Holtrop, J. & Mennen, G.G.J.

An approximate power prediction method

Readers are reminded that copyright subsists in this extract and the work from which it was taken. Except as provided for by the terms of a rightsholder's licence or copyright law, no further copying, storage or distribution is permitted without the consent of the copyright holder. The author (or authors) of the Literary Work or Works contained within the Licensed Material is or are the author(s) and may have moral rights in the work. The Licensee shall not cause or permit the distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory treatment of, the work which would be prejudicial to the honour or reputation of the author. Holtrop, J. & Mennen, G.G.J., (1982) "An approximate power prediction method", International Shipbuilding Progress 29 (335), 166-170, Delft University Press Reproduced with permission from IOS PressThis is a digital version of copyright material made under licence from the rightsholder, and its accuracy cannot be guaranteed. Please refer to the original published edition. Every effort has been made to trace the copyright owner(s) of this material, and anyone claiming copyright should get in touch with HERON at [email protected]. Licensed for use at the University of Newcastle upon Tyne by all students during the period 24/09/2007 to 24/09/2010.

Permission reference: 0020-868X_29_335(166-170)68974 ISN: 0020-868X

166

AN APPROXIMATE POWER PREDICTION METHOD

J. Holtrop* and G.G.J. Mennen* 1. Introduction

In a recent publication [ 1 ] a statistical method was presented for the determination of the required propulsive power at the initial design stage of a ship. This method was developed through a regression analysis of random model experiments and full-scale data, available at the Netherlands Ship Model Basin. Because the accuracy of the method was reported to be insufficient when unconventional combinations of main parameters were used, an attempt was made to extend the method by adjusting the original numerical prediction model to test data obtained in some specific cases. This adaptation of the method has resulted into a set of prediction formulae with a wider range of application. Nevertheless, it should be noticed that the given modifications have a tentative character only, because the adjustments are based on a small number of experiments. In any case, the application is limited to hull forms resembling the average ship described by the main dimensions and form coefficients used in the method. The extension of the method was focussed on improving the power prediction of high-block ships with low L/B-ratios and of slender naval ships with a complex appendage arrangement and immersed transom sterns. Some parts of this study were carried out in the scope of the NSMB Co-operative Research programme. The adaptation of the method to naval ships was carried out in a research study for the Royal Netherlands Navy. Permission to publish results of these studies is gratefully acknowledged. 2. Resistance prediction The total resistance of a ship has been subdivided into:

RTR additional pressure resistance of immersed transom stern RA model-ship correlation resistance. For the form factor of the hull the prediction formula:

can be used. In this formula CP is the prismatic coefficient based on the waterline length L and lcb is the longitudinal position of the centre of buoyancy forward of 0.5L as a percentage of L. In the form-factor formula LR is a parameter reflecting the length of the run according to:

The coefficient c12 is defined as:

In this formula T is the average moulded draught. The coefficient c 13 accounts for the specific shape of the afterbody and is related to the coefficient C stern according to: For the coefficient C stern the following tentative guidelines are given: Afterbody form V-shaped sections Normal section shape U-shaped sections with Hogner stern C stern 10 0 + 10

where: frictional resistance according to the ITTC1957 friction formula 1+k1 form factor describing the viscous resistance of the hull form in relation to RF RAPP resistance of appendages RW wave-making and wave-breaking resistance RB additional pressure resistance of bulbous bow near the water surface
*) Netherlands Ship Model Basin, (Marin), Wageningen, The Netherlands.

RF

The wetted area of the hull can be approximated well by:

In this formula CM is the midship section coefficient, CB is the block coefficient on the basis of the

