Estimating Principal Dimensions
5.1 Displacement, Lightweight and Deadweight
The load displacement of a ship is made up of two components - lightweight and deadweight. Each of
these can in turn be subdivided for analysis and control. In naval practice the subdivisions are set out in
great detail but for merchant ships there is no commonly agreed breakdown other than the large groups
associated with preliminary design. The difficulty in creating clear-cut definitions of weight groups can
make comparison of figures from different sources difficult and often dangerous. In this respect large
groups are likely to provide better agreement than small ones but they will be less amenable to analysis
and control.
In Preliminary Design the following definitions and subdivisions are customarily used:
Design Displacement or Full Load Displacement is the displacement of the ship at its Summer Load
Draught in salt water of density 1.025 tonne/m3
Lightweight is the weight of the vessel complete and ready for sea with fluids in systems, settling tanks
and ready-use tanks at their working levels. No cargo, crew, passengers, baggage, consumable stores,
water or fuel in storage tanks is on board.
(The Lightweight represents the fixed part of the displacement.)
Lightweight = Steel Weight
+ Outfit Weight (Including Refrigeration & Insulation)
+ Machinery Weight
(Refrigeration & Insulation Weight may be taken with Outfit, as above, or may be made a separate group)
Deadweight is the difference between the Displacement at any draught and the Lightweight i.e.
Deadweight is the variable part of the displacement.
Design Deadweight (Total Deadweight) is the difference between the Design Displacement and the
Lightweight.
In general, Displacement = Lightweight + Deadweight
In particular, Design Displacement = Lightweight + Design Deadweight
Deadweight = Cargo Deadweight (Payload)
+ Fuel Oil
+ Diesel Oil
+ Lubricating Oil
+ Hydraulic Fluid
+ Boiler Feed Water
+ Fresh Water
+ Crew & Effects
+ Stores
+ Spare Gear
+ Water Ballast*
*Water ballast is only carried if required to achieve a particular trim or draught/trim combination. It is not
normally carried in the Full Load Condition.
Cargo Deadweight will include passengers and their effects if they are carried.
Cargo Deadweight is sometimes referred to as Payload.
5.2 Deadweight/Displacement Ratio
This ratio is a common starting point for a design although an immediate choice of main
dimensions based on past practice is sometimes taken as a short cut. The
Deadweight/Displacement Ratio is used to obtain the first approximation to Displacement for a
given Deadweight. It is often based on total deadweight rather than the more logical choice of
cargo deadweight because total deadweight is a more readily available figure being independent
of the amount of fuel etc. carried. If cargo deadweight is available then it may be used but as the
value will be taken from data on existing ships the designer must be sure of the figures being
used. The data would normally be recorded as a graph of Deadweight Ratio against Deadweight.
The Ratio will vary with the type of ship, its speed, endurance and quality. Generally speaking,
the larger, slower and more basic the ship the higher the value of the ratio.
DWR = Deadweight/Displacement
Typical values of DWR for a range of ship types are as follow-
Table 5.1. DWT/∆ ratios for merchant ships
Ship type CD
Passenger ship 0.35
General cargo ship 0.62-0.72
Large bulk carrier 0.78-0.84
Small bulk carrier 0.71-0.77
Container ship 0.70-0.75
Oil tanker 0.80-0.86
Product tanker 0.77-0.83
Ro-Ro 0.50-0.59
Trawler 0.37-0.45
LPG carrier 0.62
Reefer 0.58 - 0.60
Kafali (1988) recommends the following formulae for small cargo ships and tankers
Tanker DWT 0.775 DWT
=
❑ DWT +250
Cargo Ship DWT 0.750 DWT
=
❑ DWT +300
In a preliminary design it is wise to consider how the ratio may vary from the chosen type ship
and be prepared to correct the resulting displacement at a later stage of the design process if
necessary.
The quoted figures indicate considerable variation in the value of DWR for similar ships. Among
the factors which account for this variation are: -
1) Ship Speed and Block Coefficient. These factors partly account for the variation in DWR
between different ship types as well as within any one ship type. For a given set of dimensions,
an increase in speed will call for an increase in power. The increased power will increase the
machinery weight and so decrease the available deadweight. It may decrease the Cargo
Deadweight even further if there is, in addition, an increase required in the amount of fuel to be
carried. If, on the other hand, the Block Coefficient is reduced to allow a slight increase in speed
for no increase in power then the displacement is reduced but there is scarcely any decrease in
Lightweight and again the deadweight is reduced.
