A Seminar on

A Study of Air Lubrication

System to reduce frictional drag
ABHISHEK NEGI (P16TD003)
M. Tech in Thermal System Design
(Mechanical Engineering )

Guided By DR. R. D. SHAH

MED, SVNIT, Surat

2017-2018
Department Of Mechanical Engineering
Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute Of Technology,
Surat395007, Gujarat, India.
Flow of Contents
Introduction
Working Principle
Types of Air Lubrication Techniques
Methods for Drag Reduction Analysis
Case Study
Introduction

Shipping being a global commerce; its 60% of a typical ships propulsive power is required to overcome
frictional drag. Viscous drag is the resistance that is caused by the creation of a boundary layer. This boundary
layer consists of water particles clinging to the hull. These water particles are dragged around by the ship.

Any technique that could significantly reduce a ship's frictional resistance might have a substantial impact
both economically and environmentally.

Air lubrication aims to reduce the frictional or viscous resistance of the ship By inserting air in the boundary
layer of the flow around the hull, contact between water particles and the hull is being avoided. When there is
less or no more contact, the clinging of water particles on to the hull is being avoided. In this way, a lot of
resistance is avoided. The shape of the hull influences the ratio of pressure versus frictional drag, but on
average in shipping, the frictional or viscous resistance takes up 80% of the total drag resistance.
Working Principle

In general formulation, frictional drag is described by

2
= . . .
2
D =frictional drag
Cf =friction coefficient
= density of fluid
Uw =velocity of the moving wall
Uf =velocity of the fluid outside the boundary layer
A = area of fluid contact with the wall

Air lubrication method uses the air to reduce local average density of the fluid and also reduces the area of
direct contact of fluid to hull surface which results in a significant drag reduction.
Decreasing the relative velocity will not be a optimum solution as it will lower the speed of ship
and furthermore consequences of that.
Bubble Drag Reduction (BDR)

In this reduction method, small bubbles are injected into the boundary layer. The dispersed bubbles act to
reduce the bulk density and to modify turbulent momentum transport.

The technique is sometimes referred to as micro bubble

drag reduction, when the bubbles are very small
compared to the boundary layer thickness or wall units.
Air Layer Drag Reduction (ALDR)

Air creates a seemingly continuous lubricating layer between hull and liquid. It is injected beneath the hull of
a ship, forms a film on the flat (horizontal) part of the hull and reduces the frictional drag on the area covered
by in excess of 80%.

The effect of ALDR was found to persist for the entire length
of the model whereas the effect of BDR was seen to rapidly
decay.
Partial Cavity Drag Reduction (PCDR)

In this method, gas creates a lubricating layer between the hull and liquid as shown in the figure. The gas
separates the solid surface from the liquid resulting in more than a 95% decrease in frictional drag for the area
covered.

Drag reduction is achieved by filling a recess, much thicker than the ship-hull boundary layer thickness, with
gas. To apply PCDR on a ship's hull, the bottom of the hull needs to have indentations, which are to be filled
with gas, usually air.
A major disadvantage of PCDR is that although it reduces the drag in the order of 90% in its area covered but
it cannot include a large hull surface and hence a major hull portion remains unaffected by this technique.
METHODS FOR DRAG REDUCTION ANALYSIS

Flat plate experimental method

A rectangular flat plate has been subjected inside a moving fluid with velocity U. For studying the
effect of surface roughness two different plates with smooth and rough surfaces have been used.

Boundary layer analytical method

Boundary layer theory and its empirical correlations have been used to find Drag Reduction w.r.t. air
volume fraction inside the boundary layer.

Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis of air lubrication

A 3D fluid domain and rectangular plate with a single point air injection unit has been modelled and
results for Drag Reduction by simulation are plotted to derive conclusions.
Flat plate experimental method

The baseline friction drag coefficient on the smooth plate,

= = 1 2 =

2

where, F is the friction force, and and are the density and viscosity of the liquid, respectively
The baseline power needed to move the fluid across the surface of the plate is
1 3
=
2

where, P is the propulsive efficiency

The power needed to inject a given quantity of air beneath the surface of the hull is given by,

= 1 +

where, qA is the gas volume flux per unit width at depth d,

pA is atmospheric pressure, g is the gravitational acceleration, and
A is the pumping efficiency
 Below graph points is obtained by experimental setup used and best fit curve is induced.
Figure shows the three region with bubbly to air layer formation transition with Drag Reduction increasing from a
range of (20-80)%.
The critical gas volume flux increases with free-stream speed. The required gas flux increased for a roughened surface
with flush injection.
By using the graph we can obtain the equation of flux required for smooth, rough and transitional air layer formation which
are qALS , qALR , qALT respectively.

qALS = 0.0002 U2+ 0.0063U 0.0234

qALR = 0.0004U2 + 0.0058U 0.0003

qALT = 0.0002U2 + 0.0043U 0.0233

Data were acquired on a test model with L ~ 10 m over a speed range of 5 m/s < U < 15 m/s.

