Sei sulla pagina 1di 18

ITTC – Recommended 7.

5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 1 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

Table of Contents

3.5.3 Speed.................................9
1 PURPOSE OF PROCEDURE……...…2
3.5.4 Measured quantities……...9
2 PARAMETERS…………………..……2 3.6 Data Reduction and Analysis.........9
2.1 Data Reduction Equations…….…2 3.6.1 Analysis of model scale
2.2 Definition of Variables……………2 results…………………….9
3 DESCRIPTION OF PROCEDURE…..3 3.6.2 Extrapolation to full
3.1 Model and Installation....................3 scale..................................10
3.1.1 Model.................................3 3.6.2.1 Form factor....................12
3.1.2 Installation..........................4 3.6.2.2 Model-Ship Correlation 12
3.2 Measurement Systems.....................5 3.7 Documentation...............................12
3.3 Instrumentation...............................5 3.8 Special Considerations..................12
3.3.1 Resistance...........................6 3.8.1 Air Resistance..................12
3.3.2 Speed..................................6 3.8.2 Appendage Effects……...13
3.3.3 Sinkage and Trim………...6 3.8.3 Wetted Area Estimation...14
3.3.4 Temperature.......................6 3.8.4 Spray Resistance..............15
3.3.5 Air cushion pressure……...6 3.8.5 Blockage..........................15
3.3.6 Air cushion flow rate……..6 3.8.6 Captive Resistance Tests..15
3.4 Calibrations......................................6 3.8.6.1 Fully Captured Force
3.4.1 General remarks 6 Measurements and
3.4.2 Resistance Dynamometer...7 Simulation.....................16
3.4.3 Sinkage and Trim 3.8.6.2 Partially Captured Force
Transducers………………7 Measurements ...............16
3.4.4 Air cushion pressure……...7 3.8.6.3 Automatic Attitude
3.4.5 Air cushion flow rate……..7 Control Method.............16
3.4.6 Speed..................................7 4 VALIDATION………………………..16
3.4.7 Thermometer……………..8 4.1 Uncertainty Analysis.....................16
3.5 Test Procedure and Data 4.2 Benchmark Tests...........................17
Acquisition.......................................8
3.5.1 Method...............................8 5 REFERENCES………………………..17
3.5.2 Range and Interval………8

Updated by Approved
Specialist Committee: Procedures for Resis-
tance, Propulsion and Propeller Open Water 23rd ITTC 2002
Tests of 23rd ITTC 2002
Date Date
ITTC – Recommended 7.5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 2 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

High Speed Marine Vehicle (HSMV)


Resistance Test

1 PURPOSE OF PROCEDURE Appendage Resistance Coefficient


RApp
CApp =
The purpose of the procedure is to ensure ρ
consistency of methodology and the acquisition SV 2
2
of correct results for the resistance tests of
high-speed marine vehicles (HSMV). High V
Speed Marine Vehicles are for this purpose Froude Number Fr =
defined to be vessels with a design speed corre- gL
sponding to a Froude number above 0.45,
and/or a speed above 3.7 ∇ 1/6 (m/s) and/or V
Depth Froude Number Frh =
where high trim angles are expected or for dy- gh
namically supported vessels.

2 PARAMETERS VL
Reynolds number Re =
ν
2.1 Data Reduction Equations
2.2 Definition of Variables
R
Total resistance Coefficient CT = 1 T 2
2 ρ SV Total resistance (N) RT
Appendage resistance (N) RApp
Residual Resistance Coefficient Speed (m/s) V
CR = CTM − CFM − CAAM − CAppM Air Speed (m/s) VA
Running sinkage (m) zV
Static trim (m) tS
Frictional Resistance Coefficient-
Running trim (m) tV
ITTC Model-Ship Correlation Line
Running (dynamic) trim angle (°) θV
0.075
CF = Length on static waterline (m) LWL
( log10 Re − 2 ) Mean wetted length, underway (m) LM
Representative length [Normally
Air Resistance Coefficient LWL for Fr and LM for Re] (m) L
ρ V2 A C Tank water temperature (0C) t
CAA = A A 2V D Depth of water (m) h
ρV S
Wetted surface area (dynamic
or static) (m2) S
ITTC – Recommended 7.5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 3 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

