Ocean Engineering 107 (2015) 70–84

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ocean Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/oceaneng

A fast numerical method for trimaran wave resistance prediction$

Wei Yu a, Xu-jun Chen a,b,n, Guang-huai Wu a, Junyi Liu a, Grant E. Hearn b
a
College of Field Engineering, PLA University of Science and Technology, Nanjing 210007, China
b
University of Southampton, Faculty of Engineering and the Environment, Southampton SO171BJ, UK

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The optimisation of a trimaran configuration is not trivial due to the influence of longitudinal and
Received 23 May 2014 transverse clearance between the hulls. This sensitivity is illustrated in the predictions presented.
Accepted 8 July 2015 The proposed calculation procedure is based on an extension of the slender ship theory of Noblesse.
Available online 12 August 2015
In particular the highly oscillatory terms within the associated Kochin function are expanded as series of
Keywords: products of Bessel functions and Legendre polynomials to facilitate faster computation and to separate
Ocean engineering out specific parameter dependencies. These objectives allow calculation of constituent terms of the
Trimaran Kochin function as a function of hull clearance parameters, which may be stored externally to the
Wave resistance resistance calculation software.
Novel numerical method
The rapid calculation procedure allows identification of optimal trimaran configurations. Comparison
between the numerical predictions and experimental measurement based on the authors’ earlier
experimental investigations and those of other researchers (Degiuli et al., 2003) has shown good
agreement.
The wave resistance differences for symmetric and asymmetric outer hull forms for three distinct
cases are presented and discussed.
& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction particularly true of linear slender-ship theory (Noblesse, 1983). Wave

The Trimaran has attracted ever-growing attention in recent
years. Trimarans have wide naval applications and for civil
transportation provide such outstanding advantages as: lower
levels of resistance at high speed, good seakeeping performance
and a comparatively wide deck compared with mono-hull and
catamaran hull forms. The published research addresses: strength
(Wu et al., 2011b; Zhen et al., 2012) and resistance (Ma et al., 2013)
of the high speed trimaran, good seakeeping performance (Davis
and Holloway, 2007) and multi-hull configuration optimisation
(Zhang and Han, 2011).
Appropriate longitudinal and transverse clearance of hulls of a
trimaran can significantly reduce wave resistance for a narrow range
of Froude numbers. However, such optimisation is not trivial.
Furthermore there are many different levels of trimaran wave
resistance theory (Hebblewhite et al., 2007) and consequently
predictions will vary widely with model test measurements. This is
☆
The project was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China
(Grant no. 51379213), The National Key Technology R&D Program (Grant no.
2014BAB16B05) and High-tech Ship Research Projects Sponsored by MIIT.
n predicted using contemporary Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD)
Corresponding author at: College of Field Engineering, PLA University of Science
and Technology, Nanjing 210007, China. Tel.: þ86 25 80821315.
E-mail address: chenxujun213@sina.com (X.-j. Chen).
resistance has been shown to be affected by longitudinal clearance of
outer hulls and speed of advance (Wang et al., 2011). Some
improvement within the linear method integration has been
achieved through expansion of the particularly highly oscillatory
terms using special functions and the concept of wave steepness
(Huang and Li, 1999).This improved theory was applied to catamaran
wave resistance prediction (Li and Huang, 2002). A practical non-
linear Euler formulation (Yang et al., 2001) coupled with three linear
potential flow methods have been applied to determine optimal
location of the trimaran side hulls (Xu and Zhang, 2011). The three
potential flow methods correspond to a hierarchy of simple approx-
imations based on the Fourier
Kochin representation of ship waves
and the slender-ship approximation. The classical Michell formula-
tion has been adopted in predicting trimaran wave resistance
(Wilson et al., 1993; Li et al., 2002; Lu and Pan, 2004) with some
agreement with slender hull measurements. The waterline based
integral of the new slender ship theory of Noblesse does not occur in
the Michell formulation and hence the resulting numerical predic-
tions are often higher than those of the enhanced theory. Computa-
tion of wave resistance and its minimisation (Mizine and Amromin,
1999; Yang et al., 2000; Wu et al., 2011a; Fang et al., 2009) can be
codes for a range of trimaran geometrical arrangements. Such
predictions are in satisfactory agreement with measured residuary

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.07.008
0029-8018/& 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 W. Yu et al. / Ocean Engineering 107 (2015) 70–84 71

Nomenclature L  Lo length of centre hull

Li length of ith hull (:i¼ 0, 1, 2)
B  Bo half beam of centre hull (hull 0) l; m; n degrees of polynomials
Bij maximum offset for jth side of ith hull with j¼1, n unit outward normal vector
2 denoting port and starboard side and i¼ 1, 2 denoting nx x component of n
port and starboard side hull P n ðxÞ Legendre polynomial of degree n; also written as
Cb block coefficient P ðn; xÞ
Cr non-dimensional residual resistance Rei Reynolds number of the ith hull
Cw the non-dimensional wave resistance Rf friction resistance
P
Cw an alternative non-dimensional wave resistance Rf i frictional resistance of the ith hull
estimate Rm model test measured total drag force
CD non-dimensional wave pattern resistance Rr difference of the model test measured total drag force
wp
  Rm and the frictional resistance Rf
wp ¼ Rw = 2 ρU S
CD 1 2
R dimensional wave resistance
Pw
C wp an equivalent set of non-dimensional wave pattern Rw summation of the predicted wave resistance for each
 
hull advancing as an isolated mono-hull
wp , C wp ¼ Rw = 2 ρU L
resistanceC D 1 2 2
Si wetted surface areas
Rf i
Cf i Cf i ¼ 1 ¼ 0:075
2 T  To draught of central hull
ðlog Rei
2Þ
2 ρU S i
2

Ti draught of ith hull (:i¼0, 1, 2)

