ss. of the y--equation and the
aadditional moment mzR to th he r.h.s. of o the  equation. The sign of the
aadditional force is negative,
n ssince the positive rudder r anggle results
s in the
negative trransverse force.
The sysstem (7.4) is then red duced to:
 x   C y   Cy   C YR ,
 
(7.31)
 0  m z   m 
z   m zR .
The driift angle annd the ang gular veloccity are fou und from th he solutionn of the sy
ystem of
linear e
equations (7.31)
(
C y m zR  m z C YR C*y m zR  m z C YR
c     , c  . (7.32)
m z C y  m z C*y m z C*y  mz C y
The turrning circle
e radius is calculated
c from the definition
d of 
L V L L L
c  z    Rc  (7.33)
V Rc V Rc c
7.7 Regulation of the stability

The expression m z C*y  C y m z is not a quantity to measure the stability. Rather the
roots p1 and p2 characterizing the rate of the perturbation decay can be considered
as the stability measure. From one side, the ship has to be stable. From the other
side, the ship may not be too stable, since in this case the ship is hardly to steer.

At present there is no widely accepted measure of the stability. Kleinau [1] proposes
to regulate the position of the apparent centre of rotation along the ship. The
apparent centre of rotation x D is the point where the local incoming flow velocity is
zero:
x x 
V( c  c D )  0  D  c (7.34)
L L c
1
It is assumed that the arm of the transverse force is L/2, i.e. mzR   CYR .
2
Substitution (7.32) into (7.34) yields
 B  C   C
*   CB   
x D c C y  2mz  T 4  4 C B
     B 3 (7.35)
L c C y  2m z   C  C  CT

2 2
Comparing with (7.26) we obtain a new formulation of the stability condition
xD 1
 (7.36)
L 2

The centre of rotation should lie within the ship length behind the bow. Practical
experience (see [1]) shows that the well steered stable ship has the centre of rotation
at x D  (0.3  0.4)L
xD
 0.3  0.4 (7.37)
L

Lecture 8. Manoeuvrability Diagram. Experimental study of the

manoeuvrability.

8.1 Stability at large drift angle and large angular velocity

Stability analysis at large drift angle and angular velocity (* , * ) is performed in a
similar way as the stability analysis described in the previous chapter for the case
(*  0, *  0) . The criterion of the stability is obtained in the same form as (7.22)
m z ( * , * ) m z ( * , * )
  (8.1)
C*y ( * , * ) C y ( * , * )

B
3
 x  CB  . Please prove!
T
with the difference that the derivatives mz (* , * ) , mz (* , * ) , C*y ( * , * ) and
C y ( * , * ) are calculated at (* , * ) and not at (*  0, *  0) as previously. In this
case the nonlinear are taken into account. For instance, the derivative of the
transverse force on the drift angle looks differently at (*  0, *  0) and (* , * ) :
C y (  )  C y   C 
y  ,
2

C y
 C y  2C 
y ,

C y (8.2)
 C y ,
  0

C y
 C y  2C 
y *
   *

The term 2C y * is responsible for nonlinear effects. Effect of the nonlinear terms
changes the ship dynamics qualitatively:
The ship which is unstable at (*  0, *  0) experiences an unstable motion, moves
into the turning trajectory and arrives a stable motion state along a circle at certain
(* , * ) , at which the ship becoming stable.

Without account for nonlinear terms the ship remains unstable at every drift angle
and angular velocity.

200
1000

160
800

120
600

400 80

200 40

0 0

-200 -40
-400 -200 0 200 400 600 800 0 40 80 120 160

Figure 8.1: Turning circle of a container ship with the length 232 m (left) and of
the same ship with reduced up to 62 m length (right). In the second case the
ship is unstable.
8.2 Diagram 
The ship stability can be estimated from the slope of the dependences of the
dimensionless angular velocity on the drift angle derived from the system (7.31)
 x   C y   Cy   C YR ,
 
 0  m z   m z   m zR .


The angular velocity can be found from this system:

 C y C YR
f  *
 from th
he first equ
uation for th
he y- forcee (8.3)
Cy C*y
 m m 
 m    z   zR  from the second equ
uation for th
he z- mom
ment
 mz m z 
(8.4)
 
Cy mz
The slo
ope of the ence f (  ) is
e depende whereas  is the slope
e of the
C *
y m z
Cy
dence m (  ) .Accord
depend ding to the
e criterion (7.22)
( the slope should be
e larger
C*y
C y m z m z m z 
     *   . It was cconsidered that the coefficientt m z is ne
egative.
C*y mz Cy Cy
Typicall dependen nces f ( ) and m ( ) are pres sented in Fig.
F 8.2 forr stable sh hip (left)
and un nstable sh hip (right). Since w we used linear representatio n of force es both
depend dences are e linear. Th he crossingg points off the lines f (  ) annd m ( ) with
w the
verticall axis are
C
f  0   YR  0 for positiv
ve rudder angles
a R  0 (8.5)
C*y
CYR
f   0 for negative rudder angles  R  0 (8.5)
 0
C*y
mzR
 m  0   ve rudder angles  R  0
 0 for positiv (8.6)
mz
m
m  0   zR  0 for negattive rudder angles  R  0 (8.7)
mz
.

Figu
ure 8.2: Ty
ypical dep s f (  ) an
pendences nd m ( ) fo
or stable sship (left) and
unsta
able ship (right)
(
The cro o lines f ( )  m ( ) are equilibrium ppoints whic
ossing points of two ch both
equatioons of the system (77.31) are ssatisfied, i.e. the tota
al transverrse force and
a the
total ya
aw moment are zero.

If the nonlinearr force an nd mome ent compo onents are e taken iinto accou unt the
dependdences f (  ) and m ( ) are nonlinear. Typical picture
p for the stablee ship is
presented in Fig.8.3a. Again, the crosssing pointts are equilibrium pooints. The diagram
d
8.3 can
n be redraw wn into thee diagram of manoeeuvrability showing
s thhe dependence of
gular veloccity  (or the
the ang e rudder anngle  R (Fig.8.3b).
t turning circle radiius) on the
Each p
point along e ( R ) is the equilibrium poin
g the curve nt. At eachh equilibrium point
the slope of the curve
c f ( ) is large at of the curve m ( ) . Therefo
er than tha ore, the
ship is stable.

Figu
ure 8.3: Ty s f (  ) , m ( ) and
ypical dependencies d ( R ) forr a stable ship.
s

Figure ndences  f (  ) , m ( ) and ( R ) for an

e 8.4: Typical depen n unstable
e ship.
Typical picture for the unstable ship is presented in Fig.8.4a. Again, the crossing
points are equilibrium points which are subdivided into stable points (filled circles)
and unstable points (bars). At stable points the slope of the curve f (  ) is larger
than that of the curve m ( ) . The diagram 8.4a can be redrawn into the diagram of
manoeuvrability (Fig.8.4b). This procedure is illustrated in Fig. 8.4b. To map the
plane    into the plane    R , each point corresponding to a certain rudder
angle  R in    plane is projected onto line  R  const in    R plane. The line
corresponding to the equilibrium states has a typical S-shaped form for unstable ship.

8.3 Manoeuvrability diagram

The dynamic yaw stability can also be analyzed using dependencies of the
dimensionless angular velocity  on the rudder angle which can be either
calculated or obtained from the trial tests. Typical dependencies ( R ) are shown in
Fig. 8.5 for the stable ship a) and unstable ship b). The ship is stable is the slope of

the curve ( R ) is positive and vice versa the ship is unstable if  0 . The
 R
negative slope is observed at small rudder angles corresponding to small drift angles.
At large rudder and drift angles the nonlinear components of force and moment

secure the yaw stability as was already mentioned above. The derivative
 R

characterizes the ship controllability. If the derivative is zero, the ship is not
 R

steerable. The value of should be large but restricted. The infinite derivative
 R

  is the sign of the yaw instability.
 R
 Figu
ure 8.5: M
Manoeuvrability diag
gram

In the rudder anggle range between  R*     R* there exists

e threee possible turning
circles for the unstable
u ship. The sship is no ot steerable in this range. Th he ship
oscillates betwee
en two angular velocitties corres o stable staates  an
sponding to 0
nd 1 .

