Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Ahmed A. Swidan, Giles A. Thomas, Dev Ranmuthugala, Irene Penesis, Walid Amin, Australian Maritime College,
University of Tasmania, Australia
SUMMARY
With the increasing demand for faster and lighter ferries the need for predicting motions and sea loads for efficient
structural design and safe operation has become necessary. Operation at speeds of around 40 knots in the open ocean,
where water impacts can result in structural damage and crew injuries emphasises the need for the development of
reliable tools to accurately predict slam loads.
This work investigated the behaviour of a quasi-2D section model of wave-piercing catamaran fitted with a centrebow
during the impact phase using finite-volume Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), overlapping grids, Reynolds-
Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations and Volume of Fluid (VOF) method to solve the water-entry problem. The
computed vertical acceleration and slamming pressures are compared to previously published drop test experimental
data and show good agreement. It was found that taking into account the compressibility of the trapped air is necessary
to accurately predict slamming pressures.
1. INTRODUCTION
To accurately predict hydrodynamic impact loads on
light-weight high-speed catamarans, it is necessary to
include slam events in estimating global loads in the
preliminary design stages. There is a lack of data
concerning unconventional hull forms in rough seas,
particularly data on motions and loads during full scale
Centrebow
trials and/or experimental tests, in order to conduct
Demihull
statistical studies for predicting the behaviour of such
vessels. In severe sea states many wave encounters result Figure 1: INCAT 112m high-speed catamaran fitted with
in rapid and significant local hydrodynamic loads called centrebow [4]
slamming.
These techniques can be divided into: full scale sea-trials
Over the past two decades, high-speed catamarans have
[5], scale model experimental tests [6], theoretical
been used for both commercial and military operations,
approaches [7], empirical formulae [8] and numerical
thus extending their service area from protected waters to
simulations [9].
the open ocean where frequent and large slams can result
Pioneering work on slamming was carried out by Von
in severe local and global loads.
Karman [10] and Wagner [11], which were followed by
A severe slam load acting on high-speed catamarans is
a significant number of publications, as summarised in
called wetdeck slamming. For a typical catamaran, this
Ship’s Structure Committee report (SSC-385A) [12].
occurs on the flat area of the fore body. For a catamaran
Kapsenberg [13] reviewed the problem of slamming
fitted with a centrebow, as shown in Fig. 1, slamming
from a practical perspective and highlighted the
occurs when the archway between the demihull and
challenge in predicting slamming loads, especially when
centrebow impacts the surface.
the angle between the hull and the free-surface is small
From a structural design perspective, primary importance
due to the effect of air inclusions and aerated water.
is given to the impact load, as the main source of
Almost all of these works focused on solving the slam
structure failure and buckling of ship frames tends to be
problem in either conventional hull forms, such as
hydrodynamic loads with very short time incidences [1].
wedges, or cylindrical structures as found in offshore
These slam events can excite the natural modes of the
systems. However relatively limited attempts have been
structure, a process called whipping, which can have a
made to solve the water-entry problems of 3D bodies or
significant influence on reducing the vessel’s fatigue life
unconventional hull forms such as catamarans.
as discussed by Thomas et al [2, 3].
Chuang et al [14] developed a method of predicting
Slamming is a complex non-linear problem. Many
slamming pressure in waves based on Wagner’s theory
researchers have developed various techniques to predict
[11] and relative velocity, known as the ‘k-factor
the behaviour of vessels during a slam event.
method’.
1
X HSMV - Naples, October 2014
This study found that even if a vessel is moving at a wetdeck archway during a slam event due to its
certain velocity in a direction other than the normal significant influence on the localised slamming
component to the impact surface, the impact load on the pressures.
wetdeck is only affected by the relative velocity The work presented here carries out CFD simulations
component normal to the impact point on the surface. using the Finite Volume Method (FVM) and is validated
Kaplan [15] considered the effect of forward speed in against published experimental drop test data, thus
calculating the slamming pressure on twin-hulled vessels establishing a numerical model to predict slamming loads
by applying Von Karman’s technique [10]. However, the and corresponding motions of wave-piercing catamarans.
selected 2D section was in the longitudinal direction This provides a preliminary indication on the suitability
rather than a transverse section. Thus the effect of two of the suggested to accurately predict the behaviour of
demihulls was not considered, consequently sealing off catamarans during slamming.
the escape of air and water when contact was not
considered.
