20

//
/
!
k / '

/!
-
SECTION II. WAVE MAKING RESISTANC E
Let any particle be in its bottom position at a given
-
WAVE INTERFERENCE PHENOMENA AND THEIR EFFECT moment , due to a wave from the first wave system.

27. Interference
-
ON WAVE MAKING RESISTANCE

between two
Then of + —
0. If fA > > i> x the same fluid
particle in the second wave system would already
jrave trains having
the same velocity and direction of motion have passed this lowest position . However, as a
result of the presence of this second wave system 3
We will consider the influence which interference particle further to the left ( see Fig. 27 ) would be
phenomena may have on wave- making resistance by in its bottom position at the same moment. The
starting from a simplified case. distance a to the left at which this particle is situated
In dealing with the trochoidal wave we saw that is also a measure of the phase difference, since :
each water particle in such a wave describes a cir- a _ 1) , — 2 7l a
cular path with a uniform velocity . At a given
moment the ordinates of such a particle in respect
„
2 cr or ->
0
,,
0X — ——
y— • ( 45 )
ii:
r !
of coordinate axes through the centre of the path According to formula ( 44 ) the phase difference
are ( see Fig. 26 ) : between the two interfering wave trains influences
if ; '

the height of the waves of the resultant wave train .

x =
r sin ( ot + 0 )
. . . . ( 42 ) In the case where r1 = r2
—
r , the resultant wave
y —
r cos ( cot + 0 )
The angle 0 indicates the phase of the particle at
height may vary between r —
2 r and r = 0
dependent on the magnitude of the phase differ -
li! the moment t —
0. Two wave trains having the ence.
same velocity have also equal wave lengths and
wave periods . Moreover, the angular velocity of all i
water particles is the same. The two systems, there - i
fore, can only differ in height ( and consequently
in path diameter 2 r of the surface particles ) and in
phase. The phase difference is equal for all particles
and independent of time. Addition of the ordinates
of a particle resulting from each of the two wave
trains yields:
—
x rx sin ( cot ~ i9 t ) -]- r> sin ( cot + A> )
y = r1 cos ( <ot + t'L ) 4- r > cos ( not + 0 > ) ( 43 )
-
This addition has been represented in Fig. 26 ,
which shows that the resultant motion is again a
circular one . The radius of the resultant path is
found by squaring the above equations and adding
U the results:
r" 2
—
ri + rr -f 2 n r 2 cos ( 02
A resultant wave is obtained having the same
—$1 ) ( 44 )

ii length and period as the component parts ( see

Fig. 27 ) . However , the phase differs, while the
height is dependent on the heights of the two
components and the phase difference between them .
, The latter can also be expressed in a different way. Fis. 26, Super position of tuo trochoidal u- at -cs

I-
 21
A, = A 2 A ~

\ » a ~ ^i rt
ri
H,
r,
T

'
Hz
!

i
rz

r
H
r> r r
rz
rv
^z ^ t
"

Fig . 27 . Superposition of two trochoida ! naves

28 . Components of the secondary wave system
Let any body disturb a free surface , thus gener -
ating various wave systems. How these wave systems
interfere with one another will then have a great
influence on the resistance experienced by the body ,
As -was mentioned the ship moving along
the water surface may be regarded as a collection
of a large number of travelling pressure points. It
will be obvious, however , that the character of the
resultant wave system is mainly determined by the
peaks of high and low pressure which occur in the
pressure distribution . Such peaks are generally
found in places where the water has to change its
direction of motion more or less suddenly. They are
positive if the angle between waterlincs and centre
line increases, and negative if this angle decreases.
The pressure peaks occur therefore in any case at
the bow and at the stern. In some cases, however ,
they may also occur at the transition between en -
trance and parallel middlebody and at the transition
between parallel middlebody and run . In those
cases the ship form decidedly shows shoulders.
Each of the pressure peaks causes a wave system ,
of which the first wave crest ( or wave trough in the
case of a negative pressure peak ) is situated at some
distance behind the point of the highest pressure '
possible , however , to consider the resultant wave
system to be built up of four components, viz.:
1 . The bow wave system , due to the high - pressure
area in the vicinity of the bow ;
2 . The forward shoulder wave system , due to the
low - pressure area between amidships and the
high - pressure area mentioned under 1 ; 1
3. The after shoulder wave system , due to the low - .!
pressure area between amidships and the high -
pressure area at the stern ;
r
4. The stern wave system , due to the high - pressure
area at the stern. ,
The bow and the stern wave systems always
occur at a fixed place, owing to the predominating
influence of fhe high - pressure peaks at bow and
I
stern . As a contrast the shoulder wave systems are
rather difficult to localize for ordinary ship forms .
Only in the case of a pronounced shoulder the
low - pressure peak generated will have a relatively
great influence so that the position of the shoulder
indeed determines the position of the shoulder wave.
29 . Possible cases of interference between
nents of the secondary wave system
compo -

