Marine Technology, Vol. 30, No. 3, July 1993, pp.

153 171

Design and Operational Experience of the SWATH Ship N a v a t e k I

L u d w i g H. Seidl, 1 William F. Clifford, 2 and J a m e s P. C u m m i n g s 3

A presentation is attempted linking the historical development, general design considerations for Small
Waterplane Area, Twin-Hull (SWATH) hull shapes, the design of a particular SWATH, the Navatek I, and
her operational experience. The "carrier vessel" concept on which the Navatek / is based is introduced.
Principal dimensions and general arrangements are shown. A parametric study of twin-strut SWATH hull
forms for a hull of constant displacement is presented in some detail. Stability and ship motion are
discussed and actual data for the Navatek I presented. The overall structural analysis is briefly presented,
including the method of analysis for the Navatek L The SWATH captain's operational experience with
the Navatek I during her extensive journeys is related to quite some extent.

The SWATH concept devised a single-hulled ship based on such a principle, which
would a p p e a r to be a quite workable design. To counter t h e
SURFACE SHIPS face basically two problems i n h e r e n t l y asso- ensuing stability problem other inventors considered twin-
ciated with operation at t h e surface of an ocean: (a) excitation hull and m u l t i h u l l vessels. F o r example, in 1905 Nelson [2]
by wave action and (b) w a v e m a k i n g resistance. The Small conceived a twin-hulled vessel whereby the buoyancy is pro-
W a t e r p l a n e A r e a Twin-Hull ship, or SWATH, has the poten- vided by a p a i r of cylindrical submerged hulls and the above
tial to alleviate s u b s t a n t i a l l y these problems. w a t e r portion of t h e vessel is supported by struts.
In simple terms, both of these p h e n o m e n a could be reduced F a u s t in 1932 followed with a s i m i l a r b u t a l r e a d y more
by bringing the bulk of t h e d i s p l a c e m e n t well below the free practical design. A short discussion of f u r t h e r p a t e n t s is given
surface. If t h a t p a r t of t h e ship where passengers a n d / o r by Seidl and Wilkie (1980) [3]. The more modern patents,
cargo a r e to be carried is to be located above water, the s t r u t s s t a r t i n g with Creed in 1946 a n d Boericke in 1962 [4], appar-
of the S W A T H ship a r e required to hold t h a t p a r t above e n t l y also give consideration to seakeeping. Modern and scien-
water. This puts serious constraints on the distance t h a t the tific investigations s t a r t with Boericke in 1959 and Lewis and
lower hulls can be located below t h e w a t e r surface. The con- Breslin in 1960 [5].
s t r a i n t s come from four sources: Stenger [6] provided the first m e d i u m small w a t e r p l a n e
(a) Stability: the center of buoyancy would be well below a r e a vessel in 1966. In 1968 this a p p r o x i m a t e l y 40 m vessel,
t h e design w a t e r l i n e a n d the CG (from the effect of the above the Duplus, which we would now call a SWATH, was
w a t e r p a r t of the ship) high above the DWL, r e s u l t i n g in l a u n c h e d [7].
stability problems. More recently p a t e n t s a n d designs by Leopold (1967, 1969),
(b) Resistance: the w a v e m a k i n g resistance of the s t r u t s is Lang [8] and Seidl [9] have followed. The l a t t e r exhibits a
significant and m a y even be d o m i n a n t for a deeply submerged lower hull of '~substantially v a r y i n g " cross section, while all
lower hull. previously m e n t i o n e d designs have in common lower hulls
(c) S t r u c t u r a l strength: the t r a n s v e r s e wave '~prying mo- t h a t a r e torpedo-shaped or elongated bodies of essentially
m e n t " will increase a p p r o x i m a t e l y l i n e a r l y with t h e depth constant cross section. All the l a t t e r designs show single or
of the struts. twin-strut designs.
(d) O p e r a t i o n a l difficulties with excessive draft. W h i l e for v e r y high speed operations, say V/x/~/L) > 1.2,
t h e torpedo-shaped or essentially constant-cross-section lower
hulls t e n d to have less total resistance, t h e resistance at lower
speeds, V/x/(g/L) < 1, is less for a v a r y i n g cross section. This
Historical background
is of p a r t i c u l a r i m p o r t a n c e for twin-strut per side ships.
A long list of designs a n d p a t e n t s is evidence t h a t m a n has
a t t e m p t e d to minimize these ocean surface r e l a t e d problems
Twin strut versus single strut
w i t h i n t h e l i m i t s of these constraints.
Possibly t h e a t t e m p t to reduce t h e w a v e m a k i n g resistance Much discussion has been dedicated to this question in t h e
was t h e first i n d u c e m e n t to b r i n g t h e b u l k of t h e displaced past. F o r most hull p a r a m e t e r c o m b i n a t i o n s t h e single s t r u t
volume f u r t h e r below t h e surface. E a r l y p a t e n t e d designs configuration m a y have less resistance. However, t h e r e a r e
m a y indeed have been i n s p i r e d by t h e notion t h a t a deep o t h e r ship p e r f o r m a n c e considerations besides resistance.
diving s u b m a r i n e does not have a n y w a v e m a k i n g resistance. F i r s t a n d foremost is the question of static stability. Passen-
Hence t h e i d e a to provide for a n elongated hull or hulls ger crowding at e i t h e r end of t h e ship r e q u i r e s a c e r t a i n
disposed well below the free surface. In 1880 L u n d b o r g [1]4 m i n i m u m a m o u n t of l o n g i t u d i n a l second m o m e n t of wa-
t e r p l a n e area.
* Professor and chairman, Department of Ocean Engineering, School As t h e s t r u t s need to have a v e r y fine e n t r a n c e , t h e r e is
of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology, University of Hawaii, Hono- not m u c h of second m o m e n t a v a i l a b l e if t h e s t r u t is to be
lulu, Hawaii.
2 President, Navatek Ships, Ltd., Honolulu, Hawaii. n a r r o w also. I n c r e a s i n g t h e s t r u t thickness, will provide a
3 Senior captain, Navatek Ships, Ltd., Honolulu, Hawaii. g r e a t e r Iyy, however a t the expense of i n c r e a s i n g t h e TPI (tons
Presented at the February 7, 1991 meeting of the Northern California per inch) and i n c r e a s i n g t h e r e s o n a n c e frequency in h e a v e
Section of THE SOCIETYOF NAVAL ARCHITECTSAND MARINE ENGINEERS. a n d roll. The roll period could be controlled by a high CG of
4 Numbers in brackets designate References at end of paper. t h e e n t i r e ship, which will, however, also effect t h e s t a b i l i t y

0025-3316/93/3003-0153500.63/0 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 153

in trim. Alternatively, too fast a roll period can be counter-
acted by reducing the centerline spacing between the two
hulls. The heave n a t u r a l period will, however, be reduced
because of the greater w a t e r p l a n e area of the single strut.
This can only be counteracted by a greater lower hull diame-
ter, which m a y be inappropriate for a variety of reasons.
Finally, the mode of operation is a n i m p o r t a n t factor. If
the vessel is to operate in a ferry mode, t h e n the single-strut
design may have a n edge. If the operation includes periods
of low or zero speed, e.g., for whale watching, on a n a t u r e
excursion ship or other station-keeping applications, then the
twin-strut configuration can prove more advantageous. As
the motions of a SWATH are much reduced in the vertical
modes of motion, the horizontal motions and accelerations
are sensed more easily by passengers, a n d need therefore be
minimized also. A twin-strut configuration will tend to have
less transverse accelerations in beam seas.
It is, of course, dangerous to make too broad generaliza-
tions, and only actual calculations can give a clearer picture.
M a n y other considerations affect the choice between single-
s t r u t and twin-strut configurations. The most i m p o r t a n t may
be the a r r a n g e m e n t and type of propulsion in the lower hull,
and last not least, the aesthetic appearance of the hull from
a distance.
Many persons c o m m e n t on the impression they receive
when seeing a (two-strut per side) SWATH ship for the first
time. The ship seems to be magically elevated above the sea;
seeing through or better b e n e a t h the ship creates the exciting
Fig. 1 Carrier vessel
impression of a vessel which '~levitates" above the waves.
Besides the obvious novelty of this view there may be a n
implicit expectation that such a ship is indeed decoupled from
the waves of the sea. Observing on the other h a n d a single- allow a customized deckhouse design. The carrier vessel m a y
s t r u t SWATH from the side, one does not at all get the high- be b u i l t at one shipyard and the deckhouse m a y be built at
tech connotation about this novel ship type. It may easily be another. This m o d u l a r building concept should provide a n
m i s t a k e n for a conventional c a t a m a r a n or even a conven- economical method to construct similar ships.
tional ship. The deckhouse being m o u n t e d on resilient m o u n t s provides
several other advantages:
(a) It allows the carrier vessel to be built from steel, while
The "carrier vessel" concept the deckhouse can be a l u m i n u m without requiring a special
There are several methods possible to s t r u c t u r a l l y connect interface. The resilient m o u n t s automatically insulate the
the two demi-hulls of a twin-hull ship, w h e t h e r it is a catama- a l u m i n u m deckhouse from the steel hull.
r a n or SWATH. The major building blocks of a SWATH ship (b) No s t r u c t u r a l loads are t r a n s m i t t e d from the vessel
are the lower hulls, the struts, the sponsons a n d the super- structure to the deckhouse, which allows for a more economi-
s t r u c t u r e or deckhouse. Figure 1 shows t h a t part of the ship cal s t r u c t u r a l design of the deckhouse.
t h a t we call the '~carrier vessel." (c) Hull vibrations and h u l l b o r n e noise is effectively
In the case of a twin-strut design, the midships part of shielded from the passenger carrying deckhouse.
the sponson does not directly contribute to the transverse
s t r e n g t h of the vessel. Therefore, the transverse s t r u c t u r a l Design guidelines
members for the purpose of carrying the p r i m a r y t r a n s v e r s e
loads, i.e., those due to the ~prying forces," are provided only The SWATH ship Navatek I is intended to serve as a casino
i n way of the struts. excursion ship, day cruise ship a n d d i n n e r excursion ship
The hydrodynamic transverse forces which act on the lower for 400 passengers and crew. Most importantly, this ship is
hulls are t r a n s m i t t e d to the struts and from there to the required to provide a very stable shipboard e n v i r o n m e n t
structure connecting the two demihulls. In the present de- which will provide the feeling of very much larger cruise
sign, the connecting structure consists of a box beam forward ships.
and a n o t h e r box beam aft. The superstructure, in this case The second most i m p o r t a n t characteristic of the ship is
the deckhouse, does not contribute to the transverse s t r e n g t h t h a t its appearance conveys a novel technology, namely, t h a t
of the ship. As a m a t t e r of fact, it is simply m o u n t e d on of a SWATH ship able to provide a n e x t r a o r d i n a r i l y stable
the m a i n deck (here the sponson deck) by m e a n s of resilient e n v i r o n m e n t at sea. The futuristic look of the ship will be
mounts. enhanced by a considerable gap between the wet deck a n d
Thus, by carrier vessel we m e a n t h a t part of the vessel the sea surface.
which is made up from the lower hulls, the struts, the spon- A twin-strut per side configuration was suggested that will
sons a n d the crossbeams. This is the s t r u c t u r a l entity. The convey to a n observer the impression t h a t the deckhouse is
pilothouse belongs to the carrier vessel, to make it opera- suspended above the sea surface.
tional, but being also simply m o u n t e d to the deck of the car- Speed--Cruising speed of 14 knots and m a x i m u m speed of
rier vessel by m e a n s of resilient mounts, it does not contribute 16 knots were initially anticipated though some discretion
to the transverse strength of the vessel. was given to economical speeds. Speed d u r i n g the operation
The m a i n advantage of the carrier vessel concept is t h a t of the ship as day excursion ship is anticipated to be about 8
it provides the possibility to utilize a s t a n d a r d vessel and to 14 knots.

