0
Research Papers: Structures and Safety Reliability

Fluid–Structure Interaction Effects on Free Vibration of Containerships

[+] Author and Article Information
Shahrokh Sepehrirahnama

National University of Singapore,
9 Engineering Drive 1,
Singapore 117575
e-mail: mpeshse@nus.edu.sg

Dong Xu

Singapore Innovation and Research Centre,
American Bureau of Shipping (ABS),
438 Alexandra Road #08-00, Alexandra Point,
Singapore 119958
e-mail: dxu@eagle.org

Eng Teo Ong

National University of Singapore,
9 Engineering Drive 1,
Singapore 117575
e-mail: mpeoet@nus.edu.sg

Heow Pueh Lee

National University of Singapore,
9 Engineering Drive 1,
Singapore 117575
e-mail: mpeleehp@nus.edu.sg

Kian-Meng Lim

National University of Singapore,
9 Engineering Drive 1,
Singapore 117575
e-mail: limkm@nus.edu.sg

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 October 24, 2018; final manuscript received April 8, 2019; published online May 17, 2019. Assoc. Editor: Yi-Hsiang Yu.

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 141(6), 061603 (May 17, 2019) (10 pages) Paper No: OMAE-18-1188; doi: 10.1115/1.4043540 History: Received October 24, 2018; Accepted April 12, 2019

