Shigeru Naito

Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean

Engineering,
Osaka University,
Yamada-oka 2-1, Suita,
Osaka, 565-0871, Japan
e-mail: naito@naoe.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp

Hiroshi Isshiki
Institute of Mathematical Analysis,
Osaka University,
Yamada-oka 2-1, Suita,
Osaka, 565-0871, Japan

Effect of Bow Wings on Ship

Propulsion and Motions
A seaworthy ship must have the ability to endure the constantly changing and sometimes
harsh environments of the ocean. Stable operation of a ship is important not only to
prevent capsizing, but also to maintain an acceptable level of comfort for the crew. When
navigating through waves, a ship experiences greater resistance, which adversely affects
its speed and stability. Hence, one of the most important goals of research and development in naval architecture is to stabilize a ships movement in waves. Insects, birds, and
fish use wings and fins to maintain stability and to generate thrust. Drawing from these
examples in nature, researchers have investigated the employment of wings to transform
wave energy into propulsion and to improve a ships stability. Research has shown that
bow wings can generate thrust while simultaneously enhancing ship stability. In this
paper, we review various strategies for improved bow wing technologies. Both theoretical
and experimental efforts are reviewed. The effects of wing shape, size, position, and
stiffness on the characteristics of thrust and resistance are detailed. Various control and
energy conversion strategies are discussed. Perspectives for further research and development are also presented. DOI: 10.1115/1.1982801

Introduction
From ancient times, human beings have used ships with propulsion devices. Some devices use hydrodynamic drag and some use
hydrodynamic lift. As well, some creatures moving in air and
water also use drag and/or lift for their propulsion. Birds use wind
energy by using their own wings to fly up and down rapidly.
Fishes also take advantage of fluid flow energy by using their own
fins to move around in the water. The behaviors and movements
of their wings and fins are useful references for naval architects to
develop new devices to decrease ship motions in waves and to
utilize wave energy for an auxiliary propulsion device. As one
example, to stabilize a roll motion in waves, the anti-rolling fin
system has been utilized for a long time, which is equipped at the
midship. To make more advanced ocean-going ships, it is useful
for naval architects to investigate further the mechanics of flying
and swimming of creatures.

General Overview

The state of the art in bow wing research, which has been
confirmed by experiments and/or alternative verifications, is summarized in 22 topics, which follow. The theory behind much of
this research is laid out in Sec. 2.
1.1 Ships in Sea. Generally speaking, a ships resistance increases in waves, as compared with calm water. This phenomenon
is well known to naval architects as the resistance increase or
added resistance of a ship in waves. Waves also produce ship
motion; namely, a ships body receives increased kinetic energy.
In winter, a season punctuated by increased large waves, this kinetic energy greatly increases. Utilization of this kinetic energy
for ship propulsion, i.e., converting this kinetic energy into ship
propulsion, would serve as a great energy-saving measure. In the
North Pacific and North Atlantic Ocean, there exists enormous
natural wave energy, especially during the winter season. This
wave energy causes various kinds of ship motion which sometimes lead to serious damage of a ship, with sinking being the
worst case.
1.2 Examples of Wave Devouring Propulsion. In 1895, Linden 1 filed a British patent on a ship which has a flexible wing at
the bow and moves by utilizing wave energy British Patent No.
Transmitted by Associate Editor W. Shyy.

Applied Mechanics Reviews

14,630. According to the contemporary report, Linden actually

built two boats, one 13 ft and one 24 ft in length, both named
Autonaut as shown in Fig. 1. With his design, using wave energy, the boat could move in its desired direction against wind and
waves at a speed of 3 4 knots.
Jakobsen 2 has reported interesting experimental results as
shown in Fig. 2. According to his report, a model ship 1.03 m in
length could move against a wave at a speed of about 1 m / s. The
wave length and height were 2.25 m wave period was about
1.2 s and 0.1 m, respectively. This result showed the wave height
and wave period dependency clearly.
Terao 3 has also given an experimental report on a floating
body that moves against waves. He named this phenomenon
wave devouring propulsion WDP.
Those primitive results on WDP show the reality of kinetic
energy from a ship in waves being converted into ship propulsion
with the use of wings.
1.3 Negative Resistance Increase Thrust. Precisely speaking, a resistance increase of a ship in waves is an unsteady wavemaking resistance. A generated unsteady wave produced by ship
motions in waves consists of many wave components, which is
shown in the theory of Maruo 4. Researchers who have studied
resistance increase know that a component of the resistance increase has negative parts, namely the thrust component. This is
mainly caused by the phase difference between a pitch and heave
motion. From the point of view of the wave system, one of the
wave systems generated by the motions propagates the wave system backward. As a result, the ship gets a reaction force that is a
thrust force without any wings. However, these negative resistance increases, namely thrust components, are not large. This
shows that by controlling the phase of the motions with some
devices, we can increase the negative resistance increase, namely
thrust.
1.4 Antirolling and Antipitching Fins. It is known that a
wing at the bow can reduce ship motion, especially pitch motion,
and a wing at midship can reduce roll motion. These wings are
named anti-pitching fins and anti-rolling fins.
During 19581961, research of the bow fin was carried out at
the David Taylor Model Basin DTMB in the U.S.A. Ulysses 5
reported the experimental results of the effect of anti-pitching fins.
He used four fin forms with an area ratio fin area/waterplane
area of about 0.022. He calculated the relative vertical motion at

Copyright 2005 by ASME

JULY 2005, Vol. 58 / 253

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Fig. 1 Picture of Autonaut designed by Linden from Pearsons Magazine, Dec. 1898

each section of the ship, and produced the following conclusions:

The results of the model tests indicate that reduction of the
pitching motion of the Mariner ship can be obtained by means of
fixed antipitching fins installed at the bow.
Abkowitz 6, Stefun 7, Becker and Duffy 8, Marks 9, and
Ochi 10 also researched anti-pitching fins. Their interests mainly
focused on reducing the pitch motion and increasing the strength
of the bow fins. In their research they also showed the effect of the
fins on reducing a ships speed loss. Reference 8 is most notable,
as it shows the actual experimental results on a ship. During these
experiments, an abnormal vibration occurred due to the fin at the
bow. Later Ochi 10 researched that problem.
Also, Matsui et al. 11,12, Vugts 13, and Bessho et al.
1416 discussed these effects. They observed that, when towed
by the same amount of towing force, the speeds of a model ship
with anti-pitching fins were faster in waves than those without the
wings. More significantly than the research on anti-pitching fins,
the research on anti-rolling fins has produced an optimum control
procedure, which is now equipped in many passenger ships to
reduce the roll motion.
This shows that the technology to reduce ship motion by using
a wing, especially the technology to reduce rolling motion by
using a design procedure including wing control theory, has already been established.
1.5 Open Characteristics of Wings in Waves. Nishiyama
17 first showed the theory of the unsteady oscillating wing. Wu
18 also showed theoretically that propulsive efficiency of an
active-type wing propulsion driven by an external energy can become positive. Wus theory is partly verified with experiments by
Watanabe 19,20. A comparison between the linear unsteady
wing theory and the experiments is sufficiently explained. In Wus