-
( see also Tig , o 9 ) .
The general trend is to make the transitions
Any two of the four components of a ship’s wave
system mentioned above will be capable of inter -
mentioned above as gradual as possible, so that no fering with one another more or less favourably.
pronounced shoulder waves will occur. It is always We will number the wave systems 1, 2 , 3 and 4

i
 1

22
I
i
starting from the bow . Also the distance of a crest The resistance experienced by the ship in conse-
of the transverse bow wave system from the nearest quence >. .f its maintaining the above - mentioned four
crest of the transverse stern wave system will
be components of the wave system may then be ex
called Z 1.4, etc. pressed as follows : - j
'

For the equation of the path of any given particle

at a great distance behind the ship we may then !
write analogously to equation ( 43 ) : Ra = C . V- jH,- 4 Hr 4 Hr 4 Hr 4
*

x —ri sin ( cot 4 (X\ ) -f - r 2 sin ( oot -J- 02 ) 4

+ r2 sin ( cot 4 #3 ) 4 r 4 sin ( cot + i? ) ,
4 2 Hi Hi cos
/
+ , -
2 /-/ U i cos
2
— .— /
Z i
i
i
y —rj cos ( <ot 4 i){ ) 4 r > cos ( cot
4 0 > ) -f
+ » 3 COS ( oaf + & j ) 4 r4 cos ( oot 4 #4 )
( 46 )
4 2 Hl Hi c o s

4 2 H , II 4 cos
—
2> 4
4 2 H » I13
- 4 2 H 3 Hi
COS

2 JT Z3.4)
4 I
cos i
2 (
where r >, and are the wave heights at the
rq
place considered due to each of the four wave
*
(H) i
systems.
If it is assumed that the wave heights of the
For the resultant transverse wave we then find : various systems are
proportional to the pressure
=
r 2 rr 4 ’> r - 4 rr- + ry + 2 rs r , cos ( &i &2 ) + differe — nces caused by the primary wave system
4 2 r , r:i cos ( 0\ #3 ) 4 2 rt r4 cos ( i? i #4 ) -f ( and consequently to V2 ) formula ( 31 ) can be
— —
— ,
+ 2 r£ r3 cos ( 4 & <, ) 4 2 ri- r. cos ( d 2 &4 ) 4 . transformed into:
— i
—
4 2 rA r4 cos ( &i i> i )
and , according to equation ( 43 ) and with H
also:
( 47 )
2r
RW C Vs 1 4 Yv n . cos 2 ez Zmn ( 2 )
—
= — \ .
*
H- = Hr 4 - Hr 4 Hr 4 M?+ The wave- making resistance may therefore be
?r *. J 2 conside red to be built up of :
4 2 Hi Hz cos 2 — ,
- + .r,
1
2 Hi H 3 cos
2 a Z1.3
XT
+
K l 1 °. A component Rw0 =
!
n
4 2 H1 Hi cos 2 zlA + 2 Hz H 3 cos 2 n z2 ,3 4
1 CV{
indicating the magnitude the wave - making
resistance would have if the individual wave
l x
systems did not influence one another.
—
4 2 Hz Hi cos ~-4 4 2 Hi H 4 cos 2 n Z3.4
K /
( 48 )

