Master Thesis Correction Ummu Saiyidah Najihah

INTEGRATION OF OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE (OSS)
INTO THE SHIP HULL RESISTANCE ANALYSIS
UMMU SAIYIDAH NAJIHAH BINTI ZAINUDIN
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

PSZ 19:16 (Pind. 1/13)
UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA
DECLARATION OF THESIS / UNDERGRADUATE PROJECT REPORT AND

COPYRIGHT
Author’s full name : UMMU SAIYIDAH NAJIHAH BINTI ZAINUDIN
Date of Birth : 07 MAY 1995
Title : INTEGRATION OF OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE (OSS) INTO

THE SHIP HULL RESISTANCE ANALYSIS
Academic Session : 1 – 2020/2021
I declare that this thesis is classified as:
CONFIDENTIAL (Contains confidential information under the

Official Secret Act 1972)*
RESTRICTED (Contains restricted information as specified by

the organization where research was done)*
✓ OPEN ACCESS I agree that my thesis to be published as online

open access (full text)
1. I acknowledged that Universiti Teknologi Malaysia reserves the right as

follows:
2. The thesis is the property of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
3. The Library of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia has the right to make copies for
the purpose of research only.
4. The Library has the right to make copies of the thesis for academic
exchange.
Certified by:
SIGNATURE OF STUDENT SIGNATURE OF SUPERVISOR
MKM183009 NASRUDIN BIN HAJI ISMAIL

MATRIC NUMBER NAME OF SUPERVISOR
Date: 23 MAY 2021 Date: 23 MAY 2021

NOTES : If the thesis is CONFIDENTIAL or RESTRICTED, please attach with the letter from
the organization with period and reasons for confidentiality or restriction
“We hereby declare that we have read this thesis and in our
opinion this thesis is sufficient in term of scope and quality for the
award of the degree of Master of Philosophy in Mechanical Engineering”
Signature : ________________________________
Name of Supervisor I : NASRUDIN BIN HAJI ISMAIL
Date : 23 MAY 2021
Signature : ________________________________
Name of Supervisor II : ARIFAH BINTI ALI
Date : 23 MAY 2021
Signature : ________________________________
Name of Supervisor III : AHMAD FUAAD BIN AHMAD SABKI
Date : 23 MAY 2021
BAHAGIAN A - Pengesahan Kerjasama*
Adalah disahkan bahawa projek penyelidikan tesis ini telah dilaksanakan melalui
kerjasama antara ________________________dengan ________________________
Disahkan oleh:
Tandatangan : Tarikh :
Nama :
Jawatan :
(Cop rasmi)
* Jika penyediaan tesis atau projek melibatkan kerjasama.
BAHAGIAN B - Untuk Kegunaan Pejabat Sekolah Pengajian Siswazah
Tesis ini telah diperiksa dan diakui oleh:

Nama dan Alamat Pemeriksa Luar :
Nama dan Alamat Pemeriksa Dalam :
Nama Penyelia Lain (jika ada) :
Disahkan oleh Timbalan Pendaftar di SPS:

Tandatangan : Tarikh : 23 MAY 2021
Nama :
INTEGRATION OF OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE (OSS)
INTO THE SHIP HULL RESISTANCE ANALYSIS
UMMU SAIYIDAH NAJIHAH BINTI ZAINUDIN
A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the

requirements for the award of the degree of
Master of Philosophy
School of Mechanical Engineering

Faculty of Engineering
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
MAY 2021
DECLARATION
I declare that this thesis entitled “Integration of Open Source Software (OSS) into The
Ship Hull Resistance Analysis ” is the result of my own research except as cited in the
references. The thesis has not been accepted for any degree and is not concurrently
submitted in candidature of any other degree.
Signature : ....................................................
Name : UMMU SAIYIDAH NAJIHAH BINTI ZAINUDIN
Date : 23 MAY 2021
iii
DEDICATION
Every challenging work, needs self-efforts and self-determination as well as

guidance from elders, especially those who were very close to my heart.
My humble effort I dedicate to my beloved husband and parents, who have been the
source of strength, encouragement, financial support and inspired me to pursue and
complete this research.
Lastly, along with all hard working and respected to my supervisors who shared the
guidance, words of advice, for the time and for providing the necessary opportunities
to complete the research project.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and Foremost praise is to ALLAH, the Almighty who gave me the
strength, patient, wisdom and knowledge to do my research.
Along with all hard working and respected to my supervisors, Prof. Madya Dr.
Abu Hasan Abdullah, Mr Nasrudin Bin Haji Ismail, Dr Arifah Binti Ali and Mr Ir
Ahmad Fuaad Bin Ahmad Sabki who shared the guidance, words of advice, for the
time and for providing the necessary opportunities to complete the research project.
I would like to express my deepest appreciation to the staff Marine Technology