The manoeuvrab bility diagrram can b be used fo or solutionn of the fofollowing practical
p
problem
ms:

 eestimation of the ship p stability ffrom the co
ondition  0.
 R

 eestimation of the critical rudderr angles  R* and  R* from the ccondition 
 R
,
 eestimation of the ang gular veloccity and turrning circlee radius forr the given
n rudder
a
angle. Thiss task has unique so lution only y for stable ships.
 d t control system.
design of the

8.4 Ex
xperimenta
al manoeu
uvring testts

The maanoeuvring g propertie

es of shipss are valida
ated in seaa trials witth full-scale
e ships.
The te
ests are performed
p in calm d deep wate er with litttle wind. The ship motion
parame
eters are measured
m usually
u by GPS. The e main mannoeuvring tests are:
 tturning circcle test
 zzigzag manoeuvre
 sspiral mannoeuvres
 pull-out ma anoeuvre
 sstop mano oeuvre

8.4.1 T
Turning circle
c
The tesst is started
d from straaight motioon with the design sppeed. Afterr that the ru
udder is
deflecte
ed to an angle
a  R and
a the sppeed is a little reduced due too increase e of the
resistan
nce. The te est is perfoormed whe en ship course anglee is changeed from ze ero to at
least 5540 degre ees. The wind can be less than Bea aufort fourr. The fo ollowing
parame eters are measured
m in turning ccircle test:
 ttactical dia
ameter (see e Fig. 8.6)
 maximum advance (see Fig. 8..6)
 ttransfer at 900 chang ge of headiing (see Fiig. 8.6)
 ttimes to ch hange heading 900 a nd 1800
 ttransfer losss of steaddy speed.

Fig
gure 8.6: Geometric
G paramete
ers of the turning
t cir
ircle

Typicall tactical d
diameters lie in the range bettween 4.5-7 ship le ngths for slender
ships, 2.4-4 for short
s and full ships. Conventio
onal ships have heeel outwardss in the
turning circle.

8.4.2 Z
Zigzag ma
anoeuvre

The ziggzag manoeuvre is performed d at wind less than Beaufort two. The e test is
started from the straight motion
m with gn speed. The ruddeer is turned at  *
h the desig
degreees to the back
b board
d and is kkept consta ant until thhe course angle atta ains  *
degree ack board. After that the rudderr is deflected to  * d egrees to the star
es to the ba
board aand kept constant un
ntil the couurse angle attains thee value  * to the star board.
After th
hat the whhole proce
edure is re epeated. Typical
T alues of  * are 10 and 20
va
degreees.
 Figure 8.7
7: Parame
eters of the
e zigzag manoeuvre
m e

Fig. 8.7
7 shows the parametters of the zigzag ma
anoeuvre as given byy Kleinau [1
1]:
 initial turning time t A ,
 ttime t Ü fro
om the rudder reverssion time in nstant to th
he time corrresponding to the
maximum course angle,
 oovershoot angle  Ü ,
 period of thhe first cou
urse oscillaation.
ng time t A is about one to onee and halff of ship
According to Brixx [11] the initial turnin
length travel time e t Ü lies in the range between 0.5
e. The time 0 and 2 ship trave
el length
time. T
The oversh hoot angle is betwee 5 degrees. Small val ues of t A and
en 5 and 15 a Ü
pointed
d out the biig ship stability.

8.4.3 S
Spiral manoeuvre

The aim of the spiral testt is the de eterminatio

on of dataa to draw the mano oeuvring
m ( R ) (ssee Fig. 8.5). At the beginning of the tes
diagram st the ruddeer is turned at the
um deflecttion angle  R max . Afte
maximu er the stead
dy turning circle motiion is attained the
um turning radius R min corresp
minimu o  R max is measuredd. The ma
ponding to aximum
angular velocity max is caalculated. T
The rudderr angle is gradually decreased d and R
and  are determ mined for each
e er angle in steady cirrcle motionns. The pro
rudde ocedure
ated for the rudder angle
is repea a rangee from  R max
m to -3 -5 degrees. H
Herewith, the
t right
branch of the curve ( R ) is obtaine
ed. Then th
he tests arre perform
med for the
e rudder
m -  R max to
angle rrange from o +3 +5 de
egrees. The anch of thhe curve ( R ) is
T left bra
obtaine
ed. For the
e stable shiip both bra
anches maatch each other.
o The diagram ( R ) is
used to
o estimate the turning
g ability an
nd yaw stab
bility of the
e ship.

8.4.4 Pull-out manoeuvrre

The fu
ull spiral test
t is tim
me consum ming and requires much plaace. The pull-out
manoeuvre allow ws one to get
g the ma anoeuvrability diagra
am at reduuced costs. At the
beginning of the test
t the rud ned at the maximum deflectionn angle  R max
dder is turn m . The

um turning radius R min corresp

minimu o  R max is measuredd. The ma
ponding to aximum
angular velocity max is calculated. After that the rudder angle is set at zero and kept
constant until a steady motion is attained. Then the rudder angle stepwise is
decreased towards small negative values until the rotation direction is changed (  is
getting negative). The right branch of the curve ( R ) is obtained. To get the left
branch, the whole procedure is repeated beginning from -  R max through zero towards
positive rudder angle values. The manoeuvrability diagram gained from the pull-out
test is used only for the yaw stability analysis.

8.4.5 Stop manoeuvre

At the beginning of this manoeuvre the engine is stopped and then reversed at full
astern. The manoeuvre ends when the ship motion speed becomes zero. The
stopping time and the stopping distance are measured.

8.5 Exercise

1. The ship has the following parameters: L=232 m, T=10 m, B=32 m, The Lewis
coefficient of the main frame C=0.75, the wake number w= 0.2, V=10 m/sec. Thrust
loading coefficient is 1.0. Find the rudder area AR from the condition that the ship
turning circle diameter is five ship lengths at  R  350 . The aspect ratio of the rudder
is three.

Tips:
 C  C  C B  C
 Use the formulae Cy  , mz  , Cy  .
, mz   ,  x  CB
2 4 4 8 T
 Find the block coefficient CB from the condition of the proper stability
xD
 0.35 and formula (7.35).
L
2. The ship has the following parameters: L=232 m, T=10 m, B=64 m, the Lewis
coefficient of the main frame C=0.75. The block coefficient is 0.7. Prove the yaw ship
stability. How to make this ship stable?
Tips:
 C   C   C   C B
 Use the formulae Cy  , mz  , Cy  , mz   ,  x  CB  .
2 4 4 8 T

xD
3. Determine the ratio of longitudinal and cross flow velocity for a ship with  0.5
L
at a steady turning circle with a diameter of D = 10*L! Use linearized formulae from
chapter 7.

4. Compute the relative increase of a ship's steady turning radius after a ship
extension of 10m if L=100m, B=20m, T=10m, CB =0.6 with rectangular cross section.
Tips:
Consider rudder forces and moment unchanged! Determine Lewis coefficient from
chart, compute new value for CB . Use formulae from Chapter 7.6.
Lecture 9. Inffluence of
o differe
ent factorrs on the
e manoeu
uvrability
y.

9.1 Inffluence off the prope

eller on th
he ship dynamics. Additional
A force on
proopeller

9.1.1 F
Forces due
e to non-u
uniformity of the shiip wake.

The pro opeller is located in the ship w

wake. In thet case of
o odd num mber of pro opellers
ed on ship additional transverse
installe e force arises on the e ship due to non-un niformity
of the ship wake e. Schematic verticall distributio
on of the axial
a veloccity in front of the
propelleer is shown in Fig. 9..1

.
Fig.. 9.1: Sche
ematic verrtical distrribution of
o the axiall velocity iin front off the
propeller.
r.

