Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

Technical note

Empirical calculation of roll damping for ships

and barges
Subrata Chakrabarti

Offshore Structure Analysis, Inc., 13613 Capista Drive, Plainfield, IL 60544, USA
Received 28 January 2000; accepted 15 March 2000

Abstract
For a large floating structure in waves, the damping is computed by the linear
diffraction/radiation theory. For most degrees of freedom, this radiation damping is adequate
for an accurate prediction of the rigid body motions of the structure at the wave frequencies.
This is not particularly true for the roll motion of a long floating structure. For ships, barges
and similar long offshore structures, the roll damping is highly nonlinear. In these cases the
radiation damping is generally quite small compared to the total damping in the system. Moreover, the dynamic amplification in roll may be large for such structures since the roll natural
period generally falls within the frequency range of a typical wave energy spectrum experienced by them. Therefore, it is of utmost importance that a good estimate of the roll damping
is made for such structures. The actual prediction of roll damping is a difficult analytical task.
The nonlinear components of roll damping are determined from model and full scale experiments. This paper examines the roll damping components and their empirical contributions.
These empirical expressions should help the designer of such floating structures. The numerical
values of roll damping components of typical ships and barges in waves and current (or forward speed) are presented. 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Damping; Roll; Ships; Formulas; Barges; Experiments

1. Introduction
The purpose of this paper is to examine the damping characteristics of a
variety of ship shapes and offshore structures undergoing roll motion in the
presence of waves. Unlike other degrees of freedom motion, roll damping is
* Tel.: +1-815-436-4863; fax: +1-815-436-4921.
E-mail address: chakrab@aol.com (S. Chakrabarti).
0029-8018/01/$ - see front matter 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 0 2 9 - 8 0 1 8 ( 0 0 ) 0 0 0 3 6 - 6

916

S. Chakrabarti / Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

Nomenclature
a1, a2,
bBK
B
B(f )
BBK
Be
Beq
Bf
BL
Bw
CB
CM
D
Fn
g
H0
I
KG
L
M
OG
R0
Rb
Re
re
S
U
a
b

n
r
s
w
x

a3 (empirical) extinction coefficients

breadth of bilge keel
beam of ship or barge
total roll damping coefficient
bilge keel damping coefficient
eddy making damping coefficient (subscript 0 represents zero speed
case)
the equivalent damping coefficient
skin friction damping coefficient (subscript 0 represents zero speed
case)
lift effect damping coefficient
damping from free surface waves (radiation)
block coefficient of the ship
mid-ship section coefficient (1.0)
draft
Froude number (=U/gL)
gravitational acceleration
half the beamdraft ratio
total moment of inertia
distance from the keel to the c.g.
lateral dimension of the ship
wave exciting moment
vertical distance (positive downward) from SWL to c.g.
(OG=DKG)
amplitude of roll motion (in radians)
bilge radius
Reynolds number
effective bilge radius
wetted surface area
forward speed (or current)
angle (deg) between the hull surface at the water line and the
vertical
exponential parameter
ship displacement
kinematic viscosity of water
water density
area coefficient of a cross section of the hull
wave frequency
damping factor

S. Chakrabarti / Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

917

highly nonlinear. The quantitative evaluation of roll damping is a difficult task,

