Marine Technology, Vol. 20, No. 3, July 1983, pp.

257-271

Mode Coupling in Torsional and Longitudinal Shafting Vibrations

Michael G. Parsons 1

The effect of propeller coupling on the torsional and longitudinal vibration of marine propulsion shafting is
studied. Recent research on the nature and computation of propeller added mass and damping is reviewed.
It is now possible to estimate the inertia coupling and velocity coupling characteristics which couple the
torsional and longitudinal vibration of a marine propeller. Regression equations suitable for estimating the
torsional and longitudinal added mass and damping of 4-, 5-, 6-, and 7-bladed Wageningen B-Series propel-
lers are presented in the Appendix. The torsional and longitudinal modeling of a typical marine propulsion
plant is reviewed. The numerical techniques and computer programs used in solving the free vibration prob-
lem for natural frequencies and mode shapes and the forced vibration problem for vibratory response are
introduced. Results for a realistic numerical example are presented to compare the natural frequencies,
mode shapes, and vibratory response which are obtained when the propeller coupling is neglected with
those obtained with the propeller coupling included. In general, the natural frequencies are shown to
change by less than 2 percent. The modes shapes can show significant change. Vibratory response can
be either increased or decreased. Some cases show that neglecting the propeller coupling can result in
more than a 50 percent underprediction of the vibratory response. The coupling effects are greatest when
a torsional natural frequency obtained with the propeller coupling neglected and a longitudinal natural fre-
quency obtained with the propeller coupling neglected converge.

Introduction routinely treat the torsional and longitudinal vibrations as cou-

pled motion [6-8].
MARINE PROPULSION shafting vibrates torsionally about its A simple example which extends one presented by Lewis and
axis of rotation, longitudinally along its axis of rotation, and Auslander [5] can be used to illustrate one of the principal effects
laterally normal to its axis of rotation. These forms of vibration of the propeller coupling between the torsional and longitudinal
are often referred to as general modes of vibration. Traditional propeller vibration. Consider the simple one-mass, two-de-
U.S. marine engineering practice considers torsional, longitudi- grees-of-freedom model shown in Fig. 1. The propeller is a rigid
nal, and lateral vibrations independently and separately. There body with motion in x and 0; the shaft is considered massless.
is assumed to be no coupling among these general modes. Many (The propeller mass Mp and mass moment of inertia Jp could
references [1-3] 2 do not even recognize the possibility of coupling. include the effective mass of the shaft.) The equation of motion
For over 20 years it has been understood that the characteristics and u n d a m p e d natural frequency in uncoupled longitudinal
of marine propellers (and diesel engine crankshafts) actually motion is given by
couple the torsional and longitudinal vibration of the shafting
system. The lateral vibration is generally uncoupled from the m~i + k x x = 0
other modes.
where
Guidance has existed for some time concerning when the
coupling between torsional and longitudinal motion must be X = R e X e i~xt
considered. For example, McGoldrick wrote in 1960 [4]: ~i = - R e w x 2 X e i~xt
"the coupling effect is significant chiefly when the critical
frequencies that would exist without this coupling effect are which yields
close to one a n o t h e r . . , for the designer, it is more important -wx2mX + kxX = 0
to ensure that the longitudinal and torsional frequencies are
kept far apart than to he able to predict the amplitude when Wx = x / - k x / m (1)
they are close." The equation of motion and undamped natural frequency in
It may not be the best overall design to keep the torsional and uncoupled torsional motion is given by
longitudinal natural frequencies "far apart" and we now have the
ability to evaluate the coupling properties, so it is of interest to JO + koO = 0
consider the coupling effects. where
Lewis and Auslander [5] were among the first to discuss the
coupling of longitudinal and torsional shafting vibration by the ~0 = R e O e i'~°t
hydrodynamic added inertia and damping of the propeller. They 0 = - Reo~o20e i~°t
analyzed this coupling to aid in the interpretation of experimental
d a t a for the added mass and added-mass moment of inertia of which yields
marine propellers. The Dutch appear to have been the first to - W o 2 J O + koO = 0
Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, The ~0 = ~ (s)
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
2 Numbers in brackets designate References at end of paper. When the propeller shown in Fig. 1 is rotating and vibrating
Presented at the October 23, 1981 meeting of the Great Lakes and either longitudinally or torsionally it will develop an oscillatory
Great Rivers Section of THE SOCIETY OF NAVALARCHITECTS AND lift which will produce both an oscillatory axial force and an os-
MARINE ENGINEERSheld in conjunction with the centennial of naval
architecture and marine engineering at The University of Michigan. cillatory torque on the propeller. These will have components

JULY 1983 0025-3316/83/2003-0257500.55/0 257

 m = Mp + Ma ~ z
J =Jp+ Ja [1
AE
k x = --
L x~
J'G
k 0 = __
L E = Younq's modulus
Fig. 1 Simple one-mass propeller and shafting model
proportional to the acceleration and the velocity of the propeller
which will couple the longitudinal and torsional motion.
Neglecting the damping force and moment proportional to the
velocity, the hydrodynamic force and moment proportional to
the acceleration will produce the following coupled equations of
motion:
[m mclM Po 0][x]
mc dllOl + k0 o = °
The inertia coupling me gives a hydrodynamic tbrce proportional
to 0 and a hydrodynamic moment proportional to 2. Substituting
x = R e X e i°~t and 0 = R e O e i°~t and their derivatives into these
equations yields the system of linear equations
I(k--moo)
-m 22) -mc 2 l[xl
(kO -- J¢~2)1 [OJ = 0
This system will have a nontrivial solution (X ~ 0, 0 ~ 0) if the
d e t e r m i n a n t of the coefficient matrix is zero. This requirement
yields the characteristic equation
(kx -- m o z 2 ) ( k o -- J w 2) -- m c 2 W 4 = 0
which can be rearranged using equations (1) and (2) to become
0,) 4 (1 -- ~ j ] W 2(W02 + Wx 2) + Wx 2W02 = 0
If we define a coupling parameter a as,
/7/e 2
- (4)
rnJ
equation (3) has roots which yield the u n d a m p e d natural
frequencies
OJ= [(OJO2+ Wx2) -F ~(OJO2
2(1+ -Wx2)2--
a) n(1-- a)Wx2W02]
If there is no coupling, c~ = 0 and equation (5) yields the uncou-
pled results COxand w0 as required.
One of the principal effects of coupling is a change in the un-
d a m p e d natural frequencies as given in equation (5). For pro-
pellers the coupling parameter ~ is small with values less than
about 0.10. The amount that the coupling alters the u n d a m p e d
natural frequencies obtained for this simple model neglecting
coupling is shown in Fig. 2. As suggested by McGoldrick, the
greatest change occurs when the uncoupled longitudinal and
torsional natural frequencies are close. When they are equal,
~o/w~ = 1, coupling with c~ = 0.10 causes one natural frequency
to decrease 12.8 percent and the second to increase 20.9 percent.
For many marine propulsion shafting systems, the uncoupled
torsional natural frequency associated with the model shown in
Fig. 1 is about half the lowest longitudinal natural frequency.
With COo/O~x = 0.5, coupling with a = 0.10 will .cause the lowest
(predominantly torsional mode) natural frequency to decrease
1.6 percent and will cause the second (predominantly longitudinal
mode) natural frequency to increase 7.1 percent. The coupling
can thus have a significant influence on the natural frequen-
cies.
258
~@ I Mp = propeller mass
Ma = propeller added mass
JP = propeller polar mass moment
of inertia
Ja = propeller added mass moment
of inertia
L = shaft lenqth
A = shaft c r o s s - s e c t i o n area
J' = shaft polar area moment of
inertia
G = shear modulus
In this paper, the effect of propeller coupling on the torsional
and longitudinal vibration of a typical marine propulsion system
is considered.
Propeller coupling characteristics
As noted in the preceding, the characteristics of the marine
propeller couple the torsional and longitudinal motion. These
characteristics have been the subject of recent research. In The
Netherlands, Hylarides and van Gent [9] have recently used
.unsteady lifting-surface theory to obtain the propeller added-
mass and damping properties. In the United States, Parsons and
Vorus [10] have used unsteady lifting-line theory to obtain these
propeller characteristics. Vassilopoulos and Triantafyllou [11]
have reported work at Massachusetts Institute of Technology
to obtain the propeller characteristics using unsteady lifting-
surface theory. These results can be used to estimate the coupling
properties of a marine propeller.
It will be useful to review some of the results of our recent work
[m lIxl
here. If the propeller shown in Fig. 3 is operating behind a ship
and vibrating in all six degrees of freedom, the equations of mo-
tion of the rigid-body propeller can be written as:
(3)
d 0
m =M~=fe+ f h + f~ (6)
Jd y
0 tn
Jd LOzA
where fe is a vector of excitation forces and moments due to the
operation of the propeller in the circumferentially varying wake
(5) field, fh is a vector of additional hydrodynamic forces and mo-
ments due to the vibration of the propeller in a wake field which
can be assumed to be uniform, and fs is a vector of restoring
forces and moments exerted on the propeller by the shaft. The
polar mass moment of inertia is J ; the diametral mass moment
of inertia (about y or z) is Jd.
The additional hydrodynamic force fh will depend on x and
3t for a fully immersed propeller. It can be expressed in the
form
fh = -- M a ~ - Cpx (7)
where M , is the propeller added mass matrix and Cp is the
propeller damping matrix. This expression can be used in
equation (6) to yield the typical equations of motion
(M + Ma)£ + Cp x - f~ = fe (8)
The minus signs are included in equation (7) so the added mass
and damping terms will occur with plus signs on the left side of
the equations of motion, equation (8), where they are normally
used.
In our recent work [10, 12] we have shown theoretically that
the added mass and damping matrices have the following general
form
MARINE TECHNOLOGY
 I mll m21 0 0 0 1 ~2 - - t°2
m21 m22 0 0 0 1.3
Ma = 0 0 m33 /7t43 -m53 --m63 (9)
0 0 m43 rn44 -m63 -m64[ a = .i0
0 0 m53 m63 m33 m43| 1.2.
0 0 m63 m64 m43 m44 _..]
~x
and w i i.i-
[-Cll C21 0 0 0 ~ fl ~8
|c21 c22 0 0 0 1.0
o -co / (10)
0 C43 C44 --C63 --C64 /
0 C53 C63 C33 C43/ 0.9
0 C63 C64 C43 C44_J / _ _ ~ = .05

