Investigation Into The Physics of Ship Capsizing by Combined Captive and Free-Running Model Tests PDF

SNAME Transactions, VoI. 97, 1989, pp.
169-212
Model of a fishing vessel running in breaking quartering waves
Investigation into the Physics of Ship Capsizing by

Combined Captive and Free-Running Model Tests
Stefan G r o c h o w a l s k i , 1 M e m b e r
Ship capsizing in heavy seas is a problem which still awaits a solution. A comprehensive study of
the physics of capsize phenomenon, focused on the behavior of small fishing boats in extreme
waves, has been conducted by the National Research Council of Canada. The paper presents a
philosophy of an original concept of experimental investigation into the mechanism of ship
capsizing, which consists in a specially designed composition of free and captive model tests. Also
outlined are the experimental technique developed and the test program. The obtained
experimental data are unique. The presented detailed analysis of some of the free model runs
gives an insight of ship kinematics in quartering and beam waves, while the examination of the
captive tests identifies the composition of the exciting hydrodynamic forces and moments. The
majority of the paper is dedicated to analysis of the mechanism of ship capsizing in quartering
waves. Various types of capsize and their causes are presented. Special attention is paid to the
influence of bulwark submergence. The hydrodynamic phenomenon and the subsequent couplings
and heeling moments created by bulwark submergence are discussed. Some other factors
influencing ship capsizing are also considered.
1 Head, Ottawa Laboratory, Institute for Marine Dynamics, National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
169
Presented at the Annual Meeting, New York, N.Y., November

15-18, 1989, of THE SOCIETY OF NAVAL ARCHITECTS AND MARINE ENGINEERS.
1.
Introduction
THE SOLUTION of the ship capsizing p r o b l e m is one of

the major challenges that scientists and naval architects
have to meet. T h e p r o b l e m is as old as shipbuilding itself.
It concerns ship operators and designers and has preoccupied r e s e a r c h e r s ' attention for m a n y years. Capsize disasters are so painful, not only because of material losses,
but primarily because they take h u m a n lives.
It is not strange, therefore, that the m a t t e r is raised and
discussed so frequently. It is amazing, however, how little
progress is being m a d e despite the considerable a m o u n t
of research that has b e e n carried out in this field worldwide.
At present, t h e r e is no scientifically based stability safety
criterion, and t h e r e is no m a t h e m a t i c a l m o d e l of ship capsizing in the general case of operation in e x t r e m e waves.
The complex physical n a t u r e of the capsize p h e n o m e non and the large n u m b e r of possible scenarios are the
m a i n reasons for this situation. This is reflected in the work
of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), w h e r e
various stability standards and criteria have b e e n p r o p o s e d
and discussed for m a n y years, and yet some classes of
vessels are not c o v e r e d by safety standards, while the imp l e m e n t e d criteria are considered to be very unsatisfactory. T h e y are in practical use because of lack of criteria
that are m o r e adequate.
Two p r e d o m i n a n t approaches to the ship capsizing
p r o b l e m can be o b s e r v e d at present. O n e of t h e m is based
on the classic assessment of stability safety by analysis of
the righting m o m e n t curve in comparison with external,
usually stipulated, heeling moments. The major efforts are
focused either on establishing r e q u i r e m e n t s for the shape
and values of the G Z curve (calculated in calm w a t e r or
on a wave crest) so that a r e q u i r e d safety level can be
m a i n t a i n e d during ship operations in unspecified sea conditions, or on establishing the nominal heeling m o m e n t s
which the ship has to withstand (statically or dynamically
or both).
T h e r e q u i r e d safety standards are usually a result of a
detailed stability analysis of a particular t y p e of ship or
some statistical studies of safe ships and casualties, and
reflect so-called " g o o d m a r i n e p r a c t i c e . " T h e y m a y provide a reasonable safety level for some classes of ships or
some operational situations but in other cases they are not
satisfactory or fail completely.
T h e second t r e n d r e p r e s e n t s efforts to base the stability
criteria on m o r e sound theoretical models. H o w e v e r , the
studies are focused on some selected simplified cases which
are r e l a t e d to ship behavior either in b e a m or following
seas. Although the selected situations are realistic, they do
not r e p r e s e n t the most severe scenarios of ship operation
in oblique e x t r e m e seas, and none of the p r o p o s e d approaches is g e n e r a l enough to r e p r e s e n t the whole range
of p h e n o m e n a affecting ship stability.
An e x a m p l e of a stability study which avoided this weakness is the H a m b u r g Ship Model Basin's (HSVA) c o m p r e hensive m o d e l testing of ship behavior in q u a r t e r i n g waves
[2,3 ].~ H o w e v e r , the a p p l i e d e x p e r i m e n t a l t e c h n i q u e and
the m e t h o d of analysis of the results do not allow adoption
of the d e v e l o p e d stability criteria to classes of ships other
than that class for which the tests w e r e carried out, that
is, fast containerships.
It will be very difficult (if not impossible) to generalize
the results of studies of particular simplified cases, while
Numbers in brackets designate References at end of paper.
170
the rationality of i m p r o v e m e n t s of traditional methods,

based on "sufficient" righting arms curve, can always be
questioned. The situation is particularly difficult in the case
of small fishing vessels. T h e variety of hull forms, loading
conditions (changing during operations at sea), operational
and e n v i r o n m e n t a l circumstances, m a k e the safety assessments e x t r e m e l y difficult.
The lack of applicable stability criteria and f r e q u e n t
capsize disasters involving small fishing vessels p r o m p t e d
the Canadian Coast G u a r d a few years ago to request the
Institute for Marine Dynamics of the National Research
Council of Canada to formulate and u n d e r t a k e a corresponding research p r o g r a m [ 4 ].
It was a g r e e d that, in o r d e r to avoid the weaknesses of
existing stability criteria, and to lay out a sound scientific
base for future regulations, a f u n d a m e n t a l study of the
capsizing p h e n o m e n o n must be undertaken.
The p r i m a r y objectives in the first stage of the project
w e r e defined as:
1. investigation of the physics of the capsize p h e n o m e n o n in the general case,
2. d e v e l o p m e n t of a n u m e r i c a l code for t i m e - d o m a i n
simulations of motions and capsizing of an arbitrary
ship in e x t r e m e waves with r a n d o m headings; and
3. formulation of a m a t h e m a t i c a l m o d e l of ship capsizing in severe seas.
The d e t e r m i n i s t i c a p p r o a c h s e e m e d to be the most app r o p r i a t e at this phase. It should p r o v i d e a basis for further
study of the influence of ship design p a r a m e t e r s on a vessel's p r o p e n s i t y to capsize in various selected critical conditions.
Following some p r e l i m i n a r y analyses and a review of
results of various m o d e l tests,the instance of a ship m o v i n g
in quartering, breaking waves was selected as the subject
of the study. It was c o n c l u d e d that this is the most severe
and also the most general case in which all potentially
dangerous situations, usually investigated separately, m a y
be p r e s e n t in a single event. F u r t h e r m o r e , capsizing in
q u a r t e r i n g waves m a y also occur as a totally transient
e v e n t due to some factors usually not considered in the
equations of roll.
In studies of such a c o m p l i c a t e d d y n a m i c p h e n o m e n o n
it is essential to d e t e c t all the major factors and e l e m e n t s
which play a decisive role. Obviously, this cannot yet be
done by theoretical considerations alone. A p p r o p r i a t e l y
designed and scrupulously p e r f o r m e d physical m o d e l exp e r i m e n t s can be the most valuable source of otherwise
u n o b t a i n a b l e information and can form an excellent basis
for the validation or calibration of n u m e r i c a l simulation
programs.
F o r these reasons a special e x p e r i m e n t a l p r o g r a m was
designed. The objective was not to examine systematically
the stability of a certain vessel or class of vessels in various
e n v i r o n m e n t a l conditions, but r a t h e r to investigate the
physics of the capsize p h e n o m e n o n in g e n e r a l and the
most critical situations.
T h e m o d e l tests w e r e carried out at the SSPA Maritime
Consulting facilities at G6teborg, S w e d e n in 1984-85. In
parallel with the analysis of the e x p e r i m e n t a l results, the
d e v e l o p m e n t of a c o m p u t e r time d o m a i n simulation prog r a m for ship motions and capsizing in e x t r e m e waves was
continued. The first version of the c o m p u t e r code and
some comparisons of the calculated and e x p e r i m e n t results
are p r e s e n t e d in [5]. The results of the m o d e l tests are
still being carefully analyzed.
This p a p e r presents the c o n c e p t and philosophy leading
to the design of the p e r f o r m e d set of free and captive
Physics of Ship Capsizing
model experiments, and outlines the experimental techn i q u e developed and the test program performed. Detailed analysis of some of the free model runs gives an
insight of ship kinematics in quartering and b e a m waves,
while the examination of the captive model tests identifies
components of exciting hydrodynamic force and m o m e n t .
The major part of the paper is dedicated to the analysis
of the m e c h a n i s m of capsizing in quartering waves. Various types of capsize and their major causes are presented,
with particular emphasis on the influence of bulwark submergence. Some other factors which have an influence on
ship capsizing are discussed as well. The results prove that
the e x p e r i m e n t a l approach developed is very useful and
provides a u n i q u e opportunity to gain a b e t t e r understanding of the m e c h a n i s m of ship capsizing.
0)
WAVE
PROFILE
GENERATED
HYDRODYNAMIC
FORCES
2. Philosophy of the experimental approach

The dynamic identification of a ship from the capsizing
point of view could be completed if for any set of envir o n m e n t a l conditions two c o m p o n e n t s of the p h e n o m e non:
composition of externally exerted forces and moments, and
. corresponding response of a ship, are fully identified.
As the hydrodynamic forces are caused by the surrounding
e n v i r o n m e n t , we deal with a chain of i n t e r m e d i a t e physical p h e n o m e n a which together constitute a "cause-result" chain. The key elements of this chain are presented
in Fig. 1. All of these elements and the strict quantitative
relations b e t w e e n t h e m must be completely identified if
a mathematical model of ship behavior is to be developed,
or the validation of a numerical simulation carried out.
Because of the large n u m b e r of factors which play a role
in ship behavior in extreme waves, a simple analysis, and
comparisons of the cause (waves) and response (ship motion) only are not sufficient.
However, the p r o b l e m lies in the fact that it is impossible
to measure the exciting h y d r o d y n a m i c forces and the
model response at once. Therefore, the usual practice in
the experimental investigation of ship capsizing is the measuring of the behavior of a free model in various wave
INSTANTANEOUS
POSITION OF A
SHIP IN AWAVE
SHIP
RESPONSE
Fig. 1 Elementsof the "cause-result" chain in ship motions
configurations. These types of tests may be very useful for

the stability estimation of a particular ship in specified
e n v i r o n m e n t a l conditions, but they do not give any information about either exciting forces or the force-response
relationship during complicated motion and capsizing. Obviously, the identification methods based on linear theory,
which are used in seakeeping, are not applicable to this
case.
A special composition of experiments was designed to
solve this complex problem. The principles of the idea
could be summarized as follows:
(a) The dynamics of large-amplitude motions and capsizing in specified waves, loading and propulsion-steering
Nomenclature
A4,
hydrodynamic added mass moment in roll
F ~ F ~ , F . = hydrodynamic force in surge, sway, and heave,

GM=
H=
L. =
k,,k~t,,kzz =
LCG =
M.M~,M. =
M~=
M,o =
ME =
M_K =
M,=
MN =
Ms=
Mso =
M,=
8M.=
respectively
initial metacentric height
wave height
mass moment of inertia upon G - X axis
radius of gyration in roll, pitch, and yaw, respectively
longitudinal center of gravity
hydrodynamic moment in roll, pitch, and yaw,
respectively
buoyant part of wave exciting moment
difractional part of wave exciting moment
total wave exciting moment
total Froude-Krylov moment
inertial part of wave exciting moment
damping part of wave exciting moment
inertial part of scattering moment
total scattering moment
hydrostatic restoring moment
additional roll moment created by bulwark submergence
additional heeling moment due to lateral motion

while bulwark is submerged
8 M x n = additional heeling moment due to heave while
bulwark is submerged
N s = damping part of scattering moment
N. = hydrodynamic damping in roll
R = hydrodynamic reaction
S = instantaneous shape of immersed part of hull in
~Mxs =
a wave
T=
TM=
t=
v=
y =
8=
19 =
/~ =
~ =
~, =
qbs =
~ =
kO=
wave trough, wave period

modal period of irregular waves
time
forward speed
spectrum parameter of irregular waves
rudder angle
pitch angle
course (heading) angle
roll angle
radiation velocity potential
scattering potential
undisturbed wave velocity potential
yaw angle
171
conditions will be simulated by use of the free-running

m o d e l technique.
(b) The h y d r o d y n a m i c forces, g e n e r a t e d on the ship by
the same specified waves, and at the same conditions as
for a free-running model, can be m e a s u r e d on a m o d e l
restrained at a specified " f r o z e n " position, moving with
the same forward speed. The c o r r e s p o n d i n g e x p e r i m e n t s
are n a m e d " c a p t i v e m o d e l tests."
(c) In o r d e r to reconstruct the capsizing mechanism,
the free-running and the captive m o d e l tests must be corr e l a t e d so that for e v e r y instantaneous position of the
m o d e l with respect to the wave profile in the free-running
situation, the a p p r o p r i a t e " f r o z e n " situation in the captive
tests can be found, and the composition of the hydrodynamic forces interpolated. This can be achieved if in both
cases the wave profiles and forward speeds are the same
and the range of headings and heel angles in the captive
tests cover the range of changes of those p a r a m e t e r s in
the free-running tests.
The traditional description of ship motions in wave splits
the total h y d r o d y n a m i c force into separate parts which
reflect the physics of the involved p h e n o m e n a . In a general case, the equation of a motion contains the following
categories of forces:
Inertial + D a m p i n g Restoring + W a v e exciting = 0
force
force
force
force
As the physics of the forces g e n e r a t e d on a body by waves
is the same as the n a t u r e of the h y d r o d y n a m i c forces of
the body motion on calm w a t e r [ 6 - 8 ] , the wave exciting
force can be divided into the following components:
Wave exciting = Buoyant + Wave diffraction
force
force
force
Inertial part
of diffraction
Damping part
of diffraction
In the case of roll motion, the equation could b e p r e s e n t e d

in the form:
[I~ + A,(S, qP,,)]~ + N,(S, ap,,, ~ )

+ M,(S,(k) = ME(S, cP~,t)
(1)
w h e r e the wave exciting m o m e n t
M~(S, Oot) = MB(S,P~,t) + M~(S, Oot ) + MN(S, Oot )

Mo(S, ~, t)
(2)
The structure of equation (1) is based on the superposition principle, assuming that the c o m p o n e n t s of the total
h y d r o d y n a m i c force during ship motions in waves can be
considered as a sum of the forces g e n e r a t e d by an oscillating ship in calm w a t e r (radiation and hydrostatic forces)
and forces g e n e r a t e d by the waves on a restrained hull
( F r o u d e - K r y l o v and diffraction forces).
This can be considered to be valid only in some applications to the analysis of seakeeping, w h e r e the a m p l i t u d e s
of motions are limited to certain values.
In the case of ship motions in e x t r e m e waves and capsizing, this principle is not valid. T h e r e is a strong continuous i n t e r f e r e n c e of the fluid flow caused by ship motions
with the flow g e n e r a t e d by the p r e s e n c e of the ship in
progressive waves and the radiation and diffraction effects
172
cannot be distinguished. The correct form of this equation

should be
I ~ $ = [MB(S,Ps,t) - M,(S, q)s, t)]
+ [M~(S, Ps, t) - A,(S, q)s, t) $ ]
+ [MN(S,~bs,t) - N,(S, Ps,t)]
(3)
Ixx$ = M,_K(S.O~t) + M~(S.Os.t) + Ns(S.Os.t)
(4)
or, shortly:
w h e r e MF-K denotes buoyant ( F r o u d e - K r y l o v ) m o m e n t ,

while Ms and Ns d e n o t e the inertial part and d a m p i n g part
of the scattering effects, respectively. Each c o m p o n e n t of
the total h y d r o d y n a m i c m o m e n t in (4) is a function of the
instantaneous shape of the i m m e r s e d part of the hull in a
wave and of the kinematics of the body motion relative
to the wave flow. These two factors are r e p r e s e n t e d by
the second e l e m e n t in the causal chain (Fig. 1).
T h e e x p e r i m e n t s with a free-running m o d e l should allow the identification of e l e m e n t s 1, 2, and 4 (Fig. 1), w h e r e
the m e a s u r e d motions result from the total h y d r o d y n a m i c
force and m o m e n t r e p r e s e n t e d by the right-hand side of
equation (4).
T h e tests with a fully restrained m o d e l which moves
with r e q u i r e d forward speed, h e a d i n g and fixed angle of
heel (fully captive tests), p r o v i d e a possibility to measure
the total h y d r o d y n a m i c force and m o m e n t g e n e r a t e d by
the waves on the m o d e l at a particular "frozen" position.
This force and m o m e n t , however, are not the same as
those r e p r e s e n t e d by equation (4). The restraints in the
motion eliminate its influence on the g e n e r a t e d velocity
and pressure fields. This means that c o m p o n e n t s A,(S, ePs,t )
and N,(S,ePs, t ) in equation (3), which r e p r e s e n t a d d e d
mass and d a m p i n g in calm water, are eliminated.
Thanks to the fact that the conditions are well specified,
fully captive m o d e l tests are the most c o n v e n i e n t for a
validation of theoretically d e v e l o p e d c o m p u t e r p r o g r a m s
and for analyses of the influence of various factors (such
as forward speed, drift, h e a d i n g angle, hull shape) on the
g e n e r a t e d wave exciting forces.
In the studies of ship capsizing, however, the full constraint a p p l i e d to the body makes the h y d r o d y n a m i c phen o m e n o n too different from the one in the u n r e s t r a i n e d
condition. In particular, the elimination of the buoyancy
self-adjustment m e c h a n i s m causes significant differences
in the g e n e r a t e d h y d r o d y n a m i c forces and moments. In
o r d e r to eliminate this shortcoming, partly captive tests
w e r e designed. In these tests, a m o d e l is free to heave and
pitch but is restrained in the other modes of motion.
If the partly captive tests are carried out for a combination of various h e a d i n g angles with respect to the wave
direction, fixed angles of heel and forward speeds, t h e n a
p a t t e r n of the "frozen" positions can be designed. The
values of the total h y d r o d y n a m i c force, g e n e r a t e d by the
wave at any instantaneous ship-wave configuration, can
be i n t e r p o l a t e d b e t w e e n the values for the tested positions.
Only the influence of the e l i m i n a t e d motions (roll, sway,
yaw, surge) on the velocity distribution in the surrounding
fluid would not be accounted for [corresponding to A and
N forces in equation (3)]. An evaluation of this influence
can be p e r f o r m e d by forced oscillation tests in the same
waves or by theoretical considerations.
Summarizing, in the fully captive tests the total hydrod y n a m i c exciting force contains Froude-Krylov force and
wave diffraction force, while in the partly captive tests
the h y d r o d y n a m i c force consists of Froude-Krylov force
and scattering force modified by the absence of some of

the ship motions.
Me = MF_K(S, eps, t) + Mso(S, ePs, t)
(5)
The captive model tests should be performed in such a

manner that the first three phases of the chain in Fig. 1
could be identified.
It becomes obvious that the first two elements of the
"cause-result" chain must be the same for captive and free
model tests, if any direct correlation between the hydrodynamic forces and the corresponding model response is
to be defined. In other words, if the wave profile (and in
consequence velocity potential), forward speed and the
instantaneous shape of the hull immersed in this wave are
the same in both cases, then there is a direct correlation
between the hydrodynamic forces generated in captive
modes and the corresponding components of free motion.
Identification of these elements requires a special test
procedure which, beyond the measurements of motions
and forces, should also satisfy the following conditions:
Wave parameters must be continuously measured in
the close vicinity of the model (but in the undisturbed
field).
Position of the model with respect to the wave profile
has to be recorded continuously so that, for any time point,
an instantaneous configuration of the immersed body in
a wave can be identified.
The program of captive model tests should contain a
sufficiently wide range of fixed heading angles, heel angles,
forward speeds, drift velocities and appropriate wave parameters so that a large, consistent grid of "frozen" positions can be constructed.
A wide seakeeping basin equipped with a carriage
and an appropriate wavemaking system must be used, such
that the fastened model can be moved along a desired
path in extremely steep, breaking waves.
3.
Test techniques
The model experiments were carried out at the SSPA

Maritime Consulting AB laboratory (Sweden). The facilities satisfied all the requirements and made the complex
experimental program feasible.
According to the philosophy developed, the experimental program consisted of free-running, fully captive, and
partly captive model tests. A detailed description of the
test arrangements, procedures and instrumentation has
been presented in [9]. The most important information on
the test technique used is outlined below.
Free-running model tests

