See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/315718309

Analysis of Ship Hull Girder Hydro-Vibration: excitation force induced for

propulsion system and rudder interaction

Article · May 2017

CITATION READS

1 187

3 authors, including:

Franklin Johnny Dominguez Ruiz Marcelo Cali

Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral (ESPOL) Xunta de Galicia
7 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS    3 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Franklin Johnny Dominguez Ruiz on 31 March 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Analysis of Ship Hull Girder Hydro-Vibration: excitation force induced
for propulsion system and rudder interaction.
Franklin Jhonny Dominguez Ruiz
Tecnavin S.A., Guayaquil, Ecuador, jdominguez@tecnavin.com

Edgar Marcelo Cali

COTECMAR, The Science and Technology Corporation for Development of the Naval and Riverine Industry
of Colombia, Cartagena, Colombia, mcali@cotecmar.com

Lino Andrés García J.

Tecnavin S.A., Guayaquil, Ecuador, lgarcia@tecnavin.com

ABSTRACT: The hydro-vibration analysis of hull girder has become a very important methodology in the design
stages of a ship, for predicting resonance problems that can be caused by the encountering wave loads, or due
to the interaction between the ship’s drive line and rudder. This paper presents the methodology that has been
used to analyze the Hull-girder vibrations induced due to propeller - rudder interaction, in the design stage of a
Coastal Patrol Vessel (CPV). The methodology at first analyze the interaction of the propulsion system and the
rudder as two separate sub-systems and finally the interaction with the hull girder in a system of forced vibration
caused by the excitation of the propeller. The resulting interaction takes into consideration: the excitation of the
propeller, natural frequencies of the drive line, natural frequencies of the rudder, natural frequencies of the
structure of equipment foundations, added mass, and damping of both the propeller and the hull girder. Vibra-
tion levels acting in the vessel structure are compared with the limits proposed by ISO 6954 (2000).

1. Introduction sides respectively were distributed on the correspond-

Dynamic propeller forces need to be included to ac- ing nodes following Germanischer Lloyd, I. Asmus-
curately verify that the hull girder supports all loads sen (2001) recommendations.
acting on it. These forces are a function of thrust,
torque, and propeller frequency. Namely, it is a func-
tion of: i) rotational speed for fixed pitch propellers,
and ii) pitch angle for controllable pitch propellers.
In the present work, Finite Element Method was used
to estimate the deformation due to these forces acting
over the hull girder. This method allows modeling
hull girder considering all structural elements and the
propeller dynamic forces. Numerical results ex- Figure 1 – Ship Finite Element Model
pressed in RMS speed of vibration are compared to
the limits proposed by the Classification Societies.

2. Finite Element Method Applied to the Hull

Girder
There are several recommendations for the develop-
ment of a Finite Element Model (FEM), especially by
Classification Societies, in the present work; it was
necessary to include mass and inertia of the structural Figure 2 – Ship photography
elements of hull and superstructure, incorporating
machinery foundations for hull girder vibration anal-
ysis.
Shell elements were used in the hull and in primary
structures, and frame elements to model the second-
ary structures and pillars, see Figures 1 and 2. The
mass of the structure, equipment, tank liquid, and the
added mass values of 40 and 20 [kg/m2] on decks and
Figure 3 – FEM interior view: Engine room
 Table 1 – Hull added mass
Vel. Sea State ωe Added mass % of displacement
Knts rad/s ton %
11 3 1.24 483 173%
18 3 1.5 436.9 157%
21 3 1.61 425.1 152%

5. Propulsion line behavior

The propulsion line transmits the thrust of the ship as
well as the exciting forces from the propeller. It’s lat-
eral, axial, and torsional natural frequencies need to
Figure 4 – Ship interior view at construction be considered to assess resonance. Figures 4 and 5
show the FEM propulsion line included in this analy-
3. Hydro elastic Hull Behavior sis.
Restraints were placed to simulate the ship behavior
into the water, using an equivalent spring system
placed in the submerged surface of the hull to balance Hull
the ship weight. Spring stiffness was calculated using
the volume of water displaced within specific sec- Propulsion Gearbox bearing
tions, see Figure 3. To verify that the restrictions are Propeller Bearings shaft
conveniently applied, each node deformation was
Figure 6 – Longitudinal section at propulsion line
verified using static weight of the vessel.

