SSC 350 Ship Vibration Design Guide

SSC-350
SHIP VIBRATION
DESIGN GUIDE
DTIC
9%FLECTEI
AO5 1991,
D
'his d:ument has been appro'ed for public release and sale; its distribution is unlimited
SHIP STRUCTURE COMMITTEE

1990
t
f
SHIP STl9UQTU8ECQMMITTEE The SHIP STRUCTURE COMMITTEE is constituted to prosecute a research program to improve the hull structures of ships and other marine structures by an extension of knowledge pertaining to design, materials, and methods of construction. RADM J. D. Sipes, USCG, (Chairman) Chief. Office of Marine Safety, Security and Environmental Protection U. S. Coast Guard Mr. Alexander Malakhoff Director, Structural Integrity Subgroup (SEA 55Y) Naval Sea Systems Command Dr. Donald Liu Senior Vice President American Bureau of Shipping Mr. H. T. Hailer Associate Administrator for Shipbuilding and Ship Operations Maritime Administration Mr. Thomas W. Allen Engineering Officer (N7) Military Sealift Command CDR Michael K. Parmelee, USCG, Secretary, Ship Structure Committee U. S. Coast Guard
CONTRACTING OFFICER TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVES Mr. William J. Siekierka SEA 55Y3 Naval Sea Systems Command Mr. Greg D. Woods SEA 55Y3 Naval Sea Systems Command
SHIP STRUCTURE.SUBCOMMITTEE TIno SHIP STRUCTURE SUBCOMMITTEE acts for the Ship Structure Committee on technical matters by providing technical coordination for detorminating the goals and objectives of the program and by evaluating and interpreting the results in torms of structural design, construction, and operation. AMERICAN BUEAOUQF-SHIPPING Mr Stephen G. Arntson (Chairman) Mr. John F. Conlon Mr. William Hanzalek Mr. Philip G. Rynn MILITARY SEALIFT COMMAND Mr. Albert J. Attermeyer Mr. Michael W. Touma Mr Jeffery E Beach MARITIME ADMINISTRATION Mr Mr Mr Dr Frederick Seibold Norman C Hammer Chao H. Lin Walter M Maclean SHIP STRUCTURE SUBCOMMITTEE LIAISON MEMBERS U. S. COAST GUARD ACADEMY LT Bruce Mustain Mr. Alexander B. Stavovy U. S, MERCHANT MARINE ACADEMY Dr C B. Kim U S NAVAL ACADEMY Dr Ramswar Bhattacharyya STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK MARITIME COLLEGE Dr. W. R. Porter WELDING RESEARCH COUNCIL Dr. Martin Prager AMERICAN IRON AND STEEL INSTITUTE Mr. Alexander 0. Wilson NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES COMMITTEE ON MARINE STRUCTURES Mr. Stanley G. Stiansen SOCIETY OF NAVAL ARCHITECTS AND MARINE ENGINEERS HYDRODYNAMICS COMMITTEE Dr. William Sandberg NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES MARINE BOARD NAVYALSEA- SY EMS COMMAND
Mr. Robert. A. Sietski Mr. Charles L. Null Mr. W. Thomas Packard Mr. Allen H. Engle U. S. COAST GUARD CAPT T. E. Thompson CAPT Donald S. Jensen CDR Mark E. Noll
Member Agencies: United States Coast Guard Naval Sea Systems Command C
Address Correspondence to: Secretary, Ship Structure Committee U.S. Coast Guard (G-MTH)
Maritime Administration
American Bureau of Shipping
Military Sealift Command
Ship Structure Committee

An Interagency Advisory Committee Dedicated to the Improvement of Marine Structures
December 3, 1990
2100 Second Street S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20593-0001
PH: (202) 267.oo0 FAX: (202) 267-0025
SSC-350
SR-1312
SHIP VIBRATION DESIGN GUIDE
Vibration control in ship structures is a major concern for those who design and operate vessels. Excessive vibrations can lead to fatigue failuire in structural members and can adversely effect the efficiency of operating crews. lynoring excitations caused by rotating machinery or propellers, for example, may lead to a vessel design that is unsuitable for service. This guide is intended to provide the reader with a method of integrating existing technology into the ship design cycle for the purpose of avoiding ship vibration problems.
Admi~~SIPES Rear Admira, U.S. Coast Guard Chairman, Ship Structure Committee
Technical Report Documentation Page

1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No.
SSC-350
4. Title and Subtitle S. Report Date
Ship Vibration Design Guide

. 7. Author's)
July 1989 6.Performing Organizaton Cod*

8. Performing Organization Report No.
SR-1312
Edward F. Noonan
9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)
Edward F. Noonan 719 North Holly Drive Annapolis, MD 21401

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
I,Contrue; .13. Type of Report and Period Covered
Ship Structure Committee U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters (G-MTH) 2100 Second Street Washington, DC 20593-0001
15. Supplementary Notes
Final Report
14. Sponsoring Agency Code
G-M
The American Bureau of Shipping acted as the contracting office for the Ship Structure Committee
16. Abstract
It is the purpose of this design guide to integrate existing technology into the ship development program in a manner consistent with commercial ship design philosophies. The approach is based on experience and relies on emperical factors, where necessary. Weaknesses in the procedures are identified and recommendations for further development are indicated. This guide addresses the major components over which we have the ability to excercise control in the design phase, and which will generally minimize most local vibration problems. These components include the hull girder, major structural elements, main propulsion systems including propeller selection, stern design and underwater appendages. Excitation forces, including those generated by propulsion systems and the operational environment that a ship's propeller and hull girder experience, are addressed in this guide. Transient excitation resulting from heavy seas and collision impact are not addressed in this document. A procedure to determine the natural frequencies of major shipboard elements at the preliminary design stage is presented to predict anticipated problems and facilitate selection of propulsion system components, stern configuration and hull structure..
17.
Key Words
18. Distribution SlatemenAvail
able to the public from:
Shipboard Vibration Hull Structure Propulsion Machinery

19. Security Clossif. (of this report) 20.
National Technical Information Service, 5pringfield, VA 22161 or Marine Technical Information Facility National Maritime Research Facility Kings Point, NY 10024-1699
Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price
[INCLASS [. F IED
UNCLASSIFIED
Reproduction of completed page authorized
330
Form DOT F 1700.7
(8-72)
-a
iiw
IL
U-v
il
*c
LI
I...-
-.
-I
II *r
'I
0w
PREFACE
A ship is a complex structure propelled by an equally complex propulsion system, subjected to self generated dynai forces of a periodic nature, as well as serious transient forces generated by random seas. Under the general title of Shipboard Vibration, we would normally include everything that vibrates, whether excited by periodic or transient forces, whether the response is noted in a major structural or mechanical component, or in local joiner work, or in a piping run. For this guide, however, we will address the major components over which we have the ability to exercise control in the design phase, and which will generally minimize most local vibration problems. These cunponents wll include the hull girder, major structural assemblies, main propulsion systems, including the propeller, stern configuration and underwater appendages. Structural reliability of the ship, responding to the transient excitation produced by heavy seas, is ordinarily established by the Classification Societies, as discussed in the recent paper on "Strength Assessment of Ocean Going Vessels" presented by Thayamballi and C.le- ;n SNAME's 1987 Transactions arid are not included in this design guide. Because of the interdisciplinary nature of ship vibration problems and the complexity of the total mechanic-,J system, the design of a ship, free from objectionable vibration, is still considered an art in which the designer applies his own approach to ensure satisfactory performance. Although nuch, research has been carried out in recent years, i has generally been fragmentary in nature and not effectively reduced to a practical design guide, useful for the low budget, commercial ship design projects. It is the purpose of this design guile to integrate existing technology into the ship development program, in a manner consistent with commercial ship design philosophies. The approach is based on experience and relies on empirical factors, where necessary. Weaknesses in the procedures are identified and recommendations for further development are indicated. A more detailed outline of the background and approach to this guide was presented by the author in the paper, "';hipboard Vibration Can Be Controlled" at SNAME's Chesapeake Marine Engineering Symposium in 1986. Recently, a companion effort, "Practical Guide for Shipboard Vibration Control and Attenuation" (SSC-330), was developed to provide operators, shipyards, shipowners and others who must deal with ship vibration problems, but who have limited knowledge and experience in the field, with an understanding of the nature of the more common problems frequently encountered, how to assess and evaluate them, and what alternatives are available for their solution. Where applicable, sections of the original text were also incladcd in this publication. In the development of this guide, an effort has been made to present sufficient information to understand the basis for the observed vibration phenomenon. It is recommended that the reader make use of selected reterences given for a more in depth understanding. It is suggested that. "Ship Hull Vibration" (Todd, E.F., Edward Arnold Ltd.), "Ship Vibration" (McGoldrick, R.T., DTMB Report 1451), and "Mechanical Vibrations" (Den Hartog, J.P., McGraw Hill) be referred to for more c(mplete understandinig of shipboard vibration.
By
, D It ixbut ion/ "NAwdi1btlity Codey
iii
Av'ali
and/or.
\ ,,,-Dis, ,, t Speoil
-1m
TABLE of CONTENTS
ACK N O W LED G MENTS ................................................................................................................ PREFA CE ...................................................................................................................................... TA BLE of CO NTENTS ................................................................................................................. LIST of FIG URE S and TA BLES ............................................................................................. CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION to SHIPBOARD VIBRATION Purpose A nd Scope .............................................................................................................. Shipboard V ibration ............................................................................................................. Hull G irder V ibration ........................................................................................................... 1.3.1 H ull G irder Excitation ................................................................................................. 1.3.1.1 Shaft Frequency Forces ...................................................................................... 1.3.1.2 Propeller Forces .................................................................................................. 1.3.2 H ull G irder Response .................................................................................................. 1.3.2.1 M odes of V ibration of the H ull Girder .............................................................. 1.3.2.2 Frequency of V ibration of the H ull G irder ... ................................................... 1.3.2.3 Effects of Adverse O perating Conditions .......................................................... Vibration of M ajor Substructures ....................................................................................... Vibration of Local Structural Elem ents ............................................................................. Vibration of Shipboard Equipm ent .................................................................................... 1.6.1 Passive Shipboard Equipm ent ................................................................................... 1.6.2 Active Shipboard Equipm ent .................................................................................... Vibration of M ain Propulsion M achinery .......................................................................... 1.7.1 D ynam ic U nbalance and M isalignm ent .................................................................... 1.7.2 D ynam ic Shaft Stresses ............................................................................................. 1.7.3 Longitudinal V ibration .............................................................................................. 1.7.4 Torsional Vibration .................................................................................................... 1.7.5 Lateral Vibration ........................................................................................................ REFEREN CES ..................................................................................................................... APPENDIX 1-A, Useful Dynamics Formulas i iii v xi
1.1 1.2 1.3
1.4 1.5 1.6
1.7
1-1 1-2 1-3 1-3 1-4 1-5 1-7 1-8 1-8 1-1 1-13 1-14 1-14 1-15 1-15 1-15 1-16 1-17 1-17 1-18 1-19 1-20
CHAPTER TWO VIBRATION CRITERIA and SPECIFICATIONS 2.1 General Hull V ibration ......................................................................................................... 2.2 Major Substructures, Local Structures And Shipboard Equipment ..................................... 2.2.1 Hum an Reaction .......................................................................................................... 2.2.2 Equipm ent M alfunction ............................................................................................... 2.2.2.1 Structural Adequacy of Support System ............................................................ 2.2.2.2 V ibration of Shipboard Equipm ent .................................................................... 2.2.3 Environm ental Testing of Shipboard Equipm ent ........................................................ 2.2.3.1 VIibration Tests ................................................................................................... 2.2.3.2 Exploratory V ibration Test ................................................................................. 2.2.3.3 Endurance Test .............................................................................................. 2.2.3.4 V ariable Frequency Test ....................................................................................
2-2 2-6 2-6 2-6 2-6 2-7 2-8 2-8 2-8 2-8 2-8
Ship Vibration Design Guide 2.2.3.5 Exception ............................................................................................................ 2.2.3.6 Endurance Test for Mast-M ounted Equipm ent ............................................... 2.2.4 Structural Fatigue Failure ............................................................................................ 2.2.4.1 Hull Girder Vibration (Springing) ..................................................................... 2.2.4.2 Local Vibration ................................................................................................ 2.3 M achinery Vibration .......................................................................................................... 2.3.1 M ain Propulsion M achinery ...................................................................................... 2.3.1.1 Dynamic Unbalance and Misalignment ........................................................... 2.3.1.2 Dynamic Shaft Stresses .................................................................................... 2.3.1.3 Torsional Vibration .......................................................................................... 2.3.1.4 Longitudinal Vibration ..................................................................................... 2.3.1.5 Lateral Vibration .............................................................................................. 2.3.2 General M achinery Vibration ................................................................................... 2.3.2.1 Nonreciprocating Machines ............................................................................. 2.3.2.2 Reciprocating Engines ...................................................................................... 2.4 Ship Vibration Specifications ............................................................................................ SAM PLE SHIP SPECIFICATIONS: Vibration ................................................................. A. General Requirem ents ............................................................................................. B. Hull Girder Criteria ................................................................................................. C. Criteria for M ajor Substructures ............................................................................. D Criteria for Local Structural Elements .................................................................... E. Criteria for Shipboard Equipm ent ........................................................................... F. Vibration of M ain Propulsion Machinery ............................................................... REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................
CHAPTER THREE
2-8 2-9 2-9 2-9 2-11 2-11 2-11 2-12 2-13 2-14 2-14 2-15 2-15 2-15 2-22 2-22 2-24 2-24 2-24 2-24 2-24 2-25 2-25 2-29
3.1
3.2
3.3 3.4
EXCITATION of VIBRATORY FORCES Guidelines for Minimization of Propeller-Induced Vibratory Forces .................................. 3.1.1 Approach ................................................................................................................ 3.1.2 Selection of Afterbody Type ........................................................................................ 3.1.3 Development of Afterbody Shape ............................................................................. 3.1.3.1 Design of Closed-Stem Afterbodies for Single Screw Ships ............................ 3.1.3.2 Design of Open-Stem Afterbodies .................................................................... 3.1.3.3 Selection of Propeller to Hull Clearances ......................................................... 3.1.4 Development of Shapes and Arrangement of Aft Apendages ................................ 3.1.5 Selection of Propeller Characteristics ........................................................................ Early Design Stage Estimates of Propeller-Induced Vibratory Forces and M oments .................................................................................................................. 3.2.1 Approach .................................................................................................................... 3.2.2 Example .................................................................................................................... Guidelines for Minimization of Propulsion System Induced Vibratory Forces and Mom ents .................................................................................................................. General Com m ents and Recom mendations ...................................................................... REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... APPENDIX 3-A, Example of Early-Design-Stage Estimate of Propeller Induced Vibratory Forces and Moments
3-2 3-2 3-2 3-6 3-6 3-15 3-15 3-23 3-25 3-40 3-40 3-45 3-45 3-46 3-47
vi
CHAPTER FOUR SHIP HULL VIBRATION 4.1 The Design Approach ........................................................................................................... 4.1.1 Scope of Ship V ibration A nalyses .............................................................................. 4.1.2 Contractual Considerations ..........................................................................................
4.1.3 Stages of Ship Design .................................................................................................
4-1 4-2 4-3

4-3
4.1.3.1 Concept D esign .................................................................................................. 4.1.3.2 Prelim inary D esign ............................................................................................. 4.1.3.3 Contract D esign .................................................................................................. 4.1.3.4 D etail Design ..................................................................................................... 4.1.3.5 Construction ........................................................................................................ 4.1.3.6 Tests and Trials .................................................................................................. 4.1.3.7 Ship Operation .................................................................................................... 4.2 Prelim inary H ull V ibration Design Analysis ....................................................................... 4.2.1 H ull Frequency Determ ination .................................................................................... 4.2.1.1 Empirical A nalysis ............................................................................................. 4.2.1.2 20-Station Beam M odel ...................................................................................... 4.2.1.3 Finite Elem ent M odel ......................................................................................... 4.2.2 Empirical Calculation Procedures ............................................................................. 4.2.2.1 Destroyer Calculations ..................................................................................... 4.2.2.2 LNG Calculations ............................................................................................. 4.2.2.3 Current H ull D esigns ........................................................................................ 4.2.2.4 Examples of O ther Ship Types ........................................................................ 4.3 Prelim inary Hull Response A nalysis ................................................................................. 4.3.1 Avoiding H ull Resonance ......................................................................................... 4.3.2 Forced H ull Response ............................................................................................... 4.3.2. i Estim ated H ull Forces ...................................................................................... 4.3.2.2 H ull Response ................................................................................................... 4.3.3 Resonant H ull Response ............................................................................................ 4.3.3.1 H ull V ibratory Forces ....................................................................................... 4.3.3.2 H ull D am ping ................................................................................................... 4.3.3.3 Concept Design-Estimated Response ................................. 4.3.3.4 Prelim inary D esign-Calculated Hull Response ................................................ 4.4 General Com m ents and Recom mendations ....................................................................... 4.4.1 G eneral Com ments .................................................................................................... 4.4.2 Recom mendations ...................................................................................................... REFEREN CES ..................................................................................................................... APPENDIX 4-A, ABS Comments CHAPTER FIVE PROPULSION SYSTEM VIBRATION 5.1 D ynamic U nbalance and M isalignm ent ............................................................................... 5.1.1 U nbalanced Propeller Forces ....................................................................................... 5.1.2 M isalignm ent ............................................................................................................... 5.1.3 Diesel Engine U nbalance ............................................................................................ 5.1.3.1 External Forces and M om ents .............................................................................
4-3 4-4 4-4 4-4 4-4 4-4 4-5 4-5 4-6 4-6 4-6 4-7 4-17 4-17 4-26 4-34 4-37 4-39 4-39 4-42 4-42 4-42 4-43 4-46 4-46 4-47 4-50 4-51 4-54 4-54 4-55
5-2 5-2 5-4 5-4 5-5
vii
5-9 5.1.3.2 Internal Forces and M om ents ............................................. 5-10 5.1.3.3 Lateral M om ents .................................................... 5-12 5.2 Dynamic Shaft Stresses ........................................................ 5-13 5.2.1 Tailshaft Design ......................................................... 5-17 5.2.2 Thrust Eccentricity ....................................................... 5-21 5.2.3 Detail Design Considerations ................................................. 5-23 ......................... ................ s . ....... System of Propulsion Vibration 5.3 Longitudinal 5.3.1 Longitudinal Vibration Analysis of the LNG Carrier........ . ....................... 5-23 5-25 5.3.1.1 Longitudinal Shaft Vibrations ........................................ 5-28 5.3.1.2 Com ments ......................................................... 5-31 5.3.1.3 Frequency Analysis - Conventional H ull ..................................... 5-33 5.3.1.4 Resporse Calculations ................................................. 5-34 5.3.2 Longitudinal Critical W ithin the Operating Spczd ................................... 5-34 5.3.2.1 Frequency Analysis ............................................ 5-42 5.3.2.2 Response Analysis .................................................... 5-44 5.3.2.3 D iesel Propulsion Drive System s........................................... 5-45 5.3.3 General Comments ............................................ 5-46 5.4 Torsional Vibration of Propulsion System s........................................... 5-47 5.4.1 Torsional Vibration Analysis of the LNG Carrier Propulsion System .................... 5-48 5.4.1.1 Frequency Analysis of Project Hull ......................................... 5-49 5.4.1.2 Frequency Analysis of Conventional Hull .................................... 5-50 5........... 5.4.1.3 Response Calculations 5-52 5.4.2 Direct Diesel Drive System s ................................................. 5-53 5.5 Lateral Vibration of Propulsion Shafting ............................................. 5-55 5.5.1 Lateral Vibration (W hirling) Frequency of the LNG Cairier ............................ 5-56 5............. 5.6 General Comm ent ................... 5-57 REFERENCES .............................................................. APPENDIX 5-A, Example of Preliminary Vibration Analysis of Propulsion System APPENDiX 5-B, Slow-Speed Diesel Data
CHAPTER SIX MEASUREMENT and ANALYSIS of SHIPBOARD VIBRATION 6-1 6.1 Background ............................................................... 6-2 6.1.1 SNAM E Vibration Program ................................................. 6-2 6.1.2 ISO Standards .......................................................... 6-3 6.1.2.1 The U se of Shipboard Vibration Standards .................................... 6-6 6.2 Instrum entation ............................................................. 6-6 6.2.1 M echanical Instrum ents .................................................... 6 -6 6 .2 .1.1 R e ed s ............................................................ 6-6 6.2.1.2 Askania ........................................................... 6-6 6.2.2 Transducers ........................................................... 6-6 6.2.2.1 Accelerom eters ...................................................... 6-7 6.2.2.2 Velocity Gages ...................................................... 6-7 6.2.2.3 Displacem ent G ages .................................................. 6-8 6.2.2.4 Strain G ages ....................................................... 6-8 6.2.3 Signal Conditioners ................................................................................................
viii
6.2.. 1 D ifferential A m plifiers .................................................................................. 6.2.3.2 Charge A m plifiers .............................................................................................. 6.2.3.3 Strain G age A m plifiers ....................................................................................... 6.2.3.4 Filters .......................................................................................................... 6.2.4 Recorders .....................................................................................................................
6--8 6-8 6-9 6-9 6-9
......................................................... 6 -9 6 .2 .4 .1 M e te rs ....................................................... o-10 6.2.4.2 Oscilloscopes .................................................................................................... 6-10 6.2.4.3 O scillographs ................................................................................................ 6-11 6.2.4.4 Tape Recorders ................................................................................................. 6-11 6.3 Q uantities To Be M easured ............................................................................................ 6-12 6.3.1 D isplacem ent, Velocity, or Acceleration ................................................................. 6-12 6.3.2 Frequency Range ....................................................................................................... .... 6-12 6.3.3 Time H istory or Frequency Spectra .................................................................... 6-13 6.4 A nalysis and Reporting O f D ata ....................................................................................... 6-13 6.4.1 M anual M ethod ......................................................................................................... 6- 16 6.4.2 Envelope M ethod ................................................................................................... 6-21 6.4.3 Spectral M ethod ......................................................................................................... 6-23 6.4.4 Histogram s of Instantaneous V alues ....................................................................... 6-24 6.4.5 H istogram s of Peak Values ....................................................................................... 6-24 6.4.6 Reporting Form ats ................................................................................................... 6-25 6.5 Transducer Locations ......................................................................................................... ............................. 6 -2 6 6 .5 .1 H u ll S te rn ..................................................................................... 6-26 6.5.2 Thrust Bearing ........................................................................................................... 6-26 6.5.3 M ain Propulsion System , Longitudinal ..................................................................... 6-28 6.5.4 Deckhouse .................................................................................................................. 6-28 6.5.5 H ull G irder ................................................................................................................. 6-28 6.5.6 Rotating M achinery ................................................................................................... 6-29 6.5.7 Resonant Equipm ent .................................................................................................. 6-29 6.5.8 Torsional V ibration .................................................................................................... 6-29 6.5.9 M ain Propulsion System , Lateral .............................................................................. 6-32 6.5.10 Local Structures ....................................................................................................... 6-33 6.6 Test Conditions ... ............................................... 6-33 6.7 Test Procedures ....................................................... 6-33 6.7.1 Calibration Procedures .............................................................................................. 6-34 6.7.1.1 A ccelerom eters ................................................................................................. 6-34 6.7.1.2 Velocity G ages ................................................................................................ 6 34 6.7.1.3 Proxim ity Probes ......................................................................................... 6--34 6.7.1.4 Strain G ages ................................................................................................. 6-35 6.7.2 Com m unications ........................................................................................................ 6-35 6.7.3 H ull and M ain Propulsion System Vibration ............................................................ 6-36 6.7.4 Auxiliary Machinery ........................................... 6-36 6.8 General Comments and Recommendations .................................... 6-37 6.8.1 General Comments on Instrumentation .............................. 6-41 6.8.2 Recom m endations ...................................................................................................... 6-42 REFERENC ES ..................................................................................................................... APPENDIX 6-A, Vibration GeneratortTests
ix
LIST of FIGURES and TABLES

M ain E xcitation Sources .............................................................................................................. 1-4 Action of Free Forces And Moments of the Main Engine ci Hull Girder ................................ 1-5 Description of Bearing.Forces and Moments .............................................................................. 1-7 Description of Hull Pressure Forces And Moments ................................................................... 1-8 Hull Girder Vertical of 2-5 Nodes (1st - 4th Mode) .............................................................. 1-9 Hull Girder Horizontal Vibration of 2-5 Nodes (1st - 4th Mode) .............................................. 1-9 I-lull G irder Torsional V ibration ................................................................................................ 1-10 H ull G irder Longitudinal Vibration ........................................................................................... 1-10 Plots of Hull Girder Vertical Vibration ..................................................................................... 1-12 Superstructure Longitudinal Vibration ...................................................................................... 1-14 Longitudinal Vibration of Shafting System ............................................................................. 1-17 Torsional Vibration of Typical Shafting System ...................................................................... 1-18 W hirling V ibration of Shafting .................................................................................................. 1-19 Position of Aft Bearing Support ................................................................................................ 1-19 Table 1-A-1 Natural Frequencies of Common Systems ....................................................... 1-A-1 Table 1-A-2 Stiffness of Common Structures ........................................................................ 1-A-5 Table l-A-3 Inertias of Common Cross Sections .................................................................. l-A-7 Notation for Appendix 1-A ...................................................................................................... l -A-8 Guidelines for the Evaluation of Vertical and Horizontal Vibration in Merchant Ships ......... 2-3 Guidelines for Ship Vibration - Vertical and Horizontal ............................................................ 2-4 Comparison Between ISO 6954 and Addendum 3 to ISO 2631 ................................................ 2-5 'Table 2-1 Vibration Test Requirements for Shipboard EqUipment and Machinery .................. 2-9 Vibration Test Requirements for Various Categories of Shipboard Equipment (Proposed) .... 2-10 Table 2-2 Types of Correction .................................................................................................. 2-12 Maximum Allowable Vibration, Type II (MIL-STD-167-1 (SHIPS), 1 May 1974) ............... 2-16 Main Propulsion Steam Turbines and Reduction Gears - Turbine Bearing Housing and G ear Casing V ibration Lim its ................................................................................... 2-17 Main Propulsion Gas Turbines Bearing Housing Vibration Limits ......................................... 2-18 Main Propulsion Units - Shaft Vibration Limits ....................................................................... 2-19 Turbine Driven Auxiliaries - Bearing Housing Vibration Limits ............................................. 2-20 Turbine Driven Auxiliaries - Shaft Vibration Limits ................................................................ 2-21 Vibratory Levels of Diesel Engines and Reciprocating Engines .............................................. 2-23 Table 3-2 Balancing Procedure Criieria.... .............................................................................. 2-25 Overall Hydrodynamic Design Sequence for Minimization of Propeller-Induced Vibratory Forces ............................................................................. 3-3 Wake Fraction of Various Types of Ships Based on Results of Model Tests at DTRC [3-2] .. 3-4 Relationship for Cavitation Number Versus Wake Non-Unifrormity Parameter with Data Points Based on Actuual Ship Performance and on Model Test Wake Surveys for These Ships ...................................................................... 3-5 Afterbody Configuration and Wake Characteristics of an Open-Stern Single-Screw Ship ............................................................................................................. 3-7
xi

Afterbody Configuration and Wake Characteristics of a Conventional, Closed-Stem Single-Screw Ship ....................................................................................... Afterbody Configuration and Wake Characteristics of a Modified-Hogner, Closed-Stem Single-Screw Ship ....................................................................................... Selected Afterbody Configuration for an LNG Ship and Associated Wake C haracteristics ...................................................................................................... Thrust-Deduction Fraction of Various Types of Ships Based on Results of M odel Tests at DTRC [3-2] ..................................................................... Criterion Plot for Gross Estimate of Wake Non-Uniformity Parameter Value Based 3-8 3-9 3-10 3-11
on Block Coefficient [3-3] ........................................................................................
. 3-11
3-12 3-13 3-14 3-16 3-17 3-18 3-19 3-21 3-22 3-24 3-25
Suggested Criteria for Afterbody Design .................................................................................. Suggested Relations:nips Between Axial Wake Variation and Half Angle of Flow L ine at 0.8R [3-5] ............................................................................................. Suggested Non-U niform ity Criterion [3-6] ............................................................................... Tip Clearance versus Propeller Loading for S.S. Navy Ship [NAVSEA] ............................... Tip Clearance versus Propeller Diameter and Blade Loading as Recommended by Several Classification Societies for a Particular Sh'p Design .................................. Table 3-1 Classification Society Guidance on Propeller Clearance ........................................ Table 3-2 Propeller Clearances Recommended by Classification Society Guidance for E xam ple Ship (T-A O )............................................................................................... Guidance for Selection of Clearance Ahead of Propeller Based on Data from Actual Operating Ship [3-9] .................................................................... Guidance for Selectio, of Propeller Tip Clearance Based on D ata from Actual Operating Ship [3-91 .................................................................... Actual and Minimum Required Propeller Blade Clearance for an Example Ship ................... Variation of Blade Rate Peak-to-Peak Hull Pressure Over Propeller Tip versus Ship Speed for U.S. Navy Oiler, Based on Model Tests ...................................
Burrill C avitation Diagram [3-91 ...............................................................................................
3-27
Vibration Problem Areas Identified in a versus CT Diagram [3-15, 3-16] ............................ 3-28 Vibration Problem Areas Identified in a versus CT Diagram [3-15, 3-16] ............................ 3-29 Normalized Thrust (F3) and Horizontal Bending Moment (M) Variations at Blade Frequency Shown as Mean Values and Standard Deviations. Four-, Five-, and Six-Bladed Propellers Fitted on Conventional Single-Screw Ships ............. 3-30 Effect of Number of Propeller Blades on Vertical Excitation Force 13-181 ............................ 3-30 M odified Burrill Cavitation Diagram [3-19] ............................................................................. 3-31 Propeller Characteristics for Maximum Loading with Uniform Inflow (Case 1): Maximw C, = 0.64, 5 Blades, PAR = 0.8, Design CL = 0.200 [3-191 ..................... 3-33 Propeller Characteristics for Maximum Loading with Open Stern-Low Speed (Case 2): Maximum C, = 0.50, 5 Blades, PAR = 0.8, Design CL = 0.150 13-191 .............. 3-33 Propeller Characteristics for Maximum Loading with Open Stem-High Speed(Case 3A): Maximum C, = 0.50 , and with Hogner Stern (Low Speed) (Case 3B): Maximum CTh = 0.40, 5 Blades, PAR = 0.8, Design C, = 0.125 13-191 .............................. 3-34 Propeller Characteristics for Maximum Loading w/ Hogner Stern-High Speed(Case 4A): Maximum CTh = 0.40 , and with Convential Stem (Low Speed) (Case 4B): Maximum CTh = 0.32, 5 Blades, PAR = 0.8, Design CL = 0.100 [3-191 .................. 3-34
xii
Variation of Propeller Efficiency with Diameter and Delivered Power at 16 Knots, w = 0.40, t = 0.20, Submergence to 0.7R = 1.6 Diameter [3-19] ............... Variation of Propeller Efficiency with Diameter and Delivered Power at 24 Knots, w = 0.30, t = 0.20, Submergence to 0.7R = 1.2 Diameter [3-19] .................................. Variation of Propeller Efficiency with Diameter and Delivered Power at 32 Knots, w = 0.20, t = 0.20, Submergence to 0.7R = 0.8 Diameter [3-19] .................................. Variation of Propeller Efficiency with Ship Speed and Power for a 30 foot Diameter Propeller [3-19] ......................................................................... Variation of Cavitation-Limited Delivered Power (DHP) with Ship Speed for Various Propeller Diameters [3-19] .......................................................................... Variation of Cavitation-Limited Effective Power (EHP) with Ship Speed for Various Propeller Diameters [3-19] .......................................................................... Effect of Blade Skew on Hull Pressure ..................................................................................... Table 3-3 Characteristics of Generally Similar Twin-Screw Ships and Associated Vibratory Force Data ............................................................................. Table 3-4 Vibratory Force Data for Large, Single-Screw LNG Ship Design ......................... Calculated Propeller Forces for Generally Similar Twin-Screw Ships .................................... Table 3-5 Normalized Values of Unsteady Thrust and Unsteady Torqae for a N um ber of Ships .................................................................................................... Hull Lines for T-AO 187 Class Fleet Oiler ............................................................................ Original T-AO 187 Shafting Arrangement .............................................................................. T-AO 187 Effective Horesepower Curves .............................................................................. Table 3-A-1 Propeller Characteristics .................................................................................... Table 3-A-2 Characteristics of Comparitive Twin-Screw Naval Ships ................................. BHP versus RPM for SWD 9 TM 620 ................................................................................... Calculated Propeller Forces for Comparitive Twin-Screw Naval Ships ................................ Avondale LNG Ship, Modeling Procedure ................................................................................. Avondale Hull Finite Model Aft of BHD 104, 3-D View .......................................................... Avondale Hull Complete Ship Model, 3-D View ..................................................................... Isometric View of Finite Element Model .................................................................................. Table 4-1 Calci'ated Vertical Hull Frequencies ....................................................................... V ertical Mode Shapes ................................................................................................................ Shear Correction Factors [4-1] .................................................................................................. Horizontal 2 - Node Hull Frequencies [4-1] ............................................................................. Table 4-2 Calculated Horizontal Hull Frequencies ................................................................... H orizontal M ode Shapes ............................................................................................................ Torsional M ode Shapes ............................................................................................................. Table 4-3 Calculated Torsional Hull Frequencies ..................................................................... Table 4-4 Calculated Vertical Hull Frequencies (Hz) ............................................................. France - Dunkerque LNG Ship Hull Frequencies ..................................................................... Avondale LNG Ship Hull Frequencies ...................................................................................... Higher Frequency Ratios, Vertical Vibration [4-1 ................................................................... Higher Frequency Ratios, Horizontal Vibration 14-1i .............................................................. Table 4-5 Calculated Horizontal Hull Frequencies,(Hz) ........................................................... Table 4-6 Estimated Vertical Hull Frequencies (Hz) ................................................................
3-36 3-36 3-37 3-37 3-38 3-38 3-39 3-41 3-42 3-42 3-43 3-A-1 3-A-3 3-A-4 3-A-5 3-A-6 3-A-7 3-A-9 4-8 4-9 4-10 4-11 4-18 4-19 4-20 4-21 4-23 4-24 4-25 4-26 4-27 4-28 4-29 4-31 4-32 4-33 4-36
xiii

Table 4-7 Estimated Horizontal Hull Frequencies, Ship 11, (Hz) ............................................ 4-37 4-38 Table 4-8 Examples of Hull Frequencies for Other Ship Types ............................................. Range of Vertical, Horizontal and Torsional Frequencies from Light to Full Load Compared with 4 - Bladed or 5 - Bladed Propeller Frequencies ................. 4-40 External 1st and 2nd Order Moments for 4, 5 and 6 Cylinder Two-Stroke Engines .............. 4-41 4-43 Table 4-9 Amplitude at the Stem, x mils ................................................................................ 4-44 Variations of Hull Impedances versus Ship Displacement ....................................................... ISO Guidelines for Vertical and Horizontal Vibration in Merchant Ships .............................. 4-45 4-47 Table 4-10 Step Function Input Damping Factors .................................................................. 4-48 ............................................................................................... Frequency versus H ull D am ping 4-52 France-D unkerque H ull Response ........................................................................................... 4-53 Response ........................................................................................... Predicted A vondale Hull Table 4-A-1 Estimation of 2-Node Mode Natural Frequency (Hz) for Tankers .................. 4-A-2 Table 4-A-2 Estimation of Natural Frequency Ratio for Higher Mode of Tankers ............. 4-A-2 Table 5-1 Unbalanced Moments in Two-Stroke Engines ......................................................... External First and Second Order Moments for Four-, Five-, and Six-Cylinder, Two-Stroke Engines ........................................................................... External Moments (or Couples) of Engines ................................................................................ Balancing of First O rder M om ent ............................................................................................... Additional Balancing of First Horizontal Moment ..................................................................... Action of External (Free) Forces and Moments on the Hull Girder .......................................... Mechanical Exciter Fitted to Compensate for Slow-Speed Diesel Engine E xcitation of the H ull G irder ............................................................................................ Effect of .'ateral Moments on Engine Frame ........................................................................... Installation of Hydraulic Stays Between Engine and Ship Structure ....................................... Preliminary Shafting Arrangement for LNG Project Hull ........................................................ Stem Configuration and Wake Components for LNG Carriers ............................................... Thrust Eccentricity for Alternate LNG Stern Configurations ................................................... Values of Thrust Eccentricities for Three Stem Forms ............................................................ Polar Diagram of Thrust Eccentricity for Destroyer ................................................................. Polar Diagram of Thrust Eccentricity for Center and Starboard W ing Propellers (Four Blades) ....................................................................................... 'Fable 5-2 Results of Calculations of Propeller Forces Based on NSMB Data ....................... First Mode Frequency versus Thrust Bearing Stiffness (K3 ) and Foundation Stiffness (K4 ) for Project Hull ............................................................ Table 5-3 Frequency Estim ate ................................................................................................. Preliminary Shafting Arrangement for LNG Conventional Design ......................................... First Mode Frequency versus Thrust Bearing Stiffness (K3 ) and Foundation Stiffness (K4 ) for Conventional Hull ........................... Estimated Response of Machinery System to Longitudinal Vibration .................................... Shafting Arrangem ent ................................................................................................................ Lever Effect Representation of Example Problem Foundation Mass M4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stiffness of Thrust Bearing Housing and Support versus Full Power Thrust .......................... Stiffness of Kingsbury Thrust Bearing Elements as Calculated by Kingsbury ....................... Preliminary Method for Determining First-Mode Longitudinal Frequency ............................. 5-5 5-6 5-6 5-7 5-7 5-8 5-9 5-10 5-11 5-16 5-18 5-19 5-20 5-21 5-22 5-24 5-27 5-30 5-31 5-32 5-33 5-35 5-37 5-38 5-38 5-39
xiv
Foundation Stiffness versus Full Power Thrust ........................................................................ 5-40 Mass-Elastic Representation of Example Problem ................................................................... 5-40 Equivilant Damping Constant at Propeller as a Function of Propeller D eveloped A rea ............................................................................................... 5-42 Calculated Blade Frequency-Alternating Thrust at Thrust Bearing for Six-Bladed Propeller and Comparison with MIL-STD-167A Criteria .......................... 5-43 Calculated Longitudinal Vibrator)' Response of Example Propulsion System with a Six-Bladed Propeller ....................................................................... 5-44 Estimated Response of Machinery System to Torsional Vibration .......................................... 5-52 Harmonic Analysis, Heavy Load - Calm Sea ........................................................................... 5-54 Prelim inary Shafting A rrangem ent .......................................................................................... 5-A -3 Table 5-A-i Calculated Shaft Diameters in Inches ............................................................... 5-A-5 Mass-Elastic Model for Longitudinal Shaft Vibration ............................................................ 5-A-8 Table 5-A-2 Longitudinal Natural frequencies and Mode Shapes ........................................ 5-A-9 T able 5-A -3 Shaft Stiff nesses ................................................................................................. 5-A -9 Assumed Dimensions of Shafts Used for Calculating Stiffness ............................................. 5-A-9 T able 5-A -4 C alculation of M asses ...................................................................................... 5-A -10 Table 5-A-5 Characteristics of T-AO 187 Propeller ............................................................ 5-A-10 Axial Natural Frequency vs. Bull Gear Mass and Thrust Bearing/ Foundation Stiffness .................................................................................................... 5-A -12 Table 5-A-6 Calculated Response Amplitudes .................................................................... 5-A-13 T orsional M ass-E lastic System .............................................................................................. 5-A -15 T orsional M ode Shapes ......................................................................................................... 5-A -16 Torsional Natural Frequencies versus Coupling Stiffnesses and Bull Gear and PTO Inertias for 80 RPM System ........................................................................ 5-A-17 Torsional Natural Frequencies versus Coupling Stiffnesses and Bull Gear V arious T ypes of W aveform s .................................................................................................... Table 6-1 Calculated Attenuations Due to One Filter ............................................................. Normalized Attenuation Characteristics of Krohn-Hite 3550 Filters ....................................... Table 6-2 Calculated Attenuations Due to Two Filters ........................................................... Vertical Blade Frequency Displacement of a Ship's Stern ....................................................... Vertical Blade Frequency Displacement of a Ship's Stern Recorded at V arious S low Speeds .................................................................................................. Sample Peak Spectra for Various Locations ............................................................................. Typical Cumulative Distribution Plot with Cursor Set for 99 Percent Probability .................. Location of Transducers for Main Engine (Turbine) Vibration 16-51 ..................................... Location of Transducers for Vibration of Aft End of Line Shafting ........................................ Location for Transducers for Main Engine (Direct-Drive Diesel) Vibration [6-51 .................. Location of Pressure Transducers 16-51 .................................................................................... Comparison of El Paso Savannah Data Analyzed with Different Methods ............................. T able 6-3 F ilter Induced E rrors ................................................................................................ 6-15 6-17 6-17 6-18 6-19 6-20 6-22 6-23 6-27 6-30 6-31 6-32 6-39 6-40
xv
CHAPTER ONE
*:]
INTRODUCTION TO SHIPBOARD VIBRATION
ibration aboard ships can result in fatigue failure of structural members or major machinery components, adversely affect the performance of vital shipboard equipment, increase maintenance costs, and greatly increase discomfort or annoyance to passengers and crew. Generally, hull vibration will be identified as objectionable to the crew before it becomes damaging to the ship's structure. However, failure of major machinery components and vital equipment can occur without significant annoyance to those aboard the ship. The design and construction of a ship free of excessive vibration continues to be a major concern. The principle reasons include the interdisciplinary nature of the problem, which requires the coordination of naval architects, hydrodynamicists, structural and mechanical engineers, and the lack of suitable vibration criteria, specifications and design procedures. During the design of new naval or commercial vessels with long lead time and large design budgets, it is possible to implement a development program that includes model studies and extensive computer programs, which will optimize the chances of obtaining the desired results. Unfortunately, in the development of the average, low budget commercial ship or naval auxiliary, the lack of suitable specifications and design procedures may result in a ship with unsatisfactory vibration characteristics.
1.1 Purpose And Scope

It is the purpose of this design guide to provide a basic approach to the integration of design considerations in the development of a ship, which will provide reasonable assurance of satisfactory vibration characteristics. Although many parts of this guide would be useful on most ships, it is primarily applicable to turbine and diesel-driven ships of 100 meters or greater. This guide should be useful during both preliminary and detailed design stages. Preliminary vibration design studies are aimed at the confirmation of the many design considerations associated with the selection of: "stern configuration "main propulsion machinery "propeller and shafting system "location and configuration of major structural assemblies, such as deckhouse, superstructure and large deck panels
1-1
Ship Vibration Design Guide Preliminary vibration studies are required before design detais are fixed. Additionally, detailed vibration studies are required during detail design and construction to confirm that the predicted performance will satisfy the specifications given the leeway to perform minor alterations to optimize performance. Depending on the specifications, experience and other considerations, the detailed vibration design studies may be limited.
1.2 Shipboard Vibration

The best way of understanding the nature of shipboard vibration is to experience it firsthand.
The complexity of the phenomena ranges from piping vibration to total vibration of the hull, the failure of a reduction gear, a propeller shaft, or the global movement of a deckhouse. Having experienced serious shipboard vibration, you will readily recognize the necessity of investigating the likelihood of its occurrence prior to the approval of a design for construction. Although the complete ship can be represented by a total mass-elastic system, in which all parts mutually interact, a detailed analysis of the total ship generally cannot be evaluated in the early stages of design. In the preliminary design phase, many elements have not been firmly established because they are relatively unimportant and don't justify the cost and time required for a more detailed analysis. A reasonable alternative was presented in "An Assessment of Current Shipboard Vibration Technology," [1-1], in which, for convenience, the total ship is divided into five parts: Hull Girder " Major Structural Substructures " Local Structural Elements " Shipboard Equipment " Main Propulsion Machinery Systems Considering the ship in this light is particularly helpful in the diagnosis, evaluation and development of corrective action in the resolution of shipboard vibration problems. The first three elements are structural and in descending order of size, are primarily excited by propeller or diesel propulsion engine forces transmitted through the structures, and responsive directly to the applied forces as transmitted by the intervening structure. Shipboard equipment is classified as active when it generates vibratory forces or passive if it does not. As an example;St generator get is active and an electrical transformer is passive. The response of shipboard equipment may be related to its own exciting forces or to those transmitted through the ship's structure. The main propulsion machinery system may be excited by the ship's propeller, by dynamic or hydrodynamic unbalance, or, in the case of diesel engine applications, by harmonics of the engine. Excessive vibration of the machinery system can prove to be damaging to the hull structure, equipment, or to the machinery system itself.
1-2
iroductlon to Shipboard Vibration .i

An understanding of the excitation and response of these individual elements and their
interrelationship will assist in the diagnosis. of most vibration problems encountered. Each of the five elements are treated in greater depth in the following sections.
1.3 Hull Girder Vibration

The ship's hull girder includes the shell plating, main deck, and all internal members, which collectively provide the necessary strength to satisfactorily perform the design functions of the ship in the expected sea environment. The hull girder responds as a free-free beam (both ends free) when subjected to dynamic loads. Although the surrounding water and loading of the hull intluences its response, the hull girder will always respond as a free-free beam. Vibration of the hull girder, excited by alternating propeller forces, represents the most frequent source of troublesome vibration encountered aboard ship. The vibration characteristics of the ship are primarily established by the propeller and stem configuration. After the ship is built, modifications to correct excessive vibration resulting from improper selection of propeller and/or stern configuration are generally most extensive and impractical. In addition, vibration of the hull girder will excite major substructures, local structural elements, and shipboard equipment. Main propulsion machinery and auxiliary machinery can also contribute to general hii tvibration and the vibration of local structural components. A ship's hull girder responds in vertical flexure when :subjacted to wave impact. In oceangoing ships subjected to random seas, the dynamic response at the fundamental natural frequency of the hull is normally at low stress levels and is referred to as transient in nature and is not treated in this publication. In the case of ore carriers on the Great Lakes, however, periodic vibration of the hull girder at its fundamental natural frequency has been found to be a potentially dangerous structural problem that is referred to as Springing.
1.3.1 Hul Girder Excitation

Dynamic forces entering the hull ihrough the propulsion shaft bearings or directly through propeller blade pressure forces impinging against the hull account for the majofity of hull girder vibration. In the case of slow-speed diesel engine drive systems, engine unbalance or firing forces may also be important. Less important sources are auxiliary machinery and hydrodynamically excited appendage vibration. When attempting to determine the source of vibration, it is necessary to determine the frequency of excitation and it is convenient to relate it to the shaft rotational frequency by determining the number of oscillations per shaft revolution (order). The total signature may include first order, blade-frequency, harmonics of blade frequency, as well as constant frequency components. Primary excitation sources are shown in Figure 1-1, from [1-2].
1-3
Figure 1-1 Main Excitation Sources 1.3.1.1 Shaft Frequency Forces Mechanical forces that are associated with shaft rotational speed (1st order) may result from one or more of the following causes: A. Shaft unbalance B. Propeller unbalance
C. Propeller pitch error
D. Engine unbalance (for slow-speed diesel driven ships) E. Bent shafting F. Journal eccentricity 0. Coupling or flange misalignment The most likely causes of shaft frequency forces are attributed to A, B, C, and D above. The other possible causes are not as likely to occur if reasonable specifications, workmanship, and inspection procedures are exercised during the design and construction of the ship. Shaft frequency forces occur within a low frequency range. They are, however, of considerable concern since they may be of large magnitude and may excite one of the lower null modes at or near full power, thus producing a significant resonant effect. The principal engine unbalance encountered with slow-speed diesel driven ships are the primary and secondary free engine forces and moments. Of particular concern is the magnitude of the
1-4
Introduction to Shipboard Vibration

forces and moments, the location of the engine, and the possible correlation of these inputs with the lower vertikal and athwartship natural ficquencies of the hull girder. Primary forces and moments occur at shaft frequency and the secondary forces and moments occur at twice shaft frequency. The magnitude of these forces and moments should be furnished by the engine builder. The effect of free forces and moments of the main engine on the hull order is shown inFigure 1-2, from [1-3].
W*ork effected in the
harmonic m ovement
r.'
?,
F ree t = 9
M free moment
I ordinate of the mode-form i way of the opplied effot 9 otation of the mode -form
in way of the appied eoMrt
Figure 1-2 Action of Free Forces And Moments of the Main Engine on Hull Girder 1.3.1.2 Propeller Forces In addition to the basic design purpose of generating steady thrust for the ship's propulsion, the marine propeilef also generates undesired fluctuating dynamic forces and moments due to its operation in a nonuniform wake caused by the passage of the blades close to the hull and appendages. These fluctuating forces and moments are usually referred to as propeller forces and are at fundamental blade frequency and higher harmonics. The higher harmonics are normally of secondary importance. These propeller forces are in turn categorized as either bearing or hull pressure forces. A more detailed description of the alternating forces generated by a ship's propeller may be obtained in "Principles of Naval Architecture," published by SNAME and the many papers presented on the subject in recent years. However, for purposes of this guide, it would be helpful to provide some physical insight on how a propeller generates the unsteady forces and moments. Propeller theory relates to opcration "in open water," in which the propeller is advancing into undisturbed water. However, when it is operating behind the hull it is working in water that has been disturbed by the passage of the hull and the water around the stern has acquired a forward motion in the same direction as the ship. This forward moving water is called the
1-5

wake and it varies in the plane of the propeller disc, giving rise to variations in loading on each blade as the propeller rotates. Since the propeller produces both torque and thrust, both components vary with each blade as it passes through the uneven wake, which gives rise to alternating torque and thrust at propeller blade frequency and harmonics of blade frequency. As a further effect of the uneven loading of the propeller, the center of thrust is eccentric to the physical center of the propeller, thus creating bending moments in the shaft and vertical and transverse forces in the bearing [1-4]. These forces are also at blade frequency and harmonics of blade frequency while the principal bending stress in the shaft occurs at the shaft frequency with smaller components at n - and n +1, where n = the number of propeller blades. Similarly, alternating pressure forces are generated by the operation of the propeller blades adjacent to the hull surfaces in the axial and transverse directions. The resulting forces and momems generated on the hull surface reacts with the propeller blades to produce bearing forces. To minimize these forces, maximum clearances are required in the axial (forwaid) directions and radially at the propeller tip. The propeller generated hull pressure forces are greatly increased if cavitation exists [1- 5]. The collapse of air pockets produce implosions, which are characterized by the hammering frequently noted in the stern compartment and the presence of vibration at higher harmonics of blade frequency. 1.3.1.2.1 Bearing Forces. Unsteady bearing forces originate from the nonuniformity of the wake in the plane of the propeller disc. The strength of the various harmonics of the wake affects the magnitude of the bearing forces and influence the choice of the number of propeller blades. The relative strength of the various orders of wake harmonics is indicative of the relative strength of the blade-frequency forces. The wake, in turn, is influenced by the design of the hull form. An optimum design of the hull form would reduce the nonuniformity of the wake, thereby reducing the magnitude of the bearing forces. Bearing forces excite the ship through the propulsion shafting/bearing system and are fully described by six components illustrated in Figure 1-3. As shown in Figure 1-3, with the origin of axes at the center of the propeller, these components are the thrust and torque in and about the longitudinal or fore and aft axis; the horizontal bearing force and the vertical bending moment in and about the horizontal or athwartship axis; and the vertical bearing force and horizontal bending moment in and about the vertical axis. Fluctuating vertical and horizontal bearing forces result from differences in torsional forces on the blades of the propeller, while the vertical and horizontal bending moments are due to the propeller thrust vector centered at a point that is eccentric to the center of the propeller. 1.3.1.2.2 Hull Pressure Forces. Hull pressure forces originate from the pressure variation caused by the passage of propeller blade tips close to the hull and appendages. The hull pressure forces are affected by propeller-hull clearance, by blade loading, and by changes in the local pressure field around the blade. The occurrence of blade cavitation will drastically increase the pressure forces. In some cases, a 20 to 40 times increase of hull pressure forces due to cavitation has been observed in experimentai measurement, as compared to non-cavitating condition [1-51. The pressure forces excite the ship through the hull bottom
1-6
to
MTV
9.
Y, Z AXES T F4 r
'*OR(oAFT, ATHdARI"$ RESPECT.I-iEL fWNHUST WOIZONTAL i.AR oYf TICAL
IP,
AC
',ERT:.AL
AXLS.
NEAAING FORCE
* TORQUE
TH ATV NOAREO4TA. SE4OING MOMENT
- YERIf CAL 3(1OGING MOMENT
Figure 1-3 Description of Bearing Forces and Moments

surface in way of and adjacent to the propeller. The pressure forces are fully described by six components: the longitudinal force and moment in and about the fore-aft axis, the horizontal force and vertical moment in and about the athwartship axis, and the vertical force and horizontal moment in and about the vertical axis illustrated in Figure 1-4. 1.3.1.2.3 Effect of Propeller Forces. The alternating blade frequency thrust of the bearing forces provides the principal excitation to the propulsion system in the longitudinal mode, while the blade frequency torque constitutes the principal excitation to the propulsion system in the torsional mode. The blade frequency vertical bearing force, when vectorily combined with the blade frequency vertical pressure force, provides the total vertical force, which excites the hull in the vertical direction. Similarly, the horizontal bearing forces, when combined with the blade frequency horizontal pressure forces, provides the major contribution for exciting the hull in the horizontal direction. The vertical and horizontal forces and their distance from the neutral axis of the hull combine to excite the hull torsionally. Longitudinal hull pressure forces and alternating tl.-ust entering the hull through the thrust bearing will combine to excite the hull in the longitudinal direction.
1.3.2 Hull Girder Response

The response of the hull girder may be resonant or nonresonant (forced). It is likely to be resonant through the first five or six modes of vibration when driven by the shaft or if propeller frequencies are present. Above the fifth or sixth mode, the hull girder vibrates approximately in proportion to the generated forces (forced vibration). Principal exciting frequencies are shaft frequency, propeller blade frequency, and harmonics of propeller blade frequency. Hydrodynamic forces may also stimulate the resonant frequency of hulls, rudders, or struts excited by hydrodynamic flow over the appendage.
1-7

Z F;
A. f. Z AXES T FI F
FORE-AFT, ATHWARTSHIP, AND RESPECTIVELV LONGITUDINA. FORCE HORIZONTAL FORCE
ERT!CAL 4KES.
VERTICAL FORCE LWIIOITJOINAL MOMEN"
I.~H
~HORIZONTAL MO WT VERTICAL. MO ENT
Figure 1-4 Description of Hull Pressure Forces and Moments 1.3.2.1 Modes of Vibration of the Hull Girder
The hull girder will normally vibrate in the following modes: * Vertical Flexure (Figure 1-5) * Horizontal Flexure (Figure 1-6) * Torsional (Twist) (Figure 1-7) * Longitudinal (Compression) (Figure 1-8) Coupling may exist between vertical and longitudinal and between horizontal and torsional modes. The most significant vibration is normally associated with vertical and horizontal flexure.
1.3.2.2 Frequency of Vibration of the Hull Girder

Vertical flexural hull vibration is the most important type of resonant hull vibration encountered in service. As previously noted, this may be excited by dynamic or hydrodynamic unbalance of the propeller, dynamic unbalance or eccentricity of shafting or other large rotating masses such as bull gears, and by primary or secondary unbalanced moments of direct drive diesel engines. Transient forces, introduced by sea waves, may also excite hull natural frequencies. In twin screw ships significant excitation of' horizontal modes may occur due to phasing of propeller unbalance forces. Some ships, particularly container ships with large deck openings may be sensitive to torsional response excited by horizontal forces.
1-8
2nd MODE
I4th MODE
Figure 1-5
Hull Girder Vertical of 2-5 Nodes (1st - 4th Mode)
1st MODE
2nd MOOE
3rd MODE
Figure 1-6
Mode) Hull Girder Horizontal Vibration of 2-5 Nodes (1st - 4th
1-9
'J'~I
j U 4LU'
'Po
0;O 000
Figure 1-7
Hull Girder Torsional Vibration
Figure 1-8
Hull Girder Longitudinal Vibration
1-10
Intoductiun tu ahipbcurd Vibrutiuti
As a general rule, the fundamental vertical mode may be as low as 1 Hz while the higher modes will follow the fundamental frequency by the ratios 1, 2, 3, 4, etc., as indicated on Figure 1-9, from Det Norske Veritas Guidelines [1-2]. Horizontal flexural frequencies follow a similar pattern. However, the fundamental (two noded) frequency will be approximately 50 percent higher than the fundamental vertical frequency. The fundamental torsional mode of the hull girder may e estimated at approximately twice the horizontal or three times the first vertical natur:al frequency. The longitudinal natural frequency may be estimated to be approximately three and one half times the fundamental horizontal mode. 1.3.2.3 Effects of Adverse Operating Conditions Adverse operating conditions frequently result in significant increase in vibration amplitudes. When reporting shipboard vibration, or responding to reported problems, it is extremely important to recognize that shipboard vibration is a somewhat random phenomenon and the operating conditions must be reported for the data given. This factor also has a significant impact on the analysis and reporting of data used for evaluation purposes. Details are given under Chapter 6.0, Measurement Methods. Some relevant factors are given below: 1.3.2.3.1 Sea Conditions. Under ideal sea conditions (flat calm, straight ahead) hull vibration signals will modulate from maximum to minimum by a factor of 2 to 1. Under prescribed trial conditions (sea state 3 or less) hull vibration signals may modulate by a factor of 3 to 1. Higher factors may exist under adverse weather conditions. 1.3.2.3.2 Hard Maneuvers. During hard turns, amplitudes may readily increase by a factor of two for single screw ships and a factor of three for twin screw ships. During a crashback (full ahead to full astern), the alternating thrust may exceed the driving thrust and can result in damage to the thrust bearings if care is not exercised. It is prudent to first check this procedure at lower speed conditions while monitoring the thrust bearing response. This precautionary note is recommended for all sea trials. 1.3.2.3.3 Shallow Water. An increase in hull vibration by 50 percent may be experienced in shallow water. Shallow water in this context is a depth of less than six times the draft of the ship. 1.3.2.3.4 Light Draft Condition. An increase in hull vibration by 25 percent may be experienced in ballast condition. For minimum hull vibration, full load with aft peak tanks filled is recommended.
1-11

REGRE.SSION ANALYSIS GENERAL CARGO
k\
VERTICAL HULL GIRDER VIBRATION DEVIATION INCLUDES 67%. :STANDARD I\
00 3 SO e0.31 Htz
SO0.2 HN 2
NOTE
A LINEAR SCALE IS USED ALONG THE HORIZONTAL AXIS IN ORDER TO OBTAIN GETTER DATA SEPARATION
0 00 001I000
20000) jtnes. DISPLACEMENT A
REGRESSION ANALYSIS VERTICAL HULL GIRDER VIBRATION\4 TANKERS (2-3 NODES FOR BULK CARRIERS N 'N ALSO) VNoK :1 STANDARD DEVIATION INCLUDES 67%. OF DATA.*''
200
0.UH
10
7--
SO
0.I4
10
56 7gI904
A 56 7 69 0 DISPLACEMENT
20MomeIa~s A
Figure 1-9
Plots of Hull Girder Vertical Vibration
1-12
1.4 Vibration of Major Substructures

For purposes of evaluation, major substructures are defined as secondary structures of sufficient mass or force generating ability to have dynamic characteristics of their own, which, because of the direct coupling with hull girder vibration, can significantly influence the total or global pattern of ship vibration. In analyzing vibration patterns of such large complex structures, it is necessary to identify the principal reason for observed excessive vibration. Although the excitation of the substructure generally originates at its attachment to the hull girder, excitation can come from machinery or active equipment mounted to major substructure. Excessive vibration of a major substructure may be the result of structural resonances in the substructure or in the attachment detail for the substructure and hull girder. Depending on the mass involved and method of attachment, major substructure can sometimes amplify the response of the hull girder. The best way to evaluate the vibratory characteristics of a major substructure would be by means of a finite-element analysis. However, since this is generally not available for the preliminary design phase, the use of typical common system frequencies, as included in Appendix 1-A, is useful at that time. Typical major substructures would include deckhouses; main deck structures; large propulsion machinery systems, particularly large slow diesels and other heavy installations, including their foundations, such as boilers, reactors, large weapon systems, rudders, etc. Figure 1-10 shows some possible modal patterns of vibration frequently found in aft deckhouse structures when excited by flexural and longitudinal vibration of the hull girder. Those shown indicate longitudinal vibration and include: " Superstructure shear deflection . Superstructure bending deflection " Superstructure support deflection with rigid body motion " Vertical hull girder vibration " Longitudinal hull girder vibration The dynamic response characteristic of the superstructure is primarily a function of superstructure shear stiffness, supporting structure vertical stiffness and the degree of coupling to hull girder modes. The superstructure rigid body motion is mostly due to hull girder response. The avoidance of superstructure vibration problems generally requires a structural designer of considerable experience. A finite-element analysis of the aft portion of the ship, with the forward portion represented by the balance of a 20 station beam, has been found to be a considerable help in determining aft deckhouse response. Such analysis should be conducted as early as possible.
1-13

SHEAR I IC 1D "FLrT op
COM11INED SHErAR MM IJFtpJNf:
VINITICAE
NUlH CIRDERIIVINII
TI(,"
"TIC
UlI
MI' L ILL I
RDU VIIIPttap Stf"T
Figure 1-10 Superstructure Longitudinal Vibration
1.5 Vibration of Local Structural Elements

A local structural element is a minor structural assembly, relative to major substructures previously referred to. Local structure may be identified as panels, plates, girders, bulkheads, platforms, handrails, minor equipment foundations, etc. and are components of larger structures (major substructures) or of the hull girder. Most problems encountered aboard ship occur in local structural elements and are the result of either strong inputs received from the parent structure amplified by resonance effects in the local structure or are the response to vibratory forces generated by mechanical equipment attached to the local structure. In some cases, problems are generated by the improper attachment of shipboard equipment, even when the equipment has no self-exciting forces (passive equipment). During the design of the ship, details of local structural elements and methods of installation of shipboard equipment are frequently based on practical experience and dynamic analyses are rarely performed. Although this approach is satisfactory in most cases, many problems arise or result from subsequent modifications. Most shipboard vibration problems fall in this category and are generally amenable to easy and simple solutions once an understanding of the problem is obtained.
1.6 Vibration of Shipboard Equipment

Shipboard equipment is defined as all equipment installed aboard ship as a permanent part of the total ship system. It may contribute to the propulsion system, auxiliary, communication, control, or life support systems, and will include joiner work and furniture. For convenience, all such equipment is classified as "passive" or "active." With regard to vibration problems of shipboard equipment, it is useful to separate the two.
1-14
1.6.1 Passive Shipboard Equipment

Passive equipment is all shipboard equipment permanently attached to the ship structure but which has no moving parts and/or produces no exciting forces. Typical examples would include heat exchangers, radio equipment, switchboards, joiner work, furniture, piping, etc. Excessive vibration of such equipment could be damaging to the equipment and adversely affect the operation of the unit or the system of which it is a part. In most cases, specific environmental limitations exist, whether identified or not. In some cases, vibration limitations are established for shipboard equipment, particularly with naval equipment. At the present time, international standards are under consideration for qualification of commercial shipboard equipment subject to environmental vibration. Equipment which is sensitive to vibration, such as electronic equipment, is frequently installed on resilient mountings. A common difficulty arises from an improper selection of mountings. In the evaluation of shipboard vibration as it affects passive shipboard equipment, the same approach is recommended as is used for the vibration of local structural elements. The vibration encountered is normally associated with the response of the supporting structure and may be related to the main propulsion system, to the forces generated by nearby machinery, or to an ancillary device directly attached to a machine (such as a gage on a diesel engine). As in the previous case, the problem results from strong input forces and/or a resonant magnification from the attachment method or internal mechanical characteristics.
1.6.2 Active Shipboard Equipment

In contrast to the characteristics of passive shipboard equipment, active shipboard equipment (e.g., pumps, compressors, generators) have moving parts that frequently include sufficient mass to produce vibratory forces, which when combined with the dynamic characteristics of the supporting structure, would be capable of creating problems when operating. Support systems for equipment may also include resilient mountings that can reduce the transmission of self generated forces to the supporting structures but which can also amplify the low frequency vibration generated by the ship's propulsion system. The principal problems associated with the vibration of active shipboard equipment relates to the forces generated by the equipment itself and those transmitted to the equipment through the ship's structure. These forces can usually be distinguished by the different frequencies present. The supporting structure and associated mounting system can generally be modified, if necessary, without great difficulty.
1.7 Vibration of Main Propulsion Machinery

The main propulsion machinery includes all components from the engine up to and including the propeller, and thus contributes to the vibration of the ship and to dynamic stresses within the propulsion s3"stem itself by forces generated both by the propeller and by the propulsion system components. The propeller forces and their effect on hall vibration were discussed previously. In this section we will discuss dynamic forces generated by the propulsion system and the effect of these forces on the vibratory characteristics of the total propulsion system.
1-15
Ship Vibration Design Guide Dynamic stresses within the system and within the system components is a major concern. The control of dynamic forces generated by the propulsion system contributes to the vibratory characteristics of the total ship. Although the vibration of both the ship's hull and main propulsion machinery are interrelated, it is convenient, both in preliminary design studies, and in the control of shipboard vibration, to conduct independent studies on the propulsion system. It is necessary, however, to include actual or empirical factors related to the ship's structure, which form an important part of the effective mass-elastic system under study. In particular, the stiffness of the thrust bearing foundation is critical when evaluating the response of longitudinal vibration of the propulsion system. The main areas of concern that can give rise to troublesome vibration or dynamic stresses include: " Dynamic Unbalance and Misalignment " Dynamic Shaft Stresses " Longitudinal Vibration " Torsional Vibration " Lateral Vibration The following sections will cover the above topics and include both the excitation and response of the propulsion system.
1.7.1 Dynamic Unbalance and Misalignment

Dynamic and/or hydrodynamic unbalance of the propeller, dynamic unbalance of shafting, bull gears, and other large components of the propulsion system operating at propeller shaft speed may contribute to objectionable hull vibration, particularly if the exciting frequency falls in resonance with a natural frequency of the hull. Such difficulties may also arise from the primary (1st order) or secondary (2nd order) unbalanced forces in large, slow-speed diesel engines or from serious shaft misalignment (lst order). It is generally true, however, that the vibration occurring at these low frequencies (1st or 2nd order) will be particularly objectionable to humans when operating at the lower hull resonances. Vibration that exceeds the recommended criteria should be corrected to prevent local damage and/or excessive bearing wear. Specific corrective action may be required to control primary and secondary unbalances in slow-speed diesel engines. Specific unbalance tolerances or machine vibration limits of high-speed components, such as turbines and compressors, are normally established by the manufacturer. When the vibration of such units exceed recommended criteria it may result in potentially dangerous problems with the equipment itself or may cause resonances of local foundations, attached piping, or components. In the absence of manufacturers' criteria, the criteria given in this guide should be used. Care should be exercised to distinguish between hull-excited and machine-excited vibration in order to properly determine corrective action required.
1-16
1.7.2 Dynamic Shaft Stresses

Propulsion shafting is normally designed in accordance with Classification Society Rules (ABS, Lloyds, etc.), and in some instances, by Navy rules [1-6]. With normal design practice, periodic inspections, and proper maintenance procedures no difficulty should be experienced with propulsion shafting during the life of the ship. However, experience has indicated serious difficulties, including shaft failure, can happen under normal operating conditions [1-4]. Shaft problems are related to dynamic stresses that in most cases, are exacerbated by corrosion fatigue. Such problems may be caused by the eccentric thrust, precipitated by adverse flow conditions at the propeller, and aggravated by misalignment and/or faulty shaft seals. Excessive stresses associated with torsional vibration in slow-speed diesel engine drives is also a potential problem area. As a minimum, the complete propulsion system should be evaluated for acceptable steady and dynamic stress levels during the design phase, and verified during ship trials. Maintenance procedures should check for corrosion and fatigue cracks at the propeller keyway and at the shaft near the forward end of the propeller hub. Bearing wear and wear of shaft seals should also be checked.
1.7.3 Longitudinal Vibration

