Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ocean Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/oceaneng

The Naples warped hard chine hulls systematic series MARK

⁎
F. De Luca , C. Pensa
Università degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II", Naples, Italy

A R T I C L E I N F O A BS T RAC T

Keywords: An experimental study was carried out to evaluate still water performance of a Systematic Series of hard chine
Hull systematic series hulls in planing and semiplaning speed range. Models of the Naples Systematic Series (NSS) were of varying
Planing hulls length-to-beam ratios of the parent hull. The parent hull, shaped with warped bottoms, was derived from a pre-
CFD benchmark existing hull extensively tested in a towing tank. This hull was validated by many work boats built in the last
Experimental data
fifteen years. To simplify the construction of vessels with rigid panels (aluminium alloy, plywood or steel) the
Interceptor
Warped hull
original hull form was transformed to obtain developable hull surfaces. The models were tested at Re > 3.5×106,
in speed ranges Fr=0.5−1.6 and Fr∇=1.1−4.3. The series studies the influence of LP/BC and Ⓜ ratios that vary
respectively in the ranges of 3.45–6.25 and 4.83–7.49, for two positions of CG. All the models were tested both
with and without interceptors. To enable model-ship correlation following the ITTC recommendations, in
addition to the resistance coefficients of the models, dynamic wetted lengths and surfaces were provided as
tables. To facilitate the implementation of Velocity Predict Programs, all the data (resistances, lengths and
surfaces) were also furnished in polynomial form. In addition to the use of series in the design field, this study
was done to provide data to improve the numerical simulations of a planing craft. With this aim, in addition to
the resistance data, the wave profiles, obtained by wave cuts, were provided to carry out validation procedures.

1. Introduction and Pensa, 2012). Both these actions reduce the resistance induced by
the lift particularly in the speed range of Fr=0.5–0.8 (Fr∇=1–3), where
The design of high-speed craft is strongly conditioned by two anti- the trim angles are high and the lift has not completely replaced
synergetic needs: reduction of fuel consumption (for economic and buoyancy.
environmental considerations) and improvement of comfort on board Consistent with these aims, a new systematic series of hard chine
(that with high speeds has typically got worse). To reach an effective hulls (NSS) was designed at the naval division of the Dipartimento di
balance between these needs, it is important to increase the deadrise Ingegneria Industriale (DII) of the Università degli Studi di Napoli
angles from stern to bow. It is possible to do this containing the rising “Federico II”. The parent hull, designed taking into account the use of
deadrise in the forward part of the hull (monohedral hull) or to do the interceptors, is characterized by deadrise angles constantly growing
same variation of deadrise on the whole length (warped hull). The from astern to forward and by an AT/AX that is lower, but near to 1.0.
warped solution enables to shape the forward of the bottom with higher Both these characteristics assure good performance over a wide range
deadrise angles respect the mean value chosen. This option needs the of speeds if an interceptor is working on the hull.
utmost attention to avoid inadequate sectional area curve (typically Unlike the NSS, the more well known systematic series with a single
evaluated by AT/AX ratio) as shown in Begovic and Bertorello (2012). chine (Hubble, 1974; Keuning and Gerritsma, 1982; Keuning and Alii,
Often, to balance the sectional area curve, the best option is rising of 1993; Taunton and Alii, 2010) – has a constant β along the third astern
the keel line towards the stern. The combination of these solutions of the hull. This is also true on a series whose AT/AX is lower than 1–
(warped bottom and rising keel line) improves the comfort minimizing (Clement and Blount, 1963); on these hulls the reductions of AT/AX are
the vertical accelerations but reduces the hull efficiency due to the obtained by homothetic reductions of the transversal sections that keep
rising of the dynamic trim that increases the resistance induced by the β constant. Two Series, the USCG Series, (Kowalyshyn and Metcalf,
lift, the main component of the pressure resistance on high speed 2006) and the double chine NTUA Series (Grigoropoulos and Loukakis,
planing crafts. 2002), are exceptions: the bottom of the USCG is quite – but not
To overcome this shortcoming, the interceptors have proved high absolutely – monohedral whereas on the NTUA Series it is markedly
effective working as trim correctors and as high lift devises (De Luca warped. For both series, the AT/AX ratio loses its content because AT

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (F. De Luca).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.04.038
Received 7 December 2016; Received in revised form 15 March 2017; Accepted 23 April 2017
Available online 11 May 2017
0029-8018/ © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-NC-ND/4.0/).
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

Nomenclature RP pressure resistance

RT total resistance
AT area of transom RTi total resistance of model with interceptors
AX area of maximum transverse section SW wetted surface (m2)
BCT chine breadth at transom (m) SWD dynamic wetted surface (m2)
BC maximum chine breadth (m) TH height of towing point from baseline (mm)
BWL maximum waterline breadth (m) TL towing point distance from transom (mm)
CG centre of gravity VM model speed (m/s)
CA correlation allowance coefficient VS ship speed (m/s)
CF frictional resistance coefficient W weight of the model (kg)
CR residuary resistance coefficient βT deadrise angle at transom (deg)
Li length of interceptor (% BCT) β0.5 deadrise angle at 50% LWL (deg)
LP maximum chine length (m) β0.75 deadrise angle at 75% LWL (deg)
LWL waterline length (m) λ scale factor
LWLD dynamic waterline length (m) νS kinematic viscosity (salt water)
i depth of interceptor (mm) τS trim at rest (deg)
iE half angle of entrance (deg) τ dynamic trim (deg)
LCG longitudinal position of centre of gravity (m) ∇ hull volume of displacement at rests (m3)
Fr Froude number Ⓜ length-displacement ratio (L/∇1/3)
Fr∇ Froude displacement number DII Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale
Re Reynolds number NSS Naples Systematic Series
RP pressure resistance

has the highest value of the sectional area curve. resistance data, experimental wave elevations obtained by longitudinal
The following tables summarize the main hull data of the series for cuts of wave patterns are provided in Appendix E.
reference (Table 1). Finally, to facilitate the implementation of the performance of NSS
Beyond the evident task to make available a number of hulls that within the Velocity Predict Program (VPP), the complete set of data
meet contemporary needs, the NSS was designed from ITTC Resistance required for model-ship correlations are given in polynomial forms.
Committee recommendations that push for new benchmarks for
validation of numerical simulation, particularly in a speed range where 2. Tested models
hydrodynamic lift is significant (De Luca and Alii, 2016). For a more
in-depth study on the reliability of CFD procedures, in addition to the 2.1. Parent hull

The parent hull of the series, C1 model, was derived from a pre-
Table 1 existing model, C954, that had shown good performance, registered by
(a, b) Hull data for reference series.
an intensive experimental program in a towing tank, with and without
Series L/B range Ⓜ range BTC/BC
interceptors (De Luca and Alii, 2010). The C954, designed in 1995,
were also frequently chosen as a working boat hull assuring good
Clement & Blount; 1963 2.00 2.97 0.66 performance in still and rough waters (especially in short sea condi-
7.00 8.46 tions). To simplify building of the hulls, the C954 hull form was
Keuning & Gerritsma; 1982 1.95 2.99 0.66
6.82 8.36
changed to obtain the plating as developable surfaces. Fig. 1 shows the
Keuning & Alii; 1993 3.41 3.29 0.66 not-developable zones (red colour) that are those most drastically
7.00 8.25 changed. Evaluation of the developability of the surfaces was done thru
Hubble – A; 1974 3.20 4.0 0.35 analysis of the Gaussian curvature. Fig. 2 shows a comparison between
9.26 10.0
Hubble – B; 1974 2.32 4.0 1.00
9.28 10.0
Kowalyshyn & Metcalf; 2006 3.24 4.98 0.96
4.50 0.87
Taunton & Alii; 2010 3.77 6.25 1.00
6.25 8.70
Grigoropoulos & Loukakis 4.00 6.18 * Fig. 1. C954: Variations of the Gaussian curvature. (For interpretation of the references
7.00 10.00 to color in this figure, the reader is referred to the web version of this article).
NSS 3.24 4.83 0.95
5.86 7.49

Series AT/AX βT β0.50 β0.75

(deg) (deg) (deg)

Clement & Blount; 1963 0.8 12. 5 13.0 19.2

Keuning & Gerritsma; 1982 0.8 25.0 26.0 30.7
Keuning & Alii; 1993 0.8 30.0 31.2 35.8
Hubble – A; 1974 0.100.12 14.627.9 14.829.9 22.038.0
Hubble – B; 1974 1.0 16.330.4 21.237.4 35.053.0
Kowalyshyn & Metcalf; 2006 * 16.6 22.5 34.4
Taunton & Alii; 2010 1.0 22.5 22.5 35.3
Grigoropoulos & Loukakis * 10.0 22.5 38.0
NSS 0.94 13.2 22.3 38.5
Fig. 2. Comparisons between C1 (solid line) and C954.

206
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

3. Experimental program & results

3.1. Experimental program

The experimental program, in terms of speed range, dimensions of

the models and load conditions is summarized in the Tables 3 and 4.
The highest speed tested on the models with interceptors were
limited, mostly, at the Fr for which the resistances were higher than
those measured on bare hull or when the dynamic trim was too low.
Wherever possible interceptors as long as the transoms breadths
were chosen to minimize the edge effects and maximize the effective-
Fig. 3. C1: Transversal sections (units: mm). ness. Consistently, on models C1, C2 and C3 the interceptors were as
long as the transoms, whereas on models C4 and C5, to avoid fixing
the transversal sections of the C954 and C1 hulls and highlights the interceptors whose depth is smaller than 2 mm, as shown in Fig. 5, the
substantial identity of the C1 and C954 models. lengths of these were the half of the transom breadths.
Figs. 3 and 4 show the transversal and longitudinal sections of Finally, tests of wave cuts were performed on the C2 Model
parent hull C1. displacing 96.82 kg. The wave heights were measured at VM=3.5, 4.5
and 5.5 m/s Fr=0.721, 0.928 and 1.134 respectively), at 1125 and

Fig. 4. C1: Longitudinal profile (units: mm).

1625 mm from the centre-line.