The objective of these tests was to provide detailed information on a ship's behavior in extremely steep/breaking, quartering waves with a particular focus on the
dynamics of the capsize phenomenon.
The test technique and procedure assured a possibility
of detailed analysis of the kinematics of ship capsizing and,
at the same time, provided the conditions for the capsize
process to be realistically modelled.
During the tests the model was completely free to move
(cover picture). It was self-propelled and controlled by an
autopilot of a proportional regulator type:
rudder rate 15 deg/sec and the coefficient k = 1; rudder

height = 0.125 m, length -- 0.077 m.
Power supply to the model and all the signals from the
sensors placed in the model were transmitted via a flexible
cable to the carriage which was tracking the running
model. The cable did not introduce any constraints to the
model motions. If, occasionally, such a constraint occurred,
it was detected and the results were eliminated from further analyses.
All components of the model motion were continuously
measured and recorded. Roll and pitch were measured
with a gyroscope and yaw with an electro-optical system
(Selspot) which was also a base for the autopilot control
system. The translatory motions were measured in the
model moving reference system by accelerometers fixed
in the centre of the model. Relative vertical motions of
the water surface at both model sides were measured
amidships with capacitance wave probes. Additionally, the
rudder angle was recorded and the instantaneous forward
speed of the model was measured with a Pitot tube located
underneath the keel at midships. The waves were measured with one wave probe at a fixed position in the basin
and another one mounted to the carriage and measuring
the waves in the carriage moving reference system, in
close vicinity to the running model.
The adopted reference system and the signs convention
is presented in Fig. 2.
All the measured values were recorded by the carriage
standard data acquisition system in a digital form with a
sampling rate of 25 Hz.
The problem of the continuous recording of the relative
position of the model with respect to the wave profile was
solved by the implementation of a video recording system
into the whole measurement setup. Two cameras were
used simultaneously in order to allow observation of the
model from two different perspectives. In addition, every
second theoretical station was marked on the model sides
and plainly visible draft marks were put on them. The
time base of the video recording was synchronized with
the main data acquisition system and therefore, it was
possible to identify any instantaneous wave-model configuration by using a stop-picture technique ("frozen" position) and to relate it to the main records of the test. This
technique was the key element in the motion analysis and
~
~ . ~ s~o~
AW (+)
~AVE PROPAGATION
~
PITCH(+)
WEATHER ~
SIDE ~
Z
8 = k(t~ - I~Nom)
The range of rudder angles was -+35 deg; the maximum
ROLL()
i~
Fig. 2
LEE
SIDE
Reference system in free-running model tests

173
in the process of relating the free test results to those of

the captive tests. The accuracy of the still-picture analysis
is 0.03 see.
Fully captive model tests

In this test procedure, the model was c o n n e c t e d to the
carriage by a six c o m p o n e n t balance and was constrained
in all modes of motion relative to the carriage. The model
followed the carriage motion, being forced to move in
waves in the horizontal plane with controlled forward
speed and with required course angle with respect to the
direction of wave propagation (Fig. 3). The m o u n t i n g system provided the possibility of fixing the model at various
heel angles up to 45 deg. The vertical position of the model
at each angle of heel was adjusted so that constant model
displacement in calm water was maintained. Drift speed
was added in some runs, in order to study the influence
of a lateral motion on the generated hydrodynamic forces
while moving in waves.
The model was equipped with the same propulsion syst e m as in the free r u n n i n g tests. The propeller revolutions
were adjusted to a constant value corresponding to the
model self-propulsion point in calm water.
The adopted coordinate system and the signs c o n v e n t i o n
in the fully captive tests are presented in Fig. 4. The forces
or m o m e n t s in all the six modes were measured, that is,
surge, sway, and heave forces, and the roll, pitch and yaw
moments. The forward speed, drift velocity, heading angle
and heel angle were the adjusted values. The waves were
measured the same way as in the free tests. F u r t h e r m o r e ,
the free surface oscillations on both model sides were recorded by use of the same probes as in the case of the free
tests and the same video recording system was used for
tracking the instantaneous wave position with respect to
the model (see Fig. 3).
Partly captive model tests

In the partly captive experiments, the model was free
to heave and pitch but was fixed to the carriage in all other
modes of motion. The model was attached to the carriage
through a statically balanced frame containing a four comp o n e n t balance and was forced to move in the horizontal
plane by the carriage motions with an adjusted speed and
course with respect to the direction of wave propagation
(Fig. 5).
Surge and sway forces, as well as roll and yaw moments,
Fig. 3 Fully captive model tests in breaking waves

174
//////////////,
WAVE CREST
i/////////////////~///////
z
Fig. 4
Reference system in fully captive model tests
were measured by the four-component balance, while

heave and pitch motions were tracked by a special lightweight arm. During the tests the model was m o u n t e d at
various angles of heel up to 45 deg.
The model was prepared and ballasted as for the freer u n n i n g tests. The displacement, position of the center of
gravity, and the mass m o m e n t s of inertia were correctly
scaled. D u r i n g the tests, the propulsion system worked
with propeller revolution corresponding to the self-propulsion point in calm water.
The coordinate system and signs c o n v e n t i o n for the
forces and m o m e n t s are the same as for the fully captive
tests, (Fig. 4), while the signs of heave and pitch motions
are in a g r e e m e n t with the f r e e - r u n n i n g tests (Fig. 2).
As in the case of the fully captive tests, the wave characteristics were measured in the moving system by one
probe fixed at the carriage close to the model, at a k n o w n
distance from it, and in the fixed reference system by
another probe fixed in the basin. The relative motions of
water at the model sides were measured with the same
system as in the free model testing and the fully captive
Fig. 5
Partly captive model tests in breaking quartering waves
ULWARK
DECK AT SIDE
TOP OF BULWARK
is
12
m
a9
BASELINE
0
-- I
14
,,
15
16
17
18
, BASELINE
19
20
Fig. 6 Body lines of tested model
Table 1 Principal particulars of model
tests. T h e instantaneous position of the m o d e l with respect

to a passing wave was t r a c k e d by the use of the videor e c o r d i n g system, synchronized with the m a i n recording
system as in the case of the previous m o d e l tests.
4.
Length overall, LoA = 1.413 m a

Length on waterline, LWL =
Beam, B =
Draft (molded), d =
Depth, D =
Bulwark height, hN =
Model particulars
A typical small Canadian, hard-chine stern trawler of

19.75 m length was selected as a subject of the experim e n t a l studies. The body lines are p r e s e n t e d in Fig. 6.
A 1:14 scale m o d e l was fabricated of fiberglass (GRP)
and was fitted with bulwarks, freeing ports, superstructure
and stern ramp, all correctly scaled. It also included a large
centerline skeg and a single four-blade p r o p e l l e r / flat plate
rudder arrangement.
Specific e l e m e n t s of the hull shape are:
- - s i n g l e h a r d chine along the whole body,
- - f i a t , side-to-side, b o t t o m in the stern part, sloping up
from the keel at midship to the stern ramp,
- - l a r g e skeg, and
- - s t e r n ramp.
Distribution of the hull volume to the deck and to the
waterlines corresponding to the two tested loading conditions is p r e s e n t e d in Fig. 7. Note in these graphs and
body lines the large difference in the distribution of volu m e b e t w e e n the forebody and afterbody. The principal
particulars of the m o d e l are given in Table 1.
Two loading conditions w e r e selected for the testing:
p o r t d e p a r t u r e (loading condition I) and full load (con-
1.328 m
0.435 m
0.190 m
0.263 m
0.065 m
Scale 1:14
= l m = 3.28 ft.
dition II), with two different stability characteristics for
each. T h e particulars for these conditions are given in
Table 2. The righting lever curves for each of the tested
loading conditions are p r e s e n t e d in Figs. 8 and 9.
It is worth noting that conditions IA and IIB satisfy the
IMO stability r e q u i r e m e n t s while IB and IIA do not [10].
5. T e s t program
According to the conceptual frame d e v e l o p e d , the exp e r i m e n t s w e r e split into t h r e e different categories and
the p r o g r a m was organized in such a way that identification of the e l e m e n t s of the capsizing m e c h a n i s m and
d e t e c t i o n of major factors which bring a ship to capsize
w e r e m a d e possible.
Free-running tests
T h e tests with the free-running m o d e l w e r e focused on
investigations in quartering, close to breaking, and break-
SECT. AREA [crn=]

1200.0
1000.0
GZ
[m]
DECI<
800.0
LOAr
.,KI-~ I I
0.40
0.30
400.0 -
0.20
200,0
0.0
i
0.0
AP
0.10
5.0
L
10,0
~
15.0
3L
20.0 STATION
FP NUMBER
~ "/
/_,~1 /
1
10
4
Fig. 7 Distribution of hull volume of tested model
/ /"
'
30
.~=0.49m
IIIII
II IIdMo~BI
', II II =0.~4m
,liB "~xlItlII
I
,. "~1
I_
j
~",V,A
"~
!
20
40
50
60
[deg]
Fig. 8 Righting arm curves for tested port departure conditions
175
model molded depth, while the range of e n c o u n t e r e d frequencies covered the roll natural frequencies.
The tests were carried out for combinations of the following parameters:
Loading conditions:
Port departure: G M = 0.035, 0.021 m
Full load: G M = 0.036, 0.054 m
Forward speed, m / s e c : 0.7, 1.1, 1.4
Heading angle, deg: 30 (nominal), 90
The program, which consisted of 117 runs, covered a
wide range of possible dangerous situations, and m a n y
capsize events were recorded.
GZ
[m]
M (/I/B)= /
0.40
,/
//
0.30
G M o (II/A)=
=0.504m - -
--
0.20
'- - . Ir/~
0.10
10
20
30
40
J"x,
lrdl
60
50
I II I
I
80
70
90
$ [deg]
Fig. 9 Righting arm curves for full load conditions
ing waves. They were carried out in regular and irregular

waves. In this case, the category of "regular wave'" refers
to waves with a constant period and a constant height, but
with the wave profile not sinusoidal.
The regular waves were g e n e r a t e d with a wave height
to wave length ratio of 1:7 in order to achieve the maxim u m steepness and the breaking effect.
The irregular waves were g e n e r a t e d according to the
JONSWAP (Joint North Sea Wave Analysis Project) spect r u m with two combinations of significant wave height
and modal period, so that a p a t t e r n of large breaking waves
could be formed frequently. The wave program was as
follows:
Begular waves:
Nominal wave height, m
Captive tests
The tests with the captive model were concentrated on
studies of the h y d r o d y n a m i c forces generated at various
model-wave configurations and on the influence of heading angle, heel position and lateral motion. The experim e n t s were performed for one regular-wave condition and
one irregular-wave spectrum:
Regular waves:
Nominal wave height 0.27 m
Nominal wave period 1.1 sec
Irregular waves:
JONSWAP spectrum ('y = 3.3)
Significant wave height
0.30 m
Modal period
1.5 sec
O n e loading condition was tested: Port d e p a r t u r e IA,

G M = 0.035 m. The parameters varied were:
Heading angle, deg:
0.18 0.27 0.38
(where 0 deg = following sea)
0.44 0.50 0.65

Nominal wave period, sec
0, 30, 40, 50, 60, 90
0.9 1.1 1.3
Heel angle, deg:
0, 10, 20, 35, 45
Forward speed, m/sec:
0, 0.7, 1.1, 1.4
(where 0 deg = upright position)
1.4 1.5 1.7

Irregular waves:
(0-10 knots in full scale)
JONSWAP spectrum (T = 3.3)

Significant wave height, m
0.30 0.36
Modal period, sec
1.50 1.70
Drift velocity, m/sec:
It is worth noting that the regular waves covered the

range of heights which corresponds to 0.68 to 2.47 of the
Table 2
0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6
The combinations of these parameters were formed in

such a way that the interpolation of the results for other
combinations within the covered range of the parameters
can be made.
Model loading conditions
Port Departure
Full Load
Loading Condition
Displacement, ms
Draft AP, m
Draft FP, m
LCG fwd L/2, m
KG above BL, m
GM, m
kxx, m
kyv, m
k,z, m
Roll period, sec
Heave period, sec
Pitch period, sec
IA
IB
IIA
IIB
0.0531
0.185
0.213
-0.009
0.216
0.035
0.141
0.310
0.315
1.74
0.94
0.97
0.0531
0.185
0.213
-0.009
0.230
0.021
0.141
0.312
0.315
2.15
0.87
0.99
0.0657
0.239
0.209
-0.058
0.208
0.036
0.146
0.310
0.322
1.71
1.08
1.05
0.0657
0.239
0.209
-0.058
0.190
0.054
0.151
0.313
0.322
1.45
1.32
1.02
al m = 3.28 ft; 1 m3 = 35.31ft s.

176
The fully captive and partly captive model tests were

carried out according to a similar program. The number
of runs in the captive testing amounted to 320.
All the results of the model tests were stored in the form
of time histories. The heave, sway and surge acceleration
of the free-running tests, which originally were recorded
in the coordinate system fixed with the model, were converted into the absolute reference system and by double
integration heave, sway, and surge displacements were
determined.
The results of force / moment measurements in the captive tests were recalculated from the balance reference
systems to the center of gravity of the model for loading
condition IA.
Video records were carefully analyzed, and the detected
posih,ms of the wave crest with respect to the model were
implemented to the time histories of motions and forces.
6.
Ship kinematics in quartering waves
The experimental procedures and techniques developed

provide tee possibility of analyzing, in detail, a composition
of the hydrodynamic forces and ship motions as a hmction
of an instantaneous ship position relative to a passing wave'.
A standard set of time histories resulting from the freerunning model testing for the light loading condition is
presented in Fig. 10. The translatory motions are presented in the inertial reference system; that is, surge and
sway are horizontal while heave is vertical. The rotational
motions are in agreement with the modified Euler's coordinates [ 6 ] where roll is a rotation about the X-axis (despite an instantaneous position of this axis in the space),
pitch denotes an angle between the X-axis and the horizontal plane, and yaw angle is the angle between the
projection of the X-axis on the horizontal plane and the
nominal course direction.
The wave elevation is the encountered wave, measured
by the probe moving with the carriage close to the running
model.
The time points at which the model was in a wave trough
(T), and when the wave crest reached the after perpendicular (AP), a quarter of the model length ( L), the
midships (~), three quarters of the length (~ L), and the
forward perpendicular (FP), have been identified from
the video records and marked on the time histories in the
form of vertical lines.
In the studies of the mechanism of ship capsizing in
quartering waves, it is essential to know what is the direction of the particular motions when a wave crest is
passing along the hull, and how they are related to each
other and with respect to the instantaneous position of the
hull in the space and in the wave.
In order to facilitate the analysis, a sequence of situations
occurring for the time points marked in Fig. 10 is presented in Fig. 11. The numerical values indicate the instantaneous position of the model in the adopted reference
system while the vectors represent the instantaneous velocity in each mode of motion. The length of each vector
is proportional to the represented velocity.
A ship advancing in quartering high waves performs a
very characteristic composition of motions. The cycle of
,one wave action which is presented in Figs. 10 and 11 can
be considered a good representation of such a composition
for a ship without bulwark submergence and without
water on deck. The short lasting exceedance of the bulwark edge at the lee side by the passing wave crest (see
the record of channel 2) did not cause any significant
changes in the motion characteristics and no water shipped

on the deck.
In the wave trough the model reaches its lowest position,
essentially without a trim angle and just starts recovering
from the maximum weatherward heel. As a result of the
motions on the back slope of the previous wave, the surge
and sway velocities are directed toward the oncoming
wave and the turning about Z-axis brings the model closer
to a position perpendicular to the wave crests.
On the front slope of the oncoming wave the model
starts to move upward and gets increasing trim by the
head. At the same time the roll motion becomes very
dynamic and the model changes its heel position from the
weather to lee side. The sway, surge and yaw motions
maintain their previous directions throughout the majority
of the time.
When the wave crest reaches the stern, the model has
a fairly large heel to lee side and dynamic roll increases
the heel further. The model is in its extreme trim by the
head.
The wave impact on the stern pushes the hull forward
and aside, causing its dynamic turning about Z-axis toward
a beam position. A significant sway toward lee side starts
to develop and the forward speed increases. The wave
crest reaches the quarter of the model length relatively
quickly, increasing greatly the velocities of yaw, sway, and
surge motions. The heel to lee side is still increasing.
When the wave crest is close to the midships, the model
reaches its extreme up position, the trim becomes zero,
and the roll attains the extreme heel to lee side. The dynamics of yaw, sway and surge is the highest at this moment. At the same time, the reduction of the restoring
moment in the wave crest is the largest. This is the most
dangerous moment for the stability safety.
In the case of the hull shape investigated, the position
of the wave crest at the midships is accompanied by the
largest increase of forward speed, combined with still large
yaw and sway in the previous directions. The model gets
a trim by the stern and starts to heave downward.
If a bulwark on the leeside is not submerged, the model
starts to recover from the large heel. With the wave crest
traveling forward, the velocity of the returning roll is increasing, while velocity of yaw, sway and surge is decreasing. At a certain time point, the yaw and surge motions
change their directions.
When the crest reaches a halfway point between the
midships and the forward perpendicular (that is, ~ L) the
bow attaiffs its highest position and is being strongly
pushed by the wave toward the lee side. The model turns
about Z-axis in the opposite direction than in the preceding
phases, trying to decrease the course angle. At this moment, the hull is approximately in an upright position but
rolls fast to the weather side. The forward speed drops
down, thus increasing the relative velocity of the wave
crest. In a short time the wave crest reaches the forward
end of the body, and the model moves on the back slope
of the wave. Shortly, the model gets to a wave trough and
a new cycle of motion begins.
The time period during which a wave crest is traveling
along the range of ship length, in particular between the
stern and approximately ~ L, is the most important part
of the motion cycle with respect to the possibility of a
capsize.
A characteristic element in the composition of motions
in quartering waves is a very unfavorable combination of
roll, sway and yaw in conjunction with the ship position
on a wave crest.
177
(30
0.25
TROUGH
CH. i : WAViEHBGI'h" (m) . . . .
....
TROUGH
0.0
~ L E E SIDE
7~,~
I
I
"l[
-q I
CREST
-0.25
0.2
WATER 0
'
BILGE
;H. !: LEE SIDE RE[LATIVEMATION(m)

I
I
BULWARKEDGE
B ~ ~ _ ULWARK EDGE :
IN WATER
t ......
.3H,3: PORTRELA~VE MOTION(m)