Fig. 2 Experimental results of Jakobsen

254 / Vol. 58, JULY 2005

Fig. 3 Experimental instrument of a free-running open wing

test two-dimensional wing NACA0015: Chord and span
length are 0.4, and 0.96 m, respectively

theory the free-surface effect is neglected. Grue et al. 21 extended Wus theory and included the free-surface effect. Their
theories were comparable with the experiments of Isshiki et al.
22.
Their experimental results and theoretical considerations are
given for the scenario of a wing placed alone in waves, as shown
in Fig. 3. In this case, wave energy is absorbed and converted into
propulsion by the wing itself. The relationship between wave
length and free-running speed is measured, as shown in Fig. 4.
The results seem to agree.
When the wavelength is 3 m and height is 12 cm, i.e., the wave
slope is 0.04, the maximum speed, 0.65 m / s, is measured. The
theory provides a fair explanation of the experimental results.
1.6 Effective Wing Form. Naito et al. 23 researched the
optimum form of the wing with the simple surface panel method
based on SQCM Kataoka et al. 24 in still water. Calculations
were performed for a wing with an aspect ratio 4 NACA.0012.
Because two wings are set up symmetrically at both sides of the
bow, the performance calculation for wings was determined by
using the mirror-image method applied to one side of the model.
The number of panels on the wing surface is 780. The number of
panels in the span direction is 13. The number of panels of chord
circumference is 60.
1.6.1 Tapered Wing. From a structural-strength viewpoint, the
tapered wing, in which the chord length of each section becomes
shorter from the point of the wings fit with the ships body toward
the wing tip, is advantageous. They compared this to the symmetrical wing rectangular wing, in which the center chord length
is the same as the length at the point of wings fit with the ship
body. As the taper ratio is reduced, the lift coefficient increases

Fig. 4 Free-running open test of wing in regular waves. Wave

height is not constant 10 17 cm.

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Fig. 5 Well-designed tapered and swept-back wing model

scale

more for a tapered wing than for a rectangular wing. In a taper

ratio of about 0.4, the value becomes maximal. Moreover, the
lift/drag ratio grows as the taper ratio decreases.

Fig. 7 Exceedance probability of vertical acceleration at F.P.

1.6.2 Swept-Back Wing. The swept-back wing, which is defined as having its wing tip pointing downstream along the direction of the chord, was examined and the desired result achieved.
The taper ratio was about 0.4 and the swept-back ratio was about
0.1. Even if the optimum tapered and swept-back wings are applied, the increase of the lift coefficient is only about 2%. Therefore, at this initial stage of experimental and theoretical investigation, a designer may use the rectangular wing in assessing the
effect of the wing on the propulsive performance of the ship with
wings in waves. The optimum wing form is shown in Fig. 5. This
is a tapered and swept-back wing, which is recommended from a
theoretical point of view. A lift coefficient of this wing is slightly
larger than that of a rectangular wing. This wing is used in the
experiments mentioned below. The model is equipped with a wing
on both sides, where the wing is at a forward position of 2.072 m
of the center of gravity and at a depth of 0.16 m.

lowing waves, and measured the model speed as shown in Fig. 6.

The advanced speeds vertical axes obtained depend on the incident wave frequency and wave height. Although the model wing
is too large, the results are attractive. Under the international standard for experimental procedure proposed by ITTC, a wave
height/model length= 1 / 50 is recommended. In the case of this
experiment, the wave height is 4 cm. As shown in a later section,
by using these results the effective horse power EHP of an actual
ship is estimated.

1.7 Free-Running Test of Model With Wings. Isshiki et al.

22,2527 carried out a free-running test in head waves and fol-

1.8 Wings Attached to Ships in Waves. When a ship with a

wing encounters a wave the ship begins to pitch and heave, and
then begins to move forward against the wave. Without a wing the
ship will move backward due to the wave drift force. In following
wave conditions, the ship will move in the direction of wave
propagation with a velocity much faster than the velocity produced by drift force.
The ship runs fast in a rather wide range of the wavelengths.
For example, the ship will run fast in a wavelength about one and
a half times the ships length. In this range of wavelength, the
pitch motion of the ship increases and efficiently converts the
wave energy into propulsion. In the case of a ship with wings, the
ships motions absorb the wave energy as kinetic energy and the
motions are delivered to the wing. The wing then generates the
thrust, and thus the wave energy is converted into propulsion.
Some feasibility studies based on experimental results have
been conducted. In one study, a cargo ship 80 m in length is
assumed to navigate the JapanNorth Pacific route in winter. According to the study, a very promising result is obtained. Namely,
the ships estimated average speed of 7.10 kts in a wave on the
JapanNorth Pacific route in winter increases to 12.1 kts when a
bow wing is attached to the ship. The ships speed in calm water
is 11.4 kts. This increase in speed is caused by the thrust generated by a wing of a ship in waves. The ships increased speed in
calm water is due to the reduction of resistance increase in a ships
hull in waves. Both experimentally and theoretically, by installing
an underwater wing at the ships bow, the resistance increase due
to waves can be decreased and ship motions can be stabilized.
1.8.1 Ship Motion. One calculated example of the feasibility
of vertical acceleration at the F.P. is presented in Fig. 7. Vertical
acceleration is one of the indicators of ship motion. Figure 7 indicates that a ship with bow wings shows less vertical acceleration, and hence shows decreased are ship motion versus a ship
without wings.

Fig. 6 Free-running test of model ship with the wing in head

sea condition

Applied Mechanics Reviews

1.8.2 Resistance Increase. The calculated results of resistance

increase of a ship with a wing is evaluated by subtracting the time
average value of thrust generated by the wing from the resistance
increase of the hull. As far as the resistance increase of the slender
ship without the wing is concerned, agreement is obtained beJULY 2005, Vol. 58 / 255

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Fig. 10 Relation between nondimensional resistance increase

and wave mean period in irregular head waves: Actual ship
scale Fn = 0.2
Fig. 8 Resistance increase of the ship with the bow wing in
regular head wave

tween the calculated results and the experimental data. On the

other hand, when the wing is attached to the ships bow, the numerical results overestimate the effects of the wing, but agree with
the experimental results shown qualitatively in Fig. 8.
Of course, the theory must be modified in order to estimate the
thrust of the wing attached to the ship more accurately, but the
effectiveness of the present method is verified at least qualitatively. At any rate, the decreasing resistance increase of a ship
with wings is confirmed by the experimental results. So, the effects of a wing attached to a ship in waves are verified not only by
the numerical results but also by the experimental data.

crease in irregular waves between a ship with and without wings.

Ship motions, pitch, and heave in regular head waves were measured. The results indicate beneficial effects of controlled bow
wings, and confirm that ship motions were decreased in Fig. 11.

1.9 Experiment Results of Speed Drop and Ship Motions.

Isshikis experimental results clearly show that the bow wings
generate a thrust as a result of the ships motion, forward speed,
and wave orbital velocity. Naito et al. have also examined the bow
wings effects in regular and irregular head waves 23. They examined the relationship between the bow wings, the ship motions,
and the resistance increase of the ship.
Figure 9 shows experimental results of a ships speed loss in
regular head waves for the ship with fixed bow wings. Even with
fixed bow wings, the ships speed is significantly affected.
Figure 10 shows the comparative results of the resistance in-

Fig. 9 Experimental results of the ship speed loss container

ship. The dotted line and solid line indicate the ship speed in
still water with and without the wings, respectively, when the
ship is towed with the same force.