3.2. Experimental procedure

Tests were performed in the towing tank of the Naval Division of

the DII with main dimensions of 136×9.0×4.5 m (Length, Width and
Depth). The models were tested, without turbulence stimulators, at Re
> 3.5×106. Towing force was applied horizontally at the towing points
with positions as identified by the coordinates shown in the next table.
The models were restrained in surge, sway, yaw and roll, but were
free in pitch and heave. All the measurements were sampled at 500 Hz.
Resistance, trim and sinkage were analyzed both in time and in
frequency domain to assure the goodness of each test.
Finally, wave elevations were measured by two capacitive probes.
Fig. 5. Interceptors positioning. The data logger was synchronized with the motion of the model to
identify its actual position in respect to the wave pattern. Probe
2.2. Derived models measurements were sampled at 100 Hz.

NSS is composed of five models: a parent hull and four derivate 3.3. Results: resistance and trim
models. The four models derived from C1, were developed by scaling
depth and breadth, by the same reduction factors, to maintain homothetic The experimental program was finalized to test both hulls, with and
forms of all the transversal sections; these transformations increased both without interceptors. The results of the tests are reported without post-
slenderness ratios: L/B and Ⓜ. It has to be noted that the hulls derived by fairing. The dimensions of the interceptors tested were chosen according
the procedure in the above description have the same transversal area to previous experiments on similar models. Data obtained, although
curves and, consequently, the same hull coefficients (CB, CP, CW, etc.). reliable and useful, cannot be considered exhaustive as optimum inter-
Table 2 summarizes scale reduction factors for depth and breadth and the ceptor's depths for any displacement and trim.
slenderness ratios of the five models in the series. The dynamic trim angles of the models C1, C3 and C5, referred at
two conditions - i.e., trimmed, at rest, by the stern 0.0° and 1.0° – are
presented in Figs. 6–8.
Table 2 Figs. 9–11 show the RT/W and RTi/RT ratios of the same models
Scale factors and slenderness ratios. with and without interceptors. The complete set of data for all five
Model reduction factors LP/BC Ⓜ
models is shown, as table, in Appendix A.
The data highlights the effectiveness of the interceptors over a wide
C1 / 3.45 4.83–5.25 range of speeds, especially in hump zones. In particular:
C2 0.888 3.89 5.23–5.69
C3
C4
0.776
0.664
4.45
5.19
5.47–6.22
6.06–6.90 • higher resistance reductions occur at speeds that are growing with
C5 0.552 6.25 6.86–7.49 L/B ratio;

207
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

Table 3
Main hull dimensions and speed range.

Model C1 C2 C3 C4 C5

LOA m 2.611 2.611 2.611 2.611 2.611

LWL m 2.374 2.374 2.374 2.374 –
2.387 2.387 2.387 2.387 2.387
2.400 2.400 2.400 2.400 2.400
– – 2.415 2.415 2.415
BWL m 0.733 0.651 0.569 0.487 –
0.737 0.654 0.572 0.489 0.407
0.743 0.660 0.577 0.493 0.410
– – 0.581 0.497 0.413
LCB (τS=0) 0.944 0.944 0.944 0.944 –
0.943 0.943 0.943 0.943 0.943
0.945 0.945 0.945 0.945 0.945
– 0.949 0.949 0.949
B/T 4.667 4.667 4.667 4.667 –
4.397 4.397 4.397 4.397 4.397
4.121 4.121 4.121 4.121 4.121
– – 3.839 3.839 3.839
Δ kg 92.25 72.74 55.54 40.66 –
106.07 83.63 63.86 46.75 32.31
122.78 96.82 73.93 54.12 37.40
– – 86.23 63.13 43.62
SW m2 1.53 1.36 1.18 1.00 0.87
1.61 1.42 1.24 1.06 0.91
1.70 1.50 1.30 1.11 0.96
– – 1.38 1.18 –
Fr 0.5–1.6 0.5–1.6 0.5–1.6 0.5–1.6 0.5–1.6
Fr∇ 1.1–3.6 1.2–3.7 1.2–3.8 1.3–4.1 1.4–4.2
i mm 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
3.0 ± 0.2 3.0 ± 0.2 2.0 ± 0.2 2.0 ± 0.2 (0.5 BCT) 2.0 ± 0.2 (0.5 BCT)
iΕ (LWL=2.387) deg 23.7 21.1 18.9 16.3 13.7
τS deg 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

• maximum effectivenesses of the devices are inversely proportional to models. The curves refer to bare hulls (without interceptors) and τS=0.
L/B;
• the speed range of performance improvement is wider for the model • at fixed Ⓜ, the higher the speed, the higher has to be the L/B ratio;
with a higher L/B. • at the lowest Fr the efficiency is directly proportional to Ⓜ;
• when increasing speed, this trend changes and the efficiency becomes
The Fig. 12 shows the efficiency ratio, in model scale, of the five – increasingly - inversely proportional to Ⓜ and to the L/B ratio.

Fig. 6. C1: Dynamic trim curves (empty symbol are referred to interceptor).

208
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

Fig. 7. C3: Dynamic trim curves (empty symbol are referred to interceptor).

For a rough evaluation of hull potentialities with interceptor (we

Table 4 remember that in this study interceptors depths haven’t been opti-
Towing point coordinates. mized), Fig. 13 shows hull efficiencies of the models with interceptors.
It must be highlighted that the best performances with interceptors
Model C1 C2 C3 C4 C5
occur with τS=0 or 1 depending on the model and on the displacement.
TH mm 191 171 154 145 134 Nevertheless, in Fig. 13, all the curves refer to τS=0.
TL mm 945 945 945 945 945 The continuous curves are the same as the previous figure, whereas
the dotted curves refer to the models (one deg trimmed by the stern)
with interceptors.

Fig. 8. C5: Dynamic trim curves (empty symbol are referred to interceptor).

209
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

Fig. 9. C1: Hull and Interceptor efficiencies.

From the curves shown, it is possible to observe that: • intermediate Fr provide the highest improvements in performance and
an inverse proportionality to Ⓜ is observable;
• the relations of proportionality between R/W and L/B and between • at lowest Fr, the performance variations:
R/W and Ⓜ of the hull with interceptors are the same as that of bare • are positive only on models with low L/B ratios (C1, C2 and,
hulls as explained above; partially, C3),
• at the highest Fr, the efficiency • fixing L/B (for a single model) the improvements are substantially
• is inversely proportional to Ⓜ, constant with Ⓜ.
• is improved by interceptors only on models with high L/B ratios
(C4 and C5);

Fig. 10. C3: Hull and Interceptor efficiencies.

210
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

Fig. 11. C5: Hull and Interceptor efficiencies.

Fig. 14. C2 Model: Interceptor effectiveness.

Fig. 12. Synopsis of the Hull efficiencies of the Series.

3.4. Results in polynomial form

In order facilitate the implementation of data in VPP and to have a

more flexible representation of the data, three polynomials in two
variables, Ⓜ and Fr, were formulated referring to τS=0 and i=0. This
representation of the results, moreover, allows for performance evalua-
tion of intermediate displacements and speeds.
The polynomial expressions give the following functions:

CR = p1(Ⓜ, Fr),
SWD = p2(Ⓜ, Fr),
LWLD = p3(Ⓜ, Fr),

with:

CR = A3Ⓜ3 + A2Ⓜ2 + A1Ⓜ + A0

SWD = B3Ⓜ3 + B2Ⓜ2 + B1Ⓜ + B0
Fig. 13. Comparison between of the efficiencies of the models with and w/o Interceptors LWLD = C3Ⓜ3 + C2Ⓜ2 + C1Ⓜ + C0
(dotted lines for interceptors).
and

Ai (Fr) = ai4 Fr4 + ai3 Fr3 + ai2 Fr2 + ai1Fr + ai0

211
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

Bi (Fr) = bi4 Fr4 + bi3 Fr3 + bi2 Fr2 + bi1Fr + bi0 3.5. Results: wave elevations
Ci (Fr) = ci4 Fr4 + ci3 Fr3 + ci2 Fr2 + ci1Fr + ci0
The curves shown in Appendix E highlight a noticeable reduction of
Due to the great number of coefficients, the polynomial formulas, the wave heights due to the work of the interceptors and the direct
for convenience, will be expressed with the vectors and the matrices as proportionality between wave heights and speed. It is of interest to
defined below: observe that the effectiveness of the interceptors, as shown in Fig. 14,
do not follow the same proportionality.
(Fr)T = {1, Fr, Fr2, Fr3, Fr4}; This circumstance shows that at higher speeds, the frictional
ⓂT = {1, Ⓜ, Ⓜ 2, Ⓜ 3}; resistance, as a component of the total resistance, increases its weight
in respect to wave pattern resistance. This higher weight of the
whereby the polynomials can be expressed as the product of the frictional resistance is due to a larger wetted surface induced by the
vectors: Fr and Ⓜ for the matrices A, B and C. lower trim effected by the interceptors. Consequently, to evaluate
actual interceptor effectiveness, this must be referred to in the
CR = (Fr)T·A Ⓜ resistances at full scale, otherwise, in model scale the interceptor's
SWD = (Fr)T·B Ⓜ effectiveness will be underestimated.
LWLD = (Fr)T·C Ⓜ

In addition to the capability to predict resistance at intermediate 3.6. Model-Ship correlation

speed and displacements, the supply of data as continuous functions
allows, in the development of the project, to evaluate the sensibility of To make feasible model-ship correlations following ITTC recom-
resistance respect Ⓜ (i.e., the weight) that is the most affected by mendations, wetted lengths and surfaces of the models underway were
uncertainty in the development of a project. Indeed, the continuous reported for each test in Appendix A. To determine wetted surfaces, the
polynomial functions allow an easy evaluation of a partial derivative boundaries of these surfaces were evaluated by camera documentation
through the use of the same coefficients. Defining and assigned to hull surfaces in 3D-CAD. The identified surfaces
include the reattached wetted area above the chines. Whisker spray
Ⓜ i
T
= {0, 1, 2Ⓜ, 3Ⓜ 2, 4Ⓜ 3, 5Ⓜ4} areas, as a precaution, were excluded from the estimations of the
wetted surfaces due to the uncertainty of their contribution to viscous
it is possible to evaluate the partial derivative of CR, SWD and LWLD resistance. With the same criterion of precaution, the dynamic wetted
to Ⓜ as follows: length taken into account for the Reynolds number was measured on
the keel line (not as an average value between keel and chine lengths).
∂CR/∂Ⓜ = (Fr)T·A Ⓜ i
∂SWD/∂Ⓜ = (Fr)T·B Ⓜi
∂LWLD/∂Ⓜ = (Fr)T·C Ⓜi 4. Conclusions & future work

This is quite useful by providing an evaluation of error propagation This work presented a new hard chine Systematic Series, composed
on resistance due to Ⓜ. of five models, showing hull forms, geometric coefficients and a table of
offset. The hull forms of the models were characterized by a very high
δCR (Ⓜ) = |∂CR/∂Ⓜ|δⓂ level of developability of the plating. In tabular form and as a
continuous function, CR and dynamic SW and LWL are furnished to
In short, in this way the designer can estimate the maximum error carry out very accurate model-ship correlations. The experimental tests
for resistance due to the error expected in Ⓜ which, especially in the highlight the good quality of the parent hull and show it to be in line
first part of design, could be significant. Similarly, it is possible to with state-of-the-art technologies.
evaluate the expression of the partial derivatives of Fr to appraise the The experimental program on the Series is in progress to char-
sensitivity of the resistance to the speed. acterize the behaviour of the models on waves and to evaluate, for each
The coefficients of the matrices have been obtained by applying a model, the dependence on the interceptor effectiveness of the depth i.
least-squares root fit procedure to the numerical results, similar to the To the completion of the study on the models with interceptors, data in
optimization techniques used to find a set of design parameters, as polynomial form will be furnished as done for the bare hulls.
described in Balsamo and Alii (2011). Both these tests will be completed at the end of the 2017.

