ADA464002

Naval Surface Warfare Center NVAVSEA
Carderock Division WARFARE CENTERS--"

'- West Bethesda, MD 20817-5700 Carderock Division
0
C
0
4-6
(U
o NSWCCD-50-TR-2006/043 December 2006
- Hydromechanics Department Report
a)
"-0 Reissue of CRDKNSWC/HD-1274-01 (November 1996)
t-
C
ca
C U.S. NAVY SURFACE SHIP FLEET: PROPULSION
"ENERGYEVALUATION, AND IDENTIFICATION OF COST
-> EFFECTIVE ENERGY ENHANCEMENT DEVICES
w
By
C- Cn Dominic S. Cusanelli and Gabor Karafiath
C5
4-
t"W
I.-
OC
.0
zw
•o
0
cc}
z C.)
- Approved for Public Release. Distribution Unlimited.

z
Form Approved
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188
and nmantaining the
response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestons for reducing
information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate
data needed. and completing and reviewing this collection of Arlington, VA 22202-
Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188). 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204,
this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for a currently
shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if A does not display
4302, Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law. no person
valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.
2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED (From - To)
1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)
Final July 1995 - Nov 1996
December 2006
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
5a. CONTRACT NUMBER
U.S. Navy Surface Ship Fleet: Propulsion Energy Evaluation, 5b. GRANT NUMBER
and identification of Cost Effective Energy Enhancement
Devices 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
0603724N
5d. PROJECT NUMBER
6. AUTHOR(S)
Dominic S. Cusanelli and Gabor Karafiath 5e. TASK NUMBER

R0829
5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER
1-8590-537
7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT
NUMBER
Naval Surface Warfare Center

NSWCCD-50 TR2006/043
Carderock Division, Code 5200
9500 MacArthur Blvd.
Reissue of
West Bethesda, MD 20817-5700
CRDKNSWC/HD-1.27 4-01
10. SPONSORIMONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)
9. SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)
11. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT

NUMBER(S)
12. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Approved for Public Release. Distribution Unlimited.
References
13. SUPPLEMNTARY NOTES Reissue of Report CRDKNSWC/iHD--1274-01 (November 1996).
mentioned in the text that are not in the public domain have been omitted.
14. ABSTRACT This report identifies U.S. Navy surface ships that would benefit most from the
retrofit of hydrodynamic energy enhancement devices. These devices reduce the required
power, and consequently, the fuel needed for propulsion. A large number of potential energy
suitability and cost effectiveness for
enhancement devices are assessed with regard to their
retrofit to U.S. Navy surface ships.
was prepared. This information
A powering evaluation of the U.S. Navy surface ship fleet
to identify eleven U.S. Navy surface ship classes as candidates for consideration
was used
with regard to retrofit of energy enhancement devices. These classes possess worthwhile
potential with the installaLion of such devices. Potential yearly energy
energy savings
term potential fuel savings, were then estimated
device fuel cost savings, and long and short
for these identified candidate ship classes.
for reducing
A large number of energy enhancing concepts and devices with potential
power requirements or improving ship energy efficiency, are identified and
delivered
described. (continued on next page)
Energy
15. SUBJECT TERMS U.S. Navy Surface Ship Fleet; Fleet improvement; Propulsion
Evaluation; Energy Enhancement Devices to reduce energy (fuel) consumption.
17. LIMITATION 18. NUMBER 19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF:
OF ABSTRACT OF PAGES Dominic Cusanelli
b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE 19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (include area
a. REPORT
UNCLASSIFIED SAR code)
UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED
301-227-7008
Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)
Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18
i
(continued) A chart of compatibility between all identified energy savings
14. ABSTRACT
Over a dozen propulsion energy enhancement devices are identified as
devices was prepared.
to U.S. Navy candidate surface ship classes.
having potential for retrofit
devices are to be
Recommendations are prepared with regard to which energy enhancement
to each of the eleven identified candidate U.S.
considered as cost: beneficial for retrofit
Navy surface ship classes.
Front cover design. Descriptions, credits, and acknowledgments.
1.Fudl scale propeller on PC-] 3 Class. Energy efficient tip

propeller with advanced blade sections. Photograph by author. 12 1 2
2. DDG-5 1, Arleigh Burke Class. Modified fi'om original
artwork appearing on Bath Iron Works Corporation promotional
literature. 3
3. Model scale small, near surface, bow bulb on 1)1)G-5 1.

Photograph by author.
4. LPD- 17 Amphibious. Modified from original artwork

appearing on LPD-l 7 world wide web site.
5. Full scale stern flap on FFG-7 Class. Photograph by author.
i~i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
....................... . v
N O T A T ION ........................................................................................................
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................
ADM INISTRATIVE INFORM ATION ........................................................................................ 1
I
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................
3
PRIM ARY M EANS OF ENERGY REDUCTION ......................................................................
3
U.S. NAVY SURFACE FLEET EVALUATION ........................................................................
5
SELECTION OF ENERGY SAVINGS DEVICES .....................................................................
7
ENERGY DEVICE APPLICATIONS TO U.S. NAVY HULLFORMS ......................................
20
GENERAL LISTING OF SUBJECT REFERENCES .................................................................
20
CONCLUSIONS .........................................................................................................................
21
RECOMM ENDATIONS .............................................................................................................
22
ACKNOW LEDGM ENTS ............................................................................................................
23
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................
APPENDICES
AI
A. - U.S. NAVY SURFACE FLEET EVALUATION ..........................................................
BI
B. - ENERGY SAVINGS DEVICES AND CONCEPTS ....................................................
C. - GENERAL LISTING OF SUBJECT REFERENCES ............................................... C1
±iii
FIGURES
Page
8
1. Resistance reductions due to stern flaps ..................................................................................
9
2. Bare hull residuary resistance for selected U.S. Navy hullforms .............................................
14
3. Propeller efficiency for selected U.S. Navy huillforms ...........................................................
TABLES
4
I. Eleven selected candidate U.S. Navy surface ship classes .......................................................
.......................... 5
2. General characteristics of the eleven selected U.S. Navy surface ship classes
....................... 6
3. Selected retrofit energy savings devices for identified U.S. Navy ship classes
iv
NOTATION
The notation contained herein conforms with International Towing Tank Conference (ITTC)
Symbols and Terminology List - 1993, except where noted.
INTERNATIONAL STANDARD SYMBOLS (abbreviated)
Computer
Conventional Compatible
USymbol LCC Symbol Title
CA CA Ship/Model Correlation Allowance

CD CD Drag Coefficient
CF CF Frictional Resistance Coefficient
CR CR Residuary Resistance Coefficient
Cr CT Total Resistance Coefficient
C1,, CTh Propeller Thrust-Loading Coefficient

D D Drag (in general)
FD FD Towing Force in self propulsion test
F, Fn Froude number
j J Propeller Advance Coefficient (Advance number)
Jv JV Apparent (Ship Speed) Advance Coefficient
KQ KQ Torque Coefficient
K1 KT Thrust Coefficient
n n rate of revolution
PD PD Delivered Power at propeller
pF, PE Effective Power
Q Q Torque
R R Resistance (in general)
R, Rn Reynolds number
t t Thrust deduction fraction
T T Thrust
V V Speed (Velocity) in general
VA VA Speed of Advance of propeller
wQ WQ Taylor Wake Fraction (torque identity)
wl- WT Taylor Wake Fraction (thrust identity)
(X ALPHA Angle (in general)
BETA Advance Angle of propeller blade section
v
,1 ETA Efficiency (in general)
X LAMDA Model linear scale ratio
NOTATION (continued-)
U.S. CUSTOMARY AND METRIC EQUIVALENTS
U.S. CUSTOMARY METRIC
I inch 25.4 millimeter 10.0254 m (meter)j
1 foot 0.3048 m (meter)

I pound (force) 0.4536 kg (kilograms)
I ft - pound 0.1382 kg - m (kilogram - meters)
1 foot per second 0.3048 m/s (meter per second)

I knot 0.5144 m/s (meter per second)
I degree (angle) 0.01745 rad (radians)
I horsepower 0.7457 kW (kilowatts)
I long ton 1.016 tonnes, 1.016 metric tons, or
1016.0 kilograms
I inch water (60'F) 248.8 pa (pascals)
vi
This document is a reissue of Report CRDKNSWC/HD-1274-01 (November 1996).
References mentioned in the text that are not in the public domain have been omitted.
ABSTRACT
This report identifies U.S. Navy surface ships that would benefit most from the retrofit of
hydrodynamic energy enhancement devices. These devices reduce the required power, and
consequently, the fuel needed for propulsion. A large number of potential energy enhancement
devices are assessed with regard to their suitability and cost effectiveness for retrofit to U.S. Navy
surface ships.
A powering evaluation of the U.S. Navy surface ship fleet was prepared. This information
was used to identify eleven U.S. Navy surface ship classes as candidates for consideration with
regard to retrofit of energy enhancement devices. These classes possess worthwhile energy
savings potential with the installation of such devices. Potential yearly energy device fuel cost
savings. and long and short term potential fuel savings, were then estimated for these identified
candidate ship classes.
A large number of energy enhancing concepts and devices with potential for reducing
delivered power requirements or improving ship energy efficiency, are identified and described.
A chart of compatibility between all identified energy savings devices was prepared. Over a
dozen propulsion energy enhancement devices are identified as having potential for retrofit to U.S.
Navy candidate surface ship classes.
Recommendations are prepared with regard to which energy enhancement devices are to be
considered as cost beneficial for retrofit to each of the eleven identified candidate U.S. Navy
surface ship classes.
ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION
The work described in this report was performed at the David Taylor Model Basin, Carderock Division
Headquarters, Naval Surface Warfare Center (CARDEROCKDIV, NSWC), herein referred to as DTMB, by
the Hydromechanics Directorate, Resistance and Powering Department, Code 5200. The work was
sponsored by the Shipboard Energy R&D Office, Code 859, Annapolis Detachment, CARDEROCKDIV,
NSWC, Sponsor R823, Task Area R0829, Element No. 0603724N, job order number 1-8590-537.
INTRODUCTION
The Shipboard Energy R&D Office has requested the Resistance and Powering Department to identify
hydrodynamic energy enhancement devices that could be used by the U.S. Navy surface ship fleet. These
energy enhancement devices would reduce the power required for ship propulsion for the purpose of
reducing fuel consumption.
The data reported herein is divided into three topic areas. The first is a compilation of the propulsion
energy usage evaluation of the present U.S. Navy surface ship fleet. The second topic area is descriptive
information on a large number of energy enhancing concepts and devices, and an assessment with regard to
their suitability for retrofit to U.S. Navy surface ships. Third. recommendations are prepared with regard to
to U.S. Navy surface
which energy enhancement devices are to be considered as cost beneficial for retrofit
ship classes.
A, is to identify those
The reason for the U.S. Navy surface ship fleet evaluation, presented in Appendix
an economic point
ships or ship classes that will use the most fuel during their remaining service life. From
life, will tend to
of view, the ship classes that use the most fuel, and will do so over a long remaining service
percentage gains in
be the primary candidates for the retrofit of energy enhancement devices. Small
Furthermore, for ship
propulsion efficiency can result in very large total fuel cost savings on these classes.
costs, can be spread
classes with a large number of identical ships, the design, model testing, and ship trials
the retrofit of
out over many ships, so that the actual cost per ship can be reduced dramatically. In addition,
installations
any energy enhancement device may become significantly less expensive through subsequent
curve" effect
on identical ships. This reduction in installation cost is due to the traditional "learning
fleet evaluation,
associated with ship integration and construction. Thus, within the U.S. Navy surface ship
of identical
it was important to identify those ships that used a large amount of fuel, had a large number
surface ship
ships in their class, and had a significant amount of service life remaining. Eleven U.S. Navy
classes are identified as potential candidates for the retrofit of an energy saving device.
been
Appendix B is a compilation of many energy saving ideas, concepts. and devices, that have
of the devices
developed or considered by the U.S. Navy, or by the commercial ship industry. Many
presented in
depicted could be considered the hypothetical energy saving device of the economic analysis
underlying
Appendix A. Depictions of these devices, as well as some cursory explanations as to the
devices has
physical principles of operation are presented. A chart of compatibility among energy savings
to a U.S.
been prepared. An assessment is made with regard to the practicality of retrofitting each device
Navy surface ship hullform. Based upon hydrodynamic performance, approximately 14 energy
of references
enhancement devices are identified as potential candidates for retrofit. An extensive listing
is also
documenting the development and performance of the energy savings ideas, concepts, and devices,
provided as Appendix C.
The third part of this report is a recommendation in regard to which of the fourteen selected energy
identified
enhancement devices are to be considered as cost beneficial for retrofit to each of the eleven
as cost
candidate U.S. Navy surface ship classes. Many practical considerations beyond suitability, such
(R&D, ship integration, manufacturing, and installation), availability of devices with greater potential,
technical risks, etc., were taken into account in making these recommendations.
2
PRIMARY MEANS OF ENERGY REDUCTION
For any ship design, the primary means, by which to save shipboard energy, is the correct sizing and
optimization
design of the vessel and its propulsor, Schneekluth (1)'. During the initial design, basic ship
the hullform
must be considered in the areas of hullform dimensions such as length, beam, and draft, and
it is important that the
shape parameters such as block coefficient and prismatic coefficient. In addition,
engine.
propeller(s) be sized and designed to operate efficiently with the hull and with the main propulsion
1. Even within
The critical nature of this sizing and design process is emphasized and explained in Ref.
Appendix B
identical size and shape parameters, there exists the opportunity to design superior hullforms.
features
identifies some features and design procedures for reduced energy hullforms. Some hull shaping
are
can only be implemented during new construction while other features such as bulbs, flaps, and wedges,
suitable for
suitable as either new design or retrofit. The emphasis of this report will be on retrofit devices
existing U.S. Navy surface ships.
U.S. NAVY SURFACE FLEET EVALUATION

A
The collected information on the existing U.S. Navy surface ship fleet is presented in Appendix A.
fleet is
summary is provided in this section. For presentation purposes, the U.S. Navy surface ship
separated into five main surface force classifications: (A) Surface Combatants, (B) Amphibious Warfare
Ships, (C) Fleet Auxiliary Force, (D) Mine Warfare. and (E) Active Strategic Sealift. Ships or ship classes
in each of the main ship functional force classifications are further subdivided into nineteen (19) categories
separated by ship type (ship function). Nearly sixty (60) active surface ship classes were identified.
The four new TAKR sealift ship classes are not included in the above compilation because their initial
most of
deployment is intended for Maritime Preposition ships or Ready Reserve Force ships that are in port
will be
the time. If the deployment of these ships changes to predominantly underway operations then it
appropriate to consider them for propulsion energy enhancement devices.
each ship
The nearly 60 active surface ship classes were ranked according to how much propulsion fuel
class would use during their remaining service life. Actual fuel consumption data on all ships of the U.S.
installed
Navy is not readily available, therefore a relative future fuel usage index, defined by the product of
propulsion power, number of ships in a class, and remaining service life was established.
US Navy surface ship classes were then selected from Appendix A as appropriate candidates for the
a large
retrofit of an energy savings device. The selected candidates were those classes that tended to have
life
number of identical ships in their class, had a high fuel usage, and had a significant amount of service
the
remaining. These candidate ship classes would have the highest potential life-cycle fuel savings with
References are listed on page 23

3
of
installation of energy savings device. The annual potential fuel cost savings, attributed to the installation
candidate ship
a hypothetical energy savings device, was then determined for each of the II identified
fuel savings. The
classes. It was assumed that this energy savings device would effect a 5 percent annual
class, and the potential
annual fuel cost savings was then carried through the remaining service life for each
The eleven selected
life-cycle fuel savings was determined for the hypothetical 5% energy savings device.
candidate U.S. Navy surface ship classes are shown below:
Table I. Eleven selected candidate U.S. Navy surface ship classes
SELECTED CANDIDATE SHIP CLASSES FOR ENERGY DEVICE RETROFIT
hNumber of Ships Potential Class Life Cycle

Navy S
USP in Class * Fuel Savings from 5%, Device
(A) Surface Combatants
Ticonderoga, CG 47 27 $ 129 M
Spruance / Kidd, DD 963 / DD 35 $ 84 M
993
Arleigh Burke, DDG 51 50 $ 283 M
Oliver Hazard Perry, FFG 7 35 $ 55 M
(B) Amphibious Warfare Ships

San Antonio, LPD 17 12 $ 49 M
Wasp, LHD 1 6 $45 M
Tarawa, LHA 1 5 $18 M
Whidbey Island / Harpers Ferry, 12 $ 24 M
LSD 41 /LSD 49
(C) Fleet Auxiliary Force
Henry J Kaiser, TAO 187 16 $ 59 M
Cimarron (Jumbo). AO 177 5 $ 10 M
Supply, AOE 6 4 $ 23 M
* Number of ships in class presently active or planned.

CG 47, DD 963, and DD 993, share the same hullform
According to the above table, the most savings are associated with the destroyer and cruiser classes, and
187 class.
the next largest savings are associated with the TAO
Table 2 shows some general characteristics of these selected U.S. Navy ship classes. The type of prime
mover will have an influence on the amount of fuel saved for a given reduction in delivered power achieved
power
through the retrofit of a hydrodynamic energy saving device. In general, for diesel and for steam
plants, there is an almost I to I correspondence between decreased delivered power and decreased fuel
consumption. However, the general experience based on fuel calculations for gas turbine ships, has been
that a 1% decrease in delivered power results in only a 0.7 % decrease in fuel usage. Thus with all other
4
factors being equal, a given hydrodynamic device will be more effective in terms of % fuel saved on a diesel
or steam driven ship than on a gas turbine driven ship.
Table 2. General characteristics of the eleven selected U.S. Navy surface ship classes
SELECTED CANDIDATE SHIP CLASSES GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS
Prime Bow Max Rudder Shafting

Ship Class Prop
Type Mover Type Speed Type Appendages
CG 47 CP-2 GT NB, BSD 31 2-spade Shaft & Strut

DD 963 / DD 993 CP-2 GT NB, BSD 31 2-spade Shaft & Strut
DDG 51 CP-2 GT NB, BSD 32 2-spade Shaft & Strut
FFG 7 CP-1 GT NB. KSD 30 1-spade Shaft & Strut
LPD 17 FP-2 (CP?) D BB 23 2-horn Shaft & Strut
LHD FP-2 S BB 25 2-spade
2-spade Shaft & Strut
S NB 25
LHA FP-2
LSD 41 / LSD 49 FP-2 D BB 23 2-spade Shaft & Strut
AO 187 CP-2 D NB 22 2-horn Shaft & Strut
AO 177 (J) FP- I S BB 22 I-spade Closed Skeg
AOE 6 FP-2 GT BB 30 2-spade Shaft & strut
Prop Type: Controllable Pitch (CP), Fixed Pitch (FP), Single screw (- 1), Twin Screw (-2)
Prime Mover: Gas Turbine (GT), Diesel (D), Steam (S)
Bow Type: No Bulb (NB), Bulbous Bow (BB), Bow Sonar Dome (BSD), Keel Sonar Dome (KSD)
Max Speed: Approximate Maximum Speed in Knots
The cost of the hypothetical 5% energy saving device was separated into low, median, and high cost
categories, to reflect realistic cost differences associated with simple versus complex devices. The net cost
savings, equal to the fuel savings over the ship service life minus the device retrofit cost, was calculated for
each selected ship class. The device retrofit cost included design, model testing, construction, and ship trials
costs. Construction and installation did not include dry docking costs. The net cost savings were then
calculated through three net cycle term lengths (periods of time). These three terms were: a short term (5
year) net cycle, a median term (10 year) net cycle, and ultimately the remaining service life cycle. All of the
above selected candidate ship classes show a positive net cost savings after 5 years of operation with a
"low" cost retrofit device (see Fig A6), and a net positive lifetime cost savings even with the "high" cost
device (see Fig A8). This simple cost analysis was performed using constant dollars.
SELECTION OF ENERGY SAVINGS DEVICES

The compiled information on many energy enhancing concepts and devices is presented in Appendix B.
The information generally includes the following: Depiction of the geometry or general appearance of the
device (including photographs, drawings, and/or sketches), mechanisms or principles of operation, practical
5
power (or fuel)
considerations, full scale applications or model scale experiences, possible delivered
reduction potential, and mention of prominent references, where available.
(A) HULL, (B)
The specific identified devices were grouped into three main categories:
devices, or devices that
APPENDAGE(s), and (C) PROPULSOR(s). Groupings were made so that similar
in a total of thirty-
performed under similar principles of operation, were organized together. This resulted
five (35) organizational groups of energy savings devices.
to U.S. Navy surface
From the 35 energy device groups, fourteen (14) were selected for potential retrofit
listed in Table 3:
ships. The selected retrofit energy savings devices for identified U.S. Navy classes are
Table 3. Selected retrofit energy savings devices for identified U.S. Navy ship classes
SELECTED RETROFIT ENERGY SAVINGS DEVICES

Energy Savings Device Selected for Study and/or Retrofit on U.S. Navy Classes
Category (A) Hull

Bulbous Bow, Traditional TAO 187, LHA 1, FFG 7
Bow Bulb, Small, Near-Surface DDG 51, CG 47/DD 963/993, FFG 7, TAO 187, LHA I
Stern End Bulb Recommend R & D for destroyer / frigate hullforms, other likely
candidates are TAO 187, AO 177, AOE 6
Category (B) Appendage(s)
Stator Upstream of Propeller LHA/LHD, TAO, LSD
Main Strut Barrel Designs Probably not a feasible retrofit
Alternative Rudder Designs Recommend flow visualization tests, most likely candidates are
TAO 187, AO 177, AOE 6
Thrusting Fins on Rudder(s) Recommend flow visualization tests, most likely
candidates are TAO 187, AO 177, AGE 6
Stern Flap, Stern Wedge Design Developed for DDG 51, CG 47/DD 963, FFG 7, LPD 17.
Investigate for LHD I, LHA I, LSD 41&49 and TAO
Category (C) Propulsor(s)
New Propeller Design LSD 41 & 49, and possibly AOE 6
Low RPM / Large Diameter Propeller May not be practical as retrofit
Energy Efficient Tip Propeller R & D design efforts, LSD 41 & 49
Propeller Fairwater Designs Recommend flow visualization tests, most likely on DDG 51, CG
47/DD 963/993, FFG 7, LSD 41&49, TAO 187
Fins (Blades) on Propeller Hub Possible application to all II selected ship classes. Recommend to
explore retrofit on auxiliary ship.
Propeller Pitch Scheduling Highly recommend for study and adoption on all ships with
controllable-pitch propellers: DDG 51, CG 47/ DD 963/993, FFG
7, LSD 41 &49. TAO 187
6
The selection criteria for the energy savings devices was as follows:
* (1) The device had to be practical as a retrofit.
• (2) The device had to be reliable and durable enough for use on U.S. Navy ships.
or
* (3) The device had to have a history of demonstrated energy enhancement potential (model
full scale) on some ship similar to a possible U.S. Navy present or future application.
* (4) The energy savings devices had to be applicable to at least one of the U.S. Navy ship classes
hullforms.
identified in the first part of the study, or had to be applicable to foreseeable future Navy
type
Devices suitable to only high block coefficient., relatively slow speed, commercial or merchant
hulls, with single-screw heavily loaded propellers, were not selected.
The energy savings devices, listed in Table 3, initially satisfied all of the aforementioned criteria.
ENERGY DEVICE APPLICATIONS TO U.S. NAVY HULLFORMS

The following are recommendations with regard to which of the 14 selected energy enhancement
I I identified
devices are to be considered as cost beneficial for eventual retrofit and/or study on the
and DD-
candidate U.S. Navy surface ship classes. For this evaluation, the ship classes of CG-47, DD-963,
minor
993, are treated as one class, because they share the same hullform and propeller design, with only
differences in the propeller shafting and appendage sizes.
are
Traditional and Small Near Surface Bow Bulb, Stern End Bulb, Stern Flap, and Stern Wedge,
of the
grouped together for discussion purposes because they all act to reduce the wave resistance portion
on the
ship resistance. They can also affect the form drag, eddy-making, and/or local pressure distribution
crudely
hull. Nevertheless, they all affect the wave drag, and their speed range of effectiveness can be
more
characterized by the ship Froude number, F, based on length. In addition these devices tend to be
effective on ships which have a large wavemaking drag component.
It is dangerous to generalize about the performance improvement of these devices, nevertheless
and
empirical evidence indicates that bow bulbs can start to reduce resistance at F, as low as 0.16 to 0.18,
generalize
they become more effective as the speed is increased. We do not have enough experience to
low as
about the range of effectiveness of stern end bulbs. Stern flaps can start to reduce resistance at F,, as
resistance
0.2. Stern flaps tend to improve performance slightly more than wedges. Model test data on the
ship,
reduction due to stern flaps is shown in Figure 1 for some previously tested combatant, amphibious
and sealift models, Cusanelli and Forgach (2).
7
(0 1.1 -*-s' FFG-7
LL Combatants
z DDG-51
=3 Fit1
1.05 Cruiser
M V 0 Variant
Ri. 0 CG-47
E 1 --- 0 CG Heavy
U V DD-963
S09
bA __-AC][ Concept
.2-0.95 Ef fM
•Frigate
MC 9 U @mm
6 -V
1
a- 0.90.1
WL
0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55
Ship Froude Number (Fn)
ca 1.1
L. Amphibious! Sealift 0 LPD-17
z
T
O MT SSL (D)
S1.05
•a ]0 MT SSL (A)
SCSP/S-24
E 1 0 O0
0 E
0 f0000 0
U)
.2 0.95 0 3 ri U "Er
W 0.
0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
Ship Froude Number (Fn)
Figure 1. Resistance reductions due to stem flaps
In addition, many cases of model tests show that the powering reduction due to a stern flap can be
more than the resistance reduction, possibly 1 to 2 % more. Full scale trial data tend to indicate that the
full scale performance improvement due to a stern flap is better than the model scale performance
improvement, especially at low speeds, Cusanelli and Cave (3) and Cusanelli (4).
Bare hull resistance information on 9 of the 11 selected hullforms is shown in Figure 2. Three
spots are shown for each ship, a near maximum speed, a representative mid-speed, and the lowest
speed that was judged to be of interest in terms of energy consumption. The Residuary resistance, CR,
8
some
represents the sum of wave resistance, eddy-making, viscous-wave resistance interaction, and
The total
hullform effect. In most cases, the wave resistance is by far the largest component.
CF, and the
resistance coefficient, CT, represents the sum of CR, the calculated frictional resistance
to be
correlation allowance, CA, determined from full scale trials and model test data. CA is assumed
of
mostly a frictional resistance. Thus the ratio CR/CT shown in Figure 2, represents the percentage
and/or
ship resistance that is mostly wavemaking in nature, and could be affected by bulbs, flaps,
of
wedges. The LHD bare hull data was not available. The LHD would exhibit resistance close to that
LHA, except that it would be lower for the two highest speeds shown, and higher at the lowest speed
point, because the LHD has a bulb.
CR /CT vs. Fn (Bare Hull Condition)
0.7
-•?A0. 0.6
OU
cn
V 0.4 ---E3 -
cc 0.3 _AA E DDG51 0 LSD41

- 0 0 DD963 A TAO187
a, 0.2 A FFG 7 0 AO 177J
"" 0 LPD17 W AOE6

Fh 0.1
a)-
• 0 LHA
. I
I
0 t
0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5

Froude Number (Fn)
Figure 2. Bare hull residuary resistance for selected U.S. Navy hullforms
Specific recommendations and discussion with respect to Figure 2 is as follows:

Bulbous Bow. Small Near Surface and Traditional:
The design/model test effort involving bow bulbs should investigate both the traditional and small
near surface bows. The small bow will be a less expensive retrofit.
9 DDG 51, DD 963, CG 47 Classes: The small, near-surface bow bulb is highly recommended
for retrofit on these classes. This bow bulb design was developed as a retrofit device for U.S. Navy
9
design
indicate a 2 percent delivered power reduction, Cusanelli (6). It is expected that with continued
approach that of
refinement, the delivered power reduction of this device on the CG 47 or DD 963, would
DD 963 / CG 47
the DDG 51. The DDG 51 is currently under consideration for a near surface bow bulb.
efforts should wait until the DDG 51 program is complete.
Class. Previous
* TAO 187 Class: A bulbous bow is highly recommended for retrofit on the TAO 187
reduction at
1980's model experiments on the TAO with a traditional bulb showed adequate powering
bulb design.
design displacement but a powering penalty in the ballast condition. A newer traditional type
Development
as developed in the AE 36 Energy Enhancement program, and also in the Sealift Technology
bulb, such as developed for DDG 5 1.
program, should be tried. In addition, a near surface type retrofit bow
of Figure 2,
should be tested. All bulb designs have to take into account ballast operations. The CR/CT plot,
shows that there is potential for improvement, and that the operating F, is high enough.. A previous 1980
would be
U.S. Navy study concluded that the anticipated fuel cost savings due to retrofitting bulbous bows
are near
sufficient to justify bulb fabrication and installation costs on some similar ship classes that today
the end of their service life, Slager and Fung (7).
or
* FFG 7 Class: The energy saving, with either the traditional or near surface bulb, would be similar
near-
slightly greater than the 4% shown by the current DDG 51 bulb retrofit model tests. Both the small,
placed on
surface bow bulb, and traditional bow bulb, should be explored. Particular emphasis should be
avoiding bubble sweepdown on the keel mounted sonar.
• LHA Class: From a hydrodynamic point of view, the LHA class is an ideal candidate for bulb retrofit.
The LHD has the same hullform, except that it has a traditional bulb. A small. less expensive near surface
bulb, should be considered for the LHA, in lieu of the traditional bulb already on the LHD.
• Other Hull Forms: The hullforms of the other classes such as LPD 17. LHD 1. LSD 4 1, AO 177
J, and AOE 6. all have bulbous bows.
Stern End Bulb:

There is insufficient experience with stern end bulbs to generalize F, speed ranges where they would be
effective. One would expect wave resistance reduction for a speed range similar to that of bow bulbs and
stern flaps. In addition, stern end bulbs are expected to reduce the eddy-making drag, and drag due to
excessive vorticity associated with the transom flow, bilge vortex, or propeller wash. This eddy-making
drag reduction is probably not as dependent on F,. The stern end bulb will increase the total wetted surface.
Thus, for a stern end bulb to be effective, the combined resistance reduction associated with wave making
and eddy-making must be greater than the friction drag associated with the increased wetted surface.
10
The experience with stern end bulbs (SEBs) is mostly that which is reported from overseas model tests
and ship retrofits on just a few merchant ships. There is no U.S. Navy full scale experience with stern end
bulbs, or verification of the performance associated with these overseas designs. However, U.S. Navy
model experiments were conducted with a similar concept on an Escort Research ship, which had a large
single centerline underwater pod aft. The combined effect of the aft pod (i.e. stern end bulb), and of a large
forward protruding bow bulb, was to reduce power significantly at high speeds and to increase power at low
speeds. Also, initial preliminary design stern end bulbs were model tested on the AOE 6 and the Mid-Term
Sealift. Model scale experiments indicated performance ranging from increased power to approximately 2%
reduction, depending on ship configuration. These were first design iteration SEBs, and continued design
refinement could result in better performance.
A stern end bulb is more expensive to retrofit than a stern flap. However, the stern end bulb could
possibly be designed to be effective in both ballast and in the design displacement conditions, whereas the
flap could be out of the water in the ballast condition. On the amphibious ships, the stern end bulb may be
incompatible with welldeck operations. The recommendation would be to consider stern end bulb
hydrodynamic analysis and exploratory R&D on the fuller body ships (TAO 187, AO 177, AOE 6); or
on the combined effects of a stern flap with a stern end bulb on the destroyers and cruisers.
Stern Flap, Stern Wedge:
Emphasis should be placed on stern flap design, as they have been shown to perform better than wedges
in recent comparative model testing. The U.S. Navy has retrofitted stern flaps on two FFG 7 Class frigates.
and verified full scale performance improvements, Cusanelli and Cave (3). Stern flap performance
improvements, demonstrated on Patrol Coastal PC 13, has lead to the Navy's plan to retrofit flaps on the
entire PC I class, Cusanelli (4). An investigation is underway to quantify the energy savings with stern
flaps on the DD 963 ,CG 47 and DDG 51 Flight I and Flight 2 class ships, and to install a flap on a DD 963
class in FY97. Stern flaps will be featured on the new LPD 17 and DDG 51 Flight 2A ships. Several model
tests have shown powering benefits with stern flaps on larger, sealift type ships operating near their design
speeds. The ease of ship integration, low costs of R&D and ship installation, and proven performance
improvements, make this device ideal for retrofit.
• DD 963, CG 47, DDG 5 1, FFG 7. LPD 17 Classes: The recommendation is to complete the stern flap
work currently funded.
* LHA. LHD. LSD 41/49 Classes: Using the F, > 0.2 criteria for effectiveness of a stern flap at low
speed, a stern flap will be effective for speeds of 16.2 to 22.8 knots for LSD. and for 18.7 to 24.4 knots for
the LHA / LHD. The upper speeds represent the maximum trials speeds. Stern flap design needs to
il
for these ships is
consider amphibious operations and stern gate deployment. Stern flap design
recommended. The low deadrise transom shape is suitable for stern flaps.
•TAO .!7AQ.i7 and AOE 6: Again using the aforementioned F, > 0.2 criteria and the maximum
ranges; 17.1 to 22.2 knots

trials speed, stern flaps would be effective on these ships at the following speed
the AOE. However, none of
for the TAO, 17.3 to 22 knots for the AO, and 18.1 knots to 30.3 knots for
for a significant time at
these ships are ideal candidates for a traditional stern flaps, because, they all operate
water. Also, these hulls are
ballast displacement. In this light condition, the transom may be out of the
19 degrees (AOE), to 21
designed with "V" shaped transoms, with transom deadrise angles varying from
are considered not as
degrees (TAO), through 25 degrees (AO). These higher transom deadrise angles
as a retrofit device, design
suitable for stern flaps. Nevertheless, because of the attractiveness of stern flaps
AOE 6 are recommended.
efforts and model tests to define stern flap performance on the TAO 187 and the
of other energy
Research into stern flaps on these hulls, in conjunction with the model test evaluation
enhancement devices, may prove especially promising.
Stator Upstream of Propeller:
powering
The major motivation for the U.S. Navy's interest in this device has been to obtain enhanced
the exception
and enhanced propeller cavitation characteristics. U.S. Navy stator models tested to date, with
These tests have
of a single AE 36 model test, have been mostly on single screw frigate type hullforms.
on the order
shown, at Froude scale model test speeds, some minimal powering performance enhancement
(R,,) on the
of 2%. Traditional self propulsion model tests with stators encounter low Reynolds numbers
to rotating) stators, the
stator vanes. This is because of the low inflow velocity due to the fixed (as opposed
the stator vanes. The
relatively low Froude scaled model test speeds, and the short chord lengths on
special model tests
powering improvement at full scale is expected to be better than at model scale. Some
that the
have shown that as R, is increased, the efficiency increases, thus tending to confirm the hypothesis
that some additional
performance with vanes is better at ship scale than at model scale. It is possible
designs oriented more
performance improvements (powering reductions) could be obtained from new stator
towards energy enhancement. Furthermore, specially designed model experiments in the new Large
Cavitation Channel (LCC), might circumvent the low model Rr, problem.
than the
Stators have been retrofitted on commercial ships, mostly on ships with fuller afterbodies
afterbodies typical of Navy ships
on
Stator retrofit would fall into the "high cost" device category, and are most attractive economically
the destroyers and cruisers. However, for these ships, signature considerations could override energy
enhancement considerations for the retrofit. In addition, for these high speed (approximate 30 knot) ships,
12
loads, and
and for the 30 knot AOE, there is an elevated risk level with regard to cavitation, hydrodynamic
of U.S. Navy
design development costs. These additional risk factors are difficult to quantify. Due to lack
retrofit for slower
full scale experience with retrofit for this concept, it would be more prudent to consider
ships. The
ships. However, the payback potential as shown in Figure A8, is much less for these slower
most promising candidates would be the LHA / LHD and the TAO Classes.
Main Strut Barrel Designs:

emphasis
It is doubtful that the retrofit of a new strut barrel design would be cost beneficial. The main
cavitation and
of this concept is to provide better inflow wake into the propeller, for reduced blade root
it is felt that
increased cavitation inception speeds. While the potential for small powering reductions exists,
work
the potential for energy reduction would not offset the substantial cost of retrofit. Empirical and CFD
work, to
on this concept is in its preliminary stage. Consideration should be given to follow on model test
verify computational predictions, and to determine energy reduction possibilities for new designs.
New Propeller Design. Low RPM / Large Diameter Propeller.

Energy Efficient Tip Propeller:
The concept of a new, more efficient propeller design, is a universal way of reducing powering
the benefit
requirements. Advances in design procedures, and the opportunity to redesign a propeller with
(8).
of full scale data, virtually assure that some improvements could be achieved, Bailar and Jessup
lives)
Previous propeller design studies (on ships that are now mostly retired or at the end of their service
(9).
concluded at that time that several classes would benefit from new propeller designs, Lindenmuth
However, a new propeller for a U.S. Navy vessel is associated with considerable design. R&D, construction,
in
and installation costs. They would definitely be in the "high cost" category of retrofit devices. Thus,
performance
order to economically justify a propeller replacement, a very large improvement in propeller
must be demonstrated. Such gains can only be obtained for situations where the current propeller
performance is very poor.
of
The propeller efficiency for 10 of the II selected candidate ship classes is plotted as a function
are, near
propeller thrust loading, as shown on Figure 3. Again, the three spots shown for each ship
ideal
maximum speed, a representative mid-speed, and the lowest speed of interest. In addition, the
In making
efficiency, q, based on momentum theory, is also shown on Figure 3. as a dotted line.
and AOE
comparisons among the ship propellers, it is important to realize that the DDG, DD, CG, FFG
which
propellers have a much more severe (30 knot plus) operating environment than the rest of the ships,
have maximum speeds in the 22 to 25 knot range.
13
Propeller Efficiency vs. Thrust Loading
U DDG51 0 LSD 41/49
0.95 0 DD 963 A TAO 187
"0. A FFG7 '> AO177J
0.9" , - LPD17 F AOE6
0 LHA/LHD - - -ETA
>, 0.85
0.8
oa .
CL
A
0.7 M
O00
0.65
0.6 f I - --
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2
Propeller Thrust Loading Coefficient (CTh)
Figure 3. Propeller efficiency for selected U.S. Navy hullforms
LSD 41/49 Propeller: In the amphibious and auxiliary ships group, the LSD 41/49 propeller efficiency
pitch
is about 6% worse than the Navy's recent LPD 17 propeller design. The LSD propeller is controllable
These
versus fixed pitch for the LPD, with a blade area ratio about 12 % greater on the LSD propeller.
differences may explain a small part of the 6% performance difference. New propeller retrofit is attractive
Only
from a hydrodynamic point of view on these classes, in that a 5 % energy saving is almost certain.
new propeller blades would be needed for retrofit into the existing hubs. In this way, the retrofit cost could
be maintained between the low and medium cost categories, and there would be a possibility for payback in
approximately 5 years, (See Figure A6).
* AOE 6 Propeller: in comparison to DDG 51, DD 963, or FFG 7, the AOE 6 has lower propeller
by
efficiency. This may be partly explained by the worse inflow conditions to the AOE propeller, and
ballast condition design constraints applied to the AOE propeller design. In addition, the AOE model
propeller cavitation evaluation did not have the benefit of testing at the Large Cavitation Channel (LCC), as
did the DDG 5 1. Recent propeller viewing trials on the AOE showed that the propeller had very good
cavitation characteristics, in terms of minimal extent of cavitation over the blade. In the design of such a
propeller, good cavitation performance is sometimes obtained through blade shaping and circulation
14
advanced blade
distribution, which can sacrifice some powering performance. It is possible that with
Comparison to the
sections, and the latest evaluation methods, the efficiency could be improved somewhat.
TAO is not recommended because of the lower maximum speed of the TAO.
diameter, as a
* Low RPM / Large Diameter Propeller: The concept of using lower RPM, and larger
is only suitable for
means of achieving a more efficient propeller, is proven technology. However, this
ship classes have
retrofit if there is sufficient propeller tip clearance for a larger propeller. No selected
Also, in the
adequate clearance if current US Navy practices for minimum tip clearances are maintained.
to receive a new
cases where the ship propulsion machinery has an excess torque capability, or if the ship is
meet this
engine design, the large diameter propeller is possible. None of the selected candidate ships
condition. This is not a recommended retrofit option.
more
* Energy Efficient Tip Propeller: Energy efficient tip propellers present a viable means of getting
in a way
efficiency out of a propeller. The efficiency enhancement is due to the an increased tip loading
that avoids harmful cavitation or pressure pulses. The U.S. Navy recent approach to this kind of propeller
PC I
was to incorporate a smooth twist into the tip, as shown on Figure B29a, for the recently designed
Another
propeller. This design showed good powering and noise characteristics on recent ship trials.
approach, with a more prominent bend in the tip, is shown in Figure B29b. Both of these approaches
41/49
represent refinements to existing design procedures. These approaches could be used on the LSD
propellers as discussed previously.
tip loaded
A more radical approach, to increasing tip loading, is the use of end plates. The concentrated
than 120
(CLT) type propellers with large end plates, (Figures B29c and B29d), have been fitted to more
name by
commercial ships, in both fixed pitch and controllable pitch versions. CLT is a proprietary trade
12 percent.
one manufacturer. These propellers are claimed to reduce fuel consumption by 8 to
to
Independent verification of these claims is very difficult. However, the claims are believable if subjected
performer
certain considerations, such as, if the original propeller was: too small, very highly loaded, a poor
incur
in terms of efficiency, or a poor match to the engine in terms of RPM. The end plates clearly
must be
additional viscous losses. For these propellers to have improved efficiency, these viscous losses
load at the
overcome by a more efficient lift distribution on the blade, or by the ability to carry additional
highly or
blade tips. The hydrodynamic mechanism for improving efficiency with these end plates favors
moderate
very highly loaded propellers. Most U.S. Navy ships tend to have propeller loading in the low to
The
range, with the possible exception of some tugs or ships that have a large towing requirement.
because of
suitability of propeller designs with end plates to the high speed combatant hullforms is uncertain
15
this type propeller on a high speed
propeller cavitation issues. There is. however, one commercial retrofit of
hydrofoil ferry.
by Andersen (10), and by DeJong
Design theories for propellers with end plates have been developed
of these design approaches are
( I1). Some model tests have shown a 3% increase in efficiency. The details
at the blade / end plate
not fully revealed, however, all approaches present difficulties with cavitation
fully simulate the performance gains
juncture. Some investigators also claim that low R, model tests do not
plate blade tip design for a Naval
achievable at full scale. Confirmation of a 3% efficiency gain for the end
the future fuel usage of Navy ships.
auxiliary could have a major impact on future propeller design and on
Therefore, the following research program is recommended:
such as LSD 41 or one of the
"* In order to minimize the cavitation problem, select a medium speed ship
Development Program.
designs that were fully developed & model tested in the Sealift Technology
best equivalent propeller design
"* Develop a propeller design with end plate blade tips, and one for the
without end plate blade tip design.
"• Conduct high speed, high Reynolds number open water tests on the designs
"* Conduct cavitation evaluation and tip flow mapping
"* Conduct model powering experiments to determine hull-propulsor interaction.
as a design for which
-End Plates for LSD 41 Propeller: The LSD 41 propellers have been identified
propeller design methods.
performance could be improved by as much as 6%, using the latest conventional
propeller blade refit is long,
Because of the high cost of new propeller blades, the payback period for a new
fairings on surface ship
about 5 years. The U.S. Navy has experience with the retrofit of numerically cut tip
the order of 2/3 the cost of
propellers. The propeller modification cost, of fitting end plates, may be on
making new blades. This, of course, would reduce the cost of retrofit. However, without actually
improvement due to
performing some design and model test work, it is difficult to estimate the performance
end plates.
Fairwaters. Hub Fins. Rudder modifications:

(1)
These devices are grouped together because they have the following common characteristics:
dependent on the local
They are all low to medium cost retrofit devices, and (2) their effectiveness is highly
flow conditions
pitch
* Propeller Fairwater Designs: This energy reduction concept is applicable mostly to controllable
and consequently
propellers. These can benefit most because of the relatively large propeller hub diameter.
DDG 51, CG 47
relatively large base drag of the hub without fairwater or with a poor fairwater design. The
All, except
/ DD 963/993. FFG 7, LSD 41 &49, and TAO 187 class ships have controllable pitch propellers.
rapid curvature
the TAO, have a "button" shaped fairwater. This "button" shape is characterized by a
16
immediately aft of the hub. It is believed that this rapid curvature contributes to excessive base drag.
Carefully conducted self propulsion model tests of various fairwater designs for the DD-963 destroyer
"button" shaped
showed a 1.0 % reduction in delivered power for a truncated cone design relative to the
hydrodynamic
design, Lin and Borda (12). The TAO 187 fairwater is a stepped down design with no
Even with only a
fairing, and it is believed that an improvement is very likely with a new faired design.
and expected
modest I% energy improvement, these concepts are attractive due to ease of ship integration
is recommended
low installation and R&D costs. However, because of the small energy improvement, it
in order
that the fairwater concept be considered as a "piggy back" to other energy enhancement concepts,
to share the costs of model tests, dry docking, retrofits, and ship trials.
e Hub Fins: The purpose of putting blades on the propeller hub/fairwater is to enhance propeller
B33 for a
performance by making use of the fluid energy near the propeller blade root area. See Figure
will be
photograph of a comparative commercial device. The extent of the energy enhancement
regard
significantly affected by the adequacy or limitations of the original propeller design, especially with
to
to the hydrodynamics in the root area. State of the art commercial propeller design practice is to attempt
take into account hub effects, however, lack of good knowledge about local flow into the root-hub
intersection hinders these efforts. The more traditional commercial practice is to slightly modify an existing
Troost series propeller. For current U.S. Navy combatant ship propellers, root cavitation considerations
play an important role in the hydrodynamic design of the root area. The goal is to avoid cavitation on both
very
sides of the propeller blade near the root, which can result in some inherent kinetic energy loss. The
for
latest design methods, which are still in the research stage, attempt to account more completely
root
hydrodynamic propeller blade root and hub interactions. In addition, the design of the propeller blade
or
is often significantly affected by propeller strength considerations. This leads to increased root thickness
filleting, and on controllable pitch propellers, the root chord is limited by the rotating blade palm diameter.
Thus, even well designed propellers can experience losses associated with the flow in the root area of the
propeller blade.
The open water propeller efficiency shown in Figure 3 is not a good indicator of which propeller would
of the
benefit from these hub fins. The open water propeller efficiency reflects the overall performance
by a
propeller blades only, i.e. without the hub. During the open water model test, the propeller is powered
the
downstream shaft, and. in addition, thrust and torque tare loads of the hub spinning alone (without
blades) are subtracted out.
The hub-fin units are commercially available, with over 200 such devices having been applied to variety
of commercial ships. Claimed savings in fuel consumption is 3 to 5 percent. These savings are believable,
17
direct U.S. Navy
especially if the original propeller was in some way deficient. However, there is no
expected low associated
verification of these claims. The concept is recommended for retrofit, due to its
on a selected auxiliary
costs of ship integration and installation. The recommendation is to explore retrofit
The combatant ship
ship prior to conducting R&D into suitability for eventual retrofit on a combatant.
and signature
retrofit involves much more extensive design and model test work because of the cavitation
related potential impacts of such a device.
the rudder
- Rudder Modifications: Examples of possible rudder modifications are the thrusting fin, and
upper (above the
bulb fin, as shown in Figure B2 I. In addition, there is a split rudder concept that aligns the
devices work when
propeller centerline) and lower portion of the rudder at slightly different angles. These
conditions, the
there is a strong vertical or horizontal flow component in way of the device. Under such
angularity is
devices can either produce thrust, or decrease rotational energy losses, or both. The flow
hull wake. The
usually the result (or combination) of the propeller slipstream, the bilge vortex, and the
Powering
thrusting fin, and rudder bulb fin, have been fitted mostly to single screw commercial ships.
for a
reductions up to 5% have been reported. U.S. Navy model tests have shown a 3% powering reduction
mostly been
thrusting fin. and a 1% powering reduction with a split rudder. In general, the devices have
present.
applied to single screw ships, but: will work with twin screw if strong angular flow conditions are
The recommendation with regard to the alternative fairwater designs, hub fins, rudder bulbs, and twisted
rudder devices, is to perform brief flow visualization model tests and brief propeller hub flow calculations,
for all of the selected ship classes. CDNSWC has all of the nine hull models and design propeller models,
and. in addition, the propeller design geometry is readily available. The following work is envisioned:
of the
"* Underwater flow visualization to determine flow directions on the rudder to help with the selection
most suitable hull for thrusting fins, and for the split rudder.
"• Stroboscopic underwater flow visualization on the propeller hubs to help with the selection of the most
suitable candidate for alternative fairwaters, and hub fins.
"* Simple vorticity measurement downstream of the propeller to help with selection of ships for hub fins.
for
"• Simple calculations of flow over the propeller blade near the root area to identify the best candidate
hub fins.
The hull geometry and operational characteristics of the selected hulls tend to favor some of the above
retrofit concepts. The AO 177 is the only single screw merchant ship type hullform, and from a geometry
point of view, it is the only realistic candidate for a rudder bulb. The ships with controllable pitch propellers
loads
are the only realistic candidates for alternative fairwaters. Thrusting fins will impose some additional
on the rudders of all the ships, and calculations will be needed to determine if the additional load is critical
or not. On ships with horn rudders such as the TAO 187 and LPD 17 there is a possibility for locating the
thrusting fins on the fixed part of the horn, and thus minimize any impact on the rudder. On the high speed
18
cost,
ships such as DDG 51, DD 963, CG 47, FFG 7, and AOE 6, the design complexity and possible retrofit
of any of these devices, is increased because of cavitation considerations.
• Propeller Pitch Scheduling: Propeller pitch scheduling is an at-sea practice, rather than a retrofittable
engine fuel
hydrodynamic device, of setting and maintaining the optimal propeller pitch for minimal
employ
consumption. It is highly recommended for study and eventual adoption on all ships which
controllable-pitch propellers for their main propulsion. These ships are: DDG 51, CG 47 / DD 963/993,
FFG 7, LSD 41 &49, TAO 187, and possibly the new LPD 17 Class.
on
The traditional view of propeller pitch scheduling involves a set of instructions to the ship's force
963) to
setting propeller pitch. The U.S. Navy conducted full scale trials on the USS Spruance (DD
(1 3). Analysis
evaluate the effects of pitch scheduling during trailed shaft operations, Hansen and Santelli
speed
of the trials data revealed that a fuel savings of I to 2 percent could be achieved in the portion of the
manual
range between 15 to 20 knots. Implementation of propeller pitch scheduling was envisioned to be a
process, performed by the ship's crew, according to specific instructions.
the
One of the difficulties with this traditional approach is that the propeller pitch indicator (on board
a servo
ship) is often in significant error. Propeller pitch is set by hydraulic pressure exerting force on
fluid
mechanism. Many factors may affect the accuracy of the set propeller pitch, such as: hydraulic
on the
temperature, thermal expansion of long pitch control rods, propulsion shaft compression, wear
in
system, and the accuracy of the pitch indicator itself. For ship trials the pitch indicator can be calibrated
drydock, pierside by divers, underway at speed, or by a combination of techniques, Klitsch et. al. (14). The
only pitch point known for sure, is an over-pitched position that is up against mechanical stops. This pitch
problem has been known for some time, and for DDG 51, an in-hub pitch sensor was developed,. However,
this system failed, and was removed from the ship. The development of reliable and accurate pitch
indicators is strongly recommended.
Another approach to pitch scheduling, is to purchase or develop a real time feedback system. This
system would automatically optimize the combination of propeller pitch and engine RPM, for minimum fuel
consumption. A survey should be conducted to determine what commercial systems are available today,
and to see if they are adequate for U.S. Navy use. Actual sensing of the propeller pitch may not be critical
to the system. The principal of optimization would be to minimize fuel flow at an operator specified ship
speed, by varying propeller pitch and thus engine RPM. Both software algorithms, and accurate hardware
be
such as thrust and torque meters, fuel flow meters, wind indicators, and ship motion sensors, might
needed for such a system. Such a system could be readily adapted to other desirable modes of operation,
including optimization for minimum propeller noise, maximum ship speed, and maximum acceleration. The
19
propeller fouling, and
real-time nature of the system would automatically account for the effects of hull and
the normal wear related degradation of engine performance.
ship. For the LSD
The sensitivity of delivered power to propeller pitch variations will vary from ship to
speed of 22 knots, Bell
41, the sensitivity of delivered power and propeller RPM was calculated for a ship
(15). The results for LSD 41, relative to the nominal design pitch condition, were:
6% reduction in pitch caused a 3.5% RPM increase and a 2.2% delivered power increase
6% increase in pitch caused a 3.5% RPM reduction and a 0.7% delivered power reduction
ship, the
The change in fuel consumption was not computed, nevertheless, since this is a diesel powered
The magnitude of the
fuel consumption change is expected to be on the same order as the powering change.
small gain per ship.
fuel usage improvement, due to ensuring operations at optimal pitch, represents only a
on a large
However, the overall U.S. Navy fleet savings could be expected to be significant, due to the gains
potential number of ships. The total savings could be calculated for assumed pitch variations.
both
The expected low implementation costs and widespread potential application for pitch scheduling,
fuel savings is
the traditional and the automatic real time methods, make this a highly desirable option. The
in selecting
difficult to quantify. The baseline performance depends on the current skill of the ship's crew
pitch and engine RPM for a given speed, and this skill could vary from ship to ship.
GENERAL LISTING OF SUB.IECT REFERENCES

