JOURNAL OF MARITIME RESEARCH
Vol XIII. No. III (2016) pp 47–60
ISSN: 1697-4040, www.jmr.unican.es
New Optimal Fishing Vessels Design Approach for Power - Speed
Prediction
S.C. Duru 1,∗
ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT
Article history: Numerous regression formulae centered on computation of main power and speed are derived from 197
Received 17 August 2016; modern existing fishing vessels of length up to 150m and presented here under. Optimal methods for the
in revised form 24 August 2016; application of these formulae are exemplified using a projected fishing vessel of 100 tonnes deadweight.
accepted 07 November 2016. A power prediction criterion is formulated and used to select the best set out of the three projected main
dimensions of this projected vessel, basing on optimum power and speed computation. These formulae
Keywords:
can be used for more advanced mathematical, computerized optimization procedure.
Fishing, Vessels, Power, Speed,
Optimization.
c SEECMAR | All rights reserved
1. Introduction Similar works exist (Duru, 1997; Brett Wilson, 1985; Wat-
son, 1989) and (M.F.C. Santerelli, 1982) amongst others, in dif-
The regression analysis was done using Microsoft Excel ferent perspectives. This work serves as an update as well as a
program basing on main power and vessel speed and presented new approach to solve this problem.
in figure 1 to figure 20. The vessels data for the regression
taken from Lloyds register of Ships, (Soviet- Trawlers 2016),
and (marintimesales 2016) are presented in Table 1 in a short 2. Methodolgy
form, while the regression formulas derived from them are col-
lected in Table 3. Regression coefficients range from 0.8 to 0.99 The method follows the following exemplified steps:
for all the formulae presented. A total of 32 formulae are pre-
sented. • In the process for preliminary design presented by the
The new method of how to utilize these formulae to find the author (Duru, 2016) three optimal main dimensions of
best required power for a comparative design process is pre- projected 1000 tonnes deadweight fishing vessel was pre-
sented. This is within the premises of preliminary design be- dicted. These three best comparative designs named A1,
fore the preliminary machinery weight or Light weight estima- A2, A3 options respectively, are shown in row 1 to 6 and
tion of the vessel. The detailed power estimation based on more column 1 of Table 5, 6, 7, respectively.
advanced hydrodynamics methods (Sugalski, 2014; Kleppestø,
2015; Holtrop, 1984) amongst others is used in the latter stage • Calculate the power P1 , P2 , to P21 using the 21 respec-
of vessel design. The result from this method serves to set or tive formulae 1 to 21 give in Table 3, see column 2 of
select the desired limits for power and speed to be achieved by Table 5,6,7 for the three respective designs A1, A2, A3.
the latter stage vessel design process. Then select the average power Pavg predicted for each de-
sign option
1 Senior Lecturer and Departmental co-ordinator at the Mechanical/Marine
• Calculate v1 and v2 using the respective Pavg in formula
Engineering Department, Niger Delta University, Amassoma, Bayelsa State,
Nigeria. 22 and 23. See v1 and v2 of column 3 of Table 5, 6, and 7
∗ Corresponding author: S.C. Duru E-mail address: [email protected]. respectively.
S.C. Duru / Journal of Maritime Research Vol XIII. No. III (2016) 47–60 48
• Do similarly to above step for v3 to v11 using P(L) , P(B) , The best option in A2 vessel, A1 is also very good choice.
P(D) , and P(T ) being the average power with respect to the A3 option is no longer in the race.
main dimensions, to the corresponding speeds v3 to v5 , v6
to v7 , v8 to v9 , and v10 to v11 respectively shown in Table
Table 1: Choosing the optimal design vessel from the final result
5,6,and 7 for each design option.
PKw %PDEV VKn VCRIT
• Finally calculate the criterion power Pcrit requirement based A1 1135.1 -17.63 13.05 12.03
on the power and speed criteria formula Vcrit which are A2 1274.5 -12.73 12.63 11.99
derived for fishing vessel which has a regression coeffi- A3 1701.9 -22.77 13.50 12.08
cient R2 = 0.94185, equation 33 and 34 respectively pre-
sented below as: Further optimization method with respect to stability, and
structural weight prognoses could be done between A1 and A2
to choose which one would be the best option.
