Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 7

11th International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation

FAST 2011, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, September 2011

Study on Linear 3D Rankine Panel Method for Prediction of Semi-Displacement


Vessels’ Hydrodynamic Characteristics at High Speed
Babak Ommani1, Odd M. Faltinsen1,2
1
Centre for Ships and Ocean Structures, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
2
Department of Marine Technology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
ABSTRACT well developed, the presence of forward speed makes the
The abilities of a three-dimensional Rankine panel method process complicated. Moreover, as shown by Keuning
in capturing the hydrodynamics of semi-displacement (1988), the Froude dependent wave making problem is
vessels are studied in order to be used as a numerical tool influenced by dynamic sinkage and trim.
for dynamic stability predictions. Steady forward speed and There exists an extensive literature on numerical and
forced heave oscillations are considered. Transom stern experimental calculations for both the steady and unsteady
effects are modeled by introducing a hollow in the free problem of a ship with forward speed (see i.e. Raven 1996
surface behind the stern. The analytical formulation and Nakos 1990). However, these studies are mostly at low
proposed by Faltinsen (2005), with an iterative method and moderate Froude numbers. Moreover, the presence of a
proposed by Zhu & Faltinsen (2007) is used to satisfy zero transom stern of a semi-displacement vessel affects the
pressure on the hollow in the steady case. Unsteady flow in steady and unsteady flow around the hull. The flow
forced heave motion is linearized around the obtained separation from the transom has an influence on the lift and
hollow shape from the steady calculations. A finite trim moment which affect the vessel’s sinkage and trim in
difference method is used to calculate derivatives of values steady equilibrium as well as the forces acting on the vessel
on the boundaries. Calculations are performed and in unsteady motion. Experimental investigations by Doctors
compared to existing experimental and numerical results for (2006) and Keuning (1988) show the importance of transom
a Modified Wigley hull (Journée 1992), a semi- stern effects for both the steady wave-making and unsteady
displacement mono-hull (Lugni et al. 2004) and Keuning’s forces. Lugni et al. (2004) studied the steady wave pattern
(1988) model. Results are in overall good agreement with for a vessel with a transom stern at high Froude numbers
the experiments and existing numerical calculations. Close using the 2D+t and Rankine panel methods. Zhu &
to the transom stern the present method gives better Faltinsen (2007) also studied a similar problem by
predictions relative to previous works. The limitations of introducing a hollow body to model the transom stern
linear theory and the abilities of the present method to effects and solve for the steady wave-making problem by
capture transom stern effects in order to be used further for using a Rankine panel method.
numerical dynamic stability predictions of semi- As shown by Keuning (1988) and more in detail by
displacement vessels in calm water are discussed. Faltinsen & Zhao (1991), strip theories based on the STF
KEY WORDS method (Salvesen et al. 1970) for wave induced motions and
Semi-Displacement Vessels, Rankine Panel Method, loads are questionable for high forward speeds. They used a
Transom Stern, Forced Oscillations. 2D+t theory to solve for the steady and unsteady flow
around a semi-displacement vessel in the frequency domain.
1.0 INTRODUCTION Recently Sun & Faltinsen (2010, 2011) used a nonlinear
Dynamic stability of ships has captured the attention of 2D+t theory with non-viscous flow separation to solve the
researchers for decades. Due to the increased importance of steady wave-making and forced heave problems of a semi-
hydrodynamic pressure relative to the hydrostatic pressure, displacement vessel with forward speed. The predicted
vessels which are stable at rest may become unstable at high longitudinal vertical force distribution is in good agreement
speeds. Therefore high-speed vessels such as semi- with the experiments except in the area close to the transom
displacement mono-hulls suffer from dynamic instability stern.
effects, e.g. “calm water broaching” and “bow drop/dive” In the present work, a three-dimensional Rankine panel
(Faltinsen 2005). method based on Green’s second identity is used to solve
Linear stability analysis is the first step in understanding the the steady and unsteady potential flow around a semi-
phenomenon. In this method prediction of hydrodynamic displacement vessel. The method proposed by Zhu &
forces acting on the vessel in the framework of linear theory Faltinsen (2007) for modeling the free surface behind a dry
is the key to the prediction of the vessel’s dynamic transom stern of a vessel on straight course is used. Forced
instability condition. These are categorized as the so called heave oscillations of the high speed vessel tested by
added mass, damping and restoring forces. Although Keuning (1988) is also calculated. In this case the unsteady
numerical calculations of these values for vessels at rest are

