SKMO 4941 MARINE LABORATORY I

RESISTANCE TEST EXPERIMENT

FINAL REPORT

GROUP 5
NAME MATRIC NO.
JASON A/L M. CHANDARAN A17KM0115
MAHMOUD YASSER MOSTAFA KAMAL A17KM0504
ABDELRAHEM ORABY
MOHAMED AIZAK BIN DIN A17KM0143

SESSION:
2020/20-1

PREPARED FOR:
DR. NIK MOHD RIDZUAN

15 JANUARY 2020
 ABSTRACT

The resistance test is performed to determine the Total Resistance, RT of a

designed hull form at its designed speed which will give us some indications on the
power installation to be made. The test was conducted on the MTC Hull Model in the
MTC Towing Tank. Two methods of approach have been used and they are the ITTC
1957 and ITTC 1978 methods. The resistance was calculated and then plotted against
the speed to display a directly proportional relationship meaning that resistance and
power both increase with the increase of the vessel’s speed. Despite the errors that
occurred during the test, it has been found out that the ITTC 1978 method will yield a
larger resistance value but it is more accurate than the ITTC 1957 method. The
objective of the experiment was achieved and the test was carried out successfully.

i
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT i

TABLE OF CONTENTS ii

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW 2
2.1 DERIVATION OF FORM FACTOR 2
2.2 ITTC-1978 PERFORMACE PREDICTION METHOD 4
3.0 OBJECTIVES 6
4.0 METHODOLOGY 7
4.1 APPARATUS 7
4.2 MOEL SCALE 7
4.3 MODEL MAKING PROCEDURE 8
4.4 STEP BY STEP EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE 9
5.0 RESULT 11
5.1 ITTC 1957 RESULTS 11
5.2 ITTC 1978 RESULTS 12
6.0 SAMPLE CALCULATION 13
6.1 ITTC 1957 CALCULATION 13
6.2 ITTC 1978 CALCULATION 15
7.0 DISCUSSION 17
8.0 CONCLUSION 18
9.0 ERRORS & METHODS OF IMPROVEMENT 19
10.0 REFERENCES 20

ii
1.0 INTRODUCTION

One of the most important considerations for a naval architect is the

powering requirement for a ship. Once the hull form has been decided upon, it
is necessary to determine the amount of engine power that will enable the ship
to meet its operational requirements. The powering depends mainly on the size
of the vessel, the speed required and of course the resistance. The resistance is
divided into frictional resistance and viscous resistance. Frictional resistance is
a function of the hull’s wetted surface area, surface roughness, and water
viscosity. The frictional resistance depends on the size of the wetted area.
Viscous resistance is created due to viscous stress that the fluid exerts on the
ship hull and can called friction of water against the surface of ship. Even
though these are the two main components, there are still other resistances
such as air resistance and appendages resistance.

The Froude method considers the total model resistance as the sum of a
frictional resistance component and a residuary resistance component. The 1978 ITTC
Performance Prediction Method is the method developed to predict the rate of
propeller revolutions and delivered power of a single screw ship from the model
test results. The viscous and the residuary resistance of the ship are calculated from
the model resistance tests assuming the form factor to be independent of scale and
speed. The ITTC standard predictions of rate revolutions and delivered power are
obtained from full-scale propeller characteristics determined by correcting the model
values for drag scale effects.

1
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

Resistance depends on the ship's velocity. Resistance is, therefore, often defined at a
given velocity. In addition, we know that resistance will depend on the condition of the sea.
Resistance in the rough sea can not be expected to be the same as in the calm sea; Ship
resistance is therefore characterized as the force needed to tow the ship at a constant velocity
in calm water.

2.1 DERIVATION OF FORM FACTOR

Hughes proposed taking form effect into account in the extrapolation process. Form
factor of (1 + k) which depends on hull form, CF is the skin friction coefficient based on flat
plate results, CV is a viscous coefficient taking account of both skin friction and viscous
pressure resistance and CW is the wave resistance coefficient. The form factor (1 + k) depends
on the hull form and may be derived from low-speed tests when, at low Fr, wave resistance
CW tends to zero and (1 + k) = CTm/CFm.

There are a number of model experiments that allow the form factor to be derived directly
or indirectly. These are summarized as follows:

1. The model is tested at very low Fr until C T runs parallel with CF, Figure 4.9. In this
case, CW tends to zero and (1 + k) = CT/CF.
2. CW is extrapolated back at low speeds. The procedure assumes that:

RW ∝ V 6 or CW ∝ RW/V2 ∝ V4

That is

CW ∝ Fr4 , or CW = A Fr4

2
 Where A is a constant. Hence, from two measurements of CT at relatively low speeds,
and using CT = (1 + k) CF + A Fr4 , (1 + k) can be found. Speeds as low as Fr = 0.1∼0.2 are
necessary for this method and a problem exists in that it is generally difficult to achieve
accurate resistance measurements at such low speeds.

