Accuracy of Potential Flow Methods to Solve Real-time Ship-Tug Interaction Effects within Ship Handling Simulators

• Autorzy: Jayarathne B. N. , Ranmuthugala D. , Fei J.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.12716/1001.08.04.03

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The hydrodynamic interaction effects between two vessels that are significantly different in size operating in close proximity can adversely affect the safety and handling of these vessels. Many ship handling simulator designers implement Potential Flow (PF) solvers to calculate real-time interaction effects. However, these PF solvers struggle to accurately predict the complicated flow regimes that can occur, for example as the flow passes a wet transom hull or one with a drift angle. When it comes to predicting the interaction effects on a tug during a ship assist, it is essential to consider the rapid changes of the tug’s drift angle, as the hull acts against the inflow creating a complicated flow regime. This paper investigates the ability of the commercial PF solver, Futureship®, to predict the accurate interaction effects acting on tugs operating at a drift angle during ship handling operations through a case study. This includes a comparison against Computation Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations and captive model tests to examine the suitability of the PF method for such duties. Although the PF solver can be tuned to solve streamline bodies, it needs further improvement to deal with hulls at drift angles.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

ship handling; ship handling simulator; hydrodynamics; computational fluid dynamics (CFD); potential flow; ship-tug interaction; real time; hydrodynamic interaction effect

• Wydawca: Faculty of Navigation, Gdynia Maritime University
• Czasopismo: TransNav : International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation
• Rocznik: 2014
• Tom: Vol. 8 no. 4
• Strony: 497--504
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 18 poz., rys.

Twórcy

autor

Jayarathne B. N.

• Australian Maritime College

autor

Ranmuthugala D.

• University of Tasmania, Newnham, Tasmania, Australia

autor

Fei J.

• Australian Maritime College, University of Tasmania, Newnham, Tasmania, Australia

Bibliografia

• 1 CD‐Adapco. (2014). User Manual of Star CCM+ Version 08.
• 2 DNV GL Maritime. (2014). User Manual of FS‐Flow Version 14.0228.
• 3 Doctors, L. J. (2006). A Numerical Study of the Resistance of Transom Stern Monohulls. Paper presented at the 5th International Conference on High Performance Marine Vehicles, Australia.
• 4 Doctors, L. J., & Beck, R. F. (2005). The Separation of the Flow Past a Transom Stern. Paper presented at the First International Conference on Marine Research and Transportation (ICMRT ʹ05), Ischia, Italy.
• 5 Eliasson, S., & Olsson, D. (2011). Barge Stern Optimization: Analysis on a Straight Shaped Stern using CFD. (MSc thesis), Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden. (X‐11/266)
• 6 Fonfach, J. M. A., Sutulo, S., & Soares, C. G. (2011). Numerical study of Ship to Ship Interaction Forces on the Basis of Various Flow Models. Paper presented at the 2nd International Conference on Ship Manoeuvring in Shallow and Confined Water: Ship to Ship Interaction, Trondheim, Norway.
• 7 Hensen, H. (2012). Safe Tug Operation: Who Takes the Lead? International Tug & OSV, 2012(July/August ), 70‐ 76.
• 8 Hensen, H., Merkelbach, D., & Wijnen, F. V. (2013). Report on Safe Tug Procedures (pp. 40). Netherlands: Dutch Safety Board.
• 9 ITTC. (2011). Resistance Test (Vol. 7.5‐02‐02‐01): International Towing Tank Conference.
• 10 Leong, Z. Q., Ranmuthugala, D., Penesis, I., & Nguyen, H. (2014). RANS‐Based CFD Prediction of the Hydrodynamic Coefficients of DARPA SUBOFF Geometry in Straight‐Line and Rotating Arm Manoeuvres. Transactions RINA: Part A1‐ International Journal Maritime Engineering.
• 11 Mantzaris, D. A. (1998). A Rankine Panel Method as a Tool for the Hydrodynamic Design of Complex Marine Vehicles.(Ph.D. thesis), Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA.
• 12 Mierlo, K. V. (2006). Trend Validation of SHIPFLOW based on the Bare Hull Upright Resistance of the Delft Series. (MSc thesis), Delft University of Technology, Netherlands.
• 13 Pinkster, J. A., & Bhawsinka, K. (2013). A Real‐time Simulation Technique for Ship‐Ship and Ship‐Port Interactions. Paper presented at the 28th International Workshop on Water Waves and Floating Bodies (IWWWFB 2013), LʹIsle sur la Sorgue, France.
• 14 Pranzitelli, A., Nicola, C., & Miranda, S. (2011). Steady‐state calculations of Free Surface Flow around Ship Hulls and Resistance Predictions. Paper presented at the High Speed Marine Vehicles (IX HSMV), Naples, Italy.
• 15 Sutulo, S., & Soares, C. G. (2009). Simulation of Close‐Proximity Maneuvers using an Online 3D Potential Flow Method. Paper presented at the International Conference on Marine Simulation and Ship Maneuverability, Panama City, Panama.
• 16 Sutulo, S., Soares, C. G., & Otzen, J. F. (2012). Validation of Potential‐Flow Estimation of Interaction Forces Acting upon Ship Hulls in Parallel Motion. Journal of Ship Research, 56(3), 129–145.
• 17 Vantorre, M., Verzhbitskaya, E., & Laforce, E. (2002). Model Test Based Formulations of Ship‐Ship Interaction Forces. Ship Technology Research, 49, 124‐141.
• 18 White, F. M. (2003). Fluid Mechanics (5 ed.). New York: McGraw‐Hill.