138 © 2011 American Society of Naval Engineers


potential is linearized around the steady hollow surface aft suitable for low Froude numbers (see i.e. Nakos 1990).
of the transom stern. Therefore the total velocity potential function may be
2.0 THEORY described as follows,
 
2.1 Formulation  ( x , t )  U  x  ( x , t ) (6)
A vessel advancing in the negative X direction is considered Here U∞ is the vessel’s constant forward speed and  is the
(Fig 1.). Two Cartesian coordinate systems OXYZ and Oxyz perturbation potential which must also satisfy the Laplace
are defined. The X-Y plane of the Earth-fixed global equation.
coordinate system OXYZ corresponds to the undisturbed free The body boundary condition for the perturbation potential
surface. The local inertial coordinate system Oxyz moves  after linearizing around the mean body surface is shown
with the vessel’s forward speed with Oxyz system being
in equation (7).
parallel to the OXYZ coordinate system and the z-axis going 
( x , t )   
through the vessel’s center of gravity. The flow is assumed
to be irrotational and the water incompressible. Therefore a n

 U (t )  U  i n (7)

total velocity potential  exists which satisfies the Laplace Here U (t ) is the oscillatory part of vessel’s velocity and
equation in the whole water domain, together with the body, 
does not include the constant forward speed. n is the unit
free surface kinematic and dynamic boundary conditions
normal vector to the body surface which points inside the
which are shown in equations (1), (2), (3) and (4),
water domain.
respectively.
 The free-surface kinematic and dynamic boundary
 2( x, t )  0 (1) conditions are also linearized around the mean free surface.
The linearized forms are as follows:

 ( x, y, t )  ( x, y, t ) ( x , t ) (8)
U  on z  0
t x z
 
( x , t ) ( x , t ) (9)
g  ( x, y , t )   U on z  0
t x
It is possible to eliminate ζ from the two above equations to
obtain the combined form of free-surface boundary
condition, known as the Neumann-Kelvin condition, as
Fig. 1. Semi-displacement model with coordinate systems shown in equation (10).

 ( x , t )    (2)   
  U B n where x is on the body   x , t   2   x , t  2    x, t 
2

n g   U
z t 2

x 2 (10)
      (3) 
    0 on z    x, y , t      x , t  
t x x y y z 2U     0 on z  0
t  x 
 1           
2 2 2

g        0 on z    x, y, t 
(4)
   
t 2   x   y   z  
 In case of constant forward speed, the differentiation with
Here ζ is the free-surface elevation, U B is the body velocity respect to time disappears. By doing so equation (10) will be
 transformed to equation (11) below,
and n is the normal vector to the body surface. Radiation
boundary condition which ensures solution uniqueness must  
  x  U 2  2   x  (11)
also be satisfied. Infinite water depth is assumed in present  0 on z  0
z g x 2

work. Therefore the bottom boundary condition will be


The pressure can be calculated using the linearized
simplified as shown in equation (5) below,
 Bernoulli equation,
  x , t  (5)
0 as z     (12)
z p  pa  U     gz
In addition come initial conditions. The fully nonlinear x t
problem is very difficult to handle especially in three Here pa is the atmospheric pressure. Forces are calculated
dimensions. Therefore linearization is used to simplify the by integrating pressure multiplied with the normal vector.
problem. Many different linearization approaches may be Forced motions are applied in the form of simple harmonic
found in the literature. Since the focus of the present work is motion. Equation (13) expresses the vertical position of the
on high Froude numbers, the Neumann-Kelvin linearization vessel in forced motion and the consequent vertical velocity.
is applied. In this approach the undisturbed in-flow potential
is chosen as the base potential for the linearization and the 3  3a cos  t 
(13)
influence due to the presence of the body is assumed to be  3  3a sin  t 
small. This is more consistent for high Froude numbers,
relative to the double body linearization which is more Since the conditions are satisfied on the mean body position,
the influence of vessel’s heaving is carried out in to the

