Savitsky Power Prediction

Discussion in 'Software' started by guest12020101217, Sep 23, 2003.

  1. Dingo
    Joined: Dec 2003
    Posts: 43
    Likes: 5, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 89
    Location: South Australia

    Dingo Junior Member

    Your Vessel

    Danialsan, Hoe gaat 't?

    I entered the numbers that you gave and I obtained different results. I noticed that you are using a trim tab of 1 ft chord and no rudder (?). The top speed that Savitsky will predict for this boat is 45 kts (trim > 15 deg at 50 kts) and will require 262 effective kW (or 352 ehp). This is the power required to tow the boat, not what the engine power is. The actual brake power depends on the propeller and transmission losses, which as a basic rule is 60% and 97% efficient respectively.

    Also, you used an LCG of 10.5 ft which is very far forward for a planing craft. I re-ran it for an LCG of 8 ft (2.438 metres) and got a lower effective power of 207 ekW (277 ehp) for 50 kts, or a brake power of 355 ekW (476 bhp). Note that your deadrise is 27 degrees; high for a fast planing boat. I would suggest lowering it to 16 degrees unless you are going to use it in rough open seas.

    For the others, and yourself, here is an updated version of my planing spreadsheet. It includes an addition for wind resistance due to superstructures and above water hull; the theory for the rest remains unchanged.

    Dingo
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Danielsan
    Joined: Jul 2004
    Posts: 244
    Likes: 0, Points: 16, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Belgium (Europe)

    Danielsan Amateur designer-builder?

    Hi Dingo, Met mij goed en met U?

    Thx for the reply

    Did some more precise measurements, as I didn't have the drawings on my other PC

    and came to the next results:
    (I am a bit disapointed, as I want to build that boat from scratch and for the lowest budget possible, but now I would need a high power engine? So I can't fall back on my 6l +150HP Perkins long block)

    How do I have to translate this to prop size/pitch rpm, any idea?

    Length of Waterline LWL 24.34 feet
    Beam B 9.180 feet
    VCG VCG 1.02 feet = 0.311 metres
    Displacement D 6,700 lbf = 3,039 kg
    Deadrise @ Transom b T 16.61 °
    Deadrise @ Amidships b )0( 19.89 °
    Distance to Amidships L )0( 12.172 feet = 3.710 metres
    q 1.372 °
    Angle of Thrust Line e 9.25 °
    f 3.32 feet = 1.012 metres

    Minimum Speed Vmin 6.1 kn = 10.3 feet/s This is the minimum speed valid for this analysis
    Maximum Speed Vmax 132.4 kn = 223.4 feet/s This is the maximum speed valid for this analysis

    Length Overall LOA 24.34 feet = 7.420 metres
    Maximum Beam Bmax 9.81 feet = 2.990 metres
    Moulded Depth of Hull Z 4.95 feet = 1.509 metres
    Height of House HSS 1.30 feet = 0.396 metres
    Breadth of House BSS 8.00 feet = 2.438 metres
    Frontal Area of House *** 10.4 feet2 = 0.966 m2

    Number of Propellers N 1

    Chord cF 1.2 feet = 0.366 metres
    Span Ratio s 0 ( <= 1 )
    Deflection Angle d 5 °

    Chord crudder 1.60 feet = 0.488 metres
    Thickness t 0.10 feet = 0.030 metres
    Area Arudder 2.59 feet2 = 0.241 m2
    Centrepoint xc -0.20 feet from transom = -0.061 metres (+ve fwd)
    yc 0.24 feet from baseline = 0.073 metres (+ve up)

    Diameter of Shaft Fshaft 0.10 feet = 0.030 metres
    Length of Shaft & Hub l 3.00 feet = 0.914 metres
    Centrepoint xc 0.20 feet from transom = 0.061 metres (+ve fwd)
    yc 0.80 feet from baseline = 0.244 metres (+ve up)

    Chord cstrut 0.00 feet = 0.000 metres
    Thickness t 8.00 feet = > 15° metres
    Area Astrut 0.75 feet2 = > 15° m2 ****
    Centrepoint xc 3.50 feet from transom = 1.067 metres (+ve fwd)
    yc 2.00 feet from baseline = 0.610 metres (+ve up)

    V LCG t D T Peffective h tcr Comments
    [kn] [ft] [metres] [°] [lbf] [kN] [lbf] [kN] [ehp] [ekW] [ft] [metres] Lew.[°] Angeli [°]
    6 7.45 2.271 7.8498 509 2.3 535 2.4 9 7 2.66 0.811 > 15° > 15°
    7.5 7.45 2.271 9.6101 959 4.3 1,017 4.5 22 16 2.75 0.838 > 15° > 15°
    10 7.45 2.271 10.8676 1,370 6.1 1,466 6.5 42 31 2.52 0.768 14.97 > 15°
    12.5 7.45 2.271 9.6235 1,346 6.0 1,428 6.4 52 39 2.10 0.640 10.33 11.44
    13 7.45 2.271 9.2981 1,325 5.9 1,403 6.2 53 39 2.02 0.616 9.70 10.85
    14 7.45 2.271 8.6521 1,281 5.7 1,352 6.0 55 41 1.88 0.573 8.62 9.81
    15 7.45 2.271 8.0358 1,240 5.5 1,303 5.8 57 43 1.76 0.536 7.74 8.94
    17.5 7.45 2.271 6.6964 1,163 5.2 1,214 5.4 62 47 1.51 0.460 6.14 7.28
    20 7.45 2.271 5.6434 1,130 5.0 1,173 5.2 69 52 1.32 0.402 5.08 6.11
    25 7.45 2.271 4.1786 1,171 5.2 1,207 5.4 90 67 1.07 0.326 3.78 4.59
    30 7.45 2.271 3.2527 1,312 5.8 1,348 6.0 121 90 0.91 0.277 3.04 3.66
    35 7.45 2.271 2.6356 1,522 6.8 1,559 6.9 163 122 0.80 0.244 2.58 3.04
    40 7.45 2.271 2.2053 1,782 7.9 1,823 8.1 219 163 0.73 0.223 2.26 2.60
    45 7.45 2.271 1.8939 2,081 9.3 2,127 9.5 287 215 0.68 0.207 2.04 2.27
    50 7.45 2.271 1.6621 2,412 10.7 2,462 11.0 370 276 0.64 0.195 1.87 2.03
     
  3. ABoatGuy
    Joined: Aug 2004
    Posts: 208
    Likes: 6, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 79
    Location: LeftCoast

    ABoatGuy Member

    You may also want to search SNAME for Donald Blounts papers. He has a few which apply a correction to the hump area for a better fit to reality.

    aboatguy
     
  4. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 14,509
    Likes: 660, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    Without doing the numbers, I am sure there must be some error. The HP seems too low. Also, how are you going to build a boat of such low displacement to be structurally adequate for 50 Knots?
     
  5. Danielsan
    Joined: Jul 2004
    Posts: 244
    Likes: 0, Points: 16, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Belgium (Europe)

    Danielsan Amateur designer-builder?


    Good Question.

    I do find it has low dispacement or maybe not low displacement, but more low draft? the one goes with the other I know...

    On the other hand I did find some (fast)planning boats that where 10% bigger, with around 3600 Kg of displacement

    On the other hand (damn I only have two of them) it does not have to do 50kt, if it goes by 30kt and it keeps a float I will be verry happy.

    I am also a bit concerned about the low draft, displacement as if I would go out on our North sea, it can be kind of rough.

    Anu sugestions, all welcome...

    Daniel Peeters
     
  6. RThompson

    RThompson Guest

    Dingo,
    Thanks a lot for making the spreadsheet available. Its superb.

    Rob
     
  7. Ilan Voyager
    Joined: May 2004
    Posts: 1,242
    Likes: 159, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 758
    Location: Cancun Mexico

    Ilan Voyager Senior Member

    About the HP

    I have just downloaded the excell sheet by Dingo (nice work!) The FP does not seems to be too low; it seems that it's the HP at the PROPELLER (I have bot looked in detail in the sheet cells) which about 50 %

    Efficiency gear box: 95 % (new, when old ...oooh)
    Efficiency shaft, bearings, joints: 95 % if everything turns round.
    Efficiency of the propeller; that hurts badly:
    9.6m diameter propeller 79 tons of bronze 85 to 90 % efficiency at 105 RPM, but this propeller is not common on small power boats for evident reasons.
    Common 13 to 15 inches propeller turning at 2000 RPM...in the very best case 65 % efficiency. 45% of the HP is used to make foam in the water.

    So 0.65x0.95x0.95: 0.58 or 58 % of efficiency.

    Take the given HP and multiply by 1/0.58 or 1.724 and I think you'll have the true horses. I'll compare the excell sheet with some empiric formulae I have and I'll give you the results.
     
  8. Danielsan
    Joined: Jul 2004
    Posts: 244
    Likes: 0, Points: 16, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Belgium (Europe)

    Danielsan Amateur designer-builder?

    Thx for the comments,

    So in the best case I will need to have around 300 Hp to get my boat at 30-35kt?

    Do I get this right? What is the influence of torque, there is a diff. between Diesel and Gas engines. Won't I need to have less Hp because using a dieselengine?

    Greetings,

    Daniel Peeters
     
  9. martok13
    Joined: Nov 2004
    Posts: 1
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: canada

    martok13 New Member

    How would i apply this method to catamarans?

    When i apply this excel sheet to my catamaran..... i get all #VALUE!

    Length of Waterline LWL 66.48 feet
    Beam B 14.000 feet
    VCG VCG 6 feet = 1.829 metres 95396.64 210311.4325
    Displacement D 210,311 lbf = 95,397 kg
    Deadrise @ Transom b T 17 °
    Deadrise @ Amidships b )0( 21.5 °
    Distance to Amidships L )0( 33.239 feet = 10.131 metres
    q 1.064 °
    Angle of Thrust Line e 3.00 °
    f 3.00 feet = 0.914 metres

    Minimum Speed Vmin 6.0 kn = 12.7 feet/s This is the minimum speed valid for this analysis
    Maximum Speed Vmax 132.4 kn = 275.9 feet/s This is the maximum speed valid for this analysis

    Length Overall LOA 78.00 feet = 23.774 metres
    Maximum Beam Bmax 27.50 feet = 8.382 metres
    Moulded Depth of Hull Z 12.00 feet = 3.658 metres
    Height of House HSS 14.00 feet = 4.267 metres
    Breadth of House BSS 27.50 feet = 8.382 metres
    Frontal Area of House *** 385 feet2 = 35.768 m2

    Number of Propellers N 1

    Chord cF 0 feet = 0.000 metres
    Span Ratio s 0 ( <= 1 )
    Deflection Angle d 0 °

    Chord crudder 0.00 feet = 0.000 metres
    Thickness t 0.00 feet = 0.000 metres
    Area Arudder 0.00 feet2 = 0.000 m2
    Centrepoint xc 0.00 feet from transom = 0.000 metres (+ve fwd)
    yc 0.00 feet from baseline = 0.000 metres (+ve up)

    Diameter of Shaft Fshaft 0.00 feet = 0.000 metres
    Length of Shaft & Hub l 15.00 feet = 4.572 metres
    Centrepoint xc 5.50 feet from transom = 1.676 metres (+ve fwd)
    yc 0.00 feet from baseline = 0.000 metres (+ve up)

    Chord cstrut 0.00 feet = 0.000 metres
    Thickness t 8.00 feet = > 15° metres
    Area Astrut 0.75 feet2 = > 15° m2 ****
    Centrepoint xc 3.50 feet from transom = 1.067 metres (+ve fwd)
    yc 2.00 feet from baseline = 0.610 metres (+ve up)
     
  10. Dingo
    Joined: Dec 2003
    Posts: 43
    Likes: 5, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 89
    Location: South Australia

    Dingo Junior Member

    Marktok13, The reason that you have VALUE in all the boxes is because the trim is above 15 degrees at all speeds. This theory is valid only for trim angles below 15 degrees.
     
  11. RThompson

    RThompson Guest

    Hi there,
    I am most interested in learning a bit more about the "Sea Keeping" and "Roll stability" aspects of Dingo's spreadsheet. ie what the numbers really mean .

    So, my questions:

    Are the following papers possibly available on-line anywhere:

    Lewandowski, Edward M., "Prediction of the Dynamic Roll Stability of Hard-Chine Planing Craft", Journal of Ship Research, juni 1996

    Savitsky & Brown, "Procedures for Hydrodynamic Evaluation of Planing Hulls in Smooth and Rough Water", Marine Technology, Okt. 1976


    Dingo, you suggested e-mailing you for translation issues, I figured you have already given your time in the spreadsheet, I could get off my bum and translate it myself. :)
    So, can anyone direct me to a suitable on-line Afrikaans/English translator?
    (I'v had a look and there's not to much out there)

    Thanks again for the spreadsheet,

    Rob
     
  12. nevd
    Joined: Nov 2003
    Posts: 99
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Australia

    nevd Junior Member

    Savitsky papers

    Rob,

    Lewandowski, Edward M., "Prediction of the Dynamic Roll Stability of Hard-Chine Planing Craft", Journal of Ship Research, juni 1996 is on the SNAME CD. It is highly mathematical.

    Let me know if you find somewhere to get the Savitsky paper as I am also interested.

    nevd
     
  13. mistral
    Joined: Jul 2004
    Posts: 154
    Likes: 2, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 22
    Location: Sardinia, Italy

    mistral Senior Member

    for Dingo

    i've put savitsky calculus routine into a mathcad spreadsheet as you've done with excel;the surprise came when i saw that given the same input parameters, outputs are dramatically different in terms of power required, although similar in terms of trim angle. How could it be possibile?? i used savitsky formulations as they're explained in Larsson & Eliasson text,
    other question: i don't find any parameters in your spreadsheet involving propeller efficiency. Am i wrong??
    If you're interested i may post you the mathcad file to understand differencies between them;
    other few questions:
    have you compared your results with some commercial software like hullspeed???
    have you tested them with any real boat??

    thanx
    Mistral
     
  14. Dingo
    Joined: Dec 2003
    Posts: 43
    Likes: 5, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 89
    Location: South Australia

    Dingo Junior Member

    Mistral, Please note that the calculations from Planing.xls give the effective power, not the required engine power. Hence there are no propeller efficiency results used since I am only interested in the actual drag (or thrust vector). Regarding propeller efficiency, I use another program that I wrote based to the B-series to determine the efficiencies of the prop for a given diameter, pitch etc. and then use the various losses for the final installed power included. The trim is worked out using mostly Savitsky's theory based on equilbrium of force vectors. I am not familiar with the Larsson & Eliasson text. Also, I do not have MathCad so unless you can post the calculations in a text format, I would not be able to debug them.
    I have compared my results with other programs that other engineers use and they compare favourably. One that I have directly compared with is NavCad, and the results corresponded well with thenm, as well as various waterjet manufacturer's curves for hull resistance.

    To all, I have received some e-mails stating that they have trouble running the spreadsheet Planing.xls. Note that macros must be turned on. It is not password protected, but be sure that the Visual Basic editor can display the macros, otherwise you will get wrong results or #VALUE in various cells. Check also that anti-virus software will allow the running of the macros, or that your firewall allows them through when downloading. (Note, if the trim is greater than 15 degrees, the theory will not be valid). Also be careful when using it for catamarans since I have not yet adapted it for cat use yet (I've just moved house and jobs, so I've been busy).

    Dingo
     

  15. rxcomposite
    Joined: Jan 2005
    Posts: 2,100
    Likes: 226, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1110
    Location: Philippines

    rxcomposite Senior Member

    Sorry but you are reinventing the wheel.I've seen a savitsky based program by arneson drive.Its tailored to arneson but it is a simple filling in the data program. if you want the complete series of formula, a publication (i dont know if it is still current) by SNAME about prediction of performance on planing craft.Yes, it can be programmed into excell but it is not simple.
    Rxcomposite
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.