Antigravitational Fast Containership Theoretical Design

J. López L, Adjoint Researcher of National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM),

A1269 Mexico D.F.
México
email: Ed.hardstore@gmail.com

Abstract This is the first of five papers where briefly discussed the main theoretical characteristics of a
advanced Antigravitational Fast Container-Ship (AFCS). design, based in load platforms with Antigravitational
Gyroscopic Hyper-Damping System (AGHD). The system is so revolutionary than would define all the future
of maritime transport. The main idea back concept is the use of gyroscopic precesion to support and
counteract the dead- load of a ship and so to cause one substantial increase in speed. In this paper
we board the hydrodynamic point of view , in the other papers we treat the stability and control ,
powering requirements , hull geometry, structural dynamic and antigravitation engine thermodynamic.

Key words. advanced ultra large containership , Antigravitational Gyroscopic Hyper-Damping System
(AGHD). SWATH technology, Rigid Body Dynamic, Euler’s Equations, Gyroscopic Precession, Vibration Dynamic
, Antigravitational Gyroscopic Damping.
.

1. Introduction gravity force , this force is named angular

moment and came expressed by

Angular Moment = Moment of Inertia × Angular

'Give me a place to stand, and I shall move the Earth
with it1' sayed the Great Archimedes of Syracuse
two thousand year ago , but , as we will see in
this paper it should be changed as follow :
'Give me a flywheel with enough angular moment
, and I shall lift the Earth with it' . And in effect, if
we have a flywheel with sufficient kinetic energy
mounted over a shaft, floating on roller bearing ,
it willl turn and then, with surprise!, we will
note that have less weight (Fig. 1 ) Why It? It’s
because the flywheel mounted in the axle act
like spinning top (precess) converting part of
weight in a force contrary (in direction) to the
Speed ,
Is to say that this anti-gravity force (this pseudo-
force) may be caused by a mass subject to
acceleration (the flywheel) . This is exactly
principle of which grip us to create the
antigravitational engines but instead of use one
axle , we use multipe-axle generating one
additive effect of antigravity (Fig. 2), like see in
subsequent chapters. To this mechanism, we’d
called it… antigravitational engine or
antigravitational damping engine gyrodine® .

1
"Δώστε μου ένα μέρος για να σταθώ και θα μετακινήσω
ακόμα κι ολόκληρη τη Γη." In Greek.

1
The big question is: How is the real possibilities
have this antigravitational engines? The
possibilities of this antigravitational engines are
truely amazing, because may cancel ( in theory)
completely enormous gravitatory mass, this make
it excellent to future applications in machines
where the weight is a parameter that play a
role against inner the efficiency equation, as
is the case of various transport system : trains
, minning trucks, building anti-earquarks system,
ground effect mega-aerplanes until futuristics
space elevators, and of course, maritime
transports that here will analize us . Fig. 3 – the chine-plate experiment one version of
the before experiment but extend to more
masses showing the same lifting potential.

Fig. 2 – the flywheel experiment showing mass in

gyroscopic precession (the disk weight 50 lbs and is
easy take with one arm)

One problem is that we had called the inertial

mass paradox ; is to say while more mass must
to be lift, more mass must be aggregate in form
of rotatory inertial mass. so that the
antigravitational engine aren’t perfect machines
and must be analizeits its limits, is to say
measure its thermodynamic efficiency and in this
paper dedícate us analize, only and strictly from
its theroretical physics view point .

2
1.1. Problematic

Shipping has been an important human activity

throughout history, particularly where prosperity
depended primarily on international and
interregional trade. In fact, transportation has been
called one of the four cornerstones of globalization,
along with communications, international
standardization, and trade liberalization [Kumar and
Hoffmann, 2002]. Due to a number of technological, Fig. 4 – the “OOCL Shenzhen“, 8,063 TEU, World Largest
economic, and sociocultural forces, only the rare Container Ship
country can keep itself fully isolated from the
economic activities of other countries. Indeed, many
countries have seen astonishing economic growth in The success of the new transport concept was
the recent past due to their willingness to open their exceptional and the container ships grew very
borders and markets to foreign investment and quickly in size and container capacity. In the
trade. This increased flow of knowledge, resources, beginning the ships were classified using the
goods, and services among our world‟s nations is generation concept:
called “globalization”, formally defined as “the
development of an increasingly integrated global 1st Generation with about 1,000 TEU occurred for
economy marked especially by free trade, free flow the first time in about 1966,
of capital, and the tapping of cheaper foreign labor
markets.” 2nd Generation with about 2,000 TEU occurred for
the first time in about 1969,
During the last four decades the loading capacity of
container ships has increased from a few hundred 3rd Generation with about 3,000 TEU occurred for
TEU2 for the first full container ship to more than the first time in about 1972.
8,000 TEU for the most modern vessels now in
operation. Over this period of development
numerous design and construction problems
associated with the increasing size of the vessels and
their propellers were overcome. The demand for
sufficient stability, higher speeds and low vibration
levels has led to new hull forms specific to
this type of vessel.
Fig. 5 – the “Beowulf“, with 8,063 TEU, futuristic Vision
of a Antigravitational Fast Container-Ship (AFCS).

2 As container shipping was invented in the USA, it is clear that the ft (2.435 m) and a height of 8 ft (2.435 m). This container is the basis for the
dimensions of the first containers followed American standards. Later on the world-wide used TEU (Twenty Feet Equivalent Unit).
ISO defined a standard container with a length of 20 ft (6.035 m), a width of 8

3
1.1. Speed and Power
Fig. 6.1 presents the required ship speed and the
Container ships with higher container capacities corresponding required delivered power as
have to sail at higher speeds than those ships with functions of the container capacity of single screw
lower capacity, if they want to be competitive. The container ships. It also shows that due to the limited
reason is simply the longer time in the harbour available power of the main engine nowadays only
which is needed to load and unload the high container ships with less than about 7,300 TEU can
number of containers. This is the reason why the be operated with the required ship speed. Larger
ship speed is of so enormous importance for large vessels cannot sail fast enough to offer a
container ships. Container ships carrying more than competitive container line service until more
6,000 TEU have to sail with service speeds of more powerful main engines are built and become
than 25 kts. Nowadays two-stroke engines drive the available.
propeller directly. Thus, the available most powerful
main engine limits the speed of very large container
ships. Currently this most powerful motor is the 12K
98MC designed by MAN B&W and is built by
Hyundai. The twelve cylinders of this motor develop
a brake power of 68,640 kW at 94 rpm. Hyundai also
offers this motor with up to 18 cylinders. But these
motors have not been built up till now. A motor with
18 cylinders would offer a brake power of 102,960
kW. The competing motor 12RTA96C from Sulzer
offers a brake power of 68,640 kW at 102 rpm.
During service not the theoretical maximum power
(MCR) is available at the propeller, but a much lower
power. The example in Tab. 6.1 shows that during
sea trials only about 71% of the installed engine
power is taken into account at the propeller for the Tab. 1 – Required Speed and Delivered Power for VLCS
determination of the service speed.
Fig. 6.2 and Fig. 6.3 show the delivered power (trial
conditions) and the specific delivered power as
functions of the displacement volume with the ship
speed as parameter. These diagrams are suitable for
a rough estimation of the required power for new
project vessels. But for actual projects the block
coefficient and the prismatic coefficient should be
taken into account as well as the quality of the hull
lines and the propeller. Furthermore, the
interaction of ship hull, propeller and rudder must
be considered.

Fig. 6. diagram showing required speeds to VLCS.

4

Tab. 2 – Required Speed and Delivered Power for VLCS
1.3. Special Hydrodynamic Problems of
VLCS and ULCS
1.3.1. Propeller Cavitation
Propeller cavitation is not a special problem of very
large container ships alone. But due to the very high
power density the propellers of VLCS and ULCS are
more endangered from cavitation than those of
smaller container ships. In Fig. 7.1 the pressure
pulses of the first harmonic are presented in relation
to the delivered power of container ships. These
pressure pulses were measured during cavitation
tests in HSVA’s large cavitation tunnel HYKAT. For
the vibration excitation of the ship hull structure the
second and the third harmonics are important, too.
7.2 Rudder Cavitation
Not only the ultra large container ships themselves
and their propellers are huge, but also the rudders
are incredibly large. The movable part of the most
commonly used semi-balanced rudders is up to 12
m high and often more than 7 m long. Due to the
high ship speed and the enormous amount of
energy transmitted from the propeller to the water,
the rudders are put to a high risk for cavitation even
5
at small rudder angles. These small rudder angles
occur very often during service, since small course
corrections are required to keep the ship on track.
Thus the rudders are highly endangered from
cavitation induced erosion. Erosive damages often
occur after the first voyages. These problems can be
avoided and overcome if the rudder is designed
carefully. In the last years the number of rudder
cavitation investigations in HSVA’s HYKAT facility
has increased significantly. These tests prove that
the rudder cavitation problems can be minimised
with a well designed rudder. Fig. 7.2 presents
sketches of the observed cavitation pattern on the
suction side of the rudder of a very large container
ship at rudder angles of 4 and 10 degrees.
1.3.2. Parametric Rolling
Parametric roll motions occur when the wave length
of head or following seas is close to the ship length.
Due to the significant changes of the ship stability
(high stability in the wave trough and low stability
on the wave crest, see Fig. 7.3)massive roll motions
can be induced if the exciting period is a multiple of
the ship's half natural period. Under these
conditions the roll motions reach the highest
amplitudes. In extreme cases the ship may capsize.
Fig. 7 – Ship Stability on Wave Crest and in Wave Trough
(Source: Schneekluth, 1988)
In principle the phenomenon of parametric rolling
applies to all ships. But very large container ships are
especially endangered, since their principle
dimensions nicely fit to the ocean’s waves.
Furthermore, the container ships have very low
metacentric heights, i.e. a low transversal stability.
Parametric rolling could be counteracted with
special hull forms, especially at the ship ends, and
active roll damping devices like fin stabilizers or roll
damping tanks. Furthermore, higher metacentric
heights could be achieved by correct distribution of
cargo and ballast water. And last but not least the
risk of parametric rolling can be reduced by
choosing the right course and ship speed. Fig. 7.4
shows an example for damaged cargo due to
parametric rolling.

