CHAPTER 45

Antony Armstrong
CATAMARANS
45.1 INTRODUCTION
The vast majority of water-borne craft have
a single-hull, because this provides a simple
solution to the problem of transporting a given
payload across the water, and at a minimum cost.
The conventional mono-hull solution to the
transportation problem is usually a compromise,
because, as with most engineering problems, there
are many different requirements such as payload
and stability as illustrated in Figure 45.. !rior to
about "5#, the principal requirement of a craft was
to provide as much stowage space for payload as
could be fitted into a given length and sail layout.
The speed of the vessel was never an issue, and it is
only since the introduction of mechanical
propulsion and the socio-economically-driven
development of international trade, that the concept
of ma$imi%ing speed has become important. Today,
greater speed can provide a commercial edge in
getting the product to the mar&et as well as suiting
the modern rapid lifestyle. 'reater speed might be
achieved by greater installed propulsion power, but
usually it is more efficiently obtained by the
minimi%ation of resistance.
(nfortunately, such a minimi%ation of
resistance affects the compromise engineering
solution that so favors the simple mono-hull at
lower speeds.
Figure 45.1 - Title
)nalysis of the somewhat simplified
relationship illustrated in Fig 45.. shows that the
hull form determines the resistance of the craft. )s
will be further e$amined in *hapter 45.+, the
principal hull characteristics that determine the
resistance at a given high speed are the ratios of
slenderness L,
,-
and thinness L,., where L is the
waterline length, B is the individual hull beam, and
is the displacement.
The solution for a mono-hull to achieve
low resistance is a minimum displacement, a
minimum beam and the greatest practical length.
(nfortunately these three hull characteristics not
only affect the resistance, but the stability
characteristics and the payload capacity. ) long thin
lightweight mono-hull may have the minimum of
resistance, but would e$hibit poor and probably
inadequate stability. )n e$ample is a rowing shell,
which relies on the buoyancy of the oars or the
dynamic forces generated by the oars to remain
upright.
)n obvious solution to this dilemma of
poor stability is to add one or more stabili%ing hulls
to the main hull, and this is the basic reason for the
success of the multi-hull as a high-speed craft.
The advantages of a high L,B ratio in
minimi%ing resistance, are such that a catamaran
/L,b 0 51 will have considerably less resistance
than a mono-hull /L,b 0 say 21 of equal and L,
despite having two hulls.
)dding another hull of the same
dimensions as the main hulls results in a craft
generally termed a 3catamaran4. There are other
types of craft with more than one hull. 5f the other
stabili%ing hull is smaller, a commonly used term is
a 6proa7, as illustrated in Figure 45.+. )dding two
small hulls to provide additional stability results in
a craft termed a 3stabili%ed mono-hull4 /8onostab1
or 3trimaran4. 9hen the stabili%ing hulls, or
pontoons are somewhat larger, the craft is generally
termed a 3trimaran4.
Figure 45.2 - Title
)ll of these above e$amples are multi-hull
craft. 8any of the characteristics that they
e$hibit can be applied to craft that are
powered by mechanical means, or by
person-power, for e$ample, a 3pedallo,4 or
by the wind.
:igh-speed sailing catamarans however are
somewhat different because they are usually
designed to operate with some heel angle, and
trimarans may, in hydrodynamic terms, be
considered as monohulls as one hull may be above
the water surface. ;ailing proas such as *rossbow
/Figure 45.-1 may only be operated on one tac&, and
may be designed to operate as a mono-hull with the
side hull above the water surface.
Figure 45.3 -
The remainder of this *hapter will
therefore concentrate on mechanically propelled
craft and catamarans. /;ee *hapter 42 -;9)T:
and Trimaran <essels for discussion of other
multihull craft1. ) discussion on catamarans
requires the introduction of additional
nomenclature, as illustrated in Figure 45.4. The
overall beam B of the craft is made up of the beam
of the individual hulls b, and the hull separation Sc.
42-
The space between the hulls is generally called the
tunnel, and when discussing resistance effects the
tunnel width or the clear distance between the
inside hull surfaces ST may be of interest. 9hen
considering slamming, the height of the underside
of the structure between the hulls HT may be
important. ;uch structure is generally called the
3bridging structure4 and the depth of this structure
H. is an important structural characteristic.
For a catamaran, the individual hulls are
often called demi-hulls.
Figure 45.4 -
45.2 BRIEF HISTORY OF THE
CATAMARAN
The earliest catamarans were probably
developed amongst the islands of the !acific and
5ndian =ceans. *atamaran is a Tamil word
meaning 3tied wood4 /1. This type of craft almost
certainly developed because the only available
material was a hollowed-out tree trun&. ;uch a
craft of necessity would have a large L,b ratio, and
very poor stability characteristics, which could have
been dramatically improved by lashing cross-
bracing to the main hull and adding another hull or
outrigger to the cross- bracing. ;uch craft had
e$ceptionally good stability characteristics and
allowed trans-oceanic journeys to be made between
islands over a wide distance, particularly throughout
the >orthern !acific, where the !olynesian canoe is
still in use today.
The earliest mechanically propelled
catamarans were designed at the end of the ?
th
century to operate across the @nglish *hannel. The
first mono-hull ferries were driven by paddle
wheels, and were operated directly across the
prevailing sea direction, as a result of which the
vessel would roll and e$pose the paddle wheel on
one side, and deeply immerse the other, resulting in
an inefficient propulsion system. ) catamaran
layout with the paddle wheel at the center of the
craft solved this problem, as well as providing for a
more attractive layout for passengers. :owever, it
was also recogni%ed at this early stage that the
catamaran layout offered a large dec& area and a
lower resistance. (nfortunately the catamaran
layout resulted in a rolling characteristic that
increased the levels of motion sic&ness.
The modern history of the catamaran starts
in >orway in the ?2#7s. 9ith towns situated on
the edges of the fjords and with high mountains
between them, which were usually impassible in
wintertime, it is easy to understand how a
transportation system developed based on the sea.
*atamarans were ideal for this trade, as they offered
a large dec& area and a high-speed resulting from
their low resistance. 9estamoen /later 9estamarin1
was at the forefront of the construction of
catamarans built from aluminum, and a typical
vessel is illustrated in Figure 45.5. These passenger
craft were all less than -5mm in length.
Figure 45.5 -
5n ?A5 the first high-speed catamaran was
built in )ustralia, following the collapse of a bridge,
which split the city of :obart into two. ) ferryboat
operator Bobert *lifford, recogni%ed the ability of a
catamaran layout to carry large numbers of
passengers, and rapidly built a number of such craft
in steel to provide a service between the two severed
parts of the city. These craft were immediately
successful, and *lifford recogni%ed from this that a
lightweight version of the same craft could provide
a means of transporting tourists from the )ustralian
mainland to the 'reat .arrier Beef, )ustralia7s
main tourist attraction, a trip which could ta&e up to
two hours by conventional ferry.
Figure 45. -
The first aluminum passenger ferry in
)ustralia was built and demonstrated with
immediate success by *lifford7s new company,
5nternational *atamaran /5ncat1. )fter building
thirty or forty of these boats, one of which is
illustrated in Figure 45.2, attempts were made to
improve the sea &eeping performance in head seas
by ma&ing the hulls e$tremely fine at the bow and
removing the flare of the hulls above the waterline.
5n this way it was thought that the hulls would
pierce through the waves rather than to ride up and
over them. This concept was demonstrated with a
5m prototype 3Tassie Cevil4 and then a -#m
prototype 3;pirit of <ictoria4, illustrated in Figure
45.+.A.
Figure 45.! -
Becogni%ing that additional buoyancy was
needed at the bow, the fore body of the catamaran at
the centerline was molded into a ship bow shape,
but located above the waterline such that it only
became immersed when pitching down into waves,
and so provided hydrodynamic and hydrostatic lift
when necessary. These craft were termed 3wave
piercing catamarans4.
5n ?"", :overspeed instigated the design
and subsequent construction of a A4m length wave-
piercing catamaran arranged to carry passengers
and cars. This craft was the first of five intended to
supplement the two ;B>4 hovercraft that were
operated by the company. The initial wave piercer
3:overspeed 'reat .ritain4, illustrated in Figure
45.+." was the first vehicle-carrying high-speed
catamaran, and proved the speed capability on the
delivery voyage in Dune ??# by successfully ta&ing
the :ales Trophy for the fastest crossing of the
)tlantic by a passenger craft, a trophy that had been
held since ?5- by the ;; (nited ;tates.
