Applied Ocean Research 42 (2013) 105113

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Applied Ocean Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apor

Review

Hydrodynamic analysis techniques for high-speed planing hulls

Reza Yousea , Rouzbeh Shafaghata , * , Mostafa Shakerib
a
b

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Babol Noshiravani University of Technology, Babol, Iran

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 11 June 2012
Received in revised form 9 May 2013
Accepted 10 May 2013
Keywords:
High-speed planing hull
Analytical technique
Experimental technique
Numerical method
Benchmark table

a b s t r a c t
A planing hull is a marine vessel whose weight is mostly supported by hydrodynamic pressures at highspeed forward motion. Its high-speed character has made it popular and thus the interest for planing hulls
for military, recreational and racing applications is progressively rising. The design and analysis procedure
for high-speed planing hulls, due to their performance and speed requirements, is very important. Access to
a fast, accurate technique for predicting the motion of these hulls plays a signicant role in improvement in
this eld. Over the past several decades, numerous investigations have been done on hydrodynamic analysis
of high-speed planing hulls. In this study, the existing techniques for analysis of these hulls are reviewed.
Understanding the strengths and limitations of these techniques will help researchers and engineers select
the most appropriate method for optimal design and analysis of a hull. To present a comprehensive study on
the existing techniques, they are classied into two major categories: analyticalexperimental and numerical
techniques. The numerical techniques are further divided into methods for boundary value problems and
domain-dependent problems. Each technique is applicable only for a limited range of cases.

c 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Nowadays, high-speed vessels are used for military, recreational,
racing, and transportation purposes. The number of high-speed hulls
has signicantly increased in recent years owing to their speed and
performance. Accurate analysis of the hull behavior in motion plays
an important role, mainly due to the signicance of their optimum
and reliable operation under a variety of sea conditions. The structural
design of these hulls is also important as it has direct effects on their
weight, cost and the load they can transport. The need for developing
new concepts in the design of these hulls is becoming indispensable.
Hydrodynamic forces on the high-speed hull, during its forward motion, support most of its weight and thus lift a large portion of the hull
out of water. Dynamic behavior of a hull in waves mutually alters its
hydrodynamic performance. As the hull advances in water, both its
underwater hydrodynamics and above-water aerodynamics affect its
motion and thus contribute to the dynamic behavior of the hull.
For marine vessels that move in the displacement mode, the wavemaking drag increases signicantly with speed, requiring a higher
level of power. Optimum design of the ship architecture can decrease
the hydrodynamic drag at higher speeds. Planing hulls have characteristics that distinguish them from other types of hulls. Understanding the characteristics of the hull is important in making an accurate
prediction of the behavior of the planing hull under various operating

* Corresponding author. Tel.: + 98 912 376 7507.

E-mail address: rshafaghat@nit.ac.ir (R. Shafaghat).

c 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

0141-1187/$ - see front matter 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2013.05.004

conditions. One of the greatest challenges in evaluating the performance of planing hulls is to obtain accurate and practical results from
hydrodynamic analyses.
The emphasis of this study is to evaluate the existing hydrodynamic analysis techniques and determine the applicability of each
method. A brief description of the high-speed planing hull is rst presented. Research studies in this eld is then reviewed and classied.
Finally, the applicability and limitations of each analysis method are
presented in a benchmark table.
2. General specications
In a planing vessel, hydrodynamic pressure distribution on the
hull creates a lift that supports a signicant portion of its weight.
Hydrodynamic pressures also affect the stability of these hulls. In
some cases, the hull speed exceeds 60 knots. At lower speeds, the hull
displaces water to move forward. As the speed increases, a lift force
is generated, which eventually supports the hull and moves it out of
water. As the wetted surface area decreases, the hydrodynamic lift
rises further.
There is a point at which the hydrodynamic lift balances the weight
of the hull. Under this situation, the buoyancy forces decrease with
the increase of hydrodynamic forces. In the displacement mode, to
achieve a higher speed, a larger engine power is needed. However,
as the vessel shifts to the planing mode, the hydrodynamic forces
produced by the submerged portion of the vessel lift the hull toward
the water surface and thus cause a faster motion (Fig. 1). The vessel in
the planing mode has a higher efciency and thus requires less power
for the same forward speed. This is because the wetted surface area

106

Reza Youse et al. / Applied Ocean Research 42 (2013) 105113

Fig. 3. Schematic of a planing hull.

Fig. 1. A photograph of a high-speed boat in the planing mode.

becomes impossible. Although experimental tests are the most reliable way for modeling these ows, these techniques are very costly
and data are achievable only for a limited number of cases. The inherent limitations of analytical and experimental techniques have
motivated the researchers to use computational uid dynamics (CFD)
methods in recent years.

3. Geometric characteristics

Fig. 2. Hull resistance as a function of speed, indicating the three modes of motion.
Graph reproduced from [1].

and consequently the skin friction decrease.

Fig. 2 shows the hull resistance behavior in the three conventional
modes of motion (displacement, semi-planing (transition), and plan
ing) as a function of the loaded hull Froude number ( F r = V / gL,
where V is the forward velocity (m/s), g is the gravitational acceleration (m/s2 ), and L is the length of the hull at the waterline (m)). The
Fr of the hull in the displacement mode is less than 0.5. The hull
speed beyond this falls within the hump region and is a transition
between displacement and planing modes. Once Fr exceeds 0.85, it
shifts to the planing mode. In comparison with other types of hulls,
the performance of the planing hulls strongly depends on the location of its center of gravity. The hull experiences a different set of
conditions in each of the aforementioned mode. For instance, the hull
motion in the displacement mode is very similar to the motion of
displacement hulls.
In the semi-planing mode, the hull shifts from displacement to
planing mode and the Froude number stays less than 0.85. Similar
to the displacement mode, the trim of the hull, wetted surface area,
and drag all increase in this case. To achieve the planing mode, the
hull has to overcome a so-called resistance barrier (Fr = 0.5), which
requires a relatively high power. The practical upper limit for the
semi-displacement mode occurs when Fr reaches 0.85. The hull will
not shift to the planing mode if enough power is not supplied by the
vessel engine. As the Froude number increases, the trim of the hull
gradually decreases and tends to a constant value.
In the planing mode, the hydrodynamic lift and buoyancy forces
support approximately 95% and 5% of the hull weight, respectively. In
this mode of motion, the ow around the hull becomes two-phase and
the solution of the governing equations using analytical techniques

Planing hulls have a number of common geometric characteristics

which include the dead-rise angle, chine, and spray rail (Fig. 3).
The deadrise angle is dened as the angle between the bottom
of the hull with the horizontal (Fig. 3). According to this denition,
the hulls with a at bottom have a deadrise angle of zero. Vessels
with a deadrise angle of zero move constantly and comfortably in
still water; however, in rough waters, they experience slamming. In
the event of slamming, the passengers will be uncomfortable and, in
extremely rough waters, slamming can hurt the passengers and cause
severe damages to the hull and the equipment onboard. The hulls
with a non-zero deadrise angle, on the other hand, break the water
and move more smoothly in both waters and are lifted to the water
surface while moving forward. Selecting a correct deadrise angle can
help stabilize the hull and facilitate a smoother ride. It also reduces
the wetted area and drag in the planing mode. To minimize slamming
effects, hulls usually come in a V-shaped structure. It should be noted
that hulls with a at bottom have a much higher drag compared
to their V-shaped counterparts. As the hull advances in water, the
stern is the last section that comes out of water and is the rst to
touch the water on its way back. Therefore, larger sterns result in
larger slamming effects. Slamming can be considerably reduced with
increase in deadrise angle.
The intersection of the bottom and side of the hull forms a line
that is called a chine. The chine becomes harder as the angle between
the side and bottom surfaces increases. A chine can cause a smoother
hull motion at higher speeds and in turbulent waters. It is also an
important factor in keeping the hull more stable. In addition, a chine
cuts the water and reduces the wetted area, which in turn, reduces
the drag force and increases the speed.
Spray rails can improve the efciency and performance of highspeed planing hulls. The shape, size, and location of the spray rails
have important effects on their effectiveness. Spray rails redirect the
upcoming water and conne it through the bottom of the hull and
thus cause a lift force. They improve the efciency by reducing the
wetted area. Spray rails also increase the longitudinal and transverse
stability of the hull. Another advantage of spray rails is that they
protect the side walls from incident water. Spray rails come in a
variety of shapes; however, they all share a triangular cross-section.
Spray rails have sharp edges in order to prevent stagnation points for
the upcoming water.
Planing hulls have three main cross-sections: convex, concave,
or at (Fig. 4). Convex cross-sections are more popular in practice
than the other two shapes. The convex hulls are very strong and,
compared with other cross-sections require less material, causing the
hull to become lighter. Another advantage of this shape is its reduced
slamming loads [2].

Reza Youse et al. / Applied Ocean Research 42 (2013) 105113

107

Fig. 4. Common cross-sections used in high-speed planing hulls. Left: convex; middle: concave; and right: at [2].

4.2. Boundary element method (BEM)

Fig. 5. Hydrodynamic analysis techniques for planing hulls.

4. Analysis techniques for planing hulls

The design of a planing hull requires tools to allow for estimating
the dimensions, propelling power, hydrodynamic drag, and predicting
the hull motion behavior. Due to the complexity of the behavior of
these hulls, hydrodynamics of the ow around them has not been
fully understood. Hydrodynamic analysis of these hulls is much more
complicated than displacement hulls due to the spray drag, wavemaking drag, free-surface simulation, and the two-phase nature of
the ow. The best and most accurate results are from experiments
that have been conducted over the past several decades. Numerical
techniques can be used to determine the ow unknowns and predict
the hydrodynamic behavior of these hulls. Numerical methods can be
instrumental at different stages of the planing vessel design specially
in selecting the optimum hull form. In general, there are a variety of
theoretical and numerical techniques for hydrodynamic analysis of
planing hulls, which can be classied as in Fig. 5.
The main objective of this study is to describe the numerical techniques that are more popular among researchers. FVM and BEM are
the dominant methods for viscous and potential ows, respectively.
However, FDM and FEM are among the least popular methods for
hydrodynamic analysis of the ow around planing hulls. It should
be emphasized that the FVM was originally developed in the form
of FDM [3]. Among the methods presented in Fig. 5, FEM and FDM
have limited applications in hydrodynamic analysis of planing hulls.
Therefore, in the following sections, among the methods based on
viscous ow, only FVM will be described.
4.1. Analyticalexperimental techniques
There are a limited number of techniques for analysis of planing
hulls. Savitskys design and analysis method is among the most popular techniques. In 1964, Savitsky [4] conducted a series of tests on
various wedge-like hulls and obtained semi-empirical correlations
for estimating lift and drag forces. He obtained equations through a
regression procedure and suggested a method for estimating the drag
of high-speed planing hulls. To use his equations, the hull is assumed
to be in the planing mode, which in turn, requires that the pressure
applied to the bottom of the hull support the entire weight and thus
neglect buoyancy forces.

Fluid motion is described by the continuity equation in conjunction with the NavierStokes equations. These equations are based
on the conservation of mass and momentum, respectively. In general, solution of NavierStokes equations is both complicated and
time-consuming. In practice, to simplify the governing equations, a
number of assumptions are made. Simplication of governing equations limits their applicability. In inviscid ows, in most applications,
the potential theory is used, which assumes negligible variations of
properties in the computational domain.
BEM uses the properties of the Greens second identity to solve
a set of differential equations. In this technique, the ow eld is not
separated from the boundary; the equations are solved only on the
boundary. This method reduces one dimension of the problem, leading to fewer unknowns. As a result, less memory and time are needed.
In BEM, the integral over the entire uid region can be related to
the integral over the boundary, which results in easier meshing and
higher computational speed.
Due to the semi-analytical nature of this method and the use of
integrals, the function for the Laplace equation is exact. Discretization
of boundaries can be a source of errors in BEM. Using this technique,
partial velocity potentials are rst calculated, followed by the total
potentials. Therefore, by calculating the partial potentials, velocity
is obtained by differentiation. Knowing the velocities, pressures and
forces are computed. Although BEM can considerably reduce the analysis time and provide reasonable solutions compared to the viscous
ow based techniques, they lead to signicant errors for problems in
which viscous effects are not negligible and/or wave breaking occurs.
4.3. Finite volume method (FVM)
In FVM, integrals over the control volume are discretized in the
computational domain. NavierStokes equations (3 equations) and
continuity for an incompressible ow have a total number of 4 unknowns (3 velocities and 1 pressure). These equations can be solved
simultaneously or iteratively. In the simultaneous method, a set of
equations are solved for the four unknowns. This method is costly
and requires a relatively high memory and computational time. Due
to the high volume of computations in this method, the computer
speed plays an important role [3].
FVM has the following algorithm:
1. Integration of the governing equations over the control volume.
2. Discretization, which includes replacing approximations for integral terms and converting the integral equations to a set of algebraic equations.
3. Selection of a method to solve the set of equations.
The rst step, i.e. integration over the control volume, distinguishes FVM from other CFD methods.
The problem modeling can be done in three steps: calculating the
velocity and pressure distributions, modeling the free surface, and
simulation of the hull motion. To obtain the velocity and pressure