of
Within Appendix C is provided a general listing of the compiled references pertaining to the subject
references
energy enhancing concepts and devices. References listed are in open literature. Many of these
text of the
were utilized in the composition of this report and are referred to within the main text and/or the
appendices. All of these references are available from CARDEROCKDIV, NSWC Code 5200.
CONCLUSIONS
Information was compiled on U.S. Navy surface ship classes. This data was utilized to select eleven
(11) candidate classes for the possible retrofit of energy savings devices. The criteria for this selection was
those ship classes that had the highest potential life-cycle fuel savings with the installation of an energy
savings device. The annual potential fuel cost savings and potential life cycle fuel savings, attributed to the
installation of a hypothetical 5% energy savings device, was then determined for each of the identified
candidate ship classes.
Descriptions are provided of many energy enhancing concepts and devices, including depiction of the
geometry, principles of operation, practical considerations, full scale or model scale experiences, and energy
reduction potential. Fourteen (14) devices were selected for potential retrofit to U.S. Navy surface ships.
20
suitability for retrofit,
The criteria for this selection included applicability to U.S. Navy type hullforms,
reliability, and history of demonstrated energy enhancement potential.
devices
An evaluation was then made in regard to which of the fourteen selected energy enhancement
identified candidate
are to be recommended for consideration as cost beneficial for retrofit on the eleven
as cost (R&D, ship
U.S. Navy surface ship classes. Many practical considerations beyond suitability, such
technical risks,
integration, manufacturing, and installation), availability of devices with greater potential,
etc., were taken into account for each hullform.
RECOMMENDATIONS
for the DDG 51.
(i) Continue the retrofit bulbous bow research and development work already planed
ship classes. A
Continue the ongoing stern flap work for the DDG 51 Class and for the DD 963 / CG 47
DD 963 /
stern flap for the FFG 7 class has already been developed. The fuel consumption of the
major research
CG 47 ship classes and the FFG 7 class can benefit from retrofit bulbous bows, however,
and development efforts for these ships should be performed after the results from the DDG 5i bulbous
bow program are analyzed.
for the
(2) Hydrodynamic research and development work to design retrofit energy enhancement devices
be
TAO 187 Class is recommended. The following retrofit items, listed in order of priority, should
considered:
"*Bow bulb (traditional type and the new small near surface type)
"*New fairwaters and/or fairwater fins
"•Thrusting fins on the rudders
"•Stern end bulb and/or stern flap
be conducted
(3) Brief model flow visualization experiments and propeller hub flow computations should
would
on the models that represent the I I ship classes identified in this report. These experiments
of
determine which of these ships possess favorable hydrodynamic characteristics for the retrofit
fairwater fins, new fairwaters, thrusting fins on the rudder, and modified rudders. These retrofit devices
are all very attractive because of their low cost and ease of retrofit.
for
(4) A system that automatically selects an optimum propeller pitch and engine RPM combination
propellers
minimized fuel usage could be applied to seven major ship classes with controllable pitch
should be
(consisting of 175 ships in total). The potential fuel saving benefits of such a system
The
estimated using current ship usage patterns, engine characteristics, and powering characteristics.
If
availability, applicability, and accuracy of off-the shelf commercial systems should be determined.
of
there are no satisfactory commercial systems, then the U.S. Navy should embark on the development
21
modes of
such a system. In addition to energy enhancement, such a system could have alternative
operation for minimizing propulsor noise or for maximizing propeller thrust.
bulbs should be
(5) An investigation into the potential benefits and design methodologies for stern end
transoms, the
started. For destroyer / cruiser type ships, with conventional low deadrise submerged
In
performance of a stern bulb alone, and in combination with a stern flap, should be investigated.
/ retrieval
addition, the possibility of using a stern end bulb as a housing for the underwater deployment
concepts.
of various towed array sonar arrays should be investigated, for both retrofit and new design
end bulb
For the auxiliary type ships such as AOE 6, TAO 187, and AO 177 classes, the stern
performance should be investigated for both the design and ballast displacement.
is recommended.
(6) The development of a bulbous bow design oriented towards retrofit on the LHA class
a retrofit an
New developments in bulbous bow design, which could be adapted to the LHA, may make
attractive option.
On the
(7) The development of a stern flap on the LSD class and the LHA / LHD class is recommended.
LSD the flap should be effective for speeds of roughly 16 knots and above. On the LHD the flap should
become effective at speeds of roughly 18 knots and above. The flap design has to be optimized for the
mission operational speed profile of the ship. Stern flap design needs to consider amphibious operations
and stern gate deployment. The low deadrise transom shape on these ships is suitable for stern flaps.
(8) Research on energy efficient tip propellers should be pursued. The general performance claims for
If a
propellers with end plates should be verified through design and high Reynolds number model tests.
impact
theoretical 3% efficiency improvement claim is valid for U.S. Naval ships, there could be a great
on the fuel consumption of new ships if fitted with this type of propeller. The LSD 41 propellers have
a
been identified as a design less efficient than possible with today's state of the art propellers. From
retrofit cost point of view, hydrodynamic design efforts and feasibility analysis of retrofitting end plates
to the current LSD propellers is recommended.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to thank the CARDEROCKDIV, NSWC Ship Resistance and Powering Department
(Code 5200) employees: W. Beaver and K. Forgach, for their contributions towards this report with regard
to the compilation and arrangements of portions of the subject material, and for supplying U.S. Navy test
data on many of the energy savings devices.
In addition. Code 5200 employee D. Drazin was largely responsible for the work required to prepare the
original document for this reissue.
22
REFERENCES
I. Schneekluth, H., Ship Design for Efficiency and Economy, Butterworth & Co. (Publishers) Ltd, (1987).
Twenty Fourth
2. Cusanelli, D.S., and Forgach, K.M., "Stem Flaps for Enhanced Powering Performance",
(Nov. 1995).
American Towing Tank Conference, Texas A & M University, College Station, Texas,
of the FFG-7
3. Cusanelli, D.S., and W. Cave, III, "Effect of Stern Flaps on Powering Performance
Class", Marine Technology, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 39-50, (Jan. 1993).
4. This reference is not in the public domain.
Combines a
5. Cusanelli, D.S., "Development of a Bow for a Naval Surface Combatant which
Symposium
Hydrodynamic Bulb and a Sonar Dome", Transactions of ASNE Technology Innovation
'94, Pittsburgh Sect., (Sept. 1994).
8. Bailar, J.W., S.D. Jessup, and Y.T. Shen, "Improvement of Surface Ship Propeller Cavitation
Orleans,
Performance Using Advanced Blade Sections", Proceedings of the Twenty-Third ATTC, New
LA. (June 1992).
Spring
10. Andersen, P. and H. Schwaneke. "Design and Model Tests of Tip Fin Propellers", RINA
Meeting, (1952).
with Optional
11. DeJong, K, "On the Optimization, Including Viscosity Effects, of Ship Screw Propellers
End Plates", International Shipbuilding Progress, Vol 38, (1991).
USS
13. Hansen, A.G., and N. Santelli, "Effect of Pitch Scheduling on Fuel Usage for Gas Turbine Ships:
Spruance (DD-963) Sea Trials", The Scientex Corp., Report No. TSC-35.5-1, (Nov. 1983).
Full
14. Klitsch, M.L., R.J. Stenson, and E.L. Woo, "Experience with Controllable Pitch Propellers During
(Sept.
Scale Performance and Special Trials", Proceedings of Ninth Ship Control Systems Symposium.
1990).
23
This page intentionally left blank
24
APPENDIX A:
U.S. NAVY SURFACE FLEET OVERVIEW
A I
Presented in Appendix A is the overview information collected on the existing US Navy fleet of
surface
surface ships. Within this appendix, the US Navy surface ship fleet is separated into five main
with
force classifications. The five main ship force classifications of this appendix do not correspond
ship force
the official US Navy List of Ship Classifications, updated periodically '. These five
classifications are: (A) Surface Combatants, (B) Amphibious Warfare Ships, (C) Fleet Auxiliary
Force, (D) Mine Warfare, and (E) Active Strategic Sealift. Ships or ship classes in each of the main
ship functional force classifications are further subdivided into nineteen (19) categories separated by
on
ship type (ship function). The individual US Navy ship class overview information is presented
only those classes for which activity status data indicates that at least one ship remains active in the
2
fleet. Eliminated from the overview are those classes for which all ship's activity status is listed as
non-deployed (or non-deployable), out of service, inactive, inactive status in Military Sealift Command
(MSC), assigned to Naval Reserve Force (NRF), or sold to foreign navies, etc. In some instances,
two ship classes, listed separately in the US Navy ship register, were grouped together in the present
overview. These specific instances, indicated in the present overview, occur when the same
underwater hull design was utilized for the two classes. For the purpose of this energy study, the hull
design was the primary differentiating factor. The present US Navy class overview resulted in the
identification of nearly sixty (60) active ship classes.
The individual US Navy ship class overview information includes data such as number of ships,
activity status, number of ships planned or being presently built, and remaining service life, as well as
common data on ship type, size (displacement, length, beam, draft), speed, range, and propulsion
(number of shafts, installed power, prime mover). The data comprising the US Navy surface fleet
overview was extracted from the following sources: The first source being a variety of different types
of documents within the technical library at CARDEROCKDIV,NSWC, Carderock site. The second
3
source was the Polmar reference guide book of the U.S. Fleet (Ref. Al) . This book was the source
for much of the activity status of the older ship classes, as well as additional fleet information. A third
source was the broadly known book of world-wide fighting forces, published by Jane's (Ref. A2).
This was again a source of additional fleet information. This overview of US Navy ship classes,
compiled for this energy study, is presented in the following Table Al.
' The official US Navy List of Ship Classifications includes a much more extensive differentiation between ship force
functions, and consequently includes many additional ship classification branches.
2 US Navy surface ship fleet present activity status is presented when available, however, many of the older ship cklsses
reflect activity status as of FY94.
3 Reference for Appendix A are presented on the last page of the appendix.
A2
0O Y) 0 m v (0 o(D I
c C) cec
) .- . L y)(
C, r- 0)C
-)N )c)(
-U) f)Ci rý l C'~j " CM q ' 7
coC\co0)C) ca. r e ) - L
me c'lj
E 000 c)~~~ )e0() (N O. 0

LO) CO) -e C0) 4n.... tO U -) C -it 0
Er co co m LO LLO (D 0Inrl- LO0to IT' C\I m) cc0 ) co r
0) 00 m c)
a)
r- (O0)
0) Gý 00)D o)
m (D
00) co'ITC~j
z .
0 00ooD Cj Ou 00 ~Lo
:i 0
(
0
00
(D Goc
)00
0)NN.) r-to
U T0
c0)0)
c
CQJ
0) co CO U U)'
0 00
00
Cw 0) 0 CD r T0) 0" 0 CD 0.0
00) 000) 0)0) .l-C~
C c0
0))Oq
LO n0 ~~ ~o 0 \ ~ 0 -ýClC 0) O0 0- ). > L 0
5O C r - c C000 NmCe0 0 m 0) o 0 m 1-0) oL.
I. 10 0)J O'0 M -0)0 0) D c ) )c :
00) - 0)0) 0)j in0 oe) ) C)0 c
0)N 0)TC\ 0 T
LO ( U)
0)j .r)
wL
0)o ) 0 0 0 0
- co0 - C'J 00 )0
00o )c
>~~
a) m cm ~
M- C~j- M - CO M CO
U) - -
m(I co - rIrL l Ow 0 c : C:0o c o0 , ci C\J

In (a w C'o
O 0) 00o1- a - am4 oF
~0 0) 0) CY )M M :a
I) I0I . 0I
(n to0)Nq( ý O r C'J (D - 0o0) 0)(

m) m)).N0 mN. ( ) m0) O 0
Mo 0)0 m
m~ m)0 )
E- 0 - - , ) -, 0) M 0) 0Y) - a
v1 (Dcm ) 0)
U \
U) (0
- 0 >) 0)c CC)

o 0) 0o
N-0 dl
:
L>) t-.
N. r* C6. Go) c'. o t N.U?
C) U-) ob dr, *
D(D rN.C) 60)C) to ) 7V') (0) 0~?
0 '
C
~~~~~
N. ZZ
0
b0
ZZ
zC~0 \'b0
CD
N. -
C! 0 00
--
1 0 00 N
> a) > > >> 0C)!(5-)! (DD.0 000
0 0 C mC 0--U-Q
LCl)C/to (
00 LLU DC - ii--l ---- I
< <0 0 C)00U0000
C~ Ce) (ao -- Lo
fll
E C~
3 LCe) )O -'-t
U- ' c-N
a. - 0 (a
U)- 0)0 co CO o-
(D co (L D 00 M.0
(D 'D0 CL CD 0) 0)
C:~ a: (D :2E co E 0)
c CO0. 0
W 0N
CL '0C:.
c)C.0 . c 0
(z a) - 0 cc:> a
0
- D
--
C:
0 C:
CI
~
0 C
) 0
Q00~
>0 U ILU :3
di
c
~ )0 (u 0
O3: c. cu
0ca <r zl
v . LL ý4WJZ F- D0 0)M Ui)m N2 0)
I- U..
'( 0
c0) 0)
0
0 0 C
C.) wlU
<. (0
nI-I
-UO o C\Jr-o0 *t(O00o ol 1*ý
C..
C'I~T Cl1C -
0C~~~~~j~
'T010
~() o)
o N~Q
CMMMC))~~Cl-N
m ~ (D
c C~
0C L
v ~ O)M
U')to
~ )C)C)m
U) E o M ; Cf)C')
co C~ CMC O
0z (N
co 0
V- a) c m U) U)U) 10, m Om o 0 ma
CC ooJ CC)~coU CC Nc4 C'J
r -2 C'JC CY)u I) ) 0)CM 10'

C' CO
U') M r- C LO (
(D Nr'T'T ( U "U) M OLD r-N
Q 0 e)ý
Z ~ ~ U o U0 0 'D)
0o CCJU 00
ýt
10
ýt
1 00 0
10i0 c o o O O"O 00 00 00
*0M C'1U)-)L0
O O U 00O 0 N0)0
(D 01' 0CJ N )
2 O ~0 m 0j N-0 Cl
0r
0 00N--io
nLOC
CM
((Nh
0)0
OLO -(
0 LU)Co
)cl))
-o) o
0 'T
c. (D-- 0) 0
0) 0
l -'T )0 0t I' 0)Cj
-C 0r 0'TC-( M00 D -
It to 0 D0
0101(h
U) ()
.4D
1
a)1- U)N- U)0'U N- OUN O ) m m)' (0 N 0) LO0 VU'I I
> -7 Ur(0 OD -T
m - 00 N - C- n CM
,- r- co m N N- - - .4-1 0 4- N 1
0U)
co4 . tm( C:- CD

U) 0D U) m-
7; (MU N0M) 1 ) Nm10 0, a) 0 O CO -
N0 o r- co
L)
cor
m )
Dc
) )
r U) p- tnU ) 01 1--
0)
0m 0)Inm
a) co -
)0) 0)
m
m
-
-I
U
a))
)0 m m ~ - -
0) a)0)
,r-
10)r
0) CO,~ r- CO
T - r- t-c-O L
0. CL
CIO Or- -:
U) 'I c CM 0 Q C
-d N 000 U-)
0 CMNco
oo 10)- r7t 0 01 0)' "t N) co
Ln
r 0) 0)0 m CM LlO)2
C0 ).
mMU LI. -2
s
"0:U 0)4L .4 <0)1 C -
-
a) U)
101
0
Ocm -M
co O0~M
V) N mQ
LL m -a:
-1 .- m HCcoJ w
> Q)
E ~ LLL
( (DO
0
00(o010L
~ '
Luw 00 < 00
rU 00
< < Cc
D P
< <1 <
dyl eN:yý
<< 00
< < <<< F-< F- << F- HH H I -H H
<<< < <
z
U) ,0)L ~ ~ ,~-.4 ~10~tC) - N
0ý- c 0E
w10 0 ?~ CD C~
3 DC
o 1 n E=0)-e c L 5 2 (D
01>
u. C) 0 c01
fc u.0
E a) U 01
L V0 a--m- UJD
0 (0 a) - 0 C) 0
mI _ 0 01
EE 0
U0 LL.O H1 0 0 10 L
A4
0 C13
a) > >
E C ) 0 0DSSS
Z5 0 W a
- o0 0 000coc
V5 ýcU 0 W0
E n ncfl 00
E_ E E
wcc (a ( cra
N- t:;:
N C, - q c
o 0 o 0 to L~
cc3U u) (hW > u) a: Lo' CLO 0 -h
CL a- 0 M0 C .5Z _e W0
E
0) 0
~~j
.-
CL ~a o a Z5 a) u
_, 0 Lc 0
-, 5 C C0 O to CCC 0oa 0)
c Doa o-c a. 000 . C Lw (0
L)U0 - T2 w aw.2a, ,
~~~( W'c3 c3' 0 00 0 w 0 0
">X cmC 'zCJ
0:
C ) 00:L 0L
a) .0Zia a - 0 -0 U .0E E E Z4 in
0c - 6 1 5 C7 0 o .C 0 0 0
C C zc a c 0 o LD E
C C
,-N Cn 5 a0-
) 0
U)_
0 0 Z Z Z 00 00 0-
00 U)u 00 0 if
EC- >oc I'D 2D M - fcBm
~ 0(l0
to ' a)i J \~' C o'C
4 ' C%lC' "J - C ~ 'J~ V) a)'J
000000 cu. cc ca cocc
(n U) 0n oC C
C6 C
ci) w Cý0C) 0 z oa'

6
Cl 00
N0 C o0 0 )
0 0~cv 0ciV )..nC 0 . oo-' 00 0 0 0
c Q "0 -LO 1, o L,0 r COn 0.
N~) -Qw(I
o'I t
0o ILUZim>ca ~ta 0~
0 r :!c)
<
0,
> A5
U)
a))
~ a)O)C U)UU
a) -c c c
a) a))a)a)
N C:U -e
nnN -
0 0 a -e
Eo (n EE
-wco (D C 0 m)
E E o E 0 U
0) EE 02ý5
*Q) Co 0 ='a - Cci UJW 0
~~(1 EaEcci~c-ci -) as~
m i> > Co CO
(D - ) _ LU a) _ q0
0
'-D _ a! > -f( CD U
-~ C
'- _j -M 0~~ 0' 0
Q) .
U) U)i N -.LL a@
>) .0~ C~ CC 0. a) W- E
0 0)
0
~0~
m m m 0
a)o
=
5
-i m
0oa
oC1-C 0)0
0 -
EO
E ~ CCD 0 C C WU) - ci a) 2
CO' 0)U)( U) 75 U)
0 cc a) 0 c a c Ca)- n in co
E
EU ni LU ELJ U)E EU U)U) UJ
w x
tao 000aa~ c' cD a C5 (Dw acn ) a
0 0) 0)
a) 0 )(D(
cc C0) 0~a 0 0 ao0cc0 T( 0 0
0 mno04 a )o a
~~)0 U)- C).~-

a) L0:3)00 ~ ~~) 00
>) > ŽŽ > U) ) >>
oN CCD
<2c- 0C0C)Ll~
0a 00 D Q (D 0)
>a)CJ~J W (D a) ~Cc (D .> w 0 00 0 0 0 Q> a
0"Z- >0 >- C.r- .;- 00Z 2 Z 2 lZ ,
t5t 675t-6t 5 '
cci E)t
cc
.1
6t 1
t5©© t5~@ @6
t;. t5*- .- r- . C'o'
M- CZ coo 0 0 t0 0o( 0 0 0o a 0o
-E C7E w-C
(n
a)i 0,-. 0 0 0 O o
m0C 0l
@ @a 0 0 0 0 00 00 0 00 0000 00
QO Cl I l C-C,~ I -C l
-L CO 0 0 0 0 0
LI) 0I 00 0 00C) 0U)

000 0 0~ 0-- 6OC
0 0 -( 0 0C U)') LO C)0 (0 0 0
(0 1,- (D'C~ C C'C' a C')' -- v-rN)- ,-
Uo CF) r- C') 0L -D-O
~cI
0 00 0
Z 0-) 00 00 oo
0 o~0 o 00 00) 0D 00 00
U) CM
U))I
CIOa z
0 : c o 0 0 0 ) 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 ý 0 (
a_ c o 0 ) C 0 I ) C 0) C D
a) t 'T E0 0) 0
C)4(62n0~ C4ýicl 06 a)C w -U a)0
O>0CE4: co N~ U) 0-j C~UU)U
C') m) N N:
a:: -,U)
0 < a:
The data of this US Navy surface fleet overview was utilized to obtain information for
identification of candidate ship classes with the highest potential life-cycle fuel consumptions. These
ship classes would possess the greatest potential fuel savings benefits by way of installment of energy
enhancement devices. Because of the difficulties in obtaining the actual fuel usage data on all of the
nearly sixty (60) identified active ship classes, another approach was undertaken. The field of
potential high fuel usage ship classes was narrowed down by taking into consideration that class life-
cycle fuel consumption rating would be a result of the following three characteristics: number of ships
in class, remaining average service life, and installed power of the prime mover. A ship class
possessing relatively high values in these three characteristics would, therefore, have a high potential
life-cycle fuel consumption. The overview data pertaining to the number of ships in (or planned for)
the class, remaining service life, and installed power, is presented in graphical form in Figure Al. The
data was then used to determine figure of merit factors to quantify these three characteristics. The first
factor, Power*Number, is simply the multiplicative sum of the number of ships in class and the class
installed power. The second factor, Power*Number*Life, simply multiplies the Power*Number
factor by the average years of remaining service life for the class. These figure of merit factors are
presented in bar graph form in Figure A2. The candidate ship classes with the highest potential life-
cycle fuel consumptions were identified as those which exhibited a relatively high
Power*Number*Life merit factor, (as judged by an elevated bar graph level on Figure A2).
A decision was then made to place an additional criteria on the candidate ship classes. Only those
ships which burned fossil fuels would be considered for further analysis. Realistic cost savings, from
reduced fossil fuel consumption, could be determined for these candidate classes. Excluded from
further consideration in this energy study were those surface ships equipped with nuclear power.
Several of these ships did, however, exhibit high values in the figure of merit analysis. There is the
possibility, with enhanced hull and/or propulsor performance, of effecting overall life-cycle costs of
these ships by extending the service life of the reactor nuclear core. However, assessment of this
scenario would be difficult and is not considered at this time.
Eleven US Navy surface ship classes were identified as having high potential life-cycle fuel
consumptions. These eleven ship classes, are candidates for retrofit of energy savings devices, and are
recommended for further consideration in this energy study. The eleven US Navy surface ship classes
include four from classification (A) Surface Combatants, four from classification (B) Amphibious
Warfare Ships, and three from classification (C) Fleet Auxiliary Force. No candidate ship classes were
identified from either classification (D) Mine Warfare or classification (E) Active Strategic Sealift. The
candidate US Navy surface ship classes, identified for further consideration in this energy study, are
presented in the following Table A2. Note: the four new classes of sealift ships just being launched are
not contained in this overview.
A7
Table A2. US Navy surface ship classes identified as candidates for retrofit
of energy enhancement devices
Classification (A) Surface Combatants
Ticonderoga, CG 47
Spruance / Kidd, DD 963 / DD 993
Arleigh Burke, DDG 51
Oliver Hazard Perry, FFG 7
Classification (B) Amphibious Warfare Ships

San Antonio, LPD 17
Wasp, LHD I
Tarawa, LHA 1
Whidbey Island / Harpers Ferry, LSD 41 / LSD 49
Classification (C) Fleet Auxiliary Force
Henry J Kaiser, TAO 187
Cimarron (Jumbo), AO 177
Supply, AOE 6
The fossil fuel carrier class of Kitty Hawk and John F. Kennedy (CV 63 & CV 67) exhibited a
slightly elevated Power*Number*Life merit factor bar graph level on Figure A2. However it was
eliminated from contention because it was felt that installation of energy enhancement devices on this
class would not be economically justified. This decision was based on the low number of ships in the
class (4) and the short average remaining service life (< 10 years). The elevated merit factor was
solely based upon the relatively high installed power (280,000 hP).
Obtaining the actual fuel usage data for these identified candidate ship classes was the next step.
4
Information on ship annual fuel usage and fuel rates was obtained from Navy VAMOSC data supplied
by the Naval Center for Cost Analysis (NCA). Presented in Table A3, is the US Navy ship average
annual fuel consumptions, for the selected candidate classes. As indicated, no fuel usage data was
reported for three of the classes, therefore, it was necessary to estimate data for these. The Navy
VAMOSC fuel data is separated into both barrels of fuel consumed underway and not underway.
Utilized in this energy analysis is only the ship fuel consumption underway. Additionally, it was
assumed that only 70 percent of the reported underway fuel consumed was utilized predominantly for
ship propulsion. The remaining 30 percent is assumed for ship auxiliary generators, hotel loads, etc.
Henceforth, all of the analyses presented, reflect annual propulsion fuel usages equal to 70 percent of
the reported Navy VAMOSC underway fuel consumed. The data on individual ship and class
averaged annual barrels of fuel used for propulsion, is presented in bar graph form in Figure A3.
In order to determine if an energy saving device makes economic sense in terms of payback on
investment, it was assumed that a hypothetical device would save 5 percent on propulsion fuel. To
'Navy VAMOSC data supplied by Naval Center for Cost Analysis (NCA) from a report dated 11/21/95, reflecting
individual class fuel usages from FY85 through FY94.
A8
make this 5% hypothetical device more realistic, it was also assumed that it could have three possible
ranges of cost, low, medium, and high, depicted as follows:
Device Cost Range Total R&D Cost Installation Cost / ship (Example Device)
Low Cost $ 500K $ lOOK stern flap
Mid Cost $ IM $ 500K bow bulb
High Cost $ 2M $ 1M propeller
5
The simple following constant dollar analyses were then performed to determine the possible fuel cost
savings associated with the 5% hypothetical device, on each identified US Navy class:
"* Annual potential fuel saved (barrels), and annual potential fuel cost savings ($K), Figure A4.
"* Estimated costs of R&D and full scale installation, Figure A5.
", Fuel cost savings potential for short-term (5 years), Figure A6.
"* Fuel cost savings potential for mid-term (10 years), Figure A7.
"* Total life cycle fuel cost savings potential (remaining class service life), Figure A8.
It is readily apparent that potentially the most significant fuel savings could be realized with the
cruisers and destroyers, (Figure A4). If the requirement is to show a net savings, i.e. payback, in a
five year short term, than only devices in the low cost and median cost ranges should be considered
(Figure A6). For payback in ten years, even the devices in the high cost range look attractive for
several of the identified ship classes, (Figure A7). It is interesting to note that over the remaining class
service life, the initial cost of tie device has only a moderate impact on the net savings, (Figure A8).
For the fuel cost savings, a per barrel fuel cost of $55 was utilized. This value has been recommended by
NAVSEA, and reflects the cost of procurement and delivery.
A9
REFERENCES OF APPENDIX A
Al. Polmar, N., The Naval Institute Guide to the Ships and Aircraft of the U.S. Fleet, 15th Edition,
Naval Institute Press, 1993.
A2. Sharp, Capt. R., RN, editor, Jane's Fighting Ships 1995-96, 98th Edition, Jane's Information
Group Limited, 1995.
A 10
Z~ .2 -p U 00
w m)
C OD LoLt) 0
O) - ' -
U 0E 05 - .)0 c)0 U)
E C0 0)>t
2o j> 't C. mUCOU0I
c "a)
CU 0 w~ D
oo -n c (
a)
E 0C 0 >1)
,2 '1) 0 C c
0
=)o4VU 0Ut 0 LO C J0
000
(n 00 0 0 -
WVU o w L
V 3CU a)) 0 U UL E~ iU)1

CO CI ~(0
0 (D (0 ( ) CD1C) .
U
2~L - U)
U)) CUOC
> U-)
C'U) n 0(0) U) n ( 0 0 a))0
(D r-U
00 0 0J000) 000 .0 U
< < < < M~i0 a
E 0 U)
-j -~~ c) 0) 0 CE I D-a
0-c
>
-0
wU CUU cmCI )-0)
- 0 0CD0
1-O
a (D
3p...- ZOC) 0 0 (N0 U Y)
cCJ
NC~ )cm N -0 ciC~ -L ~ N5I a CL
< C
* 00
0) LOv 06 oC O - o U
a)C) N c - M o N- o
ca)L > 0)U) r

a) < CO
a) 0) -
cr C\I VnU)Vc)
z~ C: ZC 0 ' <i~ w <

>2 ) C<
zY.C UUU
0) r)-) 0 C - I U
cAll
(dq) JOMOdj P91IlsuI
0 C) 0 000
o C0 0 000
o 0 0
0
0
LO
0
0
0
0
ao L
CY) C~j C'j LO
C/) 6L.IL L.IS- liodMeN

I~t S-1 Ad sjadWLH V2 sI Aeqp!Lt4,
(]~
U) cn
Cc -i 9C OISi OEJ~O140UV
0
LL fn
3: 0_
U) 1 0) Hdl ewijr omi
-~ L. Cdi1 OIUOIUV UUS
61. 00-1 96p!H E~nII

Tm-o
L Odd AJued ZeH JGAIqO

I.q 9(]U VII IIII slij ~'9>"U
ARMI!
R-ý-7- I£66 0JO '696 (3G PP!)1 V s3UenidS
EhD G£ NE0 '9Z!00 unixni±L~dvuujes-
Z 8£ NOD E!'uiBJ!A
co Y - 9£ NOO le!uJOI!le0
0 93 NOO '9L. g0 Aq.eE)-je6ppjqum-g o~
0
0__________ LtV !D0 UOJePUoOOIj
99 NAD asujdjElu3
_____ __________ ____ ___ -L91RO9 AO >urv2)IMPH AI~IN
09 AO '69 LAV I~ls9JJO
CD 0C 0 0 0
CD ICO Cli
co I-
(si-eeA),94fl GOIAIGS 6U!U!'eU8H e6BaJeAV

(Peuuuld IReA!1OV) sselo ui sd!itS jo jeqwflN
A12
(dWq JOMOd POIIUISUI
o 0
o 0 0 C 0 0
o 0 0 0 0 0
o CD 0 0 CD 0
N~ C0 0 0 0D 0
(0Z 0 N
6t,03 )IVI
enuH r -1Ido
>iv _oo
f' iO> \ 5
Cf) (nlOSO
0 90o6 >IVI oqo8 d r