mI
The zeros indicate that the longitudinal coordinate (1) and tor- 0.8 =
~oO ti - 7
~x ~ a .15
sional coordinate (2) are not coupled by the propeller with the
lateral coordinates (3, 4, 5, 6). The terms off the main diagonal
produce the coordinate coupling. In this notation, coefficient m21 ? 0.15 i JO 1 }5 2 .:0 "~
is the inertia coupling between longitudinal and torsional motion.
Coefficient c21 is the velocity coupling between longitudinal and wO/~ x
torsional motion. The longitudinal added mass is rnll; the tor- Fig. 2 Variation of undamped natural frequencies with coupling c~
sional added mass moment of inertia is rn22. The longitudinal
propeller damping is cn; the torsional propeller damping is be used to derive some very practical results for a constant pitch
C22. propeller. Using equation (14) in equations (11) through (13) it
Our analysis of the propeller added mass and damping [10, 12] is easy to show that
yields the complex expressions
Fh 21 P m21 c21 P
Fhll
_

2~r' so that (15)

Fhll = w2mll - iwcll = Z t p(r) cos2~g rdr (11) mll c~1 2~-
Fh22 _ P m22 __- _C22
_ _-- P
Fh21 2~r' so that (16)
Fh21 = ~02m21 -- i~c21 = - Z fr h r' p(r) cosflg sinflg r2dr m21 c21 27r
and
(12)
Fh22_ p2 rn22 = C22 _ p2
Fhll 47r2, so that mn Cll 47r2 (17)
Fh22 = w2m22 -- iwc22 = Z f r ~ p(r) sin2fle r3dr (13)
,0' r h
Thus the torsional/longitudinal coupling terms m2i" and c 21 can
where Z is the number of blades, rh and rt are the propeller hub be estimated from either the longitudinal characteristics (rnll
and tip radii, respectively, and p(r) is the complex force ampli- and c11) or the torsional characteristics (rn22 and c22). For a
tude due to the pressure acting on the propeller blade at radius constant-pitch propeller, the coupling parameter a, equation (4),
r due to a unit heave oscillation normal to the propeller face. The can be expressed as,
angle fig is the geometric pitch angle of the propeller blade a t each p2
radius; that is 47r2 D2a2
1 P(r) (14) a = (18)
fig(r) = t a n - 2~rr p2

where P(r) is the pitch at radius r. These theoretical results can

displacements x, y, z
fz 'z rotations @x' @y' @z

~ / forces fi
q ~ // m°ments qi

qx,@x

.....

Fig. 3 ,Nomenclature for propeller vibration

JULY 1983 259

 If the added mass ma = m 11 is 60 percent of mp and if Ja = m22
is 30 percent of Jp so that Jp = p2ma/(O.3*4~r2), equation (18)
yields a = 0.0865.
The PRAMAD (Propeller Added Mass and Damping) program
developed in our research work [12] can be used to obtain the
propeller added mass (rn11), added mass moment of inertia (m22),
inertia coupling (m21), longitudinal damping (c11), torsional
damping (c22), and velocity coupling (c21) using unsteady lift-
ing-line theory. These llfting-line results can then be improved
using approximate lifting-surface corrections which are produced
by the program. The program requires the input of the mean axial
wake and propeller geometry data typicallyfound on a propeller
drawing. We have also developed regression equations which can
be used to obtain the propeller added mass and damping in ear-
lier design when only the propeller diameter, expanded area ratio,
and pitch-diameter ratio are known. Equations of the following
form are presented for each of the six terms of interest here:
m11' m*---L
pD 3 = C1 + C2 + C3 {- C4 ~Ao]
+c5(P)2+C6(-~oo)(P)
These equations were developed for the lifting-line results for
all of the added mass and damping characteristics of 4-, 5-, 6-, and
7-blade Wageningen B-Series propellers [13]. Each of these
values can then be improved using a lifting-surface correction
(LSC). For example, the correction for m H ' has the following
form:
LSC(m11") = D I T D 2 ( P ) + D 3 ( A R ) - I + D 4 ( A R ) -2
where AR is the propeller blade geometric aspect ratio. For
Wageningen B-Series propellers the geometric aspect ratio is
related to the no. of blades Z and the expanded area ratio by
0.22087 Z
AR - - -
Ae/Ao
For the longitudinal added mass, the final dimensional result is
then given by
roll = pD3m11'LSC'(m11 ')
The full set of regression equations for all six torsional and lon-
gitudinal added mass and damping coefficients for 4-, 5-, 6-, and
7-bladed Wageningen B-Series propellers is given in the Ap-
pendix.
Torsional model
To provide a specific example, we will consider a marine steam
propulsion plant of a typical design. The system consists of a
compound unit with a high-pressure turbine, low-pressure tur-
bine, and a double-reduction gear driving a fixed-pitch propeller.
The physical system is shown in Fig. 4. The propeller speed at
full power is 106.5 rpm. The gear ratios are shown. The effect of
the gearing can be reflected in the system model by using an
equivalent system model [1] as shown in Fig. 4. Equivalent
properties are introduced so the whole system can be viewed as
rotating at propeller rpm. Neglecting the damping, the discrete
mass equations of motion are
o o
-kl (kl -[- k4 Jr k6) 0 -k 4
o o
J0+ (k +k4)
o o o llO l
-k6 0 0
260
where J is a diagonal matrix with main diagonal elements Jii --
Ji. Element J1 includes the propeller added mass moment of
inertia m22. The vector fT includes the excitation moments. The
vibratory torque on the propeller, element fT1, is the only nonzero
element. The inertia of the shafting is negligible compared with
that of the propeller, gears, and rotors so the springs are assumed
massless. The equations of motion can now be written as follows
with the addition of absolute and relative damping matrices:
JO + cTO + GT 0 + KTO = fT (24)
The torsional absolute damping matrix CT is a diagonal matrix
with nonzero terms due to the propeller hydrodynamic torsional
damping CT11 = C22 and the equivalent damping in the high-
pressure and low-pressure turbines, CT33 and CTs~, respectively.
The torsional relative damping matrix Gv includes the internal
or hysteretic structural damping in the shafting and other mis-
cellaneous damping. It will have the same form as K T but with
the gi replacing the ki. It is common in structural vibration
analyses to assume that the structural damping matrix G.r is
proportional to the stiffness matrix KT'. Marine Engineering
(19) [1] and authors from the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS)
[14] assume that the internal damping will dissipate some per-
centage/3 of the kinetic energy and flexural potential energy,
respectively, per cycle of vibration. A value of/3 = 0.05 is typically
used for solid shafting. Salzman and Pamidi of ABS [14] use an
energy dissipation per cycle of
Ej = ~/3 ki (0j - 0j_l) 2 (25)
where 0j and 0i_1 are the twist magnitudes at the ends of a shaft
segment with spring constant kj. This results from a flexural
moment of the form
QJ = kj(Oj - Oj-ti
The relative damping shown in Fig. 4 produces a moment of the
form
QJ = gi(0J - 0j-l)
(21)
At resonance, this moment will dissipate the following energy per
cycle
Ej = gjTrw(Oj - O j _ l ) 2 (26)
(22) Comparing equation (25) and equation (26), we get the same
dissipation of energy at resonance if the relative damping matrix
has the form
GT = ~ KT (27)
This yields a structural damping which is the same for all ele-
ments and is inversely proportional to the excitation frequency
as is typically used [15].
Longitudinal m o d e l
The longitudinal model for the marine steam propulsion sys-
tem of Fig. 4 is shown in Fig. 5. The thrust bearing for this par-
ticular system is aft of the reduction gear with a separate housing
and foundation. The couplings between the first reduction gears
and the low-speed pinions are assumed to be effective so the first
reduction gear setsand turbine rotors are not included in the gear
o o 7 l-e-I
0 -k6 //02/
o IIO I
o o II° I = JO + KTO = fT (23)
-ks (ks + k6)_.lL06__]
MARINE TECHNOLOGY
&.
C
r"