The propulsion system may exhibit excessive longitudinal vibration caused by alternating thrust generated by the propeller at blade frequency or harmonics of blade frequency. The vibration is considered excessive if it exceeds machinery criteria and can be particularly damaging to thrust bearings and/or reduction gears. Depending on structural characteristics, the alternating thrust forces transmitted to the ship through the thrust bearing can cause serious local vibrations in the engine room and to serious superstructure fore and aft response. Figure 1-11 shows the longitudinal vibration of a typical propulsion shaft. The addition of the main engines and reduction gears to the mass-elastic system is required for complete evaluation. The forces transmitted to the ship's structure are primarily dependent on the total mass of the system shown in Figure 1-11 and the combined thrust bearing and foundation stiffness.
\I
I,
Figure 1-11 Longitudinal Vibration of Shafting System
1-17
Ship Vibration Design Guide In general, longitudinal and torsional vibrations of propulsion systems may be considered as independent of one another, but this is not always the case. The propeller couples the longitudinal and torsional degrees of freedom of the system to some extent under all conditions, but the coupling effect is significant primarily when the independent critical frequencies are close to one another. In such cases the mode excited is actually a longitudinal-torsional mode and the excitation involves a generalized force, which includes both torque and thrust variations. This phenomenon is of particular concern with diesel drive systems. While longitudinal vibration may be observed aboard ship, to properly instrument and evaluate against the various criteria will require a dynamic analysis for correlation purposes and, in most cases, further analyses to determine optimum corrective action. Vibration specialists should be obtained for such problems and for total system evaluation during ship trials.
1.7.4 Torsional Vibration

Torsional vibration of the propulsion system may be excited by the alternating torque produced by the propeller and/or the engine harmonics in a diesel drive system. Ordinarily torsional resonances within the shafting system shown in Figure 1-12 does not produce serious vibration problems in the ship's structure although they can produce damaging effects in reduction gear drives, particularly under adverse sea conditions. In diesel engine drive system of all types, torque reactions can be a major structural vibration concern. Additionally, torsional resonances can be damaging to system components.
,A
Figure 1-12
Torsional Vibration of Typical Shafting System Although the evaluation of torsional vibration of the shafting is subject to classification rule requirements, it is also considered necessary to carry out a torsional vibration analysis of the complete propulsion system in the design phase and verify the system response characteristics during ship trials. As in the case of longitudinal vibration studies, experienced personnel are considered necessary for the evaluation and resolution of shipboard problems. For more detailed information on the subject see "Practical Solutions of Torsional Vibration Problems" [1-81 and "BICERA" [1-9].
1-18
1.7.5 Lateral Vibration

The propulsion shaft system, Figure 1-13, is normally designed so that the fundamental lateral or whirling critical speed is well above the running speed. Background information and calculation procedures are given by Jasper [1-10], Panagopulos [1-11], and Navy Design Procedures [1-6]. The fundamental mode of vibration is referred to as "forward whirl" and is excited by mass unbalance, and at resonance poses a serious danger to the propeller shaft system. The frequency of the system is significantly influenced by the effective point of support of the aft bearing and the stiffness of the bearing supports.
Figure 1-13 Whirling Vibration of Shafting Figure 1-14. taken from Det Norske Veritas guidelines [1-21 shows the influence of the position of the aft bearing support on the frequency of the whirling critical. Misalignment or serious bearing wear can result in high dynamic stresses in the shaft, dynamic magnification of bearing reactions and increased hull vibration, and overheating. On the assumption that the design was satisfactory initially, good maintenance is required to keep it that way. The use of roller bearings or self aligning bearings, and attention to dynamic balance will minimize potential problems.
MAJOR~WH R IN R IT I L
I ,
p~
Figure 1-14 Pos;tion of Aft Bearing Support
1-19
REFERENCES
1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 Noonan, E. F., "An Assessment of Current Shipboard Vibration Technology," Ship Structures Symposium, 1975, S.N.A.M.E. Publication SY-5. Det Norske Veritas Guidelines, "Prevention of Harmful Vibration in Ships," May, 1980 Bureau Veritas, "Recommendations Designed to Limit the Effects of Vibration on Board Ships," 1979. Noonan, E. F., "Propeller Shaft Bending Stresses on the S.S. Esso Jamestown," Journal of the A.S.N.E., August, 1961. Huse, E., "Propeller-Hull Vortex Cavitation," Norwegian Ship Model Experimental Tank Publication No. 106, May, 1971.
1-6 Department of the Navy, Bureau of Ships, Interim Design Data Sheets, DDS-4301, "Propulsion Shafting," 1 Jan., 1960. 1-7 1-8 "A Statistical and Economic Evaluation of Stem Tube Bearing and Seal Failures," MTI, Inc., Report No. MA-RD-940-77091, July, 1977. Wilson, W. Ker., "Practical Solution to Torsional Vibration Problems," Chapman and Hall, Ltd;, London, 1963, (Two Volumes).
1-9 B.I.C.E.R.A., "A Handbook on Torsional Vibration," Cambridge University Press, 1958. 1-10 Jasper, N.H., "A Design Approach to the Problem of Critical Whirling Speeds of Shaft-Disc Systems," D.T.M.B. Report 890, Dec. 1954. 1-11 Panagopulos, E.P., "Design Stage Calculations of Torsional, Axial, and Lateral Vibration of Marine Shafting," Trans. S.N.A.M.E., Vol. 58, 1950.
1-20
APPENDIX 1-A
Table 1-A-1 Natural Frequencies of Common Systems

SKETCH NATURAL FREQUENCY. HZ
1.
Single mass and spring
Tn
. -L I 21 J;
2. Two m sses,
one spring
-l
n 2r
k(m 1 +
it
2)
3.
5inglp canti-
.{L
k1
4.
Two masq, two springn
lvd-skl m
1 2 +
41
5.
One rotor And sha ft
k' n 2"-
Vr77: S i , i'. .o cl. No.
~d o e I No . I. 2 or 4.
Twi
ti
s~~
r i
i'. i r ton
I-A-1
Ship Vibration Design Guide Table 1-A-1 Natural Frequencies of Common Systems (continued)
YODE.
SKETCH
NATURAL FREQUENCY,
YIZ
6.
Rectangular plate, simply supported
L n
8.91 H(I I L
=1 L)
edges
For Steel:
9.7 =
1 4 H L
1.
2
L
7.
Rectangular plate,
For Steel:
clanpe
edges f -8.2 x10

n endL H _
H1
-2
2 ( 2
LL I L
8.
Longitudinal vibration of bea(fixed or free
1_ NODEn
fn 9.82
endq)L-
k
IrOL
SLOCIJ
VL
r',.inum:
ANT INODE
L[
10.
Fixed-Free beam mass at erd
3E1 f fb 3
2-
L L
(m
.23 m,
I-A-2
Useful Dynamics Formulas Table 1-A-1 Natural Frequencies of Common Systems (continued)
MOEL
SK TQI
NATFAT, FRCTECY.
VZ
I].
Ringed-Hinged beam mass in centerfn
M4E 2w -I nIT
L3
4E .51%) . b
12.
Fixed-Fixed beam mass in center
m f3
7 E L( .375
NOTE:
For Models 10-12, set mb
0 for masslesE beans
13.
Hinged-Hinged beam, off-center mass, massless beam
L n
I
27L L
3I ,m
14.
Fixed-Fixed beam, off-center mass, massless beam
l I3EIL1
fn 2 LL 1
15.
Uniform beam,
fixed-free Ai E
3.52
A4 2
=22.4
A3
61.7
16.nfo-n
beam,
A_
=_
'iiged-hinged
A1
9.87
A2 = 39.5
A=
88.9
'47
1-A-3
Ship Vibration Design Guide Table 1-A-1 Natural Frequencies of Common Systems (continued)
!1OTFI,
SKETCH
NATURAL
FRFQUECY.
HZ
17.
Uniform beam, fled-f ixed
El f i
-
A 1
22.4
61
A3
121
Ai El
18.
Uniform beam, free-free
AI
22.4
A2
61.7
A 3 = 121L
A _
If"
19.
Uniform beam,
fixed-hinged f 1
A1
2f
I~
E1
Al
15.4
A2 = 50
A3
104
20.
Un iform string
21.
Mas ses-,st
mass
tr ng
f Mn L T OIL
in center
ILI
22. Pendulum f T
1-A-4
Useful Dynamics Formulas Table 1-A-2 Stiffness of Common Structures
torIr.
SK ZT CF
STIFFNESS
1.
Parallel springs
kk
k2
2.
Series springs k2
kIk
k I + k2 k,
3.
Snlid shaft (torsion
----
"
4GD -G
4.
Hollow shaft
.G(Do 4
(torsioni)
D
0L
t
D
-
4)
32L
5.
Rectangu lar
GWH
7. Smplysuporte
8E___L
7.
Simply supported
bean (center lo'.) L L k
48E
3
l-A-5
Ship Vibration Design Guide Table 1-A-2 Stiffness of Common Structures (continued)
14ODEL
SK E:T CH
STIFFNESS
8.
Fixed-Fixed beam
192EI
(center load)
L
9. Sinply supported beam (off-center
load)
tL
L2
L
k .3EIL 2
10.
elical spring
D--=
Gd 43
8nD s
n turns
11.
String
in tension
--4?I L
22
12. Axial stiffness AE
of beam
LL
13.
Torsional stiffness of beam
GI LR
J-A-6
Useful Dynamics Formulas Table 1-A-3 Moments of Inertia of Common Cross Sections
I (WITH RESPECT To
CR.OSS-SECTION !e C""rc SKETCH XXIS SHOWN) OR L
-
D4
64
jD .p 32
L 32
4 (D Do
v4)
Thin Wall Circle
wD 0 3 H
~83
Ip
iD ff
Do
WH 3
Rectangle
12
-Ari
W
I -A-7
Notation for Appendix 1-A
Mass lb-sec2 / in, weight / g Translational Stiffness, lb / in 2 Mass Moment of Inertia, lb-in-sec 2 Young's Modulus, lbs / in
Poisson's Ratio
3 Weight Density, lbs / in 2 Mass of Beam, lb-sec / sec 4 Area Moment of Inertia of Cross Section, in 4 Area Polar Moment of Inertia of Cross Section, in
k J
E v mb
= =
= =
=
p = I Ip
L P
= =
= =
= = =
Length of Beam or String, in

2 2 Mass per Unit Length, lb-sec / in
g = A g G
Tension in String, lb
2 Cross Section Area of Beam, in 2 Acceleratio Due to Gravity, 386.1 in / sec 2 Shear Modulus of Elasticity, lb / in
1-A-8
CHAPTER TWO
":
VIBRATION
CRITERIA AND
SPECIFICATIONS
he design objective of all new ship construction is to meet the criteria or specifications invoked for that project. To accomplish this, the perfoimance requirements of the propulsion system and other functional shipboard systems must all be carefully specified. To control and/or to minimize shipboard vibration, it is also necessary to stipulate applicable criteria in specification format. The use of general requirements, such as: "Shipboard vibration should be limited to acceptable levels," or "A good dynamic balance is required," has little or no value in practice and frequently leads to expensive litigation and/or major design changes. Since such problems are generally not encountered until the ship is undergoing trials, the results can be devastating. It is the purpose of this chapter to provide guidance in the form of suitable criteria, which when invoked in the form of ship specifications, represents a "line item" in the ship design cycle and thus provides the basis for the required design analyses to control shipboard vibration. The importance of this approach, together with specific examples, was demonstrated at the 51st Shock and Vibration Symposium in September, 1980, [2-1]. In developing vibration specifications (design criteria) to be used in the control of shipboard vibration, of paramount concern are those periodic forces developed by the ship's machinery systems and the response of hull structure and machinery systems. In summary: "Ships are excited by both transient and periodic forces. "In most cases, transient forces are caused by rough seas. "Most periodic forces are generated by propeller and machinery systems. * Heavy transient forces, such as slamming, will excite structural resonances and can cause serious damage in heavy seas. "Comparatively low periodic forces, when combined with resonant conditions, can cause serious shipboard vibration problems. " Both transient and periodic forces are aggravated by heavy seas and hard maneuvers. "This guide is directed toward the control and attenuation of vibration excited by periodic forces and does not relate to transient excitation.
2-1

To properly evaluate shipboard vibration, it has been generally accepted that uniform test conditions should be employed for vibration trials, such as those specified in the SNAME T&R Code C-1, "Code for Shipboard Vibration Measurement," [2-9] and ISO 4867, "Code for the Measurement and Reporting of Shipboard Vibration Data" [2-6]. Thus, in the absence of other design requirements, a standard method of testing can be employed for all ships for evaluation against uniform criteria. It should be noted, however, that more serious vibration can be expected under adverse operating conditions and suitable factors must be included in the design of structural and mechanical components to account for the maximum anticipated dynamic stresses. Shipboard vibration is considered excessive when it results in structural damage, damage or malfunction of vital shipboard equipment, or adversely affects the comfort or efficiency of the crew. Normally, crew complaints will occur before vibration becomes damaging to the ship's structure. However, failure or malfunction of vital shipboard equipment may occur without significant annoyance to the crew. The criteria recommended in this guide are based on existing requirements related to: * Human reaction (habitability) * Machinery and equipment malfunction Fatigue failure For convenience, the total ship system relates to the five basic elements defined in Chapter 1.0 in the following manner: 2.1 General Hull Vibration Most shipboard vibration problems originate with the vibration of the hull (ship's girder). The recommended criteria relates to human reaction. 2.2 Major Substructures, Local Structures and Shipboard Equipment These structures, which are attached to and excited by the hull girder, can relate to all three criteria. 2.3 Machinery Vibration In most instances, machinery vibration relates to malfunction or fatigue failure of components.
2.1 General Hull Vibration

The recommended criteria for general hull vibration is based on human reaction to the vibration aboard ship in normally occupied spaces of the hull and superstructure. The criteria shown in Figure 2-1 is based on maximum repetitive values (peak values) for each component such as shaft frequency, propeller blade frequency, or harmonics of propeller blade frequency, and is
2-2
Vibration Criteria and Specifications
SUGETE GRADATIONS
/INTOLERABLE
NEARLY INTOLERABLE VERY UNCOMFORTABLE
C,
/~ \
>
/ I
Adverse
probable
//
I
-UNPLEASANT/
>t$
K'ANNOYING
ANNOYING
__
~MINOR
-
OCCASIONAL COMPLAINTS
NOTICEABLE
Figure 2-L
Gudeinsfo teEvlutonofVrtca ndetHoiotlVbainxnMrhn
2-3rbale
hp
Ship Vibration Design Guide identical to those in ISO 6954 and SNAME T&R Bulletin 2-25. The curves shown from [2-2] and [2-3] are in both metric and English units. For convenience of interpretation, Figure 2-2 shows a linear displacement plot of a 4 mm/sec or 0.16 in/sec :::nt velocity curve, which rep,esents ihe lowel iimit of the shaded area of Figure 2-1 above 5 Hz. The 9 mm/sec or 0.36 in/sec velocity curve represents the upper limit of the shaded area of Figure 2-1, above 5 Hz. Below the 4 mm/sec curve, referred to as Zone 1 by the SNAME guidelines, adverse comments are generally unexpected. Above the 9 mm/sec curve, in Zone III, complaints are generally expected. Zone II, which represents the shaded area in the guideline curves, has been further divided by a 0.25 in/sec or 6.3 mram/sec curve to represent a finer evaluation of complaints received. It is recommended that vibration levels in Zone I be considered totally acceptable from 5 to 100 Hz. Vibration levels in Zone III generally are considered unacceptable. Vibration levels in the upper half of Zone H (above 0.25 in/sec or 6.3 mm/sec) may require further investigation if personnel are exposed to these levels for extended periods of time (above 8 hours). Below this curve, complaints should be considered of minor importance.
30 28
26 CONSTANTVELOCITYCURVES FOR USE ABOVE S H1 WHlENCVALUATING NUIM
RIKTIUR
24 CONSTAVT ACCELERATION CURVES SHOULD DY USED RON1-6 Hz MHEN (VALUATIIG HU2MAN REACTION
208
6.1 I
or .2so/,
V,VODSC COIHICNTS NOT PROWAUL 0 I 2 4 S 6 1 H 9 1 0 Ii 12 13 FRP)IIENCY,VY tCpS) 14 15 I 17 V D 0 21 02
18
Figure 2-2 Guidelines for Ship Vibration - Vertical and Horizontal Below 5 Hz, the ISO and SNAME guidelines for human reaction show constant acceleration curves of .013 g for the lower limit and .029 g for the upper limit. While the corresponding amplitudes below 5 Hz would be relatively high (greater than shown on the constant velocity curves of Figure 2-2), the normal excitation at that frequency would result from dynamic or hydrodynamic unbalance in the propulsion system with attendant hull resonances at certain operating speeds (RPM). In Great Lakes ships, which are long and slender, the fundamental frequency may be below 1 Hz and thus may be excited by wave energy that includes a frequency which produces springing or resonant vibration at the hull's natural frequency. The
2-4

vibration level would be high but the acceptable limit would be based on the total all,able hull-bending stress. Also see Section 2.2.4.1, Hull Girder Vibration (Springing). The relatively high tolerance below 5 Hz, as shown on Figure 2-1, is generally required for ships driven by slow-speed diesels with large primary unbalanced forces and moments. For turbine-driven ships, it is normally feasible to continue the constant-velocity limits of 4 mm/sec and 9 mm/s down to 1 Hz since the residual unbalance in the propulsion system is much lower. Figure 2-2 shows these constant velocity curves on a linear plot. As noted in Chapter 6.0, shipboard vibration is generally a narrowband random pnenomena. A crest factor of 2.5 is commonly encountered during trial conditions. Maximum repetitive vibration is more appropriate than rms vibration to evaluate overall ship vibration. Both the SNAME guidelines and ISO 6954 evaluate overall shipboard vibration in terms of maximum repetitive values and, for comparison with rms values, the crest factor must be taken into account. In ISO 2631, the effect of vibration on human beings is evaluated by refering to curves of rms acceleration and applying a wide range of crest factors. The guidelines recommended herein correspond to ISO 6954 and ISO 2631 with respect to crew exposure to whole body vibration provided that the upper band specified, when converted to rms acceleration with factors of 1.6 and 3.0, is below the criteria curves selected on the basis of ISO 2631 [2-4]. The relationship of these criteria is shown graphically in Figure 2-3.
0.0s
1o.os
Slateog Quar e's IAcdendum 3 to ISO 26311
Ot'er occvo*oo Quarters
0.01
Uce,
D
(Atatmovm 3 to ISO 2631) ISO W5. Crest ac.,or. 1.6

ISO S54 Crest factor 3.0
0,005-
L S
16
FrequenCv Hz
31.5
63 8C
15
1C
Figure 2-3 Comparison Between ISO 6954 and Addendum 3 to ISO 2631
2-5
2.2 Major Substructures, Local Structures And Shipboard Equipment

Based on the general philosophy expressed in Section 2.0, the complete ship system can be divided into a number ot its basic elements for convenience in the diagnosis, evaluation and development of corrective actions to resolve shipboard vibration problems. In a similar manner, vibration criteria applicable to specific elements or problem areas can be developed. To accomplish this, majr substructures and local structures. are treated similiarly since they both represent segments of the total ship structure with the hull girder acting as a vibrating platform on which these components are attaced, frequently in a descending order of structural rigidity. Human reaction, equipment malfunction, and fatigue failure represent applicable design criteria.
2.2.1 Human Reaction

The criteria for human reaction throughout the ship remains the same for all areas designated as accommodations or working spaces. Major substructures, such as deckhouses or large deck areas, may magnify the basic hul vibi-a"on. Iocal structures, such as a compartment deck in the deckhouse, may further amplify the hull vibration. fiowe cr, the same criteria for adequacy, based on human reaction, should be applied. Thus, all areas utilized for habitability purposes should meet the requirements recommended in Section 2.1 for general hull vibration.
2.2.2 Equipment Malfunction

Equipment malfunction or damage may occur as a result of the vibration of those structural components to which the equipment is attached or may be due to the sensitivity of the equipment. Examples of this include meters mounted on bulkheads, electronic equipment mounted on isolation mountings, binnacles mounted on the bridge deck, equipment mounted on a fabricated foundation, switchboard equipment, transformers, and steam piping. When considering the response of passive (non self-exciting) equipment that could result in malfunction or damage to the equipment installed in the ship, the structural adequacy of the support system and the adequacy of the equipment to perform its function in the shipboard vibration environment must be considered.
2.2.2.1 Structural Adequacy of Support System

The structural adequacy of the total support system for any shipboard mounted equipment must be related to the basic hull vibration and the capability of the equipment to adequately perform in a shipboard vibration environment. In Section 2.1 criteria for the evaluation of hull vibration was identified where vibration levels in Zone IllI, "Adverse Comments Probable," required further investigation if these guidelines were exceeded. As a rule of thumb, it is recommended that the structural adequacy of the support system be based on the response of the local structure at the mounting point when the structure is loaded as it would be in service and vibration amplitude should not exceed that of the basic hull structure in that area by more than 50 percent. This limitation would prohibit structural resonance but would allow for some amplification by the local structure with reference to the input motion of the vibrating platform, the hull girder. Motion should be restricted to a
2-6
V rttiori
Urituria and bpecitications
maximum of 13.5 mm/sec in the frequency range of 5 to 100 Hz, when the maximum recommended limit of 9 mm/sec occurs in the hull. Frequently, excessive vibration of equipment may be directly related to the geometry of the resonant response. Examples include a ship's binnacle located on an improperly supported deck section or a tall electronic chassis with resilient inotfings placed too close together. In such cases, excessive vibration may result, although ihe o)bserved amplitLde at the structural base appears satisfactory. Appropriate corrective action could include modifications to the support system and/or the addition of supporting braces. Similar problems can occur within shipboard equipment, frequently resulting in damage or malfunction in service. Hence, it is considered necessary to ascertain whether the problem is one of resonant structure, faulty installation, or unsatisfactory equipment.
structural support system and/or the improper use of rcsilient mountings, which produce a
2.2.2.2 Vibration of Shipboard Equipment Failure or malfunction of shipboard equipment subjected to shipboard vibration is not necessarily caused by excessive vibration at the point of support, as noted above. It has been well established that commercially available equipment, originally designed for stationary installations, frequently fail when used in the shipboard vibration environment. Resonance of components of the equipment must be avoided and the equipment should be qualified in vibration resistance for shipboard use. To ensure consistency in vibration resistance requirements for shipboard equipment and machinery, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO/TC108/SC2/WG2 Vibration of Ships) has undertaken the devdlopment of a "Code for Vibration Testing of Shipboard Equipment and Machinery Components," which was approved a. a Draft Proposal (ISO/DP) for vote and comments, by SC 2, 3 April, 1987. WG2 N51, Oct. 1986 is based, in part, on MIL-STD-167-1 (SHIPS), Mechanical Vibration of Shipboard Equipment, Type 1, Environmental, and is consistent with the basic environmental testing procedures outlined in IEC Publication 68-2-6, Fifth Edition, 1982, which has as its objective, "to provide a standard procedure to determine the ability of components, equipment, and other articles to withstand specified severities of sinusoidal vibration." When designing the installation of shipboard equipment and machinery components to meet shipboard vibration requirements, it is necessary to determine: 1. That the rigidity of the supporting structure is adequate; 2. That the method of attachment to the supporting structure will not result in excessive motion (rcsonance); 3. That the equipment itself has beci qualified for shipboard use. To assist in the evaluation of the vibration resistance of' lightweight shipboard equipment and machinery components under study, proposed test pi ocedures and test requirements are provided in Section 2.2.3. It should be noted, however, that these test requirements represent
2-7

an accelerated vibration test to simulate the environmental vibration that may be encountered aboard ships under adverse conditions. Vibration levels recorded on a ship during vibration trials will be lower than the levels shown in Table 2-1. The amplitudes specified for the environmental tests are sufficiently large within the selected frequency range to obtain a reasonably high degree of confidence that equipment will not malfunction under the most severe service conditions.
2.2.3 Environmental Testing of Shipboard Equipment

The test specified herein is intended to locate resonances of the equipment and impose an endurance test at each of these resonances. Equipment that passes this test will have a greater probability of satisfactory performance aboard ships.
2.2.3.1 Vibration Tests

Equipment vibration tests shall be conducted separately in each of the three principal directions of vibration. All tests in one direction shall be completed before proceeding to tests in another direction. The equipment shall be secured to the vibration table and shall be energized to perform its normal functions. If major damage occurs, the test shall be discontinued and the entire test shall be repeated following repairs and correction of deficiencies, unless otherwise directed by the agency concerned. The manufacturer may, at his option, substitute an entirely new piece of equipment for retest. If this option is taken, it shall be noted in the test report.
2.2.3.2 Exploratory Vibration Test

To determine the presence of resonances in the equipment under test, the equipment shall be secured to the vibration table and vibrated at frequencies from 2 Hz (or lowest attainable frequency) to 15 Hz, at a table vibratory amplitude of 1.0 mm. For frequencies from 15 to 100 Hz, the equipment shall be vibrated at an acceleration levl of 0.9 g. The change in frequency shall be made in discrete intervals of 1 Hz and maintained at each frequency for about 15 seconds. The frequencies and locations at which resonances occur shall be noted.
2.2.3.3 Endurance Test

The equipment shall be vibrated for a period of at least 90 minutes at each of the resonant frequencies chosen by the test engineer at the corresponding amplitudes shown in Table 2-1. If no resonances are observed, this test shall be performed at the upper frequency as specified in Table 2-1 for each category for a period of two hours.
2.2.3.4 Variable Frequency Test

In addition to the endurance test, the equipment shall be tested in accordance with the vibration levels shown in Table 2-1 or Figure 2-4 at discrete frequency intervals of 1 IIz. At each integral frequency, the vibration shall be maintained for five minutes.
2.2.3.5 Exception
Category 2 or 3 equipment intended for installation solely on a particular class of ship need be vibrated only up through the frequency range that includes the second harmonic exciting frequency of the propeller ((2 x Maximum Shaft RPM x # of Blades) 6 0 ),
2-8
Vibration Criteria and Specifications Table 2-1. Vibration Test Requirements for Shipboard Equipment and Machinery Category
1.Control and Instrumentation Equipment when mounted on Diesel Engines, Air Compressors and other severe environments. 2.Communication and Navigation Equipment, Control and Instrumentation Equipment and other Equipment and Machinery 3 Mast-Mounted Equipment
Frequency Range
2 to 25 Hz 25 to 100 Hz 15 to 50 Hz 2 to 15 to 15 50 Hz Hz
Displacement or Acceleration Value*

1.6 mm (Disp) 4.0 g (Accel)
2 to 15 Hz
0.9 g (Accel)
1.0 mm (Disp)
1.0 mm (Disp) 2.25 g (Accel)
*Allowable deviation from these values is 10 percent.
2.2.3.6 Endurance Test for Mast-Mounted Equipment

Equipment intended for installation on masts, such as radar antennae and associated equipment shall be designed for a static load of 2.5 g (1.5 g over gravity) in vertical, athwartship and longitudinal directions to compensate for the influence of rough weather. In addition, the equipment shall be vibrated for a total period of at least 90 minutes at the resonant frequencies chosen by the test engineer. If no resonance is observed, this test shall be performed at 50 Hz, unless excepted by 2.2.3.5 above. The vibration levels shall be in accordance with those of Category 3 in Table 2-1.
2.2.4 Structural Fatigue Failure

Fatigue failures have been known to occur in major ship structures such as the hull girder or bow area in extreme weather conditions. In most cases, however, such failures are the result of design deficiencies in areas of high stress concentration combined with high dynamic or shock loads. As pointed out earlier, this guide does not cover extreme transient forces but instead focuses on periodic forces generated by the operation of the vessel and its machinery under normal operating conditions. Fatigue failure can occur in the ship's structure under normal operating conditions when the exciting forces are combined with resonant structural vibration, high stress concentration factors, and low system damping. Specific examples of such failures include the hull girder, local structure, and equipment supports.
2.2.4.1 Hull Girder Vibration (Springing)

Hull girder vibration at the fundamental natural frequency of the hull, also referred to as springing, has been found to be a potential problem area for ore carriers on the Great Lakes. This results from a combination of factors that can produce significant dynamic stresses at the hull natural frequency, which when combined with normal loading stresses, can approach dangerous levels. Unlike oceangoing ships that can experience dangerous hull stress levels by a combination of loading, heavy seas, and slamming effects represented by transient forces, Great Lakes ore
2-9
0?Z
>
>(
-,
<,K.'
I0
li:~
CATEGORY1 CATEGORY CATEGORY 2 3
Figure 2-4
Vibration Test Requirements for Various Categories of Shipboard Equipment (Proposed)
Vibration Criteria and Specifications carriers are longer more slender, have a relatively lower midship section modulus, and lower natural frequency in bending. In addition, the wave patterns on the Great Lakes are periodic in nature ar.d the periodicity of encounter between the ship and the waves can excite a resonance of the fundamental hull frequency. Supplemental dynamic loading may also be introduced by the nonlinear excitation of two different long wave components interacting. As a result, under certain headings, sea conditions or wave trains, the resulting dynamic hull stresses can be excessive. Much study has been made on this subject and care must be taken to avoid this resonant phenomena by making necessary adjustments to hull speed and/or direction of encounter with the waves. For purposes of this guide, however, we would recommend adherence to the human reaction or habitability criteria as given in Figure 2-1. Dangerous hull stresses will not occur within an est,-nated maximum allowable amplitude of . 25 mm ( 1.00 inch). As an alternative, stress monitoring based on design analyses should be employed.
2.2.4.2 Local Vibration

The majority of structural fatigue failures that occur aboard ship are related to resonant vibration of local structural members, which are readily recognizable. Typical cases include: supports to radar antennas, equipment supports, and hardrails. In most cases, the problem is recognizable and may be readily corrected by stiffening the support structure so that resonance does not occur below 115 percent of operating speed. Not so obvious are fatigue cracks that may develop in the aft peak tank and adjacent structures. Most of such cracks can be related to propeller pressure forces generated by cavitation effects and resonant local structural elements with high stress concentration factors. The immediate correction usually involves stiffening of the resonant member and the elimination of stress concentration points. Depending on other problems aboard the ship, consideration might be given to the correction of the exciting fOrces. If this approat-h is taken, a maximum hull pressure force of 8 kPa or 1.16 psi.i measured on the centerline over the propeller is recommended.
2.3 Machinery Vibration

Shipboard machinery includes the main propulsion mnachincry, auxiliary machinery, support machinery, and related equipment. In this category, primary concern is with the effects of vibration on svapm dynamics (fatigue failure of components) and the environmental effects on machines and equipment (damage and/or malfunction). Active shipboard equipment introduces self-generating forces. Subsections of this chapter include Main PropuIlsion Machinery, which relates to fatigue failure of coniponents, and General Machine Vibration, which relates to environmental effects.
2.3.1 Main Propulsion Machinery

Main propulsion machinery includes all comnponents from the engine up to and including the propeller. Vibration of the ship and dynamic stresses within the propulsion system result from forces generated both by the propeller and by the propulsion system components.
2-11
Ship Vibration Design Guide Recommended criteria to be employed in the control of the more important dynamic forces existing in the main propulsion system are based on design requirements. It should be noted that vibration measurements alone cannot always be used to determine the acceptability of dynamic systems. The levels of dynamic stresses are dependent on both the vibration amplitude and the dynamic analysis of the vibrating system. Main engineF, shafts, couplings, reduction gears, propellers, and related equipment are designed for structural adequacy when operating under the conditions stipulated in the procurement specifications. The vibration characteristics of the propulsion system must be controlled to avoid the presence of damaging vibratory stresses within the system, as well as the generation of severe hull vibration. Potential problem areas include unbalance and misalignment of system components; excessive shaft stresses; and longitudinal, torsional, and lateral vibration of the propulsion system.
2.3.1.1 Dynamic Unbalance and Misalignment

All rotating propulsion machinery should be balanced to minimize vibration, bearing wear, and noise. The types of correction, as shown in Table 2-2 below, should depend on the speed of rotation and relative dimensions of the rotor. Table 2-2. Types of Correction Type of Correction Speed (RPM) Rotor Characteristics
Single-Plane
Two-Plane Multi-Plane
0-1000 0-150
> >1000 150
L/D JD > 0.5 0.5
L/D!5.0.5 L/D > 0.5 Flexible: Unable to correct by two-plane balancing L Length of rotor mass, exclusive of shaft D = Diameter of rotor mass, exclusive of shaft
The residual unbalance in each plane of correction of any rotating part shall not exceed the value determined by: U =for speeds in excess of 1000 RPM N 4000W U= 4 for speeds between 150 and 1000 RPM N' U = 0.177W for speeds below 150 RPM where: U = Maximum residual unbalance in ounce-inches W = Weight of rotating part in pounds N = Maximum operating RPM of unit
2-12
Vibration Criteria and Specifications When checking the propulsion system for first-order (shaft RPM frequency) forces, in addition to balancing, the following should be considered: propeller for pitch accuracy; shafting and couplings for run-out or bending; and stern bearings for uneven or excessive wear. Shafting should also be checked for corrosion/fatigue cracks originating in keyway fillets. 2.3.1.2 Dynamic Shaft Stresses Conventional design requirements for propulsion shafting generally include factors to compensate for the eccentric thrust produced at the propeller. This eccentric thrust produces a dynamic bending moment due to shaft rotation with maximum alternating bending stresses usually occurring at the propeller keyway. Dynamic stress is greatly influenced by the actual moment arm between the propeller and the effective point of support of the aftermost bearing. Additionally, the presence of seawater presents a corrosive medium and greatly deteriorates the fatigue characteristics of the shaft. These stresses are also significantly effected by sea and operating conditions and are the root cause of most shaft failures. If during normal maintenance procedures, evidence of fatigue cracks in the tailshaft in the vicinity of the forward face of the propeller are noted, it would be prudent to check the alternating bending stress of the tailshaft against the following empirical formula: S=c (Mg + Mt) 6000 where: S = C Mg
= =
I Section modulus R
Service factor = 1.75 for commercial ships Gravity moment due to overhanging propeller weight calculated from forward face of propeller hub to assumed point of shaft support (1 diameter of shaft for water lubricated bearing and 1/2 diameter for oil lubricated)
Mt= Calculated moment of eccentric thru.st = 0.65 x Propeller Diameter x Rated Thrust I R
= =
Shaft moment of inertia Shaft radius

= Maximum
6000
safe fatigue limit (psi) to be used for the assembly operating in the presence of a corrosive medium
Cold rolling the tailshaft in the vicinity of the keyway forward beyond the aft end of the liner has been found to be effective in retarding the propagation of fatigue cracks. A detailed
2-13
dynamic analysis of the complete propulsion system is strongly recommended, particularly in

the case of diesel drive systems or new or unusual design concepts.
2.3.1.3 Torsional Vibration

The mass-elastic system, consisting of engine, couplinvs, reduction gears, shafting, and propeller, should have no excessive torsional vibratory stresses below the top operating speed of the system nor excessive vibratory torque across the gears within the operating speed. Excessive torsional vibratory stress is that stress in excess ol: Strength Ultimate Tensile 25 Below the normal operating speed range, excessive torsional vibratory stress is that stress in excess of 1 3/4 times S. V Excessive vibratory torque, at any operating speed, is that vibratory torque greater than 75 percent of the driving torque at the same speed, or 10 percent of the full load torque, whichever is smaller. Gear rattling is a strong indication of torsional vibration in a geared drive. To evaluate any torsional vibration measurements, it is necessary to have available, or to develop, a complete mathematical analysis of the system to be tested. It is obvious that experienced personnel are required to conduct such studies.
2.3.1.4 Longitudinal Vibration
Longitudinal vibration of' the main propulsion system is frequently a problem and can cause significant structural vibration within the ship. It may be very pronounced at the main thrust bearing, at other parts of the propulsion system, and particularly in the higher levels of deckhouses. If significant vibration in the fore-and-aft direction is noticed, the problem should be investigated. To avoid damage or crew annoyance, the propulsion system should have no excessive alternating thnst within the operating speed range. In no case, however, should the displacement amplitude o' longitudinal vibration of the propulsion machinery, including the main condenser and associated piping in a steam turbine drive, be sufficient to adversely affect the operation of the propulsion unit or precipitate fatigue failure of components such as thrust bearings or gear teeth. Pitting of gear teeth may also indicate excessive torsional or longitudinal vibration. Excessive alternating thrust is defined as: (a) Main and turbine thrust bearings Excessive alternating thrust occurs when the single amplitude of alternating thrust, measured at the main and turbine thrust bearings, exceeds 75 percent of the mean thrust at that speed or exceeds 25 percent of the full power thrust, whichever is smaller. 2-14
Vibration Criteria and Specifications (b) Excessive alternating thrust Excessive alternating thrust in the reduction gear occurs when the vibratory acceleration of the bull gear hub exceeds 0.1 g, unless another value is provided by the gear manufacturer. If the acceleration exceeds the allowable value, calculations will be required to determine the vibratory stresses in the gear teeth to determine their acceptability to the gear supplier. (c) Excessive longitudinal vibration Excessive longitudinal vibration of the main propulsion system components (including condenser, piping, etc.) occurs when vibration exceeds 0.25 g, or that level certified as satisfactory by the equipment manufacture-, whichever is the least. Although detailed measurements would be required to evaluate the presence of excessive longitudinal vibration in (a) or (b) above, hammering of the thrust bearing represents a very dangerous condition and mr'"t be avoided. AS in the case of excessive torsional vibration, gear rattling may also occur if the longitudinal vibration is excessive. In some instances, particularly in diesel drives, harmonic components of torsional and longitudinal vibration may be coupled through the action of the propeller. 2.3.1.5 Lateral Vibration Lateral vibration in the main propulsion shafting could be destructive if the fundamental frequency is resonant in the operating speed range. This phenomena, sometimes referred to as "whirling," occurs at shaft RPM and is excited by propeller and shafting unbalance. In all designs, the fundamental frequency must occur well above operating speed (115 percent of maximum RPM). Frequency can be effected, however, by misalignment, bearing wear down, or lost bearing support (structural failure). Whirling frequencies at blade rate frequency are excited by propeller forces at the shaft rate. Thus, a five-bladed propeller would excite fourth and sixth order frequencies, referred to as counter whirl and forward whirl, respectively. However, these frequencies are not generally significant because of the low level of propeller forces normally encountered. It is usually customary to avoid the presence of the frequencies in the upper 15 percent of the speed range.
2.3.2 General Machinery Vibration

Shipboard machinery is referred to in this guide as "active" shipboard equipment since, in addition to being affected by general hull vibration, it generates vibratory forces that contribute to the total motion of the machine itself and may also adversely effect the structure to which it is attached. The maximum acceptable vibration of shipboard machinery is frequently defined by the manufacturer. When this information is available it should be used. When such
information is not available the criteria provided herein is recommended.
2.3.2.1 Nonreciprocating Machines The maximum allowable vibration of rotating machinery required to demonstrate compliance with MIL-STD-167-1 (SHIPS) balancing requirements is shown in Figure 2-5. On all
machinery except turbines, amplitudes of vibration are measured on the bearing housing in the
2-15
Ship Vibration Design Guide direction of maximum amplitudes. In the case of turbines, amplitudes of vibration are measured on the rotating shaft adjacent to the bearings. When feasible, machinery is completely assembled and mounted elastically at a natural frequency less than one-quarter of the minimum rotational frequency of the unit. Large and complex units are shop tested on a foundation similar to the shipboard mounting for which it is intended. These requirements are recommended for new, replacement, or reworked equipment.
10
0.00
ao
.00
ATO
0 . 40
4 ,. 0.10
0.0.1
0.05
0.0
00
00
VIBRATION
FREQUNCIY -CPU
Figure 2-5
Maximum Allowable Vibration, Type II(MIL-STD-167-1 (SHIPS), 1 May 1974) The SNAME T&R Code C-5, "Acceptable Vibration of Marine Steam and Heavy-Duty Gas Turbine Main and Auxiliary Machinery Plants," provides maximum allowable vibration levels for shop test and shipboard test as illustrated in following figures: Figure 2-6 For steam turbine bearing housing or gear casing measurements Figure 2-7 For gas turbine housing measurements Figure 2-8 For steam turbine shaft measurements
2-16
_-Q3 x . -
%J3
7. 0. 5< NRQUNC 4 20
50
00
00
30
'A N, Figure 2-6 Main~~~~~~ Proulio Steam1 TrIne n eutinGas-Tubn HosngadGerCsigVbrtoZLmt x!A'SN 2-17
ern
NPB ARID TEST::
00
00
103--
CSINGL
AMLITUD
2
04 3 )kO
p---
-4
4
FREUENC
4 ?C
5 3rJIC 0 TE00.'\ SH00AR
Fiue6
Main~~~~~~ Prpl7nGsTrie
erigHuigVbainLmt
-/SH(P TF - 18
0.1
.40N" SM
X11
Ilk
0S
.03
10 .02
02
f%3
10
4D
20
30
FREQUINCY
1-1
1.-
^w
105
I-01
FREOUENCY
12-2
f\ 3U
1 NIX
ZIROU NCY 8
1,e
04
94,
0N
0.
3%
8_8_88
_8_8
I4
w W 0
FRE0UENCY
f0
20
40% mS w
100
200
00
Figure 2-1
Tubie rve Axliris- hatV~r~on i<t
z 2'!2V 1

These limits are narrowband readings of first order (rotational frequency) and second order vibration and apply to steady state operation, preferably under trial conditions called for under SNAME Code C-I or ISO 4867. Measurements that exceed the limits called for by "Shipboard Test" indicate corrective action required. Similiarly, Figures 2-9 and 2-10 give the maximum acceptable levels applicable to turbine driven auxiliaries for measurements made on the bearing housing or shaft, respectively. For motor-driven auxiliaries, the maximum first order and second order bearing housing vibration velocities of the assembled driver and driven equipment is recommended to be 0.25 inches per second above 30 Hz and 2.5 mils below 30 Hz. For new or replacement equipment, the values shown by MIL-STD-167, Figure 2-5 should be used.
2.3.2.2 Reciprocating Engines

Based on data presented by Bureau Veritas Guidance Note NI 1381-RD3, "Recommendations Designed to Limit the Effects of Vibration Onboard Ships," June 1979 [2-8], the acceptable vibration levels for diesel engines and reciprocating engines are as shown on Figure 2-11. Vibratory levels at 11 mm/sec measured at the base of the engines should be monitored, while 18 mm/sec for the smaller engines ( 1000 HP) and 28 mm/sec for larger engines ( 1000 HP) would be considered excessive. Somewhat higher levels could be tolerated at the cylinder heads.
2.4 Ship Vibration Specifications

It has been shown that hull vibration criteria is primarily based on habitability requirements. It was also shown in a recent paper [2-5] that iupwards of 60,000 SHP on a single screw ship would be possible, within habitability criteria. It is therefore reasonable to expect that lower levels of hull vibration could be realized on ships with lower power requirements if the owner was willing to spend the effort in achieving that objective. On a recent tanker design of 15,000 SHP, the owner specified vibration limits of 4 mm/sec, corresponding to the lower line of the shaded area of Figure 2-1. That objective was successfully met. In line with the above information, a suggested set of ship vibration specifications is presented for guidance purposes. In this instance, requirements are established that are considered practical but with an incentive in the form of a design objective and a reject hull vibration level. This approach is proposed as a means of establishing a joint working basis between the owner and builder, as opposed to the frequent adversarial relationship. The specification sample is based on the development of a large single-screw tanker with a geared-turbine drive and a rating of 30,000 SHP. The habitability requirements are based on the current ISO Guidelines [2-21, when tested in accordance with the ISO Vibration Test Codes, [2-6] and [2-71. With a geared-turbine drive, the constant velocity limit is extended below 5 Hz to 1 Hz, rather than using the constant acceleration limit, between 5 Hz and 1 Hz, which is considered appropriate for low speed direct diesel drives.
2-22
..
"- -...
j
. ...

iL
.
.
.....
21-,-
" .... 777"
.. .... ..
-A
-Il-
,.o..o...
...
:-'I..
'" ..... .. . -7 .. .
.. ...---
... -:... ..
I ;
......
.. .. .. ~~~~~~~~.. _1 . . . ... .. .. . .
-
......... ....
......... ...
T--i - :-'.i
275 OTHER kW>L
J.
4.
D .EI.CN L 0E
slws .. ...... e de gsa up~ should be less ~~ ~~~t .. 5 ....
15
P ,t _. e ia ntvl iyam itd e sue tb arn sa dfo n ai n
thant1.5g:
.... .. ....
:7 ;
HIbraor SPEveo Dieel ENGNES OTHE REIPRCATNG
SLOW ANDpoatn MEDIUM-SEEDIsLN DESE2ENINE
SAMPLE SHIP SPECIFICATIONS: Vibration

A. General Requirements The vessel shall be designed and constructed to limit the vibration of the ship and within the ship to those generally accepted levels that will not result in discomfort or annoyance to the crew, will not prove damaging to the main propulsion system, or will not precipitate damage or malfunction of other shipboard machinery and equipment when operating up to maximum (ABS) horsepower. It shall be the responsibility of the shipyard to provide a design that will meet the vibration criteria set forth in this specification. Tests will be conducted during the trials of the vessel to establish compliance with this criteria. Necessary corrections will be the responsibility of the shipbuilder, During the design phase, the shipbuilder shall prepare an analysis of the response of the main hull girder with respect to the generation of the driving forces originating in the main propulsion system. This analysis will provide the base from which the response of the major substructures, local structures, and supporting systems for equipment may be evaluated. The selection of the propeller type, number of blades, skew and clearances should be compatible with the desired vibration characteristics of the main hull girder and propulsion machinery. B. Hull Girder Criteria The design objective is to limit the vibration of the main hull girder to a velocity of 6 mm/s, between 1 and 100 Hz, in all three directions (vertically, athwartship and longitudinally) when tested in accordance with the International Standard (ISO 4867), "Code for the Measurement and Reporting of Shipboard Vibration Data." Amplitudes greater than 150 percent of this value will be considered unacceptable for geared turbine or geared diesel drive systems. For low-speed,direct-drive diesels, accelerations greater than .029 g below 5 Hz will be considered unacceptable. C. Criteria for Major Substructures The criteria for the vibration of major substructures occupied by the crew is based on habitability requirements. The design objective is a maximum velocity of 7.5 mm/s in all three directions when tested in accordance with ISO 4867. Amplitudes greater than 9 mm/s will be considered unacceptable. The criteria for the vibration of major substructures, not inhabited by the crew, is 9 mm/s, provided this level of vibration is acceptable to equipment mounted thereon, as defined by the equipment manufacturer. Below 5 Hz, the acceleration limit of .029 g is applicable for direct-drive, low-speed diesel ships. D. Criteria for Local Structural Elements The criteria for local structural elements, if they are considered as part of a habitable space in contact with the crew, such as a compartment floor or bulkhead, should be based on habitability requirements. Amplitudes greater than 9 mm/s in any direction shall be considered unacceptable.
2-24
Vibration Criteria and Specifications *rhe criteria for the vibration of structural elements not in contact with the crew and not supporting equipment is 0.25g, providing no structural damage results or that noise generated by the vibration is not considered excessive (greater than 70 dBA). If damage to structural elements, or if excessive noise in habitable compartments results, corrective action by the shipyard will be required. The criteria for the vibration of structural elements supporting vibration-sensitive equipment must be limited to that level considered acceptable to the equipment, as specified by the equipment manufacturer or 0.25g, whichever is the least.
E. Criteria for Shipboard Equipment

Equipment selected should be designed to meet the environmental vibration requirements established for shipboard use. In this instance, 0.25g shoulh be tused. Balancing and vibration tolerances for rotating machines should he representative of and must meet ihe acceptable standards for good commercial practice. Installation details, including the choice of mountings, should be designed to prevent excessive vibration of equipment or the generation of excessive vibration or noise in the compartment (or adjacent habitable spaces) in which it is installed. Excessive vibration is that above 0.25g, or that level for which the equipment is certified by the manufacturer, whichever is the least. The vibration generated noise is excessive when it is over 70 dBA.
F. Vibration of Main Propulsion Machinery

The main engines, shafts, couplings, reduction gears, propellers and related equipment should be designed for structural adequacy when operating under the conditions stipulated in the Vibration characteristics of the propulsion system must be procurement specifications. controlled to avoid the presence of damaging vibratory stresses within the system, as well as the Potential problem areas include: unbalance and generation of severe hull vibration. misalignment of system components; excessive shaft stresses; and longitudinal, torsional and lateral vibration of the propulsion system. F.I Balancing Requirements for Propulsion Machinery All rotating propulsion machinery shall be balanced to minimize vibration, bearing wear, and noise. The type of correction, as shown in the following table, shall depend on the speed of rotation and the relative dimensions of the rotor. Table F-1 Balancing Procedure Criteria Type of Correction
Single-Plane Two-Plane .fhi-Plane
Speed (RPM)
0- 1000 0- 150 > 1000 > 150
Rotor Characteristics
L/D < 0.5 L/D>0.5 L/D <0.5 L/D>0.5 Flexible: Unable to correct ,Ill-Plane-by two-plane balancing L = Length of rotor mass, exclusive of shaft D Diameter of rotor mass, exclusive of shaft
225
Ship Vibration Design Guide The residual unbalance in each plane of correction of any rotating part shall not exceed the value determined by: U 4W N for speeds in excess of 1000 RPM 4000W ,2 for speeds between 150 and 1000 RPM U= 0.177W for speeds below 150 RPM where: U = Maximum residual unbalance in ounce-inches W = Weight of rotating part in pounds N = Maximum operating RPM of unit F.2 Design of Tailshaft To avoid the possibility of a corrosion fatigue failure of the propeller shaft, in addition to meeting the ABS design requirements, the alternating bending stresses in the tail shaft shall be limited to 6,000 psi when calculated by the following expression (English units used):
S=C (Mg + M t ) 6000 where: S = C = Mg Section modulus

-
R R
Service factor = 1.75 for commercial ships Gravity moment due to overhanging propeller weight calculated from forward face of propeller hub to assumed point of shaft support (1 diameter of shaft for water lubricated bearing and 1/ diameter for oil lubricated)
Mt = Calculated moment of eccentric thrust = 0.65 x Propeller Diameter x Rated Thrust I = R = Shaft moment of inertia Shaft radius
6000 = Maximum safe fatigue limit (psi) to be used for the assembly operating in the presence of a corrosive medium
2-26

F.3 Longitudinal Vibration of Propulsion Machinery The dynamic response of the propulsion system shall have no excessive alternating thrust within the operating speed range. In no case, however, shall the displacement amplitude of longitudinal vibration of the propulsion machinery, including the main condenser and associated piping, be sufficient to adversely affect the operation of the propulsion unit or precipitate fatigue failure. Excessive alternating thrust is defined as: (a) Main and turbine thrust bearings Excessive alternating thrust occurs when the single amplitude of alternating thrust, measured at the main and turbine thrust bearings, exceeds 75 percent of the mean thrust at that speed or exceeds 25 percent of the full power thrust, whichever is smaller. (b) Excessive alternating thrust Excessive alternating thrust in the reduction gear occurs when the vibratory acceleration of the bull gear hub exceeds 0.1 g unless another value is provided by the gear manufacturer. If the acceleration exceeds the allowable value, calculations will be required to determine the vibratory stresses in the gear teeth to determine acceptability to the gear supplier. (c) Excessive longitudinal vibration Excessive longitudinal vibration of the main propulsion system components (including condenser, piping, etc.) occurs when the vibration exceeds 0.25g, or that level certified as satisfactory by the equipment manufacturer, whichever is the least. A mathematical analysis of the longitudinal vibratory characteristics of the mass-elastic system shall be prepared by the engine builder or the shipyard to demonstrate the probable compliance with the given criteria. This analysis is to be forwarded to the owner for review. During ship trials, measurements shall be performed to demonstrate compliance with specified limits in accordance with the International Standard, ISO 4867, "Code for the Measurement and Reporting of Shipboard Vibration Data." F.4 Torsional Vibration of Propulsion System The mass-elastic system, consisting of engine, couplings, reduction gears, shafting, and propeller, should have no excessive torsional vibratory stresses below the top operating speed of the system nor excessive vibratory torque across the gears within the operating speed. Excessive torsional vibratory stress is that stress in excess of Ultimate Tensile Strength 25
2-27

Below the normal operating speed range, excessive torsional vibratory stress is that stress in excess of 1 34 times SV Excessive vibratory torque, at any operating speed, is that vibratory torque greater than 75 percent of the driving torque at the same speed, or 10 percent of the full load torque, whichever is smaller. A mathematical analysis of the propulsion system shall be prepared by the engine builder or shipyard to demonstrate probable compliance with these requirements. This analysis is to be forwarded to the owner for review. In the event the analysis does not indicate probable compliance, a torsiograph test will be required, prior to acceptance.
F.5 Lateral Vibration of Propulsion Shafting

No critical frequency of lateral vibration of the propulsion shafting system shall exist below 115 percent of maximum rated shaft RPM. A mathematical analysis of the lateral vibration characteristics of the rotating propulsion shafting system shall be made to clearly demonstrate that the system is free from any lateral critical frequency below 115 percent of the maximum rated RPM. This analysis shall be submitted to the owner for review.
2-28
Vibration Criteria and Specifictions
REFERENCES
2-1 Noonan, E. F., "An Approach tu the Limitaticn and Control of Shipboard Vibration," 51st Shock and Vibration Symposium, San Diego, CA, Sept. 1980. International Standard, ISO 6954, "Mechanical Vibration and Shock - Guidelines for the Overall Evaluation of Vibration in Merchant Ships," Dec. 1984. "Ship Vibration and Noise Guidelines," SNAME T & R Bulletin 2-25, January, 1980. International Standard, ISO 2631, "Guide for the Evaluation of Human Exposure to Whole Body Vibration" - Part I, General Requirements Chang, Noonan, Scherer, Seibold and Weschsler, "Limitations on the Maximum Power of Single-Screw Ships," SNAME Transactions, Vol. 87, 1979. International Standard, ISO 4867, "Code for the Measurement and Reporting of Shipboard Vibration Data," Dec., 1984. International Standard, ISO 4868, "Code for the Measurement and Reporting of Local Vibration Data of Ship Structures and Equipment," Nov., 1984. "Recommendations Designed to Limit the Effects of Vibrations on Board Ships," Bureau Veritas Guidance Note NI 138A-RD3, June, 1979. "Code for Shipboard Vibration Measurement," SNAME T & R Code C-i, 1975.
2-2
2-3 2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
2-29
CHAPTER THREE
EXCITATION
OF VIBRATORY
FORCES
n this chapter, practical guidelines are presented for developing the hull form, appendage and propeller designs of a new ship, such that the excitation of vibratory forces will be minimized. The emphasis is on minimization of vibratory forces of hydrodynamic origin, minimization of vibratory forces due to the imbalance of propellers, propeller blade pitch differences, imbalance or misalignment of shafting, and imbalance of propulsion engines is also briefly considered. Only currently available information and methods are presented, and the focus is on the early stages of the design of single- and twin-screw ships. In addition to presenting methods for designing to minimize vibratory forces, early design stage methods for estimating such forces for a proposed ship are also presented. With respect to the vibratory forces of hydrodynamic origin, the principal parameters involved are those which describe the hull (especially the afterbody), the afterbody appendages and the propeller(s). The basic relationship between the hull, appendages and propeller(s) is that, at the required speed, a certain amount of thrust is required to overcome the resistance of the hull and appendages and the propeller(s) must provide this thrust at a given number of revolutions. The ship resistance characteristics and the propeller dimensions, primarily, determine the propeller thrust loading; the thrusting propeller alters the flow along the hull forward of and near the propeller, which in turn affects the wake field. The non-homogeneity of this wake field causes the propeller blade loading to fluctuate with time and this causes a corresponding fluctuation in the forces applied to the ship; these forces are normally considered to be applied to the ship as fluctuating vertical and horizontal forces at the stern bearing(s), fluctuating axial forces at the thrust bearing(s), fluctuating torque at the reduction gear(s) or engine(s), and fluctuating pressure forces on the hull in the immediate vicinity of the propeller(s). The fluctuations in propeller blade loading that occur also cause changes in blade cavitation patterns when cavitation is present; this effect can cause a considerable augmentation of the hull pressure forces. From the perspective of hull form and appendage design, it is to be noted that by careful selection of hull form typo and by careful development of hull form shape (particularly afterbody shape), it may be possible to minimize wake field variations; this, together with careful selection of the propeller characteristics, will have the effect of minimizing the magnitude of the fluctuating forces, which are applied to the hull and propeller.
3-1
3.1 Guidelines for Minimization of Propeller-Induced Vibratory Forces

3.1.1 Approach
The recommended approach to the design of the hull form, afterbody appendages and propeller(s), for the purpose of minimizing propeller-induced vibratory forces, is to give primary attention to selection of the basic propeller characteristics (diameter, number of blades and blade area ratio) such that thrust loading can be kept to moderate levels. This includes giving consideration even to selection of the number of propellers to be installed; in general, the use of twin-screw propulsion, when it is reasonable to do so, will reduce the potential for excessive vibratory force due to the increased blade area, which may be achievable and due to the more uniform inflow to the propellers, compared with a single-screw installation. Achieving moderate levels of thrust loading will tend toward minimization of cavitation, thereby minimizing cavitation augmentation of hull pressure forces. By proper selection of the number of blades, hull and propulsion system resonant response can normally be avoided. Then, by appropriate selection of the basic afterbody type and propulsion appendage configuration, and by development of the details of the aiterbody form and of the shape and arrangement of the afterbody appendages, wake (propeller inflow) non-uniformity can be minimized. By taking this approach and by careful design of the propeller blades, the fluctuations in hull pressure, in propeller thrust and torque delivered to the shaft(s), and in the propeller shaft bearing forces, can be minimized. The selection and design development of the afterbody, appendages and propeller(s) is an iterative process and the designs of these three major elements are, of course, interrelated. A flowchart, which illustrates this process with particular reference to closed-stem, single-screw ships, has been presented by Ward [3-1] and is included herein as Figure 3-1. The process will be briefly reviewed in the sections that follow. Although the designs of the three above mentioned elements may be carried out simultaneously, afterbody selection and design are described first. This is followed by descriptions of the selection and design of the afterbody appendages and the propeller(s), in that order.
3.1.2 Selection of Afterbody Type

Of course the overall characteristics of the hull must be selected before attention can be given to the afterbody. The length (L), beam (B), draft (T), amidships depth (D), basic proportions (LIB, BIT, LIT and BID), midship section coefficient (CM), longitudinal prismatic coefficient (C.) and waterplane coefficient (Cwp) of a new hull will be selected at an early stage of design. The characteristics may be selected on the basis of owner/designer experience and preference, operational requirements, the results of appropriate design processes (which would include the use of a design synthesis model), or some combination of the above. After selection of such characteristics, a preliminary hull form definition, consisting of a rough body plan or a three view lines drawing, is prepared. One obvious guiding principle for development of this preliminary hull form definition is that the forebody and afterbody shapes must be compatible. The preliminary development of the afterbody design can then proceed.
3-2
Excitation of Vibratory Forces

STAGE I
SELECT PREL1I4NARV FEATURES Of MUL.AL ANDPWPULER SECTION4 SHAPE RPM MEASURE WAKEE BEHINDSCALEO -D~fINE APERTURE CALCULATE BOLWIARY DEFrINE ANGLES OF RUN LAVER DEVELOPMENT *I W STEMNGAN & Cl4 OIA WAKIE OF BOYSCINI"30ANYALYTICAL
-
SAE2Z
_
DESIC0PPOP~ELLFA iC1L&.AR)GOMERY
TG
F4NALISE OLKL
~ ~
CAUCULAYL IT)AINAL WAKE FO SHIPA,_JSCM.I.CORECII NOMNAL WAKE
ESTIATE SHPCAND MODELOY MOUJOIF -WAE
9"A~,STATE jAVR~4LOPMNT AKE L1 -A OR !_R(EFrFc'vE
AkIt 5ICADY
MZP- JtA YIERACTION wAAEY
IALS
DESIGN
~UER
CNTORS'MOFICATIY OF HIJL GEOME f V
I CLCJIATC LN!EAY
SATISFACTORYS
ASSES
FACO,:
EVALUATE "LNFACE PRESSURE ANDFORCE FRM EIRCAL ETHODGS
~ANAO'TICAL
wrf-4oos roY 1 [P,7)PELEP AND] I'AYATOd I
CCA64TATION TESTS *4 W064MALN SCALE-CORiRECTED WAKE)

-_
ASSESRCITAON
SRUC(IAL
AALYSIFOR
Figjut 3-1 Overall Hydrodynamnic Design Sequence for Minimization of Propeller- Induced Vibratory Forces [3-1]
First, the basic type of afterbody must be selected (bearing in mind the requirement for compatibility with the forebody). For single-screw ships, the basic types of afterbody may be categorized as follows: ""Closed" stern, with relatively tall, narrow/ sections (which may vary from U-shaped to V-shaped) in wyof the skeg or "deadwood." " "Closed" stern, with bulbous sections (e.g., a Hogner stern) in way of the skeg or "deadwood." " "Open" stem, with a strut supported, exposed propeller shaft; this type of afterbody can feature an "integral" skeg or an "appended" skeg. For twin-screw ships, the basic types of afterbody mnay be characterized as follows: "C.'stern, with strut supported, exposcd propefler shafts and a centerline skeg ("integral" or "appended") *Stern with boss ing-cnaclosck! shafts, -.1th or --'ithout a centerline skeg. *Twin-skeg stern, wvith shafts ejiclos;ed in Ow, s1icgsl ,.wihout a centerline skeg.
3 Ai

A considerable number of variations are possible within the above listed categories; for instance, the selection of relatively large, relatively slow turning propellers can result in afterbody configurations, which are quite different from those associated with "normal" propeller diameter and RPM values. Guidelines relative to selection of afterbody type, with the goal of reducing the potential for propeller-induced vibratory forces are as follows: Open-stern configurations, in general, yield smaller wake fraction (W) values and smaller values of wake non-uniformity than do closed-stern configurations. The ranges of wake fraction values for various types of ships are presented in Figure 3-2. The importance of minimizing wake non-uniformity, with respect to minimization of propeller-induced vibratory forces, is illustrated in Figure 3-3. This figure, based on real ship data, shows that with small values of the wake non-uniformity criterion, the propeller(s) can operate at a greater range of cavitation numbers (greater range of thrust loadings) and still provide acceptable
.6
0T
.5 .a
1oo:1
Max
V
L
n C
M in
, .4.
oW
/
0 0:0 I~
.2
2~
04
cc
40
to
La
V)
1-
Z--
-J "
x
.J
Figure 3-2
Wake Fraction of Various Types of Ships Based on Results of Model Tests at DTRC [3-2]
Wake Fractionof. Varou
3-4
of Ship
Bnased-, -T.pes
.- .- -'---...
+ 0
Ships with acceptable vibration characteristics Ships with unacceptable vibration characteristics
0"26-
III,
0 24-
+ +
"+
Relationships Proposed by Various

Researchers
224
+
0-20-
onM +
0-16-
0.14
4--
0.10 0-2
0-4
0.6
0.0
1-0
1.2
1 .4
1.6
Figure 3-3 Relationship for Cavitation Number Versus Wake Non-Unifrormity Parameter, with Data Points Based on Actuual Ship Performance and on Model Test Wake Surveys for these Ships [3-3]
3-5
Ship Vibration Design Guide vibration qualities. The relative uniformity of the wake of an open-stem, single-screw hull form, as compared to the wakes of a conventional, closed-stem single-screw hull form and a Modified-Hogner (bulbous), closed-stem single-screw hull form, is illustrated in Figures 3-4, 3-5, and 3-6 (respectively). (As a result of model tests of the three hull forms depicted in Figures 3-4, 3-5, 3-6, a modification of the open-stem hull form was selected for the ship and this ship was built and used in commercial service. The final configuration is illustrated in Figure 3-7. The goal of the hull form selection and development process had, in this case, been to produce a 90,000 ton, single screw, 45,000 SHP ship for which the propeller-induced vibratory forces would be minimized. This goal was achieved. Thus, this design study, partially documented by Noonan [3-4], serves as one example of the hull form selection/development approach being discussed herein.) * Open-stem configurations, in general, yield smaller values of thrust deduction fraction (t) than do closed-stem configurations, as illustrated in Figure 3-8. This relates to minimization of propeller-induced vibratory force in that a smaller value of t means a smaller value of mean thrust, and in turn, smaller values of propeller blade loading. * It is generally advantageous to avoid high values of hull block coefficient (CB); for example, the increase in wake non-uniformity with increasing CB, for closed-stem single-screw hull forms, is illustrated in Figure 3-9. After selection of the afterbody type, the shape of the afterbody can be developed. Guidelines for development of the shapes of the various types of afterbodies are presented below.
3.1.3
Development of Afterbody Shape
3.1.3.1 Design of Closed-Stern Afterbodies for Single Screw Ships

Applicable guidelines are as follows: * The ideal wake is that which gives constant wake velocities concentric to the propeller center. This can only be achieved in the case of a propeller working behind a tapered, circular cross-section hull form (such as the afterbody of a modem, single-screw submarine). For "conventional" surface ships, this condition can be approximated by using a bulbous stem (e.g., a Hogner stem). " For "conventional" ships, the waterline exit angles should be moderate and the differences between this angle at waterlines above and this angle at the waterlines below the propeller center should be minimized. Extremely V-shaped sections can result in relatively large differences in waterline exit angles above and below the propeller center and should be avoided. Conversely, U-shaped aft sections can provide more uniform waterline exit angles; such sections are especially recommended for relatively short, "full," single-screw ships.
3-6
r/RuQO.46/
r/R/R*ITTS
0/a.5
110 050
3-7
5 54
POSTION ANGLE IN D(GREES CIRCUMFERENTIAL DISTRIBUTIONS OF LONGITUDINAL VELOCITY COMOWNTS
Figure 3-5 Afte rbody Configuration and Wake Characteristics of a Conventional, Closed-Stern Single-Screw Ship
3-8
7- 10
R 96
r/R.O6
1
rJ
.O.
0.
440
CIRCUMFERENTIAL
POSITION ANIQI IN DEGRES DISTRIBUTION4S OF LONGITUDINAL VELOCITY COMPVNT3
Figure 3-6 Afterbody Configuration and Wake Characteristics of a Modified-Hogner, Closed-Stern Single-Screw Ship
3-9
TYPE OF LINE o
- ---------
,/Q i 0.267
~-
----
0468
0.655 0.748 ." ..... ............... 1.0 2 9
1,842
POSITON CIRCUMFERENTIAL
..
<N
}EGREES
1ISTINSUTIONS OF LONGIT'UOINAL. VELOCITY CO PONENTI
Figure 3-7 Selected Afterbody Configuration for an LNG Ship, and Associated Wake Characteristics
3-10

.6
Meanj 2: at-
.4WW
o
00
I.-
2w
.-
Iu ( Fg rX -
Il
.2
oe,/
Figure 3-8
Th rust- Deduction Fraction of Various Types of Ships Based on Results of Model Tests at DTRC [3-2]
1.2
__
__
on Bloc Cofiin
0.8__
Apial
_
oClsdSenigeSrwSisOny[3]
_ ___ _ _ _
AW/
I 1-W)
3c
0.4
0.0
__
__
__
__
__
0.6
0.8
1.0
Figure 3-9
Criterion Plot for Gross Estimate of Wake Non-Uniformity Parameter Value Based on Block Coefficient (Applicable to Closed-Stern, Single-Screw Ships Only) [3-3]
3-11

* Concerning the relationship between afterbody shape and flow characteristics at the propeller plane, one set of information applicable to single-screw ships is that presented by Ward [3-li; criteria from that reference are d -i- ted in Figure 3-10. This includes a criterion for waterline exit angles (angles of run) and for the angle between flow lines aft. For the latter criterion, it is suggested by Ward that the value of the angle between flow lines, divided by the hull form's block coefficient, should be less than 30.
" With respect to waterline endings, or aft flow line endings, relationships between the maximum and minimum wake at 0.R and the angle between the flow lines, ending at 0.8R in the 12 o'clock position, have been suggested by Jonk and v.d. Beek [3-5]. Figure 3-11 illustrates these relationships. The suggested relationship for Ao.8R (difference of maximum and minimum value of wake at 0.8R), as a function of the half angle of the flow lines at 0.R in the 12 o'clock position (MM.8), for normal aperture clearances, can be expressed as follows:
R =
aO.8 R?+29
AW~
83
cDES$13N CRiTERIA
FOR d, CAVITATION FRNOM IOIAGRAM *A I ARAN ZOE OF I)OEUAIE EACIIAT>O FCORCES Iwhee HULL FORM DESIGND IVAL CLEARANCES (DTIAGRAM CI25.21 WATERLINE MAX OF RON ANGL.E
NEMAX SYREA&
0 02 X A L. 21
ew. # H
P. .,09 Ip nwwsn depth
zo
T1-
It s ?3FINt FORl4
'Ft
Li
7
wib-edr
ZC ZrC TOF OR1C Eh ESrcl EXCIION FORCES
Cuc%onile,,rmil meun w KefJi r0*
FOhra~~jcrom
I.0 sc,t,.
O,/V
"Ir
V
-
1t.
body
ANGI E OF RUA STERNPOST CiC
Ig
.tI
v', 0oI fOO I~f~0Lp l
i WtOrfr
W, 4 0
00AM
-00
05
GLOIBAiWAKtE Cl1ARACIERW5ICS FRO)MCAvITATION OIIAC.RAMN A
~FROPLER
SEC710hTA.CFNT AT HIGtit O S'IAFT ENTIIE
SLAC ATE PE% P, AMPUILC AUOVE P, WS ON* [ 12 1 I' P*22
evPa 5
~oA1
,-tq,. .~.
'
UI
V )2(2 VI
FORCE110,17
F,
4 SEE TEXTI
.,7
Figure 3-10 Suggested Criteria for Afterbody Design (reference numbers refer to (3-1])
3-12
0 .8
-T -T -T *
Normal Apertures
I
-
0.6----
------
0.4_"
o 0.2--------------
Wide Apertures
-. --
0al
10
20
30
40
Half
Argle of Flow Line,
aO.8R.
in degrees
Figure 3-11
Suggested Relationships Between Axial Wake Variation and Half Angle of Flow Line at 0.8R [3-5] In the case cf very wide apertures (considerably greater than those suggested by the rules of classification societies), the suggested relationship is as follows: AWR =
o.8R
+19 83
Jonk and v.d. Beek have also suggested a "Difficulty Index," applicable to the propeller in combination with the afterbody (icpiesented by the half angle of the flow line at 0.8R), as follows: +29)/83 + 0.61 (ND 3_Vs) _(X0.8R _ _ _ D.I. = T __ _ _ 2 (h + 10) D where: D.I. T N D
= = =
Difficulty Index thrust, in kilograms number of revolutions per minute diameter, in meters
3-13

