1981renilsonphd PDF

Renilson, M.R. (1981) The broaching of ships in following seas.
PhD
thesis
http://theses.gla.ac.uk/6615/
Copyright and moral rights for this thesis are retained by the author
A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or

study, without prior permission or charge
This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first

obtaining permission in writing from the Author
The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any
format or medium without the formal permission of the Author
When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the

author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given.
Glasgow Theses Service

http://theses.gla.ac.uk/
theses@gla.ac.uk
THE BIDACHING OF SHIPS
IN FOLl.D'VING SEAS
by
M.R. Renilscn
A thesis subnitted for the Degree of Doctor

of Philosqily in the DepartIrent of Naval
Architecture and Ocean Engineering at the
University of Glasga.l
DeoenDer 1981
IMAGING SERVICES NORTH
Boston Spa, Wetherby
West Yorkshire, LS23 7BQ
www .bl.uk
BEST COpy AVAILABLE.
VARIABLE PRINT QUALITY

(H )
/ .
. . Froontispiece "Broaching-to'" (Taken from Ref. 2)

(i ii)
SUMMARY
The two aims of this work were: (1) to develop a theoretical

technique for determining the conditions w~ere a broach would occur,
and (2) to identify the principal factors affecting the liability of
a ship to broach.
The first step was to develop a mathematical model based on the

conventional manoeuvring equations with coefficients which were
fUnctions of the ship's longitudinal position in the wave, but inde-
pendent of encounter frequency. Next, a theoretical method for cal-
culating the values of some of the coefficients as functions of wave
position was developed using a strip theory approach and the results
compared with those obtained experimentally. The experimental tech-
nique involved using a planar motion mechanism to oscillate a con-
strained model balanced on a wave created by a wavedozer in a circul-
ating water channel. Although the agreement was poor and experimental
scatter high for some of the coefficients, the more important ones
were predicted quite well using the theory.
Constrained model experiments were also --carried out in calm

water in order to determine the approximate value of the roll coupling
terms and it was found that, since they were small, the roll equation
could be ignored as a first approximation.
It was then possible to study the stability of the lateral and

longitudinal motions separately for various wavelengths and to deter-
mine that the principal factor causing a broach was the large wave-
induced yaw moment combined with the small restoring moment available
from the rudder operating with reduced effectiveness. The lateral and
longitudinal equations were then combined using a digital/analogue
hybrid simulation permitting the conditions which caused a broach to
be determined. When the results from the simulation-were compared
with e~perimental results which had already been carried out by the
Admiralty Marine Technology Establishment at Haslar there was fairly
good agreement, implying that this method could be used to determine
whether a proposed design would meet an acceptable standard.
Finally, possible improvements to the simulation were suggested

and guidelines for reducing the liability to broach were given both
for the operator and the designer.
(i v)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This thesis is based on work carried out at the University of

Glasgow which was funded by the SRC, and the author is indebted to
Professor D. Faulkner and Dr. A.M. Ferguson who made this possible.
The experiments carried out at the National Maritime Institute

were funded by the Admiralty Marine Technology Establishment, and
the author is very grateful to the staff of both of these organis-
ations without whose help the experiments could not have been com-
pleted. In particular, Mr. B.N. Steele, Dr. A.M. Ferguson and Mr.
J.A.H. Paffett are to be thanked for making this possible.
The encouragement and interest shown by Mr. P.O. Marshall

(previously at AMTE(H», Dr. A.R.J.M. Lloyd, Mr. J.F.W. Anslowand
Professor R.K. Burcher of AMTE(H), and Dr. R.C. McGregor of the
University of Glasgow is gratefully acknowledged.
The author would like to record a special thanks to Mr. A.

Driscoll ·who acted as liaison officer at AMTE(H) during the whole
period of the project, and without whom the co-operation between
the University of Glasgow and the Admiralty Marine Technology
Establishment would not have gone nearly so smoothly.
Finally, the author would like to thank Mrs. H. Taylor and

Mrs. M. Frieze for typing the manuscript, Mr. G. Kerr for drawing
the figures, and all his colleagues in the Department for their
useful comments and helpful advice.
(v)
DECLARATION
Except whepe pefepence is made to

the wopk of otheps this thesis is
beZieved to be oPiginaZ.
(vi)
CONTt'NTS
Page
FRONTISPIECE (ii)
SUMMARY (iii)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (iv)
DECLARATION (v)
LIST OF FIGURES (ix)
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION 1
Previous Work on Broaching 1

Physiaal Model Apppoaah 1
Mathematiaal Model Apppoaah 2
Background to the Present Study 4
. Definition of a Broach 8
Objectives and Scope of the Present Study 10
Chapter 2 MATHEMATICAL MODEL 12
The Equations of Motion 14

The Conventional Manoeuvping Equations 14
The Equations fop the Bpoaahing Model 14
AutopiZot Equation 15
Stability 16
CaUn Watep Stability CpitePia 16
Stability CPitepia in the FolZowing Sea 17
Addition of Rudder Terms 18
Equilihpium Ruddep Angle 19
Longitudinal Stability 20
Chapter 3 CALCULATION OF THE HYDRODYNAMIC COEFFICIENTS 22
Introduction 22
Sway Force and Yawing Moment due to Heading Angle 23
Pressupe Fopae 24
Aaaelepation Fopae 27
Longitudinal Force 30
Fressupe Forae 31
Aaaelepation Fopae 32
Rudder Derivatives 37
Manoeuvring Derivatives 40
(vii)
CONTENTS~ Contd. Page
Chapter 4 CONSTRAINED MODEL EXPERIMENTS 43
Introduction 43
Heel-Induced Yaw Moment and Sway Force Experiments 43
Free Running Experiments 43
Constrained Model Expenments 45
The Development of the Wavedozer 47
General 47
Preliminary Experiments 51
Design/Manufacture 52
Calibration 52
ResuZts 55
Planar Motion Mechanism Experiments 57
General 57
Experiment Specification 57
Experiment Procedure 61
Analysis 62
Results 66
Chapter 5 'COMPARISON BETWEEN THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL

DETERMINATION OF THE COEFFICIENTS 68
Conclusions 70
Chapter 6 THE EFFECT OF THE VARIATION OF THE COEFFICIENTS

OF THE EQUATIONS OF MOTION 78
The Wave-Induced Longitudinal Force 78

Wave-Induced Yaw Moment 80
The Calm Water Stability Criteria 80
Rudder Effectiveness 80
Equilibrium Rudder Angle 83
Solution of the Lateral Equations of Motion 86
Conclusions 88
(viii)
CONTENTS" Contd. Page
Chapter 7 SIMULATION 90
Surging 90
Lateral Simulation 92
Simulation of Longitudinal and Lateral
Motions Combined 94
Comparison of Simulation with Free Running
Model Experiments 98
Discussion 101
Chapter 8 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS 108
Simulation 108
P08sible Improvements to the Mathematiaal Model 108
Possible Improvements to the Coeffiaient
~ediation Method 109
Conalusions 109
Factors Affecting a Broach 110
Guide~ines for Reduaing the Liabi~ity to
Broaah at the Operating Stage 111
Guide~ines for Reduaing the Liabi~ity to
Broach at the Design Stage 112
Closure 113
APPENDIX (A) - CO-oRDlNATE SYSTEMS 114
APPENDIX (B) - NOTATION 116
APPENDIX (C) SUMMARY OF COMPUTER PROGRAMS 121
APPENDIX (D) - PLANAR MOTION MECHANISM ANALYSIS 123

Data Handling 123
Conventional, PMM Ana~y8is 123
Modified Analysis 128
REFEREtcES 135
BIBLIOGRAPHY 139
(ix)
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Frontispiece "Broaching to" (ii)
CHAPTER 1
1.1 Plot of steered run 5

1.2 Plot of broached run 5
1.3 Broaching zone for standard rudder 6
1.4 Broaching zone for ~ depth rudder 7
CHAPTER 2
2.1 Profile of the ship in two different positions 12

2.2 Illustrative plot of X force along wavelength 21
CHAPTER 3
3.1 Profile of the hull in a wave 22

3.2 Schematic view of the hull in a wave 23
3.3 Pressure against depth for 3 positions in a

wave calculated using equation 3.1 25
3.4 Comparison of Ca obtained using the Frank Close
Fit Method with the Schwarz-Christoffel
Transformation for a rectangular cross-section 28
3.5 Comparison of Co obtained using the Frank Close
Fit Method with the Schwarz-cbristoffel
Transformation for a triangular cross-section 29
3.6 Longitudinal forces acting on the hull 31
3.7 Schematic view of a transverse strip showing a
.trapezohedron 0 z thick 33
3.8 Rhombus formed from trapezium 34
3.9 Z-plane for Schwarz-Christoffel transformation 35

3.10 Position of wave waterline relative to rudder 39
CHAPTER 4
4.1 Schematic diagram of experiments in ewe 44

4.2 Arrangement of model for heel-induced yaw moment
and sway force experiments 48
4.3 Sway force against heel angle 48
4.4 Yaw moment against heel angle 49
(xl
LIST OF FIGURES, Contd. Page
4.5 Sway force and yaw moment against speed 50

4.6 Final design of wavedozer 53
4.7 Fully assembled wavedozer 54
4.8 A/h against running water depth 56

4.9 Body plan of fine form model 58
4.10 General arrangement of fine form model 59
4.11 Diagrammatic arrangement of instrumentation 60
4.12 Model in a wave 63
4.13 Rudder ventilation in a wave 64
CHAPTER 5
5.1 Trim as a function of ~ 71

5.2 Non-dimensional X-force as a function of ~ 71
5.3 yl as a function of ~ 72
a
5.4 N' as a function of ~ 72
a
5.5 yl as a function of ~ 73
o
5.6 N~ as a function of ~. 73
5~7 yl as a function of ~ 74
v
5.8 N' as a function of ~ 74
v
5.9 (y -m) I as a function of t 75
r
5.10 (N
r
-mx
G
)1 as a function of t 75
5.11 (Y.4m) I as a function of t 76
v
5.12 (N as a function of t 76
v-mlCG ) I
5.13 (Yf-mxG)I as a function of ~ 77
·5.14 (N.-I ) I as a function of t 77

r z
CHAPTER 6
6.1 Xl force as a function of t for various A/Lis 79

6.2 N6 as a function of t for various A/Lis 79
6.3 Calm water stability criteria, C, as a function of ~ 81
6.4 N6 as a function of ~ for various A/L's 82
6.5 N~ as a function of ~ for various ship conditions 82
6.6 0eq/a o as a function of t for A/L = 0.9 A/h ;; 28 84
6.7 oeq·/a0 as a function of ~ for A/L = 1.0 A/h = 28 84
(xi)
LIST OF FIGURES J Contd. Page
6.8 0 /a as a function of ~ for 'A/L = 1. 4, 'A/h = 28 85

eq 0 .
6.9 0 /a as a function of ~ for various wavelengths 85
eq 0
6.10 The real part of the principal root as a function
of ~ 87
6.11 The real part of the principal root as a function
of ~ 87
CHAPTER 7
7.1 Digital simulation of surging; varying ~ 91

o
7.2 Comparison of digital and analogue simulation
of surging 93
7.3 Stability in lateral plane only; varying P l 95
7.4 Patch diagram for complete hybrid simulation 97
7.5 Comparison between predicted and experimental
results for standard rudder 99
7.6 Comparison between predicted and experimental
results for ~ depth rudder 100
7.7 Record from simulation 102
APPENDIX (A)
Al Wave fixed co-ordinate system 115

A2 Body fixed co-ordinate system 115
APPENDIX (D)
D1 Pure sway in calm water 124

D2 Pure sway in calm water 125
D3 Pure yaw in calm water 126
D4 Pure sway in waves 127
D5
y(v) for varying v 131
D6 y(v) /y w for varying w2 132
D7 y(V) f~r varying v 133
D8 y(V)/y (&)2 for varying (&)2 134
0
1.
Chapter 1
INI'R)[)UCTION
Considerable difficulties have often been experienced with

steering when travelling in severe following seas[l]. The danger is
that the ship will suddenly yaw from its desired course, ending up
almost beam on to the wave direction despite application of maximum
opposite rud~er. This is known as broaching-to and the associated
large heel angles can cause considerable damage and possibly even a
capsize. The danger has been appreciated for many years by mariners,
who can give graphic but unscientific descriptions of the behaviour
of their ships under extreme , conditions. The fact that the frequency
of encounter is low and that surging velocities can be high makes the
problem extremely non-linear and hence very difficult to investigate
sCientifically[2].
Previoos ~rk al Broaching

The work done on broaching can be divided into two separate
approaches. There is the physical approach where full-scale incidents
are studied in depth and where free running models are used in regular
or irregular waves, in order to simulate a broach, and there is the
theoretical approach which involves the setting up of a mathematical
model and solving for ~t~ility. This can involve the use of con-
strained physical models to help determine the coefficients for the
equations.
Physical, Model, Approach:

In 1957 Du Cane included following sea tests in an experimental
programme to compare the seakeeping performance of four high speed
hull forms[3]. He used a fishing line control in a conventional tow-
ing tank and initiated a yaw by deflecting the bow of the model by
hand. If the rudders could respond and return the model to its orig-
inal path then the run was considered "steered". On the other hand,
if the model continued to yaw, it was prevented from capsizing by a
safety line and the run was considered "broached". Although this
2.
technique seems very crude it has often been used since for investi-
gating the liability to broach of particular ships. [For example
Refs. 4 and 5.]
[6]
Boese improved upon this technique by using a radio controlled
model in a large towing tank fitted with an autopilot and means of
determining its exact path throughout the run. He recognised the
importance of surging and concluded that it was necessary for the
ship to be forced to travel at wave speed before a broach could occur.
The experiments discussed above were all carried out in regular

waves in a towing tank. Paulling, et al.[7,8] went a stage nearer
the full-scale situation by using radio controlled models in San
Francisco Bay. These extensive experiments involved two models about
five and a half metres long running for around 200 wave encounters on
a fixed heading controlled by an autopilot. The study was not one of
broaching specifically, but investigated the three different modes of
capsizing in following seas. Films were taken of some of the runs
and it can be seen that the surging affected the motions quite con-
siderably. Loss of directional control was found to occur either due
to a succession of steep waves or due to the fact that the "vessel
accelerated on the face of a wave". If the yaw was caused by one
wave only it was much more dynamic and this was thought to be more
likely with smaller, faster craft than those used in these experi-
ments. (A "conventional dry cargo ship" and a "large fine high speed
container ship".)
In 196~ Du Cane and GOOdriCh[l] gave a comprehensive summary of

the factors involved in broaching and presented a number of accounts
of full-scale incidents. They showed how complex the situation was,
particularly in irregular seas, and concluded that the surging motion
was very important. Conolly [2] also described a number of full-scale
incidents and reviewed the work done so far, in particular pointing
out the inadequacies of existing mathematical model approaches.
Mathematical Model Appraoach:

As early as 1948 Davidson[9] investigated the problem of broach-
ing using conventional manoeuvring equations with additional terms
for the lateral wave forces. Be calculated the value of the loss in
3.
rudder effectiveness and obtained the value of the wave force terms
from constrained model experiments in following sea conditions.
Unfortunately, however, since he assumed that the sway force and yaw
moment due to drift angle remained constant at their calm water value
in the wave condition, the results he obtained were incorrect. In
addition, he assumed that the ship was travelling at wave speed and
neglected the effect of the surge equation.
This idea of using conventional manoeuvring equations with con-

stant coefficients was continued by other authors[lO-15] with improve-
ments in the calculation of the lateral wave forces and with contrib-
utions due to autopilot terms. Using linearised small waves, Rydill
found that a stable ship could not be made unstable in a following
sea. However, Wahab and Swaan found that if the waves were not con-
sidered small it was possible to obtain longitudinal positions in the
wave where the ship became unstable. Since the surge equation had
not been included in the above analysis it was not possible to say if
the ship would spend much time in the unstable regions or if it would
pass from them before a broach could be built up.
Grim recognised the importance of surging and devised an experi-

[16]
mental method of obtaining the wave induced-surge forces • He
also devised a theoretical method for obtaining the condition where
the ship could be forced to travel at wave speed and stated that this
was a pre-requisite for a broach to occur[17]. He was later able to
compare his theoretical results with the experimental ones given by
Du Cane and Goodrich 1n Ref. 1. (See Grim's discussion to Ref. 1.>
Boese [6] also investigated the surging motion and, in addition to
measuring its magnitude using a free running model, he studied the
effect it would have on the behaviour of the ship depending on the
ratio of ship speed to wave speed.
Hamamoto was the first to consider that all the coefficients in

the lateral manoeuvring equations should vary in the following sea
condition[18,19]. However, he neglected the surge equation. He
devised an experimental method for determining the variation of some
of the coefficients and compared the results obtained with those
from an adaption of a calm water theoretical method. Unfortunately,
4.
the comparison was not favourable and he did not go on further to

examine the resulting lateral stability.
Background" to the Present study
In order to investigate the liability to broach of current fine

form designs the Admiralty Marine Technology Establishment at Haslar
(AMTE (H» undertook two series of free running model experiments in
regular waves in their large manoeuvring basin. (This work was
. [20]
carried out by N~cholson and by Lloyd.) The models were steered
manually by radio control from the shore on a course of about 20° to
the wave direction. Since the optical tracking method gave the posit-
ion of the wave with respect to the model at each time interval, the
plots of the model trajectories can give a good idea of the behaviour
of the model in the waves (Figures 1.1 and 1.2). The effect of the
surging velocities can be seen, as can the fact that in the broaching
run the model was being forced to travel at wave speed when the severe
yaw was initiated[21]. From analysing these path records it was poss-
ible to obtain a plot of AIL against nominal F
n
for a constant wave
steepness. The area on this plot where broaching occurs can be
denoted "broaching zone" and this is shown in Figure 1.3. The second
series of experiments involved investigating the effect of altering
the depth of the rudders, and the broaching zone obtained using half
depth rudders can be seen in Figure 1.4. If this is compared with
Figure 1.3 it can be seen that the rudder depth has a significant
effect on the liability to broach of a certain ship. When the depth
of the rudder was increased by 50\ the model did not broach in any
of the conditions tested.
The line we =0 is shown in Figures 1.3 and 1.4 since this

corresponds to the case where model speed equals wave speed. It is
suggested that, since the model is accelerated to wave speed before
being broached, the upper boundary of the broaching zone is the line
corresponding to the minimum self-propulsion speed to enable the model
to be surged to wave speed. Grim[17] calculated this line theoretic-
ally and the result obtained using his method is compared with the
experimental results in Ref. 20.
s.
7
55
50 °
- 6#3S P
7 - -7
45 2SOP
40
35
3__
~2
350 R
_~_5
6fi £i
20 p
0
6
6
-
&II
30
1-
f!)35"P
_2
~ E Time interval = 2 sees
~oo
oX
C
25
{! ,_ _2
20 I
r
0°
S
1
'02~0--~2-5--~30---3~5---4~0--~4-5--~~
- Tank Position
m
Figure 1.1 Plot of steered run (taken from Ref. 20)
55 _6_ 7
50
40
.~ 35
o...E
~ 30 =Q1?
25 Time interval = 2 sees
f)fS
20 -' ,
1'5~--~--~--~--~--i- __~
20
..
25 30 35
Tank Position
40 45 50
m
Figure 1.2 Plot of broached run (taken from Ref. 20)
6.
A
L
2.0
w ;: 0
e
1.0
0.1 . 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
x Steered
o Broadled
Figure 1. 3 Broadli.ng zone for standard rudder

(Fran an unpublished report by Ll~)
..,
I.
A
L
2.0
we =0
1.0
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
x Steered
o Broached
Figure 1. 4 Broaching zone far ~ depth rudder

