Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106 www.elsevier.

com/locate/oceaneng

Parametric studies on seaworthiness of SWATH ships

V.I. Beena, V. Anantha Subramanian
Department of Ocean Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras 600 036, India Received 14 May 2002; accepted 21 August 2002

Abstract This paper reports seakeeping studies performed on a parametrically varied set of SWATH hull forms. The SWATH form, because of its de-linked nature of design affords many variations of the underwater hull geometry without affecting overall deck length and beam. For a given displacement, the hull form can be varied in terms of length, basic section shape, maximum area of cross section of under water hull and strut water plane shape. Using these variants, a parametric family of hull forms has been generated employing Chebychev polynomial scheme for representing sectional area distribution and using a bi-quintic B-spline based surface denition scheme. Not all designs offer optimal performance in a given sea state. A twin-hull motion analysis program SEDOS has been used to study the motions and other dynamic effects. Setting criteria for operability, these dynamic effects have been quantied into a single value namely, operability index. The approach here fulls an investigation at the design stage in order to tap the full advantage of the SWATH form. The study brings out a methodology for assessment of the SWATH at the design stage highlighting interesting results related to section shapes and sectional area distribution. Thus, combining a newly developed interactive surface generation scheme with an analysis package, a rapid assessment tool is offered for new design. 2002 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.

Corresponding author. E-mail address: subruiitm@usa.net (V.A. Subramanian).

0029-8018/02/$ - see front matter 2002 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. doi:10.1016/S0029-8018(02)00101-4

1078

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

1. Introduction During the past decades, seakeeping has come to be understood as a complex combination of characteristics that determine ship behaviour in waves. Estimation of seaworthiness of ships at an early design stage is of great importance in selecting a seaworthy hull form, from among those that meet other design requirements. The ability to readily analyze the relationship between hull form modications and seaworthiness can allow consideration of many hull forms in a short period of time. Seakeeping performance index is a term used to assess the motion and dynamic effects for a given sea state, direction of heading angle and speed of transit. Since sea state and heading angle are probabilistic in nature and speed of transit may vary according to mission requirements, the effects of all these factors must be combined into an overall performance index. Thus a seakeeping performance index is evolved not just based on the hull form and geometry but also based on the above operational and external characteristics. SWATH ships, by the nature of their special geometric form, must be specically assessed for performance index with due consideration for dening their limiting operating conditions. A hull form with favourable behaviour in one sea-state may not necessarily behave favourably in another. Also not all designs offer optimal performance in a given sea state. For this purpose, keeping displacement constant, the hull forms have been evolved using a convergent Chebychev scheme for representation of sectional areas distribution as well as strut thickness distribution. A family of forms with parametric variants has been assessed for seaworthiness characteristics. The common feature of a family is constant displacement and the variants introduced within a family are change in cross section shape, length, and distribution of area of cross section.

2. Contemporary methods of assessment of performance Blok and Beukelman (1984) compared hull forms on their seakeeping merits using a regression predictor model based on number of hull shapes, by arriving at one single gure of merit for heave, pitch and acceleration. McCreight (1987) used measures of merit for assessing seaworthiness namely Limited Signicant Wave Height (LSWH) and percentage time of operation (PTO) during which the vessel performs without degradation of operation. Oehlmann and Pereira (1995) assessed seakeeping performance of SWATH by calculating ship motions and selecting criteria for voluntary and involuntary speed reduction as well as crew comfort. On this basis they evolved operability index and seakeeping performance index. The achievable speeds at each heading (limited by seakeeping performance criteria) plotted in polar diagram give the navigable zone for each sea state. Kuteynikov and Lipis (2000) proposed determining seakeeping indices considering short-term and long-term seakeeping characteristics. Short-term characteristics give characteristics in a given seaway while long-term characteristics consider probability of occurrence of the seaway over larger period of time.

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

1079

3. Methodology for assessment of operability index The method is based on short-term evaluation of ship performance by obtaining various responses at different speeds and headings in the specied sea conditions, as dened by their directional sea spectra. The ship response spectra are thus obtained. For any specic set of performance criteria, the speeds at which the criteria will be met can then be determined for any combination of sea-state and ship heading. Operability Index (OI) is dened as the ratio of navigable area limited by the chosen limits of operation divided by the total area in a polar plot. The polar plot represents angle of heading demarcated by radial lines and speeds represented by concentric circles. Shaded areas indicate locations of such speed and heading combinations where chosen limits of operation have been exceeded. Mathematically, Operability Index is dened as OI pi pn pm where pi is the local probability within each elemental area that ships function can be accomplished (for any distribution of heading and speed) and pn, pm are the probable fractions of time that the ship will travel at each combination of speed and heading angle, respectively.