-
30 . Relation between wave making resistance
and speed
As a first approximation it may be assumed that
i the energy present in the first transverse wave of
Lord Kelvin’s wave system is proportional to the
wave breadth the squareoi the wave height and to
the wave lengthTH ence ~E
^ —
H ~ . X . The
wave breadth b of the first wave is approximately
proportional to the wave length X , which, in its
turn , is proportional to the square of the wave
velocity. The amount of energy required to main -
tain this wave system , when moving over a distance
x , is equal to the product of E and ~r. On the other
hand this energy is equal to the product of wave
making resistance and distance covered . Hence :
R w . x = C . b , H* . X

and :
-C . V2 ^ .I
=C
f1 .
’

X
. b . H* . x =
.,
I
( 49 )

Rw = C .V 2 . H 2
( 50 ) Fig. 2 8 . Resistance curve with humps and hollows
 £
23
L

bow forward shoulder rafter shoulder stern

1 2a

symmetrical surface disturbance

( primary wave system]

bow wave system

forward shoulder wave system

after shoulder wave system

stern wave system

i
total wave system
\ (measured) :

total wave system (calculated)

j

i
Fig. 29 . Wedge - shaped body
'
with wave systems according to Wigtey f

:
ANALYSIS OF WAVE PHENOMENA AND WAVE- MAKING In this w y a specified speed may be attained
RESISTANCE OF SOME BODIES OF SIMPLE FORMS ^
with relatively little power .
r

In the following sections, therefore , we will

3 1. General
Owing to the oscillating . components occurring
-
in the expression for the wave making resistance,
the curve of a ship’s or a model ’s resistance as a
function of speed will often have a wavy character
It oscillates around the mean curve R ICO - C Vs.
The regions of relatively high resistance are . called
“ humps”, and those of relatively low resistance
“ hollows ”. Fig. 28 represents a typical instance of
such a wavy resistance curve. It is of importance for
the designer to be able to design a ship in such a
way that at her service speed she operates in a
i
hollow of her resistance curve.
examine to what extent it is possible to predict the i
positions of humps and hollows for any ship. i
V
32. Straight line forms of infinite draught
. a. Interference phenomena
We will consider a ship form with very pro -
nounced shoulders. For a reason to be specified later ,
we choose a wedge-shaped body of infinitely great
draught and waterlines as shown in Fig. 29 [ 10 ] ,
[ 11 ] . It consists of a parallel middle body for a dis -
tance of 2 a and wedge -shaped fore and after bodies,
each of length /. The total length L equals 2 a T 21
—
and the prismatic coefficient <f. has the value
c
- zz L
;
24
Because of the symmetrical shape, the interference and after shoulder wave system , for which :
phenomena between the various wave systems will
sometimes occur in pairs simultaneously. Therefore,
instead of six only four cases of interference need
*1.2 *3.4 —l T 22 —
( 54 )
III. Interference between bow wave system and ;*
:
"

be considered here , viz.: stern wave system , for which : i

i I. Interference between bow wave system and *i . 4 2a + 2/ = ( 55 )|

: after shoulder wave system , coinciding with IV. Interference between forward and after - i
interference between stern wave system and shoulder wave system , for which :
forward shoulder wave system , for which : *2.3 2a ( 56 )

1 =
II. Interference between bow
—
*1.3 ziA 2 a + l + £ 7. . . ( 13 )
wave system and
The maxima in urnn
Vs
will occur at :
1
1 forward shoulder wave system , coinciding
with interference between stern wave system
cos 2
n z ,n i
2
/

—+ I or
2 n
;
zmn
= 2 kn ( 57 )

-
(7 ) values at which Maxima and Minima occur in various oscillating components of the
1
TABLE II.

1)
2)
^ wave resistance of a wedge - shaped body ( see Fig . 29 )
According to trochoidal wave theory.
From the wave system in the plane of symmetry as calculated theoretically by Wigley \

\
From as calculated theoretically by Wigley.

