See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/328577464

Propulsion system improvement for trawlers

Chapter · January 2013

CITATIONS READS

0 526

2 authors:

Emilio Notti Antonello Sala

Italian National Research Council Italian National Research Council
55 PUBLICATIONS   313 CITATIONS    196 PUBLICATIONS   2,939 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

BYCATCH View project

Flagship project Ritmare - SP2_WP5 View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Antonello Sala on 05 April 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

COPYRIGHT © 2014 TAYLOR and FRANCIS GROUP, LONDON, UK CRC PRESS / BALKEMA - PROCEEDINGS AND MONOGRAPHS IN ENGINEERING, WATER AND EARTH SCIENCES
WWW.CRCPRESS.COM, WWW.TAYLORANDFRANCIS.COM

ISBN 978-1-138-00124-4

Developments in Maritime Transportation

and Exploitation of Sea Resources

Editors
Guedes Soares
L—pez Pe–a

help open
 Developments in Maritime Transportation and Exploitation of Sea Resources –
Guedes Soares & López Peña (eds)
© 2014 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-1-138-00124-4

Organisation

Conference chairman

Fernando López Peña, University of A Coruña, Spain

Chair International Scientific Committee

Carlos Guedes Soares, IST, Technical University of Lisbon, Portugal

CHAIR LOCAL ORGANIZATION COMMITTEE

Richard Duro, University of A Coruña, Spain

Chair National Support Committee

Daniel Peña, University of A Coruña, Spain

Technical Programme Committee

Ahmed Alkan, Yildiz Technical University – Istanbul, Turkey

Makoto Arai, Yokhohama University, Japan
Felice Arena, University of Reggio Calabria, Italy
Eugen Barsan, Constanta Maritime University, Romania
Ermina Begovic, University of Naples Federico II, Italy
Kostas A. Belibassakis, Technological Educational Inst. Athens, Greece
Giovanni Benvenuto, University of Genoa, Italy
Carlo Bertorello, University of Naples, Italy
Marco Biot, University of Trieste, Italy
Maria Boile, CERTH/IMET, Greece
Aida Campos, IPIMAR, Portugal
Nian-Zhong Chen, American Bureau of Shipping, USA
Nastia Degiuli, University of Zagreb, Croatia
Leonard Domnisoru, University of Galati, Romania
Branislav Dragovic, University of Montenegro, Montenegro
Selma Ergin, Istanbul Technical University, Turkey
R. Cengiz Ertekin, University of Hawaii at Manoa, USA
Stefano Ferraris, FINCANTIERI, Italy
Matt Folley, Queens University, Belfast, United Kingdom
Alberto Francescutto, University of Trieste, Italy
Christos Frangopoulos, National Technical University of Athens, Greece
Petar Georgiev, Technical University of Varna, Bulgaria
Omer Goren, Istanbul Technical University, Turkey
Gregory Grigoropoulos, National Technical University of Athens, Greece

xv
Yordan Garbatov, IST, Technical University of Lisbon, Portugal
José M. Gordo, IST, Technical University of Lisbon, Portugal
Atilla Incecik, University of Strathclyde, UK
Mohammad R. Khedmati, Amirkabir University of Technology, Iran
Kristofor Lapa, University of Vlora, Albania
Heba W. Leheta, Alexandria University, Egypt
Inigo Losada, University of Cantabria, Spain
Dimitrios Lyridis, National Technical University of Athens, Greece
Adolfo Marón, CEHIPAR-Madrid, Spain
Radoslav Nabergoj, Unversity of Trieste, Italy
Marcelo Neves, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Apostolos Papanikolau, National Technical University of Athens, Greece
Joško Parunov, University of Zagreb, Croatia
Floriano Pires, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Jasna Prpić Oršić, University of Rijeka, Croatia
Vicent Rey, University of Toulon, France
Phillipe Rigo, University of Liège, Belgium
Cesare Rizzo, University of Genoa, Italy
Enrico Rizzuto, University of Genova, Italy
Antonello Sala, ISMAR, Italy
Marcos Salas, University Austral of Chile, Chile
Antonio Scamardella, Parthenope University (Naples), Italy
Agustin Sanchez-Arcilla, UPC-Barcelona, Spain
Constantinos Spyrou, National Technical Univ. Athens, Greece
Francisco Taveira Pinto, University of Porto, Portugal
Nicholas Tsouvalis, National Technical Univ. Athens, Greece
Nikolaos Ventikos, National Technical Univ. Athens, Greece
Michele Viviani, University of Genova, Italy
Panos Yannoulis, OCEAN KING, Greece
Vedran Zanic, University of Zagreb, Croatia

