1
OUTRIGGER SHIPS WITH TRADITIONAL HULL SHAPE:
AN EXAMPLE OF CONCEPT DESIGNING.
Victor A. Dubrovsky
Abstract.
Introduction.
Twin-hull ship with identical hulls of traditional shape, catamaran, was the first type of
multi-hulls, which was applied periodically from Ancient Ages. And the type was widespread
enough applied from the second half of twentieth century.
Ship with one bigger (main, central) hull and two smaller side hulls, outriggers, is the
second type of multi-hull ships, which is more or less widespread at the last ten-year periods.
As lot of multi-hulls, the outrigger ships usually have nothing near enough prototype for
designing. It means, straight calculations of technical and exploitation characteristics is the most
convenient method of approximately prediction for dimension selection at the early stages of
designing. Such method is proposed below as a part of wide researching of multi-hull ships of
any purposes.
All multi-hull ships and boats differ from mono-hulls by some common specificities, and
each type of multi-hulls differs from the other types by own specificities.
Specificity of multi-hull ships (MHS) in a comparison with mono-hulls:
- great number of types and shape options with various characteristics;
- bigger relative area of deck;
- more or less higher seaworthiness;
- any needed initial stability without any restriction of a hull aspect ratio;
- big above-water watertight volume;
- possibility of wet deck slamming;
- sufficient influence of transverse external loads on strength;
- possibility of sufficient changing of draft by small enough water ballast (if the water-plane area
is small enough)
- in general, absence of more or less narrow prototypes for early stages of designing. [2]
All outrigger ships are divided to two groups. These ships with traditional main hull and
outriggers differ from the ships with small water-plane area (SWA) main hull by sufficiently
higher role of main hull in transverse stability ensuring.
The examined below ships are so named “capacity-carriers”, i.e. they need for relative big area
of decks. The used algorithm can`t be applied for ships, which need for outriggers for
bigger transverse stability only. The shown algorithm was proposed by the author at general
view, and the article contain an example of the algorithm using.
1. Base option.
Littoral Combat Ships of US Navy was selected as the base for an example of concept designing,
Fig. 1.
2
Fig. 1. Littoral Combat Ship of US Navy at trials.
Referring to official data, the ship have following main dimensions and general characteristics:
length overall 127.4 m, beam overall two gas turbines LM2500, two diesels MTU32.6 m, design
draft 4.6 m, full speed 44 kn, sprint speed about 50 kn, standard displacement 2750 T, full
displacement 3100 T, range 4300 nm at 18 kn, two gas turbines LM 25000, two diesels MTU
20V8000, crew 40 +35, 1 x 57 mm gun, 24 Hellfire missiles, helicopter Seahawk MH-60R/S, 2
drones MQ + MQ8C fire Scouts.
The other needed initial data were estimated by photos of external view and was supposed on the
general base of combat and multi-hull ship statistics.
2. Concept designing.
2.1. Previously solutions [4].
Some technic solutions must be selected before beginning of variant designing.
The standard used for US Navy seems most simple and convenient for all types of ships: heel no
more, than 10 degrees, at rest and for side wind of speed 100 knots (for unrestricted region of
exploitation) or 50 knots (for restricted ones).
The transverse stability will be ensured by one outrigger.
Some restrictions of the overall dimensions are not known, except of draft at full displacement,
which is supposed equal to draft of the built ship.
Besides, steel structure, diesels for economy speed and gas turbines as the main engine for full
speed are supposed.
2.2.Preliminary added assumptions:
- number of inner decks in the above-water platform N1 = 2;
- height between the inner decks of above-water platform hD= 3 m;
- part of total platform weight in the full displacement at zero approximation wP = 0.6;
- relative volume of apartments for engines in the above-water platform (vE =0.05 for diesels,
0.1 for gas turbines), the main engines and ship electric station are placed in the main hull ;
- relative part of displacement supply, system, equipment weight in the value of full
displacement at the first approximation ( wS = 0.20);
- specific outlay of fuel on economy speed, kgf per a kWt at a hour, including lubricating oil
outlay ( qF is approximately about 0.235 for diesels, about 0.3 for gas turbines);
- the weight of primary engines (gas turbines with cylindrical gears and high-speed diesels),
will be defined by engine catalogues after power definition; weight of shafts, propulsors,
electric station will be taken into account by engine weight correction by coefficients of
about 1.5 for diesels, about 2 for gas turbines;
- relative volume of a superstructure on the platform vSS = 0.2;
- relative length of outrigger lA = LO/L = 0.4; 0.5; 0.6;
- specific weight of platform metal structure per a cubic meter of the platform inner volume
qW = 0.065 t for steel structures. Hull and superstructure are supposed steel ones.