154 July 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

 R a n g e - - A r a n g e of 1000 n a u t i c a l miles is r e q u i r e d a t cruis- r e s u l t s a r e for a twin-strut-per-side S W A T H . The lower hull
ing speed. has c i r c u l a r cross section t h r o u g h o u t ; its axis is h o r i z o n t a l
Endurance--The ship shall be capable of operations with- a n d p a r a l l e l to t h e l o n g i t u d i n a l p l a n e of s y m m e t r y . It is de-
out m a j o r restocking of provisions a n d potable w a t e r for a fined by eight control sections of d i a m e t e r s Din. F o r t h e follow-
period of 7 days. ing p a r a m e t r i c resistance calculations t h e r a t i o Din~
Seakeeping--For cruising a t design speed, p a s s e n g e r com- D . . . . m = 1 ... 8 is k e p t constant; i.e., t h e hull s h a p e r e m a i n s
fort at t h e following speeds a n d sea states m u s t be main- unchanged. The hull c e n t e r l i n e spacing is also constant, un-
tained: less noted. The s t r u t s a r e also k e p t u n c h a n g e d a n d a t t h e
15 knots t h r o u g h sea s t a t e 4 s a m e position, unless as noted. F i g u r e 2 depicts t h e geometry.
14 knots t h r o u g h sea s t a t e 5 The s a m p l e calculations a r e c a r r i e d out for a S W A T H of 750
10 knots t h r o u g h sea s t a t e 6 t (tonnes or m e t r i c tons) t o t a l displacement. As t h e displace-
Slow-speed operation--To m a i n t a i n o p e r a t i o n a l a n d pas- m e n t is k e p t c o n s t a n t in Figs. 3-5, t h e abscissa can also be
senger comfort, defined more specifically below, u n d e r the t h o u g h t of as p r o p o r t i o n a l to t h e v o l u m e t r i c F r o u d e n u m b e r .
b e s t speed a n d best h e a d i n g for 80% of t h e o p e r a t i o n a l time: These figures a r e given only to provide a p i c t u r e of r e s i s t a n c e
Sea s t a t e 4: Significant wave h e i g h t = 2.00 m; wind = 20 coefficients. No consideration is given to s t a b i l i t y or seakeep-
knots; m o d a l period = 8.8 sec. ing of t h e a n a l y z e d hull forms.
Sea s t a t e 5: Significant wave height = 3.25 m; wind = 25 F i g u r e s 3 t h r o u g h 5 depict t h e ratio of w a v e m a k i n g resist-
knots; m o d a l period = 9.7 sec. ance to total resistance for T/Dmax = 1.2, 1.3 a n d 1.5, respec-
Vibration and noise levels--Vibration a n d shipborne noise tively. As t h e volume of t h e hull v a r i a t i o n s is c o n s t a n t a n d
a r e to be k e p t as low as possible. Audible noise from the m a i n even though t h e wetted surface of t h e hulls changes, t h e s e
propulsion engines is expected to be well reduced by having g r a p h s are also quite r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l
t h e engines located in t h e lower hulls. w a v e m a k i n g d r a g coefficients, g r a p h s of which a r e not pre-
Special guidelines--(a) The design shall be to classification sented here because of space limitations.
s t a n d a r d s of t h e A m e r i c a n B u r e a u of S h i p p i n g and satisfy the The ratio of l e n g t h to m a x i m u m d i a m e t e r , L/DMA x is v a r i e d
r e q u i r e m e n t s of the U.S. Coast G u a r d a n d other applicable between 7.0 a n d 9.5. T/DMAx is t h e ratio of d r a f t to t h e maxi-
r e g u l a t o r y agencies for U.S.-fiag registry. (b) To satisfy (a), m u m diameter.
t h e ship shall m e e t a o n e - c o m p a r t m e n t d a m a g e stability crite- F i g u r e s 6-8 i l l u s t r a t e t h e significant dependence of t h e
rion. (c) The ship shall be capable of changing draft. (d) The o p t i m a l hull configuration on t h e hull p a r a m e t e r s . Between
ship shall be equipped with a b a l l a s t system. The b a l l a s t 12 a n d 14 knots t h e m i n i m u m wave resistance for this ficti-
system is to provide sufficient response to counteract the tious 750-ton S W A T H a p p e a r s to have a well-defined mini-
effect of p a s s e n g e r movements. m u m envelope. Note how t h e o p t i m a l h u l l for 12 knots is on
The g e n e r a l a r r a n g e m e n t s of both t h e c a r r i e r vessel and the o t h e r end of t h e L/Dmax d i a m e t e r t h a n t h a t for 14 knots.
Navatek I a r e shown in t h e Appendix; t h e principal dimen- The effect of t h e draft to d i a m e t e r ratio T/Dma x is pronounced,
sions a r e given in Table 1. even though t h e s t r u t s were a c t u a l l y slender.
The longitudinal position of t h e s t r u t s m a y be governed by
Resistance
consideration of required a r r a n g e m e n t s . The s e n s i t i v i t y to
positioning of the struts is, however, of interest.
Introduction F i g u r e 6 depicts t h e effect of x2/L, t h e position of t h e aft
Resistance prediction for S W A T H ships is at t h e s a m e time s t r u t stem aft of t h e FP, w h e r e b y all o t h e r g e o m e t r y is k e p t
m o r e difficult a n d easier t h a n t h a t of monohulls. It is more constant; L/Dma~ = 7.0, T/Dmax = 1.2.
difficult as r e l a t i v e l y little past d a t a on S W A T H hulls is F i g u r e 7 depicts the effect of xl/L, t h e position of t h e for-
a v a i l a b l e a n d t h e r e a r e no regression type resistance predic- w a r d s t r u t stem aft of the FP, w h e r e b y all o t h e r g e o m e t r y is
tions possible y e t based on existing databases. On t h e other k e p t constant; L/Dmax = 7.0, T/Dm~x = 1.2.
hand, resistance prediction for S W A T H ships by hydronu- F i g u r e 8 provides t h e w a v e m a k i n g resistance over a r a n g e
meric c o m p u t a t i o n is g r e a t l y facilitated by the fact t h a t each of F r o u d e n u m b e r s up to 0.7. Note t h a t cl a n d c2, t h e chord
of the S W A T H hulls is a slender hull. H y d r o n u m e r i c com- lengths of the two struts, a r e not the s a m e as in t h e base
p u t e r codes, based on thin-ship t h e o r y can therefore predict design.
t h e w a v e m a k i n g resistance more a c c u r a t e l y t h a n t h a t of F i g u r e 9 finally depicts an overview of t h e w a v e m a k i n g
b l u n t monohulls. In 1977 C h a p m a n [10] originally developed resistance for length to lower hull d i a m e t e r ratios r a n g i n g
t h e t h e o r y for S W A T H ships. from 7.0 to 17.0, T/Dm = 1.2 a n d t h e a r b i t r a r i l y s m a l l s t r u t
The procedure used h e r e is basically s i m i l a r to C h a p m a n ' s thicknesses of t = 1.0 ft. F i g u r e 10 is a d d e d to help visualize
except t h a t the lower hull is not r e p r e s e n t e d by an axial the dependency on the c e n t e r l i n e spacing of t h e two hulls,
source distribution, based on slender-body formulation as by b/L=0.297 to 0.648. F i g u r e s 11 and 12 depict t h e effect of
C h a p m a n , b u t by a surface source distribution over the e n t i r e v a r y i n g the length of the f o r w a r d a n d aft strut, respectively.
hull. In fact, t h e s t r u t s a r e r e p r e s e n t e d in the s a m e fashion. F i g u r e s 6 t h r o u g h 12 were plotted a g a i n s t t h e F r o u d e num-
A more d e t a i l e d description is given by Seidl and W i l k i e [3]. ber only, which does not provide quite t h e s a m e c l a r i t y as
This is a more time-consuming procedure but it allows the plotting over the '~displacement" F r o u d e n u m b e r (or vessel
i n c o r p o r a t i o n of a m o r e g e n e r a l hull r e p r e s e n t a t i o n - - e . g . , speed for constant displacement) as i l l u s t r a t e d in Figs. 3, 4,
even the addition of c e r t a i n hull components such as t h a t a n d 5.
p a r t we call t h e ~stinger," which provides t h e support for the The foregoing discussion is i n t e n d e d to provide a g e n e r a l
r u d d e r a n d contains the steering m a c h i n e r y (Fig. 1). b a c k g r o u n d on t h e resistance b e h a v i o r of twin s t r u t S W A T H
General background
designs. O t h e r p a r a m e t e r s need to be v a r i e d also, most impor-
t a n t l y t h e c e n t e r l i n e spacing between t h e two demihulls, a n d
The purpose of this p a r a g r a p h is not to d e m o n s t r a t e the also t h e shape of t h e hull itself. The s a m p l e h u l l h a d only
optimization of a p a r t i c u l a r hull form for m i n i m u m resist- c i r c u l a r cross sections, w h i c h will not n e c e s s a r i l y yield t h e
ance, b u t to show an overview of the dependence of hull resist- least resistance, b u t probably t h e best propulsive efficiency,
ance on t h e various hull p a r a m e t e r s of a S W A T H , to obtain as will be discussed later. D r a f t l i m i t a t i o n s m a y force one to
a view of ~the lay of t h e land," if you will. The following adopt a shallower hull configuration. A n elliptical cross sec-

July 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 155

 Table 1 Navatek I principal dimensions
Displacement @ 3.7 m (12 It) draft 365 L tons
@ 2.4 m (8 ft} draft 310 L tons
Length on deck 40 m (131 ft)
Beam O.A. 16m (53 ft)
Length lower hull 37 m (12o ft)
Length waterline 34 m (112 It)
Two struts per side (tandem struts)
Chord fwd strut llm (36 ft)
Thickness fwd strut 1.07 m (3.5 ft
Chord aft strut 12.2 m (40 ft)
Thickness aft strut 1.22 m (4 ft)
Longit. gap between struts llm (36 ft)
Hull centerline spacing 12.8 m (42 ft)
Draft 2.4-3.7 m (8-12 It)
CP propeller diameter 1.95 m (6.4 ft)
CP propeller continuous 315
Reduction gear ratio 5.12
CP propeller efficiency 0.65