Air cushion pressure (N/m2) Pc lems with other types of HSMV are also con-
Air cushion flow rate (m3/s) Qc sidered.
Moulded displacement volume
of the model (m3) ∇
Transverse section area 3.1 Model and Installation
2
(for air resistance) (m ) AV
Model-ship correlation allowance (-) CA 3.1.1 Model
Air drag coefficient (-) CD
Scale ratio (-) λ The model should be manufactured accord-
Form factor (-) (1+k) ing to the ITTC Recommended Procedure 7.5-
Gravity constant (m/s2) g 01-01-01 Ship Models, with particular attention
Mass density of water (kg/m3 ) ρ being paid to model manufacturing tolerances,
Mass density of air (kg/m3) ρA surface finish, appendage manufacture and the
Kinematic viscosity (m2/s) ν size and positioning of turbulence stimulation.
It should be noted that compared with conven-
Subscript M signifies model scale value tional displacement ship models, many HSMVs
Subscript S signifies full scale ship require special attention to minimising the
value model weight. This is especially the case for
models that are going to be used for propulsion
tests or for models to be fitted with append-
3 DESCRIPTION OF PROCEDURE ages.
In these cases the model should generally
The testing of resistance of HSMV is in be as large as possible for the size of the labo-
many respects very similar to testing the resis- ratory and the maximum speed of the towing
tance of conventional displacement ships. The carriage. The geosim model tests reported in
main differences are related to: the 19th ITTC, 1990, provide guidance on the
likely practical limiting features of model size.
• Dynamic lift and trim is more important
• Air resistance is more important, and the In addition to what is stated in ITTC Rec-
effects of air resistance might influence ommended Procedure 7.5-01-01-01, Ship
trim Models, it is recommended that the model be
• Scale effects on lifting surfaces and ap- equipped with a superstructure with the same
pendages can be a problem basic shape and main dimensions as that of the
ship. (The purpose and alternatives to the use
There are many different types of HSMV, of a superstructure are discussed in section
some of which require special test procedures. 3.8.1). Adequate grid reference lines must be
The primary focus of this procedure is on semi- applied for estimating dynamic wetted area.
displacement mono-hulls and catamarans as
well as planing hulls. Where possible the pro- Boundary layer turbulence stimulation is
cedure is kept general enough to suit a wider recommended when the Reynolds number is
range of vessel types, although special prob- less than 5x106 based on hull length. For mod-
els tested solely at higher Reynolds numbers,
ITTC – Recommended 7.5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 4 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

turbulence stimulation might be omitted. Rey- 3.1.2 Installation


nolds number should be based on mean or ef-
fective wetted length. For tests where Reynolds The application of the tow force should be
numbers below 5x106 are unavoidable, a turbu- such that it resembles the direction of the pro-
lent boundary layer should be stimulated. Refer pulsion force as closely as possible. This is in
to ITTC Recommended Procedure 7.5-01-01- order to avoid artificial trim effects due to the
01 Ship Models for a description of alternative tow force. The preferred way of doing this is to
means of turbulence stimulation. The use of tow in the elongation and the direction of the
trip wires is not recommended on high speed propeller shaft. If this cannot be accomplished,
models due to the risk of air suction. For ves- then the artificial trim moments introduced by
sels with significant change in running attitude the towing should be corrected for by an ap-
with speed, great care must be taken in the propriate shift in the LCG.
placement of the turbulence stimulation. Test
runs must be carried out if there are doubts The model should be attached to the meas-
about the placement. uring head of the resistance dynamometer by a
connection which can transmit and measure
The resistance of appendages is often an only a horizontal tow force.
important and difficult question for HSMVs.
This question is discussed in more detail in Guides may be fitted to prevent the model
section 3.8.2, but the following basic approxi- from yawing or swaying: these should not re-
mate rule is offered: Appendages not used for strain the model in any other direction of
producing lift or altering the trim could be left movement, nor be able to impose any force or
off the model and the computed resistance of moment on the model which would cause it to
these appendages added in the extrapolation to roll or heel. The arrangement of any such
full scale. Appendages required for the propul- guides that include sliding or rolling contacts
sion test (if such a test is to be carried out) should be such as to introduce the least possi-
must be present. For small models it is advis- ble friction forces. The model should be posi-
able to leave out appendages following the tioned such that it is in the centreline of the
above rule in order to avoid problems with tank and parallel to the tank walls.
laminar separation. For large models it can be
beneficial to include appendages, at least the If any instruments carried in the model are
ones located in the wake affected area in the aft linked to the carriage by flexible cables, great
part of the model. Turbulence stimulation is care should be taken to ensure that the cables
recommended for appendages penetrating do not impose any force on the model in the
through the boundary layer of the model. running condition; in practice the cables should
therefore hang vertically from the carriage.
The size of HSMV appendages is often too Care should also be taken to balance any in-
small to obtain a Reynolds number of 5x106. In struments that must have attachments to both
such cases, turbulence stimulation on the ap- the model and the carriage (e.g. mechanical
pendages might be a reasonable solution. trim recorders).
ITTC – Recommended 7.5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 5 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

3.2 Measurement Systems


Fig 1 shows a typical measurement system:

ENVIRONMENTAL
CARRIAGE HULL MODEL CONDITIONS

SPEED SINKAGE and


RESISTANCE TEMPERATURE
MEASUREMENT TRIM
DYNAMOMETER MEASUREMENT
TACHOMETER/ MEASUREMENT
THERMOMETER
PROBE DEVICES

RESISTANCE / SINKAGE TANK WATER


MODEL SPEED
EXTERNAL and TEMPERATURE
TOW FORCE TRIM

SIGNAL CONDITIONING and


DATA ACQUISITION

COMPUTER

Figure 1 Typical measurement system

• Water temperature (for calculation of vis-


The following quantities are measured: cosity)
• Model speed
• Total resistance
• Sinkage fore and aft (or running trim and 3.3 Instrumentation
sinkage)
• Dynamic wetted surface area (for models The quoted bias accuracies are for indica-
with significant change in wetted area) tive purposes only. Uncertainty analysis should
• Air cushion pressure (for models with air be used to derive actual requirements.
cushion)
• Air flow rate (for models with air cushion)
ITTC – Recommended 7.5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 6 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