J" ,, J~
tail line couplings
106.5 rpm , 4 k3 ~ high pressure
shaft shaft
694 r~pm k4 ~ _ _ _ _ ~ turbine rotor
I I ~ ~
J2 ~ - - ~ j ~ 6227 rpm II
Jp kl ] ~ I gear

mll I I lWg = 73020,

m2 thrust}
propeller
propeller 694 low pressure bearingl k ~ k
J2rpm ~ i j~/~ turbine rotor
reduction
wf = 52100#
gear 3626 rpm
n2 = 694/106.5 shafts £ d foundation
I 448 in. 28.915 in.
n 4 = 6227/694
II 982 in. 22.586 in.
n 6 = 3626/694 III 40 in. 26.924 in.
IV 100 in. 26.924 in.
physical s~stem physical system

J4 84 g3 J3 83

J1°1 J2°2 g4~ / '~ ' k3 u2<Xc T 33

M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8 M9
gl g2 g3 g4 g5 g6 g7 g8
g ~ 6 ~6e6 ~ ~5 es~
~ 22 ~ k 6 ~

where J1 = Jp + Ja = Jp + m22 kl = kl
where
J2 = Jg + 2n22J2 k3 = n22n42k3 '' M I = mp + m a = mp + m11 M 9 = Wg/386.4 in/s 2
J3 = n22n42J3 '' k4 = n22k4' M2 = M3 224 in. shaft I MI0 = wf/386.4 in/s 2
M4 = M 5 = M 6 327.3 in. shaft II k 9 = ktb
J4 = n22J4 ' + n22n42J4" k5 = n22n62k5"
M7 40 in. shaft I I I + 40 in shaft IV k10 = kf
J5 = n22n62Js" k6 = n22k6" M8 60 in. shaft IV
J6 = n22J6' + n22n62J6"
system model
system model
Fig. 5 Longitudinal model
Fig. 4 Torsional model
weight w~,. The thrust bearing and housing weight and 25 percent pled together by the propeller characteristics. The 16 coupled
of its foundation weight are included in w[. The thrust bearing equations of motion including equations (24) and (29) can be
spring constant ktb includes the flexibility of the thrust collar, written as
the moving parts and oil film of the bearing, and the thrust
bearing housing. The foundation spring constant k t includes the •
bending and shear flexibility of the foundation and the rotational [a2axl
flexibility of the innerbottom below the foundation [16]. In
general, k / c o u l d be a frequency-dependent stiffness obtained
from a finite-element analysis of the thrust bearing foundation
or
and adjacent ship structure.
In a longitudinal analysis, the mass of the shafting must be M ' ~ ' + Cx' + G:~' + K x ' = f (32)
considered. Accurate results can be obtained for the lowest nat-
ural frequency of interest here if the distributed shaft mass is The only coupling will be the propeller inertia coupling m21 and
modeled by Seven discrete masses as shown in Fig. 5. These the propeller velocity coupling c21 so the coupling matrices will
masses are defined to preserve the total mass and center of be
gravity of the shafting. Consistent massless springs are then de- Me: 6 × 10 matrix with only mcu = m21 nonzero
fined between the discrete masses M1 through M9 to account for Cc: 6 × 10 matrix with only c c l l = c21 nonzero
the shafting flexibility. Neglecting the damping, the discrete mass Gc = 0, 6 × 10 matrix
equations of motion are Kc = 0, 6 × 10 matrix
M~ + Kxx =fx (28) The nonzero elements of the coupling matrices will cause tor-
where sional vibration to be excited by longitudinal vibration and lon-
gitudinal vibration to be excited by torsional vibration. The
-kl -kl 0 0 0 propeller will simultaneously experience a vibratory torque and
-kl (kl + k2) -k2 0 0 vibratory thrust at the blade rate frequency and its harmonics
0 -k2 (k2 + k3) -k3 0 so both longitudinal and torsional vibration will be excited di-
0 0 -k3 (k3 + kt) -k4 rectly by the right-hand side of equation (32).
0 0 0 -k4 (k4 + k5)
Kx = 0 0 0 0 -k5
0 0 0 0 0
Free vibration solution
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 The natural frequencies and mode shapes in systems with low
-0 0 0 0 0 damping are usually obtained with the damping neglected. The
excitation is also neglected, giving the following undamped free
0 0 0 0 0
vibration problems from equations (24), (29), and (32), respec-
0 0 0 0 0 tively:
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 torsion: J~ + KTO = 0 (33)
-ks 0 0 0 0
(k5 + k6) -k6 0 0 0 longitudinal: M~ + Kxx = 0 (34)
-k6 (k6 + k7 + k9) -k7 0 -k9 coupled: M'~' + Kx' = 0 (35)
0 -k7 (k7 + ks) - k s 0
0 0 -ks ks 0 Assuming harmonic motion with 0 = ReOe i~t, x = R e X e i~t, and
0 -k9 0 0 ( k g + k~0)- x' = R e X ' e i'~t, these yield the matrix eigenvalue problems:
The mass matrix M is a diagonal matrix with main diagonal el- torsion: w2JO = KTO (36)
ements mii = Mi. Element M1 includes the propeller added mass longitudinal: ~2MX = KxX (37)
m 11. The vector fx includes the excitation forces. The vibratory
thrust on the propeller, element fx 1, is the only nonzero element. coupled: w2M'X ' = K X ' (38)
The equations of motion can now be written as follows with the
addition of absolute and relative damping matrices: Standard computer methods exist for obtaining the eigenvalues
(w2) and the eigenvectors or mode shapes for these problems.
Mf~ + Cx :~ + Gx/; + Kx x = fx (29) We have developed the TORS.AXL. computer program to
solve the matrix eigenvalue problems given in equations (36),
The longitudinal absolute damping matrix Cx is a diagonal ma- (37), and (38). It is not the purpose of this paper to detail these
trix with the propeller hydrodynamic longitudinal damping cx ~
methods, but a brief review will be included for completeness.
= Cll the only nonzero element. The longitudinal relative The torsional and longitudinal problems are solved using the
damping matrix Gx includes the internal or hysteretic structural
same methods. Both J and M are diagonal matrices. Stiffness
damping in the shafting and structure and other miscellaneous
matrices KT, Kx, and K are symmetrical matrices. Using a simple
damping. Using the same approach as in the torsional case, the transformation of the type
relative damping matrix can be taken as
0 = J1/20, where j~[2= ~ i i (39)
Gx = 2~w Kx (30)
or

where j3 is the percentage of the flexural potential energy dissi- 0 = J-1/20 (40)
pated per cycle of vibration.
equation (40) can be substituted into equation (36) and the result
can be premultiplied by j-1/2 to give
Coupled torsional/longitudinal model w2J-1/2J J - 1 / ~ = J - 1 / 2 K T J - 1 / 2 0
The torsional and longitudinal vibratory motion will be cou- ~20 = A 0 (41)

