Huisman - 2015 4 - Optimization of Ice Class Propellers - Master Thesis Definition Study

Optimization of ice-class ship propellers
Definition Study
Teunis J. Huisman BSc

13-4-2015
A Delft University of Technology Master’s Thesis Definition Study performed at MARIN
Marine Technology – Science – Resistance and Propulsion

Optimization of ice-class ship propellers
Definition Study
Author : Teunis J. Huisman BSc

Student number : 4080777
Contact Details : t.j.huisman@student.tudelft.nl
j.huisman@academy.marin.nl
nl.linkedin.com/in/huismanjohn/
0031 642 823 814
Date : 13-4-2015
A Delft University of Technology Master’s Thesis Definition Study performed at MARIN

Marine Technology – Science – Resistance and Propulsion
A report submitted to the faculty of Marine Engineering at Delft University of Technology in partial fulfillment of
the requirements of a Master’s of Science thesis at the chair of Propulsion and Resistance of Ships.
Thesis Definition Study II
ABSTRACT
This document contains a definition study aimed at the formulation of a Master’s thesis
research problem. Starting from a practical problem concerning ice class ships, which
seldomly sail in ice infested waters, a literature review is initiated. The focus is on
propeller efficiency and propeller performance in ice conditions.
Ship propulsion in ice is addressed first, by considering fundamental principles to derive

a power requirement as function of ice resistance. Operation in ice is a significant off-
design condition for a propeller with high loading at low speed. The conventional
iterative propeller design cycle is studied together with the impact of ice class
requirements on propeller geometry and efficiency. The generally accepted propeller-ice
interaction process is described and governing physical processes are extracted. It is
concluded that extreme loads are covered reasonably well within the regulatory
framework. Ice class rules are reviewed and their background is described to study
assumptions. Geometry freedom is allowed since required strength should be analyzed
based on ice load cases. Recently, further design space is introduced by the repeal of
any blade edge thickness requirements.
Based on the literature review, research directions are indicated which make use of the
design space within the current ice class rules. A computational framework is proposed
in which a propeller geometry can be analyzed for strength and hydrodynamic efficiency.
An automated design optimization routine should be used for that purpose. A work plan
has been drafted to develop an optimization routine for ice class propellers.
Thesis Definition Study III
PREFACE
This report is the first deliverable in my graduation process. I already had quite some
background in ice engineering due to the ‘Arctic’ minor and my bachelor project. The
OMAE2014 in San Francisco was the starting point of the problem formulation. I liked to
take the problem again, and focus on it which much more dedication and time. For that
reason a good practical problem was needed. Eventually, this resulted in the problem of
cargo ships instead of the heavy ice breakers.
During a discussion with my professor, Tom van Terwisga, it was agreed that my project
could be performed at MARIN. I would like to thank Tom for his confidence, critical
remarks and support during the definition phase.
Literature review is always time consuming, I especially underestimated the effort to

understand the background of the ice class rules. Next to the literature review, the
definition study and research problem were continuously in mind. I think that iterating
between the two is always required to find a good research problem, although it can be
frustrating once and again.
I wish to thank my daily supervisor, Gerco Hagesteijn, for his support and discussions
during this first stage of the graduation process. I also liked the discussions with Do
Ligtelijn. His experience was of much value during the literature and early definition
phase. He brought me into contact with his former colleagues at Wärtisilä, Erik van
Ballegooijen and Robert Otto. I am also grateful to Ralph Moolenaar for the opportunity
to see the manufacturing process and associated margins on geometry and details at
Van Voorden castings.
During dips in the literature and definition phase I had fruitful discussions with MARIN
employees Evert-Jan Foeth, Hannes Bogaert, Joris Brouwer and Jie Dang for which I
want to express my gratitude. At the propeller design department at MARIN I had some
meetings with Gert-Jan Zondervan, Arjan Lampe and Jan Holtrop to study the traditional
design methods and current state of research in propellers. I would like to thank them
also.
After the literature research, during the in-depth definition phase I had some meetings to
talk about the project in order to limit the scope and have some feedback. I want to
thank Henk de Koning Gans and Pieter Maljaars from the TU Delft and Erik Vroegrijk
from Lloyds for their input and critical remarks.
I want to thank my roommates for allowing me in the office and colleague student
Reinier Bos for the daily discussions.
Finally, I'm very grateful to my fiancée Jantine for her patience and understanding in
good and bad times. Above all, I thank the almighty God for giving me everything that
was needed in this phase of research already.
John
April 2015
Thesis Definition Study IV
CONTENTS
Abstract .............................................................................................................................. II
Preface .............................................................................................................................. III
Contents ............................................................................................................................IV
Nomenclature .....................................................................................................................V
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1
2 Practical Problem ..................................................................................................... 2
2.1 Baltic Winter Trade .............................................................................................. 2
2.2 Operational Profile ............................................................................................... 3
2.3 Owner Requirements ........................................................................................... 4
2.4 Conclusions ......................................................................................................... 4
3 Literature Review...................................................................................................... 5
3.1 Approach .............................................................................................................. 5
3.2 Ship Propulsion in Ice .......................................................................................... 6
3.2.1 Fundamentals of Ship Propulsion ........................................................ 7
3.2.2 Regulatory Requirements on Shipping in Ice ..................................... 12
3.2.3 Ship Performance in Ice ..................................................................... 13
3.2.4 Propeller Design Conditions ............................................................... 16
3.2.5 Propulsion Configuration .................................................................... 18
3.3 Propellers in Ice ................................................................................................. 19
3.3.1 Geometry Parameterization ............................................................... 19
3.3.2 Propeller Design Methodology ........................................................... 20
3.3.3 Optimization Principles ....................................................................... 22
3.3.4 Cavitation ............................................................................................ 23
3.3.5 Ice Conditions on the Propeller .......................................................... 25
3.3.6 Propulsive Performance ..................................................................... 30
3.4 Propeller Ice Loads ............................................................................................ 32
3.4.1 Propeller-Ice Interaction Prediction Models........................................ 32
3.4.2 Ice Class Rules ................................................................................... 36
3.4.3 Concluding Remarks .......................................................................... 39
4 Definition Study ...................................................................................................... 40
4.1 Literature Conclusions ....................................................................................... 40
4.2 Research Scope ................................................................................................ 41
4.2.1 Ice Class Propeller Design Opportunities........................................... 42
4.2.2 Research Framework ......................................................................... 45
4.2.3 Optimization Algorithm ....................................................................... 46
4.2.4 Design Method ................................................................................... 46
4.3 Design Tools ...................................................................................................... 47
5 Research Problem and Workplan .......................................................................... 49
5.1 Problem Statement and Objectives ................................................................... 50
5.2 Plan of Approach ............................................................................................... 50
5.2.1 PHASE I: Starting Points .................................................................... 51
5.2.2 PHASE II: Sensitivity Studies ............................................................. 51
5.2.3 PHASE III: Optimization Problem Implementation ............................. 52
5.2.4 PHASE IV: Full Optimization .............................................................. 53
5.2.5 PHASE V: Analysis, Reporting and Graduation Preparations ........... 53
5.3 Time Planning .................................................................................................... 53
References ....................................................................................................................... 54
Thesis Definition Study V
NOMENCLATURE
ABS American Bureau of Shipping

BV Bureau Veritas
BPG Best Practise Guidelines
CPP Controllable Pitch Propeller
CRS Cooperative Research Ships consortium
DAS Double Acting Ship
DNV Det Norske Veritas
EEDI Energy Efficiency Design Index
FPP Fixed Pitch Propeller
FSICR Finnish-Swedish Ice Class Rules
IACS International Association of Classification Societies
ITTC International Towing Tank Conference
MCR Maximum Continuous Rating
NACA National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics
NSIDC National Snow and Ice Data Centre
NURBS Non-Uniform Rational Basis Spline
SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats
TraFi Finnish Transport Safety Agency
ULM Unified Load Model
UPCR Unified Polar Class Rules
Axial losses for a self-propelled ship W

Swept area by the propeller m2
Disk to calculate losses for a self-propelled ship -
Stream tube area in undisturbed flow m2
Stream tube area in propeller slipstream m2
Thrust loading coefficient -
Propeller hub diameter m
Propeller diameter m
Stream tube diameter in undisturbed flow m
Stream tube diameter in propeller slipstream m
Expanded blade area ratio -
Kinetic energy rate W
Ice thickness m
Advance coefficient -
Alternative quality index -
Approximate quality index for ice class rules -
Thrust coefficient -
Torque coefficient -
Mass flow kg/s
Mass flow in front in undisturbed flow kg/s
Mass flow in propeller slipstream kg/s
Propeller rotational speed rev/s
Pressure Pa
Undisturbed pressure Pa
Pressure head over actuator disk Pa
Propeller pitch m
Pressure losses for a self-propelled ship W
Thesis Definition Study VI
Added kinetic energy by actuator disk W

Delivered power to propeller W
Effective towing power W
Shaft power required for ice class W
Thrust power W
Quality index -
Torque Nm
Radial coordinate -
Ice resistance N
Towed resistance N
Thrust deduction factor -
Thrust N
Transverse losses for a self-propelled ship W
Axial velocity m/s
Radial velocity m/s
Tangential velocity m/s
Undisturbed velocity m/s
Velocity over actuator disk m/s
Ship speed m/s
Velocity increase after actuator disk m/s
Advance velocity m/s
Wake fraction -
x-coordinate -
Number of propeller blades -
Angle of attack
Behind efficiency -
Ideal efficiency -
Hull efficiency -
Open water efficiency -
Relative rotative efficiency -
Density of water kg/m3
Tangential coordinate -
Viscous dissipation for a self-propelled ship W
Thesis Definition Study 1
1 INTRODUCTION
Every winter lots of ships sail through ice infested waters. Ice conditions are important
design conditions. High design demands ensure reliability and safety. However, ice
going cargo ships sail only occasionally in ice infested water. These highly powered and
ice strengthened ships should perform well in ice and still be competitive in summer
time. Therefore, they would benefit in economic sense if their operational fuel efficiency
in ice free waters could be improved. An efficiency improvement of only few percent
would reduce the fuel bill significantly. These improvements should not lead to worse ice
performance, longer development times and higher investment costs.
Given a ship which is already assumed to be optimized for ice free water, a focus on
propeller design could make this happen. Ice capable propellers already have decent
research history; however, a lot of uncertainties are still to be addressed. Therefore, ice
class rules govern strength requirements of ice going propellers. While it is difficult to
gain efficiency by propeller design for ice free water only, it is expected that efficiency
can be improved for ice class propellers. Due to strengthening and ice performance,
non-optimal blade shapes are required. An optimization procedure might give valuable
insight in the trade-off between efficiency, ice performance and ice strengthening.
The purpose of this report is to investigate propeller design methods for ice class ships.
It will suggest a Master’s thesis research problem and approach on propeller design
optimization for ice class ships.
The scope of this study is limited to propeller design of cargo vessels designed for trade
in the Baltic Area which comply with the ice navigation requirements. It should be noted
that propeller design is not the only factor which influences the efficiency of ice going
cargo vessels. Propeller design is inseparable from the ship and its operational
conditions, otherwise design points could not be established. Also propulsion machinery
is important to which a propeller should be matched. Assumptions and simplifications
will be made in this respect such that the scope of the study can be focused on the
propeller design itself. Limitations are also taken into account with respect to time,
means, expertise and the current state of research. A research problem is defined which
can be performed within a Master’s thesis project.
The reader should have basic knowledge about ships, their propulsion systems and sea
ice conditions to read this report. For an introduction to ships, shipping and propulsion
systems the interested reader is referred to Van Dokkum (2008). Also many textbooks
consider propeller design, among which Carlton (2007) is easy readable. Sea ice
conditions, appearances and properties have been studied in detail by Weeks (2010). A
concise introduction of sea ice is given in the first chapters of Leppäranta (2011).
An initial project description as accepted upon the start of this Master’s thesis project is
given in Appendix A as starting point. By means of a literature review the practical
problem is formulated further in chapter 2. To investigate its necessary components
further literature research is carried out which is given in chapter 3. A definition study
with conclusions and recommendations is performed in chapter 4 after which the
research problem is formulated in chapter 5.
2 PRACTICAL PROBLEM
The introduction already revealed the outline of the practical problem: ship owners of ice
class cargo vessels need efficient, ice capable propellers. The focus of industry is on
high efficiency ships due to regulations, such as the Energy Efficiency Design Index
(EEDI), and operational costs. Short return-on-investment times are required. Tight
development times are needed to address new markets with suitable ships. This chapter
will consider the practical problem in more detail.
With regards to propeller optimization, ice class ships suitable for operation in the Baltic
area have the biggest prospective increase in open water efficiency due to their
operational profile. There is a difference between high powered ice breakers which
proceed through any ice conditions, milling the ice with their propellers if necessary, and
competitive cargo traders which should be as efficient as possible while having sufficient
capabilities in ice. Ice strengthened cargo vessels are commonly not designed for ice
breaking operations but for normal operation in ice free waters. An ice free water
optimized cargo ship may incorporate only the minimum requirements on ice
performance specified by its class notation.
However, in that case, there is no consideration about the actual ice performance
(Veitch, 2015). Ice operations pose significant off-design conditions. An ice capable
propeller should not only withstand ice impact on its blades, it should also maintain
thrust at low advance speeds during ice interactions to overcome the high ice resistance
on the ship. Ice class propellers differ compared to normal propellers with respect to
blade thickness and other geometry adaptations which ensure sufficient structural
strength. Ice going capabilities always come at the cost of reduced open water efficiency
and vice versa. A compromise for the highest overall efficiency should be searched.
2.1 Baltic Winter Trade

About 40% of all cargo in the Baltic region is traded in the ice period as surveyed by
Feistel et al. (2008). About 774 million tonnes of bulk were traded in Baltic ports in 2013
according to the Baltic Port List (Wahlström et al., 2014). This is divided in 41% liquid
bulk, 26% dry bulk and 33% general cargo. Also container trade is present with an
annual number of 9.4 million TEU. These goods are generally shipped with small to
medium sized ships, due to size and draft limitations in for instance Denmark’s straits
and the Kiel Canal. Usually, long term trade contracts ensure trade for ice class ships.
During winter, most important ports are infested with ice. Therefore, winter navigation is
only lucrative because of the winter navigation system in which high powered ice
breakers assist ice strengthened cargo vessels. If necessary, traffic restrictions are
issued by the authorities. Only vessels suitable for ice navigation are allowed to trade in
the winter season. For that reason, the Finnish and Swedish maritime authorities
developed the Finnish-Swedish Ice Class Regulations (FSICR) to ensure sufficient
engine output, ice performance and strength of hull and propeller, depending on the ice
conditions (Trafi, 2015). The general purpose of the ice class rules is to ensure safe and
smooth operations in ice conditions.
Ice classed cargo vessels should be able to proceed independently in the broken
channels of the Baltic area. The channels are broken by preceding cargo vessels or by
an icebreaker. Ice breaker assistance is only required in and limited to very harsh ice
conditions. To visualise the operating conditions, Figure 2-1 gives a photo of icebreaker
assisted cargo vessels. The cargo vessels operate in the newly broken channel by the
icebreaker.
Figure 2-1: Photo of cargo vessels sailing in a newly broken ice channel by
icebreaker IB Urho in the Baltic area. [Courtesy of Arctia Shipping, Helsinki, Finland]
Ship owners have to make a choice in the trade-off between high dues for ice breaker
assistance and high investment and operational costs due to high ice performance
requirements. The number of icebreakers is too few to properly assist vessels trading to
Finland and Sweden. Independent ship operations might therefore be required by ship
owners. Ideally, ice class is chosen based on scenario and risk assessments in addition
to the predicted ice conditions as argued by Hindley and Shepherd (2009). For higher
efficiency during the life, ice class should be based on the trade pattern.
2.2 Operational Profile

Ice conditions in the Baltic area are only present during winter time, roughly from
December till May. Moreover, during a voyage up north, open water is encountered
most, ice is encountered during a smaller percentage of the total voyage distance. Also,
ice class ships do not always have a trade in the Baltic area or other ice infested areas.
Trade of cargo in ice infested waters is the most important motivation for ship owners to
choose an ice class. However, unforeseen future market developments and saleability
of their ships may be additional arguments. Sometimes the ship is not even required by
the owner to ever sail in ice conditions or to perform well in ice. Yet, an ice class is
assigned to obtain a better EEDI. The EEDI requirement contains correction factors for
ice class ships (Westerberg, 2014). The ship is fully optimized for open water, while just
complying with the ice class rules.
Hence, most ice class ships do not enter the ice frequently and only sail in ice for 10% of
their lifetime or much less. Some ships with ice class never entered the ice during their
operational lifetime. Still, good ice performance is required, both by authorities and ship
owners as Riska and Kämäräinen (2011) explain: traffic to the northernmost ports in
Finland and Sweden ran very slowly for several weeks in the winter of 2011 due to bad
performance of some ships. Ship-owners claimed that they lost several hundred ship-
days in delays.
2.3 Owner Requirements

Typical owner requirements concerning propulsion are quite straightforward. To have a
competitive ship it should be as fuel efficient as possible to reduce the operational
expenditure. This, amongst machinery specifications, requires a highly efficient propeller
which should meet some additional requirements which are listed below:
 The ship should be designed for operations world-wide. Ship owner Wagenborg
(2014), for instance, writes in the leaflets: “Solidly constructed to
Finnish/Swedish Ice Class IA, these vessels are fully fitted to trade worldwide,
including in the Saint Lawrence Seaway, Panama Canal and Suez Canal.”
Notwithstanding the ice class, efficient open water performance is required. Ice
class IA should enable shipping without significant restrictions in the Baltic area
during average winters.
 High cargo transport reliability is expected without a need for icebreaker
assistance in design ice conditions. High propeller performance in ice conditions
is required.
 It should be possible to deliver maximum engine power to the propeller in all
operating conditions. Both maximum speed and maximum bollard pull are
required. High bollard pull is beneficial due to high ice resistance.
 The propeller should be designed for the expected operational profile. An
optimal overall performance throughout the operational life of the ship is
required.
In the ideal case of perfect ship design there should be, compared to other designs, an
improvement of the efficiency in all operational conditions, including ice infested waters
and heavy weather conditions while having a reduction of vibrations and cavitation
hindrance such as noise and erosion. Ship-owner, captain and crew should be
comfortable with their competitive ship while sailing through any environmental
conditions.
In summary, besides optimum open water efficiency, the owner needs reliability on his
ship in ice conditions. Hence adequate structural integrity, both with regards to ultimate
strength and fatigue is required. Also acceptable noise, vibration and cavitation erosion
levels are expected. Finally, the propeller should be able to maintain thrust to propel the
ship through ice at sufficient speed as required by the FSICR.
2.4 Conclusions
Based on the operational profile and owner requirements it can be concluded that ice
class ship propulsion should always be capable of independent ice operations while
being optimized for open water behaviour.
The practical problem can be formulated as:
High propeller efficiency is expected for ice class cargo ships while featuring good
ice performance and full compliance with the Baltic winter trade system.
Literature review is required to investigate the possibilities and approach for an in-depth
research problem. The research problem should be part of a solution to address the
practical problem.
3 LITERATURE REVIEW
The introduction in chapter 1 already introduced the problem which was formulated in
the previous chapter 2. This chapter elaborates on the literature review approach in
section 3.1 after which the literature review is reported in the subsequent sections.
Review of literature is necessary to arrive at a research problem within the scope of a
Master’s thesis. Below the other purposes of literature review are described first.
Literature review is needed for a correct interpretation and original processing of existing
information conform the practical problem. Current state of research should be
investigated, summarized and evaluated. Relationships and dependencies between
research projects and individual researchers are needed to place scientific literature in
its context. In the line of this Master’s thesis, literature review is the basis of the project.
It sets the focus and starting point of study. It also prevents duplicating or overlapping
research. It should confirm the practical problem and give the basis for the formulation
and definition of the research problem. Also the feasibility of the Master’s thesis should
be supported. Ideally, this definition report should contribute to the research field. By
drawing conclusions from literature it should be made sure that new insights are
obtained which are not already mentioned or observed. There should be a contribution
to new technology development, besides obtaining personal knowledge in the field. This
gives the basis for an innovative research project.
3.1 Approach
The literature review is approached by supposing that the practical problem can be
addressed by an optimization routine as indicated in the introduction chapter. A lot of
study has already been performed on ice class propellers regarding the ice loads and
performance. From the practical problem it is deduced that there is a need of using this
research in propeller design. For design purposes optimization routines may come in
beneficial, especially when trade-offs are to be quantified. Design choices and
advanced compromises can be directed by the optimization routine.
A literature research question is formulated as:

How can propeller efficiency of ice class cargo ships in operational conditions be
improved by means of an automated propeller design optimization routine taking
design constraints and simplifications into account?
The terms in this question are considered in more detail in the itemization below:
 Propeller efficiency is defined as a measure of the relation between torque and
thrust. In ice conditions additional factors have to be taken into account to
quantify the propeller performance.
 Operational conditions are to be interpreted as conditions which the ship will
face during its lifetime and their respective duration. An optimization is
envisioned in which all conditions are addressed. Special focus is on ice
conditions.
 Automated refers to minimal user interaction during both the propeller analysis
for performance and strength and the optimization itself. The user should specify
design objectives, parameters and constraints.
 Design is to be conceived in this context as the development of shape and
scantlings of the propeller blades. Neither the matching to the main engine nor a
detailed analysis of propeller-hull interaction is to be taken into account to limit
the scope of work.
 Optimization Routines are existing iterative algorithms which could be used to

assess the current state of knowledge by means of a design optimization
problem. No extensive literature reviews will be carried out on the algorithms,
only the structure of optimization problems will be reviewed.
 Constraints such as blade strength, cavitation and pressure pulses will be
considered shortly. Ice loads, however, will be considered in more detail to study
the applicability of the current state of research for practical propeller design.
Compliance with classification societies and other regulatory frameworks is
required.
 Simplifications refer to the amount of simplification which can be or should not
introduced in propeller analysis tools without losing crucial sensitivity to design
parameters.
The literature question can be addressed by fist considering ship propulsion in ice in
general in section 3.2. Operational aspects and design points for the propeller are
studied. Also the ice performance of ships is reviewed shortly to estimate, amongst
others, the ice conditions on the propeller. A comparison for different propulsion
configurations is made as well.
Section 3.3, subsequently, zooms in to the propeller. Its geometry is briefly described
and parameterization methods are reviewed. It is also noted that propeller design is a
specialism which requires experience. Therefore, common propeller design
methodology is studied as well. After that, the focus is shifted to ice conditions again. Ice
conditions and scenarios are described. Common ice interaction processes are
described. Finally, propeller efficiencies are considered both in ice and in ice free
conditions.
Since the interaction of a propeller with ice induces additional loading, section 3.4
focuses on propeller ice loads. First the origin of blade loads is discussed. After that,
load prediction models are reviewed. Ice class rules are considered with their
background and assumptions. Finally, the propeller design consequences due to ice are
explored.
Conclusions about the current state of research and the gaps in knowledge are given in
chapter 4. Research directions are indicated, after which the research problem and its
intended approach are formulated in chapter 5.
3.2 Ship Propulsion in Ice

Ship propulsion in ice should be addressed before focusing on the propeller to study
design points and operational profiles. The ice performance of ships is reviewed to
estimate, amongst others, the working point and ice conditions on the propeller.
First the fundamental principles of ship propulsion and the corresponding definitions are
given. Then ship performance in ice conditions is considered. Definitions of different ice
regimes and conditions are summarized. Also the ice breaking process is explained.
Furthermore, regulatory requirements for shipping in the Baltic area are addressed since
they give an indication of a required design point for the propeller. After a discussion
about scenario based design to find the design points, this section is closed with a
consideration about the ice performance of different propulsion configurations.
3.2.1 Fundamentals of Ship Propulsion

In this work the conventional standard definitions will be used to express the power and
efficiency of a ship propeller. These are summarized in Figure 3-1 (MAN Diesel & Turbo,
2015a, p.14).
Figure 3-1: Basic definitions of ship propulsion. [Courtesy of MAN Diesel & Turbo]
Many factors influence the total efficiency of ship propulsion; however, focus is on
propeller efficiencies and in this report. Propeller efficiency is related to the
performance of a propeller in a homogeneous inflow. The behind efficiency also
takes the actual velocity of the behind hull inflow into account with the relative rotative
efficiency . Non-constant and rotational flow in the wake of the ship influence propeller
efficiency. As indicated in Figure 3-1, the propeller efficiency can be written as the
relation between the delivered thrust power by the propeller and the required power
to overcome propeller torque :
(1)
where propeller thrust, propeller torque and propeller rotational speed.

Furthermore, in the last equality the following standard non-dimensional definitions are
used:
(2)
Thrust coefficient , torque coefficient and advance coefficient are made non-
dimensional by a combination of density , rotational speed and diameter . It should
be noted that the incoming velocity is a circumferentially averaged quantity in behind
hull conditions.
3.2.1.1 Actuator Disk Theory

By means of mass, momentum and energy conservation, propeller efficiency can be
derived if the propeller would work in an ideal, incompressible, inviscid flow with infinite
blades without inducing rotation into the slipstream. The thrust is assumed to be
uniformly distributed over the propeller disk and uniform inflow and outflow are
supposed. Only axial kinetic energy losses are considered while rotational losses,
viscous losses and non-uniformities in the inflow are neglected.
This method is referred to as actuator disk theory since the propeller is represented with
a thrust generating disk as visualised in Figure 3-2 (Klein Woud & Stapersma, 2008,
p.391).
Figure 3-2: Actuator disk representation of propeller action. [Courtesy of Klein Woud &
Stapersma]
The disk acts in a circular fluid column bounded by streamlines. Due to increased
velocity by propeller action, the streamlines contract. No mass flow is allowed over a
streamline boundary. Conservation of mass and momentum can be applied. A short
derivation is given here, details can be found, if needed, in Carlton (2007), Klein Woud &
Stapersma (2008) and many others. Rankine and Froude were the first to apply
momentum theory to propellers.
Amongst other properties of ideal propeller flow, the ideal efficiency can be derived by
means of momentum and kinetic energy considerations. Also conservation of mass
applies for the three disks in Figure 3-2 such that the mass flow :
(3)
Conservation of momentum says that the exerted force on the fluid should equal the net
outflow of momentum where momentum is the product of mass flow and velocity:
(4)
where Equation (3) has been used for the last step.
Subsequently, the energy conservation equation in the form of Bernoulli’s equation may
be applied, since it is assumed that the flow is incompressible, inviscid and irrotational.
Bernoulli can only be applied in front and after the actuator disk. The pressure is
discontinuous over the disk. Also note that the pressure at the inlet and outlet is the
same and equal to the undisturbed pressure. Bernoulli is only valid when no external
force is applied.
(5)
(6)
where Equation (5) is valid after the propeller action while Equation (6) is valid in front
of the propeller. These equations can be solved for the pressure rise over the propeller
which can be used to form an alternative formulation for the thrust:
(7)
Equating Equation (4) and (7) and solving for gives a relation between the advance
velocity and the velocity increase over the propeller disk :
(8)
Substituting Equation (8) into Equation (4) gives a definition for the thrust:
(9)
Traditionally, this equation is rewritten in the form of a non-dimensional thrust loading

coefficient which is defined as:
(10)
where Equation (9) has been substituted. Alternatively, when substituting Equation (2),
can be expressed as:
(11)
Equation (10) is a simple quadratic equation for and can be solved with the
quadratic formula according to:
(12)
Only one solution is physically feasible.
The relation is needed for an expression of the delivered thrust power of the
propeller, as defined before in the expression of the open water efficiency of
the propeller. Moreover, kinetic energy has been added to the fluid. Hence, the
added power can be written as:
(13)
The ratio between the effective delivered thrust power and the power needed for
delivering this thrust can be regarded as a quantification of the ideal efficiency of a
propeller:
(14)
From this equation can be seen that the ideal efficiency of a propeller decreases with
higher loading on the propeller disk area due to kinetic energy in the slipstream which
cannot be used effectively. It is more efficient to give a large mass of water a small
acceleration than vice versa.
3.2.1.2 Quality Index

A measure of the energy conversion and involved losses can be obtained from the
relation between and . Traditionally this is called the quality index .
(15)
As seen, this equation is not zero for like . Hence it can also be used as a
measure of the performance in bollard pull conditions:
(16)
In order to derive an alternative equation for the delivered power as function of the
required power use is made of the standard definitions. The definition of can be
solved for rotational speed :
(17)
which can be substituted in Equation (2):
(18)
Torque can be expressed in the required power where Equation (17) can be used
as well.
(19)
Substitution into Equation (18) gives an expression for the thrust as function of delivered
power:
(20)
The factor can be regarded, similar to Equation (16), as a kind of quality
index for the performance of the propeller in bollard pull conditions where .
Sometimes it is referred to as the merit coefficient of a propeller (Carlton, 2007).
It should be noted that no considerations about the relation between ship resistance and
required thrust have been made. Expression (20) will be used in a subsequent
paragraph to explain the power requirement in the ice class rules. To do that, propeller-
hull interaction effects are considered first in the next subsection.
3.2.1.3 Propeller-Hull Interaction

Propeller-hull interaction and hull efficiency is regarded according to Kerwin & Hadler
(2010). The suction from the propeller of the flow in the aft ship can be regarded as
thrust deduction due to low pressure or as an increase in resistance. The thrust
deduction factor is defined as:
(21)
in which the thrust and the towing resistance of a hull. In most cases is assumed
to be constant. In reality it will vary as function of loading conditions and ship speed.
A second effect is the reduction of inflow into the propeller due to the boundary layer on
the hull. The wake is highly non-uniform with high turbulence and rotation levels. The
wake fraction expresses the difference in ship velocity and averaged propeller
inflow speed :
(22)
Larsson & Raven (2010) indicate that momentum loss in the boundary layer may be
compensated by the slipstream of the propeller to increase propulsive efficiency. The
wake fraction and thrust deduction factor can be used to express this effect in the hull
efficiency
(23)
in which the effective towing power. This efficiency can be larger than one.
3.2.1.4 Energy Losses

Traditionally, Equation (1) is used to compare different propellers. Olsen (2004) critically
remarks that this method gives no details about the background of differences between
propellers. Olsen indicates that more insight can be obtained by comparing different
energy losses for the propeller based on momentum flux considerations. Terwisga
(2013) summarizes these ideas and expresses the required power in the losses in the
wake:
(24)
where axial losses, the loss of effective energy by transversal losses

due to fluid rotation, pressure losses and the viscous dissipation. The
subscript refers to the wake of a self-propelled ship. The energy balance gives the
expression for the losses at a certain disk after the propeller:
(25)
in which and the axial, radial and tangential velocities at

respectively, while represents the pressure. Undisturbed conditions, in front of the self-
propelled ship, are represented by velocity and pressure . The first term contains
the axial and transversal losses while the second term accounts for the pressure losses.
Pressure losses and viscous dissipation are related and should both be considered in
terms of heat production. Kinetic energy is dissipated into heat due to the turbulence
cascade and skin friction. Axial losses compromise both retarded flow due to hull friction
and accelerated flow due to propeller action. Axial losses of propeller action in ideal fluid
are represented by in Equation (14). In non-ideal conditions the combined losses of
hull and propeller should be considered. Transverse losses are mainly due to hull and
propeller induced rotation in the flow.
3.2.2 Regulatory Requirements on Shipping in Ice

Shipping is subjected to all kinds of regulations concerning safety and environment. Ice
poses significant ship demands, not only on safety but also on performance as
explained in chapter 2. Ice class ships are “ships with such structure, engine output and
other properties that they are capable of navigating in difficult ice conditions, with the
assistance of icebreakers when necessary” as formulated by the Finish Swedish Ice

Class Rules (FSICR) issued by Trafi (2010, p.4).
The most common ice conditions for ice class cargo ships are old ice channels covered
with brash ice. Brash ice is ‘the wreckage from other forms of ice’ (NSIDC, 2015). It is
formed due to the repeated breaking of a newly frozen consolidated layer on top of the
broken channel. The channel becomes filled with brash ice which may even be thicker
than the surrounding level ice as sketched in Figure 3-3 . Cargo vessels should be able
to push the brash ice aside to proceed. Sometimes, the resistance in a brash ice
channel can be higher than in the surrounding level ice, depending on ice breaking
capabilities of the bow. Old ice channels, however, are often found in the navigation
channels in shallow areas.
Figure 3-3: Sketch of a possible cross section of a brash ice channel [Sandkvist (1978),
obtained from Kujala (2007)]
Harsher ice conditions, such as strong level ice and ice ridges, are managed by ice
breakers after which the broken channel can be used by commercial ships. If no
assistance would be provided, the ships would need much more power and
strengthening for continuous ice breaking in all kind of ice regimes. Level ice is floating
ice with a flat surface which never has been broken or deformed. Ice ridges, however,
are formed when wind, ocean currents, and other forces push sea ice around into piles
of broken ice pieces (NSIDC, 2015).
Although the FSICR prescribe engine power and assume certain ship behaviour a more
formal statement on ice performance is given. If ice model tests are used to define the
engine power, it should be based on the design requirement of “a minimum speed of 5
knots in brash ice channels” with a thickness of 1.0 m for ice class IA (TraFi, 2010, p.9).
Ships designed without ice model tests are assumed to have this performance based on
a minimum required engine power.
3.2.3 Ship Performance in Ice

The background of the Baltic trading system is thoroughly reported by Juva and Riska
(2002) in a research report. They explain the basis of the power requirement. Riska et
al. (1997) are focussed on the explanation of the ice resistance. Ice performance of a
ship is influenced by a number of factors. First there is an added resistance due to ice
while ice conditions on the propeller may influence its ability to provide adequate thrust.
Also the machinery installation and propulsion concept are important. It should be able
to deliver high thrust at low speeds due to the high resistance.
3.2.3.1 Ice Breaking Principles

Traditional ice breaking principles in level ice are described by for instance Lindqvist
(1989). Figure 3-4 gives a quick overview of the ice breaking process. In the breaking
phase the ice will be bent and to some extent crushed until the bending moment is high
enough to break the ice in one or more pieces. The broken ice floes will then be turned
in the rotative phase until the piece is aligned with the bow surface. Due to forward
motion the ice pieces will submerge further and slide along the hull. Due to buoyancy of
the ice, pieces will float up depending on hull shape, ice thickness and size and speed.
Figure 3-4: Illustration of ice breaking principle. [Obtained from Jalonen (2012)]
Hull design could play an important role with regards to ship reliability in ice. A spoon
shaped bow will be more effective in breaking the ice than a bulbous bow which
encounters the ice perpendicularly. Considering the operational profile as sketched in
chapter 2, an open water optimized hull shape is to be preferred. Optimization
procedures can help to make a good compromise between the performance in ice and
regular performance in open water.
Moreover, hull design can also be such that ice conditions on the propeller are avoided.
Large ice breakers, for instance, barely face ice conditions on their propellers due to
their large draft as Airaksinen and Marttila (1976) indicate. Due to draft limitations with
respect to operational area and hull form, cargo ships generally have limited draft.
Propellers are exposed to ice conditions especially in ballast conditions.
A new development is the Double Acting Ship (DAS) concept in which ships proceed
astern through ice conditions as patented by Aker Arctic (Harjula & Salmi, 1993). The
bow can be optimized for open water while the aft ship is optimized for both high hull
efficiency and good ice performance. In this concept the propeller is also designed as a
milling tool. Conventional merchant ships do not feature this ability since an expensive
podded propulsion concept has to be applied while efficiency in ice free waters may be
lower than normal shaft line propulsion.
Extensive research is available on the ice breaking resistance and its fundamentals.
However, within the scope of this report, ship resistance due to ice is only to be
approximated to define design points for the propeller. Therefore, the ice resistance
formulations for the Baltic area are addressed in their final formulations only. Other
formulations are not considered here.
3.2.3.2 Ice Resistance Formulations