ci i ¼0,1 and 2 denotes waterline of ith hull
t unit vector tangential to the mean water line
cij i ¼0,1 and 2 and j¼1, 2 denotes port and starboard
t t ¼ tan θ
side of waterline ci
ty y component of t
DX longitudinal clearance defined as distance between
U speed of advance of trimaran
Y-axis of the centre hull and that of the side hulls
ν kinematic-viscosity
DY transverse clearance defined as distance between
ðX; Y; Z Þ coordinate system of the centre hull of the trimaran
X-axis of the centre hull and that of the side hulls
ðX i ; Y i ; Z i Þ coordinate system of the port hull (i¼1) and starboard
Eðx; t Þ exponential function
hull(i¼ 2) of the trimaran
E complex conjugate of E
ðx; y; zÞ non-dimensional coordinates of the coordinate system
Fr Froude number
pffiffiffiqffiffiffiffi     of ðX; Y; Z Þ
F I ðl; kr Þ F I ðl; kr Þ ¼ ð2l þ1Þ π2 k1r I l þ 12; kr xi ; yi ; zi non-dimensional coordinates of the coordinate system
pffiffiffiqffiffiffiffi   of ðX i ; Y i ; Z i Þ
F J ðl; kr Þ F J ðl; kr Þ ¼ ð2l þ 1Þ π2 k1r J l þ 12; kr
ðx0 ; y0 ; z0 Þ generalised non-dimensional coordinates of the
g gravitational acceleration  centre hull
hi i ¼0,1, 2 denotes wetted surface of ith hull xi'; yij'; zi' generalised non-dimensional coordinates of the
hij i ¼0,1, 2 and j¼1, 2 denotes port and starboard wetted port side (j¼1) and starboard side (j¼ 2) of the port
surfaces of ith hull hull(i¼ 1) or starboard hull(i¼ 2) of the trimaran
 1=2
Hull i i ¼0, 1, 2 denotes central, port and starboard hulls α0 α0 ¼ 12 1 þ t 2 F r
2
I n ðz Þ modified Bessel function of first kind of order n; also αi αi ¼ F r
1=2 Li
2L ¼ α0 L , (:i¼ 1 & 2)

2 Li
1 þ t2
written as I ðn; zÞ αm αm ¼ 15=C b
i purely imaginary number  1=2
β0 β0 ¼ t 1 þ t 2 F r
2 2LB
i subscript identifying a specific trimaran hull  1=2 Bij
J n ðz Þ Bessel function of first kind of order n; also written as βij βij ¼ F r
2 1 þ t 2 Ut 2L ¼ β 0 Bij , (:i,j ¼1, 2)
B
 
J ðn; zÞ γ0 γ0 ¼ F r
2
1 þ t 2L2 T
 T
j subscript identifying a specific side of a trimaran hull γi γ i ¼ Fr
2 1þ t 2 2L i
¼ γ 0 TTi (:i¼1, 2)
K ðt Þ zeroth-order Kochin spectrum function applicable to a ε ε ¼ t 1þt 2 1=2
Fr
2

trimaran θ obliquity of elementary wave direction

K 0 ðt Þ Kochin spectrum function of the centre hull of the ξ the location of the field point
trimaran ζ non-dimensional wave height
K i ðt Þ Kochin spectrum function of the ith hull of the π circular constant
trimaran ρ water density
K ij ðt Þ Kochin spectrum function of the port (j¼1)and star- ϕ velocity potential
board (j¼ 2) side of the ith hull

drag obtained during towed model tests. Satisfactory prediction
of trimaran residuary drag has been achieved via a modified quasi-
linear theory (MQLT) of wave resistance (Mizine et al., 2004)
based on a viscous-inviscid interaction concept. In practice applica-
tion of MQLT is much faster than CFD, but fails the needs of
trimaran configuration optimisation. Hence a fast numerical method
for wave resistance prediction capable of addressing optimisation is
required.
Based on the slender ship theory of Noblesse, Wu et al. (2005)
developed trimaran resistance formulae by separating the
variables through judicious expansion of the exponential functions
within the associated Kochin functions. In this case the geometry
of side hulls were considered symmetric.
In this paper trimaran wave resistance is deduced for both
symmetric and asymmetric side hulls using a novel expansion
of the Kochin function based on Bessel functions of first order
and Legendre polynomials. It will be demonstrated that the
method is sufficiently fast to investigate trimaran optimisation
and accurately reflect the trends of measured trimaran wave
resistance.
72 W. Yu et al. / Ocean Engineering 107 (2015) 70–84

Fig. 1. Definition of the trimaran coordinate systems.

2. Wave resistance formulae of a trimaran source point and the exponential function Eðx; t Þ is
n 1=2
2 h 1=2 io
2.1. Deduce of the wave resistance formulae of a trimaran Eðx; t Þ ¼ exp 1 þ t 2 Fr 1 þ t2 z
iðx þ t U yÞ ; ð8Þ

where t ¼ tan θ and θ is the obliquity of elementary wave.

This study develops a novel method of prediction for trimaran
Introducing the definitions:
wave resistances for a forward speed of advance U in otherwise Z Z
calm deep-water of density ρ. The water is assumed to be inviscid, K 0 ðt Þ ¼ F r
2 Eðx; t Þnx dα þ Eðx; t Þn2x t y dl; ð9Þ
incompressible and subject to irrotational flow. The flow caused by h0 c0
the trimaran is considered to be steady with respect to the Z Z
trimaran fixed reference system which has the Z-axis vertical K 1 ðt Þ ¼ F r
2 Eðx; t Þnx dα þ Eðx; t Þn2x t y dl; ð10Þ
and positive upwards with the mean undisturbed water surface h1 c1

corresponding to the plane Z ¼ 0. The X-axis is parallel to the Z Z

direction of forward speed and is positive towards the bow. The K 2 ðt Þ ¼ F r
2 Eðx; t Þnx dα þ Eðx; t Þn2x t y dl; ð11Þ
X-axis and the Y-axis lie in the mean water plane, and are h2 c2

orthogonal to the Z-axis in the sense of a right-handed Cartesian it follows that:

reference system. Thus the OXYZ, O1 X 1 Y 1 Z 1 and O2 X 2 Y 2 Z 2 are
K ðt Þ ¼ K 0 ðt Þ þ K 1 ðt Þ þ K 2 ðt Þ: ð12Þ
considered the local frames of reference of the central, port and
starboard trimaran hulls depicted in Fig. 1. The generalised non-dimensional coordinates lie within the
The symmetric central hull has length L, half beam B and range of ½
1:0; 1:0 and satisfy:
draught T. On the outer ith hulls (i¼1  port, i ¼2  starboard) the  
ðx0 ; y0 ; z0 Þ ¼ X=L; Y=B; Z=T on the central hull ð13Þ
corresponding dimensions are Li and T i with hi &hij respectively
denoting the total and the port and starboard wetted surfaces of  0 0   
x1 ; y11 ; z01 ¼ X 1 =L1 ; Y 1 =B11 ; Z 1 =T 1 ; ð14Þ
the ith hull with associated maximum offset of each side denoted
by Bij . The port (j¼ 1) and starboard (j¼2) portions of the water  0 0   
x1 ; y12 ; z01 ¼ X 1 =L1 ; Y 1 =B12 ; Z 1 =T 1 on the port hull; ð15Þ
plane contour ci of hull i are respectively cij .
Coordinates and velocity potential are made non-dimensional and
with respect to central hull length L and forward speed U, thus:  0 0   
x2 ; y21 ; z02 ¼ X 2 =L2 ; Y 2 =B21 ; Z 2 =T 2 ; ð16Þ
ðx; y; zÞ ¼ ðX; Y; Z Þ=L; ð1Þ  0 0   
x2 ; y22 ; z02 ¼ X 2 =L2 ; Y 2 =B22 ; Z 2 =T 2 on the starboard hull: ð17Þ
 
x1 ; y1 ; z1 ¼ ðX 1 ; Y 1 ; Z 1 Þ=L; ð2Þ For the centre hull, the exponential function assumes the form:
  

