Resistance Test of Alternative Design of Traditional Purse-seine Boat

Ida Bagus Putu Sukadana

Mechanical Engineering Department
Politeknik Negeri Bali
Abstract
The current research is aimed to evaluate the resistance characteristic of traditional fishing boats called ijon-ijon used
mostly in several coastal regions. Research object is focused on purse-seine boat used at Brondong, East Java.
Design of the existing boats is a unique hull with low L/B ratio. This typical hull design usually leads to weak and lessefficient resistance characteristic. An alternative design, consequently, is proposed in order to improve the hull
resistance characteristic. To deal with resistance characteristic of the boat, resistance test is performed for alternative
hull model. The experiment is carried out at a towing tank of Hydrodynamic Laboratory Fakultas Teknologi Kelautan,
ITS Surabaya using a boat model with scale ratio of 8 without appendages. The test is designed for two loading
conditions, light and full load. The resistance correlation analysis of boat and its model is performed using ITTC 1978
extrapolation method where the hull-form factor is determined following Prohaskas method. Comparison analysis
between the tested model and other similar models is also conducted using coefficient of specific resistance . The
test result indicates that resistance of the alternative model is 16% lower than the original, at the speed of 6 knots and
light loading. Comparison with other models shows that the existing fishing boat design associates with inferior
characteristic of hull resistance.
Keywords: Traditional fishing boat, boat resistance, towing test, model-ship correlation

1. Introduction
The existing traditional fishing boats within Nusantara coastal communities are characterized by
their culture-based design applied through all generations without significant improvement.
Especially for those of purse-seine type of fishing boats, their hull is built in very unique
geometrical form which more oriented to meet the required capacity hence ignoring the safety
as well as hydrodynamic factors. As shown in Figure 1, this type of boat seems very full with
the round-bottom hull form and low ratio of length to breadth (L/B) less than 2. The draught is
extremely low also, comparing with the boat length, especially at the full load condition. The
parent-hull data is never documented, proved that the new building was developed in absence
of a certain pattern. This means that their resistance characteristics are still unknown. Our
previous work [1] has discovered the weakness of the boat resistance among other similar
boats used by foreign fisheries communities. The less-efficient hull is known to have significant
effects to boat operation, as the propulsion system will be designed at poor character of the hull.
Some improvement efforts are in demand without neglecting the merit of fishing culture.

Figure 1. Some fishing boats docking at Brondong waterfront

The current research tries to address the aforementioned issue by proposing an improved
design of traditional fishing boat. The result is expected to be an alternative hull provided with
respective resistance data through an experimental test. A specific type of traditional seinenets
boat locally called ijon-ijon has been chosen as the research object. A large numbers of this
boat can be met at Brondong harbor, East Java coastal area. Brondong is one of fish landing
place categorized as Nusantara Fishing Harbor (Type B fishing harbor), able to provide daily

servicing of 75 fishing vessels of 1560 GRT each, fishing in Indonesian home waters and the
EEZ.
2. The Proposed Design of Hull
The improvement concept upon the existing hull is not a matter of revolutionary modification.
Hydrodynamic study shows that a good character of hull resistance is not only determined by a
modern design. Culture of communities is a valuable factor worth to be maintained as a local
genius. Hence, the new design should aware to this issue by accommodating the traditional
architecture form and the folk fishermen behavior in operating the boat when designing the
improved hull. The unchanged features; therefore, are the physical appearance of the boat with
classical architecture, length to breadth ratio (L/B) (to ensure sufficient space for hauling) and
the classic open stern form.
Some important facts are to be concerned through an extensive study of some series of small
boat ever tested in the world. Traung [2] tested around 30 round-bottom boat model, concludes
that half-angle of entrance (iE) should be sufficient small, parallel middle-body should be avoided
and variation of length-displacement ratio is not significant while the prismatic coefficient (CP) is
highly essential and optimum about 0.575. Gilmer [3] found that the best resistance obtained
from the boat having the smallest iE by shifting the displacement volume in a great extent toward
to stern, causing CP would be slightly greater. Hence, there is an optimum value of C P for a
certain variation of iE. This importance of CP is also recommended by some other researchers,
such as by Lackenby [4], Calisal and Mc.Greer [5] as well as Yaakob et al.[6].
Based on those above details, it is decided to perform modification of hull form below waterline
leading to smaller iE. In order to maintain the boat displacement, its distribution is re-arranged
along the boat length. First, lines plan of the hull form is developed from the actual boat. The
original iE is about 40, too large angle proves weakness of the hull shape. The angle is decided
to reduce to 20, after a long effort to accommodate a proper distribution of displacement
volume. Figure 2 depicts the lines plan of original (coded as ijon1) and the modified hull (coded
as ijon2) whiles their respected hull parameters are attached in table 1.

