Resistance and Propulsion Study of a 17 500-DWT Oil Tanker Using Computational Fluid Dynamics and Slender-Ship Theory: Effects of Energy-Saving Device Fins

Abstract

The shipping industry is a major contributor to global carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions, with oil tankers accounting for a significant portion of this contribution. To meet international targets, such as the Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Index (EEXI) and Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) under the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships Annex VI, improvements in hull hydrodynamics and energy-saving technologies are essential. This study investigated the hydrodynamic performance of a 17 500 deadweight ton (DWT) oil tanker equipped with an energy-saving device (ESD) consisting of rectangular flat plate fins optimized at 8° inclination and installed in stern Zones III and IV (forward of the propeller). The novelty of this work lies in its application-specific optimization of flat-plate ESD fins for a midsized tanker, a vessel segment underrepresented in prior ESD studies, and the integration of a comprehensive computational fluid dynamics (CFD) framework validated against the Holtrop–Mennen approach and the slender-ship theory to assess resistance, propulsion, and seakeeping performance, alongside EEXI and CII. Unlike previous studies focusing on container ships or bulk carriers, this research systematically optimized fin geometry and positioning (6 m ahead of the propeller at a tailored inclination angle) for a tanker with high block coefficient (C_b = 0.775) and complex stern flow. The installation of the flat ESD fins achieved a 3.11% reduction in calm-water resistance at service speed, a 2.5% overall resistance decrease in self-propulsion, a 0.24% thrust increase, and 0.08% propeller efficiency improvement, enhancing hull efficiency from 1.213 to 1.344 and propulsive efficiency from 0.776 to 0.848. This resulted in a 2.55% effective horsepower (EHP) reduction and brake horsepower decrease from 3 203.7 to 2 912.4 kW. Consequently, the ship’s EEXI value improved from 9.45 to 8.55 g·CO₂/(t·mile), achieving regulatory compliance, while the annual fuel consumption and CO₂ emissions were reduced by 8.6%. However, this improvement did not significantly impact the vessel’s operational CII rating, which remained at E. Overall, the study demonstrates that strategically positioned flat fins optimized for tanker-specific flow characteristics with CFD errors below 2% can effectively enhance energy efficiency and reduce emissions, supporting international maritime decarbonization goals while offering a low-cost retrofit solution.

Keywords

Computational fluid dynamics / Energy efficiency existing ship index / Carbon intensity indicator / Self-propulsion performance / Tanker retrofits

References

[1] Bekhit A. Numerical simulation of the ship self-propulsion prediction using body force method and fully discretized propeller model. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 2018, 400: 42004

[2] Belibassakis K, Papadakis G, Spinelli F, Mancini S, Vitiello L, Bilandi RN, De Carlini M. Marine science and engineering shipping decarbonization: An overview of the different stern hydrodynamic energy saving devices. J. Mar. Sci. Eng., 2022, 10(5): 574

[3] Bengtsson S. Life cycle assessment of present and future marine fuels, 2011, Gothenburg, Sweden, Chalmers Tekniska Hogskola

[4] Bertram V. Practical ship hydrodynamics, 2000, London, UK, ButterworthHeinemann

[5] Bilgili L, Ölçer AI. IMO 2023 strategy-Where are we and what’s next?. Marine Policy, 2024, 160: 105953

[6] Cadence. FINE ™/Marine theory guide, 2024[Accessed on Dec. 29, 2025]

[7] Cadence. FINE ™/Marine 12.1 user guide, 2024[Accessed on Dec. 29, 2025]

[8] Chryssakis C, Balland O, Tvete HA, Brandsæter A. Alternative fuels for shipping, 2014, Hovik, Norway, DNV GL17-2014

[9] ClassNK. Guidelines on measures to comply with EEXI and CII regulations, 2022, Tokyo, Japan, Nippon Kaiji Kyokai (ClassNK)

[10] DNV. EEXI and CII requirements taking effect from 1 January 2023, 2023[Accessed on Dec. 29, 2025]