Vs 0.R
= =
ship's speed, in knots
h=
half angle of flow line at 0.8R in the 12 o'clock position, in degrees height of water column above propeller tip, in meters
Jonk and v.d. Beek provide values of this "Difficulty Index" for a number of ships with known (acceptable and unacceptable) vibration characteristics. These computed values indicate that the value of the "Difficulty Index" should be about 740 or less, in order to ensure that the ship will have acceptable vibration characteristics. It may be necessary to roughly estimate the value of the previously mentioned "wake non-uniformity" parameter during the early stages of hull design. One criterion for this parameter is that suggested by Odabasi and Fitzsimmons [3-6] and presented in Figure 3-12. This criterion is nearly the same as that suggested
by Ward [3-31 (see Figure 3-10). If the value of aw/(1 cannot be estimated
from model test data for similar hull/appendage configurations, the plot presented in Figure 3-9 can be used to provide a very gross estimate of AW/(f - W). (The above discussed wake non-uniformity information is, of course, primarily applicable to closed-stem, single-screw hull forms.)
o.3 o
n
9.903- D/ - Z + TA 0.051(irnD )2 --
where:
0
2S
On
D = Propeller Diameter ZP = Distance between propeller shaft axis
o20
TA
0 is
and ship baseline

= Ship draft at aft perpendicular AW = Wake variation W = Taylor wake fraction
o IQ
0
1 to
.5
(All values in S1. units)

20
Figure 3-12
Suggested Non-Uniformity Criterion [3-6]
3-14
Excitation of Vibratory Forces 3.1.3.2 Design of Open-Stern Afterbodies

Certain guidelines have been developed from experience in the design of naval ships, primarily; these are as follows: "The angle between buttock lines (in the vicinity of the shaft centerline) and the baseline should not exceed 10 degrees. "The angle between buttock lines (in the vicinity of the shaft centerline) and the shaft centerline at the hull/shaft intersection should not exceed 12.5 degrees. "The angle between buttock lines (in the vicinity of the shaft centerline) and the shaft centerline, in way of the propeller plane, should not exceed 5 degrees. (The above guidelines apply primarily to open-stem, twin-screw ships; however, they can also apply, in general to open-stem, single-screw ships and to twin-screw ships featuring "buttock flow" stems fitted with shaft bossings or bossing/strut configurations.)
3.1.3.3 Selection of Propeller-to-Hull Clearances

Propeller-to-hull clearances must be large enough to avoid any undue interference with the circulation pattern around the blade as it passes the hull, skeg and rudder boundaries. Note that the pressure field around each blade rotates with the blade and gives rise to fluctuating forces on those boundaries, which are close enough to the blade to feel the effects of the rotating pressure field. The clearance between the propeller tips and the hull should be selected in order to minimize propeller-induced fluctuating hull pressures. Three components of the propeller-induced hull pressures are normally calculated separately and then added together. These components are as follows: "Pressures due to the thickness of the rotating propeller blades " Pressures due to the hydrodynamic loading of the propeller blades "Pressures due to the thickness and thickness variation with time of the area of cavitation on the propeller blades The pressures induced by the thickness and the loading of the propeller blades have a sinusoidal character with the blade frequency being dominant. For the non-cavitating propeller, there is a strong decay in the amplitude of the pressure with increasing propeller clearance. For example, 4r, where the calculations for one particular propeller showed a decay proportional with about 1 r is the distance between the point considered and the propeller shaft. The behavior of the pressures originating from blade cavitation is usually quite different. First of all, these pressures have a strong fluctuating character. Secondly, the blade frequency components and the higher harmonics can have a considerable magnitude. Hnally, for the case with blade
3-15
Ship Vibration Design Guide cavitation, the decay with increasing propeller tip clearances is much smaller. For example, for one particular propeller investigated, the decay was proportional to l/r2. The net result is that the excitation forces can reach values much higher than those generated when only the blade thickness and blade loading con-onents are involved. For most naval ships, the propeller to hull clearance (commonly called "tip clearance") is selected to be at least 0.25 times the propeller diameter (D). Naval ship propeller tip clearance, plotted versus a gross propeller loading parameter, is presented in Figure 3-13. This information, together with full scale evaluations of ship vibration characteristics, indicates that vibration problems can probably be avoided by using a tip clearance value of 0.25 D.
__O
_I
3 o0~
U-
-RECENT
SHIPS ARE I THIS REGION
.0
II
o
_
0
!
KNOWN VIBRATION PROBLEMS
00
,!
20
30
,4o 50
70
100
150
200
300
400
SHP PER SQUARE FOOT OF PROP DISK AREA
Figure 3-13 Tip Clearance versus Propeller Loading for U.S. Navy Ships [NAVSEA] For ships built to commercitl tandardk, the cla:sififaion societies recommend the propeller tip clearance. One example of such recommendations, for a particular closed-stern, single-screw ship, is given in Figure 3-14. It is interesting that the recommended tip clearances in this example, for the different values of propeller diameter, amount to roughly constant percentages of propeller diameter. The classification societies also provide guidance for propeller tip clearance for twin-screw ships. The guidance provided by three classification societies is summarized in Table 3-1. Application of this guidance to an example ship (the T-AO 187 design, which at the time an analysis of clearances, etc., was carried out, featured twin, 90 RPM, 24 ft. diarnetei propellers) yielded the recommended minlimum pro)pellcr clearances as shown in Table 3-2. This table also indicates the slight reduction in recommen1 ded clearances that would accompany the selection of five-bladed instead of four-bladed pi( pClLets t rthe c,\ ample ship.
3-16

Tip clearance relationships recommended by Classification Societies
POWER 1S500 GHP 2.0 1.5
SPEED - 19 KNOTS
z C e
51BLADES
0.5 5
C 14
w u M
1.5 1,3 -1.0 4
cT)1.0
cla 'le VAI'. ITD' 5.3 145
T0.5 6.25 110 7.2 85 DIAMETER IN M RPM
Figure 3-14 Tip Clearance versus Propeller Diameter and Blade Loading as Recommended by Several Classification Societies for a Particular Ship Design [3-5]
For open-stem, twin-screw ships with strut-supported shafts, one significant factor related to selection of propeller tip clearance is the thickness of the boundary layer. In this regard, Todd [3-7] discusses the work of van Lammeren, who developed a formula based on the assumption that the tip clearance should be equal to 0.8 times the thickness of the boundary layer in way of the propellers. For a ship the size of the T-AO 187, for example, this formula would yield a tip clearance of 30 inches, or 0.104 DI. In his study of some 20 twin-screw ships, covering a length range of 350 to 750 feet, Todd noted clearances greater than values suggested by van Lammeren; for these ships, the largest clearances can be represented by the following expression: C = .08 L
P
- 5.0
Where C is the clearance, in inches, and LP is the ship length (between perpendiculars), in feet. Thus, for the above mentioned example ship (T-AO 187):
C
=
(.08 x 633) - 5.0 45.64 inches 45.64/(24x 12) 0.158
CIDe
= =
3-17
Table 3-1 Classification Society Guidance on Propeller Clearance Classification Society

Det Norske Veritas
Number of Propellers
1 2 1
Tip To Clearance
(0.24 - 0.01z) Dp (0.30 - 0.01z) Dp Greater of (0.65 c)Dp or 0.1ODpfor z = 4
Longitudinal Clearance Blade at O.7R

(0.35 - 0.02z) DO No guidance given 1.5 times tip clearance
Bureau Veritas 2
Greater of (0.55 (x)Dp or

0.1ODp for z = 5 Greater of (0.65 a)Dp or 0.20Dp for z = 4 Greater of (0.55 a)Dp or 0.16Dp for z = 5
1.5 times tip clearance

Greater of tip clearance or 0.15Dp Greater of tip clearance or 0.15Dp
where:
aCB
= =
(C B x SHP)"
IOL
SHP
Block Coefficient Shaft power per shaft, metric HP
L
z D
= = =
Ship length, meters Number of blades Propeller Diameter

Greater of (1.OK1)Dp or 0.10Dpfor z = 4 Greater of (0.85K 1)Dp or 0.10Dp for z = 5 Greater of (1.0K2)Dp or 0.20Dp for z = 4 Greater of (0.85K 2 )Dp or I 0.20Dp for z = 5 Greater of (1.5KI)Dp or 0.15Dp for z = 4 Greater of (1.275KI)Dp or 0.15Dp for z = 5 Greater of (1.0K2)Dp or 0.15Dp for z = 4 Greater of (0.85K 2 )Dp or 0.15Dp for z = 5
Lloyd's
where: K .1 1 +218C.L2-+0.3)
( 14CBxSHP L"2 +0.3)
K2
L 0.10+ 10000
CB
= =
SHP
Block Coefficient Total installed shaft horsepower
Ship length, feet
3-18
Excitation of Vibratory Forces Table 3-2 Propeller Clearances Recommended by Classification Society Guidance for Example Ship (T-AO) Classification Society
Det Norske Veritas
Number of Propellers
2
Tip Clearance
Longitudinal Clearance to Blade at O.7R
No guidance aiven 0.26Dp for z = 4 0.25Dp for z = 5 No guidance given 0.20Dp for z - 4 0.20Dp for z = 4 2 Bureau Veritas 0.16Dp for z = 5 0,16Dp for z = 5 0.18Dp for z = 4 0.20Dp for z = 4 2 Lloyd's 0..16Dpfor z = 5 0.150p for z = 5 Note: Example ship had twin, 90 RPM, 24 ft diameter propellers, at this stage of design
Actually, Todd recommends a tip clearance of 0.2 Dp or, in special cases, 0.25 Dp, for early stage design, for open-stem, twin-screw ships. Saunders [3-8] also recommends the determination of propeller tip clearance based on an estimated boundary layer thickness at the propeller. In his approach, the nominal thickness of the smooth-hull turbulent boundary layer (8) can be estimated at the ship's sustained speed, using the following relationship: 8= 0.38 (x)
where:
2 xl0
=
=
Distance from bow to propeller, in ft. Kinematic viscosity (for salt water at 3.5 percent salinity
and 590 F, v = 1.2791 x 10. ' ft2/sec)
v
U
Undisturbed velocity of the water, in ft/sec
Saunders notes that the friction wake velocities in the outer half of the boundary layer are generally less than about one-tenth the ship velocity, which would suggest an acceptable tip clearance of 0.58. However, the foregoing estimate of 8 is based on a smooth hull, and the expected roughening and fouling of the hull over its service life results in average boundary layer thicknesses in excess of the values that result from the use of the above formula. He, therefore, recommends minimum propeller tip clearances of about 0.78. Thus, for the 20-knot T-AO 187 (for example):
x = U* = 600 feet (approximately) 33.78 ft/sec
3-19
Ship Vibration Design Guide 8

=
-
0.2 (0.38) (600) ((1.2791 x 10 ) / (33.78 x 600))
3.30 feet 2.31 feet 2.3 1/24 = 0.096
0.7 8 = 0.7
/ DP
Tip clearances based on boundary layer thickness as recommended by Todd and Saunders (which result, for example, in 0.104 and 0.096 Dp, respectively,for the T-AO 187) permit the propeller tip to penetrate the outer boundary layer; such tip clearances must be considered to be minimum values since it is preferable to keep the tip out of the boundary layer, especially in ships with relatively highly loaded propellers. Continuing the reference to the example ship, the tip clearance shown on the T-AO 187 drawings is 0.20 Dp, based on DP = 24 feet. This clearance was considered to be satisfactory in light of the guidance provided by Bureau Veritas, Lloyd's, and Todd and Saunders. The larger clearance recommended by Det Norske Veritas (0.26 DP for four-bladed propellers and 0.25 DP for five-bladed propellers) was considered to be too conservative; the Det Norske Veritas recommendations are based on moderately cavitating propellers, whereas the 24 ft. T-AO 187 propellers had relatively light thrust loading and would have been relatively free of cavitation. Concerning the longitudinal clearance between the skeg (deadwood), struts, or bossings and the leading edge of the propeller blades, classification society guidance is presented in Table 3-1. This guidance applies primarily to closed-stern, single-screw ships and twin-screw ships with bossings. When applied to the above mentioned example ship (T-AO 187 with twin, 90 RPM, 24 ft. diameter propellers), a longitudinal clearance of about 0.20 DP is indicated. Saunders [3-81 recommends a longitudinal clearance of 0.20 DP or the propeller chord length at 0.7R, whichever is greater. For the example ship (T-AO 187) propeller, the range of recommended longitudinal clearance would be from about 0.27 DP (for five-bladed propellers with blade area ratio of 0.50) to about 0.35 D, (for four-bladed propellers with blade area ratio of 0.66), using Saunders recommendation and assuming Wageningen B Series propellers. Saunders indicates, however, that longitudinal clearances, like tip clearances, may be reduced from the average recommended values when thrust loadings are light. The example ship (T-AO 187) drawings sb,)wed a longitudinal clearance between the centerplane of the propeller (a plane at right angles to the shaft centerline at the propeller center) and the aft edge of the struts of six feet at 0.7R of the propeller, which corresponds to 0.25 D,; the clearance to the leading edge of the blades would depend on blade geometry, including blade rake. Studies reported by Lewis in Chapter 10 of Principles of Naval Architecture [3-9] tend to support these above noted values of longitudinal clearance for the example ship. In the case of another example ship (the DD963), the longitudinal clearance (aft edge of strut to propeller centerplane) is about 0.41 D,; the approximate clearance between the strut and the propeller blades, at 0.7R, is 0.32 Dp. For this ship, however, the blade thrust loading coefficient is considerably greater than that for the other example ship (T-AO 187).
.3-20

Additional guidance on selection of propeller tip clearance and longitudinal clearance, based on data from actual operating single-screw, closed-stern ships, has been given by Vossnack and Voogd [3-10]; this guidance is presented in Figures 3-15 and 3-16. Based on the discussion presented above, it is obvious that many considerations affect the selection of propeller-to-hull clearances. For early stage design purposes, it is recommended that a tip clearance of 0.25 DP and a longitudinal clearance of 0.5 Dp between the trailing edge of the skeg (deadwood) or strut and the centerplane of the propeller be selected.
60000
SHP
-
MSOOg
I OW ?ANKIN
t1100, ' TAWB~tIE Ow W(S OL, W(
400001... 11.1 T* 1.i 1"A o h
.ft 0 t
OLW A 0
1)0OOD7
&AIR AM "00$ 1INC. A "C' S
&6L
TAkAN
I AWSL.* COMN&I AY
30000
IE&COVNLITA
,-oooI
At
B% U,1T ,-.-o
--
STARI.
20 000
20000
AO STA Ir ACO OREGG 1k41Zof "I S-(LL Ila WR, =p t ,.O

JAP
_____
"'_
DOef.wltg
10000
,, SLLOYD
S LLIOYD
01
Clearance Ahead of Propeller, in Meters
Figure 3-15
Guidance for Selection of Clearance Ahead of Propeller Based on Data from Actual Operating Ships [3-9]
3-21
50000
S HP
--
1
ht h It WAKI BE 6T I ) bb% ,UL1 V091tit CAITA?04 eP0541 Ivt Dtftt NO P O3K P0ITH rRE 10F46.6.RS Nov
inst.
50000
4jS0Q0 Tow * VtPOLME
,(0.Lk. of itih
0~ 000 / pTIN SCAEw
27%000 1ow * JAP.IANSER
COL~ ASHA
30000
_______
Powct
/// /
BULK-t~E 40'
AWIGAN
C&LIF .STAR
/
20000
AIL, $SIAM
_.
W.61 It
t(1A(OO.0
*i .LO O
-0.
0 19000 l.ST9400 * OOLWIJK

ST a.wLkGA7l. PL(rR/I twALCMEAt00
10000 lit0k /11
*Rol% $tA flNog
/
0
I2 3
Tip Clearance, in Meters

Figure 3-16 Guidance for Selection of Propeller Tip Clearance Based on Data from Actual Operating Ships [3-9]
3-22
3.1.4
Development of Shapes and Arrangement of Aft Apendages
The development of the configuration of the aft appendages to ensure that induced vibratory forces are minimized is discussed separately, although it is closely related to the development of the afterbody shape. The subjects considered under this heading are as follows: * Propeller location (fore and aft) * Shaft strut geometry and shaft strut arm alignment * Fore and aft clearance between propeller(s) Pid rudder(s) * Transverse offset of shaft(s), relative to transverse offset of rudder(s) Propeller tip clearance and the longitudinal clearance between the skeg (deadwood), struts, or bossings and the propeller(s) is discussed under 3.1.3, above. As a broad guideline, it can be stated that the propeller(s) should be located as far aft as is practicable; this will, in general, tend to maximize propulsive efficiency and minimize the propeller-induced vibratory forces. The geometry of shaft strut arms must be such as to provide the stiffness necessary to prevent the strut arms from respondig to propeller-induced vibratory forces of hydrodynamic origin or those vibratory forces caused by propeller, shaft or engine imbalance. For the design of U.S. Navy ship struts, DDS 161-1 [3-11] applies. DDS 161-1 could also be used for the preliminary design of struts for commercial ships. Strut arms must, of course, be aligned to the flow in order to minimize any adverse effects of these strut arms on the inflow to the propeller. The practice for U.S. Navy ships is to deteimine the proper alignment of strut arms by means of a model test. Such a test should be carried out with a hull model representing the final hull form, and the final apppendages (including the final strut locations as determined by the shipbuilder, if possible), and with a propeller model representing the final propeller design. With respect to the longitudinal clearance between the strut arms and the propeller(s), as noted in 3.1.3, above, a reasonable practice for early stage design is to provide a clearance of at least 0.5 DP between the trailing edge of the strut arms and the centerplane of the propeller (a plane at right angles to the shaft centerline at the propeller center). The longitudinal clearance between the propeller(s) and the rudder(s) must be selected. While Saunders [3-8] states that c!earances abaft the propeller may be less than those ahead of the propeller, the guideline that clearance should not be less than the expanded blade-chord-length at each radius can be used as criterion to determine the allowable clearance between the aft edge of the blade and the leading edge of the rudder. For an example ship (a twin-skeg, T-AO design), the actual clearance was appreciable larger than the clearance required by the "blade-chord-length" guideline (see Figure 3-17). Figure 3-17 shows that another criterion, which requires a minimum clearnce of 0.25 DP at 0.7R, was satisfied for the example ship. It should be noted, that the aiove two criteria were formulated with reference to "conventional" propeller blade shapes, prior to the increasing use of highly-skewed blades. For "conventional" blades shapes, the clearance will usually tend to remain at the magnitude established at 0.7R (as determined by the above criteria), or increase as the radius increases. For the example ship, (Figure 3-17), which featured skewed propeller blades, the blade shape is such that clearance decreases at radii greater than 0.7R. Nevertheless, the requirement that relates local clearance
3-23
2 o 34' -
Figure 3-17
Actual and Minimum Required Propeller Blade Clearance for an Example Ship to local chord length of the blade, which seems to be rational, is satisfied. guidelizes noted above (and illustrated in Figure 3-17) are recommended. Both of the
A transverse separation of the rudder(s) and the extended propeller shaft line(s), thereby placing the rudders outside of the shaft hub trailing vortices, is considered to be good practice. This avoids rudder erosion due to the hub vortices and may also reduce vibratory input to the rudders, thereby reducing any tendency for rudder vibration. This separation also enables shaft removal without unshipping the rudders. A reasonable estimate of the transverse separation of shaft centerline and rudder centerline would be as follows: 0.10 Dp for ships with fixed-pitch propellers, and r. 125 DP for ships with controllable-pitch propellers. Numerous considerations affect the design of the rudder(s) and, normally, the strength and structural arrangement requirements will result in rudder shapes and rudder construction such that the rudders will not be likely to vibrate (or transmit vibration to the ship's hull) due to fluctuations in the inflow to the rudder (e.g., due to the fluctuations in the propeller race). However, in some cases it may be necessary to ensure that rudder vibration will not occur. A general approach for avoidance of rudder vibration is as follows: "Establish the proportions of the rudder in accordance with classification society rules or with the U.S. Navy ship control surface design data sheets, DDS-562-1 and DDS-562-2 [3-12 and 3-13, respectively]. "Estimate the rudder inflow forces and periodicity from appropriate wake and propeller data and from empirical data. "Estimate the resonant frequency of the rudder, using empirical data. "Develop the design of the rudder such that resonance with the vibratory inputs will be avoided. 3-24
3.1.5 Selection of Propeller Characteristics

As intimated above, if propeller cavitation can be minimized, there is a reasonable likelihood that the hull pressure forces can be minimized; this is due to the fact that propeller cavitation can greatly magnify (by multipliers of 3 to 10, or greater) the hull pressure forces, which would "normally" (i.e., under non-cavitating conditions) result from the passage of the propeller blades through the non-uniform wake field. (These "normal" hull pressure forces can, in turn, be minimized by careful design of the afterbody, propeller blades and afterbody appendages, as discussed herein.) An example of the differences in pressure pulses over the propeller tip, for cavitating and non-cavitating conditions, in this case for a U.S. Navy oiler, is illustrated in Figure 3-18. It is not the purpose of this document to cover details of propeller design or even details of propeller selection; however, certain ,,,,-l ,, " Pp. apy and t,c w e suiniarizd b..w. Also, sample data, applicable to a limitea range of propellers for certain types of ships, is presented for possible use and to illustrate the approach. General principles, applicable to early design stage selection of basic propeller parameter values for surface, displacement ship, are as follows: Large-diameter, low-RPM propellers are, in most cases, more efficient than small-diameter, high-RPM propellers, thereby reducing the required shaft power.
PRESSURE PULSi OVER PROVtL~ttK TIP 50

-----------
-*--
BALLAST CONrNITION FULL LOAD
40 -
30
4
MN
U.(
M
20
.o
Z/
/3
/
0
2
1 1
.,0
00
10 15 20 25
SHIP SPEED. XNOTS
Figure 3-18
Variation of Blade Rate Peak-to-Peak Hull Pressure Over Propeller Tip versus Ship Spped, for U.S. Navy Oiler, Based on Model Tests [3-14]
3-25

Reducing the propeller full-power RPM usually increases machinery system weight; reducing the propeller full-power RPM may result in reduced fuel consumption. Propellers with a low expanded area ratio (E.A.R.) are usually more efficient than propellers with a high E.A.R., thereby reducing the required shaft power. * Cavitation performance degrades with decreasing E.A.R., for a given diameter and RPM. Higher propeller tip speeds degrade tip cavitation performance; hence, a large diameter must normally be complemented with a low RPM to minimize cavitation as well as to maximize the propulsive efficiency. As noted above, the provision of adequate propeller tip clearance can help to reduce the risk of propeller-induced hull vibration. In turn, the requirement to provide adequate tip clearance can affect the selection of Dp, especially if the propeller tips are constrained to be above the ship's baseline or not to extend below a specified draft. The number of propeller blades is usually not selected during the very early stages of design; however, this selection should be made as a result of a preliminary vibration analysis of the hull/machinery system and this analysis should be carried out as soon as is feasible. In selecting the number of blades, the blade arrangement on the hub and thc blade root suucture iuust also be considered, particularly in the case of controllable-pitch propellers. For early design stage estimates of propeller thrust, torque and efficiency, the appropriate Wageningen B Series data may be used. As indicated above, the basic propeller design parameter values to be selected are the diameter (D,) and the blade area ratio (e.g., the expanded area ratio, E.A.R.), the RPM and the number of blades. Sufficient blade area (i.e., sufficient DP and E.A.R. values) should be provided to yield values of thrust-loading, which result in acceptable cavitation performance. The Burrill Cavitation Diagram, Figure 3-19, may be used as an aid in making this determination. The data included on the Burrill Cavitation Diagram is based on tests of propellers designed prior to 1943. Simple comparisons with the Burrill data do not take into account the cavitation performance that is attainable with contemporary propeller blade designs. The Burrill diagram can, however, be used for a preliminary cavitation performance assessment during early stages of design. Thus, if the computed (,, (Tv ) data point corresponding to the selected propeller loading condition (e.g. the full power, full load condition) for the new ship design falls under the appropriate "limit line" on the Burrill Diagram, tr: ."avitation pcrfoiniance of the eventual , Li adition, the plots provided in Figures 3-20 and 3-21 may i b propeller(s) be of use in selecting values of D, and RPM, based on the suggested limits for cavitation number, as a function of thrust-loading coefficient; however, as pointed out by Wilson [3-15],
3-26

T - THRUST IN POUNDS
0.4
A.,(067o-229)
(EON77)
VRI.,RELAnIVf VELOCITY AT , 70 RADIUS 03 EHP (I*X) IPOUNDS PER
0'3X
,22
'tIVA
45.045h
So INCH)
IPOUNDS PER 1.I.
C)
-%I
;:02
h.I'HEAD ABOVE SHAFT
FEET
VN
0.1
_____SKETCHES
~OF
21/2%
GLACE PROPELLER SHOWING PERCENTAGE CAVITATION ON BACK
5%
10%
20%
30%
0'0o
0.2
O.3
0.4
1.
0.
V,
0.6
0.7
GO 0.9 tO
,.S
2o
LOCAL CAVITATION NUMBER AT 0.7 R - r|O.T 07
Figure 3-19 Burrill Cavitation Diagram [3-9]

single-screw ships with vibration problems (noted in Figure 3-20) all had cavitation numbers that fell below the suggested cavitation number limit and no data points are shown for the twin-screw ships. Of course, the selection of Dp, E.A.R. and RPM values is also governed by propulsive efficiency considerations and normal machinery design considerations (propeller location, arrangement and tip clearance, weight of machinery plus fuel, limits on propeller RPM due to engine and reduction gear restrictions, etc.). The number of propeller blades should be selected to keep the propeller forces and moments within acceptable limits and also to avoid development of blade-rate fluctuations of thrust and torque at frequencies close to natural frequencies (through the 5th mode) of the hull and of the propulsion sytCBi, reqpectively. The information in Figure 3-22 can be used as initial, very general guidance for selecting the iuziibcr of blades, with respect to the range of alternating thrust values and shaft bending moment variations that can be anticipate!, for "conventional," single-screw ships having propellers with four, five and six blades. The plot in Figure 3-23 shows some disparity between calculated and experimentally determined values of excitation force, for one set of foa , . -, aii,. , p, . .',a:uowd data, for both single-screw and twin-screw ships, should be assembled in order to provide the needed guidance for selection of the number of propeller blades.
3-27

2 2 on = (Po - pv)/(0.5pn D ) CT = T/(0.5VAZAO)
2 A 0 = xD /4 = prop disk area
n - prop revolutions per unit of time Po

=
static pressure at shaft C.L.
pv = vapor pressure of water VA

=
/
/1 ^1 04
I
I.
flow velocity into prop
T =prop thrust
J = prop advance coefficient AJ = increment inJ, based on increment inthrust (T) and the slope (AKT/AJ)
-F
N
\
X/
___
0.5
s0.4 z
H
"0.3
I0.1
THRUST LOADING COEFFICIENT, CT Figure 3-20 Vibration Problem Areas Identified in a an versus CT Diagram [3-15, 3-16]
3-28

0
VA a
(Po- Py)/(0.5VA2)
CT a T/(O.SPVA 2Ao)
A 0 a f02/4 a prop disk area Po x static pressure at shaft C.L, Pv " vapor pressure of water V A a flow velocity into prop T = prop thrust J a prop advance coefficient. AJ s increment inJ,based on increment inthrust (T) and the slope (&KT/AJ)
0
-
'A
4/!i
THRUST LOADING COEFFICIENTf, CT
Figure 3-21 Vibration Problem Areas Identified in a aVA versus CT Diagram [3-15, 3-16]
3-29
F3
MI
To
C15
-0.15
6o
0.10
0.10
005
005
Figure 3-22 Normalized Thrust (F3) and Horizontal Bending Moment (Ml) Variations at Blade Frequency Shown as Mean Values and Standard Deviations. Four-, Five-, and Six-Bladed Propellers Fitted on Conventional Single-Screw Ships 13-171
VERTICAL EXCITATON FORCE (KN) A, 'LITLVDE BLADE FRED.
J4EASL;RE,_
01 4
~
w.
5 OF BLADES
Figure 3-23 Effect of Number of Propeller Blades on Vertical Excitation Force [3-18]
3-30

As noted previously, the recommended approach to development -f a shi 9 design having minimized propeller-induced vibratory forces is to first select the propeller characteristics su%,h that the cavitation will be minimized. Guidelines to aid in the selection of the characteristics of the propellers for a particular range of ship designs [lazg, singlksrew ships with conventional stems, Hogner-type (or, bulbous) sterns, and open sterns] were developed by Atlas, et al. [3-19], and are presented below. This detailed material, although applicable to a very limited range of ship designs, is included herein as a significant example. The example "cavitation-minimization" guidelines (reproduced from the report by At.:las 13 19]) make use of a modified Burrill chart. This modified Burrill chart, Figure 3-24, shows relationships between mean blade lift coefficient CL, and local cavitation number, Y. . Six data
0.50
0.40 "
MAX K
0.30
,. FROMC
it\'~
L 0.20 0.15/.
3
o
LIMIT
IAIT
OPEHI S ERI
-hOGNER
STERN
0.10 0.09 0.08 0.07 0.06U
(r//'
LIMIT -CLOSED STERN
0.05
0.1
.
0.15 0.2 0.3
0
L..
0.4
LL
0.6
Ll_...
0.8
1.0
AT 0.7 R
Figure 3-24 Modified Burrill Cavitation Diagram [3-19] points located on Figure 3-24 indicate estimated maximum acceptable blade loadings, from a cavitation viewpoint (for large single-screw ships). Propellers operating at these conditions will not be cavitation free but will have about three or four percent of the blades coe\'red by cavitation, depending on wake characteristics. The applicability of the six data points is as follows: Point 1 reflects an estimate of the limiting condition foi a pi-opeller operaling; in circumferentially uniform flow. This point lies very close to the back bubble boundary and thus will have little tolerance for variations in inflow conditionis. Some tip vortex cavitation will be present, due to the relatively high design lift coefficient.
3-31

" Points 2 and 3A connect a region judged to be acceptable for hulls with very good wake characteristics, such as hull forms with open stems where the primary wake non-uniformity comes from the circumferential wake component due to shaft inclination. Points 2 and 3A lie on a line that would represent propellers with the same thrust requirements but operating with different rotation rates. Typically, Point 2 would apply to low speed ships and Point 3A to higher speed ships. " Points 3B and 4A lie on a line that would represent propellers acceptable for ships with moderate wake characteristics, such as Hogner-type sterns with large propeller clearances (particularly those with large clearances ahead of the blades). " Point 4B applies to conventional (closed-stem) designs having better than average propeller clearances and relatively fine stern lines. With the aid of momentum equations, the operating conditions represented by the six above described data points were converted into propeller operating characteristics for a range of thrust loadings (CTh), for the large, single-screw ships being considered. For the purpose of illustration, it has been assumed that the propellers have five blades and a projected area ratio of 0.80. It was found that this area ratio yielded propellers with slightly higher than optimum loading from an efficiency standpoint. Thus, while higher projected area ratios would allow higher loading before reaching the cavitation limit, the efficiency penalty associated with such a high loading would make the designs of little practical interest. The above assumptions must be born in mind when using this set of data. The resulting propeller operating characteristics are presented in Figures 3-25 through 3-28, where each figure corresponds to the specific mean lift coefficient (CL) values corresponding with Data Points 1, 2, 3A/3B and 4A/4B, respectively, on Figure 3-24. Included on these curves are: advance coefficient, J; open water propeller efficiency, im0; pitch diameter ratio, PID; propeller thrust coefficient, K-; blade area ratio, BAR; and maximum allowable value of thrust loading coefficient, CTh (as a function of cavitation number based on ship speed, as). These curves thus represent the estimated maximum loading that can be applied to a propeller of given diameter at a given ship speed. The maximum allowable thrust loading coefficient, CTh, for each operating condition can be related to ihe cavitation number based on ship speed, as, as follows: '30 aP_
= A
" 3s xChJ
ACL
where cro is the local section operating cavitation number, A is a section camber distribution constant, as is the cavitation number based on ship speed, and APIA is the projected area ratio of the propeller blades. This relationship yields the following:
3-32
10.60
.5.
60
00
4.
20.0 80.0 40.0 10KT
20.0
.0
.4 0506. 0.r.
.SO00
2.
F0ue32
Figre3-2

10010
80.07 40.0
20.0 -
20.0
8.0 6.0 4.0-
10.AA
2.0
10K0
1.0
0.1 .
0.60.1.0
2.0
4.0 Cl"
6.08010.0
20.0
Figure 3-27 Propeller Characteristics for Maximum Loading with Open Stern-High Speed(Case 3A): Maximum CTh = 0.50 as; and with Hogner Stern-Low Speed (Case 3B): [3-19] Maximum CTh = 0.40 as; 5 Blades, PAR =0.8, Design CL =0.125
80.0
40.0-
IC4.'
6.0*
00
2.0)
Figure
K72
Maximum2 C0h= 0.328. as; 5.Blades, PA10.
Dein0L.0.00[-9
3-34

For unifoin- wale, For oren sterns, For Hogner-type sterns, For conventional sterns,
Max.
Max. C
h-
0.64
.'
0.5(o )s
os
Max. c7h -0.40
032 0'3. os
Fo t
to c.s 2ake -lg~tan non-a-Lnnity is achipbs h ng Iill-limiLA ,IIIr, ntimnaL.Iemw ihataga _ l. e 1,: r loading_ uch .. ti iscj taLtnnitow~k acceptable loading toaix uthaiLtha The information presented on Figures 3-25 through 3-28 cat be nse to determine the maxim rn power jfor the large, single-screw ships being .onsidered), which can be absorbed by a propeller of a given diameter under specified operatirg ccedt'.o.n. As an example, suppose it is desired to determine the maximum power thai could be alosOrbe., by a 30 foot diameter propeller at 32 knots, with a Ilogner-1.;, e stern. The wake fracii ,n i> ,srinated to be about be about 24 feet, for this 0.20 and the propeller submergence to the 0.7 ,adius is estimate-d . inaxiumC value is ship. Ihe resulting cavitation iiumber, o, is 1.9:;. For this C. 0.45 oT, or 0.78. Using Figure 3-28, since this is a high speed ship , we get the following data: Advance coefficient, d 0.74 which corresoonds to 11 .' -I-
'P Propeller efficiency, '1i 0.66, which orresponds to 131,000 .Pitch diameter ratio 0.90 0
i7 Thrust coefficient, K. = 0.
Blade area ratio, BAR " 0.93
For this example, a series of plots have been prepared, idiich ,how the limniting power levels for a Hogner-type stern (C Th - 0.4 c), for a range of tropeller dimeters from 20 to 50 feet and for a range of design speeds from 16 to 3? knots. in pre-paring thes figa:es, the following parameter values were assumed: Ship speed in knots (16' Wake fraction (W) Thrust deduction fraction (t) Relative rotative efficiency (rlR) Propeller subnergen CtO 0.7 rauius 0.40 0.20 1.0
1 6 I)
24 0.30 0.20
i.0
32 0.20 0.20 1.0 (),80 I), O.
For this example, Figures 3-29 through 3.-3i siiov, the ,afiation of p~opctler efficiency (1;) with
I nots respectively. Constant k1; diameter and delivered horsepower ([)it') :1 16, 24, and efficiency lines on these fi ,rcs correspond tki , (onstat popclie loading in terms of

7Vol SW0
-
100
/S
CVITAIION LIMI!
- -.-
40
0,6
30
21 '
ti
.0.7
10
/ / -
16 KI$
t t 20
I so
30 40 PIO .ELU DIMOi (fr)
Figure 3-29 Variation of Propeller Efficiency (ijo) with Diameter and Delivered Power at 16 Knots; w = 0.40, t = 0.20, Submergence to 0.7R = 1.6 Diameter [3-19]
200
300 200 -CAVITATION4

40
LIMIT 10.60. n
100
0
'SC0 20
/
40
/T / /
7 --
24KI
20
30
40
50
POOPOLiEI DIAMTOi ( Of)
Figure 3-30 Variation of Propeller Efficiency ( 0 0) with Diameter and Delivered Power at 24 Knots; w = 0.30, t = 0.20, Submergence to 0.7R = 1.2 Diameter [3-19]
3-36
2000
CAITTON LIMI
7200
0.6
320
/
3 32.KI
0.0
.0
umrenet
.R=0.
imtr[-9
* 200
I I / 20
0, 25
, 0.4 20IIAI
F~gur 3-3
33-3

TOO 4M 0 50' 04A.
40
200-
30
50
~2U2005 3
Fi3r 33
Variation of Cavitation-Limited Delivered Power (DHP)

with Ship Speed, for Various Propeller Diameters [3-19]
40 70o
4Do0 2 i I I I I I
50' DIA,
| I
so -
20'
WATT ITATIONI CAV
Is
25 20 (KNOTS) SPEED SHLP
30
Figure 3-34
Variation of Cavitation-Limited Effective Power (EHP) with Ship Speed, for Various Propeller Diameters [3-19]
3-38

Note that the cavitation limit permits higher loadings, corresponding to lower efficiency lines, for larger propellers. This is due to the increased submergence, and corresponding cavitation number, for the larger propellers. Figure 3-32 is a cross plot of Figures 3-29 through 3-31, for the 30 foot diameter propeller used in the example. The low efficiencies at the cavitation limit for low speeds reflect the high thrust loadings permitted at low speeds. Thus, efficiency rather than cavitation, would probably be the limiting consideration at low design speeds. Figure 3-33 shows the cavitation-limited power (DHP) as a function of ship speed, for various propeller diameters. Note that the power limit is nearly independent of speed. (The 30 foot diameter limit line is the same as shown on Figure 3-32.) Figure 3-34 is similar to Figure 3-33, but it gives the EHP limit instead of the DHP limit. The lower EHP values at low ship speeds reflects the lower efficiency associated with the higher thrust loadings possible at low speeds. As noted previously, the above guidance material and the example apply to large. single-screw ships. Similar guidelines could be developed for other sizes and types of ships, and used in selecting the basic propeller characteristics during early stages of design, as an integral part of the process of designing to minimize vibratory forces and moments. In addition to selection of the gross characteristics, the details of the propeller blade design must eventually also be developed to minimize propeller-induced vibratory forces; this includes development of the blade area distribution, contour, pitch distribution, section shapes, rake, skew, etc. Development of the detailed blade design is beyond the scope of this report; however, it should be noted that blade skew has been found to be particu!arly useful for minimizing hull pressure amplitudes, assuming that the other characteristics are carefully selected. An example of the effect of blade skew on hull pressure amplitude for a particular hull/propeller configuration, is presented in Figure 3-35.
100% 80% -
Blade frequency
Pressure amplitude
60%
Twice bade frequency
40% 20% 0% 0%
I
20%
I
40%
i
60%
I
80%
Skew
Figure 3-35
Effect of Blade Skew on Hull Pressure
3-39
Ship Vibration Design Guide Numerous references applicable to the details of propeller design are available. For commercial ship designs, the information presented in SNAME and RINA publications and in "International Shipbuilding Progress" and other periodicals, should be utilized. For U.S. Naval ship designs, the propeller design practices developed by NAVSEA and DTRC would apply.
3.2 Early Design Stage Estimates of Propeller-Induced Vibratory Forces and Moments 3.2.1 Approach
As noted previously, the hull shape details, the design of the appendages and the propeller design can be refined, with respect to minimization of vibratory forces, during the later stages of design since the required detailed ship design information and results of appropriate model tests will be available at that time. During the early stages of design, when only a preliminary lines drawing (or body plan), an appendage sketch and minimal definition of the propeller(s) may exist, vibratory force and moment estimates can be made by interpolation/extrapolation of applicable data previously calculated for generally similar ships. Fundamental to this approach is the fact that propeller-induced alternating thrust () and alternating torque (Q) values have been found to vary roughly in proportion to the variation in the value of propeller advance coefficient (J), for generally similar hull/appendage/propeller configurations, with the hull forms having approximately equal values of block coefficient (CB). The first step in this estimating process is to assemble the calculated values of T and Q and the corresponding values of alternating horizontal bearing force (FH), alternating vertical bearing force (Fv), mean thrust (T)and mean torque (Q), all at design full-power speed and all on a per shaft basis, plus the pertinent hull form and propulsion data for the similar ships. A sample of this type of assembled data is presented in Table 3-3. The material in Table 3-3 was utilized in the 1982 review of a proposed hull/propeller configuration for the T-AO 187 Baseline. This material and the material presented in Table 3-4, which relates to the vibratory force measurements and analyses carried out for three different LNG ship hull/propeller configurations (see Figures 3-3, 3-4, and 3-5), represented readily available data suitable for use in early design stage vibratory force estimates; hence, this material is referred to in this and other chapters of this publication. As the initial edition of this publication was nearing completion, some additional unsteady thrust and unsteady torque data, including the associated data source references, was supplied by the American Bureau of Shipping. This data is included in Table 3-5. It is important to note, that to facilitate the development of early design stage estimates of propeller induced vibratory forces, considerably more empirical data (of the type represented in Tables 3-3, 3-4, and 3-5) must be assembled. The next step is to plot as functions of J the values of T, F. 1 , and Fv, all expressed as percentages of T, and of Q expressed as a percentage of Q. Figure 3-36, which is a plot of the data presented in Table 3-3, is a sample of this type of plot.
3-40
Table 3-3 Characteristics of Generally Similar Twin-Screw Ships

and Associated Vibratory Force Data Type I
z
Vs L B T Trim by Stern A Tons LIB CB SHP per Shaft EHP/SHP EHP 1- W 1- t RPM 6 4 33.4 520.00 53.83 18.57 1.00 7,000 9.70 0.469 40,000_ 0.708k 28150 1.023 0.955 176.00
-Type II
5 22.00 548.00 82.10 21.58 2.17 17,000 6.67 0.589 33,70___ 0.560 18,872 0.905 0.800 251.00
Type IlU
4 34.00 383.00 40.50 13.00 E.K. 3,051 9.45 0.529 _ 30475_ _ 0.63
Type IV
5 29.00 540.00 57.0 20.30 E.K. 9,217 9.50 0.514 23,835 0.664 191200 1585 0.970 0.916 224.8
DD 963
5 Omftted 530.00 54.00 18.00 Des. E.K. 7,500 9.62 0.480 40,000 0.69 27,600 0.980 0.960
I
0.983 0.955 345.0
-
D
T
18.33
268,100 1,131,600 1.47 1.70 1.30 1.50 1.00 1.08
--
12.50
12.00
15.00
195,000 560,000 1.24
17.00
-284,000
O
V/Z_ 7in % ofT in% of 0 FH in% of T Fv in% of T J
160000 1192,000 350,000 ... 465,000-0.942 1.74 ] 0.98 0.46 z0.32 0.42 0.839
1,236,400 1.43 +1.79
I1
..
1.26
1.43 + 1.00
0.815
0.845
1.13
Preliminary estimates of the following information must be available for the new ship design:
* Propeller diameter (Dp), or a range of Dp values

* Design full-power propeller rate of rotation (n), or a range of values of n. EHP, SHP, 1-t and 1-W- values at the (estimated) design full-power speed. Using this information, values of J,T, and Q are computed as follows: V s (I -W) nD P
3-41
CB
.-
F~&V~lfT
-------
-'-Tt-
Tiov i
of T% ..
n
..
n
"in O/ of T
bin%ofQ
V i+
Figure 3-36
Calculated Propeller Forces for Generally Similar Twin-Screw Ships Table 3-4 Vibratory Force Data for Large, Single-Screw LNG Ship Design 125,000 CM LNG Ships with 5-Bladed Propeller Results of Calculations of Propeller Forces Based on NSMB Data* Model 4141 Model 4147 Model 4148
Vs, kts SHPm D, ft T Thrust, Ibs , lbs 20.0 43,000 26.64 635,800 39,760 19.0 34,400 25.0 472,900 31,820 20.0 41,600 24.5 451,600 17,520
TI T %
6.25
6.75
3.89
b Torque, ft-lbs 0 ft-lbs Q, % F.H Bearing Force, Ibs

FH / T, %
FvBearing Force, Ibs

Fv IT, %
2,370,000 97,470 4.10 6,750 1.06 3,190

0.50
1,754,000 88,780 5.05 3,900 0.82 1,660

0.35
2,053,000 56,660 2.74 4,950 1.11 2,134

0.47
*Applicable to hull/propeller configurations depicted in Figures 3-3, 3-4, and 3-5
3-42

where Vs is the estimated design full-power speed. Note that J is a non-dimensional quality; hence the units used to express the value of each quantity must be consistent.
550 EP/she Vs(1- )
where T is in pounds, and Ys is the ship speed in ft/se.

-
550 SHP/shaft
where Q is in ft-lbs, and n is in revolutions per second.
Table 3-5 Normalized Values of Unsteady Thrust and Unsteady Torque
for a Number of Ships

Unsteady Thrust (In % of Steady Thrust)
Ship
20 Ships Measured [3-201 Oil Carrier Calculated [3-21]
Tanker Calculated [3-22] Bulk Carrier Measured [3-23]
Blade Frequency
Once Twice Once Twice
Once Twice Once Twice
4-Bladed Propeller
4.7-11.5 1.7-2.6
5-Bladed Propeller
1.4-2.7 1.4-2.0 1.4-9.5" 1.3-8.7"
2.0
6-Bladed Propeller
1.2-6.0 1.0-5.0
9.24 0.9
1.6 0.95
Containership
Measured [3-24]
Once
Twice
5.0
0.76
*The large value is for the fully loaded condition and the small value is for the ballast condition.
Unsteady Torque (In % of Steady Torque)

Ship
20 Ships Measured [3-20]
Calculated
Blade Frequency
Once Twice Once
Twice Once Twice Once Twice
4-Bladed Propeller
4.0-9.0 0.5-2.8
5-Bladed Propeller
1.0-2.0 0.7-2.1 0.7-5.9"
0.7 1.0 0.55
6-Bladed Propeller
1.0-5.0 0.8-1.2
Oil Carrier
[3-21]
Bulk Carrier Measured [3-23] Containership Measured [3-24]
5.0 0.5 5.0 0.2
"The large value is for the fully loaded condition and the small value is for the ballast condition
3-43

For early design stage estimates, it may be that a range of propeller diameters and rates of rotation are under consideration; for such a situation, a range of J values and Q values, corresponding to two or more (DP, n) combinations, would be computed. The next step is to enter the data plot (similar to that in Figure 3-36) at the computed J value(s) and determine estimated values of T, FH and FV, as percentages of T and estimated value(s) of Q as (a) percentage(s) of Q. Comparisons of ship vibrations, as measured during proper trials, and as estimated using the early design stage vibratory force and moment estimating method discussed above, have indicated that a modulation factor of two should be applied to the calculated values of F,, and FV, and that an alternating hull pressure force component should be included to properly estimate the total vertical force on the hull, from each propeller. In this regard, it has been determined that it is reasonable to assume that the alternatinghull pressure force would be equal to and in phase with the alternating vertical bearing force (Fv , ), for the case where little or no propeller cavitation exists. (Excessive propeller cavitation can greatly increase the hull pressure forces, and must be separately considered; the approach recommended herein is to size the propeller such that excessive cavitation will not occur.) Since there will normally be little effect of the hull pressure force exhibited in the horizontal plane, it is not nece,sary for these early design stage estimates, to augment FH with an alternating hull pressure factor. For early design stage estimates of propeller induced forces for twin-screw ships, the forces generated by the two shafts are assumed to be equal to and in phase with each other; therefore, the force per shaft is multiplied by another factor of 2.0 to provide the estimated total force on the hull. A summary of the above described relationships for early design stage, propeller-induced vibratory force and moment estimates is given below.
Alternating Hull Forces Single-Screw Ship, Horizontal Force: Calc'd F11 x 2 (modulation factor)
Single-Screw Ship, Vertical Force: Calc'd Fv x 2 (modulation factor) x 2 (hull
pressure factor) Twin-Screw Ship, Horizontal Force per Shaft: Calc'd FH x 2 (modulation factor) Twin-Screw Ship, Vertical Force per Shaft: Calc'd Fv x 2 (modulation factor) x 2 (hull pressure factor) Twin-Screw Ship, Total Horizontal Force: Calc'd F-H x 2 (modulation factor) x 2 (two-shafts-in-phase factor) Twin-Screw Ship, Total Vertical Force: Calc'd 7v x 2 (modulation factor) x 2
(hull pressure factor) x 2 (two-shafts-in-phase factor)
3-44

Alternating Shaft Forces and Moments Single-Screw Longitudinal Force: Calc'd T Single-Screw Torsional Moment: Calc'd Q Twin-Screw Longitudinal Force: Calc'd T (for each shaft) Twin-Screw Torsional Moment: Calc'd Q (for each shaft)
3.2.2
Example
An example of an early design stage estimate of propeller-induced vibratory forces and moments is presented in Appendix 3-A. This appendix is a copy of material developed by NKF, Inc. for the T-AO 187 Baseline Review, May, 1982.
3.3 Guidelines for Minimization of Propulsion System Induced Vibratory Forces and Moments
The primary causes of propulsion system induced vibratory forces and moments are as follows: * Engine imbalance * Propulsion shafting imbalance * Propulsion shafting Misalignment Propeller imbalance * Propeller blade pitch differences Engine imbalance is most apt to occur in ships propelled by slow-speed, direct drive diesels or medium-speed diesels with direct or geared drives; however, all rotating machinery, including propulsion turbines, must satisfy dynamic balancing requirements. Criteria for the dynamic balance of turbines, gears, shafting and propellers are given in Chapter Two, under Section 2.4. In order to minimize vibratory forces and moments due to diesel engine imbalance, the following guidelines are given: " Select engines known to exhibit minimal imbalance. "Avoid engine operating speeds that coincide with first and second order vibration. "Select a fore and aft location of the engine(s) such that, knowing the normal modal patterns of the hull vibratory response, magnification of the response can be avoided. "Design engine foundations to avoid dynamic response. "Possibly, utilize fixed or fractionally-damped engine bracing. "As a last resort, consider the use of dynamic absorbers.
3-45
Ship Vibration Design Guide More detailed information on diesel engine vibratory forces and moments is given in Chapter Five. The minimization of vibratory forces and moments due to propeller blade pitch differences can be accomplished by application of appropriate criteria and standards (e.g., the criteria and standards of the U.S. Navy, and the criteria and standards of the several classification societies).
3.4 General Comments and Recommendations

The Ship Vibration Design Guide is intended to be a first step in the establishment of a practical approach to the control of ship vibration. As such, this chapter is a first step in the establishment of a practical approach to the development of estimates of the vibratory forces. It is considered that the approach discussed in this chapter (i.e., selection of basic propeller characteristics to avoid obvious resonance and hull pressure problems, selection of basic hull characteristics and development of the hull/appendage/propeller configuration to minimize vibratory forces and moments, all in accordance with Preliminary Design-type guidelines presented herein) is appropriate; however, the nature of this subject is such that considerably more can be done to enhance the usefulness of this approach. Selected recommendations for effort that would appear to be immediately useful for augmenting the approach are as follows: " Assemble additional guidance material in the areas of afterbody design, propeller clearances and appendage arrangements (new material appears frequently in open U.S. and foreign magazines and technical papers); integrate this material with material presented in this initial document. * Prepare material for selection of propeller characteristics, which is similar to that presented herein for large, single-screw ships, but is applicable to an appropriately wide range of single- and twin-screw ships. " Assemble additional sets of ships characteristics and associated vibratory force data, similar to that presented in Tables 3-3, 3-4 and 3-5 for as wide a range of ship size, propulsive power, and hull/appendage/propeller configurations as possible. This material should, if possible, apply to ships with good vibration characteristics, as well as those with poor vibration characteristics (thereby allowing the designer to avoid any hull/appendage/propeller characteristics that obviously lead to vibration problems). Such material would constitute the real design data, which is needed during early stages of ship design.
3-46
REFERENCES
3-1 Ward, G., "The Application of Current Vibration Technology to Routine Ship Design Work," The Naval Architect (RINA), January 1983. Grant, J.W., and C.J. Wilson, "Design Practices for Powering Predictions," DTRC Report SPD-693-01, October, 1976. Rutherford, R., "Aft End Shaping to Limit Vibration," Transactions of the NECIES, July 1979; see discussion by Moor and Nethercote. Noonan, E.F., and S. Feldman, "State of the Art for Shipboard Vibration and Noise Control," Proceedings of SNAME Ship Vibration Symposium, October, 1978. Jonk, A. and J.v.d Beek, "Some Aspects of Propeller Hull Interaction," a paper presented at the 5th Lips Propeller Symposium, 19-20 May 1983. Odabasi, A.Y., and P.A. Fitzsimmons, "Alternative Methods for Wake Quality Assessment," International Shipbuilding Progress, February 1978. Todd, F.H., Ship Hull Vibration, Edward Arnold Publishers, Ltd., London, England, 1961. Saunders, H.E., Hy!drodynamics in Ship Design, Vol. II, published by the SNAME, 1957. Principles of Naval Architecture, published by the SNAME, 1967.
3-2
3-3
3-4
3-5
3-6
3-7
3-8
3-9
3-10 Vossnack, E., and A. Voogd, "Developments of Ship Afterbodies, Propeller Excited Vibrations," a paper presented at the Lips Symposium, 1973. 3-11 "Shaft Struts," NAVSEA Design Data Sheet (DDS) 161-1, June 1982. 3-12 "Control Surface Design," NAVSEA Design Data Sheet (DDS) 562-1, July 1984. 3-13 "Control Surface Structure Design," NAVSEA Design Data Sheet (DDS) 562-2, July 1984. 3-14 Wilson, M.B., D.N. McCallum, R.J. Bosswell, D.D. Bernhard, and A.B. Chase, "Causes and Corrections for Propeller-Excited Airborne Noise on a Naval Auxiliary Oiler," Transactions of the SNAME, 1982. 3-15 Wilson, M.B., "Review of Available Criteria for Identifying the Likelihood of Excessive Propeller Induced Vibration," DTRC Report SPD- 1001-01, May 1981. 3-16 van Gunsteren, L.A., and C. Pronk, "Propeller Design Concepts, International Shipbuilding Progress," Vol. 120, No. 227, 1973.
3-47

3-17 Skaar, K.T., and A.E. Raestad, "The Relative Importance of Ship Vibration Excitation Forces," Proceedings of the Symposium on Propeller Induced Ship Vibrations (RINA), London, England, 1979. 3-18 Holtrop, J., "Estimation of Propeller Induced Vibratory Hull Forces at the Design Stage of a Ship," Proceedings of the Symposium on Propeller Induced Ship Vibration (RINA), London, England, 1979. 3-19 Atlas, R., P.Y. Chang, D.P. Roseinan, J.0. Scherer, C.A. Tomassoni, and L. Wechsler, "Technical Requirements for High Powered Single Screw Propulsion of Merchant Ships," MARAD Report MA-RD-940 - 79032, January, 1979 3-20 Frivod, H., "Vibration Excitation Forces," Seminar on Ship Vibration, sponsored by Det Norske Veritas, June, 1977. 3-21 Chen, Y.K., et al., "Propeller and Main Engine Induced Ship Hull and Deckhouse Vibration Analysis of 30,850 DWT Oil Carriers, " ABS Technical Report RD-87001, January 1987. 3-22 Chen, Y.K., et al., "Propeller Induced Ship Hull Vibration Analysis of Ecological Tanker," ABS Technical Report RD-81004, January, 198,. 3-23 Chen, Y.K. and Chiou, J.W., "Propeller Induced Ship I-lUll and Deckhouse Vibration Analysis of 64,000 DWT Bulk Carriers," ABS Technical Report RD-81002, January, 1981. 3-24 Chen, Y.K., et al., "Propeller and Main Engine Induced Ship Ilull and Deckhouse Vibration Analysis of 1,400 TEU Containerships, Bay Shipbuilding Hulls 735/736/737," ABS Technical Report RD-87001, January, 1987.
3-48
APPENOJIX 3-A
Example of Early-Design-Stage Estimate of Propeller-Induced Vibratory Forces and Moments* SHIP CHARACTERISTICS
The ship characteristics, applicabl, to the TlAO 187 Class Fleet Oiler, as used in this study, are given in Table 3-A-i. The data as obtained fromi Levingston Marine [8, 9]. Supplemental inputs, as noted in the table or in other paTS Ot the report, were developed or agreed to in technical discussions hield between L(eVirgStonl Mnd NK F'personnel at Levingstoii's Annapolis office on 13, 19, and 30 April 1982. For purposes of this Study, considleration has been given to either a four- or five-bladed prop,;fler and shaft speeds of 80 to 90 RPM. Preliminary recommendations are given in, this report, subject to confirmation by the resuilts of the dynanfic analyses of the shafting system being conducted in :esponise to paragraph 4.4.2.6 )f the contract.
71
Hul 1.n
fn
'
iI
le
ih
from~~ ~ ~ 1, ~
N KI Re
~ -A-Faut!,ii
pc 'o'
Ship Vibration Design Guide Hull lines for the T-AO 187 Class are shown in Figure 3-A-i and the propulsion shafting, as originally designed, shown in Figure 3-A-2. This configuration is used to evaluate propeller forces, propeller-hull clearances and cavitation effects. Recommended modifications to the shafting arrangements will be included in the second report. Table 3-A-1 T-AO 187 Characteristics Length Overall (LOA) Length Between Perpendiculars (LBP) Beam Molded (B)
Depth (D)
667 ft 633 ft 93 ft
50 ft
6 in
Draft (Maximum) (d) Draft-Scantling Molded (Type B) Approx. Displacement (A) Length-Beam Ratio (LIB) Beam-Draft Ratio (B/d) Block Coefficient (C.) Prismatic Coefficient (Cp) Midship Section Coefficient (CM) Midship Area Moment of Inertia (Iv) (Levingston) (4/19) Wetted Surface Number of Shafts SHP/Shaft* Engine RPM* Propeller Diameter (Dp) (CRP) Propeller RPM
Ship Speed (Vs )
35 ft 37 ft 10 in 40,000 Long Tons 6.77 2.67 0.662 0.683 0.970 1 ,767,385 in2ft2 76,066 sq ft 2 16,865 430 24 ft 80-90
20 knots
Number of Propeller Blades (z) Wake Factor ( 1-w ) (Levingston) (4/19) Thrust Factor (1-t) (Levingston) (4/19)
4 or 5 0.932 0.8924
* Based on ABS (MCR) of Transamerica DeLaval/Stork Werkspoor 9 TM 620.
3-A-2
Appendix 3-A - Example Problem
Original T-AO 187 Shafting Arrangement
SHIP POWERING REQUIREMENTS

3.1 Engine Characteristics
From model test results at 20 knots, Figure 3-A-3, El-P = 17,600. From NAVSEA T-AO 187 Specifications, Mod. I of February 5, 1982: Propulsive Coefficient Service Factor Power Margin
Orgia 18 hfig
0.68 15 % 1.5%
ragmn iA
Transmission Efficiency Still Air Drag Factor CAH Correlation Allowance EHP SHP - .68 .98 17,600_ .6664 -26,410
0.98 3.5 % .0002
3-A-3

Correcting for power margin (.0 15) and CAH (.035):
BHP
Breq",
1.0-.05280
26,410
=2,0
To operate at 0.87 MCR requires: 27,800 _ 31,954t or 32,000 BHIP .87 From Figure 3-A-4, the MCR of the Transamerica DeLaval/Stork Werkspoor 9 TM 620 is 16,865 BHP at 430 RPM, or 33,730 for two shafts. It was agreed at the conference of 19 April 1982, between Levingston and NKF, that the rating of 16,865 BH-P at 430 RPM would be used for determination of maximum shaft dimensions, with a corresponding shaft speed of 80-90 RPM. This would provide a service factor of: 1 2780or 18 percent 33,750
L.EN"Qrm SVETTW CW.L.) SLJRPA08
Ls 29400 L-1r iSAMN HUtLL)
0 ISPL.ACEMN4SN
76066 SQ.
PTr.
C(nUf
t4LLL
30
-___
15P
LU0
-RO
hcn-
-FrTFFSJ0002
20
.SPEDF-
(KNC>TS)
M..IAM H-%LMiODEL- 8146-3
Figure 3-A-3
T-AO 187 Effective Horsepower Curves
3-A-4
3.2 Propeller Characteristics

The propeller design criteria calls for a sustained speed of 20 knots at 87 percent MCR, and highest possible thrust at very low speeds for maneuverability. Since the shaft RPM (80-90) and number of propeller blades (four or five) were not initially fixed, data was requested for four- and five-bladed propellers at both 80 and 90 RPM. The analyses carried out under 4.4.2.6 and 4.4.2.7 are intended to provide recommendations for the final selection. With the diameter fixed at 24 feet for all propellers, the following propeller characteristics were obtained from Levingston on April 13, 1982:
Four-Bladed Propellers 80 RPM P/D

Ar/AO 1 25 0.66
Five-Bladed Propellers 80 RPM

1.13 0.66
90 RPM
1.03 0.5
90 RPM
0.99 0.5
0.74
0.735
0.72
0.7
T10 of .70 = rip of .65 and T1 o of .74 = T1, of .69 NAVSEA ilp of .68 x 32,000 HP = 21,760 SHP
T:, of .65 x 33,730 HP = 21,924 SHP
Thus, all four propeller characteristics would fit within the MCR of 16,865 HP of the Werkspoor engine.
21,760 33,477 or 16,730 per shaft
.65
ESTIMATED PROPELLER FORCES 4.1 Assumptions

In the present analysis, we have proceeded on the assumption that factors other than the hull lines that would affect the vibration characteristics of the ship, such as the propeller skew, strut angles, propeller clearances, propeller cavitation, etc., will be optimized as part of the complete hull design in Phase II. At that time, the stipulated cavitation/hull pressure model studies should be designed, not only to report on the initial configuration, but to permit adjustments, as necessary, to improve the in-flow to the propeller disc area.
4.2
Approach
To obtain a preliminary estimate of propeller forces by which we can evaluate hull and machinery response characteristics, an estimate of these forces was made by direct comparison with the forces previously calculated for other twin-screw naval ships. In general, it has been
3-A-5
found that the alternating forces will vary with thc speed of advance coefficient, J, for ships having approximately equal block coefficients, where:
V
j _ a
V n
V (1-w) ft/sec
Rev/sec
= Propellcr diameter, ft
Estimates of propeller forces are extrapolated from those calculated for similar ship types. Table 3-A-2 gives the characteristics of comparative twin-screw naval ships. Figure 3-A-5 gives the alternating forces with respect to the advance ratio for the DD 963 Class destroyers and two other types of twin-screw naval ships, for which the propeller forces had previously been calculated and listed in Table 3-A-2. Both Figure 3-A-5 and Table 3-A-2 were taken from the DD 963 Preliminary Vibration Analysis [3].
Table 3-A-2 Characteristics of Comparitive Twin-Screw Naval Ships
Type I
z Vs L B T Trim by Stern A,Tons LIB CB SHP per Shaft EHP/SHP EHP 1- W
1- t
Type II
5 22.00 548.00 82.10 21.58 2.17 17,000 6.67 0.589 33,700 0.560 18,872
0.905 0.800
Type III
4 34.00 383.00 40.50 13.00 E.K. 3,051 9.45 0.529 30,475 0.63 19,200
0.983 0.955
Type IV
5 29.00 540.00 57.0 20.30 E.K. 9,217 9.50 0.514 23,835 0.664 15,815
0.970 0.916
DD 963
5 Omitted 530.00 54.00 18.00 Des. E.K. 7,500 9.62 0.480 40,000 0.69 27,600
0.980 0.960
6 33.4 520.00 53.83 18.57 1.00 7,000 9.70 0.469 40,000 0.708 28,150
1.023 0.955
RPM D T Q V-E Tin % ofT

Q in % of Q
176.00 18.33 268,100 1,131,600 1.47 1.70

1.30
251.00 12.50 160,000

350,000
0.942 0.98 0.46

0.32
345.0 12.00 192,000 465,000 1.74
224.8 15.00 195,000

560,000
17.00 284,000
1,236,400
1.24
1.43 1.79
1.26 1.43 1.00
FH in % of T
Fvin %off
1.50
1.00
1.08
0.42
0.839 0.815 0.845
1.13
3-A-6
Appendix 3-A - Example Problem As in this case, a preliminary estimate of the DD 963 alternating bearing forces, thrust and torque was developed from the curves shown on Figure 3-A-5, using the calculated alternating force data shown for the ships identified as Type I and Type II, versus the advance ratio. The estimated values were taken from Figure 3-A-5 at the appropriate J value for the DD 963. These values show good agreement with the values shown in Table 3-A-2, which were predicted by calculations from an assumed wake and a standard propeller based on estimated propcir characteristics. The valucs estimated from Figure 3-A-5 were approximately 10 percent higher on the average than those obtained by the more detailed calculations. It should also be noted that when the average of the estimated and calculated values of the forces so obtained were used in predicting ship response, good agreement was obtained during the full-scale trials [5].
11
,
0
/_
224
240
260
280
12 2
340
36
38
40q
420
431
gcIIw SPIl - UK
Figure 3-A-4
BHP versus RPM for SWD 9 TM 620
3-A-7
4.3 Estimated Forces

The advance ratio J =V nD is calculated for the T-AO 187 at 80 and 90 RPM, the lower and upper limits of the shaftaspeed range under consideration. In both cases, the propeller diameter is assumed to be 24 feet. V a
=
20 x .932 x 6072 3600
31.44 ft/sec
80 60- 1.33 for 80 RPM

90 n -1.5 = 60 J31.44 3
for 90 RPM
1.33 x 24
0.985 for 80 RPM
31.44 J =-1.4 1.5 x 24
0.873 for 90 RPM
It should be noted, normally the propeller diameter could be expected to decrease as the RPM increased for the same power, thus reducing the difference between the above J factors. At 20 knots, from Figure 3-A-3, the EHP = 17,600 or 8,800 per shaft and the steady thrust is:
-
326 x8800
V (1 - t) =
326x8800
20 x.8924 -- 161,000 lbs per shaft
T-
At 20 knots, the total SHP was previously calculated to be 26,410 or 13,205 per shaft. At 80 RPM, maximum torque is developed and the steady torque is:
-Q
13,205 x 33,000
868,000 ft-lbs per shaft
At 90 RPM, Q = 772,000 ft-lbs per shaft It should be noted that these values of steady torque and thrust relate to model test conditions at the design speed of 20 knots and represent the conditions normally used for computation of propeller forces from wake studies or from self-propelled model studies. Shaft design requirements include additional margins, as previously noted.
3-A-8