   1=2
2  1=2 T 0 B
x2 ; y2 ; z2 ¼ ðX 2 ; Y 2 ; Z 2 Þ=L: ð3Þ Eðx; t Þ ¼ Eðx0 ; t Þ ¼ exp 1 þ t 2 Fr 1 þ t2 z
i x0 þ ty0
L L
 
 exp 2γ 0 z0
2α0 x0 i
2β0 y0 i ; ð18Þ
φ ¼ ϕ=ðLU Þ: ð4Þ

The three coordinate systems satisfy:  T 1 1=2
2

upon defining γ 0 ¼ F r
2 1 þ t 2 ; α0 ¼ 1 þt 2 Fr and
2L 2
Y ¼ Y 1 þ DY ¼ Y 2
DY ð5Þ   1=2 B
β0 ¼ t 1 þt 2 F r
2 : ð19Þ
and 2L
The variable t and the trimaran hull parameters need to be
X ¼ X 1
DX ¼ X 2
DX : ð6Þ
separated to speed up the computation. Huang and Li (1999)
The zeroth-order trimaran Kochin spectrum function (Davis provided a method of variable separation. Here the authors provide
and Holloway, 2007) is a novel expansion based on products
 of Bessel functions I and J, and
Z Z the Legendre polynomials P l; cos θ i.e.
K ðt Þ ¼ F r
2 Eðx; t Þnx dα þ Eðx; t Þn2x t y dl; ð7Þ 1 n
X  o
cos θ
h0 þ h1 þ h2 c0 þ c1 þ c2
eikr ¼ il F J ðl; kr ÞP l; cos θ ð20Þ
pffiffiffiffiffi l¼0
where F r ¼ U= gL is the Froude number; g is gravitational accel-
eration, nx is the x-component of the unit outward normal vector n, and
t y is the y-component of the unit vector t tangential to the mean X
1
cos θ
 
water line. Looking from above the trimaran the tangential unit ekr ¼ F I ðl; kr ÞP l; cos θ ; ð21Þ
vector t is positive in a clockwise direction. x is the location of the l¼0
 W. Yu et al. / Ocean Engineering 107 (2015) 70–84 73



2x0 ÞP ðl;
y0 Þdl ; ð24Þ

where h01 and c01 are respectively the left wetted surface and
water line of the central hull ðy Z 0Þ, m, n and l are the order of the
Legendre polynomials. It should be noted that the term

1 þ ð
1Þl in the above equation ensures that contribution from
both port and starboard sides of the hull are included.
For the port hull (Hull 1) the exponential function is now
to be expressed in terms of its own local non-dimensional
coordinates i.e.
n 1=2
2 h 1=2 io
Eðx; t Þ ¼ exp 1 þ t 2 Fr 1 þ t2 z
iðx þtyÞ
  

 1=2
2  1=2 Z X Y
¼ exp 1 þ t 2 Fr 1 þt 2
i þt
L L L
  

  1=2   1=2 Z X
D Y 1 þ DY
F r
2 1 þ t2
1 1 X
¼ exp 1 þ t 2
i þt :
L L L
ð25Þ
Fig. 2. The non-dimensional residual resistance and the non-dimensional wave
resistance. For an asymmetric port hull the Kochin function K 1 ðt Þ must be
divided into two parts as K 1 ðt Þ ¼ K 11 ðt Þ þ K 12 ðt Þ. Here K 11 ðt Þ
denotes the contribution from the port side of the port hull and
K 12 ðt Þ provides the starboard contribution from the port hull.
To generate K 11 ðt Þ one must recast Eq. (25) to reflect the port
side geometric characteristics of the port hull. As is common in
mathematics one multiplies each appropriate term by a relevant
term of unitary magnitude to obtain a revised equation, i.e.
  

 1=2
2  1=2 T 1 Z 1 L1 X 1
DX B11 Y 1 þ DY
Eðx; t Þ ¼ exp 1þ t 2 Fr 1þ t 2
i þt
L T1 L L1 L B11

upon recalling relationships provided in Eq. (19) becomes:

     
Eðx; t Þ ¼ exp 2γ 1 z01 exp
2α1 x01 i exp β11 i
2β 11 y011 i
 
  DX DY
exp
β11 i exp 2α0 i
ε i ; ð26Þ
L L

with the new parameters defined as

 T 1 T1
γ1 ¼ F r
2 1 þ t2 ¼ γ0 ; ð27Þ
2L T
Fig. 3. Relationship between the resistance and the forward speed.  12 L1 L1
α1 ¼ F r
2 1 þ t 2 ¼ α0 ; ð28Þ
where 2L L

rffiffiffiffisffiffiffiffiffi    1 B11 B11

π 1 1 β11 ¼ F r
2 1 þ t 2 2 U t ¼ β0 ; ð29Þ
F J ðl; kr Þ ¼ ð2l þ 1Þ J l þ ; kr ; ð22Þ 2L B
2 kr 2
 1=2
and ε ¼ t 1 þ t2 Fr
2: ð30Þ
rffiffiffiffisffiffiffiffiffi   Thus K 11 ðt Þ can be written as
π 1 1
Z Z
F I ðl; kr Þ ¼ ð2l þ 1Þ I l þ ; kr : ð23Þ
2 kr 2
K 11 ðt Þ ¼ F r
2 Eðx; t Þnx dα þ Eðx; t Þn2x t y dl
h11 c11
To meet the needs of numerical accuracy the infinite series are  
truncated in practice at say l ¼ lmax and numerical investigation DX DY  
¼ exp 2α0 i
ε i exp
iβ11 K 0;11 ðt Þ; ð31Þ
suggests that lmax should be an integer exceeding 1.2 times the L L
value of kr .
for
Because the central hull is symmetric, K 0 ðt Þ defined in Eq. (9)
can upon appealing to the definitions of Eqs. (18) and (19) and the X
1 X 1 
1 X      
identities (22) and (23) be re-expressed as K 0;11 ðt Þ ¼ F r
2 exp
γ 1 F I m; γ 1 F J ðn; α1 ÞF J l; β11 :
m¼0n¼0l¼0
X
1 X 1 
1 X       ðn þ l Þ
K 0 ðt Þ ¼ F r
2 exp
γ 0 F I m; γ 0 F J ðn; α0 ÞF J l; 2β0 i : Z 
     
m¼0n¼0l¼0 iðn þ lÞ nx P m; 1 þ2z01 P n;
2x01 P l; 1
2y011 dα
h11
Z 
 1 
1 X
X  
Z
 1 þ ð
1Þl nx P ðm; ð1 þ 2z ÞÞP ðn;
2x ÞP ðl;
y Þdα
0 0 0
þ F J ðn; α1 ÞF J l; β 11 iðn þ lÞ n2x t y P ðn;
h01 c11
n¼0l¼0
1 
1 X
X   ðn þ lÞ   Z 
  
þ F J ðn; α0 ÞF J l; 2β 0 i 1 þ ð
1Þl n2x t y P ðn;
2x01 P l; 1
2y011 dl : ð32Þ
n¼0l¼0 c01
74 W. Yu et al. / Ocean Engineering 107 (2015) 70–84

Fig. 4. Comparison of C w and C r ð DY =L ¼ 0:198; F r ¼ 0:289 Þ.

