Marine Technology, Vol 30, No. 4, Oct. 1899, pp. 286-296 A Resistance Study on a Systematic Series of Low L/B Vessels ‘Sander M. Calisal’ and Dan McGreer' Mode! resistance test results fora systematic series of low L/6, dsplacement-type vessels are presente. ‘The UBC Series is based on West Coast seiners and travers. These vessels nave low L/S and L/V ‘Yalues tat are outside the tange of existing rodel series data. A parent hull form was developed that has 14 potoont loss resistance and yet has the same dsplacement and deck area of a typical ishing A seies of 19 models was generated by systemaicaly varying L/8, 6/7 ahd Cy, Algorithms are proseniod for calculation of the resistance of sirilar smal vessels fortwo loading crafts. Results of side bulb applications reduced the resietance ofthe parent hul at design speed by an additional 166 percent. ‘The parent hull form is designed as a developable hull farm. Introduction ‘Mover. eenins have proven to be very useful tools for pre- dicting the resistance of ships. As part of a research program to reduce fuel consumption of fishing vessels a systematic model series has been developed at the University of British ‘Columbia (UBC) based on a typical British Columbia purse During the development of the UBC FISH [1F fuel con- sumption prediction program it was found that the resistance of many West Coast fishing vessels cannot be predicted by existing model series data (see Table 1). West Coast vessels typically hava lower length-to-beam ratios and lower length- to-volume ratios than previously reported model series: Brit- ish Ship Research Association (BSRA) Trawler Series [2,3], Webb Trawler Series [4,5,6], and the Technical University of Istanbul (ITU) Series [7], Table 1 shows the comparison of vessel series parameters of these series. ‘The trend for new fishing vescels in British Columbia, Can- ada is to increasing beam for their length. The advantages of larger beam are increased fish hold volume, increased sta- bility for hauling the net, larger deck area and the ability to carry a longer net drum. The disadvantage of larger beam is increased resistance. The series data could be used to ealcu- late the tradeoffs of increasing beam with increasing resist- ance, Also, the series data will be useful in calculating the resistance of many existing small vessels, ‘A systematic series of models was generated from a parent hull form. The series parent was developed by testing differ- ‘ent chine, stern and bow configurations to find a hull with ‘the lowest resistance. This hull was selected as the series parent and was scaled to generate a systematic series of 13, models, The series was created by varying the length-to-beam ratio, beam-to-draft ratio, and the block coefficient. ‘Resistance prediction algorithms have been developed by regression analysis of the model test results. The algorithms are suitable for implementation on computer and are pres- ently used in the UBC FISH program. Professor and research engineer, respectively, Mechanical Engi neering Deportient, University of British Columbie, Vancouver, BC, Canada, "Numbers in brackets designate References at end of paper. ‘Precentad the May 11/12, 1890 Spring Meeting ofthe Pacific North: 0025:3916/99/0090-0208600.47/0 ‘Table + Comparison of fehing vassl eri parameter ranges ry & e ar uve [we oe | 26-40 2s yaa SRA see | 43-58 a3 | ass-sa m ss-s6 | 33-5 232 | 34a wet ass | 32-575 23 | aas-saz Model test procedure ‘The resistance experiments were conducted at the BC Re- search Ocean Engineoring Centro located adjacent to the UEC campus. The towing tank is 67.06 m (220 ft) long, 3.66 m 112 ft) wide, and 2.44 m (8 ft) deep. The models were con- tracted of wood and were hetween 1.52 m (6 ft) and 2.18 m (7 #0 long. They were built at a scale of 13.75: ‘The models were tested at about ten speeds in the Froude number range of 0.2 to 0.45, which corresponds to full-scale speeds of between 6 and 12 knots. Two drafts were tested: light ship and loaded. The light ship draft is defined as the dreft the vessel would have when