262 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

This is a matrix eigenvalue problem in standard form with matrix
A a symmetrical matrix. Simply premultiplying equation (36)
by j - 1 would not yield a symmetrical matrix on the right-hand
side; that is, J - 1 K T is not symmetrical.
Our computer program TORS.AXL. uses Householder's
method [17] to transform equation (41) into the matrix eigen-
value problem in standard form
co20' = A ' 0 '
where A ' is a symmetrical, t r i d i a g o n a l matrix and then uses the
QL algorithm [17, 18] to obtain the eigenvectors and eigenvalues.
The various transformations are then reversed to give the natural
frequencies and mode shapes for equation (36). The solution of
the longitudinal problem, equation (37), is handled exactly the
same numerically.
The coupled problem, equation (38), must be treated in a dif-
ferent manner than the torsional and axial problems because the
propeller inertia coupling causes matrix M' to be nondiagonal.
The simple transformation equation (39) cannot be used in this
case. The same result can be obtained, however, by using the
Cholesky factorization [17] to obtain the square-root matrix M "1/2
where
( M ' I / 2 ) T M '1/2 = M '
and then using the transformation
X' = M'-I/2X '
This is used exactly as in the foregoing to produce the matrix
eigenvalue problem in standard form
w2X ' = ( M ' - I / 2 ) T K M ' - I / 2 X ~ = A Z '
where A is a symmetrical matrix. The eigenvalues and eigen-
vectors are then obtained by using Householder's method to
obtain a tridiagonal form and then using the Q L algorithm as in
the solution of the torsional and longitudinal problems.
Forced vibration solution
The response amplitudes in torsional vibration, longitudinal
vibration, and coupled torsional/longitudinal vibration can be
obtained by solving equations (24), (29), and (32), respectively.
Using the coupled problem as the example here, we have the
equations of motion
M ' f d + Cf~' + G x ~ + K x ' = f = R e f e i~t
The excitation amplitude vector f is composed of the complex
amplitudes of the vibratory torque and vibratory thrust excita-
tion at some frequency w. These complex amplitudes include the
magnitude of each excitation and its phase angle with respect to
t = 0. The response will be at the same frequency, so we have
x ' = R e X ' e i~t, X' a complex vector
which can be differentiated and substituted into equation (44)
to give
R e [ ( - c o 2 M I + i w C + i w G + K ) X ' ] e i°~t = R e f e i~t
For this to be true for all time, the following complex equation
must be satisfied:
( - o z 2 M ' + i w C + i w G + K)X' = f
The matrix on the left is commonly called the dynamic matrix
D(w), giving
D(w)X ~ = f
The vibratory response vector X' can be obtained by solving this
system of complex linear equations. The technique of modal
analysis commonly used in structural vibration problems cannot
JULY 1983
be used in this problem due to the presence of the absolute
damping matrix C.
We have developed the TAC.RESP. computer program to
solve for the vibratory response in torsional, longitudinal, and
coupled torsional/longitudinal vibration. With the excitation
amplitude and frequency specified, the appropriate dynamic
matrix is formed and then solved by standard methods. The three
problems
torsion: (-oo2J + iOaCT + i w G T + K T ) O = DT(co)O = fT (47)
longitudinal: ( - o a g M + iooCx + icoGx + K x ) X = Dx(w)X = fx
(48)
and equation (45) for the coupled torsional/longitudinal problem
are solved exactly the same numerically. The solution is obtained
by computing the LU-decomposition of the dynamic matrix using
Gaussian elimination with partial pivoting and then back sub-
stitution [18[. All computations are performed for complex
components in the dynamic matrix and the excitation vector.
Example analysis
To establish the effects of the propeller coupling on the tor-
sional and longitudinal shafting vibration, a specific numerical
example is considered. The data are based upon that for a
28 500-shp, 23-knot containership which was completed in the
(42)
United States within the past decade. Partial data were available
for this vessel. Propeller characteristics and wake data were ob-
tained from a similar vessel. This particular vessel was delivered
with inadequate thrust bearing foundation stiffness and expe-
(43) rienced longitudinal vibration problems on initial trials. The
foundation was later stiffened so that the lowest longitudinal
natural frequency would not be in resonance in the operating
range. To my knowledge coupling was not considered in the vi-
bration analyses performed for this vessel.
Three cases are considered here to illustrate some of the effects
and potential effects of the propeller coupling:
• A s - b u i l t case: This corresponds to the as-delivered condition
where the thrust bearing foundation stiffness is low
enough that the lowest longitudinal natural frequency can
be in resonance in the operating range.
• M o d i f i e d case: This corresponds to the post-delivery con-
dition where the thrust bearing foundation stiffness is
increased so the lowest longitudinal natural frequency
(44) cannot be in resonance in the operating range.
• W o r s t case: This condition is constructed so that a torsional
natural frequency and the lowest longitudinal natural
frequency obtained neglecting coupling essentially coin-
cide so that maximum coupling effects are produced.
As-built case. The torsional model in Fig. 4 and the longitu-
dinal model in Fig. 5 apply to the example vessel. The equivalent
system torsional characteristics are given in Table 1. Our PRA-
MAD program was used with the propeller characteristics given
in Table 2 to obtain the propeller added mass and damping
characteristics. For comparison, the Wageningen B-Series re-
gression equations in the Appendix were also used to estimate
the propeller added mass and damping. Both results include the
appropriate lifting-surface corrections. A comparison of these
results is shown in Table 3; the PRAMAD results were used in
the analyses reported here. The high-pressure and low-pressure
(45)
turbine damping coefficients were obtained using the quasi-
steady approximation recommended by M a r i n e E n g i n e e r i n g [1].
Assuming the approximate turbine torque model
(46) Q = Q0~rth(2 - N / N o ) (49)
where Q0 and No are the rated torque and rpm, respectively, and
7rth is the percent throttle, the quasi-steady turbine damping
coefficient is then given by
263
 Table 1 Torsional model characteristics The longitudinal system characteristics are given in Table 4.
The foundation stiffness kl0 = 10 000 000 lbf/in, is taken as the
Ji CT i ki
mean value recommended by Kane and McGoldrick [19] for a
Ibf in s 2 ibf in s ibf in thrust bearing installed aft of the reduction gear on its own
foundation. The thrust bearing stiffness k9 is also based upon
4742829. 2.2000 x 108
I 1025681. Kane and McGoldrick's recommendations. Their value for a
2 554178.5 0. 40-in.-dia Kingsbury thrust bearing, their mean value for a thrust
3 998254.7 487432. 5.8118 x 1010 bearing housing installed separately aft of the reduction gear, and
4 1512851. 0. 7.8558 x 108
an approximate value for the thrust collar are combined as series
springs to give k9 = 11 137 000 lbf/in. These values produce re-
5 10690093. 487432. 1.0410 x 1010
sults which correlate well with the longitudinal natural frequency
6 1599301. 0. 7.8558 x 108 observed on the prototype vessel. As in the torsional case, equa-
tion (30) was used to obtain the relative damping matrix Gx using
/~ = 0.05. This corresponds to a dissipation of 5 percent of the
flexural potential energy per cycle due to structural and miscel-
Table 2 Propeller characteristics laneous damping.
vx/v The coupled torsional/longitudinal model was completed by
X C/D t/D P/D
dimensionalizing the results in Table 3 to give
• 20 0.210 0.040 1.325 0.440 me11 = m 2 1 = - 5 1 3 7 . 5 l b f s 2
• 25 0.228 1.295 0.494 Cc~ = c21 = -99823.2 lbf s
• 30 0. 245 0.037 1.275 0.553
The final part of the problem definition is the excitation vector
• 35 0. 260 1.262 0.610 f which contains the vibratory torque fT~ and vibratory thrust
.40 0 • 273 0.034 1.257 0.664 fxr With a harmonic analysis of the axial and tangential wake
.45 0 • 283 1.256 0.713 behind the ship and the propeller characteristics, the vibratory
1.248 0.751
thrust and torque can be obtained [19, 20]. In this case, the fol-
• 50 0. 290 0.029
lowing values were assumed without calculation, due to a lack of
• 55 0 • 295 1.220 0.775
complete wake data:
.60 0. 298 0.023 1.176 0.790
fT1 = 1.13 × 106 cos(6[tt - 10 deg) lbf in.
• 65 0.300 1.125 0.802
fx~ = 2.69 × 104 cos(6~t - 25 deg) lbf
.70 0 • 298 0.017 1.070 0.814
where ~ is the rotation rate in rad/sec. These correspond to about
• 75 0. 290 1.014 0.826
9 percent of the steady torque and about 12 percent of steady
• 80 0 • 274 0.012 0.968 0.838
thrust, respectively, at the resonance rpm studied in the fol-
.85 0.248 0.940 0.851 lowing. These values are typical of high values which might be
.90 0.208 0.008 0.925 0.863 experienced on a single-screw ship with an even number of pro-
• 95 0. 135 0.910 0.871
peller blades and poor wake characteristics.
The TORS.AXL. computer program was used to obtain the
1.00 0.000 0.006 0.901 0.878
uncoupled torsional and longitudinal natural frequencies and
mode shapes and the coupled torsional/longitudinal natural
zero skew; zero rake; A e / A o = 0 . 7 7 2 ; Z = 6; P/D10.7 = 1.070
frequencies and mode shapes. The results for the lower modes
of interest are given in Table 5. The third torsional mode has a
blade rate resonance at 91.4 propeller rpm with a full power rpm
of 106.5. The mode shapes are normalized by the first coordinate
Ct _ 1 5 Q _ 60~rthQ0 (50) in the vector throughout Table 5. The third torsional mode has
2~ ~n 2~rNo low amplitude at the propeller so it should not be excited seri-
In the equivalent model, the damping will be the same for the two ously by the propeller excitation. Only the lowest longitudinal
turbines if they have a typical 50:50 power split at rated condi- mode is of practical interest; it has a blade rate resonance at 100.5
tions. In equation (50), ~th is throttle at the operating condition rpm. This longitudinal resonance near full power was observed
about which the vibration is taking place. To complete the tor- on the prototype ship and led to a power restriction being im-
sional model in equation (24), equation (27) was used to obtain posed until the thrust bearing foundation could be stiffened. The
the relative damping matrix GT using ~ = 0.05. This corresponds coupled torsional/longitudinal results show the following:
to a dissipation of 5 percent of the flexural potential energy per • The second and fifth coupled modes are the second and
cycle due to structural and miscellaneous damping. fourth torsional modes, respectively, with little change in natural