42-+
Figure 45." - Hoverspeed Great Britain #e$%i&g
Ne' Y(r) *(r t+e Su,,e--*ul Atte./t (& t+e
H$le- Tr(/+01 2u&e 1334
5n the ten years since ??#, the si%e of the
catamarans has grown as the available engine power
has grown and the comple$ities of the structural
design have become understood. The larger vessels
can now carry truc&s and coaches. ;ome catamaran
car ferries are operating at very high speed, above
5# &nots. The principal manufacturers of high-
speed car ferrying catamarans have been 5ncat and
)ustal ;hips in )ustralia, although the largest craft
have been built in Finland and *anada. The
principal >orwegian builder of aluminum
catamarans, Fjellstrand has been the major
manufacturer of passenger high-speed catamarans,
including a subsidiary shipyard in ;ingapore, with
over 5# craft built at about 4#m si%e. Figure 45.+.?
illustrates the growth of the industry between ?"?
and ???, and the si%e and number of vessels in
service at the beginning and end of the ten-year
period.
;ince the introduction of 3:overspeed
'reat .ritain4, the high-speed catamaran industry
has been a volatile and slowly maturing one. The
desire for ever-increasing speed, sea &eeping ability
and deadweight capability has ensured that new
designs have been one step ahead of regulations and
legislation. ) constant flow of ideas has led to
confusion in the industry as designers have
promoted their own ideas, which were mostly
unproven.
;everal established builders of
conventional craft, often with many years of
e$perience in steel construction, have failed with
their attempts to build lightweight catamarans as a
result of not appreciating that different materials
require different design and construction
techniques.
From the year +### it is anticipated that
the established and proven designers and builders of
high-speed catamarans will continue to improve the
product and to e$pand the range of capabilities,
possibly with technology spin-offs into the military
area. Beliability of structure and machinery will be
improved, the sea &eeping characteristics will be
e$ploited to result in reduced motions, and the
effects on the environment will be specifically
considered.
45.3 CATAMARAN CHARACTERISTICS
*atamaran high-speed craft have been
developed to e$ploit the inherent advantages of such
craft, namelyE
) large dec& area.
Beduced hull resistance leading to
higher speeds or lower fuel
consumption.
5ncreased safety levels
)ttractive layout possibilities resulting
from the wide beam.
The challenge is to ma$imi%e the
advantages whilst addressing the structural
difficulties in the design of these craft.
) catamaran essentially contains three
elementsE
1 The hulls, which are principally
intended to provide buoyancy and to
house the propulsion machinery.
+1 The connecting structure, sometimes
called the 6bridging structure7, between
the hulls. This structure provides the
transverse strength of the craft.
-1 The superstructure is fitted above the
hulls and the bridging structure
containing the passenger
accommodation space dec&. ;ome
manufacturers have fitted the passenger
accommodation as a module onto rubber
mounts, mounted on the hulls and
bridging structure, and in this way
ensured that no structural loads are
transmitted into the superstructure and
isolated the passengers from noise and
vibration from the propulsion system.
This system is also used by 5ncat under
the passenger cabin on the vehicular
ferries, as illustrated in Figure 45.#.
Figure 45.35$6-5,6
Figure 45.14 -
45.4 HU## SHA7ES
@arly catamarans were characteri%ed by
asymmetrical hull shapes, as illustrated in Figure
45.5. These can be described as being a mono-hull
shape split along the hull centerline and the two
parts separated, with a /usually1 vertical inside
surface, and provided a minimum of additional
resistance from the interference effects resulting
from having two hulls in close pro$imity. The small
hull separation reduced the structural loads by
minimi%ing the span of the bridging structure.
42--
These loads were not fully understood, but as
&nowledge of the behavior of the multi-hull
structure in a seaway developed, it became possible
to design with larger spans.
This lead to a reduction in interference
effects on resistance, as discussed in ;ection 45.+.-,
and allowed the hulls to each become symmetrical
in shape. This simplified construction and
minimi%ed the wetted surface area, allowing for
further reduction in resistance, such that almost all
catamaran craft by +### were of the symmetrical
hull type.
)lmost all high-speed catamaran hull
shapes feature a transom stern, which offers three
distinct advantages. Firstly, it is simple to
construct. ;econdly, it provides an abrupt change to
the hull shape along any flow streamline, causing
the flow to separate from the full at a fi$ed point.
This prevents any problems associated with flow
separation as could be anticipated with conventional
shapes such as a canoe stern, although it also causes
additional drag as discussed in ;ection 45.4.
Thirdly, the transom stern provides a simple and
effective means for the mounting of water jets, a
favored propulsion system for high-speed craft.
The sectional hull shapes are generally
characteri%ed into two types F round bilge and hard
chine. The hard chine shapes are somewhat simpler
to construct and are favored by less e$perienced
builders. ) round bilge hull form at high speeds
will generate lift, and the center of this force can
move longitudinally by a substantial amount, such
that a poorly designed round bilge hull may e$hibit
large amounts of dynamic trim at high speeds, with
an associated increase in resistance.
The straight-line stability, or course-
&eeping ability of multi-hulls is generally poor, a&in
to an arrow without flight feathers. This can be
improved by the addition of s&egs at the stern. :ard
chine shapes e$hibit improved course-&eeping
ability, and consequently some commercial builders
have developed a hull shape being round bilge in
the forward part and with a hard chine in the after
part.
) special type of round bilge form is the
semi-swath, so called because it demonstrates the
main characteristics of a ;9)T: described in
;ection 45.2 as having a small waterplane. The
semi-swath generally has a fine angle of entrance at
the waterline in the forward part, as illustrated in
Figure 45.. The after part is generally more full
in order to accommodate the propulsion machinery
and the waterline may be wedge shaped, with the
widest part almost at the transom. ) chine may be
introduced at the stern to improve course &eeping
and sea &eeping. Figure 45. illustrates the largest
high-speed catamaran built to date 3;tena
@$plorer4, which as a patented semi-swath hull
shape, developed for a minimum of ship motion in a
seaway and with a low resistance.
Figure 45.11 - HSS Stena Explorer
45.5 HU## CHARACTERISTICS
The hull forms associated with high-speed
multi-hulls are generally simple shapes.
*onsiderable leeway is possible in the hull
characteristics without unduly affecting the hull
performance, unli&e conventional slower speed
hulls where many parameters have an optimal
value, and may be determined by simple empirical
formula. For e$ample, there is no obvious
relationship between hull speed and form
coefficients, such as that demonstrated by the
)le$ander formula relating the ship speed V and the
bloc& coefficient C.. This difference from
conventional slower speed hull shapes may be
because as the speed increases, the component of
resistance associated with friction also increases, as
illustrated by Figure 45.+. The effect of the
transom stern may also be a factor.
42-4
Figure 45.12 -
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 32.13 -
The choice of hull parameters is therefore
usually driven by more pragmatic requirements than
optimi%ing the hydrodynamic performance.
The length L is usually chosen to suit the
required deadweight and speed. 'enerally a longer
hull results in an improved hydrodynamic
performance, however the construction cost of a
vessel is also directly related to the length, as may
be the operating costs. The choice of hull length is
therefore a balance between cost and performance.
Figure 45.- /a1-/c1 illustrates the broad
relationship between length and payload for many
multi-hull craft built between ??#-+###. The hull
beam b is usually the minimum width chosen to suit
the chosen propulsion machinery layout. This
dimension is typically dictated by the necessary
width on the transom to mount the water jets, or by
the width of the main propulsion engines and
associated gearbo$es with the necessary allowances
being made for access to the machinery and for any
structural fire protection against the hull structure.
.y minimi%ing b it can be anticipated that the
resistance will also be reduced, as may be the
characteristics of the bow wave. 8ost multi-hulls
do not utili%e the space in the hulls. 5f it is desired
to place accommodation or other spaces below dec&,
then the hull width may need to be enlarged.
