Fifth International Symposium on Marine Propulsors
Smp’17, Espoo, Finland, June,2017
Propeller-hull interaction coefficients: classic vs alternative system *
Kanevsky G.I1., Klubnichkin A.M.2
1,2
Krylov State Research Center (KSRC), Saint-Petersburg, Russia
ABSTRACT - model scale;
Propulsion performance of icebreakers moving in ice fields, V - ship speed, m/s;
as well as of the ships towing various objects, is hard to
S - wetted surface area of the hull, m2;
assess because propeller-hull interaction coefficients are not
always possible to determine as per the classic system. To CT= RT/ ( V2/2*S) (3)
overcome this difficulty, an alternative system of propeller- CT - total resistance coefficient;
hull interaction coefficients is suggested.
RT - towing resistance of the ship.
This paper shows that the method of self-propulsion tests
Output data of the self-propulsion tests with tow force FD
with tow force FD and the method of captive self-propulsion
for specified speed VS of the ship are the three following
tests adopted by KSRC yield the same results.
values:
It is noted that the classic system of propeller-hull
Wake fraction wTM;
interaction coefficient does not work in the processing of
self-propulsion test data for the propellers under high loads. Thrust deduction fraction t;
The paper suggests an alternative, “bollard-pull” system of Relative rotative efficiency ηR.
interaction coefficients that remains workable in self- These three values correspond to uniform straight
propulsion data processing for heavily loaded propellers. movement of a ship at speed VS. For details on the method
INTRODUCTION of self-propulsion tests with tow force FD, see, for example,
To calculate propulsion performance of a ship, it is [1].
necessary to have propeller-hull interaction coefficients. CAPTIVE SELF-PROPULSION TESTS
Propulsion performance of icebreakers moving in ice fields, KSRC applies the method of captive self-propulsion tests,
as well as of the ships towing various objects is hard to which is a combination of the test runs performed at
assess because propeller-hull interaction coefficients cannot constant towing speed and variable propeller RPM, and the
be determined as per the classic system. To overcome this test runs performed at constant propeller RPM and variable
difficulty, an alternative system of propeller-hull interaction towing speeds.
coefficients is suggested.
Thrust T and torque Q of the propeller are measured by a
SELF-PROPULSION TESTS WITH TOW FORCE FD screw dynamometer installed inside the model hull. Force Z
To determine propeller-hull interaction coefficients, most of arising between the model and the towing carriage during
hydrodynamic centres perform self-propulsion tests with self-propulsion tests is measured by a towing dynamometer.
tow force FD. These self-propulsion tests are performed During self-propulsion tests (at different test runs), force Z
with the model towed at speed VM corresponding to the varies, starting from positive values (propeller loads are
specified speed VS of the ship. heavy), then passing the zero level (self-propulsion point),
and then becoming negative (propeller loads are small).
⁄ (1) Useful thrust TE is calculated as a sum of force Z
√ measured by the towing dynamometer and model resistance
Here, tow force FD is determined as follows: R TM at given towing speed:
TE=RTM+Z (4)
( ) (2),
Calculation of propeller-hull interaction coefficients
requires open-water model test data for the propeller.
where:
Useful thrust coefficient is determined as:
M and S subscripts denote “model” and “ship” respectively;
- mass density of water, kg/m3;
TE . (14).
KE (5),
ZPn D 2 4 Expression (14) means that these two methods of self-
where: propulsion tests yield the same results.
ZP – number of propellers, ZP=1 or ZP=2; ANALYSIS OF CAPTIVE SELF-PROPULSION TEST
DATA: CONSTANT RPM
n – propeller rotation rate, rps; Self-propulsion tests at constant RPM and variable towing
D – propeller diameter, m. speed are performed to investigate the effect of Froude
numbers upon propeller-hull interaction coefficients. The
value of constant RPM is selected so as to correspond to the
ANALYSIS OF CAPTIVE SELF-PROPULSION TESTS: value of the useful-thrust loading coefficient, as determined
CONSTANT SPEED by Formula (9). If the effect of Froude numbers is
Output data of self-propulsion tests with the speed significant, additional tests at constant speed are performed.
remaining constant for each advance
ANALYSIS OF CAPTIVE SELF-PROPULSION TEST
JV = V/(n D) are the following four values: DATA: CONSTANT RPM CORRESPONDING TO
wTM (JV) – wake fraction; BOLLARD-PULL OPERATION OF PROPELLERS
t (JV) – thrust deduction fraction; For icebreakers, ice-going ships and tugs, additional self-
propulsion tests at constant RPM are performed. The RPM
ηR (JV) – relative rotative efficiency; is selected so as to correspond to the bollard-pull condition.