Figure 2. Comparison between the original (ijon1) and the modified hull form (ijon2)
Table1. Hull parameters comparison

Parameters
displacement volume
displacement
water plane area
water plane coefficient
midship sectional area
midship coefficient
block coefficient

symbol

ijon1

ijon2

Unit

72.2
74.0
46.5
0.748
9.41
0.896
0.647

67.1
68.7
44.5
0.696
9.54
0.883
0.584

m3
tons
m2
m2
-

AW
Cw
AM
CM
CB

wetted surface area

prismatic coefficient

S
CP

72.8
0.722

63.8
0.661

m2
-

3. Methodology
3.1. Research Design
Strategy chosen to deal with the research goals was an experimental study by performing a
number of towing test to the boat model. The test was conducted in Hydrodynamic Laboratory
of FTK-ITS at the towing tank of 50m length x 3m breadth x 2m depth. Initially, hydrostatic
calculation was prepared based on the lines plan of the boat to support the test. A model was
built made of Styrofoam by implementing the law of similarity as explained in depth by Harvald
[7]. The scale ratio is determined in such a way considering the tank dimension in order to avoid
blockage and shallow water effects. Hence, the scale ratio of 8 is chosen to deal with a proper
dimension anticipating the deprived effects of restricted water.
The model was tested in calm-water condition at two loading state, full and light loading within
the speed range of those relates with 2 to 7 knots. Variable obtained from the test is the total
resistance of model (RTM) in kg that being converted to its coefficient (C TM). The later is then
subtracted into two components, the friction coefficient (C FM) and the residuary resistance
coefficient (CRM), following Froudes theory as described by Manen and Oossanen [8].
Calculation of the friction coefficient follows the ITTC 1957 friction line. The result is presented
graphically and then examined with model-ship correlation method and linear regression of boat
resistance. Figure 3 depicts the research procedure showing each step in flowchart.

Figure 3. Flowchart of research procedure

3.2 Instrumentation
The towing tank of Hydrodynamic Laboratory of FTK is provided with a wave maker apparatus,
able to produce the maximum wave length of 3 m and 10 cm wave height within the period of
0.4 to 1.3 sec. The towing carriage is electrically driven at 0.8 m/sec to 4 m/sec in maximum.
The resistance measurement is performed by an electrical dynamometer, using a load cell
attached near the top of boat model. The signal from the cell was amplified before undergoes a
voltage-to-frequency (V/F) conversion. Therefore it was transmitted in a frequency range of 50
Hz, which corresponds to a voltage range of 5 V and then converted (F/V) to an output voltage
for acquisition by an acquisition board mounted on a PC. Force calibration should be performed
before the test. The censored temperature of water in the tank is directly sent to computer
software where the respective value of water density and kinematics viscosity is determined
automatically by the computer program.
3.3 Experiment Setup
In order to ensure the water flow around the model surface approaching the turbulence state,
amount of sand strip was attached at the bow as the turbulence stimulator. A wooden rod was
used to assist the model placement at the towing carriage allowing the fore-guide, aft-guide and
load cell to be attached easier. The model was arranged to fix at event-keel position by adding

some ballast weights as required. These weights were also used to adjust the model draught at
two immersion line, 0.125 m and 0.225 m depth for light and full load condition respectively.
Force calibration was conducted to obtain the constant of 2.5 kg load for each 1.974 voltage
sent by the cell to data acquisition device. During the test, the water temperature in the tank
indicates 27C used to find the related value of kinematics viscosity. Figure 4 shows the model
preparation under the carriage before the first run.

