Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia Engineering 194 (2017) 197 – 202

10th International Conference on Marine Technology, MARTEC 2016

Outrigger RC Boat Model Hull Development As A High Speed

Craft Based On Resistance and Lift Force
B. Suwasonoa,∗, H.M.A. Akbara , A. Sahira , A. Munazida
a Hang Tuah University, Jl. Arief Rahman Hakim No.150, Surabaya 60111, Indonesia

Abstract
A hull development of outrigger RC boat model, which was made as planning hull was carried out numerically. The observation
focus on the analysis of resistance and lift force which were produced by the boat while cruising that can enhance the performance
and also help the boat to reach her best speed. The numerical study was using Ansys fluent code for resistance and lift force
analysis. The overall results were further compared with the published data for verification purpose. The results are also believed
can be useful in the development of the high speed boat model, especially in outrigger class.
©c 2017
2017The
The Authors.
Authors. Published
Published by Elsevier
by Elsevier Ltd.is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
Ltd. This
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of the 10th International Conference on Marine Technology.
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of the 10th International Conference on Marine Technology.
Keywords: Outrigger; RC boat; planing hull; high speed boat

1. Introduction

The use of outrigger boats has already existed before a Portuguese explorernamed Ferdinand Magellan’s ship first
encountered the Chamorros of the Mariana Island, the western North Pacific Ocean in 152. This type of boat was
originally developed by the Austronesian-speaking people of the islands of Southeast Asia for sea travel, and included
fish catching purpose. This type of boat called in many names in the ancient era, such as jukung in Indonesian,
Wakaama in New Zealand Maori, Wa’a in Hawaiian, Va’a in Tahitian and Samoan [1]. In the modern days, outrigger
usually described as a counterpoising float rigged out from the side of a vessel to provide additional stability, some
vessels have one on each side while others have a single outrigger which is mostly, but not always, kept to windward
[2]. The usage of outrigger boat is mostly developed in the water sport such as canoeing, however it will be so
unfortunate if then the development of this vessel type shall only be concentrated on this purpose. Therefore this
research shall focus on the hull development of an outrigger RC model boat which then hoped to be a good start in
the power outrigger type boat development. To enhance the accuracy in the results data which will be gathered in
this research, the boat shall be conditioned with three different demi-hulls positions with fixed S/L ratio which is 5.45
measured from the main hull outer body to the outer body of the demi-hull and also fixed hull positions differences,
one with the aligned forepeak and the other is not aligned which pictured in Fig.1.
Also in this research the boat categorized as a planning hull boat. By definition, a planning hull boat described as a
hull form which is configured to develop the positive dynamic pressure, so that it’s draft decreases and with increasing

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +628123534191; fax: +62315946261.

E-mail address: bagiyo.suwasono@hangtuah.ac.id

1877-7058 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of the 10th International Conference on Marine Technology.
doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2017.08.135
198 B. Suwasono et al. / Procedia Engineering 194 (2017) 197 – 202

Fig. 1: Outrigger RC Models Layout

speed. The dynamic lift reduces the wetted surface area and therefore also the drag. Planning hulls are more efficient
at higher speeds, although they still require more energy to achieve these speeds [3].

2. The Design

In order to expand the usage of the outrigger boat, a RC power outrigger boat design is developed based on
resistance analysis. The principal particulars of the models are shown in Table 1 and Fig. 2.

Table 1: Outrigger RC Model Principle Particulars

Principle Dimension Model A Model B Model C

Length Over All (cm) 68.5 68.5 59.8
Breadth Moulded (cm) 17 22 22
Draught (cm) 4 4 4

Fig. 2: Lines Plan of Outrigger RC Model

3. Resistance and Lift Force Analysis

To make sure and being able to compare the results, the resistance calculation analysis was carried out with Ansys
Fluent for fluids flow analysis, Savitsky Planning Analysis method and Slender body resistance analysis. Because
of the boat specimen is an RC model boat, the units of the total resistance and slender body resistance results were
minimized to Newtons (N). The resistance analysis was carried out by using Computational Fluids Dynamics (CFD)
software. CFD is a branch of fluids mechanics that uses numerical analysis and algorithms to solve and analyze
 B. Suwasono et al. / Procedia Engineering 194 (2017) 197 – 202 199

problems that involve fluids flow, computers are used to perform the calculations required to simulate the interaction
of liquids and gases with surfaces defined by boundary conditions [4]. In all of these approaches, the same basic
procedure is followed.

1. During pre-processing [5]:

a The geometry of the problem is defined.

b The volume occupied by the fluid is divided into discrete cells (mesh).
c The physical model is defined. Boundary condition is defined.

2. The simulation is started and the equations are solved iteratively as a steady-state or transient.
3. Post-processor is used for analysis and visualization of the resulting solution.CFD analysis was carried out in
order to figure out the flow movement phenomenon thus contributes to the total resistance measurements. Several
works on the resistance investigation have been done such as reported by Utama in 1999 [6].

