TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITEIT

Laboratorium 'mor
Scheepshydromechanlca
frrchief
Mekelweg 2, 2628 CD De!ft
TeL: 015 786873 - Fax: 015-' 781838

MONOGRAPH PUBLISHED BY THE NETHERLANDS MARITIME INSTITUTE

i, q

An investigation into the difference

between nominal and effective
wakes for two twin-screw ships

M. Hoekstra

M22
October 1977
An investigation into the difference
between nominal and effective
wakes for two twin-screw ships

M. Hoekstra
 CONTENTS

page
Summary 3

i Introduction 3

2 Application of the diffuser test to twin-screw ships 4

3 Experiments 4

4 Results and discussion 6

5 Conclusions 11

References 11

Appendix 12

Netherlands Maritime Institute

 AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN NOMINAL AND EFFECTIVE WAKES FOR TWO TWIN-SCREW SHIPS
by

M. HOEKSTRA
Netherlands Ship Model Basin, Wageningen

Swnmary
With the aid of the diffuser test method, the effects of propeller-hull interaction ori the wake field were studied for two twin-screw
ship models with different afterbody shape. lt appears that interaction effects tend to reduce the non-uniformity of the wake field.
Calculations of the unsteady shaft force and moment components show a better correlation with experimental data when the effective,
instead of the nominal, wake field is used as input.

i Introduction although small, it is still important for the propeller

When dealing with wake fields in the propeller plane
of ships, two kinds must be distinguished: the nominal
wake field and the effective one. The nominal wake
field is the velocity field behind the ship without pro-
peller. The effective wake field is the flow field actually
experienced by the propeller; it is the flow field
obtained by subtracting the propeller-induced velocities
from the flow through the propeller plane.
The differences between the nominal and the effective
wake distribution are due to propeller-hull interac-
tion. Propeller theories assume the flow in which
the propeller operates to be a potential flow and
the presence of any body in its environment is ne-
glected. This means that the inflow to the propeller
is found by simply superposing the original potential
wake and the propeller induction. In a viscous flow
with vorticity, produced by a body, the propeller will
interact with the vorticity and with the solid bound-
aries of the body to maintain the no-slip condition.
All these interaction effects have to be incorporated
in the wake, resulting in what one calls the effective
wake, in order to calculate the propeller performance
correctly with existing theories.
Recently, the effect of propeller-hull interaction on
the flow field in the propeller plane of a ship has
received increased attention. This is not surprising
when it is realized that for a big tanker with a heavily
loaded propeller, the difference between the nominal
and effective wake fraction can amount to 2O0/ of the
nominal wake fraction, the effective wake fraction
being the smaller one.
Evidently, the interaction plays a less important role
for twin-screw ships. The clearances between hull and
propeller are relatively large for these ships, and so,
the difference between nominal and effective wake will
be less significant. However, hardly anything is known
about the nature of this difference and whether,
design. Therefore, an investigation of this difference
was initiated within the scope of an extensive research
project on two twin-screw dredgers, one with a con-
ventional and the other with a pram-type afterbody
shape {3].
The problem in such an investigation is the deter-
mination of the characteristics of the effective wake
field. Since the propeller-induced velocities are not
contained in the effective wake field, the latter is
essentially unmeasurable. Hence, in order to arrive
at the effective wake distribution, we must follow a
procedure, such as, for example:
measuring the velocity field closely ahead of the
propeller.
calculating the propeller-induced velocities and
subtract them from the flow field measured.
Unfortunately, when a Pitot tube is used as a device
to measure the velocity, the desired measurements
cannot be made sufficiently close to the propeller. In
order to overcome this difficulty, it was decided to
replace the propeller by a diffuser with circular cross-
section, mounted co-axially with the shaft axis to the
ship model with the orifice at the propeller plane.
Such an axisymmetrical diffuser may be conceived as
an annular hydrofoil-at-incidence. When it is fitted
behind the towed ship model, a flow circulation will
be established which causes the velocity in the orifice
to become greater than the advance speed of the
diffuser. Thus, ahead of the orifice the sink-like action
of the propeller is simulated. The diffuser-induced
velocities, which have to be subtracted from the flow
field measured in the orifice of the diffuser, must be
calculated.
The obvious advantage in using a diffuser instead
of the propeller is that the velocity measurements can
be made in the propeller plane with the standard Pitot
apparatus. On the other hand, it should be realized
that the simulation of the propeller by a diffuser is not