National Support Committee

Ángel M. del Real Abella, Ferrol Port Authority

Angel Recamán, Navantia
Domingo García López, U.P. Cartagena
Emilio Fernández Suarez, Campus do Mar, U. Vigo
Enrique Losada Rodríguez, A Coruña Port Authority
Fernando Alcalde, Galician Naval Sector Cluster
Fernando González Laxe, Institute for Maritime Studies
German Rodriguez, U. Las Palmas de Gran Canaria
Ignasi Colominas, ETSIC, U. A Coruña
José de Lara Rey, ETSIN, U.P. Madrid
Jose Luis Villate, TECNALIA
José San Cristobal, University of Cantabria
Julio García Espinosa, U. P. Catalonia
Luis Carral, Association of Naval Architects of Spain
Luis Pérez-Rojas, Univ Politécnica de Madrid-ETSIN
Luis Vilches, Association of Naval Architects of Spain
Vicente Pérez Muñuzuri, MeteoGalicia

xvi
Local Organizing Committee

Marcos Miguez Gonzalez, University of A Coruña, Spain

Pilar Caamaño, University of A Coruña, Spain
Sara Ferreño, University of A Coruña, Spain
Vicente Diaz-Casas, University of A Coruña, Spain

Technical Programme Secretariat

Maria de Fátima Pina, IST, Technical University of Lisbon, Portugal

xvii
IMAM Organisation

IMAM Executive Committee

Enrico Rizzuto, University of Genova, Italy (President)
Fernando López Peña, University of A Coruña, Spain (Vice-President)
Sergey Baskakov, Odessa State Maritime University, Ukraine
Elena-Felicia Beznea, University “Dunarea de Jos” of Galati, Romania
Selma Ergin, Istanbul Technical University, Turkey
Yordan Garbatov, Instituto Superior Técnico, Portugal
Petar Georgiev, Technical University of Varna, Bulgaria
Heba W. Leheta, Alexandria University, Egypt
Jasna Prpic Orsic, University of Rijeka, Croatia
Fabien Remy, École Sup. d’Ingenieurs Marseille, France
Constantinos (Kostas) Spyrou, Hellenic Institute of Marine Technology, Greece
Ermal Xhelilaj, Vlora University, Albania
Carlos Guedes Soares, Instituto Superior Técnico, Portugal (Past President)

IMAM Technical Committees

Hydrodynamics
Stefano Brizzolara, University of Genoa, Italy
Dario Bruzzone, University of Genoa, Italy
Pierre Ferrant, École Centrale Nantes, France
Nuno Fonseca, Instituto Superior Técnico-Lisbon, Portugal
Omer Goren, Istanbul Technical University, Turkey
Gregory Grigoropoulos, National Technical University of Athens, Greece
Atilla Incecik, University of Strathclyde, United Kingdom
Fernando López Peña, University of A Coruña, Spain
Adolfo Marón, CEHIPAR-Madrid, Spain
Touvia Miloh, Tel Aviv University, Israel
Bernard Molin, École Centrale Marseille, France
Marcelo Neves, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Jasna Prpić Oršić, University of Rijeka, Croatia
Constantinos Spyrou, National Technical Univ. Athens, Greece
Penny Temarel, University of Southampton, United Kingdom
Leszek Wilczynski, CTO–Gdańsk, Poland
Kostadin Yossifov, Bulgarian Ship Hydrodynamics Centre, Bulgaria