108

Reza Youse et al. / Applied Ocean Research 42 (2013) 105113

distributions, NavierStokes equations are solved. Normal stresses

(pressure) and tangential stresses (due to viscous forces) are then
calculated from pressure and velocity distributions. Forces and moments are obtained from normal and tangential stresses. Furthermore,
linear and angular displacements are calculated using conservation
of linear and angular momentum equations.
In FVM, solution of the governing equations is signicantly inuenced by the type and quality of the mesh, type of ow and turbulence
model (if used), and solution algorithm of the velocity and pressure
elds. The rst step in numerical simulation of the ow around a
high-speed planning hull is to create an appropriate mesh. There are
a variety of meshes, each of which having advantages and drawbacks
depending on the specic problem. Based on the geometry of the
problem, a structured or unstructured mesh can be used. Structured
meshes are much simpler and require less information for discretization and computation of the mesh. However, these meshes encounter
difculty when they are used for complex geometries. On the other
hand, unstructured meshes are more efcient but require high capacity storage for the mesh data. To resolve this, multi-block meshes are
used. The quality of the mesh is improved by increasing the resolution of the mesh in regions with a high gradient of ow parameters.
Multi-block meshes improve the accuracy of the solution [5].
Degree of freedom of the hull, motion amplitude and relative motion between the hull and uid play an important role in selecting
a suitable mesh. Cartesian, overset, and body-attached meshes are
mainly used by researchers in this eld. In some cases, remeshing
is also used to improve the simulation results. Cartesian meshes are
xed and the effect of the motion of the structure is applied to the
discretized equations or the shape of the cells on the boundaries.
However, in overset method, a number of overlapped meshes are
used to discretize the computational domain. In this technique, one
simple mesh covers the entire domain, and for each moving section
or complex geometry, a separate mesh is used.
In remeshing, an unstructured mesh containing the boundaries
is rst created. Linear and angular displacements are then applied
to the structure. Given the initial computational domain, which is
kept xed throughout the solution, and displaced boundaries of the
structure, a new mesh on the entire domain is created. In the attached
mesh technique, by computing the linear and angular displacements,
the structure is rst displaced, and then the undeformed mesh is
displaced accordingly. This method is appropriate in the simulation
of 6 degree-of-freedom small amplitude motion [6].
The ow regime around a high-speed hull is normally turbulent. In
turbulent ow, transport quantities such as momentum and energy
uctuate at a high frequency. Simulations of these uctuations are
time consuming and numerically expensive. Instead of direct simulation, the governing equations can be averaged over time (RANS
equations) to reduce the time and expense. The averaged equations
have additional unknowns, which can be obtained using turbulence
models.
In the analysis of turbulent ows, it is very important to select an
appropriate model. In hydrodynamic analysis of high-speed hulls, k
and k have mostly been used by researchers. k model is popular due to its accuracy both for simple and complex ows including
recirculation, streamline curvature and swirl ows. The k model is
further divided into three types: standard, RNG (re-normalization),
and realizable. While the standard model is used in high Re ows,
the RNG theory uses a differential equation to account for viscous
effects, which become important in low Re ows. However, effective use of this model depends on appropriate behavior of the ow
near the wall. The RNG model has a signicant improvement over the
standard model specially where the streamlines are highly curved
and thus vortices and circulation exist. In ows with reduced velocity and separation due to reversed pressure gradient, RNG performs
better than standard k. k models lead to more accurate results
in regions with higher Re. However, near the wall, where the Re is

relatively small, it runs into troubles and results in less accurate estimation of the ow parameters. Therefore, k model can be used
to predict turbulent variables near the rigid wall using ner mesh
elements.
In control volume method, there are two methods to solve the
NavierStokes and continuity equations: simultaneous and iterative
methods. In simultaneous method, all ow variables (velocities and
pressure) are rst discretized to obtain a system of algebraic equations. These linear equations are then simultaneously solved. This
method is very expensive and requires powerful computers. In this
method, the velocity eld is st solved and the pressure is then computed. On the other hand, in iterative method, the velocity and pressure terms are discretized in two ways: estimation-correction and
partial step. Both of these discretization methods are usually used in
hydrodynamics problems and are relatively accurate. There are different methods for discretization of the velocity and pressure terms.
Among them, 1st and 2nd order up-wind are mostly used in this eld.
In comparison to the 1st order up-wind discretization, the 2nd order
up-wind is less stable but more accurate.
On the convergence of the solution, it should be noted that in addition to the residuals plots, another criterion should be monitored. For
instance, in problems in which hydrodynamic forces are important,
variations of drag and lift with time can be plotted to monitor convergence. Or, if the maneuverability of the hull is important, variations of
heave and pitch of the hull are usually monitored, as in [7]. A benchmark table, summarizing major velocity-pressure coupling schemes,
meshes, and turbulence models used in numerical investigations on
planning hulls, is presented in Section 6.
5. Review of research on high-speed planing hulls
A great deal of theoretical and experimental research has been
done on high-speed planing hulls since early 20th century and a number of techniques have been developed for hydrodynamic analysis of
these hulls. Earlier research on hydrodynamics of these vessels was
based on analytical methods. Due to the natural limitations of these
techniques, they were limited to two-dimensional (2D) studies with
the exception of the work by Wagner [8], Mauro [9], and Tulin [10],
which was based on three-dimensional (3D) ow. Doctors [11] perhaps conducted the rst comprehensive 3D study on planing hulls
with no limitations on the Froude number. Most of the research then
was based on BEM. Because BEM reduces one dimension of the ow
eld, computations were quite fast and since the computers were
slow, it was a great advantage. However, an important factor, i.e.
viscosity, is neglected in this technique. This method was based on
potential theory and thus the results were not reliable for viscous
ows. With the advances of computer technology in the later decades
of the 20th century, interest in FVM, which is capable of providing
details about the ow eld, gained momentum and has constantly
improved. FVM is now used in CFD codes or commercial software.
It should be noted that BEM is still being used. Depending on what
information about the ow is needed and the time constrains, either
of BEM or FVM is used. In the following sections, 2D and 3D analytic studies based on potential theory will rst be presented. This
is followed by studies based on viscous ow. Finally, experimental
investigations will be briey discussed.
5.1. Potential ow
One of the earlier studies on high-speed hulls is by Von Karman
[12], which was based on conservation of momentum for analysis
of 2D hulls. In 1932, Lamb [13] investigated a 2D planing problem.
He used an integral equation to obtain the pressure distribution as
a function of slope for a 2D planing plate with a small aspect ratio.
Later in 1951, Mauro [9] solved the 2D planing problem based on
Lambs method and by a Fourier series expansion to obtain an unknown pressure distribution on a plane. He used the slope of the

Reza Youse et al. / Applied Ocean Research 42 (2013) 105113

109

Table 1
List of software programs and their major capabilities and characteristics.
Capabilities

Computational
stability
Scripting capability
Access to source
code
Availability of
software

Software
Fluent

ANSYS-CFX

CFDShip-IOWA

OpenFOAM

Star-CD

Tdyn

Excellent

Excellent

Good

Good

Excellent

Good

Good
No

Good
No

No

Excellent
Yes

No

No

Easy

Easy

Very difcult

Easy

Difcult

Difcult

Table 2
List of major numerical investigations performed after year 2000 and summary of their results. The x symbol next to each research represents whether the study obtains the pressure
distribution, trim diagram and drag curve. It also shows whether the study simulates the free-surface and investigates stability, wave pattern and maneuverability.

