Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Ocean Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/oceaneng

Course stability of a ship towing system in wind

A. Fitriadhy a,n, H. Yasukawa b, K.K. Koh c
a
b
c

Department of Maritime Technology, Faculty of Maritime Studies and Marine Science, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Malaysia
Department of Transportation and Environmental Systems, Hiroshima University, Japan
Department of Marine Technology, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Malaysia

a r t i c l e i n f o

abstract

Article history:
Received 7 June 2012
Accepted 3 February 2013
Available online 3 April 2013

This paper proposes a numerical model for analyzing the course stability of a towed ship in uniform and
constant wind. The effects of an unstable towed ship and a stable towed ship were recorded using
numerical analysis at various angles and velocities of wind. The stability investigation of the ship towing
system was discussed using the linear analysis, where a tugs motion was assumed to be given. When the
tug and the towed ships motions were coupled through a towline as a proper model of the ship towing
system, their dynamic interactions during towing was then captured using towing trajectories and
analyzed using nonlinear time-domain simulation. With increasing wind velocity, the simulation results
revealed that the towing instability of the unstable towed ship was recovered in the range of beam to
quartering winds; however, the towing stability of the stable towed ship in head and following winds
gradually degraded. It should be noted that this towing instability might have resulted in the impulsive
towline tension and could led to serious towing accident e.g. towline breakage or collisions.
& 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Stable barge
Unstable barge
Course stability
Wind angle
Wind velocity
Towline tension

1. Introduction
Course stability of a ship towing system is vital in still water and
still air conditions. In reality, tug and towed ship are always exposed
to some degrees of wind at different directions. A reliable investigation either using a theoretical or experimental approach is required to
obtain a deeper understanding of the course stability of the ship
towing system with such external disturbance.
In recent years, several studies regarding course stability of ship
towing systems in wind discussed investigating the motion characteristics of a towed ship in various velocities and angles of wind.
Kijima and Varyani (1986) carried out a linear analysis and found
that when the wind angle changed from the head to the following
winds, the course stability of the two towed ships tended to become
unstable. In addition, Kijima and Wada (1983) presented that the
course stability of the towed barge would generally be unstable in
the range of beam to quartering wind conditions. Using an experimental model in a towing tank, Yasukawa and Nakamura (2007a)
found that the course stability of an unstable towed barge was
recovered in the range of beam to quartering winds. In this work,
however, the towed barge was decoupled from the tug, i.e. the tugs
motion was assumed to be given.
This paper presents linear and nonlinear model analyses of
course stability for a ship towing system in uniform and constant
wind conditions as an extension study from the previous work by

Corresponding author. Tel.: 60 1 9155 590; fax: 60 9 668 3719.

E-mail addresses: naoe.at@gmail.com (A. Fitriadhy),
yasukawa@naoe.hiroshima-u.ac.jp (H. Yasukawa), koh@fkm.utm.my (K.K. Koh).
0029-8018/$ - see front matter & 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2013.02.001

Fitriadhy and Yasukawa (2011). In the nonlinear analysis, a

proper model of the ship towing system was modeled, where
the tug and towed barge are coupled by a towline. This is quite
reasonable given the fact that wind forces will be exerted on
windage areas both of the towed ship and also the tug. Thus, the
analytical model of predicting course stability of a ship towing
system is deemed more reliable. The effect of wind velocities (Uw)
and absolute wind angles (yw ) were taken into account in the
models. A 2D lumped mass method was applied to model towline
motion incorporated with dynamic towline tension; and an
autopilot system was employed to reduce heading and deviation
of the tug from its desired track. The presented numerical
approach is expected to reduce experimental costs, even though
the model test validation is still recommended.

2. Mathematical formulation
The mathematical model of maneuvering motions equations
for a tug and towed ship associated with dynamic towline tension
relates to nonlinear three degrees of freedom in the time-domain,
i.e. surge, sway and yaw motions.
2.1. Coordinate systems
In deriving the basic equations of motion of the tug and towed
ships, three coordinate systems are used, Fig. 1. One set of axes is
xed to the earths coordinate system that is used to specify
absolute wind velocity Uw and angle yw denoted as OXY, and

136

A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145

Fig. 1. Coordinate systems of tug and towed ships (left) and lumped mass model for towline (right).

two sets of axes G1 x1 y1 and G2 x2 y2 are xed relative to each
ships moving coordinate system aligned with its origin at the
center of gravity. In the moving reference, the xi-axis points
forward and the yi-axis to starboard. i 1 designates the tug,
i2 the towed ship. The heading angle ci refers to the direction of
the ships local longitudinal axis xi with respect to the xed x-axis.
The instantaneous speed of ship Ui can be decomposed into a
forward velocity ui and a lateral velocity vi. The angle between Ui
and the xi-axis is the drift angle bi  tan1 vi =ui . Here, yw 01
and yw 1801 are the head and following winds, respectively, and
coincide with the earths xed system X; yw 901 is the beam
wind, which coincides with the earths xed system Y.
The towline is composed of a nite number N of lumped
masses; the masses are connected by segments into the entire
truss element. The lumped mass particulars describe the towline
characteristics, such as the mass, the density and the drag. The
coordinates of the ith lumped mass is labeled by X i ,Y i , where
i 1,2,3, . . . ,N 2. The angle between the x-axis and the length
of ith segmented towline i is denoted as yi . Here, N 2 is the
distance of the connection point at the towed ship with respect to
her center of gravity and yN 2 c2 is the heading angle of the
towed ship. Their connection points with respect to the earths
xed coordinate systems X 0 ,Y 0 and X N 1 ,Y N 1 , respectively,
have the coordinates T ,0 and B ,0 in the respective local ship
coordinate systems. Then, the coordinates of lumped masses
X i ,Y i through yi and i can be written as
i
X