4) According to theory .
'

i a . Length of parallel middle body 2 u = 0.1 L \

j

Interference between :
Max , or
Min .
Values of
® '
*> 3) 4
> *) *) *) 4
> ') !) 5) 4)

Bow and After Max. '[j/1.41 1.43 1.50 2.00 0.82 I 0.82 0.85 0.89 ! 0.63 0.63 0.65 1 0.67
shoulder waves Min . || 1.00 1.01 1.04 1.15 0.71 ! 0.71 0.73 0.76 0.5 8 0.58 0.59 0.60
I ]
Bow and Forward Max. 0.82 0.83 0.89 I 0.47 0.47 0.49
shoulder waves Min. 0.58 0.58 0.60 ! I 0.41 0.41 0.42
;l i
!
Bow and Stern Max. 1.15 I 1.16 1.21 0.82 ! 0.83 0.84 i 0.67 0.67 0.68
waves Min . | 1.53 1.66 1.73 0.94 0.95 0.98 0.73 0.73 0.75
1
Forward and After Max. | 0.82 0.58 0.47
shoulder waves Min. 1.15 0.67 0.52 (
i

b. Length of parallel middle body 2 a = 0.1 L

Bow and After Max. , 1.41 1.43 | 1.50 2.00
j 0.82 0.82 0.85 0.89 0.63 0.63 0.65 0.67
t
shoulder waves Min . 1.00 1.01 1.04 1.15 0.71 0.71 0.73 0.76 0.58 0.58 0.59 0 , 60

Max. \
Bow and Forward 1.28 1.30 1.39 0.74 0.74 0.76
I
0.57 0.57 0.58
shoulder waves Min . 0.91 0.91 0.94 0.64 0.64 0.66 0.52 0.52 0.53

Bow and Stern Max . 1.35 1.36 1.41 0.95 0.96 0.98 0.78 0.78 0.79
waves Min. 1.91 1.93 2.02 1.10 1.11 1.14 0.86 0.86 0.87
i *
ll

Forward and After I Max. I 0.43 0.30 0.25

shoulder waves Min. 0.60 I '
0.35 0.27
 25
and the minima at : Tables Ha and lib they have been given for
Cfi
Ui
r
-
2 n ztn n zm „
=— ‘
2 n
cos 1 or
L —0 , 5 and 0.1 respectively. In these Tables
use
( 58 ) is made of the velocity constant (?)
If it is remembered that according to equation =
2 n v2 Only in the case of interference between bow

^ =
( 27 ) , it becomes possible to determine
i7 and after shoulder waves the values of (?) at
the positions of the humps and hollows of the in - which maxima and minima occur , are independent
dividual interference components.
of j- . From what follows it will appear that this is
Generally the results will be dependent on ar . In ~

indeed the most important case of interference.

Fig. 30. Wave resistance components of the wedge- shaped body of Fig
"

.29 according to Wigley

© total wave - resistance without interference.

© resulting from interference between bow wave and stern wave.

© resulting from interference between bow wave and

shoulder wave.
© resulting from
shoulder wave.
interference between forward and after

© resulting from interference between bow wave and forward

shoulder wave,
© total wave resistance including interference components.
 Fig. 31. Total wave resistance split
ir. Results of theoretical considerations by Wigley
and Lunde
For the simple wedge form described above,
Wigley [ 10 ] calculated entirely theoretically the
wave pattern in the longitudinal plane of symmetry.
From this calculation it appeared that the first
waves of each wave system are slightly shorter than
would follow from formula ( 27 ) . The result is
that the maxima and minima in the resistance owing
to interference effects occur at slightly higher
velocities than those calculated in the previous
section . The theoretical results according to Wigley
are also represented in Table II. Fig. 29 shows the
wave pattern calculated by Wigley as compared
with that determined experimentally. Generally the
agreement between theory and experiment may be
called satisfactory with regard to the positions of
wave crests and wave troughs. Towards the stern ,
however, the experimental wave heights show in -
creasing differences compared with the theoretic-
ally calculated values. This must be attributed to a
viscosity effect in consequence of which the
potential flow around the stern cannot have full
up into two parts according to Lunde
play. Besides for this form Wigley could calculate
the various components of the wave - making resist -
'
ance separately. They are represented in Fig. 30. It
is clearly shown how the wave-making resistance is
built up from one component continuously in -
creasing with speed and four oscillating components.
For the oscillating components Wigley calculated
£
the velocities which maxima in V 6 occur. Again
at ;
the results are given in Table II. It appears that the
latter results differ from those which were also *
obtained theoretically from the transverse wave
system. The extreme values calculated from the
resistances occur at somewhat higher velocities. This
difference was accounted for by Lunde some years
ago [ 12 ]. He calculated mathematically the wave-
making resistance for a certain ship form. This
resistance could be split up, however , into two com -
ponents, corresponding to the amounts of energy
which are left behind in the transverse and the
diverging wave -systems respectively.
It appears from Lunde’s calculations, the results
of which are represented in Fig. 31, that .he ex -
i
 27
-
1

