10th International Conference on Hydrodynamics October 1-4, 2012 St.

Petersburg, Russia

Assessment of Simplified Propeller-Models for General Purpose CFD Solvers

D.Durante1, G.Dubbioso1*, C.Testa1
CNR-INSEAN National Research Council-Italian Ship Model Basin Via di Vallerano 139, 00128 Rome, Italy
* 1

Corresponding author: Dr. G. Dubbioso e-mail: g.dubbioso@insean.it

Abstract
CFD simulation of a whole hull-propeller configuration requires high computational efforts to solve accurately propeller hydrodynamics. This fact may be unacceptable for preliminary design and optimization applications. Thus, in order to overcome this crucial aspect, the presence of the propeller should be simulated by simplified models that represent a good trade-off between accuracy and computational costs. In this paper three different hydrodynamic models for the analysis of propellers working in hull-behind conditions are presented and compared, from a numerical standpoint, in view of a further implementation into a general purpose CFD solvers. Their drawbacks and potentialities are discussed to derive some guidelines on the use of fast and reliable algorithm suited to treat either design and off-design conditions.
KEY WORDS: Unsteady propeller hydrodynamics; Airfoil theories; Computational Fluid Dynamics.

very fine time-discretization may be required to properly detect the unsteady behavior of propeller hydrodynamics. For this reason, the presence of propeller-induced effects into CFD solvers are typically modeled through the momentum theory yielding a rough, quick prediction of the azimuthalaveraged propeller loads [3]. Despite the intrinsic limits of such approach in describing hull-propeller interactions, numerical results, in terms of averaged velocity-field and propulsive performance in design conditions, may be in satisfactory agreement with experiments [4]. An enhancement of the hydrodynamic simulation might be obtained by coupling more accurate propeller hydrodynamic models with the CFD solver. Such consideration has inspired the present paper that proposes a numerical comparison among three models based on the potential-theory for incompressible flows; in detail, the Nakatake hydrodynamic formulation [5] is here compared with propeller hydrodynamics predicted by Theodorsen and Sears unsteady sectional theories, respectively. The Nakatake model has been successfully used in the past for the analysis of self-propulsion tests of fullappended ships [6] and for steady maneuvers [2]. In this model, blades shape is not described in terms of geometry, since the propeller is seen as an actuatordisk where the presence of the blades is accounted by bound vortex sheet and free-vortices shed rearwards. To use this model, experimental input data in terms of open-water propeller performance are necessary for tuning some coefficients related to both blade loads computation and geometric features, otherwise not described [5]. The need of an ad-hoc tuning procedure represents a drawback that encourages the investigation of different hydrodynamic approaches. To this aim, a first attempt is addressed by the Theodorsen theory where sectional unsteady loads are obtained from the knowledge of the upwash velocity at the -chord and -chord points, respectively [7-8].

INTRODUCTION
During the last decade, Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) has been extensively verified and validated for marine hydrodynamic applications. From a theoretical point of view, CFD yields a detailed insight into the flow-field around the stern, accounting for hydrodynamic effects induced by the propulsion system (propellers and shaft-line appendages) and control devices. As a matter of fact, computations where hull and propeller are solved jointly provide the wake onset-flow affecting propeller hydrodynamics and, in turns, vessel maneuverability [1-2]. Although a key-point for the success of ship-design lies on the computation of stern hydrodynamics, CFD analysis of the whole vessel configuration (including the barehull, appendages and propeller system), may be prohibitive in terms of computational effort, because a