Xi X0 

i
X

j cos yj , Y i Y 0 

j1

j sin yj

j1

where yN 2 c2 and N 1 B .
2.2. Motion equations of towed ship and towline
The motion equations of the towed ship are written in
Eqs. (2) and (3) as follows:


N
2
X

N
2
X

j B sin gMy2 cos yj Mx2 sin yj y j

j1

N
2
X

j B sin gMy2 sin yj Mx2 cos yj y_ j B sin g

j1

T V2 Mx2 X 0 M y2 Y 0 M 2
z

j Mx1 sin yj My1 cos yj y j

N
2
X
j1

where
2
Mx1 M 2
x sin g cos c2 M y cos g sin c2
2
My1 M2
x sin g sin c2 M y cos g cos c2
2
Mx2 M 2
x cos g cos c2 M y sin g sin c2
2
My2 M2
x cos g sin c2 M y sin g cos c2
2
2
_
_ F 2 M 2 v c
T V 1 M x v2 sin g M y u2 cos gc
2 2 sin g
2
x
y
2
2
_
F M u c cos g
y

2
2
2
_
_
T V 2 M 2
x v2 cos g M y u2 sin gc2 F x M y v2 c 2 cos g
2
2
_
F M u c sin g
y

g yN 1 c2
2
The notations of M2
x m2 mx2 and M y m2 my2 represent
the virtual mass components in the direction x2 and y2, respectively; and I2
z I2 J 2 is the virtual moment of inertia, which is
expressed as the sum of mass (moment of inertia) and added
2
2
mass (added moment of inertia) components. F 2
x , F y and M z are
the surge force, the sway force, and the yaw moment acting on
the towed ship, respectively. The superscripts (1) and (2) denote
the tug and the towed ship, respectively.
Lagranges motion equations are applied to describe the
dynamic motion of the towline and are derived in Eq. (4). mi
and kFi are the mass and the added mass coefcients of the ith
lumped masses, respectively.
8
9
=
N <X
i
X

msi sin yk sin yj mci cos yk cos yj k j y j

:
;
ik

j1

k sinyk yN 1

N
2
X

j Mx2 sin yj My2 cos yj y j

j1

Q 0k Q 1k k T V 3 sinyk yN 1

j1

I2
z yN 2

j Mx1 cos yj My1 sin yj y_ j T V1 Mx1 X 0 My1 Y 0

where
msi mi 1 kFi sin2 yi

k 1,2,3, . . . ,N

A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145

mci mi 1 kFi cos2 yi

N
2
X

T V3

j Mx2 cos yj My2

2
sin yj y_ j M x2 X 0 M y2 Y 0 T V 1 T V2

N
2
X

137

j Mx2 sin yj My2 cos yj yj cos yN 1 T 1

X

12

j1

j1

Q 0k k sin yk

N
X

RCi sin yi F Ci cos yi

TY 

ik

k cos yk

N
X

Q 1k k sin yk

RCi cos yi F Ci sin yi

0
@X 0

i
X

N
X

0
@Y 0

2k

mci @

N
2
X

i
X

j cos yj yj A

j1

j Mx2 sin yj My2 cos yj yj sin yN 1 T 1

Y

13

j1

y_ j j cos yj Amsi

where

i
X

1
T 1
X

2
y_ j j

sin yj Amci

N
X

20
4@X0

i1

j1

ik
N
X

j1

ik

k cos yk

i1

ik
N
X

N
X

i
X

1
2
j cos yj y_j Amsi 2mi X_i kFi sin yi cos yi y_i

j1


RCi sin yi F Ci cos yi T V3 cos yN 1
20
1
N
i
X
X
2
1
4@Y0
TY 
j sin yj y_j Amci 2mi Y_i kFi sin yi cos yi y_i

X_ i sin yk Y_ i cos yk mi kFi y_ i sin yi cos yi

ik
2
2
X_ k Y_ k mk kFk cos yk sin yk

i1

j1


RCi cos yi F Ci sin yi T V 3 sin yN 1
Two different external forces experienced on the segmented
towline, Fig. 1 (right). These forces are decomposed into normal
and axial force components:
RCi 12 rSi C Di 9V Ci 9V Ci ,

F Ci 12 rSi C Fi 9U Ci 9U Ci

where V Ci X_ i sin yi Y_ i cos yi and U Ci X_ i cos yi Y_ i sin yi . r is

the water density, Si the prole area of the segmented towline, CDi
the coefcient of the normal force, and CFi the coefcients of the
axial force.

2.3. Motion equation of tug

The equation of the tug motion was derived adequately as
follows:
1
1
_
_
M 1
x u1 M y v1 c 1 F x F Tx

_
M 1
y v1

_
M 1
x u1 c 1

F 1
y F Ty

I1
z c 1 M z M Tz

2.4. Forces and moments acting on the ships

The equation of external forces and moments on hull, propeller, rudder, and wind acting on the tug and towed ship are
expressed in Eq. (14). The rst three of the aforementioned forces
and moments were described in the previous study (Fitriadhy and
Yasukawa, 2011).
9
i
i
i
i
>
F i
>
x X H X P X R X A
>
=
i
i
i
i
F y Y H Y R Y A
14
>
>
;
M i Ni N i Ni F i x >
z

