0
Research Papers: CFD and VIV

Study of Maneuverability of Container Ship With Nonlinear and Roll-Coupled Effects by Numerical Simulations Using RANSE-Based Solver

[+] Author and Article Information
R. Rajita Shenoi

Department of Ocean Engineering,
IIT Madras,
Chennai 600036, India
e-mail: rajita.shenoy@gmail.com

P. Krishnankutty

Professor
Mem. ASME
Department of Ocean Engineering,
IIT Madras,
Chennai 600036, India
e-mail: pkrishnankutty@iitm.ac.in

R. Panneer Selvam

Professor
Department of Ocean Engineering,
IIT Madras,
Chennai 600036, India
e-mail: pselvam@iitm.ac.in

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 June 30, 2015; final manuscript received February 5, 2016; published online April 7, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Celso P. Pesce.

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 138(4), 041801 (Apr 07, 2016) (14 pages) Paper No: OMAE-15-1059; doi: 10.1115/1.4032895 History: Received June 30, 2015; Revised February 05, 2016

The examination of maneuvering qualities of a ship is necessary to ensure its navigational safety and prediction of trajectory. The study of maneuverability of a ship is a three-step process, which involves selection of a suitable mathematical model, estimation of the hydrodynamic derivatives occurring in the equation of motion, and simulation of the standard maneuvering tests to determine its maneuvering qualities. This paper reports the maneuvering studies made on a container ship model (S175). The mathematical model proposed by Son and Nomoto (1981, “On Coupled Motion of Steering and Rolling of a High Speed Container Ship,” J. Soc. Nav. Arch. Jpn., 150, pp. 73–83) suitable for the nonlinear roll-coupled steering model for high-speed container ships is considered here. The hydrodynamic derivatives are determined by numerically simulating the planar motion mechanism (PMM) tests in pure yaw and combined sway–yaw mode using an Reynolds-Averaged Navier–Stokes Equations (RANSE)-based computational fluid dynamics (CFD) solver. The tests are repeated with the model inclined at different heel angles to obtain the roll-coupled derivatives. Standard definitive maneuvers like turning tests at rudder angle, 35 deg and 20 deg/20 deg zig-zag maneuvers are simulated using the numerically obtained derivatives and are compared with those obtained using experimental values.

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

References

IMO, 2002, “ Explanatory Notes to the Standard for Ship Manoeuvrability,” International Maritime Organization, London, Resolution MSC.137(76).
Xing-Kaeding, Y. , and Jensen, A. G. , 2006, “ Simulation of Ship Motions During Maneuvers,” Ship Technol. Res., 53(4), pp. 14–28. [CrossRef]
Carrica, P. M. , Ismail, F. , Hyman, M. , Bhushan, S. , and Stern, F. , 2013, “ Turn and Zig-Zag Maneuvers of Surface Combatant Using URANS Approach With Dynamic Overset Grids,” J. Mar. Sci. Technol., 18(2), pp. 166–181. [CrossRef]
Dubbioso, G. , Durante, D. , and Broglia, R. , 2013, “ Zig-Zag Maneuver Simulation by CFD for Tanker Like Vessel,” 5th International Conference on Computational Methods in Marine Engineering, Hamburg, Germany, May 29–31.
Ohmori, T. , 1998, “ Finite Volume Simulation of Flows About a Ship in Maneuvering Motion,” J. Mar. Sci. Technol., 3(2), pp. 82–93. [CrossRef]
Nonaka, K. H. , Miyazaki, H. , Nimura, T. , Ueno, M. , Hino, T. , and Kodama, Y. , 2000, “ Calculation of Hydrodynamic Forces Acting on a Ship in Maneuvering Motion,” International Conference on Marine Simulation and Ship Maneuvering (MARSIM), Orlando, FL, May 8–12.
Simonsen, C. D. , Otzen, J. F. , Klimt, C. , Larsen, N. L. , and Stern, F. , 2012, “ Maneuvering Predictions in the Early Design Phase Using CFD Generated PMM Data,” 29th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, Gothenburg, Sweden, Aug. 26–31.
Cura-Hochbaum, A. , 2011, “ On the Numerical Prediction of the Ship's Manoeuvring Behaviour,” Ship Sci. Technol., 5(9), pp. 27–39.
Stern, F. , Agdrup, K. , Kim, S. Y. , Hochbaum, A. C. , Rhee, K. , Quadvleig, F. , Perdon, P. , Hino, T. , Broglia, R. , and Gorski, J. , 2011, “ Experience From SIMMAN 2008—The First Workshop on Verification and Validation of Ship Maneuvering Simulation Methods,” J. Ship Res., 55(2), pp. 135–147.
Di Mascio, A. , Dubbioso, G. , Notaro, C. , and Vivan, M. , 2011, “ Investigation of Twin-Screw Naval Ships Maneuverability Behaviour,” J. Ship Res., 55(4), pp. 221–248. [CrossRef]
Sakamoto, N. , Carrica, P. M. , and Stern, F. , 2012, “ URANS Simulations of Static and Dynamic Maneuvering for Surface Combatant: Part 1 Verification and Validation for Forces, Moments and Hydrodynamic Derivatives,” J. Mar. Sci. Technol., 17(4), pp. 422–445. [CrossRef]
Eda, H. , 1980, “ Maneuvering Performance of High Speed Ships With Effects of Roll Motion,” Ocean Eng., 7(3), pp. 379–397. [CrossRef]
Son, K. , and Nomoto, K. , 1981, “ On Coupled Motion of Steering and Rolling of a High Speed Container Ship,” J. Soc. Nav. Arch. Jpn., 150, pp. 73–83.
Yoon, H. K. , Son, N. S. , and Lee, C. M. , 2004, “ Estimation of Roll Related Hydrodynamic Coefficients Through the Free Running Model Tests,” MTTS/IEEE/TECHNO-OCEAN’04, Kobe, Japan, Nov. 9–12, pp. 1086–1092.
Banerjee, N. , Rao, C. S. , Raju, M. S. P. , and Hughes, P. , 2006, “ Determination of Manoeuvrability of Ship Model Using Large Amplitude Horizontal Planar Motion Mechanism,” International Conference in Marine Hydrodynamics (MAHY-2006), SNAME, Visakhapatnam, India, Jan. 5–7.
Kim, Y.-G. , Kim, S.-Y. , Kim, H.-T. , Lee, S.-W. , and Yu, B.-S. , 2007, “ Prediction of the Maneuverability of a Large Container Ship With Twin Propellers and Twin Rudders,” J. Mar. Sci. Technol., 12(3), pp.130–138. [CrossRef]
SNAME, 1952, “ Nomenclature for Treating the Motion of a Submerged Body Through a Fluid,” Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, Tech. Res. Bull., 1–5.
Shenoi, R. R. , Krishnankutty, P. , Selvam, R. P. , and Kulsreshtha, A. , 2013, “ Prediction of Maneuvering Coefficients of a Container Ship by Numerically Simulating HPMM Using RANSE Based Solver,” Third International Conference on Ship Manoeuvring in Shallow and Confined Water, Jun. 3–5, Ghent, Belgium.
Crane, C. L. , Eda, H. , and Landsburg, A. , 1989, “ Principles of Naval Architecture,” Controllability, SNAME, Jersey City, NJ, pp. 200–258.
Shenoi, R. R. , Krishnankutty, P. , and Selvam, R. P. , 2015, “ Sensitivity Study of Hydrodynamic Derivative Variations on the Maneuverability Prediction of a Container Ship,” ASME Paper No. OMAE2015-41490.
Shenoi, R. R. , Krishnankutty, P. , and Selvam, R. P. , 2014, “ Study of Maneuverability of Container Ship by Static and Dynamic Simulations Using RANSE Based Solver,” Ships Offshore Struct. (published online).
ITCC, 2011, “ Practical Guidelines for Ship CFD Application,” ITTC Recommended Procedures and Guidelines, 7.5-03-02-03.
Vantorre, M. , 2000, “ Captive Manoeuvring Tests With Ship Models: A Review of Actual Practice Based on 22nd ITTC Maneuvering Committee Questionnaire,” International Conference on Marine Simulation and Ship Manoeuvrability (MARSIM 2000), Orlando, FL, May 8–12.
Abkowitz, M. A. , 1964, “ Lectures on Ship Hydrodynamics—Steering and Maneuverability,” Hydro-Og Aero-Dynamisk Laboratorium, Report No. Hy-5, Lyngby, Denmark.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Earth-fixed and ship-fixed coordinate system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Path and orientation of model in pure yaw mode

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Container ship (S175) model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Meshed fluid domain with boundaries labeled for dynamic simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Time history of force/moments for dynamic simulation in pure yaw mode

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Model configuration in resistance test

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Meshed fluid domain with boundaries labeled for static simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Variation of surge force with forward speed in static simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Surge force–time history at different forward speeds

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Time history of force/moments for dynamic simulation in pure yaw at different heel angles

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Plots to determine Yrφφ′,Nrφφ′, and Krφφ′

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Force and moment, and yaw rate time history for heel angle, φ = −10 deg

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Plots to determine Xφφ′,Yφ′,Nφ′, and Kφ′ from pure yaw with roll simulations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Plots to determine Xφφ′,Yφ′,Nφ′, and Kφ′ from pure yaw with roll simulations at different yaw rates

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Plots to determine Yrrφ′, Nrrφ′, and Krrφ′

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Path and orientation of model in combined sway–yaw mode

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Time history of force/moments for dynamic simulation in combined sway–yaw mode

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Turning circle test

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Turning circle test (δ = 35 deg)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

20 deg/20 deg zig-zag maneuver

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