6
 2. Theoretical Background
2.1. Total Hull Resistance (RT)
As a ship moves through calm water, the ship
experiences a force acting opposite to its direction of
motion. This force is the water’s resistance to the
motion of the ship, which is referred to as “total hull
resistance” (RT). It is this resistance force that is used
to calculate a ship’s effective horsepower. A ship’s
calm water resistance is a function of many factors,
including ship speed, hull form (draft, beam, length,
wetted surface area), and water temperature.
Total hull resistance increases as speed increases as
shown in Figure 7.5. Note that the resistance curve is
not linear, but increases more steeply at higher
speeds. In later sections of this chapter we will
investigate why resistance increases so rapidly at high
speeds. Also shown in Figure 7.5 is a bump, or “hump”,
in the total resistance curve. This hump is not a
mistake, but a phenomenon common to nearly all ship
resistance curves that will be discussed later. As shown
in previous sections, the power required to propel a
ship through the water is the product of total hull
resistance and ship speed, and so engine power
increases even more rapidly than resistance. Often,
ship power is roughly proportional to the cube of the
speed, so doubling (2x) the speed of a destroyer from
3
15 knots to 30 knots will require 2 = 8 times as much
power!
For the ship operator planning a voyage, getting from
Point A to Point B in a shortest amount of time (high
speed) requires a lot more power than traveling the
same distance at a slower speed. This increase in
power is felt directly in the amount of fuel burned
during the transit. A ship’s fuel consumption curve is
similar in shape to its horsepower and total
resistance curves. Voyage planning requires careful
attention to transit speed and fuel consumption rates
to ensure that the ship arrives at its destination with
an adequate supply of fuel onboard. The U.S. Navy
generally requires that ships arrive with no less than
50 percent fuel onboard as a reserve.
Components of Total Hull Resistance
As a ship moves through calm water, there are many
factors that combine to form the total resistance force
acting on the hull. The principle factors affecting ship
resistance are the friction and viscous effects of water
acting on the hull, the energy required to create and
maintain the ship’s characteristic bow and stern
waves, and the resistance that air provides to ship
motion. In mathematical terms, total resistance can be
written as:
RT = RV + RW + RAA
Where: RT = total hull resistance
RV = viscous (friction) resistance
RW = wave making resistance
RAA = air resistance caused by ship moving through
calm air
Other factors affecting total hull resistance will also be
presented. Figure 7.6 shows how the magnitude of
each component of resistance varies with ship speed.
At low speeds viscous resistance dominates, and at
high speeds the total resistance curve turns upward
dramatically as wave making resistance begins to
dominate.
Fig. 8. the total resistance grphic.

7
2.2. Antigravitational Dynamic Damping 𝑑𝐿
= 0,
𝑑𝑡
(1.2)
If joined to electromagnetic we aggregate the
anti-gravitational force then we are before truly Let’s expand this in the body frame. we have
interesting because that the electromagnetism
and the mechanical technologies is two
consolidated technologies. 𝑑𝐋 𝑑𝐿𝑎 𝑑𝑒𝑎
0= = 𝑒𝑎 + 𝐿𝑎 ,
𝑑𝑡 𝑑𝑡 𝑑𝑡
2.2.1. Precesion 𝑑𝐿𝑎
= 𝑒 + 𝐿𝑎 𝜔 × 𝑒𝑎 ,
𝑑𝑡 𝑎
The mechanical anti-gravitation is based in the
(1.3)
precession a phenomenal of rigid body dynamic
This simplifies if we choose the body axes {ea} to
coincide with the the principal axes. Using

𝐿𝑎 = 𝐼𝑎𝑏 𝜔𝑏 ,

(1.4)
we can then write
𝐿1 = 𝐼1 𝜔1

(1.5)

and so on. The equations of motion (3.32) are now

three non-linear coupled first order differential
equations,
Fig. 9. spinning top showing euler angles.

𝐼1 𝜔̇ 1 + 𝜔2 𝜔3 (𝐼3 − 𝐼2 )=0
Euler’s Equations 𝐼2 𝜔̇ 2 + 𝜔3 𝜔1 (𝐼1 − 𝐼3 )=0

𝐼3 𝜔̇ 3 + 𝜔1 𝜔2 (𝐼2 − 𝐼1 )=0
From now on, we shall neglect the center of mass
and concentrate on the rotation of the rigid body. (1.6)
Since the body is free, its angular momentum must
be conserved. This gives us the vector equation

8
These are Euler’s Equations3. We can extend this
analysis to include a torque τ . The equation of
motion becomes L˙ = τ and we can again expand in
the body frame along the principal axes to derive
Euler’s equations (3.33), now with the components
of the torque on the RHS.

Free Tops

We start with a trivial example: the sphere. For this

object, I1 = I2 = I3 which means that the angular
velocity ! is parallel to the angular momentum L.
Indeed, Euler's equations tell us that !a is a constant Fig. 10 The precession of the spin: the direction of
in this case and the sphere continues to spin around precession depends on whether the
the same axis you start it on. To _nd a more object is short and fat (I3 > I1) or tall and skinny (I3 < I1)
interesting case, we need to look at the next
simplest object.

So, in this case, we see that !3, which is the spin

Symmetric Tops about the symmetric axis, is a constant of motion.
In contrast, the spins about the other two axes are
time dependent and satisfy
The symmetric top is an object with I1 = I2 6= I3. A
typical example is drawn in Fig. 1.11 𝜔̇ 1 = 𝜔2 , 𝜔̇ 2 = −𝜔1 ,

Euler's equations become (1.8)

where

𝐼1 𝜔̇ 1 = 𝜔2 𝜔3 (𝐼1 − 𝐼3 )  = 𝜔3 (𝐼1 − 𝐼3 )/𝐼1

𝐼2 𝜔̇ 2 = −𝜔1 𝜔3 (𝐼1 − 𝐼3 ) (1.9)
𝐼3 𝜔̇ 3 = 0
is a constant. These equations are solved by
(1.7)

(𝜔1 , 𝜔2 ) = ω0 (sin t, cos t)

(1.10)

3 (15 April 1707 – 18 September 1783) was a Swiss mathematician,
physicist, astronomer, logician and engineer, who made important
and influential discoveries in many branches of mathematics, such as
infinitesimal calculus and graph theory, while also making pioneering
contributions to several branches such as topology and analytic
number theory. He also introduced much of the modern
mathematical terminology and notation, particularly for
mathematical analysis, such as the notion of a mathematical
function.[3] He is also known for his work in mechanics, fluid
dynamics, optics, astronomy, and music theory.[4]

9
 𝑡𝑜 𝜓̇ ≫ 𝜙̇0
for any constant !0. This means that, in the body
frame, the e 3 Lw Figure 31: 𝐼3 𝜓̇𝜙̇
direction of the spin is not constant: it precesses 𝑠𝑜 𝑚𝑔 =
ℎ
about the e3 axis with frequency . The direction of
the spin depends on the sign on or, in other words, 𝑀𝑅 2 𝜓̇𝜙̇
∴ 𝑃=
whether I1 > I3 or I1 < I3. This is drawn in 2ℎ
_gure 30.
(1.12)

2 ̇2 2
𝑁𝑓𝑤 𝑀𝑓𝑤 𝑟𝑓𝑤 𝜙 𝜋
𝑚𝑠 = ( ),
2 ∙ 2ℎ𝑔900
(1.27)

further knowing that

2
𝑁𝑓𝑤 𝑀𝑓𝑤 𝑟𝑓𝑤 2̇ ∙ 𝜋 2
∙ 𝜙𝑐𝑟
𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑥 = ( ),
2 ∙ 2ℎ𝑔 ∙ 900
(1.27)

where 𝜙̇𝑐𝑟 is the critical speed, of the flywheels

and that depend of material resistance and the
Fig. 11. precesion and nutation showing movement.
engineering of the flywheel . According to
Raleigh’s Method, If the shaft is simply
supported at the end , with no mass involved
other than that of the Shaft itself, the first critical
speed, 𝜙̇𝑐𝑟 , will came given by

30 5 𝑔
𝜙̇𝑐𝑟 = √ ∙ ,
𝜋 4 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥
(1.98)

where 𝑔 is the acceleration of gravity, and 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 is

the maximum static deflection of the shaft to see
APPENDIX F.
Fig. 12. Basic array showing the gyroscopic mechanism.
following is easy to obtain 𝜙̇𝑚𝑖𝑛 as

2
∑ 𝐸𝑃+𝐾 = 𝐼1 𝜙̇1 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝜃0 − 𝐼3 𝜓̇𝜙̇0 + 𝑚𝑔ℎ = 0

(1.11)

10
 30 5𝑔 1
𝜙̇𝑚𝑖𝑛 = √ √ ∙ ,
𝜋 4𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤

(1.27)

Finally the maximum weight able to be lift by

one only gyrodyne platform came given by so
called ERL Equation or Euler-Raleigh-Lopez
4Equation and came given by

2
𝑁𝑓𝑤 𝑀𝑓𝑤 𝑟𝑓𝑤 ∙ 𝜋2 2 30 5∙𝑔 1 30 5∙𝑔 1
𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝜙̇ − 2 ∙ 𝜙̇√ √ ∙ + ∙√ ∙ ,
2 ∙ 2ℎ𝑔 ∙ 900 𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤 𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤
{ }
(1.27)

Where 𝑁𝑓𝑤 is the number of flywheels

4
It’s only a mnemonic rule and not pretend more than it

11
2.2.2. The Gyrodyne Mechanism

The mechanism gyrodine® is a antigravitational

engine. The antigravitational engines transform
part of gravitatory potential energy in precession
gyroscopic energy (antigravitational potential
energy)

Fig. 14. gyrodine® mechanism to marine applications.

Its excessive simplicity is deceptive (Fig. 1.5)

because that its science fall in the art state; it is, fine
adjustments, delicate dynamics balances, advanced
materials and other engineering refinements that
only the advances of twenty one century make
possible.

Fig. 13. gyrodine®5 internal mechanism.

The mechanism gyrodine® is nothing of UFO secret

technology but the last ingenious gadget that
remained in the old trunk of the newtonian physics
and nobody has notice its utility until now . Actually
this antigravitational device is being analized in
various transport system so as : trains , minning
trucks, building anti-earquarks system, until
futuristics space elevators and of course fault
maritime transports that is more ambitious all.

Fig. 1.17. mechanism gyrodine® showing a free body

diagram .

𝑥̈ 𝑚 + 𝑐𝑥̇ + 𝑘𝑥 = 𝐹0 𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝜔𝑡 + 𝜑)
(1.14)

5
gyrodine® acronym of gyroscopic-dynamic engine, is a strongly studied to entry to a patent process so we show only
technology discovery by Antigravity Works Ltd. and being the physic principles inherent.

12
Where 𝑧̈1 𝑚𝑝𝑙 + 𝑐𝑝 (𝑧̇1 − 𝑧̇2 ) + 𝑘𝑝 (𝑧1 − 𝑧2 ) = 0
𝑛
𝐼𝑖 𝜓̇ 𝑖 𝜙̇ 𝑖 𝑧̈2 𝑚𝐺 + 𝑐𝐺 (𝑧̇2 − 𝑧̇1 ) + 𝑘𝐺 (𝑧2 − 𝑧1 ) + 𝑐𝑤 (𝑧̇2 − 𝑧̇3 )
𝑚 𝑇 = 𝑀𝑆𝑢𝑝𝑝 − ∑ [(𝑀𝑑 𝑖 + 𝑀𝑢 ) − ] + 𝑘𝑤 (𝑧2 − 𝑧3 ) = 𝐿𝑇 − 𝐹𝑟
𝑔ℎ
𝑖=1
𝑧̈3 𝑚𝑐𝑠 + 𝑐𝑤 (𝑧̇3 − 𝑧̇1 ) + 𝑘𝑤 (𝑧3 − 𝑧1 )
(1.15) = 𝐹0 sin[(𝜔𝑡 − 𝜑) − 𝛷]
If now, we aggregate the wave motion, with (1.18)
ascendant force, then the system is as follow
Where

𝐹0 𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝜔𝑡 + 𝜑) = 𝑘𝑤 𝑧0 + 𝑐𝑤 𝑧̇0

(1.18)

Where 𝐿𝑇 is the total angular moment, 𝐹𝑟 is

the friction force of roller bearing inner gyrodyne,
𝑚𝑝𝑙 is the load platform with the containers, 𝑚𝐺
is the gyrodyne mass , 𝑚𝑐𝑠 is the mass of ship
and 𝐹0 is the ascendant force caused by waves.
Now, introducing the motion of rigid super-
structure of ship the above system turn it more
complicate.