Fig. 7. Comparison of C w and C r ð DY =L ¼ 0:198; F r ¼ 0:453 Þ.

Fig. 5. Comparison of C w and C r ð DY =L ¼ 0:198; F r ¼ 0:371 Þ. Fig. 8. Comparison of C w and C r ð DX =L ¼ 0:396; F r ¼ 0:330 Þ.

Fig. 6. Comparison of C w and C r ð DY =L ¼ 0:198; F r ¼ 0:412 Þ. Fig. 9. Comparison of C w and C r ð DX =L ¼ 0:396; F r ¼ 0:371 Þ.
 W. Yu et al. / Ocean Engineering 107 (2015) 70–84 75

For the starboard side of the port hull introduction of the

unitary terms leads to:
  

 1=2
2  1=2 T 1 Z 1 L1 X 1
DX B12 Y 1 þ DY
Eðx; t Þ ¼ exp 1þ t 2 Fr 1þ t 2
i þt
L T1 L L1 L B12
    
¼ exp 2γ 1 z01 exp
2α1 x01 i exp
β 12 i
 
   DX DY

2β12 y012 i exp β12 i exp 2α0 i
ε i ; ð33Þ
L L
where the only new parameter is a variation of Eq. (29) due to change
from port parameter B11 to the starboard maximum offset B12 i.e.
 1 B12 B12
β12 ¼ F r
2 1 þ t 2 2 U t ¼ β0 : ð34Þ
2L B
Hence
Z Z
K 12 ðt Þ ¼ F r
2 Eðx; t Þnx dα þ Eðx; t Þn2x t y dl
 h12  c12
DX DY  
¼ exp 2α0 i
ε i exp iβ12 K 0;12 ðt Þ; ð35Þ
L L
where
X
1 X 1 
1 X      
Fig. 10. Comparison of C w and C r ð DX =L ¼ 0:396; F r ¼ 0:412 Þ.
K 0;12 ðt Þ ¼ F r
2 exp
γ 1 F I m; γ 1 F J ðn; α1 ÞF J l; β11 :
m¼0n¼0l¼0
Z 
ðn þ lÞ      
i nx P m; 1 þ 2z01 P n;
2x01 P l;
1
2y012 dα
h12
1 
1 X
X  
Z
 
þ F J ðn; α1 ÞF J l; β 12 iðn þ lÞ n2x t y P n;
2x01 P ðl;
n¼0l¼0 c12



1
2y012 dl : ð36Þ

For the starboard outer hull the associated function K 2 ðt Þ has to

be divided in an analogous manner. Thus the exponential term is
arranged as follows:
n 1=2
2 h 1=2 io
Eðx; t Þ ¼ exp 1 þ t 2 Fr 1 þ t2 z
iðx þ tyÞ
  

 1=2
2  1=2 Z X Y
¼ exp 1 þ t 2 Fr 1 þ t2
i þt
L L L
  

 1=2  1=2 Z X
D Y 2
DY
F r
2 1 þ t 2
2 2 X
¼ exp 1 þ t 2
i þt :
L L L
ð37Þ
For the port side of the starboard hull introduction of appro-
Fig. 11. Comparison of C w and C r ð DX =L ¼ 0:396; F r ¼ 0:453 Þ. priate unitary quotients leads to:

 1=2
2  1=2 T 2 Z 2
Eðx; t Þ ¼ exp 1 þ t 2 Fr 1 þ t2
L T2
 

L2 X 2
DX B21 Y 2
DY

i þt
L L2 L B21
    
¼ exp 2γ 2 z02 exp
2α2 x02 i exp β 21 i
 
   DX DY

2β 21 y021 i exp
β21 i exp 2α0 i þ ε i ; ð38Þ
L L
where
 T 2 T2
γ 2 ¼ F r
2 1 þ t 2 ¼ γ0 ; ð39Þ
2L T
 12 L2 L2
α2 ¼ F r
2 1 þ t 2 ¼ α0 ; ð40Þ
2L L
 1 B21 B21
β21 ¼ F r
2 1 þ t 2 2 Ut ¼ β0 ; ð41Þ
2L B
Consequently K 21 ðt Þ assumes the form:
Z Z
K 21 ðt Þ ¼ F r
2 Eðx; t Þnx dα þ Eðx; t Þn2x t y dl
h21 c21
 
DX DY  
Fig. 12. The comparison of theoretical wave resistance with experimental results of ¼ exp 2α0 i þ ε i exp
iβ21 K 0;21 ðt Þ; ð42Þ
Deguli et al. L L
76 W. Yu et al. / Ocean Engineering 107 (2015) 70–84

Fig. 13. The configuration and wave resistance (F r ¼0.289).

Fig. 14. The configuration and wave resistance (F r ¼ 0.309).

 

where L2 X 2
DX B22 Y 2
DY

i þt
L L2 L B22
X
1 X 1 
1 X           
K 0;21 ðt Þ ¼ F r
2 exp
γ 2 F I m; γ 2 F J ðn; α2 ÞF J l; β21 : ¼ exp 2γ 2 z2 exp
2α2 x02 i exp
β22 i
0
 
m¼0n¼0l¼0
Z     DX DY
     
2β 22 y022 i exp β 22 i exp 2α0 i þ ε i ; ð44Þ
ð n þ lÞ
i nx P m; 1 þ 2z02 P n;
2x02 P l; 1
2y021 dα L L
h21
1 
1 X
X  
Z where
þ F J ðn; α2 ÞF J l; β 21 iðn þ lÞ n2x t y P ðn;  1 B22 B22
n¼0l¼0 c21 β22 ¼ F r
2 1 þ t 2 2 Ut ¼ β0 : ð45Þ
 2L B
  

2x02 P l; 1
2y021 dl : ð43Þ The previous process applied to K 12 ðt Þ is now transferred to
K 22 ðt Þ and yields
Similarly the starboard side of the starboard outer hull takes on Z Z
the form: K 22 ðt Þ ¼ F r
2 Eðx; t Þnx dα þ Eðx; t Þn2x t y dl
h22 c22
  
 1=2
2  1=2 T 2 Z 2 DX DY  
Eðx; t Þ ¼ exp 1 þ t 2 Fr 1 þ t2 ¼ exp 2α0 i þ ε i exp iβ 22 K 0;22 ðt Þ; ð46Þ
L T2 L L
 W. Yu et al. / Ocean Engineering 107 (2015) 70–84 77

Fig. 15. The configuration and wave resistance (F r ¼ 0.320).