3
completely correct. In fact, every ship-propeller com-
bination has a unique effective wake field. With the
application of the diffuser, it is assumed that only the
mean loading of the propeller to be simulated is
relevant for the interaction. Interaction effects asso-
ciated with the details of the propeller geometry and
load distribution are lost in this approach.
In this paper, the application of the diffuser test to
twin-screw ships will be discussed. Results will be
shown for the two subject vessels and a comparison
will be made between nominal and effective wake
distributions.
2 Application of the diffuser test to
twin-screw ships
A description of the diffuser test method for single-
screw ships has been given in Ref. [I]. The application
of the method to twin-screw ships calls for some addi-
tional remarks.
The diffuser-induced velocities can be computed
when the diffuser is represented by an annular sheet
vortex. Assuming uniform inflow to the diffuser, this
vortex model has a relatively simple form, since varia-
tions of vorticity only occur in longitudinal direction
and not in circumferential direction. This approach is
justified as long as the non-uniformities in the inflow
and the deviations of the flow direction from the axial
direction are small. This model was actually used for
diffusers behind single screw ships. Unfortunately, the
condition of small inclination of the flow to the
diffuser axis is not satisfied for most twin-screw ships.
As a result, a circumferential variation of the vorticity
distribution of the diffuser surface occurs. Hence, such
a circumferential variation of the vorticity must be
accounted for in the calculation of the diffuser-
induced velocities. En order to avoid the cumbersome
evaluation of a surface integral, inherent to this prob-
lem, we shall apply the following analysis.
It will be assumed that the inflow to the diffuser is uni-
form but inclined to the diffuser axis. The vorticity
strength distribution on the surface will be re-
presented by t, which we define as
r = hm (2.1)
5 being the vorticity vector and r the infinitesimal
thickness of the vortex sheet. Introducing a cylindrical
co-ordinate system x-r-O with the x-axis aligned with
the diffuser axis, the circumferential component of T
will be assumed to be of the form
ro = A(x)+B(x) cosO (2.2)
A is the contribution to the vorticity strength asso-
ciated with a uniform inflow in axial direction, which
4
can be calculated by means of the procedure given in
Ref. [I . B cosO is the perturbation of the vorticity dis-
tribution caused by the flow inclination. The angular
coordinate O is zero at the location of maximum angle
of incidence. The distribution of the induced axial
velocity in the orifice resulting from (2.1) is (see
Appendix):
VA1fld(r, O) = A 1(r) + B(r) cosO (2.3)
The contribution A is related to the circumferentially
uniform part of the loading and B1 is due to the
variable part.
Any vorticity field has to satisfy the condition
V5 = 0 (2.4)
For the present sheet vortex this implies
8w 13w0
8x
+-r80 =0 (2.5)
or, equivalently,
3T
8x
+=0i 8f0
r80
(2.6)
Equation (2.6) shows that the circumferentially
varying vorticity implies the presence of a longitudinal
component of t. More specifically, recalling (2.2), f'
will be of the form
I = a(x)sinO (2.7)
This longitudinal component of T gives rise to an ap-
proximately uniform "downwash" in the diffuser ori-
fice as shown in the Appendix. Thus, the tangen-
tially and radially induced velocities of the diffuser
can be approximated by
VT1d = - B, sin O (2.8)
(2.9)
VR1fld = A2(r) + B2 cosO
where the contributions B2sinO and B2cosO result
from f and A2 is related to the uniform part of the
loading.
The effective wake field can be determined from the
flow measurements in the orifice of the diffuser, once
the coefficients A1, A,, B1 and B2 specifying the dif-
fuser-induced flow field, are known. A1 and A, can be
calculated according to Ref. [I]. B1 and B2 will be
estimated on the basis of the test results. As is shown
in section 4 below, this is fairly easy.
3 Experiments
The ship models used for the present investigations
were NSMB ship model No. 4984 with a more or less
conventional stern and No. 4984A with a pram-type
stern. Both models represent a twin-screw dredger.
Their body plans are presented in Fig. 1. The shaft-
strut configurations and the shape of the afterbody
frames are shown in Fig. 2. Both models have a length
of 12 m.
The test programme consisted of nominal wake field
measurements and velocity measurements in the orifice
of a diffuser, carried out for both models. The nominal
wake measurements were made in the propeller plane
on port side. The three velocity components were
measured in 144 locations specified by r/R = 0.40,
0.48, 0.64, 0.80, 0.88, 1.04 and b = 0,20, 40, 60, 80, 100,
20
L -
MODEL NO, 4984
MODEL NO. 49A
Fig. I. Body plans of the subject models.
850
Fig. 3. Geometry of diffuser.
120, 140, 160, 170, 180, 190, 200, 210, 220, 230, 240,
250, 260, 270, 280, 300, 320 and 340 degrees. The
measurements in the orifice of the diffuser were made
at the same stations, except for those on the outer
radius, being located outside the diffuser orifice. The
dimensions of the diffuser used behind both models are
given in Fig. 3. The diffuser replaced the port propeller;
the starboard propeller was normally driven during
the diffuser tests.
All measurements were made at a model speed of
2.19 m/s, the measuring device being a 5-holes Pitot
tube.
MODEL NO. 4984
BASE LINE
O A.PP
MODEL NO 4984A
Fig. 2. Shaft-strut configurations.
DETAIL ' LEADING EDGE DIFFUSER
NSMB NOZZLE iBA PROFILE
5
 I
NOMINAL WAKE FIELD NOMINAL WAKE FIELD
1.00 0.5