f
~ T,.,../
0.0
WATER UP
I
I
BULWARK EDGE
-0.15
15.0
I ~ F 2 , ,
I
if)
I
I
-0.2
0.15
N"
--.
~'
I
t
0.0
"o
C)
.....
w~~
"O
:3"
(/)
~"
' i.. ;: ,o..'..~.~(~,)
: ....
~-i f~-~
:
~,~
~UDD~,DE
/
I
",,,,,
../~'
'
'
F-
~11
.3H. T: RUDDERANq;LE(deg)
(D
1~,,3o0)
,,,'/~'now TO WEATHER
I SlOE
/
I
"~
3H $: Y
~~~C.E.,(o,
~-
o.o
RUDDER TO LEI~ SIDE
-15.0
1.5
/t
'1 ~.o.o~
~.
0.75
0.0
15.5
I
I
I
I
<
.'H. I1: FWD SPEED(m/s)
://
)J
I
I
:H. 14: SWAY DISPI.ACEMENT(m)
'
/d
EE~OE
WEATHER SIDEI
I
17.0 17.25 17.5
18.0 18.25
I
I
1/4L
~1~
18.5 18.75
19.0
19,25 19.5 19.75
3/4L FP
~'
' / f
.~
.~
I ",,~,-. ~
I
I
AP
'\IN
I
I
16.75
BACKWAROS-~
0.125
-'qt
I
I
I
- ' 1 t . / ~ m ) :
TIME (seconds)
0.0
UP
-0.125
16.5
; ~'
\
,
16.75
17.0 17.25
18.0
18.25
18.5 18.75 19.0 19.25 19.5 19.75

J
~r
Fig. 10
I
I
AP 114L
3/4L FP
TIME (seconds)
]"
Example of a time record from free-running model tests in quartering waves. Typical configuration of motion components during one wave cycle; run No. 13, condition
I / A ; headir~g angle /~ = 30 deg; forward speed v ~ 0.85 m / s ; nominal parameters of periodic waves: H = 0.38 m, T = 1.3 sec
0- "11deg T R O U G H
0 - -2
-+8
o= +17d,~ A P
0 = +26
0 = -9
0=
-+11
t ...'''''~
deg !L
-4.5
= +6.5
Z = -O.09m
IIIIIIQ
..
0 -
+22 d e g
o.+,., = -9
Z-
-0.075m
~..oo,c J
i
Q~
~ = +3 deg
3L
.....7
Ib
I ...l~.~/dl,
o.+,0- 4
~
Z = Om
o~-~9'e.
FP
x
IIIIIIQo
n.~--.~/,,.~
z.
...
+o.o 5
...
o~,
Tz
Tz
Velocity:
Fig. 11
~--~ 0.1m/sec
0.1rd/sec
Ship motion components in quartering waves (free-running model test No. 13)
After a wave impact, the stern is pushed forward and

aside, and the ship undergoes fast yaw and sway motions
to lee side with a simultaneous increase of heel angle. As
a result of this combination, the after part of the deck edge
at the leeside is moving down and sidewards, attaining a
large lateral velocity.
At the same time, the wave crest is moving forward
increasing the dynamics of the lateral motion of the after
part of the hull, reducing the restoring moment, and increasing a chance of the bulwark and deck edge immersion
at the lee side.
The increase in forward speed, caused by the wave impact and by the subsequent large surge, makes the duration of this dangerous situation relatively long. If the
bulwark becomes submerged, the ship is under a threat
of capsizing.
Note that, because of the surge motion, the time during
which the model remains on a wave crest (wave crest
between ~ L and ~ L) is very long and in the case considered it constitutes over 70 percent of the time of the
wave crest traveling along the model, and 35 percent of
the whole cycle.
The roll is not symmetric. The amplitudes to lee side
are about twice as large as those to weather side.
The model's behavior in beam waves was also examined.
A fragment of time histories, recorded for the model in
full load condition IIA, running with average speed 0.8
m / sec in periodic waves, is presented in Fig. 12. Similarly

to the analysis of motions in quartering waves, Fig. 13
presents the sequence of instantaneous positions of the
model in space and the corresponding velocities of the
motions for the model in trough (T), at one quarter of the
cycle (T/4), when the wave crest is at the weather side
(WS), at the central line (CL), at the leeside (LS), and for
three quarters of the cycle (~T).
Because of a strong nonsymmetry of the fore- and
afterbody of the vessel, small pitch, yaw, and surge occur
during the motion in beam waves. However, the amplitudes are very small in comparison with the other motion
components and do not have any significant influence on
the nature of the ship behavior.
From the comparison of Figs. 12 and 13 with Figs. 10
and 11, it can be found that basically the composition of
roll, sway, and heave in both cases is very similar. The
essential difference occurs, obviously, in the shape of the
immersed part of the body and in the whole configuration:
immersed body-wave elevation.
Furthermore, the large portion of wave energy is absorbed by heave, and the phase of heave motion is such
that it reduces the chance for a deep submergence of the
bulwark. In addition to this, although the roll is even more
nonsymmetric than in quartering waves, the phase of roll
in relation to the wave profile is also advantageous. During
the most critical phase of motion when the wave crest is
179
RUN 128 FREETEST8

0.3
CH. 1: WAVE HBGHT (m)
0.0
,0.3
0.2
0.0
-0.2
0.2
!
!
FIR 81DE RELATIVE MOTION
I
0.0
BULWARKEDGE
._1 _ ~ . _ _ . r - ~ _
oI_o
-0.2
30.0
c ~ 4: ROLL ~ m , e l a q )
_ _.
7.5
-15.0
5.0
I
CH. 5: ~
ANGLE (clog)
Fig. 12 Fragment of time record

of test with free model running in
beam periodic waves; run No.
128, condition II/A; forward
speed v = 0.75 m / s ; nominal
wave parameters: H = 0.44 m, T
= 1.4 sec
I
2.5
0.0
10.0
c..0 YAwe.oLE(~)
BOWTOLEESIDE
I ,~""'-'"~
~i
_..:
0.0
I
I
I
-10.0
0.025
CH. 12: 8UIIGEDISPLACEMENTlm)
,,fl~
0.0
BACk'WARD6
-0.025
0.25
I
I
0.0
-0.25
0.25
I
I
CH. 14: SWAY DISPLACEMENT III1)
",,,
'
I
I
J
,0.25
. . . . . .
6.0
6.25
6.5
TIME (SECONDS)
180
.
6.75
I . .
I 7.0
T
. .
7.25
7;5
WS
~'.75
CL LS
..o
o.25
I.
..51
..Ts
Physics of Ship C a p s i z i n g
9.0
,~
Ig.2sl
WS CL LS
14j
L+ y
I
THROUGH
CALMWATE,~I
,pl~;llk:
ws
...j.~..'-
: ~-"+Y,m]
Y [m]
I"
"0
.<:
0'J.
0~
z [ml
9,,
CL
01
Z
,"
! or,,,'
~0.4
' Z [m!
3__T
4
+.4T..--4-.
C,r)
"O
(Jo.
N
-0.4'
gm~
5"
CALMWATE,R-
L~V~L +4i
.
i
,
i
. ~
/i . ~
. ~
i
0~',"
+.4
~ / l ~I 'i
+0z~.,
0.4
Y [m] ~
I
-0A
SCALE:
0.1 r a d / s e c
miD,.
0.1 m / s e c
Fig. 13 Ship motion components in beam periodic waves. Free-running model test No. 128
..&
l;
;,
' J.L__'GI '
i:mj
z [ml
VELOCITY
IJ'~
l~
"-
Ytm]
directly acting on the body (WS, CL and LS in Fig. 13),

the direction of roll motion is such that it prevents immersion of the bulwark.
A fragment of the time record for a fully captive test

without forward speed and without drift, with the model
fixed in the upright position at a heading angle/~ = 30
deg, is presented in Fig. 14. The signs of the graphs correspond to the reference system represented by Fig. 4.
The position of the wave crest in relation to the model
is marked in the graphs the same way as in the case of
the free-running tests (T, AP, ~ L, ~ , ~ L, FP, T). The
same cycle of hydrodynamic exciting forces is presented
in a vector form for the selected wave crest positions in
Fig. 15.
7. H y d r o d y n a m i c e x c i t i n g f o r c e s
The testing with the fully restrained model enabled
study of the composition of the forces in well-defined conditions and analysis of the influence of the hull-wave configuration on the hydrodynamic forces created.
RUN 181
0.15
FULLY CAPTIYE TF.ST8

.
TROU~
CH. 7: WAVE HEIGHT (m)
o.o
CREST
-0.15
100.0
I
I
I
I
I
CHL 2," FY (N)
I
I
I
I
I
-100.0
150.0
0.0
\\
UmOl~
I
I
I
I
I
-150.0
300.0
~
I
I
I
I
100.0
0
-Ioo.o
e.o
I
I
I
I
I
01L 4: Ik (lira)
o.0 ~ , , ~ ~
.....
I
I
-8.0
75,O
0.0
I
I
.0.00.;
J
I
I
I
-75.0
70.0
I
I
I
CHrlIII6: I l l ( N I n ~ / ~
I
I
'i
BOW TO ~.~TNER
4.0
: My (Nm)
4.125
4~5
T
/
4.375
J
4.5
AP
\
4+525
I
L
"3
4.75
~
5.0
~1.
4
5.125
t
FP
5.25
5.375
t
T
i
5,5 5.625
TIME (SECONDS)
Fig. 14 Components of hydrodynamic force and moment on fully restrained model in quartering waves; fully captive test No. 181; condition I/A; forward speed v -- 0; heel angle ~> :
0; heading angle/+ = 30 deg; drift velocity = 0; periodic waves: H : 0.27 m, T -- 1.1 sec
182
TROUGHx~x~
. Fy
~ M z
Fz
Forces
Fig. 15
HN
Moment= ~
10Nm
Forces and moments on fully captive model in quartering waves (run No. 181 )
In order to make the composition of the hydrodynamic

exciting forces directly comparable with the corresponding motions in Fig. 11, the assumption is made that the
wave is coming from the port side (as in the case of the
free tests) and not from the starboard, as it was in the
captive tests (compare Figs. 2 and 4). So, in comparison
with Fig. 14, the signs of F v, M,, and Mz in Fig. 15 have
been changed to the opposite.
The presented composition of the hydrodynamic forces
is very characteristic for a ship under the action of a quartering wave.
When the model is situated on the front slope of the
oncoming wave (T-AP), the moment M, constitutes a heeling moment and endeavors to heel the body to the lee
side. The composition of the longitudinal (F,) and lateral
(F~) forces with the yaw moment (M=), which, in the wave
trough, was a result of the action of the back slope of the
previous wave, changes its direction to the opposite. The
forces F, and F v now act forward and to the lee side,
respectively, while the M= moment pushes the stern to lee
side. The pitch moment M v tends to trim the model to
the "'bow down" position and the heave force Fz, which
is still directed downward, is decreasing. This characteristic composition of forces persists until the wave crest
reaches almost ~ L.
The heeling moment M, attains its extreme value when
the wave crest approaches the stern. The extreme value
of My occurs closely before the wave crest reaches ~ L,

and of F,, when the crest is at ~ L.
After the wave crest passes one quarter of the model
length, the M, moment changes its direction and becomes
a restoring moment. The composition of M=, F, and F v
remains the same as before, although F, starts to decrease.
During the wave traveling between L and midships,
the sway and heave forces and the yaw moment attain
their extreme values. At the same time, the pitch moment
M v changes its sign, tending to trim the model to "bow
up.'"
When the wave crest is between ~ and ~ L, the restoring moment (Mx) reaches its maximum value, while Fx
force changes its direction and starts to push the model
aft.
When the model's bow is on the crest, the composition
of the forces is characteristic for the action of the back
slope of the wave: the model is being pushed aft and to
the weather side, the yaw moment endeavors to turn the
model to a "following waves" position, and M, acts toward
the weather side.
It follows from the above discussion that the characteristic composition of the roll and yaw moments and the
sway and surge forces is consistent with the corresponding
motions in the free running situation. The directions of
the motions follow the directions of the appropriate forces.
The situation is different with respect to heave and
183
These difficulties are eliminated in the partly captive

tests, where the model is free to heave and pitch. As the
model can adjust its vertical and trim positions in order
to maintain its buoyancy and the longitudinal balance in
waves, the measured forces in the remaining captive
modes more closely represent the real forces which occur
during a completely free motion.
A fragment of a time record, representing one cycle of
a wave action in a partly captive test, is presented in Fig.
16.
pitch. The applied restraints which eliminate the buoyancy

self-adjustment mechanism make the conditions of the
measureme~nts of the heave force and pitch moment significantly different from the conditions in the free-running
situations.
The strong nonsymmetry of the wave profile (steep
crest, fiat trough) and of the model shape with respect to
the waterline resulted in a strong shift of the F, curve
relative to the zero level. This situation obviously affects
the rest of the measured forces.
RUN 226 PARTLY CAPTIVE 1118T8

0,1~4
TROUGH
-0.1~
,,
I
:H. 1: FX(N) I
I
i
:t,L 2: FY(N) t
I
IS0.0
o.o
,,
-1~11
~.0
i
I
',
I
~,
s:
ux (Hal)
I
I
_/
l'~AlqOl~ LEE ~UE ~
I
-I0.
sO.o
t
I
:H.
/ u,
6:
I
HEAVEI(m)
N___.
I
I
-0.12S
I
I
20.5
~1.
I
I
2.0
2,12S
225
p.,37S
T
P~TCHIANOLE ((k~l)
o.o
6:
2.5
~
AP
2,75
I
L
~
3.0
~
3.125
3L
4
3.25
FP
3,375
I 3.5
T
3.~
"rOdE(SECONDS)
FIg. 16 Forces and motions in the partly captive test in quartering waves; test No. 225; condition
I/A; forward speed v = 0; heel angle ~ = 0; heading angle ~ = 30 deg; drift velocity = 0;
periodic waves: H = 0.27m, 7" = 1.1 sec
184
As for the fully captive tests, the composition of the

hydrodynamic exciting forces and the free motions for the
given wave crest positions has been transformed according
to the assumption that the wave is coming from the port
side, and presented in a vector form in Fig. 17. This makes
the comparison with Figs. 11 and 15 easier.
Comparison of the heave and pitch motions in the partly
captive test (Fig. 16) with those in the free-running test
(Fig. 10) indicates a very good qualitative agreement despite the elimination of roll, yaw, sway, and surge motions
in the partly captive test.
Bearing in mind that the small differences between the
two cases reflect the difference in the wave profiles, and
the fact that the partly captive test was performed at zero
forward speed, it can be stated that heave and pitch motions in the partly captive tests represent very well the
same motions in the free tests.
Thus, in the partly captive tests, the factor which most
greatly affects the Froude-Krylov forces as well as the
scattering effects (that is, the restraint in heave and pitch)
has been eliminated.
The composition of the hydrodynamic exciting forces
depends on the change of wave crest position in the manner described in the following. On the front slope of an
oncoming wave, the model moves up and gets increasing
trim by the head. The increasing roll moment (Mx) is a
,.our.l\ ~
e=-o.6~
z.
+o.o,m
AP
-
heeling moment which endeavors to heel the model toward the lee side, while the yaw moment (M=) attempts
to turn the model toward the beam position. The surge
and sway forces which are still directed aft and to weather
side, respectively, decrease rapidly and shortly change
their directions.
After the wave crest reaches the AP, the model is in its
maximum trim by the head, the stern is pushed strongly
aside (toward the lee side) and forward, and the roll and
yaw moments, which endeavor to heel leeward and turn
the model to beam position, reach their extreme values.
This configuration persists during the time of wave crest
advancing to about a quarter of the model length (~ L)
when the roll moment changes its direction, and tends to
heel the model to the opposite direction (to weather side);
that is, it acts as a righting moment.
The model is being strongly pushed forward and to the
lee side together with turning to beam position all the
time when the wave crest is moving between the stern
and midships.
When the wave crest is in the vicinity of midships, the
yaw moment changes its direction and starts to force the
model to turn to the following wave positi9n. At the same
time, the sway and surge forces and the roll moment reach
their maximum values. The model is in the highest vertical
position and on even keel.
lOMx x
-z
.O=m
..-..
.\
:z ...
zV z
_...-- ~,~ .~
_3L
4
FP
0 - +13.6deg
Z - +0.041m
xJ
-'z
I
Mz
Fx
Fy I
FORCE
lO.xt=
Mz
MOMENT
MOTION:
PITCH~'0"25rd/sec"
~
HEAVE 0.1m/sec~.
Fig. 17 Forces and motions in a partly captive test in quartering waves (run No. 225)
185
During a wave advancing between the midships and

approximately half of the distance to the forward perpendicular (that is, ~4 L), the model is still being pushed to
lee side and forward. The heave is directed down, while
the bow goes up.
After a wave crest has passed that distance (~ L), the
bow goes up and is strongly pushed toward the lee side,
and the sway and surge forces reverse their directions
shortly afterwards.
At the forward perpendicular (FP) the configuration of
the forces is typical for the action of the back slope of a
wave. The model moves down and the trim by the stern
decreases. The roll moment acts weatherward, while the
yaw moment endeavors to turn the model to a position
perpendicular to the wave crest. The model is being
pushed aft and to the weather side.
It is worth noting that the hydrodynamic forces are not
symmetrical, relative to their zero lines. In both fully and
partly captive tests, the sway force F, toward the lee side
is larger than toward the weather side, the surge force Fx
is larger when directed forward, and the yaw moment M,
is significantly greater when tending to turn the stern to
the lee side (bow to weather side).
This should be attributed to the wave impact and to a
nonsymmetry of the wave profile. Surprisingly, the nonsymmetry in the roll moment Mx is such that it reaches
larger values when acting as a restoring, rather than a
heeling, moment.
The composition of the acting hydrodynamic forces and
their transformations, caused by the traveling of the wave
crest along the hull in the partly captive tests, is consistently compatible with the corresponding patterns of motions in the free-running tests. For instance, when the roll
moment Mx acts toward lee side (from the trough to ~ L
in Fig. 16), the model rolls from the weather to lee side
in the free tests (Fig. 10), and changes the direction of
roll shortly after the roll moment started to act in the
opposite direction. The same good agreement in the directions of the forces and motions, and the consistency
with respect to the wave crest position, occurs in the case
of all the remaining forces and the corresponding motions.
It is interesting that despite the significant difference
in the shape of the immersed body, there is also a good
qualitative agreement between the partly and the fully
captive test results, as far as Mx, M~, Fx and F v are concerned.
The consistency and the good agreement between the
results of the partly captive and the free-running model
tests prove the pertinence of the basic assumptions of the
philosophy of the captive tests. They confirm that, despite
some motion restraints, the configuration of the hydrodynamic forces, which are generated on the model in the
partly captive tests, is qualitatively the same as that in
completely free motion. This means that conclusions
which can be derived from the captive tests are applicable
(with appropriate qualifications) to the analyses of the
dynamics of model capsizing during the free-running tests.
The presented compositions of the hydrodynamic exciting forces were obtained by the measurements on the
restrained model without forward speed, for a constant
heading angle (p = 30 deg), and at the upright position.
Obviously, forward speed and a variation of heading and
heel angles result in changes of the measured forces. However, a detailed analysis of the influence of these parameters on the hydrodynamic forces exceeds the scope of
this paper.
186
8. Analysis of capsize phenomena in quartering

waves
The program of experiments with the model running
freely in waves covered a wide range of possible dangerous
situations. The results provide insight into the physics of
ship behavior in extreme waves and yield evidence of the
influence of some factors on ship susceptibility to capsizing
in quartering seas.
Two distinctly different ship displacements were tested:
light load condition I (port departure), and full load condition II (designed maximum displacement).
Two stability conditions for each displacement were selected in such a way that, in one case, the ship just satisfied
the existing, commonly used IMO stability criteria (conditions I / A and I I / B in Figs. 8 and 9), while in the other
case the GZ curves were significantly below the required
values (conditions I / B and II / A). The unsatisfactory righting lever curves were almost identical for both displacements, while those which satisfied the criteria differed
between themselves for the heel angles larger than 40 deg
(different range of positive GZ).
The experiments with the free-running model revealed
a significant qualitative difference in a ship behavior at
the light and the full load conditions.
In the case of the model running in relatively smaller
waves, when there was no significant shipping of water
on deck and no bulwark submergence, the characteristic
composition of the motions in quartering waves, which
was discussed in Section 6, occurred for both ship displacements despite the shape of the GZ curves. Although
the intensity and the amplitudes of the motions were different for the two displacements, the character remained
the same and the pattern of motions presented in Figs. 10
and 11 can be considered as a typical composition of ship
motions in quartering seas. In the case of extreme waves,
however, the model behavior was significantly different
for the two displacements.
At the light condition, the relatively high freeboard gave
protection against intensive shipping of water on deck,
and provided reasonable stability even at a moderate initial metacentric height (GMo for the I / A condition). However, the model was very responsive to wave impacts and
moved very dynamically with large-amplitude motions.
The model broached very often and had difficulties with
course-keeping. Large, dynamic lateral motions occurred
frequently and created specific dangerous model behavior
if, at the same time, the bulwark submerged.
At the full load condition the mass of the model was
much larger and the freeboard was very small. These two
factors affected strongly the behavior in waves. The hull
was deeply seated in the water. The speeds and the amplitudes of the motions were much smaller than in the
previous case. The model kept on course better, and the
broaching occurred less frequently than in the case of the
light condition. Owing to the low freeboard, the water
shipped on deck frequently and in large amounts. The
open stern ramp made this phenomenon even more intensive, resulting in the accumulation of water on deck in
some cases, and strongly affecting the model's behavior in
waves.
About the same number of tests were carried out for
each loading condition.
At port departure condition I/A, the model survived
the action of the waves with the nominal wave height up
to about twice the molded model depth. However, difficulties started to occur at the runs with high forward speed
at these wave heights. In the higher waves, the model

experienced serious difficulties at slower speeds and capsized when running at high speed.
At the light load condition with the insufficient G Z
curve, the model moved safely only in the smallest waves
and had difficulties when running with greater speed in
waves with a height approximately the same as that of the
model's depth. In the higher waves, the model always
capsized, irrespective of the magnitude of forward speed,
both in regular and irregular waves.
The full load condition with the stability curve I I / B
appeared to be safe in all of the tested wave conditions.
However, with the worse stability represented by the G Z
curve II / A the model started to capsize in waves of height
approximately 0.7 of model depth. Contrary to the light
load condition, the lower speed appeared to be more dangerous than the higher one. Running with high speed, the
model survived the action of the waves in which it capsized
when moving at the lower speed.
The tests revealed that beyond the poor stability at conditions I / B and II/A, the mechanism which brought the
ship to capsize was different at the two tested displacements.
While the water on deck had a decisive influence on
the course of behavior at the full load conditions, the dynamics of motions and the bulwark submergence appeared
to dominate the behavior at the light load conditions.
Various types of capsizing were recorded, some of which
represent very clear examples of some characteristic behavior with dominating phenomena generated by a specific combination of certain factors, while some others
contain a mixture of various elements occurring in other
types. As a result of the tests
- - p o o r stability and exposure to impact of breaking
waves;
--stability reduction on a wave crest,
--shipping and accumulation of water on a deck, and
--effects of the submergence of the bulwark.
were identified as the most distinct situations which may
bring the ship to capsize in quartering waves.
While in general the first three scenarios had already
been addressed in some studies, the role of a bulwark
submergence had not been analyzed before.
The examples which represent the above-mentioned
capsize events are discussed next.
Influence of bulwark submergence on ship susceptibility

to capsizing
An immersion of the deck edge and the upper edge of
bulwark causes radical changes in the configuration of
