Effect of Bow Wings on Ship Propulsion and Motions

[+] Author and Article Information
Shigeru Naito

Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering,  Osaka University, Yamada-oka 2-1, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japannaito@naoe.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp

Hiroshi Isshiki

Institute of Mathematical Analysis,  Osaka University, Yamada-oka 2-1, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan

Appl. Mech. Rev 58(4), 253-268 (Jul 01, 2005) (16 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1982801 History:

A seaworthy ship must have the ability to endure the constantly changing and sometimes harsh environments of the ocean. Stable operation of a ship is important not only to prevent capsizing, but also to maintain an acceptable level of comfort for the crew. When navigating through waves, a ship experiences greater resistance, which adversely affects its speed and stability. Hence, one of the most important goals of research and development in naval architecture is to stabilize a ship’s movement in waves. Insects, birds, and fish use wings and fins to maintain stability and to generate thrust. Drawing from these examples in nature, researchers have investigated the employment of wings to transform wave energy into propulsion and to improve a ship’s stability. Research has shown that bow wings can generate thrust while simultaneously enhancing ship stability. In this paper, we review various strategies for improved bow wing technologies. Both theoretical and experimental efforts are reviewed. The effects of wing shape, size, position, and stiffness on the characteristics of thrust and resistance are detailed. Various control and energy conversion strategies are discussed. Perspectives for further research and development are also presented.

Copyright © 2005 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Topics: Ships , Wings , Motion , Waves
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Picture of “Autonaut” designed by Linden (from Pearson’s Magazine, Dec. 1898)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Experimental results of Jakobsen

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Experimental instrument of a free-running open wing test [two-dimensional wing (NACA0015): Chord and span length are 0.4, and 0.96m, respectively]

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Free-running open test of wing in regular waves. Wave height is not constant (10–17cm).

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Well-designed tapered and swept-back wing (model scale)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Free-running test of model ship with the wing in head sea condition

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Exceedance probability of vertical acceleration at F.P.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Resistance increase of the ship with the bow wing in regular head wave

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Experimental results of the ship speed loss (container ship). (The dotted line and solid line indicate the ship speed in still water with and without the wings, respectively, when the ship is towed with the same force.)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Relation between nondimensional resistance increase and wave mean period in irregular head waves: Actual ship scale (Fn=0.2)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Comparison of ship motions between experiments and calculations. Top=RAO of heave; bottom=RAO of pitch; RAO=Response Amplitude Operator.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Three wing forms

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Effective position of wings to get wave energy for propulsion (28)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Relation between the resistance increase and the wing position (28)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Attack angle of the bow wings in regular head waves

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Effect of moment spring stiffness on thrust generated by the wing and resistance increase of ships in waves (Fn=0.2,λ∕L=1.2). The wing is set in front of the bow, Kp is the coefficient of spring stiffness.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Total resistance ratio of theoretical to experimental results for various wings. Fn=0.15(Rn=3.30×106): Initial attack angle=0deg. Case A=without wing, Case B=NACA0012, chord=0.1m, span=0.2m, Case C=NACA0012, chord=0.082m, span=0.246m, Case D=NACA0024, chord=0.1m, span=0.2m.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

Comparison of pressure distribution around the bow wings between Case A (without wing: left) and Case D (with wing: right) (Rn=6.0×106)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 19

Comparison of the time history of the measured pressure acting on the wing between calculation and experiments (Fn=0.2,λ∕Lpp=1.0)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 20

Comparison of bending moment acting on the root of wings between calculation and experiment. The U.S. Navy, in order to investigate the safety of wings in waves, measured the force acting on the wings of an actual navy ship—i.e., whether the wings collapse or not. These well-known results indicated that bow wings are highly effective in reducing ship motions, and are safe except under very heavy sea conditions.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 21

Effective operation sea condition of wings in sea

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 22

The concept of the bow stowing system (Kawatani (33)). (The point A is fixed. The angle BCD is a constant. When the point F moves to the x direction, the point D also moves to the x direction. The point C can only move in y direction. The lengths AB and CD are important.)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 23

Frequency response function of the heave motion of the ship caused by the forced wing motion in still water

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 24

Frequency response function of the pitch motion of the ship caused by the forced wing motion in still water

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 25

Frequency response function of rolling of ship caused by forced wing motion in still water. (Vertical and horizontal axes are nondimensional: Nonlinearity of the roll motion can be seen around the resonance frequency.)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 26

Comparison of the directional characteristics of the roll motion with the fixed and the controlled bow wings in waves (top: fixed wing; bottom: controlled wing)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 27

Relationship among controlled bow wings, added resistance, and attack angle in head waves. (Measured added resistance = [added resistance without the wings in waves] − [thrust generated with the wings and other effects].)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 28

Relationship of phase between the controlled bow wings and pitch motion in head waves

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 29

Relationship between the bottom pressure and the attack angle (Fn=0.284, head wave)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 30

Comparison of attack angle of bow wings between calculated and quasi-experimental values

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 31

Coordinate system of a ship

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 32

Coordinate system of a wing

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 33

Coordinates of the bow wing

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 34

Comparison of the attack angle between fixed and controlled wings (calculated result)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 35

Comparison of thrust generated by the bow wings for fixed and controlled wings (calculated result)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 36

Block diagram of the control system

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 37

Impulse response function of the proposed system

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 38

Comparison of the generated thrust between the fixed and the controlled wings. Simulated results are based on the proposed system.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 39

Short-term prediction of the mutual relationship between nominal speed loss and significant wave height. The ship does not have a wing stowing system.



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In