-
)
^
TABLE III. ‘ Py values at which Maxima and Minima occur
in the interference
between bow and after shoulder wave systems of a body with parabo
lic water lines
From the. wave systems in the plane of symmetry as calculated
) From resistance calculations by Havelock .
theoretically by Wiglcv.
:i ) According
to - theory .
a . For no parallel middle body
j

Values of ( P^) -
! 2)
j »)
;j ‘) *> j 3)
) 2)
ii *) *) 3)

Max. :i i

Min .
1.52 1.55 2.00 10.87 0.89 0.89 0.67 0.73 0.67
'
1.07 1.07 1.15 0.75 0.79 0.76 l| 0.61 0.67 0.60
j 0.57 0.62 0.56
;i

b . For 60 % parallel middle body

Max . 1.45 1.52 ' 2.00 0.83 0.85 0.89 0.64 0.65 0.67 0.54
|| 0.62 0.56
Min . j 1.02 1.07 1.15 ;i 0.72 0.73 0.76 0.59 0.59 0.60
:! — — —
ircmes in the transverse wave- making resistance
Indeed occur where they might be expected oh the -
“ transverse wave making resistance” This is in
agreement with the results obtained by Wigley.
.
Ilrcngth of interference considerations.

The “ divergirtg wave - making resistance ” , how - 33. Bodies with parabolic waterlines and infinite
ever , has its extremes at other velocities. The result draught
|i that the maxima and minima in the total
wave- In the case of bodies which have not such pro-
making resistance occur at somewhat higher velo
cities than the corresponding extremes in the
- nounced shoulders, the wave system can also be
split up into five components [ 10 ], [ 11 ] In prin -
ciple the various particulars are identical to those of
.
s £
o the wave systems , occurring with the wedge -shaped
U
V'
load waterline of model .
body The shoulders, however, are spread over the
I I entire fore or after body.
- — 2a The changes in the slopes of the waterlines are
i

^ symmetrical surface disturbance more gradual and extend over the whole entrance
^ or run .
i

c\ bow wave system For a parabolic shape with various lengths of

parallel middle body Wigley calculated the wave
J

profiles at various speeds and from these the ( P ) -

forward shoulder wavesystem
values at which maximum or minimum interference i

after shoulder wave system

would have to occur Taking into account correct- .
ions for the smaller lengths of the first waves he
found the results which are given in Table III.
Fig. 32 shows the calculated wave profiles as
stern wave system compared with those measured The differences can .
be accounted for in the same manner as in the case
of the wedge shaped body.

total wave system

(calculated) 34. Ship forms with parabolic waterlines and
sections
total wave system Wigley also calculated the positions of humps
(measured)
and hollows in the resistance curve of a ship form
with parabolic waterlines and sections [ 13 ]. In
Table IV his results are compared with those ob -
Fie. 52 . Parabolic form mitb corresponding wave systems tained experimentally. Fig. 33 represents the cal -
according to Wigley culated and measured resistance curves.
28

.
Fig. 34 Influence of choice of parameters in the position of humps and hollows

i
 TABLE IV. Comparison between calculated and
measured values of V
at which maxima and
minima occur in the interference components of the
wave - making resistance of a parabolic ship form
V
\TL Maximum or
Minimum
Calculated i Measured

0.75 0.80 Max.

0.51 0.52 Min.
0.44
0.38
0.44 Max .
0.38 Min .
0.34 0.35 Max.
0.31 0.31 Min.
0.30 0.30 Max.

From these data it is evident that fair agreement

between theory and experiment can be obtained for
certain simplified forms.

