Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Wave-Making Resistance of Ships - Inui, 1962
Wave-Making Resistance of Ships - Inui, 1962
This paper discusses the wave-making resistance of displacement ships in steady motion.
It is not intended for detailed discussion of the quantitative relationship between certain
types of ships and their wave-making resistance, but for discussion of the method by
which the author believes such relationship should be studied. In such method, great im-
portance is attached to the photographic study of model ship wave patterns which hi~'herto
has been ignored almost entirely in tank experiments. The paper, in appropriate con-
junction with the theoretical study, suggests a new approach to the ship hull-form research.
Early in the paper the author points out in principle the defects found in the usual resistance
tests as a method of studying the ship hull form, and also the inevitable difficulties in the
theory of wave-making resistance. Part 1 is devoted to a description of the basic
elements upon which a new method of hull-form research is based. In Part 2 the cluthor
describes the effectiveness of the new method in solving various practical problems in
hull-form design. One example of the effective use of the method is the development
of the "waveless-form theory" in the Experimental Tank of the University of Tokyo. In
the last part of the paper the author suggests a course along which the proposed method
of hull-form research should be further developed.
OVER a period of almost a century since the first it in his tank, all work conducted in the experi-
experimental tank was built at T o r q u a y in 1870 mental tanks up to date for the ,;tudy of ship's
b y William Froude such experiments have made a resistance (wave-making resistance) has been
great contribution to the improvement of ship's nothing but the "resistance test." So far as the
resistance performance. In the meantime the wave-making resistance is concerned, no new
scope of tank experimental work has been grad- method of study, or no new method of experiment
ually increased both in volume and variety. has'ever been tried.
In addition to towing tanks, there have been built I t is the opinion of the author that, although the
seakeeping laboratories for seakeeping quality "resistance test" is a vitally necessary, and very
study, maneuvering basins for maneuverability important practical method for the investigation
research, and other new types of experimental of wave-making resistance of ships, it is by no
tanks, each being intended exclusively for a means perfect, or even adequate.
special purpose. Let us now consider methodically the way in
As for the results of all such research work 'we which the physical quantity, the "force" known
m a y safely say that remarkable progress has as wave-making resistance of ships, is analyzed.
been made with respect to tank experiments in The process involved may be shown by the block
general compared to the age of Froude. How- diagram Fig. 1.
ever, in one particular aspect, little has so far At first there is (A), a given geometric body of a
been achieved. This is what is known as the ship which creates (B), ship's waves; as it advances
"resistance test." Ever since Froude started at a certain speed. A theoretical analysis of
(I), the process from (A) to (B) is troublesome and
1 Professor, Department of Naval Architecture, Faculty ship's waves are complicated in all respects.
of Engineering, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. However, since these waves are visible, it should
Presented at the Annual Meeting, New York, N. Y., be possible to observe them. A force known as
November 15-16, 1962, of THE SOCIETY OF NAVAL
ARCHITECTSANDMARINBENGINEERS. "wave-making resistance" is obtained through
283
./
/
GIVEN SOURCE1
OISTRIBUTON
] HAVELOCK'S
THEORY
ram_it of the resistance of a body moving in a
fluid, the answer can be found from the energy
carried to the rear of the body. The energy carrier
may be a vortex system or a surface-wave system,
and so on. This analysis is made in the far rear
GEOMETRY
(Al
' WAVE
(B)
)q RESISTANCE
(C)
1 of the body, where fluid motion has :much simpler
features. This is for the reason that, since the
Fig. 2 Block diagram (2) scalar product of the two vectors just mentioned
is not zero, as the body advances it continuously
gives the fluid around it a positive work-(i.e.,
sent an actual hull form as it is cannot be given energy) which is in proportion to the distance
directly by this method without great difficulty. of its advance. When the viscosity of the fluid
Here again the proposed method of wave analysis is ignored, the energy so given is steadily aeeunm-
could prove very effective. lated in the fluid as wave energy. I t is reasonable
I t is a method of hull-form research intended to assume that this accumulated energy will
for the thorough investigation of wave-making remain in some form behind the body. In the
resistance by a combiried use of experiment wake the further the distance away from the
and theory which are co-related through the body the simpler are the features of the flow mo-
photographic observation of a model's waves; tion in general. This makes it comparatively
in particular through the analysis of stereopic- easy to investigate in what manner the energy
tures. Part 1 is devoted to the discussion of the is carried to the far rear of the body.
basic principles and P a r t 2 to the "waveless form" A method like the foregoing has often been
as examples of the application of the proposed employed effectively to explain the resistance of a
method. This method has been investigated body in motion in a perfect fluid, as shown by such
in the Experimental Tank of the University of outstanding examples as (a) the theory of resist-
T o k y o over a period of several years. ance due to K~rm{m vortices, (b) the theory of
discontinuous motion with respect to the pressure
Part 1 Basesof Proposed Method resistance of a plate placed vertically in a flow,
and (c) the induced drag of a wing with a finite
In this part of the paper the discussions will be span due to accompanying free vortices.
on the three elenlents which constitute the bases The method is applicable also to the wave-
of the proposed method of hull-form research making resistance of ships. The carrier of the
adopted at the Experimental T a n k of the Uni- energy supplied into the water by a ship in motion
versity of Tokyo. This method is essentially a is its waves. But not all waves carry energy" to
combination of theoretical and experimental the rear of the ship. Only a portion of ship's
studies of ship's waves and wave-making resist- waves transport energy rearward. To be more
ance. The two of the elements are the analytical precise, the gravity waves created by a ship ad-
theories which correspond respectively to the two vancing through the surface of water consist of
phases of the process, (I) and (II), from "hull two types of waves, which are entirely different
form" to "wave-making resistance" via "waves" in character, as expressed by the following equa-
as shown in Fig. 1. The third one is the tech- tions.
niques involved in taking bird's-eye view pictures
of model's wave pattern and their stereo-analysis. ~(x,y) = ¢,(x,y) + ¢,~.(x,y) (t)
where
I Havelock's Theory
fl(x,y) = local disturbance, (2)
If an ordinary course of discussions is followed
with respect to the theories involved, this section
f,,(x,y) = free-wave pattern (3)
should start with how to establish a relationship In this case the coordinates are assumed to move
in the process (I) in ~Fig. 1 such that ship's waves with the ship, with the z-axis vertically upward;
can be predicted from the geometry of a ship. z = 0 on the still-water surface and the x-axis
However, let us consider this subject later and opposite to the ship's course.
{;
/i
/
~-" / / / - - ~/
0 . ~~ j / /
/
o: oo Ce=o o)
x
", \ "\2~T~." \
~10 o
I, \\ \ \
I\. \ \ j \ . ~
\ \ \ \
I \ \ N \
\
~,20 o
80 ° 70 ° 60 ° 50 ° 40 ° 55°16 ' 30 °
local d i s t u r b a n c e m a i n t a i n s a c o n s t a n t a m o u n t of
d- y sin 0) ] dO -I- ./2 (o) c o s [K0 sec20 (.~ - x0
w a v e e n e r g y r e g a r d l e s s of t i m e a n d t h e i r d i s t r i b u - ~/2
tion is c o n c e n t r a t e d in t h e s h i p ' s p r o x i m i t y , t h e
X COS 0 + y sin 0)]d0 (4)
r a n g e of t h e f r e e - w a v e p a t t e r n is increasing p r o -
p o r t i o n a t e l y to t h e d i s t a n c e over which t h e ship where
h a s a d v a n c e d . As a consequence t h e t o t a l s u m
Ko = g/V 2 (S)
of t h e w a v e - m o t i o n e n e r g y in t h e w a v e s y s t e m
increases w i t h t h e a d v a n c e of time. T o p u t i t I n (4) sign " ~ - / ' i n d i c a t e s t h a t this e q u a t i o n
in a n o t h e r way, t h e difference b e t w e e n the two becomes a c c u r a t e when t h e v a l u e of x ( > 0) is
w a v e s y s t e m s is t h a t , while t h e local d i s t u r b a n c e sufficiently large, V r e p r e s e n t s t h e s h i p ' s speed,
has n o t h i n g to do w i t h t h e t r a n s f e r of t h e w a v e a n d g t h e a c c e l e r a t i o n of g r a v i t y . E a c h t e r m
energy, t h e f r e e - w a v e p a t t e r n alone is responsible on t h e r i g h t - h a n d side of e q u a t i o n (4) r e p r e s e n t s a
for it. T h a t m e a n s t h e w a v e which is r e l a t e d K e l v i n w a v e g r o u p as shown in Fig. 3, or to be
to t h e s t e a d y w a v e - m a k i n g resistance is n o t t h e m o r e precise, a H o g n e r w a v e g r o u p as shown in
s h i p ' s w a v e as a whole, b u t o n l y t h e f r e e - w a v e Fig. 4. I t is well k n o w n t h a t these m a t h e m a t i c a l
p a t t e r n expressed b y e q u a t i o n (3). w a v e p a t t e r n s express s h i p ' s w a v e s f a i r l y well.
~_ 19°30'
15o
//
I ~___
0 o×` "t s I ,0 15
I I', I',/
/ II! /I. J.
