Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
and empirical planing equations are given which describe the lift,
wetted area,
center of pressure, and porpoising stability limits of planing surfaces as a function of
speed, trim angle, deadrise angle, and loading. These results are combined to formulale simple computational procedures to predict the horsepower requirements running
are
trim, draft, and porpoising stability of prismatic planing hulls. Illustrative
included to demonstrate the application of the computational procedures.
l
Cf
friction-drag coefIicient
V j 2Ab2
wide attention
followed by
Sedov [5
researchers
describing the
dead rise
end of paper.
D f cos
to gravity,
distance between T
(measured normal to
Ib
CL{3
V 2 b2
=
Cp =
also
D
due
where
b
Df
to
rnc:1JlOml.1
D'
COS'T
1:1 sin
keel, ft
'T
1964
Reprinted from MAR!NE TECHNOLOGY, Vol. 1( No.1, pp. 71-95
CG
_)..b--
'---_~IP-"---V
Fig. 1
LEVEL WATER
SURFACE
SPRAY THICKNESS
u.s.
of
Stevens Institute of
undertook
of the
a theoretical study .and
phenomenon of planing.
study produced 16 technical reports (listed in the Appendix), which consider
planing-surface lift, drag, wetted area, pressure distribuspray
tions, impact forces, wake
dynamic stability, and parallel
surfaces. 'Vhere
possible the ONR sponsored
utilized existing
planing data and theoretical results but in many areas
additional
results and new theoretical
were provided
the Davidson
In 1949, Korvin-Kroukovsky and
lished a summary report on the then
of
lift, drag, and wetted
utilized these results in deVelOrnng
tational procedure for
In
Savitsky
ONR study, developed an extensive
\vhich increased the
-,--"'-"'VV.LunJV
STAGNATION LINE
Fig. 2
UU,ll.lV.l.l0
In
characterIS
surconstant
assumed to have constant
beam and a constant
trim for the
wetted
Variations from
conditions will be
the
72
surface
"'""" ..HF,u,""vvu
over
water pressure is
forward thrown spray
this sense is
~------------~------------~--------------.-----------~
w
()
LL
0:::
::J
(f)
0:::
W
3 ~------------~--------------+-------------~--~r-------~
-.l
>
W
-.l
Z
o
o
(j)
~------------4-------------~---?L---------r-----------~
I-
0:::
:::?!
(1~
+ 0.30
I)
AI ~4)
w
m
I
:r:
I<..9
Z
W
-.l
o
W
lIW
3:
~~~~~~~~~-L~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fig. 3
1.60 Al
Al
and
The
0.30
0.30
wave-rise relation is
(0 ~ Al ~ 1)
(1 ~ Al ~
form of
..--_ _C~.HINE
ON
2--
3.00
r----,---;--y--,---,:-----,--------------,
2.00
(J)
:?!
<!
W
ill
1.50
-l
I
~
-l
/.00
1-----\-_+_4--Jr---l~-~:____+_--~,...__j.----
12
16
20
24
. A :::; 4.0;
0.60 :::;
:::; 2;3.00.
In the case of
section of the bottom surface with
Surfaces
the inter-
Cv =
Cv
2,01
Gv
Gv
Fig.7
Variation of shape of
is defllled
b
T
jJJlGLl1..1l1'>;
A, which de-
b
evidence indicates that
for
deadrise and trim combinations
coefficient is
than
2.0. This indicates a
and water
full
of the
deadrise surfaces of 10
<.V1J1.J1.J.vU> ....Hv at
= 1.0.
= 1.0 and T ::::; 4,
than those
breakdown of the
spray-root
evidence for 30deg deadrise surfaces
similar effects except
at
= 1.0, the
formation breaks down
when T ::::; 6. It
for
= 1.0, the sprayroot formation
to break down
for a
deadrise, the trim is reduced to a value such that
theoretical value of
to
1.66b. This
of 4
and at five values of
The calcur = 17 It is seen
at
3.02
and
the spray-root line is one continuous line and
the value of
with that com1.0, the
a broken line
forward ~A ,~~r"~
l.va,UJ.1Jl,>;
...
ment of the
keel which would
section with the bottom.
pnen1011'len.on is in evidence
"",,'O,;,_,'I,nT portion of the line is reduced.
