Fifth International Symposium on Marine Propulsors

smp’17, Espoo, Finland, June 2017

Effect of Propeller Eccentric Forces on the Bearing Loads of the

Complicated Shafting System for Large Container Ships

Tae-goo Lee, Gi-su Song, Ji-nam Kim, Jin-suk Lee and Hyoung-gil Park

Samsung Heavy Industries Co., Ltd.

ABSTRACT in the twin or double shaft system having a relatively

This paper presents the results of estimation on the higher propeller load compared to the bearing capacity. A
propeller shaft forces and their effects on the bearing number of researches have been introduced to estimate
loads during a straight run and a turning. The 10,000TEU the proper bearing loads under the hull deformation and
class container ships having the conventional single the eccentric load from the rotating propellers. Kuroiwa et
propeller and the contra-rotating propellers are selected as al(2007) proposed the quasi-steady method(Hoshino
the target vessels. The hydrodynamic forces and moments 1985) to estimate the propeller shaft forces during turning
of propeller were calculated with RANS solver. And the with the wake field calculated by CFD based on the
bearing loads were investigated with the elastic alignment manoeuvring simulation. The full-scale measurement of
calculation. propeller forces during turning was performed for the
various ship types and the results were compared to the
The magnitudes of each eccentric forces and moments
calculated values by a commercial RANS solver using the
from the forward and aft propeller and the summation of
moving reference frame by Vartal et al.(2009). In case of
those do not exceed the maximum value of lateral forces
double shaft system, the propeller shaft forces for the
and moments generated by the single propeller in the
straight ahead and turning condition were measured in the
conventional shafting. The propeller hydrodynamic forces
model test and the sea trial, and the calculation method
do not affect the loads of the bearings supporting the
using the unsteady lifting surface theory capturing the
shafts of the contra-rotating gearbox.
general tendency of eccentric forces and moments was
The extreme loads are exerted on the stern tube bearing introduced by Hoshino(1994). In recent years, with the
under the early stage of turning manoeuvre both in the breakthrough of CFD, it has become common to solve the
conventional and double shafting. These extreme loads entire ship and the rotating propeller at the same time.
are about 4 times higher than the static load in the single The flow into the CRP propeller behind the hull was
shafting, meanwhile this ratio between the static load and analyzed using commercial RANS solver with sliding
the extreme load are about 3 times in the double shafting. mesh technique and the difference in thrust eccentricity
The results of this research could provide useful between front and rear propellers under straight run
information to establish the practical design criteria for condition was compared by Paik et al.(2013). In this
the extreme bearing load during ship turning. paper, the propeller shaft forces at the beginning of the
Keywords turning motion were obtained through the RANS solver
Propeller Shaft Forces, Contra-Rotating Propeller, Elastic with sliding mesh technique and compared with the forces
Shaft Alignment, Turning Motion in the straight run. In addition, the elastic alignment
calculation considering the hull deformation and the
1 INTRODUCTION hydrodynamic behavior of oil lubricant was carried out.
The hydrodynamic lateral force of propeller rotating in a As a result, the effect of propeller load on the bearing of
non-uniform wake field is one of the major sources of the each location was investigated for the large container ship
load on the shaft bearings. The appropriate estimation of having the conventional single shaft system and the
propeller shaft forces used in the shaft alignment double shaft system for CRP.
calculation has become more and more important due to
the increasing size of the vessel and the recent 2 ESTIMATION METHODOLOGY FOR THE SHAFT
introduction of the Environmental Accepted Lubricant BEARING LOAD
(EAL). The cases of stern tube bearing damage still have The shaft bearing load can be evaluated by the shaft
been reported in these days although the various alignment calculation. The hydrodynamic forces and
numerical and experimental approaches for the shaft moments of the rotating propeller is one of the major
alignment have been developed to provide the appropriate sources of the alignment calculation as an external force.
design guideline. The risk of the bearing damage is higher The propeller shaft forces during the turning test were
calculated in the flow field reproduced by the
manoeuvring simulation. The bearing load and the turning process have been selected to calculate the
movement of the shaft inside the sliding bearings can be propeller shaft forces. The same actual drift angles as of
estimated considering the stiffness of each shafting the conventional single shaft system were used to
component, the hull deflection, and the propeller simulate the inflow condition for the double shaft system.
hydrodynamic forces.
2.1 Propeller Shaft Forces during Ship Turning
The propeller behind the ship under a turning motion
experiences the inflow changing from moment to
moment. In this paper, the quasi-steady approach
representing the flow condition was introduced to
simplify the problem. Kuroiwa et al (2007) proposed the
actual drift angle to capture the flow angle against the
propeller plane at a specific instant during turning. The
actual drift angle is calculated by equation (1).