2. NUMERICAL SIMULATION
Faltinsen [16] reviewed the problem of wetdeck
slamming on an initially calm free-surface. It was noted The numerical simulations were performed using STAR-
that for bottom and/or wetdeck slamming experimental CCM+ 8.06.007 on a PC to solve the problem of a free-
pressures should not be Froude scaled due to the falling 3D wave-piercer model free-fall on to a clam
significant effect of the entrapped air cushion between water surface at an initial velocity of 0.8984m/s at the
the free-surface and structures with small dead rise instant the demihull keel touches the free-surface. The
angles. Faltinsen also stated that slamming is a 3D motion was restricted to a single degree of freedom
problem; so that testing the water-entry problem purely (DOF).
in 2D will increase the loads significantly. To validate the numerical model, the computed motions
Davis and Whelan [7] designed a drop test rig in order to and slamming pressures were compared against
study slamming loads and corresponding motions on a experimental results from Whelan [19]. Whelan
series of quasi 2D hull form models including an INCAT investigated the behaviour of nine quasi 2D models,
wave-piercer. It was found that the 2D drop test can including a free falling 1/40-scale wave-piercing model
overestimate the peak slamming pressures by around entering still water.
three times the largest experienced slam loads on an 86m The model measuring 0.54m wide x 0.29m long x 0.22m
wave piercing vessel with the same transverse section. deep and the tank geometries are shown in Figs.2 and 3.
Yang et al. [17] solved the problem of water-entry of
wedge-shaped hull form, wave piercer with a flat top 0.54m
arch model and cylinder using the Finite difference
method on a fixed Cartesian grid to solve the Navier-
Stokes equations. The Constrained Interpolation Profile
(CIP) method developed by Yabe et al. [18] was used to P3
P4 0.22m
capture the free-surface deformation. For the wave- P2
piercer model, the study compared the velocity ratios and P1
flow visualisation against the drop tests conducted by
Davis and Whelan [7]. Although it was found that free-
surface elevation was in good agreement with Figure 2: Positions of four pressure transducers on the
experiments, a bigger separation was seen to occur at the wave piercer model
demihull sides by using the CIP method. In addition, the
velocity ratios were over predicted, particularly for
higher initial velocities.
These limitations can be overcome by using
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) methods [13].
Swidan et al. [9] used CFD techniques to solve the
problem of water-entry of a free-fall wedge. The
computed slamming pressures and corresponding
motions were in good agreement with data from the drop
tests conducted by Whelan [19]. It was found that a
slight change in the location of the pressure transducers
can affect the results significantly. Also, computing
pressures in rapidly changing pressure zones, such as
near the wedge apex, needs particular focus and a
Courant number of 0.1 was considered sufficient to
capture the slamming pressures.
For CFD simulations of catamarans it is necessary to
consider the effect of the aerated water at the top of the
2
X HSMV - Naples, October 2014
3
X HSMV - Naples, October 2014
The final background region had around 200,000 cells, are governed by continuity, three momentum
while the overset region included approximately components and two equations for the Shear Stress
400,000cells. Transport (SST) K-ω turbulence model. The latter was
selected due to the insensitivity to free-stream conditions
3.2 INITIAL AND BOUNDARY CONDITIONS of the K-ɛ model in the far-field, while retaining the
advantages of the K- ω model near the walls [23].
Simulation of the free-falling quasi-2D catamaran hull A volume fraction equation, Volume of Fluid (VOF)
model was performed under realistic initial and boundary method, accounts for the free surface deformation of air
conditions. Only one quarter of the geometry was and water fluid mixture. Water/ air are considered to be
considered, imposing symmetry conditions in the two fractional components of a single effective fluid
geometrical symmetry planes of the catamaran hull characterised according to the proportion of each fluid
model. There were two main dimensionless parameters [24].
of importance when simulating the model, the mass For this case STAR-CCM+ uses the multiphase
number m*=mm/ρTL2 and a dimensionless drop height segregated iterative method to solve the conservation
(H/L), where mm is the model mass, ρ is the water equations for mass, momentum and energy (RANS
density, T is the length of the model (0.29m), L is the equations) for each phase. This model solves the flow
beam of the model (0.54m), and H is the drop height equations for the velocity components and pressure in an
measured from the top of the archway of the wetdeck to un-coupled manner. First, the linearized components of
the free-surface at the instant when the model starts the momentum equations are the prevailing pressure and
falling. mass fluxes through the control volume faces (inner-
The wave piercing hull model, weighting 24.4kg, was iterations), followed by a Semi-Implicit Method for
allowed to free-fall under the influence of gravity. Pressure-Linked Equations (SIMPLE) to resolve the
pressure-velocity coupling, while the linkage between
the momentum and continuity equations is achieved
through predictor and corrector stages.