Pcrit = 21.093L − 252.624B + 114.128D + 346.970T
L D 4. Conclusion
+ 99.622V + 0.0389LBT − 179.014 − 891.651
T T This work has presented 35 regression equations based on
B B L
− 89.627 + 0.1567LBD + 199.031 − 533.571 197 data from existing world fishing fleet for the preliminary
T D B calculation of main power P and vessel speed V of modern fish-
L F
+ 373.240 + 4589.493 (33) ing vessels of various types. A new procedure for obtaining op-
D D timized value of P and V at the early stage of design is described
and, with an example for main dimensions of three comparative de-
sign designated as A1, A2, and A3 for a projected vessel of
1000 tonnes deadweight. The approach presented can be used
X for production of ship design software for optimum preliminary
Vcrit = (34)
(−2E − 06X 2 + 0.0743X + 9.0269) design of ships in respect to main power and speed prediction.
with regression coefficient R2 = 0.9917.
where, X = Pcrit given above in (33).
3. Discussion and Results
The optimal best choice of projected design has to satisfy
the following rules with respect to the main power P(Kw) and
speed v(Kn) :
• A, Power P should be the minimum alternative, but must
have a lower value and minimum deviation from the cri-
terion power Pcrit predicted.
• B, The average v predicted should be higher than then the
criterion v. This means that power P is minimized while
average speed v is maximized.
The Pcrit , vcrit calculated, for instance, shown in Tables 5, 6,
and 7 for three respective projected vessel sample dimensions,
are compared with the Vavg and Pavg as well as the minimum
P(kw) . The vessel that meets A and B rules is the best vessel and
in our example Table 5, 6 and 7 for A1, A2, and A3 options
respectively, these are the results:
Taking:
100 · (P − Pcrit
%PDEV = (35)
Pcrit
Where: Pcrit calculated from equation 33 above, P(Kn) is the
design minimum power from column 3 of Table 5, 6, 7. vcrit =
v2 . And v(Kn) is the design vavg
S.C. Duru / Journal of Maritime Research Vol XIII. No. III (2016) 47–60 49
Table 2: List of some of the fishing vessels used in the regression analysis
S/N Name of vessel P(kw) LBP(m) B(m) D(m) T(m) v(kn) LBT(m3) LBD(m3) B/D L/B etc
1 ” 5215 106 17 10.2 7.32 16.5 13176 18372.6 1.67 6.23
2 1825.3 56.51 15.6 6.85 6.5 14.2 5730 6038.6 2.28 3.62
3 1005.8 45.91 8 4 3.7 12 1359 1469.25 2 5.74
4 VZ10 1095.9 71.18 14 10 6.5 14 6477 9965.22 1.4 5.08
5 JAS10 89.4 8.15 3.4 1.6 1 8 27.71 44.34 2.13 2.4
6 DMX10 335.25 19.02 6.15 6.15 2.5 9 292.4 719.29 1 3.09
7 MHL10 3352.5 93.01 16 9.9 6.8 18 10119 14732 1.62 5.81
8 ASP10 596 28.07 8 6.25 6.07 10 1363 1403.68 1.28 3.51
9 RAU10 800 30.34 8.84 6.4 3.35 11 898.4 1716.38 1.38 3.43
10 DTR10 634.74 49.63 9.8 5 4.14 12 2013 2431.72 1.96 5.06
11 AQUIILA 3874 91.97 17 10.4 5.72 14.6 8944 16260.3 1.63 5.41
12 ATRIA 1280 85 15.6 9.7 5.6 15 7425.6 12862.2 1.61 5.45
13 CARINA 512 80 14.52 9.75 5.25 13 6098 11325.6 1.49 5.51
