5 views

Uploaded by Ahmet Gültekin Avcı

CDadapcoPaper

- Ship Prestn
- 345857
- Full Text
- Consequence Modelling
- Anexo. Cyberbased Analysis, Modelling and Simulation of Wind Effects in Vortex-Winds
- iwwwfb27_35
- NAFEMS Books.xlsx
- Erosion Webinar QA
- Multiphase Flow Modelling
- ANSYS CFX Introduction
- Atomization and Sprays Levebvre
- 1 Introduction-OpenFaom
- ANSYS CFX Introduction
- 06 Research Methodology
- FlowVision - Fluid Structure Interaction
- 07_2011_157_Ilic_03
- XFlow2016 Product Sheet
- solo
- 4.2.4.a ToolsofAeronautics
- meeting minutes

You are on page 1of 6

Milovan Peri (CD-adapco, Germany)

Robinson Peri (University of Erlangen-Nrnberg, Germany)

1.SUMMARY

The paper describes results of computations of

resistance, trim and sinkage for the KRISO

Container Ship (KCS) at different Froude numbers

in calm water. Unstructured trimmed grids with

local refinement in zones of interest have been used

to obtain maximum accuracy at low cell count. The

solution method is of finite-volume type and uses

mostly approximations of second order. Free surface

is modeled using Volume-of-Fluid approach and a

high-resolution interface-capturing scheme. It is

demonstrated that acceptable accuracy can be

achieved with grids containing around half a million

cells for half of the geometry.

2. INTRODUCTION

Industrial use of Computational Fluid Dynamics

(CFD) requires high level of automation, in order to

provide sufficient accuracy at low effort (both in

terms of manpower and computing time). Therefore

the design of computational grid requires some

effort, so that grid refinement and modifications to

geometry can easily be done. All computations

reported here were performed using the same grid

topology described in the next section. All grids

were created and all computations and postprocessing were performed using STAR-CCM+

code.

The solution method is of finite-volume type and

uses control volumes of arbitrary polyhedral shape.

The conservation equations in integral form for

mass and momentum, together with an equation for

volume fraction of liquid and two or more equations

describing turbulence quantities, are solved using a

segregated iterative solution method based on

SIMPLE-algorithm. Details on discretization and

solution methods can be found in literature and will

not be given here (see Ferziger and Peri, 2003;

Demirdi and Muzaferija, 1995; Weiss et al, 1999).

All surface and volume integrals are approximated

approximations are based on linear shape functions.

Since time accuracy in the cases studied here is not

of importance, first-order Euler implicit scheme is

used for time integration.

The free-surface effects are modeled using the so

called Volume-of-Fluid approach: the solution

domain is assumed to be filled by a single effective

fluid whose properties vary locally according to

volume fraction of liquid. This equation contains

only rate-of-change and convective term and its role

is to track the deformation of the initially flat free

surface. The convective terms are discretized using

the HRIC-scheme (Muzaferija and Peri, 1999). It

resolves the free surface typically with one cell

when the interface is expected to be sharp.

In most computations, the standard k- turbulence

model with wall functions was used to describe the

effects of turbulence on the mean flow (Launder and

Spalding, 1974). Some test calculations for the hull

in fixed position and one Froude number were

performed using two other two-equation turbulence

models of edy-viscosity type and the full Reynoldsstress model, which requires the solution of 7

additional equations (6 for Reynolds stress tensor

components and one for the dissipation rate). This

was done to analyze the effects of turbulence models

on the solution.

In addition, grid effects were analyzed by

performing some simulations on a sequence of

systematically refined grids. Grid spacing was

reduced by a factor of 1.5 in the entire solution

domain, except in the prism layer along walls,

where the refinement was only in the directions

tangential to wall. This was done in order to keep y+

values at near-wall cell centers around 50, which was

found in the past to produce best solutions (Azcueta,

2001). However, one simulation was perform with

varying mesh spacing in prism layer in wall-normal

direction to assess the influence of y+ on the predicted

resistance.

3. GRID GENERATION

In this study trimmed hexahedral grids with local

refinements and prism layers along walls were used.

The grid generation process is driven by specifying

base mesh size, relative to which all spacings (prism

layer thickness, cell size in various regions etc.) are

defined. Finer meshes of the same topology are then

automatically created by just reducing the base size.

In order to avoid using fine grid where it is not

necessary (in front of hull and at larger distance

above, below, on each side and behind the hull),

local volumes of different shape were created and

assigned particular cell size, resulting in mesh

structure shown in Fig. 1 for the coarsest mesh.

hull with rudder, showing local refinement regions

near hull, near free surface, in the wake and in the

wave zone.

symmetry conditions. The solution domain extended

from -18 m to 18 m in flow direction, from -18 m to 9

m in vertical direction and from 0 to 18 m in lateral

direction, respectively. The hull length was about 7.7 m

(Lpp = 7.2786, scale factor 31.6) and the coordinate

origin was at aft perpendicular and still water surface

(which was 0.341772 m above keel). In addition to the

symmetry plane of the hull, the lateral boundary

parallel to it was also treated as symmetry plane. At the

downstream boundary, hydrostatic pressure corresponding to the undisturbed water surface was prescribed.

Upstream, top and bottom boundaries were treated as

inlets with prescribed velocity and volume fraction.

hull with rudder, showing local refinement regions.

The coarse, medium and fine mesh had 544138,

1220966 and 2997355 control volumes, respectively.

There were 6 prism layers along walls (except for nonwetted walls) and the next-to-wall cells were 0.9 mm

thick (prism layer was 20 mm thick, cell expansion

ratio was 1.5). Figure 2 shows the fine mesh segments.

This section contains results for the case of a hull

fixed in its floating position at zero speed (even

keel). The Froude number is 0.26. Computations

were performed in a time-marching mode, starting

with a flat water surface. The time step was 0.04 s

and 4 iterations were performed at each time level.

The standard k- turbulence model with wall

functions was used. Figure 3 shows how forces on

hull converge towards steady-state solution on the

fine mesh. While shear force very quickly settles to

a nearly constant value, pressure force oscillates

around the steady-state value with a diminishing

amplitude.

during computation.

Table 1 shows predicted resistance at each grid

level. The measured value of C T is 3.557 10-3 (Van

et al, 1998) and the numbers in parentheses show

percentage difference to the experimentally obtained

value (the + sign indicates that the value is overpredicted). The predicted total resistance is within

0.5% of measured value on all grids. The variation

from one grid to another is not monotonic: the

largest difference relative to measured value is

obtained on medium grid. While the pressure drag

reduces monotonically with grid refinement, the

friction drag is largest on medium grid. It is not

unusual that such variation is observed, especially

when unstructured, locally refined grids are used.

Table 1: Predicted resistance coefficients on

different grids

Grid

CT (103)

CF (103) CP (103)

Coarse

3.568 (+0.31%)

2,873

0,695

Medium

3.574 (+0.48%)

2,911

0,663

Fine

3.561 (+0.11%)

2,909

0,652

stress on the hull and the near-hull y+ distribution.

Only one half of the geometry was computed, but a

mirror image of waves on the other side is also

shown. The y+ values vary between 40 and 60 over

the largest part of the wetted hull surface, as desired

when wall functions are used. The strong reduction

of wall shear stress in the stern region is due to the

diffusor effect in the absence of propeller.

(middle) and near-wall y+ (lower), computed on the

finest mesh.

All three grids in these calculations had the same

number of prism layers at walls: mesh refinement

was done by reducing the cell size in all directions

outside prism layer by a factor of 1.5, and within

prism layer only in the two tangential directions, but

not in the wall-normal direction. The idea here was

to keep the same y+ values at near-wall cells. In

order to verify the effect of variable mesh spacing

inside prism layer, another coarse grid was

generated with 4 prism layers instead of 6. The

expansion factor was the same, but now the nearwall cell was 2.46 mm thick (compared to 0.9 mm

when 6 prism layers were created). This resulted in

y+ values between 100 and 120 over most of the hull

surface. The total resistance computed on this mesh

(which had 501342 cells, compared to 544138 cells

with 6 prism layers) was 3.61410-3, which is 1.6%

more than the measured value (compared with

+0.31% more when 6 prism layers were used).

Although this result is also acceptable for a

relatively coarse mesh, the increase in accuracy

resulting from adding two more prism layers is

worth while.

We also looked at the effects of the choice of

turbulence model on predicted resistance. This

analysis was done using two grids provided by

those presented earlier and one had 745434 cells

while the finer one had 2680461 cells. The results

are summarized in Table 2.

performed, while for the flow computation, 8 to 10

iterations were performed. The time step was the

same for all grids, since temporal accuracy is not of

interest only the final steady-state solution is

sought.

grids using different turbulence models

Grid

Coarse

Fine

k-

k-

k- SST

standard two-layer

RSM

3.610

3.591

3.425

3.638

(+1.49%)

(+0.96%)

(-3.71%)

(+2.28%)

3.588

3.560

3.415

3.623

(+0.87%)

(+0.08%)

(-4.86%)

(+1.86%)

optimized, and hence the effect of mesh refinement

is more visible. For all models but k-, the values

computed on the finer mesh are closer to

experimentally obtained value of 3.557 10-3. The

Reynolds-stress model (RSM) predicts slightly

higher resistance than both versions of k- model,

while the k- SST model under-predicts the

measured value by almost 5%. The fact that for this

model the deviation compared to experiment

increases with grid refinement is due to the fact that

modeling and discretization errors vary locally in

both sign and magnitude; the finding that the k-

model produces the best result is most probably due

to the partial cancellation of the two error types.

Also, the model which predicts resistance closest to

the measured value may not necessarily give the

best velocity distribution in the propeller plane

(RSM is expected to do the best job in this respect).

(upper) and friction and pressure forces (lower) for

Fn = 0.2599 and the finest mesh.

In the second set of simulations, the hull with rudder

was free to heave and pitch. The same grids were

again used, but the mesh was now moving with the

hull as a rigid body. All simulations started with a

flat water surface and hull's bottom parallel to free

surface. The mass of the half hull with rudder was

set to 823.0451 kg, the center of gravity was at x =

3.5315 m (relative to coordinate origin in CAD-file,

which was at aft perpendicular) and 0.1113924 m

below free surface. The moment of inertia for

rotation around y axis, needed for prediction of

pitching motion, was set to 2725.117 kg m 2. Simulations were performed for four Froude numbers:

0.1949, 0.2274, 0.2599 and 0.2816. For the two

smaller Froude numbers, computations were

performed only on the coarsest grid, while for the

two highest Froude numbers, all three grids were

used. The time step was set to 0.04 s for the Froude

number 0.2599, and for other Froude numbers it was

scaled according to velocity variation. For body

(upper) and friction and pressure forces (lower) for

Fn = 0.2816 and the finest mesh.

Figures 5 and 6 show convergence of ship motion

and forces acting on it during simulation on the

finest mesh for the two largest Froude numbers.

Both the amplitude and frequency of oscillations are

been observed in other applications of the solution

methods to similar problems. No attempts were

made here to vary the parameters in the simulation

to minimize the computing effort needed to obtain

the steady-state solution.

Froude number). For Fn = 0.2816, the error is

reducing with grid refinement to 0.2% on the finest

mesh. However, for Fn = 0.2599, the error first

increases to 1.3% and then drops to 1% on the finest

mesh. It is also interesting that the predicted friction

resistance slightly reduces with increasing Froude

number (from 3.035 to 2.985, 2.071 and 2.961),

while the pressure drag increases (from 0.455 to

0.520, 0.701 and 1.549, in the order of increasing

Froude number). The contribution of pressure drag

to total resistance increases sharply from 19.1% at

Fn = 0.2599 to 34.3% at Fn = 0.2816.

resistance (upper), sinkage (middle) and trim (lower)

Figure 7 shows comparison of predicted and

measured total resistance, sinkage and trim. The

predicted drag agrees well with experimental data:

the largest discrepancy is 1.66% on the coarsest grid

for Fn = 0.2816. For other Froude numbers, already

on the coarsest grid the error is of the order of 1% or

Froude numbers 0.1949, 0.2274, 0.2599 and 0.2816

(from top to bottom; first two computed on the

coarsest, last two on the finest grid).

data. The discrepancies in sinkage are 7.7%, 0.8%,

7.0% and 4.1% in the order of increasing Froude

numbers, respectively (the last two values correspond to the finest mesh). Grid refinement did not

result in improvement: the error increased from

5.3% to 7% for Fn = 0.2599, and from 2.5% to 4.1%

for Fn = 0.2816. The errors in trim angle are 1%,

3.3%, 0.7% and 8.6% (from the lowest to the

highest Froude number). At Fn = 0.2599, the

discrepancy reduced from 4.7% to 0.7% with grid

refinement, but for Fn = 0.2816, the discrepancy to

experiment increased slightly from 7.5% to 8.6%.