Fig. 15 – mechanism gyrodine® showing a free body

diagram .

The equations that represent our gyrodyne

system in study, is represented in the fig. 15 ,
have four degree of freedom and respond to
three simultaneous equations system
Fig. 15 – diagram showing complete hyper-damping
system with p degree of freedom including the solid
axles .

13
and the complet description of system dynamic is As we can see, is an equation set very laborious
the follow equation, in tensor notation to use the method of multiple-DOF (Modal
Analysis ), so that will use an method more easy,
analytical, of one dimension and based in the
𝑁 6 thermodynamic efficiency.
𝑖𝑗 𝑗 𝑖𝑗 𝑗 𝑖𝑗 𝑗
𝑚𝑘𝑖 𝑥̈ 𝑘𝑖 + ∑ ∑(𝑀𝑙𝑘 𝑥̈ 𝑙 + 𝑐𝑙𝑘 𝑥̇ 𝑙 + 𝑘𝑙𝑘 𝑥𝑙 ) = 𝐹𝑘𝑖 𝑒 −𝑖𝜔𝑡
𝑗=1 𝑙=1

(1.18)

the equations system to solve grow as follow

𝑁𝐸𝑞 = ((𝑁𝑚 ∙ 𝑁𝐹𝐺 ) + 𝑁𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑟 ) − 𝑁𝑅𝐸

(1.18)

Where 𝑁𝑚 is the number of mass in the hyper-

damping system, 𝑁𝐹𝐺 is the number of somier
row of matrix APPENDIX E, 𝑁𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑟 is the number
of solid coordinates to motion of superstrure and
𝑁𝑅𝐸 is the number of restriccion equations that
here is zero. The table 3 , analize us this equation
and we can see that to a somier of 10x6
gyrodynes we have 20 equations to solve and
to to a somier of 80x30 gyrodynes we have 92
simultaneus equations to solve.

𝑁𝑚 𝑀𝐺 𝑁𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑟 𝑁𝐷𝑔 𝑁𝐸𝑞 M

3 1 1 4 3 3x3
3 10x6 3 21 20 20x20
3 50x10 3 33 32 32x32
3 80x30 3 93 92 92x92
3 100x40 3 123 122 122x122
3 180x60 3 183 182 182x182

Tab. 3 – Showing total number of equations to

calculate depending on various variables .

14
2.3. Transport Efficiency The propulsive efficiency includes the
transmission efficiency and slip efficiency of the
vehicle.
Transport productivity , which is defined as the The reciprocal of transpot efficiency expressed
product of payload and the average crosss- in terms of power consumption per unit
country speed through a specific region , may transportproductivity may also be used to
be used as a criterion for evaluating the characterize the performed of a transport system.
performance of off-road transporters . For an
existing vehicle , the average speed may be
measured experimentally . However , for a vehicle
under development , the prediction of its average
operating speed through a particular region may
be quite complex , as the terrain conditions may
vary considerably from one path to another.
In addition to vehicle tractive performance , a
member of other factor , much as the ability in
obstacle negotiation , mobility in a riverine
environment , and vehicle vibrations excited by
ground roughness, also effect the cross-country
speed of the vehicle.
To characterize the efficiency of a transport
system , the transport efficiency , which is
defined as the ratio of the transport productivity
to the corresponding power input to the system
, may also be used

𝜂𝑇𝑟 = 𝑊𝑝 𝑣/𝑃, (1.22)

When is the payload and P is the power input

to the system . the transport efficiency is defined
has three basic components meanly , the lift
/drag ratio (the ratio of the vehicle total weight
to the resultant motion resistance) structural
efficiency (the ratio of the payload to the vehicle
total weight) and propulsive efficiency :

𝑊𝑝 𝑣
𝜂𝑇𝑟 =
𝑃

𝑣
= 𝑊𝑝 𝑣/ (∑ 𝑅)
𝜂𝑝

, (1.23)

15
3. The Coupling Equations. and from (7.4)

3.1. The Bouyancy Condition

2 ̇ 2
𝑉𝑐𝑠 𝑁𝑃𝑙 𝑁𝑓𝑤 𝑀𝑓𝑤 𝑅𝑓𝑤 𝜙 𝜋2
From The Archymide’s principle 𝑉𝑠𝑤 = (𝑚𝑐𝑠 − ),
𝑚𝑐𝑠 2 ∙ 2ℎ𝑔900
𝑚𝑐𝑠 = 𝜌𝑉𝑐𝑠 , (1.30)
(1.24)
late, assuming a geometry of twin hulls as being
where 𝑚𝑐𝑠 is the containership mass and 𝑉𝑐𝑠 spheroid6 (prolate type) with volume
its respective volume, and for SWATH-AFC
catamaran 𝑉𝑠𝑤 = 4𝜋𝑎𝑏𝑐/3,
(1.31)
𝑚𝑠𝑤 = 𝜌𝑉𝑠𝑤 ,
for its semi-diameters following the arbitrary
(1.25)
reIation 𝛼
from where stablish us the follow relation
𝑎 = 𝑏 = 𝑐/𝛼,
𝑚𝑐𝑠 𝑉𝑐𝑠 (1.32)
= ,
𝑚𝑠𝑤 𝑉𝑠𝑤
so the volume take the form,
(1.26)
3
And from (4.5) 𝑉𝑠𝑤 = 4𝛼𝜋𝑟𝑠𝑤 /3,
(1.33)
2
𝑁𝑃𝑙 𝑁𝑓𝑤 𝑀𝑓𝑤 𝑅𝐷2 𝜙̇ 𝜋 2
𝑚𝑠𝑤 = (𝑚𝑐𝑠 − ), Late from (7.7) finally obtain the radii with we
2 ∙ 2ℎ𝑔900 make our ship ,
(1.27)

so
2
3𝑉𝑐𝑠
3 𝑁𝑃𝑙 𝑁𝑓𝑤 𝑀𝑓𝑤 𝑅𝐷2 𝜙̇ 𝜋 2
𝑉𝑐𝑠 𝑟𝑠𝑤 =√ (𝑚𝑐𝑠 − ),
𝑚𝑠𝑤 = 𝑚𝑐𝑠 ( ), 4𝛼𝜋𝑚𝑐𝑠 2 ∙ 2ℎ900 ∙ 𝑔
𝑉𝑠𝑤
(1.28) (1.34)

equally Following , now we stablish that

𝑚𝑠𝑤 2
𝐹𝑅 = 𝜌𝐶𝑓 𝑣𝑠𝑤 𝑆𝑠𝑤 /2,
𝑉𝑠𝑤 = 𝑉𝑐𝑠 ( ),
𝑚𝑐𝑠 (1.35)
(1.29)
so

6An ellipsoid is a quadric surface, that is a surface that may be defined as the reduced to a single point (this explains the name, meaning "ellipse like"). It is
zero set of a polynomial of degree two in three variables. Among quadric bounded, which means that it may be enclosed in a sufficiently large sphere.
surfaces, an ellipsoid is characterized by either of the two following
properties. Every planar cross section is either an ellipse, or is empty, or is

16
 3
𝜌𝐶𝑓 𝑣𝑠𝑤 𝑆𝑠𝑤 3.2. The Resistance Force Calculation
𝑃𝑐𝑠 = ,
2
(1.36) Now we we proceed to stablish the resistance force
that come given by
where

2 𝑅𝑇 = (𝑅𝑤 + 𝑅𝑓 + 𝑅𝑎 + 𝑅𝑟 ),
𝑆𝑠𝑤 = 𝜋 ∙ 𝑟𝑠𝑤 ,
(1.40)
(1.37)
Where 𝑅𝑤 respond to the wave resistance, 𝑅𝑓 to
so
the hydrodynamic friction, 𝑅𝑎 respond to the air
resistance and and 𝑅𝑟 , is the residual resistance. 𝑅𝑟
3 2𝑃𝑐𝑠 is considerate zero for all subsequent effects, but
𝑣𝑠𝑤 = √ 2
,
𝜌𝐶𝑓 𝜋 ∙ 𝑟𝑠𝑤 for largest accuracy may to consult the Harvald’s
regression formula [29] for residual resistance. So
(1.38)

so
𝜌𝑤 𝑣 2
𝑅𝑇 = [𝑅𝑤 + (𝐶𝑓 𝑆𝑚𝑓 + 2𝐶𝑓′ 𝑆𝑤𝑓 )
1.328 2
𝐶𝑓 = ( ), 𝜌𝑎 𝑣 2
√𝑅𝑒 𝑙 + (𝐶𝑎 𝑆𝑚𝑓 + 2𝐶𝑎′ 𝑆𝑤𝑓 + 𝐶𝑎′′ 𝑆𝑤𝑖 ) ],
2
(1.39)

(1.41)

17
3.3. The Coordinate System

In the multi-hull ship motion analysis, three right-

handed coordinate systems (Figure 3.1) are
employed. The space-fixed coordinate system.
OXYZ. has the OXY plane coinciding wit h the
undisturbed water surface and the Z-axis pointing
vertically upward. The steady moving coordinate
system, 𝑜̅ 𝑥̅𝑦̅, moves at a steady fonvard speed, U,
with respect to the OXYZ system in the OX direction,
and the 𝑜̅ 𝑥̅ -axis is in the same direction as the OX -
axis; the 𝑜̅ 𝑥̅𝑦̅-plane coincides with the calm mrater
surface and the or-axis is positive upward. In the Fig. 17. for all calculation effects we have
shipfixed coordinate system, osxs yszs, the origin, considerated the float like a proalate spheroid.
O,, is at the midship section intersecting with the
longitudinal plane of symmetry on the calm water
surface; the osx, y, plane coincides with the
undisturbed water surface when the ship is at rest;
and the positive x.-axis points toward the bow and
the y,-auis to the port side. Figure 3.1: The
coordinate systems of a catamaran moving in waves
Ship motions are represented by C = {CI, &, c3, cd, b,
&} in the &@Z system, where {ci, b, c3} are the
displacements of the center of gravity CG, and {c4,
&, 6) are the Eulerian angles of the ship.

