0 Stimmen dafür0 Stimmen dagegen

0 Aufrufe11 Seitencg

Dec 01, 2017

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT oder online auf Scribd lesen

cg

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

0 Aufrufe

cg

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

- CFX-Intro 14.5 L10 Turbulence
- 372_NO06_ReynoldsEq
- Clt
- 1970-Petukhov- Heat Transfer and Friction in Turbulent Pipe Flow With Variable Physical Properties
- Two Phase Tutorial
- POF_08_2nd
- Fluid Mechanics
- HLLC Scheme for the Preconditioned Pseudo Compressibility Navier Stokes Equations for Incompressible Viscous Flows
- Lynne Du Bois - LES Applicability
- paper ingles fluidos.pdf
- Hydraulic Resistance
- KV_JFM_2013
- Exam2010 Solutions
- Central Upwind
- Compact Heat Exchanger Www.profluent.ir
- Stokes Flow Before Plane Boundary With Mixed Stick-slip Boundary Conditions
- Open Water Test for Testing Methodology
- hydrofoil flutter
- 10.1.1.595.7046
- Xia 1998

Sie sind auf Seite 1von 11

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305268239

characteristics of the DTC

containership using URANS based

simulations

CITATIONS READS

0 292

5 authors, including:

National Technical University of Hamburgische Schiffbau-Versuc

27 PUBLICATIONS 166 CITATIONS 369 PUBLICATIONS 1,663 CITATIONS

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

All content following this page was uploaded by Dionysia Chroni on 13 July 2016.

Maritime Technology and Engineering 3 Guedes Soares & Santos (Eds)

2016 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-1-138-03000-8

using URANS based simulations

Ship Design Laboratory, National Technical University of Athens, Greece

ABSTRACT: The objective of the presented research is to explore the capability of CFD techniques and of

numerical methods in general, in the estimation of the hydrodynamic derivatives and ultimately in the simu-

lation of the maneuvering performance. In this context, the DTC standard containership bare hull is subjected

to resistance, transverse force and yaw moment CFD calculations at various Froude Numbers and headings.

Unsteady Reynolds Averaged Navier Stokes (URANS) computations were performed using the STAR-CCM+

code. The resulting hydrodynamic derivatives are validated against results of other approaches, such as semi

empirical methods as well as the NTUASDLs panel codes (NEWDRIFT, HYBRID) and the respective results

are discussed. Resulting hydrodynamic derivatives are then used to predict the maneuvering performance of the

hull, using the NTUASDLs HYBRIDMAN, in calm water and in adverse weather conditions.

plemented by the development of sophisticated Finite

Nowadays, maneuvering simulations are used to esti- Volume Method codes, provide promising insights

mate and assess the operational capabilities of a ship for the hydrodynamic pressure and viscous phenom-

during the design phase. Zigzag and turning circle ena occurring during a maneuvering action. Much of

tests are, amongst others, standard IMO tests in order the work performed so far is focused on simulating

to identify the compliance of a ship design with the the various PMM conditions through the modelscale

related design requirements. As the respective process replication of basin tests like static drift, static rud-

suggest, the maneuvering performance of the ship for a der, pure sway or pure yaw. Their aim is to identify

given set of environmental loads and effects, is depen- the actual hydrodynamic forces and moments, which

dent on the design characteristics of the ship. Using are ultimately used to feed a mathematical maneu-

a solid mathematical modeling technique (Hirano, vering model based on the MMG standard. Latest

1980), simulators solve the equations of ship motion, efforts (Yasukawa et al., 2015) pursue the replication of

using the data set of forces and moments acting on the the actual maneuvering motions, simulating zigzag,

ship during its course. The key advantage of this pro- circle tests, etc.

cess is the strength of the simulator to estimate the ship The milestone work of (Abkowitz, 1964) facilitated

performance in any arbitrary motion of the ship. How- the development of several mathematical formula-

ever, the accurate prediction of forces and moments as tions in order to estimate the forces acting on a

source data is fundamental for the development of a ship during a maneuvering action, like Hirano et al.

simulation model for ship maneuvering. (1980) with a 3DOF and Son and Nomoto (1981)

Traditionally, standard Planar Motion Mechanism with a 4DOF equation model. Recently, within the

(PMM) tests, Circular Motion Tests (CMT) and other context of SIMMAN 2008 (Stern et al., 2011), the

tank tests provide the necessary data, yet in a costly and first workshop on verification and validation of ship

time consuming manner. Experiments on a Froude maneuvering simulation methods was contacted, pre-

scaled hull model, enable a deeper insight into the senting insights for the maneuvering abilities of the

hydrodynamic effects on models maneuverability. KVLCC1 and KVLCC2 standard tankers, as well as

