A Bayesian study of the residuary resistance of sailing yachts as a function of hull geometry and speed (Froude number).
Source. UCI Machine Learning Repository, https://archive.ics.uci.edu/dataset/243/yacht+hydrodynamics. Original record: Gerritsma, Onnink and Versluis, Geometry, resistance and stability of the Delft Systematic Yacht Hull Series, 1981.
Data. The dataset describes 22 different hull forms (sailing yachts), each
tested at multiple Froude numbers in a towing tank, producing 308 hull-form ×
Froude-number rows (data/yacht_hydro.csv).
Variables.
| Variable | Description |
|---|---|
LCB |
Longitudinal position of the center of buoyancy (% length) |
prismatic |
Prismatic coefficient (dimensionless) |
L_disp |
Length–displacement ratio |
beam_draught |
Beam–draught ratio |
L_beam |
Length–beam ratio |
Froude |
Froude number (dimensionless, Fn = v/√(gL)), in [0.125, 0.45] |
resistance |
Residuary resistance per unit weight of displacement (target) |
The first five covariates are geometric form factors that are constant within a
given hull. Froude is a dimensionless measure of speed and is the dominant
predictor: for sailing yachts the residuary resistance scales approximately as a
power law of the Froude number, with an exponent close to 4 in the bulk regime.
The physics of the problem says that for sailing yachts the residuary resistance follows a power law of the Froude number with exponent close to 4 in the bulk regime. The project explores this with a Bayesian analysis:
-
Log–log regression. Fit
$$\log(\mathrm{resistance}) = \beta_0 + \beta_F,\log(\mathrm{Froude}) + \sum_k \beta_k,\mathrm{hull}_k + \varepsilon,.$$ Verify that
$\hat\beta_F \approx 4$ . -
BAS / BMA. Use
bas.lmto enumerate the$2^5$ submodels over the five hull-geometry covariates and identify which of them (LCB, prismatic, L/disp, B/draught, L/beam) carry signal onceFroudeis in the model. -
Correct for heteroscedasticity. Train the nonlinear model
$$\mathrm{resistance} = k,\mathrm{Froude}^{\gamma_F},\exp\left\lbrace\sum_k \beta_k,\mathrm{hull}_k\right\rbrace + \varepsilon$$ where only the form factors that appear relevant in the model-selection phase are kept. Compare the results with the log–log regression and discuss the impact of the heteroscedasticity correction on the inference on
$\gamma_F$ and on the hull-geometry covariates. -
Posterior predictive. Plot the posterior predictive curves and compare the curves with and without the treatment of the heteroscedasticity, and compare the curves with the data.
| Path | Contents |
|---|---|
data/yacht_hydro.csv |
The yacht hydrodynamics dataset (UCI #243) |
yacht_resistance.Rmd |
Analysis notebook (R Markdown) |
report.tex / report.pdf |
Project report (LaTeX source and compiled PDF) |
figures/ |
Figures used in the report |
Project2026_INFO.pdf |
Official final-project instructions |