Date April 2008

Author A. Vrijdag, D. Stapersma and T. van Terwisga

Address Deift University of Technology
Ship Hydromechanics Laboratory
Mekelweg 2, 26282 CD Delft TU Deift
Deift University of Technology

Tradeoffs ¡n ship propulsion control: engine

overloading and cavitation inception in
operational conditions
by

A. Vrijdag, D. Stapersma and T. van Terwisga

Report No. 1584-P 2008
Published: Proceedings of the gth International Naval
Conference and! Exhibition, Hamburg, Germany, INEC'OB,

Page lof 1/1

 Y-

-,,

Aa.
w'. .
.
L
e

.
îf a

I
N

DA
s s
s e s e . s e S S

CONFERENCE THEMES
1- L 2008 » Concepts
CCH, HAMBURG, GERMANY » Signatures and modelling
ORGANISED BY » Propulsion
THE INSTITUTE OF MARINE ENGINEERING,
» Responding to external influences
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (IMAREST)
» Through life support systems
SUPPORTED BY
THE INSTITUTION OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY » System design
THE NAUTICAL INSTITUTE » Equipment design
AMERICAN SoCIETY OF NAVAL ENGINEERS » Ownership
THE SOCIETY OF NAVAL ARCHITECTS & MARINE ENGINEERS » Equipment support

MAIN SPONSORS » Damage control ard fire fighting

Iñs(iI,,leof
Rolls-Royce Marine Engineering,
Science ¿Technolo!y

' BMT Defence Services I M4iE ST

 TITE INSTITUTE OF MARINE ENGINEERING, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

80 Coleman Street, London, EC2R 5BJ

Tel: +44 (0)20 7382 2600 Fax: +44 (0)20 7382 2670
Email: [email protected] Web: www.imarest.org

President: Professor Yoo Sang Choo

ChiefExecutive: Keith F Read CBE

9th
International Naval Engineering Conference and Exhibition
(INEC 2008)
1 3 April 2008
Congress Center Hamburg, Germany

The Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology would like to thank the following Advisory
Committee Members for their invaluable help in the organisation of this conference:

Chairman:
Capt John Newell MBE RN, Ministry of Defence, UK

Committee Members:
Dipl Ing Wolfgang Bohlayer, ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems, Germany
Cdr Matt Bolton RN, Ministry of Defence, UK
Capt Mark Dannatt RN, Converteam Ltd, UK
Cdr John Dannecker USN, Ministry of Defence, UK
CV Stanislas Gouriez de la Motte FN, French Ministry of Defence, France
Dr Alistair Greig, University College London, UK
Mr Rob Hughes, Rolls-Royce plc, UK
Mr Paul Maillardet, Ministry of Defence, UK
Mr Dave Mattick OBE, Converteam Ltd, UK
Mr Roy Quilliam, BMT Defence Services Ltd, UK
Dr Phil Rottier, BAE SYSTEMS, UK
Lt Cdr Dr Paul Schulten RNLN, Defence Materiel Organisation, The Netherlands
Mr Tim Stiven, QinetiQ, UK
Lt Cdr John Voyce RN, Ministry of Defence, UK

Published by THE INSTITUTE OF MARINE ENGiNEERING, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY,

a Registered Charity, No 212992, of 80 Coleman Street, London EC2R 5BJ.
('England Reg No 1100685.)

Cöver design by Gung-Ho Design, 2 Pear Tree Street, London, EC1V 3SB

In accordance with the terms and conditions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, the written
consent of the publisher must be obtained before publishing more than a reasonable abstract.

Papers presented or published reflect the views of the individuals who prepared them and, unless indicated
expressly in the text do not necessanly represent the views of The Institute of Manne Engineenng, Science and
Technology. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that the information in this publication is accurate,
The Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology makes no representation or warranty, express or
implied, as to the accuracy, completeness or correctness of such information. The Institute of Marine
Engineering, Science and Technology accepts no responsibility whatsoever for any loss, damage or other
liability arising from any use of this publication or the information which it contains.

IMarEST Conferences
© 2008 The Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology
Contents

¡NEC OPENING SESSION

CVF Procurement and build strategy

RAdin R Love, CVF Team Leader, Ministiy of Defence, UK
(Paper not available at the time of printing)

i F125 - the new frigate for the German Navy

A Grudda, ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems, Germany

10 The new Dutch patrol ship

Capt MHendriks, Cdr P Knipping, Defence Materiel Organisation, The Netherlands

16 Existing gunboat proven design improvement New concept design

J Tzagarakis, Hellenic Shipyards SA, Greece

Session A: CONCEPTS

26 The globally deployable minor warship - A conceptualisation of future solutions

A Kimber, W Giles, BMT Defence Services Limited, UK; TDinham-Peren, BMT
Seatech, UK

38 The new Dutch JSS - the challenges of its design and procurement
Lt Cdr Dr P J M Schulten, Cdr J W Hartman, P Everts, Deftnce Materiel Organisation,
The Netherlands

