See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/266442553

The effects of transom stern on the resistance of high speed craft

Conference Paper · April 2000

CITATIONS READS
4 389

3 authors, including:

E. Mete Sireli Mustafa Insel

Vard Marine Hidroteknik Nautical Design Technologies
8 PUBLICATIONS   8 CITATIONS    19 PUBLICATIONS   229 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Ducted Turbine Design View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mustafa Insel on 04 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 THE EFFECTS OF TRANSOM STERN ON THE
RESISTANCE OF HIGH SPEED CRAFT
E.M. Şireli, M. İnsel, Ö. Gören
Dept.of Naval Architecture, Istanbul Technical University,TURKEY

ABSTRACT
In this study it is aimed to investigate the effects of transom stern on the wave
resistance of high speed marine craft by using a series of five monohull forms by both
experimental and numerical methods. Five hull forms with transom stern area/max section
area of 0 to 1.0 are utilised for experimental and numerical methods.

Theoretical wave resistance calculations are made by a panel method based on

Dawson’s algorithm. Consequently comparisons among the residuary, wave pattern and
theoretical wave resistance are made and conclusions are derived based on the Froude
numbers and transom stern ratios.

1. INTRODUCTION improve the understanding about the

The increasing interest on high
speed craft during last two decades and
limitations on the propulsion engine power
have resulted in extensive research in
hydrodynamics of high speed craft. Slender
high speed displacement forms have been
developed in order to achieve higher
speeds. The development and extensive use
of waterjets have also brought freedom in
the aftbody design as the limitations due to
propellers and shaft system do not need to
be satisfied anymore.
transom stern flow and its effects on the
resistance.
Five hull forms with different
transom areas have been developed and
tested for total and wave resistance.
Numerical studies have been performed to
calculate wave resistance. Comparisons
between the experimental and numerical
results have been made.
2. HULL FORMS

Five models by varying “transom

This paper aims to describe the first
stern area/maximum section area” were
stage of the work (1,2) undertaken in
utilised in this study. The base model was
Istanbul Technical University in order to
chosen from the NPL round bilge hull
series given by Bailey (3) with LWL/BX=7. cleanly separates from the transom stern,
This form was named as Form 3. The base and transom stern is running in atmospheric
model has a transom stern area/maximum conditions which is called the dry transom
section area (ATR/AX) ratio of 0.572. Four regime (Figure 2b). There is a transition
hull forms were designed from the base regime between these regimes where the
form with the same L/B and B/T ratios but transom stern is called semi-dry or semi-
with ATR/AX ratios of 0.000, 0.286, 0.786 wet. The regimes of the current forms are
and 1.000. All the models have the same given in Figure 3.
forebody form but not aftbody form. The
main characteristics and the body sections b) Total Resistance Experiments: The
of the models are given in Table 1 and in total resistance was measured in a speed
Figure 1, respectively. range of Froude numbers from 0.2 to 1.0
with an electronic dynamometer and a
Form 1 is the fullest model with the computer aided data acquisition system.
maximum body section extended The experiments were performed both for
throughout the whole aftbody, and Form 5 free and fixed to trim and sinkage
is the most slender with no underwater conditions. The results of the total
transom stern area at rest. resistance experiments are given in Figure 4
and 5.
M1 M2 M3 M4 M5
AT / Amax 0.000 0.286 0.572 0.786 1.000 The smallest total resistance was
L/B 7.000 7.000 7.000 7.000 7.000 measured for original hull form (Form 3) in
B/T 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 free to trim and sinkage condition where the
CB 0.45 0.42 0.4 0.35 0.31 fuller models Form 1 and Form 2 have the
Table 1: Model characteristics highest resistance as expected.

Form 4 has the smallest resistance

3. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY
All the five models were tested in
the large towing tank of I.T.U. Ata Nutku
Ship Model Testing Laboratory. Two sets
of experiments were conducted for total and
wave resistance measurements. The
experiments were performed both for free
and fixed conditions to trim and sinkage.
a) Observations: Observations of the
flow about the transom stern was made
during the experiments. The flow at low
speeds is associated with vortices and the
transom stern area is totally wet as shown
in Figure 2a which is called the wet
transom regime. At high speeds the flow
meanwhile Form 3 is the second best and
Form 1 is the last in terms of the least total
resistance values for fixed to trim and
sinkage condition.
c) Wave Pattern Resistance
Experiments: The waves generated by the
models were acquired through four wave
probes and a computer aided data
acquisition system in order to make
comparisons of measured and calculated
wave resistance components directly. The
wave pattern of a model in a towing tank
can be mathematically written as;
[ξ n cos(ω n x ) + η n sin (ω n x )]cosæç 2πyn ö (1)
N
ζ =
n =0 è W
ω n = K n cos(θ n ) , these speeds. The ranking is from the most
2πn g slender to the fullest again when the forms
K n sin (θ n ) = and K n − 2 sec 2 (θ n ) = 0
W V get into the dry transom regime.