KDE(JV)=JV/√KE – useful-thrust loading coefficient. The tests are performed at several low speeds of the ship.
Thus, the following three relationships are determined: Here, the effect of Froude numbers is negligible. Figs. 1
and 2 provide self-propulsion model test data for an ice-
wTM = wTM (KDE) (6); going twin-shafter, where constant propeller rotation rate
t = t (KDE) (7); (n= 14.6 rps) corresponds to the bollard-pull condition.
ηR = ηR (KDE) (8).
The values of wTM, t, ηR are calculated as per the classic 0,4
- KT,10*KQ - open water
KTS 10*KQS KE
KTS
procedure described in [2,3]. V=1.9 m/s
10*KQS n=14.6 1/s
For the ship, the load coefficient with respect to the useful KE
0,3
thrust is determined as:
10*KQS
⁄√ ⁄√ (9), 0,2
KTS
where 0,1
KE
(10) 0,0
0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 J, JV 0,7
For the model tested with tow force FD, the load coefficient
with respect to the useful thrust can be expressed as
Fig. 1 – Performance curves of the starboard propeller
⁄√ (11), No. 8369 in open water and behind the hull of model
No. 11765.Outward rotation. Ahead running.
Draught TF= TA=0.286 m.
where In Fig. 1 above, the curves without the experimental points
show the open-water model test results for the starboard
(12). propeller No. 8369, J = VA/(n D) being the open-water
Then, it has to be considered that propeller advance ratio, VA – speed of the propeller
advance. The curves with the experimental points in the
( same Figure 1 show the following hydrodynamic
parameters of propeller No. 8369 model behind the model
) , hull:
so KT = T/ ( n2 D4) – propeller thrust coefficient;
T–
⁄√ ⁄√ (13). propeller thrust, N;
√ n- propeller rotation rate, rps;
Consequently, at the calculation point for the ship as per
(9), the load coefficient with respect to the useful thrust KQ = Q/ ( n D5) – 2
propeller torque coefficient;
coincides with the load coefficient for the model tested with Q- propeller torque, N*m;
tow force FD (13). TE
KE - useful thrust coefficient;
2 n 2 D 4
Subscript S means “starboard”. Instead of Expression (8), Fig. 3 provides the following
coefficient:
0,4
KTP
- KT,10*KQ - open water iQ= 1/ ηR (15).
KTP 10*KQP
10*KQP
V=1.9 m/s So for classic interaction system we have three functions:
0,3
n=14.6 1/s
t = t (KDE) (7);
10*KQP wTM = wTM (KDE) (6);
0,2
iQ= iQ(KDE) (16).
KTP
0,1 For classic interaction system we have following
connection for hull efficiency coefficient:
0,0
0,0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 J, JV 0,7
ηH=(1-t)/(1- wTM)*1/ iQ (17)
Analysis of the data in Fig. 3 shows that thrust deduction
Fig. 2 – Performance curves of the port side propeller fraction t is determined for all the values of useful-thrust
No. 8370 in open water and behind the hull of model loading coefficient KDE. Along with it, wake fraction wTM at
No. 11765.Outward rotation. Ahead running. KDE < 0.45 becomes negative and tends to infinity as KDE
Draught TF= TA=0.286 m. tends to zero, which means that at KDE<0.45 the classic
In Fig. 2 above, the curves without the experimental points system of propeller-hull interaction coefficients does not
show the open-water model test results for the port side work.
propeller No. 8370, J = VA/(n D) being the open-water It shall be noted that operational conditions of the
propeller advance ratio. icebreakers moving in the ice field correspond to KDE<0.45.
For behind-the-hull operation conditions, the nomenclature Operational conditions of the ships towing various objects
in Fig. 2 is the same as in Fig. 1, except p (port side) also correspond to KDE<0.45. So propulsion and net thrust
subscript. calculations of these ships require an alternative system of
Processing of the self-propulsion test data provided in Fig. interaction coefficients.
1 and 2 above, intended to obtain relationships 6-8, yields This paper suggests the alternative, “bollard-pull”, system
the results shown in Fig. 3 below: of propeller-hull interaction coefficients, consisting of the
following three relationships:
0,0 0,4 0,8 1,2 1,6 2,0 2,4 2,8 1. Thrust deduction fraction coinciding with the one
1,1
iQs adopted in the classic system:
iQp iQs t= t(KDE) (7).
1,0
iQp 2. Coefficient of hull effect upon the thrust:
iTB(KDE)= KT (JV)/KTo.w.(J) J=JV (18).