Hull
Rudder Propeller Bearings

Figure 7 – Propulsion line in FEM

5.1. – Bearings location

Cutless bearings or roller bearings are included in our
Figure 5 - Aft frame – Hull bottom restraints FEM model. Usually, bearing center is the support
point, except for bearing close to the propeller, which
4. Hull added mass estimation is considered to 1/3 from the aft end of bearing.
On elements that are submerged in water vibration The propulsion line natural frequencies depend on
moves a small fluid volume; its mass is called added bearing position and stiffness. In the present study, 3
mass. This mass is added to FEM model as a distrib- bearings were used, as shown in Figure 6. Two aft
uted mass over all submerged elements. supports are bronze – rubber cutless bearings. The
The added mass can be obtained from Seakeeping propeller shaft had been modeled using beam ele-
analysis for each speed and sea state [Lewis, FM ments. The propeller and flanges masses are included
1929]. This mass is a function of the vessel encounter in their respective locations. The manufacturer pro-
frequency, vided the bearing stiffness value for accurate results.

2
𝜔𝑒 = 𝜔 + (𝜔 ⁄𝑔) (𝑈. cos 𝜇) (1)

Where ωe= Encounter frequency (rad/s), ω= Wave

frequency (rad/s), g= Gravity acceleration (m/s2), U=
Ship speed (m/s), and µ= Wave incidence angle (rad)

Added mass values for three different ship speeds Figure 8 – Propulsion line drawing
with the same sea state 3 and following seas are
shown in Table 1.
5.2. – Propeller added mass
The propeller accelerates its surrounding water and an where:
added mass is generated, that was estimated using
PRAMAD program [U OF MICHIGAN, 1980]. [M] is the mass matrix of the system
There are several formulas for estimating these [K] is the stiffness matrix of the system
masses M. Parsons (1980), Schwanecke (1963) or D. {𝑌} is the displacement vector
MacPherson (2007) {𝑌̈} is the second derivative of displacement Y
Table 2 – Propeller added mass Nowadays, computers allow this calculation accu-
Direction Units Value rately and for several degrees of freedom.
M11 N.s2/m 332.6 Tables 3 and 4 present the natural frequencies in the
M22 N.s2/m 48.9 system working range.
M52 N.s2 37.2
M55 N.m.s2 40.0 Table 3 – Hull girder natural frequencies
Vertical direction
Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4
Hz Hz Hz Hz
3.59 7.46 15.16 28.3
Horizontal direction
Mode 1 Mode 2 Mode 3 Mode 4
Hz Hz Hz Hz
5.59 10.23 16.17 28.27

Table 4 –Propulsion line natural frequencies

Figure 9 – Added mass nomenclature Mode 1 Mode 2
Hz Hz
5.3. Thrust bearing and engine/gearbox flexible 23.49 29.73
coupling Stiffness
In our model, thrust bearings are placed on the gear- Figures 9 and 10 show the modal shape of natural fre-
box; and flexible mounts of gearbox & engine with quencies
the stiffness provided by manufacturer. Mounts prop- It is recommended that the working range has to be
erties were modeled for each direction (x, y, z). Fig- from 650 RPM to 2000 RPM on engine, due to coin-
ure 8 shows the position of the elements used. cidence between hull girder natural frequencies and
engine and propeller excitation range as can be seen
Thrust Gearbox in Table 5.
bearing mounts
Engine
mounts

Stuffing box

Figure 10 – Thrust bearing and engine/gearbox mounts

5.4. - Natural vibration analysis

Once the mentioned hull and propulsion line proper-
ties are modeled, vibration analysis can be performed
for both, hull girder and propulsion line natural fre-
quencies.
The FEM and the eigenvalue matrix method had been
used to calculate the propulsion system vibrational
modes. The finite element method divides a body in
finite elements interconnected by nodes, which are
equivalent to the original body; in the elastic zone the
equations to find the nodes deformation can be ex- Figure 11 – Vertical direction mode shapes
pressed in matrix form as follows:
[𝑀]{𝑌̈} + [𝐾]{𝑌} = {0} (2)
 5.5.1. – Propeller damping
Damping is generated when the propeller rotates in
the water, the approximation of these values are
shown in Schwanecke (1963) or M. Parsons (1980).
The damping depends on the propeller rotation speed,
therefore is determined for each operating condition,
see Table 6. The damping is placed on the propeller
node in the FEM. Structural deformations caused by
the propeller excitation forces decreases due to the
damping effect.