departing for the fishing greunds, The fishholds are assumed to be empty and a full supply of fuel and stores is assumed. At the loaded dratt, it is essumed that the fishholds would be full and a half supply of “uel and stores would be onboard. ‘The models were towed from a bracket located at midships (station 5). The bracket was fastened as low as possible so thet trim moments caused by towing would be minimized. ‘The models were free to squat and trim. Resistance was mea sured by a strain gage force dynamometer and the sinkage and trim were measured by high-resolution potentiometers. "To induce a turbulent boundary layer on the models, brass studs were inserted at 25.4 mm (1 in.) centers 10% of LBP aft of the forward perpendicular. Tho pins were 3.18 mm (0.125 in) in diameter and extended 2.54 mm (0.1 in.) from the hull surface. The ITTC7 (nternational Towing Tank Conference) correlation line was used to estimate the friction drag. The resistance equations are: 0.075 oo Gog;cRa — 27 MARINE TECHNOLOGY‘A form factor was used in the scaling of the light ship draft results but was not used in the scaling of the loaded-draft results. The form factor wes found by making a Prohacka plot based on four low-speed resistance tests. The calculated form factors are listed in Table 2 and are presented in the form (k+1). The form factors measured are found to be smaller than those predicted hy the algorithin given in the Principles of Naval Architecture on page 91, Vol. If [10], The values predicted for k-+1 by this algorithm were higher than the measured values by about 8 percent. The authors suggest that the users should calculate the model resistance based on the information available in this paper and follow a model to ship scaling procedure with a form factor of their own choice. In the loaded-draft case, the form factor was assumed to be zero for the algorithmic calculations. The towing tank procedure was calibrated by testing a Wigley hull and a Series 60 block 60 model; satisfactory results were obtained, Parent hull development ‘The first step.in the generation of the UBC Series was to develop the parent hull form. The starting point for the development of a parent for the series was a fishing vessel hhull that had been designed by Gerry Stensgaard at BC Re- search. It was a 21.34 m (60 ft) purse seiner typical of steel ‘Table 2 Geomatre properties of UBC Series models = waterline beam at amidships prismatic coefficient residual resistance coefficient ‘total resistance coefficient oPPPoPe ‘OcToBER 1803 F, = Froude number block coefficient LE = waterline length frictional resistance coefficient CB — longitudinal center of buoyancy imidships area coeficient B, = Reynolds number EB, = residual resistence R= total resistance in Newtons = draft at midships excluding keel and aluminum vessels currently being constructed on the West Coast of North America for purse seining of salmon and herring (Fig. 1). The principal particulars of the vessel are given in Table 3, Purse scining is a stationary fishing method in which a large net is deployed in a circle surrounding a school of fish. ‘The net is then drawn closed on the bottom and the net reeled in over the stern. These vessels typically have low L/B ratios {or large hold capacity, maneuverability and stability. ‘A number of model tests were conducted to ensure that the parent hull would havo good resistance characteristics. ‘The first experiment was to determine if modifying the hull ‘to havea double chine or round bilge would reduce the resist- ance. Two models were designed so that the area of each station and waterline breadth at each station remained con- stant. This ensured that all the sectional area curve, displace- ‘ment, form coefficients, and center of buoyancy remained unchanged. The wetted surface also did not change signifi- cantly. The wetted surface of the double chine hull was 1.2% greater than the single chine hull and the round bilge hull ‘was 0.2% greater than the single chine hull. The body plans of the three hulls are shown in Fig. 2. A significant reduction in resistance was achieved with the double chine and round bilge designs (Fig. 3). Ata typical cruising speed of 10.5 knots the resistance was reduced 8% for the double chine hull and 10% for the round bilge hull. Because it had performance that nearly matched the round bilge design, and probably ‘would cost less to construct, the double chine hull wasselected {for further refinement. ‘Additional experiments were then conducted to improve the double chine hull. Gireesh Sadasivan, a graduate student, designed a developable new bow shape that reduced the half entrance angle from 42 to 30 deg (Fig. 4). The sectional areas ee eee ee ene of each station were again held constant but the design water- mm ET [|] @ | % | & | [TE line hal-broadths were reduced in the bow region to reduce Tee tae tae bearer aie pane the entrance angle. To maintain the same sectional area 2 [ise ove [3% [3S] fe [om | te | Sst | Si [Fe | curve, the profile of the bow was made deeper and the stem 2 | i23) S| Ae | 25 | ak |] S88 | Ge | 48 | 223 | SIE | was made vertical below the design waterline. The stern pro- PS PER | | 22 | ae | 28 | amt | 22 |S | 26 | fle was also modified The run angle was decreased by mak- § [HR | ine | 3h | 2 | es | 383 | ot | 38 | S25 | Ze | ing the buttocks slightly concave (hooked buttocks). 3 | ism | oom | 340 | 39 | oss: | oa | can | 33s | Same | fice | ‘The resistance decreased slightly when compared with the | Be | Le) ) 12 |g | eee | eee | 2 | 128 | cus | previously tested double chine hull see Fig. 6) Measurements | BE PASS | 2 | 2s | ses] eae | ame | 2] 228] 2S] ofthe wave profiles by longitudinal cut procedures indicated B Lior Lise | sm | ie Pose [aan | Gru | aie Lis | Sis | that the bow wave had been significantly reduced by the new bow shape but, since the reduction in resistance was less than wee ET [ERR TCE] TE] expected, t was concluded that the new bow may have had ee he coxa _ favorable resistance characteristics but the new stern did not. Y [Ss | abs [3a 38 [os $2 | [S| Anew model was constructed that had the new bow and the i] sae] as | an a a S28 | original double chine model stern. This configuration 3 | ee | te | oe | St Jat Ss | 1 | achieved a reduction of 7% at 10.5 knots over the double $ | HBR) ae: || iS S52 | 18 | chine hull or 149% when compared with the single chine hull a | Be) de |e 322 | Mo | Gig. 5). This hull was then selected to be the parent hull ve | 13s | ost || Sa 3s | 12 | form for the UBC fishing vessel series (Fig. 6). Offsets for i | dan | case | Sm | Sa: fewer S38 | 3 | the UBC Series parent hull are given in Appendix 1. The sot | ie |e aa dete is tt} geometric properties of the parent hull are given in Table 2. Nomenclature displaced volume ‘wetted surface area in calm water displacement of hull MARINE TECHNOLOGY 267Fig. 4 Lines plen of sngle-hine esinor ‘Table 9. Principal particulars ofa typlal seiner ‘Tang tween Perpentenas Tem ony Mall Boum som @ 8) rat excl eel 28m 2m) Displacement dStumes HOLT o ais S 70 Fig.2_ Body pans a sngl-chine,doube-chine, and rounds models = sige Cine m0 © nounsioe ° ‘Speed (nots) Fig. Etec of chine contgraton on tla resistance 288 OCTOBER 1993, The parent hull is referred to in the table as model 1 and is, nntended to be a developable hull form. ‘Tests of series models Once established, the parent hull design was scaled in length and depth to generate models in a systematic series of seven models (Fig. 7). Tho L/B ratio was increased by 30% and decreased by 15%. The B/T ratio was both increased and Aecreased by 20%. The models were generated by holding the beam constant and sealing the longth to change the L/B ratio and sealing the depth to change the B/T ratio. This could be done easily by computer and model scale drawings were generated on a large Houston plotter for the model builder. ‘The geometric properties of the models for both light ship and loaded drafts are given in Table 2. Scaling the length ‘and depth of the model did not alter G, Cy» C, or LCB/L. In order to determine the effect of changing the block coefficient a