Figure 4. Setting up the model at towing carriage, upper view (left) and front view (right)

Some geometrical parameters of hull are to be input into processing unit before towing; such as
displacement, wetted surface area, length of water line and breadth. The ITTC 1957 friction line
was selected to compute CFM. The test scheme was initially planned to perform within the range
correspondence to the boat speed of 2 to 7 knots with 1 knot increments, for both loading
conditions. Hence, the speed of towing should be calculated first using the kinematics similarity
that follows:

VS
..
VM
(1)

where V is velocity, is the scale ratio, S and M denote boat and its model
respectively.
The speed unit has to be converted to voltage as input data into the carriage control system. It
is not an easy work to set the precise voltage values for each speed points, hence repetition of
setting is needed. Test of each speed point was repeated at least three times to minimize the
uncertainty of the test result.
3.4 Data Analysis
The test results in form of resistance coefficients are then extrapolated to predict the boat
resistance by applying the model-ship correlation method of ITTC 1978. According to the
Froudes concept of resistance components, the residuary coefficients of the model
assumed to be equal to those of boat at the same value of Froudes number. The hull
form factors for both draughts were assessed using Prohaskas method using leastsquare regression of:

CT M
Fnn
(1 k) c
CFM
CFM

.(2)
Having the extrapolated values, the resistance charts were developed by curve fitting in powermode regression using SPSS application. Comparison with other boats was carried out
graphically using the plot of specific resistance constant defined as:

..(3)

125
RT
0.5 2/3 V 2

4. Test Results
The result of light-load condition test is attached in table 2. The first Froudes number Fn = 0.118
is approximation to the first point of boat speed 2 knots and the succeeding Fn values are
designated to increments of 1 knot. The residuary resistance component C R tends to slightly
fluctuate starting at the point Fn = 0.22, where the peak of resistance occurred at Fn = 0.25 then
decrease for some extent. Since the friction coefficient C F tends to decrease for rising value of
Fn, the increased resistance is mostly affected by the wave resistance component. According to
Carlton [9], if the bow and stern wave systems interact such that they are in phase
reinforcement of the transverse wave pattern occurs at the stern region. For such event to take
place, the distance between the first crest at bow and stern must be an odd number of halfwavelengths, or the harmonic constant k must be at 1,3,5(2j+1) with j = 0,1,2,3etc.
Evaluation to the peak point of resistance, this reinforcement occurs at the third hump point j
with k = 5. Since it is not happened at k =1 or 2 the high resistance value is not produced by the
main hump of wave-making resistance.
Run
1
2
3
4
5
6

Table 2. Resistance test result of model ijon2 at light-load condition

V (m/s)
Fn
Rn
RTM (N)
CTM
CFM
0.415
0.118511
607371.59
1.022
8.75E-03
5.24E-03
0.580
0.165630
848856.68
2.441
1.36E-02
4.86E-03
0.781
0.223029
1143029.42
4.301
1.63E-02
4.55E-03
0.879
0.251015
1286456.93
6.920
2.25E-02
4.44E-03
1.120
0.319837
1639171.52
6.934
1.65E-02
4.22E-03
1.272
0.363243
1861630.51
10.940
2.20E-02
4.11E-03

CRM
3.52E-03
8.71E-03
1.17E-02
1.80E-02
1.22E-02
1.79E-02

When towing at full draught, it was not possible to run the test at higher speed than 0.8 m/sec
owing to the model start to suffer pitching problem. This unaccepted movement together with
the restricted freeboard causing the water started to flood the model deck. The test;
consequently, was only conducted in limited speed range with smaller increments that identical
to 0.5 knot. The result is shown in table 3 below. The first value of Fn relates with boat speed of
1 knot. The residuary resistance component seems to fluctuate also as occurs at light-load
condition. The peak of total resistance happened at Fn = 0.16 as the result of wave interference
beyond the point of main hump (k=1) or prismatic hump (k=2). The observed k at this peak point
is 11, means that the distance between two wave crests is fairly short.
Run
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Table 3. Resistance test result of model ijon2 at full-load condition