(Fran an unpublished report by Lloyd)
8.
From these experiments Lloyd proposed a simple method of obtain-

ing the probability of broaching in an irregular sea and a standard
criteria for future ships. He suggested that, since the size of the
rudders played such an important role in determining the liability to
broach, it should be increased until this acceptable criteria was met.
Although the work by Nicholson and Lloyd had clarified many points
about broaching and had achieved "a reasonable qualitative understand-
ing of the mechanism of broaching-to", it was still "not yet possible
to quantify the forces and moments involved". Lloyd, therefore,
recommended that a theoretical study of broaching be commenced in
order that it might be possible to determine the minimum rudder size
without recourse to experiment. In addition, it was pointed out that
this approach might also lead to identification of the features of
hull form which make a ship susceptible to broaching.
Defini tian of a Broach
Before going on to set up a mathematical model to describe the

broaching condition, it is worth defining exactly what is meant by a
broach. Loss of control in a following sea can occur in several
ways, depending roughly on the speed of the ship compared to the
speed of the waves. On one extreme, when the ship speed is much less
than the wave speed, the ship will be subject to a fluctuating yawing
moment as the waves pass. This moment, combined with the non-linear-
ities introduced by the surging of the ship will, at best, result in
a zig-zag path about the correct mean heading or, at worst, in a
gradual shift of the mean heading, ending with the ship beam on to
the waves. This worst case occurs when the ship cannot recover its
original heading before the next crest strikes it, and is termed
"cumulative yawing motion,,[22]. On the other extreme, when the ship
speed is much greater than the waves, it will be slowed down by
climbing up the back of a wave and then accelerating down its face
into the trough in front. Since the ship will now have a consider-
able downward speed in addition to its increased forward speed, it
will bury its bow in the back of the next crest, causing a sudden
.forward shift in the centre of lateral area and a sudden high increase
in bow resistance which may cause a loss in directional stability.
9.
This mode of loss of control is termed "bow rooting,,[22] and will

occur only with very fast craft.
As has already been noted, a ship travelling slower than the

waves can be accelerated to a considerably higher speed. Now, if
this results in the ship travelling at the same speed as the waves,
it will take up a steady state position with respect to the waves,
and the periodic fluctuations will be replaced by a constant moment
with a value dependent on the heading angle. For a heading angle of
zero there can be no moment, and for small angles this will increase
linearly.
This wave-induced yawing moment will be a function of the ship's

longitudinal position in the wave, the wave length and the wave
height. As can be seen from Figures 1.3 and 1.4 the length of the
waves which can cause broaching will be of the order of ship length
or greater, and for a steepness of Alh = 28 the ship must have a calm
water speed of F
n
= 0.35 or greater. Therefore, since shorter ships
are more likely to encounter waves of ship length or greater they are
more prone to broaching than longer ships provided they are travelling
fast enough. For example, a 25m long fishing boat travelling at 12
knots has a Froude number equal to 0.38 and could be in danger of
broaching in a severe following sea, whereas a 200m long container
ship travelling at 24 knots has a Froude number of 0.27 and is very
unlikely to broach. This is because of the relative rareity of 200m
plus long waves which would need to be steeper than Alh = 28 in order
to accelerate the ship to wave speed. A 100m long frigate has been
known to broach while travelling at 10 knots[23]. (F
n
= 0.16.)
However, the exact wave condition at the time is unknown.
If the moment applied by the waves is greater than that applied

by the rudder then the ship will yaw, increasing the wave-induced
moment and causing further yawing. If the rudder does not control
the ship quickly then it will spin round till it is almost beam on to
the waves. This loss of control occurs suddenly with a high rate of
turn, and the centrifugal forces combined with the high heel angles
can cause considerable, damage or even total loss. This is known as a
"true broach,,[24] and is the subject of the present investigation.
For convenience, the true broach has been defined as occurring due to
10.
one wave only and if it takes successive waves to yaw the ship then
the condition is deemed to be "cumulative yawing motion".
Thus, although "cumulative yawing motion" can result in the ship

ending up beam on to the waves, and possibly even capsizing, it is
not being included in this present study which is involved only with
a true broach as defined above. This simplifies the analysis consid-
erably as the frequency of encounter will be almost zero during the
. critical phase and the ship can be assumed to be in its steady state
position in the vertical plane. This is very important since, as will
be seen later, it permits the coefficients of motion to be determined
assuming zero encounter frequency - thus reducing the complexities of
both the experimental procedure and the theoretical calculation method.
Cbjectives and Scope of the Present stOOy
The two objectives of this work are: (1) to develop a technique

for theoretically predicting the broaching zones discussed above, and
(2) to identify the principle factors affecting the liability of a
ship to broach. The result of ?,uccessfully accomplishing both these
aims would be an acceptable standard against which proposed designs
could be compared and sound guidelines for reducing the liability to
broach, both for the design and operating stages.
In order to tackle these two objectives a simulation will be set

up to predict the broaching zones. This can be used to obtain the
values of the forces and moments during a broach and hence the factors
affecting the liability to broach can be found.
First, a mathematical model will be developed in Chapter 2, and

then a theoretical method for obtaining some of the coefficients
developed in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 describes two sets of constrained
model experiments. The purpose of the first set was to obtain the
approximate magnitude of some of the coefficients to see if they could
be ignored in order to.simplify the mathematical model, while the
second set provided experimental results of the coefficients calculated
in Chapter 3. The experimental and theoretical coefficients are com-
pared in Chapter 5, and Chapter 6 uses the theoretical method to obtain
the coefficients for a range of wave lengths and hence to investigate
11.
stability and the effect of small changes over the range. The complete
simulation is developed in Chapter 7 and the results are compared with
those obtained using the free running model experiments. The conclus-
ions for both objectives are given in Chapter 8.
12.
Chapter 2
MATHEMATICAL M)DEL
In order to study theoretically the behaviour of a ship in a

following sea at or near to the broaching condition, it is necessary
to develop a mathematical model. The more complex this model the
more accurate any predictions will be, but the more difficult it will
be to isolate the predominant factors due to difficulties in handling
the complex equations. In order to benefit from the large amount of
work done on manoeuvring in calm water, it would be of great advant-
age to base any model on the conventional manoeuvring equations.
When a ship is travelling in a following sea and is in danger of

broaching, the encounter frequency will be low, as discussed in the
previous cnapter. The waves will be slowly overtaking the ship and
the relative longitudinal position of the ship to the wave will be
important. From looking at Figure 2.1 it can easily be seen that the
hydrodynamic forces will vary with longitudinal position and therefore
the longitudinal equation will be required.
..... -
Figure 2.1 Profile of the ship in two different positions.
13.
Since the waves are slowly overtaking the ship it is reasonable

to assume that the hydrodynamic coefficients of motion will not depend
on encounter frequency. That leads to the important assumption upon
which all subsequent analysis is based. This is that the motion of
the ship can be determined using the conventional lateral motion
manoeuvring equations, with coefficients dependent on longitudinal
wave position, coupled to a longitudinal equation to obtain the rela-
tive position between the ship and the wave. It is thus possible to
obtain the values of the coefficients for any given longitudinal posit-
ion by assuming zero frequency of encounter and hence that the ship
will be in its steady state position in the vertical plane. This is
important because it allows the values of the coefficients to be
obtained experimentally using a constrained model held in a fixed long-
itudinal position with respect to the wave, and it also makes it poss-
ible to calculate the ship's position in the vertical plane for the
theoretical calculation of the coefficients.
The coefficients, then, are all functions of the relative longi-

tudinal position of the ship to the wave but are assumed to be inde-
pendent of encounter frequ~ncy. The main reason for this assumption
is that because the encounter frequency is sufficiently low the ship
can be assumed to be in its equilibrium position in the vertical plane
all the time. Obviously, as the encounter frequency increases this
assumption will become less accurate so the present investigation is
restricted to the very low encounter frequency case of a "true broach"
as defined in the previous chapter. It may be that the method can be
extended to cover the slightly higher encounter frequency of the "eum-
ulative yawing motion" and "bow rooting" conditions and this could be
the subject of a future investigation.
Although the relationship between motion and force will be far

from linear in the latter stages of a broach, it is considered that
linear equations could predict a broach/no broach situation during the
transient phase. For this reason, together with the motivation to
reduce complexity as discussed above, the present analysis is restrict-
ed to the linear equations of motion.
14.
The Equations of Motion
The Conventional Manoeuvring Equations:

The development of these equations can be found in many places
in the literature, for example Refs. 25 and 26, so it is not intended
to repeat it here. It is usual to neglect the longitudinal equation,
the roll coupling and, hence, the roll equation and to use right-
handed body-fixed axis with origin amidships. If the resulting equat-
ions are non-dimensionalised they become
Y'v' + (Y.' - m')v' + (y' - m')r' + (Y.' - m'x')t' + y'6' - 0

v v r r G 6-
N'v' + (N.' - m'x')v' + (N' - m'x')r' + (N.' - I')t' + N'c' 0
v v G r G r z 6
2.1
As discussed in Ref. 26 these equations are based on a linearised

Taylor expansion and are adequate to determine stability character-
istics in calm water. Fluid memory effects have been ignored as it
[27]
has been shown that they are negligible for usual ship manoeuvres.
The Equations [or the Broaching Model:

As has already been discussed, the longitudinal equation must be
added to the above equations if they are to be used in the following
sea conditions. This is required in order to determine the wave posit-
ion, denoted x which is the x* co-ordinate of the stern and can be
ws
non-dimensionalised as ( = x /A (see Appendix A) .
ws
The roll equation is neglected from the conventional equations
because large merchant ships moving in fairly calm water remain
approximately upright. It has already been shown in the previous
chapter, however, that ships can adopt significant heel angles during
a broach. Little work has been done on the roll coupling coefficients
(Y~, N~) and the need to include the roll equation will depend on
their value compared to the other forces and moments. If interest
were to be extended to the possibility of a broach resulting in a cap-
size, obviously the roll equation would be required; however, the
assumption of linearity in the lateral motions would probably not hold
this far and non-linearities would need to be introduced as in Ref. 28.
For completeness, therefore, the roll equation will be included but,
as yet, with no knowledge of the relative size of the coefficients,
conclusions as to how important it is cannot be made.
15.
In calm water Y and N will be functions of: v, V, r, i, ¢ and O.

However, in the following sea condition there will be the additional
dependence on heading angle to the direction of wave travel, a. Thus
for the wave condition, Eqs. 2.1 become
Y'v' + (Y.' - m')v' + (Y' - m')r' + (Y.' - m'x')£

V v r r G
+ Y'¢' + Y'O' + Y'a'

¢> cS a
=0
N'v' + (N.' - m'x')v' + (N' - m'x')r' + (N.' - 1')£'

v v G r G r z
+ N'¢>' + N'cS' + N'a' = 0
¢> 0 a
K'v' + (K.' - m'z' )v' + (K' - m'z')r' + (K.' - m'x'z')r'
v v G r G r G G
+ (K.' - I' )p' + (K' - m' z' )p'

p x P G
+ K'0 0' + K'a'

a + ~'GM'¢>' = 0
X'u' + XlV' + X'r' + (x! - m')6' + x'eS' + XI = 0

U v r u 0 l;
2.2
In order to reduce complexity Eqs. 2.2 are not written in funct-

ional form. However, it is important to remember that all the c~eff
icients (Y', (Y.' - m'), ••••• etc.) are functions of l; as described

v v
above.
The dependence on heading angle, a, in Eqs. 2.2 in the horizontal

plane has its analogy in the vertical plane as a dependence on pitch
[29]
angle, a, when considering the submarine equations .
AutopiLot Equation:
Equations 2.2 contain terms dependent on the rudder angle, o. This
rudder angle is often prescribed by a helmsman but, for the model being
developed, some means of determining it is required. The most conven-
ien~ way to do this is to adopt the standard autopilot equation dis-
cussed in Ref. '3D
2.3
where PI and P 2 are known as the autopilot constants, and $ is the

heading error ($ = a - ad).
16.
The problem with simply substituting 2.3 into 2.2 is that of time
lags since neither the control system nor the rudder respond instant-
aneously. There are essentially two types of lag, that due to the
control system (constant lag) and that due to the rudder response
(exponential lag). When a desired rudder angle is called for there
will be a delay before the rudder starts to move, and it will reach
its maximum rate fairly quickly. It will then continue to move at
this rate until it approaches the desired angle, whereupon it will
slow down and stop.
Describing this procedure analytically is not simple; however,

it can be set up on an analogue computer relatively easily and that
is described in Chapter 7.
Stability
Before looking at the stability of the motion resulting from

these equations it is worth noting that there are essentially three
different classes of stability [26] :
(1) Straight line stability,

(2) Directional stability, and
(3) Positional motion stability.
If a shdp possesses (1) alone it will end up travelling in a

straight line with a new heading after a small disturbance. If it
possesses (2) it will return to its original heading, whereas if it
possesses (3) it will return to its original path. It is possible to
subdivide (2) into those with complex stability roots (oscillations)
and those with real roots (no oscillations).
Catm Water StabiZity Criteria:

Ships in calm water with.rudders fixed amidships can only possess
(1) a~ best. (Many of them do not even do this.) The criteria for
rudder fixed straight line stability developed from 2.1 is
c = Yv I (N I
r
- mI x I)
G
- NI
v
(Y I
r
- mI ) > 0 2.4
i.e. C must be positive for stability.

17.
Comparing different ships for degree of stability on the basis of

their values of C is quite common in calm water and it was suggested
that ships which were more stable using this criteria would be less
liable to broach. The assumption made was that the effect of the wave
would be to alter the coefficients in Eq. 2.4 in order to make C nega-
tive and hence result in a broach. This assumption will be tested in
Chapter 6, but for the meantime it is worth noting that many ships
(notably supertankers) possess negative values of C and are easily
made controllable by correct use of the rudder.
StabiZity Criteria in the FoZZowing Sea:

If the last two equations in 2.2 are neglected and the stability
in yaw/sway only is considered, a cubic is obtained
2.5
where:
A = (Y.' - m') (N.' - I') - (N.' - m'x') (Y.' - m'x')
v r z v G r G
B = Y'
v
(N.' - I' ) + (Y.' - m') (N' - m'x')
r z v r G
- N' (Y.' - m'x')
v r G
- (N.'-m'x')(Y' - m')
v G r
C = Y' (N' - m'x') + (Y.' - m')N'(l - N' (y' - m')

v r G v v r
- (N.' - m'x')Y'
v G (l
D = Y'N'
v a
- N'Y'
v a
For stability it is necessary that D/A be positive and, since A

is always positive, this reduces to that of D being positive.
Since N' is very small and y' is always large and negative, the
v v
over-riding factor is the sign of N'. If it is positive, the ship
(l
will be unstable, whereas if it is negative the ship will be stable.

In other words, when the wave-induced yaw moment is positive a small
positive heading angle will result in a positive moment, increasing
the heading angle and hence causing an instability. This is intuit-
ively correct and the addition of the roll equation will not alter the
conclusions which are that, with the rudder fixed, an instability is
bound to occur over that part of the wavelength which has positive N'.
a
The above argument applies only to the case when the desired heading
angle is zero and, in fact, results in a directional stability test.
18.
If the desired heading angle is other than zero a negative wave-induced

moment will reduce the actual angle to zero, whereas a positive yawing
moment will increase the angle, resulting in a broach. Thus, the posit-
ions on the wave which are going to be important in relation to broach-
ing are those where N' is positive.
a
Addition of Rudder Terms:

As was discussed above, when the rudder is fixed there will be
regions of instability, therefore it is necessary to look at how addit-
ion of the rudder terms can reduce this.
Again neglecting the last two equations of 2.2, but now including
the autopilot equation, 2.3, with no allowance for time lag gives
A v' + B
2 2
v' + (D
221
+ H P )a' + (E + H P )&' + F 2 ~ - H21d
222
P a' =0
2.6
where:
Al = y'
V
A2 N'
v
B1 = (Y.' - m')
v B2 = (N.'
v
- m'x')
G
DI = Y'a D2 = N'a
EI = (y'r - m') E2 = (N'r - m'x')
G
Fl = (Y.' - m'x')
r G F2 (N.' -
r
I' )
Z
HI = Y'15 H2 = N'15
and PI' P are the autopilot constants.
2
If the desired heading angle is taken to be zero, Eqs. 2.6 can be

written
(A + B I D)v' + (D + B P + (E + H P )D + F 0 2 )0.' = 0
1 1 I 1 1 1 2 1
(A 2 + B2 D)v' + (D 2 + B 2 P 1 + (E 2 + H2 P 2)0 + F 202)a' =0

2.7
where D is the differential operator operating on v or a with respect
to time. It can be shdwn[25] that this results in the cubic
19.
).3
+ a 2).2 + a ). + a 0 2.8
1 0
where:
B1 (F 2 + H2P 2) + AIF2 - B2 (E 1 + H1 P 2 ) - A2Fl
a2 =
BIF2 - B2Fl
a l = ----------------------------------------------------------
Equation 2.8 can be solved for each position along the wavelength
and the stability roots examined. This will give an indication of the
effect of varying PI and P 2 • However, it must be remembered that this
has many important simplifications. These are: neglect of time lag
in the rudder response, no maximum rudder angle, no coupling with the
roll equation and, perhaps most important of all, no coupling to the
longitudinal equation. The effect of the longitudinal equation is
important because, if the ship only spends a short time on certain
parts of the wave, it may well be able to suffer being very unstable
in the lateral plane for this short period of time.
EquiZibrium Rudder AngZe:

Another approach to the problem of lateral stability is to con-
sider the rudder angle that would be required to keep the ship on a
desired heading angle. This rudder angle is brought abQut by the wave-
induced yawing,moment causing a moment on the ship, dependent on head-
ing angle. In order to balance this moment there will be a required
rudder angle which may be termed the equilibrium rudder angle. Since
there is a maximum angle permitted by the steering gear, it can be
seen that if the equilibrium angle exceeds this then it is impossible
for the ship to travel at the required heading angle. This analysis
ignores dynamic effects but allows different parameters, such as rudder
dimensions, trim angle, stern shape, etc., to be readily compared.
From Eqs. 2.2, again neglecting the last two equations, the ratio of
equilibrium rudder angle to heading angle can be obtained as
Y'N' - N'y'
v a v a
N'Y' - N'y' 2.9
v <5 <5 v
20.
LongitudinaZ StabiZity:
If the coupling from the lateral equations is neglected from the
last equation in 2.2 it becomes
X' u' + (X.' - m') u' + X' = 0 2.10

u u l;
Now, if the change in resistance with speed and the longitudinal

added mass can be considered independent of ~, then the only term
dependent on wave position in 2.10 is Xk' This will be a cyclic funct-
ion repeated every wavelength and can be considered as a sine curve for
now. For longitudinal stability
X'u + X, = 0
u ~
which requires a large enough wave-induced force (Xk) to counteract
the increased resistance that the ship has when travelling at wave
speed over that when travelling at self-propulsion speed. Figure 2.2
shows an idealised plot of Xi against~. The lower dashed line indi-
cates the increased resistance of a ship initially travelling at u,
when travelling at wave speed. The points where this intersects the
wave force indicate the equilibrium positions. The pos~tion at
~ = 0.94, however, is one of unstable equilibrium, since a small dis-
turbance which produces an increase in forward force will cause a pos-
itive acceleration resulting in a larger ~ which, in turn, results in
a further increase in X'. The position at S= 0.32 will be one of
stable equilibrium, as any disturbance produces a contrary force.
For the same ship travelling at a different self-propulsion speed

there will be a different increase in resistance when travelling at
wave speed, resulting in different equilibrium positions as indicated
by the chain dotted line in Figure 2.2. (This is an example of a
ship initially travelling at a lower self-propulsion speed.)
A ship slowly being overtaken by waves will be accelerated and

may eventually settle down into its longitudinal steady state position.
Before doing this, however, it will spend more time over a certain
length of the wave than on another and lateral instability may cause a
broach. In order to. study this possibility it is necessary to know
which region of the wave the ship will spend most of its time in, and
how laterally stable it will be over this region. Thus, it is necess-
21.
ary to know the values of the coefficients in Eqs. 2.2 and how they
vary with ~.
Figure 2.2 Illustrative plot of X force along wavelen~th.
Chapters 3 and 4 deal with obtaining these coefficients, while

Chapters 6 and 7 cover the subsequent stability analysis.
22.
Chapter 3
CALCUIATlrn OF THE HYDROOYNAMIC COEFFICIENI'S
Introduction
This chapter deals with the theoretical calculation of the coeff-

icients used in the model developed in Chapter 2.
~e 3.1 Profile Of The Hull In A Wave
Figure 3.1 shows the ship in the wave and it can be seen that the
wave height will not be small compared to the draft. In addition, the
wave length will be of the order of the ship length, or greater, and
so it is not possible to assume infinitesimal wave height or that the
ship will remain in its undisturbed position in the vertical plane.
Since the coefficients are assumed to be independent of encounter
frequency they can be calculated for the zero frequency of encounter
condition. -For this case the ship will be in its equilibrium position
in the vertical plane so the pitch angle (T) and vertical displacement
(z*) will be functions of wave position only. They are calculated by
a trial and error method which adjusts the position of the ship in the
vertical plane until the displacement in the wave equals that in calm
23.
water, and the longitudinal centres of buoyancy (LCB) and gravity (LCG)
are in the same longitudinal position. This has the effect of ignoring
the vertical component of the Froude-Kryloff and inertia forces and
assumes that the pressure varies linearly with depth from the surface
of the wave. Since the vertical position of the ship in the wave is
only used for calculating the lateral and longitudinal coefficients and
will be altered by the fact that the ship adopts an additional trim
angle due to the high speed it is thought that the above approximation
is sufficiently accurate for the present purpose.
Sway Force and Yawing McJrent due to Heading Angle
As described in Chapter 2, the wave-induced sway force and yawing

moment are assumed to be linear functions of heading angle for small
angles. They are denoted by Y a and N a respectively, where Y and N
a a a a
are functions of ~.
In order to calculate Y (~) and N (~) it is convenient to con-

a a
sider the ship with a small heading angle a . The ship is then divid-
o
ed into transverse strips 6x wide, distance x from the origin (Figure
3.2).
Figure 3.2 Schematj~_Yiew Of The HuH In A Wave

24.
Using the slender body assumption, the side force can be obtained
by integrating the horizontal component of the force on each strip
along the length of the hull. (Since the x component of the force is
assumed to be negligible compared to the y component.)
The velocity forces are ignored throughout the wave force calcul-
ations as they were found to be negligibly small compared to the press-
ure and acceleration terms.
Pressure Force:
The pressure at any point in the wave is given by
-Kz*
P = Apg e cos Kx* + pgz 3.1
Thus, the lateral pressure force on each strip is
Y~TRIP = S P dz dx - ~ P dz dx 3.2
where Ss is the wetted surface on the starboard .side of the strip,

and Sp the wetted surface on the port side. Using
n = - A cos Kx* 3.3
it can easily be shown that Eq. 3.1 gives a non-zero pressure on the
wave surface. In other words, it does not satisfy the dynamic bound-
ary condition on the free surface. This is because 3.1 is obtained
from the linear velocity potential derived by neglecting second order
terms and by applying the boundary conditions to the undisturbed
plane of the free surface, z* = O•
. Figure 3.3 gives a plot of pressure against depth for three wave
posit1ons; crest, node and trough. The lateral pressure force will
depend on the difference in forces on each side caused by different
wave positions due to the heading angle. Thus, the important factor
in determining the pressure force at a depth z* on a transverse strip
is the local rate of change of pressure with respect to x*. As can
be seen from Figure 3.3, the small error in the pressure calculation
resulting in a non-zero pressure at the free surface will have only a
second order effect on the rate of change of pressure. It is, there-
25.
Surface
').. = 36.S7m
A= 1·83m
1.0
Crest Node Trough
-2 -3
Pressure N m • 10
10 20 30 40
-1.0
Surface
-2.0
Figure 3.3 Pressure Against OeRth For Three Positions In A Wave

Calculated Using Eguation 3.1
n.
fore, considered accurate enough for the present purposes to calculate

the pressure using 3.1 and integrate to the free surface obtained by
3.3
Thus, the Y force on each strip will be
P -Kz*
y
STRIP pg(A e cos KxP + z*) Ox dz
-Kz*
+ pg(A e cos Kx* + z*) Ox dz 3.4
S
however, because the ship is not wall-sided but has some shape, x* and
S
x* are functions of z
P
L
x*
S
= x* + x cos a + - cos a - b (z) sin a.
T 2
3.5
L
x*p = x* + x cos a + - cos a + b(z) sin a
T 2
XSf and X;f are the values of Xs and x; respectively on the free sur-
face. Equations 3.5 simplify to
xs = x; + x + L2 - b(z) a.
3.6
x*
P
= x; + x+ 2 + b(z)
L
a.
for small a and, in addition, for small pitch angle, T, z* = z.

In order to integrate 3.4 analytically, b(z) must be known for
each strip; therefore, it is preferred to perform the integration
numerically using the values of b given as functions of z in the form
of the offset tables.
Hence, the total lateral pressure force and yawing moment can be
found using
27.
L
2
yP =
~ L
yP
STRIP
dx
2
3.7
L
2
P
N =
S L
yP
STRIP
x dx
Aooeleration Foroe:
The acceleration force can be calculated by
n
F = acc x AVM 3.8
Now, in order to calculate the transverse force and yawing moment,

the ship is divided into strips as before. The acceleration is assumed
to be constant over the width of the strip with the value at its centre-
line. It will, however, vary with depth. The method used here, there-
fore, for calculating the acceleration force on each strip, is to
obtain a mean transverse acceleration and then multiply this by the
added mass for the strip.
= a2ng A e- KZ * sin Kx* 3.9

A C
Integrating and dividing by the depth the mean acceleration becomes
n 3.10
acc
Thus,
a AVMSTRIP agA -KD KA cos Kx*

YSTRIP = --~~~---- sin Kx* (e T - e C) OX
.DWC C
..... ' 3.11
AVMSTRIP is the two-dimensional added mass value for the strip and
can be calculated using the Schwarz-Christoffel transformation[32]
for straightsided sections, or by the Frank-Close-Fit method for ship
shapes. Figures 3.4 and 3.5 show comparisons between these two
2H.
Frank Close
Fit Method . ____
AVM/L
2.0 y-
.~_.- - - - c -
'/2 P nT'
Schwarz - Christoffel
1.5 Transformat ion
1.0
0.5
o
o 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0
B
... "
TctJ-= .
Figure 3.4 Com~rison OfCH Obtained Using The Frank Close

Fit Method With The Schwarz .. Christoffel Transformation For
A RectaQgular Cross Section
29.
'-- Schwarz- Christoffel
0.5
.~ Transformation
. "
--- .
., Frank Close / " - - - - - -
Fit Method
O~------~--------L---~--~--------~------~-
1.0 2.0 3:0 4.0 a'b 5.0
-\tdb - -. _.
Figure 3. 5 Com~arison Of CH Obtained Using The Frank Close
Fit Method With The Schwarz- Christoffel Transformation For
A Triangular Cross Section
30.
methods for simple shapes. (Reference 32 gives the Schwarz-Christoffel

results, while Ref. 33 outlines the Frank-Close-Fit method.)
Longitudinal Force
As described in Chapter 2, there will be a wave-induced longitud-

inal force acting on the ship's hull as a function of wave position.
This is denoted X~ and is assumed to be constant for small heading
angles.
The slender body assumption does not hold for longitudinal motions
since the gradient dy/dx cannot be assumed to be zero. A further com-
plication is the trim angle which introduces a component of the vertical
gradient, dy/dz, into the required gradient on the x* - y* plane,
dy*/dx*. It can easily be shown that
dy* du du
dx*
=~
dx
cos T + ~
dz
sin T 3.12
In principle it should be possible to make use of Eq. 3.12 when

computing the X force on the hull. It was found, however, that the
numerical errors introduced by this method were considerable and an
alternative approach was used.
Instead of attempting to calculate the force in the x* direction

directly, the forces in the x and z directions were found and resolved
to obtain the x* and z* forces. This procedure involved less error,
as the z* force is known to equal - mg for equilibrium and the x force
is small.
Figure 3.6 shows the forces acting on a ship with a trim angle of
T. Z and X are the hydrodynamic and hydrostatic forces acting; mg is
the gravitational force on the body and X~ is the resultant wave force.
For equilibrium
X sin T =Z cos T + mg 3.13
X~ + X cos T .+ Z sin T =0 3.14
Giving
x
x~
~
= mg tan T -
cos T
3.15
which, when T is small, simplifies to

X~ = mg T - X 3.16
31.
:x:
Figure 3.6 Longitudinal Forces Acting On The Hull
As mg and T are known, only X is required to be calculated and

this can be done as follows.
Pressure Forae:
As for the sway force and yawing moment, the longitudinal press-
ure force is calculated by integrating the pressure over the entire
wetted surface of the hull. The essential difference between the cal-
culation for the longitudinal force and the lateral force is that, in
the case of the lateral force the longitudinal component of the normal
to the ship's hull is neglected, whereas for the longitudinal calcul-
ation it must be taken into account.
Thus, the longitudinal component of the pressure force on a trans-

verse strip will be
,~
"I.:, •
- A cos Kx*
C
P -Kz*
XSTRIP =- 2pg (A e cos Kx* + z*) Sox dz
C
3.17
for small 8,
where 8 is a function of z as well as of x.
In addition to the pressure force contribution to the X force

from the longitudinal component of the pressure at the sides of the
ship, there will be a contribution due to the transom stern. Here
8 = n/2 and the contribution to the X pressure force will be
- A cos Kx*
T
P -Kz*
XTRANSOM =- 2pg (A e cos Kx* + z*) b dz
T
3.18
Thus, the total longitudinal pressure force is given by
L
2
xP =
5L
2
xPSTRIP ~+ X
P
TRANSOM
3.19
AaaeZeration Forae:
The problem with calculating the longitudinal acceleration force
is in obtaining the longitudinal added mass and, in particular, since
the acceleration will be varying over the ship's length, in obtaining
the longitudinal spread of the added mass.
The method used is to divide the ship into tranverse strips as

before. These transverse strips are further divided into horizontal
strips resulting in regular trapezohedrons as shown in Figure 3.7.
Each of these trapezohedrons can be considered in two dimensions as a
trapezium which forms part of a rhombus as shown in Figure 3.8. Now,
3 .
-- -- ....
Figure 3.7 Schematic View Of A Transverse Stri~ Showing

A TraRezohedron 6i! Thick
34.
'i
E!gure 3.8 Rhombus Formed From Tra~zium
35.
using the Schwarz-Christoffel transformation, the AVM of this rhombus

can be obtained and, assuming that this is spread evenly over the
entire shape, the AVM of the trapezium can be found. Thus, what in
fact is being obtained is the AVM due to an element of the ship's sur-
face. It is then assumed that the acceleration is constant over this
element in order to calculate the acceleration force.
Using the Schwarz-Christoffel transformation, which is explained

fully in Ref. 34, the added mass coefficient of half a rhombus, as
shown in Figure 3.9 is given by
2TI2 (1 - )')
----------~--~~------ + 2 cot (),TI) 3.20
r2 <% - )') r2 ()') sin 2 )'TI
~ =-1 x
Figure 3.9 2-Plane For Schwarz - Christoffel Transformation

Thus, the two-dimensional added mass of the rhombus containing
the required trapezium will be
2-D AVM = P1T B2 C 3.21

1 al
where Bl is the local half breadth.
Now the two-dimensional AVM/unit length which is, in fact, the

added mass due to the ends of an elemental trapezohedron, can be cal-
culated by dividing Eq. 3.21 by the length of the rhombus to obtain
2-D AVM/unit length = ~P1T Bl C

al
tan [(l-Y)1T] 3.22
Hence the longitudinal acceleration force at a point on the

ship's hull can be expressed as
2 B·
P1T 1 Cal A e -Kz* tan [ (l-Y)1T ] sin Kx*C
3.23
Thus, the longitudinal acceleration force on a strip will be
- A cos Kx*
T
a
XSTRIP =
S X
a
P01NT
oX dz 3.24
In a similar way to the pressure force there will be a contribut-

ion due to the force on the transom. This will depend on the AVM of
the transom which can be calculated using half of the value of an
equivalent flat plate. Thus, the total longitudinal acceleration force
is given by
L
2
) L
a
XSTR1P dx + XTRANSOM
a
3.25
It is interesting to note that if this modification of the

Schwarz-Christoffel transformation is applied to a semi-submerged
37.
circular cylinder using ten evenly-spaced ordinates, the value of the

AVM coefficient obtained is 1.09. This compares quite well with the
idealised value of 1.0 for this case.
Rudder Derivatives
The rudder derivatives, No and Yo' are both dependent on the side
force generated by the rudders operating at an angle to the centreline
of the ship. The rudders operate as low aspect ratio hydrofoils with
a limited groundboard effect, caused by their proximity to the hull,
in a complex flow which is affected by the hull and screws upstream.
For this reason an absolute theoretical calculation of the rudder der-
ivatives will be complex and inaccurate, so the method used here is to
calculate the ratio between calm water and wave derivatives. This is
then used together with the experimental calm water value to obtain Yo
and No in the wave. In order to simplify the procedure the effect
the vertical component of the orbital velocity will have on the rudder
derivatives is ignored.
For simplicity, the velocity at the rudders can be calculated

from
3.26
where n is assumed constant for small changes in speed.
From Ref. 26 the lift coefficient of a low aspect ratio foil is

given by
3.27
where 0 is the angle of attack in radians and IRis the effective

aspect ratio. CD
is the crossflow drag coefficient which is depend-
c
ent on both tip shape and taper ratio. The second term on the right-
hand side of Eq. 3.27 is a small non-linear contribution and can be
neglected in the present analysis, which is aimed at finding the ratio
between calm water and wave conditions, as opposed to the absolute
value of the derivatives.
Considering only rectangular geometry rudders with no sweepback,

the lift slope can be expressed as
38.
deL 0.9 ( 21T) lR

at5 = 3.28
[(/lR 2 + 4) + 1.8]
Now, the lift on the rudder is given by
dL deL
2
do = ~p SR VR d6 3.29
giving
1 deL
Y' SR vR2 3.30
0 L2 vS2 d6
and
lR deL
N' =
0 SR vR2 d6 3.31
L3 v2
S
2
0
y' N'
0 SR vR 1Rw [/(J.R2
. c + 4) + 1. 8]
w w w w
--= --= 3.32
2
y'
0
N'
0 SR vR lRc [/(1R2w + 4) + 1.8]
c c c c
d~ (n Vs - Vo )2 Ac ~w
= 3.33
d2 (n v )2 A 1.1
c S w c
where
Ic~~
d2
c
AC = -2+ 4)+ 1.8
Y
A
w
= ~~2w d~ 2
•
~+ 1.8
y
vo = KAC e -Kz cos Kx*
and ~c' ~w are the aspect ratio factors caused by the proximity of the
rudders to the hull in the calm water and the wave conditions respect-
ively. V is the horizontal component of the orbital velocity which
o
is assumed to be constant over the rudder with the value taken at its
centre of area.
39.
Wave Waterline
n771~777"l
Load Wat~1 ~!le_____ _
(:x::- y Plane)
Base Line
a. Wave Waterline Above The Rudder
Load Waterline
-----......::....::-=
(x-y Plane)
:nn{f]ORW Wave Waterline
I { 0" Basel; ne
b. Wave Waterline Below The Rudder
Figure 3.10 Position Of Wave Waterline Relative To Rudder

40.
There are two separate possibilities for the wave condition

dependent on the position of the wave waterline as shown in Figure
3.10(a) and (b). In the first case the aspect ratio and rudder area
are unchanged from the calm water condition to the wave condition and
hence Eq. 3.33 simplifies to
Y' N'
0 0 (T) V S _ V )2
W W 0
-- = --= 3.34
Y' N' (T) V )2
0 0 S
C C
In the second case both the aspect ratio and the rudder area
will be reduced from the calm water condition to the wave condition.
~ will equal one, since the hull will now no longer have a ground-
w
board effect on the rudder in the wave condition, and d - o.
w
Thus Eq. 3.33 becomes
y' N' _ 0')2

(DR (n Vs - V )2 A
0 0 o c
w w w 3.35
--= --=
y' N' d 2 (T) VS)2 A ~c
0 0 c w
C c
The rudder derivatives are then obtained from

Y'
o
Y'
o (y,W) 3.36
oc
and
N'
0
N6 = N' (N'w) 3.37
°E 0
c
where Y' and N' are the calm water values obtained experimentally.
°E °E
Manoeuvring Derivatives
It is not possible, using the present state-of-the-art, accurately
to predict theoretically the sway velocity or rotational velocity deriv-
atives even at low speeds in calm water. For this reason no attempt
has been made here to try to do so at high speeds in waves. Instead, a
calculation of the change in the derivatives caused by the wave is made
and applied to the derivative obtained experimentally in calm water.
The method used here is based on the assumption that the derivatives
41.
are made up of potential and viscous flow components which rtre inde-
pendent. The potential flow component is that which exists in an
ideal fluid and hence can be calculated using strip theory, whereas
the viscous flow component is related to lift and crossflow drag
effects and cannot be readily calculated theoretically. The ass~lpt
ion made here is that the viscous component will remain unchanged in
the wave condition and hence it is only required to calculate the
change in the potential flow component.
Considering the derivative Y we have

v
Y
v
= Y + Y 3.38
TOTAL vpOTENTIAL vVISCOUS
If Y is assumed to be known from model experiments in calm

VTOTAL
water and YVPOTENTIAL can be calculated using strip theory, then
YVVISCOUS can be calculated for calm water. Since YVVISCOUS is
assumed constant and YVPOTENTIAL can be calculated, YVTOTAL can be
found for any desired wave condition. This method is applied to the
derivatives Y', N', y' and N'.
v v r r
The acceleration derivatives can be calculated directly using
strip theory as they comprise entirely of potential flow contributions.
The cross coupling acceleration derivatives are calculated here
although it is recognised that they are very small and often assumed
to be zero.
The strip theory used is due to Clarke[32,35] with the added mass
values obtained from the Frank-Close-Fit method as for the transverse
force calculation. The rudders are assumed to be at the stern so that
an addition due to their added mass is made to the added mass coeffic-
ient of the stern.
Thus
BOW
Y.' =
v - 1T
(.!.)2
L
~
STERN
T2 C
H
dx' 3.39
BOW
~
2
N.' = - 1T (1.) T2 C x' dx' 3.40
v L . H
STERN
42.
BOW
y.' = - iT
r
(l)
L
2
) T2 C
H
X' dx' 3.41
STERN
BOW
N.' =
r
- iT (l)
L
2
) T2 C X' dx'
H
3.42
STERN
2
y' = - iT (l) T2 C 3.43
VparENTIAL L STERN H
STERN
N' = Y' X'

STERN
+ Y.'
v
3.44
VparENTIAL VparENTIAL
y' = Y' x'

STERN
3.45
rparENTIAL VpOTENTIAL
N' = Y' x'

STERN
+ y!
r
3.46
rparENTIAL VpOTENTIAL
using the generally accepted assumption that C

HBOW
= 0, since a
finite value of kinetic energy cannot be instantaneously imparted to
the fluid at the bow.
43.
Chapter 4
CX>NSI'RAINED M)OEL EXPERIMENrS
Introouction
In order to test the validity of the theoretical technique for

determining the coefficients developed in the previous chapter, and
in order to obtain the approximate magnitude of the roll coupling
terms constrained model experiments were carried out both in the
University of Glasgow's Hydrodynamics Laboratory[36] and in the
[24]
National Maritime Institute's (NMI) Circulating water Channel (CWC) .
Initial experiments at Glasgow were conducted on a 2.9m Series 60

model. These comprised of (a) investigating the loss of GM in a
following sea (described fully in Ref. 37), and (b) investigating the
magnitude of the heel-induced yaw moment in calm water.
The experiments at NMI used a 3.66m fine form model constrained

to remain upright and were devised to obtain the change in the coeff-
icients in the following sea condition. Originally it was intended to
test at various heel angles also, but this was prevented due to lack
of time. The model was oscillated using a planar motion mechanism (PMM)
whilst remaining in the same longitudinal position in the wave. This
was obtained by using a wave created by a wavedozer travelling at the
same speed as the carriage (Figure 4.1). In order to reduce experi-
mental difficulties and to permit additional PMM oscillations, this
experiment was carried out in a ewc. In this facility the model,
carriage and wavedozer all remained fixed with respect to the earth,
while the water flowed past at the required velocity. The dynamics
are identical to those of the more conventional water-fixed, model-
moving towing tank facilities.
Heel-Induced y~ Marent and Sway Force Experiments
Free Running Experiments:

Prior to carrying out the constrained experiments a selection of
models was projected down the tank with given heel angles and their
trajectories observed. The models were not self-propelled and, since
44.
- - - - - - - Working Section-----
Disturbed Settling Test

Region Region Region
Direction Of
Flow
Figure 4.1 Schematic Diagram Of Experiments In C.W, C

45.
they relied purely on momentum for motion, their speed was not con-
stant. For some of the runs a rudder angle was applied in an attempt
to counteract the heel-induced yaw moment and result in a straight
line motion of the model. This was extremely difficult as it appeared
that the relation between the yawing caused by the heel and that
caused by the rudder varied with speed. The only conclusions that
could be drawn from these ad hoa experiments, therefore, was that, in
general, a starboard heel angle caused a yaw to port (and vice versa),
which could be counteracted by a port rudder angle. The required
rudder angle appeared to vary from model to model and over the Froude
number range tested, which was from 0 to about 0.2.
Constrained ModeZ Experiments:

Three series of constrained model experiments were carried out
using a 2.9m long Series 60 form with a block coefficient of 0.65,
principle dimensions of which are given in Table 4.1[36,38]. The
model was not self-propelled, but was towed using the arrangement
shown in Figure 4.2. For the first series of experiments a solid tow-
ing rod was used instead of the wire shown in Figure 4.2, but it was
found that this could apply an additional moment and hence these
results were discarded. The remaining two series of experiments used
the towing wire and it was found that correlation between them was
very good. The first of these involved running at.a constant speed
with various heel angles in order to obtain plots of side force and
yawing moment against heel angle. This was repeated for six separate
speeds and gave an indication of the range of linearity, together
with values of y~ and N~ for the different speeds tested.
The final series investigated the effect of a constant heel angle

over the Froude number range 0.22 < F < 0.37 giving plots of sway
n
force and yaw moment against speed.
The experimental set-up was as shown in Figure 4.2. The model

was free to heave and pitch. The guides permitted heel angles up to
45 0 and were fitted close to the centre of lateral resistance in the
vertical plane. The attachment of the model to the guide incorporated
a cantilever bar which was fitted with a strain gauge bridge for meas-
uring side force. The signals from the strain gauges were fed through
46.
Gantry.
Towing wire.
Guide. Guide.
Cantilever bar. Cantilever
2·05 m
\. J
Figure 4.2 Arrangement Of Model For Heel Induce~

Yaw Moment And Sway Force Experiments
47.
suitable amplifiers to a pen recorder. All analysis was done lTlanually.

The yawing moment due to heel angle can be split up into two compon-
ents:
(1) A component due to the aerofoil effect of the aSYllunetrical

waterplane causing a varying side force along the length of
the hull which induces a moment.
(2) The transverse displacement of the centre of longitudinal

resistance from the tow position forming a couple in the
horizontal plane.
The first component can be considered as a pure moment, with the

second component being an induced moment, caused by the fact that the
centre of longitudinal resistance (CLR) will move transversely due to
the heel angle. Since the CLR will be in the same vertical plane as
the tow point in the upright condition and will shift an amount depend-
ent on heel angle and independent of tow height, the induced moment
will be dependent on tow height. Further, since the tow height used
in the experiments is above the propeller position a self-propelled
ship would be expected to have a more positive heel-induced yaw moment
than the model used in the experiments. The proportion of the total
measured yaw moment due to induced moment will vary with speed. For
F
n
= 0.24 it will be about 20% and for F
n
= 0.32 it will be about 50%.
Since the induced moment is caused by the resistance forming a couple
with the propulsion the usual Froude scaling considerations will apply.
The non-dimensional results are given in Figures 4.3 to 4.5,

where it can be·seen that both y~ and N~ vary considerably with speed.
Since the Series 60 form is not intended to travel at very high Froude
numbers, the additional wavemaking produced may have affected the
results somewhat.
The Developrent of the Wavedozer
General:
The wavedozer was pioneered by HOgben[39] and Standing[40] who
used it to create waves behind a carriage in a conventional towing
tank. The carriage stopped before the test area and waves were pro-
jected on towards the model. For the experiments described here the
4P.
5·0. 50.
10- 5 GI
u
10- 5 CII
....u
VIrc
-
~
0
.~
Fn = 0·21. = 082.
-
0
01
C
Fn = 0 26. V/fC =088.
>-
0
'>'
0
~ 0 ~ 0 Q
0
til
0
III 0 0
..E 0·1 0·2 0·3 j 0 1 02 o3
H(?el angle (Radians.' .~ Heel angle (Radians)
:.0 -0
I I
C C
0 0
z , z ,
~so. Vq, =0 -50. Y~ = 0
'10- 5 10- 5
50. 50.
10- 5 uGI 10- 5 uCII
,g
01
C
Fn=028. V//C=0'9S -
....
0
~
Fn = 032. V/rc = 1- 07.
'>., >-
c
-,
~.
,.
i
til
~
til
.. - i 0 0
; t, 0·2 0·3 o3
- ~
"0
H.eel angle (Radians.' angle (Radians)
I
c
i z
0
~, ~~
~"O.
~, YrJ' =-2,1. .10- 4 - 5·0.
YrJ'= -16.10- 4
-5 10- 5
J
50. 5·0.
10
- Q/
Q/
U 10 U
....0
....
-0
01
C
Fn = 0·36. V/./L =,. 26.
01
C
Fn = 0 56. V/./L= 189
'>'
i
til
0 0
- ~'
0·2 0·3 0·1 0·2 03
Heel angle (Radians.) Heel angle (Radians)
"'0
I
C
0
Z
:' '-50. - 5·0 •
.10· S 10-
Y , -4
~ =-2·3.10 Y~'=-38.1O-1.
,.
Figur~ 4.3 Sway Force Against H€'~l ~ng~

- Mean line through experimental points.
Corrected to propeller position.
Fn = 0·24 VIIl = 082. Fn = 0 26 V//L= 0 88

'ECII
E
o
E
04-=-------~----------r_--------_r- 04-~------_,----------,_--------~-----
0·2 0·3 o· 2 0 3
Heel angle (Radians.) Heel angle (Radians)
..E
N'I' =-3'31(1 o-~~~ =--- :::::::-...
~
~
~~
-1,0 I( ~
i4 z§
a
10x ··c
CII
10- 4 E
- N~' = 561(10-4
..........:::~ "Ox c
10- 4 ~
~
NeII'=39 x 10- 4
!i., 0 ~
E .Q::::= 0
"
p 0 . 0
t
" E 0,' 0·2 0·3 0·1 o2 03
:.0 Heel angle (Radians.) '0 Heel angle (Radians)
I I
C C
0
z ~
!,,. Fn = O' 28. VIIC = 095. Fn = 032. VI/[= 107
i -1 0 x -1,01(
10- 4 10- 4
10x 1-0.
10- 4 .
Nell =0
Hj"'4
Fn = 0·56. VI fC = ',89
~ ~
c cQ/
CII
E E
0
0
E
01
C
'i
- 0,'
Heel angle (Radians.)
o·
0
0
E
0·2 0·3
(Radians)
0
>.
.i
E oJ
'0 E
1-1Ox I -1,01( is
C I
10- to 0
Fn = 0 38, V/ /[ = ',26. 10- 4 c . Nell' = - 7· 1 I( 10 -4
Z
~
Figure 4.4 Yaw Moment Against Heel Angle

~) .
15 16 17 8 19 20
Model speed, (m/s)
-4
-1,. 10
Non-dimensional swaying force
025 0·30 o 35
fn
. -5
4,.10 f"
/ \
.,;
cQ/
E
0
Corrected to peopeller positi"'y \\
E
01
C
~
C As measured / \
>-
2 10
I(
-s c
.~
\
III \
~
E \
"'---...,/"
u
I
C
\ /;'
~
.,/'
O+---~------.-------.---~--.-------~------~~----.-------,-------,
'·2 '·3 ,.t. / ,·5 1·6 18 1-9 2·0
Model speed. (m/s)
/
/
/
/
-21(10-s ------""
51.
the model was tested in the waves behind the wavedozer and a c'We was
used to overcome the difficulty of towing a large flap and a model
with the prescribed separation in a conventional towing tank. The
ewe at NMI was chosen for the experiment as being the largest in the
country, but a wavedozer had to be designed and built to fit it[41].
The main requirements were:
(1) As smooth a wave as possible.
(2) The ability to vary the separation distance between

the flap and the model.
(3) As large a separation between the model and the flap

as possible.
In order to get a smooth wave it was essential that the flap was
as smooth as possible and had a straight trailing edge. It was also
important that the tank wall and the flap be tight-fitting - using a
ewe helped greatly here since the flap was not required to move with
respect to the wall. The separation distance was easily altered in
the ewe as the carriage which mounted the PMM and the model was on
"'
rails and could be moved very exactly by hand. Finally, the separat-
ion distance possible, over two wave lengths (~ 8m) at the desired
speed, was adequate to allow the disturbances from the wavemaker to
die down.
~eZiminary Experiments:
Before designing the full-scale wavedozer some preliminary experi-
ments were carried out. First, using the 1/10th scale ewe at NMI (an
exact hydrodynamic scale model of the large· ewe[42]) the optimum posit-
ion and flap angle were obtained. This was level with the join between
the constriction zone and the working section at an angle of 14° to the
horizontal •.
Next, the ewe at AMTE(H) was used to test the idea that oblique
waves could be created using an oblique flap. The conclusions drawn
from these experiments were:
(1) The wave profile at the upstream side of the flap

disappeared after the first wave.
52.
(2) The wave gradually became more normal to the dir0ction

of flow in the channel, although this was difficult to
observe due to the effects of (1).
(3) The first wave was quite well-defined and parallel to

the flap.
From these conclusions it was obvious that the oblique wave dozer
would not be suitable for the PMM experiments.
Design/Manufacture:
The detailed design and manufacture of the wavedozer was under-
taken by AMTE(H). For ease of handling, the final design (Figure 4.6)
was arranged to consist of four sections. Each section consisted of
a quarter of the flap, a vertical support frame and a heavy channel
which spanned two of the 305mm x 457mm concrete beams which span the
ewe in the constriction section.
The flap was manufactured from 6mm thick mild steel (MS) plate,
suitably stiffened transversely, each plate being joined to its
neighbour by nuts and bolts passing throug~ MS angles welded to the
edges of the plates. Each plane was bolted to its support frame
which was manufactured from sOmm x sOmm x 6mm MS angle. The frames
were bolted to support channels spanning the beams.
The edges of the flaps adjacent to the channel walls had glass
reinforced plastic (GRP) extensions moulded to the shape of the
channel walls. The outer edges of these GRP inserts had plastic
tubing covering them to give a good fit to the channel walls.
An adjustable stiffened extension was fitted to the trailing

(downstream) edge of the flap.
A photograph of the fully assembled wavedozer is shown in

Figure 4.7.
Calibration:
Prior to conducting the model experiments the wavedozer was cali-
brated for a range of speeds and wave steepnesses. References 39 and
40 indicated that wave steepness depended almost entirely on the depth
of immersion of the flap and that the wavelength depended on the speed
53.
M.5 Channel
- - - - - - - - -..---.- ---.,.------
Concrete
Beam
Support
Frame--' -]~
Insert ---EE~~~-=~==;~----------·
~==~~=-=-.-=~~-==~~~
Water Flap"'----- / /
Level
Stiff!n;rs
SECTION A-A
G.R.P Extension Concrete Beam

~ ,
\
\ r-
r-
M.S Flat Bar

Stiffeners - I-
t-
t-
r-
l - -Concrete Beam t-
r--
t-
M.S Channel
.
6mm M.S Plate Flap
r--
~-
r--
'--
.
J. r-
r-
PLAN
Eigure 4.6 Final Design Of Wavedozer

54.
Figure 4.7 Fully assembled wavedozer
/
of the water. This was also borne out in both the prelimindry (,xlwri-
ments.
In the ewe, an increase in water speed causes an increase in

water depth, thereby increasing flap immersion as the flap position
was fixed. It was not possible, therefore, to vary the WdLcr speed
independently of flap immersion and the following technique had to be
used.
The depth of water at zero speed (DO) was measured and then the
water speed was slowly increased (raising the water depth) until the
water level touched the flap. The resultant wave conditions were
allowed to settle for 10 -15 minutes when wave height and length were
recorded. (The third and fourth crests were used as this was the
region in which the model was to be tested.) The depth of water (DR)
in the running condition was also recorded. The water speed was then
slightly increased and once the conditions had settled another record
was taken. This procedure was repeated for further speeds until the
first generated wave broke and the wave system became disturbed. The
technique was repeated for several initial water depths .DO'
Results:
Figure 4.B gives a plot of A/h obtained for various running
depths of water DR' Because the vertical position of the wavedozer
flap was fixed, any variation in DR was effectively a variation in the
depth of flap immersion, and Figure 4.B can be interpreted as the
effect of changing flap immersion. Although some scatter is present,
a reasonable curve can be drawn, confirming that wave slope depends on
the depth of flap immersion. Experiment also showed that for a con-
stant depth of flap immersion water speed did not directly influence
the wave slope.
Steep waves, A/h of IB, were generated, but a further increase in

flap immersion produced a breaking first crest and greatly reduced the
size of subsequent waves. It is considered possible that a curved
flap rather than a flat one may allow steeper waves to be generated.
It is important to note that the relationship
e = Iii21T 4.1
S6.
31
30
29
28
" 27
h 26
25
24
23
22
21
20 ~'
19
18
17
16
0
2.35 2.36 2.37 2.38 2.39 2.40
Water Depth DR (Metre)
Figure 4.8 '" h Against Running Water DeRth

57.
holds to wi thin 1% for the conditions where the wav(>h>rlf]th WdS 1TIl'i1S-
ured and this discrepancy is easily explained by errors in speed and

length measurement.
The generated waves appear staionary to an observer or to a ship

model secured in the working section of the ewc, i.e. the ship model
will have a zero frequency of encounter.
Planar Motion l-Echanism Exper.irrents
General.:
The body plan of the model used in these experiments is given in
Figure 4.9 and its principal dimensions are given in Table 4.2.
Three 1.1 KN modular force gauges were fitted into the illodel to
measure the lateral and longitudinal forces. A general arrangement
of the fully rigged model is given in Figure 4.10. A ten turn rotary
potentiometer was fitted between the cwe carriage and the centre of
the model so that the lateral position of the model could be constantly
monitored.
A diagrammatic arrangement of the recording set-up is shown in

Figure 4.11. The signals from the gauges and rotary potentiometer
were fed through suitable amplifiers and filters to a Racal tape
recorder with downstream monitoring being undertaken by a U/V recorder •
. Prior to commencing the experiments the assertion made in Ref. 43

that blockage effect on transverse forces is negligible over the work-
ing range was checked and found valid.
Experiment Specification:
The water speed for the experiments in waves was 2.47 m/s which
was as fast as practical in the ewe. This speed gave a wavelength of
3.9m (AIL = 1.07). The Froude number for the model at this speed is
0.41. From the results of the free running model experiments conduct-
ed by Lloyd on the same fine form (see Chapter 1) it was estimated
that the initial ship speed from which the acceleration must take place
would be equivalent to a F
n
= 0.37, which is a typical operating speed
for this type of vessel and is equivalent to a ewe water speed of 2.22
m/s.
58.
- - -7- ~ - T
INcR~ASc H Ff££~ r
I I
I
I
-."
/'
1/
I~'-rr"''''
I II I
'II
I
r .- r -,-
I r,
- - - - - - - I
I
I
I I' . I· I il
I I I I I I II
III I I 'I I I I I I I I I I I:
'::: : :1 I I I I I ' , J I II
I I I
III II I I I ', I III
III 1 I " I I I I I 'I
II' I II ' I
, I
I I 'I
III I II I I I II
FP
Experiment 2
- - - waterline II
~__~D~e_Si~------1-'
-\-,'<-''r--'Ioc- wate r'i ina 1-
,
Figure 4.9 Body plan of fine form model.

PMM ACTUATING BEAM
RUDDER
SERVO MOTOR
----If--''--'A.. ;. .T-=E RLIN E

- I • '{ X 11·
MODULAR\
FORCE DUMMY MODULAR
GAUGE GAUGE FORCE
GAUGES
Figure 4.10 General arrangement of fine form model.
tr
\.0
MODULAR
FORCE r--
GAUGE
AMPLIFIER FILTER ANALOGU:::

MODULAR l MAGNETIC SIGNAL
t= U/V
FORCE AMPLIFIER . FILTER CONDITIONER f
GAUGE
AMPLIFIER FILTER rr= TAPE
RECORDER
RACAL.
UNITS
SE LABS
-
f - RECORDER
TYPE 993
PH
SE LABS. AMTE. STORE
MODULAR CARRIER TYPE 14 DS
FORCE AMPS. LP BESSEL
GAUGE I HZ .
ROTARY
POTENTIOMETER
Figure 4.11 Diagrammatic arran~ement of instrumentation
o
t 1.
(a) Series I
Wi th the ewe operating at 2.22 mls (low speed) and wi thuut CJ(·ner-
ating waves, the model self-propulsion revolusiuns (SP2.22) was
obtained. Conventional* PMM experiments were thf'n cunducted
maintaining the propeller revolutions at SP2 .
• 22
(b) Series II
The water speed was increased to 2.47 mls (high speed), calm
water conditions being retained. The propeller revolutions were
again set at the SP2.22 value and the Series I experiment repeated.
(c) Series III

The initial depth of water (DO) in the ewc was set to give a Alh
of 28 (steeper waves were found to swamp the model) and the water
speed set at 2.47 m/s. The model was positioned with its transom
on the third crest from the wavedozer and the Series I experiments
repeated. The propeller revolutions were again set at the SP 2 • 22
value.
(d) Series IV - IX
The Series III experiments were repeated with the model sited at
6 further positions relative to the wave crest, the last position
being a repeat of that in Series III, but one wave crest further
downstream.
Many of the individual runs were repeated at later dates and, in

general, there was good repeatability in the results. Some limited
experiments were conducted in the next wave either side of that used
for the majority of the experiments and, again, agreement was good.
E~epiment Proaedupe:
Running conditions in the ewe were allowed to settle for at least
ten minutes before any records were taken.
For the steady state runs, records were taken for a period of
10 - 15 seconds so that fluctuations in the measured forces could be
averaged out.
*The conventional PMM experiments undertaken were as follows:

Steady state yaw angle; steady state rudder angle;
dynamic pure sway and dynamic pure yawing.
Two amplitude s of oscill a ti on a nd a r nge of fn:qu l' nc l "s w ' re
us ed f or all mode l/wa ve pos iti ons . For t h e d y na mi c swa y run s t he y
were:
Amplitude s yo 0.40 and 0.60 me tr e s

Fre qu e ncies W 0.1 -+ 1.0 r a di a ns/ se c.
For the dynamic y awing runs three amplitudes we re used with a

different range of frequencies for e a c h amplitude . This is b e e use
w = uu / YO a nd r eason ab le for c es h ad to be produced. The ampli t ude s
O
a nd frequencies used were:
Amplitudes a 0.03 rad 0.09 rad 0.15 r a d

O
Freque ncies w 0.1 -+ 1.0 rad/se c 0.1 -+ 1.0 rad/sec 0.5 -+ 1. 0 r ad/ se c .
Note : For both dynamic sway and dyn amic y a wing, the fr equ ency was
built-up slowly, 10 - 15 seconds being allowed at the running f r equ e ncy
before data recording commenced. At l east ten cycles we re re cor ded to
e nable any fluctuations due to wave disturbances to be a verag ed out .
Figure 4.12 shows the model in a wa ve. It will b e seen that

the fr eeboard had to be incr eased ,to reduce the possibility of
swamping .
During the settling down period of one o f the seri es it was

noticed that the port rudder ventilated (de spite being well immersed
initially) as shown in Figure 4.13.
Analysis:
The re were two sets of steady state experiments:
(a) Varying h eading a ngle, fixed rudder 0 degrees , and
(b) Varying rudder a ngle, fixed h eadi ng a degrees .
In the calm water condition, h eading angle (a) is equivalent to

drift angle (B) and h e nce the drift derivatives (y' and N') can be
v v
obtained since v = uB for small B. In the wa ve condition, h owev e r ,
the fac t that the model is given a h eading angle mea ns that the wave
derivatives (Y', N') account for p art of t h e force . Thus , the mea s-
a a
ured force a nd moment correspond to
Y (Y v
v
+ Y aa)
(N v + N a)
4.2
N
v a
whe re v = - uB and B- a in this cas e .
63.
Figure 4.12 Model in a wave

64.
Figure 4.13 Rudder ventilation in a wave

Hence,
y 4.3
with a similar exprQssion for the 1l1011wnt. Till,lvf,.re, lhe ,:u iVdtiVl:'S
Y and Y cannot be measured independently froID the steddy sldtc
v a
results because they always appear in the forID (y - y /u) .
v a
The rudder derivatives can be obtained using the same technique
for the wave condition and the calm water condition, as the model has
no heading or drift angle.
For both dynamic pure sway and dynamic pure yaw the model is given
harmonic motion of the form y :;; A sin wt. For pure sway O,e (Joverrli ng
equations are
Y YO sin wt
v = YO w cos wt
4.4
v= Y w
o
2
sin wt
a = 0 = IS
and the sway force equation becomes
4.5
This makes it possible to separate Y and (Y. - m) from the force

v v
record using the in-phase and the out-of-phase components in the usual
[29]
manner • This approach, however, is complicated by the existence
of frequency dependence and non-linearities as discussed in Appendix D.
For this reason the technique outlined there was used for the analysis
of all dynamic records.
The governing equations for pure yaw are
a = a cos wt
O
r =- a
O
w sin wt
.
r - W w2 cos wt
4.6
o
8 =0 =6
and the sway force equation becomes
4.7
, , .
From Eq. 4.7 it is not iIlJIlH:.'iliately l'I):;"ible to <,"1.11 .de I hi, til'r-
ivatives Y and (Y - mx ). The technique for doing Illis is siH,iJar

a i G
to that for separating Me and Mq when testing Sllllllld} il.c~ Pludc'ls with a
vertical PMM. The combined coefficient, [Y ex - (Y. - mx lw 2 ] , is
Ct 0 r G
plotted against w2 for the range of frCljUc:IIC.:il:S tl'stpd 'Hid he'nee Y(X
and (Y - IDX ) are obtained from the resulting straight line. This
i G
is discussed more fully for the submarine model in Ref. 29.
Results:
The results of the PMM experiments are all presented in the next
chapter, where comparison is made with the results obtained from the
theory developed in the previous chapter.
Table 4.1. SERIES 60 MODEL PARTICULARS
---------_._-_. - -------
Length between perpendiculars 2.9m
Beam 0.399m
Draft O. 16m
Displacement 118 kg
GM O.055m
-----------------------_._-
Table 4.2. FINE FORM MODEL PARTICULARS
Length between perpendiculars 3.66m
Beam O.417m
Draft O. 161m
LCB O.0119m aft
Displacement 127.65 kg
I 81.3 kg m2
z
Stern arrangements Twin screw
(outward turning)
Twin rudder
(,' .
Cl1i1pter 5
cx::MPARISON Bl:.""TWJ:.::tN THlDREI'ICAL AND EXPERlI·lI·Nl'AL

m~I'ERMINATION OF THE COJ':FFICHNrS
The theoretical method developed in Chapter 3 was prograHuntod in

Fortran on the Department's PDP 11/40 digital computer. Each stage
of every calculation was checked by hand to ensure that it was carried
out correctly by the computer. Due to limitations in the size of the
11/40 it was not possible to carry out all the calculations in one
large program and hence it was necessary to write three smaller pro-
grams, each requiring to be run separately (see Appendix C) •
Once these programs were running and checked, the coefficients

were calculated for the fine form in the same condition as used during
the PMM experiments. The theoretical results are compared with the
experimental ones in Figures 5.1 - 5.14.
Figure 5.1 shows the variation in trim over the ship's longitud-
inal position in the wave. Zero trim is taken to be that obtained
when running at F
n
= 0.41 in calm water. This shows that the assuIIlpt-
ion made early in Chapter 3 - that the position of the ship in the
vertical plane can be calculated by assuming that the displacement
must remain constant and that the longitudinal position of the LeB and
the LCG must coincide - is reasonable, at least for determining the
trim angle.
Figure 5.2 gives the longitudinal force as a function of ship

position in the wave. The chain dotted line represents the experi-
mentally obtained increase in resistance from initial speed to wave
speed as discussed in Chapter 2. From this figure it can be seen that
a free running model w6uld probably spend most of its time between
~ ~ 0.8 and ; ~ 0.1. Thus, lateral stability over this region would
be most important. The agreement between experiment and theory is
quite good considering the difficulties of calculating longitudinal
forces on a slender body. The major discrepancy is between ~ ~ 0.3
and ~ ::: 0.5, which may not be too significant, as a free running model
would not spend much time over t.his region anyway.
9.
The wa v e -induce d swa y f orce a nd y a w mome nt rl pr ivd i v s r e giv n

in Figures 5 . 3 and 5 .4 re s p ec tiv e ly. Th e y c a n b e o bta jn e d [r o m the
experimental r e cords eith er using Eq . 4.3 or Eq . 4.7, a nd b oth r e sults
are given in the two figur e s. Con siderabl e scatter is pres e nt in t h e
exp erime ntal r esults , p a rticul a rly for Y' , since th e a a l me as u re d
a
force was quite small. It is tho ught that the me hod of Eq . 4 . 7 is
more reliable (solid circles). Bear ing in mind th e expe rim e n a l
scatter , the corre lation b e tween th e or y and experime nt is rea son le ,
p a rticularly in the case of N~, which i s more import nt fo r the pre-
diction of broaching than Y'.
a
The rudder derivatives , as functions of longi tudi n a l s hip p osit-
ion in the wave, are given in Figures 5.5 a nd 5 .6. Ag ai n, the Y' de r-
ivati~e is not predicted as well as the N' d erivative , due to sma ll
total side force , but as i t is not v e ry significant i n th e prediction
of broaching, this is not too important. The serious l oss of rudder
effectiveness often associated with a broa ch c a n be see n ove r the
range ~ ~ 0.55 to O.B. However, this does not correspond to th a t i n
which Figure 5.2 implied the ship would spend most of its time . Thus ,
p e rhaps for a broach to occur a signifi ca nt yawing motion must be se t
up in the short time that the .ship passes through this region. A more
thorough look at th~ effect the changing coefficients h ave on the s hip
motion is given in the next two chapters.
Figures 5.7 and S.B are plots of yO and N' r espectively aga inst ~ .
v v
y' is fairly large, so experimental scatter is not too gr ea t and
v
correlation between theory and experiment is quite good . N', o n the
v
other hand, is quite small and although the e xperime ntal p oi n ts do not
have a large scatter the correlation b e tw ee n them and the th eory is
poor.
(Y
r
m) I and (N
r
- mx )
G
0 are given as functions of S in Figure s
5.9 and 5.10 respec~ively. Here (Y

- m)' is sma ll and th e exp ri-
r
mental scatter is fairly large, with correlation b e twee n th eory and
experiment not being very good. This will not be too importa nt as
(Y - m) 0 only has a second order effect in the prediction of y a win g
r
b e haviour, since i t is the coupling term b etween the y a w velocity (r)
and the sway force (Y). (N - mx ) I h a s a direct inf l ue n ce o n yaw
r G
70.
and not on ly is e xper i me ntal sc a tte r a lot 1 s s , but th e corr lation

between theory and e xpe rime nt is qu i te good .
The sway acceleration derivativ es , (Y

v- m)' and (N
v- mx )' are
G
give n as functions of ~ in Figure s 5.11 a nd 5 .1 2 . Th e r e is con s i de r-
able scatter in both set s of experime ntal re sults and , although the
correlation b etwe en theory and e xperiment is reasonable for (Y. - m) "
v
it is particularly bad for (N
v - mx G) '. Figures 5.13 a nd 5.14 show t he
rotary acceleration derivatives an d agai n e xpe rim e ntal s catter is quite
high . Correlation between theory and experim nt is r a sonable and s hows
the considerable reduction in (N. - I ). with the crest a t amidships
r z
(~ = 0 . 5) , which may permit large yaw rates to be built-up rapidly when
the ship is in this longitudinal p osi ti on.
Conclusions
Although there is considerable scatter in a lot of the e xperimental
results, and correlation between theory and experiment for some of the
coefficients is poor , the more important ones (X', N~, N
6) appear to be
predicted quite well by the theo+y d eveloped in Chapter 3 for the only
wave condition tested . It is , therefore , proposed to use this theory to
predict the values of the coefficients with othe r wa ve lengths in a n
attempt to determine theoretically the "broaching zones" discussed in
the first chapter , although it is recognised that the theoretica l
results should really have been compared with the e xperimental ones for
more than one wave condition . The next chapter discusses the effect
the varying coefficients will have on the equations of motion, while
Chapter 7 develops a complete analogue/digital hybrid simul ation of
ship motion based on simplified equations in order to predict t h e
"broaching zones ".
7 1.
trim angle
(radians )
0.04
x h eory
0 . 02
o x
1.ot
-0.02
x
-0.04
x
Figure 5.1 Trim as a fUnction of ~
x experiment
theory
x
2.0
x
1.0
6x ' resistance
-------
x
a
x
'x 1.0 t
-1.0
Figure 5.2 Non-dimensional X-force as a fun c tion of ~

; 2.
'I' )( 10- 3
Cl
3.0 • o
o 'Jbl:,iIl(.,j
(y -y /U)-y
v a:
U<'l11g
v
2.0 o
• obtained u~ing
1.0 r](jt of y(r)/o.
, 2 0
i."J<'llnst W
0 +-------------r---'\.------------- - T---
1.0 t
-1.0
-2.0
• • •
-3.0
•
-4.0 o
-5.0
o
o
-6.0
Figure 5.3 y' as a function of ~

Cl
t_heory
N' x 10- 3
Cl 0 obtained using
(N -N /U)-N
v ex v
1.5
1.0
0
0
• • obtained using
plot of N(r)/o.
against w2 0
0.5 •
0
0
0
1.0 ~
-0.5
-1.0
• ()
-1.5
0
-2.0
Figure 5.4 N' as a function of

Cl
C
7:l.
theory
X experiulPnt
2.0 X
x x
1.0.., __-
o -+----------,---T---------------.--
0.5 1.0 f
Figure 5.5 y~ as a function of t
theory
N' )( 10-' X experiment
6
0.2
0
0.5 1.0
f
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-O.B
-1.0
-1. 2
Figure 5.6 N6 as a function of (

74.
y' )( 10- 3
V
X f.'xl'priment
10.0
o ~----------------------II----------·------------'I---
0.5 1.0 t
-10.0
-20.0
x
-30.0 X
Figure 5.7 y' as a function of ~

v
theory
3
N' )( 10-
V
x experiment
o
0.5 1.0 f
-5.0
x
x
Figure 5.8 N' as a fUnction of (

v
1 S.
_ I.h,·: 1 y
o +-------------,r------------.--
0.5 1.0 t
x
-5.0
x
-10.0
x x
-20.0
)(
Figure 5.9 (Y -m)

r
I as a function of C
theory
(N -mx ) I
---
r G3
)( 10-
)( experiment
0
0.5 1.0 t
)(
X
-2.0
-4.0
-6.0
)(
-B.O
Figure 5.10 (Nr-mx ), as a function of

G
C
7(,.
+-----------------------,-·----------------------~I----
0.5 1. 0 t
-8.0 x
x
-10.0
-12.0
x
x
Figure 5.11 (Y.-m) I as a function of ~

v
theory
)( experiment
)(
)( )(
x x )(
1.0
a
1.0 t
-1.0
Figure 5.12 (Nv-mx ) I as a fUnction of ~

G
n.
theory
x experiment
x
2.0
1.0
x
)(
o
1.0 £'
-1. 0
x
x
-2.0
-3.0
x
Figure 5.13 (Y.-mx )' as a function of ~

r G
-0.6
-0.8
Figure 5.14 (N.-I )' as a function of ~

r z
Iii.
Chapter 6
THE ~ OF THE VARIATION OF ---_._---_._---

'rHE COEFFICUNrS
-----
OF THE E)',}JATIONS OF M:JI'lON
The theoretical method developed in Chapter 3 is used in this

chapter to obtain the coefficients over a range of wave lengths. The
effect these coefficients have on the equations of motion developed in
Chapter 2 is discussed in an attempt to get an indication of which are
the more important factors. Although it is not intended in this
chapter to predict the "broaching zones" described in Chapter 1, it
will be possible to make comparisons between different ships, etc.,
using the methods discussed here.
The Wave-Induced !mgitudinal Force
The variation in non-dimensional wave force with ~ for various

wave lengths is given in Figure 6.1. The peak positive value is
fairly constant over the range, being only a little less at AIL = 0.9
and 2.0. However, the main difference between AIL values is the shift
in ~ position. As discussed in Chapter 2, the longitudinal equilibrium
positions are the intersections between the plot of Xl against ~ and a
horizontal straight line representing the non-dimensional increase in
resistance from self-propulsion speed to wave speed. For a given self-
propulsion speed the non-dimensional increase in resistance is larger
for longer waves (since they travel faster), so there will be a parti-
cular wave length above which no equilibrium positions exist. This
will give an upper bound for AIL above which it is not possible for
the ship to be forced to travel at wave speed with that value of self-
propulsion speed. (When dynamic factors, increased resistance due to
rudder action, etc., are taken into account, this maximum wave length
will be reduced and will depend on other aspects, such as heading
angle, etc.)
The important pOints to note from Figure 6.1 then, are that there
will be an upper bound of AIL for each self-propulsion speed above
which no longitudinal equilibrium positions exist, and that the stable
9.
~Il = 09
~I L = 10
_ _ _ _ _ 0
~I L = ,. t.
- - -- ~ I L = 2.0
2.0
-3
Xl. 10
,
I
1.0 ,
I
,,
I
,
,
I
O~____~r-~~r-~~______~,'__~_________lT'O__~
I
,,,' I;.
-1.0
Figure 6.1 X· force as a function of C for various A/L's

OIL - 22.73 A/h E 28
1.0
I
I
0.5 I
t
I
All = 0.9
- 0.5
~/l = 1.0
~'l= 1.4
"/l = 2.0
Figure 6.2 N6 as a function of t for various A/L's
OIL - 22.73 A/h - 28
80.
equilibrium position is between ~ = 0.0 and ~ = 0.3, llPlwnding on ship

self-propulsion speed and AIL, hence this is the region in which Lhe
ship will spend most time.
Wave-Induced Yaw M:m:mt
A plot of the derivative, relating wave-induced yaw monlent to

heading angle N', is given against ~ in Figure 6.2 for various AIL
Cl
values. As discussed in Chapter 2, N' is required to be positive to
Cl
cause a broach, and it can be seen that this is the case over the
region identified above as being the most important. There is a shift
in ~ position with increase in AIL in the same direction as for the
plot of X'. However, the maximum value of the AIL = 2.0 plot is much
smaller than for the shorter wave lengths. This might imply that as
AIL increases there is a reduced tendency to broach, even when travell-
ing at wave speed.
The Calm Water Stability Cr'iteria
As discussed in Chapter 2, the calm water stability criteria is

given by Eq. 2.4 where C must be positive for stability. A plot of C
against t is given in Figure 6.3 as it was suggested that C becoming
negative could be the cause of a broach. As can be seen, C is reduced
considerably over the range O.S < ~ < 0.7, but remains positive. In
addition, this range corresponds to negative values of N', whereas for
Cl
a broach to occur, a positive value of N' is needed. It is, therefore,
Cl
concluded that the change in the calm water stability criteria does
not cause a broach and hence cannot be used directly as a measure of
the liability to broach of a given ship.
Rudder Effectiveness
As was mentioned in the previous chapter, a loss of rudder effect-
iveness 1s often associated with a broach, and since the type and posit-
position of the rudders can be varied to a certain extent by the des-
igner it is worth taking a closer look at this aspect. The effective-
ness of the rudder can be easily judged by the derivative N6 and a
plot of this against ~ for various Alh ratios is shown in Figure 6.4.
~ 1.
C " 10·
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 05
Figure 6 . 3 Calm water stability cri eria , C, as a function of

A/L = 1 . 0 A/h = 28
82 .
AIL = 0 .9
AI L = 10
A/L = 1.4
A/L = 2 .0
0 1.0
I -:5
No l" O I
I ~
/
/
I
I
I
I I ,
-0.5 / I
I
I
/ I
I
I
I
/
I
I
-, .0
I
I
I
/
~/ ----
/
Figure 6.4 N~ as a functi on of ~ for v arious A/L ' s

D7L =
22.7 3 A/h = 28
'/2. Depth Rudder D/L = 22 . 73

Standard Rudder D/L = 22 . 73
Standard Rudder D/L = 26. 32
1.0
O ~-----------------.~----~~~------,-----~
N~'O
-~
,"
. .. -, , \
-0.5 I
!
,' "
\
\ \ \.
\
\
\
! \\ \ .,::-=
, ,: ,'-_. ..- ,."'" -..7
.
-1 .0 ~" . J . :I
---< - -",
I
Figure 6 . S N6 as a fun c tion of ~ for v ar ious shi p con iti on s
AIL = 1.0 A/h = 2B
~n .
The large loss of effectiveness can be seen and, in some cases, N~
equals zero, implying that at these positions the rudder is no use at

all. The region over which this loss of effectiveness occurs does
not correspond to that in which it was estimated the ship would spend
most of its time. However, it is sure to pass through this region
and that may be the root of the problem. It is worth noting that a
large part of the region with low rudder effectiveness (0.5 < ~ < 0.9)
corresponds to negative values of N ' , whereas it is positive values
a
which are required to cause a broach.
Assuming for the moment that the severe loss of rudder effective-
ness is a prime cause of a broach, it is worth looking at two alter-
natives to the standard condition. Figure 6.5 shows the variation in
N6 against ~ for a AIL value of 1.0. The three conditions plotted are:
standard rudder OIL; 26.32; standard rudder OiL = 22.73 and half-
depth rudder D/L = 26.32. It can easily be seen that the slight
increase in draft has a marked reduction in the seriousness of the
loss of rudder effectiveness. This is due to obtaining a better
immersion of the rudder, which is obviously very important. Although
the condition with a marked trim by the stern was not investigated, it
can be envisaged that this would have a similar effect, as it would
also result in a deeper rudder immersion. The other condition shown
is that of a half-depth rudder. Due to the reduction in size this is
less effective even in calm water and it suffers from being easily
emersed, resulting in a considerable region where N5 equals zero.
E'quilihriun Rudder Angle
As discussed in Chapter 2, it is possible to look at the combined

effect of the variation of N~ and N6 together with some of the other
derivatives by plotting the ratio of the equilibrium rudder angle to
the heading angle, (0 la) against~. This is done for the three
eg 0
conditions described above in Figures 6.6, 6.7 and 6.8 for AIL values
of 0.9, 1.0 and 1.4 respectively. Here the large rudder angles needed
to hold the ship on a given heading angle can be seen and it is clear
from this that in many cases it will just not be possible to hold the
ship on a given heading since there will be a maximum rudder angle
available of between 30 and 35 degrees. From Figure 6.9 it can be
seen that the peak values are higher
-- - - - ' 1/2 Depth Rudder el L 26 . 32
Standard Rudder o/L = 26 . 32
: Standard Rudder DIL = 22.73
B.O
6 7.0
eq
OZ-
o
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0 r-----~~------~0~.5~~/_4-----------1~.0~
I
/ '
- ----
\ .------
"---"
---\--_/,,'
-.....~' ...
-1.0 \
-2.0 \
\
-3.0 \
\
Figure 6.6 o, eqla 0 as a function of ~ for AIL ; 0 . 9 A/h ; 28
8.0. 1/ Z Depth Rudder D/L=26 . 32

Stand ard Rudde r D/L=26 . 32
Standard Rudder D/L=22 . 73
Seq 7.0
~ 6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
t.
, .0
0
-1.0
- 2.0
-3.0
Figure 6 .7 0eq/a o as a f unc ion o f ~ fo r AIL = 1. 0 A/h :: 28
H', •
1/2 Depth Rudder D/L"'26. 32

7.0
Standard Rudder D/V=26. 32
Standard RudderD/L=22. 73
£> 6.0
eq
oc. o 5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0 ,I
,--... ..
.... - .... _........~.
I
I
-1.0
-2.0
-3.0
Figure 6.E <5 lao

eq
as a function of ~ for AIL ;; 1. 4 A/h = 28
'\" ,/
1.0
>( ,/
/ \J1'-..-/-----
0.5
-0.5 A/L=0.8
AIL =1.0
A/L=1.4
-1.0 AI L = 2.0
eqla 0 as a function of C for various wavelenyths

Figure 6.° <5
Standard rudder OIL ~ 26.32 A/h ~ 28

U( •
for AIL of 1.0 and 1.4, implying that at AIL of 0.8 and 2.0 a btOdch
is less likely. The dangerous region for broaching is when 6 la is
eg 0
large and positive and the stable longitudinal equilibrium position
will be when Xl is positive and dXl/d~ is negative, but since they do
not appear to coincide, it is difficult to see why a broach occurs.
The situation, however, will be dynamic, with the ship not settling
down in its position immediately and so it may be that on passing
through the dangerous region a large enough yaw acceleration is set up
to initiate a broach. The only way to determine this is to set up a
complete simulation of the broaching condition allowing all coeffic-
ients to vary as functions of ~ and this is what is done in the next
chapter.
Solution of the Lateral Equations of M:>tion
As discussed in Chapter 2, the autopilot equation can be added to

the lateral equations of motion and the resulting equations solved for
each position along the wave length. This procedure can be repeated
for different ships and different wave lengths to give an idea of the
effect of certain parameters on the stability roots. In order to do
this a computer program was written (see Appendix C) and some of the
results are given in Figures 6.10 and 6.11.
Figure 6.10 shows the effect of varying the autopilot constants,

while Figure 6.11 shows the effect of varying AIL. The effect of the
variation in autopilot constants over the range selected (typical ship
values) is less than had been expected, although the addition of a
small rate term (P2) reduced the regions with complex roots signifi-
cantly. However, this cannot be seen in Figure 6.10, which is only a
plot of the real part of the principle root. When the root is positive
the solution is unstable and it can be seen from Figure 6.11 that the
unstable region is reduced markedly when AIL = 2.0, again implying that
a broach is less likely for longer waves.
Although solving the equations of motion does yield some useful

results, particularly for comparative purposes, the simplifications,
such as the assumption that the rudder will always be at the desired
angle. and the neglect of a maximum rudder angle, do impose limitations
on this method.
tn.
p'=3)~=O
p'=3,~=,
-------- p'=5 ~ =0
-- --- - - p. = 5 ~ =3
0.5
0 1.0
\
E
\\ .
-8 -0.5
a:
\\
\\ .
a \\ \
'u \\~
&.
c
--...
0
-1.0 \ " ....
'---'
,
,,
\
e. ,,
"i- 1.S \
,
a:
"
-2.0
Figure 6.10 The real part of the principal root as a function of ~

Standard rudder OIL c 22.73 AIL ~ 1.0 A/h = 28
0.5
0
-8
ex:
~ -0.5
I ,, /
I
V, , I
U
.!;
'- I
I
I I
I
- -1.0
Q..
0 ~ , I
,
/
~ I /
Ii ,1./ :"/L=0.9
GI
a:: '" -_._-
-1.5 : "'l= 1.0
- - - - - - - ~ '" l = 1 .4
---:"/L=2.0
-2.0
Figure 6.11 The real part of the principal root as a function of ~

Standard rudder OIL = 22.73 P 1 = 3 P 2 z 1 A/h ~ 28
HEl.
Conclusions
Two separate methods have been used in this chapter to investi-

gate the cause of a broach. They have both remained independent of
the longitudinal, equation and, hence, have only been able to give
comparative information which must be treated with a certain amount
of caution. This is because the ship may well be able to suffer a
severe instability over a region in which it spends little time.
From the plot of longitudinal force against ~ it is possible to

estimate in which regions the ship will spend most time, and this
information can be used, together with that obtained using the lateral
equations only, to get a general impression of the factors involved.
It is also possible from this plot to obtain a minimum self-propulsion
speed for each AIL, below which the ship cannot be accelerated to wave
speed. (Or a maximum AIL for each self-propulsion speed.) The region
in which the ship will spend most of its time depends on AIL, but will
be from ; ~ O~8 through ~ = 1.0 to ~ = 0.3. This must be borne in
mind when looking at lateral motions, but since the situation will be
dynamic, with the ship not arriving in its equilibrium position immed-
iately, other wave positions cannot be ignored.
The use of the equilibrium rudder angle approach is purely static,

but allows different rudder configurations to be readily compared and
it is fairly easy to interpret the resulting plot. This approach can
also be used for comparing ships in different conditions of trim,
draft, etc., and could be used to investigate the merits of transom
versus round stern arrangements.
Solving the lateral equations permits the effect of the autopilot

to be included and, although time lags are neglected in the analysis
given here, they could be included in an approximate form by modifying
the autopilot equation (see Ref. 30). This method could indicate an
instability due to the build-up of oscillations which is not strictly
a broach and has not been found to oqcur in either the full-scale or
model cases. The fact that it does not appear to occur in practice
could be due to non-linearities, the ship not remaining on that longi-
tudinal position for long enough for the oscillations to become
serious, or to the use of a better autopilot for the full-scale case
89.
than that used in the present model. Since this type of inslability
does not appear in practice, results from this method must be treated
with great caution.
From looking at the results of these two methods it appears that

the most significant factor is probably the yaw moment caused by the
wave and that due to the rudders. The fact that, over a region the
rudders seriously lose their effectiveness, appears to be very sig-
nificant and it seems that this may be able to be solved at the design
stage by positioning the rudders deeper, thus reducing their tendency
to emerge. A trim by the stern and an increase in draft also tend to
submerge the rudders more, although in addition they have a slight
effect on the wave-induced yaw moment. In the case of an increase in
draft the change in yaw moment is insignificant and, although it has
not been calculated, it is assumed to be small also for a trim angle.
Thus, these are things which may be done at the operating stage to
increase the rudder's ability to counter a broach.
The other comment which can be made from the results is that the
tendency to broach appears to red~ce as the wave length increases
beyond AIL of around 1.4 to 2.0. This is contrary to what is shown
in Ref. 20, but is intuitively correct since, taken to the extreme,
would imply that a very long wave (A/L > 10.0) would not be able to
cause a broach (for a ship travelling at wave speed), since the ship
would see little change in pressure or acceleration along its length,
resulting in a very small moment being set up. In addition, the water
level would not change much along the ship length and so the rudders
would be less likely to emerge.
The next stage is to couple the lateral equations to the surge

equations and study the resulting lateral stability. This is done in
the following chapter in the form of an analogue/digital hybrid simul-
ation which also takes into account time lags and maximum rudder rate.
Chapter 7
SIMIJIl\TION
In order to predict whether the ship will broach in certain con-

ditions it is necessary to couple the lateral equations to the surge
equation for the reasons given in the previous chapter. It is also
desirable to model the maximum rudder velocity, maximum rudder angle
and any time delays which may occur in the autopilot system. It was,
therefore, decided to set up a simulation based on a simplified form
of the equations developed in Chapter 2 using the theoretical technique
for predicting the coefficients developed in Chapter 3.
Before looking at the complete simulation, the longitudinal and

lateral equations were set up independently. Once the separate simul-
ations were checked and found to be working correctly they were com-
bined to form the complete simulation.
SUrging
When separated from the lateral and roll equations in 2.2 the
longitudinal equation becomes
o= X'u' + (X. - m)
u u
'u' + X'
~
7.1
This equation is in non-dimensional form based on a reference velocity

Uo ' In order to run the simulation at real time for any model or ship
and to get a "feel" for the factors involved, it is convenient to dim-
ensionalise Eq. 7.1 and to introduce a squared relationship between
resistance and velocity. Thus, the longitudinal equation becomes
o = XU2U2 + (X~ - m)u + X~ + X 7.2

'" .. prop
where U is the total forward velocity (i.e. U = Uo + u) and Xprop is

the thrust from the propeller that balances Xu2U~ which is the resist-
ance at self-propulsion speed in calm water. In Eq. 7.2 X~ is depend-
ent on ~ but all the other coefficients are assumed to be constant.
~ is given by
t
~ =! f [U - C] dt 7.3
A 0
Cj I .
- --. t = -0.2
--: ~ = 0.0
------: ~ = 0.2
- - - ~ = 0.4
-"--;J= 0.6
Fn
...--,,,,,,
0.45
/' / '" ~~-- --~----~..---

... --
_--.;:;::-> - ' ' _____
-...
I
,...-
, .......... /'~.....-
·--'0 ... - . . . . . . ~
- - ><..:;,., o~
---- -
0 / " . / '
.. ,./
.. - - -------
- - . t =-0.2
---: E = 0.0
----- . f, = 0.2
---. ~ = 0.4
_._ .. - . t :: 0.6
'-- "--- .---..
--- ~-- ----. .~
.---..
.-----
---- ---- '--- .. ?:nr
Time( s)
o 2 4 6 8 10
Figure 7.1 Digital simUlation of SUrging ' va=rOy~.·n3g7 ~o
AIL = 1.07 A/h = 28 y no
A digital simulation based on Eqs. 7.2 and 7.3 was set up on the
Department's PDP 11/40 digital computer (see Appendix C) and an
example of the results obtained is given in Figure 7.1. This simulat-
ion was repeated for a number of different conditions. However, it
was very slow and used a lot of computer space. Because of the time
involved for each run and because the problem was going to be made sig-
nificantly more complex by the addition of the lateral equations, an
analogue simulation was set up on the Faculty's EAI 2000 analogue com-
puter. A comparison between the analogue and the digital simulation is
given in Figure 7.2. Here it can be seen that there is good agreement
and since by using the analogue method the problem could be run at very
high speeds resulting in a considerable saving in time, it was decided
to abandon the digital approach. The simulation can be run at real
time on the analogue computer and this gives an additional advantage to
this method as it is possible to get a "feel" for what is happening.
I.a.teral S1nulatioo
After dimensionalising and separating the lateral equations from

Eqs. 2.2 they become
o = y vv + (Y. - m)v + Y a + (y - mU)d + (Y. - mx

v a r r G
}a + y~O
u
o : NvV + (Nv - mxG)v + Naa + (Nr - mxGU}d + (Nt - Iz}a + NoO

7.4
The desired rudder angle is given by
<Sd = P1IP + P2~ ..... 7.5
However, the actual rudder angle is the integral of the actual

rudder angular velocity which is limited by the power of the steering
gear. There is also a limit to the maximum rudder angle available due
to the design of the steering gear.
Thus
t
0
a = f 0•a dt
0
- Cs < 6a < Cs 7.6
- cS < <S < 0

am a a
m
- - - - - Digital Simulation
Fn Analogue Simulation
0.1.5
,-- -- ... -. _-
---- ---- -----------
0.35
Digital Simulation
0.05 Analogue Si mutation
----------- -- -----------
8 10 12
Time(s)
-0.05
Figure 7.2 Comparison of digital and analogue simulation of surging

AIL c 1.07 A/h ~ 28 F c 0.37
no
where oa will be about 35° and C will vary depending on the I~wer of
m s
the steering gear. A value of C s greater than 2;0/sec is required by
law for certain types of ShiPs[26] and a typical modern frigate will
have a value of around SO/sec.
Looking at the lateral stability alone, it is possible to identify

regions along the ~ axis which are unstable due to oscillatory motion
and regions which are unstable due to a broach-like motion with a
single swing in the direction of the initial heading angle. It is
possible to vary the values of P 1 , P z , o~ and C s ' and observe the
effect they have on the resultant motion. Figure 7.3 shows the effect
of varying Plover the complete range of t. The system is given an
initial heading angle and the resulting motion observed. If it is
stable the initial heading angle is increased and the test repeated
until the minimum value of initial heading angle required to induce
instability is found. This is plotted against t for the various con-
ditions to be compared, and it can be seen that there are two distinct
regions of instability. The region between about t ~ 0.3 and' = 0.65
is unstable due to the build-up of oscillations and can be reduced by
addition of the P z term in the autopilot equation. However, the other
region is unstable due to a broach-like motion as discussed in the
previous chapter and is, therefore, the significant region.
Although the lateral simulation alone can be used to investigate

the effects of varying certain parameters, as discussed in the previous
chapter, it is necessary to couple the lateral and longitudinal equat-
ions together to predict what will actually happen in the physical con-
dition. Now that both the longitudinal and lateral simulations have
been shown to be working, they can be combined to form the complete
simUlation.
Simulatioo of La'lqitudinal and Lateral t-btioos carbined
When dimensionalised and simplified the equations become
o = Yv
v +
(Y. - m)v + Y a + (Y - mUla + Y 0
v a r 6
o = Nv
v
+ N a + (N - mxGu)a + (N. - Iz>ci + NOO
a r r
7.7
0 = Xu 2u 2 + (x.u - m)u + X + xprop + XIS I01

t
p. = 1
P. = 2
P. = 3
P. =4
\.\\\\ /;' I'/ '\\

\\\ / I ~\ //
~~
~\
1S-
\\\"\ "-_... /11
' \
.~~'
,:I I
., "
/.
..........
. --
--
'
--"
//
",' /
~'-
\ II
"
\ I
, I
, I
, I
'- ...... _-, ,
d~~~L- ___~______~_____ - L ____- L ____ ~____~~_ _~_ _~~_ _~.
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Figure 7.3 Stability 1n lateral plane only, varying PI

6d - PI (P 2 - 0) llL - 1.07 l/h s 28
~6.
t
~ = 1 J ~-c - va] dt
A0
= Pl~
.
cd + P2~
t
ca J 6a dt 7.7
0
- C3 < 6a < C3
- 0 < 0 < 0
a a a
m m
where £QS~ is assumed to be equal to 1 and, sin a to be equal to a.

The cross coupling acceleration terms and the coupling between v and r
and X have been ignored since they are small and there was a shortage
of coefficient units. The resulting patch diagram is given in Figure
7.4. In addition to Eqs. 7.7 a first order Pade circuit has been in-
corporated between the demand for the rudder and the start of the
[44)
rudder movement in order to provide an approximation to a time delay •
The main problem with the total simulation on the analogue computer was
that many of the coefficients of the equations were dependent on~. A
digitaly set function generator (DSFG) was used to provide the depend-
ence of X~ on ~, but as there was only one of those available, an alter-
native method had to be used for the remaining coefficients. The tech-
nique involved using the PDP 11/45 digital computer which is connected
to the EAI 2000 through serial and parallel ports. At first the serial
port connections were used to alter coefficient values, but this proved
too slow, so the parallel port connection was adopted. The procedure
was as follows. The digit~l computer set up the initial conditions as
normal using the serial port, and the counter on the logic part of the
analogue computer was set to a pre-determined value. The '2000 was
then put into the operate mode by the '11 and the counter started
counting down to zero. The simulation continued with X~ being varied
by the DSFG, but with all other coefficients remaining constant. When
the counter reached zero (this took 0.05 of a second) the '2000 was put
into the hold mode using the patch panel control. The digital computer
then sampled the output from A61 (t) through an analogue to digital
converter and calculated the values of the variable coefficients using
interpolation from previously fed data. The appropriate coefficient
values were then set at the 6 digital to analogue converter's and the
I,U
:c
2 .~,~
',;:~ - . )
(L
(L1
~
:.r
--.J
Figure 7.4 'Patch diagram for complete hybrid simulation.
98.
'2000 put back into the operate mode. This continued until (a) the
ship was overtaken by three waves, (b) it was broached, or, (c) the
time limit elapsed. The time spent in the hold mode depended on how
heavily the PDP 11/45 was being used by other users, but was generally
negligible and, by watching the simulation, it was difficult to tell
that it was stopping every O.OSs.
Unfortunately, there were only 6 digital to analogue converter's

available and 8 required. This was solved by assuming [Y I(Y. - m)]
v v
and [(Y - mU)/(Y. - m)] remained constant at their calm water value,
r v
and the effect of this on the yaw motion is thought to be negligible.
Carparisan of Simulation with Free Running r.t:rlel E?cper.iITents
Since the relationship between motion and force was assumed to be

linear, prediction of the model's path during a broach was not attempted.
Instead, the simUlation was used to predict the broaching zones dis-
cussed in the first· chapter. Although the hydrodynamic coefficients can
be calculated using the method developed in Chapter 3, the coefficients
governing the rudder mot~on have not yet been discussed. The maximum
rudder angle possible on the model was ±3S0 and the maximum rudder rate
was scaled from the ship which had a value of 3°/sec. The radio-con-
trolled model was steered by a helmsman who stood at the side of the
manoeuvring basin directly behind the model. He relayed the desired
.rudder angle via a walkie-talkie to the controller who selected the
angle from a series of buttons. This then operated the servo motor on
the model via radio control. As can be seen, it is not very easy to
model this system using an autopilot equation. Values of P 1 and P 2
were chosen to be 3 and 1 respectively. It was assumed that once the
rudder started to move it would reach maximum speed almost immediately.
However, the time delay from the moment the rudder was required to when
it started moving was estimated to be 3 seconds model scale. The
standard rudder and half-depth rudder conditions were both investigated
in waves of A/h = 28, which corresponded to the free running experi-
ments discussed in the first chapter. Comparison between the broaching
zones obtained using the simulation and the experimental results are
given in Figures 7.5 and 7.6. The desired heading angle was 20° since
the limited experimental records available showed that this was what
9~.
Predicted Broaching
"
h = 28 Zone-
2.0
I
~
L
1.0
O'+--=~-L ____~______~____~________
o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Fn 0.5
Ex~imental Reosults
x : Steoered
o : Broached
Figure 7.5 Comparison between predicted and experimental

results for stan~ar" rudder
1UO.
Predicted Broaching
2.0 "
-h -- 28
zy
1.0
o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Fn 0.5
Ex~erimental Results
x: Steered
0: Broached
Fiqure 7.6 Comparison between predicted and experimental

results for ~ depth rudder
101.
was used in the experiments. A broach was considered to have occurred

if either there was an overload* or the heading angle exceeded 40°.
If the model was overtaken by three waves without broaching then the
run was assumed to be steered, although it was possible in some of
these cases that, if the initial value of ship speed was greater than
self-propulsion speed (i.e. u > 0), a broach would have occurred. The
other way in which a steered run could be obtained was if the model
was carried along by the wave at a constant heading angle. This gener-
ally happened if the self-propulsion speed was nearer to wave speed as
the model settled into its longitudinal equilibrium position almost
immediately.
Looking at Figures 7.5 and 7.6, the comparison between the pre-
dicted zones and the experimental results is quite good. This is
especially so considering that there are a large' number of imponder-
ables, such as, calculation of coefficienta, neglect of heel angle,
simplification of equations and, not least, the modelling of the rudder.
Discussioo
I
Assuming for now that the reasonable correlation between theory
and experiment shown in the previous section indicates that the simul-
ation gives a good model of a broach, it is now possible to look closer
at what is happening in an attempt to see why a ship broaches. As
mentioned in the previous chapter, the longitudinal equilibrium posit-
ion does not correspond to the region which requires the highest equil-
ibrium rudder angles. Thus, it is presumably a combination of the
lateral and longitudinal motion which is causing a broach. Looking at
Figure 7.7 it can be'seen that the build-up of heading angle starts
before the ship has settled down into its longitudinal equilibrium pos-
ition. In fact, it seems to be the longitudinal oscillations which are
causing the broach. From"Figure 6.6, the region with the large equil-
ibrium rudder angle is around t • 0.1, with fairly large angles required
from t = 0.7 to 1.0. From
I
the lower graph in Figure 7.7 it can be seen
that the ship passes through this region fairly rapidly at time t = O.Ss
*On an analogue computer all variables must be within the range -1 to +1

and the equations are scaled using expected maximum values before being
patched up. If the value of a variable goes outside these limits dur-
ing a simulation an overload is said to occur implying that the value
has exceeded the expected maximum.
1 ('2.
201--------
Time( 5)
O~~~~--~---L--~--~ __~__~~~~__~__~___
o 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0
£>
•
30
1<f Time(~)
o 6.0 8.0 10.0 120
6.0 6.0 10.0

-0.5
Fiqure 7.7 Record from simulation for: AIL - 0.9, F - 0.33

~ depth rudder, C. • 3- I sec. full-scale, no
L
time delay • 3 secs model Bcale

103.
with only a slight yawing motion (upper graph). The ship then contin-
ues to be overtaken by the wave. However, the relative speed begins
to reduce beyond ~ = 0.0 until ~ = - 0.2 (t = 4.1s) when U = C. At
this point large equilibrium rudder angles are required as ~ 0.2
corresponds to ~ = 0.8 for the next wave. The ship then moves for-
ward with respect to the wave system (still in the region with a
reasonably high equilibrium rudder angle) and by now a large yaw rate
has been built-up due to the large amount of time spent in the critical
region. The rudder cannot cope and the ship continues to yaw, result-
ing in a broach. Very similar behaviour can be seen for AIL = 1.6 in
Figure 7.8.
Thus, the principle cause of a broach is that the ship is being

overtaken by the waves and will be accelerated, but before reaching
wave speed will overshoot the longitudinal equilibrium position and
enter the region which has a high required equilibrium rudder angle.
There will now be a low relative velocity between the waves and the
ship which will reduce to zero and then the ship will slowly move for-
ward with respect to the wave system, passing through the critical
region again. It is all this time spent in the critical region which
will initiate the broach. If the self-propulsion speed is higher the
ship will not overshoot its longitudinal equilibrium position by so
much, and hence will not spend so much time in the critical region,
thereby permitting it to be steered. On the other hand, if the ship
self-propulsion speed is lower, it will pass through the critical zone
with reasonably high relative velocity - spending a much shorter time
there, again permitting it to be steered.
The critical factor then is the amount of time spent in the part
of the wave which requires high equilibrium rudder angles and this is
influenced by the relative velocity between the ship and the wave as
this region is entered. Although this is governed in the regular wave
condition by the ship self-propulsion speed, in the jumble of an irreg-
ular sea it will depend to a certain extent on the previous wave and,
hence, predicting a broach in these conditions will be far more diffi-
cult.
Increasing the maximum rudder rate seems to have little effect on

the motion, as can be seen by comparing Figure 7.7 with Figure 7.9.
lCJ4 •
40•
2~~------------------
Tim~( ~)
O·~ __L-~~~_ _~_ _~_ _~_ _ - L_ _- L_ _~_ _~_ _~_ _~_ _ _
o 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0
£,
3($
lcf Time(s)
o 6.0 8.0 10.0 120
,
1.0
0.5
6.0 8.0 10.0
-1.0
Figure 7.8 Record from simulation for: AIL - 1.6, F - 0.43

no
~ depth rudder, C. - 3 e /sec. full-scale,
time delay - 3 secs model scale
105.
oc:
•
40
2cf~------
cf~~__~__~__~__~~~~__~__~__~__~T_im~e_(~s)
o 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0
6•
30
10"' Time(s)
o 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0
Time( s)
6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0

-0.5
Fiqure 7.9 Record from simulation for; A/L - 0.9, F • 0.33

no
; depth rudder, C, - 6·/sec. full-scale,
time delay - 3 aecs model scale ·
106.
This is because the rudder never reaches maximum rate due to the low
rate of change of desired rudder angle. Over the complete range of
A/L's there is only a marginal reduction in the size of the broaching
region when increasing the maximum rudder rate. This is contrary to
the findings of Crago who stated in his discussion to Ref. 1 that "if
model rudders can be moved at an unrepresentatively high rate, then
even a bad hull form can be easily controlled in a severe following
sea". This contradiction could be due to two things: (1) Using manual
control it may be possible to antiCipate a broach and order full rudder
which, if applied immediately, may save an otherwise broached situat-
ion. This would depend to a certain extent on the ability of the
helmsman and is not modelled by the simple autopilot equation used in
the simulation. (2) The model tested in Ref. 1 represents a consider-
ably smaller ship with a rudder rate of 3~o/sec. Since rudder rate
scales with l/lLthis represents a rate for a' Sm long model of 9~o/sec
compared to that used in the experiments of AMTE(H) of 14°/sec. This
much lower rate could be below the desired rate which would then mean
that an improvement could be made by increasing the actual permitted
rate.
The effect of reducing the time lag can be seen by comparing

Figures 7.8 and 7.10. Bere it can be seen that there is a slight
improvement, although a broach still occurs. This is typical of the
complete ,A/L range where, although in each case a broach does not
happen so quickly with the reduced time lag, the actual boundaries of
the broaching zones are little changed. Thus, it can be concluded
that, although redUCing the time lag does help to a certain extent,
it is not nearly as good as increasing the size and depth of the
rudders.
107.
20~------------------
dL-~~L-~~ __~~__~~__~~~__Time(s)
~__
o 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
6
3d'
1d' Time (s)
o 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0
,
1.0
Time(s)
0~~--~--~--~~~~--~--4---~~--~--~~
6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0
- 0.5
- 1.0
Figure 1.10 Reoordfrom simulation for: AIL. 1.6, F

no • 0.43
~ depth rudder, C. - 3 e /aee. full-Bcale,
time delay - laee model scale
lOB.
O1apter 8
DISCUSSION AND (X)N::LUSIO~
As discussed in the introduction, there were essentially two

objectives to this work. (1) To develop a technique for theoretic-
ally predicting the broaching zones, and (2) to identify the principle
factors affecting the liability of a ship to broach.
Simulation
The method of achieving the first objective was to develop a

digital/analogue hybrid simulation using simplified equations. The
broaching zones obtained using this method agreed reasonably well with
those obtained experimentally, despite the many simplifications and
approximations. The most important thing to note, however, 1s that
the simulation predicts the change from standard to half-depth rudder
quite well and could, therefore, be used for obtaining minimum rudder
size requirements for future designs as proposed in the first chapter.
The problems with using this technique are that a digital/analogue
hybrid facility is required and that the calm water manoeuvring coeff-
icients must be known. Comparison between two similar proposed des-
igns or rudder configurations, etc., can be made using the techniques
developed in Chapter 6, although the limitations here must be borne
in mind.
Possible Improvements to the Mathematioal Model:

As mentioned above, there are considerable simplifications
involved in the simulation method. Probably the most important of
these is the neglect of the roll equation, and any improvements should
include "this. In addition, the equations governing the rudder move-
ment with the first order Pade circuit could be improved. Since the
simulation can be run at real time the autopilot equation could be
replaced by a human helmsman. This may correspond better to the free
running model experiments. However, considerable thought would have
to be given as to how to display the course and heading error data to
simulate the information available during the experiments. The inclus-
109.
ion of the coupling terms ignored in the present work would be reason-
ably straightforward. However, it would probably have little effect
on the prediction of the broaching zones. Including all the non-
linear terms would be a formidable task, requiring a much larger anal-
ogue computer and would be unlikely to improve the results since accur-
acy is limited by the theoretical method of predicting the coefficients.
Possible Improvements to the Coeffiaient ~ediation Method:

Obviously the best way to obtain the coefficients is to run model
experiments for each wave condition, self-propulsion speed and ship
condition required. This is, however, prohibitively time-consuming and
costly, so the theoretical method was developed. The comparison
between theoretical and experimental results is made in Chapter 5,
where it can be seen that there are substantial differences for some
of the coefficients. It is not possible accurately to obtain the
coefficients theoretically for the low speed calm water condition using
the state-of-the-art knowledge, so it is unlikely that accurate coeff-
icierits can be obtained for the wave conditions - even using the calm
water experimental results as a basis. Fut~e developments in the calm
water manoeuvring field can be applied here if required and these may
follow the methods of Chapman[4S,46,47] or others[48, 49 1.
Despite the inaccuracies involved with some of the coefficients,

the more" important ones (N~, N6 and X~) are predicted reasonably well
and hence it is thought that the present prediction method is adequate
for the existing mathematical model. However, if the roll equation
were to be included, considerable thought would have to be given to
obtaining the additional coefficients, particularly N~ and K~.
ConcZusions:
It can be concluded that the simulation method developed here can
be used to predict the broaching zone, and the way in which it changes
with rudder size, quite well. It is, therefore, adequate to use this
to predict whether a proposed design will meet the standard criteria
discussed in the introduction and, if not, to determine the increase
in rudder size required.
110.
Inclusion of the heel equation and a better modelling of the

rudder movement could improve the simulation should this prove necess-
ary. The principle drawback to the method is the need for the calm
water manoeuvring derivatives which, at present, can only be obtained
by model experiment.
Factors Affecting a Broach
From studying the simulation results it is possible to determine

the principle factors involved. One of the most important points is
the surging of the ship to wave speed. As described in Chapter 6, if
the ship self-propulsion speed is high enough there will be a longitud-
inal stable equilibrium position. There will also be a region where
there is a high positive wave-induced yawing moment and a reduced
rudder effectiveness (the critical region). These two regions do not
coincide, so if the ship settles into its longitudinal steady state
position immediately, the rudder should be able to prevent a broach.
(This could happen in regular waves if ship ,self-propulsion speed is
near wave speed.) On the other hand, if it spends a long time in the
critical region, a high yaw rate may be set up which cannot be count-
ered by the rudder - resulting in a broach. The length of time spent
in the critical region depends on the relative velocity between the
ship and the wave and, in regular waves, this will depend on ship
self-propulsion speed. However, in irregular waves it will depend to
a certain extent on the previous wave.
The assumption that broaching is caused by the ship becoming un-

stable as measured by the calm water directional stability criteria,
has been shown in Chapter 6 to be incorrect.
Since the cause of a broach is principally the imbalance between

the high wave-induced yawing moment and the low counteracting moment
from the rudder, with reduced effectiveness, a simple way of comparing
different conditions is to plot the ratio of required equilibrium
rudder angle to heading angle over the non-dimensional wave position.
Using the results from the simulation, together with those from
Chapter 6, it is possible to formulate some provisional guidelines for
operators and designers in order to reduce the likelihood of broaching.
111.
The limitations of the simulation must be borne in mind - particularly

the neglect of the roll equation and the restriction to regular waves.
However, it is thought that the guidelines can be applied fairly well.
to the full-scale condition.
GuideZineB for Reducing the LiabiZity to Broach

at the Operating Stage:
The first step is to recognise when the sea is severe enough to
cause a broach. The predominant wave length must be of the order of
the ship length or greater, with the wave amplitude the order of the
ship draft or greater. In these conditions broaching may occur if
running in following seas and the safest advice is to avoid that head-
ing. If the ship is not able to avoid being in a following sea (due
to operational requirements) there are one or two actions which can be
taken in order to reduce its susceptibility to broaching.
The most obvious factor, next to heading angle, which is under

the control of the captain, is the ship speed. The situation to try
and avoid is being accelerated to wave speed by a steep wave as long
-, as, or longer than, ship length. Thus, if the ship takes on a low
frequency surging motion with the maximum speed near to wave speed,
then it is time to slow down - before encountering a slightly steeper
wave which might just carry the ship along for long enough to be
broached. The speed ought to be reduced till the surging motion becomes
less noticeable and the waves are overtaking the ship with a reasonably
high frequency.
AS can be seen from Figures 1.3 and 1.4 no broaching occurs when
ship self-propulsion speed is close to wave speed (i.e. faster than
the broaching zone) and it may be presumed from this that an alter-
native to slowing down might be to speed up. Unfortunately, it is
un~ikely that this would work in a real irregular sea since there is
always the possibility of encountering a longer wave resulting in
-acceleration to this wave's speed and hence broaching. As was noticed
in Chapter 6, however, the liability to broach appears to reduce with
very long waves so increasing speed may reduce the liability to broach
for speeds above about Fn = 0.6. This is outwi th the scope of the
present investigation and is unattainable for conventional high-speed
displacement craft.
,«.,.r::
112.
As discussed in Chapter 6, loss in rudder effectiveness due to

emersion is an important factor which can be reduced by submerging
the rudders as much as possible. This can be done by either increas-
ing draft or increasing trim by the stern, or both, and could reduce
considerably the liability to broach. This is particularly important
if the rudders are near the surface in the calm water condition -
such as with short spade rudders.
Guidelines for Reducing the Liability to Broach

at the Design Stage:
When a ship is being designed which may have to travel at high
Froude numbers (greater than about 0.25) in rough seas, it is necess-
ary to give considerable attention to its susceptibility to broaching.
Since the critical wave lengths are dependent on the ship length,
shorter ships will encounter more severe conditions and, hence, are
more likely to broach. In addition, because time scales with the
inverse square root of ship length, a broach will occur more rapidly
on shorter craft, resulting in the need for higher rudder rates and
shorter time lags.
By far the most important variable at the design stage is the

rudder and it has been shown how the loss in rudder effectiveness
caused by emersion has an important influence on broaching. The spade
rudders common to twin screw ships are prone to emersion in waves,
since they are near the calm water line and tend to be short to reduce
the bending moment on the stock. Increasing their depth can result in
a marked reduction in the liability to broach. However, this may make
the ship difficult to dry dock. The, method developed in this thesis
can be used to determine how big the rudders need to be in order to
meet a desired criteria. The single deep skeg-mounted rudder favoured
by American destroyers is less likely to emerge and may prove to be
better at preventing broaching, although more work will have to be done
in this direction.
A reduction in beam over the stern region may decrease the amount
by which the stern is lifted by the waves permitting the rudders to
emerge. The reduction would have to be continued forward for a short
distance and would also have to include a reduction in flare over the
113.
stern region. This could tend to imply that the wider transom-sterned
ships may be more vulnerable, particularly if associated with consid-
erable flare to increase deck area aft. The techniques developed in
Chapter 6 can be used to compare two similar ships in this respect
quite easily.
During a broach the bow is well immersed, while the stern emerges,
so the use of a bow rudder may reduce the liability to broach. This
has not been studied here and more work is needed before its effects
can be quantified.
Increasing the rudder rate can have a slight effect on a ship's

susceptibility to broaching. However, when it exceeds the rate of
change of desired rudder angle it will not have any effect at all.
The optimum rate will depend on ship length, being faster for shorter
ships. Reducing the time lag can also have a slight effect on broach-
ing and, again, this is more critical for shorter ships.
closure
It is thought that this work represents a step forward in isolat-
ing the predominant factors contributing to broaching and in quanti-
fying the forces and moments involved. Although considerable work
still has to be done, particularly on the inclusion of the roll equat-
ion, the simulation method developed here "can be used to determine
whether a new design will meet a given criteria and to carry out para-
metric studies in order to reduce its liability to broach.
11<4.
APPENDIX (A) CD-{)RDINATE SYS'l'r11S
Since the ship and the wave are both moving independently with
respect to the earth, three co-ordinate systems are used. They are:
+ + +
earth fixed, wave fixed and body fixed and are denoted by (x , y ,z),
(x*, y*, z*) and (x, y, z) respectively. All three co-ordinate systems
are right-handed and all velocity components, force components, etc.,
are positive in the positive direction of the axis concerned. All
rotations, angular velocity components, moment components, etc., are
positive in the clockwise sense looking along the positive direction
of the axis concerned from the origin, with the angles measured in
radians unless otherwise stated.
The wave fixed axis system has its origin on the calm water sur-
face at a crest position with the positive x*-axis being in the direct-
ion of wave travel, as shown in Figure Al. The positive z*-axis is
vertically downwards.
The earth fixed system is chosen such that it coincides with

(x*, y*, z*) at t = 0, therefore
x* = Ct + x +
y* = + y
z* :;
z+
The body fixed axis has its origin on the centreline amidships at
a depth corresponding to the calm water level when the ship is in calm
water. The positive x-axis is f6rward and parallel to the load water-
line, while the positive y-axis is to starboard (Figure A2).
Thus,
x* =x cos a cos L - Y sin a cos L + x*

y* = y cos a + x sin a
z* "" z cos L
The heading angle (a) is defined as the angle between the project-
ion of x vertically onto the horizontal plane and x* as shown in
Figure A3. ad is the desired heading angle and the heading error (~)
is defined as
1jJ = a - ad
1 15.
Figure At Wave fixed co-ordinate system
Figure A2 Body fixed co~ordinate system

1 l("
APPENDIX (B) NOI'ATION
A Wave amplitude
AP After perpendicular
1R Effective aspect ratio
Effective aspect ratio in the calm condition
Effective aspect ratio in the wave condition
Local half breadth
Half breadth
Calm water stability criteria
Wave speed
Added mass coefficient of half a rhombus calculated using
the Schwarz-christofel transformation
Cross flow drag coefficient
Local transverse added mass coefficient
Lift coefficient
Maximum rudder rate
Draft
Initial depth of water in ewe
Running depth of water in ewe
Draft at rudder in wave condition
z* displacement of bottom of strip
Draft of strip in wave condition
Depth of rudder in calm condition
Depth of rudder in wave condition
Force, generally
Fn Froude number
FP Forward perpendicular
GM Transverse metacentric height
g Acceleration due to gravity
h Wave height
Ix Moment of inertia about the x-axis
I z Moment of inertia about the z-axis
K Wave number (- 2w/~)
K Component of moment about x-axis

Roll moment derivative with respect to roll velocity
Roll moment derivative with respect to roll acceleration
1 17 .
Roll moment derivative with respect to all']u 1 ar velocity

Roll moment derivative with respect to angular ,H:<:(·l crdt ion
Roll moment derivative with respect to sway velocity
Roll moment derivative with respect to sway ilcech-rati on
Roll moment derivative with respect to hending nngle
Roll moment derivative with respect to rudder angle
Ship length
Lift on rudder
x co-ordinate of rudder
m Ship mass
Nr Yaw moment derivative with respect to angular velocity
Ni Yaw moment derivative with respect to angular acceleration
Nv Yaw moment derivative with respect to sway velocity
N v Yaw moment derivative with respect to sway acceleration
Na Yaw moment derivative with respect to heading angle
N6 Yaw moment derivative with respect to rudder angle
N6 c Value of N6 in the calm condition
.No Calm water value of N6 obtained experimentally
E
N6 w Value of N6 in the wave condition
N, Yaw moment derivative with respect to roll angle
NP Total yawing moment due to pressure
P Pressure
Pi Autopilot proportional control constant
P
2
Autopilot rate control constant
P Roll velocity
P Roll acceleration
r Angular velocity
r Angular acceleration
Sp Wetted surface on port side of strip
Sa Rudder area
SR Rudder area in calm condition
c
SRw Rudder area in wave condition
Ss Wetted surface on starboard side of strip
T Draft
U Ship speed
U Self-propulsion speed
o
u Surge velocity
u Surge acceleration
,- • ._~. 1 ' ••
11 p.
Relative velocity of wa.ter pa.st the ru,lder

Ship speed
v Sway velocity
v Sway acceleration
Orbital velocity at centre of area of rudder
Component of force along x-axis
Surge force derivative with respect to angular velocity
Surge force derivative with respect to surge velocity
Surge force derivative with respect to surge accelerdti.on
Xv Surge force derivative with respect to sway velocity

xIS Surge force derivative with respect to rudder angle
Xc Wave induced surge force
XpROP Thrust from the propeller
a
X Total force in x direction due to acceleration
a
XPOINT Acceleration force in x direction on a point
a Acceleration force in x direction on a transverse strip
XSTRIP
a Acceleration force in x direction on the transom
XTRANSOM
r Total force in x direction due to pressure
P
XSTRIP Pressure force in x direction on a transverse strip
P
XTRANSOM Pressure force in x direction on the transom
x co-ordinate of the centre of gravity
x* co-ordinate of the stern
x*c x* co-ordinate to centre of strip
x;, x* co-ordinate to port side of strip
*
~f value of xp on free surface
Xs* x* co-ordinate to starboard side of strip
*
xsf value of Xs* on free surface
~ * x* co-ordinate of the stern

Y Component of force along y-axis
Yr SWay force derivative with respect to angular velocity
Y r SWay force derivative with respect to angular acceleration
Yv SWay force derivative with respect to sway velocity
Y v SWay force derivative with respect to sway acceleration
Va. Sway force derivative with respect to heading angle
Yt5 Sway force derivative with respect to rudder angle
Y6 c Value of Y6 in the calm condi tion
Yt5 E Calm water value 6f Y15 obtained experimentally
11 9 .
Va lue o f Yo in th e wa ve condition
Sway for ce der iva t i ve wi th respect t o roll angle
In phase c omponent o f meas ure d sway force fr om PMM experiments
Out of phase compone nt o f measu red sway force from PMM
e xpe riments
ya Total force in y d i r e ction due t o acce l eration
a
YSTRIP Acce l e ration force in y direction on a transverse strip
yP Total force in y di re ction due t o pressure
P
YSTRIP Pressure force in y dire ction on a tra ns verse strip
y(v)
.
Y (v)
Measured sway force due to all s wa y ve locity terms
Me asured sway force due to all s way a c celeration terms
Sway amplitude of PMM os cillation
z d i~ placement of c entre of gravity
Heading angle
Desired beading angle
Yaw amplitude of PMM oscillation
.
a Angular velocity
a Angular acceleration
Drift angle
y Rudder chord
t:. Displacement
o Rudder angle
Oa Actual rudder angle
O~ Maximum rudder angle

•
°a Actual rudder rate
°d Desired rudder angle

6d Desired rudder rate
Oeq Equilibrium rudder angle
£ Phase shift
z co-ordinate of centre of a re a of rudde r
n Ratio of relative velocity o f water pas t the rudder to
the ship velocity
n Wave elevation
e Angle between tangent to the wa t erl i ne a nd the c entrelin e
me a s ured in such p way that it i s ,ne ga t i v e t owards the
bow and pos itive towa rds the s t ern
Wavelength
] 20 .
llc Aspect ratio factor for rudd e r caused by its proximity to

,the hull in the ca lm wate r condition
llw Aspec t ratio factor for rudd er ca used by its proximity to
the hull in the wave condition
Non-dime nsional x* co-ordi nate of the stern
p Ma ss density of water
(J Cl earance between the ba se lin e and the bottom of the
rudder
T Pitch angle
Roll Angle
Heading error (= a - ad )
Heading error rate
w Frequency
Encounter frequency
Superscript I indicates that the quantity has b een non - dime n sionalise d
as follows :
Non-dimensional mass = ml = m/~ p L'
Non-dimensional force = Xl = X/~ P L2 U2

Non-dimensional velocity component - Vi = v/U
Non-dimen sional angular velocity component = r l = r L/U
Non-dimensional acceleration component = Vi = V L/U 2
Non-dimensional angular acceleration component = rl = r L2 /U 2
Etc .
12 1 .
APPENDIX (C) SlJM'1ARY OF CQ\1PUTER PRCX;RAMS
Mai n Program Subroutine s Description
FRANK2 Calcul ates transverse AVM for each

station . Inp ut file Offset data ;
Output file = AVM data .
INDAT Reads in data file
SHAPE2 Calculates g eometric qu a ntities for
each segment.
FIN02 Calculates normal d e rivati ves of
logarithmitic singularities .
MATINV Call ed by FIND2 , inverts matrix by
pivot method (Library routine)
DERIV l Calculates manoeuvring derivations in

wave condition. Input files = Offset
d~ta , AVM data .
SUB l Reads in data and balances ship on
wave.
VAVE Called by SUB1, calculates hydrostatics .
BLKl )
These short subroutines are involved
)
BLK6
) with the numerical integration .
BLKB )
SUB3 Calculates rudder derivatives.
I, ,
FORCE 3 Calculat es Ya , Na and X~
Input files = Offset data , AVM d a ta.
SUB 1 Reads 1n data and bala nces ship on wa v e .
VAVE Called by SUB! , calculates hydrostatics .
)
BLK1, BLK2 , )
BLK3 , BLK4 , ) These short subroutines are involved
)
BLKS , BLK6,) with the numerica l integration.
BLK7 , BLK8 , )
)
BLK9
BLK1 0 Calculates longitudinal force
ROOTS 1 Calculates roots of differe ntial

equations .
l ' 2.
Main Program Subroutines Des cripU on
C02AEF Library routine wh ich calculates the

roots of polynomials usi ng the method
of Grant and Hi tchen.
READ Reads digitised data from disc , plots

records and calcul ates required values.
PLT DEV
MARGIN
PACK IN
Library routines which organise
JBAXES
plotting of records.
TITLE
JOIN PT
ENDPLT
WAVES Digital simulation of surging.

SUB1 Reads in data and balances s hip on
wave.
VAVE Called by SUB!, calculates hydrostatics .
SUB2 Calculates trans verse AVM.
SUB3 calculates rudder de rivatives
SAMPLE Digital program which controls EAI2000

analogue computer for broaching
simulation.
Input files = constant settings;
variable settings.
SETCK Library routine which initialises
EA12000
BS1M2 Reads in variable coefficients and
organises them in arrays.
COEFF1 Reads A to D values and u ses straight
line interpolation to reset D to A's.
+ EA1 Hybrid Library routines for altering priority, changing

mode of EA12000 and setting and reading compone~t valu es .
123 .
APPENDIX (D) PIANAR MJI'ION MEO-iANISM ANALYSIS
This appendix d ea ls with the PMM ana lysi s technique used to obtain
the results p resen ted in Chap te r 5. The d a t a ha nd ling procedure is de s-
cribed a nd this is foll owed by a br ief outline of conve n tiona l PMM
ana lys is a nd its problems. The me thod u s ed he re i s t h en expla ined ,
together with examples of s ome of the results.
Data Handling:
The results were r e corded in analogue f o~ a t NMI u s ing a Raca l

14-channel magnetic t ape recorder r e cor ding at 1.875 i nches p er second .
They were then &i ~itised and stored on disc by r epla ying at r eal time
through the A to D converters of the PDP 11/40 at Gl asgow University.
The sample rate was 8 samples/sec a nd the da ta wa s s~or ed i n block s of
1024 samples. Each run was then check ed by plotting on the Tek tronix
digital plotter to obtain records similar to thos e s hown in Fi gure s D1
to D4. For the lower frequency runs more than one block of 1024
samples was required to cover the whole run .
A computer program was written to an~ ly s e the re sults, but many

of the runs were checked manually using both the original U/V recor d s
·and the plots of the digitised results. Agreeme nt with the computer
results was very good.
Convent ionaZ PMM Analysis:

Considering the sway force only in the dynamic p ure sway condit -
ion , the equations of motion are *
y = Yo sin wt
v = yO w cos wt D1
2
V = - Yo w sin wt
and the force equation is
y = y v + (y . - m) v . D2
v v
*·The me thod for the s way f orce in the pur e sway experiment i s described ,
but the te chnique is simi lar for the o the r coefficien ts .
..,• .
,.....
~~
N
(I') c:Il ~ (!j
(S) (!j
-
~
E
<.D
l!i
Q
:::=: 11
(S)
<X> ~
I
z
::J ~
u
, I
J -....:.-
== -
C1J
I 11\
<0
11\
lSI U
lSI fl)
CI)
'-
("I")
Q .
0 ~ II
Z ~
:::s;:
~ 3
~
u
0
-.J
(0
-
N
VI
E
N
lSI N
lSI (!j
«l co It
S
0
0
z
ltJ
-J
- --=0:
Z
W
-J
:::>
~
'-
~
(/)
5:1
~
Q.
x:
~
~
E
fl)
u
C
lSI
..,.
lSI >-
ro
~---
~
~ c.Il
~
::J
a..
.....
0
~
::J
........ 0'1
i.i:l
5f
(!j
CSI
N
-:s:=-
---
......
I
lSI
~
lSI
-
Gl
CSI
Gl
I
I
0
re
I
1
lSI
~
I
I
CSI
~
I
CSI
t:l
r--
~
0
.
0
\I) ,
CSI ..,.CSI lSI
N
I
0
'f
0
~
3!lnV$ O~V"'I~OJ LN3W3:lV1dSIO 3DM!l 1.ft

12 5.
12 .
.
I
127 .
lI
E
....r
0
II
Ito
o
z -k:11\
VI
'tJ
Il)
"-
CD
0
"
CIt II) 3
-
(S) (II
&
Cl I)
<0 1/1'
l/)
. ~
E
t'--
a
z -,I w ....r
~
N
Z
::J
0::
VI
"
::>
0
II>
&
x:>
'" ~
C
~
l/)
.~
:J
a.
...:r
ID 0
CD
N ell
"-
:J
0)
~I
I
II)
m
II) II)
ta . lX . ~
lNJWJOY1dSIO
II) CSI
, ~
l.
,. , ('
1 .0.
" D3
which can be written
Y = Yout cos wt + Yin sin wt D4
where
From 04 it can be seen how, in principal, Y and (Y. - m) can be

v v
obtained from the force record, yet). However, Eq. 02 makes two very
important assumptions: (1) the relation between side force and sway
velocity or sway acceleration is linear, and (2) the force is entirely
dependent on sway velocity and acceleration at the present moment and
unaffected by their past history.
These assumptions imply that Y and (Y. - m) are constants and

v v
should not vary with frequency (w) or amplitude (YO). The results of
PMM experiments show mark~d dependence on both wand YO' however, and
conventional analysis techniques cannot readily determine which of the
assumptions made above is invalid. It is usual practice to plot the
derivatives against a base of w or w2 and extrapolate to zero frequency
to obtain the "slow motion derivative" which is then used in the equat-
ions of motion. This procedure is not very accurate, particularly when
using a conventional towing tank where the length of run is quite short
and the frequency quite high.
Modified AnaLysis:
The aim of the analysis presented here is to determine how accur-
ate the two basic assumptions are for the range of amplitudes and
frequencies tested and to provide a more reliable estimate of the
coefficients to be used in the equations of motion.
The model was tested as normal and the force recorded as a funct-
ion of time. The major advantage of dOing PMM experiments in the ewe
compared to doing them in the more conventional way in a towing tank
was the virtually unlimited run length. This permitted lower frequenc-
ies to be used and more cycles to be obtained, reducing the extrapolat-
ion difficulties of the conventional method and increasing accuracy.
Rather than assume an equation of the form D2, which immediately
invokes the two assumptions to be tested, it is simply stated that the
side force will be due to three things: (1) sway velocity, (2) sway
acceleration, and (3) memory effects. The make-up of these components
is at present unknown and that is what the analysis is directed to
determine. The principle behind the analysis technique is to record
the force when the contribution of one of the first two of these com-
,ponents is zero and then to vary the contribution of the third (by
varying past history) whilst keeping the remaining one constant. The
resultant plots give an indication of the importance of the memory
effects and the amount of non-linearity separately.
From Eq. D1 it can be seen that at time t = 0, 2n/w, 4n/w, .....

the motion become.8
v = Yo w
v=0 =y
and at
t = n/w, 3n/w, 5n/w, ••••• the motion becomes
v = - y
ow
v =o =y
Thus, any force acting on the model at these times must be due to
(1) and (3) above, since there is no sway acceleration. The value of
v is easily determined and it is possible to obtain the same value
using various combinations of Yo and w, i.e. different past histories.
Thus, if a plot of this force (denoted y(v» is made against v (±yO w)
for the different amplitudes tested, then the difference between the
curves is an indication of the memory effect. The deviation of these
curves from a straight line shows the amount of non-linearity. In
addition, for the sway velocity only, it is possible to plot the steady
state results which have yet another past history. An example of this
plot is given in Figure D5, where it can be seen that for this case the
memory effect is negligible (at least for the low frequencies), but
that non-linearities start to have influence above about v = 0.2 mise
The coefficient, (yv)' is obtained by taking the slope of the curve at
the origin. The principal objection to this type of analysis is the
130.
fact that by using paints much of the data is lost and the result is
inaccurate. For the results presented here, the force curves were
smoothed using neighbouring samples, reducing irregularities, and the
long run time allowed sufficient cycles to be recorded to increase
accuracy. If the assumptions discussed above were correct, all the
points on Figure D5 would lie on the one straight line and y(v) would
equal Yau t.
It is possible to plot y(v) /yO W against w2 as in Figure D6,

which corresponds to y /YOWin the conventional analysis and the
out
difficulty of extrapolating to zero frequency can be seen.
If a similar procedure is applied at time t = 3n/2w, 7n/2w,

Iln/2w, ••••• and at t = 5n/2w, 9n/2w, 13n/2w, •••.• , then the curve
a f Y(v) aga i
nst·v can be obtaine d as in Figure D.
7 Here i t can b e seen
that both non-linearity and memory effects are negligible over the
range tested. This is because all the points lie on one straight line.
The slight scatter at the low v values is due to the fact that the
forces are very small, resulting in a larger percentage error. This
2
is much worse for the plot of y(v) /yo w against w2 , as the small
2
force is divided by a small number (Yo W ), resulting in a large error.
This is shown in Figure D8 where the difficulty of extrapolating the
curve to zero frequency can be seen. However, for the more accurate
higher frequencies the single straight line parallel to the x-axis can
be seen, implying that the coefficient does not vary with frequency or
amplitude, i.e. that the two assumptions are correct for this case.
The coefficient (Y.v - m) can be oQtained by taking the slope of

the line in Figure D7. This line should pass through the origin and
(v)
the slight offset is attributed to a small error in obtaining Y
from the force record.
EXactly the same procedure can be applied to obtain the moment

coefficients from the pure sway records. The pure yawing case is
·slightly more complex when in the wave condition, due to the depend-
ence of the force on heading angle, as described in Chapter 4.
However, the same basic principle holds.
131.
v (m/s)
o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

o o
Q()(
)( 0 )(.
°Xe
-100
o
)( 0
-200 )(
a
)(
-300
0 Yo = 0.4m
y (v)
0 Yo = 0.6m
)( Steady state o
-400
(v)
Fiqure 05 Y for varying VJ hiqh speed calm water
1 32.
w2 (rad/sec)2
o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

a -r--------J---------~--------~--------~--------L-
-200
o
-500 0
o Yo = O.4m
-600
Cl Yo - 0.6m
-700
Fiqure D6 y(V) /YoW for varyinq w2 , high speed calm water

133.
o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

o
o
o 00
o
-50
o
o
o
-100
0 0
-150 o y = 0.4m
o
o y ... 0.6m
o o
-200
Figure D7 y(V) for varying Vi high speed calm water

134.
w2 (rad/sec) 2
o
o +-________0.2
- L_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
0.4
~
0.6 0.8
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _L __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~
1.0
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ L _
Q o a
8
o
-1000 o
-2000
-3000
o y=0.4m
o y- 0.6m
-4000
Figure D8 high speed calm water

135
References
(1) Du. Cane, P., Goodrich, G. J • : "The Following Sea,
Broaching and Surging". Trans. RINA Vo1.104, April 1962.
(2) Conolly, J.E.:"Stability and Control in Waves: A
Survey of the Problem". Proceedings of Int. Symposium on
Directional Stability and Control of Bodies Moving in
water, 1972.
(3) Du Cane, P.:"Mode1 Evaluation of 4 High Speed Hull
Forms in Following and Head Sea Conditions". Proceedings
Symposium on the Behaviour of Ships in a Seaway, 1957.
(4) "Fast Container Vessel for Australia". NSMB Report,
May 1979.
(5) Lyster, C.A., Watson, D.G.M. Contributions to
reference (24).
(6) Boese, P.:"Steering a Ship in a Heavy Following
Seaway". Institut fur Schiffbau, Hamburg University, March
1970. DRIC Translation No.5700.
(7) Paulling, J.R., Wood, P.D.:"Numerical Simulation of
Large-Amplitude Ship Motion in astern seas". Seakeeping
1953-1973, SNAME Publication, 1974.
(8) Paulling, J.R., Oakley, O.H., Wood, P.D.:"Ship
Capsizing in Heavy Seas: the correlation of theory and
experiments". Int. Conf. on Stability of Ships and Ocean
Vehicles, University of Strathclyde, 1975.
(9) Davidson, K.S.M.:"A Note on the Steering of Ships in
Following Seas". 7th Int.· Congress of Applied Mechanics -
London, 1948.
(10) Eda, H.:"Directional Stability· and Control of Ships in
Waves". J.' of Ship Res., September, 1972.
(11) Eda, H.:"Yaw Control in Waves". Proceedings of Int.
Symposium on Directional Stability and Control of Bodies
moving in water, 1972.
(12) Eda, H., Crane, C.L.: "Steering Characteristics of
Ships in Calm water and Waves". SNAME Vol.73, 1965.
(13) Rydill, I,,.F.:"A Linear Theory for Steered Motion of
Ships in Waves". Trans. RINA 1959.
(14) Boese, P.s"Steering a Ship in a Heavy Following
Seaway". DRIC Transl. No.2807.
(15) Wahab, R., Swaan, W.A.:"Course-keeping and Broaching
of Ships in Following Seas". J~ of Ship Res., April 1964.
(16) Grim, O.K.:"The Ship in a Following Sea (Das Schiff in
von achtern auflaufender See)". DTMB translation 313,
February 1965.
136
(17) Grim, O.K.:"Surging Motion and Broaching Tendencies in

a Severe Irregular Sea". Davidson Laboratory Report R-929,
November 1962.
(18) Hamamoto, M.: "On the Hydrodynamic Derivatives for the
Directional Stability of Ships in Following Seas (Part 1)".
J. of Soc. of NA of Japan, Vol.130, 1971.
(19) Hamamoto, M.:"On the Hydrodynamic Derivatives for the
Directional Stability of Ships in Following Seas (Part 2)".
J. of Soc. of NA of Japan, Vol.133, 1973.
(20) Nicholson, K.:"Some Parametric Model Experiments to
Investigate Broaching-to". International Symposium on the
Dynamics of Marine Vehicles and Structures in Waves,
London, April 1974.
(21) Reni1son, M.R.:"A Note on the Analysis of AMTE(H)
Broaching Records". University of Glasgow, Naval
Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Report No.
NAOE-HL-80-25, 1980.
(22) Reni1son, M.R.:"Broaching in a Heavy Following Sea".

