Ocean Engineering 35 (2008) 117130

Computational hydrodynamic analysis of the propellerrudder and the

AZIPOD systems
Hassan Ghassemi

, Parviz Ghadimi
Department of Marine Technology, Amirkabir University of Technology, Hafez Ave, No 424, P.O. Box 15875-4413, Tehran, Iran
Received 20 November 2006; accepted 13 July 2007
Available online 27 July 2007
Abstract
A computational method has been developed to predict the hydrodynamic performance of the propellerrudder systems (PRS) and
azimuthing podded drive (AZIPOD) systems. The method employs a vortex-based lifting theory for the propeller and the potential
surface panel method for the steering system. Three propeller models along with three steering systems (rudder and strut, ap and pod
(SFP)) are implemented in the present calculations for the cases of uniform and non-uniform conditions. Computed velocity components
show good agreement with the experimental measurements behind a propeller with or without the rudder. Calculated thrust, torque and
lift also agree well with the experimental results. Computations are also performed for an AZIPOD system in order to obtain the pressure
distributions on the SFP, and the hydrodynamic performance (thrust, torque and lift coefcients). The present method is useful for
examining the performance of the PRS and AZIPOD systems in the hope of estimating the propulsion and the maneuverability
characteristics of the marine vehicles more accurately.
r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Hydrodynamic analysis; Propellerrudder; AZIPOD
1. Introduction
Propellerrudder systems (PRS) are located behind a
ships stern where they encounter large wake ow. Due to
the hulls presence, the ow distribution into the propeller
is non-uniform and unsteady. Recent improvements made
in the electrical propulsion by the engine manufacturers
provide the azimuthing podded drive (AZIPOD) systems
which are compact propulsion systems, and give excellent
maneuverability. The most signicant hydrodynamic ad-
vantage of the AZIPOD system is that the propeller is set
in a more regular ow. It utilizes a smaller rudder, i.e. the
ap, located at the trailing edge of a vertical hydrofoil, and
the strut, situated in a similar arrangement as a ap on an
airplane wing, The ap and strut mechanism provides
greater propulsion efciency and excellent maneuverabi-
lity. The ap is generally used for high-speed crafts when
the pod needs to be locked in neutral position, but could
also function as a controlling element for the course
keeping task.
Until now, hydrodynamics investigations of the propeller
rudder systems, by virtue of different methodologies, have
mainly concentrated on the PRS propulsors. A theoretical
treatment of the propeller and rudder was initially
conducted by Yamazaki (1968) and later numerically by
Yamazaki et al. (1985). Tamashima et al. (1993) and
Matsui et al. (1994) evaluated the PRS propulsion systems
under uniform ow conditions. Matsui et al. (1994) applied
this method in the context of the ship maneuverability
taking into account free surface effects. Molland and
Turnock (1993, 1996) investigated experimentally the
propellerrudder performance in the wind tunnel and
developed the propeller theory and rudder lifting line
theory to predict forces on a rudder in a propeller
slipstream. Li (1996) also investigated the propellerrudder
interactions by applying the lifting line theory for the
propeller and the vortex lattice method for the rudder.
For the AZIPOD systems, efcient numerical schemes
are scarce. Rains et al. (1981) applied empirical formulas to
ARTICLE IN PRESS
www.elsevier.com/locate/oceaneng
0029-8018/$ - see front matter r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2007.07.008

Corresponding author. Tel.: +982166419615; fax: +982166413028.

E-mail address: gasemi@aut.ac.ir (H. Ghassemi).
estimate the drag coefcients of different parts of the strut,
ap, and pod (SFP). Wang et al. (2004) investigated
experimentally and numerically (panel code) the push and
pull congurations of the podded propulsion system and
the effect of the pod geometry on the hydrodynamic
performance of the whole system.
More recently, due to the market needs and in order to
gain more efciency by the AZIPOD systems, marine
researchers have rigorously pursued this topic and much
effort has been devoted to explore it numerically and
experimentally. During the past two years, the 1st and 2nd
T-Pod conferences have been held at the University of
Newcastle (UK) and Universite de Bretagne Occidentale
Brest (France) in 2004 and 2006, respectively, and many
researchers (like Ma et al., 2004; Mohammed Islam et al.,
2004; Sakir Bal et al., 2006; Zhang Lijun and Wang
Yanyin, 2006) presented their latest ndings.
Hydrodynamic design of the propellerpod-strut system
has not thus far been adequately explored. It is indeed
imperative that we use more reliable procedures in the
design of such a propulsion system in order to increase the
propulsion efciency. In an attempt to meet these needs,
the present paper introduces a numerical procedure which
analyzes the hydrodynamic performance of the PRS
and the AZIPOD systems. The method applies Yamazaki
et al.s (1985) method for the analysis of the propeller and
the potential-based boundary element method (so-called
panel method) for the steering system. This combined
method could not only emulate the hydrodynamic behavior
of the simple PRS systems, but also could quite satisfacto-
rily predict the hydrodynamic performance of the more
complex and involved AZIPOD systems. In this work, the
effect of the steering system is also examined on both types
of the propulsors as well as the interactions occurring at
different operating conditions.
2. Prediction method
2.1. Formulation of the problem
2.1.1. Coordinate system
In order to study the ow elds around a rotating
propeller and steering system in a steady ow, a
rectangular coordinate system O-XYZ and a cylindrical
coordinate system O-Xry are dened in space. The origin is
located at the center of the propeller and the X-axis
coincides with the propeller shaft axis as shown Fig. 1. The
steering post is placed behind the propeller and is parallel
to the Z-axis. The distance between the post and the
propeller is X X
Rud
.
2.1.2. Inow velocity onto the propeller
The propeller is assumed to rotate with a constant
angular velocity o around the X-axis in the negative
direction of y. Denoting the components of the steady non-
uniform velocity eld towards the propeller in the
Cartesian coordinates by (u
PX
, u
PY
, u
PZ
) and in the
cylindrical coordinates by (v
PX
, v
Pr
, v
Py
), they are expressed
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Nomenclature
a
0
(r) geometric pitch of the propeller
a(r) effective pitch of the propeller
c(r) propeller chord length at r
c
M
(r) distance from leading edge to maximum thick-
ness
C
P
pressure distribution coefcient
D propeller diameter
F
RY
rudder lift
h(r) pitch of the free vortex
k
N
(r) Prandtls tip correction factor
M
P
radial number of intervals
n revolutions per second
N number of propeller blades
n
q
normal vector
N
P
circumferential number of intervals
P
i
pressure at center of each panel
P
0
atmospheric pressure
P propeller pitch
P
U
upper-side pressure
P
L
lower-side pressure
Q propeller torque
r
B
hub radius
R propeller radius
S
B
body surface (steering system)
S
W
wake surface
S
N
outer control surface
T propeller thrust
t
L
(r) distance from LE to base line at r
t
T
(r) distance from TE to base line at r
t
max
(r) maximum thickness at r
tan a
g
zero lift angle from the base line
~
V
0
upstream inow velocity