/ ../-;.2"~;;f v^+ I
/ / / / ZJf-q
M~ /
_ ~ ~ ' 7.d-". . -- - 7
/ 1 1 1 / i / .¢.1~
Fig. 6
wavelength) between the two wave systems. Following another paper [2] of Havelock pub-
When this difference is ignored, the isophasal lines lished in 1934, we shall see next a relationship
in the wave patterns m a y be illustrated as in between wave-making resistance and the free-
Fig. 3; and when this difference is taken into wave pattern mentioned in the foregoing. In
account the isophasal lines can be shown as in this case, instead of a coordinate system which
Fig. 4. These, too, are well-known facts. moves with a ship, we consider a coordinate system
The concept of the "elementary waves" is fixed to the still-water surface. In Fig. 6 let us
extremely useful in the discussion of all problems consider two fixed planes, A and B , which are per-
relevant to the study of the wave-making resist- pendicular to the direction of the ship's course, A
ance. I t is so important that no efficient study being far ahead of the ship and B far in the rear
of wave-making resistance can be made easily of it. At the moment, t = t, the free-wave pat-
without a clear concept of the elementary waves. tern is at the position indicated by a soIid line,
For example, the discontinuous phenomenon and it will advance to the position shown by a
[7] due to the restricted water effect can be ex- dotted line at the time, t = t + At. An increase
plained fully by empIoying this concept. The in energy in the fluid between A-plane and B-plane
discovery of the waveless form to be discussed is equal to an increase in wave energy correspond-
in this paper was made also from this very concept. ing to the increase in the area of the free-wave
For simplicity let us represent the whole of the pattern. The quantity of the increase of wave
right-hand side of equation (S) by F (0), calling energy can be obtained by advancing the wave
it the phase function of the elementary waves, patterns shown by the solid line to the position
and S (0) and C (0) on the right-hand side of shown by the dotted line over a distance, ax
equation (4) the amplitude functions of the sine = vat. By a lengthy calculation Havelock
wave and the cosine wave, respectively. I t is obtained the expression for the time average of
easy to imagine that where the value of x is suf- such energy increase as
ficiently large, in each integral of the right-hand
side of equation (4) the main contribution is from gax=~pv .~at F~/2 {A(0)}~ c°sB° do (9)
a small range of 0-values. The contributions from u-,/2 i + sin°"0
the remaining portion are cancelled with each where
other because of rapid phase changes. This
means an asymptotic expansion can be applied
{.~(0)}~ = {s(0)}~ + {c(o)}~ (lo)
to the right-hand side of equation (4). Such In equation (9) Ois the density of water.
expansions are given in Appendix 1. This increase of energy m a y be attributable to
I F'~ ,~t = ~ p V :~ ~t
//~'/2 {A (0)
}2 - c°s~0
- dO
ployed.
a-,/') 1 -Jr- sin20 2 Nonlinear Treatment of Ship Surface Condition
(12) This section will be devoted to the discussion of
From the energy-conservation law in which the the process (I) in Fig. 1 which will explain a rela-
viscosity of fluid is ignored we have tionship between the "hull form" (A) and the
"ship's waves" (B). There are some reasons why
/~ Ax -- W, at ~- IP: At (13)
the process (I) is taken up after the process (II).
and from the foregoing, wave-making resistance In the first place, since there are several theo-
R~ is expressed in a very simple form like retical approaches by which "wave-making re-
sistance" (C) is derived from the "ship's waves"
R~ = /~ l'P2
V _ 97r p 17:2 F "/2 {.4 (0) } ~ eos:~0 dO (B), the point to be emphasized in the discussion
- d - ~/2
of the process (I) will v a r y depending on which of
(14) these approaches is followed. From a hydro-
Equation (14) shows t h a t the wave-making dynamic point of view, actual ship hulls have
resistance of a ship is an integration of the quan- quite complicated three-dimensional forms. I t
tity {A(0)}2 weighed by a factor cos:~0. From is extremely difficult to treat the wave-making
this we can see that, where the value of A(0) phenomena involved exactly. I t is necessary to
changes little with respect to 0, the wave-nmking make some assumptions to simplify the problem
resistance is determined mainly by the amplitude in order to make it amendable. The assumptions,
of the transverse wave. As the diverging wave, which can be made and still yield a useful solu-
especially at a large 0-value, has a small wave- tion, also influences the discussion of the process
length, it is more visible than the transverse (I). We shall linfit our discussion here to the
wave when we observe ship's waves from above displacement ships with Froude number up to
downward vertically. This is because of the fact 0.3 or 0.35. Within this Froude-number range
t h a t the diverging wave has a steeper slope than our research work has been greatly emphasized.
the transverse wave. This sometimes tends to As mentioned before, as far as wave-making
give us an erroneous impression about the relative resistance is concerned, we need to study only the
importance of these two waves with respect to free-wave pattern in the far rear of a ship. In
wave-making resistance. In order not to be t a n k experiments, however, the model's waves
deceived by such an impression, it is advisable to reflected b y the side walls make it impossible to
take notice of the relationship expressed in equa- observe the wave pattern far enough in rear of
tion (14). the model as to avoid local disturbances. I t is
In the preceding paragraphs an outline has been necessary therefore to have the local disturbance
given of the concept of elementary waves formu- calculated beforehand so t h a t the free-wave
lated b y Havelock, as well as to the related theory pattern can be separated from the total of the
of wave-making resistance. As a theoretical waves observed. This means t h a t the " w a v e
approach to wave-making resistance of ships analysis" which is the most i m p o r t a n t p a r t of
there have so far been introduced several methods the work involved in the proposed method of
including Michell's method of pressure integration. hull-form research, consists of two items: The
(The detailed descriptions of these methods are first one is the division of the observed waves into
found in two papers [8,9] published b y Prof. the local disturbance and the free-wave pattern.
J. K. Lunde). However, the author regards, T h e other one is a detailed analysis of the free-
-T -T
Z Z
l -4 /5'
7(b), resembles an o r d i n a r y hull form near the Table 1 Values of KoT sec20
ends, b u t differs c o n s i d e r a b l y n e a r a m i d s h i p ~A'07" sec20 (T/L = 0 . 0 4 ) ~
toward which the keel line curves d o w n w a r d . F 0 = 0° 0 = 30 ° 0 = 60 °
However, the hull form n e a r the load w a t e r l i n e 0.1 4 5. 333 16
can be m a d e to a n y required form b y selecting an 0.15 1. 778 2. 370 7. 111
0.2 1 1. 333 4
a p p r o p r i a t e source d i s t r i b u t i o n f u n c t i o n re(x, z). 0.25 0.64 0. 853 2.56
T h a t m e a n s a m a j o r p o r t i o n of the difference be- 0.3 O. 444 O. 593 1 . 778
tween such form a n d a n o r d i n a r y hull form is near
the lower m i d d l e part. I t is well k n o w n t h a t the
a b i l i t y of a m o v i n g b o d y to m a k e surface waves According to T a b l e 1, when the theoretical
decreases with the increase of submergence. hull form in Fig. 7(b) is c o m p a r e d to the o r d i n a r y
W i t h respect to a b o d y s u b m e r g e d to a d e p t h f, hull form in Fig. S(b), the effect on the waves due
a n y wave with a w a v e l e n g t h less t h a n 2J" can be to a difference in the b o t t o m shape is of no sig-
neglected. T h e ratio b e t w e e n the d r a f t T a n d nificance in a speed r a n g e b e t w e e n F = 0.1 a n d
the w a v e l e n g t h of the e l e m e n t a r y waves in the 0.15. I t becomes noticeable when F r o u d e n u m -
0-direction X(0) is as follows: ber is larger t h a n this, b u t this effect is n o t very
serious w i t h i n the F r o u d e - n u m b e r range u n d e r
l"/x(o) = ~ KoI" see ~-O, (20) consideration.
Several m e t h o d s m a y be considered to keep the
Therefore, w h e n K 0 T sect0 exceeds 7r, the shape keel line straight. One m e t h o d m a y be, for
of the b o t t o m will have little effect on all the example, the source d i s t r i b u t i o n s in vertical tri-
e l e m e n t a r y waves with a direction angle larger angles as i l l u s t r a t e d in Fig. 8(a) i n s t e a d of the
t h a n 0. T h e values of K o T sec20 a t F = 0.l r e c t a n g u l a r p l a n e d i s t r i b u t i o n . In this case,
to 0.3 on the hull form T / L = 0.04 are given in however, it is expected t h a t a m u c h greater n u m -
T a b l e 1. ber of calculations m u s t be carried o u t in o b t a i n -
-T
F// -T
z Z
ing the ship geometry, the wave pattern, and the paragraphs Michell's linearization in the treat-
wave-making resistance. ment of the ship-surface condition has not been
In the Experimental T a n k of the University of used. In Michell's theory the ship geometry and
Tokyo, the simplest source distribution as shown the corresponding source distribution Vm(x, z)
in Figs. 7(a) and 7(b) has been adopted as a pre- are related directly by the following equation :
liminary step in the experiment. At first a source
m(.v, o, z) = - 2 ~--Y (21)
distribution is chosen to represent a hull form bx
with good resistance performance. From this
where
chosen source distribution the corresponding hull
geometry is obtained by following the indirect y = y(x, z) = equation for ship surface (22)
method mentioned before. After the resistance In the comparative studies of the theory of
test and the wave observation experiment have wave-making resistance and the results of tank
been completed, this model is modified near the experiments, this linearization assumed in equa-
middle lower part to obtain a practical form tion (21) had always been employed until the
suitable for commercial use. The same tests are accuracy of such approximation was questioned
also conducted on this modified model. I t has by the author. I t is rather important to know
been noticed that within the interested Froude- the sources of inaccuracy of N[ichell's wave-mak-
number range the difference in resistance is usually ing resistance theory before we seek any im-
small. Also it has been found that the difference provement. In the past the viscosity effect was
in wave profiles observed correspond very well thought to be the_major source and, as a result,
with the difference in wave-making resistance no satisfactory improvement to Michell's theory
measured. More detailed discussion on this sub- could possibly be found. Since Wigley [16],
ject will be introduced in Section 5 of Part 2. started the comparative study in 1926, such study
In the method introduced in the foregoing has been made on nearly sixty different hull
0.001
0.005
I iii
Model Ill~t
0.004
0.003
,'.-I~l~ o.ooz
h ~
o.oo i
°.s 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 ,5.0
V= Ft3/Sec
o 005 I /
Model 1136 t
0.004
~>~
° 0.003 ,,,7
OWL 0.002 I~' ~ °s
°°° °
Fig. 9 Comparison of measured (broken line) and calculated (solid line) wave-making resistance by Michell's
theory (Weinblum 1932)
forms by himself, Weinblum [17], and others, b y Weinblum. This is only one of the typical
Fig. 9 indicates an example of the result obtained examples which show that, when Michell's theory
-I.0 0 I.o
3
oStern f I I ) ) Bow I0
-I.0 1 J I .,j~'O 1.0
b=0.20 ---
-4
is followed, t h e c a l c u l a t e d w a v e - m a k i n g r e s i s t a n c e 3
is a l w a y s s m a l l e r t h a n t h e m e a s u r e d one a t t h e
l a s t h u m p F - 0.5. C o n s i d e r i n g the fact t h a t , a t LIB =5
h u m p s , t h e v i s c o s i t y h a s a l w a y s the t e n d e n c y to 2
decrease w a v e - m a k i n g resistance, i t seems reason-
a b l e to believe t h a t M i c h e l l ' s t h e o r y u n d e r e s t i -
m a t e s t h e w a v e - m a k i n g resistance a t the n e i g h b o r -
~ >
,- ~
LIB=IO~~
"L/B = 20 ""
hood of F = 0.5.