hydrodynamic forces and, in effect, in the character of
ship motions. The hydrodynamic phenomena, which are
generated by the movement of the submerged part of the
deck and the bulwark, are very complex and have not yet
been investigated or mathematically described. Some distinct elements of these effects have been revealed during
the experiments.
The bulwark submergence causes radical alterations in
the roll motion. A hydrodynamic reaction is generated on
the immersed part of the deck and on the bulwark during
roll motion. This reaction constitutes a resistance of the
surrounding water to the hull motion. The reaction force
R creates a moment 8Mx relative to the center of gravity
G [ Fig. 18(a)]. This moment counteracts the ship restoring
moment. The resistance to the motion of the immersed
part of the deck is usually so large that the generated
moment 8M~ prevents the ship from the usual rolling back
A)
~L~x
/
ROLL
MOTION
WITH
A SUBMERGED
BULWARK
B)
40.0
ROLL
ANGLE
(deg)
= .
20.0
o.o
..
J
I
35.6
DECAY
I
37.6
I
39.4
TEST WITH THE BULWARK
I
41.2
L
,
43.0
TIME (seconds)
SUBMERGED.
Fig. 18 Influence of bulwark submergence on roll motion
to the vertical position. Such behavior was observed during the decay tests in calm water, with the model running
at initial inclinations greater than the angle of bulwark
submergence.
An example of the roll record from these tests is presented in Fig. 18(b). After the release, the model started
to recover, but the reaction R reached, at a certain time
point, a value large enough to stop further model motion.
The model then made a few oscillations around this heeled
position, and subsequently returned slowly to the upright
position. This interruption and the delay in the recovery
motion can have a critical consequence if a ship is moving
in waves.
The influence of bulwark submergence becomes more
emphatic if a ship executes lateral motions. As a result of
a lateral movement of the hull, the submerged part of the
deck is being forced to plough under the water. The resuiting pressure on the submerged part of the deck and
the bulwark generates a hydrodynamic resistance to the
motion, and the resultant force (R) creates an additional
moment, 8Mx, which tends to increase the heel angle [ Fig.
19(a)].
The generalized hydrodynamic reaction and, in effect,
the additional heeling moment depend on the size and
shape of the immersed part of the deck and bulwark, on
187
A)
8~
5 Mxs
uJ I
LATERAl
i l l
27
-Fig. 20 Pivot-likeeffect caused by bulwark submergence, lateral

motion and heave
B)
~
S I DYs ~ / A LEE
about a longitudinal axis located close to the bulwark (Fig.
20).
As a result, the submerged bulwark and the deck edge

act like a pivot at some phases of the motion when the
dynamics of motions are very intense (this characteristic
k
phenomenon has been symbolized by a pivot mark in Fig.
20). The phenomenon causes additional coupling effects
Fig. 19 Hydrodynamiceffects generated by lateral motion during between the lateral motion, heave, and roll, which create
bulwark submergence
an additional heeling moment due to heave (SMxn in Fig.
20).
The restraint of the motion of the submerged bulwark
and,
as a result, the preventing of the ship from rolling
the heel angle, and on the velocity of the lateral motion
back
to the vertical position, has also another negative
relative to the surrounding water. The larger the part of
influence
on stability safety. If this restraint lasts long
the deck deeply immersed in water and the relative veenough
and
causes the ship to remain in a heeled leeward
locities in the lateral motion, the larger is the hydrodyposition at an angle d#* (Fig. 21) until the next wave crest
namic reaction generated on the bulwark and on the
reaches the hull, then the potential restoring energy of
submerged part of the deck. If the lateral motion during
the ship is significantly reduced.
ship movement in waves is directed leeward and the bulAssuming that the GZ curve reflects, to some extent,
wark at the lee side becomes submerged, the additional
the restoring potential energy of the ship, the new zero
moment 8 M , generated is a heeling moment and adds to
level (0') of this energy is established due to the heel angle
the wave action [Fig. 19(a)].
4)* (Fig. 21 ). It can be seen that only dynamic action of a
If it accidentally happens that the weatherside bulwark
significantly smaller wave can be counterbalanced by the
becomes submerged during a wave crest action and the
ship in this configuration.
ship is in weatherward heel position, the generated adFurthermore, if the ship remains in the restrained
ditional hydrodynamic moment 8Mx counteracts the wave
heeling moment, and the lateral motion toward the lee heeled position, the initial conditions of the next wave
side reduces the reaction R and, in effect, also the 8Mx action are altered. The whole energy of wave impact is
moment [Fig. 19(b)]. As the leeward lateral motion also applied to the ship with the bulwark already submerged.
reduces the wave heeling moment, the configuration of As a result, all the negative effects generated on the subthe hydrodynamic forces created may result in the ship merged part of the deck are significantly enhanced, and
remaining at the heeled position (so-called pseudo-static the phenomenon lasts much longer than during the first
wave action. As a result, the leeward heel angle increases
angle of heel).
further, threatening the ship with capsize.
The difference between the Fig. 19(a) and 19(b) cases
In order to confirm these--to some extent, intuitive-provides some explanation of why, during some reported
analyses, part of the captive tests was dedicated to exmodel tests in beam waves [11, 12], the low-freeboard
amining the hydrodynamic forces generated on the hull
model which was heeled to the weather side and system- when moving in waves with the lee side bulwark subatically subjected to water shipping on deck, never fully merged and with leeward lateral motion. Various constant
capsized to the weather side during the tests in beam drift velocities toward the lee side were used to simulate
waves, but did capsize on a next wave if, accidentally, a
the lateral motion of the ship after a wave impact. Fully
large wave impact heeled the model with the water on
deck to the lee side.
The dangerous effect of the hull lateral motion while
the bulwark is submerged consists not only in the generating of an additional heeling moment, which increases
the leeward heel angle, but also has a substantial influence
on the other motions.
The hydrodynamic effects created by the underwater
ploughing movement prevents the bulwark and the deck
edge from coming out of the water. This causes local restraints to the hull motion. If, simultaneously with a fast
*
HEELANGLE
lateral motion, and with the bulwark submergence, a fast
heave motion directed upward is forced by the wave acFig. 21 Reducing effect of bulwark submergence on ship potential
tion, the restrained deck edge causes the body to turn
restoring energy
188
HEADING ANGLE
ANGLE OFHEEL
FORWARD SPEED
11111.0
.
"I
"
I"
ml =l i~l, Ttii==w. o w, - .
R i l l 14 ~ F l r v l . G c l i Y o l i i i l
RUN I I 0 R F I r V m , O C I 1 W . l i m t
"1
CH. 1: Fx(N)
200.0
. . . . .
" I " 1
I W N 84 ORIFT V E L G G ~ .
RUN S 9 m r r V l L O C ~ .
...........
"-
OJl~
ojM
. . . . .
.........
""._._._--
.... "
0.0
/
-100.0
.......................
T
500.0
1
~,L
......
I- " r '
I" "
m l = m ' T ~ u x ~ , o ,,,,, .~. .
RUN I N ~ W 1 r V B . O C t l W . ~
IL
FP
100.0
. . . . . .
AP
" I
"
i"
II ~ l ~ r t l l l l ~ . o ~l ~
M
n ~ l q ' W .
"
L ~ ~L
3
.....
I" " f " -I"
ml II =ii'rtiin=w. o w, ~
"1
FP
. . . . . . . . . .
Cl" 4: Mx [Nm)
o llml
. . . . .
. (k4ml .........
0.0
AP
RUIN il4 i t l l i t l ~ O C l T Y
RMN I I ~ I l F T V E L ~ I ~
..z
10.0
'-..N
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
..............
CH. 3: FzlN)
'1
. .
e.4aes . . . . . . . . .
0.0
-500.0
""'' \.__ J- /
-200.0
AP
RWJ m DFB1T t ~ u : l C n ' Y ,
"l-
~L
"
-10.0
FP
AP
~L
~L
FP
50.0
............
=:~__~.,:~_-~_.\
C) , 5: My (Nm)
c~.s: ,,/(N-)
~A~ .........
%,j ~
0.0
0.0
"
,- .---'/,,,
,o'' ,o."
%%,i
....
-10C.0
deg
deg
m/8
RUN ~ ONPl'VitLOCS~. 0 M
. . . . .
.........
0.0
- 30
-0
,,1.1
...............
T
Fig. 22
AP
~L
%.
o,
o j#."
.'"
-50,0
3
~L
FP
TAP
~1L
3L
FP
Influence of lateral velocity on hydrodynamic forces and moments generated on fully captive model in quartering waves
189
captive and partly captive tests were carried out for various fixed heel angles so that the bulwark edge was above
the water surface, or was submerged to various depths
An example of the results for the fully captive model in
the upright position, running in the quartering waves with
a forward speed 1.1 m / s e c , is presented in Fig. 22. The
components of the hydrodynamic force, generated during
one cycle of wave action on the model subjected to two
drift velocities and without the drift, were collated as a
function of an instantaneous position of a wave crest relative to the hull.
The differences which were caused by the difference in
the wave profiles of the test runs were reduced by rescaling the values of the forces proportionately to the wave
heights. The basis for the comparison is the instantaneous
position of the acting wave crest.
It can be seen that the leeward drift reduces the amplitudes of the hydrodynamic forces on the fully restrained
model, which runs in the upright position. Significant differences due to leeward drift can be noticed in the sway
force (F~), yaw m o m e n t (21,/,) and roll m o m e n t (Mx), when
the model moves on the wave crest.
The significance of the bulwark and deck edge submergence, combined with a leeward lateral ship motion
in quartering waves, can be evaluated on the basis of the
results presented in Fig. 23. The three graphs present the
roll m o m e n t Mx for three different heel angles: 0, 20 and
45 deg. In the upright position the bulwark edge is practically almost all the time above the water surface; at the
heel of 20 deg the bulwark is submerged when the crest
is passing along the model length; and at the heel of 45
deg the lee side bulwark is deeply submerged at all times.
The dramatic alteration of the roll m o m e n t appears already at the heel angle of 20 deg. At this angle, the Mx
m o m e n t is always positive if there is no lateral motion
(drift velocity = 0), which, according to the sign convention for the captive tests (see Fig. 4), means that the mom e n t acts in the opposite direction to the waves, that is,
constitutes a restoring moment The static righting mom e n t causes this large shift of the Mx m o m e n t in waves.
If the model is forced to drift toward the lee side, then
the hydrodynamic effects illustrated by Fig. 19(a) occur
and the leeward heeling m o m e n t is generated. This mom e n t reduces the m o m e n t Mx. At the drift velocity 0.2
m / s the restoring action of the Mx m o m e n t is practically
eliminated and, for any faster drift, Mx always acts as a
heeling m o m e n t , which endeavors to increase the angle
of the heel. The larger the drift velocity, the greater the
magnitude of the generated heeling moment.
At the heel equal to 45 deg, a qualitative change of the
Mx curve, in comparison with that of the upright position,
can be observed The Mx curve is reversed, and the maxi m u m - - w h i c h occurs when a wave crest reaches the midship zone at the upright position--becomes a m i n i m u m
at 45-deg heel. However, the generation of the additional
heeling m o m e n t is also clearly revealed.
As the restraints in the vertical motions of the model
strongly influence the pattern of the hydrodynamic forces,
the same sort of experiments was repeated in the partly
captive tests
An example of a set of the test results for the model
running with a m e d i u m speed in quartering waves (p, =
30 deg), with the fixed heel angle of 20 deg toward the
lee side, is shown in Fig. 24.
The four components of the hydrodynamic force and
the heave and pitch motions are presented as the functions
of the wave crest position relative to the model. The results
190
10.0
. . . . .
I
" (
RUN 32 ORIFT VELOCITY.
"
o
1"
mrs
RUN 34 DRIFT VELOGITY.
o2m/s
'1-
"
.. . . .
..
CH. 4: MX(Nm)
. . . . .
R U N 3 8 D R I F T V E L O C I T Y . O.4m/s . . . . . . . . .
0.0
HEADING ANGLE.
ANGLE OF HEEL
3O
.
FOIqWARDSPEED.
.
-10.0
1,1m/e
I . . L
AP
10.0
deg
Beg
1 L
0.0
1~OQ
_ ...
....'-..,
-10.0
-..%
.
HEADING ANGLE . 30 deg
I .
. . . . .
1L
.-
3 L
, . .
FP
t - ~ . .
oo
..
"
o. _
RUN 145 DRJF'r VELOCITY.
-10.0
AP
~'-~
1.1m/s
.I
.20~
FORWARO SPEED .
10.0
o'.
A~EOF,EEC
.
" I " CH'4 MXiNm)

/
"
L
..
.~
--%.
FP
" ".u.'~o.~,,mt~n'v-o".v;. : ' ,,.B"

F~, u Om:T V B . O C ~ . O:,W, . . . .
,_ ..u. 7* o~rr vttoc~, o A . f . ~--o
'
.....
O,2m/s . . . . .
HEADING ANGLE . 30
RUN 146 DRIFTVELOCrT'Y.
O.,knR . . . . . . . . .
ANGLE OF HEEL
RUN 147 DRIFTVELOCITY.
O.(Im~ - - - - -
FORWARD SPEED .
- ~T
- i
AP
. . I.
1 L
4
.I . . . .
~
3
~-L
1 . .I
FP
. 45
deg
deg
'hlm~s
......
T
Fig. 23 Influence of lateral motion and bulwark submergence on

roll moment in quartering waves (fully captive model)
of the measurements for the run without any lateral motion are collated with corresponding results for various
drift velocities, and are matched with the position of the
wave crest. For all these runs the bulwark at the lee side
is submerged when the wave crest is passing along the
model length. It can be seen that the lateral m o v e m e n t
H~ING ~GLE
~ G L E OF HEEL
F O R W ~ D SPEED
200.0
,u," m ' o ~ ' l . ;

U
~ r " "1 . . . . . .
M
200.0
oH.'1" I=X(hl)
ltd
tl
/I
...f'
,,\ '..-
AP
1L
:,X,I
~L
FP
....
.~..l:"
~.
T
",C~1,~ MX (N)
,,~
50,0
"-." l:~,:' I
-~,o
-~.0
. . . . .
,//.
"~,,,,.,.
/
.'T:.
AP ~-L
. .
~... ,,
.. ..;
....:,
"~
o.o
V'-
;,,
',.~ ,-..~ ../
"FY iN)
),
i /
0.0
~ " . . . . . . . . . . . .
/ "~',;,",..,
",X..
,.,/
- 30
- ~
- 1.1 m/I
%,
,.
~L
,i
FP
r , ~ H , - 4:" M Z " ( N m ) "
/-
."".....
:""":",,I:$.:-.-";
0.0
0.0
,.-,'..'--I-"T-1.,{I Zj,> :.:.;,,
,/
.4 -
RUN I I
U
-20,0
....
. . . .
0,1
. . . . . .
AP
m? CRFI"VlU~ITY
I.
,1_
1L
- .....
* OA n W ~ - ~
J . .
3
~L
. . . .
0.0
FP
IRB,OCI1P. ( ~ ~
. . . .
Cl- 5: H EAVE (m)
3
~.L
FP
10.0
""
./.,
.........
AP 1 L
.. -.'...'"
~.-~.~
..~,
I .~ "
OltT
:'Y
I "-,~'~ ,. "
-50.0
'...t
.if}"/
",:'J
~ ' ~
%o...I
0.0
:"
(:.<.~
%.
j/==~w~.,:[,
4.1
.....
,...,.
,
Fig. 24
,.
,P ,
., . . . . . .
,3_, uP
-10.0
AP
J.
$
~L
FP
. . . .
Influence of lateral motion on hydrodynamic forces and motions generated in partly captive test with model running in
quartering waves with a leeward heel ~b = 20 dog
191
toward the lee side affects mostly the sway force (Fy) and
the roll moment (Mx).
Alteration of the Mx characteristic for two different heel
angles is demonstrated in Fig. 25. At the heel of 45 deg,
the bulwark at the lee side is permanently deeply submerged.
The graphs clearly demonstrate the large reduction of
the restoring features of the roll moment and indicate that,
at a certain velocity of the lateral motion, the roll moment
may become a permanent heeling moment (negative moment on the graphs), independent of the position of the
wave crest.
The captive model tests confirmed that the lateral motions, combined with the bulwark submergence, create a
hydrodynamic phenomenon which generates additional
heeling moments and local restraints in the hull motions.
The restraints cause some couplings between the lateral
motions, heave, and roll, which further enhance the dangerous effects of bulwark submergence.
Analysis of the elements of the model motions presented
in Figs. 10 and 11 indicates that the characteristic composition of the motions of a ship moving in extreme quartering waves is conducive to the occurrence of the
dangerous effects of bulwark submergence. The impact of
a breaking quartering wave on the stern causes a dynamic
leeward lateral motion of the afterbody, coinciding with
a leeward heel. If the bulwark at the lee side submerges,
further lateral motion and heave will generate the previously discussed effects.
Some selected fragments of the records of the free-running model tests provide more evidence of the influence
of the phenomenon on ship behavior and display the conditions in which it may occur. In order to facilitate the
analyses, the time histories of the motions are presented
in the form of one set, together with the record of water
level oscillations on the lee side at the midships. The records of the acting waves are included as well.
The time points which correspond to the selected positions of a wave crest relative to the model are marked
as vertical lines and each analyzed wave action is clearly
indicated at the bottom of the set.
The lateral motion of the local submerged part of the
deck is composed of sway and yaw motions. Therefore,
these two motions and the heave are taken into detailed
consideration in order to detect when the additional heeling moment may be generated.
At the bottom of the time history of each analyzed motion, a thick horizontal line indicates the time when the
leeward bulwark is immersed in the water. The shadowed
part of this line represents the time when the bulwark is
deeply submerged. These time periods are established
from the record of the lee side relative motion.
The additional hydrodynamic couplings and heeling moments appear when the local lateral motion takes place
from the weather to the lee side, and the bulwark/deck
edge at this part of the hull is submerged. The time interval
during which this condition is satisfied are marked on the
upper part of the sway and yaw time records in the form
of thick horizontal lines.
The heave will contribute to the heeling effects, if the
movement is upward at the time when the bulwark is
submerged and the lateral motion proceeds toward the
lee side. The time at which the heave motion is directed
upward while the bulwark at the lee side is submerged is
marked by the horizontal lines on the heave time records.
All these time-indicating lines are then collated on the
record of the roll motion.
192
HEADING
ANGLE
FORWARD
ANGLE
OF
20.0
"
"
= 30
SPEED
HEEL
1
=1 . l m / s
=20
I-
RUN 2 6 7 D R I ] = T V 1 E L O C I T Y
RUN 2 ~ DRIP'T V E L O C I T Y
RUN 287 DRIFT VELOCITY
"1'
0~ntl
0.4m~
--
0.Sm/I
'1-
. . . .
-.. \
"
.....
-..:
, .......
0.0
,,"
'\.j,
"><.~..."
,,.i /
'\
/ ....
-20.0
T
HEADING
ANGLE
FORWARD
ANGLE
OF
50.0
. . . . .
RUN 374
RUN 342
RUN 343
o.o
FP
..
......
.
.
.
;~"i. 3 : " M X
(Nm)
,~
=1.1 m/s
=45
i'
i - 'l i'
'i .
I~IFTVELOCrrY. 0 mtl ~
DRIFTVELOCITY = 0.2m~ . . . . .
DRIFTVELOCITY 0.4m~ .........
T
Fig.
3
,~L
= 30
SPEED
HEEL
ii~
-50.0
1
AP ~-L
AP
r"1" "\
.
""
.
FP
25 Influence of bulwark submergence and lateral motion on

roll moment in quartering waves (partly captive model)
Figure 26 presents a fragment of a run at the light load

condition with the formally sufficient stability curve (condition I/A). The model survived the action of all shorter,
extremely steep / breaking waves at this loading condition,
despite the large dynamic motions, broaching, and difficulties with keeping the course. In the presented run, the
model was advancing with the nominal speed 1.1 m / s in
quartering waves, with an average course angle of 30 deg.
The nominal parameters of the periodic wave (which was
the largest one tested) were: wave period 1.7 sec, wave
height 0.65 m.
In the wave trough (T), the model was approximately
in a vertical position, and began to roll to the lee side on
the front slope of the oncoming wave (wave 1 ). When the
crest of the breaking wave reached the stern, a large impact violently increased the model's motions. Large and
fast sway motion toward the lee side, combined with a
rapid yaw increasing the course angle, and an upward
heave motion took place. If the bulwark on the lee side
had not been immersed, the roll motion would have proceeded regularly as shown in Fig. 10, and is marked by
the dashed line in Fig. 26.
In the case analyzed, however, the bulwark in the aft
part of the hull became submerged shortly after the wave
impact (although at midships the bulwark edge was still
above the water surface). The additional heeling moment
due to sway/yaw and heave motions was generated and
the heel angle dramatically increased.
The horizontal dashed lines on the roll graph mark the
time when this phenomenon was activated, and the bulwark at the midship was still not submerged.
After the crest of wave 1 passed one quarter of the model
length (L/4) the roll moment changed its direction and
acted as a restoring moment (compare with Figs. 16 and
25). However, the hydrodynamic phenomenon generated
on the submerged part of the deck by dynamic sway / yaw
and heave were so powerful that they prevented the
model from coming back to the vertical position. Instead,
the leeward heel increased continuously until one of the
elements which generated the additional moments vanished. This took place shortly after the wave crest had
passed the model's midships (~). The heave motion
changed its direction and started to move the model downward. This direction did not enhance the heeling moment,
due to heave, and the model reached its maximum leeward
heel.
The bulwark was deeply submerged and the model remained subjected to a continuous action of the reaction
to the sway and yaw. Shortly after the wave crest had
passed midships, the yaw changed its direction and the
bow was pushed strongly toward the lee side. At that point,
the forebody contributed strongly to the creation of the
effects analyzed.
When the wave crest passed the forward perpendicular
(FP) the sway reversed its direction and, shortly after this,
the yaw lost its momentum. Although the bulwark was
still submerged, the additional heeling moment was no
longer generated. The model started to recover from the
large heel angle due to the roll moment caused by the
back slope of wave 1.
Shortly before the position in the next trough (T), the
roll motion gained large angular velocity. Although the
bulwark was still submerged, and the direction of heave
on the slope of the next wave became conducive once
again, the lack of lateral motion caused the hydrodynamic
couplings not to appear, and the model continued to roll
quickly toward the vertical position. This fragment shows
that the additional influence of heave appears only in the
presence of the lateral motions.
In the middle of the front slope of the next wave (between T and AP of wave 2) the dynamics of the recovering
motion were counterbalanced by the heeling moment induced by wave 2. The model started to roll slowly back
toward the lee side. Meantime, the bulwark emerged and,
therefore, contrary to the action of wave 1, no conditions
existed for the creation of the hydrodynamic effects in
question.
Thus, when the wave approached midships, the model
followed the direction of the Mx moment, that is, started
to roll toward the upright position. Though for the time
of the wave crest passage between ~ and 3 / 4 L the bulwark edge was exceeded for a while by the wave crest, it
was still not a real submergence. Furthermore, the conducive sway motion had too low velocity, and there was
no yawing during this period. In effect, the dangerous
coupling was not generated by the second wave, and the
model came to the vertical position when the crest of wave

2 passed the FP.
The model was not as successful during the next test
when running in the same waves, but with greater forward
speed.
The nominal speed of the run, which is presented in
Fig. 27, was v = 1.4 m / s. The first of the analyzed waves
(wave 1) met the model at a small heel (about 10 deg) to
weather side, running with the course almost zero (about
+ 2 5 deg on the yaw record), that is, in a following wave
position.
As a result of a strong wave impact on the stern, the
model moved rapidly forward (see the surge and forward
speed graphs) without changes in course, and practically
in the upright position. Due to the increase in model speed,
the wave crest advanced very slowly relative to the model,
and when the crest reached midships the model rode on
the crest for longer than one half of a second. The bulwark
