Influence of EEDI on Ship Design & Operation,13 September 2017, London, UK

On the Design of X-bow for Ship Energy Efficiency

M. A. Mosaad, M.M. Gafaary, W. Yehia and H.M. Hassan.
Naval Architecture and Marine Eng. Dept., Faculty of Eng., University of Port said, Egypt.

ABSTRACT

Ship researchers devote great efforts towards improving hull form for minimizing ship resistance which reflects on
capital and running cost by reducing fuel consumption. Benefits of bulbous bow were shown reduction of wave
resistance. However, further research work on different bow shape is needed. This paper offers a study of how
minimizing the wave making resistance is due to using new innovative x-bow shape. The work involves a numerical
simulated flow around hull model to estimate ship resistance using computational fluid dynamics, CFD. Validations of
experimental data for wave making resistance for series 60 hull with conventional bow are done. For accurate output,
numerical study is performed to choose an optimum turbulence model. Geometrical modification using Rhinoceros
software on the series 60 hull by adding delta-type bulb and new innovative X-bow on the fore portion are made. Similar
works are done using KCS and DTMB 5415 hull models. The work has shown significant reduction in wave making
resistance due to using the X-bow for the range of Froude number from 0.18 to 0.45, if compared with the original hull
of series60, KCS or DTMB 5415 for the same range.

NOMENCLATURE resistance by form factor (1+K). The frictional resistance

has direct relation with the ship's wetted surface area,
1+k Form factor however, wave making resistance change due to by many
Cf Frictional resistance coefficient parameters especially bow form shape. In this study,
CT Total resistance coefficient ship resistance validation was carried out by comparing
CV Viscous resistance coefficient experimental data with numerical simulation of three
CW Wave resistance coefficient different hull forms series 60, KCS and DTMB 5415.
Fn Froude Number In the past, ship hull was designed with rack bow type
k Turbulent kinetic energy (m2/s2) which have high wave making resistances. Accordingly,
RF Frictional resistance (N) many modifications were carried out on the fore portion
Rn Reynold Number of ship to minimize wave making resistance and create a
▼ Volume displacement (m3) new bow form shape called bulbous bow. This bow
RR Residual resistance (N) depends on the interfering between two wave systems
RV Viscous resistance (N) one created by main hull and another one by bulb. The
RW Wave making resistance (N) sum of the two waves can minimize wave making
LPP Length between perpendiculars (m) resistance. Nowadays, there is a new innovative bow
Y First wall thickness (m) called X-bow form which depends on wave cancellation
Y+ Non-dimensional wall distance theory.
ε Turbulent dissipation (m2/s2) Numerical simulation was carried out by CFD- ANSYS
software which has different codes solver for fluid flow
1. INTRODUCTION such as FLUENT solver, CFX solver or POLYFLOW
solver. The three codes are different in input data method
Reduction of ship fuel consumption is important to and graphical interface, but have the same output. These
improve ship efficiency. This study is intended to reduce codes are usually used to predicate the total resistance
fuel by modifying ship hull form shape which has a around ship hull after calibrated and validated using
direct effect on the total ship resistance. The related existing experimental data.
determination of ship total resistance from naval Theatrical and experimental works were carried out for
architecture approach is always carried out by using optimizing the geometrical shape of the bow. Starting
towing tank model experiment but from the other hand, with the theoretical work attempt work by Wigley [1],
total resistance can be estimated hydrodynamically by show how far the effects of bulb on the reducing of wave
using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) codes with making resistance. The first experimental attempt to
through geometrical modelling creation. study the effect of fitting bulbous bow was carried out by
Recently, CFD has become good and popular tools due Dillon and Lewis [2]. They found that there is a large
to its advantages in consume time and low cost if reduction in wave making resistance in calm water if
compare with ship model experiments. Generally, CFD compared with that bulb in rough waves.
simulation of flow around a ship hull results represents Johnson [3] carried out experimental work on four
the total ship resistance. The main components of total different models. One has conventional bow and the
resistance can be expressed as the sum of frictional three others have a bulbous bow with different frontal
resistance (RF) and residual resistance (RR) or the sum of sectional area. The results have shown that decrease in
viscous resistance (RV) and wave making resistance required effective power by 20% for larger bulb area and
(RW), where viscous resistance is multiplied frictional 4% of effective power for the lower one.