Referring to Figure 3-A-5, the following propeller alternating forces, in terms of percentages of steady thrust and torque, for the T-AO 187 Class are obtained:
80 RPM
T J F
V
90 RPM
161,000 772,000 0.873 0.55% = 890 0.60%= 1,000 1.2% = 2,000 0.7% = 5,400
Steady Thrust, lbs Advance Ratio Alternating Vertical Bearing Force, lbs
161,000 868,000 0.985 0.8% = 1,300
Q Steady Torque, ft-lbs
FH Alternating Horizontal Bearing Force, lbs 1.1% = 1,800 ' Alternating Thrust, lbs Alternating Torque, ft-lbs 1.4% = 2,300 1.0% = 8,700
CB
____.
---
I _ _I
% FH and Fv in
oft
in
Tin% of T oin% of .
Figure 3-A-5
Calculated Propeller Forces for Comparitive Twin-Screw Naval Ships
3-A-9
Ship Vibration Design Guide Although the estimated propeller forces are expected to be lower when operating at 90 RPM, we consider the higher values, estimated for operation at 80 RPM, would be more representative for two reasons: first, the somewhat higher block coefficient (C, of 0.662) of the T-AO; second, the likelihood that similar propellers would have a slightly smaller diameter whcen operating at 90 RPM than when operating at 80 RPM. This would tend to raise the advance ratio (J) and increase the forces. As a basis for evaluating the vibratory response characteristics of the hull and machinery of the T-AO 187, the higher forces shown above in the 80 RPM column will be used. In the application of these forces we will relate to specific design/performance criteria where it exists, either in the specifications for the T-AO 187 or in other suitable standards, which based on our experience, would be more appropriate. Based on the studies of Hadler and Cheng [10], the hull form chosen for the T-AO 187, the twin-screw open transom design, appears to be the best choice. However, the heavy skeg starting at Frame 117 should be evaluated in the prescribed model studies, along with the details discussed under 4.1, Assumptions. A less dramatic skeg, starting approximately at Frame 110, could possibly provide improved flow conditions to the propellers without adversely affecting maneuvering characteristics. A word of caution should be introduced at this point in regard to the evaluation of design prediction against full-scale trial results. As in all such projections, it is necessary to ensure we are comparing like quantities and that all significant factors are taken into account. The following factors are of major importance and will be discussed in terms of the calculated bearing forces Fv and FH generated by the propeller at blade rate, and the response of the hull to these predicted forces: 1. The bearing forces calculated from the wake and the propeller characteristics represent an average or approximately sinusoidal value. 2. The propeller also produces pressure forces on the hull and the hull reacts to the combined effect of both force systems. Although theoretical methods of predicting these forces have been developed in recent years, at the time of the
development of t .; DD 963 (1970) they were unavailable. Indeed, today the
combined effect cannot be reliably predicted analytically. It was about that time (1971) that von Manen [111 and Huse [12] identified the significant effect of cavitation on these forc-s and led to the development of the vacuum tank at the Netherlands Ship Model Basin in which the combined effect of these forces could be measured. 3. Cavitation effects, if serious, can radically increase the total hull force by factors of 10 or more - hence, our earlier note on the subject (see 4.1, Assumptions). To account for normal propeller-generated pressure forces we assume the addition of an equal and in-phase pressure force, combined with the bearing force, acting on the hull.
3-A-10
Appendix 3-A - Example Problem 4. When relating the hull response to the predicted response, we must have a standard method of evaluating shipboard vibration measurements. Toward this end, the test codes [13, 14] evaluate the "maximum repetitive amplitude" under controlled test conditions. These trial conditions stipulate straight runs and sea-state 3 or less. Under these conditions, the trial results will indicate a factor of two greater than predictions. This was found to be the difference between the crest-factor associated with a random signal (2.5) and that used for the maximum value of a lightly modulating signal of RMS values (1.4). Thus, to account for the modulation influence of trial conditions, when compared to predicted response, a factor of two must be used (2.5 A.4). 5. Under adverse sea conditions and hard maneuvers, additional amplifications will occur. Caution should be used in this regard, however. For example, the combination of rough weather and hard maneuvers can be a reasonable expectation for combatant-type ships but not necessarily so for auxiliary types.
ESTIMATION OF HULL VIBRATION 5.1 Hull Forces and Moments

The total forces and moments acting on the hull and main machinery include both bearing and pressure forces and moments. The most significant, however, are those exciting the hull vertically and horizontally, the alternating thrust, which can excite the hull and propulsion system longitudinally, and the alternating torque, which will affect the propulsion system torsionally. To arrive at the input force estimates to the hull, we must include hull pressure forces generated directly by the propeller and augmented by cavitation effects, when present. In estimating the total hull forces in the absence of the necessary basis for their calculation or model studies in which the forces may be measured, we rely on our experience or "rule-of-thumb, " which we successfully used on a similar (twin-screw, open-transom) design (DD 963), in which efforts were made to minimize cavitation effects. In that case, we assumed the alternating pressure force in the vertical direction was equal to, and in phase with, the vertical bearing force. Thus, the vertical hull force was equal to the alternating force derived above, multiplied by two, and again by two to include the phasing of two shafts. The forces in the horizontal direction were limited to twice the bearing forces only, since little effect on the pressure forces is realized in the horizontal plane of the propeller. The total longitudinal force on the hull is assumed to be the combined alternating thrust of the two shafts, entering the hull through the thrust bearing and in phase. The forces may significantly affect the response of an aft deckhouse. The alternating thrust and torque, which can be expected to excite each of the two propulsion systems, will be subject to the estimated values shown. The total alternating propeller forces for use in estimating the T-AO 187 hull and machinery vibration characteristics, or as inputs to the dynamic analyses, are summarized as follows: 3-A-11
HullEorce
F v Hull Vertically = 2 x 2 x 1,300 = 5,200 lbs
FH Hull Horizontally = 2 x 1,800 = 3,600 lbs
Hull Longitudinally = 2 x 2,300 = 4,600 lbs Shaft Forces and Moments
Longitudinally, each shaft = 2,300 lbs Torsionally, each shaft = 8,700 ft-lbs
Note:
The base values chosen were the more conservative (larger) values obtained for 80 RPM. This was done since the hull form has a higher CB, is not as flat or clear as the DD 963 Class, and does not have the heavier skeg. It is expected that the model studies called for will be effictive in optimizing the appendage characteristics and minimizing cavitation forces.
3-A-12
REFERENCES
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Subcontract for T-AO 187 Baseline Review between NKF Engineering Associates, Inc., and Levingston Marine Corporation, April 7, 1982. Noonan, E .F., "Design Considerations for Shipboard Vibrations," Marine Technology, January 1971. Noonan, E.F., "Preliminary Hull and Machinery Vibration Analyses for DD 963 Class Destroyer Design," NKF Report No. 7105-4 to Litton Systems, Inc., 26 February 1971. Noonan, E. F., "Vibration Considerations on Project and Conventional Hulls for 120,000 CM LNG Ships," NKF Report No. 7107, 28 May 1971. NKF Engineering Associates, Inc., "USS SPRUANCE, DD 963, Vibration Trials Report," for Ingalls Shipbuilding Division, Litton Systems, Inc., Report No. 7404-2, April 1975. NKF Engineering Associates, Inc., "El Paso Paul Kayser, Vibration Trials Report," for Methane Tanker Service Co., Houston, Texas, Report No. 7321-2, November 1975. Noonan, E.F., "An Assessment of Current Shipboard Vibration Technology," Ship Structures Symposium 1975, SNAME Publication SY-5. Levingston Marine Corp letter of 5 April 1982 forwarding T-AO 187 Class Fleet Oiler Design Information. NAVSEA Specifications for Building Fleet Oiler, T-AO 187 Class, MOD I of 5 February 1982, received from Levingston Marine 13 April 1982. Hadler, J.B., and H.M. Cheng, "Analysis of Experimental Wake Data in Way of Propeller Plane of Single- and Twin-Screw Ship Models," SNAME Transactions, 1965. von Manen, F.D., "The Effect of Cavitation on the Interaction Between Propeller and Ship's Hull," presented at the IVTAM Symposium on Nonsteady Flow of Water at High Speeds, Leningrad, 1971. Huse, E., "Propeller-Hull Vortex Cavitation," Norwegian Ship Model Experiment Tank Publication No. 106, May 1971. ISO D-P 4867, "Code for Measurement and Reporting of Shipboard Vibration Data," September 1979. SNAME Code C-I, "Code for Shipboard Vibration Measurements," January 1975.
12. 13. 14.
3-A- 13
CHAPTER FOUR
*.-
SHIP HULL VIBRATION
hapter One provided a general review of shipboard vibration and noted that the hull girder responds as a free-free beam when subjected zo dynamic ILads. The discussion in Chapter One also referred to the many other dynamic systems included in the total ship vibration problem, the sources of excitation ai.d the interaction between the various systems. The principal dynamic systems considered in this design guide are the hull girder major substructures and the main propulsion system from the prime mover to the propeller. In this chapter, primary consideration is given to the hull girder and major substructur,._ including their natural frequencies of vibration; response to the exciting forces developed in Chapter Three; and their interaction with other dynamic systems. The fundamental elements of a vibrating system includes the basic mass-elastic properties as well as damping and exciting forces. In order to control or limit the vibratory response it is necessary to modify the mass-elastic properties by increasing the damping, reducing the exLiting forces or changing the exciting frequencies. Increasing the damping may be useful in the solution of local structural vibration problems and in ce"tain machinery and equipment problems but is not a practical solution for reducing hull girder vibration. In this chapter, the hull girder, along with its major substructures and local structures, is the basic mass-elastic system. The primary hull girder exciting forces considered in this chapter originate in the main propulsion system where the propeller and large diesel engines are the main contributors. The objective of the hull designer is to avoid resonance with the exciting forces emanating from the propulsion system elements, thereby minimizing hull girder response and thus reducing the transmission of vibration to major substructures, local structures, machinery and equipment. If resonance with elements of the propulsion system cannot be avoided, then it is the responsibility of the hull designer to evaluate the response with relevant criteria and make recommendations for modifications to the ship design so that the ship's response will meet accepted criteria.
4.1 The Design Approach

In the introduction to this design guide, it was noted that the reliability of the ship structure, primarily based on its response to the transient forces produced by heavy seas, is established by the rules of the classification society. Since the classification rules are periodically updated to reflect current practice with information on new develennment broadly exchanged, it may be generally concluded that all seagoing ships designed to classification society rules can be
4-1
Ship Vibration Design Guide expected to dnamically respond similarly to vibratory forces, for a given ship type. This has been well established in the literature by Todd, [4-1], Lewi, [4-2] and many other references noted in these publications. To insure minimum vibration in a proposed new design; avoid damage to structures, machinery or equipment (mechanical suitability); and to sitisfy habitability requirements, a detailed vibration analysis of the proposed design is required. Such studies apply to the vibration of the main hull girder; principle substructures (deckhouse) that can respond to the motion of the hull girder, and the main propulsion system, as excited by the alternating forces originating in the main propulsion system. The response of these basic systems directly relate to the reliability of the drive system and to the vibratory inputs to the ship's equipment and personnel. The vibration environment to which the ship's equipment and personnel are subjected will greatly influence the efficiency and reliability of the total ship system.
4.1.1 Scope of Ship Vibration Analyses

The scope of a total ship vibration analysis may be briefly encompassed in the following four phases: A. Preliminary hull and main machinery vibration analysis (To determine approximate system vibration characteristics; to identify conflicts or likely failure to meet specifications; and to recommend necessary design modifications as early as possible.) B. Final hull and main maciiinery vibration analysis (To more accurately determine the system characteristics and confirm the final design configuration.) C. Evaluation of local hull and equipment vibration characteristics during design (To deternine predicted response of local structures and the adequacy of installation details of selected items of equipment. Inputs are based on hull response determined in "B" and/or inpt.ts from specific items of rotating equipment.) D. Test and service evaluation phase (To determine actual ship and equipment performance in relation to design objectiv s or specifications; to identify corrective action, if necessary; and to develop improved data base.) In theor-', Phases A and B form the basis for the frequently referred to "Design Cycle" in which modifications and/or refinements in the design are introduced. In this design guide, it will be shown that simplified procedures can be used effectively to provide reasonable assurance that the specified vibration requirements can be achieved by performing relatively simple preliminary vibration analyses based on emnirical data. This procedure should be effective for most low-budget projects. Altl.ough this chapter deals particularly with hull vibration, the hull girder response will directly relate to tt.e exciting forces developed in Chapter Three. Interaction between the ht 11
4-2
Ship Hull Vibration response and major substructures and the main propulsion machinery is addressed. The detailed machinery vibration analyses are included in Chapter Five. Procedures for vibration measurement and analysis are included in Chapter Six.
4.1.2 Contractual Considerations.

Depending on the individual shipbuilding program, detailed requirements to be recommended for each of the above four phases could vary significantly. Certainly the development of a multiple ship program would warrant a more detailed study than could be justified for a one or two shipbuilding program of a typical ship type. In all cases, however, the preliminary hull and main machinery vibration analyses are considered mandatory, unless the program was simply a repeat of an existing design having known and satisfactory vibration characteristics. The specific scope of preliminary vibration design analysis, including applicable specifications, should be considered part of a total shipbuilding package with the owner and builder jointly determining the degree of responsibility to be shared in the total effort. If the shipbuilder is also responsible for the development of the design, he would be expected to assume complete responsibility but could share it with subcontractors, particularly engine builders, propeller manufacturers or other suppliers. If however, the owner, independently or with the support of a naval architectural fim, develops the design details required for construction, then most of the responsibility would be his. In practice, this division of responsibility is normally shared and can vary in each case. The important point here is the recognition that shipbuilding is a shared responsibility and is best carried out as a joint venture as recommended by Boylston and Leback [4-31. It is obvious from the above considerations that the vibration requirements for a shipbuilding contract must be included as a line item, together with an estimated cost. To omit this could either jeopardize the design or penalize a more conscientious bidder.
4.1.3 Stages of Ship Design

There are many ways to break down the ship design process into stages, depending on the owner, designer and ship type. However, for the purpose of this guide, the seven stages of ship design are defined as suggested by Taggart [4-41 and it is up to the reader to fit their job and the required vibration analyses into these definitions.
4.1.3.1 Concept Design

This is where the owner's basic requirements are translated into naval architectural and engineering characteristics. Concept design consists of technical feasibility studies to estimate such fundamental elements of the proposed ship as length, beam, depth, draft, displacement, light ship weight, capacity, speed, power and range. Alternative designs are analyzed in parametric studies in order to optimize controlling parameters. The concept design is specified in the form of general characteristics and arrangement used to estimate construction and operating costs.
4-3
Ship Vibration Design Guide 4.1.3.2 Preliminary Design In the preliminary design phase, the ship's general characteristics, arrangement, propulsion and structure are further refined as are performance and construction costs. By the end of preliminary design, the major ship characteristics, such as length, beam, depth, capacity and power would not be expected to change. Completion of preliminary design results in a precise definition of the ship that will meet the owner's basic requirements and provides the basis for the next stage of design development. 4.1.3.3 Contract Design Contract design yields a set of plans, specifications and other documentation that will be used for shipyard bidding, and will form an integral part of the shipbuilding contract. This stage of design encompasses one or more loops around the design spiral, thereby further refining the preliminary design. This stage delineates more precisely such features as hull form, type of propulsion, number of propellers and RPM, sea keeping and maneuvering characteristics, hull materials, structural arrangements, major scantlings and an accurate weight and center of gravity estimate. The final general arrangements developed in this stage fixes the arrangement and location of the propulsion system, accommodation spaces and cargo holds as well as their interrelationship, plus other features such as cargo handling equipment and machinery components. A final midship section is also developed at this stage which fixes the hull girder structure in the middle 40% of the ship. Other plans usually developed in contract design include: lines plan, scantling plan, arrangement of machinery and shafting, critical system diagrams, electric load analysis, capacity plan, curves of form, flooding and damaged stability calculations. The accompanying specifications delineate the quality standards of hull and outfit, the performance of each item of machinery and equipment, and numerous other details that cannot be included in a few plans. The specifications also describe tests and trials that shall be performed successfully in order that the ship be considered acceptable. Once a contract is signed, the contract design becomes the basis for the next phase of the ship design. Contract design is considered by some to be the product of the design process. 4.1.3.4 Detail Design The next stage of ship design is the development of detailed working plans. These plans are usually developed by the shipbuilder or his agent and describe in extraordinary detail the ship's construction, assembly, machinery and equipment installation, and initial testing in terms the shipyard workers can easily understand. While all the ship's characteristics are defined in the contract design, within the contract there is a great deal of latitude allowed in detail design. 4.1.3.5 Construction For a ship designer employed by a shipyard or as an owner's representative, there is a considerable amount of theoretical and practical design work to be done during construction. This is also where the designer first gets to see if his design works and if not, he must develop a fix within the constraints of cost and schedule. 4.1.3.6 Tests and Trials This is usually not considered a stage of design but is included here because it is the proof of the design. Each ship designer has the responsibility to carefully consider the results of all tests
4-4
Ship Hull Vibration

and trials to evaluate his performance in the design; to do his best to fix those features of the design that do not operate according to the specifications; and to apply the experience, good or bad, into the next design.
4.1.3.7 Ship Operation

Again this is not often considered a part of ship design, but it is included because experience gained from the ship's operation is the ultimate proof of a design.
4.2 Preliminary Hull Vibration Design Analysis

As previously noted, the owner's basic requirements are translated into naval architectural and engineering characteristics during the concept design phase. Technical feasibility studies are carried out to determine the fundamental characteristics of the proposed ship. Alternative designs may be analyzed in order to determine the most economical design, consistent with other controlling parameters. In some cases shipboard vibration has been an important parameter. During concept design, objectives relative to vibration requirements should be established since the stem configuration, choice of propellers and main propulsion machinery significantly influence the vibratory forces generated. A preliminary review of the proposed design concept should be carried out by a naval architect or marine engineer experienced in shipboard vibration to identify areas of "notentialproblem and to recommend any required modifications. In some cases, such as a 125,000 CM LNG ,Carrier where the estimated SHP required on a single screw ship exceeded the maximum power installed up , that time by 25%, more extensive vibration studies are required. Model studies were conducted on three different hull designs to obtain speed and power requirements and wake data. Self-propelled models were run to obtain propeller vibratory forces and extensive theoretical propeller force studies were carried out to optimize the propeller selection. Detailed vibration studies were carried out during preliminary, contract and detail design to avoid structural resonances. Similar studies were also carried out at about the same time for a new destroyer development program. Both were high powered, unique ships of vastly different characteristics and high budget projects that justified the concern and expense of the extensive vibration investigations. Simplified vibration analyses were also carried out, in parallel, to determine applicability. Both ships were successful designs with regard to hull vibration characteristics and were reported on by Noonan [4-5] in 1975. While such extensive vibration avoidance programs are not warranted in most commercial projects, preliminary hull and main propulsion machinery vibration analyses are considered mandatory, if vibration problems are to be avoided. As an example, no one would consider omitting torsiciial and longitudinal vibration analyses of a proposed propulsion system. Although not as well defined in the literature, it is considered that similar concern should be given to hull vibration. Toward that end, the preliminary hull vibration design analysis suggested in this chapter should provide an indication of probable compliance with vibration requirements and identify potential problem areas, if they exist. The recommended procedures
4--5
Ship Vibration Design Guide are primarily empirical, easily applied, inexpensive and subject to continued improvement with experience. The work should be carried out in parallel with the preliminary design phase.
4.2.1 Hull Frequency Determination

The most important requirement to minimize hull vibration, after the necessary steps are taken to limit the exciting forces, is to avoid resonance of the hull girder with the frequency of exciting forces. This section addresses the alternate methods available to calculate hull natural frequencies and demonstrates a simplified, empirical method that can be used in the preliminary hull vibration analysis. 4.2.1.1 Empirical Analysis As early as 1894, Schlick [4-6] developed an empirical formula based on modification of an ordinary beam, which approximated fundamental bending frequency. By introducing empirical factors obtained by systematic shipboard vibration studies, it was possible to estimate the fundamental vertical frequency of a ship. Recognizing the importance of determining the natural frequencies of ships in the early design stage, a number of investigators have developed improvements to the Schlick formula, as discussed by Todd [4-1]. Further improvements are continuing in this direction for the obvious reason of obtaining a simplified and effective way of predicting the vibratory response of a ship's hull. A study by Disenbacker and Perkins [4-7], demonstrates a further refinement of this simplified approach, which would provide the natural frequencies of a ship's hull, within 5% of that obtained by the more conventional 20-station beam model, which requires a complete distribution of ship parameters.
4.2.1.2 20-Station Beam Model

The 20-station beam model, frequently used for preliminary design purposes, was developed at the David Taylor Research Center [4-8], [4-9]. For each station along the length of a hull, it is necessary to develop the weight, virtual mass, bending rigidity and shear rigidity. This of course, requires firm design data that is not necessarily available in the early stages of design, and considerable engineering time to assemble and calculate. An early digital computer program for solving the system of finite-difference equations that approximate the problem representing the steady-state motion of a vibrating beam-spring system, such as a ship hull in bending, was also developed at DTRC. This FORTRAkN II program is referred to as Generalized Bending Response Code 1, (GBRC1) was developed specifically to handle hull and shafting vibration analyses. A description and details for usage of the General Bending Response Code was prepared by Cuthill and Henderson [4-10]. A detailed hull and machinery vibration analysis, in which this beam model was used on a Coast Guard Icebreaker preliminary design was published in Marine Technology, [4-11]. Hull vibration analysis of the France-Dunkerque (F-D) 125,000 CM LNG Carrier, using the 20-station beam model, was carried out in 1975 [4- 12]. The STARDYNE program employed in this analysis uses the finite-element method for structural analysis and was developed by Mechanics Research, Inc. (available through Control Data Corporation). Detailed information on this program is contained in references [4-13] and [4-14]. Results of this study were documented in [4-12].
4-6
Ship Hull Vibration 4.2.1.3 Finite Element Model A hull frequency study was also carried out on the Avondale 125,000 CM LNG Carrier by finite-element analysis. The aft part of the ship, from the stem to BHD 104 (shown in Figure 4-1) was modeled by dividing the hull into sections of structures between web frames along the length of the ship. The propulsion system, co,iiisting of propeller, shafting, bearings, gears, etc. was represented by beams and concentrated weights. The finite-element model of the aft part of the ship, including the propulsion system, is shown in Figure 4-2. The fore-body of the ship forward of Frame 104 was modeled by 15 elastic beams of appropriate cross-sectional properties. At Frame 104, where the aft-body finite element model coupled with the fore-body beam model, a rigid beam system was utilized to ensure a continuous transmission of motion to the interface. The complete finite-element ship model, incorporating the aft part, the fore body and the propulsion system of the Avondale LNG ship is shown in Fig. 4-3. This model has about 1450 finite-elements of beam and plate, with approximately 630 joints (or nodes) as inter-joining points. With each node having six degrees of freedom (DOF), the mathematical model consists of mass and stiffness matrices of the order of 3780. Computations with matrices of such an order of magnitude are very costly and not warranted to determine hull frequencies. Reduction of matrix size was therefore undertaken. To accomplish reduction of matrix size for the finite element model, a mathematical program termed GUYAN Reduction was utilized. Application of this reduction of DOF is made feasible by assuming that many fewer joints or node points are needed to describe the inertia of a structure than are needed to describe its elasticity [4-15]. For this ship model, the GUYAN Reduction program was used to redistribute the ship's masses to a set of node points with 28 resultant degrees-of-freedom. This reduction process gave 28 corresponding natural frequencies of the ship model. An analysis employing the 20-station beam model, as used on the F-D hull, was carried out, for comparison purposes, with good results. This study was documented by Reference [4-16]. The finite- element model of the stem portion of the ship can also be used to evaluate the response characteristics of the deckhouse and shafting system if serious hull girder resonances are indicated. A more detailed finite-element analysis, in which the entire hull is represented, may be developed by the NASTRAN computer program [4-17], where the mode shapes are obtained by solving the generalized eigenvalue problem represented by the equations:
K (0)= O2M (0)
where: K
M
= = = =
symetrical square stiffness matrix

diagonal mass matrix column mode matrix natural frequency
(0)
o3
A typical model for a product carrier, as developed by the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS), having 2680 degrees of freedom, is shown in Figure 4-4. A free vibration analysis
4-7

Ship Characteristics:
L B T
Length between Perpendiculars Beam Draft Light Ship Weight Loaded Ship Weight
886 ft 903 ft 140.5 ft 36 ft.

3 3,320,000 ft
LWI Length on Water Level
A Displacement
32,000 long tons 96,000 long tons
The following sketch gives a rough graphic description of the ship. The tanks are located forward of Frame 104, while the machinery and deckhouse structure are located aft of Frame 104.
-t
I
r -lz_:,
- -
__-_
FP
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
,-
ICO1-0 1.
0 o o
I3C C
80
60
4o
2o o
FR. NO.
FR.'04
Since the stem is the location where excitation forces due to propeller action are at their peaks, and deck-house-structures are our biggest concern, it was therefore decided that a detailed modeling of the ship hull aft of Frame 104 would be necessary for vibration assessment. As for the fore body of the ship forward of Frame 104, representation by a beam element with proper sectional properties would be sufficient for vibration assessment purposes. At Frame 104 where detailed finite-element model of the aft ship coupled with the beam-like fore-body model, proper care had been taken to ensure complete transmission of motion across this interface.
Figure 4-1
Avondale LNG Ship, Modeling Procedure
4-8
Ship Hull Vibration
IN4
Figure 4-2
Avondale Hull Finite Model Aft of BHD 104, 3-D View
4-9
Figure 4-3 Avondale Hull Complete Ship Model, 3-D View
4-10
Ship Hull Vibration
-----
-.
Figure 4-4
Isometric View of Finite Element Model would also produce 2680 frequencies. For determination of the basic hull frequencies however, only the lowest frequencies are required. Figures 4-5 to 4-9 show the rigid body motions and the undamped vertical mode shapes for the seven vertical bending and first longitudinal modes. Higher frequencies can be used to indicate hull girder vibration coupled with deckhouse and local vibrations and will represent the response of a three-dimensional finite-element model, as opposed to the usual free-free beam representation of the ship. The use of the finite-element model analysis requires the geometry of the structure to be analyzed. In the early design phase, the detail required for a vibratory response analysis is generally not available. If it is necessary to make assumptions on the structural details and the boundary conditions, the accuracy expected of the finite-element analysis is lost and the expense is not warranted. The recommended approach would then suggest the use of an empirical approach, or the 20-station beam model for preliminary design purposes and reserve the use of the finite-element analysis for the contract and detail design phases, if considered necessary at that point.
4-11
NI
:33
C)
"0
E M,
-4-
4-12-
Ship Hull Vibration
"D0
CD
*
V
0) CM C
4-13
KM
0 0
-j
I~ -
-o oE
Cvm
L()
(0
a)
4-1
Ship Hull Vibration
._0
M~
.0
N0
r0)_0)
-5
0
-a
7-
0)0 0
F z
0i
/N
0)
0)
0)
i
(a
-5
0 .5
U)
c I
U) 0
U)
-o
K-c-
loo
Ship Hull Vibration
4.2.2 Empirical Calculation Procedures

A number of cases have been studied in which the previously discussed methods of calculating hull frequencies have been employed and checked against test results and against each other. This guide suggests that the most sophisticated finite-element methods of analysis are best reserved for the contract and detail design phases and that the 20-station beam analysis and the empirical method of predicting hull frequencies can be most appropriately applied in the preliminary design phase. When time and cost is an important factor, the empirical procedurc': given in this chapter can be effectively employed. Examples follow for a number of various ship types.
4.2.2.1 Destroyer Calculations

Preliminary design calculations were conducted on the DD 963 Class destroyer [4-18]. The 20-station beam model was used and the fundamental (two nodes) frequency was calculated to be 1.1 Hz. A simplified calculation, similar to that used by Ali [4-19] gave a frequency of 1.2 Hz. Test results indicated a frequency of 1.2 Hz. Using the original Schlick formula [4-6], and correcting for added mass of entrained water and adding a shear correction factor gave a frequency of 1.15 Hz. 4.2.2.1.1 Vertical Hull Frequencies Results of the 20-station beam analysis (conventional), the simplified beam analysis and the empirical N2v frequency, multiplied by the average ratio of the higher frequencies, obtained for similar ship types included in Ref. [4-7], are shown in Table 4-1. Frequencies are in Hz, cycles/sec. Ship Characteristics: L B D T A Length between Perpendiculars Beam Depth Draft Displacement 525 ft 54 ft 42 ft 19 ft. 7500 tons 483,000 in 2 ft2 630,000 in 2 ft2
IV Midship Vertical Moment of Inertia I Midship Horizontal Moment of Inertia Schlick's Empirical Formula (Original): N 2V=
C 'V77
A L3
where C1, a constant, = 156,850 for Destroyers
4-17
Ship Vibration Design Guide Adjusting for entrained mass of water and adding a shear correction factor: A, = ( 1.2 + B ) A, entrained water factor
4i +r = 1.07, shear correction factor (Taylor & Burrill [4-1])

N2 V
1
IC
+r xL
3 =
,:
483,000 2.147xl.07x7500x144.7x10
69 cpm = 1.15 Hz
Substituting BD 3 for I, N2V =54,500
2.3-L
69 cpm = 1.15 Hz
Results of the 20-station beam analysis (conventional), the simplified beam analysis and the empirical N 2v frequency, multiplied by the average ratio of the higher frequencies obtained for similar ship types included in reference [4-7], are shown in Table 4-1. Frequencies are shown in Hz (cycles per second). Table 4-1 Calculated Vertical Hull Frequencies Mode 2V 3V
4V
Conventional 1.10 2.24

3.7
Simplified 1.20 2.50

4.04
Frequency Ratios 1.0 2.15

3.5
Empirical 1.15 2.47

4.03
Test Results* 1.2 2.4
5V
6V 7V
5.5
7.2 9.02
5.82
7.60 9.22
5.0
6.5 8.0
5.75
7.47
9.20
*Obtained by anchor drop test. Calculated Nlode shapes are show in Figure 4-10, (undamped). 4.2.2.1.2 Horizontal Hull Frequencies Due to the lack of available data and the questionable reliability of using the same Schlick constant for both vertical and horizontal hull vibration, the fundamental horizontal frequcncy was obtained in two methods: a) Derived from the Schlick forniula
N2
156,85 0
3
A
--
l- r +
4-18
Ship Hull Vibration
STE RN
1.0
B ,./1
i
0 -.
--
-L
1.20
-2.24
1.0
-DATA-
-,
-7.
--
1,
V_ I_
--
.9
Figure 4-10
Vertical Mode Shapes
4-19
---
040
of 0,
Shea Corecton acor [41
;4-2
Ship Hull Vibration 1=/ .0.0225 L.d2

24-
1]17
200
to o
180
..
--
S160
-
-F-
7-
O0C4
0060O0,0 001
.02
00014 006
001
Figure 4-12 Horizontal 2 - Node Hull Frequencies [4-1]
4-21
Ship Vibration Design Guide where:: AH (1.2 + with shear correction factor: 4-1+r = 1.07, (see Figure 4-11) 1.32 A
156,850
1.4
.7xo6 - 100 cpm= 1.42 Hz
b) Empirically, from Figure 4-12:
A1H L 3
00064 and N 2H= 85 cpm
1.4 2 Hz
In this instance, 1.42 Hz agrees with the conventional analysis and is confirmed by test in the third mode. This would indicate that the more appropriate horizontal C, would be:
85 /.00064 = 132,800
When substituting DB3 (for Horizontal) for IH' for N21 1 :

C
132,800
1H
41,000
Therefore:
N2H = 41,000
1 41750
447
106 =
85 cpm = 1.42 Hz
Results of the 20-station beam analysis (conventional), the simplified beam analysis and the empirical N2 H frequency, multiplied by the higher frequency ratios of the conventional analysis, are shown in Table 4-2. The test frequency of 5.8 Hz was obtained by anchor drop test, corresponds to the third horizontal mode. This would also confirm that the 1.68 Hz fundamental frequency was too high.
4-22
Ship Hull Vibration Table 4-2 Calculated Horizontal Hull Frequencies Mode
2H 3H
Convential
1.42 3.14
Simplified
1.54 3.26
Frequency Ratios
1.0 2.2
Empirical
1.42 3.14
Test Results
4H
5H 6H 7H
5.36
7.60 10.28 12.50 by *Obtained
5.40
7.76 10.22 12.70 drop test.
3.78
5.35 7.24 8.80
5.36
7.60 10.28 12.50
5.8*
anchor
Calculated mode shapes are shown in Figure 4-13, (undamped). 4.2.2.1.3 Torsional Hull Frequencies The flexure free (uncoupled) torsional frequencies and mode shapes were calculated for the DD 963, by means of an electric analog. The mass rotational inertias for the ship and virtual mass were calculated at 20 points; the torsional rigidity was calculated at stations 3,5,10,15 and 191/2; and plotted with a curve faired through the points. Resonant frequencies are given in Table 4-3 and mode shapes are shown in Figure 4-14. Horn's empirical equation [4-20] yields: Nr . = 1.58 Where: g G A B D L
2
gABG Hz 2 A(B 2 +D )L
=
=
2 gravitational acceleration = 32.2 ft / sec 4 midship torsional moment of inertia = 4260 ft 2 shear modulus = 7.71 x 105 tons / ft
= =
displacement = 7500 tons beam=54ft depth = 42 ft length = 525 ft
=
=
Horn also proposed an approximate value of e based on a circular cylinder:
e
Where:
4A
=
= =
enclosed area thickness of plate a small element along the wall enclosing the section
6
ds
4-23
STRN
BC W
--- 1I,54
i~~~
1,
, .: - -. 12~ 6 Iz
II-7
_I
142
I
-.
n\
.L0 I7,60
10 ,2
___ __
____ _.0_ _
____
I1
---
- 32 10128 '-'-1
ii7..~.hi~
ORBGI11AL LITTOr DATA
LIl;
T JJ..... FALIZtP-A
___
Figure 4-13
Horizontal Mode Shapes
4-24
Ship Hull Vibration
1.0 0
T RSIOW L VIBPATION
3.64 Hz
-1.0
2( 1 STERN 1 1(
1,00 I
0 BO
5.62 Hy
../ "'"
STIRN
BO
f)
N
776 1-' ~ ~
1 11
5
I1.
H7
2(
STIRN
0
BO
LaJ
LAJ
\ I~_I
21 ST RN 1E 1( 5 0 BO
2 STEF N
0 BO
STE N
BOd
Figure 4-14 Torsional Mode Shapes
4-25
Ship Vibration Design Guide The estimated torsional frequency is:

" / 2x4260x7 NT= 1.58" 32 525 = 3.8 Hz 7500 (542+ 422) x10'
Table 4-3 Calculated Torsional Hull Frequencies Empirical* Frequency Conventional Ratios Calculation 3.8 1.0 3.64 IT 5.86 1.54 5.62 2T 8.10 2.13 7.76 3T 10.50 2.76 10.05 4T 12.73 3.35 12.20 5T 15.03 3.96 14.40 6T mode frequencies *The same frequeny ratios are used for the higher Mode
No evidence of torsional hull frequencies, excited by shaft or blade-rate frequencies, was observed during ship trials. Although the one-noded torsional mode may be excited by shaft or blade-rate forces, the shaft rate is below the calculated value and the blade-rate is well above it. 4.2.2.2 LNG Calculations The design of the LNG ships for El Paso Natural Gas Company, having an original cargo capacity of 120,000 CM; a draft limit of 36 feet; a speed of 20 knots at 80% of maximum continuous power rating; and an estimated 45,000 SHP (25% higher than previously employed in a single screw ship) presented many significant challenges including hull and machinery vibration. A preliminary study [4-21] provided a comparison of propeller force coefficients for three alternate stem configurations, identified constraints on the main propulsion system and recommended the adoption of the open transom stem configuration to minimize propeller induced vibratory forces. This work was carried out during the concept design phase. During the preliminary design phase, wake studies were carried out on the three alternate stern configurations and estimates of alternating propeller forces were developed. Self propelled model studies were conducted on all three designs to determine speed and power requirements. Estimates of hull response to projected alternating forces were made and evaluated against recommended criteria. Preliminary analyses of the torsional and longitudinal vibration characteristics of the main propulsion system were also carried out. As a general conclusion, the report [4-22] recommended that the open transom stem configuration offered the most likelihood of meeting the total requirements for power and vibration characteristics. This configuration was used for both the France-Dunkerque and Newport News designs. Trial results of the first F-D hull were presented at the 1975 Ship Structures Symposium [4-5].
4-26
Ship Hull Vibration

4.2.2.2.1 Vertical Hull Frequencies Preliminary vertical hull frequencies were calculated in 1971 by empirical methods for the proposed 120,000 CM LNG ships [4-22]. The final F-D open-transom configuration was slightly larger with a cargo capacity of 125,000 CM. A detailed 20-station beam analysis was carried out on the final configuration to provide a predicted hull response for comparison with underway vibration measurements [4-23]. Ship Particulars: Loa Length overall L B D T A Length between perpendiculars Breadth Depth Draft Displacement, long tons France- Dunkerque 923 872.7 136.5 90.25 36 94,234 .7549 14 x 106 24 x 106 Avondale 902 ft 887 ft 139 ft 90 ft 36 ft 94,811 long tons 14.8 x 106 in 2 ft2 27.4 x 106 in2 ft2
CB Block Coefficient
IV Vertical moment of inertia

1H
Horizontal moment of inertia
A second study was conducted on the Avondale LNG Hull [4-24], which included finiteelement and 20-station beam analyses. Both ships are similar in ship characteristics except the F-D ships have built-in tanks while the Avondale hull has large trapezoidal tanks, which are installed after completion of the hull. The stern configuration differed on the two hulls. The F-D design employs an open-transom while the Avondale hull has a conventional design. Results of vertical hull frequency calculations are shown in Table 4-4.
Table 4-4 Calculated Vertical Hull Frequencies (Hz) France-Dunkerque Mode

_________
Avondale Hull 20-Station

1.05
1.95
20-Station
1.00
1.81
Finite Elen Bureau

__-veritas) 0.8
1.7
FAverage Finite Frequency Element Ratio (NKF)___

NF 1.08
2.08
Empirical
1.03
1.90
2V
3V
1.0
1.84
4V
5V
6V
2.64
3.36
4.08
2.7
3.5
2.80
3.63
4.40
3.04
3.96
4.93
5.33
_
2.66
3.41
4.14
2.74
3.51
4.26
7V
8V 9V
4.72
5.30 5.86 6.39
5.03 5.56
6.17
4.76
5.30 5.87 6.44
4.90
5.46 6.05 6.63
1V
6.81
4-27
-4
0..
3--
->-
a
U
. -
.70D
Figure 4-15
France - Dunkerque LNG Ship Hull Frequencies
4-28
Ship Hull Vibration
BEAM LONGITUDINAL 0
FINITE ELEMEN r MODEL
HORIZONTAL
A 0
/
14-
VERTICAL
12I
~/
4I 0..
I 1 2 3
1
4
I 5 G 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
-Itl
14
15
MODE
Figure 4-16
Avondale LNG Ship Hull Frequencies
4-29

4.2.2.2.2 Empirical Vertical Calculation The fundamental vertical hull frequency (2V) was originally estimated during the preliminary design phase to be 1.035 Hz [4-22]. This was predicted on the basis of the original Schlick formula. A similar calculation, based on the final characteristics of the F-D hull would yield: N2v = 130,0004 - = 1.02 Hz
However, this did not account for the entrained water nor the increase in the ship depth (D), apparently offsetting factors. The Todd formula includes a factor for the entrained mass of water and thus permits a more accurate frequency estimate for alternate load conditions. For conventional tankers the recommended formula is:
2,00
7+
28 CPM
This formula produces a fundamental hull frequency of 1.16 Hz, which is estimated to be about 12% too high for this type of hull, based on the detailed analyses conducted. Although the fundamental modes were not identified during trials, evidence of the eighth vertical mode (9V) at 5.83 Hz (vs. 5.86 Hz for the F-D calculation) was noted during shaker tests conducted on the El Paso Sonatrach. The horizontal modes (6H, 7H and 9H) wei, also noted at 5.5, 6.56 and 8.66 Hz, respectively, indicating the 20-station F-D calculations shown in Tables 4-4 & 4-5, are correct.' Adjusting the coefficients to the special LNG case, we obtain:
N V =46,000+ 25 CPM
This yelds approximately 1.03 Hz for the F-D hull and 1.02 Hz for the Avondale hull. The 20-station beam calculations would be 3.4% lok for the F-D hull and 3% high for the Avondale hull. The frequencies shown in the empirical column of TaLA- 4-4 were generated by multiplying the fundamental frequency of 1.03 Hz by the average frequency ratios obtained from both 20-station calculations. 4.2.2.2.3 Horizontal Hull Frequencies When making preliminary estimates during the concept or preliminary design phases, the fundamental horizontal hull frequency has been generally estimated to be 140% to 150% that of the fundamental vertical hull frequency, as may be noted from Figures 4-17 and 4-18. This estimate is normally satisfactory since the vertical
A light weight mechanical shaker was used at sea with the ship dead in the water to explore the response of the hull in the upper blade-frequency range and to identify the presence of local resonances, if any. Due to the limitation of forces generated at low frequencies, only resonances above 5 to 6 Hz could be identified.
4-30
Ship Hull Vibration Suggested ines are shown for estimating purposes
o :
U
ip
org
. 30
4.0
Num6er of nodes 0 cargo -ships (Todd) @ Johnson A Aylmng-limits for Tankers n Johnson & Ayling -,mits for Passenyger Cargo ships B * Cargo ships * Ore carriersjTMB Report 906 cargo ship (SNAME, 1955) & 'Marincrcass v 42,000 tons dwt. tanAcr (KIumai)
Figure 4-17
Higher Frequency Ratios, Vertical Vibration [4-1]
4-31
Ship Vibration Design Guide Suggested hnes are shown for estimating purposes
80 -
70
3-03
-3'
67
Nubr
e. Cag hps(od
fnoe
ag
hp
.4-3
Ship Hull Vibration hull response is much more important. The data base is not as great for horizontal modes and ship details are not sufficiently firm to make adequately accurate calculations. Relying on the more accurate 20-station F-D calculations, which have been confirmed by shaker test, the fundamental horizontal frequency is 1.09 Hz, or about 9% higher than the corresponding fundamental vertical frequency. Calculated results for both hulls are shown in Table 4-5. 4.2.2.2.4 Empirical Horizontal Calculations Referring to Figure 4-12, the estimate for N211 would be approximately 1.25 Hz, assuming the general characteristics are proportional to the average ship. However, as previously noted, the fundamental vertical frequency calculates to be about 12% high and it is expected that the horizontal frequency would also be high. In that case, if the estimated horizontal frequency is reduced by a like amount, the 1.25 Hz would be 1.10 Hz, compared to the value of 1.09 Hz.
Table 4-5 Calculated Horizontal Hull Frequencies,(Hz).

France-Dunkerque Frequency 20-Station Ratio 1.09 2.21
3.44
Mode 2H 3H
4H
Avondale 20-Station 1.0 2.15

3.28
Average Frequency Ratio 1.00 2.09

3.22
Shaker Test Results
1.00 2.03
3.15
5H 6H 7H 8H
9H
10H *
4.53 5.69 6.55 7.65

8.65
9.57
4.16 5.22 6.01 7.02

7.94
8.78
4.23 5.21 6.19 7.00

7.98
8.93
4.20 5.22 6.10 7.01

7.96
8.85 1
_1
5.50* 6.56
8.66
Also noted during underway runs on F-D Trials.
Another approach, suggested by Brown [4-251 and reported by Todd:
N2 V
and: 1 N21,N =
vL
CPM
-TB AVL AVL3
C131 -
4-33

where: N 2v and N 2H are 2-node frequencies of vertical and horizontal vibration. ov =
PH
vertical coefficient
=
= = = =
horizontal coefficient
beam molded length between perpendiculars depth molded displacement virtual weight factor, (1.2 +
= 2.46
B L D A V
or (1.2 + T
1.29
for vertical and horizontal modes, respectively For the F-D design, assuming the calculated N v = 1.0 Hz and NH= 1.09 Hz, Pv= 7 4 ,700 and P. Additional values for different ship types, have been given by Brown and are - 39,200. repeated by Todd [4-1]. It should be noted that the 20-station beam analysis for the F-D hull, gave NV = 1.0 Hz and NH = 1.09 Hz (9% higher), while the same calculation on the Avondale hull gave N v = 1.05 Hz and NH= 1.00 Hz ( 5% lower). The F-D design is conventional in that the tanks are built-in. The Avondale design has voids arranged in the hull to receive trapezoidal tanks, which apparently reduce the horizontal hull stiffness. A significant departure from the generally standardized design concepts requires more refined calculations than the empirical estimates during the preliminary and/or detailed design phase.
4.2.2.3 Current Hull Designs

Sections 4.2.2.1 and 4.2.2.2 provided hull frequency studies for a Destroyer and a large LNG Carrier. Both ships represented unique, high powered designs which were sufficiently well studied to ensure, in so far ab possible, that they were free from objectionable vibration. Data was available to make vibration predictions yielding vibration specifications and provided a basis for judgment on the applicability of relatively simple methods of empirical analysis in the conceptual and preliminary design phase of shipbuilding. Both ships were successful with regard to their vibration characteristics. Results of full-scale ship trials were reported at the 1975 Ship Structures Symposium [4-5]. In this section, the application of empirical hull frequency determination is evaluated against current designs on which ship data is available. Of primary consideration at this time are recent Product Carrier/Tanker designs with machinery aft. Modifications to empirical coefficients are made to reflect current requirements. 4.2.2.3.1 Vertical Hull Frequencies For preliminary estimates the original Schlick formula is used. A range of coefficients, from 127,000 for cargo ships with full lines, to 156,850 for ships with very fine lines, was suggested. In 1960 Todd suggested 130,000 for large tankers, fully
4-34
Ship Hull Vibration

loaded and 100,000 for small, trunk-deck coastal tankers, 300-350 ft. in length, fully loaded. The experience of the author suggested the value of 130,000 for tankers was low. Thus, for the 1982 Baseline Review of the T-AO-187 [4-26], this constant was increased by 10%, to 143,000. The two T-AO hulls and a recent (1987) Product Carrier give the following results:
N 2V= C
For I:
I17
CPM with C = 143,000

_
c c
40,000x633 3 = 143,000 x .4174 x
1,767,385
10-3
= 59.69 CPM = .995 Hz
For II:
40C600x650 3 = 143,000 x .3883 x
1,656,000
10-3
= 55.52 CPM = .925 Hz
For III:
49,884x55.53
143,000 x .4459 x
3= 10-
63.76 CPM = 1.06 Hz
With this constant, the N 2v frequencies of II and III fall within 4% of the test results obtained on the T-AO and with the FEM analysis conducted on the Product Carrier, as shown on Figures 4-6 through 4-9. Although this is recognized as a small sample, it indicates that for similar ship types built to classification society requirements, such preliminary estimates can be very useful in the concept and preliminary design phases. Ship Characteristics: I Baseline T-AO-187 L B D T A Length Between Perpendiculars Beam Depth Draft Displacement 633 93.5 50 35 40,000 6.77 2.67 .662 1,656,000 2 2 II As Built T-AO-187 650 97.5 50 37.83 40,600 6.67 2.58 III Product Carrier 554.5 ft 105.6 ft 56.75 ft 36.75 ft 49,884 long tons 5.5 2.87 .7934 1,691,163 in2 ft2 1
L/B Length-Beam Ratio B/T Beam-Draft Ratio C I V Block Coefficient Number of Shafts
Midship Area Mom. of Inertia 1767,385
4-35
Ship Vibration Design Guide 4.2.2.3.2 Recommended Empirical Hull Vertical Frequency Coefficients Following his
1960 review of past research on hull frequency determinations, Todd proposed a modification of the Schlick formula that permits the use of ship dimensions and the determination of hull frequencies for different load conditions. The empirical coefficients would be expected to vary when modifications to the classification society rules are introduced. As originally drafted, the Todd formula was written, as follows: N V=1C where: <+CPM I
C = 52,000 and C2 = 28, for Tankers C = 46,750 and C2 = 25, for Cargo and PassengerShips A, = (1.2 + BT ) A Applying the Todd formula to the above two tankers built: it (FL) 52,000 x .7285 x 10- 3 + 28 = 65.88 CPM = 1.1 Hz vs. .95 Hz by Test. Il (FL)52,000 x 1.025 x 103. + 28 = 81.30 CPM = 1.36 Hz vs. 1.14 Hz by FEM. III (BAL) 52,000 x 1.237 x 10- 3 + 28 = 92.32 CPM = 1.54 Hz vs. 1.34 Hz by FEM. The results indicate the proposed coefficients, derived from ships built prior to 1960, may not reflect current classification society rules. By adjusting C1 to 45,000 and C2 to 25 for these ships: 11 (FL) = .96 Hz vs. .95 Hz by Test. III (FL) = 1.19 Hz vs. 1.14 Hz by FEM. III (BAL) = 1.34 Hz vs. 1.34 Hz by FEM (1.3 observed by Test). The higher frequency estimates are based on the estimated fundamental frequency multiplied by the known higher frequency ratios obtained for ships of the same category. Results for this limited group are shown in Table 4-6.
Table 4-6 Estimated Vertical Hull Frequencies (Hz) Ship II Ratios Test
.95 1.99 3.09 4.18 4.84 1.0 2.09 3.25 4.40 5.09
Mode
2V 3V 4V 5V 6V 7V
Ship III Predicted Ratios

1.14 2.32 3.72 5.17 6.25 7.26 1.0 2.04 3.30 4.50 5.5 6.4
Average Ratios
1.0 2.06 3.27 4.45 5.30 1 6.4
Estimated Frequencies (FL) Ship II Ship III

.96 1.98 3.14 4.27 5.09 6.14 1.19 2.45 3.89 5.30 6.31 7.60
4-36
Ship Hull Vibration

It may also be noted that the frequency ratiosit;,,,, fhc :L,1tc.' cr,'e for Tankers, shown on Figure 4-17. The following formula is also fevucnitv,d -bi t-s;im-, the higher modes: N V =Nv (n-1) P, Where: i. = 1 .02 for Tankers, 1.0 for Buii Cai;; r:; a-,. f.3 for ai',go Ships. However, for the above ships, a value ot 1.05 tor Tanker:. voald K ,r yropiiate. When available, the actual frequency ratios obtained for a given siyi sht:,ila Kuesd. Supplemental data prepared by ABS, which address recommende- ,w i -; ail I'rIcV *,x coefficients, is given in Appendix 4-A. It should be noted that ihe LU~p t a - , i-y: a special case. 4.2.2.3.3 Horizontal Hull Frequc nill-si estimated at 1.5 times the estimated vertical ' -i , -dl frequency is for Ship II) for
(.-4 preliminary design purposes, although the act tiA ;; I i,-.pTxirmately 1,65, . ' as determined by test results. Additio'nat ship i .t.. i: dii ai0; .I, , i tm to this factor. The estimated horizontal hull frequencies are c'1 hK ii, G 'hich " test data is reported. Alternate higher frequency ratios sih.'. ,re ft: - - y ::p i.rposns.
Table 4-7 Estimaiod -o
i :,
,i
Iq
I -t ns
Mode
Test*
Ratios
e '.
Ratios
a
from
1 41 c i;' .144
6
p = Ui2
1.0, lx 1.05
2H 3H 4H 5H 6H
1.58 3.006 4.90 6.60
101.44 2.12 3.10 4,18
305 3
_6.02
I2
Note that the test frequencies show;n a1(
1,44 3.02 14.46 4.32 4.54 6 41 7F 987 6.05 0 T_____ 34 7.56 ' 1, . ,' 1 '. 1l iicd value shown. 1, 1 ht, c:11in _?. -0 4.41
1~
4.2.2.4 Examples of Other Ship

Based on currently available empirical calculations against against test results. Although the validity of the empirical
i,
..
data, several di, the more extc,;, , ,, , significant dift ,v nc: . ii approach in pthoiit i 5.
,pAsd C I.
, I
by comparing and where available, th co1eLation indicates , dc'-Jopmcnt of a
suitable data base, more accurate pmeiii , , characteristics of these additioial sliips H,:
raii, made.
The
Ship Vibration Design Guide Ship Characteristics

LBP
Mariner 528 76 44.5 27 18,647 39,872
Containe 644.69 105.77 61.68 23.19 27,218 74,042
RORO 547.9 89.99 54.13 29.95 29,753 65,502
Icehreaker
352 78 53 30 12,100 25,007 1.7 x 106 4.15 x 106
Length, ft. Breadth, ft. Depth, ft. Draft, ft. Displacement, Lt.
B D T A
Al Displacement + Entrained water Area Moment of Inertia, in 2 ft2
IV Area Moment of Inertia, in2 ft2 1,123,200

IH
Table 4-8 Examples of Hull Frequencies for Other Ship Types

Mariner Class Cargo Container Ship Icebreaker 4-11] ROROShip (Recent) [4-11 (Recent) 1960) (Prior to Mod Mode Beam MeasTodBaFEcerar Beam Todd Calc MesShlkCalc Meas Schtick I acI Meas Schlick Calc Todd Calc Tod Todd
See note number: 1 2 3 4 1 3 &5
2V 3V 4V 5V
6V 2H 3H 4H 5H I
1.22 2.48 3.88 5.30
1.37 2.58 3.78 4.50

1
1.36 2.52 3.54 4.49

1 2.04 4.22 6.53 8.70
1.25 2.31 3.25 4.13
1.00 1.96 2.83 3.69

4.09
1.03 2.05 2.93 3.67

4.30 1.37 2.84 3.86
1.08 2.00 2.81 3.56

4.21 1.40* 2.38 3.57
3.10 3.30 6.70 6.60 10.10 9.60 13.40 13.50

16.70 5.60 10.50 15.20 19.70 16.80 4.95 9.90 14.85 19.80
3.84 7.10 9.98 12.67

14.95 5.76 11.52 17.28 23.04
1.09 2.31 3.66 4.90
1.10 2.31 3.47 4.62
1.78 3.90 6.15
1.97 4.67 5.83
1.88 3.88 6.00 8.00
1.28 2.34 3.45
6H *N2H Notes: 1 Original Schlick, N2v = 127,900 " Figures 4-17 and 4-18 1.3 xNv and i is assumed to be .85
24.20 24.75 28.80
3 Higher Frequency Ratios,
2 Todd, N2 = 46,750
BDT AL 3 + 25 HFR from Fig. 4-17 and 4-18
3 Todd with revised coefficients C, = 40,000 and C2 -20, HFR Fig.4-17 4 Todd with coefficients C, = 52,000 and C 2 = 28, N211 5 it = 1.05 is assumed for HFR
=
1.5 x N2V a-d LL= 1
4-38
Ship Hull Vibration
4.3 Preliminary Hull Response Analysis

It has been stated earlier, that the major steps to be taken to avoid hull vibration include the minimization of the exciting forces and the avoidance of structural resonances. Propeller forces were covered in Chapter Three and the prediction of hull frequencies was treated earlier in this chapter. At this point, the application of estimated vibratory forces to the mass-elastic systems of the hull and main propulsion system is addressed. Additionally, an estimate, or calculation for the dynamic response of these systems against the criteria recommended in Chapter Two is presented. For convenience, in this chapter, the primary emphasis is placed on the hull response with the recognition that final decisions on propeller type, number of propeller blades, location and type of main engines, shaft dimensions and RPM will have a very significant impact on many related variables. These facts emphasize the necessity of evaluating the vibration characteristics of the hull and main propulsion machinery system in the concept and preliminary design phases of any shipbuilding program, if possible prohibitive ship or machinery modifications are to be avoided. The earlier sections of this chapter have indicated from the exampls shown that while the most important hull frequencies can be determined by finite element or beam analysis (at considerable expense and loss of time), empirical estimates can be readily made during the concept design phase at little expense and with equivalent reliability, given a reasonable data base. This approach is recommended since potential conflicts with initially proposed propulsion system characteristics can be identified before machinery orders are placed. During the preliminary design phase, the beam model and/or the FEM analysis can provide confirmation of hull frequencies and estimates of hull response. While the total preliminary vibration design analysis includes both hull and main propulsion machinery, this section covers the hull portion aad Chapter Five covers machinery. Most decisions will be based on the integrated evaluation of both system studies. The following subtopics are included in this section: Avoiding Hull Resonance * Forced Hull Response * Resonant Hull Response
4.3.1 Avoiding Hull Resonance

Having established estimated hull frequencies, a plot of hull frequency vs. shaft RPM for the vertical, horizontal and torsional (if required) modes will permit a ready evaluation of anticipated resonances. Figure 4-19, taken from the Icebreaker study [4-11 ], shows the range of vertical, horizontal and torsional frequencies, from light to full load for full speed and bollard conditions with four- and five-bladed propellers. Such a display will assist greatly in the selection of the number of propeller blades, location of the engines and operating RPM. For most commercial vessels that employ direct drive operating at low RPM, the addition of first and second order lines on the graph will identify possible resonances with first and second order moments introduced by the engine. This will have a direct bearing on the selection of the engine and the safe operating RPM.
4-39
12
4 A'OOED
5 BLADE$,-.,
11
44.1
4 NOOED
LADES
2 NOED
S, 20 (a.)
I3 NODED
, BLAE5 40 0 0 0 RPM VERTICAL VIBRATION 60

":
BLADES '180 o6 4B NODED = 7 77...
04 2Q
0608
oA
RPM (c.) TORSIONAL VIBRATION
42 0 20
(b)
4 BLADES
NOTE
IN EACH SHNAVED AREA THE TOP LINE CORRESPONDS TO Tie LIST LOAOD T!E BOTTOM LiNE TO HE FuLL LOAD CONvITON
40
60
80 RPM
00 1
0 160
HORIZONTAL VIBRATION
Figure 4-19 Range of Vertical, Horizontal and Torsional Frequencies from Light to Full Load Compared with 4 - Bladed or 5 - Bladed Propeller Frequencies First order forces emanating from dynamic unbalance or misalignment in the propulsion system, or hydrodynamic unbalance (damage or out of pitch) of propellers, can produce a strong response if resonant with a vertical or horizontal hull frequency. Although these forces can be readily limited to acceptable levels by adhering to the recommended tolerances previously noted, it is strongly recommended that the shaft RPM be selected so as to avoid resonance at normal operating speeds, providing of course, that this choice is consistent with the requirements of blade frequencies. It was pointed out in Chapter Two that in the low-frequency range below 5 Hz, the ISO criteria changes from constant velocity to constant acceleration. This is considered necessary to compensate for the effects of engine unbalance encountered with large, low-speed, direct-drive diesel engines. The lower constant velocity limits were recommended for turbine driven ships. Low-speed, direct-drive diesels will generally develop strong first and second order moments, which can produce serious hull vibration if resonant with the lower hull frequencies. To provide a realistic evaluation of engine-hull response to the unbalanced forces and moments
4-40
Ship Hull Vibration

introduced by the engine, the manufacturer should provide this information that can be included in the vibration analysis. The engine input forces and operating speed, when considered with the predicted hull frequencies should be used in the selection of the engine. An example of the input moments are shown in Figure 4-20, taken from Reference [4-271. This reference also shows the estimated hull response on a container ship, which employs a low-speed engine with shaft speed in the vicinity of the lower vertical hull modes. The fore and aft location of large, slow-speed diesels can also be an important factor in hull response. Using the nodal points for the lower vertical and horizontal hull modes from mode shape diagrams, Figures 4-11 and 4-13 can be used for spotting the engine to minimize the influence of generated unbalanced forces and moments. Unbalanced forces have the maximum influence at the anti-node position and unbalanced moments are most effective when the engine is centered at the nodal point.
Fret moss momwnts I k Nr 1
4200
3200
2800
2 400-
2000
1600
4001
t'r
7 00
g00
116
1300
15000 17000 1000 Power at MCR IkwI
Figure 4-20 External 1st and 2nd Order Moments for 4, 5 and 6 Cylinder Two-Stroke Engines
4-41
4.3.2 Forced Hull Response

The principal blade-frequency forces affecting the vertical and horizontal hull responses are the vertical (F ) and horizontal (F ) hull forces, respectively. The vertical hull force is a combination of the vertical bearing force and hull pressure force. To avoid resonance at blade frequency, (number of blades x RPM), it is best to choose this combination so that the normal operating frequency is above the sixth vertical mode and not in resonance with a horizontal mode. In that case (above the 5th or 6th mode) the hull response is representative of a forced response rather than a resonant response and the amplitude of vibration is proportional to the driving force.
4.3.2.1 Estimated Hull Forces

As mentioned in Chapter Three, the components of vertical hull force are the alternating hull pressure force and the vertical bearing force, while the horizontal hull force consists of the horizontal bearing force only since there will normally be little effect of the hull pressure force exhibited in the horizontal plane. Propeller bearing forces, F. and F , may be estimated from wake studies performed on similar ship types, or empirically as developed in Chapter Three for alternate stem configurations. These values are given in terms of a percentage of steady thrust developed by the ship. The hull pressure force can be radically increased by cavitation effects and result in total hull forces being increased by a factor of ten or more, if serious cavitation occurs. Under normal circumstances (assuming the rules for avoiding cavitation are followed) it is assumed that an equal and in-phase pressure force, combined with the bearing force, acts on the hull. Also, since the trial requirements stipulate that shipboard vibration measurements be "maximum repetitive amplitude," (MRA), under controlled test and trial conditions, a factor of two greater than the predicted sinusoidal response phs a second factor due to trial signal modulation is introduced. Thus, Fv = 2 x 2 x Estimated (sinusoidal) forces, and F 1 = 2 x Estimated (sinusoidal) forces.
4.3.2.2 Hull Response

The response of the hull in a non-resonant condition above the 5th or 6th mode, may be estimated by the impedance method proposed by McGoldrick [4-28]. The mass or hull impedance, Z, is defined as: F
6
where: F is the excitation force induced by the propeller 6 is the hull displacement at the stem induced by the forces. The impedance is tbund, theoretically, to be a function of the elastic properties, inertia, damping and driving force frequency. Based on studies conducted on a few ships, McGoldrick developed an empirical expression for the hull impedance, as: Z =t A ((7PM)2 where: (y, A (CPM = an empirical constant for a given ship type. displacement of the ship in long tons. blade frequency in cycles per minute.
4-42
Ship Hull Vibration For the Mariner class Cargo Ship, o = 3.4 x CM), x = 8.323 x 10"7 from [4-30].
10"6 from
[4 29]. For the LNG Carrier (125,000
Based on full scale studies conducted on a few ships ranging from 7,800 tor.s to 94,000 tons, hull impedance curves for vertical and horizontal vibration, as shown in Figure 4-21, taken from the T-AO 187 Baseline Review, [4-26], were developcd. Using these curves as the basis, the estimated hull response to the derived input forces for the 40,000 ton T-AO was: Vertically: 5,200 lbs. *, 0.52 mils. (520( lbs/10000 lbs/mil) Horizontally: 3,600 lbs. * 0.60 mils. (3())0 lbs/6000 lbs/mil) For the T-AO equipped with two shafts, to include the in-phase forces for both shafts, the following factors are recommended: A B C Full power, trial conditions MCR, rough seas Case B, plus hard maneuvers (2x5) 2 5 101
Applying the factors for the three cases described above to the predicted hull response, the values in Table 4-9 are Obtained: Table 4-9 Amplitude at the Stern, + mils. Case
A
Vertical
1.04
Horizontal
1.2
B C
2.60 5.20
3.0 6.0
For reference purposes, the amplitudes of Horizontal (Athwartships) vibration for Cases A, B, and C are shown in Figure 4-22. The vertical amplitudes are slightly less. Case A would be representative of design trial conditions.
4.3.3 Resonant Hull Response

As in any dynamic system, the response is determined by the exciting forces and moments and the damping in the system. In the theoretical approach to the problem of hull vibration the input forces and moments are derived from model wake data and applied to FEM or Beam analyses, sometimes with damping inputs. At times, some investigators use an undamped analysis and then estimate an appropriate magnification factor, based on their experience. It is the experience of the author and the theme of this design guide that it is feasible to develop conservative input forcing functions based on stern configuration and propeller characteristics, 1 The factor of two times Case B is considered appropriite for tankers. A factor of three times Case B would be recommended for a destroyer.
4-43
Ship Vibrationi Design Guide
Vt rt ical
___ -
Bull
Impedance
4 i
Ship Hull Vibration
1L9751
Fgrobbl 4-2 ISOfor Guidelnes Vetical andHorizontalVibrationi

4-45
ecatSis Pa
aus

if appropriate attention is given to the avoidance of cavitation. In either case, theoretical or empirical development of propeller forces for the system can be realistically determined. The system damping, however, has been the subject of much controversy and continues to be investigated. In this section of the guide, the following subsections are treated: Hull Vibratory Forces, Hull Damping, Concept Design (Estimated Hull Response) and Preliminary Design (Calculated Hull Response).
4.3.3.1 Hull Vibratory Forces

Hull vibratory forces may be developed theoretically, deduced from previous studies on similar designs, or estimated from experience factors obtained on alternate propellers and stem configurations. The first case (theoretical) is more appropriately carried out on large budget projects in which the expenditure of much time and money can be justified. However, little work has been done on the verification of such studies via full scale testing. When considering the uncertainties associated with cavitation, damping and the modulation of shipboard vibration signals, plus the reliability of instrumentation selection and usage, coupled with the cost, time and availability of the required ship and propeller data, there would seem to be little justification to support this approach on a typical low-budget ship design program. The second case, used in the T-AO Baseline Review 14-26] and in the preliminary vibration analysis of the DD 963 [4-18] would be extremely valuable if the data base was extended to a broad range of ship types. These studies were based on the broad use of empirical factors and previous studies on similar ships. Tne third case, based largely on the work carried out on the LNG Carriers, indicates the feasibility of developing empirical input functions relating primarily with stem configuration and propeller design. This approach has been employed for many years in estimating the propeller induced alternating torque in main propulsion machinery systems. In this guide, estimating propeller forces by either the second or third method noted above is recommended for most typical commercial ship programs. In the T-AO and DD 963 studies, propeller forces were based on theoretical analyses on similar ship types and deduced forces were determined, as noted in the second case. A factor of two was added to include the effects of hull pressure forces. It was assumed or verified by test that the required caution was employed, to avoid cavitation. Limited data is currently available to give specific values on alternate hull configurations. However, it is considered feasible to develop a suitable data base from existing ship data.
4.3.3.2 Hull Damping

Damping values used by the author are derived from experimental observations on surface ships, as reported by Foster and Alma 14-311, who conducted anchor drop tests to excite transient vibrations of the hulls at low frequencies. Their findings indicated that damping 4 ,which is shown in varied with frequency and a curve for damping values as = 8.5 x 10 Fig. 4-23 was proposed.
4-40
Ship Hull Vibration For convenience of input to the computer, a step function with the following incremental values has been used, as proposed by Honke and Perkins [4-32]: Table 4-10 Step Function Input Damping Factors Frequency Range (Hz) 0.5 to 2.0 2.0 to 4.0
4.0 to 5.5
.
Dampin Factor, T{ .01 .014

.024 .035 .045
Magnification Factor, 0 100 71.4

41.7
5.5 to 7.5 7.5 to 9.5
28.6 22.2
over 9.5
.064
15.6
This step function is also shown on Figure 4-23. The damping factor corresponds to percent of critical damping. The damping factor is the reciprocal of the magnification factor, Q, i.e. Q =
Thus c/4o = 0.064 corresponds to a magnification factor of 15.6. This set of damping values was used in the Avondale LNG Hull Vibration Analysis [4-241 with good results. For comparative information on hull damping, Figure 4-24 from [4-33] shows the damping coefficients used by various investigators. Further work is required on this subject, preferably by conducting design analyses and ship trials and deducing underway damping characteristics. 4.3.3.3 Concept Design-Estimated Response During the concept design phase of the T-AO Baseline Study, the horizontal mode, estimated at 447 CPM, was indeed resonant at 450 CPM (5 blades @ 90 RPM) and with a magnification factor, Q, of 22.2, yields: FH (Hor. Brg. Force) = 1,000 lbs. and 2,000 lbs. for two shafts in phase. From the impedance curve of Figure 4-21, the hull impedance = + 6,000 lbs/mil. The non-resonant amplitude = 2,()0/60(X)() = .33 mils; Q = 22.2 @ 7.5 Hz. The resonant amplitude = 22.2 x .33 = 7.3 mils and if multiplied by the Trial Factor of 2, the estimated amplitude would be 14.6 mils. On the ISO Plot, in Figure 4-22, this amplitude at 7.5 Hz, would be equivalent to a velocity of approximately 18 tum/sec, well above the recommended value of 9 mm/sec. This result would appear to be excessive. However, it should be noted that the magnification factors are high since they do not include the effects of cargo. Thus, true resonance is not likely to occur, or could easily be avoided and the trial factor of 2, for horizontal hull vibration is probably high. It is also noted that in this case at the fifth mode, the analytical model is in the transition phase from resonant to forced vibration. Of the two options available, the 5 bladed propeller at 90 RPM was the clear choice.
4-47
.150
c/Pw 8.5 x10 -477

.T-7
7
-
.10011
VT
inn
17J
1
*
.08- .~
.05
--
j1:
1
Hz~~
U 10*{ 5
-0253
U
Hul.amingi vesu Frqunc
IFigure_4-23
4-48
Ship Hull Vibration
4A.
00
U->
0
0<~
le
w-< I
0
0.
Q.
LAU
4w
. 0)
0
z 0
m
z
0
0)
0j
NU
4-
00
o0
4-440

By referring to Section 4.2.3.3 in this chapter, the .close sfmilarity betwe~n Ship I - Baseline T-AO 187 and Ship 11 - As-Built T-AO 187 with regard to hull characteristics and estimated fundamental hull frequency is apparent. By relating the actual frequencies obtained by test, for Ship II, as shown in the first column of Tables 4-6 and 4-7, with the estimated values, the fifth horizontal mode, column 4 of Table 4-7 (gt = 1.02), as recommended by Todd, gives a value of 7.34 Hz, or 440 CPM vs 447 CPM obtained in the earlier T-AO Base-line Study. While this would represent less than a two percent difference for the 5th mode, other variations exist. which would indicate the desirability of carrying out the more reliable Beam or FEM analysis in the preliminary design phase. Of particular importance would be the true ratios between F v and F,, in the fundamental and higher frequencies. This can be obtained by systematically conducting and documenting ship vibration test results, for various ship types.
4.3.3.4 Preliminary Design-Calculated Hull Response

In Section 4.3.2.2, an empirical metiiod of estimating hull response for non-resonant conditions by the use of the hull impedance aproach was presented. In the previous section (4.3.3.3), this approach was extended to the earliest shipboard analysis, carried out during the concept design phase of the program to obtain an e(stimate of hull response and expected resonant conditions, using the initially planned ship charatcteristics. Based on that analysis and the interpretation of the results, a more detailed analysis nmay be required to confirm the first opinion; to better judge possible changes to the system, if required; and to gain a better understanding of the total system response for a direct compaison with specifications or other acceptance criteria. For the preliminary design phase, where the required ship detailed characteristics have been established, the choice of computer models may include: A B C 20-station beam model FEM of aft portion of the hull and forward beam model Complete FEM
Descriptions of these alternate programs have been given in earlier sections of this chapter. The complexity of the analysis and the associated time and cost increases in the order listed. The least expensive model has been used with good results. A few cases referred to in this chapter, include references [4-111, !4-12], [4-161, and 14-181. Complete detailed calculation procedures for this model have been published in Marine Technology 14-111. Procedure B includes a FEM of the aft (approximately 25%) portion of the ship, coupled with the beam-like fore-body model. Proper care nmist be taken to ensure the complete transmission of motion acro.s the interface. Reference [1-16] provides details of the finite element method and comparison with the conventional method (A). This FEM gives satisfactory results on natural frequencies of ship's hull, a:s checked by the conventional 20-station beam model and provides the basis for the more detailed evaluation of the aft deckhouse, as required. For most cases, however, method (A) is simpler, less expensive and faster for the determination of hull frequencies through the sixth mode, after which the hull responds to forced vibration. Typical response data is shown in Figure 4-25.
4-50
Ship Hull Vibration Procedure (C) is most expensive, time consuming and requires the most detailed structural information. Generally run on a NASTRAN computer program [4-171 or equivalent, it can produce detailed mode patters, as showr in Figs. 4-5 to 4-9. Results of response studies are, however, only as good as the input functions and damping assumptions, which are common to all three procedures. Such detailed analysis is best suited for the evaluation of more limited models associated with the evaluation of major substructures, such as deckhouse, large deck structures, and machinery foundations. With respect to ship hull vibration, the response of the main hull girder, which provides the input function to the major substructures and local structural components, can be estimated by the impedance method. Computer model (A) is recommended as being efficient for most preliminary design analysis. Model (B) can be used more effectively % hen detailed response of hull major substructures is required. For the detail design analysis, model (C) is considered more appropriate. For purposes of comparison of the various computing methods discussed, results of analyses, adjusted to the same input functions, are shown in Figure 4-26, taken from 14-30]. At 111 RPM, the vertical stern response at blade-rate and predicted by the alternate methods show good agreement.
4.4 General Comments and Recommendations

The ability to predict and design against objectionable vibration varies widely in the technological world. First, one must identify what is objectionable, which may vary from fatigue stress limits to human reaction; then establish suitable criteria as a basis for judgment of the phenomena; obtain or develop adequate means of measuring, of defining the testing conditions and of evaluating the data obtained; and finally develop an analytical procedure by which, with reasonable confidence, the designer can meet the criteria or specifications. In some relatively simple systems, such as engine excited torsional vibration in a diesel-generator set where the engine harmonics precipitate crankshaft resominces, i, has been a relatively straightforward procedure to technically resolve the problcm. II ship hull vibration, however, the problem is much more complex, largely du to the randoml nature o! tibe sea environment, which strongly influences the primary exciting forccz and tho lic response of the hull girder, which effects the total structural and niechin lea! sven.
-1%11
A good understanding of hydrodynalieC theory inol ed has been achieved. Laboratory techniques for the measurement of forces, extensive finite element programns for the evaluation of large complex structures and international standards on1 methods of measurement and evaluation of ship vibration have also evolved. ltmcvcr. tihe maiiv variables in the total system still require many judgment calls and an Cxtensie "design cycle" program to reliably evaluate a design. Such an approach is only siitcl to lare, e pensive programs and does not fit well with the normal, low-budget lprog!zara tidscrihed Iu th 'Stages () Ship Design" (4.1.3). For this reason, \vith regard to shipbord ,Ii'iation, dhiphtitlm i sill! u1nil-T-cd an art.
1-51
NLI 3 1
I
F-D
F..
HULL RESPONSE@~ 45,000 SHP1
I7 _
7.
HULL 4221A; PROPELLER 4522 RESPONSES @ STER14 POINT IN WAY OF PROPELLER
I L
'I
--
CJI
11
LCI
... J .. 4.IILL
-.
..
TI7
TF IE
C
A. I
Ii
~
I.
*'
ji
IK
Ill
4-5
Ship Hull Vibration
10.
.:_
__ _
.1 1 ; .:t
i-.
III
a~
~-l I-_
L
IITE:L4(~
EN
MODEL: ADJUSTED
J0.
FROM
CURVE (E)
mmv
rr
CURV (A)0RE.b
L!
-AOI FO RC N
'Ll.
IIZ -i-
RPM.
.4 - j-.j.;4-53.