Non unniform distribution of

o the stre
eam velocity results in the apppearance e of the
transve
erse force and yaw moment.
m T
The axial ve
elocity con
nsists of tw nent Ux
wo compon
and u x where the t first is
s constantt whereass the seco ond is chaanged in vertical
directio
on. To illusstrate the creation
c of the transv
verse force
e let us connsider two profiles
1 and 2 on a four blades right-hande d propeller (Fig. 9.2)). The proofile are mo oving in
y  r . The incoming stream has then
circumfferential direction wiith the loccal velocity
velocityy V   r . Axial velocity in th
he ship wa ake U x  ux reducess the angle e attack
from 0 to  . Th he lift force
e acting onn the profile e 1 is
A 2 u  Ux
 Y1  Cy V  (U x  u x1 )2 )( 0  x1
(V ) (9.1)
2 V
whereaas the lift fo
orce on the e profile 2 iis
A 2 u  Ux
 Y2  Cy (V  (U x  u x 2 )2 )(0  x 2 ) (9.2)
2 V
 Fig.9
9.2: Explan
nation of transverse
t e force cre
eation on a propelleer in ship wake

Assuming that the e non unifo ormity velo ocity is sma all with respect to V
 u x1,2 
  O( )
 V 
one obtains
 A A(V 2  U 2x ) U u
 Y1  C y ( 0  x  x1 ) (9.3)
2 V V
 A(V 2  U 2x ) U u
 Y2  Cy ( 0  x  x 2 ) (9.4)
2 V V
The lift force has a component projectted on the rotation diirection:
 A(V 2  U 2x ) U u
 Y1  Cy ( 0  x  x1 )siin  0 (9.5)
2 V V
 A(VV 2  U 2x ) U u
 Y2  Cy ( 0  x  x 2 )sin  0 (9.6)
2 V V
The sum of two fo orces yield ds the transsverse forc ce
 A(V  Ux )
2 2
u u  A(V 2  U 2x ) u x 2  u x1
 Y1   Y2  Cy ( 0  x1   0  x 2 )sin  0  Cy sin  0
2 V V 2 V
(9.7)
Since u x 2  u x1 , this forc ce compo onent is positive
p  Y1   Y2  0 . Conssidering
conseq quently pro ofiles in thhe upper blade and d lower blade positi ons in the e same
manner as it has just been done abovve one can n explain th he creationn of the tran nsverse
force ccaused byy the non uniformityy of the sh hip wake. The direcction of th he force
depend ds on the propellers
p turning
t direection. The e positive transverse
t e force app pears on
the rig ght hande ed propelle er(Fig.9.3le eft), wherreas the negative transverse e force
appearrs on the le eft handed propeller ((Fig.9.3righ ht)
 Fig.9.3: Trans
sverse forrce on the
e right han
nded (left) and left h
handed (riight)
p
propellerss.

9.1.2 Forces du
ue to obliq
que flow.

The traansverse fo orce arisess on prope eller in oblique flow, i.e. on prropeller un
nder the
local drrift angle caused
c by the ship d rift motion and rotation with thee angular velocity
. Lett us  is th he local driift angle in
n place of right
r handeed propelleer. To exp plain the
creation of this foorce we co onsider the e scheme similar to that show wn in Fig.9..2. The
inflow o
on the prop peller has an
a transve erse compo onent Vsinn  (see Fi g.9.4).

Fig.9.4: Explanatio
E on of tran
nsverse forrce creatio
on in obliq
que flow.

The dra
ag forces acting
a on th
he upper a and lower profiles
p aree
C A
 Y1  D ( r  V sin  ) 2 (9.8)
2
C A
 Y2   D (r  V sin  )2 (9.9)
2
where CD is the profile
p drag
g coefficien nt. The sum of these e two compponents yie
elds the
transve
erse force which
w is no
ot zero:
 Y1   Y2  2CCD  AVsin  (r)  0 (9.10)
 Fig.9
9.5: Transv
verse forc
ce on the propeller
p in
i obliquee flow.

As seeen in Fig. 9.5

9 the ad dditional foorces arisinng due to oblique floow are sta
abilizing
ones. This force e producees the neg gative mom ment and reduces tthe reason n of the
oblique
e flow appeearance, i.e. the driftt angle and
d the angu
ular velocitty. We con
nsidered
above the right handed
h pro
opellers. Th he same conclusions
c s can alsoo be drawnn for left
handedd propellers.

Additional forces due to oblique flow ccan be estimated from m the form
mula:
 dK Q 
Y   n 2 D 4  22K Q (J  0)  J  J taan  ,
 dJ 
where n is the rootation num mber per ssecond, D is the dia ameter of ppropeller, J is the
advancce ratio, K Q is the torrque coeffiicient.

9.2 Influence of the

t seawa
ay

The inffluence of the

t seawa ay on the sship stabilitty can be detrimental
d p speed
l if the ship
is gettin
ng equal to o the wavee speed inn following waves. The T ship loosses the stability,
s
turns quickly perp pendicular to the wa ve propagation direc ction. This effect disa appears
when tthe differen nce betweeen the sh ip and wave speeds s increasess. In head d waves
the shiip stabilityy and man noeuvrabiliity are suffficiently better
b thann in the fo ollowing
waves.

9.3 Sha
allow wate
er effect

The shhallow effe

ect takes place whe en the waater depth is smalleer than fo our ship
draughts H  4T . The shalllow water influenced
d both the ship addedd mass an nd force
acting on the ship.
s The added m ass coeffiicients k111  m11_ shalloww _ water / m11_ deep _ water ,
k 22  m 22 _ shallow _ wateer / m 22 _ deep _ water and k 66  m 66 _ shhallow _ water / m 66 _ deep _ water are prese
ented in
Fig. 9.6 6. As seen the added mass are increa ased drastically due to shallow w water
effect. The transsverse force is also in ncreased. This effectt can be eaasily expla ained by
the bloocking effect caused by the sh hip in shalllow water. In this caase each frame
f is
streamed not in unrestricte
u ed flow butt in a narro
ow channe el as it is sshown in Fig.
F 9.8.
The fra ame blockss the flow in the cha annel. Obv viously the force is mmuch large er when
the dep pth is smaall. The forrce and m oment increase due to shallow w water efffects is
illustratted in Fig. 9.7 and 9.8.
9 The on nly non inc creasing deerivative iss the deriv
vative of

the forrce on the e angular velocity C Y . Very interesting is the deependence e of the
transve erse force and the moment
m on the Fn nu umber in shallow watter (Fig. 9.9). The
measurement is performed d for a m
merchant ship
s at H/TT=3.5 andd angular velocity
  0.667 deg/sec.. Like in the deep waater case thhe coefficie
ents are inndependent on the
Fn num mber at Fnn  0.2 . Crittical effectss take plac
ce when th
he Froude number ba ased on
V
the dep pth H attaains the va alue aroun d one Fn H   1 . Similarl y to the drag
d the
gH
transve erse force and the yaw mom ment expe eriences ju
ump-like bbehaviour around
V
Fn H   1.
gH

Fiig. 9.6: Sh
hallow watter effect o
on the add
ded mass. 1- CB=0.552, 2-CB=0
0.8.
Fig. 9
9:7 Shalloww water efffects on ttransverse
e force and momen nt derivativ ves on
  
driftt angle and angularr velocity ffor a merc p. k Y  C y ((H) / C y (H   ) ,
chant ship
k z  mz (H) / mz (H  ) , k Y  Cy ((H) / C y (H   ) and k z  mz (H)) / mz (H  ) .
 F
Fig.9.8: Shallow wate o the derrivative C y
ter effect on y .

Fig
g.9.9: Shallow waterr effect onn the trans
sverse forrce and yaaw momen
nt at
differe
ent Fn nummbers.

