Jai Ram Saripilli

Ram Kumar Joga

Sharad S Dhavalikar
Apurba Ranjan Kar
About : Indian Register of Shipping
 An internationally recognised independent ship classification
society, founded in India in 1975
 Achieved the status of full membership of the International
Association of Classification Societies (IACS)
 Major divisions in IRS
 Maine: Classification & Statutory Surveys
 IRQS: Indian Register Quality Systems
 IRSIS: IRS Inspection Services
 Research Activities
 Hydrodynamics
 Structural analysis
 Risk & Reliability
 Technical Software Development
Introduction
 It is essential to pre-determine the behaviour of floating structures
when subject to waves to determine the habitability and survivability.
 Seakeeping Analysis at a glance
 Motion & Load responses
 Motions and accelerations
 Loads:
 Global hull girder loads
 Local and non linear loads – slamming, sloshing
 Other aspects
 Green water
 Whipping, springing etc.

Model Tests Computational

Potential Flow CFD
Speed
Applicability
Nonlinear and viscous effects
Scaling and uncertainty
Scope
 Seakeeping analysis by RANSE based multiphase flow using
ANSYS CFX

 Key aspects of seakeeping analysis using CFD:

 Wave generation / Numerical wave tank
 Regular / Irregular waves
 Forward / Current speed of vessel
 Load computation
 Motion computation & mesh displacement
 Viscous effects – e.g. viscous roll damping
 Capturing fully nonlinear free surface

 The ultimate goal is to simulate a complex seakeeping problem

associated with ‘green water physics’ i.e. ‘green water loads’ and
‘rate of water ingress’.
Wave Generation & Numerical Wave Tank
 Velocity inlet method
 BC’s as per potential flow solution
 Wave reflection effects at outlet
 Linear wave theory
 Water particle kinematics
 Pressure distribution
 Forward speed correction
 Heading angle
 Wave superposition method for irregular waves
 Free surface capturing
 Multiphase flow mode – volume of fluid
 User defined code implemented using CEL
Wave Generation & Numerical Wave Tank (continued...)
Wave Generation & Numerical Wave Tank (continued...)
 Potential flow solution – Linear wave theory
 Velocity potential

 Free surface elevation

 Dispersion relation

 Water particle velocity coupled with volume fraction

.
Wave Generation & Numerical Wave Tank (continued...)
 Water particle pressure distribution coupled with volume fraction

 Where , volume fraction is defined as

Seakeeping Simulation
 Seakeeping Simulations of FPSO
 Head seas condition, zero speed
 Regular waves
 Degrees of freedom in heave and pitch
 Aim:
 Study green water physics, free surface on deck
 Validate Green water loads on deck and deck structure
 Seakeeping Simulations of a Open top Feeder vessel
 Roll decay test
 Roll natural period, decay ratio
 Beam sea condition, zero speed
 Irregular waves
 Degrees of freedom in heave and roll
 Aim:
 1 hour simulation to compute motion responses and water ingress
 Validate rate of water ingress
Seakeeping Simulations of FPSO
 Numerical model according to model test
 160000 DWT FPSO of scale 1:60
 Buchner (1995a, 1995b, 2002)

Main Particulars Ship Model

Length 260.34 m 4.339 m
Beam 47.1 m 0.785 m
Draft 17.52 m 0.292 m
Depth 26.4 m 0.440 m
Displacement 183053 T 847.468 T
KG (from base) 14.22 m 0.237 m
LCG (from midship) 6.72 m 0.112 m
Pitch radius of gyration 65.1 m 1.085 m
Seakeeping simulations of FPSO(continued...)
 Model Tests
 Zero speed
 Tp = 11.2 s, H = 17.3 m (full scale)
 180° heading
 Wave height Probes
 H1, H2, H3
 Along centre line at
0m, 10m, 20m from FP on deck
 Pressure Probes
 P1, Pdeck
 P1 – on deck structure, 30m from FP, 2.65m above deck and 3m port
 Pdeck – on deck, 12.5m from FP along centreline
Seakeeping simulations of FPSO(continued...)
 CFD simulations
 Unsteady RANSE computation
 Domain extents 1.5L forward, 3L aft, 0.8L top, 1.5L bottom and sides
 Hexahedral Grid
 H-O topology
 1.16 million cells
 Near wall thickness with y+ ≈ 50
 k-ω SST model with automatic wall function
Seakeeping simulations of FPSO(continued...)
 Validation of Green water loads
 Experiments – Buchner (1995a, 1995b, 2002)
 Other CFD simulation – Zhu et al. (2009)
 Fluent; motions imposed from potential flow solution
Seakeeping simulations of FPSO(continued...)
 Comparison of computed
free surface profile on deck
with experiments
 Seakeeping of Open Top Feeder Vessel
 Numerical model according to model test
 Hatch less container ship of scale 1:13
 Model test by HSVA
 Fully Appended hull
 Skeg
 Bilge keel
 Two open holds

Main Particulars Ship Model

Length 63.63 m 4.89 m
Beam 13.3 m 1.02 m
Draft 3.2 m 0.25 m
Displacement 2349 m3 1.07 m3
KG (from base) 4.51 m 0.35 m
LCG (from midship) 0.465 m 0.036 m
Roll radius of gyration 4.921 m 0.38 m
Pitch radius of gyration 15.908 m 1.22 m
Seakeeping of Open Top Feeder Vessel (continued...)
 Modelling of vessel
 Multi block hexahedral structured grid with y+ ≈ 150
 Automatic wall function implemented
 Appendage Modelling
 Skeg
 Voluminous part of hull structure
 Thin surface – simple and good mesh
 No-slip wall
 Bilge Keel
 Fluid-fluid interface with
 free slip/no-slip wall
 Part of hull
 No-slip wall
Seakeeping of Open Top Feeder Vessel (continued...)
 Resistance Test  Roll decay test
 coarse grid of 0.7M elements  k-ω SST model
 k-ω SST model  Automatic wall function
 Automatic wall function  Thin surface – simple Roll
 Thin surface – simple and Decay Test
good mesh  Bilge keel – thin surface
 No-slip wall

 Resistance study – Drag of bilge keel – 0.6% of Total hull drag

 Roll decay test – Tp=7.9s (Accurately Predicted)
Seakeeping of Open Top Feeder Vessel (continued...)
 Modelling open holds
 Part of fluid continuum
 No fluid interface
 Difficult to determine ingress rate
 Sub-domain
 Interfaces
 Easy to determine ingress rate
 Independent domain
 Empty hold condition
 User defined code/ initialization with air
 Boundary Conditions
 Interface with momentum transfer and wall
Seakeeping of Open Top Feeder Vessel (continued...)
 Definition of open hold
 At initialisation of domain
staticvofwater = max(0.0, min(1.0, 0.5*(1-(z-h)/zcell)))
wavevofwater = max(0.0, min(1.0, 0.5*(1-(z-h-eta)/zcell)))

if(x < xdist, wavevofwater, staticvofwater)

 For wave initialisation till a specified location

Condition =
If Heading < 45 [deg] :
"((L1 < 0 [m] && L2 > 0 [m])…
|| (L3 < 0 [m] && L4 > 0 [m]))…
&& (L5 < 0 [m] && L6 > 0 [m])…
&& (z < ztop && z > zbottom)”

ivofwater = if(condition, 0, tempivofwater)

Seakeeping of Open Top Feeder Vessel (continued...)
 Seakeeping simulations
 270° heading
 Long crested irregular waves
 JONSWAP spectrum
 Tp = 7s, Hs = 4m (Full Scale)
 1M hexahedral elements
 Free to roll and heave
Seakeeping of Open Top Feeder Vessel (continued...)

Heave Acceleration Heave Roll

[m s-2] [m] [deg]
Max Min RMS Max Min RMS Max Min RMS
CFD 2.68 -2.56 0.60 2.53 -3.31 0.99 28.90 -22.08 8.63
Exp 2.52 -2.92 0.66 2.97 -3.45 0.81 19.14 -18.98 6.51

Rate of Water Ingres

[m3/h]
Hold 1 Hold 2
CFD 31.30 29.92
Exp 20.1 10.7
Seakeeping of Open Top Feeder Vessel (continued...)
Conclusions
 Green water load computation
 Pressures computed had good agreement with experiments
 Wave height on deck also had good agreement with
experiments
 Motions were not captured accurately
 Rate of water ingress computations
 Extrapolation of results of results for 1 hour equivalent
simulations
 Simulations was carried for 120s instead of 998.46s (model scale)
 Motions computed accurately
 Rate of Water ingress was over predicted
 Coarse grid
 Capability of free surface capturing method
Conclusions (continued…)
 Free surface capturing
 Coarse grid
 Accuracy of coupled multiphase interface capturing technique
Conclusions (continued…)
 Reliable seakeeping computations are achieved for zero
speed at all heading conditions
 Reliable seakeeping computations are achieved for forward
speed at head seas, beam seas and bow quartering seas
 Limitation to seakeeping simulations for forward speed at
following seas and stern quartering seas
 Wave celerity and equivalent velocity corresponding to
forward speed oppose each other
 Inconsistencies at boundary conditions
 Treatment of pressure boundary condition at outlet
 Present work employs opening BC with entrainment pressure
equal to second order wave pressure
 Wave damping model might improve the accuracy of the
NWT