7
8

Estimation of wind forces on exposed windage areas of the tug

and the towed ship are modeled in various velocities and angles
of wind. Based on Isherwood (1972), the equation of wind forces
and moments are
9
i
i i2 i
>
X i
>
A 1=2ra AX V A C XA yA
>
=
i
i
i i2 i
Y A 1=2ra AY V A C YA yA
15
>
>
i >
i
i i2
i
;
NA 1=2ra AY V A Li C NA yA
where
1 i
yi
vA =ui
A tan
A

V i
A

16

q
i2
ui2
A vA

17
18

F Ty T X sin c1 T Y cos c1

10

ui
A ui U w cosyw ci

M Tz T T X sin c1 T Y cos c1

11

vi
A vi U w sinyw ci

The towline tension components TX and TY are expressed

following Yasukawa et al. (2006):
0
1
N
i
X
X

@
TX
msi
j sin yj yj A
i1

j1

Gi

1
where M 1
x m1 mx1 and M y m1 my1 represent the virtual mass components in the direction x1 and y1, respectively,
1
1
1
I1
z I1 J 1 the virtual moment of inertia. F x , F y and M z are
the surge force, the sway force and the yaw moment acting on the
tug, respectively. FTx, FTy and MTz denote the surge force, the sway
force, and the yaw moment due to the towline tension acting at
the connection point of the tug, respectively, which can be
expressed as

F Tx T X cos c1 T Y sin c1

The resultant towline tension at the tow point of the tug can
q
T 2X T 2Y .

be expressed as T C

C i
XA ,

C i
YA

19
C i
NA

The notations of
and
are the force and moment
i
coefcients as a function of yA (relative wind angle); ra is the
i
density of air; Ai
X and AY are the front and lateral projected areas.
Here, Uw and yw are the absolute velocity and angle of winds,
respectively.

138

A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145

3. Linearization of motion equations for course stability

investigation in wind

y2
Aq1

Study on course stability of the ship towing system in wind

involves stronger nonlinearities than in calm water conditions. To
understand the basic mechanism of the ship towing system in the
wind condition, a course stability model using piecewise linear
system is utterly essential. This approach leads to provide a
threshold for identifying stable and unstable towing conditions
in the various angles and velocities of wind. Based on Fig. 2,
several simplications have been considered:

1. Motions are considered in the horizontal plane only (surge,

sway, yaw).
2. The motion of the tug (X 0 ,Y 0 ) is assumed to be given with
Y 0 0.
3. The towline is treated as non-extensible catenary model
(N 0).
4. This virtual tug moves in a straight-course with U X_0 , where
c1 , X0 , X_0 and Y0 are equal to zero, while y2 c2 .
Here, y1 and c2 are dened in steady and unsteady motions as

y1 y0 Dy1 ,

y_ 1 Dy_1

c2 c0 Dc2 , c_ 2 Dc_ 2

20
21

where Dy1 and Dc2 are negligibly small (Oe); g0 c0 g0 and
Dg Dy1 Dc2 .
3.1. Linearized motion equation of forces and moments acting on a
towed ship
The basic linearization of external force under wind condition
2
is based on the relative wind angle yA , which is exerted
forcefully on superstructure of the towed ship as written in
Eq. (16). Using Taylor series expansion with respect to Dy_1 ,
Dc_2 , Dc2 , then y2
A is solved as

fU cos y0 U w cosyw y0 g

22
u22
A0 vA0

2
B uA0
y2
Ar  2
uA0 v2
A0
2
yA0c 1

u2
A0 U cos c0 U w cosyw c0
v2
A0 U sin c0 U w sinyw c0
The square term of relative wind velocity V 2A in Eq. (17) can
be recast into the linearized form:
2
2
2
_
_
V 2
A V A0 V Aq Dy1 V Ar Dc2

23

where
2
V 2
A0 U U w2 2UU w cos yw

V 2
Aq 2 sin g0 fU w cosyw c0 U cos c0 g
cos g0 fU w sinyw c0 U sin c0 g
V 2
Ar 2 B U w sinyw c0 U sin c0 
2
2
The equations of forces and yaw moment X 2
A ,Y A ,N A under
wind condition are denoted as F Ak (k1,2 and 3, respectively), as
follows:
k
k
k
k
_
_
F k
A F A0 F Aq Dy1 F Ar Dc2 F Ac Dc

24

where
k k
F k
A0 1=2ra A C A yA0 V A0
"

#
@C k
A yA0
1=2ra A
yAq V A0
@yA
"
#
@C k
k
k
k
A yA0
F Ar 1=2ra A
C A yA0 V Ar
yAr V A0
@yA
F k
Aq

F k
1=2ra Ak
Ac

C k
A yA0 V Aq

@C k
A yA0
yAc V A0
@yA

1 2
y2
vA =u2
A tan
A
2
2
2
2
C yA0 yAq Dy_1 yAr Dc_2 yAc Dc2

where
1 2
y2
vA0 =u2
A0 tan
A0

22

2
3
and A1 A2
A2
A2
X , A
Y and A
Y L2 .
Then, the hydrodynamic forces and moment acting on the hull
2
2
k
X 2
H ,Y H ,N H are denoted as F H (k1,2 and 3, respectively) and
expressed as
k
k
k
k
_
_
F k
H F H0 F Hq Dy1 F Hr Dc2 F Hc Dc2

25

where
2
2
2
2
F 1
H0 X 0 U cos c0 X vv U sin c0

F 1
Hq 2 UX vv sin c0 cos g0 X 0 cos c0 sin g0
F 1
Hr U sin c0 2 B X vv X vr
2U 2 sin c0 cos c0 X vv X 0
F 1
Hc
2

3
3
F 2
H0 Y v U sin c0 Y vvv U sin c0
2
2
F 2
Hq  cos g0 Y v 3Y vvv U sin c0
2
2
2
2
F 2
Hr Y r Y vvr U sin c0  B Y v 3Y vvv U sin c0

U cos c0 Y v 3Y vvv U 2 sin2 c0

F 2
Hc
2

3
2
3
F 3
H0 N v U sin c0 N vvv U sin c0 xG F H0
2
2
2
F 3
Hq  cos g0 N v 3N vvv U sin c0 xG F Hq
2
2
2
2
2
F 3
Hr N r N vvr U sin c0  B N v 3N vvv U sin c0 xG F Hr

Fig. 2. Coordinate systems for linear model of a towed ship in wind.