Consider the stab ble ship motion

m in thhe turning circle with the angullar velocityy Ω and
the con
nstant rudd der angle. When the water dep pth is getting small, tthe term inn the Y-

force equation C y   (C y   x )  C YRR  0 propo

ortional to the
t angulaar velocity remains
r
nearly constant (see Fig.9 9.7) where eas the teerm proporrtional to the drift angle
a is
substanntially incrreased. The equil ibrium is then poss sible whenn the drifft angle
decreases. Indee ed the drifft angle du uring the turning
t circ
cle motionn is much smaller
than onn the deep p water (ssee Fig.9.1 10). Redu uction of thhe drift anngle results
s in the
decrease of the e ship speed
s droop. Figure e 9.11 displaying the depe endence
 sppeed in sshallow water
w
V  on the angu
ular velociity gainedd from fu
ull-scale
sspeed in deep watter
oment equation mz   mz   mzR  0 ,
measurements supports this fact. As to the mo
erms propo
both te ortional to Ω and  in
ncrease suufficiently. According
A to conside
erations
above the drift angle
a is ge
etting smal ler when the
t ship comes to thhe shallow w water.
The terrm mz  iss changed weakly beecause thee decrease e of  is coounterbalan
nced by
the inccrease of the
t nt derivativve m z . To
momen o counterb
balance th e increase
e of the
derivative m z annd to hold the balancce in moments, the angular
a veelocity shou
uld also
become e small. Therefore,
T the angullar velocity
y decrease
es when thhe water depthd is
getting smaller ata H  0 . The turn ing circle radius inc creases w when H  0 . The
turning ability of ship is ge
etting worsse in shallo
ow water. It is illustrrated in Fig. 9.12
 in shallow water
showing the depe endence    on T/H ratio,
 inn deep water
w

water effect on the drift

Fig. 9.10: Shallow w d anglee

Fig. 9.11:
9 Shalllow water effect on the ship speed
s redu
uction
 Fig
g. 9.12: Sh
hallow watter effect o
on the red
duction of the angullar velocity
ty in
tuurning circ
cle

The shhallow watter has ne egative effeect on the

e yaw stab bility. Fig . 9.13 sho
ows the
manoeuvrability diagram of o a tanke r at differeent ratios H / T . Ass seen thee tanker
become es unstable at H / T 1.5 . The e zigzag manoeuvre
m e is also iinfluenced by the
shallow
w water effe
ects. Partic
cularly, the
e overshoo
ot angle is decreased
d d when H  0 .

9.4 Influence of the

t wall on a moori ng ship

This efffect takes place whe en the dis tance betw ween the wall
w and thhe ship is smaller
than foour ship wiidths H  4B
4 .When tthe ship is s moving close
c to thhe wall (Figg. 9.14)
additionnal force and
a moment arise du ue to intera action betw
ween the w wall and thhe ship.
When tthe angle between th he wall an d the ship  is small the flow channel between
b
the ship and the wall is gettting narrow
w. According to the continuity equation the t flow
is acceelerated between the ship and tthe wall. Frrom Bernoulli equatioon follows, that an
under p pressure region
r occu
urs betweeen the ship and the wall. In thhe bow reg gion the
transveerse force Y1 is positive whereaas a strong g negative suction fo rce Y2 app pears in
the reggion of the minimum distance
d be
etween the e ship and the wall. UUsually at small
s 
Y2 > Y1 and the e ship expperiences the attraction effectt. The ressulting mom ment is
positive
e and leads to the sh hip motion away from m the wall. At large aangles  both
b the
resultin
ng force annd the momment are poositive and d displace the
t ship aw way from the wall.
At each h  the opperator has
s to put mu ch effort to
o hold the ship
s parall el to the wall.
w
 Figure 9.13: Manoe
euvrability
y diagram
m of a tank
ker in shalllow waterr

Figure 9.14:
9 Intera
action of tthe ship with
w wall during
d the mooring

9.5 Influence of the

t incline
ed wall or of incline
ed bottom

The same effectss as in the case of th e wall are observed in cases oof the inclin
ned wall
or of inclined boottom. Th he difficult ies of ship control are illustraated in Fiig. 9.15
showing the rudd der angle necessaryy to hold th he ship on n a given ccourse in shallow
water a
at different speeds. The
T Froude e number Fn H is bas
sed on thee speed annd water
depth Fn H  V / gH . At small H a and velocities the ship
s can bbecome fu
ully non
ble and mo
steerab oves in dire
ection of th
he water de
epth enlarg
gement.
Fig. 9..15: The ru
udder ang
gle require
ed to hold
d the ship course
c du
uring the motion
m
above thhe inclined
d bottom

9.6 Critterion of the static stability

s o f airplanes.

mz
0

mz / 
0
Ca / 
X  0

9.7 Critterion of the static stability

s o f WIG crafft and hyd
drofoils.

Let us the positio on 1 of thee wing in g

ground efffect craft is
s the equi librium sta
ate. The
hight off flight is h1 and the trim angle 1 . Due to perturbatio
ons the trim
m angle inc
creases
and atttains the value
v  2 (position 2 ). The increase of th he trim anngle results s in the
increasse of the liift what, in
n its turn, lleads to th
he growth of the heigght of fligh ht. The
WIG ruuns to the new positio on 3 which h is equilib
brium state for the liftt force, butt not for
the mooment. If th
he momentt in the possition 3 is negative, the t trim anngle can de ecrease
and thee WIG cra aft is able to return tto the orig ginal position 1. Thee WIG is statically
s
stable, otherwisee statically y unstable . The crite erion of th
he staticall stability can be
derivedd from thesse considerations.
 Fig.9
9.16 Illustrration to derivation
d of the critterion of th
he WIG sttatical stab
bility.

Generaally, the lift coeffic

cient and the mom ment coeffficient havve the fo
ollowing
represe
entations neglecting
n nonlinear tterms:
Cl  Cl1  Cl (  1 )  Clh (h  h1 ) (9.11)
mz  mz (  1 )  mhz (h
(  h1 ) (9.12)
where Cl1 is the e lift coeffic
cient at th he position n 1. Since the positi on 3 is th
he force
balancee state, th
he force inncrement d due to trim m increase is counteerbalanced by the
force decrease du ue to growwth of the h height of flig ght

Cl ( 2  1 )  Cl (h 3  h1 )  0
h

(9.13)
Cl   Clh h  0
We havve to estim
mate the mo oment at th he position n 3. If

mz   mz  h  0
h
(9.14)
the W
WIG is sta able. Exprressing  from (9.13) 
atically sta   Clh / Cl  h and
substitu
uting into (9.14) yield
ds the formmula
Cl m z / Cl  mhz  0
h 

Dividingg the lastt formulae by C lh w which is us sually neg gative Clh  0 one gets g the
criterion of the sta
atic stabilitty
m h m
mz / Cl  m hz / Clh  0  hz  z (9.15)
Cl Cl
The arm m of forcess arising due to chan nge of the height
h of flight is locaated in fron
nt of the
arm of forces arissing due to o change o f the trim angle:a
X h  X
The arm m of forcess due to h change is referred as a to the ae erodynamicc centre in n height,
wherea as the arm due to cha ange of the e trim is referred as to the aeroodynamic centre c in
pitch. TThe same form has the t criterio n of the sta atic stabilitty of the hyydrofoil ship.

Contro
olling
1) How do main ship pa arameters influence the
t ship's stability?
s
2) WWhy is it disadvantag
d geous, if a ship is too
o stable?

3) Draw a ma
anoeuvrability diagra m for a sta
able and an
n unstablee ship. Why
 R
 is becoming smaller at large  R ? What values do rudder angles usually
have?
4) Does the ship's bow point inside or outside of a turning circle? Explain this
effect. What is the relation between  and R?
5) How is the absolute ship velocity changed during a turning circle manoeuvre?
Explain this.
6) What is the influence of the ship's velocity on the turning circle diameter?
7) How does the velocity influence the Zig-Zag manoeuvre? Draw a
representative diagram.
8) How does the stability influence the Zig-Zag manoeuvre? Draw a
representative diagram.
9) Which manoeuvres are undertaken to prove the ship manoeuvrability?
10) Does the propeller influence the dynamic yaw stability? How?
11) Draw the trajectories for a stable and an unstable ship after a short transversal
perturbation.
12) Which hydrodynamic derivatives can be determined using Circular Motion Test
(CMT)?
13) What is the physical meaning of the ratio X   C m / C y ? Where X  should lay
from the stability point of view?
14) Consider the equations of motion for a ship. Using identification method, which
values do we measure, which values do we compute?
15) What are the principal differences between the PMM-test and the identification
method?