3.3.1 Resistance
The sinkage should be measured to within
The resistance dynamometer should meas- 1.0 mm. If the trim is measured directly, rather
ure the horizontal tow force to within 0.2% of than deduced from a measurement of sinkage
maximum resistance or 0.05 N, whichever is fore and aft, it should be measured to an accu-
the larger. This does not necessarily imply that racy of 0.1 deg.
the resistance itself is measured within the
same tolerance of its true value.
3.3.4 Temperature
3.3.2 Speed
The water temperature should be measured
Ideally the speed of the model through the at a depth near half of the model draught using
water should be measured directly throughout a thermometer.
the measuring run. Since this is in general im-
practical, one of the following two methods
may be employed: 3.3.5 Air cushion pressure

(i) the speed of the towing carriage rela- The air cushion pressure (if measured)
tive to the ground should be measured. should be measured with an accuracy of 1% of
the average (designed) air cushion pressure.
(ii) the speed of the towing carriage rela-
tive to the water should be measured by
a current meter far in front of the 3.3.6 Air cushion flow rate
model. In this case the current meter
wake and waves should be minimised. The air cushion flow rate should be detect-
able to within 10% of the mean (design) air
The speed of the model should be measured to flow rate. The air cushion flow rate is often
within 0.1% of the maximum speed or to detected through the use of a calibration dia-
within 3 mm/sec, whichever is the larger. gram from the measured pressure and fan
speed.

3.3.3 Sinkage and Trim


3.4 Calibrations
Sinkage fore and aft may be measured with
mechanical guides, potentiometers, encoders, 3.4.1 General remarks
LDVTs or with remote (laser or ultrasonic)
distance meters; the running trim is then All devices used for data acquisition should
calculated from the measured running sinkage be calibrated regularly. For calibration, the
fore and aft. Alternatively, the running trim measured quantities should be either substi-
may be measured directly using an angular tuted by calibrated weights and pulses or
measuring device. checked by already calibrated other measuring
ITTC – Recommended 7.5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 7 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

devices. The range of the calibration should 3.4.4 Air cushion pressure
include at least the range of values to be meas-
ured in the experiment. Calibration diagrams, The air pressure sensor should be calibrated
where the measured quantities (output values) against a well-known pressure, either by use of
are plotted versus the calibration units (input another pressure sensor that is already cali-
units), may be useful to check the calibration brated, or against a known height of water col-
itself as well as the linearity of the instruments. umn. (A mercury column can be used, but it is
Calibration should generally be in accordance then harder to obtain an accurate reading)
with ITTC Quality Manual Standard Procedure
7.6-01-01. 3.4.5 Air cushion flow rate

The calibrations of the resistance dyna- If the air flow rate in the experiment is go-
mometer and the sinkage and/or trim sensors ing to be found from measurement of cushion
should be checked immediately prior to the pressure and fan rotational speed, then calibra-
testing. The calibrations should preferably in- tion curves for the fan(s) must be determined as
clude as much of the measurement chain as part of the calibration. A calibrated flow rate
possible (e.g. amplifier, filter, A/D converter). meter is needed, or a venturi meter or orifice
If the check indicates that the required accura- type instrument must be constructed. The fan is
cies cannot be met, the calibration should be then run at different rotational speeds and the
renewed or the instrument replaced and the delivered pressure must be varied using a vari-
check repeated. Daily checking of a pulse able aperture or some other method. The deliv-
counter type speed measurement device is usu- ered flow rate is measured for each combina-
ally not required. Instead, the check on this tion of backpressure and fan rate of revolu-
device is covered by calibrations carried out at tions. Two-variable calibration curves may
regular intervals. then be constructed. The rotational speed sen-
sor on the fan should be calibrated, for instance
using a pulse counter with verified accuracy.
3.4.2 Resistance Dynamometer

The calibration of the resistance dyna- 3.4.6 Speed


mometer should be carried out by the use of
calibrated weights as an input to the instru- The calibration of the carriage speed will
ment. depend mainly on how the carriage speed is
measured. The carriage speed should be
checked regularly and respective records
3.4.3 Sinkage and Trim Transducers should be stored.

The calibration of linear measuring devices


should be performed with a calibrated ruler.
Angular measuring devices should be cali-
brated against an accurate angular scale.
ITTC – Recommended 7.5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 8 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

3.4.7 Thermometer There should be sufficient waiting time be-


tween consecutive runs to achieve similar con-
Thermometers should be calibrated ditions for each of the runs and to obtain con-
according to common standards and/or sistency in results. This waiting time will de-
following the advice of the manufacturer. pend on the size and type of model, model
speed and test facility. The waiting time should
be recorded.