Weight summary
Weight [LT] Weight [LT]
Basic ship: Ship 3.7 m (12 ft) draft:
Hull structure 160 Light ship 265.5
Propulsion plant 28 Passenger, liquid load and ballast 99.5
Electrical systems 3 Total operational ship 365.0
Auxiliary systems and miscellaneous outfit 15.5
Subtotal 206.5 Light ship 265.5
Deckhouse: Ship 2.4 m (8 ft) draft:
Aluminum structure 41.5 Passenger, liquid loads and ballast 44.5
Deckhouse outfit 17.5 Total operational ship 310.0
Light ship 265.5
Generators:
two G.M.6-71 99 kW (each)
Main engines:
two Deutz MWM 16V-816CR
Cruise 670 kW (900 hp) (a) 1500 rpm
Max. 990 kW (1300 hp) (a) 1800 rpm
cruise speed 15.0 knots
max. speed 17.5 knots
Stabilization:
four Koopnautics active fin stabilizers

w e r e p l a n n e d t h r o u g h t h e a f t s t r u t , t h e r e b y s i g n i f i c a n t l y in-
f l u e n c i n g t h e l o n g i t u d i n a l p o s i t i o n of t h a t s t r u t .
F i g u r e 13 d e p i c t s t h e c a l c u l a t e d w a v e m a k i n g r e s i s t a n c e
c o e f f i c i e n t Ca = Rw/(O.5pgV w3) for v a r i o u s d r a f t s . O n t h i s
d i a g r a m t h e v o l u m e is n o t c o n s t a n t , b u t i n c r e a s e s w i t h t h e
d r a f t . I t is e v i d e n t t h a t t h e w a v e m a k i n g d r a g is s t r o n g l y
influenced by the draft. The increase in resistance with draft
is d u e to t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n to w a v e m a k i n g b y t h e s t r u t s . N o t e
that the lowest drafts, however, show the highest wavemak-
ing resistance at speeds past the last hollow in the resistance
Fig. 2 Lower hull
c u r v e , i.e., a t a F r o u d e n u m b e r g r e a t e r t h a n 0.39.
F i g u r e 14 d e p i c t s t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g e h p p o w e r i n g c u r v e s .
I t is s e e n t h a t 14 k n o t s is a n e c o n o m i c a l s p e e d , 15 k n o t s is
t i o n is g e n e r a l l y t h e n e x t b e s t to a c i r c u l a r , f r o m a h y d r o d y - t h e d e s i g n speed, a n d a s u b s t a n t i a l i n c r e a s e i n p o w e r is re-
n a m i c p o i n t of view. q u i r e d to go 16 k n o t s t o p speed.
F i g u r e s 15 a n d 16 c o m p a r e t h e c a l c u l a t e d a n d e x p e r i m e n -
Navatek I t a l r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d f r o m m o d e l tests. T h e c o n t i n u o u s l i n e is
A m o n g t h e o w n e r ' s r e q u i r e m e n t s for t h e S W A T H s h i p Na- t h e m o d e l t e s t d a t a ; t h e " + " s y m b o l s give t h e c a l c u l a t e d
vatek I w e r e a m a x i m u m d r a f t of 8 ft a n d a m a x i m u m l o w e r r e s u l t s . T h e a g r e e m e n t is v e r y good for s p e e d s u p to t h e d e s i g n
h u l l l e n g t h of 131 ft b e c a u s e of b e r t h i n g r e s t r i c t i o n s a t c e r t a i n speed, p a r t i c u l a r l y for t h e c a s e of 12 ft, t h e d e s i g n d r a f t . T h e
experimental data are from model tests at the Vienna Ship
p i e r s of its p r o s p e c t i v e service. T h e s e l i m i t a t i o n s n e c e s s i t a t e d
M o d e l B a s i n i n 1987 [11]. T h e m o d e l scale w a s 12:1.
e l l i p t i c a l cross s e c t i o n s t h r o u g h t h e p o r t i o n of t h e h u l l w i t h
maximum draft. In addition, the engine spaces were specified
Propulsion
b y t h e o w n e r to b e i n t h e l o w e r h u l l s a n d a t w i n - s t r u t - p e r -
side c o n f i g u r a t i o n w a s c a l l e d for. Access to t h e e n g i n e r o o m T h e e v a l u a t i o n of t h e p r o p u l s i v e c o e f f i c i e n t is p o s s i b l y m o r e
a n d s p a c e for e n g i n e a i r i n t a k e d u c t i n g a n d e x h a u s t s t a c k s p r o b l e m a t i c for S W A T H s h i p s t h a n for m o n o h u l l s . F i r s t l y ,

156 July 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

 O.70 o.~.o

--=--- !i!! ~I
___~ I! Igl !i.!l
, ~ l II ,it~l:l II:If III r
"
O.S0
/ o.lo

O,BO

~ O.40

O nO o,~o "

O.IO o.io "

O'~O~, O o.,%~,i o o. ,~ o.,o

Sp I I d -- k~ot I
b Ft. No. -- R./R. (A~?IS0ton T/Dm"I.R)

Fig. 3 Resistance coefficients

o.~.o O.7O

iil i;I Ii: iil O 4 0

iili
o.6o

o.,~o

3
O.nO

o,no

o,ao
./
/

o.*o -: o.,~
I.O
o., o o. ,o o.: o., o
lrr (v.O~)
No. -- R./IRt (,c~"r150ton T / D I r n d l . 3 )

Fig. 4 Resistance coefficients

o.~o I o.7o

0.60 ~ =_-"---=I..
I IIU I!i o.eo

o.oo ~ o.8o L

~ o.4o

o,30 :
J,
o..o

0'20i. 0 Lo.o
R--/HL --
*L.o
Sp ..
~p~d
d _
(~
li.o
,.~g~.
on
i~.o
T/D__I
~4.o

1.8)
.,o4,
b Fr.
o,
No.
|B

--
~r
]R./R,
o,:
(v
~o
)
o.~
~ " ~ ? 5 0 t o n
e

T/DznrXI1.5)
olo
Fig. 5 Resistance coefficients

much less empirical data are available for SWATH ships and, at the propeller disk can be helpful in suggesting improve-
secondly, the flow pattern behind a SWATH, certainly that ments to the hull form. Location and shape of each strut,
behind a two-strut-per-side SWATH, can be much more con- shape of lower hull, spacing between the two demihulls, and
fusing. Because of the location of the relatively deeply sub- hull appendages, all have a distinct influence on the flow
merged propeller, several papers and reports predicted that pattern at the propeller.
the total propulsive coefficient should be greater than ~?T = In principle, we find that a speed with a large component
0.75. of wavemaking resistance will show a reduced propulsive
In our experience, the propulsive coefficient needs to be coefficient, probably because a large wavemaking drag will
measured in self-propulsion tests. Carrying out a wake survey cause uneven flow at the propeller and thereby a reduced
is also suggested. An accurate assessment of the flow pattern rotative efficiency. The topic of propulsive coefficient and

July 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 157

 0.00
to 144.o t4 40 vst
i e.~ iao.0 t4oa vsl
e0 ?6e

I
II g
li,l
ltl
~I
==ram, |.l
8., ,...o
!=.~ t~ ,8 .~,,
.t:-..~. Z.= j . / ~ , , " / ~ ~.\
I li'l t~l

o oo
..... .... <\?.b>L,"L.
0.so t/,//
J o.~o -

J 0.40

0=0

0~0
/
-i~, 0
R--/RI -- mpeed (L/D==7. T/D=m&.2) o.lo

Fig. 6 Effect of aft strut stem position

o.lo l

% 0' 0.,o 0.
Fr ( V/Y~L )
Y.7' Fr. No. -- R . / R t ( T / D = = I . 2
Lit llt ,.-A t=l.Oft Ci=38.ft Cl=40.fL Xt=O X i / L = . 6 1 4 )

% ,///2/; Fig. 9 Wavemaking resistance

~ 0.40

/
0.~0

.s~ s/,s

o.,% o,, d ....... o.~o

--'='"> :.L~ IH
Fr (V.//~)
Ft. No. -- R = / R t (varying Xt/L)
L/D=~7.0. T/D_--I.g t--3.Sft Xe/L--,501

Fig. 7 Effect of forward strut stem position g o.4o

o.so

o.oo o.,o

o.~o o.,%:, . ...... <~.i,, I

- r. No . -- ~ / R t (varying Width/L)
L/D==7.~ T/D~= 1.2 X, =2.ft Xe/L= .SZ

Fig. 10 Dependency on centerline spacing

~oO '7 %
,~) c.cR)
Lo . . . . . . ~'~ o.eo !
Fr(v//])
' Ft. No. -- ]R=/R t (AmTt~Oton T/I)mu I .~ Eil ..,
t=3.Sft Cl=38.ft Ce=40.ft Xt=O Xi/L=.614)
o.oo \k \
Fig. 8 Wavemaking resistance

g o.4o ~"

analysis of wake surveys for SWATH ships is indeed a very o.~o -=

interesting one. The scope of this paper does not permit to

deal with this topic in sufficient detail. o.ao

Stability o.~% ~,~ . . . . . . . o.,

Wr'~V/~rL)
Intact stability Fr. No. -- R.IR~ (varying Cj/L)
L/u==?.5 T/Drn=1.2 t,=3.Sft Cj=40.ft

General--The principle of SWATH rests in part on the

intent to decouple the SWATH ship from the sea surface in Fig. 11 Effect of varyiqg length of forward strut

158 July 1993 MARINE T E C H N O L O G Y

 o.'#o EFFIZCTIIEF4ORR~ER

o.oo

o.~o
:I1!
III I ll~ II:l
ltil tii,!
Itli --i-"
_17] - 5 1
g o.~o

o.ao
I,
i i
o.ao il,

o-lOo. ~

-- l~.--/'NI (varying Cm//L) $

i i
L/D__=7.~5
Fir. No.
T/D__= i.2 tt=3.Sft C~=38*ft ! |.~ II ll} ij.~ It li,~ li ~i.$ II 115 l~.5

Fig. 12 Effect of varying length of aft strut

Fig. 15 Model test results, 11 ft draft

WA~ W,ki(I~ ~ COEFFICIENT

-rEt, lilE

O,I,
OIV#T
1,17
Oi L__
(11 ~
-- t0

I.B

I II.