4. Choice of limiting values of criteria for seakeeping performance In all cases criteria for seakeeping performance analysis of SWATHs are based directly or indirectly on limiting values of roll, pitch, vertical acceleration, slamming and deck wetness. With regard to human habitability and comfort motion sickness is a derived parameter. 4.1. Governing criterion for roll, pitch and vertical acceleration Seasickness depends on the vertical accelerations, their frequency and the exposure time. Universal standards of limiting values as applied to SWATH vessels are at an evolutionary stage. McCreight (1987) used a limiting value of 8 for roll and 0.4g for vertical acceleration (all gures mentioned here are signicant single amplitude SSA) while investigating performance of SWATH ships in transit condition. Sandison et al. (1994) investigated the performance of T-AGOS 19 (reconnaissance SWATH vessel) using the above criteria and in addition, a limiting horizontal acceleration value of 0.2g. STANAG (NATO Standardization Agreement) uses 0.55g for signicant amplitude of vertical acceleration at forward perpendicular. For heavy manual work, a limiting criterion of 0.125g is prescribed for vertical acceleration and 4 for roll. By the nature of geometry of SWATH ships, roll occurrence is small and the frequency at which it occurs is quite low and well de-linked from the frequencies in a natural seaway. Rolling, when present may contribute to motion sickness con-

1080

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

sidering the above factors. RMS roll angle amplitude is the governing criterion associated with motion sickness. However, it is the vertical acceleration component arising from motions that induces motion sickness. The roll criterion has been moderated to a value of 8 which looks more realistic in the context of low frequency roll motion that a SWATH ship typically undergoes. A limiting value of 0.40g has been set for vertical acceleration for the SWATH. Pitching motion is detrimental to human effectiveness since it contributes to vertical acceleration. Therefore it is important to set correct upper limits for pitching motion. A SWATH ship would be smaller in length compared to a mono-hull on the basis of constant displacement. SWATH vessel also has characteristically lower frequency of pitch oscillation and hence higher limit of pitch amplitude is conceivable in the limiting case. Olson (1977) xed 2.4 rms pitch as an operational limit on ship subsystems such as replenishment-at-sea equipment, if there exists no specic consideration of human effectiveness. McCreight (1987) and Sandison et al. (1994) have assumed an upper limit of 30 for pitch to assess the seakeeping performance of SWATH ships. In the present case, transit conditions are assumed and rms pitch value is set at 3. 4.2. Governing criterion for slamming acceleration Slamming induces local acceleration and therefore the ship experiences vibratory response and some times, high hull bending stresses. A SWATH vessel with rounded underwater displacement hull is possibly subjected to lesser slam acceleration. However in association with higher speed capacity of SWATH in rough weather, a value of 0.55g is set as the operational limit. 4.3. Criteria prescribed for performance limits The analysis is performed on an assumption of transit condition associated with oceanographic research. This mission consists of general point-to-point transit to and from the research area. Performance evaluation is limited to sea-state 5, and equal probability of all ship headings is assumed (Table 1).
Table 1 Prescribed performance limits for SWATH Governing criteria Signicant roll amplitude Signicant roll amplitude Vertical acceleration at FP Slamming acceleration Deck wetness Performance limit 8 deg 3 deg 0.40g 0.55g (H1/3Hkr) m when positivea

a H1/3 is the signicant wave height, and Hkr is critical wave height such as corresponding to deck height from water surface.