3.5 Test Procedure and Data Acquisition In some cases it is necessary to modify the
LCG to correct for artificial trim effects from
3.5.1 Method resistance components that influence the trim
but do not follow the Froude scaling laws. Ex-
Before the test begins, zero readings of all amples of such resistance are air resistance,
instruments are taken. Zeros should be checked appendage resistance and viscous resistance,
between runs to ensure no drift has occurred. when the propulsion force is applied far from
The model is towed at speeds giving the same the centre of viscous resistance, such as for a
Froude numbers as for the full scale ship. vessel to be propelled by air propellers. When
the tow-point is not in the extension of the pro-
The model speed is selected and the model pulsor line of thrust, it is then also necessary to
accelerated to that speed. If the model has been modify the LCG for the trim effect of the total
held during initial acceleration, it should be model resistance.
released smoothly as soon as the selected speed
has been reached. It is recommended that the An alternative approach to correcting for ar-
data acquisition should begin not later than tificial trim effects would be to apply the tow-
after releasing the model or a steady speed has ing force in such a way that its lever also pro-
been reached. The mean values are derived duces the correct longitudinal trimming mo-
afterwards from the time series, selecting a ment.
time window with the criterion that, after the
mean measurement values have stabilised, a
3.5.2 Range and Interval
period of at least five oscillations should be
used for the average that is entered into the
result. Maximum and minimum values together The speed range should extend from at least
with mean and standard deviations should be 5% below the lowest speed at which reliable
stored for each run. This process is repeated at data is required to at least 5% above the highest
other selected speeds covering the required speed required. This range should be covered
range, avoiding continuous progression from by a suitable number of speeds. Care should be
one limit to the other. For example, runs at al- taken to ensure that there is sufficient number
ternate speeds from the lowest speed to the of speeds to define humps or hollows and other
highest followed by the highest speed to the rapidly changing features of the curve.
lowest filling in the gaps.
ITTC – Recommended 7.5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 9 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

3.5.3 Speed 3.5.4 Measured quantities

The following aspects should be noted During each run, the measured values of
when measuring speed: speed, resistance, sinkage and trim should be
• Attention should be paid to residual cur- recorded continuously.
rents in the towing tank near the surface,
which are caused by previous tests. It is not Water temperature should be measured at a
unusual to exclude the first run of the day if depth near half of the model draught. If there is
no active artificial circulating device is a non-homogeneous temperature in the tank it
available. This has however not always should be recorded. Temperature measure-
shown to be necessary and can be tested ments should be recorded at the beginning and
with uncertainty analysis. For more infor- end of each test sequence
mation see Uncertainty Analysis, Example
for Resistance test, provided in QM 7.5-02-
02-02. 3.6 Data Reduction and Analysis

• It is essential that the speed of the model The speed, resistance, sinkage, trim, pres-
through the water should be constant sure and other continuously recorded quantities
throughout that part of the test run during of the test should be the mean value derived
which resistance is measured, and for a sig- from an integration of the instantaneously
nificant distance before measuring begins. measured values over the same measuring in-
Steadiness of carriage speed is an essential terval, with the zero measurement being sub-
element in achieving steady model speed, tracted from the averaged values.
but is not necessarily sufficient since the
rate of change of the initial acceleration and Running wetted surface must normally be
the moment and manner of release of the derived manually from underwater or above-
model may interact with the model- water photographs, video recordings, paint
dynamometer system and cause it to oscil- smear techniques or from visual observations
late. during the test runs as described in Section
3.8.3.
• During the measuring run, the carriage
speed should normally not vary by more Total resistance and residual resistance co-
than 0.1% of the mean speed or 3 mm/s, efficients, together with Froude Number, are
whichever is the larger. The cyclic charac- calculated for each speed using the data reduc-
teristics of the carriage speed control sys- tion equations given in Section 2.1.
tem should be such as not to synchronise
with the natural frequency of the model dy-
namometer system. 3.6.1 Analysis of model scale results

Resistance RTM measured in the resistance


tests is expressed in the non-dimensional form
ITTC – Recommended 7.5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 10 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

3.6.2 Extrapolation to full scale


R
CTM = 1 TM 2
2 ρ M S MVM
The total resistance coefficient of a HSMV
without bilge keels is
It should be noted that the observed running
wetted surface area will normally be used for CTS = CR + CFS + CAAS + CAppS + CA
HSMVs, see Section 3.8.3. The speed should,
if necessary, be corrected for blockage by where
methods such as those described in Section
3.8.5. Values of water density and viscosity CFS is the frictional coefficient of the ship
should be determined according to ITTC Stan- according to the ITTC-1957 model-ship
dard Procedure 7.5-02-01-03. correlation line