T h i s t h o u g h t s t i m u l a t e d t h e a u t h o r to investi-
[
I
//// ~Exac+
..... Appro×[nmfe
g a t e t h e possible difference b e t w e e n t h e a p p r o x -
i m a t e source d i s t r i b u t i o n in e q u a t i o n (21) a n d t h e 0 !
0.2 0.3 0-4 0.5 0.6 0.3
c o r r e c t source d i s t r i b u t i o n . H e also o b t a i n e d t h e
difference b e t w e e n t h e w a t e r l i n e form r e p r e s e n t e d
---*v/~
b y t h e a p p r o x i m a t e source d i s t r i b u t i o n of equa- Fig. 11 Comparison in wave-making resistance
(parabolic waterline)
tion (21) a n d t h e original w a t e r l i n e form. A n
e x a m p l e is shown in Fig. 10, in which t h e w a t e r -
line is given b y t h e ship, a n d where F r o u d e n u m b e r is large t h e
w a v e s are affected b y t h e a r e a u n d e r t h e source-
y = b(1 -- x 2) (23) d i s t r i b u t i o n curves. I n Fig. 10 t h e w a t e r l i n e s
cross each o t h e r a t x = 0.S, a n d t h e source-dis-
w i t h b = B / L = 0.05, 0.10 a n d 0.20, or L / B t r i b u t i o n curves cross each o t h e r a t x = 0.9.
= 20, 10 a n d 5. T h i s e x a m p l e i n d i c a t e s t h a t b y In Fig. 1 t t h e p o i n t w h e r e Cw curves cross each
M i c h e l l ' s a p p r o x i m a t i o n , errors of a f a i r l y large o t h e r is F = 0.35. T h e s e t h r e e crossing p o i n t s
m a g n i t u d e a r e f o u n d even o11 a v e r y n a r r o w hull are r e l a t e d to one another.,
f o r m of b = 0.05 (L/B = 20). Fig. 11 shows t h e s e F r o m t h e foregoing results we m a y safely
errors in t e r m s of t h e c a l c u l a t e d w a v e - m a k i n g c o n c l u d e t h a t in a lower speed r a n g e t h a n F
resistance. T h e c o m p a r i s o n b e t w e e n these two = 0.35 M i c h e l l ' s t h e o r y o v e r e s t i m a t e s t h e w a v e -
figures shows t h a t where F r o u d e n m n b e r is small m a k i n g resistance, a n d in a higher speed range it
w a v e - m a k i n g r e s i s t a n c e is affected p r e d o m i n a n t l y u n d e r e s t i m a t e s t h e w a v e - m a k i n g resistance. A n
b y t h e source d i s t r i b u t i o n n e a r b o t h e n d s of e x a m p l e shown in Fig. 12 i n d i c a t e s some results
U 0.001
i
o.~o o.~s o.zo o.zs o.3o o.3s 0.40 o.4s o.so o.ss aoo o.os o.~o
r=vl~
Fig. 12 Comparison of measured wave-making resistance for models S-IO1 (exact) and A-IOI (approximate)
obtained experimentally b y conducting resistance calculated profiles of the bow waves shows t h a t the
tests on Models S-101 and A-101. B o t h models phase of the measured wave leads t h a t of the
were derived from the same given source distribu- calculated as illustrated in Fig. 23. F o r the
tion. Model A-101 was obtained based on equa- a m o u n t of this phase difference = X r , 6r m a y
tion (21), while Model S-10t was obtained b y be defined as follows:
following the a u t h o r ' s m e t h o d m e n t i o n e d pre- 6~ = Xj,/'L (27)
viously. T h e given source distribution is ex-
As for w a v e - m a k i n g resistance, a comparison
pressed as follows:
between the result of the experiment and t h a t of
Jl(X) = a.~:v, (--I < x < 1),~ (24) the theoretical calculation indicates t h a t the
j"2(z) = 1, (--77< z < O) f former has h u m p s and hollows shifted t o w a r d a
with higher speed range. I t seems reasonable to in-
terpret this as being due to the distance L be-
2'/(21) = 1"/5 = 0.05, a~ = 0.4: tween the starting point of bow wave and t h a t
Based Oil equation (21) it is easy to see t h a t the of the stern wave having increased to (1 q- 6) L.
waterline of A-101 is given b y A portion of 6 is 6~. mentioned before, and the
remainder is 6A, which is used to a c c o u n t for the
y = b(1 -- .~VZe), ( - - [ < :v < Z), (2.5)
viscosity effect. 3"o define this we nlay write
where 6 = 6F+,h (2S)
b = a J 4 = 0.1 (26) In equation (28) while 6,~ denotes principally
the viscosity effect, it also expresses a m u c h more
In the same figure the calculated w a v e - m a k i n g complicated substance. F o r example, when wave
resistance based on the same given source distribu- profiles are measured along a centerline (:v-axis)
tion in the perfect fluid is also plotted. F r o m
i m m e d i a t e l y behind the stern, the wave length
these curves it is quite clear t h a t the a u t h o r ' s
there is found clearly s o m e w h a t shorter t h a n the
objection to Michell's theory is b o t h meaningful
theoretical wave length, which corresponds to
and fruitful. These results also show t h a t the
ship's speed V and is expressed b y
difference between the two models agrees very
well with w h a t has been anticipated b y the a u t h o r Xo = 2rrV'-'/g (2!))
as stated previously. T h e tigure further shows This shows the effects of a frictional belt.
t h a t the effect of the errors due to 5,[ichell's T h e fact t h a t the waves propagate in the rear
approximation is either equal to or greater than of a ship t h r o u g h this frictional belt seems to have
the effect of the viscosity. m u c h to do with 6~ (> 0). To explain it minutely,
A l t h o u g h the a u t h o r ' s indirect m e t h o d has 6a (> 0) seems to come o u t for the reason that,
a d v a n c e d a step .toward improving Michell's besides the effective starting point of the stern
approximation in the t r e a t m e n t of ship surface waves lags behind (this has been proven b y a
conditions, it does not t r e a t the free-surface con- result obtained in the course of the waveless stern-
dition exactly. This n a t u r a l l y leads to errors, form research to be described in Section 4, P a r t
especially at the higher F r o u d e - n u m b e r range. 2), the wave-lnaking separation L, measured b y
Such effect of free surface is shown, for the m o s t the actual wavelength which has become a little
part, as phase shift of the bow wave. T o be more smaller, works as if it becalne (t + 6) L when
precise, a comparison between the measured and measured b y the unit of the original wavelength.
~ l ~ 0.004
U
o.ooz
0.008
----- C~lculafed (Uncorrecfed)
- - ]'S- 1011. Calculai-ed ('Cot reefed)
I_S-201J
0.006
tv- t~
• S-IOI M e a s u r e d .i
o S-201 Measured / J ~,~
0.004
"-----o-..___
t:~loJ
II
_5 0.002
t.)
0 -~,~
O/O 0.15 0.20 0.7_5 0.30
0.40 1~3`5
0.4.5 0.50 0.55 0.60 O.GS 0.70
F= V v/-~
Fig. 14 Measured and calculated wave-making resistance coefficients for models S-tO1 and S-201 (T/L = 0.05)
/
A~ I z 3 4 s o v a 9 FP I//
0.002
plane C J
A.P.
2 " '1 ' 3 4 ~ G ~9 'a' ' 7P. j ~
I t / r i
o.~s 020 o.z5 o.~o o.~s
F= v/V'ffwLCJ
Fig. 16 Wave-making resistance for Model SR-452 and Model SR-453
retical analysis as described in Section 2, however, (b) Use stereo-photogrammetry such as has
the difficulties of this kind can be overcome by actually been employed in the author's experi-
properly designing appropriate devices. ments up to date.