© 2011 American Society of Naval Engineers 139


problem by imposing a vertical velocity   3 in the body G  p, q    q 
  p      q  dsB   G  p, q  dsB 
boundary condition. Due to the forced harmonic motion of B nq B nq
the vessel, the obtained vertical force shows a periodic (15)
G  p, q    q 
pattern around a non-zero mean value, after a transient  q
FS nq
dsFS   G  p, q 
FS nq
dsFS 
period. The nonzero mean value corresponds to lift/sinkage
force. After subtracting the mean value, phase and G  p, q    q 
amplitude of this periodic force is extracted in the form of a  q
HB nq
dsHB   G  p, q 
HB nq
dsHB
total complex force by means of the Fast Fourier Transform. Here α is the solid angle at point p (Mantic 1993). G refers
The real and imaginary parts of this force are related to the to the Rankine source function. B, FS and HB refer to the
added-mass and damping coefficients. surface of the vessel, free surface and the hollow body
2.2 Transom Stern Modeling surface, respectively. n is along the surface normal vector
Due to the transom stern shape, flow separation occurs at pointing inside the water domain.
the vessel’s stern. This may cause the stern to be partly or Two different solution strategies are used depending on
fully ventilated. This phenomenon adds a great deal of whether the case is steady or time dependent.
complexity in handling the flow in this area. The transom 3.1 Steady Case
stern draft Froude number FnD  U gDS is the most
The steady case is when the vessel is on a straight course
important parameter in this context, in which DS is the draft with constant forward speed and no lateral or vertical
at the transom stern considering the vessel’s sinkage and motions. The steady form of the combined free surface
trim. As shown by Doctors (2003), we can expect to have a condition presented in equation (11) can be used in this
fully ventilated stern for transom draft Froude number case.  is kept as an unknown on the free surface boundary,
approximately larger than 2.5. This condition holds for all
the cases studied here. while  n is substituted from equation (11). It must be
noted that the normal vector on the mean free surface is in
At the transom the flow must leave the vessel tangentially
the negative z direction. By replacing  n on the body
and the pressure on the free surface detaching from the stern
must be equal to the atmospheric pressure. In order to and the hollow surface from equation (14), equation (15)
capture this part of the free surface, an analytical 2D will change to the following relation which only depends on
solution proposed by Faltinsen (2005) in close vicinity of  and its derivatives with respect to x.
the stern and in the Oxz-plane is used. Further, to create a G  p, q 
three dimensional shape of the hollow in the free surface aft   p    q dsB  HB
of the stern the method by Zhu & Faltinsen (2007) is used.
B  HB nq
 
Iteration on shape constants are carried out to find the  G  p, q   U  i nq  dsB  HB (16)
B  HB
optimum shape with pressure as close to zero as possible on
the hollow surface. In steady forward speed condition this G  p, q 
   q  dsFS
surface is assumed to be the actual free surface of the FS nq
hollow. Therefore, the exact kinematic free-surface
 U 2  2  q  
boundary condition, equation (3), can be satisfied by   G  p, q     dsFS
 g x 
FS 2
imposing no flow through this surface, i. e.
   If we let the point p approach q on a set of collocation
( x )
  U  i  n (14)
points, we end up with an equation system. The free surface
n
In forced heave motions, we can no longer assume the on the hollow body is treated just like the body surface. This
steady hollow surface to be the exact free surface, because means no flow through the surface. The validity of this
the pressure on the hollow is oscillating around the mean assumption depends on the accuracy of the estimated shape
zero pressure due to the ship oscillations. Therefore, the of the hollow relative to the real free surface behind the
free-surface condition must be satisfied directly for the stern. Therefore it is important to achieve pressure
unsteady potential. In order to do so, the unsteady potential distribution close to zero on the hollow body by means of
is linearized around the steady surface of the hollow which iterating its shape.
results in equation (10) to be satisfied on the steady hollow 3.2 Unsteady Case
surface. In the unsteady case, an initial boundary value problem
3.0 NUMERICAL METHOD must be solved. On the free surface both  and  n are
In order to solve  from the boundary value problem unknowns. However, we can assume  to be zero at t=0 on
defined by Laplace equation and boundary conditions the undisturbed free surface. Therefore we can calculate
showed in equations (7) through (9), a collocation method is  n from the solution of the boundary integral equation.
used based on the Green’s second identity as follows, The kinematic and dynamic free-surface boundary
conditions are then solved separately by means of Runge-
Kutta 4th order numerical method to step forward in time

140 © 2011 American Society of Naval Engineers


and obtain values of  at the next time instance. At the the body and the free surface. Then the surfaces are mapped
waterline, a double node technique is used to treat the two to a computational domain and the differentiation chain rule
different unknowns at one position. The vessel is started is applied to calculate derivatives. Mapping coefficients for
from rest and the forward velocity is increased by a ramp this transition are calculated using numerical grid methods
function until the desired Froude number is reached. The (see i.e. Thompson 1999). It is important to choose correct
same procedure is applied for the vessel’s heaving direction of differentiation in order to ensure stability and
amplitude in presence of forced motions. A numerical satisfying radiation condition as seen before also by Bunnik
damping zone at the boundaries of the truncated free surface (1999) in case of higher Froude numbers Therefore,
is applied similar to the method used by Nakos et al. (1993). upstream differentiation is used for all derivatives on the
Although, the presence of a damping zone is known to be free surface. Problem of tooth-saw instabilities reported
important for low and moderate Froude numbers, at high before in the literature (see i.e. Kring 1994) is treated by
Froude numbers its presence is believed to be unnecessary. adjusting the damping of the finite difference scheme.
On the body surface, just like before,  n is known for Since finite difference is performed on collocation points,
grid quality plays an important role in the present method.
all times and therefore substituted from equation (7).
This is more important at the points with singular tendency
However, imposing  n from equation (7) on the hollow
such as the vessel’s bow and the closing point of the hollow
surface will result in an unsteady  which does not satisfy as shown in Fig. 2. To avoid singularity of normal vector
the linearized free surface condition on the hollow surface. and mapping coefficients at the closing point, rectangular
Therefore corrections must be made on these values. Due to panels are used at the closing point instead of triangular
the heaving motions of the body these corrections mostly panels as suggested by Zhu & Faltinsen (2007).
will be on  n ’s vertical component  z . Since the z-
component of the normal vector on the hollow surface is
largest close to the stern, these corrections are expected to
be important just in that area. An iterative scheme is used to
estimate these corrections from equation (10) on the hollow
surface. First we start from equation (7) which means no
flow through the surface. Then the resulting  on the hollow
surface will be substituted into equation (10). The resulting
 z on the hollow is used to estimate new values for the
z-component of  n . The iteration is continued until
convergence is achieved.
3.3 Discretization
In order to solve equation (16), boundaries are discretized Fig. 2. Typical illustration of the hollow body grid
into a finite number of rectangular and triangular panels.
Linear distributions of unknowns on these panels are 4.0 NUMERICAL RESULTS AND VALIDATION
assumed. Points are distributed on the boundaries by
numerical grid generating methods such as the Hybrid Results from calculations of several test cases are presented
Curve Point Distribution Algorithm (see i.e. Thompson here for validation. Moreover applicability of the numerical
1999). This provides the ability to control the grid-point method and the transom stern modeling is examined by
density directly. Since the slope of the free surface close to comparisons with existing experimental and numerical data
the bow has a singular behavior according to thin-ship 2D+t in the steady case as well as for unsteady forced heave
theory (Faltinsen 2005), this proved to be important in motion.
adjusting the accuracy of the solution by increasing the 4.1 Wigley Hull on Straight Course
density of collocation points at the areas of high variation
As a first test case the free surface elevation of a Wigley
such as the bow and the stern. The method described in
hull on a straight course with constant speed is calculated
Shao (2010) is used to evaluate the singular integrals in
and compared with the existing numerical and experimental
equation (16).
data for different Froude numbers as shown in Fig. 3. and 4.
It is shown by Zhao & Faltinsen (1990) that calculating The overall agreement is acceptable bearing in mind the
derivatives of  close to a panel using derivatives of limitations of the linear theory.
Rankine sources and dipoles is inaccurate. This problem is Results from the time domain simulations for forced heave
treated for instance by Raven (1996) by moving the motion, added mass and damping are presented in Fig. 5.
collocation points away from the panels and de- and 6., respectively. As mentioned by Nakos (1990) the
singularizing the free surface. Therefore, a finite difference difference between the experiment and other numerical
method is applied in the present work to calculate results are believed to be due to the speed dependent
derivatives of  both on the free surface and the body restoring term which has not been accounted for.
surface. In order to do so, structured grids are generated for

© 2011 American Society of Naval Engineers 141


4.2 Transom Stern Mono-hull on Straight
Course
The free-surface elevation of a semi-displacement mono-
hull on a straight course with constant speed tested at the
INSEAN towing tank (Lugni et al. 2004) is calculated and
compared with the experimental and numerical values in
Fig. 7 and 8. The experimental values of sinkage and trim of
the model are included in the calculations.

Fig. 3. Free surface elevation along a Wigley hull on


straight course with Fn=0.348, (Bai & McCarthy 1979)

Fig. 4. Free surface elevation along a Wigley hull on Fig. 7. Wave profile along a semi-displacement mono-hull
straight course with Fn=0.452, (Bai & McCarthy 1979) with hollow body for Fn=0.5

Fig. 8. Wave profile along a semi-displacement mono-hull


with hollow body for Fn=0.7
Fig. 5. Comparison of heave added mass A33 for modified The stern effects are modeled as a hollow body. The overall
Wigley hull (1) on a straight course with Fn=0.3 agreement of the results is satisfactory. The experimental
values for the free-surface elevation are obtained using
sensors with 3 cm distance from the 4-meters long model
hull. As mentioned by Lungi et al. (2004) the large error
bars for surface elevation is believed to be due to ventilation
at the pressure sensors. The calculated free-surface elevation
at the body is also presented in Fig. 8. We note a clear
difference between the free-surface elevation at the hull and
at the pressure sensors.
4.3 Keuning Model
Calculations for the semi-displacement vessel tested by
Keuning (1988) are presented here. The steady vertical force
distribution along the ship for Froude number 1.14 is
presented in Fig. 9. The vessel’s 1.62 degrees trim and
0.004 m sinkage as suggested by Sun & Faltinsen (2010) is
applied in the calculations. The overall agreement between
Fig. 6. Comparison of heave damping B33 for modified the experiments and the linear theory is satisfactory. While
Wigley hull (1) on straight course with Fn=0.3 the nonlinear 2D+t method by Sun & Faltinsen (2010)

142 © 2011 American Society of Naval Engineers


predicts the values more accurately along the body, the
present method gives better predictions close and at the
transom. This is due to the fact that the 2D+t theory neglects
the effects of the downstream flow while close to the
transom stern these effects are known to be important. In the
present method these effects are considered by imposing
tangential flow at the transom and solving a 3D problem.