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

1081

5. Methodology for hull form generation and performance assessment A computer aided numeric form of bi-quintic surface generation has been developed and adopted (Subramanian and Beena, 2002). The surface is evolved on the basis of prime owners requirements of size (displacement) and speed. Briey stated, the scheme employs Chebychev polynomial and coefcients to arrive at optimal distribution of area of cross section of underwater displacement hull as well as distribution of strut thickness (McCreight, 1987). In order to assess the seaworthiness, three hull forms conforming to same length, displacement and distribution of strut thickness and hull cross sectional area, but differing in basic hull shapes have been designed by the above scheme. The hull shapes conform to circular, elliptical and golf club shaped sections respectively for constant values of displacement (1750 tons), ratio of volume of displacement hull and strut (0.8:0.2), spacing of hulls (15 m), length of hull (LB=80 m), length of strut (0.85LB), a selected range of maximum cross sectional area of displacement hulls, constant maximum width of strut, and constant air gap between waterline and cross deck. For design purpose, to generate the hull form, the upper hull and strut are delinked from the lower hull. Thus different underwater hull forms are evolved for given water plane area and xed upper hull. 5.1. Scheme for hull form generation Based on the minimum inputs of vessel displacement and speed, other parameters based on geometry, are generated and employed in a convergent scheme to obtain distribution curves for the strut thickness and displacement hull sectional area. Geometrical coordinates constituting the polygon net for each frame are formed using these distribution curves. The obtained geometrical coordinates form the control polygon points for the surface generation. The general B-spline equations (Rogers and Adams, 1990) are used for the surface generation to evolve a bi-quintic surface (Subramanian and Beena, 2002; Subramanian and Suchithran, 1999). The salient feature of the method is that desired hull geometry characteristics are in-built in the form by choice of sectional areas and strut width based on the optimal Chebychev scheme. Secondly, the points generated are tentative coarse grid points that form the polygon net enabling ab initio design of the surface. They play the role of effective weighting functions, which locally inuence the formation of a continuous 3D surface to represent the smooth hull form. By modifying the coarse grid points, different hull forms can be rapidly evolved for evaluation. Thus for a given sectional area distribution and strut thickness distribution of SWATH the polygon net is formed rst, and thereafter a B-spline based surface is formed. The scheme is shown in Fig. 1. 5.2. B-spline based surface generation The forms evolved are shown in Figs. 2, 3 and 4 and the mathematical technique backing the development is briey described. Bi-quintic B-spline surface represen-

1082

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

Fig. 1.

Scheme for hull form generation.

Fig. 2.

Bi-quintic B-spline surface for Circular SWATH.

tation requires polygon net points, which may lie in the plane of either ship stations (frames) or waterlines. They are the input data (Bi) and provide added features of controllability. Multiple polygon vertices [Eq. (1)] help formation of cusps where required and this feature of introduction of multiplicity of points where knuckles are formed, is incorporated in the algorithm. The position vectors of a point along a frame on the ship (hence representative of curves in a plane) are given in terms of a single parameter t, as follows:
n1

P(t)

i1

BiNi,k(t) tminttmax, 2kn 1

(1)

where, Bi=the position vectors of polygon vertices, these are the coarse coordinates chosen on the basis of the distribution of areas of sections, along a frame; ; Ni,k=normalized B-spline basis functions which assume the values; Ni,k(t)=1 if xitxi+1, 0 (txi)Ni,k1(t) (xi k1)Ni 1,k1(t) ; xi=elements of a knot otherwise; Ni,k(t) xi k1xi xi kxi 1 vector, xixi+1, these give exibility to the curve by appropriate choice; t=parameter, tminttmaxwhere tmin corresponds to minimum value of knot vector, typically zero

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

1083

Fig. 3.

Bi-quintic B-spline surface for Elliptical SWATH.

Fig. 4.

Bi-quintic B-spline surface for Golf club shaped SWATH.

and tmax corresponds to maximum value of knot vector chosen; n=one less than number of dening polygon vertices; and k=order of the B-spline polynomial which can be chosen to give exible shape control. The B-spline surface is dened by
n 1m 1

Q(u,w)

i1j1

Bi,jNi,k(u)Mj,l(w)

(2)

1084

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

where Ni,k(u) and Mj,l(w) are the B-spline basis functions in the bi-parametric u and w directions, respectively. Typically for the SWATH form, u and w can be taken along body frames and waterlines. The basis functions are given by Ni,k(u) Ni,k(u) and Mj,l(w) Mj,l(w)