Marine Structures
Dino Cervetto, RINA, Italy
Matteo Codda, CETENA-Genoa, Italy
Ionel Chirica, University of Galati, Romania
Leonard Domnisoru, University of Galati, Romania
Yordan Garbatov, Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisbon, Portugal
Mohammad Reza Khedmati, Amirkabir University of Technology, Iran
Heba W. Leheta, Alexandria University, Egypt
Mario Maestro, University of Trieste, Italy
Joško Parunov, University of Zagreb, Croatia
Cesare Rizzo, University of Genoa, Italy
Emmanuel Samuelides, National Technical University of Athens, Greece
Ajit Shenoi, University of Southampton, United Kingdom

Machinery & Control

Giovanni Benvenuto, University of Genoa, Italy
Andrea Cogliolo, RINA, Italy

xviii
Christos Frangopoulos, National Technical University of Athens, Greece
Antonio Paciolla, University of Naples (Federico II), Italy
George Palambrou, National Technical University of Athens, Greece
Luca Sebastiani, CETENA-Genoa, Italy

Shipyard Technologies
Ashutosh Sinha, SSA, United Kingdom
Niksa Fafandjel, University of Rijeka, Croatia
Luigi Mor, Nuovi Cantieri Apuania, Italy
Kalman Ziha, University of Zagreb, Croatia

Design of Marine Systems

Ahmed Alkan, Yildiz Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey
Ernesto Fasano, University of Naples, Italy
Miguel Ángel Herreros, UPM-ETSIN, Spain
Kristofor Lapa, University of Vlora, Albania
Apostolos Papanikolau, National Technical University of Athens, Greece
Panos Yannoulis, OCEAN KING, Greece
Vedran Zanic, University of Zagreb, Croatia

Safety of Marine Systems

Eugen Barsan, Constanta Maritime University, Romania
Gianfranco Damilano, ATENA, Italy
Alberto Francescutto, University of Trieste, Italy
Paola Gualeni, University of Genoa, Italy
Heba Leheta, Alexandria University, Egypt
Enrico Rizzuto, University of Genoa, Italy
Ângelo Teixeira, Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisbon, Portugal

Marine Environment
Jose Antunes do Carmo, University of Coimbra, Portugal
Felice Arena, University of Reggio Calabria, Italy
K.A. Belibassakis, Technological Educational Inst. Athens, Greece
Juana Fortes, LNEC, Portugal
German Rodriguez, University of Las Palmas, Spain
Eugen Rusu, University of Galati, Romania
Agustin Sanchez-Arcilla, UPC- Barcelona, Spain
Lev Shemer, Tel Aviv University, Israel

Protection of the Environment

Ruggero Dambra, CETENA, Genoa, Italy
Selma Ergin, Istanbul Technical University, Turkey
Corrado Schenone, University of Genoa, Italy
Massimo Figari, University of Genoa, Italy

Ports & Transports Systems

Makoto Arai, Yokhohama University, Japan
Rui Carlos Botter, University of S.Paulo, Brazil
Dimitrios Lyridis, National Technical University of Athens, Greece
Eden Mamut, Ovidius University of Constantza, Romania
Nikitas Nikitakos, Aegean University, Greece
Harilaos Psaraftis, National Technical University of Athens, Greece
Giovanni Solari, University of Genoa, Italy

xix
Offshore & Coastal Development
Francisco Taveira Pinto, University of Porto, Portugal
Mohamed Chagdali, University Ben M’Sik Casablanca, Morocco
Inigo Losada, University of Cantabria, Spain
Spyros Mavrakos, National Technical University of Athens, Greece
Vicent Rey, University of Toulon, France
Leonardo Brunori, RINA, Italy

Aquaculture & Fishing

Aida Campos, IPIMAR, Portugal
Teresa Dinis, Algarve University, Portugal
Rajko Grubisic, University of Zagreb, Croatia
Barry O’Neil, MARLAB, United Kingdom
Daniel Priour, IFREMER, France
Antonello Sala, ISMAR, Italy
Emma Tomaselli, RINA, Italy

Small & Pleasure Crafts

Carlo Bertorello, University of Naples, Italy
Dario Boote, University of Genoa, Italy
Izvor Grubisic, University of Zagreb, Croatia
Massimo Musio-Sale, University of Genoa, Italy
Lorenzo Pollicardo, Federagenti Yacht, Italy
Antonio Scamardella, Parthenope University (Naples), Italy

xx
 Developments in Maritime Transportation and Exploitation of Sea Resources –
Guedes Soares & López Peña (eds)
© 2014 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-1-138-00124-4