The residual resistance coefficient CR is calcu- CR is the residual resistance calculated from
lated without the use of a form factor (1+k): the total and frictional coefficients of the
model in the resistance tests.
CR = CTM − CFM − CAAM − CAppM
CAA, is the air resistance
where CFM is derived from the ITTC –1957 ρ V2 A C
CAA = A A 2 V D
correlation line for the model, CAAM is the ρV S
model wind resistance coefficient, and CAppM is
the model appendage resistance coefficient (if The equation for air resistance coefficient
appendages are present and their resistance CAA is used for both model (CAAM) and full
scaled separately). CAppM can be found by cal- scale (CAAS). For model scale the wind velocity
culation or from the difference in resistance by VA might be different from the through water
testing with and without appendages. velocity V due to carriage displacement effects.
In addition, the wind area AV and the drag coef-
The CR or CT curve is the best basis for ficient CD might be different in model and full
judging if a sufficient number of test points scale. However, if VA=V, and AV and CD are
have been obtained in order to define humps considered to be equal in model and full scale,
and hollows. The model resistance curve then the wind resistance might be left out of the
should be faired in order to facilitate reliable extrapolation process.
interpolation to obtain the resistance at the re-
quired speeds. The smoothing should be car- CAppS is the appendage resistance coeffi-
ried out with care in order not to remove cient of the ship. It can be found from calcula-
humps and hollows. An acceptance criterion tions, using the same method as for finding
for the test might be derived based on the scat- CAppM but at full scale Re. If CAppM is found
ter in the CR or CT curve. from testing with and without appendages, then
CAppS should be found from extrapolation of
CAppM using an acceptable friction line.
ITTC – Recommended 7.5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 11 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

it is recommended that a correlation coefficient


CA is the model-ship correlation allowance of zero be used. Alternatively, if the hull is of a
type for which correlation is available, the hull
The full scale ship resistance is then resistance can be corrected with the applicable
correlation coefficient, while the foil system
RTS = 1
2 ρS VS2 S λ 2 CTS drag should be added without a correction due
to correlation.
where S is equivalent to the observed model
wetted surface area. Surface Effect Ships (SES) – For SES craft,
it is common practice to estimate resistance
The following specific considerations can components due to hull friction and aerody-
be made for SWATH, Hydrofoils, SES, and namic forces and then deduce the residual re-
ACV. sistance, which includes the friction and in-
duced drag of the seals. Froude scaling of
SWATH – Separate friction coefficients are speed is based on the cushion length. For cal-
determined for the struts and submerged hulls culating friction resistance it is recommended
based on the Reynolds number of each compo- that a Reynolds number based on the length of
nent. Form factors for cylindrical hulls, struts the wetted sidewall is used. Underwater pho-
and control surfaces have been derived using tography is recommended for estimating wet-
theoretical and experimental methods (Gran- ted surface area of the inner sidewalls. Aerody-
ville, 1976) which may be used if no other namic resistance is best estimated from wind
source is available. Correlation allowances for tunnel tests. If that is not a possibility, aerody-
SWATHs have been proposed over a wide namic resistance can be approximated using a
range from 0.0000 to 0.0005. drag coefficient of approximately 0.5 applied
to the entire frontal area of the vehicle. Testing
Hydrofoils – For hydrofoils, the hull resis- with a superstructure covering the entire model
tance should be analysed like the resistance of is recommended in order to model the impor-
an ordinary HSMV without foils. The foil sys- tant trim effect of the air lift and drag.
tem resistance should be computed for full
scale Reynolds number, or expanded from tests Air Cushion Vehicles (ACV) – It is com-
at a Reynolds number high enough to ensure mon practice to Froude scale all of the resis-
fully turbulent flow. In case the foil system was tance measured on an ACV model except for
present during the towing tests, the drag of the that of fully wetted appendages. Stevens and
model foil system must then be subtracted from Prokhorov (Savitsky et al., 1981) defended this
the total resistance to get the bare hull resis- approach with the premise that the unrealisti-
tance. In this case it is strongly advised that the cally high friction resistance of the model’s
foil system resistance be measured during the wetted skirt would be partially offset by lower
towing tests, as uncertainty regarding the ex- spray resistance of the model. It is recom-
tent of turbulent flow on the foils in model mended that fully wetted appendages should be
scale will make it difficult to calculate the drag treated the same as for other HSMVs.
in model scale. Due to lack of correlation data,
ITTC – Recommended 7.5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 12 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

3.6.2.1 Form factor • Particulars of the towing tank including


The use of the 1978 powering performance length, breadth and water depth, together
procedure implies the use of a form factor with the method of towing the model in-
(1 + k ) . Particular problems arise with esti- cluding position and angle of towing force.
• Test date
mates of (1 + k ) for HSMVs in that low speed
• Parametric data for the test:
tests are not normally reliable or sufficient. Water temperature
Many HSMVs employ transom sterns, leading Water density
to a confused flow aft of the transom at low Kinematic viscosity of the water
speeds and wetted surface area generally Form factor (even if (1+k)=1.0 is ap-
changes with speed, resulting in a change in plied, this should be stated)
true (1 + k ) with speed. For this reason it is Correlation factor (even if a correlation
currently recommended that, for consistency factor is not applied, this should be
and for the time being, form factors for stated)
HSMVs continue to be assumed (1 + k ) = 1.0 . Air resistance coefficients for model
and full scale
3.6.2.2 Model-Ship Correlation • For each speed, the following data should
The proposed extrapolation method re- be given as a minimum:
quires an established model-ship correlation, Resistance of the model
partly because the form factor is set to zero. It Sinkage fore and aft, or sinkage and
is not possible to give general guidance to what trim
this correlation factor should be, but is left in- Dynamic wetted surface area (if consid-
stead to each facility to establish its own corre- ered)
lation factor. The extrapolation method adopted Air cushion pressure (if applicable)
should be documented clearly in the test report. Air cushion flow rate (if applicable)