V measured axial mean velocity

~
V
r
induced radial velocity
~
V
P
inow velocity to propeller
~
V
R
inow velocity to rudder
~
V
X
induced axial velocity
~
V
t
induced tangential velocity
X
Rud
propellerrudder stock distance
d
F
ap angle
d
R
rudder angle
f
P
velocity potential on propeller
f
R
velocity potential on rudder
f
R
right-side potential
f
L
left-side potential
r water density
G(r,y) strength of bound vortex
H. Ghassemi, P. Ghadimi / Ocean Engineering 35 (2008) 117130 118
as components of the vector:
~v
P
v
PX
; v
Pr
; v
Py
u
PX
; u
PY
sin y
u
PZ
cos y; 2prn u
PY
cos y u
PZ
sin y. 1
In the case of steady and uniform ow, the inow
velocity simplies to
~v
P
v
PX
; v
Pr
; v
Py
V
0
; 0; 2prn, (2)
where V
0
is the speed at which water is moving onto the
propeller and n is the propeller rotational speed.
2.2. Vortex-based lifting theory for the propeller
2.2.1. Vortex and potential calculations
The propeller is represented by the vortex system. This is
composed of the bound vortex arranged in the radial
direction on the propeller (it is assumed that the propeller
is replaced by the innitely many blade-like actuator discs)
and the free vortex shedding from the bound vortex. The
free vortex is distributed on the helical surface with
pitch 2ph(r) without contraction. The strength of the
bound vortex G(r,y) and the velocity potential f
P
are
determined by the equations of the propeller theory and the
kinematic boundary condition (KBC). An iterative proce-
dure is used to obtain converged values of h(r) on the blade
radius.
The velocity potential f
P
due to the bound vortex on the
propeller may be expressed (Yamazaki, 1968) as
f
P

_
R
r
B
r
0
dr
0
_
2p
0
Gr
0
; y
0
G
P
x; r; y; r
0
; y
0
dy
0
, (3)
where
G
P
x; r; y; r
0
; y
0

r
0
hr
0

1
R
P

r cos y sin y
0
r sin y cos y
0
R
2
P
X
2
1
X
R
P
_ _
4
and
R
P

X
2
Y r
0
sin y
0

2
Z r
0
cos y
0

2
_
.
Other parameters of the Eqs. (3) and (4) are identied in
Fig. 2.
2.2.2. Kinematic boundary condition
The propeller is considered to have a nite number of
blades and a nite chord length. Under these assumptions,
the KBC on the blade is expressed as
2

r
2
ar
2
_
Nk
1
cr

r
2
hr
2
2rhrk
N
r
_
_
_
_
Gr; y

qf
P
qX
_ _
P

hr
r
qf
P
rqy
_ _
P

ar
r
v
Py
v
PX
, 5
where a(r) is the effective pitch angle and is dened by
ar k
a
0
r r tan a
g
1 a
0
r=r tan a
g
;
tan a
g

2k
0
t

r=cr
1:5 c
M
r=cr

t
L
r t
T
r
cr
,
t

r
t
max
r
2
1
c
M
r
cr
_ _
t
L
r
c
M
r
cr
t
T
r, 6
k
N
r
2
p
cos
1
exp N 1
r
R
_ _

R
2
hr
2
_
2hr
_
_
_
_
_
_
. (7)
In the above expression, tan a
g
denotes the zero lift angle
from the base line of the blade section, k and k
0
indicate the
correction factors relating to the blade section, and k
N
(r)
indicates the Prandtls tip correction factor. All parameters
of Eq. (6) are shown in the Fig. 3. The discretized version
of the KBC is as follows:
2

r
2
m
ar
m

2
_
Nk
1
cr
m

r
2
m
hr
m

2
2r
m
hr
m
k
N
r
m

_
_
_
_
_
_
G
mn

N
P
i1

M
P
j1
r
i
G
ij
P
Xij

hr
m

r
m
P
yij
_ _

ar
m

r
m
v
Py
v
PX
, 8
ARTICLE IN PRESS
O
O
Pod
Flap
Strut
Rudder
X
Z
HULL
X
Z
HULL
Y
Z
O

r
Fig. 1. Coordinate systems for the PRS and the AZIPOD systems.
) (Pr
) (
*
op R
Rudder R
R
P
R
*
R
r
r
Z
Y O
Panel Control
Panel y Singularit
Fig. 2. Description of the singularity distributions.
H. Ghassemi, P. Ghadimi / Ocean Engineering 35 (2008) 117130 119
where
P
Xij