The overall beam B is largely determined
by the tunnel width ST, as illustrated in Figure 45.4.
5t is &nown that the presence of two hulls operating
alongside each other leads to interference affects
and changes to the residuary resistance. This has
been of interest to researchers for many years, for
e$ample @verest /?A41 and Coctors /??41, and it
is apparent that at some values of ST, there will be
greater or lesser total resistance. 'enerally the
resistance will decrease as the hull separation is
increased, but above a certain value the effects
might be considered to be small, as illustrated in
Figure 45.+.4. /a1 and /b1 ta&en from 8uller-'raf
/??41.
Figure 45.14 -
The relationship between tunnel length L
and tunnel width ST for designs built between ??#
and +### is illustrated in Figure 45.5, suggesting a
mean minimum value of A. )ll commercial high-
speed catamarans built to date have been designed
with demi-hulls arranged alongside each other in
the longitudinal direction. 5t should be theoretically
possible to design the hull placement with a stagger,
with one hull fitted ahead of the other, such that
there are beneficial effects reducing resistance, as
suggested by @verest /?A41 and later by ;oding
/??A1. ;imilar effects could be evident if one of
the demi-hulls was smaller, as would be the case
with a proa, or when two smaller 3demy-hulls4 were
fitted as with a trimaran. :owever, it is probably
impractical to ta&e advantage of these troughs in the
humps and hollows of the resistance curve because
the effects are only valid for a given displacement,
craft speed and depth of water. 5f these are altered
then what was the advantage of the trough may
become the disadvantage of a crest, requiring a
change to the hull geometry.
The vessel draft T may be determined by
the propeller diameter, required propeller shaft
angle, or by the immersion of the water jets and the
associated machinery and transmission. There
appears to be an optimal value of b/T associated
with a minimal resistance, but this only a wea&
relationship, as illustrated in Figure 45.2, and it
may be varied considerably without a significant
effect on resistance.
Figure 45.1-

The bloc& coefficient C. is typically chosen
between #.45 and #.55. The half angle of entrance
ie should be chosen as small as practical in order to
reduce the bow wave height and period. <alves of
-G - 5G for the larger vessels at speeds of 4# &nots,
varying up to +G for the smaller craft at speeds of
-# &nots are typical.
The deadrise angle H is obviously a
parameter that affects the midship section area. 5t
may be anticipated that different values have an
effect on resistance, but e$actly what this
relationship may be is not yet understood. Flatter
deadrise angles generate greater hydrodynamic lift,
and a small planing craft, for e$ample a +5m long
craft operating at -5 &nots, would have a dead rise
angle of about 4G. ) larger craft operating more in
a displacement mode, would have a higher dead rise
angle, for e$ample a A4m long craft at -5 &nots may
have a dead rise angle of up to about +2G.
The displacement is the principal
parameter of importance in the design of high-speed
craft. :ydrodynamic resistance is directly related to
displacement, which must as a consequence be
minimi%ed. The design of successful high-speed
multi-hulls is therefore directly associated with
efficient structural design and the minimi%ation of
lightship weight
l
.
42-5
The ra&e of &eel and the amount of
longitudinal curvature in the hull, called roc&er, are
other parameters that may be considered at the
design stage. The ra&e of &eel may influence the
amount of lift generated at increasing speeds, or
perhaps more importantly the hydrodynamic trim.
'enerally a rise of &eel may only be of value at
higher speeds, but may be used to influence the
position of the longitudinal center of buoyancy
/I*.1. The amount of roc&er varies from design to
design, but it generally should be small for higher
speed craft, because the roc&er will introduce
dynamic trim, thereby increasing resistance as
discussed in ;ection 45.A and frequently causing
course instability.
The parameters , L, b, T, Cb, ie, H, ra&e of
&eel and roc&er are obviously all inter-related, and a
choice of one will affect the value of the others. The
hull shape should generally be developed with a
minimum of wetted surfaces area S), however it
should be noted that many features affect the
dynamic trim which in turn changes the wetted
surface area, and therefore some shapes with an
apparently low value of S), have a high frictional
resistance, as further discussed in ;ection 45.".
(nli&e conventional slower speed craft, the
position of the longitudinal center of buoyancy LCB
is not important from a hydrodynamic viewpoint,
and it is common to position the LCB at the
longitudinal center of gravity LCG as dictated by
the vessel arrangement. The coefficients normally
of value for conventional craft, prismatic Cp, bloc&
C., and midships section C8, appear to have little
significance for high-speed multi-hulls. The two
coefficients of most use in the design of high-speed
multi-hulls are L,b and L,n
,-
, where n is the
volume of displacement. 8a$imi%ing these values
usually leads to reduced resistance, suggesting that
L should be ma$imi%ed and b and n minimi%ed.
:owever, as previously noted, increasing L can lead
to increased weight and n as well as cost.
45. RESISTANCE
)s discussed in the previous sections, the
various hull shapes and characteristics are
developed substantially to minimi%e resistance.
This is achieved by minimi%ing the vessel weight,
wetted surface area and characteristics driving the
wave ma&ing resistance Cw such as L,b and L,n
,-
.
Figure 45.A illustrates the Cw values for a wide
range of practical catamaran hull shapes according
to 9erens&jold /??#1. ;ee
Figure 45.1! -Re-i8u$r0 Re-i-t$&,e C(e**i,ie&t
*r(. T$&) Te-t Re-ult- (& M$&0 5u&rel$te86
M(8el-1 $,,(r8i&g t( 9ere&-)i(l8 513346
The total resistance of a catamaran may be
split into component parts in the normal way.
CT 0 CB J CF /lJk1
where CT is the non-dimensional total resistance, CB
represents the residuary resistance, CF the frictional
resistance and /lJk1 is a form factor to account for
the three-dimensional effect of the shape on the
chosen frictional formula.
The two basic characteristics of high-speed
multi-hulls are high speed and lightweight. The
result of high speed is the generation of high
dynamic pressures at the hull surface, and when
combined with the lightweight nature of the craft
the result is a substantial movement of the hulls in
translation /sin&age1 and in rotation /trim1. These
dynamic effects are substantially greater for high-
speed craft than conventional craft, and
unfortunately the result in a changed underwater
geometry compared to the hull form under the static
waterline. This dynamic squat changes the wave
ma&ing and frictional components of drag.
45.! 9A:E MA;IN< DRA<
*B is substantially made up of the wave
ma&ing resistance C9, however the effect of the
transom stern on wave ma&ing drag must also be
considered. The hull shapes associated with multi-
hulls are generally long and slender, and
consequently fit the thin ship and slender ship
theories very well. The formula for C9 first
published by 8ichell /"?"1 and developed by
Iunde /?1 has been shown to provide an accurate
predictive method for *9 for catamarans as
illustrated in several papers by Coctors /??#1. The
use of *omputational Fluid Cynamics CFD based
on solutions to the >avier-;to&es equations can also
provide accurate estimates of C9, but in both these
cases special care must be ta&en to allow for flow
separation at the transom. Coctors /??#1 has
found good correlation using the 8itchell 5ntegral
by e$tending the transom bac& with a 6virtual
appendage7.
5f the wave ma&ing drag is calculated by
ta&ing wave cuts in the towing tan&, as first
suggested by @ggart /?A1 and first used for high-
speed catamarans by 5nsel /??#1, then an
additional component termed transom drag CTB has
to be introduced. This drag represents the
additional force caused by the imbalance of
hydrostatic pressure on the hull as a result of flow
separation at the transom causing the entire transom
to be at atmospheric pressure. 5t is part of the
residuary resistance and scales with Froude number
Fn and can be easily calculated from the hydrostatic
pressure on the transom. 5f C9! represents the wave
pattern resistance as measured from wave cuts,
thenE
CB 0 C9! J CTB and the total resistance
becomes
CT 0 C9! J CTB J CF /lJk1
9hen calculating C9 by numerical means,
it is important that the effect of dynamic squat is
included in the calculation.