This guide is developed in a specific manner in which each chapter, although interacting with the others, represents basic technical areas, which can be developed and updated individually. It is also based on the concept of translating the product of research into practical application by the use of empirical means, in order to include shipboard vibration as a line-item in the development of the average shipbuilding program. With these thoughts in mind, the following comments and recommendations are submitted as pertinent to Chapter Four.
4.4.1 General Comments

Hull vibration should be considered in the early decisions to be made during the concept and preliminary design stages of any shipbuilding program. It should be noted that vibration specifications, based on ISO Standards, are currently being employed. Empirical estimates of hull frequencies can be made during the concept stage to influence the choice of machinery type, location of engines, shaft RPM, number of shafts, number and type of propeller blades, etc. Empirical estimates of propeller forces, damping factors and hull response for evaluation against specifications or other applicable criteria can be developed in the preliminary design stage. The 20-station Beam analysis is considered suitable for preliminary design purposes, particularly when the proposed design deviates from classification society rules or represents a unique ship type. The more expensive and time consuming FEM analysis method is most suitable for the detailed evaluation of ship structures, particularly in the aft portion of the ship, during the contract and detail design stages. A more extensive supplement, dealing with major substructures, including large, slow-speed diesel engine installations and local vibration, should be considered.
4.4.2 Recommendations
The early development of a practical "Ship Vibration Design Guide" depends heavily on the availability of design analyses and shipboard vibration test data to expand the limited data base. Since such data is extremely difficult to obtain from private industry and in most cases, questionable in reliability, it is recommended that a program be developed for this purpose by the American Bureau of Shipping, which can be effectively carried out at low cost and in a properly organized manner. This would also enhance the ABS ship design and testing capability. The guide as written is not intended to be an end product but rather a pilot effort to establish the concept of a practical approach to the control of shipboard vibration. As such, its expansion and/or updating should be considered the norm. In this light it is recognized that specific work is required in the development of more detailed guidance on the analysis and testing of large, slow-speed diesel engine installations.
4-54
Ship Hull Vibration
REFERENCES
4-1 4-2 Todd, F. M., Ship Hull Vibration, Edward Arnold (Publishers) Ltd., London, 1961. Lewis, F. M.,"Hull Vibration of Ships," Chapter X, S.N.A.M.E. Principles of Naval Architecture, 1967. Boylston, J. W. and Leback, W. G., "Toward Responsible Shipbuilding," S.N.A.M.E. Transactions, 1975. Taggart, R.,"Ship Design and Construction," S.N.A.M.E., 1980. Noonan, E.F., "An Assessment of Current Shipboard Vibration Technology," Ship Structures Symposium 1975, S.N.A.M.E. Publication SY-5. Schlick, 0., "Further Investigations of Vibration of Steamers," R.I.N.A. 1894. Dinsenbacker, A. L. and Perkins, R. L., "A Simplified Method for Computing Vertical Hull Natural Frequencies and Mode Shapes in Preliminary Design Stage," D.T.R.C. Report 3881, January, 1973. Leibowitz, R. and Kennard, E., "Theory of Freely Vibrating Nonuniform Beams, Including Methods of Solution and Application to Ships," DTMB Report 1317, May, 1961. Bruck, 11. A., "Procedure for Calculating Vibration Parameters of Surface Ships," NSRDC Report 2875, December, 1968.
4-3
4-4 4-5
4-6 4-7
4-8
4-9
4-10 Cuthill, E. H. and Henderson, F. M., "Description and Usage of General Bending Response Code 1, (GBRCI)," DTMB Report 1925, July, 1965. 4-11 Noonan, E. F., "Design Considerations for Shipboard Vibration," S.N.A.M.E., Marine Tchnology, January, 1971. 4-12 "124,000 CM LNG Carrier, F-D Hull Vibration Analysis Using 20-Station Beam Model," NKF Technical Note 7321-9, August, 1975. 4-13 MRI/Stardyne 3, "Static and Dynamic Structural Analysis Systems, User Information," developed by Mechanics Research, Inc., available through Control Data Corp. 4-14 MRI/Stardyne, Static and Dynamic structural System, Theoretical Manual, available through Control Data Corp. 4-15 Guyan, R. J., "Reduction of Stiffness and Mass Matrices," AIAA Journal, Vol . 3, No. 2, February, 1965.
4-55
Ship Vibration Design Guide 4-16 "Avondale Hull Vibration Analysis by Finite-Element Method Including Comparison with Conventional Beam Method on 125,000 CM LNG Carrier," NKF Technical Note 7321-8, August, 1975. 4-17 MacNeal, R. H., "The NAS' RAN Theoretical Manual, Level 15," a NASA Publication, April 1972.
4-18 Noonan, E. F.,
'Prclininnry
!hull nmd Machinery Vibration Analysis for DD 963 Class
Destroyer Desig'
N. Fcprt No. 7105-I, to Litton Systems, Inc., February, 1971.
4-19 Ali, H. B. "Calculatcd Natral Frequencies and Normal Modes of Vibration of USS Brumby, (DE- 1044)," NSRDC Report 2619, March, 1968. 4-20 Horn, F., "Horizontal and Torsionschwingurigen and Frachtschiffen," Werft Reederie Hafen, 1925. 4-21 Noonan, E. F. "Vibration Considerations for 120,000 CM LNG Ships," NKF: Preliminary Report No. 7107, 25 Januay, 1971. 4-22 Noonan, E. F.,"Vibration Considerations on Project and Conventional Hulls for 120,000 CM LNG Ships," Final Report No. 7107, 28 May, 1971. 4-23 NKF TN 7321-9 "125,000 LNG Carrier, F-D Hull Vibration Analysis Using 20-Station Beam Model," 19 August, 1975. 4-24 NKF TN 7321-8 "Avondale Hull Vibration Analysis by Finite Element Method Including Comparison with Conventional Beam Method on 125,000 CM LNG Carrier," 12 August, 1975. 4-25 Brown, T.W.F., "Vibration Problems from the Marine Engineering Point of View," N.E.C.I., 1939. 4-26 T-AO 187 Baseline Review, "An Evaluation of the Proposed Propeller-Hull Configuration," NKF Report 8213, May 1982. 4-27 Payer, 1-.G. and Asmussen, I., "Vibration Response on Propulsion-Efficient Container Vessels," S.N.A.M.E. Transactions, 1985. 4-28 McGoldrick, R.T., "Ship Vibration," DTMB Report No. 1451, December 1960. 4-29 McGoldrick, R.T., and Russo, V.L., "Hull Vibration Investigation on SS Gopher Mariner" DTMB Report 1060, July, 1956. 4-30 NKF TN 7321-15 "Avondale Hull No. 4628, Prediction of Underway Hull Response at Stern by the [lull Impedence Method Including Comparison with Results by the Traditional Beam Method and the Finite Element Method," 15 June, 1976.
4-56
Ship Hull Vibration

4-31 Foster, W.P. and Alma, H.F., "Damping Values of Naval Ships Obtained from Impulse Loadings," Shock and Vibration Bulletin No. 40, December, 1970. 4-32 Honke, P. and Perkins, R., "Vibration Characteristics of Hull a-d Propulsion System for Patrol Frigate," NSRDC Report No. SAD-C30E-1962 (1973). 4-33 Chang, P.Y. and Carroll, T.P., Ship Structure Committee Report SSC-306, "Experimental Program for Determination of Hull Structural Damping Coeftcients," 1981.
4-57
APPENDIX 4-A
Comments on "Ship Vibration Design Guide," Preliminary Draft Report

(Prepared by Jeng Wen Chiou, Senior Engineer, ABS) I agree with the author that the values of the coefficients in the Todd formula for tankers should be changed to reflect current vessel experience. A F-udy of validity of the formula was made with C, = 45,000 and C2 = 25 for four tankers, which already have the lowest mode natural frequency results either calculated by using 3-D finite element models representing the entire ship or measured on board. Table 4-A-1 shows the results obtained by using the Todd formula as compared to the FEM calculations or the measured data. The comparison reveals that by using the Todd formula, the estimation of the lowest frequency of the three tankers for which LBP is less than 770 feet is adequate. The one exception is the result estimated by using the formula for the supertanker with LBP equal to 1150 feet, which is 53% away from the measured data. As to the formula for estimating the higher mode frequencies, it appears that the formula N2 (n - 1)gv used in this guide would pro,.uce more accurate results than the formula N2V(n - 1)v employed by DnV. For illustrative vessels, Table 4-A-2 presents frequency ratio derived from measured data, 3-D FEM calculations and from above mentioned formula. From the table it is found that the ratio obtained by using the formula suggested in the draft guide follows the trend of the ratio derived from the measured data. Nonetheless, it is recommended that setting Av = 1.05 for 3-node mode to 5-node mode and i.v= 1.02 for 6-node mode and higher modes be used in the formula.
4-A-1
I-'1
Table 4-A-1 Estimation of 2-Node Mode Natural Frequency (Hz) for Tankers Characteristics L L
548 548 554
554 770 770 1148
_
2-Node Vertical Mode A

21720 38900 24560
49000 56000 121200 172000
Number Condition
1 2 Ballast Laden Ballast
Laden Ballast Laden Ballast
Ship
Loading
B
91.8 91.8 106
106 130 130 197
D
49 49 57
57 75 75 93
T
20 34 20
37 25 52 34
Todd 3-D FEM IFormula Calculations

1.2 1.09 1.34
1.19 1.05 0.93 0.75
Frequency
Test
1.21 0.97 1.34

1.13 0.98 0.83 1 0.49
Table 4-A-2 Estimation of Natural Frequency Ratio for Higher Mode of Tankers Mode
2V 3V 4V 5V 6V 7V
8V
Number
of Guide * 16 Ships**
1 2.15 3.20 4.23 5.19 6.19
7.15 * ** 1
Figure 17
B.S.R.A
1 2.15 3.25 4.27 5.07 5.85
2 FEM &
1 Test***
1 2.05 3.15 4.10 5.03 5.85
1
!v -1) N (n
)V = 1.02
1 2.04 3.06 4.08 5.10 6.12
7.14
LV N (n -1)
V= 1.021 [,V= 1.05
1 2.03 3.07 4.11 5.16 6.22
7.28
V= 1.05
1 2.1 3.15 4.2 5.25 6.3
7.35
1 2.07 3.17 4.28 5.42 6.56

7.72
SSC Project SR-1312 16 ship measurement results selected by B.S.R.A. 3-D FEM calculations performed for three tankers by ABS and measurements performed on one tanker by Bureau Veritas
4-A-2
CHAPTER FIVE
PROPULSION SYSTEM VIBRATION

he main propulsion system includes all mechanical and structural elements from the prime mover up to and including the propeller. Through the structural attachment of the thrust bearing foundation and the bearing supports, vibratory forces and moments may readily transfer from the ship structure to total machinery system, or from the machinery system to the ship structure. Engine and thrust bearing foundations typically provide the direct transfer of vibratory energy between the hull and main propulsion machinery systems. Propeller generated forces can adversely effect the dynamic response characteristics of the propulsion system and of the hull, through the engine and thrust bearing foundations, while machinery generated dynamic forces can precipitate serious damage to the machinery system and produce excessive hull vibration. In Chapter Four, the effect of propeller-generated vibratory forces on hull vibration were discussed. In this chapter, the dynamic forces and moments generated by the propulsion system, including the propeller, and their effect on the vibratory characteristics of the total propulsion system, are treated. Of major concern is the dynamic stresses within the system and its components and the control of dynamic forces generated by the propulsion system, which contributes to the vibratory characteristics of the total ship. Although the vibration of both the ship's hull and main machinery are interrelated, it is convenient, both in preliminary design studies and in the control of shipboard vibration, to conduct independent studies on the propulsion system. It is necessary hjwever, to include actual or empirical factors related to the ship's structure that form an important part of the effective mass-elastics system under study, such as the stiffness of the thrust bearing foundation, when evaluating the response of longitudinal vibration of the propulsion system. The main areas of concern, and which can give rise to troublesome vibration or dynamic stresses, include *Dynamic Unbalance and Misalignment Dynamic Shaft Stresses Longitudinal Vibration Torsional Vibration Lateral Vibration
5-1

The following sections will cover these topics and include both the excitation and response of the propulsion system and its effect on hull vibration.
5.1 Dynamic Unbalance and Misalignment

Dynamic and/or hydrodynamic unbalance of the propeller, dynamic unbalance of shafting, bull gears and other large components of the propulsion system operating at propeller-shaft speed may contribute to objectionable hull vibration, particularly if the exciting frequency falls in resonance with a natural frequency of the hull. Such difficulties may also arise from the primary (1st order) or secondary (2nd order) unbalanced forces in large, slow-speed diesel engines or from serious shaft misalignment (1st order). It was noted in Chapter Four, that the fundamental vertical natural frequency of a ship's hull may be in the range of one Hz, or 60 cycles per minute. Unbalance in a major component of the propulsion system, such as the propelle,, which is located close to the stem, an antinode of hull-girder response, can have a serious effect on the vibration of the ship, if significant dynamic or hydrodynamic unbalance is present. Thus, it is important, if we are to minimize the exciting forces and avoid resonances, that we dynamically balance the propeller, minimize propeller-blade pitch error and avoid important operating shaft speeds at, or near important hull frequencies. While the actual balancing of machinery components and the check of propeller pitch error are carried out during the construction phase of the shipbuilding program, it is necessary to determine the compatibility of major components with the hull response. The number of shafts, number of propeller blades, shaft RPM, identification of acceptable engines and proposed shafting arrangements and propulsion system vibration characteristics must be evaluated during the preliminary design phase. It is necessary. therefore, to determine the dynamic forces generated by the propellers, shafting, gears, and in the case of low-speed diesel drives, the primary and secondary unbalanced forces and moments inherent in all engines under consideration.
5.1.1 Unbalanced Propeller Forces

The dynamic unbalance criteria given in Section 2.3.1.1 of Chapter Two, taken from MIL-STD-167 [5-1], is applied to specific cases: W LNG Propeller weight D LNG Propeller diameter LNG Propeller RPM 122,000 lbs 24.5 ft 105 (Radius = 12.25 ft)
Since the length of the rotor mass is less than 0.5 D, a single plane correction is used. The .nximun "es;,idual unbalance is: U = 0.177 W for speeds below 150 RPM, = 21,594 oz-ins = 112.5 ft-lbs. This is equivalent to an average correction of 12.85 lbs @ 0.7 radius, or 9.18 lbs at the
5-2
Propulsion System Vibration

propeller tip. The allowable unbalance would generate a centrifugal force at 105 RPM equal to:
g where: v
R
=
linear velocity of unbalanced weight 2rRN 60
therefore: F and: 421.8 41220 = 0.0035, or 0.35% of the propeller weight 122,000 Applying the same criteria to a twin-screw destroyer propeller, with a weight of 55,000 lbs, 17 ft diameter and operating at 170 RPM, the allowable unbalance would be: 4000W U =U2 4
-
9.18 x (3.14 x 105)2 x 12.25 =421.8 lbs 900 32.2
7612 oz-ins or 39.65 ft-lbs which is 4.66 lbs @ R = 8.5 ft
The centrifugal force generated would be: 4.66 32.2 (3.14 x 170)2 x 8.5 = 389.33 lbs 900
It should be noted, that with two shafts, the allowable vibratory force would be 2 x 389.33 ui approximately 779 lbs when the unbalanced forces acted in phase. The allowable force generated by each propeller would be 389/55,000 = .7% of the propeller weight. For a single plane dynamic balance of a disc of similar weight, operating at 1500 RPM, the allowable vibratory force would be: U = 4W N 4 x1500 55,000
-
146.67 oz-ins or 0.764 ft-lbs (0.09 lbs @ R = 8.5 ft)
The dynamic force generated would be: 0.09 32.2 (3.14 x 1500)? x 8.5 = 585 lbs or 1.06% of the propeller weight 900
As an approximate value, to be used in estimating vibratory forces generated by a rotating element, such as a ship's propeller, when balanced to this criteria, one percent of the weight is
5-3

recommended for each propeller. This would also provide some margin for shaft contribution. Similar estimates should be made for bull gears. In support of this proposed unbalance tolerance, Marine Engineering, Reference [5-2] states, on page 387, "Ship's specifications usually require that propellers be balanced (with static or dynamic equipment) such that the static unbalanced force at rated RPM is no greater than one percent of the propeller weight." These forces should be used in estimating hull response in the preliminary design phase. Figure i-9 of Chapter One indicates most ships have a fundamental vertical hull frequency below 2 Hz and most large ships, over 50,000 tons have the fundamental frequency below 1 Hz. If we assume the fundamental athwartship frequency is approximately 11/2 times the vertical frequency, we may also deduce the damping factor to be below .01, as shown on Figure 4-23 of Chapter Four and that the magnification factor, at these fundamental resonances would be 100:1, or the equivalent stati, load would be 100 times the estimated centrifugal force developed by the unbalance present in the propeller. While the detailed calculation of the hull response can be deferred to the detail design phase, it would be prudent in the preliminary design phase, to avoid operating speeds at, or close to hull resonances. This would be particularly true in a design employing large, slow-speed diesels. For hydrodynamic unbalance, although not readily subject to quantitative evaluation, it is obvious that great care should be taken in the manufacturing process to insure pitch irregularities are kept to a minimum. Specific tolerances are generally invoked, such as given in Marine Engineering [5-2], page 388, but no allowances of the unbalanced forces generated are applicable in the preliminary design phase. As noted above, the application of one percent of the propeller weight, as an estimate for the dynamic unbalance of the propeller, would provide a margin for the possible augmentation introduced by an in phase hydrodynamic unbalance.
5.1.2 Misalignment
As in the case of hydrodynamic unbalance, misalignment could be a potential problem area but is generally referred to as a deficiency in workmanship and no allowances are made for it in the preliminary design phase. Care should be taken, in establishing the location of line shaft bearings to avoid lateral shaft vibration, to determine the setting of stem bearings to minimize wear and particularly to insure proper alignment in large reduction gears. For bearing location and spacing refer to Marine Engineering, [5-2] and for main reduction gear alignment, see "Guide to Propulsion Reduction Gear Alignment and Installation," [5-3]. Procedures for checking lateral shaft vibration, which should be done in the preliminary design phase, is treated in Section 5.5.
5.1.3 Diesel Engine Unbalance

Large, low-speed diesels are currently used more frequently for utilizing slower speed and more efficient propellers. The two-stroke diesel, which is most commonly used, may cause significant hull structural vibration when the frequency and magnitude of free moments coincides with one of the lower hull modes, may cause serious local structural vibration resulting from internal forces and moments or large engine vibrations caused by lateral or
5-4

guide-force moments. The engine unbalanced forces and moments are treated here. Engine alternating torques and harmonics and alternating torques produced by the propeller, are treated in Section 5-4, which deals with torsional vibration in propulsion systems. Hull, structure and engine vibration may result from one or more of the following excitation sources: * External or free mass forces and moments. SInernal mass forces and moments. * Lateral or guide-force moments. 5.1.3.1 External Forces and Moments The external or free mass forces and moments represents engine unbalance. On the modem two-stroke diesel, the inertia forces are generally neutralized in engines of four or more cylinders, but the external moments may be significant. Aware of the possibility of serious vibration excitation, engine manufacturers can furnish detailed information on the unbalanced moments generated by their engines due to inertia forces. Table 5-1 indicates the presence (x) of free or external moments (,n modern two-stroke diesel engines: Table 5-1 Number of Cylinders 4 5 6 7 8 Unbalanced Moments in Two-Stroke Engines 1st Order Horizontal Moment X X 0 X X 2nd Order Vertical Moment X X X X 0
Vertical 1st Order Moment X X 0 X X
Figure 5-1 shows the magnitude range of first and second order moments for four-, five-, and six-cylinder, two-stroke engines from [5-4]. More specific data on the unbalanced forces and moments generated by M.A.N. and Sulzer two-cycle engines are included as Appendix 5-B for information purposes. This data was furnished by the American Bureau of Shipping. In the preliminary design phase it is important to consider the available engine options, obtain the manufacturers calculated external forces and moments and make preliminary estimates of the effect on hull response based on the planned location. Figure 5-2 shows the external moments (couples) of the engine. Figure 5-3 shows the standard balancing normally provided and the modifications which can reduce the first vertical and horizontal moments. It is important to note that the reduction of one will result in an increase in the other. In some cases, additional balancing can be incorporated for the first horizontal moment, as shown in Figure 5-4. Since the external moments of the engine are the major contributor to general hull vibration by the combination of large vertical or horizontal moments with a hull resonance, the preliminary
5-5

Free, miie oam [kNmI
4200-
00
90o
Ii
300
7w
7 0
1000
ot
Ikw) Power ol MCA
Figure 5-1
External First and Second Order Moments for Four-, Five-, and Six-Cylinder, Two-Stroke Engines
aI
Figure 5-2
External Moments (or Couples) of Engines [5-5]
5-6
Standard bIlancing
PAiN
blancing giving
reduced M1V
Mu
MIH
Ralacing giving
reduced MIN
Figure 5-3 Balancing of First Order Moments [5-5]

A
rot."
.hewilCVigVlll
Figure 5-4
Additional Balancing of First Horizontal Moments [5-51 5-7

design analysis should evaluate the preferred engine for compatability with the planned location, strength of external forces and moments, and location of hull frequencies and mode shapes. In this regard, it should bce noted that the hull response due to external forces is a maximum when the engine is located at an anti-node, while the external moment produces the maximum hull response when the engine is located at a hull nodal point, as shown in Figure 5-5. Thus, if the unbalanced external forces are eliminated, attention can be focused of unbalanced moments.
+6
-M1 FIwl
-"Work
harmonic movement
effected in the
hW, 0=
d=/F Pd.M
+F free force
M free moment
+ 2
zF z )rdihole o the mode-form in way of the apohied effort
e
1E
rotation of the mode - form in way of the apied effor
Work effected In the
harmonic movement
WO0z,.F
W cW
M,
Figure 5-5 Action of External (Free) Forces and Moments on the Hull Girder [5-5]
If necessary, it is also possible to minimize the 2nd order, vertical moment, by including balance weights operating at twice the engine RPM, or by the use of a mechanical exciter at an anti-node in the aft part of the ship, as shown on Figure 5-6, taken from Reference [5-6]. In this situation the frequency of the exciter would operate at two times the RPM. This approach has been used effectively to resolve problems of 1st and 2nd orders of engine unbalanced moments in more than seventy applications. The obvious expense of design, installation and maintenance of such equipment would strongly indicate the importance of the potential problem associated with the treatment of the external engine moments and the necessity of conducting the preliminary design analysis, to avoid potential problems. For a more in-depth study of the subjczt, see Reference [5-4].
5-8
FREE FORCE
ExCITER
rT
....
!FREE MOMEN T
Figure 5-6
Mechanical Exciter Fitted to Compensate for Slow-Speed Diesel Engine Excitation of the Hull Giroer
During the preliminary design phase, care should be taken in the following areas, relative to the external (free) forces and moments: * Engine selection (minimum unbalance and/or ability to correct). * Avoiuance of hull-girder resonances. * Involve the engine builder in the preliminany design phase. * Develop requirements for vibration studies in detail design phase. 5.1.3.2 Internal Forces and Moments While the external or free mass forces and moments are always transmitted through the engine seatings into the ship structure and directly effect the hull-girder response, the internal mass forces and moments directly disturb the engine frame, foundation and local structural supports. They are only retained as internal forces and moments if the foundation is infinitely rigid and the frame of the engine is designed to resist these forces and moments with minimum distortion. Ordinarily, the supporting structure in the ship is far from being rigid and some 're flexible than others. This could result in significant local vibration of ei-gine designs are -. plates and stiffeners and incrcase noise and maintenance problems.
5-9
Ship Vibr:."in Design Guide To minimize the effects of internal forces and moments it is desireable to have maximum rigidity in the form of high moments of inertia of the engine bedplate and engine frame. In the preliminary design phase, the alternate engines under consideration should be evaluated for structural rigidity and recommendations obtained from the engine builder on the recommended construction of the engine foundation. It is likely that the manufacturer has foundation designs available, developed on the basis of their experience.
5.1.3.3 Lateral Moments

Lateral moments, also called guide force moments, are caused by the transverse forces acting on the crossheads, due to the connecting-rod/crankshaft mechanism and are the function of effects of combustion and inertia forces. They are dependent on the number of cylinders and the firing order and due to the irregularity of torque. These lateral moments may produce rocking of the engine, generated by the -1-moment, or twisting of the engine, generated by the X-moments, as shown in Figure 5-7, from Reference 15-5]. These moments will vary between engines, with variations of response dependent on engine and foundation rigidity.
H-momeni
to if ,
Figure 5-7
Effect of Lateral Moments on Engine Frame
5-10
Propulsion System Vibration Excessive lateral vibration of the low-speed diesel engine, used aboard ship, has been encountered on many occasions, requiring top bracings between the engine upper brackets and stiff structure of the hull. Initially, the top bracing was accomplished by direct connection to the engine but in later applications friction connections and hydraulic stays have been used, which would allow adjustments for the loading conditions of the ship. See Figure 5-8 as an example of hydraulic supports.
Figure 5-8
Installation of Hydraulic Stays Between Engine and Ship Structure
ISO 4867, "Code for measurement and reporting of shipboard vibration data," [5-71, includes the location and direction of vibration measurements to be made on low-speed diesels, during full-scale shipboard trials. Data of this type is needed on a number of ships, with alternate engines, engine foundations and inner bottom structures, to obtain a suitable basis for the evaluation of a proposed design. In this connection, the preliminary recommendations of engine builders, with such shipboard vibration experience, would be helpful.
5-1 1
5.2 Dynamic Shaft Stresses

In the development of the propulsion shafting design for commercial vessels, it is customary to follow the requirements of the classification society [5-8], for the determination of shaft dimensions, based on shaft strength characteristics. These requirements are reduced to the specified minimum diameters for the various shaft sections, based on shaft horsepower and RPM. When subjected to strong vibratory loads, more detailed analyses are generally required for review and evaluation, to insure serious critical are adequately considered. These rules reflect current practice and are periodically updated, as necessary. An alternate method is used by the Navy Department, [5-9], in which all steady and alternating stresses are combined, with suitable service factors, to obtain a factor of safety of two, when incorporated in a Goodman diagram. This procedure is preferred, for the detailed design phase, to insure serious torsional and longitudinal vibration criticals are avoided and/or meet the required design criteria. As a result of a significant iiumber of tailshaft failures occurring during and following WW II, an investigation on the cause of failure was undertaken by Panel M-8, "Investigation of Tailshaft Failures," under the sponsorship of SNAME. Full scale strain-gage studies were conducted on a number ships and laboratory fatigue studies were carried out under simulated shipboard environmental conditions. Results of the full scale studies were reported and proposed design criteria recommended to alleviate the effect of off-center thrust and operation in a corrosive environment, [5-10]. The Summary Report, [5-11], includes the results and recommendations emanating from this program. Several important factors were identified, which indicated that the tailshaft design was the most critical and would not necessarily be identified in detailed design analyses: "Propeller thrust is eccentric to the shaft centerline. "Tailshaft bending stress is generally the largest alternating stress. "Surface cracks at keyways develop at points of high stress. "Fatigue limits are greatly reduced in a corrosive medium. * Corrosion fatigue is the major cause of tailshaft failures. Tailshaft alternating bending stresses should be limited to 6,000 psi " Cold-rolling shafts will inhibit corrosion fatigue. Based on these considerations and the results of the full-scale stress measurements, the maximum allowable alternating bending stress requirement has been included in Chapter Two, Section 2.3.1.2. It is considered prudent to include this requirement of the limiting tail shaft bending stress, which may indicate an increase in shaft dimension in the preliminary design phase to permit early modification to the shafting, if required and provide a better evaluation of the important longitudinal, lateral and torsional vibration design analyses by the use of the more correct shaft dimensions.
5-12
Propulsion System Vibration As pointed out in Reference [5-11], the Navy shaft design procedures were modified in 1960, [5-91 and design calculations generall". tend to increase the minimum tailshaft diameters. This trend may also be noted in the changes in the ABS Rules [5-8], between 1971 and 1986.
5.2.1 Tailshaft Design

The preliminary design analysis developed for the 125,000 CM LNG Carrier, [5-121, is used to demonstrate the application of the limiting tailshaft bending stress of 6,000 psi, as given in the criteria of Chapter Two, Section 2.3.2.1. As a first step, shaft diameters are determined by ABS Rule (1971) and compared with ABS Rule (1986). The minimum tailshaft diameter, obtained by the criteria given in Chapter Two is then compared the ABS Rule and the Navy Criteria [5-91. Engineering data and assumptions used in the original study, are: Maximum SHP Maximum RPM Propulsive Thrust Propeller Weight Propeller Diameter Propeller BAR Number of Blades Propeller MR 2 Machinery Weights: LP Turbine HP Turbine Condenser Bull Gear Reduction Gear (Total) 80,800 lbs 42,500 lbs 160,000 lbs. (wet) 87,000 lbs 310,000 lbs 45,000 100 526,400 lbs 122,650 lbs (in air) 24.5 ft 0.9 5 1.69 x 106 lb-in-sec 2 (incl. entrained water)
Line Shaft Diamtekr* (Based on ABS Rule, 1971) D=C I R 0.8754 64 x 45,000
100
= 26.86 inches = 27.0 inches where:
5-13

H K R C Thrust Shaft Diameter: DCKHR =1.05 64 x 45,000 100 = 32.25 inches where: H K R C = = = = 45,000 SHP 64 100 RPM 1.05 = =
= =
45,000 SHP 64
100RPM
0.875
Tailshaft Diameter (1971 ABS Rule) T= 1.14D + P. in C
2 94 =1.14 x 27 + 144 = 32.82 inches = 33.0 inches
where D P C
= = =
27 inch line shaft diameter 294 inch propeller diameter 144
Tajishaft Diameter: (1986 ABS Rule) DIOOK 4H 3.695 where: K H R U D R U+23,180

= = = = =
1.26 45,000 100 60,000 34.25 inches
5-14

Check on Bending Stress (6,000 psi max-) The method of selecting the section modulus for a maximum bending stress of 6,000 psi will be that recommended by Noonan, reference [5-10] C (M 6,000 where: Z
C
=
) in3
Section Modulus, in3

Service Factor = 1.75
M8
M
=
=
Gravity Moment, in-lb

Off-Center Thrust Moment, in-lb
A moment arm of 44 feet between the CG of the propeller and the point of maximum shaft stress at the forward face of the propeller is assumed. Mg = 122,650 (44) = 5.4 x 106 in-lbs
Mt = 0.065 (D) (T)
where:
D T
= = =
Propeller Diameter = 294 inches Maximum Propulsive Thrust = 526,400 lbs
M (Mt + M )
0.065 (294) (526,400) = 10.06 x 106 in-lbs 15.46 x

106
in-lbs
Z= 1.75 x (15.46 x 106) = 4,520 in3
6000
D=
R[
332(4520) = 35.9 = 36 inches 71
Since the ABS Tailshaft size of 33 inches is too small compared to that required for a maximum 6000 psi bending stress, a tailshaft diameters 36 inches will be used. The above results of the various shaft diameters and the preliminary arrangement of shafting shown in Figure 5-9 suggest that only two basic shaft diameters be considered; 36 inches for the Tailshaft and 32.25 inches for the thrustshaft, lineshaft and stem tube shaft, for preliminary design purposes.
5-15
62.0'
g0' 29_
1960
- , 9 )
21 2
Figure 5-9
Preliminary Shafting Arrangement for LNG Project Hull Tailshaft Diameter by Navy Calculation, 15-91
For single-screw vessel, solid shaft: M = 5.4 x 106 in-lbs (from previous calculations)
g
M = 3M = 16.2 x 106 versus 15.46 x 106 in-lbs

P g Z
1.75 x 6,000 15.46 x 106 =459i
34509
D=
10.2 x 4509 = 35.85 = 36 inches
The above analysis indicates that the minimum tailshaft diameter, determined by ABS Rule, increased from 33 inches obtained by the 1971 Rule to 34.25 inches obtained by the 1986 Rule. This increase reflects the influence of the studies conducted by the SNAME M-8 Panel, as discussed in References 15-10] and [5-111. The application of the recommended criteria [5-10] and the Navy Criteria of 1960 [5-9] both indicate, for the LNG design, a minimum tail shaft diameter of 36 inches. While this analysis is considered conservative based on the author's experience, it was derived from the limited data available at the time. As shown in Figure 5-9, the 36 inch diameter was used for the tailshaft and the 32.25 inch diameter was used for the thrust shaft, as indicated by the ABS Rule. This diameter was also
5-16

used for the line shaft and stem-tube shafts. Thus, Figure 5-9 is applicable for the shafting vibration analyses shown later. This portion of the preliminary design analysis will generally be the controlling factor in the development of the shafting design, due to the importance of the thrust eccentricity, the high alternating bending stress developed, and the low corrosion fatigue properties of the shaft.
5.2.2 Thrust Eccentricity

It was shown in Reference [5-13] that there are three principal contributions to the resultant shaft bending moment: (a) The moment due to eccentric thrust (b) The moment due to gravity (c) The moment due to the propeller torque reaction It was also shown that the thrust moment was significantly greater than the others and that the gravity moment was significantly greater than the torque moment. The combined stress pattern is the resultant stress produced by the above moments and their harmonics. It was also shown in the results of the tests conducted that the harmonic content of the combined stress pattern has relatively small importance. It was concluded that the first order stress roughly represents the stress produced by the combination of the moments referred to above and that its magnitude is a direct function of the phase relationship of the various vectors. Studies were conducted on the phase relationship under various speed, load and sea conditions. Under maximum power, the first order bending stress was nearly out of phase with the gravity moment and over twice the magnitude of the gravity moment. Thus, the eccentric thrust produced a moment, roughly equal to three times the gravity moment. Detailed analyses and the development of the criteria, for the criteria, for the limited number of ships studied, are shown in Reference [5-10]. It was clearly established, however, that the thrust eccentricity is the most important factor to be considered in establishing the tailshaft diameter. Of particular importance in the determination of alternating bending stresses in tail shafts, is the estimation of the thrust eccentricity factors for various ship types. For information and guidance, supplemental data on alternate stern configurations is included, as follows: Figure 5-10 Stern Configurations and Wake Components for LNG Carriers Figure 5-11 Thrust Eccentricity for Alternate LNG Stern Configurations Thrust eccentricity varies according to the wake distribution. Since the Hogner stern accumulates wake in the upper and lower part of the propeller disc area, a low eccentricity factor is expected. The open-strut transom stem also shows a low eccentricity factor due to the high and uniform wake distribution and thus indicates the tailshaft bending stress calculations, based on the recommended criteria, to be conservative. The eccentricity shown for the conventional stern of approximately 15% of the propeller radius, or .075 times the propeller diameter would be of the same order of magnitude, but slightly higher than the average value of .065 obtained in the original test program and used in the criteria formula.
5-17
MODEL 4147 - Conventional Stern
t I
II1*( i?
o.
MODEL 4141
Modified Hogner
POW
aasA -&
MODEL 4148 - Open Transom
SITW Vl
I1*0
CwCUmMII
01M5Th15ON& OF LONSITUIUOLVCL*UT 001N71U
Figure 5-10
Stern Configuration and Wake Components for LNG Carriers
5-18
0.
350
3400
330*
."Model 4141 IA.G. Weser- Modi-fie"
Modi.:4148 (OpenTransom- Hydronaut is) I MJodel 4147 lConventional stern - Henry): / idjner-Sten.
20
,
.,
*"
'
*,
.>*,
310
..
,e
,. . ""1
,I
. -,
"
. , 'I
. .
I"
*I1o.C
,
L -.
*
o..............*.,
80 t2 270
1. 270
.$
,
,,"
-4.4
-.
/,
.> 9 ; 7
*.."-
. .' , ,,9..
'
1hI
.Z.'... ~e ..
. .
'.1
'9.,.l. . 9liil ..
i .... ... "'~~~~~~~~~~......e ... 4 ........ ...

. , i "
..
' "
. /
"I:
- "-
"'" .. "
. " .,
1 .23C
*..
22(
Figure 5-11
5-19
Ship Vibration Design Guide Supplemental data, relative to the eccentric thrust obtained on single-screw vesseis, for three stern types, is shown in Figure 5-12, from Reference [5-5]. It may be noted that the eccentricity for the "V" form, Intermediate form and "U" form, all fall between .1OR and .15R, or .05D and .075D, which supports the criteria value of .065. Although the background for these data are not known, it would suggest that the "V" form would be the least preferred in regard to tailshaft bending stress.
"Vtorm
20so
'" m
form '1"
Figure 5-12 Values of Thrust Eccentricities for Three Stern Forms When considering ships with two or more shafts, Figure 5-13 for a twin-screw Destroyer, Reference [5-14] and Figure 5-14 for the triple-screw Icebreaker, Reference [5-15], are shown. It is important to note that the eccentricity shown for the destroyer exceeds that associated with single-screw ships, used as the basis for the criteria given. It is also to be noted that the eccentricity shown for the wing propeller of the Icebreaker exceeded both the criteria value and that of the center propeller, which appears to fit the criteria. It is believed, however, that the high eccentricity value of the wing propeller was probably due to the heavy bossing used for ice protection. Significant modifications were recommended to improve the flow into the propellers, Reference [5-16], which would probably have reduced the eccentricity. At this point, however, the design was radically changed and no opportunity permitted verification of this assumption. It is assumed, however, with bossings the eccentricity of the wing propellers could still exceed that of the center shaft.
5-20

09
PROPELLER ROTAT ION
20
15
0
REFERENCE
-24'10
BLADE
6'~
1.420 ft. 10 15 20
Percent of Propeller Radius Angles of Blade Rotation, CCW (00 - 3600) 24', Angular Blade Position of the Reference Blade (00 - 720) 289', Angular Eccentricity 1.42 ft, Radial Eccentricity 0.167, Eccentricity Factor
0 = 0' =
t =
e
e/R
=
=
Figure 5-13
Polar Diagram of Thrust Eccentricity for Destroyer
5.2.3 Detail Design Considerations

Based on the limited research conducted on the design of propulsion shafting,, we may conclude: * Tailshaft bending, due to eccentric thrust, produce maximum dynamic stresses. * Surface cracks and "fretting" originate in the keyway. * Seawater frequently enters the propeller-hub and shaft cavity. * Shaft fatigue limits are grcatly reduced in a corrosive medium. * Corrosion fatigue has been the primary cause of shaft failure.
5-21
Ship Vibration Design Guide * High-strenth alloy steels do not improve fatigue limits in seawater. * Long stem-tube bearings exacerbates the thrust eccentricity. * Current calculation methods are based on limited empirical studies. * Reduction of propeller overhang will reduce thrust eccentricity. * Cold rolling or shot-peening will inhibit corrosion fatigue. During the detail design, it is important to consider stern-tube bearings, which permit the reduction of the propeller overhang, to carefully align the shaft to follow its natural slope and to consider cold rolling or shot-peening to inhibit corrosion fatigue. From a long range viewpoint, additional test data is required on alternate stern configurations and multiple-screw ships and improved procedures developed for shaft in design.
00 3600
30 PROPELLER ROTATION
0-340 o
80. 00
3170
25
20 0' 7
0 3200
00,
:30
RADIAL ECCENTRICITY Ck 239R
gQO
WING PROPELLER ENTEN PROPELLER 30
:317' 5
0a
25 10 15 20 PERCENT OF PROPELLER RADIUS
EXAMPLE FOR WING PROPELLER
9',
e/ft
.00
0.239
ANGLES ARE MEASURED IN COUNTERCLOCKWISE DIRECTION FROM VERTICAL UPRIGHT

*
* ANGLES OF BLADE ROTATION, COUNTERCLOCKWISE (0 ANGULAR BLADE POSITION OF THE REFERENCE BLADE (00 a , ANGULAR ECCENTRICITY * RADIAL ECCENTRICITY
9''
3600) 900)
Figure 5-14 Polar Diagram of Thrust Eccentricity for Center and Starboard Wing Propellers (Four Blades)
5-22
5.3 Longitudinal Vibration of Propulsion Systems

Longitudinal vibration originating in the propulsion system can result in excessive vibration of the hull, deckhouse and superstructure; produce serious local vibration of turbines, condenser and piping; and result in failures in reduction gears, main thrust bearings and turbine thrust bearings. Ir, most cases the excitation originates at the propeller and is magnified by resonances within the total shafting system. In this framework, the total shafting system includes the propeller, shafting, thrust bearing with its attachment to the hull, the reduction gear and engines. In the case of low-speed, direct drive diesels, the engine harmonics of torsional vibration may also generate longitudinal exciting forces through the coupling action of the propeller. The mass-elastic system involved includes a number of components that may be readily calculated, such as propeller and shafting weights and shafting stiffness. The properties of other components, such as thrust bearings, turbines or high speed engines, may be obtained from potential suppliers or estimated from previously obtained data. Of major concern is the rigidity of the attachment to the hull ,which requires some engineering judgment and calculation. In the preliminary design phase it is necessary to develop a reasonable expectation of meeting the vibration criteria or specification and achieving the necessary compatibility between the vibration response characteristics of the hull and propulsion system. In this regard the proposed machinery arrangement (shafting design, engine selection and location), RPM and number of propeller blades must meet the longitudinal vibration criteria of Section 2.3.1.4 while the estimated hull response characteristics must meet the vibration criteria shown on Figure 2-1.
5.3.1 Longitudinal Vibration Analysis of the LNG Carrier

In the preliminary design analysis of the LNG Carrier, 15-121, the estimated vertical and horizontal hull frequencies, through the sixth mode, fell below the maximum blade-rate exciting frequency, when the ship is equipped with a five-bladed propeller, thus minimizing the potentially adverse influence of hull girder resonance. Although slightly lower forces were indicated for a six-bladed propeller, the higher blade-rate frequency would have compromised the longitudinal vibration characteristics of tile propulsion system when we attempt to avoid longitudinal resonance of the propulsion system within the operating speed range. In the development of the high powered LNG Carrier, three candidate hull forms, shown in Figure 5-10, were studied at the Netherlands Ship Model Basin (NSMB) and calculations of propeller forces, based on the NSMB data, were carried out. Results of the calculations, taken from Reference [5-12], are shown in Table 5-2. The calculations of the vibratory propellerexciting forces support the preference for the open-strut transom stern, as represented by the Project ttull, for the generation of minimum vibratory forces. The computed forces, shown in Table 5-2 for the Project lull and the Conventional Hull are used in the longitudinal and torsional vibration analyses for tile propulsion systems of each of these hulls. The engineering data and assumptions used in the original study, shown earlier in Section 5.2.1, are repeated here, for convenience. The machinery weights for the turbines, gears and condenser were fur nihed by the Geycal FlIcctic Companm
23
--
Ship Vibration Design Guide Table 5-2 Results of Calculations of Propeller Forces Based on NSMB Data A. G. Weser Model 4141
Vs, knots 0, feet J :T, Ibs TIbs
_T, __%
Conventional Stern Model 4147

19.00 25.00 0.494 472,900 31,820
Open-Strut Model 4148

20.00 24.50 0.690 451,600 17,520
20.00 26.64 0.440 635,800 +39,760

6.25
6.75
1,754,000
3.89
2,053,358
Q,ft-lbs
0, ft-lbs
2,370,000
97,470
4.10
- 5,300 0.84
+
88,780
5.05
- 9,980 2.10 + 3,900 0.82
-
56,660
2.74
- 3,700 0.82
4,950
/Q',%
FH, Ibs %
___F_ __,
FH, lbs
F_, %
6,750
+_ 1.06
1.11
Fv, Ibs
FV, %
- 2,500 0.40
18,700 4.00
16,500 3.66
FV, Ibs
F T, %
+3,190 0.50
_ 1,660
0.35
2,134
+ 0.47
Engineering data and assumptions used in the original study, are: Maximum SHP Maximum RPM
Propulsive Thrust
45,000 100
526,400 lbs
Propeller Weight Propeller Diameter Propeller BAR Number of Blades Propeller MR

2
122,650 lbs (in air) 24.5 ft 0.9 5 1.69 x 106 lb-in-sec 2 (incl. entrained water)
Machinery Weights: LP Turbine iP Turbine Condenser Bull Gear Reduction Gear (Total) 80,8(X) lbs 42,5(X) lbs 160,0(X) lbs. (wet) 87,0X) lbs 310,0(X) lbs
5-24

The preliminary shafting arrangement for the Project Hull is shown in Figure 5-9. The preliminary shafting arrangement for the Conventional Hull is shown in Figure 5-16. Pertinent figures, taken from Reference [5-17], are included at the end of the LNG longitudinal vibration analysis. Additional information on the estimation of thrust bearing foundation stiffness may be obtained from SNAME T&R Report R- 15, Reference [5-18 1.
5.3.1.1 Longitudinal Shaft Vibrations

The mass-elastic model for the longitudinal shaft vibration analysis, when assuming the propulsion machinery is installed on the satie fotndation as the thrust bearing, may be represented as follows:
M1,M M4
KIK,
Ki
CrM
LIEIV
M2
= lb-sec / inch
K = lbs /inch
Propeller Mass + Entrained Water + 1/2 Tailshaft Mass Tailshaft Mass +]/, of Other Shafting up to Thrust Bearing
M
M4
Balance of Shafting Mass + Bull Gear Mass Turbines, Reduction Gear (less bull gear), Condenser and foundation structure - lever effect to be considered Tailshaft Stiffness Stern Tube, Line and Part of Thrust Shaft Stiffness
KI K K3 K4 TF
= = = = =
Thrust Bea-ing Stiffness (elements and housing)

Machinery Stiffness Alternating Propeller Thrust, lbs
C,, ,
Equivilant Propeller Damping Constant, lb-sec / in

1 5 < +290 x 678 12,5M, . 2 .... 386 ?v// = 2x841] >678 + 23 [290 x 2= = 731 lb-sec 2 / in
386
386
= 460 b-sec 2 / in
5-25

232 x 684
8 7 00 0
M3 A
4
386
607,300 386
= 431 lb-sec / in
1,570 lb-sec 2 / in b 42,500 lbs 80,800 160,000 101,000 607,300 lbs
where: HP Turbine LP Turbine Condenser (wet) Foundation (20% of above)
Reduction Gear (less bull gear) 223,000
In view of the lever effect, which causes the machinery masses above shaft level to experience larger longitudinal displacement (see reference [5-171) the effective height of the overall machinery mass will be assumed as being 1.4 times higher than the shaft centerline. This results in an increase of the machinery mass by a factor of (1.4)2. Therefore:
M4 =
=AE L
(1.4)2 (1,570) = 3,080 lb-sec 2 / in
K K2 K3
=
=
-678
1020 x 30x 106 =45.1

6 817 x630 30 x 10
106
lbs/in
389106lb/i
The overall thrust bearing stiffness, K3 is found by a series combination of the housing and elements stiffnesses. The stiffness of the thrust elements is estimated to be 42 x 106 lb/in, from the G.E. data. The housing and support stiffness will be estimated from Figure 4 of Reference [5-17]. Since this figure does not cover the thrust value of the LNG, an upper and lower estimate will be made, i.e., 23 x 106 and 15 x 106 lb/in respectively. Therefore: K3 or:
3 K3 * =
1
6+
6 42 x 10
-
=14.9 x
106
lbs /in
23x 10
1
6+
1
6
11.1 X 10 6 lbs /in =lllObsi
42 x 10
15 x 106
5-26

In a similar manner, the foundation stiffness, K4 , will also have to be estimated since Figure 6 of [5-17] does not cover the propulsive thrust of the LNG. Therefore, an upper value of 30 x 106 lb/in and a lower value of 20 x 106 will be considered to cover the range of the LNG foundation stiffness. Although no foundation details are available at this time, inspection of Figure 5-9 suggests that the foundation will be rather short and is in a relatively small space since it is still in the confines of the "bulb." Two studies were therefore conducted, one with the lower values of K3 and K4 and another with the higher values. The results of the frequency analyses are shown in Figure 5-15.
10
9111 6 lb /n.
--
FOU
TI
ES
5-2
Ship Vibration Design Guide 5.3.1.2 Comments

In this analysis, K? represents the thrust bearing stiffness (elements and housing). In calculating this value, the stiffness of the elements, as given by GE, (42 x 106 lb/in.) are combined with the estimated thrust bearing housing and its immediate support bracket, as deduce from Figure 4 of Reference [5-17]. Thus, the estimated range of 15 to 23 x 106 lb/in, as used in this analysis, results in a much lower stiffness value for the "housing" than is given for a comparative Michell bearing (73 x 106 lb/in). However, the "foundation" stiffness range of 20 to 30 x 106 lb/in, as taken from Figure 6 of Reference [5-17] is, as would be expected, correspondingly higher since it does not include the immediate support bracket for the thrust bearing. For comparison purposes, the total thrust bearing housing and foundation stiffness for the LNG using the stiffness value estimates from Figures 4 and 6 of Reference [5-171 are compared with the value obtained foi the Sea Land SL-7 design. LNG Low Foundation Stiffnes(Including Housing)
KL K17L where: K, K2
K1 FL
= =
1
K1
11
K2
Housing and Support = 15 x 106 lb /in Foundation = 20 x 106 lb / in

0.067 + 0.05 =8.55x 1061bin
LNG High FounduiorLSiffnessIh
Wing H ounsing
K K2
=
=
6 23 x 10
6 30 x 10
KF11
0.0435 4 0.033
13 x 106 lb / in s
=
Average LNGFsindtiSiffisdncl i g 8.55 + 13.0

KF
-
x 10 6
10.77 x 10 6 lb /in
Sea LandSkL-_Foundatin a t(l

KF =
jngSiffness
K~
KI K2
1 -0.0835 + 0.0139
=10.3x 10 6 1b/in
5-28

where: K,
K2
=
Housing and Support = 73 x 106 lb / in Foundation = 12 x 106 lb / in
Thus, the average value for the LNG compares very well with that computed for the Sea Land SL-7. However, since the SL-7 employs a much larger shaft, which places the thrust foundation on the tank top, presumably the LNG design would more closely be represented by the upper value of foundation stiffnesses. If, in addition, a stiffer thrust bearing, as represented by the Michell, which provides a line support for the thrust block rather than a point support, the fundamental frequency of the system would be expected to fall at 10.4 Hz, which would result in a 5th order critical of at least 125 RPM. A second calculation was made, in which we assumed the propulsion machinery is not installed on the same foundation as the thrust bearing. The equivalent mass-elastic system is then taken as:
M1
AA M2 M3 M4
M1
Mass of Propeller + 50% for Entrained Water + Mass of 1/2 Propeller Shaft (31 x 12 x 290)
122,650 1g 61,325 108.000 292,000
M, = 755 lb-sec 2 /in

M2 1/2
+
Propeller Shaft 1/2 Line Shaft ((29 + 19) x 12 x 232)2
108,000 1/g 6/000 175,000
M 2 = 455 lb-sec2 / in M3 1/2 Line Shaft + Thrust Shaft (9 x 12 x 232) + Thrust Bearing (GE estimate) + 1/4 Thrust Bearing Foundation (estimate = to TB)
=
67,000 23,000 68,000 226,000
1/g
585 lb-sec 2 / in
100,00
1/g
M 4 Gear Masses, Including Shafts (estimate) M 4 = 260 lb-sec 2 / in
5-29
Ship Vibration Design Guide K, Stiffness of Propeller Shaft (from propeller centerline) AE 1020 x30 x 106 4 5 .1 x1 0 6 lb / in L 678 Stiffness of Line Shaft to Thrust Collar = 817 x 30x 106 =38.9 x 106 lb/in 630 Stiffness of Shaft from Thrust Collar to Bull Gear Centerline 817 x 30 x 106 195 x106 lb / in 10.5 x 12
K2
K3
K4 Stiffness of Thrust, including thrust housing and thrust foundation. Since we are interested in keeping the critical above the operating speed, we assume we use the Michell bearing. The rating for the bearing used on the Sea Land SL-7 is appropriate, although our shaft size is larger (32.5ins vs. 26.5ins). Thus it will be equal to or higher than that used on SL-7. K1 Internals
K2
120 x 106 lb / in 73 x 106 18 x 106 (The estimated value on the SL-7 was 12 x 106 when installed forward on tank tops-assume this foundation is 50% more) 1 K3
M3
Housing
K., Foundation
K1 4
0.0775
-12.9 x 106 lb / in
KI
K2
For convenience, combine relatively high. Thus:

M3
& M4 . This is possible since the M4 is relatively small and K3 is
= 845 lb / sec 2 and K3 is eliminated. Table 5-3 Frequency Estimate (As a first approximation, assume frequency = 10 Hz; co= 62.8 rad/sec; co2 = 4,000)
M
755 455 845 3.02 1.82 3.38
P/v 2X/lo M
_,NO 2X/10"
K,0B
AX
1.000 .933 .811

-
3.02 1.69 2.74
3.02 4.71 7.45
45.1 38.9 12.9
.067 .122 .578
1__
.578 .233
1_1
5-30

Thus, using a K4 of 12.9 x 106 would result in a higher frequency than 10 Hz. If we used the foundation stiffness of 12 x 106, as was estimated for SL-7, the combined K4 would be = 1/1053 = 9.5 x 106 lb/in. Then, the last line of the above Holzer table would equal:
845 3.38
-
.811
.785
2.74
7.45
9.5
.785
S.026 The above analysis would indicate the system response would be largely controlled by the foundation stiffness, that the lowest frequency would result with the project hull, and that the fundamental longitudinal frequency of the system would be, at least 10 Hz, or 600 cpm. On this basis, a 5-blided propeller would give a resonance at 600/5 = 120 RPM or higher. 5.3.1.3 Frequency Analysis - Conventional Hull The Preliminary Shafting Arrangement used for the Conventional Design, is shown in Figure 5-16. The schematic of the mass-elastic system is similar to that used for the Project Hull, except that the mass and stiffness values vary somewhat due to the shorter shaft. A comparison of the two sets of data is given, as follows:
FR.
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
Figure 5-16 Preliminary Shafting Arrangement for LNG Conventional Design
5-31

Paramee MI731
M' 2 M3431 M43,080
ProjectHull
Conventional Hull 641 lb-sec 2/in
460
277 lb-sec2lin 337 lb-sec 2/in 3,080 lb-sec 2/in
1I
45.1
11. 1 x 106
X 106 106
69.8 x 65.9 x
11. 1 x 106
106 106
lb/in lb/in
K K3 K4
38.9 x
to 14.9 x
106
to 14.9 x
106
6
lb/in
lb/in
20 x10 6 to 30 x10 6
20Ox106 to 30x1
Results of the computer analysis for the mass-elastic system of the Conventional Hull, is shown in Figure 5-17. Using the upper limits of K3 and K4 as discussed under the frequency analysis for the Project Hull, the estimated frequency of the system is most likely to be in the vicinity of 11.5 Hz, with a 5th order critical occurring at 600/5 =138 RPM.
.90
1b-n
it)~
3*
-f3
41
u4
__
Figure 5-17
First Mode Frequency versus Thrust Bearing Stiffness (K3) and Foundation Stiffness (K4 ) for Conventional Hull
5-32
Propulsion System Vibration 5.3.1.4 Response Calculations In estimating the response of the mass-elastic systems to the estimated alternating thrust forces originating at the propeller, for both the Project Hull and the Conventional Hull, the forces () given in Table 5-2 were used, i.e., 17,520 lbs for the Project Hull and 31,820 lbs. for the Conventional Hull. The exciting force is assumed to vary as the square of the RPM, as the propulsive thrust does. Of equal importance in estimating the system response, is the damping assumed. The equi,,alent damping constant at ihe propeller, C,, L, was based on Figure 14 of Reference [5-171, which was developed from experimental data obtained on naval ships of smaller dimensions. In this instance the developed area of the propeller was estimated at (BAR) (Disc Area) = .9x (it x 24.5)2/4 = 425 ft2 and CL was estimated to be 15,000 lb-sec / in. Results of the computer analyses, for both the Project Hull and the Conventional Hull, are shown on Figure 5-18. Also shown is the allowable alternating thrust (50% of maximum full power thrust) as given in the proposed specifications prepared for the LNG carriers.
__
.... SP-- ....II ~
-EJ --
I:
180
--
be C r"
-zw . ..
...
Figure 5-18 Estimated Response of Machinery ,System to Longitudinal Vibration
5d3 3
Ship Vibration Design Guide An approximation of the anticipated severity of these criticals at 102 RPM, is shown by dotted line. The purpose of this estimate is to show the anticipated response, should the actual system parameters, as built into the ship, result in the critical actually falling at or near full power. The connecting dotted line shows the loci of resonnant peaks at any RPM between full power and the calculated location of the critical. It should be noted that the proposed specifications for the LNG Carriers were based on U.S. Navy requirements, Reference [5-19]. The criteria given in Chapter Two, Section 2.3.1.4 is more restrictive in regard to allowable alternating thrust at the main and turbine thrust bearings. The alternating thrust in this guide, is now considered excessive if it exceeds 75% of the mean thrust or 25% (as opposed to 50%) of the full power thrust, as given in Reference [5-19], whichever is smaller. The purpose of this limitation is to account for the signal modulation and sea conditions that result in a significant increase in the sinusoidal value obtained in the design analysis. As noted in Reference [5-17], a factor of two normally exists between maximum amplitudes and average or sinusoidal values obtained in calculations.
5.3.2 Longitudinal Critical Within the Operating Speed

The longitudinal vibration analysis is representative of the optimum shafting system in which it is possible to avoid the fundamental critical from occurring within the operating speed range. In some cases this is not possible and it is necessary to estimate the feasibility of the design by estimating the severity of the critical, evaluate the predicted response against the established criteria and the effect of this critical on the response of the hull. An alternate propeller or machinery arrangement may be required. The selection of the number of propeller blades and the skew angle of the blades can have a significant impact on the total ship and machinery vibration. The seriousness of the longitudinal vibration characteristics of the propulsion system, particularly when reduction gears are employed, cannot be underestimated. While we are primarily concerned with the fundamental critical and its response to blade-rate vibratory forces, harmonics of blade-rate must also be considered along with the higher frequencies of vibration of the total system, including the shafting and bull-gear web (structural flexibility). Thus, having established the omission or safety of the fundamental critical in the preliminary design phase, it is necessary to have more detailed analyses conducted, as early as possible, in the detail design phase. This study is normally included in the contractual responsibility of the gear builder, or in the case of diesel engine drive systems, by the engine builder. They should be required to submit detailed design studies to insure compliance with the criteria or specifications invoked. It is also important that the contract price include this effort.
5.3.2.1 Frequency Analysis

In the preliminary design phase, which is primarily dependent on empirical data, we necessarily turn to DTRC for the limited available data required. In this instance Reference [5-17] provides a typical analysis for a turbine-drive system, for which the following example is developed. The figure numbers used in the original report [5-17] are retained for reference convenience.
5-34
TI I
r-rr
Shafting Arrangement
The shafting arrangement for the sample problem is shown in Figure 18. The machinery characteristics and related engineering data, are as follows: Maximum SHP Maximum RPM Maximum thrust 30,000 (single-screw) 130 300,000 lb
Component weights (in pounds) are as follows: Reduction gear (total) Bull gear and shaft Second reduction pinions Low-pressure turbine High-pressure turbine Condenser (wet) Foundation structure Propeller (in air) Propeller shaft Stem tube shaft Line shafting 131,000 38,500 7,000 30,000 25,000 60,000 60,000 50,000 65,850 29,150 82,900
5-35

A four-mass, four-spring, mass-elastic model will be developed as shown:
8-KI
8\
K2
K(3K
where: A!41 is the mass of the propeller and entrained water plus one-half of the mass of the propeller and stern tube shafts in pound-seconds per inch (50 percent of propeller weight is nominally taken for the entrained water), is one-half the mass of the propeller and stern tube shafts plus one-half the mass of the line shafts in pounds-seconds 2 per inch, is one-half the mass of the line shafts plus bull gear plus second reduction pinions in pound-seconds per inch, and is the effective mass (including lever effect) of the reduction gear, (less bull gear and second reduction pinions) low- and high-pressure turbines, condenser and foundation in pound-seconds 2 per inch. is the combined stiffness of the propeller and stern tube shafts in pounds per inch, is the stiffness of the line shafting in pounds per inch, is the stiffness of the thrust bearing elements and housing in pounds per inch, and is the stiffness of the foundation/hull structure in pounds per inch
M2
M3
M4
KI K2
K3
K4
The mass parameters are computed as follows: [50,000 + (0.5 x 50,000) + 65,850 x 29,1501
MI
=
F65,850 + 29,150
386
82,900-
=317 lb-sec2/in
M2
=2
386
230 lb-sec2 / in = "=225 lb-sec 2 / in
[82,90 + 38500 +7000
386
5-36

The machinery and foundation mass M 4 will be computed to include the lever effect of the individual components. The lever effect is the tendency for the components of the propulsion machinery, above the shaft level, to have increased vibratory amplitudes. This effect has been observed on all reported measurements. To compute the effective foundation mass M 4, the component weights and the location of the center of gravity above the inner bottom must be known first. Figure 19 gives the computation to account for the lever effect on the machinery/foundation mass; the equivalent value of M4 lb-sec 2 /in. referred to shaft level is found to be 1003
Ite
- P &NP TLAu .
Weight (lb%) 63.200

2230D
Mass (Ib-sec2/in. 164

W
___1
b (ft) 14.5
16.5
2 ( a) 1.73?
2.25
Mass (b/a) lb-sec'/in.) 285

131
Go er
Case
High Speed Gear Train 0-" CAM -- NUP Lot Press. Turbine High ne (Wet) Foundation
30.000
78 7 65 155 155
17.5 1.5 17.S 12.5 4.3
2.53 539 2.53 1.29 0.167
197 164 200 Ze I00
Is -
25.000 60.000 60.000 r675
wool s orv
PWCondenser
Effective b/a
1.22
Figure 19
Lever Effect Representation of Example Problem Foundation Mass M4
The stiffness parameters for the propulsion shafting are computed by the expression: K = A lbs / in L where: A is the cross-sectional area of the shaft in square inches, E is Young's modulus for shaft material in pounds per square inch, L is the length of shaft of constant cross-section in inches, K = t (252 - 162 ) (29 x 106 ) = 7.28 x 4 x1154 S K- =
24
106
lbs / in /in
(202 - 13.52) (29 x I0 ) -2.91
106 lbs
x 1707
5-37