Appendix A. Data for dynamic Model-Ship correlation

Note: the number before the symbol Δ indicate the test number.
C1 – Bare hull

Τ1; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

92.25 2.374 5.25 0 / 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.95 2.33 1.61 12.628 16.039

3.00 3.39 2.29 1.56 10.843 14.152
3.50 3.61 2.26 1.49 8.959 12.184

212
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

4.00 3.93 2.23 1.40 7.867 11.024

4.50 4.47 2.17 1.32 7.145 10.252
5.00 4.78 2.10 1.22 6.465 9.531
5.50 4.66 2.08 1.12 5.901 8.921
6.00 4.37 2.09 1.07 5.153 8.127
6.50 4.12 2.09 1.06 4.377 7.310
7.00 3.85 2.10 1.04 3.842 6.736
7.50 3.63 2.10 1.03 3.468 6.327

Τ2; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

106.07 2.387 5.04 0 / 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 3.05 2.33 1.64 16.506 19.916

3.00 3.86 2.29 1.54 14.371 17.679
3.50 4.11 2.26 1.46 11.897 15.122
4.00 4.44 2.22 1.38 10.217 13.376
4.50 5.15 2.14 1.34 8.967 12.080
5.00 5.46 2.09 1.31 7.392 10.460
5.50 5.24 2.06 1.26 6.168 9.194
6.00 4.94 2.02 1.19 5.382 8.372
6.50 4.62 2.03 1.11 4.875 7.821
7.00 4.30 2.05 1.02 4.762 7.667
7.50 4.01 2.08 0.95 4.627 7.491

Τ3; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

122.78 2.400 4.83 0 / 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 3.25 2.35 1.62 20.990 24.394

3.00 4.29 2.30 1.53 18.580 21.886
3.50 4.51 2.26 1.48 14.722 17.947
4.00 4.92 2.22 1.44 12.190 15.349
4.50 5.71 2.15 1.36 11.068 14.179
4.75 6.87 2.10 1.26 11.276 14.371

Τ4; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

92.25 2.374 5.25 0 / 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 4.05 1.90 1.49 16.640 20.181

3.00 4.64 1.81 1.43 13.616 17.071
3.50 4.35 1.73 1.36 11.506 14.892
4.00 5.59 1.65 1.29 9.893 13.225
4.50 4.93 1.56 1.16 8.889 12.184
5.00 5.69 1.49 1.05 7.948 11.209
5.50 4.54 1.47 1.02 6.462 9.674
6.00 4.92 1.47 1.01 5.165 8.326
6.50 3.76 1.47 1.01 4.230 7.349
7.00 4.27 1.47 1.00 3.524 6.603
7.50 3.97 1.47 1.00 3.051 6.092

Τ5; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

106.07 2.387 5.04 0 / 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 4.30 2.31 1.53 19.565 22.980

3.00 5.00 2.23 1.46 16.566 19.890

213
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

3.50 5.40 2.19 1.37 13.899 17.143

4.00 5.98 2.11 1.29 12.462 15.651
4.50 6.43 2.00 1.20 10.963 14.114
5.00 6.28 1.94 1.11 9.372 12.482
5.50 5.89 1.91 1.02 8.105 11.171
6.00 4.56 1.94 0.98 6.866 9.879
6.50 5.01 1.96 0.96 5.770 8.734
7.00 3.85 1.98 0.95 4.824 7.746
7.50 4.50 1.99 0.95 4.160 7.046

Τ6; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

122.78 2.400 4.83 0 / 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 4.53 2.30 1.49 25.220 28.639

3.00 5.59 2.23 1.44 21.922 25.246
3.50 5.98 2.19 1.39 17.567 20.811
4.00 6.70 2.10 1.41 14.398 17.588

C1 – Hull with interceptors

Τ7; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

92.25 2.374 5.25 3 100 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.48 2.36 1.62 10.555 13.957

3.00 1.67 2.35 1.55 9.091 12.383
3.50 1.49 2.35 1.48 7.450 10.652
4.00 1.01 2.35 1.46 6.064 9.191
4.50 0.53 2.36 1.43 5.378 8.438
5.00 0.08 2.37 1.41 5.107 8.109
5.50 −0.43 2.38 1.40 5.173 8.124

Τ8; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

106.07 2.387 5.04 3 100 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.66 2.37 1.66 13.061 16.461

3.00 2.06 2.35 1.63 11.073 14.365
3.50 1.85 2.35 1.59 8.642 11.846
4.00 1.44 2.35 1.57 6.763 9.890
4.50 0.85 2.35 1.55 5.780 8.842
5.00 0.41 2.37 1.54 5.237 8.240
5.50 −0.09 2.39 1.57 4.972 7.920

Τ9; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

122.78 2.400 4.83 3 100 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.04 2.38 1.68 17.715 21.112

3.00 2.50 2.36 1.63 14.510 17.801
3.50 2.25 2.35 1.60 11.060 14.262
4.00 1.72 2.35 1.58 8.561 11.688
4.50 1.20 2.36 1.59 6.957 10.017
5.00 0.70 2.38 1.59 6.047 9.048
5.50 0.30 2.38 1.59 5.659 8.610

214
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

Τ10; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

92.25 2.374 5.25 3 100 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.65 2.32 1.41 14.502 17.915

3.00 2.77 2.30 1.41 11.040 14.344
3.50 2.40 2.30 1.41 8.197 11.410
4.00 1.92 2.31 1.43 6.170 9.306
4.50 1.44 2.32 1.44 4.954 8.024
5.00 0.94 2.33 1.45 4.280 7.291
5.50 0.50 2.35 1.46 3.954 6.911

Τ11; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

106.07 2.387 5.04 3 100 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 3.02 2.33 1.63 15.735 19.147

3.00 3.25 2.31 1.58 12.383 15.688
3.50 2.84 2.30 1.56 9.230 12.444
4.00 2.31 2.30 1.54 6.999 10.138
4.50 1.85 2.31 1.52 5.614 8.686
5.00 1.44 2.32 1.52 4.783 7.797
5.50 1.00 2.33 1.50 4.331 7.294
6.00 0.56 2.33 1.48 4.228 7.145

Τ12; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

122.78 2.400 4.83 3 100 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 3.35 2.35 1.64 20.225 23.630

3.00 3.67 2.31 1.62 15.709 19.013
3.50 3.34 2.30 1.54 12.175 15.390
4.00 2.89 2.31 1.49 9.417 12.555
4.50 2.44 2.31 1.47 7.564 10.636
5.00 2.04 2.32 1.45 6.383 9.397
5.50 1.67 2.32 1.38 5.924 8.889
6.00 1.24 2.32 1.30 5.910 8.830

C2 – Bare hull

Τ13; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

72.74 2.374 5.69 0 / 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.22 2.35 1.42 10.677 14.082

3.00 2.83 2.32 1.42 8.024 11.324
3.50 3.07 2.29 1.32 6.839 10.056
4.00 3.24 2.25 1.25 6.059 9.210
4.50 3.70 2.20 1.18 5.531 8.629
5.00 4.18 2.15 1.08 5.227 8.280
5.50 4.24 2.12 1.02 4.758 7.769
6.00 4.13 2.10 0.98 4.187 7.158
6.50 3.94 2.08 0.95 3.699 6.633
7.00 3.78 2.09 0.92 3.374 6.269
7.50 3.56 2.10 0.90 3.157 6.016

Τ14; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

215
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

83.63 2.387 5.46 0 / 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.50 2.34 1.56 12.457 15.863

3.00 3.18 2.32 1.56 9.049 12.350
3.50 3.40 2.29 1.48 7.402 10.620
4.00 3.60 2.24 1.42 6.282 9.435
4.50 4.10 2.20 1.27 6.109 9.207
5.00 4.72 2.12 1.17 5.634 8.695
5.50 4.75 2.07 1.05 5.539 8.562
6.00 4.60 2.05 0.97 5.195 8.178
6.50 4.41 2.04 0.96 4.325 7.269
7.00 4.10 2.04 0.92 3.912 6.821
7.50 4.47 2.03 0.88 3.625 6.501

Τ15; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

96.82 2.400 5.23 0 / 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.80 2.34 1.60 14.191 17.598

3.00 3.23 2.32 1.52 11.406 14.707
3.50 3.82 2.28 1.44 9.785 13.004
4.00 4.06 2.23 1.34 8.738 11.894
4.50 4.65 2.16 1.23 7.995 11.104
5.00 5.37 2.09 1.11 7.746 10.814
5.50 5.39 2.05 1.03 6.927 9.955
6.00 5.20 2.03 0.98 6.038 9.026
6.50 4.94 2.00 0.94 5.190 8.145
7.00 4.62 1.99 0.92 4.491 7.410
7.50 4.36 1.99 0.91 3.879 6.764

Τ16; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

72.74 2.374 5.69 0 / 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 3.66 2.04 1.46 11.501 14.997