 xp  x
    tan 1  r     p  r (1)
U  U

where,
x p : Distance from the propeller to the gravitational
center of the hull
U : Velocity of the ship
 : Drifting angle

Figure 2.1.2 Ship motion during turning circle test in the

sea trial (upper : port turn, lower : starboard turn)

Table 1 Information of the turning rate at three

representative inflow conditions
Actual
Turning Yaw Rate
Drift Angle
Direction (deg./sec.)
(deg.)
Straight Run - 0 0

Yaw Rate Port turn -1.01 22.45

Max. St'bd turn 0.99 -22.15
Port turn -0.80 27.04
Steady Turn
St'bd turn 0.79 -26.20

Figure 2.1.1 Inflow angle into propeller during turning

(Kuroiwa et al 2007) The methodology of the numerical analysis used in this
study is summarized in table 2. There is no strong bilge
vortex in the flow around container ship. Therefore the
The ship motion during turning is simulated based on the realizable k-ε turbulence model is used in order to
sea trial data of similar vessel. As shown in the Figure enhance the convergence of solution. The free surface
2.1.2, the ship in turning motion reaches to the point of was not considered in this numerical simulation because
maximum yaw rate in a short time just after the turning the existence of wave around aft part does not directly
test starts. The eccentricity of propeller forces are higher affect the flow around the propeller. Treating the free
in the steady turning condition, however the rotational surface as the symmetry plane makes it possible to reduce
speed becomes the lowest value when the ship enters the the calculation time. The velocity inlets were introduced
state of steady turn. Therefore, the amount of side forces as boundary conditions of the side planes to consider the
reaches to the highest at the moment of maximum yaw oblique flow into the propeller during turning. The
rate. Three inflow conditions representing the whole
boundary conditions of the entire calculation domain are alignment model, each bearing load is calculated at one
presented in Figure 2.1.4. time. In next step, the outer shaft with two stern tube
journal bearings (aft bush & fwd bush) and the
intermediate journal bearing is modeled and calculated by
Table 2 Numerical method used in present study the advanced elastic shaft alignment. In this model, the
Commercial Code STAR-CCM+ v.9.06 bearing loads of the roller bearings between the inner and
outer shaft are considered as external forces acting on the
Governing Equation RANS
outer shaft.
Realizable k-ε model
Turbulent Model The elastic shaft alignment calculations using the
(w/ wall function) commercial software LILAS have been performed to
Rotation of Propeller Sliding mesh evaluate the bearing load and check the shaft movement
inside the hydrodynamic sliding bearing during turning
Longitudinal length: 7L
Computational Domain process. Andreau et al(2007) introduced the method for
Transverse length: 5L determination of the elastohydrodynamic (EHD) behavior
(L : Ship Length)
Vertical length : 2L of line shafting bearing in detail. The elasticity of the
support structure of shafting is considered as well as the
About 5 Million cells
Number of cells elasticity of the propulsion line shafting in this method.
(including propeller) The global equilibrium matrix equation given by (2) is
Unstructured grid solved using an iterative process to find the nodes
Grid system displacements {u} as the unknowns. We can achieve the
(Trimmer mesh)
distribution of reactions and the corresponding
displacement of each support, the position of the shaft’s
center relatively to the bearings’ center, pressure
distribution, and the minimum thickness of the oil film.

K u   B   F   0 (2)

Where, K  : global stiffness matrix

u  : nodes displacement vector
Figure 2.1.3 Surface and Volume Mesh for CFD Calculation of B  : non linear terms
Contra-rotating Propeller for anti-friction material and oil film
F  : vector of external load
Global stiffness matrix [K] is a combination of partial
matrices :

K   K   K   K   K 
a p m s

Where, K  : shaft stiffness matrix

a
with K u   F 
a a a
K  : stiffness matrix of anti-friction material
with K u   B   F 
p
e
Figure 2.1.4 Computational domain and boundary conditions for p p p
K : oil film stiffness matrix
p
CRP simulation in the wake field behind the ship
m
with K u   B   F 
m m m m
2.2 Elastic Shaft Alignment Calculation K  : support structure stiffness matrix
s
with K u   F 
In order to investigate the bearing loads and the oil film
distributions of the double shaft system, the elastic shaft s s s
alignment calculation was carried out in straight run and
turning condition. In the first step, the inner and outer From this approach, the bearing loads and the oil film
shaft are modeled using the ANSYS (Ver 16.0) in order to characteristics of the journal bearing such as the pressure
consider simultaneously all connections and interfaces by and thickness distribution are systematically calculated
the roller bearings between two shafts. From this considering the eccentric forces by propellers.
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
3.1 Bearing Load Analysis for the Single Shaft System
The propeller shaft forces during the straight run and the