va- -
Vt/v
/v

0.50 o

o -0,5
DIFFUSER FLOW FIELD
1.75
DIFFUSER FLOW FIELD
0.5
1.50
Va-
Vt/v
/v

V0,
/V
1 00

0 50
1.50
l--l EFFECTIVE FLOW FIELD
-05
EFFECTIVE FLOW FIELD

1.00

0.50
0? go, 180 270 360?

Fig. 4. Circumferential distributions of axial velocity compo- Fig. 5. Circumferential distributions of tangential velocity com-
nent (model No. 4984). ponent (model No. 4984).

4 Results and discussion

The circumferential distributions of the three velocity
components VA, VT and VR as measured in the nominal
wake fields are plotted at the top of Figs. 4-6 (model
4984) and Figs. 7-9 (model 4984A). Corresponding
results of the measurements in the diffuser orifice, as
well as of the derived effective wake fields, are added
for a direct comparison. As usual, the velocity com-
ponents are given as a fraction of the model speed.
In addition, plots of the lines of equal axial velocity
are presented in Fig. 10 and vector diagrams of the
transverse velocity components in Fig. Il.
Let us first consider the axial velocity component.
In the nominal wake field, this axial component is
almost uniform over a large part of the propeller disk.
Distortions of the flow are found primarily around
the = 2000 position. They are caused mainly by the
presence of the propeller shaft. The position of the
shaft wake peak is slightly different for the two models
owing to differences in the hull shape. lt is striking
that the non-uniformities in the wake distribution are
much less for the pram-type stern (4984A). This must
be attributed partly to the smaller hull inclination and
partly to the favourable strut location. Behind model
4984 the strut wakes interfere with the shaft wake, while
for model 4984A the strut wakes develop outside the
shaft wake, at least at the outer radii. For both models
the variations of the velocity distribution with the
radius are small, as appears from Figs. 4 and 7. In
the flow field measured in the diffuser orifice, this is
evidently not the case due to the non-uniform diffuser
induction. The axial velocity distribution in the effec-
tive wake fields was obtained by subtracting VA1 as
given by (2.3), after assessment of the contribution
B1cosO. This has been accomplished as follows. From
the direction of the transverse component, it can be
concluded that the heaviest loading of the diffuser
occurs around 'p = 20, hence O = 20. The value