Based on ice resistance measurements, a linear relationship with speed is assumed
both for level ice resistance and brash ice channel resistance. Level ice resistance is
assumed to depend mainly on the ice thickness. Three groups can be distinguished
further: assumed properties of the ice, ship shape and ship size. Based on earlier
formulations of the resistance by, amongst others, Lindqvist (1989), the rule ice
resistance has been formulated. Brash ice resistance is based on the bow shape and
mid ship length, buoyancy of the brash ice, ship speed, friction and the thickness and
shape of the channel. A consideration of the resistance components has been made by
Riska et al. (1997). The resistance is mainly due to mass inertia of ice blocks which
have to be pushed away.
A much simplified form of ice resistance is used in the FSICR. Level ice resistance and
brash ice resistance are combined with the assumption that the consolidated layer on
top of the brash ice resembles level ice. Speed dependency, almost linear relationships
and physical constant factors such as density and ice strength are replaced by
constants. The final equations are presented in
.
3.2.3.3 Power Requirement

In the development phase of the FSICR the assumption has been made that ship
performance in ice can be completely quantified in terms of propulsion power.
Furthermore, it is assumed that sailing through ice can be compared with bollard pull
conditions. Hence, Equation (20) is used to develop a power criterion. Due to high
resistance and low speed in ice conditions, the total thrust in Equation (20) may be
assumed to be equal to the total ice resistance . The quality index is assumed to be
constant. Together with the other constants involved, an approximation for this factor,
, is given based on the propeller arrangement to include hull efficiency. The factor
is also assumed to take thrust decrease due to ice interaction and the difference
between bollard pull conditions and five knots forward speed into account. After
rearrangement of Equation (20), the required power in ice conditions can be given as:
(26)
Final approximations for have been derived based on full scale measurements. For
single fixed pitch propellers = 2.26 is assumed. Since a controllable pitch propeller
(CPP) is able to deliver more bollard pull than a comparable fixed pitch propeller due to
engine limitations, should be multiplied with 0.9 for a CPP according to the FSICR
and Riska et al. (1997).
As given by Equation (26), the current rules base engine power on resistance and
propeller diameter. No requirements are given about the machinery plant. Big diameter
fixed pitch propellers require high torque at a low rotation rate. Normal direct driven
diesel engines cannot deliver this demand. Hence, the ship is not really capable of ice
conditions. A large diameter propeller is good for efficiency and for required installed
power, but is not suited for sufficient ice performance. This problem is also found in a
brochure by MAN Diesel & Turbo (2015b) which states that modern ships with larger
fixed pitch propellers, lower rotational speed and ultra-long stroke two-stroke engines
will comply easier to the FSICR.
Therefore, the requirement of Equation (26) does only work when the engine is well
matched. The biggest reason (55% on average from 2000 to 2011) for poor ice
performance and need for ice breaker assistance in normal ice conditions is the non-
availability of sufficient power in ice conditions as Vedenpää (2012) surveyed.
Unfortunately, no distinction has been made in fixed or controllable propellers in this

report. It can, however, be assumed that controllable pitch propellers are more capable
of full power absorption at low speeds and high ship resistance. A minimum thrust
requirement in ice conditions would maybe work out better than a power requirement
since engine performance is excluded and will be left to the creativity of the designer.
3.2.4 Propeller Design Conditions

A proper propeller design is matched to its main engine and optimized for the intended
operations of the ship. First the matching principle is addressed, and then definitions
about the design points are given. Furthermore, the mission profile of a ship is
considered and the choice of design points is discussed.
3.2.4.1 Propeller Matching

Design requirements on ship propulsive performance can already be determined without
a propeller design. There may be a required ship speed, power or desired rotation rate
for a power take off (PTO). The propeller should be matched to a certain engine with its
specific characteristics. Usually, the engine load diagram and propeller curves are used
to design and match the propeller. The engine load diagram specifies the operational
limits of the engine with respect to power as function of the rotational speed. A propeller
curve represents the performance of the propeller in a certain operating condition of the
ship. Engine load limits are not discussed in detail in this report. It suffices to describe
Figure 3-5 in this respect.
Line 3 represents the speed limit of the engine; line 7 is the power limit. Line 4 and 5 are
properties of the diesel engine. In this case the engine is matched to deliver maximum
power in all conditions between line 2 and 6. It should be noted that the axis are
logarithmic. Line 1, 2 and 6 represent propeller curves. For a short derivation, note that
ship resistance can be assumed to be proportional to the square of ship speed. Hence,
power will be proportional to the third power of ship speed. For constant pitch propeller
operation, ship speed will be proportional to the propeller rate of revolution. In a
logarithmic diagram this relation will be presented as a straight line. In heavy conditions
the propeller is more heavy loaded and will require more power. Calculations or
measurements are needed to find the exact relationships for a certain ship type.
The propeller should be designed such that sufficient power is available in all operating
conditions, during acceleration and in ice conditions. Imagine that the conditions will be
harder than line 2, for instance due to ice. The propeller curve will move to the left. In
case of a FPP, full power is not available. The engine load diagram can aid in this
process to find a correct balance and matching points. For controllable pitch propellers
the diagram can be used as well. It is extended with constant pitch lines. Also the
combinatory curve is usually given. This curve presents the optimum pitch and rotational
speed settings as function of the ship speed.
Figure 3-5: Standard engine load diagram of a turbocharged diesel engine. [Courtesy of
MAN Diesel & Turbo, 2015a, p.30]
3.2.4.2 Definition of Design Conditions

Before designing the propeller and its matching to the main engine a proper selection of
design conditions should ensure that the propeller can be designed and optimized for its
intended operational conditions. Typical operational requirements, or design conditions,
set the demand on powering, manoeuvring, propulsion performance and strength.
Connections are made towards the propeller and its arrangement, the propulsion
configuration and power delivery.
The design conditions have a big impact on the balance between design and off-design
properties of the propeller. The importance of the off-design conditions depends on ship
type, mission profile and the preferred optimizing conditions. Van Beek (2004) stresses
the importance of the evaluation of all environmental and operational conditions and
their impact throughout the whole design cycle. If loading conditions, speed, engine
performance and weather and sea conditions are also considered, the propeller can be
optimized for all conditions, such that optimal efficiency is obtained during commercial
usage of the ship. This concept is referred to as scenario based design by Hindley and
Shepherd (2009) for which they argue that the ship and its propeller can be optimized
for intended operations only. This will contribute to safety, lower emissions and better
performance in the envisioned conditions. Scenario based design is not commonly used
in propeller design. In other branches, however, scenario based product design is widely
accepted and more and more used as Anggreeni and Van der Voort (2009) indicate.
The design condition is the most common operating condition, usually this is the fully
loaded condition at 90% of the maximum continuous rating (MCR) of the engine. The
propeller should be optimized for a required ship speed, at specific draft and sea margin.
Revolutions and engine load will be calculated. Also a required rotation rate and power
take off may be specified. Alternatively, speed may be calculated when power is
prescribed. Often the main engine is already chosen.
Off-design conditions are conditions, different to the design condition, in which the
propeller should still perform well. These conditions change the operational point of the
propeller and should be studied on their hydrodynamic performance. Due to increased
ship resistance the operational point of the propeller may change. Resistance may
increase due to fouling, high sea states and ice conditions. Sailing in ballast conditions
and towing operations are also regarded as important off-design conditions. Ligtelijn
(2010) mentions that off-design conditions are in fact additional design conditions. Often,
the off-design conditions are more critical with respect to propeller design than the
dominant design condition.
Special conditions are those in which the operation of the propeller is not stationary. For
instance during shaft reversal, acceleration and manoeuvring. Sufficient power should
be available for such conditions.
3.2.4.3 Mission Profile

The mission profile of a ship indicates the intended operational usage and is mainly
influenced by ship type, trade and environmental conditions (Carlton, 2007). Time
distributions of speed, loading condition and ship resistance are specified in the mission
profile. A typical mission profile and chosen design conditions is not needed in this text
since it is noted by Verhulst et al. (2012) that there is a large diversity in mission profiles
and operational conditions for ships within the same deadweight range. Also the
required minimal operational speed and design points differ per ship owner.
For propeller design, the unique mission profile of each ship should be considered. Also
ice conditions are part of the mission profile for ice class ships. In principle, the
traditional design methods do not change as ice resistance can be regarded as a strong
off-design condition with a heavy propeller curve. An ice class propeller should be
designed for at least two design conditions, one in open water and one in ice conditions.
3.2.5 Propulsion Configuration

A controllable pitch propeller (CPP) is mostly used for heavy ice classes, ships which
should be capable of independent operations in ice conditions. Light ice classes,
however, will have a fixed pitch propeller (FPP) for optimized open water efficiency and
lower investment costs. FPP can have higher efficiency in the dominant design condition
due to streamlined smaller hub geometry. It should be also noted that the pitch
distribution of CPP blades is usually also optimized for the dominant design condition.
The choice depends on the mission profile. If good performance is required in multiple
off-design conditions without a dominant design condition a CPP is advantageous. The
pitch settings can be optimized over the operational range such that full power is
available in all conditions. A FPP cannot adapt its pitch and would require very high
torque at low rpm to deliver the required thrust. Normal diesel engines cannot provide
this torque due to surge limitations (Stapersma & Klein Woud, 2008).
Ghose and Gokarn (2004) mention several advantages and disadvantages of a CPP
compared to a FPP which are not related to ice conditions such as improved
manoeuvring, no need for shaft reversal for backward thrust and the possibility to adapt
the pitch to the most efficient operational point of the main engine. A CPP, however, is
more vulnerable to damage due to the pitch mechanism. Additionally, as Ligtelijn (2010)
indicates, reduced pitch operation with a CPP reduces efficiency. Also pressure side
cavitation is likely to occur. In extreme off-design conditions the propeller design pitch is
chosen in between the conditions to avoid erosive cavitation at heavily loaded, reduced
pitch operation.
Some ships, after the reduction of ship speed since 2008, feature a nozzle which gives
higher thrust at low speed. Since ice conditions can be compared with bollard pull
conditions, a nozzle can be beneficial in ice. The nozzle also acts as a propeller
protection against large ice blocks. However, the nozzle may become clogged with ice
blocks, which will cause thrust breakdown due to violent cavitation (Veitch, 2015). Also,
nozzle performance in ice may be reduced by circulation disturbances due to ice blocks
and blockage. For general cargo ships with limited draft a nozzle is not preferred. Big ice
breakers do have nozzles; however, their draft is large enough to avoid regular ice
interaction (Wind, 1983).
3.3 Propellers in Ice

Following the ITTC (1999) a propeller is defined as a ship propulsor which consists of a
central hub fitted with a number of foil shaped blades. Lift is generated by the blades
when the propeller is rotated. One component of the lift force produces the desired
thrust to propel the ship and the other component creates drag. This drag, manifested
as torque, must be overcome by the engine to sustain rotation. Propeller performance
can be quantified using the relation between thrust and torque. For a given thrust, the
propeller should be designed for minimum required torque.
In this report the standard ITTC propeller terminology is used (ITTC, 1999). A complete
description of propeller geometry is not given here. The interested or unfamiliar reader is
referred to Carlton (2007) or for an initial introduction to Kuiper (2002).
This section not only considers the parameterization of a propeller and its design
methodology, also its design constraints and performance are addressed. Especially
when interacting with ice, the propulsion efficiency and strength need additional
consideration.
3.3.1 Geometry Parameterization

This section shortly considers the basics of propeller parameterization which should
ensure a complete specification of propeller geometry. Parameterization is required for
systematic variations and optimization algorithms.
Propeller parameters can be divided into three main groups:

1. Global parameters such as diameter , hub size and number of blades .
2. Distribution functions to describe the chord, chamber, pitch, rake, skew and
thickness distributions in radial direction.
3. Parameters to describe local details such as hub shape, root fillets, anti-singing
edge and tip geometry.
The standard ITTC definition of the coordinate system is used. The propeller is
represented in 2D foil sections over the propeller radius.
The distribution function should be described in as few parameters as possible.

Nowadays, the Non-uniform Rational Basis Spline (NURBS) has become the standard
to describe complex geometries in as few control points as possible. A NURBS always
produces a smooth geometry with continuous second derivative such that flow
separation is delayed.
Sectional foil shapes may also be described using a closed NURBS. Alternatively,
standard shapes, such as the NACA profiles may be used. For analysis purposes the
parameterization is converted into a point cloud or 3D object, depending on the required
input, level of detail and smoothness.
3.3.2 Propeller Design Methodology

Propeller designers often have to make numerous choices and compromises. Also,
propeller design usually is performed when hull form and propulsion configuration have
already been defined. Therefore, a propeller should be optimized by taking into account
numerous constraints.
Figure 3-6 gives a simplified representation of the propeller design process. In reality the
process is highly iterative, especially between phase III and IV in order to converge to
the optimum design, tailored to a specific ship and ship owner demands. Phase I is
needed to set the starting point of the propeller design. Together with phase II the
estimated propeller performance is determined. A datum propeller is designed based on
existing propeller designs and systematic propeller series. If needed, the main
characteristics can be evaluated with simplified numerical or empirical tools.
PHASE I: PHASE II: PHASE III: PHASE IV:

Preparation Initial design Detailed Detailed
geometry evaluation
• Propeller questionnaire: • Selection and optimization • Adaption to ship wake • Evaluation of off-design
Ship data and design of main parameters, while maximizing conditions to find the best
conditions based on estimated efficiency compromise
• Owner requirements performance and • Preferred pitch distribution • Detailed flow analysis
• Consultancy on propeller- expierence while constraining the • Hull Interaction
hull interaction • Definition of design cavitation extent and • Performance optimization
• Comparable projects constraints and objectives possible harmful by fine tuning the design
• Investigation of design behaviour. parameters and exploring
space • Sectional shape and radial the design space which is
• Evaluation of main camber distributions left
characteristics • Iteration between • Compatibility with class
propeller geometry rules regarding strength
parameters until a suitable and performance
compromise is found
between main objectives
Figure 3-6: Different phases in the propeller design process.
Alternatively, when focusing on design constraints in more detail, the iterative propeller
design process may be represented as in Figure 3-7. Five main topics are presented
with their keywords which need attention during the propeller design process. In this
figure also ice performance is included. Not only hydrodynamic analysis is important,
also the strength and matching to the main engine should be taken into consideration.
Hydrodynamics Ice
• Thrust, Torque Performance
• Cavitation
• Pressure fluctuations
• Noise
Operation Structure
• Ship constraints • Ultimate stress
• Operational profile • Fatigue
• Design conditions • Spindle torque
• Transient • Weight
operations • Manufacturability
Machinery
• Matching
• Drive train
• Pyramidal
Strength
Figure 3-7: Iterative Propeller Design Spiral
The terms in Figure 3-7 are considered in more detail:

 Hydrodynamics is the study of the interaction of the solid propeller blades and
the liquid water. Thrust & Torque are properties of the propeller in given
operational conditions from which propeller efficiency is derived, Equation (1).
Cavitation is a source of noise, vibration and erosion and should be considered
as a constraint. The propeller induces hydro-acoustic pressure fluctuations
due to the passing blades in an uneven wake field and cavitation dynamics.
Pressure fluctuations are an important source of on-board vibrations. As rough
estimate the first harmonic of thrust variation may be used according to Foeth &
Lafeber (2013). A short comment on cavitation is drawn in section 3.3.4.
 Ice Performance should be studied for ice class propellers to meet the
requirements of the FSICR. The propeller should be able to develop the required
thrust in ice conditions while torque due to ice cutting should be minimized. Ice
performance is considered in more detail in sections 3.3.5 and 3.3.6.
 Structure refers to the structural integrity of the propeller to withstand the
hydrodynamic and ice loading. Ultimate stress is the amount of stress that
propeller material is expected to bear without failure. Fatigue is the weakening
of material due to cycling loading. Since both hydrodynamic loading and ice
loading are cyclic to some extent, fatigue analysis is important in propeller
design. Spindle torque is the torque acting about the spindle axis about which a
CPP is rotated for pitch adaption. Spindle torque is limited by the actuator forces
of the pitch adaption mechanism. Weight is important for propeller investment
costs, especially in case of a FPP. Although sufficient strength is important in
propeller design, no further consideration besides required compliance with
class rules is deemed necessary in this literature review. Load cases and
strength analysis according to class society will be considered in section 3.4.2.
Manufacturability should be kept in mind. Adaptations in propeller design
should always be bigger than production allowances.
 Propulsion machinery should be taken into account as already seen in section

3.2.4.1. The propeller should be matched to a certain drive train which consists
of shafting, gear box and main engine. It should be noted that pyramidal
strength is required in which the propeller blades are the weakest link.
 Operation is part of the propeller design spiral as already explained in more
detail in section 3.2.4.
Traditionally, the propeller design cycle of Figure 3-7 requires significant user
interaction. Automated optimization routines could help the designer in the design
choices. Ultimately, the complete design can be automated with well-chosen objectives,
analysis tools, design parameters and constraints.
3.3.3 Optimization Principles

Optimization is the process of determining the best solution to a certain problem. Or, as
Papalambros & Wilde (2000) define: “improve the design so as to achieve the best way
of satisfying the need, with all the available means”. A formal definition of optimization is
also given in this text: “The determination of values for design variables which minimize
the objective, while satisfying all constraints”. Optimization provides a systematic
problem solving approach with minimal human interaction. It also provides insight in
design problem characteristics, the underlying physics and their sensitivities and
weaknesses. A short comparison with a traditional design method is presented in Figure
3-8.
Figure 3-8: Comparison between traditional design process (bottom) and optimization-based
design process (top)
Design variables are variables by which the design problem is

parameterized. The design space is the set of all possible designs for which
where and are the lower and upper bound of the design variables respectively.
Usually, an optimization problem is given in its Negative Null Form (NNF). An objective
is a quantity as function of the design variables that is to be optimized. Optimization
is a minimization of the objective, , in case of a NNF. A constraint is a condition
that has to be satisfied. Inequality constraints or equality constraints should
be defined for a NNF such that and respectively.
Typically, an optimization problem consists of an iterative procedure with a model and a

optimization algorithm like indicated in Figure 3-9a. An optimal solution should be
achieved using the smallest number of function evaluations. Multi-objective optimization
problems, with objective vector where , are often used to quantify
design trade-offs. A possible design space is given in Figure 3-9b. Pareto points are
points on the Pareto set for which “no other feasible point exists that has smaller
without having a larger ” as Papalambros & Wilde (2000) define. There is no

improvement of an objective possible without worsening another objective. The designer
has to make the choice between these multiple objectives. Often, the weighted sum
with proper, designer preferred weight factors , is used for this
purpose.
Constants Model
Design
Responses
Variables Optimization
f, g, h
x
Optimizer
Figure 3-9a: Iterative optimization cycle Figure 3-9b: Visualisation of a Pareto set
3.3.4 Cavitation
This section considers the basic principles of propeller cavitation. Cavitation is regarded
as a constraint which should be taken into account during propeller design. Cavitation is
formed when the liquid’s pressure drops below its vapour pressure (White, 2011, p. 34).
Cavitation can have several appearances as seen in a typical propeller cavitation sketch
in Figure 3-10. Cavitation should be taken into account in every propeller design.
Cavitation may influence propeller performance in terms of vibrations, noise and
erosion. A well balanced design allows as much as possible cavitation such that no
hindrance is experienced.
Figure 3-10: Typical cavitation sketch. Several forms of cavitation

are present on this propeller blade. [Courtesy of Carlton, 2007,
p.239]
Carlton (2007, p. 219) states that the cavitation number should be one of the design
constraints for cavitation in propeller design. The cavitation number can have several
forms in which the location of consideration is different. The difference between the local
pressure and the vapour pressure is an indication for cavitation inception. Bernoulli’s
equation, neglecting gravity effects and assuming steady, incompressible, inviscid flow,
can be used to express the pressure variation along the streamline of a body, or in this
case a cavity surface:
(27)
The cavitation number is formed from this relation. It gives the relation between the
static and dynamic pressure head:
(28)
in which and are characteristic pressure and velocity, respectively, is the

density of water and is the vapour pressure. The cavitation number is a measure for
the vulnerability to cavitation. Higher numbers indicate that cavitation is less likely to
occur.
White (2011) states that depending on geometry, a flow has a critical cavitation number
below which the flow will cavitate. Hence, the cavitation number is suitable for a rough
prediction of cavitation. Cavitation inception properties can be expressed in an inception
diagram. This gives the risk on cavitation as function of the cavitation number and
different load levels of the propeller. The assumption can be made that cavitation
inception will occur when the pressure on a blade is equal to the vapour pressure.
Based on operating conditions a diagram can be constructed which gives an indication
off the risk on cavitation, as given in Figure 3-11.
Figure 3-11: Typical cavitation inception diagram as function of thrust loading and cavitation
number. [Courtesy of Kuiper, 2012]
Alternatively, the inception pressure may be given as function of the dimensionless

advance coefficient or the angle of attack for two dimensional sections. This diagram
is referred to as the cavitation bucket. Normally, distinction is made between sheet
cavitation and bubble cavitation only. The cavitation extent is not specified. This should
be determined with more advanced tools or measurements.
Cavitation may be more severe in ice conditions. Flow blockage due to ice induces very
low pressures which will induce cavitation. Extensive cavitation studies for propellers in
blockage and milling conditions have been performed by Sampson et al. (2009). He
concludes that cavitation is an additional significant factor to take into account for
propeller-ice interaction. Cavitation contributes to a loss in mean thrust and torque and
leads to an increased dynamic loading as compared to propeller-ice interaction tests
without cavitation. At the start of the propeller design the power density, cavitation
number and wake quality should be optimized to reduce the dominance of the cavitation
constraint (Ligtelijn, 2010).
3.3.5 Ice Conditions on the Propeller

Ice conditions on the propeller depend on several factors. Not only the environmental
conditions, but also the breaking of the ice by the hull is important as highlighted in
section 3.2.3. Ice blocks beneath a ship eventually come into contact with the propeller
if not cleared to the sides or blocked and deflected by some propeller protection. There
is also an influence of propeller suction. Large draft or aft trim give less ice on the
propeller. Ships in consideration are shallow drafted. Especially in ballast conditions the
propeller will interact with ice, since the propeller may partly even be surfaced. Ice
conditions on the propeller depend on the operational mode as indicated in Figure 3-12
as function of advance velocity and propeller rotational speed. Subsequent propeller
blade sections are sketched.
Figure 3-12: Ice interaction as function of operational mode. [Copied from Soininen & Veitch,
1996, p.9]
Interaction of a propeller with ice is a term to indicate the mutual effect of ice on the
propeller. This interaction can be divided into contact interaction and non-contact
interaction. For the description of the contact interaction the following definitions are
required:
 Contact occurs when the propeller comes into contact with an ice block in any
way whatsoever.
 Impact is the contact with ice on a flat part of the propeller blade, i.e. on the face
or back of the blade. Impacts occur most in quadrant II and IV. (Soininen, 1998)
 Milling is the ice erosive contact between ice block and the leading or trailing
edge of the propeller blade in quadrant I and III respectively. The ice is milled
and scraped by the propellers’ edge part due to its rotary motion. (Soininen,
1998)
 Crushing occurs when the ice is pressed by the propeller blade until the
crushing pressure of ice is reached. The ice will pulverize in small particles.
 Spalling is the mechanism due to contact which produces cracks and
subsequently flakes of ice.
 Flaking is the process of pushing away flakes from the ice block by the propeller
blade. The difference with spalling is illustrated in Figure 3-13.
 Shearing often occurs in combination with crushing. If the shear strength of the
ice in a certain direction is higher than the crushing strength, the ice will fail by a
shear process, i.e., parts of the ice slide along each other in a deforming motion.
Figure 3-13: Sketch of the spalling process at the left and the flaking process at the right.
[Adapted from Soininen, 1998, p.86, 48]
Non-contact loads arise due to the presence of ice blocks in the vicinity of the propeller
(Soininen, 1998). Two different aspects are generally distinguished as per Veitch (2015):
Proximity effects and blockage. These effects will be described below. A summary of a
typical, generally accepted ice interaction process is given based on Veitch & Laukia
(1993), Veitch (1995, 2015) and Soininen (1998). It is established using full scale
observations of the interaction and laboratory tests of the failure of ice.
Ice interaction can take innumerable forms since the inflow and the interaction are highly
stochastic. Many ice pieces approach and pass through the propeller in an unsteady,
discontinuous, irregular stream where contact and non-contact loads occur
simultaneously.
If ice pieces approach the propeller, their transient, local flow disturbances will affect the
wake field. The propeller responds with a transient hydrodynamic loading into thrust
variation and vibration. This is the proximity effect. Veitch (2015) states that the “main
issue during the approach phase is the effect of the ice wake on hydrodynamic
performance, rather than propeller strength”. Since ice pieces have positive buoyancy
the ice pieces tend to flow in the top half of the propeller plane only, right where the
wake already is disturbed most in normal conditions. The propeller designer should take
these effects into account. It will lead to a lower efficiency propeller due to more
stringent cavitation and pressure pulses constraints. The hydrodynamic disturbance due
to an ice block reaches a maximum until blockage and contact.
Blockage occurs when the ice blocks come very near the propeller blade before and
during contact. During milling, part of the blade is not in contact with the ice. The inflow
to the blade, however, is blocked by the ice. Due to the lack of inflow, a low pressure is
generated which may cause severe cavitation. Also a complete ice block may become
stuck upstream the propeller. The highly turbulent flow can cause large vibrations due to
increased unsteady, cyclic propeller loading. Veitch (2015) discusses that some have
argued that blockage may increase efficiency due to the extra low pressure on the
suction side which would improve the contribution of the wake fraction. However,
blockage conditions induce severe flow separation, thrust breakdown and cavitation.
Note also that the wake fraction is assumed to be steady while the blocked conditions
are highly unsteady. The ship operator will be forced to flush the blockage away by
thrust reversal.
In addition to proximity and blockage loading, the propeller comes also into contact with
the ice. Large ice pieces, larger than the propeller radius, will be progressively milled by
consecutive blade passes. Each blade cuts into the ice with its leading edge and spalls,
shears, flakes and crushes the ice into a burst of small broken ice particles which may
be mixed with cavities. These loads are cyclic and will induce large blade loads and
increased torque. Depending on the ice block size, whether it is constraint by the hull,
the momentum of the propeller blades will move and rotate the ice blocks. Small ice
blocks, compared to the propeller radius, may pass through the blades while impacting
without being milled. In brash ice channels the concentration of small ice blocks may be
very high such that hydrodynamic performance is also significantly compromised.
Sliding ice blocks on the blades cause severe flow circulation disturbances. Temporarily,
the flow encounters a different shape. Also, the slipstream of the propeller is disturbed
with shedded vortices due to the interaction with ice blocks.
Figure 3-14: Sketch of ice contact on a propeller blade section. 1) Local crushing, shearing,
spalling, 2) Cracks prior to spalling, 3) Crushing and extrusion, 4) Flaking, 5) Extrusion and
cavitation, 6) Clearing [Adapted from Veitch, 2015, p.9 & Jones et al., 1997, p. 401]
The contact process may be summarized by Figure 3-14 in which the following
processes can be distinguished:
1. Leading edge contact processes. The ice is locally crushed and sheared. Due to
the pressure, cracks are initiated. The propeller blade mills through the ice,
widening the gap by its leading edge and flat suction side depending on the
forward speed of the ice block en the milling depth. It may become clear from
the left photo in Figure 3-15 that ice contact is not only oriented at the leading
edge, but also on the flat blade area.
2. Spalling due to initial cracks. Once spalling occurs, the blade proceeds further
into the ice, flaking and clearing the broken spall, after which the cycle is started
again.
3. Extrusion of crushed ice through the gap between the ice and suction side. Once
the ice is crushed at position 1, the ice has to be removed to enable to blade to
proceed.
4. Flaking of ice is possible because the ice can be pushed away at the pressure
side. No extrusion process is present here.
5. Cavitation in the gap due to blockage effects. The cavities are mixed with the
extruded ice.
6. Clearing of broken ice particles into the wake. The bottom-right sketch shows in
more detail that clearing may involve a large amount of ice particles.
Subsequent conceptual sketches, similar to Figure 3-14, for the whole ice interaction
process, are given in Figure 3-16. A milled ice block is shown in the right photo in Figure
3-15 to give an impression of the dimensions of the ice blocks.
Copyright by Aker Arctic Technology Inc.
Figure 3-15: Left: Propeller model test for ice milling. [Courtesy of Sasajima, 1981, p.264],
Right: Milled ice block. [Obtained from Kari Laukia, Aker Arctic Inc.]
A summary of the ice interaction process is given in the hierarchy of Figure 3-17. First
the propeller processes are divided into a part which is not influenced by ice and a part
which is influenced and interacts with the ice. Three process can then be distinguished
elaborated on above: disturbed hydrodynamic flow, direct contact interaction and
indirect contact.
As illustrated above, the propeller ice interaction process is highly dynamic and should
be simplified for design and optimization purposes. Design loads and the influence on
propulsive performance as function of the ice conditions are to be specified. Design
loads are governed by ice class rules. Performance, however, is not considered in any
regulatory framework.
Figure 3-16: Ice milling process according to Veitch (1995). Sketch 1-10 show the first blade
cutting, 11-15 show the next blade which continues cutting. [Copied from Veitch, 1995, p.55]
Physical processes
on a propeller operating in ice
Undisturbed hydrodynamics Interaction
Disturbed hydrodynamics Direct contact Indirect contact

mix of hydrodynamics &
turbulent, discontinuous flow of propeller blade and ice
ice mechanics
Proximity Failure Impact Extrusion
Blockage Spalling Clearing
Circulation
Flaking
Disturbance
Ice block
Shearing
wakes
Crushing
Figure 3-17: Hierarchy of the propeller-ice interaction processes.
3.3.6 Propulsive Performance

The effectiveness of available power will largely depend on the capabilities of the
propeller and its interaction with ice. In this section it is assumed that the main engine is
able to deliver the required power. As seen in section 3.2.3.3 this is not always the case.
Torque and thrust in ice conditions can be evaluated with a focus on the open water
efficiency according to Equation (1). However, especially the milling process tends to
cause sharp peaks in torque, in magnitude several times higher than the average
hydrodynamic torque load. Besides the loss in efficiency in the main engine due to the
unsteady loading, also the average torque will be higher. Both yield a lower overall
efficiency. Also thrust is influenced by the interaction loads. Depending on the contact
geometry, the thrust peak may be forward or backward. It should be noted that the loads
are impact type of loads such that their momentum is very limited compared to the
propulsive momentum. These large ice loads are especially important for strength, but of
minor importance for performance due to their low probability of occurrence.
Figure 3-18 presents an overview of factors which influence propeller ice performance.
Thrust production is hindered by the highly turbulent, discontinuous flow which induces
cavitation and possible thrust breakdown. Also the continuous impact of small ice
pieces, with higher drag than water particles, will create energy losses. Milling capability
should be sufficient to avoid blocking and continue rotation during severe ice impacts.
Besides loss of thrust, static loading may become much higher than design ice loads. In
summary, more power is needed to develop the required thrust compared to open water
conditions.
Circulation Disturbance
Ice accumulation
in front of propeller
Propeller Ice Thrust Breakdown
Performance
Cavitation Limits
& Erosion, Vibrations,
Efficiency Noise
Sensitivity to ice
impacts
Milling Capability Propeller rotation block
Figure 3-18: Summary of components of ice performance.
There are several options to quantify propeller performance in ice conditions compared
to ice-free characteristics. The ratio between the hydrodynamic efficiency in ice-free
water with and without ice strengthening only gives an indication of the impact of the ice
class rules on propeller design; no actual ice performance considerations are performed.
A second option would be to define empirical factors based on measurements to specify
the reduction of efficiency in ice conditions. Besides the lack of enough measurements,
limited dependencies on propeller geometry and ice conditions can be derived. Third,
quantification of all efficiency reducing factors including milling, impact loads, circulation
disturbance, proximity and blockage effects might be performed, preferably as function
of the ice conditions, propeller arrangement and propeller geometry. In the end, if
needed, these effects might be combined into an overall performance factor. Options in
this respect could be the prediction of propeller performance during:
a) unsteady wake field to simulate proximity and blockage,

b) blockage conditions including cavitation to study thrust breakdown,
c) ice milling and
d) high frequency small ice block impacts as encountered in ice channels
The first three options are addressed by for instance Walker (1996) and Sampson
(2009).
To put the above into the perspective of the practical problem, it should be noted that it
is assumed that the propeller is exposed to ice conditions due to for instance
environmental ice conditions, hull shape, propeller immersion and clearances. Common
practise, however, is to neglect propeller ice performance considerations at all. No
guidelines are available. Hence, the ice off-design condition is solely considered based
on open water. The off-design condition is formed by an ice resistance curve from the
ship. Normally, no effective wake is calculated for this condition. The practical problem
agrees with these observations, since ships operate only limited in ice conditions which
has negligible effect on the overall efficiency. Hence ice performance for the practical
problem can be summarized in only three components, neglecting efficiency in ice:
1. Sufficient structural integrity, both with regards to ultimate strength and fatigue,
2. Capability to maintain thrust to propel the ship through ice at sufficient speed as
required by the FSICR and
3. Acceptable noise, vibration and cavitation erosion levels in ice conditions.
3.4 Propeller Ice Loads

The governing ice failure processes during propeller-ice interaction have been described
in section 3.3.5. This section contains an overview of load prediction models and
associated research. Also the current ice class rules are reviewed. Their background is
explained. Also the design space in the ice class rules is investigated.
3.4.1 Propeller-Ice Interaction Prediction Models

Jussila and Soininen (1991) made an extensive literature review about then existing
state-of-the-art research into propeller-ice interaction. A short summary of this review is
given below. Some references to the original early model papers are based on Jussila
and Soininen (1991).
3.4.1.1 Early Models

Although ice breakers already operated from the beginning of the previous century, the
first propeller-ice interaction model was published by Jagodkin in 1963. This work is
regarded as the basis of all ice models by Jussila and Soininen (1991). An ideal milling
situation is considered with a fixed pitch propeller on a rigid ice block. Two loads are
distinguished. The first is ice crushing in compression when the leading edge contacts
and penetrates the ice. The second consists of a shearing load due to the sliding motion
between the blade and the ice. Full scale measurements are used to tune the
coefficients in the model. The model is intended to only calculate the added torque due
to ice. Ignatjev (1964) extended the research with considerations about propeller blade
strength while Wind (1983) also takes elementary dynamic effects into account based
on traditional momentum theory.
Belyashow and Shpakov (1983) studied the propeller blade as two-dimensional

segments. Forces on the segments are just simply integrated over the whole blade. Ice
forces are based on laboratory experiments with a cutting tool, no failure mechanisms
are studied. These were studied by Sajajima and Mustamäki (1984). Energy balance
equations are used to equate the dissipation due to the interaction and the external
work. Failure is divided in cutting and splitting, shearing, crushing and friction. Also
Kotras et al. (1985) divide the propeller into two-dimensional, highly simplified strips.
The model deviates from the simple milling case and considers all four quadrants of
propeller operation. Therefore, impact loads and milling loads are considered
separately. Moreover, Kotras et al. (1985) introduced the shadowing effect of the milled
paths of successive propeller blades.
Laskow et al. (1986) studied ducted propellers in ice which required the evaluation of ice
induced hydrodynamic loads due to blockage in addition to milling and impact loads. Ice
failure is studied using the assumption of elastic behaviour of ice outside the contact
zone which fails in compressive crushing.
Neither ice model considers the actual blade geometry in the models. Impact surfaces
are approximated as wedge-shaped sections. The models are intended to predict the
overall loading on the propeller blade. There is no clear distinction or transition from
milling to impact type of loading. In view of possible optimization, no pressure
distributions due to the ice loading are prescribed. Loading is applied by means of
forces. Blade geometry is taken into account by means of averaged angles and
thicknesses.
Chernuka et al. (1989) consider the milling process in different stages for which
pressure distributions are defined based on contact length and blade curvature. Hence
the actual blade geometry can be studied. Static Finite Element Method (FEM)
calculations were used based on a nonlinear concrete material model. Unfortunately,
details about the pressure distributions are not explained. Even that this model is the
most extensive model, Jussila and Soininen (1991), miss details about the contact
phenomena and governing failure processes.
3.4.1.2 Joint Research Project Arrangement no. 6