47 Submarines for the future, a new design model

WH de BruUn, B J van Oers, Delfi University of Technology, The Netherlands

63 A future RN fleet with an IFEP nuclear aircraft carrier

Dr A R Greig, S Rusling, Dr R W G Bucknall, University College London, UK

New concepts in mine warfare

FSchom, DCNS, France
(Paper not available at the time of printing)

Session B: SIGNA TURES AND MODELLING

71 Acoustic design tools - present and future integrated software

R Fischer, L Boroditsky, J Spence, Noise Control Engineering mc, USA

82 Tradeoffs in ship propulsion control: engine overliiäding and cavititiiijitiijÌ

(in operational condition
4 P7däDStapeaTDelfl-Un1vergi1y
(Tvan Terwis,a, De(fl University

94 Considerations for low noise navy propellers

CJohannsen, Dr UHollenbach, HSVA, Dr C Bauer, VA TECH Escher Wyss GmbH,
Germany
 Simulation of ship electric AC-networks: a mean value first principle approach
T de Lange, Delfi University of Technology, The Netherlands
(Paper not available at the time of printing)

107 On electric load characterization and categorization in ship electric installations

Prof Dr Ing 1K Hatzilau, Cdr 1K Gyparis, Hellenic Naval Academy, Ass Profi M
Prousalidis, Dr G J Tsekouras National Technical University ofAthens, Greece

123 Real time simulation of the propulsion plant dynamic behaviour of the aircraft
carrier "Cavour"
MAltosole, G Benvenuto, U Campora, MFigari, Università di Genova, Italy; Capt M
Giuliano, Capt S D'Arco, Italian Navy, Italy, V Giuffra, A Spadoni, ABB PS&S;
MRotto, S Micchetti Fincantieri, Italy

Session C: PROPULSION

131 Making Waves Faster - The MT3O enters naval service

R Tooke, R Kok, Rolls-Royce plc, UK

143 Naval gear systems and their future demands

Dr F Hoppe, RENK, Germany

Hybrid electric propulsion for Naval Auxiliaries

R Partridge, A Scott, M North, Rolls-Royce Naval, UK
(Paper not available at the time of printing)

154 Propulsion options for future frigates - Power dense solutions for medium sized
warships
R F Lamerton, N Moss, Thales Naval Ltd, UK; R E Maltby, W Ubhi, Converteam UK
Ltd, UK

164 Practical application of viscous CFD in ship design - Integration study of a

submerged waterjet
P Kaeding, C Thieme, J Ballé, ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems, Blohm and Voss GmbH,
D Jürgens, Voith Turbo Schneider Propulsion GmbH, Germany

179 Putting the power into CVF - integrating the prime movers behind the IFEP
System
Lt R Casson RN, Lt Cdr I Timbrell RN, Min istiy of Defence, UK; S Newman, C English,
Aircraft Carrier Alliance, UK

Session D: RESPONDING TO EXTERNAL INFLUENCES

189 Rise to the challenge - a newly developed CP Propeller system that fulfils the
strictest environmental requirements
L D Johansson, MSkrinning, Rolls-Royce AB, Sweden

200 UK Navy surface warships engines exhaust emissions study 1988-2006

Lt Cdr J P Olivier, Ministry of Defence, UK
 218 Demonstrating safety by class societies: A Navy's point of view
E C A ter Bekke, Netherlands Defence Materiel Organisation/Delfi University of
Technology, The Netherlands; P Everts, Netherlands Defence Materiel Organisation,
The Netherlands

227 Maintaining Naval combatants in classification

G MAshe, Capt D H Lewis USN, American Bureau of Shipping, USA

237 Future fuels onboard UK warships

JBuckingham, BMT Defence Services Lid; Lt R Casson RN, Ministiy of Defence, UK

250 First ever classification of a Naval submarine

Dr L Grünitz, Germanischer Lloyd AG, Germany

Session E: THROUGH LIFE SUPPOR T SYSTEMS

254 Support solution design and development, in the light of the Defence Industrial
Strategy
SB Mather, TLillie, Dr P Grosse, BAE Systems UK

269 Maximising performance across a class of vessels, through optimal distribution of

system availability
N Lawson, Ministîy of Defence UK; Dr P Rottier, BAE SYSTEMS, UK

278 Enhancing value for money through model-based support solution optimisation
A Bowden, R Parker, Dr P Rottier, BAE SYSTEMS, UK

289 Improving the performance of complex support organisations - the application of

systems dynamics modelling in the UK submarine support enterprise
S Kershaw, PA Consulting Group, UK

307 Managing and supporting ship availability

G Lea, D Houghton, VT Naval Support, UK

Session F: SYSTEM DESIGN

Technology management in warship acquisition

A J Shanks, W L Mitchelmore, BMT Defence Services Ltd, UK
(Paper not available at the time of printing)

326 Facing up to failure - the defence of graceful degradation

B Salter, N Smith, Converteam Ltd, UK

341 Advanced marine power system architecture with active fault protection
J Wang, Dr P Kadanik, Dr M Sumner, Dr D WP Thomas, University of Nottingham,
UK; Lt R D Geertsma RNLN, Ministiy of Defence, UK

355 The use of a complement generation and analysis tool within ship design
H Morley, P Wotton, Quintec Associates, UK
 364 Unmanned underwater vehicle (UUV) deployment and retrieval considerations
for submarines
T Hardy, G Barlow, BMTDefence Services Ltd, UK:.

