Advertisement

China Ocean Engineering

, Volume 33, Issue 4, pp 493–502 | Cite as

Numerical Prediction of Total Resistance Using Full Similarity Technique

  • Savas Sezen
  • Ferdi CakiciEmail author
Technical Notes
  • 43 Downloads

Abstract

Model tests are often conducted by researchers in a real or a numerical towing tank to calculate residuary resistance of a ship with the aid of Froude similarity. Common ITTC-1957 formula is usually employed to calculate frictional resistance. As computer technologies develop over time, CFD tools are used for calculating total resistance of a ship at full scale without establishing any dynamic similarities. In this paper, both Froude and Reynolds similarities are numerically implemented to four different model scales by using virtual fluids. The total resistance at different Fr numbers calculated by the numerical study is validated against the experimental data of DTMB 5512 (L=3.048 m) model hull. The results show that establishing Froude and Reynolds similarities together in numerical simulation is possible in principle. To determine whether it has advantages for prediction of full-scale ship total resistance by employing this method, it is also examined the model scale with the same number of elements and Reynolds number of the full-scale ship. Results show that numerical calculation of total resistance for a full-scale ship in a model scale by defining virtual fluids has only slight advantages on the prediction of residuary resistance. Additionally, no advantage in the calculation of frictional resistance is observed.

Key words

total resistance Froude and Reynolds similarities DTMB 5512 CFD 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgment

The second author of the study was supported by ASELSAN Graduate Scholarship for Turkish Academicians.

References

  1. Benek, J.A., Steger, J.L., Dougherty, F.C. and Buning, P.G., 1986. Chimera: A Grid-Embedding Technique, Report of Arnold Engineering Development Center Arnold Air Force Station, Tennessee Air Force Systems Command United States Air Force.Google Scholar
  2. CD-Adapco, 2015. Star CCM+ Version 10.02. User Guide, CD-Adapco.Google Scholar
  3. Celik, I.B., Ghia, U., Roache, P.J., Fretias, C.J., Coleman, H., Raad, P.E., 2008. Procedure for estimation and reporting of uncertainty due to discretization in CFD applications, Journal of Fluids Engineering, 130(7), 078001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Choi, J.E., Kim, J.H. and Lee, H.G., 2011. Computational study of the scale effect on resistance and propulsion performance of VLCC, Journal of the Society of Naval Architects of Korea, 48(3), 222–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Date, J.C. and Turnock, S.R., 1999. A Study into the Techniques Needed to Accurately Predict Skin Friction using RANS Solvers with Validation Against Froude’s Historical Flat Plate Experimental Data, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK, pp. 62.Google Scholar
  6. De Luca, F., Mancini, S., Miranda, S. and Pensa, C., 2016. An extended verification and validation study of CFD simulations for planing hulls, Journal of Ship Research, 60(2), 101–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Demirel, Y.K., Turan, O. and Incecik, A., 2017. Predicting the effect of biofouling on ship resistance using CFD, Applied Ocean Research, 62, 100–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Farkas, A., Degiuli, N. and Martić, I., 2018. Assessment of hydrodynamic characteristics of a full-scale ship at different draughts, Ocean Engineering, 156, 135–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hänninen, S. and Sehweighofer, J., 2006. Numerical investigation of the scale effect on the flow around a ship hull, Ship Technology Research: Schiffstechnik, 53(1), 17–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. ITTC, 2011. Recommended Procedures and Guideline Practical Guidelines for Ship CFD Applications, 2011-7.5-0.3, ITTC.Google Scholar
  11. Jasak, H., Vukčević, V., Gatin, I. and Lalović, I., 2019. CFD validation and grid sensitivity studies of full scale ship selfpropulsion, International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, 11(1), 33–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lazauskas, L., 2009. Resistance and squat of surface combatant DTMB model 5415: Experiments and predictions, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242738153[2016-04-02].
  13. Lee, Y.G., Ha, Y.J., Lee, S.H. and Kim, S.H., 2018. A study on the estimation method of the form factor for a full-scale ship, Brodogradnja/ Shipbuilding, 69(1), 71–87.Google Scholar
  14. Liefvendahl, M. and Fureby, C., 2017. Grid requirements for LES of ship hydrodynamics in model and full scale, Ocean Engineering, 143, 259–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Marcu, O., Jagite, G. and Ivanov, S., 2012. Model scale resistance computation for the Kriso Container Ship (KCS), The Annals of ‘Dunarea De Jos’ University of Galati Fascicle XI-Ship Building, Romania.Google Scholar
  16. Richardson, L.F., 1911. The approximate arithmetical solution by finite differences of physicalproblems involving differential equations, with an application to the stresses in a Masonrydam, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 210(459-470), 307–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Roache, P.J., 1998. Verification of codes and calculations, AIAA Journal, 36(5), 696–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Schweighofer, J., Regnström, B., Starke, A.R. and Tzabiras, G., 2005. Viscous-flow computations of two existing vessels at model- and full-scale ship Reynolds numbers-a study carried outwithin the European Union Project, EFFORT, International Conference on Computational Methods in Marine Engineering MARINE 2005, CIMNE, Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar
  19. Starke, A.R., Windt, J. and Raven, H.C., 2006. Validation of viscous flow and wake field predictions for ships at full scale, Proceedings of the 26th ONR Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, MARIN, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
  20. Stern, F., Wilson, R. and Shao, J., 2006. Quantitative V&V of CFD simulations and certification of CFD codes, International Journal of Numerical Methods in Fluids, 50(11), 1335–1355.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Tahara, Y., Katsui, T. and Himeno, Y., 2002. Computation of ship viscous flow at full scale Reynolds number-Consideration of near-wall flow model including surface roughness effects, The Society of Naval Architects of Japan, 192, 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tezdogan, T., Demirel, Y.K., Kellett, P., Khorasanchi, M., Incecik, A. and Turan, O., 2015. Full-scale unsteady RANS CFD simulations of ship behaviour and performance in head seas due to slow steaming, Ocean Engineering, 97, 186–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Visonneau, M., 2005. A step towards the numerical simulation of viscous flows around ships at full scale - Recent achievements within the European Union Project EFFORT, MARINE CFD 2005, Royal Institution of Naval Architects, Southampton, UK.Google Scholar
  24. Wilcox, D.C., 2006. Turbulence Modeling for CFD, third ed., D C W Industries, La Cãnada, Calif.Google Scholar
  25. Wilson, R.V., Stern, F., Coleman, H.W. and Paterson, E.G., 2001. Comprehensive approach to verification and validation of CFD simulations-part 2: Application for rans simulation of a cargo/container ship, Journal of Fluids Engineering, 123(4), 803–810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Zhao, Q.X., Guo, C.Y. and Zhao, D.G., 2015. Study on self-propulsion experiment of ship model with energy-saving devices based on numerical simulation methods, Ships and Offshore Structures, 10(6), 669–677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Chinese Ocean Engineering Society and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Naval Architecture and Marine EngineeringYildiz Technical UniversityIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations