CA2359532A1 - Monohull wave piercing bow - Google Patents
Monohull wave piercing bow Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CA2359532A1 CA2359532A1 CA002359532A CA2359532A CA2359532A1 CA 2359532 A1 CA2359532 A1 CA 2359532A1 CA 002359532 A CA002359532 A CA 002359532A CA 2359532 A CA2359532 A CA 2359532A CA 2359532 A1 CA2359532 A1 CA 2359532A1
- Authority
- CA
- Canada
- Prior art keywords
- bow
- hull
- sea
- going ship
- enclosing surface
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Abandoned
Links
Classifications
-
- B—PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
- B63—SHIPS OR OTHER WATERBORNE VESSELS; RELATED EQUIPMENT
- B63B—SHIPS OR OTHER WATERBORNE VESSELS; EQUIPMENT FOR SHIPPING
- B63B1/00—Hydrodynamic or hydrostatic features of hulls or of hydrofoils
- B63B1/02—Hydrodynamic or hydrostatic features of hulls or of hydrofoils deriving lift mainly from water displacement
- B63B1/04—Hydrodynamic or hydrostatic features of hulls or of hydrofoils deriving lift mainly from water displacement with single hull
- B63B1/06—Shape of fore part
-
- B—PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
- B63—SHIPS OR OTHER WATERBORNE VESSELS; RELATED EQUIPMENT
- B63B—SHIPS OR OTHER WATERBORNE VESSELS; EQUIPMENT FOR SHIPPING
- B63B39/00—Equipment to decrease pitch, roll, or like unwanted vessel movements; Apparatus for indicating vessel attitude
Landscapes
- Chemical & Material Sciences (AREA)
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Combustion & Propulsion (AREA)
- Mechanical Engineering (AREA)
- Ocean & Marine Engineering (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Fluid Mechanics (AREA)
- Other Liquid Machine Or Engine Such As Wave Power Use (AREA)
Abstract
This invention provides an improved shape of the bow of a high speed ocean-going ship. It introduces a set of inverted and inclined surfaces that enclose the bow from above, and cause the hull to move through the waves rather than over them. These surfaces generate a downward lifting force that counteracts the displacement force. Displacement force causes a traditionally-shaped bow to lift above waves and initiate pitching movement. The new type of bow reduces or eliminates pitching movement and slamming loads on the hull, thus improving ride quality, and enabling designers to specify lighter structure under the existing rules. This in turn reduces the overall weight of the craft, enabling reduction in the power required to achieve the service speed, reduction in fuel consumption, and reduction in the associated capital and operating costs.
Description
DESCRIPTION
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
This invention pertains generally to the hull shape of ocean-going ships. More specifically, this invention relates to the shape of the bow of a monohull high speed marine craft. The new and unique proposed shape of the bow includes several inclined top surfaces that replace the traditional forward deck, and are positioned to cause the hull of a ship to go through the waves, rather than over the waves.
A ship moving in waves is subjected to vertical accelerations; that moveriient is commonly referred to as "pitching". A traditional bow, characterized by transverse sections that are the widest at the deck, typically rEaults in high acceleration levels; at certain combinations of ship's speed and wave height, the hull will emerge and crash back into the water. To prevent damage to the ship, the rules governing structural design call for a suitably strong" hence heavy, supporting structure of the hull's shell. Structural strength requirement can be reduced under the construction rules in force only if the global load; (accelerations) and local loads (slamming) are reduced. In turn, these loads can only be lowered by reducing the level of hull's response to the waves. The benefits of reduced structural weight are significant. Firstly, the construction cost is reduced, as less material needs to be purchased. Secondly, a lighter craft requires less power to achieve the required speed, further reducing the cost of building and operating such a vessel, as smaller engines need to be purchased and less fuel is consumed. Finally; reduced acceleration levels result in reducing damage to cargo and the incidence and severity of seasickness in passengers. This directly and significantly increases the revenue-generating potential of the ships, which are often restricted in their operation by weather conditions. In some cases, ships are not permitted to operate above certain present or forecasted sea states.
This invention is expected to eliminate or reduce those restrictions, and to produce the benefits associated with lower structural weight.
DESCRIPTION OF PRIOR ART
There are several patents related to a marine craft bow form, filed in several countries. The following have been found to be the closest related to this invention.