42-2
45." FRICTIONA# DRA<
The frictional drag can be estimated using
the standard friction lines, based upon the Beynolds
number Rn, such as the ?5A 5T5* formulaE
CF 0 #.#A5,log /Rn-+1
+
8any of this formula were derived from
e$perimentation on essentially two-dimensional flat
plates, and it is standard practice to apply a form
factor to the value of CF to account for the three-
dimensional effects. :igh-speed multi-hull forms
are usually slender and have little longitudinal
curvature, and it may be anticipated that the form
factor correction for these hull forms would be close
to unity. The 5TT* formula is in reality a
correlation line and contains some allowance for the
three-dimensional effects, so it is not surprising if
form factor values for high-speed multi-hulls are
less than unity when applied to the 5TT* formula.
)rmstrong /+###1 calculates values of form factor
/lJk1 relating to the 5TT* formula for the >!I
standard series described by .ailey /?A41 at full
scale and given byE
/lJk1ship 5TT* 0 .A+ - f/L,n
,-
1
g
/b,T1
-#.
for Fn values of between #.2 and .# only, and
where the factors f and g vary with Fn according to
Table 45.5.
TAB#E 45.I -
)t model scale the Beynolds >umber Rn is
different to that at full scale, and the boundary layer
is considerably thic&er. )s a result the form factor
at model scale may be quite different to that at full
scale. For Rn about #
2
to #
A
, )rmstrong /+###1
suggestsE
/lJ&1model 5TT* 0 .45 F #.45/L,n
,-
1
#.2
/b,T1
-#.
valid for values of Fn between #.45 and .#, and
L,n
,-
values between A.# and #.#.
The limit of Fn 0 #.45 is important because
this is appro$imately the speed at which the flow
separates clearly at the transom. )t speeds below
this limit the form factor may be quite different.
9ith no flow over the transom at higher speeds, it is
important that in calculating the frictional
resistance value from the coefficient CF that the
wetted surface area S, only includes the hull surface
and does not include any of the transom. This also
raises the difficulty of what value of S should be
used, the value at the static waterline or the value
associated with the dynamic value, which may vary
substantially as illustrated in Figure 45.". 5t is
normal practice to use the static waterline value,
e$cluding the transom, as this is easily calculated
and the dynamic value is e$tremely difficult.
8olland et al /??41 has shown that in scaling from
model tests to full si%e using the static value or the
dynamic value ma&es a negligible difference as long
as it is consistent.
Figure 45.1" -
5n addition to the form factor allowance on
CF, it has become standard practice with
conventional craft to add to correlation allowance
C). This may consist substantially of an allowance
for hull roughness CF and to account for un&nown
differences between model tests and full-scale trials.
:igh-speed craft depend on achieving a high speed,
and as frictional resistance is the major component
of the total, most if not all operators &eep the hull
free from marine growth in order to minimi%e the
frictional resistance. 8ost multi-hulls are built
from aluminum which has considerably greater
resistance to corrosion than does steel, and
manufacturers may also go to greater lengths to
ma&e the hull hydraulically smooth in order to
minimi%e the hull resistance. The consequence of
these factors is that the hull roughness CF is
usually very small for multi-hulls, and several
authorities suggest a value of %ero. 8uller-'raf
/??+1 gives a table for various hull surfaces, which
is reproduced in Figure 45.?.
Figure 45.13 -
45.3 AIR RESISTANCE
8any high-speed craft are operating at
speeds where the resistance of the part above the
waterline may be significant. )t speeds above about
2# &nots it would be worthwhile to streamline the
superstructure shapes and to remove features
associated with high-drag such as the bridge wings
and handrails. )t speeds below 2# &nots, the air
resistance may be reasonably calculated using the
front profile area of the vessel above the waterline
and ignoring the tunnel opening, and applying a
drag coefficient *C of #.45. This may vary between
#.4# and #.55 depending on the degree of
streamlining, angle of the wheelhouse windows and
after end shape of the superstructure.
45.14 A77ENDA<E RESISTANCE
The resistance of appendages can be
calculated from drag coefficients such as those given
by :oltrop /?""1 and reproduced in Table 45.55.
TAB#E 45.II - FACTORS TO A77#Y TO CF
:A#UES 9HEN CA#CU#ATIN< THE
RESISTANCE OF :ARIOUS A77ENDA<ES1
ACCORDIN< TO HO#TRO7 513""6.
42-A
8ost high-speed multi-hull craft are fitted
with ride control systems, incorporating foil control
systems. The drag associated with these foils in
isolation may be calculated by standard means, such
as :oerner /?251, however a substantial portion of
the total drag comes from tip vorte$ effects and
interference effects, and it is recommended that the
resistance values be provided by the manufacturers.
45.11 MODE# TESTIN< FOR
RESISTANCE
The measurement of resistance at model
scale, and the scaling of the results up to full scale is
a well-proven technique for most conventional hull
forms, and is used by many designers of high-speed
craft. )t model scale, the Beynolds >umber Rn is
&nown to be far too low, however the effect at lower
speeds and particularly on conventional monohull
shapes may be small enough to be ignored.
:owever, it appears that on multi-hull shapes at
high speed the low value of Rn and the resulting
relatively thic&er boundary layer results in a change
to the dynamic pressures developed around features
such as the transom flaps or wedges, and the
amount of lift produced by these stern-lifting
devices is noticeable reduced. ) consequence is that
the dynamic trim is different between model scale
and full scale, as illustrated in Figure 45.+#. This
difference in trim results in a difference in
resistance, and for this reason, model testing high-
speed catamarans may be an inaccurate method to
determine the resistance at full scale, unless the
correct trim and sin&age can be applied to the model
by applying additional e$ternal forces.
Figure 45.24 - D0&$.i, Tri. (* $ Hig+--/ee8
C$t$.$r$& $t Full -,$le $&8 $t M(8el -,$le.
5t should also be noted that model tests
with and without model waterjets produced different
dynamic trim effects, owing to the changes to the
pressure acting on the bottom plating, and hence
produced different resistance values.
45.12 SEA;EE7IN<
45.12.1 ======
The waterplane of each hull of a catamaran
usually has a high L,b ratio by comparison with a
monohull, and fine angles of entrance to minimi%e
resistance. Therefore it may not be surprising that
the longitudinal moment of inertia of the waterplane
is substantially smaller than that of a mono-hull. 5n
addition, having two or more widely separated
hulls, the transverse moment of inertia can be
higher than a similar-si%ed mono-hull. The result is
that a multi-hull craft will have motion
characteristics that are quite different to that of a
monohull.
5n beam seas a monohull will roll. :igh-
speed monohulls having hard chines e$perience
some resistance to rolling, but these types of craft
also suffer from other phenomena owing to the
dynamic pressures generated around the hull. The
rolling motion is characteri%ed in that the transverse
motion of the water relative to the hull is around the
girth, i.e. it is a radial motion. The amount of roll
can be reduced by the fitting of bilge &eels and fins,
although these are not desirable features for high-
speed craft owing to the additional frictional
resistance. =n the other hand, catamarans will roll
in beam seas, but the amount of roll is considerably
less, and the rolling motion is characteri%ed as one
hull heaving up whilst the other hull heaves down.
5n other words the transverse motion of the water
relative to the hull is in a vertical direction as
opposed to the radial direction of the mono-hull.
.ecause of this the rolling of a catamaran cannot be
successfully reduced by fitting bilge &eels, and the
most effective way is to fit hori%ontal control
surface, as will be further discussed. This
fundamental difference means that many of the
formula developed to predict the motion and
characteristics of roll for monohulls will not wor&
successfully for catamarans.
'enerally a catamaran will have
considerably lesser roll angles than a mono-hull, but
the radial accelerations levels will consequently be
much higher.
The fine angles of entrance and lac& of
substantial flare on most multi-hulls result in
reduced resistance to pitching motions by
comparison with a mono-hull. The vessel will pitch
and heave more than a mono-hull but will have
reduced acceleration levels. 5n following seas a
catamaran may run down the face of a wave and
then stri&e the bac& of the preceding wave. The
bow down attitude of the craft, stri&ing another
wave at high-speed can result in the bow of the
vessel becoming buried in the wave, with green
water shipped over the bow, and the vessel
e$periencing a severe reduction in speed. This is
termed dec&-diving or nose-diving, and has been a
problem for some vessels particularly those
undergoing trans-oceanic delivery or re-positioning
voyages. To avoid this problem, one designer has
introduced a substantial centerfold between the hulls
of the catamaran, having a large amount of flare
and reserve buoyancy, and this feature is typical of
the wavepiercing catamarans built by 5nternational
*atamarans in )ustralia, as illustrated in Figure
45.+. :ere, the centerfold is above the design
waterline in the static load condition in order to
minimi%e resistance, but becomes immersed should
the vessel pitch down and thus provide a pitch
reduction force.