Unfortunately, such tests are performed much later the KCS standard containership.

in the design process, leading to long design cycles, Recent advances in the field suggested by Ske-

costly prototype development and late estimation of jic and Faltinsen (2008) in their review paper of the

maneuvering capabilities. subject area, provide methods to incorporate second

Recent advances in the field of numerical hydro- order wave forces and moments in the maneuver-

dynamics, like (Stern, et al., 2011), (Simonsen ing equations as well as a two time scale model

et al., 2012), suggest the use of Computational Fluid to separate low frequency (maneuvering) from high

Mechanics as a way to assess the hydrodynamic forces frequency (seakeeping) motion components. Simi-

and moments used for the maneuvering simulation of larly, Yasukawas (2006) two time scale model used

259

a 6DOF motion formulation, coupling seakeeping 2.2 Maneuvering problem

motion with the second order mean drift forces, com-

In the present study, the ships motion is restricted

puted by a momentum conservation far field approach.

to three degrees of freedom (surge, sway and yaw).

In the present study, a 4DOF maneuvering model,

Herein, heel motion is disregarded; although it may has

mathematically formulated and solved within MAT-

effects during maneuvering. For this case the equations

LABs Simulink environment, developed at Ship

of motion are as follows:

Design Laboratory of National Technical University

of Athens, is used (Chroni D. et al., 2015). The nonlin-

ear maneuvering equations are formulated by applying

the Newtonian laws. Forces and moments acting on the

hull are computed using computational fluid dynam-

ics. Moreover, the resulted forces and moments during

a maneuver induced by the propeller and rudder are

taken into account, as well as, environmental forces,

such as wind and waves. The maneuvering motion

results are validated against experimental data of the

DTC hull, in calm water as well as under the influence

of winds and waves.

where, m is the ship mass, Ixx and Izz are the moments

of inertia about x and z axes, xG and zG are the center

of gravity coordinates with respect to the body fixed

2 FORMULATION OF THE MANEUVERING coordinate system (i.e. CG = [xG , 0, zG ]). u, v and r

PROBLEM are the time varying accelerations which are defined

with respect to the body fixed coordinate system. Their

2.1 Coordinate system integration in time, leads to u, v and r velocity com-

Two types of coordinate systems will be used: Fixed ponents and their double time integration expresses

systems (relative to earth) and moving systems. As ships position in the earth fixed coordinate system.

shown in Figure 1, the earth fixed, right handed X, Y, K, N represent the surge, sway, heel and yaw

coordinate system O(i,j,k) with the kaxis pointing directional components, respectively, and subscript H,

downwards, is used for the identification of the posi- R, prop and e indicates forces and moments due to

tion and orientation of the vessel, during a maneuver. hull, rudder, propeller and wind. In addition, Rx , Ry

The body fixed o(x,y,z), advances with the ships for- and Mz are the mean second order wave forces and

ward speed V and rotates with rotational speed r moments.

and it is used for the calculation of the forces and The hydrodynamic forces and moments acting on

moments which are acting on the ship during a maneu- the hull are modeled as nonlinear functions of the

ver. Another, earth fixed coordinate system is defined accelerations, the velocities and the Euler angles which

in order to express the existence of mean second order can be expressed in a series expansion of coefficients,

wave forces, which is right handed with the kaxis called hydrodynamic derivatives. Hull forces for each

pointing upwards. Finally, as shown in Figure 1, is degree of freedom in HYBRIDMAN in-house code

the rudder angle (negative for rudder to starboard) and are expressed as follows:

, and are ships heading, drift and incident wave

angles respectively.

were determined from CFD computations, as will be

presented in section 3.

There are several references (Lewis, 1989) which

provide good overviews on hull resistance forces.

In case of absence of resistance test data of the

examined vessel, the water resistance can be estimated

as follows:

260

where , S, u are the sea water density, the wetted where k2 = 1.065 for the port rudder and 0.935 for the

surface area of the hull and the ship forward speed starboard rudder.

respectively. CT is the resistance coefficient. Finally, R which is the effective inflow angle of the

However, in the present study, resistance is pre- rudder, is calculated as follows:

dicted from CFD calculations for the subjected vessel

at various Froude numbers. Then, the non dimensional

resistance force as a function of Froude number is esti-

mated as a third order polynomial function of ships

speed in x direction (body fixed system). Finally, the 2.5 Wind force

resistance is imported in HYBRID MANs code, as The wind force and moment acting on the ship hull is

follows (in surge hull forces component): estimated as follows:

equation:

2

where Vres = (Vwx + u)2 + (Vwy + v) is the resul-

tant airflow velocity felt by the ship.The dimensionless

where Z, , n, D, KT (J ) are the number of propellers, CX , CY , CN and CK coefficients are functions of ships

the propeller revolution per second, the propeller water profile and of relative wind angle. In HYBRID-

diameter and thrust coefficient, respectively. Thrust MAN code, these coefficients are obtained from pub-

coefficient is a function of the advance coefficient lished, model experimental data for the specific vessel

J and it is dependent on the propeller design and type, which are given in tabulated form, as a function of

Reynolds number Rn. For, the approximation of KT (J ) the relative wind angle, as presented by Blendermann

the Wagenigen B series were used (Lammeren et al., (2001).

1969) (Oosterveld, 1975).

The initial value of the propeller revolutions should 2.6 Calculation of mean second order wave forces

be adjusted so that the desired ship velocity is obtained

for the condition of still water and constant forward The second order mean forces are calculated by either

speed (ships speed at the beginning of the maneuver). near field method (Papanikolaou et al., 1987) or

far field method (Liu et al., 2011) using the first

order quantities calculated with potential flow method

2.4 Rudder force (Papanikolaou et al., 1990). Noting that in relatively

The rudder force and moment acting on the ship hull short waves (/LPP < 0.5), it is necessary to consider

by rudder action is calculated as follows (Lewis 1989): some complications of the ensuing physical problem

of the added resistance (Liu et al. 2011), (Papanikolaou

et al., 2015), (Papanikolaou et al., 1990). In the Fig-

ures 2, 3 and 4 the profiles of the mean second order

wave forces are presented (/Lbp = 0.5).

and z directional center of normal force acting on it.

H is the ratio of the hydrodynamic force induced on

the ship hull by the rudder action and can be estimated

by the following empirical formula:

where AR and are the rudder area and the aspect ratio

of the rudder respectively. aR stands for the speed and

the angle of the effective inflow into the rudder. The

effective rudder inflow speed UR can be calculated as

follows:

261

viscous stress tensor. In order to simplify the solution

of the system of equations, by removing all fluctua-

tions arising from turbulence, an averaging process at

a time scale larger than the largest scale of turbulence,

is followed.

Practically, the velocity components may be

expressed as the sum of a mean term ui and an instan-

taneous deviation term ui and then, the system of

equations rewrites in the following form:

aged NavierStokes (RANS) computational methods,

where turbulence fluctuations are removed below a

certain turbulence length scale. However, due to the

final term of Equation 13 which represent the so-called

Reynolds stresses, the introduction of a turbulence

model is required in order to resolve the correlation

Figure 3. Mean second order surge force /Lbp = 0.5. symmetric tensor arising from the velocity fluctuation

components.

Boussinesqs eddy viscosity assumption stated that

the Reynolds stresses may be approximated from

the rate of strain tensor Sij , as in the case of vis-

cous stresses, by substituting molecular viscosity

with its turbulence equivalent, turbulent viscosity T .

Rewriting the final term of equation 13, using the

Boussinesqs assumption, we have:

tensor and k the turbulence kinetic energy per unit

mass.

Amongst the various models to calculate the value

of turbulent viscosity, in the frame of the current

Figure 4. Mean second order yaw moment /Lbp = 0.5. research, the two equation NASAs realizable k tur-

bulence model is used (Shih et al., 1997), which is

based on Jones and Launder (1972) standard k

3 HYDRODYNAMIC FORCES AND MOMENTS model. According to the model, the eddy viscosity is:

COMPUTATION USING CFD

to replace tank test conditions used traditionally to esti-

mate the required bare hull forces and moments used where C is a function of mean strain and rotation rates

in the maneuvering simulation method. whereas is the kinetic energy rate of dissipation.

Complementing the RANS equations, the fluid

mass conservation is described by the continuity

3.1 Governing equations equation:

The governing equations for the case studied are the

NavierStokes equations for an incompressible and

laminar flow of a Newtonian fluid. Using a compact

form and Einsteins notation the equations are written:

Typically, in order to resolve the free surface phe-

nomena, either interface tracking or interface captur-

ing techniques may be used. Each method chosen has

certain advantages, however in the present research the

where ui represent the components of the velocity vec- Volume of Fluid (VOF) interface capturing technique

tor, p is the fluid pressure and ij the components of the is used. According to the method, the fraction of water

262

and air is calculated in each volume cell, solving the

following equation for the entire grid:

and c is the volume fraction of water in the cell

which varies from 0 to 1, full of air to full of water,

respectively.

The CFD computations performed in the context Figure 5. The computational domain.

of the present research used the Reynolds Aver-

aged NavierStokes (RANS) solver STAR-CCM+

from CDAdapco (CDAdapco). The code solves the

RANS and continuity integral equations on an unstruc-

tured mesh using the Finite Volume technique. For

the case studied, even though it could theoretically be

solved using the steady RANS equations and model-

ing, the Volume Of Fluid technique implemented by

STAR-CCM+ is far more robust when solving the

unsteady equations for such a problem type. Thus, Figure 6. The DTC hull mesh.

the Unsteady RANS equations have been used herein,

where the timestep, iterative convergence and over-

all simulation time have been selected to achieve

a converged steady solution. A second order Euler

difference temporal discretization scheme was used.

Spatial discretization was performed using second

order schemes for both convective and viscous terms.

The SIMPLE method was used by the solver, coupling

pressures and fluid velocities, while the RANS stress

tensor closure was achieved using a realizable k tur-

bulence model, using an all Y+ wall treatment that is

capable to treat the flow near the wall depending on

theY+ value achieved by the respective mesh and flow

conditions. Figure 7. The near field mesh.

In order to analyze the resulting forces and

moments, two coordinate systems were used: an earth

fixed inertial reference coordinate system and a COG

ship fixed coordinate system.All ship motions and hull the inlet of the fluid flow, describing the inlet velocity

forces and moments are calculated with reference to as well as the volume fractions of the corresponding

the ship fixed frame. For the case studied, the ship is fluid phases.

considered free to move in heave and pitch, while all The sides are located two ship lengths from the hull.

other ship motion DOFs are constrained. On the sides, Neumman symmetry conditions are used,

ensuring the field gradient continuity on the sides.

3.3 Computational domain The outlet is located three ship lengths from the hull.

A Dirichlet pressure condition is used at the outlet,

The computational domain presented in Figure 5 was ensuring zero gradients of velocity and volume frac-

developed using the STAR-CCM+ meshing tools. The tion of fluids, as well as the continuity of hydrostatic

mesh is dominated by hexahedral cells, while near the pressure.

hull, the cells are polyhedral as a result of the trimming Bottom and top sides are located one and half a

to follow the hull lines. In order to resolve the bound- ship length from the hull, respectively. Top and bottom

ary layer flow (Simonsen et al., 2012) and the near sides are considered as inlets with similar boundary

field viscous phenomena, a number of prism layers are conditions.

attached on the hull wall, where a noslip condition is The resulting hull mesh is presented in Figure 6,

applied. while the near field meshing is presented in Figure 7.

Typical boundary conditions for the subject case are The standard DTC hull was modeled using a scale

used. The inlet boundary is located two ship lengths 1:80 and thus, its main particulars are presented in

in front of the ship. A Dirichlet condition is used at Table 1.

263

Table 2. PMM static drift non-dim forces and moments.

X

Drift

angle v 20 kts 16 kts 6 kts

5 0.087 6.51E04 6.94E04 6.95E04

10 0.174 6.56E04 6.71E04 7.20E04

15 0.259 8.49E04 7.78E04 7.58E04

20 0.342 9.99E04 9.30E04 8.14E04

Y

Drift

angle v 20 kts 16 kts 6 kts

5 0.087 4.75E04 5.36E04 5.38E04

10 0.174 1.46E03 1.54E03 1.50E03

15 0.259 2.87E03 2.87E03 2.15E03

Figure 8. Wave contours ate various drift angles, at 20 kts. 20 0.342 4.73E03 4.60E03 4.08E03

N

Table 1. DTC model particulars.

Drift

angle v 20 kts 16 kts 6 kts

Lbp 5.577 m

Lwl 5.684 m

0 0.000 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00

Bwl 0.801

5 0.087 3.67E04 3.70E04 3.54E04

T 0.228 m

10 0.174 7.25E04 7.03E04 6.79E04

15 0.259 1.20E03 1.14E03 1.07E03

20 0.342 1.75E03 1.65E03 1.33E03

CFD analysis is a laborious task, yet often the pro- Table 3. CMT non-dim forces and moments.

cess results to either poor stability or poor accuracy.