The equation that being used to express the flow movement phenomenon is the Navier-Stokes equation.
∂ ∂ ∂  μi  ∂k 
(ρk) + (ρkUi ) = μi + + Pk + Pb − ρ − Ym + S k (1)
∂t ∂xi ∂x j σi ∂x j
In the term of mass conservation and the fluids flow continuity which state [8]:
   
d ∂ρ ∂
ρdV = − + (ρμi ) dV = 0 (2)
dt ∂t ∂xi
V V

Since the integral is valuated at a fixed instant of time, the distinction that V is a material volume is unnecessary at
this stage. Moreover, this volume can be composed of an arbitrary group of fluids particles; hence, the integrand itself
is equal to zero throughout the fluid. Thus the volume integration can be replaced by a partial differential equation
expressing conservation of mass in the form.
∂ρ ∂
+ (ρμi ) = 0 (3)
∂t ∂xi
Our intension from now is to assume that the fluids is incompressible and the density is constant. Thus can be
simplified to give the continuity equation:
∂μi
=0 (4)
∂xi
The approximations based on knowledge of the properties of turbulence flow to give approximate time-averaged
solutions to the Navier-Stoles equations, which explained in the Reynolds Average Navier-Stokes (RANS). This
equation can be written in the following notation [9]:
∂Ui ∂Ui ∂ p̂ 1 ∂2 U i ∂
+ Uj =− + − ui u j (5)
∂t ∂x j ∂xi Re ∂xi ∂x j ∂x j
In the process of turbulence model analysis, the K-epsilon model was used. The K-epsilon (k − ) is the most common
model used in Computational Fluids Dynamics (CFD) to simulate mean flow characteristics for turbulent flow condi-
tions. It is a two equation model which gives a general description of turbulence by means of two transport equations
(PDEs). The original impetus for the K-epsilon model was to improve the mixing-length model, as well as to find an
alternative to algebraically prescribing turbulent length scales in moderate to high complexity flows. The transport
equation for standard K-epsilon (k − ) can be express as follows:

a) For turbulent kinetic energy k

∂ ∂ ∂  μi  ∂   2
(ρ) + (ρUi ) = μi + + C1 (Pk + C3 Pb ) − C2ρ + S  (6)
∂t ∂xi ∂x j σ ∂x j k k
200 B. Suwasono et al. / Procedia Engineering 194 (2017) 197 – 202

b) For dissipation 

∂ui ∂ui
≡ν (7)
∂xk ∂xk
c) Turbulent viscosity is modeled as:

k2
μt = ρCμ (8)

The CFD simulation then used to clarify the total resistance calculation based on the fluids flow model measurements
to enhance the accuracy of the results data in this research and the water condition in this research was assumed as
smooth water. Based on Savitsky planning theorem in hydrodynamics evaluation of planning hulls in smooth water,
it has been found that the flow which separated from the chine may reattach to the side of the prismatic hull at
some distance forward of the transom for certain combinations of Cν , β, r, and mean wetted length-beam ratioλ. An
empirical formulation of the slope of the line through the data is [7]:

λc1 − λc2 = 3C 2 ν sin r (9)

To define the operating condition for the chine-dry case,λc2 should be equal to zero. From the wetted-area relations
given by Savitsky (1964), it can be shown that:
1 tan β
λc1 = λ − (10)
2π tan r
For the simple planning case when it can be assumed that the thrust axis and viscous force vector coincide and that both
pass through the center of gravity, the empirical planning formulations for lift, wetted area, and center of pressure can
be combined into nomograph which can be used to obtain the equilibrium planning conditions. Savitsky has shown
that the lift coefficient for a finite-deadrise surface C Lβ is related to that for a flat-bottom surface (C L0 ) by the following
formula:

C Lβ = C L0 − 0.0065βC L0.60
0
(11)

Where β is given in degrees [7], from the simulation that already done, some results had been found as follows: The
simulation in Fig.2 shows that the model A is having less fluids pressure due to a larger S/L ratio and asymmetric
outrigger hulls placement which then leads to a higher turbulence effect (TED and TKE). The results from the CFD
simulation of model A can be shown as follows:

Fig. 3: Outrigger RC a) Model A, b) Model B and c) Model C

The simulation in Fig.3 shows that the model A is having less fluids pressure due to a larger S/L ratio and asym-
metric outrigger hulls placement which then leads to a higher turbulence effect (TED and TKE). The difference of the
second RC model is that the model B is having lower turbulence effects (TED and TKE) due to the smaller value of
S/L ratio and asymmetric outrigger hulls placement, besides that these factors also leads to the pressure enhancement
especially in the after peak part of the model. The model C is having the highest value of turbulence eddy dissipation
due to the larger S/L ratio and the symmectric outrigger hulls placement. Because of the value of the S/L ratio is the
same as model A the approximation of the turbulence kinetic energy value is near.
 B. Suwasono et al. / Procedia Engineering 194 (2017) 197 – 202 201