42-"
Figure 45.21 - HSC Millenium1 -+('i&g t+e B('
Ce&ter*(l8.
These craft also have very fine angles of
entrance at the bows, with the intention that the
incoming waves do not cause significant pitching.
This is the reason for the term 3wavepiercer4.
) comparison of the relative motions of a
high-speed mono-hull and a high-speed catamaran
is illustrated in Figure 45.++. Typical transfer
functions /Besponse )mplitude =perators1 are
illustrated in Figure 45.+.+-.
Figure 45.22 - Rel$ti%e M(ti(&- (* $ Hig+--/ee8
M(&(-+ull $&8 $ Hig+--/ee8 C$t$.$r$&
Figure 45.23 -RAO- *(r $ Hig+--/ee8 C$t$.$r$&
)s previously stated, the motion
characteristics are different to those of monohulls.
:ow then might passenger comfort be affectedK
*urrent levels of &nowledge relate passenger
comfort to the level of vertical acceleration, but this
is not the full story. The levels of &inetosis /motion
sic&ness1 on a catamaran can be higher than the
vertical acceleration level might suggest,
particularly in quartering seas where a cor&screwing
motion of the craft might be evident. This is
because the roll period and the pitch period of
catamarans can be very close, and coupled motions
result. :owever, at the present time only the
vertical acceleration can be considered as a measure
of &inetosis, using methods such as those developed
by =7:anlon and 8ac*auley /?A41.
The sea&eeping characteristics of stabili%ed
monohulls such as trimarans and proas may be quite
different to that of catamarans. .y careful design it
appears to be possible to incorporate the beneficial
elements of a mono-hull in head seas with the
beneficial elements of a catamaran in roll. 5n stern
seas a trimaran may have substantially improved
motions, but this is not yet clear as very few such
high-speed craft have been built, and none at any
large si%e.
;everal methods to minimi%e craft motions
have been developed. ) common method for multi-
hull craft is to fit a fully submerged foil at the
forward part of each hull containing an integral
movable trailing edge control surface similar to
elevators on the tailplane of an aircraft, as
illustrated in Figure 45.+4.and commonly called a
3T-foil4 because of its configuration. These control
surfaces are typically activated by accelerometers in
order to produce forces opposing the pitching
motion of the craft. .ecause of the need for rapid
response, the hydraulic systems for such Bide
*ontrol ;ystems can be quite large and
sophisticated.
Figure 45.24 - A Ri8e C(&tr(l >T-*(il? *(r $ Hig+-
-/ee8 C$t$.$r$&.
)s well as the forward foil, most multi-hull
craft have a device mounted on the transom
principally to provide opposing forces to control the
roll angle. These fall into two types, the fully
activated flap and the interceptor. .oth of these
interact with the water flow to promote a high-
pressure region to provide a lifting force on the
stern. Flaps are usually hinged at the transom, or
fitted in a recess forward of the transom, and
operated over a range of about + to 5 degrees by
hydraulic rams, in response to accelerometers fitted
to the vessel. .ecause of the need for a hinge at the
front of the flap, this dictates that the transom be
flat, which does not always suit the requirements of
the hull design, and in this case the interceptor may
be more effective. The interceptor is a flat blade
surface or guillotine that if fitted to the bottom
e$tremity of transom, and can be raised or lowered
by hydraulics to change the immersion beyond the
hull surface. Typically this immersion may be up to
## mm, and the interceptor may have any shape to
suit the transom shape.
Cesigns e$ist for interceptors fitted to the
after end of flaps and which can be fitted forward,
but in this position they will be less effective than a
T-foil because interceptors can only provide a
vertical upward force, whereas a foil can also
produce a downward force.
The additional drag of T-foils can be quite
high, because of induced drag and the creation of
vortices from foil tips, and the design of T-foils
remains a specialist area. *haracteristics such as
sweep angles, aspect ratios, materials and structural
design methods to minimi%e the thic&ness of the foil
are carefully guarded by the manufacturers.
Cesigns have been built to allow the T-foils to be
retracted out of the water flow, thereby allowing for
a ma$imum ship speed in calm water when the ride
control will not be needed.
;everal multi-hull craft have been built
with passive control surfaces where a hori%ontal
section of the hull plating is arranged, usually at the
forward end, to resist the vertical motion of the bow
when pitching or heaving. ;uch a comple$ hull
surface will increase the difficulty of construction,
and it is debatable as to whether overall it improves
the motion characteristics. 5t will change the pitch
and heave periods so that it may be beneficial in
some seas, but perhaps it may result in worse
motion in other seas.
45.12.2 Sl$..i&g
=ne unfortunate characteristic of multi-
hull craft is the need for a cross-structure to support
the two or more hulls. This means that there is a
structure above the waterline, which in the case of
severe motion of the craft may come into contact
with the water at high speed causing a slam. The
underside of the tunnel structure is frequently a flat
surface, and slamming may be an issue if the tunnel
height is too low. 5t should be noted that the
42-?
congruence of the bow waves from the multiple
hulls, superimposed on the waves passing through
the tunnel, can result in slamming occurring in the
after part of the underside of the tunnel structure.
The vessel structure is designed to
withstand such occurrences of slamming, but
damage can still result in the form of indented shell
plating and crac&s, and in any case there is usually
a severe shuddering of the craft causing passenger
concern. 5n sea conditions where slamming occurs
it is therefore normal practice to slow down.
=bviously an increased tunnel height will allow
operations to continue at full speed in greater sea
states, but a greater tunnel height leads to greater
scantlings and hence a heavier overall weight and a
consequent reduction in speed, so the design of the
tunnel height is a careful balance between avoiding
slamming and obtaining a ma$imum speed.
8ost high-speed craft are limited by the
sea-state to a particular speed of operation.
:owever there is another factor unrelated to the hull
design that can affect the ability to sail, and that
concerns the ability to launch the life rafts. The life
raft systems, specifically the 8arine @vacuation
;ystems /8@;1, are type-approved up to a particular
significant wave height. Therefore the vessel may
be prevented from sailing if the forecast significant
wave height is above the capability of the escape
system. )t the present time, the ma$imum
significant wave height for which life rafts and
8@; have been tested is 4 meters.
45.13 S7ECIA# TY7ES OF CATAMARAN
45.13.1 S9ATH $&8 Se.i-S9ATH
.ecause the sea&eeping characteristics are
substantially determined by the shape and properties
of the waterplane, it is beneficial to reduce the si%e
of the waterplane. ) craft having a small
waterplane area still requires a displacement
volume, and therefore the underwater shape is
usually bulbous, as illustrated in Figure 45.+5.
;uch a craft, called a ;mall 9aterplane )rea Twin-
:ulled craft, or ;9)T:, can have e$cellent
sea&eeping characteristics, and where sea&eeping is
a major issue then this craft is the most suitable.
(nfortunately a ;9)T: suffers from some
disadvantages as well. The increased wetted surface
area results in additional frictional drag, and no
truly high-speed ;9)T: craft have yet been built.
The propulsion system may be very difficult to
arrange with a small waterplane shape allowing no
room for an engine room, and when combined with
a comple$ curved hull shape the craft are e$tremely
e$pensive to construct. *hapter 42 - ;9)T: and
Trimaran <essels presents a detailed discussion of
;9)T: vessels.
Figure 45.25 - S9ATH %e--el 7$tri$
8any of the larger fast ferries have been
built as a so-called semi-;9)T:. These craft have
the features of a ;9)T: in the forward part, as
illustrated in Figure 45.+2, but the waist at the
waterline decreases going aft, such that the engine
room shape is the same as a conventional
catamaran. There is a small penalty to pay with
increased frictional resistance, but usually a small
benefit in the wave ma&ing resistance, and a
substantial benefit in the sea&eeping.
Figure 45.2 - Se.i-S9ATH Hull F(r.