The goal of the early ice load models in previous paragraph 3.4.1.1 was to understand
and describe propeller ice interaction in more detail. However, each class society used
its own rules, complementary to the FSICR, whether or not based on ice load models or
experience. These ice class rules were based on the use of ice torque as dimensioning
load. Full scale test measurements are converted to blade loads using assumptions and
simplifications. However, applications outside the measurement data such as highly
skewed propellers, large diameters, severe arctic ice conditions and nozzle propellers
cannot be extrapolated from these rules as Soininen & Veitch (1996) conclude.
Ideas for updated, unified FSICR were already initiated by the Finnish Board of
Navigation in 1971 as indicated by the ABS guidance notes (2005). Norhamo et al.
(2009) indicate that this was at first intended for the development of new FSICR only,
however, the International Association of Classification Societies (IACS) joined in the
process which was the actual drive behind a new project. The Canadian and Finnish
Swedish Authorities established a joint research project (JRPA#6) to develop a
propeller-ice interaction simulation model (Soininen & Veitch, 1996). The goal of the
JRPA#6 expanded to develop unified propeller strength requirements for both Baltic
and Arctic conditions based on direct expressions of the load (Soininen & Veitch, 1996).
As part of this project it was concluded by Jussila and Soininen (1991) that the current
state of research at that time was still not sufficient for a physically justified development
of new ice class rules. For further developments Canada acquainted full scale data while
Finland developed a contact model and an interaction model for propellers in ice. The
data and simulations were calibrated into a unified load model (ULM) as explained by
Browne et al. (1998).
The ULM is a propeller-ice interaction simulation program which calculates the contact
geometry at each time step as visualised in the diagram of Figure 3-19. It was
developed at the Technical Research Centre of Finland (VTT) by Koskinen et al. (1996).
A force balance is used on contact loads and hydrodynamic disturbance loads.
Momentum theory is used to update the simulation. The ULM uses an early version of
the contact model of Soininen (1998). Hydrodynamic disturbance loads due to proximity
and blockage and non-contact loads at the suction side are based on full-scale
measurements which were analysed by Browne et al. (1998).
The contact model of Soininen (1998) considers local contact processes in much more
detail than earlier models. The model is based on experimentally observed failure
phenomena in laboratory conditions with a propeller blade alike impact tool. It simulates
the ice contact scenario which is described in section 3.3.5. The model consists of the
subsequent combination of solid ice failure and extrusion of crushed ice. A simplified
geometry of the blade and the ice block are taken into account. Finally, this resulted in
an averaged pressure distribution on a propeller blade section which can be used for
design loads on propeller blades.
Figure 3-19: Flow-Chart of the simulation process of the JRPA#6

model [Reproduced from Jones et al., 1997, p.411].
A concise summary of the JRPA#6 which contains the main assumptions, the contents
of the ULM and its results is reported by Jones et al. (1997). It is explained that the ULM
and full scale measurements are calibrated after which a large number of simulations
have been performed. Ice block size, location and strength, propeller diameter, blade
thickness, blade area, rotational propeller speed and ice block speed have been
systematically varied. A regression analysis resulted in draft versions of the design ice
loads which are nowadays found in the Unified Polar Class Rules (UPCR) and FSICR.
Veitch (1995) took a similar approach by coupling a time domain propeller-ice interaction
model to hydrodynamic propeller analysis tools. Veitch also did full scale cutting tests,
however, with different types of impact tools. He made the explicit distinction between
pressure and suction side tools and stressed that a propeller blade can be regarded as
a combination of the two. In further work, Veitch (1997) incorporated his model in a
panel method to study the hydrodynamic loads including blockage and proximity loads.
Both Veitch (1995) and Koskinen et al. (1996) take ice motion into account due to
contact forces, weight, buoyancy, drag and added mass. A complete overview of the
parameters is given in Figure 3-20. Veitch assumed spherical ice shapes while Koskinen
et al. implemented disk shapes. No definitive description or distribution of the shapes of
ice pieces reaching a propeller disk had been made in 1995 as Veitch indicates. To the
knowledge of the author this conclusion is still valid as per date. Also the relationship
between ice in a channel and the conditions at the propeller disk has not been reported.
(Model) test video results are usually not obtainable or proprietary. Veitch (1992) gave
ice piece sizes in brash ice channels according to high speed video results. The ice
pieces are highly irregular and randomly shaped. However, it is reported by Veitch
(1995) that old brash ice pieces become kind of circular due to repeated scraping of hull
and propellers. This explains his choice for spheres, while Koskinen et al. might have
focussed on pieces from newly broken level ice as Wind (1983) proposed.
Figure 3-20: Parameters in an ice simulation model
3.4.1.3 Further research

A literature review by Wang et al. (2007) provides an overview of the research which
was conducted after the JRPA#6. Canadian research was granted to investigate the
operation of marine propellers in ice blocked flow as was recommended and agreed on
within the JRPA#6. Their focus is on hydrodynamic loads, advanced measurement
techniques and podded propulsion. Since Canada was responsible for non-contact
loads in the JRPA#6, Walker (1996) indicates that this follow up research is “extended
responsibility about the development of the non-contact loads”.
Numerical and experimental work was done on propeller operation in disturbed flow
conditions due to the presence of ice. Bose (1996) proposed a theoretical model of
propellers in ice blocked flow. Walker (1996) did experimental work on the
hydrodynamic loads and the effect of cavitation while he also gives numerical
predictions of blockage effects based on a Boundary Element Method (BEM). Blockage
was modelled as a heavy disturbance in the wake field (Walker, 1997). Searle (1999)
experimentally investigated a high skew propeller in ice conditions in all four quadrants.
He concluded that highly skewed propeller behave similar in ice conditions, however, he
noted that strength requirements on the tip section were not sufficiently covered within
the then existing ice class rules.
Wang (2006) and Wang et al. (2007) also performed ice model tests to study the
interaction phenomena in more detail on a working propeller. Based on advanced
experiments in which the contact and hydrodynamic load components were investigated
separately, he made a comparison with existing ice load models, also the JRPA#6
model was used in this work (Wang, 2006). The experiments were in the range of the
JRPA#6 formulations. Also his computational predictions were included in these
comparisons. Wang also made computational predictions with a BEM including
blockage and ice milling. BEMs were already applied by the Canadians to study
blockage effects. Wang extended this research by including shadowing effects and
milling contact loads. Ice crushing is taken into account by applying a pressure to each
panel on the propeller which is in contact with an ice piece. Ice shearing is applied
externally by means of a force.
Sampson et al. (2009) designed another experimental setup in a cavitation tunnel and
observed violent cavitation due to the ice blockage effect. Large variations in loading are
reported. The propeller became also more heavily loaded on average due to the
hydrodynamic blockage effect, both thrust and torque increased.
Small unfinished research is not investigated in details here. No further finished projects
concerning propeller ice interaction, which served for development of ice class rules, are
published to the knowledge of the author.
3.4.2 Ice Class Rules

Ice class rules govern the design of ships and their propellers. Recently, basically only
two formulations are used, the Unified Polar Class Rules (UPCR) and the Finnish
Swedish Ice Class Rules (FSICR). Most class societies have adopted both formulations,
sometimes still supplemented with own experience. The UPCR do not prescribe a
minimum power requirement for operations in ice. Propeller strength requirements for
UPCR and FSICR are almost the same. Minor differences include propeller edge
thickness requirements and prescribed fatigue calculations. Actual ice performance is
not taken into account at all in the ice class rules.
3.4.2.1 Background
The earlier explained JRPA#6 is the background of the current propeller ice class rules.
Propeller requirements are based on the ULM in which a design ice block has been
chosen. Ice block shape, orientation and location were selected to represent extreme
loading events (Jones, 1997, p.414). The dimensions are based on maximum ice
thickness depending on ice class. The results of the ULM, supplemented with full scale
data, served as basis for the maximum blade force, torque and thrust formulations in the
ice class rules. They are based on normal ship operation in the first quadrant. The
backward force is due to impact processes and based on the extreme events from the
ULM by means of regression analysis. The forward force is based on an empirical
formula from full-scale measurements. Load intensity, loaded area and inertia effects
were taken into account in the regression analysis. A complete explanation is given in
Browne and Norhamo (2006). They also show that some dependencies are neglected in
the final rule equations. The equations in the class rules are to be used as maximum
design loads, not depending on ice block size or advance velocity. Also the angle of
attack, for instance, which is highly uncertain and hardly measurable, has been chosen
such that the simulation results from Koskinen et al. (1996) and full scale data agree.
3.4.2.2 Summary of Requirements

The general formulation of the ice class loads is
(29)
(30)
for force and torque in which the expanded blade area, the number of
blades, the ice thickness, the propeller diameter, rotational speed, hub
diameter and the pitch at . Coefficients are used to tune the forces with respect to
angle of attack, ice strength and inertia effects.
These design loads are applied on the propeller blade by means of load cases which
should be considered in a Finite Element Method (FEM) stress analysis. The load cases
are given as a uniform pressure applied on a certain area of the propeller blade. The
shaded area in Figure 3-21 should be considered for both backward and forward
bending. In case of an FPP also the trailing edge should be loaded to account for
operation in the third quadrant.
Figure 3-21: Load cases as defined by the ice class rules
The total force should be equal to the maximum blade forces, uniformly applied on the
area. A milling condition of the design ice block is considered as the extreme load case
during normal propeller operation. It should be noted that extreme special conditions are
not taken into account; only normal operating conditions with working propeller are
considered. Especially the backing operations with a FPP appear to give critical loads.
Furthermore, if a propeller is stopped, high static ice loads may occur.
The basis of load cases are points of application based on full scale measurements.
Also damage cases for high skew propellers such as in Figure 3-22 contributed to the
developments. Reverse engineering with FEM showed that a tip load case should be
considered (Norhamo et al., 2009). Differences have been introduced for FPP, CPP and
nozzle propellers.
Requirements on spindle torque and blade bending moment are a function of the
maximum blade force and the moment arm. Spindle torque is important for strength of
the root section and the pitch mechanism in case of a CPP.
Load distributions are prescribed based on statistical data. The number of ice loads is
important for fatigue design. Blade failure is defined as the occurrence of plastic
deformation. In case of a seemingly harmless damage like in Figure 3-22, extreme
imbalances require immediate temporary repairs by cutting of the blade tip and the
opposite one to avoid damage to other parts of the propulsion system. Loss of
propulsion might lead to dangerous situations.
Figure 3-22: Bent blade of high skew propeller in old ice channel. [Courtesy of DNV, 2011,
p.8]
For early design approximations a rule formula for blade thickness is given to avoid
plastic bending around the blade root. Final approval of propeller design is always based
on strength assessments by means of FEM calculations in which the load cases are
applied. Best practise guidelines are issued by ABS (2005) and DNV (2011) for
instance. A blade stress criterion to assess FEM results is based on a safety factor of
1.5 and a reference stress based on material properties. Local details such as tip
details, anti-singing edge, hub and root fillets are not required. The load is governed by
bending, not by local stress concentrations. DNV (2011, p.9) recommends to check
details separately.
A blade edge thicknesses requirement is removed from the current FSICR to provide a
“unique opportunity for designers to optimize the blade edges and profiles individually”
(DNV, 2011, p.13). The old blade edge requirements were based on bending
considerations of high local forces as derived by Koskinen et al. (2006). The edge
thickness requirement is only included in the UPCR, since the FSICR are intended for
first year ice conditions only. This type of ice is relatively weak compared to multiyear
hard glacier ice for which the UPCR are suited.
3.4.2.3 Design Procedures

An alternative design procedure might be accepted if it includes both fatigue and
maximum load design calculations and fulfils the pyramid strength principle. ‘Loads on
the propeller blade and propulsion system shall be based on an acceptable estimation of
hydrodynamic and ice loads’ as stated in the FSICR (TraFi, 2010, p.43).
Class societies as ABS (2015), BV (2014), DNV-GL (2013), Lloyds (2014) and others
have adapted the FSICR and UPCR for propellers one-to-one as design basis, as
required by the Finnish Maritime Authorities (FMA) and agreed within the International
Association of Classification Societies (IACS) respectively.
DNV-GL, for instance, added some clarifying notes on direct calculations. Also notes on
propeller edge thickness differ. DNV-GL leaves it for the propeller designer, while old
methods are still mentioned. Some propeller designers prefer to have quick starting
points for an ice class propeller design. BV, ABS and Lloyds, on the other hand, still
include requirements for the minimum edge thickness based on beam theory.
Since the FSICR or UPCR do not consider the complete propulsion plant class societies
developed their own rules concerning the design of nozzles, propeller hubs, podded
propulsors and other individual components.
3.4.3 Concluding Remarks

Both from experience and calculations it is found that the ULM, its regression model and
the ice class rules over-predict the loads for small ice blocks. This has a consequence
for the design loads of small ships. Small ice class propellers need more ice
strengthening and bigger components due to pyramidal strength than before with the old
ice class rules. In practise these propellers performed already without damages. Also
the developers admit this, since Koskinen et al. (2006, p.2) state: “calculated stresses
for ‘Gudingen’ propeller indicate that blades should have been destroyed. The ship has
been operated 20 years in occasionally difficult ice conditions without visible damage on
propeller blades”. The ‘Gudingen’ is a 49 meter car ferry.
Comparison of the ULM with full scale measurements is carried out as validation. The
angle of attack is tuned to obtain similar results. Mass of the ice pieces is estimated.
Only few cases are validated and only two ships have been considered. Ship shape and
ice conditions during the measurements are implicitly taken into account in this
approach. Still, the results are generalized for all ship types. In general, validation of the
ice class rules is difficult since the ice class rules govern the extreme events which
implies that a long measurement campaign is required. Damage cases, or the absence
thereof, should indicate the value of the ice class rules. It might appear that the rules are
too conservative for an efficient and safe propeller design.
The discrepancy between the loads based on the rules, the measured loads and actual
loads on a propeller is considerable. There is already a discrepancy between rule loads
and actual loads since ice class loads are based on maximum loads during life time.
Additionally, safety factors are applied on ice strength, propeller material strength and
load cases. Ice strength and load cases are chosen to represent the extreme events.
Measured loads on the propeller shaft might be full of noise due to shaft vibrations.
Ice models and ice class rules are based on both empiricism and first principles.
Observations and experiments serve to establish theories about the propeller ice contact
process. Uncertainties are covered by means of extreme cases and safety factors. Only
significant parameter dependencies are taken into account, assumptions and
generalizations are made for other detailed parameters.
Ice models are not suitable for optimization purposes since they are generally based on
empirical results, highly simplified propeller geometry, extreme conditions and loads or
extensive simulations. Assumptions and uncertainties in these factors obscure crucial
parameter sensitivities for optimization. Pressure distributions to represent ice loads, for
instance, are prescribed without taking the shape of the leading edge into account.
Instead, it is assumed that all propeller leading edges have a circular shape with
constant circularity.
Ice class load cases are mainly based on full scale observations on damage cases. The
loads which are applied are maximum loads during the lifetime. Hence, only structural
considerations can be drawn from the ice class loads. No hydrodynamic performance
relationships can be derived. For a representative propeller analysis in ice conditions
extreme loads should be taken into account for strength while all loads should be
considered for performance.
4 DEFINITION STUDY
The literature review in chapter 3 addresses the problem of ship propellers in ice. Based
on conclusions from the literature research in section 4.1, research directions are
indicated in section 4.2. Limitations and scope of the intended work are given in the last
section of this chapter. The research directions serve as basis for a further definition of
the research problem in chapter 5.
4.1 Literature Conclusions

Currently, the practical problem is already partly addressed by other researchers.
Podded propulsion and the double acting ship concept are studied at classification
societies and research institutes to develop Best Practise Guidelines (BPG) for design
and load cases. Thanks to the development process of the UPCR and the updated
FSICR there is a consensus on relevant issues in propeller engineering for ice
conditions among researchers. However, most ship owners and propeller designers
were satisfied with the old ice class rules. Barely any damage cases where encountered
for traditional propellers. Not only the design process is more complex for the new ice
class rules in the early design phase, small propellers also need to be stronger. Due to
pyramidal strength principles which couples other components and system design, this
impacts throughout the whole ship. The ice load prediction for low powered ice class
propellers is currently under discussion at classification societies. Recently, also
approximation formulae for strength requirements in ice conditions have been developed
for initial design purposes or to easily make offers for propeller designs without the
usage of FEM.
State-of-the-art in propeller ice loading are the models of Veitch (1995), Koskinen et al.
(1996) and Wang (2007). Work after the JRPA#6 was mainly focussed on the
development of the ice class rules. This joint arrangement project recommends to focus
on the hydrodynamic performance of a propeller in ice conditions, with a special focus
on the load due to blocking and cavitation. No comparable big projects have been
carried out since. Recommendations from the ice class propeller literature are almost
completely governed by the JRPA#6.
Especially the updated ice class rules, which include design by means of FEM based on
the JRPA#6, are a big step forward. Previously, no governing requirements about
propeller strength were specified. Rule formulae only specified a certain thickness,
without giving actual criteria on the strength of propeller blades. More design freedom is
allowed when the load is based on a physical, first principles model, like in the current
ice class rules. This freedom, however, is seldom utilized in practise due to time
limitations. The propeller design process is already complex as it is for a good propeller
design with limited resources. Research on the practical smart usage of the ice class
rules in the scientific context is needed, aimed at the improvement of the propeller
design process.
Propeller parameterization and automatic meshing procedures become more and more
standard among propeller designers. Coupling with automatic optimization algorithms is
not yet performed in the design cycle. Although there is also a lack of experience with
such algorithms, it is not straightforward to specify the objectives, design parameters
and constraints in an efficient way. It is expected that research will focus on this area in
the near future.
Ice models are not yet available as fully established theory, and hence not suited for
implementation in an optimization routine which requires all details. Only the strength
requirements are available with only limited dependency on propeller geometry and its
detailed shape. Ice failure is described by Soininen (1998) in great detail. However, he
had to use numerous assumptions about the failure process and contact geometry. The
pressure he prescribes in his model is still not fully tailored to specific propeller blade
geometries but established on a semi-empirical basis. There is no dependency on the
shape of the leading edge for instance.
Scenario based design will become more important in order to develop methods to
optimize the whole ship for its intended operations. Shipping in ice infested water should
be included. However, a performance criterion of propellers in ice conditions is not yet
available and should be developed to specify efficiency, risk on damage and additional
vibrations. Performance in ice conditions is still based on ice free propeller analysis.
Direct calculations of the loads and the effect on performance are difficult. Some
statistical probability based methods have been proposed. Ice class rules do not take
this into account. Risk based design for propellers is not commonly applied, partly
because strength is prescribed in the ice class rules based on extreme events which
implicitly includes numerous risk assessments.
Further usage of CFD is envisioned in hydrodynamic predictions of propellers.