6
 NOMINAL WAKE FIELD NOMINAL WAKE FIELD
0.5 1.0

Vn
Va/v
'V

05

-0.5 o

_u
DIFFUSER FLOW FIELD DIFFUSER FLOW FIELD
0.5 20
Vr/ Va-
/V

o 1.5

____-
0.88
-0.5 o
EFFECTIVE FLOW FIELD EFFECTIVE FLOW FIELD
0.5 10
Vr! Vol
V /V

o 0.5

-0.5 o
0 90 180 270 360 cf 90 180 270 360

Fig. 6. Circumferential distributions of radial velocity compo- Fig. 7. Circumferential distributions of axial velocity compo-
nent (model No. 4984). nent (model No. 4984A).

of B1 can then be derived when it is assumed that
interaction effects are negligibly small at ( = 20
(O = 0), which is reasonable in view of the distance to
the hull being relatively large. This means that after
subtraction of (2.3) the nominal velocity distribution
should be recovered at p = 20. Ef the axial velocity
component at q = 20 in the nominal wake field is
denoted by VN(r) and the same component in the
diffuser flow field by V0(r), we can plot
B1 = VDVNAI
as a function of the radius. The actual value of B1(r) is
determined from a faired curve through the plotted
points.
Following this procedure, the distribution of the effective transverse flow fields are compared with the
effective velocity field can be constructed leading to
the results shown in Figs. 4, 7 and 10. These results
indicate that the circumferential variations of the
axial velocity are smaller in the effective than in the
nominal wake. This is also clearly illustrated by the
harmonic analysis of these circumferential axial velo-
city distributions, given in Tables I and 2.
Turning now to the transverse velocity components,
it is shown at the top of Figs. 5, 6, 8 and 9 that, in the
nominal wake, the familiar, almost sinusoidal, distri-
butions occur. In the diffuser orifice, the magnitude of
the tangential velocity components is found to be
decreased and the radial components vary with the
radius, as anticipated in section 2, eq. 2.8 and 2.9. For
the derivation of the effective transverse flow fields, the
coefficient B2 has to be determined. For this purpose
a procedure analogous to that used for B1 can be
applied, B7 being independent of the radius. The
corresponding nominal fields in Fig. 11. It appears
that the transverse velocity components are hardly
affected by the interaction.

7
 NOMINAL WAKE FIELD NOMINAL WAKE FIELD
0.5 05

Vt/ Vr!
'V V

-0.5 -0.5

DIFFUSER FLOW FIELD DIFFUSER FLOW FIELD

0.5 05
Vt/ Vr,!
V

0 o
7.-
r/R0 40

-05 -0.5
EFFECTIVE FLOW FIELD EFFECTIVE FLOW FIELD
05 05

Vt'
1v Iv

o o

-0.5 -0.5
00 900 1800 2700 3 60 0 go. 1800 2 70 36d0

Fig. 8. Circumferential distributions of tangential velocity corn- Fig. 9. Circumferential distributions of radial velocity cornpo-
ponent (model No. 4984A). nent (model No. 4984A).