2.3.Initial data
The minimal needed initial data for outrigger ship designing are:
- needed payload P = 300 t, needed deck area SD= 8500 sq m;
- height between decks in the above-water platform hD= 3 m;
- full and economy speeds vS= 50 knots (at full displacement), vE= 18 knots;
- range R = 4300 nm at economy speed.
2.4. Variant selection of dimensions.
The table shows the next calculations.
3
№ Step Formula Values
1 Relative K1 0.2 0.3 0.4
overall beam
variation
2 Overall length, LOA= {2*SD/ 137 112 97
m [(1+N1)*K1*(1+lA)]} 0.5
3 Definition of WPS= hD* (1.1 + vE )*SD *qWP 746
the
weight of
above-water
platform
structure, t
4 Total weight WP = WPS + P 1046
of platform,
WP , t
5 Ship W0 = WP / 0.6. 1740
displacement
at zero
approximation
, W0, t
6 Design draft d 4.6
selection.
7 Outrigger dO= 0.1*BOA 2.75 3.35 3.9
draft, m
8 Block CB 0.5
coefficient of
the main hull
CB
9 Main hull DMH = 1830
displacement, 1.025*0.95*LOA*B1*d*CB
t
1 Main hull B1= DMH/(LOA*d*CB) 5.8 7.1 8.2
0 beam, m
1 Main hull SWI = 1305 1150 1055
1 wetted area LI*d*(1.36+1.13*CB*B1/d)
estimation, sq
m
1 Vertical hV = 0.085*BOA 2.33 2.85 3.3
2 clearance
selection, m
1 Platform SPP =(N1 +2)*LOA* + lO)*BOA/2 13720 13340 13040
3 plating area, = 2*hD*LOA*(N1+1)
sq m
1 Area of longit. SLB= LOA *(N1+1)*hD 1233 1008 870
4 bulkheads, sq
m
1 Area of transv. STB = 4*BOA*(N1+1)*hD 1330 1752 2145
5 bulkheads, sq + 7*B1*(2d+hV)
m
4
1 Total area of S = SWI + SPP +SLB 17590 17250 17110
6 structure + STB
plating, sq m
1 Average tAV = tMIN tAV= 7 mm
7 thickness, mm
Fig. 2. Average thickness of steel plating vs. full displacement [4].
1 Plating WP= 0.001*S*tmin*q 942 948 940
8 weight, t
1 Equipped hull WH = WP*q1*q2 1884 1892 1880
9 + above-water
structure
weight, t
2 Residual In the dependence from 1.0 1.5 1.9
0 resistance Froude number at full speed
coefficient of and relative length, l= LOA /
the main hull V1/3, Fig. 2.
only
3
CR* 10
12
Fn = 0.5
10
6 Fn = 0.6
Fn = 0.7
4
2 Fn = 0.8
1/3
L/ V
0
6 8 10 12 14 16
Fig. 3. Residual resistance coefficient of a single traditional hull vs. relative length.[3].
2 Residual CRO=CR*I Abt.1.1 Abt.1.65 Abt.2.1
1 resistance
coefficient of
the main hull
5
with
outriggers
4,0 I
2*7.5% outrigers, STA 10,
1/3
3,5 conventional hull, L/ V =8
3,0
2b/L=0.21
2,5
2,0 2b/L=0.31
1,5
1,0 2b/L=0.47
0,5
Fn
0,20 0,25 0,30 0,35 0,40 0,45 0,50
Fig. 4. Interaction coefficient for outrigger displacement 2*7.5% VH at middle. [3]
I 2*7.5% outriggers, STA 17.5,
2,5 1/3
conventional hull, L/ V =8
2,0
2b/L=0.47
1,5
2b/L=0.21
1,0
2b/L=0.31
0,5
Fn
0,0
0,20 0,25 0,30 0,35 0,40 0,45 0,50
Fig. 5. Interaction coefficients for outrigger displacement 2*7.5% VH at stern.[3]