14 FOKAB 3725 80 14.14 9.75 5.36 14 6063 11029.2 1.45 5.66
117 17.8 10.2 7.32 16.5 15234 21242.5 1.75 6.57
140 Gorizont
147 Kerchanin 167.63 22.38 6.49 3.04 2.27 9.5 329.71 441.55 2.13 3.45
148 Kociewie 7375.5 130 20 12.6 7.4 17 19240 32760 1.59 6.5
149 Kronshtadt 1490 79.43 14 10.01 5.61 12.5 6238 11131.3 1.4 5.67
184 Fishing V 223.5 15.26 5.26 2.6 1.83 10.2 146.89 208.7 2.02 2.9
185 Fishing V 171.35 16.7 5.5 2.43 1.6 9.8 146.96 223.2 2.26 3.04
186 Kristall al 7673.5 142 22.2 13.6 7.98 17.2 25140 42872.6 1.63 6.4
187 LF RYB A 234.68 37.98 7.2 3.2 2.1 9.1 574.26 875.06 2.25 5.28
188 MRS-225 167.63 20.97 6 2.67 1.94 9 243.46 335.94 2.25 3.5
189 RB-150 119.2 24 5.5 2.5 1.84 6 242.88 330 2.2 4.36
190 Refrig Sein 167.63 22.4 6.5 3.06 2.36 9.4 343.62 445.54 2.12 3.45
191 Refrig T 167.63 24.6 5.66 2.5 1.93 10 268.73 348.09 2.26 4.35
192 Sola TR27 338.23 26.23 7.5 4 2.85 10.5 560.67 786.9 1.88 3.5
193 RS=150 111.75 24.6 5.5 2.5 1.7 8.5 229.33 338.25 2.2 4.47
194 Storem 4 89.4 16.1 5.2 2.6 2.55 8.5 213.49 217.67 2 3.1
195 Storem 4c 89.4 16.1 5.3 2.6 2.55 8.6 217.59 221.86 2.04 3.04
196 Storem 7 186.25 19.47 5.59 3 2.6 8.8 282.98 326.51 1.86 3.48
197 Sohispan 1 465.63 25.48 7.5 5.39 3.6 10 687.96 1030.03 1.39 3.4
http://www.soviet trawler.narod.ru and http://www.marintimesale.com/dtr10.htm
S.C. Duru / Journal of Maritime Research Vol XIII. No. III (2016) 47–60 50
Figure 1: Power P(Kw) to Length L(m) Regression Figure 2: Power-Speed Ratio P/V to Length (m) Regression Formula
Figure 3: Power(Kw) to D(m), T (m), B(m), v(m) Regression
Figure 4: Power-Speed, Draft to length Figure 5: Power to cubic length Regression
S.C. Duru / Journal of Maritime Research Vol XIII. No. III (2016) 47–60 51
Figure 6: Power-Speed Ratio P/V to P Regression Figure 7: Speed V to Main Power P Regression
Figure 8: Power P − D, B to length Regression Figure 9: Power P/BeamB to Length L(m) Regression
√
Figure 10: Power P-Draft T , L to Length L Figure 11: Power P/V 4/3 to L Regression
S.C. Duru / Journal of Maritime Research Vol XIII. No. III (2016) 47–60 52
√ √ √
Figure 12: Power P-Draft T , L to Length L Figure 13: P/ B, and P/ T to Beam B Regression
√ √
Figure 14: P/B, and P/ L to Beam B Regression Figure 15: P/v, and P/ B to Beam B Regression
√ √ √
Figure 16: P/ T , and P/ V to Beam D Relation Figure 17: P/v, P/B, and P/ L to Beam D Regression
S.C. Duru / Journal of Maritime Research Vol XIII. No. III (2016) 47–60 53
√ √ √
Figure 18: P/ B, P/ T ,and P/ v to Beam T Regression
√
Figure 19: P/v and P/B, to Beam D Figure 20: P/B and P/ L to Beam T Regression
S.C. Duru / Journal of Maritime Research Vol XIII. No. III (2016) 47–60 54
Table 3: Derived regression equation for main power formulas as written in fig 1 to 20
FORMULAR FROM REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF 197 FISHING VESSELS DATA ON MAIN POWER P(Kw)
R2 = Square Correlation coefficient.
