Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 66

# Yacht Design & Technology

Hydrodynamics
Lecture Contents
How is resistance determined?
Components of resistance
How can resistance be minimised?

Resistance
theory
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Fn
R
t

(
N
,

f
u
l
l

s
c
a
l
e
)
theory
1) Model testing in a towing tank

Determining the Resistance of a
Design
Determining the Resistance of a
Design
2) Calculation by Computational Fluid
Dynamics (CFD)
Using numerical techniques to
solve equations defining fluid
flow
Equations solved are numerical
approximations, hence inherent
level of approximation in
solution
Determining the Resistance of a
Design
3) Systematic Series
Calculation by empirical formulae -
determined by regressional analysis of
Systematic Series
Series of towing tank test models all
derived from one particular parent

Change one parameter at a time and
keep others constant

Empirical formulation for
determination of resistance of arbitrary
shape

Components of Calm Water
Resistance
Components of Calm Water
Resistance
Influence of Speed on Resistance
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 14 16 20 25
True Wind Speed (knots)
D
r
a
g

B
u
d
g
e
t
induced drag
heel drag
appendage viscous drag
canoe body viscous drag
wave drag
Components of Calm Water
Resistance
Dependent on:
area of hull/keel/rudder in contact
with water
forward speed
frictional coefficient
Frictional Resistance
S C V
2
1
R
f
2
friction
=
Frictional Resistance

Total frictional resistance of yacht is
) C C C (
2
1
R
r fr k fk c fc
2
f
S S S V + + =

Subscripts: c = canoe body
k = keel
r = rudder
Frictional Resistance

Note that Van Oossanen gives
Rn
1800
2) - (Log(Rn)
075 . 0
C
2
f
=
C
f
determined from experiments with flat
plates, now a standard equation, ITTC-57, is
used
2
f
2) - (Log(Rn)
075 . 0
C =
Dependent on:
length
forward speed
kinematic viscosity of fluid
Reynolds Number
v
vL
Rn =

Remember that flow changes from laminar to
turbulent flow at around Rn = 4.5x10
5
Reynolds Number Canoe Body
v
WL
c
0.8L v
Rn =
For ships L is taken as waterline length.
For yachts this is not a realistic representation.
Therefore typically a value of L is taken
between 70% & 90% of the waterline length.
This obviously leaves space for interpretation.
Reynolds Number - Foils
v
k
k
C v
Rn =
v
r
r
C v
Rn =
Average chord length used to determine
Rn
If taper ratio (difference between chord
length at tip and root) greater than 0.6,
then appendage divided into strips and
total skin friction found by summing
skin friction of all the strips.

Components of Calm Water
Resistance
The actual frictional resistance of the
yacht will differ from plat plate frictional
resistance due to shape of hull or
form, i.e. flow is 3D rather than 2D.

Viscous Resistance - Form Drag
friction viscous
R ) k 1 ( R + =
) ) 1 ( C ) 1 ( C ) 1 ( C (
2
1
R
r r fr k k fk c c fc
2
viscous
S k S k S k V + + + + + =
Form Factor, k, is determined from tank
tests using Prohaska Plot. Obtain k from
C
T
/C
f
versus Fn
4
/C
f
plot

k may also be calculated from Holtrop
1977.
For sailing yacht k~0.1
caused by effects of hull surface, since
ITTC-57 accounts for smooth surface
only.

Viscous Resistance - Form Drag
Viscous Resistance - Form Drag
length chord aerofoil c
thickness aerofoil t
digit - 4 NACA 60(t/c) 2(t/c) 1 k 1
65 & 64 63, NACA 70(t/c) 2(t/c) 1 k 1
4
4
=
=
+ + = +
+ + = +

Keel and rudder Form Factor may be
determined from data available in
literature e.g. Hoerner Fluid Dynamics
Drag & Fluid Dynamics Lift

Components of Calm Water
Resistance
Viscous Resistance - Transom

) (
2
1
with
5 0 C
5 ) 2 . 0 1 ( 2 . 0 C
area transom immersed A
C A V
2
1

TR
TR
TR
TR TR
2
TR
WL
WP
WL T
T
T
T
T T
L
A
B B
gB
V
Fn
Fn
Fn Fn
R
+ ~
=
> =
< =
=
=
Pressure drag
caused by
immersed transom
is a component of
the viscous
resistance

OK, we now know what Viscous
Drag is - how do we minimise it?
Minimise Viscous Drag:
Reduce wetted surface area

Maintain laminar flow as far back as possible
(use straight lines in forebody)

Minimise form factor by ensuring that flow lines
along hull are as straight as possible

slender waterlines in low B
WL
/T
c

slender/straight buttock lines in high B
WL
/T
c

avoid pronounced bilges in diagonal flow

Components of Calm Water
Resistance
Wave-making resistance is associated with
the energy involved with generating the
pattern of waves seen when a vessel travels
along the surface.

Wave-Making Resistance
Flow along hull reduced (in relation to yacht
speed) at bow and stern while increased at
amidships.