scaling function was developed that when applied to the parent hull offsets decreased the block coefficient by 14% at the loaded draft and 16% at the light ship draft (Fig. 8). The equation used to scale half-breadths was: where x = distance forward or aft of midships 9 = half-breadth 2 = height above baseline Scaling the hull to reduce the block coofficient also reduced the midship section coefficient and the prismatic coefficient. ‘The scaling did not change the LOB or LCF significantly. The new block coefficient hull was then sealed in the same way ‘28 the original block coefficient hull to generate six additional models with different L/B and B/T ratios. ‘The results from the resistance tests of both drafts are presented in tables and graphs in Appendix 2, The results are presented as graphs of residual resistance coefficient versus Froude number. The ITTC57 correlation lines used to obtain MARINE TECHNOLOGY‘onde che ‘4. New Bow 8 Sam © Saree Part Fig. 5 Resistance optimization of parent ha Fla. 7_ UBC Series model parameter matic Fig. 6 Lines plan of UBC Serios parent hall Fig. 8 Lies plan of UBC Series parent ul with ewer block coetcient MARINE TECHNOLOGYthe residual resistance values. Also shown in the graphs are estimates for the residual resistance calculated using the re- sistance algorithms presented in the following section. Development of resistance algorithm ‘Two resistance algorithms have been developed based on regression analysis of the model test data. The first algorithm, is based on the equation developed by Oortmerssen [8,10] for the analysis of small vessels and the socond is an equation developed at the Institute of Marine Dynamics (MD), St. Johns, Newfoundland [11] for semi-planing hulls. The Gort. ‘merasen equation was found to have the bes fit for the loaded- draft resistance data and the IMD equation was best for the light ship draft data. “The Oortmerssen equation is based on Havelock’s equation for wave resistance of a two-dimensional pressure distur- bance (the vessel is replaced by a pressure point at the bow and a negative pressure point at the stern): C= Ce math + Cae Ph + Gye mM sin? + Cen" Fh cos? where = Be dgshige tay GH dy t dag t dst daz t du and m = 0.44947 G21" ‘The coefficients, were determined from regression analy- sis of the model test data, Two sets of coefficients were com- puted, one for each block coefficient. This was found to give a much better fit to the model test data. ‘The coefficients for C,— 0.615 are given in Table 4 and those for €,=0.531 in Table 5. Oortmerssen’s coefficients for the equation for m were used in the analysis. ‘Table 4 Coeticients for resistance algorithm for C, = 0.615 = 1 2 3 ‘ 40 T06s 988 00162 1962 4a ore anes aad 10si08 42 20070 asiws 200507 00118 4a 05188 ose oust ors 4a 9801 sr. 0098 ons ‘Table § Coetilents for resistance algorithm for C, ~ 0.501 = 7 2 3 4 &o ‘nase 1680) ory oat a saa 0S 0081? 042s on26 42 999108 ost 299 pons 43 001986 0088 soos poo 4a oxms ses post sone ‘The accuracy of the resistance algorithms is shown in Ap- pendix 2. For each model, residual resistance coefficient C, versus Froude number is plotted. The results from the Oort- ‘merssen equation are labeled “ean 1”. The calculated resist- ance values are reasonably close to the model data for all of the models, For the C,=0.615 equation, 86 regression data points were used, resulting in an average error in prediction of the total resistance of 4.6%; for the C,=0.531 equation, 54 points ware used, giving an average error of 6.4%. There are two limitations to this resistance algorithm. The algorithm smooths out the hump in the resistanco curve at a Froude ‘number around 0.35 and the algorithm is not accurate above Froude number 0.425. ‘The IMD algorithm uses the equation 1 iL Cor Sash + o(P!S + agF,'8 + off. 