45.13.2 F(il-$--i-te8 .ulti-+ull-
) limited number of foil-assisted
catamarans have been built, such as the *atafoil
described by 'ee /??A1 where the foil lift was
small and the hull remained in the water, and the
Foilcat illustrated in Figure 45.+A, where the foil lift
was designed to lift the hull completely clear of the
water. 'enerally these have been successful
designs, although comple$ to set-up and are
e$pensive to construct. The foils have been fitted to
generate dynamic lift and hence increase the speed
of the craft, and also to minimi%e the craft motion
and hence improve passenger comfort.
Figure 45.2! - C$t F(il
) foil-assisted trimaran has recently been
constructed in )ustralia /Figure 45.+"1, but the
performance of this craft is not yet &nown.
Figure 45.2" - Tri.$r$& Curre&tl0 u&8er
C(&-tru,ti(&
45.13.3 Air-lu@ri,$te8 .ulti-+ull-
=nly one catamaran with air-lubrication,
mv Caraibe Jet, has been constructed to date.
(nfortunately this craft was not successful,
principally owing to the decision to use waterjets for
propulsion, and which were unable to operate
satisfactorily with the large amounts of air being
ingested from the air-lubrication.
45.14 DETAI#ED DESI<N 7ROCEDURES
45.14.1 9eig+t e-ti.$te-
)s with any high-speed craft, the
performance is closely associated with the weight of
the craft, and careful estimation of the weight is
required. Typically this can be done by modification
of the weight estimates for craft that have been
previously built. 9here this is not possible, then a
detailed item-by-item estimate has to be underta&en.
Table 45.55 illustrates the lightship weight of many
42-#
catamarans that have been built, and Table 45.555
gives the brea&down of lightship weight into the
major components for catamaran fast ferries.
TAB#E 45.II - #9# :. #I<HTSHI7 9EI<HT
FOR EAISTIN< CATAMARANS
TAB#E 45.III - BREA;DO9N OF #I<HTSHI7
9EI<HT FOR EAISTIN< CATAMARANS
45.14.2 M$teri$l- $&8 M$teri$l 7r(@le.-
The great majority of high-speed
catamarans have been built from aluminum alloy.
Cesigns for ;urface @ffect *raft do e$ist in steel, as
illustrated in Figure 45.- but no &nown high-speed
catamaran has been built in steel. *omposite
materials are common for small private craft, but
the strict fire regulations for passenger-carrying
ferries rule out composites as a suitable material,
owing to the flame spread characteristics, the
flammability and the smo&e and to$icity emissions.
)luminum is the obvious solution for high-speed
catamarans, being lightweight and easy to wor&
with.
Figure 45.33 - SES De-ig& i& Steel1 *r(. B((te et
$l 5133!6
The plate material is typically a 5### series
alloy, usually 5#"- or 5-"-, having a tensile
strength of 8!a. The stiffeners are usually
e$trusions, made from 2### series alloys, as the
5### series are difficult to e$trude. 2#2 is a
common designation for e$truded stiffeners, having
a tensile strength of 8!a. The welding of
aluminum causes a reduction in strength of the base
material, and it is normal practice to allow for this
reduced strength in the heat-affected %one where the
wor&ing strength of 5-"- alloy is A5 8!a.
@$trusions from other alloys such as the
A### series are possible, and have been used on
some vessels, however the corrosion of these alloys
in pro$imity to 5### series alloys is questionable.
The corrosion of 5### and 2### series
alloys in a marine environment is generally
e$cellent, and will far outlast the life of a steel hull
if properly maintained.
*are has to be ta&en to prevent galvanic
action when other materials are present. !ipewor&
is therefore generally made from -2 stainless steel,
and shafting and other e$ternal fittings are also
usually of the same -2 material. Linc anodes are
usually fitted, and may be recessed into the hull
plating to reduce drag.
;teel may be used in some of the larger
vehicle-carrying catamarans, particularly for pillars
on the vehicle dec&s. ;teel is used in place of
aluminum in order to minimi%e the si%e of the
pillar, because an aluminum pillar would need to be
protected with structural fire protection and which
would intrude too far into the car lanes. The
connection of the steel to the aluminum may be
made by bolted flanges with gas&ets, or, more
commonly, e$plosively formed bi-metallic strips are
used which allows the aluminum and the steel to be
welded to the common strip.
)luminum might appear to be an ideal
material from which to manufacture a high-speed
ferry, being easy to wor& with, relatively
ine$pensive, easy to obtain, and easy to maintain.
:owever it does have two problem areas. Firstly the
low melting point requires that the material be
protected from the effect of fire. This is usually
provided by the application of structural fire
protection to those areas of the structure where it is
essential that failure does not occur. <arious
structural fire protection systems e$istM typically
they may be mineral wool bats bac&ing onto a thin
steel sheet, either galvani%ed or stainless, and
supported by a framewor& and struts off the
aluminum structure, as illustrated in Figure 45.-+.
;uch a system obviously increases the weight of the
structure and offsets some of the advantages of
aluminum.
Figure 45.32 - T0/i,$l Stru,tur$l Fire 7r(te,ti(&
Arr$&ge.e&t *(r Alu.i&u.

The second problem associated with the
use of aluminum is the fatigue strength and crac&
propagation. There was insufficient understanding
on these related problems when the first large
aluminum ferries were designed and constructed,
and there were several problems with some of these
early vessels. The high number of cyclic loads
e$perienced in some areas of the structure, for
e$ample the waterjet area where cyclic loads may be
of the order of 5### per minute, rapidly results in a
reduced fatigue life. Cesign charts e$ist covering
the strength degradation of aluminum up to #
"
cycles, but very little has been published beyond
that, and yet #
"
cycles might be achieved in a mere
2 wee&s of operation for a seven-bladed waterjet at
A+# rpm
The design of comple$ structures to
account for high cyclic loads is e$tremely difficult
and time consuming, and not well understood. 5t
has become common practice to therefore over-
design these areas with sub-frames and additional
structure and increased thic&ness, based upon
e$perience and measurements of vibration levels
from previous designs.
The majority of crac&s occurring in
aluminum can be sourced to poor detail design or
poor attention to detail in the manufacturing
process. 9ith high cyclic loads, failure can occur at
42-
very low stress levels, and where local stress
concentrations occur, crac&s can easily start. =nce
started, crac&s can propagate easily. !revention is
the best cure, and this requires removal of all
3square4 corners, for e$ample at window openings,
soft toes on all brac&et connections, and sniping of
the flanges at the ends of stiffeners where attached
to structure.
45.14.3 Stru,tur$l 8e-ig&
8ulti-hulls, in common with other high-
speed craft, are designed to withstand the static and
dynamic loads that can act under the operating
conditions, without such loading resulting in
inadmissible deformation or loss of watertight
integrity.
These loads generally fall into two broad
areas, those considered to be local, such as the
hydrostatic sea load, and those considered to act on
the whole structure and termed the global loads.
For vessels having a length of less than about 5# to
2# meters, the local loads will dominate the global
loads, and the minimum strength standard is
normally achieved by considering the scantlings
required for the local loads. These smaller craft are
therefore somewhat easier to design, as the local
loads can generally be easily determined from
simple formula contained in the classification
society rules or national authority regulations.
)ll of the major classification societies
have developed rules specifically for high-speed and
lightweight craft. They address the local loads
resulting from the slamming pressure and sea loads
on the hulls and allow for specific hull geometry.
For a catamaran, the transverse strength of
the structure connecting the two hulls needs to be
analy%ed for the moments and forces specified
either from simple classification society rules or
from model tests or correlated numerical methods.
The moments and forces illustrated in Figure 45.--
are those resulting from the vertical bending
moment Ms on the cross-structure, together with the
shear force, also the pitch connecting moment Mp
where one hull is rotating relative to the other,
illustrated in Figure 45.-4, and the associated
torsional moment Mt.