Z9-19S OHIN Aejdso
ECL-V t.
991
VJO)VqJ9eUE)AV
UU)LM~
a)v
99six uoVIuepa mod
09 SUV pjien~eleS
..... 61. SOOVI HIVMS sfliOIO3IA
SOOVI 1emPI~S
V7HOV BNLO!M
LL[. OV (oqwnr) uoijiewlo
L8L9LOV±Je sle>j rA~iueH
30
iV OluewejoeS
9 30V AjddflS
2. 3V OJ~IN/!qLpq!jnS
Cl)
CC SV AejunHV8)e-1
* F- 9C SV puu-i~juedSZ
-j L47 C~v euolsmoiiek
LL__ ___
LE (V siedwoE)
0) 0 C0 0 0 0
(0 O ~- co) N1
(SaeeA) 91!l OOIAJE)s 6uIu!BWqeU 6bL:1eAV
(POUUL-Id Ig OA!IOV) ssBIO u!sd!LlS jo jaqwnN
A13
ap1eo i/V'S 6uiuiieweHsdiqS jo jeqwflN4 ' 1emOd P91IIsuI
sditqS jo 1eqwfl, 4 JemOd POVIISUI
0 0
C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o C0 0 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 C0
0
C) C0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C0
i- ~- 0) 00 P'-. (0 LO Ilz C') N' '- 0
cl) -6L1-L. 181 :WodmON

U) O)
W o U-- _ --
cc~9C COSi 96'eJ0'43UV

< z
L.-Z -n -
0f)4
Zd LI ~ Q!OU
(D -K
= 0 0
IOJI~I. Od 9uoioA0
Z90 L jJA XOU)N
L C).dd AuJid ZeH JeA!IO
___ -Ls 19000 VII'II'I sil. 'E)ýjng

666 00 '696 GO ppN~ V eouenidS
6 NOO LI3,9e 6u0-1
U) SS NOO '9Z !D0 unlxnj_'~dieui~a8 .
< ~~8C NOO!U!BJ!A
co96 NOO MWUOPqP3
0 At eE-pVE)6ppquieg3
9Z NOO '91 00!D
w
U--
99 NAOz!WIN
U) 99 NAD esujdjelu3
L9HC9 AD NffPRimLRH AWN
17, ~09 AD '69 iAV I~e~GJOJ

U) 0 U') 0 Uf) 0 UO a U-) 0 IC) 0
UO U) 4C '?t CO Co) N' C"j T- 7-
(PeuueId V 9A!I3O') ssiel U!sdiL1S jo .jeqWlN

A14
en!- eo/e Buu!iew ,sd!iqS jo 1eqwflN4 Jem~d P811elsu,
sdiLIS jo JeqwflN4'JemOd P9OII1suI
o U') C LO 0 U-) 0 LO 0 0
U') qT 14 co
C' o
C' Cm N T- LO~
Cl) 06t02; )VIV
W U -)J.. 9OOEC >IV_ Ne~o)4i Vq 16 S
-0E
-0 90 >IVi oqog d r
W ~ 4'
E ý: 3: C - [ VVOINA9i6UaAV
l~t - 9LIVi
99 L_ ue1lem~d4'
_ _ L S±V uOluE)P3
os Suv pjun6ejuS
6L. SOOVi HIVMS sloUjoiD!A
L SOOI PLM)I
17 UOV 72!L40!M
LLI. OV (oqwnr) uonjLwio
Lig oviL .iesie>j r AJUGH
L.30V 01u9WBJOM5
9 30V AiddnS
2~ 3V OJI!N/!qoeq!jflS
U-o
x C~C SV AeluflH)RE)N?1
< ge~ SV pup-1viedS
w
W Li" G~V oUOISMOII8A
-i
LC]V si adwo!D
le
t7 ZIOV uijSlsn
L.dOV L16!e91%
Ca c0 (D It c'~j a co (0 It 01 0
(Nj i- - '- ~
(PeuuuId '? OAIJOV) SSL-1 UI sditqS j0 ieqwnN
A15
(000 L/saiejug) ss~aj lol Ijfld UoiSindOid liefUUV
o 0 0 0 0 0 0
o 0 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
CD N~ co ý 0 (D C'j 0
c12 CY) C~j C'J C'j ~OD~
(Inmmm 930V AjddflS
U- --.
< cn V)
co m LSL OVI MEN r ýPJu9H
mm-
c 0)
I0- 6w~L~aS1sioddJH/AqpM
LL
E
C
C/))
mICl) 7U)
CLu
co (A
z -
L. Gd-1 OIUOIUV u2e i-
U) -
D)
__ _ __ _ __ _U
CUd
CD 0 0 LD Aie Z~ aC)
co r )l ( ' I T
(oo/sj~jq dL94 lon'4 Ej [SliddO~
8)jnfl
A1
(I!v'J$) Iluil1~Od SBUIAUS ISQO SJ"l 901A.JOS SSUIO
o 0 0 0 0
o 0' LO0
Cf) C~j O
cl) 9 3OV AjddnS

w
CE co
< E
___L LI. OVJ.L Js'eA! r AJUGH
a)a
a) a
0o ca CD
(1D C/) 0<
w >
>
> -
0t 6W17t7GS-1 sjedjeBH/Ae~qp!LIM
a)
0~
0~u z
U-
C.) =3O1U r.7 17
I.. LI Odi
. l) c 4
0 o ___ o
CL)
0 <
z z c
: _ _ C.
-a
i4i:ouvUe £6'90. p>/e nd
< aL d
00
0) U)l- Cv) 9C]( VCC) a
A1
(I!Vq) SISOOj Uo!1elIelSUI PUE O])Rl GOIAE)c
LO C"J 0 LO LO
N- tO C~j0
9 30V AiddnS
M ~ a a) 0. C
(D co I LLL. ov (oqwnr) uonjL:w loL.
0 0 -
0 ~0 L8- Oiesie>i rAfuueH

L o.
0o 30 0___0
af) 0 o
0 0
U
U) (0 U
0 0 0 EnC>
0 0
U) V5
_
ca (D ( (n _
U) "- 'D 4-0 00Hlem~
0 0 as co as
0o 0 o in 8,
vv -e4 H-1 dsMJI
oc cc ~ ___
coOOO
0
L•J~L~i>
rnmr~ I -_____ ____
-- ____ L~.Cdl !UOIV U

0 ~ _ __ -E
L!EDJ: AiJed( ZL JOAIJO
0O L9 000Q V~Z'Z 1.sl_ EMng 7
< S~66196CMG PP!>j/9oulefJdS l

co
0t 0 to 0 101 EtO
Co) CNJ C~l T
A1 8
/ 9 30V AjddnS
LLiU)(qwp o~~
0
C)J
co
Ciid a
aSi ediEH/Aeqp!IqM
6t,(S-
a~C) __ H1-me'- 0
F
4- (D
> a)
CD (D
cn 0 0 0
LL 0 0> 0
CU 0 0 C:
Uo 0
0))L L.Gd- O'uOluV ueS
00
0a
0/
C0 I
LtV go e6oiepuooij1
NC C'J C'
(I!v'J$) Sslel .10J 1'81UeOI~ S6U!AIBS 19N

(JeaA 9) WJejGI:O4S
A19
9 30V AjddnS
0
LL L.ov (oqwnr) uojuewio
co
C,)e L OVI 6sle>4i r IuE)H
co
LbL)
> >) cr
U)n , U) _
(D z
L >) >
-a-
04 V
2 I. JH IJd zEJ9MJ
0)0
_ 61RI9LI.
0d10!UO EVuienS d
CDl
-C
C0 C> C
LO!q$ O el~ldsuAe 9 C)l
088 o_ 0 t.
A20
9 3OV AddflS
,LLL OV (oqwnr) uojjwio
L9 OSINLovi P uuO
C-)
CIS U,
0) 0
Cl)C'~0)6tWV Lt'OS1 sI~dJEH/Aeqp!tqM

a)) ca cu
WCa
-0 a) a) a)
oz 0
a) >) v1
0 7
0 0
0 - 0 0
U) -J6
C.) a:~ L I dd1Aiu~ed Z2HJ8!

010
4-_ _
U\ u~~TT
0A Z/~ -h
F7,77
jd
r'~r
~&' ~ Lt' 00 R60OipuoDI-L
0 0
oO 0 L0O 1
Cf) C'j T.~
(I!VV$) sselo jol Ieiluelodj s6ulAES 19N
(a;l- GOIAJGS 6uIuILuwaIJ) 01pAO-8;!-
A21I
A2 2
APPENDIX B:
ENERGY SAVINGS DEVICES AND CONCEPTS
B I
It is assumed that competent ship design and naval architecture have already been applied to the US
Navy hullforms contained in this study. That is, basic optimization of the hullform has been
considered in the areas of: hull main dimensions; hull ratios such as length/beam, beam/draft, etc.; and
basic hydrodynamic principles have been applied to the hull lines. Also assumed is that propeller
design and sizing, and main propulsion plant considerations, have all been taken into account. The
primary means, by which to save shipboard energy, is this correct sizing and design of the vessel and
its propulsor. Jumboizing (adding a ship parallel middle body), or the removal of a parallel middle
body, are not considered as energy enhancement options in this report.
The data contained in Appendix B is a broad survey of energy enhancing concepts and devices,
which have a potential for improving ship energy efficiency. A tremendous number of alternatives, in
terms of ship types and shapes, hull innovations, shipboard devices, designs, and concepts, are
available to the ship designer, and are reviewed later in this appendix. The individual identified
devices and concepts were grouped into three main categories: (A) HULL, (B) APPENDAGE(s), and
(C) PROPULSOR(s). The devices and concepts were grouped so that similar devices, or devices that
performed under similar principles of operation, were organized together. This resulted in
approximately thirty-five (35) organizational groups of devices and concepts. The categorization and
organization, of the identified potential energy savings devices and concepts, are presented in the
following Table B 1.
Henceforth, in this text, any design, device, concept, or organizational grouping of similar devices
and concepts, shall all be referred to under the common designation of "device".
After identification, the second step in the process was to provide descriptions of the potential
energy savings devices. These descriptions were to include any/all of the following: depiction of the
geometry or general appearance of the device, mechanisms or principles of operation, practical
considerations, full scale applications or model scale experiences, and if possible, delivered power (or
fuel) reduction potential. Also, along with descriptions, photographs, drawings, and/or sketches, are
presented of the devices, when available. Within each description is mention of a prominent reference
or references for that device, again if available. A list of these references is presented on the last page
of Appendix B. The descriptions are presented for each of the thirty-five (35) device groups specified
above. Each description is applicable to all of the devices in a common group, except for a few
instances, where noted. These thirty-five descriptions of the potential energy savings devices are what
compose the main body of Appendix B. A concise listing of these possible energy savings devices,
identified as applicable to US Navy ships, is presented in Table B2. Table B2 contains summary
information on the energy devices as to their possibility for retrofit, suitability for combatants,
amphibious ships, and/or auxiliaries, and very brief comments.
B2
Table B 1. Categorization of the identified potential energy savings devices
Catepory (A) HULL Categor (B) APPENDAGE(s) Category (C) PROPULSOR(s)

.p Pevice Identification GroupDevice Identification Grow Device Identification
1 Bulbous Bow, Traditional 12 Duct Upstream of Propeller 26 New Propeller Design
2 Bow Bulb: Small, Near-Surface Hitachi Zosen (HZ) Nozzle 27 Low RPM/Large Dia Propellers
3 Bulbous Stern Mitsui Integrated Duct (MIDP) 28 Overlapping Propellers
Bulbous Skeg Wake Equalizing Duct (ZAD) 29 Energy Efficient Tip Propellers
4 Stern End Bulbs 13 Flow Fins on Hull Kappel Propellers
5 Stern Tunnel(s) Fins to Reduce Bilge Vortex Concentrated Tip Loaded (CLT)
6 Asymmetric Gondola Grothues (HDF) Spoiler 30 Contra-Rotating Propellers
Off Center Propeller Profiled Strut Arms 31 Tandem Propellers
7 Asymmetric Stern Wake Adapting Fins 32 Propeller Fairwater Designs
Cochlea Stern 14 Stator Upstream of Propeller 33 Fins (Blades) on Propeller Hub
8 Extended Skeg Double Guide Fins Propeller Boss Cap Fin
9 Twin Skegs Inflow Control Vanes Post Swirl Cap
10 Propulsion Pods Stream Control Installation 34 Vane (Grim) Wheel
11 Numeric Optimized Forebodv 15 Ducted Inflow Control Vanes 35 Propeller Pitch Schedulingq
Reaction(tive) Fins
16 Ducted Propeller(s)
1 7 Stator Behind Propeller
18 Bearing in Rudder Post
19 Main Strut Barrel Designs
20 Alternative Rudder Designs
Contra-Guide Rudder
Rudder with Costa Bulb
Split Rudder
21 Thrusting Fins on Rudder
Additional Thrusting (AT) Fin
Profiling Fins on Rudder
Rudder-Bulb-Fin
22 Steering Nozzle
23 Semi Tunnel Nozzle
Semi-Duct
24 Sterntube
25 Stern Flap
Stern Wedge
The device descriptions presented were extracted from a wide variety of different types of media
sources. The following are the three main types of media sources taken into consideration:
0 (1) US Navy research and development programs. The data was extracted from both open
publication reports, journals, and technical presentations, and from limited distribution unclassified
reports.
0 (2) Foreign and domestic R&D programs. The data was extracted from referenceable open
publication reports, journals, and similar technical documents.
(3) Foreign and domestic commercial shipbuilding industries. The data was extracted most
generally from advertising material of a technical nature for a particular device, from company
brochures and promotional literature, or from magazines and journals. Some of the information
was extracted from referenceable technical documents.
B3
A chart of compatibility between all identified energy savings devices was prepared, and is
presented as Table B3. Again, the individual energy savings devices are represented in their respective
groupings. For the purpose of condensation of this table, the thirty-five groups are identified by only
the title of the first individual device in that group. The stated compatibility is equivalent for all devices
in any particular group. The practicality of equipping a single hullform with all identified compatible
devices is not within the scope of Table B3. It is simply a presentation of the material limitations on
compatibility between devices. Device compatibility, in Table B3, is labeled in four different
classifications. Device compatibility classification is as follows:
"* (C) COMPATIBLE: These two devices perform under different principles of operation, and/or
occupy different (non-overlapping) positions on the ship hullform.
"* (N) NOT COMPATIBLE: These two devices either perform under equivalent principles of
operation, and/or occupy similar (overlapping) positions on the ship hullform.
"* (PC) PARTIALLY COMPATIBLE: These two devices could be used together on a hullform,
however, either/or the following applies:
a) The use of both devices may inhibit the full performance potential of either.
b) Both devices perform under related principles of operation.
c) For practicality considerations, both devices would not likely be utilized together.
"* (D) DIFFERENT HULL DESIGNS: These two devices are designed to operate on dissimilar
hulls or hullform types.
The energy device groups were then subjected through a selected process for potential retrofit to
US Navy surface ships. The criteria for this selection process was:
* (1) The device had to be practical as a retrofit. Those devices that are exclusively new designs, or
for some identified reason classified as non-retrofittable, were eliminated from further
considerations.
0 (2) The device had to be reliable and durable enough for use on US Navy ships.
• (3) The device had to have a history of demonstrated energy enhancement potential (model or full
scale) on some ship similar to a possible US Navy present or future application.
* (4) The energy savings devices had to be applicable to at least one of the US Navy ship classes
identified in the first part of the study, or had to be applicable to foreseeable future Navy
hullforms. Devices suitable to only high block coefficient, relatively slow speed, commercial or
merchant type hulls, with single-screw heavily loaded propellers, were not selected.
B4
A summary is presented in Table B4 of the selection or elimination of the energy devices, and
criteria for the selection or elimination. Fourteen (14) energy savings devices were selected as
the
applicable for retrofit to a present US Navy hullform design. These devices satisfied all of
aforementioned criteria. The selected devices included three from Category (A) Hull, five from
Category (B) Appendage(s), and six from Category (C) Propulsor(s). A simple listing of the
candidate retrofit energy savings devices are presented in the following Table B5:
Table B5. Selected candidate retrofit energy savings devices
Selected Candidate Retrofit Energy Savings Devices
Category (A) Hull Category (B) Appendage(s) Category (C) Propulsor(s)

Bulbous Bow, Traditional Stator Upstream of Propeller New Propeller Design
Bow Bulb, Small, Near- Main Strut Barrel Designs Low RPM / Large Diameter
Surface Propeller
Stem End Bulb Alternative Rudder Designs Energy Efficient Tip Propeller
Thrusting Fins on Rudder(s) Propeller Fairwater Designs
Stern Flap, Stem Wedge Fins (Blades) on Propeller Hub
Propeller Pitch Scheduling
Lastly, a chart listing the fourteen (14) selected candidate energy savings devices, and
recommendations for retrofit on the eleven (11) identified US Navy Classes, is presented in Table B6.
This table represents, in basis, a summary of the entire identification, classification, and selection
process. Table B6 also indicates the following information on each selected candidate energy savings
device:
0 (R) Device is Recommended for retrofit on this ship class
* (C) Device should be Considered for retrofit on this ship class
* (S) Device is Suitable for this ship class
* (M) Model tests have previously been conducted with this type of device on this ship class
0 (D) Design of ship hull presently includes this type of device
The descriptions of the potential energy savings devices (main body of Appendix B) are presented
after the final table (Table B6). Again, these descriptions are separated into three categories: (A) Hull,
(B) Appendage(s), and (C) Propulsor(s). and further sub-divided into thirty-five organizational device
groupings.
B5
Table B2. List of possible energy savings devices
(C)ombatants
CATEGORY (R)etrofit (AMP)hibious Brief Comments
(N)ew Design (AUX)illiaries
No. (A) HULL
1 Bulbous Bow, Traditional R, N C, AMP, AUX reduced hull resistance
2 Bow Bulb: Small, Near-Surface R, N C, AMP, AUX reduced hull resistance, designed to
be used on bows with sonar domes
3 Bulbous Stern N AUX for single-screw, high block hulls,
Bulbous Skeg favorable prop-hull interaction coeffs

R AUX reduced hull resistance
4 Stern End Bulbs
N C, AMP, AUX used in combination with large dia propeller
5 Stern Tunnel(s)
6 Asymmetric Gondola N AUX generate pre-swirl into propeller
Off Center Propeller
7AUX generate pre-swir into propeller
Cochlea Stern technology in commercial applications
Extended Skeg N S8 C, AMP, AUX elongation of underwater hull
9 Twin Skegs N AUX favorable interaction coefficients
.10 Propulsion Pods N C, AMP, AUX .._for electric drive, long-term R&D
N C, AMP, AUX reduced hull resistance
.11 Numerically Optimized Forebody
No, (B) APPENDAGE(s)

12 Duct Upstream of Propeller R, N AUX all: reduce vorticies, homogenize flow,
Hitachi Zosen (HZ) Nozzle generally for single-screw, high block
Mitsui Integrated Duct (MIDP) coefficient hulls
Wake Equalizing Duct (ZAD) technology in commercial applications
13 Flow Fins on Hull R AUX all: reduce vorticies, homogenize flow,
Fins to Reduce Bilge Vortex generally for high block coefficient hulls
Grothues (HDF) Spoiler technology in commercial applications
Profiled Strut Arms
Wake Adapting Fins
14 Stator Upstream of Propeller R, N C, AMP, AUX all: homogenize flow, and
Double Guide Fins generate pre-swirl into propeller,
Inflow Control Vanes and attempt to augment thrust
Stream Control Installation
15 Ducted Inflow Control Vanes R, N C, AMP, AUX both: generate pre-swirl, homogenize flow
Reaction(tive) Fins into propeller, utilize flow ducts
16 Ducted Propeller(s) R, N C, AMP, AUX flow control for heavily loaded propellers
17 Stator Behind Propeller R, N C, AMP, AUX regain lost rotational energy
18 Bearing in Rudder Post N C, AMP, AUX eliminate shaft struts
19 Main Strut Barrel Designs R, N C, AMP, AUX reduced appendage resistance
20 Alternative Rudder Designs R, N C, AMP, AUX increase swirl recovery
Contra-Guide Rudder
Costa Bulb Rudder
Split Rudder
21 Thrusting Fins on Rudder(s) R C, AMP, AUX all: regain lost rotational energy in
Additional Thrusting (AT) Fin propeller race (increase swirl recovery)
Profiling Fins on Rudder technology in commercial applications
Rudder-Bulb-Fin
22 Steering Nozzle N C, AMP, AUX for heavily loaded propellers
23 Semi Tunnel Nozzle N AUX combination tunnel and semi-duct
Semi-Duct combination fins and duct
24 Sterntube N C, AMP, AUX eliminate shaft struts
25 Stern Flap R C, AMP, AUX both: easily backfit, reduce hull resistance,
Stern Wedge increase efficiency
proven technology in US Navy applications
B6
Table B2. List of possible energy savings devices (continued)
(C)ombatants
CATEGORY (R)etrofit (AMP)hibious Brief Comments
(N)ew Design (AUX)illiaries
No. (C) PROPULSOR(s)
26 New Propeller Design R, N C, AMP, AUX improved efficiency propeller
27 Low RPM / Large Dia Propellers R, N C, AMP, AUX improved efficiency, used with tunnel stern
28 Overlapping Propellers N C, AMP, AUX reduce loading, increase efficiency
29 Energy Efficient Tip Propellers R, N C, AMP, AUX all: increased loading at blade tips for
Kappel Propellers increased efficiency
Concentrated Tip Loaded (CLT)
30 Contra-Rotating Propellers N C, AMP, AUX improved effic, high cost and long-term R&D
31 Tandem Propellers N C, AMP, AUX improved efficiency, reduced acoustics
32 Propeller Fairwater Designs R C, AMP, AUX reduce hub drag and losses
33 Fins (Blades) on Propeller Hub R C, AMP, AUX all: reduce propeller hub vortex losses
Propeller Boss Cap Fin technology in commercial applications
Post Swirl Cap
34 Vane (Grim) Wheel R, N AUX regain rotational and axial losses
technology in commercial applications
35 Propeller Pitch Scheduling R C, AMP, AUX increase engine efficiency at specified speeds
B7
0~- - T
o2
'
0' 0, ?
go~~~ ~ a
0' 0 0 0
Bu.p3:c0
'"
0 l C- lo 0 u0 0 a. )L zu o a
u' 0 1 0 u
q:I0Joldl
13C (-99 0 0 .e 0 0 o0 u l- 0' 0 0 I;
s0s- ~e~~jilaOd 0 0 1- . ~ 0 1 0 ,0C) ~- 0 0 a Q Q U
Qul oilood 0 0 0 u u U.) L) 0 0 0 U 0 -. 0 0 a
sJPW'ddl 0u W"J3ABQU 00 0 0 4 ý 0 o0
33U0 g 00
111 0 L, z 0 0 0
(z 0) 0 (0
silld~d6uddlOA
0 U L) 0 1 ) )1) 0
eQIs4M(WIJ9)~e 0
0~u1Hd 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0l 0, 0) u u 0 0 0 o0 L0 0 0o
jboeaJiad0Jd
SU61sao mQ 0 0 o 0 0 0 0L0 0 u 0 0 0l 0 0 u u
aaII qdapue.lS - 0 00 00z0000 0 z 0
. .) 0 1-- -I 1U1 RN1-1.
ruSZZlON lau
d ;~O - 0 -1 -1 . -1- - - 1 -1 Z -1 -1 -_ -1ZC
S~Iod~e~5e/.
91 u lQZO3
,
Z80 0 00 0 0000 0060 z 00 0 00
Z_ 1._1_1Zi
subsa()j~appbad0etajdM u o u u 000 ol 0l 0 ',I00
J 0'la~l0ua
0 u 0 0 0 000 Z0 0) 0 00 0200 00
ME cOIZZmONllPO~lOJOS 0 0 0 0) 0 01 0 0> 0 0 0 2 0I H 220 0 0002 d
su:&:d
j waui0)f:njoSei 0000000000 0 u0 0 ooz
0I2Z oNsu!jS 20
uooooo 2202
(s~~pp~U~t~6USfl;F 7E -00000 00000
su~ts~ppr~12 wa'n
a~dO~djo wejlsdnlono
Ap Idjjpa"IdWC fql~ja~u o oo O 2z0 12oo