3 5 . Influence of the choice of resistance and speed 0, 005

parameters on the position of humps and

hollows
In the foregoing paragraphs various calculations
were carried out concerning the position of humps
and hollows. It should be remembered that in doing
Fig. 3 5 . Wave resistance of
so we proceded from the wave pattern. Only the the same ship plotted m various ways
positions of maxima and minima were determined
in the oscillating components :
__ _ dYA
—
ax =
- Ca— sin
.
x — Ca
— cosj X
V ’ diu- mn 2 71 X mn a x X1
6
£/ 6 — ' -' inn COS ^ nn cos 2
V dY 2 -Ca 2
- sin x — 2—
. Ca 1

( 59 ) dx —x - 2r v- cos X
X 3

Let — . , then dYo _ -Ca 3

3 CV
p-
2 V :
dx x
sin x
X
4 COS X — ——
A wmn
( a / x )' C „m COS X = ( 60 ) It follows, therefore , that maxima and minima
occur in the various functions if :
The maxima and minima will then occur if :
_ ^ =0 —0
d_ Yj
dx C ,„„ sin x — 0 . . . . ( 61 ) — dx or tan x

or x —
0 , n, 2 n , 3 ft , . . . . dx or tan x
— i
x
Now , —pp is not a quantity normally used in 2
( 63 )
dx or tan x — x
plotting ship resistance. If the quantities
A u mn
'
-pp , e° = o
dx or tan x =
3
X
v - or Rwm.it are considered as functions of V or Fig. 34 shows the solutions of these four equations
a/ Vi , the following relations apply: conveniently arranged. From this figure it is evident
Rivmn Ca that corresponding extremes occur at lower values
= IT cos * a
of yi and consequently at higher values of V as
,. 2? wmn Ca '

* 2 = - yr = C0S
* the oscillating resistance component is divided by a
lower power of V. It is further shown that the
„ „ Ca*
>u = = --f COS X
differences increase as
( 62 ) p^ dccreases and consequently
-
1
30
as V increases. Indeed , in the region of the greatest
humps and hollows the differences prove to be no
longer negligible. Therefore the resistance coeffi-
cient considered has to be taken into account , when
the positions of humps and hollows arc considered .
In Fig. 3 5 the wave - making resistance of a fast
ship has been plotted in several ways.
SOME. APPROXIMATE METHODS TOR DETERMINING THE
POSITION OF HUMPS AND HOLLOWS.
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
36. General
In the previous section we dealt with the deter -
mination of maxima and minima in the separate
interference components of the resistance. Wigley
derived on the grounds of theoretical considerations
that in the case of a wedge-shaped body the inter -
ference between bow wave and after - shoulder wave
is predominant [ 10 ] .
It is doubtful , however , whether this is generally
the case. In general where the humps and hollows in
the total wave - making resistance may be expected
will depend on the total effect of all interference
. phenomena . On theoretical grounds little can be
predicted with regard to any given normal ship
form. Consequently , in practice recourse had to be
made to experimental results, on the basis of which
Kbow forward shoulder rafter shoulder
bow wave system
wave making length
Fig. 3 C . Splitting
up of the total wave system according to the Z theory
a few methods have been proposed w' hich can be
applied to ordinary ship forms. These methods will
be dealt with below.
-
3 7. The 2- theary
It is obvious from what has been said that many
interference phenomena may influence resistance.
Nevertheless attemps have been made to formulate
simple rules with the aid of which predictions might
be made as to whether the resistance of a given design
would be favourably or unfavourably affected by
interference. One of these rules is the so-called
Z- theory, which was originally devised by R . E.
Froude and afterwards also adopted by Taylor and
Horn [ 4 ] , [ 6 ] , The theory was simplified by as -
suming that a ship’s wave system could be split up
into two components , viz. a bow wave system and a
stern wave system. Here the bow and stern wave
systems respectively are the entire wave systems
created by the forward and the after part of the
ship. It was further assumed that the positions of
the first wave crest of the bow wave system and the
first wave trough of the stern wave system ( hence
the after shoulder wave trough ) did not vary with
speed . The distance between bow wave crest and
after shoulder wave troueh was called the wave
making length Z ( see Fig! 36 ) "~
ustern
!
I.
!
i
!
a Z i
stern wave system
-
 31
Maximum wave making resistance will then 39. William pro ude' s experiments
occur if t T
Z _ (2 k + 1 ) Fig. 13 (sshows the results of experiments which
J ( 64 ) William Froude carried out with regard to the
1
subject under consideration [ 15 ] . He used the same
minimum wave making resistance, if fore and after ends with parallel middle bodies of