but estimation of the numerical values of damping is essential in the design of
such structures. Several physical phenomena contribute to roll damping. Moreover, the flow field in the vicinity of the structure in waves is altered by the
presence of current or forward speed of the vessel (Haddara and Zhang, 1994).
Thus the magnitude of roll damping with combined waves and steady speed is
also an important quantity. Moored floating structures often experience slow
drift motions coupled with high frequency wave motion. The periods of these
slow motions are an order of magnitude higher than the wave periods. The
slow drift may be approximated by an equivalent steady speed of the ship or
the moored offshore structure so that the formulas for wave plus forward speed
may be applicable.
The amplitudes of dynamic motion of a floating structure in a specified degree
of freedom in waves are limited by the damping present in the system. The damping derived from the diffraction/radiation theory is often adequate to describe the
motion of the structure in surge, sway, heave, pitch and yaw. This is not necessarily true for the rolling motion. It is found that the damping in roll cannot be
predicted well by the radiation component only. The difficulty in predicting the
roll motion arises from the nonlinear characteristics of roll due to the effect of
fluid viscosity. The roll-damping coefficient for a ship hull form has several contributions. These components are considered as (1) skin friction of the hull, (2) eddy
shedding from the hull, (3) free surface waves, (4) lift effect damping, and (5)
bilge keel damping. This subdivision of roll damping may not be justifiable hydrodynamically since hydrodynamic interaction among these components is unavoidable. However, this subdivision is a convenience, which allows computation of
the individual components analytically and experimentally. Of these, bilge keels
are often used as a motion stabilizer in roll. Bhattacharyya (1978) describes other
methods of motion stabilizers.
The sources for these individual components are discussed below. Empirical formulas derived from a series of model experiments (largely by Ikeda; see References
at the end) are given. Many of these experiments are performed on 2-dimensional
shapes. The implications of this on 3-dimensional vessels are discussed. The computation of these components may be made with the formulas provided here. Since each
source is isolated in these experiments, the interaction among the various sources has
generally not been considered in these formulations. They are expressed approximately in terms of an equivalent linear damping coefficient or damping factor. It
should be stressed here that these empirical coefficients are derived from model tests
of limited number of ship/barge hull forms including cylinders and flat plates. Thus
their application in the case of a special hull form may be inappropriate. For conventional hull shapes they are considered to be adequate. One may question the applicability of the empirical formulas based on model tests to the full scale structures. The
scale effect for use in a full scale hull, however, is considered to be small. The only
correction deemed appropriate is the skin friction damping, which is normally a
small contribution.

918

S. Chakrabarti / Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

2. Roll equation of motion

While the other degrees of motion of a ship, barge or a semisubmersible may be
described reasonably well by a linear equation, this is not true for roll motion. The
equation of motion in roll may be written in general as
If B(f )f C(f,t)M cos(wt)
(1)
in which f is the angular roll motion, dots represent time derivatives, I is the total
moment of inertia in roll, M is the wave exciting moment, w is the wave frequency
and t is time. The damping coefficient B and the restoring coefficient C are shown
as nonlinear quantities. The restoring term in Eq. (1) is often given in a polynomial
form in f. The damping term B may be represented by
B(f )B1f B2|j |f B3f3
(2)
in which the first term is linear, the second term represents quadratic drag and the
third term is cubic. Quite often, the total damping is approximated by an equivalent
linear damping term,
B(f )Beqf
(3)
The coefficient Beq denotes the equivalent damping coefficient. In terms of the
nonlinear coefficients it is expressed as
BeqB1

8
3
B2(wR0) B3(wR0)2
3p
4

(4)

where R0 is the amplitude of roll.

3. Roll damping formulation
In the following, the equivalent coefficient of roll damping components is
expressed in terms of its various contributions (Himeno, 1981). The total damping
coefficient is obtained from
BeqBfBeBwBLBBK

(5)

in which the component damping coefficients are as follows: Bf=hull skin friction
damping, Be=hull eddy shedding damping, Bw=free surface wave damping, BL=lift
force damping, and BBK=bilge keel damping. The expressions are given with and
without forward speed of the vessel. The additional subscript 0 in the following
stands for the zero speed case.
3.1. Skin friction
Friction damping is caused by skin friction stress on the hull surface of the ship
form as the ship rolls. Thus it is conceivable that it is influenced by the waves. The
presence of a bilge keel also alters the skin friction.