IvQ'Ul.U;;:;-vUl;;:'
.J..:JAjJvJl.l1.1tvH.UW1.
and nel:LQI'lSe
[13]. The
root line forward to
tween the keel and spray
of the bottom is
tan <I>
llla
,;:,vl.1.v1.Gb11.UC;U
1964
that the
to break-
where:
measured in
A
1
f3
TANT
TAN a::
TAN
f3
FLOW DIRECTIONS'
SPRAY LINES
SPRAY EDGE
LK
VIEW OF BOTTOM ON PLANE PAR ALLEL TO KEEL
and
The. total
along the
Lift of Flat
Surfaces
projected on a plane
1
4 tan<p
In making visual observations of the wetted chine
1-'H"'U~.HF1 run) it is
to
intersection and the
the chine.
9 illustrates
It is seen that the
of the
u.J..JUJ.JlJ.:",'l.UW'U
DAn
= AT
tanr
r1.1
is
rll::.,,,I,-,,,,.c,rj
can be written
BT2
+
there are several ways
lift. The form
of
jJ.iQ,lll.Ll5;::..
nr"n""rl
lift and
is
The constants
and n are
the
formula to the
collection of pH111lng
data contained in the
literature. The mechanics of this evaluation are described
As a result
of this
the
for a
that (A
C011-
OCTOBER; 1964
0.60 :::;
0.05
TO
TO
0.04
0.03
-
TI.I
2.14
II. 21
3.35
10
12.59
13.98
4.59
II
5.87
12
15.39
7.18
13
16.80
8.50
14
18.23
9.85
15
19.67
\-----j------t--------,t---t----+--+----Tt----:;r<-i:------.7""--1
f-.
"" o
U
..J
0.01
T
1.1
(0.0120
2 )
+ 0.0055
o ~~~~----~----~------~----~----~----~----~
1.0
Fig. 10
3.0
is
in
a wide range of
this
at a fixed value of ~
contribution to lift is
2.0
4.0
between the
load is limited to
of
0.5 ,,-------,----,.----,---...,.-------,
0.4
i------t----+---l---+--yL,.LA
0.3
1----I----+---J---:T~Sf_:,-L-----l
0.2
1------+---+--,4~,..f---I_---I
0.1
0.09 .----,..-0.2
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.08 I----+---.----..----.--.---..----.----+---I---,.L---l
0.07
I__----+---~----J----L---~-----+-----+_-
=c
La
-0.0065
(3c
La
__I__~-+~L-~
0.60
0.06
I__----+----r----,.----,------,-----+----I--"r--f--:.,,-:::-b.,c----l
0.05
1--------+---+-----+---+-----+---+--"fIL--~-_"tif!.!---=-
0.03
I------+----+----+---_f----"L----+-"r---,!----..~--+-------+-----l
0.02 I-----+----I--...,-L
0.01 1------+-
0.02
0.04
0.06
CL
1
OCTOBER,
GAI.JGvUGu.
0.10
approaches zero, it is
lated load should
0.08
Lift of Deadrise
Surfaces
IS
::: T
1.1 [
0.0120 \
1/2
Cv
+ 0.0055
2
b=(\-0.30) TANT
0.70
lAO
2.80
0.60
1.20
2.40
0.50
1.00
2.00
0.40
0.80
1.60
0.30
0.60
1.20
0.20
0.40
0.80
0.10
0.20
0.40
f'I)
-0
en
Q..