V (m/s)
Fn
Rn
RTM (N)
CTM
CFM
0.177
0.04900
275626.69 0.621954
1.23E-02
6.34E-03
0.284
0.07862
442248.47 0.914292
9.66E-03
5.64E-03
0.403
0.11157
627556.81 1.877634
1.25E-02
5.20E-03
0.432
0.11960
672715.99 3.061701
1.86E-02
5.12E-03
0.585
0.16196
910969.57 4.917753
2.01E-02
4.78E-03
0.587
0.16309
911748.18 4.804938
1.96E-02
4.78E-03
0.773
0.21400
1203725.60 7.259400
2.05E-02
4.50E-03

CRM
5.91E-03
4.02E-03
7.31E-03
1.35E-02
1.53E-02
1.48E-02
1.60E-02

5. Extrapolation of Model to Boat Resistance

Prediction of hull-form factor (1+k) follows the Prohaskas procedure that using the main formula
as in equation 2. Calculation of C TM/CFM is performed at low Fn, between 0.1 to 0.2 then plotted
against the related value of Fn 4/CFM. By using the least-square regression method, a linear chart
of CTM/CFM is developed intercepting Fn4/CFM axis from which the hull-form factor can be read, as
shown by Figure 5.

Figure 5. Regression of CTM/CFM curve to find (1+k) factors for both conditions

The scatter plot of CTM/CFM leads to a slightly high value of the hull-form factor, especially for the
full-load condition. The hull-form factors obtained are 1.1284 and 1.5519 for light and full-load
condition respectively. The interesting point is when comparing with the test result of ijon1
reported in Sukadana [1] the factor (1+k) at light condition is lower in amount of 24% but at fullload condition is higher around 18%. This fact indicates the fullness of ijon2 hull is larger than
ijon1 at full-load condition, owing to the effort of reducing prismatic coefficient C P while keeping
the displacement at nearly constant value. To have a better validation value of (1+k),
comparison is performed with numerical method using Holtrop formulation [10]. On his work,
Holtrop introduced a new concept in predicting the speed-dependence hull-form factor using
statistical formulas. When using the formulas, the factors of ijon2 are definitely high in values at
lower Fn. At Fn = 0.1; for instance, the formulas lead to 1.584 and 1.618 at light and full-load
condition respectively. Holtrops formulas approach the factor of 1.1284 at Fn = 0.4 while the
test locates to Fn = 0.36 and (1+k) = 1.5519 is approached at Fn = 0.25 while the test lays to Fn
= 0.21. This evaluation verifies the hull-form factors obtained from the test are within the
acceptable range.
Entering extrapolation of the model to the boat resistance, the roughness of hull surface is set to
150 e-6 mm and the kinematics viscosity of water is determined at 15C of seawater temperature
that is equal to 1.1883e-6. The total resistance is the total summing of extrapolated frictional
resistance coefficient (CF), residuary resistance (CR), added-roughness resistance (CA) and
added-wind resistance coefficient (CAA). Both the results are attached in table 4 and 5.
Table 4. Result of extrapolation, light-load condition

No.

V(m/sec)

1
2
3
4
5

1.174
1.640
2.209
2.486
3.168

3.598

No.

