UNDERSTANDING THE PHYSICS OF TRIM

Green Ship Technology conference March 2012

Nikolaj Lemb Larsen, FORCE Technology/DCMT Denmark

Trimming a vessel
FORCE Technology have performed more than 50 model trim tests within the last 10 years: Savings up to 15% at specific conditions Overall saving up to 2 to 3% Focus on trim guidance In the following focus will be on the effects that cause the change in power.

Definition:

Trim = TA TF
Positive trim to the aft.

Change in propulsive power due to trim

The change in propulsive power may relate to following parameters: Wetted surface area Water line length Form factor Residual resistance coefficient Thrust deduction Wake fraction Propeller efficiency Relative rotative efficiency

Result of the study may be a change in approach: Now -> Self-propulsion model test Future -> Resistance model test or CFD?

Reference vessel Large cargo vessel

Represents most large car-carriers, Ro-Ro vessels, container carriers etc. Pronounced bulbous bow, slender hull, centre skeg and one propeller Tested at one partly loaded condition Trim from -2.5m to 2.0m in steps of 0.5m Tested speeds: Fn=0.128, 0.164 and 0.201 (Design speed Fn=0.228) Results presented are for Fn=0.128 and trim=-2.0, 0.0 and 2.0m only! Resistance and Self-Propulsion model tests Repeated with resistance RANS CFD and potential theory CFD

Trim guidance

Propeller power deviation as function of trim, compared to even keel.

15 10 5

Power deviation (%)

Fn=0.128 Fn=0.164 Fn=0.201

20

-2.50

-2.00

-1.50

-1.00

-0.50

0 0.00 -5 -10 -15

Trim (m)
0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00

Results for Froude number = 0.128 (Red curve)

Trim PD [%] -2.0m -11.3% 0.0m 0.0% 2.0m 20.7%

Propulsive power
The propulsive power can be described by the following formula:

PD =

RT V

Speed (V) is kept constant. In order to gain from the trim: Decrease hull resistance (RT) Increase the total propulsive efficiency (T) The effects are analysed individually although they might be dependent on each other.

Hull resistance
Hull resistance according to ITTC-standards:

RT = V 2 S CT
Changes relate to either wetted surface area (S) or the total resistance coefficient (CT).

CT = C R + (1 + k )C F + C A
Form factor (1+k) and allowance coefficient (CA) are kept constant. Changes in the total resistance coefficient will then be a result of: Changed residual resistance coefficient (CR) or Changed frictional resistance coefficient (CA)

Wetted surface area

Wetted surface ar ea (m2)
16250 16230

Results for Froude number = 0.128

Trim S [m2] S [%] PD S [%] -2.0m 16181.4 -0.3% -0.3% 0.0m 16223.6 0.0% 0.0% 2.0m 16241.3 0.1% 0.1%

16210

16190

-2.5

-2

-1.5

-1

16170 -0.5 0

Trim (m)
0.5 1 1.5 2

The wetted surface area changes mainly aft due to flat stern region. Changes at the propulsive power are minimum.

Frictional resistance coefficient

Calculated accordingly to ITTC-standards.

CF =

0.075 (log10 (Re ) 2)2

Where Re is the Reynolds number for the flow along the hull.

Re =

V Lwl

Speed and kinematic viscosity (v) are constant, but the water line length changes with trim. Results for Froude number = 0.128
Trim -2.0m 0.0m 2.0m -2.5% 0.0% 1.8% LWL [%] Re [-] 1.91E+09 1.95E+09 2.00E+09 1.415E-03 1.412E-03 1.407E-03 CF [-] PD Lwl [%] 0.2% 0.0% -0.3%

Changes at the propulsive power are minimum.

Residual resistance coefficient (1/3)

Residual resistance coefficient (2/3)

Residual resistance coefficient (3/3)

Results for Froude number = 0.128
Residual resistance coefficient [-]
6.0E-04 5.0E-04 4.0E-04 3.0E-04 2.0E-04 1.0E-04 0.0E+00 -0.5 0

Trim CR [-] CR [%] PD CR [%]

-2.0m 6.80E-05 -70.9% -8.8%

0.0m 2.34E-04 0.0% 0.0%

2.0m 5.41E-04 131.7% 16.4%

Residual resistance coefficient is the part of the hull resistance most affected by trim!
Trim (m)
0.5 1 1.5 2

-2.5

-2

-1.5

-1

Approx 80% of the total saving by trimming is from changes in the residual resistance coefficient.