2) Voluntary reduction of draught . The operating draught may be less than the maximum allowed by
freeboard rules or by the choice of scantlings. Thus the vessel, in service, is carrying less deadweight than
it might theoretically be able to
3) Variations in propulsion machinery. There can be a significant difference in machinery weight between
an installation using a slow speed diesel engine and one using medium or high-speed engines.
4) Variations in construction method. For example the Ore Carrier requires to have a much heavier
bottom structure than a non-ore carrying Bulk Carrier because of the local intensity of loading arising
from the very dense ore.
5) Variations in Outfit Specification. A Refrigerated Cargo Ship (or Reefer) will have a greater outfit
weight than the equivalent General Cargo Ship and so carry less Deadweight on a given Load
Displacement. Similarly a Bulk Carrier with cargo handling gear is likely to have reduced deadweight
when compared with a gearless vessel (one without cargo handling gear).
Once the displacement has been derived then each of the principal dimensions can be considered in turn.
5.3. Main Dimensions
The main dimensions (L, B, T, D) affect the many techno-economical performance
characteristics of a ship. Therefore the proper selection of the main dimensions is vitally
important in the early stages of design.
There may be an infinite number of combinations of length, breadth, depth and draught, which
satisfy the main requirements, and restrictions of the design problem. The designer will attempt
to find the best combination, however there are too many factors to be investigated within a
limited time period. Therefore, the designer, most commonly, will use an iterative approach and
the resultant main dimensions will be a compromise solution rather than the optimum values.
The estimation of main dimensions will require an iterative process based on the following order
• Estimate the design displacement.
• Estimate length based on displacement and speed
• Estimate breadth based on length
• Estimate block coefficient based on length and speed
• Calculate draught to satisfy ∆ = LBTCB
• Calculate the required freeboard and hence the minimum required depth
Dimensional constraints may impose a limit on length, breadth, draught and air draught.
A constraint on length may be set by the dimensions of canal locks or docks. It may also be set
by a need to be able to turn the ship in a narrow waterway. The constrained length is usually the
overall length but in some cases the constraint may apply at the waterline at which the ship is
floating.
A limit on breadth is usually set by canal or dock lock gates, but the breadth of vehicle ferries is
sometimes limited by the dimensions and position of shore ramps giving vehicles access to bow
or stern doors. The outreach of other shore based cargo handling devices such as grain elevators
or coal hoists can limit the desirable distance of the offshore hatch side from the dockside and
thereby limit the breadth of the ship.
A draught limit is usually set by the depth of water in the ports and approaches to which the ship
is intended to trade. For very large tankers the depth of the sea itself must be considered.
The air draught of a ship is the vertical distance from the waterline to the highest point of the
ship’s structure and denotes the ship’s ability to pass under a bridge or other obstruction, which
forms part of the projected route.
5.4 Length
Length is probably the most expensive dimension to provide and is governed in part by size and
in part by speed. It is expensive in terms of steel weight and building costs and were it not for
hydrodynamic considerations the ideal length might well be taken to be the cube root of the
volume of displacement. However that is not the case and ship size associated with desirable
characteristics for resistance and propulsion is used to fix a first approximation to the length.
Adjustments are then made above or below this value to account for the relative importance of
frictional and wavemaking resistance and to meet any physical restrictions imposed by canals,
ports, docks and ship handling. The choice of Length and Block Coefficient (CB) are closely
related and are dependent on Speed and Froude Number.
The length of a ship will affect most of the technical and economical performance requirements.
The following will be observed when two ships with the same displacement but with different
length values are compared.
• The longer ship will have larger wetted surface area and hence higher viscous resistance.
However, both the wave making resistance and the propulsive performance will improve with
and increasing length. Therefore, fast ships should have higher lengths compared with slow
speed vessels.
• Both the weight and building cost of ship will increase with length.
• Long ships may achieve the same speed with less engine power; hence the increasing length
will reduce the operational costs.
