Resistance and Dynamic Trim Predictions

  • Dejan RadojčićEmail author
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology book series (BRIEFSAPPLSCIENCES)


This section addresses the MMs for resistance prediction (and dynamic trim where available) of high-speed craft (HSC’s MMs). Similar subjects were addressed earlier, for instance by van Oossanen (1980), Almeter (1993), and others, but these are now outdated and merit an update. Some resistance prediction MMs for high-speed round bilge hull forms were re-evaluated recently, see Sahoo et al. (2011). In the following text 18 MMs are discussed and 10 are recommended as they have not yet been superseded. These MMs are presented in Tables 3.2 and 3.3. Some of them form the basis of current computerized resistance prediction software packages.


  1. Almeter JM (1988) Resistance prediction and optimization of law deadrise, hard chine, stepless planing hulls. SNAME STAR symposiumGoogle Scholar
  2. Almeter JM (1993) Resistance prediction of planing hulls: state of the art. Mar Technol 30(4)Google Scholar
  3. Almeter JM (2008) Avoiding common errors in high-speed craft powering predictions. In: 6th international conference on high performance Marine vehicles, NaplesGoogle Scholar
  4. Bailey D (1976) The NPL high speed round bilge displacement hull series. Maritime Technology Monograph No. 4. London : Royal institution of naval architectsGoogle Scholar
  5. Bailey D (1982) A statistical analysis of propulsion data obtained from models of high speed round bilge hulls. In: RINA symposium on small fast warships and security vessels, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Bertram V, Mesbahi E (2004) Estimating resistance and power of fast monohulls employing artificial neural nets. International conference High Performance Marine Vehicles (HIPER), RomeGoogle Scholar
  7. Blount DL (2014) Performance by design. ISBN 0-978-9890837-1-3Google Scholar
  8. Blount DL, Fox DL (1976) Small craft power prediction. Mar Technol 13(1)Google Scholar
  9. Blount DL, McGrath JA (2009) Resistance characteristics of semi-displacement mega yacht hull forms. RINA Trans, Int J Small Craft Technol 151(Part B2), July–Dec 2009Google Scholar
  10. Clement PE, Blount DL (1963) Resistance tests of a systematic series of planing hull forms. SNAME Trans 71Google Scholar
  11. Compton RH (1986) The resistance of a systematic series of semi-planing transom stern hulls. Marine Technol 23(4)Google Scholar
  12. Couser P, Mason A, Mason G, Smith CR, Konsky BR von (2004) Artificial neural network for hull resistance prediction. In: 3rd international conference on Computer and IT Applications in the Maritime Industries (COMPIT ’04), SiguenzaGoogle Scholar
  13. Davidson KSM, Suarez A (1941) Tests of twenty related models of V-bottom motor boats—U.S.E.M.B. Series 50. Report No. 170, Experimental Towing Tank, Stevens Institute of Technology, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  14. Delgado-Saldivar G (1993) Experimental investigation of a new series of planing hulls. M.Sc. thesis, Technical University of Nova Scotia, Halifax, Nova ScotiaGoogle Scholar
  15. De Luca F, Pensa C (2017) The Naples warped hard chine hulls systematic series. Ocean Eng 139Google Scholar
  16. De Marco A, Mancini S, Miranda S, Scognamiglio R (2017) Experimental and numerical hydrodynamic analysis of a stepped planing hull. Appl Ocean Res 64Google Scholar
  17. Doust DJ (1960) Statistical analysis of resistance data for trawlers. Fishing Boats of the World: 2 Fishing News (Books) Ltd., LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. Farlie-Clarke AC (1975) Regression analysis of ship data. Int Shipbuilding Prog 22(251)Google Scholar
  19. Fung SC (1991) Resistance and powering prediction for transom stern hull forms during early stage ship design. SNAME Trans 99Google Scholar
  20. Fung SC, Leibman L (1993) Statistically-based speed-dependent powering predictions for high-speed transom stern hull forms. Chesapeake Section of SNAMEGoogle Scholar
  21. Gamulin A (1996) A semidisplacement series of ships. Int Shipbuilding Prog 43(43)Google Scholar
  22. Grigoropoulos GJ, Damala DP (2001) The effect of trim on the resistance of high-speed craft, 2nd edn. In: International EURO conference on High-Performance Marine Vehicles, HIPER ‘01, HamburgGoogle Scholar
  23. Grigoropoulos GJ, Loukakis TA (1999) Resistance of double-chine large high-speed craft. Aeronautique ATMA, vol 99. ParisGoogle Scholar
  24. Grubišić I, Begović E (2000) Resistance prediction of the fast round-bilge hulls at the concept design level. In: Proceedings of the 9th international congress of the International Association of Mediterranean, IMAM, IschiaGoogle Scholar
  25. Hadler JB, Hubble EN, Holling HD (1974) Resistance characteristics of a systematic series of planing hull forms—Series 65. Chesapeake Section of SNAMEGoogle Scholar
  26. Holling HD, Hubble EN (1974) Model resistance data of a Series 65 hull forms applicable to hydrofoils and planing craft. NSRDC Report 4121Google Scholar
  27. Holtrop J, Mennen GGJ (1982) An approximate power prediction method. Int Shipbuilding Prog 29(335)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hubble EN (1974) Resistance of hard-chine stepless planing craft with systematic variation of hull form, longitudinal centre of gravity and loading. DTNSRDC R&D Report 4307Google Scholar
  29. Jin P, Su B, Tan Z (1980) A parametric study on high-speed round bilge displacement hulls. High-Speed Surface CraftGoogle Scholar
  30. Keuning JA, Geritsma J (1982) Resistance tests of a series of planing hull forms with 25 degrees deadrise angle. Int Shipbuilding Prog 29(337)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Keuning JA, Hillege L (2017a) The results of Delft systematic deadrise series. In: Proceedings of 14th international conference on Fast Sea Transportation (FAST 2017), NantesGoogle Scholar
  32. Keuning JA, Hillege L (2017b) Influence of rocker and twist and the results of the Delft systematic deadrise series. High Speed Marine Vehicles Conference (HSMV 2017), NaplesGoogle Scholar
  33. Keuning JA, Gerritsma J, Terwisga PF (1993) Resistance Tests of a series planing hull forma with 30° deadrise angle, and a calculation model based on this and similar systematic series. Int Shipbuilding Prog 40(424)Google Scholar
  34. Kowalyshyn DH, Metcalf B (2006) A USCG systematic series of high speed planing hulls. SNAME Trans 114Google Scholar
  35. Lahtiharju E, Karppinen T, Hellevaara M, Aitta T (1991) Resistance and seakeeping characteristics of fast transom stern hulls with systematically varied form. SNAME Trans 99Google Scholar
  36. MacPherson DM (2003) Comments on reliable prediction accuracy. A HydroComp Technical Report 103Google Scholar
  37. Mason A, Couser P, Mason G, Smith CR, von Konsky BR (2005) Optimisation of vessel resistance using genetic algorithms and artificial neural networks. In: 4th international conference on Computer and IT Applications in the Maritime Industries (COMPIT ’05), HamburgGoogle Scholar
  38. Mercier JA, Savitsky D (1973) Resistance of transom-stern craft in the pre-planing regime. Davidson Laboratory Report 1667Google Scholar
  39. Molland AF, Turnock SR, Hudson DA (2011) Ship resistance and propulsion—practical estimation of ship propulsive power. Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-76052-2Google Scholar
  40. Moore WL, Hawkins F (1969) Planing boat scale effects on trim and drag (TMB Series 56). NSRDC Technical Note No. 128, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  41. Morabito MG (2013) Re-analysis of Series 50 Tests of V-bottom motor boats. SNAME Trans 121Google Scholar
  42. Morabito M, Snodgrass J (2012) The use of small model testing and full scale trials in the design of motor yacht. In: SNAME’s 3rd chesapeake power boat symposium, AnnapolisGoogle Scholar
  43. Müller-Graf B (1999) Widerstand und hydrodynamische Eigenschaftender schnellen Knickspant-Katamarane der VWS Serie ’89 (Resistance and hydrodynamic characteristics of the VWS fast hard chine catamaran Series ’89). In: 20th symposium Yachtenwurf und Yachtbau, HamburgGoogle Scholar
  44. Radojčić D (1984) A statistical method for calculation of resistance of the stepless planing hulls. Int Shipbuilding Prog 31(364)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Radojčić D (1985) An Approximate method for calculation of resistance and trim of the planing hulls. University of Southampton, Ship Science Report No. 23. Paper presented on SNAME symposium on powerboatsGoogle Scholar
  46. Radojčić D (1991) An engineering approach to predicting the hydrodynamic performance of planing craft using computer techniques. RINA Trans 133Google Scholar
  47. Radojčić D, Kalajdžić M (2018) Resistance and trim modeling of naples hard chine systematic series. RINA Trans Int J Small Craft Technol. doi:
  48. Radojčić D, Rodić T, Kostić N (1997) Resistance and trim predictions for the NPL high speed round bilge displacement hull series. RINA conference on power, performance and operability of small craft, SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
  49. Radojčić D, Prinčevac M, Rodić T (1999) Resistance and trim predictions for the SKLAD semi displacement hull series. Oceanic Eng Int 3(1)Google Scholar
  50. Radojčić D, Grigoropoulos GJ, Rodić T, Kuvelić T, Damala DP (2001) The resistance and trim of semi-displacement, double-chine, transom-stern hull series. In: Proceedings of 6th international conference on Fast Sea Transportation (FAST 2001), SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
  51. Radojčić D, Zgradić A, Kalajdžić M, Simić A (2014a) Resistance prediction for hard chine hulls in the pre-planing regime. Pol Mar Res 21(2(82))CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Radojčić D, Morabito M, Simić A, Zgradić A (2014b) Modeling with regression analysis and artificial neural networks the resistance and trim of Series 50 experiments with V-Bottom motor boats. J Ship Prod Des 30(4)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Radojčić DV, Zgradić AB, Kalajdžić MD, Simić AP (2017a) Resistance and trim modeling of systematic planing hull Series 62 (with 12.5, 25 and 30 degrees Deadrise Angles) using artificial neural networks, Part 1: the database. J Ship Prod Des 33(3)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Radojčić DV, Kalajdžić MD, Zgradić AB, Simić AP (2017b) Resistance and trim modeling of systematic planing hull Series 62 (with 12.5, 25 and 30 degrees Deadrise Angles) using artificial neural networks, Part 2: mathematical models. J Ship Prod Des 33(4)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Robinson JL (1999) Performance prediction of chine and round bilge hull forms. RINA international conference on Hydrodynamics of High Speed Craft, LondonGoogle Scholar
  56. Sabit AS (1971) Regression analysis of the resistance results of the BSRA series. Int Shipbuilding Prog 18(197)Google Scholar
  57. Sahoo P, Peng H, Won J, Sangarasigamany D (2011) Re-evaluation of resistance prediction for high-speed round bilge hull forms. In: Proceedings of 11th international conference on Fast Sea Transportation (FAST 2011), HonoluluGoogle Scholar
  58. Savitsky D (1964) Hydrodynamic design of planing hulls. Mar Technol 1(1)Google Scholar
  59. Savitsky D (2012) The effect of bottom warp on the performance of planing hulls. In: SNAME’s 3rd Chesapeake Power Boat symposium, AnnapolisGoogle Scholar
  60. Savitsky D, Brown PW (1976) Procedure for hydrodynamic evaluation of planing hulls in smooth and rough water. Mar Technol 13(4)Google Scholar
  61. Savitsky D, Roper JK, Benen L (1972) Hydrodynamic development of a high speed planing hull for rough water. In: 9th symposium Naval Hydrodynamics, ONR, ParisGoogle Scholar
  62. Swift PM, Nowacki H, Fischer JP (1973) Estimation of Great Lakes bulk carrier resistance based on model test data regression. Mar Technol 10(4)Google Scholar
  63. Tanaka H, Nakato M, Nakatake K, Ueda T, Araki S (1991) Cooperative resistance tests with geosim models of a high-speed semi-displacement craft. J SNAJ 169Google Scholar
  64. Taunton DJ, Hudson DA, Shenoi RA (2010) Characteristics of a series of high speed hard chine planing hulls—Part 1: performance in calm water. RINA Trans 152, Part B2. Int J Small Craft TechnolGoogle Scholar
  65. van Hees MT (2017) Statistical and theoretical prediction methods. Encyclopedia of Maritime and Offshore Engineering, WileyGoogle Scholar
  66. van Oortmerssen G (1971) A power prediction method and its application to small ships. Int Shipbuilding Prog 18Google Scholar
  67. van Oossanen P (1980) Resistance prediction of small high-speed displacement vessels: state of the art. Int Shipbuilding Prog 279(313)Google Scholar
  68. Yegorov IT, Bunkov MM, Sadovnikov YM (1978) Propulsive performance and seaworthiness of planing vessels. Sudostroenie, leningrad (in Russian)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Department of Naval ArchitectureUniversity of BelgradeBelgradeSerbia

Personalised recommendations