10th International Conference on Hydrodynamics October 1-4, 2012 St. Petersburg, Russia Such an approach, widely used for the study of fixed/rotary wing aeroservoelasticity (see for instance [9-10]), is here applied to marine propeller in hullbehind conditions by observing that a spatially, nonuniform flow produces periodical forces on the blades. Next, since each section of the propeller blades, rotating within the non-uniform inflow coming from the hull, behaves like an airfoil uniformly moving in a multi-harmonic gust, the Sears theory is proposed as an enhanced bi-dimensional approach. Note that the Sears theory has been applied in the past, for hydroacoustics purposes, to determine the unsteady pressure distribution upon a marine blade operating in a wakefield [11]. The main goal of this work is to develop an unsteady hydrodynamic tool that offers a good trade-off between accuracy and required computational costs so as to be suited for a further integration into CFD-tools. In order to validate the proposed formulations, hydrodynamic results from the present approaches are compared with those obtained through the fully threedimensional, time marching BEM hydrodynamics solver [12-13], extensively validated for marine propellers in uniform and non-uniform incoming, non cavitating flows. Fast and physically consistent propeller hydrodynamic solvers may be very attractive for ship maneuverability applications where the reliable prediction of propeller hub-loads, deeply affecting vessel dynamic response, is mandatory. pitch of the original propeller blades through a preliminary tuning process based on open-water propeller performance given by experiments or highly accurate computations. A set of bound vortex sheets, localized at the propeller-plane S p along with freevortices shed from rearwards, allow to describe the propeller induced velocity-field through a potential theory [1-2]. For a propeller moving with constant advancing ratio J=V/nD (V denotes the hull velocity along the x direction orthogonal to the propeller plane, n the propeller rate of revolution and D the propeller diameter) the velocity-potential wherever in the flow-field (except on S p and at the rearwards wake) is given by [14-16]
( x, y , z ) =
1 4

( r , ) G
rboss 0

R 2

( x, y, z , r , ) d dr

(1)

where r , identify the position of points on the disk, x, y, z are the coordinate of a point in the flow-field,

rboss and R denote the boss and blade radius, respectively, G p represents the singularity function
defined in [16] whereas (r,) refers to the circulation obtained from the solution of the boundary-condition that defines the conservation of mass through the propeller-plane [5]. From the knowledge of both and , the velocity field on S p may be written as

Unsteady Propeller Hydrodynamics

In this section, the prediction of the unsteady loads arising when propeller blades operate within an inflow due to the moving hull, is addressed. Although marine propellers work in a very complex hydrodynamic environment, other contributions to the non-uniform inflow, like perturbations induced by the propellerwake vorticity and/or interferences with other bodies (if present), are here neglected. Furthermore, only the axial component of the onset flow is considered. The interaction between propeller blades and the hullwake determines periodic hydroloads; the more irregular is the onset flow, the more important are blade-loads pulses. In the following, the hydrodynamic models used for the prediction of such unsteady loads are briefly outlined (without loss of generality, only propeller thrust is considered). More details are found in the literature references. The Nakatake Model The propeller model proposed by Nakatake [5] is represented by a continuum disk that takes into account for the chord radial distribution and effective

V + x 2 P (2) V V = 2nr + r 2r where u ( r , ) defines the ahead axial-velocity field Vx = u +

from the hull-wake, P is the nominal pitch associated with the helical vortices shed rearwards, denotes the Prandtl tip correction factor [5], whilst the third term at the right-hand-side of (2) represents the velocity contribution due to both bounded and shed vorticity. The global thrust may be expressed as

T ( ) = V (r , )V (r , ) dr
rboss

(3)

where is the fluid density. The nondimensional thrust coefficient is finally defined by

KT =

T n 2 D 4

(4)

10th International Conference on Hydrodynamics October 1-4, 2012 St. Petersburg, Russia Hydrodynamic Loads From Airfoil Theories Blade hydroloads are here obtained as radial integration of the loads given by sectional hydrodynamic models. These are typically derived from airfoil unsteady hydrodynamic theories. Let a coordinate axes be fixed to a thin, straight airfoil with the x axis parallel to the flow at infinity, and with the origin at the mid-chord. For an airfoil of chord-length c = 2b, moving in an incompressible flow with V velocity, subjected to a harmonic vertical translation h(t) and to a pitch rate (t) imposed about an axis at a semi-chord from the mid-chord (t denotes time), the Theodorsen theory yields the unsteady aerodynamic force acting on it by combining the non-circulatory lift Lnc, orthogonal to the chord, with the circulatory lift Lc directed along the normal to the relative wind (see, for instance, [17]). Specifically, the non-circulatory lift is expressed as
~ p( , ) = 2V a0 tg + 2a 1sin + 2a 2 sin( 2 ) 2

