fast conference 2013 paper id 61 -the wageningen c- and d-series propellers - final version

8/10/2019 FAST Conference 2013 Paper ID 61 -The Wageningen C- And D-Series Propellers - Final Version

1/10

The Wageningen C- and D-Series Propellers

J. Dang, MARIN, The Netherlands

H. J. J. van den Boom, MARIN, The Netherlands

J. Th. Ligtelijn, MARIN, The Netherlands

SUMMARY

The Maritime Research Institute Netherlands (MARIN) has recently started a Joint Industry Project (JIP) on developing

two new propeller series for Controllable Pitch Propellers (CPPs). Following the well known Wageningen B-series and

Ka-series, the new C-series comprise open CPPs whereas the newD-series concern ducted CPPs.The primary objective

of developing the new CPP series is to help the shipbuilding and offshore industries in understanding the off-design per-

formance of the CPPs, for which systematic information was lacking.

CPP blades have been generated for 4- and 5-bladed open propellers and for 4-bladed ducted propellers in two ducts,

representing the most contemporary propeller design practice. Systematic measurements of the propeller and duct

thrusts, the torque and also the blade spindle torque have been carried out for the entire range of operational conditions

and pitch-settings of each propeller. The results of the C4-40 series are presented in this paper as an example case.

1. INTRODUCTION

The Maritime Research Institute Netherlands (MARIN),

former Netherlands Ship Model Basin (N.S.M.B.),

started to develop the well-known Wageningen B-seriesPropellers right from the establishment of this institute in

1932 [1]. The first series were published by van Lam-

meren [2] and Troost [3,4], followed by further devel-

opments and expansions of the series over more than 40

years. A major review of the available data was given by

van Lammerenet al[5,6]. The B-series had been furtherextended to 6 and 7 bladed propellers in the 1970s. To-

tally, 20 series with more than 120 propellers were tested

over that period.

Systematic series have also been developed for ducted

propellers since 1954 [7]. A major amount of data of theKa-series were published by Oosterveld [8]. In the mean-

time, other systematic propeller series were also devel-

oped worldwide, such as the Taylor- [9], Gawn- [10],

(M)AU- [11] and SSPA- [12,13] series. However, in prac-

tise the B-series data are among the most widely used in

the industry.

Besides that most of the propeller characteristics (the

thrust and the torque) of the series in design operation

condition have been made available by model tests be-

tweenJ=0 andKT=0, four-quadrant open water character-istics of some of the propellers in the B-series and the

ducted propellers in the Ka-series were also made avail-

able in the 1980s [14] for off-design conditions. Table 1

provides an overview of the propellers in theB-series, of

which 4-quadrant open water characteristics are avail-

able. For the Ka-series, only Ka 4-70 propellers in 19Aand 37 ducts have been published [1].

Different from Fixed Pitch Propellers (FPPs), Controlla-

ble Pitch Propellers (CPPs) are well-known for their ad-

vantage for full power utilization at any circumstances:

accelerating and stopping, rapid manoeuvring, dynamic

positioning (DP), etc. For these reasons, CPPs are widely

used for multi-purpose vessels where their propulsors are

often used in off-design conditions.

Table 1 Overview of B-series with four-quadrant open

water characteristics (pitch ratioP/Dof the propellers are

listed in the table).

AE/A0 [%] 40 55 65 70 75 80 85 100

Z=3 1.0

Z=4 1.0 1.00.5, 0.6, 0.8

1.0, 1.2, 1.41.0 1.0

Z=5 1.0

Z=6 1.0

Z=7 1.0

In order to predict the performance of a CPP in off-

design conditions, people have to either carry out dedi-

cated and expensive measurements for a specific propel-ler design, such as often done for navy vessels [15,16], or

rely on the estimated values from the existing four-

quadrant open water data from the B-series [17], which

were primarily designed for merchant ships with FPP

blade forms. Information for the complete two-quadrant

open water characteristics of CPPs in the public domainis scarce, especially when the propeller blades are de-

flected away from their design pitch [18,19]. In the

Wageningen series book [1], off-design information is

only available for two CPPs in ahead and astern condi-

tions, one with a design pitch ratio of zero and the other

of one.