edge became immersed, and very small sway and yaw
caused a slow heeling toward the lee side. However, these
factors disappeared very shortly and though the bulwark
was submerged, the lack of sway, yaw, and heave motions
at the crest position between ~ and FP eliminated the
possibility of inducing any additional moments attributable
to bulwark submergence.
The heel increased to about 35 deg due to a reduction
of the restoring moment on the wave crest, but when the
crest advanced to about 3 / 4 L the model followed the
direction of the roll moment (which now acted toward
the weather side) and started to recover. In the trough,
the model resumed a vertical position, but further roll to
the weather side was counterbalanced by the heeling moment due to the front slope of the next wave (wave 2).
The model started to roll back to the lee side so that at
the moment of the next crest impact, the heel angle
reached about 35 deg, and the bulwark was submerged.
As a result of the strong impact of the wave crest, the
sway and yaw were directed so that they caused the deck
edge to plough under the water and generated all the
accompanying hydrodynamic effects explained previously.
The direction of the heave was also conducive to the induction of the additional coupling.
Because of this, the roll motion did not proceed according to the anticipated characteristic, which is marked by
the dashed line on the roll graph. Rather, the leeward heel
increased to 53 deg. When the wave crest was between
1 / 4 L and ~ , the heave coupling disappeared but sway /
yaw action restrained the bulwark/deck edge from an
upward movement and the model could not roll back,
despite the restoring action of the wave slope after the
crest had passed midships. The model remained in a
heeled position (about 45 deg), and even before the model
got into the next trough, it began to roll farther to the lee
side, forced by the effects of yaw motion and the direction
of the acting roll moment (compare the moment Mx for
the heel angle 45 deg in Fig. 25). The direction of yaw
motion was changed and the course angle, which was coming back to 30 deg (0 line in the yaw graph), began to
increase, turning the model toward the beam position with
respect to the wave.
As on the front slope of the next wave (wave 3) the
yaw/sway and heave motions generated the hydrodynamic effects on the submerged part of deck, the heel
angle further increased, and when the wave crest hit the
side (WS), the model capsized upside down in the beam
position to the wave. The capsize event was marked by
the symbol on the roll angle record (Fig. 27).
193
0.45
CH. 1: WAVEHEIGHT(m)
"R
'i OUOH
TROUOH
TROU(:kH
0.0
"0.45
CR~rr
-"0.075
WATER
DOWN
-BULI.W/rddRI~E
XDGE
BULWARE
~DGE
INWATER]
--
BULWAR~I(
-0.25
so.0
I
I
I
T
I ~
INWAI
CH. 4: ROLLANGLE(deg)
0 --~.0
20.0
;HANGLE(dell)
0.0 .
'
-2o.o
1
1
4o.0
CH. 6 YAWANGLE(dell)
0.0
eowTOLee=oe
IBOW
TOW~I~ERSlOE
"40.0
0.5
I
I
'T~
I
I
0,0
Fig. 26 Influence of hydrodynamic phenomenon

created by bulwark submergence on roll motion-fragment of time record of
a free model's run in breaking quartering waves; free
running test No. 25; load
condition I/A; nominal forward speed v = 1.1 m/s;
heading angle/~ = 30 deg;
nominal parameters of periodic waves: H = 0.65 m,
T = 1.7 sec
CH.12:SUI~
FORWARO
.0.5
0.3
CH. 14: SV~AYDISPLACEMI

I
o.o
-0.3
"T
0.0
OWN
'~
'
-0.25
4.0
4.5
5.0
'
AP L
4
~
7.0
7.5
8.0
riME(SECONDS)I
3LFP
T
WAVE 1
194
=,
8.5
AP t
(~
WAVE 2
~LFP
~<
o.o J - - ~ - ~ - ~
.2o.o ,!
/
.~,
4o.0
p=="
Fig. 27 Time history of model capsize in breaking quartering waves;

free running test No. 27; load condition I / A ; nominal model speed v =
1.4 m / s ; course angle/~ = 30 deg;
Periodic waves with nominal parameters: H = 0.65 m. T = 1.7 sec
...........
BOWTO*r~;,~ ~OE
"
..,-----~---,,
g=~
0.4
o.o
."
----~
'
-,~.o ~
~.
CH. 6 YAW ANGLE (deg)
o.o -I- ~' ~ u~E ~ E --x-'''-a--------~
i:,
CH. 12: SURGE DISPLACEMF-~I (m)
-"
-0.4
;3'1 ~
4,
-ll
i
I
i
I
CH. 141 SWAY DISPLACEMENT (m)
~.l
.~l
i
=am m
' am
,
o.o
I
.I
-o.3
0.3
~.
:
=l= I
.................. i
CH. 16: HEAVE DISPLACEMENT (m)
It . . . . . . . . ... . . . ... . . . . .
. J,,,%,,-,,
.
-I
o.o,~ ;,
ilt11
BULWARKSUBMERGED
-0.a i I
2.5
I
I
1.25
I~fd~/dl~
i ~
~ 1
BULWARKSUBMERGED
nl
%
/
c.. 11: ~w, ~e(n~,)
:
:.
I
I
.I
0.0
3.0
T
I"
II
AP
I
-~
~
~
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
I
TIME (SECONDS)
~ L FP
T
wAvE,
= I ~
8.0
I
AP L ~ - ~ - L F P
WAVE 2
8.5
9.0
T
= i =
9.5
WS
WAV~3
195
Evidently, the hydrodynamic effects created by the

deck edge ploughing under the water were the major
factors that brought the model to capsize.
In all other runs at this loading condition, where the
analyzed p h e n o m e n o n either did not appear, or lasted only
for very short period, the model m o v e d safely in the waves.
The set of time records presented in Fig. 28 constitutes
an example of the model behavior and capsize at the light
load condition with the stability curve which does not
satisfy the IMO stability criteria (condition I / B - - F i g . 8).
At this loading condition, the model survived the testing
in smaller waves, but capsized in all waves with nominal
height to model depth ratio h / D > 1.4.
In the test presented in Fig. 28, the model ran with a
nominal speed v = 1.4 m / s in periodical waves with the
nominal parameters: wave height h = 0.38 m, wave period
T = 1.3 sec.
At the beginning of the run (wave 1 ), the model performed the characteristic pattern of motions in quartering
waves, similar to those described in Section 6. Wave 2 met
the model in a position perpendicular to the wave crest
(following waves position). The model was then pushed
forward by the wave crest, and rode for some time on the
crest with a very slow change of course, without roll, maintaining a small weatherward heel angle. Although some
sway motion appeared in the leeward direction, no coupling effects were created because the bulwark was, at all
times, above the water surface. The next wave (wave 3)
increased the course angle and, at the m o m e n t when the
wave impact on the stern occurred, the model was in a
quartering position with the course angle/x ~ 30 deg.
Unlike during the previous capsize, the model motion
was not affected by the bulwark submergence during the
first phase after the impact of wave 3. W h e n the wave
crest got close to midships, the bulwark became submerged, and the s w a y / y a w motion activated the deck
edge ploughing effects. As a result, instead of rolling back,
the model was kept at the inclined position during the
m o v e m e n t on the back slope of the wave. The next wave
(wave 4) further inclined the model. As the bulwark was
submerged at all times, the forced y a w / s w a y and heave
motions activated the additional heeling mechanism. The
model was turned back from its course of/~ ~ 70 deg and,
at the m o m e n t of the impact of wave 4, the course angle
was about 35 deg.
Because of the deep submergence of the bulwark, the
wave impact did not change the direction of yaw, and the
model turned farther toward a following waves position.
Shortly after the impact, the model capsized on the wave
crest upside down, in a position perpendicular to the wave
crest.
In both capsize events analyzed (Figs. 27 and 28), the
heeling mechanism generated by the submerged bulwark / deck edge and the appropriate direction of the lateral motions, and sometimes the heave, was clearly evident
and constituted the major cause of the model's capsize.
S t a b i l i t y r e d u c t i o n o n a w a v e crest
The reduction of a stability curve when a ship is moving

on a wave crest is usually considered to be one of the
major threats to the safety of the ship.
The record of the run presented in Fig. 29 may be
considered an example in which this effect contributed to
the capsize of the model. The test was carried out for the
light load condition with poor stability (condition I / B ), as
in the previously analyzed case. This time, however, the
model ran with a low forward speed (v ~ 0.7 m / s ) . The
196
nominal wave parameters were: wave height H = 0.50

m, wave period T = 1.5 sec.
As the model speed was low and the heading angle about
40 deg, the first wave (wave 1 in Fig. 29) passed the model
length fairly quickly.
As a result of its action, the model heeled to about 30
deg leeward, and some water shipped on the deck through
the stern ramp and above the bulwark on the weather
side at the beginning of the wave action. When the wave
crest was passing FP, the bulwark at the lee side immersed,
and the lateral motion of the forebody, caused by the yaw
motion on the back slope of the wave, generated the effect
of local restraint of the bulwark motion. This prevented
the model from rolling to the vertical position.
The next wave (wave 2) met the model running with a
course of about 15 deg, that is, close to the "following
w a v e " position. The sharp, breaking wave hit the heeled
model at the stern, pushing it forward. Some water got on
the deck through the ramp. After the wave crest passed
L / 4 , the model speed was close to the speed of wave
propagation and, as a result, the model started riding on
a very sharp wave crest. The angle of heel increased from
an initial value of 15 deg to about 30 deg, and the leeward
bulwark became submerged again. The angle of heel increased as the sway motion enhanced the heeling moment.
The model was inclined to 40 deg when the crest was close
to FP.
The results of the captive tests indicate that for these
heading and heel angles, the m o m e n t Mx begins to act as
a heeling m o m e n t after the wave crest passes 3 / 4 L. In
effect, the model rolled farther toward the lee side on the
back slope of wave 2. In the next wave trough, it was
already heeled more than 60 deg and started to turn to
the "following w a v e " position.
The heel angle was increasing on the front slope of the
next wave (wave 3 ) and was further enhanced by the same
coupling effects caused by yaw and heave.
The model capsized on the crest of wave 3 at the position
approximately perpendicular to the crest (at the last phase
it even crossed the zero course line, so that the lee side
b e c a m e the weather side).
The critical m o m e n t in this run appeared to be the
riding of the model in a heeled position with the small
heading angle (close to a perpendicular position to the
wave crest) on a very sharp, steep crest of wave 2.
It seems that the large increase of the heel angle from
15 to about 40 deg during the model ride on the crest can
be attributed primarily to the reduction of the restoring
capability on the wave crest in the presence of a heeling
m o m e n t induced by some amount of water accumulated
on the deck at the lee side and enhanced by the sway
action.
L o s s o f s t a b i l i t y d u e to w a t e r o n d e c k
Shipping and accumulation of green water on deck is

widely recognized as one of the most dangerous elements
affecting stability safety. This is particularly true in the
case of small vessels, where the mass of the water trapped
in the deck well may constitute a significant percentage
of the ship's displacement.
The experiments with the model in the light load conditions I / A and I / B did not expose water accumulation
on the deck as the cause of capsizing. The larger freeboard
and the large responsiveness to wave actions prevented
the deck from a systematic overflooding through the stern
ramp and over the weather side bulwark. If some amount
0.3
CH. 1: WAVE HBGHT (m)

TROUGH
TROUGH
-0.3
CREST
o. ~
TROUOH
c. =:u=
~ ='"=~'1.o.o.111
(m)
0.0
BULWARK~qWATER
BULWARKF.I~3E
-I
-0.25
100.0
CH. 4: ROLL ANGLE (deg)
37.5
0
-25.0
12.0
Fig. 28 Time record of capsizing of

model with poor
stability;
free-running model test No.
54; loading condition I / B ; nominal
model speed v =
1.4 m / s; effective
speed VR = 0.85
m / s;
nominal
course ~. = 30 deg;
periodic waves with
nominal
parameters: H = 0.38 m, T
= 1.3 sec
CH. 5: PITCHANGLE (deg)
o.o
-12.o
4o.0
CH. 6 YAW ANGLE(deg)
~-..NI I
o.o
-4o.o
o.3
CH. 12: SURGEDISPLACEMENT(m)
0.0
-0.3
0.08
CH. 14: SWAY DISPLACEMENT
0.0
-0.08
0.15
t
CH. 18: HEAVE DISPLACEMENT (m)
0.0
I
"0.15
5.0
L
5.5
I 6.0
~ L FP
WAVE 1
8.5 I
I
,o I 175Ho
iOOl
~SECO.DS.
8o
88
lOOILI~
TIME
T
T
WAVE 2
I "~-
I 1 ,I o
,,8
12oII [
AP .~ ~ -~LFP
L
AP ~.
WAVE3
~ I~-
WAVE4
197
0.3
TROUGH
CH. 1: WAVEHEIGHT(m)
TROUGH
0.0
-0.3
0.3
CREST
CREST
CH. 2: LEE SIDERELATIVEMOTION(m)
f.
fl
0.0
WATER UP
IN WATER
I
I
-0,3
100.0
T
I
I
LEE SIDE
YAW
m
HEAVE
4-
0.0
WEAll-lER SIDE
BULWARKSUBMERGED
-100.0
20,0
CH. 5: PITCHANGLE(de(I)
0.0
BOW DOWN
-gO.O
40.0
Fig. 29 Model capsize

caused by stability reduction on a wave
crest; free-running test
No. 60; load condition
I / B; forward speed v =
0.7 m / s , nominal heading angle V. = 30 deg;
nominal parameters of
periodic waves: H =
0.50 m, T = 1.5 sec
CH. 6 YAW ANGLE
BOW TO LEE SIDE
0.0
BOW TO WEATHERSIDE
-40.0
0.3
CH. 12: SURGE DISPLACEMENT(m)
0,0
-0,3
0,4
CH. 14: SWAYDISPLACEMENT(m)

LEE SIDE
0.0
WEATHERSIDE
-0A
0.25
CH. 16:
0,0
-0.25 r..
0.0
0.5
1.o
1.5
,, i Oll
T
i~
198
AP.~L
3 L FP
WAVE 1
3.0
"
6.0
I
AP .~L
~]~ 3 L FP
WAVE 2
~ I ~
6.5 TIME
(SECONDS)
AP
WAVE 3
of w a t e r a c c u m u l a t e d on the deck, it dispersed before the

next wave action.
An i m m e r s i o n of the bulwark at the lee side, which was
analyzed earlier, should not be confused with the effects
caused by the water t r a p p e d on deck. The p h e n o m e n a
which occur w h e n the b u l w a r k at the lee side is s u b m e r g e d
are a result of the h y d r o d y n a m i c reactions of the surr o u n d i n g w a t e r to the motions of the s u b m e r g e d part of
the d e c k and the bulwark, while the effects caused by
w a t e r t r a p p e d on the deck are of an inertial nature, attributable to the mass of water.
T h e m o d e l tests carried out for full load conditions I I /
A and II / B p r o v i d e e v i d e n c e of the dangerous influence
of the w a t e r on deck on the ship's resistance to capsize.
Unlike at the light load condition, the dynamics of m o d e l
motions are m u c h smaller at the full load condition, and
the f r e e b o a r d height is very small. This facilitates w a t e r
shipping on deck through the stern and above the bulwark
at the w e a t h e r side.
T h e w a t e r shipped and a c c u m u l a t e d on deck in m a n y
tests and, in particular during runs with low forward speed.
T h e wave f r e q u e n c y e n c o u n t e r e d at small forward speed
was such that the w a t e r t r a p p e d on deck did not m a n a g e
to dissipate before another a m o u n t of w a t e r was d e l i v e r e d
by the next wave, and the mass of w a t e r was increasing.
A f r a g m e n t of a time r e c o r d in Fig. 30 is a good e x a m p l e
of a ship's behavior with a systematically increasing mass
of w a t e r on deck. The test was p e r f o r m e d in irregular
waves at a significant wave height H1~3 = 0.36 m and modal
p e r i o d Tm= 1.7 sec.
The model, ballasted to condition II / A, that is, full load
with a poor stability curve (Fig. 9), was advancing with
slow forward s p e e d v = 0.6 m / s at the nominal h e a d i n g
a n g l e / z = 30 deg. As a result of the first wave action, the
m o d e l a c c u m u l a t e d some w a t e r on deck and was h e e l e d
l e e w a r d to an angle of about 15 deg. At the b e g i n n i n g of
the time r e c o r d f r a g m e n t (Fig. 30), the m o d e l rolled
a r o u n d a l e e w a r d angle ~ 15 to 17 deg, and the h e a d i n g
angle was r e d u c e d to about 5 deg.
After the i m p a c t of large wave 1, the sway and yaw
motions w e r e conducive to the generation of the additional
heeling m o m e n t , but the bulwark at the lee side was not
immersed. T h e increase of the heel angle was caused by
the heeling m o m e n t due to the wave acting at the increasing h e a d i n g angle, and by an additional mass of w a t e r
on deck which was brought by the wave.
T h e bulwark b e c a m e fully s u b m e r g e d w h e n the crest
of wave 1 passed 3 / 4 L, but the lateral motion at that
time practically vanished. After the first wave passed, the
angle of heel d e c r e a s e d slightly from 29 to 25 deg, but
the bulwark r e m a i n e d submerged.
T h e next w a v e did not exert an impact and the forced
lateral motions w e r e small, without any significant dynamics. F u r t h e r m o r e , the phase of heave was such that the
u p w a r d motion o c c u r r e d w h e n t h e r e was no effective leew a r d lateral motion. In effect, no significant additional
coupling effects due to bulwark s u b m e r g e n c e w e r e gene r a t e d during the action of waves 1 and 2.
However, the mass of the a c c u m u l a t e d w a t e r on deck
as well as the heel angle was increased. The h e a d i n g angle
started to decrease systematically due to the s u b m e r g e n c e
of the bulwark at the lee side. The water on deck and the
s u b m e r g e d bulwark p r e v e n t e d the m o d e l from rolling
back to the vertical position. Although the subsequent
waves w e r e very small, and did not create large heeling
m o m e n t s on the model, which was r u n n i n g almost following the waves (heading angle = 5 to 10 deg), they further
increased the amount of water on deck. As a result, the

heel angle was systematically increasing and the m o d e l
finally capsized in a position p e r p e n d i c u l a r to the crest of
wave 5.
The systematic shipping and accumulation of water on
the deck of the model with poor stability was the major
cause of this capsizing.
In most cases, the m o d e l at the I I / A condition was
brought to capsize not by a single cause, but by a combination of a n u m b e r of elements which f o r m e d unfavorable conditions w h e n the m o d e l was moving in breaking
quartering waves.
An example of such a combination is p r e s e n t e d in Fig.
31, w h e r e the m o d e l was running with an average speed
v = 0.65 m / s in irregular waves with HI = 0.30 m and
T m = 1.5 sec. The heading angle varied ~ e t w e e n 20 and
0 deg (following waves) due to frequent s u b m e r g e n c e of
the bulwark on the lee side.
As a result of an impact of a big b r e a k e r (wave 2), a
large amount of water came on deck and, simultaneously,
the m o d e l was h e e l e d toward the lee side. T h e heel angle
was e n h a n c e d by the additional m o m e n t caused by the
sway and yaw with the s u b m e r g e d bulwark, and the water
on deck accumulated at the lee side. W h e n the crest of
wave 2 passed the bow, the w a t e r on deck and the resistance to the motion of the s u b m e r g e d b u l w a r k / d e c k
edge p r e v e n t e d the m o d e l from rolling back to the upright
position.
The next wave (wave 3) r e p e a t e d the same action, but
on the hull already inclined to about 25 deg leeward, and
with m u c h stronger coupling effects g e n e r a t e d by the bulw a r k / deck edge submergence. More water shipped on
the deck as well. After the wave passed, the s u b m e r g e d
bulwark and the water on deck once again p r e v e n t e d the
m o d e l from recovering.
Although the next wave (wave 4) was relatively small,
it did not give any chance for the model, which was already
h e e l e d to over 50 deg, to recover. The combination of the
heeling m o m e n t s discussed earlier and the vanishing of
the restoring potential brought the m o d e l to ultimate capsize on the crest of wave 4.
9. Role of operational conditions in ship

capsizing
T h e analyses of the free-running m o d e l tests p r o v i d e d
a great deal of i m p o r t a n t information on the influence of
various factors on ship susceptibility to capsizing in quartering waves. T h e y confirmed the i m p o r t a n c e of some traditionally r e c o g n i z e d e l e m e n t s and put some other factors
in a new perspective.
In the previous section, some specific physical p h e n o m ena g e n e r a t e d by the hull-waves interaction w e r e analyzed. The d a n g e r c r e a t e d by bulwark s u b m e r g e n c e , by
the r e d u c t i o n of the ship restoring capability on a wave
crest, and by the accumulation of water on deck w e r e
d e m o n s t r a t e d and discussed.
Two events, which w e r e observed at various time during
the testing, and which are considered by some authorities
as specific autonomous p h e n o m e n a , w e r e not discussed
s e p a r a t e l y - - n a m e l y , broaching and ship riding on a wave
crest. Both are a t t r i b u t e d to ship m o v e m e n t in the following waves. If the model, which was r u n n i n g at high speed
in following waves, did not lose course control after wave
impact on the stern, a wave riding occurred. If it lost course
control, it started to broach.
The two p h e n o m e n a do not constitute a direct cause of
199

TROUGH
0.O
r,Rs~rr
-0.3
0.O
raTER UP
CH. 2: LEE 81DE RELATIVE MOTION (m)
I
I
-0.1
BULWN~EDGE
EaLA.WAF~EDGEINWATER
I--
8ULWA~XSUS~I~:GED
-0.2
100.0
CH. 4: ROLL ANGLE (dell)
50.0
O.O
eel 8ZOl
15.0
CH. ,: PITCH ANGLE(dog)

O.0

due to water on deck in
irregular
quartering
waves; free model test
No. 99, loading condition
II/A, forward speed v =
0.7 m / s ; nominal heading angle ~. = 30 dog;
JONSWAP
spectrum,
Hl/3 = 0.36 m, Tm = 1.7
sec, ~, = 3.3
-1,.0
40.0
CH. 6 YAW ANGLE (dog)
10.0
80WTO LEE 8 1 0 t
0
80W TO Y i A ~ I L q 8~Oe
-20.0
0.3
CH..12" SURGE DISPLACEMENT(m)
0.0
-0.3
0.1
CH. 14: SWAY DISPLACEMENT(m)
0.0
-0.1
0.15
CH. 16: HEAVE DISPLACEMENT(m)
0.O
-15.0
4.5
TIME
5.25
(SECONDS)
6.0
6.75
T ,pl ~ ~L-J~
200
WAVE 1
; T I ITI
T
APL
~4LFP
WAVE 2
,v, i11=,1 ii=io

T AP
12.7511
13.5j
T APL ~
WAVE 3
I ~
3LFP
WAVE4
14~s I
T
AP
WAVE 5
. . . . . . . . .
0.25
i . . . . . . . . .
i . . . . . . . . .
i . . . . . . . . .
i . . . . . . . . .
i . . . . . . . . .
i . . . . . . . . .
i . . . . . . . . .
i . . . . . . . . .
i . . . . . . . . .
i . . . . . . . . .
i . . . . . . . . .

TROUGH
moJOH
( . . . . . . . . .
i . . . . . . . . .
0.0
-0.25
0.0
_u
CREST
llc"t
-0,1
-0.2
100.0
WATER
ONDECK
I- - ,,,t
HI
HEAVE
I- - I
50.0
0.0
12.0
0.0 L

due to combination of
bulwark submergence
and water on deck in irregular
quartering
waves; test No. 86;
loading condition II/A;
model speed v = 0.7
m/s; nominal heading
angle/~ = 30 deg; JONSWAP spectrum; 7 =
3.3, H1/3 = 0.30 m, TH
= 1.5 sec
BOW UP
-12.0
40.0
0.0
BOWTO WEATHER81DE
"'"'""'
-40.0
0.25
0,0
CH.
FORWARD~I
-0.25
0.1
0.0
CH,
WEAII"IERSIDE
-0.1
0.12
CH.
0.0
.o,12 f ........... l ....

4.0
4.5
TIME (SECONDS)
s.o
5.51
8.,;
6.5
?.~
J Jill
8.0
^~ ~ ~ ~ F~
WAVE 1
7.5
WAVE2
T
~=~ i ~-~
A P L4
~
WAVE3
AP L
4
43-'LFP
=~ J ~l
3LFP
4
WAVE4
201
capsize, but do activate certain mechanisms which have

already b e e n discussed.
By causing a ship to r e m a i n on a wave crest for a relatively long time, the riding p h e n o m e n o n facilitates the
reduction of the restoring capability on the wave crest. If,
at the same time, any heeling m o m e n t acts on the ship,
the situation ends e i t h e r with a large heel angle (see Fig.
2 7 - - w a v e 1) or with a capsize (Fig. 2 9 - - w a v e 2).
T h e loss of course control and broaching induce a dynamic yaw motion and l e e w a r d heel, which essentially
constitutes the same behavior as after an impact of a quartering wave. The only difference consists in a higher initial
forward s p e e d and acceleration (because of the following
wave position) and subsequently larger yaw rate. The high
yaw rate with the large forward speed creates centrifugal
m o m e n t s which increase the l e e w a r d heel angle.
T h e dangerous situation c r e a t e d by broaching ( t o g e t h e r
with the wave action) consists in dynamically bringing the
ship to a large angle of heel which, in the case of bulwark
s u b m e r g e n c e , generates the previously discussed coupling
effects.
The influence of some factors which reflect the operating conditions is highlighted in the following.
Righting arm curve
T h e tests c o n f i r m e d that the ship behavior in e x t r e m e
waves is c o r r e l a t e d with the shape and values of the G Z
curve. Despite large motions, the m o d e l ran successfully
at both load conditions w h e n the G Z curve was satisfactory