0.650
00
turning were calculated for the single propeller according

0.7
0.6
to the inflow condition described in Table 1. These

50
eccentric propeller forces were used as an external load in 0.700

0.750
the shaft alignment analysis.
As a first step to investigate the characteristics of the flow
field into the propeller, the wake distribution for each ship

0.6 0.550
motion was compared in Figure 3.1.1 ~ 3.1.3. These wake

0.5
0.70

50 0.6
00
fields are the nominal velocity distributions in the absence 0
of the propeller at the propeller plane.

00
The distribution of axial and tangential component of the 0.5

0.700
000.450
inflow velocity during turning is asymmetrical about the
vertical centerline and there is also an asymmetry of the
propeller rotational direction, therefore the magnitude of
the propeller eccentric forces become higher than those in
the straight run case.
Figure 3.1.3 Velocity Distribution at the Propeller Plane
during Starboard Turn (Yaw Rate Max.)
0.6
0.5

00
00

0.7
00

The inflow angle to the propeller blade highly increase in

the lower and port side during starboard turn because the
0.650
0.550

right handed propeller rotates against the tangential flow

0.6
00

0.550
0.7

having the highest speed in this position. The pressure

00
0.750 800

level on the propeller blade passing through the lower and

0.8 .750
0.

0.850

port side region in Figure 3.1.4 shows this tendency well.

00
0

90
0 In case of port turn, the tangential component of flow has
0.
0.8

the opposite direction of the propeller rotation in the

50

0.700 upper and starboard side. The highest angle of attack

occurs in the upper and starboard region according to the
0.9
00 direction of the tangential flow. These are typical trend of
the inflow pattern to the propeller behind the single skeg
ship during turning.
The time-averaged values of the calculated propeller
Figure 3.1.1 Velocity Distribution at the Propeller Plane lateral forces and moments during one revolution are used
Straight Run as the eccentric loads applied on the shafting. Figure 3.1.6
and 3.1.7 show the mean eccentric load generated by the
propeller in the turning motion. The highest value of the
0.60

00

propeller lateral force and moment occur at the moment

0.6
0
0.700

of the maximum yaw rate during starboard turn.

0
.65

0
50

0.70
0.6

0.8
00
50

0
0.65
0.7

0
0.70
50
55 0

0.7
00. .60
0

0.6

0
00

45
0.
0
55
0.0
.6 0
0

Figure 3.1.4 Pressure Distribution on the hull and the

Figure 3.1.2 Velocity Distribution at the Propeller Plane propeller surface during starboard turn.
during Port Turn (Yaw Rate Max.)
 Figure 3.1.7 Propeller Lateral Forces and Moment during
Figure 3.1.5 Definition of the Coordinate System of Starboard Turn
Propeller Forces & Moments

Figure 3.1.8 shows the maximum local pressure at each

The coordinate system for the propeller forces and state from the elastic alignment calculation using the
moments are described in Figure 3.1.5. The same propeller lateral forces. The measurement results of
coordinate system is applied to the conventional single propeller forces during sea trial have been presented by
propeller, the forward and aft propeller in CRP. FX has the Vartdal et al.(2009), however the direct comparison is not
opposite direction to that of the positive thrust for all possible because it is the total bending moments including
propeller cases, and MX has the same direction as of the the weight of propeller. Instead of the comparison of
torque for the right handed propellers (single & aft propeller forces, the maximum pressure value on the stern
propeller in CRP). The direction of torque for the left tube bearing using finite element analysis in the
handed propeller (forward propeller in CRP) is opposite reference(Vartdal et al 2009) is compared with the results
to that of MX according to coordinate system. The of present method in Figure 3.1.8. The general tendency
propeller lateral forces and moments non-dimensionalized of the bearing load changes and the level of extreme load
by the thrust and torque in straight run state are presented are similar in both studies. The maximum pressure under
in Figure 3.1.6 and 3.1.7. The simulation results show the extreme load generated at the beginning of the
good agreement to the tendency expected based on each starboard turn is about 4.5 times higher than the pressure
flow pattern into the propeller. The direction of the peak in the static condition. The pressure distribution of
eccentric load in the straight run and the port turn state is the static condition is calculated without the effect of the
opposite to that of the static load generated by the weight propeller rotation. The pressure peak under extreme load
of propeller. This helps to reduce the load on aft part of exceeds the recommended criteria (below 80bar) which is
stern tube bearing. However, the eccentric load from the established by Bureau Veritas(2015) based on the
propeller in the starboard turn state have the same assumption of a normal straight going operation. The
direction of the moment generated by the weight, shaft behavior inside the aft stern tube bearing and the oil
therefore the load on the aft end of the bearing becomes film thickness at each state is investigated, and the results
maximum. are presented in Figure 3.1.9. There is a consistency
among the magnitude and direction of the propeller
forces, bearing loads, and the shaft behavior with the oil
lubricant.