S. Chakrabarti / Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

919

For zero speed (U=0), Kato (1965) gives an expression for the friction damping
in a laminar flow field in terms of an equivalent linear damping coefficient as follows:
Bf0

4
rSr3R wC
3p e 0 f

(6)

in which the friction coefficient Cf is given by

Cf1.328

2pn
3.22r2eR20w

1/2

(7)

The effective bilge radius is computed from

re

1
S
(0.8870.145CB) 2OG
p
L

(8)

where r=water density, n=kinematic viscosity of water, w=wave frequency, B=beam,

D=draft, L=lateral dimension of the ship, CB=block coefficient of the ship, R0=amplitude of roll motion (in radians), and U=forward speed (or steady current speed). The
quantity OG is the vertical distance from the origin O (still water level) to the roll
axis, G, which is measured positive downward (OG=DKG). The quantity S is the
wetted surface area that can be calculated approximately for a ship by the formula
SL(1.7DCBB)

(9)

Note that the skin friction coefficient is a function of the fluid viscosity or an
equivalent Reynolds number defined as Re=(reR0)2w/n. Therefore, the skin friction
is higher in the model scale compared to the full scale value and scaling of skin
friction by Froudes law is not applicable. The values of Cf are given as a function
of Re in Fig. 1. This effect is qualitatively similar to the steady transit towing
force coefficient.

Fig. 1.

Skin friction coefficient as a function of the Reynolds number.

920

S. Chakrabarti / Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

Adjusting this form to account for the turbulent flow, the formulation for the skin
friction damping coefficient has been proposed as,

Bf00.787rSr2e wn 10.00814

r2eR20w
n

0.386

(10)

The first term in the above expression arises from the laminar flow past the ship,
which is linear and independent of the roll amplitude. The second term is nonlinear
and gives the modification due to turbulent flow. Note that the first term can be
shown to be the same as the expression in Eq. (6) once Eq. (7) is input in Eq. (6).
The effect of turbulence on the skin friction damping coefficient is shown in Fig.
2 for different roll angles. The roll angle is varied from 0 to 20. The skin friction
slowly but steadily increases with the roll angle.
Skin friction is expected to increase with non-zero Froude number,

FnU/ gL

(11)

where g is gravitational acceleration. In the presence of a non-zero forward speed,

U, Schmitke (1978) gives a simple modification to the above formula

U
BfBf0 14.1
wL

(12)

where the constant 4.1 is an experimentally determined value for an elongated spheroid. It shows that skin friction increases slightly in forward speed. In the presence
of current and wave for moored ships and offshore structures this formulation may
be applied. In spite of the scale effect this formula may be approximately applied
to a full scale ship hull, since the friction contribution to the total damping is
quite small.

Fig. 2.

Skin friction damping coefficient in laminar and turbulent flow.

S. Chakrabarti / Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

921

3.2. Eddy making damping

The viscous eddy damping considered for a naked hull in roll arises due to separation at the sharp corners and the vortices generated by the flow separation. It is
caused by pressure variation on the naked hull due to flow separation at the bottom
of the ship near the stem and stern and at the bilge circle near the midship. This
component of damping for a bare hull is found to be a square function of the roll
frequency as well as roll amplitude. The damping is large near the bow and stern
for slender ships while it has a greater contribution near the midship section for a
barge-like structure. The eddy-making drag is computed from a formula similar to
the velocity-squared drag force based on a drag coefficient
F1/2CerS(rwR0)2

(13)

where r is the radial distance from the c.g. of the ship to the corner where eddies
are shed (local radius). The drag coefficient Ce is obtained from the formula provided
for a U shaped or a V shaped hull (Tanaka 1957, 1958)

re
CeC1(B/KG)C2 a, ebre/D
D

(14)

in which KG=distance from the keel to the c.g., re=effective bilge radius defined in
this case as follows:
re0.5B[4.123.69(KG/B)0.823(KG/B)2] for KG/B2.1 and re

(15)

0 for KG/B2.1
The quantity a=angle (deg) between the hull surface at the water line and the
vertical, and b=exponential parameter. The value of C1 (Garrison, 1993) as a function
of B/KG is as follows:
B/KG
0
0.25
0.50
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0

C1
0.50
0.61
0.62
0.61
0.53
0.40
0.35
0.32
0.29
0.26

The values of C2 as a function of a and re/D are given below. The intermediate
values may be interpolated from this table.

922

S. Chakrabarti / Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

a(deg)
0
5
10
20
30

re/D=0.0
1.0
0.86
0.77
0.68
0.65

re=0.0571
1.0
0.75
0.67
0.75
.0.92

re=0.1142
1.0
0.74
0.72
0.89
1.34

re=0.1713
1.0
0.70
0.72
1.20
1.94

The exponential parameter b is calculated by

b14.146.7R061.7R20

(16)

For a rectangular section, e.g., a barge, C2=1.0 and b=0. Then Ce=C1 and r in the
equation for the drag force is the distance from the roll axis to the corner.
For a triangular sectioned ship, the drag coefficient,
Ce0.4380.449(B/KG)0.236(B/KG)2

(17)

Alternately, the formula for the eddy-making damping per unit ship length is derived
empirically by Ikeda et al. (1978a,b)
Be0

4
rD4R0wCpCR
3p

(18)

where
Cp0.5[0.87 exp(g)4 exp(0.187g)3]

(19)

The velocity increment ratio,

g

pf

2M 2 2
r
A +B
max
H1 1 1
2[DOG] H0s
3

(20)

where
H11a219a232a1(13a3) cos 2y6a3 cos 4y

(21)

A12a3 cos 5ya1(1a3) cos 3y{(63a1)a a1(a13)a3

(22)

2
3

a21} cos y
B12a3 sin 5ya1(1a3) sin 3y{(63a1)a23a1(a13)a2

(23)

a } sin y
2
1

B
M
2(1+a1+a3)
and

(24)

S. Chakrabarti / Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

CR

rmax
D

1f1

OG Rb
Rb
Rb
1 f1 f2 H0f1
D
D
D
D

923

(25)

(25)in which CR is computed at incremental ship station. The quantities Rb=bilge

radius, OG=distance (positive downward) from O to G, H0=half the beamdraft ratio
at different stations of the ship (a variable depending on its shape)
B
2D

(26)

H0D
H0
DOG

(27)

H0
and

The other quantities are defined as

sDOG
s
DOG

(28)

and
Rb=2d

H0(s1)
for RD,RB/2
p4

Rb=D

for H01,R/D1

Rb=B/2

for H01,R/DH0

(29)

where s=area coefficient at a cross section along the hull (sx=area/(BxDx)). The
functions, f1, f2, and f3 are
f10.5[1tan h{20(s0.7)}]

(30)

f20.5[1cos ps]1.5[1exp{5(1s)}]sin ps

(31)

f314 exp{1.65x105(1s)2}

(32)

rmaxM[{(1a1)sin ya3sin 3y}2{(1a1}cos ya3cos 3y}2]1/2

(33)

1
a1(1+a3)
y cos1
2
4a3

(34)

The constants a1, a2, a3 are defined as the extinction coefficients from fitting the
extinction curve in roll with a three degree polynomial in the roll angle.
For a 3-dimensional ship form, the above sectional coefficients are integrated over
the length of the ship. Thus the section damping coefficient considers the section
geometry of the ship along its length.
The above formulation was modified by Ikeda (1984) to take into account the
rectangular cross section of a barge and the sharp corners present at the bases. The

924

S. Chakrabarti / Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

result is based on experiments on the 2-dimensional models of rectangular cross

sections having different breadth to draft ratios. The tests included free decay and
forced roll runs. This formula is much simpler and depends only on the quantity H0
but independent of the bilge radius (on the assumption that the corner is sharp). The
eddy-making damping coefficient is computed from
2
Be0 rLD4(H201OG/D)[H20(1OG/D)2]R0w
p

(35)

This formula was found to be more suitable for the rectangular shaped barge. Note
that both formulations give the roll damping coefficient as a linear function of the
roll amplitude and frequency. Ikeda et al. (1993) confirmed that the original formulation does not work as well as the later formulation for certain rectangular barges.
Both formulations are more applicable for smaller roll angles (about 5). At higher
roll angles, the prediction seems to overestimate the experimental damping.
In the presence of steady forward speed, the eddy making damping decreases.
Ikeda et al. (1978a,b) proposed the following empirical formula for an eddy-making
damping coefficient in nonzero U,

BeBe0

(0.04wL/U)2
1+(0.04wL/U)2

(36)