256 / Vol. 58, JULY 2005

Fig. 11 Comparison of ship motions between experiments and

calculations. Top=RAO of heave; bottom=RAO of pitch; RAO
= Response Amplitude Operator.

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Fig. 12 Three wing forms

That is, even with the fixed bow wing, the wing effect appears to
have two effects, one on ship motions and the other on ship resistance. Later, the investigated results on the controlled bow wings
are described. The resistance increase of the ship with the wings is
smaller than the one without the wings. At the mean wave period
of 9 s actual ship scale, where ship motions are large, the performance of the ship with the bow wings is superior.
The effectiveness of bow wings is illustrated in Fig. 11, most
notably in the frequency region where the relative motion between
the ship and the wave is large. Three different wings shown in
Fig. 12 are used in these experiments.
1.10 Effective Position of the Wings. In Fig. 13, relations
between the longitudinal position of a wing and the thrust generated by a wing are shown for various wavelengths. The vertical
axis shows the thrust, and the horizontal axis shows the wing
position. Figure 13 is noteworthy, as it demonstrates that the best
position to obtain thrust is, generally, in front of the bow, and the
worst position is at midship, where thrust can hardly be obtained.
Furthermore, the results indicate that the optimum wing position
moves forward as the wavelength increases.
Naito et al. 28,29, additionally indicated that positioning the
wings in front of the bow also decreases the resistance increase in
waves. This is presented in Fig. 14.
1.11 Stall. When a ship speed is low, the vertical component
of inflow velocity to the bow wings becomes large in comparison
with the horizontal component. As a result, the fluctuation of the
attack angle easily exceeds the stall angle of 15 deg. The attack
angle of wings in wave can be estimated by measuring the wave
and calculating the ship motions. When the attack angle regularly
exceeds 15 deg, the wing is thought to be in the stall. In Fig. 15,
the attack angle of the bow wings is shown as reaching the 15 deg
maximum in the range of 0.9 / Lpp 1.6. To avoid stall, intermittent wing control is recommended so that when the attack
angle does not exceed the stall angle the wings are not be con-

Fig. 13 Effective position of wings to get wave energy for propulsion 28

Applied Mechanics Reviews

Fig. 14 Relation between the resistance increase and the wing

position 28

trolled, and when the attack angle exceeds the stall angle the
wings are controlled in order to reduce the attack angle. To calculate the attack angle, the bow bottom pressure method is used,
as introduced below.
1.12 Passive Control of Wings. The stall effect has a significant influence on the thrust; to avoid stall, methods for controlling
the bow wing are needed. Isshiki proposed a spring system that
added a restoring moment to the wing, as shown in Fig. 16.
From the results in Fig. 16, we know that an optimum constant
of moment spring exists. This fact indicates the necessity of considering stall effect when correctly estimating thrust generated by
a wing, and when studying active wing control. If the optimum
coefficient of the moment spring can be determined, then passive
control is recommended, because an active control system is typically expensive. The results show that, while wing thrust is affected by moment spring stiffness, resistance increase is not. It is
therefore sufficient to consider only the effect of moment spring
stiffness on thrust when determining the moment spring coefficient. Figure 16 indicates the existence of an optimum moment
spring stiffness for thrust generated by a wing. The horizontal axis
is a nondimensional coefficient of moment spring. From this figure, the value of Kp can be decided as about 0.5, which depends
on wave frequency. However, it must be noted that, because an
irregular wave includes many wave frequency components, it is
difficult to determine the stiffness value uniquely. This problem is
discussed below.

Fig. 15 Attack angle of the bow wings in regular head waves

JULY 2005, Vol. 58 / 257

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Fig. 17 Total resistance ratio of theoretical to experimental results for various wings. Fn = 0.15 Rn = 3.30 106: Initial attack
angle= 0 deg. Case A = without wing, Case B = NACA0012,
chord= 0.1 m, span= 0.2 m, Case C = NACA0012, chord
= 0.082 m, span= 0.246 m, Case D = NACA0024, chord= 0.1 m,
span= 0.2 m.
Fig. 16 Effect of moment spring stiffness on thrust generated
by the wing and resistance increase of ships in waves Fn
= 0.2, / L = 1.2. The wing is set in front of the bow, Kp is the
coefficient of spring stiffness.

1.13 Flow Around Bow Wing. Wing resistance in still water,

which is considered to be interference with the ship body and
wing, must be investigated.
The scale model is much smaller than an actual ship. Also, the
overlaid grid method 24 is used for the calculation. This method,
compared to the single-grid method, has shown fault in that preservation of the flow field is not satisfied. However, it is suitable
for catching a local flow field in a shape circumference of this
small scale. A subgrid in the wing circumference with the joint
part is arranged, in addition to the main grid on the ship body. As
a result, the entire analytical area is covered with the grid. The
calculation of the viscous flow field, where a double-flow model is
assumed, is performed on the one-sided ship model. Six cases of
calculations on the interference flow field of the ship body and the
bow wing are examined, and the resistance of the friction component and the pressure component of the hull and the wing are
obtained.
In Fig. 17, Naito et al. 23 show the ratio of the total resistance
of the ship with the wings, and the experimental results for a ship
without wings Case A. Because the surface area of the fitted
wing in each case is equal, the viscous friction resistance of the
wing is almost the same in each case. The viscous pressure resistance is the largest in the case which sets up NACA.0024 downward 5 deg.
The calculation result of resistance, in each case, is presumed to
be a little large as compared with the experimental results. However, going by the wing changes, resistance can be qualitatively
presumed. Calculated results on the flow around the bow wing are
shown in Fig. 18. According to the results, the difference in the
pressure distribution is found not only around the bow wing but
also in the upper stream.
When changing the initial attack angle of the bow wing 0 deg,
+5 deg, and 5 deg, the flow field around the wing is calculated.
The effect of the initial attack angle on the resistance is not great.
By calculating the interference flow field of the ship body and the
wing with the overlaid grid method, the wing shape, the wing
258 / Vol. 58, JULY 2005

angle, and the wing installation position can be examined. Therefore, an optimum condition of the wing can be predicted because
there is little wing resistance in still water.
Miyata et al. 30 and Ogiwara et al. 31 have succeeded in
reducing the resistance of a ship in calm water by attaching a wing
to the hull, though in their case, the wing was attached to the hull
just above still water level near the bow, which is fairly different
from that of the bow wings discussed in the WDP case.
Currently, the optimum position of bow wings that do not increase total resistance has not been found. In order to find the
wing position, where the drag of the wings is small and the efficiency of WDP is high, further research must be done.
1.14 Measurement of Pressure Working on the Wing. Nine
pressure gauges were arranged on the wing of NACA.0024, to
measure the vertical force acting on the wing. Figure 19 shows the
time history, at position A, of the differential pressure between the
upper face of the wing and the lower face / Lpp = 1.0. By using
the attack angle obtained through previous experiments, the pressure is calculated by considering the effect of the unsteady influence. This calculated result is represented by the solid line in the
figure. The dotted line indicates the pressure value corresponding
to the attack angle 15 deg. The value measured on the boundary
of this dotted line falls into disorder, and shifts more than the
calculation values. That is, the stall occurs in the range of the
attack angle exceeding 15 deg.