3.00 4.06 1.88 1.36 9.554 12.986
3.50 4.35 1.79 1.31 7.760 11.126
4.00 4.76 1.69 1.18 7.273 10.591
4.50 5.21 1.60 1.02 7.267 10.547
5.00 5.24 1.50 0.94 6.444 9.702
5.50 5.04 1.45 0.89 5.532 8.754
6.00 4.75 1.39 0.84 4.808 8.002
6.50 4.46 1.38 0.81 4.262 7.415
7.00 4.17 1.36 0.80 3.645 6.765
7.50 3.93 1.36 0.80 3.189 6.271

Τ17; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

83.63 2.387 5.46 0 / 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 3.90 2.28 1.34 16.338 19.762

3.00 4.31 2.26 1.35 12.044 15.360
3.50 4.71 2.22 1.29 10.069 13.304
4.00 5.25 2.08 1.16 9.477 12.672
4.50 5.80 1.99 1.03 9.192 12.346
5.00 5.82 1.95 0.95 8.023 11.130
5.50 5.55 1.92 0.91 6.764 9.827
6.00 5.18 1.90 0.87 5.862 8.885

216
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

6.50 4.82 1.90 0.85 4.932 7.912

7.00 4.50 1.91 0.83 4.319 7.259
7.50 4.22 1.92 0.81 3.878 6.781

Τ18; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

96.82 2.400 5.23 0 / 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 4.27 2.30 1.48 19.780 23.199

3.00 4.83 2.25 1.41 15.119 18.438
3.50 5.09 2.22 1.33 12.289 15.524
4.00 5.62 2.12 1.24 10.994 14.179
4.50 6.28 2.00 1.13 10.378 13.529
5.00 6.41 1.95 1.04 9.192 12.299
5.50 6.12 1.89 0.97 7.957 11.029
6.00 5.72 1.86 0.89 7.060 10.093
6.50 5.34 1.85 0.86 5.979 8.973
7.00 4.99 1.87 0.84 5.187 8.138
7.50 4.62 1.92 0.84 4.328 7.231

C2 – Hull with interceptors

Τ19; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

72.74 2.374 5.69 3 100 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.11 2.36 1.39 8.337 11.739

3.00 1.22 2.34 1.39 6.512 9.808
3.50 1.14 2.32 1.40 5.069 8.279
4.00 0.77 2.34 1.40 3.947 7.077
4.50 0.29 2.36 1.41 3.406 6.467
5.00 −0.15 2.38 1.44 3.105 6.105

Τ20; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

83.63 2.387 5.46 3 100 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.37 2.36 1.44 10.441 13.843

3.00 1.56 2.35 1.46 7.814 11.106
3.50 1.52 2.35 1.46 6.089 9.292
4.00 1.02 2.35 1.43 4.919 8.045
4.50 0.55 2.36 1.41 4.199 7.259
5.00 0.10 2.37 1.41 3.807 6.810
5.50 −0.48 2.40 1.43 3.765 6.712

Τ21; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

96.82 2.400 5.23 3 100 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.64 2.36 1.55 12.560 15.962

3.00 1.81 2.36 1.52 9.988 13.279
3.50 1.86 2.35 1.49 7.670 10.872
4.00 1.33 2.35 1.45 5.934 9.060
4.50 0.91 2.36 1.44 5.058 8.118
5.00 0.41 2.38 1.48 4.269 7.269
5.50 −0.23 2.40 1.54 3.911 6.858

217
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

Τ22; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

72.74 2.387 5.69 3 100 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.30 2.32 1.40 9.661 13.073

3.00 2.28 2.32 1.35 7.433 10.733
3.50 2.07 2.32 1.33 5.684 8.893
4.00 1.62 2.32 1.32 4.294 7.427
4.50 1.14 2.32 1.31 3.597 6.666
5.00 0.70 2.33 1.31 3.133 6.144
5.50 0.27 2.34 1.32 2.917 5.877

Τ23; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

83.63 2.387 5.46 3 100 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.56 2.32 1.43 12.157 15.570

3.00 2.60 2.31 1.40 9.136 12.440
3.50 2.45 2.30 1.35 7.138 10.353
4.00 2.00 2.31 1.33 5.313 8.449
4.50 1.52 2.32 1.32 4.392 7.461
5.00 1.05 2.33 1.30 3.866 6.877
5.50 0.97 2.35 1.30 3.540 6.498

Τ24; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

96.82 2.400 5.23 3 100 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.94 2.35 1.52 14.896 18.301

3.00 1.91 2.33 1.47 11.540 14.837
3.50 2.84 2.31 1.43 8.691 11.903
4.00 1.35 2.31 1.41 6.409 9.542
4.50 1.93 2.32 1.40 5.150 8.219
5.00 1.52 2.33 1.38 4.355 7.366
5.50 1.09 2.34 1.37 3.887 6.846
6.00 0.61 2.35 1.36 3.702 6.615

C3 – Bare hull

Τ25; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

55.54 2.374 6.22 0 / 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.00 2.34 1.25 7.309 10.717

3.00 2.33 2.30 1.21 6.027 9.333
3.50 2.44 2.29 1.18 4.903 8.120
4.00 2.49 2.26 1.15 4.178 7.326
4.50 2.70 2.24 1.14 3.527 6.616
5.00 3.04 2.17 1.05 3.486 6.535
5.50 3.27 2.12 0.96 3.361 6.371
6.00 3.39 2.10 0.92 3.039 6.009
6.50 3.27 2.10 0.90 2.749 5.680
7.00 3.13 2.09 0.87 2.493 5.388
7.50 3.02 2.08 0.83 2.410 5.274

Τ26; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

218
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

63.86 2.387 5.97 0 / 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.11 2.32 1.27 9.226 12.639

3.00 2.54 2.28 1.23 7.584 10.895
3.50 2.72 2.27 1.20 6.113 9.337
4.00 2.77 2.27 1.17 5.005 8.152
4.50 2.94 2.26 1.16 4.267 7.351
5.00 3.47 2.22 1.09 4.084 7.120
5.50 3.83 2.17 1.01 3.820 6.819
6.00 3.85 2.12 0.90 3.818 6.783
6.50 3.72 2.05 0.75 4.428 7.370
7.00 3.56 2.02 0.81 3.325 6.238
7.50 3.36 2.02 0.81 2.917 5.795

Τ27; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

73.93 2.400 5.72 0 / 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.27 2.34 1.26 12.217 15.623

3.00 2.75 2.32 1.16 10.671 13.973
3.50 3.03 2.30 1.26 7.324 10.538
4.00 3.08 2.28 1.22 6.087 9.231
4.50 3.29 2.25 1.15 5.526 8.612
5.00 3.93 2.19 1.00 5.884 8.927
5.50 4.38 2.12 0.92 5.539 8.550
6.00 4.39 2.05 0.88 4.883 7.866
6.50 4.19 2.01 0.86 4.240 7.192
7.00 4.04 2.00 0.80 4.014 6.931
7.50 3.78 1.99 0.73 4.092 6.978

Τ28; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

86.23 2.415 5.47 0 / 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.65 2.38 1.39 14.243 17.639

3.00 3.21 2.37 1.34 11.731 15.018
3.50 3.35 2.36 1.29 9.334 12.533
4.00 3.49 2.32 1.28 7.377 10.511
4.50 3.88 2.26 1.23 6.453 9.537
5.00 4.48 2.15 1.13 6.286 9.340
5.50 5.05 2.05 1.03 5.940 8.968
6.00 5.01 2.01 0.96 5.407 8.400
6.50 4.76 2.00 0.87 5.072 8.025
7.00 4.49 2.00 0.82 4.656 7.573
7.50 4.26 2.00 0.80 4.190 7.073

Τ29; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

55.54 2.374 6.22 0 / 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 3.27 2.25 1.18 10.450 13.883

3.00 3.47 2.23 1.17 7.855 11.179
3.50 3.69 2.20 1.17 6.090 9.330
4.00 3.82 2.14 1.06 5.682 8.863
4.50 4.21 2.06 0.99 5.107 8.242
5.00 4.33 2.00 0.91 4.635 7.728
5.50 4.28 1.95 0.85 4.188 7.243
6.00 4.11 1.92 0.82 3.451 6.469

219
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

6.50 3.84 1.90 0.80 3.104 6.084

7.00 3.60 1.90 0.77 2.906 5.850
7.50 3.37 1.90 0.74 2.708 5.616

Τ30; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

63.86 2.387 5.97 0 / 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 3.48 2.23 1.18 12.370 15.810

3.00 3.79 2.19 1.16 9.614 12.948
3.50 3.90 2.12 1.04 8.482 11.745
4.00 4.16 2.04 0.92 8.289 11.496
4.50 4.69 1.95 0.84 7.819 10.984
5.00 4.97 1.89 0.78 6.986 10.108
5.50 5.02 1.83 0.74 6.073 9.162
6.00 4.62 1.80 0.68 5.669 8.720
6.50 4.31 1.79 0.62 5.397 8.407
7.00 4.03 1.79 0.62 4.580 7.553
7.50 3.82 1.79 0.62 3.973 6.912

Τ31; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

73.93 2.400 5.72 0 / 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR 1000 CT ×1000

2.50 3.72 2.28 1.20 15.582 19.005

3.00 4.06 2.24 1.24 11.286 14.608
3.50 4.27 2.20 1.23 8.630 11.871
4.00 4.56 2.15 1.06 8.486 11.662
4.50 5.03 2.08 0.88 9.159 12.288
5.00 5.50 1.98 0.79 8.687 11.785
5.50 5.40 1.90 0.73 7.791 10.859
6.00 5.05 1.85 0.65 7.448 10.485
6.50 4.74 1.83 0.56 7.658 10.659
7.00 4.40 1.82 0.59 5.938 8.904

Τ32; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

86.23 2.415 5.47 0 / 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 4.02 2.38 1.32 18.493 21.889

3.00 4.50 2.38 1.30 13.873 17.157
3.50 4.66 2.32 1.28 10.684 13.894
4.00 4.93 2.18 1.15 9.780 12.948
4.50 5.61 2.07 1.05 9.299 12.432
5.00 6.18 1.95 0.94 8.855 11.963
5.50 6.08 1.83 0.80 8.661 11.751
6.00 5.72 1.70 0.67 8.807 11.889
6.50 5.34 1.57 0.62 8.037 11.117
7.00 4.98 1.52 0.57 7.634 10.694
7.50 4.65 1.50 0.56 6.581 9.610