With the deployment of more and more vessels with DP-

capability, accurate prediction of the off-design perform-

ance of a propulsor becomes more important than ever.

Dedicated tests for each propeller design is unaffordable

for most of the projects, while the existing limited infor-


2/10

mation is far from enough. For this reason there is a

strong demand for systematic data on the performance ofCPPs in off-design conditions.

In addition to these, a CPP blade has a completely differ-

ent blade form than an FPP. This is because more practi-

cal issues need to be considered for a CPP, such as: theblades must be able to pass each other from positivepitch to negative pitch, the blade has to be positioned

properly between the bolt holes on the blade foot, the

cavitation performance must be acceptable for a wide

range of operational pitch settings, the blade overhang at

the blade foot should preferably be avoided to prevent

stress concentration; the blade tips must not touch the

inner side of a duct at any deflected pitch angles for the

ducted CPPs. Besides all these constraints, one of the

important and unique issues is the blade spindle torque of

CPPs [20], where very limited information can be found

[19,21,22]. To the knowledge of the authors, there is also

no CPP series with systematic information on the propel-ler blade spindle torque at all possible blade pitch set-

tings (from full positive pitch to full negative pitch and

over the complete two quadrants). Also no systematic

information is available on blade feathering performance.

In close co-operation with industry and universities

MARIN started to explore the possibilities for develop-

ing new systematic series for both open and ducted

CPPs. In September 2011, a Jointed Industry Project

(JIP) was officially launched, which is called the Wagen-

ingen C- and D-series Propellers for CPPs and ductedCPPs, respectively. Here the C stands for controllable

and theDstands for ducted.

Conducting conventional open water tests for an exten-

sive propeller series in two quadrants is not economically

feasible as each propeller has to be tested at more than 10

pitch settings between full positive and full negative

pitch. New test technology had to be developed in order

to reduce the test time significantly. This leads to the idea

of a quasi-steady test technique for propeller open water

characteristics which is enabled by the new sensor tech-nology that allows high frequent dynamic measurement

with rapid response.

Under support of the Wageningen C-series and D-seriesJIP, a pilot study has been successfully carried out to

explore the possibility of using this technique. The study

proved that the quasi-steady test results are as accurate as

the conventional steady test results, while reducing the

test time by a factor of 8 to 10 [23]. This technology de-velopment enabled the JIP to test large systematic series

within reasonable budget.

The propeller series, the blade design methodology, the

parameterization of the propeller geometry, the test pro-

cedures, the data analyses and the presentation of the

results are discussed in the following sections. At the end

of the paper, the complete test results of the C4-40 seriesare presented and discussed.

2. DESIGN METHODOLOGY, THE PRO-

PELLER SERIES AND THE TEST MATRIX

In order to obtain systematic information on propeller

open water characteristics, the WageningenB-series Pro-

pellers were designed in such a way that the number of

blades, the blade area ratio and the pitch-diameter ratiowere systematically varied, while the blade contour, theskew distribution, the pitch distribution (constant, except

for the 4-bladed), the rake angle (15o), the hub-propeller

diameter ratio (1/6, except for the 3-bladed propellers

which has a ratio of 18%) and the section profiles are all

kept the same for the whole series [1].

While designing the Wageningen C- andD-series propel-

lers, an extensive propeller database search has been car-ried out first. A large number of practical propeller de-

signs, made with up-to-date hydrodynamic knowledge

was gathered. Studies have been carried out to relate the

propeller main dimensions to the typical applications, sothat each design of the blades reflects a certain scenario

of a typical application. For instance, a 4-bladed CPPwith large blade area and high pitch ratios is often used

for the fast ferries and cruise ships where the comfort is

weighted more than the efficiency; a 4-bladed CPP with

small blade area and low pitch ratios is typically used by

transport ships with a large amount of harbour activities,

such a shuttle tanker, where the propulsive efficiency isessentially important, rather than the comfort. The 5-

bladed CPP designs are aimed at applications for the

navies.

The statistics from the database also showed that the CPPhub size changes noticeably with the blade area ratio and

the blade design pitch ratio for open propellers. This is

because these main parameters of a propeller are closelyrelated to the power density on the blade, which deter-

mines how strong a hub should be and how large the

pitch actuating system should be. However, this tendency

is not found for the ducted CPPs. These findings are ap-

plied to the present series designs where the C-series has

different hub-propeller diameter ratios for each propellerdesign; while theD-series propellers have the same hub-

propeller diameter ratio for all designs.

