HYDROFOIL OVERVIEW - A BRIEF TUTORIAL

By
John R. Meyer
INTRODUCTION

The basic principle of the hydrofoil concept is simply to lift a ship's hull out of the water and dynamically support it
on wing-like lifting surfaces, i.e, hydrofoils, in order to reduce the effect of waves on the ship and to reduce the
power required to attain modestly high speeds. Engineers and naval architects have been intrigued with the
possibilities envisioned by this concept for many years. A United States patent for a hydrofoil was defined in the
late 1880's, about the same time as the early airplane and airfoil patents. The earliest record of a successful
hydrofoil flight is 1894 when the Meacham brothers demonstrated their 14 foot test craft at Chicago, Illinois. This
compares with the Wright brother's first airplane flight in 1903. The early attempts to exploit the hydrofoil concept
were frustrated by lack of suitable structural materials and power plants. However, advancement in these areas,
much of it stemming from aircraft developments, have permitted development over the past 30 to 40 years of the
technology necessary to achieve and demonstrate reliable and effective hydrofoil ships for both military and
commercial applications, see Reference [1]. History of early developments and later U.S. Navy programs is detailed
in References [2] to [5].

HYDROFOIL CONFIGURATIONS

Hydrofoil configurations can be divided into two general classifications, surface piercing and fully submerged, which
describe how the lifting surfaces are arranged and operate (see Figure 1). In the surface piercing concept, portions
of the foils are designed to extend through the air/sea interface when foilborne. Struts connect the foils to the hull of
the ship with sufficient length to support the hull free of the water surface when operating at design speeds. As
speed is increased, the lifting force generated by the water flow over the submerged portion of the foils increases
causing the ship to rise and the submerged area of the foils to decrease. For a given speed the ship will rise until
the lifting force equals the weight carried by the foils. As indicated by the terminology, the foils of the fully-
submerged concept

Figure 1-Surface-Piercing & Fully- Figure 2-Foil/Strut Arrangements

are designed to operate at all times under the water surface. The struts which connect the foils to hull and support
it when the ship is foilborne generally do not contribute to the total hydrofoil system lifting force. In this configuration,
the hydrofoil system is not self-stabilizing. Means must be provided to vary the effective angle of attack of the foils
to change the lifting force in response to changing conditions of ship speed, weight and sea conditions. The
principal and unique operational capability of hydrofoils with fully-submerged foils is the ability to uncouple the ship
to a substantial degree from the effect of waves. This permits a relatively small hydrofoil ship to operate foilborne at
high speed in sea conditions normally encountered while maintaining a comfortable motion environment for the
crew and passengers and permitting effective employment of military equipment. It is this desirable characteristic
which has caused the hydrofoil ship development in the United States to concentrate on the fully-submerged foil
concept. The basic choices in foil and strut arrangement are canard, conventional or tandem as shown in Figure 2.
Generally ships are considered conventional or canard if 65% or more of the weight is supported on the front or aft

1
foil respectively. If the weight were distributed relatively evenly on the fore and aft foils, the configuration would be
described as tandem.

HYDROFOIL CHARACTERISTICS

Resistance and Powering

Although the major reason for the employment of hydrofoils is to lift the hull out of the water to reduce the effect of
waves and to reduce the drag at high speed, a naval hydrofoil ship spends a considerable portion of its life
hullborne and must have an efficient hull form to keep the drag low at low speed and through takeoff. Total drag
just prior to takeoff is a significant factor in establishing the power requirement. Careful attention must be paid to
the hull design to minimize this effect. Figure 3 shows a generalized smooth water drag curve for a hydrofoil craft
with its significant "hump" prior to takeoff. Comparison is also made with a typical planing craft to illustrate the high-
speed advantage of the hydrofoil even in smooth water. In order to overcome additional takeoff drag which results
from rough water, a power margin over the smooth-water takeoff drag is required. Since the magnitude of this
margin is a prime factor in the sizing of the propulsion system, it is essential that it not be arbitrarily overspecified.
Tests in design sea states on well-instrumented U.S. Navy hydrofoils show that 20 to 25 percent margin is ample to
permit takeoff in rough water in any direction.

Figure 3-Typical Calm Water Thrust and Drag Curves

2
 Figure 4-Effect Of Sea State On Hydrofoil Speed

Seakeeping

Some of the principle advantages of hydrofoil ships, over all other monohull or alternative ship types are: (1) the
ability of a ship, which is small by conventional ship standards, to operate effectively in nearly all sea environments,
and (2) an improved ratio of power to displacement in the 30 to 50 knot speed range permitting economical
operation at these higher speeds. The submerged-foil ship can maintain its speed and maneuverability in heavy
seas while simul- taneously providing a comfortable working environment for the crew. The ship's automatic control
system (ACS) provides continuous dynamic control of the ship during takeoff, landing, and all foilborne operation. In
addition to providing ship roll and pitch stability, the ACS controls the hull height above the water surface, provides
the proper amount of banking in turns and all but eliminates ship motions caused by the orbital particle motion of
waves. Foilborne operations only become limited as wave height exceeds the hydrofoil's strut length. Figure 4
shows operating data points for three submerged-foil hydrofoil ships in actual sea conditions. The data clearly
show only a modest reduction in speed as wave heights increase. A hypothetical operating envelope is drawn to
represent hydrofoils designed to have a 50-knot speed capability in calm water.

Maneuvering

Besides a significant speed advantage, hydrofoils are more maneuverable and provide a more stable platform than
conventional ships. Foilborne turns are accomplished in a banked (coordinated) fashion. This causes the
centrifugal force required in turns to be provided predominantly by the reliable lift capability of the submerged foils
rather than by the unpredictable side forces from the struts. Turn coordination enhances crew comfort during high-
rate turns because the accelerations due to turning are felt primarily as slightly greater vertical forces rather than
lateral forces. For example, a 0.4g turn is felt as only 0.08g vertical acceleration increase while the lateral
acceleration is zero. Therefore, hydrofoil ships have design turn rates of 6 to 12 degrees per second, two to four
times those of conventional ships, and they can maintain these rates in both calm and rough seas. This makes the
hydrofoil ship a more difficult target for enemy missiles, guns, or torpedoes. The exceptional stability of the
hydrofoil ship makes it a superior platform in which to mount surveillance equipment and weapons while
maintaining crew comfort and proficiency.

3
HYDROFOIL FEATURES

Weight Limitations

Like the airplane designer, the hydrofoil designer must, at all times, be extremely conscious of weight. The hydrofoil
type of craft is weight critical and every pound of weight saved in structure, outfit, or machinery means weight
available for payload and fuel.

The structural engineer, in designing hydrofoils to conserve weight, uses aircraft techniques. Relative to
conventional ships, hydrofoil craft are subject to very high loadings, as caused by high operating speeds. Likewise,
lightweight, high strength materials are used. He also must contend with fatigue and problems of hydroelasiticity,
including both divergence and flutter.

Hull Considerations

The development of a satisfactory hull form for hydrofoil application represents a significant challenge to the
designer. The hull should perform well in the hullborne mode but also during takeoff and during foilborne operation
where impacts with waves are involved. In addition, the hull configuration of a hydrofoil ship must satisfy all of the
requirements for strength, freeboard and intact and damaged stability for any other ship.

Relatively high power requirements for high-speed operation, in common with other high- performance systems,
pay a high performance dividend for achieving a minimum weight structure. Therefore, hydrofoil ship hulls
generally constructed using high-grade aluminum alloys, 5000 series weldable alloy being typical. Structurally, the
hull must have the strength to resist wave impact at high speed as well as distribute the concentrated load at the
strut attachment points. Although hydrofoil hulls may appear quite conventional, the required compromises are
more complex than for a monohull because of the many operating modes of the ship. An efficient hull form for a
lower speed operation requires a narrow beam. However, a righting moment large enough to satisfy the stability
criteria of reference [6] with the foils retracted generally dictates a wide beam. Cresting the tops of waves while
foilborne points toward the use of a deep vee forward and high deadrise.

Another major consideration in hydrofoil hull design is the requirement for good seakeeping characteristics in a
heavy sea. If hydrofoil craft are to operate unrestricted in open ocean, they must be capable of surviving storm
seas in the hullborne condition. Furthermore, in certain missions, it may be expected that the hydrofoil ship will
spend the greater portion of its operating lifetime in the hullborne mode. Thus, it is essential that close attention be
given to the hull seakeeping characteristics. With the foils extended during hullborne operation, which is normal
operation at sea, there is a significant reduction of craft motion, in both the roll and pitch modes which is normally
not heavily damped. Thus the strut/foil system gives hydrofoil craft hullborne motion characteristics of ships having
much larger displacement.