C3 – Hull with interceptors

Τ33; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

55.54 2.374 6.22 2 100 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

220
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

2.50 1.12 2.29 1.22 6.990 10.410

3.00 1.18 2.29 1.18 5.475 8.784
3.50 1.23 2.27 1.16 4.367 7.589
4.00 0.82 2.27 1.14 3.628 6.774
4.50 0.56 2.29 1.11 3.284 6.361
5.00 0.08 2.30 1.13 2.925 5.943

Τ34; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

63.86 2.387 5.97 2 100 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.26 2.36 1.27 7.850 11.251

3.00 1.36 2.35 1.26 6.062 9.355
3.50 1.37 2.35 1.22 4.813 8.016
4.00 1.01 2.35 1.16 4.148 7.275
4.50 0.62 2.36 1.17 3.479 6.539
5.00 0.25 2.38 1.18 3.063 6.064
5.50 −0.14 2.39 1.20 2.871 5.821

Τ35; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

73.93 2.400 5.72 2 100 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.62 2.36 1.22 10.809 14.211

3.00 1.84 2.35 1.26 7.942 11.235
3.50 1.73 2.35 1.28 5.821 9.023
4.00 1.27 2.35 1.20 4.976 8.102
4.50 0.88 2.36 1.18 4.230 7.290
5.00 0.48 2.38 1.18 3.774 6.774
5.50 0.04 2.40 1.19 3.463 6.409

Τ36; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

86.23 2.415 5.47 2 100 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.88 2.39 1.32 13.438 16.832

3.00 2.09 2.35 1.25 10.912 14.206
3.50 2.02 2.35 1.22 8.482 11.683
4.00 1.69 2.34 1.18 6.696 9.826
4.50 1.34 2.37 1.16 5.526 8.583
5.00 0.83 2.35 1.14 4.924 7.931
5.50 0.39 2.40 1.16 4.409 7.356

Τ37; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

55.54 2.374 6.22 2 100 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.39 2.30 1.21 8.581 12.000

3.00 2.35 2.29 1.20 6.169 9.477
3.50 2.11 2.26 1.18 4.645 7.870
4.00 1.74 2.29 1.18 3.511 6.652
4.50 1.35 2.30 1.18 2.798 5.872
5.00 0.96 2.31 1.19 2.447 5.462
5.50 0.62 2.34 1.12 2.491 5.451

Τ38; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

63.86 2.387 5.97 2 100 1

221
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.51 2.30 1.09 11.619 15.036

3.00 2.51 2.30 1.08 8.525 11.831
3.50 2.45 2.30 1.09 6.239 9.454
4.00 1.92 2.30 1.08 4.786 7.925
4.50 1.56 2.30 1.11 3.692 6.766
5.00 1.18 2.31 1.10 3.272 6.288
5.50 0.81 2.34 1.09 2.945 5.905
6.00 0.44 2.35 1.10 2.776 5.690

Τ39; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

73.93 2.400 5.72 2 100 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.76 2.32 1.25 12.648 16.061

3.00 2.84 2.27 1.20 9.779 13.093
3.50 2.79 2.30 1.14 7.524 10.739
4.00 2.26 2.29 1.06 6.404 9.545
4.50 1.84 2.30 1.09 4.827 7.901
5.00 1.50 2.24 1.10 4.018 7.049
5.50 1.17 2.16 1.10 3.455 6.457
6.00 0.86 2.08 1.08 3.188 6.164
6.50 0.48 2.34 1.08 3.237 6.113

Τ40; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

86.23 2.415 5.47 2 100 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 3.14 2.33 1.27 16.298 19.707

3.00 3.26 2.33 1.22 12.634 15.932
3.50 3.02 2.31 1.20 9.347 12.561
4.00 2.74 2.27 1.16 7.236 10.381
4.50 2.29 2.25 1.15 5.770 8.856
5.00 1.98 2.30 1.12 5.015 8.033
5.50 1.70 2.31 1.03 4.912 7.879

C4 – Bare hull

Τ41; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

40.66 2.374 6.90 0 / 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.47 2.34 0.99 5.529 8.936

3.00 1.69 2.33 1.00 4.357 7.656
3.50 1.90 2.31 1.01 3.477 6.689
4.00 1.96 2.30 0.99 3.029 6.169
4.50 2.06 2.28 0.95 2.757 5.836
5.00 2.35 2.24 0.91 2.591 5.624
5.50 2.77 2.20 0.87 2.529 5.520
6.00 3.02 2.16 0.80 2.471 5.428
6.50 3.12 2.12 0.75 2.399 5.324
7.00 3.11 2.10 0.72 2.262 5.154
7.50 3.07 2.10 0.71 2.062 4.921

Τ42; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

46.75 2.387 6.63 0 / 0

222
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.84 2.31 0.95 7.577 10.992

3.00 2.04 2.31 1.00 5.848 9.150
3.50 2.25 2.30 1.03 4.342 7.556
4.00 2.27 2.29 1.03 3.484 6.624
4.50 2.31 2.28 0.99 3.147 6.225
5.00 2.66 2.25 0.95 3.043 6.073
5.50 3.17 2.20 0.91 2.861 5.852
6.00 3.46 2.15 0.85 2.694 5.652
6.50 3.47 2.10 0.81 2.493 5.423
7.00 3.44 2.07 0.76 2.352 5.252
7.50 3.34 2.04 0.70 2.444 5.318

Τ43; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

54.12 2.400 6.34 0 / 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.86 2.36 1.17 7.444 10.846

3.00 2.10 2.33 1.14 6.219 9.516
3.50 2.40 2.31 1.10 5.013 8.226
4.00 2.52 2.30 1.06 4.102 7.236
4.50 2.60 2.29 1.00 3.799 6.876
5.00 2.88 2.25 0.94 3.835 6.864
5.50 3.53 2.18 0.87 3.724 6.720
6.00 3.81 2.13 0.79 3.683 6.647
6.50 3.93 2.08 0.73 3.545 6.480
7.00 3.89 2.05 0.70 3.236 6.140
7.50 3.73 2.04 0.72 2.702 5.575

Τ44; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

63.13 2.415 6.06 0 / 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.14 2.36 1.21 9.462 12.864

3.00 2.48 2.34 1.12 8.174 11.470
3.50 2.61 2.32 1.08 6.744 9.954
4.00 2.64 2.30 1.06 5.345 8.483
4.50 2.88 2.28 1.01 4.787 7.866
5.00 3.50 2.22 0.95 4.743 7.779
5.50 3.97 2.16 0.89 4.493 7.494
6.00 4.28 2.12 0.83 4.203 7.169
6.50 4.41 2.08 0.78 3.857 6.791
7.00 4.34 2.03 0.74 3.528 6.436
7.50 4.16 2.00 0.70 3.318 6.201

Τ45; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

40.66 2.374 6.90 0 / 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.80 2.28 0.94 7.602 11.026

3.00 2.94 2.25 0.96 5.567 8.887
3.50 3.09 2.22 0.95 4.462 7.697
4.00 3.29 2.20 0.92 3.815 6.979
4.50 3.50 2.16 0.87 3.482 6.591
5.00 3.83 2.07 0.78 3.422 6.496
5.50 4.05 1.95 0.68 3.578 6.632
6.00 4.06 1.90 0.63 3.424 6.447
6.50 4.00 1.88 0.61 3.126 6.113

223
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

7.00 3.74 1.87 0.60 2.869 5.820

7.50 3.54 1.90 0.60 2.486 5.394

Τ46; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

46.75 2.387 6.63 0 / 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 3.06 2.28 0.97 9.253 12.677

3.00 3.16 2.30 1.00 6.619 9.923
3.50 3.34 2.30 1.00 5.263 8.477
4.00 3.54 2.23 0.95 4.549 7.704
4.50 3.85 2.14 0.85 4.521 7.634
5.00 4.30 2.00 0.76 4.533 7.626
5.50 4.49 1.90 0.70 4.214 7.283
6.00 4.40 1.91 0.68 3.667 6.687
6.50 4.22 1.94 0.64 3.385 6.355
7.00 4.03 1.94 0.62 3.043 5.975
7.50 3.87 1.94 0.61 2.677 5.576

Τ47; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

54.12 2.400 6.34 0 / 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 3.23 2.30 1.01 11.216 14.634

3.00 3.40 2.29 1.01 8.348 11.655
3.50 3.61 2.27 1.01 6.560 9.784
4.00 3.83 2.21 1.01 5.298 8.459
4.50 4.15 2.14 0.97 4.612 7.726
5.00 4.75 2.04 0.86 4.655 7.738
5.50 4.88 1.96 0.73 4.841 7.893
6.00 4.81 1.90 0.69 4.408 7.431
6.50 4.65 1.84 0.66 3.927 6.925
7.00 4.44 1.81 0.63 3.590 6.558
7.50 4.18 1.80 0.62 3.165 6.100

Τ48; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

63.13 2.415 6.06 0 / 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 3.46 2.30 1.01 14.545 17.964

3.00 3.72 2.27 1.02 10.579 13.892
3.50 3.92 2.24 1.01 8.456 11.686
4.00 4.08 2.21 0.97 7.179 10.340
4.50 4.41 2.16 0.93 6.274 9.382
5.00 4.97 2.05 0.83 6.228 9.308
5.50 5.40 1.90 0.72 6.304 9.373
6.00 5.37 1.78 0.68 5.697 8.753
6.50 5.13 1.69 0.65 4.984 8.025
7.00 4.82 1.68 0.62 4.441 7.447
7.50 4.61 1.70 0.60 4.044 7.008

C4 – Hull with interceptors

Τ49; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

40.66 2.374 6.90 2 50 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

224
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

2.50 0.93 2.37 0.95 4.944 8.434

3.00 1.01 2.36 0.98 3.814 7.104
3.50 1.09 2.35 1.04 2.704 5.906
4.00 1.00 2.34 1.04 2.206 5.335
4.50 0.81 2.35 1.02 1.947 5.010
5.00 0.62 2.36 1.02 1.730 4.736
5.50 0.46 2.36 1.00 1.743 4.698
6.00 0.32 2.36 1.04 1.593 4.503

Τ50; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

46.75 2.387 6.63 2 50 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.35 2.36 0.99 6.489 9.891