Fortunately, in the Experimental T a n k of the Method ((~), where a cylindrical lens is neces-
University of Tokyo, such problems have been sary to cast parallel light beams, has proven
for the most p a r t solved in the past five years, useful in case the measuring objects are not so
primarily b y Professor Takahei. The method large; for example, for optical study of model
of taking pictures of waves includes using alu- wing sections. For such use as intended by the
m i n u m foil (mesh 150 to 170) which is spread on author such a cylindrical lens will have to be so
the surface of water at a rate of about 1 gram large that it is not practical.
per sq meter, and strobo-light (flash time ]./2000 In the case of method (b), on the other hand,
see) used for illumination. The extremely short even if stereo-analysis could not be made, each
flashing time of this light permits us to obtain picture showing a wave pattern as a whole should
sharp pictures of waves with vivid details and also be very useful for qualitative study. Hence,
to take each pair of stereo-pictures with good research work has been conducted using this
synchronization. The surface of the water is method as a major tool. As an example of pic-
made very bright by light reflected by the silvery tures used for qualitative observation a pair of
surface of the scattered aluminum foil. I t is pictures is shown in Fig. 15. These pictures
possible to ignore the effect of the foil on surface were taken of two high-speed cargo liner models.
tension when the model length is over 1 m. Both have ordinary conventional lines, and the
Some ten years ago when the author conceived only difference is in the sectional-area curve of the
the idea of employing an optical method for the fore body. Model SR-452 has a large entrance
investigation of the wave pattern of a model, he angle and an easy fore shoulder, but Model SR-453
did not know which of the following methods has a small entrance angle and a hard fore
should be used: shoulder. The comparison of the two pictures
(a) T a k e pictures of wave profiles cut by any clearly shows the correspondence between the
vertical plane b y casting parallel light beams onto ship geometry and the ship waves. The hard
the surface of the water through slits having shoulder produces a large shoulder wave, while the
small width; repeat this operation to photograph large entrance angle gives a large bow wave. The
various sections of waves. Cw-curves of the both models plotted in Fig. 16
I~O.g
_ ~v ol3 "~ ,
/ ~ .I ~ ~ i ~)b~--------~-Tl _i .-i N s
_. t
.....
r~, - I.....
1,°1,~ } ......... I7-I
[. . . . . . ....
detail experimentally. This fact makes the At this point it is interesting to mention that
further improvement of our present wave-making Prof. B. V. Korvin-Kroukovsky [18], Dr. K.
resistance theory possible arid the application of Eggers" [19], and Prof. L. W. Ward [20] have also
such to the design of ships much easier. realized the importance of observing and studying
With such a new approach, the author believes the ship's waves in a towing tank in order to have
t h a t effort expended in hulldorm research work more basic understanding about the ship's wave-
can be much more fruitful. making mechanism.
wave system, such as a Kelvin wave group can be When the bow-wave system of the main hull
reduced to two-dimensional elementary waves. and that of the bulb are superposed, the resultant
Then our problem is equivalent to cancelling the wave system will produce, a wave-making re-
integrand of equation (4) rather than the inte- sistance as expressed by the following equation :
grated result. T h a t means our complicated
71" f~r/2
problem of cancelling a three-dimensional wave R,~,~.+ ~ = ~ p y-' {.4 ~ (0) - ~ (0) 1 ~
system has been reduced to an elementary prob- ,J --~r/2
lena of mutual interference of simple, two-dimen- X eos30d0 (35)
o 0.0010
v-
D ~/~
I B jD/iS
e~
Fig. 2O Wave-making resistance for C-201 (main hull alone), C-201F2 (with bow
bulb), and C-201F2)<A4 (with bow and stern bulbs)
or stern free-wave pattern of a main hull starts belief, as stated in (a) in the introductory part of
with a crest having its origin fairly close to the this section, t h a t the wave-making resistance
end point, in either case. of any ship can never be reduced to zero.
From these considerations, it appears quite 9 Summarizing the foregoing discussion, it m a y
natural to believe the possibility of realizing safely be concluded t h a t when the possibility of
an inverse phase relationship between the afore- replacing a bulb b y an isolated doublet system is
mentioned two free-wave systems; one is the accepted, the possibility of finding a waveless
bulb wave and the other is the main hull end hull form m u s t also be accepted at the same time.
wave. In other words, when the possibility of finding a
However, through the successive analysis from waveless hull form is denied at all, the possibility
1 to 7, it is also quite clear t h a t once such inverse of replacing a bulb b y an isolated doublet system
phase relationship is realized, a waveless hull form m u s t also be denied.
could be obtained without any difficulty. 10 Now our question m a y finally be reduced to
At this stage of analysis, it also must be recalled a very elementary form as follows:
t h a t the concept of a waveless hull form is con- With respect to the phase of the free-wave
trary to the century-old and widely accepted pattern caused b y an attached bulb is it possible
,,.,L..... i J i
1~-~1 ~=1 >-I ~1 ',,I iI iI i II
I®
I
~i i ~ I
®J i
ml i I
ml I
mi t '
", ~ . I -- 0.5
'l° 20° 35~6 '40° (ill° 8--- 80"
.,t~/l'~'lilllllll"vl'~
(a) Amplitude Function
/ / ~i 77
,[Ar(O)]"c<,saO/ E -' (,,',/hour Butt>) ,'ix ," ,'/ "~a =-" , F_p •/,/Lg
I.~ ~ I I I
0.4 q.t0 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0,35
I I I l
0i.5 1.0 1.5
- - blain Hull Fy=g/f,GTg
.... Bulb
t((///////H//////,'/,?'////4/////////,.~///~~
0° 20 ° ,10° 60 ° 80° Fig 22 Amplitude functions versus Froude number
(b)Wave Resistance Integral
4O
40
2O
20
0
0
--20 Stern
"
2
I
(measured)
I- I
4 /
/
.......>
6
I
~ - . 7 £
. 4_ "'% I
SY-f 7
'
Bow
-20
Hull Wave (with Bulb) C--201 × F 2
2O
20
0
0 ~'< ~ e ' lo ~_ ' 16<.~, " 4 \ 2 Ko,/,
"-" J ~ " ('calculated) \ ~ A'
--20 <m.-.-,, \V/ --20
to replace the bulb with good approximation b y a experimental and theoretical, was carried o u t
certain isolated system of doublet ? [A113 E v e n t h o u g h this rather preliminary
A l t h o u g h this question seems as elementary as s t u d y was not intended for the waveless form it-
it seems self-evident, it has, at the same time, an self, its importance m a y be the greatest of all the
extremely great i m p o r t a n c e with respect to ship's work reported in the papers previously published
resistance problems. related to the w a v d e s s forms (Appendix 3), for
the reason t h a t this has given a definite answer,
Preliminary Approach to First Findings of Waveless for the first time, to the foregoing e l e m e n t a r y
Forms question, b y proving t h a t a bulb can be replaced
T o exalnine the aforementioned elementary
question, some preliminary research work, both s Refer to Bibliography in Appendix 3.
\
0
0~
-9
|
.4 ! "2
k24
I
8. I
6"
/ 5//
.i /
Oc,sp denotes the angle of the radial line passing c o m p a r i s o n with the calculated line Ocu.p = 15 °.
t h r o u g h the crossing p o i n t s (cusps) of the trans- T h e r e is a b o u t 4030 ' difference b e t w e e n the two,
verse w a v e a n d the diverging wave. I n Fig. 4 the reason for which still r e m a i n s unelarified.
the m e a s u r e d line Ocu~p = 19030 ' is shown in Fig. 26 is an example of detailed analysis of the
40
20 2, ,o
14// 12 IO~.x'~.,.,8 ~//~6 4 ~ K0R 0
-20 >j/ \ \ ,0
-40 Bulb Wave (l)ifferenee between C-201 x F2 and C-201) ~ --40
Fig. 26 Measured and calculated wave profiles on the radial line for Model C-201 and C-2OIF2
(O = 19030 ' for measured wave profile, O = 15 ° for calculated wave profile)
wave contours in Fig. 25. I n this case a compari- characteristics and, consequently, a curved bot-
sort is m a d e between the measured wave profile t o m which is impractical.
on the radial line 0 = 19o30 ' and the calculated F u r t h e r investigation is needed to bring this
wave profile on the radial line O = 15 °. waveless form into more practical hull geometry.