(that is, I / A and I I / B ) . Only the highest tested waves
b r o u g h t the m o d e l to capsize at the light condition I / A .
C o n t r a r y to this, at the conditions which w e r e characterized by the insufficient stability curve (conditions I / B and
I I / A ) , the m o d e l survived operations only in the smaller
tested waves and b e c a m e susceptible to capsize at the
m e d i u m wave heights. Although the mechanisms of capsizing w e r e different in both cases, the p r o p e n s i t y to capsize was similar.
In fact, it is difficult to discuss the G Z curve for a ship
m o v i n g in oblique seas. T h e restoring m o m e n t which is
r e p r e s e n t e d by this curve does not exist during motions
in oblique waves. T h e real m o m e n t , Mx, acting on a ship
is a resultant h y d r o d y n a m i c m o m e n t c o r r e s p o n d i n g to the
hull-wave interaction, and e v e n the hydrostatic p a r t of this
m o m e n t for a transient configuration of the i m m e r s e d
body in a wave would not have the same m e a n i n g as the
hydrostatic restoring m o m e n t in calm water. H o w e v e r ,
the consistency of the results proves that the righting a r m
curve reflects the ship's capability to withstand the w a v e s '
action and could be considered as one of the factors representing stability safety in general.
Load condition
Significant differences in the model's behavior in waves
w e r e o b s e r v e d at the two load conditions tested.
At the light condition, the m o d e l was m o r e responsive
to wave actions. The motions w e r e very d y n a m i c and with
large amplitudes. A g r e a t e r t e n d e n c y to riding on wave
crests and to broaching was noticed. T h e heeling mechanism c r e a t e d by the bulwark s u b m e r g e n c e was mostly
involved in m o d e l capsizing.
At the full load, the hull was positioned d e e p in the
w a t e r and the resistance to lateral motions as well as the
inertia effects w e r e m u c h larger than in the light condition
case. The motions w e r e smaller and less dynamic. Less
t e n d e n c y to broaching and crest riding occurred. W a t e r
202
on deck was the d o m i n a t i n g factor in the majority of the

capsizes.
Course angle
The h e a d i n g angle relative to the main direction of wave
p r o p a g a t i o n strongly affects the behavior of ships in waves.
In q u a r t e r i n g waves, at a h e a d i n g angle 10 to 30 deg, a
strong influence of large surge motion on the dynamics of
other motions can be observed. The increase of forward
speed due to wave impacts, which occurs f r e q u e n t l y at
small h e a d i n g angles, enhances the probability of broaching or wave riding and increases the m a g n i t u d e of these
p h e n o m e n a if they occur.
At the h e a d i n g angles /z > 40 deg, amplitudes of the
lateral motions and of roll are m u c h larger than at the
smaller h e a d i n g angles. The large motions are caused directly by the wave exciting forces and not by broaching.
Running in following waves did not induce dangerous
roll unless any additional heeling m o m e n t was occurring
(see Fig. 2 7 - - w a v e 1 and Fig. 2 8 - - w a v e 2).
The e x p e r i m e n t s in b e a m waves c o n f i r m e d that this
course does not constitute the most dangerous situation.
The tests with the m o d e l at the full load (low f r e e b o a r d )
and low stability (condition II / A) w e r e carried out in regular b e a m waves with the nominal p a r a m e t e r s H = 0.44
m, T = 1.4 sec.
W i t h these p a r a m e t e r s , the m o d e l capsized at each run
w h e n moving in q u a r t e r i n g waves at each forward s p e e d
tested. H o w e v e r , it o p e r a t e d safely w h e n r u n n i n g b e a m
to the same waves. Also, no d a n g e r of capsize o c c u r r e d
during tests in b e a m irregular waves, while the m o d e l
almost always capsized w h e n it was running in the same
waves at q u a r t e r i n g courses.
An explanation of this surprising fact can be found in
Figs. 12 and 13. Although the roll, heave and sway motions
display large s p e e d and fairly large amplitudes, the phase
lags b e t w e e n themselves and relative to the wave profile
p r e v e n t the ship from an intensive shipping of w a t e r at
the w e a t h e r side and from the p l o u g h i n g - u n d e r effect at
the lee side.
The tests p r o v e d that the most dangerous situations arise
w h e n the ship is moving in q u a r t e r i n g waves. It seems
that the most hazardous course lies in the range of h e a d i n g
angles of 15 to 45 deg.
Wave parameters
T h e d e g r e e of d a n g e r which i m p e n d s over a ship exposed to wave action d e p e n d s on two wave characteristics:
wave steepness and wave height relative to ship size.
E x t r e m e l y steep and b r e a k i n g waves g e n e r a t e the most
d y n a m i c course of the i n d u c e d p h e n o m e n a , while wave
height stimulates the m a g n i t u d e of e n e r g y applied on a
hull. Obviously, the m a g n i t u d e of e n e r g y necessary to capsize a ship d e p e n d s on the size of that ship. Thus, the wave
height to ship d e p t h ratio m a y be one of the indicators of
the potential threat c r e a t e d by the waves.
No essential difference b e t w e e n the m o d e l behavior in
periodic waves and in a s e q u e n c e of c o m p a r a b l e irregular
waves was observed, if at least t h r e e or four large waves
constituted the train of irregular waves. On this basis it is
advantageous to carry out the capsizing m o d e l tests in
periodic waves, because it is difficult to synchronize a
m o d e l run with the d e v e l o p m e n t and p r o p a g a t i o n of irregular waves so that the m o d e l could m e e t a r e q u i r e d
sequence of e x t r e m e waves.
Forward speed
Forward speed plays an important role in the ship's
behavior in extreme waves. However, its influence on ship
propensity to capsize is different for different load conditions.
In light load conditions, the greater speed enhances
large ship motions, facilitates the occurrence and enlarges
the negative effects of broaching and bulwark submergence and, thus, significantly increases the probability of
capsizing.
At full load, when the hull motions are smaller and water
on deck constitutes the main cause of capsizing, the higher
speed prevents a ship from intense water shipping on deck
(in particular, through the stern) and increases a chance
for ship survival. At the full load condition II / A, the model
capsized many times when running with a low or moderate
speed, but survived despite large motions and difficulties
with course-keeping when running in the same waves but
with a high forward speed.
Initial conditions
The model tests have demonstrated an essential influence of the initial conditions at the m o m e n t of wave impact on the subsequent history of ship motion and, thus,
on a probability of ship capsizing in waves.
The position of a hull in space, the direction and the
velocity of the motions, as well as their composition at the
m o m e n t of wave impact, decide the ship's response to a
wave action. Examples of this influence can be found in
Figs. 26, 27 (compare the model position and the direction
of motions at the m o m e n t of impact of waves 1 and 2)
and in Fig. 28 (compare the initial conditions and the
results of actions of waves 2 and 3).
For this reason, any numerical simulation of ship behavior in extreme waves has to be exercised for a wide
range of the parameters characterizing the initial conditions, unless the most dangerous combination of the initial
conditions is known.
It is worth noting that usually the action of two subsequent large, extremely steep or breaking waves was necessary to capsize the model with a low yet not entirely
inadequate stability curve, at the light load condition. The
first wave heels the ship to a large angle, so that the bulwark gets submerged and usually restrained in its motion,
and the second wave, acting on a hull with the reduced
potential restoring energy, forces the ship to heel further
and to capsize.
If the reason for loss of stability is water accumulating
on deck, the capsizing process may last longer, and more
than two subsequent waves may be necessary to bring the
ship to an upside-down position.
10.
Concluding remarks
The results of the model tests reported herein demonstrate the applicability of the presented concept of experimental investigation into the mechanism of ship
capsizing in waves. The compatibility of the captive test
results with the corresponding results of the free model
tests confirms that the assumptions of the approach are
correct.
Although the elimination of some modes of motion affects the hydrodynamic scattering effects, the partly captive tests provide an adequate qualitative representation
of the hydrodynamic forces which are exerted on a ship
during its motion and capsizing in extremely steep / breaking quartering waves.
The discrepancy between the forces which are measured in the partly captive tests and the total hydrodynamic forces exerted on a free-running model can be
evaluated by appropriate forced oscillation tests in waves.
On the basis of the foregoing analyses of the test results,
it is believed that the effects of the restraints introduced
in the partly captive tests are small in comparison with
the magnitude of the forces generated on the hull by
extreme and breaking waves, and in comparison with the
major effects caused by a change of the fixed position of
the hull (that is, the adjusted heel and heading angles, and
the forward and drift velocities). Therefore, the forces
obtained by interpolation between the results of partly
captive tests for various " f r o z e n " positions may constitute
a reasonable approximation of the total hydrodynamic
forces acting on a free-running model. Thus, it is possible
to evaluate quantitatively the total hydrodynamic forces
exerted on a ship advancing in oblique, extremely large,
and breaking waves, for which the theoretical (numerical)
approaches still fail. The appropriate combination of the
correlated free and partly captive tests provides a possibility of the reconstruction of the composition of the hydrodynamic forces which act during ship capsizing and
thus a better understanding of the capsize mechanism may
be gained.
The proposed experimental approach also constitutes a
very good basis for the verification of time-domain simulation programs, not only with respect to ship motions in
extreme waves but also with the generated hydrodynamic
forces.
The detailed analysis of the experiments] results confirmed the important influence of some of the factors traditionally considered) such as righting arms curve and
wave parameters, on ship stabilitysafety, and shed some
n e w light on the influence of other factors.
However, the most valuable and direct effeet achieved
by application of the experimental approach developed is
the identification of the hydrodynamic phenomena created by bulwark and deek edge submergence. If the bulwark at the lee side becomes submerged w h e n the ship
moves in steep waves, the lateral motions of the hull induce local restraints to the motions of the submerged part
of the deck and of the bulwark. These restraints cause a
shift of the longitudinal axis of rotation to the vicinity of
the deck edge and create a pivot-like effect. The n e w
hydrodynamic couplings between roll, sway) yaw, and
heave are activated and the additional heeling m o m e n t is
generated. The stiffnessof the local restraint and the magnitude of the generated additional heeling m o m e n t depend, first of all, on the lateral relative velocities and on
the size of the immersed part of the deck.
This p h e n o m e n o n requires further study, in particular
with respect to the quantitative influence on the total roll
m o m e n t and to its mathematical representation.
It must be emphasized that the p h e n o m e n o n discussed
has a hydrodynamic nature and is generated by the reaction of the surrounding water to the m o v e m e n t of the
submerged part of the deck. It should not be confused
with the effects of water trapped on deck, which are of
static and inertial nature.
The experiments demonstrate that the effects created
by bulwark submergence may dramatically increase a
ship's susceptibility to capsizing, and may cause a capsizing
of a vessel which, according to the existing stability criteria,
may be considered safe.
The tests also confirmed that the most dangerous situations are created when the ship moves in quartering
203
waves. Some p h e n o m e n a which are characteristic for operation in q u a r t e r i n g waves n e v e r occur in b e a m or following waves. T h e y also cannot be obtained by a
superposition of the h y d r o d y n a m i c effects which a p p e a r
in these two separate cases. This means that the stability
level which could be achieved by the separate studies of
ship behavior in b e a m and in following waves would not
p r o v i d e sufficient safety for a ship o p e r a t i n g in q u a r t e r i n g
seas. Therefore, ship m o v e m e n t in e x t r e m e l y steep / breaking q u a r t e r i n g waves, and the h y d r o d y n a m i c p h e n o m e n a
g e n e r a t e d at this course, should be considered as a basis
for the establishment of future stability safety requirements.
Acknowledgments
The p a p e r is based largely upon a study initiated and
sponsored by the Canadian Coast Guard.
The author wishes to express his sincere a p p r e c i a t i o n to
the Ship Safety Branch of the CCG, in particular, to Messrs.
T.G.W. Brown, F.J. Connolly, and C.B. Wallace for the
support of the idea of long-term f u n d a m e n t a l studies and
for continuous sponsorship of the project.
T h e m o d e l tests w e r e carried out at the SSPA facilities
in Sweden. The SSPA's recognition of the specific character of the experiments, and solidity in the p r e p a r a t i o n
and flexibility in the p e r f o r m a n c e of the p r o g r a m , far exc e e d e d the usual c o m m e r c i a l approach. Both this and the
d e p e n d a b i l i t y and dedication of the whole t e a m involved
in the m o d e l testing are gratefully acknowledged. Special
thanks are due to Dr. J. L u n d g r e n and Messrs. I. Rask and
P. S 6 d e r b e r g for their professional assistance and valuable
cooperation during the testing.
The author wishes to express his gratitude to Mr. D.
C u m m i n g of the NRC's Institute for Marine Dynamics
(IMD) for his dedication and contribution to the analysis
of the test results. Thanks are also due to Mr. Chi K. Lee,
a student of the Memorial University of Newfoundland,
for his reliability and p a t i e n c e in the strenuous analysis of
the wave crest positions, to Mr. R. D r o d g e of N O R D C O
L i m i t e d for his contribution in the analysis of the captive

test results, and to all those m e m b e r s of the IMD staff who
w e r e involved in the data reduction process.
T h e author wishes also to express his special thanks to
Dr. J.S. Pawlowski of IMD for his valuable comments.
References
1 Paulling, J.R., Oakley, O.H., and Wood, P.D., "Ship Motions
and Capsizing in Astern Seas" in Proceedings, Tenth Symposium
on Naval Hydrodynamics, 1974.
2 Blume, P. and Hattendorff, H.G., "Ergebnisse von systematischen Modellversuchen zur Kentersicherheit," Jab rbuch der
Schiffbautechnischen Gesellschaft, Vol. 78, Berlin, 1984.
3 "Report on Stability and Safety Against Capsizing of Modern Ship Design," submitted by the Federal Republic of Germany,
IMO Document SLF/34 , International Maritime Organization,
Sept. 1984.
4 "Outline of Current Investigations into Fishing Vessel Stability," submitted by Canada, IMO Document SLF/48, International Maritime Organization, 9 May 1985.
5 Pawlowski, J.S., Bass, D.W., and Grochowalski, S., "A Time
Domain Simulation of Ship Motions in Waves" in Proceedings,
17th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, The Hague, the Netherlands, 1988.
6 Blagoveshchensky, S.N., Theory of Ship Motions, Dover
Publications, New York, 1962.
7 Hashind, M.D., "Hydrodynamic Theory of Ship Motions"
(in Russian), Publ. Nauka, Moscow, 1973.
8 Newman, J.N., "The Exciting Forces on Fixed Bodies in
Waves," Journal of Ship Research, Vol. 11, No. 1, March 1967.
9 Grochowalski, S., Rask, I., and S6derberg, P., "An Experimental Technique for Investigation into Physics of Ship Capsizing" in Proceedings, Third International Conference on Stability
of Ships and Ocean Vehicles, STAB "86, Gdansk, Poland, 1986.
10 Safety of Fishing Vessels, Torremolinos Convention, Spain,
1977.
11 Grochowalski, S., "Experimental Determination of Pseudostatic Angles of Heel," Report of the Ship Research Institute
of the Technical University of Gdansk (in Polish); also IMO Document PFV IX/3/3. Sept. 1969.
12 Grochowalski, S., "Model Tests of Ship Behaviour in Trans_
verse Regular Waves of Varying Parameters in Condition of Initial
Heel," Report of the Ship Research Institute of the Technical
University of Gdansk (in Polish); also IMO Document PFV X/6,
June 1970.
Discussion
John Zseleczky, Member
[ The views expressed herein are the opinions of the discusser and
not necessarily those of the Department of Defense or the Department of the Navy.]
My i n v o l v e m e n t in m o d e l capsize testing has b e e n limited to studies in b e a m seas, so I a m i m p r e s s e d with the
author's ambitious and well-executed p r o g r a m to study the
far m o r e complex p r o b l e m s involved at o t h e r headings.
These e x p e r i m e n t s m a k e it a b u n d a n t l y clear that quarte r i n g seas can be as dangerous, or e v e n m o r e dangerous,
than b e a m seas; however, I w o n d e r if the author would
b e willing to qualify the s t a t e m e n t which reads: " T h e tests
p r o v e d that the most dangerous situations arise w h e n the
ship is m o v i n g in q u a r t e r i n g waves.'"
While these e x p e r i m e n t s show that a vessel m a y be in
m o r e d a n g e r of capsizing in q u a r t e r i n g seas than in b e a m
seas, it should be r e c o g n i z e d that this conclusion is based
on tests using one hull form, two irregular seaways, and
one set of steep regular waves. E x p e r i m e n t s at the U.S.
204
Naval A c a d e m y using models of m o t o r lifeboats and sailing

yachts have also shown limited d a n g e r of capsizing in b e a m
sea waves that are s t e e p or spilling. In b e a m sea p l u n g i n g
breakers, however, the same models w e r e capsized with
relatively small wave heights.
E x p e r i m e n t s have also b e e n p e r f o r m e d by the Wolfson
Unit at the University of S o u t h a m p t o n [13] (additional
r e f e r e n c e s follow some discussions) using plunging breakers. These tests w e r e c o n d u c t e d with sailing yacht models
in b e a m seas, q u a r t e r i n g seas and following seas. In following seas the models rarely capsized. In b e a m seas they
always capsized and in q u a r t e r i n g seas the models usually
broached, t u r n e d b e a m to the b r e a k e r and t h e n capsized.
These tests i n d i c a t e d that in plunging breakers, a b e a m
sea is least desirable and a q u a r t e r i n g sea is marginally
m o r e desirable. To avoid confusion w e should restrict our
conclusions to the wave types a n d hull forms used in our
r e s p e c t i v e experiments.
Moving to a n o t h e r area, the p a p e r places emphasis on
the role of the bulwarks in the capsize process. The pres-
ence of freeing ports was noted but no details were given.

A thorough study of freeing ports was conducted in the
experimental studies of the Helland-Hansen capsize, [ 14]
which was very enlightening. It may be of interest to other
readers as well if the author would include some details
of the ports on this model.
One last comment: The author noted how discrepancies
between the partly captive tests and the free running tests
could be evaluated "with appropriate forced oscillation
tests." I have thought about trying this for the relatively
simple beam sea case, but felt it would be far too complicated to cover a matrix of roll angles, velocities, accelerations and phase angles with respect to the wave. There
is also the problem of the moving roll axis when dealing
with large roll angles. Am I making this more complicated
than necessary? Could the author share his ideas on how
this could be done?
Additional references
13 Claughton, A. and Handley, P., "An Investigation into the

Stability of Sailing Yachts in Large Breaking Waves," University
of Southampton (U.K.), Department of Ship Science, Ship Science
Report No. 15, Jan. 1984.
14 Dahle, E. and Kjaerland, O., "The Capsizing of M / S Helland-Hansen," Trans. RINA, 1980.
Bruce L Hutchleon, Member

This is a truly prodigious paper and the power of detailed
observation of complex phenomena exhibited is amazing.
I believe that the author's observations regarding the hazard presented to small ship capsize safety by bulwark submergence is of great importance. Dr. Grochowalski's
observations in this regard will hopefully have two immediate applications: first, to produce safety advice and
sailing instructions to the operators of small ships, and
second, to stimulate further research into this process.
The systematic research into the influence of drift velocity on wave forces and moments should also be of interest to future research efforts.
Although Dr. Grochowalski presents in. equations (3)
and (4) proposed decomposition of wave forces, nowhere
in the paper do I find measured forces decomposed in this
or in any other manner. What one does find is detailed
time-domain measurements of motions for free running
models and various forces and moments for partially and
fully restrained models.
I am frankly somewhat amazed at the effort expended
on partially and fully restrained model tests. As the free
running model moves through space its motion is fully
determined by the total external force experienced. Using
Newton's second law and the known physical mass inertial
properties, the time history of the total instantaneous fluid
force vector acting on the ship could be determined from
the motion record, provided that the propeller thrust and
rudder force were also measured.
In the absence of a meaningful decomposition of forces,
it would seem that the total force determined from the
free running model tests would be the most appropriate
challenge to place in front of those endeavoring to develop
analytical methods to predict wave forces, motion response and capsize of vessels operating in severe conditions.
A. Y0cel Odabasl, Member

The author presents the results of systematic study into
the physics of capsizing in a very elegant manner. To a
very large extent I agree with the statements made by the
author. In particular the following points needs extra amplification:

1. In small amplitude oscillatory motions, sway imparts
energy from roll and hence reduces roll amplitude, compared with the pure rolling motion. However, in large
amplitude motions, drifting (not sway) takes place and
drift-roll coupling increases the roll amplitude. A simple
proof of this fact is the comparison of roll decrement data
for a ship with or without drift [15]. However, the presence of drift force is not a function of bulwark immersion
but a function of the geometry and the flow configuration.
The initial drift is generally generated by the crossflow
around the hull [ 16].
2. Load condition plays an important role on the capsize
behavior not only because of the hydrodynamic effects,
but also due to the stronger gyroscopic effects.
3. Wave steepness, height and relative headings are the
most critical environmental factors. As such, coastal
waters, where high amplitude and steep refraction waves
may form, may be as dangerous as deepwater operations.
4. So far, many researchers involved with numerical
simulation have not acknowledged the significance of the
initial conditions. It is refreshing to note the author's observations, which have been pointed out many times by
the present discusser.
