Experimental Analysis of the Propeller

Rudder Interaction
M. Felli1, G. Guj2, F. Di Felice1, G. Aloisio1

1
I.N.S.E.A.N., Via di Vallerano 139, 00128 Rome, Italy
Tel. +39 06 50299240, Fax. +39 06 5070619
2
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
Roma Tre University, Via della Vasca Navale 79, 00146 Rome, Italy
e-mail: m.felli@insean.it

In the present study an experimental analysis of the propeller-rudder interaction has been performed in a cavitation
tunnel. The experiments simulated the condition of a rudder operation aft of a propeller but without the influence of the
hull.
The activity has been performed through dynamometric measurements, LDV phase sampling techniques and flow
visualizations with an high speed camera.

- The complex vortical flow induced by the propeller

INTRODUCTION
With the present emphasis on increased ship speeds
and consequently much higher propeller thrust, the
prediction and the knowledge of the interaction effects
between propeller, rudder and hull have become a focal
point for the improvement of the ship performance.
Propeller and rudder have been considered as a
propulsion unit in which the former is an active device
that generates the thrust to keep the ship on speed and
the latter a control surface that produces the transverse
force to keep the ship on course. The rudders
effectiveness in producing a turning moment is
proportional to its lift force (side force), which depends
on the dynamic pressure of the incoming flow. That is
why mostly rudders are placed behind the propeller
slipstream, where the flow is accelerated. The larger
dynamic pressure in the propeller slipstream improves
the response of the ship to the rudder angle variations,
rather critical at low ship speeds. Furthermore, a
significant increase in the stall angle is achieved,
allowing that large rudder angles can be useful
employed in the lower speed manoeuvring situations.
On the other hand, in spite of a general improvement of
the ship manoeuvrability and control, the installation of
the rudder behind the propulsor leads to a number of
side effects, mainly linked with the unsteady nature of
the propeller slipstream and the complex interaction
with the its vortical structures. More specifically:
- the unstready and rotating slipstream of the propeller
makes the rudder working at incidence even if it is
made with symmetrical profiles and in cruise trim
condition. The local incidence at the rudder leading
edge changes periodically along the appendage span
and, for the case of highly loaded propeller, can be
such to cause flow separation and an efficiency loss
in manoeuvring.
on the rudder can expose to the danger of cavitation
(sheet cavitation, gap cavitation, vortex cavitation)
and, hence, to serious structural damages at regions
where the cavities collapses. Periodic replacement
and repair of the damaged rudders increases the
maintenance costs and decrease the ship operation
time. Furthermore, cavitation compromises the
hydrodynamic and the hydroacoustic performances
of the ship with an overall worsening of the on board
comfort.
- The interaction of the propeller vortices with the
rudder causes a complex stress at the blade
frequency that induces noise, vibrations and fatigue
stresses. Such an effect is amplified for highly loaded
propellers due to the bigger strength of the vortical
structures.
- Due to the mutual interaction effects, rudder can
affect blade circulation, resulting in load fluctuations
along the azimuth, and, in worst of the cases, leading
cavitation on the propeller itself, with propulsive
performances decay. These effects vanish with
increasing propeller-rudder distance (Kracht, 1992).
The accurate analysis of the flow around a rudder in
the influence of a propeller in a challenging task.
Actually, the need for an improvement in the detailed
aspects of rudder performance prediction have implied
a rising interest in detailed numerical and experimental
analysis to be used for both new design approaches (as
in the case of the twisted rudder (Shen et al., 1997)) as
well as to get a better insight into the complex
mechanism of interaction with the propeller slipstream.
The problem of the propeller-rudder interaction has
been investigated in literature through both
experimental and theoretical analyses. Stierman (1989)
conducted a series of model tests with three different
propeller and rudder models, studying the effect of
their mutual distance and the advance ratio. Molland