Figure 3.1.6 Propeller Lateral Forces and Moment during Figure 3.1.8 The Change of the Maximum Pressure Peak
Port Turn on the aft stern tube bearing
The minimum oil thickness at the aft end of the stern bush
under extreme loads are also smaller than the
recommended value by the rule requirement(BV 2015)

Figure 3.2.2 Velocity Distribution at the Forward

Propeller Plane during Port Turn (Yaw Rate Max.)

0.6

00
50

0.7
0.7
Figure 3.1.9 The shaft behavior inside aft stern bush 50

bearing under the propeller rotation condition, Single

0
0.80

0.7
0.800
50
0.650

0.850
3.2 Bearing Load Analysis for the Double Shaft
System

0.
The double shaft system for the contra-rotating propeller
0.3 .450.6
0.

70
0.7

55
0 0 0 50

0
0.3
0

0
00

was designed for the similar size vessel as the single 50

0.5
0.750

00
conventional shaft system. There was a partial change of
hull-form in a stern part for the arrangement of two
propellers and increased shafts. The complicated shafting
is required for the contra-rotating operation, and the
number of bearings also increases for the double shaft
system.
Figure 3.2.3 Velocity Distribution at the Forward
0.500
0.550

Propeller Plane during Starboard Turn (Yaw Rate Max.)

0.7

0
00

0.550

75
0.
0.700
0.500

Three roller bearings were selected to support the load

0.650

between the inner and outer shaft in addition to the stern

0
00
0.75

0.6

tube bushes (aft/forward) and the journal bearing type

0.6

00

intermediate shaft bearings.

0.800
0.
90

0
90
0

0. The nominal wake distributions according to the ship

0.70

50
0.8
0.850

motions are investigated by numerical calculation in the

0.8
0
00

0.

0
6

75

same way of the conventional single shafting case. The

00

0.

investigated plane is located at the forward propeller

position. The conceptual approach to the relationship
0.900
between side forces and moments is helpful to understand
a complicated combination of eccentric forces by contra-
rotating propellers. The side forces and moments from the
right-handed propeller (clockwise rotation looking
Figure 3.2.1 Velocity Distribution at the Forward upstream) have same directions, and the left-handed
Propeller Plane during Straight Run propeller (counter clockwise rotation looking upstream)
generate the side forces and moments having opposite
directions. For example, the higher angle of attack into
the right-handed propeller in upper side of the propeller
disk results in the positive horizontal moment. The sum of
horizontal forces is also has positive value. In contrast,
the sum of horizontal forces in the left-handed propeller
(forward propeller in this paper) has negative value due to
the higher lift force in the upper side of propeller plane.
Therefore the forward propeller generates a horizontal
force having opposite directions to that of the single
propeller in the similar wake field shown in Figure 3.2.1. Figure 3.2.5 Propeller Lateral Forces and Moment during
The aft propeller generates the shaft forces having same Port Turn
directions from the conventional single right handed
propeller in spite of the forward propeller effect on the
inflow to the aft propeller.