3.00 1.42 2.35 1.11 4.228 7.520
3.50 1.42 2.35 1.08 3.478 6.680
4.00 1.34 2.34 1.07 2.718 5.846
4.50 1.13 2.34 1.07 2.214 5.280
5.00 0.93 2.34 1.06 1.956 4.965
5.50 0.80 2.35 1.04 1.961 4.919
6.00 0.69 2.35 1.04 1.880 4.793

Τ51; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

54.12 2.400 6.34 2 50 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.47 2.36 1.17 6.800 10.202

3.00 1.58 2.36 1.16 5.171 8.462
3.50 1.70 2.35 1.14 4.107 7.309
4.00 1.61 2.34 1.09 3.419 6.548
4.50 1.41 2.34 1.08 2.793 5.858
5.00 1.21 2.34 1.07 2.435 5.444
5.50 1.08 2.34 1.07 2.210 5.169
6.00 1.01 2.34 1.06 2.078 4.993
6.50 0.95 2.34 1.04 2.010 4.886

Τ52; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

63.13 2.415 6.06 2 50 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.65 2.37 1.14 8.946 12.345

3.00 1.90 2.36 1.16 7.152 10.442
3.50 1.92 2.35 1.16 5.422 8.624
4.00 1.82 2.35 1.14 4.272 7.399
4.50 1.64 2.33 1.11 3.661 6.729
5.00 1.49 2.31 1.08 3.173 6.188
5.50 1.41 2.31 1.08 2.780 5.747
6.00 1.37 2.31 1.07 2.531 5.453
6.50 1.36 2.31 1.07 2.238 5.136

Τ53; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

40.66 2.374 6.90 2 50 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.22 2.30 0.94 6.759 10.177

3.00 2.29 2.26 0.90 5.355 8.671
3.50 2.14 2.26 0.97 3.641 6.867
4.00 2.07 2.26 0.96 2.883 6.033

225
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

4.50 1.87 2.26 0.92 2.625 5.710

5.00 1.71 2.26 0.91 2.317 5.345
5.50 1.60 2.26 0.89 2.157 5.135
6.00 1.00 2.30 0.90 1.902 4.827

Τ54; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

46.75 2.387 6.63 2 50 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.45 2.32 0.97 8.313 11.725

3.00 2.51 2.30 1.02 5.727 9.032
3.50 2.49 2.29 1.00 4.452 7.669
4.00 2.34 2.28 0.99 3.441 6.584
4.50 2.14 2.28 0.97 2.821 5.900
5.00 2.02 2.28 0.94 2.526 5.549
5.50 1.95 2.29 0.93 2.277 5.248
6.00 1.89 2.29 0.90 2.144 5.070
6.50 1.78 2.29 0.98 1.519 4.406

Τ55; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

54.12 2.400 6.34 2 50 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.65 2.31 1.07 8.825 12.241

3.00 2.77 2.30 1.05 7.188 10.493
3.50 2.73 2.29 1.05 5.313 8.530
4.00 2.60 2.27 1.00 4.326 7.472
4.50 2.49 2.28 0.99 3.450 6.530
5.00 2.37 2.27 0.97 2.976 6.001
5.50 2.36 2.26 0.94 2.685 5.663
6.00 2.31 2.26 0.90 2.542 5.476
6.50 2.25 2.25 0.88 2.331 5.226
7.00 2.12 2.25 0.88 2.068 4.927

Τ56; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

63.13 2.415 6.06 2 50 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.91 2.31 1.07 11.805 15.221

3.00 3.08 2.30 1.13 8.624 11.929
3.50 3.06 2.30 1.09 6.964 10.178
4.00 2.93 2.30 1.07 5.213 8.352
4.50 2.74 2.29 1.04 4.243 7.320
5.00 2.69 2.29 0.98 3.850 6.871
5.50 2.72 2.27 0.95 3.446 6.422
6.00 2.75 2.28 0.92 3.069 5.999
6.50 2.76 2.25 0.89 2.782 5.677
7.00 2.63 2.24 0.83 2.803 5.664

C5 – Bare hull

Τ57; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

32.31 2.387 7.49 0 / 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.15 2.34 0.89 4.158 7.565

3.00 1.37 2.33 0.86 3.485 6.784

226
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

3.50 1.57 2.31 0.84 2.985 6.198

4.00 1.58 2.28 0.80 2.778 5.921
4.50 1.62 2.28 0.79 2.462 5.542
5.00 1.72 2.26 0.77 2.324 5.352
5.50 1.90 2.22 0.74 2.307 5.294
6.00 2.35 2.19 0.70 2.343 5.291
6.50 2.64 2.15 0.66 2.117 5.034
7.00 2.66 2.12 0.63 1.970 4.858
7.50 2.65 2.10 0.60 1.937 4.797

Τ58; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

37.40 2.400 7.18 0 / 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.32 2.34 0.95 5.063 8.469

3.00 1.56 2.33 0.92 4.131 7.428
3.50 1.75 2.32 0.90 3.443 6.654
4.00 1.77 2.31 0.89 2.801 5.938
4.50 1.81 2.30 0.88 2.457 5.532
5.00 1.88 2.28 0.85 2.305 5.328
5.50 2.12 2.24 0.80 2.431 5.413
6.00 2.65 2.19 0.74 2.457 5.405
6.50 3.05 2.13 0.68 2.261 5.184
7.00 3.19 2.08 0.63 2.258 5.157
7.50 3.04 2.03 0.58 2.353 5.228

Τ59; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

43.62 2.415 6.86 0 / 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.64 2.37 0.98 6.390 9.790

3.00 2.03 2.34 0.96 5.071 8.366
3.50 1.89 2.33 0.94 4.178 7.386
4.00 1.94 2.32 0.91 3.625 6.760
4.50 2.03 2.30 0.88 3.110 6.183
5.00 2.02 2.30 0.85 2.936 5.955
5.50 2.25 2.27 0.80 2.916 5.892
6.00 2.90 2.15 0.75 2.908 5.866
6.50 3.32 2.08 0.64 3.112 6.047
7.00 3.36 2.03 0.60 2.962 5.873
7.50 3.43 2.01 0.60 2.607 5.488

Τ60; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

32.31 2.387 7.49 0 / 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.49 2.27 0.86 5.970 9.396

3.00 2.60 2.24 0.85 4.490 7.812
3.50 2.73 2.21 0.84 3.551 6.789
4.00 2.69 2.18 0.82 3.027 6.197
4.50 2.90 2.16 0.78 2.727 5.835
5.00 3.22 2.10 0.71 2.759 5.826
5.50 3.67 1.99 0.61 3.064 6.108
6.00 3.63 1.93 0.58 2.694 5.709
6.50 3.57 1.89 0.57 2.313 5.296
7.00 3.44 1.85 0.55 2.104 5.060
7.50 3.28 1.79 0.48 2.426 5.365

Τ61; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

227
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

37.40 2.400 7.18 0 / 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.63 2.28 0.89 7.245 10.669

3.00 2.80 2.25 0.85 5.754 9.073
3.50 2.87 2.21 0.82 4.846 8.083
4.00 2.97 2.20 0.78 4.152 7.315
4.50 3.02 2.17 0.76 3.640 6.746
5.00 3.40 2.10 0.71 3.503 6.570
5.50 3.96 1.97 0.60 3.841 6.890
6.00 4.08 1.85 0.55 3.570 6.606
6.50 3.92 1.77 0.53 3.235 6.251
7.00 3.76 1.74 0.50 3.101 6.090
7.50 3.56 1.71 0.45 3.248 6.208

Τ62; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

43.62 2.415 6.86 0 / 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.78 2.35 0.98 8.325 11.730

3.00 2.96 2.30 0.92 6.685 9.991
3.50 3.14 2.25 0.86 5.682 8.908
4.00 3.16 2.23 0.84 4.682 7.838
4.50 3.30 2.19 0.83 3.989 7.088
5.00 3.70 2.10 0.77 3.882 6.949
5.50 4.22 2.00 0.67 4.126 7.167
6.00 4.35 1.93 0.62 3.739 6.753
6.50 4.27 1.87 0.58 3.471 6.461
7.00 4.06 1.80 0.54 3.289 6.260
7.50 4.10 1.73 0.50 3.288 6.243

C5 – Hull with interceptors

Τ63; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

32.31 2.387 7.49 2 50 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 0.90 2.35 0.95 3.386 6.791

3.00 0.96 2.33 0.93 2.713 6.012
3.50 1.13 2.32 0.90 2.214 5.424
4.00 0.91 2.33 0.87 1.992 5.123
4.50 0.81 2.35 0.83 1.906 4.968
5.00 0.73 2.36 0.83 1.795 4.799
5.50 0.50 2.37 0.82 1.767 4.721

Τ64; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

37.40 2.400 7.18 2 50 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.04 2.38 0.95 4.707 8.103

3.00 1.19 2.36 0.92 3.706 6.996
3.50 1.25 2.34 0.90 3.034 6.238
4.00 1.16 2.34 0.86 2.642 5.770
4.50 0.99 2.34 0.83 2.476 5.539
5.00 0.83 2.35 0.78 2.526 5.533
5.50 0.75 2.35 0.74 2.676 5.634
6.00 0.58 2.37 0.78 2.281 5.191

228
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

Τ65; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

43.62 2.415 6.86 2 50 0

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 1.32 2.40 0.98 6.002 9.394

3.00 1.54 2.39 0.96 4.673 7.956
3.50 1.43 2.39 0.94 3.671 6.865
4.00 1.31 2.38 0.92 3.111 6.230
4.50 1.10 2.38 0.89 2.726 5.783
5.00 0.87 2.37 0.85 2.597 5.599
5.50 0.85 2.37 0.83 2.517 5.470
6.00 0.70 2.38 0.83 2.401 5.308
6.50 0.57 2.39 0.84 2.258 5.124

Τ66; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

32.31 2.387 7.49 2 50 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.12 2.30 0.94 4.731 8.149

3.00 2.12 2.29 0.92 3.380 6.689
3.50 2.10 2.28 0.90 2.654 5.874
4.00 1.93 2.26 0.86 2.315 5.463
4.50 1.80 2.26 0.81 2.206 5.291
5.00 1.61 2.27 0.78 2.070 5.096
5.50 1.50 2.28 0.76 1.942 4.914

