Advertisement

Additional Resistance Components and Propulsive Coefficients

  • Dejan RadojčićEmail author
Chapter
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology book series (BRIEFSAPPLSCIENCES)

Abstract

Additional components necessary for the evaluation of a HSC’s in-service power performance are briefly discussed here (see also Sect.  1.3). These components consist of those that: 1. Increase the resistance from bare hull total resistance in deep and calm water to in-service total resistance (i.e. from RT to RT*), and 2. Account for the hull-propeller interaction (i.e. propulsive coefficients).

References

  1. Bailey D (1982) A statistical analysis of propulsion data obtained from models of high speed round bilge hulls. In: RINA Symposium on Small Fast Warships and Security Vessels, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Blount DL (1997) Design of propeller tunnels for high speed craft. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation (FAST ’97), SydneyGoogle Scholar
  3. Blount DL (2014) Performance by design. ISBN 0-978-9890837-1-3Google Scholar
  4. Blount DL, Bartee RJ (1997) Design of propulsion systems for high-speed craft. Mar Technol 34(4)Google Scholar
  5. Blount DL, Bjarne E (1989) Design and selection of propulsors for high speed craft. In: 7th Lips Propeller Symposium, Nordwijk-on-SeaGoogle Scholar
  6. Blount DL, Codega LT (1992) Dynamic stability of planing boats. Mar Technol 29(1)Google Scholar
  7. Blount DL, Fox DL (1976) Small craft power prediction. Mar Technol 13(1)Google Scholar
  8. Blount DL, McGrath JA (2009) Resistance characteristics of semi-displacement mega yacht hull forms. RINA Trans, Int J Small Craft Technol 151(Part B2)Google Scholar
  9. Bowles J (2012) Turning characteristics and capabilities of high speed monohulls. In: SNAME’s 3rd Chesapeake Power Boat Symposium, AnnapolisGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown PW (1971) An experimental and theoretical study of planing surfaces with trim flaps. Davidson Laboratory Report 1463, Stevens Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  11. Celano T (1998) The prediction of porpoising inception for modern planing craft. USNA Trident Report No. 254. AnnapolisGoogle Scholar
  12. Chen CS, Hsueh TJ, Fwu J (1993) The systematic test of wedge on flat plate planing surface. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation (FAST ’93), YokohamaGoogle Scholar
  13. Clement EP (1964) Reduction of planing boat resistance by deflection of the whisker spray. DTMB Report 1920Google Scholar
  14. Cusanelli D, Karafiath G (1997) Integrated wedge-flap for enhanced powering performance. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation (FAST ’97), SydneyGoogle Scholar
  15. De Luca F, Pensa C (2012) Experimental investigation on conventional and unconventional interceptors. RINA Trans, Int J Small Craft Technol 153(Part B2)Google Scholar
  16. Denny SB, Hubble EN (1991) Predicting of craft turning characteristics. Mar Technol 28(1)Google Scholar
  17. Faltinsen OM (2005) Hydrodynamics of high-speed marine vehicles. Cambridge University Press. ISBN-13 978-0-521-84568-7Google Scholar
  18. Fossati F, Muggiasca S, Bertorello C (2013) Aerodynamics of high speed small craft. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation (FAST 2013), AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  19. Fossati F, Robustelli F, Belloli M, Bertorello C, Dellepiane S (2014) Experimental assessment of mega-yacht aerodynamic performance and characteristics. RINA Trans 156(Part B2). London.  https://doi.org/10.3940/rina.ijsct.2014.b2.157
  20. Fridsma G (1971) A systematic study of the rough water performance of planing boats (Irregular waves—Part II). Davidson Laboratory Report 1495Google Scholar
  21. Friedhoff B, Henn R, Jiang T, Stuntz N (2007) Investigation of planing craft in shallow water. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation (FAST 2007), ShanghaiGoogle Scholar
  22. Gregory D, Beach T (1979) Resistance measurements of typical planing boat appendages. DTNSRDC Report SPD-0911-01Google Scholar
  23. Gregory DL, Dobay GF (1973) The performance of high-speed rudders in a cavitating environment. SNAME Spring Meeting, FloridaGoogle Scholar
  24. Grigoropoulos GJ, Loukakis TA (1995) Effect of spray rails on the resistance of planing hulls. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation (FAST ’95), Lubeck-TravemundeGoogle Scholar
  25. Hadler JB (1966) The prediction of power performance of planing craft. SNAME Trans 74Google Scholar
  26. Harvald SA (1983) Resistance and propulsion of ships. Ocean Engineering (Wiley). ISBN 0471063533Google Scholar
  27. Hoerner SF (1965) Fluid dynamic drag. Book published by the author, Midland ParkGoogle Scholar
  28. Hofman M, Kozarski V (2000) Shallow water resistance charts for preliminary vessel design. Int Shipbuild Prog 47(449)Google Scholar
  29. Hofman M, Radojčić D (1997) Resistance and propulsion of fast ships in shallow water. Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Belgrade, Belgrade. ISBN 86-7083-297-6 (in Serbian)Google Scholar