Table 1. Harmonic analysis of axial velocity component in nominal and effective wake field ol model No. 4984

VA/V= A0 +Acos(i+)
nominal wake field

nR A0 A1 a1 A2 a, A3 a3 A4 a4

0.40 0.744 0.143 15.2 0.083 225.3 0.067 69.0 0.028 267.9 0.019 108.6
0.48 0.756 0.138 14.4 0.075 224.3 0.060 70.5 0.025 270.9 0.015 119.1
0.64 0.772 0.129 18.0 0.061 229.4 0.047 75.2 0.018 269.8 0.015 141.2
0.80 0.774 0.135 20.5 0.063 235.5 0.047 89.9 0.021 326.5 0.018 171.4
0.88 0.770 0.139 19.5 0.064 236.3 0.045 88.2 0.020 317.2 0.023 167.8
1.04 0.760 0.157 19.9 0.076 244.7 0.054 98.3 0.031 319.4 0.031 168.6

effective wake field

nR A0 A1 a5 A2 a3 A3 a3 A4 a4 A5 a5

0.40 0.831 0.042 21.0 0.035 221.0 0.038 67.8 0.014 251.6 0.001 139.2
0.48 0.845 0.028 33.1 0.025 235.5 0.034 71.9 0.0 18 269.3 0.009 153.6
0.64 0.8 57 0.033 30.3 0.019 260.3 0.030 103.5 0.021 297.3 0.0 17 147.0
0.80 0.842 0.070 28.4 0.026 231.3 0.022 106.1 0.0 17 322.3 0.017 144.7
0.88 0.800 0.127 32.0 0.052 252.1 0.023 122.7 0.012 8.5 0.010 161.3

8
 MODEL NO. 4984 MODEL NO.
4984A

75

.80

.85
85

NOMINAL WAKE FIELD NOMINAL WAKE FIELD

1.10

1.15

j.20

1.25

t30

35

1.40

45
1.50

DIFFUSER FLOW FIELD DIFFUSER FLOW FIELD

EFFECTIVE WAKE FIELD EFFECTIVE WAKE FIELD

Fig. iO. Plots of lines of equal axial velocity.

MODEL NO. 4984
NOMINAL WAKE FIELD
EFFECTIVE WAKE FIELD
Fig. 11. Transverse velocity components.
As an illustration of the effect of the differences be-
tween nominal and effective wakes, as derived for the
subject vessels by the diffuser test, on propeller per-
formance, calculations were made of the fluctuations
of shaft force and moment in both the nominal and
effective wakes. The employed calculation procedure
is based on lifting surface theory [2]. The results of
these calculations are compared with measurements in
Fig. 12. The correlation with the measurements is, in
general, slightly better for the effective than for the
nominal, wake field. The correlation is improved,
especially in the case of model 4984. Apparently, in
lo
4984A
MODEL NO.
NOMINAL WAKE FIELD
EFFECTIVE WAKE FIELD
spite of the assumptions made in the analysis of the
diffuser test results, the derived effective wake fields
are a better representation of the flow field actually
experienced by the propeller than the nominal wake
fields. Nevertheless, the interaction effects are so small
for twin-screw ships that the restrictions on measuring
accuracy and the approximations involved in the
diffuser test may lead to errors of the same order
of magnitude as these effects. The diffuser test ap-
proach is therefore considered more useful when the
interaction effects to be determined are more pro-
nounced [1].
Table 2. Harmonic analysis of axial velocity component in nominal and effective wake field of model No. 4984A

VA!V= A0 +A1cos(ic+1)
nominal wake field
nR A0 A1 A: (i, A3 (03 Ag (04 A5

0.40 0.788 0.099 10.0 0.063 213.0 0.046 47.7 0.014 232.3 0.002 106.0
0.48 0.803 0.086 5.3 0.051 205.5 0.044 38.0 0.016 227.7 0.008 52.9
0.64 0.812 0.085 359.2 0.040 199.5 0.030 35.0 0.009 178.1 0.006 3.9
0.80 0.818 0.077 357.9 0.026 205.1 0.017 49.1 0.005 105.9 0.008 239.1
0.88 0.815 0.084 358.2 0.028 194.5 0.012 48.8 0.006 67.2 0.008 223.3
1.04 0.810 0.095 352.6 0.028 187.0 0.009 43.6 0.008 64.1 0.010 219.8