© 2017: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects

 Influence of EEDI on Ship Design & Operation, 22 September 2017, London, UK

It is therefore, recommended that there is a good relation resistance. The change in wave making resistance effect
between bulb area and reduction in effective power. of bow form was validated with experimental available
Doust [4] carried out his experimental work on two data of series 60, KCS and DTMB models. Modification
trawler models with same dimensions and displacement has been made for series 60 hull to be modelled with
one of them have conventional bow and the other have geometrical generating bulb and x-bow. A similar
bulbous bow form. Trawler with bulbous bow reduce modification was carried out on original hulls of KCS
effective power by 5 - 7.5% in the Froude number rang and DTMB5415 to suit with an x - bow. Numerical
(Fn = 0.27 - 0.32), if compared with trawler with estimation is calculated by commercial software
conventional bow. ANSYS-FLUENT version 14.5.
Inui [5] completed his theatrical work for determining
the bulb size by using amplitude functions of regular 2. GEROMETRY OF ORIGINAL MODEL
waves from both the ship with conventional bow and HULL FORM
ship with bulb. In the 1970's two design methods were
created by Yim [6] and Kracht [7] for designing a The hull forms selected in this study are series 60 model,
bulbous bow. These are the most common design KCS model and DTMB 5415 model. Series 60 hulls with
methods used in the design preliminary stage. clipper bow using for cargo ship shape in towing tank
Friis et al. [8] performed tests with two different bulbous model test. KCS model was conceived to provide data
bows having different lengths. From the resistance tests it for a modern container ship with bulb bow. DTMB 5415
was found that the longer bulb provided 8 - 9% reduction Model is suitable for a preliminary design for a navy
in resistance at speeds above 7 knots. combatant. DTMB 5415 model hull geometry includes
The other literature review is related to numerical both a sonar dome and transom stern. The main
methods which carried out on different vessels types dimensions of original three models are shown in table 1
with different CFD codes. Fonfach and Soares [9] and longitudinal profile of the Series 60 model, KCS
showed simulation around series 60 model by using model and DTMB5415 model are shown in figures 1, 2
CFD-CFX Code. They found a good agreement between and 3 respectively.
CFD-CFX Code and experimental work when used k-e
turbulence model. The authors modified series 60 model Table 1: [Main dimensions of original three models].
to suit with two bulbs. They considered the bulbs as
cylinder, in which the transversal area of the cylinder Series 60 KCS DTMB5415
was estimated as 20% of the midship section area and the LPP (m) 7.000 7.2786 5.72
length was considered 0.04Lpp for the first bulb and B (m) 0.933 1.0190 0.76
0.06Lpp for the second bulb. They concluded that, for T (m) 0.373 0.3418 0.248
low Froude number (i.e.0.22) the total resistance S (m2) 943.8 9.5441 .4794
coefficient was reduce by 3.19% for the first bulb and ▼ (m3) 1.462 1.6490 0. 549
10.35% for the second one. At high Froude number CB (….) 644 0.651 0.506
(i.e.0.34), the total resistance coefficient was reduce by
8.25% for the first bulb and 9. 73% for the second one.
Grzegorz Filip and et al., [10] carried out their study on
the effect of bulbous bow on container ships .They used
KCS model as original model for computational test and
the numerical estimation was done by using CFD-
OpenFOAM Code. They used three different bulbs with
height 8m, 9m and 10 m permutations with three
different bulb width 4m, 5.4 m and 6.7 m. They
generated nine new bulb geometry and retrofit on KCS
model hull to do the numerical simulation. The result has
shown that the bulb with 8 m height and 4 m width is the
best one in power savings. The bulb with 10 m height Figure 1:[ 3D view of Series 60 hull model].
and 6.7 m width have increased in total resistance by
25% if compare with the best bulb.
Yonghe Xie and Gangqiang Li [11] used CFD-FLUENT
Code for simulation flow around Deep Sea Trawler
vessel. Validation results with existing experimental
model test with length 4.67 m fitted with bulbous bow
have been done. They concluded that reduction in total
resistance due to fitted bulb is 4.31% at Froude number
0.326, if compared with original model.
The aim of this study is to use of CFD code for
estimating the total resistance which includes two main
components viscous resistance and wave making
Figure 2: [3D view of KCS hull model].

© 2017: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects

Influence of EEDI on Ship Design & Operation,13 September 2017, London, UK

It is preferable to use unstructured type of meshing due

to complex shape of hull models and domain [16]. Both
volumes of domain and hull were subdivided primarily
into tetrahedral shape mesh for three original hulls. The
number of mesh elements used for computational
estimation for three original hull are shown in table 3 and
mesh of series 60 model are shown in figure 5.