Table 2: Outrigger RC Model (A) (B) (C) from CFD Results

Parameter Value-A Value-B Value-C Units

Pressure -20020.1 4.27202 -20020.1 Pa
Density 1025 1025 1025 kgm−3
Turbulence Eddy Diss. 9.5538 0.161122 9.5538 m2 s3
Turbulence Kinetic Energy 2.08389 0.272159 2.08389 Jkg−1
Air Volume Fraction 1 1 1
Velocity 1 1 1 ms−1

Because of the lift only happen in the first beat of the model’s speed, the research then focused on the first 1 m/s
of the RC boat speed, which have the most impact of the lift force that caused by the existence of the hydrodynamic
pressure so that the model had a trim moment that can be express mathematically as:

∞
ρU 2
Z=−  iS¯ (k) B̄(k)sgn(k)dk (12)
4πh 1 − Fh −∞
2

Here B̄(k) denotes the Fourier transform of B(x) , and the asterisk denotes complex conjugate. The bow-down trim
moment is found by replacing x B̄(k) by B̄(k) , wherex B̄(k) is the Fourier transform of xB(x) [8].According to Michell’s
thin-ship theory, the wave resistance of each hull is obtainable by following the equation as follows [9].

π/2
R = c (P2 + Q2 )sec5 θdθ (13)
0

the total and slender body resistance calculations, some results also had been found as follows:

Table 3: Outrigger Model Results

Speed Model A-Total Model Model B-Total Model B Model C C-Total

(m/s) A Fn Resis- A Slen- B Fn Resis- Slender Fn Resis-
tance der tance Body (N) tance
(N) Body (N) (N)
(N)
0 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
0.1 0.122 - 0 0.122 - 0 0.131 -
0.2 0.244 - 0 0.244 - 0 0.261 -
0.3 0.366 - 0 0.366 - 0 0.392 -
0.4 0.488 - 0 0.488 - 0.1 0.522 -
0.5 0.61 0 0 0.609 0 0.1 0.653 0
0.6 0.732 0 0 0.731 0 0.1 0.783 0
0.7 0.854 0 0 0.853 0 0.1 0.914 0
0.8 0.976 0 0 0.975 0 0.1 1.044 0
0.9 1.098 0 0.1 1.097 0.1 0.1 1.175 0.1
1 1.22 0.01 0.1 1.219 0.1 0.1 1.305 0.1

Table 3 the change of the Froude number which indicates the hull categorization occurs between 0.4 m/s to 0.5
m/s. The total resistance of each models also experienced various differences due to the hull configurations and S/L
ratio differences.
202 B. Suwasono et al. / Procedia Engineering 194 (2017) 197 – 202

4. Conclusion

The study of the outrigger RC boat model hull development in the term of resistance analysis and lift force which
demonstrated by using Ansys Fluent had been done quite successfully. From the results of the simulations some
conclusions can be described as follows:

1. The hull configurations and the S/L ratios effect on the resistance appearance start points.
2. The hull configurations and the S/L ratios affected on the amount of deviation values and also the change of hull
categorization indication.
3. The S/L ratio and the hull placements furthermore shall give a great impact to the turbulence effects and it’s
centralisation.

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements Aimed shown to The Directorate General of Strengthening Research & Development Kemen-
ristekdikti, and Rector through LPPM Hang Tuah University with schema IbIKK - Hang Tuah Model Boat period
2014 ∼ 2016

References
[1] Kapitan, Gerhad, Records of Native Craft in Sri Lanka—I: The Single Outrigger Fishing Canoe OruwaPart 2.2: Rowed, Paddled and Poled
Oru, The International Journal of Nautical Archeology and Underwater Exploration, Siracusa, Italy, 1989.
[2] Sean McGrail, Early Ships and Seafaring: Water Transport Beyond Europe, Pend and Sword Archeology Ltd, Great Britain, 2015.
[3] K.J. Rawson, E.C. Tupper, Basic Ship Theory Volume 1: Hydrostatics and Strength, Butterworth Heinemann, 1968.
[4] Jameson A. and Caughey D., A Finite Volume Method for Transonic Potential Flow Calculations, AIAA paper 77-635, presented at the Third
AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, Alburquerque New Mexico, June 1977.
[5] Richard Benny Luhulima, I Ketut Aria PriaUtama, Aries Sulisetyono, Experimental Investigation into the Resistance Components of Displace-
ment Trimaran at Various Lateral Spacings, International Journal of Engineering Research & Science (IJOER),2016.
[6] Utama, I K A P, An Investigation into the Viscous Resistance Components of Catamarans, PhD Thesis, University of Southampton, UK, 1999.
[7] Daniel Savitsky and P. Ward Brown, Procedures for Hydrodynamic Evaluation of PlaningHulls in Smooth and Rough Water, Marine Technology
Vol. 13, 1976.
[8] Tim Gourlay, Slender-Body Methods for Predicting Ship Squat, Curtin University, Ocean Engineering, Vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 191-200, 2008.
[9] E.O. Tuck, Wave Resistance of Thin Ships and Catamarans, reprint of internal report T8701, University of Adelaide, 1997.J. Van der Geer,
J.A.J. Hanraads, R.A. Lupton, The art of writing a scientific article, J. Sci. Commun. 163 (2000) 5159.