Propulsion system improvement for trawlers

Emilio Notti & Antonello Sala

Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Ancona, Italy

ABSTRACT:  Many technical solutions on trawler propulsion system can be adopted in order to reduce
fuel consumption. Propulsion system efficiency is mainly influenced by propeller and main engine effi-
ciency. Unless the use of slow diesel engines where main engine is directly coupled with the propeller shaft,
common high speed diesel engine must be coupled with the propeller shaft through a reduction gear in
order to obtain optimum conditions for the whole fishing activity, which, for trawlers, is subdivided in
two very different operating conditions: sailing and trawling. A two-speed reduction gear box can be
adopted to perform each operating condition without overloading the main engine, thus saving fuel. An
open fixed pitch propeller is mostly used in fishing vessels. Bollard pull tests demonstrated the usefulness
of a ducted propeller. An improvement in propeller thrust up to 25%, compared to an open propeller
with same pitch over diameter ratio, has been observed. Devices such as stators and grim wheel could be
considered as useful improvements. Main engine efficiency can be improved using a hybrid diesel-electric
propulsion system. Comparative tests on new hybrid concept demonstrated a fuel saving of up to 15%.
The abovementioned improvements could be applied simultaneously in the same fishing vessel, each one
improving the propulsion system efficiency. Such optimization can be adopted for new or existing vessel.

1  INTRODUCTION (Notti et  al., 2012). Trawlers activity is character-

ized by two basically different fishing conditions,
Many initiatives and tests have been carried out corresponding to sailing and trawling (Notti &
in recent past to find substitutes for fossil fuels. Sala, 2012). In Figure 1 advance resistance for sail-
­Nevertheless, fossil fuels remain the most used ing and trawling conditions of a 30 m LOA trawler is
energy source, mainly due to their low €/kWh represented in terms of specific resistance, defined
price, compared to other alternative energy sources as the resistance at any speed divided by the resist-
(Notti et  al., 2011a). Starting by the “fuel crisis ance at maximum speed against specific vessel speed
Regulation” (EC Regulation n. 744/2008) funds which is obtained as ratio between vessel speed and
have been introduced for decommissioning and maximum vessel speed. From the side of the pro-
modernization onboard fishing vessels to respond pulsion system, sailing condition is characterized
to increases in fuel prices. The high fuel consump- by high propeller thrust at high vessel speed. Trawl-
tion of many important fisheries is the major con- ing condition is characterized by high ­propeller
straint to their economic viability, represents a
significant source of greenhouse gas emissions and
has a considerable impact on marine environment
(Suuronen et  al., 2012). The economic viability is
also influenced by a generalized overexploitation of
the fishery resources. Actually it is not possible for
fishermen to sustain increasing costs, such as fuel
costs, by increasing in catches, thus in revenues. The
revenue/cost ratio, which is one of the definitions
of the profitability of a company, can increase only
through a reduction in fuel use (Sala et al., 2011a).
Most European fishing vessels are technologically
outdated and characterized by a low energy effi-
ciency level (Sala et al., 2010). Some energy audits
(Buglioni et al., 2011; Sala et al., 2012) and studies
focused on fuel usage in fisheries (Sala et al., 2011b) Figure 1.  Resistance curve during trawling and sailing.
showed that fishing vessel energy efficiency is gen- The resistance r over the maximum resistance r* is vari-
erally affected by propulsion system low efficiency able with the speed v over the design speed v*.