Table 6 - Propeller damping for vibration analysis

Damping (Schwanecke)
Engine RPM 1071 1356 1722 2000
Frec HZ 23.49 29.73 37.77 43.86
Figure 12 – Horizontal direction mode shapes C11 N.s/m 109071 138045 175354 203655
C22 N.s/m 11070 14011 17797 20670
Table 5 - Engine and propeller working ranges C52 N.s 11119 14073 17876 20761
Engine working range C55 N.m.s 12197 15436 19608 22773
RPM 600 650 2000
Hz 10 10.83 33.3 5.5.2. Structure damping
Propeller working range Hysteresis damping is caused by internal molecular
RPM 197 213.4 658 friction on vessel structures, and its value is estimated
Hz 13.16 14.22 43.86 using a coefficient 0.05 proportional to the stiffness.
Figures 11 and 12 show the natural frequencies mode 6. - Transmissibility
shape found in the propulsion line. It should be noted Flexible mounts reduce vibration effect produced by
that the first vibration mode is at the tunnel between the engine on their foundations. In the case of study,
Stern tube bearing and gearbox and the second mode the propulsion system has 2 front flexible rubber
at the propeller end. The first axial natural frequency mounts for each engine and 2 flexible mounts for each
is 37.77 Hz. gearbox.

k k
c
Figure 13 – First vibration mode 23.49 Hz 2 2

Figure 15 – Perturbing force transmitted by the springs and

damper. Thomson W., (1972)