I n this section, the following points will be dis-
Possible Causes of Successful Experimental Results cussed:
T h e aforementioned results, as a whole, show a 1 Can the waveless form be realized also with a
v e r y good coincidence with the theoretical predic- conventional flat-bottom hull which will have
tion. This seems to be a t t r i b u t e d to the following to produce more complicated waves than a curved-
reasons: b o t t o m hull ?
i T h e use of the a u t h o r ' s m e t h o d of approxima- 2 U n d e r a given condition of displacement and
tion b y which a higher a c c u r a c y is obtained in the stability, there can be innumerable combinations
t r e a t m e n t of the hull-surface condition c o m p a r e d of a main hull and a bulb which will bring a b o u t
to Micfiell's approximation. I t would be quite the waveless situation in effect.
doubtful whether such successful results could However, the hull form with the bulb of the
have been obtained if Miehell's approximation smallest size and of the least projection o u t w a r d
had been followed as done b y Wigley. f r o m the main hull is m o s t desirable from the
2 T h e concept of the viscosity effect was bas- practical point of view, either for construction or
ically correct. I n fact, the o p t i m u m position of for operation.
the stern bulb's center was in good a g r e e m e n t W h a t kind of main hull g e o m e t r y can satisfy
with 6a = 6 -- ~p, where 8 was predicted b y the such condition ?
resistance test, while aF was determined b y the T h e m a t h e m a t i c a l t r e a t m e n t of the conven-
comparison between the measured and calculated tional flat b o t t o m , which is closely connected with
bow-wave profiles. the problem 1, was the subject which the a u t h o r
intended to s t u d y immediately after he finished
5 Practical Developments of the Waveless Forms his work published in 1957. I t is n o t so easy to
I n the preceding section the possibility of find- find the source distribution which exactly repre-
ing the waveless f o r m has been experimentally sents a given ship g e o m e t r y with a flat b o t t o m .
ascertained as theoretically predicted, with two However; for this purpose some approximation
basic models which have simple w a v e - m a k i n g m u s t be possible at a F r o u d e n u m b e r not higher
0.5
0L~ - t ~ ..... i
0 05
V
I'~-.
0 5 ~ '-"
Source D[s~ribu~'ion 1///.//
/'~> "/
I
I U3
'"/ " 1
• ~ ~ ~'- ~ " ~
II 129
- I.o L. _/
U-2o, : : - i---
C~[s ob{ained by using Hughes'Line / , } ; ~ ' / '
w'+h 'orm 'Oc~or K=O.Z5 / d / < /
0.001
tt
0 ~-~ ~ r c ==---=- - - I ~ i I 1
020 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40
r:v/~
Table 3 Particulars for U-Series Models and Their Optimum Bulbs (LBp = 2.5m)
Model No. B(m) v ( m ~) S(m 2) Bulb No. ao/L f/L XF/L &V/v (%) &S/S(%) AB/Am(%)
U3 . . . . . 0.389 0.1058 1.315 F2 . . . . 0.030 0.05 --0.025 2.49 4.07 21.8
U5 . . . . . 0.374 0.1074 1.299 F1 . . . . 0.034 0.05 --0.005 3.87 6.11 31.6
U7 . . . . . 0.371 0.1063 1.295 F1 . . . . 0.030 0.05 0.030 3.18 7.07 24.8
U0 . . . . . 0.363 0.1078 1.299 F1 . . . . 0.034 0.05 0.035 3.41 7.59 29.2
C-301... 0.356 0.1070 1.300 0.036 0.05 0.07
Table 4 Particulars for UF-Series Models and Their Optimum Bulbs (Lsp = 2.5m)
Model .",'o. /3(m) v ( m 3) S ( m 2) Bulb No. ao/L f/L Xp/L &V/v (%) & S / 3 (%) AB/A,~(%)
UF3(xUF7).. 0.380 0.08273 1. 170 F1 0.026 0.042 --0.020 1.95 3.09 20.0
UF5(xUF9) .. 0. 369 0.08386 1.17(} F1 0.030 0.042 0.010 2.99 5.52 29.5
UFT(xUF3) .. 0.380 0.08273 1.170 F1 0.030 0.042 0.040 3.92 7.77 28.2
UF9(xUFS).. 0.369 0. 08386 1. 176 F1 0. 030 0. 042 0.045 3.71 7.88 29.5
SR-451... 0.357 0.08302 1. 195
NOTE: As for ao, f, ,g[ Ab, Am in T a b l e s 3 a n d 4 l e f e r t o f o o t n o t e in T a b l e 5 p a g e 318.
Results Obtained by UF-Series Models and UF-series models and their optimum bulbs
Fig. 29 also s h o w s t h e b o w profile p i c t u r e s a n d a r e l i s t e d on T a b l e s 3 a n d 4.
t h e r e s u l t s of t h e r e s i s t a n c e t e s t s for f o u r cases
Effect of Flat Bottom
when two 2.5-m UF-series models, UF3XUF7
and UFSXUF9 w e r e r u n f o r e a n d aft. T h e Fig. 30 s h o w s t h e d i f f e r e n c e in t h e w a v e profiles
d e s i g n s p e e d of t h e b u l b w a s F = 0.277 (KoL a l o n g t h e m o d e l side b e t w e e n t w o m o d e l s U 9
= 13), as in t h e case of U-series m o d e l s . and UF9 (XUFS) at four Froude numbers F =
T h e c o m p a r i s o n b e t w e e n Figs. 28 a n d 29 s h o w s 0.250, 0.277, 0.302, 0.354, w h i c h c o r r e s p o n d t o
a g r e a t s i m i l a r i t y of t h e t r e n d . I t also tells t h a t KoL = 16, 13, 11, 8, r e s p e c t i v e l y . I n t h i s figure
e v e n w i t h t h e f l a t b o t t o m t h e r e is sufficient possi- t h e o r i g i n a l l y m e a s u r e d w a v e profiles of M o d e l U9
b i l i t y f o r t h e " w a v e l e s s " c o n d i t i o n to b e a p p r o x - a r e also s h o w n , for c o m p a r i s o n , a t t w o F r o u d e n u m -
i m a t e l y r e a l i z e d . F o r c o n v e n i e n c e in c o m p a r i s o n , b e r s 0.250 (KoL = 16) a n d 0.302 (KoL = 11).
F i g . 29 s h o w s also t h e r e s u l t of a c e r t a i n c o n v e n - T h e c o m p a r i s o n r e v e a l s t h a t , as w a s e x p e c t e d ,
tional hull form which has a similar design condi- t h e c h a n g e in w a v e - m a k i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s d u e t o
t i o n . T h e p a r t i c u l a r s of t h e m a i n h u l l s of U - s e r i e s t h e b o t t o m b e i n g f l a t t e n e d is n o t so g r e a t . Let
0.001
Ciw •Ls ob÷ained by using Hughes' Line / /
(5 J-
a
= .....................
~ ~ ~ D e s i g q e d Speed'
-.---~--~'~~, " l I/ " L "
o.~s o.zo o.~ o.so
Fo v / ¢ ~
-. F*0.250 /// t 20 E
,/ ~ 8O
G0
j-20
// -40
F=0.302 // 40
"\ / 20
\~ -- --__ __---- - - . ~ /
_ -20 40
- ~ ~-20
I I ~ I I I I i ~ J j ]-40
A.R I 2_ 3 4 5 G 7 8 9 LR
Fig. 30 Measured and calculated difference in wave profile between Model-UF9 (XUF5)
and Model U9
5~ o.oo
/!
f o . . ~ . ~ ..~. ~-~y
o.~: ~
~ I I I I
o.~5 o.~o o.2~ o.~o o.35
F= v / ~ t ~
Fig. 31 Measured and calculated wave-making resistance for Model U9, UF9 (XUF5)
a n d UF9
o 0.001
** LEXdeno+es+he ex{reme leng{h
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
/
:Jl
J%" "[~. I
/
N 4 Z40 - - I
I
UF3xFi .... / UFgxFI . . . .
t-
.-J
(b) Oesigned~
I , S~pe.ed 1 ' I --
16 18 20 22 [ Z4 16 t8 20 22 [ 24
, Vs (K+) I , ' Vs ( ~ ) i
0.20 0.25 0,30 F o.2o 0'30
Fig. 33 Comparison in EHP (L = 600 ft) between Model UF3 (XUF7) and M.
No. 4240 (DTMB 60-series)
(a) K (form factor) = O, ACF = 0.0004 (Schoenherr-llne base)
(b) K (form factor) = 0.14, ACt = 0 (Schoenherr-line base)
5
H. No. Wifhouf B. Wifh Bulb
SI F4 - -
4 1:3-----
S3 F5 . . . .
it 2
£3
I " Speed
0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30
F=V/(LwL9
Fig. 34 Wave-making resistance for railway-ferry boat Models St and $3 (L = 2.4m)
Table 5 Particulars for Railway Ferryboat Models and Their Optimum Bulbs (Lsp = 2.4m)
Model No. B(m) v(m 3) S(m ~) Bulb No. ao/L f/L XF/L 2XV/v(%) AS/S (%) AB/A,~ (%)
S1 . . . . . . . 0.348 0.04843 0.9191 F4 0.020 0.0302 0.020 2.18 3.74 20.4
$3 . . . . . . . 0.3766 0.04741 0.9068 F3 0.020 0.0302 0.010 2.02 3.18 20.1
F5 0.016 0.0309 0 1.27 1.57 16.2
ao = effective radius of bulb.
f = immersion of bulb center.
XF = longitudinal position of bulb center ( + foreward, -- aftward from FP)
AB = maximum sectional area of bulb.