Prohaska uses a similar technique but applies more data points to the equation as follows:
CT/CF = (1 + k) + A Fr4 /CF, (4.18) where the intercept is (1 + k), and the slope is A, Figure
4.10.

For full form vessels the points may not plot on a straight line and a power of Fr
between 4 and 6 may be more appropriate. A later ITTC recommendation as a modification to
Prohaska is

CT/CF = (1 + k) + A Frn /CF , (4.19)

Where n, A and k are derived from a least-squares approximation.

3
3. (1 + k) from direct physical measurement of resistance components:

CT = (1 + k)CF + CW = CV + CW.

(a) Measurement of total viscous drag, CV

CV = (1 + k) CF , and (1 + k) = CV/CF .

(b) Measurement of wave pattern drag CW

(1 + k) CF = CT − CW, and (1 + k) = (CT − CW) /CF .

Methods 3(a) and 3(b) are generally used for research purposes, rather than for routine
testing, although measurement of wave pattern drag on a routine basis is a practical
option. It should be noted that methods 3(a) and 3(b) allow the derivation of (1 + k) over
the whole speed range and should indicate any likely changes in (1 + k) with speed.

2.2 ITTC-1978 PERFORMACE PREDICTION METHOD

 k is the form factor

 CFS is the frictional resistance coefficient of the ship
 CR is the residual resistance coefficient calculated from the total and frictional
resistance coefficients of the model in the resistance tests:

ΔCF is the roughness allowance.

4
  where kS indicates the roughness of hull surface. When there is no measured data, the

standard value of kS=150×10-6 m can be used.

CA is the correlation allowance. CA is determined from comparison of model and full-scale

trial results. When using the roughness allowance as above, the 19th ITTC recommended
using.

CAAS is the air resistance coefficient in full scale.

 where, AVS is the projected area of the ship above the water line to the transverse
plane, SS is the wetted surface area of the ship, ρA is the air density, and CDA is the air
drag coefficient of the ship above the water line. C DA can be determined by wind
tunnel model tests or calculations. Values of CDA are typically in the range 0.5-1.0,
where 0.8 can be used as a default value.

5
3.0 OBJECTIVES

The purpose of Resistance Test is to determine the Total Resistance, RT of a designed hull
form at its designed speed. It will give us some indications on the power installation to be
made.

6
4.0 METHODOLOGY

The resistance test is divided into two parts:

1. Model Making Procedure

2. Experimental Procedure

4.1 APPARATUS

MTC Hull Model

Towing Tank
Ballast weight
Swinging Frame
DAAS
Towing Carriage

4.2 MOEL SCALE

Table 1: Main Dimensions

7
 Table 2: Speed Recommendation

4.3 MODEL MAKING PROCEDURE

In order to become equal to the actual displacement, the MTC 115 needs to add some
mass. Next, the evaluation processes for Swinging is to determine the location of the center of
gravity, the ship model CG is carried out. In addition, the ballast weights have been taped on
the ship model to ensure that there is no movement during the resistance test being carried
out.

The swinging frame levels have been adjusted to acceptable levels in the swinging frame
test. Height depends on the center of gravity of the form that has been downscaled. Then
there's the water level was observed when either the swinging frame was set in to observe
state of equilibrium. 200g of ballast was mounted at the end of the swinging frame and
released to make the spinning frame freely oscillates. The period for one full oscillation,
meanwhile, the time taken for 10 (natural oscillation period) was determined by recording the
time taken for oscillations, splitting them into 10. Using the time of normal oscillation, the
swinging frame's mass moment of inertia with regard to the ship model was with respect to
the hinge is measured.

The ship model was eventually mounted on the Swinging Frame and the center of
gravity, They assessed CG. But before the center of gravity, the ballast was determined by
CG. By observing the water level so that it was in the right position, weights shifted into the

8
right position. state of equilibrium. Then, the ship model's normal oscillation time was
calculated on the Swinging Frame (ship model) and must be similar to the empty frame.

4.4 STEP BY STEP EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

1. Transducer will calibrate and install at gimbal of towing carriage.

Figure 3.1: Transducer connected to gimbal of towing carriage in experiment video

(Ridzuan,2020).

2. After, swinging process the model of ship will install at towing carriage.
3. The gimbal at towing carriage will positioned at the same level of ship’s model KG.