U.S. Patent 5,184,561 Nickel) 0711993 U.S. Patent 5,263,433 Meyer 1111993 U.S. Patent 6,116,180 Thompson 0912000 U.K. Patent 2150890 0711985 U.K. Patent 2230717 04!1991 Japan Application 02296855 I.H.I. 0611992 Japan Application 05277190 Kiyoshi 0511995 Most of the patents or applications cited herein refer to various shapes of a ship hull bow form of an ordinary general shape, with very local reverse stem (forward edge of a bow) of varying shape; none, except for one, of a wave piercing form.
The only wave piercing form is claimed by Thompso~n (U.S. Patent 6,116,180);
however, it is designed and defined to not have army lifting surfaces, nor any portion of its shape designed to minimize pitching motion by way of creating a dynamic lift force counteracting the displacement force, which is the principle of the present invention.
None of these inventions claim the features described herein.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
The concept behind this invention, which distinguishes it from all other existing forms of ship's bow, provides for the shape of a bow that reduces pitching motion of ship's hull at speed in waves by means of creating a dynamic lift force counteracting the forces that initiate pitching motion in waves.
The reduction of pitching is achieved by a new shape of the bow that causes the hull to move deliberately through the waves, rather than over them. This phenomenon is generally achieved by a bow that is shaped in such a manner that the center of the area of the transverse sections of the bow is located close to the water surface in normal operating condition, rather than high above it, as it is in a traditional ship's bow. The former is referred to ;as a "wave piercing bow".
Wave piercing bows per se, are not new. Not to be confused with the early ramming bows, fitted to warships to enable them to ram an enemy's ship, wave piercing bows have recently been subject to extensive research worldwide.
Based on the concept of preventing the initiation of pitching by eliminating the traditional bow's large volume above the waterline, the first wave piercing bows have been designed, optimized, and fitted to multihull vessels (primarily twin hulled, or "catamaran" ships), many of which are presently in service. There is a record of sporadic research into the wave piercing bows for a singe hull (referred to as "monohull"), but at the time of this writing, none yet in commercial service.
The main reason is the difficulty of stabilizing a wave piercing monohull in waves.
In the most simple terms, the volume of a bow above the waterline prevents the hull from diving (a desired effect), but it also causes i:he bow to lift over a wave, and then often crash into the next wave (not a desired effect). In the wave piercing monohulls researched to date, reducing that volume eliminates both effects. The hull will not lift and crash, but it will dive easily. In multihulls, this problem has been solved by adding a third bow, posutioned between and above the main two wave piercing hulls. In a monohull, it cannot be fitted.
This invention solves that problem by going beyond the passive elimination of the bow volume that causes pitching, and instead using a new shape and distribution of volume in the wave piercing bow, to dynamically control and reduce the movement by balancing lifting forces produced by the interaction of the hull and the waves.
The main feature, which creates an improvement in hydrodynamic performance, is a system of surfaces enclosing the bow from above., forming the general shape of a wedge pointed forward, in the direction of the ship's movement. These upper surfaces are further inclined transversely to form a shallow inverted "V"
(i.e., "?"
shape) in the transverse section. At their aft, top end, the surfaces additionally curve outwards, deflecting the water and spray away from the wheelhouse and from the deck.
An added advantage of this invention is the reduction of resistance and power at speed in calm water, as compared to a standard raked bow. The tip of the proposed wave piercing bow is located much closer to the waterline, and the resulting length at the waterline is greater than that of a hull of the same overall length, fitted with a standard bow. Hydrodynamically, a hull of the same displacement and greater waterline length will inevitably require less power for the same speed in calm water.
That benefit is shared by all wave piercing bows. However, wave piercing bows developed to date tend to be very long and narrow, consequently increasing the overall hull length, and hence cost of a vessel. The present concept attempts to produce the desired hydrodynamic effects without addling to the overall length. In fact, in order to create the upper surface producing a downward lifting force, the proposed new type of bow has to be relatively wide, resulting in a hull which has more usable space inside than traditional narrow high speed hulls.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
This invention pertains generally to the hull shape of ocean-going ships. More specifically, this invention relates to the shape of the bow of a monohull high speed marine craft. The new and unique proposed shape of the bow includes several inclined top surfaces that replace the traditional forward deck, and are positioned to cause the hull of a ship to go through the waves, rather than over the waves.
A ship moving in waves is subjected to vertical accelerations; that moveriient is commonly referred to as "pitching". A traditional bow, characterized by transverse sections that are the widest at the deck, typically rEaults in high acceleration levels; at certain combinations of ship's speed and wave height, the hull will emerge and crash back into the water. To prevent damage to the ship, the rules governing structural design call for a suitably strong" hence heavy, supporting structure of the hull's shell. Structural strength requirement can be reduced under the construction rules in force only if the global load; (accelerations) and local loads (slamming) are reduced. In turn, these loads can only be lowered by reducing the level of hull's response to the waves. The benefits of reduced structural weight are significant. Firstly, the construction cost is reduced, as less material needs to be purchased. Secondly, a lighter craft requires less power to achieve the required speed, further reducing the cost of building and operating such a vessel, as smaller engines need to be purchased and less fuel is consumed. Finally; reduced acceleration levels result in reducing damage to cargo and the incidence and severity of seasickness in passengers. This directly and significantly increases the revenue-generating potential of the ships, which are often restricted in their operation by weather conditions. In some cases, ships are not permitted to operate above certain present or forecasted sea states.
This invention is expected to eliminate or reduce those restrictions, and to produce the benefits associated with lower structural weight.
DESCRIPTION OF PRIOR ART
There are several patents related to a marine craft bow form, filed in several countries. The following have been found to be the closest related to this invention.
U.S. Patent 5,184,561 Nickel) 0711993 U.S. Patent 5,263,433 Meyer 1111993 U.S. Patent 6,116,180 Thompson 0912000 U.K. Patent 2150890 0711985 U.K. Patent 2230717 04!1991 Japan Application 02296855 I.H.I. 0611992 Japan Application 05277190 Kiyoshi 0511995 Most of the patents or applications cited herein refer to various shapes of a ship hull bow form of an ordinary general shape, with very local reverse stem (forward edge of a bow) of varying shape; none, except for one, of a wave piercing form.
The only wave piercing form is claimed by Thompso~n (U.S. Patent 6,116,180);
however, it is designed and defined to not have army lifting surfaces, nor any portion of its shape designed to minimize pitching motion by way of creating a dynamic lift force counteracting the displacement force, which is the principle of the present invention.
None of these inventions claim the features described herein.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
The concept behind this invention, which distinguishes it from all other existing forms of ship's bow, provides for the shape of a bow that reduces pitching motion of ship's hull at speed in waves by means of creating a dynamic lift force counteracting the forces that initiate pitching motion in waves.
The reduction of pitching is achieved by a new shape of the bow that causes the hull to move deliberately through the waves, rather than over them. This phenomenon is generally achieved by a bow that is shaped in such a manner that the center of the area of the transverse sections of the bow is located close to the water surface in normal operating condition, rather than high above it, as it is in a traditional ship's bow. The former is referred to ;as a "wave piercing bow".
Wave piercing bows per se, are not new. Not to be confused with the early ramming bows, fitted to warships to enable them to ram an enemy's ship, wave piercing bows have recently been subject to extensive research worldwide.
Based on the concept of preventing the initiation of pitching by eliminating the traditional bow's large volume above the waterline, the first wave piercing bows have been designed, optimized, and fitted to multihull vessels (primarily twin hulled, or "catamaran" ships), many of which are presently in service. There is a record of sporadic research into the wave piercing bows for a singe hull (referred to as "monohull"), but at the time of this writing, none yet in commercial service.
The main reason is the difficulty of stabilizing a wave piercing monohull in waves.
In the most simple terms, the volume of a bow above the waterline prevents the hull from diving (a desired effect), but it also causes i:he bow to lift over a wave, and then often crash into the next wave (not a desired effect). In the wave piercing monohulls researched to date, reducing that volume eliminates both effects. The hull will not lift and crash, but it will dive easily. In multihulls, this problem has been solved by adding a third bow, posutioned between and above the main two wave piercing hulls. In a monohull, it cannot be fitted.
This invention solves that problem by going beyond the passive elimination of the bow volume that causes pitching, and instead using a new shape and distribution of volume in the wave piercing bow, to dynamically control and reduce the movement by balancing lifting forces produced by the interaction of the hull and the waves.