2 Needed power PME=1.15*1.2*0.000069*vS3* 54000 58000 62500
2 of main SWI*[CRO+1.1*(0.075/log(Rn-
engines, kWt 2)2]/0.65
2 Power at PEE= PME*/(vS/vE)3 21000 23000 25000
3 economy
speed, kWt
2 Fuel supply, t WF=1.2*PEE*qF*R/vE 1200 1300 1400
4
2 Main engine WE= PME*qE 1.5*2*17. 1.5*2*17. 1.5*2*17.
5 mass, t 5+ 5+ 5+
2*2*40 2*2*45 2*2*50
=210 =230 =250
6
Fig. 6. Weight of diesels: x - MTU diesels, O – Russian-made, - diesels with electric
transmissions [4]
Fig. 7. Weight of gas turbines with transmissions: 1 – turbine only; 2 – turbine with
cylindrical gear; 3 – turbine with angular gear; 4 – turbine with electric transmission; n =
propeller RPM [4].
2 Full W1=(1+wS)* ( P + 3600 3700 3830
6 displacement, WH+WE+WF)
t
2 Hull depth, m DH = d + hV + hD*(1 +N1) 15.93 16.45 16.9
7
2 Mass center ZG = 0.7*DH 11.15 11.5 11.83
8 height, m
2 Volume center ZV= 0.75*d 3.45
9 height, m
3 Above-water SW= LOA*(DH-d) 1550 1330 1200
0 side area, sq m
3 Design FH= 0.000021*SW*vW2 325 280 250
1 heeling force,
t
3 Design MH= 1.2*FH*0.5*DH 2590 2300 2110
2 heeling
moment, tm
7
3 Needed hO = MH/(0.17*W1) 4.23 3.65 3.24
3 transverse
metacentric
height, m
3 Needed rO= hO + ZG - ZV 11.9 11.7 11.6
4 transverse
metacentric
radii, m
3 Needed area SWPO= 4*rO*W1/BOA2 230 155 120
5 of an outrigger
water-plane,
sq m
3 Beam of an BO= SWPO/(0.7*LO) 4.8 4.0 3.5
6 outrigger, m
3 Displacement WO= 0.5*LO*BO*dO 452 375 330
7 of an
outrigger, t
3 Relative l = LO/WO1/3 8.9 7.76 7.0
8 length of an
outrigger, l
3 Wetted area of SWO = 440 380 350
9 an outrigger, LO*dO*(1.36+1.13*0.5*BO/dO)
sq m
4 Residual CO Abt. 1.2 Abt. 1.6 Abt. 1.9
0 resistance
coefficient of
an outrigger
4 Needed power PO=2*0.000069*vS3* 22100 22200 22300
1 for two SWO*[CO+1.1*(0.075/log(Rn-
outriggers, 2)2]/0.65
kWt
4 Total power, PE =0.8*PMO+ PO 65300 68600 72300
2 kWt
Evidently, the result of these calculations is full set of main dimensions at the first
approximation.
3. The second approximation.
The second approximation will include more detail calculations of masses, intact
stability, needed power. Some estimation of seaworthiness will be possible after these
calculations for definition of operability at desired seas.
Conclusion, recommendation.
These calculations show some common results:
- if the needed deck area is constant, structure weight is approximately the same for
any relative overall beam (at the first approximation);
- evidently, bigger overall beam means smaller area of outrigger decks, and
outrigger length increasing (without changing of the above-water structure
dimensions) is desired for smaller own towing resistance of outriggers;
- without that grows, needed power for outriggers increases with overall beam
increasing.
8
References.
1. Dubrovsky, V., “Specificity and designing of multi-hull ships and boats”, 2016,
Nova Science Publishers, ISBN 9781634846158, USA, 210 p.
2. Dubrovsky, V., Matveev, K., Sutulo, S., “Ships with small water-plane area”,
2007, Backbone Publishing Co., ISBN-13978-09742019-3-1, Hoboken, USA, 256
p.
3. Dubrovsky, V., “Ships with outriggers”, 2004, ISBN 0-9742019-0-1, Backbone
Publishing Co., Fair Lawn, USA, 88 p.
4. Dubrovsky. V, Lyakhovitsky, A., “Multi-hull ships”, 2001, ISBN 0-9644311-2-2,
Backbone Publishing Co., Fair Lawn, USA, 495 p