Fig. 16. The configuration and wave resistance (F r ¼0.330).

where Kochin spectrum function to be defined in full, viz

 
X
1 X
1 1 
X       DX DY  
K ðt Þ ¼ K 0 ðt Þ þexp 2α0 i
ε i exp
iβ 11 K 0;11 ðt Þ
K 0;22 ðt Þ ¼ F r
2 exp
γ 2 F I m; γ 2 F J ðn; α2 ÞF J l; β22 : L L
m¼0n¼0l¼0   
þ exp iβ12 K 0;12 ðt Þ
Z   
ð n þ lÞ       DX DY  
i nx P m; 1 þ 2z02 P n;
2x02 P l;
1
2y022 dα þ exp 2α0 i þ ε i exp
iβ21 K 0;21 ðt Þ
h22 L L
  
1 
1 X
X Z þ exp iβ22 K 0;22 ðt Þ : ð48Þ
   
þ F J ðn; α2 ÞF J l; β 22 iðn þ lÞ n2x t y P n;
2x02
n¼0l¼0 c22 Treating the port outer hull as an independent translating
mono-hull ship the mono-hull zeroth-order Kochin spectrum

  function would be
P l;
1
2y022 dl : ð47Þ    
K 0;1 ðt Þ ¼ exp
iβ11 K 0;11 ðt Þ þ exp iβ 12 K 0;12 ðt Þ: ð49Þ

Finally reverting to Eq. (12) for the trimaran, the above hull Clearly the same logic applies if the starboard hull is considered
derivations now allow the final form of the trimaran zeroth-order an independent mono-hull ship, then the zeroth-order Kochin
78 W. Yu et al. / Ocean Engineering 107 (2015) 70–84

Fig. 17. The configuration and wave resistance (F r ¼ 0.340).

Fig. 18. The configuration and wave resistance (F r ¼0.351).

spectrum function is: formulation only needs to be calculated once for a complete range of
    forward speeds. Therefore it is possible to tabulate Kochin spectrum
K 0;2 ðt Þ ¼ exp
iβ21 K 0;21 ðt Þ þ exp iβ 22 K 0;22 ðt Þ: ð50Þ
functions for a range of DX and DY clearances at a given speed. Only
The zeroth-order Kochin spectrum function of the trimaran can when additional DX and DY clearances are required need dependent
also be expressed in the form: exponential functions in Eq. (48) have to be computed. Hence, the
    zeroth-order Kochin spectrum function of the trimaran wave resis-
DX DY DX DY
K ðt Þ ¼ K 0 ðt Þ þ exp 2α0 i
ε i K 0;1 ðt Þ þ exp 2α0 i þ ε i K 0;2 ðt Þ: tance can be calculated very efficiently as a consequence of the
L L L L
indicated look-up tables.
ð51Þ
Eq. (48) is the main contribution of this paper as it achieves the 2.2. Influence of hull port-starboard symmetry
requirement of separating the variable t and trimaran hull para-
meters. Additionally the longitudinal and transverse clearances If the port hull (Hull 1) is symmetric then B11 ¼ B12 and
DX &DY and the zeroth-order Kochin spectrum function components: β11 ¼ β12 and therefore
K 0 ðt Þ, K 0;11 ðt Þ, K 0;12 ðt Þ, K 0;21 ðt Þ and K 0;22 ðt Þ are separable. Thus, unlike 
references of Huang and Li (1999) and Li and Huang (2002), the  1=2
2  1=2 T 1 Z 1
Eðx; t Þ ¼ exp 1 þ t 2 Fr 1 þ t2
integral of each port and starboard Kochin spectrum function in this L T1
 W. Yu et al. / Ocean Engineering 107 (2015) 70–84 79

Fig. 19. The configuration and wave resistance (F r ¼0.371).

Fig. 20. The configuration and wave resistance (F r ¼ 0.392).

 
 X 1 
1 X   Z
L1 X 1
DX B1 Y 1 þ D Y  

i þt þ F J ðn; α1 ÞF J l; 2β11 iðl þ nÞ U 1 þ ð
1Þl n2x t y P ðn;
L L1 L B1 n¼0l¼0 c11
  
      DX DY   
¼ exp 2γ 1 z01 exp
2α1 x01 i exp
2β 11 y01 i exp 2α0 i
ε i ;
2x01 P l;
y011 dl : ð54Þ
L L
ð52Þ
whereas K 1 ðt Þ can be rewritten as Similarly for a symmetric starboard hull ðHull2ÞB21 ¼ B22 and β 21 ¼ β22
Z Z   ð55Þ
DX DY
K 1 ðt Þ ¼ F r
2 Eðx; t Þnx dα þ Eðx; t Þn2x t y dl ¼ exp 2α0 i
2ε i K 0;1 ðt Þ;
h1 c1 L L and so K 2 ðt Þ assumes the equivalent form:
ð53Þ Z Z  
DX DY
K 2 ðt Þ ¼ F r
2 Eðx; t Þnx dα þ Eðx; t Þn2x t y dl ¼ exp 2α0 i þ ε i K 0;2 ðt Þ;
where h2 c2 L L

X
1 X 1 
1 X      
ð56Þ
K 0;1 ðt Þ ¼ F r
2 exp
γ 1 F I m; γ 1 F J ðn; α1 ÞF J l; 2β 11 :
with
m¼0n¼0l¼0
 Z      
 X
1 X 1 
1 X      
iðn þ lÞ 1 þ ð
1Þl nx P m; 1 þ 2z01 P n;
2x01 P l;
y011 dα K 0;2 ðt Þ ¼ F r
2 exp
γ 2 F I m; γ 2 F J ðn; α2 ÞF J l; 2β21 :
h11
m¼0n¼0l¼0
80 W. Yu et al. / Ocean Engineering 107 (2015) 70–84

Fig. 21. The configuration and wave resistance (F r ¼0.412).

Fig. 22. The configuration and wave resistance (F r ¼ 0.454).