Propulsive efficiency, P 60%

Pumping efficiency, A 30%
Speed 5 m/s < U < 15 m/s
Fluid density, (Kg/m3) 1025
Persistence length 20m, 50m, 100m
Fluid viscosity, (Pa s) 0.0011
Draft 2m, 5m, 7m, 10m
Atmospheric pressure, 101
pA(KPa)
CFBR 0.004
Cost Benefit Analysis

The relationships presented above suggest that the air flux required to form air layers increases as ~ U2, while the
propulsive power increases as U3. Hence we would expect that at some speed, the energy cost balances the energy
saved.
Also, the required pumping power will increase as ~ d2. Finally, the relative benefit will increase with increasing
L, as the cost of pumping the gas into one location along the surface yields drag reduction along the entire length
of the surface.
DR
PPB %100 PA
Percentage power saved (PS) = 100 PPB

Therefore, with 100% drag reduction, and negligible air pumping power, the savings would be 100%. But, with
less drag reduction and increased pumping power, we can reach the break-even condition where %PS = 0%. And,
it is possible to have a negative value of %PS when the required pumping power exceeds any realized savings in
propulsive power.
Fig 1 - The power saved (%PS) as a function of speed (U) Fig 2 - The power saved (%PS) as a function of speed (U)
for transitional (%DR = 20%), fully developed air layers on for transitional (%DR = 20%), fully developed air layers on
the smooth (%DR = 80%) and rough (%DR = 80%) surfaces the smooth (%DR = 80%) and rough (%DR = 80%) surfaces
for L = 20 m and d = 5 m. for L = 50 m and d = 5 m.
Figure 3. The power saved (%PS) as a function of speed The power saved (%PS) as a function of speed (U)
(U) for developed (%DR = 80%) air layers for L = 100 m for developed (%DR = 80%) air layers for L = 100
and varying draft, d, on a smooth surface . m and varying draft, d, on a rough surface.
Boundary layer analytical method

The schematic represents an air chamber for air injection, free stream with velocity U0, a hydrodynamic
boundary layer with two phase fluid.
The injected microbubbles are assumed to be distributed uniformly across the boundary layer.
The air volume fraction Cv is defined as the ratio of the injected air flow rate divided by the summation of
the air flow rate and the water flow rate within the boundary layer,

=
+

=
+

0.37
=

= 1 = 0
R0.2
ex
0
0

0.2
= 0.32380

Where Qa is the injected air flow rate

Qw is the water flow rate within the boundary layer of the plate
b is the width of the plate
U0 is the inflow velocity
and is the boundary layer thickness
 Df of a flat plate with length l and width b can be derived as
0.2
= 0.036 02 2

the mixture density b can be calculated by the linear combination of the density of air and the density of water
according to the air volume fraction Cv, and is given by
+
= = + 1
+
Similarly The dynamic viscosity of the water-bubble mixture is
+
= = + (1 )
+
the frictional resistance of a flat plate with a water-bubble mixture boundary layer Dfb

0.2
= 0.036 02 2

0.2 0.2

= 0.2 = 0.2 = 1

CONCLUSION TABLE
 DR v/s v DR v/s ( )/
1.2
1.2

1
1

0.8
0.8

0.6
0.6

0.4
0.4

0.2
0.2

0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis of air lubrication

The gambit tool is used to draw the 3D model of the problem and mesh it over the entire domain length. Mesh
size is fine over rectangular plate region in compare with domain.

PLATE DIMENSION
Length : 3m
Breadth : 1.5m
Thickness : 0.5m

Diameter of hollow opening : 0.2m

DOMAIN DIMENSION
Length : 9m
Breadth : 4.5m
Thickness : 1.5m
OTHER VALUES USED:
Multiphase flow model was decided upon so that the
Number of cells : 4, 98, 143
interpenetrating two phases can be taken into
Reynolds number : 6.6*106
Under relaxation factor : 0.2 computation.
Results for CFD analysis

U(m/s) Ujet(m/s) FP(N) FF(N) FD(N) Drag

Jet speed v/s Drag reduction at body speed 4m/s
reduction 40

(%)
30

0 57.27 58.53 115.8 -

20

1 65.26 15.53 80.79 30.23

10

4 2 64.47 13.77 78.24 32.43

0
4 60.83 12.94 73.78 36.28 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