The interaction between fluid and structure affects the vibration response of the structure due to the additional hydrodynamic pressure. These effects are accounted for by incorporating the so-called added mass into the vibration equation of the structure. In this paper, a containership was used to study the impact of the added mass on its free vibration response. The natural frequencies of the ship decrease after including the added mass in the vibration analysis. It is shown that the frequency-ascending sequence of the wet mode shapes, for which the added mass is accounted for, may differ from that obtained for the dry state of the ship. Also, the effects of different draft levels on the mode shapes of the ship are reported. These results provide a better insight for designing ships based on their wet-state frequencies and mode shapes, which is the typical operation condition when sailing in the open seas.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Newman, J. N., 1979, “The Theory of Ship Motions,” Adv. Appl. Mech., 18, pp. 221–283. [CrossRef]
Korotkin, A. I., 2008, Added Masses of Ship Structures, Springer Science & Business Media, New York.
Evans, D., and McIver, P., 1984, “Added Mass and Damping of a Sphere Section in Heave,” Appl. Ocean Res., 6(1), pp. 45–53. [CrossRef]
Brennen, C., 1982, A Review of Added Mass and Fluid Inertial Forces, Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, Sierra Madre, CA.
Zhu, R.-C., Guo, H.-Q., Miao, G.-P., and Yu, J.-W., 2009, “A Computational Method for Evaluation of Added Mass and Damping of Ship Based on CFD Theory,” J. Shanghai Jiaotong Univ., 2, p. 10.
Yang, J., 1990, Comparison of Added Mass Modelling for Ships, University of British Columbia, British Columbia, Canada.
Fu, Y., and Price, W., 1987, “Interactions Between a Partially or Totally Immersed Vibrating Cantilever Plate and the Surrounding Fluid,” J. Sound Vib., 118(3), pp. 495–513. [CrossRef]
Faltinsen, O., 1993, Sea Loads on Ships and Offshore Structures, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Salvesen, N., 1978, “Added Resistance of Ships in Waves,” J. Hydronaut., 12(1), pp. 24–34. [CrossRef]
Jennings, A., 1985, “Added Mass for Fluid-Structure Vibration Problems,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids, 5(9), pp. 817–830. [CrossRef]
Armand, J.-L., and Orsero, P., 1979, “A Method for Evaluating the Hydrodynamic Added Mass in Ship Hull Vibrations,” Automated Vehicles Symposium., New York, Nov. 15–17.
Bermudez, A., Duran, R., and Rodríguez, R., 1997, “Finite Element Solution of Incompressible Fluid–Structure Vibration Problems,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 40(8), pp. 1435–1448. [CrossRef]
Bonfiglio, L., Brizzolara, S., and Chryssostomidis, C., 2012, “Added Mass and Damping of Oscillating Bodies: A Fully Viscous Numerical Approach,” Recent Advances in Fluid Mechanics, Heat & Mass Transfer and Biology, Jan. 25–27, Harvard, Cambridge, pp. 210–215.
Söding, H., and Shigunov, V., 2015, “Added Resistance of Ships in Waves,” Ship Technol. Res., 62(1), pp. 2–13. [CrossRef]
Daidola, J., 1984, “Natural Vibrations of Beams in a Fluid With Applications to Ships and Other Marine Structures,” Soc. Naval Archit. Mar. Eng. Trans. 92(1984).
McIver, M., and McIver, P., 2016, “The Added Mass for Two-Dimensional Floating Structures,” Wave Motion, 64, pp. 1–12. [CrossRef]
Rajasankar, J., Iyer, N. R., and Rao, T., 1993, “A New 3-D Finite Element Model to Evaluate Added Mass for Analysis of Fluid-Structure Interaction Problems,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 36(6), pp. 997–1012. [CrossRef]
Kaydıhan, L., Uğurlu, B., and Ergin, A., 2011, “A Hydroelastic Investigation Into the Dynamic Response Characteristics of Bulk Carriers,” Adv. Mar. Struct. pp. 33.
Paidoussis, M. P., 1998, Fluid-Structure Interactions: Slender Structures and Axial Flow, Academic Press, New York.
Paik, K.-J., Carrica, P. M., Lee, D., and Maki, K., 2009, “Strongly Coupled Fluid–Structure Interaction Method for Structural Loads on Surface Ships,” Ocean Eng., 36(17–18), pp. 1346–1357. [CrossRef]
Andersen, P., and Wuzhou, H., 1985, “On the Calculation of Two-Dimensional Added Mass and Damping Coefficients by Simple Green’s Function Technique,” Ocean Eng., 12(5), pp. 425–451. [CrossRef]
Xia, J., Wang, Z., and Jensen, J. J., 1998, “Non-Linear Wave Loads and Ship Responses by a Time-Domain Strip Theory,” Mar. Struct., 11(3), pp. 101–123. [CrossRef]
Van Brummelen, E., 2011, “Partitioned Iterative Solution Methods for Fluid–Structure Interaction,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids, 65(1–3), pp. 3–27. [CrossRef]
Everstine, G. C., and Henderson, F. M., 1990, “Coupled Finite Element/Boundary Element Approach for Fluid–Structure Interaction,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 87(5), pp. 1938–1947. [CrossRef]
Arribas, F. P., and Fernández, J. C., 2006, “Strip Theories Applied to the Vertical Motions of High Speed Crafts,” Ocean Eng., 33(8–9), pp. 1214–1229. [CrossRef]
Wilken, M., Menk, A., Voss, H., and Cabos, C., 2011, “Efficient Calculation of Fluid Structure Interaction in Ship Vibration,” Adv. Mar. Strut., pp. 75–85.
MSC Nastran 2016 Reference Manual., 2016, MSC Software Corporation, Newport Beach, CA.
Advanced Dynamic Analysis User’s Guide, 2014, Sivan Toledo, Siemens Product Lifecycle Management Software Inc., Tel-Aviv University.
MSC Nastran 2001 Quick Reference Guide, 2001, MSC Software Corporation, Newport Beach, CA.
Hirdaris, S., Price, W., and Temarel, P., 2003, “Two-and Three-Dimensional Hydroelastic Modelling of a Bulker in Regular Waves,” Mar. Struct., 16(8), pp. 627–658. [CrossRef]
Riggs, H. R., Niimi, K. M., and Huang, L. L., 2007, “Two Benchmark Problems for Three-Dimensional, Linear Hydroelasticity,” ASME J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng., 129(3), pp. 149–157. [CrossRef]
Kim, J.-H., and Kim, Y., 2017, “Numerical Computation of Motions and Structural Loads for Large Containership Using 3D Rankine Panel Method,” J. Mar. Sci. Appl., 16(4), pp. 417–426. [CrossRef]
Das, S., and Cheung, K. F., 2012, “Hydroelasticity of Marine Vessels Advancing in a Seaway,” J. Fluids Struct., 34, pp. 271–290. [CrossRef]
Kim, Y., Kim, K.-H., and Kim, Y., 2009, “Springing Analysis of a Seagoing Vessel Using Fully Coupled BEM–FEM in the Time Domain,” Ocean Eng., 36(11), pp. 785–796. [CrossRef]
American Bureau of Shipping, 2018, Guidance Notes on Ship Vibration, American Bureau of Shipping, Houston, TX.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Overview of the containership finite element model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Discretization of the wetted part of the ship hull for draft levels of (a) 6, (b) 8, and (c) 10 m. The interface mesh is created for potential flow simulation by using boundary element method.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Panels ((a), 1-node torsional bending), ((c), 2-node vertical bending), ((e), 2-node horizontal bending), and ((g), 3-node vertical bending) are the first four dry mode shapes of the ship model and ((b), 2-node vertical bending), ((d), 1-node torsional bending), ((f), 2-node horizontal bending), and ((h), 3-node vertical bending) are their wet counterparts, respectively, for 6 m draft level

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Panels ((a), 1-node torsional bending), ((c), 2-node vertical bending), ((e), 2-node horizontal bending), and ((g), 3-node vertical bending) are the first four dry mode shapes of the ship model and ((b), 1-node torsional bending), ((d), 2-node vertical bending), ((f), 2-node horizontal bending), and ((h), 3-node vertical bending) are their wet counterparts, respectively, for 8 m draft level

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Panels ((a), 1-node torsional bending), ((c), 2-node vertical bending), ((e), 2-node horizontal bending), and ((g), 3-node vertical bending) are the first four dry mode shapes of the ship model and ((b), 1-node torsional bending), ((d), 2-node vertical bending), ((f), 2-node horizontal bending), and ((h), 3-node vertical bending) are their wet counterparts, respectively, for 10 m draft level

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Normalized modal added mass for the dry modes 1–12, as shown in panels ((a), mode shapes 1–4), ((b), mode shapes 5–8), and ((c), mode shapes 9–12), for the three different draft levels

Tables

Errata

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