L! 2 &*, with k = 0, 1i
'
£ different lengths. As was to be expected the wave-
, ) ( 6 b) making resistance at any constant speed varied with
r, , . ,
,
The
.. applicati
e •
, , on of this
i
/- theory is seriously
, .the, length
•
of parallel
t , . middle body. From Fig. 38 it
1S obvious that there is a periodicity in this ° . .
r
-,
I
handicapped by the tact that T / cannot^ be deter . , , , , .
, variation
, ,
, , , ,
i T i
.. ,v/ . i
mined exactly In the case of Wigley >s
, „ , ° ' . wedge
body the adoption ofr the / theory ?
i
shaped
r
-
is equivalent to,
-, , which is in agreement with
. .
the wave ,length of the
free-surface wave corresponding to the speed
C c °
r
.
con -
cernecj
considering exclusively the interference between the
bow wave and the after shoulder wave. Indeed The curves of constant (?)- values clearly show
Wigley proved theoretically that this must be the the relation on which the (?) -theory is based.
most important case of interference .
40. Experiments by Lante and Eggeri
3 8. -
The ( Pj theory
Laute in Germany in 1933 [ 16 ] and Eggert in the
From the results of a large number of experi- U.S. A. in 1935 [ 17 ] and 1939 [ 18 ], published
ments carried out by themselves and by the Froudes,
results of pressure measurements carried out on
Baker and Kent arrived at a criterion for predicting models with a view to determining the wave- making
interference phenomena [ 14 ]. They found that the resistance. It is not possible, however, to determine
wave- making length Z, was equal to <f L + /4 X and
thus varied with speed . This relation , which leads
to the so- called
results:
Maximum wave resistance if :
^
( / - theory, yiels the following

V L + /4 X
'
—
( 2 b T 1 ) ,\ X

or
<pL
—
X =
1

KJ . . . . ( 66 )
OT
® ,

Minimum wave resistance if :

<f‘ E + J4 X k X =
T = it
Vk 1 :
or
f p )2 i:
V mm
... . ( 67 ) !

or
® mi „ 1
Except for determining the highest hump the !
( Pj -theory appears to be a useful aid in the pre-
liminary stage of design of the ship. In view of the
numerous possible interference effects, which may
occur with any ship, one must not expect every -
thing from the (?) -theory.
Fig. 37 shows in a readily survey able manner
V
wrhat combinations of <p and lead to relatively
favourable or unfavourable wave- making resistances
respectively. In Tables II end III the results of the
(?) - theory have been inserted for comparison Kg . J 7. Humps ami hollows according to the theory
with the results calculated theoretically. ( Vi in kn , L in ft )

32
Fig. 38 , Results of interference experiments by
the wave -making resistance separately in this man
ner, since the eddy - making or pressure resistance too
manifests itself in local pressure changes along the
hull surface. For good hull forms the latter compo-
nent is probably small. Fig. 39 , taken from a
publication by Tggert, is a typical example of a
pressure distribution . It clearly shows that the bow
wave originates at some distance behind the region
with the highest pressure.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
41. General
Several times in the course of the present study
the possibility was mentioned of calculating wave -
making resistance mathematically. Unfortunately ,
it is beyond the scope of this course to deal with
similar methods of calculation so that it must suffice
to say that there are very interesting potentialities
in ' these methods. From the results important quali -
tative and sometimes also quantitative conclusions
can be drawn.
For present - day normal hull forms the quanti-
tative results still leave something to be desired .
Nevertheless in our opinion a promising future is
opening for these methods. Their application should
be left to specialized mathematicians [ 12 ], [ 19 ] ,
[ 2 0 ].
!
William Fronde
- It is quite possible, however , to lay down some
lines to be followed in designing a good ship form ,
which lines follow from simple theoretical consider -
ations.
42 . Properties of various ship forms
5
U - shaped sections in the forepart of the ship
One of the most obvious conclusions to be drawn
from our considerations is the following. \
We have seen that wave - making resistance is :
excited as soon as a body moves in the vicinity of
a free surface.
Therefore, if the wave - making resistance has to
be restricted to a minimum, care should be taken i
that as much displacement as possible is kept far
below the surface. This generally leads to the
adoption of U -shaped sections. From a wave resist -
ance point of view this type of sections is
advantageous in the fore part of the ship as far as
concerns the non -oscillating part of the wave-
making resistance. In the second place, steps may be
|
taken to ensure that the interference phenomena
are favourable. To this end the means adopted most
frequently are:
Bulbous bows
A bulbous bow [ 4 ] is a thickening of the bow
, ?
sections below the load waterline. If this thickening !
!
 33
Section nr .
17 1615