(9)

where the variable [0,] is such that x = b cos whereas coefficients a0 , a1 , a2 are expressed as

~ ~ ~ a0 = C(k)w 3c / 4 w3c / 4 + wc / 2 jk ~ ~ ~ a1 = w wc / 2 3c / 4 wc / 2 + 2 jk ~ ~ a2 = (w 3c / 4 wc / 2 ) 4

(10)

An alternative approach to predict the unsteady loads on an airfoil passing through a spatially non-uniform flow is that proposed by Sears [8] where the upwash distribution, at any point of the airfoil and for a given frequency of the multi-harmonic onset flow, may be expressed as

&c/ 2 Lnc (t) = b 2 w

(5)

w(x,t) = We j (t x / V )

(11)

& c / 2 represents the time derivative of the where w normal component of the relative wind (upwash) evaluated at the airfoil mid-point (positive upwards). The circulatory lift is given by
~ ] Lc (t) = 2bV 1 [C(k) w 3c / 4
where (6)

stating that the sinusoidal gust pattern, with constant amplitude W, moves past the airfoil with the speed V. Assuming that the wave-length of the gust is l, 2 V / l denotes the frequency with which the wave passes the airfoil. Following [8], the unsteady lift may be written as

denotes Fourier transformation, ~ w3c / 4 = [ w3c / 4 ] with w3c / 4 representing the upwash

L = cVWe jt (k)

(12)

at the airfoil -chord point whereas C(k) indicates the lift deficiency function defined by Theodorsen [17] in terms of the reduced frequency k = b/V ( is the frequency of the harmonic motions). The application of the Theodorsen theory to marine propellers operating in a non-uniform axial-inflow may be done assuming that the periodic upwash on the airfoil is the combination of multi-harmonics plunge and pitch j t jt motions h(t) = h0 e and (t) = 0 e with constant phases ( h0 and

where ( k ) denotes the Sears function representing the frequency response of the lift to the gust. The lifting force L may be expressed as in (8) where, for each frequency of the wake-field, the pressurejump along the chord is

~ p (, ) = 2 VW ( A0 + A1 ) tg 2 with coefficients A0 and A1 given by A0 = C (k )[J 0 (k ) jJ1 (k )]

(13)

0 represents complex amplitudes). Thus, the upwash w is described as the

superposition of chordwise linear distribution of velocity amplitudes with constant phases such that

A1 = jJ1 (k ) being J n (k) the Bessel functions of the first kind. As

shown from (11), the Sears theory represents the upwash velocity-field on the airfoil as a combination of chordwise constant distribution of velocity amplitudes with linear phases. Thus, differently from the Theodorsen model, it is able to model (linearly) the inflow phase shift between points on the airfoilchord when a non-uniform flow is encountered. Note that, in terms of jump-pressure, the blade response to the uniform mean axial-velocity is obtained directly from (9) or (13) by imposing k=0: as expected, for the steady-state condition, both the Theodorsen and Sears formulations reduce to the Glauert theory. In the following, Theodorsen and Sears models are applied

(14)

w(x,t) = [h 0 + 0 ( x ab)]e jt

(7)

The total lift L=Lc+Lnc is directly obtained by the integration of the pressure-jump long the airfoil

L(t ) = p( x, t )dx
b

(8)

with ~ p ,for each harmonic component of the onset flow, given by [8]

