3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
•
Dimensional analysis
– Total resistance coefficient
C
T
= C
T
(
R
n
,
F
n
)
• Total resistance coefficient (S = Wetted surface)
C
T
=
R 1/ 2ρ V
T
2
S
• Reynolds number
^{R} n
=
VL
ν
• Froude number
F n
=
V
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
•
Flow similarity
Equal nondimensional numbers.
•

 Reynolds number:

 Froude number:
L
s
R
=
R
⇒
V
=
V
n
n
m
s
s
m
L
m
L
m
F
=
F
⇒
V
=
V
n
n
m
s
s
m
L
s
(same fluid)
Conclusion: it is impossible to satisfy simultaneously the equality of Reynolds and Froude numbers.
•
The model dimensions do not allow the equality of the Reynolds number for model testing.
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Resistance tests
•
Resistance force is measured at model scale (model) and extrapolated for full scale (ship).
•
Measurements are performed with the equality of the Froude number at model and full scale (Froude scaling):
V
m
= α
−1/ 2
V
s
•
α = L
s
/ L
m
is the scale factor.
•
Model’s length
L
m
is determined by the geometrical
properties of the towing tank.
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Resistance tests
•
The length of the model should try to minimize the difference in Reynolds number (maximum length) within the limits imposed by the towing tank dimensions.
– The precision of the measurements increases with the growth of the model.
– Model dimensions are limited by the depth (h) and width (b) of the towing tank section to avoid a significant influence of the bottom and side walls.
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Resistance tests
•
Typical model dimensions:
L
m ^{<}
h

h: depth

b / 2

b: width

Area of the model’s midsection < 1/200 bh
– With the reduction of the ship’s length it becomes difficult to avoid a significant region of laminar flow.
•
At full scale, the flow is nearly “fullyturbulent” (region of laminar flow at the bow is negligible). Therefore, model testing should avoid laminar flow.
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Resistance tests
•
For the typical Reynolds number of model testing (10 ^{6} to 10 ^{7} ), transition to turbulence must be stimulated:
– Trip wires, studs or roughness strips applied at the bow. These devices introduce an added resistance that has to be estimated to correct the measured resistance.
– Turbulence of the outer flow may be increased with the use of grids or bars in the incoming flow.
3. Resistance of a Ship
•
•
•
3.1 Model testing
Resistance tests
The model is towed at a constant speed and it is generally free to heave, surge, pitch and roll.
The resistance force is measured.
The test is performed at different speeds.
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Examples:
Resistance tests
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uc35JROubRM&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLcNRKYqis&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Odkc4ic6jds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQfzXdTuceY&feature=related
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Resistance components. Froude’s hypothesis
•
Froude’s Hypothesis:
– The friction resistance may be calculated from the flow over a flat plate with the same length of the ship (equality of Reynolds number) and the same wetted surface. All the rest is residual resistance.
– The residual resistance is independent of the Reynolds number, i.e. it depends only on the Froude number.
C
T
(
R
n
,
F
n
)
= C
F
(
R
n
)
+C
R
(
F
n
)
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Resistance components. Froude’s hypothesis
•
Model scale:
– Total resistance coefficient:
m
=
R
T
m
1/ 2ρ
m
V
m
m
– Friction resistance coefficient:
C
= C
(
R
)
– Residual resistance coefficient:
C
R
m
= C
T
m
−C
F
m
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Resistance components. Froude’s hypothesis
•
Ship (full scale):
– Residual resistance coefficient:
C
R
s
= C
R
m
= C
T
m
−C
F
m
– Friction resistance coefficient:
C
F
s
= C
F
(
R
n
s
)
– Total resistance coefficient:
C
T
s
=
C
R
s
+
C
F
s
+
c
a
• Correlation allowance, c
a
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Extrapolation of the friction resistance
• Schoenherr:
0,242
=
log(
R
×
C
)
n
F
C
F
•
ITTC 1957:
0,075
C
=
F
2
(log
R
−
2)
10
n
3. Resistance of a Ship
Resistance components
Viscous pressure resistance “Form drag”
C T
C
F>0
R
F=0
C
Resistência
F
de forma
log R
C
= (1+ k)C
+ C
T
F
w
Form (“viscous pressure”) resistance coefficient: kC _{F} 1+k: Form factor
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Deteremination of form factor Prohaska’s method
•
•
•
Wave resistance coefficient
4
C
T
n
is proportional to
Total resistance coefficient:
C
T
=
(1
+ k C
)
F
+ cF
n
4
Therefore,
C
C
= (1+
k
) +
c
F
C
29
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Extrapolation of the Resistance, ITTC method
•
Model scale:
– Total resistance coefficient:

=

R
T
m

m

1/ 2ρ
m
V
m
m
– Friction resistance coefficient. ITTC line:


= C

F
(
R
)

m
n
m
– Form factor 1+k,viscous resistance coefficient:


=
(
)
1+ k C




– Wave resistance coefficient:
= C
T
m
F
m


3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Extrapolation of the Resistance, ITTC method
•
Ship (full scale):
– Wave resistance coefficient:
C
w
s
= C
w
m
– Form factor 1+k independent of Reynolds number. – Friction resistance coefficient, ITTC line:
C
F
s
= C
F
(
R
n
s
)
– Total resistance coefficient:
C
= (1+
k C
)
+
C
+
c
• Correlation allowance c
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Roughness effects
•
Roughness effects on the wall shearstress of a turbulent flow:
– For typical roughness heights
k
s
smaller than the thickness
of the viscous sublayer (region with negligible Reynolds stresses), the wall shearstress is not affected by the roughness of the wall, hydrodynamically smooth wall.
k u
+
s
τ
k
≡
< 5
ν
τ
w
u
=
τ
ρ
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Roughness effects
•
Roughness effects on the wall shearstress of a turbulent flow:
– For typical roughness heights
k
s
much larger than the
thickness of the viscous sublayer (region with negligible
Reynolds stresses), the wall shearstress becomes
independent of the Reynolds number and essentially
determined by the roughness height, fullyrough regime.
k
+
≡
k u
s
τ
ν
> 70 −80
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Roughness effects
•
Roughness effects on the wall shearstress of a turbulent flow:
– Equivalent sandgrain roughness height,
k
sg
, of a given
surface is the height of an evenly distributed sandgrain
roughned flat plate that produces the same resistance of the
selected surface. This is a single parameter definition of
roughness that is not easy to obtain for real ship surfaces. A
recently painted ship has a typical value of k _{s}_{g} =30µm,
which is equivalent to 150µm for the average roughness
height, k _{M} , (the typical roughness height measured in
shipyards).
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Roughness effects
•
Roughness effects on the wall shearstress of a turbulent flow:
– The nondimensional parameter used to quantify roughness
effects is the Reynolds number based on the roughness
height
R
k
=
Vk
sg
ν
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Roughness effects
•
Roughness effects on the wall shearstress of a turbulent flow:
– Nearwall nondimensional roughness parameter depends
on the Reynolds number of the flow
k
=
u k
τ
s
=
ν
C
f
k
s
R
L
≈ 0.17
x
k
s
L
R
L
– Model testing is perfomed with “hydrodynamically
smooth” surfaces.
– Full scale ships have rough surfaces.
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Roughness effects
•
Roughness effects are covered by the correlation allowance,
c
a
.
•
The correlation allowance is not only a “roughness correction”.
Each model basin uses its “knowhow” to determine
.
•
•
Holtrop’s formula for the correlation allowance:
c
a
=
0.006(
L
wl
+
100)
−
0.00205
Bowden and Davison formula:

k


= 0.105


0.00064


−


L


3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Appendage resistance
•

Resistance tests are frequently performed with the rudder

and the remaining appendages (shaft brackets, bilge keels,

fins, etc).

•

The appendages contribute to the wetted surface of the ship.

•

The Reynolds number based on the ship length (and

undisturbed velocity) is not representative of the local flow
on the appendages. In general, due to the smallest
dimensions of the appendages, the local flow has a smaller
Reynolds number than the ship flow.
3. Resistance of a Ship
3.1 Model testing
Appendage resistance
•

The extrapolation of the resistance based on a friction

resistance dependent on the Reynolds number and an equal

form factor at model and full scale, may not be applicable to

each appendage separately.

•

Due to the small size of the appendages at model scale, it

may be impossible to avoid laminar flow on the appendages
for the lowest velocity tests, required to determine the form
factor. At full scale, the flow will be “fullyturbulent” on the
appendages.
3. Resistance of a Ship
•
3.1 Model testing
Appendage resistance
An alternative way to determine the viscous pressure
resistance of the appendages (“form drag”) is to perform
two model scale tests at high speed for a bare hull and a
fullyappended model. Assuming that the wave resistance is
equal in both models and that the friction resistance
component may be corrected according to the wetted
surface of the two models, the difference between the
resistance of the two tests gives a measure of the viscous
pressure resistance of the appendages.