V(m/sec)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

0.501
0.803
1.140
1.222
1.655
1.656
2.186

Rn

1+k

CF

CR

CA

CAA

CT

3492384
4880922
6572414
7397122
9425229
1070436
8

1.128
1.128
1.128
1.128
1.128

3.63E-03
3.41E-03
3.23E-03
3.16E-03
3.03E-03

3.52E-03
8.71E-03
1.17E-02
1.80E-02
1.22E-02

1.95E-03
1.93E-03
1.93E-03
1.93E-03
1.93E-03

1.27E-04
1.14E-04
1.14E-04
1.14E-04
1.14E-04

9.69E-03
1.46E-02
1.74E-02
2.37E-02
1.77E-02

RT(kN)
0.32
0.94
2.03
3.50
4.26

1.128

2.96E-03

1.79E-02

1.93E-03

1.14E-04

2.33E-02

4.91

Table 5. Result of extrapolation, full-load condition

Rn

1+k

CF

CR

CA

CAA

CT

1584852
2542927
3608449
3868114
5238071
5242548
6921417

1.552
1.552
1.552
1.552
1.552
1.552
1.552

4.25E-03
3.86E-03
3.61E-03
3.56E-03
3.37E-03
3.37E-03
3.20E-03

5.91E-03
4.02E-03
7.31E-03
1.35E-02
1.53E-02
1.48E-02
1.60E-02

1.90E-03
1.93E-03
1.93E-03
1.93E-03
1.93E-03
1.93E-03
1.93E-03

1.86E-05
1.76E-05
1.76E-05
1.76E-05
1.76E-05
1.76E-05
1.76E-05

1.44E-02
1.20E-02
1.49E-02
2.10E-02
2.24E-02
2.20E-02
2.29E-02

RT(kN)
0.12
0.25
0.63
1.02
2.01
1.97
3.58

In order to know the resistance characteristic such as relationship between resistance variations
as the function of boat speed, it is worth to perform a simple statistical analysis using SPSS 11.
This analysis uses curve fitting regression technique in power mode as the most appropriate

mode of boat resistance in common. The resulting equations are as written in (4) for light-load
and (5) for full-load condition. Figure 6 depicts the plot of their curves.

Figure 6. Plotting of resistance curve after regression

RT=0,2833 x V2,4540 (light-load condition) ..(4)

RT=0,5457 x V2,4097 (full-load condition) ....(5)
6. Comparison Study
The dimensionless specific resistance of versus Fn provides a more realistic criterion of
hydrodynamic performance instead of presenting the result in the form of R T alone. The
constant clearly identify the merits of total resistance relative to the displacement and speed, as
expressed by equation (3). Some other boat models used here for comparison are:
1. Boat ijon1, the existing boat hull that was reported previously in [1]
2. A model of UBC trawler series, tested by Calisal dan McGreer [5] consists of 13
models using double chine designated for low L/B. The model selected for
comparison is model number 2 having the most similar main parameters of hull to
ijon2 (coded as UBC-2)
3. Two models of USNA fishing launches tested by Gillmer [3] consists of 4 models two
of them using round bottom (M1, M2) and the others using hard chine hull (C1, C2).
Two superior models are selected for comparison, coded as M2 and C1
4. A model of BSRA-A trawler series, reported by Lackenby [4] consists of 3 models with
systematic variation of CB, B/T and L/. The selected model is that using the parent
basic hull, coded as BSRA-A.
Table 6 presents the comparative hull parameters of entire models being concerned. Note that
the last column reflects the difference of each model displacement to that of ijon2.
Table 6. Some hull parameters of the comparative model

Model

CB

CP

L/B

B/T

iE

(m3)

delta

ijon1
ijon2
USNA C1
USNA M2
BSRA-A
UBC-2

0.647
0.584
0.582
0.53

0.722
0.661
0.750
0.590
0.656
0.650

1.80
1.80
3.56
3.13
5.58
2.60

3.3
3.3
4.1
3.66
2
2

40
20
18
14
20
30

0.141
0.131
3.17
5.3
6.6
0.051

1%
304%
517%
648%
-8%

The test result of all above models available for the light-load condition, hence the discussion
will be focused on this matter. Figure 7 plots the constant in relation to Fn for all models.