Table 3: [Element number of meshes]

Figure 3: [3D view of DTMB 5415 hull model]. Model Number of elements
Series 60 Model 2383776
3. MODEL EXPERMINTAL DATA FOR KCS Model 450510
VALIDATION DTMB 5415 Model 2154201

Experimental work data carried out on series 60 model

was obtained from Takeshi's experiment [12] and
experimental results of total resistance coefficient are
shown in the table 5. The KCS model experimental data
carried out by the Korea Research Institute for Ships and
Ocean Engineering (KRISO) [13] and experimental data
performed in the table 6. DTMB 5415 combatant model
test results are obtained from the Iowa Institute of
Hydraulic Research (IIHR) [14] and table 7 represents
the results of the experimental data. Form factor (1+k) of
the three models was estimated graphically and the
results are shown in table 2.
Figure 5: [Mesh of series 60 model].
Table 2: [Form factor determination of three original
hulls]. The first near wall distance of hull surface of boundary
layer based on y+ value is calculated by the following
Model 1+k recommended equation by ITTC [15] and y+ value within
Series 60 Model 1.125 the desire limit (30<y+<300) with 10 numbers of layers
KCS Model 1.2068 for all three original models.
DTMB 5415 Model 1.482

4. CFD SETUP OF ORGINAL MODELS Equation (1)

Computational domain was chosen to be box shape as

shown in figure 4. Dimensions of computational domain
of three models are recommended by International
Towing Tank Conference (ITTC) [15] and defined as
function of ship's length (LPP). The length of
computational domain in front of the hull, behind the
hull, bottom, and side boundaries are taken as 1.0Lpp,
3.0Lpp, 1.0Lpp, and 1.5Lpp respectively.
The main aim of turbulence modeling study is chosen of
optimum turbulence model used in simulation which
depends on the accuracy of the results. In this study, the
turbulence model study was carried out at the maximum
Froude number range (i.e. Fn= 0.34) for series 60 model
between two different types of turbulence model k-ε
model and k-ω model which are common uses in ship
hydrodynamics problems.

Table 4: [Turbulence model study of series 60 model at

Fn =0.34].

Turbulence RT, EXP RT,CFD Error %

model (N) (N)
k-ε Standard 168.17 173.66 3.26455
k-ε Realizable 168.17 125.118 25.59989
k-ε RNG 168.17 121.38 27.82304
k-ω Standard 168.47 168.47 0.178
k-ω SST 168.17 120.92 28.09657

Figure 4: [Computational domain].

© 2017: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects

 Influence of EEDI on Ship Design & Operation, 22 September 2017, London, UK

From table 4, it is obvious that the best turbulence model

used for this problem is the standard k-ω model. It is
possible that use this turbulence model for all original
models and at all different Froude numbers.

5. NUMERICAL SIMULATION RESULTS

AND VALIDATION OF ORGINAL MODELS

In this section, CFD-FLUENT code is used to calculate

the resistance of three original hull models in calm water.
The pressure distribution contour at a maximum Froude
number of the three original models is shown in figure 6,
7 and 8. Tables 5, 6 and 7 show a comparison between
experimental results and numerical value of CFD-
FLUENT output, of different resistance coefficients
Figure 8: [Pressure distribution along DTMB5415 model
components.
with X-bow at Fn= 0.45].

Table 5: [Validation of series 60 model]

Error%
CW*103
Fn
Takeshi's CFD-
Experiment Fluent
0.22 0.151513 0.144817 4.4
0.26 0.479013 0.492885 2.899
0.3 1.749571 1.753774 0.273
0.34 1.907463 1.895064 0.6

Table 6: [Validation of KCS model]

Error%
CW*103
Fn
KRISO's CFD-
Experiment Fluent
0.1949 0.01 0.0095 5
0.2274 0.044743 0.048 7.27
Figure 6: [Pressure distribution along Series 60 model
0.2599 0.360770 0.35 2.98
with X-bow at Fn=0. 34].
0.2816 1.195198 1.21 1.23

Table 7: [Validation of DTMB 5415 model].