3.7 Documentation 3.8 Special Considerations

3.8.1 Air Resistance


The results from the test should be collated
in a report which should contain at least the
following information: This is an important area to address for the
• Model specification: testing of HSMVs. However, given the differ-
Identification (model number or similar) ences in physical characteristics of each facility
Loading condition it is not possible to propose a single testing
Turbulence stimulation method method that will provide identical results in
Model scale each facility. Factors such as the size of the
Main dimensions and hydrostatics, in- carriage and permeability of its structure are
cluded static wetted surface area (see difficult to quantify but can significantly affect
recommendations of ITTC Standard the flow of air above the model as the carriage
Procedure 7.5-01-01 Ship Models) travels down the tank.
ITTC – Recommended 7.5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 13 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

well documented in the test report so that users


The speed at which air resistance becomes of the test data can make their own estimates of
significant varies with the facility, towing ar- air effects if they wish. When estimates of air
rangement and vehicle type. If it is decided that resistance are made by staff members at the test
air resistance is insignificant for a particular facility, the method used, including details such
HSMV model test, the justification for that us frontal cross section area and drag coeffi-
decision should be documented in the test re- cient should be documented in the test report.
port. Drag coefficients typically range from 0.3- 1.0.
Since HSMVs such as planing boats are ex-
When air resistance is considered to be sig- tremely sensitive to trim, estimates of the ef-
nificant, wind tunnel tests provide the best fects of aerodynamic forces on trim should be
source of information since the model can be made and documented in the same manner as
tested at or close to the correct Reynolds num- for air resistance.
ber. However, for most test programmes, the
expense of wind tunnel tests can be cost pro- The recommended method of accounting
hibitive. A practical alternative is to tow the for aerodynamic effects on trim, which are not
model, fitted with a superstructure, above the properly taken into account by a modelled su-
water surface. Corrections can then be made to perstructure on the model, is to calculate the
account for Reynolds number effects based on difference in bow-up or bow-down moment
the wind speed measured under the towing car- between the model and full-scale vehicle by
riage and resistance contributed by the nor- assuming centres of aerodynamic pressure and
mally-submerged portion of the hull. Since hydrodynamic pressure. These forces are then
ship superstructures are in general relatively balanced against the towing force and the re-
bluff, the Reynolds number effects on drag are sulting moment converted to an effective shift
often moderate. This would confirm that the in longitudinal centre of gravity.
most straightforward way of minimising the
errors introduced by air resistance is to fit the
model with a modelled superstructure during 3.8.2 Appendage Effects
the tests.
It is important to make adequate corrections
Before making air resistance corrections it for appendage effects on HSMV model test
is important to measure the actual airspeed be- results. Two methods are commonly used to
neath the carriage, in the area the model will be account for appendage effects:
tested. These measurements can be made with- (i) Testing the bare hull and then sepa-
out the model in place if the model cross sec- rately accounting for the lift and drag of
tion is small compared with the cross section of individual components using analytical
the air space housing the tank. Air speed meas- methods
urements should be made over the speed range (ii) Testing the hull with and without ap-
of interest with the carriage configured as it pendages and expanding the values
will be when tests are conducted. The air speed based on the local Reynolds number of
measurements and physical features of the each component.
above-water portion of the model should be
ITTC – Recommended 7.5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 14 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

Testing both with and without appendages get the hull resistance at the draught and trim
has the advantage of providing more informa- that matches the computed (or tested) lift and
tion for expanding the test data using different drag of the foil system. A more thorough dis-
methods. Trim moments caused by appendage cussion of this is given in the report of the
forces not correctly represented in the experi- Committee for Testing of HSMV of the 22nd
ment should be accounted for using equivalent ITTC (1999).
shifts in centre of gravity location and dis-
placement. If these corrections are made after
the tests are completed, the results can be ob-
tained by interpolating between results from 3.8.3 Wetted Area Estimation
tests with different centre of gravity locations.
A method for setting up test programmes with In cases where wetted surface area varies
the intent of making corrections at a later time significantly with speed, which is quite fre-
was proposed by Hoyt & Dipper (1989). quent with HSMVs, then running wetted sur-
face area (WSA) should be estimated for each
HSMVs with lift-producing appendages different speed. Possible methods include:
have the added complication of Reynolds num-
ber effects on lift. One approach for addressing • visual observations from outside model
scale effects of lift-producing appendages is to • visual observations from inside model
modify the section shape or angle of attack of • above water photography or video
the model appendage so that the lift character- • underwater photography or video
istics of the model appendage better represent • insoluble paint techniques
those of the full-scale vehicle. Another way of
• water soluble paint techniques
dealing with the problem is to adjust the
• electrical wetting probes
amount of ballast in the model to account for
the scale effect on lift, but then one must re-
Surface tension may have an effect on
member also to correct for error introduced to
WSA, as discussed in some detail in the pro-
the induced drag.
ceedings of the 18th ITTC (1987). Surface ten-
sion leads to a different form of spray between
Also, for lift-producing appendages, there is
model and full scale, the model spray appear-
the choice of either to test with the appendage,
ing like a sheet of water rather than droplets as
correcting for scale effects on lift and drag, or
at full scale. For this reason, separation of the
to test without the appendage and correct for
spray sheet at model scale is delayed and the
the computed (or separately tested) lift and
WSA tends to become relatively larger with
drag of the appendage. When a hydrofoil vessel
decreasing model size and model speed. Mini-
is tested without the main hydrofoil system it
misation of scale effects due to surface tension
will usually be most practical to test the hull
can be achieved with the use of larger models,
fixed in heave and pitch at a range of draughts
higher speeds, and the fitting of model spray
and trims, measuring the forces in the vertical
rails which correctly simulate full scale rails
plane in addition to the resistance. When calcu-
and which can aid the correct determination of
lating the combined resistance of hull and foils
WSA.
it is then required to interpolate the results to
ITTC – Recommended 7.5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 15 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