where W is the width of the tank, n is the

wave harmonic number, Kn is the wave 4. NUMERICAL WAVE
number and θ n is the angle of the harmonic RESISTANCE
wave. The wave pattern resistance can be
written from the law of the conservation of The numerical treatment used in the
momentum (4) as follows: present wave resistance analysis utilises the
usual assumptions for the non-lifting
ρgW é 2 ù
ê(ξ 0 + η 0 ) +
N
RWP =
2 ë
2
(ξ n2 + η n2 )(1 − 0.5 cos 2 (θ n )) potential flow, which is implied in a
n =1
computer program (5) based on Dawson’s
(2) (6) algorithm. Accordingly the basic
expression for the potential flow about a
The resistance components can be double-model is as follows:
defined as viscous wake traverse drag and σ (ξ ,η , ζ ) ⋅ ds (ξ ,η , ζ )
wave pattern resistance component: φ ( x, y, z ) = Ux − (4)
S
r ( x, y , z , ξ ,η , ζ )
RT = RV + RWP = (1 + k )R F + RWP . (3)
The velocity potential ( φ = Φ + ϕ ,
The results of the wave pattern
where Φ : double-model potential and ϕ :
resistance experiments are given in Figure 6
and Figure 7. The characteristics of the perturbation potential) satisfies the
results are similar to the total resistance, kinematic boundary condition;
∂φ
however, there are differences in ranking. =0 (5)
∂n
Although Form 1 has the highest total
On the rigid body and the free surface
resistance values, it does not have the
condition;
highest wave pattern resistance. Form 5
shows low values in total resistance, but it [
∇Φ ⋅ ∇ − (∇Φ ) + ∇Φ ⋅ ∇φ +
2
] 1
2
∇φ ⋅ ∇(∇Φ ) + gφ z = 0
2

has high values in wave pattern resistance. , (z=0) (6)

This indicates that the fullest form (Form 1)
has high viscous resistance due to the high
eddy-generation, and the most slender form
(Form 5) has low viscous resistance due to
the low eddy-generation.
The wave spectrums of the models
are given for eight speeds in Figure 8. The
ranking of the models usually occur from
the most slender to the fullest but not
between the Froude numbers of 0.42-0.50.
This is due to that the slender forms run in
dry transom regime at slower speeds than
the fuller forms. The slender forms show
higher values of wave pattern resistance in
obtained by discarding quadratic and higher
order terms in perturbation potential ϕ
according to the low Froude number
approximation. Depending on Hess and
Smith’s (7) method, constant source
strength σ distribution is assumed over
each panel distributed on a portion of the
free surface as well as on the body. On the
other hand by taking the differentials in the
free surface condition along the streamlines
we arrive at the Dawson’s (6) free surface
condition;
(Φ l2φ l )l + gφ z = 2Φ l2 Φ ll , (z=0) (7)
in which the derivatives along the
streamlines are performed by a fourth-point
backward differencing scheme proposed by
Dawson (6). Thus the source strengths on
the panels are then determined by satisfying
the kinematic boundary condition on the
body and Dawson’s free surface condition.
The transom at the stern needs a
special treatment to assure the continuity of
normal vector on the body surface. No
panels at the transom are considered and we
let the internal flow go through the transom
and continue its way inside a hypothetical
closed tube bounded by the stream surface
which is defined in this case as the body
surface and which clears the transom
extending to infinity. Accordingly a
boundary condition is imposed at the
upstream edge of the free surface transom
panels which states that the total velocity is
assumed to be equal to ship’s velocity, as
discussed in Maissonneuve (8), when the
transom is wet. For the Froude numbers
greater than 0.40 the flow clears the
transom and in this case dry transom
conditions are imposed which are studied
by Cheng (9).
An example of panel distribution
and computed wave resistance values are
given in Figure 9 and Figure 10
respectively. The discontinuity at the
graphs is due to the different computational
treatments used for wet and dry transom
conditions. Compared to the experimental
data similar ranking is derived both for wet
and dry transom stern regimes.
Computational rooster tail, wave
profile and wave distribution in the
computational domain about the hull are
given in Figure 11, 12 and 13 respectively.
From Figure 13 it can be easily seen that
the second wave peaks at the transom of
Form 1 and Form 5 differ severely where
Form 3 which has the least wave generation
and thus the least wave resistance shows the
least wave height.
5. RESULTS
Transom stern has an important
effect on both wave resistance and viscous
resistance as indicated by the results of the
current study. The experiments about the
effects of the transom stern on the viscous
resistance are still continuing and are not
included in the current paper.
The transition from wet to dry
transom regime depends on the transom
stern area as well as speed. The hulls with
smaller transom stern area dries quicker
than the larger transom stern area hulls. As
soon as the transom stern area dries, the
wave resistance increases, specially in the
higher wave spectrum, i.e. above 30
degrees of the waves angle generated by the
hull. As the larger transom stern area hulls
dry, these differences on high wave angles
disappear and the large transom area hulls
have higher wave resistance across the
spectrum. The increase of wave resistance
in the dry transom regime is demonstrated
by the experiments and supported by the
theoretical computations.
The models with larger transom area
have higher total resistance values, because
of eddies generated by them although they
may not have high wave resistance values.
6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors are thankful to Turkish
Scientific and Technological Research
Council (TUBITAK) for partially funding Singularites de Rankine”, Ph.D. Thesis,
the study. University of Nantes, 1989.
9) Cheng, B.H., “Computations of 3D
Transom Stern Flows”, Proc. 5th Int.
REFERENCES Conf. on Num. Ship Hydrodynamics,
1989.
1) Tümer, K., “The Effects of Transom on
the Performance of Round Bilge High
Speed Craft Performance”, M.S.
Thesis, I.T.U. Institute of Science &
Technology, 1997.(In Turkish)
2) Sireli, E.M., “The Effects of Transom
on the Performance of Round Bilge
High Speed Crafts”, M.S. Thesis, I.T.U.
Institute of Science & Technology,
1999. (In Turkish)
3) Bailey, D., “The NPL High Speed
Round Bilge Displacement Hull
Series”, Marine Technology
Monograph, Nr.4, The Royal Institute
of Naval Architects, 1976.
4) Insel, M., “An Investigation into the
Resistance Components of High Speed
Displacement Catamarans”, Ph.D.
Thesis, University of Southampton,
1990.
5) Gören, Ö., “A Numerical Study of Wave
Resistance of Wet Transom Stern
Ships”, Unpublished Report, University
of British Columbia, 1990.
6) Dawson, C.W., “A Practical Computer
Method for Solving Ship Wave
Problems”, Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. on
Num. Ship Hydrodynamics, University
of California, Berkeley, 1977.
7) Hess, J.L. and Smith, A.M.O.,
“Calculation of Non-lifting Potential
Flow About Arbitrary Three-
dimensional Bodies”, Journal of Ship
Research, Vol.8, Nr.2, pp.22-44.
8) Maisonneuve, J.J., “Resolution du
Probleme de la Resistance de Vagues
des Navire par une Metode de
 M1 M2