Fig. 18 Comparison of pressure distribution around the bow

wings between Case A without wing: left and Case D with
wing: right Rn = 6.0 106

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

consideration. The wing emerges from the water, and when it

enters the water again, it receives a violent impact force. Determining the critical probability and the critical values of the relative velocity and displacement between the wing and the wave
surface provides an assessment of the wing slamming.
The problem of bow wing slamming is a key for comprehending the bow wing system. The distribution function of the extreme
value of ship responses relative displacement and relative speed,
etc. can be approximated with the Rayleigh distribution function.
And, the relative displacement is independent of the relative velocity. From this, the exceedance probability of bottom slamming
is shown as Ao.

A0 = exp

Fig. 19 Comparison of the time history of the measured pressure acting on the wing between calculation and experiments
Fn = 0.2, / Lpp = 1.0

1.15 Vertical Forces and Moment Acting on the Wing. By

using the measurement value of pressure, Naito et al. 23 obtained the vertical force Fz acting on the wing.
In Fig. 20, the bending moment Mt at the wing root presumed
from Fz and the bending moment from the calculation are indicated. Stall influence is not considered in the calculation, but the
result of stall in the experimental value is measured. The value Mt
falls below the calculated value in the vicinity of / Lpp = 1.0.
This difference in values determines the stall effect. The values of
Fz and Mt are obtained by the following procedure.
The distribution of the vertical force in the direction of the
wingspan is approximated with the third spline function. The moment acting on the root of the wing is obtained by multiplying Fz
and the distance to the section from the root.
1.16 Bow Wing Slamming. When navigating in heavy
weather, so-called bow wing slamming becomes a significant

1 C2d Cv2
+
2 2d v2

1.1

where 2d is the variance of relative displacement between water

surface and wing, 2v is the variance of relative speed between
water surface and wing, Cd is the critical value of relative displacement, and Cv is the critical value of relative speed between
water surface and wing. Here, Cd is given to be the distance
between the fitted depth of the wing and the water surface in still
water the static swell is included. Moreover, Cv is given from
the wing strength point of the view mentioned below. A designer
can determine the value of Ao by applying the value A0 = 1.0%.
By using these concepts, the critical operation upper bound of
the bow wings in rough weather can be provided. The value of Cv
is obtained as follows. Okada and Sumi 32 give the maximum
water impact pressure of a two-dimensional flat plate by
Pmax =

M wK mV t
ct

1.2

Here
Km =

1
,
1 + M w/M

2
c
8

Mw =

1
Vt
= 0.144 103
t
c

1.3

0.673

1.4

M,M w,c: mass, added mass, and chord length of flat plate
Vt: entering velocity into water

If the impact pressure is assumed to be an even action on all

aspects of the wing, the forces acting on the fitted part of the wing
can be predicted. Hence, the shearing force Fz and the bending
moment Mt are easily obtained by
Fz = Pmax cb

1.5

cb2
2

1.6

M t = Pmax

Here, b is the span length and the bow wing slamming condition is
defined as when the bending moment at the fitted part of the wing
becomes equal to the yield stress of mild steel. The critical value
of relative speed Vt max that generates this bending moment can be
determined by the next formula in conjunction with Eq. 1.2.
Vt1.673
max =

c0.673
Mt
M wK m

Considering Eqs. 1.2, 1.4, and 1.6, we get

Fig. 20 Comparison of bending moment acting on the root of
wings between calculation and experiment. The U.S. Navy, in
order to investigate the safety of wings in waves, measured the
force acting on the wings of an actual navy shipi.e., whether
the wings collapse or not. These well-known results indicated
that bow wings are highly effective in reducing ship motions,
and are safe except under very heavy sea conditions.

Applied Mechanics Reviews

Vt max 1.15 m/s

Usually, the critical value of the relative velocity used to assess
bow bottom slamming is shown in the form of C0gL pp C0: constant. If the same expression is used to judge bow wing slamming, the relative velocity becomes the next equation.
JULY 2005, Vol. 58 / 259

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Fig. 21 Effective operation sea condition of wings in sea

Cv = 1.15 0.03gL pp m/s

1.7

In the case of bow bottom slamming, the critical relative velocity

between a ship bottom and the water surface is usually given by
Cv = 0.09gL pp m / s. Compared with this, the value of the critical relative velocity related to bow wing slamming shown in Eq.
1.7 is an appropriate value. By considering those values, the
groundwork for avoiding bow wing slamming could be established.
1.17 Effective Operation Sea Zone of Wing. It has been
shown 23 that there is a restricted sea condition for which bow
wings are effective. In a calm sea, bow wings cause resistance. In
a rough sea, slamming damages the wings.
Naito et al. 23 provided each critical line effective line of the
wing for a moderate sea and a heavy sea as described above. The
lower line indicates that the speed loss of both ships, one with
bow wings and one without, is the same. Namely, the resistance
increase of the wings is the same as the thrust generated by the
wings. The lower line indicates the perspective of total resistance.
The upper line indicates that the exceedance probability A0 of bow
wing slamming is 0.01. This line in rough weather is proposed
from the wing strength point of view. For determining the upper
line in the condition, the critical entering velocity of wings into
water is important. In this paper Eq. 1.7 is used. The zone enclosed by these two lines is the effective operation region of the
wing. For the main direction X = 120, 150, 180 deg of an irregular
wave X = 180 deg is head sea; the effective wing operation sea
conditions are shown in Fig. 21. If technology could succeed in
making an advance that can decrease wing size and reduce wing
resistance itself, the wing effective zone might be extended.
Therefore, it has been proposed that bow wings be stowed in the
ships hull in both calm and very rough sea conditions. It is advisable that bow wings be made smaller to accommodate stowing.
However, as wing area decreases so does its effectiveness. Therefore, to compensate for the reduced wing effectiveness, controlled
bow wings are recommended.
1.18 Stowed System of the Wing. As mentioned above, a
system for stowing bow wings is recommended in order to
counter the inefficiency of bow wings in both calm and very
rough seas.
A stowed system of wings for an anti-rolling fin has already
been established; therefore, it would seem that an application of
the system to bow wing storage would not be difficult. Many
designs have been proposed and many patent applications have
been filed. Since the bow is more narrow than the midship, the
260 / Vol. 58, JULY 2005

Fig. 22 The concept of the bow stowing system Kawatani

33. The point A is fixed. The angle BCD is a constant. When
the point F moves to the x direction, the point D also moves to
the x direction. The point C can only move in y direction. The
lengths AB and CD are important.