Figure 45.33 -Tr$&-%er-e Be&8i&g (* $ Multi-+ull
Figure 45.34 - 7it,+ C(&&e,ti&g M(.e&t (* $
C$t$.$r$&
45.14.4 <l(@$l '$%e l($8-
For all high-speed craft greater in length
than about 5# to 2# meters, it is necessary to carry
out a detailed e$amination of the structural behavior
using a finite element analysis /f.e.a.1 of the whole
craft. This can be a time-consuming e$ercise, and
represents the major part of the design effort. The
structural scantlings need to be estimated in order to
produce the f.e.a. model, which then has to be
modified to suit the results and run again. ;everal
solutions will need to be run in order to optimi%e the
design for a minimum weight. 5t is not uncommon
to start with an appro$imate model, created by
e$truding a midships section over the length of the
craft in order to obtain a starting point for the
scantlings to be used in a more accurate model.
The loads to be applied to the f.e.a. model
are also difficult to estimate, and these are usually
provided by the classification society. )lternatively
they can be determined from numerical analysis of
the motion of the vessel in a seaway, modified to
allow for the long-term distribution of responses
that the craft will e$perience during its operating
life. ) safety factor of ten to account for the
through-life e$periences is not uncommon.
5n order to e$amine the global loads, it
may be acceptable to ma&e a fairly simple model to
start with, and to determine the equivalent loads at
the boundaries of the various compartments. These
equivalent loads can then be applied to
compartment models that are more comple$ and
detailed, thereby saving on computer resources.
) typical global f.e.a contour plot of the
stresses is given in Figure 45.-5.
Figure 45.35 - T0/i,$l F.E.A. 7l(t (* $ C$t$.$r$&
45.14.5 T0/i,$l Stru,ture (* C$t$.$r$&-
The catamaran originated as two hulls
joined together with two crossbeams, one aft and
one forward. This same philosophy still continues
with many of the smaller catamarans. For e$ample,
one of the most prolific designers of catamarans,
5ncat Cesigns in )ustralia, continues to produce
very successful designs based upon a forward
transverse beam, or bridge, connecting the bows,
and a substantial 5-beam at the transom loc&ing the
after ends of the hulls together. Frequently there
may be no dec& fitted between the hulls, as
illustrated in Figure 45.-2. 5n this design the
dec&house is a separate module, mounted on rubber
isolation mounts in order to reduce vibration and
minimi%e noise. The loads resulting from operation
in a waves are also ta&en entirely by the hulls, and
not transmitted to the superstructure, which can
consequently be made to lighter scantlings and
reduce weight.
Figure 45.35 - Mi8-+i/- Se,ti(& t+r(ug+ $ S.$ll
C$t$.$r$&
The larger designs for carrying vehicles
may also have a forward and an after bridging
42-+
structure, but supplemented by intermediate
bridging frames. =ther designs treat each
transverse frame as equal, and although this
arrangement will be heavier in construction it is
somewhat simpler to construct. The superstructure
of these designs are usually arranged to ta&e the
loads produced in operation in a seaway, and the
whole craft is designed along the lines of a
monocoque shell. Figure 45.+.-A illustrates these
two types of design.
Figure 45.3 - Mi8-+i/- Se,ti(& t+r(ug+ $ S.$ll
C$t$.$r$&
The stiffening system used by almost all
aluminum high-speed catamarans is longitudinal
stiffeners at a close spacing, typically about +##--##
mm. ;ubstantial transverse web frames, typically
spaced at about +## mm for the large vessels and
about 5## mm for the smaller craft, support these.
These dimensions have evolved to ta&e the
ma$imum advantage of the scantling formulae in
the classification society rules.
.ecause it is a simple matter to produce
e$trusion dies, many catamaran shipyards have
developed their own e$trusions that offer particular
benefits in manufacture or in simplifying
construction. T-bar stiffeners of various shapes and
si%es are popular shapes.
Transverse struts may be fitted between the
web frames to brea& up the span. These struts are
typically 5-beams or hollow sections. ) longitudinal
watertight bul&head is usually fitted at the boundary
of the bridging structure and each hull. Typical
structural sections are illustrated in Figures 45.+.-"
/a1 to 45.+.-" /c1.
Figure 45.3! - T0/i,$l Stru,tur$l Se,ti(& t+r(ug+
$ #$rge C$t$.$r$&
.ecause aluminum e$trusions are relatively
simple to manufacture, these have become a
common structural feature. Cec& plating has been
replaced by e$trusions incorporating plate and
stiffeners, as illustrated in Figure 45.+.-" /a1. These
plan&s usually have fittings at the sides so that
adjacent plan&s can be mechanical clipped together,
thereby allowing for e$cellent presentation for ease
of welding. :ollow sections such as the e$ample
given in Figure 45.-" /b1, are becoming more
popular, particularly where high dec& loads are
used. @$trusions are in use with a capability of up
to # tonnes a$le loads.
Figure 45.3" - T0/i,$l Alu.i&u. EBtru-i(&- i&
U-e i& C$t$.$r$& C(&-tru,ti(&
@$trusions are being used in an innovative
way to simplify the manufacturing process, but there
is a small penalty to be paid because alloys that can
be easily e$truded have a lower strength capability.
Fabricated hollow sections are now entering the
mar&et made from higher strength material and
joined by laser welding.
45.14. M$,+i&er0 #$0(ut-
.ecause high-speed craft require large
propulsion powers, the engine si%es are
geometrically relatively large. The beam of
catamaran hulls is usually dictated by the machinery
arrangement, and therefore the available space in
the engine rooms is at a premium. =ther than the
lac& of space, the machinery layout is simple,
particularly where only one engine and transmission
is fitted in a hull.
9here two propellers or waterjets are
fitted, the engines may need to be staggered, with
one fitted ahead of the other, and offset gearbo$es
used. This results in long transmission shafts, and
these may be made from carbon fiber in order to
reduce weight. @ngine rooms are therefore usually
long and thin, and this leads to difficulties in the
layout of the ancillary equipment, and care has to be
ta&en to ensure that proper access for maintenance
is provided.
@$haust systems are large, and the
silencers can be physically larger than the engine.
The silencers are often fitted above the engine, or
adjacent to the tunnel structure, and the e$haust is
frequently led into the tunnel space, thereby
avoiding the need to pass through the passenger
areas.
!ipewor& has to be duplicated in each
engine room of a multi-hull, because it is
impractical to share such services, given the height
of the tunnel and the distance to the other engine
room/s1.
The propulsion systems vary depending
upon the duty of the craft. !ropellers remain a very
popular method of propulsion, and these have no
different characteristics for multi-hull craft as for
mono-hull craft. They are less e$pensive than
waterjet propulsion to purchase and install, and are
generally more efficient up to speeds of about -#
&nots. ;ome designs are in use up to -4 &nots, but
above this speed the onset of cavitation starts to
severely limit the application of propellers.
9aterjets are the most common solution to
the propulsion problem above about -# &nots, and
are commercially available in a wide variety of si%es
and capabilities. There are no problems specific to
multi-hulls in the application of waterjets, e$cept
for the lac& of space with the hull beam being
frequently made the smallest possible to fit the
waterjets onto the transom.
The combination of waterjets and multi-
hulls having widely-spaced hulls results in e$cellent
maneuverability at low speed.
42--
45.15 STABI#ITY
45.15.1 I&t$,t St$@ilit0
5t is obvious that the inertia of the
waterplane of a catamaran will be considerably
higher than that of a mono-hull, and it is not
surprising that the metracentric height GMT is
consequently higher. The high GMT value of
catamarans results in e$cellent stability
characteristics at low angles of heel, but this leads
to two problems. Firstly the roll acceleration rate
will become quite high, with short roll periods, so
much so that passenger comfort can be affected, and
secondly the GZ curve usually pea&s at a relatively
low value, and can be less than the +5G
recommended by many maritime regulations, such
as those of 58= contained in ;=I); regulations.
)n e$ample of a 'L curve for an "2m catamaran is
illustrated in Figure 45.45.
Figure 45.45 - T0/i,$l <C Cur%e *(r $ #$rge
C$t$.$r$&
;ome regulations have been specifically
regulated for multi-hull craft allowing a pea& in the
GZ curve at a lesser value than +5G, and down as
low as 5G, with additional compensatory
requirements elsewhere in the GZ curve.
5t is very difficult to modify the high GMT
value and low angle at which the pea& in the GZ
curve occurs. The hull separation must be reduced,
and the dutiful beams also reducedM these
characteristics are usually determined by the layout
and it may be difficult to modify them.