The main feature, which creates an improvement in hydrodynamic performance, is a system of surfaces enclosing the bow from above., forming the general shape of a wedge pointed forward, in the direction of the ship's movement. These upper surfaces are further inclined transversely to form a shallow inverted "V"
(i.e., "?"
shape) in the transverse section. At their aft, top end, the surfaces additionally curve outwards, deflecting the water and spray away from the wheelhouse and from the deck.
An added advantage of this invention is the reduction of resistance and power at speed in calm water, as compared to a standard raked bow. The tip of the proposed wave piercing bow is located much closer to the waterline, and the resulting length at the waterline is greater than that of a hull of the same overall length, fitted with a standard bow. Hydrodynamically, a hull of the same displacement and greater waterline length will inevitably require less power for the same speed in calm water.
That benefit is shared by all wave piercing bows. However, wave piercing bows developed to date tend to be very long and narrow, consequently increasing the overall hull length, and hence cost of a vessel. The present concept attempts to produce the desired hydrodynamic effects without addling to the overall length. In fact, in order to create the upper surface producing a downward lifting force, the proposed new type of bow has to be relatively wide, resulting in a hull which has more usable space inside than traditional narrow high speed hulls.
The reduction in accelerations and wave impact loads on the hull also enables the designer to specify a lighter internal structure for a ship fitted with the proposed new wave piercing bow. Weight is one the most important factors affecting the economics of a cargo ship. In simple terms, the less weight built into the design, the more payload can be carried in the same hull, to generate revenue. There is a certain minimum structural strength required to safely operate an ocean going ship, a minimum safeguarded by the recognized authorities by enforcing compliance with their rules. These classification societies examine and approve the design before a ship can be built.
High speed craft, to which the application of the proposed new wave piercing bow would primarily apply, have their internal structure designed to so called High Speed Craft (HSC) code. Under HSC code, the scantlings (thickness of the plates or size of the stiffeners) depend primarily on the accelerations and impact loads. These, in turn, are based on empirically determined maximum loads measured on high speed ships, and inevitably produce a heavy structure.
Lighter structure is allowed only if lower loads are proven through model testing.
Lighter structural weight not only results in lower construction cost, but it also requires lower power for the same speed and payload. Alternatively, the difference in weight may be exchanged for a higher payload and revenue. This weight reduction is the primary benefit of the present invention.
The inventor has funded a comprehensive research and development programme, involving comparative model testing of the standard and wave piercing bows on the same hull, and the design of a lighter structural arrangement. This preliminary R&D work has fully confirmed the benefits claimed herein.
The form of the ship's bow described above creates a unique and improved concept. This bow takes advantage of the waves to stabilize the hull at speed, resulting in lower accelerations, lower structural weight, lower power requirements, lower capital and operating costs, and higher payload and revenue.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
Figure 1 - Comparison of the profile (side) views of a hull fitted with the proposed wave piercing bow and a hull fitted with a standard bow.
Figure 2 - Profile (side) view of the proposed new wave piercing bow showing key surfaces.
Figure 3 - Plan (top) view of the wave piercing bow, showing key surfaces.
Figure 4 - Body plan (front view) of the wave piercing bow, showing key surfaces and sections.
High speed craft, to which the application of the proposed new wave piercing bow would primarily apply, have their internal structure designed to so called High Speed Craft (HSC) code. Under HSC code, the scantlings (thickness of the plates or size of the stiffeners) depend primarily on the accelerations and impact loads. These, in turn, are based on empirically determined maximum loads measured on high speed ships, and inevitably produce a heavy structure.
Lighter structure is allowed only if lower loads are proven through model testing.
Lighter structural weight not only results in lower construction cost, but it also requires lower power for the same speed and payload. Alternatively, the difference in weight may be exchanged for a higher payload and revenue. This weight reduction is the primary benefit of the present invention.
The inventor has funded a comprehensive research and development programme, involving comparative model testing of the standard and wave piercing bows on the same hull, and the design of a lighter structural arrangement. This preliminary R&D work has fully confirmed the benefits claimed herein.
The form of the ship's bow described above creates a unique and improved concept. This bow takes advantage of the waves to stabilize the hull at speed, resulting in lower accelerations, lower structural weight, lower power requirements, lower capital and operating costs, and higher payload and revenue.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
Figure 1 - Comparison of the profile (side) views of a hull fitted with the proposed wave piercing bow and a hull fitted with a standard bow.