1, Length L(m) Related Main Power P(Kw) Regression Derived Equations.
Let L = X1, L = Length Between Perpendiculars
R2 = 0.896, P1 = 0.2811X12 + 16.049X1 − 138.76 (1)
R2 = 0.886, P2/T = 0.0701X12 + 10.124X1 − 42.911 (2)
R2 = 0.884, P3 = 6E − 16X16 − 3E − 09X15 + 0.0065X13 + 421.35 (3)
R2 = 0.863, P4 = 6E − 16X16 − 3E − 09X15 + 0.0065X13 − 421.35 (4)
R2 = 0.865, P5 = 0.0004X13 − 0.0554X12 + 13.579X1 − 144.05 (5)
R2 = 0.842, P6 = 6.7422X1 − 22.248 (6)
R2 = 0.801, P7/L = 4.5837X1 − 28.344 (7)
2. Breadth(moulded) B(m) regression Derived Equations.
Let B = X2
R2 = 0.924, P8 = 22.153X22 − 150.93X2 + 365.85 (8)
R2 = 0.863, P9/T = 1.4795X22 + 13.972X2 − 27.73 (9)
R2 = 0.907, P10/T = 6.04X22 − 5.5202X2 − 19.642 (10)
R2 = 0.923, P11/B = 5.0457X22 − 24.999X2 + 50.175 (11)
R2 = 0.857, P12/L = 33.9772X2 − 156.98 (12)
R2 = 0.826, P13/B = 18.596X2 − 72.998 (13)
3. DEPTH(moulded) D(m) regression Derived Equations.
Let D = X3
R2 = 0.884, P14 = 59.25X32 − 332.55X2 + 852.41 (14)
R2 = 0.818, P15/T = 166X3 − 368.52 (15)
R2 = 0.806, P16/L = 44.45X3?78.974X3 (16)
4. DESIGN DRAFT T(m) regression Derived Equations.
LET T = X4
R2 = 0.896, P17 = 148.37X42 − 432X1 + 409.77 (17)
R2 = 0.884, P18/B = 35.836X42 − 93.243X4 + 95.107 (18)
R2 = 0.842, P19/T = 044.228X42 − 69.608X4 + 82.639 (19)
R2 = 0.871, P20/B = −1.6877X43 + 27.424X42 − 84.995X4 + 109.57 (20)
R2 = 0.893, P11/L = −2.2452X43 + 40.908X42 − 129.71X4 + 161.82 (21)
(22)
S.C. Duru / Journal of Maritime Research Vol XIII. No. III (2016) 47–60 55
Table 4: Derived regression equation for vessel speed formulas as written in figures
FORMULAS FROM REGRESSION ANALYSIS OF 197 FISHING VESSELS DATA ON VESSELS SPEED v(Kn)
R2 =Square Correlation coefficient.
1, Main Power P(Kw) Relation with Fishing Vessels Speed v(Kn) Power to Speed ratio formulas.
R2 = 0.805, v1 = 1.9845 · ln(P) − 1.5452 (23)
R = 0.992,
2
P/v = −2e
2 −06
P2 + 0.0743P + 0.0269 (24)
2, Length L(m) Related to Main Power P(Kw) to Vessel Speed Regression formulas.
R2 = 0.879, P/v3 = 3.260X1 + 42.036 (25)
R = 0.890,
2
P/v4 = 0.0581X12 + 5.6589X1 − 43.804 (26)
R = 0.872,
2
P/V54/3 = 0.0038X12 + 0.8133X1 − 4.2364 (27)
X1=L
3, Breadth B(m) Related to Main Power P(Kw) to Vessel Speed Regression formulas.