Am = midship sectional area.
derivative rnr'(}) is discontinuous, both at the This gives us the warning t h a t in the prepara-
midship section. The photogrammetrical survey tion of ship's lines unless great caution is exercised
of wave patterns adopted b y the author cannot in this regard it m a y be a cause of a wave-making
as yet claim t h a t it is able to recognize clearly effect to an unexpectedly great degree. From a
such high-order free-wave systems, but it seems theoretical point of view it is especially interesting
undeniable t h a t these high-order free waves are to investigate the relationship between singularity
produced. and ship geometry with respect to hull forms hay-
Measured U-/
0.0014 U-/xFI
Calcula÷ed wave-mcxking resi#ance
coefficienf of U]x Fi CaIculafed wifhouf Cw - -
O.O01Z correcfion C w'(I) - -
Calculcr~ed {undamen+al fern OKt/(t ] - -_ _
of UTxFI i i ) v w --. ve~
0.0010 CwQ)- C~ (l)= due % midship wa
Cw# due fo ~ern waye
and midship wc~veof U-( Calculafed wifh Cw
correcffon C~ (
C~ is obfolned
I~-~ 0.0008 by using Hughes' Line
wifh form facfor K= 0.7.3
o.ooo~
II
0.0004
Designed Speed
0.000Z
OpO.~o_q,e q - 0 , o _k . . . . r. . . . I I IJ i i I
o.~2 o~4 o,o o~8 020 o~2 024 o~ oz8 030 o3~ 034
F=V/L¢-C~-
Fig. 36 Measured and calculated wave-making resistance for Model U7 (without bulb) and Model U7 MF1 (with
bulb)
ing a parallel body. Fig. 37 illustrates the result t i n u i t y in source d i s t r i b u t i o n which causes an
of load-waterline calculation m a d e for a case excessive shoulder wave.
where the forward h a l f - b o d y source a n d the after
Final Remarks
half-body sink are separated. E v e n t h o u g h the
load waterline a n d its successive derivatives are T h e foregoing sections discuss the fact t h a t a new
all continuous, there exists a r e m a r k a b l e diseon- m e t h o d of hull-form research has b e e n developed.
The relation between the roots 0~, 0"- and the in Fig. 39. F r o m Fig. 39 we can see t h a t the
radial angle @ is shown in Fig. 38. Iq, F"-, K~, phase difference between the transverse-wave
K= are also the numerical values easily obtainable system and the diverging-wave system is nearly
with
~(R, 0 >~ 19°28 ') ~-~ \~R/__ I-/3 A (0~) K(~-)
S(O) - -~l~/K°2sec 4 0 exp (--Kof sec 2 0) (67)
sin [ F 3 ' K o R + h(O.~)], (59) 7r
Appendix 3 NOTES :
(a)* T h e English translations of these papers
Published Papers on Waveless Hull Forms
were published by the University of Michigan,
A I * T. Inui, T. Takahei, and M. Kumano, [21].
" W a v e Profile Measurements on the Wave- (b)~ This paper alone is written in English;
Making Characteristics of the Bulbous Bow," all other papers listed are in Japanese, each with
Journal of Th.e Society of Naval Architects of a brief English abstract.
Japan, vol. 108, 1960, p. 39. (c) Reference [All discusses mainly the phase
Discussion
Prof. T. Takahei, Member and Prof. R. B. Couch, chell's theory which has been followed so far in
Council Member: The author has proposed an en- the theoretical works pretaining to ship resistance.
tirely new model t a n k testing procedure taking The procedure which author has outlined takes
advantage of model wave observations and advantage of the concept of "elementary waves"
analyses. I t is possible to use this procedure be- to clarify the mechanism of wave interference
cause of advances in wave-resistance theory, the caused by the bulbous bow.
availability of adequate digital computers, and At The University of Michigan we have been
the high degree of sophistication of present-day active in bulbous-bow research. One of the
instrumentation. The overall effectiveness of writers, Dr. Takahei, is one of the co-developers
his method has been verified quite well by the with the author of the new bulb theory, and has
evidence presented in the paper. been working at the University for the past year.
Another i m p o r t a n t contribution is the author's In t h a t time we have duplicated the Japanese
explanation of the application of wave-resistance model tests on the mathematical forms C-101
theory to practical ship hydrodynanfics instead and C-201 with and without bulbs using larger
of the tenuous calculations on the basis of Mi- models of 12 ft in length as compared to the S.2-
MEASURED,
- - 1 2 FT MODEL AT UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
. . . . 8.2 FT MODELAT UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO /
/
A:MAIN HULL (WITHOUT BULB)
O.OO20 B:WITH B O W - B U L B , /
t~_j
%
-... O.OOIO
Ol
0 I ~ I ! r r I T
O. IO 0.20 ~' 0.50 0.40 0.50
DESIGN SPEED ( F = 0 . 2 6 7 ) FROUDE NUMBER F=V//'Cgg
3.2 ---e - -
2.8
P
2.4
o
x I
BARE HULL
a~,~ 2.0
WITH ORIGINAL __ Y
OBSERVATION CH A M B / , . ~ ~ " "
u .~
.{~WITH BULB F2
1.2 IWETT[ SURFACE
AREA
I BARE HULL 486 SQ FT
2 HULL WITH OBSERVATION
0.8 _ _ CHAMBER (ORIGINAL DESIGN) 509 SO FT
2, HULL WITH BULB F2 508 SQ FT
I I D~SIGNI-1SPEED
0.4
0.03 0.09 0.15 0)21 0.27 0.55 0.39
FROUDE NUMBER
L I I f I I I i I I I I I
0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 I.I 1.3
SPEED-LENGTH RATIO
ft length of the Japanese models. Our results and (36) it is indeed dill]cult to follow his argu-
compare very closely with the author's on the ment, since both formulations lead to the con-
C-101 form, but slight discrepancies were found clusion that the wave-making resistance will be
for C-201, as shown on Fig. 41 of this discussion. zero for B(O) identically equal to A (0). When
These small differences .are negligible and our earlier investigators failed to imagine how two dis-
tests very effectively conflrln the Japanese tests. tinctly different three-dimensional bodies can
In both the Japanese and the University of Mich- produce two wave systems of equal amplitndes
igan tests the ratio of tank cross section to n]odel and inverse phase the writer finds himself in their
cross section was about 160. company. If the term "waveless" is to have an
We have also recently tested a model of an exact meaning it must be demanded t h a t B(O)
oceanographic research ship of about 15() ft in is exactly identical to A (0). I t has been shown
length on which was fitted an observation cham- that this is only al)proximately true, and we there-
ber. This observation chalnber was replaced by fore have a form for which the wave-making resist-
an Inui bulb to serve a double purpose. The ance is only approximately equal to zero. If
new bulb produced a total reduction in E H P of criticism is to be leveled against Havelock, \Vein-
about 1,5 percent at a design speed of 12 knots. blum, Wigley and others it can only be said that
Fig. 42 shows the results in the form of CR curves they did not go far enough in their investigations.
versus Froude number. This is an ideal ap- In any theoretical treatment of a physical
plication of the Inui bulb. phenomenon, approximations arise from two
sources; i.e., ai)proximations implied in the for-
Dr. Finn C . M i c h e l s e n , Associate Member: The mulation of the theory and those encountered in
wave cancellation obtained with the large bulbs, numerical calculations. Since the streamlines
which the writer believes are already being gen- defining a hull form from a given singularity dis-
erally referred to as Inui bulbs, is quite remark- tribution are usually determiued by means of
able. One m a y wonder why such results were numerical methods, such as that of Runge-Kutta,
not obtained a long tinle ago. The author gives the resulting form will not be an exact one. At
the opinion that failure to realize a "waveless" The University of Michigan it has been found,
hull form is due to the failure of earlier investi- for instance, that great care must be exercised in
gators to understand fully the lneehanisn~ of wave the determination of the streanllines. A finer
cancellation. On that point the writer wishes to mesh than that used by the author did, in fact,
express disagreement. If the author's judgnlent reduce the beam in the case of model C-201.
is based on the difference between equations (35) The difference iu this case is small and is believed
, I
+.,,.
0.12
0 I0 20 50 4'0 50 60 70 80 90 I00
No. OF SPACINGS IN X
Fig. 43 Runge-Kutta method, effect of disisions in x on maximum beam for C-201
to be insignificant. Fig. 43 shows the variation equations (61), (62), (63), (66) and (67). Equa-
of beam as a function of n u m b e r of subdivision tions (61) t h r o u g h (63) give the free-wave pat-
used. tern of a traveling point source, and equations (66)
T h e a u t h o r has now for m a n y years been one of and (67) the free-wave p a t t e r n of a traveling
the m a j o r contributors to our knowledge of wave- point doublet. T h e point source produces waves
m a k i n g resistance of ships. His work on bulbs m u c h like those of the bow of a ship, while the
has indeed stirred our imagination and has led to point doublet produces waves like those of a
full realization of the significance of the wave- sphere :
resistance theory. F o r this alone will he take a
place a m o n g the fotmders of this theory. ~os(x,y) N
f_ +/'~
,2 C(O) eos(K0p sec-~0) dO (6~)
STEM~
25 FT )RAFT
BULB ON BULB ON
WL R ---/1560 C ,478 B
WLS
WLT
WL U i DIAMETER
KEEL 7 !
NOSE OF BULB F!P
1560 F IS 75 FT 51.25 FT. t
A F T OF F P
ELEVATION
WLU
WL R /WL S ~
S~ ~ - - - - - - ~ ~
T~ ~ ~ _ _ _ ~ .
u ~_ -- -- ~- _. . . .