Date

Author(s)

Hull

Finite volume method (FVM)

2000
Subramani et
Planing Series
al. [49]
60
2001
Caponnetto
Planing
[37]
2002
Thornhill
Planing
[40]
2003
Caponnetto
Planing
et al. [39]
2005
Senocak and
DTMB 5415
Iaccarino
[47]

2007
Ozdemir
[3]
Planing
2007
Subramanian
Planing w/
et al. [48]
tunnel
2007
Javanmardi
Trimaran
et al. [7]
2008
Fultz [42]
Pentamaran
2009
Jahanbakhsh
Catamaran
et al. [45]
2009
Seif et al. [44]
Planing
2009
Panahi et al.
Catamaran
[43]
planing and
wedge
2011
Pranzitelli et
Semi-planing
al. [1]
2011
Brizzolara
Planing wedge
and Serra
[41]
Boundary element method (BEM)
2002
Savander et
Planing plate
al. [25]
2006
Kihara [34]
Planing
pyramid
2008
Ghassemi
Series 62
and Yu-min
planing
[27]
2010
Ghassemi
Wedge/ at
and Kohansal
plate, variable
[28]
deadrise
2010
Sun and
Planing
Faltinsen
[32]
Finite element method (FEM)
2000
Yang et al.
Planing, Series
[29]
60
2005
Xie et al. [30]
Planing

Software/analysis method
CFD-Ship-Iowa: RANS, VOF,
dynamic mesh
COMET: HRIC interpolation for
VOF
FLUENT: RANS, VOF
COMET: dynamic mesh, RANS,
k
FLUENT: VOF, RANS, k

FLUENT: RANS, k, k
FLUENT: RANS, k,
single-phase
NUMELS: dynamic mesh,
CICSAM for VOF
FLUENT: k, PLIC for VOF
NUMELS: dynamic mesh, VOF

Pressure
distribution

Trim
diagram

Drag
curve

Free-surface
simulation

Potential perturbation, vortex

distribution
2D + T, domain decomposition
in spray region
BEM for pressure drag, BL for
frictional drag and empirical
method for spray drag
Coupled BEM and boundary
layer theory
2D + T

x
x

x
x

x
x

x
x

x
x

Maneuverability

x
x

x
x

x
x

FEM, dynamic mesh

FEM

x
x

Wave
pattern

x
x

NUMELS: CICSAM for VOF

NUMELS: dynamic mesh, k,
CICSAM for VOF
FLUENT and SHIPFLOW: RANS,
VOF, panel method, two-phase
Star-CD: RANS, VOF

Stability

plane as a boundary condition in his solution. His method was valid

for plates moving at typical Froude numbers. Cumberbatch [14] was
able to solve the 2D planing problem for high Froude numbers. In
his method, the integral equation was expanded, with a power series
of inverse Froude number, and solved using an iterative technique.
He showed that the right combination of a geometric shape and at
surface could remove the singularity of the leading edge. His results
showed a considerable reduction in drag force. Clement and Blount

[15] evaluated the existing techniques for predicting the motion of

high-speed hulls and compared them with experimental results.
Doctors [11] presented a nite pressure element method for solving the ow around a 2D plate. In his problem, an inviscid ow ran
over the free-surface. His idea was similar to Mauros; however, a
different pressure distribution was used. A linear potential ow was
used in his work. His method allowed for a variety of pressure distributions for the planing plate.

110

Reza Youse et al. / Applied Ocean Research 42 (2013) 105113

The strip theory, which is based on potential ow, is used to determine the drag and lift coefcients for planing hulls. In this technique,
the hull is divided into thin strips and each strip is then analyzed. This
method assumes a two-dimensional ow around the hull. Strip theory
was rst used in Salvensens study [16] and has been improved over
the years. Frandoli et al. [17] showed that the strip theory provides
relatively good results even at higher Froude numbers.
Another method for analysis of high-speed hulls is 2.5D or 2D + T.
This technique assumes a xed imaginary plane which intersects with
the hull as it moves through. In this technique, the problem reduces
to a plane moving the water surface. This technique was rst used by
Tulin [10] and then Zhao et al. [18] extended the method for analysis
of high-speed hulls in calm water.
Three-dimensional methods are much more complicated than 2D
techniques. In 3D problems, the wetted surface area is much larger
and calculation of the integral equation is more sophisticated. In the
earlier decades of the 20th century, due to the limitations on computational hardware, the 3D problem was tackled by only a limited
number of investigators. These studies were limited in hull speed and
aspect ratio. Earlier attempts for modeling 3D-planing problem were
made by Wagner [8]. He modeled the hydrodynamics of the planing
problem by a slender body moving in water. Furthermore, Tulin [10]
used a vortex distribution to determine the ow around the hull and
the plunging jet impact on the free-surface. Wagners water entry and
Tulins jet models laid the foundations for future studies.
Mauro [19] presented an integral equation for the 3D-planing
problem, which related the slope of the surface to the velocity potential terms using a function of unknowns. His integral equation
was similar to the integral equation for the vortex distribution over a
thin planar foil. He then solved the integral equation by both a large
and a small aspect ratio approximation. He expanded the integral
equation with respect to the aspect ratio and only the rst term was
taken into account, neglecting higher orders. Therefore, the solution
was an approximation. For smaller aspect ratios, his method required
a high Froude number. Mauros method was incapable to be used
for rectangular planing plates. Wang and Risipin [8] also solved the
3D steady state potential ow around a planning rectangular plate
with a moderate aspect ratio and a large Froude number. They obtained the pressure distribution on the hull in the form of a series and
compared it experiments. Their results were in good agreement with
experiments.
Doctors [20] perhaps conducted the rst comprehensive 3D study
on planing hulls with no limitations on the Froude number and aspect ratio. He used an integral equation that related the pressure
distribution to the velocity potential, which was earlier obtained by
Wehausen and Laitone [21]. The ow around the hull was modeled by
nite pressure elements. The pressure was allowed to vary with the
position of each element and the overall distribution was continuous.
The double integral equation was transformed to a line integral using
a special function. One of his problems was that the wetted area was
unknown a priori and thus it was part of the solution. Through an iterative procedure, the wetted area was adjusted in such a way to satisfy
the trailing-edge Kutta condition until it reached a constant value.
The pressure distribution was found to be oscillatory. The pressure
oscillation was attributed to the inaccuracy of the pressure elements.
Because the pressure elements were not uniform on the free-surface,
the pressure distribution was not correctly modeled on the surface.
Wellicome and Jahangeer [22] studied the 3D-planing problem
based on the pressure distribution on the wetted area using rectangular elements of constant pressure. Tong [23] also used these integral
equations for pressure to study the planing plate problem. In his study,
the elements were constant and matched the leading edge prole of
the wetted surface area. The shape of the wetted surface was known
a priori and the draft was determined at the transom.
In addition, Cheng and Wellicome [24] used pressure strips in the