[11] Faber J, Hanayama S, Zhang S, Pereda P, Comer B, Hauerhof E, van der Loeff WS, Smith T, Zhang Y, Kosaka H, Adachi M, Bonello J-M, Galbraith C, Gong Z, Hirata K, Hummels D, Kleijn A, Lee D, Liu Y, Lucchesi A, Mao X, Muraoka E, Osipova L, Qian H, Rutherford D, Suárez de la Fuente S, Yuan H, Perico CV, Wu L, Sun D, Yoo D, Xing H. Fourth IMO GHG study 2020, 2020, London, UK, International Maritime Organization

[12] Faltinsen OM, Minsaas KJ, Liapis N, Skjørdal SO. Prediction of resistance and propulsion of a ship in a seaway. Proceedings of the 13th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, 1980v.3.1–v.3.19

[13] Firdhaus A, Ketut Suastika I. Mesh convergence study for ship resistance prediction. Journal of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, 2021, 182123-134

[14] Furcas M, Vernengo G, Villa D, Gaggero S. Design and testing of energy saving devices for a container ship: A case study on stern fins. Ships and Offshore Structures, 2020, 15(8): 870-881

[15] Gilbert P. From reductionism to systems thinking: How the shipping sector can address sulphur regulation and tackle climate change. Marine Policy, 2014, 43: 376-378

[16] Gougoulidis G, Gougoulidis G, Vasileiadis N. An overview of hydrodynamic energy efficiency improvement measures, 2015[Accessed on Dec. 29, 2025]

[17] Holmegaard Kristensen HO. Model for environmental assessment of container ship transport, 2010, Bellevue, USA, SNAME Maritime Convention SNAME-SMC-2010-T41

[18] Holtrop J, Mennen GGJ. An approximate power prediction method. International Shipbuilding Progress, 1982, 29: 166-170

[19] IMO. EEXI and CII - ship carbon intensity and rating system, 2022(Hot Topics/FAQ page)

[20] ITTC. Report of the Resistance Committee. Proceedings of the 15th International Towing Tank Conference, 1978143208

[21] ITTC. Practical guidelines for ship CFD applications: Recommended Procedures and Guidelines 7.5-03-02-03. Proceedings of the 27th International Towing Tank Conference, 2014319

[22] ITTC. Recommended procedures and guidelines: Seakeeping experiments 7.5-02-07-02.1. 28th International Towing Tank Conference, 2017135

[23] John D, Anderson JR. Computational fluid dynamics: the basics with applications, 1995, New York, USA, McGraw-Hill Inc.261262

[24] Kleinsorge L, Lindner H, Bronsart R. A computational environment for rapid CFD ship resistance analyses. Proceedings of PRADS2016, 2016

[25] Kozlowska AM, Savio L, Steen S. Predicting thrust loss of ship propellers due to ventilation and out-of-water effect. Journal of Ship Research, 2017, 61(4): 198-213

[26] Lee J, Kim H, Choi Y. Hydrodynamic performance of energy-saving devices for a bulk carrier. Ocean Engineering, 2021, 237: 109612

[27] Lee J, Kim I, Park DW. A study on the resistance performance and flow characteristic of ship with a Fin attached on stern hull. Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment and Safety, 2021, 27(7): 1106-1115

[28] Lee MK, Lee I. Optimal design of flow control Fins for a small container ship based on machine learning. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 2023, 11(6): 1149

[29] Lee MK, Lee J. Numerical study on the effect of stern fins on a container ship. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 2023, 283456-467

[30] Lindstad E, Bø TI. Potential power setups, fuels and hull designs capable of satisfying future EEDI requirements. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2018, 63: 276-290

[31] Lindstad H, Eskeland GS. Low carbon maritime transport: How speed, size and slenderness amounts to substantial capital energy substitution. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2015, 41: 244-256

[32] Lindstad H, Jullumstrø E, Sandaas I. Reductions in cost and greenhouse gas emissions with new bulk ship designs enabled by the Panama Canal expansion. Energy Policy, 2013, 59: 341-349