Figure 2 - Profile (side) view of the proposed new wave piercing bow showing key surfaces.
Figure 3 - Plan (top) view of the wave piercing bow, showing key surfaces.
Figure 4 - Body plan (front view) of the wave piercing bow, showing key surfaces and sections.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT
Referring to the drawings showing figures 1 through ~, the numbers 1 through 9 indicate the following portions or features of the new bow.
1. Standard bow shown to illustrate the difference in waterline length, 2. General outline of the proposed wave piercing bow, 3. Waterline length with a standard bow, 4. Waterline length with the wave piercing bow, 5. Waterline, 6. Hull draft, shown to illustrate the relation to the height of the wave piercing bow tip above waterline, 7. Height of the tip of the wave piercing bow tip above waterline, 8. A pitch reducing reverse lifting surface, 9. Wave and spray deflector.
Figures 1 through 4 illustrate the preferred embodirnent of this invention.
The specific features that are unique to this invention and their hydrodynamic effect are shown on the drawings and described in detail hereinafter, although it should be understood that the invention is not confined to ainy strict conformity with, or limited by the accompanying drawings, but it may be modified to optimize the hydrodynamic performance, so long as one or all the essential features are present within the limits specified below and in the claims.
The first significant and unique feature not applied thus far to the design of a high speed marine monohull craft, is the lifting surface (8)v a panel forming the top of the proposed new wave piercing bow, shaped to generate, upon the bow entering a wave, a lifting force directed down, opposite to the displacement force generated by a submerged volume of the bow, which typically initiates the pitching movement by lifting the bow up over the wave. Panels (8), shown in Figures 1 through 4 only in a generic form, will have 'their size, shape and angle optimized for the size of the craft and the design speed, to counterbalance the displacement force and to minimize the pitching motion while moving through the waves. The height (7) of the point of origin of panels 1;6) will also be optimized in terms of its ratio to the draft (6). Introduction of the reverse panels (6), which counterbalance the forces causing pitch motions, and reduce said motions and the associated loads affecting the structural weight required under the rules, represents a significant improvement in the art of ship design.
An additional improvement resulting from lowering the tip of the bow to the distance (7) closer to the waterline (5) than in a standard bow, is an increase in the waterline length (4) as compared to the waterline length (3) of a ship of the same overall length, as shown in Figure 1. As a rule, resistance of a marine craft hull and the associated power required to move the hull at a required speed, is an inverse function of the waterline length, i.e., the longer the waterline length, the lower the resistance and power at the same hull displacement. This again represents an improvement in the art of ship design.
An adverse effect of the water and spray being carried over the bow moving through the wave, rather than over it, is admittedly a trade-off for all other improvements listed here. As expected, the initial tests confirmed that overall amount of water and spray displaced by a wave piercing hull was lower than that displaced by a hull fitted with an ordinary bow, but a standard hull crashing into the wave displaces water and spray away from the hull, while the wave piercing hull causes it to move over the bow and onto the aft deck, where equipment or payload may be stored. This undesirable effect is controlled by the spray deflectors (9), a curved upper portion of the reverse surfaces (8), deflecting water sliding up the surface (8) to the side and away from the hull centerline. This effect may be further controlled by the operator, by slowing down the craft when particularly adverse sea conditions are encountered.
Referring to the drawings showing figures 1 through ~, the numbers 1 through 9 indicate the following portions or features of the new bow.
1. Standard bow shown to illustrate the difference in waterline length, 2. General outline of the proposed wave piercing bow, 3. Waterline length with a standard bow, 4. Waterline length with the wave piercing bow, 5. Waterline, 6. Hull draft, shown to illustrate the relation to the height of the wave piercing bow tip above waterline, 7. Height of the tip of the wave piercing bow tip above waterline, 8. A pitch reducing reverse lifting surface, 9. Wave and spray deflector.
Figures 1 through 4 illustrate the preferred embodirnent of this invention.
The specific features that are unique to this invention and their hydrodynamic effect are shown on the drawings and described in detail hereinafter, although it should be understood that the invention is not confined to ainy strict conformity with, or limited by the accompanying drawings, but it may be modified to optimize the hydrodynamic performance, so long as one or all the essential features are present within the limits specified below and in the claims.
