Application of Computational Fluid Dynamics to Research Vessel Design

S. Anil Kumar The Glosten Associates, Inc. 1201 Western Avenue, Suite 200 Seattle, WA 98101 USA
Abstract - This paper describes the application of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to a few problems relating to the design and operation of research vessels and platforms. The first application presented is the prediction of the speed-power relationship for a twin-strut SWATH. Calculations of the shaft horsepower curve for a predecessor SWATH design show good comparison with available experimental data. The CFD calculations help to determine the main propulsion levels and to suggest a design improvement that would be conducive to a fixed-pitch propeller solution. The second application presented is the calculation of the wind field around a semi-submersible platform. The calculations quantify the wind field distortion in the presence of the platform and show how two suitably positioned anemometers may be used together to obtain a good estimate of the far-field wind environment. Finally, brief mention is made of a third application involving the minimization of the resistance penalty incurred by Gondola-type sonar transducer assemblies. I.

rent configuration, as a science platform. The SSP Kaimalino was developed as an experimental vessel by the United States Navy in the late 1960s and was in service as a research vessel in the 1970s. Ref. [3] traces the development ofthe vessel.

INTRODUCTION

Figure 1. Picture of the Current SSP Kaimalino

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) methods are increasingly being used in the ship design process at shipyards and design firms. This is particularly the case for analyzing the flow field and making comparative rankings of hull design variations areas in which the methods have attained a certain level of maturity. Progress in the development of CFD methods for ship hydrodynamic problems and the present state of the art are reviewed in, e.g., [1] and [2]. Evidently, many problems still do not lend themselves to CFD analysis. This may be due to inherent limitations of the underlying methodologies or simply difficulties in modeling a complex hull form. The present paper describes the creative use of CFD methods to surmount such difficulties in studying two problems relating to the design and operation of research vessels and platforms: 1. Predicting the speed-power relationship for a complex, twin-strut SWATH (Small Waterplane Area Twin Hull), to determine the main propulsion levels 2. Calculating the wind field around a semi-submersible platform, to guide the suitable positioning of anemometers for measuring far-field winds
II. SPEED-POWER RELATIONSHIP FOR A TWIN-STRUT SWATH

A main difference between the vessel's original configuration and the current configuration lies in the enlargement of the lower hulls (see Fig. 2). Re-powering is thought to be necessary due to obsolescence and deterioration of the existing propulsion plant and also because the vessel was originally powered for higher speeds.

(a) Original Configuration

(b) Current Configuration

The first application is the prediction of the speed-power relationship for the Stable Semi-Submerged Platform SSP Kaimalino in its current configuration (Fig. 1). The analysis is part of a feasibility study to evaluate the vessel's use again, in its cur1-4244-01 15-1/06/$20.00 2006 IEEE

(c) Proposed Configuration Figure 2. Comparison ofthe Kaimalino's configurations

A reliable speed-power curve was available only for the original configuration (from field trials). Schedule and cost constraints meant that it was not feasible to perform model tests or field trials to obtain the speed-power relationship for the current configuration. Therefore, a CFD analysis was undertaken with the specific objective of identifying the propulsion levels. Computational Method and Results The difficulties in performing a CFD analysis of the Kaimalino are to a large extent due to the complexities in the hull form and the interactions between the various features. Unlike traditional ship hulls, the Kaimalino has multiple surface-piercing struts with raked bows; prominent submerged bodies of revolution of varying cross-sectional areas; bulbous bows; multiple lifting surfaces (twin rudders, an aft hydrofoil, and canards at the bow); and twin propellers. Details on how the Kaimalino was panelized to resolve these complicated features are in a working paper [4]. The CFD calculations were carried out using SHIPFLOWTM [5]. The software has been validated and verified for a wide variety of ship hydrodynamic applications featuring not only monohulls but also catamarans and trimarans. It employs an interactive zonal approach consisting of a potential-flow method for calculating the inviscid flow away from the hull surface, momentum integral methods for calculating the boundary layer along the hull surface, and a Reynolds-averaged Navier Stokes (RANS) method for calculating the viscous wake. Potential-flow calculations were first performed using SHIPFLOW and the total resistance was calculated for a number of speeds ranging from 7 to 15 knots. Fig. 3 shows the calculated wave field at 10 knots.