Thereafter, each propeller in the series was designed in-dividually with the best present design practice with the

compromise between efficiency, comfort and mechanical

requirements, which comprise the blade strength re-

quirements, minimum blade passing distance when going

from positive to negative pitch, fitting the blade root be-

tween the bolt holes, blade root over-hang, tip clearance

in a duct while the pitch is actuated through the wholestroke, blade spindle torque at all operation conditions,

etc. The compromise has given more weight on:

- propulsive efficiency for low pitch and blade

area ratios;

-

comfort (better cavitation performance) for highpitch and large blade area ratios.


3/10

The design methodology and philosophy discussed above

for these C- and D-series propellers can be summarizedin one sentence: these series represent contemporary and

practical CPP designs.

The whole series consist of 20 open propellers and 15

ducted propellers, as listed in Table 2, which were testedfor 604 complete two-quadrant open water characteristicsat various pitch settings and duct combinations (Table 3).

Table 2 Overview of the C-series and D-series propeller

models (design pitch ratio P0.7R/D of the propellers are

listed in the table), in total 35 propeller models.AE/A0 [%] 40 55 60 70 75

C4series0.8, 1.0,

1.2, 1.4

0.8, 1.0,

1.2, 1.4

0.8, 1.0,

1.2, 1.4

C5series1.0, 1.2,1.4, 1.6

1.0, 1.2,1.4, 1.6

D4series0.0, 0.8,

1.0, 1.2,1.4

0.0, 0.8,

1.0, 1.2,1.4

0.0, 0.8,

1.0, 1.2,1.4

Table 3 Overview of the test matrix, in total 604 com-

plete two-quadrant propeller open water tests.

tested

pitch

settingsP0.7

R/D Propeller design pitch ratioP0.7R/D

C4-40

C4-55C4-70*

C5-60

C5-75

D4-40D4-55

D4-70

in No.19A duct

D4-40D4-55

D4-70

in No. 37 duct

0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 0.0 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 0.0 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4

-1.4

-1.2 -1.0 -0.7 -0.4 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4

1.6

1.8

*blade feathering tests, in both positive & negative advance directions.

3. PROPELLER GEOMETRY

After the initial design of each propeller of the series, themain parameters of every propeller were fitted with

polynomials and the propeller models were manufactured

according to the parametric descriptions. In order toreduce the influence of the blade weight on the

measurements, all propeller blades and hubs were madeof aluminium with anodized final surface treatment.

3.1 HUB-PROPELLER DIAMETER RATIO

The hub-propeller diameter ratio is determined first,

which varies with the design pitch ratio at 0.7R of the

propeller, defined as:

and represents the present best practice on hub design

with smallest achievable hub size. The ratio isdetermined by the following quadratic polynomial:

with a hub consisting of a basic spherical form contourconnected to two cylinders on the two sides (Figure 1).

3.2 BLADE PARAMETRIC DESCRIPTIONS

The radial distribution of the main parameters of the pro-

pellers (blade chord length ratio C/D, pitch ratio P/D,

skew ratio S/D, rake ratio X/D, maximum thickness ratio

tmax/D and maximum camber ratio fmax/D of the blade

sections) are all given in polynomials in the form of:

wheresis the non-dimensional radius defined as:

and ris the radius. At the blade tip when r=D/2,s=0. At

the blade root when r=d/2, s=1. The coefficients a

depend on the design pitch of the propeller p by

quadratic polynomials defined as:

By integrating the chord length of the propeller blades

from the blade root to the tip, as given in Equation (3)

and (4), the blade area can be easily derived and

expressed also in parametric formula.

3.3 BLADE SECTION PROFILES

The NACA 66 (MOD) thickness distribution and the

NACA a=0.8 meanline have been used for all of the pro-

peller blades for the present propeller series. The thick-

ness distribution is, however, applied perpendicular to

the nose-tail line of the section profile.

In order to prevent very thin blade trailing edges in

model scale, the trailing edges of the propeller model

blades are thickened to minimal 0.4 mm, starting gradu-

ally from the maximum thickness of the profile to the

trailing edges by a parabolic distribution.