Eq. (36) shows that damping decreases rapidly with the forward speed and becomes
negligible at a large value of wL/U.
4. Lift damping
The lift damping in roll occurs in the form of a lift moment similar to the lift
force caused by a ship moving forward with the sway motion. Ikeda et al. (1978a,b)
provided a simple expression of this complex phenomenon in terms of an equivalent
linear damping as

0.15
OG
OG
BL
rULD3kN 12.8 4.667
2
D
D

(37)

where the slope constant of the lift coefficient,

D
B
kN2p 4.1 0.045
L
L
and

=0,

for CM or =0.92

=0.1, for 0.92CM or =0.97

=0.3, for 0.97CM or =0.99

(38)

S. Chakrabarti / Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

925

where CM is the mid-ship cross-section coefficient (area/BD) which is less than 1.0.
Since the lift damping is a function of U and independent of the frequency w, it is
zero for a ship at zero forward speed. At high forward speeds of a ship, the contribution due to lift to the total damping is quite large.

5. Wave damping
Wave damping is caused by the free surface waves and is thus a function of the
wave parameters. It is computed quite accurately from the linear diffraction/radiation
theory and is generally known as radiation damping, Bw0. This is the only damping
used in the other degrees of freedom with reasonable success in getting satisfactory results.
In the presence of ship forward speed, this damping is modified. A simple analytical expression for this damping may be derived (Ikeda et al., 1978a) for a flat plate
by introducing a pair of doublets at the two longitudinal ends. The wave damping
in current (or forward speed) is obtained by the following formula
1
BwBw0 {[(A21)(A21)tanh 20(t0.3)](2A1A21)exp(150(t
2

(39)

0.25)2}
where
A11x1.2
d exp(2xd)

(40)

A20.5x1.0
d exp(2xd)

(41)

xdw d/g

(42)

tUw/g

(43)

Note that the damping coefficient is maximum at t=1/4 and asymptotically

approaches a constant value at large values of t. Again, this equation may be applied
to those structures which are undergoing a slow drift motion coupled with high
frequency motion in waves.

6. Bilge-keel damping
The bilge keel is an effective and efficient way to increase the overall damping and
thus stabilize excessive roll motion of a ship (Bolton, 1972) or a barge. Sometimes, a
semisubmersible is equipped with bilge keels as well. When the bilge keel is present,
it produces additional damping due to normal force on the keel plus pressure variation on the hull surface caused by the presence of the bilge keels. It includes the
damping of the bilge keels themselves and the interaction effects among the bilge

926

S. Chakrabarti / Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

keels, hull and waves. These contributions vary with the amplitude of roll and the
wave frequency.
An expression for the damping in roll due to bilge keels was given by Miller et
al. (1974). The damping factor at zero speed is a function of the ships dimension
and the bilge keel area,
x0

0.55 3/2
(B L 0.0024LBD1/2)D5/2R1/2
0
B2 BK BK

(44)

In the presence of forward speed, it becomes,

x

0.00085L3/2 Fn
Fn 2
Fn

2
1/2
B(GM)
CB CB
CB

(45)

in which the forward speed is included in the Froude number, Fn, is the displacement and GM is the metacentric height of the ship.
A more recent expression based on a more controlled experiment was developed
by Ikeda et al. (1978a). Neglecting the wave effect, bilge keel damping is written
in terms of the contribution of the normal and hull pressure as
BBKBBKNBBKH

(46)

The normal force component per unit length is written as

8
BBKN rr3cbbBKwR0f 2CD
3p

(47)

in terms of an equivalent drag coefficient

CD22.5

bBK
2.4
prcbR0f

(48)

where bBK=breadth of the bilge keel and f is the correction factor to take into account
for the increase in the flow speed at the bilge keel,
f10.3 exp{160(1s)}

(49)

On the other hand, the pressure component of damping per unit length due to hull
surface was obtained from the pressure measurement on a 2-dimensional hull surface,
which was caused by the presence of the bilge keels.