1085
thrust at low vessel speed. Among such condi-
tions, the propulsion system can vary his overall
efficiency depending on propeller design and main
engine characteristics. The major challenge in pro-
pulsion system engineering is to reach an optimum
design both during sailing and trawling, obtaining
a good coupling between main engine and propel-
ler performances. Many improvements are avail-
able for increasing propulsion system efficiency
in the whole fishing activity. Despite of the tests
and experiments carried out during recent past,
aimed at demonstrating improvements opportuni-
ties and the effort of industry to introduce innova-
tions on propulsion system technology, no sensible
progresses can be noticed mainly due to fishermen
suspicious. By the way, the actual fuel price crisis
can make fishermen more sensible to any solution
aimed at reducing costs.
(in liters per hour l/h), related to the brake power
generated BP (in kW) or in terms of specific fuel
consumption SFC, (in g/kWh), in relation to the
power generated. As shown in Figure 3, on the basis
of data collected by engine datasheets and data
declared by for the four major marine diesel engine
manufacturers, two similar trends are obtained
for the relationship between engine brake power
and fuel consumption declared. In ­Figure 3 same
results are obtained from the point of view of the
specific fuel consumption. Engine performances
of the four major manufacturers can be clustered
in two groups. Manufacturers A and B are charac-
terized by a mean SFC of about 149–152  g/kWh
(see Table 1) while the range of SFC for manufac-
turers C and D, is 207–214 g/kWh.

2  MATERIAL AND METHODS

Usually, the propulsion system of a Mediterranean

trawler consists of (Fig.  2) a high speed marine
diesel engine (1) that drives, through a reduction
gear (4) the intermediate shaft (5), for delivering
of propulsive power to a fixed pitch propeller (9)
that produces the required thrust for the different
operating conditions. For such propulsion system,
the requested thrust is managed by controlling the
engine revolution speed. Propulsion system effi-
ciency is mainly affected by main engine and pro-
Figure  3.  Relationship between brake power and
peller efficiency. For each of the devices composing fuel consumption for the major marine diesel engines
the typical propulsion system of a Mediterranean installed onboard fishing vessels (BP  =  brake power in
trawler, possibilities of improvement are proposed kW; FC = fuel consumption in l/h; A, B, C, D represents
and discussed in this paper. Information provided four major engine manufacturers, identified with generic
come from grey literature, project reports and symbols).
conference proceedings. Further information have
been collected through a direct information collec-
tion based on visits carried out on major European
events related to energy efficiency in fisheries.

2.1  Review of marine diesel engine state-of-the-art

Diesel engine performance and efficiency can
be evaluated in terms of fuel consumption FC,

Figure  4.  Specific fuel consumption for different brake

Figure  2.  Standard propulsion system of a fishing
­vessel: 1) diesel engine, 2) flywheel, 3) coupling flange,
4) reduction gear, 5) intermediate shaft, 6) stuffing box,
7) stuffing box bulkhead, 8) stern tube, 9) propeller.
power for the major marine diesel engines installed onboard
fishing vessels, on the basis of data declared by manu-
facturers. (BP  =  brake power in kW; SFC  =  specific fuel
consumption in g/kWh; A, B, C, D represents four major
engine manufacturers, identified with generic symbols).