W a t e r l i n e length L. C W P is the waterplane area coef f i c i e n t and ABT is the transverse sectional area of the b u l b at the position where the still water surface inter sects the stem. The appendage resistance can be determined from: In these expressions c 2 is a parameter which accounts for the reduction of the wave resistance due to the ac tion of a bulbous bow. Similarly, c 5 expresses the in fluence of a transom stern on the wave resistance. In the expression A T represents the immersed part of the transverse area of the transom at zero speed. In this figure the transverse area of wedges placed at the transom chine should be included. In the formula for the wave resistance, Fn is the Froude number based on the waterline length L. The other parameters can be determined from:

where is the water density, V the speed of the ship, SAPP the wetted area of the appendages, 1 + k2 the appendage resistance factor and C F the coefficient of frictional resistance of the ship according to the ITTC 195 7 formula. In the Table below tentative 1 + k 2 values are given for streamlined flow oriented appendages. These values were obtained from resistance tests with bare and appended ship models. In several of these tests turbulence stimulators were present at the leading edges to induce turbulent flow over the appendages. Approximate 1 + k2 values rudder behind skeg rudder behind stern twin screw balance rudders shaft brackets skeg strut bossings hull bossings shafts stabilizer fins dome bilge keels 1.5 2.0 1.3 1.5 2.8 3.0 1.5 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.8 2.7 1.4

The coefficient c15 is equal to 1.69385 for L3/! < 512, whereas c15 = 0.0 for L3/! > 1727. For values of 512 < L3/! < 1727, c 1 5 is determined from:

The equivalent 1 + k2 value for a combination of appendages is determined from: The half angle of entrance iE is the angle of the waterline at the bow in degrees with reference to the centre plane but neglecting the local shape at the stem. If iE is unknown, use can be made of the following formula:

The appendage resistance can be increased by the resistance of bow thruster tunnel openings according to:

where d is the tunnel diameter. The coefficient C B T O ranges from 0.003 to 0.012. For openings in the cylindrical part of a bulbous bow the lower figures should be used. The wave resistance is determined from:

with:

This formula, obtained by regression analysis of over 200 hull shapes, yields iE values between 1 and 90. The original equation in [1] sometimes resulted in negative iE values for exceptional combinations of hull-form parameters. The coefficient that determines the influence of the bulbous bow on the wave resistance is defined as:

168

where h B is the position of the centre of the trans verse area ABT above the keel line and TF is the for ward draught of the ship. The additional resistance due to the presence of a bulbous bow near the surface is determined from:

increase CA = (0.105 ks1/3 - 0.005579)/L 1/3 In these formulae L and k s are given in metres. 3. Prediction of propulsion factors The statistical prediction formulae for estimating the effective wake fraction, the thrust deduction frac tion and the relative rotative efficiency as presented in [ 1 ] could be improved on several points. For single screw ships with a conventional stern ar rangement the following adapted formula for the wake fraction can be used:

where the coefficient PB is a measure for the emer gence of the bow and F ni is the Froude number based on the immersion:

In a similar way the additional pressure resistance due to the immersed transom can be determined:

The coefficient c 6 has been related to the Froude number based on the transom immersion:

The coefficient c9 depends on a coefficient c8 defined as:

FnT has been defined as:

In this definition C WP is the waterplane area coeffi cient. The model ship correlation resistance RA with

is supposed to describe primarily the effect of the hull roughness and the still air resistance. From an analysis of results of speed trials, which have been corrected to ideal trial conditions, the following formula for the correlation allowance coefficient C A was found:

In the formula for the wake fraction, C V is the vis cous resistance coefficient with CV = (1 + k) CF + CA . Further:

In a similar manner the following approximate for mula for the thrust deduction for single screw ships with a conventional stern can be applied:

The coefficient c 10 is defined as: In addition, C A might be increased to calculate e.g. the effect of a larger hull roughness than standard. To this end the ITTC 1978 formulation can be used from which the increase of C A can be derived for roughness values higher than the standard figure of k 5 = ISOm (mean apparent amplitude):

The relative rotative efficiency can be predicted

169

well by the original formula:

c 0.75 is the chord length at a radius of 75 per cent and Z is the number of blades.