transverse direction to study hydrodynamics of planing hulls. Pressure along each strip was assigned a sinusoidal series, and thus each
term was represented by a mathematical formulation. The wetted
area was determined when the draft and the transom prole were assumed unknown. In his case, there was no limit on the Froude number
and the aspect ratio. One drawback of this technique was that variable
transverse pressure strips produced a continuous pressure distribution only in the transverse direction; however, in the longitudinal
direction, the pressure distribution was discontinuous.
Savander et al. [25] applied the boundary value problem to a planing plate and obtained relationships between potential perturbation
and vortex distribution. They calculated the hydrodynamic pressure,
lift and drag forces for the planning plate at different speeds. Ghassemi et al. [2628] have developed a computer code, based on BEM in
conjunction with boundary layer, for hydrodynamic analysis of planing and non-planing hulls. One of the drawbacks of this code is that
it does not take into account a two-phase ow model. It addition, the
code cannot be used for complex geometries and high Froude number
cases. They also used this code to study the wave pattern and pressure
coefcients. Furthermore, Ghassemi and Yu-Min [27], and Ghassemi
and Ghiasi [26] developed a hybrid technique to determine the hydrodynamic forces for steady state ow around a planing hull. In all
of these studies, good agreement between BEM and experimental
results was reported.
Yang et al. [29] used an FEM to simulate the ow around a planing
hull. In their simulation, the draft of the hull was determined through
an iteration procedure and then the heave and pitch were determined using the balance of normal forces and moments. They applied
a moving mesh near the hull. Their iterations were continued until it
converged to a dynamic balance. Tests were also done for the Wigley
and Series 60 for an extensive range of Froude numbers. When the
trim and draft were xed, this technique revealed considerable difference with experiments compared to the variable trim and draft case
(two degrees of freedom). Xie et al. [30] also investigated 3D-planing
hulls using FEM. They used the potential theory and determined the
free-surface by adopting a coordinate system normal to the hull and
by assuming a zero pressure condition. In this technique, each element on the planing plate was set to a constant power pressure eld.
The pressure distribution obtained with this technique was in good
agreement with the results of Tong [23], Cheng and Wellicome [24],
and Wang and Risipin [31]. In this study, unlike previous studies, the
pressure was not oscillatory. The oscillation is believed to be related
to the constant pressure distribution and induced coefcient for pressure elements, which was not used previously.
Sun and Faltinsen [32] investigated the performance of a planing
hull with unsteady ow assumption for the incident waves using the
BEM and 2D + T techniques. They also studied the resulting waves
due to the heave and pitch motions. The results were compared with
the experiments of Fridsma [33]. In addition, Kihara [34] used a 2D + T
technique along with BEM to investigate nonlinear free-surface ow
including the spray. Their idea was based on domain decomposition
in the spray region using boundary elements.
The aforementioned theoretical studies were all based on potential
theory and the free- surface uctuations were assumed to be small.
In reality, the ow around a planing hull is a nonlinear free-surface
phenomenon. A number of researchers have studied the nonlinear
planing hull problem using a variety of techniques. These techniques
will be described in the following section.
5.2. Viscous ow
With the advancement of computer technology, researchers have
started to widely use the FDM for solving the 3D, nonlinear problem
for displacement hulls. Hino et al. [35] utilized the FDM to study the
hydrodynamics of two simple prismatic geometries. They used the
Euler equation along with a nonlinear free-surface condition and a

Reza Youse et al. / Applied Ocean Research 42 (2013) 105113

Marker-and-Cell scheme. The wave at the stern was accurately approximated; however, the pressure at the bow was not in agreement.
Richard et al. [36] used the RANS model to predict the planing lift in
2D at plates. They calculated the lift force for the plate planing at the
free-surface and with a slip wall approximation for the free-surface.
They found that the approximated free-surface produced better results than those from the calculated free-surface when compared
against the empirical correlations. They suggested enhancements in
the VOF method before these calculations could be used for design of
planing hulls.
In the same year, Caponnetto [37] used a two-phase, FVM to nd
the pressure distribution on the planning hull. They utilized a uniform mesh in their analysis with the COMET software (zero degreeof-freedom). For each speed, three trim angles and three drafts were
used. For other cases, the results were interpolated for a given lift and
LCP relative to the equilibrium state of the hull. Balance is achieved
when the lift equals the weight of the hull and the center of pressure
coincides with the center of gravity. They compared the results using
the Savitsky empirical correlations [4,38]. Caponnetto et al. [39] later
extended this work using CFD to solve the 3D, high-speed hull problem. In the new technique, they employed a two degree-of-freedom
moving mesh in the simulation. The two degrees of freedom included
balances of moments and normal forces to obtain the trim and draft,
respectively. The results were found to be quite accurate; however,
the computational cost was relatively high.
Pranzitelli et al. [1] used the panel method along with FVM to simulate the free-surface, two-phase ow around a semi-displacement
hull advancing steadily in calm water. A volume of uid (VOF) method
was used to predict the free-surface prole and the drag. Using the
FLOWTECH SHIPFLOW software, they employed the panel method
to calculate the waves generated around the hull. In addition, Javanmardi et al. [7] used their NUMELS code to study the effects of the
three congurations of the Trimaran hull with a two-phase, viscous
ow model using FVM. They presented the hull maneuverability, stability, trimangle, and the drag. Furthermore, Thornhill et al. [40] used
FVM and the VOF method to investigate the steady, two-phase ow
around the hull. They assumed a 3D ow in calm water and used an
unstructured mesh. To nd the equilibrium state for the hull, balances
of normal forces and moments were used to determine the draft and
trim angle, respectively. The results included diagrams for trim, drag,
and pressure as a function of speed and for three cases of zero, one
and two degrees of freedom. Their results were found to be in good
agreement with experiments. Finally, Brizzolara et al. [41] simulated
the free-surface ow around a wedge-like hull using FVM and the
VOF method. Lift, drag, and the trim angle were obtained and compared against experiments and the results from Savitsky empirical
correlations.
Fultz [42] has recently investigated the ow around a Pentamaran
hull using FVM for two uid conditions: single phase, and two-phase
(using the VOF). Panahi et al. [43] have also used the FVM and VOF
and the partial step method for velocity and pressure coupling to
simulate hydrodynamics of two different hulls. The rst hull was a
two-dimensional wedge with a two degrees of freedom. They then
analyzed the motion of a planing Catamaran hull. In these studies,
they obtained the drag and trim angle curves and compared their
ndings with other existing numerical results and found relatively
good agreement. They used the NUMELS-NUMERIC code, which was
developed and optimized by Seif et al. [44]. This code allows for
hydrodynamic analysis and maneuverability of high-speed planing
hulls. One limitation of this code is that suffers solution divergence at
higher Froude numbers. They have recently published several studies
including three-dimensional simulation of the nonlinear motion of a
high-speed hull, simulation of the motion of a Catamaran hull using a
moving mesh [45] and numerical simulation of a high-speed planing
hull.