The first significant and unique feature not applied thus far to the design of a high speed marine monohull craft, is the lifting surface (8)v a panel forming the top of the proposed new wave piercing bow, shaped to generate, upon the bow entering a wave, a lifting force directed down, opposite to the displacement force generated by a submerged volume of the bow, which typically initiates the pitching movement by lifting the bow up over the wave. Panels (8), shown in Figures 1 through 4 only in a generic form, will have 'their size, shape and angle optimized for the size of the craft and the design speed, to counterbalance the displacement force and to minimize the pitching motion while moving through the waves. The height (7) of the point of origin of panels 1;6) will also be optimized in terms of its ratio to the draft (6). Introduction of the reverse panels (6), which counterbalance the forces causing pitch motions, and reduce said motions and the associated loads affecting the structural weight required under the rules, represents a significant improvement in the art of ship design.
An additional improvement resulting from lowering the tip of the bow to the distance (7) closer to the waterline (5) than in a standard bow, is an increase in the waterline length (4) as compared to the waterline length (3) of a ship of the same overall length, as shown in Figure 1. As a rule, resistance of a marine craft hull and the associated power required to move the hull at a required speed, is an inverse function of the waterline length, i.e., the longer the waterline length, the lower the resistance and power at the same hull displacement. This again represents an improvement in the art of ship design.
An adverse effect of the water and spray being carried over the bow moving through the wave, rather than over it, is admittedly a trade-off for all other improvements listed here. As expected, the initial tests confirmed that overall amount of water and spray displaced by a wave piercing hull was lower than that displaced by a hull fitted with an ordinary bow, but a standard hull crashing into the wave displaces water and spray away from the hull, while the wave piercing hull causes it to move over the bow and onto the aft deck, where equipment or payload may be stored. This undesirable effect is controlled by the spray deflectors (9), a curved upper portion of the reverse surfaces (8), deflecting water sliding up the surface (8) to the side and away from the hull centerline. This effect may be further controlled by the operator, by slowing down the craft when particularly adverse sea conditions are encountered.
Claims (9)
1. A sea-going ship's hull form, in which the bow is enclosed from the top by a surface extending longitudinally from the tip of i:he bow located at a point vertically closer to the waterline than the deck, to said deck level further aft, said surface also inclined transversely sloping down from the center plane of the hull towards the sides of the hull, said surface having at least half of its area, in which straight lines tangent to the points on longitudinal sections through said half of the area, are at angles of no less than 0 degrees and no more than 30 degrees to horizontal, and in which straight lines tangent to the points on transverse sections through said half of the area, are at angles of no less than 0 degrees and no more than 30 degrees to horizontal.
2. A sea-going ship's hull form as defined in claim 1, in which said top bow enclosing surface has shape symmetrical port and starboard.
3. A sea-going ship's hull form as defined in claim 1, in which shape of said top bow enclosing surface is composed of plurality of panels separated by knuckles.
4. A sea-going ship's hull form as defined in claim 1, in which said top bow enclosing surface has an additional panel having horizontal transverse sections, at the center portion of said top bow enclosing surface.
5. A sea-going ship's hull form as defined in claim 1, in which one or more portions of said top bow enclosing surface is of a conical shape.
6. A sea-going ship's hull form as defined in claim 1, in which one or more portions of said top bow enclosing surface is flat.
7. A sea-going ship's hull form as defined in claim 1, in which shape of said top bow enclosing surface is composed of plurality of panels, some of which are displaced vertically in relation to one another, and joined with additional panels of height not exceeding 10% of the total length of said top bow enclosing surface, and inclined no more than 45 degrees from vertical.
8. A sea going ship's hull form as defined in claim 1, in which said top bow enclosing surface is further twisted below said deck to deflect the flow of water and spray to the sides, away from the hull.
9. A sea-going ship's hull form as defined in claim 1, in which said top bow enclosing surface is fitted with one or several recesses to accommodate mooring and other fittings and/or equipment.