Because the formulae above apply to ships with a conventional stern an attempt has been made to in dicate a tentative formulation for the propulsion fac tors of single screw ships with an open stern as applied sometimes on slender, fast sailing ships:

In this formula t/c is the thicknesschordlength ratio and k P is the propeller blade surface roughness. For this roughness the value of kP = 0.00003 m is used as a standard figure for new propellers. The chord length and the thickness chordlength ratio can be estimated using the following empirical for mulae:

These values are based on only a very limited num ber of model data. The influence of the fullness and the viscous resistance coefficient has been expressed in a similar way as in the original prediction formulae for twin screw ships. These original formulae for twin screw ships are:

The blade area ratio can be determined from Keller's formula:

In this formula T is the propeller thrust, pO + gh is the static pressure at the shaft centre line, pV is the vapour pressure and K is a constant to which the following figures apply: 4. Estimation of propeller efficiency For the prediction of the required propulsive power the efficiency of the propeller in open water condition has to be determined. It has appeared that the charac teristics of most propellers can be approximated well by using the results of tests with systematic propeller series. In [2] a polynomial representation is given of the thrust and torque coefficients of the B series propellers. These polynomials are valid, however, for a Reynolds number of 2.106 and need to be corrected for the specific Reynolds number and the roughness of the actual propeller. The presented statistical pre diction equations for the model ship correlation al lowance and the propulsion factors are based on Reynolds and roughness corrections according to the ITTC 1978 method, [3]. According to this method the propeller thrust and torque coefficients are cor rected according to: K = 0 to 0.1 for twin screw ships K = 0.2 for single screw ships For sea water of 15 degrees centigrade the value of 2 pO - p V is 99047 N / m . The given prediction equations are consistent with a shafting efficiency of

and reflect ideal trial conditions, implying: no wind, waves and swell, 3 deep water with a density of 1025 kg/m and a temperature of 15 degrees centigrade and a clean hull and propeller with a surface roughness according to modern standards. The shaft power can now be determined from:

5. Numerical example The performance characteristics of a hypothetical single screw ship are calculated for a speed of 25 knots. The calculations are made for the various resistance components and the propulsion factors, successively. The main ship particulars are listed in the Table on the next page:

Here CD is the difference in drag coefficient of the profile section, P is the pitch of the propeller and

170

Main ship characteristics length on waterline L length between perpendiculars LPP breadth moulded B draught moulded on P.P. TF draught moulded on A.P. TA displacement volume moulded ! longitudinal centre of buoyancy 2.02% transverse bulb area ABT centre of bulb area above keel line hB midship section coefficient CM waterplane area coefficient CWP transom area AT wetted area appendages SAPP stern shape parameter Cstern propeller diameter D number of propeller blades Z clearance propeller with keel line ship speed V 205.00 m 200.00 m 32.00 m 10.00 m 10.00 m 37500 m 3 aft of Lpp 20.0 m2 4.0 m 0.980 0.750 16.0 m2 50.0 m2 10.0 8.00 m 4 0.20 m 25.0 knots

The calculations with the statistical method resulted into the following coefficients and powering characteristics listed in the next Table: Fn CP LR lcb c12 c13 1+k1 S CF RF
1 +k 2

= 0.2868 = 0.5833 = 81.385 m = 0.75% = 0.5102 = 1.030 = 1.156 2 = 7381.45 m = 0.001390 = 869.63 kN
= 1.50

References 1. Holtrop, J. and Mennen, G.G.J., 'A statistical power prediction method', International Shipbuilding Progress, Vol. 25, October 1978. 2. Oosterveld, M.W.C. and Oossanen, P. van, 'Further computer analyzed data of the Wageningen B-screw series', International Shipbuilding Progress, July 1975. 3. Proceedings 15th ITTC, The Hague, 1978.

RAPP c7 iE c1 c3 c2 c5 ml c15 m2 RW PB Fni RB

= 8.83 kN = 0.1561 = 12.08 degrees

= 0.02119 = 0.7595 = 0.9592 = 2.1274 = 1.69385 = 0.17087 = 0.6513 = 557.11 kN = 0.6261 = 1.5084 = 0.049 kN

FnT RTR c4 CA RA Rtotal PE CV c9 c11 Cpi w c10 t T AE/AO R c0.75 t/c0.75 CD

= 5.433 = 0.00 kN

= 0.04 = 0.000352 = 221.98 kN = 1793.26 kN = 23063 kW = 0.001963 = 14.500 = 1.250 = 0.5477 = 0.2584 = 0.15610 = 0.1747 = 2172.75 kN =0.7393 = 0.9931 = 3.065 m = 0.03524 = 0.000956

From the B series polynomials: KTs n KQo 0 PS = 0.18802 = 1.6594 Hz = 0.033275 = 0.6461 = 32621 kW