6. CONCLUSIONS

The presented results of simulations show that one

can obtain a reliable prediction of resistance of

container vessels using relatively coarse grids with

about half a million cells (for half of the geometry)

when the grid is well designed and locally refined in

critical zones. The standard k- turbulence model

with wall functions is adequate for this purpose and

for optimum results, the prism layers near wall

should be arranged so that y+ values around 50 are

obtained. While the k- and Reynolds-stress model

over-predict resistance by up to 2%, the k- SST

model under-predicts the measured value by almost

5%.

REFERENCES

[1] Ferziger, J.H. and Peri, M. (2003): Computa-tional

Methods for Fluid Dynamics, 3rd Ed., Springer Verlag,

Berlin, Heidelberg.

number 0.2816 computed on the coarse (upper) and

fine (lower) grid.

Figure 8 shows predicted wave patterns for the four

Froude numbers. The highest water elevation is

always just behind ship stern, ranging from 45 mm

at Fn = 0.1949 to 95.1 mm at Fn = 0.2816. The

minimum water level is always at hull shoulder,

ranging between -26 mm at Fn = 0.1949 to -64 mm

at Fn = 0.2816. Water elevation is over-predicted on

coarse grids. Figure 9 shows a comparison of wave

pattern at Fn = 0.2816 computed on the coarse and

the fine grid, respectively. The maximum predicted

water elevation on the coarse grid was 98.6 mm,

which dropped to 95.1 mm on the finest mesh (3.7%

change). The lowest predicted point on water using

coarse mesh was at -68.1 mm, which changed to

-63.8 mm on the finest mesh (6.7% change). The

change in resistance, however, was just below 1.5%.

Finally, Fig. 10 shows the resolution of free surface

in the symmetry plane and along hull in the stern

region on coarse grid. Almost everywhere the

interface falls into one cell, which is the maximum

possible resolution by interface-capturing schemes.

method for coupled fluid flow, heat transfer and stress

analysis using unstructured moving meshes with cells of

arbitrary topology, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg.,

125, 235-255.

[3] Weiss, J., Maruszewski, J.P., Smith, W.A. (1999):

Implicit solution of preconditioned Navier-Stokes

equations using algebraic multigrid. AIAA J., 37, 29-36.

[4] Muzaferija, S., Peri, M. (1999): Computation of free

surface flows using interface-tracking and interfacecapturing methods, In O. Mahrenholtz, M. Markiewicz

(eds.), Nonlinear Water Wave Inter-action, Chap. 2, 59100, WIT Press, Southampton.

[5] Launder, B.E., and Spalding, D.B. (1974): The

numerical computation of turbulent ows, Comput. Meth.

Appl. Mech. Eng., 3, 269289.

[6] Azcueta, R. (2001): Computation of turbulent freesurface flows around ships and floating bodies, PhD

Thesis, Technical University of Hamburg-Harburg,

Germany.

[7] Van, S.H., Kim, W.J., Yim, G.T., Kim, D.H., and Lee,

C.J. (1998): Experimental Investigation of the Flow

Characteristics Around Practical Hull Forms, Proc. 3rd

Osaka Colloquium on Advanced CFD Applications to

Ship Flow and Hull Form Design, Osaka, Japan.