F 3
U cos c0 N v 3Nvvv U 2 sin2 c0 xG F 2
Hc
Hc
2

A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145

Referring to Eq. (14), the linearized equation of the total

k
k
k
external forces and moments F k
x ,F y ,M z is denoted as F
(k1,2 and 3, respectively) and take the following form:
F

k
_
F k
0 F q Dy1

_
F k
r Dc2

F c Dc2

26

139
0

c Dy_ d Dc
_ e Dy f Dc 0
a2 Dy b2 Dc
2
2
2
2

32

where
0

a1  M 0x0 sin y0 M 0y1 cos y0

b1 0B M 0x0 sin c0 M0y1 cos c0

where
F k
0

k
F k
H0 F A0 ,

F k
q

F k
r

k
F k
Hr F Ar ,

02
c1 F 01
q sin g0 F q cos g0

k
F k
Hq F Aq

F c F k
H c2
2

d1 cos c0 cos g0 M 0y M 0x sin c0 sin g0 M 0y M 0x

F k
A c2

F 02
cos g0 F 01
sin g0 
r
r
02
e1 F 01
0 cos g0 F 0 sin g0

The notation of F k
0 is the steady component of the lateral forces
k
k
and yaw moments; F k
q , F r and F c2 are the unsteady derivative
values of lateral forces and yaw moments with respect to Dy_1 ,
Dc_2 and Dc2 , respectively.

01
02
01
f 1 F 01
0 F c cos g0 F 0 F c sin g0
0

a2 I0y0 cos y0 I0x0 sin y0

b2

I0z 0B I0y0

cos c0 I0x0 sin c0

02
03
c2 0B sin g0 F 01
q cos g0 F q sin g0 F q

d2 0B sin c0 sin g0 cos g0 M0x M 0y sin2 g0 cos c0 M 0y M 0x

3.2. Course stability of a towed ship

sin g0 cos g0 F 02
sin2 g0 F 03
F 01
r
r
r
Referring Eq. (2), the linearized equations of the towed ship
can be written in the following form:

M x0 sin y0 M y0 cos y0 Dy 1 B M x0 sin c0 M y0 cos c0 Dc

2
1
2
1
2
_
F sin g F cos gDy F cos g F sin g Dy
0

0
2

2
0
2
1

F
F
0
0
c2 sin

F 1
0 F c cos g
F 1
0

sin g

2
0 F 0

g0 Dc2

cos g0

27

Similarly, Eq. (3) becomes:

Iy0 cos y0 Ix0 sin y0 Dy1 Iz B Iy0 cos c0 Ix0 sin c0 Dc2

g0 cos g0 2F y0 sin g0 cos g0 Dy1

2
2
B sin g0 F 1
c cos g0 F c sin g0 2F 0 cos g0
2

2
0 F0

cos g

sin g0  M z0

Ix0 ,Iy0

1=2rL42 d2

28

02 01 02
F 01

q ,F q ,F r ,F r

M x0 Mx sin g0 cos c0 M y cos g0 sin c0

M y0 M x sin g0 sin c0 M y cos g0 cos c0

03
F 03
0 ,F c

Ix0 B sin g0 M x cos g0 cos c0 M y sin g0 sin c0

03
F 03

q ,F r

Iy0 B sin g0 M x cos g0 sin c0 My sin g0 cos c0

0

0
B

,
Eqs. (27) and (28) are non-dimensionalized with respect to
1=2rL2 d2 U 2 and 1=2rL22 d2 U 2 , respectively. L2, d2 and U denote
the length and the draft of the towed ship and the tows speed,
respectively. Through separating these equations into the nondimensional steady and unsteady motion terms, the following
equations are expressed:
Steady components:

01
0 F 0

0
B

sin g

cos g

02
0 F 0

29
0
0 M z0

sin g

1=2rL22 d2

1=2rL32 d2
Iz

where

02
F 01
0 sin g0 F 0 cos g0 0

M x M y M x0 M y0

02 01 02
F 01
0 ,F 0 ,F c ,F c

g0 cos g0 F c2 =B Dc2

1
0 F 0

I0x0 ,I0y0
I0z

2
1
2
_
F 3
r = B F r sin g0 cos g0 F r sin g0 Dc2

B sin g

From Eqs. (29) and (30), the value for the variables of y0 and c0
is obtained. By substituting those values accordingly into Eqs. (31)
and (32), the unsteady motion equations of the towed ship are
then solved. When the wind coefcient is equal to zero, this work
follows essentially the approach of Peters (1950) and Shigehiro
et al. (1997).
The non-dimensional motion are

B U sin c0 sin g0 cos g0 M x M y U sin2 g0 cos c0 M y M x

2
F 1
0 sin

2
03
2
F 01
0 sin g0 cos g0 F c

M0x M 0y M 0x0 M 0y0

2
2
3
_
B F 1
q sin g0 cos g0 F q sin g0 F q = B Dy1
2
1
B F 0 sin

02
02
f 2 0B sin g0 F 01
c cos g0 F c sin g0 2F 0 cos g0

U cos c0 cos g0 My M x U sin c0 sin g0 My Mx

_
F 2 cos g F 1 sin g Dc
r

2
02
2
e2 0B F 01
0 sin g0 cos g0 2F 0 sin g0 cos g0 

2 1 2
F 1
0 ,F 0 ,F c ,F c

1=2rL2 d2 U 2
2 1 2
F 1
q ,F q ,F r ,F r

1=2rL22 d2 U

3
F 3
0 ,F c
1=2 L22 d2 U 2
3
F 3
q ,F r
1=2 L32 d2 U

r
r

, B
L2

Dy 01 , Dc 02
Dy_ 01 , Dc_ 02

Dy 1 , Dc 2
U=L2 2
Dy_ , Dc_
1

U=L2

where and 0B denote the ratios of towline length and tow point
0
to length of the towed ship, respectively, where =L2 and
0
B B =L2 (B 4 0.