'S + ayoF,? + anF, 57) BCL. (a+ ag B+ aFug + a8? + OFS where . $= LUBE. ‘A set of coefficients a, was computed by regression analysis ‘or each of the two draft conditions. The coefficients for the ioaded draft are given in Table 6 and for the light ship draft in Table 7. ‘The plots in Appendix 2 labeled “eqn 2” refer to the predic- tion by the IMD method using the coefficients in Table 6. The curves labeled “eqn 3” are for light condition and they refer to the IMD equation with coefficients from Table 7. ‘An algorithm for the estimation the wetted surface areas s= nar + BYE, + es tGy +6) where the coefficients were derived as c = 0.750, cy = 0.185, e4=0.161, and e,=~0.001 for the parent hull form ‘Cy=0.615, C,,=0.878) in the loaded condition. It was found that the maximum deviation froma the measured wetted sur- face for the models is of the order 5 percent. ‘Table 6 Coefficients for IMD equation for loaded drat % Ossie » 7698 * 23ers % -107ess8 102 " 109426 4 1399635 4 206x105 oe oossee 103 » 1413863104 oa sea9034 & torsrrsx102 ‘Table 7 Costficionts for IMD equation for ight ship draft , 150581 x10 » SIRS 8 2301082 x 102 “ oases 5 1 s260re x10 * 1251588 « 1144379105 Me oie x104 2anissex 105 on 94807 290 OCTOBER 1993, % zens 102 MARINE TECHNOLOGYEffect of bulbous bows on the series parent hull Further testing of the UBC Series parent hull has shown ‘that itis responsive to the addition of a bulbous bow. Pioneer- ing work on this type of bulb was done by Weinblum [12] and ‘Hauing [15] but never considered for hull forms like fishing vessels. The main idea was thet they should work well with fine hull forms. Several experiments were conducted with side bulbs [9], Side bulbs protrude to the side rather than forward as with a conventional bulbous bow (Fig. 9). Four bulb shapes were developed for the UBC Series parent using the OPTIHULL computer program developed at UBC by Goren [g}. This procedure permits the design of bulbs for operation at different drafts and speeds very suitable for fish- ing vessels. ‘The mathematical methods used to develop the side bulb designs are described in reference [9]. Briefly, the method optimizes an objective function which is the sum of the frie- tional resistance and the wave resistance. The frictional re- sisianoe is estimated by the ITTC-1957 formula and the wave resistance by Michell’s integral. The hull surface is repre- sented by tent functions, leading to a resistance equation that is a function of the hull offsets. The quadratic programming method is used to find the offsets that give the minimum resistance, Constraints are used in the optimization to limit, the offsets to practical values. Tt is shown that the proper selection of constraints in the formulation is essential for a practical bulb form and nonseparating flow aft of the bulb. Some additional resulte are discussed in [14], and Susuki [13] developed a different procedure to design side bulbs and ap- plied his procedure successfully on the UBC parent hull. As an example, the results for Bulb 2 are given in Fig. 10, which shows that at speeds above 9 knots the resistance is, substantially reduced. At a typical cruising speed of 105 Iknots the resistance was reduced 16.6%. At speeds below 9 knots the resistance increased somewhat. Experimentally observed wave-breaking aft of the side bulb seems to have caused the increase in resistance at low speeds. H a SS fy V7 Fig. 8 Lines plan of side bulb 2 ‘ocroBER 1903 Conclusions ‘The resistance algorithm presented in this paper will be useful for estimating the resistance of low L/B displacement vessels, for which resistance data have not previously been available. The systematic series is based on a West Coast seiner; however, itis applicable to other typesof small vessols. ‘Tests to optimize the hull form of the UBC series parent have indicated that significant reductions in resistance are possible for these vessels. Using a double chine rather than Single chine reduced the resistance 8%, and reducing the entrance angle reduced the resistance a further 7%. Addi- tional reductions in resistances of 16.6% were achioved with bulbous bows, effective at multiple speeds and in multiple Toad configurations, "A number of experiments are planned for the UBC series. Seakeoping tests in head seas are currently underway and they will be