3.4 PITCH DEFINITION

The design pitch is defined based on the nose-tail line of

the blade section profile. At off-design condition, the

pitch setting refers to the pitch of the blade at 0.7R which

is based on the nose-tail line of the section profile at that

pitch setting (R is the propeller radius at design pitch).

3.5 TIP FORM, BLADE ROOT FILLETS AND

ANTI-SINGING EDGE

A non-ice-strengthened tip form and composite bladeroot fillets are applied to all of the model propellers. The

composite blade root fillets consist of two fillet radii, the

larger one has a radius of 3Tmaxand the small one has a


4/10

radius of Tmax/3, where Tmaxis the blade maximum thick-

ness at the blade root. Due to the fact that the propellermodel blades are too thin to make anti-singing edges, no

anti-singing edges are applied.

4. TEST SET-UP AND PROCEDURES

4.1 TEST SET-UP

The test set-up is the same as used and discussed in Ref-

erence [23] with a dummy test hub and force transducers

as shown in Figure 1. The thrust and torque are measured

on the shaft next to the propeller and the blade spindletorque is measured inside the test hub.

Figure 1 Test set-up and propeller shaft thrust and torque

sensors and blade spindle torque sensor.

4.2 TEST PROCEDURES

In a conventional propeller open water test from J=0 to

KT=0, the propeller shaft rotational rate is often kept con-

stant while the advance speed of the propeller varies.

During propeller four-quadrant open water tests, likedone for FPPs, both the advance speed and the shaft

rotational rate have to vary and change directions, be-

cause only a finite towing speed of the carriage can be

achieved. However, most controllable pitch propellerswill never rotate reversely. This practice has been also

used here during the model tests, where only one rota-

tional direction (positive rotational direction) has been

tested. Therefore, only two-quadrant (the first and the

fourth quadrant) open water characteristics have been

measured.

At propeller off-design conditions, the propeller hydro-

dynamic pitch angle is often used, instead of the ad-vance ratio J, to define the operation condition of the

blades,

Under this definition, a complete set of two-quadrant

open water characteristics of a controllable pitch propel-

ler covers the range -90o +90

o.

A quasi-steady open water test is, in principle, an un-

steady model test by continuously varying the advance

speed and/or the rotational rate in such a way that the

steady state performance of the propeller for the com-plete range of conditions can be derived. For the whole

C- and D-series two-quadrant tests, the following four

test runs have been used, as listed in Table 4.

Table 4 Quasi-steady test runs for the complete 2-

quadrant open water characteristics of a controllable

pitch propeller.

run shaft rotational rate advance speed range1 constant +900RPM 0 to +4m/s to 0 0oto ~+30oto 0o

2 0 to +900RPM to 0 constant +4m/s +90oto ~+30oto +90o

3 constant +900RPM 0 to4m/s to 0 0oto ~30oto 0o

4 0 to +900RPM to 0 constant4m/s 90oto ~30oto90o

This makes it possible to test the complete two-quadrant

open water characteristics of a propeller in only 4 test

runs, using 2 runs by varying the towing speed of thecarriage and 2 runs by varying the shaft rotational rate.

From the first two runs - No. 1 and No. 2, the results in

the first quadrant for from 0 to +90 degrees can be ob-

tained. From the last two runs - No. 3 and No. 4, the re-

sults in the fourth quadrant for from 0 to -90 degreescan be obtained.

A sinusoidal variation as sketched in Figure 2 has been

used for the variations of the carriage (advance) speed

and the propeller rotational rate during the tests.

Figure 2 Sketch of the sinusoidal variations for towing

speed and propeller shaft rotational rate.

For the first quadrant (test runs No. 1 and No. 2), the

towing carriage is travelling in the normal towing direc-

tion, which we call the positive direction as shown in

the sketch in Figure 3.

Figure 3 Sketch of test set-up for the first quadrant tests.

For the fourth quadrant (test runs No. 3 and No. 4), the

same set-up used for the first quadrant test but towed by

the carriage in the reverse direction, see Figure 4. The

advantage of this method is that the whole set-up remains

the same as for the first quadrant, except for the towing

direction of the carriage. The drawback is that the flowgoes first over the open water test POD housing and strut

before it reaches the propeller. The influence of the wake

from the strut was found to be very limited and has beencarefully corrected for.