Transmissibility is the relationship between the per-

turbing force and the transmitted force to the founda-
Figure 14 – Second vibration mode 29.73 Hz tion and depends especially of the connection stiff-
ness between the engine and the boat structure. For
Propulsion line natural frequencies are within the this study, flexible rubber mounts had been used.
working range and forced analysis should be consid-
ered to check the structures resistance and whether There are several references that provide recommen-
the proposed vibration levels standards are met. dations to know whether a particular mount is suitable
to reduce engine forces transmission to structures. W.
5.5. - Damping Thomson, (1972), shows a graph that has frequency
Energy due to vibration on the ship can be dissipated (cpm) and the static deformation produced by the en-
as damping. Vibration analysis should consider three gine on the flexible mount or the connecting element
types of damping, namely: the propeller damping, the as variables.
hysteresis damping and hull damping in water.
For the present study, the engine manufacturer pro-
vides several options for flexible mounts, tables 7 and
8 show the percentage of effectiveness of the system their moments M33 and M22, while for the axial anal-
foundation. ysis the longitudinal force F11 is considered, follow-
According to transmissibility analysis results had ing same nomenclature shown in Figure 7.
been decided to use the 315 mount - 55SH due to the Exciting forces are decomposed into harmonic com-
appropriate reduction of excitation forces transmitted ponents using the Fourier analysis [Kumai, 1961].
by the engine and therefore these forces will not be Currently, Classification Societies recommend exci-
considered in the analysis of vibration of the boat. tation values for each order based on the number of
blades and thrust or torque on the propeller, as appro-
Table 7 - Transmissibility for engine mount at 650 RPM priate. For the study boat, the excitation values rec-
650 RPM ommended by ABS (2006) had been used. The values
Equiv. arrangement Effectiveness % of the forces applied to the study boat in 4 different
working conditions are shown in Table 9.
Flexible mounts dB Isolation
RD314 B-65Sh -8.390 -590.2% Table 9 - Propeller excitation forces for vibration analysis
RD314 B-60Sh -3.821 -141.0% Frequency (HZ) 23.49 29.73 37.77 43.86
RD314 B-55Sh -1.790 -51.0% Order 1Z 1Z 1Z 1Z
RD314 B-50Sh 0.165 3.7% Engine RPM 1071 1356 1722 2000
RD314 B-45Sh 1.821 34.3% Total thrust 20503 35677 65830 91605
RD315 HD-65Sh -1.009 -26.1% Total torque 4974 8476 15141 20936
RD315 HD-60Sh 2.819 47.8%
Propeller excitation forces
RD315 HD-55Sh 3.785 58.2%
Axial F11 (N) 2358 4103 7571 10535
RD315 HD-50Sh 5.221 69.9%
Vertical F33 (N) 246 428 790 1,099
RD315 HD-45Sh 6.919 79.7%
Transv. F22 (N) 472 821 1514 2107
Moment M11 (N.m) 433 737 1317 1821
Table 8 - Transmissibility for engine mount at 2000 RPM
Moment M33 (N.m) 622 1059 1893 2617
2000 RPM
Moment M22 (N.m) 1134 1932 3453 4773
Equiv. arrangement Effectiveness %
Flexible mounts dB Isolation
7.2. – Hull pressure forces (pressure fluctuation)
RD314 B-65Sh 9.742 89.4% There are several causes that produce fluctuating
RD314 B-60Sh 10.877 91.8% pressures on the hull in the area of the propeller.
RD314 B-55Sh 11.651 93.2% These pressures fluctuate proportional to the propel-
RD314 B-50Sh 12.604 94.5% ler rotation speed, its number of blades (blade rate fre-
quency), and cavitation.
RD314 B-45Sh 13.578 95.6%
Pressures can be obtained by experimentation, by nu-
RD315 HD-65Sh 12.006 93.7% merical approximation (CFD) or by empirical formu-
RD315 HD-60Sh 14.236 96.2% las [Holden, 1980]. For the current analysis, Holden
RD315 HD-55Sh 14.919 96.8% formulas were used. These pressures vary according
RD315 HD-50Sh 16.011 97.5% to working condition. Table 10 shows pressures val-
ues applied in an area of 1 m2 of each propeller, in all
RD315 HD-45Sh 17.403 98.2%
working conditions analyzed.
7. - Forces and moments of propeller excitation Table 10 – Hull fluctuating pressures applied
Propeller vibration forces are predominant in calcu- Frec. (HZ) 15.2 23.5 28.3 29.7 37.8 43.9
lating propulsion line and boat structure vibration.
Order 1Z 1Z 1Z 1Z 1Z 1Z
These forces occur due to non-uniform water flow in
Engine RPM 691 1071 1290 1356 1722 2000
the propeller creating periodic forces depending on
Pressure PT (N/m2) 1108 3114 4962 5667 9847 14335
the number of blades called propeller excitation
forces. These forces are generated in the vertical,
transverse and longitudinal directions. 7.3. - Working conditions to evaluate
For this study case, the reduction ratio is R = 3.04,
7.1. - Forces transmitted to the propulsion shaft and a 4 blades propeller were used. Therefore, the ex-
(bearing forces) citation will occur at a frequency:
For lateral vibration analysis (bending) should be
𝑓𝑒𝑥𝑐 = (𝑅𝑃𝑀𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑖𝑛𝑒 )(𝑁𝑏𝑙𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑠 )⁄𝑅 (3)
considered vertical forces F33 and transverse F22 and
Generally, the two first orders of the propeller excita- Table 12 – Calculated rudder added mass
tion are considered: 1Z and 2Z, due to lower excita- Transversal added mass
tion magnitudes presented by higher orders. C 0.73
Resonance conditions between the excitation fre- psw 1025 Kg/m3
quency and propulsion line natural frequencies had B 0.824 m
been analyzed. Additionally maximum working con- L 1.44 m
dition (MCR) had been analyzed, which in this case B/L 0.572
is 2000 RPM. M* y 574.6 Kg
The following table shows the resonances to be con- Longitudinal added mass
sidered. C 0.21
psw 1025 Kg/m3
Table 11 – Resonances table
B 0.824 m
Natural Frec. (HZ) 15.2 23.5 28.3 29.7 37.8 43.9 A 0.182 m
Order 1Z 1Z 1Z 1Z 1Z 1Z B/L 4.53
Engine RPM 691 1071 1290 1356 1722 2000 M* x 20.89 Kg
Added inertia
8. - Rudder line behavior C 0.73
Vibration analysis must consider the rudder behavior, psw 1025 Kg/m3
to check if there is any resonance in the working B 0.824 m
range. Additionally it is important to know if the rud- L 1.44 m
der holds up propeller fluctuating stress loads. B/L 0.572
MI* 12.2 Kg.m2

9. - Classification Societies Acceptance criteria

Classification Societies recommend limits for vibra-
Rudder shaft tion velocity for crew, passengers, structures and ma-
chinery areas.
These limits are recommended to ensure people com-
fort in the accommodation areas and to prevent fa-
tigue failure in local structures.