Figure 3.2.6 Propeller Lateral Forces and Moment during

Starboard Turn

Figure 3.2.4 Surface Pressure Distribution and Streamline

around Large Container Ship with CRP System

Propeller side forces in the extreme turning condition Figure 3.2.7 Comparison of Propeller Lateral Forces
have different directions to those in the straight run case, between Single and Double Shafting
and some components of moments have opposite
direction between forward and aft propeller. These kinds
of propeller forces maximize the load of bearing located
between the inner and outer propeller shaft, however
reduce the load of aft stern tube bearing. On the other
hand, when the components of side forces of the forward
and aft propeller have same directions, those increase the
load of stern tube bearing closely located to the propellers
as presented in Figure 3.2.10 ~ 3.2.11. There is no
significant difference between the propeller forces during
port turn and starboard turn unlike the case of the
conventional single shaft system. Similar level of bearing
load has been expected in the shaft alignment calculation.
The lateral forces of CRP have similar magnitude to those
of the conventional single propeller, and the lateral Figure 3.2.8 Comparison of Propeller Lateral Moments
moment of each propeller and their summation do not between Single and Double Shafting
exceed the extreme load in the single shafting case.
The elastic shaft alignment calculation supported by the
finite element analysis is necessary to estimate resultant
bearing load on the CRP shafting due to the complexity of
double shaft system. Initial prediction of bearing load
based on the propeller shaft forces only is not easy unlike
the single shafting case. The inner and outer shaft system
are treated separately based on the reaction forces
simulated by the finite element analysis of the whole
double shaft system, because current elastic shaft
alignment system does not support the coupled analysis of
double shaft system. The result of finite element analysis
for the double shafting is described in the Figure 3.2.9.
The value of maximum pressure on the aft stern tube bush
for the CRP system is compared with that of the
conventional single shafting, and it shows that the bearing
loads of CRP system are not higher than those of the
single shafting. The difference of pressure values at each
turning direction is small, this is consistent with the
tendency of the propeller lateral forces and moments. The
maximum pressure and the minimum oil thickness are
much higher than the rule requirement for the normal
running condition, although the pressure peak of CRP is
lower than the simulated value for the single shafting of Figure 3.2.11 The Shaft Behavior inside Aft Stern Bush
the vessel delivered to the ship owner without any claim Bearing under the Propeller Rotation Condition, CRP
on the bearing side.
The mean pressure of each oil lubricated sliding bearing
is presented in Table 3, and it shows that the bearing load
on the aft stern tube increases at the extreme load case
during turning. The negative margin means that the mean
pressure level is higher than the classification criteria(BV
2015) of normal operating condition. Table 4 shows the
reaction forces of bearings located between the inner and
outer shaft and there are large amount of margin to the
allowable load limit provided by roller bearing
maker(SKF 2005).

Table 3 Load on the bearings supporting outsides of

the outer and the inner shaft according to the
propeller eccentric forces and moments (% value to the
static load, mean pressure)
Figure 3.2.9 FEM Analysis Results of the CRP Shafting

(margin to Straight Port turn St'bd turn

criteria) Ahead (Yaw rate max.) (Yaw rate max.)

AFT Bush 54.0% 170.0% 172.7%

(55.5%) (-40.0%) (-42.3%)
FWD. Bush 229.7% 88.9% 92.9%
(7.3%) (64.1%) (62.5%)
No.2
93.5% 105.2% 104.1%
Inter. Shaft
(10.8%) (16.6%) (6.1%)
Bearing
No.1
99.9% 100.0% 100.0%
Inter. Shaft
Figure 3.2.10 The Change of the Maximum Pressure Peak (12.1%) (12.0%) (12.0%)
on the Aft Stern Tube Bearing Bearing
Table 4 Load on the bearings located between hull supplementary design criteria to cover the extreme load
structure and outer shaft according to the propeller limit is necessary, and the result and the estimation
eccentric forces and moments (% value to the static load, procedure of this study could provide useful information.
reaction force)

REFERENCES
(margin to Straight Port turn St'bd turn
criteria) Ahead (Yaw rate max.) (Yaw rate max.)
Andreau, C., Ferdi, F., Ville, R. & Fillon, M. (2007). ‘A
No.3 CR 74.1% 145.7% 77.7% Method for Determination of Elastohydrodynamic
bearing (20.6%) (70.8%) (84.4%) Behavior of Line Shafting Bearing in Their
Environment’. Proceedings of the STLE/ASME
No.2 CR 109.0% 97.7% 107.2% International Joint Tribology Conference, San Diego,
bearing (35.2%) (88.7%) (87.6%) California, USA.
No.1 CR 99.5% 100.0% 99.5% Bureau Veritas. (2015). Elastic Shaft Alignment(ESA),
bearing (37.8%) (87.9%) (87.9%) Rule Note NR 592 DT R01 E.