Both require care and attention in order to exploit the Y N

respective results. When it comes to verification, grid

sensitivity, i.e. the perturbation of the results when R 15.5 kts 6 kts 15.5 kts 6 kts

assuming a slight change on grid sizing, is of major

importance. 50 4.52E04 6.81E05 7.28E04 1.27E04

40 7.24E04 7.81E05 1.15E03 1.62E04

According to ITTC (2002), an uncertainty analy- 30 1.09E03 9.93E05 1.63E03 2.27E04

sis is required to verify and validate CFD results. In 20 1.49E03 1.59E04 2.76E03 3.78E04

order to perform such an analysis, three distinct values

for each studied parameter are required and therefore,

three different grid sizes have been used, namely a

695 K cell coarse (No. 3), a 1.2 M medium (No. 2)

and a 2.5 M fine grid (No. 1) to provide three solu- non-dimensionalized with the appropriate factors for

tion sets. However, a systematic grid refinement is not the forces and moments respectively

possible when using an unstructured grid, since the PMM static drift analysis was performed for three

refinement areas are not explicitly controlled. In order different ship speeds, namely 20 kts, 16 kts and 6 kts,

to overcome this challenge, a grid base size has been in order to evaluate how the viscous phenomena affect

used and all grid areas have been defined according to the calculated hydrodynamic derivative values. Drift

this size. angle ranged from 0 to 20 degrees. Furthermore, CMT

Refinement is performed by limiting the grid base analysis was performed at two different ship speeds,

size using a refinement factor of r2G = 2, as suggested namely 15.5 kts and 6 kts with a rotating radius varying

by ITTC (2002). For the different grid sizes, in order to from 20 to 50 meters at model scale.

subsequently estimate the hydrodynamic derivatives, Following the ITTC process, a parameter and iter-

the longitudinal X-force, the transverse Y-force and ative convergence study is required, with systematic

the yaw moment N around the vertical axis Z with refinement ceteris paribus. Such an analysis was

reference at mid-ship, were computed. performed and the respective results validated the

The results from the CFD PMM static drift analy- accuracy of the CFD findings. However, the further

sis are presented in Table 2, while for the CMT tests analysis of this process is neglected within the context

are presented in Table 3. Forces and moments are of this research.

264

Table 4. The DTC bare hull hydrodynamic derivatives

(105 ).

Xuu 1740 Yuu Nuu

Xuuu 1060 Yuuu Nuuu

Xv 50 Yv 970 Nv 350

Xvv 150 Yvv 3290 Nvv 580

Xvvv 400 Yvvv 11400 Nvvv 1310

Xr Yr 90 Nr 170

Xrr Yrr 340 Nrr 1340

Xrrr Yrrr 830 Nrrr 2390

Figure 9. The non-dimensional X force vs the non- non-dimensional forces and moments at higher drift

dimensional vertical ship speed. angles, a matter that may be attributed to the contribu-

tion of free surface phenomena as well as the viscous

phenomena observed at higher Froude numbers.

In order to estimate the ship maneuvering behav-

ior, the mathematical model used requires the bare

hull hydrodynamic derivatives. Using the data from

non-dimensional forces and moments coming from the

numerical simulations, the hydrodynamic derivatives

of the hull are calculated. These data are assumed to

replace the experimental data that could be measured

during a full set of costly towing tank campaigns. The

predicted hydrodynamic derivatives are presented in

Table 4. However, only the static drift and the rotating

arm tank tests were simulated with the CFD solver and

thus, the hydrodynamic derivatives set does not inl-

Figure 10. The non-dimensional Y force vs the non- cude the coupling terms (Yrv , Yvr , etc.). Therefore, the

dimensional vertical ship speed. simulated maneuvering motion is performed without

the above coupling terms, assuming that their effect is

herein limited; it will be elaborated in planned future

CFD investigations of the authors.

4 IMPLEMENTED CODE

mented by coupling NTUA-SDLs 3D seakeeping

codes (NEWDRIFT, HYBRID) with a newly devel-

oped code to simulate the maneuverability of ships,

i.e. HYBRID MAN.

The new code has been developed in MATLABs

Simulink environment. As shown in Figure 12 the

maneuvering module enables the time domain simula-

Figure 11. The non-dimensional N moment vs the vertical tion of different maneuvering scenarios, as specified

ship speed. by IMO, taking in addition into consideration the

influence of external forces due to wind and waves.

Production runs performed, identified the values Each examined hull is subjected to virtual tank tests

for the non-dimensional forces and moments required by using Star-CCM+ commercial code. From the

as inputs for the simulation models. At the following resulted forces and moments acting on the hull, the

figures, a comparison is made between the CFD cal- non-dimensional hydrodynamic coefficients are cal-

culated data from PMM static drift analyses, at the culated in order to be imported in HYBRID MAN

various drift angles and rotating radius, respectively, maneuvering code. Hydrodynamic components of the

for the case of 6 kts. hull, i.e. added masses, as well as the mean second

From the results obtain, a good agreement between order wave loads are being calculated by the sea-

the CFD and the EFD data from MARINTEK keeping module. For each time step, depending of the

(Sprenger F. et al., 2015) is observed, especially at vessel position and orientation with respect to the earth

the 6kts speed. Increased speed leads to improved fixed coordinate system, the mean second order wave

265

Figure 12. Flow chart of the maneuvering simulation

procedure.