Session G: L?QUIPMENT DESIGN r

379 Simulation and performance analysis of a faulty marine diesel engine running in
realistic operating conditions
G Benvenuto, U Campora, Università di Genova, Italy

391 The influence of turbo charger matching on propulsion performance

Prof D Stapersma, Netherlands Defence Academy, The Netherlands,
Dr H T Grimmelius, Delfi University of Technology, The Netherlands

402 Energy storage systems as a mechanism for improving power quality in an IFEP
system
Dr I MElders, JD Schuddebeurs, Dr CD Booth, Dr G MBurt, ProfJR McDonald,
University of Strathclyde, UK, J McCarthy, Rolls-Royce pic, UK

413 Electrical insulation for ships

Dr R E Hebner, Dr A Ouroua, University of Texas at Austin, USA

Session H: OWNERSHIP

420 Application of re1iabilitybased inspection techniques for integrity management of

mechanical handling systems
IBottomley, DrJAustin, Frazer-Nash Consultancy Limited, UK; JBentley, IMES
Limited, UK, K Barnes, Lt Cdr S Mealing RN, Ministry of Defence, UK

430 Project managing a VICTORIA class extended docking work period (EDWP): a
snapshot naval perspective
LCdr MC Wilson, LCdr D E Hughes, CF - Canadian Forces, Canada

440 Through life support of the Collins class submarine

P Crosby, ASC PTYLTD, Australia

450 Maritime environmental challenges - impact and solutions for Naval vessels
Cdr(ret) K D Eule, Deerberg-Systems GmbH, Germany

Lessons from marine incidents for Naval Engineering

Capt MDannatt RN, P T Norton, Converteam Ltd. UK
(Paper not available at the time of printing)

Session I: EQUIPMENT SUPPORT

458 Living with the threat of microbiologically influenced corrosion in submarine sea
water systems - the Royal Navy's perspective
Lt G JE Nicklin RN, Ministry of Defence, UK
 468 Protraction of legacy warships by judicious implementation of automation
Commodore (Dr) R K Rana, Commander S Chhabra, Indian Navy

479 The dry dock code

WBrook-Hart, G[ford, UK, R Smith, BMT Marine Projects Ltd, UK; G Skinner, Fleet
Support Marine Projects Ltd, UK

Session J: DAMAGE CONTROL AND FIRE FIGHTING

498 Recoverability in the füture damage control & fire fighting in 21st century
C S Smit, TNO, The Netherlands, Lt Cdr H Zor, Defence Materiel Organisation; The
Netherlands

508 Latest developments in damage control

MK Vierow, L-3 Communications MSUK, UK

519 Intelligent robotic local suppression system for the marine enviùonment
Dr JL D Glockling, Fire Protection Association, UK; Dr G Doherty, Rolls-Royce
Marine Electrical Systems, UK

532 Challenges to protect confined and cluttered environments like submarine

compartments with water mist
C Cueff C Le Gac and G Lucas, DCNS, France

Design methodology for increasing the survivability of warships

R A Logtmeer, K S van Bodegraven, Defence Materiel Organisation, The Netherlands
(Paper not available at the time of printing)

INEC CLOSING SESSION

542 Warship missile system integration

PNGazard, MBDA UKLtd, UK

550 The Type 45 AAW Destroyer Combat System Integration Strategy

SfLoneragan, BAE SYSTEMS, UK

The electric warship - then, now and later

CHodge, BMTDefence Services Ltd, UK; D Mattick, Converteam Ltd, UK
(Paper not available at the time of printing)
 Tradeoffs in ship propulsion control:
engine overloading and cavitation
inception in operational conditions
A. Vrijdag, MSc
PhD student, Delfi University of Technology/Netherlands Defence Academy
D. Stapersma, MSc
Professor of Marine Engineering, Delfi University of Technology/ Netherlands Defence
Academy
T. van Terwisga, MSc, PhD
Professor of Ship Propulsion, Delfi University of Technology! MARIN

SYNOPSIS

Off-design conditions can have a severe impact on ship propulsion system behaviour. Resistance
increase for instance leads to a higher engine loading, and can also easily lead to a decrease of
cavitation inception speed with respect to calm water conditions. Wakefield variations due to ship
motions, waves and manoeuvres also have effect on engine loading and on cavitation inception speed.
This paper shows that one single pitch-shaft speed relation not always results in favourable propulsion
system behaviour in the great variety of ship operating conditions. It is demonstrated that with
relatively simple changes to the propulsion control system, the adverse effects of off-design
conditions can be counteracted by using a condition dependent pitch-shaft speed relation.