Propulsive efficiency
Described by three parts:

T = H 0 RR
Relative rotative efficiency (RR) Propeller efficiency (0) Hull efficiency (H) The hull efficiency can described by two factors:

1 t H = 1 w
Thrust deduction (t) Wake fraction (w)

Thrust deduction
Should be as low as possible in order to gain on the hull efficiency! Function of the propeller thrust (T) and the hull resistance.

t=

T RT T
Results for Froude number = 0.128

Thrust deduction
0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 Fn=0.128 Fn=0.164 Fn=0.201

Trim t [-] t [%] PD t [%]

-2.0m 0.166 14.9% 2.5%

0.0m 0.145 0.0% 0.0%

2.0m 0.147 1.7% 0.3%

Trim (m)
-2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5

0.1 0 0.5 1 1.5 2

Wake fraction
Should be as high as possible in order to gain on the hull efficiency! Function of the vessel speed (V) and propeller inflow velocity (VA).

w=

V VA VA
Results for Froude number = 0.128

Wake fraction
0.22 Fn=0.128 Fn=0.164 0.2 Fn=0.201

Trim w [-] w [%] PD w [%]

-2.0m 0.209 15.5% -3.5%

0.0m 0.181 0.0% 0.0%

2.0m 0.17 -6.1% 1.3%

0.18

Trim (m)
-2.5 -2 -1.5 -1

0.16 -0.5 0

0.5

1.5

Propeller efficiency

Non-dimensionalised result of a propeller test i.e. not in the wake field. Plotted as a function of the advance ratio (J).

Open Water
1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
KT 10KQ o

J=

VA nD

Propeller revolutions (n) Propeller diameter (D)

Results for Froude number = 0.128

Trim J [-] 0 [-] 0 [-] PD 0 [%] -2.0m 0.751 0.638 -0.1% 0.1% 0.0m 0.752 0.639 0.0% 0.0% 2.0m 0.729 0.629 -1.5% 1.5%

Relative rotative efficiency

Function of the torque in open water (Qow) and torque behind ship (Qship) :

Relative rotative efficiency

1.01 Fn=0.128 Fn=0.164 1.00 Fn=0.201

RR

Qow = Qship
Trim (m)
-2.5 -2 -1.5 -1

0.99

The moment measured on the ship/model differs from the moment in open water due to non-uniform flow and the level of turbulence.

0.98 -0.5 0

0.5

1.5

Results for Froude number = 0.128

Trim RR [-] RR [-] PD RR [%] -2.0m 1.005 1.7% -1.7% 0.0m 0.988 0.0% 0.0% 2.0m 0.982 -0.6% 0.6%

Origin of change in propulsive power Fn=0.128

From hull resistange
Trim PD S [%] PD Lwl [%] PD CR [%] PD RT [%] -2.0m -0.3% 0.2% -8.8% -8.9% 0.0m 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.0m 0.1% -0.3% 16.4% 16.2%

From propulsive efficiency

Trim PD t [%] PD w [%] PD 0 [%] PD RR [%] PD T [%] -2.0m 2.5% -3.5% 0.1% -1.7% -2.7% 0.0m 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.0m 0.3% 1.3% 1.5% 0.6% 3.7%

Total change
Trim PD RT [%] PD T [%] PD [%] Ref [%] Diff [%] -2.0m -8.9% -2.7% -11.5% -11.3% -0.3% 0.0m 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.0m 16.2% 3.7% 19.9% 20.7% -0.7%

Alternative to self-propulsion model tests

Trim guidance from RANS CFD and model tests are around the same. On resistance based results propeller effects naturally not visible! Limited resistance variation for potential theory CFD. No variation at all for -1.0m trim. 1.5 and 2.0m trim not calculated due to convergence problems.

Possible savings, Fn=0.128

20% RT, RANS CDF RT, Model test 15% RT, Potential theory CFD 10% PD, Model test 5%

Trim (m)
0% -2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 -5% -10% -15% 0.5 1 1.5 2

RT = based on resistance results PD = based on propulsion results

Conclusions

Around 80% of the change in propulsive power origins in changed residual resistance coefficient. Primarily from changed flow around the bulbous bow Remaining 20% are from changes in the propulsive coefficients. Trim guidance from resistance model tests or alternatively RANS CFD can give a reasonable result. Especially if it is combined with experience from self-propulsion tests. The potential theory CFD was found to under predict the change in performance when trimming.

Thank you for your attention

Nikolaj Lemb Larsen, nll@force.dk FORCE Technology, Denmark