Priority Applications (2)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA002359532A CA2359532A1 (en) | 2001-09-27 | 2001-09-27 | Monohull wave piercing bow |
| US10/266,141 US20030089290A1 (en) | 2001-09-27 | 2002-10-08 | Wave piercing bow of a monohull marine craft |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA002359532A CA2359532A1 (en) | 2001-09-27 | 2001-09-27 | Monohull wave piercing bow |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CA2359532A1 true CA2359532A1 (en) | 2003-03-27 |
Family
ID=4170313
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA002359532A Abandoned CA2359532A1 (en) | 2001-09-27 | 2001-09-27 | Monohull wave piercing bow |
Country Status (2)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| US (1) | US20030089290A1 (en) |
| CA (1) | CA2359532A1 (en) |
Families Citing this family (9)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NO324744B3 (en) * | 2005-03-09 | 2012-01-10 | Ulstein Design & Solutions As | Device for displacement of a displacement type vessel. |
| EP1873051A1 (en) * | 2006-06-30 | 2008-01-02 | Technische Universiteit Delft | Ship |
| EP1873055A1 (en) * | 2006-06-30 | 2008-01-02 | Technische Universiteit Delft | Ship with bow control surface |
| KR101139417B1 (en) | 2010-03-23 | 2012-04-27 | 에스티엑스조선해양 주식회사 | anti-spray fence for arctic ship |
| PL2826702T3 (en) | 2013-07-18 | 2019-08-30 | Baltic Workboats As | Hull for an ocean-going workboat |
| CA155856S (en) | 2013-10-11 | 2015-02-10 | Ulstein Design & Solutions As | Ship stern |
| US9751593B2 (en) | 2015-01-30 | 2017-09-05 | Peter Van Diepen | Wave piercing ship hull |
| NL2016506B1 (en) * | 2016-03-29 | 2017-10-06 | Hermitage Family Office Sarl | Yacht. |
| RU2682385C1 (en) * | 2017-12-25 | 2019-03-19 | Федеральное государственное бюджетное образовательное учреждение высшего образования "Калининградский государственный технический университет" | Ship hull |
Family Cites Families (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US993440A (en) * | 1909-10-29 | 1911-05-30 | Elouild Duplessis | Ice-breaker. |
-
2001
- 2001-09-27 CA CA002359532A patent/CA2359532A1/en not_active Abandoned
-
2002
- 2002-10-08 US US10/266,141 patent/US20030089290A1/en not_active Abandoned
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| US20030089290A1 (en) | 2003-05-15 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| EP1855937B1 (en) | A foreship arrangement for a vessel of the deplacement type | |
| US7418915B2 (en) | Entrapment tunnel monohull optimized waterjet and high payload | |
| US8122840B2 (en) | Transom stern hull form and appendages for improved hydrodynamics | |
| US10518842B1 (en) | Boat hull | |
| US5522333A (en) | Catamaran boat with planing pontoons | |
| US20120291686A1 (en) | Planing hull for rough seas | |
| US6666160B1 (en) | High aspect dynamic lift boat hull | |
| US5402743A (en) | Deep chine hull design | |
| WO1997022513A1 (en) | Monohull water-borne craft | |
| EP1406811A2 (en) | Powered boat hull | |
| EP3395667B1 (en) | Stabilized hull for a keeled monohull sailboat or sail and motor boat | |
| Uithof et al. | An update on the development of the Hull Vane | |
| WO2011126358A1 (en) | Round-bilge hull form with bulbous bow, spray rails and dynamic trim control for high speed | |
| US5265554A (en) | Boat construction | |
| CA2359532A1 (en) | Monohull wave piercing bow | |
| JP2012162116A (en) | Wave shock relieving device | |
| CA2900157C (en) | Planing hull for rough seas | |
| JP6687673B2 (en) | Vessels with low wind resistance | |
| EP1545968B1 (en) | Vessel provided with a foil situated below the waterline | |
| EP3050792B1 (en) | Wave piercing ship hull | |
| AU654040B2 (en) | Multiple hull air ride boat | |
| WO2009053762A2 (en) | Ship with longitudinally extending foils, inclined keel, and lift producing blades at the stern | |
| RU2263602C2 (en) | High-speed vessel at delivery of air under bottom | |
| Kos et al. | Comparative analysis of conventional and swath passenger catamaran | |
| Begovic | Comparative assessment of rule-based design on the pressures and resulting scantlings of high speed powercrafts |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| EEER | Examination request | ||
| FZDE | Discontinued |