To estimate the thrust bearing stiffness K3 from figures 4 and 5, the propulsive thrust at the resonant speed must first be known. This amounts to making a preliminary estimate of the first-mode natural frequency and determining the critical shaft speed. The propulsive thrust at the resonant speed may then be obtained using the square-law and full-power thrust.
30a10
-
THRUST BEARING FORWARD
46 THRUST BEARING AFT
25
20
'
io
5010 1W202
0
"3 FULL POWER THRUIT IN POUNDS i 10
Figure 4 Stiffness of Thrust Bearing Housing and Support versus Full Power Thrust
$.@WE ,::f
OM
THRUS INPUNOS
Figure 5
Stiffness of Kingsbury Thrust Bearing Elements as Calculated by Kingsbury
5-38
Propulsion System Vibration Figure 20 shows a quick method for obtaining a preliminary estimate of the first-mode natural frequency. Other similar methods have been published but they use shaft length as an input to the curve for determining the flexibility factor and do not differentiate between hollow or solid shafting. In contrast, the method of Figure 20 enables either hollow or solid shafting to be considered.
-----------------------------------------------
-K
------------------------------W6
1. - 04T NOWS LOITUIDIAL UATIJRAL PtHJICY a TOTAL IAPT XTIFPSM 10.5 PLUS ON ,T'IDOF IN NAM OF PROPIUlE)a TOTAL W4AFTNGI Fx- FLIUIUTY FACTOR TO ACLD6PT PO ThRLWT KARSSSAM FOUNATION
IL
4N
--
TOTAL WlAFT VWTIPW
IN K UW
MWS PiN IWOI
Figure 20
Preliminary Method for Determining First-Mode Longitudinal Frequency
The overall shaft stiffness in the sample problem is:

1 X 106
1 1 7.28k 2.91 which from Figure 20 results in a flexibility factor, Fk of 0.71. [50000x 15 M
6 5 ,8 50 + 2 9 , 14 0 + 8 2 ,9 0
- 2.08 x 106 lbs / in
31 386 0.71
2t
348 lb-sec 2 / in
2.08 x 10" =8.7 Hz 348
A resonant speed of 87 RPM would result from a six-bladed propeller. Fewer blades would bring the resonant speed undesirably closer to full power. The mean thrust at 87 RPM is (87/30) 2 x (300,000) = 134,000 lb From Figure 4, the stiffness of the thrust bearing housing is
5-39

found to be 15 x 106 lb/in; from Figure 5, assuming a six-shoe 40-in. thrust braring, the element stiffness is estimated at 18.4 x 106 lb/in. Combining these stiffnesses in series, the overall thrust bearing stiffness, K3, is approxiimately 8.3 x 106 lb/in. The foundation stiffness K4 is estimated from Figure 6 to be 21 x 106 lb/in; however, natural frequencies will be found for a range of values of K4.
sozo
uo3
FULL POWER Th1UST INPOUNDS z 10-
Figure 6
Foundation Stiffness versus Full Power Thrust
The mass-elastic diagram is now completely defined and is shown in Figure 21.
lb-sWC/ifl
1lin]
NJ
317
230
7.28
2.91
3
4
25
8.3
210
675
Figure 21a - System with Lever Effect Acting on Foundation Mass

lb-sic 11n, 1 317
2
K/10
lb/in. 7.28
230 225 1003
l3
4
2.91 8.3 21.0
Figure 21b
- Equivalent In-Line System, Foundation Mass Referred to Shaft Level
Figure 21 Mass-Elastic Representation of Example Problem
5-40

The next step is to calculate the first-mode natural frequencies as a function of foundation stiffness. The rationale is that if a small change in the predicted foundation stiffness causes a relatively large change in the corresponding natural frequency, then the designer should attempt to more closely estimate the foundation stiffness. Perhaps a procedure of structural analysis may be available to him or he may search the literature for experimental results on a similar ship. In any event, the designer should be aware of the relationship of frequency to foundation stiffness of the system under study. Several methods are available for determining natural frequencies, many of which are programmed on digital computers. For simplicity, a Holzer analysis may be employed, as shown in Section 5.3.1. A discussion of the various computational methods will not be undertaken since it is assumed that the designer has such means at his disposal. The natural frequencies of the mass-elastic system shown in Figure 21 are plotted in Figure 22 as a function of foundation stiffness: The results show the effect on the system with and without a lever. Since the lever has the effect of increasing the foundation mass when referred to shaft level, it is reasonable to expect a reduction in the frequencies of the first and second The first-mode frequencies did not change significantly, but the second-mode modes. frequencies were noticeably lowered due to the lever effect. This was because the foundation mass did not have a large amplitude relative to the propeller for the first mode as it did for the second. Incidentally, the lever effect could possibly be the reason why foundation stiffness values deduced from past trial measurements have been considerably higher than design estimates. The magnitude of the difference would be a direct function of the lever ratio b/a, which in our sample problem is not large enough to shov any appreciable change in the first-mode frequency. The preliminary frequency estimate of 8.7 Hz obtained by using the procedure in Figure 20 is considered close enough to the first-mode frequency of 8.8 Hz. From Figure 22 (K4 = 21 x 106 lb/in.) shows that an adjustment to the thrust bearing stiffness K s is not warranted. An iteration in determining the thrust bearing stiffness is recommended should the frequencies obtained by the two methods differ by more than 20 percent. For a natural frequency of 8.8 fHz, the corresponding resonant shaft speeds for different numbers of blades, would be: Number of Blades 4 5 6 Resonant Shaft_Sgecd RPM 132 105.6 88 Percent of Full Power 101 81 68
Obviously, four blades would not be a prudent choice because of the close proximity of the resonant shaft speed to the full-power shaft speed of 130 RPM. The five-bladed resonant speed is considered sufficiently close to full power to discount a five-bladed propeller as a likely candidate. Therefore six blades is recommended.
5*-41
MODE
I
FIRS
MODE
24
SECOND---01.0
2
MOD
N6
0
14
1
00
45
50
II
FO)UNDATION STIFFNESS K6 IN POUNDS PER INCH x 10'
Figure 22 Relationship Between Natural Frequency, Foundation Stiffness and Lever Effect
5.3.2.2 Response Analysis

To obtain the longitudinal vibratory response of the propulsion system we will require the application of the vibratory exciting forces and system damping characteristics to the computer program for the developed model. Based on the limited data available at the time of the initial study, Reference [5-17], the estimated longitudinal vibratory force, derived from similar ship types, was : 0.9% of the mean propulsive thrust, below 90% of full power RPM. Above 90 percent of full power, the vibratory force increased to + 2.6 percent. Since these values are average (sinusoidal) input functions, similar to functions obtained from wake surveys, a factor of 2.9, obtained from test results on ships reported on in the referenced study, [5-17], is used to obtain the maximum repetitive value. 5-42
At 88 RPM, using a square function, the mean thrust would be: (81- x 300,000 = 137,467 lbs The alternating thrust = 0.009 x 137,467 = 1237 lbs Peak value (MRV) = 2.9 x 1237 = 3587 lbs Damping, C , provided by the propeller, is dependent on the developed area. In the sample calculaton, a six-bladed propeller, 21 feet in diameter, with a developed area of 225 square feet, was used. The damping constant, C of 4100 lb-sec/in, was obtained from Figure 14 of Reference [5-171, as developed by Rigby (9-201.
3000ur
1400
o 410 lbsec dampng cnstnt
gur issono1iue43 i
rmRfrnc
51]
ob
approximately 28,000 lbs.
The magnification factor would be
28,/587
-* 8. Under
maneuvering conditions, an increase in amplitude by a factor of 2.5, also derived from full-scale tests, results in an alternating thrust of 1:70,000 lbs, well below the criteria given in MIL-STD-167, [5-19].
5-43
MAXIMUM ALTERNATING THRUST AT THRUST BEARING
10X0AT
ALTERNATING THRUST THRUST SEARING:
FOR EMANUEV|S FOR STE.ADY STATE
20
40
g0
4AFT U
so
100
140
Figure 23
Calculated Blade Frequency-Alternating Thrust at Thrust Bearing for Six-Bladed Propeller and Comparison with MIL-STD-1 67A Criteria Figure 24 shows that the machinery foundation, at shaft level, has a resonant vibratory displacement of 0.0018 in. The low- and high-pressure turbines with a b/a of 1.6 will have a displacement of about 0.0029 in., 0.0073 in. when applying the factor of 2.5 for maneuvering. This is still below the maximum value of 0.030 in. allowed in MIL-STD-167
[5-19].
5.3.2.3 Diesel Propulsion Drive Systems

Longitudinal vibration of medium and high-speed diesel driven propulsion systems, which employ reduction gears, can normally be treated in a manner similar to that of the geared-turbine drives treated in the previous sections. When possible, it is preferable to avoid having the fundamental longitudinal critical, excited by the propeller-blade frequency, above the operating speed range. If this cannot be accomplished, the fundamental critical should be kept in the low power range and the second frequency above the operating range. Care should be taken in the selection of the propeller characteristics to avoid strong second harmonics from exciting the higher modes of the system, which may be introduced in the shafting or in webbed frame of the bull gear. When controllable-pitch propellers are employed, the operating speed-range is generally limited, which would then provide greater latitude in the design, to avoid longitudinal vibration problems.
5-44
Io
14 10~
LIVWI)- -
10
2-
-a0 AT
BUHALEVLGAISAT Ml
10iii I
4s
*O
Figure 24
3050 10100
110
I0
130
140
Calculated Longitudinal Vibratory Response of Example Propulsion System with a Six-Bladed Propeller
The potential vibration problems associated with geared diesel-drive systems, will however, require primary consideration be given to their torsional vibration characteristics. This approach would dictate the choice of the engine-gear couplings and clutches, which in most cases, reduce the impact of cross-coupling of the torsional and longitudinal vibration characteristics. The range of possibilities of geared diesel-drive systems, subject to both longitudinal and torsional vibration problems, when excited by both propeller and engine harmonics, are practically limitless. For guidance, it is recommended that proposed engine-gear drive systems be solicited from potential manufacturers with complete torsional vibration analyses provided by the engine builder, including the initial propeller and shafting arrangement, for review and check by the designer performing the preliminary vibration analysis for the shipbuilder. Based on the acceptability of the proposed arrangement, modifications to the propeller-shafting system can be introduced to avoid longitudinal vibration problems. The procedures, previously used for geared-turbine drives, can be effectively used for this purpose. In the application of large, slow-speed, direct-drive diesels, the combination of longitudinal and torsional vibration of the system, in which propeller and engine exciting forces are involved, can present difficult problems in determining how well the drive system will function. When we include engine unbalanced forces and moments, previously discussed in Section 5.1.3,
5-45

propeller characteristics discussed in Chapter Three, and the hull vibration characteristics covered by Chapter Four, we can readily appreciate the total complexity of the shipboard vibration problem. To minimize the risk, it is necessary to treat the problem early, in the , .. preliminary desivn pha'e. To o,".t ' iri-,.: u-.i_ analyses would be equivalent to playing "Russian Roulette." In this chapter, dealing with Propulsion System Vibration, we have treated the subject in five sections, included as five individual areas of concern. In most cases these phenomena seriously impact each other. Potentially the most serious impact could be the interaction between the torsional and longitudinal vibration characteristics of the engine-drive system. As in the geared-diesel drive system, torsional vibration in the direct-drive diesel application would be considered potentially more dangerous. In this regard, we would again recommend the potential engine builder provide a complete torsional vibration analysis of the engine and the proposed propeller-shafting system, for evaluation by the preliminary design engineers. Compatibility with the longitudinal vibration characteristics of the total propulsion system and the hull-girder response is required. The interaction or coupling of torsional and longitudinal vibration, through the oscillating motion of the propeller, should be investigated.
5.3.3 General Comments

The original issue of MIL-STD-167, as published in 1954, prohibited the presence of the fundamental longitudinal critical from occurring within the normal operating speed range of the ship. This appeared to bc a logical conclusion following the serious difficulties encountered during and immediately following WW II. This conclusion was based on the limited experience available at that time, in which longitudinal criticals were noted in the full-power range and compromises had to be struck between acceptable hull vibration and longitudinal vibration of the main propulsion systems, on multiple shaft ships. However, this requirement was, of necessity, waived in a number of cases. Thus, in 1969, based on limited test data, a revision of MIL-STD-167 was issued, which permitted longitudinal criticals to fall within the operating speed range, but with restrictions on the response at these criticals. At this time, approximately 20 years later, the same criteria exists, and the best available study on the subject was that published by NSRDC, 15-171, 1970. As is shown in this preliminary design analysis, we can now predict, but with limited confidence, the fundamental longitudinal vibratory response of the main propulsion system. However, we are still a long way from being able to satisfy a number of inconsistencies between the analysis and the requirements for a reliable machinery system, particularly when reduction gears are employed. A few important points require specific attention, including: * The development of more appropriate service factors for all operations. *The development of more suitable reduction gear alternating load criteria. *The development of longitudinal stiffness data for bull-gear web frames. * A program for the development of more suitable input and damping functions. * An updated version of MIL-STD-167, Type IV, Longitudinal Vibration.
5-46
Propulsion System Vibration Based onl more ieccnt exerene

vibration analysis be cai-ricti out vi' ciiii should preferably be: pr0\ ided h\ tiC
probable r-:*-,
.it1
n SII hrWi
usd~.kn
osti)portaInt that thle detailed longitudinal icth detail design phase. This _M11-1 I:deIgnler support, to demonstrate v
A r-1*1''': ..Jwtia;
5.4 Torsionial Vibratioii t

Trorsional vibration in prIOp)Uisiu'0i' l torque produced by a ship's pikopc-kLc mass-elastic systemn inivoked cofisis primarily effects the integrity ofti resonances within thc shaftine, s cIu but can produce dainagjutg efcid -il In diesel engine driVe systems. o! ij1Jd
pt~o~ Sy stems
.i J.
i
ii
. ..
on 1.7.4 as the alternating diesel drive system. The ii i-opulsion system and u Ordinarily, torsional InI the ship's structure 1' a\vrse sea conditions. In the engine, can
-A)Al
generate destructive
force,, within thu:
conditions, as well
hg in with longitudinal
as adverse structural resp~onse throa i~d vibration problems ar-e geeaedt

Historically, thle torsional vitbrujii
opeller.
t:1 development of ship ithe h'_1wr'i c~ i IIIa;laei tall engine crankshafts and l propulsion systems, throngh1 :,cm)Ittance effects, coupled with high propeller shafts. Although Oh wr'v \C srp failures, such as loss of the uanc oiul PIO alternating torqlues and stress rnenitu I eagint, as applied to ship ot' the diescl ki>.1~ t a l, 3c% 'I he crankliafts.broken propeller and do',.e, 1cclerated research it- this area. At the propulsion systems, generator- anld kl-dre .- pan pIJI a inajor concern, both in engine development c pr it 1t vibration torsional WW 11, start of L Jn C0ttstt tIli program. This problem directly mICSIL. and application iii the su~bmrie 111( led to the establishment of the torsional vl ritmon ci uiteof the S.A.E., a major effort of ~ h,, wctheJS. Navy and the development of the research onl diesel engine levelklpmnCiit 1521I. D~rafted in 1949, this criteria was j torsional vibration cilterJ i~ oin IIIMIL SI 1 lennodit led sInIce. originally published in 1954 and has niot
the, torsional vibration characteristics of the 21 In all commercial and Navil ships the :!aly1,; o a proposed propulsion system, propulsion systemi is required. In ,h pr( the fundamental critical will fall .i-i-tIsul l~ 1,) relatively simple analyses wik,7111 .vN produce a '"rattle" in the gears, as nuamenur below the normal operating speed ranpoe and I:) a the critical is passed throughf. Th1is critical htil hc aivoided In thle operating speed range since it onl.ssf the orlcna vibration characteristics of the final could result in gear damage . A detaziled 'II S cictv :lpprovai. This analysis is generally (2,I- i.t; design must be submitted f~ alur n;, the purchase contract. d X10 hnIldh ;c provided by the engine bil~deran
'Ia
' In direct-drive diesel allran'_kiioii and engine hrois;h.'1Il
I,
Itusi'n
to
'
to establish Preliminary shII"II_ to that used for "ered dri builder, Should be caried 111 111
I'!
2.'
n~atr~ iti'tions by both the propeller ,cKtreated inl at simplified manner ihainn ha oil, 1~ a manner similar F) 1it 1cA by the engine I movided i\s:l' a. specifications ;:neWith
. . .
and/or Classification Socict~v It11
5.4.1 Torsional Vibration Analysis of the LNG Carrier Propulsion System

Simplified torsional vibration analyses, carried out in the preliminary design studies, for the Project and Conventional Hull designs for the LNG Carrier, aie shown as an example. Similai analyses for propeller-excited torsional vibration, are applicable for diesel drive systems. The detailed torsional vibrational analyses for the total systems, as required by specification acceptance, is considered beyond the preliminary design requirements and are not shown here. For reference, "Mechanical Vibrations," by DenHartog, [5-22], "Practical Solution to Torsional Vibration Problems," by Ker Wilson, [5-231, and "A Handbook on Torsional Vibration," [5-241. are recommended. Only the first mode will be investigated since the turbine and reduction gear inertia and stiffness values are presently known. It should also be mentioned that these values are usually selected by the machinery vendor to cancel out the 2nd mode (i.e. to "tune" the two turbine branches to the same frequency resulting in a node at the bull gear) and to raise the 3rd mode above the maximum blade frequency excitation. Therefore, the torsional model is a simple two-mass system: Cp, T C, TC ,T Q S
12 1
= =
=
in-lb-sec /rad +in-lb lb-in-sec2 in-lb /rad
I] 12 K, Q Cp, T
= = =
Propeller Inertia (including entrained water) + 1/2 Shafting Inertia 1/2 Shafting Inertia + Inertia of All Rotating Gear and Turbine elements Overall Stiffness of Shafting Alternating Propeller Torque Equivilant Propeller Damping Constant
= =
5.4.1.1 Frequency Analysis of Project Hull The propeller (and entrained water) mass moment of inertia, based on preliminary Hydronautics estimates of 7 February 1971 is: 522 x 106 X 1.25 = 1.69 x 106 lb-in-sec 386
5-48

The mass moment of inertia of the shaft is:
4pL lb-in-sec 2 IS= =D 321,
81 67+ Is-x0"284[ 3 n x 384 x 364 x 678 + 32.254 x 684 = 0.136 x 106 lb-in-seC2
where: D p L g = = =
=
Shaft Diameter, inches 3 Density of Material = .284 lb / in Length of Shaft in inches 2 386 in/sec
The inertia of the rotating machinery elements (Im) was estimated from those of a similar system of equal torque rating. The inertia values are all referred to the propeller speed. lb-in-se Low Speed Gear and Shaft Low Speed Pinions (4) Low Pressure High Speed Gears (2) High Pressure High Speed Gears (2) Low Pressure High Speed Pinion and Coupling High Pressure High Speed Pinion and Coupling Low Pressure Turbine Rotor High Pressure Turbine Rotor Total: Is
, 1
600,000 52,000 1,125,000 1,290,000 276,000 330,000 21,400,000
2.50X00
27,573,000
2 = Ip + L = 1.69 x 106 + 0.068 x 106 = 1.758 x 106 lb-in-sec
S= lI +
= 27.573 x 106 + 0.068 x 106 = 27.641 x 106 lb-in-sec 2
The torsional stiffness of the tailshaft (see Figure 5-9) is: 7tGD 4 = 3GD KTs Kr-32L where:
2 12x106 1b/in
Tn (12 x 106) 364 = 2,919 x 106 in-lb / rad
32 x 678
5-49

The stiffness of the stern tube, line and thrust shafts is: s (12 x 106) 32.25 4 1,860 x 106 in-lb / rad
-
32 x 684 The combined stiffness of the shafting is: 1 Ks 1x10

6
1 1 K Ts +)C
1
2919
1136 x 106 in-lb / rad
1860
Frequency is: 1 j1136x10 6 (1.758 + 27.641)x10 6 1.758 x 27.641 x 1012 2nI Fifth order critical: 4.17 x= 5 5 RPM 16 27 Hz 417 =
5.4.1.2 Frequency Analysis of Conventional Hull

The propeller (and entrained water) mass moment of inertia (I ) is assummed equal to that obtained for the Project Hull = 1.69 x 106 lb-in-sec2 . The mass moment of inertia of the propeller shaft is: 1s = 32 lb-in-sec 2 = 72.7 x 10-6 D 4L
IS=32g
2 = 72.7 x 10.6 (1.68 x 106) (438) = 53,500 lb-in-sec 2 Its = 72.7 x 10.6 (1.08 X 106) (492) = 38700 lb-in-sec 21 92,200 lb-in-seC Is
ITs
The inertia of the rotating machinery elements (U M) will be assumed as equal to that previously 2 estimated = 27,573 x 106 in-lb-sec . I
lb-in-sec 2 2M + I = (27.573 + 0.046) x 106 = 27.619x 106 The torsional stiffness of the propeller shaft (see Figure 5-16) is:
Ks-
itGD 4
32L
106 xD 1. 178 x L L
5-50

Ks = 1.178 x 106 x 1.68 x 1064530 x 106 in-lb /rad
438
1.178 x 106 x 1.08 x 106 2580x 106 in-lb/rad nl/ra x 106 ,8 ~ 492 1 =19
Ks
KT, KL, Frequency is: 2it Fifth order critical:
1_
X106
1,640 x 106 in-lb /rad
4530+2580
x 10 6 _ 2n 1640x10 6 (1.736+27.619
1.736x27.619x 1012 27t
4-i,000
= 5.03 Hz
60 5.03 x LO = 60 RPM
5.4.1.3 Response Calculations The alternating propeller torques used in the response calculations were those obtained from the analysis of the NSMB wake data and the NKF estimated propeller characteristics. These torques, given in Table 2, were 56,660 ft-lbs and 88,780 ft-lbs for the Project Hull and Conventional Hull, respectively. From SHP data, the estimated service SHP m was 41,600 at 20 knots for the Project Hull and 34,400 at 19 knots for the Conventional Hull. This would correspond to 41,000 and 34,000 SHP in terms of British units, for the Project and Conventional Hulls, respectively. Estimated torques (Q) at the nominal service condition would then be: = 5250 x 4Q 1000
=
2,150,000 ft-lbs for Project Hull
Q = 52503x
Q=52534,000 100 = 1,785,000 ft-lbs for Conventional Hull
These values check well with the values of Q obtained by the propeller force calculations given in Table 5-2, and which were obtained with the estimated propeller characteristics used in the study. The estimated ratio of alternating torque to the driving torque, as given in Table 5-2, was approximately 2.75% and 5% for the Project Hull and Conventional Hull, respectively and appear to represent reasonable values. For considering the allowable vibratory torques, the full power rating of the machinery, which is assumed to be the same for either hull, was taken as 45,000 SHP at 100 RPM. This value is used since the service condition represents an average condition and at times is assumed that the maximum condition would occur. Therefore, the allowable alternating torque, from the specifications, is taken as 10% of maximum and would equal approximately:
A
x 45,000 .10 x 63,000 100
+ 2.835 x 106 in-lbs
5-51
Ship Vibration Design Guide The torsional damping used in the response analysis was limited to propeller damping, as is customary for first mode analyses, and was based on propeller damping given in reference [5-22]. The propeller damping CT, is estimated by the relationship: CT=42
p
where:
f0
B co= 4.17 x 2n = 25.2 (Project Hull)
co Q For Prject Hull:
= 5.03
x 2r = 31.6 (Conventional Hull)
B - Number of Blades = 5
=
Mean Torque
C,T 4 x 28.35 x 106x(50? x x 510 - 5.62 x 106 in-lb-sec / rad P 100)T 25.2 For Conventional Hull: C,T 4 x 28.35 x 106 x 60 P100) x 5 31.6 6.45 x 106 in-lb-sec / rad
Results of the estimated alternating torque at resonance, for both hulls, obtained by computer analysis, is shown in Figure 5-19. For reference, the specification allowance is also shown.
5.4.2 Direct Diesel Drive Systems

The two-mass system used for the preliminary torsional vibration analysis of the turbine driven LNG carrier can also be used for direct diesel drive systems, provided that the torsional stiffness of the propulsion shafting is less than one-fourth the stiffness of the full length of the engine crankshaft, as noted in Reference [5-9]. This reference also provides convenient procedures for estimating the vibratory torque in the shafting system when using propeller damping as defined by Den Hartog, [5-22], and used in the LNG analysis. For the alternating propeller input torques, for single-screw ships, estimates may be taken from similar ship types, such as given in Table 5-2. For the more detailed analysis, to be carried out during the design phase, References [5-23] and [5-24] would be most helpful. It is presumed however, that the detailed analysis would be provided by the engine builder who would be in a better position to provide the necessary harmonic forces and the total system damping characteristics, based on past experience.
5-52
L G SHI )S 4x10 EST MATED RESPOISE OF MACHINERY S'ST
~~TO Tj
ATnLVBITQON
!
S5-B
As .I
DS~oc
2,AIQZaii.___
ADED ROPEL ER
. ...
.A
..
. . L. L... E A . ..... BL
t1171
C2l~
PI , T ULL
-
I
0
. 0 1-
ON
.... -.
-
O '
0-
10 -0
"10 "10
SHAF
RPMe ..
Figure 5-19 Estimated Response of Machinery System to Torsional Vibration
5.5 Lateral Vibration of Propulsion Shafting

The numerous fractures of propeller shafts, which occurred on a number of single-screw ships built during WW II, was discussed in Section 5-2, prompted the study of the lateral vibrations of shaft-disc systems, at the David Taylor Research Center, in 1950. The purpose of the study as defined by Jasper in his 1954 report, "A Design Approach to the Problem of Critical Whirling Speeds of Shaft-Disc Systems," [5-25], was: (a) To familiarize the designer with the problem of whirling vibration so that he will give it proper consideration in the design of shafting and shaft supports. (b) To provide the designer with an approximate method for computing the fundamental critical whirling speed of the tailshaft system. (c) To indicate the more exact but more complex methods that were being studied for possible application to the whirling problem.
5-53
Ship Vibration Design Guide For background information and reference, it was also in 1950 that Panagopulos presented "Design Stage Calculations of Torsional, Axial and Lateral Vibration of Marine Shafting," [5-26] and Hesse presented "Critical Speeds of Overhung Shafts," [5-27]. In 1952, Jasper and Rupp presented the paper "An Experimental and Theoretical Investigation of Propeller Shaft Failures," [5-28], which provided background information for the 1954 Jasper report, [5-25]. The problem of tailshaft failures was -finally attributed to the high bending stresses resulting from the steady, eccentric thrusi, which produces a high alternating stress at shaft rotational frequency, in combination with corrosion fatigue, originating at the propeller-shaft keyway, [5-101, [5-11]. As a result of these studies however, it was recognized that, in addition to designing the tailshaft to accommodate the high bending stresses, that an understanding of the whirling characteristics of the propeller-shaft systems was necessary to avoid serious system resonances. First order whirling of the propulsion shafting (whipping) is caused by unbalance and can result in shaft failure if the rotational frequency coincides with the lateral natural frequency of the propeller-shaft system in the absence of sufficient damping forces. Of lesser importance is the whirl excited by externally applied forces of frequency n times the shaft RPM (nth order whirl), where n is the number of propeller blades or their harnionics. The whirling motion may occur in the direction of, or in the opposite direction to the direction of rotation of the shaft. At a fixed point on the shaft, this will produce (n-I) cycles of bending stress for forward whirl and (n+l) cycles of bending stress for counter whirl. Thus for a four-bladed propeller, stress components of n-i and n+l may occur. An example of this phenomena is shown in Figure 5-20, taken from Reference [5-10]. The reported data shows the 3rd and 5th order stresses produced by the alternating thrust of the four-bladed propeller and the 7th and 9th order produced by the second harmonic of the alternating thrust of the four-bladed propeller. The major 1st order stress amplitude results from a single revolution of the shaft and the steady eccentric thrust generated by the propeller. It is this high bending stress, generated by the thrust eccentricity in combination with the corrosion filtigue properties of the shafting, which was determined to be the cause of the shaft failures encountered. Relative to the eccentric thrust loading, the blade-frequency stress values are small, in this case. The necessity of avoiding the fundamental lateral frequency of the propeller-shaft system, which is the most critical section of the propulsion system, is obvious since operation at that critical is destructive. Of the alternate design analysis procedures, that of Panagopulos provides an estimate of the fundamental system frequency, while both the Jasper and Hesse formulas include the gyroscopic effects of the propeller and result in higher frequencies, which may be referred to as whirling frequencies. A comparison of the results obtained by the three methods is shown in the sample preliminary design study shown in Appendix A. Of the three methods, the Panagopulos formula more closely represents the fundamental propeller-shaft system ftequency, primarily due to the greater influence placed on the shaft mass, which is significant. Therefore, since the fundamental lateral propeller-shaft frequency, when excited by unbalance can be destructive, it ik considered conservative to use this procedure, which results in the lowest frequency. This mnethod is also used by the Navy [5-9]. 1 5-54

Much has been said about the necessity of avoiding whirling-frequency resonance, when excited by blade-frequency or the second harmonic of blade-frequency. Although these frequencies do exist in fact, as noted in Figure 5-20, and do occur within the operating range, the existing forces are generally not sufficiently severe as to be of serious concern, unless coupled with other adverse conditions, such as the unloading of the forward bearing. This view is also noted by Bureau Veritas, Reference [5-5] and Long, [5-29]. For preliminary design purposes, the Panagopulos method of estimating the fundamental lateral frequency of the propeller-shaft natural frequency is recommended and the sample calculation is shown for the LNG carrier.
.4 0 0[ 1
'11 T I " -I F7 1 1 t I ' 7 ' " 1 F

~911
Ordelr
71h Order
4000-
Boo
--
-- -
4800,*-
.o
4
0 0
1OF~
--
3rd Order
I30 *+
. .
I
e2000
16800-_ 12400L-_-800
-400-
-1600
-200-
240041200
I100
- --
t
1-
1-
Se
ed S eiC.rv
:
1.
1
4
1~ _, oo'
. .. %I OrderL
240
.500
60
0
AnQI
20
80
210
240270300
Of Stretl (CycI@ in dag'.ll,
Figure 5-20 Hlarrnonic Analy.i. Heavy Load

-
Carm Sea
5.51
5.5.1 Lateral Vibration (Whirling) Frequency of the LNG Carrier

The Panagopulos [5-25] procedure for estimating the critical (fundamental) natural frequency of lateral vibration of the shafting system is the most conservative and is used on the LNG Carrier's initial arrangement, Figure 5-9, for demonstration purposes.
f=30i
It
1
+ -
W A!
Pg
lb' 7e +t- + 9 + 360)
b
where: f
41
= = Cycles per Minute
i
I
Shaft Moment of Inertia About the Diameter =
D4/ 64
= 82,448 in 4
Ip =
X
2 Mass Moment of Inertia of Propeller About its Axis, lb-in-sec
= =
Mass Moment of Inertia of Propeller About its Diameter, plus plus 60% for Entrained Water = 1/21 x 1.6, lb-in-sec 2
Wp
. =
E b =
= =
Weight of Propeller, including Shaft Stub, Nut and Hub Cap 25% for Entrained Water, lbs (air) 2 2 Shaft Mass per Inch = W/g lb-sec / in
2 Young's Modulus = 30 x 106 lbs /in
Distance of Propeller Centerline to Bearing Centerline = 141 in
Bearing Centerline Distance = 540" of 36" diameter + 48" of 32.25 diameter 364 36.4 = 72" + 540" Equivilant I for 36" diameter is 48 x 32.25T
=
612" of 36" diameter
2- 8
386
106 - 1.35 x 106 lb-in-sec 2

106 = 1.08 x
1/x 1.35 x 1.6 x
106 lb-in-sec 2
5-56

Wp
W/
P g
= =
122,650 (propeller) + 27,260 (stub shaft, nut, etc.) = 149,910 lbs 149,910 x 1.25 86 = 485 lb-sec 2 / in 2
=D 2
0.284 = 0.749 lb-sec2 / in 2

386 82,448 x 30 x 106
30
7C
1.08 x 106(141 + 204) + 485 x 19,881 x 274.5 + 0.749 (49.407 + 190.62 + 2727.73) x 106 f= 9.55 2,473,440x 10 = 207 RPM 5,242 x 106
This is well above the criteria minimum of 115% of maximum of 102 RPM Note: In the particular case of the LNG Carrier, many modifications to the shafting system were introduced during the program development. However, with simple, readily checked analyses, such as this one, for lateral shaft vibration it is convenient for the quick identification of the effects of proposed modifications. During the detailed design, more complete FEM analyses were carried out on the complete propulsion system. This should also be done in all ship detail design studies.
5.6 General Comment

Better control of the effective point of support of the aft bearing can be realized by the use of self-aligning bearings, which permit heavier loading, shorter bearings and self adjustment. This approach is then one of the best reasons for the use of the oil lubricated bearing, with reliable seals. During detail design studies, in addition to the evaluation of lateral frequencies, bearing spacings and alignment calculations should be carried out and the studies should be documented for future use, as may be required. Appendix 5-A is a sample preliminary machinery vibration analysis of the T-AO 187 propulsion system conducted for Levingston Marine Corporation by NKF Engineering on June 4, 1982. Specific data on the unbalanced forces and moments generated by M.A.N. and Sulzer two-cycle engines are included as Appendix 5-B for information purposes. This data is extracted from MAN/B&W Project Guide, 1986 and Sulzer Technical Data for Marine Diesel Engines, 1988.
5-57
REFERENCES
5-1 MIL-STD-167-1 (Ships), "Mechanical Vibration of Shipboard Equipment," Type II, Internally Excited Vibration. 1 May, 1974. Marine Engineering, Published by SNAME, 1971. "Guide to Propulsion Reduction Gear Alignment and Installation," Technical and Research Bulletin No. 3-43, SNAME, September, 1987. Payer, H.G., and Asmussen, I., "Vibration Response on Propulsion- Efficient Container Vessels," SNAME Trans., Vol. 93, 1985. "Building and Operation of Vibration Free Propulsion Plants and Ships," Bureau Veritas Publication NR 207 SMS E, November, 1987. "Prevention of Harmful Vibration in Ships, Det Norske Veritas Guidelines," July, 1983. ISO 4867, "Code for the Measurement and Reporting of Shipboard Vibration Data," December 1984. "Rules for Building and Classing Steel Vessels," A.B.S., 1986. "Propulsion Shafting," Design Data Sheet, DDS 4301, U.S. Navy Department, 1960.
5-2 5-3
5-4
5-5
5-6 5-7
5-8 5-9
5-10 Noonan, E.F., "Propeller Shaft Bending Stresses on the S.S. Esso Jamestown," A.S.N.E. Journal, August, 1961. 5-11 Nickerson, Archer M., Jr., "Summary Report of the Investigation of Tailshaft Failures," SNAME T & R Report R-2, January, 1966. 5-12 Noonan, E.F., "Vibration Considerations on Project and Conventional Hulls for 125,000 CM LNG Ships," NKF Project 7107, May, 1971. 5-13 Noonan, E.F., "Propeller Shaft Bending Stresses on the USNS Lt. James E. Robinson," Noonan, Knopfle and Feldman Report, September, 1955. 5-14 Noonan, E.F., "Preliminary Hull and Machinery Vibration Analyses for DD-963 Class Destroyer Design," NKF Report R-7105-4, to Litton Systems, Inc., February, 1971. 5-15 Noonan, E.F., "Design Considerations for Shipboard Vibration," SNAME, Marine Technology, January, 1971. 5-16 Hinterthan, W.B., "Bossing Design for the Wing Screws of the New Design Polar Icebreaker," for USCG, Washington, D.C., NKF Project 6819, August, 1968.
5-58

5-17 Zaloumis, A. and Antonides, G.P., "Recent Developments in Longitudinal Vibration of Surface Ship Propulsion Systems," NSRDC Report 3358, September, 1970. 5-18 "Longitudinal Stiffness of Main Thrust Bearing Foundation," SNAME T & R Report R-15, 1972. 5-19 Military Standard, "Mechanical Vibration of Shipboard Equipment," Type IV, Longitudinal Vibration, MIL-STD-167-2 (Ships), 1 May, 1974. 5-20 Rigby, C.P., "Longitudinal Vibration of Marine Propulsion Shafting Systems," Institute of Marine Engineers, February, 1948. 5-21 Military Standard, "Mechanical Vibration of Shipboard Equipment," Type III, Torsional Vibration, MIL-STD-167-2 (Ships), 1 May, 1974. 5-22 Den Hartog, J.P., "Mechanical Vibrations," McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York. 5-23 Wilson, W. Ker., "Practical Solutions to Torsional Vibration Problems," Chapman and Hall, Ltd., London, 1963. (Two Volumes). 5-24 B.I.C.E.R.A., "A Handbook on Torsional Vibration," Cambridge University Press, 1958. 5-25 Jasper, N.H., "A Design Approach to the Problem of Critical Whirling Speeds of Shaft-Disc Systems," DTMB Report 890, December, 1954. 5-26 Panagopulos, E.P., "Design Stage Calculations of Torsional, Axial and Lateral Vibration of Marine Shafting," SNAME Trans. Vol. 58, 1950. 5-27 Hesse, H.C., "Critical Speeds of Overhung Shafts," Product Engineering, December, 1950. 5-28 Jasper, N. H. and Rupp, L.A., "An Experimental and Theoretical Investigation of Propeller Shaft Failures," SNAME Trans. Vol. 60, 1952. 5-29 Long, C.L., "Propellers, Shafting and Shafting System Vibration Analysis," Chapter XI, Marine Engineering, SNAME, 1971.
5-59
APPENDIX 5-A
Example Problem - Preliminary Vibration Analysis of Propulsion System*

he T-AO 187 is a U.S. Navy tanker now in the preliminary design stage. Levingston Marine Corporation is one of several companies viewing the preliminary design and has subcontracted NKF Engineering Associates, Inc. to assist. This report is in response to Paragraph 4.4.2.6 of the T-AO 187 Baseline Review: Paragraph 4.4.2.6 A preliminary design evaluation of the proposed propulsion drive system will be carried out to determine its adequacy to meet the ship characteristics and design objectives within the constraints imposed by twin- shaft diesel drive systems. This study will include shaft strength calculation, torsional, lateral and longitudinal vibration analyses, and evaluation of proposed propeller characteris-'cs. Specified coniiuents and recommendations will be provided to permit the development of the detailed design of Phase II. Specific attention will be given to the interaction between propulsion systems components and the ship structure such as general shaft arrangements, bearing locations, foundation stiffness, volume and area requirements, and service requirements. This preliminary analysis is based on limited data, particularly regarding the engine, power takeoff, clutches and couplings. Many assumptions were made and, where practical, the effect of varying some parameters was studied. The propeller forces assumed for calculating longitudinal and torsional system responses are based on a companion study by NKF reported in Reference [1].
PURPOSE and SCOPE

The purpose of a preliminary vibration analysis is to determine the nature of any vibration problems likely to affect the design of the ship. In many cases the preliminary analysis indicates a certain type of vibration will not occur no matter what the detailed design. In other cases, it indicates that the designer does not have as much latitude and must be careful in working out details. In some cases it even shows that a basic design is unworkable. It is usually based on many assumptions and should not be used to finalize major decisions concerning the propulsion system configuration without confirming the conclusions with a detailed analysis. Such detailed analysis would be carried out under Phase II for the T-AO 187.
*from
"Preliminary Vibration Analysis of Propulsion System," NKF Report No. 8213-001/2, June 1982.
5-A-1
Ship Vibration Design Guide The scope of this preliminary analysis includes: "Determining the sizes of the shafting in accordance with ABS rules [2] and the proposed bearing arrangements. "Evaluating the shaft with respect to shaft strength, based on DDS 4301 [3]. "Calculating the longitudinal criticals for four cases: four- and five-bladed propellers; 80 and 90 RPM rated speeds. "Estimating the alternating thrust in the thrust bearing and bull gear amplitude. "Calculating the torsional natural frequencies for the cases cited above. "Determining the alternating torsional stresses in the shaft. "Calculating the shaft's lateral critical speed. "Providing comments and recommendations for use in the detailed design.
SHIP CHARACTERISTICS
The T-AO 187 will have a twin-screw propulsion system with diesel engines and reduction gears. A power takeoff generator will be driven from the bull gear. This analysis was performed for both four- and five-bladed propellers and for rated shaft speeds of 80 and 90 RPM. The ship characteristics used for this study are given below. Length Overall (LOA) Length Between Perpendiculars (LBP) Beam Molded (B) Depth (D) Draft (Maximum) (d) Draft-Scantling Molded (Type B) Approx. Displacement (A) Length-Beam Ratio (LIB) Beam-Draft Ratio (B/d) Block Coefficient (C,) Prismatic Coefficient (Cp) Midship Section Coefficient (CM) Midship Area Moment of Inertia (v) (Levingston) (4/19) Wetted Surface Number of Shafts 667 ft 633 ft 93 ft 50 ft 35 ft 37 ft 10 in 40,000 Long Tons 6.77 2.67 0.662 0.683 0.970 1,767,385 in2ft2 76,066 sq ft 2 6 in
5-A-2

SHP/Shaft* 16,865
Engine RPM* Propeller Diameter (Dp) (CRP) Propeller RPM Ship Speed (Vs) Number of Propeller Blades (z) Wake Factor ( 1-w ) (Levingston) (4/19) Thrust Factor (1-t) (Levingston) (4/19)
430 24 ft 80-90 20 knots 4 or 5 0.932 0.8924
* Based on ABS (MCR) of Transamerica DeLaval/Stork Werkspoor 9 TM 620.
SHAFTING DESIGN and ARRANGEMENT

The shafting arrangement as originally conceived is shown in Figure 5-A-1. It is understood that the coupling, which is shown between the aft and intermediate struts, will be moved forward of the intermediate strut. Also, the shaft diameters were increased slightly to conform to ABS rules. Details are given in this section. The aft stem tube bearing is a tilting pad, oil lubricated bearing. The length of this type of bearing is only about one shaft diameter. The entire shaft turns inside a closure tube filled with oil.
all
sow.. ........
L a" Iss
....... o--L
PrlmnaySatigAragmn
5-A-
4.1 Shaft Design

Shaft sizes were calculated in accordance with ABS rules [2] for a horsepower of 16,865, which is the maximum continuous rating (MCR) of the Transamerica DeLaval/Stork Werkspoor 9 TM 620. It is understood that a revision to these rules is imminent, but that the new equations require the Ultimate Tensile Strength of the shaft material. For the T-AO 187 this was not available so the older version was used. The effect of the revised rules has been checked and found to be negligible. Section 34.19 Line and Thrust Shafts requires the diameters to be:
d=c
where:
R
d H R c
= = = =
diameter in inches HP at rated speed = 16,865 RPM at rated speed = 80 and 90 a constant = 3.504 for line shafts 4.000 for thrust shafts
The required diameters are: LINE SHAFT 80 RPM 90 RPM 20.855" 20.053" THRUST SHAFT 23.808" 22.892"
Section 34.23 Tube Shafts requires the tube shafts to be 1.2 times the line shafts:
TUBE HAFT
80 RPM 90 RPM 25.026" 24.064"
Section 34.25 Tail Shafts requires the least diameter to be 1.236 times the line shafts: TAIL SHAFT 80 RPM 90 RPM 25.777" 24.786"
5-A-4
Appendix 5-A - Example Problem Section 34.27 Tail Shaft Liners requires the liner thickness at bearings to be 0.2 inch more than the tail shaft diameter divided by 25. For a continuous liner, the thickness between bearings must be 0.75 times that. LINER THICKNESS At Bearings Between Bearings 80 RPM 90 RPM 1.296" 1.255" 0.9719" 0.9410"
The above sizes refer to solid shafts. The T-AO 187 shaft has a 9-inch bore, d, to accommodate the controllable pitch propeller. To find the equivalent outside diameter, do
do
8'+
For ice strengthening, ABS rules require a 5 percent increase in diameter, and the specifications require an additional 0.25 inch. The rCsalt 'g diamte.s were calculated and the next higher one eighth inch used in the analysis as shown in Table 5-A-1.
Table 5-A-1 Calculated Shaft Diameters in Inches 80 RPM Shaft

Line
Solid
20.855
with 9" Bore

21.034
+5%+ 1/4"
Size Required (next 'As")

21.125
Thrust
Tube
23.808
25.026 1
23.929
25.130
24
25.25
Tail
Liner at Bearings
25.777 1.296
25.872
27.416
27.5
1.375
Liner Between Bearings
0.9719
1
90 RPM
Shaft Line
Thrust
Solid
________________(next
with 9" Bore 20.253 23.028 24.181 24.893
+5% + 1/4"
Required Size
1/")
Tube Tail Liner at Bearings Liner Between Bearings
20.053 22.892 24.064 24.786 1.255 0.941
26.388
20.375 23.125 24.5 26.5 .1.375 1
5-A-5
BEARING ARRANGEMENT
The primary objective in arranging the propulsion shaft bearings is to provide adequate radial support for the propulsion shaft under normal conditions of operation. A special consideration is establishing and maintaining a proper gear-to-lineshaft relationship in order to minimize This is usually adverse effects of misalignment on the reduction gear components. accomplished by conducting a bearing reaction study and determining the sensitivity of bearing loads due to bearing weardown and thermal growth of the reduction gear. Since the available time in the preliminary study was insufficient to permit such an analysis, and since the reduction gear details were not available, a few "rules of thumb" will be used instead. It is generally accepted that a length/diameter ratio of about 15-20, between the aftmost reduction gear bearing and the first line shaft bearing will provide sufficient flexibility to accommodate reduction gear thermal growth, setting errors and bearing weardown without adversely affecting the bearing loads. Referring to Figure 5-A-i, we estimate a ratio of approximately 14 when using the 20 3/8 inch line shaft and approximately 13.5 when using the 21 1/8 inch line shaft. This is considered sufficiently close for the preliminary evaluation. The only other major concern regarding the placement of bearings is that they not be spaced too far apart from a lateral vibration point of view. However, this is taken care of in Section 8 dealing with lateral vibrations since the only large spans are those in the outboard shafting. Another consideration regarding the placement of bearings is the vulnerability of the shafting system to underwater explosion. In order to minimize any such damage to the shafting system, the bearings should be placed, insofar as possible, on so-called "hard spots." Such spots would tend to deflect less from an underwater explosion and therefore minimize deformation of the shaft system. The optimum hard spots would be the bulkheads, which form continuous rigid supports from the ship's bottom to the upper decks; however, these locations may not be practical in this case. As an alternative, it is suggested that consideration be given to locating the line shaft bearings on deep frames. Based on the limited drawings available at this time, it appears that locating the bearings on Frame 93, rather than 92, would satisfy that requirement and simultaneously provide the additional distance between the lineshaft and aft reduction gear bearing indicated previously. In the Phase II design stage, a more thorough analysis should be carried out to fully develop the various characteristics and interrelationship of the shafting system components.
5-A-6
ESTIMATED PROPELLER FORCES

Reference [1] estimates the propeller forces that are used for this analysis as follows: 80 RPM T Steady Thrust, lbs Alternating Thrust, lbs Alternating Torque, ft-lbs 161,000 868,000 2,300(1.4%) 8,700(1.0%) 90 RPM 161,000 772,000 2,000(1.2%) 5,400(.7%)
Q Steady Torque, ft-lbs
The specifications require the following factor, to be applied to the blade rate excitation forces: TYPE of EXCITATION and OPERATION Average Excitation, Straight Peak Excitation, Straight Peak Excitation, Maneuvering CORRECTION FACTORS 0-90% Rated RPM 100-120% Rated RPM 1 3 9 3 9 27
Reference [1] presents a more refined definition of such factors and suggests the alternating thrust be related to four operating conditions:
BOTTOM A. Clean B. Clean C. Fouled D. Fouled
RPM 90% 100% 100% 100%
SPEED 18 knots 20 knots 20 knots
EHP/SH 6,000 8,800 11,240
T/SH 121,800 161,000 205,600
SEAS Calm Calm Calm Rough
The alternating thrusts associated with these operating conditions are taken from Table 6 of Reference [1] and relate to the alternating thrust of 2,300 pounds (1.4 percent) associated with operation at 80 RPM.
TYPE of EXCITATION and OPERATION

A
CONDITION B 3,450 6,900 17,250
C
5,800
D 8,700
Average Excitation, Straight, lbs Peak Excitation, Straight, lbs Peak Excitation, Maneuvering, lbs
1,700 3,400 8,500
11,600 17,400 29,000 43,500
5-A-7

For this analysis we will calculate the response for the peak excitation, straight course, and maneuvering using the factors in the specifications and the most severe condition ( 43,500 pounds) from the above table. That amount of alternating thrust can be expressed as a correction factor of 19 relative to the input force of 2,300 pounds at 100 percent rated RPM.
LONGITUDINAL VIBRATION 6.1 Longitudinal Natural Frequencies

'n order to estimate the longitudinal natural frequency of the propulsion system, the model shown in Figure 5-A-2 was used. As inputs to the model, Figure 5-A-3 shows the assumed dimensions of the shaft for purposes of calculating stiffnesses. The propeller characteristics were estimated by Bird Johnson Company as shown in Table 5-A-2 and forwarded by Reference [4]. The stiffnesses and masses are calculated in Tables 5-A-3 and 5-A-4 for 80 and 90 RPM and for four and five blades. The value for M 2 is assumed because data on the reduction gear is not yet available. M, M2 K, K2
=
Mass of Propeller + 50% for Entrained Water, anu -2 the Shafting Mass of 1/2 the Shafting, all of the Reduction Gears and Casing Stiffness of Shafting Stiffness of Thrust Bearing and Machinery Foundation in Series
IKI E
M2K2
Figure 5-A-2 Mass-Elastic Model for Longitudinal Shaft Vibration

'The thrust bearing will be an eght-shoe, 40-inch diameter bearing which, according to Reference 151, will have a stiffness of about 27 x 106 lb/in. The housing will have a stiffness of about 10 x 106 lb/in, and the foundation is estimated to be about 16 x 106 lb/in, also based on data in Reference 151. The combined stiffness is 5.01 x 106 lb/in, which is the estimated value for K2 . With these assumptions the natural frequencies and mode shapes are calculated and shown in Table 5-A-2. The natural frequency does not change significantly with the number of blades but, naturally, the critical shaft speed does.
5-A-8

80 RP MI
T.ALSHA.FT I" TRICK LINER 9"
TUBE BORE
SRAFT THROUGnoUT
LINE
SHAF
27 1/2" 335.5"
DIA.
25
1/4" 594'
DIA.
-
21
1/8" DIA. 302"
90
RPM
TA-TLSHAFrT 1 "THI CK LINER9"BR
TUBE HOCLr SH-AFT
j
j':'------
LINE
SHArT
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..- -- ---- ----- ---------------................................................................................. 26 1/2" DIA. 335.5" 24 1/411IA 594"
":j
................. 20 3/8" DIA.
I-
302"
Figure 5-A-3 Assumed Dimensions of Shafts Used for Calculating Stiffness
Table 5-A-2 Longitudinal Natural frequencies and Mode Shapes Blades RPM RPMBladesFrequency,
80 90
1
Natural
9.68 9.65 10.00
9.97
Hz
(for Blade Rate)
Critical RPM
145 116 150
120
Mode Shape
(X2 / Xi)
0.781 0.781 0.763
0.763
4 5
5
Table 5-A-3 Shaft Stiff nesses RPM Shaft

Tail Liner Tube Line
Combined
Outside Diameter (Inches)

27.5 29.5 25.25 21.125 26.5 28.5 24.25 20.375
Inside Diameter (inches)

9 27.5 9 9 9 26.5 9 9
Length Lngth (inches)

335.5 335.5 594 302 335.5 335.5 594 302
Axial Stiffness* (lb/in)

47.42 x 10' 4.27 x 106 22.08 x 106 28.50 x 10'
10.02 x 10
Torsional Stiffness** (in-lb/rad)

1952 x 10 391 X 106 780 x 106
326.6 x 106
80
739 x 10-
90
Tail Liner Tube Line

1 Combined
43.63 x 106 4.13 x 106 20.11 x 106 26.07 x 106

9.17 x 106
1680 x 106 351 X 106 689.9 x 106 635.9 x 106

284.5 x 106
.........
5-A-9

AE Axial Stiffness, K
**
7r(OD L ID 2 ) x 30 x 106 4L GJ 11.8x10 6 x (OD 4LID4 ) 1 1

KLNE 32L
Torsional Stiffness, K
1
KCOMB
'
KTAIL + KUNER
KTUBE
Table 5-A-4 Calculation of Masses

Length Outside Inside Mas Outside Inside Masi* Lnhs Diameter Diameter (lb-sec "/n) Diameter (bameter (inches) (Inches) (inches) (inches) (inches) (Ib-sec /In)
300.5 300.5 35 60 542 72 52 52 155 39 36 72 *
**
Shaft Item
Tail Shaft T S. Liner** T.S. End Coupling Tube Shaft Liner** Coupling Line Shaft-Lg Line Shaft-Sm Thrust-Sm Thrust-Lg Thrust-Sm
27.5 29.5 25.25 38.5 25.25 27.875 33.25 25.25 21.125 21.125 24 21.125
9 27.5 9 25.25 9 25.25 25.25 9 9 9 9 9

Shaft Total:
116.7 22.3 11.2 29.2 173.5 6.6 14.0 16.6 32.6 8.2 10.3 15.1
456.3
26.5 28.5 24.25 37.5 24.25 26.875 32.25 24.25 20.375 20.375 23.125 20.375
p
9 26.5 9 24.25 9 24.25 24.25 9 9 9 9 9

Shaft Total:
107.4 21.5 10.2 28.2 158.1 6.3 13.5 15.2 29.8 7.5 9.4 13.8
420.9
Mass = p -
3 Bronze, p = 0.320 lb / in
4)
ID
x-
386.4'
0.283 for steel
Propeller Mass
RPM 80 90 Blades 4 5 4 5 (including 50%) 365.3 369.6 338.5 342.0
Mass of
Half Shaft 228.2 228.2 210.5 210.5 M 593.5 597.8 549.0 552.5 M2 Assume same as Ml
Table 5-A-5 Characteristics of T-AO 187 Propeller

80 RPM Four Blades Diameter, ft EAR P/D @ 0.7R Weight, lbs VVR (in air), lb-ft 24 0.66 94,100 2,292,400 Five Blades 24 0.66 95,200 2,386,400 90 RPM Four Blades 24 0.50 1.25 87,200 1,984,000 Five Blades 24 0.50 1.13 88,100 2,115,000
5-A-10

Since these frequencies were calculated on the basis of rough estimates of K2 and M 2, a study was made to find how the fundamental frequency changes with changes in K2 and M2 , Figure 5-A-4 shows the results, which apply to both four and five-bladed systems. The reduction gear mass cannot be changed much from whatever is required, but care should be taken in the foundation design to make it as rigid as is practical.
LONGITUDINAL RESPONSE
The axial response was calculated for the 80 and 90 RPM systems with four and five blades. The resonant condition is outside the operating speed range in all cases, so no resonant amplitudes need be calculated. For the specified operating speeds it will be assumed that the dynamic magnifier, Q, for the alternating thrust and bull gear amplitude can be given by: 1
where: f f = = Blade Rate at Operating Speed, Hz Axial Natural Frequency, Hz
This is true for a single-degree-of-freedom system and a reasonable approximation for our system below resonance. The amplitude of the bull gear X g is: X =QX Xg
Qs
where: X s = PK. EXC. / K2 , the Static Deflection of X 2 With these assumptions, the alternating thrust at the thrust bearing and t' will be calculated (see Table 5-A-6) for the following conditions: * 90%, 100% and 120% of Rated RPM * Peak Excitation * Straight Course and Maneuvering At rated speed, the only quantity exceeding specified limits is the alternating thrust at the thrust bearing ,.n turns. The percentages given reflect a worse condition for the five-bladed propellers. This may not actually be the case because the five-bladed propeller is likely to have less excitation than the four-bladed. The data used to estimate forces in Reference [1] did not distinguish between the two, but there is much evidence to that effect. Reference 161, for example, estimates the pressure forces of a five-bladed propeller to be about 77 percent of the four-bladed. If we assume the four-bladed calculations are correct and the five-bladed alternating thrusts are 77 percent of the calculations, then all of the alternating thrusts are essentially the same varying only from 50 percent to 57 percent.
bull gear amplitude
5-A-I1

9RPM Be' 12-4
asRPM
N * A
N A
I@--
T 1
L
F
6
5 4-
Full Fwr Blade Rate aB,
L
R
F. P., BMade Rat.
6-
B,+
-1
--
0'
200 400 L GEAR 600 MATSS(i8 PULL 180
e
LBXSECXSEC/IN
,- . . '
.,
THRUST BRG & FHON STIFFNESS ,HX@"
NT
a
8 RPM
A
90 RPM
T1
IH 2.
.84.
t
t IL
-
z2
-0
+
I
I
I
-I'
I
i
'
iI
20
00
18 1s 86
4
THRUST ORG I FNON STIFFNESS (LB/IN)XISA6
BULL GEAR MASS LSXSECXSEC/IN
Figure 5-A-4
Axial Natural Frequency vs. Bull Gear Mass and Thrust Bearing/Foundation Stiffness
5-A-12
Appendix 5-A - Example problem Table 5-A-6 Calculated Response Amplitudes 90 Percent of Rated RPM Pk E 0 .. oo' 20_ Blades (%T) tX e 1 ! .&It Thrst . .
(
RPM
Ec %T9lbs Factr %y Ibs

3
3
Bull Gear Deft

(mils)
Rt
Freq
FeStraight 9.68
9.65
,Thrust Br-%T
80
4
5
1.4
1.4
4.2
4.2
6762
6762
4.80
6.00
1.33
1.63
5.57
6.83
Turns Straight Turns 16.7 1.80 5.40

20.5 2.20 6.60
4 5
1.2 1.2
3 3
3.6 3.6
5796 5796
5.40 6.75
1000 9.97
1,41 1.85
5.08 6.65
15.2 19.9
1.63 2.14
4.89 6.42
100 Percent of Rated RPM

RPM Blade RPMBldes(%~)Facr Exc
PPk
M T) Factr
T %-
k Exc
ls bs
90% Bid
I Fit
es Fr req |
K0
1.91
T Alt Thrust hnst Brq-%T -'
Bull (mils) Gear Defl
IStrai ht
lThuns Straight
Turns
17.5 23.2 16.2
80 90
4 5
1.4 1.4 1.2
9 9 9
12.6 12.6 10.8
20286 20286 17388
5.33 9.68 6.66k 9.65 6.001 10.00
54.4 1.A4j 18.1 24.1-_j- 72.2 1.56 16.8 50.5
5.83
7.73
5.41
1.2
10.8
17388
7501 997
230
248-74.5
7.98
23.9

-__
Pk Factr
Pk Exc
90%
Re
Alt Thrust @_
Bull Gear Defl
RPM
Blades (%TPE Exc

,%f
P %T
x lbs
Str_ Turns_-StraihtFreq
1.78
2.08
Thrust Br
_rmils) M-%T
ight Turns
5
90 4
1.4 1.4
1.2
9 9
9
12.6 12.6
10.81
20286 20286
17388
6.4 8.0
7.2
9.68
9.65
10.00
224 j240
-2-2__
67.3 121.0
67.4
21.6
12.96
7.22
38.9
21.7
1.2
1 10.81 17388
9.0
9.97
5.40
58
175.0
18.70
56.2
At 90 percent of rated speed, all specified limits are satisfied. At 120 percent of rated speed, when using the correction factors called for by the specifications, the alternating thrust obtained in a hard turn exceeds the 50 percent of steady thrust limit for all combinations of RPM and number of propeller blades. The combination of five-bladed propeller and 90 RPM also exceeds the limit on the straight course. Old analysis also indicates thc bull gear exceeds the 30-mil limit prescribed for the thrust bearing (both the gear and thrust bearing housing will have essentially the same response) when using the five-bladed propeller. As noted in the earlier NKF study [1l, the requirement of MIL-STD-167 18], relative to the allowable gear tooth stress, has been omitted from the T-AO 187 specification. Two things are obvious at this point. First, with the level of alternating thrust present in the system used in the preliminary analysis, the alternating gear tooth stresses would be expected to seriously exceed the gear tooth load capacity and, second, the requirement for the largc correction factors and operation at 120 percent of rated speed seriously impacts the viability of the propulsion system, as contemplated. As was shown in Fable 7 of the previous NKF study i !1, we must operate between the longitudinal and torsional criticals. Thus, the application of generous correction factors and the omission of appropriate gear tooth stress limits arc considcrcd in;ppropriate.
5 A-13

One reason the allowable gear tooth stress limitation, specified in MIL-STD-167, may have been omitted is that it may be too restrictive as written. Experience would tend to confirm this. As an alternative, it should provide that "excessive alternating thrust in the reduction gear occurs when the vibratory stress in the gear teeth exceeds the allowable limits established by the gear manufacturer." To resolve this problem, a more accurate method of predicting true propeller input forces and the optimization of the underwater details of the design to minimize these forces, as recommended in the earlier report [1], should be employed. This should go a long way in reducing the first correction factor applied to the 90-100 percent speed range. Secondly, a more accurate assessment of appropriate correction factors associated with the expected ship operating characteristics may justify the reduction of the presently stipulated 120 percent rated speed. And, finally, the detailed system analysis required under Phase II should permit evaluation of gear tooth loading against the allowable loading specified by the gear manufacturer. There is no doubt that the longitudinal response at full power must be carefully considered in the final design and in the decision as to the number of blades. Detailed longitudinal calculations should include a finite element representation of the foundation structure. When the same responses are calculated for the recommended alternating thrust from Reference [1] at 100 percent of rated speed, the following (including effects of modulation, cavitation, fouled bottom, maneuvers, and rough seas) are obtained:

RPM 80 Blades
4 5
(%P) Factr %T
1.4 1.4 19 19 26.6 26.6
Pk Exc
Pk Exc
Ibs 2,826 42,826
4
100% Bid
Rt 5.33 6.66
Res Freq
9.68 9.65
0
1.44 1.91
Alt Thrust @Thrust Brg-%T

38.3 50.8
Bull Gear Del (mils)

12.3 16.3
4 5
1.2 1.2
19 19
22.8 22.8
36,708 36,708
6.00 7.50
10.00 9.97
1.56 2.30
35.6 52.4
11.4 16.9
TORSIONAL VIBRATION 7.1 Torsional Natural Frequencies

The torsional model of the propulsion system is shown in Figure 5-A-5. The propeller inertias are given in Table 5-A-2. The bull gear and pinion inertias were estimated from that of a similar ship. The engine inertia is that of the 9 TM 620 engine as provided by DeLaval. The PTO inertia is that of a Siemens 2000 kW unit, similar to that will be installed. The shaft stiffnesses are from Table 5-A-3. The coupling stiffnesses were taken from an Eaton/Airflex catalog. The average stiffnesses for all the couplings for the appropriate torque ratings were used.
5-A-14

So many assumptions had to be made that the results have to be considered very rough. The values of the parameters used for the 80 and 90 RPM systems are shown in Figure 5-A-5. The only difference between the four- and five-bladed systems was the propeller inertias, which differed by less than seven percent, where averages were used. The high speed components are multiplied by the gear ratios squared, based on 430 engine RPM.
K12
If
12
=
=
Inertia of Propeller plus 25% for Entrained Water Inertia of Bull Gear and Pinions Inertia of Diesel Engine Inertia of PTO Stiffness of Propeller Shaft Stiffness of Engine Coupling Stiffness of PTO Coupling
13 14
K1 2
=
K23 K24
=
RPM
1h
12
13
14
K1 2
K 23
K 24
80 90
1.09 0.995
0.1 0.1
2.31 1.82
.668 .528
326.6 284.5
i156 912
927 732
Figure 5-A-5 Torsional Mass-Elastic System
5-A-15
Ship Vibration Design Guide The natural frequencies of the systems are: RPM 80 90 IstMODE 2.93 Hz 2.94 Hz nd MODE 5.09 Hz 5.10 Hz 3rdMODE 25.12 Hz 22.57 Hz
The mode shapes are very similar for both cases and are given in Figure 5-A-6. Fiz'st Mode
~i~ePRO?
GEAR-"
"11 PTO
Second Mode
Third Mode PROP

-t
T.:O ENG'
I
GEAR Figure 5-A-6
Torsional Mode Shapes
5-A-16

Only the first and second modes are in the operating speed range, and the second mode would not be excited very efficiently by propeller forces. In order to anticipate the effect of the stiffnesses and inertias being different than assumed, several parametric studies were performed as shown in Figures 5-A-7 and 5-A-8. These show that the first mode is fairly independent of those changes, but the second mode is quite dependent.
Be RPM RPM' s.o8
N A
75 3 BLADES BLAOES LL A "AE 4
BLADES
7-
S4
~L f
N
4--43--
a*
I,.2 .1 .3 .2 .3 .4 .5 .4 .5 .6 .7 PTO INERTIA .8 .9 1
(LBXIH/SECXSEC)'X19"6
19^6 (LXIHN/$ECXSEC )X
BULL GEAR INERTIA
7 . 4.--
Be
144 4 BLADOES
RPM
*RPMI so
5eLA DES
r, 7'.,
4--
BLlADES B LADES 4__--.

4.
H
. 3,
2,2
3.
t*t
25 * ~~~~ 166 ENGINE COUPLING STIFFNESS CLXINN/RAO1US)XOU
... , te s. t-
O
~
NS 1560 100 18 ~ POCUPIGST
sO ee
'+--.-----I tie
-----zees 1508
PTO COUPLNG STIFFESS ,6
Figure 5-A-7 Torsional Natural Frequencies versus Coupling Stiffnesses and Bull Gear and PTO Inertias for 80 RPM System
5-A-17

go RPM 3 BLADES 6. F 44 BLADES L S.b;, t
90 RP" 5 BLAOES 4 BLADES
4-
2Z I.. Z
2.
e
,1
I'
, I
I
.5 .2
I ,,
.3
'
' -- I
.4 .2 .3 BULL GEAR INERTIA (LSXIH,SECXSEC)X198-6
.7 . .9 1.6 .4 .5 .6 PTO INERTIA (JLXIN/SECXSEC)X1S,,
90 RP 6. A L F 4' 3-2
_ _ _ _ _,'_ _ _
N 4 B LADE S ! L 6. S. 4--
9e RPM S BLADES 45 LAES ... .....,.... ,.I ..