4
bBK
BBKH rr2cbD2wR0f 2 22.5
1.2 A21.2B2
3p
prfR0

(50)

where
A2(m3m4)m8m27

(51)

S. Chakrabarti / Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

B2

(1m1)2(2m3m2)
m34

(m3m5m4m6)m1
3(H00.215m1)
6(10.215m1)

927

(52)

m1Rb/D; m2OG/D; m31m1m2; m4H0m1

(53)

m5

0.414H0+0.0651m (0.382H0+0.0106)m1
(H00.215m1)(10.215m1)

(54)

m6

0.414H0+0.0651m21(0.382+0.0106H0)m1
(H00.215m1)(10.215m1)

(55)

2
1

m7=S0/D0.25pm1 for S00.25pRb

m7=0,

otherwise

m8=m7+0.414m1

for S00.25pRb

m8=m7+ 2{1cos(S0/Rb)}m1, otherwise

(56)

(57)

where
S00.3pfrcbR01.95bBK

(58)

The bilge-circle radius Rb and the mean distance rcb from the roll axis to the bilge
keel are given by
Rb=2D

H0(s1)
for RbD, RbB/2
p4

Rb=D

for H01, R/D1

Rb=B/2

for H01, R/DH0

rcbD[{H00.293Rb/D}2{1OG/D0.293Rb/D}2]1/2

(59)

(60)

7. Numerical results
The expressions presented in the preceding section provide five contributions to
the total damping in roll. For the eddy making component, the expressions are given
by different sets of equations depending on whether the vessel is a barge or a ship
shape. In all cases the effect of current or forward speed has been shown explicitly
with additional formulations. When bilge keels are present, roll damping depends
on the shape and position of the bilge keel on different ship shapes having a small
to large block coefficient. Seakeeping software based on the above formulation estimates the roll damping coefficients. The calculations consider the detailed crosssection of the vessel. The roll predictions from these calculations are considered to
be quite accurate and the method should be fairly robust. The empirical formulas

928

S. Chakrabarti / Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

have been derived from many experiments with flat plates, cylinders, ship and barge
models. However, as with any such empirical formulations, the formulas are based
on experimental data on particular ship shapes and generalization to all shapes may
pose some problems.
An example of the computed damping coefficients for a container ship is shown
in Fig. 3, where the difference between the case of a bilge keel and no bilge keel
is shown. In this case the bilge keel almost doubles the total damping in roll for the
stationary ship. The container ship data represents the geometry of a particular container ship model of dimensions 1.75 m0.254 m0.095 m draft. The ship model
had a block coefficient of 0.571 and was described by the cross sections at 21 stations
numbered from 0 to 10. The KG was assumed to be the same as the draft. The bilge
keel width was taken as 0.0045 m and its length spans the stations from 3.75 to
6.25. The wave radiation-damping coefficient was set at 0.0009562, obtained from
the diffraction/radiation theory. The roll mass coefficient is chosen as 2.0 and the
roll amplitude is assumed to be 10.
The moment of inertia is computed in the program using the simple formula of
a rectangular box. For the purposes of presentation the data is normalized by 2wnI
where I is the roll moment of inertia and wn is the roll natural frequency. Therefore
the data represent an equivalent damping factor.
The total damping shown in Fig. 3 includes the five damping terms discussed
above. The individual contribution of the five components to this damping coefficient
in roll vs the Froude number is illustrated for the container ship in Fig. 4. The
wave damping component is comparatively small. It is found that the forward speed
increases the lift component significantly. The most important contribution at zero
forward speed is the eddy-making damping coefficient. The presence of the bilge
keel provides a steady increase in the damping coefficient.
Next a typical derrick barge with a cross section of 400 ft120 ft19 ft (draft),
and a block coefficient of 0.923 having a high fore and aft rake was analyzed. Near
the section with rakes, the breadth remains unchanged, the only difference being the
depth of the section, which reduced to an end value of 3.25 ft within two stations

Fig. 3.

Total roll damping factor for a container ship with and without a bilge keel.

S. Chakrabarti / Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

Fig. 4.