• Increasing length with constant displacement may result in losses in capacity
• Increasing length may detoriate the intact stability characteristics.
• Increasing length will improve the directional stability but worsen the turning ability
• Increasing length will require a higher value of freeboard
• Increasing length will improve the vertical plane motions, including heave, pitch, vertical
accelerations, deck wetness and probability of slamming
Many empirical formulae have been proposed to estimate the design length. These formulae are
usually based on displacement and design speed.
Ayre
L=❑1 /3
[ 10 5 V
+
3 3 L ] where L[m], ∆[ton] and V[knot].
Posdunine ( )
L=C ( )
V 2 1/ 3
V +2
❑
where L[m], ∆[ton] and V[knot]. C
coefficient is recommended as follows
Schneekluth recommends C=7.25 for freighters with a trial speed of 15.5 to 18.5 knots
Kafali (1988) proposes the following values for C coefficient.
V
C=3 +3.2 Passenger Ship
L
V
C=1.7 + 4.4 CargoShip−Tanker
L
V
C=3 +3.2 Tug
L
where V (knot) and L (m)
Gilfillan (1968) proposes the following formula for the length of a bulk carrier
L=7.38 ( VV+2 ) DWT 1/ 3
Völker ( ) proposes the following formula for dry cargo and container ships
1 /3
L=❑ 3.5+2.3
( V
( g❑1 /3 ) )
Where L[m], ∆[ton] and V[knot] .
Schneekluth (1987) developed the following formula on the basis of lowest production costs.
0.3 0.3
L=C ❑ V
Where L[m], ∆[ton] and V[knot] . C is a coefficient which van be taken 3.2 if the block
0.145
coefficient has the approximate value of C B= within the range of 0.48-0.85. If the block
FN
coefficient differs from this value the coefficient C can be modified as follows
C B +0.5
C=3.2
0.145
+ 0.5
FN
V
Where FN= (L [m], V [m/s])
gL
Benford(10) recommends the following formula for liner type general cargo vessels:
L=6.31 (
V 2 1 /3
V +2 )
❑ V [Knot ]
Wright () proposes the following formula for the design length
1/ 3
LBP =5.58 DWT
The relation between the term ( VV+2 ) DWT 1 /3
and ship design length has been investigated for
a large number of recent designs which resulted in a series of empirical formulae as given in the
following table.
5.5 Breadth, Draught and Depth
Given the Volume of Displacement, Length (L) and C B, then the value of the product of Breadth
(B) and Draught (T) is determined. Unless there are over-riding dimensional constraints such as
the width of a dock entrance or the water depth at a harbour mouth then both B and T can be
determined knowing a typical value of the ratio between them, B/T. Alternatively B may be
determined from a typical value of L/B and hence T can be found. Depth (D) may be determined
in a similar way if a requirement for total internal volume is known and an estimate is made of C
BD, the Block Coefficient of the ship up to the upper deck. Depth is also constrained by the need
for a minimum freeboard over the draught. A good first approximation is to take T = 0.70 D. The
final choice of Breadth, Draught and Depth is also influenced by stability considerations where
increasing Breadth and/or reducing Depth will lead to an increase in initial stability. On the other
hand, increasing Breadth and reducing Draught may have an adverse effect on the resistance and
propulsion characteristics of the vessel.
5.5.1 Breadth
The effects of breadth on techno-economic performance characteristics of a ship can be
summarized as follows.
• Increasing breadth will increase the resistance and hence the engine power and operating costs
• Increasing breadth will improve the initial stability characteristics.
• The weight and cost of hull will increase with increasing breadth
• Roll period will reduce with increasing breadth
The breadth of containerships can be estimated on the basis of the number of containers located
transversely in the ship. The standard ISO container has a width of 2.44 m. However, each
container requires an allowance for clearence, guides etc. of about 240 mm so that each container
requires a width of 2.68 m.
Thus the number n of cells located transversely in the ship require 2.68n metres. Since the width
available for containers is about 80 percent of the ship’s breadth, then B=3.35n.
5.5.2. Draught
Draught of a ship is less effective on technical and economical performance compared with
length or breadth. Therefore the draught is usually selected to satisfy the displacement equation
∇ = LBTCB . The draught may be limited due to the depths of port, harbour and canals. Low
draught increases the risk of bow slamming in rough seas.