yF Figure 3. Perspective view of the calculated wave field at 10 knots

total resistance at the given speed. The calculated total resistance also includes a correlation allowance [6] of 0.0004. Viscous-flow calculations were also performed using SHIPFLOW to calculate the wake fraction and, iteratively, the thrust deduction factor (the propellers were modeled as actuator disks that exert a uniform thrust). From these, the hull efficiency at a given speed was obtained. Open-water propeller efficiency was determined using data for standard B-series (conventional blade) propellers [7]. Since controllable-pitch propellers were in use on the original Kaimalino, in calculating the shaft horsepower (SUP) the propeller face pitch ratio was allowed to vary. The expanded blade area ratio was set to the design value of 0.6 (documented in [8]). The relative rotative efficiency was assumed to be 1.0, considering the axisymmetric shape of the vessel's lower hulls and the tail cones leading into the propeller planes. The transmission efficiency was assumed to be 0.95, accounting for losses in the gearbox and bearings. From these efficiencies, the propulsive coefficient (PC) was calculated for each speed of interest. Finally, the SUP was calculated using the calculated effective horsepower (EHP, the product of the total resistance and the vessel speed) and the PC. Fig. 4 presents a validation against data from sea trials [9]of the calculated speed-power curve for the original configuration. Good agreement is found between the calculations and the data, providing confidence in the calculations. Fig. 4 also shows the predicted SUP curve for the current configuration. A modification was then proposed to the current configuration, in the form of the addition of a conical plate for a smoother enlargement of the lower hulls at the bow (Fig. 2), so as to reduce the wave-making resistance and form drag of the hull. There is little difference in the calculated SUP between the three configurations up to about 8.5 knots (Fig. 4). However, between 8.5 and about 12 knots, the power required to propel the vessel is significantly lower for the current configuration, compared with the original configuration (e.g., about 250 hp less at 10 knots). The proposed configuration's SUP curve shows that it would have the advantage of a slightly lower required SUP between 9.5 and 10.5 knots. More significantly, the hump in the SUP curve at about 10 knots would be removed. Therefore, the proposed modification may be conducive to a fixedpitch propeller solution and merits consideration.
3U000=-=-2500_ =
Q

Due to inherent limitations of the computational method, simplifying assumptions needed to be made to the model so that the wake fraction and thrust deduction factor could be calculated. These assumptions and the procedure for calculating the shaft horsepower are also detailed in [4]; for brevity, only the salient points are mentioned here. Essentially, at a given speed, SHIPFLOW was used to calculate the wave-making resistance, appendage drag and liftinduced drag (due to the canards and the aft hydrofoil), and the form factor. The ITTC-57 model-correlation line [6] was used along with the calculated form factor to obtain the frictional resistance. Air drag due to a head wind of 10 knots was estimated. The wave-making resistance, appendage drag, liftinduced drag, frictional resistance, and air drag then make up the

B
C0

2000 _g
1500
1000
...... ......

,
[\ Instal le
= v

:1 low 2x<
.......... <
rre nlt

~~~Original Kaimalino CFD

a77mal77 ::::
..........

:::::::::::: ::::..

500_

-: : : ::::::::: ................. ................ 1:::::::::: .::::::D :: ::

/ X _ . . [ ~~~Proposed KZ7a1mal71
7 8 9

CFED..
14 15 16

.... ...... ...........::::::: :::::: :::::::::::::: ::::::: :::::: ::::::

10 11 12 13 Vessel Speed, V (knots)

Figure 4. Calculated speed-power curves for the SSP Kaimalino

III. FAR-FIELD WINDS OVER AN OFFSHORE PLATFORM

The second application describes the use of CFD to predict the wind velocity distribution around a proprietary semisubmersible platform (Fig. 5).

Figure 6. Close-up of the computational mesh for the platform

Figure 5. Illustration of the proprietary semi-submersible platform

The analysis was motivated by the need to obtain a good representation of the complex far-field wind environment. This is of particular relevance to research vessels and platforms. The problem is a challenging one because the wind field is inevitably distorted by the presence of the platform and the platform's orientation in the wind field. Further, physical limitations generally exist on where anemometers may be placed on the vessel or platform. As such, the problem is an area of ongoing research; see, e.g., [10, 11, and 12]. Computational Method and Results CFD analysis was undertaken to guide the selection of suitable anemometer locations, using another commercial CFD code, COMET-DesignTM. COMET-Design is a design-centric CFD tool that combines meshing, flow solving and post-processing in a single environment. The software uses automatic meshing algorithms to produce a polyhedral cell mesh, which offers the benefits of rapid mesh creation and flexibility with high levels of accuracy. The underlying flow solver is a finite-volumebased algorithm that solves the Navier-Stokes equations on the unstructured mesh and uses classic turbulence models (standard k-c turbulence model with wall functions) for modeling the boundary layer development and viscous effects. Further details of the flow solver are discussed in general in [13]. Fig. 6 shows the computational domain and a close-up (inset) of the platform. COMET-Design was used to calculate the detailed flow field around the platform, including the wind velocities at a number of candidate anemometer locations for a range of wind headings. Fig. 7 shows calculated wind speed contours and wind velocity vectors for the platform in a uniform wind stream, along a longitudinal section through the centerplane. Fig. 8 presents a polar plot comparing calculated wind speeds (normalized by the free-stream wind speed) at different anemometer location alternatives. Finally, Fig. 9 presents a polar plot of normalized wind speed magnitudes at two suitable locations, illustrating how anemometers at those locations may be used to obtain a good representation of far-field winds.

Figure 7. Wind velocity vectors along a longitudinal section through the semi-submersible platform' s centerplane
0 1.250 T

315

45

F /~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- EF-/} l2F

270

90

ft

3F

-O5F

225 <

8135

180

Figure 8. Polar plot comparing wind speeds at different anemometer location alternatives, for a range of wind headings

-4F Port -4F Starboard

270 F

180

Figure 9. Polar plot illustrating use of two anemometers to obtain a representation of far-field winds for a full range of headings

IV. APPENDAGE RESISTANCE AND DESIGN

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The third application discusses how CFD may be used to minimize the resistance penalty incurred by a Gondola-type sonar transducer assembly. Bubbles swept down from the bow of research vessels are known to cause interference with sonar transducers as they pass under the transducers. Gondola-type sonar transducers are appendage-like assemblies at a lower submergence than the keel (Fig. 10). By allowing the swept bubbles to pass between them and the hull surface, they see less interference to the transducer measurements. However, as they are external to the hull surface, they result in a resistance penalty.

The author is thankful to the University of Hawaii Marine Center for their permission to present this paper; to FLOWTECH International and CD-adapco for technical support provided over the course of the work; and to Bruce Hutchison, Dirk Kristensen, and Jay Edgar for helpful discussions.
REFERENCES
[1] R. Dejhalla and J. Prpic-Orsic, "A Review of the State-of-the-Art in Marine Hydrodynamics," Brodogradnja Shipbuilding, vol. 57, no. 1, 2006, pp. 13-22. [2] J.J. Gorski, "Present State of Numerical Ship Hydrodynamics and Validation Experiments," Journal ofOffshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, May 2002, pp. 74-80. [3] T.G. Lang, "The SWATH Ship Concept and its Potential," AIAA/SNAME Advanced Marine Vehicles Conference, San Diego, California, April 1978. [4] S.A. Kumar and B.L. Hutchison, "Speed-Power Prediction for a TwinStrut SWATH," unpublished. [5] L. Larsson, "CFD in Ship Design - Prospects and Limitations," 18th Georg Weinblum Memorial Lecture, Ship Technology Research, vol. 44, no. 3, 1997. [6] E.V. Lewis (Ed.), "Principles of Naval Architecture, Vol. II: Resistance, Propulsion, and Vibration," The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, 1989. [7] W.P.A. van Lammeren, J.D. van Manen, and M.W.C. Oosterveld, "The Wageningen B-Screw Series," SNAME Transactions, vol. 77, 1969. [8] J.A. Fein, "Static and Dynamic Stability, Control Surface, and Propulsion Characteristics of the Stable Semi-Submerged Platform (SSP)," Naval Ship Research and Development Center, E Report no. 425-H-04, June 1972. [9] R.J. Stenson, "SSP Kaimalino Trial Agenda: Phase 1 SWATH-Related Trials," August 1973, unpublished. [10] S. Popinet, M. Smith, and C. Stevens, "Experimental and Numerical Study of the Turbulence Characteristics of Airflow around a Research Vessel," Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, vol. 21, no. 10, 2004, pp. 1575-1589. [11] B.I. Moat, M.J. Yelland, R.W. Pascal, and A.F. Molland, "An Overview of the Airflow Distortion at Anemometer Sites on Ships," International Journal ofClimatology, vol. 25, no. 7, 2005, pp. 997-1006. [12] B.I. Moat, M.J. Yelland, and A.F. Molland, "Quantifying the Airflow Distortion over Merchant Ships, Part II: Application of the Model Results," Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, vol. 23, 2006, pp. 351-360. [13]M. Peric, "Computation of Engineering Flows," Ship Technology Research, vol. 41, 1994, pp. 204-214.

Figure 10. Image of research vessel showing a Gondola-type transducer installed below the keel within the forward third of vessel (Image courtesy of Kongsberg Maritime)
CFD may be used to calculate the resistance penalty that would be incurred by alternative transducer assembly configurations, thereby aiding the hull design process. By enabling a quick and cost-effective comparison of several design alternatives, CFD offers the benefit of leading to reduced physical model testing and a faster development of hull lines.