For the Finite Volume Method (FVM), the governing
equations on its integral form are approximated over
each control volume by the midpoint rule. This means
that before interpolating all integrals the discrete form of
the equations are solved at the centroid of faces and
volumes, converting the volume integrals to surface
integrals. The objective is to obtain a set of linear
algebraic equations, with the total number of unknowns
in each equation system corresponding to the number of
cells in the grid [25].
To complete the mathematical model, the fluids flow
when using the overset grid (moving grid) as the grid
movement is not prescribed by initial conditions, rather it
follows the motion of the moving body. This requires,
for this case, a coupled solution between the previous
mentioned equations and one equation for the simulated,
Figure 6: 3D wave-piercer catamaran model 1DOF linear motion. In addition, the space-conservation
computational domain law equation is solved to conservatively express the
transport motion since the control volumes of the overset
The top boundary of the simulation domain, which mesh moves and changes its location as the body moves
represents air, was treated as a pressure outlet. The two [26].
planes that dissected the catamaran model were treated as
symmetry planes. The starboard and bottom planes of the 3.4 NUMERICAL ACCURACY
domain were treated as slip walls. The tank wall adjacent
to the catamaran model and the hull surfaces were treated This section presents the investigation into the effect of
as non-slip walls (see Fig.6). venting clearance (see Fig.4) and air elasticity on the
computed results.
3.3 GOVERNING EQUATIONS Assuming the model to be infinitely rigid, pressure
transducers were flush-mounted to the curved structure
The problem of the free-falling catamaran model surface neglecting the compressibility of water. The
impacting on to the water surface is numerically effect of frictional forces between moving parts in the
represented by the RANS equations in which the effect drop test rig were assumed to be negligible. Symmetry
of turbulence is solved using SST k-ω eddy-viscosity was assumed across the centerline during experimental
model. The equations to be solved for a viscous 3D flow drop tests based on symmetric flow visualisation. The air
4
X HSMV - Naples, October 2014
at the top of the arch, between the structure and disturbed pressures and vertical accelerations result in large errors.
free-surface, was assumed to compress adiabatically, i.e. At 7mm clearance, the error bound associated with wall
with no change in heat energy. clearances was around 15% in percentage terms and
The error bound associated with the venting clearance 1mm in absolute terms when compared against
space between the model’s end flat face and the tank experimental data. In addition, the boundary condition
wall during experiment, as stated by Whelan [19], was limitations were minor at this venting clearance.
more than 15% in percentage terms and 1mm in absolute Moreover, two simulations were carried out at 8mm
terms. This study was carried out using three different venting clearance and stable results were achieved. Thus,
grid sizes from 500,000 to 3000,000 cells, including a a 7mm venting clearance was used in all presented
range from 10 to 45 cells between the model’s flat face simulations.
and tank wall with a Courant number of 0.1.
It was found that simulating the same venting clearance
between 5 to 6mm space as in the experiment resulted in Experimental
15
an error of around 78%, as shown in Fig. 7. This error
Cell Size= 0.5mm
can be attributed to boundary condition limitations due to 13
Cell Size= 0.25mm
Acceleration (gm/s^2)
the rotation of flow around the sharp ended edge of the 11
Cell Size= 0.1mm
wetdeck and in a very tiny space of the venting
9
clearance. Thus a detailed study was carried out by
increasing the venting clearance spacing from 6mm to 7
Figure 8: Venting clearance error study and corresponding time record uncertainty of vertical acceleration and slamming
pressures distribution
To investigate the sensitivity of the computed results to of the model was numerically solved using various cell
the cell sizes and the time step, the vertical acceleration sizes at a Courant number of 0.1, as shown in Fig. 9. In
5
X HSMV - Naples, October 2014
this figure, the cell sizes at the venting clearance ranged It was observed that including the elasticity of air could
from 0.1∆x to 0.05∆x. In addition, air compressibility enhance the computed vertical acceleration from
was included in this study. It was observed that there quantitative as well as temporal perspectives.