5.5.3. Depth
Depth of a ship may be estimated as the sum of design draught and the freeboard. The weight
and cost of the ship will increase with increasing depth. Classification Societies may impose
certain limits on L/D ratio due to the longitudinal strength characteristics. However lower values
of L/D may result in buckling problems. The depth will increase the height of centre of gravity
which will affect the stability and sea-keeping characteristics of the vessel. The following
formulae may be suggested for an initial estimate of depth.
The length-depth ratio L/D is primarily important in its influence on longitudinal strength. In
the length range from about 100 to 300 m, the primary loading vertical wave bending moment is
the principal determinant of hull structure. In this range, the vertical wave bending moment
increases with ship length. Local dynamic pressures dominate below about 300 feet. Ocean
wavelengths are limited, so beyond 1000 feet the vertical wave bending moment again becomes
less significant. The ability of the hull to resist primary bending depends upon the midship
section moment of inertia, which varies as B and D 3. Thus, the ratio L/D relates to the ability of
the hull to be designed to resist longitudinal bending with reasonable scantlings. Classification
society requirements require special consideration when the L/D ratio lies outside the range
assumed in the development of their rules.
L, B, D in meters.
The depth of a container ship is in general controlled by the number of containers to be carried in
the hold. Thus
D = 2.43n + h
where n is the number of tiers of containers in holds and h is the height of double bottom.
5.6 Length to Beam Ratio
L/B ratio affects powering and directional stability. A steady decrease in L/B in recent years can
be seen in an effort to reduce ship cost and with increased design effort to produce good inflow
to the propeller with the greater beam. Watson & Gilfillan (1977) proposes the following values
5.7. Length to Depth Ratio
The length-depth ratio L/D is primarily important in its influence on longitudinal strength. In
the length range from about 100 to 300 m, the primary loading vertical wave bending moment is
the principal determinant of hull structure. In this range, the vertical wave bending moment
increases with ship length. Local dynamic pressures dominate below about 300 feet. Ocean
wavelengths are limited, so beyond 1000 feet the vertical wave bending moment again becomes
less significant. The ability of the hull to resist primary bending depends upon the midship
section moment of inertia, which varies as B and D 3. Thus, the ratio L/D relates to the ability of
the hull to be designed to resist longitudinal bending with reasonable scantlings. Classification
society requirements require special consideration when the L/D ratio lies outside the range
assumed in the development of their rules. Classification Societies, in general, require special
consideration L/D >15.
5.8. Beam to Depth Ratio
B/D ratio has a major impact on stability. This provides effective early guidance on initial intact
transverse stability. In early design, the transverse metacentric height is usually assessed using,
where the 3% (or similar) increase in KG is included to account for anticipated free surface
effects. The value of the transverse metacenteric radius BMT is primarily affected by beam
(actually B2/CBT) while the vertical center of gravity KG is primarily affected by depth so the
B/D ratio gives early guidance relative to potential stability problems.
Early designs should proceed with caution if the B/D is allowed to drop below 1.55 since
transverse stability problems can be expected when detailed analyses are completed.
5. 9 Beam to Draught Ratio
If this ratio is too small stability may be a problem; too large residuary resistance goes up.
The beam-draft ratio is primarily important through its influence on residuary resistance,
transverse stability, and wetted surface. In general, values range between 2.25 ≤ B/T
≤ 3.75, but values as high as 5.0 appear in heavily draft-limited designs. The beam-draft ratio
correlates strongly with residuary resistance, which increases for large B/T. Thus, B/T is often
used as an independent variable in residuary resistance estimating models. As B/T becomes low,
transverse stability may become a problem as seen from the above example partial derivatives.
Saunders presented data for the nondimensional wetted surface coefficient CS = S/√(∇L)
for the Taylor Standard Series hulls that is instructive in understanding the influence of B/T on
wetted surface and, thus particularly, frictional resistance. Saunders’ contour plot of CS versus
CM and B/T is shown in Figure 11.3. One can see that the minimum wetted surface for these
hulls is achieved at about CM = 0.90 and B/T = 3.0. The dashed line shows the locus of B/T
values which yield the minimum wetted surface hulls for varying CM and is given by,
and the beam-draft ratio be limited to the following maximum, in order to ensure acceptable flow
to the propeller on large draft-limited vessels.