Error%
CW*103
Fn
IIHR 's CFD-
Experiment Fluent
0.3 0.5332 0.5 6.2
0.35 1.032 1.01 2.13
0.4 2.2736 2.38 4.65
0.45 4.1416 4.21 1.65

The result presented in Tables 5, 6 and 7 shows that

Figure 7: [Pressure distribution along KCS model with
X-bow at Fn=0. 2816].
resistance component coefficient of experimental and
CFD-Fluent codes for three original models. The
percentage errors between CFD-FLUENT code and
experimental data for three original models on wave
making resistance coefficient not exceed 7% and this
acceptable value for validation.

© 2017: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects

Influence of EEDI on Ship Design & Operation,13 September 2017, London, UK

6. MODIFICATION OF HULL GEOMETRY 7. NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF X-BOW

HULL MODELS
Modification carried out on the original three models to
suit with an X-bow. The X-bow design was Numerical simulation was carried out on modified
recommended by patent cooperation treaty (PCT)[17]. models, has the same domain size, number of mesh,
Modified hulls model have the same principle boundary conditions and turbulence model which are
dimensions of original hulls with slightly different in illustrated in section 4. The pressure distribution contour
wetted surface area and length over submerged (LOS) of of series 60 with bulb and with X-bow was shown in
the original three models. It is clear that both KCS and figures 12 and 13 at Froude number 0.34. Figures 14 and
DTMB5415 models have bulbs and it is not likely to 15 show the pressure distribution of KCS model with X-
compare with series 60 models. Series 60 model was bow and DTMB 5415 with X-bow respectively.
modified to have bulbous bow. Generating of bulb
dimensions and bulb form coefficients are depending on
recommendations by kratch in 1978 [7] .The modified
geometry of series 60 with bulbous bow and X-bow are
shown in figure 9. KCS model with X-bow and DTMB
5415 with X–bow are shown in figure 10 and 11
respectively.

Figure 12: [Pressure distribution along series 60 model

with bulbous at Fn=0.34].

B
Figure 9: [3D view of Series 60 hull model with A)
Bulbous bow B) X-bow].

Figure 10: [3D view of KCS hull model with X-bow].

Figure 13: [Pressure distribution along series 60 model with

X-bow at Fn=0.34].

Figure 11: [3D view of DTMB 5415 hull model with X-

bow].

© 2017: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects

 Influence of EEDI on Ship Design & Operation, 22 September 2017, London, UK

Figure 18 shows wave making resistance of original

DTMB 5415 model and with x-bow; it is obvious that
there are reductions in wave making resistance at low
Froude number about 18%. For intermediate Froude
number, the reduction change from 22% to 30% by
increase hull speed. At high Froude number, the
reduction of wave making is about 50%.

Figure 14: [Pressure distribution along KCS model with

X-bow at Fn=0.2816].

Figure 16: [Wave making resistance of series 60 with

bulbous bow and X-bow].

Figure 15: [Pressure distribution along DTMB 5415

model with X-bow at Fn=0.45]. Figure 17: [wave making resistance of KCS with bulbous
bow and X-bow].
8- RESULTS AND DISCUSIONS OF
X-BOW MODEL HULLS

Figure 16 shows the comparison between wave making

resistance coefficients of series 60 (with bulbous bow)
and with an X-bow version. It is clear that at low Froude
number, reduction in wave making resistance by 29% is
shown. At intermediate Froude number, the reduction of
the wave making resistance reach to 14 % then to 6% by
increase hull speed. At high Froude number, the
reduction of the wave making resistance coefficient
becomes 4% due using X-bow form.
Figure 17 shows the results of KCS Model. The
reduction of wave making resistance coefficient has
increased dramatically by 6 % by increase the Froude
number. However, at low Froude number the reduction
about 7%, and for high Froude number the reduction Figure 18: [Wave making resistance of DTMB 5415 with
about 27% due to using X-bow form. bulbous bow and X-bow].