30
3.3. Course stability criterion

Unsteady components:
0

c Dy_ d Dc
_ e Dy f Dc 0
a1 Dy b1 Dc
1
1
1
1

31

Simultaneous solution of equations can be used for the

assessment of the stability of the straight-line motion in steady

140

A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145

wind, i.e. motion with Y 00 Y_ 00 0. The values of Dy1 and Dc2

are described by

of square shape with both span and chord lengths of 2.0 m. The
steering speed of the rudder was set to 2.0 1/s.

Dy1 C 1 elt , Dc2 C 2 elt

4.2. Hydrodynamic derivatives

33

By substituting Eq. (33) into Eqs. (31) and (32), a fourth-order

characteristic equation with respect to l should satisfy the
following conditions:
4

D0 l D1 l D2 l D3 l D4 0

34

where the values of D0 ,D1 ,D2 ,D3 and D0 are obtained (see
Appendix A). By applying the Hurwits method in Eq. (34), the
basic solution of stability criteria is written in Eqs. (35) and (36).
D0 ,D1 ,D2 ,D3 ,D4 4 0

35

D  D1 D2 D3 D21 D4 D0 D23 4 0

36

4. Simulation condition

Hydrodynamic derivatives for the tug and barges 2B and 2Bs,

including their resistance coefcients, were obtained from captive
model test in the towing tank (see Fig. 3), which are completely
summarized in Table 2. Based on the stability index C, barges 2B
and 2Bs are considered respectively unstable and stable motions
in course-keeping. In addition, added mass coefcients m0x ,m0y ,J 0z
were calculated using singular distribution method under the
rigid free-surface condition.
4.3. Wind coefcients
Referring to Eq. (15), the wind coefcients for the tug and
barges were obtained using the linear multiple regression technique, Fujiwara et al. (1998) and are shown in Fig. 4.
4.4. Autopilot of the tug

4.1. Ships
The principal dimensions of tug and barge including their
lateral and longitudinal windage areas used in the simulation are
presented in Table 1. The length of the tug and the barge are
denoted as L1 and L2, respectively. The towing point at the tug is
denoted as T and non-dimensionalized as 0T T =L1 . Negative 0T
means that the tow point is located behind the center of gravity of
the tug. Two conditions of the barge, namely with and without
attached skegs, are denoted as barge 2B and barge 2Bs,
respectively, hereafter named the stable and unstable barge. The
tug has twin CPP propellers and twin rudders. Each CPP Propeller
has a diameter of 1.8 m, revolution of 300 rpm and a total engine
power of 1050 kW, used in the simulations for maintaining a
constant speed of 7.0 knots on the tug alone. The rudder design is

Table 1
Principal dimensions of tug and barge.
Symbol

Tug

Barge

Ship length L (m)

Breadth B (m)
Draft d (m)
Volume V (m3)
Lateral wind area AX (m2)
Longitudinal wind area AY (m2)
LCB position xG (m)
Block coefcient Cb
kyy =L
L/B

40.0
9.0
2.2
494.7
57.35
28.91
2.23
0.63
0.25
4.44

60.96
21.34
2.74
3292.4
77.5
250.5
 1.04
0.92
0.252
2.86

During ship towing operation, the autopilot is often employed.

The rudder of the tug as an actuator automatically adjusts the
backlash of the controller according to the heading angle and
lateral position of the tug. The control law of the tug is given in
Table 2
Resistance coefcient, hydrodynamic derivatives on maneuvering and added mass
coefcients.
Symbol

Tug

2B

2Bs

X 0uu
X 0vv
X 0vr
X 0rr
Y 0v
Y 0R
Y 0vvv
Y 0vvr
Y 0vrr
Y 0rrr
N 0v
N 0R
N 0vvv
N 0vvr
N 0vrr
N 0rrr
Y 0d
N 0d
m0x
m0y

 0.0330
 0.0491
 0.1201
 0.0509
 0.3579
0.127
 0.2509
0.1352
0.000
0.000
 0.0698
 0.0435
 0.0588
 0.0367
0.000
0.000
 0.05
0.025
0.0187
0.1554

 0.0635
 0.0188
 0.0085
 0.0272
 0.4027
0.0568
 0.2159
0.4840
0.495
 0.8469
 0.1160
 0.0237
0.0458
 0.0578
0.2099
 0.0982

0.0391
0.2180

 0.0641
 0.1152
 0.1086
 0.1311
 0.4373
0.1355
 0.7265
0.3263
 0.2424
 0.4167
 0.0491
 0.0742
 0.0067
 0.2486
0.0360
0.000

0.0391
0.2180

0.0124
 0.251

0.0124
0.023

J 0z
C

Fig. 3. Model of tug (left) and barge (right).

0.0056
0.0509

A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145

141

Fig. 4. Wind coefcients for tug and barge 2B/s in various angles of wind.