CR gearbox
Kerwin, J.E. & Lee, C.S.(1978). ‘Prediction of Steady and
101.4% 98.9% 99.1% Unsteady Marine Propeller Performance by Numerical
bearing (aft) Lifting Surface Theory’. Transactions of The Society
CR gearbox of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, Vol. 86,
100.7% 99.4% 99.5% 1978, pp. 218-253.
bearing (fwd)
Kuroiwa, R., Oshima, A., Nishioka, T., Tateishi, T.,
Ohyama, T. & Ishijima, T. (2007). ‘Reliability
The reaction forces on the CR bearings are maintained in Improvement of Stern Tube Bearing Considering
a similar level regardless of the increase of propeller Propeller Shaft Forces during Ship Turning’,
lateral forces except the extreme port turn case for the Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., Technical Review
No.3 CR bearing. Higher load limit criteria is applied Vol. 44 No. 3.
considering the extreme load as a static load at one
Strasberg, M. & Breslin, J.P. (1976). ‘Frequencies of the
instant, therefore the margin to the bearing maker's
Alternating Forces due to Interaction of Contrarotating
criteria(SKF 2005) increases even with the similar
Propellers’.Journal of Hydronautics, 10(2), pp. 62-64.
propeller forces. The introduction of this kind of approach
can be used to establish the practical criteria for the Tecnitas(Bureau Veritas Group) (2008). LILAS v.2.3 –
design of the stern tube bearing considering the extreme User’s Manual, Rev.0. Tecnitas / Bureau Veritas
load exerted while ship turns. Group
Hoshino, T. (1985). ‘Application of Quasi-Continuous
Method to Unsteady Propeller Lifting-Surface
4 CONCLUSIONS
Problems’.Journal of the Society of Naval Architects
In this study, the numerical simulation of the propeller of Japan, Vol. 158, pp. 51-71.
forces behind the ship during turning motion was carried
out and their effect on the bearing loads were investigated Hoshino, T. (1994). ‘Experimental and Theoretical
using the elastic shaft alignment calculation. The Analysis of Propeller Shaft Forces of Contra_Rotating
propeller lateral forces and moments are highest when the Propellers and Correlation with Full Scale Data’.
ship motion reaches near the point of yaw rate peak both Propellers/Shafting `94 Symposium, Virginia Beach, U.S.A.
in the conventional single shafting and the double CRP SKF (2005). General catalogue. 6000EN. SKF KOREA
shafting. In case of single shaft system, the maximum LTD.
propeller lateral forces are occurred during the starboard Paik, K.J., Lee, J.S., Lee, T.G., Hoshino, T., Park, H.G. &
turn meanwhile the highest propeller forces of the CRP Seo, J.S.(2013). ‘Numerical Study on the Effects of
shafting are exerted in both turning directions. The Combination of Blade Number for Shaft Forces and
maximum pressure on the aft stern tube bearing of each Moments of Contra-Rotating Propeller’. Journal of the
shafting system during the turning motion is 3~4 times Society of Naval Architects of Korea.Vol. 50, No. 5,
higher than those in the static condition. The effect of pp. 282-290.
hydrodynamic loads on the bearings located at the stern
part is significant, however the bearings around the CR Vartdal, B.J., Gjestland, T. & Arvidsen, T.I.(2009).
gearbox located in the engine room experience almost no ‘Lateral propeller forces and their effects on shaft
differences according to the change of propeller lateral bearings’. First International Symposium on Marine
forces. The estimated extreme loads exceed the current Propulsors, Trondheim, Norway, pp.475-481
rule requirement for the load on the stern tube bearing
under the normal straight going state. A practical
DISCUSSION

Question from John Carlton

This was an interesting paper in which the multiplying
factor on steady loading of 3 and 4 which is certainly
recognized from work done some years ago on cruise
ships. There we measured values in the region of 3-5.

However, it is noted that the rudder did not feature, how

did you satisfy yourself that the throttling effect of the
rudder, after initiation of the turn, does not have an effect
on the cross flow in the propeller that are induced by the
turning motion of the ship.

Author’s closure
The numerical simulation in this paper is the quasi-steady
method focused on the representative instants. The rudder
has not been included in this calculation because the
change of the propeller lateral forces due to the presence
of the rudder would be not large in the present calculation
assuming a steady state. However, if we consider the
unsteady effect at the initiation of the turn just after the
change of rudder angle the cross flow acceleration could
increase as you commented. Investigation of the unsteady
effect in the very early stage of turn is the major interest
in the future works to find the condition exerting the
maximum load on the bearing, and the rudder effect
should be included in that study.