1 if xiu xi+1

0 otherwise

(uxi)Ni,k1(u) (xi+ku)Ni+1,k1(u) xi+k1xi xi+kxi+1

1 if yjw yj+1

0 otherwise

(wyj)Mj,l1(w) (yj+lw)mj+1,l1(w) yj+l1yj yj+lyj+1

where xi, yj are the elements of knot vectors; Bi,j are the vertices of a dening polygon net enveloping the hull shape in a set of coarse coordinates as chosen already on the basis of distribution of area; n and m are one less than the number of dening polygon vertices in the u and w parametric directions; and k and l are the order of the B-spline curve in u and w directions respectively. The surface as generated above is directly interfaced with AutoCAD to get the various 3D views as required. Conventional grid of waterlines can be obtained by suitable sorting of the obtained surface data. The resulting bi-quintic B-spline surface representing three different hull forms are shown in Figs. 2, 3 and 4. 5.3. Evaluation of ship performance Only short-term evaluation has been considered in the present study and this has been considered adequate for assessing the different forms in assumed sea conditions. The variants of SWATH forms are analyzed to obtain hydrodynamic loads and motions using the package SEDOS (Soeding, 1988). Six degrees of freedom motions and internal loads for twin hull ships are calculated on the basis of strip method. Hydrodynamic interactions between both hulls are taken into account. The method performs integration over ship length, excluding areas of sharp discontinuities such as transom ends or at the ends of struts. Inputs for calculating hydrodynamic loads and motions are given in the form of geometrical description for demi-hull, mass based properties, coordinates of points for which motions are to be obtained, ship speed and spectrum parameters. Outputs obtained are the excitation and radiation forces, non-dimensionalized values for six degrees of freedom for regular waves, signicant amplitudes in natural short crested seaways, motions of selectable xed points on the ship and relative motions between ship-xed points and water surface. Stationary condition responses as well as motions in speed conditions in regular head seas are considered in the present study.

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

1085

Seakeeping predictions were performed for short-crested irregular seas, utilizing JONSWAP wave spectra model. Performance in sea state 4, 5 and 6 were estimated to obtain the seaworthiness characteristics. 6. Parameter based performance evaluation of loads and motion response Keeping strut water plane area constant, 20 variants of underwater displacement hull have been systematically generated. In addition, the semi-SWATH was also investigated. The objective primarily is to predict the trend of changes due to parameters of length, basic section shape, and taper of the hull due to modied distribution of cross sectional area along the length. The cases are graphically presented in Table 2. The results were obtained for responses and dynamic effects in short crested seaway. For this purpose the spectral parameters of the seaway have to be dened. The inputs contain the following spectral parameters, viz. signicant wave height, peak period and directional spreading function. The assumed data is given in Table 3. Seakeeping predictions were performed for the short crested irregular seas, dened by JONSWAP wave spectra. Table 4 shows environmental data pertaining to different sea-states. The methodology for obtaining the Seakeeping Operating Envelope (SOE) is illustrated in the case of SWATH with length 55 m and slenderness ratio 0.083. The wave spectrum for sea state 5 is shown in Fig. 5. The derived signicant responses are reproduced in Tables 510. Similarly slamming accelerations given in Table 8, show occurrence of values exceeding the set limit of 5.4 m/s2 (0.55g). They occur in head sea conditions at high speeds. Signicant roll responses given in Table 9 indicate that they do not exceed the set upper limit value of 8 in any case. Vertical acceleration also does not exceed 0.4g as given in Table 10. In no case, the condition, ((H1/3Hkr)0) occurs. Fig. 2(d) shows the SOE obtained with these data. The transition of favourable zones of operation to unfavourable zones occurs due to speed effect. Primarily the ships frequency of response may get shifted into effective frequencies where the sea spectral energy occurs. Case illustration is provided in Fig. 7 The occurrence of pitch response in head sea results in predominantly inoperable condition as seen in the polar plot. The response obtained in regular waves is plotted after correction to a scale of encounter frequency along with plot of wave spectrum. It is obvious that in all the ve cases the input sea spectrum overlap signicantly resulting in large pitching motions. Hence predominantly shaded areas occur in the polar plot in head sea condition. Similarly the effect in following sea condition is brought out in Fig. 8. At zero speed the spectral overlap is maximum, hence resulting in shaded area around the innermost circle in the polar plot. Beyond 10 knots, the spectral plots do not overlap. Hence the polar plot shows unshaded area beyond speed of 10 knots in following sea condition. The results of the analysis are given in the form of polar plots in Fig. 6.

1086

Table 2 Variants for parametric study on motions and loads. Common constant displacement=1750 tons Midship section coefcient (Cm) 0.73 0.71 0.72 0.72 Midship section Sectional area distribution Prismatic coefcient (Cp) 0.88 0.78 0.68 0.64

Slenderness of displacement hull A / L

0.063

0.070

0.079

0.083

0.053 0.71 0.72 0.72

0.73

0.72 0.65 0.59 0.56 (continued on next page)

0.060

0.067

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

0.071

Table 2 (continued) Midship section coefcient (Cm) Midship section Sectional area distribution Prismatic coefcient (Cp)

Slenderness of displacement hull A / L

Midship section coefcient, Cm = Amax/(OxT)