Foil Systems

Foil variable lift is obtained by either trailing edge flaps or variable incidence of the entire foil as illustrated in Figure
5. A fundamental limitation is imposed by the so-called "square-cube" law, which impacts the growth potential of
hydrofoil ships. The lift developed by the foils is proportional to their planform area (the square of a linear
dimension), whereas the weight to be supported is proportional to a volume (the cube of a linear dimension). It
follows that as size of the hydrofoil is increased, the foils tend to outgrow the hull. Aircraft solve this problem by
increasing speed and wing loading as size is increased, but practical hydrofoil speeds are limited by cavitation. In
the early period of hydrofoil development it was felt that an increase in the foil and strut weight fraction by direct
application of the square-cube law would inherently limit hydrofoil size.

4
 Figure 5 - Hydrodynamic Force Control

Figure 6 - Strut and Foil System Weight Trend

More detailed design studies show that foil system weight fractions increase only slightly with displacement, Figure
6. The principal reasons why the weight fraction does not increase as might be expected is that required strut length
varies with design sea state, not ship size, and larger foils are structurally more efficient. For hydrodynamic
efficiency, it is desirable to use as high a foil aspect ratio (span/chord) as possible. The PHM aft foil extends almost
10 feet on either side of the hull. Thus, a camel is normally used to hold the ship away from the pier for mooring.
When no camel is available the ship must be moored across the end of a pier or the transom of a larger ship with
the stern overhanging. PHMs have occasionally nested bow to stern. As ship size increases and foils grow relative
to the hull and in actual dimension, practical considerations dictate efforts to limit the span. The trend will be to
move toward tandem foil configurations to divide the weight more evenly between the forward and aft foils.

Propulsion Systems

Modern hydrofoil ships have been made possible by the development of lightweight diesel engines and marinized
gas turbine engines. Most of the European commercial ships using fixed surface-piercing foil systems have used
lightweight diesel engines driving subcavitating propellers by means of an angled transmission system. This
combination provides simplified construction, relative ease of maintenance and low cost. However, the
comparatively high specific weight (6-8 pounds per horsepower) of the diesel engines and higher overall drag have
resulted in practical design speeds of these ships of about 35 to 40 knots.
Existing aircraft gas turbine engines slightly modified and coupled with specially designed free powered turbines are
available in sizes with power ratings up to about 30,000 horsepower and specific weights of around 0.5 pounds per
horsepower. The newer large engines employing blade cooling techniques have specific fuel consumption rates at
their design power about equal to diesel engines. Gas turbine engines have been used in all major U.S. military
and commercial hydrofoil ships permitting practical design speeds greater than 40 knots. Propellers are the most

5
efficient propulsion device available for operating over the subcavitating speed range of current hydrofoil ships. The
power transmission systems required when using fully submerged foil systems consist of right angle bevel gears,
flexible shafts and possibly a speed reduction gearbox in the propeller transmission pod. See Figure 7 as an
example.

Figure 7 - PHG-2 FLAGSTAFF Propulsion System

Figure 8 - PHM Waterjet System

Problems encountered with gear transmission systems in early hydrofoil ships led to interest in waterjet propulsion
systems. While not entirely eliminating the need for gearboxes, these systems consist of underwater inlets, water
ducts in the struts, a pump located in the machinery spaces and an above-water exhaust nozzle. The U.S. Navy's
PHM waterjet system is shown on Figure 8. The price paid to achieve these less complex waterjet systems is a
decrease in propulsive efficiency of about 20% at 45-50 knots and considerably more at takeoff speeds along with
an increase in propulsion system weight due to the water carried in the system.
6
Automatic Control System

As noted earlier, surface-piercing hydrofoil configurations are self-stabilizing in both pitch and roll and thus do not
require an automatic control system. However, to reduce the inherent reaction to rough seas, a number of ships
have added trailing-edge flaps to the surface-piercing foils and have used autopilots for ride improvement.

In the United States, full automatic control of submerged foils has been deemed necessary to attain the seaway
performance desired for ocean-going hydrofoil ships. Typically, control is accomplished by positioning trailing-edge
flaps on the forward and after foils and by rotating the swiveled forward strut (rudder), or by moving the entire foil
surface and by using the power driven aft strut as a rudder. See Figures 9 and 10 for schematic and pictoral
diagrams of a control system. The control surfaces are positioned by means of conventional electrohydraulic
servos. The control system motion sensors consist of: 1) a vertical gyro which measures craft pitch and roll angular
motion, 2) a rate gyro which measures craft yaw rate, 3) three vertical accelerometers, one accelerometer being
located approximately on top of each strut (the two aft accelerations work differentially to provide roll angular
acceleration feedback, and they work in unison to provide pitch and heave acceleration feedback), and 4) a height
sensor which measures the height of the bow above the water surface. The manual inputs consist of a foil depth
command, which the helmsman uses to select any desired foil depth (or flying height), and the helm, which
introduces the craft turning commands.