V5

Fig. 39. Pressure distribution over the hull surface as measured by Eggert

is regarded as a separate body, it will be clear that effect of these fins on pitching. Their adoption in
it will create a wave system, when moving sub- practice will presumably be accompanied by
merged relatively close to the surface. At certain , structural difficulties.
generally fairly high speeds = 1.0 and higher, Patent forms
V in kn and L in ft ) this wave system may interfere In the course of time innumerable patents have
favourably with the bow wave of the ship. This been granted for all sorts of ship forms. Judgment
interference may result in a reduction of the wave - as to the merits of these forms lies outside the scope
making resistance. Moreover , the adoption of a .
of this course We will restrict ourselves to a few
bulbous bow is often combined with the use of
more U -shaped sections. In that case there is an
additional factor causing a reduction in resistance.
Fig. 40 represents a body plan of a modern ship
with a bulbous bow .
Fins
LWL
Another possibility is to provide aerofoil -shaped
fins in the vicinity of the bow wave crest ( see F
Fig. 41 ) [ 21 ].
These fins can be fitted in such a way that the
wave system generated interferes favourably with
the bow wave. Model experiments carried out by
Abkowitz have yielded satisfactory results notwith -
standing the additional resistance caused by the fins.
Abkowitz is also making investigations into the .
Fig 40, Ship with bulbous bow
!
•

y-
«£ZZZZZ22ZZ2>

T Tins applied to the fore ship

remarks about some of their properties in connect -

ion with what has been discussed so far. By means
of fins as well as of a bulbous bow an additional
1 wave system is generated which interferes favour
ably with the total wave system of the ship without
-
I such appendages.
A second method , of influencing wave making
Piii' resistance is, however, to shift , strengthen or weaken
!!: the components of the ship’s own wave system Fig. 43 . Body plan according to the Yourkevitch patent
r relatively to each other in such a way that their
'f mutual interference yields a total wave pattern as
tween bow wave and shoulder wave, it may be
favourable as possible. The adoption of the Maier
I form [ 22 ] , for instance generally results in the bow
desirable to make the shoulder wave big so as to
cause as large a portion of the bow wave as possible
wave being shifted farther aft than usual. An ex
ample of the original Maier form is- shown in
- to be neutralized by the shoulder wave.
In contrast with current practice a ship form has
Fig. 42.
ii. then to be designed having pronounced shoulders as
In the case of the Yourkevitch form [ 23 ] the shown in Fig. 44. i
waterlines are given such a form that the shoulder Theoretical resistance calculations have proved
wave occupies a favourable position. Fig. 43 repre- that at relatively high speeds such forms can yield
sents a body plan designed according to this patent .

Results of theoretical calculations

good results =>1
If a ship is to run within a speed range where The results of these calculations have been con -
there is a possibility of favourable interference be- firmed by experiments.
SECTION III
LAWS OF COMPARISON
43. Introduction
In the preceding sections several interesting
aspects of wave resistance were reviewed. Un - I
fortunately we had to mention the fact that the
theoretical methods of calculating wrave resistance
have not yet been developed to such an extent , that
they are of direct importance in practice. So one of
LWL
the resistance components being intractable for
calculation the total resistance cannot be determined
either. Attempts had to be made therefore to find
an experimental method of determining the magni-
tude of ship resistance. In the following sections, in S
a purely physical way, a reasoned account will be
given of the conditions which have to be satisfied
when carrying out these and similar model ex-
.
Fig 42. The original Maier form periments [ 24 ] , [ 25 ], [ 26 ],