  30. Hoggard MM (1979) Examining added drag of planing craft operating in the seaway. Hampton Road Section of SNAMEGoogle Scholar
  31. Hoggard MM, Jones MP (1980) Examining pitch, heave and accelerations of planing craft operating in a seaway. In: High Speed Surface Craft Conference, BrightonGoogle Scholar
  32. ITTC (1984) Proceedings of the 17th International Towing Tank Conference, High-Speed Propulsion, vol 1, GoteborgGoogle Scholar
  33. ITTC (2011) Recommended procedures and guidelines—High speed marine vehicles (Section 7.5-02-05)—Resistance test, Section 7.5-02-05-01; Propulsion test Section 7.5-02-05-02Google Scholar
  34. Katayama T, Nishihara Y, Sato T (2012) A study on the characteristics of self-propulsion factors of planing craft with outboard engine. In: SNAME’s 3rd Chesapeake Power Boat Symposium, AnnapolisGoogle Scholar
  35. Lasky MP (1980) An investigation of appendage drag. DTNSRDC Report SPD-458-01Google Scholar
  36. Lewandowski E (1993) Manueverability of high-speed power boats. In: 5th Power Boat Symposium, SNAME Southeast SectionGoogle Scholar
  37. Lewandowski E (1997) Transverse dynamic stability of planing craft. Mar Technol 34(2)Google Scholar
  38. Lyakhovitsky A (2007) Shallow water and supercritical ships. Backbone Publishing Company, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  39. Millward A (1976) Effect of wedges on the performance characteristics of two planing hulls. J Ship Res 20(4)Google Scholar
  40. Millward A, Sproston J (1988) The prediction of resistance of fast displacement hulls in shallow water. RINA Maritime Technology Monograph No. 9, LondonGoogle Scholar
  41. Molland AF, Turnock SR (2007) Marine rudders and control surfaces—principles, data, design and applications. Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-75-066944-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Morabito MG (2013) Planing in shallow water at critical speed. J Ship Res 57(2)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Müller-Graf B (1981) Semidisplacement round bilge vessels. In: Status of hydrodynamic technology as related to model tests of high speed marine vehicles (Section 3.2), DTNSRDC Report 81/026Google Scholar
  44. Müller-Graf B (1991) The effect of an advanced spray rail system on resistance and development of spray on semi-displacement round bilge hulls. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation (FAST ‘91), TrondheimGoogle Scholar
  45. Müller-Graf B (1997a) Part I: Resistance components of high speed small craft. In: 25th WEGEMT School, Small Craft Technology, NTUA, Athens. ISBN I 900 453 053Google Scholar
  46. Müller-Graf B (1997b) Part III: Factors affecting the reliability and accuracy of the resistance prediction. In: 25th WEGEMT School, Small Craft Technology, NTUA, Athens. ISBN I 900 453 053Google Scholar
  47. Müller-Graf B (1997c) Dynamic stability of high speed small craft. In: 25th WEGEMT School, Small Craft Technology, NTUA, Athens. ISBN I 900 453 053Google Scholar
  48. Radojčić D, Bowles J (2010) On high speed monohulls in shallow water. In: SNAME’s 2nd Chesapeake Power Boat Symposium, AnnapolisGoogle Scholar
  49. Ruscelli D, Gualeni P, Viviani M (2012) An overview of planing monohulls transverse dynamic stability and possible implications with static intact stability rules. RINA Trans 154(Part B2). London.  https://doi.org/10.3940/rina.ijsct.2012.b2.134
  50. Rutgersson O (1982) High speed propeller performance—influence of cavitation on the propeller-hull interaction. Ph.D. thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Goteborg. ISBN 91-7032-072-1Google Scholar
  51. Savitsky D (1981) Planing hulls. In: Status of hydrodynamic technology as related to model tests of high speed marine vehicles (Section 3.3), DTNSRDC Report 81/026Google Scholar
  52. Savitsky D, Brown PW (1976) Procedure for hydrodynamic evaluation of planing hulls in smooth and rough water. Mar Technol 13(4)Google Scholar
  53. Savitsky D, Koelbel JG (1993) Seakeeping of hard chine planing hulls. SNAME’s Technical and Reasearch Panel SC-1 (Power Craft), Report R-42Google Scholar
  54. Scherer JO, Patil SKR (2011) Hydrodynamics of surface piercing outboard and sterndrive propulsion systems. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation (FAST 2011), HonoluluGoogle Scholar
  55. Schleicher DM (2008) Regarding small craft seakeeping. In: SNAME’s 1st Chesapeake Power Boat Symposium, AnnapolisGoogle Scholar
  56. Toro A (1969) Shallow-water performance of a planing boat. Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering Report No. 019, Michigan University (AD-A016 682)Google Scholar
  57. van Manen JD, van Oossanen P (1988) Propulsion. In: Lewis EV (ed) Principles of naval architecture, vol II, Chapter 6. SNAME, Jersey CityGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Department of Naval ArchitectureUniversity of BelgradeBelgradeSerbia

Personalised recommendations