Figure 9 – Simplified Hydrofoil ACS Schematic

The ACS provides continuous control during takeoff, landing, and all foilborne operations. The pitch, roll, and
height feedback loops provide automatic stabilization of the craft. The craft is automatically trimmed in pitch by the
pitch feedback, and roll trim is accomplished by helm inputs. To steer the ship, the helmsman simply turns the
helm, and the ACS automatically maintains a coordinated turn, with turn rate being proportional to helm deflection.
ACS system requirements and operation are discussed in detail in References (7), (8), and (9).

7
 Figure 10 - Typical Hydrofoil ACS

Hydraulic System

The hydraulic and automatic control systems are worthy of mention because: 1) they have proven reliable and
functionally well suited for a hydrofoil ship, 2) they combine proven aircraft system equipment applications, and 3)
they are essential to all operations: foilborne, hullborne, and docking. Because the hydraulic systems are crucial to
both foilborne and hullborne operation the design should employ multiple levels of redundancy to assure continued
operation in the event of system failures.

On the PHM, for instance, four separate systems supply the required power to the various hydraulic equipment
users which include the foilborne and hullborne control actuators, strut retraction and lock actuators, bow thruster,
anchor windlass, and emergency fuel pump. Systems No. 1 and No. 2 supply hydraulics to the forward part of the
ship while systems No. 3 and No. 4 supply the aft part. Two separate supply systems feed each user with
provisions included to transfer (shuttle) the user from its primary supply to its alternate supply in the event of loss of
primary supply pressure. The hydraulic systems of the PHM operate at a standard 3,000psi (20.68 MN/m2)
constant pressure. Proven aircraft hardware, mostly from the Boeing 747 aircraft, was used where possible. The
hydraulic pumps, tube fittings, tubing material, and filters were all taken directly from the 747. In the case of the
foilborne and hullborne steering actuators, an automatic shuttle valve was specifically developed for the hydrofoil
program which rapidly transfers the user actuator from a failed supply to the alternate, thus assuring continued safe
foilborne operation. The hydraulic actuators on the PHM were for the most part specifically designed and developed
for this program. The four foilborne control actuators, the hullborne steering actuator, two hullborne thrust reverser
actuators and the strut retraction actuators all were designed, manufactured and qualified to military specifications
including rigorous environmental and life testing.

The hydrofoil program pioneered the use of a new hydraulic fluid, a synthetic hydrocarbon. This new fluid provides
a much greater resistance to fire and explosion than its predecessor. At the same time it overcomes the serious
shortcomings of phosphate ester base fluids which have proven to be incompatible with the saltwater environment.

8
REFERENCES

[1] "Modern Ships and Craft", Special Edition of Naval Engineers Journal, pp. 142-199, February 1985.

[2] Oakley, Owen H., "Hydrofoils--A 'State-of-the-Art' Summary," Proceedings of the Hydrofoil and Air Cushion
Vehicles Institute of Aerospace Sciences, Washington, D.C., September 1962 .

[3] Ellsworth, William M., "The U.S. Navy Hydrofoil Development Program-A Status Report," AIAA/SNAME
Advanced Marine Vehicles Meeting, AIAA Paper Number 67-351, May 1967.

[4] Lacey, Ralph E., "A Progress Report on Hydrofoil Ships,"Quarterly Transactions of the Royal Institute of Naval
Architects, Volume 1, Number 1, January 1965.

[5] Johnston, Captain Robert J. USNR (Ret), "History of U.S. Involvement in Developing the Hydrofoil," First
International Hydrofoil Society Conference, Ingonish Beach, Nova Scotia, Canada, July 1982.

[6] Sarchin, T.H. and L.L. Goldberg, "Stability and Buoyancy Criteria for U.S. Naval Surface Ships," Transactions
SNAME 1962.

[7] Vogt, James E., "Automatic Control of the Hydrofoil Gunboat, Tucumari," AIAA 2nd Advanced Marine Vehicles
and Propulsion Meeting, AIAA Paper Number 69-729, 1969.

[8] Stark, D.R., "The PHM Automatic Control System," SAE National Aerospace Engineering and Manufacturing
Meeting, San Diego, California, October 1974.

[9] Johnston, R.J. and W.C. O'Neill, "The Development of Automatic Control Systems for Hydrofoil
Craft,"International Hovercraft, Hydrofoil and Advanced Transit System Conference, Brighton, England, May 1974.