This is responsible for:
increase pressure in bow region
decrease in pressure amidships
increase pressure at stern

Wave-Making Resistance
The length of the wave is a function of the wave
speed:

g
V 2
=
2
t

Wave-Making Resistance

This means that as the speed of the yacht
changes the interference between the waves
generated by significant parts of yacht hull e.g.
bow, shoulder, stern changes.

hull speed is when: = LWL

Influence of yacht speed on wave length

Wave-Making Resistance
Wave-Making Resistance
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
V/sqrt(L)
C
t
Humps and hollows of a yacht resistance curve
(Ct = total resistance coefficient)
The volume of the keel produces wave-
making resistance.

To avoid abrupt changes in lengthwise
distribution of volume, keel volume may be
faired into Curve of Cross Sectional Areas.

Work by Keuning & Binkhorst (Chesapeake
1997) measured forces on keel and rudder
separately from hull forces. Results clearly
showed residuary drag on the keel in upright
condition (2 5% of overall resistance).

Wave-Making Appendage Resistance
OK, we now know what Wave-
Making Drag is - how do we
minimise it?
Minimise Wave-Making Drag:
Design hull to have long effective waterline
length

Carefully distribute displacement volume along
length

More volume towards bow and stern, decrease
XSA of maximum section of hull - this increases
prismatic coefficient, Cp

m WL
A L
= p
V
C
Effective wave-making length of the hull is
increased (distance between wave peak at bow &
wave peak at stern increased)

Components of Calm Water
Resistance
Going to windward hull, keel and rudder develop
side force.
To generate side force flow requires angle of
attack with respect to hull centreline.

Induced resistance is directly related to side
force generated by hull and appendages. It is
dependent on:

wing geometry
flow around wing tip
aspect ratio of wing
presence of the free surface

Induced Resistance

Induced Resistance
Induced resistance minimised when wing has

Elliptical plan form is not strictly necessary for
t
/c
r
=0.6 is
effective (c
t
= tip chord & c
r
= root chord)

Induced Resistance Wing Geometry
Induced resistance strongly related to strength
and shape of tip vortex changes to shape of
wing tip may influence induced resistance.

Flow around tip, from high-pressure side to low-
pressure side, must be restricted to minimise R
I
.

End plate may be used to minimise tip losses.
Hull is one end plate. Wing tips or bulbs may be
used at other end.

End plates & bulbs however have additional
resistance e.g. large wetted area & form drag.

Induced Resistance Wing Tip
Aspect ratio is ratio between wing span and the
wing area. A long slender wing has a high aspect
ratio.

For high AR wing, effect of wing tip on overall
performance of wing is small.

Lift/R
I
increases with increasing AR

Induced Resistance Aspect Ratio
Induced resistance effect due to pressure field
around keel being close to free surface as yacht
heels. This pressure field generates waves which
manifests itself as resistance.

Induced Resistance Free Surface Effect
When sweep angle increased pressure field is
spread out over longer portion of free surface,
hence reducing wave generation.

Has led to development of inverse taper keels
and winglets.

Interaction between pressure field around keel
and free surface may not be neglected during
keel design.

Induced Resistance Free Surface Effect
Forces on sails produce heeling and trimming
moments in addition to drive force for yacht.

Running trim will lead to a bow down attitude,
unless counteracted by crew movement.

This will change both the viscous and residuary
resistance

Heeled Resistance
When yacht heels underwater part of hull will
become asymmetrical and there will most likely
be a change in the wetted surface area.

New wetted area may be found from hydrostatic
calculations.

Change of Viscous Res. due to Heel
This is more significant than change in viscous
resistance due to heel.

When yacht heels there will be a change in the
distribution of of the cross sectional areas over
the length of the yacht.

Depending on hull geometry this will lead to
change in hull shape parameters:
waterline length
waterline beam
canoe body depth
LCB may lead to change in trim (bow down
as LCB moves aft)

Change of Residuary Res. due to Heel
Most influential are B/T ratio and LCB.

Hullform with increased B/T ratio tends to have
greater increase in residuary resistance when
heeled.

Trimming effect can significantly increase
resistance by 10-15% at high speeds.

Change of Residuary Res. due to Heel
Ability of yacht to sail close to wind and achieve
good VMG is mainly dependent on ability of hull,
keel and rudder to develop substantial side force
without significant resistance.

Side force produced when hull has yaw or
leeway angle relative to track of yacht through
water.

Yachts with good windward performance can
generate high side force at small leeway angle,
whereby leeway is reduced.
Hydrodynamic Side Force
Keel & rudder must be symmetrical this limits
lift to drag ratio to the order of 10.
(Non-symmetrical cambered wing sections can have lift to drag
ratios of 30 for small angles of attack).
Flaps may be used on trailing edge to increase lift, though drag
penalty also present.

Canoe body is inefficient producer of side force
with max L/D ratio about 5 6 at low speed and
2 3 at high speed.

Large Keel
high sideforce, large wetted area, V
B
low, b
TW
small
Sails high and slow
Small Keel
low sideforce, small wetted area, V
B
high, b
TW
large
Sails low and fast

Hydrodynamic Side Force
Side Force:
Aspect Ratio

Lift increases with
angle of attack until
flow separates from
foil and it stalls.