the model approaches or coincides with the


When making estimates of WSA and wet- critical depth speed of the tank, i.e. Frh = 1.0.
ted length, a distinction is made between the Blockage was addressed for different types of
area covered by spray and that covered by solid HSMVs by Savitsky, Müller-Graf and others,
water. It is common practice to disregard the and these are summarised as follows:
viscous drag of spray-covered areas and to ac-
count for only the viscous drag of the area wet- For planing hulls, Savitsky stated that wall
ted by solid flow. This practice is questionable effects are believed to be minimal if the tank
but the flow in the spray region is extremely width is at least seven times the model beam.
complex and no alternative practices are For semi-displacement hulls and hydrofoils,
known. Müller-Graf stated that tank depth should be
greater than 0.8 times the model length and the
For SWATHs it is standard practice to tank width should be greater than two times the
measure wetted area separately for the hulls model length.
and struts. The appropriate Reynolds number is
later used to analyse the viscous resistance of For SWATHs, van Oossanen stated that
each component separately. This procedure is blockage corrections for conventional ships can
also used for trimarans, where the length of the be used at Froude numbers below 0.35. At
side hulls is different from that of the main higher speeds, blockage effects can be esti-
hull. mated using three dimensional wave resistance
Based on the need for better accuracy and calculations for the situation with the model in
representation of the correct physics, it is rec- a tank.
ommended that running WSA should be used
for HSMVs instead of static WSA. Any one of For SES and ACVs blockage effects might
the measurement methods listed may give good be calculated using simple numerical methods
results depending on the vehicle type and test like those summarised by Doctors (1992).
facility characteristics, but the method of
measurement and likely level of accuracy For displacement and semi-displacement
should be described and defined in test reports. ships, two-dimensional wave resistance calcu-
lations might be applied. Relatively simple
computer programs for blockage and shallow
3.8.4 Spray Resistance water corrections based on thin-ship theory by
Lunde (1961) have been found useful for this
At present there is no accepted method purpose.
available to account for scale effects in resis-
tance attributable to spray.
3.8.6 Captive Resistance Tests

3.8.5 Blockage In some cases the standard way of connect-


ing the model to the carriage is not the best.
For all types of HSMV it is important to Some alternative test set-ups are described be-
avoid the situation in which the hump speed of low.
ITTC – Recommended 7.5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 16 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

3.8.6.1 Fully Captured Force Measurements 3.8.6.2 Partially Captured Force Measurements
and Simulation To avoid the effect of water surface fluctua-
The method is made up of force measure- tion on lift force, hydrodynamic force meas-
ments on a fully or partly captured model and a urements in the free-to-heave condition have
computer simulation using the database of the been developed. Using the measured drag and
measured hydrodynamic forces. In this method, moment, an equilibrium equation of two forces
any additional forces acting on appendages and is solved to provide the running attitude and
scale effects can be taken into account. Hydro- resistance of a fast craft. A variation of this
dynamic forces (drag, lift and trim moment) method, which is used in cases where the trim
acting on a fully captured model, are measured of the ship is going to be controlled, for in-
by systematically changing trim, sinkage stance by a forward lifting foil system, the
(negative) and speed. By solving the equilib- model is fixed in the required trim without the
rium equation of forces using the measured need for any iterations. The required control
data, running attitudes and resistance of a craft system force is then easily determined from the
can be obtained. Multi-component load cells trim moment measurement.
are used to measure the forces. Extrapolation to
full scale is carried out in the same way as for 3.8.6.3 Automatic Attitude Control Method
ordinary towed models. The problem of the A more sophisticated experimental method
scale effect on running attitude can be avoided. has been developed on the basis of the same
The effect of appendages can be obtained as a philosophies. The experimental apparatus is
result of the simulation by adding hydrody- composed of a force measurement system, a
namic forces acting on them into the equilib- system for solving the equilibrium equation of
rium equation. This method can easily cope the forces by a computer in real time and a sys-
with design changes, such as the location of the tem for continuously changing the running atti-
centre of gravity, appendages and thrust force tude of the model, for instance by stepping mo-
direction. The disadvantage of the method is tors. Forces acting on a model craft are meas-
that the hydrodynamic force measurements are ured and its attitude changed using these values
time-consuming compared with a conventional to satisfy the equilibrium of forces. Additional
resistance test. Also, investigations of porpois- forces acting on appendages and any predict-
ing and chine walking are precluded. It is noted able scale effects can be taken into account in
that any standing waves in the towing tank the calculation.
should be reduced as much as possible since
they affect the lift force directly. It is also more
important to have well-aligned rails and a 4 VALIDATION
smooth running carriage for this method than
for towing a model free to heave and trim. 4.1 Uncertainty Analysis
Typical practical methods together with results
are described by Ikeda (1992, 1993), Yoko-
Uncertainty analysis should be performed
mizo (1992), and Katayama & Ikeda (1993,
in accordance with ‘Uncertainty Analysis in
1995, 1996) for planing craft and by Minsaas
EFD, Uncertainty Assessment Methodology’
(1993) for fully submerged hydrofoils.
as described in QM 4.9-03-01-01 and ‘Uncer-
ITTC – Recommended 7.5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 17 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