2-1
and Turnock (1992) investigated experimentally the
effect of the propeller slipstream on the rudder
performance by dynamometric measurements in a wind
tunnel. Kracht (1992) studied the ship-propeller-rudder
interaction measuring lift, drag and cavitation
characteristics for different rudder configurations.
Propeller-rudder interaction has been theoretically
investigated by Tsakonas et al. (1975), Moriyama and
Yamazaki (1981), Zhu and Dong (1986), Kerwin et al.
(2003), Li (1994), Shen et al. (1997). The present study
describes the results of an experimental analysis of the
flow field around a propeller-rudder configuration, by
means of dynamometric measurements, LDV phase
sampling techniques and flow visualizations with an
high speed CMOS camera.
EXPERIMENTAL SET-UP
Facility
Measurements have been conducted in the Italian Navy
Cavitation Tunnel (C.E.I.M.M.) This is a close jet
tunnel with a 2.6 m long by 0.6 m span by 0.6 m deep
test section. Perspex windows on the four walls enable
the optical access in the test section. The nozzle
contraction ratio is 5.96:1 and the maximum water
speed is 12 m/s. The highest free stream turbulence
intensity in the test section is 2%. In the test section,
the mean velocity uniformity is within 1% for the axial
component and 3% for the vertical component.
Propeller
The E779A model propeller has been used for the tests.
This is a four blades Wageningen modified type model
with a diameter of 272mm and an uniform pitch
distribution. This choice has been motivated by the fact
that a thorough experimentally-based knowledge of
such model propeller is available through a dataset that
collects hydrodynamics and hydroacoustics
measurements performed at the Italian Navy Cavitation
Tunnel (CEIMM) over the last years.
Further details of the propeller are summarized in
Table I.
Number of blades 4 axisymmetry of the propeller wake, two configurations
Diameter (mm) 272
Pitch-diameter ratio 1.1
Boss diameter max (mm) 45.5
Rake (deg) 4 3
Developed area-disk area ratio 0.688
Rudder
The choice of the rudder geometry has been oriented to
simple shapes in order to limit as much as possible
complex fluiddynamics features that make
measurements difficult to be understood. Moreover,
simple geometries are fully adequate to provide CFD
codes validation datasets. Thus, an all movable rudder
2-2
having a rectangular planform and standard
symmetrical sections with NACA 0020 profiles has
been used.
Models are designed as modular objects. This means
that they are built in separated parts that can be
assembled in different ways to realize different
geometries.
Rudder has been fixed to the top horizontal window of
the tunnel with the leading edge at r=R from the
propeller disk plane and a 50mm offset from the
propeller axis (figure 1). This arrangement has been to
minimize the perturbation induced by the hub vortex.
Overall details of the rudder are summarized in Table I,
considering the propeller diameter D as reference
length.
Rudder length 1.65D
Rudder chord 0.66D
Rudder profiles NACA 0020
Rudder yaw axis dist. from LE 0.18D
Rudder distance from propeller 0.4D
Figure 1. Overview of the propeller-rudder installation
LDV measurements
Flow velocity has been measured by means of a two
component back scatter LDV system, which consists of
a 6W Argon Laser, a 2 component underwater fiber
optic probe, a 40 MHz Bragg cell for the velocity
versus ambiguity removal and a TSI IFA 655 Doppler
processor.
The three dimensional velocity field measurements
have been performed in two separate steps rotating the
experiment of 90. More specifically, in view of the
with the rudder fixed on the top and side window of the
test section has been used to resolve the U-W and the
U-V velocity components respectively.
A rotary 7200 pulse/revolution encoder supplied the
actual propeller position with an angular accuracy of
0.05. The encoder signals have been processed by a
synchroniser which provided the digital signal of the
propeller position to the TSI RMR (Rotating Machine
Resolver).
The correspondence between the randomly acquired
velocity bursts and the propeller angular position has
been carried out by using phase sampling techniques.
The adopted procedure has been the Tracking
Triggering Technique (TTT) because it allows the Flow Visualizations of the propeller rudder
acquisition process to be efficient and fast. interaction
More information about such a technique can be found The analysis of flow visualizations at high frame rate
in Felli et al. (2000). The LDV probe has been set up reveals interesting details of the complex interaction
on a computer controlled traversing system which between the propeller slipstream and the rudder.
allows to get a displacement accuracy of 0.01mm in all When the tip vortex filament approaches the leading
the directions and to achieve an high automation of the edge of the rudder an inviscid interaction occurs: the
LDV system. The seeding particles size and effect of potential bumping due to the elliptical
concentration has been controlled in the facility: the nature of the flow field deforms progressively the tip
water has been filtered before the measurements (3m vortex trajectory as it moves toward the appendage
low-pass) and seeded with 10m silver hollow coated leading edge.
glass particles. The tunnel water has been seeded with
10m silver hollow coated glass particles. Water
seeding has performed at the start of the tests, because
it has been experienced that seed particles density
remains almost constant for a long time in the facility.
Data acquisition has been accomplished by using a low
end personal computer, while the post processing
analysis, requiring several Gbytes of data storage and
computational resources, has been performed on a
workstation.