111

5.3. Analysis using commercial software

With the development of computational techniques in recent
years, calculation of drag forces for a oating body using commercial software has become reliable. MARNET-CFD research team in
Barcelona investigated the effects of incident water on transverse
sections of a planing hull, using both an experimental technique and
a numerical method with the FLUENT software. In the ANSYS users
conference in 2008, Godderidge [46] presented a modeling of freesurface ow using the CFX software. His results included the pressure
and trim diagrams as a function of speed and in the presence of a
free-surface pattern.
Senocak and Iaccarino [47] utilized the FLUENT software to investigate the free-surface ow around the DTMB5415 ship model.
They adopted the VOF method to track the free-surface and the k
turbulence model in their simulations. A structured mesh was used
in their study. They found that the quality of the mesh considerably

affected their computations. Ozdemir

[3] used the FLUENT software
to compute the lift and drag for a high-speed hull. He obtained the
velocity and pressure elds and compared the accuracy of k and
k turbulence models.
Subramanian et al. [48] used the FVM based CFD-Ship-Iowa code
to simulate a Series 60 hull. VOF method was used to trace the freesurface. With a moving mesh, the position of the hull changed with
time, which in turn, caused the trim and draft of the hull to change
toward a balance state. This procedure was continued until balance
was achieved. The results agreed with experiments very well. The
trim diagram and drag of the hull for a variety of speeds and freesurface shapes were among their results. Subramani et al. [49] also
used FVM for a single-phase, RANS model to investigate the effect of
a tunnel on the pressure drag and lift. They used the FLUENT software
and compared the results with Savitsky experiments.
It should be mentioned that there are a number of computer software that have the capability to simulate the ow around a hull, taking into account maneuverability, wave and free-surface effects, and
estimate the hull drag. ANSYS-FLUENT, ANSYS-CFX, CFD Ship-Iowa,
Open FOAM, Ship Flow, Tdyn, and Star-CD are among the available
software. To date, the rst four software programs are the most popular ones having excellent computational stability. ANSYS-FLUENT and
ANSYS-CFX are easily available and have programming capabilities,
though they are not open source. Open FOAM is readily available, open
source and allows for user programming. Although CFDSHIP-Iowa is a
powerful and professional program for simulation of the ow around
ships; it is not easily available and has no user programming capabilities. In addition, it is not open source. It should be noted that Open
FOAM has not yet gained popularity and FLUENT and CFX are still
the dominant software for simulation of the ow in this eld. Table
1 summarizes the characteristics of a number of popular software
packages.
5.4. Experimental studies
Although the main focus of the current study is on computational
techniques, a brief description of some important experimental investigations is presented. Experimental measurements made by Sottorf
[50] were among the early experimental studies on planing hulls. He
conducted a series of systematic model tests for planing hulls and
measured the hydrodynamic drag, center of pressure, and pressure
distribution for a planning at plate. In 1934, he extended his analysis
to include the V-shaped models [51]. His work was followed by Shoemaker [52], Sambraus [53], Sedov [54], and Locke [55]. These efforts
led to a large volume of experimental data on hydrodynamic characteristics of planing plates under special conditions. Shoemaker [52]
reported data for hydrodynamic drag, center of pressure, wetted line,
and draft for a variety of trim angles, loading, and forward speeds.
Clement and Blount [15] further performed extensive model tests on
Series 62. These experimental data on planing hulls became a good

112

Reza Youse et al. / Applied Ocean Research 42 (2013) 105113

Table 3
List of major experimental investigations on planning hulls and a summary of results.
Date

Author(s)

Hull

Major results

1929

Sottorf [50]

Planing at plate

1934
1934

Sottorf [51]
Shoemaker [52]

V-shaped model
Sottorfs V-shaped model

1938
1939
1948
1963
1964

Sambraus [53]
Sedov [54]
Locke [55]
Clement and Blount [15]
Savitsky [4]

Extended Sottorfs V-shaped model

Extended Sottorfs V-shaped model
Extended Sottorfs V-shaped model
Series 62 model
Wedge-shaped planing hull

1969
1971
1976

Fridsma [33,56]
Savitsky and Brown [38]

1953

Kapryan and Boyd [59]

2002

Katayama et al. [57]

Wedge-shaped
planing hull
Extended method to include effects of
waves on drag
Prismatic planing hull, variety of
deadrise angles
Wedge-shaped planing hull

Drag, center of pressure, pressure

distribution
Drag and center of pressure
Drag, center of pressure, wetted length and
draft
Drag, center of pressure, wetted length
Drag, center of pressure, wetted length
Drag, center of pressure, wetted length
Database for future studies
Semi-empirical correlations for drag, lift,
center of pressure
Drag and center of pressure in
regular and irregular waves
Drag, lift, and center of pressure

2005

Bowles and Denny [58]

Planing hull

2007

Savitsky [60]

Prismatic planing hull

database for future studies.