tainty Analysis in EFD, Guidelines for Uncer- (4) Ikeda, Y., 1993. Simulation of Running
tainty Assessment’ as described in QM 4.9-03- Attitude and Resistance of High-Speed
01-02. In addition to the above an example Craft Using a Database of Hydrodynamic
‘Uncertainty Analysis, Example for Resistance Forces. Japan.
Test’ is provided in QM 7.5-02-02-02.
(5) Ikeda, Y., and Katayama, T., 1997. Stabil-
ity of High Speed Craft. Proc. of 3rd Int.l
Workshop on Theoretical Advances in
4.2 Benchmark Tests Ship Stability and Practical Impact,
Greece.
Benchmark data are collected and described
in ‘Benchmark Database for CFD, Validation (6) ITTC 1987, 18th International Towing
for Resistance and Propulsion’, QM 7.5-03-02- Tank Conference.
02.
See also the following reference: Summary and (7) ITTC 1999, 22nd International Towing
Conclusions of Co-operative Model Resistance Tank Conference
Experiments (19th ITTC 1990 pp.329-332 ), (1)
Hard Chine BTTP Model, (8) Katayama, T., and Ikeda, Y., 1995. An
(2) Semi-Displacement Geosim Models in Experimental Study on Transverse Stabil-
Japanese Towing Tanks (11-1 ) Resistance ity Loss of Planing Craft at High Speed in
Tests (19th ITTC 1990 pp.360-365) Calm Water. Jour. Kansai Soc. N. A., No.
224, Japan.

5 REFERENCES (9) Katayama, T., and Ikeda, Y., 1996. A


Study on Transverse Instability of Planing
(1) Doctors, L., 1992, The Use of Pressure Craft at High Speed in Calm Water. Proc.
Distributions to Model the Hydrodynamics KO-JAM’96, Korea.
of Air Cushion Vehicles and Surface Ef-
fect Ships. Proceedings of Intersociety (10) Katayama, T., and Ikeda, Y., 1996. A
High Performance Marine Vehicle Con- Study on Unstable Rolling Induced by
ference and Exhibit (HPMV’92) (1992). Pitching of Planing Craft at High Advance
Speed. Jour. Kansai Soc. N. A., No. 255,
(2) Hoyt, J., and Dipper, M., 1989. A Matrix Japan.
Data Base Approach to Planing Craft Re-
sistance Model Experiments, 22nd ATTC, (11) Kirkman, K., and Kloetzli, J., 1981. Scal-
St.John’s, Newfoundland. ing Problems of Model Appendages. 19th
ATTC, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
(3) Ikeda, Y., et al., 1992, Hydrodynamic
Forces Acting on a High-Speed Craft (12) Minsaas, K.J., 1993. Design and Devel-
Running with Constant Speed. Jour. of opment of Hydrofoil Catamarans in Nor-
Kansai Soc. N. A., No. 218, Japan. way. FAST’93, Yokohama, Japan, pp. 83-
99.
ITTC – Recommended 7.5-02
-05-01
Procedures and Guidelines Page 18 of 18
Testing and Extrapolation Methods
Effective Date Revision
High Speed Marine Vehicles 2002 01
Resistance Test

(14) Yokomizo, K, et al., 1992. Simulation of


(13) Savitsky, D., et al., 1981. Status of Hydro- Running Attitude and Resistance of a
dynamic Technology as Related to Model High-Speed Craft Using Database of
Tests of High-Speed Marine Vehicles. Three-Component Hydrodynamic Forces.
HSMV Panel 16th ITTC, DTNSRDC, Re- Jour. of Kansai Soc. N. A., No. 218, Japan
port No. 81/026, Bethesda, MD,USA.