INTRODUCTION

During the design phaseof a ship propulsion control system, there are tradeoffs to be made between the
various goals that one pursues with the propulsion installation. These goals can be related to fuel
efficiency and manoeuvrability, but also to acoustic signature, thermal overloading of the (diesel)
engine, or even shipboard vibration levels
A (naval) ship is required to operate in a great variety of environmental conditiOns. During propulsion
(control) system design these conditions should be taken into account to ensure that the system delivers
favourable behaviour under many circumstances. These circumstances include effects given by nature
such as seastate and wind, but also dynamic conditions resulting from ship manoeuvres such as turning
circles and accelerations! decelerations.

Author's Biographies
Arthur Vrijdag graduated from the Royal Netherlands Naval College in 2004 and in the same year heobtained his
masters degree in ship hydromechanics at DeIft University of Technology. He is now performing a PhD research
titled 'development and implementation of an optimised ship propulsion control system' in close cooperation with
the Royal Netherlands Navy, Defence Research and Development Canada, the Royal Australian Navy, Wärtsilä
Propulsion Netherlands, IMTECH and MARIN.

Douwe Stapersma, after graduating in 1973 at DeIft University of Technology in the field of gas turbines, joined
NEVESBU - a design bureau for naval ships - and was involved in the design and engineering of the machineiy
installation of the Standard frigate. After that he co-ordinated the integration of the automatic propulsion control
system for a class of export corvettes. From 1980 onward he was responsible for the design and engineering of the
machineiy mstallation of the Walrus class submarmes and in particular the machinery automation After that he
was in charge of the design of the Moray class submarines in a joint project organisation with RLDM. Nowadays he
is professor of Marine Engineering at the Netherlands Defence Academy and of Marine Diesel Engines at Delfi
University of Technology.

Tom van Terwisga finished his studies in ship hydromechanics at Delfi l!Jniversity of Technology in 1985. After
that he started working at the R&D department of the Maritime Research Institute Netherlands (MARIN). In 1990
he moved to the Ship Research Department and focussed on ship propulsor hydrodynamics In 1996 he finished his
PhD research on 'waterjet-hull interaction'. Currently he is working as senior researcherPropulsors at the R&D
dept. of at MARIN and is professor in ship hydromechanics at Delft University of Technology.

82
To demonstrate the effect of environmental conditions on the propulsion system behaviour, two
operating conditions are worked out in detail by means of a simulation model. Furthermore the benefit
of making the traditionally fixed shaft speed pitch combinations dependent on the actual conditions is
considered. Therefore this paper is limited to controllable pitch propeller (CPP) ships since only these
ships have the possibility to achieve the same ship speed with multiple shaft speed-pitch combinations
This paper focuses on the minimization of acoustic signature due to propeller cavitation combined with
the prevention of thermal overloading of the diesel engine.

TRE SIMULATION MODEL

This section describes the propulsion system simulation model that has been used in the current study.
The total simulation model includes the propulsion system model:, the (simplified) currently applied
control system, and the environmental disturbance model.

The propulsion model

The propulsion simulation model as used in this paper is shown in a block diagram in Fig I. It
describes the (non-linear) dynamics of the ship propulsion plant including the engine, the propulsion
control system, and the CPP. Note that the gearbox is part of the propulsion machine-block and that
the hydraulic pitch actuating system is part of the pitch control system-block. The actual ship under
consideration has a similar installation for port and starboard side. Only one side is shown here.
On the right hand side of the figure, the ship translation loop is shown, based on a force balance
between propeller thrust and ship resistance. When those two forces are out of balance, a net force Will
result in an acceleration or deceleration of the ship. Integration of acceleration gives ship speed:

v3(t) =--JFdt+v0
where v is ship speed (having initial value v0 at time t = O), F is the sum of all forces working in
the longitudinal direction of the ship and m is the effective mass of ship and entrained water.
On the left hand side the shaft rotation loop is shown, dealing with the balance between propeller and
engine torque. In the same way as in the translation loop, a net torque will cause an acceleration or
deceleration of the shaft. Integration of angular acceleration gives shaft speed:

n(t)=1 JMdt+n0
where n is shaft speed (having initial value n0 at time t = O), M is the sum of all torques working
on the shaft and I is the effective rotational inertia of the shaft system (engine and gearbox rotating
parts, shaft, propeller and entrained water).
In the middle the propeller thrust and torque are modelled. The propeller thrust Fprop and torque Q
can be computed from the open water diagram of the propeller under consideration:
v(1w) k1 =f(O,J), kq =g(O,J),
nD
Q=kqpn2D5,and Fprop k1pn2D4
where J is the advance coefficient made up from the advance speed of the water (ship speed v
corrected by wake factor w) and something that is proportional to circumferential speed (propeller
speed n times diameter D). The actual open water diagrams are given as thrust coefficient k, and
torque coefficient kq both being a function ofpitchangle 9 and the advance coefficient. Torque and
thrust than can be determined using the definition of the two non dimensional coefficients. A more
complete description of this general propulsion block diagram is given in Stapersma'. Some particulars
of the ship under consideration are given in Table I.