Τ67; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

37.40 2.400 7.18 2 50 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.25 2.30 0.91 6.498 9.916

3.00 2.29 2.28 0.88 4.903 8.213
3.50 2.34 2.27 0.86 3.858 7.081
4.00 2.12 2.26 0.84 3.150 6.299
4.50 1.96 2.26 0.82 2.646 5.731
5.00 1.76 2.26 0.79 2.482 5.509
5.50 1.73 2.27 0.76 2.401 5.376
6.00 1.67 2.28 0.72 2.403 5.331

Τ68; Δ (kg) LWL (m) Ⓜ i (mm) Li (% BCT) τS (deg)

43.62 2.415 6.86 2 50 1

VM m/s τ deg LWLD m SWD m2 CR ×1000 CT ×1000

2.50 2.45 2.31 0.95 7.918 11.333

3.00 2.51 2.29 0.92 5.990 9.300
3.50 2.53 2.27 0.89 4.740 7.962
4.00 2.35 2.26 0.87 3.753 6.902
4.50 2.21 2.26 0.86 3.091 6.176
5.00 2.07 2.26 0.85 2.664 5.692
5.50 2.00 2.27 0.83 2.433 5.409
6.00 1.91 2.26 0.80 2.359 5.293
6.50 1.91 2.24 0.75 2.358 5.257
7.00 1.90 2.20 0.70 2.444 5.314
7.50 1.85 2.15 0.66 2.505 5.353

229
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

Appendix B. Offset tables of Parent model (C1)

X: distances from Transom (mm)

Y: distances from Centreline (mm)
Z: distance from Baseline (mm)
Half breadths of transversal sections

X 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600

Z
100 226 231 235 234 227 212 192 170 147 121 87 35
200 357 364 371 375 375 367 351 327 295 224 166 96 9
300 376 384 391 396 397 392 378 356 326 288 238 172 73
400 396 403 411 417 419 416 404 385 357 321 275 214 126
460 408 415 423 429 432 430 420 402 375 341 296 238 157 24

Heights of Keel line

X 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1778 1800 2000 2200 2301 2400 2420 2499 2569 2600 2616
Z 42 40 36 32 27 21 16 10 4 0 0 4 47 100 180 200 300 400 444 460

X 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1778 1800 2000 2200 2301 2400 2420 2499 2569 2600 2616
Z 42 40 36 32 27 21 16 10 4 0 0 4 47 100 180 200 300 400 444 460

Height and half breadths of Chines

X 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1740 1800 2000 2200 2400 2487
Z 122 123 125 128 134 143 156 171 188 200 205 225 246 271 283
CHINE1 Y 341 349 356 360 360 353 339 318 291 268 256 209 148 56 0
CHINE2 Y 312 318 324 328 329 322 309 289 263 240 229 184 122 40 0

Appendix C. Uncertainty analysis

A high value of sampling rates have been used (oversampling technique) to overcome aliasing errors and to identify any unwanted sources of
errors due to electricity network, so that the standard of 500 Hz have been chosen. That corresponds to 10 times of the frequency of the networks.
The total error was evaluated according to the ITTC 7.5-02-02-02 procedure. It recommends a criterion for the estimation of the total error on the
resistance coefficient CT. The method allows an evaluation of the error propagation due to resistance measurement, temperature, speed and
geometries of the models (ITTC 7.5-01-01-01). The procedure shows that in essence the error is mostly influenced by the quality of the
measurement of the load cell and, with a less effect, by the other parameters.
The total estimated errors are ± 0.1 N on resistance measurement, ± 0.05° on trim, ± 0.001 m/s on speed and ± 0.01 kg on weights.
In addition to that, an error related to the interceptor positioning could occur. In a previous work (De Luca and Pensa, 2012) a deep analysis of
these errors had been done on models with comparable dimensions. The estimated maximum error allowed for the depth of the interceptor was
0.2 mm; it implies a maximum error on resistance of 1.1% and an average error of 0.5%.
The evaluation of the errors due to the uncertainties related to the weights, was conducted by the polynomial expressions above proposed, the
maximum value is not higher than 0.2% due to an error of displacement evaluation of ± 0.005 kg.

230
 Appendix D. Polynomial coefficients. Matrices A, B and C were estimated for each model at zero trim condition

A: CR B: SWD C: LWLD

C1
F. De Luca, C. Pensa

Ⓜ0 Ⓜ1 Ⓜ2 Ⓜ3 Ⓜ0 Ⓜ1 Ⓜ2 Ⓜ3 Ⓜ0 Ⓜ1 Ⓜ2 Ⓜ3
Fr0 −52.3614304 20.31259152 −1.96762882 0 Fr0 −2318.268824 915.7636824 −90.29357252 0 Fr0 402.5795259 −153.504576 14.67169884 0
Fr1 286.4623048 −111.026144 10.75001148 0 Fr1 12345.98475 −4857.027592 477.3767143 0 Fr1 −1596.597844 610.8261395 −58.20175408 0
Fr2 −563.4842137 218.4820402 −21.16568117 0 Fr2 −24860.01416 9746.053358 −954.6884175 0 Fr2 1954.074722 −742.4499108 70.16202604 0
Fr3 473.6139554 −183.7480269 17.81253846 0 Fr3 22628.89698 −8844.098459 863.7141402 0 Fr3 −545.3332711 198.785597 −17.84833494 0
Fr4 −143.4809583 55.69598585 −5.402185962 0 Fr4 −7849.469063 3060.691291 −298.2180626 0 Fr4 −217.8527037 88.29350685 −8.964416704 0
C2 Ⓜ0 Ⓜ1 Ⓜ2 Ⓜ3 Ⓜ0 Ⓜ1 Ⓜ2 Ⓜ3 Ⓜ0 Ⓜ1 Ⓜ2 Ⓜ3
0 0 0
Fr −8.651492353 3.218243839 −0.296508998 0 Fr 732.2088962 −267.2739822 24.3531546 0 Fr 104.1696329 −39.23949492 3.737292 0
Fr1 33.3883941 −12.3731322 1.137265092 0 Fr1 −2987.146141 1094.958332 −99.93880661 0 Fr1 −386.1340358 150.2701096 −14.41143517 0
Fr2 −42.53857932 15.77020018 −1.449593462 0 Fr2 3980.924468 −1459.987766 133.2488033 0 Fr2 506.9454551 −199.6785252 19.31776421 0
Fr3 22.47021354 −8.341597912 0.767121541 0 Fr3 −2196.437643 805.0132252 −73.39869198 0 Fr3 −282.552569 112.4609204 −10.97157109 0
Fr4 −4.26237798 1.584736731 −0.145788018 0 Fr4 436.8508255 −159.8801337 14.55293371 0 Fr4 58.1727911 −23.36601492 2.29783155 0
C3 Ⓜ0 Ⓜ1 Ⓜ2 Ⓜ3 Ⓜ0 Ⓜ1 Ⓜ2 Ⓜ3 Ⓜ0 Ⓜ1 Ⓜ2 Ⓜ3
Fr0 −178.8484205 91.86445373 −15.69811469 0.892662744 Fr0 24072.09927 −12368.37217 2115.663221 −120.4734834 Fr0 2172.95883 −1213.96111 224.2424416 −13.69475688
Fr1 757.4182535 −388.8770127 66.44216236 −3.778246534 Fr1 −108249.71 55663.56499 −9528.51592 542.9820032 Fr1 −10595.08245 5897.256912 −1085.102718 66.05588453
Fr2 −1165.166612 598.1694266 −102.2048474 5.812606265 Fr2 175570.7946 −90326.9141 15470.22269 −882.0293985 Fr2 17214.95566 −9559.531624 1755.823644 −106.73832
Fr3 764.0525611 −392.2383513 67.02302685 −3.812187759 Fr3 −120600.7041 62071.48541 −10635.44021 606.6355759 Fr3 −11166.78459 6201.996297 −1139.578581 69.31062512
Fr4 −180.9056723 92.86895078 −15.86944899 0.902707054 Fr4 29697.32456 −15289.73591 2620.647095 −149.5296535 Fr4 2505.394884 −1393.985396 256.5915173 −15.63254025
C4 Ⓜ0 Ⓜ1 Ⓜ2 Ⓜ3 Ⓜ0 Ⓜ1 Ⓜ2 Ⓜ3 Ⓜ0 Ⓜ1 Ⓜ2 Ⓜ3
Fr0 187.0765705 −86.29968472 13.25994392 −0.678490385 Fr0 −10022.97515 4689.579788 −729.8819608 37.7926063 Fr0 −6601.847073 3045.958024 −467.6074895 23.89682474
1

231
Fr1 −727.2767657 335.5559617 −51.55991652 2.638111168 Fr 38588.77513 −18048.14245 2808.382332 −145.3931435 Fr1 27942.50715 −12874.17572 1974.346768 −100.7935837
Fr2 1064.51692 −491.1727862 75.46822225 −3.861065346 Fr2 −58848.86056 27495.67209 −4274.355049 221.0931301 Fr2 −43591.99773 20073.68339 −3076.733767 156.9850673
Fr3 −688.7578524 317.8290221 −48.83610558 2.498529552 Fr3 40991.38592 −19128.70231 2970.189313 −153.4670435 Fr3 29516.09896 −13590.2982 2082.725207 −106.2525438
Fr4 164.3579935 −75.85526686 11.65676485 −0.596418867 Fr4 −10591.21653 4937.139522 −765.8312619 39.53216426 Fr4 −7295.373112 3359.58061 −514.9344665 26.27389189
C5 Ⓜ0 Ⓜ1 Ⓜ2 Ⓜ3 Ⓜ0 Ⓜ1 Ⓜ2 Ⓜ3 Ⓜ0 Ⓜ1 Ⓜ2 Ⓜ3
Fr0 −0.670234511 0.19409594 −0.01372601 0 Fr0 161.6779709 −42.77732217 2.85219049 0 Fr0 584.329822 −158.9955918 10.86261005 0
Fr1 3.653442358 −1.006500999 0.068687577 0 Fr1 −606.1974058 159.9136185 −10.57224552 0 Fr1 −2553.94212 696.8942509 −47.55769397 0
Fr2 −6.218715898 1.677445818 −0.112494121 0 Fr2 818.4671671 −212.5019958 13.82127902 0 Fr2 4048.515628 −1103.523494 75.22903207 0
Fr3 4.704098373 −1.25708063 0.083688226 0 Fr3 −522.0803404 134.1237101 −8.628178068 0 Fr3 −2757.646854 751.2371152 −51.18723833 0
Fr4 −1.314589281 0.350640185 −0.023330255 0 Fr4 132.3696572 −33.98758905 2.184815407 0 Fr4 681.0684735 −185.5581227 12.6448848 0
Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

The reliabilities of the polynomials and of their coefficients have been verified point by point on the entire amount of experimental data. An
example of the polynomial fitting is shown in the Fig. D1.
As indicator of the reliability the normalized root mean square deviation (NRMSD) has been chosen:
NRMSD = {1/n ∑n [(yi- ŷi)/ yi]2}0.5
where:
n = number of predictions
yi = experimental value
ŷi = predicted value
Next table shows the results referring to the three polynomials (CR, SWD and LWLD).

