Computational prediction of the resistance of the the floatplane at various trim angles

• Autorzy: Sulisetyono Aries , Fadhlurrohman Ihsan , Ali Baharudin , Zubaydi Achmad

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.15632/jtam-pl/148053

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The prediction of the total resistance occurred during operation of a floatplane on the water surface is an important aspect in developing the floater as well as the engine power required. Theoretically, the trim angle of the floater may affect the total resistance. This paper intends to find the optimal trim angle for the take-off operation using the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software. The floater set up under a fixed trim angle includes 2◦, 5◦ and 10◦ taken in simulation at five different speeds between 9.21 m/s and 15.87 m/s. In one case of 2◦ trim angle, the floater model test has been carried out in a tow tank laboratory to validate the accuracy of the numerical result. Comparison of both results has a good fit with an average error of 2.27%. In the final simulation results, the optimum trim angle is 5◦, which produces the total resistance less than 2◦ and 10◦ of the trim angle with average differences of 9.21% and 50.46% for all speeds, respectively.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

resistance; floatplane; trim angle; computational fluid dynamics

• Wydawca: Polskie Towarzystwo Mechaniki Teoretycznej i Stosowanej
• Czasopismo: Journal of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: Vol. 60 nr 2
• Strony: 267--278
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 19 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Sulisetyono Aries

• Department of Naval Architecture, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya, Indonesia

autor

Fadhlurrohman Ihsan

• Department of Naval Architecture, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya, Indonesia

autor

Ali Baharudin

• Balai Teknologi Hidrodinamika-BPPT Indonesia

autor

Zubaydi Achmad

• Department of Naval Architecture, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya, Indonesia

Bibliografia

• 1. Aliffrananda M.H., Sulisetyono A., 2021, Porpoising instability study of the floatplane during take-off operation on calm water, IOP Conference Series Materials Science and Engineering, 1052, 1, 012013.
• 2. Aliffrananda M.H., Sulisetyono A., Hermawan Y.A., Zubaydi A., 2022, Numerical analysis of floatplane porpoising instability at calm water during take-off, International Journal Technology, 13, 1, 190-201.
• 3. Berg T., 2015, Simulating sinkage & trim for planing boat hulls, FLUENT Workshop.
• 4. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA-H-8083-23), 2004, Seaplane, Skiplane, and Float/Ski Equipped Helicopter Operations Handbook, Aviation Supplies & Academics Inc.
• 5. Gudmundsson S., 2014, General Aviation Aircraft Design, Oxford: Elsevier.
• 6. Insel M., Molland A.F., 1992, An investigation into the resistance components of high-speed displacement catamarans, Transactions of the RINA, 134, 1-20.
• 7. ITTC, 2011, Practical guidelines for ship CFD applications, 26th International Towing Tank Conference Specialist Committee on CFD in Marine Hydrodynamics.
• 8. Locke F.W.S., 1944, General Resistance Tests on Flying-Boat Hull Models, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Wartime Report, NACA, Washington.
• 9. Molland A.F., Turnock S.R., Hudson D.A., 2017, Ship Resistance and Propulsion, Cambridge University Press.
• 10. Qiu L., Song W., 2013, Efficient decoupled hydrodynamic and aerodynamic analysis of amphibious aircraft water takeoff process, Journal of Aircraft, 50, 5, 1369-1379.
• 11. Reichel M., Minchev A., Larsen N.L., 2014, Trim optimization – theory and practice, International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, 8, 3, 387-392.
• 12. Sajedi S.M., Ghadimi P., 2020, Experimental and numerical investigation of stepped planing hulls in finding an optimized step location and analysis of its porpoising phenomenon, Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2020.
• 13. Sazak E., 2017, Parametric Investigation of Hull Shaped Fuselage for Amphibious UAV, Middle East Technical University.
• 14. Savitsky D., 1964, Hydrodynamic design of planing hulls, Marine Technology, 1, 4, 71-95.
• 15. Sherbaz S., Duan W., 2014, Ship trim optimization: assessment of influence of trim on resistance of MOERI container ship, The Scientific World Journal, 2014.
• 16. Suydam H.B., 1952, Hydrodynamic Characteristics of a Low-Drag, Planing-Tail Flying-Boat Hull, National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Washington.
• 17. Tomaszewski K.M., 1950, Hydrodynamic Design of Seaplane Floats, Aeronautical Research Council, Ministry of Supply, London.
• 18. Versteeg H., Malalasekera W., 2007, An Introduction to Computational Fluid Dynamics the Finite Volume Method, Pearson Education Limited.
• 19. Yanuar, Gunawan, Utomo A.S.A., Luthfi M.N., Baezal M.A.B., Majid F.R.S., Chairunisa Z., 2020, Numerical and experimental analysis of total hull resistance on floating catamaran pontoon for N219 seaplanes based on biomimetics design with clearance configuration, International Journal of Technology, 11, 7, 1397-1405.