Systematic series based on CFD are expected to supplement existing systematic series.
Especially cavitation analyses are sparsely covered in the traditional series. Not to
mention a propeller’s performance in ice conditions. Therefore, propeller performance in
ice conditions should be researched in more detail. Time simulations should be more
generic such that realistic ice blocks can be added. Ultimately, a hydrodynamic solver
with the inclusion of ice blocks and particles can aid in this process. Ice blocks can be
shaped and distributed conform typical ice conditions such that the interaction dynamics
can be computed and visualised. A next step is the coupling with an ice failure analysis
method and the subsequent updates of ice geometry due to damage.
4.2 Research Scope

One of the goals for this Master’s thesis definition study is to further define its scope.
Based on the literature review several directions can be pointed out, no specific in-depth
choices are given. The main framework is proposed. An initial focus is given in the
infographic of Figure 4-1.
yes Propeller design, detailed

or general
no Ice properties &
characteristics
High efficiency with Detailed ice material

sufficent ice performance models
BPG for practical usage In depth failure mechanics
Detailed propeller Ship design

interaction model
Datum propeller Scenario based design
Optimization and sensitiviy Propeller-hull interaction

studies
Figure 4-1: Initial scope of the Master’s thesis definition study.
An elucidation on Figure 4-1 starts by mentioning that propeller design is the focus of
this study. New openings in ice class rules give opportunities for propeller design which
are not fully utilized yet. Therefore, general design directions or BPG for ice class
propeller design are the objective of this study. Additionally, ice models are not yet fully
suitable for in-depth optimization. Interaction models, however, are based on
established momentum theories and could be suited. Sensitivity studies are needed to
prove these statements while indicating design directions. Optimization is a tool which
can be used to study sensitivities on the design objectives. A datum propeller is required
to have a correct reference point to indicate the improvements in the propeller design.
The focus of this study is limited with respect to the right side of Figure 4-1. Firstly, ice
class rules are based on extreme events such that the uncertainties in ice
characteristics are implicitly covered. The same reasoning applies for detailed ice failure
mechanics and material models. Secondly, ship design is left out of the scope of the
definition study. A propeller should be matched to a given ship in two conditions only.
Scenario based design should be considered in a next phase. Also propeller-hull
interaction, although very important for the overall efficiency, will not be considered in
full details. Finally, the problem should be defined in further details to avoid ambiguity
and misguided interpretability in the research problem definition. This will be done
subsequently in the next subsections.
4.2.1 Ice Class Propeller Design Opportunities

An important starting point is the design freedom within the current FSICR as
summarized in Figure 4-2. Two different paths can be distinguished depending on
whether the ice class rules are followed or an alternative method is chosen.
Design Opportunities
in the current 2010 Finnish Swedish Ice Class Rules
for given ship characteristics
Design trade-offs
Efficiency ↔ Strength ↔ Milling Forces ↔ Cavitation
Ice Class Alternative Design for Propeller

Rule Formulations Operation in Ice
1. 2. 3. 4.
Optimization of Optimization of Estimation of Ice Minimization of
General Outline and Blade Profiles and Loads, Thrust and Ship Power
Thickness Edges Milling Torque in Ice
Blade Scantlings based Alternative Propeller Alternative Ship Power

on FEM Removal of Edge Design Procedure Requirement
Conservative Rule Loads Thickness Requirement
Ice Performance Design Point
and FEM modelling
Figure 4-2: Design space within the FSICR of 2010.

Two opportunities in the design space within the ice class rule formulations can be
identified. Firstly, there is a freedom in propeller outline, blade profiles and material as
long as stress criteria are fulfilled. These are checked by means of FEM analyses in
which the ice load cases are superimposed on the ice free hydrodynamic loading. Even
in the FEM analysis there is conservativity due to the replacement of the root fillet and
hub with a clamped boundary condition.
Secondly, even more freedom is allowed when edge thickness requirements are
disregarded. Either better cavitation favourable profiles could be designed or the focus
could be on sharp edges to mill the ice more easily. An elaboration on the edge
thickness requirement opportunities is given in subsection 4.2.1.1.
Both options have their trade-off for efficiency, strength, milling capability and cavitation.
Especially the milling capability poses an additional objective compared to traditional
propeller design. Proper modelling of the governing processes is required, but not easily
achieved. In addition, correct physical sensitivity of the models on propeller geometry
and its details is questionable, but worth to investigate.
Hence, there appears a link between the ice class rules and the ice models: ice models
should give an indication of milling capability while the ice class rules still govern the
strength. If it can be proved that improved milling capability reduces ice loading, the
alternative design route can be exploited such that improved propeller design is
possible.
Two opportunities are also given these alternative design methods within the FSICR. In
the first place, rather than accepting prescribed power based on Eq. (26), the power is
determined such that sufficient speed in an ice class brash ice channel can be obtained.
Usually, self-propulsion model tests are performed in order to take hull form and all
interaction effects with the propeller into account. In this approach the propeller is
actually of minor importance, the required thrust is governed by ice resistance on the
hull. In this approach, hull resistance is usually optimized, without any considerations to
the propeller. However, if propeller efficiency of the propeller in ice conditions can be
improved, there might be a reduction of required power. The second opportunity
concerns the propeller design procedure as mentioned in section 3.4.2.3. It should be
demonstrated that the propeller can operate safely and reliably in ice. If it can be shown
that extreme loads are reduced because of smart propeller design, more optimization
freedom is allowed.
The next subsections elaborate shortly on possible projects. Subsection 4.2.1.1 explores
a possibility of alternative edge designs due to the removal of the edge thickness
requirements. Milling loads can be estimated with a simulation model which is the focus
of subsection 4.2.1.2.
4.2.1.1 Edge Thickness Requirements

A possible research problem could be a two-dimensional optimization of blade profile
sections. The assumption is that a sharper leading edge will reduce the ice milling load.
Traditionally, section shapes are chosen based on maximum efficiency and minimum
cavitation. Each propeller designer uses own, sometimes proprietary, section shapes.
Often, they are the same for open water and ice conditions. The importance of the
sections in ice conditions is not yet investigated in detail although leading edge shapes
have been investigated indirectly by numerous laboratory indentation and wedge cutting
tests, e.g., Veitch (1995). Application for propeller design purposes is not published to
the knowledge of the author besides a summarily patent by Daley & Bulat (1995) in
which they propose several leading edge modifications to reduce the ice loading.
Cavitation will be incepted earlier; the cavitation extent will probably not change.
A conceptualization of the idea is given in Figure 4-3 below. The changes are
exaggerated because the blade is still subject to the ice load cases from the ice class
rules which apply on the edges. Traditionally, only the thicknesses were prescribed,
while currently the stresses are to be evaluated.
Figure 4-3: Edge adaptations for better efficiency and improved ice performance.
Since the FSICR excluded edge thickness requirements, this option not only has an
opportunity for ice performance, but also for open water performance. Its goal is twofold:
create better ice class sectional shapes for performance in ice free water and reduce the
milling load. A focus is on the leading edge; however, section profiles and 3D propeller
shape are needed for global strength considerations. A trade-off is sought between
cavitation, strength, efficiency and ice milling forces. An evaluation of Strengths,
Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) of this problem is given in Figure 4-4.
Strengths Weaknesses
• Usage of existing design space and tools • Milling force cannot be quantified in such
• Possible coupling to an optimization algorithm detail. There is no ice performance
• Approach is useful for ice class propellers, quantification. It can only be estimated based
regardless of their ice performance on laboratory tests
• Quantification of actual design space within • Hard to prove the gains with respect to ice
the ice class rules performance without sensitivity of the tools to
the leading edge shape
Opportunities Threats
• Can be practically applied in propeller design • Practical functioning with respect to
methods. manufacturing accuracy, maintenance and
• Modular, can be extended with more repairs
advanced constraints • Sharp leading edges could be against
common sense
• Sharp leading edges are not allowed for polar
conditions
Figure 4-4: SWOT evaluation of edges optimization
Advanced ice failure models, sensitive to leading edge shapes, are required while an
accurate prediction of cavitation inception and stalling behaviour is needed. Probably,
existing ice models are not suited to properly perform this research. The gain in
objective cannot be quantified if ice failure models are insensitive to leading edge
shapes. A short study with systematically varied leading edge shapes can be carried out
to investigate whether existing ice models are suitable for leading edge optimization.
After that a recommendation can be given for further work. This leading edge problem is
not considered in further detail in this work.
4.2.1.2 Milling Load Estimates

A second option deals with the minimization of milling loads. A milling process is the
governing condition for ice induced torque. If this condition can be gentled for extreme
conditions, less torque and installed power will be required. In that case, the alternative
design opportunities of Figure 4-2 can be utilized.
Not only the leading edge mills the ice, also the flat suction side of the blade scrapes the
ice as seen in Figure 3-14 and Figure 3-15. This might induce the highest loading and
bending moment. An optimal combination for skew, pitch, chord length and RPM should
be sought. Also, in case of existing CPPs, pitch and RPM can be tuned in ice conditions
for a reduction of power.
4.2.2 Research Framework

Figure 4-5 abstractly proposes a framework in which a datum propeller is improved by
means of a standardized design method. Different models and tools may be utilized.
Based on the practical problem the main objective is on efficiency, while ice
performance should be sufficient to comply with the FSICR. Smart choices of design
parameters, objectives and constraints are required to tune the framework for its
intended optimization direction within the feasible design space. Results are compared
on certain measures for efficiency, ice performance and simplified cavitation. Possibly,
the optimized propellers will be checked, if time would permit, with advanced tools for a
more detailed analysis with respect to cavitation, flow separation and quality of the
slipstream.
Datum Optimization Comparison

• Stock Propeller • Modelling • Detailed analysis Best
• Typical Ship • Design • Efficiency Practise
• Wake Field Parameters • Cavitation Guidelines
• Design Point • Objectives • Ice Performance
• Constraints
Figure 4-5: Framework of the research scope
An advantageous effect of this approach is the opportunity to derive a better

quantification of the impact of ice class on propellers. Ice class rules pose significant
constraints. A comparison between propeller design without ice class and with ice class
can be performed within this framework. Among ship owners, ship designers and
propeller designers there is a deficit of knowledge on the impact of ice class with respect
to efficiency or cavitation behaviour. This is seldom checked, let alone published. If the
impact of ice class on a certain propeller can be quantified, ship owners can make an
informed choice while weighing the costs and benefits. This would of much aid to the
practical problem.
4.2.3 Optimization Algorithm

An optimization algorithm which drives and couples analysis tools could perform the
design analysis as given by the cycle in Figure 4-6. Note the similarity to Figure 3-9a.
Based on the results from the analysis tools, the objectives and constraints are checked
within the algorithm. Design parameters are updated after which a new propeller
geometry is created. This iterative process should converge to the global optimum
design for a given objective function.
Optimization Algorithm
• Objectives
• Design Parameters
• Constraints
Strength Geometry
• Ice load • Fully Parametrized
• Hydrodynamic load • Smart, modular choice of
design parameters
Dynamics
• Thrust and Torque
• Cavitation
• Pressure variations
• Ice Interaction
Figure 4-6: Cycle to iterate through feasible designs to find the optimal propeller.
Alternatively, if the computational cycle of Figure 4-6 is not available, the cycle can be
iterated by hand. A human factor is introduced which should be minimized by means of
prescribed steps at different stages of the iteration.
To save computational effort, the design cycle should be modular. Initial design can be
performed with less design parameters and constraints than the final iteration in which,
ideally, full details have to be taken into account with more advanced tools.
4.2.4 Design Method

An outline of a design method for ice class propellers is given in Figure 4-7. The
structure is inspired by the standard optimization problem formulation of design space,
design parameters, objectives and constraints as given in section 3.3.3 and Figure 4-6.
Firstly, choices are important to set the overall focus of the design procedure. They are
threefold. There are global choices first, to study the influence of ice class, cavitation
and milling performance on propeller geometry. Second, design parameters can be
chosen as well. Parameters such as pitch and RPM can be varied, while it is also
possible to only change the thickness distribution or leading edge shape. Third,
preference of objective influences the design direction.
Secondly, starting points for the design are given by fixed data such as the design point,
design space and computation settings. These should not be varied for comparison
reasons. It should be noted that these are also choices in an earlier stage, while defining
the design method.
Design method
applied to datum propeller
Ice Class (y/n) Edge Requirement (y/n)
Cavitation (y/n) Ice Milling (y/n)
Design Point Fixed Geometry Parameters
Computation Settings Geometry Design Space
Design Objectives Constraints

Parameters
Equality Inequaltiy
Global Efficiency
Propeller Required
Parameters Stresses
Thrust
Ice Milling
Distributions Thrust Variation
Cavitation
Blade Profile Extent
Shape
Spindle Torque
Figure 4-7: Outline of a design method for ice class propellers. Green ovals give choices,
blue parallelograms give fixed data, striped blue rectangles give objectives and red
trapeziums give constraints on the design method.
Finally, constraints ensure compliance to ice class rules and owner requirements. The
propeller is tuned to the design point with the equality constraint on thrust. Effectively,
this requires an iteration to specified thrust.
4.3 Design Tools

All components of Figure 4-6 and Figure 4-7 are available, however, iterative feedback
coupling has not been fully established yet. Cavitation, ice interaction and strength
analyses are not included in the current state-off-the-art optimization tools within MARIN
as indicated by Foeth & Lafeber (2013) and Foeth (2015). In their case, objectives are
efficiency and pressure pulses.
Full propeller parameterization with predefined sectional shapes is already used in the
daily commercial design process. Sectional descriptions are also available separately.
Furthermore, a boundary element method for the hydrodynamic analysis of unsteady
cavitating lifting bodies, PROCAL, is available within MARIN from the Cooperative
Research Ships consortium (CRS). Additionally, efforts have been made to implement a
propeller ice interaction model within PROCAL by Peddle et al. (2012) and Peddle
(2013). Validations with model tests at Aker Arctic have been performed which indicate
that the model gives a correct estimation of the magnitude of milling loads. Full details of
PROCAL and the implementation of the ice model are available only within the CRS.
Within PROCAL it is already possible to superimpose ice loads from the simulation
model or the ice class rules on the hydrodynamic loads for further strength analysis by
means of FEM. Strength analysis can be performed automatically in the commercial
ANSYS FEM package. However, design checks are performed visually only, based on a
representation of Von-Mises stresses over the propeller blade.
Not all components of propeller design can be coupled or automated yet. A modular
approach can be imagined in which cavitation is only taken into account in a next
optimization phase. Iterative cavitation analysis for each design in the optimization
phase is computationally very expensive. First the propeller is optimized on main
parameters and simplified cavitation constraints. Further optimization can then be
carried out including more advanced cavitation analysis. This project’s scope will focus
on the first optimization phase. For this phase a focus on the strength analysis coupling
is required.
5 RESEARCH PROBLEM AND WORKPLAN
The definition study in the previous chapter revealed the choice of the research problem,
based on the literature study of chapter 3. These observations lead to the objectives of
the research are proposed first, after which the problem is formulated further in detail in
a main problem statement. A plan of approach is proposed together with a time
planning.
All work in this thesis will be focussed on the proper definition of a design optimization
problem based on the design space within the FSICR. Before any optimization can be
performed, an in-depth study of the optimization problem is required. This provides
insight in the problem and paves the way for efficient implementation and solution
methodology. A summary is given by Figure 5-1 below. Not only the choice of
objectives, constraints and design parameters is to be studied, also the model
responses and sensitivities are required to check the well-posedness of the problem.
Section 5.2 explains this figure in further detail by means of the plan of approach for this
thesis project.
x
• shape, size
c→f
• tayloired choices • weighting factors
• dependencies, • possible pareto fronts
relationships
...
• model analyses, preparation & g&h
simplifications • constants
• response analyses • requirements
• sensitivity studies • constraints
• formulation errors • modelling
• optimality conditions
• well-constrainedness
• suitable algorithm
Figure 5-1: Summary of optimization problem analysis and characteristics study
First the objectives of the study are defined and explained in section 5.1. Then the work
plan is proposed for the remainder of the thesis work in section 5.2 after which this
report is closed with a time planning and estimate of workload in section 5.3.
5.1 Problem Statement and Objectives

The main purpose of this Master’s thesis is to develop and implement an ice class
propeller analysis and optimization routine to improve ice class propeller design
methodology. The following objectives give direction to the Master’s thesis research:
1. Quantification of the design space within the FSICR as given by Figure 4-2.
2. Usage of the design space within a computational optimization framework to
optimize ice class propellers.
3. Development of Best Practise Guidelines for ice class propeller design.
The main problem in this framework concerns the procedures to set up an efficient, well-
posed optimization problem including a strength analysis. Sound, smart choices should
be made for design parameters, objectives and constraints, aided by model sensitivity
studies. The number of design parameters should be limited, while constraints should be
simplified. Especially cavitation, noise and vibration constraints cannot be fully taken into
account in this project’s scope.
5.2 Plan of Approach

The plan of approach or intended work plan gives directions to reach the objectives as
given in the previous section. An overview and summary is given in Figure 5-2.
PHASE I PHASE II PHASE III PHASE IV PHASE V

Starting Points Systematic Optimization Full Optimization Finalization
Sensitivity Preparation
Studies
2D: Soininen Smart,

Fixed Starting modular Impact of Conclusions
Point on ice load choice of constraints:
• Prescribed • LE shapes optimization • Ice class
ship, wake parameters loads and
and design stress Further Work
point • Edge Proposal
3D: PROCAL requirements
Implemen-
and Ice
tation of:
Simulation
Tools Model • Objectives Best Practise
• Design Guidelines
• BPG on ice load Pareto fronts
• Theory and and efficiency parameters
limitations • Given data • Efficiency
• Pitch • Stress
• Mesh • Design Scientific
• rpm Space • Ice milling
Refinement MiniPaper
• skew • Choices load
• Computation
al setup and • thickness • Constraints
settings • BAR
Design Space Leaflet
Optimization within the
FEM with ice Test Cases FSICR
Coupling of loads Marin Report
Tools • Partial
on blade optimization
• User stress Opportunities
Interface with one and
• Boundary two design for alternative
• Modular variables design route
setup conditions
according to • skew
general • thickness
optimization • edge
problem sharpness,
• Dataflow % of
maximum
thickness
Figure 5-2: Overview of the Plan of Approach in five phases.

The first phase, timewise already partly performed during this definition study, is
intended to give the starting points of study. The next phases describe the work for the
remainder of the Master’s thesis. Each phase is described is subsequent subsections.
5.2.1 PHASE I: Starting Points

Firstly, the goal of this phase is to define a fixed datum to which all future results are
compared as proposed by Figure 4-5. This starting point should ideally be obtained from
a typical cargo ship conform the practical problem. Its controllable pitch propeller should
have a fixed design point and corresponding working point in ice conditions. Probably,
this design point will be estimated based on ice resistance formulations in the FSICR.
Secondly, familiarization with computational tools is required to study the input and
output data structures and running commands. Also the tools’ BPGs are to be studied
for accurate, efficient usage. Definition of the proper computational settings which can
be used in automatic calculations during optimization and systematic variations. Mesh
refinement studies using existing BPGs are to be carried out while convergence is to be
monitored.
Thirdly, reporting on working principles and fundamental principles of the tools is needed
for theoretical understanding. Also limitations and accuracies should be investigated.
This gives a starting point for the required level of detail of design parameters and
constraints.
Finally, a tailored user interface should be set up within MATLAB to store all constants
and computation settings. Geometry should be adapted visually, based on certain
parameters of the distributions. The geometry should be panelled and prepared for
PROCAL and ANSYS. Also automatic calculations should be possible with prescribed
standard settings to prepare for optimization. In this phase the setup should already be
modular conform the general optimization problem formulations. A challenge is the
design of the dataflow between optimizer, propeller geometry, PROCAL and ANSYS.
Automatic storage, extraction, analysis and usage of the data is required for the next
iteration within the optimizer.
In this phase also the Kick-Off meeting is planned. In this meeting the literature study,
definition study and definition of the research problem are discussed. Especially the plan
of approach and time planning will be critically reviewed.
5.2.2 PHASE II: Sensitivity Studies

Sensitivity studies will be used to study the influence of geometry changes by means of
design parameters on the objectives. Sensitivities are twofold. First, physical sensitivities
give the actual impact of geometry variation without taking numerical and modelling
errors into account. The latter are a second kind of sensitivity.
Increased understanding of relationship between input and output variables is one of the
purposes of sensitivity analyses. While familiarizing with the optimization environment
and design space, insight in model simplifications and possible reductions of design
parameters for optimization will be obtained. Related to that, also tool, model and
implementation limitations can be investigated. In general, computation settings will be
chosen for a suitable balance between required accuracy and computational effort.
A systematic variation approach will be used. Response analysis by means of the

systematic variations should give insight in the response properties of the used
computational models. Noisiness, monotonicity, linearity and convexity are important

response properties for the choice of optimization algorithm. Several variations on the
datum propeller will be systematically generated. Parameters to be varied are chosen
based on the models for which the sensitivities are sought. The different objectives are
given in subsequent paragraphs.
One objective of the sensitivity studies is to investigate the usability of existing ice
models. Two kind of studies are proposed. Firstly, the ice failure model of Soininen
(1998), which was used in the development of the ice class rules, should be investigated
on its sensitivity to propeller geometry. The cutting force is studied as function of the
shape of a propeller blade section. According to Veitch’ (1995) laboratory experiments
there is a large difference between pressure side and suction side cutting. It is expected
that Soininen’s model does not represent this difference. Also sharpness of the leading
edge is varied as proposed in section 4.2.1.1.
Secondly, the ice simulation model as implemented in PROCAL is studied as introduced

by section 4.2.1.2. Milling force and torque is studied as function of pitch and RPM,
blade thickness and BAR. Dimensionless quantities should be used to avoid iteration to
the design point. Sensitivities of the existing ice class rules and JRPA#6 project can be
compared with the results obtained by the model of PROCAL. In the PROCAL
computations also hydrodynamic efficiency is calculated. Hence, the effect of propeller
geometry on efficiency can be studied as well.
For the stress constraint from the ice class rules general FEM modelling options and
results assessment criteria are to be studied. Stress as function of thickness of the
edges and general blade thickness is important. Also the boundary conditions should be
studied on their conservativeness.
5.2.3 PHASE III: Optimization Problem Implementation

Phase III is concerned with the implementation of the optimization problem in the
computational environment. However, before that, the optimization problem should be
defined first and worked out in a detailed structure. The objectives, design parameters
and constraints should be formulated. Separate files will be created for:
 Objectives en constraints,
 Design parameters,
 Constants, choices and other user input,
 Optimization algorithm,
 Model analysis
 Starting file
Functions are used to create a modular approach with clear commands and insightful
function names.
Objectives will involve both efficiency and ice milling load. Although the practical
problem concerns ships in brash ice channels, their propellers should be able to
withstand the presumably harsher loads due to full ice milling. A challenge in
optimization is to limit the number of involved parameters while obtaining correct design
directions. An initial estimate of the choice of optimization variables is given by the
sensitivity studies and the limitations of the computational tools. After that, probably, an
iterative process is required to find the correct settings during optimization test cases.
In a test campaign the computational framework will be checked, debugged and

improved. Partial optimization is a powerful method to study convergence. Convergence
can be quantified by means of necessary optimality conditions. Trivial optimization
cases should be studied to see whether the optimization algorithm is capable of giving
the, already intuitive, optimum result. Probably, a large part will consist of debugging of
the code. Based on the test campaign a choice will be made for the settings of a final
optimization test case problems according to the general framework in Figure 4-5.
5.2.4 PHASE IV: Full Optimization

In this phase the number of design parameters will be increased. The optimization
algorithm will evaluate the models and converge to the optimum solution within the given
feasible design space.
One of the purposes of the optimization is to investigate the impact of ice class on ship
propellers. Several choices and variations can be made in this respect as explained in
section 4.2.4 about the design methodology.
Data analysis and presentation will form a large portion of this phase. Pareto fronts of
objectives give insight in the possible trade-off between efficiency, blade stresses and
ice milling loads. Other graphs of these objectives as function of design parameters are
already generated in PHASE II during the sensitivity studies.
Conclusions can be drawn about the design space within the FSICR for a typical Baltic
cargo ship. Also opportunities for the alternative design route can be pointed out after
optimization.
5.2.5 PHASE V: Analysis, Reporting and Graduation Preparations

PHASE V is the final phase of the graduation project. In this phase overall conclusions
will be drawn, recommendations will be proposed and best practise guidelines for the
design of ice class ships will be developed based on the sensitivity studies and
optimization results. Furthermore, as addition to the acknowledgement of work a short
scientific paper will be written to summarize the research project. A leaflet and article for
the MARIN report will be written as well if time permits.
5.3 Time Planning

A prognosis of the available hours per week is made in Table C-1. This table, together
with the plan of approach is copied into a timesheet as seen in Table C-2. A rough
estimate of workload is assigned to each part of each phase of the workplan. These are
to be found in Appendix C. During the work the time planning will be updated when more
insight in implementation problems and computation times is available.
Alternatively, if it appears that the time planning is too tight, the sensitivity studies and
test campaign could serve as basis for the conclusions and BPGs, reducing the
workload on the full optimization.
REFERENCES
ABS (2005). Propeller Strength Assessment. Guidance Notes on Ice Class. Chapter 3, Section 1 to 4. American
Bureau of Shipping.
ABS (2015). Strengthening for Navigation in Ice. Rules for building and classing steel vessels. January 2015. Part 6,
Chapter 1.
Anggreeni, I. & Van der Voort, M. (2009). Supporting Scenario-Based Product Design and Its Adapters: An Informal
Framework for Scenario Creation and Use. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Volume 5617, pp 217-226.
Airaksinen, K & Marttila, M. (1976). On propulsion of icebreakers. International Shipbuilding Progress. Vol. 23, 1976,
pp. 194-202.
Beek, T. van (2004). Technology guidelines for efficient design and operation of ship propulsors. The Ship Power
Supplier. Wärtsilä magazine 1-2004.
Browne, R.P., Revill, C.R., Ritch, A.R. & Keinonen, A.J. (1998). Propeller Design Load Model. Prepared for the
Transportation Development Centre Safety and Security Transport Canada. Calgary, Alberta: R.P. Browne
Marine Consultants Limited. Report no TP 13243E.
Browne, R.P. & Norhamo, L. (2006). IACS Unified Requirements for Polar Ships – Background notes to “Propeller
Ice Interaction Loads”. IACS UR I3, 15 June 2006, Rev 0.1.
BV (2014). Ice Class (ICE). Rules for the Classification of Steel Ships, July 2014. Part E, Chapter 8.
Carlton, J.S. (2007). Marine Propellers and Propulsion. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Second Edition.
Daley, C.G. & Bulat, V. (1995). Ice Load Reduction Device for Ship Propellers. Canadian Patent CA2100140 A1.
Issued 9 January 1995.
DNV (2011). Ice Strengthening of Propulsion Machinery. Classification notes. No. 51.1. January 2011.
DNV (2013). Ships for Navigation in Ice. Rules for Ships, July, 2013. Part 5, Chapter 1. Amended July 2014.
Dokkum, K. van (2008). Ship Knowledge. Vlissingen: Dokmar.
Feistel, R., Nausch, G. & Wasmund, N. (2008). State and Evolution of the Baltic Sea 1952-2005. New Jersey: John
Wiley & Sons.
Foeth, E.J. & Lafeber, F.H. (2013). Systematic propeller optimization using an unsteady Boundary Element Method.
Proceedings of the 12th International Symposium of Practical Design of Ships and Other Floating Structures
(PRADS2013), 2013, Changwan City, Korea.
Foeth, E.J. (2015). Systematic propeller optimization using an unsteady Boundary Element Method. Fourth
International Symposium on Marine Propulsors (SMP’15). Austion, Texas, USA. Draft version. To be published.
Ghose, J.P. & Gokarn, R.P. (2004). Basic Ship Propulsion. New Delhi: Allied Publishers Pvt. Limited.
Hindley, R. & Shepherd, B. (2009). Combining ice conditions and envisaged operational scenarios to derive the
design basis for ships operating in ice. Presentation Slides. Presented at the Mari-Tech 2009 on behalf of
Lloyds Register.
Harjula, A. & Salmi, P. (1993). Icebreaking ship. United States Patent US5218917 A, issued 15 June 1993.
IACS (2011). Requirements Concerning POLAR CLASS. Unified Requirements. Part I.
ITTC (1999). Recommended Procedures and Guidelines – Terminology and Nomenclature for Propeller Geometry.
International Towing Tank Conference. 7.05-01, 02-01. Effective date 1999.
Jalonen, R. (2012). Ship Performance in Ice. Kul-24.4610. Lecture Slides. Aalto University, Espoo, Finland.
Jones, S.J., Soininen, H., Jussila, M., Koskinen, P., Newbury, S. & Browne, R. (1997). Propeller-Ice Interaction.
SNAME Transactions, Vol. 105, 1997, pp. 399-425.
Jussila, M. & Soininen, H. (1991). Interaction between ice and propeller. Technical Research Centre of Finland
(VTT). Research Notes, no. 1281.
Juva, M. & Riska, K. (2002). On the power requirement in the Finnish-Swedish ice class rules. Research Report no
53. Winter Navigation Research Board. Helsinki University of Technology, Ship Laboratory, Espoo.
Kerwin, J.E. & Hadler, J.B.. Ed: Paulling, J.R.P. (2010). The Principles of Naval Architecture Series. Propulsion.
New Jersey: The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers.
Klein Woud, H. & Stapersma, D. (2008). Design of Propulsion and Electric Power Generation Systems. London:
IMarEST. First published 2002. Reprint 2008.
Kotras, T., Humphreys, D., Baird, A., Morris, G. & Morley, G. 1985. Determination of Propeller-Ice Milling Loads.
Proceedings of the 4th International Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering Symposium, 1985, New York,
USA. The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 2. pp. 336-343.
Koskinen, P., Jussila, M. & Soininen, H. (1996). Propeller ice load models. Technical Research Centre of Finland
(VTT). Research Notes, no. 1739.
Koskinen, P., Browne, R. & Norhamo, L. (2006). Background Notes to “Blade Design” version 2.0. IACS Unified
Requirements for Polar Ships (IACS UR I3). Technical Background. Propeller Blade Design. Available at
www.iacs.org.uk/document/public/publications/tbs/urtb.pdf. Accessed 9 March 2015.
Kuiper, G., Ed: Bernaert, S. (2002). Hydrodynamica 3, Resistance and Propulsion 1. Lecture notes from course
MT527 at Delft University of Technology. Available at ocw.tudelft.nl/fileadmin/ocw/opener/Courses/Kuiper.pdf.
Accessed 24 February 2015.
Kuiper, G. (2012). Cavitation in Ship Propulsion. June 21, 2012. Lecture notes of online open course ware.
Available at: http://ocw.tudelft.nl/courses/engineering-and-policy-analysis/marine-technology/cavitation-on-ship-
propellers/readings/. Accessed 26 February 2015.
Kujala, P. (2007). Winter Navigation. Kul-24.3500. Lecture slides. Aalto University, Espoo, Finland.
Larsson, L. & Raven, H.C.. Ed: Paulling, J.R.P. (2010). The Principles of Naval Architecture Series. Ship Resistance
and Flow. New Jersey: The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers.
Leppäranta, M. (2010). The Drift of Sea Ice. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
Ligtelijn, J.T. (2010). The pay-off between cavitation and efficiency. Proceedings of the Institute of Marine
Engineering, Science & Technology (IMarEST) Ship Propulsion Systems Symposium 2010, London, UK.
Lindqvist, G. (1989). A Straightforward Method for Calculation of Ice Resistance of Ships. Proceedings of the 10th
International Conference on Port and Ocean Engineering under Arctic Conditions (POAC’89), Lulea, Sweden.
pp. 722-735.
Lloyd’s Register (2014). Ice Operations – Ice Class. Rules and Regulations for the Classification of Ships, July
2014, Part 8, Chapter 2.
MAN Diesel & Turbo (2015a). Basic Principles of Ship Propulsion. Available at: http://marine.man.eu/propeller-aft-
ship/downloads/page/2. Accessed 23 February 2015.
MAN Diesel & Turbo (2015b). Ice Classed Ships. Main Engines. Available at:
http://marine.man.eu/docs/librariesprovider6/technical-papers/ice-classed-ships-main-engines.pdf?sfvrsn=14.
National Snow & Ice Data Center (2015). Sea Ice Glossary. Available at: http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/glossary-
terms/sea-ice. Accessed 19 February 2015.
Norhamo, L., Bakken, G. M., Deinboll, O. & Iseskär, J.J. (2009). Challenges related to propulsor – ice interaction in
arctic waters. First International Symposium on Marine Propulsors. SMP’09 , Trondheim.
Olsen, A.S. (2004). Energy coefficients for a propeller series. Elsevier. Ocean Engineering. Vol. 31. 2004. pp. 401-
416.
Papalambros, P.Y. & Wilde, D.J. (2000). Principles of optimal design. Modeling and Computation. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. Second Edition.
Peddle, A., Dang, J. & Terwisga, T.J.C. van. (2012). Towards a model for propeller-ice interaction. Proceedings of
the ASME 2013 31st International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering (OMAE2012). Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil.
Peddle, A . (2013). Numerical prediction of propeller loading due to sea ice. MARIN Report. January 2013. Number,
p.13. Available at: http://www.marin.nl/web/Publications/Publication-items/Numerical-prediction-of-propeller-
loading-due-to-sea-ice.htm. Accessed 24 March 2015.
Riska, K., Wilhelmson, M, Englund, K. & Leiviskä, T. (1997). Performance of merchant vessels in ice in the Baltic.
Research Report no 52. Winter Navigation Research Board. Helsinki University of Technology, Ship Laboratory,
Espoo.
Riska, K. & Kämäräinen, J. (2011). A Review of Ice Loading and the Evolution of the Finnish-Swedish Ice Class
Rules. Draft to the SNAME annual meeting in 2011. Retrieved from:http://www.arctis-
search.com/A+Review+of+Ice+Loading +and+the+Evolution+of+the+Finnish-Swedish+Ice+Class+Rules.
Sampson, R., Atlar, M. & Sasaki, N. (2009). Cavitation analysis of a double acting podded drive during ice milling.
Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Cavitation. CAV2009-135. Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Sasajima, T., Bulat, V. & Glen, I. (1981). An experimental investigation of two candidate propeller designs for ice
capable vessels. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Port and Ocean Engineering under Arctic
Conditions (POAC’81), Québec, Canada. pp. 263-275.
Sasajima, T. & Mustamäki, E. (1984). Ice-Milling Load Encountered by a Controllable Pitch Propeller. Proceedings
of the 7th International Symposium on Ice, IAHR (International Association for Hydraulic Research). Hamburg,
27-31 August 1984, Hamburgische Schiffbau-Versuchsanstalt GmbH. pp. 281-295.
Searle , S. S. (1999). Ice Tank Tests of a Highly Skewed Propeller and a Conventional Ice-Class Propeller in Four
Quadrants. Master’s thesis. Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science. Memorial University of Newfoundland.
St. John’s. Canada.
Soininen, H. & Veitch, B. (1996). Propeller-ice interaction. Joint research project arrangement #6, Joint conclusion
report. Espoo: VTT publications.
Soininen, H. (1998). A propeller-ice contact model. PhD dissertation. 15 May 1998. Espoo: VTT publications.
Terwisga, T.J.C. van (2013). On the working principles of Energy Saving Devices. Third International Symposium on
Marine Propulsors smp’13. Launceston, Tasmania, Australia, May 2013.
Trafi (2010). Maritime safety regulation - Ice class regulations and the application thereof. Issued 23 November
2010 by the Finnish Transport Safety Agency. TRAFI/31298/03.04.01.00/2010
Trafi (2015). Ice classes of ships. Available at: http://www.trafi.fi/en/maritime/ice_classes_of_ships. Accessed 3