dead space of the bow is not very wide for stowing wings. Kawatani 33 has proposed one system for stowing wings in the narrow bow portion, which is an improved model of the anti-rolling
fin system. In this system, the starboard wing is piled up against
the portside wing, as shown in Fig. 22.
1.19 Evaluation of Wings Effect in Actual Sea. In Isshikis
study 25, the JapanNorth Pacific route in winter is supposed
as the sea condition, and the experimental results shown in Fig. 6
are used.
A wave of period 8 s is chosen as a design wave, since the
power of this wave is the highest at 28.0 ps/ m or 20.6 kW/ m.
The wavelength and height of the wave are 99.8 and 3.13 m,
respectively, and the frequency of occurrence is 26.8%. According
to the model test results, wave energy is utilized efficiently when
the ship length is smaller than the wavelength.
The effective horse power EHP, in calm water, of the ship
with bow wings ship length is 80 m is compared with the EHP
of the ship without wings in the design wave. For example, if the
output of the main engine and the propulsive efficiency are assumed to be 700 ps and 0.7, respectively, the speed of the ship
with the wing in the design wave becomes 12.1 kts. On the other
hand, the speed of a ship without the wing is 11.4 kts in calm
water and 7.1 kts in the design wave. This suggests that the effect
of the wing is significant.
Tests were conducted at sea, using a small fishing boat 15.7 m
in length. The principal particulars of the wing were 1.05 m in
chord, 3.8 m in span equal to the ship breadth, and 1.65 m in
submergence, as described in NACA 0015. The pivot point of the
wing is placed at 1 / 4 of the chord length, namely at the lift center
in the steady state. Although the theory overestimates the effects
of the wing, it explains the experimental results qualitatively.
A large wing at the bow induced no serious abnormal phenomena, and no increase of turning radius was observed. The wing
support system was composed of a hydraulic lifting device and a
flexible wing support by a hydraulic spring. The hydraulic cylinder and accumulator altered the spring constant. In spite of unfavorable weather conditions small waves, a free-running speed of
2.5 kts was obtained. If this velocity is scaled up to a ship of 80 m
in length by Froudes law, this corresponds to 5.6 kts. In freerunning tests, the ship automatically adjusted its direction to
match the wave direction. Furthermore, speed increased about
0.75 kt in following seas. Effects on the reduction of pitch were
also verified.
Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Fig. 23 Frequency response function of the heave motion of

the ship caused by the forced wing motion in still water

1.20 Ship Motions Caused by the Forced Bow Wings Motion in Still Water. Experiments of the forced wing motion were
carried out in still water 34 to confirm the relationship between
wing motion and ship motion. Namely, Rz, R, and
R shown in Sec. 2, Eq. 2.14 must be confirmed. In these
experiments, the wing amplitude 0 was 10, 15, and 20 deg,
and the phase difference between both side wings was 0deg and
180deg; i.e., in the former case heave and pitch motions occurred, and in the latter case roll motion occurred.
The frequency response functions of heave and pitch are shown
in Figs. 23 and 24. The ship motions are almost a linear function
of the wing motions in the range where the wing amplitude is
relatively small. In Fig. 25, the results of the rolling motion are
shown with nondimensional vertical and horizontal axes. There is

Fig. 24 Frequency response function of the pitch motion of

the ship caused by the forced wing motion in still water

Applied Mechanics Reviews

Fig. 25 Frequency response function of rolling of ship caused

by forced wing motion in still water. Vertical and horizontal
axes are nondimensional: Nonlinearity of the roll motion can be
seen around the resonance frequency.

good agreement between the experiments and calculations. The

results indicate that the forced ship motions in still water, with
controlled bow wings, can be calculated by the theory mentioned
below in Sec. 2. Because the theory that predicts ship motions
without bow wings has already been established, these results
show that ship motions heave, pitch, roll in waves with controlled bow wings can be estimated based on the linear super
principle theory.
Based on the results, the comparison of the calculated results of
the roll motion in oblique waves between fixed wings and controlled wings is shown in Fig. 26. The directional characteristics
of roll motion are obtained from this theory. The phase difference
between the two wings was controlled at 180 deg. These results
indicate that the effect of controlled bow wings on decreasing roll
motion is great, and although an anti-rolling fin is usually fitted
midship, this is not always necessary. To decrease the roll motion,
there is no problem if the wings are placed at the bow. The effect
of controlled bow wings on ship motion is significant, and we
consider the control effect of bow wings on ship motions together
with resistance increase.
1.21 Relations between Controlled Bow Wings, Ship Motions, and Resistance Increase. Experiments were performed to
determine the relationship among controlled bow wings, ship motions, and resistance increase in head waves incident wave
height= 0.08 m, / L pp = 1.5. Because it is difficult to directly
measure the thrust generated by the wings, we indirectly confirm
the wings effect on the thrust by measurement of ship resistance.
The bow wings were periodically controlled so that the amplitude
0 was 10 deg and the phase was varied between
180 + 180deg.
The following two figures Figs. 27 and 28 show these experimental results. The horizontal axis indicates the phase difference
between the wing motions and the incident wave. The phase standard is that the crest of waves is at the midship section.
The relationship among the controlled bow wings, the meaJULY 2005, Vol. 58 / 261

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Fig. 26 Comparison of the directional characteristics of the

roll motion with the fixed and the controlled bow wings in
waves top: fixed wing; bottom: controlled wing

sured resistance increase, and the attack angle are shown in Fig.
27. It has been established that there are strong relationships
among wing motion, wave motion, and ship motion, that reduce
the resistance increase of the ship. That is, the phase is important
so that if one misses phase control, contrary to natural expectation, ship resistance increases even more.
The attack angle shown in Fig. 27 is obtained indirectly by

t =

vWt zt lW t

t + t
U
U

1.8

Here, U , zt , t , and t are measurable values and lw is

given. The value of vWt cannot be measured directly. Accordingly, by multiplying the measured value t and 0ekdw, the
vertical orbital velocity vWt can be estimated, which is said to be
a quasi-measured value. Then, the attack angle t is determined
by a quasi-experimental method using the measured value. This
procedure can be applied to the model tests. But, for an actual
ship, the measurement of t is almost impossible.
From the calculated results, the measured resistance increase of
the ship with controlled bow wings is minimal, at = 30 deg.
From the experiments, at a minimum of = 15 deg, the attack angle for the wings is 13 deg. When the attack angle becomes
more than 20 deg, the measured added resistance suddenly becomes large. Because, in this condition, stall occurs, the wing
does not generate a thrust. This experiment was only carried out at
one frequency / L pp = 1.5. Therefore, at arbitrary frequencies, it
is necessary to determine the optimum wing motion in order to
generate thrust more efficiently. These results are needed for the
optimum wing control described in Sec. 3.
Further, the relationship of phase between the controlled bow
wings and the pitch motion is given in Fig. 28 as one example.
262 / Vol. 58, JULY 2005

Fig. 27 Relationship among controlled bow wings, added resistance, and attack angle in head waves. Measured added
resistance added resistance without the wings in waves
thrust generated with the wings and other effects.