I1 11 1.t 11
Catet~/
i
II 11
1
li ll
ill

. . . .
" ll. ! 5 il JlI,S ll. il
SPEEOI l l S )
i! i
ll t~.S rl iI 5 i4
!-I-il
14 $
li!
I~ ~.S li

Fig. 13 Calculated wavemaking resistance for different drafts

Fig. 16 Model test results, 12 ft draft

hulls will provide only a certain degree of relief. If not enough

~'T ..... ' --! " -V-T-,/]F-~--L/~7 transverse stability is achieved by this means, then the only
.... ' : ,/I/ -,- , resort to increase stability is to increase the waterplane area,
" - '- I ' ~ / t ! _ which generally has the unwanted effect of reducing the
heave natural period.
/
'"f .....
:<:i ......
-:---I
! ', /~7 i
-r--~/~i - * --
i
:-- ,
ii -9
- i0
The saving factor is that at larger inclinations the sponson
gives a nearly unlimited reserve buoyancy, as both the free-
board and the reserve buoyancy can be increased by raising
i ~ ~ i i I i:-s2 the level of the main deck. The center of gravity of the deck-
house will, unfortunately also go up in the process, reducing
I ~- , ~.X+-.f-.--A~ .... 1- -4-- --'- -" --,,' the gain in stability somewhat.
N a v a t e k / - - T h e s e considerations are illustrated by the sta-
bility calculations for the Navatek I. Figure 17 shows the
,, ,,,!,. ,,! intersection of the inclined waterplanes with the hull, for an
initial draft of 12.5 ft. This figure illustrates the waterplane
S~EFJ7 l~lOlS]
locations corresponding to the angles of the righting arm
Fig. 14 Power curves curve.
The deckhouse cross structure is totally excluded from the
hydrostatic calculation, as it is not assumed to be watertight.
an effort to reduce the effect of an undulating sea surface. The vessel is free to trim as it is inclined. The cross section
By the s a m e token, the initial stability is reduced in relation depicted here is located about at the entrance of the aft strut.
to a conventional vessel. The waterplane area is small, the This explains w h y the strut appears so thin.
displaced volume is deeply submerged below the water sur- Figure 18 depicts the righting arm curve for a draft of
face, and the center of gravity is high because the underside 12.5 ft. Also shown on this figure is the heeling arm due to
of the deckhouse, the <'wet deck," needs to have a certain passenger crowding. A wind heeling arm, not shown, is about
clearance above the design waterline. 1 ft at zero heel, increasing to about 1.5 ft at 24 deg heel.
The initial stability is characterized by a small TPI, and This righting arm curve is illustrative of w h a t was explained
small KMT and KML. Increasing the spacing between the above, namely, that initially there is very little stability, but

July 1993 MARINE T E C H N O L O G Y 159

 POINT OF D O ~ O O D [ N G

NOTF* l n l i n e t m n a i[iven m d e i [ r e e l

Fig. 17 Intersection of inclined waterplanes

PA.~,~I~ CROWDING RUN 40

12' Figure 20 depicts the inclinations of the vessel correspond-
ing to the case of the m a i n engine room flooded. Of greatest
11
interest here is the significant a m o u n t of reserve stability.
I //
/
10
f There is still a reserve righting a r m of about 7.0 ft left before
9 the down-flooding angle is reached.
8 In the above calculations c o u n t e r b a l l a s t i n g was not con-
sidered.
/
i
7'

5
/ Seakeeping
/ General background
4..
' /
The seakeeping performance of a SWATH is, of course, at
3"

2"
/ the center of the decision to employ a SWATH ship r a t h e r
t h a n a monohull or c a t a m a r a n . The desired seakeeping quali-
t f I I ties typically are given in the owner's requirements. A reason-
0 ~ -
0 4 8 12 16 20 24
ably correct and to the n a v a l architect useful description of
A N o ~ o~ [NCUNAnON [ ~ g z , o ~ ]
these criteria is of great importance, since too s t r i n g e n t crite-
ria might lead to u n r e a s o n a b l e hull configurations, incompat-
Fig. 18 Righting arm curve for 12.5 ft draft (Navatek I) ible with other requirements. The owner on the other h a n d
is usually not well equipped to answer such questions, either
because he doesn't have the scientific background or he
the righting a r m increases rapidly from a certain point on.
doesn't have a sufficiently well defined application or mission
For the wind heeling a r m mentioned above, the area ratio
criteria. Most importantly, he needs to know how costly a
A 1 / A 2 is about 4.
design to his r e q u i r e m e n t s will be.
Damaged stability In principle, the designer has two avenues to reduce the
Figure 19 gives a sample of the intact a n d damaged righting motion response of a floating vessel: (a) reduce the amplitude
a r m curves. I n the latter case either the m a i n engine room of wave excitation, t h a t is, wave forces and moments; and (b)
flooded or the aft m a c h i n e r y room flooded. These two com- choose the n a t u r a l periods in heave, roll and pitch. To explain
p a r t m e n t s flooded are the most critical. this in its simplest m a n n e r , consider the response amplitude
of a l i n e a r oscillator to a regular wave input, n a m e l y

15'
1 4 0 Pe~l on 01 & 20 ~n 02 Fo
Xo = - - / ~ (1)
12 ~ c
" /1
10 j , and
,
8 . . . .
)/ 1
(2)
7 t~ = x/(1 _ A2)2 + (2~A)Z

where the t u n i n g factor is given by A = O~/~0NAT.

Figure 21 depicts the magnification factor for a d a m p i n g
3
~///r coefficient of ~ = 0.1 to 0.2 as it m a y be obtained for a
~ ~ ~/ SWATH. The region for A > 1 is called supercritical, and the
corresponding vessel response has frequently been called
0":
"platforming." This t e r m should indicate t h a t the vessel does
not move or does not follow the waves. In reality the vessel
-l' does move, as indicated by equation (1). The wave force ampli-
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 tude is, of course, also a function of frequency. W h a t more
ANGLE O f INCAJNATION [ a e g e ~ s ] i m p o r t a n t l y happens, though, is t h a t the ship's response is
+ a ( t m a a ~ i n , r m . Nd ( 7 5 ) o enQ~nernn f~oode~ (>e)
out of phase with the wave force in this region, which m e a n s
Fig. 19 Intact and damaged righting arm curves (Navatek I) that when the wave (force) is up the ship goes down. Needless

160 July 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

 ~5

NOTK I n c h ~ t l O ~ | g~ven ~n de~rees

Fig. 20 Inclination, main engine room flooded

to say, this picture is a g r a n d simplification of the actual

motion process but it can help to visualize the motion. A
motion behavior where the ship goes down as the wave comes
up is d e t r i m e n t a l considering deck wetness and occurrence
of slamming. F o r t u n a t e l y , as the waves have a h i g h e r fre- 4-

quency, wave height and force tends to be less, because either

the wave particle motion decays faster with depth or the :3-

i n t e g r a t e d sectional forces over the ship length become less

as ~/Lpp becomes less t h a n 1. For the "small" S W A T H ship 2-

the l a t t e r is u n f o r t u n a t e l y not a realistic expectation.

The region for A < 1 is called subcritical a n d the corres- 14

ponding vessel response called "contouring." This implies

t h a t the vessel is following the waves, as exemplified for very ~.o t .'0 2 .'0 :3 .'0
low wave frequencies, where the vessel rises with t h e waves A

the way a ship rises with the tide. This behavior is a t first Fig. 21 A -/,L relation
sight objectionable, it resembles t h e motion of a monohull.
Very long waves, like swell, have a long wave period and low
frequency. The really objectionable characteristic about ship d r a g on the hull a n d appendages becomes quickly i m p o r t a n t .
motion is the acceleration, and not necessarily t h e motion This so much so t h a t one can a c t u a l l y observe, without a n y
itself. Take as an example the large vertical motion an eleva- need for m e a s u r e m e n t s , t h a t the vessel motions do not a p p e a r
tor makes, if the acceleration when s t a r t i n g and stopping is to increase p r o p o r t i o n a l l y with increasing wave height. A t
gentle enough, one does not even notice it. This goes to say forward speed, the d a m p i n g increases f u r t h e r s u b s t a n t i a l l y
t h a t t h e contouring mode of the vessel is not necessarily un- to the point t h a t t h e r e is no resonance behavior (Fig. 23)
comfortable if it is only a "slow enough" motion. visible at all.
During survival conditions, with very large wave heights, In order to reduce the magnification factor ~ it is necessary
the wave length a n d t h e wave period a r e also large. The to have a n a t u r a l frequency much less t h a n the incoming
vessel is forced to follow these long waves while not following wave frequency. The n a t u r a l frequency in a n y mode of motion
the short waves of lesser height which would yield the un- is governed by the basic mass of the vessel, t h e added mass
p l e a s a n t high accelerations on a conventional ship. and t h e r e s t o r a t i o n force.
N e a r resonance, vessel response can be large even for a F o r a given design t h e basic mass of t h e ship is given,
S W A T H ship. W h a t helps here, however, is t h a t resonance discounting t h e possibility to add fixed deadweight or fixed
occurs a t a much longer wave period. The acceleration of ballast, even t h o u g h the l a t t e r m a y be justified for c e r t a i n
harmonic motion of given a m p l i t u d e a t an 8 sec period is applications. The added mass, more p r o p e r l y the hydrody-
only a q u a r t e r of t h a t at a period of 4 sec. These two periods n a m i c force due to vessel acceleration, can be influenced by
would typically reflect the heave n a t u r a l period of a S W A T H t h e hull form, though only w i t h i n limits as t h e hull design is
and a monohull, respectively, of 30 to 40 m in length. limited by o t h e r design considerations such as ship resistance.
At resonance, the value of the magnification factor is This leaves only the t h i r d component, t h e restoration, to
strictly d e p e n d e n t only on the damping. For small motion affect s u b s t a n t i a l l y the n a t u r a l period. The restoration is
and at zero forward speed, the region where t h e motion re- directly proportional to the w a t e r p l a n e area. This is precisely
sponse is linear, the d a m p i n g of a n u n a p p e n d e d S W A T H hull w h a t has been exploited by t h e S W A T H concept.
is surprisingly small, in the order of a few percent of critical In this discussion we exclude the possibility of an active
damping, a t best. Fins, bilge keels, propeller guards, elliptical b a l l a s t system. A t zero speed or low speeds active fin stabiliza-
cross section and location of the lower hull n e a r the surface, tion is not effective. For roll a n d pitch, t h e vertical location
help a g r e a t deal, but for small a m p l i t u d e s of motion the of t h e CG is, of course, also i m p o r t a n t .
d a m p i n g still is very small. As is a p p a r e n t from t h e above equation of the response
The model of linear motion response does not r e a l l y apply a m p l i t u d e s to r e g u l a r waves, t h e d y n a m i c magnification fac-
at resonance, for a SWATH. As soon as the motion a m p l i t u d e tor will get s m a l l e r (for A > 1) with increasing t u n i n g factor
increases, the so-called square-law d a m p i n g due to pressure A, or increasing n a t u r a l period. If t h e increase in n a t u r a l