N
"-
""<J
o '----1_--1._--1._--'=_-'-_....1
o
2
3
Fig. 12
o ~~--~--~--~~--~
o
2
3
ULU. .lU>'JV
where
82
Planing load versus calculated displacement load for a flat planing surface at various velocity coefficients
(3
00
",~.~"n+,,~.~
T,
A) and
as
U,-"evU.l.lUv >JLli.
at the same
.l(;~\J'-'
is
due to
tanT
to the bottom
13 to be
IS
tanT
COST
[9 J to be com-
0) FRICTIONLESS
FLUID
where
Schoenherr [14] turbulent friction coefficient
bottom
D=l':!. TANr
l':!. TANr
from
was based
the case of a zero
tribution to
lift is
to be
U""",,,,-1.1.O'-'
b) VISCOUS
Fig. 13
The
(21)
The average
Pd
pressure is
'Ab 2 cos
for!3 = 0
The average bottom
is
in an
coefficient for deadrise surfaces
The ratios
have been
for four dead rise
and
the results are
14 in a convenient form
for use
the
It will be
used in
IS
OCTOBER, 1964
FLUI D
where
is plotted in
turbulent-friction cO(~rnClent,
defined,
From
surface can be calculated as
D
tan
ratio of a
rtnr1E'",nn'
111
D
L1
tanT
variations in
curve for
of A and
I t is
each test trim over
also seen
= 1 there is a very
rapid increase
the ratio
for all test trims. At
T > 2 and at
> 1, the ratio
stant for any combination of
For T = 2,the curve of
constant value for ratios of
The above variations of
can be associated with
observed
of the flow conditions around the
It vvas found
at
> 2.0 there
Qt:n-,o,'nT',,,,.. of the fluid from the chines and
at
:::; 1.00 the
of flow
from
is
force is increased and hence the ratio
until complete flmv
has occurred
chines and transom.
If
is defined to exist when the fluid breaks
the transom and
Cer)tlo'n of
can be
> 4 and at
= 2,
J:'H,~"UUb occurs when the
rlrd,,,,,',rl
84
>
"'-..,.
0.90
>-
/3
0.80
1.00 T=
"'>-. ,.
0.90
T=
!----==--~""'-----_+_----+_---___1
/3= 20 0
2.00
1.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
A
Fig. 14
A
Magnitude of average botton velocity for a planing surface
Surfaces
964
3.00
in the
this paper.
the 1l10ments taken about
transom for each
cornp(ments of the total load and then rinnri',nO'
,,.v,r\'Y'c,,,.co,r\Y) for the distance
. . . . '>'"""',,,,'" +rn'nu",rl of the transom.
and
force
'-"'-'\./\'.d..-' UU..U.l.V
_U.""U..l,Ll.r,
5.21 Ix 2
2.39
where
is the ratio of the
distance from
the transom to the center of pressure divided
the
mean wetted length.
A
between
and actual test data is
17 of reference
Excellent
the formula and data.
17 of this paper.
coefficient are
value
determined from this chart.
.....,Tr,h,I,T"
>J~'~""'"'
limits
0.30
T= 4
0.20
OIl:;
f--
0.10
T=IO
'--
-I
V
I
VI
0.30
T=6
f--
0.20
0./0
Vr
T=15
~/
f--L
OIl:;
r-
VI
I
1.0
!
2.0
3.0
4.0
CV
0.60
T=2
040
{J =20 0
OIl:;
b= 9"
0.20
4.0
Fig. 15
of certain
be obtained
36
eXl)er.lm!~ntal1}
0.20
0.16
<J
'-
0.12
I
VI SCOUS DRAG
f-
lJ...
:::::i
0.08
I
t9
TANT
TANT
0:::
0
0.04
PRESSURE DRAG
PRESSURE DRAG
2.0
TRI M ANGLE, DEGREE S
Fig. 16
6.0
8.0
to avoid
,vith the trim
results in minimum resistance. It was shown
16 that a trim
of
4 to 5 reDOrD()ls]~ng limits
In
as 1 to 2 to
achieve
boat.
because of
the boat at an n,-,h'":rr,,',,
as a guide
hulls.
which
surfaces.
combinations of
which
the limit curves indicate stable
operation while those above the line indicate the existence
of porpoising.