Figure 3.2: Position of transducer at towing carriage in experiment video

(Ridzuan,2020).

4. The transducer will be connected to the DAAS system available at the towing
carriage. before starting the experiment make sure the water is calm and all
instruments for reading at DAAS system shows zero before starting the test.

9
 Figure 3.3: DAAS system shows zero at beginning of test in experiment video
(Ridzuan,2020).

5. After all the systems are ready, we will start the towing carriage at the set speed.

Figure 3.4: Ship model moving in experiment video (Ridzuan,2020).

6. Data will be recorded in Excel file.

Figure 3.5: Results of experiment in experiment video (Ridzuan,2020).

7. Repeat steps 1 to 6 with the different set speed of towing carriage.

10
5.0 RESULT
5.1 ITTC 1957 RESULTS

Particulars Full Scale (s) Model Scale (m)

LOA 45.4 1.816
LBP 37.4 1.12
Lwl 39.101 1.564
B 10.5 0.42
Disp 588320 37.65248
S 498.0000 0.7968
Density S.W 1026.021 S.W Viscosity 1.19E-06 Temperature, T 15°C
Density F.W 997.2994 F.W Viscosity 9.13E-07 Temperature, T 24°C

Speed, Vs Speed, Vs Speed, Vm

RT,M (N) Rn, m Rn, s Ctm Cfm Cr Cfs Cts Rts (kN) PE (kW)
(Knots) (m/s) (m/s)
9.0 4.6300 0.9251 3.0663 1.58E+06 1.52E+08 9.02E-03 0.0043 0.0048 1.96E-03 0.0071 39.035 0.181
10.0 5.1444 1.0312 4.0595 1.77E+06 1.69E+08 9.61E-03 0.0042 0.0054 1.93E-03 0.0078 52.625 0.271
11.0 5.6589 1.1378 5.3717 1.95E+06 1.86E+08 1.04E-02 0.0041 0.0064 1.91E-03 0.0087 70.979 0.402
12.0 6.1733 1.2441 7.5926 2.13E+06 2.03E+08 1.23E-02 0.0040 0.0083 1.89E-03 0.0106 103.480 0.639
12.5 6.4306 1.2968 8.5180 2.22E+06 2.11E+08 1.27E-02 0.0040 0.0088 1.87E-03 0.0111 116.779 0.751
13.0 6.6878 1.3494 9.7132 2.31E+06 2.20E+08 1.34E-02 0.0039 0.0095 1.86E-03 0.0118 134.278 0.898

Ship Resistance Vs Ship Speed

160.00

110.00
RTs, (kN)

60.00

10.00
4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00 7.50 8.00
-40.00
Vs, (m/s)

Power Vs Ship Speed

1.00
0.80
0.60
PE, (kW)

0.40
0.20
0.00
4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 6.50 7.00 7.50 8.00
Vs, (m/s)

11
 5.2 ITTC 1978 RESULTS

Speed, Vs
Ctm Cfm 1+k Cw Cfs Ca Caas Cts Rts Pe ∆CF
(knots)
0.0011604 0.00425442 0.00551899 0.00196 0.00077 0.00021 0.01036 56780.3 264766.
9 5 1 1.57 2 3 1 8 8 4 7 0.000778
0.00415621 0.00528875 0.00193 0.00074 0.00021 0.01006 68056.6 317348.
10 0.0012365 2 1.57 2 4 3 8 6 3 1 0.000779
0.0013439 0.00407511 0.00505396 0.00190 0.00071 0.00021 0.00976 79905.9 372601.
11 6 3 1.57 4 8 8 8 7 2 3 0.000781
0.0015888 0.00469620 0.00188 0.00069 0.00021 0.00935 91047.9 424556.
12 7 0.00400323 1.57 4 5 6 8 1 9 8 0.000782
0.0016405 0.00459261 0.00187 0.00068 0.00021 0.00922 97433.9 454334.
12.5
9 0.00397019 1.57 1 5 5 8 3 4 5 0.000782
0.0017277 0.00393884 0.00445620 0.00186 0.00067 0.00021 0.00905 103514. 482686.
13 8 6 1.57 8 4 5 8 9 1 1 0.000783

12
13
6.0 SAMPLE CALCULATION
6.1 ITTC 1957 CALCULATION

Calculation for Speed of 9 knots

 Total Model Resistance Coefficient, CTS

3.0663
C Tm=
1
(997.2994 )¿ ¿
2

= 9.02E-03

 Model Frictional Resistance Coefficient, CFM

(0.9251)(1.564)
Rnm=
9.13 x 10−7
= 1.58 x 106

0.075
C Fm=
¿ ¿¿

= 0.0043

 Residuary Resistance Coefficient, CR

CR = CTM - CFM
CR = 9.02E-03– 0.0043
CR = 0.0048
14
 Ship Frictional Resistance Coefficient, CFS

(4.63)(39.101)
Rns=
1.19 x 10−6
= 1.52 x 108

0.075
C Fs=
¿¿¿

= 1.96 x 10−3

 Total Resistance Coefficient, CTS

An "incremental resistance coefficient" CA to account for surface roughness of the ship. This
value can vary, but CA =0.0004 is a reasonable default value.