Fig. 10. Comparison of sectional vertical force along the


Keuning model for Fn=1.14, and Trim=1.62o

Fig. 9. Comparison of sectional vertical force excluding


hydrostatic force along the Keuning model for Fn=1.14, and
Trim=1.62o
The total pressure on the body is subdivided into the
hydrostatic pressure (p1), the linear hydrodynamic pressure
(p2) and the nonlinear hydrodynamic pressure (p3) which
has not been considered in the present work due to
linearization. Distribution of these forces along the vessel is
shown in Fig. 10. The consistency of the values is checked
at the transom by examining the total force distribution Fig. 11. Distribution of sectional heave added mass along
acting on the vessel, i.e. we have to add the hydrostatic Keuning model for Fn=1.14, and Trim=1.62o
force to the predicted hydrodynamic force. The sum of total
forces must go to zero at the transom due to the atmospheric
pressure. This is satisfied as seen in Fig. 10. The agreement
of total force with values presented by Sun & Faltinsen
(2010) is fairly acceptable. However, as mentioned earlier,
the present results are more consistent with the dry transom
stern effects close to the transom. Hydrostatic forces are
calculated by numerical integration of pressure over the
submerged body. Due to the complex shape of the model,
accuracy of the values is highly dependent on number of
linear panels which is used to represent the body surface.
The hydrodynamic force is in good agreement with the
results by Sun & Faltinsen (2010) around the mid-ship,
while there are disagreements at the bow and stern. The
reason at the bow is believed to be due to the fact that
Fig. 12. Distribution of sectional heave damping along
nonlinearities are neglected in the present method. The
Keuning model for Fn=1.14, and Trim=1.62o
nonlinear term in the pressure has the maximum effect at the
bow as shown in Fig. 10. However, the difference at the The accuracy of the present method is similar to the linear
stern is believed to be due to effect of the atmospheric 2D+t results from Zhao & Faltinsen (1991) except for the
pressure at the transom stern which is not considered in the last section close to stern. The nonlinear 2D+t results with
2D+t method. non-viscous separation from the vessel’s round bilge,
presented by Sun & Faltinsen (2011), show the importance
Unsteady forces for forced heave oscillations in terms of the
of nonlinearities in capturing the correct values along the
added mass and damping are also calculated and presented
vessel. However, as mentioned by Faltinsen and Zhao
in Fig. 11. and 12. respectively. The motion frequency is 11
(1991) we expect the sum of added mass force per unit
radians per second and the amplitude is 0.01 m.
length and restoring force per unit length to go to zero at the