© 2017: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects

 Influence of EEDI on Ship Design & Operation,13 September 2017, London, UK
9. CONCLUSIONS
The present studies utilize the computational fluid
dynamics to predict hull resistance coefficients and
improve hull form. CFD-FLUENT code is found to be an
effective tool for validating the results with the existing
experimental data. The standard k-ω turbulence model
found to be suitable for such as these ship
hydrodynamics problems. The Present results show that
the effect of X-bow is not effective for cargo ships
operating at high speed. It is concluded that the container
ships with X-bow have good reduction in fuel
consumption at high Froude number. It is worth wise to
design and manufacture combatant vessels with X-bow
operating at Froude number more than 0.44.
10. REFERENCES
1. Wigley, W., ‘The theory of the bulbous bow and
its practical application’, North East Coast
Institution of Engineers and Shipbuilders, 1936.
2. Dillon, E.S., Lewis, E.V., and Scott E., ‘Ships
with Bulbous Bows in Smooth Water and in
Waves’, Transactions of SNAME, 1955.
3. Ridgely, C., ‘The resistance of a high
displacement-length ratio trawler series’,
Transactions of SNAME, 1967.
4. Doust, D., ‘Optimised Trawler Forms’, National
Physical Laboratory, 1962.
5. Inui, T., Takahei T., and Kumano M., ‘Wave
profile measurements on the wave-making
characteristics of the bulbous bow’, Journal of
Zosen Kiokai, 1960.
6. Yim, B., ‘A simple design theory and method
for bulbous bows of ships’, Journal of Ship
Research, 1974.
7. Kracht, A.M.,’ Design of bulbous bows’,
Transactions of SNAME, 1978.
8. Friis, D., Bose, N., and Luznik, L., ‘Bulbous
Bow Design and Ice Strengthening Project
Carried out for Canadian Centre for Fisheries
Innovation’, coast guard research and
developement centre groton, 1985.
9. Fonfach,J.M, and Soares,C.G., ‘Improving the
resistance of a series 60 vessel with a CFD
code’, In European Conference on
Computational Fluid Dynamics, 2010.
10. Grzegorz Filip, et al., ‘ Bulbous Bow Retrofit
Of a Container Ship Using an Open-Source
Toolbox’, Transactions of SNAME, 2013.
© 2017: The Royal Institution of Naval Architects
View publication stats
11. Xie, Yonghe,L., and Gangqiang, ‘Study on
Optimal Design of Bulbous Bow for Deep Sea
Trawlers Based on Viscous Flow Theory’,
International Society of Offshore and Polar
Engineers, 2012.
12. Takeshi,H., Hino, T., and Hinatsu, M., Tsukada
Y, and Fujisawa, J., ‘Flow Measurements and
resistance Tests, ITTC Cooperative Experiments
on a Series 60 Model At ship Research
Institute’, In 17th Towing Tank Conference
(ITTC), 1987.
13. Kim et al., ‘Measurement of flows around
modern commercial ship models’, Exp. in
Fluids, (2001).
14 Olivieri, A., et al., ‘Towing Tank Experiments
of resistance sinkage and trim, boundary layer,
wake and free surface flow around a naval
combatant 2340 model’, The University of Iowa,
2001.
15. ITTC., ‘Recommended Procedures and
Guidelines: Practical Guidelines for Ship CFD’,
26th Int. Towing Tank Conf., 2011.
16. Hirsch, C., ‘The fundamentals of computational
fluid dynamics, Butterworth-Heinemann, 2007.
17. Kamsvag, ‘Fore Ship Arrangement for a Vessel
of Displacment Type’, Patatant Appl.
Publication, 2005.
11. AUTHORS BIOGRAPHY
Mohamed A. Mosaad is a Professor of Marine Engineering
and Naval Architecture, Ex.Vice Dean of Educational and
Students Affair, Faculty of Engineering, Port Said
University, Egypt. He has got his Ph.D. from Newcastle
University in 1986. His research interests include ship
hydrodynamics, marine propulsions and performance.
Mo'men M. Gaafary is a Professor of Marine Engineering
and Naval Architecture, Vice Dean of Graduate studies and
Researches, Faculty of Engineering, Port Said University,
Egypt. He has got his Ph.D from Stevens Inst. of
Technology in 1987. His research interests include ship
hydrodynamics and marine propeller.
Walyeed Yehia is an assistant professor in department
Naval Architecture and Marine, Faculty of Engineering,
Port Said University, Egypt. His research interests lie in the
areas of Energy Efficiency, Marine Engineering, propeller
hydrodynamics and ship vibrations.
Hussien Mohamed Hassan is a master degree student at
faculty of engineering in Port Said University. He received a
Bachelor Science degree in Marine engineering and naval
architecture.
Typical catamaran hull forms, semi-displacement (top) and planing (bottom)

1
Foil arrangement on foil-assisted catamarans in
model test at HSVA; forward foil (top) and aft foil
(right)

Resistance of a 45m catamaran with and without

foils

ASD form with faired deep-V addition ASD longitudinal rails at model