Figure 13. Calculated turning circle trajectory compared

Table 5. Principal particulars of the DTC hull. with experimental data.

B 0.801 Ship breadth [m]

T 0.228 Mean draft [m]

Cb 0.661 Block coefficient

m 672.7 Ship mass [kg]

Sw 5.534 Wetted surface [m2 ]

Propeller information

Z 5 Number of blades

P/D 0.959 Propeller pitch ratio

Ae/Ao 0.8

forces and moments are calculated by interpolation Figure 14. Port and starboard turning circles for DTC hull,

calculated via HYBRID MAN.

from pre-calculated response surfaces.

5 NUMERICAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

propeller revolutions were initially set to attain ships

speed in calm water.

The DTC standard container hull (El Moctar et al,

In Figure 13, the calculated trajectory results are

2012) has been selected as a validation example of

compared with model experimental data disposed by

the maneuvering numerical simulations. The principal

MARINTEK in the frame of the SHOPERA project

particulars of the vessel are presented in the table 5

(Sprenger F. et al., 2012). Moreover, in Figure 14

above.

the turning circle trajectories, both for both port and

Port and starboard turning circle tests were per-

starboard rudder angles (35 deg), are presented.

formed in calm water, in waves and with wind.

The tested conditions, such as vessels speed, wind

direction and speed, and the wave characteristics are

presented at the beginning of each case study. The 5.2 Turning circle test in waves

numerical results are compared with experimental data

which were conducted in MARINTEK (Sprenger F., In this test, DTC hull is subjected to the turning circle

2015). maneuver in the presence of waves. The initial ship

velocity is again equal to 6 knots (full scale) and the

rudder angle is set to 35 degrees after a phase in

5.1 Turning circle test in calm water

procedure. The propeller revolutions are initially set up

In the turning circle test, the initial ship velocity is to achieve the initial ship speed. The incident waves are

equal to 6 knots (full scale) and the rudder angle is set regular, with a wave height of 2 m, and 12.5 sec period.

to 35 degrees after the end of a phase in procedure. The initial encounter angle is 0 (head waves).

266

REFERENCES

Abkowitz, M. (1964). Lectures on Ship Hydrodynamics

Steering and Manoeuvrability, Report No HY-5, Hydro-Og

Laboratorium, Lyngby, Denmark.

Blendermann, W. (2001). Probabilistic and spectral mod-

elling of the wind loads on ships. Technische Univ.

Hamburg, Harburg.

Carlton, J. (2007). Marine Propellers and propulsion. USA:

Elsevier.

CDAdapco (n.d.). Retrieved from Star CCM+: www.cd

adapco.com

Chroni, D., Liu, S., Plessas, T., & Papanikolaou, A. (2014).

Ship maneuvering in waves: Background and validation

of simulation software (HYBRID_MAN). Technical Report

of Ship Design Laboratory, National Technical University

of Athens.

Chroni, D., Liu, S., Plessas, T., Papanikolaou, A. (2015). Sim-

Figure 15. Calculated turning circle trajectory in waves, ulation of the maneuvering behavior of ships under the

compared with experimental data. influence of enviromental forces, IMAM 2015, Croatia.

Hirano, M. (1980). On the calculation method of ship maneu-

vering motion at initial design phase (in Japanese).

A comparison between calculated and experimental Journal of the Society of Naval Architects of Japan 59,

data is presented in Figure 15. pp. 7181.

International Towing Tank Conference (ITTC). (2002).

Uncertainty Analysis in CFD: Verification and Vali-

dation Methodology and Procedures. Quality Manual

6 CONCLUSIONS 7.5-03-01-01.

International Towing Tank Conference (ITTC) (2011).