were only slight changes in the numerical solution results
despite the change in cell size. Therefore, 0.075 ∆x was 170
Experimenal
considered sufficient to perform the numerical simulation 150
150
0.1 ∆x_Compressible 70
130 0.075 ∆x_Compressible
50
110 0.05 ∆x_Compressible
30
90
10
70
-10
50 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
Time (Sec.)
30
Figure 10: Vertical acceleration of INCAT model as a
10
function of time.
-10
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
Time (Sec.)
Figure 9: Sensitivity mesh study vs. drop test data
6
X HSMV - Naples, October 2014
Jet forming
P3 P4
P2
P1
15
Pressure (kPa)
-1.2
Velocity (m/s)
10
-1
-0.8
Experimental
0
CFD (compressible air) 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
7
X HSMV - Naples, October 2014
75
as the pressure transducer touched the surface, as shown P3 (Experimental)
in Fig.13, or more likely, the pressure sensing area not 65 P3 (Compressible)
being flush mounted to the curved surface, thus P3 (incompressible)
55
separation may have occurred between the sensing
Pressure (kPa)
surface and the water. Between the occurrence of the 45
both simulations.
-5 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
Time (Sec.)
25
P2 (Experimental) Figure 16: Pressure at probe P3 with respect to time
110
20
P2 (compressible) P4 (Experimental)
P4 (Incompressible)
10
70
5
Pressure (kPa)
50
0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
30
-5
10
-10 Time (Sec.)
8
X HSMV - Naples, October 2014
function of pressure is better in predicting slamming Shaped Hull Form Using CFD," World Journal of Mechanics, vol. 3,
pp. 1-8, 2013.
pressures and corresponding motions of wave piercing
[10] Von Karman, "The Impact on Seaplane Floats during Landing,"
catamarans than air has a constant density due to the National Advisory Committee for Aeroneautics (NACA), Technical
existence of air inclusion during the slam event. Note, October 1929.
The presented CFD methodology was used to predict the [11] H.Wagner, "Über Stross-und Gleitvorgange an der Oberflasche "
magnitude and peak values of slamming pressures at four Von Flüssigkeiten, vol. 12, No. 4, May 1932.
[12] J. Daidlooa and V. Mishkevich, "Hydrodynamic Impact on
positions along the top archway. Computed pressures far Displacement Ship Hulls," Ship Structure Committee (SSC-385), 1995.
from the initial impact where slam occurs resulted in [13] G. Kapsenberg, "Slamming of ships: where are we now?,"
under predicting slamming pressures. Special attention Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical,
must be paid to ensure that the pressure transducers are Physical and Engineering Sciences, vol. 369, pp. 2892-2919, 2011.
[14] A. Korobkin, "Elastic response of catamaran wetdeck to liquid
fitted flush to the hull, particularly in the case of curved impact," Ocean Engineering, vol. 25, pp. 687-714, 1998.
hull surfaces such as in the catamaran model used in this [15] P. Kaplan, "Analysis and Prediction of Flat Bottom Slamming
study. Impact of Advanced Marine Vehicles in Waves," ISP, vol. 34, March
The CFD correctly predicted the velocity profile and the 1987.
[16] O. M. Faltinsen, M. Landrini, and M. Greco, "Slamming in
maximum vertical acceleration of the tested model. Marine Applications," Journal of Engineering Mathematics, vol. 48,
Thus, this CFD methodology presented can be used to pp. 187-217, 2004.
predict the maximum loads acting per unit length of the [17] Q. Yang and W. Qiu, "Numerical simulation of water impact for
model during water-entry. Although the numerical 2D and 3D bodies," Ocean Engineering, vol. 43, pp. 82-89, 2012.