Fig. 5. Course stability diagram of 2B in various velocities and angles of wind.

Fig. 6. Course stability diagram of 2Bs in various velocities and angles of wind.

5.1. Course stability of the ship towing system in wind: linear

analysis

the form of

d1 GP cT c1 GD c_ 1 GYP Y T Y 1 GYD Y_ 1

37

The notations of c1 and Y1 are the actual heading angle and lateral
motion, respectively; cT and YT are the targeted heading angle and
lateral motion, respectively, (cT ,Y T 0). GP and GD are the proportional and derivative gains with respect to the heading angle; GYP
and GYD are the proportional and derivative gains with respect to the
lateral motion. Here, the constant controller gains of GP, GD, GYP and
GYD are applied, i.e. 9, 10, 10 and 3.5, respectively.

5. Results
Course stability of the towing system at different wind velocities
and wind angles are numerically simulated using linear and nonlinear
approaches. In these simulations, the authors employed the towing
0
parameters of 0T 0:44, 0B 0:5 and different from 1:0 to 5:0;
0
whereas 2:0 was only used for the nonlinear analysis.

Following the work of Yasukawa and Nakamura (2007a), the

stability conditions of the linearized system are determined by the
signs of the real part of its eigen values from Eq. (34): negative and
positive values represent stable and unstable motion responses,
respectively. The analysis was discussed in course diagram stability
designating stable (white color) and unstable (black color) zones, as
shown in Figs. 5 and 6. In this analysis, the tug motion was assumed
to be given as explained earlier in Section 3.
For barge 2B, the course stability diagrams of the ship towing
system using linear approach vs. the angle of wind are plotted in
Fig. 5. Based on the diagrams, the increase of U w =U from 0.0 (no
0
wind) to 4.0 took place in the unstable towing regions although
was lengthened from 1.0 to 5.0. Using the linear theory from
Fitriadhy and Yasukawa (2011), the towing stability was dominantly determined by the inherent stability criterion of the
0
towed ship itself: therefore the increase of on the towing of
the unstable barge (negative course stability index) was

142

A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145

unnecessary and even prone to degrade the towing stability.

However, the stable region then appeared in the range of beam

Table 3
Case of 2B, effect of wind velocity on motion amplitude of ship towing system
with yw 01.
U w =U

u 1 (m/s)

c1 (1)

c2 (1)

d1 (1)

0
4
8

2.67
2.34
1.91

1.01
1.19
1.24

51.1
50.3
51.6

5.0
5.3
6.4

and following winds as a further increase of U w =U up to 8.0. This

could possibly be explained by the wind forces exerted on the
exposed windage of barge 2B, which would increase of the yaw
damping on her hull and result in signicant reduction of
amplitude of the lateral motion. The results agreed well with
model basin tests conducted by Yasukawa et al. (2007b), where
barge 2B was towed in uniform and constant wind conditions.
For barge 2Bs, the course stability analysis is plotted in Fig. 6.
For the no wind case (U w =U 0:0), the towing of barge 2Bs was
absolutely stable. When U w =U increased up to 4.0, the towing
instability appeared in the range of 1541 r yw r 1801 at
0
0:4 r r5:0. The same tendencies showed that the towing
condition took place in the unstable region in the range of

Fig. 7. Time histories and trajectories of towing for 2B in various wind velocities with yw 01.

Fig. 8. Time histories and trajectories of towing for 2B in various wind velocities with yw 1201.

A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145

0

01 r yw r261 and 1671 r yw r 1801 at 0:4 r r2:65 and

0
0:2 r r 5:0, respectively, as U w =U increased from 4.0 to 8.0.
Similar to what is noted by Yasukawa et al. (2012), the instability
towing regions in the head and following winds occurred mainly
due to the effect of the positive sign for N 0Ac2 (the restoring
moment derivative with respect to yaw angle). As discussed in
Section 5.2, this towing instability was presented in the form of
increasing oscillation of the lateral motion for barge 2B (see
Figs. 9 and 10). However, the towing instability regions in the
head wind case with U w =U 8:0 vanished by lengthening the
0
towline ( 4 2:65). For this reason, the higher resistance of the
stable barge (positive stability index) associated with the longer
towline led to more stable towing conditions, similar to the
nding by Fitriadhy and Yasukawa (2011). In general, the
towing stability of barge 2Bs was found to be more stable than
barge 2B.

5.2. Course stability of the ship towing system in wind: Nonlinear

analysis
In the presence of wind, the ship towing model, composed of a
tug and towed ship coupled through a towline, has revealed the
enormous complexities involving two ships motions associated
with dynamic tension in a towline. Therefore, nonlinear analysis
is required to capture this phenomenon, which would be efcient
to obtain a more reliable prediction for the course stability of the
ship towing system.

Table 4
Case of 2B, effect of wind velocity on motion amplitude of ship towing system
with yw 1201.