Table 3 Comparison of added mass and damping from PRAMAD and Appendix

nondimen sional PRAMAD Appendix percent

characteristic computer program regression equations difference

m I I/PD 3 •060327 .060060 .4

m2 I / P D 4 -.011022 -.010610 3.9

m22/pD5 .0020368 .0018513 10.0

c I I/P nD3 •6 6 5 8 7 6 .65422 1.8

c2 i / p n D 4 -. 1 2 0 6 5 7 -.117076 3.1

c22/pnD 5 •0 2 1 7 1 4 8 .0204249 6.3

n = rev./sec.; D = diameter; p = water mass density

264 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

frequency and mode shape. The fifth mode shows a reasonable Table 4 Longitudinal model characteristics for as-built case
coupling between the torsional and longitudinal motion. For
Mi Cx i ki
example, in the fifth mode a 0.01-rad torsional oscillation at the
ibf s2/in ibf s/in ibf/in
propeller will be coupled with a 100-mil longitudinal oscillation
at the propeller.
I 356.60 2086.76 1.7589 x 108
° The third coupled mode is primarily torsional and corre-
sponds with the third torsional mode. The natural frequency 2 108.11 0.00 8.7947 x 107
57.387 rad/sec is only 0.05 percent lower than obtained with the 3 108.11 0.00 5.1809 x 107
coupling effects neglected. 4 96.40 0.00 3.6721 x 107
° The fourth coupled mode is primarily longitudinal and 3.6721 x 107
5 96.40 0.00
corresponds with the first longitudinal mode. The natural fre-
0.00 6.2663 x 107
quency 64.125 rad/sec is 1.5 percent higher than obtained with 6 96.40

the coupling effects neglected. 7 33.48 0.00 2.4400 x 108

For this case where the closest torsional and longitudinal 8 25.11 0.00 5.6933 x 108
natural frequencies with the coupling effects neglected are 57.414 9 188.98 0.00 1.1493 x 107
and 63.158 rad/sec, there is relatively little effect on the natural
10 134.83 0.00 1,0000 x 107
frequencies and mode shapes.
The TAC.RESP. program was used to obtain the forced vi-
bration response for the uncoupled torsional and longitudinal
vibration--that is, coupling effects were neglected--and for the modes and with the third torsional and first longitudinal modes
coupled torsional/longitudinal vibration. The vibration ampli- if coupling were neglected. The boxed results represent the cases
tudes are summarized in Table 6. Calculations were performed a designer would use if coupling were neglected. To evaluate the
for excitation in resonance with the third and fourth coupled effect of coupling on the torsional vibration, the amplitudes and

Table 5 Free vibration results for as-built case

uncoupled torsional results: ~o = 0.000 rad/sec; ~5 = 311.201 rad/sec

mode I 2 3 4
natural frequency rad/sec 12.130 15.583 57.414 89.687
resonant propeller rpm 19.3 24.8 91.4 142.7
i
1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
0.314 -0.132 -14.368 -36.502
mode shapes 0.594 -0.595 1.556 1.607
0.593 -0.593 1.468 I 1.385
-0.223 0.045 0.460 i -16.836
-0.189 0.034 -1.097 i 122.232

uncoupled lon@itudinal results:

natural frequencies mode shape for ~1

1.000
I 6 3 . 1 5 8 rad/sec. .992
2 2 2 8 . 9 6 8 rad/sec. .971
3 4 1 3 . 9 5 3 rad/sec. .927
4-10 > 5 0 0 . 0 0 0 rad/sec. .856
.776
.724
Note: ~I has a resonant .726
propeller rpm of 100.5 .727
.391

coupled torsional/lon@itudinal results:

mode 2 3 4 5
natural frequency rad/sec 15.576 57 • 387 64.125 89.687
resonant propeller rpm 24.8 91.3 102.1 142.7

1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

-0.133 -16.389 -0.437 -34.562
torsional -0.598 1.777 0.037 1.522
coordinates -0.595 1.676 0.035 1.312
0.046 0.525 0.014 -15.939
0.034 -1.250 -0.044 115.722
mode shapes
-0.376 -26.460 184.682 10.328
-0.368 -26.187 183.262 10.394
-0.354 -25.536 179.503 10.425
-0.329 -24.258 171.596 10.303
longitudinal -0.293 -22.245 158.587 9.913
coordinates -0.258 -20.039 143.866 9.313
-0.237 -18.645 134.330 8.847
-0.238 -18.699 134.817 8.910
-0.238 -18.720 135.001 8.934
-0.125 -10.035 72.684 4.914

JULY 1983 265

 Table 6 Forced vibration amplitudes for as-built case

resonance for mode coupled 3 torsional 3 long'l 1 coupled 4

excitation frequency 57.387 57.414 63.158 64.125

uncoupled torsion:

0 1 rad. .000422 .000449 .000300 .000289

02 .004437 .004456 .000153 .000126
03 .000481 .000483 .000014 .000011
04 .000454 .000455 .000013 .000010
05 .000142 .000143 .000005 .000004
96 .000338 .000340 .000015 .000013

uncoupled long'l:

x I in.
x2
.0410
.0406
.0412
.0407
I' .1668 .1349
.1655 .1338
x3 .0396 .0397 .1620 .1311
x4 .0376 .0377 .1547 .1253
x5 .0345 .0346 .1428 .1158
x6 .0310 .0312 .1294 .I051
x7 .0289 .0290 .1208 .0981
x8 .0290 .0291 .1212 .0985
x9 .0290 .0291 .1213 .0886
x10 .0155 .0156 .0653 .0531

coupled motion:

0 1 rad. .000151 .000159 .001106 .001866

O2 .001592 .001574 .000566 .000815
83 .000173 .000171 .000050 .000070
84 .000163 .000161 .000047 .000065
05 .000051 .000050 .000018 .000025
06 .000121 .000120 .000054 .000082
x I in. .0441 .0445 .2234 .3179
x2 .0436 .0440 .2216 .3154
x3 .0425 .0429 .2169 .3090
x4 .0404 .0408 .2071 .2954
x5 .0371 .0374 .1912 .2730
x6 .0334 .0337 .1733 .2476
x7 .0311 .0314 .1617 .2312
x8 .0311 .0314 .1623 .2320
x9 .0312 .0315 .1625 .2324
x10 .0167 .0169 .0874 .1251

phase angles were used to calculate the amplitude of the vibratory which could be acceptable. A comparison of coupled mode 4 and
twist in the main shafting 101 - 021 in the following cases: the longitudinal mode 1 shows that by neglecting the propeller
coupling, the longitudinal vibration amplitudes would be un-
VIBRATORY T W I S T derpredicted by 48 percent at the propeller and thrust bearing.
CASE AMPLITUDE
This could have serious consequence and could be one reason why
Torsional mode 3 resonance 0.00477 rad the prototype ship experienced unexpected unacceptable lon-
without coupling
Coupled mode 3 resonance 0.00169 rad gitudinal vibration on initial trials. The coupling between the
Coupled mode 4 resonance 0.00268 rad torsional and longitudinal modes can have a significant effect on
the vibratory response.
The coupling reduces the torsional vibration in this case. The
M o d i f i e d case. This analysis is a repeat of the as-built analysis
predominantly torsional mode, coupled mode 3, has a twist am-
using an increased thrust bearing foundation stiffness kl0 = k/
plitude only 35 percent of that obtained neglecting coupling. The
= 30 000 000 lbf/in. This is a threefold increase in the foundation
predominantly longitudinal mode, coupled mode 4, actually
stiffness and represents the ship after the foundation was stif-
produces a higher twist amplitude in the main shafting, but this
fened to increase the lowest longitudinal natural frequency so
is only 56 percent of that obtained neglecting coupling. Including
t h a t it would not be in resonance with a blade rate excitation in
coupling in the analysis might eliminate a torsional overde-
sign. the operating range. The uncoupled torsional natural frequencies
and mode shapes are the same as shown for the as-built case in
The effect of coupling on the longitudinal vibration can be
Table 5. The natural frequencies and mode shapes from the
evaluated by considering the amplitudes in Table 6 at the pro-
TORS.AXL. program for the lowest mode of uncoupled longi-
peller and thrust bearing in the following cases:
tudinal vibration and the third, fourth, and fifth modes of the
THRUST
coupled torsional/longitudinal vibration are given in Table 7. The
PROPELLER BEARING uncoupled longitudinal mode shape is renormalized to permit
CASE AMPLITUDE AMPLITUDE a more direct comparison with coupled mode 4. The increased
Longitudinal mode ] resonance 167 mils 121 mils foundation stiffness raises the lowest natural frequency of un-
without coupling coupled longitudinal vibration to 72.94 rad/sec. With a full-power
Coupled mode 3 resonance 44 mils 31 mils rpm of 106.5, a resonance of this mode with a blade rate excitation
Coupled mode 4 resonance 318 mils 231 mils
would occur outside the operating range. With a larger difference
These values are high due to the 12 percent of steady thrust vi- between the uncoupled torsional third mode (w = 57.414 rad/sec)
b r a t o r y thrust amplitude. Resonance in the predominantly tor- and the uncoupled longitudinal first mode (w = 72.941 rad/sec)
sional coupled mode 3 produces longitudinal vibration levels in this case, the effects of the coupling would be expected to be

266 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

 Table 7 Free vibration results for modified case

mode coupled 3 long'l 1 coupled 4 coupled 5

natural frequency rad/sec 57.403 72.941 74.089 89.687
resonant propeller rpm 91.4 116.1 117.9 142.7

1.000 1.000 1.000

torsional -15.110 -0.164 -33.333
coordinates 1.637 0.011 1.468
1.544 0.010 1.265
0.484 0.006 -15.371
-1.153 -0.028 111.598
mode shapes
-9.717 190.562 190.562 16.868
-9.550 188.334 188.443 16.805
-9.178 182.652 182.880 16.513
longitudinal -8.485 170.991 171.391 15.741
coordinates -7.434 152.154 152.712 14.320
-6.318 131.191 131.832 12.596
-5.632 117.832 118.483 11.430
-5.649 118.385 119.057 11.511
-5.655 118.594 119.274 11.542
-1.541 32.466 32.664 3.178

Table 8 Comparison of mode 3 amplitudes for as-built and modified cases

resonance for mode as-built coupled 3 modified coupled 3

excitation frequency 57.387 57.403

e I rad. .000151 .000311

82 .001592 ,003165
03 .000173 .000343
84 .000163 .000324
85 .000051 .000101
86 .000121 .000242
x I in. .0441 .0184
x2 .0436 .0181
x3 .0425 .0174
x4 .0404 .0161
x5 .0371 .0141
x6 .0334 .0120
x7 .0311 .0107
xg .0311 .0107
x9 .0312 .0107
x10 .0167 .0029

less than in the as-built case. Comparison of the coupled mode
3 in Table 5 and the coupled mode 3 in Table 7 confirms this
expectation. The natural frequency is changed less by the cou-
pling and the mode shape shows less coupling between the tor-
sional and longitudinal motion.
The TAC.RESP. program was used to obtain the vibratory
response of the modified case at the coupled mode 3 natural
frequency of 57.403 rad/sec. These results are given in Table 8
with those for the as-built coupled mode 3 resonance for com-
parison. As expected, the effect of the coupling is less. Since the
coupling reduces the torsional response for this mode, the vi-
bratory twist amplitudes in the main shafting 181 - 821 for the
various cases are
VIBRATORY
TWIST
CASE AMPLITUDE
Torsional mode 3 resonance 0.00477 rad
without coupling
Modified coupled mode 3 resonance 0.00338rad
As-built coupled mode 3 resonance 0.00169 rad
The further separation of the natural frequencies in the modified
case reduces the coupling and thus the coupling reduces the twist
in the main shafting by only 29 percent below that obtained ne-
glecting coupling.
Worst case. The propeller coupling is expected to have the
greatest influence when a torsional natural frequency obtained
neglecting coupling and a longitudinal natural frequency ob-
tained neglecting coupling coincide. To determine how large these
effects might be in a realistic example, the as-built model was
changed by reducing the thrust bearing foundation stiffness klO
to 7 000 000 lbf/in, and increasing the propeller mass about 10
percent to 386.60 lbf s2/in. The uncoupled torsional natural
frequencies are the same as shown for the as-built case in Table
5. The natural frequencies and mode shapes from the TOR-
S.AXL. program for the uncoupled torsional third mode, the
uncoupled longitudinal first mode, and the third and fourth
coupled modes are shown in Table 9. The uncoupled longitudinal
mode shape has been renormalized to permit a more direct
comparison with coupled mode 3. The uncoupled natural
frequencies essentially coincide as a result of the modifications
to the thrust bearing foundation stiffness and the propeller mass.
When the coupling effects are included, the lower natural fre-
quency is reduced to 57.223 rad/sec or a reduction of 0.3 percent.
The higher natural frequency is increased to 58.344 rad/sec or
an increase of 1.7 percent. Both the coupled mode 3 and coupled
mode 4 appear to be a general combination of the uncoupled
torsional mode 3 and the uncoupled longitudinal mode 1. The
coupling effects on the mode shapes are much larger than shown
for the as-built case in Table 5.
The TAC.RESP. program was used to obtain the vibratory
response of the worst-case design in resonance with the uncou-
pled longitudinal natural frequency of 57.346 rad/sec and in
resonance with the coupled mode 3 and mode 4 natural
frequencies of 57.223 and 58.344 rad/sec, respectively. These
results are summarized in Table 10. The uncoupled torsional
results are unchanged in the worst case so the results in the sec-

JULY 1983 267

 Table 9 Free vibration results for worst case
mode coupled 3 long'l I torsional 3 coupled 4
natural frequency rad/sec 57.223 57.346 57.414 58.344
resonant propeller rpm 91.1 91.3 91.4 92.9

1.000 1.000 1.000

torsional -105.625 -14.368 -2.749
coordinates 11.521 1.556 0.288
10.873 1.468 0.271
3.388 0.460 0.087
-8.005 -1.097 -0.218
mode shapes
-1194.783 -1194.783 152.483
-1186.088 -1186.145 151.441
-1163.966 -1164.125 148.730
longitudinal -1118.549 -1118.831 143.082
coordinates -1044.857 -1045.268 133.836
-962.182 -962.696 123.393
-908.888 -909.433 116.627
-911.509 -912.061 116.977
-912.501 -913.053 117.109
-572.026 -572.432 73.474