5.10 Overall Limits on Dimensions
For many ships the maximum dimensions are restricted by navigational features of the routes
they must use: - Depth of Channels; Size of Canals or Seaways and their associated Locks Clear
Height under Bridges The limiting dimensions for some of the world's most significant canals
are given in the following table: -
Flow diagram for Iterative Procedure to Satisfy Dimensional Requirements
Problem:
Estimate the dimensions of a dry cargo ship of 13000 tonnes DWT at a maximum
draught of 8.0 m and with a service speed of 15 knots. Assume CD=0.67 and
CB=0.7.
Initial Hull Form Coefficients
The choice of primary hull form coefficient is a matter of design style and tradition. Generally,
commercial ships tend to be developed using the block coefficient C B as the primary form
coefficient, while faster military vessels tend to be developed using the longitudinal prismatic C P
as the form coefficient of greatest importance. Recall that through their definitions, the form
coefficients are related by dual identities, one for the longitudinal direction and one for the
vertical direction, they are
CB ≡ C P CX
CB ≡ CVP CWP
Thus with an estimate or choice of any two coefficients in either equation, the third is established
by its definition. A designer cannot make three independent estimates or choices of the
coefficients in either identity.
Block Coefficient CB : The block coefficient CB measures the fullness of the submerged
hull, the ratio of the hull volume to its surrounding parallelepiped LBT. Generally, it is
economically efficient to design hulls to be slightly fuller than that which will result in
minimum resistance per tonne of displacement. The most generally accepted guidance for
the choice of block coefficient for vessels in the commercial range of hulls is from
Watson and Gilfillan (1) as shown in Figure 11.4.
Watson and Gilfillan empirical formula
Schneekluth and Bertram note that a recent Japanese statistical study yielded for vessels in the
range 0.15 ≤ Fn ≤ 0.32,
Alexander’s formula has been used in various forms since about 1900,
CB = K – 0.5 Vk/√Lf
where K = 1.33 – 0.54 Vk/√Lf + 0.24(Vk/√Lf)2, is recommended for merchant vessels.
Maximum Section Coefficient CX and Midship Section Coefficient CM
The midship and maximum section coefficient CM ≈ CX can be estimated using
generalizations developed from existing hull forms or from systematic hull series. For
most commercial hulls, the maximum section includes amidships. For faster hulls, the
maximum section may be significantly aft of amidships. Recommended values for CM
are,
Longitudinal Prismatic Coefficient CP
The design of faster military and related vessels typically uses the longitudinal prismatic
coefficient CP, rather than CB, as the primary hull form coefficient. The longitudinal
prismatic describes the distribution of volume along the hull form. A low value of CP
indicates significant taper of the hull in the entrance and run. A high value of CP indicates
more full hull possibly with parallel midbody over a significant portion of the hull. If the
design uses CΒ as the principal hull form coefficient and then estimates CX, CP can be
obtained from the identity equation. If CP is the principal hull form coefficient, the
remaining CB or CX could then be obtained using equation.
Displacement–Length Ratio and Volumetric Coefficient C∇ :
The block coefficient describes the fullness of the submerged hull and the longitudinal
prismatic describes the distribution of its volume along the length of the hull for normal
hull forms with taper in the entrance and run. But, neither of these reveals a third
important characteristic of a hull form. Consider a unit cube and a solid with unit cross-
section and length 10. Each would have C B = 1 and CP = 1, but they would obviously
have significantly different properties for propulsion and maneuvering. The relationship
between volume and vessel length, or its fatness, also needs to be characterized. There
are a number of hull form coefficients that are used to describe this characteristic. The
traditional English dimensional parameter is the displacement-length ratio = ∆/(0.01Lf)3,
with displacement in long tons and length in feet. Others use a dimensionless fatness ratio
∇/(0.10L)3 or the volumetric coefficient C∇ = ∇/L3.
Traditional British practice uses an inversely related circle M coefficient defined as
L/∇1/3.
Waterplane Coefficient CWP :
The waterplane coefficient CWP is usually the next hull form coefficient to estimate.