February 2015.
Vedenpää, L. (2012). Observations of ship ice performance in the Baltic. Research Report no 84. Winter Navigation
Research Board. Helsinki University of Technology, Ship Laboratory, Espoo.
Veitch, B. & Laukia, K. (1993). The propeller-ice impact process. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference
on Port and Ocean Engineering under Arctic Conditions (POAC’93), Hamburg. pp. 378-389.
Veitch, B. (1995). Predictions of Ice Contact Forces on a Marine Screw Propeller During the Propeller-Ice Cutting
Process. PhD dissertation. Acta Polytechnica Scandinavica, Mechanical Engineering Series No. 118. Helsinki:
Finnish Academy of Technology.
Veitch, B., Bose, N., Meade, C. & Liu, P. (1997). Predictions of hydrodynamic and ice contact loads on ice-class
screw propellers. Proceedings of the ASME 1997 16th International conference on Offshore Mechanics and
Arctic Engineering (OMAE1997). Yokohama. Volume IV. Arctic/Polar Technology. pp. 119-125.
Veitch, B. (2015). Propulsion in Ice. Lectures notes. Memorial University. Available at:
http://www.engr.mun.ca/~bveitch/courses/r-p/Assignments/Propulsion-in-ice.pdf. Accessed 25 February 2015.
Verhulst, M., Nieuwenhuis, J.J. & Duursema, W. (2012). A study on a fairer inclusion of small General cargo ships
and small Containership within the EEDI regulatory framework. Centre for Maritime Technology and Innovation
(Kennisdelta). Available at: https://www.kennisdelta.nl/library/documents/616/download/ . Accessed 25
February 2015.
WAGENBORG (2014). 25 vessels during 7 years. TIMES, volume 8. Annual issue 2014.
Wahlström, I, Holmroos, H. & Kajander, S. (2014). Baltic Port List 2014 – Market review on cargo development in
the Baltic Sea Ports. Centre for Maritime Studies, Brahea Centre. University of Turku. Report MKK-013.
Walker, D.L.N. (1996). The influence of blockage and cavitation on the hydrodynamic performance of ice class
propellers in blocked flow. PhD dissertation. Ottawa: National Library of Canada.
Wang, J., Akinturk, A, Jones, S.J., Bose, N. Kim, M.C. & Chun, H.H. (2005). Ice Loads Acting on a Model Podded
Propeller Blade. OMAE2005-67416. SNAME Transactions. Vol. 129. August 2007. pp. 236-244.
Wang, J. (2006). On a model podded propulsor in ice (propeller-ice interaction). PhD dissertation. December 2006.
Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science. Memorial University of Newfoundland. St. John’s. Canada.
Wang, J., Akinturk, A., Bose, N. & Jones, S.J. (2007). An Overview of Model Tests and Numerical Predictions for
Propeller-Ice Interaction. Proceedings of the 8th Canadian Marine Hydromechanics and Structures Conference.
St. John’s, New Foundland.
Westerberg, V. (2014). EEDI and Finnish-Swedish Ice Class Rules. Research Report no 88. Winter Navigation
Research Board. Finnish Transport Safety Agency and Swedish Maritime Administration.
Wind, J. 1983. The Dimensioning of High Power Propeller Systems for Arctic Icebreakers and Icebreaking Vessels.
Proc. Of the 5th LIPS Propeller Symposium, Drunen, the Netherlands.
SECONDARY REFERENCES (due to language and accessibility)
Belyashov, V. A. & Shpakov, V. S. (1983). On Mechanics of Ice Crushing by Propeller Blades. Ice Mechanics and
Physics. Moscow, 1983. Nauka, Academy of Sciences of the USSR, pp. 21-29.
Chernuka, M. W., Jategaonkar, R. P., Norwood, M. E. & Warner, J. L. (1989). Development of a Procedure for
Predicting Propeller-Ice Interaction Forces. Final report, prepared for the Transportation Development Centre,
Halifax, Nova Scotia. Martec Ltd. Report TP 9850E. 178 p.
Ignatjev, M.A. (1964). Strength Calculations for Propeller Blades of Icebreakers and Ice-Going Vessels.
Sudostrojenie, January 1964. pp. 5-7.
Jagodkin, V. J. (1963). Analytical Determination of the Resistance Moment of a Propeller During its Interaction with
Ice. Leningrad, Problemy Arktikii i Antarktikii (Problems of the Arctic and Antarctic), Vol. 13, pp. 79-81.
Laskow, V. & Revill, C. (1986). Engineering analysis of ice/propeller interaction data. Report prepared for the
Transportation Development Centre. Calgary, Alberta. Canadian Marine Drilling Ltd. Reports TP 8449E and
TP8450E.
Sandkvist, J. (1978). Problems in Keeping Year-Round Navigation in the Luleå Harbour. IAHR-78.
Thesis Definition Study A-1
APPENDIX A INITIAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Optimization of light ice class propellers
Problem Introduction
The majority of light ice class ships sail mostly in open water, even during winter time.
These ships operate in ice covered waters for a small part of their time only, sometimes
even assisted in convoy by icebreakers. Their propulsion system, however, should be
able to withstand the significant higher loads due to the presence of ice. Hence, the
design of the propeller is hindered with considerations about the ice loads: ice class
rules prescribe additional propeller strength requirements. As such open water efficiency
is compromised. Improvements in the design of ice-class propellers with respect to
overall efficiency are to be studied to improve feasibility and profitability. In this context
overall efficiency is defined as the efficiency of the ice-class propeller taking into account
the operational profile of the ship and the possible ice conditions of the operational area.
Objectives
The main objective for the thesis work is to develop a method for the optimization of light
ice class propellers for higher efficiency. Specific objectives to reach the main objective
are:
 To define overall efficiency of an ice class propeller for operational conditions;
 To assess the optimization choices for light ice-class propellers taking into
account the operational profile of the ship and ice conditions;
 To assess ice class propeller design methods taking into account the
uncertainties in ice loads and
 To develop design guidelines for practical usage for high efficiency ice-class
propellers.
Scope of Work
The following tasks should be conducted in the thesis work:
1. Research of literature to prove and define the problem;
2. Definition of propeller design parameters, optimization objectives and
constraints;
3. Review of propeller loads, simple ice model models and ice class rules;
4. Study of wake field adjustments and propeller-hull interaction effects due to ice;
5. Review of existing propeller analysis tools for hydrodynamic performance and
structural strength;
6. Review of the implementation of ice conditions in the propeller analysis tool;
7. Development of the propeller analysis and optimization routine;
8. Validation of the routine with empirical formulations and experimental tests;
9. Comparison between:
a. Existing designs,
b. Optimization with propeller ice loads as defined by different class rules
and
c. Optimization with experimentally observed propeller ice loads.
10. Development of design guidelines.
The overall efficiency of an ice class propeller can be improved either by focussing on
the ice performance or open water performance, depending on operational profile and
Thesis Definition Study A-2
ship owner requirements. Leading edges which mill the ice can be studied together with
an optimal blade contour. A proper selection and research focus will be defined during
the project definition phase of the thesis work.
Deliverables
Deliverables of the thesis work include:
1. Report which contains all the findings of the work;
2. Tool to improve the overall efficiency of a propeller given its operational profile
and ice conditions and
3. Design guidelines for ice class propellers.
Schedule
The thesis compromises 1260 hours of work. Full time work is scheduled from January
2015 until completion in September / October 2015. The thesis work can roughly be
divided in four phases:
1. Initial phase to plan, discuss and write the project description.
2. Definition phase to define a detailed plan of approach and research focus by
means of literature study.
3. Project phase to do research, develop and use the propeller optimization tool,
analyse results and report the findings.
4. Final phase to correct the thesis report and prepare the presentation.
Contact
John Huisman
T 0031 642 823 814
E t.j.huisman@student.tudelft.nl / j.huisman@academy.marin.nl
L http://www.linkedin.com/in/huismanjohn
Thesis Definition Study B-1
APPENDIX B ICE CLASS ICE RESISTANCE FORMULATION
Below the ice resistance description for a ship speed of 5 knots is copied as used in the
Finnish-Swedish Ice Class Rules (Trafi, 2010, p.7).
and are used to approximate the level ice resistance. The hull shape is taken into
account by means of the bow angles.
The rest of the equation for determines the brash ice channel resistance.
Figure B-1: Determination of the geometric quantities of the hull. If the ship has a bulbous
bow, then . [Copied from Trafi (2010, p.6)]
Thesis Definition Study B-2
Thesis Definition Study C-1
APPENDIX C TIME PLANNING SHEETS
Table C-1: Planning of available hours per week.

Week Monday Friday Hours Courses Day Comments, Deadlines Totals
Delft Off
2 5-Jan 9-Jan 37 37
3 12-Jan 16-Jan 32 1x 69
4 19-Jan 23-Jan 32 1x 101
5 26-Jan 30-Jan 30 1x 131
6 2-Feb 6-Feb 40 171
7 9-Feb 13-Feb 31 1x 202
8 16-Feb 20-Feb 36 1x 238
9 23-Feb 27-Feb 36 1x 274
10 2-Mar 6-Mar 36 1x 310
11 9-Mar 13-Mar 32 Prayer Day 11/3 342
12 16-Mar 20-Mar 28 1x 0.5x 370
13 23-Mar 27-Mar 29 1x 0.5x 399
14 30-Mar 3-Apr 17 1x 1x Good Friday 3/4 416
15 6-Apr 10-Apr 26 1x Easter Monday 6/4 442
16 13-Apr 17-Apr 36 1x Kick-Off Meeting 14/4 478
17 20-Apr 24-Apr 26 1x Friends' Wedding 24/4 504
18 27-Apr 1-May 26 1x Kings Day 27/4 530
19 4-May 8-May 26 1x Liberation Day 5/5 556
20 11-May 15-May 20 Ascension Weekend 576
21 18-May 22-May 34 1x 610
22 25-May 29-May 32 Whit Monday 25/5 642
23 1-Jun 5-Jun 34 1x 676
24 8-Jun 12-Jun 34 1x 710
25 15-Jun 19-Jun 26 1x 1x 736
26 22-Jun 26-Jun 34 1x 770
27 29-Jun 3-Jul 34 1x Second Meeting 30/6 804
28 6-Jul 10-Jul 44 848
29 13-Jul 17-Jul 36 1x 884
30 20-Jul 24-Jul 26 2x 910
31 27-Jul 31-Jul 0 Holiday 910
32 3-Aug 7-Aug 0 Holiday 910
33 10-Aug 14-Aug 26 2x 936
34 17-Aug 21-Aug 26 2x 962
35 24-Aug 28-Aug 36 1x 998
36 31-Aug 4-Sep 45 1043
37 7-Sep 11-Sep 44 Go-NoGo Meeting 8/7 1087
38 14-Sep 18-Sep 43 1130
39 21-Sep 25-Sep 43 Thesis Submission 25/9 1173
40 28-Sep 2-Oct 40 1213
41 5-Oct 9-Oct 32 1245
42 12-Oct 16-Oct 15 Master's Exam 14/10 1260
Thesis Definition Study C-2
Table C-2: Overview of hours per phase and topic. After week 15 this table represents the planning of the
remainder of the Master’s thesis.
Week 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42
Unforeseen problems & workload 120 9.5% 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Totals 1260 37 32 32 30 40 31 36 36 36 32 28 29 17 26 36 26 26 26 20 34 32 34 34 26 34 34 44 36 26 0 0 26 26 36 45 44 43 43 40 32 15
Planned Work Load per week 37 32 32 30 40 31 36 36 36 32 28 29 17 26 36 26 26 26 20 34 32 34 34 26 34 34 44 36 26 0 0 26 26 36 45 44 43 43 40 32 15
Events 7 2 5
Arrangements 10 5 1 1 2 1
Meetings 41 2 2 2 2 2 2 8 4 4 4 3 3 3
Discussions 14 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1
Presentations 40 2 1 3 2 2 2 4 4 10 10
18.4%
PHASE O
Literature search 53 15 7 6 4 5 2 4 4 5 1
Literature Questions 16 5 5 2 4
Reading, Analysis 107 10 15 18 8 16 6 8 7 9 3 2 3 1 1
Brainstorm 34 2 2 2 3 2 3 2 4 2 5 2 3 2
Definition Study Report 13 3 5 2 2 1

Practical Problem 13 6 5 2
Literature 60 4 5 15 15 15 6
Definition Study 38 2 18 7 7 1 2 1
Workplan 14 6 6 2
27.6%
PHASE I
Initial familiarization with tools
PropArt 14 2 3 3 6
ProCal 15 3 2 6 4
Ansys 13 5 8
Fixed Starting Point 12 9 3
Tool Principles 20 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 2
Taylored user interface 10 2 3 1 2 2

Coupling of Tools, Dataflow 35 1 4 4 2 2 12 7 3
9.4%
PHASE II
Systematic sensitivity studies
Computational setup, settings 34 4 17 7 6
Soininen 16 12 4
Ice Simulation Model 26 10 8 4 4
FEM 31 4 6 9 12
8.5%
PHASE III
Optimization Implementation
Objectives 15 3 3 7 2
Design parameters 14 3 3 2 2 4
Design Space 8 2 4 2
Constraints 30 4 4 4 18
Optimization Test Cases 59 2 3 24 20 10

10.0%
PHASE IV
Optimization 106 19 21 21 16 16 8 5
Comparison and data analysis 69 3 3 16 24 23

13.9%
PHASE V
Conclusions 34 2.7% 3 3 3 15 10
General Thesis 51 4.0% 2 2 4 8 8 19 8
Best Practise Guidelines 25 2.0% 4 16 5
Scientific (Mini) Paper 43 3.4% 26 17

← Already performed Planned →
Wageningen, April 2015
MARITIME RESEARCH INSTITUTE NETHERLANDS

Huisman - 2015 4 - Optimization of Ice Class Propellers - Master Thesis Definition Study

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Huisman - 2015 4 - Optimization of Ice Class Propellers - Master Thesis Definition Study

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Optimization of ice-class ship propellers

Teunis J. Huisman BSc

A Delft University of Technology Master’s Thesis Definition Study performed at MARIN

Marine Technology – Science – Resistance and Propulsion

Author : Teunis J. Huisman BSc

A Delft University of Technology Master’s Thesis Definition Study performed at MARIN

Ship propulsion in ice is addressed first, by considering fundamental principles to derive

Literature review is always time consuming, I especially underestimated the effort to

ABS American Bureau of Shipping

Axial losses for a self-propelled ship W

Added kinetic energy by actuator disk W

2.1 Baltic Winter Trade

2.2 Operational Profile

2.3 Owner Requirements

The practical problem can be formulated as:

A literature research question is formulated as:

 Optimization Routines are existing iterative algorithms which could be used to

3.2 Ship Propulsion in Ice

3.2.1 Fundamentals of Ship Propulsion

where propeller thrust, propeller torque and propeller rotational speed.

3.2.1.1 Actuator Disk Theory

Traditionally, this equation is rewritten in the form of a non-dimensional thrust loading

Only one solution is physically feasible.

3.2.1.2 Quality Index

which can be substituted in Equation (2):

The factor can be regarded, similar to Equation (16), as a kind of quality

3.2.1.3 Propeller-Hull Interaction

3.2.1.4 Energy Losses

where axial losses, the loss of effective energy by transversal losses

in which and the axial, radial and tangential velocities at

3.2.2 Regulatory Requirements on Shipping in Ice

assistance of icebreakers when necessary” as formulated by the Finish Swedish Ice

3.2.3 Ship Performance in Ice

3.2.3.1 Ice Breaking Principles

3.2.3.2 Ice Resistance Formulations

3.2.3.3 Power Requirement

Unfortunately, no distinction has been made in fixed or controllable propellers in this

3.2.4 Propeller Design Conditions

3.2.4.1 Propeller Matching

3.2.4.2 Definition of Design Conditions

3.2.4.3 Mission Profile

3.2.5 Propulsion Configuration

3.3 Propellers in Ice

3.3.1 Geometry Parameterization

Propeller parameters can be divided into three main groups:

The distribution function should be described in as few parameters as possible.

3.3.2 Propeller Design Methodology

PHASE I: PHASE II: PHASE III: PHASE IV:

Figure 3-7: Iterative Propeller Design Spiral

The terms in Figure 3-7 are considered in more detail:

 Propulsion machinery should be taken into account as already seen in section

3.3.3 Optimization Principles

Design variables are variables by which the design problem is

Typically, an optimization problem consists of an iterative procedure with a model and a

without having a larger ” as Papalambros & Wilde (2000) define. There is no

Figure 3-10: Typical cavitation sketch. Several forms of cavitation

in which and are characteristic pressure and velocity, respectively, is the

Alternatively, the inception pressure may be given as function of the dimensionless

3.3.5 Ice Conditions on the Propeller

Copyright by Aker Arctic Technology Inc.

Undisturbed hydrodynamics Interaction

Disturbed hydrodynamics Direct contact Indirect contact

Proximity Failure Impact Extrusion

Blockage Spalling Clearing