July 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 161

period is achieved by reducing the restoration coefficient c, to exceed t h a t found in a given sea state. This is obviously
i.e., reduction of the w a t e r p l a n e area, then the static displace- d e p e n d e n t on the geographic a r e a a n d type of operation.
ment, Fo/c, will also increase, unless the a m p l i t u d e of wave W h a t m a y be feasible for a passenger excursion vessel op-
force, F0, is also reduced. e r a t i n g in t h e M e d i t e r r a n e a n will not hold for an all oceans
Reducing the w a t e r p l a n e a r e a a r b i t r a r i l y is therefore a research ship.
two-sided sword, risking an increase of static displacement, 2. To be located n e a r t h e period of canceling heave force
Fo/c. Lack of restoration leads to a set of problems with other, or vice versa.
nonperiodic forces, including the static ones, like wind loads
The type of operation will c e r t a i n l y have a major impact.
a n d shifting weights and passengers.
Wave forces--Wave excitation forces and m o m e n t s can be A passenger ship o p e r a t i n g as a ferry at a given speed has
influenced by judicious design. As described in g r e a t e r detail clearly defined resonance conditions. A passenger excursion
by Seidl and Wilkie [3], the g e n e r a l l y d o m i n a n t force in heave, ship t h a t might t r a v e l at a certain speed much of its time
the pressure g r a d i e n t force, or Froude-Kryloff force acting but also o p e r a t i n g at, or near, zero speed d u r i n g a s u b s t a n t i a l
on a S W A T H hull will be reduced to zero for one p a r t i c u l a r portion of its operation, for e x a m p l e for whale watching, will
wave frequency. F i g u r e 22 is a schematic to i l l u s t r a t e this. pose a more difficult tradeoff.
Wave inertial a n d d a m p i n g forces do not cancel to zero at Computational approach--The preceding discussion on de-
a n y frequency, but t h e y are also affected, e i t h e r increased or sign for seakeeping tried to synthesize t h e ideas which m i g h t
reduced by proper design. The combination of the Froude- lead to a s e a k i n d l y design. P a r a m e t r i c e v a l u a t i o n of the sea-
Kryloff force and the wave i n e r t i a l force will g e n e r a l l y sl~ill keeping properties of design v a r i a t i o n s is still time-consum-
have a zero, b u t shifted to a different wave frequency. ing a n d beyond the scope of most p r e l i m i n a r y design efforts.
The situation is complicated by the fact t h a t all six modes
The discussions were not intended as a basis for design. An
of motion, but p a r t i c u l a r l y heave and pitch, and sway, roll
and yaw, are coupled. a c t u a l design situation is so complex t h a t it is not possible
The i m p o r t a n t question is t h e n which wave frequency to to a r r i v e at m e a n i n g f u l solutions by a p p l y i n g only these gen-
choose. One possibility is to have the frequency of canceling eralities. For a c t u a l computations one has to t a k e resort to
heave force coincide with the r e s o n a n t frequency in heave. c o m p u t e r codes. The scientific level of such codes is a delight.
A l t e r n a t i v e l y the modal period of the p r e v a l e n t wave spec- There a r e not m a n y a r e a s in e n g i n e e r i n g w h e r e advanced
t r u m might be chosen. science interacts t h a t closely with practical e n g i n e e r i n g en-
It is only fair to note t h a t an e n t i r e range of design require- deavors.
m e n t s define the design of the hull, so t h a t the above a r e As S W A T H ships a r e slender ships, computer p r o g r a m s
only some of the considerations driving the design. It m a y based on strip t h e o r y provide sufficiently accurate results for
often therefore not be feasible to satisfy the above demands. design purposes [12]. This is p a r t i c u l a r l y true for single-strut-
Natural periods in heave, roll and pitch--Natural choic.es per-side S W A T H ships, b u t also applies for twin-hull-per-side
for the n a t u r a l period in heave would be:
ships.
1. To be located outside the r a n g e of t h e wave periods of
a certain sea state or have an encounter period in head seas F o r t h e calculation of wave loading at zero speed, on the
o t h e r hand, and in p a r t i c u l a r for the calculation of t h e so-
called p r y i n g force a t zero speed, a t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l source
distribution technique m a y be more accurate. The scope of
this p a p e r does not allow for a reasonable exposition of this
effort. McCreight [13] and Salvesen et al [14] give excellent
descriptions of these c o m p u t a t i o n a l techniques.

Navatek 1
IllJ!l~l!!
The ship motion calculations for the Navatek I were per-
formed by a p r o g r a m based on strip t h e o r y and two-dimen-
sional source distribution technique. This procedure was de-
scribed by Lee and C u r p h y [15] and t h e c o m p u t e r p r o g r a m s
are essentially those given by K. McCreight and Lee [12],
which were modified however to allow for the sectional varia-
tions of the hull in t h e calculation of the viscous effects.
F u r t h e r modifications were incorporated to allow for more
t h a n two horizontal control surfaces. This was necessary to
"~l~ I J i ltt i I IJ account for t h e effect of hull appendages such as t h e hori-
zontal propeller g u a r d and fixed bilge keels. The effect of
h y d r o d y n a m i c forces and wave forces on these items is in-
cluded [3].
The design of the Navatek I with respect to s e a k e e p i n g was
based p r i m a r i l y on t h e premise of reducing wave forces and
pitching moments, in case of heave n e a r resonance condi-
tions. The n a t u r a l periods could t h e r e b y be allowed to r e m a i n
s o m e w h a t s h o r t e r t h a n c u s t o m a r y for S W A T H ships. This
facilitated f u r t h e r the a i m of providing sufficient static intact
and d a m a g e d stability required for c a r r y i n g a large n u m b e r
Fig. 22 Pressure gradient force on SWATH hull of passengers for a vessel of h e r size.

162 July 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

 Figures 23 and 24 depict, respectively, the heave and pitch
*T""-~--'- I --~-~--!---~ "'. - - - ]
RAOs (response amplitude operators) in head seas and for
" "

various speeds. It cannot be overemphasized, however, that " l l .t. - - ' ' . . . . . i
, - - -_i_-_ - :
i , '.
r,
. . . . . . . . .
:~ t ~
t,,~T~
these RAOs are by definition for very small motions, for the ! : I i ~ t
, i----. ~ ; i -" ', ...... It-- i
linear system, while with larger motions the nonlinear damp- /i I / . i , I l_=___]i-0
ing and restoration will change the picture, generally for the "1' t ~-~ . . . . . T ', :, .i-- :!+,.
better. i . ' t "T t ' ' , '! '

Figures 25 and 26 depict the sway and roll, respectively,

,.J .... "1- ! ~ ~.~', - % ~ ..... + ~ - - . b - - - ~ --
RAOs in bow quartering seas and for various speeds. The roll
response has a resonance for the loading condition shown in "t----" -f---l---~--~---"v - " ~ .F--nlZ':+-4"~-Ni ,>.',.

the vicinity of 16 sec. Again, because of the square-law damp-

,.~] ~':4 : ,. ; i I ~ ~, ~ ~, :,
ing the response ratio is actually much less for larger roll l I : I I le tt '
t.lza~ ~ ~ve Pt~lO[[ :see}
angles.
Figure 27 depicts the vertical acceleration at the bow due
Fig. 26 Roll R A O s
to combined heave and pitch. The diagrams are response oper-
ators, hence the ordinate shows amplitudes per wave ampli-
tude. In case of this figure, the acceleration in g's is given
for regular waves of unit amplitude. For shorter periods the

I.M
% : : ~ , -:~-Z - t , ',, . . . . r . . . . . . . . . . . . i -
A,'G I l i
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . / ~ . -o

.,z,.... , .... t ...... i -~+--~,~ ....:~, .-~. ----i . lo

O~ / ............. ~ ---i ....... [ '~
*.o. . . . . . i -- -~- '. ......... , - " ~ ~5 l .it
. . . . . . . . -_ .. , ' , .... _: . . . . . _, :::~- ...,~

........ + .... -~/ . . . . t- ~ -i- i~ --~ I ! , : i !

i i i I I I 1 I I i
I 1 I t IO li i2 li 14
:a~l ISECI

Fig. 27 Vertical acceleration

Lq,t7 ~',:It '~,~)

Fig. 23 Heave R A O s
values increase, but the m a x i m u m wave amplitude associated
with waves of these periods decrease.
Figure 28 finally depicts the horizontal acceleration RAOs
PITCH RAO mNtill-llIr
z.s at the bow, containing the contribution from sway, roll and
-~- ~---R--1- I "7 -l---r-- yaw. These accelerations are even less than the vertical ones.
z It was felt, however, that it is very important to keep the
horizontal accelerations also low, even if only the vertical
-o ! ones are supposed to contribute to seasickness. The reason is
zs

that the comfort of walking around is greatly enhanced by

keeping the horizontal accelerations low. Furthermore, since
on a SWATH the vertical accelerations are much less than
those on a monohull of the s a m e size, one would notice the
horizontal ones proportionally more.
The complete assessment of the seakeeping behavior con-
s ~ 7 *
~E~
!
(SECl
I
sists of a quite complete set of response operators. N e x t there
is a set of sea conditions to be considered for the proposed
Fig. 24 Pitch R A O s operational conditions. The irregular seas are best described

o1~ ~ w ~ e l Sk~ ~ - RAO ~ ~ e , ~ -smmg" -.---" H{~IZONTkL ACCF.I./G a t S t a t l m ~ 0 ~ n m - m w "

' T - - r -I ~ . .-~: -_ -F , ,, , ~ ,
!l
I 1- , ~ E i I1!
i

, ! , [ b , ~ ~ ' I !..o-. 5

""---1- '--~-----~----- ' , .... , - ~ - -

', .. ! _:, ' I R H I 3 t . """
~ 7--4~r' ---- I

~ I 7 e t :o *~ 4 ~ t t I S
I~t.l~ tZ~ ~ave ~el0c (sec} tra/~ tt ~ Wave P~P|od (see)

Fig. 25 Sway R A O s Fig. 28 Horizontal acceleration

July 1 9 9 3 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 163

directly by the p a r a m e t e r s of the sea, namely, the modal The p r i m a r y wave-induced load, t h e so-called " p r y i n g "
period and t h e significant wave height. F o r t h e spectral de- force, is the difference sway force acting on t h e two hulls. In
scription we use t h e B r e t s c h n e i d e r spectrum. The significant b e a m seas and for a w a v e l e n g t h equal to about twice t h e
values for t h e various ship motion p a r a m e t e r s such a,~ the centerline spacing between t h e two hulls, t h e wave forces on
significant a m p l i t u d e s in t h e six degrees of freedom a n d t h e t h e two hulls t e n d to p r y the two hulls a p a r t a t t h e i n s t a n t
significant a m p l i t u d e s of acceleration, t y p i c a l l y at 5 points t h a t t h e crest is about a t the ship's centerline. If only t h e
along the length of t h e ship a n d on the c e n t e r l i n e as well as Froude-Kryloff force were considered, t h e n a m a x i m u m pry-
on t h e beam, collectively provide the s h o r t - t e r m statistics of ing force would occur exactly when two a d j a c e n t nodes of t h e
t h e vessel response. wave profile pass, respectively, a d e m i h u l l centerline.
Next, long-term statistical values are calculated for partic- The wave s c a t t e r i n g force, however, e n t e r s into t h e wave
u l a r geographic locations. These values a r e t h e n s u m m a r i z e d force equation so t h a t the picture w i t h one wave node at each
in d i a g r a m s depicting the probabilities of occurrence of such d e m i h u l l is only a n a p p r o x i m a t e one. As a m a t t e r of fact, a t
values. These will finally be c o m p a r e d with the desired crite- the wave frequency producing the g r e a t e s t p r y i n g force, t h e
r i a specified in t h e owner's requirements. wave s c a t t e r i n g force is by far t h e d o m i n a n t force component.
Once a vessel is in operation for a long period, like t h e This has the consequence t h a t t h e wave l e n g t h which pro-
Navatek I, one can come up with vastly more simple a n d duces the m a x i m u m p r y i n g force becomes s u b s t a n t i a l l y
telling descriptors of the a c t u a l seakeeping p e r f o r m a n c e of longer t h a n the one based on F r o u d e - K r y l o f f force only (which
the vessel. F o r instance, in case of Navatek I we can r e p o r t was twice t h e hull spacing). The highest n o n - b r e a k i n g wave
t h a t upon c a r r y i n g a daily a v e r a g e of a p p r o x i m a t e l y 200 land- height is proportional to the wave length, t h e theoretical
lubber tourists on a d i n n e r cruise lasting 2.5 hours, a n d trav- value being Hbreaking = L . . . . 17.
eling a t a speed of a r o u n d 12 knots on a daily basis t h r o u g h A s s u m e t h e wave profile nodes at each c e n t e r l i n e give a
seas with a significant wave height g r e a t e r t h a n 2 m (6.5 ft), wave l e n g t h of 84 ft for t h e Navatek I. This corresponds to a
on average t h e r e a r e only one or two persons t h a t show a n y wave period of Tw = 4 sec and a wave a m p l i t u d e of 4.2 ft,
signs of motion sickness. assuming gbreaking/L. . . . : 1/10. Calculations based on a 3D
This n u m b e r is believed to be more significant t h a n all our source distribution technique show a peak p r y i n g force at
RAOs a n d c u m u l a t i v e probabilities of exceedance of accelera- Twave -- 5.05 sec. The m a x i m u m wave a m p l i t u d e based on
tion levels, as it includes the h u m a n factors, such as the Hbreaking/L. . . . = 1/10 is now 6.53 ft.
response to engine vibrations, or more correctly t h e lack F i g u r e s 29 and 30 depict the pressure distribution on one
thereof, room layout and c r e a t u r e comfort. hull section for the m a x i m u m side p r y i n g force a t t h e critical
The vessel frequently operates in 3 m seas, without t h e
passengers noticing much, while sipping t h e i r glass of wine
a n d t a k i n g in the floor show.