It is seen that, as the lift coefficient is rlPI"l'p>1c:.~'rj
loaded hull
T
inertias.
is to move
If this cannot be
and if
the addition of a small transverse
bottom at the transom 'will Imver the
a small cost in added resistance.
It may
of
this
compare
1964
4.0
Method for
Prismatic
to
and center
shows the
where
T=
D.A
thrust, lb
of boat, lb
CG
= inclination of
line relative to
resultant of pressure forces
to
bottiom,Ib
a = distance between
and CG
ea~3lU'ed normal
to
ft
j = distance between T and CG
,-.\A normal
to shaft
ft
c = distance between
and CG -'U'-''-''''-''~U'-''--' nonnal
to
ft
fJ
deadrise
ft
b
ili,-,U,OILH
moment is
the viscous
can be assumed
the center of
of EoebePs
are included in this paper.
There are in the literature test results on related series
of planing boats which provide excellent
informa-tion on families of specific hull
Davidson and
Suarez
present the results for
Series 50, a
DTIVIB. Clement
of
boats
" " T n ... "'.... '"
n"o"n+"n
presEmt,ed In
the perare similar in
conditions
those
For Vertical1CJu"IhIA.LUI
D.o
Forces:
Slnr
For Horizontal
Forces:
J11oments:
a -
Performance Prediction
of a
it be a mernber of a tested series.
method involves the determination
and
\vhich will
for
TH'lQn-,Q1"l
88
s1nr
COSr
= 0
Table 1
drodynamic
Planing Hull
REQUIRED:
at which (30) = 0
line AR interpolation' between
and T = 3
Osl39FT
POWER REQUIREMENT
LCG=29.0 FT
':0.50FT
PORPOISING LIMIT
VCG"2.0 FT
" 4
fj,
::60,000 L8
:: 14FT (AVERAGE)
j3
:: 10
V=40 KNOTS
(AVERAGE)
5 = 1115 hp
6_7 _.
_----::c-::-
Aeb
+ ::----
Lc
Aeb -
b tan
36.1 ft
0.186
It 59
2,14
.085
315
.085
(2) / (1)
.0397
.025<4
).,
Flqure 10
Figure 14
Vm
II!!
Cf
Cf
-LCI
Vrrl- b/v
Schoenherr
ATlC Stands'd
6.
Cf
(])
(8)
pl~b2( :f + 6 :f)
2 CO'l/3
3.85
67.0
3.61 x 108
.001]4
40
.085
.0185
2.60
1,86
66.6
66.2
108
2.42
.00184
108
1.7)
.00192
.0004
.00214
.00224
.00232
7.340
5.160
.760
11
tan,.
,0349
.0524
.0698
12
lIn,.
.0349
.0524
13
14
co'!'!'
2~ ___
.0698
.9976
4188
3760
15
16
f}.
(10) /cOH
2094
7340 __
.9986
3144
5160
tllln,.
Of/COS'!'
(14) + (15)
94J
8304
7948
17
Cp
Figure 17
.59
.65
18
Cpi--b
31.6
23.5
.70
18.2
-2.6
5.5
10.8
19
20
21
OCTOBER,
1: ..
Figure II
Draft of Keel
0.0345 1 / 2
1: .. ]0
CLa
Clo/'!' 1. I
10
at Transom
d = Lk sinTe = 55.9 X tan 2.3
d == 2.24 ft
"',l
1:1.1
Cf
T
'T
Source
,..,
2,
4
5
I tv
Quant
Lk
Row
LeG - (18)
(b/4)tanB
II
22
$ln('T+~)
23
I - s n'T sln('T + c)
.616
616
616
(20)
1. 39
1.3~
I .3~t
.1045
9964
.1219
(12) (22)
.9964
.1392
.990)
-2.59
5.46
10.70
'leG -
24
(23) (cofr)
25
f sin,.