R2 = 0.847, P/v6 = 1.5512X22.3064 (28)
R = 0.879,
2
P/v7 = 23.401X2 − 127 (29)
X2=B
4. Depth D(m) Related to Main Power P(Kw) to Vessel Speed Regression formulas.
R2 = 0.892, P/v8 = 1.3304X33 − 15.055X32 + 119.64X1 − 162.75 (30)
R = 0.832,
2
P/v9 = 3.8034X31.7622 (31)
X3=D
5. Draft T(m) Related to Main Power P(Kw) to Vessel Speed Regression formulas.
R2 = 0.872, P/V10 = 26.326X12 − 29.104X1 + 22.75 (32)
R = 0.887,
2
P/V11 = 8.647X12 − 19.835X1 + 24.005 (33)
S.C. Duru / Journal of Maritime Research Vol XIII. No. III (2016) 47–60 56
Table 5: Projected 100 tonnes deadweight fishing vessel. Design option A1 data analysis and result.
0 1 A1 2 3
1 VESSEL DATA POWER P(Kw) SPEED V(Kn)
2 L(m) = 53.40 P1 = 1519.81 V1 = 13.36
3 B(m) = 12.47 P2 = 1586.96 V2 = 12.06
4 D(m) = 7.58 P3 = 1409.82 V3 = 12.15
5 T (m) = 5.18 P4 = 1677.89 V4 = 14.32
6 L/T = 10.32 P5 = 1709.22 V5 = 13.48
7 D/T = 1.46 P6 = 1748.04 V6 = 13.66
8 LBD = 5048.58 P7 = 1581.54 V7 = 11.72
9 LBT = 3446.30 P(L) = 1604.75 V8 = 13.72
10 B/D = 1.65 P8 = 1928.97 V9 = 12.58
11 L/B = 4.28 P9 = 1948.98 V10 = 12.90
12 L/D = 7.04 P10 = 1935.66 V11 = 13.55
13 F/D = 0.32 P11 = 1847.46 V(avg) = 13.05
14 P(Kw) = 1335.16 P12 = 1949.26 Vcrit = 12.03
15 V(Kn) = 13.05 P13 = 1981.80
16 P(B) = 1932.02
17 P/V = 102.31 P14 = 1736.54
18 PCRIT = 1620.85 P15 = 2024.46
19 PDEV = −285.69 P16 = 1335.16
20 %PDEV = −17.63 P(D) = 1698.72
21 P17 = 2147.61
22 P18 = 2020.98
23 P19 = 2063.01
24 P20 = 2123.25
25 P21 = 2009.21
26 P(T ) = 2072.81
27 PAVG = 1823.13
S.C. Duru / Journal of Maritime Research Vol XIII. No. III (2016) 47–60 57
Table 6: Projected 100 tonnes deadweight fishing vessel. Design option A2 data analysis and result.
0 1 A1 2 3
1 VESSEL DATA POWER P(Kw) SPEED V(Kn)
2 L(m) = 48.686 P1 = 1308.88 V1 = 13.04
3 B(m) = 10.986 P2 = 1380.77 V2 = 12.02
4 D(m) = 7.740 P3 = 1170.64 V3 = 11.89
5 T (m) = 5.022 P4 = 1527.67 V3 = 14.12
6 L/T = 9.695 P5 = 1431.54 V4 = 13.23
7 D/T = 1.541 P6 = 1536.75 V5 = 13.46
8 LBD = 4139.85 P7 = 1359.35 V6 = 11.01
9 LBT = 2686.09 P(L) = 1387.94 V7 = 13.20
10 B/D = 1.419 P8 = 1381.43 V8 = 12.41
11 L/B = 4.432 P9 = 1528.35 V9 = 11.60
12 L/D = 6.290 P10 = 1453.71 V10 = 12.92
13 F/D = 0.351 P11 = 1274.47 V(avg) = 12.63
14 P(Kw) = 1274.47 P12 = 1509.18 Vcrit = 11.99
15 V(Kn) = 12.630 P13 = 1442.44
16 P(B) = 1431.60
17 P/V = 100.91 P14 = 1828.00
18 PCRIT = 1460.43 P15 = 2053.46
19 PDEV = −186.0 P16 = 1331.18
20 %PDEV = −12.732 P(D) = 1737.54
21 P17 = 1982.23
22 P18 = 1758.82
23 P19 = 1901.52
24 P20 = 1764.49
25 P21 = 1798.56
26 P(T ) = 1841.12
27 PAVG = 1558.26
S.C. Duru / Journal of Maritime Research Vol XIII. No. III (2016) 47–60 58
Table 7: Projected 100 tonnes deadweight fishing vessel. Design option A3 data analysis and result.