8 68.47 12.35 80.79 30.23 -10

25 117.38 11.23 128.62 -11.06 -20

U(m/s) Ujet(m/s) FP(N) FF(N) FD(N) Drag
Jet speed v/s Drag reduction at body speed 5m/s
reduction
70
(%)

60

0 53.54 589.9 643.44 -

50
1 52.05 218.23 270.29 57.99
40
5 2.5 73.44 170.63 244.07 62.06
30
5 120.21 153.03 273.25 57.53
20
7.5 164.23 146.79 311.02 51.66

10
15 188.13 141.46 329.59 48.77

0
30 381.62 137.04 518.66 19.39
0 20 40 60 80 100 120

100 520.24 137.42 657.67 -2.21 -10

U(m/s) Ujet(m/s) FP(N) FF(N) FD(N) Drag Jet speed v/s Drag reduction at body speed 15m/s
reduction 70
(%)

60
0 824 684 1508 -

1 890 224 1115 26.06 50

15 5 805 164 969 35.74

40

15 613 149 762 49.46

30
30 539 137 677 55.1

50 525 128 654 56.63 20

100 727 122 846 43.89

10
200 914 123 1037 31.23

0
300 1100.925 127.2 1228.12 18.55
0 100 200 300 400 500 600

500 1406.849 144.18 1551.03 -2.85 -10

 Comparison of drag reduction in various jet speed

DR v/s Jet speed

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
-10

-20
U=4m/s
U=5m/s
U=15m/s
OBSERVATION AND CONCLUSION

Frictional drag is directionally proportional to the speed of ship and hence seen in analysis.
Maximum drag reduction comes at higher speed of air injection at higher ship speeds.
For a constant ship speed, percentage of drag reduction increases with speed of air injection up to a point and
then reduces afterwards.
Value of Maximum drag reduction also increases with speed of ship up to a certain ship speed and then
reduces afterwards.

By above observations we can conclude that there is an optimum ship speed for which an optimum air injection
speed will give the maximum draft reduction.
CASE STUDY
After a normal speed trial test without discharging air, the same speed trial test with air discharged was carried
out to measure the energy-saving effect.
The speed was compensated by wind and tidal correction and the horsepower of the main engine is calculated
from the readings of a load indicator.
In a test run, a Togino torsion meter was temporarily installed to simultaneously measure shaft horsepower.

Here thickness of air layer formed is defined as = .

Length over all 162 m tb Horse power Blower electric Net energy saving
Width 38 m
(mm) reduction power effect
Depth 9.0 m
(KW) consumption(KW)
Draft 4.5 m / 6.37 m
Design speed 13.25 kt 7 680 211 46.9KW (12%)
Main engine 3,218 kW x 2 5 530 143 387KW (10%)
Propeller CPP 3 380 72 308KW (8%)
References

Ronen D (1982) The effect of oil price on the optimal speed of ships. J Oper Res 33:10351040
Marie JL (1987) A simple analytical formulation for microbubble drag reduction. J PhysicoChem Hydrodyn 13:213
220
Sanders WC, Winkel ES, Dowling DR, Perlin M, Ceccio SL (2006) Bubble friction drag reduction in a high-Reynolds-
number flat plate turbulent boundary layer. J Fluid Mech 552:353380
Kodama, Y., Kakugawa, A., Takahashi, T., and Kawashima, H. Experimental study on microbubbles and their
applicability to ships for skin friction reduction. International Journal of Heat Fluid Flow, 21:58288. 2000
Elbing, B. R. Skin friction drag reduction within turbulent flows, Ph. D. Thesis, University of Michigan, (2009)
Elbing, B. R., Winkel, E. S., Lay, K. a, Ceccio, S. L., Dowling, D. R., & Perlin, M. "Bubble-induced skin-friction drag
reduction and the abrupt transition to air-layer drag reduction". Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 612, 201-236, 2008
Hoang, C. L., Toda, Y., and Sanada, Y. Full scale experiment for frictional resistance reduction using air lubrication
method. Proc. of the Nineteenth International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, 812-817, 2009.
Mizokami, S., Kawakita, C., Kodan, Y., Takano, S., Higasa, S., & Shigenaga, R. "Experimental Study of Air Lubrication
Method and Verification of Effects on Actual Hull by Means of Sea Trial. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Technical
Review, 47(3), 41-47, 2010.
Kodama, Y. et al., A Full-Scale Air Lubrication Experiment Using a Large Cement Carrier for Energy Saving (Result
and Analysis), Proc. Japan Soc. Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers Conference, Vol.6 (2008) pp.163-166.