Figure 16. The coordinate systems of a catamaran

moving in waves

18
7.6.1. The Wave Resistance
𝜙𝑖𝜎 = − ∬ 𝜎𝑖 ∙ 𝐺(𝑥, 𝑦, , 𝑧; 𝜉𝑖 , 𝜂𝑖 , 𝜁𝑖 )𝑑𝜉𝑖 𝑑𝜁𝑖 ,
The wave resistance for multi-hull ships can be (1.46)
expressed as an extension of the traditional wave
resistance of Michell Integral for thin symmetric ship 𝜕
hull forms by including, in addition to the 𝜙𝑖𝜇 = − ∬ 𝜇𝑖 ∙ 𝐺(𝑥, 𝑦, , 𝑧; 𝜉𝑖 , 𝜂𝑖 , 𝜁𝑖 )𝑑𝜉𝑖 𝑑𝜁𝑖 ,
𝜕𝑛𝑖
centerplane sources oi, a camber surface dipole (1.47)
distribution, pi, where the strength of which is
related to the asymmetry of the hull The source strength is

𝑛 𝑛−1 𝑛
𝑈 𝜕(𝑓𝑖+ − 𝑓𝑖− )/2
𝑅𝑤𝑇 = ∑ 𝑅𝑤𝑖 + ∑ ∑ 𝑅𝑤𝑖⇋𝑗 , 𝜎𝑖 (𝑥, 𝑧) = − ∙ ,
2𝜋 𝜕𝑥
𝑗 𝑖=1 𝑗=𝑖+1 (1.48)
(1.42)
where 𝑓𝑖+ is the port side of the it h hull function and
Lagally's theorem (Lagally 1922) yields for the
f; is the starboard side of the ith hull function. The
horizontal component of the force on the spheroid
dipole strength can be determined by the hyper-
the expression
singular Fredholm integral equation of the first
𝜕 kind as given below:
𝑅𝑤 = −4𝜋𝜌 ∫ 𝜎 𝑑𝑆,
𝑆 𝜕𝑥
(1.43)
1 𝜕 𝜕(1/𝑟) 𝜕(𝑓𝑖+ + 𝑓𝑖− )/2
∬ 𝜇𝑖 𝑑, 𝑑 = 𝑈 ∙ ,
Where 4𝜋 𝜕𝑦 𝑆 𝜕 𝜕𝑥

𝜕 𝜕
 (𝑃) = ∮ { − } 𝐺(𝑄; 𝑃)𝑑𝑠(𝑄),
𝑆 𝜕𝑛 𝜕𝑥 (1.49)
(1.44)

Where where (x, y, z) is the field point and (ξ,η,ζ) is the

source point. The Green function, G(x, y, z; ξ,η,ζ) ,
𝐺(𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧; , , ) expressed in tems of the Havelock moving source
1 𝑟 (Wehausen and Laitone, 1960),
= 𝑙𝑜𝑔
2𝜋 𝑟1
∞
1
− 𝑙𝑖𝑚 ∫ 𝑒 −𝑘(𝑦−) 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑘(𝑥 − )𝑑𝑘,
𝜋 0
𝐺(𝑥, 𝑦, , 𝑧; 𝜉𝑖 , 𝜂𝑖 , 𝜁𝑖 )
(1.45) =− +
1 1
𝑟 𝑟1
4𝑘0 𝜋/2 ∞
𝑐𝑜𝑠[𝑘(𝑥 − 𝜉)]𝑐𝑜𝑠[𝑘(𝑦 − 𝜂)𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃]
and +
𝜋 0
∫ 𝑠𝑒𝑐 2 𝜃𝑑𝜃 ∮ 𝑑𝑘𝑒 𝑘(𝑧−𝜁)
0 𝑘 − 𝑘02 𝑠𝑒𝑐 2 𝜃
𝜋/2
2 2 𝜃(𝑧−𝜁)
+ 4𝑘0 ∫ 𝑠𝑒𝑐 2 𝜃𝑑𝜃𝑒 𝑘0 𝑠𝑒𝑐 𝑠𝑖𝑛[𝑘0 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝜃(𝑥 − 𝜉)]𝑐𝑜𝑠[𝑘0 𝑠𝑒𝑐 2 𝜃(𝑦
0
− 𝜂)𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃],

19
 (1.50)
(1.54)

and
where

1 1
= ,
𝑟 √(𝑥 − )2 + (𝑦 − )2 + (𝑧 − )2 𝑃𝑖𝜇 𝑠𝑖𝑛
} = 𝑘0 𝑠𝑒𝑐 2 𝜃𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃 ∬ 𝜇𝑖 {𝑘0 [(𝜉𝑖
𝑄𝑖𝜇 𝑆𝑖 𝑐𝑜𝑠
1 1
= , − 𝑙𝑥𝑖 )𝑐𝑜𝑠𝜃
𝑟1 √(𝑥 − )2 + (𝑦 − )2 + (𝑧 + )2 2
+ 𝑙𝑦𝑖 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃] 𝑠𝑒𝑐 2 𝜃 }𝑒 𝑘0 𝜁𝑖 𝑠𝑒𝑐 𝜃 𝑑𝜉𝑖 𝑑𝜁𝑖 ,
(1.51)

(1.55)

and

𝜋/2
𝑅𝑤𝑇 = −16𝜋𝜌𝑘02 ∫ [(𝑃12 + 𝑄12 )] 𝑠𝑒𝑐 3 𝜃 𝑑𝜃,
0

(1.52)

where

𝐾 𝐾

𝑃 = ∑(𝑃𝑖𝜎 − 𝑃𝑖𝜇 ) , 𝑄 = ∑(𝑄𝑖𝜎 − 𝑄𝑖𝜇 ),

𝑖=1 𝑖=1

(1.53)

and so time

𝑃𝑖𝜎 𝑐𝑜𝑠
} = ∬ 𝜎𝑖 {𝑘 [(𝜉 − 𝑙𝑥𝑖 )𝑐𝑜𝑠𝜃
𝑄𝑖𝜎 𝑆
𝑠𝑖𝑛 0 𝑖
𝑖
2
+ 𝑙𝑦𝑖 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃] 𝑠𝑒𝑐 2 𝜃 }𝑒 𝑘0 𝜁𝑖 𝑠𝑒𝑐 𝜃 𝑑𝜉𝑖 𝑑𝜁𝑖 ,

20
7.6.1.1 SWATH with Single Strut (1.57)
Distribution. The summation is carried out over al1 the hull
elements. Wave resistance R, contains components
produced by the wave-making of each individual
hull element (squared terms) ∑ 𝑃𝑖 and ∑ 𝑄𝑖 and
components produced by the wavemaking
interactions of different hull elements (cross-
product terms) 2 C PiPj and 2 QiQ,. The squared
terms are positive, but the cross-product tems can
be either positive or negative, depending on the hull
arrangement. It is the negative crossproduct terms
that are responsible for the potential of a reduction
in total wave resistance because of the favorable
wave-making interactions for groups of ship hulls.

Writing Ro for the resistance of either torpedo

(ellipsoid) if existing alone, and using these
expressions in (16), we get at once the known result

Fig. 18. Swath with Single strut. 𝜋/2

𝑅𝑤𝑇 = −16𝜋𝜌𝑘02 ∫ [(𝑃12 + 𝑄12 )
0
Although explicitly given, it should be mentioned + (𝑃22 + 𝑄22 )] 𝑠𝑒𝑐 3 𝜃 𝑑𝜃,
that the contribution of the odd terms (4.21) to the
wave resistance force is virtually zero.
(1.58)

Thus, for each demihul an "exact" solution, within

𝜋/2 the theory of infinitesimal waves, may be obtained.
𝑅𝑤𝑇 = −16𝜋𝜌𝑘02 ∫ [(𝑃12 + 𝑄12 ) + (𝑃22 + 𝑄22 ) The solution is sought in the form of a distribution
0
+ 2𝑃1 𝑃2 + 2𝑄1 𝑄2 ] 𝑠𝑒𝑐 3 𝜃 𝑑𝜃, of sources on the surface of the spheroid, of
unknown density; the analysis yields an infinite set
of equations for determining the coefficients of the
(1.56) expansion of the density function in spherical
harmonics (and therefore for determining the
where
coefficients of the expansion of the potential in
𝐾 𝐾 spheroidal harmonics).
𝑃 = ∑(𝑃𝑖𝜎 − 𝑃𝑖𝜇 ) , 𝑄 = ∑(𝑄𝑖𝜎 − 𝑄𝑖𝜇 ),
𝑖=1 𝑖=1

21
𝑅𝑤 and
∞ 𝑛 ∞ 𝑛′
1 𝑚 𝑚𝑚′ ′
= −2𝜋𝜌𝑔𝑐 3 (∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ (−1) 𝐴𝑚
𝑛 𝐴𝑛′ 𝕁𝑛𝑛′ )
1
 𝛤𝑛𝑚
−
= { 𝑄1 (𝑐𝑜𝑠ℎ0 ),
̇
𝑛=0 𝑛=0 𝑛′ =0 𝑚′ =0
𝜋/2
0
− 32𝜋𝜌𝑘02 ∫ (𝑃1 𝑃2 + 𝑄1 𝑄2 ) 𝑠𝑒𝑐 3 𝜃 𝑑𝜃,
0 (1.64)
(1.59)
And
so

𝑃𝑛̇ 𝑚 (𝑐𝑜𝑠ℎ0 ) 1 1
𝑚𝑚′
𝐵𝑛𝑛′ = 𝑚 { } (2𝑧 + 1)(−1)𝑛′ ∙ 𝕁𝑚𝑚′ ,
1
∞ 𝑛 ∞ 𝑛′
′ ′
𝑄𝑛 (𝑐𝑜𝑠ℎ0 )
̇ 1/𝑧 𝑧 𝑛𝑛′
𝑚 𝑚𝑚
𝑅𝑤 = −2𝜋𝜌𝑔𝑐 3 (∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ (−1) 𝐴𝑚
𝑛 𝐴𝑛′ 𝕁𝑛𝑛′ ) − 𝐼2 ,

𝑛=0 𝑛=0 𝑛′ =0 𝑚′ =0 (1.65)
(1.60)
Where the term 𝕁𝑚𝑚′
𝑛𝑛′ came given by

The wave resistance 𝑅𝑤 produced by floats with

geometry of prolate spheroid [25][26] and came
given by 𝕁𝑚𝑚′
𝑛𝑛′
𝑛+𝑚+𝑛′+𝑚′ 𝜋/2
2𝑡 ′
𝑚
= (−1) 2 8𝜋 ∫ sec2 𝑡 𝑒−2𝑘0 𝑑𝑠𝑒𝑐 𝑇𝑚
𝑛 (𝑡)𝑇𝑛′ (𝑡)𝑑𝑡
0
∞ 𝑛 ∞ 𝑛′
3
1 𝑚′
𝑅𝑤 = 𝜋𝜌𝑔𝑐 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ (−1) 𝐴𝑚 𝑚𝑚′
𝑛 𝐴 𝕁𝑛𝑛′ , 𝑛′ (1.66)

𝑛=0 𝑛=0 𝑛′ =0 𝑚′ =0

(n+m+n’+m’) even
(1.61)

making 𝑐 = 𝑣

𝜋𝜌𝑔𝑣2
𝑅𝑤 =

∞ 𝑛 ∞ 𝑛′
𝑚′ 𝑚𝑚′
∑ ∑ ∑ ∑(−1) 𝐴𝑚
𝑛 𝐴𝑛′ 𝕁𝑛𝑛′ ,
𝑛=0 𝑛=0 𝑛′ =0 𝑚′ =0

(n+m+n’+m’) even
(1.62)

where
∞ 𝑛′

𝐴𝑚
𝑛 = Γnm 𝑚𝑚′ 𝑚′
+ ∑ ∑ 𝐵𝑛𝑛′ 𝐴𝑛′ ,
𝑛′=0 𝑚′=0

(1.63)

22
SWATH with n-Submerged Hulls 𝑅𝑤𝑇
∞ 𝑛 ∞ 𝑛′
1 𝑚 𝑚′ 𝑚𝑚′
= −𝑛𝜋𝜌𝑔𝑐3 ( ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ (−1) 𝐴𝑛 𝐴𝑛′ 𝕁𝑛𝑛′ )