The Motor Ship, September, 1980.
(23) Hawes, A.P.A.:"Icing and Broaching Experienced Onboard

HMS Jaguar off Iceland". AMTE(H) TM800l5, 1980.
(24) Reni1son, M.R., Driscoll, A.:"Broaching An
Investigation into the Loss of Directional Control in
Severe Following Seas". RINA Spring Meetings, 1981.
(25) Abkowitz, M.A.:"Stability and Motion Control of Ocean
Vehicles". Pub. MIT Press, 1969.
(26) Principles of Naval Architecture, Ed. J.P. Comstock,
SNAME New York.
(27) Frank, T., Loeser, D.J., Scragg, C.A.,· Sibul, O.J.,
Webster, .W.C., Wehausen, J.V.:"Transient-Manoeuvre Testing
and the Equations of Manoeuvring". 11th Symposium Naval
Hydrodynamics.
(28) Gill, A.D.:"The Analysis and Synthesis of Ship

Manoeuvring" •. Trans. RINA 1979.
( 2 9 ) Booth, T. B • , Bishop, R. E. D. : "The Planar Motion
Mechanism" •. A.E.W. Crown Copyright, 1973.
(30) Schiff, L.I., Gimprich, M.:"Automatic Steering of
Ships by Proportional Control". Trans. SNAME 1948.
(31) Wylie, C.R.:"Advanced Engineering Mathematics". Pub.

McGraw-Hill Inc.
(32) Clark, D.:"Some Aspects of the Dynamics of Ship
Steering". PhD. Thesis University of London, 1976.
(33) Atlar, M.z"Frank Close-Fit Computer Program for the

137
Calculation of Added Mass and Damping Coefficients of

Oscillating Cylinders". University of Glasgow, Naval
NAOE-HL-8l-09, 1981.
(34) Milne-Thompson, L.M.:"Theoretical Hydrodynamics".
Pub. Macmillan and Co. Ltd., 1955.
(3S) Clark, D.:"A Two-Dimensional Strip Method for Surface
Ship Hull Derivatives: Comparison of Theory with
Experiments on a.Segmented Tanker Model". J. Mech. Eng.
Sci. 1972.
(36) Renilson, M.R.:"An Investigation of the Heel-induced

Yaw, Moment and Sway Force on a Displacement Vessel Under
Way". University of Glasgow, Naval Architecture and Ocean
Engineering, Report No. NAOE-HL-79-1S, 1979.
(37) Renilson, M.R.:"The Effect of Forward Motion in
Following Regular Waves on the Transverse Stability of a
Displacement Vessel". University of Glasgow, Naval
NAOE-FYP-78-07, 1978.
(38) Renilson, M.R.:"Preliminary Experiments to Investigate

Heel Induced Yaw Moment on a Displacement Vessel Under
Way". University of Glasgow, Naval Architecture and Ocean
Engineering, Report No. NAOE-HL-79-07, 1979.
(39) Hogben, N.:"The 'Wavedozer ' : a Travelling Beam
Wavemaker". 11th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, 1976.
(40) Standing,.R.G.:"Proving Trials of the Wavedozer, a
Travelling Beam Wavemaker". NPL Report Ship 195, 1976.
(41) Driscoll, A., Renilson, M.R.:"The Wavedozer, a System
for Generating Stationary Waves in a Circulating Water
Channel". AMTE(H) TM 80013, 1980.
(42) Steele, B.N., Turner, R.T.:"Design and Construction of
the NPL Circulating Water Channel". Symposium on the Expt.
Facilities for Ship Research in Great Britain, May 1967.
(43) Gill, A.D., Price, W.G.:"Determination of the

Manoeuvring Derivatives of a Ship Model Using.a Horizontal
Planar Motion Mechanism in a Circulating Water Channel".
Trans. RINA, 1977.
(44) Smith, R.:"Analogue Computer Programming Manual Vol.II

Advanced Techniques". Pub. Electronic Associates Limited
Burgess Hill, Sussex.
·(45) Chapman, R.B. : "Prediction of Free Surface Effects on

Ship Manoeuvring". Eleventh Symposium on Naval
Hydrodynamics, London 1976.
(46) Chapman, R.B.:"Numerical Solution for Hydrodynamic

forces· on a Surface-Piercing Plate Oscillations in yaw and
sway". 1st Int. Conf. on Numerical Ship Hydrodynamics,
138
October 1975.
(47) Chapman, R.B.:"Free-Surface Effects for Yawed

Surface-Piercing Plates". J. of Ship Res. Vol.20, 1976.
(48) Kasai, H.:"A Semi-empirical Approach to the Prediction
of Manoeuvring Derivatives (1st Report)". Trans. of the
West Japan Soc. of NA's, No.58, August 1979.
(49) Yumuro, A.:"Influences of Propeller and Rudder on

Manoeuvring Stability Derivates". Naval Architecture and
Ocean Engineering, Vol.l6,1978.
139
The following is a general bibliography of some of the

work made use of that is not directly referred to in the
Text. It is grouped alphabetically by first named author
in general sUbject headings.
General Seakeeping
Bishop, R.E.D., Price, W.G., Tam, P.K.Y.:"A Unified Dynamic
Analysis of Ship Response to Waves". Trans, RINA 1977.
Brooks Peters, J.:"Digital Synthesis of Modelled Irregular
Seaway Time Histories". Proceedings 18th General Meeting
of the ATTC Vol.2, Annapolis, Maryland, 23-25 August, 1977.
Faltinsen, O.M.:"Theoretical Seakeeping, A State of the Art

Survey". Int. Symposium on Advances in Marine Technology~
at the Norwegian Institute of Technology, June 1979.
Fein, J.A., McCreight, K.K., Kallio, J.A.:"Seakeeping of
the SSP Kaimalino". AlAA/SNAME Advanced Marine Vehicles
Conference, 1978.
Grim, O.K.:"Motions of a Ship in a Head or Following Wave".

Hamburg Model Basin Report 1303.
Grim, '·O.K.: "The Influence of Speed on Heaving "and Pitching
Motions in Smooth Water and on the Forces Generated in Head
Seas". Hamburg Model Basin, HSUA Report No.1197, October
1959.
Grim, O.K.:"A Method for a More Precise Computation of

Heaving and Pitching Motions both in Smooth Water and in
Waves". 3rd Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics,
Scheveningen, September 1960.
Heather, R.G., Nicholoson, K., Stevens, J.s.:"Seakeeping

and the Small Warship". Symposium on' Small Fast Warships
and $ecurity Vessels Paper 3, March 1978.
Hosoda, R.:"The Added Resistance of Ships in Regular
Oblique Waves". Selected Papers from the Journal of the
Society of Naval Architects of Japan, Vol.12, 1974.
Kjeldsen, S.P., Myrhaug, D.:"Breaking Waves in Deep Water

and Resulting Wave Forces". Norwegian Maritime Research,
No.2, 1979.
Lloyd, A.R.J.M.:"The Hydrodynamic Performance of Roll

Stabiliser Fins. AEW Report 8/73 (Unclassified).
Lloyd, A.R.J.M., Brown, J.e., Anslow, J.F.W.:"Motions and

Loads on Ship Models in Regular Oblique Waves". RINA
Spring Meeting, 1979.
Loukakis, T.A.:"Computer Aided Prediction of Seakeeping

Performance in Ship Design". MIT Department of N.A. and
M.E. Report No.70-3, August 1970.
140
McCreight, W.R.:"Exciting Forces on a Moving Ship in

Waves". MIT Phd Thesis, September 1973.
Murdey, D.C.:"Experimental Techniques for the Prediction of

Ship Seakeeping Performance". Int. Symposium on Advances
in Marine Technology June 1979.
Odabasi, A.Y., Hearn, G.E.:"Seakeeping Theories: what is

the choice?" NECIES, November 1977.
Ogilvie, T.F.:"Fundamental Assumptions in Ship-Motion
Theory". International Symposium on the Dynamics of Marine
Vehicles and Structures in Waves, 1974.
Ogilvie, T.F., Beck, R.F.:"Transfer Functions for
Predicting Ship Motions: A review of the theory".
Seakeeping 1953-1973, SNAME Pub., 1974.
Salveson, N.:"Second-Order Steady-State Forces and Moments

on Surface Ships in Oblique Regular Waves". International
Symposium on the Dynamics of Marine Vehicles and Structures
in Waves, 1974.
Salveson, N.:"Ship Motions in Large Waves". symposium on

Applied Maths dedicated to the late Professor R. Timman,
11-13 January, 1978.
Schmitke, R.T.:"Comparisons of Theory with Experiment for

Ship Rolling in Oblique Seas". Proceedings of 18th General
Meeting of the ATTC, Vol.2, 23-25 August, 1977, Annapolis,
Maryland.
Schmitke,.R.T.:"Ship Sway, Roll and Yaw Motions in Oblique

Seas". Trans. SNAME, 1978.
Standing, R.G.:"Application of Wave Diffraction Theory".

Int. Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, Vol.l3,
pp.49-72, 1978.
Sugai, K.:"A Model Test on Hydrodynamic Pressures Acting on

an Ore-Carrier in Oblique Waves". Int. Symposium on the
Dynamics of Marine Vehicles and Structures in Waves, 1974.
Takagi, M.:"An Examination of the Ship Motion Theory as

Compared with Experiments". International Symposium on the
Dynamics of Marine Vehicles and Structures in Waves, 1974.
Tasai, F.:"On the Swaying, Yawing and Rolling Motions of

Ships in Oblique Waves". Selected papers from the Journal
of the Society of Naval Architects of Japan.
Tasai, F., Sugimuru, Y., Abe, M., Arakawa, A., Kobayashi,

M.:"Model Experiments and Theoretical Calculations in Waves
on an Ultra-High Speed Container Ship with Triple Screws".
(1972) DRIC Translation No.4832.
1 11
Transverse Stability and ~~E~~~inq
Baker, G.S., Keary, E.M.:"The Effect of the Longitudinr'll

Motion of a Ship on its Statical Transverse Stability".
Trans. RINA 191B.
Barr, R.A.:"Dynamic Stability and Capsizing". Proceedings
of the 18th General Meeting of the A.T.T.C. Vol.2,
Annapolis, Maryland, 23-25 August, 1977.
Bird, H., Odabasi, A.Y.:"State of Art: Past, Present and
Future". International Conference on Stability of Ships
and Ocean Vehicles, 1975.
Ferguson, A.M., Conn, J.F.C.:"The Effect of Forward Motion
on the Transverse Stability of a Displacement Vessel".
~rans. lESS Vo1.113, January 1970 •
.. I
Marwood, W.J., Bailey, D.:tlTransverse Stability of

Round-Bottomed High Speed Craft Underway". Ship Div., NPL,
Report 98, 1968.
Miller, E.R.:"A Scale Model Investigation of the Intact
Stability of Towing and Fishing Vessels". International
Conference on Stability of Ships and Ocean Vehicles,
University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, March 1975.
Millward, A.: "Transverse Stability of a . Fast Round Bilge
Hull". U~iversity of Liverpool Report ..
Morrall, A.:"Capsizing of Small Trawlers". Trans. RINA
1979.
Obrastsev, W.B.:"Method of Calculating the Restoring Moment

of a Moving Ship". Proceedings of the Leningrad
Shipbuilding Institute, translated by the University of
Michigan, March 1970.
Obrastsev, W.B.:"Experimental Investigation of Influence of

Ship's Speed on its Transverse Stability". Proceedings of
the Leningrad Shipbuilding Institute, translated by the
University of Michigan, March 1970.
Sobo1ov, G.V., Obrastov, W.B.:"The Calculation of the

Righting Moment of a Moving Ship with an Initial Angle of
Heel". Proceedings of the Leningrad Shipbuilding
Institute, Translated by the University of Michingan, March
1970.
Suhr~ier, K.R.:"An Experimental Investigation on the Roll
Stability of a Semi-Displacement Craft at Forward Speed".
Symposium on Small Fast Warships and Security Vessels Paper
9, March 1978.
Tsakonas, S.:"Effect of Appendage and Hull Form on

Hydrodynamic Coefficients of Surface Ships". SIT Report
No.740, July 1959. .
Watanbe, I.:"On the Effect of the Forward Velocity on the

142
Roll Damping Moment". Papers of Ship Research Institute

No.5l, Tokyo, Japan, February 1977.
General Manoeuvring
Astrom, K.J., Kallstrom, C.G., Norrbin, N.H., Bystrom,
L.:"The Identification of Linear Ship Steering Dynamics
Using Maximum Likelihood Parameter Estimation". Pub. of
the Swedish State Shipbuilding Experiment Tank, No.75,
1975.
Burcher, R.K.:"Developments in Ship Manoeuvrability".
Trans. RINA 1972.
Burcher, R.K.:"Model Testing". Proceedings of Int. Symp.

on Directional Stability and Control of Bodies Moving in
Water, 1972.
Crane, C.L.:"Manoeuvring Trials of 278000-Dwt Tanker in
Shallow and Deep Waters". SNAME Annual Meeting, 15-17
November, 1979.
Davidson, K.S.M., Schiff, L.I.:"Turning and Course-Keeping
Qualities". Trans. SNAME Vol.54, 1946.
Eda, H., Falls, R., Walden, D.:"Ship Manoeuvring Safety

Studies". SNAME Annual Meeting, 15-17 November, 1979.
F~jino, H.:"Directional Stability and Cont~ol of a Vessel
in Restricted Waters". Proceedings of Int. Symposium on
Water, 1972.
Gill, A.D., Price, W.G.:"Experimental Evaluation of the

Effects of Water Depth and Speed on the Manoeuvring
Derivatives of Ship Models". Trans. RINA 1977,
(Supplementary Paper).
Lewison, G.R.G.:"The Development of Ship Manoeuvring

Equations". NPL Report SHIP 176, December 1973.
McVoy, J.L.:"Prediction of a Submarines Trajectory by an

Approximate Solution to its Equation of Motion". Naval
Engineers Journal, August 1979.
Marti.n, M.: "Analysis of ~atera1 Force and Moment caused by

Yaw during Ship Turning". Davidson Laboratory Report No.
R792, March 1961.
Newman, J.N.:"Some Theories for Ship Manoeuvring".
Proceedings of Int. Symposium on Directional Stability and
Control of Bodies Moving in Water, 1972.
Newman, J.N.:"Theoretical Methods in Ship Manoeuvring".
Int. Symposium on Advances in Marine Technology, June
1979.
Newman, J.N.:"Marine Hydrodynamics". MIT Press, 1977.

143
Nomoto, K.:"Problems and Requirements of Directional

Stability and Control of Surface Ships". Proceedings of
Int. Symposium on Directional Stability and Control of
Bodies Moving in Water, 1972.
Norrbin, N.H.:"Circle Tests with a Radio-Controlled Model
of a Cargo Liner". Pub. of the Swedish State Shipbuilding
Experiment Tank, No.57, 1965.
Sutherland, W.H., Korvin-Kroukovsky, B.V.:"Some Notes on
Directional Stability and Control of Ships in Rough Seas".
SIT Report Note No.91, October 1948.
Thurman, G.D.:"Yaw Motion Stability: Twin-Screw
Twin-Rudder Ships Some Model and Ship Results".
Proceedings of Int. Symp. on Directional Stability and
Control of Bodies Moving in Water, 1972.
Autopilots and Control Theory
Afremoff, A~Sh., Nikolaev, E.P.:"Yawing of a Ship Steered

by an Automatic Pilot in Rough Seas". Proceedings of Int.
Symposium on Directional Stability and Control of Bodies
Moving in Water, 1972.
Fuwa, T., Nimura, T.:"A Consideration on the Extraordinary
Response of Model Ship's Automatic Steering System in
Following Sea (English Abstract)". 26th General Meeting of
Ship Research Institute, 1975.
Koyama, T., Kose, K., Hasegawa, K.:"A. Study on the
Instability Criterion of the Manual Steering of Ships".
Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering Vol.16, 1978.
Whyte; P.H.:"A Note on the Application of Modern Control
Theory to Ship Roll Stabilisation". Proceedings of the
18th General Meeting of the ATTC Vol.2, 23-25 August, 1977,
Annapolis, Maryland.
Calculation of Manoeuvring Derivatives

Aklurst, R.:"Calculation of Stability and Control
Derivatives for Surface Ships and Application to Ship
Design". A.E.W. Technical Memorandum No.26/67, September
1967.
Dawes, J.E.:"Calculation of Slow Motion Derivatives for a

Surface Ship Using the IBM 1130 Computer". AMTE Report
R4l804.
Fedayaevsky, K.K., Sobolev, G.V.:"Application of the

Results of Low Aspect-Ratio Wing Theory to the Solution of
Some Steering Problems". Proceedings Symposiun on the
Behaviour of Ships in a Seaway, 7-10 September, 1957.
Fuwa, T.:"Hydrodynamics Forces Acting on a Ship in Oblique

Towing". J. of the Soc. of NA's of Japan, Vol.134,
114
December 1973.
Jacobs, W.R.:"Method of Predicting Course Stability and
Turning Qualities of ~hips". Davidson Laboratory Report
945, March 1963.
Jacobs, W.R.:"Estimation of Stability Derivatives and
Indices of Various Ship Forms, and Comparison with
Exp~rimenta1 Results". J. of Ship Res., September 1966.
Sundstrom, 0.: "Experiments with a Surface-Piercing Flat
Plate". Symposium on Small Fast Warships and Security
Vessels Paper 9, March 1978.
Sundstrom, O.:"Measurments of Side Forces and Moments on a
Ship Model and a Comparison with Some Simplified Theories".
The Royal Institute of Tech. in Stockholm Dept. of
Hydrodynamics - TRITA-HYO-78-03. August 1978.
Wu, T.Y., Newman, J • N. : "Unsteady Flow Around a Slender
Fish-Like Body". Proceedings of Int. Symp. on
Water, 1972.
Planar Motion Mechanism

Bishop, R.E.D., Parkinson, A.G. :""On the Planar Motion
Mechanism Used in Ship Model Testing" • Trans-. R.Soc.
Lond: (A), Vol.266, February 1970.
Bishop, R.E.D., Burcher, R.K., Price, W.G.:"The 5th Annual
Fairey Lecture, On the Linear Representation of Fluid
FC?rces,and Moments in Unsteady Flow". J. of Sound and
V1brat1ons, 29(1) pp113-128, 1973.
Functional Analysis in Ship

..
Bishop, R.E.D., Burcher , R K , Price, W.G.:"The Uses of
Dynamics". Trans. R.Soc.
Lond. (A) Vo1.332 , 1973.
Bishop, R.E.D., Price, W.G., Tam, P.K.Y.:"A Unified Dynamic

Analysis of Ship Response to Waves". Trans. RINA, 1977.
Chislett, M.S., Smith, L.W.:"A Brief Description of the HyA
Large Amplitude PMM System". Proceedings of Int.
symposium on Directional Stability and Control of Bodies
Moving in water, 1972.
Grim, o.K., Ottmann, P., Sharma, S.D., Wolff, K.:"CPMC - A

Novel Fa~ility for Planar Motion Testing of Ship Models".
"11th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics UCL London, 29th
March - 2nd April, 1976.
Zunderdorp, H.J., Buitenhek, M.:"Oscillator-Techniques at

the Shipbuilding Laboratory Tech. University Delft
Report No.lll, No~ember 1963.

1981renilsonphd PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1981renilsonphd PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1981renilsonphd PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Renilson, M.R. (1981) The broaching of ships in following seas.

A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or

This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first

When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the

Glasgow Theses Service

A thesis subnitted for the Degree of Doctor

BEST COpy AVAILABLE.

VARIABLE PRINT QUALITY

. . Froontispiece "Broaching-to'" (Taken from Ref. 2)

The two aims of this work were: (1) to develop a theoretical

The first step was to develop a mathematical model based on the

Constrained model experiments were also --carried out in calm

It was then possible to study the stability of the lateral and

Finally, possible improvements to the simulation were suggested

This thesis is based on work carried out at the University of

The experiments carried out at the National Maritime Institute

The encouragement and interest shown by Mr. P.O. Marshall

The author would like to record a special thanks to Mr. A.

Finally, the author would like to thank Mrs. H. Taylor and

Except whepe pefepence is made to

Previous Work on Broaching 1

Chapter 2 MATHEMATICAL MODEL 12

The Equations of Motion 14

Chapter 3 CALCULATION OF THE HYDRODYNAMIC COEFFICIENTS 22

CONTENTS~ Contd. Page

Chapter 4 CONSTRAINED MODEL EXPERIMENTS 43

Chapter 5 'COMPARISON BETWEEN THEORETICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL

Chapter 6 THE EFFECT OF THE VARIATION OF THE COEFFICIENTS

The Wave-Induced Longitudinal Force 78

CONTENTS" Contd. Page

Chapter 8 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS 108

APPENDIX (A) - CO-oRDlNATE SYSTEMS 114

APPENDIX (B) - NOTATION 116

APPENDIX (C) SUMMARY OF COMPUTER PROGRAMS 121

APPENDIX (D) - PLANAR MOTION MECHANISM ANALYSIS 123

Frontispiece "Broaching to" (ii)

1.1 Plot of steered run 5

2.1 Profile of the ship in two different positions 12

3.1 Profile of the hull in a wave 22

3.3 Pressure against depth for 3 positions in a

3.8 Rhombus formed from trapezium 34

3.9 Z-plane for Schwarz-Christoffel transformation 35

4.1 Schematic diagram of experiments in ewe 44

LIST OF FIGURES, Contd. Page

4.5 Sway force and yaw moment against speed 50

4.8 A/h against running water depth 56

5.1 Trim as a function of ~ 71

5.13 (Yf-mxG)I as a function of ~ 77

·5.14 (N.-I ) I as a function of t 77

6.1 Xl force as a function of t for various A/Lis 79

LIST OF FIGURES J Contd. Page

6.8 0 /a as a function of ~ for 'A/L = 1. 4, 'A/h = 28 85

7.1 Digital simulation of surging; varying ~ 91

Al Wave fixed co-ordinate system 115

D1 Pure sway in calm water 124

Considerable difficulties have often been experienced with

Previoos ~rk al Broaching

Physical, Model, Approach:

The experiments discussed above were all carried out in regular