83
 Table I Vesselparticulars

Type of vessel Frigate

Lpp 114m
Draught FPP/APP 4.3 m
Engines Stork - Wärtsjl5 Diesel SW280
Number ofpropellers 2
Displacement 300 tons

Command

dem Propulsion dem Pitch Disturbances

Control Control
Governor
System System

e
Propulsion
MSh,tì M
Propeller
1< Propeller Fprop FshjP Ship
machine Torque Thrust Resistance
+
J

Shaft Ship
rotation translation
dynamics dynamics

Disturba nces
FIg 1 Theshippropûlsion block diagram

The control system

The real propulsion control system has many nonlinear and dynamic features such as fuelrack-limiting,
transient control and overspeed/ underspeed protection. However, in static conditions the input-output
relation of the propulsion control system is given by the pitch- shaft speed relation which is also called
the "combinator curve". This combinator curve consists out of two lookup tables. One lookup table
translates the single lever command to a shaft speed setpoint. The other iookup table translates the
single lever command to a pitch setpoint. One single command thus results in two setpoints.
An example of both iookup tables is shown in Fig 2. Three types of regimes can be distinguished: for
commands between -80rpm and +67rpm the shaft speed is fixed to 80rpm, while the pitch increases
(nonlinearly) from -15 to 26deg. Secondly there is a region from 67rpm to 91rpm where pitch is kept
constant at 26deg and shaft speed is increased from 80rpm to 110rpm. The commands between -80rpm
and -135rpm follow the same regime. Finally for commands above 91 rpm there is a regime where both
pitch and rpm are changing until the maximum command is reached at 135rpm and 3ldeg pitch.
The single lever command should have the property that it allows intuitive use and it should be
monotonously increasing with ship speed In the Royal Netherlands Navy commands on the bridge are
given in terms of the virtual shaft speed setpoint. This virtual setpoint is a virtual number (in rpm) that
has the properties described above. For the ship under consideration the so-called virtual shaft speed
virI is given by:

0 'i (1)
1'nom -
where 00 is the zero thrust pitch-angle and 9nom
is the nominal pitch angle. n represents the actual
shaft speed and O the actual pitch. Onboard, the realised virtual rpm is constantly calculated and
presented via measurement of actual pitch and actual shaft speed via Eq 1.

84
 140 35 -

30
130
25 I

E 20
120
C
o
D,
is----------------- I

110 10 r T
oo. 1

t5 5 ---------------t
I
-i
100
C,
O ----------I----
i
-I------1
I

90

80

-100 -50 0 50 100

20
o io
command: irt.setitpmj command: irt.set
(rnm]

Fig2 Exampleof a combinator curve. The left figure shows theshaft speed lookup table. The right figure shows the pitch lookup
table. Three different regimesare present.

The relation between yjrj and ship speed is shown in the n - O plane in Fig 3. Note that the contours
of vjr1
and ship speed align quite well. Also note that this figure only holds for calm water conditions.
More heavy loaded conditions will shift the ship speed curves to the lower left comer. In other words:
the same virtual shaft speed setting will result in lower ship speed in high resistance conditions. A well
known fact is clearly illustrated by Fig 3: the same n., or the same ship speed can be reached with
many combinations of pitch and shaft speed

5
ship speed [kts]
C'virtuaI shaft speed [rpm]
i example combinator curve

25

20

C.)

lo

60 80 100 120 140

[rpm]
shaft

Fig 3Contours of virtual:shaflspeed and ship speed in the n-pitch plane. Only forward speed is shown For reference the
combinator curve is shown The ship speedas shown holds. for the calm water condition, 6 months out of dock.

Environmental disturbance model

85
As illustrated in Fig 1, there are two main disturbances acting on the propulsion system: resistance
disturbances and wakefield disturbances. The mean resistance disturbance is modelled from three
resistance components as follows:

Rincr = R wind + R waves + Rouiing

The mean wave resistance R waves is determined using the wave resistance transfer function, in
R waves
combination with the spectrum undr consideration The wave resistance transfer function

shows that the wave resistance is considered proportional with squared wave amplitude . This

transfer function has been calculated offline by means of the Gerritsma-Beukelman method for
multiple values of wave frequency w, and is taken from MARIN report2. By combining these transfer
functions with the wavespectrum S (w) related to a certain seastate, the predicted mean resistance
increase due to waves is obtained as follows:

R waves
R waves = 2f (w) S(w).dw
Mean wind resistance is calculated by application of:
)2
R wind = Pair (reI AC

Where Vrel is the mean relative wind speed, A is a reference area, and Cd is a wind drag-coefficient
(for headwinds in this specific case). fouling-resistance is taken as an extra increase of 13% of the
calm water resistance, taken from MARIN report2. This is an estimate for the 6 months out of dock
condition, based on data supplied by the RNLN.