_
r
i1
r
i
_
y
i1
y
i
qG
P
X; r; y; r
0
; y
0

qX
_ _
S
P
dr
0
dy
0
,
P
yij

_
r
i1
r
i
_
y
i1
y
i
qG
P
X; r; y; r
0
; y
0

rqy
_ _
S
P
dr
0
dy
0
. 9
Most of the numerical work is devoted to the evaluations
of the inuence coefcients (P
Xij
and P
yij
) in Eq. (9) which
are calculated by the Gauss quadrature method. The free
vortex pitch is approximated by
hr
k
2
r

V
PX

V
Py
, (10)
where

V
PX

1
2p
_
2p
0
V
PX
dy;

V
Py

1
2p
_
2p
0
V
Py
dy,
V
PX
v
PX

rGr; y
2hrk
N
r

qf
P
qX
_ _
P
,
V
Py
v
Py

Gr; y
2k
N
r

qf
P
rqy
_ _
P
. 11
The parameters k
1
and k
2
depend on the propeller chord-
length ratio. For MAU and B-series propellers they are
given as
k
1
1:07 1:05cr=R 0:375cr
2
=R
2

r0:7R
,
k
2
1 0:625cr
max
=R 0:84. 12
2.2.3. Hydrodynamic characteristics of the propeller
The thrust and torque of the propeller can be obtained
by summation of the vortex and viscous components as
T F
PX
r
_
R
r
B
_
2p
0
Gr; yV
Py
r dy dr
0:5r
_
R
r
B
_
2p
0
C
f
Ncr

1 hr=r
2
_

V
PX

V
Py
dy dr,
F
PY
r
_
R
r
B
_
2p
0
Gr; WV
PX
r cos ydy dr;
F
PZ
r
_
R
r
B
_
2p
0
Gr; WV
PX
r sin ydy dr,
Q M
PX
r
_
R
r
B
_
2p
0
Gr; yV
PX
r
2
dy dr
0:5r
_
R
r
B
_
2p
0
C
f
NCr

1 hr=r
2
_

V
2
PW
r dy dr,
M
PY
r
_
R
r
B
_
2p
0
Gr; yV
Py
r
2
cos dy dr,
M
PZ
r
_
R
r
B
_
2p
0
Gr; yV
Py
r
2
sin y dy dr; 13
where C
f
is the viscous coefcient and can be obtained by
the application of PrandtlShlichting formulas. The hydro-
dynamic characteristics of the propeller are given by
K
t

T
rn
2
D
4
; K
q

Q
rn
2
D
5
,
J
V
0
nD
; Z
o

J
2p
K
t
K
q
. 14
2.3. Panel method for the steering system
2.3.1. Mathematical formulations
The uid is assumed to be incompressible and inviscid.
The ow is considered to be irrotational and subject to the
uniform or non-uniform inow velocity
~
V
R
that is affected
by the induced velocity of the propeller. Under these
assumptions, the ow eld around a body is characterized
by a perturbation velocity f
R
which satises the Laplaces
equation:
r
2
f
R
0. (15)
A boundary value problem can be constructed by
specifying the boundary conditions on the rudder or the
steering system as follows:
(i) Tangential condition on the wetted surface:
qf
R
qn

~
V
R
~n ~v
BL
, (16)
where the
~
V
R
is the total resulting velocity onto the
steering system (rudder in PRS and SFP in AZIPOD)
and is later shown to be obtained from the Eq. (30).
Also, ~v
BL
is the transition (or blowing) velocity to be
obtained from the solution of the boundary layer given
by Katz and Plotkin (1991):
~v
BL

qu
e
d

qs
, (17)
where s is the line along the surface of the rudder, u
e
the ow velocity at the edge of the boundary layer and
ARTICLE IN PRESS
) (
0
r a
r 2
) (r c
) (r c
M
) (
max
r t
) (r t
L
) (r t
T
Line Base
Fig. 3. Description of the blade section.
H. Ghassemi, P. Ghadimi / Ocean Engineering 35 (2008) 117130 120
d* the displacement thickness. The solution is based on
the two-dimensional boundary layer model and, in
practice, when extended to the three-dimensional ow,
it is performed along the on-body streamlines that
have previously been computed.
(ii) Kinematic and dynamic conditions in the wake imply
that there is no ow and no pressure jump across the
wake surface S
W
:
D
qf
R
qn
_ _
S
W

qf
R
qn
_ _
R

qf
R
qn
_ _
L
0, (18)
DP
S
W
0. (19)
(iii) Constant circulation (Kelvins theorem):
Df
R

S
W
f
R
R
f
L
R
G. (20)
(iv) Quiescence condition at innity (outer control surface):
rf
R
! 0; as S
1
! 1. (21)
(v) Kutta condition at the trailing edge:
jrf
R
j
TE
h1 defined to be finite. (22)
Applying Greens theorem, the perturbation velocity
potential at any eld point P(x,y,z) can be expressed by a
distribution of source and doublet on the boundary surface
S
B
as in
2pf
R
p
_
S
B
f
R
q
q
qn
q
1
R
R
_ _