The conducted research study and the presented Guideline on Use of RANS tools for Manoeuvring Predic-

numerical simulation results for the DTC standard tion, Recommended Procedures and Guidelines Manual,

containership have shown that, the employed theoret- 7.5-03-04-01.

ical and numerical approaches to the determination of Jones, W., & Launder, B. (1972). The prediction of laminar-

the maneuvering equation components are satisfactory ization with a twoequation model of turbulence. Journal

of Heat and Mass Transfer, pp. 301304.

and the overall agreement of the obtained theoretical/

Lammeren, A., Mannen, & Oosterveld. (1969). The

numerical results with corresponding experimental Wagenigen B-screw series. Monograph, SNAME.

data very good, even though some coupling terms Lewis, E. V. (1989). Principles of Naval Arctitecture Vol

in the equations of motion were not included in the III: Motion in waves and controllability. Jersey City, NJ:

hydrodynamic derivatives set. The same conclusion SNAME.

is generally valid for the simulated turning circle Liu S., Papanikolaou, A., & Zaraphonitis, G. (2011). Pre-

maneuvering trajectories, even though the effect of diction of added resistance of ships in waves. Ocean

waves on the trajectories is less satisfactorily cap- Engineering, pp. 641650.

tured with increasing simulation time. The reason for Moctar, O., Shigunov, V., & Zorn, T. (2012). Duisburg Test

Case: Post Panamax Container Ship for Benchmarknig.

this deviation is being investigated and will be elab-

Ship Technology Research Vol.5 No.3.

orated in future publications of the herein presented Oosterveld, O. (1975). Further Computer Analysed Data of

research work. the Wagenigen B-srew Series. ISP.

Papanikolaou, A., & Zaraphonitis, G. (2015). Practical

approach to the added resistance of a ship in short waves.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Proceedings of the 25th International Offshore and Polar

Engineering Conference KONA- USA.

Papanikolaou, A., Zaraphonitis, G., & Schellin, T. (1990).

The work presented in this paper is supported by On a 3D method for the evaluation of motions and loads

the Collaborative Project (Grant Agreement num- of ships with forward speed in waves. Proceedings of 5th

ber 605221) SHOPERA (Energy Efficient Safe SHip International Congress on Marine Technology.

OPERAtion) cofunded by the Research DG of Shih, T., Zhu, J., & Lumley, J. (1997). A realizable Reynolds

the European Commission within the RTD activ- Stress Algebraic Equation Model. NASA Lewis Research

ities of the FP7 Thematic Priority Transport/FP7- Center.

SST-2013-RTD-1/Activity 7.2.4 Improving Safety and Simonsen, C., Otzen, J., Klimt, C., & Larsen, N. (2012,

Security/SST.2013.4-1: Ships in operation. The Euro- August 2631). Maneuvering predictions on the early

design phase using CFD generated PMM data. 29th

pean Community and the authors shall not in any way

Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics.

be liable or responsible for the use of any knowledge, Skejic, R., & Faltinsen, O. (2008, August). A unified seakeep-

information or data of the present paper, or of the con- ing and maneuvering analysis of ships in regular waves.

sequences thereof. The views expressed in this paper Journal of Marine Science and Technology, pp. 371394.

are those of the authors and do not necessary reflect Son, K., & Nomoto (Sprenger, Maron, Delefotrtie, &

the views and policies of the European Community. Hochbaum, 2015), K. (1981). On the coupled motion

267

of steering and rolling of a high-speed container ship. and Validation of Ship Maneuvering Simulation Methods.

Journal of Society of Naval Architects 150. Journal of Ship Research, pp. 135147.

Sprenger, F., Maron, A., Delefotrtie, G., & Hochbaum, A. Yasukawa, H. (2006). Simulations of ship maneuvering in

(2015). Mid Term Review of Tank Test Results. SHOPERA waves. Journal of the Japan Society of Naval Architects

(Grant Agreement number 605221). and Ocean Engineers.

Stern, F., Agdrup, K., Kim, S., Hochbaum, A., Rhee, K., Yasukawa, H., & Yoshimura, Y. (2015). Introduction of MMG

Quadvlieg, F., Gorski, J. (2011, June). Experience from standard method for ship maneuvering predictions. J Mar

SIMMAN 2008 The First Workshop on Verification Sci Technol.