𝑛=0 𝑛=0 𝑛′=0 𝑚′=0
𝜋/2
2
− 32𝜋𝜌𝑘0 ∫ (2𝑃1 𝑃2 + 2𝑃1 𝑃3 + 2𝑃1 𝑃4 + 2𝑃1 𝑃5
0
+ 2𝑃1 𝑃6 + 2𝑃2 𝑃3 + 2𝑃2 𝑃4 + 2𝑃2 𝑃5 + 2𝑃2 𝑃6
+ 2𝑃3 𝑃4 + 2𝑃3 𝑃5 + 2𝑃3 𝑃6 + 2𝑃4 𝑃5 + 2𝑃4 𝑃6
+ 2𝑃5 𝑃6 + 2𝑄1 𝑄2 + 2𝑄1𝑄3 + 2𝑄1 𝑄4 + 2𝑄1 𝑄5
+ 2𝑄1 𝑄6 + 2𝑄2 𝑄3 + 2𝑄2𝑄4 + 2𝑄2𝑄5 + 2𝑄2 𝑄6
+ 2𝑄3 𝑄4 + 2𝑄3 𝑄5 + 2𝑄3𝑄6 + 2𝑄4𝑄5 + 2𝑄4 𝑄6
+ 2𝑄5 𝑄6) 𝑠𝑒𝑐3𝜃 𝑑𝜃,
(1.83)

so

∞ 𝑛 ∞ 𝑛′
1 𝑚 𝑚𝑚 ′ ′
𝑅𝑤𝑇 = −𝑛𝜋𝜌𝑔𝑐 3 (∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ (−1) 𝐴𝑚
𝑛 𝐴𝑛′ 𝕁𝑛𝑛′ )

𝑛=0 𝑛=0 𝑛′=0 𝑚′ =0
Fig. 24. Swath- SLICE with n-Submerged Hulls 𝜋/2
𝑛×𝑛
2
− 32𝜋𝜌𝑘0 ∫ ( ∑ 𝑃𝑖𝜎 𝑃𝑖𝜇
0 𝑖=𝑛+1
𝑛×𝑛

+ ∑ (−1)𝑖 𝑄𝑖𝜎 𝑄𝑖𝜇 ) 𝑠𝑒𝑐 3 𝜃 𝑑𝜃,

𝜋/2
𝑖=𝑛+1
𝑅𝑤𝑇 = −16𝜋𝜌𝑘02 ∫ [(𝑃12 + 𝑄12 ) + (𝑃22 + 𝑄22 )
0 (1.84)
+ (𝑃32 + 𝑄32 ) + ⋯ + (𝑃𝑛2 + 𝑄𝑛2 )
+ 2𝑃1 𝑃2 + 2𝑃1 𝑃3 + ⋯ + 2𝑃1 𝑃𝑛 so
+ 2𝑃2 𝑃3 + 2𝑃2 𝑃4 + ⋯ + 2𝑃2 𝑃𝑛
+ 2𝑃3 𝑃4 + ⋯ + 2𝑃3 𝑃𝑛 + ⋯
+ 2𝑃𝑛−1 𝑃𝑛 + ⋯ + 2𝑃1 𝑃2 + 2𝑃1 𝑃3
∞ 𝑛 ∞ 𝑛′
+ ⋯ + 2𝑃1 𝑃𝑛 + 2𝑃2 𝑃3 + 2𝑃2 𝑃4 + ⋯ 1 ′ ′

+ 2𝑃2 𝑃𝑛 + 2𝑃3 𝑃4 + ⋯ + 2𝑃3 𝑃𝑛 + ⋯ 𝑅𝑤𝑇 = −𝑛𝜋𝜌𝑔𝑐3 (∑ ∑ ∑ ∑(−1) 𝐴𝑚𝑛 𝐴𝑚𝑛′ 𝕁𝑚𝑚

𝑛𝑛′
)

+ 2𝑃𝑛−1 𝑃𝑛 ] 𝑠𝑒𝑐 3 𝜃 𝑑𝜃, 𝑛=0 𝑛=0 𝑛′ =0 𝑚′ =0

(1.82) − 𝐼𝑛 ,

(1.85)

so

23
7.6.2. The Total Resistance
Now we we proceed to stablish the resistance force
that come given by
𝑅𝑇 = (𝑅𝑤 + 𝑅𝑓 + 𝑅𝑎 + 𝑅𝑟 ),
(1.86)
Where 𝑅𝑤 respond to the wave resistance, 𝑅𝑓 to
the hydrodynamic friction, 𝑅𝑎 respond to the air
resistance and and 𝑅𝑟 , is the residual resistance. 𝑅𝑟
is considerate zero for all subsequent effects, but
for largest accuracy may to consult the Harvald’s
regression formula [29] for residual resistance. So
7.6.2. The Aerodynamic Resistance
The Air resistance caused by the movement of the ship
through the air, shall be included in the resistance
calculation procedure. See Appendix A for analysis of this
factor. Based on this analysis the following air resistance
coefficient; CAA values, are recommended. Tankers and
Bulk Carriers CAA⋅1000 Small tankers 0.07 Handysize
tankers 0.07 Handymax tankers 0.07 Panamax tankers
0.05 Aframax tankers 0.05 Suezmax tankers 0.05 VLCC
0.04 Container Vessels CAA ⋅1000 = 0.28 ⋅TEU-0.126 but
newer less than 0.09

𝜌𝑤 𝑣 2 𝜌𝐶𝐷 𝑣 2 𝑆𝑎
𝑅𝑇 = [𝑅𝑤 + (𝐶𝑓 𝑆𝑚𝑓 + 2𝐶𝑓′ 𝑆𝑤𝑓 ) 𝑅𝑎 = ,
2 2
𝜌𝑎 𝑣 2 (1.88)
+ (𝐶𝑎 𝑆𝑚𝑓 + 2𝐶𝑎′ 𝑆𝑤𝑓 + 𝐶𝑎′′ 𝑆𝑤𝑖 ) ],
2

(1.87)

24
1.6. The Coupling Equations that the ship have one excellent aerodynamic
(see fig ) so we should have that
7.6. The Maximum Speed to AFC Ships
𝑅𝑤 + 𝑅𝑓 = 0,
The resistance equation is non-linear, but to (1.96)
calculate the maximum speed we can make
And finally our formula to speed of AFC ship ,
some concesions and so achieve a suitable result
that now in forward we call Euler-Michell-López
to AFC ship, then making
formula or EML formula to AFC Ship ( Fig.) is
𝑅𝑇 = (𝑅𝑤 + 𝑅𝑓 + 𝑅𝑎 + 𝑅𝑟 ) = 0,
(1.95)
𝑣𝑠𝑤
2
First making negligible the residual resistance, 𝜌𝜋𝐶𝑓 3 3𝑉𝑐𝑠 𝑚𝑐𝑠 − 𝑁𝑃𝑙 𝑁𝑓𝑤 𝑀𝑓𝑤 𝑅𝐷2 𝜙̇ 2 𝜋 2
=− √ [ ( )] ,
supposing that the ship have technological 2𝑅𝑤 4𝛼𝜋𝑚𝑐𝑠 2 ∙ 2ℎ900 ∙ 𝑔
refinement such as water jets propulsion , air (1.98)
lubrication system and excellent surface
roughness (see Fig. 25. )

Fig. 25. showing the geometry model for the

calculation.

Fig. 26. Graphic7 showing the speed function to AFCS

.

then we have that

where is possible deduce a minimum angular
𝑅𝑤 + 𝑅𝑓 + 𝑅𝑎 = 0, speed for the flywheel where 𝑣𝑠𝑤 = 0 so
(1.96) rewriting the new equation (1.98) to speed we
have
Late, we know in actuality that the aerodynamic
resistance is not more largest than the 4% of
the total ship resistance , and if we supposing

7
Although may see a curves family in the APPENDIX 8

25
 2
𝜌𝜋𝐶𝑓 3 3𝑉𝑐𝑠 𝑁𝑃𝑙 𝑁𝑓𝑤 𝑀𝑓𝑤 𝑅𝐷2 𝜙̇ 2 𝜋 2
𝑣𝑠𝑤 =− √ [ (𝑚𝑐𝑠 − )] /𝑅𝑤 ,
2 4𝛼𝜋𝑚𝑐𝑠 2 ∙ 2ℎ900 ∙ 𝑔
(1.98)

As we can see in the graphic Fig 1.18 ,

Fig. 28. Graphic9 showing the speed function to AFCS

.

Fig. 27. Graphic8 showing the speed function to AFCS

.
So the speed to be developed by one AFC Ship
came defined by so called the EMRL Equation or
Euler-Michell-Raleigh-López Equation to speed to
afc ship and came given by

𝑣𝑎𝑓𝑐
2

3 2
𝜌𝜋𝐶𝑓 3𝑉𝑐𝑠 𝑁𝑃𝑙 𝑁𝑓𝑤 𝑀𝑓𝑤 𝑟𝑓𝑤 ∙ 𝜋2 2 30 5∙𝑔 1 30 5∙𝑔 1
=− 𝑚𝑐𝑠 − 𝜙̇ − 2 ∙ 𝜙̇√ √ ∙ + ∙√ ∙ ,
2𝑅𝑤 4𝛼𝜋𝑚𝑐𝑠 2 ∙ 2ℎ𝑔 ∙ 900 𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤 𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤
( ) }
√{ ( )

(1.27)

8 9
Although may see a curves family in the APPENDIX 8 Although may see a curves family in the APPENDIX 8

26
7.8. The Minimum Efective Power to AFC

Following , now we know that the power is

𝑃𝑠𝑤 = 𝑅𝑡 ∙ 𝑣𝑠𝑤 ,
(1.89)

The Minimum Efective Power to AFC , of above

pages, the minimum effective power (theoretical )
came when 𝑣𝑠𝑤 = 0 , it is when 𝜙̇ = 𝜙̇𝑚𝑖𝑛 , is
to say when

30 5𝑔 1
𝜙̇𝑚𝑖𝑛 = √ √ ∙ ,
𝜋 4𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤

(1.27)

therefore, the AFCS speed and came given by

𝜌𝜋𝐶𝑓 3 3𝑉𝑐𝑠 2
𝑣𝑚𝑖𝑛 =− √( ) ,
2𝑅𝑤 4𝛼𝜋

(1.27)

therefore, the power and came given by Where

establish it the condition

𝜌𝜋 0.075 3
3𝑉𝑐𝑠 2
𝑃𝑠𝑤 ≥ 𝑅𝑡 ∙ ( √
) ( ) ,
2𝑅𝑤 (𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑅𝑒 − 2)2 4𝛼𝜋
(1.98)

Where the term 𝑉𝑐𝑠 came given by

𝑉𝑐𝑠 = 𝐶𝑓 ∙ 𝑏 ∙ 𝑙 ∙ ℎ

(1.66)

27
7.9. The Maximum Load to AFC Ship

The maximum load is when is called the Second ERL Equation or Euler-
Raleigh-Lopez Equation to AFCS maximum load10
and came given by
𝜙̇ = 𝜙̇𝑚𝑎𝑥 < 𝜙̇𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 ,
(2.3)

𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑥 =

2
𝑁𝑃𝑙 𝑁𝑓𝑤 𝑀𝑓𝑤 𝑟𝑓𝑤 ∙ 𝜋 2 900 5∙𝑔 30 5∙𝑔 30 5∙𝑔 1 30 5∙𝑔 1
0.8 ∙ 𝑚𝑐𝑠 − 2
∙( )−2∙ ∙√ √ √ ∙ + √ ∙ ,
2 ∙ 2ℎ𝑔 ∙ 900 𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤 𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤
{ ( )}

(1.27)

10
It has been the practice ( in turbomachinery ) a operating
range of speed at shafts of less of 20 percent below the
first critical speed .

28
7.9. Thermodynamic Efficiency for AFC
Ship

With all above we are in condition to stablish

the Propulsive Efficiency to AFC Ship. It came
given by

𝑃𝑇𝑠𝑤 − 𝑄̇
𝜂𝑠𝑤 = ,
𝑃𝑇𝑠𝑤
(2.11)

where 𝑃𝑇 is the total power consumption and

is addition of effective propulsive power 𝑃𝑠𝑤
calculate before in (7.5) more the antigravitional Fig. 29. Graphic11 showing the speed function to
damping power 𝑃𝐷 , late AFCS .

𝑃𝑇 = 𝑃𝑀𝐸 + 𝑃𝐴𝐷 ,
(2.12) Gyrodyne Power Consumption
Minime Efective Power Consumption

the minime efctive power 𝑃𝐷 , is the motive
power consumed by a carriership and stay only
expressed by its total resistance (1.98) and
speed
the antigravitional damping power 𝑃𝐴𝐷 , is the
motive power consumed by gyrodyne units and
stay expressed by follow matrix
𝑛 𝑚

𝑃𝑀𝐸 = 𝑅𝑇 ∙ 𝑣 𝑃𝑓𝑤 = ∑ ∑ 𝜏𝑖𝑗 ∙ 𝜙̇𝑖𝑗 ,

(2.12) 𝑖 𝑗
(2.13)
where
then
𝑅𝑇 = 𝑅𝑤 + 𝑅𝑓 ,
(1.96)
𝑃𝑓𝑤 = 𝑁𝑝𝑙 ∙ 𝑁𝑓𝑤 ∙ 𝜏 ∙ 𝜙̇,
(2.14)

11
Although may see a curves family in the APPENDIX C

29
where 𝑁𝑝𝑙 is the number of gyrodyne cells , 𝑁𝐷 is Finally we arrive to
the number of inertial flywheel inner of gyrodyne
units, 𝜏 is torque , 𝜙̇ is the angular speed of inertial making 𝜙̈ = 0 we have that gyrodyne power is
flywheel . Now, knowing that
𝜙̇ 3 𝑀𝑟𝑓𝑤
2

𝑑 𝑃𝑓𝑤 = 𝑁𝑝𝑙 ∙ 𝑁𝑓𝑤 ∙ ,

2
𝜏 ∙ 𝜙̇ = 𝐸 ,
𝑑𝑡 𝐾 (2.24)
(2.15)
This is the e total expression extended Third ERL
where 𝐸𝐾 is the kinetic energy of flywheel given Equation or Euler-Raleigh-Lopez Equation to AFCS
by
gyrodyne power12 and may to see in the
APPENDIX
1
𝐸𝐾 = 𝜙̇ ∙ 𝐿,
2
(2.16)

late

1𝑑
𝜏 ∙ 𝜙̇ = (𝜙̇ ∙ 𝐿),
2 𝑑𝑡
(2.17)

but

𝐿 = 𝜙̇ ∙ 𝐼,
(2.18)

late

1𝑑
𝜏 ∙ 𝜙̇ = (𝜙̇ 2 ∙ 𝐼),
2 𝑑𝑡
(2.19) Fig. 30. Graphic13 showing the speed function to
AFCS .
Where inertial moment 𝐼 for a cylindrical
flywheel stay expressed by 𝑀𝑅 2 /2, late so , we
have the definitive expression to derive

1𝑑
𝜏 ∙ 𝜙̇ = (𝜙̇ 2 ∙ 𝑀𝑟𝑓𝑤
2
/2),
2 𝑑𝑡
(2.20)

12 13
It has been the practice ( in turbomachinery ) a operating Although may see a curves family in the APPENDIX C
range of speed at shafts of less of 20 percent below the
first critical speed .

30
 2 ∙ 𝜋 ∙ 𝜇𝑣𝐵 𝑙𝐵 𝑟𝐵 1
𝐹𝐵 = ( ) ,
𝑐 √1 − 𝜀 2
(2.26)

so

𝑛
2𝜋𝜇𝑣𝐵2 𝑖 𝑙𝐵 𝑖 𝑟𝐵 𝑖 1
𝑄̇ = 𝑁𝑝𝑙 𝑁𝑓𝑤 ∙ ∑ ( ) ,
𝑐𝑖
𝑖=0 √1 − 𝜀𝑖2
(2.27)

and knowing that 𝜇 is the viscosity to

Fig. 31. Graphic14 showing the speed function to pressure 𝑝 𝜇 = 𝜇0 𝑒 𝛼𝑝 , where and came
AFCS . expressed by

𝜇 = 𝜇0 𝑒 𝛼𝑝 ,
(2.28)

where 𝜇0 is the atmospheric viscosity and 𝛼 is

the pressure-viscosity coefficient and is given by
Frictional Power Dissipation
𝛼 = [(0.6 + 0.965 ∙ 𝑙𝑜𝑔𝜇0 )10−8 ],
Finally we must find the 𝑄̇ for which we’ll
(2.29)
suppose that all heat is produeced by the
friction force of the journal bearing in the
where 𝜇0 is the atmospheric viscosity and 𝛼 is
flywheel, so we can write that:
the pressure-viscosity coefficient and is given by

𝑛 3𝜙̇ 𝜇0𝜀𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃 𝑙𝐵 𝑖 2
𝑝=[ ( − 𝑦2 )],
𝑄̇ = 𝑁𝑝𝑙 ∙ 𝑁𝑓𝑤 ∙ ∑ 𝐹𝐵 𝑖 ∙ 𝑣𝐵 𝑖 , 𝑐2𝑖 4

𝑖=0 (2.30)
(2.25)
𝑄̇
where 𝐹𝐵 𝑖 is the friction force of i-th bearing = 𝑁𝑝𝑙 𝑁𝑓𝑤
and respond to the Petroff’s Friction given by 3𝜙̇ 𝜇0𝜀𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃 𝑙𝐵 𝑖 2 2
𝑛 𝛼[ ( −𝑦 )]
2𝜋𝜙̇𝐵2 𝑖 𝑙𝐵 𝑖 𝑟𝐵3 𝑖 𝜇0 𝑒 𝑐2𝑖 4

∙ ∑( ) ,
8𝑐𝑖
𝑖=0 √1 − 𝜀𝑖2

14
Although may see a curves family in the APPENDIX C

31
 (2.31) (2.31)

Fig. 33. Graphic16 showing the speed function to AFC

Ship .

Fig. 32. Graphic15 showing the speed function to AFC
Ship .
Now we can write our final efficiency equation
to AFC Ship that from now in forward we call
Euler-López-Petroff Equation or ELP equation to
AFC Ship . In the APPENDIX we can appreciate
one extended form of this.
Summarization
Now we have a landscape more general from
as function this antigravitational system and
already we have an equations set, where we
can to continue tunning the system engineering
to the future . As we have see , we has been
pessimistic with the calculation , since we
suppose journal bearing in the power dissipation
by friction.

𝑁𝑝𝑙 𝑁𝑓𝑤
𝜂𝑠𝑤 = 1 −
𝜙̇ 3 𝑀𝑅𝑓𝑤
2
(𝑅𝑇 ∙ 𝑣 + 𝑁𝑝𝑙 𝑁𝑓𝑤 )
{ 2

𝑛
2𝜋𝜙̇𝐵2 𝑖 𝑙𝐵 𝑖 𝑟𝐵3 𝑖 𝜇0 𝑒 𝛼𝑝
∙ ∑( ) ,
8𝑐𝑖 √1 − 𝜀𝑖2
𝑖=0
}

15 16
Although may see a curves family in the APPENDIX C Although we can see the curves family in the
APPENDIX C

32
 Personally, I must say, this was a work that
crown twenty years of effort treating to domine
themes very difficult like is the ship wave
resistance and euler mechanic , specially the first
, and that has given beauty fruits like are this
equations

Fig. 34. Graphic17 showing the power dissipation

function to AFCS .

As sayed, in the Actuality, we have a serie of

technological refinement such as magnetic
bearing, torque converters, water jets propulsion ,
air lubrication system and paint to achieve
excellent surface roughness than easily would
move the power curve in our favor (see fig 35
)
Acknowledgments
Thanks First all, I must show gratitude for with The
Geophysics Institute of UNAM and the Prof. PhD Ismael
Herrera R. in whose mathematical modeling seminars
gestate it ideas that we present in this paper and in other
more. Also Thanks to the Metro train of CDMX for their
help, in spite of they decide finally not to finance
theoretical researches to future anti-g metrotrain
project . Also to the UNAM Central Library, The
Vasconcelos library and the Mexico Library for your
patience and your grandiose labor. Although an special
thanks to Geogebra® for your excellent program
online to create math graphic. And of course to my
lucky star that always shinning over me.

Fig. 35. Graphic18 showing the total power function

to AFCS .

17 18
Although may see a curves family in the APPENDIX C Although may see a curves family in the APPENDIX C

33
 References
[10] Dennis G. Zill , Michael R. Cullen , Differential
Equations with Boundary Value Problem 5th Edition,
John Wiley & Sons .pages 547–548, 1993.
[11] Christian Constanda, Solution Techniques For
Elementary Partial Equations 2nd Edition, Chapman &
Hall/ CRC .pages 181–182, 1993.
[12] Wilferd Kaplan Ordinary Differential Equations ,
Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, USA , 1967.
[13] Stanley J. Farrlow Partial Differential Equations
for Scientists & Engineer , CRC Press, Boca Raton,
2005.
[14] Nakhlú H. Asmar Partial Differential Equations
with Fourier Series and Boundary Value Problems,
CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2005.
[15] Andrei D. Polyanin Handbook of Linear Partial
Differential Equations for engineers and Scientists
Boundary , CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2005.
[16] K. Kythe and Michael R. Schäferkotter, Handbook
of Computational Method for Integration , Chapman
& Hall/ CRC ., Boca Raton. Fl. , Pages 118-508, 2005.
[17] C. Pozrikidis, Numerical Computation in Science
and Engineering , Oxford University Press, Page 367,
NY, USA, 1989.
[18] J. Y. Wong, Theory of Ground Vehicles, 3th
Edition, John Wiley & Sons , pages 437, 1993.
[19] Clarence W.De Silva, Vibrations and Schock
Handbook , Taylor & Francis, Page 21-34, 2005 ,
Boca Raton, Fl.
[20] D. E. Newland, Mechanical Vibrations, Analysis
and Computation , Longman Scientifical & Technical,
Page 226, 1989 , England.
[21] Maurice Petit, Introduction to Finite Element
Vibration Analysis,2nd Edition , Cambridge
University Press, Page 357, 2010 , USA.
34
[22] William T. Thomson & Humberto Rincon Casteh
Theory of Vibration with applications , Pag 275, Boca
Raton, 1981, USA.
[23] John M. Vance, Rotordynamic of
Turbomachinery , Pag. 42 , John Wiley & Sons, USA,
1976.
[24] William Seto, Mechanical Vibration , McGraw-
Hill, Boca Raton, 1970.
[25] Jorge Flores Valdes & Gabriel Araya Duarte,
Dinamica de Cuerpo Rigido , Fondo de Cultura
Economica, page 159, 1989, Mexico.
[26] Andrei D. Polyanin Handbook of Exact
Solutions for Ordinary Differential Equations, 2nd
Edition, andbook of Linear Partial Differential
Equations for engineers and Scientists Boundary ,
CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2002.
[27] Sir Horace Lamb Hydrodynamicl ,6th Edition,
, Cambridge University Press, Page 337,USA, 1945.
[28] Gwidon W. Stachowiak and Andrew W.
Batchelor Engineering Tribology ,4th Edition,
Butterworth-Heinemann Press, Page 337, Oxford, UK,
2014.
[29] T. H. Havelock, The theory of wave resistance,
Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A, 132 (1932).
[30] Havelock, T.H. 1909 The wave-making resistance of
ships: a theoretical and practical analysis. In Proc. Royal
Soc. Of London., Ser.A. 82 (A 544), 276-303.
[31]J. H. Michell The wave resistance of a ship,
Philosophical Magazine, London, England, 45 (1898),
106–123.
[32] W. C. S. Wigley, “Ship wave resistance: A
comparison of mathematical theory with experimental
results,” Trans. IN A, vol. 68, p. 124, 1926.
[33] Tuck, E.O. 1976 An approximation to Michell’s
integral. Int.Seminar on Theor. Wave Resistance, Tokyo,
239-244.
[34] E. O. Tuck and M. Lazauskas, “Drag on a ship and
michell’s integral,” in 22nd Int. Congress of Theoretical
and Applied Mechanics, Adelaide, South Australia, 2008.