_
qf
R
q
qn
q
1
R
R
_ __
dS
B

_
S
W
Df
R
q
q
qn
q
1
R
R
_ _
dS
W
, 23
where R
R
is the distance between the eld panel and the
singular panel which is shown in Fig. 2. This equation may
be regarded as a representation of the velocity potential in
terms of a normal dipole distribution of strength f
R
(p)
on the body surface S
B
, a source distribution of strength
qf
R
/qn on S
B
, and a normal dipole distribution of strength
Df
R
on the wake surface S
W
. Discretization of Eq. (23)
leads to a linear system of algebraic equations for the
unknown f
R
as in
2pf
Ri

N
Tot
j1
iaj
C
ij
f
Rj

N
R
j1
W
ijl
Df
R

B
ij
qf
R
qn
_ _
j
,
i 1; 2; . . . ; N
Tot
, 24
where C
ij
, W
ijl
(constant dipole distributions) and B
ij
(constant source distribution) are the inuence coefcients
on panel j acting on the control point of panel i.
The velocity and pressure on the surface can also be
obtained by differentiating the velocity potential over the
body surface. Once the perturbation potential is found,
the induced velocity may be determined by the derivative of
the perturbation potential, ~v
tR
rf
R
. The pressure on
the rudder (or SFP of the AZIPOD system) surface is
calculated by
P 0:5r2V
S
v
tR
v
2
tR
. (25)
Then, the pressure coefcient C
P
on the rudder surface is
dened by
C
P

P P
0
rn
2
D
2
. (26)
The equal pressure Kutta condition is applied to
determine the unknown Df
Rj
of the dipole strength on
the wake surface. In the numerical calculation, the pressure
Kutta condition can be expressed as
DP
i
P
R
TE
P
L
TE
0; i 1; 2; . . . ; N
R
, (27)
where N
R
is the total number of panels at the trailing
edge (TE).
2.3.2. Frictional drag on the steering system
The effect of viscosity can be approximated based on a
two-dimensional boundary layer model by computing on-
body streamlines which can be calculated once the
velocities at the control points of each panels are known.
The boundary layer displacement thickness can be
calculated by applying a simple surface interpolation
procedure for the control points. This approach has been
successfully applied to a wide range of complex ow
problems and provides a more versatile and robust
engineering solution to the fully three-dimensional bound-
ary layer method. In the present paper, the boundary layer
analysis method is based on the calculations of the
momentum integral equation, Heads entrainment and
LuwiegTillmans equations with turbulent condition
(Cebeci and Bradshow, 1977; Muralidhar and Biswas,
2005). The computed results include the thickness d, the
displacement thickness d*, and the momentum thickness y*
of the boundary layer and the frictional coefcient C
f
. For
each panel in the longitudinal stripwise of the ship, the
section frictional resistance R
F
is obtained from the
equation:
R
F

_
s
0
t
0
dx
ds
ds 0:5r
_
l
0
C
f
u
2
e
dx
0:5r

N
Strip
k1
C
f
u
2
e
Dx, 28
where C
f
and t
0
are the local frictional coefcient and shear
stress on each panel, respectively.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
H. Ghassemi, P. Ghadimi / Ocean Engineering 35 (2008) 117130 121
2.4. Propellerrudder interaction
When the propeller and the steering systems are aligned,
they interact through mutually induced velocity elds. The
inow eld into the propeller is accelerated towards the
rudder inducing axial and tangential components. In turn,
the rudder blocks and diverts the ow inducing velocities
on the propeller. Given the inow velocity,
~
V
0
, the velocity
~
V
P
owing into the propeller is given by
~
V
P

~
V
0
rf
R
(29)
and the velocity components
~
V
R
owing onto the steering
system is expressed as
~
V
R

~
V
0
~ w
P
rf
P
, (30)
where ~ w
P
is the non-potential ow velocity due to the
vorticity generated by the propeller and is calculated using
the momentum theory which determines the propeller wake
radius at an innite downstream position.
The velocities Df
P
and Df
R
are induced by the propeller
and the steering system. An iterative method is required to
obtain the induced velocity generated by the rudder onto
the propeller. At each iterative step, new induced velocity
rf
R
is calculated and added to Eq. (30). Then pressure and
hydrodynamic characteristics are re-calculated for the
propeller and the steering system. When converged values
of rf
R
are found, nal values of the total forces and the
torque are computed.
3. Numerical results
3.1. Propeller set alone (without the rudder)
In order to evaluate the accuracy and applicability of the
method, several different types of propellers have been
examined. The main dimensions of the propeller models
are presented in Table 1. Fig. 4 shows the panel
arrangement of one of these propeller model called MP195.
3.1.1. Open water characteristics
The hydrodynamic characteristics of the propeller are
determined by Eqs. (13) and (14) after calculating the strength
of bound vortex (G(r,y)). Fig. 5 shows the distribution of
the bound vortex strength (shown by non-dimensional
GAMMA G/(pDV
A
), free vortex strength (h(r)) and
the Prandtle tip correction factor K
N
(r) at various propeller
radii for two propellers (MP24 and MP101). It is observed
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Table 1
Main dimensions of the propeller models
Propeller model MP195 MP24 MP101
Diameter (mm) 250 220 220
Exp. area ratio 0.65 0.62 055
Pitch ratio 0.710 0.8904 0.80
Boss ratio 0.18 0.1888 0.18
No. of blades 5 5 4
Rake angle (deg) 10.0 12.03 10.0
Thickness ratio 0.050 0.0405 0.050
Blade section MAU MAU MAU
Fig. 4. Panel arrangement of the MP195 propeller.
MP24
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
G
A
M
M
A
,