High AR wing more
effective at
producing lift.

High AR wing
generate high lift at
small angles of
attack stall very
soon.
High Aspect Ratio:
High lift production
Small leeway angles
Minimal induced drag
Reduction in WSA lowers frictional resistance

Drawbacks:
After tack large angle of attack and wing may stall
Water depth
Structural implications
In waves angle of attack varies considerably due to motions,
also lower speed, hence wing may stall.
Side Force Aspect Ratio
Thickness Ratio (max. section thickness/chord):
Greater thickness increase max lift.
Slightly higher resistance.
Thicker foils less sensitive to stall than thinner foils.

Longitudinal position along chord length of max.
thickness:
Determines extent of laminar flow on foil.
Move position aft & laminar flow may be promoted.
Too far aft and boundary layer will separate at low lift
coefficients.

Good reference: Theory of Wing Sections Abbott & von Doenhoff
Side Force Section Profile
It is recommended that every Naval Architect
draws a lines plan by hand at some stage in
their career.

Slow work but gives excellent appreciation of the
process of simultaneously drawing 3 fair
orthogonal views.

Possible Technique:
Work with parameters: length, displacement, beam
waterline, Cp and LCB.
Draw profile
Draw maximum section shape
Examine Sectional Area curve
Adjust for displacement using selected Cp
Hull Form Lines Development

Hull Form Influences:
Class Exercise - Try and define a possible influence of the
following conditions or hull form parameters:

Heel
Bow type
Flared topsides
Displacement
Cp
LCB

Boats spend large sailing time at heel.

Tend to trim bow down as they heel - aft shift in
LCB & sail force trimming moment.

Need to consider heeled lines as much as upright
lines.

Hull Form Design for Heel
Cruising yachts: styling, flare forward, shape of
deck edge in plan view, sea conditions.

Racing yachts: Rating rule
IMS system gives fine forward waterlines &
vertical stem profile.
IACC rule measurement at waterline
overhanging bow encouraged (Meter bows).

Hull Form Bow Type
Greater asymmetry results in greater drag at
heel.

Flared topsides (high B to Bwl ratio) create
asymmetry.

Deck beam important for crew-righting moment
& water ballast.

Hull Form Flared Topsides
Determines general character of boat.

High L/disp tends to give increased beam-draft
ratio since will derive stability from form rather
than ballast.

Hull Form Displacement
Typically Cp optimised for Fn = 0.33-0.35 (upwind
sailing for racing yacht in medium winds)

Cp typically vary from 0.52 to 0.56

Hull Form Prismatic Coefficient
LCB typically range between 3 6% aft of
amidships.

LCB towards gives fine bow = less added
resistance & may be appropriate for planing at
higher speeds.

However may nose dive in large waves trim bow
down with heel.

Hull Form LCB
Series established in 1974 by Gerritsma et al. at
Delft university of Technology in order to derive
empirical expressions for hydrodynamic forces on
sailing yachts.

Over 50 systematically varied models tested
upright, heeled and yawed at various speeds.

Parent hullforms have evolved as yacht design
has developed:
Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series
Parent Hull Form Year Introduced
Standfast 43 1974
S&S IMS-40 1995
Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series
Length displacement Ratio 5.0 to 8.0
Length to Beam Rat io 5.0 to 2.8
Beam to Draft ratio 2.5 to 19
LCB (%LWL) 0.0 to 8.0 (aft midship)
Prismatic Coefficient 0.52 to 0.60
Cross Sectional Area Coefficient 0.646 to 0.777
The following hull parameters were chosen:
The total resistance is calculated from the addition of the
residuary resistance and frictional resistance (ITTC-57):

The residuary resistance is determined analytically from the
individual contributions made by the hull and the keel.

Using the polynomial equation with hull form geometry coefficients
as variables the hull residuary resistance may be determined
from:

Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series
f r t
R R R + =
rk rh r
R R R + =
LWL
C A
LWL
LCB
A
LCF
LCB
A
S
A
LWL LWL
BWL
A
A
A C A
LWL
LCB
A A
g
R
c
p
fp
fp
fp
c
c
c
w
c
p
fp
c
rh
3 / 1
2
8
2
7 6
3 / 2
5
3 / 1
4
3 / 2
3 2 1 0
V
|
|
.
|

\
|
+
|
|
.
|

\
|
+ +
V
+
V
|
|
.
|

\
|
+
V
+ + + =
V

Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Fn
R
e
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
004 experiment
theory, Kuening (1999)/Gerritsma (1992)
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Fn
R
e
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
008 experiment
theory, Kuening (1999)/Gerritsma (1992)
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Fn
R
e
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
017 experiment
theory, Kuening(1999)/Gerritsma(1992)
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Fn
R
e
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
018 experiment
theory, Kuening(1999)/Gerritsma(1992)
A similar procedure is utilised for determining:

Appendage resistance

Induced resistance

Hydrodynamic side force

Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series
Good Reference for Delft Series:

Keuning, J.A. & Sonnenberg, U.B. Approximation
of the Calm Water Resistance on a Sailing Yacht
Based on the Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series
14
th
Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium,
January 1999.

Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series

Recap/reflect