 Z     
      DY DX
 1 þ ð
1Þ2 nx P m; 1 þ 2z02 P n;
2x02 P l;
y021 dα  K 0 ðt Þ þ 2 cos ε exp 2α0 i K 0;2 ðt Þ: ð58Þ
h21 L L
If all three hulls are identical and symmetric then
X 1 
1 X   Z
   

þ F J ðn; α2 ÞF J l; 2β21 1 þ ð
1Þl n2x t y P ðn; DY DX

n¼0l¼0 c21 K ðt Þ ¼ 1 þ 2 cos ε exp 2α0 i K 0 ðt Þ: ð59Þ
L L
 The non-dimensional wave resistance is defined as
    

2x02 P l;
y021 dl : ð57Þ
C w ¼ Rw = 12 ρU 2 L2 , with the dimensional wave resistance denoted
by Rw . Introducing the non-dimensional wave height designated ζ
If both outer hulls are identical and symmetric the Kochin the Kochin free-wave amplitude function K ðt Þ is immediately
function simplifies to: calculable from the Havelock (1966) formulation:
    Z
Rw 1 1    
DY DX Cw ¼ ¼ K ðt Þ2 1 þ t 2 1=2 dt ð60Þ
K ðt Þ ¼ K 0 ðt Þ þ 2 cos ε exp 2α0 i K 0;1 ðt Þ π
L L 1
2 ρU L
2 2

1
 W. Yu et al. / Ocean Engineering 107 (2015) 70–84 81

and In each case αm ¼ 15=C b , where C b is the hull block coefficient

Z and for a trimaran α ¼ 4.5 in accordance with low Froude number
1 1   1=2  
ζ ¼
Re K ðt ÞE ξ; t 1 þ t 2 dt ξ-
1 ; ð61Þ model tests (Huang and Mu, 1997). It is necessary at lower Froude
π
1
number to overcome the exaggeration of the trough and peak
where E is the complex conjugate of E and ξ is the location of the wave resistance difference in values. But no such special care is
field point behind the trimaran. required for forward speeds satisfying F r Z 0:3.
Huang and Li (1999) modified the linear method based on the
concept of the existence of wave steepness. The wave steepness
limit for integration over a wetted hull surface for each variable t is 3. Comparison of numerical analyses and model tests
given by:
       Initially all the trimaran hulls are assumed symmetric, but not
2F r
4 F I m; γ 0 F J ðn; α0 ÞF J l; 2β 0 exp
γ 0 r ααm : ð62Þ identical. Each hull has a Wigley water line which is maintained
unchanged vertically. The metre unit of length is maintained
The corresponding wave steepness limit for integration over a throughout.
water line contour, for each variable t, is The Wigley column maintained waterline of the central hull
  has horizontal plane coordinates:
2F r
2 F J ðn; α0 ÞF J l; 2β 0 r ααm : ð63Þ   2 
y ¼ 70:12 1
x=1:2 : x A ½
1:2; 1:2 for all z A ½0;
0:12;

Table 1 thus L ¼ 2:4 m and T ¼ 0:12 m ð64Þ

Separation of X- and Y-axes for minimal non-dimensional wave resistance.
Both the side hulls have the same Wigley column maintained
 
U m=s Fr DY =L DX =L Cw waterline of the form:
  2 
1.20 0.247 0.225 0.144 2.01E-04 y ¼ 7 0:06 1
x=0:6 : x A ½
0:6; 0:6 for all z A ½0;
0:12; thus L1
1.25 0.258 0.325 0.000 2.89E–04
1.30 0.268 0.267 0.000 2.29E–04
¼ L2 ¼ 1:2m and T 1 ¼ T 2 ¼ 0:12 m: ð65Þ
1.35 0.278 0.225 0.000 2.23E–04
1.40 0.289 0.192 0.000 2.67E–04 The longitudinal and transverse clearances are respectively
1.45 0.299 0.171 0.000 3.57E–04
1.50 0.309 0.150 0.000 5.23E–04
DX ¼ 0:95 m and DY ¼ 0:475 m.
1.55 0.320 0.196 0.625 7.90E–04 The frictional resistance Rf of the trimaran is
1.60 0.330 0.304 0.256 9.94E–04
1.65 0.340 0.283 0.281 8.67E–04
X
2
Rf ¼ Rf i ; ð66Þ
1.70 0.351 0.267 0.306 7.57E–04
i¼0
1.75 0.361 0.250 0.325 6.73E–04
1.80 0.371 0.242 0.350 6.19E–04 where Rf i is the frictional resistance of the ith hull; each Rf i value is
1.85 0.381 0.229 0.369 5.90E–04
determined through application of the ITTC 1957 resistance line:
1.90 0.392 0.221 0.394 5.81E–04
1.95 0.402 0.217 0.419 5.85E–04 Rf i 0:075
2.00 0.412 0.213 0.444 5.95E–04 Cf i ¼ ¼ : i ¼ 0; 1; 2 ð67Þ
2.05 0.423 0.217 0.475 6.07E–04
1
2 ρU 2 Si ðlog Rei
2Þ
2

2.10 0.433 0.125 0.463 6.11E–04

2.15 0.443 0.125 0.488 6.15E–04
with associated Reynolds number Rei ¼ ULν , wetted surface areas Si
i

2.20 0.454 0.125 0.519 6.16E–04 and kinematic-viscosity ν. Additional resistance related terms to
2.25 0.464 0.233 0.619 6.11E–04 be evaluated are:
2.30 0.474 0.221 0.625 6.02E–04
2.35 0.485 0.125 0.619 5.95E–04  Rr the difference of the model test measured total drag force Rm
2.40 0.495 0.125 0.625 5.84E–04
and the frictional resistance Rf .

Table 2
The minimal non-dimensional wave resistance and the trimaran configuration.

Speed and Froude number Case 1: bulge on outer surfaces of side hulls Case 2: bulge on inner surfaces of side hulls Case 3: the side hulls are symmetric

U Fr DY DX Cw DY DX Cw DY DX Cw

1.20 0.247 0.54 0.345 1.68E–04 0.54 0.345 1.36E–04 0.54 0.345 1.50E–04
1.30 0.268 0.44 1.035 1.37E–04 0.64 0.000 1.07E–04 0.63 0.000 1.27E–04
1.40 0.289 0.20 0.000 1.12E–04 0.47 0.000 1.21E–04 0.20 0.000 1.46E–04
1.50 0.309 0.20 0.000 1.78E–04 0.23 0.000 2.05E–04 0.20 0.000 1.97E–04
1.60 0.330 0.20 0.000 4.94E–04 0.21 0.000 4.86E–04 0.20 0.000 5.00E–04
1.70 0.351 0.62 0.735 3.40E–04 0.65 0.720 3.26E–04 0.63 0.720 3.44E–04
1.80 0.371 0.54 0.825 2.81E–04 0.59 0.825 2.73E–04 0.57 0.825 2.88E–04
1.90 0.392 0.48 0.930 3.14E–04 0.55 0.930 3.14E–04 0.52 0.930 3.24E–04
2.00 0.412 0.20 1.155 3.56E–04 0.20 1.170 3.18E–04 0.20 1.170 3.44E–04
2.10 0.433 0.20 1.245 3.85E–04 0.20 1.245 3.40E–04 0.20 1.245 3.67E–04
2.20 0.454 0.20 1.350 4.20E–04 0.20 1.320 3.75E–04 0.20 1.335 4.01E–04
2.30 0.474 0.20 1.455 4.43E–04 0.20 1.410 4.03E–04 0.20 1.440 4.27E–04
2.40 0.495 0.20 1.500 4.55E–04 0.20 1.485 4.20E–04 0.20 1.500 4.41E–04
2.50 0.515 0.20 1.500 4.65E–04 0.20 1.500 4.27E–04 0.20 1.500 4.51E–04
2.60 0.536 0.20 1.500 4.67E–04 0.20 1.500 4.29E–04 0.20 1.500 4.56E–04
2.70 0.557 0.20 1.500 4.59E–04 0.20 1.500 4.24E–04 0.20 1.500 4.51E–04
2.80 0.577 0.20 1.500 4.42E–04 0.20 1.500 4.12E–04 0.20 1.500 4.39E–04
82 W. Yu et al. / Ocean Engineering 107 (2015) 70–84

Fig. 23. The side hulls bulge on outer surfaces.