0
I~flU0SUJMC1J
0 0 0 0
-1 ----
0 0 0 0
01 -
z
I-
2 ~ 3-
SPOd uoIsifdlOd 00 00 0 00
~j- -~j a: ~
yaU!As1
s
S63Cl 10 L) j0 2 2 oI-
8 CL
-nn- -V) 03
(s)O~ull
o 0 0 J0) ~B 08
(1) U vi U U) ()
.C) =) = -0a
0)D M) > () 0 ) (- C
(D f > (0 .a
CzU c.CUa) CO U) C M aU)U)
co co (o ~ l l
c0 W0e0 > ' a "Ca(0 0 o'0 > 0 U)CU)
U) cV
->
m 7
c -c
O'",
0>
0 00CLQ
:
-
EC
:
~ ~5
coU
e o3:>
>''~~ U0 0) Im >,
,c ,Z
0) ;~
c ~ a 0.0a0
a)O F>:- U) t7, CL) a CC C >,
a) U D ý Lc a _ C c 0> ).
E a)C0 CO- aU)V z CCo(1)
a) 0
5.0 4)i (D Co "0>oC ) 0 0
U) >U-() 0 -00 a > (
2~ 0E
C0 > m- C .) nU) cn 3:Z
(n o E EE E 75-
m)0 0
ýQ0) )UU ' . (D 0 0
0 -c -)r
CC0, CC C)M
~~~~ E E i E E~
ED Mu FlU)
MuC j F U) jjf ClU) Cl)
a. U)C
U,. x a
(DlU a) cCa
>--4iU2 0 _
Z >D'- w~U
w U 0 7 LL -00 U V o N
~E
IL )
aC~ < a oLL 0 *0
cr~
~2 oCLU
0
< ON CU) 0)>ZoCL)C:
(nO M cO=00 5 0c Lc La 5 0=.-. C0t )o
CLN ) ~
cy Co ý -c c,:
!E .LL 0 U(DCW
7 O- a) 0 E ýO.2 _ m~E.U m c .2 L
' cp i ;-
U)-o< c'' a: C'CCID'
.2 S;
o ____~~~ __
-a
__
(D 8 8
0
_
u:c
)
w-
co -a C:E
0
_ __
a'C%1---0
'.
-
2_-5.__
C'Cc
E_ ca)U) -T
C -CC C CC CO)U CMCj U)i Cm 0
E) C m) C C (1)0
U) .~0 -D) ZVO V L)~

L.. 0 .0 C
CM
0 0) 2 ;5 *A " v 0 ( .
0 U) 0C V0)) 0) 0)0~ woo0 t D I 0)0()
CZC 0) >.) _o _o 0
tD. CC
'~ 0 Wc ca ) 8Ž
0 > >>Ž co- >> >C
ct~ 2 0 9c
C.Ico 0a) wC)U

0) CIS oE6ý
-) 0
c) ) c c
U) c UcUc - a) a~) 0)Ua0) 0) 0
CC)) >.* >o - - -c -
a)C CD C C Z)0
C Q) CD
a C 0
0)
m
U)~U[U )()P a) vi C)C
I0 Ci
F EC,00 000 -0 o0
00 0. D _ C)(
'0 0 0.-
V - V_ "
0.a> a)C6 0 0 0 4)~
4U) ca -cC 0 u 0 z
= =~l)U
=~ = = w U C u- MV)U) 0
(n U) m CO ED w 0i O.--OcU0C _U
U)I LLDC ~~L
U-~2)
D I to
_ _ [ 4) -0
L) 6or)0 O.NC )
g-oq:(f ICI
OO:
C U) UCI),
Cq
lJ
(100
(f)<
C 0 CD: U)U)
< U) 00 (
IU U
w'n U) CIUUU(T (CICt U)nU) UZlC4)C

-o~~~~ 0O~& ~ 0E~U
co rt
0 0<
CD I
CL 00)
0)
m 0
co
o; 00W
:s -6
CL -0
C
Z o~
U2 >
U) r'- Q U
(n: u): CD -0 .-
C.): U)
eu.. -"):
~U) (nU 0U)
u) :
0
C LL 0 >-.f-
U))
/)/ 0
(fl: U) o
cr U) Ca 0 cc:~ 6 U) - (
0 Z
2 u5C' (:,U) C;U)CJ(n U).

Cl) E 'D (DT3
- 0 ) o~3. ŽU'in 0
oU; 2 (0(
0)
U) ) Z
0>
C U) M- (Q nýU
W; u) u0L: a
(U )
1
1: - -- U- - CU CL ID
CL 5*0U
U1) 0 )0 0)
C M C ILU)
)
(3 E o- (13
U)0U 0 -
U) ca U _
0
zC5.5Q)LL Ci n CLL LL ) 0
I0.
w ~U) MU~)U a: Q crcrOa)

0: o E E IL 3 ) a Q
Z2:ý-- (1) a) Z~ C
BIO
CATEGORY (A) HULL
(1) Bulbous Bow, Traditional

Traditional bulbous bows, Figure B 1, are a well recognized, and well accepted, means of reducing
hull resistance, and therefore reducing powering requirements. The reduction in drag is derived
primarily by the lowering of wavemaking resistance through attenuation of the bow wave system of
the ship, and possibly to a lesser extent reducing wave breaking, and by the reduction of viscous
resistance due to a smoothing of the flow around the forebody. Numerous examples of traditional
bulbous bows exist, both full and model scale, and many more variations are well documented. Many
references are available from the early part of the century to present, however, KIacht (Ref. B 1.a), is a
principal design guidance and reference. Bulbous bows offer a very wide application to all ships, with
the exception of Naval combatants where hull designs incorporate a sonar dome at the bow. Many
successful US Navy ship designs have had bulbous bows, and many of the ship classes identified in
energy survey presently include a bulbous bow in their hull design.. Power reductions of as much as
10 percent are possible, however, the magnitude of the power reductions is design speed specific, and
speed dependent.
The concept is recommended for further consideration, even though it is more attractive as a new
design rather than a backfit. Backfitting of a traditional bulbous bow is possible. However,
backfitting would be associated with considerable design, construction, and installation costs, and
possible ship integration difficulties. A US Navy study concluded that the anticipated fuel cost savings
due to retrofitting bulbous bows will be sufficient to justify bulb fabrication and installation costs on
some ship classes (Ref. B 1.b). Several of the selected candidate US Navy ship classes presently
include bulbous bows: LPD-17, LHD-1, LSD41&49, AO-177, and AOE-6. Additional ships for
which this concept is applicable: FFG-7, LHA-1, and TAO-187.
Fig B 1. Photographs of two variations in traditional bulbous bow designs, on AE-36 model
Bl1
(2) Bow Bulb: Small, Near-Surface
The small, near-surface, bow bulb, Figure B2, is a new type of hydrodynamnic bulbous bow
developed and patented' for use with U.S. Navy destroyers and cruisers, (Ref. B2.a). Unlike the
traditional bulbous bow (above), the new bulb is integrated into an existing combatant bow which
houses a sonar dome. Resistance reductions are achieved similarly to the traditional bulbous bow.
Design emphasis is towards a bulb size and shape which would maximize resistance reduction in the
speed range most frequented by destroyers, thus increasing the potential for energy reduction. Alter
several iterations on simple-shaped body of revolution bulbs, of varying sizes and volumes, an initial
hydrodynamic bulb design was developed for the DDG-51 Class. Model tests show that this initial
design bulb significantly reduces ship resistance, and results in an overall decrease in powering of 5.8
percent, and an increase in top speed of 0.5 knots, (Ref. B2.b). Fuel cost savings due to the bow bulb
installation has been estimated to be $116K per year per ship, on the DDG-51 Class. Improvements in
2
propeller cavitation characteristics 2, and reductions in signature levels were also exhibited. Model
tests with a preliminary bow bulb design, conducted on the CG-47 Class Cruisers, indicate a 2 percent
delivered power reduction, (Ref. B2.c). It is expected that with continued design refinement, the
delivered power reduction of this device on the CG-47 Class would be improved.
The bow bulb for the DDG-51 was originally conceived and developed as a backlit device.
Estimated cost of "first of series" backfit bow bulb is $500K, cost for additional backfits are estimated
at $350K per bow bulb, making this concept a low-to-medium cost, high energy savings candidate for
further consideration. This technology is applicable to the following US Navy ship classes identified
for energy improvement: DDG-51, CG-47, DD-963 and DD-993, FFG-7, LHA- 1, and TAO-187
Classes. All other ship classes in survey include a traditional bulbous bow in their hull design.
,4 7
Figure B2. Photographs of a small, near-surface, bow bulb, on a DDG-51 destroyer model
Cusanelli, D.S. and G. Karafiath, "Combined Bulbous Bow and Sonar Dome for a Vessel", US Patent Number
5.28(0,761, Jan. 1994.
2 Model and/or full scale test results are of higher classification.
B12
(11) Numerically Optimized Forebody
Numerically optimized forebody, Figure B I1, is a concept where existing computational fluid
dynamics (CFD) computer codes are utilized in the design process to optimize a forebody shape for
minimum wave resistance. Power reductions of as much as 10 -20 percent are possible, however, the
magnitude of the power reductions has been extremely specific to the speed for which the forebody
was optimized. This concept was recently evaluated during the AE-36 Energy Enhancement Program
(Ref. B 11.a). The AE-36 Total Resistance Optimized Forebody (TROF) was designed by Science
Applications International (SAIC) using an optimizational scheme on a paneled hull with far-field
wavemaking resistance predicted using slender body theory (Ref. B I .b). The AE-36 TROF
exhibited a remarkable 20 percent reduction in delivered power at the 24 knot design speed, however,
it also exhibited an unprecedented increase in power of 42 percent at 14 knots. The results of this
application on AE-36 showed a time-averaged powering increase (factored for speed-time-loading
profile) of nearly 24 percent, resulting solely from the low speed resistance increases. Also, at the
light ballast load draft, a condition for which the bow was not optimized, the AE-36 TROF exhibited a
resistance of more than double the baseline bow. Implementation of this technology as an energy
reduction concept would require significant R&D work. Non-linear, near-field, free surface
phenomena need to be included in the forebody optimization. The optimization should be for a
complete ship speed range and displacement operational scenario. Free surface wave properties,
especially those properties that affect wave breaking, should also be included. The numerically
optimized forebody concept is not considered further in the present energy study, because it is
exclusively a new construction item.
(a) (b)
Fig B 11. AE-36 Total Resistance (numerically) Optimized Forebody. (a) Sketch of forebody plan,
and (b) close-up photograph of model showing design details in bow region
B21
CATEGORY (B) APPENDAGE(s)
(12) Duct Upstream of Propeller, Mitsui Integrated Ducted Propeller (MIDP),

Hitachi Zosen (HZ) Nozzle, Wake Equalizing Duct (ZAD)
These concepts are all variations of flow ducts, located (in their entirety) upstream of the propeller
plane, as depicted in Figures B12. Several of the most prevalent, and commercially available are:
Mitsui Integrated Ducted Propeller (MIDP), (Ref. B12.a), Hitachi Zosen (HZ) Nozzle, (Ref. B 12.b),
and Wake Equalizing Duct (ZAD), (Ref. B 12.c). The principles of operation are similar for all
concepts: reduced flow separation, wake homogenization, reduced propeller loading, and augmented
thrust. All concepts claim that forward component of lift generated by the duct profile will be larger
than the generated drag (resistance), thus, augmenting propeller thrust. It is also speculated that the
ducts can alter the pressure field over the hull afterbody, with a resultant power savings. The ZAD
concept also boasts a reduction in rotational losses and increased efficiency due to pre-swirl imparted
to the flow by the duct.
(a) . (b)
(c) (d)
Fig B 12. Photographs of flow ducts. (a) MIDP on TAO 168 model, (b) full scale ZAD on full body
closed stern, (c) full scale partial ZAD on tunnel stem, and (d), full scale asymmetric
ZAD on open shaft and strut propulsion suite
B22
To date, approximately 170 MIDP's have been installed full scale. All ducts have been applied to
large block coefficient ships of 43000 to 450000 DWT. Reductions in propeller loading in the range
of 3 to as much as 15 percent are claimed, from a variety of sources. A MIDP concept was model
scale tested on the US Navy T-AO 168 Class, Figure B 12(a). On the T-AO 168 model, an increase in
delivered power was measured when the MIDP was installed (Ref. B12.d). In addition, the measured
forces on the model MIDP, during the powering experiments, showed that at no speed was it
producing a net positive thrust. More than 30 ships have been fitted with an HZ nozzle, (half new
constructions and half retrofits), all ships fitted have had block coefficients greater than 0.78. Power
savings of up to 12 percent are claimed, from unidentified sources. More than 150 ZAD's have been
designed and built for ships of the containership, multi-purpose, and tanker varieties. ZAD type ducts
appear to be the most versatile concept, having been applied to full body closed stems, Figure B 12(b),
closed tunnel stems, Figure B12(c), and open shaft and struts, Fig B12(c), alike. The Wake
Equalizing Duct (ZAD) concept has been model scale tested on a variety of US Navy ship classes. The
AE-36, from Ref. B7.c, (three ZAD designs on a bulbous stern and three ZAD designs on an
asymmetric stern) The T-AO 168, from Ref. BH12.d, (six ZAD designs). And the T-AGS 38, Ref.
B 12.e, (four ZAD designs). All of these ZAD designs were tested on each model in a variety of
orientations, varying longitudinal location, vertical location, and rotation of the duct in both the yaw
and pitch planes. For the AE-36 and the T-AO 168, a total of 12 different model tested ZAD designs,
none were found to decrease required delivered power over the baseline propeller without duct. Of the
four ZAD designs model tested on the T-AGS 38, only one reduced delivered power by a predicted
1.6 percent. From these US Navy model test experiences, it appears that these concepts are most
likely suited to single screw, high block coefficient hullforms, with heavily loaded propellers, not
typical of US Navy designs. Therefore, these concepts are not recommended for further consideration
under this energy study.
B23
(13) Flow Fins on Hull, Fins to Reduce Bilge Vortex, Grothues (HDF) Spoilers,
Profiled Strut Arms, Wake Adapting Fins
Flow fins on hull, fins to reduce bilge vortex, Grothues Spoilers (hydrodynamic fin system or
HDF), profiled strut arms, and wake adapting fins, form a similar group of concepts which have
adapted some style of fin (or multiple fins) attached to the hull, Figure B 13. The purpose of these fins
are any of the following: flow re-direction, flow homogenization, reduction of flow separation or
induced hull vortices. Some fin designs claim to actually reduce hull resistance by either: reducing the
energy lost in the bilge vortices, or by generating on the fins a lift force with a forward component.
All tend to be fairly simple devices, which can easily be backfit, and frequently are. Many designs
have been model tested world-wide, with predicted power savings in the 0 to 6 percent range.
Approximately 30 or more HDF systems have been installed on containerships, bulk carriers, tankers,
etc., with claimed power savings of 5 to II percent (Ref. B 13.a). (However, the accuracy and/or
sources of these comparisons are unknown.) They are concepts which are again commercially
available, but best suited to single screw, full stern, high block coefficient hullforms, with heavily
loaded propellers. Extensive model testing and a full scale installation was conducted by the US Navy
on a flow alignment fin for the AO-177 Class (Ref. B13.b). The purpose of this fin, however, was
not for energy enhancement, and it consequently showed little to no effect on the full scale ship
powering. The flow alignment fin on the AO-177 was successful in the purpose for which it was
designed, namely, reducing inboard propeller-excited airborne noise, and propulsor cavitation erosion
tendencies. These flow fin concepts are not recommended for further consideration under this energy
study.
(a) (b)
Fig B 13. Photographs of full scale applications of (a) flow fins on hull, and
(b) Grothues Spoilers (note vane wheel installed behind propeller)
B24
(14) Stator Upstream of Propeller, Inflow Control Vanes, Double Guide Fins,
Stream Control Installation
These four concepts are all comprised of high aspect ratio fins placed forward of the propeller
plane, simply described as stator blades located forward of the propeller. The double guide fins (a pair
of fins) and the inflow control vanes, Figure B 14(a), (generally three or more fins spaced radialy
around the propeller disk), are both concepts designed for open shaft & strut propulsion. The stator
upstream of propeller, Figure B 14(b), and stream control installation, are designed for closed stern or
skeg type hullforms. All concepts work by inducing a pre-rotation of the flow, and/or causing a more
circumferentially uniform flow, to be delivered into the propeller. All concepts also attempt to augment
forward thrust, by generating on the blades a forward component of lift larger than the induced drag
(resistance). Inflow control vanes, referred to as stators, have been designed for US Navy
applications with the primary purpose of increased propulsion efficiency, as shown by Neely, et. al.
(Ref. B 14.a). Applications on models (such as Figure B14.a) have shown that increases in propulsive
efficiency of 6-7% could be achieved. The stators model tested to date, however, have shown minimal
energy enhancement over the ship's speed range, with the significant power reductions having been
realized only near the device's design speed. The data does support the possibility of designing stators
with emphasis oriented towards energy enhancement. Additional realizable benefits of the concepts
(non-energy issues) are reduced propeller cavitation, noise, and vibrations 2. The US Navy's interest
in inflow control vanes has also been in the reduction of blade erosion, as shown by Smith and
Remmers, (Ref. B14.b).
Inflow control vanes are recommended for further consideration. The most promising candidates
for study would be the LHD-1, LHA-1, and TAO-187. The concept is most appropriate on the
combatant classes, DDG-5 1, CG-47, DD-963/993, or FFG-7, however, signature considerations may
prevail. The stator upstream of propeller device is applicable to the AO- 177 Class.
(a) (b)
Fig B 14. (a) Photograph of inflow control vanes on a US Navy model. and (b) Photograph of full
scale stator upstream of propeller
B25
(15) Ducted Inflow Control Vanes, Reaction(tive) Fins (FPHFS)
Both ducted inflow control vanes, Figure B 15(a), and reaction(tive) fins, Figure B 15(b), combine
the previous concepts of an upstream propeller duct and upstream stator blades. The duct/stator is
designed as an integrated unit, and located entirety upstream of the propeller plane. The duct/stator
operating principals combine the previous two concepts. Design criteria is that the unit induced drag is
not larger than the produced forward component of lift. Extensive research into the reaction fin,
referred to as Fore-Propeller Hydrodynarnical Fin Sector (FPHFS), has been conducted by Marine
Design & Research Institute of China (MARIC), (Ref. B I5.a). The FPHFS attempts to create a pre-
swirl into the propeller so strong as to prevent any rotational flow aft of the propeller. Model tests on
two ship designs exhibited up to an 8 percent powering reduction. Two full scale FPHFS applications
have been made, on the island pushers Changjiang62025 and Changjiang62027. Claims of full scale
power savings for FPHFS of 3 - 7 percent are made based upon sister ship comparison trials. The
designers state that FPHFS is most suitable for heavily-loaded propellers, at low speed. US Navy
experience is limited to the ducted inflow control vanes on open shafts and struts. Ducted pre-swirl
units, such as Figure B 15(a), can be designed to operate efficiently, as shown by Hughes and Kinnas
(Ref. B 15.b). The ducted inflow control vanes, on the US Navy model tests, showed higher
delivered power throughout the speed range. Measured forces on the duct/stator unit showing that at
no speed was this assembly producing a net positive thrust. Increased propulsor efficiency, however,
was measured over the operating speed range, so it may be possible that some performance
improvement could be obtained from a new design. Ducted inflow control vanes would be expected to
have beneficial energy savings for highly loaded propellers, such as tugs or tankers, for which they
have seen limited full scale applications to date. Significant R&D work would be necessary to adapt
this technology to US Navy ships. Therefore, while these concepts do profess future possibilities for
US Navy applications, most likely in non-energy related areas, they are not recommended here.
(a) (b)
Fig B 15 (a) Photograph of ducted inflow control vanes on US Navy model, and (b) Photograph of
FPHFS fins on twin screw Japanese model
B26
(16) Ducted Propeller(s)
Ducted propeller(s), as depicted in Figure B 16, are a well recognized, and well accepted, design
technology. They are used for generating high amounts of thrust out of a propulsor that is extremely
highly loaded, or at/near a zero flow velocity condition, and also in instances where hull draft
limitations are severe. Ducted propellers are a common design feature on tugboats, which operate a
substantial amount of the time in a bollard pull condition. Ducted propellers have additionally been
applied as a means of reducing propeller cavitation and for propeller quieting. It is for these types of
non-energy related applications that ducted propellers have been utilized on US Navy surface ship
designs 2. One full scale US Navy surface ship application was that of a pump-jet propulsor2 on the
USS Glover, (AGDE- 1). Powering performance is of higher classification, however, excessive noise
experienced aboard ship, especially during turning maneuvers, was attributed to cavitation on the duct
(Ref. B 16.a). Ducted propeller systems, while in some applications of the types mentioned above can
provide powering reductions, are ordinarily not seen as a means of reducing delivered power for
typical US Navy hull designs under normal operational propulsion requirements. Ducted propellers
would be expected to have beneficial energy reduction for only ships with very highly loaded
propellers. Therefore, ducted propellers are not given further consideration in this energy study.
(a) (b)
Fig B 16 (a) Photograph of twin screw ducted propellers on a model, and (b) Photograph of a full
scale ducted propeller, in this case a tip vortex free (TVF) propeller
B 27
(17) Stator Behind Propeller (Post-Swirl)
The stator behind propeller (or post-swirl) concept, Figures B17, operates on the principal of
reducing both the rotational energy losses and axial kinetic energy losses in the propeller slipstream.
The efficiency of these devices varies greatly, but significant powering reductions are possible due to
increased propulsor efficiencies. Very little operational experience is available in literature for the
stator behind propeller used as a backfit device. The US Navy model test experience with stators
behind propellers have generally been of the two stage propulsor design. In these cases the
philosophy would be to design the propeller with high pitch to minimize viscous losses, but generating
some rotational losses, which would be recoverable by the stator as augmented thrust. These two
stage propulsors can have high efficiencies in the range of 0.85. A design method for post swirl
propulsors was addressed by the US Navy in the PG-100 program, as detailed by Chen (Ref. B17.a).
For this application, a post swirl propulsor was designed for a close-to-uniform flow on a tractor pod
(Figure B 17.a). Emphasis was placed on propulsor efficiency, as well as reduced blade loading and
reduced tip circulation, both to insure reduced propeller cavitation characteristics. Model tests
conducted by Cusanelli (from Ref. B 10.a), insured that the design had reduced the required delivered
power of the PG-100. Post-swirl stators may not be applicable to backfitting behind a standard
propeller. Recoverable swirl losses for a typical US Navy propeller, on a shaft & strut destroyer, have
been estimated to be on the order of only 3 percent. In addition, the backfitting of a stator behind an
existing propeller poses serious mechanical difficulties and vibration related concerns. Therefore, at
this time, the stator behind propeller concept is not foreseen as a backfittable device, and not
considered further in the present energy study. (A related device, stator fins mounted on the rudder or
rudder stock, are considered in this report under a separate device group.)
(a) (b)
Fig B 17 (a) Photograph of model scale post swirl stator behind propeller on a tractor pod, and
(b) Sketch of Stator Behind Propeller concept - Japan
B28
(18) Bearing in Rudder Post
The principles of operation, of the propeller shaft bearing in rudder post concept, Figure B 18, is
the elimination of the propeller shaftline support struts, a reduction of propeller-hub faitrwater drag,
and augmentation of the recovery of propeller swirl losses. The elimination of support struts reduces
the associated shaftline appendage drag. An additional secondary effect of this concept is the
elimination of the support strut flow deficits, thus reducing the fluctuations in the wake entering into
the propeller plane. The concept has been tried (model scale) on US Navy frigate, destroyer, and
cruiser hullforms, (Ref. B 18.a). On a single screw frigate configuration model tested, the bearing in
rudder post reduced powering by as much as 10 percent. The general conclusion, based on a large
number of US Navy model tests, is that the bearing in rudder post is a viable concept with potential for
reducing delivered power by 3 percent. The powering reduction stemmed from not only the reduced
resistance, but also from increased propeller-hull interaction coefficients and propeller efficiencies,
attributed to the cleaner wake, and recovery of propeller losses. There are some technical risks with
the concept, primarily associated with structural issues, vibration, rudder cavitation and erosion
damage, and shaft support bearings. Because of the developmental nature of bearing designs for the
higher power levels necessary for US Navy ships, a long payback period had been estimated in the
past, and pursuit of this concept was not continued. It is likely, that with present day bearing design
technology, the problems of the point and side loads associated with this concept could be overcome.
The US Navy and Coast Guard have operational experience with bearing in rudder post configurations
on approximately 200 patrol crafts, (numerous references). These cases do not show any excessive
problems with vibration or rudder cavitation. Although the concept on patrol crafts has very limited
applicability towards large combatants, due to the significantly lower power levels, it does show proof
of the concept. A great many previous model tests indicate that the propeller shaft bearing in rudder
post concept is favorable for energy enhancement, and pursuit elsewhere is encouraged. However,
this concept is not considered further in the present energy study, because it is strictly a new
construction item.
S'i 'id t|17
(a) (b)
Figure B 18. Bearing in rudder post concept. (a) Photograph of rudder designs tested on DD-963
model, and (b) sketch of concept on single screw combatant hullform. (Note elimination
of struts on main propeller shaft barrel.)
B29
(19) Alternative Main Strut Barrel Designs
Alternative main strut barrel designs are preliminary attempts to achieve a better hydrodynamic
shape for the main propeller shaft support strut barrel on open shaft and strut propulsion applications.
Some preliminary design sketches are shown in Figure B 19. The shape of the main strut barrel has a
significant hydrodynamic effect on inflow wake into the propeller, especially near the root area. The
barrel shape affects the wake deficit as well as the wake distribution into the propeller. Especially for
controllable-pitch propellers, where blade design near the hub has less freedom to adapt to the change
of wake due to the restriction that the blade is built to rotate in the hub. For this kind of propeller, the
alternative approach to improve propeller efficiency and cavitation performance near the hub area (low
propeller radius region) is to provide better inflow wake distribution. The shape of barrel plays ,an
important role to achieve better wake flow near the propeller blade roots. Limited test data that shows
that the "cone" shape can yield a preferable wake, (Ref. B 19.a). While reduced propeller blade root
cavitation and increase cavitation inception speed would be directly realizable by this concept, there are
possible benefits to propeller efficiency. As identified in the previous concept, (propeller shaft bearing
in rudder post), increased propeller-hull interaction coefficients can be attained due to the cleaner wake
provided to the propeller.
It is doubtful that the retrofit of a new strut barrel design would be cost beneficial. The main
emphasis of this concept is to provide better inflow wake into the propeller, for reduced blade root
cavitation and increased cavitation inception speeds. While the potential for small powering reductions
exists, it is felt that the potential for energy reduction would not offset the substantial cost of retrofit.
Empirical and CFD work on this concept is in its preliminary stage. Consideration should be given to
follow on model test work to verify computational predictions, and to determine energy reduction
possibilities. The concept is applicable to all identified US Navy ship classes with open shaft and strut
propulsion: CG-47, DD963/993, DDG-51, FFG-7, LPD- 17, LHD- 1, LHA- 1, LSD41 &49, TAO-187,
and AOE-6.
Traditional Cone
Nose protrudes Main strut
intoflowUpper surface of
barrel roughly
aligned with flow
Propeller
hub
~Barrel
Revolved Curve Asymmetrical

Upper surface of
barrel roughly Upper and lower surfaces
aligned with flow aligned with flow
Fig B 19. Preliminary sketches of alternative main strut barrel designs

B30
(20) Alternative Rudder Designs, Contra-Guide Rudder, Split Rudder, and
Costa Bulb on Rudder
Several alternative rudder designs have been investigated at both full scale and model scale in the
past, in an attempt to increase the swirl recovery of a standard rudder. Contra-guide rudder, split
rudder, and Costa Bulb on rudder, are a few of the alternative designs. Two of these designs are
depicted, full scale, in Figure B20. All designs operate on the principal of regaining lost rotational
energy downstream of the propeller. The Costa bulb also acts as an elongated propeller hub, thus
reducing excessive hub vortex losses. The rudder devices are generally suitable only to full body
ships of the auxiliary or merchant types. For a well designed hull/propulsor system, rotational losses
are estimated to be on the order of 7 percent. Much of this rotational energy loss (on the order of 40%)
is generally recovered by a well designed rudder placed behind the propeller. Therefore, it is surmised
that powering reductions in the range of I - 3% are achievable, with some of these alternative rudder
designs. Greater energy recovery would be possible only in the wake of an extremely bad
hull/propulsor/rudder design, or in the wake of very heavily loaded propellers, not typical of US Navy
ships. A powering savings of 1 percent was achieved with a split rudder when evaluated on the Mid-
Term Sealift model (from Ref. B3.b).
The ease of ship integration and expected low installation costs, make alternative rudder designs
attractive for the present study. The recommendation would be to conduct R&D in parallel with the
devices to be introduced in the following group (thrusting fins on rudders). The rudder devices are
directly applicable to the AO-177 Class. There is the possibility that some of the alternative rudder
designs would be suitable to the open shafts & struts Navy hulls. However, additional R&D work
would be necessary to determine their suitability.
(a) (b)
Fig B20. Photographs of full scale alternative rudders (a) split rudder, and (b) Costa Bulb rudder
Effect rudders, an alternative design for small craft, operate with a specific combination of
opposing/non-opposing rudder angles, and require a fairly complex steering system which would pose
problems for a retrofit. They are not suitable for the ships in this study, and are not included in the
recommendation of this device grouping.
B31
(21) Thrusting Fins on Rudder(s), Additional Thrusting (AT) Fins, Profiling Fins
on Rudder, Rudder-Bulb-Fins
These devices, the additional thrusting (AT) fin, profiling fins on rudder, and the rudder-bulb-fin,
are all comprised of small thrusting fins placed on the rudder and/or rudder post. Figure B21. The
rudder-bulb-fin utilizes a rudder (Costa) bulb in combination with fins. All devices operate on the
principal of regaining lost rotational energy downstream of the propeller. Approximately 20 full scale
applications of these concepts have been produced, however, all applications have been on single
screw, full bodied ships of the tanker/bulk carrier type hullforms. A general review of this concept is
presented in Ref. B21.a. The efficiency of these devices varies greatly, and powering reductions of as
much as 5 percent are claimed. These claims for large energy recovery by these (rudder fin) concepts,
it is surmised, would be possible only in the wake of an extremely bad hull/propulsor/rudder design,
or in the wake of very heavily loaded propellers. Since neither of these two situations are typical of
US Navy ships, more modest powering reductions would only be possible. A powering savings of 3
percent was achieved with relatively small rudder mounted thrusting fins when evaluated on the Mid-
Term Sealift model (from Ref. B3.b).
The ease of ship integration and expected low installation costs, make these devices attractive for
the present energy study. The recommendation would be to conduct combined R&D for alternative
rudder designs with the thrusting fins on the rudder. All the combined alternative rudder design
concepts are directly applicable to the AO-177 Class. There is, again, the possibility that some of these
alternative rudder designs would be suitable to the open shafts & struts Navy hulls, with some
additional R&D study.
(a) (b)
Fig B21 (a) Sketch of additional thrusting (AT) fin, and (b) Photograph of full scale rudder-bulb-fin
B32
(22) Steering Nozzle (Ring Rudder)
The steering nozzle (or ring rudder), Figure B22, is comprised of a shroud surrounding the
propeller blades, suspended and rotated on a rudder stock. It is used mainly when expected propeller
loading is high, where thrust loading coefficient will exceed 2.0. The concept is similar to the
traditional propeller duct (device group 16), however, the propeller tip - to - shroud clearances are
designed larger to allow for the steerable feature. The duct design can taper along forward - to - aft
diameters, incorporating a nozzle concept. The steering nozzle concept is also reportedly used to
increase the ship payload for equivalent length, for propeller protection, and in the case of draft limited
vessels. Principal effects are increased wake velocity through the propeller plane, and augmented
thrust, both due to specially designed duct section profiles. The steering force is provided by the
reaction of the turned propeller race and the shroud lift force. If additional side force is necessary,
flaps are sometimes attached to the trailing edge of the shroud. The steering nozzle has been used
widely in Europe, mainly on tugs and fishing vessels. Recently a ring rudder concept was tested by
the US Navy on the Mid-Term Sealift at model scale (from Ref. B3.b). The ring rudder concept did
not reduce powering when compared to the twin rudder parent hullform. However, the design was
successful in its intent, i.e., increased hull and propulsive efficiency was achieved. This was a first
iteration ring rudder design, on the Mid-Term Sealift model, and did not include specially designed
section profiles on the shroud. Therefore, the unit did not provide the thrust augmentation possible
with this device. There is really no conclusive data available to the effect that the steering nozzle
reduces powering requirements, and it is most suited to ship hullforms not typical of US Navy
designs. Therefore, the steering nozzle (ring rudder) device is not recommended for further
consideration under this energy study.
Fig B22. Ring rudder concept on the Mid-Term Sealift model
(23) Semi Tunnel Nozzle, Semi-Duct

The semni tunnel nozzle and the semi-duct, Figure B23, are combinations of previously introduced
concepts of stern tunnels (device 5), nozzle or ducts (devices 12 and 15), and flow fins (device 13). A
B33
semi tunnel nozzle consists of a stem design with a very moderate tunnel shape, into which a partial
ring nozzle has been faired. A semi-duct is simply a partial ring nozzle, faired into a non-tunnel stern
hullform. Both designs most closely resemble a flow alignment fin concept. Both concepts are
suitable only on single screw, full bodied hullforms, and are most probably new construction items.
Most of the design technology would be covered under different concept headings, and most designs
would not be retrofittable, therefore, pursuit of these concepts as a separate category is not
recommended in this energy study.
Fig B23. Sketches of examples of semi-tunnel, semi-duct concepts

(24) Propulsion Sterntube
The propulsion sterntube, Figure B24, consists of a large structural tube and associated cowling,
which encases and suspends the propeller shaftline. The advantages of this design are the reduction in
associated open shaft & strut appendage drag, and the elimination of the two strut flow deficits, thus
reducing the fluctuations in the wake entering into the propeller plane. However, the increased
diameter of the shafting system preceding the propeller hub, would have a significant effect on the
inflow wake into the propeller plane near the root area. A propulsion sterntube was tried (model scale)
on the AE-36 (from Ref. B7.c). The results of this application showed a resultant powering reduction
of only 0.6 percent, resulting solely from resistance reduction. Increased propulsive, propeller, and/or
hull efficiencies were not realized with the propulsion sterntube. Lack of US Navy operational
experience, and complexity of calculations/predictions of forces on propulsion stemtube, combine to
give this device a large technical risk factor. The propulsion stemtube is not considered further in the
present energy study, because it is strictly a new construction item.
S~COWLI
I• \,SKEG
Fig B24. Sketch of the propulsion sterntube on AE-36 hullform

B34
(25) Stern Flap, Stern Wedge
The stern flap, Figure B25, and the stern wedge, are two similar treatments at the transom of
combatant type hullforms. They are relatively small devices built of plate fitted to the transom of a ship
at an angle relative to the centerline buttock of the ship. A stern flap is an extension of the hull bottom
surface aft of the transom, while a stern wedge is fitted to the hull surface beneath the transom.
Comprehensive presentations of the effects on US Navy hullforms are given for stern flaps in Ref.
B25.a, and for stern wedges in Ref. B25.b. The U.S. Navy has investigated the potential for
improved powering performance by the installation of stern flaps and stern wedges on many ship
designs. Recently, the emphasis has been placed on stem flap design only, as they have been proven
to perform slightly better than wedges in comparative model testing. Powering reductions on the order
of 6 to 10 percent at cruise and maximum speeds have been measured model scale and verified full
scale. Stern flaps represent a viable mechanism for reducing resistance of ships which operate at
speeds of FN of 0.2 and greater. Some identified physical mechanisms for improved performance due
to stem flaps are: effects on the pressure distribution over the afterbody, modification of ship trim and
apparent displacement, modification of far field wave energy and localized transom wave system, and
increased apparent ship length. The US Navy has retrofitted stem flaps on two FFG-7 Class frigates,
and verified full scale performance improvements (Ref. B25.c). Stem flap performance
improvements, demonstrated on Patrol Coastal PC- 13, has lead to the Navy's decision to retrofit flaps
on the entire PC-1 class (Ref. B25.d). An investigation is underway to quantify the energy savings
with stem flaps on the DD-963 and CG-47 class ships, and to install a flap on one of these classes in
FY97. Stern flaps will be featured on the new LPD-17 and DDG-51 flight 2A ships. Numerous
model tests have shown powering benefits with stern flaps on larger, sealift type ships. Construction
and retrofitting costs of a stern flap, on a combatant hullform, could be as low as $40,000 per ship,
making this concept an extremely low-cost retrofit, which is suited to a great variety of hullforms.
It is recommended that investigations underway be continued, and new investigations be
undertaken in this energy study into the merits of stern flap performance potential on all identified US
Navy ships.
Fig B25. Photographs of full scale stern flaps applications. (a) FFG-7 Class, and (b) PC-I Class
B35
CATEGORY (C) PROPULSOR(s)
(26) New Propeller Design
The concept of a new, more efficient propeller design, is a universal way of reducing powering
requirements. A propeller design procedure has been developed by the US Navy, which incorporates
new advanced blade section shapes (Ref. B26.a). These new blade sections are applicable to US
Navy propeller designs, and are both less prone to cavitation and more efficient. Recent propeller
designs using the advanced blade section shapes are pictured in Figure B26. Both the DDG-51 (Ref.
B26.b) and the PC-1 (from Ref. B25.d) propeller performances have been verified full scale. The
recent advanced blade section propeller designs for the Mid-Term Sealift program achieved an open
water efficiency of 0.83 for the twin screw podded hullforrn, and 0.776 for the single screw extended
skeg hullform, Figure B26(c). A previous propeller design study, focusing on US Navy auxiliaries
and amphibious ships, concluded that there were several classes that could benefit from a new
propeller design (Ref. B26.c), however, most of the ships studied are now near the end of their
service life.
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
Fig B26. Recent US Navy propeller designs using advanced blade sections. Designed for (a) DDG-51
destroyer (CP) model, (b) LPD-17 amphibious transport dock (FP) model, (c) Mid-Term
Sealift (FP) model, and (d) PC-I patrol coastal (FP) full scale.
B36
The concept of developing a new, more efficient. propeller design is proven technology.
Backfitting is possible, however, the design of a new propeller for a Navy vessel is often associated
with considerable R&D, construction, and installation costs. The concept is recommended for further
consideration, and is applicable to all of the identified candidate US Navy ship classes.
(27) Low RPM / Large Diameter Propellers

The concept of a low RPM / large diameter propeller operates on an old principle that higher
propeller efficiency can be achieved through increased diameter and decreased RPM. Decreases in
delivered power of 5 to 15 percent have been documented, with increases in propeller efficiency of as
much as 40 percent (Ref. B27.a). Commercial design advances in the technology base of high power,
low RPM machinery has given this concept many practical propulsion possibilities. The concept is
frequently pursued in conjunction with tunnel sterns. Many US Navy energy programs have evaluated
the merits of increasing propeller diameters. Two recent applications are: The AE-36 Energy
Enhancement Program (from Ref. B3.a) evaluated a standard 22 ft (6.7 in) diameter versus a 26.5 ft
(8.1 m) large diameter propeller on an open shaft tunnel stern hullform. The larger diameter propeller
provided for a 6.7 percent decrease in delivered power. The Mid-Term Sealift program (from Ref.
B3.b) determined that a propeller diameter increase from the 28 ft (8.5 m) to 30.5 ft (9.3 m) on an
extended skeg hullform decreased delivered power by 7.5%, and on a producible skeg hullform
decreased delivered power by 6.0%. (The 30.5 ft diameter propeller on the producible skeg hullform,
however, was unrealistically large.) Many studies are presently underway to determine the validity of
the long-standing US Navy practices for minimum propeller blade tip clearances. The results of model
tests on the AE-36 large diameter propeller (10% tip clearance) showed pressure excitation levels
judged to still be well within the satisfactory range, and the propeller had a low likelihood of producing
excessive hull girder vibrations (Ref. B27.b).
Fig B27. Comparative propellers from AE-36 Energy Enhancement Program

22 ft (6.7 m) diameter, on left, and 26.5 ft (8.1 m) diameter, on right
B37
The concept of a lower RPM, larger diameter, and more efficient propeller design is proven
technology. Backfitting is possible, however, the increased diameter of the propeller may decrease
propeller tip clearances to marginal or unsatisfactory levels. As a retrofit, the large diameter propeller
my be severly limited by the torque and RPM characteristics of the existing ship machinery. As
mentioned, R&D, construction, and installation costs, must be taken into account. The concept is
recommended for further study, even though a relaxation in current Navy practices for minimum
propeller blade tip clearances is not in the foreseeable future. This concept is applicable to all of the
US Navy ship classes identified in the energy survey.
(28) Overlapping Propellers

Large diameter overlapping propellers, consist of two propellers placed close to the ship's
centerline so that a portion of the inboard sides of the propeller disks are overlapping. One propeller is
placed at a longitudinal distance of 0.2 - 0.3 propeller diameters ahead of the second propeller. The
concept attempts to meld many of the advantages of other concepts. It combines the higher propeller
efficiency associated with large diameter propellers, the reduced propeller loading associated with
conventional twin screw propulsion, and reduced resistance over conventional twin screw propulsion.
Additional advantages are that the aft propeller may recover some of the forward propeller swirl losses,
and there is generally an associated increase in hull efficiency. However, all these advantages may be
at the expense of increased cavitation, noise, and vibrations. Model predictions generally indicate
improved powering performance of as much as 5 - 15 percent over twin screw, but, in comparison to
conventional single screw only small improvements are indicated, (Refs. B28.a, B28.b). There is one
full scale application on the TSSS Sindoro, Figure B28(a). No comparisons on powering were
possible, and the ship propellers suffered heavily from cavitation. However, this was an old design
without the benefit of modem propeller design methods.
f '..f
~~~~ . - -..--,'-
---
--..
S•--T- I• IT
Fig B28(a). Sketch of full scale overlapping propeller arrangement on TSSS Sindoro
The large diameter overlapping propellers concept was model tested on the DD-963 destroyer
(from Ref. B I 8.a), Figure B28(b) . The concept showed only a slight powering improvement of 2
percent at high speed, and increased powering at low speeds, versus a twin screw controllable-pitch
baseline. Improved propeller design and analysis techniques should allow for improved performance
B38
over this early design, and should also reduce the vibration risks. The fact that this concept is
exclusively a new design, however, excludes this concept from further consideration in this energy
study.
Fig B28(b). Large diameter overlapping propellers on DD-963 model
(29.) Energy Efficient Tip P.1ropellers, Kappel propellers, Concentrated Tip Loading
(CLT) propellers
Energy Efficient Tip propellers, Kappel propellers, Concentrated Tip Loading (CLT) propellers,
and the former generation of CLT called Tip Vortex Free (TVF) propellers, are all forms of propellers
which use transitional tip geometry or specialized tip treatments in their blade designs. These propeller
blade designs are depicted in Figure B29. The specialized tip geometries are in an attempt to achieve
propeller efficiency gains, by way of more heavily loaded blade tips, without suffering excessive
cavitation losses. The increases in efficiency may, however, he partially offset by the increased drag
of the blade tips. By far the most well known of these propeller concepts is the CLT propeller. More
than 120 CLT propellers (including its predecessor TV`F propellers) have been fitted, in both fixed
pitch and controllable pitch versions, to a vast variety of ship types. Advantages of these propellers as
determnined full scale are: reduction in fuel consumption of 8 to 12 percent, reduction of cavitation and
vibration, improved maneuvering, and increased speed, (Ref. B29.a). The Kappel propeller boasts
many of the same advantages, but claims that its curved rake at the blade tips is more easily
manufactured, so that the pay-back period is shortened, (Ref. B29.b). Recent US Navy experience,
with this type of propeller blade, is through the design of the PC-1I Class propellers, Figure B29(a),
The propeller designer stated that the transitional tip geometry permitted loading of the tip, and a slight
efficiency gain. The blade tips still retained acceptable cavitation performance, showing very little
cavitation on the blade tips at the propeller design point. Full scale trials on the PC- 13 confirmed the
propeller efficiency gains, but the propellers exhibited slightly greater cavitation patterns on the blade
tips than predicted in the model experiments.
The design of specialized propeller blade tip geometries presents a viable means of gettingmr
efficiency out of a propeller without sacrificing cavitation performnance. In the case of the CLT, it is a
proven mature technology for commercial applications. Backfitting is possible, and therefore, the
B39
all
concept is recommended for further consideration. These propeller designs could be applicable to
combatant
of the US Navy ship classes identified in the energy survey. However, suitability to
be necessary
hullforms is uncertain, and due to this, there is the possibility that significant R&D would
to adapt this technology to US Navy ships.
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
Fig B29 Tip treatment propellers: (a) Computer rendering of energy efficient tip propeller,
(b) Photograph of model Kappel propeller, (c) Photograph of tip vortex free (TVF)
propeller, and (d) Photograph of concentrated tip loaded (CLT) propeller
(30) Contra-Rotating Propellers