© 2011 American Society of Naval Engineers 143


transom, as well as the damping. These asymptotic values, Keuning, J.A. (1988). Distributon of Added Mass and
which are shown in Fig. 11. and 12., are not reached at the Damping along the Length of a Ship Model Moving at
stern in the 2D+t calculations. After imposing the transom High Forward Speed, Delft University of Technology
stern effects on the upstream flow, a sharp change towards Report No.817-P
asymptotic values are observed. This behavior was also Kring, D.C. (1994). Time Domain Ship Motions by a Three-
anticipated before by Zhao & Faltinsen (1991). Dimensional Rankine Panel Method. Massachusetts
5.0 CONCLUSION Institute of Technology.
Lugni, C., Colagrossi, A., Landrini, M. & Faltinsen, O.M.
A three-dimensional Rankine panel method is used as a tool (2004). “Experimental and Numerical Study of Semi-
in predicting the linear hydrodynamic forces acting on semi- Displacement Mono-Hull and Catamaran in Calm Water
displacement vessels with transom stern at high speeds. The and Incident Waves” Proceedings of the 25th
steady forward motion and the unsteady forced heave Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, St. Johns’s,
oscillations are considered. The separation from the dry Canada.
transom stern is imposed by satisfying zero pressure on a Mantic, V. (1993). “A new formula for the C-matrix in the
surface constructed from the analytical solution proposed by Somigliana identity.” Journal of Elasticity, 33, no. 3:
Faltinsen (2005). This surface is considered as a hollow pp.191-201.
body attached to the vessel. The accuracy of the method is Nakos, D.E. (1990). Ship wave patterns and motions by a
tested against the experimental and numerical values from three dimensional Rankine Panel Method. Massachusetts
the literature for the models by Lugni et al. (2004) and Institute of Technology.
Keuning (1988). The general agreement of the free-surface Nakos, D.E. & Sclavounos, P.D. (1991). “Ship Motions by a
elevation and the steady hydrodynamic force is acceptable. Three-Dimensional Rankine Panel Method.”
At the transom the present method gives better prediction of Proceedings of the 18th Symposium on Naval
forces which are in agreement with the zero pressure at the Hydrodynamics, Ann Arbor, USA.
transom stern. Further, in the unsteady heave oscillations, Nakos, D.E., Kring, D.C. & Sclavounos, P.D. (1993).
the unsteady potential is linearized around the steady hollow “Rankine Panel Methods for Transient Free-Surface
surface. The linearized free-surface condition is satisfied Flows” Proceedings of the Sixth International
using an iterative scheme. Values of heave sectional added Conference on Numerical Ship Hydrodynamics, Iowa
mass and damping are presented and compared to City, USA.
experiments and other numerical methods. The accuracy of Raven, H.C. (1996). A Solution Method for the Nonlinear
the present method is in agreement with the linear 2D+t Ship Wave Resistance Problem. Delft University of
theory by Zhao & Faltinsen (1991), except at the stern Technology.
where the method can capture the anticipated sharp change Salvesen, N., Tuck, E.O. & Faltinsen, O.M. (1970). “Ship
towards asymptotic values. Motions and Sea Loads.” Trans. SNAME 78: pp.250-
The present method can be further developed to include the 287.
forced lateral motions, which then can be used to construct a Sun H., Faltinsen O.M. (2010). “Numerical study of a semi-
linear hydrodynamic model of a semi-displacement at high displacement ship at high speed.” Proceedings of 29th
speed in order to investigate the linear dynamic instability International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic
leading to for instance calm-water broaching. Engineering, Shanghai, China.
REFERENCES Sun, H. & Faltinsen, O.M. (2011). “Hydrodynamic Forces
on High-Speed Ships in Forced Vertical Motions.”
Bai, K.J. & McCarthy, J.H. (1979). “Overview of Results” Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on
Proceedings of the Workshop on Ship Wave-resistance Fast Sea Transportation, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA.
Computations, David W. Taylor Naval Ship Research Thompson, J.F., Soni, B.K. & Weatherill, N.P. (1999).
and Development Center, Maryland, USA, pp.5-50. Handbook of Grid Generation. CRC Press.
Bunnik, T. (1999). Seakeeping Calculations for Ships, Zhao, R. & Faltinsen, O.M. (1990). “Interaction between
Taking into Account the Non-linear Steady Waves. Delft current waves and marine structures” Proceedings of the
University of Technology. Fifth International Conference on Numerical Ship
Doctors, L.J. (2007). “A numerical study of the resistance of Hydrodynamics, Hiroshima, Japan.
transom-stern monohulls.” Ship Technology Research, Zhu, W. & Faltinsen, O.M. (2007). “Towards Numerical
54, no. 3: pp.134-144. Dynamic Stability Predictions of Semi-Displacement
Faltinsen, O.M. (2005). Hydrodynamics of High-Speed Vessels.” Proceedings of the Ninth International
Marine Vehicles. New York: Cambridge University Conference on Fast Sea Transportation, Shanghai,
Press. China.
Faltinsen, O.M. & Zhao, R. (1991). "Numerical Prediction
of Ship Motions at High Forward Speed." Phil. Trans. R. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Soc. Lond., Vol. 334, pp.241-252. This work is supported financially by the Research Council
Journée, J.M.J. (1992). Experiments and Calculations on 4 of Norway through Centre for Ships and Ocean Structures.
Wigley Hull Forms in Head Waves, Delft University of
Technology Report No.0909.

144 © 2011 American Society of Naval Engineers

Вам также может понравиться