Towing resistance – surface friction

Discussion in 'Boat Design' started by kolloff@get2net, Mar 1, 2011.

  1. kolloff@get2net
    Joined: Mar 2011
    Posts: 1
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: France

    kolloff@get2net New Member

    In the literature regarding towing resistance typically the total resistance is divided into four different type of resistance:

    Surface friction
    Energy loss due to wave generating
    Energy loss due to eddy’s
    Wind resistance

    For low speed the surface friction counts for the majority of the resistance forces. 80 - 90 %.

    The surface resistance is typically estimated by the ITTC formulation where the friction coefficient, Cf , is estimated based on Reynolds number, Rn, and Ct is multiplied with the velocity squared, wetted surface area water density.

    Now, I would expect that just by calculating the surface friction one should get a resistance force which was close to 80 -90 % of the total resistance force? But that is not the case. I have results from model towing tests but the surface friction resistance only contribute with about 10%.
    The velocity is quite low – Froude 0.03 to 0.07.
    From pictures it is visible that almost no waves are generated.

    Is there anyone who can explain what I am missing here?
     
  2. daiquiri
    Joined: May 2004
    Posts: 5,373
    Likes: 254, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 3380
    Location: Italy (Garda Lake) and Croatia (Istria)

    daiquiri Engineering and Design

    Depends on what has been tested. A parachute, for example, will have a very low friction drag component even at low speeds. ;)
    If you are talking about a streamlined hullform, then I think you should perform the uncertainity analysis of your towing test data.
     
  3. MikeJohns
    Joined: Aug 2004
    Posts: 3,192
    Likes: 208, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2054
    Location: Australia

    MikeJohns Senior Member

    That's quite a low Froude number.

    What was the waterline length of the model, and was the test in a proper towing tank or a very simple force balance setup?

    Also it might help to know the type of vessel being modeled.
     
  4. kolloff
    Joined: Mar 2011
    Posts: 7
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 34
    Location: France

    kolloff Junior Member

    The Froude number is correct (The vessel is 310 metre long and will be towed with a speed on 4 - 8 kn)

    The model test was performed by MARIN, a very well known tank in Holland.

    I will try to attach the results:

    Regards
    kolloff
     

    Attached Files:

  5. daiquiri
    Joined: May 2004
    Posts: 5,373
    Likes: 254, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 3380
    Location: Italy (Garda Lake) and Croatia (Istria)

    daiquiri Engineering and Design

    And what do they (MARIN Staff) say on that regard?
     
  6. kolloff
    Joined: Mar 2011
    Posts: 7
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 34
    Location: France

    kolloff Junior Member


    I am not in a position where I can contact them for this project.
    (If I could, I would have done that.)

    But I believe the results are correct.
     
  7. Alik
    Joined: Jul 2003
    Posts: 3,007
    Likes: 300, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 1306
    Location: Thailand

    Alik Senior Member

    I would expect wave resistance->0 at that Froude numbers.

    Looking at results of tests, it is important to look also at methodology of testing: what turbulization was used, extrapolation formula for CF, etc.
     
  8. daiquiri
    Joined: May 2004
    Posts: 5,373
    Likes: 254, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 3380
    Location: Italy (Garda Lake) and Croatia (Istria)

    daiquiri Engineering and Design

    What makes you believe that? I see a data which is out of normal parameters here, so the first thing I would think is - something went wrong here. As Alik said, in that Fn range the wave resistance should go to zero (and surely cannot be the predominant one), unless you have a hull geometry which is not streamlined (see the extreme example of a parachute in my first reply).

    You (or someone who is in position to do so) should try to contact the staff at MARIN and discuss that test data before proceeding further with the design based on them, imho.
     
  9. kolloff
    Joined: Mar 2011
    Posts: 7
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 34
    Location: France

    kolloff Junior Member

    The hull shape is not very streamlined. But still I would have thought a higher skin friction compared to the overall resistance. Unfortunately I cannot give so much information away but thank you very much for your input. very much appreciated! It have give me something to think about.
    I'll see if I can get closer to the problem by pulling some other strings.
    Thank you.
     
  10. MikeJohns
    Joined: Aug 2004
    Posts: 3,192
    Likes: 208, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2054
    Location: Australia

    MikeJohns Senior Member

    kollof the low Fn makes more sense now. Did you get the full resistance curve up to Fn 0.15 or 0.2 ? It pays to see this data in the full light of the resistance curve.
    And presumably Marin will have calculated the trip stud resistance and given the RM accordingly?
     
  11. kolloff
    Joined: Mar 2011
    Posts: 7
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 34
    Location: France

    kolloff Junior Member

    I have found a picture of a similar vessel.
    The dimensions are: L 300, B 61, D 30, draught for towing 8 metre.

    Fn 0.2 is equal to about 20 Kn and is not realistic for this kind of vessel. Therefore the model test only goes up to 9 Kn (Fn 0.087)

    Mike, you mentioned “trip stud resistance” can you elaborate more about that? As I have not heard about that before.

    Thank you for your attention.
     

    Attached Files:

    • fpso.jpg
      fpso.jpg
      File size:
      113.4 KB
      Views:
      722
  12. MikeJohns
    Joined: Aug 2004
    Posts: 3,192
    Likes: 208, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2054
    Location: Australia

    MikeJohns Senior Member

    The turbulence tripping studs or sand strip on the model creates extra drag and that drag needs to be taken into account and subtracted from the total measured drag of the model.

    On the full sized ship most of the flow is turbulent and only the first meter and a half or so is linear. On the model the linear flow has to be tripped to tubulent otherwise it would be nearly all linear and the resistance would be too low.

    Yes I see why the Froude numbers are low.
     
  13. Alik
    Joined: Jul 2003
    Posts: 3,007
    Likes: 300, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 1306
    Location: Thailand

    Alik Senior Member

    It could happen that at that speed flow was turbulent even with turbulence stimulators.

    I would suggest to applly data from wind tunnel tests of elongated bodies to this task. As wave resistance is very low, it could work.
     
  14. DCockey
    Joined: Oct 2009
    Posts: 5,025
    Likes: 514, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 1485
    Location: Midcoast Maine

    DCockey Senior Member

    Laminar rather than linear flow???
     

  15. DCockey
    Joined: Oct 2009
    Posts: 5,025
    Likes: 514, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 1485
    Location: Midcoast Maine

    DCockey Senior Member

    That's a very reasonable suggestion.

    A guess of a drag coefficient based on frontal area of a scale model of the underwater portion of such a shape mounted on the ground plane in an automotive wind tunnel would be 0.4 to 0.55. That's based on a guess of the underwater shape and experience with automobile aerodynamics.
     
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.