0
Research Papers: Structures and Safety Reliability

Strength of a Container Ship in Extreme Waves Obtained by Nonlinear Hydroelastoplasticity Dynamic Analysis and Finite Element Modeling

[+] Author and Article Information
Weiqin Liu

Departments of Naval Architecture,
Ocean, and Structural Engineering,
School of Transportation,
Wuhan University of Technology,
Wuhan, Hubei 430063, China
e-mail: liuweiqin_123@sina.com

Xuemin Song

Department of Systems Innovation,
School of Engineering,
The University of Tokyo,
7-3-1 Hongo,
Tokyo 113-8656, Japan
e-mail: wmyzyq@hotmail.com

Weiguo Wu

Departments of Naval Architecture,
Ocean, and Structural Engineering,
School of Transportation,
Wuhan University of Technology,
Wuhan, Hubei 430063, China
e-mail: mailjt@163.com

Katsuyuki Suzuki

Department of Systems Innovation,
School of Engineering,
The University of Tokyo,
7-3-1 Hongo,
Tokyo 113-8656, Japan
e-mail: katsu@race.u-tokyo.ac.jp

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Ocean, Offshore, and Arctic Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF OFFSHORE MECHANICS AND ARCTIC ENGINEERING. Manuscript received February 26, 2015; final manuscript received January 5, 2016; published online April 4, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Robert Seah.

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 138(3), 031602 (Apr 04, 2016) (11 pages) Paper No: OMAE-15-1018; doi: 10.1115/1.4032604 History: Received February 26, 2015; Revised January 05, 2016

Extreme waves have caused a lot of ship accidents and casualties. In this paper, a two-dimensional (2D) hydroelastoplasticity method is proposed to study the nonlinear dynamic responses of a container ship in extreme waves. On the one hand, the traditional ultimate strength evaluation is mainly performed using a quasi-static assumption without considering the dynamic wave effect. On the other hand, the dynamic response of a ship induced by a wave is studied based on hydroelasticity theory, which means the ship structural response to large waves is linear. Therefore, a 2D hydroelastoplasticity method that accounts for the coupling between the time-domain wave and ship beam for nonlinear vertical bending moment (VBM) is proposed. In addition, a nonlinear dynamic finite element method (FEM) is also applied for the nonlinear VBM of ship beam. The computational results of the FEM, including the nonlinear VBM and deformational angle, are compared with the results of the 2D hydroelastoplasticity and hydroelasticity. A number of numerical extreme wave models are selected for computations of hydroelasticity-plasticity, hydroelasticity, and FEM. A difference is observed between the nonlinear VBM calculated by FEM and linear VBM calculated by hydroelasticity, and conclusions are drawn.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Methodology of study

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Coordinate system of the 2D hydroelastoplasticity method

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Body plan of the container ship

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Former ten flexuous modal shapes of the ship

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

FEM model and constraint condition

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Loading distribution on the ship FEM model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Numerical extreme wave by superposition between a numerical regular wave and focusing wave: (a) numerical regular wave, (b) numerical focusing wave, and (c) numerical extreme wave

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Wave elevation for the FEM computation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Boundary condition of midship model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Bending moment-curvature of the 500-TEU containership at midship

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Stress contour map of the midship

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Curvature-rigidity of the 500-TEU container ship at midship

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

VBMs of case 3 at midship

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

VBMs of case 2 at midship

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

VBMs of case 1 at midship

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Deformational angle of case 3 at midship

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Deformational angle of case 2 at midship

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Deformational angle of case 1 at midship

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Stress contour distribution of the FEM model in case 1 (t = 23.5 s)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Hydroelastic model in case 1 (t = 23.5 s)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Hydroelastoplastic model in case 1 (t = 23.5 s)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Maximum VBM/Ms curves obtained with the FEM, hydroelastoplasticity, and hydroelasticity methods

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Curvature curves obtained at S.S.5.0 with the hydroelasticity and hydroelastoplasticity methods

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

Maximum VBM/Mu curves obtained with the hydroelasticity and hydroelastoplasticity methods versus the Froude number

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 25

Maximum curvature points of the hydroelasticity and hydroelastoplasticity methods versus the Froude number

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In