10th International Conference on Hydrodynamics October 1-4, 2012 St. Petersburg, Russia by dividing the mean-surface of the propeller blade into a discrete number of sections and applying (9) or (13) to each section, for each harmonic component of the inflow velocity. Further, in the time-domain, the global thrust recasts Although a typical wake-field encountered by a propeller at each radial location has different features from that herein used and, may be reasonably defined through the first eight/ten harmonics [19], the high frequency content of the inflow shown in Fig.1 allows to stress the behavior of the proposed hydrodynamic models respect to the flow nonuniformity. Hence, in the following, the blade response to the uniform mean axial-velocity is neglected. The capabilities of the three methodologies in capturing the unsteady blade loads is first investigated by analyzing the response of a single-blade 3714 propeller to an axial-inflow derived from the study-case inflow using the first 4, 8, 12 and 16 harmonics, respectively. To this aim the thrust coefficient predicted by the Nakatake, Sears and Theodorsen approaches is compared with that evaluated by BEM hydrodynamics. The tuning process of the Nakatake formulation has been done through the open-water propeller performance given by BEM computations. For the 4-harmonics inflow, Fig. 2 shows that the thrust signal predicted by Theodorsen almost perfectly match that obtained using the Sears theory. With respect to BEM results, the trend of the wave-form is well captured, especially in terms of signal-phase; relevant discrepancies, in the signal-peaks, are highlighted at the first quarter and at third-quarter of the blade revolution. On the contrary, the agreement with BEM computations is good about at half and at the end of the blade revolution, corresponding to those azimuthal positions where the blade encounters large variations in the incoming flow (see Fig.1). In these regions, numerical results yielded by the Nakatake model exhibit signal oscillations not shown neither in BEM results nor in Theodorsen/Sears outcomes; however, at the first quarter and at thirdquarter of the blade revolution, the agreement with BEM computations is slightly better than that obtained through the Theodorsen/Sears models.

T (t ) = N b

rboss b

p( x, t )(n i)dxdr

(15)

where n is the outward unit normal to the mean surface, i denotes the unit vector aligned to the direction orthogonal to the disk-plane whereas N b represents the number of propeller blades.

NUMERICAL RESULTS
In this section the hydrodynamic performance of a marine propeller operating in a multi-harmonics wake-field is examined in order to validate the presented solvers. Specifically, the hydrodynamic predictions obtained through the proposed approaches are compared with those given by the fully threedimensional, time marching, BEM hydrodynamic solver. To this aim, the PROP 3714 four-bladed propeller developed at the David Taylor Ship Research and Development Center (DTRS) working in a study-case non-uniform inflow characterized by a high-frequency content, is considered. The diameter of the propeller is D=0.254m; the operating conditions are defined by a rotational speed n=50rps, a freestream speed V=12.7m/s and an advance ratio J=1. A detailed geometric description of the DTRC 3714 model propeller is presented in [18]. Figure 1 shows the azimuthal variation of the study-case onset flow u at different radial positions on the propeller disk. A Fourier analysis (not shown here) shows that the spectrum of this wake-field contains up to 90 harmonics; moreover, the spatial distribution is such that both the velocity peaks and harmonic content increase toward the end of the disk.

Fig. 2 Blade response to the first 4 harmonics inflow Fig. 1 Axial onset flow velocity

This behavior is also confirmed by the analysis of Fig. 3, showing the blade response to the first 8-harmonics

10th International Conference on Hydrodynamics October 1-4, 2012 St. Petersburg, Russia inflow. By increasing the harmonic content of the incoming inflow, relevant discrepancies arise between Theodorsen and Sears predictions. This is well shown in Figs. 4-5 depicting the blade response to the first 12 and 16-harmonics inflow, respectively. Such discrepancies consist in oscillations of the signal predicted by the Theodorsen model with respect to that given by the Sears formulation; the greater is the harmonics content of the inflow, the greater are the signal oscillations. Amplitude oscillations are larger at half and at the end of the blade revolution, that is in those regions where higher circumferential gradient of the inflow velocity are present. This behavior is due to the fact that the Theodorsen theory describes the upwash velocity on an airfoil encountering a gust by combining basic (harmonic) motions having chordwise linear distribution of velocity amplitudes, with constant phases; in this way, each point of the airfoil is forced to experience the same signal simultaneously. comparable results until the sectional chord-length is smaller than, or comparable with, the minimum wavelength associated with the incoming inflow harmonic components.