Centre (MTC) for their assistance and guidance in completing my research. Besides
that, the gratefully acknowledge OSCAE Initiative effort at the Faculty of Mechanical
Engineering, UTM, to raise awareness and use of open source hardware and software
for Computer Aided Engineering (CAE) works and this study under full use of the
towing tank vessels at Marine Technology Centre (MTC).
Last but not least, I would like to thank you my husband and my family : my
parents and to my brothers and sister for continually supporting me spiritually and
provide their moral and motivation throughout this research and my life in general.
v
ABSTRACT
In ship-building industry, the design field is dominated by commercial

software whose inherent high costs and maintenance costs which lead to restrict the
design innovation and competitiveness that small and medium enterprises (SME)
might have. This study was undertaken to redress this issue faced by the SME with
limited support and budgets which leads to lack of advanced capability. The question
was thus, "how can these SME be made cost effective and sustainably competitive? "
Since this question is rather broad and hardly a statistically testable one, this
exploratory study adopted a general hypothesis that "adopting a carefully packaged
Open Source Computer-Aided-Engineering (OSCAE) software for hull resistance and
wave pattern analysis workflow will cut down operating costs, improves
competitiveness without sacrificing accuracy and integrity of the hull design." The
software integration was pursued through "supported open source" tools used in the
standard CAE workflow such as geometric modellers (FreeCAD, FreeShip Plus,
Blender), pre-processors (Gmsh, FreeCAD), solvers (OpenFOAM, FreeShip Plus) and
post-processors (ParaFoam/ParaView) that work on Linux platform. Selection and
combination of these tools focused on an optimal solution which took into account the
maturity level of OSCAE modules, compatibility of data protocols, degree of OSCAE
reuse, experience & skill of users and select criteria (accuracy and integrity of design).
Besides that, for verification of the codes, results from the OSCAE workflow were
compared against those obtained from the resistance experiment tests on three different
hull models which are passenger ship, patrol boat and fast interceptor craft. In this
study, three potential workflow module sets of open source software (OSS) into the
ship hull resistance analysis have been successful created. Lastly, it can be concluded
that the workflow module sets of Open Source software successfully created
throughout the study without effect the accuracy and integrity of the design.
vi
ABSTRAK
Dalam industri pembinaan kapal, reka bentuk sesebuah kapal biasanya

didominasi oleh perisian komersial yang mempunyai kos yang tinggi serta mempunyai
kos penyelenggaraan yang menyekat inovasi terhadap sesuatu reka bentuk dan
mengurangkan daya saing yang mungkin ada pada perusahaan kecil dan sederhana
(PKS). Kajian ini dilakukan adalah untuk mengatasi masalah yang dihadapi oleh pihak
PKS yang kekurangan bajet serta sokongan yang mendorong ke arah kurangnya
keupayaan untuk maju. Oleh itu, persoalannya adalah, “bagaimanakah caranya untuk
PKS menjimatkan kos yang dihadapinya dan dapat terus berdaya saing. Persoalan ini
agak melampaui batas dan susah untuk diuji dengan ujian statistik, maka dalam
mengekplorasi kajian ini sebuah hipotesis umum telah diadaptasi yang berbunyi
“dengan menggunakan pakej perisian Sumber Terbuka yang telah dikemas dan diteliti
dalam kajian rintangan sesebuah badan kapal dan dalam kerja menganalisis aliran
corak gelombang yang dihasilkan oleh sesebuah kapal akan mengurangkan kos
operasi, meningkatkan daya saing tanpa mengorbankan ketepatan dan integriti
sesebuah kapal”. “Integrasi terhadap perisian dilakukan melalui “perisian sumber
terbuka” seperti pemodel geometri pemodel geometri (FreeCAD, FreeShip Plus,
Blender), prapemproses (Gmsh, FreeCAD), penyelesai (OpenFOAM, FreeShip Plus)
dan pasca pemproses (ParaFoam / ParaView) yang berfungsi di platform Linux.
Pemilihan dan gabungan alat ini memberi fokus terhadap penyelesaian yang optimum
yang mengambil kira tahap kematangan modul OSCAE, keserasian protocol data,
tahap penggunaan semula perisian, pengalaman dan kemahiran pengguna dan
pemilihan kriteria (ketepatan dan integriti reka bentuk). Selain daripada itu, untuk
pengesahan kod sumber terbuka, keputusan hasil dari aliran kerja OSCAE akan
dibandingkan dengan keputusan yang diperoleh dari ujian eksperimen rintangan pada
tiga model kapal yang berbeza iaitu kapal penumpang, kapal peronda dan kraf perantas
pantas. Dalam kajian ini, tiga set aliran perisian kerja sumber terbuka yang berpotensi
dalam menganalisis ketahanan kapal telah berjaya dihasilkan. Akhir sekali, boleh
dirumuskan yang aliran perisian kerja sumber terbuka Berjaya dihasilkan tanpa
mengorbankan ketepatan dan integriti rekabetuk sesebuah kapal.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE
DECLARATION iii
DEDICATION iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT v
ABSTRACT vi
ABSTRAK vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS viii
LIST OF TABLES xii
LIST OF FIGURES xiv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xxi
LIST OF SYMBOLS xxii
LIST OF APPENDICES xxiii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Problem Background 1
1.2 Problem Statement 2
1.3 Research Questions 3
1.4 Research Objectives 3
Research Objectives 4
1.5 Significance 5
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 7