0 1 A1 2 3
1 VESSEL DATA POWER P(Kw) SPEED V(Kn)
2 L(m) = 62.04 P1 = 1939.00 V1 = 13.805
3 B(m) = 12.12 P2 = 2076.91 V2 = 12.07
4 D(m) = 9.41 P3 = 1970.95 V3 = 12.99
5 T (m) = 5.90 P4 = 2206.63 V4 = 15.367
6 L/T = 10.52 P5 = 2022.00 V5 = 14.143
7 D/T = 1.59 P6 = 2336.74 V6 = 15.092
8 LBD = 7078.29 P7 = 2016.78 V7 = 12.141
9 LBT = 4438.04 P(L) = 2081.29 V8 = 12.62
10 B/D = 1.29 P8 = 1792.27 V9 = 13.276
11 L/B = 5.12 P9 = 2118.93 V10 = 13.654
12 L/D = 6.59 P10 = 1946.25 V11 = 13.634
13 F/D = 0.37 P11 = 1701.84 V(avg) = 13.50
14 P(Kw) = 1701.85 P12 = 2008.23 Vcrit = 12.08
15 V(Kn) = 13.50 P13 = 1848.42
16 P(B) = 1902.66
17 P/V = 126.06 P14 = 2969.59
18 PCRIT = 2203.63 P15 = 2899.10
19 PDEV = −501.79 P16 = 2001.87
20 %PDEV = −22.77 P(D) = 2623.52
21 P17 = 3025.73
22 P18 = 2759.19
23 P19 = 2942.79
24 P20 = 2620.13
25 P21 = 2831.07
26 P(T ) = 2835.78
27 PAVG = 2287.35
S.C. Duru / Journal of Maritime Research Vol XIII. No. III (2016) 47–60 59
References ter Degree Thesis in Marine Technology. Norwegian University of Science
and Technology, Dept. of Marine Technology.
Brett Wilson, W., 1985. Fishing vessel design curves. International Conference Lutsenko Valeriy, 2016. Fishing fleet of communist and post-communist coun-
of Design Construction and Operation of Commercial Fishing Vessels Pro- tries.
ceedings 1985 Florida USA. URL: http://soviet-trawler.narod.ru/
Duru, S., 1990. A proposal for basic freeboard for ocean- going ships. London M.F.C. Santerelli, 1982. Preliminary determination of main characteristics of
IMO Doc Slf 34/inf submitted by delegation of Poland to UNO IMO. fishing vessels. Lecture Note for Sixth Wegemt School, Fishing Vessel Tech-
Duru, S., 1997. Preliminary design of modern fishing vessels- fact from existing nology Madrid.
vessels. Budownictwo Okretowe 2 Poland., pp 54–56. Parson, M., 2009. Application of optimization in early stage ship design. Ship
Duru, S., 2016. Lightship component masses in preliminary design exampli- Science and Technology Ciencia and Tecnologia de Buques COTECMAR.
fied for fishing vessel. International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Columbia Vol 3 (No.5).
Research 7 (11). URL: www.shipjournal.co
Fishing Vessel for Sale, 2016. Sugalski, K., 2014. Fishing vessel hull design and towing resistance calculation
URL: http://www.maritimesales.com/JRD10.htm by cfd methods. Scientific Journals Zeszyty Naukowe Maritime University
Holtrop, J., 1984. A statistical re-analysis of resistance and propulsion data. of Szczecin Poland Vol 40 (No.112), pp 27–30 ISSN1733–8670.
International Shipbuilding Progress Vol 31 (No.363), pp 272–276. Watson, D., 1989. Practical ship design. Elsevier Ocean Engineering Books
Kleppestø, K., 2015. Empirical prediction of resistance of fishing vessels. Mas- Series ISBN:0-0804299-8 Netherland.