143

As seen, the entire towing performance of barge 2B at yw 01

with the various wind velocities was still directionally unstable as
indicated by the sufcient large lateral motions (Y2) and amplitude of c2 (see Fig. 7). The results are presented in Table 3. In
head wind condition, u 1 decreased adequately by 28% as U w =U
increased from 0.0 to 8.0. This occurred since the quadratic
function of Uw was proportional to the total ships resistances.
Meanwhile, the yaw motion of barge 2B oscillated more frequently by 65%; and the period of Y2 became faster by 41% with
respect to the horizontal trajectories (X2). However, the increase
of head wind velocity in general had a relatively small effect on
the mean magnitude of TC; and the motion performance of barge
2B as indicated by the insignicant inuence to the amplitude of
c2 , Y2, c1 and d1 . This can be explained as the behavior of the
towing independently correlates to the inherent course stability
index of the barge itself as well-noted in Table 2.
The changing of wind angle from beam to quartering remarkably
affects the course towing stability as illustrated in Fig. 8. These
towing trajectories were captured at yw 1201. With the subsequent increase of U w =U from 0.0 to 8.0, the simulation results
showed that the motion of barge 2B veered off to the starboard side
from the initial course and then settled then in relatively steady
course with c2 35:51, Table 4. This can be explained (Section 5.1 at
Paragraph 2) as the sway forces in the towing of barge 2B were more
dominant than her yaw moment induced by the wind forces, which
acted alongside the windage. In addition, the mean amplitude of c2
was reduced by 32%, which revealed less uctuating of TC and
implied a towing to speed up u 1 by 23%. At the same time, to

Table 5
Case of 2Bs, effect of wind velocity on motion amplitude of ship towing system
with yw 01.

U w =U

u 1 (m/s)

c1 (1)

c2 (1)

d1 (1)

U w =U

u 1 (m/s)

c1 (1)

c2 (1)

d1 (1)

0
4
8

2.6
2.8
3.2

3.2
8.4
21.5

52.0
53.7
35.5

5.1
3.7
25.0

0
4
8

3.6
3.1
2.2

0.0
0.6
1.4

0.0
8.8
35.6

0.0
1.8
6.0

Fig. 9. Time histories and trajectories of towing for 2Bs in various wind velocities with yw 01.

144

A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145

Fig. 10. Time histories and trajectories of towing for 2Bs in various wind velocities with yw 1801.

preserve the tug on the desired track inevitably resulted in a larger

deection of rudder angles d1 by 251 to port. However, the
subsequent increase of U w =U at yw 1201 had an insignicant
inuence on the mean magnitude of TC.
For barge 2Bs, the towing characteristics in the various head
wind velocities are illustrated in Fig. 9. By increasing U w =U from
0.0, 4.0 to 8.0, the motion of barge 2Bs is prone to be unstable as
indicated by the increase of c2 up to 35.61, Table 5. The lateral
motion of barge 2Bs increased almost 5.5 times as U w =U changed
from 4.0 to 8.0. Similar to what was explained in Section 4.1, the
restoring force of the aerodynamic derivative N 0Ac acting on barge
2
2Bs led to diverge her yaw motion. This vigorous manoeuvring
from barge 2Bs resulted in a considerable increase of maximum TC
from 7.3 t to 9.2 t. This condition might pose structural concerns
and become even worse when the snatching frequency of the
towline coincides the with motion frequencies of the tug, Varyani
et al. (2007). From the trajectories, the resistance of barge 2Bs
seemed to increase as indicated by a decrease in the tows speed
of u 1 by 14% and 39% as U w =U increased from 0.0 to 4.0 and 0.0 to
8.0, respectively. Even though the deection of d1 increased to
stabilize the towing, an unwieldy slewing motion of barge 2Bs at
U w =U 8:0 still occurred, which is absolutely unfavorable from
the towing stability point of view.
Fig. 10 shows the effect of the following wind conditions on
the course stability of barge 2Bs. In general, the towing characteristics of barge 2Bs have been shown to bear qualitative
similarities to its characteristics in head wind condition. This
means that the increase of wind velocity gradually degrades the
entire towing performance as indicated by the excessive c2 up to
61.51 at U w =U 8:0, Table 6. Similar to the head wind case, the
diverging motion of barge 2Bs in following wind condition
occurred due to the aerodynamic derivative value of N 0Ac , which
2
was positive, Yasukawa et al. (2012). It was noted that Y2
increased at almost nine times as U w =U changed from 4.0 to
8.0. Because of the severity of barge 2Bss motion, this strongly
affects the tugs motions, where the tug experienced rigorous
motions indicated by the violent oscillation of c1 , d1 and u 1 .
However, the increase of following wind velocity up to
U w =U 8:0 is also detrimental to the tow by causing a very

Table 6
Case of 2Bs, effect of wind velocity on motion amplitude of ship towing system
with yw 1801.
U w =U

u 1 (m/s)

c1 (1)

c2 (1)

d1 (1)

0
4
8

3.6
3.7
3.9

0.0
0.8
9.2

0.0
18.4
61.5

0.25
2.6
18.5

impulsive towline tension with the maximum of TC of 18.7 t. This

amount was almost twice the maximum of TC in the head wind
case. The reason for this is that in the following seas the surge of
the tug increased the snatching of the towline due to rigorous
loosening and tightening of the towline with the violent motion
of barge 2Bs.

6. Conclusion
The course stability of the ship towing system in uniform and
constant wind conditions was solved by using theoretical
approaches. The agreement between linear and nonlinear analysis
was obtained. Using the linear analysis, the stability investigation
of the ship towing system showed that the course stability of the
unstable barge was recovered in the range of beam to following
winds as the wind velocity increased. In addition, the towing
performance of the stable barge was prone to be unstable in head
and following winds as indicated by the large amplitude of her
headings angle and lateral motion. Employing a longer towline
for the towing of the unstable barge was ineffective in stabilizing
the towing system; conversely, for the towing of the stable barge,
the longer towline led to more stable towing conditions. In the
nonlinear analysis, the results revealed that the towing instability
of the unstable barge 2B at yw 1201 and U w =U 8:0 was
recovered as indicated through attenuation in her shtailing
motions. In general, the towing of the stable barge associated
with the longer towline led to more stable towing conditions than
the towing of the unstable barge. The increase of following wind

A. Fitriadhy et al. / Ocean Engineering 64 (2013) 135145

velocity resulted in a very impulsive towline tension, which is

almost twice the maximum of TC in the head wind case.