929

Five-component roll damping factors for a container ship.

over an overall station of 21. The bilge radius was 1.97 ft running from station 3
to 14. This configuration results in a high cross section area coefficient of 0.999.
The roll amplitude was chosen to be 10.
Without any modifications to the end geometry, the damping factor due to eddymaking at zero forward speed turns out to be very large at 59% (see Table 1). Two
factors contribute to the large eddy making damping: the cross section area coefficient (s) and the fore & aft rakes.
If the area coefficient is changed to 0.8, the damping factor due to eddy making
reduces to 18%. If we further reduce the rakes (from an end depth of 3.25 ft to 15.1
ft at the fore and 14.5 ft at the aft), the damping factor becomes 9.6%. For the case
with 0.99 area coefficient and reduced rakes, the damping factor is 22.5%.
The effect of the area coefficient on eddy making damping is obvious: the higher
the area coefficient, the sharper the corner, which in turn results in more fluid separation and eddy making. However, 59% damping factor is obviously too large and
in error. Besides, the large effect of fore and aft rakes on the damping coefficient
is impractical. This effect is attributed mainly to the 3-dimensionality and end effects
Table 1
Comparison of eddy-making damping for a derrick barge
Vessel

Rake

Area coefficient Damping factor (eddy-making component)

Input file

Fore & aft

Original
formula

Modified w/
end factor

New formula &

end factor

Barge data
Barge data
Barge data
Barge data
Ship data

High (actual)
High (actual)
Reduced
Reduced
Actual

0.999
0.8
0.8
0.99
varies 0.97

0.59
0.18
0.096
0.225
0.0528

0.38
0.14
0.049
0.11
0.025

0.20
0.20
0.16
0.16

930

S. Chakrabarti / Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

Fig. 5.

Distribution of the eddy-making damping coefficient along a 3-dimensional barge.

of the barge. This is illustrated by an example of the distribution of the damping

coefficient along the ships length. The geometry of the above-mentioned barge is
considered. The variation of the damping coefficient on the stations of the barge is
shown in Fig. 5. Note that the end effect is significant in this example.
The empirical formulas for eddy making damping were derived from experiments
on models of 2-dimensional shape in which care was taken to provide end plates to
the model eliminating the end effects. Therefore, the 3-dimensional structures of
finite length are expected to suffer from large end effects. This is particularly true
for barges with rakes. Thus the eddy-making damping calculation with the above
formulation is modified for the outer stations of a 3-dimensional barge to reduce the
large end effect. In this modification the blow-up of sectional damping is avoided
by reducing the cross-sectional coefficients at the two end stations by 30%. This
reduction factor is strictly empirical in nature in order to reduce the 2-dimensional
effect, in particular, of the rakes for a rectangular barge. Moreover, the upper limit
in the value of H0 (ULHO in Fig. 5) is made an optional input. The cases shown

Fig. 6. Total roll damping factor for a derrick barge with and without a bilge keel at operating draft.

S. Chakrabarti / Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

931

are for ULHO=4 or 5. This modification produces more practical results for a rectangular barge and has much smaller end effects for a 3-dimensional ship shape.
The original formula [Eq. (18)] for the eddy component of damping was not suitable for certain rectangular barges with high area coefficients. A revised formula
[Eq. (35)] has been proposed for a rectangular barge. This formula is much simpler
and is independent of the area coefficient, s. It is incorporated as an option in the
computer program. For a rectangular barge, this formula [Eq. (35)] is recommended.
Table 1 summarizes the results before and after the modification.
Finally, the revised formulation is used to estimate roll damping for the above
mentioned derrick barge with an actual loading condition at the draft of 16.9 ft. The
revised formula for the rectangular barge is used in the calculation. The total damping
factor with and without a bilge keel is shown in Fig. 6. Note that at zero forward
speed (zero Froude number), the damping factor without the bilge keel is about 14%.
This value increases to about 18% for the derrick barge when a bilge keel of the
section dimension mentioned earlier is included.