effective wake field

nR A0 A1 a A2 a: A3 a3 A4 (04 A5 a5

0.40 0.854 0.014 307.6 0.024 195.6 0.025 51.8 0.011 242.9 0.002 10.7
0.48 0.864 0.020 299.3 0.017 151.5 0.015 39.6 0.008 187.8 0.002 216.4
0.64 0.881 0.017 266.1 0.013 114.6 0.004 151.4 0.003 89.2 0.007 208.1
0.80 0.874 0.013 342.6 0.013 151.0 0.002 165.4 0.008 30.5 0.006 176.8
0.88 0.846 0.052 2.2 0.020 156.4 0.001 230.1 0.003 59.1 0.005 227.2

MODEL NO 4984 MODEL NO 4934k

N: RESULTS OF CALCULATIONS BASED ON NOMINAL WAKE

E: RESULTS OF CALCULATIONS BASED ON EFFECTIVE WAKE
M: RESULTS OF MEASUREMENTS

FV MV PV MV

N
NE
M M

FM MH FH MM
STATIC TRANSVERSE SHAFT FORCE AND MOMENT
N
20- 20 20- 20
FORCE MOMENT FORCE MOMENT
(kgl io3) (g .io') (kgno.iD
15 15
E

io N lID to-
M
N
N
05 E34 N
05 E M M
D5 N 05 E1
EM
IM
O
T FH FV O NIH MV
D
T FM FV 0
'!.t'
MM MV
FIRST HARMONIC AMPLITUDES OF THE THREE COMPONENTS OF THE FLUCTUATING SHAFT
FORCE AND MOMENT

Fig. 12. Comparison of calculated and measured shaft force and moment.

5 Conclusions than those based on the nominal wake. Nevertheless,

The effective wake distributions of two twin-screw
dredgers were derived from the results of diffuser tests
and a direct comparison was made with the results of
nominal wake measurements. Moreover, the nominal
and effective wakes were indirectly compared with the
aid of shaft force and moments calculations.
Although the diffuser test method is insufficiently
sensitive to find all interaction effects in detail, we can
conclude with confidence from the present work that
the propeller-hull interaction effects on the wake dis-
tribution of twin-screws ships is such as to reduce the
circumtrential velocity variations. The transverse flow
field of the present ships is hardly different in the
nominal and effective wakes. The calculations of shaft
l'orce and moments fluctuations, based on the effective
wake field, correlated better with experimental data
one should bear in mind that the diffuser test is pri-
niarily useful when interaction effects on the wake are
more pronounced, as for most single-screw ships.
References
I. HOEKSTRA, M.: An investigation into the effect of propeller-
hull interaction on the structure of the wake field, paper
presented at the Symposium on Hydrodynamics of Ship and
Off-shore Propulsion Systems, Det norske Ventas, Oslo,
March 1977.
GENT, W. v: Unsteady lifting-surface theory for ship
screws: derivation and numerical treatment of integral equa-
tion, Journal of Ship Research, Vol. 19, No. 4, December
1975.
BERG, W. VAN DEN and Kooy, J. VAN DER: The effect of a
pram-type aftbody shape on performance, cavitation and
vibration characteristics of twin-screw dredgers. Nether-
Lands Maritime Institute, Monograph, M 18, June 1977.