CTS = CFS + CR + CA

CTS = 1.96 x 10−3 + 0.0048+ 0.0004

CTS = 0.0071

 Total Ship Resistance

1
RTs =( 0.0071) (1026.021) ¿
2

RTs =39.035 kN

15
 6.2 ITTC 1978 CALCULATION

Calculation for Speed of 9 knots

 Total Model Resistance Coefficient, CTS

LWL ship 39.101

Ss 498
Avs 113.7416

Ts 15
Tm 24
1+k 1.57
Cda 0.8

 CW Wave Resistance Coefficient

CW = 0.00551899
 ∆CF Roughness Allowance

16
 ∆CF = 0.00078
 CA Is the Correlation Allowance

CA = 0.00077

 CAAS is the air resistance

CAAS = 0.00022

 Total Resistance Coefficient, CTS

CTS = 0.010366

 Total Ship Resistance, RTS

RTS = 0.5*ps*Vs2*Ss*CTS

RTS = 56.780 kN

17
7.0 DISCUSSION

This experiment was carried out to determine the Total Resistance, RT of a

designed hull form at its designed speed which will give us some indications on the
power installation to be made. After all the dimensions have been scaled and the
recommended speeds have been set, the test was run at the specified speeds. With the
use of the ballasts, the model was able to simulate actual loading conditions of a
vessel and the correct draught.

From the graphs, we can notice that the ship’s resistance increases with an
increase in the ship’s velocity. This implies a directly proportional relationship.
Moreover, when the resistance increases, an increase in the effective power will be
unquestionable. This is mainly due to the increasing forces and pressures acting on the
hull of the vessel.

In the ITTC 1978 method, the total ship resistance is estimated to be 56.780 kN.
On the other hand, the ITTC 1957 method yields a lower resistance value which is
39.035 kN. There is a difference of around 30% between both values and this could
go back to the fact that the ITTC 1978 method has additional components that are
disregarded in the 1957 method. These components include the air resistance for
example. Nonetheless, this is not the main reason behind the increase in resistance
value. The form factor plays a crucial role behind this increase. The increase in the
value of the ship resistance coefficient always means an increase in the total ship
resistance.

17
8.0 CONCLUSION

To conclude, the objective of this experiment which is to determine the Total

Resistance has been achieved. The Resistance forces against six different speeds have
been obtained and the graphs for the speed vs. resistance and power have been
plotted. It has been proven that the resistance and power increase with an increase in
the vessel’s velocity. Finally, the ITTC 1978 method has proven to be more accurate
in the yielding of final results for resistance coefficient and total ship resistance.

There were some errors noticed in the experiment which will be further explained
in the upcoming sections of this report.

18
9.0 ERRORS & METHODS OF IMPROVEMENT

A main error would be due to the scaling effects (the effects due to the
difference sizes of model and ship), but it does not mean that we should stop the test.
This is because besides the software simulation, model-testing experiment is the only
way that can determine more accurate value of ship resistance. Due to some resistance
components cannot be calculated easily, especially the wave-making resistance. The
only way to estimate it is model testing experiment. With suitable experience,
material and knowledge, it will be possible to predict the necessary power for
propulsion within a margin of  2-3 %. Moreover, reflection of waves to the model
after hitting the tank’s wall will increase the total resistance.

19
10.0 REFERENCES

ITTC Recommended Procedures and Guidelines (2008). Performance, Propulsion

1978 ITTC Performance Prediction Method Resistance Test 7.5-02-03-01.4. 2.

Molland et al. (2011). SHIP RESISTANCE AND PROPULSION. PRACTICAL

ESTIMATION OF SHIP PROPULSIVE POWER, 87–89. Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu/16200597/Ship_Resistance_and_Propulsion

The Ressistance Tests on the ITTC Standard Model. (1962). Journal of Zosen Kiokai,

1962(112), 216. https://doi.org/10.2534/jjasnaoe1952.1962.112_216

ITTC Recommended Procedures. (2002). Testing and Extrapolation Methods for

High Speed marine Vehicles Resistance Test. International Towing Tank Conference

20