Table 10 Comparison of forced vibration amplitudes of worst case coupled and

uncoupled longitudinal vibration

case coupled uncoupled long'l coupled coupled

excitation frequency 57.223 57.346 57.800 58.344

01 rad. .000624 .001973 .002711

02 .008737 .009643 .007309
03 .000953 .001030 .000765
04 .000899 .000971 .000720
05 .000280 .000308 .000232
06 .000662 .000747 .000579
Xl in. .1727 •1847 .2791 .3831
x2 .1714 .1834 .2771 .3805
x3 .1682 .1800 .2720 .3737
x4 .1616 .1730 .2616 .3595
x5 .1510 .1616 .2445 .3363
x6 .1390 .1488 .2253 .3100
x7 .1313 .1406 .2129 .2930
x8 .1317 .1410 .2135 .2939
x9 .1319 .1412 .2137 .2q42
x10 .0827 .0885 .1340 .1846

ond column of Table 6 apply to the worst case as well. The tor- case can be seen by considering the amplitudes in Table 10 for
sional amplitudes can be seen to be greatly increased by the the propeller and thrust bearing in the following cases:
coupling in the worst case. The amplitudes and phase angles were
THRUST
used to evaluate the amplitude of the vibratory twist in the main PROPELLER BEARING
shafting 101 - 021 in the following cases: CASE AMPLITUDE AMPLITUDE

VIBRATORY
Longitudinal mode 1 resonance 185 mils 141 mils
TWIST
without coupling
CASE AMPLITUDE
Coupled mode 3 resonance 173 mils 131 mils
Coupled mode 4 resonance 383 mils 293 mils
Torsional mode 3 resonance 0.00477 rad
without coupling Neglecting propeller coupling results in a 52 percent under-
Coupled mode 3 resonance 0.00884 rad prediction of the vibratory amplitude at the propeller and the
Coupled response at ~ = 57.800 rad/sec 0.01150 tad thrust bearing; the actual results are over twice as large as those
Coupled mode 4 resonance 0.00998 rad
found when the coupling is neglected.
A simple search reveals that the maximum twist occurs at an
excitation frequency of about 57.8 rad/sec. These results are also
included in Table 10. Neglecting the propeller coupling effects
Conclusions
results in a 59 percent uuderprediction of the amplitude of twist Acceptable methods now exist for obtaining estimates of the
in the main shafting; the coupled results are 2.41 times larger than propeller inertia coupling and velocity coupling characteristics
those found when the coupling is neglected. which couple the torsional and longitudinal vibration of marine
The effect of coupling on the longitudinal vibration in the worst propulsion shafting systems. Regression equations for estimating
the torsional and longitudinal added mass and damping of Wa-
geningen B-Series 4-, 5-, 6-, and 7-bladed propellers are included
Metric Conversion Table
in the Appendix. These can be used in early design. The PRA-
1 shp = 0.7457 kW MAD program can be used when a detailed propeller design is
1 ft = 0.3048 m available.
l in. = 25.4 mm
1 lbf/in. = 0.1129 N.m T h e propeller coupling does not have a major effect on the
1 rail = 0.0254 mm natural frequencies of the shafting system. In the example sys-

268 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

tem, the largest change between a natural frequency found ne-
glecting coupling and the corresponding natural frequency found
with the coupling included was less than 2 percent. The mode
shapes, however, can exhibit significant changes.
The coupling effects increase as a torsional natural frequency
obtained without coupling and a longitudinal natural frequency
obtained without coupling converge.
The propeller coupling can have a major effect on the forced
vibration amplitudes in torsional and longitudinal vibration. In
the worst-case example, the inclusion of the propeller coupling
increased selected torsional twist amplitudes by a factor of 2.4
and selected longitudinal amplitudes by more than a factor of 2.
The examples also show that the coupling can decrease some
vibration amplitudes by a significant amount. Thus an analysis
including coupling may be necessary and/or desirable even when
the longitudinal criticals are outside the operating range.
With the present capability for estimating propeller coupling
characteristics and analyzing the vibrations of multi-degree-
of-freedom systems, marine propulsion shafting vibration anal-
yses should consider coupled torsional/longitudinal motion.
Acknowledgments
The following have contributed to the development of the
computer programs used here:
• The PRAMAD computer program was developed under the
Maritime Administration University Research Program Contract
No. MA-3-79-SAC-B0012. Professor William S. Vorus of the
Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, The
University of Michigan, and Edward M. Richard, then a graduate
student in the department, made major contributions in its de-
velopment.
• The initial version of the TAC.RESP. computer program
was developed in the summer of 1980 by University of Michigan
graduate students LT Michael M. Ashdown, USCG, L T Michael
A. Robinett, USCG, and LCDR Theodore J. Sampson, USCG.
This program and the TORS.AXL. program were developed for
use in the graduate level marine engineering course NA531 Ma-
rine Propulsion P l a n t Vibrations.
References
1 Long,C. L., "Propellers, Shafting, and Shafting System Vibration
Analysis," Marine Engineering, Chapter 11, SNAME, New York,
1971.
2 Technical and Research Code C5, "Acceptable Vibration of Ma-
rine Steam and Heavy-Duty Gas Turbine Main and Auxiliary Machinery
Plants,' SNAME, Sept. 1976.
3 Rules for Building and Classing Steel Vessels, American Bureau
of Shipping, New York, 1981.
4 McGoldrick, R. T., Ship Vibration, David Taylor Model Basin
Report 1451, Bethesda, Md., Dec. 1960.
5 Lewis,F. M. and Auslander, J., "Virtual Inertia of Propellers,"
Journal of Ship Research, Vol. 9, No. 1, March 1960, pp. 37-46.
6 Wereldsma, R., "Experiments on Vibrating Propeller Models,"
International Shipbuilding Progress, Vol. 12, No. 130, June 1965, pp.
227-234.
7 Wereldsma, R., "Design Stage Prediction Techniques for Ship
Vibration," in Design and Economical Considerations on Shipbuilding
and Shipping, H. Veenman En Zonen, N. V., The Netherlands, 1969.
8 van der Linden, C. A. M., 't Hart, H. H., and Dolfin, E. R., "Tor-
sional-Axial Vibration of Ship's Propulsion System," International
Shipbuilding Progress, Vol. 16, No. 173, Jan. 1969, pp. 16-26.
9 Hylarides, S. and van Gent, W., "Hydrodynamic Reactions to
Propeller Vibrations," Proceediugs, Conference on Operational Aspects
of Propulsion Shafting Systems, London, May 21-22, 1979, pp. 44-55.
10 Parsons, M. G. and Vorus, W. S., "Added Mass and Damping
Estimates for Vibrating Propellers," Proceedings, Propellers '81 Sym-
posium, Virginia Beach, Va., May 26-27, 1981, pp. 273-302.
11 Vassilopoulos, L. and Triantafyllou, M., "Prediction of Propeller
Hydrodynamic Coefficients Using Unsteady Lifting Surface Theory,"
Proceedings, Propellers '81 Symposium, Virginia Beach, Va., May 26-27,
1981, pp. 253-272.
12 Parsons, M. G., Vorus, W. S., and Richard, E. M., "Added Mass
and Damping of Vibrating Propellers," The University of Michigan,
JULY 1983
Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, Report No.
229, Ann Arbor, Mich., Oct. 1980.
13 van Lammeren, W. P. A., van Manen, J. D., and Oosterveld, M.
W. C., "The Wageningen B-Screw Series," Trans. SNAME, Vol. 77, 1969,
pp. 269-317.
14 Salzman, R. H. and Pamidi, P. R., "Machinery Vibrations in
Marine Systems," Proceedings, International Symposium on Marine
Engineering, Tokyo, 1973, pp. 3-4-1 to 3-4-12.
15 Meirovitch, L., Analytical Methods in Vibrations, The Macmillan
Co., New York, 1967, pp. 400-405.
16 Technical and Research Report R-15, "Longitudinal Stiffness of
Main Thrust Bearing Foundations," SNAME, Sept. 1972.
17 Bathe, K.-J. and Wilson, E. L., Numerical Methods in Finite
Element Analysis, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1976, pp.
363-473.
18 Wilkinson, J. H., The Algebraic Eigenvalue Problem, Clarendon
Press, Oxford, U.K., 1965.
19 Tsakonis, S., Breslin, J., and Miller, M., "Correlation and Appli-
cation of an Unsteady Flow Theory for Propeller Forces," Trans.
SNAME, Vol. 75, 1967, pp. 158-193.
20 Greenblatt, J. E., "SKEWOPT: Propeller Skew Optimization
Program User's and Programmer's Documentation," The University of
Michigan, Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering,
Report 204, Ann Arbor, Mich., Aug. 1978.
Appcndix
Torsional and longitudinal added mass and
damping for Wageningen B-Series propellers
The following regression equations were obtained by regressing
lifting-line results obtained using the PRAMAD computer pro-~
gram [12]. The propellers were assumed to be operating at 75
percent of the lightly loaded advance coefficient; that is
J = 0.75 Ja, where Ju yields KT = 0
The propellers were assumed to be vibrating at blade rate; that
is
oJ = 27¢nZ rad/sec
where n is the propeller revolutions per second and Z is the
n u m b e r of blades. The approximate lifting-surface corrections
were obtained by regressing results obtained by Hylarides and
van Gent [9] divided by comparable results obtained using the
PRAMAD program.
For Wageningen B-Series propellers, the geometric aspect ratio
AR is given by
0.22087 Z
A R - - -
Ae/Ao
These estimates should be valid in the following ranges of vari-
ables:
Z = 4, 0.5 ~ P/D <~1.2, 0.4 ~<Ae/Ao <~0.88
Z = 5, 0.5 ~<P/D <~1.2, 0.4 ~<Ae/Ao <~ 1.10
Z = 6, 0.5 ~<P/D ~<1.2, 0.4 ~<Ae/Ao <~ 1.20
Z = 7, 0.5 ~<P/D <~ 1.2, 0.4 ~<Ae/Ao <~ 1.20
L o n g i t u d i n a l a d d e d m a s s mr ~:
roll = p D 3 m u ' LSC(m11') (5i)
where
D = propeller diameter (ft or m)
p = water mass density (lbf s2/ft 4 or kg/m 3)
and
269
 m~: 000~4~+0 ~0(A~) +00~(;) m21'= -0.0005023 + 0.013927 (A~)