Fig. 24. The side hulls bulge on the inner surfaces.

P
 Rw ¼ Rw0 þRw1 þ Rw2 is equal to the summation of the pre-
dicted wave resistance for each hull advancing as an isolated
mono-hull.  
P P
 Cw ¼ Rw = 0:5ρU 2 L2 an alternative non-dimensional
wave resistance estimate
Comparisons of numerical predictions and towing test measure-
ments for  this trimaran
 model are provided in Figs. 2–12, where
C r ¼ Rr = 0:5ρU 2 L2 is the non-dimensional residual resistance.
In these presentations predicted wave resistance is compared
with measured residual resistance. Generally predicted resistance
is less than measured resistance.
The figure legend uses a solid square for measured values of a
resistance quantity with corresponding predicted values presented
as a thick continuous curve.
Other thin curves are deducible from the above definitions of
the various resistance quantities defined.
The low Froude number based measured total drag is lower
than might be anticipated for F r o0:30 as turbulence stimulating
trip wires (or studs) were not present on the tested model. For
F r 40:50 the observed motion of the trimaran model changes with
an observable increase in draught at the bow coupled with an
increase in total wetted surface area. Hence frictional resistance
will be increased. However, these observations are not addressed
in the theoretical predictions which indicate a far smaller viscous
pressure resistance than the wave resistance.
Fig. 2 illustrates the comparison of the numerically calculated
non-dimensional wave resistance
 C w and the non-dimensional
residual resistance C r ¼ Rr = 0:5ρU 2 L2 . The calculated values of
C w are in good agreement with the author measured values of C r ,
especially for the speed range 0:3 r F r r 0:5. It is readily deducible
that the summation of the wave resistance of each hull operating
as an independent mono-hull cannot effectively simulate trimaran
wave resistance.
 W. Yu et al. / Ocean Engineering 107 (2015) 70–84 83

Fig. 25. The outer hulls are symmetric.

Both Figs. 2 and 3 demonstrate that predicted values of Rf þRw
are in good agreement with the values of Rm (F r o 0:50) and
indicates that the numerical method can well predict the wave
resistance of a trimaran.
Next for a fixed maintained transverse clearance of DY =L ¼0.198
the variation of wave resistance with longitudinal clearance is
presented for the residual resistance for four different forward speeds
in Figs. 4–7. Within these figures there is good agreement between
numerical calculation and experimental measurement. The figures
also indicate a strong sensitivity to longitudinal clearance whilst
illustrating the effectiveness of the proposed calculation procedure.
Figs. 8–11 present variation of residual resistance with transverse
clearance for a fixed value of longitudinal clearance DX =L¼ 0.396. The
agreement between predicted and measured trimaran resistance in
Figs. 8 and 9 is of the same quality as Figs. 4–7 for the longitudinal
clearance variation. For the higher Froude numbers of Figs. 10 and 11
the differences are slightly more marked.
Overall the proposed new procedure is generally valid in
predicting trimaran wave resistance and has demonstrated the
sensitivity of resistance to hull clearances.
Degiuli et al. (2003) undertook the model testing of a different
trimaran. In particular they generated values of the non-dimensional
 
wp ¼ Rw = 2 ρU S in which S is the total
wave pattern resistance C D 1 2
wetted surface. Converting their data into an equivalent set of values
 