Prismatic coefcient, Cp = (V/2)/(Amax x L) 0.73 0.71 0.72 0.72 0.60 0.55 0.47 0.45

0.043

0.048

0.054

0.057

Elliptical Draught = 5.25 m 0.65 0.66 0.67

0.043

0.65

0.63 0.56 0.47 0.44 (continued on next page)

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

0.048

0.054

0.057

1087

1088

Table 2 (continued) Midship section coefcient (Cm) 0.75 0.75 0.77 0.78 Midship section Sectional area distribution Prismatic coefcient (Cp) 0.62 0.55 0.47 0.44

Slenderness of displacement hull A / L

Golf club shape Draught=5.35 m

0.043

0.048

0.054

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

0.057

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

1089

Table 3 Mission denition Mission description Transit Speed (knots) 1025 Heading (deg) All

Table 4 Environmental data Sea state 4 5 6 Sig. wave height HS (m) 1.88 3.25 5.00 Peak period TP (s) 6.90 8.70 13.50

Fig. 5.

Wave spectrum (sea state 5).

Table 5 Signicant amplitudes for pitch response in head sea condition Speed (knots) Signicant pitch (degrees)
a

0 5.85a

5 5.48a

10 4.30a

15 5.32a

20 5.61a

25 5.41a

Pitch values exceed governing criterion of operability.

1090

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

Table 6 Signicant amplitudes for pitch response in following sea condition Speed (knots) Signicant pitch (degrees)
a

0 5.75a

5 4.54a

10 2.81

15 2.22

20 2.02

25 2.03

Pitch values exceed governing criterion of operability.

Table 7 Signicant amplitudes of pitch (degrees) for circular section SWATH, L=55 m and slenderness=0.083 Heading(deg) Speed (knots) 0 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 5.75 5.63 5.29 4.80 4.24 3.79 3.62 3.83 4.31 4.88 5.39 5.73 5.85 5 4.54 4.47 4.26 3.96 3.63 3.39 3.37 3.62 4.07 4.59 5.05 5.37 5.48 10 2.81 2.80 2.77 2.73 2.71 2.76 2.89 3.13 3.43 3.75 4.04 4.23 4.30 15 2.21 2.22 2.26 2.36 2.56 2.89 3.33 3.81 4.28 4.70 5.03 5.25 5.32 20 2.02 2.03 2.07 2.22 2.54 3.02 3.59 4.16 4.67 5.08 5.37 5.55 5.61 25 2.02 2.04 2.12 2.33 2.72 3.25 3.83 4.36 4.79 5.09 5.28 5.38 5.41

Bold types indicate values exceeding permissible limiting pitch amplitudes. Such occurrences form the shaded areas in the polar plot.

7. Results The results show that the de-linked nature of design of the SWATH enables choice of a variety of hull forms even within xed overall dimensions. The short-term performance evaluation shows many parametric inuences. The quantied performance in terms of operability index is discussed below as a function of the main dependent ship form variants as well as external environmental factors. They are discussed under (1) Slenderness of hull (2) Section shape of under water hull (3) Comparison of SWATH and semi-SWATH (4) Inuence of spectral peak period. 7.1. Effect of slenderness Hull forms have been generated for the following particulars (see Table 11). For the above constants of hull particulars, the variants are as follows (see Table 12). Effect of slenderness ratio for length 55 m is shown in Fig. 6. From the polar plots, it is obvious that of the cases considered, the hull with the most uniform

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

1091

Table 8 Signicant amplitudes of slamming acceleration (m/s2) for circular section SWATH, L=55 m and slenderness=0.083 Heading(deg) Speed (knots) 0 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 0.96 0.97 0.98 1.00 1.05 1.13 1.23 1.33 1.42 1.49 1.53 1.54 1.53 5 0.54 0.58 0.69 0.87 1.09 1.34 1.59 1.83 2.04 2.21 2.32 2.38 2.37 10 0.23 0.32 0.49 0.71 0.98 1.29 1.63 2.00 2.37 2.71 3.00 3.22 3.32 15 0.15 0.24 0.41 0.66 0.99 1.42 1.92 2.47 3.04 3.56 4.01 4.34 4.51 20 0.22 0.25 0.40 0.69 1.15 1.75 2.45 3.20 3.94 4.61 5.16 5.52 5.67 25 0.53 0.53 0.59 0.86 1.39 2.13 3.00 3.93 4.85 5.67 6.34 6.77 6.93