Supports Rudder 9.1. - Living areas limits

Classification Societies recommend limits depending
Figure 16 – Rudder finite element model on craft type and accommodation or work sectors.
ISO 6954 (2000) proposed by Classification Societies
8.1. - Rudder supports location such as ABS and Germanischer Lloyd had been taken
Rudder supports are usually cutless bearings. The as acceptance criteria for the evaluation of the study
FEM represents these supports in the corresponding boat.
directions. In the present study, rudder has two sup- On Table 13, the classification refers to the area of
ports, upper one restricting rudder shaft axial move- application:
ment and allowing only rotation and lower support. • A Class: is for passenger cabins,
Due to the rudder shaft is modeled with frame ele- • B Class for accommodation of crews and
ment; constraints simulating the contact between the • C Class for workspaces
flanged shaft and the rudder shell had been included.
There are voluntary limits known as comfort nota-
8.2. – Rudder added mass tions, which are limit values proposed by the Classi-
Rudder is also immersed in water and its added mass fication Societies to grant class notations, especially
is considered in the FEM. Rudder is considered as a for passenger vessels.
plate to find the rudder added mass. Mukundan
(2002) method was used and its values are presented Table 13 - RMS vibration limits ISO 6954 (2000) of 1-80 Hz
in Table 12. The rudder added mass was evenly dis- RMS values of global vibration(mm/s)
tributed at nodes on rudder surface in their respective
directions. Classification A B C
Values on which adverse
4 6 8
comments are probable

Values below which adverse 2 3 4

comments are not probable
9.2. - Structure limits Where:
There are vibration limits for not accommodating ar- A = deformation amplitude (m)
eas as tanks, mast, lazaretto structures, engine room, 𝜔𝑣 = Vibration frequency (rad/s)
etc. These limits seek to avoid structural damage due t = time (s)
to fatigue and the cracks occurrence due to vibration.
Figure 15, taken from ABS (2006), shows vibration Since the speed is the relationship between the defor-
peak limits for structures bellow which the risk to fa- mation and the time, the vibration speed magnitude
tigue crack is expected to below. From Figure 15 can (V) can be obtained by the following equation:
be seen that for frequencies between 5 Hz and 10 Hz
vibration peak limit recommended is 30 mm/s 𝑉 = 𝐴 ∗ 𝜔𝑣 (6)

10. -Hull structure and deck house forced analy- Figures 16, 17, 18 and 19 show as color-sectors the
sis evaluation deformation that is proportional to vibration speed.
Finite element method was used to perform a forced There is greater deformation on aft bulkhead of upper
vibration analysis of the hull structure, using the fol- deck house at 43.86 Hz condition.
lowing equation:

[𝑀]{𝑌̈} + [𝐶]{𝑌̇} + [𝐾]{𝑌} = {𝐹} (4)

where [M] is the mass matrix of the system, [K] is the

stiffness matrix of the system, [C] is the damping ma-
trix system, {Y}: is the displacement vector, {Ẏ}the
first derivative of displacement Y, {𝑌̈} is is the second Figure 18 – Deformation (mm) at 23.49 Hz condition
derivative of displacement Y, {F}: is the excitation
force vector

