Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, pp.1527–1542.
Mei, C.C. 1976 “Flow around a thin body moving in shallow water,” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 77, pp. 737–752.
Mei, C.C. 1986 “Radiation of solitons by slender bodies advancing in a shallow channel, ” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 162, pp. 53–67.
Mei, C.C. and Choi, H.S. 1987 “Forces on a slender ship advancing near the critical speed in a wide canal,” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 179, pp. 59–76.
Miles, J.W. 1977 “Obliquely interacting solitary waves,” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 79, pp.157–169.
Mori, K.-H. 1993 “Resistance and lifting force of a submerged body with a wing producing a downward lifting force,” Proc. 8th Int. Workshop on Water Waves and Floating Bodies, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada.
Thews, J.G. and Landweber, L. 1935 “The influence of shallow water on the resistance of a cruiser model, ” US Experimental Model Basin, Navy Yard, Washington, DC, Rep. no. 408
Thews, J.G. and Landweber, L. 1936 “A thirty-inch model of the SS Clariton in shallow water,” US experimental Model Basin, Navy Yard, Washington, DC, Rep. no. 414.
Tuck, E.O. 1966 “Shallow water flows past slender bodies,” Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 26, pp. 81–95.
Tuck, E.O. 1978 “Hydrodynamic problems of ships in restricted waters,” Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 10, pp. 33–46.
Tuck, E.O. 1989 “A submerged body with zero wave resistance,” Journal of Ship Research, Vol. 33, pp.81–83.
Tuck, E.O. & Tulin, M.P. 1992 “Submerged bodies that do not generate waves,” Proc. 7th Int. Workshop on Water Waves and Floating Bodies, val de Reuil, France.
Tulin, M.P. & Oshri, O. 1994 “Free surface flows without waves; Applications to fast ships with low-wave resistance,” Twentieth Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, Santa Barbara, CA, pp. 74–86.
Wu, De-Ming and Wu, T.Y. 1982 “Three-dimensional nonlinear long waves due to moving surface pressure, ” Proceedings of 14th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, Ann Arbor, Mich., pp.103–129.
University of New South Wales, Australia
In the verbal presentation of the research, you displayed a graph comparing the resistance of a monohull and a catamaran as a function of the speed. Assuming the displacement of the two vessels is the same (implying that the beam of the demihull is one half that of the monohull), then the resistance of the catamaran should asymptotically approach one half that of the monohull at high speeds. However, this feature does not appear on the graph. Could you please clarify this point?
It is true that if you compare a catamaran with an affine monohull of equal length, draft, and displacement, but necessarily, twice the beam, then as the hull separation tends to infinity, which is effectively the case for infinite depth Froude number, the wave resistance of the catamaran in linear theory asymptotically approaches one-half that of the monohull. However, following Heuser (1973), we compared the specific resistance of our catamaran with that of a monohull identical to one of the component hulls so that the displacement of the catamaran was twice that of the monohull. In this case, as the depth Froude number and, hence, the effective separation tends to infinity, the specific wave resistance of the catamaran should asymptotically equal exactly that of the monohull, even in nonlinear theory since the interference effects disappear. The same should apply, approximately, also to the specific viscous resistance. Our measurements as well as calculations, as shown, for example, in Fig.7 of Jiang, Sharma, and Chen (1995) are compatible with this requirement. The practical implication is that the theoretical wave resistance reduction achieved for a finite design depth Froude number by exploiting the interference effect between the wave systems of the component hulls of a catamaran does not extend up to arbitrarily high depth Froude numbers.