Model CR*1000 NRMSD SWD NRMSD LWLD NRMSD

C1 0.0154 0.0084 0.0036

C2 0.0146 0.0055 0.0031
C3 0.0380 0.0437 0.0055
C4 0.0325 0.0060 0.0030
C5 0.0249 0.0117 0.0038

Fig. D1. Comparison between experimental and predicted data (C1 Model).

232
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

Appendix E. Wave cuts; Model C2

233
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

Appendix F. Scaling example

To correlate model’s experimental data and ship performances, two ways are available using:

• the dynamic data shown in Appendix A or

• the same data obtained by the polynomials whose coefficients are given in Appendix D.

Both the ways are carried out by the ITTC’57 procedures.

Next examples are referring to a ship whose main dimensions should be:

LOA 52–53 m
BOA 11.5 m
Δ 450 t
VS ∈ (22, 30) kn

These dimensions identify the Model C4 and a scale factor λ =20.10. The ship reference dimensions will be: LWL = 48.2 m, Ⓜ = 6.34, VS∈(22, 30)
kn.
The ITTC’57 correlation procedure prescribes the relations:

• VM = VS λ0.5 (in this case: VM∈(2.52, 3.44) m/s)

• RTS = CTS (0.5 ρ VS2 SWD)
• CTS = CR+CFS+CA
• CFS = 0.075
2
(log10Re − 2)

where CA is the Correlation allowance coefficient.

By using the tables of data
For planing vessels, it is recommended to use the dynamic data LWLD and SWD. Therefore, referring to Table 43 of the Appendix A and for CA = 2
× 10−4, the correlation procedures give the results shown in the next table.

VM=2.50 m/s VM=3.00 m/s VM=3.50 m/s

VS=21.8 kn VS=26.1 kn VS=30.5 kn
CR 7.44×10−3 6.22×10−3 5.01×10−3
LWLD (m) 2.36 2.33 2.31
Re 4.468×108 5.295×108 6.122×108

234
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

CFS 1.696×10−3 1.659×10−3 1.628×10−3

CTS 9.34×10−3 7.90×10−3 6.66×10−3
SWD (m2) 1.17 1.14 1.1
RTS (kN) 283.2 344.6 381.6

Obviously, for models with interceptors, the calculation procedure is the same. Nevertheless it has been highlighted that there is a significant
scale effect in the correlation of the interceptor work in ship scale. In particular, in model scale the effectiveness of the interceptor (as trim corrector
and as high lift device) is underrated. This underestimate is due to the non-proportional boundary layer and is growing with the scale factor. This
theme is described in detail in (De Luca and Pensa, 2012).
By using the polynomials
It is possible to perform the same example using the polynomial expressions. The vectors Ⓜ and Fr should be calculate for the speeds of interest.
ⓂT = {1, Ⓜ, Ⓜ 2, Ⓜ 3} = {1, 6.341, 40.208, 254.961}
VS = 21.8 kn:FrT = {1, Fr, Fr2, Fr3, Fr4} = {1, 0.515, 0.265, 0.137, 0.070}
VS = 30.5 kn:FrT = {1, Fr, Fr2, Fr3, Fr4} = {1, 0.721, 0.520, 0.375, 0.270}
By the next expressions, it is possible to calculate CR, SWD and LWLD.
CR = (Fr)T·A Ⓜ
SWD = (Fr)T·B Ⓜ
LWLD = (Fr)T·C Ⓜ
To be clear, the calculation of the CR at VS = 21.8 kn is shown.
⎛187.0765705, − 86.2996847, 13.25994392, − 0.6784904 ⎞
⎜ ⎟⎛ 1 ⎞
⎜ −727.276765, 335.5559617, − 51.55991652, 2.6381112 ⎟⎜ 6. 341 ⎟
V 1 : CR = (Fr)T ·AⓂ = (1, 0. 515, 0. 265, 0. 137, 0. 070)·⎜ 1064.51692, − 491.172786, 75.46822225, − 3.8610653 ⎟⎜ ⎟ = 0. 0075214
⎜ −688.757852, 317.8290221, − 48.83610558, 2.4985296 ⎟⎜ 40. 208 ⎟
⎜ ⎟⎝ 254. 961⎠
⎝164.3579935, − 75.8552669, 11.65676485, − 0.5964189 ⎠
The results are:

VS CR SWD LWLD
kn (m2) (m)

21.8 0.0075214 1.17 2.36

30.5 0.0050002 1.10 2.32

−4
Now it is possible to repeat the same ITTC’57 procedures above shown and taking ΔCF=2·10 , it is possible to articulate the resistance by a
single expression
RTS = {[(Fr)T A·Ⓜ]+{0.075/{Log10{{Vs [(Fr)T·C Ⓜ] λ)/νs}−2}2}+ΔCF}1/2ρ[(Fr)T·B Ⓜ] λ2 Vs2

VS (kn) ReS CFS CTS RTS (kN)

21.8 4.465E+08 0.0016961 0.009418 286.2

30.5 6.135E+08 0.0016278 0.006828 382.5

By the following expressions it is possible to evaluate the sensitivity of the resistance to the displacement.
∂CR/∂Ⓜ = (Fr)T·A Ⓜi;
∂SWD/∂Ⓜ = (Fr)T·B Ⓜi;
∂LWLD/∂Ⓜ = (Fr)T·C Ⓜi;
ⓂiT = {0, 1, 2Ⓜ, 3Ⓜ2, 4Ⓜ3, 5Ⓜ4}
for Ⓜ = 6.34ⓂiT = {0, 1, 12.682, 120.625}
whereas an increase of the displacement of 1.0% leads to reducing the Ⓜ of 0.02, the above mentioned expressions give the following derivatives.

VS (kn) ∂CR/∂Ⓜ ∂SWD/∂Ⓜ ∂LWLD/∂Ⓜ

21.8 −0.002524 −0.713 −0.15

30.5 −0.003053 −0.187 −0.04

The next expressions give the variations of CR, SWD and LWLD:
δCR = - δⓂ·∂CR /∂Ⓜ.
δSWD = - δⓂ·∂SWD /∂Ⓜ.
δLWLD = - δⓂ·∂LWLD /∂Ⓜ.

VS (kn) δCR* δSWD*(m2) δLWLD*(m)

21.8 0.000051 0.0143 0.0031

30.5 0.000061 0.0037 0.0008

235
F. De Luca, C. Pensa Ocean Engineering 139 (2017) 205–236

Finally, it is possible to calculate the final readings of CR, SWD and LWLD and, repeating the standard ship-model correlation, of the resistance
variations.

VS CR+δCR* SWD+δSWD* LWL+δLWLD*

(kn) (m2) (m)

21.8 0.007572 1.18 2.36

30.5 0.005061 1.10 2.32

VS (kn) ReS CFS CTS RTS+δRTS (kN)

21.8 4.471E+08 0.0016958 0.0094676 291.2

30.5 6.137E+08 0.0016277 0.0068890 387.2

Comparing the resistances evaluated through the two ways, it is possible to observe differences of 1.0% and 0.2%.

References Grigoropoulos, G.J., Loukakis, T.A., 2002. Resistance and Seakeeping Characteristics of a
Systematic Series in the Pre-planing Condition (Part 1). Transactions SNAME. Vol.
110.
Balsamo, F., De Luca, F., Pensa, C., 2011. A New Logic for Controllable Pitch Propeller Hubble, N.E., 1974. Resistance of Hard-Chine, Stepless Planing Craft with Systematic
Management. Sustainable Maritime Transportation and Exploitation of Sea Variation of Form, Longitudinal Center of Gravity, and Hull Loading. Naval Ship
Resources. Taylor & Francis Group, London. Research and Development Center, Bethesda.
Begovic, E., Bertorello, C., 2012. Resistance assessment of warped hullform. Ocean Eng.. Keuning, J.A., Gerritsma, J., 1982. Resistance tests of a series of planing hull forms with
Clement, E.P., Blount, D.L., 1963. Resistance tests of a systematic series of planing hull 25 degrees deadrise angle. Int. Shipbuild. Prog. 29 (337).
forms. Transactions SNAME. Keuning, J.A., Gerritsma, J., van Tervisga, P.F., 1993. Resistance Tests of A Series
De Luca, F., Pensa, C., 2012. Experimental investigation on conventional and Planing Hull Forms with 30 degrees Deadrise Angle, and A Calculation Model Based
unconventional interceptors. Trans. R. Inst. Nav. Archit. – Part B Int. J. Small Craft on This and Similar Systematic Series. MEMT 25, Delft, The Netherlands.
Technol., (RINA). Kowalyshyn, D.H., Metcalf, 2006. A USCG Systematic Series of High Speed Planing
De Luca, F., Mancini, S., Pensa, C., 2016. An extended verification and validation study of Hulls. Transactions of the Society of Naval Architects and marine Engineers Vol.
CFD simulations for planing hulls. J. Ship Res. 60 (2), (SNAME). 114, 2006, Jersey City, USA.
De Luca, F., Pensa, C., Pranzitelli, A., 2010. Experimental and Numerical Investigation Taunton, D.J., Hudson, D.A., Shenoi, R.A., 2010. Characteristics of a series of high speed
on Interceptors' Effectiveness 7th High Performance Marine Vehicles 2010. hard chine planing hulls – part 1: performance in calm water. Trans. R. Inst. Nav.
Melbourne, Florida. Archit. – Part B Int. J. Small Craft Technol..

236