Fig. 5 Blade response to the first 16 harmonics inflow

For a blade section located at r/R = 0.75, Fig. 6 shows the ratio between the minimum wavelength associated with the onset-flow and the local chordlength, for the 4, 8, 12, 16-harmonics inflow, respectively. As expected, is greater than one for the 4 and 8-harmonics inflow whilst it becomes less than one for inflow velocity with higher frequency content. This result states that the Theodorsen theory may be used to study the unsteady response of an airfoil travelling into a non-uniform flow until the wavelength associated with the (relevant) higher frequencies upwash components is greater, or at least, comparable to local chord-length (low reduced frequency).
Fig. 3 Blade response to first 8 harmonics inflow

Fig. 4 Blade response to the first 12 harmonics inflow

Fig. 6 Minimum Wavelength-chord ratio at r/R = 0.75, for different harmonic contents of the onset flow

Conversely, the Sears theory accounts for a chordwise linear variation of the upwash phase, so that it models (somehow) an airfoil progressively encountering a spatially, non-uniform flow. The two theories yield

Furthermore, Figs.4-5 confirm the ability of the Nakatake approach to capture, better than the Sears model, the load-peaks at the first quarter and at thirdquarter of the blade revolution, thus yielding a better

10th International Conference on Hydrodynamics October 1-4, 2012 St. Petersburg, Russia agreement with BEM computations. However, by increasing the harmonics content of the inflowvelocity, a worsening of the results in terms of both peaks and phase signal is highlighted. An in-depth analysis of the correlations among hydrodynamic predictions is given in Fig.7 that depicts the spectrum of the thrust signal for the 16-harmonics inflow. As shown, for the 1st and 2nd harmonic, the Nakatake model yields amplitudes that are closer to BEM results than Theodorsen/Sears outcomes. For higher harmonics, the Sears formulation yields predictions closer to BEM results almost throughout the whole spectrum. This fact confirms the difficulty of the Nakatake theory in capturing local high-frequency change of the onset flow. The load spectrum also points out that the Theodorsen theory is reliable up to the 3/rev frequency since for higher values the amplitudes of the response tend to diverge. All the aspects discussed above, may be well observed in Fig.8 where results from Theodorsen, Sears and Nakatake approaches are compared with BEM outcomes for the inflow velocity characterized by 90 harmonics. level of agreement is observed out of these regions; results from the Nakatake model, indeed, exhibits a greater level of accuracy in those regions where the inflow velocity is more regular with lower gradients. In the framework of the Sears approach, the more accurate is the evaluation of the upwash and the more realistic are the hydroloads predicted: computations previously shown, do not take into account for the upwash induced by the blade-wake vorticity, in that only the close shed vorticity, generated by the examined section, is modeled in the airfoil theory [7],[17]. However, these three-dimensional (3D) effects are relevant especially for low advance-ratio where the wake is closer to the propeller disk. On the contrary, the Nakatake model intrinsically accounts for the presence the vorticity shed downstream the propeller plane by a set of trailed-vortices. [5]. The importance of these free vortices is highlighted in Fig.9 that shows the comparison between the thrust predicted by BEM hydrodynamics and the Nakatake formulation, with and without 3D effects, for the 90 harmonics-inflow. As expected, the better agreement with BEM results is obtained including 3D-effects. Further, Fig.10 shows that outcomes from the Nakatake model without 3D effects are closer to those predicted by the Sears theory in terms of signal-peaks, even if relevant discrepancies remain in those regions where the incoming flow is much irregular. In view of these preliminary results, an enhanced propeller modeling, suitable for treating both high-frequency onset flow and three-dimensional induced effects, might be obtained from the Sears theory including a more detailed description of the unsteady airfoil upwash.