1086
Table  1.  Range of power fuel consumption and aver-
age specific fuel consumption declared by major marine
diesel engines manufacturers. BP brake power in kW; FC
fuel consumption in l/h; SFC specific fuel consumption
in g/kWh; % specific fuel consumption comparison; A,
B, C, D represents four major engine manufacturers,
(identified with generic symbols).
Engine PB FC SFC
manufacturer [kW] [l/h] [g/kWh] %
A 320–1610 56–269 149   0%
B 373–1864 69–323 152   2%
C 136–883 33–206 207 39%
D 339–1118 84–277 214 44%
Figure 5.  Hybrid diesel electric propulsion system layout.
2.2  Hybrid diesel electric propulsion system
The main engine efficiency can be improved with
a new hybrid diesel electric propulsion system
(Notti et  al., 2011b), conceived as a prototypal
study at the Electrical Engineering Faculty of
Bologna University in 2008 (Rossi et al., 2008a). In
­Figure 5 the two power units system, conceived for
the study, is represented. Depending on the power
requested by the vessel for sailing and trawling,
the overall power installed can be subdivided in
multiple power units, each one obtained by cou-
pling a diesel engine with a permanent magnet
brushless electric generator, while the propeller is
coupled with an electric motor. Through an elec-
tronic power management system, it is possible
to maintain one or more power units at different
operating points to guarantee the minimum over-
all fuel consumption. In order to show how the
electronic power management system operates the
power sharing the units, in Figure 6 is represented
the trend of the power generated by the hybrid
system from the start to the maximum power. The
diagram in shows three curves. Two of them (the
green and the blue) describe the trend of the out-
put power of each power unit. The third (in red) is
the trend of their sum. From time t = 0 s to time
t = 16 s only one unit (Power unit 2) is active and
1087
Figure 6.  Hybrid system startup. (For interpretation of
the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is
referred to the PDF version of the paper).
Table  2.  Comparison of two vessels, A and B with
same dimension and characteristics during sailing and
trawling.
Vessels parameters A B
Length overall [m] 23.6 23.6
Main engine power [kW] 493 493
Maximum engine speed [rpm] 1800 1800
Propeller diameter [m] 1.80 1.80
Propeller pitch [m] 1.46 1.46
Maximum engine temperature [°C] 410 410
Reduction during sailing 5.18 6.00
Reduction during trawling 6.30 6.00
then the Power unit 2 and the Total power coincide.
At t = 16 s, Power unit 1 is delivering 100 kW with
the minimum specific fuel consumption, on the
basis of the engine characteristics. The electronic
power management system starts to request power
to Power Unit 1. The Total power curve branch off
from Power unit 2 curve because, while the Power
Unit 2 is still delivering 100  kW, the total power
coming delivered by the system increases due to the
contribution of Power Unit 1. Increasing power to
be delivered up to the maximum, power units will
run at their maximum power, around 257 kW.
2.3  Reduction gear box
A comparative test has been carried out in Spain in
1995 to demonstrate the advantages coming from
the use of a 2-speed reduction gear instead of a
typical single speed reduction gear (Reso & Amici
1997). Two vessels with same hull, beam, power
installed onboard, propeller diameter and pitch have
been monitored during fishing activity. One vessel
mounted a single-reduction ratio gear box. Vessels
main characteristics are reported in Table 2.
2.4  Propeller
As mentioned in § 2.3 the propeller is the device
responsible for the propulsive thrust generation,
 (TTF) and engine temperature (T) have been moni-
tored during one day activity (Table  3). During
sailing, trawler A reached a speed of 13.5 kn, while
trawler B a speed of 14 kn. A fuel saving of about