145

02
F 01
0 cos g0 F 0 sin g0
01
02
01
F 01
0 F c cos g0 F 0 F c sin g0 
02
03
0B sin g0 F 01
q cos g0 F q sin g0 F q 

Appendix A

02
02
0B fsin g0 F 01
c cos g0 F c sin g0 2F 0 cos g0
2
03
01
02
2
F 01
0 sin g0 cos g0 gF c F q sin g0 F q cos g0

D0 0B M0x0 sin c0 M 0y0 cos c0 I0y0 cos y0 I0x0 sin y0

0

I0z 0B I0y0 cos c0 I0x0 sin c0  M 0x0 sin y0 M 0y0 cos y0 

02
D1 0B M 0x0 sin c0 M0y0 cos c0 0B sin g0 F 01
q cos g0 F q sin g0
0
0 0
0
F 03
q Iz B Iy0 cos c0 I x0 sin c0 
02
0
0
2F 01
q sin g0 F q cos g0 cos c0 cos g0 M y M x

cos g0 F 01
sin g0 
sin c0 sin g0 M 0y M 0x F 02
r
r
0

 I0y0 cos y0 I0x0 sin y0 0B sin c0 sin g0 cos g0 M 0x M0y

sin2 g0 cos c0 M0y M 0x  M 0x0 sin y0 M 0y0 cos y0 
0

2
2
D2 0B M 0x0 sin c0 M0y0 cos c0 0B fF 01
0 sin g0 cos g0
0
0 0
0
2F 02
0 sin g0 cos g0 gIz B I y0 cos c0 Ix0 sin c0 
02
0
0
F 01
0 cos g0 F 0 sin g0 cos c0 cos g0 M y M x

cos g0 F 01
sin g0 
sin c0 sin g0 M 0y M 0x F 02
r
r
02
03
0B sin g0 F 01
q cos g0 F q sin g0 F q 

0B fsin c0 sin g0 cos g0 M0x M 0y sin2 g0 cos c0 M 0y M 0x

sin g0 cos g0 F 02
sin2 g0 gF 03
F 01
r
r
r 
02
F 01
q sin g0 F q cos g0
01
02
01
F 01
0 F c cos g0 F 0 F c sin g0 
0

 I0y0 cos y0 I0x0 sin y0 

02
02
0B fsin g0 F 01
c cos g0 F c sin g0 2F 0 cos g0
2
03
2
0
0
F 01
0 sin g0 cos g0 gF c  M x0 sin y0 M y0 cos y0 
0

cos g0
D3 cos c0 cos g0 M 0y M0x sin c0 sin g0 M 0y M 0x F 02
r
2
02
2
F 01
sin g0 0B fF 01
r
0 sin g0 cos g0 2F 0 sin g0 cos g0 g

0B fsin c0 sin g0 cos g0 M0x M 0y sin2 g0 cos c0 M 0y M 0x

sin g0 cos g0 F 02
sin2 g0 gF 03
F 01
r
r
r 

01
02
01
D4 F 01
0 F c cos g0 F 0 F c sin g0 
2
02
2
0B fF 01
0 sin g0 cos g0 2F 0 sin g0 cos g0 g
02
02
0B fsin g0 F 01
c cos g0 F c sin g0 2F 0 cos g0
2
03
01
02
2
F 01
0 sin g0 cos g0 gF c F 0 cos g0 F 0 sin g0

References
Fitriadhy, A., Yasukawa, H., 2011. Course stability of a ship towing system. J. Ship
Technol. Res. 58, 424.
Fujiwara, T., Ueno, M., Nimura, T., 1998. Estimation of wind forces and moments
acting on ship. Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers 183,
7790. (Japanese).
Isherwood, R.M., 1972. Wind resistance of merchant ships. RINA Trans. 115,
327338.
Kijima, K., Wada, Y., 1983. Course stability of towed vessel with wind effect. Japan
Society of Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers 153, 117126. (Japanese).
Kijima, K., Varyani, K., 1986. Wind effect on course stability of two towed vessels.
Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers 24, 103114.
Peters, B.H., 1950. Discussion in the paper of Strandhagen, A.G. et al. Trans. Society
of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers 58, 4652.
Shigehiro, R., Ueda, K., Arii, T., Nakayama, H., 1997. Course stability of the highspeed-towed sh preserve with wind effect. J. Kansai Soc. Nav. Archit. 224,
167174.
Varyani, K.S., Barltrop, N., Clelland, D., Day, A.H., Pham, X., Van Essen, K., Doyle, R.,
Speller, L., 2007. Experimental investigation of the dynamics of a tug towing a
disabled tanker in emergency salvage operation. In: International Conference
on Towing and Salvage Disabled Tankers, pp. 117125.
Yasukawa, H., Hirata, N., Nakamura, N., Matsumoto, Y., 2006. Simulations of
slewing motion of a towed ship. Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean
Engineers 4, 137146. (Japanese).
Yasukawa, H., Hirata, N., Tanaka, K., Hashizume, Y., Yamada, R., 2007b. Circulation
water tunnel tests on slewing motion of a towed ship in wind. Japan Society of
Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers 6, 323329. (Japanese).
Yasukawa, H., Hirono, T., Nakayama, Y. and Koh, K.K., 2012. Course Stability and
Yaw Motion of a Ship in Steady Wind, J.Marine Science and Technology.
Vol.17, No.3, 291304.
Yasukawa, H., Nakamura, N., 2007a. Analysis of course stability of a towed ship in
wind. Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers 6, 313322.
(Japanese).