Structual design

A S W A T H ship obviously has a different s t r u c t u r a l design

t h a n a monohull. The s t r u c t u r a l design of S W A T H also m a y
have different m a j o r components. The m a i n difference m a y
be in the m a n n e r t h a t t h e two hulls a r e held together. In
most cases built so far, only the s u p e r s t r u c t u r e is used as the
s t r u c t u r a l s t r e n g t h m e m b e r to hold the two hulls together.
One design, the Duplus, b u i l t in 1967 [6], uses horizontal
b r a c i n g between t h e lower hulls, located a p p r o x i m a t e l y amid-
ships. The S W A T H ship SSP Kaimalino [16] uses a cross
b r a c i n g between the aft end of t h e lower hulls, though much "<x.. " ~ ~--PAMESCO
s m a l l e r t h a n t h a t of the Duplus.
The Navatek I does not use a n y s u p e r s t r u c t u r e but a deck-
house supported on resilient mounts. It employs two cross-
b e a m s a t deck level to s t r u c t u r a l l y connect the two hulls. Fig. 29 Pressuredistribution,Station 5
It has been c u s t o m a r y (St. Denis 1954) to a p p l y in the struc-
t u r a l analysis of monohulls the concept which distinguishes
between p r i m a r y loads due to the longitudinal wave-induced STATION 13.0

bending moment, yielding t h e p r i m a r y stresses; secondary

loads due to t h e bending m o m e n t between m a j o r bulkheads;
a n d t e r t i a r y loads and stresses due to plate b e n d i n g between
frames. The m a i n s t r u c t u r a l differences between a S W A T H
a n d a monohull are: (a) The depth-to-length ratio of S W A T H ;-T " T "-
ships is u s u a l l y very large c o m p a r e d with monohulls. T:his
e l i m i n a t e s the vertical longitudinal bending m o m e n t as the;
most critical effect. (b) The underside of the s u p e r s t r u c t u r e or
deckhouse, referred to as wet deck, is subject to slam impacts.
Therefore, the classification of p r i m a r y and secondary
stresses has been redefined [17]:
I \\\ "/
(a) The p r i m a r y wave-induced loading on a S W A T H ship
is the so-called p r y i n g force, due to waves i m p i n g i n g in b e a m
seas, yielding a t r a n s v e r s e bending m o m e n t in t h e superstruc-
xx'.,,.....~y\ ~ PAMESCO
t u r e or in the cross beams.
(b) The secondary wave-induced loads a r e s l a m m i n g on the
underside of the s u p e r s t r u c t u r e . Fig.30 Pressure
distributiStation
on, 13
164 July 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGY
wave period. In these figures t h e curve Pdyn denotes the dy-
namic or wave g e n e r a t e d pressure, i.e., due to incoming and
scattering wave potential. As m e n t i o n e d earlier, t h e calcula-
tions were based on 3D t h e o r y from which the sectional values
shown here were derived. Also note t h a t the scattering pres-
sure is not s y m m e t r i c a l on the two hulls and only one hull
is depicted.
F i g u r e 29 depicts the pressure distribution a t station 5,
m e a n i n g a t a section 5 ft aft of the stem of the forward strut.
The 12 ft w a t e r l i n e is the design waterline. The pressures
indicated a r e in t e r m s of pressure head, d r a w n to the same
scale as the section drawing. Figure 30 is at station 13, or 13
ft aft of t h e stem. This figure shows a pressure distribution
which differs from t h a t of Fig. 29, because this section is 8 ft
f a r t h e r aft. T h e r e is obviously a flow a r o u n d the ends of the
strut, yielding a pressure release n e a r the ends of the strut.
For twin-strut S W A T H ships this is a n i m p o r t a n t consider-
ation for choosing a 3D h y d r o d y n a m i c theory, as strip t h e o r y
Fig. 31 Model, inboard view
cannot account for such flow conditions. I n t e g r a t i o n of the
pressure over the hulls gives finally t h e prying force as well
as the sway force. The m o m e n t of the prying force about
the vertical centerline of the t r a n s v e r s e box b e a m s can be
calculated readily.
The response operator of prying force with wave frequency
is calculated next. This has a very s h a r p peak at about T =
5 sec, with the m a x i m u m p r y i n g force calculated as described
above of about 55 tons per foot of wave amplitude. A t T = 6
sec this has come down to 15 t o n s / f t and is reduced to the
order of 1 t / f t a t T = 10 sec. This is fortunate, since the
possible wave heights rise rapidly with wave period or length.
An extreme-value analysis using long-term e x t r e m e value
statistics was carried out by the A m e r i c a n Bureau of Shipping
in 1987 using t h e i r N o r t h A t l a n t i c H - F a m i l y wave d a t a to
predict the m a x i m u m wave loads. The H - F a m i l y wave d a t a
consists of five wave height groups with significant heights
of 10, 20, 30, 40 and 48.2 ft.
The m a x i m u m a m p l i t u d e of the p r y i n g force calculated
was less t h a n the value obtained from the U.S. Coast G u a r d ' s
Guidelines for the design of S W A T H ships, but reasonably
close and plausible because of the a c t u a l hull shape; t h e lower
hull with elliptical cross section; axis of the lower hull t h a t
is stepped downward, twin-strut configuration, and, finally,
the relatively small displacement. S m a l l e r p r y i n g force Fig. 32 Model, outboard view
means, of course, a lighter cross s t r u c t u r e at the height of
t h e t r a n s v e r s e s t r u c t u r a l cross beams. The m a x i m u m p r y i n g
force was employed as one of the design p r i m a r y loads for on F e b r u a r y 25, 1989. Major m a c h i n e r y components were
the finite e l e m e n t analysis. installed within t h e interiors of the steel s t r u c t u r e before
The space frame analysis was performed by ABS (1987) launch, b u t no m a c h i n e r y was o p e r a t i o n a l a t t h a t time. The
by first using a space f r a m e model to d e t e r m i n e the overall c a r r i e r vessel was t h e n towed to N o r t h w e s t M a r i n e S h i p y a r d
s t r u c t u r a l response of the vessel to the various loading condi- at Portland, Oregon for final outfitting a n d interconnection
tions. of all machinery. The a l u m i n u m pilothouse, including living
A three-dimensional finite e l e m e n t model of the forward quarters, was lifted aboard the c a r r i e r vessel and m o u n t e d
port side q u a d r a n t of the vessel s t r u c t u r e was used for the on resilient mounts. In this configuration t h e ship was r e a d y
analysis. Even so, about 1500 nodes a n d 9000 degrees of free- for sea trials.
dom were used. F i g u r e 31 shows the inboard view of the Sea trials began on April 29, 1989 in t h e Columbia River
model, including the h a u n c h a r e a of the t r a n s v e r s e crossbeam with eight crew a n d two ABS surveyors aboard. Speed runs
(the box beam) and the p a r t of the deck forward of the cross- indicated 15 knots was a comfortable cruise speed and maxi-
beam which is p a r t of the steel hull c a r r i e r vessel. F i g u r e 32 m u m speed was 18.3 knots. T u r n r a d i u s at full power with
depicts t h e outboard view of the model. The s t r u c t u r e was r u d d e r s h a r d over was 300 yards. Stopping distance from full
found to be a d e q u a t e l y designed with no s t r u c t u r a l changes a h e a d was 200 ft ( a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1~ boat lengths). Ballasting
required. The highest Hencky-von Mises stress was found to v a r i e d the d r a f t from 8.5 to 15 ft.
be 16% below t h e allowable global stress of 27 ksi. On the Portland to Astoria--Navatek I d e p a r t e d P o r t l a n d on A p r i l
other hand, all hull m e m b e r s show stress levels t h a t a r e sig- 30, 1989 for t h e 90-mile n i g h t t r a n s i t down t h e Columbia
nificant, so t h a t n e i t h e r reduction nor increase in s t r u c t u r a l
River to Astoria, Oregon. T r a n s i t speed a v e r a g e d 13 knots.
components was required.
Crew was full of anticipation u n t i l t h e y got used to t h e new
and u n f a m i l i a r systems. The only problem e n c o u n t e r e d was
SWATH captain's operational experience
t h e loss of t h e port CPP when t h e m a i n power supply failed.
Carrier v e s s e l Backup systems operated as designed, a n d t h e r e were no ad-
After t h e c a r r i e r vessel was constructed in Vancouver, verse effects on operations. Fog was e n c o u n t e r e d on the last
W a s h i n g t o n at Thompson Metal Fabricators, it was l a u n c h e d 25 miles of t r a n s i t into Astoria. The ride quality of S W A T H