K
N
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
G
A
M
M
A
,

K
N
0. 0185
0. 019
0. 0195
0. 02
0. 0205
0. 021
0. 0215
h
h (r/R) KN (r/R) GAMMA (r/R)
MP101
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
r/R
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
r/R
0.017
0.0175
0.018
0.0185
0.019
0.0195
0.02
h
h KN GAMMA
Fig. 5. Distribution of h(r), K
N
(r) and GAMMA G/(pDV
A
) at various
propeller radii for MP24 and MP101.
H. Ghassemi, P. Ghadimi / Ocean Engineering 35 (2008) 117130 122
that the bound vortex strength is between 0.6 and 0.7 R
where the chord length is bigger. The factor K
N
(r) is
important in Eq. (7) and its value is almost one except near
the tip of the propeller.
Performance in open water conditions of the MP195,
MP24 and Wageningen propeller types are shown in Figs. 6
and 7. It is also observed that the numerical results are
generally in good agreement with the experimental data
over the majority of the propellers working range.
3.1.2. Velocity eld behind the propeller
In this section, ow eld behind the propeller with and
without the rudder are found and compared. Results are
presented for some of the components whose characteri-
stics are given in Table 1. Velocity eld plays an important
role on the hydrodynamic characteristics of the propulsion
systems. Accordingly, it is very important to accurately
predict the velocity components behind the propeller.
Figs. 8 and 9 show the comparison of the induced
velocity components for the MP24 propeller for two
downstream positions (i.e. X/D 0.273, 0.773) and the
advance velocity ratio (J 0.30, 0.70). The radial velocity
is indicated to be very small but the axial and tangential
velocities are quite considerable, particularly near the root.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
J
K
t
,

1
0
K
q
,

E
t
a
Kt (Comp.)
10Kq (Comp.)
Eta (Comp.)
Kt (Exp. at IHI)
10Kq (Exp. at IHI)
Eta (Exp. at IHI)
Kt (Comp.)
10Kq (Comp.)
Eta (Comp.)
Kt (Exp. at IHI)
10Kq (Exp. at IHI)
Eta (Exp. at IHI)
MP195
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
J
K
t
,

1
0
K
q
,

E
t
a
MP24
Fig. 6. Comparison of the open water characteristics of the MP195 and
the MP24 models.
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
J
K
t
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
J
1
0
K
q
Computed (P/D=0.75)
Computed (P/D=1.0)
Computed (P/D=1.2)
Wageningen B4.40
Wageningen B4.40
Wageningen B4.40
Fig. 7. Open water characteristics for the Wageningen B4.40 propeller
model.
X/D = 0.273
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Z/R
Z/R
V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y

R
a
t
i
o
X/D = 0.773
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y

R
a
t
i
o
Vx/V0 (Computed)
Vr/V0
Vt/V0
Vx/V0 (Exp. by Tamashima)
Vr/V0
Vt/V0
Fig. 8. Induced velocity components behind the propeller without the
rudder (MP24, J 0.30).
H. Ghassemi, P. Ghadimi / Ocean Engineering 35 (2008) 117130 123
Comparison also shows some discrepancy for the axial
velocity in the neighborhood of the root for the specied
cases, but in general the agreement is good. The
discrepancy between the numerical and the experimental
results near the root can be attributed to the inadequate or
incomplete physical features of the ow in the region such
ARTICLE IN PRESS
X/D = 0.273
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y

R
a
t
i
o
Vx/V0 (Computed)
Vr/V0
Vt /V0
Vx/V0 (Exp. by Tamashima)
Vr/V0
Vt/V0
X/D = 0.773
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Z/R
Z/R
V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y

R
a
t
i
o
Fig. 9. Induced velocity components behind the propeller without the
rudder (MP24, J 0.70).
X/D = 0.30
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Z/R
Z/R
V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y

R
a
t
i
o
Vx/V0 (Computed)
Vr/V0
Vt /V0
Vx/V0 (Exp., Molland et al. 1996)
X/D = 1.0
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
V
e
l
o
c
i
t
y

R
a
t
i
o
Fig. 10. Velocity components behind the Wageningen B4.40 propeller
without the rudder (J 0.599).
Table 2
Main dimensions of the steering models (rudder and strut/ap)
Steering type MR21 MR24 SFP11
Shape REC NREC NREC
Mean chord length
a
160 179.1 115
Root chord length
a
160 235.1 155
Tip chord length
a
160 207.1 121
Flapstrut ratio span
a
N/A N/A 0.35
Span
a
240 285.6 142
Max. mean thickness
a
24 33.12 16.5
Type of section NACA0015 Normal Normal
Pod diameter
a
N/A N/A 100
a
Dimensions are in mm.
Fig. 11. Panel arrangement of the PRS for the MP101 model with the
MR21 propeller.
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
-0.125
-0.075
-0.025
0.025
0.075
0.125
-0.125
-0.075
-0.025
0.025
0.075
0.125
Suction Side Pressure Side
Fig. 12. Calculated velocities of the MR21 rudder behind the MP101
propeller slipstream (J 0.50, d
R
10.01).
H. Ghassemi, P. Ghadimi / Ocean Engineering 35 (2008) 117130 124
as thick boundary layer and presumably high geometrical
pitch angle of the propeller among others.
The outlined method has also been extended to the
analysis of the Wageningen propeller type. Fig. 10 shows
the computed velocity components behind the Wageningen
B4.40 propeller without the rudder at the advance velocity
ratio J 0.599 and for two different downstream positions
of X/D, 0.3 and 1.0. The comparison of the computed
axial velocity and their corresponding experimental values
indicate that the axial velocity distribution for the case
X/D 1.0 shows very good agreement with the experiment
over most of the blade radius. However, in the case of
X/D 0.3, there was some discrepancy between the two
graphs which the authors again attribute to the lack of
accurate modeling of the physics of the ow in the region.
3.2. Propeller with rudder
When the rudder is aligned with the propeller, the ow
will be different and the effect of the rudder on the
propellers performance would be signicant. The main
dimensions of the model of the steering system (with the
rudder) in this setting are presented in Table 2. Mesh
paneling of the PRS for the case of MP101 propeller along
ARTICLE IN PRESS
PHI(RS)
CP(RS)
PHI(LS)
CP(LS)