268

- CFX-Intro 14.5 L10 TurbulenceHochgeladen vonShaheen S. Ratnani
- 372_NO06_ReynoldsEqHochgeladen vonfab1991
- CltHochgeladen vonCarlos Diaz
- 1970-Petukhov- Heat Transfer and Friction in Turbulent Pipe Flow With Variable Physical PropertiesHochgeladen vontomekzawistowski
- Two Phase TutorialHochgeladen vonwingnut999
- POF_08_2ndHochgeladen voncarlosfnbsilva
- Fluid MechanicsHochgeladen vonMonse Vqz
- HLLC Scheme for the Preconditioned Pseudo Compressibility Navier Stokes Equations for Incompressible Viscous FlowsHochgeladen vonAnonymous gxAd4li
- Lynne Du Bois - LES ApplicabilityHochgeladen vonEslam Ezzatneshan
- paper ingles fluidos.pdfHochgeladen vonXavi Places
- Hydraulic ResistanceHochgeladen vonHari Simha
- KV_JFM_2013Hochgeladen vonAnonymous gxAd4li
- Exam2010 SolutionsHochgeladen vonmirshoaib01
- Central UpwindHochgeladen vonKian Chuan
- Compact Heat Exchanger Www.profluent.irHochgeladen vonHaunted Hunter
- Stokes Flow Before Plane Boundary With Mixed Stick-slip Boundary ConditionsHochgeladen vonnyoxydsus
- Open Water Test for Testing MethodologyHochgeladen vonJoa
- hydrofoil flutterHochgeladen vonEvgeny Shavelzon
- 10.1.1.595.7046Hochgeladen vonMaiman Lato
- Xia 1998Hochgeladen vonvelmurugan
- SPE-440-PAHochgeladen vonandrew
- Study of Turbulent Flow Downstream From AHochgeladen vonIAEME Publication
- 765_1Hochgeladen vonJuan Diego Guerrero Mateo
- Current status of CFD modeling of liquid loading phenomena in gas wells: a literature reviewHochgeladen vonAdaze
- 1180_ftpHochgeladen vonChandrasekar Attayampatty Tamilarasan
- 133 PaperHochgeladen voncghodke
- Effect of FlowHochgeladen vonluqmn hkim
- [19] Petinrin. 2016. Performance of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers WithHochgeladen vonAhmad Restian Adi Nugroho
- ARMA-05-867_Application of Depth Averaged Flow Model in Estimating the Flows in a Single Rock JointHochgeladen voncastille1956
- CHE-801 2011Hochgeladen vonSoumik Mutsuddi

- Randall D. Knight - Faraday6Hochgeladen vonRomy Desmara FeNdi RoRe
- stalagmometerHochgeladen vonRamesh Kumar
- pdf1_tcm1021-48829.pdfHochgeladen vonananta_pratama2210
- Refrigeration and Air Conditioning. W. F. Stoecker, J. W. JonesHochgeladen vonMarcialRuiz
- E406 A & CHochgeladen vonEarl Garcia
- d Hudson Ormus Gold Australian PatentHochgeladen vonDOMINO66
- Arup-ucl Worshop Ec7 Ncci in Dk Rev 2Hochgeladen vonlingamkumar
- Surface Modification by Plasma Polymerization-Film Deposition Tailoring of Surface Properties and BiocompatibilityHochgeladen vonthuron
- exp5 520Hochgeladen vonsyamsaufi
- Gupta1977 Design of Column Sections Subjected to Three Components of EarthquakeHochgeladen vonAnonymous pqzrPMJJFT
- p QuestionHochgeladen vonbabariyapruthvi
- Physics Lab Report 10Hochgeladen vonCatherine Linsley
- Question Bank KomHochgeladen vonStar Sathish
- Reverse Engineering Podkletnov’s ExperimentsHochgeladen vonArmando Milak Pérez
- Lesson 14Hochgeladen vonMarcTnn
- Plasma Doc (1)Hochgeladen vonCheerla Shiva Kumar
- Thermal Conductivity - Wikipedia, The Free EncyclopediaHochgeladen vonVarghese Mathew
- probset10Hochgeladen voncommando1180
- Stress, Strain, Pressure, Deformation, Strength, Etc.Hochgeladen vonAzkaa
- electricalHochgeladen vonRomel Panis
- 8 X-Rays Diffraction From FibresHochgeladen vonJagesh Ranjan
- handout_preface.pdfHochgeladen vonJames Scott
- Physics Final Revision - Heat and Energy 2013.pdfHochgeladen vonCikgu Faizal
- A1bHochgeladen vonTanmoy Pal Chowdhury
- Stilling Basin Training WallHochgeladen vonsatyakam0601050
- Spin WavesHochgeladen vonolsteffensen4093
- STAAD Rayleigh FrequencyHochgeladen vonKasim Polat
- Two -Way Slab ActionHochgeladen vonnvnrev
- Strength of Materials 2 Marks All 5 UnitsHochgeladen vondhiyaneswaran
- TERM PAPER on GENERATOR by Ibrahim & Rifath_ICT_3rd Batch_1st Semester_2011Hochgeladen vonKhondokar Fida Hasan

## Viel mehr als nur Dokumente.

Entdecken, was Scribd alles zu bieten hat, inklusive Bücher und Hörbücher von großen Verlagen.

Jederzeit kündbar.