July 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 165

was exceptional, although there were no seas to speak of at tered when larger waves impacted the aft crossbeam struc-
the time. All ballast and fin control systems checked out ture when heading into seas greater t h a n 10 ft in height.
satisfactorily. Other decelerations were encountered when seas were at 45
Astoria to San Francisco--While in Astoria, the Columbia deg angles off the bow a n d the wave would pass u n d e r the
River Bar Pilots and the San Francisco Pilots AssociatJ~on superstructure and impact the inboard side of the opposite
rode the Navatek I across the Columbia River Bar on two strut where the sponson meets the strut. The cupping effect
occasions to experience the ride quality of N a v a t e k I. Sea of this j u n c t u r e amplified the effect of these wave impacts.
conditions were 6 to 8 ft NW swells and wind 10 to 15 knots. Still, wave impacts and vessel motions were significantly
Our first experience in the open ocean pleasantly surpri,~ed less in m a g n i t u d e t h a n those encountered on other SWATH
our guests with a comfortable, seakindly ride. Roll motions vessels of our experience (Suave Lino and Kaimalino) and in
were less t h a n 4 deg and pitch motions were less t h a n 2 deg a comparison with a 125-ft crewboat in 4 to 6 ft seas off the
at all headings relative to the seas. The fin stabilizer system Napali Coast of the island of Kauai. Crew were able to walk
was t u r n e d off to compare motions. The ride quality degraded about the decks with very little effort on the N a v a t e k I,
insignificantly in this mode. whereas getting about the crewboat required a considerable
N a v a t e k I departed Astoria the evening of May 1, 1989 for a m o u n t of agility. N a v a t e k I was not required to slow down
the 450-mile t r a n s i t to San Francisco. Total t r a n s i t time was in order to negotiate a n y of the seas encountered, b u t the
35 h r at 12.9 knots average speed. Seas were generally follow- crewboat, of course, was required to slow considerably to re-
ing, 6- to 8 ft-long period swells. N a v a t e k I indicated some duce s l a m m i n g and uncomfortable motions.
yaw with the following sea, b u t significantly less t h a n experi- After several m o n t h s of operation, a problem became evi-
enced by the 65-ft-LOA SWATH vessel Suave Lino on the dent with cyclical vibrations in the propulsion drive train.
same route with similar sea conditions. Certain load demands on the propulsion system would induce
San Francisco to H o n o l u l u - - W h i l e in San Francisco Nava- a cyclic vibration between engine and gearbox which would
tek I was t a k e n on several excursions in the San Francisco require idling the effected engine a n d / o r changing the propel-
Bay E n t r a n c e C h a n n e l to the infamous '~Potato Patch" area ler pitch angle to stop the vibration. Deutz a n d Ulstein engi-
to find some rough seas in which to demonstrate the ship's neers were consulted and the problem was d e t e r m i n e d to be
seakeeping capabilities to the San Francisco Bar Pilots Asso- an undersized Vulcan flexible coupling connected between
ciation. A single transfer at sea was performed from N a v a t e k the Deutz engine and the output shafting to the U l s t e i n gear-
I to the pilot vessel California in 3 to 4 ft seas to demonstrate box. V u l c a n ' s next larger size coupling was installed, which
ballasting flexibility for personnel transfers. The pilots were alleviated the problem immediately.
very impressed with all aspects of the vessel. Navatek I was drydocked in Hawaii in preparation for the
N a v a t e k I departed San Francisco May 6, 1989 for the 2100 t r a n s i t to New Orleans via the P a n a m a Canal. Fins of a
mile t r a n s i t to Hawaii with a crew of eight and 11 000 gal stronger improved construction were installed. The decision
fuel aboard. The port and starboard No. 1 ballast t a n k s were was also made to install fin guards on the m a i n deck level
utilized as fuel t a n k s to extend range for the t r a n s i t to to protect the outboard protruding fin blades from damage
Hawaii. Normal fuel capacity is 5000 gallons, b u t utilizing while t r a n s i t i n g the P a n a m a Canal. The No. 2 ballast t a n k s
the ballast t a n k s increased the capacity to 11 000 gallons. were also modified so they could be utilized as fuel t a n k s to
Three days into transit, three of four fins were discovered f u r t h e r extend the range of the vessel.
missing. After stopping to take a closer look, the last fin Honolulu to P a n a m a to N e w Orleans--On October 12, 1989
carried away. It appeared the securing bolts had broken off N a v a t e k I departed Hawaii with six crew and 20 000 gal of
from vertical forces on the fin surfaces. The r e m a i n s of the fuel aboard. Thus began the 6500 mile trek to New Orleans
securing bolts were still in the fin shaft holes. The vessel did via San Diego and the P a n a m a Canal. Construction of the
not react significantly different without the fins. Roll periods a l u m i n u m two-deck passenger cabin had already started at
were a bit longer, b u t pitch motions did not change at all. T r i n i t y Marine's Equitable Shipyard. The 2250 mile t r a n s i t
Total t r a n s i t time from San Francisco to Hawaii was 6 days to our first stop, San Diego, was uneventful. Sea conditions
6 h r at a n average speed of 14 knots. The most severe sea seemed benign after spending the last few m o n t h s seeking
conditions encountered d u r i n g the t r a n s i t were upon depar- out rough water areas in Hawaii. The most severe seas were
t u r e from San Francisco (seas 8-10 ft, winds 25-30 knots). encountered one day out of Hawaii. Seas were 6-8 ft and
Average sea conditions during a majority of the t r a n s i t were winds ENE 25 knots on t h a t occasion.
seas 6-8 ft and winds 20 knots from the starboard aft quarter. News of the e a r t h q u a k e in San Francisco reached us at sea
No s l a m m i n g was encountered u n d e r the wet deck. via High Seas Radio Network as we were t u n i n g in for the
A r o u n d the I s l a n d s - - A f t e r arrival in the H a w a i i a n Islands World Series. That was the most exciting part of this leg of
on May 13, 1989, several sea trials were scheduled to test the the voyage. We reached the c h a n n e l islands off the southern
SWATH in different areas of the Islands. I n t e r e s t in future coast of California and encountered fog and heavy ship traffic.
cruise routes also drove the choice of sea trial destinations Seas were n o n e x i s t e n t except for a long rolling 6 ft swell from
t h r o u g h o u t the Islands. the NW. N a v a t e k I tied up at the downtown piers at 0100 on
The vessel was outfitted with a slam load detector u n d e r October 19th.
the forward superstructure, s t r a i n gages in the crossbeam N a v a t e k I departed San Diego after t a k i n g on provisions
and sponson j u n c t u r e areas and pitch and roll inclinomenters and 22 165 gal of diesel fuel for the long trek to the P a n a m a
in the pilothouse for motion analysis studies. M a x i m u m pitch Canal. Port and starboard ballast t a n k s I and 2 a n d the m a i n
angles of -+4 deg a n d m a x i m u m roll angles of -+ 12 deg were fuel t a n k s were filled with fuel. Draft was 13 ft in all quad-
measured in seas 12 to 15 ft and winds 50 knots. These maxi- r a n t s upon departure. Seas were virtually flat for the dura-
m u m motions were measured while dead in the water. Pitch tion of the voyage to P a n a m a .
angles of - 2 deg and roll angles of -+4 deg were encountered The t r a n s i t from the tip of the Baja P e n i n s u l a across the
in the same seas while u n d e r w a y at a heading directly into Gulf of California proved a costly one. The starboard Vulcan
the seas. Slam loads of less t h a n 2 psi were measured in flexible coupling cracked, necessitating a stop in Puerto Val-
the most severe sea conditions encountered. This information l a r t a where a new coupling could be delivered by air freight.
was fed to a computer for recording a n d f u r t h e r analy,~is. Once the coupling arrived we performed a short sea trial and
There was no need to slow down due to excessive s l a m m i n g continued on our way south. We were u n d e r w a y for only one
d u r i n g a n y of our sea trials. Slight decelerations were encoun- hour when the starboard engine threw a rod t h r o u g h the

166 July 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

block. After a short analysis of the situation, the c a p t a i n and nylon line on t h e stern, b u t carried a w a y when seas
elected to continue the voyage on one engine. The vessel main- began h i t t i n g t h e underside of t h e wet deck due to low clear-
t a i n e d a speed of 10 knots with no s t r a i n on the propulsion ance from an excessive load of fuel for extended-range capa-
machinery. The voyage would continue on one engine and bility. No s t r u c t u r a l d a m a g e was incurred.
drydocking would be accomplished in New Orleans. L a t e r in the voyage, while still in the Y u c a t a n Channel we
Navatek I docked in Balboa, P a n a m a , on November 2nd. experienced some problems with t h e m a i n propulsion sys-
The next day, after re-provisioning, t a k i n g on fuel a n d after tems. Cyclical v i b r a t i o n s in the s t a r b o a r d m a i n drive t r a i n
customs and t h e P a n a m a Canal a u t h o r i t i e s completed t h e i r a n d high t e m p e r a t u r e s in the port m a i n engine due to a
formalities, Navatek I was tug-assisted t h r o u g h t h e first set l e a k i n g raw w a t e r p u m p resulted in a decision to head for
of locks. A t this t i m e t h e c a p t a i n was v e r y grateful fin g u a r d s t h e G r a n d C a y m a n Islands for repairs. Two mechanics a n d
h a d been installed before d e p a r t i n g Hawaii. The concrete p a r t s were flown in, r e p a i r s were m a d e a n d we were b a c k to
walls of t h e locks were formidable obstacles to the p r o t r u d i n g sea in four days.
fins, especially with t h e unskilled P a n a m a n i a n tug drivers On J a n u a r y 5th Navatek I encountered t h e most severe
"assisting" Navatek I t h r o u g h the Canal. sustained rough w e a t h e r yet experienced. Seas a v e r a g i n g 12
Navatek I t r a n s i t e d G a t u n Lake between the Pacific and to 15 ft and s t e a d y winds of 35 to 50 knots on the port b e a m
Caribbean sides of the P a n a m a Canal Zone u n d e r h e r own for a 20 h r period. The ride quality was still r e l a t i v e l y stable,
power. A n o t h e r tug met us on t h e Caribbean side to assist us b u t four 25-man inflatable life rafts stowed on t h e m a i n deck
t h r o u g h the last set of locks. After a short stay in Cristobal o u t b o a r d of t h e b u l w a r k s on t h e port side were lost when a
on t h e Caribbean side of the Canal, Navatek I d e p a r t e d on large wave flipped t h e m out of t h e i r cradles.
one engine, again, for the last leg of t h e transit. Sea conditions Even with the rough sea conditions, crew were still able to
r e m a i n e d r e l a t i v e l y calm until reaching t h e offshore oil rigs w a l k about t h e decks and perform routine t a s k s easily. Crest-
of the Gulf of Mexico. H e a d seas of 6-8 ft were experienced ing a n d wave slapping on the underside of t h e wet deck was
with no difficulty, no loss of speed or discomfort. frequent, but inspection a f t e r w a r d s indicated no s t r u c t u r a l
Navatek I t r a n s i t e d up the Mississipi R i v e r - G u l f Canal damage. Pitch angles of -+3 deg and roll angles of -+ 6 deg
E n t r a n c e a n d docked at Equitable Shipyard, New Orleans, were experienced with no loss of ship's speed.
on November 9, 1989. A day of trials in the canal fronting Navatek I a r r i v e d a t Cristobal, P a n a m a , on J a n u a r y 6th
the s h i p y a r d was performed. Deutz technical r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s and, after t a k i n g on fuel and water, clearance to pass t h r o u g h
needed torsional analysis d a t a on the port m a i n engine. The the P a n a m a Canal was g r a n t e d for the next morning. We
delivery crew left the vessel in the h a n d s of the s h i p y a r d on passed t h r o u g h t h e Canal u n d e r severe restrictions and h e a v y
November 11, 1989. security and were not allowed to leave t h e confines of our
ship due to the recent actions to remove M a n u e l Noriega a n d
Finished vessel his a r m y from the Canal Zone. Evidence of the b a t t l e t h a t
While Navatek I was in t r a n s i t to New Orleans, Equitable h a d raged in t h e a r e a was still a r o u n d us.
S h i p y a r d was in the process of fabricating the a l u m i n u m Of note is t h e fact t h a t t h e Navatek I passed completely
superstructure. One m o n t h after the vessel arrived, t h e super- t h r o u g h the Canal on her own power on t h e r e t u r n voyage.
s t r u c t u r e was placed on board the c a r r i e r vessel on resilient M a n e u v e r a b i l i t y allowed easy passage within t h e locks. Tran-
mounts. Total weight of t h e s u p e r s t r u c t u r e above the c a r r i e r sit took seven hours with a one-hour layover at anchor in the
vessel is a p p r o x i m a t e l y 90 tons, which is a p p r o x i m a t e l y 20 l a k e after the G a t u n Lock.
tons more t h a n anticipated. The ability of the Navatek I to T r a n s i t i n g up t h e coast of C e n t r a l A m e r i c a was uneventful,
compensate for weight gains, losses and shifts is due to the again, except for t h e winds g e n e r a t e d from the infamous Pap-
abundance of b a l l a s t i n g capabilities, some 150 tons (sea- agayo and T a h u a n t a p e c Valleys. W i n d and seas rose a b r u p t l y
water). to a m a x i m u m of 40 knots a n d 8 to 10 ft in those areas, b u t
A l t h o u g h the s u p e r s t r u c t u r e weight was much more t h a n conditions calmed j u s t as abruptly. No o t h e r rough w e a t h e r
anticipated, t h e seakeeping capabilities of the vessel were not was encountered all the way to Acapulco, w h e r e we r e m a i n e d
significantly affected. H a n d l i n g and m a n e u v e r i n g compari- for one day for fuel, w a t e r a n d provisions on J a n u a r y 13th.
sons before and after addition of the s u p e r s t r u c t u r e indicated The next d a y we were u n d e r w a y bound for our next stop,
some m i n o r differences. Roll period a p p e a r e d longer, top San Diego. This was a very uneventful leg of our voyage with
speed reduced from 18.3 to 16.7 knots and m a c h i n e r y trans- excellent w e a t h e r and no sea conditions to test t h e o p e r a t i n g
m i t t e d hull vibrations were reduced. W i n d heel due to more p a r a m e t e r s of our SWATH. We e n t e r e d San Diego Bay on
exposed s u p e r s t r u c t u r e could be felt. Because of t h e added J a n u a r y 19th.
weight, b a l l a s t i n g was restricted to a m i n i m u m of 9.5 ft. While in San Diego, Navatek I was again d e m o n s t r a t e d to
N a v a t e k / w a s drydocked at the A m e r i c a n M a r i n e Corpora- interested parties. Once provisions were on b o a r d and fueling
tion drydock to facilitate r e p l a c e m e n t of the d a m a g e d star- was completed, we d e p a r t e d on t h e evening of J a n u a r y 20th
board m a i n engine. Total t i m e for drydocking, engine re- for t h e final 2250-mile leg of our voyage back to Hawaii.
moval, i n s t a l l a t i o n of the new engine and back into the w a t e r Again, t h e r e was no w e a t h e r in excess of w h a t we h a d
was an astonishing 28 hr. ABS and USCG were in a t t e n d a n c e a l r e a d y experienced a n d all systems performed normally. We
during t h e haul-out. were p l e a s a n t l y helped by a sea of 6 to 8 ft from our s t a r b o a r d
A short shakedown t r i a l was performed on December 22nd aft q u a r t e r on a m a j o r i t y of this leg. P r o b a b l y the most exces-
in the Mississippi R i v e r - G u l f Canal with USCG on board. All sive motions felt by t h e Navatek I a r e d u r i n g following sea
w e n t well except the weather, which proved to be the worst conditions, a l t h o u g h a very comfortable ride. In a given sea
snow storm in 100 years in New Orleans. O p e r a t i n g in inclem- state, following seas will produce t h e most motions.
e n t w e a t h e r and freezing conditions was difficult since the We a r r i v e d in H a w a i i on J a n u a r y 28th. We anchored off
Navatek I was not outfitted for cold w e a t h e r service. Lahaina, Maui, to p r e p a r e for our g r a n d e n t r a n c e into Hono-
New Orleans to Panama to H o n o l u l u - - A f t e r completion of lulu, Hawaii. F i n a l a r r i v a l into Honolulu H a r b o r was on J a n -
construction, Navatek I got u n d e r w a y with a crew of seven u a r y 29, 1990.
for the 6500-mile r e t u r n to H a w a i i on December 28, 1989. Final service--Pursuit of USCG approval to become t h e
The t r i p s t a r t e d uneventful with seas averaging 6 ft and first S W A T H in the U.S. to c a r r y 400 passengers for hire
winds 35 knots from SSE. The seas a n d wind g r a d u a l l y picked began when t h e Navatek I was u n d e r construction in Port-
up to 8-10 ft a n d 40 knots. A Zodiac was secured with shackles land, Oregon. The final stages of this e n d e a v o r came to fru-