11
APPENDIX in which
The induced velocity field of the diffuser is determined R = [(x_x')2+r2+r'22rr'cos(0_0')]t (A.6)
from a vortex sheet representation of the diffuser. The We now assume that
velocity induced by a vortex sheet is given in vector
form by T0 = A(x')+B(x')cosO' (A.7)
-- - i J
xt(') dA(x) (A.l)
Then from the conservation of vorticity, expressed by
4rr S
T i a0
(A.8)
where is the position vector of the point where V is x r' ao'
calculated, ' is the position vector of the point where we deduce
the integrand is evaluated, s= and dA is
an element of the surface A of the vortex sheet (Fig. = a(x')sin' (A 9)
A-1). The vector t has no component perpendicular Notice that an integration constant does not appear,
to the sheet. So, if the vortex sheet is axisymmetrical, since at the leading edge of the sheet (x' = a) both 1.
t is in the Cartesian co-ordinate system x-y-z given by and a(x') are zero. Besides we observe that, whereas U9
is rstricted to the actual diffuser surface, TX extends
r = jF+j(T0sjn 0')+ k(T0cos 0') (A.2)
to infinity.
where F and r0 are the components of T in axial and Inserting the above expressions for F and T in equa-
circumferential direction respectively. The vector can tions (A.5) and replacing 0-0' by 4i, we arrive at
be written as b 2,t [A + B cos (4' 0)] [r cos '1' r']
VA---5J
4ltaO R3
r'dx'di,li
= (xx')+J(rcos0r'cos0')+ (A.lOa)
+ k(rsin 0r' sinO') (A.3)
i 27rarsin('4/_0)sin'4J,d,d'4,+
Hence the axial, radial and tangential components of 4m o R3
xF are b 2,, [A+Bcos('4O)](xx')cos'4'
(x = F0[(r cosO r' cos 0') cosO' +
+SS R3
+ (r sinO - r' sin 0') sin 0'] (A.4a) (A.lOb)
asin('4iO)[r'cos'4r]
(x = T[(r sinO - r' sin 0') cosO + VT= 5$ r' dx' d'4'+
4m R3
(r cosO - r' cos 0') sin 0] +
- T0(x - x') (cos Ocos O' + sinO sin 0') (A.4b) b 2,,L14- -4- R rnc(i/,
\T - 1)V1 ( --.y", in
$ J
r' dx' d
(i xfl = T[(rsin0r'sinO')sin0+ 4mao R
(A.lOc)
+ (r cos 0 r' cos 0') cos O] +
+ T,(x x') (sin O cosO' - cosO sin O') (A.4c) The function hR3 is symmetrical on the interval
O-2m with respect to 4i = m. When it is multiplied by
Expressing speeds, f' and F0 as a fraction of some an antisymmetrical function such as, for instance,
representative velocity V0 and lengths as a fraction of sin4', the integral of the product over 4i vanishes.
a representative radius R, the non-dimensional axial, With this in mind, equations (A.lO) can be simplified to
radial and tangential components of the induced
velocity V are given by i b2lr(A+BcosOcos'4J)(rcos'4,...r')
VA - -4m- r'dx'dl
R3
2ir F0[rcos(0O')r'] (A.l la)
VA= --JJ r dx dO (A.5a)
47ra0 R 1 2,, ar'cosOsin2IJ,,,4,
VR=--$J
4m a o R3
VR =
b 2,t
FXr' sin (0 0') F0(x - x') cos (OO') r' dx' do' i b27r(A+BcosOcos)(x_x)cos'4,
- R
+sS 4m o R3
r' dx d'4i

(A .5 b) (A.11b)
TX[r'cos(0O')r] asinOcos'4i(r'cosJir)
VT - 4mao
SS
R3
V= 55
4m0o R3
r'dx'd,fi+

b 2,t Bsin0sin2'4(xx')
F0(xx')sin(O 0)} r' dx' dO' (A.5c) r' dx' di4i (A.iic)
+
R3 - R3

12
lt follows that the axial component of the induced Since
velocity in the plane x = a becomes 2n sin2i 2,r cos2i
(VA)x=a =f1(r)+f2(r) cosO (A.12)
di di (A.14)
R3

The velocity components at x = a in y and z direction we find

caused by r and the O'-dependent part of 10, are sin2O 2,r
arcos i/i
2ir (V)==C(r)+ r'dx'd,1 (A.15a)
()x=aJJ1 I ar'(cos2Osin2(/+sin2Ocos29')
R3
+
4m