Figure 19 – Deformation (mm) at 29.73Hz condition

Figure 20 – Deformation (mm) at 37.77 Hz condition1

Figure 17 – Peak vibration limits for local structures, American

Bureau of Shipping (2006)
Figure 21 – Deformation (mm) at 43.86 Hz condition
Deformation was estimated at all nodes in the model,
for each load condition. Figures 16, 17, 18 and 19 Tables 14 and 15 show vibration speed values by sec-
graphically show deformation results. tor for each condition, calculated from the defor-
Harmonic motion deformation as the case of vibration mation found with the FEM. Most vibration levels do
can be represented as follows, at any time t: not exceed the limits set by the rules, except the aft
bulkhead on upper deck at 2000 RPM, where the limit
𝛿 = 𝐴 ∗ sin(𝜔𝑣 . 𝑡) (5) is 6 mm/s.
11. - Local Reinforcements to reduce higher vi- Table 16 – Vibration speed after upper deck bulkhead reinforce-
bration levels ment
The FEM allow us to carry out structural modifica- RMS vibration velocity(mm/s)
tions to comply with the recommended limits. In this RPM 2000
case, it is requested to increase the section of the ver- Frequency (HZ)
tical reinforcements to the aft bulkhead on upper deck 43.86 Limit Direction
house. Sector
Figure 20 shows the deformation in the same scale as ACCOMODATION AREAS
the previous figures and shows the deformation de- Aft bulkhead at deck
4.42 6 X
crease on aft bulkhead at upper deck, with respect to 200
Figure 19. This improvement can be seen in Table 16.
12. - Conclusions
Table 14 - Vibration speed at accommodation  Acceptance criteria are effective, so the best way to
RMS vibration velocity(mm/s) avoid resonance problems is configuring the propul-
Frec, sion system to keep vibration below criteria.
(HZ) 15. 23. 28. 29. 37. 43.  Natural frequencies of the propulsion line need to
2 5 3 7 8 9 avoid the working range to prevent resonances.
Sector  Natural frequencies of ship panels and structure
ACCOMODATION AREAS need to avoid the working range of propeller excita-
0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.8 0.5 tion forces.
Inner main deck 4 2 5 3 4 2
 Forced vibration analyses on hull girder including
0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.9 0.5
propeller excitation forces should be performed to
Fore exterior main deck 6 5 9 4 9 1
identify sectors that do not meet standards.
0.2 0.3 0.0 0.3 1.3 0.7
Exterior deck 200 2 7 9 7 8 1
 The results obtained in the design stage allow iden-
2.2 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.7
tifying possible failures, especially when there is res-
Interior deck 200 0.3 7 7 6 9 3 onance risk in the propulsion line.
0.3 0.1 0.1 0.3 2.5 2.0
Upper side deckhouse 8 7 3 8 8 5 13. – REFERENCES
0.5 0.1 0.5 0.2 4.2 2.6 American bureau of shipping, 2006, Guidance on ship vibration,
Lower side deckhouse 5 2 4 2 4 5 Houston, ABS
0.2 0.4 0.2 0.1 5.1 20.
Aft bulkhead at deck 200 7 8 6 0 3 9 Dept. Of naval architecture and marine engineering of universtiy
of michigan, 1980, Propeller added mas and damping pro-
gram (PRAMAD). Revision of September 5
Table 15 – Vibration speed at structure
RMS vibration velocity(mm/s) H. Mukundan, Finite Element Analysis of a Rudder, July 2002,
Undergraduate Thesis for the completion of Bachelor of
RPM 691 1071 1290 1356 1722 2000
Technology in Ocean Engineering and Naval Architecture,
Frec. (HZ) Indian Institute of Technology, Madras
15.2 23.5 28.3 29.7 37.8 43.9
Sector
Holden, Fagerjord, Frostad, 1980, Early Design stage approach
STRUCTURE to reducing hull surface force due to propeller cavitation,
Long. Beam over SNAME Trans.
strut 0.25 0.25 0.65 0.42 0.80 4.99
Hull at stuffing box 0.65 0.94 1.82 1.44 2.60 2.70 ISO, 2000, International Standard ISO 694: Mechanical vibra-
tion – Guidelines for the measurement, reporting and evalu-
Long. Beam over ation of vibration with regard to habitability on passenger
tunnel bearing 0.39 2.32 1.28 1.84 5.62 5.77 and merchant ships
Pilot house roof 0.07 0.49 0.04 0.25 5.98 5.84
Transom/side inter- I. Asmussen / W. Menzel / H. Mumm, 2001, Ship Vibration, GL
section 1.05 2.14 3.98 2.26 5.64 10.0 Technology, Germanischer Lloyd, Hamburg

Lewis F.M., 1929, The inertia of the Water Surrounding a Vi-

brating Ship, SNAME transactions

M. Parsons, 1980, Added mass and damping of vibrating pro-

pellers, Department of naval architecture and naval engi-
neering University of Michigan

Rameswar Bhattacharyya, 1978, Dynamics of marine vehicles,

Figure 22 – Deformation (mm) at 43.86 Hz condition (reinforced John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
bulkhead at upper deck)
S. Quek, G.R. LIU, 2003, Finite Element Method: A Practical
Course, Burlington MA, Elseiver Science

Schwanecke H., 1963, Gedanken zur Frage der hydrodynamisch

erregten Schwingungen des Propellers und der Wellenlei-
tung, Jahrbuch STG

T Kumai, 1961, Some Aspects to the Propeller – Bearing Forces

Exciting Hull Vibration of a Single Screw Ship, Research
Inst. For Applied Mechanics, Kyushu Univ

Thomson W., 1972, Theory of vibration, Prentice Hall, New

Jersey

14. – Annex

Boat main particulars

Ship type Investigation boat
Overall length: 46 m
Bea: 7m
Depth: 4m
Draft: 1,9 m

Engine data
Strokes 4
Cylinders Nº 12
V angle 90 GRADES
Bore 165 mm
Stroke 190 mm
Connecting rod l. 354 mm
Weight 6800 Kg
Minimum rpm 500
Maximum rpm 2000
Max power x rpm 1680KW x 2000 RPM
Torque @ 1680 kw 8.02 KN.m

Propeller data
Type Fixed pitch
Blades Nº 4
Diameter 1.397 m
Pitch 1.283 m
D.A.R 0.91
Mass 363.7 Kg
Polar inertia 41.18 Kg.m2

Gearbox data
Ratio 3.04

View publication stats