[33] Liu S, Papanikolaou A, Zaraphonitis G. Prediction of added resistance of ships in waves. Ocean Engineering, 2011, 38(5–6): 641-650

[34] Lungu A. Energy-saving devices in ship propulsion: Effects of nozzles placed in front of propellers. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 2021, 9(2): 1-24

[35] Maki K, Zhao F, Horn P, Banks J, Martio J, Starke B, Zaghi S, Villa D, Vitola M, Yoon HS, Jiang Y, Shingo S. ITTC quality system manual: Recommended procedures and guidelines—Benchmark database for CFD validation for resistance and propulsion (Procedure No. 7.5-03-02-02, Revision 03). 30th International Towing Tank Conference, 202419

[36] Maruo H. Wave resistance of a ship in regular head seas. Bulletin of the Faculty of Engineering, 1960[Accessed on Dec. 30, 2025]

[37] Mewis F, Guiard T. Mewis Duct: A new energy-saving device for ship propulsion. Ship Technology Research, 2011, 58(2): 86-95

[38] Mittendorf M. Data-driven prediction of added resistance of ships in waves, 2024, Stockholm, Sweden, KTH Royal Institute of Technology

[39] Mittendorf M, Badoe C, Nielsen TR, Franz T, Akpan UE, Nielsen UD. Shipping decarbonization: An overview of the different stern hydrodynamic energy saving devices. J. Mar. Sci. Eng., 2022, 10: 574

[40] Mizuno K, Okubo T, Kuroiwa R. Development of Sanoyas Tandem Fins for fuel efficiency. Journal of the Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers, 2013, 18: 45-53

[41] Molland AF, Turnock SR, Hudson DA. Ship resistance and propulsion: Practical estimation of ship propulsive power, 20172nd ednCambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press

[42] Östlund S. Propulsion efficiency with energy saving devices for vessels, 2023, Karlstad, Sweden, Karlstad University

[43] Park DM, Lee JH, Jung YW, Lee J, Kim Y, Gerhardt F. Experimental and numerical studies on added resistance of ship in oblique sea conditions. Ocean Engineering, 2019, 186: 106070

[44] Sadakata K, Hino T, Takagi Y. Estimation of full-scale performance of energy-saving devices using Boundary Layer Similarity model. Journal of Marine Science and Technology (Japan), 2024, 29(2): 245-271

[45] Sadakata T, Kawamura T, Toda Y. CFD analysis of energy-saving fins on Japan Bulk Carrier (JBC). Marine Technology, 2024, 29(1): 78-89

[46] Stott PW, Wright PNH. Opportunities for improved efficiency and reduced CO₂ emissions in dry bulk shipping stemming from the relaxation of the Panamax beam constraint. International Journal of Maritime Engineering, 2011, 153(A4): A215-A229

[47] Svardal J, Mewis F. Fuel-and cost-savings by hydrodynamic measures. International Conference on Ship Efficiency, 20091-6

[48] Taljegard M, Brynolf S, Grahn M, Andersson K, Johnson H. Cost-effective choices of marine fuels in a carbon-constrained world: Results from a global energy model. Environmental Science & Technology, 2014, 48(21): 12986-12993

[49] Taskar B, Yum KK, Steen S, Pedersen E. The effect of waves on engine-propeller dynamics and propulsion performance of ships. Ocean Engineering, 2016, 122: 262-277

[50] Thomson H, Corbett JJ, Winebrake JJ. Natural gas as a marine fuel. Energy Policy, 2015, 87: 153-167

[51] Van Terwisga T. On the working principles of energy saving devices. Third International Symposium on Marine Propulsors, 2013510518

[52] Waskito KT, Sasa K, Chen C, Kitagawa Y, Lee SW. Comparative study of realistic ship motion simulation for optimal ship routing of a bulk carrier in rough seas. Ocean Engineering, 2022, 260: 111731

[53] Yasuda E, Iwashita H, Kashiwagi M. Improvement of Rankine panel method for seakeeping prediction of a ship in low frequency region. Proceedings of the ASME 2016 35th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering (OMAE2016), 2016V007T06A001

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Harbin Engineering University and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature