SHIP RESISTANCE AND PROPULSION

Ship Resistance and Propulsion is dedicated to providing a comprehensive and modern

scientific approach to evaluating ship resistance and propulsion. The study of propul-
sive power enables the size and mass of the propulsion engines to be established and
estimates made of the fuel consumption and likely operating costs. This book, written
by experts in the field, includes the latest developments from applied research, includ-
ing those in experimental and CFD techniques, and provides guidance for the practical
estimation of ship propulsive power for a range of ship types. This text includes sufficient
published standard series data for hull resistance and propeller performance to enable
practitioners to make ship power predictions based on material and data contained
within the book. A large number of fully worked examples are included to illustrate
applications of the data and powering methodologies; these include cargo and container
ships, tankers and bulk carriers, ferries, warships, patrol craft, work boats, planing craft
and yachts. The book is aimed at a broad readership including practising naval archi-
tects and marine engineers, sea-going officers, small craft designers and undergraduate
and postgraduate degree students. It should also appeal to others involved in transport-
ation, transport efficiency and eco-logistics, who need to carry out reliable estimates of
ship power requirements.

Anthony F. Molland is Emeritus Professor of Ship Design at the University of

Southampton in the United Kingdom. For many years, Professor Molland has extens-
ively researched and published papers on ship design and ship hydrodynamics includ-
ing propellers and ship resistance components, ship rudders and control surfaces. He
also acts as a consultant to industry in these subject areas and has gained international
recognition through presentations at conferences and membership on committees of the
International Towing Tank Conference (ITTC). Professor Molland is the co-author of
Marine Rudders and Control Surfaces (2007) and editor of The Maritime Engineering
Reference Book (2008).

Stephen R. Turnock is Professor of Maritime Fluid Dynamics at the University of

Southampton in the United Kingdom. Professor Turnock lectures on many subjects,
including ship resistance and propulsion, powercraft performance, marine renewable
energy and applications of CFD. His research encompasses both experimental and the-
oretical work on energy efficiency of shipping, performance sport, underwater systems
and renewable energy devices, together with the application of CFD for the design of
propulsion systems and control surfaces. He acts as a consultant to industry in these
subject areas, and as a member of the committees of the International Towing Tank
Conference (ITTC) and International Ship and Offshore Structures Congress (ISSC).
Professor Turnock is the co-author of Marine Rudders and Control Surfaces (2007).

Dominic A. Hudson is Senior Lecturer in Ship Science at the University of Southampton

in the United Kingdom. Dr. Hudson lectures on ship resistance and propulsion, power-
craft performance and design, recreational and high-speed craft and ship design. His
research interests are in all areas of ship hydrodynamics, including experimental and
theoretical work on ship resistance components, seakeeping and manoeuvring, together
with ship design for minimum energy consumption. He is a member of the 26th Inter-
national Towing Tank Conference (ITTC) specialist committee on high-speed craft and
was a member of the 17th International Ship and Offshore Structures Congress (ISSC)
committee on sailing yacht design.
Ship Resistance and Propulsion
PRACTICAL ESTIMATION OF
SHIP PROPULSIVE POWER

Anthony F. Molland
University of Southampton

Stephen R. Turnock
University of Southampton

Dominic A. Hudson
University of Southampton
cambridge university press
Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town,
Singapore, São Paulo, Delhi, Tokyo, Mexico City
Cambridge University Press
32 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10013-2473, USA
www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521760522


c Anthony F. Molland, Stephen R. Turnock, and Dominic A. Hudson 2011

This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception

and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements,
no reproduction of any part may take place without the written
permission of Cambridge University Press.

First published 2011

Printed in the United States of America

A catalog record for this publication is available from the British Library.

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication data

Molland, Anthony F.
Ship resistance and propulsion : practical estimation of ship propulsive power /
Anthony F. Molland, Stephen R. Turnock, Dominic A. Hudson.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-521-76052-2 (hardback)
1. Ship resistance. 2. Ship resistance – Mathematical models.
3. Ship propulsion. 4. Ship propulsion – Mathematical models.
I. Turnock, Stephen R. II. Hudson, Dominic A. III. Title.
VM751.M65 2011
623.8 12–dc22 2011002620

ISBN 978-0-521-76052-2 Hardback

Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of

URLs for external or third-party Internet Web sites referred to in this publication
and does not guarantee that any content on such Web sites is, or will remain,
accurate or appropriate.
Contents

Preface page xv
Nomenclature xvii
Abbreviations xxi
Figure Acknowledgements xxv

1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
History 1
Powering: Overall Concept 3
Improvements in Efficiency 3
references (chapter 1) 5

2 Propulsive Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.1 Components of Propulsive Power 7
2.2 Propulsion Systems 7
2.3 Definitions 9
2.4 Components of the Ship Power Estimate 10

3 Components of Hull Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

3.1 Physical Components of Main Hull Resistance 12
3.1.1 Physical Components 12
3.1.2 Momentum Analysis of Flow Around Hull 17
3.1.3 Systems of Coefficients Used in Ship Powering 21
3.1.4 Measurement of Model Total Resistance 23
3.1.5 Transverse Wave Interference 29
3.1.6 Dimensional Analysis and Scaling 33
3.2 Other Drag Components 36
3.2.1 Appendage Drag 36
3.2.2 Air Resistance of Hull and Superstructure 45
3.2.3 Roughness and Fouling 51
3.2.4 Wind and Waves 57
3.2.5 Service Power Margins 63
references (chapter 3) 64

v
vi Contents

4 Model-Ship Extrapolation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
4.1 Practical Scaling Methods 69
4.1.1 Traditional Approach: Froude 69
4.1.2 Form Factor Approach: Hughes 70
4.2 Geosim Series 71
4.3 Flat Plate Friction Formulae 72
4.3.1 Froude Experiments 72
4.3.2 Schoenherr Formula 76
4.3.3 The ITTC Formula 78
4.3.4 Other Proposals for Friction Lines 79
4.4 Derivation of Form Factor (1 + k) 79
4.4.1 Model Experiments 80
4.4.2 CFD Methods 81
4.4.3 Empirical Methods 81
4.4.4 Effects of Shallow Water 82
references (chapter 4) 83

5 Model-Ship Correlation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
5.1 Purpose 85
5.2 Procedures 85
5.2.1 Original Procedure 85
5.2.2 ITTC1978 Performance Prediction Method 87
5.2.3 Summary 90
5.3 Ship Speed Trials and Analysis 90
5.3.1 Purpose 90
5.3.2 Trials Conditions 91
5.3.3 Ship Condition 91
5.3.4 Trials Procedures and Measurements 91
5.3.5 Corrections 92
5.3.6 Analysis of Correlation Factors and Wake Fraction 94
references (chapter 5) 96

6 Restricted Water Depth and Breadth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

6.1 Shallow Water Effects 97
6.1.1 Deep Water 97
6.1.2 Shallow Water 97
6.2 Bank Effects 100
6.3 Blockage Speed Corrections 100
6.4 Squat 103
6.5 Wave Wash 103
references (chapter 6) 105

7 Measurement of Resistance Components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

7.1 Background 108
7.2 Need for Physical Measurements 108
7.3 Physical Measurements of Resistance Components 110
7.3.1 Skin Friction Resistance 110
Contents vii

7.3.2 Pressure Resistance 115

7.3.3 Viscous Resistance 118
7.3.4 Wave Resistance 123
7.4 Flow Field Measurement Techniques 136
7.4.1 Hot-Wire Anemometry 136
7.4.2 Five-Hole Pitôt Probe 136
7.4.3 Photogrammetry 137
7.4.4 Laser-Based Techniques 138
7.4.5 Summary 140
references (chapter 7) 141

8 Wake and Thrust Deduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144

8.1 Introduction 144
8.1.1 Wake Fraction 144
8.1.2 Thrust Deduction 145
8.1.3 Relative Rotative Efficiency ηR 145
8.2 Origins of Wake 145
8.2.1 Potential Wake: w P 146
8.2.2 Frictional Wake: w F 146
8.2.3 Wave Wake: w W 146
8.2.4 Summary 146
8.3 Nominal and Effective Wake 146
8.4 Wake Distribution 147
8.4.1 General Distribution 147
8.4.2 Circumferential Distribution of Wake 148
8.4.3 Radial Distribution of Wake 149
8.4.4 Analysis of Detailed Wake Measurements 149
8.5 Detailed Physical Measurements of Wake 150
8.5.1 Circumferential Average Wake 150
8.5.2 Detailed Measurements 151
8.6 Computational Fluid Dynamics Predictions of Wake 151
8.7 Model Self-propulsion Experiments 151
8.7.1 Introduction 151
8.7.2 Resistance Tests 152
8.7.3 Propeller Open Water Tests 152
8.7.4 Model Self-propulsion Tests 152
8.7.5 Trials Analysis 155
8.7.6 Wake Scale Effects 155
8.8 Empirical Data for Wake Fraction and Thrust Deduction Factor 156
8.8.1 Introduction 156
8.8.2 Single Screw 156
8.8.3 Twin Screw 159
8.8.4 Effects of Speed and Ballast Condition 161
8.9 Tangential Wake 162
8.9.1 Origins of Tangential Wake 162
8.9.2 Effects of Tangential Wake 163
references (chapter 8) 164
viii Contents

9 Numerical Estimation of Ship Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166

9.1 Introduction 166
9.2 Historical Development 167
9.3 Available Techniques 168
9.3.1 Navier–Stokes Equations 168
9.3.2 Incompressible Reynolds Averaged Navier–Stokes
equations (RANS) 169
9.3.3 Potential Flow 170
9.3.4 Free Surface 171
9.4 Interpretation of Numerical Methods 172
9.4.1 Introduction 172
9.4.2 Validation of Applied CFD Methodology 174
9.4.3 Access to CFD 176
9.5 Thin Ship Theory 177
9.5.1 Background 177
9.5.2 Distribution of Sources 178
9.5.3 Modifications to the Basic Theory 179
9.5.4 Example Results 179
9.6 Estimation of Ship Self-propulsion Using RANS 180
9.6.1 Background 180
9.6.2 Mesh Generation 180
9.6.3 Boundary Conditions 181
9.6.4 Methodology 181
9.6.5 Results 183
9.7 Summary 185
references (chapter 9) 185

10 Resistance Design Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188

10.1 Introduction 188
10.2 Data Sources 188
10.2.1 Standard Series Data 188
10.2.2 Other Resistance Data 190
10.2.3 Regression Analysis of Resistance Data 190
10.2.4 Numerical Methods 191
10.3 Selected Design Data 192
10.3.1 Displacement Ships 192
10.3.2 Semi-displacement Craft 208
10.3.3 Planing Craft 212
10.3.4 Small Craft 220
10.3.5 Multihulls 223
10.3.6 Yachts 229
10.4 Wetted Surface Area 235
10.4.1 Background 235
10.4.2 Displacement Ships 235
10.4.3 Semi-displacement Ships, Round-Bilge Forms 236
10.4.4 Semi-displacement Ships, Double-Chine Forms 238
Contents ix

10.4.5 Planing Hulls, Single Chine 239

10.4.6 Yacht Forms 239
references (chapter 10) 240

11 Propulsor Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246

11.1 Basic Requirements: Thrust and Momentum Changes 246
11.2 Levels of Efficiency 246
11.3 Summary of Propulsor Types 247
11.3.1 Marine Propeller 247
11.3.2 Controllable Pitch Propeller (CP propeller) 248
11.3.3 Ducted Propellers 248
11.3.4 Contra-Rotating Propellers 249
11.3.5 Tandem Propellers 250
11.3.6 Z-Drive Units 250
11.3.7 Podded Azimuthing Propellers 251
11.3.8 Waterjet Propulsion 252
11.3.9 Cycloidal Propeller 252
11.3.10 Paddle Wheels 253
11.3.11 Sails 253
11.3.12 Oars 254
11.3.13 Lateral Thrust Units 254
11.3.14 Other Propulsors 255
11.3.15 Propulsion-Enhancing Devices 256
11.3.16 Auxiliary Propulsion Devices 257
references (chapter 11) 258

12 Propeller Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261

12.1 Propeller Geometry, Coefficients, Characteristics 261
12.1.1 Propeller Geometry 261
12.1.2 Dimensional Analysis and Propeller Coefficients 266
12.1.3 Presentation of Propeller Data 266
12.1.4 Measurement of Propeller Characteristics 267
12.2 Cavitation 270
12.2.1 Background 270
12.2.2 Cavitation Criterion 272
12.2.3 Subcavitating Pressure Distributions 273
12.2.4 Propeller Section Types 275
12.2.5 Cavitation Limits 275
12.2.6 Effects of Cavitation on Thrust and Torque 277
12.2.7 Cavitation Tunnels 278
12.2.8 Avoidance of Cavitation 281
12.2.9 Preliminary Blade Area – Cavitation Check 282
12.2.10 Example: Estimate of Blade Area 284
12.3 Propeller Blade Strength Estimates 284
12.3.1 Background 284
12.3.2 Preliminary Estimates of Blade Root Thickness 285
12.3.3 Methods of Estimating Propeller Stresses 285
x Contents

12.3.4 Propeller Strength Calculations Using Simple Beam

Theory 286
references (chapter 12) 293

13 Powering Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 296

13.1 Selection of Marine Propulsion Machinery 296
13.1.1 Selection of Machinery: Main Factors to Consider 296
13.1.2 Propulsion Plants Available 296
13.1.3 Propulsion Layouts 299
13.2 Propeller–Engine Matching 299
13.2.1 Introduction 299
13.2.2 Controllable Pitch Propeller (CP Propeller) 301
13.2.3 The Multi-Engined Plant 302
13.3 Propeller Off-Design Performance 303
13.3.1 Background 303
13.3.2 Off-Design Cases: Examples 304
13.4 Voyage Analysis and In-service Monitoring 306
13.4.1 Background 306
13.4.2 Data Required and Methods of Obtaining Data 307
13.4.3 Methods of Analysis 307
13.4.4 Limitations in Methods of Logging and Data Available 310
13.4.5 Developments in Voyage Analysis 311
13.4.6 Further Data Monitoring and Logging 311
references (chapter 13) 312

14 Hull Form Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313

14.1 General 313
14.1.1 Introduction 313
14.1.2 Background 313
14.1.3 Choice of Main Hull Parameters 314
14.1.4 Choice of Hull Shape 318
14.2 Fore End 322
14.2.1 Basic Requirements of Fore End Design 322
14.2.2 Bulbous Bows 323
14.2.3 Seakeeping 328
14.2.4 Cavitation 328
14.3 Aft End 328
14.3.1 Basic Requirements of Aft End Design 328
14.3.2 Stern Hull Geometry to Suit Podded Units 331
14.3.3 Shallow Draught Vessels 333
14.4 Computational Fluid Dynamics Methods Applied
to Hull Form Design 334
references (chapter 14) 334

15 Numerical Methods for Propeller Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337

15.1 Introduction 337
15.2 Historical Development of Numerical Methods 337
Contents xi

15.3 Hierarchy of Methods 338

15.4 Guidance Notes on the Application of Techniques 339
15.4.1 Blade Element-Momentum Theory 339
15.4.2 Lifting Line Theories 340
15.4.3 Surface Panel Methods 340
15.4.4 Reynolds Averaged Navier–Stokes 342
15.5 Blade Element-Momentum Theory 343
15.5.1 Momentum Theory 343
15.5.2 Goldstein K Factors [15.8] 345
15.5.3 Blade Element Equations 346
15.5.4 Inflow Factors Derived from Section Efficiency 349
15.5.5 Typical Distributions of a, a and dKT /dx 350
15.5.6 Section Design Parameters 350
15.5.7 Lifting Surface Flow Curvature Effects 352
15.5.8 Calculations of Curvature Corrections 353
15.5.9 Algorithm for Blade Element-Momentum Theory 355
15.6 Propeller Wake Adaption 356
15.6.1 Background 356
15.6.2 Optimum Spanwise Loading 357
15.6.3 Optimum Diameters with Wake-Adapted Propellers 359
15.7 Effect of Tangential Wake 359
15.8 Examples Using Blade Element-Momentum Theory 361
15.8.1 Approximate Formulae 361
15.8.2 Example 1 362
15.8.3 Example 2 363
15.8.4 Example 3 364
references (chapter 15) 366

16 Propulsor Design Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369

16.1 Introduction 369
16.1.1 General 369
16.1.2 Number of Propeller Blades 369
16.2 Propulsor Data 371
16.2.1 Propellers 371
16.2.2 Controllable Pitch Propellers 385
16.2.3 Ducted Propellers 385
16.2.4 Podded Propellers 386
16.2.5 Cavitating Propellers 391
16.2.6 Supercavitating Propellers 392
16.2.7 Surface-Piercing Propellers 395
16.2.8 High-Speed Propellers, Inclined Shaft 398
16.2.9 Small Craft Propellers: Locked, Folding and
Self-pitching 399
16.2.10 Waterjets 400
16.2.11 Vertical Axis Propellers 404
16.2.12 Paddle Wheels 405
16.2.13 Lateral Thrust Units 405
xii Contents

16.2.14 Oars 407

16.2.15 Sails 408
16.3 Hull and Relative Rotative Efficiency Data 411
16.3.1 Wake Fraction wT and Thrust Deduction t 411
16.3.2 Relative Rotative Efficiency, ηR 411
references (chapter 16) 413

17 Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418
17.1 Background 418
17.2 Example Applications 418
17.2.1 Example Application 1. Tank Test Data: Estimate of
Ship Effective Power 418
17.2.2 Example Application 2. Model Self-propulsion Test
Analysis 420
17.2.3 Example Application 3. Wake Analysis from Full-Scale
Trials Data 421
17.2.4 Example Application 4. 140 m Cargo Ship: Estimate of
Effective Power 422
17.2.5 Example Application 5. Tanker: Estimates of Effective
Power in Load and Ballast Conditions 423
17.2.6 Example Application 6. 8000 TEU Container Ship:
Estimates of Effective and Delivered Power 424
17.2.7 Example Application 7. 135 m Twin-Screw Ferry, 18
knots: Estimate of Effective Power PE 429
17.2.8 Example Application 8. 45.5 m Passenger Ferry, 37 knots,
Twin-Screw Monohull: Estimates of Effective and
Delivered Power 432
17.2.9 Example Application 9. 98 m Passenger/Car Ferry, 38
knots, Monohull: Estimates of Effective and Delivered
Power 435
17.2.10 Example Application 10. 82 m Passenger/Car Catamaran
Ferry, 36 knots: Estimates of Effective and Delivered
Power 437
17.2.11 Example Application 11. 130 m Twin-Screw Warship, 28
knots, Monohull: Estimates of Effective and Delivered
Power 440
17.2.12 Example Application 12. 35 m Patrol Boat, Monohull:
Estimate of Effective Power 446
17.2.13 Example Application 13. 37 m Ocean-Going Tug:
Estimate of Effective Power 448
17.2.14 Example Application 14. 14 m Harbour Work Boat,
Monohull: Estimate of Effective Power 448
17.2.15 Example Application 15. 18 m Planing Craft,
Single-Chine Hull: Estimates of Effective Power
Preplaning and Planing 450
17.2.16 Example Application 16. 25 m Planing Craft, 35 knots,
Single-Chine Hull: Estimate of Effective Power 453
Contents xiii

17.2.17 Example Application 17. 10 m Yacht: Estimate of

Performance 454
17.2.18 Example Application 18. Tanker: Propeller Off-Design
Calculations 460
17.2.19 Example Application 19. Twin-Screw Ocean-Going Tug:
Propeller Off-Design Calculations 462
17.2.20 Example Application 20. Ship Speed Trials: Correction
for Natural Wind 464
17.2.21 Example Application 21. Detailed Cavitation Check on
Propeller Blade Section 466
17.2.22 Example Application 22. Estimate of Propeller Blade
Root Stresses 467
17.2.23 Example Application 23. Propeller Performance
Estimates Using Blade Element-Momentum Theory 469
17.2.24 Example Application 24. Wake-Adapted Propeller 471
references (chapter 17) 472

APPENDIX A1: Background Physics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 473

A1.1 Background 473
A1.2 Basic Fluid Properties and Flow 473
Fluid Properties 473
Steady Flow 474
Uniform Flow 474
Streamline 475
A1.3 Continuity of Flow 475
A1.4 Forces Due to Fluids in Motion 476
A1.5 Pressure and Velocity Changes in a Moving Fluid 476
A1.6 Boundary Layer 477
Origins 477
Outer Flow 478
Flow Within the Boundary Layer 478
Displacement Thickness 479
Laminar Flow 480
A1.7 Flow Separation 480
A1.8 Wave Properties 481
Wave Speed 482
Deep Water 482
Shallow Water 482
references (appendix a1) 483

APPENDIX A2: Derivation of Eggers Formula for Wave Resistance . . . . . . 484

APPENDIX A3: Tabulations of Resistance Design Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487

APPENDIX A4: Tabulations of Propulsor Design Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 522

Index 529
Preface

New ship types and applications continue to be developed in response to economic,

societal and technical factors, including changes in operational speeds and fluctu-
ations in fuel costs. These changes in ship design all depend on reliable estimates of
ship propulsive power. There is a growing need to minimise power, fuel consump-
tion and operating costs driven by environmental concerns and from an economic
perspective. The International Maritime Organisation (IMO) is leading the ship-
ping sector in efforts to reduce emissions such as NOx, SOx and CO2 through the
development of legislation and operational guidelines.
The estimation of ship propulsive power is fundamental to the process of design-
ing and operating a ship. Knowledge of the propulsive power enables the size and
mass of the propulsion engines to be established and estimates made of the fuel
consumption and likely operating costs. The methods whereby ship resistance and
propulsion are evaluated will never be an exact science, but require a combination of
analysis, experiments, computations and empiricism. This book provides an up-to-
date detailed appraisal of the data sources, methods and techniques for establishing
propulsive power.
Notwithstanding the quantity of commercial software available for estimating
ship resistance and designing propellers, it is our contention that rigorous and robust
engineering design requires that engineers have the ability to carry out these calcu-
lations from first principles. This provides a transparent view of the calculation pro-
cess and a deeper understanding as to how the final answer is obtained. An objective
of this book is to include enough published standard series data for hull resistance
and propeller performance to enable practitioners to make ship power predictions
based on material and data contained within the book. A large number of fully
worked examples are included to illustrate applications of the data and powering
methodologies; these include cargo and container ships, tankers and bulk carriers,
ferries, warships, patrol craft, work boats, planing craft and yachts.
The book is aimed at a broad readership, including practising professional naval
architects and marine engineers and undergraduate and postgraduate degree stu-
dents. It should also be of use to other science and engineering students and profes-
sionals with interests in the marine field.
The book is arranged in 17 chapters. The first 10 chapters broadly cover re-
sistance, with Chapter 10 providing both sources of resistance data and useable
xv
xvi Preface

data. Chapters 11 to 16 cover propellers and propulsion, with Chapter 16 providing

both sources of propeller data and useable data. Chapter 17 includes a number of
worked example applications. For the reader requiring more information on basic
fluid mechanics, Appendix A1 provides a background to the physics of fluid flow.
Appendix A2 derives a wave resistance formula and Appendices A3 and A4 con-
tain tabulated resistance and propeller data. References are provided at the end of
each chapter to facilitate readers’ access to the original sources of data and infor-
mation and further depth of study when necessary.
Proceedings, conference reports and standard procedures of the International
Towing Tank Conference (ITTC) are referred to frequently. These provide an
invaluable source of reviews and developments of ship resistance and propulsion.
The proceedings and procedures are freely available through the website of the
Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers (SNAME), which kindly hosts
the ITTC website, http://ittc.sname.org. The University of Southampton Ship Sci-
ence Reports, referenced in the book, can be obtained free from www.eprints
.soton.ac.uk.
The authors acknowledge the help and support of their colleagues at the Uni-
versity of Southampton. Thanks must also be conveyed to national and international
colleagues for their continued support over the years. Particular acknowledgement
should also be made to the many undergraduate and postgraduate students who,
over many years, have contributed to a better understanding of the subject through
research and project and assignment work.
Many of the basic sections of the book are based on notes of lectures on ship
resistance and propulsion delivered at the University of Southampton. In this con-
text, particular thanks are due to Dr. John Wellicome, who assembled and delivered
many of the original versions of the notes from the foundation of the Ship Science
degree programme in Southampton in 1968.
Finally, the authors wish especially to thank their respective families for their
practical help and support.

Anthony F. Molland
Stephen R. Turnock
Dominic A. Hudson
Southampton 2011
Nomenclature

A Wetted surface area, thin ship theory (m2 )

A0 Propeller disc area [π D2 /4]
AD Propeller developed blade area ratio, or developed blade area
(m2 )
AE Propeller expanded blade area ratio
AP Projected bottom planing area of planing hull (m2 ) or projected
area of propeller blade (m2 )
AT Transverse frontal area of hull and superstructure above
water (m2 )
AX Midship section area (m2 )
b Breadth of catamaran demihull (m), or mean chine beam of
planing craft (m)
B Breadth of monohull or overall breadth of catamaran (m)
Bpa Mean breadth over chines [= AP /LP ] (m)
Bpx Maximum breadth over chines (m)
BWL Breadth on waterline (m)
c Section chord (m)
CA Model-ship correlation allowance coefficient
CB Block coefficient
CDair Coefficient of air resistance [Rair /1/2ρa AT V 2 ]
Cf Local coefficient of frictional resistance
CF Coefficient of frictional resistance [RF /1/2ρW SV 2 ]
CL Lift coefficient
CM Midship coefficient [ A X/(B × T)]
CP Prismatic coefficient [∇/(L × A X)] or pressure coefficient
√ [RR/ /2ρ SV ]
1 2
CR Coefficient of residuary resistance
CS Wetted surface coefficient [S/ ∇ · L]
CT Coefficient of total resistance [RT /1/2ρ SV 2 ]
CV Coefficient of viscous resistance [RV /1/2ρ SV 2 ]
CW Coefficient of wave resistance [RW /1/2ρ SV 2 ]
CWP Coefficient of wave pattern resistance [RW P /1/2ρ SV 2 ]
D Propeller diameter (m)

xvii
xviii Nomenclature

Dair Aerodynamic drag, horizontal (planing craft) (N)

DAPP Appendage resistance (N)
DF Planing hull frictional resistance, parallel to keel (N)
Demihull One of the hulls which make up the catamaran
E Energy in wave front
FH Hydrostatic pressure acting at centre of pressure of planing hull
(N)
FP Pressure force over wetted surface of planing hull (N)
√
Fr Froude number [V/ g · L]
√
Frh Depth Froude number [V/  g · h]
Fr∇ Volume Froude number [V/ g · ∇ 1/3 ]
Fx Yacht sail longitudinal force (N)
Fy Yacht sail transverse force (N)
g Acceleration due to gravity (m/s2 )
G Gap between catamaran hulls (m)
GM Metacentric height (m)
h Water depth (m)
H Wave height (m)
HT Transom immersion (m)
iE Half angle of entrance of waterline (deg.), see also 1/2 α E
J Propeller advance coefficient (VA /nD)
k Wave number
KT Propeller thrust coefficient (T/ρn2 D4 )
KQ Propeller torque coefficient Q/ρn2 D5 )
L Length of ship (m)
Lair Aerodynamic lift, vertically upwards (planing craft) (N)
LAPP Appendage lift (N)
LBP Length of ship between perpendiculars (m)
lc Wetted length of chine, planing craft (m)
LCB Longitudinal centre of buoyancy (%L forward or aft of amidships)
LCG Longitudinal centre of gravity (%L forward or aft of amidships)
Lf Length of ship (ft)
lK Wetted length of keel, planing craft (m)
lm Mean wetted length, planing craft [= (l K + lc )/2]
LOA Length of ship overall (m)
lp Distance of centre of pressure from transom (planing craft)(m)
LP Projected chine length of planing hull (m)
LPS Length between pressure sources
LWL Length on waterline (m)
L/∇ 1/3 Length–displacement ratio
n Propeller rate of revolution (rps)
N Propeller rate of revolution (rpm), or normal bottom pressure
load on planing craft (N)
P Propeller pitch (m)
PAT Atmospheric pressure (N/m2 )
P/D Propeller pitch ratio
Nomenclature xix

PD Delivered power (kW)

PE Effective power (kW)
PL Local pressure (N/m2 )
PS Installed power (kW)
PV Vapour pressure (N/m2 )
Q Propeller torque (Nm)
Rair Air resistance (N)
Rapp Appendage resistance (N)
Re Reynolds Number (ρVL/μ or VL/ν)
RF Frictional resistance (N)
RFh Frictional resistance of yacht hull (N)
RInd Induced resistance of yacht (N)
rps Revolutions per second
rpm Revolutions per minute
RR Residuary resistance (N)
RRh Residuary resistance of yacht hull (N)
RRK Residuary resistance of yacht keel (N)
RT Total hull resistance (N)
RV Viscous resistance (N)
RVK Viscous resistance of yacht keel (N)
RVR Viscous resistance of yacht rudder (N)
RW Wave resistance (N)
RWP Wave pattern resistance (N)
S Wetted surface area (m2 )
SAPP Wetted area of appendage (m2 )
SC Wetted surface area of yacht canoe body (m2 ) or separation
between catamaran demihull centrelines (m)
sfc Specific fuel consumption
SP Propeller/hull interaction on planing craft (N)
t Thrust deduction factor, or thickness of section (m)
T Draught (m), or propeller thrust (N), or wave period (secs)
TC Draught of yacht canoe body (m)
U Speed (m/s)
V Speed (m/s)
Va Wake speed (VS (1 − wT )) (m/s)
VA Relative or apparent wind velocity (m/s)
VK √ Ship speed (knots)
VK / Lf Speed length ratio (knots and feet)
VR Reference velocity (m/s)
VS Ship speed (m/s)
W Channel width (m)
wT Wake fraction
Z Number of blades of propeller
(1+k) Form-factor, monohull
(1+βk) Form factor, catamaran
1/ α Half angle of entrance of waterline (deg.), see also iE
2 E
xx Nomenclature

β Viscous resistance interference factor, or appendage scaling

factor, or deadrise angle of planing hull (deg.) or angle of relative
or apparent wind (deg.)
δ Boundary layer thickness (m)
ε Angle of propeller thrust line to heel (deg.)
ηD Propulsive coefficient (η0 ηH ηR )
ηO Open water efficiency (JKT /2π KQ )
ηH Hull efficiency (1 − t)/(1 − wT )
ηR Relative rotative efficiency
ηT Transmission efficiency
γ Surface tension (N/m), or wave height decay coefficient, or course
angle of yacht (deg.), or wave number
φ Heel angle (deg.), or hydrodynamic pitch angle (deg.)
λ Leeway angle (deg.)
μ Dynamic viscosity (g/ms)
ν Kinematic viscosity (μ/ρ) (m2 /s)
ρ Density of water (kg/m3 )
ρa Density of air (kg/m3 )
σ Cavitation number, or source strength, or allowable stress (N/m2 )
τ Wave resistance interference factor (catamaran
resistance/monohull resistance), or trim angle of planing hull
(deg.)
τc Thrust/unit area, cavitation (N/m2 )
τR Residuary resistance interference factor (catamaran
resistance/monohull resistance)
τW Surface or wall shear stress (N/m2 )
θ Wave angle (deg.)
ζ Wave elevation (m)
∇ Ship displacement volume (m3 )
∇C Displacement volume of yacht canoe body (m3 )
 Ship displacement mass (∇ρ) (tonnes), or displacement force
(∇ρg) (N)

Conversion of Units
1 m = 3.28 ft 1 ft = 12 in.
1 in. = 25.4 mm 1 km = 1000 m
1 kg = 2.205 lb 1 tonne = 1000 kg
1 ton = 2240 lb 1 lb = 4.45 N
1 lbs/in.2 = 6895 N/m2 1 bar = 14.7 lbs/in.2
1 mile = 5280 ft 1 nautical mile (Nm) = 6078 ft
1 mile/hr = 1.61 km/hr 1 knot = 1 Nm/hr
√
Fr = 0.2974 VK / L f 1 knot = 0.5144 m/s
1 HP = 0.7457 kW 1 UK gal = 4.546 litres
Abbreviations

ABS American Bureau of Shipping

AEW Admiralty Experiment Works (UK)
AFS Antifouling systems on ships
AHR Average hull roughness
AP After perpendicular
ARC Aeronautical Research Council (UK)
ATTC American Towing Tank Conference
BDC Bottom dead centre
BEM Boundary element method
BEMT Blade element-momentum theory
BMEP Brake mean effective pressure
BMT British Maritime Technology
BN Beaufort Number
BSRA British Ship Research Association
BTTP British Towing Tank Panel
CAD Computer-aided design
CCD Charge-coupled device
CFD Computational fluid dynamics
CG Centre of gravity
CLR Centre of lateral resistance
CODAG Combined diesel and gas
CP Controllable pitch (propeller)
CSR Continuous service rating
DES Detached eddy simulation
DNS Direct numerical simulation
DNV Det Norske Veritas
DSYHS Delft systematic yacht hull series
DTMB David Taylor Model Basin
EFD Experimental fluid dynamics
FEA Finite element analysis
FP Forward perpendicular, or fixed pitch (propeller)
FRP Fibre-reinforced plastic
FV Finite volume
xxi
xxii Abbreviations

GL Germanischer Lloyd
GPS Global Positioning System
HP Horsepower
HSVA Hamburg Ship Model Basin
IESS Institute of Engineers and Shipbuilders in Scotland
IMarE Institute of Marine Engineers (became IMarEST from 2001)
IMarEST Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology
IMechE Institution of Mechanical Engineers
IMO International Maritime Organisation
INSEAN Instituto di Architectura Navale (Rome)
ISO International Standards Organisation
ITTC International Towing Tank Conference
JASNAOE Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers
LCG Longitudinal centre of gravity
LDA Laser Doppler anemometry
LDV Laser Doppler velocimetry
LE Leading edge of foil or fin
LES Large eddy simulation
LR Lloyd’s Register of Shipping
MAA Mean apparent amplitude
MARIN Maritime Research Institute of the Netherlands (formerly NSMB)
MCR Maximum continuous rating
MEMS Microelectromechanical systems
NACA National Advisory Council for Aeronautics (USA)
NECIES North East Coast Institution of Engineers and Shipbuilders
NPL National Physical Laboratory (UK)
NSMB The Netherlands Ship Model Basin (later to become MARIN)
NTUA National Technical University of Athens
ORC Offshore Racing Congress
P Port
PIV Particle image velocimetry
QPC Quasi propulsive coefficient
RANS Reynolds Averaged Navier–Stokes
RB Round back (section)
RINA Royal Institution of Naval Architects
ROF Rise of floor
rpm Revolutions per minute
rps Revolutions per second
S Starboard
SAC Sectional area curve
SCF Ship correlation factor
SG Specific gravity
SNAJ Society of Naval Architects of Japan (later to become JASNAOE)
SNAK Society of Naval Architects of Korea
SNAME Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers (USA)
SP Self-propulsion
SSPA Statens Skeppsprovingansalt, Götaborg, Sweden
Abbreviations xxiii

STG Schiffbautechnische Gesellschaft, Hamburg

TBT Tributyltin
TDC Top dead centre
TDW Tons deadweight
TE Trailing edge of foil or fin
TEU Twenty foot equivalent unit [container]
UTS Ultimate tensile stress
VCB Vertical centre of buoyancy
VLCC Very large crude carrier
VPP Velocity prediction program
VWS Versuchsanstalt für Wasserbau und Schiffbau Berlin (Berlin
Model Basin)
WUMTIA Wolfson Unit for Marine Technology and Industrial
Aerodynamics, University of Southampton
Figure Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge with thanks the assistance given by the following com-
panies and publishers in permitting the reproduction of illustrations and tables from
their publications:
Figures 8.5, 10.7, 10.9, 10.10, 10.12, 12.24, 14.17, 14.18, 14.19, 14.20, 14.21, 14.22,
14.23, 14.24, 14.30, 15.4, 15.14, 15.15, 15.17, 16.1, 16.2 and Tables A3.13,
A3.14, A3.15, A4.3 reprinted courtesy of The Society of Naval Architects and
Marine Engineers (SNAME), New York.
Figures 3.28, 3.29, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 7.6, 7.10, 7.16, 7.28, 8.4, 10.2, 10.3, 10.4, 10.5,
10.13, 10.14, 10.20, 10.21, 12.26, 14.15, 16.7, 16.8, 16.9, 16.10, 16.15, 16.16,
16.17, 16.19, 16.26 and Tables A3.1, A3.6, A3.24, A3.25, A3.26, A4.4, A4.5
reprinted courtesy of The Royal Institution of Naval Architects (RINA),
London.
Figures 10.11, 16.24 and Tables A3.2, A3.3, A3.4, A3.5, A3.12, A3.23, A4.1,
A4.2, A4.6 reprinted courtesy of IOS Press BV, Amsterdam.
Figures 4.8, 8.3, 8.12, 8.13, 16.3, 16.4, 16.5, 16.6, 16.13 reprinted courtesy of
MARIN, Wageningen.
Figure 10.23 and Tables 10.13, 10.14, 10.15, 10.16, 10.17 reprinted courtesy of
The HISWA Symposium Foundation, Amsterdam.
Figures A1.1, A1.7, A1.8 and Sections A1.1–A1.7 reprinted courtesy of Elsevier
Ltd., Oxford.
Figure 10.22 reprinted courtesy of The Japan Society of Naval Architects and
Ocean Engineers (JASNAOE), Tokyo (formerly The Society of Naval Archi-
tects of Japan (SNAJ), Tokyo).
Figure 3.10 reprinted courtesy of WUMTIA, University of Southampton and
Dubois Naval Architects Ltd., Lymington.
Figure 7.3 reprinted courtesy of WUMTIA, University of Southampton.
Figure 12.29 reprinted courtesy of The University of Newcastle upon Tyne.
Figures 12.31, 13.9, 15.17 reprinted courtesy of The North East Coast Institution
of Engineers and Shipbuilders (NECIES), Newcastle upon Tyne.
Table A3.7 reprinted courtesy of Ship Technology Research, Hamburg.
Table A3.27 reprinted courtesy of STG, Hamburg.

xxv
xxvi Figure Acknowledgements

Figure 10.6 reprinted courtesy of BMT Group Ltd., Teddington.

Figure 12.25 reprinted courtesy of The Institution of Mechanical Engineers
(IMechE), London.
Figures 16.27, 16.28 and Tables 16.8, 16.9 reprinted courtesy of The Offshore
Racing Congress (ORC).
 1 Introduction

The estimation of ship propulsive power is fundamental to the process of design-

ing and operating a ship. A knowledge of the propulsive power enables the size
and mass of the propulsion engines to be established and estimates made of the
fuel consumption and operating costs. The estimation of power entails the use of
experimental techniques, numerical methods and theoretical analysis for the vari-
ous aspects of the powering problem. The requirement for this stems from the
need to determine the correct match between the installed power and the ship hull
form during the design process. An understanding of ship resistance and propulsion
derives from the fundamental behaviour of fluid flow. The complexity inherent in
ship hydrodynamic design arises from the challenges of scaling from practical model
sizes and the unsteady flow interactions between the viscous ship boundary layer,
the generated free-surface wave system and a propulsor operating in a spatially
varying inflow.

History
Up to the early 1860s, little was really understood about ship resistance and many of
the ideas on powering at that time were erroneous. Propeller design was very much
a question of trial and error. The power installed in ships was often wrong and it was
clear that there was a need for a method of estimating the power to be installed in
order to attain a certain speed.
In 1870, W. Froude initiated an investigation into ship resistance with the use of
models. He noted that the wave configurations around geometrically similar forms
were similar if compared at corresponding speeds, that is, speeds proportional to
the square root of the model length. He propounded that the total resistance could
be divided into skin friction resistance and residuary, mainly wavemaking, resist-
ance. He derived estimates of frictional resistance from a series of measurements
on planks of different lengths and with different surface finishes [1.1], [1.2]. Specific
residuary resistance, or resistance per ton displacement, would remain constant at
corresponding speeds between model and ship. His proposal was initially not well
received, but gained favour after full-scale tests had been carried out. HMS Grey-
hound (100 ft) was towed by a larger vessel and the results showed a substantial level
of agreement with the model predictions [1.3]. Model tests had been vindicated and
1
2 Ship Resistance and Propulsion

the way opened for the realistic prediction of ship power. In a 1877 paper, Froude
gave a detailed explanation of wavemaking resistance which lent further support to
his methodology [1.4].
In the 1860s, propeller design was hampered by a lack of understanding of neg-
ative, or apparent, slip; naval architects were not fully aware of the effect of wake.
Early propeller theories were developed to enhance the propeller design process,
including the momentum theory of Rankine [1.5] in 1865, the blade element the-
ory of Froude [1.6] in 1878 and the actuator disc theory of Froude [1.7] in 1889.
In 1910, Luke [1.8] published the first of three important papers on wake, allowing
more realistic estimates of wake to be made for propeller design purposes. Cavit-
ation was not known as such at this time, although several investigators, including
Reynolds [1.9], were attempting to describe its presence in various ways. Barnaby
[1.10] goes some way to describing cavitation, including the experience of Parsons
with Turbinia. During this period, propeller blade area was based simply on thrust
loading, without a basic understanding of cavitation.
By the 1890s the full potential of model resistance tests had been realised.
Routine testing was being carried out for specific ships and tests were also being
carried out on series of models. A notable early contribution to this is the work of
Taylor [1.11], [1.12] which was closely followed by Baker [1.13].
The next era saw a steady stream of model resistance tests, including the study
of the effects of changes in hull parameters, the effects of shallow water and to chal-
lenge the suitability and correctness of the Froude friction values [1.14]. There was
an increasing interest in the performance of ships in rough water. Several investig-
ations were carried out to determine the influence of waves on motions and added
resistance, both at model scale and from full-scale ship measurements [1.15].
Since about the 1960s there have been many developments in propulsor types.
These include various enhancements to the basic marine propeller such as tip fins,
varying degrees of sweep, changes in section design to suit specific purposes and
the addition of ducts. Contra-rotating propellers have been revisited, cycloidal pro-
pellers have found new applications, waterjets have been introduced and podded
units have been developed. Propulsion-enhancing devices have been proposed and
introduced including propeller boss cap fins, upstream preswirl fins or ducts, twis-
ted rudders and fins on rudders. It can of course be noted that these devices are
generally at their most efficient in particular specific applications.
From about the start of the 1980s, the potential future of computational fluid
dynamics (CFD) was fully realised. This would include the modelling of the flow
around the hull and the derivation of viscous resistance and free-surface waves. This
generated the need for high quality benchmark data for the physical components of
resistance necessary for the validation of the CFD. Much of the earlier data of the
1970s were revisited and new benchmark data developed, in particular, for viscous
and wave drag. Much of the gathering of such data has been coordinated by the
International Towing Tank Conference (ITTC). Typical examples of the applica-
tion of CFD to hull form development and resistance prediction are given in [1.16]
and [1.17].
Propeller theories had continued to be developed in order to improve the pro-
peller design process. Starting from the work of Rankine, Froude and Perring, these
included blade element-momentum theories, such as Burrill [1.18] in 1944, and
Introduction 3

Fuel V
Propulsor

PD Main
T Transmission PS R
engine

Figure 1.1. Overall concept of energy conversion.

Lerbs [1.19] in 1952 using a development of the lifting line and lifting surface meth-
ods where vorticity is distributed over the blade. Vortex lattice methods, bound-
ary element, or panel, methods and their application to propellers began in the
1980s. The 1990s saw the application of CFD and Reynolds-Averaged Navier–
Stokes (RANS) solvers applied to propeller design and, bringing us to the current
period, CFD modelling of the combined hull and propeller [1.20].

Powering: Overall Concept

The overall concept of the powering system may be seen as converting the energy
of the fuel into useful thrust (T) to match the ship resistance (R) at the required
speed (V), Figure 1.1. It is seen that the overall efficiency of the propulsion system
will depend on:

Fuel type, properties and quality.

The efficiency of the engine in converting the fuel energy into useful transmit-
table power.
The efficiency of the propulsor in converting the power (usually rotational) into
useful thrust (T).

The following chapters concentrate on the performance of the hull and

propulsor, considering, for a given situation, how resistance (R) and thrust (T) may
be estimated and then how resistance may be minimised and thrust maximised.
Accounts of the properties and performance of engines are summarised separately.
The main components of powering may be summarised as the effective power
PE to tow the vessel in calm water, where PE = R × V and the propulsive efficiency
η, leading to the propulsive (or delivered) power PD , defined as: PD = PE /η. This is
the traditional breakdown and allows the assessment of the individual components
to be made and potential improvements to be investigated.

Improvements in Efficiency
The factors that drive research and investigation into improving the overall effi-
ciency of the propulsion of ships are both economic and environmental. The main
economic drivers amount to the construction costs, disposal costs, ship speed and, in
particular, fuel costs. These need to be combined in such a way that the shipowner
makes an adequate rate of return on the investment. The main environmental
drivers amount to emissions, pollution, noise, antifoulings and wave wash.
The emissions from ships include NOx, SOx and CO2 , a greenhouse gas. Whilst
NOx and SOx mainly affect coastal regions, carbon dioxide (CO2 ) emissions have a
4 Ship Resistance and Propulsion

Table 1.1. Potential savings in resistance and propulsive efficiency

RESISTANCE Principal dimensions: main hull form parameters, U- or

(a) Hull resistance V-shape sections
Local detail: bulbous bows, vortex generators
Frictional resistance: WSA, surface finish, coatings
(b) Appendages Bilge keels, shaft brackets, rudders: careful design
(c) Air drag Design and fairing of superstructures
Stowage of containers

PROPULSIVE EFFICIENCY Choice of main dimensions: D, P/D, BAR, optimum

(d) Propeller diameter, rpm.
Local detail: section shape, tip fins, twist, tip rake, skew etc.
Surface finish
(e) Propeller–hull interaction Main effects: local hull shape, U, V or ‘circular’ forms
[resistance vs. propulsion]
Changes in wake, thrust deduction, hull efficiency
Design of appendages: such as shaft brackets and rudders
Local detail: such as pre- and postswirl fins, upstream duct,
twisted rudders

global climatic impact and a concentrated effort is being made worldwide towards
their reduction. The International Maritime Organisation (IMO) is co-ordinating
efforts in the marine field, and the possibilities of CO2 Emissions Control and an
Emissions Trading Scheme are under consideration.
The likely extension of a carbon dioxide based emissions control mechanism
to international shipping will influence the selection of propulsion system compon-
ents together with ship particulars. Fuel costs have always provided an economic
imperative to improve propulsive efficiency. The relative importance of fuel costs
to overall operational costs influences the selection of design parameters such as
dimensions, speed and trading pattern. Economic and environmental pressures thus
combine to create a situation which demands a detailed appraisal of the estimation
of ship propulsive power and the choice of suitable machinery. There are, how-
ever, some possible technical changes that will decrease emissions, but which may
not be economically viable. Many of the auxiliary powering devices using renewable
energy sources, and enhanced hull coatings, are likely to come into this category. On
the basis that emissions trading for ships may be introduced in the future, all means
of improvement in powering and reduction in greenhouse gas emissions should be
explored and assessed, even if such improvements may not be directly economically
viable.
The principal areas where improvements might be expected to be made at the
design stage are listed in Table 1.1. It is divided into sections concerned first with
resistance and then propulsive efficiency, but noting that the two are closely related
in terms of hull form, wake fraction and propeller–hull interaction. It is seen that
there is a wide range of potential areas for improving propulsive efficiency.
Power reductions can also be achieved through changes and improvements in
operational procedures, such as running at a reduced speed, weather routeing, run-
ning at optimum trim, using hydrodynamically efficient hull coatings, hull/propeller
cleaning and roll stabilisation. Auxiliary propulsion devices may also be employed,
including wind assist devices such as sails, rotors, kites and wind turbines, wave
propulsion devices and solar energy.
Introduction 5

The following chapters describe the basic components of ship powering and
how they can be estimated in a practical manner in the early stages of a ship design.
The early chapters describe fundamental principles and the estimation of the basic
components of resistance, together with influences such as shallow water, fouling
and rough weather. The efficiency of various propulsors is described including the
propeller, ducted propeller, supercavitating propeller, surface piercing and podded
propellers and waterjets. Attention is paid to their design and off design cases and
how improvements in efficiency may be made. Databases of hull resistance and pro-
peller performance are included in Chapters 10 and 16. Worked examples of the
overall power estimate using both the resistance and propulsion data are described
in Chapter 17.
References are provided at the end of each chapter. Further more detailed
accounts of particular subject areas may be found in the publications referenced
and in the more specialised texts such as [1.21] to [1.29].

REFERENCES (CHAPTER 1)

1.1 Froude, W. Experiments on the surface-friction experienced by a plane moving

through water, 42nd Report of the British Association for the Advancement of
Science, Brighton, 1872.
1.2 Froude, W. Report to the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty on experi-
ments for the determination of the frictional resistance of water on a surface,
under various conditions, performed at Chelston Cross, under the Authority
of their Lordships, 44th Report by the British Association for the Advancement
of Science, Belfast, 1874.
1.3 Froude, W. On experiments with HMS Greyhound. Transactions of the Royal
Institution of Naval Architects, Vol. 15, 1874, pp. 36–73.
1.4 Froude, W. Experiments upon the effect produced on the wave-making res-
istance of ships by length of parallel middle body. Transactions of the Royal
Institution of Naval Architects, Vol. 18, 1877, pp. 77–97.
1.5 Rankine, W.J. On the mechanical principles of the action of propellers.
Transactions of the Royal Institution of Naval Architects, Vol. 6, 1865,
pp. 13–35.
1.6 Froude, W. On the elementary relation between pitch, slip and propulsive effi-
ciency. Transactions of the Royal Institution of Naval Architects, Vol. 19, 1878,
pp. 47–65.
1.7 Froude, R.E. On the part played in propulsion by differences in fluid pres-
sure. Transactions of the Royal Institution of Naval Architects, Vol. 30, 1889,
pp. 390–405.
1.8 Luke, W.J. Experimental investigation on wake and thrust deduction val-
ues. Transactions of the Royal Institution of Naval Architects, Vol. 52, 1910,
pp. 43–57.
1.9 Reynolds, O. The causes of the racing of the engines of screw steamers invest-
igated theoretically and by experiment. Transactions of the Royal Institution of
Naval Architects, Vol. 14, 1873, pp. 56–67.
1.10 Barnaby, S.W. Some further notes on cavitation. Transactions of the Royal
Institution of Naval Architects, Vol. 53, 1911, pp. 219–232.
1.11 Taylor, D.W. The influence of midship section shape upon the resistance of
ships. Transactions of the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers,
Vol. 16, 1908.
1.12 Taylor, D.W. The Speed and Power of Ships. U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, DC, 1943.
1.13 Baker, G.S. Methodical experiments with mercantile ship forms. Transactions
of the Royal Institution of Naval Architects, Vol. 55, 1913, pp. 162–180.
6 Ship Resistance and Propulsion

1.14 Stanton, T.E. The law of comparison for surface friction and eddy-making res-
istance in fluids. Transactions of the Royal Institution of Naval Architects, Vol.
54, 1912, pp. 48–57.
1.15 Kent, J.L. The effect of wind and waves on the propulsion of ships. Transac-
tions of the Royal Institution of Naval Architects, Vol. 66, 1924, pp. 188–213.
1.16 Valkhof, H.H., Hoekstra, M. and Andersen, J.E. Model tests and CFD in hull
form optimisation. Transactions of the Society of Naval Architects and Marine
Engineers, Vol. 106, 1998, pp. 391–412.
1.17 Huan, J.C. and Huang, T.T. Surface ship total resistance prediction based on a
nonlinear free surface potential flow solver and a Reynolds-averaged Navier-
Stokes viscous correction. Journal of Ship Research, Vol. 51, 2007, pp. 47–64.
1.18 Burrill, L.C. Calculation of marine propeller performance characteristics.
Transactions of the North East Coast Institution of Engineers and Shipbuild-
ers, Vol. 60, 1944.
1.19 Lerbs, H.W. Moderately loaded propellers with a finite number of blades and
an arbitrary distribution of circulation. Transactions of the Society of Naval
Architects and Marine Engineers, Vol. 60, 1952, pp. 73–123.
1.20 Turnock, S.R., Phillips, A.B. and Furlong, M. URANS simulations of static
drift and dynamic manoeuvres of the KVLCC2 tanker, Proceedings of the SIM-
MAN International Manoeuvring Workshop, Copenhagen, April 2008.
1.21 Lewis, E.V. (ed.) Principles of Naval Architecture. The Society of Naval Archi-
tects and Marine Engineers, New York, 1988.
1.22 Harvald, S.A. Resistance and Propulsion of Ships. Wiley Interscience, New
York, 1983.
1.23 Breslin, J.P. and Andersen, P. Hydrodynamics of Ship Propellers. Cambridge
Ocean Technology Series, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1996.
1.24 Carlton, J.S. Marine Propellers and Propulsion. 2nd Edition, Butterworth-
Heinemann, Oxford, UK, 2007.
1.25 Bose, N. Marine Powering Predictions and Propulsors. The Society of Naval
Architects and Marine Engineers, New York, 2008.
1.26 Faltinsen, O.M. Hydrodynamics of High-Speed Marine Vehicles. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2005.
1.27 Bertram, V. Practical Ship Hydrodynamics. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford,
UK, 2000.
1.28 Kerwin, J.E. and Hadler, J.B. Principles of Naval Architecture: Propulsion.
The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, New York, 2010.
1.29 Larsson, L. and Raven, H.C. Principles of Naval Architecture: Ship Resistance
and Flow. The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, New York,
2010.
 2 Propulsive Power

2.1 Components of Propulsive Power

During the course of designing a ship it is necessary to estimate the power required
to propel the ship at a particular speed. This allows estimates to be made of:

(a) Machinery masses, which are a function of the installed power, and
(b) The expected fuel consumption and tank capacities.

The power estimate for a new design is obtained by comparison with an existing
similar vessel or from model tests. In either case it is necessary to derive a power
estimate for one size of craft from the power requirement of a different size of craft.
That is, it is necessary to be able to scale powering estimates.
The different components of the powering problem scale in different ways and it
is therefore necessary to estimate each component separately and apply the correct
scaling laws to each.
One fundamental division in conventional powering methods is to distinguish
between the effective power required to drive the ship and the power delivered to the
propulsion unit(s). The power delivered to the propulsion unit exceeds the effective
power by virtue of the efficiency of the propulsion unit being less than 100%.
The main components considered when establishing the ship power comprise
the ship resistance to motion, the propeller open water efficiency and the hull–
propeller interaction efficiency, and these are summarised in Figure 2.1.
Ship power predictions are made either by

(1) Model experiments and extrapolation, or

(2) Use of standard series data (hull resistance series and propeller series), or
(3) Theoretical (e.g. components of resistance and propeller design).
(4) A mixture of (1) and (2) or (1), (2) and (3).

2.2 Propulsion Systems

When making power estimates it is necessary to have an understanding of the per-
formance characteristics of the chosen propulsion system, as these determine the
operation and overall efficiency of the propulsion unit.

7
8 Ship Resistance and Propulsion

Naked resistance + appendages etc.

Propeller chatacteristics
in open water

Propeller 'boat'
(or cavitation tunnel)

Self-propulsion
(Hull–propeller
PD PS interaction)
PE

Figure 2.1. Components of ship powering – main considerations.

A fundamental requirement of any ship propulsion system is the efficient con-

version of the power (P) available from the main propulsion engine(s) [prime
mover] into useful thrust (T) to propel the ship at the required speed (V),
Figure 2.2.
There are several forms of main propulsion engines including:

Diesel.
Gas turbine.
Steam turbine.
Electric.
(And variants / combinations of these).

and various propulsors (generally variants of a propeller) which convert the power
into useful thrust, including:

Propeller, fixed pitch (FP).

Propeller, controllable pitch (CP).
Ducted propeller.
Waterjet.
Azimuthing podded units.
(And variants of these).

Each type of propulsion engine and propulsor has its own advantages and dis-
advantages, and applications and limitations, including such fundamental attributes
as size, cost and efficiency. All of the these propulsion options are in current use
and the choice of a particular propulsion engine and propulsor will depend on the
ship type and its design and operational requirements. Propulsors and propulsion
machinery are described in Chapters 11 and 13.

P
T

Figure 2.2. Conversion of power to thrust.

Propulsive Power 9

The overall assessment of the marine propulsion system for a particular vessel
will therefore require:

(1) A knowledge of the required thrust (T) at a speed (V), and its conversion into
required power (P),
(2) A knowledge and assessment of the physical properties and efficiencies of the
available propulsion engines,
(3) The assessment of the various propulsors and engine-propulsor layouts.

2.3 Definitions
(1) Effective power (PE ) = power required to tow the ship at
the required speed
= total resistance × ship speed
= RT × VS
(2) Thrust power (PT ) = propeller thrust × speed past
propeller
= T × Va
(3) Delivered power (PD ) = power required to be delivered to
the propulsion unit (at the tailshaft)
effective power PE .
(4) Quasi-propulsive coefficient (QPC) (ηD ) = = P
delivered power D

The total installed power will exceed the delivered power by the amount of power
lost in the transmission system (shafting and gearing losses), and by a design power
margin to allow for roughness, fouling and weather, i.e.
delivered power
(5) Transmission Efficiency (ηT ) = , hence,
power required at engine
(6) Installed power (PI ) = ηPE × η1 + margin (roughness, fouling and weather)
D T

The powering problem is thus separated into three parts:

(1) The estimation of effective power

(2) The estimation of QPC (ηD )
(3) The estimation of required power margins

The estimation of the effective power requirement involves the estimation of

the total resistance or drag of the ship made up of:

1. Main hull naked resistance.

2. Resistance of appendages such as shafting, shaft brackets, rudders, fin stabilisers
and bilge keels.
3. Air resistance of the hull above water.

The QPC depends primarily upon the efficiency of the propulsion device, but
also depends on the interaction of the propulsion device and the hull. Propulsor
types and their performance characteristics are described in Chapters 11, 12 and 16.
The required power margin for fouling and weather will depend on the areas of
operation and likely sea conditions and will typically be between 15% and 30% of
installed power. Power margins are described in Chapter 3.
10 Ship Resistance and Propulsion

Notes
Naked resistance of hull
Estimate total calm water
1 Resistance RT at Speed V
+ resistance of appendages
+ still air resistance

Effective power PE
2 RT x V

ηD = η 0 η H η R
Estimate quasi-propulsive η0 = open water efficiency
3 coefficient (ηD) ηH = hull efficiency = (1 - t)/(1 - wT)
ηR = relative rotative efficiency

Delivered power PD
4 PD = PE / ηD

Correlation between model and

ship. Corrects for differences
Estimate model-ship
5 correlation factor SCF
between model predictions for
delivered power in calm water
and ship trial results.

Corrected delivered power

6 PDship = PDmodel x SCF

Losses between delivered power

Transmission losses (at tailshaft) and that provided by
7 ηT
engine, typically ηT = 0.98 for
engine(s) aft, ηT = 0.95 for geared
main engines.

Service power Ps
8 Ps = PDship / ηT

Allowances on installed power for

Margins roughness, fouling and weather,
9 Roughness, fouling, weather typically 15%–30% depending on
service and route.

Total installed power PI PI = (PE /ηD) x SCF x (1/ηT) + margins.

10 (shaft or brake power)

Figure 2.3. Components of the ship power estimate.

The overall components of the ship power estimate are summarised in Sec-
tion 2.4.

2.4 Components of the Ship Power Estimate

The various components of the ship power estimate and the stages in the powering
process are summarised in Figure 2.3.
The total calm water resistance is made up of the hull naked resistance, together
with the resistance of appendages and the air resistance.
The propeller quasi-propulsive coefficient (QPC), or ηD , is made up of the open
water, hull and relative rotative efficiencies. The hull efficiency is derived as (1 − t)/
(1 − w T ), where t is the thrust deduction factor and w T is the wake fraction.
Propulsive Power 11

For clarity, the model-ship correlation allowance is included as a single-ship

correlation factor, SCF, applied to the overall delivered power. Current practice
recommends more detailed corrections to individual components of the resist-
ance estimate and to the components of propeller efficiency. This is discussed in
Chapter 5.
Transmission losses, ηT , between the engine and tailshaft/propeller are typically
about ηT = 0.98 for direct drive engines aft, and ηT = 0.95 for transmission via a
gearbox.
The margins in stage 9 account for the increase in resistance, hence power, due
to roughness, fouling and weather. They are derived in a scientific manner for the
purpose of installing propulsion machinery with an adequate reserve of power. This
stage should not be seen as adding a margin to allow for uncertainty in the earlier
stages of the power estimate.
The total installed power, PI , will typically relate to the MCR (maximum con-
tinuous rating) or CSR (continuous service rating) of the main propulsion engine,
depending on the practice of the ship operator.
 3 Components of Hull Resistance

3.1 Physical Components of Main Hull Resistance

3.1.1 Physical Components

An understanding of the components of ship resistance and their behaviour is
important as they are used in scaling the resistance of one ship to that of another size
or, more commonly, scaling resistance from tests at model size to full size. Such res-
istance estimates are subsequently used in estimating the required propulsive power.
Observation of a ship moving through water indicates two features of the flow,
Figure 3.1, namely that there is a wave pattern moving with the hull and there is a
region of turbulent flow building up along the length of the hull and extending as a
wake behind the hull.
Both of these features of the flow absorb energy from the hull and, hence, con-
stitute a resistance force on the hull. This resistance force is transmitted to the hull
as a distribution of pressure and shear forces over the hull; the shear stress arises
because of the viscous property of the water.
This leads to the first possible physical breakdown of resistance which considers
the forces acting:

(1) Frictional resistance

The fore and aft components of the tangential shear forces τ acting on each
element of the hull surface, Figure 3.2, can be summed over the hull to produce the
total shear resistance or frictional resistance.

(2) Pressure resistance

The fore and aft components of the pressure force P acting on each element
of hull surface, Figure 3.2, can be summed over the hull to produce a total pressure
resistance.
The frictional drag arises purely because of the viscosity, but the pressure drag
is due in part to viscous effects and to hull wavemaking.
An alternative physical breakdown of resistance considers energy dissipation.

(3) Total viscous resistance

12
Components of Hull Resistance 13

Wake Wave pattern

Figure 3.1. Waves and wake.

2
Bernoulli’s theorem (see Appendix A1.5) states that Pg + V2g + h = H and, in
the absence of viscous forces, H is constant throughout the flow. By means of a
Pitôt tube, local total head can be measured. Since losses in total head are due to
viscous forces, it is possible to measure the total viscous resistance by measuring the
total head loss in the wake behind the hull, Figure 3.3.
This resistance will include the skin frictional resistance and part of the pressure
resistance force, since the total head losses in the flow along the hull due to viscous
forces result in a pressure loss over the afterbody which gives rise to a resistance due
to pressure forces.

(4) Total wave resistance

The wave pattern created by the hull can be measured and analysed into its
component waves. The energy required to sustain each wave component can be
estimated and, hence, the total wave resistance component obtained.
Thus, by physical measurement it is possible to identify the following methods
of breaking down the total resistance of a hull:

1. Pressure resistance + frictional resistance

2. Viscous resistance + remainder
3. Wave resistance + remainder

These three can be combined to give a final resistance breakdown as:

Total resistance = Frictional resistance

+ Viscous pressure resistance
+ Wave resistance

The experimental methods used to derive the individual components of resistance

are described in Chapter 7.

τ P

Figure 3.2. Frictional and pressure forces.

14 Ship Resistance and Propulsion

Figure 3.3. Measurement of total viscous resistance.

It should also be noted that each of the resistance components obeys a different
set of scaling laws and the problem of scaling is made more complex because of
interaction between these components.
A summary of these basic hydrodynamic components of ship resistance is shown
in Figure 3.4. When considering the forces acting, the total resistance is made up of
the sum of the tangential shear and normal pressure forces acting on the wetted
surface of the vessel, as shown in Figure 3.2 and at the top of Figure 3.4. When
considering energy dissipation, the total resistance is made up of the sum of the
energy dissipated in the wake and the energy used in the creation of waves, as shown
in Figure 3.1 and at the bottom of Figure 3.4.
Figure 3.5 shows a more detailed breakdown of the basic resistance compon-
ents together with other contributing components, including wave breaking, spray,
transom and induced resistance. The total skin friction in Figure 3.5 has been divided
into two-dimensional flat plate friction and three-dimensional effects. This is used to
illustrate the breakdown in respect to some model-to-ship extrapolation methods,
discussed in Chapter 4, which use flat plate friction data.
Wave breaking and spray can be important in high-speed craft and, in the case
of the catamaran, significant wave breaking may occur between the hulls at partic-
ular speeds. Wave breaking and spray should form part of the total wavemaking

Total ( = Pressure + Friction

i.e. local water forces acting on hull)

(Normal forces (Tangential shear

Pressure on hull)
Friction forces on hull)

Viscous pressure (Note: in deeply submerged

submarine (or aircraft) wave = 0
and Viscous pressure = pressure)

(Energy in wave pattern) (Energy lost in wake)

Wave Viscous

Total ( = Wave + Viscous

i.e. energy dissipation)

Figure 3.4. Basic resistance components.

Components of Hull Resistance 15

Total CT

Pressure CP Skin friction CF

(normal force) (tangential shear force)

3-Dim. Effects 2-Dim.

ΔCF CFo

Viscous pressure
CVP

Wave Wave breaking

Transom drag
pattern and spray

Induced
drag

Total wave CW Total viscous CV

(energy in waves) (energy lost in wake)

Total CT

Figure 3.5. Detailed resistance components.

resistance, but, in practice, this energy will normally be lost in the wake; the dotted
line in Figure 3.5 illustrates this effect.
The transom stern, used on most high-speed vessels, is included as a pressure
drag component. It is likely that the large low-pressure area directly behind the
transom, which causes the transom to be at atmospheric pressure rather than stagna-
tion pressure, causes waves and wave breaking and spray which are not fully trans-
mitted to the far field. Again, this energy is likely to be lost in the wake, as illustrated
by the dotted line in Figure 3.5.
Induced drag will be generated in the case of yachts, resulting from the lift pro-
duced by keels and rudders. Catamarans can also create induced drag because of
the asymmetric nature of the flow between and over their hulls and the resulting
production of lift or sideforce on the individual hulls. An investigation reported in
[3.1] indicates that the influence of induced drag for catamarans is likely to be very
small. Multihulls, such as catamarans or trimarans, will also have wave resistance
interaction between the hulls, which may be favourable or unfavourable, depending
on ship speed and separation of the hulls.
Lackenby [3.2] provides further useful and detailed discussions of the compon-
ents of ship resistance and their interdependence, whilst [3.3 and 3.4] pay particular
attention to the resistance components of catamarans.
The following comments are made on the resistance components of some high-
speed craft and sailing vessels.
16 Ship Resistance and Propulsion

FP
FH

V
CG

RF
τ
Δ

Figure 3.6. Planing craft forces.

3.1.1.1 Planing Craft

The basic forces acting are shown in Figure 3.6 where, for a trim angle τ , FP
is the pressure force over the wetted surface, FH is the hydrostatic force acting at
the centre of pressure of the hull and RF is the skin friction resistance. Trim τ has
an important influence on drag and, for efficient planing, τ is small. As the speed of
planing is increased, the wetted length and consequently the wedge volume decrease
rapidly, lift becomes mainly dynamic and FH  FP . A reasonable proportion of
buoyant reaction should be maintained, for example in the interests of seakeeping.
The resistance components may be summarised as

RT = RF + RW + RI , (3.1)

where RI is the drag resulting from the inclination of the pressure force FP to the
vertical. At high speed, wavemaking resistance RW becomes small. Spray resistance
may be important, depending on hull shape and the use of spray rails, according
to Savitsky et al. [3.5]. The physics of planing and the forces acting are described
in some detail in [3.6] and [3.7]. The estimation of the resistance of planing craft is
described in Chapter 10.

3.1.1.2 Sailing Vessels

The sailing vessel has the same basic resistance components as a displacement or
semi-displacement craft, together with extra components. The fundamental extra
component incurred by a sailing vessel is the induced drag resulting from the lift
produced by the keel(s) and rudder(s) when moving at a yaw angle. The produc-
tion of lift is fundamental to resisting the sideforce(s) produced by the sails, Fig-
ure 11.12. Some consider the resistance due to heel a separate resistance, to be
added to the upright resistance. Further information on sailing vessels may be
obtained from [3.8] and [3.9]. The estimation of the resistance of sailing craft is
outlined in Chapter 10.

3.1.1.3 Hovercraft and Hydrofoils

Hovercraft (air cushion vehicles) and hydrofoil craft have resistance components
that are different from those of displacement and semi-displacement ships and
require separate treatment. Outline summaries of their components are given as
follows:

(1) Air cushion vehicles (including surface effect ships or sidewall hovercraft).
Components of Hull Resistance 17

The components of resistance for air cushion vehicles include

(a) Aerodynamic (or profile) drag of the above-water vehicle

(b) Inlet momentum drag due to the ingestion of air through the lift fan, where the
air must acquire the craft speed
(c) Drag due to trim

The trim drag is the resultant force of two physical effects: 1) the wave drag due to
the pressure in the cushion creating a wave pattern and 2) outlet momentum effects
due to a variable air gap at the base of the cushion and consequent non-uniform
air outflow. The air gap is usually larger at the stern than at the bow and thus the
outflow momentum creates a forward thrust.

(d) Other resistance components include sidewall drag (if present) for surface effect
ships, water appendage drag (if any) and intermittent water contact and spray
generation

For hovercraft with no sidewalls, the intermittent water contact and spray genera-
tion drag are usually estimated as that drag not accounted for by (a)–(c).
The total power estimate for air cushion vehicles will consist of the propuls-
ive power required to overcome the resistance components (a)–(d) and the lift fan
power required to sustain the cushion pressure necessary to support the craft weight
at the required (design) air gap. The basic physics, design and performance charac-
teristics of hovercraft are described in some detail in [3.6], [3.7], [3.10] and [3.12].

(2) Hydrofoil-supported craft

Hydrofoil-supported craft experience the same resistance components on their

hulls as conventional semi-displacement and planing hulls at lower speeds and as
they progress to being supported by the foils. In addition to the hull resistance,
there is the resistance due to the foil support system. This consists of the drag of
the non-lifting components such as vertical support struts, antiventilation fences,
rudders and propeller shafting and the drag of the lifting foils. The lifting foil drag
comprises the profile drag of the foil section, the induced drag caused by genera-
tion of lift and the wavemaking drag of the foil beneath the free surface. The lift
generated by a foil in proximity to the free surface is reduced from that of a deeply
immersed foil because of wavemaking, flow curvature and a reduction in onset flow
speed. The induced drag is increased relative to a deeply submerged foil as a result
of the free surface increasing the downwash. The basic physics, design and perform-
ance characteristics of hydrofoil craft are described in some detail in [3.6], [3.7] and
[3.11].

3.1.2 Momentum Analysis of Flow Around Hull

3.1.2.1 Basic Considerations
The resistance of the hull is clearly related to the momentum changes taking place
in the flow. An analysis of these momentum changes provides a precise definition of
what is meant by each resistance component in terms of energy dissipation.
18 Ship Resistance and Propulsion

z
y

z=0
w
v

U
U+u

z=-h
A B
Figure 3.7. Momentum analysis.

Consider a model held in a stream of speed U in a rectangular channel of

breadth b and depth h, Figure 3.7. The momentum changes in the fluid passing
through the ‘control box’ from plane A to plane B downstream can be related to
the forces on the control planes and the model.
Let the free-surface elevation be z = ζ (x, y) where ζ is taken as small, and let
the disturbance to the flow have a velocity q = (u, v, w). For continuity of flow, flow
through A = flow through B,
b/2 ς B
U ·b·h = (U + u)dz dy (3.2)
−b/2 −h

where ς B = ς(x B,y). The momentum flowing out through B in unit time is
b/2 ς B
MB = ρ (U + u)2 dz dy. (3.3)
−b/2 −h

The momentum flowing in through A in unit time is

MA = ρU 2 · b · h.
Substituting for U · b · h from Equation (3.2),
b/2 ς B
MA = ρ U(U + u)dz dy. (3.4)
−b/2 −h

Hence, the rate of change of momentum of fluid flowing through the control box is
MB − MA
i.e.
b/2 ς B
MB − MA = ρ u(U + u)dz dy. (3.5)
−b/2 −h

This rate of change of momentum can be equated to the forces on the fluid in the
control box and, neglecting friction on the walls, these are R (hull resistance), FA
Components of Hull Resistance 19

(pressure force on plane A) and FB (pressure force on plane B). Therefore, MB −

MA = − R + FA − FB .
Bernoulli’s equation can be used to derive expressions for the pressures at A
and B, hence, for forces FA and FB
PA 1 PB 1 P
H= + U 2 + gz = + [(U + u)2 + v 2 + w2 ] + gzB + , (3.6)
ρ 2 ρ 2 ρ
where P is the loss of pressure in the boundary layer and P/ρ is the correspond-
ing loss in total head.
If atmospheric pressure is taken as zero, then ahead of the model, PA = 0 on
the free surface where z = 0 and the constant term is H = 12 U 2 . Hence,
 
P 1  
PB = −ρ gzB + + 2Uu + u2 + v 2 + w 2 . (3.7)
ρ 2
On the upstream control plane,

b/2 0 b/2 0 b/2

1 1
FA = PA dz dy = −ρg z dz dy = ρ g h2 dy = ρ gbh2 . (3.8)
2 2
−b/2 −h −b/2 −h −b/2

On the downstream control plane, using Equation (3.7),

b/2 ς B b/2 ς B  
P 1
FB = PBdz dy = −ρ gzB + + [2Uu + u2 + v 2 + w2 ] dz dy
ρ 2
−b/2 −h −b/2 −h

b/2 b/2 ς B b/2 ς B

1  ρ
= ρg h −
2
ς B2 dy − P dz dy − [2Uu + u2 + v 2 + w 2 ]dz dy.
2 2
−b/2 −b/2 −h −b/2 −h
(3.9)

The resistance force R = FA − FB − (MB − MA ).

Substituting for the various terms from Equations (3.5), (3.8) and (3.9),
⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎨1 b/2 b/2 ς B ⎪
⎬ b/2 ς B
1
R= ρg ς B dy + ρ
2
(v + w − u )dz dy +
2 2 2
Pdz dy. (3.10)
⎪
⎩2 2 ⎪
⎭
−b/2 −b/2 −h −b/2 −h

In this equation, the first two terms may be broadly associated with wave pattern
drag, although the perturbation velocities v, w and u, which are due mainly to wave
orbital velocities, are also due partly to induced velocities arising from the viscous
shear in the boundary layer. The third term in the equation is due to viscous drag.
The use of the first two terms in the analysis of wave pattern measurements, and
in formulating a wave resistance theory, are described in Chapters 7 and 9.

3.1.2.2 Identification of Induced Drag

A ficticious velocity component u may be defined by the following equation:
pB 1
+ 2 [(U + u )2 + v 2 + w 2 ] + gzB = 12 U 2 , (3.11)
ρ
20 Ship Resistance and Propulsion

where u is the equivalent velocity component required for no head loss in the
boundary layer. This equation can be compared with Equation (3.6). u can be cal-
culated from p since, by comparing Equations (3.6) and (3.11),

(U + u ) = 12 ρ (U + u)2 + p,
2
1
2
ρ

then

b/2 b/2 ζ B
1 1
R = ρg ζ B2 dy + ρ (v 2 + w2 − u 2 )dz dy
2 2
−b/2 −b/2 −h
  
1
+ p + ρ(u 2 − u2 ) dz dy. (3.12)
2
wake

The integrand of the last term {p + 12 ρ(u 2 − u2 )} is different from zero only inside
the wake region for which p = 0. In order to separate induced drag from wave
resistance, the velocity components (u I , v I , w I ) of the wave orbit motion can be
introduced. [The components (u, v, w) include both wave orbit and induced velocit-
ies.] The velocity components (u I , v I , w I ) can be calculated by measuring the free-
surface wave pattern, and applying linearised potential theory.
It should be noted that, from measurements of wave elevation ζ and perturb-
ation velocities u, v, w over plane B, the wave resistance could be determined.
However, measurements of subsurface velocities are difficult to make, so linearised
potential theory is used, in effect, to deduce these velocities from the more conveni-
ently measured surface wave pattern ζ . This is discussed in Chapter 7 and Appendix
A2. Recent developments in PIV techniques would allow subsurface velocities to be
measured; see Chapter 7.
Substituting (u I , v I , w I ) into the last Equation (3.12) for R,

R = RW + RV + RI ,

where RW is the wave pattern resistance

b/2 b/2 ζ B
1 1 
RW = ρg ζ B2 dy + ρ v 2I + w 2I − u2I dz dy, (3.13)
2 2
−b/2 −b/2 −h

RV is the total viscous resistance

  
1 2
RV = p + ρ(u − u ) dz dy
2
(3.14)
2
wake

and RI is the induced resistance

b/2 ζ B
1 
RI = ρ v 2 − v 2I + w2 − w2I − u 2 + u2I dz dy. (3.15)
2
−b/2 −h

For normal ship forms, RI is expected to be small.

Components of Hull Resistance 21

3.1.3 Systems of Coefficients Used in Ship Powering

Two principal forms of presentation of resistance data are in current use. These are
the ITTC form of coefficients, which were based mainly on those already in use in
the aeronautical field, and the Froude coefficients [3.13].

3.1.3.1 ITTC Coefficients

The resistance coefficient is
RT
CT = , (3.16)
1/2ρ SV 2
where

RT = total resistance force,

S = wetted surface area of hull, V = ship speed,
CT = total resistance coefficient or, for various components,
CF = frictional resistance coefficient (flat plate),
CV = total viscous drag coefficient, including form allowance, and
CW = wave resistance coefficient.

The speed parameter is Froude number

V
Fr = √ ,
gL
and the hull form parameters include the wetted area coefficient
S
CS = √
∇L
and the slenderness coefficient
∇
C∇ = ,
L3
where

∇ = immersed volume, L = ship length.

3.1.3.2 Froude Coefficients

A basic design requirement is to have the least power for given displacement  and
speed V. Froude chose a resistance coefficient representing a ‘resistance per ton
displacement’ (i.e. R/). He used a circular notation to represent non-dimensional
coefficients, describing them as 
K , 
L , 
S , M and C .
The speed parameters include
V V

K =  and 
L =  ∝ Fr
g∇ 1/3 gL
4π 4π
(4π was introduced for wave speed considerations). The hull form parameters
include the wetted area coefficient
S

S = ,
∇ 2/3
22 Ship Resistance and Propulsion

and the slenderness coefficient

L

M =
∇ 1/3
(now generally referred to as the length-displacement ratio). The resistance coeffi-
cient is
1000 R
C = , (3.17)

2
K

i.e. resistance per ton R/ (R = resistance force and  = displacement force, same
units).
The 1000 was introduced to create a more convenient value for  C . The sub-
script for each component is as for CT , CF , etc., i.e. 
C T,  C F . The presentation
R/ was also used by Taylor in the United States in his original presentation of the
Taylor standard series [3.14].
Some other useful relationships include the following: in imperial units,
427.1PE

C = (3.18)
2/3 V 3
(PE = hp,  = tons, V = knots), and in metric units,
579.8PE

C = (3.19)
2/3 V 3
(PE = kW,  = tonnes, V = knots, and using 1 knot = 0.5144 m/s).
The following relationships between the ITTC and Froude coefficients allow
conversion between the two presentations:
Cs = S/(∇.L)1/2 ,
S = S/∇
2/3
,

M = L/∇
1/3
,
Cs = S /
1/2
M and
CT = (8 × π/1000) × 
C /
S .

It should be noted that for fixed  and V, the smallest  C implies least PE , Equation
(3.19), but since S can change for a fixed , this is not true for CT , Equation (3.16).
It is for such reasons that other forms of presentation have been proposed.
These have been summarised by Lackenby [3.15] and Telfer [3.16]. Lackenby and
Telfer argue that, from a design point of view, resistance per unit of displacement
(i.e. R/), plotted to a suitable base, should be used in order to rank alternative hull
shapes correctly. In this case, taking R/ as the criterion of performance, and using
only displacement and length as characteristics of ship size, the permissible systems
of presentation are
R V
(1) (e.g. 
C ) on (e.g. 
K )
2/3 V 2 1/6
RL
(2) on Fr
V 2
R V
(3) on either 1/6 or Fr.
 
Components of Hull Resistance 23

Consistent units must be used in all cases in order to preserve the non-dimensional
nature of the coefficients.
For skin friction resistance, Lackenby points out that the most useful character-
istic of ship size to be included is wetted surface area, which is one of the primary
variables affecting this resistance.
A coefficient of the form CF = RF /1/2 ρ SV 2 is then acceptable. In which case,
the other components of resistance also have to be in this form. This is the form of
the ITTC presentation, described earlier, which has been in common use for many
years.
It is also important to be able to understand and apply the circular coefficient
notation, because many useful data have been published in  C − Fr format, such as
the BSRA series of resistance tests discussed in Chapter 10.
Doust [3.17] uses the resistance coefficient RL/V 2 in his regression analysis of
trawler resistance data. Sabit [3.18] also uses this coefficient in his regression analysis
of the BSRA series resistance data, which is discussed in Chapter 10. It is useful to
note that this coefficient is related to C as follows:
 
RL L
= 2.4938 C × . (3.20)
 V2 ∇ 1/3

3.1.4 Measurement of Model Total Resistance

3.1.4.1 Displacement Ships
The model resistance to motion is measured in a test tank, also termed a towing
tank. The first tank to be used solely for such tests was established by William
Froude in 1871 [3.19]. The model is attached to a moving carriage and towed down
the tank at a set constant speed (V), and the model resistance (R) is measured,
Figure 3.8. The towing force will normally be in line with the propeller shafting in
order to minimise unwanted trim moments during a run. The model is normally
free to trim and to rise/sink vertically and the amount of sinkage and trim during a
run is measured. Typical resistance test measurements, as described in ITTC (2002)

Carriage V

Carriage rails

Dynamometer

Model
R
Water level

Figure 3.8. Schematic layout of model towing test.

24 Ship Resistance and Propulsion

Environmental
Carriage Hull model
conditions

Sinkage and Temperature

Speed Resistance trim,
measurement, measurement,
dynamometer measurement
tachometer/probe thermometer
devices

Resistance / Sinkage Tank water

Model speed
external and temperature
tow force trim

Signal conditioning and

data acquisition

Data analysis

Figure 3.9. Resistance test measurements.