The agreement between experimental and calculated motions of

the ship is good, qualitatively. Based on the present theories and
experimental measurements we can determine the optimum phase.
For obtaining the attack angle, which is desirable for control
signal generation, it is necessary to measure the wave orbital motion vWt. The vertical motion at the bow can be measured easily
for both an actual ship and a model ship using inexpensive accel-

Fig. 28 Relationship of phase between the controlled bow

wings and pitch motion in head waves

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Fig. 29 Relationship between the bottom pressure and the attack angle Fn = 0.284, head wave
Fig. 30 Comparison of attack angle of bow wings between calculated and quasi-experimental values

erometers. However, the effect of the wave orbital motion on the

attack angle is not included in the ships vertical motion. In a
similar manner to that signal, the pressure at bow bottom is recommended, which includes the effects of the ships motions, the
wave orbital motions and the ships speed. Pressure measurement
is simple with the use of inexpensive and uncomplicated
instruments.
1.22 Bottom Pressure for Control Signal. To obtain larger
thrust from the bow wings, it is necessary to select the control
signal. Usually to produce thrust i.e., lift, the attack angle is
recommended for the control signal. If the relative vertical velocity at the wings position can be measured, the attack angle can be
derived. However, because the relative vertical velocity cannot be
measured in the case of an actual ship, it is impossible to measure
the attack angle directly.
The relative vertical velocity of fluid at the position where the
wings are equipped should have a strong correlation with the bottom pressure at that position. If this can be confirmed, bottom
pressure can be used as the control signal for the attack angle.
Because measurement of pressure is an established technology,
obtaining the attack angle in this way is expected to produce accurate results. The experimental results on this subject, shown in
Fig. 29, shows a linear relationship between the amplitude of bottom pressure and the attack angle. For angles less than 20 deg the
relationship is linear. This tendency depends slightly on encounter
frequency, and no phase difference exists.
The comparison between calculations and quasi-measurements
of the attack angle is shown in Fig. 30. Although there are some
differences between them, the figure demonstrates that the pressure at the bow bottom can be used as the control signal for the
attack angle. That is, one can obtain the frequency response function of the attack angle for the fixed bow wings with good agreement between the calculated and measured values.
Theoretically the optimum wing motion to produce thrust for
every frequency known as the target frequency response function can be predicted. Consequently, the desired attack angle can
be determined.

fitted at the bow of an oscillating ship body with forward velocity

has the characteristics of an oscillating wing. By multiplying the
quasi-static lift with the oscillation influence coefficient, one can
obtain the lift of this bow wing pair.
The instantaneous value of a quasi-static lift Lst of a wing is
given by

1
vWt zt lW t
LSt cbU2CL

t + t
2
U
U

2.1

Here, the dot above a variable indicates time differentiation. Naturally, when t = 0, the lift of the fixed bow wings is obtained.
Moreover, CL is the lift inclination coefficient by which the induced drag is considered. It is defined as

Fig. 31 Coordinate system of a ship

Theoretical Overview of Bow Wing Effect

Based on the a thorough review of the history and the current

state of the art, the basic theory of evaluating the bow wing system as it relates to ship motion and propulsion in waves is explained in what follows. This theoretical explanation also includes
references on bow wing control 34.
2.1 Thrust Generated by Controlled Bow Wings. The coordinate system is defined as shown in Figs. 31 and 32. A wing
Applied Mechanics Reviews

Fig. 32

Coordinate system of a wing

JULY 2005, Vol. 58 / 263

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

C L =

2
.
1 + c/b

2.2

In the case of two-dimensional wings i.e., where b tends to infinity, CL = 2. The first term of the right-hand side of Eq. 2.1
shows the lift obtained when the wing advances in waves at a
constant inclination. The second and third terms show the lift
obtained when the wing advances in still water while heaving and
pitching. Then, the varying lift Lunt is given by Eq. 2.3,
which is based on Eq. 2.1 by multiplying each lift with its corresponding oscillation influence coefficient COW, COH, and COP,
respectively.

zt lW t
1
vWt
COH
Lunt = cbU2CL COW
2
U
U
COPt + t

2.3
Fig. 33 Coordinates of the bow wing

k
COW = J0 + J2 i + J0 iJ1Ck
2

2M WdFPt = 2mWdFPt v Wt 2CFdFPt vWt

k
COH = i + Ck
2
COP =

k =

c
,
2U

2.5

k
k
i+
i + 1 Ck
2
2

2c
2g

2.4

+ 2Lunt + FSFt

2.6

: angular frequency

2.9

dFPt = zt lWt
dFPt = zt lW t + Ut
dFPt = zt lW t + 2U t

2.10

Ck: Theodorsen function

where M W, mW, and CF denote the mass, the added mass, and the
damping coefficient of one wing, respectively. Therefore, FSF is
obtained using Eqs. 2.3, 2.9, and 2.10.

J0,1,2: Bessel functions of the first kind

FSF = 2M W + M Wz + cbUCLCOH + 2CFz 2M W + mWlW

+ 4UM W + mW 2lWCF cbUCLCOHlW

The instantaneous value of thrust generated by a wing is

+ UcbUCLCOP + 2CF 2mWv W 2CF

Tt = Ltsint + t + t
Dtcost + t + t

1
Dt
= CLDt cU2 sin t + t + t tan1
2
Lt

2.7

where
CLDt =

Lt2 + Dt2
cU2/2

2.8

For a small attack angle t one can use Eq. 2.3 as the lift
Lt in Eq. 2.7 and neglect the drag because the lift is much
larger than the drag Lt Dt. When t is small, one
can use Ck, but when t becomes larger, the oscillating wing
stalls a phenomenon called dynamic stall. When dynamic stall
occurs, the wing performance changes; see Naito et al. 26 for
details of wing performance after dynamic stall. If one can control
the attack angle so that a stall does not occur, one can produce a
larger thrust.
In this theory, the distinction between the wing motion t and
the attack angle t must be noted.
2.2 Motions of the Ship. The force caused by controlled bow
wings influences ship motions. Here, FSF is the force of the controlled bow wings acting on the ship. The equation for the bow
wings force is
264 / Vol. 58, JULY 2005

+ cbUCLCOWvW + cbU2CLCOP

2.11

If the motions of the two bow wings are controlled with a phase
difference, an unsymmetrical motion rolling and yawing occurs.
This fact indicates that by using the bow wings one also can
control the rolling motion. In this research, yawing motion is neglected. The coupled motions of heave and pitch, and the single
motion of roll are considered.
Here, by setting up the equation of ship motions caused by the
wings, the equations of ship motions with controlled bow wings
are shown.
Heave and Pitch
A11z + A12z + A13z + A14 + A15 + A16 = Fz FSF 2.12
A24 + A25 + A26 + A21z + A22z + A23z = M + lWFSF
2.13
Roll see the coordinate system in Fig. 33
a37 + a38 + awd + a39 = m + awf t A f U2CLay Gt
2.14
where
awf t = UCLy Gaekd f eikL/2 cos

cy csinky c + B/2sin dy c eiat

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Fig. 34 Comparison of the attack angle between fixed and

controlled wings calculated result

awd = UCL y G

cy cy c + B/2dy c

and where the coefficients A11 A26, a37 a39 and the external
force and moment due to waves FZ, M , and M can be obtained
by the strip method. One can calculate ship motions with the
controlled bow wings by adding Eq. 2.11 to Eqs. 2.12 and
2.13.
, and to be
Here, one can define z, , ,
Fourier transforms of zt, t, t, t, and t. In the frequency domain, the motion of a ship with controlled bow wings is

R z R z

= R R
R R

2.15

Here, RAB indicates the frequency response function of output

A due to input B. From Eq. 2.14, the ship motions with controlled bow wings can be expressed using the superposition principle of each response due to waves and wing motions.
2.3 Resistance Increase of the Ship and the Speed Loss.
The added resistance of the ship with controlled bow wings in
waves is defined as
RAW = RAD T,
where RAD: Time average of the added resistance without
wings, and T: Time average of the thrust generated by controlled bow wings and other forces.
The resistance increase of the ship can be calculated using
Maruo 4 theory, which is the most rigorous one. The GerritsmaBeukelman method 35 which is simpler, can also be used. By
utilizing the obtained resistance increase, ship speed loss can be
estimated by including the main engine characteristics. As a result, the difference of speed loss between the ship with wings and
the one without is known. And, because the total amount of fuel
consumption can also be obtained, the positive economical effects
of the bow wing can be made clear 36.
It is important to note that resistance increase is proportional to
wave height,2 but speed loss is not. There is a variety of reasons
for speed loss.