of C wp ¼ Rw = 12 ρU 2 L2 Fig. 12 indicates that the trends of the
predicted and measured resistance values are consistent. Fig. 12 thus
provides additional confidence in the calculation procedure.
4. Optimisation of the trimaran configurations
To identify possible optimised arrangements of the catamaran
defined in Fig. 1 and by Eqs. (64) and (65) the non-dimensional
wave resistance C w will be investigated for:
 25 values of the Froude number,
 100 values of the longitudinal clearance and
 100 values of the transverse clearance.
Figs. 13–22 indicate the dependency of resistance C w (scaled by
103) upon the longitudinal and transverse clearances defined by
DX =L A ½0; 0:625 and DY =L A ½0:125; 0:542 for 10 values of Froude
number. The other Froude number dependent variations are not
presented since they provide no information additional to the
figures provided.
These figures readily highlight the strong dependence of C w
upon F r , DX and DY .
From the 3-D surfaces generated it is possible to deduce that:
 For smaller Froude numbers, the peaks of wave making
resistance occur for shorter wavelengths.
 Several trough values can be identified in Figs. 13–15 which
indicate that a small variation of longitudinal or transverse
clearance may induce a large difference in the wave interference.
 Larger Froude number based resistance is less sensitive to the
hull clearance parameters. Significant changes in resistance
require significant changes in clearance values when wave
interference may take place. This phenomenon is well known
(Yang et al., 2001; Lu and Pan, 2004; Yang et al., 2000).
For the range of speeds and clearances defined the data
associated with the 3D plots (shown and not disclosed ) were
used to identify minimum values of resistance for a given geo-
metric configuration and forward speed. These identified values
are tabulated in Table 1.
5. Comparison of resistance for symmetric central hull and
asymmetric side hulls
The central hull is as defined originally in Eq. (63). The outer
hulls are identical but are now made asymmetric.
The port hull is defined as:
  2 
y ¼ B11 1
x=0:6 : x A ½
0:6; 0:6
  2 
y ¼
B12 1
x=0:6 : x A ½
0:6; 0:6
The starboard hull is defines as:
  2 
y ¼ B21 1
x=0:6 : x A ½
0:6; 0:6
  2 
y ¼
B22 1
x=0:6 : x A ½
0:6; 0:6
In each case x A ½
0:6; 0:6 and z A ½0;
0:12.
84 W. Yu et al. / Ocean Engineering 107 (2015) 70–84
Three distinct cases of outer hull are addressed, the third
corresponding to symmetric outer hulls. That is, the parametric
details are:
 Case1 B11 ¼ B22 ¼ 0:06 m and B12 ¼ B21 ¼ 0:02 m
 Case 2 B11 ¼ B22 ¼ 0:02 m and B12 ¼ B21 ¼ 0:06 m
 Case 3 B11 ¼ B22 ¼ 0:04 m and B12 ¼ B21 ¼ 0:04 m
Tabulated minimum values of C w in Table 2 correspond to
forward speeds of 1.2 m=s to 2.8 m=s for increments of 0.1m=s,
longitudinal clearance DX varying from 0 m to 1.5 m with changes
of 0.015 m and transverse clearance values between 0.2 m and
1.2 m in steps of 0.01 m.
From Table 2 one may identify that for each of the cases
investigated the minimum resistance beyond the resistance hump
corresponds to F r ¼ 0:371.
Figs. 23–25 illustrate surface variation of resistance with hull
clearances for the three cases specified with arbitrary selected Froude
number of F r ¼0.412. The plots clearly indicate the variations of wave
resistance with longitudinal and transverse clearances are quite
different. But resistance value differences for the three trimarans
are very small.
6. Conclusions
The sensitivity of wave resistance to longitudinal and trans-
verse clearances has been clearly illustrated together with the
effort required to identify a more optimal geometric configuration
for distinct forward speeds.
The idea of expanding highly oscillatory exponential functions of
complex and real argument in terms of products of special functions,
Bessel and Legendre, as a means of extending the Noblesse slender
ship theory has provided an easier implementation of resistance
calculation. This easing of effort has been facilitated by our ability to
externally store large tabulated values of speed independent terms of
the Kochin function. Further gain has been achieved through variable
separation. Consequently, a fast numerical method of prediction has
been developed which allows wide variation of hull geometry and
subsequent identification of optimal hull geometry and speed.
The numerical predictions compare very favourably with experi-
mental measurement for different investigated trimaran forms.
The method presented in this paper is valid to a trimaran with
symmetric and asymmetric side hulls.
References
Davis, M.R., Holloway, D.S., 2007. A comparison of the motions of trimarans,
catamarans and monohulls. Aust. J. Mech. Eng. 4 (2), 183–196.
Degiuli, N., Werner, A., Doliner, Z., 2003. Comparison of experimental methods for
determining wave pattern resistance of a trimaran based on wave measure-
ments in longitudinal cuts. Int. Shipbuild. Prog. 50, 57–87.
Fang, M.C., Wu, Y.C., Hu, D.K., Lee, Z.Y., 2009. The prediction of the added resistance
for the trimaran ship with different side hull arrangements in waves. J. Ship
Res. 53 (4), 227–235.
Havelock, T.H., 1966. Wave patterns and wave resistance. Trans Inst. Nav. Archit.,
1934 76, 430–442 (also, Collected Papers, Office of Naval Research, Washington,
DC, 1966, 377–389).
Hebblewhite, K., Sahoo, P.K., Doctors, L.J., 2007. A case study: theoretical and
experimental analysis of motion characteristics of a trimaran hull form. Ships
Offshore Struct. 2 (2), 149–156.
Huang, D.B., Li, Y.B., 1999. Method of ship wave resistance calculation based on
Noblesse’s New Slender Ship Theory and wave-steepness restriction. J. Ship
Mech. 3 (4), 1–7 (in Chinese).
Huang, D.B., Mu, J., 1997. Interpretation, modification and calculation of linearized
wave resistance theory. J. Harbin Eng. Univ. 18 (5), 8–14 (in Chinese).
Li, P.Y., Qiu, Y.M., Gu, M.T., 2002. Study of trimaran wave making resistance with
numerical calculation and experiments. J. Hydrodyn. B 2, 99–105.
Li, Y.B., Huang, D.B., 2002. A calculation method for wave resistances of twin-hull
ships. J. Ship Mech. 6 (5), 9–13 (in Chinese).
Lu, X.P., Pan, Y.C., 2004. Investigation of wave resistance on high speed trimarans.
J. Ship Mech. 8 (6), 45–55.
Ma, W.J., Sun, H.W., Zou, J., Yang, H., 2013. Test research on the resistance
performance of high-speed trimaran planning hull. Pol. Marit. Res. 20 (4),
45–51.
Mizine, I.O., Amromin, E.L., 1999. Large high-speed trimaran: optimization concept.
In Proceedings of FAST-99. August, Seattle, WA, pp. 643–655.
Mizine, I.O., Amromin, E.L., Crook, L., Day, W., Korpus, R., 2004. High-speed trimaran
drag: numerical analysis and model tests. J. Ship Res. 48 (3), 248–259.
Noblesse, F., 1983. A slender-ship theory of wave resistance. J. Ship Res. 27 (1),
13–33.
Wang, Z., Lu, X.P., Zhan, J.L., 2011. New development on the investigation of high
speed trimaran hydrodynamics and hull form. J. Ship Mech. 15 (7), 813–826 (in
Chinese).
Wilson, M.B., Hsu, C.C., Jenkins, D.S., 1993. Experiments and predictions of the
resistance characteristics of a wave cancellation multihull ship concept. In:
23rd American Towing Tank Conference, 1993, pp. 103–112.
Wu, C.S., Zhou, D.C., Gao, L., Miao, Q.M., 2011a. CFD computation of ship motions
and added resistance for a high speed trimaran in regular head waves. Int.
J. Nav. Archit. Ocean Eng. 3 (1), 105–110.
Wu, G.H., Wu, P.D., Jiang, Y.J., Shen, Q., 2005. Fast method of positional optimization
on distance between hulls of a trimaran based on wave resistance. J. Ship Mech.
9 (4), 1–8.
Wu, W.G., Xu, S.X., Liu, W.Q., Li, X.B., Yue, J.X., 2011b. Study on the ultimate strength
test of high speed trimaran. Advances in Marine Structures – Proceedings of the
3rd International Conference on Marine Structures, March 2011, pp. 521–526.
Xu, M., Zhang, S.L., 2011. A numerical study on side hull optimization for trimaran.
J. Hydrodyn. 23 (2), 265–272.
Yang, C., Noblesse, F., Löhner, R., Hendrix, D., 2000. Practical CFD applications to
design of a wave cancellation multihull ship. In: 23th Symposium on Naval Ship
Hydrodynamics, 2000, France.
Yang, C., Noblesse, F., Löhner, R., 2001. Practical hydrodynamic optimization of a
trimaran. In: SNAME Annual Meeting, October 2001, Orlando, FL.
Zhang, H.P. Han, D.F., 2011. Multi-hull's optimization configuration based on new
slender-ship wave resistance theory. In: Proceedings of the 2011 International
Conference on Transportation, Mechanical, and Electrical Engineering (TMEE),
16–18 December 2011, pp. 2102–2105.
Zhen, C.B., Ren, H.L., Feng, G.Q., Li, C.F., 2012. Study on fatigue strength of trimaran
cross-deck structure based on spectral method. Appl. Mech. Mater. 148–149,
393–396.