Contra-Rotating propellers, Figure B30, are a mature technology, well known for over 80 years as
a method of reducing delivered power (Ref. B30.a). The concept consists of two propellers,
revolving in opposing directions, placed directly behind one another on a single shaftline. The aft
propeller is driven by a shaft which is located inside a hollow shaft which drives the forward propeller.
They are suitable for twin or single shaftlines, open or closed sterns. Contra-Rotating propellers
operate on the principal of regaining with the aft propeller, the lost rotational energy downstream of the
B40
forward propeller. Design philosophy would be for the forward propeller to be designed with high
pitch to minimize viscous losses, but generating some rotational losses, which would be recoverable
by aft propeller as pre-swirl into the disk. The efficiency of these complex mechanical systems vary.
but significant powering reductions are possible due to increased open water propulsor efficiencies
which may be as high as 0.85. Most predictions place the possible powering reductions for contra-
rotating propellers in the wide range of 5 to 20 percent. The contra-rotating propeller designs usually
have greatly reduced propeller RPMs compared to single rotation. Reduced cavitation, noise, and
vibrations can be a direct result of the reduced propeller RPM. Contra-Rotating propellers have seen
limited high power or naval applications due to the associated complexity of the mechanical drive
systems. However, as a result of five-years technical design studies, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries
(MHI) now claims to have developed a large scale contra-rotating propulsion system with sufficient
reliability for commercial operations (Ref. B30.b). Four Japanese built large vessel applications of
contra-rotating propellers exist. Two of these systems present operational experience for contra-
rotating propellers used as a backfit device (Ref. B30.c). For the bulk carrier Juno, a delivered power
savings of 15 percent was recorded with contra-rotating propellers. Two of these ships, MHI's
258000 dwt (26700 hP) Cosmo Delphinus, and Idemitsu Tanker Co.'s (24500 hP) Okinoshima Maru,
are examples of purpose-built ships constructed with contra-rotating propellers, Figures B30(a) and
B30(b). For the Maru, a 14 percent power savings is claimed.
(a) (b)
Fig B30. Photographs of full scale applications of contra-rotating propellers on two Japanese VLCCs.
(a) MHI's Cosmo Delphinus, and (b) Idemitsu Tanker Co.'s Okinoshima Maru
The US Navy has model tested contra-rotating propellers on a variety of ship hullforms. The most
recent applications are on the DDG-51 (Ref B30.d), Figure B30(c), and the Mid-Term Sealift (from
Ref. B3.b). The contra-rotating propellers on the DDG-51 reduced the delivered power 10.5 percent
at the design speed, and 7.6 percent overall across the speed range. On the Mid-Tenn Sealift, single
shaftline contra-rotating propellers also resulted in a delivered power decrease of 10 percent. The
B41
significant achievable delivered power reductions and improved warfighting capabilities of contra-
rotating propellers continue to make this an attractive technology for study in other arenas. When
considered in conjunction with podded hullforms and electric drive, contra-rotating propellers become
an important element of a long-term developmental effort to support future combatant propulsion
system design. For US Navy applications, this concept would be exclusively a new design, and
therefore, is not a candidate for further consideration in this study.
Fig B30(c). Photographs of twin shaftline contra-rotating propellers on DDG-51 model
(31) Tandem Propellers

Tandem propellers are a compound propulsor concept consisting of two fixed pitch propellers,
revolving in the same direction on a single shaftline, placed directly behind one another, Figure B3 1.
The forward and aft propellers have comparable diameter and equal number of blades. The propeller
blade rows are offset circumferentially on the shaft so that the forward blades do not shadow the aft
blades. The main intent of the tandem propellers concept is to satisfy stringent acoustic requirements
with a system of fairly simple mechanical complexity. However, the concept can achieve propeller
efficiency gains, by way of reducing propeller RPM, blade loading, and blade chord length (high
aspect ratio foils), while maintaining or increasing total blade area. They are suitable for twin or single
shaftlines, open or closed stems. The US Navy model tested tandem propellers on the DD-963,
Figure B31.
Fig B3 1. Photographs of tandem propellers on DD-963 model

B42
This model experience on the DD-963 (from Ref. B 18.a), showed that the tandem propellers
generally had about the same efficiency of a single fixed-pitch propeller of the same diameter. It was
determined that the drawback of the tandem propellers concept was that of difficulties in designing
matched propellers that performed as desired. It is surmised, that satisfactory tandem propeller
performance could be achieved, though significant R&D would be necessary to achieve the desired
performance. Suitability as a retrofit device is uncertain, the weight of the second propeller may easily
exceed the design limits of the existing shafting, bearings, or struts, thus making retrofit extremely
costly or impossible. Therefore, the tandem propellers concept is not recommended for further
evaluation in this energy study.
(32) Propeller Fairwater Designs

Propeller fairwaters are simply treatments to the termination of the propeller hub. They can be flat
sided, rounded, elliptical, etc., or a truncated form of any of these, Figure B32(a). The fairwater is
generally tapered aft of the propeller hub, but in some cases, may actually expend from the propeller
hub diameter. The fairwaters can effect propeller efficiency by elongating the propeller hub,
preventing flow separation and excessive vorticity. The fairwater can also have an effect on the
streamlines aft of the propeller, affecting rotational losses by imparting the rotation to the flow at an
altered diameter. The fairwater can also have a pronounced effect on propeller hub vortex cavitation.
Main strut
Proopelleri
hub Fairwater
Shaftline
M
ain BarreutI
Mainn BRarrel-
I~
i~I~Liii~
Alternative Fairwater Designs
Fig B32(a) Sketch depicting propeller fairwaters concept and example alternative fairwater designs
The US Navy investigated the effects on resistance and powering of variations in fairwater designs
on the DD-963 destroyer (Ref. B32.a), Figure B32(b). The DD-963 model, when fitted with either of
fairwaters "B" or "C" (in photograph), required roughly 1.0 percent less delivered power than with the
fleet design fairwater "A" in the photograph.
Fig B32(b) Photograph of alternative fairwater designs tested on DD-963 model

B43
The effect of adding a flat sided, tapered mad truncated, fairwater to the propeller hub of the PC- I
The
Class, (existing design did not include a fairwater), was investigated at both model and full scale.
in
model tests were inconclusive. The full scale trials concluded that there was a slight decrease
delivered power with the fairwaters installed. Full scale trials on PC- I Class were also conducted with
a flat sided fairwater that expanded aft of the propeller hub. This expended fairwater caused delivered
full
power to increase through all of the speed range with the exception of the extreme high end. Near
engine power levels, a decrease in delivered power, and an increase in ship speed was recorded. It is
believed that the expanded fairwater retarded propeller cavitation in the inner half of the propeller disk.
Thus, thrust breakdown losses were reduced, thereby providing for the high end power improvement.
The ease of ship integration and expected low installation costs, make some of the alternative
fairwater concepts attractive for the present energy study. The recommendation would be to conduct
R&D in parallel with studies into the main strut barrel designs (energy savings device 19), effects on
propeller root and hub cavitation, as well as energy enhancement. Alternative fairwater concepts are
applicable to all of the US Navy ship classes identified in the energy survey.
(33) Fins (Blades) on Propeller Hub, Propeller Boss Cap Fin (PBCF), Post Swirl
Cap (PSC)
Propeller boss cap fin (PBCF), and post swirl cap (PSC), are devices, consisting of a number of
small fins or blades, fitted to the propeller fairwater. The device, which rotates with equal RPM to that
of the propeller, attempts to recover the rotational energy shed by the propeller. Any increase in
propeller efficiency may be partially offset by the increased torque associated with the addition of the
blades on the propeller fairwater. Mitsui claims sales of over 200 propeller boss cap fin (PBCF)
devices, Figure B33(a). Mitsui promotional literature reports the following effects: A savings in fuel
consumption of 3 to 5 percent, a speed increase of 1 to 2 percent, reduction in propeller torque of I to
2 percent, and reductions in vibration due to the elimination of hub vortex cavitation. Full scale trials
were carried out by Mitsui on two sister ships, the Mercury Ace with a PBCF installed and the
Neptune Ace without PBCF (Ref. B33.a). Efficiency improvements from this pair of PBCF trials of
4 percent were claimed, with an associated speed increase of 0.2 knots. As stated previously, there is
always some degree of unreliability in sister ship comparisons. More importantly, however, it is
judged that the effectiveness of this type of device depends to a large extent on the details of the
propeller design, especially in the blade root area, and the amount of propeller rotational losses. A
assessment of the PBCF was prepared by Gearhart and McBride (Ref.B33.b), who concluded that the
performance gains were valid. A similar device, the post swirl cap (PSC), Figure B33(b), was model
tested by the US Navy during the AE-36 Energy Enhancement Program (from Ref. B3.a). The results
of this application showed an increase in the annual propulsion energy when the PSC was installed,
mainly due to delivered power increases in the lower half of the speed range. However, the device did
provide for savings at the high end of the speed range and a slight increase in maximum speed of 0. 1
knots.
B44
The concept of putting blades on the propeller hub/fairwater is easily retrofittable, and could be
physically installed, on all US Navy ship classes identified in the energy study. It is unknown
whether the concepts of this group would fare well only in the wake of a heavily loaded propeller, or a
propeller design with an excessive amount of hub vortex losses. It is assumed that the greatest
improvement would be for ships with commercially designed propellers such as the TAO-I187. This
concept is recommended for further consideration in this energy study, due to its expected low
associated costs of ship integration and installation, and (commercially) proven cost benefits.
Recommendations would be to retrofit a suitable, commercially available, propeller boss cap fin on the
TAO-187 first, and if successful, retrofits on AO-177 and AOE-6. Consideration should be given for
retrofit to the amphibians LPD- 17, LHD- 1, LHA- 1, and LSD-41 &49, prior to conducting R&D into
suitability for eventual retrofit on a combatant.
(a) (b)
Fig B33 (a) Image of full scale Propeller Boss Cap Fin (PBCF) from Mitsui literature, and
(b) Photograph of Post Swirl Cap (PSC) on AE-36 model
(34) Vane (Grim) Wheel

Vane (Grim) Wheel, Figure 34, is a freely rotating device installed on the propeller shaft,
approximately 0.125 propeller diameters downstream of the propeller (Ref. B34.a). The diameter of
the vane wheel is larger than that of the propeller, and usually consists of 9 to 12 blades. The chord
lengths of the vane wheel's blades are small compared to that of the propeller. Each blade performs
two separate functions. The inner part of the vane wheel, the blade root out to roughly the propeller
slip stream diameter, acts as a turbine. The outer portion acts as a propeller. The blades are strongly
twisted in the transition region between the turbine and the propeller. The vane wheel rotates freely in
the same direction as the propeller, but at a much reduced rotational speed in the range of 30 to 50
percent of the propeller RPM. The vane wheel's function is to transform both rotational and axial
losses in the propeller slipstream into additional forward thrust. A vane wheel can only be installed if
sufficient space is available. Over 50 full scale applications of vane wheels are on record, for a variety
of vessels, both as retrofits and as part of two-stage design propulsors. Most applications have been
on single screw, full stern hullforms. According to discussions with the inventor, 0. Grim, the vane
B45
optimal. Such a
wheel is most effective on ships where the propeller is not a hydrodynamically
propeller would have high RPM and/or small diameter, which allows the use of inexpensive direct
drive diesel propulsion machinery. Delivered power savings of 5 to 12 percent are claimed for single
screw vessels with relatively heavily loaded propellers. The delivered power claims appear be
realistic, as full scale data supports recorded savings in the range of 2 to 9 percent.
Fig B34. Photographs of two full scale installations of Vane (Grim) Wheels
It is difficult to assess at model scale the energy savings associated with vane wheels. Model scale
tests are thought to be subject to severe scale effects. The slow rotational speed, coupled with very
short blade chord lengths, consequently make the model scale Reynolds numbers on the vane wheel
blades approximately 10 times smaller than those on the propeller blades. To date, only one known
publication reports at model scale a measured reduction in power associated with the installation of a
vane wheel behind a model propeller, (Ref. B34.b). It appears from the literature, that vane wheels
are best suited to single screw hullforms, with heavily loaded propellers, and most likely high block
coefficient hulls. This is, of course, is not typical of US Navy designs. Durability and reliability of
vane wheels are somewhat questionable, as there are several incidences where blades have been
reported damaged or missing, and in worst cases, entire vane wheels have separated from the
shaftline. The vane wheel is not considered applicable to open shaft and strut type arrangements on
US Navy ships. The increased weight and shafting forces, due to the vane wheel, would likely
require increased shafting support strut strength, and therefore, require design modification of the
entire propulsion arrangement. The only foreseeable application for the vane wheel on a selected US
Navy hullform, would be on the AO-177. However, an earlier study concluded that the required
B46
clearances for a vane wheel did not exist on the AO- 177. For the aforementioned reasons, vane
(Grim) wheels are not recommended for further consideration under this energy study.
(35) Propeller Pitch Scheduling

Propeller pitch scheduling is an at-sea practice, rather than a device, of setting and maintaining the
optimal propeller pitch for minimal engine fuel consumption. This practice is, of course, applicable to
only those ships which employ a controllable-pitch propeller or propellers for their main propulsion.
The delivered power savings is probably greatest for ships whose prime mover is a gas turbine engine.
Gas turbines have a high specific fuel consumption, particularly at partial load operations. For ship
speeds of 20 knots and below, considerable fuel savings (as much as 20 percent) has been
demonstrated, over a great many years, by operating these ships in a "trailed shaft" mode. In the
trailed shaft mode, the ship is driven by one gas turbine and one propeller, while the other propeller is
allowed to freely rotate or "windmill". In practice the windmilling propeller is set at maximum ahead
pitch. The pitch setting on the driving propeller, however, has been the topic of the pitch scheduling in
the past. Model experiments coupled with propulsion systems analysis, on the DD-963 Class,
indicated that setting the driving propeller at a pitch less than 100% ahead, could result in a 2 to 4
percent additional savings. The reduced pitch allows the driving gas turbine to operate at a higher
RPM, thus reducing its specific fuel consumption. Although the propeller efficiency generally
decreases with the reduced pitch, the analysis indicated that the increased engine efficiency would
offset this, and a more favorable fuel rate would result. The US Navy conducted full scale trials on the
USS Spruance (DD-963) to evaluate the effects of pitch scheduling during trailed shaft operations
(Ref. B35.a). Analysis of the trials data revealed that a fuel savings of 1 to 2 percent could be
achieved in the portion of the speed range between 15 to 20 knots. Recent surveys do indicate that the
trailed shaft model is used by many, if not most, of the ship captains. But it is unknown at this time,
to what extent pitch scheduling, on the driving propeller, is practiced already by ship captains.
Extending pitch scheduling practices into standard operational profiles, such as two screw powering
with two-to-four gas turbines on line, has not been thoroughly analyzed. Another approach to pitch
scheduling, is to purchase or develop a real time feedback system. This system would automatically
optimize the combination of propeller pitch and engine RPM, for minimum fuel consumption. A
survey should be conducted to determine what commercial systems are available today, and to see if
they are adequate for U.S. Navy use. The principal of optimization would be to minimize fuel flow at
an operator specified ship speed, by varying propeller pitch and thus engine RPM. Both software
algorithms, and accurate hardware such as thrust and torque meters, fuel flow meters, wind indicators,
and ship motion sensors, might be needed. Difficulties with traditional approachs to propeller pitch
indicator accuracy, as discussed by Klitsch et. al. (Ref. B35.b), may be avoided because actual
sensing of the propeller pitch may not be critical to the system. Such a system could be readily adapted
to other desirable modes of operation, including optimization for minimum propeller noise, maximum
ship speed, and maximum acceleration. The real-time nature of the system would automatically
B47
engine
account for the effects of hull and propeller fouling, and the normal wear related degradation of
could
performance. To a lesser extent, the development of simple, concise, instruction manual,
scheduling a
provide ship captains with the information necessary to make the practice of pitch
fundamental.
The ease of ship integration and expected low implementation costs, makes the practice of pitch
scheduling attractive for the present energy study. The recommendation would be to conduct R&D in
parallel with studies into the effects on trailed shaft operations as well as standard operational engine
profiles. The practicality of a feedback control system, either developed or purchased commercially,
should be studied. The practice of pitch scheduling is applicable to all of the US Navy ship classes
identified in the energy survey whose propulsion is by controllable-pitch propeller(s). This includes:
CG-47, DD963/993, DDG-51, FFG-7, LSD-41 &49, and TAO-187.
B48
REFERENCES OF APPENDIX B
References from Category (A) Hull:

B 1.a Kracht, A.M., "Design of Bulbous Bows", SNAME Transactions, Vol. 86, 1978.
B 1.b This reference is not in the public domain.
B2.a Cusanelli, D.S., "Development of a Bow for a Naval Surface Combatant which Combines a
Hydrodynamic Bulb and a Sonar Dome", Transactions of ASNE Technology Innovation
Symposium '94, Pittsburgh Sect., Sept. 1994.
B2.b This reference is not in the public domain.
B2.c This reference is not in the public domain.
B3.a This reference is not in the public domain.
B4.a Hideaki, M., and others, "Resistance Reduction by Stem-End-Bulb", Journal of the Society of
Naval Architects of Japan, series of three reports, 1980-1982.
B4.b Ward, L.W., and R.D. Sedat, "Survey and Analysis of Existing Information on the Effects of
Stern End Bulbs on Merchant Ships", Webb Institute of Naval Architecture, Oct. 1984.
B4.d This reference is not in the public domain.
B5.a Shimo, L., "Twin Stem Ship for Energy Saving", Wuhan University of Water Transportation
Engineering, Ref # 31635, pages 153-160.
B6.a Carlotti, P., "A note on new forms for ships' sterns", Transactions of the Institute of Naval
Architects, Vol. 93, 1951.
B6.b NKK Corporation, "Technology for saving power with an off-centre propeller", document
supplied by The British Library Document Supply Centre.
B7.a Collatz, G., "The asymmetric afterbody, model tests and full scale experiences", International
Symposium on Ship Hydrodynamics and Energy Saving, El Pardo, Sept. 1983.
B7.b Tommassi, G.B., "A hydrodynamic study of the Cochlea-channeled stem", International
Shipbuilding Progress, Vol. 24, Sept. 1977.
B9.a Hua, Y.F., "The application of twin-stern shipform to river passenger ships", Ship & Boat
International, March 1987.
B 11.a This reference is not in the public domain.
BL.b Wyatt, D.C., and P.A. Chang, III, "Development and Assessment of a Total Resistance
Optimized Bow for the AE-36", International Symposium on CFD and CAD in Ship Design,
Sept. 1990.
B49
REFERENCES OF APPENDIX B (continued)
References from Category (B) Appendage(s):

B 12.a Narita, H., et al., "Development and full-scale experiences of a novel integrated duct propeller",
SNAME Annual Meeting, New York, Nov. 1981.
B 12.b "Hitachi's HZ nozzle: more efficient, more adaptable", The Motor Ship, June 198 1.
B12.c Schneekluth, H., "Wake equalizing duct, state of development", 6th Lips Propeller
Symposium, Drunen, May 1986.
B 12.d This reference is not in the public domain.
B 12.e This reference is not in the public domain.
B 13.a Translations from: "Der Grothues-Spoiler als weiterer Beitrag zur Verbesserung der
Propulsionseigenschaften von Einschrauben-Schiffen" Hansa, Schiffahrt-Schiftbau-Hafen,
Vol. 121, No. 10, 1984.
B13.b Wilson, M.B., et al., "Causes and Corrections for Propeller-Excited Airbom Noise on a Naval
Auxiliary Oiler", SNAME Transactions, Vol. 90, 1982.
B14.a Neeley, S.K., J. McMahon, and B.Y-H. Chen, "Design Method and Application of an
Asymmetric Stator Upstream of a Inclined Shaft Propeller", Transactions 23rd American
Towing Tank Conference, 1993.
B14.b Smith, T.B., and K.D. Remmers, "Propeller Erosion Reduction with an Asymmetric Preswirl
Stator", Transactions 23rd American Towing Tank Conference, 1993.
B15.a Wenhao, Q., et al., "A New Type of Ship Energy-Saving Device... FPHFS - Fore-Propeller
Hydrodynamical Fin Sector -", Kansai Society of Naval Architests, Japan, No. 218, May 1992.
B 15.b. Hughes, M.J., and S.A. Kinnas, "An Analysis Method for a Ducted Propeller with Pre-Swirl
Stator Blades", SNAME Propellers/Shafting '91 Symposium, VA, Sept. 1991.
B 16.a This reference is not in the public domain.
B 17.a Chen, B.Y-H., "Postswirl Propulsors - A Design Method and an Application", International
Symposium on Propulsors and Cavitation, Hamburg, June 1992.
B 18.a Reed, A.M., and W.G. Day, Jr., "Evaluation of Various Propulsion Arrangements to Improve
Energy Conservation for Naval Combatants - Summary Report", DTNSRDC/SPD-0829-27,
May 1984.
B21.a. Yamano. T., et. al., "An Energy Saving Apparatus", Kansai Society of Naval Architects, Vol.
No. 223, March 1995.
B25.a Cusanelli, D.S., and K.M. Forgach, "Stern Flaps for Enhanced Powering Performance",
Transactions of Twenty-Fourth American Towing Tank Conference, College Station, Texas,
Nov. 1995.
B25.b Karafiath, G., and S.C. Fisher, "The Effect of Stern Wedges on Ship Powering Performance",
Naval Engineers Journal, May 1987.
B25.c Cusanelli, D.S., and W. Cave, III, "Effect of Stem Flaps on Powering Performance of the
FFG-7 Class", Marine Technology, Vol. 30, No. 1, pp. 39-50, (Jan 1993)
B50
References from Category (C) Propulsor(s):

B26.a Bailar, J.W., S.D. Jessup, and Y.T. Shen, "Improvement of Surface Ship Propeller Cavitation
Performance Using Advanced Blade Sections", Proceedings of the Twenty-Third ATITC, New
Orleans, LA, June 1992.
B27.a Della Loggia, B., L. Doria, and S. Cappelli, "Experiments on propulsive arrangements with
slow turning large diameter propellers", CETENA Report No. 1103.
B27.b Wilson, M.B., K.J. Anderson, and C.C. Hsu, "Effect of Tip Clearance Extreems on Cavitation
and Unsteady Hull Pressure Excitation", Transcripts of CAV'95 International Symposium on
Cavitation, Deauville, France, May 1995.
B28.a Kerlen, H. et al., "Propulsion, cavitation and vibration characteristics of overlapping propellers
for a containership", International Shipbuilding Progress, Vol. 19,No. 214, June 1972.
B28.b Min, K.S., "Experimental study on the twin-skeg overlapping propeller system", 6th Lips
Propeller Symposium, Drunen, May 1986.
B29.a Perez-Gomez, G., and J. Gonzalez-Adalid, "Tip Loaded Propellers (CLT). Justification of their
Advantages over Conventional Propellers Using New Momentum Theory", SNAME
Transactions, New York, Feb. 1993.
B29.b Anderson, S.V., and P Anderson, "Hydrodynamic Design of Propellers with Unconventional
Geometry", Transactions Royal Institute of Naval Architecture, 1987.
B30.a Taggart, R., "Marine propulsion, Vol. 1, Historical study for US Army Transportation Corps
by Reed Research Inc., Washington, D.C., July 1957.
B30.b Nakamura, S., et al., "Development of Contra-Rotating Propeller System for Large Ships",
Bulletin of the M.E.S.J., Japan, Vol. 20, No. 1, March 1992.
B30.c "Two VLCCs with contra-rotating propellers in service", The Naval Architect, No. J228,
Oct 1993.
B33.a Ouchi, K., "Research and development of PBCF (Propeller Boss Cap Fins) to enhance
propeller efficiency", The Motor Ship 10th International Marine Propulsion Conference,
London, March 1988.
B33.b Gearhart, W.S., and M.W. McBride, "Performance Assessment of Propeller Boss Cap Fin
Type Device", 22nd American Towing Tank Conference
B34.a Grim, 0., "Propeller and Vane Wheel" Second George Weinblum Memorial Lecture, Journal
of Ship Research, Vol. 24, No. 4, Dec. 1980.
B34.b Blaurock, J. "Propeller plus vane wheel, an unconventional propulsion system", International
Symposium on Ship Hydrodynamics and Energy Saving, Madrid, Sept. 1983.
B35.a Hansen, A.G., and N. Santelli, "Effect of Pitch Scheduling on Fuel Usage for Gas Turbine
Ships: USS Spruance (DD-963) Sea Trials", The Scientex Corp., Report No. TSC-35.5-1,
Nov. 1983
B51
B35.b Klitsch, M.L., R.J. Stenson, and E.L. Woo, "Experience with Controllable Pitch Propellers
During Full Scale Performance and Special Trials", Proceedings of Ninth Ship Control
Systems Symposium, (Sept. 1990).
B52
APPENDIX C:
GENERAL LISTING OF SUBJECT REFERENCES
cl
Report Nums: Classification;: ship Type;: uhrs ae Reference Type:Kywrs
d:
Title:Auhr)NmeKyw
Plnr
The Naval Institute Guide toathseShipsanrV Aircrit Ofuse US. Fleel
BOOK: PUBLISHER! Naval Institute Press
Page Nuns Volt.: 15thEdition Onto Pu~blished:1993
Report NMum; Classification: Ship Type: Atos)Nm:Reference Type:Kewrs

Title: ASharp s) Name: Kewd
tSp ap.P.)~
Janes Pjigbi4 Stips 1995-96
BOOK: PUBLISHER: jasureslnformation Group Limited
Pago Num;sv Vof. 98thEdition Data Publlshed: 1995
Report Nurn: Classification: Ship Type: Atsos Nm:Refelrence TYPe:Kewrs

d:
Title:Ator)NaeKew Tg R.
Ittunin propulsion Vol, 1,Historical study tfo US Army Tpsnels;)O-on Cotps
BOOK: PUBLISHER: ReedResearch IMc.
Paeg Num: Vol.: Date Published: July 1957
ship Typez Reference Type:

Report Nlurn Classification:
Autrthorfs) Name: Keywords:
Title, AdditonnalThirusting (AT)fa
Kawasaki. awsk RBS-P
.R Syte .neggvn fins ontRudder*
SstemProfitling
RB~f~swus~kl Enery~o~ng
K~waakiRwdc~ul (wih'Fil)Rudder-Bulb-Fin
BOOK: ShopGroup. Kawasaki Heavy Industries. Ltd. PUBLISHER:
Page Nuns: Vol.: Oata Published:
Ship Type: ? Reference Type:

Report Nuns; Classificationr:
I Authorls) Name: Keywords:
Title: M_ M. Tet5*SM. Endo, N-* Addtionbal huting(AT) Pli
vetpr mto~nrgy~ Ap~iclio~fOPSi.Jlitt. Profiling FilmonooRgider
Mamisooto MFukAa4a.and Y. Kaseirara,
Rudder-Balb-F115
BOOK: NKK Technical Review PUBLISHIER:
Page Nutn: Vol.: 59 Oate Publirshed: 1990)
Ship Type: Reference Type:

Report Nums: Cleassfication:
Authorfs) Name: Keywords:
Title: Y, Iwasaki and
T.,Y, Yamgaubita., Addtiocal Tlssosti (AT) tFea
An Einrgy Saving ApaasYamoanc, Profiling F1 ins
on Rudder~
AppaTaatcs
Rudder-Bulls-Fini
BOOK; PUBLISHERt: KansaxSociety (if Naval ArchutectsJapan
Page Nwn; Vol.: No.223 Oats Published: March 1995
Closetficollon: Ship Type: Reference Type:

Report Nuns:
Author(s) Name: Keywords:
Title: W. andZ. Tianfesig Additional Thrusting (ALT)PTA
Pin Witls Nonlintear Vo e-Lstlic# Itelhod Gauiaof~ng. Profiling Fins on Rudder.
Design of AdditnrnallbThudsun S. .
Rudder-Bulb-Fin
BOOK: PUBLISHER:
Paeg Nuns: Vol., Oate Published:

Report Nuns: Classification:
Title: M. Fukoda. and Additional Thrusting iAT) Fian
F Okcsisoio, Y., Y. Kambatoa,
Development of Esetity-Savinsg Device NU -SýUR A Slotarki Profiling Fins on Rudder
(Swept-biack Up-thrusting Rudder Fio) itudder- Buth-Fist
BOOK: NKK Technical Review PUBLISHER:
Page Runs: Vol.: 61 OatsoPublished: 1991

Report Nuns: Cleassification:
Authorls) Name: Keywords:
Title Stem
Asymnmetric
CallottL. P.
,A note on new forms Ioratups aserio
BOOK: Prarssactiois of the in~stituteofNava~l Archtecis PUBLISHER: RINA
peg. Nun,: Vol.: 93 Oata Pubisahed: 1951
Sthip Type: 8-.CarguiAiaxitiafrrs Reference lype:

FReport Nuns Classification:
Authorfs) Name: Keaywords:
Title: Asymnietric Strun
Humborldt Express Cochlea Stem
Contaanership withstwist is th ti
BOOK: Marine Engincrinngli-Og PUBLISHER:
Page Rum; Vet.: Dale Published: Septt9814
C2
Report Hum: classification: ShipType: Atos)Nm'Reference Type:Kewrs
d:
Thite:AtorsNmeKyw yu~epe~ccsColair 0.Asyrurmetnic Stern
al~aalsI
ER: El Pardo
BOOK: Intrraaliorial Symposium onShipflydrodynstnics andEnergy Saving PUBLISH
V01.1 Date Pubisahed: Sept.1983
Page Nw,,:
Ship Type: 8 CargolAuxiliaries Reference Type:

Report Num:, Classication:lfl
Author(s) Name: Keywords,.
Title: CotlsZ a.. ASYosm~tc Stim
FoeStaln&Screw Vessels
f Afterbodwsn
..by A*ymm .ema
PruelSa-vlW Slem
Cochlea
Ltd.
PUBLISH4ER: Pergamoti Press
e Ettgng
BOOK: Ocean
Vol.. 10, No.4 Date Published: 1983
Page Hum:

Report Num; classification;
AuthorlS) Name: Keywords:
Title:
Pakor~alec~.J W.Arteti t
EffectofStlap Stemu:Asymmetry on propulio Etficienoy
Journal of Ship Research PUBLISHERý
BO0O0K:
Page Hum: Vol.; 24. No.2 Date Published: June1980

Report Nam: Classification,:
Author(@) Name: Keywords:
Title: Yarag. . I,. mg, C. Kim~*nd S. AS aa'eari Stern
T'bhe,Ap~lwatiiin of anLTye Duc~t of a40,OOODIWflTte
to dthAymmtietric Stemn Kim &Ifeaastern~
Rtaction(tiIv)38
PUBLISHER:
BOOK: PRADS 1989
Vol.: Date Pubisahed; 1989
Page Num:

Report Hum: Clsielficationl:
Title: K Hot$ Cap Fin\
RestmbWve oflPBCF (propeller Bamscip Fo$)to Enhace Pvnele ffct...uci
veoputentt
PUBLISHER:
BOOK: The Motor Ship 10thInternational Marner Propulsion Conference
Vol.: Date Published: March 1988
Page Numt

Report hum: Classification,:
Title: Lee, IC1 S. W, Jos,a art, Rod4Y-WLee~ Bulbous Bow,,~
liumesive Study ont BloHow of Slo wFullFarmtSli~p
-:'
PRADS 1989
-OK
ULSE
Vo., Doats Published: 1989
Page Hum:
Ship Typo: 3.- Destroyers Reference Type: Tectutici Report

Report hum. classification: UNCL
Authoris) Nam$: Keywords:
Title: DS
Cusaneltih. Bulbous Bow-, Saall'Ncax Surface
Catubsiant which Combines a fydrodynamiuc Bulb and
Developmtent of a Bow for &.Naval Surface
Dome
a 9Sona
PUBLISHER:
BOOK: ASNE Technology Innoynson Symposium 94, Pittsburgh
Vol.: Oats Published: Sept. 1994
Page hum:
C3
Report HNum; Classification: Ship Type: Reference Typo: Technical Report
Authoria) Name: Keywords:
Title:
K~rachr.A. MI Bolboun Blows
Design of Bulbous Bows
BOOK: SNAMETransactions PUBLISHER: SNAME
Pae. Hum;ý Vol.: 86 Dot. Published: 1978
Classification; Ship Typo: Reference Typo;

Report Hum:
Title:
Tommoasl. GBE. COchles Stem
A hydodynamic studyof the C0Clree'6haftnsld Stem
BOOK: PUBLISHER: international Shipbuilding Progress
Page Numn: Vol.: 24 Dete Published: SepL 1977
Classification,: Ship Type: Reference Type:

Report Hufm:
Title:
Tip Lhaded propeItm (CLT) Jutiictinof thIeir Advanwge:morCofldvotIOAl tPr~ek~rs Using an016nazaleo.Adalid
PereeE'omer. (1,W Concrnwtestd Tip L ndcd (CLT)?nroel~ers
New PWMometumTnory.
BOOK; SNAMvETransactioris PUBLISHER: SNAME
Pago Num;l Vol.: Dorts Published; Feb.1993
Report Num;: Classification: Ship Type; '? Reference Type:

Title:
.Contra-Roitaung Prv'jeqieru
CosaDp lunwsn theultimraireflagy-SaVitgttttker
BOOK: Significant Ships of 1993 PUBLISHER. The Royal Institute of Naval Architects
Pege Mum: Vol.. Date Published: 1993
Report flum: Classification: Ship Type; 8- Cary/Auntlaritt Refecence Type:

Authoris) Hame: Keywords:
Title:
Pnuwller
Coatzs-Rotamgo
(niuthimameert V[,CCwauh CRP
BOOK: Significant Slops of 1993 PUBLISHER: The Royal Institute of Naval Architects
Page Hum: Vol.: Date Published: 1993
Report Hugo; Classification: Ship Type: Reference Typo:

Title:
Rouating PtopelklrtSyslmo tot LargleSlops
Decveioperneit of Cornaes Nakattftir&S. it AL Contrs-Rout*ing Pnrolellers
BOOK: Bulletin of the M.E.S.J. PUBLISHER:
Paea Nu-s Vol.; 20. No. 1 Date Published; Match 1992
Classification: Ship Type: ? Reference Type:

Report Hum: J228
Title:
Cuntra-Rotating Propellet5
'Two VLCCs with contraurltatoy propellers in aceyke
BOOK: The Naval Architect PUBLISHER. RINA
Pego Hum;: Vol,; Dote Published: Oct 1993
Classification: Ship Type; Reference Type:

Report Hum;
Authorisl Name: Keywords:
Title:
0.. ansIL. Latberg
B1Jotheden, Contra-Rotating Propellant
.A eoalritrnolstatig pcopetlce-tlmsnter system
BOOKý The Naval Architect PUBLISHER;
Pege Hum; VOL.; Dots, Published: May 19881
C4
Report Mum; classification: Ship Type; Atos)Nm:Reference Type. ewrs
AujihoR., N Name:i'S ad . onnRouigs:
Keyw PLC
Title.
fDeaip (r C011atlting P-Melk);in
APrX-firA1 ..-- NiliyaniO. ~Npt.S ~ua n .CnnRlhgPoel
BOO: Tchnctt PaersPUBLISHER: lshikrawajorms-Haria Heavy Industries Co. Ltd,
Vol.. Date Published:

Pago Mum:
ship Type. - Cargo/Auxilssets Reference Typo:

Report Mum: Classification:
Name: Keywords:
Tite:Author(s) Con Rolating Propellers
fc a3700o,)WT ClusEbulk Carrier Nisiiyar S.. Y. SikaMoto, S. ishitla. RL
Tite:so wl~~~E9fyJm
L~eveopimt ~t Jno
ofSy--Folnajnad M. shina
PUBLISHER: Isltlkawa~ijare-Hattma Heavy Industries Co., Ltd.
a BOOK: SNAMETrFiIaCtiOIIS
Page Num: Vol.: 98 Date Published- 1990
Report Mum: Classification; ship Type: Atol)Nm:Reference TYPe;Kewrs
ATf5 tlet ka CtesttsPielr ls 1ad R.Vujieev

1,e comwgttigProprJler
PUBLISHER. lshirkawajinsa-Harfla Heavy Industries Co. Ltd.

0K: Techtnical Papers
BOO
Page Num; Vol.: Date Published:;IO
Repotlm:lasfctin hi ye Author(s) Name: R~o-*TP1Keywords:

Couinter Poturng PTOPullem
Throughs sBr,. id ,d ogCs'tth8m~le
Propulsions
AMvaweod
PUBLISHER:
BOOK: Sth International Maine Design Coniferenice
Vol,: Date Published: May 1994
Page Num:
Ship Type: Reference Type: TeChnicINIVDport

Report Mum: Classification: UNCL
Title: ChOen.ILY-lI., F. Peterson, AndD, T_ Drie U)strofemof Prpelle
1nB~ ~
InterateDwz
bsepsrdtsase Patulnr (D
.
PUBLISHER: SNAME.
BOOK; Propeller/lShafting 9lStmPOsiltin
Vol.: Oata Published: Sept.1991
Page Nuns:
Report Num. classification: Ship Type: Atos)Nm:Reference Type: ewrs

Title:and CyucpaDoubd Vatnes
InIVw COGbI)D
foprcporexerhydtOdynanal fin s~' Wenhao, Q_ ,Z uitalirm. Yuejt ReiSC.vc
A e yeo hpEcp5ýn ei-FH~
Japa PUBLISHER:
BOOK: KansasSocietyof Naval ArclaiLects.
Vol.; No.218 Oata Published: Sept1992
Peg. Num.
C5
Report Hum: clasuification; UNCL Ship Typo: Reference Typo: Technical Report
Author~s) Name: Keywords:
Title; Dueled Propeller(S)
HufllInteraction
Pi f Dutd Preileir- .. . . *. Ootrveld. M. W.C,. E. J. Stierman. and1.
- Auflm Keller
BOOK: international ManitmeiInnovative Sympjosiumt PUBLISHER: SNAME
Page Hum: V.:Date Published: Sept. 1984
Classification': UNCL Ship Typo: ReferenceeType:

Report Mlum:
Autho#(5) Name:. Keywords:
Title!
.AnAnlyssMto o )ci roalrwt ms fSao Blde luffiese,M.1 andS.A. RInas, Dused propeller
BOOK: SNAME Propellers/Shatfung VI Symposium PUBLISHER: SNAME

Poge Hum: Vol.: Date Published: Sept. 11991
Classification: UNCL Ship Type: Report

Referenee ye Teelsoseat
Report Mu1m:
Authorial Name: Keywords:
Title: Efficient Tip Ilropicyle
Emergy
ofShip Screw Propellers witlhOptimali End Plaice
OnltheOtmization,. Including Vineniety Effect~s, Deliog. K,
BOOK: International Shipbuilding Progress PUBLISHER.
Peg. lMum: Vol.: 38 Vale Published: 1991
classification: L!NCL Ship Type: Reoere.* Type: Technical Report

Report Hum:
Title-
Propellers
Design and Model Tests of Tip F~IR Anderson, P.,sod H.Schwaliele EffiiaentTip ptopelleft
Eniergy
BOOK: RLNA SprintgMeeting PUBLISHER: RfrJA
Page Nine: VOL.: DVet Published: 1952
classiictiehon;: UNCL Ship Type: 8- Cargo/Ateliliries, Reference Type; Technical Report

Report Hum:
Title:
Propeller
TheEvolution and Developrmnt otslti Meridian ~ Patierrci%G. andL. fradger Efficen9t Tip pepeliitm
EneUg
BOOK. Improving the Underwater Efficiency of Ships PUBLISHER: Institute of Maninut / Royal InsotituteofNaval
Engincers;
Page Hum: Vol.: 99 Dala Pubhlshed: April 1987
Report Hum: Classificationr: Ship Type: Reference Type:

Author~s) Name: Keywords:
Title
Hydrofoll Dglerfits from Tip Loaded Propeller Retrofit Ehety EfstleritTip dtprlets;~
Concerruited Tip Laing CL-) Prp~elles
BOOK' Marine Propulsion PUBLISHER:
Page Hum: Vol.: Dale Published: April 1996
Report Hum: Classification: Ship Type; Reference Type:

Title:
lrisk
mtohe,Fluid Vei Crossing Through die Prorpeller
Adioptoo Perez Goarn. D)e:0. Enlergy Efripent Tip Propelclers;
Blade Tip Loaded Prtopellars Proelers,
:Kappe1
Lodmg((L-) Prispdfler
Concilrirdfil
BOOK; 6th Ups Propeller Symoposiunm PUBLISHER:
Paga Hum: Vol.: Dale Published: May 1996
Repolt Hum: Classfflleelorl Ship Type: Reference Type:

A~uthorts) Name: Keywords:
Title:
Perez Gomez. Dr. Q3 Energy Eftlcienl Tip Propelfem
Sioleoesa'Propellet CLainisvae Bicked KsppeiPropellers
Coneenteanedip Ltsadllg(CL-1) Popeliets
Report, A Suppicnsent of fic Mrsrrrship
BOOK: Sisremsar, Publishing Lid
PUBLISHER: ReedBusinesas
Pago Hum:ý Vol.: Del. Published: Sept. 1993
Report Hum: C16fiaeelhelon: Ship Type: Reference Type:

Title:
P Guoene. Dr. (G- and &r. Enry EffleicntTip Proptella
Experience w~ithRetoufitted Propellers to Ersbip Budkers Perez.
Kappel Propellers
OottzakzAdidhsd
Tip Loadinig (CL'S) Prlopellers
Conicentrated
of The Motorshirp
BOOK: Sisiemar Report. A Supplemento Puhblshing Ltd.
PUBLISHER: Reed Business.
Page Mum: Vol.: Date Published: Sept, 1993
Report Hum: Classuication: Ship Type: Rleferencee Type:

Authoris) Name: Keywords:
Title:
Perez Gonoer Dr. andMr, (3oeoalez-Adadid Energy'Efi'cient Tip Propelers
Retrofitting n ReeferSWri Xappe Propellers
Coiseerstr1edTip IAoadrrg (CLIS)Propellern
0K; SisiensarReport, A Supplement of The Mrrrtship
BOO PUBLISHER: Reed Business Pulihshing Ltd,
Pae. Rum: Vol.: Date Published. Sept. 1993
C6
Reot u.ciseeoitioein: Ship Typo Refeetnce Type:

TOtWe CiozALz-A~d 'apel toienCtpe pel9T
Cacettes04 adng(LT) Pspolxlort
8 0O0K: Sistemar Rep-r. A Supplement of The Motorhiup PUBLISH4ER: Reed Business publishing Ltd,
pas. mum; Vol.: Date Publilshed: Sept.1993
Repot Nm
Ceestlcsiof Shp Tpo:Reference Type.
T ep otle m:la s f c ti n hi y e A u tho r ls ) Na me: Ke y words :
Tle: 'Rakne~otti*L- Dr, . and D. G Pel`*zý3.oflxx F1egyFkeiltIPTipePapllcrs
,
onShiip Hydrody~namicsad FergySaving PUBLISHER:~::N.
0 tOi
BOOK: 1nle M 5 5 1SYMPO~i-
:i i) Q< *4I
Paeg Num: .ol:Date Published: Sept1983
Ship Typet Reference Type:

* Report Hum: Claeeeitcatlion
Authorial Name:Kewrs
This:
Pogo mumý Vol.: Dael Pwllehed:
ship Type: Rolererwe Type:

Report Num: SPtS-0829-27 Chbolliflostioii:
AuthorMB Name: Keywords:
This:
Ree.:M#.fl 9ý Ds~ma7ep
BOOK: PUBLISHER: DTNSRDC
paeg Mum: Vol.: Date Puilished: May 1984
Classiicaotion: Ship Type-, RoleirenceiType:

Report Naumi
Title:
. 4
19th Septemberin Knnlaiasoand/Nneway
BOOK; Pre-eoaudonon0 PUBLISHER:N''
Detw Published: Sept R984 .z
pe"e mum: Vol.;
Clasifitcationl: Ship Type; Relerence Type:

Report Mumf:
Author(s) Namne: Keywords:
* Title:
BOOK: PR.ADS 1989 PUBLISHER-
P9ff Vol.: 3 Daet Published: 1989
Classificationt: Ship Type: ReleorenasType:

Report mum:
Author($) Name: Keywords:
Title:-
, :N M ijesref. . JLandJM&W.QC3oyioeved &ie' Saving D,,vieea
PiIPtrieic niig nain 3
uf7IPmp1idsl.RWh
and Marine Engineers

PUBLISH ER: The Society of Naval Arckutec~s
BOOK: Spring MeetingISTAR Symposium
Pegsi Num: Vol.: Daet Publlished: May 1987
Cleselticallion Ship Type: Rolerence Type:

Report Mum:ý
Title:
7hmAigiitumDvce a~tO, 3 S~ : PEmySaving Dtsices
BOO0K! Marine Popellers andPropulsion PUBLiSHER: Buiterwolh Heinemalill
Paeg Numr: Vol.: Daet Published:
C7
T
Classification: UNCI. ship Typo. Rolaronce ypoeTechnicallReporl
Report Nun,;
Title;
~9 tleE irU~.
Hyr~yel)iCE~cioiy ~iyship's ~,
NI~anuruD. &. if Engle, G P. Plal2er. Adil Bategy Saving De~vices
BOOK: PUBLISHER: Naval EngineerslJounral
Pago Nunt: Vol.: 0ate Published: May 1991
Classification: UNCL Ship Typo: 11-CargulAuxibaiitis Refe rence Type: TechnicalReport

Report: Num:
TRtlW . . . . . i, . . . Eerg
Improtvmingthe Pi. , ilEltWieny a uniorm hipM,
BOOK: Improving liheUndlerwater Efficiec=y OfShip$ oMarine Engineers /Royal 1rsfiiui of Naval
PUBLISHER: Institueofr
Page Nun,: Vol.; 99 Dael. bihd Arl18
Classificalltion UNCL Ship Type: 8- CoagolAuxibanres Reference Type; Techn"clReport

Report Mum:
Name: Keywords.
Til!Author(s)
BOOK: Improvingithe Underwatet Efficienicy of Ships PUBLISHER: Instituteof MarineiEninfieersI Royal Institiute of Naval ... ..
Pee. Hum: Vol.; 99 Dole Published: April 1987
Classification; Ship Type: R~eferente Type:

Repo"t Mum:
Titles:
PUBLISHER: The Socheiyof Naval Architects and Marine Eaigainvers Vai mu"10
BOOK; MarineTeclanology
PeDs Mum;: Vol., 27 No.6i Dote Published: Nov 1990 .'
Clossitloetlon: Ship Typo: Reference Type:

Report Murn;
Author(s) Name; Keywords-
Title: Enrg &-W
:Miftvkv(h jDf. Y. . .io-
of Naval Architects andMarnie Engineers

PUBLISHER: The Society , L8PgCt?
BOOK; 1994 Ship Operations, Management and Economics Sytmposium
Dale Published: May 1994 fosa i
PageNurn! Vol.;
Classification: Ship Type; Rof-aene Type: Rook

Report Num:
Aulbor(s) Name: Keywords: a
Title: regSMPNk*
Shiielcsip fo Wkecl6Olim .Eown Scbneekluih, H1.
BOOK' PUBLISHER: Butterworth A Co;
Oato Published: 19817 :.a

Page Mum: Vol.:
Classification: Ship Type: Referen.e Type:

Repoit Mum.:
Author(s) Name: Keywords;
Title: Sort 14Flow pis liltVortex)
ý_ VotexContol
Bnefts
P eytcs
or Popuion('TOves- nd Tm
PUBLISHER: Ronerdarn. Internatio;nal Penodii..l Press Wake AiL~ipting Fur

BOOK' International Shipbuilding Piogress
Paeg Plum; Vol.: 35 No.41.2 Oats Published: Jul l91111
Classification: Ship Type: Rleference Type:

Report Mum:
Title: StemFk)ConrolbyMnidge ohls I kuntiaK. ow Fins (Bflgc Vortex)
PUBLISHER: WkAidaptng Pill

BOOK: Society of Naval AechitecLs.Japan
Paeg Mum: Vol.: no 691 Outs Published: 19815
08
Classification: Ship Type: Reference Type:
Repoli Hum;
Title:
Agqeoiiagell Lee. K~.1 S,W. Joa..M. Part, and Y, W, Ltt Flow Firs (Bilge Vortex)
An ExperuintalStuy nthe Ship Pt5Vaa14Impio~ll G$lus
HF poiler
Profiled Strut Armns
PUBLISHER: Waite Adapiting uts
BOOK: PRADS 1992
page Hum: Vol.: Date Published: 1992
Classification: Ship Type: 8- Cargo/Atuldiarese Reference Type;

Report tium:
Title: OD
Hll
Aro o"olaNvlAxlaroe Wilson, M,, t ],Flw i ono
Co sadCrurmftPrpfe~~o
BOOK: SNAMETransactioits PUBLISHER: SN/.ME
Page muin; Vol., 90 Dot. Published:
Classificationl: Ship Type: 8i- CargoiAnxihaians Reference Typo:

Report R~um:
Title: Go91hue$sSpoiler
Derm
fhs&l9~rom- Gohe-spoiler als weitteree16allxE sue rbesaru~ns der~
Eittscbsatiberi-Scdtafrni Hatu9
Praumponisnt~il~cschaflen Vesn
BOOK: PUBLISHER: Schiffaltrt-Schlulfttao-Hafen
Page mum: Vol.: 121, No. 10 Date Published: 1994

Report mum:
Author(s) Name: Keywords: 3
Title:
~NsnmLH- el. al: Hiachi-Zodso l Nozl
BOOK; SNAMETrainsactions PUBLISHER: SN/.ME

. '
Page Num: Vol.: Date Published: Nov. 1981
classificationi: Ship Typew Relevanice Type:

Report Rum:
Title: (ZNoSzzle
Himc'
.lUWjOZdn.CUM
ititactiNa HZ no~e: moe effentmln0 adaptitbie
-
BOOK: PUBLISHER: The Motor Ship
Page Num: Vol,: Date Published:. June1981

Report Hum.:
Title:* Tkcmi, K-ihahI.n(R)N~l
'Evaluation ofvriouesty in" o An as th
iawcpropeller aWmfrstactio evc frtbl9Jrvnretof liai Dc M
pmtliv pertoitce ofroistil oi icion
h 0*Mtu ..
BOOK: Shipboaul Energy Conservation Symoltonum, PUBLIBSHR: SN/.MEA
Page mun.: Vol.: Date Published: Sept. 1980 ~:.K.> 7
Classification; Ship Type: 8- Cargo/Asxiliatics Reference Type:

Report Nun.:
Authorial Name Keywords:
Title: HitachijZocen (FMNovS
Ductg
Wake Equa~.lzing
Wake Eqaaiiglkii
ueZAD)
0K: fIlie Naval Architect
BOO PUBLISHER: The Royal Institute of Naval Architiects
Page Rum.: Vol.: Dais Published: April 1986
Clasoleicstlon: Ship Type: Reference Type:

Report Nunm:
Authorisl Name: Keywords:
& Title:
. nZosei OMiZNnzzle
Hitch
Schneeklnlth Wake Eqtlalixing Duels for Twirt-Screw ships Mitsui Integratd buct Immtl~
Wake Equaicting Duct (ZAD))
0K: The Naval Architixte
BOO PUBiLISHER:
aPage Run.: Vol.: Deta Publlshed: Oct 1992
Ciassification: Ship Type: Reference Type:

Report Num;:
Title: btajitkd7mten WH)Nozzle
ThelDesign of an hilergy Saving,WskeAdaitpcd Dottt S,'drcnin. E- .
Mulsw Islegrated Dmue(NIIDP)
WAtEl~qializio DwetCZAD)
PUBLISHER: heldTrondheimt.Norway $ASynvntrefcStetm.
BOOK: 3rd Indl. Symposiumt on Practical Designof Ships andMobile Units
. V
Paeg Nun.: Vol.: I Data Published: June 1987
Classification: Ship Typo: Reference Type:

Report Nun.
Title:
.. ltachi4 zose (H6ZNotile
Hinelnb
The Wake Equalizing Doct
WaeEuaiigDuct (ZAb)
BOOK: Applications; of New Technology in Shipping PUBLISHER: Marine Management (Holdings)
Page Rum: Vol.: Oats Published: May 1989
09
Report Hum: classification: Ship .Type: Atol)Nm:Reference Type:Kewrs
Witke:Eulzn u ~ vlopel
wake~~~~~.
.. Schneckhithl H. Elitachi ZuAien
Mitsui
(HZ) Nozzle
Integrated
.~aldgDxSaeo-eeomn Ducl (M1DP)
Walke Etpilvzig Duct {ZAD)
BOOK: 6th Lips Propeller Symposium PUBLISHER:
Page Humt: Vol.: Dot* Published: May 1986
Classification: Ship Typs: Reference Type:

Report Rum:
Autlhor~s) Name! Keywords:
Title: Hutachi Ecato OMZNozze
lHydwodytinlV Models for the Pesigr of thisEnergy Saving Devikes popovicl, Iý , St, Totoliel. M. Popa,and V
Cea48. Mitsin Integrated Duct IMIDP)
Wake Fquakizing Duct MZAD)
BOOK: PRADS 1989 PUBLISHER:
page Hunm: Vol.: Date Puiblished:1989
Report Hum: Classification: Ship Typo: Atof)Nm-Reference Typo:Kewrs

Title: Auhr11Nme Kyors
K$ClCR
klt~fl
OfDCSC dYIt~aO~uitaonWdson, Mi:, KJLAndueaoo, andCC. tH Low RPJM, IArge Da Proptler
BOOK: TnaasnwrptsorcAv'95 International Symposium onCalitiluco PUBLISHER:

Page Hum: Vol.: Date Published: May 1995
Classification,. Ship Type: Reference Type:

Report Hum:
Title: Low RPM iLarge Dig propellers
Deeomnsi Mainertoele Paijelice, G.
BOOK: lounnallofPower and Energy PUBLISHER: IMechE199I
Page Hum: Vol.: Date Published: 1991
1103 Classification: Ship Type: Reference Type:

Report Mum:
Authorls) Name: Kerywords:
Title- LtawlPM/LaegerleetzrPmpdllrr
Experiments ouproridstive srraagmc leemlrpcmli
uftingsl
widthslow Della Loggia, 3 L Doria. andS.Cappeli
BOOK: PUBLISHER: CEIENA
Page Mum: Vol., Date Published:
Classification: UNCL Ship Type: Reference Type:ýTechnical Report

Report Humn:
t
Title: ler'Desigti
New Prnpie
Suits=eShp Propclker(ývitation Perforiancer Using Avart~d Blade Seetiotia
a11p~stineet.01' I Bailer. JW.., SA), Jesatip. and Y.T. Sbetn
BOOK: Proceedings of theTwenty-Third ATrC PUBLISHER: ATTC

Page Hum: Vol.: Date Published: June1992
41
Classification; Ship Type: Reference Type:

Report Hum:
Title: New Propeller Design
S.V., and P Aniderson
Hlydrodynamic Design of Prcpteleeswih Uncormnliotal (5omehly .Anderson.
0K: Transactions Royal Intitarte of Naval Architectuire

BOO PUBLISHER: RINA
Page Hum: Vol.: Date Published: L987
Report Hum: Classification; Ship Type: Reference Type:

Title:
InPcsatltof the Elusive 'Perfect` Propeller Solution New Propeller Design
BOOK: Marine Lop PUBLISHER:
Page Hum: VOL.: Dnte Published; May 1966
0 10
Classification: Ship Type: ? Reference Typo:
Repo" mum;:
AuthorfS) Name: Keywords:
Titlls:
Wyait, DC., and PAý Chang, 111 Nucoe ,ticmyOthiedFarebotly
Deve~awat and Asaseirtent of Tolt Reistance Op~Iwized flow tfx theAE-36
onCFD andCAD in ShipDesign

BOOK: international Symoposium PUBLISHER:
Pogo Num,: Vol.: Dael Published; Sept. 1990
Claeellfcettlon Ship Type: Reference Typot

Report Hun,:
a Titlls- Author(s) Name: Keywords:
m-Pople Coprto
XOOIK 011interopetie
Tecnoogy b saving pIower withnlkl
BOOK: PUBLISHER: docurnant supplied by TheBritsh Library Documant
Page Nun,: Vol.: Dael Published:
classification! ship Type: - Carge/Auxifiaxies Roe--.nc Type:

Report Nun,:
Title:
Pro2attt..cavituci n iao cUharaterstcs feverlaipin PrQopelles fra ta Ketlen, H~.et al. oicapplugftopeliers
BOOK: PUBLISHER: International Shipbuilding Progress

Page Nun,: Vol.; 19,No. 214 Date Publieshed. June 1972
Classification; Ship Type: Roefernoe Type:

Report Hum:
Titlls: ovarlping- oe-llers
Expprfttal tuy onthe--seg vrapl rpler synlern Min, KS,
Twun skegs~
BOOK: ftb Ups Propeller Syniposituri PUBLISHER:
Page Nun,: Vol.: Onlo Published: May 1986
Report Nun,: Cleassification: Ship Type: Roe-neene Type:

Title:
GeagbtiazW.&, and MI.W. McBrWd Propeller Boss Cap Fin
Perfoarowto Aserueaun~ltofPro~lrRaws CApFin yipe Devlce
BOOK: 22nd American Towing Tank Coflffene PUBLISHER: AlTTU:
Page Numn: Vol.: Dael Published:
Classlificaton; ship Typo: Rolerence 'type:

Report Nurn:
Title:, Propeller ossCp FinP
Propeler 8=Cap Fi EnlacsE:iir~ Onci. K
BOOK; PUBLISHER:
Pago Hum: Vol.: Dole Published:
Classification; Ship Type: 3 - Destroyers Refernc* Type:

Report Hun,: TSC-35.5- I
Title:
for G msTurbline Ships; USS Spuasnce (DD--963) Sea Harlseo A.G., andN. Sanlell Propeller Pitch Scheduling
Efkia of PitchSqbdoing on Pudtisge
Thd&~
BOOK: PUBLISHER: The Scientex Corp.
Pogo Nun,: Vol.: Dol. Puiblished: Nov. 1993
C11
Classification: Ship Type; Reference Type: TechnicalRepom
Report Num:
Title: Propeller Pitch S•el.duiiutg
xpprknee with Cojimila~fble•Pih Propeller$ During Full Scale Pe fonnance W Special Trials itich. M. L., R. J. Stensr•a. and E. L. Woo
Pitch Propellers
Controllablei
BOOK: Proceedings of Ninth Ship Control Systems Symposium PUBLISHER:
Page Mum: Vol. Date Published: Sept 1990
Classification: Ship Type; Reference Type:

Report Num:
Author(s) Name: Keyworda:
Title:
Application Chen, P.Y-ff. ebuld Proplerl
Steam
PostswlelPopusots A DeusgnhMethodan
BOOK: PUBLISHIER: Intatatfional Symposium on Propulsors and Cavitation
Page Mum: Vol.: Date Published: June 1992

Report Rum:
Title:
Design Method AndApplication XannA mmer Sttor Upstream of aInclined Shaft
Propeller and O.Y-H. Chen
Nraloe,:SiL,~3.Mcmhoabo. Stator Upsaxta of Propeger
BOOK:*Trainactioss 23rdAmerican Towing Tank Conference PUBLiISHM AlTT
Vol.: Date Published: 1993

Page Rum;
Ctloliafiation: Ship Type: Reference Type:

Report Num:
Author}s) Name: Keywords:
Title:
S.,itb, 713E.mnd~
K) Petnifter3E~Un~lno rple
Propeliee Erosion Reduticton wMan Asymmetric Ptnwvlr Stator
BOOK: Transactions 23rd American Towing Tank Conference PUBL1SHER: AlTT
Pago lum: Vol.: Date Published; 1993
Clasitfiction: UNCLL Ship Type: Reterence Type: Technical Report

Report Rum:
Title:
Effxciecy
eidPmopeller I Stauor
lFn- Swirl St~ucand M. JM,,and M-M,. Mosaad
Gzalafmy. of Proptelk
Stao Upstream
BOOK: Propeller/ Shafting 91Symepostutti PUBLISHER: SNAME-

Page Mum: Vol.: Dot* Pubilehed: Sept. 1991
Cleifficatlton: Ship Type: Reference Type:

Report Num:
Title:
lidealet, M.., apdodwtrs Stem End Eluths
Resisance Reduction by ' terisibd-Duib,
BOO K: Journel of the Society of Naval Architects of Japan PUBLISHER: JSNAME
Page Plum VoI.: Deat Publlhed: 1980-1982
Clleeificetion: Ship Type: Reference Type:

Report NPum:
Title:
Resitalnee Reduction by Steni-Fad-Bulb La 1-, T Intel,andY. Tsuchiya
Muyua EndBulbs
Slernu
(Second reporf)
BOOK: J. of the Society of Naval Architects of Japan PUBLISER..
Page Num: Vol.: 149 Deta Published: 1981
Classilication: Ship Type; Reference Type:

Report Num:
Title:
Resistance Reducton bySieen-End-Builb Mijyara, IL, T, Inui, Y; Tsucltiya. and H. SieneEnd Bulbs
(First report) Adacli
BOOK: J of t•e Smiety of Naval ArcluiecL•s of Japan PUBLISHER:
Page Pum: Vol.: 148 Date Published; 1980
C12
Report Numn Classification: Ship Type: Reference Type:
Title:Authors Name: Keywords:

,Rsliatsfce Rediuction by Stem-ndEo-Bulb Okamoto, H., A.Tanyka, T aaa
(nurd report) Miyata. 12,Inn,.sod Y. Tlechaya
BOOK: 1. of lf SocielyofNavhJAl ArchiLctsof JapIa PUBLISHER:
Page Num: Vol.: Date Published:
Classlfication: Ship Type: 8-Cargo/AuibanSe Reference Type:

Report Num:
Tile: Stn EdBulbs
y
TSpv a.d........orExist l..l..t..fmEn.On........
...... Me.a.S... Ward, L W..andR.. sdat
X Center for Mauritie Studies

BOOK: PUBLISHER; Webb Institute of Naval Architecture
Page Hum: Vol.: Date Published: Oct 1964

Report Hum:
Title:
SaeMediovds to RedactSe Wave& ... ~ . Yamtio. T_ . two4¶6555IC Tagiuchi. andM SmFternEdBulbs
BOOK: 5dt Internationl Mari Design COnference PUBLISHER:
Classification: UNCL Ship Type: 7 -Patrol Craft Reference Type: Technical Report
Report Num:
Title: Stem RinFtp
t
xPC I Phixetm6oaialShip Tria*lsand Mdel Saperita~stm Cusinem D.S,
Stem l ap Powermgpe~dumane on
BOOK: PATROL '6 Conference. New Orleans. LA PUBLISHER:
Page Hum: VoL.: Date Published: Dec. 1996
Classifictlion: Ship Type; Referenct Type:

Report Num:
Title:
The Effect of StemWee n Shi pweringPerformance Kaftaliuh,G. sod S.CýFishe" StemRlap
aac
Wedge
BOOK: Naval Engineer3 Journal PUBLISHER:.
Classification: UNCL Ship Type: ? Reference Type;

Report Hum;
Title:
theFRO0Caass Cmv. WIL. M, and D .. , Casuelfit StemnRap
Effect cf Storn Flaps on Powtemg Performne of .
StarnWedge
BOOK: Mare Techdology PUBLISHER: Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers
Pegs Num: Voi.: 30 No.1 Dote Published: Ian 1993
C13
Report HNum;Ref #31635 Classification; Stiff Type: Reference Type:
Title:
Twin SternShip for fnergy Saving S)timTo.L. Twin Sings
BOOK: PUBLISHER; Wuhan University of Waler Transportation Engineering
Page Hum: Vol.: Date Published;
Report Hum; clsiicatilelon:; Ship Type: ItI - Passengers/Lantsl Rethiriflee Type:

Title:
Thst~a~n fn~ee
sipoetstl~erPOSEgC S P toa, Y F. Twin Skegs
BOOK; Ship andBoatlInternational PUBLISHER!
Page Hurn: Vol.: Date Published! March 1987
Report Hum: Classification: Stop Type: Reference Type:
Title: Authorfs) Nome: Keywords:

Energy -Saving Shell Buet for M dUl-SCnnw Ships Z. aridZ. )lanbn
Zlialonieng. Twin Skegis
BOOK: Selected Papers ofCSNAME PUBLISHER;
Page Hum; Vol.: 5 Dole Published; 1990
Report Hum; 181 a Classification: UNCL Ship Type: Reference Type: Technical Report
Title:
Study of hic ull15K Clalaf8Ostta am
wt~h Appidt TanilerY Bulk Cairie lt
Hana T-sSt, S0yinoo .X Hahimtot Mi. Twin Skegs
. . .Pdlkai, And Y.Thllada
BOOK: PUBIDLISH Society of Naval Asehitiscts

ER: Karlsax
Page Nut": Vol.; Date Published: June,1981
Repert Nurt; Classification: Ship Type: Reference Type:

Title:
PrmielWeand VanteWheel *,* rlm 0. Vane (Owin)Wheel
BOOK: Second George Weutrbium Memorial Lecture, Journal of Ship PUBLISHER: SNAME
Page Hum: Vol.; 24, No. 4 Date Pubilashd; Dec. 1980
Report Hum: Classification: Ship Type: Reference Type;
Title: , Autholofs) Name: Keywords:

free Rotating Propeller Inaalkel on Ship H., M. Nagotst. Y. Itatasa, K.Onod.
1(5110. Vane(lift) Wheel
and Mi.Yoshioika
BOO K; Marine Engineering Socieiy Bulletin. Japan PUBLISHER:
Page Hum: Vol.: 16. No. 1 Date Published: 1989
Report Hum;: Classification: Ship Typo: Referencet Type:
Title: Authorfs) Name: Keywords:

Propeller Pius VonwWheel, An Unconventional Propubtfnft System BMinrcd, J1 Vanie(Grim) Wheel
on Ship Hydrodynamics andEnergy Saying

BOO0K: tnt. Syimposmum PUBLISHER:
Pego Humn: Vol.: Data Published! Sept. 1983a
Report Hum: Classification: Ship Type: Reference Type;
Title: Author(s) Name: Keywords:

TheGiam-Wtieel Reports andExperiences 2*.. . ormBour. hi.. aridK. J Mnoyne Wheel
Vane (Gruim)
BOOK: HANSA PUSLIS HEFI
Page Hum: VOL.: Date Published: 19814
Report Rum: Classification: Ship Type: Reference Type:
Title: Author(s) Name: Keywords:

Diver face Grbm
dAmage Doughty. P. Vane(Grim) Wheel
A Supplement of Be MotorShip
BOOK: Shtprepasr. PUBLISHER: ReedBusiness Publishing
Pago Hum: Vol.; Date Published: March 1996
C14
Reporl Numn: Classification: UJNCL Ship Type: Reference Type:
Author(s} Name: Keywords:

Title:
WbeleSystetM
Des~ing Vaine deCock, J.V=n (Grun) Wheel
BOOK: PUBLISHER: Schiff& Hafen/Kornmandobruike. Heft

Page Hurn: Vol.: Date Published: Nov. 1989
C15
C16
INITIAL REPORT DISTRIBUTION
No. of Copies
Print PDF Office Individual
1 1 OPNAV N42 Dr. Alan Roberts
I DTIC
NSWCCD Code Individual

3442 (Library)
501 (w/o enclosure)
1 5060 Walden
2 1 5200 5200 Office Files
6 2 5200 Cusanelli, Karafiath

ADA464002

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ADA464002

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ADA464002

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Naval Surface Warfare Center NVAVSEA

Carderock Division WARFARE CENTERS--"

- Approved for Public Release. Distribution Unlimited.

Dominic S. Cusanelli and Gabor Karafiath 5e. TASK NUMBER

Naval Surface Warfare Center

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT

12. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Approved for Public Release. Distribution Unlimited.

17. LIMITATION 18. NUMBER 19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

Front cover design. Descriptions, credits, and acknowledgments.

1.Fudl scale propeller on PC-] 3 Class. Energy efficient tip

3. Model scale small, near surface, bow bulb on 1)1)G-5 1.

4. LPD- 17 Amphibious. Modified from original artwork

CA CA Ship/Model Correlation Allowance

C1,, CTh Propeller Thrust-Loading Coefficient

U.S. CUSTOMARY AND METRIC EQUIVALENTS

U.S. CUSTOMARY METRIC

I inch 25.4 millimeter 10.0254 m (meter)j

1 foot 0.3048 m (meter)

1 foot per second 0.3048 m/s (meter per second)

I inch water (60'F) 248.8 pa (pascals)

U.S. NAVY SURFACE FLEET EVALUATION

References are listed on page 23

SELECTED CANDIDATE SHIP CLASSES FOR ENERGY DEVICE RETROFIT

hNumber of Ships Potential Class Life Cycle

(B) Amphibious Warfare Ships

* Number of ships in class presently active or planned.

SELECTED CANDIDATE SHIP CLASSES GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS

Prime Bow Max Rudder Shafting

CG 47 CP-2 GT NB, BSD 31 2-spade Shaft & Strut

SELECTION OF ENERGY SAVINGS DEVICES

SELECTED RETROFIT ENERGY SAVINGS DEVICES

Category (A) Hull

ENERGY DEVICE APPLICATIONS TO U.S. NAVY HULLFORMS

Figure 1. Resistance reductions due to stem flaps

cc 0.3 _AA E DDG51 0 LSD41

a, 0.2 A FFG 7 0 AO 177J

"" 0 LPD17 W AOE6

0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5

Specific recommendations and discussion with respect to Figure 2 is as follows:

J, and AOE 6. all have bulbous bows.

Stern End Bulb:

ranges; 17.1 to 22.2 knots

Main Strut Barrel Designs:

New Propeller Design. Low RPM / Large Diameter Propeller.

0.95 0 DD 963 A TAO 187

"0. A FFG7 '> AO177J

0.9" , - LPD17 F AOE6

Figure 3. Propeller efficiency for selected U.S. Navy hullforms

Fairwaters. Hub Fins. Rudder modifications:

GENERAL LISTING OF SUB.IECT REFERENCES

U.S. NAVY SURFACE FLEET OVERVIEW

E 000 c)~~~ )e0() (N O. 0

m(I co - rIrL l Ow 0 c : C:0o c o0 , ci C\J

(n to0)Nq( ý O r C'J (D - 0o0) 0)(

- 0 >) 0)c CC)

r -2 C'JC CY)u I) ) 0)CM 10'

co4 . tm( C:- CD

">X cmC 'zCJ

000000 cu. cc ca cocc