Fig. 35 Comparison of thrust generated by the bow wings for

fixed and controlled wings calculated result

the controlled bow wings is presented. The figure shows the desired value of the attack angle. If wings could be controlled to
match expectation, a larger thrust could be obtained as shown in
Fig. 35. This is a significant difference, and indicates the effectiveness of the controlled wings.
Based on these calculations, a simple concept of bow wing
control is proposed, as shown in the block diagram of Fig. 36. The
upper line of the diagram shows that the input is the bottom pressure pt and the output is the attack angle t of the fixed wings
estimated from the previous research results, which are shown in
Fig. 29. The lower line shows that the input is the same and output
is the desired attack angle t. The control signal, which makes
the difference of two output signals zero, is put into the controller
G. The frequency response functions are labeled as Hp
and Hp, respectively.
The wings are controlled such that the actual wing motion must
always coincide with the desired wing motion. The joint frequency response function Hp of this whole system is written
as
Hp = GHp Hp

3.1

The impulse response function hpt of the system i.e., the input
of the bottom pressure pt and the output of the desired attack
angle outt, is obtained by Fourier transformation as
hpt = J1Hp

3.2

The function hpt is shown in Fig. 37. This function is important

for controlling the bow wings in irregular waves to produce larger
thrust.
In the case of irregular waves, by using the bottom pressure, we
can produce the control signal for the bow wings using the following convolution integral:

Optimum Wing Control for Thrust

In Fig. 34, amplitude of the attack angle between the fixed and

Applied Mechanics Reviews

Fig. 36 Block diagram of the control system

JULY 2005, Vol. 58 / 265

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Fig. 37 Impulse response function of the proposed system

outt =

hptpt d

3.3

Fig. 39 Short-term prediction of the mutual relationship between nominal speed loss and significant wave height. The
ship does not have a wing stowing system.

Simulated results are shown in Fig. 38. Pitch motion is nearly the
same between the fixed wing and the controlled wing, but the
attack angle became larger. Therefore, the controlled bow wings

generated larger thrust than the fixed wings shown in the lowest
figure in Fig. 38.
Our expectation for the controlled bow wings is great based on
these findings.

Scope of Future Research

Until now the bow wing system has had two major disadvantages:
1. Wave impact load negatively impacting the wings and the
resistance increase of the wing;
2. Economical advantage of bow wings has not been
demonstrated.
For the first point, the wing stowing system is proposed. Conceptualization of this system is not difficult, and would depend on
the ship owners decision.
For the second point, we offer the following example: When
ships navigate in the North Pacific Route from Japan to the West
Coast of the U.S.A., by using information of sea conditions on the
route and knowledge of the bow wing system, we can predict a
significant economical advantage of the fixed bow wing system in
the area of nominal speed loss, specifically involuntary speed loss,
as shown in Fig. 39. In lower significant wave height, the speed
loss of a ship with wings is larger than a ship without wings as a
result of wing resistance. On the contrary, in increased or higher
significant wave heights, the ship with wings shows advanced
performance.
Since this result can easily be transformed into fuel oil consumption, the financial merit may be evaluated.

Fig. 38 Comparison of the generated thrust between the fixed

and the controlled wings. Simulated results are based on the
proposed system.

266 / Vol. 58, JULY 2005

Conclusions
1. The bow wing system in waves, either the fixed or controlled system, produces the effect of an auxiliary propulsion
and serves as a reduction damper of ship motion.
2. In the case of a fixed system, a designer must consider the
most effective sea condition.
3. For practical application, the stored system of bow wings is
recommended, in order to avoid the negative effects of the
wing system.
4. The theories introduced here qualitatively explain the effects
of wavelength, wing form, wing size, wing position, spring
Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

stiffness, control on thrust, resistance increase, and ship motion. Future work should include quantitative estimation of
the effects of the bow wing system.
5. The effects of controlled bow wings on ship motion and
propulsion are discussed. More detailed investigations are
desired.
6. The wave energy conversion system where wave energy is
absorbed from ship motion as kinetic energy, and the kinetic
energy is then converted into propulsion through the thrust
generated by a wing, seems to be ineffective when the
wavelength is shorter than the ships length. In order to apply this kind of wave energy into propulsion of a large ship
in waves, an introduction of new technology, such as an
active control system for a wing, may be necessary.
According to the reviewed results, the possibility of wave energy utilization in ship propulsion seems promising.
Currently many ships have been fitted with anti-rolling device
systems. If this system could be remodeled into a bow wings
system, the effect would not only decrease roll, but also decrease
heave and pitch and reduce speed loss in the ship.

Nomenclature
fluid density
U ship speed
L pp ship length
lW distance between the C.G. of a ship and the
rotation center of a wing
dW depth of wing from the still water line
c wing chord length
b wing span length
k wave number
k reduced frequency
0 wave frequency
encounter wave frequency
t 0eit+kx: incident waves
Wt i0ekz0eit+kx: vertical orbital velocity
zt z0eit+s: heave motion
t 0eit+s: pitch motion
t 0eit+: roll motion
t 0eit+: wing motion
t 0eit+: attack angle
dFPt vertical motion at the bow

References
1 The Naval Architect, 1979, Wave Energy for Propelling CraftNothing
New, pp. 239.
2 Jakobsen, E., 1981, The Wing Propeller, Wave Power for Propulsion, 2nd
International Symp. On Wave & Tidal Energy, BHRA Fluid Engineering, pp.
363368.
3 Terao, Y., 1982, A Floating Structure Which Moves toward the Waves Possibility of Waves Devouring Propulsion, Journal of KSNAJ, 184, pp. 5154.
4 Maruo, H., 1963, Resistance in Waves, 60th Anniversary Series, SNAJ, 85,
pp. 67102.
5 Ulysses, A. P., 1958, A Study of the Sea Behavior of A Mariner-Class Ship
Equipped With Antipitching Bow Fins, DTMB Report 1084.
6 Abkowitz, M. A., 1959, The Effect of Anti Pitching Fins on Ship Motion,
Soc. Nav. Archit. Mar. Eng., Trans., 62, pp. 210252.
7 Stefun, G. P., 1959, Model Experiments With Fixed Bow Anti-Pitching Fins,
J. Ship Res., xx, pp. 1423.
8 Becker, L. A., and Duffy, D. J., 1959, Strength of Anti-Pitching Fins and Ship
Motions Measured on USS COMPASS ISLAND EAG153, DTMB Report
1282.