Z/R = -1.59091
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
x/C
C
p
1
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
C
p
Z/R = -0.45455
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
x/C
1
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
C
p
Z/R = -0.22727
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
x/C
1
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
C
p
Z/R = 0.00000
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
x/C
1
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
C
p
Z/R = 0.22727
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
x/C
1
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
C
p
Z/R = 1.59091
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
x/C
1
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
C
p
Z/R = 1.36364
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
x/C
1
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
C
p
Z/R = 1.13636
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
x/C
1
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
C
p
Z/R = 0.90909
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
x/C
1
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
C
p
Z/R = 0.68182
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
x/C
1
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
C
p
Z/R = -1.36364
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
x/C
1
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
C
p
Z/R = -0.90909
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
x/C
1
Z/R = 0.45455
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
x/C
1
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
C
p
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
C
p
Z/R = -0.68182
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
x/C
1
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
C
p

Z/R = -1.13636
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
x/C
1
Fig. 13. Potential and pressure distribution on MR21 rudder behind the MP101 propeller model (J 0.55, X
Rud
/D 0.45, d
R
10.01).
H. Ghassemi, P. Ghadimi / Ocean Engineering 35 (2008) 117130 125
with MR21 rudder is shown in Fig. 11. Calculated induced
velocity on both sides of the MR21 rudder in the propeller
slipstream is shown in Fig. 12. The effect of the propeller
contraction slipstream on the rudder surface is clearly seen
in this gure. The differences of the cross velocity on the
port and the starboard sides are obvious near the rudder
ends.
The surface pressure distribution on the rudder is one of
the essential parameters to understand the capability of the
potential panel method. It is well known that any rough
panel distribution will affect the pressure distribution.
Fig. 13 shows the computed perturbation velocity potential
(f) and the pressure coefcient (C
P
) on the MR21 rudder
surface behind the MP101 propeller model for various
locations along the span of the rudder from the tip to the
root (about 15 spanwise locations from Z/R 1.59 to
+1.59) for the case J 0.55, X
Rud
/D 0.45, d
R
10.01.
As shown in this gure, when Z/Ro0.90 or Z/R4+
0.90, the effect of the induced velocity of the propeller on
the rudder would diminish. While along the hub centerline
of the rudder (Z/R 0), the rudder exhibits the same
behavior, inside the slipstream (the remainder of the
computational region like the vicinity of the blades) the
rudder is under strong inuence of the propeller-induced
velocity.
When the rudder angle is increased, the thrust T
generated by the propeller increases moderately while at
the same time the rudder drag D
rud
increases considerably.
However, computational results indicate that the overall
(or the total) thrust (i.e. TD
rud
) of the propulsion system
decreases. Fig. 14 shows the comparison of the computed
total thrust with the experimental data. Good agreement
is observed up to 301 rudder angle. In excess of this value,
the numerical model does not follow the trend of the
experiments desirably because it is presumed that the
separation phenomena as well as the thick boundary layer
affect the rudder drag strongly. Similar conclusions can be
drawn for the torque and the lift coefcients.
3.3. Performance of the PRS behind the ship hull
The hull chosen for this section is the MS689 tanker
model whose main dimensions are shown in Table 3.
Experiments for this hull were carried out at the
Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries (IHI) by Ghassemi
and Tsutsumi (2002). Fig. 15 shows the experimentally
measured wake ow eld behind the ship model. This
three-dimensional velocity eld is adopted for the inow
condition into the PRS system. The selected propeller
rudder combination is the MP24-MR24.
Tables 4 and 5 list the experimental data and the
computational results of the thrust and the torque of the
propeller model (MP24) behind the tanker model (MS689)
with and without the rudder at various operating condi-
tions. Comparison of these results indicates that the error is
almost less than 5%.
3.4. Hydrodynamics of the AZIPOD systems
The method presented in this work was extended for
calculation of the hydrodynamic performance of the
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
Rudder angle [deg.]
T
o
t
a
l

T
h
r
u
s
t
Computed, J=0.55
Computed, J=0.30
Exp. by Tamashima et al.
Exp.by Tamashima et al.
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
Rudder angle [deg.]
T
o
r
q
u
e
-0.2
-0.1
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Rudder angle [deg.]
R
u
d
d
e
r