[35] C. Wigley. The collected papers of Sir Thomas

Havelock on Hydrodynamics. Office of Naval Research
Department of the NavyONR/ACR-103, Pag 408, 1963.
available at:
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/623589.pdf

[36] FareII Cesar, “Potential Flow about a Prolate

Spheroid in axial horizontal motion beneath a free
surface,” Iowa University in 1968 available at:
file:///D:/Users/Equipo153.piso1/Music/AD0690444.pdf

[37] Hongxuan Peng, “Numerical Computation of

multi-Hull Ship Resistance and Motion”, Dalhousie
University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, 2001, available at:
https://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/obj/s4/f2/dsk3/ft
p05/NQ63482.pdf

[38] J. López L. , Theoric Science , “Antigravitational

Electromagnetic Levitation Train ConceptuaL Design” ,
2016, available at:
http://theoricscience.blogspot.com/2016/12/modal-
method-to-measure.html

[39] Ioannis K. Chatjigeorgiou and Touvia Miloh,

“Free-Surface Hydrodynamics of a submerged Prolate
Spheroid in Finite Water Depth base on the Method
of Multipole Expansions,” School of Naval Architecture
and Marine Engineering, National Technical University of
Athens, Greece and Faculty of Engineering, Tel-Aviv
University, Tel-Aviv, Israel,2014,
file:///D:/Users/Equipo153.piso1/Music/AD0690444.pdf

35
 universities but after I has derivated to the physics studies
, my passion, coursing so, studies in various universities of
Latin-American : In the U.C. of Valparaíso , In the
U.S.A.CH. of Santiago, Chile, the Sao Paulo University, in
Brazil, ,at the Antioquía University of Medellin, Colombia .
Actually in the Unam I am performing researches
(theoretical) in superluminal propulsion with space
application .

Actually Mr. López is adjoin theoretical researcher in the

UNAM University at Mexico City CDMx . Further is general
director of Theoric Science one enterprise dedicated to
theoretical research . I beginning as engineer in diverse

36
 APPENDIX A
The Total Resistance to The AFCS

where

𝑅𝑇 = (𝑅𝑤 + 𝑅𝑓 + 𝑅𝑎 + 𝑅𝑟 ),
(7.2)

The Friction Resistance

𝑅𝑓
2 2

30 5∙𝑔 1 30 5∙𝑔 1
3 𝑁𝑃𝑙 𝑁𝑓𝑤 𝑀𝑓𝑤 𝑅𝐷2 (𝜙̇ 2 − 2 ∙ 𝜙̇√ 𝜋 √4 ∙ 𝑦 ∙ + 𝜋 ∙ √4 ∙ 𝑦 ∙ ) 𝜋2
𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤 𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤
𝜌𝑣 2 𝜋𝐶𝑓 3𝑉𝑐𝑠
= 𝑚𝑐𝑠 − ,
2 4𝛼𝜋𝑚𝑐𝑠 2 ∙ 2ℎ900 ∙ 𝑔

√{ ( )}

(7.11)

The wave resistance

∞ 𝑛 ∞ 𝑛′
3
1 𝑚 𝑚𝑚′ ′
𝑅𝑤 = 𝜋𝜌𝑔𝑐 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ (−1) 𝐴𝑚
𝑛 𝐴𝑛′ 𝕁𝑛𝑛′ ,

𝑛=0 𝑛=0 𝑛′ =0 𝑚′ =0

(n+m+n’+m’) even
(7.11)

The Aerodynamic Resistance

2
30 5∙𝑔 1 30 5∙𝑔 1
(𝑚𝑐𝑠 − 4 ∙ 𝑚𝑠𝑤 ℎ𝑔 ∙ 900) + (𝑚 − 1)𝑁𝑓𝑤 𝑀𝑓𝑤 𝑟2𝑓𝑤 𝜋 2 (𝜙̇ 2 − 2 ∙ 𝜙̇√ √ ∙ + ∙√ ∙ )
𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤 𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤
𝜌𝐶𝐷 𝑣 2 2√2 𝑟𝐻 ℎ
𝑅𝑎 = ( ) 2 ,
2 3
30 5∙𝑔 1 30 5∙𝑔 1
𝑁𝑓𝑤 𝑀𝑓𝑤 𝑟2𝑓𝑤 𝜋 2 (2𝑚 − 1) (𝜙̇ 2 − 2 ∙ 𝜙̇√ √ ∙ + ∙√ ∙ )
𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤 𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤
[ ]

37
 (7.11)

𝜌 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚 𝑔 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚

𝜆 = 𝑟𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑏𝑒𝑡𝑤𝑒𝑒𝑛 𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑓𝑡 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑖 𝜇0 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚

𝑁𝑓𝑤 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑓𝑙𝑦𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑙𝑠 𝜃 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚

𝑉𝑐𝑠 = 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟 𝑠ℎ𝑖𝑝 𝑉𝐿𝐶𝑆 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝐿 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚

𝑁𝑝𝑙 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚 𝑙𝐵 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚

𝐶𝑓 = 𝐹𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐻𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑎𝑚𝑖𝑐 𝐶𝑜𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝜀 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚

𝜙 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚

𝑉𝑐𝑠 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚
𝑐 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚
𝑚𝑐𝑠 = 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑟 𝑠ℎ𝑖𝑝 𝑉𝐿𝐶𝑆 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠
𝑃𝑐𝑠 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚
𝑚𝑖 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚
ℎ = 𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑙𝑦𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑙 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑓𝑡
𝑚𝑓 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚
 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚
𝑁𝐷 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒
𝑀 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚
𝜙̇ = 𝐴𝑛𝑔𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑟 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑓𝑙𝑦𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑙𝑠
𝑟𝐵 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚
𝜓̇ = 𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑓𝑙𝑦𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑙𝑠

38
 APPENDIX B
Speed Equation to AFC Ships
or EML Equations (Euler-Michell-López Equation

2 ∞ 𝑛 ∞ 𝑛′
𝜌𝜋 0.075 3 9𝑉2 𝑁𝑃𝑙 𝑁𝑓𝑤 𝑀𝑓𝑤 𝑅𝐷2 𝜙̇ 2 𝜋 2 1
√ 𝑐𝑠 𝑚 𝑚′ 𝑚𝑚′
𝑣𝑠𝑤 = {− [ ] [𝑚 − ] } / {𝜋𝜌𝑔 ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ ( −1) 𝐴𝑛 𝐴𝑛′ 𝕁𝑛𝑛′ },
2 (𝑙𝑜𝑔𝑅𝑒 − 2)2 𝑚2𝑐𝑠
𝑐𝑠
2 ∙ 2ℎ900 ∙ 𝛼𝜋𝑔 
𝑛=0 𝑛=0 𝑛′=0 𝑚′=0
(1.98)

(n+m+n’+m’) even
(7.11)

Fig. 1. Exact and approximate values for the Fourier integral F(u) = /"w dt exp (— | t \ + tat)

39
Fig. 1. Exact and approximate values for the Fourier integral F(u) = /"w dt exp (— | t \ + tat)

3 𝐵𝑚
𝑠𝑤 − 𝐶𝜙
̇2
𝑣𝑠𝑤 = 𝐴 √
𝐷𝑚𝑠𝑤

(8.14)

40
 APPENDIX C
Final Gyrodyne Power EL Equations (Euler-Raleigh-López Equation) to AFC Ships

3
2
𝑁𝑝𝑙 ∙ 𝑁𝑓𝑤 ∙ 𝑀 ∙ 𝑟𝑓𝑤 30 5∙𝑔 1 30 5∙𝑔 1 30 5∙𝑔 1
𝑃𝑓𝑤 =∙ 𝜙̇ 3 − 3 ∙ 𝜙̇ 2 √ √ ∙ +3∙𝜙∙( ∙√ ∙ ) + √( √ ∙ ) ,
2 ∙ 2ℎ𝑔 ∙ 900 𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤 𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤 𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤
( )

(2.24)

41
 APPENDIX D
Final ELP Equations (Euler-López-Petroff Equation) to AFC Ships

2
3𝜙̇𝜇0𝜀𝑠𝑖𝑛𝜃 𝑙𝐵 𝑖
𝑛 {[(0.6+0.965∙𝑙𝑜𝑔𝜇0 )10−8 ][ 2 ( 4 −𝑦 2 )]}
𝑁𝑝𝑙 𝑁𝑓𝑤 2𝜋𝐷𝐵3 𝑖 𝑙𝐵 𝑖 𝑟𝐵 𝑖 𝜇0 𝑒 𝑐𝑖
𝜂𝑠𝑤 = 1 − ∙ ∑( )
𝜙̇ 3 𝑀𝑅𝑓𝑤
2 8𝑐𝑖
(𝑅𝑇 ∙ 𝑣 + 𝑁𝑝𝑙 𝑁𝑓𝑤 ) 𝑖=0 √1 − 𝜀𝑖2
{ ( 2 )}

(1.41)
where
𝑅𝑇 = (𝑅𝑤 + 𝑅𝑓 + 𝑅𝑎 + 𝑅𝑟 ),

(7.2)

Fig. 1.11. Gyrodyne Cell Matrix with Honeycomb-type Design to Surface Calculation

42
 ̇
𝐴𝑣 4 + 𝐵𝑣 3 + 𝐶𝜙̇ 3 − 𝐷𝜙̇ 2 𝑒 2𝜙 − 𝐸
𝜂𝑠𝑤 =
𝐴𝑣 4 + 𝐵𝑣 3 + 𝐶𝜙̇ 3

Fig. 1.11. Gyrodyne Cell Matrix with Honeycomb-type Design to Surface Calculation

Fig. 1.11. Gyrodyne Cell Matrix with Honeycomb-type Design to Surface Calculation

𝜌 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚 𝑁𝑓𝑤 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑓𝑙𝑦𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑙𝑠

43
𝑉𝑐𝑠 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚 𝐿 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚

𝑁𝑝𝑙 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚 𝑙𝐵 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚

𝐶𝑓 = 𝐹𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐻𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑎𝑚𝑖𝑐 𝐶𝑜𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝜀 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚

𝑉𝑐𝑠 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚 𝜙 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚

𝑚𝑐𝑠 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚 𝑐 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚

𝑁𝐷 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑃𝑐𝑠 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚

𝜙̇ = 𝐴𝑛𝑔𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑟 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑓𝑙𝑦𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑙𝑠 ℎ = 𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑙𝑦𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑙 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑓𝑡

𝜓̇ = 𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑓𝑙𝑦𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑙𝑠  = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚

𝑔 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚 𝑀 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚

𝜇0 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚 𝑟𝐵 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚

𝜃 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑦𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑦𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑙 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚

APPENDIX E

44
 Gyrodyne Somier Design

Fig. 1.11. Gyrodyne Cell Matrix with Honeycomb-type Design to Surface Calculation

APPENDIX F

45
 Aerodynamic Surface Calculation to AFC Ships

Fig. 1.11. Gyrodyne Cell Matrix with Honeycomb-type Design to Surface Calculation

Train with n-wagons with unsprung damping and gyrodyne mechanism

𝑙 = 2𝑟𝐻 𝑚 + 𝑟𝐻 (𝑚 − 1),
(1.41)

2𝑟𝐻 √3
𝑏= 𝑛,
2
(1.41)
𝑁𝑝𝑙 = (𝑚 × 𝑛) + (𝑚 − 1) × (𝑛 − 1),

(1.41)
𝑁𝑝𝑙 + (𝑚 − 1)
𝑛= ,
(2𝑚 − 1)
(1.41)

46
 2
30 5∙𝑔 1 30 5∙𝑔 1
2
(𝑚𝑐𝑠 − 𝑚𝑠𝑤 ) ∙ 4ℎ𝑔 ∙ 900 + (𝑚 − 1)𝑁𝑓𝑤 𝑀𝑓𝑤 𝑟𝑓𝑤 𝜋 2 (𝜙̇ 2 − 2 ∙ 𝜙̇√ √ ∙ + ∙√ ∙ )
𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤 𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤
√2
𝑆𝑎 = 2 ∙ 𝑟𝐻 ℎ 2 ,
3
30 5∙𝑔 1 30 5∙𝑔 1
2
𝑁𝑓𝑤 𝑀𝑓𝑤 𝑟𝑓𝑤 𝜋 2 (2𝑚 − 1) (𝜙̇ 2 − 2 ∙ 𝜙̇√ √ ∙ + ∙√ ∙ )
𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤 𝜋 4 ∙ 𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 2𝑟𝑠𝑤
[ ]

(1.41)

47
 APPENDIX G
Rayleigh's method to AFC Ships

This is another simple method, proposed by Rayleigh based on the fact that the maximum kinetic energy must
be equal to the maximum potential energy for a conservative system under a free vibration condition. For a
shaft carrying several components, we can use static deflection or any other suitable function to represent the
fundamental mode of the shaft. The fundamental frequency can be obtained from Reference [2].

Rayleigh's method is based on the principle of conservation of energy. The energy in an undamped system
consists of the kinetic energy and the potential energy. The kinetic energy T is stored in the mass and is
proportional to the square of the velocity. The potential energy U includes strain energy that is proportional
to elastic deformations and the potential of the applied forces. For a conservative system, the total energy
must remain constant. That is

(9.5.7)

Differentiating this expression, we get the equation of motion as follows.

(9.5.7)

Note that the amounts of kinetic and potential energy in the system may change with time but their sum must
remain constant. Thus if and are energies at time and and are energies at time , then

(9.5.8)

48
For a shaftas shown in Fig.9.5.4, the potential energy is zero at the specific instant of time when the mass is
passing through its static equilibrium position and kinetic energy is at its maximum . Similarly at the instant
when the mass is at its extreme position the kinetic energy is zero and the potential energy is at its maximum .
Thus we have the following relationship

Therefore we have, considering all the disks on the shaft,

(9.5.10)

Where i=1, n represents summation over all the "n" disks. So we get the frequency of natural vibration as,

𝑊(𝑙 − 𝑎)𝑥
(𝑥2 − 𝑙2 + (𝑙 − 𝑎)2 ) , 𝑆𝑖 𝑥 ≤ 𝑎
6𝑙𝐸𝐼
𝑦𝑚𝑎𝑥 (𝑥) =
𝑊𝑎(𝑙 − 𝑥)
(𝑥2 + 𝑎2 − 2𝑙𝑥), 𝑆𝑖 𝑥 ≤ 𝑎
{ 6𝐸𝐼

(1.98)

49
where

𝑊 = Uniform load on the beam (force per unit length)

𝑎 = Length of the beam

𝐸 = Modulus of elasticity

𝐼 = Area moment of inertia of cross section

50
 APPENDIX H
Numerical Computations

All numerical evaluations were performed with an IBM 360/65 computer. The corresponding programs car be
found in Appendix E and will be discussed in this section. Subprograms which are common to various programs
appear only once in the Appendix. In order to evaluate the single integrals in the coefficients of the infinite
system of equations (44), we introduce the change of variable

tan 𝑡 = 𝑢.

Let

𝜋/2 2𝑡
𝑒 −2𝑘0 𝑑𝑠𝑒𝑐
𝐼1 = 8𝜋 ∫ 𝑇𝑜 𝑚
𝑛
(𝑡) 𝑇𝑜 𝑚′
𝑛′
(𝑡)𝑑𝑡,
0 cos 𝑡
(8.14)

We have

∞ 2
𝑒 −2𝑘0𝑑𝑢
𝐼1 = 8𝜋𝑒 −2𝑘0𝑑 ∫ 𝑇𝑜𝑢 𝑚
𝑛
(𝑢) 𝑇𝑜𝑢 𝑚′
𝑛′
(𝑢)𝑑𝑢,
0 √1 + 𝑢2
(8.14)

where

1 𝑚 1
𝑇𝑜𝑢 𝑚
𝑛
(𝑢) = {(√1 + 𝑢2 + 𝑢) + 𝑚 } 𝐽𝑛+1 (𝑘0 𝑐 √1 + 𝑢 ),
2
2 2
(√1 + 𝑢 + 𝑢) 2

(8.14)

Since the integrand in (49) is an even function of u, we can write

51
 𝑥 𝑥
−2𝑘0 𝑑 ∞
𝑇𝑜𝑢 𝑚
𝑛
( ) 𝑇𝑜𝑢 𝑚′
𝑛′
( )
𝑒 1 2 √2𝑘0 𝑑 √2𝑘0 𝑑
𝐼1 = 8𝜋 ∫ 𝑒 −𝑥
∙ 𝑑𝑥,
√2𝑘0 𝑑 2 −∞ 2
𝑥
√1 + ( )
√2𝑘0 𝑑

,
(8.14)

where we have further changed the variable of integration to

𝑥 = √2𝑘0 𝑑 𝑢.

The integral in (50) can be evaluated by Hermite-Gauss quadrature. A twenty-point formula was used, for which
the zeros and weighting factors can be found in Abramowitz and Stegun (1964). Actually, since the
integrand is an even function of x, only ten ordinates are evaluated in the corresponding c mputer program,
which yields the value of I., and includes a function subprogram (BSSSJ; to evaluate the Bessel functions which
appear in the integrand.
The evaluation of the Bessel functions J of order n + 1/2 was carried out using the series expression

(𝑧/2)𝑛+1/2 𝑧2 𝑧4
𝐽𝑛+1 (𝑧) = {1 − + − ⋯ },
2 (𝑛 + 3/2) 2(2𝑛 + 3) 2 ∙ 4(2𝑛 + 3)(2𝑛 + 5)
(8.14)

for values of the argument less than five, and the recurrence relation

2𝑛 − 1
𝐽𝑛+1 (𝑧) = 𝐽𝑛−1 (𝑧) − 𝐽 3 (𝑧),
2 𝑧 2 𝑛−
2
(8.14)

for values greater than five. In this manner, the large round-off errors associated with tbe use of (51) for large
values of the argument (especially for small n), and with the use of (52) for small values of the argument, are
avoided. The cut-off value of five is a rough estimate of the value necessary to minimize these errors. The
subprogram, which was written in doubl' precision further to reduce roundoff errors (only six, or at most
seven, significant digits are supplied by the IBM 360/65 computer in single precision), was checked against

52
 APPENDIX I
The Bessel Functions

The evaluation of the Bessel functions J of order n + 1/2 was carried out using the series expression

(𝑧/2)𝑛+1/2 𝑧2 𝑧4
𝐽𝑛+1/2 (𝑧) = {1 − + … },
Г(𝑛 + 3/2) 2(2𝑛 + 3) 2.4(2𝑛 + 3)(2𝑛 + 5)
(7.15)

for values of the argument less than five, and the recurrence relation

2𝑛 − 1
𝐽𝑛+1/2 (𝑧) = 𝐽𝑛−1/2 − 𝐽𝑛−3/2 ,
𝑧
(7.15)

for values greater than five. In this manner, the large round-off errors associated with tbe use of (51) for large
values of the argument (especially for small n), and with the use of (52) for small values of the argument, are
avoided. The cut-off value of five is a rough estimate of the value necessary to minimize these errors.

53
 APPENDIX J
Fundamental Constants for Calculations

Quantity Symbol Value

Pi 𝜋 3.141592653589793238
Exponential e e 2.718281828459045235
Euler's constants 𝛾 0.5775156649
Density of sea water 𝜌𝑠 1025.9 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3
104.61 𝑘𝑝 𝑠 2 /𝑚4
1.990 𝑙𝑏𝑓 𝑠 2 / 𝑓𝑡 4
Density of fresh water 𝜌𝑓 999.0 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3
101.87 𝑘𝑝 𝑠 2 /𝑚4
1.938 𝑙𝑏𝑓 𝑠 2 / 𝑓𝑡 4
Density of air * 𝜌𝑎
1.225 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3 to 15°C
Dynamic viscosity of lubricant 38.0 C𝑠 to 30°C
High VI oil** 𝜂0 12.1 C𝑠 to 60°C
5.3 C𝑠 to 100°C
Dynamic viscosity of lubricant 153 C𝑠 to 30°C
High VI oil** 𝜂0 34.0 C𝑠 to 60°C
9.1 C𝑠 to 100°C
Dynamic viscosity of lubricant 153 C𝑠 to 30°C
High VI oil** 𝜂0 34.0 C𝑠 to 60°C
9.1 C𝑠 to 100°C
pressure viscosity coefficient 38.0 C𝑠 to 30°C
lubricant High VI oil** 𝛼 12.1 C𝑠 to 60°C
5.3 C𝑠 to 100°C
pressure viscosity coefficient 38.0 C𝑠 to 30°C
lubricant High VI oil** 𝛼 12.1 C𝑠 to 60°C
5.3 C𝑠 to 100°C
Kinematic viscosity of sea 𝜈𝑠 1.191E-6 𝑚2 /𝑠
water 1.28 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3
*To sea level * At 101.325 kPa (abs) and 15°C
**To sea level * At 101.325 kPa (abs) and 15°C
***To sea level * At 101.325 kPa (abs) and 15°C

54
Fig. 1.11. The “Hamlet I” of 10,063 TEU’s, is futuristic Vision of a Antigravitational Fast Container-Ship (AFCS).

This paper is a version reviewed of the original paper terminated in the 24 September of 2018, and
was financing completely by Electronic-Device, enterprise dedicated to electronic systems.

55
56