15% was achieved by vessel B compared to vessel A
during sailing. During trawling, vessel B obtained
a Total Towing Force (TTF) of 7 t, trawling at a
speed of 5 kn, while for vessel B a TTF of 6 t and a
speed of 2.5 kn was measured. Considering that the
thermal load limit of the engines installed onboard,
that is the exhaust gas temperature over which the
engine is overloaded, is about 410°C, the engine of
the vessel A resulted as overloaded, as the exhaust
Figure 7.  Ducted propeller. The internal surface of the gas temperature was around 435°C, both for sail-
duct is an hydrodynamic profile aimed at reducing water ing and trawling, while the gas temperature of the
flow turbulence and increasing water speed around the vessel B was about 385° C during sailing and 400°C
propeller blades. during trawling. In Table 4, a comparison between
power delivered PD by two B 4–70  Wageningen
series propellers with same diameter (D = 2 m) and
by using the power delivered by the main engine. pitch over diameter (P/D = 0.8) for the same thrust
­During trawling condition the propeller thrust can shows a reduction in the power requested PD of
be increased by using a ducted propeller whereby about 25% and an average reduction of 20% in
the propeller is surrounded by a shroud of duct all the range of thrust for the propeller with a 19a
(nozzle). The water around the stern is disturbed NACA profile nozzle. Some bollard pull tests on a
by the hull and the efficiency propeller, interacting bottom trawler, showed improvements in propeller
with such water, is thus reduced. In a ducted pro- thrust (Table 5). The advantages of a ducted propel-
peller the water flow at the propeller is straightened ler lie mainly in the possibility of realizing, for the
by the nozzle. The internal shape of the ­nozzle same power, greater thrusts than those generated
allows to accelerate and to converge the water
flow around the propeller (Fig.  7). Ducted pro-
pellers are suitable for heavily loaded propellers, Table 3.  Comparison of sailing and trawling conditions
such as trawlers and tugboats, where high thrust of vessels A and B with same characteristics except for
is needed at low vessel speed. The opportunity of the reduction gear box.
increasing the thrust by using a ducted propeller Sailing Trawling
instead of open propeller must be intended as the
possibility to reduce the power needed, thus the A B A B
fuel consumption, for the same thrust.
Reduction ration 6 5.18 6 6.3
Vessel speed [kn] 13.5 14 2.5 5
3  RESULTS Engine speed [rpm] 1800 1850 1400 1850
Exhaust gas temperature [°C] 435 385 435 400
Related to the hybrid diesel—electric propul- Total towing force [kgf] 6000 7000
sion system, many load tests have been done on a
marine diesel engine to evaluate its fuel consump-
tion, torque and power delivered according to Table 4.  Comparison of the power delivered between a
the revolution speed. An algorithm to control the B4-70 open propeller and a B4-70 ducted in nozzle 19 a
power units has been obtained from experimental NACA profile propeller, with same diameter and pitch.
data. The tests proved that the conceived propul-
sion system is indeed reliable. A fuel saving of up to Propeller thrust PD (B4-70) PD (B4-70/19a) Ratio
15% was achieved with power units equipped with (kgf) (kW) (kW) (%)
a 257 kW @ 3800 rpm diesel engine. The proposed
4000 204 172 84%
propulsion system could be useful both for new
5000 276 227 82%
vessels and for a refitting of existing ones. Further
6000 355 285 80%
advantages are related to the possibility of avoiding
7000 440 346 79%
propeller shaft and reduction gear, thus reducing 8000 530 411 78%
weights, noise and pollution. During tests with a 9000 625 480 77%
two-speed reduction gear, speed (VS), Fuel Con- 10000 726 551 76%
sumption (FC), total towing force during trawling