In 1964, Savitsky [4] performed experimental tests and provided
empirical correlations for calculation of lift, drag, and center of pressure for wedge-shaped high-speed planing hulls. His results were
reported for a variety of speeds, deadrise angles, and loading. Based
on Fridsmas tests [33,56] on high-speed planing wedges in regular
and irregular waves, Savitsky and Brown [38] revisited and modied
their original method to include the effects of waves on acceleration and wave drag. The main advantage of this method is that it is
simple and provides relatively accurate results for a number of hulls
with a regular shape. However, his method has some drawbacks. This
technique cannot be used for analysis of hulls with variable deadrise
angles in the longitudinal and transverse directions. In addition, this
method is semi-static and is unable to predict transient behavior. It
provides the total force through a series of correlations and cannot be
used to calculate the force at a point or on a particular panel.
Katayama et al. [57] also performed model tests to nd hydrodynamic drag for wedge-shaped high-speed planing hulls at different
speeds and obtained the lift and drag coefcients. In addition, Bowles
and Denny [58] found a model for prediction of turbulent water surface at the bow of the planing hull.
Most of the previously mentioned investigations were focused
on force and moment measurements. Their main objective was to
provide experimental correlations for prediction of hydrodynamic
drag; however, there has been little experimental research on pressure distribution measurement. Kapryan and Boyd [59] measured the
pressure distribution on planing hulls. They performed a series of experiments on prismatic hulls with a variety of deadrise angles. The lift
force variations were obtained by integrating the pressure distribution. Savitsky et al. [60] has also recently studied the wetted surface
characteristics and spray to determine the spray drag.
6. Benchmark table
To help future researchers and engineers select the most appropriate design and analysis techniques for high-speed planing hulls,
the most recent research studies are summarized in Table 2. The
main purpose for this table is to compare the analysis techniques
and list their capabilities and limitations. Research studies on the hydrodynamic simulations of planing hulls published after 2000 have
been reported herein. In addition to listing the analysis technique for

Lift and pressure distribution

Drag and lift coefcients at various forward
speeds
Predicted turbulent water surface at the
bow
Wetted surface characteristics and spray
drag

each study, important results including pressure distribution, trim

diagram, drag curve, free-surface shape and effects, stability, wave
pattern, and maneuverability of the hull are presented. This benchmark table also contains information about the range of applicability
of each technique. Furthermore, given the importance of experimental techniques in the analysis of the performance of high-speed hulls,
a brief summary of experimental research is presented in Table 3.
7. Conclusions
Estimation of hydrodynamic forces is the most important component in the analysis of high-speed planing hulls. Planing hulls create
complex free-surface ows. These ows include nonlinear phenomena such as plunging jets and irregular waves. To date, model testing is
the best way to predict the hydrodynamic performance of hulls. With
the advancement in the computer hardware and software, numerical
techniques have become effective tools for hydrodynamic analysis.
The most important advantage of numerical methods is that they do
not suffer limitations that are normally encountered in model testing such as the size of the hull, environmental conditions, analysis
and interpretation of results for prototype hulls. They also eliminate
the cost for construction of laboratory models. Numerical techniques
allow for hydrodynamic modeling of real size hulls, investigation of
design components in early phases, and obtaining detailed information, which are otherwise impossible to obtain with experiments.
Computational uid dynamics can be used in applications where
analytical solution of the governing equations is not possible, using
two methods: potential theory for inviscid ow and viscous ow.
FDM and FEM are nowadays rarely used in hydrodynamic analysis of
high-speed planing hulls, although FEM is mainly utilized for structural analysis of marine vessels. Potential ow-based methods are
applicable to steady state inviscid ows, in which the viscous effects
are negligible. Computational time for this method with an advanced
computer is on the order of minutes and thus is relatively fast.
Based on previous investigations, BEM is an appropriate technique
to obtain wave patterns; however, it is not recommended for simulation of viscous ows with complex free-surface proles. In these
ows, the viscous effects cannot be neglected and thus a comprehensive analysis of the ow is required. FVM is a more appropriate and
accurate technique for modeling turbulent, free-surface ows. In recent decades, turbulent models have been improved and solution of

Reza Youse et al. / Applied Ocean Research 42 (2013) 105113

free-surface ows has become possible. In conclusion, FVM is capable

of solving complex, free-surface ows such as breaking waves. It can
also be used to predict maneuverability, seakeeping capability, and
the equilibrium state of the hulls with complex geometries.
References
[1] Marshall R. Powering your boat. All about powerboats: understanding design
and performance. McGraw-Hill Professional; 2002.
[2] Grobler B. Development of high-speed planning trimaran with hydrofoil support. Stellenbosch: University of Stellenbosch; 2007.
[3] HK Versteeg, W Malalasekera. An introduction to computational uid dynamics;
1995.
[4] Savitsky D. Hydrodynamic analysis of planing hulls. Marine Technology
1964;1:7195.
[5] Ferziger JH, Peric M. Computational methods for uid dynamics. SpringerVerlag; 1999.
[6] Javanmardi MR, Seif MS, Jahanbakhsh E, Sayyaadi H. Catamaran motion simulation based on moving grid technique. Journal of Marine Science and Technology
2009;17:9.
[7] Javanmardi MR, Panahi R, Jahanbakhsh E, Seif MS. Trimaran resistance calculation. In: 15th annual (international) mechanical engineering conference
(ISME07). Tehran, Iran. 2007.
[8] Wagner H. Planing of watercraft. National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics;
1933.
[9] Mauro H. Two dimensional theory of the hydroplane. In: First Japan national
congress for applied mechanics. Japan. 1951, pp. 40915.
[10] Tulin MP. The theory of slender surfaces planing at high speeds. Ship Technology
Research/Schiffstechnik 1957;4:12533.
[11] Doctors LJ. Representation of planing surface by nite pressure elements. In:
Fifth Australian conference on hydraulics and uid mechanics. New Zealand.
1974.
[12] Liu CY, Wang CT. Interference effect of catamaran planing hulls. Journal of Hydronautics 1979;13:312.
[13] Lamb H. Hydrodynamics. Cambridge University Press; 1932.
[14] Cumberbatch E. Two-dimensional planing at high Froude number. Journal of
Fluid Mechanics 1958;4:46678.
[15] Clement EP, Blount DL. Resistance tests of systematic series of planing hull
forms. Transactions of the SNAME 1963;71:491579.
[16] Salvansen N, Tuck E, Faltinsen O. Ship motions and sea loads. Transactions of
the SNAME 1997;78:25079.
[17] Ferandoli P, Merola L, Pino E, Sebastiani L. The role of seakeeoing calculations at
the preliminary design stage. In: NAV 2000 conference. Venice, Italy. 2000, pp.
9519.
[18] Zhao R, Faltinsen OM, Haslum HA. A simplied nonlinear analysis of a high speed
planing craft in calm water. In: FAST97. Sydney, Australia. 1997, pp. 4318.
[19] Mauro H. High and low aspect ratio approximation of planning surface. 1967;72.
[20] Doctors LJ. Representation of three-dimensional planing surface by nite elements. In: First international conference on numerical ship hydrodynamics.
Gaithersburg, MD, USA. 1975.
[21] Wehausen JV, Laitone EV. Surface waves.Encyclopaedia of physics. SpringerVerlag; 1960, pp. 446778.
[22] Wellicome JF, Jahangeer YM. The prediction of pressure loads on planing hulls
in calm water. Naval Architect, The Royal Institution of Naval Architects; 1979,
pp. 5370.
[23] Tong J. A nite element approach to planning problem. UK: University of
Southampton; 1989.
[24] Cheng X, Wellicome JF. Study of planing hydrodynamics using strips of transversely variable pressure. Journal of Ship Research 1994;38:3041.
[25] Savander BR, Scorpio SM, Taylor RK. Steady hydrodynamic of planing surface.
Journal of Ship Research 2002;46:24879.
[26] Ghassemi H, Ghiasi M. A combined method for the hydrodynamic characteristics
of planing crafts. Ocean Engineering 2008;35:31022.
[27] Ghassemi H, Yu-min S. Determining the hydrodynamic forces on a planing hull
in steady motion. Journal of Marine Science and Application 2008;7:14756.
[28] Kohansal AR, Ghassemi H. A numerical modeling of hydrodynamic characteristics of various planing hull forms. Ocean Engineering 2010;37:498510.
[29] Yang C, Lohner R, Noblesse F, Huang TT. Calculation of ship sinkage and trim
using unstructured grids. Barcelona, Spain: ECCOMAS; 2000, pp. 1114.