10. Application of CFD for manouvrability

problems
10.1 Gemittelten nach Reynolds Navier Stokes
Gleichungen (Reynolds Averaged Navier Stokes
Equations RANSE)
10.1.1 Reynolds`sche Mittelung

Als Basis zur Untersuchung der turbulenten Strömungen wird in den

Ingenieurmethoden die Mittelungsidee nach Reynolds benutzt. Die momentanen
Geschwindigkeiten ux, y, z werden als die Summe der gemittelten Werte ux, y, z und der
/
Schwankungen u x, y , z dargestellt:

u x  u x  u x/ ; u y  u y  u /y ; uz  uz  uz/ , (10.1)
Die gemittelten Werte werden durch Mittelung über eine Zeitperiode T berechnet
T T T
1 1 1
T 0 T 0 T 0
ux  u x dt ; uy  u y dt ; uz  u z dt. (10.2)
Die Darstellung (10.1- 10.2) gilt für beliebig schwankende Größen der turbulenten
Strömungen (z.B. Druck, Temperatur, etc.). Die folgenden Eigenschaften sind für die
Reynolds`sche Mittelung (10.2) gültig:
 Gemittelte Schwankung einer Größe f  f  f  ist gleich Null:

f   0.
(10.3a)
 Zweifache Mittelung ist gleich einfacher Mittelung

f  f . (10.3b)
 Gemittelte Summe ist gleich der Summe der gemittelten Werte

f g  f g. (10.3c)
 Gemittelte Ableitungen einer Größe nach den Koordinaten und nach der Zeit sind
gleich den entsprechenden Ableitungen der gemittelten Größen
f f f f
 ,  . (10.3d)
t t x x
Die folgenden Regeln sind für die Mittelungen der Produkte von zwei turbulenten
Größen gültig
f g   0 , fg  fg . (10.3e)
Aus (10.3a) und (10.3e) folgt
fg   fg   0 . (10.3f)
Die Mittelung nach Reynolds bereitet Schwierigkeiten, sofern niederfrequente
Schwankungen in der turbulenten Strömung auftreten. In diesem Fall ist es schwierig
die Mittelungsperiode T eindeutig zu definieren. Das Ergebnis ist stark von T
abhängig. Die Mittelung nach Reynolds ist für solche Strömungen durch die
Ensemblemittelung zu ersetzen. Für die Ermittlung der nach dem Ensemble
gemittelten Größen, soll die Messung einer turbulenten Größe f N-Mal durchgeführt
werden. Die gemittelte Größe f wird dann als arithmetischer Mittelwert definiert:
N
1
f ( A, t )  lim
N  N
 f n  A, t  (10.4)
n 1

Hier ist A der Raumpunkt in dem die gemittelte Größe f zu einem bestimmten
Zeitpunkt berechnet wird. Moderne Beschreibung des Standes der Turbulenztheorie
findet man in [9].

10.1.2 Reynolds`sche Gleichungen

Nach Reynolds gemittelte Gleichungen für turbulente Strömungen (RANSE) ergeben

sich unmittelbar aus den Navier Stokes Gleichungen, die für momentane
Geschwindigkeiten und den Druck geschrieben werden. Für das weitere Herleiten ist
es bequem, die Navier Stokes Gleichungen in der Tensorform hinzuschreiben:
ui u 1  ji
 u j i  Fi  , (10.5)
t x j  x j

wobei x1 = x, x2 = y, u1 = ux, etc. sind. In (10.5) wird die Einstein`sche

Summenkonvention (Einstein summation convention) benutzt. Zum Beispiel ist der
ui
Ausdruck u j nach dieser Regel der folgenden Schreibweise äquivalent:
x j

ui u ui u
uj  u1 i  u 2  u3 i . (10.6)
x j  x1 x2  x3

Die Kontinuitätsgleichung wird in der folgenden Form geschrieben:

ui  u1  u 2  u 3
   0. (10.7)
 xi  x1  x 2  x3
Mit Berücksichtigung von (10.7) können die konvektive Beschleunigung und die
Gleichung (10.5) in der so genannten konservativen Form geschrieben werden
ui
 uj
ui
 ui
u j

 ui u j  
uj , (10.8)
x j x j x j x j

ui

 uiu  j F 
1   ji
i . (10.9)
t x j  x j

Setzt man die momentanen Werte (10.1) in die Gleichung (10.9) ein, ergibt sich:


 ui  ui/    ui  ui/ u j  u /j   F  F   1    ji  ji 
t x j
i
 x j
. (10.10)

Danach wird die Reynolds`sche Mittelung der rechten und der linken Seiten der
Gleichung (10.10) durchgeführt:


 u i  u i/     ui  ui/  u j  u /j   F  F   1    ji  ji 
i .
t x j  x j

Mit Berücksichtigung der Eigenschaften (10.3) bekommt man die Zwischenform der
Reynolds`schen Gleichungen:

ui


 u i u j  u i/ u /j   F  1 
i
ji
. (10.11)
t x j  x j

Nach der Schreibweise sind die Gleichungen (10.11) den Navier Stokes Gleichungen
(10.5) sehr ähnlich. Der Unterschied besteht darin, dass die Gleichungen (10.11) für
die gemittelten Größen geschrieben werden und, was sehr wichtig ist, ein neues Glied
ui/ u /j
entsteht (10.11), das durch den nichtlinearen Term der Navier Stokes
x j
Gleichungen (konvektive Beschleunigung) hervorgerufen wird. Schreibt man diesen
Term auf der rechten Seite von (10.11), ergibt sich die endgültige Form der nach
Reynolds gemittelten Gleichung
ui ui u j 
    Fi  (  ji  ui/ u /j ) . (10.12)
t x j x j

ui
Zusammen mit der Kontinuitätsgleichung  0 bilden die Gleichungen (10.12) die
xi
Reynolds gemittelte Form der Navier Stokes Gleichungen für turbulente Strömungen.
Die Gleichung (10.12) zeigt, dass die neuen von den Geschwindigkeitsschwankungen
abhängigen Spannungen ui/ u /j , zusätzlich zu den für laminare Strömungen bekannten
Spannungen  ji in der turbulenten Strömung erscheinen. Sie heißen turbulente
Spannungen oder Reynolds`schen Spannungen. Sie entstehen durch Impulsaustausch
zwischen verschiedenen Schichten der turbulenten Strömung. Die Matrix der
Spannungen
u x/ u x/ u x/ u y/ u x/ u z/

u x/ u /y u y/ u y/ u /y u z/ . (10.13)

u x/ u z/ u /y u z/ u z/ u z/

ist symmetrisch ui/ u /j  u /j ui/ und enthält 6 Unbekannte, die nicht aus
geschlossenen, theoretischen Modellen, sondern aus halbempirischen
Schließungsansätzen bestimmt werden. Diese Schließungsansätze beinhalten die
Terme mit verschiedenen Konstanten, die üblicherweise an bestimmte einfache
Testfälle angepasst werden und nicht universell sind.

10.1.3 Schließungsansätze für Reynolds`sche

Spannungen

Die älteste Hypothese, die im Grunde von verschiedenen Schließungsansätzen liegt, ist
die Hypothese von Boussinesq (1877). Nach dieser Hypothese ist die durch Turbulenz
verursachte Diffusion der molekularen Diffusion ähnlich. Dementsprechend können
die Reynolds`schen Spannungen in der gleichen Form wie die üblichen viskosen
Spannungen dargestellt werden. Für die viskosen Spannungen nach der Hypothese von
Newton gilt die folgende Formel:
 ui u j 
 ij      (10.14)
 x j xi 
Die gleiche Formel wird für die Reynolds`schen Spannungen nach der
Boussinesq`schen Hypothese geschrieben:
 u j ui  2
ui/ u /j  t     ij k , (10.15)
 xi x j  3
 

wobei k  ui/ ui/ die kinetische Energie der turbulenten Schwankungen ist und ij die
Deltafunktion ist. Wie man sieht, gibt es zwei Unterschiede zwischen (10.14) und
(10.15). Erstens, wird statt der kinematischen Viskosität  die turbulente kinematische
Viskosität  t benutzt. Zweitens, wird auf der rechten Seite (10.15) das zusätzliche
2
Glied   ij k eingeführt. Dieses Glied ist notwendig, um die Korrektheit des
3
Ansatzes (10.15) bei i=j unter Berücksichtigung der Einstein`schen
2
Summenkonvention zu gewährleisten. Tatsächlich ist, wenn   ij k nicht
3
berücksichtigt wird, das Glied ui/ ui/ nach der Kontinuitätsgleichung gleich Null
 u u y u z  1 / /
ux/ ux/  u y/ u /y  uz/ uz/  2t  x   0, was widersprüchlich ist, weil ui ui  k die
 x y z  2
kinetische Energie der turbulenten Schwankungen ist. Sie ist nur in einer laminaren
Strömung null. Für eine einfache ebene Strömung ux = ux(y), uy = 0 entlang der Wand
y = 0 nimmt (10.15) sie die folgende Form an
du x
 u /x u y/  t . (10.16)
dy