July 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 167

ition after several s u b m i t t a l s addressing stability, s t r u c t u r a l final paper on the word processor in a very short time span
fire protection, operations a n d route. Several flights from is acknowledged. Ms. Suqin Wang, Ph.D. s t u d e n t at the de-
Hawaii to MSC H e a d q u a r t e r s in Washington, D.C., by the p a r t m e n t , also provided much appreciated assistance.
staff of N a v a t e k Ships, Ltd. E n g i n e e r i n g D e p a r t m e n t were Mr. Leighton J. Wilkie, ocean engineer, assisted in correct-
required to expedite this process. First, certification fo:c 149 ing my prose with r e m a r k a b l e tact. Ms. Edith Katada, secre-
passengers was granted u n t i l the authors could satisfy the tary of the OE department, made sure t h a t the paper got
USCG r e q u i r e m e n t s for s t r u c t u r a l fire protection. F i n a l ap- expedited on time, by keeping m a n y d e p a r t m e n t a l chores
proval from the USCG to carry 400 persons came with the away from me d u r i n g the week of preparation of the paper.
issue of the Certification of Inspection on May 1, 1990. Nava-
tek I went into full service at that point. Whale watches, References
l u n c h cruises, d i n n e r cruises and charters off the coast of
Waikiki and the Gold Coast of Oahu are in progress. N a v a t e k 1 Lundborg,C. G., "Construction of Ships," U.S. Patent No. 234, 784;
I is certified by the USCG to carry 400 persons to 100 miles Nov. 1880.
2 Nelson,A., "Vessel," U.S. Patent No. 795,002, 1905.
offshore. 3 Seidl,L. H. and Wilkie, L. J., "Application of SWATH/FPS Concept
N a v a t e k I was also issued a final ABS classification certifi- to a Passenger Excursion Vessel Design," SNAME, Jan. 9, 1980.
cate as A 1 Ferry, A M S (machinery) a n d (~ (anchor han- 4 Boericke, H., "Subsurface Craft," U.S. Patent No. 3,063,397; 1962.
dling equipment) in J a n u a r y of 1991. 5 Lewis, E. V. and Breslin, J. P., "Semisubmerged Ships for High-
Speed Operation in Rough Seas," Third Symposium on Naval Hydrody-
To date, N a v a t e k I has made over 500 cruises a n d ca:cried namics, 1960.
over 50 000 passengers without missing a day due to weather 6 Stenger, J. J., "Surface Vessel," U.S. Patent No. 3,279,407; Oct.
or mechanical problems. After the record-setting 18 000-mile 1966.
shakedown cruise of our SWATH, inquiries are flowing into 7 Stenger J. J., "The Trident Stabilized Vessel Concept for Offshore
Drilling and Construction Operation," OTC Paper 1138,Offshore Technol-
N a v a t e k Ships, Ltd. as to the possibility of utilizing the design ogy Conference, Houston, Texas, 1969.
for oceanographic research, casino, cruise, car ferry and other 8 Land, T. G., "High-Speed Ship with Submerged Hulls," U.S. Patent
endeavors. No. 3,623,444, Nov. 1971.
N a v a t e k / ' h a s appeared in several m a r i t i m e and technical 9 Seidl, L. H., "Semisubmerged Ship," U.S. Patent No. 4,174,671,
Nov. 1979.
articles and magazines and has been distinquished with 10 Chapman, R. B., "Survey of Numerical Solutions for Free-Surface
awards such as, ~'Most Distinctive Design" by Marine Log, Problems," 2nd International Conference on Numerical Ship Hydrody-
and, "Most O u t s t a n d i n g Passenger Vessel of 1990" by Mari- namics, Berkeley, Calif., 1977.
time Reporter and Engineering News. 11 Strasser, "Resistance Tests on a 40m SWATH Ship," Vienna Ship
Towing Tank Report (Propr.), 1987.
12 McCreight, K. K. and Lee, C. M., "Manual for Mono-hull and Twin-
Hull Ship Motion Prediction Computer Programs," NSRDC-SPD-686-021,
Acknowledgments June 1976.
13 McCreight, K. K., "Assessing the Seaworthiness of SWATHShips,"
The Autocad drawings a n d artistic renderings shown in Trans. SNAME, Nov. 1987.
this paper were performed by Dr. M. Zapka, of N a v a t e k Ltd. 14 Salvesen, N. et al., "Hydro-Numeric Design of SWATH Ships,"
Mr. Raymond R. Richards of Newport, California, was the Trans. SNAME, Vol. 93, 1985.
consulting n a v a l architect on the detail s t r u c t u r a l design and 15 Lee, C. M. and Curphey, R. M., "Prediction of Motion Stability and
m a c h i n e r y i n s t a l l a t i o n drawings. His practical experience on Wave Load of Small-Water-Area, Twin-Hull Ships," Trans. SNAME, 1977.
the m a n y design questions proved invaluable. 16 Land, T. G. et al, "Design and Development of the 190-ton Stable
Mr. George Z. Liu, graduate s t u d e n t at the D e p a r t m e n t of Semisubmerged Platform (SSP)," Trans. ASME, Journal of Engineering
for Industry, Nov. 1974.
Ocean Engineering, SOEST, U n i v e r s i t y of Hawaii, performed 17 Sikora, J. P. and Dinsenbacher, A. L. "Swath Structure: Navy Re-
resistance calculations for the systematic hull variations in search and Development Applications," MARINETECHNOLOGY,1990.
connection with a class design project in the Ocean Engi- 18 Boericke, H., "Unusual Displacement Hull Forms for Higher
n e e r i n g Department. His able assistance in assembling the Speeds," International Ship Building Progress, Vol. 6, 1959.

APPENDIX: General arrangements

Carrier vessel with pilothouse

i
I.

~llll[!

Fig. 33 Plan view

168 July 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

 Carrier vessel with pilothouse (continued)

)
Fig. 34 Profile with bulwarks

i \I I i
1 ..... 1 CROSS I~u~ tND

['~'r"" I oT I cz.(,,~o*
l I ~. ..... - sc.~tcc T,c
. . . . . ~_,_.,,. . . . . . ~ ,-"
- - iLI4.LAIT 4 l~ l
/ ,-oL-4 S: I ->~
, i ICRVIC(

;~. ~ - ; \ ~ . . . . . 4~- _ _ _ ..L__

/ 7-T~;:7..x:-,'-- ............. + ..............
w 4~ - -' . . ~- - ~". _ ~ ~< <"'"<- <~ " ~ L ' L ~ ' "~'~"~:o~,~ :o <: ........ :;~,
~ i~

Fig. 35 Profile--general arrangements

~0 CONTI~OL
%TJIILZZiN5 rm
riN~

1o4-tlsT TK 3 I~L.L~T TI( ~ . . -

( N G I ~ ( lOON
.)__

'~'IALL.AST TK 3 / II~..%LX|T Ti< if

"" " / "'I~LJS'I TICi

'/ ~ ' / /

%?AI[LtZIN5
rlN$
C ~ R O CONTROL
tin
Fig. 36 Lower hulls

July 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 169

 Navatek I

Fig. 37 Profile

~ N AREA i
TOILC TS
FY3
ll)~
cecv

MNCHOR
TOILETS VINDLASS
LADLES

(
GAL.L[

LAj

Fig. 38 Superstructure--main deck layout

OPEN
AREA

tOILEtg
~ __LADIES II
OPEN
OREA vet .,~ II

C~ALLFY

Fig. 39 Superstructures01 deck layout

170 July 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

 Navatek I (continued)

OBSERVAIlI~I/$UN DCK

Fig. 40 Superstructure--02 deck layout

I ~ ~ ~ , r ~ 1~,, I

VIF:W VIEW
BOW ON STERN TO

Fig. 41 Superstructuro ond views

July 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 171