-
1~~
7-LA4DBADE
--
'
I'
,
a see leee 1sis 2906 ENGINE COUPLING STIFFNESS (LIX1N/RADIUS)X10A6
see
Lee@
Msee
2908
PTO COUPLING STIFFNESS (LOXIN/RAOIUS)XIO-6
Figure 5-A-8
Torsional Natural Frequencies versus Coupling Stiffnesses and Bull Gear and PTO Inertias for 90 RPM System The first mode, which is of primary concern, will coincide with blade-rate at the following shaft speeds (assuming a 2.93 Hz natural frequency). RPM 80 90 B 4 5 4 5 Critical RPM 44 35 44 35 % of Rated Speed 55 44 49 39
5-A-18
7.2 Torsional Response

Since a torsional resonance occurs within the operating speed range, the maximum response must be calculated at resonance as well as full power. The specifications apply to speeds up to 120 percent of rated RPM, so that point will also be considered.
7.2.1 Resonance
For resonant response, damping must be estimated. formula:
C = 30 Q-
Reference [71 suggests the following
p
where:
NC Cp
=
=
Propeller Damping, in-lb-sec / rad Propeller Torque at Critical Speed in-lb (a function of RPM 2 ) Propeller RPM at Critical Speed
Q
N This results in: RPM
80 80
Blades
4 5 4 5
% of Rated RPM
55 44 49 39
,
QPower @ Full
x 10 6 10.42 x 106
10.42
-Qc
3.15 x 106 2.02 x 106
Nc
44 35 44 35
CO
2.15 x 106 1.73 x 106 1.51 x 10 1.21 x 10'
90
90
2.22 x 106 9.264 x 106 6 9.264 x 10 } 1.41 x 106
The propeller amplitude, 0

0 QP
is given by:
Cp(1n Oc
3.15 x 10
-
RPM
80
Blades
4 5 4 5
0 % ofQ
1.0 28350 181 800 _139,860
12.15 x 10
1.73 x 10' 1 1.51 x 10o 1.21 x 106
Cp
(on
18.41
Op
.00716 .00571 .00501 .00397
90
With peak excitation and mane uvering factor of 9
2.02 x 10 1.0 0.7 2.22 x 10 1.41 x 10' 10.7

-V
18.41
18.7
18.4
J 88,830
18.47
To find the stresses in the shaft, the torque must be Iound with the aid of the mode shape: RPM
80 80_5
Blades
0,i),
-. 0404 -0404
-
01 -02
-
K12
G -.
Qc= K12 (01 - 02)

6
.00745 00594
326.6x 10 326.6 x 10
2.43 x 10 1.94 x 10'
90
4
5
-.0467
-.0467
.00524
.00416
284.5 x 10
284.5x10 6
1.49 x 10
1.18X 106
5-A- 19
Ship Vibration Design Guide The alternating shear stress in the shafts, S
,
can be calculated from:
s 2J where J is the polar moment of inertia of the shaft section. RPM Blades 80 80
90 4
5
R 0Q
2.43 x 106
1.94 x 106
Tall Shaft D27.5

27.5
Tube Shaft Ss
602
481
Line Shaft
J
55,503
55,503
D
25.25
25.25
J
39,262
39,262
Ss
781
624
J 21.125 .18,908
21.125 18.908
S
1357
1084
4 5
1.49 X106 1.18x i06
26.5 26.5
47,771 47771
413 327
24.50 24.50
34,728 34,728
526 416
20.375 20.375
16,276 16,276
933 739
All of these alternating stresses are below the 1,700 psi limit imposed by the ABS rules. Even though the torsional requirements of MIL-STD-167 [8] were not invoked, it was considered worthwhile to see if the requirements weie met. The stress limits are not as restrictive as the ABS limits, so that is no problem. MIL-STD-167 also requires the alternating torque to be less than 75 percent of the steady torque at any speed and less than 25 percent of the full power steady torque. For the propulsion shafting, the ratio of alternating torque to steady torque is found to be:
RPM 80
90
Blades
4 5 4
5
6c
be O/oc
6
2.43 x 10 1.94 x 106 1.49 x 106 6

1.18x10
3.15 x 10' 2.02 x 106 2.22 x 106

1.41 x 10'
77% 96% 67%

84%
-FP 6-I 10.42 x '106 10.42 x 10 9.264 x 10 6

9.264 x 106
b'POFP
23% 19% 16%

13%
The 75-percent limit is exceeded in three of the four cases. The response at resonance should be of concern, but more detailed calculations should be made before any conclusions can be drawn.
7.2.2 Rated Speed

At rated speed we will assume that the dynamic magnifier, Q, is given by the single degree-of-freedom equation:
5-A-20
Appendix 5-A - Example Problem The calculation of alternating torques would then be: RPM
80 80 90
-
Blades
4 5 4
-FP
o
1.0 1.0
.
Q
2.813 x 106 6 2.813 x 10 1.751 x 106
fFRf. -%
6s
641FP
10.42 0.42 x 106
x 106
1.82 2.27 2.04
5 9.264 x 106 0.7 1.751 x 106 2.55 Includes peak excitation, full power, and maneuvering factor of 27
9.264 x 106
0.7
0.433 1.218 0.240 0.675 x 106 T, 0.316 0i3 3 ox 0.182 0.319 x 106
x 106
11.7% 6.5% 6.0% 3.4%
These are all below the limit of 25 percent specified in MIL-STD-67. The stresses associated with these alternating torques are low: Alternating Torsional Shear Stress at Rated Speed Tall Shaft Tube Shaft Line Shaft Stress, psi Stress, psi Stress, psi
302 167 153 88 391 217 195 112 680 377 346 200
RPM
80
Blades
4 5 4 5
Z)FP
&, In6 1.216 0.675 x 106 6 0.553 x 10 6 0.319 x 10
7.2.3 120 Percent of Rated Speed

The excitation for this speed would have the same magnitude, but the dynamic magnifier would be less because the shaft is operating farther away from resonance. Therefore, all the alternating torques and stresses would be below those for rated speed, and would be acceptable by a wide margin. Only the first mode was considered for torsional response. More detailed calculations may prove that the second mode has a significant contribution and when the complete system details have been determined, the detailed analyses carried out under Phase II of the design may indicate that other sections of the complete system, including the engine and PTO, may exhibit excessive vibratory stresses in other than the propulsion shafting and/or result in gear rattle within important operating speeds. For example, a rough estimate of the vibratory torque, between the engine and reduction gear, at the fifth order critical, occurring at 39 percent of the rated speed of 90 RPM would be approximately 160 percent of the steady driving torque. While a pass through critical below operating speed, which produces gear rattle, is not unusual, it is considered necessary to provide specific design criteria such as given in MIL-STD-167 to ensure the complete system is free from damaging levels of torsional vibration, whether excited by the engine or propeller. The ultimate selection of n uiber of propeller blades and rated RPM will depend heavily on the compromise between the torsional and longitudinal propulsion system dynamics.
5-A-21
LATERAL VIBRATION
The lateral critical speed of ship propulsion systems is normally much higher than the operating RPM. If that is the case, response calculations need not be made. For purposes of this preliminary study three approximate formulas were used to calculate the critical speed. Panagopulos' Formula:
30
f= 30
'j
iE
Ix,( + - + Wwhere: f i Ip I Wp
= = = =
+ -+ + Pg + 3 P" 9360 )J 3
D4/64,
Cycles per Minute Shaft Moment of Inertia About the Diameter
in4
2 Mass Momeait of Inertia of Propeller About its Axis, lb-in-sec
Mass Moment of Inertia of Propeller About its Diameter, 2 plus 60% for Entrained Water, lb-in-sec Weight of Propeller, ncluding Shaft Stub, Nut, and Hub Cap plus 25% for Entrained Water, lbs (air) Shaft Mass per Inch = Wg lb-sec 2 in2 2 Young's Modulus = 30 x 106 lbs / in Distance of Propeller Centerline to Bearing Centerline = 66.5 in Bearing Centerline Distance 246.5 in
E b 1
= = =
For the four cases studied, the inputs and results are: RPM
80
Blades
4 5 4 5 27,751 27,751 23,886 23,886
Id
0.6835 0.7117 0.5915 0.6305 x x x x 106 106 10 10'
m
316.5 320.3 293.4 296.4
4
0.4626 0.4626 0.4290 0.4290
f
501.9 496.9 489.2 482.7
90
1
5-A-22
Appendix 5-A Jasper Formula*
Example Problem
where:
8p (I+M
6=d
2
P Q,
El 314J
Natural frequency, CPM Propeller Mass plus 10 Percent Entrained Water .38 x Shaft Mass, lb-sec 2 / in 66.5 in 246.5 in
4 Diametrical mornent of inertia of shaft, in
m
m
= = =
d L
For the four cases studied, the inputs and results are: RPM
80 90
1 90___
Blades
56. 4_
47.
4 5
_-
-m271.
_248.2
-mes
173.
I_
2775
___
f, CPM
679
71116
27,751~
159.9 159 9 23886 2388 61-
71361
68.84 68.62
1
681
657 655
250.8
K> b
NI
~/ 187.7
Y ,
5-A 23I

where: WL - 3EI N, W L B E
1
=
3
Natural frequency, CPM Propeller Weight without Entrained Water, lb-sec 2 / in 66.5 in 246-5 in
2 Young's Modulus = 30 x 106 lbs / in 4 Shaft Moment of Inertia About the Diameter = D64, in
= = = =
=
RPM
804
Blades
5
W
94,100
I
.
27,751
27,751
N1
822
95,200
87,200
88,100
817
90
23,886 23,886
793 788
In the case of the T-AO 187, the span between the intermediate strut and stem tube is signifigantly longer than the span between the struts. The natural frequency of that span may be lower than that of the propeller and first span as just calculated. The formula for a pinned beam will be used to approximate that frequency: o, = 9.87
0EI
where:
o
Natural frequency, rad / sec Young's Modulus = 30 x 106 lbs/in
E = I
t =
Shaft Moment of Inertia About the Diameter = D"/64,

2 2 Shaft Mass per Inch = Wg lb-sec / in
t = =
Length of Beam = 438 in
For the two different shaft speeds the inputs and results are:
RPM
80
90
I
19,631
16,653
o)n 0.320
0.292
f, CPM
661
642
69.3
67.3
The critical speeds calculated for the shaft range from 483 to 822 CPM, all of which are far above the shaft operating speed. Therefore, no problems are expected regarding lateral shaft vibration.
5-A-24
Appendix 5-A - Example Problem For reference purposes, the Jasper method provides an approximate solution for the first order forward whirl (which presents the greatest potential danger to a ship's propeller shaft system). This mode would be excited by mass unbalance. The Panagopulos meitiudi does not contain the whirl effect. Other than this, the only significant difference between the two methods is that the effect of the shaft mass is considerably greater in the Panagopulos method (about five times greater). For this reason the Panagopulos method consistently yields lower frequencies and is used in Reference 13].
EVALUATION of SHAFT STRENGTH

For shaft strength calculations, Reference [3] was used except for the calculation of torsional stresses. For that a more detailed model than suggested was appropriate. It should be noted that Reference 131 was not invoked in the ship specifications. The only docume -t specified was the ABS rules. For the shaft strength calculations the torque was assumed to be 10 percent more than rated torque. Steady stresses were calculated on the basis of torque and thrust. Alternating stresses included torque, thrust, and bending. For the bending, the off-center thrust was assumed to cause as much bending stress as the propeller overhang. The aft strut bearing reaction was assumed to be in the center of the bearing. (The recommended reaction point in [31 is for different types of bearings.) The criteria for acceptance in Reference 131 are a bending stress of less than 6000 psi in the tail shaft, and a safety factor of 1.75 for inboard shafting and 2.0 for waterborne shafting when the alternating and steady stresses are considered in a Goodman-type diagram.
9.1 Steady Stress

The shear stress due to torque is: S, =5.1 where
Q
= = =
in psi
110 percent of rated torque, in-lb
D d
Outside diameter of shaft, in Inside diameter of shaft, in
110% ln-. S
&
Ta Shaft D
275 9 2842
Tube Shaft
-d-s....
Line Shaft
Ss D-
RM
80
d
9
d
9
SS
6409
1.146x 106
- 101 9 x
25.25
90
10-
26.5
'
25731 2425 1-9
3689 i_21.125
3377 1 20.375
5807
5-A-25

The compressive stress due to thrust is: 1.273 T D D2 _
in p
where:
T Rated Thrust
RPM
80304
Sc, psi Tail Shaft i Tube Shaft
Line Shaft
368
330 404
561
613
90
The steady resultant stress, SSR' at full power, is: S=

SR
2 = (2Ss)2 SC
RPM
-~SSR,_Psi
_____f
Tail Shaft
80
-5692
Tube Shaft- Line Shaft

7387 6766
_
183
11,630 _
90
5156
9.2 Alternating Stress

The bending moment in Ml ,iilhdt, .f, duc i, prncller o,erhang is: IA, I..Ii lh
where: IV = Weigh t , Polroplllcr, II;'

L
=
tcr of Aft Strut Bearing Distance from C'!(il ' l'rioplcr n (t',o (assuLmed to he 00.5 Is)
For the four cases studied, this i,:
RPM
80
Blades
4
Wp
94,100 95,200 87.200
Mg
6258 x1
80
90
6.331 x 106
5 799 x lO
88,100
5859 x 10
5 \ 26
Appendix 5-A - Example Problem This is doubled for off-center thrust and the bending moment is found from: MD SB -- i21 where: SB Mp D I For the four cases studied: RPM
80
1
= = =
Alternating Bending Stress, psi 2 Mg = Total Bending Moment on Tail Shaft, in-lbs Outside diameter of shaft, in Shaft Moment of Inertia About the Diameter
D/64,
in 4
Blades
4 4
D
27.5
27.5
SB
6201
6274
5 5
26.5
26.5
6434
F-
6500
These are all in excess of the 6,00 psi limit suggested by DDS 4301 [3]. However, the assumed overhang may be too large. Also, the assumption regarding off-center thrust should be evaluated for this ship if wake survey data becomes available. The bending moments in the two longest shaft spans were calculated with the formula: Mc
SB
where:
2
M SB
-WL
t
=
12 Bending Stress in Span, psi Bending Moment in Span, in-lb Shaft Moment of Inertia About the Diameter 2 2 Shaft Weight per Inch = 1% lb-sec / in Length of Span
= D4/64,
M = I IV L
=
in 4
= =
5-A-27
Ship Vibration Design Guide For the two shaft sizes:
j RPM
80 90
Tube Shaft
Line Shaft
c 25.25 24.25
LM 438 438
1.978 x 106 1.802 x 106
SB c 1272 21.125 1312 120375
L 244 244
0.4028 x 106 0.3685 x 106
SB 450 462
The torsional alternating stresses were found in Section 7.2, Torsional Response, and are repeated here: Torsional Alternating Stress, Ss Resonance Full Power Tall 80
90 4
5 4
RPM
Blades
Tube
781
624 526
Line
1357
1084 933
Tall
302
167 153
Tube
391
217 195
Line
680
377 346
602
481 413
19-4
327
416
739
88
112
200
Arranging the bending stresses in a similar table gives the same stresses for both resonant and full power speeds: Bending Alternating Stress,
RPM Blades SB
Tall
8 90
4 4 5
Tube
1272
Line
450
6201
6274
6434 6500
1272
1312 1312
450
462 462
The resultant alternating stress, Salt, is:

S1 = 2 + (2Ss)2 JS
RPM
Blades Tail
4
5
Resultant Alternating Stress, Salt Resonance Full Power Tube

2014
1782
Line
2751
2214
Tall
6230
6283
Tube
1493
1344
Line
1433
878
6317
6347
6487
1682
1922
6441
1369
832
6533
1554
1549
6502
1331
611
5-A-28
Appendix 5-A - Example Problem To find the factors of safety at the torsional resonance, the steady resultant stress for that speed must be found as wcll as the steady resultant at full power. Since both the torque and thrust vary as the square of RPM, the steady resultant must also. Therefore: SSR (Resonance) The table for S SR becomes: Steady Resultant Stress, SB Resonance Full Power Tall 80 90
4 5 1719 1104
S(n Torsional NaturalFrequency
Full Power Blade Rate
XSSR (FullPower)
RPM
Blades
Tube
2231 1433
Line
3875 2489
Tall
5692 5692
Tube
7387 7387
Line
12,830 12,830
4 5
1237 794
1624 1042
2791 1791
5156 5156
6766 6766
11,630 11,630
The factors of safety can then be found from:

Salt
SsR
1
=
FL. + Y.P. where: FL. Y.P. F.S. The results are as follows:
F.S. Fatigue Limit of Shaft, Assumed 27,000 psi Yield Point of Shaft, Assumed 30,000 psi Factor of Safety
=
=
RPM
Blades
Factor of Safety Torsional Resonance Tall Tube

8.79
Full Power Tube

3.31
3.38
Line
432
6.06
Tall
2.38
2.37
Line
2.08
2.17
80 90
4
5
3.43
3.68
6.71
4 5
3.55 3.73
8.59 10.84
6.09 8.54
2.44 2.42
3.62 3.64
2.39 2.44
The smallest factor of safety in the waterborne shafting is 2.37 compared to the required 2.00. The smallest factor in the inboard shafting is 2.08 compared to the required 1.75. Therefore, this design is considered quite satisfactory when judged by Navy requirements. A more refined evaluation should be made in the Phase II design study.
5-A-29
CONCLUSIONS
The first part of this study [1] recommended the use of the five-bladed propeller and 90 RPM as the rated operating condition, subject to confirmation by the analysis of the longitudinal and torsional vibration characteristics of the propulsion system. These analyses, as presented in this report, indicate that the longitudinal natural frequency of the propulsion shafting system coincides with propeller blade frequency at 133 percent to 181 percent of rated RPM, depending on the number of blades (four or five) and the RPM (80 to 90). The higher RPM and number of blades brings the critical speed closer to the operating speed and results in a higher dynamic magnification. This is also offset in part by the lower propeller forces generated. The resulting full power response, in turns, is about the same for all cases studied and ranges from 50 percent to 57 percent alternating thrust at the thrust bearing compared to the specified limit of 50 percent, including all correction factors. The specifications also require the calculations to be made for 120 percent of rated RPM. Because this is significantly closer to the resonant speed, it causes the specified limits of vib-atory thrust to be exceeded in all cases studied. It is felt that this requirement is too restrictive and that the increase in input forces by a factor of 3 in the 90 percent to 100 percent RPM range may be reduced if the efforts to minimize the input forces proposed in the earlier NKF report [11 are implemented. It is also important to note that while the limitation of alternating thrust specified in MIL-STD-167 was invoked, no restriction is imposed on gear tooth loadings. The allowable alternating thrust and resulting motion of the bull gear can readily produce excessive gear tooth stresses and should be restricted, not to the limits specified in MIL-STD-167, but to the limits specified by the reduction gear manufacturer. Experience has indicated that gear tooth loading is most critical. The fundamental torsional critical speed was found to be from 39 percent to 55 percent of rated speed, depending on the number of blades and rated speed. To minimize the exciting forces, the preferred combination of five blades and 90 RPM keeps the fundamental torsional mode low, at 39 percent of rated RPM, and the fundamental longitudinal mode at 133 percent of rated RPM. The torsional alternating stresses at all speeds are low and satisfy the ABS requirements for propulsion shaft stresses. The alternating torque at resonance falls between 67 percent and 96 percent of the steady torque during turns and is estimated at approximately 160 percent in the shafting between the engine and the reduction gear at the fundamental critical of 35 RPM in the simplified system studied for the five-bladed propeller operating at 90 RPM. Although MIL-STD-167 was not invoked in the T-AO 187 specifications, the effect of torsional vibration on the system components, other than the propulsion shafting, is of major concern. A second torsional mode occurs in the vicinity of 5.1 Hz, which is close to the full power rated RPM (76 RPM with a four-bladed propeller and 61 RPM with a five-bladed propeller). While this frequency is less accurately determined in the simplified analysis conducted, the presence
5-A-30
Appendix 5-A - Example Problem of excessive vibratory torque at the reduction gears is a distinct possibility and again emphasizes the necessity of limiting vibratory torques and gear tooth stresses. The final selection of the optimum number of propeller blades and operating RPM must still be confirmed by the detailed analyses to be carried out in the Phase II design. It is concluded, however, that the five blades and 90 RPM combination would be best if modifications to the correction factors presently specified are adjusted to the operating conditions, and a better estimate of propeller forces preferably based on model studies and utilizing the necessary limitations on reduction gear vibratory stresses is made. All natural frequencies of lateral vibration of the propulsion shafting system were found to be above 483 CPM when examined by three different methods and should provide no problems in this area. Preliminary checks on the bearing spacing and general arrangement indicate the proposed configuration is adequate although suggestions for improvement are given. In this preliminary analysis, in which the propeller overhang was estimated, the limit of 6,000 pounds alternating bending stress, indicated by Navy specifications [3], was exceeded by less than 10 percent. Although this requirement is not included in the T-AO 187 specifications, the Navy specifications were used for evaluation purposes. This may not be the case, however, when final details for the propeller shaft system are completed and a better estimate of off-center thrust is obtained from model studies or calculated from wake data. It was also determined that the shafting system, designed to ABS requirements, would satisfy the factors of safety called for by the Navy specification 131.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations presented herein support the recommendations previously given in the companion study on the Propeller Hull Configuration (4.4.2.7). However, confirmation of the preferred combination of five-bladed propellers and 90 RPM is still lacking due to the specified correction factors (which are considered overly conservative), the requirement for 120 percent rated speed, the lack of complete definition of system component details, and the omission of adequate specifications for gear loadings. The revised list of recommendations includes: Model studies presently prescribed in the specifications should be expanded to permit the optimization of the stern underwater details. Consideration should be given to reducing the skeg size, starting at Frame 110 rather than 117, to improve the inflow to the propeller. To provide a more accurate evaluation of stern details and to obtain estimates of total propeller forces entering the hull and machinery systems, it is recommended that self-propelled model studies be conducted at the vacuum tank at the Netherlands Ship Model Basin (N.S.M.B.).
5-A-31
Ship Vibration Design Guide Cavitation/hull pressure studies at SSPA should be conducted after optimization of the underwater design details and evaluation of the total propeller forces obtained at N.S.M.B. Stress limits on important elements of the propulsion system should be established by the manufacturers of major components such as reduction gears, clutches, couplings, etc. MIL-STD- 167 specifications for allowable vibratory torque and stress limits should be invoked for torsional and longitudinal vibration of the propulsion system. Correction factors for longitudinal and torsional vibratory forces on the propulsion system should be modified to reflect propeller forces determined by model studies and operating conditions required for the T-AO 187. Detailed vibration analyses of the hull, aft superstructure, and propulsion system should be carried out based on input data derived from model studies, appropriate correction factors, and stress limits provided by manufacturers and Navy specifications. Finite element analysis should be carried out on the thrust foundation to determine actual stiffness values and to determine how to increase the stiffness, if feasible. Unless the analysis still indicates poteatial problems, a five-bladed propeller, operating at 90 RPM, should be considered preferable.
5-A-32
REFERENCES
1. NKF Engineering Associates, Inc., "T-AO 187 Baseline Review (Par. 4.4.2.7), An Evaluation of the Proposed Propeller Hull Configuration," Report No. 8213-001/1, May 1982. "ABS Rules for Building and Classing Steel Vessels," 1980. Department of the Navy Design Data Sheet DDS 4301, "Propulsion Shafting," 1 January, 1960. Bird-Johnson Company letter dated April 16, 1982, Subject: "Bird -Johnson Co./KaMeWa Controllable Pitch Propeller for T-AO 187." Zaloumis, A., and G. Antonides, "Recent Developments in Longitudinal Vibration of Surface Ship Propulsion Systems," NSRDC Report 3358, September 1970. McGoldrick, R.T., "Ship Vibration," DTMB Report 1451, December 1960. Nestorides, E.J., "A Handbook on Torsional Vibration," B.I.C.E.R.A, Cambridge, 1958. MIL-STD-167-2 (Ships), "Military Standard Mechanical Vibrations of Shipboard Equipment," I May, 1974.
2. 3.
4.
5.
6. 7. 8.
5-A-33
APPENDIX 5-B
M.A.N. DIESEL ENGINES

Engine Power Range and Fuel Consumption
Comments on Power and SFOC Tables
The following pages contain data regarding the engine power, speed and specific fuel oil consumption of the MC engines. Engine power is specified in both BIIP and kW, in round numbers, for each cylinder number and in four ' our points: L, designates nominal maximum continuous rating (= nominal MCR), at 100% engine power and 100% engine speed. L 2 , L, and L, designate layout points at the other three corners of the layout area, chosen for easy reference. A. described in detail in the next section "Layout, SFOC at Part Load arid Load Diagram", any point within the layout area may be chosen as MCR and the engine may, if so desired, be delivered optimized for this specified MCR raung. The four reference points Lt, L, L, and L, are specified as stated in the table and shown in Fig. 2.1: >e~ignai.mj 20% I' Mean effective pressure 100% Engine speed 100% 100%
fuel oil lower calorific value. For calculation of these

changes, se" the section entitled "Layout, SFOC at Part Load and Load Diagram" Except for the three smallest engine types, the L42, the L35 and the S26, the specific fuel oil consumption figures are stated for engines without TCS (Turbo Compound System), as well as for engines with TCS, the design particulars of which are dealt with in the section on "Turbocharger Types and Turbo Compound Systems". The use of TCS can reduce fuel consumption substantially in the normal power range of the engine, as* will appear from the tables.
SFOC Guarantee
The Specific Fuel Oil Consu.mption (SFOC) is guaranterd for -ne engine load (power-speed combination), this being the one in which the engine is optimized. The guarantee is given with a margin of 3%, and the optimized point is chosen within the layout area on the selected propeller curve. The SFOCguarantee refers to the above-mentioned reference conditions (ISO ambient and a lower calorific value of 42707 kJ/kg = 10200 kcal/kg).
L1
L80%
o0%
75%/.
751,. -
Lubricating Oil Data

The cylinder oil consumption figures stated in the tables are valid under normal conditions. During runnng-in penods and under speial conditions; i, feed rates of up to 1.5 times the stated values should be used.
On the 1.35MC'MCE engines, the r'nin a: L, and is kept at 82%, as previousl%. Overload raring (OR) corresponds to 110% of the power at MCR, and may be perminated for a limited period of one hour every 12 hours. OR corresponds to 106.7% mean effective pressure and 103. 3^ engine speed, referring to MCR as 10 '. The engine po-tLvr fgures given in the table-, remrain valid up to tropical condiTions a: sea love), i c.: Tropical Conditions: Blower inlet temperature Blower inlet pressure Charge air coolant temperature 45'C "-=-.. oar 44"("
Power L
L
3
L2
Sp cific fuel oil consumpron zialues refer to brake power, and the following ,fercncc conditions: Reference Conditions (ISO Ambient 1 Blower inlet temperature Blowe inlet pressure Charge air coolant temperature Fuel oil lower carorific value 27'C 1000 mbar 27C 42707 kJ/kg '10200 kcal'kg;
L Speed
..
.......
Fig. 2.1 Layout diagram
Although the engine will devchlp the power specified up to tropical ambient conditions, sp,cific fuel oil consumption varies with ambient conditions and
5-B-I
Ship Vibration Design Guide Power, Speed and SFOC
K90MC
ov,..u w
f s kw120 Ii560
K90MCE
L,
K9OMC-2
+_
,iL,
L2 L ,
L,: .
1
,,.,
72
w.._
LE -Fi =
I.
.,
,, Co . 4...
0 ''0 1075 5.80 7446 '2800 0 118 01 l 14100
I
1 o0
127 40 0- 10 1720 1780
, 40
7 2 0""
12800 880 803 1'2 410 0 20 845,
12000240 41,00 120 11' 8360 314100 1M
6 6
7 8i l.W
806'250 nPI
2100 7200
Io
I
80 rag
41
kW
'O
200
88 'X
1, 4 SIP .32goo
110 '17*0 21873 2 4.
i1514011 137 80 141 208410 120 I77M 1 0'
IWO 32AM160 40 0 019 500
s UG 040
01110
ILW 270'8.0120" 1 0810 1 8HP.. 1 26 M 23 a k W I r18I2 o 22 10 22 10
"2001 2406C80 00 1 2280 1270

200I 30400
19200 1752 3WI 1 560 120

22 10200
1 70.22 375 '
HSlP
43?880
3031290
200
l 1'ii 4
3 71 20
22112 0 ?1420 304300
27340 1240f l 2 I Q 1| 20
2270 3020
SHP10
.240?
311
3090
200 210
3A,00 v360
43000 3400
2 Soo
200 2560 s
10
W
P
340
Siam2
3100
800 goo0
28601 32ol
SHIP 840
"Q 3160 2, 3,,23= 2,z O N,,

53606143 CC0 3900 4246 134710 56860 47300 1p 7286 1643W 22230 43690 3780 S I 800 38160-'26200 4738 380 AM
.11 BJp 12 12 . m
SPOC
4
23850 11 3-160 31000:47 3D
37820' 256ISO120361 37W 1035200 ZO 160 1
300, 23+ -m 04800

2 12
I I P
MW A3340 amp84 Iso 6W BlI 4218 6330
kw 134
43030
347&0, 222205 31600go -6.0 7300 143890 13s2W 1i 37910 5160I28W0 51800 47560 '38400'!
igov3
32711201302460 21200 22300 t 8160 260 3 40030 20720
4Ph at MOA1 12l 138 Ill 121 121 124 6I 2 1 lie 21 11

I
I
7 8 12,
, .
mp h & MP M
I
'W, 1CS WWWAl TC6
115 7
00TS W?; PC W38P8
122 17 .
IllI 2
122 127
4W14 SPOC oSP% WV ICS 120
&ISa' 184 " 11 120 117

. 117
1
Pan~log4R i0
,a
117
114
l+o, 0
I 12 Cs 25
115
121
Ill
15 ,,lCS 01,I,-13 I C
12,
1,9
24
its j1 '19 ',,o 'WCq h
11
91
16
,, ;;. wI
120
, 125
20 I 10-13 yV24h
voW
.p'
0.6 gHPh
0.110MC L0MC
C6,I o~'
"'O881l
S".:
_
I
L9"MC
,,s 2
7S
80 1
L90MCE
. Me a
s8 0
s-00,',6 .,a
S8rw
_
77
S80MC W So
5 57
in @:3
S80MCE M,175
FO
571 8
_i
L
1 1
L,
36
L.~~ LL,,.,L 3613 So
Speso
r~ '
0yI ,,
4
M
,..
44W I I6SA
P !21240,
1.
1
2825 AI 1
,
14 60
17 4 19-,0
+, ,.
320 i1255 2s66' 7W 11650
1550,
,0=,
0 044) '36.40 12640 9320 126i0 1106 1
.I
0118
125400 11640 7010
FIMF140
SHP kw I I
I~ 84 iI.+o
r
75 82 '48S0,13480
;
8
,I
:
,.,=
11780 4 No
8240
22-t 18 1'4Ol'aO0
..
0
3 Jr00 0
goo
01 70
27020 IWO
ISM
160
2800 '20100 'I3W20
1 ISM400 40,1400
'6250! 160 85 18 l86 2 5l10220 I7 11 3" 250'23590
,,W
3 So
60
'1 0.4 ',

0
2320XI 7050 11140. 'O '.'2, 0 17
1580700 M: ' 13o1.111401

19'70'A18 0
am
BNP 4
'22 1811 l18 ' 10117301
6 7
mp3 UW SP %W
, I11gGot26M,
2-
20
20K2sc8
lllS2 1 80 OW r!15 1 20W0 140 , 01 0 l 10 21o0, m0 14 130
21 21818 '277"3;1219 120 270 6 37170.29020 270 _Z21W N82 21. 24080 2 20 .0,DC 8 10 '219 ,4 20010 MIgo 3 34 O 03 :440' *300 26120 4
2T'
3000 22W 2 0 3,160 1
r 8163103MMA 2W 1177M 1 108 "14UO 250 2 0
,382 k
130 l '83 22550 184 26o 1720 42 i'2 0
SU
I
I 10 I_'__
kW
1
2 6800 20400 0 OO 25
21440 290 24120 32WO
19840 26900 22320 30
1160
%W
208170 .28260 2883V 'A34 233W ,140M(
20 SIM 58740 26*3O30q W41040 n317" . ISOM
24 120 1130
1 00114310 4 n
2170 M
3096, 81002J ADO ,29100 3-0

. .
112000 0'2 21820I 0 36 33___

27 280, 2
is
426 00 IO.__ O50 ....