L
i
f
t
Fig. 14. Hydrodynamic performance of the PRS propulsion system at
different operating conditions (MP101MR21).
Table 3
Main dimensions of the tanker model MS689
Parameter Value
Length Lpp (m) 7.00
Breadth B (m) 1.171
Draft d (m) 0.464
Block coefcient 0.837
Type of hull Tanker
H. Ghassemi, P. Ghadimi / Ocean Engineering 35 (2008) 117130 126
AZIPOD systems. Figs. 16 and 18 show the panel
arrangement of the AZIPOD system at the ap angle of
201 and its exposed version, respectively. Here, the strut
and the ap are considered as the lifting bodies, thus the
Kutta condition is required at the trailing edge to uniquely
specify the circulation. The calculated induced velocities on
the strut/ap behind the MP195 propeller slipstream are
shown in Fig. 17. The slipstream effect is evident on both
the pressure side and the suction side (Figs. 1618).
The pressure distribution over the StrutFlap (SF)
region behind the MP195 propeller is shown in Fig. 19 at
the ap angle of 201 for the case J 0.5. The pressure
distribution is given spanwise from the root (where it is
ARTICLE IN PRESS
0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0
.
9
0
.
8
0
.
7
0
.
6
0
.
5
0
.
4
0
.
3
0
.
4
0
.
2
0
.
3
0
.3
Fig. 15. Measured wake distribution behind the ship model MS689 in full
condition.
Table 4
Comparison of the thrust and the torque for MP24 behind the ship model
without the rudder
Operating condition Experiment Computation
N (rps)
V (m/s) T (kg) Q (kg m) T (kg) Q (kg m)
7.29 0.656 1.904 0.0520 1.784 0.0476
7.94 0.712 2.268 0.0616 2.124 0.0566
8.67 0.770 2.727 0.0733 2.557 0.0680
Table 5
Comparison of the thrust, torque and lateral force of the PRS behind the
MS689 model tanker for MP24MR24 at the zero rudder angle
Operating condition Experiment Computation
n (rps)
V (m/s) T (kg) Q (kg m) F
RY
(kg) T (kg) Q (kg m) F
RY
(kg)
7.03 0.576 1.931 0.0509 0.200 1.815 0.0475 0.208
7.68 0.629 2.304 0.0601 0.238 2.166 0.0566 0.250
8.40 0.677 2.794 0.0724 0.266 2.626 0.0684 0.303
Fig. 16. Panelarrangement of the AZIPOD (zoomed).
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
0.05
0.09
0.13
0.17
0.05
0.09
0.13
0.17
Suction Side Pressure Side
Fig. 17. Calculated velocities over the strut/ap behind MP195 propeller
slipstream (J 0.30, d
R
15.01).
Fig. 18. Panel arrangement of the AZIPOD (ap angle 201).
H. Ghassemi, P. Ghadimi / Ocean Engineering 35 (2008) 117130 127
A
R
T
I
C
L
E
I
N
P
R
E
S
S
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.08 0.13 0.18 0.23 0.28
CP(RS) Y/R = 0.586
CP(LS) Y/R = 0.586
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.08 0.13 0.18 0.23 0.28
CP(RS) Y/R = 0.437
CP(LS) Y/R = 0.437
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.08 0.13 0.18 0.23 0.28
CP(RS) Y/R =0.660
CP(LS) Y/R =0.660
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.08 0.13 0.18 0.23 0.28
CP(RS) Y/R = 0.511
CP(LS) Y/R = 0.511
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.08 0.13 0.18 0.23 0.28
CP(RS) Y/R =0.883
CP(LS) Y/R =0.883
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.08 0.13 0.18 0.23 0.28
CP(RS) Y/R = 0.734
CP(LS) Y/R = 0.734
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.08 0.13 0.18 0.23 0.28
CP(RS) Y/R = 0.957
CP(LS) Y/R = 0.957
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.08 0.13 0.18 0.23 0.28
CP(RS) Y/R =0.809
CP(LS) Y/R =0.809
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.08 0.13 0.18 0.23 0.28
CP(RS) Y/R = 1.180
CP(LS) Y/R = 1.180
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.08 0.13 0.18 0.23 0.28
CP(RS) Y/R =1.031
CP(LS) Y/R = 1.031
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.08 0.13 0.18 0.23 0.28
CP(RS) Y/R = 1.254
CP(LS) Y/R =1.254
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.08 0.13 0.18 0.23 0.28
CP(RS) Y/R = 1.106
CP(LS) Y/R = 1.106
Fig. 19. Pressure distribution over the strut/ap SFP11 behind the propeller MP195 (J 0.50, d
F
20.01).
H
.
G
h
a
s
s
e
m
i
,
P
.
G
h
a
d
i
m
i
/
O
c
e
a
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
3
5
(
2
0
0
8
)
1
1
7

1
3
0
1
2
8
connected to the pod) to the tip. It is seen when the SF is
outside of the propeller slipstream domain (Z/R41), the
variation of pressure distribution on the SF surface is very
small. In this gure, the strut section extends approxi-
mately from the initial abscissa to the point where the
second pressure peak starts. The effect of the ap deection
on the load distribution can clearly be seen in the strut
portion by the pressure extrema. The ap deection causes
a suction peak at the right side (RS) near the ap hinge.
The pressure distribution along the pod for several
circumferential locations is shown in Fig. 20. Some
pressure jump due to the deection of the ap is evident
at about 80% of the pod length.
Fig. 21 shows the hydrodynamic performance of the
AZIPOD system (MP195, SFP11) versus the ap angle (up
to d
F
30.01) at two propeller loads of J 0.3 and 0.5.
The thrust coefcients are shown for each element of the
system (pod, SF, propeller). As the ap angle is increased,
the trends of these curves become similar to those of the
PRS propulsion systems. The effectiveness of the ap in
increasing the maximum lift coefcient may not be
precisely calculated due to the inadequate modeling of
the physics of the ow. In the absence of any experimental
data for this region, the accuracy of these computed results
cannot be validated.
4. Conclusions
A computational method has been developed to predict
the local ow eld and the hydrodynamic performance of
the PRS and the AZIPOD systems. Based on the presented
computational results, the following conclusions are drawn:
1. For the PRS propulsion systems, the computed axial,
tangential and radial velocities are found in good
agreement with the experimental evidence. Hydrody-
namic performance can also be predicted well for the
rudder angles up to 301.
2. The measured wake behind a tanker model has been
used as the inow conditions into the propeller and the
numerical solution, with and without the rudder, shows
that the radial velocities are in good agreement with the
experimental data.
3. Computational results of the thrust, torque and lift force
(lateral) of the PRS propulsor behind the MS689 model
tanker for the MP24-MR24 propellerrudder combina-
tion at the zero rudder angle agree well with the
experimental data.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
- 3
- 2
- 1
0
1
2
3
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
x/L
C
P