) catamaran having a small water plane
area, commonly called a ;9)T:, will have a lower
GMT and therefore considerably better rolling
motion and longer roll periods.
Trimarans offer the possibility to easily
manipulate the GZ curve and the GMT values.
*areful selection of the displacement of the side
hulls relative to the main hull, and the shape of the
water plane allows a desired GMT value to be
selected, and the careful shaping of the hull above
the waterline can provide the desired areas under
the GZ curve. 5n this way a hull form can be
designed having a minimum GMT and therefore the
most comfortable roll characteristics, but still
meeting the stability criteria at larger angles of heel.
*raft having more than three hulls might
be similarly designed.
The majority of multi-hulled craft currently
in service are designed to carry passengers. This
usually implies large superstructures, and the
stability is frequently limited by the regulatory
requirements for severe wind and weather. 5n the
case of the :igh ;peed *raft *ode of 58=, the craft
is assumed to have rolled to windward under the
action of certain waves and to then be blown by the
wind past the upright position until equilibrium is
achieved. The area under the GZ curve to windward
has to be less than the area under the GZ curve to
leeward. (nfortunately the coefficients used in the
formulation of the roll to windward under the action
of waves is entirely based on the rolling
characteristics of monohulls, and are quite
unrepresentative of those for multi-hull craft, and
therefore the multi-hull craft may be unduly
penali%ed.
45.15.2 D$.$ge8 St$@ilit0
8ulti-hull craft generally are arranged with all
passenger or cargo areas above the main dec&, and
the hull are usually void spaces with the e$ception
of the engine rooms. This allows for a multiplicity
of watertight bul&heads, and the damage stability
characteristics of multi-hulls are usually very good
and much in e$cess of the regulatory requirements.
Furthermore, with widely separated hulls,
damage to one hull is unli&ely to lead to loss of the
craft, with the other hull remaining intact and the
superstructure or dec&house also providing
buoyancy.
>ew regulations for high-speed craft
produced by 58= in +### specify e$tensive
longitudinal ra&ing damage to the bottom of the
craft. 5n the case of the larger craft having a tunnel
width greater than A meters, then the dec& angle
after damage of up to ##N of the length of one hull
is required to be less than +#G. This may be difficult
to achieve without arranging intermediate
watertight dec&s in the hulls.
The watertight bul&heads also need to be
strategically placed in order to meet the specified
lengths of different ra&ing damage scenarios.
45.1 SAFETY AND RE<U#ATIONS
There have been few regulatory
requirements drawn up specifically for high-speed
craft, with the notable e$ception of the 58=
regulations covering craft on international voyages.
For this reason many )dministrations have adopted
the various *odes of ;afety from 58= for
application to high-speed craft operating entirely
within their national waters.
58= originally produced the Coe of
Safet! for D!nami"a##! S$pporte Craft /C;*
*ode1 in ?A" in response to the number of
hydrofoils and surface effect ships that were starting
to trade internationally. This was an interesting
approach from 58=, because they recogni%ed that
high-speed craft could be operated under a different
safety philosophy to the more traditional craft that
were required to be 3stand-alone4. 9ith high-speed
craft, they could be on a set route within reach of
rescue from the shore, and this allowed a rela$ation
from certain requirements of the conventional safety
rules. ;afety could also be enhanced by a strict
shore-based quality management system. This
rela$ation from the conventional regulations of
;=I); was necessary in order to save weight and
hence achieve a higher speed.
9hen the first high-speed multi-hulled
craft appeared in ??#, 58= quic&ly recogni%ed
that the C;* *ode was an insufficient method to
42-4
fully cover the safety certification requirements of
these sorts of craft, and set about formulating the
Coe of Safet! for Hig%&Spee Craft /:;* *ode1,
published in ??4. This was the first safety
document to recogni%e that multi-hulled craft had
specific requirements. 5n particular specific
stability criteria for multi-hulls were formulated
covering both intact and damaged stability. =ne
interesting damage stability criteria relates to the
width of bottom damage to be assumed, particularly
whether one or more hulls may be damaged, and
this was limited to A meters width in order to cover
the scenario of collision with a semi-submerged +#
ft container.
)nother regulation relating to the layout of
multi-hull craft is the ability to substitute the
emergency generator set with a normal generator
set, on the basis that with widely separated engine
rooms then in case of an accident in one engine
room, then the generator set in the engine room on
the other side is an effective emergency set. ;pecific
requirements for bilge pumping systems are also
given.
The :;* *ode was carefully written to
include several features of multi-hulls as well as
monohulls, such that the regulations could be
simply applied. For e$ample there is no reference
to the 8ain dec&, as this feature is not evident on
several designs of catamarans, rather the :;* *ode
refers to a dec& datum.
5t should be noted that the multi-hull craft
has several inherent safety features. Two or more
widely separated engines rooms, e$cellent
maneuverability, vast reserves of stability, wide
passenger compartments that allow for ease of
escape in all directions rather than being limited to
fore-and-aft as is the case on a narrow mono-hull,
easy-draining main dec&s, and limited angles of
heel are just some of these.
45.1! MANUFACTURIN<
)luminum catamarans are welded together
using established 85' or T5' processes. =pinion is
divided as to the relative benefits of pulse or non-
pulse methods, and generally the welding methods
are conventional. 5n common with most aluminum
welding, the porosity and inclusions have to be &ept
to a minimum, and therefore all welding is carried
out under cover in order to prevent the shield gas
from being dispersed by the wind.
;maller craft are frequently built upside
down for ease of construction and welding, and
turned over when completed.
Iarger craft can be built in modules, as
illustrated in Figure 45.+.4#, but this has not been
commonly done e$cept by shipyards who have
employed traditional steel construction techniques.
5n several cases this has caused problems, because it
is difficult to predict the amount of shrin&age and
distortion caused by welding in aluminum, and
therefore the modules do not easily match up to
each other. ;trict welding procedures have to be
adhered to if the shrin&age and distortion is to be
predicted, and this requires several years of data
collection and e$perience with aluminum. Those
shipyards that have used a modular approach to
building have been wise to allow the seams to
remain unwelded at the ends, and to leave an
appropriate amount of green material.
Figure 45.44 - B(' M(8ule *(r t+e HSS Stena
Explorer
For smaller vessels the hulls are usually
built inverted, turned over and the bridging
structure at the forward and after end connected.
The superstructure is then added.
For the large vessels the normal practice is
to construct the tunnel structure first, because this is
a rectangular structure having parallel sides and the
underside is normally parallel with the dec& above,
ma&ing construction a simple matter. The web
frames and bul&heads are constructed individually,
complete with the cutouts for the longitudinal
stringers. 5n some cases it may be necessary to add
temporary structure so that the frame remains the
correct shape whilst being handled. The tunnel
structure is supported in the air, and the individual
frames are then positioned in the correct place and
attached to the tunnel. =nce the frames and
bul&heads are in position, then the longitudinal
stiffeners are threaded through the cutouts in the
web frames, and finally the shell plating is fitted
and attached. This is a very old-fashioned method
of constructing a vessel, however the tas& is
considerably easier because the lightness of the
material ma&es handling an easy tas&, and
aluminum is also easily shaped and cut using
essentially hand tools. The dec& e$trusions are then
added, and the superstructure erected. Cec&houses
may be built as a separate module and added at a
later stage.
=ne shipyard has set up a simple
production line where the craft is built from
modules weighing appro$imately A to # tonnes,
brought together at the top of the line, and as the
vessel moves down the line it is further completed.
The dec&house is built in an area high above the
building shed, and slid across in a semi-completed
form and added as a final module. 5n this case the
dec&house is fitted on rubber mounts and the whole
dec&house can be pre-outfitted. This production
line approach, where up to four ?# meter long
catamarans may be in production at any one time, is
only possible where standard vessels are being
produced.
45.1 #AUNCHIN<
8ost multi-hull craft can be supported on
the underside of the tunnel structure, which is
usually flat and therefore simplifies transportation
by road trailer, as illustrated in Figure 45.+.4, or
on a cradle for launching.
42-5
Figure 45.41 - 44 . Air-lu@ri,$te8 C$t$.$r$&
Caraibe Jet (& $ R($8 Tr$iler.

42-2