[18] Y. Takashi, y. Feng-Xiao, and U. Takayuki, "The Constrained
vertical acceleration is marginally overestimated, the Interpolation Profile Method for Multiphase Analysis," Journal of
slamming pressures were under estimated. It should be Computational Physics, vol. 169, pp. 556–593, 2001.
noted that the slam pressures did not represent the [19] J. R. Whelan., "Wetdeck slamming of high speed catamarans
slamming loads due to the effect of aerated water in with a centrebow," PhD, National centre of Maritime Engineering and
Hydrodynamics, Univesrsity of Tasmanai, 2004.
computing the pressure distribution at certain locations. [20] G. Starius, "Composite mesh difference methods for elliptic and
Overlapping grids were successfully used to simulate the boundary value problems," Numer. Math, vol. 28, pp. 243–258, 1977.
motion of the numerical INCAT model under [21] I. Demirdzic, Lilek, Z., and Peric, M., "A collocated finite
gravitational forces. The computed flow visualisation volume method for predicting flows at all speeds," nt. J. for Numerical
Methods in Fluids, p. 16, 1993.
illustrated the ability of CFD to capture the trapped air [22] H. HADˇZI´C, "Development and Application of a Finite
bubbles mixed with water at the top of the arch in the Volume Method for the Computation of Flows Around Moving Bodies
hull cross section during the slam process. Wetdeck on Unstructured, Overlapping Grids," PhD, Technischen Universit¨at
slamming of wave-piercing catamarans is thus affected Hamburg, 2005.
[23] F. R. Menter, "Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence modeling
by compressibility of the air inclusion at the highest
for engineering applications," AIAA Journal, vol. 32(8), 1994.
point beneath the wetdeck during the slam event. [24] C. W. Hirt and B. D. Nichols, "Volume of fluid (VOF) method
for the dynamics of free boundaries," Journal of Computational
REFERENCES Physics, vol. 39, pp. 201-225, 1981.
[25] S.Dragomir, P.Cerone, and A.Sofo, "Some Remarks on the
Midpoint Rule in Numerical Integration," RGMIA research report
[1] F. J. Huera-Huarte, D. Jeon, and M. Gharib, "Experimental
collection, vol. 1, 1998.
Investigation of Water Slamming Loads on Panels," Ocean
[26] H.Mørch, S.Enger, M.Peri´c, and E.Schreck, "Simulation of
Engineering, vol. 38, pp. 1347-1355, 2011.
Lifeboat Launching Under Storm Conditions," presented at the 6th
[2] G. Thomas, M. Davis, D. Holloway, N. Watson, and T. Roberts,
International Conference on CFD in Oil and Gas, Metallurgical and
"Slamming response of a large high-speed wave-piercer catamaran,"
Process Industries, Trondheim, Norway, 2008.
Marine Technology, vol. 40, pp. 126-140, 2003.
[27] D. N. VERITAS, ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AND
[3] G. Thomas, M. R. Davis, D. S. Holloway, and T. Roberts, "The
ENVIRONMENTAL LOADS. Høvik, Norway, 2007.
effect of slamming and whipping on the fatigue life of a high-speed
catamaran," Australian Journal of Mechanical Engineering, vol. 3, p.
165, 2006.
[4] Maritime Denmark. (March 2013). KatExpress 2 on its way to
Denmark. Available:
http://www.maritimedenmark.dk/?utm_source=uknyhedsbrev22-03-
2013&utm_medium=email&utm_content=uknyhedsbrev2013&utm_ca
mpaign=uknyhedsbrev&Id=16757
[5] M.Davis, J.Whelan, and G.Thomas, "Computational Modeling of
Wet Deck Slam Loads with Reference to Sea Trials," presented at the
Ninth International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation, Shanghai,
China, 2007.
[6] W. Amin, M. Davis, G. Thomas, and D. Holloway, "Transient Wave
Loads on Large High Speed Catermarans," in 8th International
Conference on High Performance Marine Vehicles, 2012, p. 246.
[7] M. R. Davis and J. R. Whelan, "Computation of wet deck bow slam
loads for catamaran arched cross sections," Ocean Engineering, vol. 34,
pp. 2265-2276, 2007.
[8] X. U. Guo-dong and D. Wen-yang, "Review of Prediction
Techniques on Hydrodynamic Impact of Ships " Marine Science, vol. 8,
2009.
[9] A. Swidan, W. Amin, D. Ranmuthugala, G. Thomas, and I. Penesis,
"Numerical Prediction of Symmetric Water Impact Loads on Wedge