35
(24) - (25)
27
28
6. (25)
(a - f)
(21) - f
.89
29
Dda - f)
(10) (28)
6540
.1Q
(27) + (29)
Eq 35
149,960
0174
0352
.0349
-2.6
-156,500
5.53
332,000
10.73
645,000
89
4600
336 600
.89
3350 __
648350
Table 2
!J.
60,000 LB
LCG = 29.0 FT
POWER REQUIREMENT
PORPOISING STABILITY
VCG= 2.0 F T
= 14FT (AVERAGE)
b
/3
V
= 10 (AVERAGE)
= 40 KNOTS
a = c= f::::
=0
=0.069
Row
1
2
3
4
Quantity
CLa
'pI
A.
CLoh 1 1
'11.1
Value
,085
Igure 19
Figure 19
3.45
(1)/(4)
2.07
2.1+2
1"
2.23'
tan.
.039
l::J.\Jtan.
9
10
A.b 2
II
Re
Cf
12
13
14
vn;
2,340
0) b 2
~./!
675
Figure 14
Vrrf'-b/v
l::J. 'f
Cf + lJ. Cf
Schoenherr
ATTC Standard
l:l"""nhn<>"<it
(12) + (13)
p"~b2(f
66.9
3.22 x 10 8
.00177
.0004
.00217
l::J. ;f)
15
Of
16
17
Of/COST
D
(8) + (17)
9010
18
19
EHP
Ox V/550
1100
JCLf1~
20
7 pO'poising
procedure is recommended,
the
tional
as follows:
It can be shown that
90
Spurce
Figure 11
LCG/b
f3
6670
6670
,186
FIgure 18
4.5
COSE
LlL~tHVl10
are
cos
=1
1.00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - - - - . - - - - - . - - - - , - - - - - - , - - - - - - r - - - - - - ,
C =0.75- - - - - - - - P
5.21
+2.39
0.80
II
0..
0.60
0.40
l.L
0::
W
lZ
W
U
0.20
1----
. - - t - - - - - l - - - - - - + - - '>"=Lm/b
N= RESULTANT OF NORMAL
BOTTOM PRESSURES
VELOCITY COEFFICI
Center of pressure of planing surfaces
17
N
SO
COST
6. sinT
condition
in their
The moment c;u
E)
that
LtctLJIVLl.
COST
and
into
the conditions of
O. There are
wherein these
o
,\Vhen T) c) and
in equilibrium and the
are then
evaluated.
f = c
Performance Prediction
etnlods--U:::>moultatilonal Procedures
can
Case When Thrust Axis and Viscous Force Coincide and Pass
General Case
Through Center of
to achieve
and care
OCTOBEP.
1964
I t is assumed
12
r--------,---------r--------~------~--------~
10
REGIME OF
PORPOIS ING
U)
W
0::
(!)
W
0
'
..J
(!)
::2E
a::
I-
4
REGIME OF
STABLE PLANING
0.10
0.15
Fig. 18
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
by a mathematical foril1ulation or
initial information is ",,,,r,,,,,,r.rl
the
plots contained in this
; and Columns 3, 4
Given:
5 are the computed value
each of three as~;urrled trim
b)
Dimensions and lines of boat
angles. The last line of this tabulation contains the
of
L1
value of
for each of the
trim
Propeller shaft line location
E)
between the
and
Center of
location
c,
is obtained
results
Speed of boat,
Required:
calculate
Running trim
area, resistance and power
vVetted length
Total resistance
"'Y'r'l'ln,rll1"-C. for estimatDraft of keel (d)
boat. The
Power
the
Porpoising stability limit
The detailed computational
the
values is
trim
co 111eX~l,lnple is worked out.