- Ship PrestnUploaded byrajesh_naidu_23
- 345857Uploaded byfred_roy1984
- Full TextUploaded byHuy Le
- Consequence ModellingUploaded byvignesh
- Anexo. Cyberbased Analysis, Modelling and Simulation of Wind Effects in Vortex-WindsUploaded byStephanie Rosales
- iwwwfb27_35Uploaded byTrần Văn Cường
- NAFEMS Books.xlsxUploaded byds_srinivas
- Erosion Webinar QAUploaded byMicheleDiSclafani
- Multiphase Flow ModellingUploaded byivanmatijevic
- ANSYS CFX IntroductionUploaded byBBAT
- Atomization and Sprays LevebvreUploaded byPrakash Ghose
- 1 Introduction-OpenFaomUploaded bysuresh_501
- ANSYS CFX IntroductionUploaded byvovancuong8
- 06 Research MethodologyUploaded byMradul Yadav
- FlowVision - Fluid Structure InteractionUploaded bySrashmi
- 07_2011_157_Ilic_03Uploaded bysanthoshkumar
- XFlow2016 Product SheetUploaded byemreka82
- soloUploaded bysolomon_raj_6
- 4.2.4.a ToolsofAeronauticsUploaded byVladimir Barranco
- meeting minutesUploaded byapi-272118377
- Abdussamie PaperUploaded byFreddy Forero Longas
- 1-s2.0-S1385894714003027-mainUploaded byJonathan Alcántar
- GID CCFD OperatingManualUploaded byvelimier
- Wind ApplicationUploaded byAlbert Lucky
- jpconf7_75_012033windturbineUploaded bySattar Al-Jabair
- The Prediction of Flows in Production Risers - Truth & Myth? Pickering, Hewitt, Watson and HaleUploaded byastromo
- ijesv8n2_03Uploaded byKwanchai Choicharoen
- 1.Getting StartedUploaded byVishal Yadav
- 103820090201Uploaded byOSCARIEM
- CFD FlotationUploaded bylrodriguez_892566

- MAK301-LaminarUploaded byAhmet Gültekin Avcı
- Rina Ijsct96preprintUploaded byRama Krishna
- FaltinsenUploaded bynaufragato
- örnekUploaded byAhmet Gültekin Avcı
- Aldığımız Raw Datadan Filtre Yapiyoruz Ve Raw Datalari SmoothlaştırıyoruzUploaded byAhmet Gültekin Avcı
- StarCCM TutorialUploaded byJuan Ignacio González
- Resistance Characteristics of Semi-Displacement Mega Yacht Hull Forms[1][1]Uploaded byAhmet Gültekin Avcı
- p699-710Uploaded byAhmet Gültekin Avcı
- RoboBoat 2012 Prelim Rules2Uploaded byAhmet Gültekin Avcı
- 02Ek- Bezier eğrileriUploaded byAhmet Gültekin Avcı
- An ProUploaded byAhmet Gültekin Avcı

- NMVOC TrainingUploaded byAnkush Gupta
- MAN NR20Uploaded byDP
- Disser Ta CaoUploaded byMuhammad Adil
- Section 6 _Rock MechanicsUploaded byaistop
- All avr.Uploaded byAdeel
- Archimedes PrincipleUploaded byKristin Brienne Leander-Renomeron
- Reflection CoefficientsUploaded byBuhle Joy
- NB NK SS New PresentationUploaded byGiancarlo Cervantes
- Online Oxygen AnalyserUploaded byAlok Joaddar
- J420V06_enUploaded byMariano
- Six Stroke Engine bUploaded bykandhalarajashekar
- 5544 E Refrigeration and Air-conditioning Technology (1)Uploaded byOsman Koçak
- j-feel the forces-lsb-ansUploaded byapi-237740413
- Bracing for StabilityUploaded byaravindtank
- Throttled Valve Cavitation and ErosionUploaded bymcdale
- femUNIT -2Uploaded bySanket V Kalgutkar
- AG31 007 RefrigerantUploaded bySantosh Devassy
- Rescue.asdUploaded byantonius_surya_1
- 07_Elasticity_Applications_03_Presure_Vessels.pdfUploaded byJm Beja
- A Deformation Theory of PlasticityUploaded byRohit Kore
- AP Basic Expansion JointsUploaded byManajit Gogate
- Chapter 1 Fluid PropertiesUploaded by'uyun
- Solution Computer Lab Exam 2.1Uploaded bySai Bala
- KE-MasterhoseUploaded byfcspek
- Carlon HDPE Duct 2007 Fiber Guard Mini DuctUploaded byPeterLOW0218
- ATA 21 AirconditionUploaded byFrancisco Buenrostro
- CE6101 Behaviour of Cam ClayUploaded byGan Chin Phang
- Radiation in OpenFoam FinalUploaded byakhourch
- WELDING CHARTUploaded byjmcorsame777
- CAT-011_TaeguThreadUploaded bynelu34brasov