+Va

+n


5/10

Figure 4 Sketch of test set-up for the fourth quadrant

tests.

More details of the quasi-steady propeller open water test

procedures are given by Danget al[23].

5. PRESENTATION OF RESULTS

The measured propeller shaft thrust and torque, and the

blade spindle torque, are non-dimensionalized by the

relative velocity to the blade at 0.7R radius defined as,

with the propeller thrust coefficient defined as,

the propeller torque coefficient defined as,

and the blade spindle torque coefficient defined as,

where, the positive directions of the propeller shaft

thrust, torque and the blade spindle torque are shown in

Figure 5. The positive blade spindle torque is defined as

the direction that tends to drive the propeller to a largerpitch.

Figure 5 Definition of positive directions for the thrust,

torque and the blade spindle torque.

All coefficients provided above are hydrodynamic coef-

ficients. The spindle torque induced by the centrifugal

force of the model blade has been subtracted.

Each set of data - the propeller thrust coefficients, the

propeller torque coefficients and the blade spindle torque

coefficients - was fitted with one of the following Fourier

series respectively. The Fourier series coefficients were

determined up to the order of 40, truncated from the 31stharmonic gradually (linearly) until completely at the 40thharmonic.

(11)

6. C4-40 SERIES

As an example case, the test results of the C4-40 seriesare presented in this section.

The C4-40 series propeller model are shown in Figure 6

with MARINs propeller numbers and their design pitch

noted in the figure. The propeller diameters vary between

230.37mm to 242.81mm with hub diameter of 58.0mm.

Model No. 7189 (P0.7R/D = 0.8) Model No. 7190 (P0.7R/D = 1.0)

Model No. 7191 (P0.7R/D = 1.2) Model No. 7192 (P0.7R/D = 1.4)Figure 6 C4-40 series propeller models with aluminium

blades on the dummy hubs at design pitch settings.

During the test runs, the blade Reynolds number varieswith the variation of the propeller advance speed and the

shaft rotational rate, which depends on the chord length

of the propeller blades. Table 5 provides the range of the

Reynolds numbers based on 0.7R chord length and local

inflow velocity during the tests for the C4-40 series,

where the Reynolds number is defined as,

The open water characteristics of these series propellers

in the first quadrant are plotted in Figure 7 inKT, 10KQ, ~Jdiagram. Their two-quadrant open water characteris-

tics are plotted into diagrams on Figure 9 through Figure

+n

-Va


6/10

20. These values are all in model scale without any cor-

rections for the Reynolds numbers, which varies duringthe quasi-steady open water tests.

Table 5 Blade chord Reynolds numbers during test runs.Blade chord Reynolds numberRe 10-5

Runs Propeller Nos.7189R 7190R 7191R 7192R

Run No. 1, 3min. 4.4003 4.2608 4.1291 4.0043

max. 4.9185 4.7799 4.6490 4.5252

Run No. 2, 4min. 2.1975 2.1663 2.1364 2.1078

max. 5.0062 4.8645 4.7307 4.6041

Figure 7 Open water characteristics of C4-40 series.

To make an assessment on the C4-40 series propeller

blade designs, a comparison has been made for the open

water efficiency to the propeller ideal efficiency, together

with the B-series for the same blade area ratio and the

same pitch ratio. The comparison is based on the propel-

ler thrust loading coefficient CT, as shown in Figure 8.

It should be noted that the present series were carried out

at a shaft rotational rate of 900 RPM with a chord Rey-

nolds number Re at 0.7R radius between 0.4106 and

0.5106 (Table 5) for C4-40 series, while the B-series

were tested at much lower shaft rotational rate and the

results were later corrected to a standard chord Reynolds

number of 2.00106on 0.75R chord [5]. A direct, quanti-

tative and fair comparison of these two series is therefore

difficult.

However, for a qualitative assessment on C4-40 series,

Figure 8 can be used. The offsets between the ideal effi-ciency and the measured open water efficiency is often

used to evaluate a propeller design, which contains all

losses of a real propeller (such as the rotational losses,

friction losses, non-uniform losses due to finite numberof blades, vortex losses, etc.). An offset of the efficiency

of about 0.15 has been found for the C4-40 series, which

is regarded as excellent designs. The same results are

also found for the other C-Series Propellers.

Figure 8 Comparison of open water efficiency with the

ideal efficiency.

7. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK

Two new propeller series The Wageningen C- and D-Series Propellers have been developed within a Joined

Industry Project (JIP), with both industry and govern-

ment funding. The series represent the most contempo-rary controllable pitch propeller design practice, both for

open and ducted propellers, with balanced compromise

between efficiency and comfort, while also observing

practical and mechanical constraints. Compared to the

ideal efficiency, the C-series propellers show good effi-

ciency values.

The complete two-quadrant open water characteristics of

those propellers at all practically-used pitch settings have

been tested, which provide a huge database with com-plete information on the off-design performance of con-

trollable pitch propellers. They are the first and the onlyseries with blade spindle torque information for a com-

plete range of operational conditions and pitch settings.

All results are shared with the participating organisations

in this JIP. Furthermore, the data will be implemented insoftware for practical use by all participants.

In addition, it has been also planned to test the C4-70 and

C5-75 series for blade spindle torque in cavitating condi-

tions, the C4-70 and C5-75 series for cavitation inception

characteristics at one pitch ratio, and the D4-70 series inNo. 37 duct for thrust breakdown due to excessive cavi-

tation in bollard pull and free running conditions.

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.2

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6

THRUSTCOEFFICIENT

KT,TORQUE

COEFFICIENT

10KQ,EFFICIENCY

ADVANCE COEFFICIENT J

P0.7R/D=0.8

P0.7R/D=1.4

P0.7R/D=1.0

P0.7R/D=1.2

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

0.50

0.55

0.60

0.65

0.70

0.75

0.80

0.85

0.90

0.95

1.00

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0

PROPELLEROPENWATEREFFICIENCY

PROPELLER THRUST LOADING COEFFICIENT C T=8/p KT/J2

Ideal Efficiency

B4-40 P/D=0.8

B4-40 P/D=1.0

B4-40 P/D=1.2

B4-40 P/D=1.4

C4-40 P/D=0.8

C4-40 P/D=1.0

C4-40 P/D=1.2

C4-40 P/D=1.4


7/10

Figure 9 Thrust coefficient CT at various pitch settings

for propeller C4-40 with design pitch ratioP0.7R/D=0.8.

Figure 10 Thrust coefficient CTat various pitch settings


Figure 11 Thrust coefficient CT at various pitch settings


Figure 12 Thrust coefficient CTat various pitch settings


-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

HYDRODYNAMICPITCHANGLE[degrees]

PROPELLER THRUST COEFFICIENT CT

P/D = -1.0

P/D = -0.7

P/D = -0.4

P/D = -0.1

P/D = 0.0

P/D = 0.1

P/D = 0.2

P/D = 0.5

P/D = 0.8

P/D = 1.0

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

HYDRODYN

AMICPITCHANGLE[degrees]


P/D = -1.0

P/D = -0.7

P/D = -0.4

P/D = -0.1

P/D = 0.0

P/D = 0.1

P/D = 0.2

P/D = 0.5

P/D = 0.8

P/D = 1.0

P/D = 1.2

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8



P/D = -1.2

P/D = -1.0

P/D = -0.7

P/D = -0.4

P/D = -0.1

P/D = 0.0

P/D = 0.1

P/D = 0.2

P/D = 0.5

P/D = 0.8

P/D = 1.0

P/D = 1.2

P/D = 1.4

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

HYDRODYN



P/D = -1.2

P/D = -1.0

P/D = -0.7

P/D = -0.4

P/D = -0.1

P/D = 0.0

P/D = 0.1

P/D = 0.2

P/D = 0.5

P/D = 0.8

P/D = 1.0

P/D = 1.2

P/D = 1.4

P/D = 1.6


8/10

Figure 13 Torque coefficient CQat various pitch settings








-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4


PROPELLER TORQUE COEFFICIENT 10CQ

P/D = -1.0

P/D = -0.7

P/D = -0.4

P/D = -0.1

P/D = 0.0

P/D = 0.1

P/D = 0.2

P/D = 0.5

P/D = 0.8

P/D = 1.0

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

HYDRODYN



P/D = -1.0

P/D = -0.7

P/D = -0.4

P/D = -0.1

P/D = 0.0

P/D = 0.1

P/D = 0.2

P/D = 0.5

P/D = 0.8

P/D = 1.0

P/D = 1.2

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4



P/D = -1.2

P/D = -1.0

P/D = -0.7

P/D = -0.4

P/D = -0.1

P/D = 0.0

P/D = 0.1

P/D = 0.2

P/D = 0.5

P/D = 0.8

P/D = 1.0

P/D = 1.2

P/D = 1.4

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

HYDRODYN



P/D = -1.2

P/D = -1.0

P/D = -0.7

P/D = -0.4

P/D = -0.1

P/D = 0.0

P/D = 0.1

P/D = 0.2

P/D = 0.5

P/D = 0.8

P/D = 1.0

P/D = 1.2

P/D = 1.4

P/D = 1.6


9/10

Figure 17 Blade spindle torque coefficient CQbladeat vari-

ous pitch settings for propeller C4-40 with design pitch

ratioP0.7R/D=0.8.


ous pitch settings for propeller C4-40 with design pitchratioP0.7R/D=1.0.


ous pitch settings for propeller C4-40 with design pitch

ratioP0.7R/D=1.2.


ous pitch settings for propeller C4-40 with design pitchratioP0.7R/D=1.4.

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

-1.0

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8


PROPELLER BLADE SPINDLE TORQUE COEFFICIENT 100CQblade

P/D = -1.0

P/D = -0.7

P/D = -0.4

P/D = -0.1

P/D = 0.0

P/D = 0.1

P/D = 0.2

P/D = 0.5

P/D = 0.8

P/D = 1.0

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

-1.0

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

HYDRODYN



P/D = -1.0

P/D = -0.7

P/D = -0.4

P/D = -0.1

P/D = 0.0

P/D = 0.1

P/D = 0.2

P/D = 0.5

P/D = 0.8

P/D = 1.0

P/D = 1.2

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

-1.0

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8



P/D = -1.2

P/D = -1.0

P/D = -0.7

P/D = -0.4

P/D = -0.1

P/D = 0.0

P/D = 0.1

P/D = 0.2

P/D = 0.5

P/D = 0.8

P/D = 1.0

P/D = 1.2

P/D = 1.4

-90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

-1.0

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

HYDRODYN



P/D = -1.2

P/D = -1.0

P/D = -0.7

P/D = -0.4

P/D = -0.1

P/D = 0.0

P/D = 0.1

P/D = 0.2

P/D = 0.5

P/D = 0.8

P/D = 1.0

P/D = 1.2

P/D = 1.4

P/D = 1.6


10/10

8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors thank all participants in The Wageningen C-

and D-Series Propellers JIP: Advance Gearbox, Andritz

(Escher Wyss), Bluewater, Bruntons Propellers (Stone

Marine), Brunvoll, Caterpillar (Berg Propulsion),

CSDDC, CSSRC, Damen, DNV, DSME, GL-Group (Fu-tureShip), Hundested, Hyundai, Kamome, Kawasaki,

MAN, MARIN, Nakashima, NGC, Niigata, Rolls-Royce,

Royal Netherlands Navy, Scana Volda, SMERI, SMMC,

TU Delft, Wrtsil and ZF Marine. In addition, this JIP is

also supported by UDP-JIP, SPA-JIP and STA-JIP.

9. REFERENCES

1. G. Kuiper, The Wageningen Propeller Se-

ries, MARIN Publication 92-001, pub-

lished on the occasion of its 60th anniver-

sary, Wageningen, the Netherlands, 1992.

2.

W.P.A. van Lammeren, Resultaten vanSystematische Proeven met Vrij-varende 4-

bladige Schroeven, type A4.40, Het Schip

18, No. 12 pp. 140-144, N.S.M.B. publica-

tion No. 21, 1936.

3. L. Troost, Open water Test Series with

Modern Propeller Forms, Transactions of

North East Coast Institute of Engineers and

Shipbuilders, pp. 321, N.S.M.B. publication

No. 33, 1938.

4. L. Troost, Open water Test Series with

Modern Propeller Forms, Part 2, Transac-

tions of North East Coast Institute of Engi-

neers and Shipbuilders, pp. 91, N.S.M.B.publication No. 42, 1940

5. W.P.A. van Lammeren, J.D. van Manen

and M.W.C. Oosterveld, The WageningenB-screw Series, Transactions of SNAME,

Vol. 77, pp. 269-317, 1969.

6. W.P.A. van Lammeren, J.D. van Manen

and M.W.C. Oosterveld, The Wageningen

B-screw Series, Schip en Werf, No. 5, pp.

88-103 and No. 6 pp. 115-124, 1970.7. J.D. van Manen, Open Water Test Series

with Propellers in Nozzle, International

Shipbuilding Progress, Vol. 1, 1954.

8.

M.W.C. Oosterveld, Wake AdaptedDucted Propellers, Thesis of Technical

University Delft, N.S.M.B. Publication No.

345, 1970.

9. D.W. Taylor, The Speed and Power of

Ship, Second edition, 1953.

10. R.W.L. Gawn, Effect of Pitch and Blade

Width on Propeller Performance, Transac-tions RINA, 1952.

11. A. Yazaki, Design Diagrams of Modern

Four, Five, Six and Seven-bladed Propellers

Developed in Japan, 4th Naval Hydrody-

namics Symposium, National Academy of

Sciences, Washington DC, USA, 1962.

12. H. Lindgren, Model Tests with A Family

of Three and Five Bladed Propellers,SSPA paper No. 47, Gteborg, Sweden,

1961.

13. H. Lindgren and E. Bjrne, The SSPA

Standard Propeller Family - Open Water

Characteristics, Gteborg, Akademifor-laget/Gumperts, 1967.

14. MARIN, Vier_kwadrant Vrijvarende-

Schoef-Karacteristieken voor B-series

Schroeven, Fourier-Reeks Ontwikkeling en

Operationeel Gebruik, 1984.

15. G.A. Hampton, Four Quadrant Open Wa-

ter Characteristics of Controllable Pitch

Propeller 4739 Designed for LSD-41

(Model 5367), DTNSRDC/SPD-0049-12,

1980.

16. C.G. Queen Four Quadrant Open Water

Characteristics of Controllable Pitch Pro-

peller 4837 Designed for MCM (Model5401), DTNSRDC/SPD-0983-04, 1981.

17. R.F. Roddy, D.E. Hess and W. Faller,

Neural Network Predictions of the 4-

Quadrant Wageningen Propeller Series,

NSWCCD-50-TR-2006/004, April, WestBethesda, Maryland, 2006.

18. A. Yazaki, Design Diagrams of Four-

Bladed Controllable-Pitch Propellers,

Journal of Zosen Kyokai, Vol. 112, No-

vember, 1962.

19. C. Chu, Z.L. Chan, Y.S. She and V.Z.Yuan, The 3-bladed JD-CPP series Part

1, Proceedings of the 4th LIPS PropellerSymposium, Drunen, The Netherlands,

1979.

20. C. Pronk, Blade Spindle Torque and Off-

Design Behaviour of Controllable Pitch

Propellers, Dissertation to the Technical

University Delft, The Netherlands, 1980.

21. M. Ito, S. Yamasaki, M. Oku, H. Koizuka,

M. Tamashima, and M. Ogura, An Ex-

perimental Study of Flow Around CPPBlade (3rd Report): Measurement of CPP

Blade Spindle Torque, Journal of the Kan-

sai Society of Naval Architects, No. 192,

pp.81-91, 1984.22. S. Jessup, M. Donnelly, I. McClintock and

S. Carpenter, Measurements of Controlla-ble Pitch Propeller Blade Loads under

Cavitating Conditions, Proceedings of the

First International Symposium on Marine

Propulsors, Trondheim, Norway, June,

2009.

23. J. Dang, J. Brouwer, R. Bosman and C.Pouw, Quasi-Steady Two-Quadrant Open

Water Tests for the Wageningen Propeller

C- and D-Series, proceedings of the 29th

ONR, Gothenburg, Sweden, 26-31 August,

2012.

fast conference 2013 paper id 61 -the wageningen c- and d-series propellers - final version

Documents