PLAN
Fig. 44 D e t a i l s o f b u l b s fitted to models 1360 and 1478 (Wigley). D i m e n s i o n s are
f o r a ship 400 ft X 37.5 ft X 25.0 ft draft
; " -..N ~ g JI
-+. o
F+5
Z
LIJ
"0
rY
:o+ ' - \ ia
ILl
n 0
- 5 _ _
~-t- 1.280
75 FT A F T OF" FP I I
-I0 ! FP
I 3L2IFT ~WD OF FP
I00 80 60 40 20 0 20 40 60
DISTANCE FROM FP TO NOSE OF BULB-FEET FOR 4 0 0 - F T SHIP
Fig. 45 Percentage change in resistance due to fitting of a bulb (\Vigley). Percentages
refer to a 400-ft ship
Dr. J. P. Breslin, Member: While m a n y researchers In detail, then, the boundary condition requires
have been aware of the fact that the streamline that
shape associated with source distributions is not
that of the ship, the author has been the first, I b.f bf o
(..- u ) 57~ - ~ (0 + w b-;, =
believe, actually to nmke calculations to show what
these shapes are. Further, he shows that when so that
one builds a model to this shape rather than the
- UOf .Of wOf
one which the source distribution is supposed to
v- bx + bx + - bz
give, much better agreement between theory and
experiment is obtained. The last two terms are neglected on the basis that
He side steps this failure of the simplified they represent the product of small quantities.
relationships between the local source density and But in the neighborhood of the bow and stern
the desired or arbitrary ship geometry by accepting u --~ U and by/bz, the slopes of the sections are not
the resulting streamline shape which he calculates small and it is just these regions of a ship which
with the use of an electronic computer after are predominantly important in the generation of
selecting a source distribution. This is fine for waves. The thin-ship theory goes on then to
his purposes-particularly to demonstrate as he exploit the simple relation between the local
has-the effectiveness of bulb s;hapes to produce source strength of a distribution taken over the
interfering wave patterns which reduce the wave longitudinal centerline plane which says that on
resistance to very low values at certain design the plane
Froude numbers.
m
However, I think that it is essential to make vs± ~-~ =t=-
calculations for desired waterline and section 2
shapes so that we m a y learn how such factors as and that this expression is considered to hold out
entrance angle and waterline shape, for example, to the adjacent point on the ship boundary so that
influence wave resistance. Thus the direct
-- UOf(x,z)
p r o b l e m - - w h a t is the wave resistance for a m(x,z) = v ~ - bx
specified set of lines--is still with us, but the
answer is much nearer to hand than before and I This expression is then inserted into the formulas
would like to explain why this is so. for the Kelvin source distribution which satisfies
--
OF SCOUR,CE DIS.~. _rBUTIONS
- - M(F~) = 3.68oo9~-3.48oo9
2 L
~40DEL X . . . . . M(~) = 3.55"35~ --.01386~ 2 _ 7.3891~ 3
+4.0537~4 _.19903~ ~
0.6
ASSY~aETRICAL
T I
WITH RESPECT TO }fIDSHIP
/ \ \
\\
h_--
/
0.4
\
0.2 \
\
\
0
-0.2 ~ \ \
-0,4
\
\
,d /
-0.6 x,Q\
,\
-0.8 "~,k \
-3.,2
f
-i.0 -0.9 -0.8 -0.7 -0.6 - 0 . 5 - 0 . 4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.i O.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
first one is on Model U3 of this paper. I t is the free-wave system of these models. As mentioned
best model of the U-series for V~/L = 0.93 before, Model X has been specially chosen. I t
(F = 0.277). The second one is D T M B Model was selected so that the sine component of the
4946 which was just recently tested. The third free-wave system is negligible, and the dominating
one, Model X, is selected particularly for the component is the cosine component. In this case,
purpose of this discussion. a bulb derived from a point doublet cannot possi-
Fig. 46 of this discussion shows the source dis- bly cancel the free wave. Instead, concentrated
tributions of the three models. The notations source (sink at stern) at ends should be employed
are the same as used in the paper. Model X has for this purpose. This concentrated source at
a T / L value of 0.04 and has the source distribu- ends will avoid the cusp of waterline .endings of
tion on the central plane. 2/-'and L are the depth this model. In the case of Model U3, the cosine
and the length of source distribution, respectively. component within the range of important 0-values
Model 49'.4.6 has a T / L value of 0.03 and has the is actually larger than the sine component. A
source distribution placed off the central plane. bulb derived from both a concentrated source and
This is done in order to obtain a desired B/I-Iratio. a doublet should, at least theoretically, be more
Fig. 47 shows the resultant elementary wave effective. Furthermore, the doublet should be
amplitudes of the models at the designed 17/~/~ distributed along a vertical line at the ends in
value of 0.93. From this figure, it may be expected accordance with the amplitude curve of the sine
that Model 4946 will have better performance component of the free-wave system. Likewise,
than Model U& Fig. 48 shows the amplitude the source should be distributed along the same
curves of the sine and cosine components of the line in accordance with the amplitude curve of the
- -
MODEL
~ODEL
U3
7~ODEL 4 9 4 6 - -
/
1.0
/
+-------- J
/
"t
o.5 \
\
/
/ \
/
// \
0° i0 ° 20 ° 30 ° 40 ° 50 ° 60 ° 70 ° 80 °
cosine component. B y doing so, not only a more In conclusion, I would like to make the follow-
effective bulb can be obtained but also better hull ing statements based on the results in Figs. 46 to
geometry near the ends can be developed. For 49:
the case of Model 4946, both the sine and the 1 A large bulb seems not a necessity for a low
cosine components of the free-wave system are wave-making resistance hull form as shown in the
negligible within the range of important 0-values. case of Model 4946.
Therefore, no bulb would be required.
2 Line source should be considered as a very
Fig. 49 shows the total measured resistance-
desirable element in designing an effective bulb.
coefficient curves of Models U3 and 4946. The
In any case, it is not possible to have a bulb de-
former was obtained at the University of T o k y o
rived purely from a point doublet. The necessary
both with and without bulb, while the latter was
arbitrary fairing, in order to blend the sphere to
obtained at D T M B . The lower portion of the
the main hull, in reality is equivalent to the intro-
figure shows the Cw curves obtained from the
ducing of additional source. Would it be better
measured 'total resistance coefficients by using
to include the source in the design stage of a bulb
Sehoenherr's friction line with a K-factor of 0.14.
rather than to introduce it arbitrarily on the
The computed C,v curves have been plotted also
drawing board?
as shown. There is a shift of phase between
measured and computed C., curves for both The author's comments on these points will be
models. The better resistance quality of Model greatly appreciated.
4946 near the designed speed, as predicted by
theory, has been verified experimentally. Aside Prof. Lawrence W. Ward, Associate Member:
from the phase shift, the agreement between T h e a u t h o r presents a s t r o n g case f o r w h a t c o u l d
measured and computed Cw-values of Model be called "the photographic analysis of ship wave-
4946 is very good. making performance"; by this I mean the tech-
MODEL
X
4 9 4 6 - -
/
/
/
O.5
//
f
/
J
_ j r /
/
\ /
/
/
. ,f
SINE COMPONENT /
/
/
/
o--- l I /
- COSINE COMPONENT
-0.5 - -
. . . . ,.I
/
I d
0 ° 10° 20 ° 30 ° 4o ° 50 ° 60 ° 70 ° 80 °
nique of circumventing completely the determina- himself has shown [24] to derive such a number
tion of any number corresponding to the energy from the photographs but only with considerable
in the ship wave system but rather relying on analytical effort and still requiring complex and
visual observation of the photographs themselves large facilities, nor does it seem possible, as the
for the purpose of assessing the value of changes author suggests, to cut down the size of this equip-
made in the hull form. The success obtained ment since the wave pattern itself depends o11 the
herein for the case of adding bulbs makes this viscous-flow regime to an unknown extent. Thus
method one difficult indeed to criticize; however, his method will not eliminate the need to establish
those of us who have taken as our goal the im- practical methods for the experimental determi-
provement of the theory of ship waves still must nation of wave resistance directly from measure-
insist that we have that number, however elusive ments of the wave pattern as in the methods of
it m a y be, for comparison with the theory with a the writer [20] and that of K. Eggers [19].
view to finally improving it to the point where it The author is to be commended on having in-
can guide us .truthfully in our various design eluded an investigation into the validity of the
problems. Of course it is possible as the author usual linearized treatment of the ship hull surface
U 3 u~th Lulb . . . . . . . . .
. . C,¢ = 6.77 X lO
, C~ = 6.94 X lO
-3 //// 1.5
TMP, NC,D'ZL 49146 , C.~ = 5 . 0 3 X 10
-3 N
L %
tm
8"
P~
O
/ a
TMB~O~EL, 4946.]X /
I I I
0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35
0
o/) the waves are c o n t a i n e d is n o t a definite one; one
would h a v e to s a y "90 d e g r e e s " to be sure. T h i s
is n o t new to m o s t t a n k e x p e r i m e n t e r s , b u t has
o5 often been a s c r i b e d to an effect of the finite b e a m .
o .~ z . "~
tE
(..&3
( • OP
E =.OP
o ./ Z .~ ÷ T~
Z
f-÷Z
/, \
[z
¢-.~o
~* 0 3
0o
i':=' I'r , ',., ferent LCB location, end contours, and so oi1.