Figure 7. Comparison of specific resistance constant of ijon2 among other models

Comparing the two resistance curves of ijon boat, the model ijon2 obviously shows a better
characteristic than ijon1, except for the steep of curve occurs at Fn about 0.25 where the
specific resistance of ijon2 approaching the ijon1 curve. If lower displacement leads to equal
value of specific resistance, then the total resistance must be smaller according to equation (3).
Examination upon data test of those two models confirms this situation, which the total
resistance of ijon2 is slightly lower than ijon1. This rather indigent character; however, is then
covered when the curve falls again under ijon1 at Fn = 0.3. The last point associates with boat
speed of 6 knots, where the total resistance of ijon2 is smaller than ijon1 in amount of 16%.
The specific resistance might seem excessive compare with the larger boat, such as BSRA-A
and UBC-2. The resistance character of model UBC-2 looks uniform along speed increments.
This superior character appears from the double chine design having low prismatic coefficient,
though the half-angle of entrance is rather large compare to other boat models. Trend of ijon2
curve is very similar to that of BSRA-A and C1 while ijon1 curve more looks like that of M2. The
designed parameters of the alternative hull ijon2 have already approached those of BSRA-A as
shown in table 6. The resistance performance; however, is still undesirable. This might be
caused by two factors. First, BSRA-A is a part of trawler series, developed using the roundbottom hull form that very similar to those applied for cargo ship, such as series-60 parent hull.
Such hull form has known as the basic hull pattern used as the prime resources of improved hull
design. The hull form of ijon boat; instead, is dominated by the long parallel-middle body that
proven to cause excessive wave resistance. The small-scale model is the second possible
factor causing difficulties in adjusting and keeping the stern trim. When the model is towed at
high speed region, it starts pitching that disturbing the resistance measurement. The hull-form
design; nonetheless, is the most important factor to be concerned when assessing the improved
performance. Refers to the excellent model M2, reducing half-angle of entrance is inadequate
without modification of prismatic coefficient.
7. Concluding Remarks
Resistance test result of boat model ijon2 as an alternative hull for the existing traditional fishing
boat has been acquired. Modification of hull form is assigned to smaller i E. In order to maintain
the boat displacement, its distribution is re-arranged along the boat length. The original i E is
about 40and reduced to 20. The test result indicates that resistance of the alternative model is
16% lower than the original, at the speed of 6 knots and light-loading condition. Comparison
with other models shows that the existing fishing boat design associates with inferior
performance of hull resistance. Modification of half-angle of entrance i E; as the rule of this case,
should be followed by a proper reduction of prismatic coefficient.
8. Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank the Politeknik Perkapalan Negeri Surabaya-ITS for financially
supporting the research under Contract No. 697b/N.13/2/PG/2002 and high gratitude to all staff
of Hydrodynamic Laboratory of FTK-ITS for the facilities given and Mr. Adi Wirawan Husodo of
ME-Department of PPNS for meaningful knowledge sharing.

References

[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]

Sukadana, I.B.P., Studi Eksperimental Tahanan Kapal Ikan Tradisional jenis Payang di
Jawa Timur, in Seminar Nasional Pasca Sarjana IX-ITS Proceeding, pp. MSN 02.1-6,
2009
Traung, J.O, Some Tank Tests, Fishing Boats of the World 1, Traung, J.O. (ed.), Fishing
News Books Ltd., pp. 281-318, 1955.
Gilmer, T.C., Model Test of Some Fishing Launches, Fishing Boats of the World 2,
Traung, J.O. (ed.), Fishing News Books Ltd., pp. 341-345, 1960
Lackenby, H., Resistance of Trawlers, Fishing Boats of the World 2, Traung, J.O. (ed.),
Fishing News Books Ltd., pp. 364-369, 1960
Calisal, S.M., McGreer, D., A Resistance Study on a Systematic Series of Low L/B
Vessels, Journal of Marine Technology, 30(4), pp.286-296, 1993.
Yaakob, O., Lee, T.E., Wai, L.Y. and King, K.K., Design of Malaysian Fishing Vessel for
Minimum Resistance, Jurnal Teknologi UTM, 42(A), pp.1-12, 2005
Harvald, Sv.Aa., Resistance and Propulsion of Ship, John Wiley & Sons Inc, pp. 39-42,
1983
Manen, J.D. Van, Oossanen, P.Van, Resistance, Principles of Naval Architecture Second
Revision Vol. II, Lewis, E.V.(ed.), The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers,
pp. 54-62,1988
Carlton,J.S., Marine Propellers and Propulsion, 1st ed., Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd, pp.
269-272, 1994
Holtrop, J.A., A Statistical Resistance Prediction Method with a Speed Dependent Form
Factor, Scientific and Methodological Seminar on Ship Hydrodynamic, Varna, 1988