'
43010
20
ll97 4 amp
160'
'3M 48212 3
486 '34%0
31700 .. . 4260C 34100 ... 31700l . . .. 54 . 3 35440 27$10 28436;S' 2 34870 AA8MO 311,01 3487012740
00 g 57W t,13?600Q9202756 a 01012 SOO 1 230M
r 0
2 217
3 0 -10 4150
2 _____ 01
2
Omp6
I& 50160
4050
3707560
120
2 148 3 wo02576
~ 76 5482
? 3
o7
1 8,
54
.l2
02
64108
p4 4200 4 3256160 0 8P'4723:43100 S867012344) 40140
06 It 5M211849 Me 3280 F06 M1 U240014300 360W032400 12SOM0
63CC "'*ITCS Off01 ICS 1 121 I 28 S 12t w1 7 ' im .71 't 18 2' 119 WI Il '1,
lit
Ill
~~~~~SCOC WOW% a MCP______________

I W"16 CS 1 '1 121 Ill '21 121 04 I 12' I II l ll I 21 '8 $ '11 t I '2' eI 117 I7Al1,IC 126
14 W -.cq 04 0
II pan 1?3*1*
-' .2.
*'
l S
f'' 2
It pan to," I 0 1
1
11 7
1
' 4 1 1
Zi* .3.
0,
0ll4
Oh
S;hw 93peed D'iesel Data
power, Speed and SFOC

[
K80MC~ KBOMCE
OW 241 106 0 7 75 21 n'I 150 12710 00 I 3
J
14 as 12a2X 110 I 520
1!OM L80MCE
00
7S
60
629
1: aA
a4s0
66 S-Ni;0''00
12W
SH IIS 'i404 !!~ '2120 I76 SHP66 0"Pgs tW
12720 7" i l;.
IG
127060* 1300
4
20166 IOSP ,N
12)S0 10200 I
kW64
Ium11201 .Im 16S3W0 1I 2 'W IsmI 19050 S64-'26"40;20460;

6 21417 6.0,0120U0 24960 2D06
5202 17600 ;126M32 0iS 3"W 1622 10i 0
11
I1IS00 123606040645014260. 20000 ;6000
.IQO
102a 1 0 j8 a a 200 ' 1265,0 160 500 SO1 160 1 10150 1117-4 -,.wIM~ 1146 1660I1460 JI001 MGM0 (WOflOO 16160 12180 02512250 118960 16180 1 20C6,T63 13M60163 OU4760021W't371 122116601134110 IRAN106 1190 1060011 .P IN
-M
1012 011 I
0 kW 14600 i*"I 6 1
7 m 11"
111
1i70?1" ISO
'164 law
6-
3320ol22126440
20..j'4M
16066 .160121, 2444 I130 11006 2200' 61000 2920W 22" 292,O 260 40 3204 .I3
8"
33640 27040 25200 2024011740
60" 146011 Is
Itt162 ISM0 20240 'P0
%'' W] :2 320 121060 IS1M20 22000 SHP 1 3g0S16006 215 225 '30660
6W
1700223 206016740 22220117010I16740134101 6 37890 430,2-0 280 -22770 i3042C0124200 122770,1 i270 310 !: 4 3 1 SHP 24300 7 6 30"0 ; IOM
2W
n0.60
81
2! 2762 00 '7510
ino'
119W1
00
11400,
116I 0
OI
SH
ISH
316
171039
26
346012783 X I.3 16 ,2 70
027460
2 536D01 2 30
if
00 37440! 3000 2560C 22662 P SCOW60I 40934 30160 30600 SH5
0
109a
26
300
160 1246 ISO1
I17
I kW
646
413710460
27202660040
21910 123W2 1760. 27140I2220 3W 2974 5052D 4060 3762013036D 4050 1224W0 230360 24260
Wi6th I S
WIIIO..A7CS ;
..'L I
121
125
lit
122
in
122 122
i
12
'i f 116
is ,
116 I10.lt
I
i
27 .1mm__ ____________ WIMP%_
177v
pollL
11~o~C 122 I. h .1.03Pl !1107hTIS
11
122
'~ T -1101
-111I 11-$ -1
1122
1a7
ii2. 11
illOR
I2 -I"..
16
WilIsT
mmw l15ICS Lb 0
11 !M 2
11
125
116
I118
11,6
1-8
116
1
1
121
5
-18-in i~ ~ T 1
1
i, 200
1 6
. -
-W kgic-y24 t
OAkgCyV2 4 B-1
0~6
Oil06 Ivve
St-n 2074
I'S70MC B., 70C

of" 0 00
IS70MCE
-,
SI'r. 2-674
-X '01
,
I .
~
. Cp. 6
1
1 16
L70MC 2M0 ~ 700

0
10
0,1. 2260
L70MCE_
IS.
700
L-4L , ,
"a6 6
5
L,
71
I
L2
IO0 75
L
75
as46
CIL-15 P.l 66
66
W0l~
00
a56 125W SH 1-5C

____ I
10
4'
760 1160 I0200
"'S' 66
0 00
0160
49m6"394 6
SHPo
120 40.40,
7140 IO40 '01160. 2K176 9500
Sato0 '30 o'& 720o
7666'
!0260
P4 ;:-
6660
"It
777-01%06360 5720 11
4620
5 770
kW5 -k
6O 7
SH
15420
102W0 D6am 7700. -950_1'00 74%1 - 15260 11Iwo 6240 '740 16047 15-20 .175<7 0 10 1 145 'o 5X.~3 40 4~o CXa '600 1560237 3060
10051 6220 7020 6140 400, 3956. 120C '(45 ... ----12300 6000 6340 172 no 0740 13447 2 542 0000 14250 -Q6 16400 IS 105 moo 60im 12)'
6
7
kW 110 4"0C I', 63560 '12000 9600 SH16P '160WO0 1.5 .. - - . --___ 6 W 14160 111140'1020 1630 H '6 IOM 1 1642-. 1 "4W 11160 PHI'
9H So 2610.1(300
11260 6160 6620 16420 12340 l U
... 65
6760 96 240
'
179 64 3 Z
0710
20
,,G Ip~ W'
6 01
96.1
I160
10120 22 400
13210 '130 17 9'0 '6620 120 460
W04 7610 6O4W . 132Z30 1067O0 13%10 17990 1420 1361IC 10780' 1380 1512 -U0256 -1160 9 644
670091040001l MCF1 000 17 646'170 126
11 121 120 1
its 21
1
IIB 121
115
1@''' 1102
N;. s'c W'5 1-
11
122
1-9 ?P
111 12
116 1
l016
6461 TCS
120. LA. 01
1171
120
117
'
Il
'
'
114
W,,, 'CS L.P

'oLI01, Coo."lo,
12' 12
li
I1
10 ''6
"6
ll
Il
CL1~
L,' C~ q
'
IF". 2
]Extemal Forces and Moments in Layout Point L,
K90MC and K90MCE

No.o Cyl. Firing order 1 4 5 132-4 -4-3-25 6 -5-3-42-6
7
1-7-2-54-3-6
6 1-8-3-47-2-5-6
10
11
12
1-9-2-71- 9-4-3-6-5-4- 3-10-2-7S 5- a
1-9- 6-4-i 1-12-5-7. 10-2- 8-5- 3-111-4-9. 2-10-84 7-311
External Forces in kN 0
0 o
External Moments in kNm

Oroer:
2293b A879 c 2nd1 a,b and c see text 1ist a 728 6074 c
I
0 4225 c 1102 766 189
1145
1
1
1456
948
801
4401
Guide Force H-moments in kNm
MC
1 x No. ofcy'. 2 x No of cyl. 2292 448 64 2228 181 1659 1273
_
895
528
362
276
193
86
3 x No ofcyl.
MCE Order.
1 x No of cyl. 2 x N-. of cyl. 2065 2111 1692 118
___
_
_
1366
1001
684
503
344
236
500 79
251
3;No~otcy
.j
Guide Force X-moments in kNm
131
2nd 3rd 4th 5th
i
1 1
897
140 160 0 288 57 117 0 38
1 285
1 1 117 0 413 254 12 0 5 37 !
431
1 22 11343 i
74
0 1699 1046 3064
4487
13 402 4890 3803 1
570
0 1123 0 6036
3:1
23 '53 4020 4698
121 1741 11016 562 906 0 1 135 241 1 57 0 0
0 0 1436 1812 0
6th
7th
L
_
0 1
1
3113 128
86
39 17 197! 136 5
1
1 1 1
0
10 3 0 172 29
450
30 36
I
1
0
827 0 241 0 104
2916
1276 69 181 10
5254
0
_354
6th
__ "_ 10th 11th 121h
131
12 4 26
341 0 0
66 16 0
MCE Order
1st 2nd 3__d 41h th5 h273 6th 7th
_ _
1[__
760
__
1
_
496
86 0 515
241 617 302 106 0 58 444
1 1
0 430 547 816 0 0 0
1 1
365
78
7231 2806 1 121 87 42
63 0 915 9'3 2903 0 10
379 45
482 0 605 0 5721 0 887
314 81! 821 3623 1 4463 2974 1 13691
0 0 773 1633 0 5357 0
216 4407 3604 458 32
I
1 1 1 _
8th
9th 10th
L
1
I
126
0
49 92__
1F 284
198
312 79
6
39
22 273
0
4 0 215 ! 36
40
16 16
0
311
77j
231 131 F._.
396
442 0
,11,
12th
2o
o
16 0 45
o
6
1 70
6
-s i7
13Ci
13_
o
0
20__
321 32
5-B-4
Appendix 5-B - Slow-Speed Diesel Data
External Forces and Moments inLayout Point L,
K90MC-2
No. ofCy. Firing order 4 1.3.2-4 $ 1-4-3-25 1 1.5-42-6 7 1-7-2-54-. 8 1-8-3-47-2-5-6 9 1-9-2-73-6-5-41 10 11 12 1-9-4-6I3-10-2,7. 5- 8 1-96-4- -12-5-710-2- 8.5- 3.11-4-97-3-11 2-10-6-8
External Forces in kN 0

IOrder:
tsi a
- 2nd
j 4854 C 6043.c
2547 b
809
204
1224
76,2
210
1272
4 38
1617
j ]
1053
797 i
a. b and c:see text
MC
Order:,__
1 x No.ofcyl 2 x No. of Cyl S 2090 405 59 2007 165 1496 68 1
___
__
1150 1 810
__
480
_
331 i r 252 i 176
3x No.ofcyl.
'MC
1st 2nd 3rd 4til 51h 6th 7rn 8h1 9th 11th 12in
IVIC 807 366 142 0 259 455 106 0 34 16 15 0 256 458 500 107 Dl 51 373 230 11 0 5 33 I
i
1
1_
0 388 '1317 58 903 1 1194 8268 0 0 0 1 160 219 52 1 0 0 1 2839 115 77 35 31 15 '0 125 4 1 1 1 67 0 1511
J
1
403 33 357
513 0 999
334 60 136
1 1 L 1 T
0 0 1277 1652 0 737 0 320 310 0 0 0
954 4469 2769 r3425 j 01405 1 9 27 0 33 i 3 11 o 11 15 8 k 4 27 24'
0 3666 $s37 1 4232 0_1_263 746 1152 0 63 22 16 0 9 9 5 0 4
,_
r
__r
5-B-5 '
I
I I
_ I __
I _________
5-B-5
Extemal F:cs and Momi-is ii, a? yut Point l.,
L90MC and L90MCE

Firintg ordor 1-3-2-4 1-4-3-25.6 1-5-3-41-7-2-54
4-36
12
1 0-2- 8-5-i 3- 1-4-
1-6 3-47-2-5.6
1-92-7: -946 365. -1-2- 3 1 7-
5- 8
7-3- 11
1-9. - . 1 2-5-7. 8-0 -i' -1 .- -
2-10-6-8
Externai Forces in kN
0 0
F
External Moments in kNm , , itr:r

is, 1956 b 621 5990 c 1
--
!
0 4167 9.40
I
7r 5
F
I
808 790
90
-0
IL
2nd-
, b 'd
'
-4812 c 1
'
>
162 0
0-
976 4
1242 0
'
Guide Force H-moments in krrn

}
1 55 1898 1455
________
Order,
Tc
2582 511 Tt-7----..... 2326
573
i102
--
1 3.
No of cyl. 1 o 0 DCy. .o c ..
__01_ 411__
219__
205 . .. .
1 ..
_____I
MCE___
I-K f cy, 2 0
287
1
1
199
134__
1565
1145
_ _
11
_
782
_ _
1
_
573
_ _ _ _
1
_ _
391
_ _ _ _
1
_ _
268~
_ _ _
2 xNo of cyl.
3xNotc -)I
I-I_
Guide Force Xiornoments in kNm
mC
t 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th
10th
1C23 243 194 0 329
325 303 683 132 0 65 472 290 14 0 6 41
211 1234 1021 0 0
38
163
3507 1461
8492 0 2065 t 1178 I 3507 0 L 1
511 22 488 5510 4353 5_4 3 41 14 13
0 1365 0 6909 0 _ 0 1
423 40 186 4529 5378 6 1458 79
I650 1
F
0 O 1745 2041 0 6D09 .
578
134 ..
F
98
44
43 75 -8 0
0 021 275 65 0 0
1
0 4 0! 196 33
401
19
404
27
0 12
OF
20
11 6 5
388
0 0 0
223 155 5
11th I2 h
'
5 30
MCE
Oroer-
1oo
4th 5th 6th 7th 8 91h..
-
2no
3rd
ist~~~~ 181 110 0 312 590 0 .

'23'
867
275
-
6
F
2-,i- 72
17 -~~!___
_ _28
72_3j
433
16! 276 4964 4132 525 37 46 19
551
358
o
F
225 386 119 0 66 508 325
157
697 919 0 0 0 226! 557 91
922 31601 139 1 100 48 44
0 1167 1062 : 3328 1 0 1? 0
0 771 0 6558 0 1016 0 1 126
30 105 4080 5104 3407 1568 89

is 15
0 988 1839 0 6138
0 453
5618
105, 7
25
312
193 244
5
1
36
0' 41
604
01
1th 11th -
6 36 0J
is6
_6B
5-13-6
Appendix 5-B - Slow-Speed Diesel Data External Forces and Moments in Layout Point L,
S 8 0M C a nd S 8 0 MC E
No. o CyI.
Firing orier
_7
_1_10_1_11_12
-__
10
4
1.3-2-4
5
1-4-3-25
6 1-5-3-42-6 1-7-2-54-3-
,
1-8-3 6 1 ?.
1.
11
-410-2- 8-57.3-11 1 12-5-73-11-4-92.10-6
2-4-
4 3-10-2-78
External Forces in kN
_____0
0~

Order-
r
407 1 4 41 C i 0 i 2881 c 242 836 813 0 835 940 814 0 541 551 0 0 i
'282b 2nd 3327 c 1 a,b and c:see text

h-2301630T-' 63 122 843 279 '
i
1 x No. of yl.1_
2262 421 82
'
484
325
245
2 x No. of ^yt. 3 x No. ofcyt
MCE
Order* 1 xNo. of cyl. 2 No ofcyI 2045 2084 222 1650 96
__ _
I
1
9130 31 .
!
625 443 j
-__
286
191 -_ _
465
8-4
I_
ofcl 3 No.I
Guide Force X-moments in kNm __ IVC __ _ __

Order 2nd -3rc 41h 5th 61h
7th
-348 1126 796 0 0

0
51 !0-T i?~
__ -- __34 101 i 1232"1 2262 180 30 I 22 130 101 8 1 0 15T9 919 2263 __04
4
__
o 1247 0 5291 0 711 1
_
0 . ISS 1592 0 4571
o-2.402 177 0 254 44Z2 101 I 0 31 15 0
501 623 103 50.
'
114 2250 11445 895 198 81
1
-
172 3523 4120 2537 1 50 59 14 8 5
81h 9th
I~'53
11th 12th Order: e2rd 3rC 4t?,

_______
213 ... to 0 5 4
'
14 197 46' 0 0
0 20 0 130 33
139
29 12~ 12 149
0 1 20 1 9 0 I 1
297
278
0 0 0
675 T
214 153 405 93 0 50

-
0 107 ' 04 720 1 0 0 0 254 62 0 i
128 31 ' l
-
___
! 1
440 35 1461
429
285
1 -2
115 a__ 240 447 107
0
1025 81 . 2137 0
F20461
1701
30 0 13
0 20 . 809 112 0 13186 49643891 0 i 2568 /571 1165 o 25 19 I
0
1034 14 0 4627 0 359
6tr
1845 29C9
7-- - 8-. "-_______"_
378
35 : 13 0 5
68
0 25 0 133 26
86
j
7?
15
j
-
111 12:r
28 177 104 7
38 17 12
0
9 0 I
'1
5
0
0
C-
Ship Vibration Design Guide External Forces and Moments inLayout Point L,
K80MC and K80MCE

No. ol Cyl. Firing order 4 1.3.2-4 5 1-4.3-25
I
8 1-5-3.42-6
7 1.7-2.54-3-6
9 16-7-3. 5-8-2-49
10 1- 9-4-63-10-2-7. 5- 6
12 1-9- 6-4-I 1-12-5-710-2- 8-5- 3-11-4-97-3-11 '2-10-6-8
1-8-2-64-5-3-7
External Forces in kN SC External Moments in kNm

i I Order: Isla 1 1587 b 2nd 1 3429 c a, o and c. see text 504 4269 c
0 2970 c
300 862
503 0
1034 969
008 0
669 588
0 0
Guide Force H-moments in kNm MC

1rxNo. of cyl 2 x Nc ot cy). 3 x Nc. ol cyl
:
1630 319
46
1
1
I
1588 129
1183 69
907
638
-
3T7
258
197
MCE orao.I1x
No. of cyl. 1467
357
I
1503
179
I_
1205
84
_I_ 713
J
488 i 359 245 169
973 r.
2 x No ofcyl. i
3xNootcyI of
56 56
Guide Force X-moments in kNm MC Order:

2nd 3r0 4th 5th 6th 7__
it-
839 75 114 0 205 360 84 27

47
203 93 401 84 0 40295

181
0 7 65: 724] 644 0 01 0

126
21 19 792 1831 146 24
[ 1 1
203 i -0-7508 I 2976 j 914 0 27

0
417 21 1446 926 723 1617 67'

34
406 0 801 0 4275 0 5891

0
__2_T_
12 i1l l 2851 1 3329 2067 907

50
0 0 1024 1289 0 3724 0

252
1 :
0
10
9tr
10tIr
9
0
172
41
19
116
9
0
266
11
17
0
'3
7
243
0
1 12h
12 C
4 26
0. 0 01
80 5
51 84
9 94
7 0
4 3
___
0 0
MCE Order.:
541 172 0 102! 172' 3 53 344 228
2nd 3rd 4th
330 61 0
411 215 75
5it
:'57 7th 8th
loth -11 th 12th
-0
194
0
J, 14
0
41 316
11 5
28a 388 580
0
0!
1 j
83 424 1648
138
25: 01
25
I
0 272 2678 0 28
11
866
;
775 835
684
1648
4048
. ' 632
0 429 0
55 59 2586
3153
'2106
0 549 1160 3795
0
0
01
72 33
15
973' 16 10
4
262~-
223
650 4
0
571 o T 02
0
19
161 100 O
6
64
103
12
___
22 0
0
__
315 0
04
____0
32
115
5-B-8
External Forces and Moments
in Layout Point L,
L80MC and L80MCE

No.fCy,.
Firing order
5
1-4-3.25
1
1-5-3-.42-8
7
1.7.2-54-3-6
8
1-8.2-64-5-3-7
9
1.6.7.3 5-8-2-4-
10
1. 9-4-6. 3-10-2-75- a
11
1-. -4. 6-510-27-3-11
12
1-12-5.7. 3-11-4-92-10-6-8
11-3.2.4 S!9
External Forces in kN 0 1 External Moments in kNm

Order
_
j
0
2931 c
_____
_ 1376 b 1 st a 3384 C : 2nd a. b and C: see text
I 437 4213 C
260
851
436 0
896 956
874 0I
580 560
0
0
MC
I
OrderNO O Cy, i 2 xNo. ofcyt 3 x No of cy
,__ 1814 359 51 i 1792 1333 77 1022 !' 717

I
422
-
288
219
_
153
_
MCE
Ordor: 1 x NO of cyl. I 2 x No.of cyl.
_1_
____,
1627 402 63!
1695 202
I
I
1358 95
1097
804
550
404
276 .
190
3xNo ofcyl.'
1st 2nc 3rd

__41 _
719;
170 136 0
228
212 479 93
0
147 866 717
136
43 94a 2038
228 1
0 07 1 1 3312
469
48 1730 1032
457
12R3..[
28 132 3174
oJ
0 1225 1434
15tr 231
6th 7th 9P) 10lo I111n 121m 406 941 0 30 53 13 0
0
46 332 204 10 0 4 29
0
01 0 142] 192 45 0 0
164
27 0 11 21 129
1032
0 30 01 10 0 57 93
l i
816e
1823 75 38 29 12 10 105
0 1 959 1 0 1 4824 1 0 663 0 19 0
3757
2330 1021 56 14 8 4 3
_
0
4198 0 2831 272 0 0 0
!MCEJ
'Orde,:
89
B
0
ist 2nd 3rd_ 4th St1 6W' 71M 7 8l 9VI 1o1 lith
1 I
607 134 75 0 219 413 101 0 39 74 16 0

'
193 167 2M 83 0 46 356 228 13 0 5
116
478 543 0 0 0 159 251 64 0 0
115 34
523
1827 I5 28 0 12. 28 6 182 113 7
'
1931 3968 38 0 1 335 _ 955 2970 926 772 976 0 1857 32 81 0 42 12 38
3861 0 _ 529 _ 5 I 4563 0 1 712 1 0 1 26 0 10 0
256 22 73 2846 3554 2374 1097
63
18 11 5 4
0 0 078 1286 0 4277 0 318 356 0 0 0
38
0 72 118
17 13 130
5-B-9
SULZER RTA MARINE DIESEL ENGINES Engine Data

Reference Conditions
ISO-CONDITIONS Suction air temperature Charge air cooling water inlet temperature T :F barometric pressure 27 'C 27 'C 1bar - 750 mm Hg
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS specified by classification societies Suction air temperature Charge air cooling water inlet temperature Total barometric pressure REMARKS
-
45'C 32 'C (sea water) 1 bar - 750 mm Hg
Tropical conditions correspond to the limiting values for engine operation without restrictions, such as power reduction etc. The ancillary systems are therefore laid out for tropical conditions. Besides the ambient conditions, treatment of fuel oil and condition for cooling and lubricating systems also influence engine performance. The given engine data is therefore only valid if the respective requirements are obse-ved. ISO-CONDITIONS According to ISO-International Standard 3046/1. ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS Corresponds to the term TROPICAL CONDITIONS mentioned in this booklet.
5-B-10
I Engine Type Bore Stroke Ratings RltoR4 are mm mm RTA 84 M 840 2900 E E .S .Sc RTA 72 720 2500 RTA 62 620 2150 E .5 E RTA 52 520 1800
of the field of
admissible engine ratings
~r
.3 R1 R2 78 56 4 56 91 R2 91 F31 R3 66 R1 4 66
W (3
UJC3
T
R IF 1061 R2 106 3 76 R4 76 R1 126 R2 126 R3 91 R4 91
Speed Engine Power P
78
kW/Cyl
3460
1900 2490 1900 258013380 2580
2570 1410
1860
1410 1920
1900 1050 1360 2580 1430 1850
1050 1430
1330
740
960
740 1000
BHPICyI 4700 Specific Fuel Consumption *1 without Efficiency-Booster kWh 100.% 9 kWh
85 % P
3500 1920 2530
1810 1000 1300
170 125 167 12
159 1117
169 124
162 119 160 118
171 ,160 126 169 124 118 160 118
170 1 163 125 167 123 120 162
1731162 127 170 125

-
171
16b
174 128
163
173:
156
159t166 123117 122
~119
162 119
-
16 124
-
163 120
-
171
126 -
163 120
I
170 125
165 121
SHP h Specific Fuel Consumption with Efficiency-Booster h 100% P kWh Tol.+ 3 % -. 9_
165
156 115 156
163 120 162 I-I_
158 116 156 115
166 122 165
158 116 158
165 121 163 120
159 117 158 116
167 123 166
159 117 159
166 122 165 121
160 118 158 117
169 124 167
160 118 160
187 123 166
162 119 160 118
BHP h 121 . 163 -kW h 85%P B HPh Number of Cylinders *21 Remarks:
*1) -
120
115j1 119
121 '116
122] 117
123[118 ,122
4-10 and 12
4-8
4-8
4-8
Reference conditions: ISO-Standard - Fuel oil: LCV - 42707 kJ/kg "21 - Specific Cylnder tube oil consumption
see page A 2-1
for other oata see page C4--1 to C4-5 see page C3-1
5-Wi-Il
I7
IE
pI $1
NN
01
u/5 a~w3 PKMP1-
-Pv--
I*j
-!&v3
--
V~ g.-I
':N
~,~
2
0 N N
-146mw NPAIvl F
P~o@ " 4 @" -8 O =

-
. _vN
PP.N
4- 1 -
(-QN N
-j"lP*~
0-d
~
H'F
N'
Ut
b40l
P'fh
~C
_
ajopuwllJAZ)~e nq u N
lo
_ _ _ _ ---
Nd~
pe~g~u.'
too
P5-B-12
t~
4:
CHAPTER SIX
":"
MEASUREMENT
AND
ANALYSIS
OF SHIPBOARD
VIBRATION
hull and main machinery vibration, as discussed in previous chapters, are associated with shaft, engine and propeller frequencies and their harmonics. During the design phase, these frequencies and the effect of these frequencies on the structural and mechanical response of the hull and main machinery are considered and an attempt is made to predict their response for evaluation against the established criteria or specifications. When doing so, an assumed sinusoidal driving function to the mass-elastic system involved produces an assumed sinusoidal response. Unfortunately, the actual response will generally indicate a strong modulation, with its severity significantly increased by adverse sea conditions, depth of water and ship maneuvers. Thus, a real-time record, further complicated by the presence of propeller and machinery harmonics, hull pressure forces and dynamic magnifications in the vicinity of resonances, will produce a complex and variable record. It should be apparent then, that the measurement and analysis of shipboard vibration, associated with i's prediction and evaluation, can be quite involved. In this chapter, the problems associated with the subject are discussed in a manner that should provide the user with an understanding of the background and development of the current state-of-the-art of measurement and analysis of shipboard vibration. It will also emphasize the importance of standardizing the procedures for conducting ship trials and vibration measurement and analysis methods.
S hipboard
6.1 Background
Prior to and ouring World War II, the measurement of shipboard vibration was generally carried out by means of a "Geiger," a mechanical seismic instrument developed to measure torsional vibration and adaptable to measure hull vibration. The movement of the instrument, relative to a seismic mass, or the variation in angular motion, relative to the constant rotational speed of a built-in flywheel, produced a graphic trace on a spring-driven chart strip. The trace obtained was a real-time record. Frequency was determined by correlation with a marker actuated by time interval or an RPM contact. Analysis of the record was performed manually. The instrument was calibrated by the use of a fixed displacement vibration table, or, in the case of the torsional calibration, driven by a fixed displacement torsional calibrator. The instrument could only provide a single record, at one location, for a given run. The vibration recorded represented the displacement amplitude. The quantity measured was the peak value, also referred to as the maximum repetitive amplitude (MRA).
6-1
6.1.1 SNAME Vibration Program

Shortly after World War II, a research program sponsored by the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers (SNAME) and the Maritime Administration (MARAD) led to the first "Code for Shipboard Hull Vibration Measurements" in 1964, [6-11, and to the original shipboard vibration instrumentation package developed for MARAD in 1965. The instrumentation package included a series of ,,Aocity transducers, signal conditioning power supplies and amplifiers, and a multi-channel oscillograph. The Code designated the locations for the transducers and the trial conditions under which the tests were to be conducted. The velocity signals were usually integrated and up to eighteen channels recorded, side-by-side, on the oscillograph for each run. The displacement amplitudes could be readily compared, for each location, as shown on the strip chart. The analysis was performed manually, as was done on the Geiger. The MRA was readily observed. The MARAD equipment reduced the testing time and provided more useful information, but was bulky, heavy and contained many vacuum tubes, thus requiring considerable maintenance and frequent calibration. An updated ver-ion of this system was later developed witm transistorized signal conditioning power suppies and amplifiers, which greatly reduced the size and weight of the system and increased its reliabil'ty. Simultaneously, the revised "Code for Shipboard Vibration Measurements," Code C- [6-2], was published in 1975. Data was still taken on a multi-channel, direct-recording oscillograph and/or on magnetic tape for later laboratory analysis. In all cases, the reported data represented the MRA, which was considered the appropriate quantity for the evaluation of dynamic stress against fatigue limits, or human tolerance to vibratory motion. Most of the data on which the present criteria has been established was obtained on ti-is type of equipment. SNAME Code C-4, "Shipboard Local Structures and Machinery Vibration Measurements," [6-3], was published in 1976 and the SNAME "Shipboard Vibration and Noise Guidelines," [6-4], was published in 1980. During this same period, very fast electronic analyzers also became available at a reasonable cost. Known as Fast Fourier Transform (FFT), these analyzers conveniently reduced the manual labor involved in data analysis but did not read the data in the same manner. This frequently led to significant differences in rported data. Resolte. _.i of this problem is still under study.
6.1.2 ISO Standards

Because of the importance of developing standardized methods of conducting shipboard vibration studies and the necessity of establishing uniformly acceptable vibration criteria for the design and acceptance of ship and machinery vibration, a working group, "Ship Vibrations," was established in 1970, under Technical Committee 108, "Shock and Vibration" and Subcommittee 2, "Machines, Vehicles and Structures," of the International Standards Organization, (ISO/TC 108iSC 24W6i 2). To date, three ISO Standards have been published: ISO 4867, "Code for the Measurement and Repoiting of Shipboard Vibratio:n Data," published December 1, 1984, 16-51.
6-2
Measurement and Analysis of Shipboard Vibratio, ISO 4868, "Code for the Measurement and Reporting of Local Vibration Data of Ship Structures and Equipment," published November 15, 1984, [6-61. ISO 6954, "Mechanical Vibration and Shock Guidelines for thz Overall Evaluation of Vibration in Merchant Ships," published December 15, 1984, [6-7]. These standards have been based, in part, on the corresponding SNAME documents, [6-2], [6-3], anu [6-41. The most significant modifications relate to the SNAME Code, C-I, [6-21, in which measurement locations on large, direct drive diesels have been added. The vibration criteria of ISO 6954 and SNAME T & R Bulletin 2-25, [6-41, published in January, 1980, are identica'. At this time we may also note that these ISO Standards are frequently used for specification and test purposes. 6.1.2.1 The Use of Shipboard Vibration Standards When considering the measurement and analysis of shipboard vibration, it is particularly important to question the ieliability of newly introduced instrumentation in pro iding satisfactory data that can be effectively used in complying with the ISO Standards. The following, taken from 16-81, is considered useful in understanding when and how the standards arc used and the proper us-ige of alternate instrumentation: ISO 4867, "Code for the Measurement and Reporting of Shipboard Vibration Data" has iCeen developed to provide the basis for obtaining comparative data on ship vibration under uniform test conditions. As stated, "Such data are necessary to est,,blish uniformly the vibration charact,.xistics of hull and propulsion shaft systems and to provide a oa..is for design predictions, improvements and comparison against vibration reference leveis" Thus, for purposes of reporting test data, specific frequencies and amplitudes related to hull and main ma.lchinery This procedure also permits the response characteristics are identified. identification of sources of potential problems, should the need arise darng sh ip trials. ISO 4868, "Code for the Measurement and Reporting of Local Vibration Data of Ship Structures and Equipment." As stated, "the term 'iocal vibration,' a used in the shipbuilding industry, applies to the dynamic response of a structual element, an assembly of structural elements, machinery or equipment, which vibrates at an amplitude significantly greater than that of the basic hull girder at the location." Also, as stated, "Such data are necessary to establish unif)raily the vibration characteristics present in various compartments on board ship and to ,ovide a basis for design predictions, improvements and comparison igainst environmental vibration reference levels or criteria relative to reliability (of nachines), safety (of structures) and habitability." This International Standaid .is concerned with local vibration measured on structural el-nments, superstructur, decks, bulkheads, masts, machines, foundations, equipment, etc., and only relaics to the measurement and reporting of the local vibration of the
6-3
Ship Vibration Design Guide structure or equipment mounted thereon. Concern over local vibration may be caused by: a. Stresses due to the vibration, for example, in the structure, in the equipment or attachments; b. The necessity of maintaining trouble-free operation of a machine or other equipment that might be jeopardized by the malfunction or degradation of components; c. Physical strain on man (habitability and performance); d. Effects of the vibration on its environment, such as adjacent instruments, machines, equipment, etc." ISO 6954, "Guidelines for the Overall Evaluation of Vibration in Merchant Ships," applies to the overall evaluation of the vibration of ship structures. Evaluation of vibration exposure specifically with respect to human safety, performance capability and comfort experienced by crew members should be based on vibration measurements specified in ISO 2631/1, "Guide for the Evaluation of Iuman Exposure to Whole-body Vibration - Part 1: General requirements." For convenience, the Annex of ISO 6954 deals with the compatibility with ISO 2631/1 and states: "Shipboard vibration generally approximates to narrow-band vibration and a crest factor of 2.5 is commonly encountered. In these circumstances, the maximum repetitive vibration is more appropriate than the Root Mean Square This (rms) value with regard to evaluation of overall ship vibration. International Standard evaluates overall shipboard vibration in terms of maximum repetitive values and, for comparison with rms values, the crest factor shall be taken into account. "In ISO 2631/1, the effect of vibration on human beings is evaluated by reference to curves of rms acceleration, taking the evaluation to apply over a wide range of crest factors. "If the vibration value is below the guidelines specified in this International Standard, it will also satisfy the guidelines in ISO 2631/1 with respect to crew exposure to whole body vibration." The above referenced Codes (ISO 4867 & 4868) and Guidelines (ISO 6954) may be used in specifying and/or evaluating shipboard vibrat;on against selected vibration reference levels. These codes and guidelines are applicable to ship hulls, main propulsion machinery systems, local structures, machines and equipment. As noted in the guidelines, "evaluation of vibration exposure, specifically with respect to human safety, performance capability and comfort
6-4
Measurement and Analysis of Shipboard Vibration

experienced by crew members should be based on vibration measurements specified in ISO 2631/1." However, it is also noted, that if the vibration level is below the guidelines specified in ISO 6954, it will also satisfy the guidelines in ISO 2631/1. The guidelines given in ISO 6954 reflect the experience of the international shipbuilding community prior to the establishment of ISO/TCIO8/SC2/WG2 in 1970 and is based on oscillographic data, represented by the maximum repetitive amplitude (MRA). A typical vibration recording of blade-frequency hull vibration obtained under the specified trial conditions is shown on Figure 6-3. The original more complex recording has been filtered to isolate the blade-frequency response. The envelope shown on the record represents the MRA for that frequency, which should be used for evaluation purposes against the guidelines shown in ISO 6954. Due to the heavy modulation of the signal, the average rms crest factor was determined to be 2.5, ( CIF ), for the hull girder vibration and the longitudinal vibration of the bull gear, and agrees with the value .given in the note under paragraph 3 of ISO 6954. Although it is not appropriate to specify any particular instirumentation to be used for test purposes, it is necessary that whatever equipment is used should give the same result. Thus, if a spectral analysis is preferred, the average rms value at any particular run should be multiplied by the 2.5 crest factor for comparison with a typical oscillographic recording and with the guidelines. As an alternative, a second set of guidelines adj, sted downward by the same 2.5 crest factor could be used for direct comparison with the avc:age rms spectra. The peak rms spectrum should not be used since it does not represent the MRA and was found to differ significantly on different instruments as frequency and speed v ried. Significant variations in crest factor values can be expected a the presence of harmonics of blade-frequency and in adverse sea conditions. I lowever, ni or variations can be expected in crest factor values at some alternate measurement locations ard on smaller ships, which would produce greater signal modulation in the same seaway. If the vibration observed is found to be questionable with regard to contractual requirements, filtering and/or direct recording is recommended for a more exact evaluation. Tb provide the capability to accomplish this after the trials, it is recommended that all test data be recorded on tap[e. Finally, it is submitted, that although the criteria provided in the guidelines (ISO 6954) is based on the subjective evaluation of seafaring personnel, it does reflect the state-of-the-art of vibration evaluation of ship hulls and niain prdpulsion machinery systems and would meet the criteria of ISO 2631/1. However, in their usage, as in all similir cases, standards are treated as absolutes, with a "go/no go" philosophy. Thus, if we all used oscillographic data, as was necessarily done in the past, and on which the criteria were established, there would be good agreement on test results, just as we had good agreement in average rms spectra, as noted in Genoa, in 1986 when comparative analyses of a given tape were made by members of the ISO Working Group. Our remaining problem is to keep in mind that which our criteria represent (MRA) and when we employ, or propose to employ, other instrumentation or techniques, that we do so with our eye on the standard as it exists. It can be modified and updated in future issues, but this should not be controlled by the requirement for the use of particular instrumentation without adequate justification.
6-5
6.2 Instrumentation
This section will provide the information on mechanical instruments, vibration transducers, signal conditioning and recording equipment that would have to be considered in planning shipboard vibration measurements. It treats the various types of equipment in general terms. When specific equipment is selected, reference will have to be made to the manufacturer's instructions for the actual operation of the equipment.
6.2.1 Mechanical Instruments

There have been many mechanical and optical instruments developed for measuring vibration, most of them before electronic means were highly developed. Two of the most common are still used and are briefly described. 6.2.1.1 Reeds These instruments consist of metal reeds attached to a case that is held hard against a vibrating object. If the natural frequency of the reed coincides with the frequency of vibration, the reed's amplitude will be magnified to the point where it can be seen. One type of reed instrument (Frahm reeds) has a number of reeds of different lengths (and frequencies) attached to the same case, and the reed with the highest amplitude is closest to the frequency of vibration. Other instruments use a tunable reed where the length can be adjusted. The amplitude of the reed can be calibrated to give the amplitude of vibration (Westinghouse Reed Vibrometer). 6.2.1.2 Askania This is a hand-held instrument with a probe that is pressed against a vibrating object. The relative displacement between the probe and the casing is mechanically amplified and displayed on a 1-inch wide strip of paper as a time history, from which the amplitudes and frequencies of vibration can be determined. Low frequency signals are often unreliable due to the difficulty in holding the instrument still.
6.2.2 Transducers
Several of the basic types of transducers used for vibration measurements are discussed. The theory of operation is intentionally very brief, but the features that must be considered in their application are covered in more detail. The type of transducers chosen will depend on what type of information is required. 6.2.2.1 Accelerometers The most common type of accelerometer is the piezoelectric type. This consists of a mass mounted on a crystal, which generates an electrical charge proportional to the acceleration of the mass. It is generally small in size and models can be found that can measure from 1 Hz to 10 kHz. They require a charge amplifier and the cables from the transducers to the amplifiers must be coaxial. If the cables between the transducers and amplifiers are long and/or are subject to vibration, a charge converter should be inserted in the cable a few feet from the transducer. A two-conductor shielded cable can be used between the charge converter and the amplifier.
6-6

If frequencies down to D.C. must be measured, a strain gage or piezoresistive accelerometer can be used. The strain gage type has the mass mounted to a flexural or other support that bends or deflects when the accelerometer vibrates. Strain gages are used on the support to measure deflections. The piezoresistive types have the mass mounted to piezoresistive elements that act much as strain gages do. These must be used in conjunction with strain gage amplifiers. Four conductor-shielded cables must be used between the gages and the amplifiers. Another type of accelerometer is the servo accelerometer. This type contains a seismic mass with a coil of wire around it. Motion of the mass with respect to the case due to acceleration is detected and a current imposed on the coil to keep the mass moving with the case. The amount of the current is the signal output. The frequency response of one brand of this type is from D.C. to approximately 500 Hz. It has a built-in amplifier and requires a D.C. power supply. Acceleration signals are suitable for analyzing many types of machinery problems where high frequencies are of interest, such as bearing wear, because the high frequencies are accentuated. However, if lower frequencies are of interest, such as a once per revolution signal, that signal may be lost in a multitude of high frequency signals due to bearings, flow noise, etc. In the analysis section, some techniques will be discussed to overcome this problem.
6.2.2.2 Velocity Gages

A velocity gage is constructed with a magnetic core mounted on springs, that oscillates within a coil, generating a signal, which is proportional to velocity. It generally has an internal resonant frequency of 5 or 6 Hz, is highly damped to eliminate a high output at the resonance and has a useful frequency range of about 4 to 600 Hz. The lower frequencies require a correction but above approximately 10 Hz, the output is essentially linear. Two conductor shielded cables are sufficient for velocity gages. The velocity signal, and alternatively the displacement signal if it is integrated, is usually the most appropriate quantity to measure for ship vibration problems if high and very low frequencies are not of interest.
6.2.2.3 Displacement Gages

The most common type of gage measuring displacement directly is the non-contact proximity probe. It generally consists of a proximitor and a probe. The proximitor generates a high frequency signal, which produces a magnetic field around the probe. The closeness of a metal "target" alters the eddy currents, thus modulating the high frequency signal, which is demodulated by the proximitor producing a signal that is proportional to the distance between the probe and the target. The frequency response is from D.C. to several kHz depending on the frequency of the carrier. The proximitor requires a D.C. power supply. Cable between the proximitor and the recorder or signal conditioner can be two conductor shielded. The proximity probe is used extensively in rotating machinery studies to measure the relative displacement between stationary and rotating parts. If the actual displacement of a rotating body is required, the displacement of the casing, or whatever the probe is mounted to, must be measured by some other means. The most severe limitation of these is that they measure only a range of a few to 50 or 100 mils displacement, unless the probe is quite large.
6-7
Ship Vibration Design Guide There are other displacement measuring transducers that have each end mounted to objects to measure the relative distance between them. Two such devices are the Linear Variable Displacement Transducer (LVDT) and the Linear Motion Transducer (LMT).
6.2.2.4 Strain Gages

Strain gages are resistive elements that change their resistance when they are stretched or compressed. They are mounted with an adhesive to the object and in the direction in which strain is to be measured. The change in resistance is small so the measurement is usually made with the gage electrically connected in a Wheatstone bridge. A D.C. power supply of 5 to 10 volts is required. Often this is built into strain gage amplifiers. If the strain in a shaft is being measured, telemetry equipment or slip rings must be used. The arrangements of the gages for measuring axial, torsional and bending strains in the shaft are all different, and must be precisely positioned. The techniques for installation, calibration and measurement are quite involved and require experienced personnel.
6.2.3 Signal Conditioners

Signal conditioning equipment is used to amplify signals to a level where they can be conveniently recorded or displayed. Depending on the application, they may also include power supplies for the transducers, filters, calibration features, integrators and parts of Wheatstone bridge circuits.
6.2.3.1 Differential Amplifiers

Differential amplifiers in their simplest form use voltage inputs and merely amplify them to a level suitable for recording. The most common additional feature found on these is an internal calibration signal, which is fed into the amplifier. This could be a sinusoidal signal or a D.C. step of known value. This is convenient for calibration of the amplifier and recording equipment, but does not calibrate the sensitivity of the transducer. That would have to be done by other means or provided by the transducer manufacturer. The output of this or any type of amplifier is usually a voltage that can be used as input to high impedance devices only. This would include tape recorders, many strip chart recorders, spectral analyzers, oscilloscopes, etc. The most common low impedance device used is an oscillograph that uses galvanometers. These are designed such that the display is proportional to the input current rather than voltage. Special "galvo outputs" are required on the amplifiers to drive these devices.
6.2.3.2 Charge Amplifiers

Charge amplifiers are used with piezoelectric accelerometers to convert the charge generated by the accelerometer to a voltage proportional to acceleration. Some of these have a feature that allows the use of remote charge converters, in which case the amplifiers become basically differential amplifiers. In addition, they provide a D.C. power supply superimposed on the signal cables to power the remote charge converters. If remote charge converters are used, it is possible to use a separate power supply and differential amplifiers, provided the charge converters have the appropriate connectors.
6-8
Measurement and Analysis of Shipboard Vibration Since acceleration signals often have large amplitude high frequency signals, which are not of interest, charge amplifiers often have built-in filters to limit the amplifier output to 50, 100, 500 Hz, etc. If velocity or displacement is desired, some amplifiers can integrate the signal once to get velocity, or twice to get displacement. If this feature is used, the characteristics of the integrators at low frequencies should be checked. Often the transducer can be used at lower frequencies than the integrators. Charge amplifiers, like differential amplifiers, may have internal calibration signals and/or galvanometer outputs as well as voltage outputs.
6.2.3.3 Strain Gage Amplifiers

A strain gage amplifier is basically a differential amplifier, but usually includes most of the following features. It should have a D.C. power supply rated at up to 10 volts. It usually has a shunt calibration switch that places a calibration resistor across one arm of the bridge. This changes the resistance of that arm to correspond to a known strain. The strain gage amplifier also has a bridge balance network that adjusts the voltage across adjacent arms to zero the output when the snucture being measured is not under load. Again it is recommended that only experienced personnel be used for strain measurements.
6.2.3.4 Filters
The most common type of filter used in ship vibration measurements is a low pass filter, which passes all frequencies below a set frequency and blocks all those above it. As mentioned before, this can be used to eliminate high frequencies such as from bearings, flow, etc. The "cut-off' is not sharp, however, and the filter characteristics should be considered when using them. A high pass filter can be used to eliminate unwanted low frequencies, such as ship motion or low frequency hull vibration. Again, the cutoff is not sharp. Both high pass and low pass filters can be used on the same signals, either as a "band-pass" filter or as a "band-reject" filter. The band-pass filter would be used if there are both low frequency and high frequency signals that are unwanted. Also, it might be used to isolate a certain component, such as blade frequency, in which case a narrow band would be used. More will be said about filters in the analysis section.
6.2.4 Recorders
This section discusses four means of recording or observing vibration data: meters, oscilloscopes, oscillographs and tape recorders. Often data is fed directly into a frequency analyzer and the peaks recorded by hand or the entire plot put on hard copy. Although this can be considered a type of recording, frequency analyzers are discussed under Section 6.4, Analysis and Reporting of Data.
6.2.4.1 Meters
In the simplest type of display used for vibration data, the amplitude of the A.C. component of a signal is displayed on a meter. If there are no filters in the signal conditioning system, the meter displays an "over-all" level of vibration and no indication of the frequencies involved.
6-9
Ship Vibration Design Guide This is useful for many machinery monitoring applications where a change in overall vibration level is usually indicative of a problem. Sometimes enough is known about the machine that the frequency can be assumed. More often, some type of frequency detection is used for diagnostic purposes after a problem has been detected. A filter can be used in conjunction with a meter to obtain the frequencies and amplitudes of many of the components in the signal. Normally, a narrow band filter is used in this manner and is tuned manually. This procedure is severely limited by the gradual cut-off of most analog filters and results in lower level components being masked by the higher level signals if they are close in frequency. "Close in frequency" will be defined differently for different filters, but could be a factor of two or three. Also, two components that are very close are difficult to distinguish. Nevertheless, this procedure is very useful for many applications that have a limited number of frequency components. A meter, be it with or without a filter, is used mostly with machinery where the amplitudes do not modulate significantly. Most hull, superstructure and main shaft vibration measurements exhibit a modulation such that the maximum amplitudes are two to five times the average. This modulation varies with the quantity being measured, sea state and other factors. At any rate, it is difficult to deal with using a meter because the needle fluctuates too much to get a good reading. Also, the modulating signal is a statistical quantity and a sufficient number of cycles must be observed. This is impossible with a meter. Many packages are available from manufacturers, such as IRD, that include a transducer, tunable filter and calibrated meter.
6.2.4.2 Oscilloscopes
Oscilloscopes can display a time history of the vibration signal on a screen as it occurs. In many scopes a segment of the signal can be "captured" and retained for examination. The amplitude of the signal can be read from the screen if it is not modulating too much. If there is a dominant frequency component, the frequency can be obtained from the screen as well, by observing the period on the x-axis. If there is more than one frequency component, getting frequency information from a scope is difficult. Oscilloscopes are more useful as monitoring devices to see if a reasonable looking signal is being recorded and to observe the general characteristics of the signals. For multiple channels it should be used with a switchbox so all channels can be checked. Precise measurements of the amplitudes and frequencies should be done by other means. See Section 6.3. 6.2.4.3 Oscillographs Oscillographs produce a hard copy of the time history of a number of vibration signals simultaneously, allowing these permanent records to be analyzed any time after the data is taken. The procedures for obtaining the amplitudes and frequencies from these records are given in Manley [4-1], and briefly discussed in Section 6.4.1. Where there are several modulating frequency components in a single signal, it becomes difficult and time consuming to analyze. Oscillographs are often used in preliminary analyses and to get a feel for what is happening during the trial. It can also serve as a backup in case something should happen to a tape recorder used in parallel. 6-10

The distinction between "oscillographs" and "strip chart recorders" is somewhat vague. In general, a strip chart recorder has a pen, perhaps thermal or ink and is limited to a frequency response of 100 Hz or less. An oscillograph usually refers to a recorder that uses light beams directed towards a roll of light sensitive paper. Its frequency response could be as high as 5 kHz. The light beams might be controlled by galvanometers, in which case a small mirror reflects a fight source in response to the incoming signal. A later innovation uses fiber optics to direct the light. Galvanometers have low input impedance and are current controlled devices. Signal conditioning equipment used with galvanometers must have an output terminal designed specifically for them. The fiber optic equipment and strip chart recorders normally have differential amplifiers built in with gain controls, so that the same signal can be used for the oscillograph or strip chart recorder as is used for the tape recorder.
6.2.4.4 Tape Recorders

The use of a tape recorder provides a versatility that cannot be obtained by the other methods discussed. It reproduces the electrical signal, which can then be analyzed by any method desired. This flexibility is desirable because the requirements for analysis cannot always be totally predicted before the trial. The procedures involved are fairly simple, but must be rigorously observed. The level of the input signals must be constantly conditioning equipment so that the signal is as large , but not too large for the tape recorder, so the signal monitored with a meter built into the tape recorder. level on an oscilloscope. observed and controlled by the signal possible to reduce the signal/noise ratio, is not clipped. The level can often be An alternative method is to monitor the
An oscilloscope is desirable anyway to judge whether the signals look reasonable or not. Usually intermittent connections, 60 Hz noise, or other problems can be instantly detected. The scope should be used also to monitor the tape's reproduced signals AS THEY ARE BEING RECORDED. This will require extra wiring and switching arrangements, but it is imperative that the trial engineer be able to routinely check if all signals are the same when they are reproduced as they were when recorded. The tape speed selected will depend on the frequency response of the signals to be recorded and whether the tape recorder uses "wide band" or "standard band." Check the instructions for the recorder to select tape speed.
6.3 Quantities To Be Measured

The first choice to be made regarding the type of data to be recorded is between displacement, velocity and acceleration. In addition, the appropriate frequency range should be known in advance. Although most ship vibration data will be recorded in the form of a time history, sometimes the data will be fed directly to a frequency analyzer or other analysis equipment and a hard copy of the frequency spectra or some other type of plot will be obtained. In some very simple applications, data may be read from the equipment and recorded manually as the trial is conducted. This section discusses the measured quantities in general. Section 6.5 (Transducer Locations) makes specific recommendations for different situations.
6-11
6.3.1 Displacement, Velocity, or Acceleration

In most cases ship vibration data wIl bc analyzed in .erms of its frequency components, so the characteristics of sinusoidal motion should be considered. The displacement, velocity and acceleration amplitudcs of sii.us(oJds differ only by factors of the frequency, with the higher frequencies being accentuadtCd h'. acMcleration ard the lower by displacement. Vibration engineers often consider displacicn;ut the appropriate quantity to observe for machines that operate below 1000 RPM. ,.eocity oor 1000 to 10.000 RPM, and acceleration for those above 10,000 RPM. This is asS'umnire they arc interested in things such as unbalance, misalignment, etc. If a high frequency, such a, a eatrin frequency, is of interest even on a low speed machine, acceleration may be the best qunantitv to observe. Another factor to consider in choo.raig diplaccment. xclocity or acceleration is what is critical in determining damage to the machine or structure. li.,,placemCnts will normally be proportional to stresses in a structure and can be compared to known clearances, etc. Velocity gives an indication of the energy dissipated through vibration, Mhich is often a gxd indicator of damage to a machine. Human comfort Ilevc is niore closely related to velocity than displacement or acceleration. Acceleration is normally proportional to the forces applied to the vibrating object. The final choice is often deternined by the characteristics of the transducers available, particularly the frequency range of the transducCr. See the ,Cct ion on tranUsducers for details.
6.3.2 Frequency Range'

The frequency ranges of transducers, signal conditioners and recording equipment must be chosen to match the frequency coml)oneits of intcrc,,t in the data being recorded. Also, frequencies known to be present hum not of imccst are often excluded. Ship motion (roll, pitch, etc.) usually falls below I liz. I lull girdler modes and those of major structures, such as deckhouses, masts, etc. may be from I to 1W Ilz for the lower modes. Propeller shaft rotation, main engine rotation, gear frequencies anid blade rate can all be determined from the machinery characteristics. Even though unwanted treqolncics can he filtCred ont in the ainalysis of the data, it may be a good idea not to record therir it, the fir,, piac Iauc:lise the level of the frequency components of interest will be harder to separtt,. ' n, the "11,,in 'i later. Also, in the case of frequency analyzers, choosing a brntdcr ra a ,1RclI:crec I:n ncsar will decrease the resolution and accuracy of the results.
6.3.3 Time History or Frequency Spectra

Often it is temptirig w iil , VLK lr. icctlv rather than go through the step of recording on tape a1 1 1!1. F I ii ) 11wi i' tcra . This is appropriate for rotating machinery where ihe hI I,i Il lis cai', the amplitUdes are usually fairly constant and at larc " in " " i.'\l \ hratnrr data routinely gathered from ships, however, are e it h\ 1 ,, . . , (innaio. such as hull girder vibration. For this type of (&: t:, .1 i. am ha)\e a randomness associated with ., : ''rr t 'r the randomness, which for blade .. them and require ,t , , thrc inutnnes. If multiple channels are being -. . frequencies and i, airh!im i,,. tiii "on line'" analysis during the trials. .i recorded, as is ustial i1.c
',
I2
6.4
Analysis and Reporting Of Data
Traditionally, analysis of shipboard vibration records has been performed using the methods described in "Waveform Analysis" by R.G. Manley [4-1]. The various schemes proposed in that work allow one to extract maximum values and frequencies of the components of a complex waveform. If there are several components present, "manual" analysis is time consuming and requires good judgment (i.e., experience). Common practice has been to analyze a record of one to several minutes duration and report the "maximum repetitive" amplitudes of the predominant components. This practice was established because the maximum values are those responsible for discomfort and structural damage. Recently, very fast digital electronic analyzers have become available at a reasonable cost. These analyzers offer several advantages over manual analysis, primarily speed and repeatability. No judgment is required by the machine. Unfortunately, the machines do not look at data the same way as experienced vibration engineers. Most of these machines perform a discrete Fourier transform on an electrical analog of the vibration waveform. The analysis is accomplished by an efficient algorithm known as a Fast Fourier Transform. The result of this transform is the Root Mean Square (rms) amplitude of each component within the analysis range. For a pure sinusoid, the ratio of the peak amplitude to the rms amplitude is ii2 In order to obtain the maximum repetitive values, the rms values must be multiplied by "crest factors," which include both the "1i factor and an amplitude modulation factor. There are limited data on crest factors at present, but they are known to vary with sea state and location of measurement. Normally, they are in the range of 2 to 4, but in adverse weather, values as high as 6 to 9 have been reported. The Intemational Standards Organization (ISO) recommends that a factor of 2.5 be used unless there is enough data available to establish a more appropriate factor. Six methods of analysis are discussed below. Not enough research has been done to evaluate these methods in relation to each other, but each has its own advantages and can be used to compare quantities analyzed by similar methods.
6.4.1 Manual Method

The "manual" method of analysis involves measuring frequencies and amplitudes of vibration components on an oscillograph record. The subject is covered in great detail in Manley [6-9], and only a few basics are covered here. The analysis of waveforms is based on the principle that any periodic record is a superposition of sinusoids having frequencies that are integral multiples of the lowest frequency present. The lowest frequency is determined by the smallest portion of the record that repeats itself, or one cycle. Figure 6-1 shows several waveforms and indicates the extent of one cycle, some of which are not obvious. The first trace (a), is essentially a sinusoid with a constant amplitude. The double amplitude of vibration is obtained by measuring the double amplitude of the trace as shown and multiplying by the sensitivity of the measuring/recording system, which is found by calibration. The frequency is found by counting the number of cycles in a known time period. The time on oscillographs is indicated by timing lines (a convenient rate for many shipboard applications is 10 lines/sec.) or simply by knowing paper speed. For trace (a), the frequency is 6 Hz. Accuracy is improved if the number of cycles in a longer section of record is used.
613

Trace (b) is the superposition of two sinusoids with one cycle of the lowest frequency shown. The components can be separated by drawing sinusoidal "envelopes" (upper and lower limits) The amplitude and frequency of the low through all the peaks and troughs as shown. frequency component is that of the envelope (frequency is about 2.7 Hz). The vertical distance between envelopes indicates the amplitude of the high frequency component and the high frequency (about 8 Hz) can usually be counted. In this example, the frequencies differ by a factor of three. Often signals look like trace (c), where the envelopes are out of phase, causing "bulges" and "waists." This signal is caused by two components that are close in frequency and is called "beating." The peaks of the two signals alternately add and subtract. Other characteristics of beating are that the lengths of the beats are about the same and the spacing between the peaks at the bulges is different from that at the waists. The amplitudes between the envelopes at the bulges and waists represent the sum and difference respectively of the components. Thus, if the components' amplitudes are xm for the major and x for the minor, measurements show that: x m + x n = .7 in x m -x n =.2in Solving simultaneously by adding: 2x m =.9in or x m =.45in and xn =.25in These record amplitudes must be multiplied by the system sensitivity to get actual amplitudes. The major frequency can be found by counting the number of peaks as before. In trace (c) it is 3 Hz. This frequency is also some integral multiple of the beat frequency, in this case 6 times. The frequency of the minor component is either one more (7), or one less (5), times the beat frequency. The spacing of peaks at the waist indicates this since it reflects the major component. In trace (c) the spacing is closer so the major component has the higher frequency. If the spacing were farther apart, the major component would have the lower frequency. In this example, the beat frequency is 0.5 Hz, the minor frequency is 5 times that, or 2.5 Hz. Trace (d) shows a characteristic of most hull and propeller excited vibration on board ships. It looks similar to beating, but is actually only one component whose amplitude is varying (modulating) in response to wave action and flow variations into the propeller. This is distinguishable from beating because the length of the bulges are not likely to be the same and the spacing of the peaks is the same at the bulges and the waists. For such records, the maximum repetitive amplitude is usually desired, which would be obtained from the highest bulges. Unfortunately, many ship vibration records involve more than two components, will almost certainly involve modulation and may be beating as well. One technique that saves a lot of time is to find sections of the record in which one component is temporarily dominant.
6-14
1 SEC.1
(a)f
\TV\I
CYCLE
1 SEC.
(b
1CYE(b
(a) & (b)
Peak Spacings
(c)
Hz
I BEAT
CYCLE
F=0.5
.UG
(d)
I SEC.
Figure 6-1
Various Types of Waveforms
6-15
6.4.2 Envelope Method

This method of analysis involves filtering the signals to get the frequency component of interest and recording the result on a chart recorder at slow speed. This condenses a several minute record into an envelope just several inches long. The maximum repetitive value (MRV) can be immediately obtained visually. Care must be taken that the filter used does not pass a significant amount of any component other than the component of interest. As an example, using most analog filters to obtain blade frequency (frequency at which propeller blades pass a fixed point) is normally acceptable because the amplitude of the second harmonic is usually much lower than that of blade frequency. However, when analyzing the 2 x blade component, too much of the blade and the 3 x blade component would pass to obtain meaningful results. To illustrate how these errors can be anticipated, consider a Krohn-Hite Model 3550 Variable Filter. It uses a fourth order Butterworth function. The gain is given by Figure 6-2 and the following: G
L
+S8 ' IS + S8
4
Gti
s-f
where: GL Gi f f
= = = =
Gain of low pass filter Gain of high pass filter Frequency Cut-off frequency setting
The effect that this filter will have on blade frequency and its harmonics (.an be illustrated by calculating the attenuations for various frequency ratios, S. The results are gien in Table 6-1. It was assumed that the high pass and low pass filter settings were at 80 percent and 120 percent of the fre;uency being passed. From Table 6-1, it can be seen that using the filter attenuates the wanted signal to 83.3 percent. Any results so obtained should be divided by .833 to get true amplitudes. To see how this step affects all the components, the entire table is divided by .833 to find the "normalized" attenuations.
6-16
IVIOasLrement and Analysis of Shipboard Vibration
-- -_
I,,
7'-
t f
HIGH 5 PASS CUTO-F
FRIEQUCNCY
I....--t[-.-1 .-v...1t:
-42z
2
LOW PASS CUTOFF FREQUENCY

________ -
zn
4 5 6
-78 9 ! SOR 2 3
"2 '
4
5 6 7 8 9 10
:1-
fHP
fLP
Figure 6-2 NormF.lized Att-'ation Characteristics of Krohn-Hite 3550 Filters
Table 6-1 Calculated Attenuations Due to One Filter

Filter
Setting
Blade
2 x Blade
Actual Attenuations 2x 3 BladenBladeeBlade

---
Blade
. 378
Blade
4x
Normalized Attenuations Blade 2x 3x 4x

_ _ _ _ _
Blade
.154
Blade
Blade
833
151
128
833
_ .026 833 .604
.008
128
1.000
.181
1000
3 x Blade 4 x R-
030-009
432 .151
544 .333
.036 .011
r 9 .181
031 .454 1.000 .725
.010 .154 .653 1.000
6-17
Ship Vibration Design Guide The normalized attenuations show that if blade frequency is being filtered, 15.4 percent of the second harmonic a!so passes, an acceptable error if the second harmonic is significantly less than blade frequency, which is the usual case. When analyzing the 2 x blade component, 18.1 percent of the blade and 45.4 percent of the 3 x blade passes, an unacceptable error. To reduce this type of error, two filters can be used in series (Table 6-2). When analyzing 2 x blade, two filters result in 69.4 percent of 2 x blade, 2.3 percent of blade and 14.3 percent of 3 x blade being passed. To normalize, divide by .694. The normalized attenuations show 3.3 percent of blade and 20.6 n,:rcent of 3 x blade is passed. This technique should be acceptable unless the 3 x blade coronent is unusually high in magnitude. Even two filters may not have a sharp enough cut-off to J:olatc the 3 x blade or higher harmonics. Table 6-2 Calculated Attenuations Due to Two Filters
Setting Blade
Actual Attenuations Blade

2 x 3x
4x 1.000 .033 .001
Normalized Attenuations Blade

.024 1.000 .269 2x
Blade
.001 .143 .694
BladeBlade
.000 .016 .296
Blade
.001 .206 1.000
3x
Blade
.000 .024 .426
4x
Blade __.694 2 x Blade .023 3 x Blade .001
.016 ,694 187
4 xBlade
.000
.023
1365 .694
.000
.033
.526
1.000
For normal ship vibration signals, the following steps are recommended: Analyze blade frequency with one filter and normalize results. Analyze 2 x blade frequency with two filters and normalize results. Subtract 15.4 percent of the 2 x blade amplitude from the blade frequency amplitude. Subtract 3.3 percent of the blade frequency amplitude from the 2 x blade amplitude. NOTE: The above percentages will vary with different filters. In order to visualize the relationship between a normal oscillograph record of ship vibration and a condensed envelope, a sample of filtered blade frequency vibration of a ship's stern was recorded at different speeds. Figure 6-3 shows the record at 25 mm/sec. Figure 6-4 shows the same record at successively slower speeds. At I mm/sec the maximum repetitive value is conveniently read. It is felt that this is presently the best method to obtain the MRV for blade and 2 x blade frequency from ship vibration records.
6-18
Rio
I-
____116-117)
7 --
-i-.
5 mm/sec
I*
___
2 1/12 nun/sec (125 mm/min.)
Figure 6-4
Vertical Blade Frequency Displacement of a Ship's Stern Recorded at Various Slow Speeds
6-20
6.4.3 Spectral Method

Two types of spectra can be found with most analyzers: the common "average" and the "peak" amplitude. For both types the record is broken down into segments for frequency analysis. The segments vary in length with the frequency range of the analysis, but for ship vibration studies they would be several seconds long. For each segment, the analyzer finds the rms level of each frequency component (i.e., in each frequency interval, or for each "line"). The number of lines (resolution) varies with the analyzer, but most often falls between 100 and 1000. Ship vibration records will normally be one or several minutes long and will contain many segments. If the "average" spectrum is desired, the analyzer will average all the rms levels found in like frequency intervals. The term "number of averages" is often used referrinj to the number of segments in each average, although the terminology is sometimes confusing. This report will refer to the values obtained with "average" spectra as "average rms" values. Before proceeding further, it will be helpful to define three kinds of "peaks" associated with most ship vibration records and clarify the terminology: In each cycle, the "peak" value is the difference between the mean and the greatest value in that cycle. In this guide "peak" will be used in this manner. * A modulating signal "peaks" every few cycles. To avoid confusion, this guide will refer to this type of peak as a "maximum" value. The "peak" spectrum, which is really the spectrum of the greatest rms values in each frequency interval found among several segments. Such values will be called "peak rms" values. If the "average rms" and "peak rms" values are multiplied by <,-, spectral single amplitudes, which are called the "average spectral" and "peak spectral" values, are obtained. Sample spectra are given for three different measurements on a ship in Figure 6-5. There will be some variation in results, depending on the frequency range used. A higher frequency range will involve broader frequency intervals and yield higher results. The differences will be most apparent when the speed of the shaft or machine being measured varies slightly. To eliminate the ill effects of speed variations, some analyzers will track a signal and display the spectrum as harmonic components of the tracked signal. It is obvious that the average spectral value will always be less than the MRV and the peak spectral values will be closer to the MRV. The exact relationship between the latter two will depend on the rate of modulation compared to the length of the segment. If the modulation is very slow, the amplitude will be near its maximum for the entire length of some segments and the two will be close. If the modulation is fast, the peak will be closer to the average amplitude.
6-21
Ui
+1
1.65 psi Blade Freq.

Near Propeller
hil,
'I
*Pressure
20
40 60 Frequency, Hz
80
130
3.29 mils +1 17
C
U O1
w
Blade Freq. Vertical Stern Displacement
CL
20
40 60 Frequency, Uz
80
100
3.22 mils Blade Freq. Longitudinal Bull Gear Displacement

CL
20
60 40 Frequency, Ez
83
100
Figure 6-5
Sample Peak Spectra for Various Locations
6-22
6.4.4 Histograms of Instantaneous Values

Some analyzers, such as the Nicolet Model 660A Dual Channel Analyzer, sample the signal and obtain histograms of the instantaneous values. This capability might be useful with ship vibration records, but there are several considerations. First. we are usually concerned with obtaining the amplitudes of the blade or 2 x blade component by itself, so that filtering is necessary as it was for the envelope method. The limitations and corrections discussed in that section apply here also. Second, we are concerned with the peak amplitudes of the cycles. The histograms are usually obtained by sampling all the points on the record, not just the peaks. The amplitude, which is exceeded by only one or two percent of the samples, would probably involve only the tips of the largest cycles and may be comparable to the MRV. The amplitude, which is exceeded by some percentage of the samples, could be determined from a cumulative probability plot, such as shown in Figure 6-6.
100 9 9%
-.
80-.-
4.77 mus
C.
z 0,0
'-)-
40!"
--
1'I'
Displacement,
I
+ Mils
Figure 6-6 Typical Cumulative Distribution Plot with Cursor Set for 99 Percent Probability
6-23
6.4.5 Histograms of Peak Values

This procedure would be closer to the envelope method and can be accomplished with an analog to digital (A/D) converter and a microcomputer in conjunction with filters. It entails sampling the filtered signal, as described for histograms of instantaneous values, then finding the peak (and trough) of each cycle. The peak amplitudes are then put into a histogram or cumulative probability plot. The top three, five, or ten percent of the peak amplitudes may be comparable to the MRV. The author is not aware of this procedure being used for routine analysis of ship vibration data, but it would seem to be the most accurate and efficient method of those discussed.
6.4.6 Reporting Formats

The format chosen for reporting data will depend on the purpose of the trials and the type of analysis chosen. For propeller excited vibration the most useful data are usually plots of vibration amplitudes (whether they be maximum repetitive values, average or peak spectral values, or mis amplitudes) versus RPM. This reflects resonances encountered and any ranges of high vibration levels due to things such as cavitation. When fiequency spectra are used, there are normally too many to include all of them in a report, but a few well-chosen examples can help in understanding the nature of the data. Data in tabular form is appropriate for the amplitudes measured during maneuvers. Plots of mode shapes, if any were determined, should be included. When the data is to be used for comparison against a given criteria such as ISO 6954, maximum repetive values are required. Often measured data is not sufficient to establish accurate mode shapes that may be known from vibration analyses. This is particularly true in the case of machinery torsional mode shapes. Such analyses should be utilized in extrapolating data where possible, with sound judgment exercised regarding the validity of such extrapolations. Data generated in this manner should be annotated to reflect how it was obtained. ISO 4867 [6-5], recommends that reported data include the following: * The principal ship design characteristics. * Sketch of inboard profile of hull and superstructure. * Lines plan of the stern configuration for about one-fifth of the length of the ship. * Sketch showing locations of hull and machinery transducers. Transducer locations for local vibration measurements should be shown on a separate sketch. Trial conditions. * Curves of maaximum repetive displacement, velocity, or acceleration amplitude versus shaft speed for shaft rotational frequency or blade rate (or machinery excitation frequency) or any harmonic thereof. * Results of measurements at local areas. * Results from maneuvers tabulated. Results of an anchor drop test including the identified hull natural frequencies and from the decaying vibration traces, the derived damping coefficients. Presentation of oscillograph traces is desirable.
6-24

"Method of analysis of the results. "Type of instruments used. "Hull natural frequencies and modes that have been identified. Also any undesirable or unusual vibration condition encountered. It is recommended that the ISO Standard 4867 [6-5] be obtained for more complete information on testing requirements.
6.5 Transducer Locations

The locations of transducers chosen will depend on the type of trial being conducted, the type of ship being tested and how thorough a test is desirable. A minimal set of locations for routine sea trials would include: " Hull Stern " Thrust Bearing If there is any suspicion of longitudinal shaft vibration problems, or just to be prudent, the following should be added: . Main Propulsion System, Longitudinal When the ship has a large deckhouse aft and when it is located above large holds or machinery spaces with a minimum of transverse or longitudinal bulkheads to support it, the following should be added: . Deckhouse If hull girder vibration is a potential problem or if the hull girder excites a local structure the hull modes should be identified: . Hull Girder In addition, a problem not associated with the above measurements may have been identified and diagnostic data may be desired, Some comments on the most common problems are included: * Rotating Machinery * Resonant Equipment * Main Propulsion System, Torsional * Main Propulsion System, Lateral * Local Structures * Hull Pressure Forces
6-25
Ship Vibration Design Guide Each of the above is discussed in some detail in this section. Much of the material, particularly for the more routine measurements, is taken from ISO 4867 [6-5]. The standard locations given can often be directly compared to various criteria presented in Chapter Two.
6.5.1 Hull Stern

Vertical, athwqtship and longitudinal measnrements of the hull girder should be made as close as possible to the centerline and the stem. The steering gear foundation is a recommended location. These measurement- .'ould be used for reference purposes. When a torsional response of the hull is to be determined, a pair of deck-edge transducers for vertical vibration should also be employed. It should be ensured that the vibration of the hull girder is measured, excluding local effects. Normally, velocity gages, integrated to yield displacement, are appropriate for this data. If the lower hull modes are particularly important, accelerometers with low frequency response should be used, perhaps in addition to the velocity gages.
6.5.2 Thrust Bearing

Measurements in three directions (vertical, athwartships and longitudinal) should be made on top of thrust bearing housing. Recording should also be taken on one supplementary point on the thrust block foundation, in the longitudinal direction. Blade and twice blade frequency are of primary concern, making the velocity gage the best transducer for :he thrust bearing. Data is usually given in terms of displacement.
6.5.3 Main Propulsion System, Longitudinal

To determine the response of the propulsion shaft system to propeller excitation for steam propulsion plants having a reduction gear system, longitudinal measurements should be made at the following locations as indicated in Figure 6-7: 1. Thrust Bearing Housing. The thrust bearing may be located forward or aft of the reduction gear on the same foundation, or aft on a separate foundation.
2. IhnatRearingoundation.
rdE aBull Gear-Shaft, This location can nomially be accessed by a probe 3. F spring loaded to ride on the shaft center. The transducer is attached to the probe. 4. QcCaouFou~dation. On top of the gear case foundation under the shaft centerline. 5. _g rC'ise Kg~P. Over shaft centerline. 6. High Prcs_'uicThrbin,. Attached to iP turbine casing at forward or aft end. 7. Lkv P!rcsorc "Turbite. Attached to LP turbine casing at forward or after end.
6-26
Measurement and Analysis of Shipboard Vibration 8. Condense . Mounted as low as practicable and as near the fore and aft centerline as possible. For diesel propulsion plants, longitudinal measurements should be made as follows: 1. Thrust Bearing Housing. The thrust bearing may be incorporated into the structure of the engine at the aft end or mounted separately. 2. Thrust Bearing Housing Foundation. 3. MainEngine. Top, forward end. 4. Forward End of Engine Crankshaft. For gas turbines, measurements should be made at the thrust bearing and its foundation, the gear case top and foundation and at the forward end of the bull gear similar to the first five items for steam turbine plants. Again, blade and twice blade frequency are of primary concern and velocity gages, integrated to give displacement, are recommended.
Key
(
( (j)
Thrust bearing housing. The sketch shows the three possible positions of the thrust bearing, though the transducer poft on ameshown for only one Thrust block foundation.
Forward end of bull gear shaft. This poetion will require a probe and provision for loces in the gear case.
Gear case foundation. On top of the gear case foundation under the shaft centreline. Gear case top. Over shaft cantreline. High Pressure turbine. Attached to h.p turbire casing &t forwd or sft end. Low pressure turbine. Attached to l.p. turbine casing at forward or aft and.
G
()
()
Condenser. Mounted as low as practicable end as neer the fore-and-eft ca reline as possible.
Use propulsion system sketch of ship on which tests were conducted. Soe figure 2 fo evibols.
NOTE -
Figure 6-7 Location of Transducers for Main Engine (Turbine) Vibration [6-5]
6-27
6.5.4 Deckhouse
As a minimum, the locations given in ISO 4867 [6-5] should be measured, i.e., vertical, athwartship and longitudinal measurements at the following locations to determine the overall vibration of the superstructure: 1. Wheelhouse, centerline at front of bridge. 2. Main deck, centerline at front of deckhouse. When torsional vibration is to be determined, include a pair of transducers to measure torsional motions of an aft deckhouse. Normally, deckhouse vibration occurs in the frequency range appropriate for velocity gages.
6.5.5 Hull Girder

Where required to identify lower hull modes, vertical or athwartship amplitudes should be measured on the main deck or strength deck level, as close to the centerline as possible, at a sufficient number of points to permit determining the approximate mode shapes of all measured frequencies. If torsional modes are to be defined, phased deck-edge measurements are required. In all cases, structural "hard spots" should be selected. If instrumentation permits, both a roving pickup and a fixed pickup at the stern should be used to simplify the location of nodes by detecting phase changes and providing relative amplitude data. Even better, if enough transducers are available, all points can be measured simultaneously. Velocity gages can be used except for the lower hull modes, where accelerometers with a low frequency response may be required.
6.5.6 Rotating Machinery

In this section rotating machinery mounted by means of a foundation, which may or may not have resilient mounts and attached to a deck, bulkhead, or the hull itself, will be considered. Excessive vibration may be caused by self-excitation, such as in a rotating machine, or it may be caused by the deck (or whatever the foundation is attached to) vibrating and the machine or equipment being near resonance on that mount. In order to provide enough information for proper diagnostics, vertical, horizontal (lateral) and longitudinal measurements should be made on the bearing caps of rotating machinery. If the rotor is relatively long, or if the machine consists of two rotors (such as a turbine and a generator) connected by a coupling, measurements should be made at both ends. Alternatively, if the foundation and casing are known to be very rigid and the motion of the shaft only is of interest, vertical and horizontal (lateral) measurements could be made by proximity probes, if the shaft is accessible and if a suitable mounting can be devised. For most rotating machinery problems, velocity gages are preferred. Many of the criteria for acceptability are given in terms of velocity levels. For high frequency response, such as in bearing diagnostics, acceleration is better.
6-28
6.5.7 Resonant Equipment

If a piece of equipment is resonating on its foundation, it may be oscillating in any or all of the three translation directions and any or all of the three rotational directions. To detect motion in all directions, it is necessary to have six transducers, where pairs, oriented in the same directions, might be used for rotations. To determine all the motions of the deck (or whatever the machine is mounted to) would take another six transducers. Usually, enough is known about the problem, such as the direction of excessive vibration, that some or even most of these can be eliminated. In any case, the resonant condition, whether it be excited by the machine, the equipment itself or by motion of the base, can be easily detected by the relative motion between the equipment and its base. The frequencies encountered in resonant situations are normally in the range of velocity gages. Often displacement signals are best for these cases.
6.5.8 Torsional Vibration

If torsional measurements are to be made, it should be done with a thorough knowledge of the expected natural frequencies and mode shapes. This is true because of two factors. First, the number of locations to make torsional measurements is usually very limited and the most has to be made of what is available. Second, the mass and stiffness characteristics in the torsional direction are usually amenable to accurate determination, making the prediction of natural frequencies and mode shapes reasonably reliable. Hence, a measured quantity at one location can be extrapolated by means of these predictions to obtain displacements or stresses at other locations. While this procedure can get complicated and normally requires a vibration engineer, there are several general points that can be provided for guidance. The two types of measurements generally available are torsional motion (displacement, velocity or acceleration) and torsional strain. If motion is to be measured by means of a torsion meter it must be mounted on the end of a shaft on its centerlinc or mounted on an auxiliary shaft driven by a belt off the main shaft. An alternative is to mount an accelerometer or velocity gage to the shaft in a tangential direction. Torsional displacements are preferred to velocities or accelerations because they can more readily be related to stress. Torsional strain can be measured by means of strain gages mounted to the shaft. Whatever locations are chosen, they should have relatively high amplitudes as indicated by the calculated mode shapes for the modes that fall within the frequency range of interest. This will minimize errors in the extrapolation process.
6.5.9 Main Propulsion System, Lateral

Lateral measurements are determined by the type of problems encountered and the type of equipment involved. It is difficult to generalize as far as transducer locations are concerned. The locations shown in Figure 6-8 are recommended in ISO 4867 16-51. For lateral vibration of the shaft, vertical and athwartships vibration measurements should be made on the shaft relative to the stern tube, These may also be taken relative to line shaft bearings. In order to eliminate possible error, shaft run-out should be checked by rotating the
629
) __ x I a
of abm,
vrai "
Ah
brm
Figure 6-8
Location of Transducers for Vibration of Aft End of Line Shafting

shaft with the turning gear and recording the first-order signal. This s.gnal should be phased and the shaft vibration measurement corrected accordingly. For lateral vibration of turbines and gears, see Section 6.5.6 Rotating Machinery. For lateral vibration of direct-drive diesel engines, vertical and athwartships measurements on the top, forward and aft ends, of the main engine are required as a minimum. Vertical and athwartships measurements are also recommended on the forward and aft ends of the engine foundations as illustrated in Figure 6-9.
6-30
iThrust beveig incororated
(Thr~m inden per
bearin d.entfmi)
oulebttm
I~ar
of
argi
Transducera for rnaasurenrts ac
vibration$
vibrations
-~Atfrwarts~up
-- a-
Longtudinal vibrationg Obligatory
'A
ori ( Transdum of relative vibrawOn*
Jf
n-das~hufvmO1tis
Optinnal but
ermnd
Figure 6-9
Location for Transducers for Main Engine (Direct-Dive Diesel) Vibration [6-5]
6- 31
Ship Vibration Design Guide 6.5.10 Local Structures

The discussion for resonant equipment is applicable to this section as well. The only thing that can be readily added is a reminder that if the local structure that seems to be a problem is not a rigid body supported by a foundation but is instead a flexible member in which a part is vibrating excessively, then the natural frequencies and mode shapes of that structure must be studied with enough transducers to define its mode shapes. 6.5.11 Hull Pressure Forces If the measurement of hull pressure forces is required to confirm design estimates, to obtain design data or to investigate potential cavitation problems, the pressure transducers should be located as shown in Figure 6-10.
A BA-A
B-B
Figure 6-10
Location of Pressure Transducers [6-5]
6-32
6.6 Test Conditions

In order to obtain ship vibration data that can be evaluated against existing standards, measurements should be made during uniform test conditions. The discussion of the factors affecting vibration levels and the recommended test conditions are excerpted from ISO 4867 [6-51. The relatively uniform vibration resulting from propulsion machinery excitation (turbine or diesel drive) can be masked or distorted by transicat vibrations due to wave impact or slamming. Changes in wake distribution due to rudder angle and yaw can produce large increases in exciting forces. Operation in shallow water also has a significant effect on hull vibration. Propeller emergence, whether continuous or periodic, causes large increases in exciting forces. In view of the above, the following test-conditions are recornmended: The test should be conducted in a depth of water not less than five times the draft of the ship. The test should be conducted in a quiet sea, generally State 3 or less. The ship should be ballasted to a displacement as close as possible to the operating conditions. The draft aft should insure full immersion of the propeller. During the free-route portion of the test, the rudder angle should be restricted to about 2 degrees port or starboard (minimum rudder action is desired).
6.7 Test Procedures

For any test, the first step is to calibrate the recording equipment. If ship control is involved, communications must be set up. The procedures for taking data are discussed for tests involving ship control (Hull and Main Propulsion System) and those involving auxiliary machinery. Other tests may require different procedures.
6.7.1 Calibration Procedures

Calibration procedures are categorized as system calibration or electrical calibration. In general, system calibration refers to a procedure that is done before installing instrumentation on board ship, or as the transducers are installed. It should be a complete reckoning of the sensitivity of the transducers, signal conditioning and recording equipment. Electrical calibration refers to a procedure that can be accomplished usually at the recording center, is considered a "spot check," takes only a few ninutes, and can be done periodically during the vibration trials. Calibration procedures are different for different types of gages and are discussed in this section.
6-33
6.7.1.1 Accelerometers
All accelerometers can be calibrated over the frequency range of interest by mounting on a shaker table or calibration device that is oscillating at known amplitudes. Normally, this is the type of system calibration that is used. Strain gage and piezore'sistive acceleromeLers can be calibrated foi zero, ig by laying them on their sides, their bases and upside down, respectively. This provides a D.C. calibration only and is useful only if the conditioning and recording equipment operates at a frequency of zero Hz. Once the transducers are installed, the "electrical calibration" is usually accomplished by an internal (to the amplifier) signal of known value being applied to the conditioning and recording equipment. In the case of strain gage and piezoresistive accelerometers, a shunt resistor can be applied across one arm of the bridge and the value of the resistor can be equated to a certain acceleration. The latter results in a D.C. step being recorded.
6.7.1.2 Velocity Gages

System calibration for velocity gages should be done on a shaker table that oscillates at known amplitudes and frequencies. There are no D.C. types of calibration suitable for these gages. Electrical calibration is done by means of an internal signal of known value being fed into the conditioning and recording equipment. Since the conditioning equipment usually does not operate for D.C. signals, the known signal is normally a sinusoid. 6.7.1.3 Proximity Probes Proximity probes shcld not be sensitive to changes in frequency and therefore can be calibrated for D.C. steps only. They should be calibrated at several distances from the target by means of "feeler" gages. Plastic feeler gages are available that do not affect the signal and can be left in place while recording. Preliminary calibration can be done before installing the probes on board ship, but the final calibration should be done with the probes in place because each target has a slightly different effect on the gage. The only practical type of "electrical" calibration would be the substitution of a signal of known value.
6.7.1.4 Strain Gages

The type of calibration used with strain gages will depend on how they are used. Again the signal output should not be sensitive to frequency and D.C. calibrations are adequate. If possible, the strain gaged object should be subjected to known loads and the resulting strains calculated and related to the signal output. If the object has a complex shape or if known loads are difficult to apply, the only choice is to accept the manufacturers listed Gage Factor and use a shunt resistor for calibration. In most applications on board ship, the signal leads from the strain gages are fairly long. This reduces the sensitivity of the gages, requiring the shunt to be applied at the gage rather than at the amplifier to obtain accurate results.
6-34
6.7.2 Communications
The trial director, who should be stationed at the recording center, should have communications by sound powered phones, hand-held VHF radios or other means with the bridge or the engine control center, whoever is controllhig the course and speed of the ship. Whoever is on the phones at the controlling station should have access to RPM gages and a rudder indicator and be able to advise the trial director immediately of any changed conditions. Often the trial director will station himself and his equipment in a space where that information is available directly.
6.7.3 Hull and Main Propulsion System Vibration

ISO 4867 [6-5] and SNAME Code C-1 [6-2] give test procedures for gathering data on hull and main propulsion system vibration in commercial ships: a. Make a steady deceleration or acceleration run of, preferably, less than 5 RPM per minute to determine location of critical speeds. These runs do give an indication of critical speeds, but if the change in shaft speed, which is hard to control, is uneven when the propeller i: loaded it may give a false indication of resonance. Also, the amplitudes cannot be trusted since steady-state conditions have not been established and only a small sample is considered at each speed. In free route, run from half shaft speed to maximum speed at increments of 3 to 10 RPM. Additional runs at smaller increments are required in the vicinity of critical speeds and near-service speed. Hard turns to port and starboard at maximum speed (optional). Crashback from full power ahead to full power astern (optional). Anchor drop-and-snub (optional).
NOTE:
b.
c. d. e.
For steady speed free-route runs, permit ship to steady on speed. Hold at steady speed for a sufficient time to permit recording of maximum and minimum values (about one minute). In multip!le shaft ships, all shafts should be run at, or as close as possible to the same speed to determine total vibration amplitudes. In certain instances, it may be preferable to run with a single shaft when determining vibration modes. NOTE: A one minute record length was recommended with oscillographic analysis in mind. For electronic analysis, which is less time consuming, two to three minutes is recommended.
For maneuvers, start the recorder as the throttle or wheel is moved Allow to run until maximum vibration has passed. This normally occurs when the ship is dead in the water during a crashback maneuver or when the ship is fully in a turn.
6-35

For the anchor drop-and-snub test, the anchor must fall freely and be snubbed quickly by use of the windlass brake and must not touch bottom. The ship must be dead in the water for this test, with a minimum of rotating equipment in operation. Care must be taken not to exceed the recommendations for free drop as indicated by the manufacturer of the anchor windlass. Data should be taken continuously from the mom,.Ot the anchor is released until vibration can no longer be detected.
6.7.4 Auxiliary Machinery

ISO 4868 [6-61 and SNAME Code C-4 [6-3] give test procedures for gathering data on local shipboard structures and machinery. When evaluating the vibration of auxiliary machinery, the following guidelines are recommended: For constant speed units, measurements should be made at the rated speed. For variable speed units, measurements should be made at about five equally spaced points in the operating speed range, including known criticals. For multi-speed units, measurements should be made at each operating speed. To minimize interference, as much nearby equipment as possible should be shut down. NIO"_TE: To familiarize personnel with the measurement of shipboard vibration, the simple mechanical instruments referred to in Section 6.2.1 are recommended. As a next step, instrument packages are available, which include a transducer, tunable filter and calibrated meter, as discussed in Section 6.2.4.1. For more complex studies, including ship trials, the instrumentation system described in SNAME Code C-i is recommended. This version of shipboard vibration instrumentation is maintained by the Maritime Administration and, under special conditions, may be borrowed from MARAD.
6..
General Comments and Recommendations
In the application of vibration technology, we are necessarily concerned with its measurement and analysis, whether it is related to machines, vehicles or structures. We may be concerned with stresses in machines and structures; with performance requirements for equipment; and with environmental vibration levels related to habitability. To do so effectively in design and/or evaluation, it is of primary importance that we clearly establish standards to be used for measurement and evaluation that are suitable for the many individually established requirements and criteria. The vibration standards developed for shipboard application by the ISO are probably among the most complex, partially due to the strong signal modulation that exists aboard ship. A second problem area arises in the measurement and analysis technology due to the more recent developments of instrumentation, particularly with the preferred usage of the fast Fourier transform (FFT), which provides a convenient and efficient measurement technique but,
6 36

unfortunately, does not accurately generate the required quantification of the vibration signal. A third problem relates to the availability of alternate measurement systems, each of which may produce answers that nay not agree with the others. This in turn is complicated by the necessity (for regal reasons) of avoiding the specification of any particular instrument package and the tendency of those making the measurements to adjust to the convenience of the instrumentation, ratiher than the requirements of the standards.
6.8.1 Genivai Comments on Instrumentation

In this section, gcneal comments on the measurement and analysis procedures discussed in this chapter will be giv: iaind recommendations will be presented for current use. At the time the iSO Standards;, 486?, 4868 and 6954 [6-51, [6-61 and [6-7] respectively, were developed, the quantity to be measured and evaluated was the maximum repetitive amplitude (MRA) of the pa:ticular frequencies involved. The MRA is specified in these standards but little information ,as included on the measurement and analysis of shipboard vibration, since it is inappropriate to specify the particular instrumentation to be used. It was recognized, however, that many investigators preferred to use the FFT type analyzer, which automatically produced a spectral analysis similar in nature to that required, but unfortunately, did not provide the MRA as called for. To compensate for this deficiency, a note was included in ISO 6954, which states: N(OTE: The measurement procedures defined in ISO 4867 and ISO 4868 form the basis of the curves shown in the figure and it is intended that this International Standard is interpreted accordingly. However, time averaged rms values are ofhin measured instead of maximum repetitive values. In such cases, the tzid ,.,dth and time-averaging ix.riod should be specified and the rms values converted by using tne conversion equation given below, to the equivalent maximum repetitive values for comparison with the figure. The appropriate con,,crsion factor, CF, should either be determined by measurement or assumed to have the tentative value CF = 1.8. 11:,ximim- repetitive value = (C 4,2 ) x rms value
'v,"htt re:
'.2 is eq(ulivalent to the crest factor (i =1.0 implies pure statioMny sinusoidal vibration)
Thc Anc-ex to iS,-- Standard 6954 also states: Shipboard ,,inrbviion generally approximates to narrow-band vibration and a crest factor of 2.5 is commonly encountered. In these circumstances, the maximum repetitive vibration is more appropriate than rrns value with regard to evaluation of overall ship vibration. This International Standard evaluates overall shipboard vibration in terms of maximum repetitive values aid, for comparison with rms values, the crest factor shall be taken into account.
6 37
Ship Vibration Design Guide Section 6.4 provides more detailed information on six alternate methods of measurement and analysis, which currently could be used. As pointed out in [6-8], whatever equipment is used should produce the same result. However, experience has shown [6-10] that considerable variation in shipboard test results have been encountered due to improper use of the FF1 analyzer or omission of the appropriate crest factor. As an indication of how the envelope, spectral and statistical methods of analysis compare, these three methods were used to analyze the following three measurements, taken from a real-time tape recording obtained on a LNG ship trial with measurements made at four shaft speeds.: "Pressure on hull near propeller "Vertical stern displacement "Longitudinal bull gear displacement The envelope method was performed with the following equipment: "Racal Store-4 (4 channel) FM Tape Recorder "One or two Krohn-Hite Model 3550 Variable Filters "Gould 220 2-channel Strip Chart Recorder The spectral analysis was done with the following: Racal Store-4 (4 channel) FM Tape Recorder Nicolet Model 446A Single Channel Analyzer Nicolet Model 136A Digital Plotter The statistical method was done with the following: "Racal Store-4 (4 channel) FM Tape Recorder "One or two Krohn-Hite Model 3550 Variable Filters Nicolet Model 660A Dual Channel Analyzer "Nicolet Model 136A Digital Plotter (if hard copy desired) The results are shown on Figure 6-11 for easy comparison. The average conversion factor, CF' is approximately 1.8 for the three locations shown, with that for the Pressure measurement about 1.5 and the Stem Vertical about 2.0. It is obvious, however, that the Peak Spectra, the quantity frequently reported, is substantially lower than the Envelope value, which is considered the "true" value.
6-38
BLADE FREQ.
2"
2 x BLADE
3 x BLADE
4 x BLADE
,.
"*
.. ,..-.--.
_ __ __ __ __ __
__ __ __ __ __ __
--... ,.....
.. . --'"
110 RPM
.... .. ..
" : = -. 1 . ,= . = . ..
100
6
105
110
RPM
115
105
110
RPM
115
105
115
105
110
RPM
115
5-
ENVELOPE
STATISTICAL . ...................... /PEAK SPECTRA
+1
=3
*o
.. ..
*.i
. ..
AVE. SPECTRA
E.
-_.....-
.... ..
, .. .... ..
Cl)
.........-.
105 110 115 105 110 115
100
lor
105
110 R.PM
115
RPM
105
110
115
PM
RPM
+1o
.2tA
a: 2____'__,_____._. ___,.. __ _-
--
- -
N- - - -
-....
100
105
110
RPM
115
105
110
RPM
115
105
110 RPM
115
.105
110 RPM
115
Figure 6-11
Comparison of El Paso Savannah Data Analyzed with Different Methods
6-39

Originally, the statistical and envelope analyses produced results that were in error due to filter characteristics. The amount of error varied according to the proportions of 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th harmonics. Using the proportions from the peak spectra, the errors were calculated and are given in Table 6-3. The errors associated with blade frequency and 2 filters is small and no correction was made. A 10% correction was made for blade frequency (1 filter) and 2 x blade frequency (2 filters).
Table 6-3 Filter Induced Errors Component

Blade Blade
Number Filtersof
2 1
Pressure
1.2% 10.5%
Stern
1.7% 11.40/6
Bull Gear
1.4% 9.1%
Average
1.4% 10.3%
2 x Blade
17.4%
9.1%
7.3%
11.2%
It was expected that the statistical and envelope results would be unacceptable for the 3rd and 4th harmonics, but those quantities were obtained solely for comparison purposes. As expected, they are much higher than the spectral results. Examination of Figure 6-7 indicates that the ratios between the various methods vary with the location of measurement and the harmonic involved. The development of "crest factors" would have to account for these parameters as well as sea state, which is known to effect the modulation of ship vibration. The levels of the 3rd and 4th harmonic are low enough to ignore, except perhaps for the pressure measurements. Generally speaking, the 3rd, 4th, etc. harmonics can be minimized in the propeller design, thus rendering these harmonics to be of no consequence. Differences were also noted in the peak spectral values obtained with the Nicolet analyzer and similar quantities reported by others on the same tape. This factor may be related to the ratio between the obtained maximum value and the weighted rms values obtained by the alternate analyzers, which in turn relates to the integration time employed by the respective instruments. Some experts suggest an integration time of one or two seconds, if standardized, would produce a peak value that would approximate the MRA. However, as the frequency increases, the resulting sample would necessarily average a greater number of vibratory cycles and thus increase the difference between the averaged peak value and the MRA. The ISO Ship Vibration Working Group is continuing to investigate alternate means of minimizing the discrepancy in the use of the spectral analyzer. In this regard, most ISO member countries are continuing their investigations. Unfortunately, however, there is no current support in the USA, or in the U.S. Navy, where such development programs on shipboard vibration have traditionally been carried out.
6-40
6.8.2 Recommendations
At this time, specific interim recommendations for the measurement and evaluation of shipboard vibration are included as follows: 1. Oscillographic recording and manual analysis of real-time records, such as obtained by the current MARAD equipment, will produce the required MRA and can be used effectively. 2. As an improvement on the MARAD system to take advantage of the automatic analysis features of the FFT Analyzer, it is recommended that the real-time data be recorded on tape for more detailed analysis to be carried out after the tests, if required. Individual channels of required data can be obtained on an oscillograph to obtain "quick-look" results aboard ship, as necessary, to satisfy specification requirements. The "Envelope" method of analysis of the tape, should be employed to obtain the "true" MRA. The tapes should be retained for further use, either for resolving unanswered questions and/or for the development of a ship vibration data bank. 3. For the direct use of the spectral analyzer for satisfying the requirements of ISO Standards, it is recommended that the average rms values x i2be recorded and the results multiplied by the conversion factor CF 1.8, as specified 'n ISO 6954. In sample studies carried out by the ISO Ship Vibration Working Group members in 1986, very good agreement was obtained on the analysis of a common tape, when the average rms was evaluated. This basis would provide consistency in results, although, to obtain the "true" MRA data, it would also be necessary to use the "Envelope Method" of analysis to obtain the required crest factors. 4. When using test data to confirm design predictions, consideration should be given to the use of the average rms value x - for comparison with the sinusoidal input used in design predictions. As was previously suggested in [6-8], this could be readily accomplished by dividing the ISO criteria of 9mm/sec by the average conversion factor, CF of 1.8, and use the resulting limit of 5 mm/sec for direct comparison with the calculated hull response predictions. It is also recommended that this approach be investigated in more detail before adoption. 5. A research project should be established to develop improvements in the alternate techniques currently available in the measurement and analysis of shipboard vibration. 6. Vibration generators may be effectively used for collecting shipboard vibration data, particularly prior to the trial voyage. Details of the sinusoidal (sweep-sine)) and transient tests [6-11] are included as Appendix 6-A.
6-41
REFERENCES
6-1 "Code for Shipboard Hull Vibration Measurements," SNAME T & R Bulletin Number 2-10, June 1964. "Code for Shipboard Vibration Measurements," SNAME T & R Code, C-i, January, 1975. "Shipboard Local Structures and Machinery Vibration Measurements," SNAME T & R Code C-4, 1976. "Shipboard Vibration and Noise Guidelines," SNAME T & R Bulletin 2-25, January, 1980. International Standard, ISO 4867, "Code for the Measurement and Reporting of Shipboard Vibration Data," December 1, 1984. International Standard, ISO 4868, "Code for the Measurement and Reporting of Local Vibration Data of Ship Structures and Equipment," November 15, 1984. International Standard, ISO 6954, "Mechanical Vibration and Shock-Guidelines for the Overall Evaluation of Vibration in Merchant Ships," December 15, 1984. Noonan, E. F., "On the Use of Shipboard Vibration Standards," Document ISO/TC 108/SC 21WG 2 N 59, March 1987. 6-9 Manley, R. G., "Waveform Analysis," John Wiley and Sons, Inc. (1946).
6-2 6-3
6-4
0-5
6-6
6-7 6-8
6-10 NKF Report No. 7702-05-01, "Evaluation of Analysis Methods for Shipboard Vibration Measurements," June 5, 1980. 6-11 Ramsey, K.A., "Effective Measurements for Structural Dynamics Testing," Sound and Vibration, April, 1976.
6-42
APPENDIX 6-A
Vibration Generator Tests

For gathering data on shipboard vibration, the test procedures of ISO 4867 and SNAME Code C-1 are recommended. In addition to the procedures indicated, two other mechanical excitor-based tests, useful for collecting shipboard vibration data, particularly prior to the trial voyage, are also reconmended. These are the transient and sinusoidal (sweep-sine) tests summarized for reference as follows:
I. Sweep-Sine Test
1. Tools and Equipment:
(a) Electro - Mechanical Excitor "weighs 500-2,000 kg * welded or bolted to a ship's main structure member near propeller "produces controllable harmonic oscillating force (e.g. reaching 20 tonnes at 14 Hz at maximum) due to a rotating out-of-balance weight "force direction can be changed from the vertical to the horizontal direction by switching the position of rotating out-of-balance weight (b) Transducers - used to pick up vibration response
2. Application:
The excitation induced by the excitor is similar to a hull surface force, which is in the range of 15-50 tonnes at 6-12 Hz for large ships. Thus, the excitor will produce a forced vibration of the whole aftbody and superstructure similar to that induced by the hull surface force.
3. Limitation and disadvantage:

. Utilization for the test frequencies below 4-5 Hz is limited when rotating out-of-balance weights are used. "Time consuming "Can cause beat phenomena resonance of the main structure to which the excitor is welded or bolted.
6-A-1
II. Impact Test 1. Tools and Equipment:

a) Hammer - 35kg in weight used to produce impact forces whose duration and shape are affected by the flexibility of the rubber cushion between the hammer and impacted structure.
b) Load Cell - used to record the force pulse
c) Accelerometers - used to record transient vibration response at a number of selected

positions.
2. Application:
Producing transient vibration of a superstructure. The heavy hammer typically impact the front wall between some of higher decks (say, navigation and compass decks) and near the side wall of the structure to excite all superstructure vibration modes at the same time. Force and vibration response versus time are recorded for a 15-20 second interval beginning with the hammer hits the structure. The test is also appropriate for examining superstructure damping.
3. Limitation:
The test is generally not feasible for the hull girder.
6-A-2
.,o.,., .,,o , ,,,, ,1,
COMMITTEE
ON
MAPINE
STRUCTURES
Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems National Academy of Sciences - National Research Council
The COMMITTEE ON MARINE STRUCTURES has technical cognizance over the interagency Ship Structure Committee's research program. Stanley G. Stiansen (Chairman), Riverhead, NY Mark Y. Berman, Amoco Production Company, Tulsa, OK Peter A. Gale, Webb Institute of Naval Architecture, Glen Cove, NY Roif D. Glasfeld, General Dynamics Corporation, Groton, CT William H. Hartt, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, Flh Paul H. Wirsching, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ Alexander B. Stavovy, National Research Council, Washington, DC Michael K. Parmelee, Secretary, Ship Structure Committee, Washington, DC
LOADS WORK GROUP
Paul H. Wirsching (Chairman), University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ ubrata K. Chakrabarti, Chicago Bridge and Iron Company, Plainfield, Keith D. Hjelmstad, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL Hsien Yun Jan, Martech Incorporated, Neshanic Station, NJ Jack Y. K. Lou. Texas A & M University, College Station, TX resh Mani :. --. Rosenbatt & Son, Incorporated, New York, NY So omon C. " 7. Oreco State University, Corvallis, OR
L,
MATFERIALS
WORK GROUP
William H. Hartt (Chairman), Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL Fereshteh Ebrahimi, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL Santiago Ibarra, Jr., Amoco Corporation, Naperville, IL Paul A. Lagace, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA John Landes, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN -amdouh M. Salama, Conoco Incorporated, Ponca City, OK James M. Sawhill, Jr., Newport News Shipbuilding, Newport News, VA
SHIP STRUCTURE COMMITTEE PUBLICATIONS SSC-333 SSC-334 Advance Methods for Ship Motion and Wave Load Prediction by James C. Oliver, 1989 Influence of Weld Porosity on the Integrity of Marine Structures by William J. Walsh , Brian N. Leis, and J. Y. Yung, 1989 Performance of Underwater Weldments by R. J. Dexter, E. B. Norris, W. R. Schick, and P. D. Watson 1986 Liquid Sloshing in Cargo Tanks by N. A. Hamlin
Part 1 - Ship Fracture Mechanisms A. Stambaugh and William A. Wood Investigation 1987
SSC-335 SSC-336
,; C-;'I/
1986
by Karl
SSC-33'7
Part 2 - Ship Fracture Mechanisms - A Non-Expert's Guide
for Inspecting and Determining the Causes of Significant Ship Fractures by Karl A. Stambaugh and William A. Wood
1987
SSC-338
Fatigue Prediction Analysis Validation from SL-7 Hatch Corner Strain Data by Jen-Wen Chiou and Yung-Kuang Chen 1985 Ice Loads and Ship Response to Ice - A Second Season by C. Daley, J. W. St. John, R. Brown, J. Meyer, and I. Glen
1990
SSC-339
SSC-340
Ice Forces and Ship Response to Ice - Consolidation Report by C. Daley, J. W. St. John, R. Brown, and I. Glen 1990 Global Ice Forces and Ship Response to Ice by P. Minnick, J. W. St. John, B. Cowper, and M. Edgecomb 1990 Global Ice Forces and Ship Response to Ice - Analysis of Ice Ramming Forces by Yung-Kuang Chen, Alfred L. Tunik, and Albert P-Y Chen 1990 Global Ice Forces and Ship Response to Ice - A Second Season by P. Minnick and J. W. St. John 1990 Fatigue Characterization of Fabricated Ship Details Phase 2 by K. K. Park and F. V. Lawrence, Jr. 1988 Development of a Generalized Onboard Response Monitoring System (Phase I) by F. W. DeBord, Jr. and B. Hennessy 1987 Ship Structure Committee Publications - A Special Bibliography 1983
SSC-341 SSC- 342
SSC-343
SSC-346 SSC-349
None

SSC 350 Ship Vibration Design Guide

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SSC 350 Ship Vibration Design Guide

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

SSC 350 Ship Vibration Design Guide

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SSC-350

SHIP STRUCTURE COMMITTEE

Military Sealift Command

Ship Structure Committee

2100 Second Street S.W.

PH: (202) 267.oo0 FAX: (202) 267-0025

SHIP VIBRATION DESIGN GUIDE

Technical Report Documentation Page

Ship Vibration Design Guide

July 1989 6.Performing Organizaton Cod*

Edward F. Noonan 719 North Holly Drive Annapolis, MD 21401

I,Contrue; .13. Type of Report and Period Covered

18. Distribution SlatemenAvail

able to the public from:

Shipboard Vibration Hull Structure Propulsion Machinery

Form DOT F 1700.7

, D It ixbut ion/ "NAwdi1btlity Codey

1.1 1.2 1.3

1.4 1.5 1.6

4-1 4-2 4-3

5-2 5-2 5-4 5-4 5-5

Ship Vibration Design Guide

6--8 6-8 6-9 6-9 6-9

LIST of FIGURES and TABLES

Ship Vibration Design Guide

on Block Coefficient [3-3] ........................................................................................

Burrill C avitation Diagram [3-91 ...............................................................................................

Ship Vibration Design Guide

INTRODUCTION TO SHIPBOARD VIBRATION

1.1 Purpose And Scope

1.2 Shipboard Vibration

iroductlon to Shipboard Vibration .i

1.3 Hull Girder Vibration

1.3.1 Hul Girder Excitation

Ship Vibration Design Guide

Introduction to Shipboard Vibration

W*ork effected in the

Ship Vibration Design Guide

Introduction to Shipboard Vibration

'*OR(oAFT, ATHdARI"$ RESPECT.I-iEL fWNHUST WOIZONTAL i.AR oYf TICAL

- YERIf CAL 3(1OGING MOMENT

Figure 1-3 Description of Bearing Forces and Moments

1.3.2 Hull Girder Response

Ship Vibration Design Guide

FORE-AFT, ATHWARTSHIP, AND RESPECTIVELV LONGITUDINA. FORCE HORIZONTAL FORCE

VERTICAL FORCE LWIIOITJOINAL MOMEN"

~HORIZONTAL MO WT VERTICAL. MO ENT

1.3.2.2 Frequency of Vibration of the Hull Girder

Introduction to Shipboard Vibration

Intoductiun tu ahipbcurd Vibrutiuti

Ship Vibration Design Guide

VERTICAL HULL GIRDER VIBRATION DEVIATION INCLUDES 67%. :STANDARD I\

20000) jtnes. DISPLACEMENT A

Introduction to Shipboard Vibration

1.4 Vibration of Major Substructures

Ship Vibration Design Guide

COM11INED SHErAR MM IJFtpJNf:

RDU VIIIPttap Stf"T

Figure 1-10 Superstructure Longitudinal Vibration