=

(
p
-
p
0
)
/
(
r
h
u
*
n
^
2
D
^
2
)
167 [deg] 185 [ deg] 203 [ deg]
221 [deg] 239 [ deg] 257 [ deg]
275 [deg] 293 [ deg] 311 [ deg]
329 [deg] 347 [ deg] 149 [ deg]
131 [deg] 113 [ deg] 95 [deg]
77 [deg] 59 [deg] 41 [deg]
23 [deg] 5 [deg]
Fig. 20. Pressure distribution along the pod (J 0.50, d
F
20.01).
0.01
0.02
0.03
0 10 15 20 25 30 35
T
o
r
q
u
e

c
o
e
f
.
J = 0.3
J = 0.5
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0 10 15 20 25 30 35
Flap angle [deg.]
T
h
r
u
s
t

c
o
e
f
.
Prop. Thrust (J = 0.30) SF Drag (J = 0.30)
Pod Drag (J = 0.30) Total Thrust (J = 0.30)
Prop. Thrust (J = 0.50) SF Drag (J = 0.50)
Pod Drag (J = 0.50) Total Thrust (J = 0.50)
0
0.02
0. 04
0.06
0 10 15 20 25 30 35
L
i
f
t

c
o
e
f
.
5
5
5
Fig. 21. Calculated hydrodynamic performance of AZIPOD system
(MP195, SFP11) at different operating conditions. Fig. 22. Shuttle propulsion system.
H. Ghassemi, P. Ghadimi / Ocean Engineering 35 (2008) 117130 129
4. The computational method has also been extended to
the AZIPOD systems. Experimental data is not avail-
able for this case and cavitation tunnel experiments
should be conducted to verify the accuracy of the
numerical methodology.
Authors intend to work on the hydrodynamic analysis
of the shuttle propulsion system (Fig. 22) in the near
future.
References
Cebeci, T., Bradshaw, P., 1977. Momentum Transfer in Boundary Layers.
Hemisphere Cooperation, Washington, DC.
Ghassemi, H., Tsutsumi, T., 2002. Hydrodynamic performance of
propellerrudder system in uniform and non-uniform conditions.
Technical Report, Research Institute of IHI.
Katz, J., Plotkin, A., 1991. Low-Speed Aerodynamics. McGrow-Hill Inc.,
New York.
Li, D.-Q., 1996. A non-linear method for the propellerrudder interaction
with the slipstream deformation taken into account. Computer
Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 130, 115132.
Ma, C., Qian, Z., Yang, C., Zhang, X., Du, D, 2004. Research on wake
model of pod propulsion. In: First T-Pod Conference, April 1416,
University of New Castle upon Tyne.
Matsui, S., Yang, J., Tamashima, M., Yamazaki, R., 1994. Theoretical
study on maneuverability of ships. Transactions of the West-Japan
Society of Naval Architects, vol. 89, pp. 123153 [in Japanese].
Mohammed Islam, Rocky Taylor, Justin Quinton, Brian Veitch,
Neil Bose, Bruce Colbourne, Pengfei Liu, 2004. Numerical investiga-
tion of propulsive characteristics of podded propellers of pusher
conguration. In: First T-Pod Conference, April, University of New
Castle upon Tyne, pp. 513526.
Molland, A.F., Turnock, S.R., 1993. Wind tunnel investigation of the
propeller loading on ship rudder performance. Transactions of the
RINA 135, 227244.
Molland, A.F., Turnock, S.R., 1996. A compact computational method
for predicting forces on a rudder in a propeller slipstream. Transac-
tions of the RINA 138, 227244.
Muralidhar, K., Biswas, G., 2005. Advanced Engineering Fluid Me-
chanics, second ed. Alpha Science International Ltd.
Rains, D.A., Vanlandingham, D.J., Schlappi, H.C., Hsiung, C.C.,
Kirkman, K.L., 1981. Hydrodynamics of podded ship propulsions.
Journal of Hydronautics 15 (1), 1824.
Sakir Bal, Hakan Akyildiz, Mesut Guner, 2006. Preliminary results of a
numerical method for podded propulsors. In: Proceeding of Second
International Conference on Technological Advances in Podded
Propulsion T-Pod, France.
Tamashima, M., Matsui, K., Mori, K., Yamazaki, R., 1993. The method
for predicting the performance of propellerrudder system with rudder
angle and its application to the rudder design. Transactions of the
West-Japan Society of Naval Architects, vol. 86 [in Japanese].
Wang, D., Atlar, M., Glover, E.J., Paterson, I., 2004. Experimental
investigation of ow around a podded propulsor using LDA. In: First
T-Pod Conference, April, University of New Castle Upon Tyne.
Yamazaki, R., 1968. On the Propulsion Theory of Ships on Still Water
Introduction, 1968, Memories of the Faculty of Engineering, Kyushu
University, 274pp.
Yamazaki, R., Nakatake, K., Moriyama, F., 1985. On the Mutual
Interaction Between the Screw Propeller and the Rudder. Memories of
Faculty of Engineering, Kyushu University 45 (1), 79109.
Zhang Lijun, Wang Yanyin, A., 2006. Discussion on the hydrodynamic
performance for podded propeller in steady ow by using Surface
panel method. In: Proceeding of Second International Conference on
Technological Advances in Podded Propulsion T-Pod, France.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
H. Ghassemi, P. Ghadimi / Ocean Engineering 35 (2008) 117130 130