High speed visualizations

Flow visualizations of the unsteady propeller-rudder
hydrodynamic interaction has been undertaken by
making the tip vortices cavitating. Visualizations have
been performed by means of an high speed CMOS
camera. The camera has been a Photron-Ultima APX
model equipped with a 60 mm lens and 2.8 f-number.
Three 1000 W lamps have been used to light the
investigated area with the aim to assure an
homogeneous distribution of the light over the imaged
area and an adequate quality of the visualizations up to
a frame rate of 6000 Hz. The static pressure of the
facility has been set at 0.4 bar. This assured an
adequate identification of the propeller vortical
structures during their evolution without compromising
the quality of the images for the occurrence of air
bubbles.

Dynamometric measurements
A five-component strain gauge Kempfs & Remmers
balance has been used to measure forces and moments
exerted on the rudder. Maximum design loads and
moments for the dynamometer are as follows: 6000 N
for lift and drag, 500Nm for torque, 1000Nm for the
moments about the x and the y axes.
TEST CONDITIONS
Velocity tests have been carried with a free stream
velocity of 5 m/s and a propeller revolution speed of 25
rps, corresponding to an advance ratio J of 0.88. Based
on the freestream velocity of 5 m/s and the rudder
chord, the nominal Reynolds number has been
therefore around 1.36106. It should be added that
velocities induced by the propeller led to an effective
Reynolds of 1.63106.
EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Figure 2. Tip vortex-rudder interaction. Deflection of the tip
vortex on the rotation up (yellow) and down (red) side for
t=0.0005 sec (top, left), t=0.0015 sec (top, right), t=0.0025
sec (mid, left), t=0.007 sec (mid, right), t=0.008 sec (bottom,
left), t=0.009 sec (bottom, right)
The vortical filaments are deflected in the direction
away from the center of rotation (figure 2), as can be
easily represented using the image vortex model at the
rudder leading edge (figure 3, left). Looking from
below (figure 5) the vortex shape on the rotation down
(up) region has a kink in the starboard (port) side of the
appendage just before coming into close contact with
the rudder leading edge. The potential bumping of
the rudder perturbs also the hub vortex trajectory, in
spite of the 50mm offset from the appendage. This is
clearly shown in figure 5: the hub vortex filament is
downward moved and deformed to a shape which
resembles that of the rudder profiles. The former effect
can be justified using the image vortex model as shown

2-3
in figure 3. As a consequence of the contact with
rudder leading edge, a substantial bending of the tip
vortex occurs, causing the stretching of the filament
and an evident reduction of the core radius.
resolved by the visualizations as a cavitating thread
that suddenly appears to connect the previously severed
ends. The vorticity shed from the rudder trailing edge
seems to play a role in this mechanism, as pointed out
by Johnston et al. (1993).

Figure 3. Image vortex mechanism for the leading edge and

the spanwise motion of the tip vortex.

The vortex filaments are subjected to a double helix

break down while moving chordwise. More
specifically on the low pressure side one thread of the
double helix hangs together with the vortex filament on
the pressure side, stretching progressively before
breaking down at about 25% of the chord. The other
one, with a bigger core radius, moves chordwise
flowing nearly parallel to the rudder surface up to the
trailing edge. On the pressure side the tip vortex
filament is subjected to progressive stretching up to
about 50% chord with a sensitive reduction of the core
radius, after which it breaks down following a spiral
trajectory around the tip vortex axis with radius
progressively bigger while it moves downstream.
Viscous effects in the rudder boundary layer causes the
vortex filaments to pinch off and end on the appendage
surface. Chordwise and spanwise misalignments are
observed in the tip vortex as it moves along the rudder
surface. The former is a consequence of the higher
flow velocity above a lifting surface.
The latter can be explained on the basis of two possible
mechanisms. The first is an image vortex effect that
tends to move upward (downward) the vortex filaments
on the port (starboard) side of the appendage,
according to the direction imposed by the image vortex
(figure 3, right). The second is linked with a spanwise
circulation gradient due to the effect of the propeller
induced velocities. These changes in rudder circulation
can be modeled as line vortices shed from the trailing
edge that give rise to spanwise velocities and, hence, Figure 4. Tip vortex reconnection at the rudder trailing edge
propeller tip vortex motion. The above mentioned for t=0.0005 sec (top, left), t=0.0055 sec (top, right),
mechanisms act simultaneously , adding or subtracting t=0.0105 sec (bottom, left), t=0.00155 sec (bottom, right).
their effects depending on magnitudes and directions. Rudder contours and tip vortex trace have been colored in
This explains the different misalignement in the white and red, respectively.
rotation up and down sides for the tip vortex filaments
on the face and back surface of the rudder. Velocity measurements
The rejoining of the tip vortex after passing the rudder The LDA data have been processed using a slotting
is described in figure 4 and can be observed also in technique with 360 angular slots, 2 wide and a
figure 5: flow visualizations at high frame rate are, in gaussian weight for the statistical analysis. Wake
fact, a powerful tool to investigate into this evolution is described by the representation of the
phenomenon, otherwise rather difficult to pick up velocity field during the revolution period; so, each
experimentally. The helical vortex recovering after velocity distribution, in the measurement plane, is
leaving the rudder trailing edge shows evidence of a related to the corresponding blade angular position
vertical vortex joining the filaments coming from the between 0 e 90, as shown hereinafter:
face and the back of the appendage. This is clearly

2-4
Figure 5. Chordwise evolution of the propeller tip vortices at t=0.0005 sec (top, left), t=0.0055 sec (top, right), t=0.0105 sec (bottom,
left), t=0.00155 sec (bottom, right)
r
V ( x , y , z ) = F ( (t )) (1)
where (t) is the propeller angular position. In the
following, for space reasons, just three representative
angular positions of the clock wise rotating propeller
can be shown.
Figure 6 shows the axial velocity field along two
cross planes in front and behind the rudder, for the
angular positions =0, =30 and =60 of the propeller
reference blade. The rudder trace can be easily
recognized as a defect of the axial velocity in both the
upstream and downstream planes. The former is caused
by the potential bumping of the rudder that induces
locally a slow down of the slipstream and the
previously mentioned deflection of the tip vortex right
in front of the appendage leading edge, as also shown
in the visualizations. The latter depends on both the
viscous contribution of the boundary layer and the
momentum transfer from the axial to the cross
components of the velocity, due to the fact that rudder
is generating lift (side force).
The interaction of the blade wake with the leading edge
of the rudder appears as a peak of the velocity defect
that moves downward along the span during the
propeller revolution. The beginning and the end of such
a phenomenon are the tip vortex-rudder interaction at
the rotation up and down side.
The analysis of the axial and horizontal components
of the velocity at the rudder leading edge as well as the
distribution of the trailing vorticity in the downstream
plane provide information on the hydrodynamic
loading conditions along the appendage span: the
former through the blade element theory, considering
the spanwise distribution of the hydrodynamic
incidence ((z)=atan(V/W)) and the effective velocity
( U eff = V 2 + W 2 ) (figure 7), the latter considering the
2-5
spanwise circulation at the trailing edge (red on figure
8), estimated on the basis of the vorticity flux over a
well defined control surface and the Kutta-Joukowsky
theorem. In both the approaches, the magnitude for the
hydrodynamic load has a maximum at approximately
the intersection with the propeller slipstream and
decreases progressively toward the inner sections,
changing sign at about z=0.
This is also pointed out by the spanwise distribution of
the axial component of the vorticity field in the
downstream plane (figure 8): actually, the trailing
vorticity, clockwise direct (<0) in the outer region of
the rudder changes suddenly sign to have a maximum
around z=0.
The good agreement between the above approaches is
pointed out comparing the spanwise load distributions
of figure 7 and figure 8.
Integrating the side force distribution over the
appendage span for each angular position of the
propeller it is possible to get an estimation for the
angular evolution of both its resultant and the bending
moment at the rudder support. At this regards figure 9
describes the angular evolution for the resultant of the
side force and the bending moment estimated through
the blade-element-theory/upstream wake.
The deviation between the averaged values of the side
force and of the bending moment calculated through
the velocity field and those measured by the balance is
around 10%. The uncertainly for the adopted
approaches (velocity field measured on part of the
rudder span, location of the measurement planes with
respect to the rudder leading and trailing edge,
dynanometric and velocity measurements uncertainly,
as an example) can justify such a deviation.
Figure 10 shows the evolution for the vorticity field
upstream and downstream the rudder. Vortices
contours have been identified marking the boundary of
the regions with complex eigenvalues of the velocity
gradient tensor (Jeong and Hussain, 1995). The displacement of the tip vortex filament induced by the
analysis of the vorticity field and the turbulent wake is interaction with the image vortex on the appendage
a suitable way to measure the spanwise misalignement starboard (port) side is less than that in the rotation up
of the tip vortex filaments at the rudder trailing edge. side.
As pointed out by the analysis of the visualizations, the
spanwise shear of the tip vortices is not symmetrical
and appears larger on the propeller rotation up region

Figure 7. Spanwise distribution for the hydrodynamic load

for =30 (green), =60 (blue) and averaged over a
complete propeller revolution (red).