GOALS AND CONSTRAINTS

As shown in Fig 3 there are many combinations of shaft speed and pitch that result in the same virtual
shaft speed. The choice for one of these combinations is a compromise between various goals that one
pursues with the ship, limited by constraints of the ship, its installations, and its crew. In this paper the
goal is to decrease propeller cavitation noise in operational conditions, under the constraint that the
diesel engine should not be subjected to thermal overloading. Both the goal and the most important
constraint are further described:

Goals

In the discipline of propeller hydrodynamics it is customary to present cavitation inception behaviour

of a propeller in a propeller inception diagram. This is a diagram showing the dimensionless cavitation-
number a versus the thrust- or torque coefficient (k or lç) or versus the advance ratió J. a is given
by:
p0pr +pgz
n
p
where Po is the atmospheric pressure, Pv iS the vapour pressure of seawater, is the density of
seawater, g the gravitational acceleration, and z the water height above the propeller shaft. n represents
shaft speed, and D is the propeller diameter.
Inception conditions are drawn to show the locús of propeller working points where a specific type of
cavitation starts. Due to their shape the inception lines are often related to as the "inception bucket". An
example is shown in Fig 4. Note that a nominal operating line is also shown. Operating on the left hand
of this bucket-shape will result in pressure side cavitation, while operation on the right hand side will in
this case results in tip-vortex suction side cavitation. Unfortunately this bucket only holds for one
single pitch angle. A change in pitch results in (a) a shift in location of the bucket with respect to KT
and (b) a different shape of the bucket and thus requires a completely new diagram.

86
 Cavitation
number

t Operational
curve

Tip Vortex
Pressure
side
i suction side

Full
power

Kl

Fig 4: Example cavitation bucket showing two inception lines

In this paper an alternative presentation of the inception diagram is presented where the variable K1 is
replaced by something like an effective angle of attack of the flow encountering the blade. The effect is
that a change in pitch angle will practically not result in a shift of the bucket This type of presentation
is useful both during analysis of propeller design but even more in the design phase of a propulsion
controller.
The idea is as follows: cavitation takes place if the pressure somewhere around the propeller blades
drops below the vapour pressure. The pressure distribution around the blades is dependent on the
(local) inflow angles of the propeller sections. These inflow angles are the result of the following
aspects: shaft speed, ship speed, wakefield, propeller geometry and the loading dependent induced
velocities. A simple sketch of the inflow of a specific section is shown in :Fig 5.

Fig 5: Velocity triangle of a carnberedLsection at OiR

From this figure it can be derived that the local inflow angle contains pitch:O, flow angle ß and a
correction fOr the shock free entry angle a. as follows:

aeff =G-ß-a
Working this out gives:

ae - arctan ( '7R
I I arctanI
( c1va
I a.
O.7rD) O.7rnD)

Where c1 is a correction factor that can be used for tuning, a1 is the shock free entry angle that is
dependent on camber and on induced velocities near the leading edge.

87
For now only the geometric (camber) part a.0 of a. is determined and incorporated in the effective
inflow angle estimation process. a10 is calculated from the (pitch dependent) camber c and thickness f
and given without derivation:
Cfmax
a,0
ç2
4 J max

By conversion of three full scale observed cavitation buckets (each observed at a different pitch), the
coefficient c1 is determined such that the best overlap of the three buckets in the a versus o, plane is
found. From this, since we are interested in control, a safe inner bucket is derived that is expected to
give cavitation free behaviour over a large pitch-range. This safe inner bucket is made visible
schematically in Fig 6. Operating on the left hand of this V-shape will result in pressure side cavitation,
while operation on the right hand side Will result in suction side cavitation. The existing combinator
curve and the RTBO-constraint (explained in the next section) are shown for reference. Contours of
virtual shaft speçd and pitch angle are also shown.

i: i
i' ¡I
II
pitch contours [deg]
Cl) virtual shaft speed contour [rpmi
combinator curve
- cavitation inception bucket
RTBO line th
/
/

¡ I.

o
nI
I
'g

/ 'I

/ 1/
/o
__/
-

-6 -2 0 2 4 6 8
eff [deg]
Fig 6 Cavitation bucket in terms of OeS. Contours of pitch, virtual shafl speed are shown. This figure holds for the calm water
condition, 6 months out.of dock.

Constraints

Examples of constraints of the propulsion system are: minimum/maximum engine speed and maximum
(engine speed dependent) fuelrack setting to prevent thermal overloading of the diesel engine. In this
paper the latter one is called the Reduced Time Between Overhaul (RTBO) -line. A prolonged stay on
the high loaded side of the RTBO-line is undesirable from the viewpoint of maintenance and costs.
Closely related to the RTBOlthe is the engine margin: this is the amount of fuelrack X (in mm) that
can be added to theactûal ftielrack position (at the actual shaft speed) until the RTBO-line is crossed:
margin = XRTBO - X
This margin is important when sailing in waves since propeller torque variations require the governor
to constantly adapt the fuelrack in order to keep the shaft speed constant at the requested speed. A
higher seastate thus requires a higher margin to allow for fuelrack variations. An example showing the
engine envelope consisting out of the RTBO-line and the maximum and minimum shaft speed is shown
in Fig 7. The figure also shows the reference combinator curve that was introduced in Fig 2. The other

88
two combinator curves that are shown are described later. Note that the RTBO- line shown in Fig 6 is
exactly the same RTBO line as in Fig 7, but now shown in a different grid.
Other constraints may be imposed by for instance the thrust bearing or by the CPP hydraulic actuator
capabilities. These constraints are not dealt with here.

35 ,ssI
p...'