M3

Figure 4: Residuary resistance of models in fixed to

trim and sinkage condition
M4 M5

Figure 1: Sections of the forms

Figure 5: Residuary resistance of models in free to

Figure 2a: Wet transom stern trim and sinkage conditions

Figure 2b: Dry transom stern

0.6

Dry Transom Figure 6: Wave pattern resistance of models in fixed

Stern Regime
0.5 to trim and sinkage conditions
Semi-Wet Transom
0.4
Stern Regime
Fn

0.3
Wet Transom
Stern Regime
0.2

0.1

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

At/Ax
Wet Transomi DryTransomi

Figure 3: Dry and wet transom regime for utilised Figure 7: Wave pattern resistance of models in free
hull forms to trim and sinkage conditions
 0.01 0.07

0.009 Fn=0.35 0.06

Fn=0.42
0.008

Figure 8: Wave pattern resistance across theWave

Wave
Dalga Form Direnci (N)

Dalga Form Direnci (N)

0.05
0.007

spectrum
Pattern 0.006 Pattern 0.04

Resis. 0.005 Resis.

(N) 0.004 (N) 0.03

0.003
0.02

0.002

0.01
0.001

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Wave Angle
Dalga Açisi
Wave Angle
Dalga Açisi

0.09
0.16

0.08
Fn=0.45 0.14
Fn=0.50
0.07

Wave
0.12
Dalga Form Direnci (N)

Wave

Dalga Form Direnci (N)

0.06

Pattern Pattern 0.1

Resis.
0.05

Resis. 0.08

(N) 0.04
(N) 0.06
0.03

0.04
0.02

0.01 0.02

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

WaveDalga
Angle
Açisi
0.14
WaveDalga
AngleAçisi
0.14

0.12
Fn=0.59 0.12
Fn=0.68

Wave Wave
Dalga Form Direnci (N)

0.1
Dalga Form Direnci (N)

0.1

Pattern Pattern 0.08

Resis.
0.08
Resis.
(N) 0.06 (N) 0.06

0.04
0.04

0.02
0.02

0
0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Wave Angle
Dalga Açisi Wave Angle
Dalga Açisi

0.1 0.09

0.09
0.08
Fn=1.00
0.08
0.07

Wave
Dalga Form Direnci (N)

Wave
Dalga Form Direnci (N)

0.07
0.06
Pattern 0.06 Pattern
Resis. 0.05 Resis.
0.05

(N) 0.04 (N) 0.04

0.03
0.03

0.02
0.02

0.01 Fn=0.75 0.01

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Dalga Açisi
Wave Angle WaveDalga
AngleAçisi
 Model 1

Figure 9 : Panel distribution for potential flow

Model 2
calculations

0.006

0.005
Cw
0.004 Model 3
0.003

0.002

0.001
Model 4
0.000
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90
Fn

Figure 10: Calculated wave pattern resistance

0.02
Model 5
0.01
z [m] Figure 13: Calculated wave pattern about the models
0.00
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
-0.01
-0.02
-0.03
-0.04
-0.05
x [m]

Figure 11: Calculated wave pattern behind the

transom
0.03

0.02

0.01
z [m]
0.00
-1.2 -1.0 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0.2 0.4 0.6
-0.01

-0.02

-0.03

Figure 12: Calculated wave profile along the hull

View publication stats