Question 2 of 6: Question 2 (Part A, Question A2): Skin-Friction Drag and Power for a Super-Tanker
Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)
Notes on this paper
Paper format. National Exams, May 2013 — 07-Mec-B6
Advanced Fluid Mechanics. Three hours, open book, any non-communicating
calculator permitted. Part A holds three questions of 20 marks each (40 per cent of the
paper) and Part B three questions of 30 marks each (60 per cent); the candidate answers
any two in each part. All six questions are worked here, because the set is a
study resource rather than a three-hour sitting. The paper supplies an aid sheet of compressible-flow,
boundary-layer, Navier–Stokes and potential-flow relations, and the coefficients quoted below
are taken from that sheet so that the arithmetic matches what a candidate had in front of them.
Reference texts.
F. M. White, Fluid Mechanics, 8th ed. — Ch. 5 (dimensional analysis and
similitude), Ch. 7 (external flow), Ch. 8 (potential flow), Ch. 9 (compressible flow),
Ch. 10 (open-channel flow).
F. M. White, Viscous Fluid Flow, 3rd ed. — Ch. 3 (exact solutions of the
Navier–Stokes equations), Ch. 6 (turbulent wall flow).
J. D. Anderson, Modern Compressible Flow, 3rd ed. — Ch. 3 (normal shock waves),
Ch. 5 (quasi-one-dimensional nozzle flow).
P. K. Kundu, I. M. Cohen and D. R. Dowling, Fluid Mechanics, 6th ed. —
Ch. 6 (irrotational flow), Ch. 9 (laminar flow).
H. Schlichting and K. Gersten, Boundary-Layer Theory, 8th ed. — Ch. 21
(plate drag, mixed laminar/turbulent layers).
R. W. Fox, A. T. McDonald and J. W. Mitchell, Introduction to Fluid Mechanics,
10th ed. — Ch. 7 (similitude), Ch. 11 (open-channel flow).
Question 2 (Part A, Question A2): Skin-Friction Drag and Power for a Super-Tanker (20 marks)
Find. The total skin-friction force on the wetted hull and the
propulsive power needed to overcome it.
Figure 2.1 — Left: transverse section, with the wetted flat bottom and the two side faces marked in red. Right: the boundary layer along the hull, laminar over the first few centimetres and turbulent thereafter (vertical scale greatly exaggerated).
Approach. Treat the wetted bottom and the two sides as flat
plates of length L in a stream of speed U, integrate the aid-sheet local
friction coefficient along the plate in two pieces — laminar up to the transition point,
then the 1/7-law turbulent form — to obtain a mean coefficient, and convert that to force
and power.
Wetted area and free-stream speed. The flat bottom contributes
$B L$ and each of the two vertical sides contributes $T L$, so
$$A_w = BL + 2TL = (70)(360) + 2(25)(360) = 25{,}200 + 18{,}000
= 43,200\ \text{m}^{2}$$
and the ship speed converts to
$U = 24\ \text{km/h} \div 3.6 = 6.6667$ m/s.
Reynolds numbers and the transition point. Over the full hull length
$$Re_L = \frac{U L}{\nu} = \frac{(6.6667)(360)}{1.37\times 10^{-6}}
= 1.752 \times 10^{9}$$
and transition occurs where $Re_x = 3\times10^{5}$, that is at
$$x_{tr} = \frac{Re_{x,tr}\,\nu}{U} = \frac{(3\times10^{5})(1.37\times10^{-6})}{6.6667} = 0.06165\ \text{m}$$
Transition is complete within the first 62 mm of a 360 m hull, so the
layer is turbulent over essentially the whole ship; the laminar piece is retained anyway because
the question asks for a naturally developing layer.
Mean friction coefficient, laminar portion. The mean coefficient is the
length average of the local one, $C_F = (1/L)\int_0^L C_{fx}\,\mathrm{d}x$. Over the laminar
run the aid sheet gives $C_{fx} = 0.67\,Re_x^{-1/2}$, and since
$Re_x^{-1/2} = (\nu / U x)^{1/2}$ the integral is elementary:
$$\int_0^{x_{tr}} 0.67\left(\frac{\nu}{Ux}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{d}x
= 1.34\,\frac{x_{tr}}{\sqrt{Re_{x,tr}}}
= 1.34\,\frac{0.06165}{547.7}
= 1.5083 \times 10^{-4}\
\text{m}$$
Mean friction coefficient, turbulent portion. With
$C_{fx} = 0.0266\,Re_x^{-1/7}$ the same integration from the transition point to the stern gives
$$\int_{x_{tr}}^{L} 0.0266\left(\frac{\nu}{Ux}\right)^{1/7}\mathrm{d}x
= \frac{7}{6}(0.0266)\left[L\,Re_L^{-1/7} - x_{tr}\,Re_{x,tr}^{-1/7}\right]$$
Substituting $Re_L^{-1/7} = 0.04781$ and
$Re_{x,tr}^{-1/7} = 0.16503$ yields
$0.5338$ m. Dividing the sum of the two pieces by the hull length,
$$C_F = \frac{0.00015 + 0.5338}{360}
= \boxed{1.4832 \times 10^{-3}}$$
The laminar strip supplies only about 0.03 per cent of the total, so an all-turbulent estimate
$C_F = \tfrac{7}{6}(0.0266)Re_L^{-1/7} = 0.00148$ differs by less than a tenth
of a per cent — a reassuring cross-check.
Skin-friction force. The dynamic pressure is
$q = \tfrac12\rho U^{2} = \tfrac12(1020)(6.6667)^{2}
= 22,667$ Pa, and the drag follows directly from the definition of the mean
coefficient:
$$F_D = C_F\,\tfrac12 \rho U^{2} A_w
= (0.001483)(22,667)(43,200)
= \boxed{1,452\ \text{kN}}$$
that is about 1.45 MN, equivalent to the weight of roughly
148 tonnes.
Propulsive power. The power delivered against a steady drag force is the
product of force and speed:
$$P = F_D\,U = (1,452,336\ \text{N})(6.6667\ \text{m/s})
= \boxed{9.68\ \text{MW}}$$
This is the effective power needed for skin friction alone; a real tanker also pays for
wave-making and form drag and for propulsive inefficiency, so the installed shaft power would be
appreciably larger.
Check: the calculation assumes the three wetted faces behave as smooth flat plates with a boundary layer starting fresh at the bow on each, that the bilge curvature, the bow and stern regions, appendages and hull roughness add nothing, and that wave-making drag is excluded — exactly the idealisation the question specifies. A fouled or riveted hull can easily double the friction coefficient, which is why service allowances are applied in practice.