113

[30] Xie N, Vassalos D, Jasionowski A. A study of hydrodynamics of three-dimensional

planing surface. Ocean Engineering 2005;32:153955.
[31] Wang DP, Risipin P. Three-dimensional planing at high Froude number. Journal
of Ship Research 1971;15:22130.
[32] Sun H, Faltinsen OM. Numerical study of planing vessels in waves. Journal of
Hydrodynamics, Series B 2010;22:46875.
[33] Fridsma G. A systematic study of the rough-water performance of planning
boats. Davidson Laboratory; 1969.
[34] Kihara H. A computing method for the ow analysis around a prismatic planinghull. In: 5th international conference on high performance marine vehicles.
2006.
[35] Hino T, Hirata N, Hori T. Calculation of free surface ows generated by planning
craft. In: FAST91. 1991, pp. 31730.
[36] Richard P, Stephen T, Stephen W. Free surface CFD simulations of the ow
around a planning plate. In: FAST 2001. Southampton, UK. 2001.
[37] Caponnetto M. Practical CFD simulations for planing hulls. In: HIPER01. Hamburg, Germany. 2001.
[38] Savitsky D, Brown PW. Procedures for hydrodynamic evaluation of planing hulls
in smooth and rough water. Marine Technology 1976;13.
[39] Caponnetto M, Soding H, Azcueta R. Motion simulations for planing boats in
waves. Ship Technology Research/Schiffstechnik 2003;50.
[40] Thornhill E, Bose N, Veitch B, Liu P. Planing hull performance evaluation using a
general purpose CFD code. In: Fukuoka, Japan. 2002.
[41] Brizzolara S, Serra F. Accuracy of CFD codes in the prediction of planning surface
hydrodynamic characteristics. Rome: INSEAN (Italian Ship Model Basin); 2011.
[42] Fultz ER. CFD analysis of a penta-hulled, air entrapment, high speed planning
vessel. Naval Postgraduate School; 2008.
[43] Panahi R, Jahanbakhsh E, Seif MS. Towards simulation of 3D nonlinear highspeed vessels motion. Ocean Engineering 2009;36:25665.
[44] Seif MS, Jahanbakhsh E, Panahi R, Karimi MH. A unied computational method
for simulating dynamic behavior of planing vessels. China Ocean Engineering
2009;23:51728.
[45] Jahanbakhsh E, Panahi R, Seif MS. Catamaran motion simulation based on moving grid technique. Journal of Marine Science and Technology 2009;17:9.
[46] Godderidge B. The simulation of free surface ows with computational uid
dynamics. In: ANSYS UK user conference: inspiring engineering. UK. 2008.
[47] Senocak I, Iaccarino G. Progress towards RANS simulation of free-surface ow
around modern ships. Stanford, CA: Center for Turbulence Research, Stanford
University; 2005, pp. 1516.
[48] Subramanian AV, Subramanian PVV, Ali NS. Pressure and drag inuences due to
tunnels in high-speed planing craft. Amsterdam, PAYS-BAS: IOS Press; 2007.
[49] Seif MS, Amini E. Performance comparison between planing monohull and catamaran at high Froude numbers. Iranian Journal of Science and Technology,
Transaction B 2004;28.
[50] Sottorf W. Experiments with planning surfaces. National Advisory Committee
for Aeronautics; 1929.
[51] Sottorf W. Experiments with planning surfaces. National Advisory Committee
for Aeronautics; 1934.
[52] Shoemaker JM. Tank tests of at and vee-bottom planning surfaces. National
Advisory Committee for Aeronautics; 1934.
[53] Sambaraus A. Planing surface tests at large Froude numbers airfoil comparison.
National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics; 1938.
[54] Sedov L. Scale effect and optimum relations for sea surface planning. Moscow:
Central Aero Hydrodynamical Institute; 1939.
[55] Locke FWS. Tests of a at bottom planning surface to determine the inception
of planing. Department of Navy, BuAer, Research Division; 1948.
[56] Fridsma G. A systematic study of the rough-water performance of planning
boats (irregular waves-part II). Davidson Laboratory; 1971.
[57] T Katayama, S Hayashita, K Suzuki, Y Ikeda. Development of resistance test for
highspeed planing craft using very small model scale effects on drag force. 2002.
Asia Pacic workshop on hydrodynamics
[58] Bowles BJ, Denny BS. Water surface disturbance near the Bow of high speed, hard
chine hull forms. In: 8th international conference on fast sea transportation,
Petersburg, Russia. 2005.
[59] Kapryan WJ, Boyd GMJ. The effect of vertical chine strips on the planning characteristics of V-shaped prismatic surface having angles of deadrise of 20 and
40 . NACA; 1953.
[60] Savitsky D, DeLorme MF, Datla R. Inclusion of whisker spray drag in performance prediction method for high-speed planing hulls. Marine Technology
2007;44:3556.