30
o

25 con bindo'tl%
- %.. I "s 's-'
ccmbintoy2
I' I

I I

20
.1
contour [rpm]
D)
Q)
-D ='cavitation bucket
15 -+reference combinator
-combinator 2
--combinator i
10 engine envelope
refe re n ce cçmb Inator

F
-- -------.;.--,.---

£
60 80 100 120 140
shaft
[rpm]
Fig 7 The engine envelope in the shaft speed-pitch plane. This figure holds for the calm water condition, 6 months'out of dock.

DESIGN EXAMPLE

The difficulty with the design of a combinator is that a specific curve may be a good compromise in
one operating condition, but might not even completely fall within the system constraints (engine
envelope) in another condition. A conservative approach can then easily result in a design in which the
combinator curve falls just within the engine- envelope in the most demanding operating condition.
Unfortunately this will most likely lead to (unnecessary) performance degradation in less demanding
operating conditions.
In this section the design-process of a combinator curve is demonstrated for the two conditions shown
in Table II: seastate O and seastate 6. It is emphasised that for the sake of the example, the two cases are
considered independently. Later on the consequences are shown if a combinator-design that is specific
for one condition is used in another condition.

Table Il Considered operating conditions

Operating Operating
condition I condition 2
Windforce Bfi O Bfi 8
Wind direction - heathvind
Equivalent seastate 0 6

89
 Desgn for calm water

For the design in calm water the plots as shown in Fig 6 and Fig 7 are used. The design consists out of
several steps and decisions that influence each other. The main starting points are given here

The working point of the engine should lie within the operating envelope for all possible static
working points.
The combinator curve should preferably lie in the middle of the cavitation bucket. Is it
acknowledged that this is not possible for the lower ship speeds where ship speed can only be
reduced by reducing the pitch.
The maximum pitch is 31 deg.

Results of the decision process for the calm water condition are listed in Table III. Some choices are
somewhat subjective, but it is likely that another "designer" will come up with a similar combinator
curve. Especially in the lower virtual shaft speed-region there is somewhat more freedom of choice.
The resulting combinator 1 is shown in Fig 7. It is clear that in calm water combinator I satisfies the
goal and the constraints
Table Ill Resulting combinatôr curve for calm water. (Combinator 1)
Node
remarks
viri (command) seI 9set number
Only one viable option: max engine speed and
135 rpm 135 rpm 31 deg 4 max pitch. Lies just outside the operating
envelope due to the 13% fouling resistance.
Bottom of the Cl-bucket. A bucket less deep
120 rpm 135 rpm 27.8 deg
wouldlead toa different choice.
50rpm 56.2 rpm 27.8 deg 2 Thisis the middle of the cavitation bucket.
Zero thrust. The minimum shaft speed is fixed
0rpm 56.2 rpm 1.7 deg I
to 56.2rpm

Design for Seastate 6

The same process as for the calm water cofldition is now carried out for the "seastate 6" condition. Fig
8 and Fig 9 are the equivalents of Fig 6 and Fig 7, but now for the new operating condition. For the
design process the same starting points as in the previous section apply. Results of the design process
are shown Table IV. In Fig 9 it can be seen that combinator 2 satisfies the goal and the constraint in the
high loaded condition.

Table IV: Resul ing combinãtor curve for seastate 6. (Combinator 2)

Node
vjri (command) 'sef 8set remarks
number
5 Only one option.
135 rpm 135 rpm 31 deg Not achievable without
serIous overloading of the engine.
4 Bottom of the cavitation bucket. A bucket
110rpm 135 rpm 26 deg less deep would lead to'a different choice.
108.5 3
90rpm 26 deg Compromise between margin and CI
rpm
2 This is to ensure that thelowest shaft
speed is equal to lowest shaft speed of the
30rpm 56.2 rpm 17.3 deg other combinator curve. This is done for the
sake of comparison
0 56.2 rpm 1.7 deg i Zero thrust

90
 I
j
I
I,
i/ r
pitch contours [deg]
C1ä) virtual shaft speed contour [rpm]
combinator curve
cavitation inception bucket
k RTBO line
i ,'l

C
b
/

/
F

/ //

j I

'F
/ / I
-.o
,.c::t_
- I

-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
aeff [deg]
Fig 8 Cavitation bucket in terms of aipha_eff. Contours of pitchandvirtual shaft speed are shown. This figure
holds for the seastate 6 condition, headwaves, 6 months out of dock.

35
"s» .90
'4.
I
S..-'

N I 77_
- -.
I -

30 ..-i

- "t 's
con bInaJori1
25
II - -1

I ccmbln'toj' 2 .'--
\
I

'-4.
I '-.
20 ..__I C) nVd contour [rpm]
C) -S
cl)
-D cavitation bucket
4-- reference combinator
15
combinator2
--combinator 1
IO k engine envelope
¡..!ference c.rnbinator --3

+
04
60 80 100 120

shaft
[rpm]
FIg 9 Theengine envelope in the shaft speed-pitch plane. This figure holds for seastate 6, 6 monthsotAt of
dock..