Table 9 Signicant amplitudes of roll (degrees) for circular section SWATH, L=55 m and slenderness=0.083 Heading(deg) Speed (knots) 0 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 2.27 2.47 2.94 3.48 3.95 4.26 4.37 4.26 3.95 3.49 2.94 2.47 2.27 5 2.02 2.22 2.71 3.27 3.78 4.15 4.33 4.29 4.05 3.64 3.15 2.71 2.53 10 1.67 1.89 2.40 3.01 3.58 4.02 4.29 4.34 4.18 3.83 3.37 2.96 2.79 15 1.54 1.76 2.27 2.90 3.51 4.01 4.33 4.43 4.30 3.97 3.51 3.08 2.90 20 1.40 1.62 2.14 2.80 3.43 3.95 4.28 4.38 4.24 3.89 4.34 2.93 2.72 25 1.22 1.46 2.02 2.72 3.40 3.94 4.29 4.39 4.25 3.87 3.34 2.80 2.56

underwater hull shape (in this case slenderness=0.063) has highest OI namely 0.964 at sea state 5. For length of 65 m, the polar plots are shown in Fig. 9. Here the highest OI of 0.893 is obtained for slenderness ratio 0.060. For length 80 m, the polar plots are shown in Fig. 10. The highest OI 0.869 is obtained for slenderness ratio 0.057. It is concluded that the most uniform hull is not always the best. The parameter of length also plays a dependent role. See Fig. 17 with 3D plot showing

1092

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

Table 10 Signicant amplitudes of vertical acceleration (m/s2) forcircular section SWATH, L=55 m and slenderness=0.083 Heading(deg) Speed (knots) 0 0 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 0.80 0.81 0.82 0.84 0.85 0.861 0.86 0.84 0.82 0.79 0.76 0.73 0.73 5 0.44 0.46 0.52 0.60 0.71 0.817 0.93 1.03 1.12 1.18 1.23 1.26 1.27 10 0.27 0.30 0.39 0.53 0.70 0.904 1.12 1.33 1.53 1.70 1.83 1.92 1.94 15 0.17 0.22 0.34 0.52 0.75 1.03 1.33 1.62 1.88 2.10 2.27 2.37 2.41 20 0.12 0.18 0.32 0.54 0.835 1.17 1.51 1.82 2.09 2.31 2.46 2.55 2.58 25 0.10 0.16 0.33 0.60 0.938 1.31 1.67 1.98 2.23 2.40 2.51 2.56 2.58

the combined inuence of ship length, slenderness ratio and OI. The location of performance peaks namely OI are shown in the contour plot. In the above cases, the trend suggests that slenderness ratio for most favourable OI decreases with increasing length. It is important to assess all possible variants in order to arrive at the most favourable OI associated with a form for given external conditions. 7.1.1. Degradation of performance with increasing sea state It may be intuitively deduced that with increasing sea-state, performance may deteriorate rapidly. The polar plots as a function of sea-state are given in Figs. 11and 12. For slenderness ratio of 0.053, the performance has degraded rapidly with OI 0.996 at sea state 4, to 0.855 at sea state 5 and drastically to OI 0.108 at sea state 6. For sea state 4, the limitation is only due to slamming which occurs at high speed in head sea condition. For sea state 5, the limitation is due to both slamming in head sea at high speed as well as pitching in following sea. For sea state 6, almost a complete degradation occurs due to pitching, except for a small island of operable zone for low speed in head sea condition. The same trend of results is obtained for ship with length 65 m, and slenderness ratio 0.060. The degradation is complete at sea state 6. The two case studies above show optimal combination of length and slenderness ratio can only be obtained with such analysis. 7.2. Effect of section shape of underwater hull Three section shapes, which are common variants in prototype constructions, are considered. They are circular, elliptical and the golf club shape section incorporated in recent designs (see Table 13 for main particulars). The golf club shape offers

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

1093

Fig. 6.

Speed polar plots based on slenderness. Sea state 5, L=55 m, 1025 knots.

1094

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

Fig. 7. 5).

Wave spectrum and pitch response in head sea (SWATH L=55 m, slenderness=0.083, sea state

advantage of maximum displacement for given beam and depth of displacement hull (see Fig. 13). The results are presented for SWATH with length, 80 m and slenderness ratio, 0.054. Three section shapes namely, circular, elliptical, golf club shape have been considered for a common sea state 5. Speed has been limited to the range

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

1095

Fig. 8. Wave spectrum and pitch response in following sea (SWATH L=55 m, slenderness=0.083, sea state 5)

1015 knots. In all three cases operability is limited by pitch exceeding limiting value in following sea condition. They show relatively high OI. However the circular shaped section shows highest OI=0.896. The golf club section shape has 0.696. The elliptical section shape has OI=0.685. The performance degradation is not severe on a comparative basis.