+ 0I~4/A~/~
A, o, 000~14~(~)~ °°°~(;) -°.°~°4~/~1~,~o,
0~0~(A~)(;) ~orZ:4 + 0.0056027 (~)~- 0.017030 (~)(~), for Z = 7

m~l: 004~+0~(~)+004~4~(;) LSC(m21')= 0.65348 + 0.28788 (~)

+ 0.39805(AR) -1 - 0.42582(AR)-2
+0~0~(~)~+00004~44(;) ~ -0.61189 (P) (AR) -1 + 0.33373 (P) (AR) -2, for all Z
0~404(A~)(;) ~or~:~
T o r s i o n a l added m a s s m o m e n t of inertia m22:
ml~: 00~+0~0~(~) +00~0~(~) m2z = pD~m22'LSC(m22 ') (53)
+0 1~(~)~ 0000~(;) ~ where
m22' = 0.0030315 - 0.0080782 (A~o~)
010~(~)(~) ~o~Z~
m~ 00~0~+00~4~(~)+00~0(~) °°°~°~(~) +°.°°~41~°r~e/~,~o,
+ 0.00043437 (P)2 + 0.0099715 (~eoe)(P) , forZ = 4
+0 11~(~; 0000~0(~)~
m~' : 000~-000~0~0(~)
00~(A~)(;) ~orZ-~
-°°°~°~(~) +°.°°~°~°r~e/~,~o,
(Ae/IP/, for Z = 5
+ 0.42253(AR) -1 - 0.43911(AR)-2
m~' : 000~-0000~ (~)
-0.46697(P)(AR)-1+O.25124(P)(AR) -2, for all Z
ooo~oooo(~)+ ° °°~4~ r~/~,~o,
T o r s i o n a l / l o n g i t u d i n a l inertia c o u p l i n g m21: + 0.00029060 (P ) 2 + 0.0073650 (~o)
(P),Ae forZ = 6
rn21 = pD 4 m21' LSC(m21') (52)
m22"=O.OO21372-O.OO56155(A-~o )
where
m21" = 0.0012195 + 0.017664 (A~eoe) ooo~(~) +ooo~4~/~e/~
,~o,
ooo~(~) -00~0i~/~e/~
,~o, +oooo~o~(~)~+oooo4~o~(~)(~) forZ = 7

+ 0.0094301 (P)2 - 0.026146 (~eoe)(P), forZ = 4

+ 0.60294(AR) -1 - 0.56159(AR)-2
-0.80696 (P) (AR)-I + 0.45806 (P) (AR) -2, for all Z
~AoJ
- 0"0055064 (P) - 0"021012/Ae/2

+000~0 00~40(~)(~) ~o~:~ Longitudinal d a m p i n g cll:

Cll = pnD3clI'LSC(cll ') (54)
m~ 0000~+00~4~(~) where

°°°~1~(;) -°°1~4~/~/~,~o~ ¢11I = 0.32017 + 2.9375 -0.908~4 -1.9719(A~/~

~Ao]
+000~4~(~)~ 001~0~(~) (~) ~orZO + 0.53868 - 0.65404 , for Z = 4

270 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

 c~ o~o~o~+~o~(~)o~o~(~)~(~)~ LsC(c21') : 0.80988- 9 63077(AR)-2 + 1.3909 (-~) (AR)-I

+o~(~)~ o~o~(~) (~) z~ + 7 . 5 4 2 4 ( A R ) - 3 - 1 5 . 6 8 9 (P) ( A R ) - 3 - 8 . 0 0 9 7 ( A R ) -4

A~ _ 0.44113 (~) - 1.5696 r~

c11' = 0.11113 + 2.9831 ()
~oo ~no] ~
Torsional damping c22:
+o~oo(~)~ oo~o(~)(~) ~o~o c22 = pnD5c22'LSC(c22 ') (56)
c11' = 0.03407 + 2.9353 ~o (~e) o~o(~) X~e~~Ao] where

c22' = -0.035124 + 0.081977 (A~o~)

+ 0.17571 - 0.65123 , for Z = 7
+ 0"032644 (P) - 0"041863/Ae/2
[Ao]
LSC(c~') -- 0.82004 - 0~67190(AR)-~ + 1.3913 (~) (AR)-I

+~4~ ~ ~o~(~)~ ~ ~ o ~ 4 + 0.0060813 (~)~- 0.037170 (~)(~), for Z = 4

22 = -0.030935 + 0.069382 Ae + 0.027392

+ 19.121 (P) (AR) -4, for all Z

oo~,~o~IAel2..]_ ooo~(~) ~
Torsional/longitudinal velocity coupling c21: oo~(~)(~) ~or~
C21 = pnD4c21'LSC(c21 ') (55)
22 = -0.027873 + 0.061760 Ae + 0.023242
where

c21'=0"13925-0"48179 (~e)
~oo - 0 . 1 4 1 7 5 (~) +0.27711/Ae/2 °°~°°~r~/~+
~,o~ °°°~°°4~(~)~
[no]
- 0.0094311 (~)~+ 0.17407 (~)(~), for Z = 4 - 0.011641 (A~oe)(P), forZ = 6

(~e)
c21' = 0.14558 - 0.44319 Aoo - 0.17025
(~) + 0.24558 ~e~
~Ao] c22' = -0.024043 + 0.051680 (A~-~)+ 0.018585 (P)

+ 0.014798 (P)2 + 0.12226 ( ~ } (P), forZ =5 - 0"031175/Ae/2

[Ao] + 0"0075424 (P) 2

c21' = 0.14228 - 0.41189 (~oe) - 0.17770 (P) + 0.22644 (~oe)2 ooo~o~4~(~:)(~) ~or~
+ 0.026626 + 0.083269 for Z = 6 LSC(c221) = 0 . 8 2 7 6 1 - 0.41165(AR)-2 + 1.2196 (P) (AR) -1

c21' = 0,14003 - 0.37358 (A~) - 0.18904 (P} + 0.20133/A~/2 +~.~ 1~o~(~)~t~ ~ o ~ 4

~no]
+ 0.040056 + 0.045135 , for Z = 7

JULY 1983 271