Fig. 7 Blade response spectrum at the first 16 harmonics inflow

Fig. 8 Blade response to 90 harmonics inflow

Fig. 9 Behavior of Nakatake thrust prediction with and without 3D effects

As shown, results from the Theodorsen formulation appear to be completely unreliable; Sears computations well capture the unsteady thrust at azimuthal regions where the blade encounters large variations in the incoming flow, albeit some lower

Finally, Fig.11 depicts the thrust coefficient, for the four-bladed propeller subjected to the 90 harmonics inflow, computed by BEM, Sears and Nakatake formulations. The spectrum of the signal, limited to the first 32 harmonics, is shown in Fig.12. Akin to the

10th International Conference on Hydrodynamics October 1-4, 2012 St. Petersburg, Russia one-blade propeller results, outcomes from Figs. 1112 point out that the Nakatake/Sears formulations overpredict the global thrust respect to the converged BEM result even if Nakatake predictions match very well the minimum thrust values over the whole propeller revolution. the unsteady behavior of the propeller, it is useful to observe that computations on propeller open water performance at J=1 show that the Sears/Theodorsen methodologies predict a K T value (0.165) that matches BEM prediction (0.169) within the accuracy of the Glauert theory, here modified by the Prandtl correction factor. Because of the initial tuning process on BEM open water curves, it is an expected result that Nakatake yields the same value of the BEM one.

Fig. 10 Comparison among Bem, Sears and Nakatake (w/o 3D effects) thrust predictions

Fig. 12 Spectrum of the thrust for the four-bladed propeller

The trend of the curves capture with satisfactory agreement BEM-computations albeit undesired relevant contributions at high-frequency arise from Nakatake results. Up to the 8th harmonics, the differences between Sears and Nakatake results are negligible whereas at higher-frequencies a noticeable worsening in the harmonic response of the Nakatake model is shown. Note that the Nakatake modeling is inherently an actuator-disk approach, thus, the fourbladed thrust signal shown in Fig.11 has been artificially obtained by dividing the thrust delivered by the whole-disk (see Fig.13) by N b = 4 and then accounting for the angular shift between the rotor blades.

Fig. 13 Thrust prediction from the Nakatake model for a four-bladed propeller

CONCLUSIONS
This paper addresses a numerical study on three simplified propeller models to investigate their attitude in detecting unsteady hydroloads arising when an axial non-homogeneous wake-field flows around rotating blades. Without any loss of generality, the emphasis is herein posed on the thrust delivered in response to a numerical study-case onset flow, having a high-frequency content. Two strip-theory approaches, based on Theodorsen/Sears theories, and an actuator-disk model suggested by Nakatake , are compared with respect to a physically-consistent BEM hydrodynamics. Investigation carried-out throughout the paper show that Theodorsen hydrodynamics may be used whether the onset flow does not involve relevant high-harmonic components such that their