Applied Mechanics Reviews

9 Marks, W., 1959, The Pitching Performance of the SS Silver MARINER in a

State 5 Sea, DTMB Report 1293.
10 Ochi, M. K., 1961, Hydroelastic Study of a Ship Equipped With an AntiPitching Fin, Soc. Nav. Archit. Mar. Eng., Trans., 64, pp. 281337.
11 Matsui, M., Nekado, Y., Mokunaka, M., and Takagi, M., 1966, On Activated
Anti-Pitching Fins, Journal of SNAJ, 119, pp. 3849.
12 Matsui, M., 1966, On the Motion of a Ship Equipped with Activated AntiPitching Fins, Journal of KSNAJ, 123, pp. 4247.
13 Vugts, J. H., 1967, Pitch and Heave With Fixed and Controlled Bow Fins,
ISP, 153, pp. 191215.
14 Bessho, M., 1983, On the Theory of a Two-Dimensional Oscillating Wing,
Journal of KSNAJ, 189, pp. 91101.
15 Bessho, M., Kyozuka, Y., Yamauchi, S., and Hayashida, M., 1983, On the
Ship Motion Reduction by Anti-Pitching Fins in Head Seas, Journal of SNAJ,
153, pp. 176187.
16 Bessho, M., Kyozuka, Y., and Miyazaki, M., 1984, On the Ship Motion
Reduction by Anti-Pitching Fins in Head Seas Second Report, Journal of
SNAJ, 155, pp. 8492.
17 Nishiyama, T., 1963, Unsteady Hydrowing Theory Part 3 Characteristics of
Hydrowing Moving at Constant Forward Speed Under Sinusoidal Waves
While Performing Heave or Pitch, Journal of SNAJ, 113, pp. 16.
18 Wu, T. Y., 1972, Extraction of Flow Energy by a Wing Oscillating in Waves,
J. Spacecr. Rockets, xx, pp. 6678.
19 Watanabe, I., and Ishida, S., 1981, On the Thrust of Oscillating Hydrowing,
Abstract of Annual Meeting of Ship Research Institute. No. 38, pp. 4144.
20 Watanabe, I., and Ishida, S., 1990, An Experiment of Oscillating Hydrowing
in Waves, Engineering Science, Fluid Dynamics, Symposium to Honor T. Y.
Wu, pp. 331340.
21 Grue, J., Mo, A., and Palm, E., 1986, The Forces on an Oscillating Wing
Moving Near a Free Surface in a Wave Field, Institute of Mathematics, University of Oslo.
22 Isshiki, H., and Murakami, M., 1983, A Theory of Wave Devouring Propulsion 3rd Report. An Experimental Verification of Thrust Generation by a
Passive-Type Hydrowing Propulsor-, Journal of SNAJ, 154, pp. 125135.
23 Naito, S., Higaki, S., Kato, J., Mizuno, S., and Yamamori, T., 2001, Reduction of Added Resistance and Thrust Generation by Using a Bow Wing in
Waves, Journal of KSNAJ, 235, pp. 7989.
24 Kataoka, K., Ando, J., Oda, K., and Nakatake, K., 1993, On Characteristics of
Three-Dimensional Tandem Hydrofoils, Transaction of WJSNAJ, 86, pp. 13
26.
25 Isshiki, H., Murakami, M., and Terao, Y., 1984, Utilization of Wave Energy
into Propulsion of Ships-Wave Devouring Propulsion, 15th Symposium on
Naval Hydrodynamics, Hamburg, Sept., pp. 539552.
26 Isshiki, H., and Murakami, M., 1984, A Theory of Wave Devouring Propulsion 4th ReportA Comparison Between Theory and Experiment in Case of
a Passive-Type Hydrowing Propulsor, Journal of SNAJ, 156, pp. 102114.
27 Isshiki, H., Murakami, M., and Terao, Y., 1985, Thrust Generation by a Hydrowing Driven by WavesA Basic Aspect of Wave Devouring Propulsion,
IUTUM Symposium on Hydrodynamics of Ocean Waves Energy Utilization
held at Lisbon.
28 Naito, S., Isshiki, H., and Fujimoto, E., 1986, Thrust Generation of a Fin
Attached to a Ship in Waves, Journal of KSNAJ, 202, pp. 2329.
29 Isshiki, H., and Naito, S., 1986, An Application of Wave EnergyThrust
Generation by a Hydrowing in Waves, Current Practices and New Technology in Ocean Engineering, Symp. ASMEs Ocean Engineering Division, New
Orleans, LA.
30 Miyata, H., Kajitani, H., Iwase, S., Ichiju, K., Tominaga, H., and Tsuchiya, Y.,
1983, Resistance Reduction by a Horizontal-Bow-Fin and a Movable Bulb,
Journal of KSNAJ, 191, pp. 1730.
31 Ogiwara, S., Masuko, A., Sato, R., and Tsutsumi, T., 1984, Experimental
Investigation on Free Surface Flow Related to Bow Wave Breaking, Journal
of KSNAJ, 194, pp. 119131.
32 Okada, S., and Sumi, Y., 1995, Experimental Study on the Maximum Pressure and the Duration Time of the Horizontal Water Impact of Flat Plate,
Journal of SNAJ, 178, pp. 381389.
33 Kawatani, S., 2002, Reduction of Rolling Motion by using Activated Wings
in Oblique Waves and Design of Wing Stowing System, Masters thesis,
Osaka University, Japan.
34 Naito, S., 2003, Effect of Bow Wings on Ship Propulsion, Proceedings of
2nd International Symposium on Aqua Bio-Mechanisms CD-ROM, September, Honolulu, HI.
35 Gerritsma, J., and Beukelman, W., 1972, Analysis of the Resistance Increase
in Waves of a Fast Cargo Ship, Appendix 5 of Report of Seakeeping Committee, Proc. of The 13th ITTC Conference, Vol. 2, pp. 902917.
36 Naito, S., Nakamura, S., and Hara, S., 1979, On the Prediction of Speed Loss
of a Ship in Waves, Journal of SNAJ, 146, pp. 147155. References
22,2527 are summarized in A1A2.

JULY 2005, Vol. 58 / 267

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Shigeru Naito graduated and gained his Doctorate of Engineering from Osaka University in 1975. He has
worked since 1975 as a Lecturer and Associate Professor, and for the last 10 years as a Professor of Marine
Systems Engineering, Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Osaka University. Naitos principal current research topics are seakeeping performance of ships,
added resistance of ships in waves, utilization of wave energy, and wave generation and absorption. He has
been a committee member at several international conferences such as the International Towing Tank
Conference (ITTC), International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineering (ISOPE), etc. And, he organized several international conferences in his research field. He became President of the Japan Society of
Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers this year.

Hiroshi Isshiki graduated from the Department of Naval Architecture, University of Tokyo in 1965 and
obtained his doctoral degree from the same university, carrying out research on Variational Principles in
Applied Mechanics in 1972. After working as a visiting scholar at College of Engineering, Seoul National
University, Korea, he joined the Technical Research Institute, Hitachi Zosen Corp. in 1973. He established
IMA. (Institute of Mathematical Analysis) in 2001. He is currently interested in the theory of high accuracy
long baseline kinematic GPS positioning, algorithms for measuring sea bottom crust movement, and the
theory of hovering flight of a dragonfly.

268 / Vol. 58, JULY 2005

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 10/25/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use