There are, however, a few points which require further
clarification or correction. In the first part and in the conclusion, the author indicates the clear agreements between
free running and semi-captive tests; however, in the section on bulwark submergence he demonstrates the significance of drift on the resultant motion. Since the m o d e l
was not free to drift during the semi-captive tests and the
effect of drift has been observed in a large number of tests
performed by other organizations, I would suggest that
the author should re-examine his assumptions and data.
Furthermore, semi-captive tests with "frozen" positions
cannot represent the effect of water on deck.
Since the author performed his tests using a single
model, I would like to know whether any of the tests w e r e
performed with motion damping devices, such as bilge
keels and skegs, and what differences were observed.
Within this context it is worth noting that there is no
difference between the hydrodynamics of a bilge keel and
a bulwark while they are submerged.
Out of necessity this paper deals only with wave effects
on an intact model. While accepting its importance o n e
should not overlook to the influence of wind (including
gusts), icing and flooding resulting from water on deck.
In fact in a recent research effort performed jointly by
BMT and IFREMER [17], casualty data indicated that
flooding was one of the main causes of loss of small fishing
boats.
Before closing I would like to suggest that, due to its
operational procedures, passage of a resolution through
IMO depends more on politics than on technical adequacy.
In fact, a large number of national and international research programs have been and are being performed leading to numerous submissions to IMO. Figure 32 shows only
Phase 1 of the U.K. SAFESHIP program [18]. Whether
and when these findings turn into criteria is difficult to
predict. After all, it took more than half a century to accept
and adapt Rahola's findings.
Finally, I would like to express my appreciation to the
author for a fine work and a first-class presentation.
15 Sellars, F., "Seakeeping Characteristics of a Drifting Vessel," Journal of Ship Research, Vol. 30, No. 1, March 1986.
205
16 Odabasi, A. Y., "Formulation of Equations of Motion for

Coupled Large Amplitude Rolling Motion," British Ship Research
Association (BSRA) Contract Report W884, SAFESHIP Project 6,
1982.
17 "Small Fishing Vessels--Safe Operation and Crew Safety.
Part 1 Final Report," Joint British Maritime Technology (BMT)IFREMER Report for EC Project 87 E3-024, 1988.
18 Bird, H. and Morrall, A., "'SAFESHIP Project Phase 1,
Executive Summary Report to the Steering Committee ", Marine
Directorate, U.K. Department of Transport, MS 12/12/016,
1985.
Eugene R. Miller Jr., Member
This p a p e r presents the results of a r a t h e r r e m a r k a b l e
series of m o d e l e x p e r i m e n t s and the author is to be cong r a t u l a t e d on a clear description of a v e r y c o m p l i c a t e d
p h e n o m e n o n . This p a p e r is of particular interest to m e
since it covers a research project which is in m a n y ways
similar to a project carried out by Tracor Hydronautics
for the U.S. Coast G u a r d about 15 years ago. T h e results
of this previous project w e r e p r e s e n t e d to the 1976
SNAME Annual M e e t i n g in a p a p e r of which I was a coauthor [ 19].
I thought it would be of interest to c o m p a r e the results
of these two studies. By way of review, the 1976 p a p e r
p r e s e n t e d the results from capsize m o d e l tests of four
models of tugs and fishing vessels which w e r e carried out
in support of the d e v e l o p m e n t of r e c o m m e n d e d stability
criteria. At that time it was possible to conduct only freer u n n i n g tests. Nonetheless, in m a n y respects the results
w e r e r e m a r k a b l y similar to the results p r e s e n t e d in this
I_I
SHiPPARAMETERS
l (a)almenslonsariaother hutl form
lOatamol~s
ENVIRONMENTALAND
OPERATIONN.DEMAND
(a)W,sKl:O;"
8doeKeelSlze
O))~ r ' o ~ i o n s
su~oy,peeo~,m~v,~,e
(b)Weves~*
Re~ar,~Jo.~ eVeak~o
(c)OperationalLoads:
f) Ualhematlcal ('~' (~" 0" (~]

(C)ModelExpedments(~'
13
/ ta)R~~ " ~ m
q "'
Momenl Balance
19 Amy, J. R., Johnson, R. E., and Miller, E. R., Jr., "Development of Intact Stability Criteria for Towing and Fishing Vessels," TRANS. SNAME, Vol. 84, 1976, pp. 75-114.
(b) OynamleCrllerla:
k~t~oneomk/emtlons
~SKASSEssus~r
i(a) Basedon C=sually Slallsllce (:),

] (t))Fl~kAnalysisTechniques ~ '
Mollon and P~armll et Umils
Probabllisllc/L~mssmanl
|
~
1 1
8 DESIGNCRITERIAANO REGULATIONS
APPLICATIONOFNEWCRITERIA:
(a)OperationalExperience
fo) I~l~l~nimOLogtslatlye 1tpotkmce
* Numbers in circles are SAFESHIPproject numbers.

Fig. 32 SAFESHIP Project flow chart
206
Additional reference
I
~t~.~r.~a
7 WORLO.WIOERESEARCH
(a)Collallon ol d~ells ol known
tesetuch i~ro~lects from IMO,I'ITC,
universitiesand others.
(b)S&l~lallon otInl~nedonal
co-ol'~atlon
"
/ (c)R~,~'
/ 1.F~-td
(g~emallveSiebi~y C~ ado)
(e) Stali Crileda:

Area OnOetGZ Curve
t FACTORS'
SI"ATIC/OYNAMIC
p a p e r . This includes the selection of almost identical photos from the r e s p e c t i v e tests to illustrate the paper.
To b e m o r e specific, both studies identified the same
basic capsize p h e n o m e n o n and the critical i m p o r t a n c e of
w a t e r on deck. T h e r e are, however, some differences and
the implications of these differences m a y b e worth some
consideration.
In the 1976 study, w e found high speeds to be dangerous
in all loading conditions tested. Very low speeds, particularly w h e n towing (a n e t or h e a v y tow) w e r e also dangerous because of the b u i l d u p of w a t e r on deck from a
s e q u e n c e of waves. T h e best s p e e d s e e m e d to be a mode r a t e one which r e d u c e d the f r e q u e n c y of e n c o u n t e r but
still allowed good control without a t e n d e n c y to broach.
W i t h r e s p e c t to the d a n g e r of capsize in following/
q u a r t e r i n g seas relative to b e a m seas, we did find cases
in which t h e models would capsize in b e a m seas. H o w e v e r ,
the following-seas condition t e n d e d to be the m o r e dangerous.
P e r h a p s the biggest difference in the results b e t w e e n
these two studies is in the relative i m p o r t a n c e p l a c e d on
t h e s u b m e r g e n c e of t h e bulwarks. Although s u b m e r g e n c e
of t h e b u l w a r k is not desirable, I d o n ' t think w e felt it was
as critical as does the author of the p r e s e n t paper. This
view is p a r t l y t h e result of the tow t r i p p i n g tests w e conducted. In these tests t h e m o d e l was d r a g g e d sideways by
t h e towline. T h e m e a s u r e d d r a g coefficient a n d heeling
m o m e n t i n c r e a s e d as the b u l w a r k was s u b m e r g e d b u t the
effect was not dramatic. Unfortunately, n e i t h e r w e n o r the
a u t h o r c o n d u c t e d d i r e c t l y c o m p a r a b l e tests with and without bulwarks. I think this t y p e of test would b e v e r y inf o r m a t i v e a n d I h o p e it will b e i n c l u d e d in the u p c o m i n g
U.S. Coast G u a r d fishing vessel stability research project.
As a final point, I do not a g r e e c o m p l e t e l y with the last
s e n t e n c e of t h e p a p e r , which says that ship m o v e m e n t s in
e x t r e m e l y s t e e p / b r e a k i n g q u a r t e r i n g waves should b e
c o n s i d e r e d as the basis for establishing future stability
safety r e q u i r e m e n t s . T h e a p p r o a c h w e a d o p t e d in the 1976
p a p e r , which I still think is valid, was to consider each of
the basic capsize situations and to formulate stability criteria for each. T h e most stringent condition for the part i t u l a r ship t h e n governs the allowed vertical center-ofgravity location. In most cases this will b e the following/
q u a r t e r i n g seas situation, b u t allowance must b e m a d e for
t h e o d d ship which is m o r e v u l n e r a b l e in o t h e r conditions.
C. Kuo, Member, D. Vassalos, Visitor, I. MacLeod,

Member, O. Turan, Visitor, K. Spyrou, Visitor, and A.
Maimun, Visitor
[The discussers are all members of the University of Strathclyde's
Stability Research Group, Glasgow, U.K. ]
In view of the scarcity of e x p e r i m e n t a l data, both m o d e l
and full scale, on ship capsizing, w e are d e l i g h t e d to be
able to e x a m i n e t h e information p r o v i d e d in this paper.
W e b e l i e v e that e v e r y o n e i n t e r e s t e d in ship safety will,
like ourselves, a p p r e c i a t e the usefulness of this further
insight into the m e c h a n i s m s of capsizing. T h e Canadian
Coast G u a r d is to b e c o m m e n d e d for sponsoring such a
project, a n d for m a k i n g the k n o w l e d g e gained so readily
available.
We enjoyed studying the free-running model tests and,

in particular, those involving the influence of bulwark submergence. That last is a situation in which theoretical
formulations are difficult and these experiments have been
most valuable. However, we have several difficulties in
regard to the captive tests. It is not clear to us what their
aims were, nor why such a series of experiments was carried out. Neither is it clear why theoretical checks were
not done in parallel.
We understand that in these experiments the author
was measuring hydrodynamic forces at the mean position
of the model displaced at large angles, but for relatively
large waves most computer software would allow these
forces to be computed for this situation. For the case of
extreme waves, on the other hand, we believe that the
"captive" forces would be quite different from the freerunning forces. The logical way forward would surely be
a combination of theory and a few selected experiments
before making a decision on whether further experiments
were necessary. We should be grateful for an explanation
of the thinking behind this series of experiments. We
should also appreciate the author's comments regarding
how best to translate the knowledge gained into the practical design of a fishing vessel.
T. G. W. Brown, 3 Visitor
able to relate the model tests to the corresponding condition of the vessel.
5. In the conclusion the author states that "the results
obtained by interpolation between the results of partly
captive tests for various frozen positions may constitute a
reasonable approximation of the total hydrodynamic forces
acting on a free-running model." Could he place a value
on the margin of error in using this approach?
6. One of the parameters identified as significant is the
influence of bulwark submergence, and how this varies
from light to loaded conditions. Could the author elaborate
on this factor, and comment on whether or not freeing
port areas would be an influence, either beneficial or detrimental?
7. The author writes that the hydrodynamic phenomena generated by the movement of the submerged part
of the deck and bulwark are very complex and, indeed,
have not yet been investigated or mathematically described. Is it his intention to study these phenomena and
include their effects in the formulation of the mathematical model? If so, what confidence level does he have in
the validity of the data?
N. A. Hamlin, Member
[This is a joint discussion of all three papers in the stability minisymposium, identified in numerical order of appearance by the
discusser: No. 5 (the preceding paper), by de Kat and Paulling;
No. 6 (the present paper), by Grochowalski; and No. 7 (the next
paper), by Shark et al.]
The author should be congratulated on this informative

and well-presented paper, which raises a number of interesting questions and introduces some useful suggestions
There are encouraging consistencies in the three efforts
for novel lines of research.
1. The paper concludes that "ship movement in ex- reported in Papers Nos. 5, 6 and 7 in that all have used
tremely steep/breaking quartering waves and the hydro- or presently include time-domain deterministic simuladynamic phenomena generated at this course should be tions of rolling in high, steep seas near or at the point of
considered as a basis for the establishment of future sta- breaking. Also, Papers 5 and 7 utilize the instantaneous
free surface of the impacting wave, together with the
bility safety criteria."
Does the author envisage that simplified safety stability vessel's position, to find the wave profile along the vessel
criteria can be developed to overcome this phenomenon, and the associated hydrodynamic forces and moments.
Comparing the approaches in the papers, it appears that
bearing in mind that the owners of small vessels may not
be able to afford the high costs of producing normal sta- the ability to predict capsizing is further along on semibility books? Will he be able to produce simplified criteria submersible units, Paper 7, than on fishing vessels, No. 6,
in terms of GM and minimum freeboard, for example? In and cargo ships, No. 5. This is not surprising, considering
the case of larger vessels which are already accustomed the simple underwater geometry and low waterplane area
to being subject to stability assessment, it would appear of most MODU's.
I would like to offer some comments on the present
that the traditional approach of evaluating areas under GZ
curves is on the right track. Does he envisage some ad- paper (No. 6). The unique model tests in waves giving the
ditional criteria being developed to complement the tra- captive, and partly captive, tests of forces and moments
ditional stability safety criteria, such as a limitation on must represent a very demanding experimental program.
K G / D ratio or even adoption of different required areas The author's agency and the SSPA are to be congratulated
under the GZ curves for light and loaded condition or the on undertaking a task never before attempted, to the disintroduction of minimum freeboards? Perhaps some other cusser's knowledge. However, I do not sense "the good
agreement between the results of the partly captive and
form of safety criteria may have to be developed.
2. The JONSWAP spectrum was used in the tests. Would the free-running model tests" noted on page 186. Agreethe use of other spectra have appreciably affected the ment can be achieved only between simulated motions
results? Does the author think that the JONSWAP spec- using the measured forces and moments in a time-domain
trum is representative of the coasts of Canada, particularly step calculation and the measured free-running motion
tests. Undoubtedly these are given in reference [ 5 ], which
in those areas where fishing vessels operate?
3. Would it be premature to conclude that the existing I have not seen. It should be remembered that the influIMO criteria would need improvement, as the model tests ence of roll velocity, and the velocity distribution in the
indicate capsizing of the model in a condition which meets wave, must make itself felt through roll damping moments,
in addition to Froude-Krilov moments, and is needed in
the IMO criteria?
4. Could the author supply the data on the vessel, par- the simulation.
The description of the effect of immersed bulwarks on
ticularly more details affecting the stability, for example,
minimum freeboards? It would enhance the paper to be the lee side of the hard-chine fishing vessel on capsizing
is revealing. If the bulwarks are as detrimental in recovering from an immersing roll as the tests indicate, it might
be in order to consider further tests with fail-safe bulwarks
3Ship Safety Branch, Canadian Coast Guard.
207
which detach and drop off when subjected to heavy hydrodynamic loads, leaving an open railing.
In attempting to develop rational stability criteria for
fishing vessels, regulatory agencies will probably continue
to consider traditional measures, such as initial GM, area
under the righting arm curve, angle of heel to cause downflooding, and the intercept of the righting arm and heeling
arm curve. Such measures are easily found in the design
stage for various ship conditions and applied heeling moments. On the other hand, the major efforts reported in
Papers 5, 6 and 7 all look toward the ability to simulate
with confidence the roll response of the vessel in high,
steep seas, including those cases where the ship capsizes.
When that day comes, what then?
Since the stability of fishing vessels apparently cannot
be effectively legislated, it may be fruitful to choose a small
number of specific instances where fishing vessels are
known to have capsized and to run computer simulations
of roll using the best estimate that can be made of the
seaway, including the effect of wind gusts. By including a
series of heights of the vessel's center of gravity, a limit
could probably be found to insure survivability against
capsize. A simple check would then show whether the
simplified criteria based upon G M are met.
In order to provide guidelines to the fishermen, computer-generated simulations of the time history of the vessel with deficient stability--leading to capsize--and with
adequate stability might be prepared as a videotape, using
animation techniques as appropriate, and ending with a
brief rundown on the fundamentals of stability, including
the righting arm curve and how to find one's own GM.
Such a videotape, when made available to fishermen's
organizations, and sold at minimum cost to fishing vessel
operators, would become an educational, or guidance exercise, rather than a regulatory one.
Pending the development of completely reliable simulation models, free-running physical model tests in waves
might serve the same purpose as the suggested computer
simulations.
I would like to commend the Society for holding this
minisymposium on stability. The topic demands our best
efforts.
M. Huther, Member
The paper is for me a real, fundamental work which
will help specialists to make a valuable step forward in the
understanding of the capsizing mechanism and in the calibration of theoretical formulations. This paper and others
in previous conferences lead me to the following remarks
that I hope will be useful for the minisymposium:
1. The research is oriented mainly to simulation by
mathematical models or experiments. Such an approach
often supposes that the phenomenon is random; that is,
some constant parameters exist that are able to represent
it versus ship or meteorological conditions, and observations can be reproduced at various times.
Few works seem to show that nonlinear rolling might
be a chaotic phenomenon. In such cases, no real prediction
can be made and the way to characterize the capsizing
will have to be reviewed drastically. But the chaotic behavior found can come from the physics, or only from the
mathematical representation one imagines. Therefore, I
think that there is an urgent need for research to clearly
settle if the nonlinear rolling and the capsizing are physically chaotic or not, and therefore to define the best way
to study this problem.
2. I don't believe that we shall one day be able to obtain
208
100 percent safety with respect to instability of a ship. The

crew action will always remain an important parameter
with possible human errors. There is therefore a need, in
parallel with technical progress, for progress in the understanding of the risk by captains and crews and also by
staff ashore who are charged with the loading program.
So actions to sensitize and to educate sailors and owner
staffs seem of first importance, and I don't believe that
too much has been done or is being done in this respect.
Only a coordinated action in'both fields will provide real
progress in safety of people at sea with respect to stability
accidents.
Peter Blume, Visitor

See joint discussion of this and the preceding paper on
p. 165.
Author's Closure
I wish to thank the discussers for their valuable comments and kind remarks. Their opinions, which are based
in some cases on long experience in ship capsizing research, accentuate even more the challenge created by
the capsizing phenomenon.
Before responding to each participant, I would like to
add some general explanations. This paper is not a final
report of the research on ship capsizing carried out by the
National Research Council of Canada; the work is ongoing.
The extent of the program and the huge volume of detailed data achieved in the model tests make it impossible
to present all the key findings in a single paper; it was
difficult to decide which fragments of the completed tasks
should be selected for this presentation. As the focus of
the first phase of the project was put on the investigation
of the mechanism of ship capsizing in quartering, extremely steep waves, the detailed analysis of the capsizing
process was chosen to be the main topic of this paper. In
particular, the hydrodynamic phenomenon which can be
created when the bulwark and part of the deck become
submerged, and its influence on ship susceptibility to capsize, should be brought to scientists' attention.
As this is the first presentation of the experimental results, the program of the model testing, the technique
used, and the philosophy behind this approach also had to
be outlined in order to give a background of the analysis.
However, the limited length of this paper did not allow
for further elaboration on the hydrodynamic forces exerted on the ship in extreme waves. This confused some
of the discussers when they realized the magnitude of the
captive model testing program, and what limited use of
the results was made in this paper. I would like to confirm
that the results of detailed analyses of the measurements
of the hydrodynamic forces will be published separately.
In addressing the questions raised, I will respond to the
individual discussers in the order presented.
Mr. Z s e l e c z k y - - I am glad that Mr. Zseleczky raised the
question of whether quartering or beam waves create the
most dangerous situation, in terms of capsize. It is still
fairly common opinion among naval architects and ship
operators that the most dangerous situation arises when
the waves act on a ship from the side. This opinion is based
mainly on intuitive assessment of the heeling moments
exerted on a ship by the waves. It is true that the applied
wave energy may be the greatest in this case, but at the
same time, the restoring potential of the ship is also the
greatest, which is something that seems to escape people's

attention.
In the quartering situation, the pure heeling moment
exerted by the wave is smaller than in beam position, but
the restoring capability deteriorates to a much larger degree. Furthermore, in quartering seas, many additional
negative hydrodynamic effects are concentrated in one
event (as presented in this paper) which, together with
centrifugal heeling moments generated during broaching,
create a much more dangerous situation. In this case, the
difference between a ship's potential to withstand any
heeling action and the wave heeling energy is much
smaller than in beam seas. As a result, in the same wave
conditions, a ship may capsize in quartering seas at the
GZ characteristics at which she would operate safely in
beam seas.
This conclusion is based not only on the tests presented
in this paper, but also on the results reported by Blume
and Hattendorff [ 2 ], and on comprehensive model tests
carried out in natural wind waves on a lake by the Ship
Research Institute of the Technical University Gdansk in
1967-72 (some description of the latter tests can be found
in additional reference [20 ]). The tested models in these
three programs cover a wide scope of ship forms, ranging
from a small fishing boat of 20 m length, through a large
side trawler (L = 55.5 m, L / B = 6.0) with a form typical
for a conventional medium-size cargo vessel, to a modern
large and fast containership. So, responding to the request
to qualify my statement, I would like to emphasize again
that, in the case of displacement ships exposed to the action
of extremely steep and breaking waves, the most dangerous situations arise when the ship operates in quartering