1088
 Table  5.  Bollard pull test comparison for a bottom trawler with an open and a ducted in nozzle with same
­diameter. For each propeller revs thrust, power delivered and thrust over power delivered ratio are represented.
Propeller Total towing force [kgf]
speed
[rpm] Open Ducted
385 3380 4240
400 3640 4600
415 3920 4950
by conventional propellers. For the same reason,
the same thrust required can be achieved with less
engine power and thus less fuel consumption.
4  Discussion AND CONCLUSIONS
Any possibility to increase the energy efficiency
could make the difference between positive or
negative economic balance in Mediterranean trawl
fisheries. Many fishing vessels propulsion systems
with fixed pitch propellers are obsolete and energy
intense. Improvements could be achieved with
technologies like controllable pitch propellers,
bulbous bows, ducted propellers and multi speed
reduction gears (Kasper et  al., 1999; Messina &
Notti, 2007). Also innovations such as the herein
reviewed hybrid diesel electric propulsion system
can contribute to the reduction in fuel consump-
tion. Many of the above mentioned technical
solutions are well known as well as their possi-
ble contribution to the fuel saving. Furthermore
continuously increasing in fuel prices must renew
attention to any considerable technical change and
improvement. Despite this logical conclusion, Ital-
ian fishermen are not interested in such “not-new”
technologies, probably due to suspicion and a tra-
dition issues. It is important to note that the more
the fuel price increase, the more the profitability
increase adopting improvements even if they could
be expensive. Together with the development of
new technologies and improvements in existing
solution for the energy efficiency in fisheries, a
challenge for scientists, researchers and industries
should be to induce fishermen to approach existing
technologies as well as the newest solutions.
References
Buglioni, G., Notti E., Sala A. 2011. E-Audit: Energy use
in Italian fishing vessels. In Rizzuto et  al. (Ed). Pro-
ceedings Sustainable Maritime Transportation and
Exploitation of Sea Resources IMAM Conference,
Genova, Italia.
Towing force over power
Power delivered [kW] delivered [kgf/kW]
Open Ducted Open Ducted
132 125 25.5 33.9
147 141 24.7 32.6
166 158 23.7 31.3
Faiz J., Hossieni S.H., Ghaneei M., Keyhani A., Proca A.,
1999. Direct torque control of induction motors for
electric propulsion systems. Electric Power Systems
research, 51: 95–101.
Kasper, E., 1983. Model tests of application of bulbous
bows to fishing vessels. International Symposium of
Ship Hydrodynamics and Energy Saving. Canal de
esperiencias hidrodinamicas, El Pardo, Paper No.
III-2, pp 13.
Messina, G., Notti, E., 2007. Energy saving in trawlers:
practical and theoretical approaches. Proceedings of
the International Conference on Marine Research and
Transportation (ICMRT), Ischia, Naples, Italy 28–30
June 2007: 91–98.
Notti E, Sala A, Buglioni G, 2011a. Energy profiling can
lead to reduced fuel consumption. Euro Fish Maga-
zine, 6/2011: 27–29.
Notti, E., Messina, G., Sala, A., Rossi, C., 2011b. New
Hybrid Diesel Electric Propulsion System for trawlers.
In Paschen & Soldo (Ed) Proceedings Contributions
on the Theory of Fishing Gears and Related Marine
Systems DEMAT Conference, Split, Croatia.
Notti E, Sala A, 2012. On the opportunity of improv-
ing propulsion system efficiency for Italian fishing
vessels. In Sarasquete (Ed) Proceedings of the Second
International Symposium on Fishing Vessel Energy
Efficiency E-Fishing (Vigo, Spain, 22–24 May 2012),
ISBN 978-84-615-8943-2: 117–122.
Notti, E., Sala, A., Martinsohn, J., Damalas, D., 2012.
Effects of engine replacement on the fuel consump-
tion reduction in fisheries. JRC Scientific and Policy
Report prepared under ICEEF Service Contract Nr.
256660 by CNR-ISMAR, Ancona (Italy) for the Joint
Research Center of the European Commission. 13 pp.
Rossi C. Grandi G., Corbelli P., 2008a. Series
Hybrid Power train Based on the Dual Two-Level
­Converter—Proceedings of the 11th International
Conference on Optimization of Electrical and Electronic
Equipment, OPTIM’08, BRASOV, OPTIM: 1–10.
Rossi C. Casadei D., Messina G., Chinellato A.,
­Belvedere C., Robino R., 2008b. Dimostrazione
dell’affidabilità tecnica e dell’interesse economico
derivanti dall’utilizzo della propulsione ibrida diesel-
elettrica a bordo di navi da pesca—Final report of the
project n. 27/IM/06—CE 2792/99, Art. 17.
Reso H., Amici A., 1997. Advantages of the 2-speed
reverse/reduction gearbox in fishing vessels. Proceed-
ings of the 6th International Symposium on Techincs
and Technology in Fishing Vessels, Ancona, Italy,
May 17th 1997:244–261.
1089
Sala A, Buglioni G, Lucchetti A, 2010. Fuel saving
otterboards. Paper proceedings of the International
Symposium on Energy use in Fisheries: Improving
Efficiency and Technological Innovations from a Glo-
bal Perspective, Seattle, USA, November 2010: 4 pp.
Sala A, Notti E, Buglioni G, 2011a. Analysis of energy
use in Italian fishing vessels. In Paschen and Soldo
(Eds) Contributions on the Theory of Fishing Gears
and Related Marine Systems Vol. 7. Proceedings of
the 10th International Workshop on methods for the
development and evaluation of maritime technologies
(Split, 26–29 October 2011), ISBN 978-3-8440-0468-7,
ISSN 0945-0874: 296–306.
1090
View publication stats
Sala, A., De Carlo, F., Buglioni, G., Lucchetti, A., 2011b.
Energy performance evaluation of fishing vessels by
fuel mass flow measuring system. Ocean Engineering
38, 804–809.
Sala A., De Carlo F., Buglioni G., Lucchetti A., 2011—
Energy performance evaluation of fishing vessels by
fuel mass flow measuring system—Ocean Engineer-
ing, 38, 804–809.
Suuronen Petri, Francis Chopin, Christopher Glass,
Svein Løkkerborg, Yoshiki Matsushita, Dante
Queriolo, Dominic Rihan (2012). Low impact and
fuel efficient fishing—Looking beyond the horizon.
­Fisheries research.