1096

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

Fig. 9.

Speed polar plots based on slenderness. Sea state 5, L=65 m, 1025 knots.

7.3. Comparison of SWATH and semi-SWATH The Semi-SWATH is a recent adaptation. It has evolved as a modication of the SWATH and merits a comparative study with the SWATH form. The Semi-SWATH results from the merger of the displacement hull with a broadened strut water plane at the aft. Consequently, the added water plane area contributes signicantly to modi-

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

1097

Fig. 10.

Speed polar plots based on slenderness. Sea state 5, L=80 m, 1025 knots.

1098

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

Fig. 11.

Speed polar plots for different sea states. L=65 m, Slenderness=0.053, 1025 knots.

cation in forces and motions. See Table 14 for main particulars of the two hull forms generated. Because of the signicant changes in hull shape as well as water plane area, the displacement is kept constant, not the draught (see Fig. 14). The polar plot is shown for sea-state 5 and for slenderness ratio 0.06. The SWATH is limited at higher speeds due to pitch value exceeding the set limit in following sea and slamming occurring in head sea condition. The semi-SWATH besides being limited due to pitch and slamming, is also hindered with excessive value of roll in low to medium speed quartering sea condition. The OI is 0.893 for the SWATH and 0.784 for the semi-SWATH. The semi-SWATH has the penalty of relatively smaller OI due to relatively larger water plane area at its aft.

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

1099

Fig. 12.

Speed polar plots for different sea states. L=65 m, Slenderness=0.060, 1025 knots.

7.4. Effect of spectral peak period The period of the spectrum will have a direct effect on the response of the ship and length of ship. The analysis has been performed for the semi-SWATH for constant slenderness 0.060. The spectrum denes sea state 5, however two different values of peak period have been used namely, 7.02 s and 8.7 s. It is interesting to see in Fig. 15 that OI falls drastically in comparison. For peak period 8.7 s, the SOE is limited by roll, pitch and slam values exceeding the limits. For peak period 7.02 s,

1100

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

Fig. 13. knots.

Speed polar plots for different section shapes. L=80 m, Slenderness=0.054, Sea state 5, 1025

the operable region of polar plot has drastically reduced with OI 0.246. See Fig. 16 for speed polar plots for circular section SWATH at different peak periods. The effect of peak period of the spectrum is obviously directly related to the length of the vessels. A summary of results in terms of OI for all the cases studied are given in Tables 15 and 16.

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

1101

Fig. 14.

Speed polar plots for SWATH and semi-SWATH. Sea state 5, Slenderness=0.060, 1025 knots.

Fig. 15. knots.

Speed polar plots based on spectrum. Sea state 5, Semi-SWATH, Slenderness=0.060, 1025

1102

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

Fig. 16. Speed polar plots based on spectrum. Sea state 5, Circular SWATH, Slenderness=0.060, 10 25 knots.

Table 11 Main particulars (circular section SWATH, L=65 m) Length of hull, L (m) Centre to centre spacing of demi-hulls (m) Section shape Depth, D (m) Draught, T (m) Displacement, (m3) KG/D kyy/L 65.0 15.0 Circular 11.0 6.5 1750 0.89 0.26

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

1103

Table 12 Variants (circular section SWATH, L=65 m) Hull parameters Case 1 Case 2 15 4.37 0.060 0.715 0.656 Case 3 19 4.92 0.067 0.718 0.587 Case 4 21 5.17 0.071 0.724 0.558

Maximum cross sectional area of displacement hull at 12 mid-ship, A (m2) Max. diameter of displacement hull, f (m) 3.91 0.053 Slenderness of hull (A / L) 0.727 Midship section coefcient, Cm (Amax/(fT) 0.719 Prismatic coefcient, CP ((/2)/(AmaxL)a
a

See denition sketch (within Table 2).

Table 13 Main particulars (different section shapes) Description Section shape Length of hull, L (m) Slenderness of hull (A / L) Displacement, (m3) Draught, T (m) Case 1 Circular 80 0.054 1750 6.5a Case 2 Elliptical 80 0.054 1750 5.25 Case 3 Golf club shape 80 0.054 1750 5.35

a The draughts in the three cases could not be kept constant because of the requirement of constant displacement as well as constant ratio of strut volume/displacement hull volume.