8. Conclusions
The damping in roll has several components. For convenience, in the calculation
of the total damping, five components comprising the total are defined. The wavedamping component is computed by the linear diffraction/radiation theory. Its contribution to the total damping in roll is generally quite small compared to the other
components for a conventional ship-shaped or barge like structure. Unfortunately, it
is not easy to theoretically compute the other contributions to roll damping.
Empirical expressions are given for the components due to friction, lift and eddymaking damping. The presence of a bilge keel introduces additional damping for
which formulas are also given. Of these the eddy making and bilge keel damping
are quite nonlinear based on the amplitude of roll. In all cases the effect of the
forward speed of the vessel or the presence of current is specified.
These formulas are considered to be applicable to conventional hull forms of ships
and barges. They may not necessarily be equally suitable for 3-dimensional offshore
structures and ships of special hull forms.
The expressions are based on model testing data, mostly from 2-dimensional models. The components of damping are isolated in these tests. The interaction effect is
mostly ignored. It should be noted that the interactions in these components may be
important; for example, the interaction effect of the bilge keels and appendages
present in a ship may be significant.
The 3-dimensional effect of vessels of finite length may be large for certain barge
like vessels. Modifications that reduce the end effect of a 3-dimensional shape and
make the damping values more realistic are recommended.
The empirical formulas are based on small scale tests and thus some scale effect
is expected. This is particularly true for the nonlinear responses. However, it is
assumed that the scale effect is small and the formulas may be used to compute the
damping of full-scale ships and barges.

932

S. Chakrabarti / Ocean Engineering 28 (2001) 915932

References
Bhattacharyya, R., 1978. Dynamics of Marine Vehicles. Wiley, New York, pp. 278307.
Bolton, W.E., 1972. The effect of bilge keel size on roll reduction. Admiralty Experiment Works, Haslar
Report no. 1972. September.
Garrison, C.J., 1993. Users guide and theoretical analysis. Computer Program MORA, Report No. 10188. In:.
Haddara, M.R., Zhang, S., 1994. Effect of forward speed on the roll damping of three small fishing
vessels. J. OMAE, Transactions of ASME 116 May.
Himeno, Y., 1981. Prediction of ship roll damping state of the art. Report No. 239. Department of
Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. September.
Ikeda, Y., 1984. Roll damping of ships. In: Proceedings of Ship Motions, Wave Loads and Propulsive
Performance in a Seaway, First Marine Dynamics Symposium, The Society of Naval Architecture in
Japan., pp. 241250 (in Japanese).
Ikeda, Y., Himeno, Y., Tanaka, N., 1978a. Components of roll damping of ship at forward speed. Report
No. 00404. Department of Naval Architecture, University of Osaka Prefecture, Osaka, Japan (August);
[also in Journal of Society of Naval Architecture of Japan, vol. 143, 1978 (in Japanese)].
Ikeda, Y., Himeno, Y., Tanaka, N., 1978b. A prediction method for ship roll damping. Report No. 00405.
Department of Naval Architecture, University of Osaka Prefecture, Osaka, Japan.
Ikeda, Y., Fujiwara, T., Katayama, T., 1993. Roll damping of a sharp-cornered barge and roll control by
a new-type stabilizer. In: Proceedings of the Third International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Singapore, June 1993., pp. 634639.
Kato, H., 1965. Effects of bilge keels on the rolling of ships. J. Society of Naval Architecture of Japan
117(in Japanese).
Miller, E.R., Slager, J.J., Webster, W.C., 1974. Development of a technical practice for roll stabilization
system selections. NAVSEC Report 6136-74-280.
Schmitke, R.T., 1978. Ship Sway, Roll and Yaw Motions in Oblique Sear. Transactions Society of Naval
Arch and Marine Eng. 86.
Tanaka, N., 1957. A study on the bilge keel. Part 1. J. Society of Naval Architecture of Japan 101.
Tanaka, N., 1958. A study on the bilge keel. Part 2. J. Society of Naval Architecture of Japan 103.
Tanaka, N., 1959. A study on the bilge keel. Part 3. J. Society of Naval Architecture of Japan 105.
Tanaka, N., 1961. A study on the bilge keel. Part 4. J. Society of Naval Architecture of Japan 109.