[3.20], are shown in Figure 3.9. An example of a model undergoing a resistance test
is shown in Figure 3.10.
Model speed is measured either from the carriage wheel speed (speed over
ground), from the time taken for the carriage to travel over a known distance (speed
over ground) or by a Pitôt-static tube or water speed meter attached to the carriage
ahead of the model (speed through water). If the model speed remains constant
during the course of a run and the tank water does not develop any significant drift
during the test programme, then all of these methods are equally satisfactory.

Figure 3.10. Model resistance test. Photograph courtesy of WUMTIA and Dubois Naval
Architects Ltd.
Components of Hull Resistance 25

The total hydrodynamic resistance to motion (R) is measured by a dynamo-

meter. The dynamometer may be mechanical, using a spring balance and coun-
terbalance weights, or electromechanical, where the displacement of flexures is
measured by a linear voltmeter or inductor, or where the flexures have strain
gauges attached. In all cases, a calibration procedure of measured output against
an applied calibration force will take place before and after the experiments. Two-
component (resistance and sideforce) or three-component (resistance, sideforce and
yaw moment [torque]) dynamometers may be used in the case of yawed tests for
assessing manoeuvring performance and for the testing of yacht models.
Model test tanks vary in size from about 60 m × 3.7 m × 2 m water depth up
to 300 m × 12 m × 3 m water depth, with carriage speeds ranging from 3 m/s to
15 m/s. A ‘beach’ is normally incorporated at the end of the tank (and sometimes
down the sides) in order to absorb the waves created by the model and to minimise
wave reflections back down the tank. This also helps to minimise the settling time
between runs.
Circulating water channels are also employed for resistance and other tests. In
this case, in Figure 3.8, the model is static and the water is circulated at speed V. Such
channels often have glass side and bottom windows, allowing good flow visualisation
studies. They are also useful when multiple measurements need to be carried out,
such as hull surface pressure or skin friction measurements (see Chapter 7). Circu-
lating water channels need a lot of power to circulate the water, compared say with
a wind tunnel, given the density of water is about 1000 times that of air.
For many years, models were made from paraffin wax. Current materials used
for models include wood, high-density closed-cell foam and fibre reinforced plastic
(FRP). The models, or plugs for plastic models, will normally be shaped using a
multiple-axis cutting machine. Each model material has its merits, depending on
producibility, accuracy, weight and cost. Model size may vary from about 1.6 m in a
60-m tank up to 9 m in a 300-m tank.
The flow over the fore end of the model may be laminar, whilst turbulent flow
would be expected on the full-scale ship. Turbulence stimulators will normally be
incorporated near the fore end of the model in order to stimulate turbulent flow.
Turbulence stimulators may be in the form of sand strips, trip wires or trip studs loc-
ated about 5% aft of the fore end of the model. Trip studs will typically be of 3 mm
diameter and 2.5 mm height and spaced at 25 mm intervals. Trip wires will typic-
ally be of 0.90 mm diameter. For further details see [3.20], [3.21], [3.22] and [3.23].
Corrections for the parasitic drag of the turbulence stimulators will normally be car-
ried out; a detailed investigation of such corrections is contained in Appendix A
of [3.24]. One common correction is to assume that the deficit in resistance due to
laminar flow ahead of the trip wire or studs balances the additional parasitic drag of
the wire or studs.
In order to minimise scale effect, the model size should be as large as possible
without incurring significant interference (blockage) effects from the walls and tank
floor. A typical assumption is that the model cross-sectional area should not be
more than 0.5% of the tank cross-sectional area. Blockage speed corrections may
be applied if necessary. Typical blockage corrections include those proposed by
Hughes [3.25] and Scott [3.26], [3.27]. The correction proposed by Hughes (in its
26 Ship Resistance and Propulsion

approximate form) is as follows:

V m
= , (3.21)
V 1 − m − Frh2
where V is the correction to speed, Frh is the depth Froude number.
V
Frh = √ ,
gh
where h is the tank water depth and m is the mean blockage
a ∇
m= = ,
AT LM AT
where LM and ∇ are model length and displacement, and AT is the tank section
area.
The temperature of the test water will be measured in the course of the experi-
ments and appropriate corrections made to the resistance data. Viscosity values for
water are a function of water temperature. As a result, Re and, hence, CF vary with
water temperature in a manner which can be calculated from published viscosity
values (see Tables A1.1 and A1.2 in Appendix A1). Standard practice is to correct
all model results to, and predict ship performance for, 15◦ C (59◦ F), i.e.

CT(15) = CT(T) + (CF(15) − CF(T) ). (3.22)

The ITTC recommended procedure for the standard resistance test is described
in ITTC 2002 [3.20]. Uncertainty analysis of the results should take place, involving
the accuracy of the model and the measurements of resistance and speed. A back-
ground to uncertainty analysis is given in [3.28], and recommended procedures are
described in [3.20].
After the various corrections are made (e.g. to speed and temperature), the
model resistance test results will normally be presented in terms of the total resist-
ance coefficient CT (= R/1/2ρSV2 ) against Froude number Fr, where S is the static
wetted area of the model. Extrapolation of the model results to full scale is described
in Chapter 4.

3.1.4.2 High-Speed Craft and Sailing Vessels

High-speed craft and sailing yachts develop changes in running attitude when under
way. Compared with a conventional displacement hull, this leads to a number of
extra topics and measurements to be considered in the course of a resistance test.
The changes and measurements required are reviewed in [3.29]. Because of the
higher speeds involved, such craft may also be subject to shallow water effects and
corrections may be required, as discussed in Chapters 5 and 6. The typical require-
ments for testing high-speed craft, compared with displacement hulls, are outlined
as follows:

(i) Semi-displacement craft

High-speed semi-displacement craft develop changes in running trim and wetted

surface area when under way. The semi-displacement craft is normally tested free
to heave (vertical motion) and trim, and the heave/sinkage and trim are measured
Components of Hull Resistance 27

Tow force
x2
w

R Model free to trim and heave

x1
T Expected thrust line

Figure 3.11. Trim compensation for offset tow line.

during the course of a test run. Running wetted surface area may be measured dur-
ing a run, for example, by noting the wave profile against a grid on the hull (or by a
photograph) and applying the new girths (up to the wave profile) to the body plan.
There are conflicting opinions as to whether static or running wetted area should
be used in the analysis. Appendix B in [3.24] examines this problem in some detail
and concludes that, for examination of the physics, the running wetted area should
be used, whilst for practical powering purposes, the use of the static wetted area is
satisfactory. It can be noted that, for this reason, standard series test data for semi-
displacement craft, such as those for the NPL Series and Series 64, are presented in
terms of static wetted area.
Since the high-speed semi-displacement craft is sensitive to trim, the position
and direction of the tow force has to be considered carefully. The tow force should
be located at the longitudinal centre of gravity (LCG) and in the line of the expected
thrust line, otherwise erroneous trim changes can occur. If, for practical reasons, the
tow force is not in line with the required thrust line, then a compensating moment
can be applied, shown schematically in Figure 3.11. If the tow line is offset from the
thrust line by a distance x1 , then a compensating moment (w × x2 ) can be applied,
where (w × x2 ) = (R × x1 ). This process leads to an effective shift in the LCG.
w will normally be part of the (movable) ballast in the model, and the lever x2 can
be changed as necessary to allow for the change in R with change in speed. Such
corrections will also be applied as necessary to inclined shaft/thrust lines.

(ii) Planing craft

A planing craft will normally be run free to heave and trim. Such craft incur sig-
nificant changes in trim with speed, and the position and direction of the tow line
is important. Like the semi-displacement craft, compensating moments may have
to be applied, Figure 3.11. A friction moment correction may also be applied to
allow for the difference in friction coefficients between model and ship (model is
too large). If RFm is the model frictional resistance corresponding to CFm and RFms
is the model frictional resistance corresponding to CFs , then, assuming the friction
drag acts at half draught, a counterbalance moment can be used to counteract the
force (RFm – RFms ). This correction is analogous to the skin friction correction in the
model self-propulsion experiment, Chapter 8.
Care has to be taken with the location of turbulence stimulation on planing
craft, where the wetted length varies with speed. An alternative is to use struts or
wires in the water upstream of the model [3.29].
28 Ship Resistance and Propulsion

Air resistance can be significant in high-speed model tests and corrections to the
resistance data may be necessary. The actual air speed under the carriage should be
measured with the model removed. Some tanks include the superstructure and then
make suitable corrections based on airflow speed and suitable drag coefficients. The
air resistance can also cause trimming moments, which should be corrected by an
effective shift of LCG.
Planing craft incur significant changes in wetted surface area with change in
speed. Accurate measurement of the running wetted area and estimation of the
frictional resistance is fundamental to the data analysis and extrapolation process.
Methods of measuring the running wetted surface area include noting the position
of the fore end of the wetted area on the centreline and at the side chines, using
underwater photography, or using a clear bottom on the model. An alternative is to
apply the running draught and trim to the hydrostatic information on wetted area,
although this approach tends not to be very accurate. The spray and spray root at
the leading edge of the wetted area can lead to difficulties in differentiating between
spray and the solid water in contact with the hull.
For high-speed craft, appendage drag normally represents a larger proportion
of total resistance than for conventional displacement hulls. If high-speed craft are
tested without appendages, then the estimated trim moments caused by the append-
ages should be compensated by an effective change in LCG.
Captive tests on planing craft have been employed. For fully captive tests, the
model is fixed in heave and trim whilst, for partially captive tests, the model is tested
free to heave over a range of fixed trims [3.29]. Heave and trim moment are meas-
ured, together with lift and drag. Required values will be obtained through interpol-
ation of the test data in the postanalysis process.
Renilson [3.30] provides a useful review of the problems associated with meas-
uring the hydrodynamic performance of high-speed craft.

(iii) Sailing craft

A yacht model will normally be tested in a semi-captive arrangement, where it is

free to heave and trim, but fixed in heel and yaw. A special dynamometer is required
that is capable of measuring resistance, sideforce, heave, trim, roll moment and yaw
moment. Measurement of the moments allows the centre of lateral resistance (CLR)
to be determined. A typical test programme entails a matrix of tests covering a range
of heel and yaw angles over a range of speeds. Small negative angles of heel and yaw
will also be tested to check for any asymmetry. Typical test procedures, dynamomet-
ers and model requirements are described by Claughton et al. [3.8].
In the case of a yacht, the position and line of the tow force is particularly
important because the actual position, when under sail, is at the centre of effort
of the sails. This leads to trim and heel moments and a downward component of
force. As the model tow fitting will be at or in the model, these moments and force
will need to be compensated for during the model test. An alternative approach
that has been used is to apply the model tow force at the estimated position of the
centre of effort of the sails, with the model set at a predetermined yaw angle. This
is a more elegant approach, although it does require more complex model arrange-
ments [3.8].
Components of Hull Resistance 29

-P
+V
+P
+P
-V
-V

Figure 3.12. Pressure variations around a body.

3.1.5 Transverse Wave Interference

3.1.5.1 Waves
When a submerged body travels through a fluid, pressure variations are created
around the body, Figure 3.12.
Near a free surface, the pressure variations manifest themselves by changes in
the fluid level, creating waves, Figure 3.13. With a body moving through a stationary
fluid, the waves travel at the same speed as the body.

3.1.5.2 Kelvin Wave Pattern

The Kelvin wave is a mathematical form of the wave system created by a travelling
pressure point source at the free surface, see Chapter 7. The wave system formed is
made up of transverse waves and divergent waves, Figure 3.14. The heights of the
divergent cusps diminish at a slower rate than transverse waves, and the divergent
waves are more predominant towards the rear. The wave system travels at a speed
according to the gravity–wave speed relationship, see Appendix A1.8,

gλ
V= , (3.23)
2π
and with wavelength of the transverse waves,
2π V 2
λ= . (3.24)
g
The ship wave system is determined mainly by the peaks of high and low pres-
sure, or pressure points, that occur in the pressure distribution around the hull. The

Stern wave system Bow wave system

Figure 3.13. Ship waves.