Table 14 Main particulars (SWATH and semi-SWATH) Description Displacement (m3) Waterplane area (m2) Draught (m) Vertical centre of gravity (m) LPP (m) Centre to centre distance of demihulls (m) Radius of gyaration, kxx (m) Radius of gyaration, kyy (m) Radius of gyration, kzz (m) SWATH 1750 157.30 6.50 9.75 60.00 15.00 7.60 17.68 16.77 Semi-SWATH 1750 270.60 4.50 11.48 60.00 15.00 10.10 17.14 16.30

8. Conclusion A hydro-numeric scheme is deployed and the results are presented for rapid evaluation of the performance of SWATH type vessels. The analysis of different cases establishes that a performance analysis is feasible and desirable in order to choose

1104

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

Fig. 17.

Plot of OI values for circular section SWATH.

the best geometry and proportions for a given capacity, mission requirement and external sea conditions. Acknowledgements This work forms part of a study carried out under a research grant from the Department of Science and Technology, Government of India. The support is acknowledged.

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

1105

Table 15 Operability Index for the SWATH variants Description Draught Sectional area distribution A (m2) A / L Speed range (knots) Operability Index

SS5 (HS=3.25 m) 8.7 s 7.02 s

SWATH (DIFFERENT LENGTHS) L=55 m Circular 6.5 m 12 15 19 21 L=65 m Circular 6.5 m 12 15 19 21 L=80 m Circular 6.5 m 12 15 19 21 SWATH (SECTION SHAPES) L=80 m Circular 6.5 m 12 15 19 21 L=80 m Elliptical 5.25 m 12 15 19 21 L=80 m Golf club 5.35 m 12 shape 15 19 21 Semi-SWATH L=66 m 4.5 m 15

0.063 0.070 0.079 0.083 0.053 0.060 0.068 0.071 0.043 0.048 0.054 0.057 0.043 0.048 0.054 0.057 0.043 0.048 0.054 0.057 0.043 0.048 0.054 0.057 0.060

1025 1025 1025 1025 1025 1025 1025 1025 1025 1025 1025 1025 1015 1015 1015 1015 1015 1015 1015 1015 1015 1015 1015 1015 10~25

0.964 0.802 0.500 0.433 0.855 0.893 0.581 0.437 0.547 0.763 0.785 0.869 0.719 1.000 0.896 0.902 0.737 0.723 0.685 0.653 0.693 0.723 0.696 0.665 0.784

0.641

0.664 0.793 0.999 0.991 0.679 0.652 0.608 0.592 0.652 0.641 0.616 0.615 0.246

Table 16 OI for different sea states Length (m) Draught Sectional area (m) distribution A (m2) 65 6.5 12 15 A / L 0.053 0.060 1025 1025 0.996 0.994 0.855 0.893 0.108 0.000 Speed range (knots) SS4 SS5 SS6

1106

V.I. Beena, V.A. Subramanian / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 10771106

References
Blok, J.J., Beukelman, W., 1984. The high-speed displacement ship systematic series hull formsseakeeping characteristics. SNAME Transactions 92, 125150. Kuteynikov, M.A., Lipis, V.B., 2000. On indices of ships operational seaworthiness. 7th International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, A, 176189. McCreight, K.K., 1987. Assessing the seaworthiness of SWATH ships. SNAME Transactions 95, 189 214. Oehlmann, H., Pereira, R., 1995. Comparison of seakeeping performance of a monohull and a SWATH design for a new naval research vessel. Third International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation 2, 539549. Olson, S.R., 1977. A methodology for quantifying the operational effects of ship seakeeping characteristics. Centre for Naval Analyses. Rogers, D.F., Adams, J.A., 1990. Mathematical Elements of Computer Graphics, 2nd ed. Mc-Graw Hill International Editions, New York. Sandison, N., Woolaver, D., Dipper, M., Rice, M., 1994. Sea trials of the SWATH ship USNS Victorious (T-AGOS 19). Marine Technology 31 (4), 245257. Soeding, H., 1988. Berechnung der bewegungen und belastungen von SWATH-schiffen und katamaran im seegang. Institute fur schiffbau der Universitat Hamburg, Bericht Nr. 483 (in German). Subramanian, V.A., Suchithran, P.R., 1999. Interactive curve fairing and bi-quintic surface generation for ship design. International Shipbuilding Progress 46 (446), 189208. Subramanian, V.A., Beena, V.I., 2002. Numeric design and evaluation of SWATH form. International Shipbuilding Progress, in press.