However, these differences are not necessarily in
0 ~PE6~EE) favor of model UF3(xUF7). Besides, the purpose
of m y UF-series is not to compete with other forms
Fig. 5 5 but rather to study how the optimum size and
location change with main hull forms. Our re-
sults are shown in Fig. 29. Even though the
elementary waves is, of course, one of the results resistance at F -- 0.277 is quite different among
obtained from the linearized wave theory, where the forms UF-series models, if each of them is
the wave slope is assumed as infinitesimally small. fitted with its own specially designed bulb, their
Referring to equation (7), it would be easily wave-making resistance can all be reduced to a
understood that the wave slope of the "elemen- very low magnitude. Concerning the end con-
tary waves" rapidly increases with inereasing 0. tours, it should be noted that the railway ferry
For a numerical example, Fig. D5 is reproduced boat model $3 has a conventional <~tem and a
from Professor Takahei's paper [A-3], Fig. 10. cruiser stern•
When we remember that the limiting allowable The second item of Dr. Todd's discussion is the
wave slope is, say 1/7, the concept of the "elemen- comparison of our theory of bulb with that of
tary waves" m a y fail its physical meaning in the Mr. Wigley's. From the six conclusions of Wig-
range beyond a certain finite value of 0, say 0 = ley's work on bulbs as quoted by Dr. Todd, very
70 deg. little is said about the relationship between each
In conclusion, this problem seems rather "reIa- main hull form and its optimum bulb. This rela-
tive," not "absolute." T h a t lneans, since the tion is a vital requirement in order to design an
wave-resistance level of the conventional hull effective bulb. Each bulb has to be specially
form is not so low, we lnay be allowed to use the designed to fit a particular hull form. Wigley's
term waveless. conclusions are too vague to be useful for a par-
I want to thank Captain Shor for his interests in ticular design. For exalnple, if the bulbs of the
m y paper as well as for his informative comments form UF-series models are interchanged, no
on the usefulness of a combined system of point satisfactory results can be obtained.
source and sink in place of a point doublet. In Concerlfing the free-wave pattern of an im-
his case, the additional displacement due to the mersed doublet or sphere, Dr. Todd expressed his
added system of singularity would be larger, and experience that he could not find visual evidence
must be taken into consideration at an early stage that the free wave starts with a trough, as the
of design. theory explains. In such conlparison between ob-
Dr. Todd's discussion is very interesting to me served and calculated wave profiles, the following
especially because his comments might be ac- two points must be considered:
cepted generally as representing the average opin- (a) To clearly make a distinction between
ion of the naval architects who are working at the "free" wave and the "total" wave.
ship model basins the world over. He first pointed (b) To appreciate the difficulty of obtaining
out the several minor differences in the hull-form tile wave profile of a bulb directly. As explained
characteristics between the two models, UF3- in Fig. 2"3 an indirect method was used by sub-
(xUF7) and Series 60, Model 4240. As I remarked tracting the wave profile measured on the without-
clearly in the snmmary of m y text, the main pur- bulb model from that lneasured on the with-bulb
o,4
Ol t , . a
0.2 l>.1
#,# I I I 0
0.2 0.3 ~.4. f=v~"£-~ o,.r 0,2 0,3 0.4 a..¢
O.l
I,~ 1.0
?, ~ ~ o~
.D a
O.Z 0,2
O,O i I I 0 I | I
o.I ~.2 0.3 ,~.4 ,c~Y/(/'~ ,~..¢ 0.1
g
/,o 1,0
0,8 o,~
ZI 0. /~ 'Z o.6
0,4- o.,
jz
#2 O2
I,O o I I I
0.2 o,4. /: = ~,/'~$ d.i a,2 o,3 o,4 ~ = V o,g
0./ a. 3
model. T h e d i r e c t m e t h o d of t o w i n g a s u b m e r g e d a n d o b t a i n all t h e n e c e s s a r y i n f o r m a t i o n s a b o u t
sphere alone m a y be m e a n i n g l e s s d u e to a s t r o n g t h e a m p l i t u d e f u n c t i o n A(O) t h r o u g h o u t ]01 =
s e p a r a t i o n of t h e b o u n d a r y l a y e r on t h e surface of 0 ,--, rr/2 ( A p p e n d i x 1).
t h e sphere. F u r t h e r i t should be n o t e d t h a t even a single
Dr. T o d d ' s f o u r t h c o m m e n t is on t h e d o u b t of s t e r e o - p i c t u r e of such w a v e p a t t e r n is q u i t e use-
t h e usefulness of t h e w a v e p i c t u r e a n d our stereo- ful to us to g e t general i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e
a n a l y s i s in c o m p a r i s o n w i t h t h e existing m e t h o d of w a v e m a k i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of a n y given hull
m a k i n g use of t h e m o d e l - s i d e w a v e profiles, as form, as i l l u s t r a t e d in Figs. 15 a n d 16.
r e p r e s e n t e d b y Dr. G u i l l o t o n ' s e l a b o r a t e w o r k Dr. T o d d ' s fifth c o m m e n t is on t h e effects of
p u b l i s h e d in 1952. As I e x p l a i n e d in t h e text, large b u l b s on t h e sea-going qualities. F o r t h i s
t h e m o d e l - s i d e w a v e profile r o u g h l y c o r r e s p o n d s to Dr. Y o k o y a m a ' s w o r k on fishing b o a t s (reference
a single r a d i a l section s u r v e y on S = 0 °, which A7 a n d F i h n No. 4) as well as Dr. T a k e z a w a ' s
gives us o n l y a small p a r t of t h e i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t w o r k on h i g h - s p e e d escorts (References AS, 9 a n d
t h e n a t u r e of t h e f r e e - w a v e p a t t e r n c o r r e s p o n d i n g F i l m No. 3) is m o s t i n s t r u c t i v e .
to 0 = t) °. I n our m e t h o d we can d r a w v a r i o u s I agree w i t h Dr. T o d d ' s sixth c o m m e n t o11 t h e
r a d i a l lines from 8 = 0 ° to, s a y S = 25 ° or more, p r a c t i c a l m e r i t of a b u l b o u s b o w in keeping L C B
, /
I
U P 3 ( x UFq) ,rFl
/ / I
0
? o.ool
B--+---
C~se Ca) ~[ "7"^yl.oR~
C=~e Cb)
ST,4~D,~RO ,St~rz i $
/
I
/
/
I I
!
o I
/
//
UF3 0 L/F,7) x F I
o
0 r4 z~
0
/
7 _
0")
0.ool
J N
.¢ II
I I I
,Ir~ •/S ,~3" • 30
Fig, 57
P#oupL" ~Mak¢ F,,= e,a~9 (Y, .ao.s,,,,,~= ~,, Z-~o')
C~, = ~ / ~ a ¢ t . ' ) 6) CA z-CUL-ATGp ( I$,'l ~o 7o )
4- H~A,vU,q~O ( "g" ~a,,oT~.S ~'~,~z-#.8#L~*)
2 x / o -u . ~ - / . 8",4~a x / b ~ 8~IIRcE PIGT-RIBUT/olV :
- Z o. i c =o .o, )
J:l
I ~ I0 -ll
+ U.C'B
+ TJ 3 B
+ U qB
I)R. Pigwts [~Esecr (c,,t.cUl..,4rg:o)
+*1
o, o Og3 ~rlO-~,
+ U'q8
I I . . . . . T 4
2 3 4 8- x
Fig. 58 M i n i m u m w a v e r e s i s t a n c e due to f o r e - h a l f b o d y *
Presently in writing this reply I agree with him can never fully emphasize. Owing to these re-
wholeheartedly, but [ must confess that when I suits, it m a y be safely concluded that m y bulb
prepared m y text, which is only 6 months ago, ] form is not always the necessary condition for ob-
would not have expected a drastic result from such taining "practically" waveless forms. Thus, from
an approach. At that time I assumed t h a t the the mathematical point of view, we m a y divide the
better forms of existing designs represented a near waveless forms into .three categories, as; follows:
limit of such as approach, and I was inclined to Category (A): A s y s t e m of a "simple" con-
believe t h a t the long history of ship model basin tinuous source-sink distribution in combination
work would indicate, very little possibility for with a concentrated doublet, just like those de-
further improvement. scribed in Part 2 of m y text.
All this thought has now clearly turned out to
be questionable, as indicated by Dr. Pien's model
Category (B): A system of a "complicated"
continuous source-sink distribution alone, without
D T M B 4946 (refer to Figs. 48 and '4.q).
adopting any concentrated singularity, just like
Dr. Breslin's final c o m m e n t is " W h y the wave
Dr. Pien's model D T M B 4946.
resistance of the sinusoidal source distribution
(Models C-101, C-20l without bulbs) is larger Category (C) : A system of a "simple" or "con>
than t h a t which would be obtained for a ship of plicated" continuous source-sink distribution in
the same proportions?" These models were used combination with two different kinds of con-
to obtain the simplest wave-making characteris- centrated singularities; i.e., the concentrated
tics, without making use of the "internal self- doublet and the concentrated source.
interference," of the source distribution. Mathematically speaking, category" (C) m a y
Dr. Pien's discussion brings out m a n y i m p o r t a n t be the best. However, from a practical point of
fundamental points. Especially, his calculation view, category (B) m a y be most important.
and experiment on D T M B Model 4946 show In Fig. 47, A, (O)/L and ..:1~ ( 0 ) / [ of Model
epoch-making results, the importance of which I 4.q46 change their sign with increasing 0. This is
o U3
1,0
12t///
o.6
")2=2
0.2
-0.2
-o.4
-0,6
-O,B
-I. 0
-/,2
-1,4
-I.£
Fig. 59 Optimum source distribution (T/L = 0.04, F = 0.277)
,4 ~ ap) .7"l= Z
O ---------
-/ -- ( DE &gEE )
-~" / z
_~. .__---~ ~
/
/V/IN/HUH ~/AVe ~EsISTANeE DUE TO / FoRE--~'IALF BODY"
"'°~ / ( T/= = , , , , , # , ,~ =o 2~,;, )
R .,
C w =--i--~-7~,--~-- ~ .rl SOIII~CE DI~STRII3/JTION
. m
•~ 0 ' , o ? ~ <0"~12"
0 i ~lLJ'/S('~t'2~ -'~o
o O, ! 0.2 0.3 o,4. o ,$" o.g
Fig. 61