Fig. 11 Four-bladed propeller response to 90 harmonics inflow

Although numerical outcomes are aimed at detecting

10th International Conference on Hydrodynamics October 1-4, 2012 St. Petersburg, Russia wavelength is less than the local chord-length; differently, Theodorsen results are completely unreliable. On the contrary, Sears results match quite well BEM-computations in terms of signals trend, especially in those azimuthal regions where the inflow is much irregular. This behavior highlights the capability of the Sears model to capture the hydrodynamic blade response to higher frequencies. However, signal peaks are overpredicted respect to BEM results. Nakatake computations denote the attitude of such a model to capture the hydrodynamic response components at low-frequency better than Sears; however, a noticeable worsening of the results arises at higher frequency. The strength of the Nakatake model consists of its ability to accounts for some 3D effects through the set of vortices shed rearwards; however, it requires an initial tuning procedure based on open-water propeller performance provided by experiments or accurate computations. On the contrary, except for the contribution described in the airfoil theory, Sears methodology is not able to model the hydrodynamic effects from the blade-wake shed rearwards; these information could be included into the analysis through advanced hydrodynamic solvers yielding a more accurate description of the upwash field on the mean-blade surface. Both approaches take few seconds to perform a calculations so, in view of CFD applications, they are computationally cheap. In this context the major difference to be highlighted is the different body-force distribution that can be derived by the two simplified methodologies: Nakatake computations would provide an angular load distribution that does not account properly for the presence of a multi-bladed propeller, as the Sears approach does. This aspect should be considered in design or off-design maneuvers where the unsteadiness involved may have a high frequency content so that the actuator-disk modeling may furnish inaccurate results. All these aspects will be addressed in future investigations.
and Applied Mechanics, vol. 2 pp. 317-336. [4] Goteborg CFD workshop in Ship Hydrodynamics, Proceedings, 2010. [5] Nakatake K., A Practical Method to Calculate Propulsive Performance of Ships [J], 1981 Memories of Faculty of Eng., Kyushu University, vol 41, no. 1. [6] Kawamura T., Miyata H., Mashimo K., Numerical simulation of the flow about self-propelling tanker model [J], 1997, JMST, vol 2 pp.245-256. [7] Leishmann J.G., Principles of Helicopter Aerodynamics [M], Cambridge, 2005. [8] Fung, Y.C., 1993, An Introduction to the theory of Aeroelasticity,Dover Publications, New York. [9] Gennaretti, M., Molica Colella, M., Bernardini, G., Analysis of Helicopter Vibratory Hub Loads Alleviation by Cyclic Trailing--Edge Blade Flap Actuation [J], The Aeronautical Journal, Vol. 113, No. 1146, pp. 549--556, 2009. [10] Lim M,J.W., Yu, Y.H. and JOHNSON, W. Calculation of rotor bladevortex interaction airloads using a multiple-trailer free-wake model, [J] Aircr 2003, 40, (6), pp 1123-1130. [11] Gennaretti M., Testa C., Bernardini G., 17th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference [C], Portland, Oregon, June 2011. [12] Greco, L., Salvatore, F., Di Felice, F.,Twentyfifth ONR Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, [C], St. John's, Newfoundland (Canada), August, 2004. [13] Salvatore, F., Testa, C., Greco, L., CAV 2003 Symposium, [C], Osaka, (Japan), November 2003. [14] R. Yamazaki: A Study on Screw Propellers, Mem. of Fac. of Eng., Kyushu Univ., Vol. 19, No 1. (1960) [15] R. Yamazaki: On the Propulsion theory of Ships on Still Water Introduction, Mem. of Fac. of Eng., Kyushu Univ., Vol. 27, No 4. (1968) [16] R. Yamazaki: On the Propulsion theory of Ships on Still Water A case of thin Ship, Mem. of Fac. of Eng., Kyushu Univ., Vol. 31, No 4. (1972) [17] Theodorsen, T., 1935, General Theory of Aerodynamic Instability and the Mechanism of Flutter, 1935, NACA Report 496. [18] Subramanian, S., and Mueller, T.J.,An Experimental Study of Propeller Noise Due to Cyclic Flow Distortion," [J] JSV, Vol. 183, No. 5, 1995, pp. 907-923. [19] Carlton, J.S., Marine Propellers and Propulsion [M], 1994, Butterworth Heinemann

REFERENCES
[1] Broglia R., Durante D., Dubbioso G., Di Mascio A., Marine ECCOMAS [C], Lisbon, Portugal, 2011, 266267 [2] Simonsen C., Stern F., 2005, RANS Maneuvering Simulation of Esso Osaka With Rudder and a Body-Force Propeller [J], JSR, 2005, vol. 49 no. 2 pp. 98-120. [3] Hough G.R.,Ordway D.E., The generalized Actuator Disk [J], 1960, Developments in Theoretical