91
 EVALUATION OF DESIGNED COMBINATOR CURVES IN OTHER CONDITION

The previous two combinator designs give a desirable locus of static working points in specific
conditions. In other conditions these combinator curves do not give the same desirable behaviour. To
show this, combinator 1, combinator 2 and the reference combinator are all shown in condition i (calm
water) in Fig 7.
This figure clearly shows that in the calm water condition, combinator i is a balanced compromise
between keeping the middle of the cavitation bucket, and keeping a reasonable distance from the
RTBO-line. The second combinator touches the pressure side of the CI bucket since it is (too) lightly
loaded. Due to the high uncertainty in the CI bucket this is not a desirable situation. A very small
disturbance of the working point or of the pressure side inception line will immediately lead to
inception. The ample distance to the RTBO-line is due to the relatively high shaft speed that is used to
achieve the desired virtual rpm. The same holds for the referencecombinator.
In the higher loaded condition (seastate 6) as shown in Fig 9, combinator 2 has one extra combinator
"node", which was necessary to keep well clear of the RTBO-line. It can be observed that node 3 could
be positioned a little more towards the southeast in order to keep more distance from the RTBO-line in
the area around point (90 rpm, 23 deg). Combinator 1 in this case is not a viable option since a
significant part lies outside the engine envelope. To resolve this, the iso-pitch value should then be
reduced from 27.75 deg to 25 deg or less. The reference combinator also isn't a good option here, since
it partly lies outside the engine envelope.

SAILING WITH CONDITION DEPENDENT SHAFT SPEED-PITCH COMBINATION

The foregoing showed that it is wise to develop and use condition-dependent combinator curves. As
was demonstrated, it is very well possible to develop different combinator curves beforehand for
different conditions. Once these "condition dependent" combinator curves have been designed, the
question remains how the propulsion control system should recognise that the ship is sailing in certain
conditions. A possible solution could be to give the operator the possibility to choose one of the
combinator curves by means of an additional switch on the bridge or in the engine control room.
Another option is to let the ship system recognise the environmental conditions automatically, and then
automatically choose a suitable pitch-rpm combination that delivers the requested virtual shaft speed.
This paper is part of a PhD-study that is currently focussed on full scale implementation of a
propulsion control system onboard of one the HNLMS frigates. This control system automatically
determines the desirable pitch-shaft speed combination that still delivers the desired virtual shaft speed.
This means that the actual realisation of the command truly is condition dependent. This "adaptive"
feature is expected to give positive system behaviour in terms of both propeller cavitation and engine
overloading prevention.

CONCLUSIONS

There are many combinations of pitch and shaft speed that deliver the same ship speed or virtual shaft
speed. The freedom of choice for one of these combinations is limited by application of a combinator
curve. It was shown that a defensive combinator design will lead to performance degradation in terms
of propeller cavitation in calm water. This performance degradation is unnecessary because there is still
enough engine margin to be able to operate at a higher propeller loading. On the other side, a
combinator design that is well suited for calm water conditions results in engine overloading and a
decrease in cavitation inception speed in high loaded conditions. It is shown that the reference
combinator results in loss of cavitation performance in calm water conditions, while engine
overloading occurs in high loaded conditions.
It is concluded that one single combinator curve cannot give satisfactory system behaviour (in terms of
engine overloading and propeller cavitation) in the great variety of conditions that (naval) ships are
required to operate in. In ongoing research the possible gain in performance due to smart control of
pitch and rpm is investigated. Full scale trials are scheduled in March 2008.

92
 REFERENCES

34th
Stapersma, D. 'Interaction between propulsor and engine', Proceedings of the WEGEMT
School, Deift, the Netherlands (2000)
MARIN report No 14449-1 -RD 'Propeller-in-service-effects'. Technical report by Maritime
Research Institute Netherlands. (February 2000)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Stapersma, D., Grimmelius, H., Schulten P., , 'A fresh view on propulsion control'
proceedings of the 2004 INEC Conference, Amsterdam, the Netherlands (2004)
Van Terwisga, P.F., 'Hydrodynamic aspects of the application of a dynamic simulation model
in frigate propulsion design and operation', Proceedings of the 34th WEGEMT School, Deift,
the Netherlands (2000)
Verkuyl, J.B. et al. ,'Testing a new full scale cavitation observation system on board of Hr.
Ms. Tydeman', Proceedings of the 34" WEGEMT School, Delfl, the Netherlands (2000)
Van Terwisga, T. et al., 'Effect of Operational Conditions on the Cavitation Inception Speed
of Naval Propellers', 25" Symp. Naval Hydrodynamics, St. John's, Canada (2004)
Morvillo, R.A., 'Application of Modern Digital Controls to Improve the Operational
Efficiency of Controllable Pitch Propellers'. SNAME transactions, Vol 104, 1996, pp. 115-
136.
8 Hellström, T., 'Optimizing Control at Sea: The Experience of the Seapacer Project.'
htt ://www. cs. umu.se/thomash/re orts/sea 'acer. , d (2002)
4th
9. Vrijdag, A., 'Cavitation Inception in Operational Conditions'. Proceedings of the
International Conference on Computer and IT Applications in the Maritime Industries
(Comp it 2005), Hamburg, Germany. (2005)

93