Die Hypothese von Boussinesq ermöglicht eine wesentliche Reduzierung der

Unbekannten. Statt der sechs unbekannten Reynolds`schen Spannungen hat man nur
eine Einzige, den Beiwert der turbulenten, kinematischen Viskosität  t . Die
kinematische Viskosität ändert sich im Raum und in der Zeit. In der Wandnähe werden
die turbulenten Schwankungen gedämpft. Dementsprechend nimmt  t bei y  0 ab.
An der Wand y = 0 ist die turbulente Viskosität t Null. Die turbulente Viskosität ist
maximal in Strömungsgebieten, wo die stärksten turbulenten Wirbel auftreten. Die
turbulente Viskosität  t kann bei großen Reynoldszahlen mehrere Ordnungen größer
als die übliche Viskosität  sein. Nach Landau gilt die folgende Abschätzung für das
Verhältnis  t zu  :
t/ = Re/Rekrit (10.17)
wobei Rekrit die kritische Reynoldszahl ist, bei der der Umschlag in der betrachtenden
Strömung passiert. Die gesamte Spannung ist gleich der Summe der laminaren und der
turbulenten Spannungen. Für die Bestimmung des Beiwertes der turbulenten
kinematischen Viskosität t benutzt man verschiedene Ansätze, einige von denen
werden unten diskutiert.

10.1.3.1 Algebraische Schließungsmodelle

Algebraische Modelle sind die einfachsten Schließungsansätze in denen der
Zusammenhang zwischen der turbulenten Viskosität und den gemittelten
Geschwindigkeiten in Form der algebraischen Abhängigkeiten dargestellt wird. Das
bekannteste algebraische Modell ist das Mischungswegmodell von Prandtl (1925).
Betrachten wir eine ebene Strömung in Wandnähe mit den
Geschwindigkeitskomponenten:

u x  u x  u x/ ; u y  u /y . (10.18)
Durch Schwankungen springen die Flüssigkeitsteilchen quer zur Hauptströmung.
Betrachten wir ein Flüssigkeitsteilchen, das sich aus der horizontalen
Strömungsschicht, in der die mittlere Geschwindigkeit u x ist, in eine obere Schicht mit
du x
der mittleren Geschwindigkeit u x  lu verschiebt, wobei lu der Abstand zwischen
dy x x

den Schichten ist. Da das Teilchen die Geschwindigkeit ux beibehält, verursacht diese
du x
Verschiebung eine Geschwindigkeitsschwankung  lu in der oberen Schicht. Die
dy x
Wurzel aus dem gemittelten Quadrat der Schwankung kann in der folgenden Form
dargestellt werden
du x
u x/ 2  u x  lu . (10.19)
dy x
Die gleiche Form wird für die Wurzel aus dem gemittelten Quadrat der Schwankung
in Querrichtung benutzt:
du x
u /y2  lu . (10.20)
dy y

u x/ u /y
Führt man den Korrelationskoeffizient Rxy  in Betracht, ergibt sich aus
u x/ 2 u /y2
(10.19) und (10.20) der folgende Ausdruck für die turbulente Spannung
2 2
 du   du 
 т  u x/ u y/  Rxy lux lu y  x   l 2  x  , (10.21)
 dy   dy 
wobei l  Rxy lux lu y die Länge des Mischungswegs ist, die den Turbulenzmaßstab
charakterisiert. Die Länge des Mischungswegs wird aus verschiedenen empirischen
Ansätzen bestimmt. Für die Grenzschichtströmungen wird die Hypothese benutzt:
l = ky, (10.22)
wobei k die erste Konstante der Turbulenz (Konstante von Karman) ist. Sie ist etwa
0,4. Die Formel (10.22) wurde aus den physikalischen Beobachtungen ausgewählt. Die
Schwankungen nehmen in Richtung Wand zu. Dementsprechend sollen auch die durch
Turbulenz verursachten Verschiebungen der Flüssigkeitsteilchen und folglich die
Länge des Mischungswegs größer werden. Die Genauigkeit der Formel (10.22) kann
mittels Modifikation von Van Drist erhöht werden:
  yu
  
l  ky  1  e A 
 , (10.23)
 
wobei А eine experimentelle Konstante ist, die zwischen 26 und 27 liegt, und
w
u  (10.24)


die Schubspannungsgeschwindigkeit ist, wobei W die Wandspannung ist.

In freien Scherschichten ist die Länge l annähernd quer zur Schicht konstant. Entlang
der Scherschicht wächst l proportional zur Schichtdicke 
l= const(x). (10.25)
Der Ausdruck (10.21) ist für den Betrag der Spannung gültig. Die Formel für  T mit
Berücksichtigung des Vorzeichens lautet
du x du x 2
т   l . (10.26)
dy dy

Aus dem Vergleich der Formel (10.16) und (10.26) findet man den Ausdruck für die
turbulente, kinematische Viskosität
du x
т  l 2 . (10.27)
dy

10.1.3.2 Differentiale Schließungsmodelle

Das Mischungswegmodell ist hauptsächlich für einfachste Strömungen anwendbar.

Für die dreidimensionalen Strömungen und Ablösungsströmungen sind die
algebraischen Modelle sehr ungenau. Deutlich genauer sind die Differentialmodelle,
die im Rahmen der turbulenten Parameter (z.B. turbulente Spannungen, turbulente
Viskosität, etc.) aus den Transportgleichungen berechnet werden. Damit wird die
Änderung der Turbulenz im Raum und in der Zeit berücksichtigt. Während im
Rahmen der algebraischen Modelle die Turbulenz von lokalen momentanen Werten
der gemittelten Geschwindigkeiten bestimmt wird, hängen die Turbulenzparameter im
Rahmen der Differentialmodelle von der Evolution der Turbulenz stromaufwärts ab.
Die höchste Genauigkeit unter den Differentialmodellen haben die Modelle der
Reynolds`schen Spannungen (Reynolds stress models, RSM). Im Rahmen der RSM
Theorie werden die Transportgleichungen unmittelbar für die Reynolds`schen
Spannungen gelöst. Dieses Verfahren ist mit relativ großem Aufwand der
Rechenressourcen verbunden.
Deutlich weniger aufwendig sind die Ein- und Zweigleichungsmodelle. Eine der
erfolgreichsten Eingleichungsmodelle, die in der letzten Zeit entwickelt wurden, ist
das Modell von Spalart und Allmaras (1992). Im Rahmen dieses Modells wird die
Transportgleichung für modifizierte turbulente kinematische Viskosität  = t/fv1
gelöst:
 2
   1     Cb 2 d  d 
uj  Cb1  Cw1 f w          . (10.28)
t x j  d   xk  xk   dxk dxk

Die Konstanten des Modells und die Hilfsfunktionen findet man aus den Formeln
Cb1 1  Cb 2
Сb1 = 0,1355, Cb2 = 0,622, C1 = 7,1,  = 2/3, Cw1  
k 2 
, Cw2 = 0,3, Cw3 = 2,0, k = 0,41,
1/ 6
3   1  Cw6 3 
f v1  , fv 2  , f  g 6 6 
3  C31 1  f 1 w  g  Cw3 