waves. This does not mean that the ship cannot capsize
in beam seas--obviously it can. However, at the same
waves and loading conditions, it will not capsize in beam
seas ff it does not capsize in quartering seas, but it may
well capsize in quartering waves even if it never capsizes
in beam waves. Therefore, the case of a ship advancing
in extremely steep, stern quartering waves should be considered as a basis for the establishment of future stability
safety requirements for displacement ships.
The foregoing deliberations do not apply to fast, dynamically supported ships, sailing yachts, or small motor boats
for which the height of near-shoe plunging breakers may
be enormously large in comparison with the size of the
boat. I agree with Mr. Zseleczky that in such cases, operation in beam seas may require special consideration.
The size of freeing ports in the bulwarks constitutes a
significant factor in the process of dynamic behavior in
waves. The size and shape of the ports were correctly
scaled. The model had six freeing ports 65 mm by 15.4
mm on each side between stations No. 2 and Ne. 6. Two
additional ports on each side of the ramp were placed at
the stern.
Mr. Zseleczky is perfectly correct in recognizing the
complexity and large number of possible combinations in
the forced oscillation tests in waves. However, this number
can be radically reduced, bearing in mind that these tests
have to be matched with the partly captive tests, while
the frequency of the forced oscillations would be the same
as the encountered wave frequency. The phase lag between the forced motion and the exciting wave should be
the same as in the case of the corresponding free motion
in the same waves, and it can be taken from the freerunning tests, or estimated by numerical calculations using
existing simplified methods. Such a program of testing is
feasible, and I hope to perform it in the future.
Mr. Hutchison--I would like to thank Mr. Hutchison for

his words of appreciation for the paper and for emphasizing the importance of the observations regarding the hazard presented to capsize safety by bulwark and deck edge
submergence.
In response to his comments on the decomposition and
measurements of the hydrodynamic forces, I would like
to add some explanation to the general comments which
I already made. The objective of the discussion on the
components of the total hydrodynamic force exerted on
a ship by extreme waves was to present clearly the defectiveness of the adoption of the existing methods used
for calculations in seakeeping (linearity and superposition
principle) to time-domain simulations in extreme wave
conditions.
With this background, it has been explained which part
of the total hydrodynamic force, occurring in completely
free motion, is measured in the partly captive test. As some
of the captive test results are used in the paper for the
analysis of the hydrodynamic phenomenon generated by
bulwark and deck edge submergence, it seemed to me
that such explanation was necessary. The partly captive
tests yield the real hydrodynamic forces (slightly modified
by some constraints in the motions) and, at present, they
constitute the best source for the approximation of the real
values of the total hydrodynamic forces exerted on a ship
by extreme waves.
Although they do not provide direct measurement of
the components presented by equation (4) or (5), it is
possible to estimate the scattering effects Mso in equation
(5) if the total force Me is known, because the FroudeKrylov force can be calculated fairly accurately. I would
like to emphasize that the difficulties with the calculation
of the total scattering effects are the main source of discrepancies between the calculated and real values of the
total hydrodynamic forces. Thus, the partly captive tests
provide a very good basis for full validation of the analytical
methods of prediction of the wave forces and ship motions
in extreme waves. Furthermore, they provide an opportunity to study the influence of various conditions and
situations on the generated hydrodynamic effects, which
is crucial for the understanding of the physics involved in
ship capsizing. A good example of the value of this testing
is the confirmation of the forces generated by the deck
edge submergence, as has been demonstrated in the paper.
I concur with Mr. Hutchison that the total force acting
on a ship can be determined from the history of.the motion
and, in fact, we use this method in our research. An example of the total hydrodynamic forces corresponding to
the measured free motions is presented in [5]. It has to
be emphasized, however, that the force, or moment, determined by such an inverse procedure contains all forces,
or moments, acting on a ship--not just the hydrodynamic
forces exerted by the waves. Therefore, it can be applied
only to analysis of steady motions caused exclusively by
the wave forces. In the case of ship capsizing in quartering
seas, the observed motion is usually a result of simultaneous
action of several forces such as wave exciting forces, rudder
forces, centrifugal effects in broaching, forces created after
bulwark submergence, and additional couplings with other
motions, and the application of the inverse procedure does
not provide any possibility of identifying those factors.
Thus, an appropriate composition of partly captive tests
is necessary, if insight into the hydrodynamic composition
is required.
Dr. Odabasi--I am pleased by Dr. Odabasi's concur-
209
rence with the main conclusions of the paper. Amplification of the statements by a scientist well known for his
unconventional theoretical approaches in the research of
stability safety enhances the messages of this paper.
Some further comments made by Dr. Odabasi seem to
be a result of some misinterpretation of a few fragments
of the paper. I apologize if I did not explain some aspects
clearly enough.
I entirely agree that the drift force, that is, the force
which causes drifting, is a function of the hull geometry
and the flow configuration. We could even add that it is
also a function of the impacts of breaking waves. I did not
say in the paper that this force is a function of bulwark
immersion. What I have presented is the analysis of what
happens if, during drifting, the bulwark becomes submerged. The moment and drift-roll couplings generated
in this situation are additional to those mentioned by Dr.
Odabasi, and they far exceed the latter.
It is true that sway analyzed here is not the same as the
sway we know in linear seakeeping theory. After a wave
impact, this motion is rather closer to the drift with varying
velocity, but the term "sway" is used in the analysis in
order to indicate which of the traditional six components
of motion is being considered.
Regarding the agreement between the free-running and
the semi-captive tests, it has been demonstrated that heave
and pitch motions (which are not constrained in the partly
captive tests) are in good agreement, which means that
the size and shape of the immersed part of the hull in the
passing wave are very close in both types of testing. Furthermore, the configuration of the hydrodynamic forces
in the restrained modes is consistently compatible with
corresponding motions in the free-running tests. Thus, the
forces measured in the partly captive tests well represent
qualitatively corresponding free motions.
The influence of drift w a s investigated in the partly
captive tests. The model was not free to drift in these tests
but, instead, was forced to drift with various velocities.
Obviously, none of the partly captive situations models
directly a corresponding free-running situation, where the
velocity of drift is varying in time, but they do provide
the possibility of deducing and estimating the influence
of lateral motion on the exerted forces.
In response to the comment on the representation of
the effects of water on deck in semi-captive tests, I would
like to emphasize once again the significant difference
between the case when the bulwark and part of the deck
are submerged and the case of water on deck. In the first
case, the bulwark and part of the deck are moving under
the surrounding water, while in the other situation the
water is moving in the space of the deck well, and does
not constitute a continuous extension of the surrounding
water. The partly captive experiments are adequate for
testing the hydrodynamic phenomena generated by bulwark submergence and also for dynamic effects of impacts
of water coming on deck at various heel angles, but I agree
that they cannot represent the effects of water sloshing in
the deck well. Testing of the sloshing effects would require
a special test setup, and it was not a subject of the reported
work.
The tests were performed without bilge keels (single
hard-chine vessel) but with a large skeg, as is the case with
the prototype. There were no additional tests with bilge
keels added or with the skeg removed.
I agree only partially with Dr. Odabasi's opinion that
"there is no difference between the hydrodynamics of a
bilge keel and a bulwark while" they are submerged." It
210
is true only when the bulwark is very deeply submerged.

In such a situation, the bulwark acts similarly to a bilge
keel, increasing the damping of roll, but also contributes
in preventing the deck edge from coming out of the water.
If the bulwark is not very deeply submerged, it operates
in close proximity to the free surface and, therefore, the
effects are not the same as on a bilge keel. But this is not
the key point. The additional dynamic heeling moments
discussed here are generated basically on the immersed
part of the deck. Obviously, this can happen only if the
bulwark is submerged. Therefore, for brevity, it is referred
to as influence of bulwark submergence, but the main
cause of the presented phenomenon is the ploughing of
the part of the deck under the water. This phenomenon
would also appear ff the bulwark were removed, although
perhaps not with such great intensity.
The influences of wind, icing, and water penetration
inside the ship were not subjects of this study. I share Dr.
Odabasi's view that these effects are important and they
should be considered at the stage when the stability safety
criteria will be under elaboration.
Mr. M i l l e r - - I wish to thank Mr. Miller for reminding us
of his past study, the conclusions of which, in many respects, were similar to the findings of this presentation. In
particular, the confirmation that the following / quartering
situation is more dangerous than the beam position enhances the message on the direction of further research
in stability safety.
With regard to the influence of forward speed, the resuits of the two studies are not contradictory. I think we
can agree that the safest is that speed which, at given
loading and environmental conditions, prevents against
buildup of water on deck and at the same time does not
introduce too high dynamic motions and loss of control in
waves. The model would probably capsize in our tests at
the full load condition I I / A if the speed were further
increased.
Whether or not such a high speed is even achievable at
the full load for this ship operating in high waves is another
question.
With regard to the importance of bulwark submergence,
I already explained, in my response to Dr. Odabasi, that
it is mainly the submerged part of the deck where the
additional heeling moment is generated. The magnitude
of this moment depends on the size of the submerged
deck surface and on the lateral relative velocity. It is worth
noting that the portion of the discussed moment in the
total Mx is much larger in quartering seas than in beam
situations. I am not sure if the Tracor Hydronautics testing
provided any reasonable ground for drawing the conclusions in this matter. The presence of the bulwark modifies
to some extent the hydrodynamic conditions on the submerged part of the deck and, therefore, I agree with Mr.
Miller that it would be very useful to carry out appropriate
tests, captive ones in particdlar, with and without bulwarks.
I have to disagree with Mr. Miller's philosophy with
respect to the development of stability safety criteria. The
separate analysis of each basic capsize situation may not,
and usually will not, represent the most dangerous situation which may occur in the practical operations of the
ship. Neither the most stringent individual simple condition nor the envelope of the criteria developed for the
individual separate situations will provide a sufficient
safety level for a realistic case when the events happen
simultaneously.
Therefore, a realistic combination of simultaneously act-
ing factors which may occur in the operational practice of

the ship, and not the individual separate situations, should
form the basis for the formulation of stability criteria. As
far as the pure hydrodynamic aspects are concerned, that
is, the hazard created by the wave action, the stern quartering situation is one such realistic most dangerous situation. This obviously does not preclude adding any other
factors such as wind, towing effects and so on, if such a
combination is justifiable by the operational nature of a
ship under consideration.
Professor Kuo and bolleagues--I think that my previous
general explanation and the responses to Mr. Hutchison
and Dr. Odabasi answer, to a large extent, the questions
asked by Professor Kuo and his Stability Research Group
from the University of Strathclyde with regard to the purpose and philosophy of the captive tests. The objective of
the captive tests was to monitor the hydrodynamic forces
in a wide range of realistic hull-wave configurations created during real free motion and capsizing in extreme
waves. This should allow detection of the hydrodynamic
reasons for ship capsizing.
I do not agree with the team's statement that most computer software would calculate these forces. If this were
true, the problem of correct prediction of ship capsizing
would be solved. None of the existing programs is capable
of adequately calculating the hydrodynamic effects exerted on a ship by extreme waves at large heel angles, up
to capsizing. What the programs do is a fairly accurate
calculation of Froude-Krylov forces, but without appropriate representation of the hydrodynamic scattering effects. These effects constitute a large portion of the total
hydrodynamic force (see [5]) and the lack of its correct
representation means that the results of time-domain simulation based on Froude-Krylov forces are, in a majority
of the cases, misleading.
Though the program developed at our Institute [5 ] calculates the total hydrodynamic force, including the scattering effects, it fails when the deck edge becomes
submerged and water comes on deck. In this situation, the
captive testing is the best source of information on the
complex configuration of the hydrodynamic forces, which
cannot be achieved, at present, by any theoretical calculations.
This testing stimulates further development of the analytical approach and, at the same time, constitutes the
best ground for validation of the numerical methods, once
they are developed. It is the validation against the hydrodynamic forces--not only against the ship motions--which
makes the analytical model reliable. A more detailed explanation of use of the captive test results will be the
subject of a separate publication.
Mr. Brown--The questions raised by Mr. Brown have
one common denominator: practical application of the resuits and the findings of this research. I wish to emphasize
that the ultimate objective is formulation of criteria of
safety against capsizing, and the program of the project is
stimulated by this goal.
The form of future criteria is not yet known. It is difficult
to predict at this phase whether there will be a completely
new type of formula replacing the existing formulas, or
some addition to the currently used requirements. The
form of the criteria will be decided when the mathematical
model of capsizing is completed. Using the validated
model for systematic computations and combining the resuits with appropriate statistics of ship casualties, it should
be possible to make a judgment whether the existing IMO
criteria provide sufficient safety level in the conditions
studied, or if they need improvements or, perhaps, replacement. With regard to the simplicity of the criteria
for small fishing vessels, it is possible to develop simple
formulas from a complicated model by use of statistical
representatives for the considered type of vessel, and relate the stability safety indices to the available basic particulars of the ship. However, it has to be realized that
each step in the simplification process decreases the level
of adequacy of the criteria to the represented stability
situation. That would be particularly true if the considered
vessel were to differ significantly from her statistical representation.
The JONSWAP spectrum represents well the wave conditions in the North Sea. As the objective of the model
testing was to investigate the mechanism of ship capsizing
in extreme waves, this spectrum was selected because it
provides trains of large breaking waves frequently in the
basin. The problem of appropriate representation of waves
in Canadian coastal waters will be considered when the
capsizing criteria are under development.
Regarding the difference between the real hydrodynamic forces acting on a free-running model and those
estimated from the partly captive tests, I cannot give any
definite figure representing the margin of error at this
time, because the results of the captive testing are still
being analyzed. Estimation of this error will certainly be
given once the analysis is completed.
The influence of freeing ports on the course of behavior
after the bulwark gets submerged was not tested in the
experiments carried out. Some model testing with and
without bulwark in beam waves was carried out at the
Gdansk Technical University [21 ] for two models of lowfreeboard fishing vessels. However, the subject of that
study was the pseudo-static angle of heel (toward the
weather side) and the influence of water trapped on deck.
The conclusions of that study may not be fully applicable
to the lee side bulwark during its submergence when the
ship is moving in quartering waves. Logically, larger ports
should facilitate better flow around the deck edge and
reduce banking up of water on the deck, which should
reduce the magnitude of the additional heeling moment
generated on the submerged part of the deck. On the
other hand, smaller openings better protect against water
shipping on deck if the upper edge of bulwark does not
get submerged. The problem requires further consideration. Some model testing should be carried out for various
sizes of the freeing ports up to removal of the bulwark, in
order to define its influence on the hydrodynamic forces,
and subsequently on the ship behavior in such critical
situations.
The hydrodynamic phenomenon generated by the
movement of the submerged part of the deck and bulwark
will be included in the formulation of the mathematical
model of ship capsizing. The large part of the experimental
program was designed and dedicated to investigate this
phenomenon and provides a very good and reliable basis
for the validation of the theoretical model.
Professor Hamlin--The questions on the agreement between the results of the partly captive and free-running
tests, on the effect of submerged bulwark, and the role of
freeing ports were also raised by other discussers, and I
have already responded on these matters.
The suggestion by Professor Hamlin to use statistical
data of capsized vessels in combination with numerical
time-domain simulations is, in fact, part of our program
for the next phase of the project.
I also share Professor Hamlin's view that safety against
211
capsizing d e p e n d s not only on the stability characteristics

of the ship, b u t also on the k n o w l e d g e and skills of the
crew. In this r e g a r d , the e d u c a t i o n of masters on t h e m e c h anism a n d causes of capsizing is one of t h e most i m p o r t a n t
ways to increase safety at sea. W i t h this in mind, w e are
c u r r e n t l y p r o d u c i n g a video film on ship capsizing in waves
in which b o t h t h e video records from our capsizing testing
a n d the a n i m a t i o n t e c h n i q u e are used.
In closing, I would like once again to thank t h e participants for their valuable c o m m e n t s a n d for t h e stimulating
212
discussion. I wish also to thank Mr. M. H u t h e r and Dr. P.

Blume, who, after r e a d i n g the p a p e r , p r e p a r e d their general c o m m e n t s on t h e ship stability p r o b l e m for this minis y m p o s i u m on stability.
20 Grochowalski, S., "The Prediction of Deck Wetting in
Beam Seas in the Light of Results of Model Tests" in Proceedings,
Second International Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean
Vehicles, STAB '82, Tokyo, 1982.
21 Dudziak, J., "Safety of a Vessel in Beam Sea" in Proceedings, First International Conference on Stability of Ships and
Ocean Vehicles, Glasgow, I975.

Investigation Into The Physics of Ship Capsizing by Combined Captive and Free-Running Model Tests PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Investigation Into The Physics of Ship Capsizing by Combined Captive and Free-Running Model Tests PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SNAME Transactions, VoI. 97, 1989, pp.

Model of a fishing vessel running in breaking quartering waves

Investigation into the Physics of Ship Capsizing by

Presented at the Annual Meeting, New York, N.Y., November

THE SOLUTION of the ship capsizing p r o b l e m is one of

the rationality of i m p r o v e m e n t s of traditional methods,

Physics of Ship Capsizing

2. Philosophy of the experimental approach

Fig. 1 Elementsof the "cause-result" chain in ship motions

configurations. These types of tests may be very useful for

hydrodynamic added mass moment in roll

F ~ F ~ , F . = hydrodynamic force in surge, sway, and heave,

additional heeling moment due to lateral motion

Physics of Ship Capsizing

wave trough, wave period

conditions will be simulated by use of the free-running

In the case of roll motion, the equation could b e p r e s e n t e d

[I~ + A,(S, qP,,)]~ + N,(S, ap,,, ~ )

w h e r e the wave exciting m o m e n t

M~(S, Oot) = MB(S,P~,t) + M~(S, Oot ) + MN(S, Oot )

cannot be distinguished. The correct form of this equation

Ixx$ = M,_K(S.O~t) + M~(S.Os.t) + Ns(S.Os.t)

w h e r e MF-K denotes buoyant ( F r o u d e - K r y l o v ) m o m e n t ,

Physics of Ship Capsizing

and scattering force modified by the absence of some of

Me = MF_K(S, eps, t) + Mso(S, ePs, t)

The captive model tests should be performed in such a

The model experiments were carried out at the SSPA

Free-running model tests

rudder rate 15 deg/sec and the coefficient k = 1; rudder

Physics of Ship Capsizing

Reference system in free-running model tests

in the process of relating the free test results to those of

Fully captive model tests

Partly captive model tests

Fig. 3 Fully captive model tests in breaking waves

Reference system in fully captive model tests

were measured by the four-component balance, while

Partly captive model tests in breaking quartering waves

Physics of Ship Capsizing

Fig. 6 Body lines of tested model

Table 1 Principal particulars of model

tests. T h e instantaneous position of the m o d e l with respect

Length overall, LoA = 1.413 m a

A typical small Canadian, hard-chine stern trawler of

SECT. AREA [crn=]

Fig. 8 Righting arm curves for tested port departure conditions

Physics of Ship Capsizing

Fig. 9 Righting arm curves for full load conditions

ing waves. They were carried out in regular and irregular

O n e loading condition was tested: Port d e p a r t u r e IA,

0.18 0.27 0.38

(where 0 deg = following sea)

0.44 0.50 0.65

0, 30, 40, 50, 60, 90

0.9 1.1 1.3

Heel angle, deg:

0, 10, 20, 35, 45

Forward speed, m/sec:

0, 0.7, 1.1, 1.4

(where 0 deg = upright position)

1.4 1.5 1.7

(0-10 knots in full scale)