2,r
R3

arsin2Ocos!1J1 ()x=a =
sinOcosO a?cosl,d,d, (A.15b)
r'dx'd + 4m R3
R
' B(cos2Ocos2/j + sin2Osin2i)(xx') Recalling eq. A.6 with OO' = li, it is readily shown
+-J$
47ta0 R3
r'dx' di that C(r) tends to become independent of r for r'r.
(A.13a) Under the same condition, the integral in (A.15a) and
2ir ar sinOcosO(sin2icos2i) (A.15b) tends to zero. In our case r'>r, so that
(V)x=a = - (') is approximately constant and (V2) is almost
s
ol R3 zero.
or sinO cosO cos
+ r'dx'd+
R3
b 2,r
B sin O cos O(sin2i cos2J) (x -x')
r' dx' di
R
(A.13b)

X b X Xa

Fig. A-1. Definition of co-ordinate systems.

13
 PUBLICATIONS OF THE NETHERLANDS MARITIME INSTITUTE

Monographs
M 1 Fleetsimulation with conventional ships and seagoing tug/
barge combinations, Robert W. Bos, 1976.
M 2 Ship vibration analysis by finite element technique. Part
III: Damping in ship hull vibrations, S. Hylarides, 1976.
M 3 The impact of Comecon maritime policy on western
shipping, Jac. de Jong, 1976.
M 4 Influence of hull inclination and hull-duct clearance on
performance, cavitation and hull excitation of a ducted
propeller, Part 1, W. van Gent and J. van der Kooij, 1976.
M 5 Damped hull vibrations of a cargo vessel, calculations and
measurements, S. Hylarides, 1976.
M 6 VLCC deckhouse vibration, Calculations compared with
measurements, S. Hylarides and R. van de Graaf, 1976.
M 7 Finite element ship hull vibration analysis compared
with full scale measurements, T. H. Oei, 1976.
M 8 Investigations about noise abatement measures in way of
ship's accommodation by means of two laboratory facili-
ties, J. Buiten and H. Aartsen, 1976.
M 9 The Rhine-Main-Danube connection and its economical
implications for Europe, Jac. de Jong, 1976.
M 10 The optimum routeing of pipes in a ship's engine room,
C. van der Tak and J. J. G. Koopmans, 1977.
M 11 Full-scale hull pressure measurements on the afterbody
of the third-generation containership s.s. "Nediloyd
Delft", R. A. P. J. Schulze, 1977.
M 12 Cavitation phenomena and propeller-induced hull pressure
fluctuations of a third-generation containership, A. Jonk
and J. van der Kooij, 1977.
M 13 Hull vibration measurements carried out on board the
third-generation containership s.s. "Nediloyd Delft",
R. A. P. J. Schulze, 1977.
M 14 Hull vibrations third-generation containership, S. Hylari-
des, 1977.
M 15 Influence of hull inclination and hull-duct clearance on
performance, cavitation and hull excitation of a ducted
propeller. Part II, J. van der Kooij and W. van den Berg,
1977.
M 16 The determination of the acoustical source strength of
propellers of two merchant vessels. A. de Bruijn, 1977.
M 17 Experiments on acoustic modelling of machinery excita-
tion, J. W. Verheij, 1977.
M 18 The effect of a pram-type aftbody shape on performance,
cavitation and vibration characteristics of twin-screw
dredgers. W. van den Berg and J. van der Kooij, 1977.
M 19 investigations into the effect of model scale on the perfor-
mance of two geosim ship models, Part 1: Flow behaviour
and performance in calm water, A. Jonk and J. van de
Beek, 1977.
M 20 Investigations into the effect of model scale on the perfor-
mance of two geosim ship models, Part II: Behaviour
and performance in waves, M. F. van Sluijs and R. J.
Dommershuijzen, 1977.
M 21 A Tale of Eight Seaports. Jac. de Jong, 1977.