0,9 wTs 0,2 3. Coefficient of hull effect upon the torque:
wTp iQB(KDE)= KQ (JV)/KQo.w.(J) J=JV (19).
0,0 For alternative interaction system we have following
WT, iQ wTs connection for hull efficiency coefficient:
v=1.9 m/s
- star
wTp
-0,2
ηH=(1-t)* iTB / iQB (20)
- port
n=14.6 1/s
t - star
0,20 - port -0,4 Here, o.w. subscript means “open-water”.
0,16
Fig. 4 provides the results of the same self-propulsion tests
t as those in Fig. 1 and 2 above, processed as per the
0,12
“bollard-pull” system of propeller-hull interaction
0,08 t coefficients.
v=1.9 m/s:
0,04 n=14.6 1/s:
0,00
0,0 0,4 0,8 1,2 1,6 2,0 2,4 KDE 2,8
Fig. 3- Interaction coefficients of propeller models with the
hull of model No. 11765 (classic system). Ahead running.
Draught TF= TA=0.286 m.
Table 2: The ice trial results for icebreaker ‘Vladivostok’.
0,0 0,4 0,8 1,2 1,6 2,0 2,4 2,8
J
1,8
№ of Speed, Power, kWt RPM
1,6 run knots star port star port
iQBs
1,4
2.1 10,3 8964 8964 156 156
iQBp
iQBp 3.1 2,28 8964 8964 140 140
1,2
ITBs
3.2 2,54 8964 8963 141 140,5
iQBs
1,0
ITBp 3.3 0,61 7228 7279 128 127
2,8
iTB, iQB 2,4
The prediction of the ice propulsion for icebreaker
2,0 ‘Vladivostok’ is shown in table 3.
n=14.6 1/s
- star iTBs 1,6
- port Table 3: The ice propulsion for icebreaker ‘Vladivostok’.
1,2
iTBp
0,8 Ice resistance or
0,20 № of Speed, Power, RPM
towing force of
t run knots kWt
0,16 propellers, kN
0,12 2.1 10,3 151 1080
t
0,08 t
3.1 2,28 2×9000 139,2 1654
n=14.6 1/s: 3.2 2,54 139,5 1643
0,04
3.3 0,61 2×7250 128,1 1495
0,00
0,0 0,4 0,8 1,2 1,6 2,0 2,4 KDE 2,8
It may be note that for given speed and power predicted
Fig. 4 – Interaction coefficients of propeller models with RPM are close to measured ones. Beside that the ice ship
the hull of model No. 11765 resistance is also determined.
(bollard-pull system). Ahead running. Draught TF=
TA=0.286 m.
Analysis of the data provided in Fig. 4 above shows that the
bollard-pull system of propeller-hull interaction coefficients CONCLUSION
remains workable at low values of useful-thrust loading 1. It has been shown that the method of self-propulsion
coefficient, KDE<0.45, i.e. at KDE<0.45 propeller-hull tests with tow force FD and the method of captive self-
interaction coefficients iTB, iQB are possible to determine. propulsion tests adopted by KSRC yield the same
It was decided to fulfil investigation of data of ice results.
trial of icebreaker ‘Vladivostok’ to show the results of use 2. It has been noted that the classic system of propeller-
of alternative interaction coefficients system. The ice trial hull interaction coefficients does not work in the
environment is shown in table 1. The resultant ice processing of self-propulsion test data for heavily
thickness was varied from 0.81 to 1.68 m for the different loaded propellers.
runs. 3. An alternative, “bollard-pull” system of interaction
coefficients has been suggested. This alternative system
Table 1: The ice trial environment. remains workable in the processing of self-propulsion
test data for heavily loaded propellers.
Resultant Bending
Ice Snow REFERENCES
№ of ice strength,
thickness, thickness, 1. ‘1978 ITTC Performance Prediction Method’.
run thickness, kPa
m m 7.5-02-03-01.4. ITTC Recommended Procedures 1999.
m
2.1 0,63 0,18 0,81 280 2. ITTC Dictionary of Hydromechanics. 2011.
3.1 128 30 1,58 3. W.P.A. Van Lammeren, L. Troost, J. G. Koning
3.2 138 23 1,61 420 ‘Resistance, Propulsion and Steering of Ships’. A
3.3 128 40 1,68 manual for designing hull forms, propellers and
rudders. The Technical Publishing Company H.
Stam-Haarlem-Holland, 1954.
The ice trial results for icebreaker ‘Vladivostok’ are
shown in table 2. The icebreaker speed was varied from
0.63 to 10.3 knots for the different runs.