reported shortly. Standard motion response am- plitudes as well as the effect of L/B, B/T and C, on added resistance and acceleration levels will be studied. Seakeeping tests in oblique waves are planned for later years, Acknowledgments ‘The authors would like to thank Energy Mines and Re- sources and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans of Can- ada for funding the research program. They also would like to thank Gireesh Sadasivan for his work in designing the parent hull form. Many people assisted in the research proj- fet, including especially Bob McIlwaine of Pacific Fisheries R&D Ltd., Gerry Rohling, and George Roddan of BC Research ‘Ocean Enginocring Centre. References 1. Calisl, SM, MeGreer, D., and Rabling, GF, "A Fishing Vessel Energy Analisis Program.” Mains Tecrnowocr, Vol. 25, No. 1, dan. 1889, pp. 62-73. 2) Pactullo, RN.M. and Thomson, GR, “The BSRA Trawler Series (Pare 1)" Trandactions, HINA, Vol. 107, 1965, po. 215-241 3 Pattulloy NM, "The BSRA Trawler Series (Part 1D," Transac- tions, BINA, Vol 10, 1968, po. 151-185. "t Ridgley Nevit,C. "The Resistance of Trawler Hull Forms of 65 Prismatie Cefficiont” Tranaactions, SNAME, Vol. 64,1956, pp. 483-68. B Ridgley Nevill C, “The Development of Parent Full for a High Displacement Length Series of Trawler Farms,” Transactions, SNAME, Vol, 71 1988, pp. 5-20. 1 idgley Nevit C, “The Resistance of a High Displacement-Length Ratio Trawler Series" Transactions, SNAMB, Vel. 75, 1967, pp. 51-77 "7 Kata K, "A Study on the Fishing Vessel Forms.” Turkish Resoareh Incitt, Pablieation No. 25, Technical Uni of Istanbul, 198 Van Oortmerscen,C., "A Power Prediction Method andlts Applica- “international Shipbuliding Progres, 1971. imu Sd Bub 2 Speed nets) Fig. 10. Resstance of USC Series parent with se bub 2 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 25o: coeno,and Cll SM, “Opting Hal Former Fahing Ver 13, Sm K, Clu] SM, and Teng, Pr sade fircetghet Sin BAG Bp gS aia Ne ane aa iS RE fe cae nso v0.2, EMEA Boa a2 me Cau ‘ She coe eaten ania aa 1) Maleeas, Ds Fria communes seein Saree (CH RE Bae ea aegandns” sobruch ETL SERA, sue or Minium War Ree \ Shiffbautechnik Gesellschaft, Vol. 51, 1951, pp. 175-204, ance,’ Journal of Ship. +h, Wol. 28, No. 2, June 1981, pp. 96-116, Appendix 1 Ofteets and sectional area curve for UBC Series parent hull ‘Table of Mes ‘orbs are noadlnenstonlved by 2 Hem Heieht™ sin 16 S912 Sia9 SiaSl/t SwS Sia7 Stas Stas Sia2 Stal Sta WL2 com 000 amm 00m sos om ‘nm 00 amo WL3 aim 0x0 om 0% os osTs sma fom 600 awe WLS —am% oo 01s 035 as ane nast 00H au com ome ym omms ome teat ar WLS cam} xo ima? om ssh OTs as WLé asbb com 019 oxo? as” oto nome. WL? ten om aie asi ods ona ae oT DWL tao, com ain 039 oss as) cH eT 00 Lower Chive "3 00m 1 osm OuSS OS) OTIS Upper Chine com axes osm ouss_ asso, aTv7 88088 MinDeek ci tam Oats Oa cate ae ‘Tbe ot Heighs Heights are nondimensonazed by T em S10 Sa912 Sad SaSi2 Sw Sa7 sus Sas sind Sia2 Sat Simo rofte tu am a1 ao oT” tomtom a ans am ou Lover hive tm am SMS OHM OID. mI OS ee aap 6s on UpperChine ay) uoos« eas 84D Oana aa] OIE ast 06a one ManDek = 1) tm Ta Thanet LMT Lae tae tama ‘Seca Area Cxve ‘Ares ar nondinensanllelby Mihi Area Sia0 Su912 Sind S812 Sin Suo7 Sie6 SS Sad Su3 Siu? Sta Stud ‘tom tie) 028 GAD Osm GTS ayaa onez_— ome a7sl_ 05087 Appendix 2 Results of resistance algorithms versus model test results for UBC Series Fesidua Rasitance versus Speed for Residual Resetance versus Speed for ‘ouslt at Leadea Oh tocol at Lordee Ooh 292 OCTOBER 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGYwae woe poe poner Sn ee] | ae /esidul Resistance vreus Speed for esidl Resistance verus Speed for Residue Resistance versus Speed for | tuodel 9 at Loaded Oak ‘Mogel 10 at Looted re ode at coacea bre Fig. 18 Fig. 20 Fig. 2 ara was wae omar Sa | See pga ak Tenet festa Tne eo ‘esigual Resistance verse Sped for ‘ecidus Resitare ves Spee for | Residual Recotance versus Speed for ‘Model tam Loagee| ‘Mode! 1 at Loaded Draft, | Node at Lightship brat Fla. 22 294 OCTOBER 1998 Fig. 24 MARINE TECHNOLOGY2