The shape of the design waterplane correlates well with the distribution of volume
along the length of the hull, so CWP can usually be estimated effectively in early
design from the chosen CP, provided the designer’s intent relative to hull form,
number of screws, and stern design is reflected. An initial estimate of CWP is used to
estimate the transverse and longitudinal inertia properties of the waterplane needed to
calculate BMT and BML, respectively. With a CWP estimate, the identity equation can
be used to calculate a consistent CVP that can be used to estimate the vertical
center of buoyancy KB of the hull.
Vertical Prismatic Coefficient CVP:
The vertical prismatic coefficient is used in early design to estimate the vertical center
of buoyancy KB needed to assess the initial stability. The vertical prismatic
coefficient describes the vertical distribution of the hull volume below the design
waterline. Since conventional hull forms typically have their greatest waterplane area
near the water surface, a CVP approaching 0.5 implies a triangular-shaped or Vshaped
hull.
A CVP approaching 1.0 implies a full, extreme U-shaped hull. Small Waterplane Twin
Hull (SWATH) vessels would, obviously, require a unique interpretation of CVP.
The vertical prismatic coefficient CVP inversely correlates with hull wave damping in
heave and pitch, thus, low values of CVP and corresponding high values of CWP
produce superior vertical plane seakeeping hulls. If a designer were to select CVP to
affect seakeeping performance, identity equation 11 can then be used to obtain the
consistent value for CWP.
Vertical Center of Buoyancy KB :
An extreme U-shaped hull would have CVP near 1.0 and a KB near 0.5T; an
extreme V-shaped hull would be triangular with CVP near 0.5 and a KB
near 2/3 T. Thus, there is a strong inverse correlation between KB and C
VP and CVP can be used to make effective estimates of the vertical center of
buoyancy until actual hull offsets are available for hydrostatic analysis.
Two useful theoretical results have been derived for the KB as a function of CVP
for idealized hulls with uniform hull sections described by straight sections and a
hard chine and by an exponential half breadth distribution with draft, respectively.
These results are useful for early estimates for actual hull forms. The first
approach yields Moorish’s (also Normand’s) formula,
KB/T = (2.5 – CVP)/3
which is recommended only for hulls with CM ≤ 0.9.
The second approach yields a formula attributed to both Posdunine and Lackenby,
KB/T = (1 + CVP) –1
This second approximation is recommended for hulls with 0.9 < CM. Posdunine’s
equation is, thus, recommended for typical larger commercial vessels.
Schneekluth and Bertram also present three regression equations attributed to
Normand, Schneekluth, and Wobig, respectively,
KB/T = (0.90 – 0.36 CM)
KB/T = (0.90 – 0.30 CM – 0.10 CB)
KB/T = 0.78 – 0.285 CVP
Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy LCB:
The longitudinal center of buoyancy LCB affects the resistance and trim of the
vessel. Initial estimates are needed as input to some resistance estimating
algorithms. Likewise, initial checks of vessel trim require a sound LCB estimate.
The LCB can change as the design evolves to accommodate cargo, achieve trim,
etc., but an initial starting point is needed. In general, LCB will move aft with
ship design speed and Froude number. At low Froude number, the bow can be
fairly blunt with cylindrical or elliptical bows utilized on slow vessels. On these
vessels it is necessary to fair the stern to achieve effective flow into the propeller,
so the run is more tapered (horizontally or vertically in a buttock flow
stern) than the bow resulting in an LCB which is forward of amidships. As the
vessel becomes faster for its length, the bow must be faired to achieve
acceptable wave resistance, resulting in a movement of the LCB aft through
amidships. At even higher speeds the bow must be faired even more resulting in
an LCB aft of amidships. This physical argument is based primarily upon smooth
water powering, but captures the primary influence. Note that this “acceptable”
range is about 3% ship length wide indicating that the designer has reasonable
freedom to adjust LCB as needed by the design as it proceeds without a
significant impact on resistance.
Harvald includes a recommendation for the “best possible” LCB as a percent of
ship length, plus forward of amidships, in his treatise on ship resistance and
propulsion
This band at 1.6% L wide is somewhat more restrictive than Benford’s
acceptable” range. Schneekluth and Bertram note two similar recent Japanese
results for recommended LCB position as a per cent of ship length, plus forward
of amidships,