Figure 8 Spanwise distribution for the axial vorticity for

=0 (blue) =60 (green) and on average over a complete
propeller revolution (red). Averaged spanwise distribution of
the hydrodynamic load (bold blue).

Figure 6. Angular evolution of the axial velocity for =0

(top), =30 (mid) and =60 (bottom)

(see figure 11). A possible explanation of this behavior

is provided by figure 10 that shows the distribution for
the vorticity over the rudder span: on the rotation down
side the incoming vortex filaments of the propeller
interacts with the rudder tip vortex and makes it Figure 9 Angular evolution for the side force (red) and the
weaker. For such a reason the downward (upward) bending moment Mx (blue).

2-6
Figure 11 shows the angular evolution for the turbulent
kinetic energy. The analysis of the Turbulent Kinetic
Energy (TKE) allows to resolve the trace of the rudder
and the blades wake, pointing out the wake
deformation due to the combined action of the tip and
hub vortex as well as to their interaction with the
rudder. More specifically a different mechanism acts in
the downstream evolution of the tip and hub vortices
and the blade wake. The former is an increase of the
turbulence trace of the tip and hub vortices, due to the
combined effect of the rudder induced perturbation and
the incoming instability of the propeller slipstream, the
latter is a process of progressive deformation, diffusion
and dissipation of the turbulent trace of the blade wake,
whose energy content is distributed on the small scale
eddies. The interaction between the blade tip vortex
and the rudder, is well described by the evolution of the
turbulence field, showing the strong deformation when
it crosses the rudder surface.

CONCLUSIONS
The present study describes the results of an
experimental analysis of the flow field around a
propeller-rudder configuration, performed by means of
flow visualizations with an high speed camera and
LDV phase sampling measurements. The effects of the
potential bumping of the rudder on the propeller
structures, the double helix break down of the vortex
filaments while moving chordwise, the tip vortex
rejoining at the trailing edge, the chordwise and
spanwise misalignement between the vertical filaments
on the face and the back surface of the appendage have
been pointed out by the flow visualizations. The
adoption of LDV phase sampling techniques allowed
an effective reconstruction of the propeller wake
evolution and its interaction with the rudder. The
analysis of the axial and horizontal components of the
velocity at the rudder leading edge as well as the
distribution of the trailing vorticity in the downstream
plane provides information on both the hydrodynamic
loading conditions along the appendage span and the
angular evolution of the side force and the bending
moment.

AKNOWLEGMENTS
The present work has been supported by the European Figure 10. Angular evolution of the axial component of
Community in the frame of the VIRTUE Research the vorticity for =0 (top), =30 (mid) and =60
Project. (bottom)

3. Li DQ. Investigation on propeller-rudder

REFERENCES
1. Felli M, Di Felice F. Propeller wake analysis
in not uniform inflow by LDV phase sampling
techniques. Marine Science and Technology.
2005.
2. Kracht AM. Ship propeller rudder
interaction. 2nd International Symposium on
Propeller and Cavitation. Hangchou. Chine.
1992.
interaction by numerical methods. PHD
thesis. Chalmers University of Technology.
Sweden. 1994.
4. Molland AF, Turnock SR. Wind tunnel
investigation of the influence of propeller
loading on ship rudder performance. The
Royal Institution of naval Architects. London.
1992.
5. Moriyama F, Yamazaki R. On the forces
acting on rudder. The West Japan Society of
Naval Architects. 1981.

2-7
6. Shen YT, Jiang CW, Remmers KD,. Effect
of ship hull and propeller on rudder
cavitation. Journal of Ship Research. 41-4.
1997
7. Shen YT, Remmers KD, Jiang CW. Effect of
ship hull and propeller on rudder cavitation.
Journal of Ship Research. 41-3. 1997
8. Stierman EJ. The influence of the rudder on
the propulsive performance of ships.
International Shipbuilding Progress. 36. 1989.
9. Tsakonas, S, Jacobs WR, Ali MR.
Application of the unsteady lifting surface
theory to the study of propeller rudder
interaction. Journal of Ship Research. 19-2.
1975.
10. Zhu ZL, Dong ST. A theoretical method for
predicting the hydrodynamic performances of
propeller-rudder interaction. International
Symposium on propeller and cavitation.
Wuxi. China.1986.
11. Johnston RT, Sullivan JP. Unsteady wind
surface pressures in the wake of a propeller
Journal of Aircraft. Vol.30, N.5. 1993
12. Jeong J, Hussain F. On the identification of a
vortex Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 285:69-
94. 1995

Figure 11. Evolution of the turbulent kinetic energy for =0

(top), =30 (mid) and =60 (bottom)

2-8