,  = , g = r + Cw2(r6  r), r  ,
k 2 d 2

 1  u u j 
S f2 , S  2 ij  ij , ij   i  ,
k 2d 2 2  x j xi 

wobei d der Abstand bis zur nächsten Wand ist. Ist t bekannt, können die
Reynolds`schen Spannungen aus der Boussinesq`schen Hypothese (10.15) ermittelt
werden. Mit dem Modell von Spalart und Allmaras wurden gute Ergebnisse für viele
ingenieurtechnische Anwendungen erzielt. Zum Beispiel wurde große Genauigkeit bei
Vorhersagen der Aerodynamik der Flugzeuge erreicht. Auch die
Ablösungsströmungen und Strömungen mit konzentrierten Wirbelstrukturen lassen
sich gut mit diesem Modell berechnen.
Das Anwendungsgebiet der Eingleichungsmodelle ist breiter als das der algebraischen
Modelle. Trotzdem unterliegen die Eingleichungsmodelle den
Zweigleichungsmodellen bezüglich der Genauigkeit. Unter den
Zweigleichungsmodellen ist das sogenannte k –  Modell bekannt. Hier ist k die
kinetische Energie der turbulenten Schwankungen und  ist die Dissipationsrate.
Für die kinetische Energie k, die Dissipationsrate  und die integrale Turbulenzlänge
(Längenmaß) L ist die Formel von Prandtl und Kolmogorov gültig
  k3/2/L, (10.29)
Sie wurde unter der Annahme hergeleitet, dass die Turbulenz im
Gleichgewichtszustand ist. Das heißt, dass die Generation der kinetischen Energie der
turbulenten Schwankungen durch gemittelte Strömung der Dissipation dieser Energie
gleich ist. Dieser Zustand ist für den so genannten Trägheitsbereich typisch.
Aus der Dimensionsanalyse folgt ein einfacher Zusammenhang zwischen der
turbulenten kinematischen Viskosität t, charakteristischer Geschwindigkeit q = k
und integralem Längenmaß
t = C qL, (10.30)
wobei C  0,09 eine Modellkonstante ist. Aus (10.29) und (10.30) ergibt sich

k2
t  C qL  C . (10.31)

Die unbekannten Funktionen k und  werden aus den folgenden
Differentialtransportgleichungen berechnet

k k     k  u 
uj    t    ij i   
t x j x j    x  x 
 k j  j
 (10.32)
    t    C1 ui C 2  2 
uj       ij  
t x j x j    x j  k x j k 


Die Konstante des k –  Modells sind: C1 = 1,44, C2 = 1,92, k = 1,  = 1,3.
Sind k und  bekannt, berechnet man die kinematische Viskosität aus der Formel
(10.31) und die Reynolds`sche Spannungen aus der Boussinesq`schen Hypothese
(10.15). Das System (10.32) wird zusammen mit den Reynolds`schen Gleichungen
(10.12) gekoppelt gelöst. Das k – Modell ist gültig für die Strömungen bei großen
Reynoldszahlen. In Wandnähe wird es unbrauchbar. Eine Alternative zum k – 
Modell ist das k- Modell. Es ist in Wandnähe genau und wird aber mit größer
werdendem Abstand von der Wand unbrauchbar. Um die Nachteile von beiden
Modellen zu überwinden, wurde von Menter das SST Modell vorgeschlagen, das eine
Kombination von k– und k- ist. Der wichtigste Vorteil dieses Modells ist die
Gültigkeit sowohl in Wandnähe, als auch mit größer werdender Entfernung.
Detaillierte Beschreibung verschiedener Turbulenzmodelle findet man in [14].

10.2 Calculation of yaw ship motion

The yaw ship motion can be calculated in a rotating frame of reference fixed to the ship, i.e.
the ship is at the rest whereas the surrounding flow moves. The flow around the ship is steady.
The ship rotation is considered in two ways. First, the incident flow at the computational
 
domain borders is specified taking the rotational component of the speed   r into account.
Second, CFD equations originally written for inertial coordinate system have to be rewritten
for moving frame of reference. Continuity equation stays unchanged since the mass balance is
invariant to system rotation. Other equations get additional terms. Let us demonstrate the
transformation for the Navier Stokes equation.
   
Let us i , j , k is a triad of orthogonal unit vectors fixed in the moving frame. Any vector V
    
can be written through the projections V  V1i  V2 j  V3k . The change of V occurs as a result
of both change of components V1 ,V2 ,V3 in the moving frame and change of the unit vectors
  
i , j, k
    
dV dV1  dV2  dV3  di dj dk
 i j k  V1  V2  V3 
dt 0 dt dt dt dt dt dt
dV  dV  dV       
 1 i  2 j  3 k  V1 (  i )  V2 (  j )  V3 (  k )  (10.33)
dt dt dt

dV  
   V
dt

dV 
The derivative is calculated in the rotating with angular velocity  frame of reference
dt

dV
whereas is determined in the inertial referece system.
dt 0

Let us consider the vector x determining the position of a moving element with respect to the
inertial frame of reference:
 
dx dx      
    x  u0  u    x (10.34)
dt 0 dt
The acceleration in the inertial frame of reference:
   
du0 du0   d 2 x  dx d     
    u0  2  2    x    (  x ) (10.35)
dt 0 dt dt dt dt
The acceleration of a fluid particle in the inertial coordinate system is
 
du u  
  (u)u (10.36)
dt t
The equation of fluid motion in a moving frame of reference is identical in the form with that
in an absolute frame provided the fictitious body force
2  
d x  dx d     
 2  2    x    (  x ) per unit mass acts upon the fluid in addition to the
dt dt dt
real body and surface forces, i.e.:
  
u    1  d 2x  dx d     
 (u)u  f  p  u  2  2    x    (  x ) (10.37)
t  dt dt dt
The equation (10.37) is the Navier Stokes equation in a moving frame of reference.
Additional body forces are creferred to as:

d 2x
 2 apparent body force compensating the translational acceleration of the frame,
dt
 dx     
2   2  u Coriolis force,   (  x ) centrifugal force. The Nevier Stokes
dt
equation in a steadily rotating frame without acceleration is:

u    1      
 (u)u  f  p  u  2  u    (  x ) (10.38)
t 
The ship in a yaw motion in the moving frame of reference (Fig.10.1) is calculated like the
ship in a straightforward motion or the ship under the drift angle.
 Fiig.10.1 The ship a yaw
w motion. Calculations
Ca of M. Haaase.

Some saamples of thhe grid for the

t combataant ship are presented in Fig. 10.2,,10.3 and 10
0.4.

Fig.10.2 The Cartesiian grid forr the comba

atant ship.

Fig.10.3 Unstructurred grid forr the comba

atant ship.
 Fig.10.4 Unstructurred grid forr the comba
atant ship with
w the freee surface.

To get iimpression on sizes off the compuutational dom main, we prresents typiical data tak ken from
a CFD ccalculation of manoeuv vrability: inn X direction
n the compuutational doomain is from m -2L to
3L (L iss the ship leength), the ship
s is from -0.5L to 0.5L, in the trransversal ddirection fro
om –L to
2L, in vvertical dirrection from m 0.2L to --1.5L. The resolution is chosen from the condition c
 
y  1 ffor the modeel scale and d y  100 ffor the full scale.
s

10.3. O
Overset orr Chimera grids

For more compplicated shipp motions liike the PMM

M Tests (Fiig.10.5) onee uses eitherr overset
gridds or movingg or morphiing grids.

Fig. 10.5 PMM

M tests

The ideea of chim mera or overset grids is to gen nerate the grids
g separrately around each
geometrrical entity in the compputational ddomain. Aftter that the grids are coombined tog gether in
such a wway that theey overlap each
e other w
where they meet. The crucial
c operration is an accurate
transferr of quantiities betweeen the diffferent gridss at the overlapping region. Th he most
importaant advantagge of the ovverset or Chhimera grid is the possibility to geenerate highh quality
structurred particullar grids seeparately ffor hull, ru
udder, prop peller, appeendages com mpletely
indepenndent of each other, witthout havingg to take caare of the intterface betw
ween grids (Fig.10.6
(
and 10.7). The exxperience sh hows that th the grid nummber necesssary for ruudder and propeller
p
models is approximmately as larrge as for thhe whole huull.

Fig. 110.6 Chimeraa grid for tanker KVLCC C2. Propelleer is modeled
d using bodyy forces distrributed
alongg the propelleer disc.

Fig. 10.7
1 Chimerra grid for a container sh
hip with prop
peller and ruudder.

10.4 M
Morphing grids
The idea is the com
mputational grid is movved in accoordance with h the displaacement of the
t body
by usinng an anallytical weig ghted regriidding which is a ty ype of extrrapolation of rigid
transforrmation. Foor instancee, in orderr to replicaate the sw way motionn produced d in the
experim
mental PMM M tests the ship geomeetry moves within the domain, deeforming th he mesh.
The posssible problem of morp phing grid iis poor quallity caused by its motioon. Consequently if
the mesh surrounding the vehicle is allowed to deform the elements around the vehicle
deform. This can quickly lead to poor quality elements if care is not taken. An alternative
method is to replicate the motion of the vessel with the fluid domain split into an inner and
outer region. The outer domain remains fixed in space while the inner domain containing the
hull moves laterally to replicate the motion induced by a PMM. The mesh in the inner sub
domain remains locked in position relative to the lateral motion of the vessel. This prevents
deformation of the detailed mesh around the vessel. The outer mesh is deformed due to the
motion of the inner region.

If moving
 grids are used the Navier Stokes should be transformed to take the velocity of grid
faces U g into account,

u     1
t
 
 (u  U g ) u  f  p  u


(10.39)

Thomas and Lombard have shown that the function U g can not be arbitrary rather than they
have to be found from the Geometric Conservation Law
  

t U
dU   U g ndS  0
S
(10.40)

Where U ans S are respectively volume and surface of cells. The equation (10.40) is derived
from the condition that the computation of the control volumes or of the grid velocities must
be performed in a such a way that the resulting numerical scheme preserves the state of the
uniform flow, independently of the deformation of the grid. The equation (10.40) is satisfied
automatically if the control volumes don’t change their shape. The Geometric conservation
law (10.40) should solve coupled with other fluid flow equations using the same
discretizations schemes..

Literature

1. Kleinau D., Theorie des Schiffes, Manuskript, University of Rostock, 2001 (in
German).
2. Kornev N., Schiffstheorie I, Shaker Verlag, 2009, 162 S (in German).
3. Bertram V., Practical ship hydromechanics, Butterworth-Heinemann, 2000,
270 p.
4. Lewandowski E., The dynamics of marine craft, World scientific, 2004, 411 p.
5. Handbook of the ship theory. Editor Voitkunsky, 1985
6. www.oceaniccorp.com
7. Bishop R.E., and Parkinson A.G., On the planar motion mechanism used in
ship model testing, Phil. Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series
A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Vol. 266, No. 1171, 35-61.
8. www.ksri.ru/eng1/
9. www.becker-marine-systems.com
10. Schneekluth H., Hydromechanik zum Schiffsentwurf, Herford-Koehler,
1988.
11. Brix J., Menoeuvring technical manual, 1993, Seehafen Verlag.
12. Bronsart, R. Manuscript of lectures.
 13. Norrbin, N. (1971). “Theory and observations on the use of a mathematical model
for ship manoeuvring in deep and conned water.” Technical Report 63.Swedish
State Shipbuilding Experimental Tank. Gothenburg.
14. Fedayevsky, K.K. and G.V. Sobolev(1963). “Control and Stability in Ship Design.”
State Union Shipbuilding Publishing House. Leningrad, USSR.
15. Abkowitz, M. A. (1964). “Lectures on Ship Hydrodynamics -Steering and
Manoeuvrability.” Technical Report Hy-5. Hydro-and Aerodynamic Laboratory.
Lyngby, Denmark.

Appendix I.

Theory of irrational flow

 
Definitions. If the vorticity is zero     u  0 and the flow is inviscid the
velocity can be expressed through the gradient of the scalar function  called
the potential:

V  g ra d     (1.45)
In Cartesian coordinate system the velocities are:

  
Vx  ; Vy  ; Vz 
x y z . (1.46)

Such flow is called as the irrational or potential flow. The potential has to
satisfy the Laplace equation
 2  2  2
    0. (1.47)
x 2 y 2 z 2
which is derived by substitution of formulae (1.46) into the continuity equation

divV  0 (1.48)

divV  divgrad      0    0 . (1.49)
The boundary conditions for the Laplace equation (1.47) are as follows:
 no penetration on the ship surface S

Vn   Vn _ body . (1.50)
n S

where n is the normal vector to the ship surface, Vn _ body is the local normal
component of the body velocity at the surface point.

 decay of perturbations far from the ship

  0 when R  x 2  y 2  z 2   (1.51)

Kinetic energy of the fluid surrounding the body. Let us consider the body with
the surface S (see Fig. 4). Ambient fluid is located between two surfaces S
and  with the radius
r uid volume is W . T
R  x 2  y 2  z 2 . The flu The case R  
corresponds to the unbou unded flow w. Accord ding to deffinition, th
he kinetic energy
of the ffluid is
           
2 2 2
E FFl          dWW (1.52)
2 W   x    y    z  
  

Fig. 4.

2 2 2
       

um
The su         can be calculated e following identities:
d using the
 x   y   z 
2 2
        
       2 ;
 x  x  x  x
2
        2
        ;

 y y  y   y 2

2
        2
       2 .
 z  z  z  z
i.e.
2 2 2
                         2  2  2 

                       2  2  2  .
 x   y   z   x  x  y  y  z  z    x y z 
(1.53)
2 2 2
     
The lasst term dissappears because of the Lap
place equation 2
 2
 0:
x y z 2

2 2 2
                       
                    
 x   y   z   x  x  y  y  z  z  
 and
              
2 W
EFl              dW (1.54)

 x  x  y  y  z  z  

Using the Gauss theorem gives

     
2 S   x
EFl   cos( ne ,x )   cos( ne , y )   cos( ne ,z )dS 
y z 
(1.55)
   
  dS   ne dS

2 S ne 2

  
where ne is outer normal vector to the surfaces S and , ne   n (see Fig.4).
The normal derivative of the potential is
    
 ne   cos( ne , x )  cos( ne , y )  cos( ne , z ).
ne x y z
The second integral is zero because of the decay condition (1.51)

   
EFl   
2 S ne
dS     dS ,
2 S n (1.56)

The no penetration condition (1.50) at a point

    
 Vn _ body  (V0  0  r)n , (1.57)
n S

with account for the identity

         
V0  n   0  r   n  V0  n   0  n   r
can be rewritten in the form

 V0 x cos(n, x)  V0 y cos(n, y)  V0 z cos(n, z) 
n S (1.58)
 0 x  y cos(n, z)  z cos(n, y)  0 y z cos(n, x)  x cos(n, z)  0 z x cos(n, y)  y cos(n, x)
where V1  V0x , V2  V0y , V3  V0z , V4  0x , V5  0y , V6  0z are components of linear
and angular velocities.

Since the Laplace equation is linear, the solution can be sought in the form of a
superposition
  V0 x1  V0 y 2  V0 z 3  0 x 4  0 y 5  0 z 6 (1.59)

where i are potentials of the flow when the ship is moved in i-th direction with unit
speed. They depend only on coordinates and on the ship geometry. They don’t
depend on time. Substituting (1.59) into (1.58) one obtains:
       
 V0 x 1  V0 y 2  V0 z 3  0 x 4  0 y 5  0 z 6
n n n n n n n

1   
 cos(n, x); 2  cos( n, y ); 3  cos(n, z );
n n n

4 
 y cos(n, z )  z cos( n, y ); 
n

5  (1.60)
 z cos(n, x)  x cos( n, z );
n 
6 
 x cos( n, y )  y cos(n, x). 
n 

The functions i satisfy the Lapalce equation i = 0, decay condition i  0 if

r   and no penetration conditions in corresponding form (1.60).

Using the designations V1  V0 x , V2  V0 y , V3  V0 z , V4   0 x , V5   0 y , V6   0 z the

potential of the flow at arbitrary ship motion is written in the form
6 6
( x, y, z , t )   Vi (t )i ( x, y, z )   Vi i . (1.61)
i 1 i 1
Substituting (1.61) in (1.56) one obtains:
6
  k
  Vk
n k 1 n

 6 6
 k 1 6 6   
E Fl  
2   Vii  Vk n
dS   Vi Vk     i k dS  .
2 i 1 k 1 n
(1.62)
S i 1 k 1  S 
The term in brackets
 k
mik      i
dS (1.63)
S
n
is called the added mass. The kinetic energy reads
1 6 6
EFl    ViVk mik
2 i 1 k 1
(1.64)

The number of added mass is 36. In unbounded flows this number is reduced
to 21 due to the symmetry condition
 k  i
S  i n dS  S  k n dS (1.65)

or
mik = mki (1.66)