The
~la.'lULi>; boat is
is to assume several values
carried out for the entire
the
restriction that
;::::
It will be
conditions for force and moment
value of trim angle that makes
Case When Thrust Axis is ParaJfet to Keel
zero is the required solution.
IS
the
The
to be evaluated;
Column 1 in Table 1 is the
this
Oolumn 2 is the source
92
1.8
2.6
2.2
3.0
P/b::
I-
3.0
- 2.6
2.2
.0
"E
1.8
..J
II
--<
f:
o r~~
T'
tIll
~~I I I I!
ILl I I I 11
III
III
I I I I 1 I 11
IIt I
Cv=VI
Fig. 19
Case When Thrust Axis and Viscous Force Coincide and Pass
Through Center of Gravity
For this
OCTOBER, 1964
~l
liLI Jlll
II IIII
10
11
H.
on
1932.
R. F.
i (The
Phenomena of
" NACA translation
..L.ia>VVJ.U.U'VL
17 D.
tion in the
Stevens Institute of,
..l-n(H'lij~LLLL ~~~',","'~V 1952.
References
G. S.
on
Bottom
1934.
4 A.
Froude
No.
5 L. I.
for Sea Surface
"Tank
of Flat and VeeNACA TN
November
1947.
6
-,-"",.u.V'VU.
UDtm,lmn
Relation
February
1942.
22
F. VV. S.
1943.
Ii How
to
Planing Hulls," vol.
AIotor
Ideal
Series.
29 1(. S. 1\11. Davidson and A.
"Test of
Related 1Hodels of V-Bottom l\iotor Boats50,)) DT1V1B Report
1VIarch 1949.
E. P. Clement and D. L. Blount, {(Resistance
Tests of a
Series of
Hull
"
No. 10, presented at the Annual
vember 19G3 of
TRANS.
pp.
dinger, Joseph
A
Chines-Dry Planing Body.
{i
No.
Sherman l\1.
Publication Fund
Institute of the Aeronautical
1-<"''''f'>')'1:"
'-'V1\./LlV'-'0,
B. V.;
Daniel;
and
vVilliam F. uvVave Contours in the Vvake
of a 20 0 Deadrise
Stevens Institute
of Technology,
Tank
No.
337, June 1948.
l\1.
Publication l?und
Paper No. 1G8, Institute of the Aeronautical
New York.
'-''-'H:;'.Ll\A:;0.
10
1 Korvin-Kroukovsky, B. V. and
('The Discontinuous Fluid Flow Past an
Stevens Institute of
October 1948. Sherman
Tank Report No.
No. 169, Institute
Publication Fund
of the Aeronautical DClelJlCe,S,
2 Pierson, John D.
of the Fluid Flow in the
Regions of l?lat
Stevens Institute of
Technology,
Tank
No.
Octo bel' 1948.
)J
Technology,
November
tion Fund
Sherman
170, Institute of the Aeronautical
Sur-
Sciences,
3
for a vVedge
Institute of
No. 336, l::iet)telnbler
Publication Fund
No.
nautical Sciences, New York.
4
John D. and Leshnover,
and Loads
)) Stevens Institute
t!..iXpel:mllental Towing Tank Report No. 382,
Sherman N1:. Fairchild Publication Fund
No.
Institute of the Aeronautical
New York.
John
"On
Penetration of a Fluid
" Stevens Institute of
Tank
No. 381,
Shern1an 1\11:.
Publication Fund
No.
Institute of the Aeronautical Sciences, New York.
6
B.
ilLift of
Institute of
Published in Readers' Forum Section
,-,'-".un.1Vi,
Daniel and
Interference Effects between Two
Parallel to Each Other at
tute of
Published in -,-",-,'-"\.A 'v" ...,
"Sonle
1950.
VV1Hi'-'iV,,;.Y)
in Readers'
AeTlYnautical
June 1951.
8
John D.;
David
OCTOBER, 1964
J O?.i.:rnal
95