2.1 Introduction 7
2.2 Ship Resistance 8
2.3 Planing Hull 11
2.4 Semi-displacement Hull 15
2.5 Ship Wave Pattern 16
Kelvin Wake Pattern 17
2.6 Apparatus and Open Source Software 19
viii
Pre-processor 19
FreeCAD 20
VariCAD 21
FreeShip Plus 22
Gmsh 24
Salome 25
2.7 Solver 26
OpenFOAM 27
2.8 Measuring The Maturity of Open Source Software 28
2.9 The Continuity Equation 29
2.10 The Navier - Stokes Equations 30
2.11 Turbulence 31
Turbulence Parameters 31
2.12 The Volume of Fluid (VOF) Method 32
2.13 Boundary Condition 34
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 37

3.1 Introduction 37
3.2 Flow Chart and Taguchi Designs of Research Study 38
3.3 Description of The Selected Numbers of Ship Models 39
3.4 The Workflow Process of The Passenger Ship Model
(MTC 092) by Using Open Source Software (OSS) 43
Workflow 1 Process for The Passenger Ship
Model 44
3.4.1.1 Workflow 1: Pre-Processing for The
Passenger Ship Model Geometry 45
Model 49
Passenger Ship Hull Geometry 50
Model 53
3.5 The Workflow Process of The Patrol Boat Model
Workflow 1 Process for The Patrol Boat Model 60
ix
Patrol Boat Model Geometry 62
Workflow 2 Process for The Patrol Boat Model 66
Patrol Boat Hull Geometry 67
Workflow 3 Process for The Patrol Boat Model
69
3.6 The Workflow Process of The Fast Interceptor Craft
3.7 Solver Workflow Process for The Ship Hull Model
Analysis 79
3.8 Post-Processor Workflow Process for The Ship Model
Analysis 83
CHAPTER 4 RESULT AND DISCUSSION 87

4.1 Ship Resistance and Wave Pattern Result 87
The Total Resistance Result of Passenger Ship
Model 87
The Wave Pattern Result of Passenger Ship
Model 91
The Total Resistance Result of Patrol Boat
Model 95
The Wave Pattern Result of Patrol Boat Model 98
The Total Resistance Result of Fast Interceptor
Craft (MTC 112) 101
The Wave Pattern Result of Fast Interceptor
Craft (MTC 112) Model 103
4.2 The Potential Workflow Module Set of Open Source
Software (OSS) into Ship Hull Resistance Analysis 107
4.3 The Maturity of Open Source Software (OSS) 108
4.4 Number of Workflow Sets in Integrating Open Source
Software (OSS) into Ship Hull Resistance Analysis 112
4.5 The Most Potential Workflow Set in Integrating Open
Source Software (OSS) into Ship Hull Resistance
Analysis 114
4.6 The Effect of Accuracy and Integrity of The Workflow
Design in This Research 115
4.7 Grid Independence Test (GIT) vs Courant-Friedrichs-
Lewy (CFL) 117
x
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 119
5.1 Conclusion and Recommendation 119
REFERENCES 121
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS 175
xi
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE
Table 2.1 The list of file format that can be import and export into
Freeship Plus software. 23
Table 3.1 CAE workflow and Software setting. 39
Table 3.2 Main dimensions of the full scale passenger ship (MTC
092) and its model. 40
Table 3.3 Resistance test results of the passenger ship (MTC 092)
model values. 40
Table 3.4 Main dimensions of the full scales patrol boat (MTC 101)
and its model. 41
Table 3.5 Resistance test results of the patrol boat (MTC 101) model
values. 41
Table 3.6 Main dimensions of the full scale fast interceptor craft (MTC
112) and its model. 42
Table 3.7 Resistance test results of the fast interceptor craft (MTC 112)
model values. 42
Table 3.8 The passenger ship hull model hydrostatic data particular
differences. 49
Table 3.9 The passenger ship hull model hydrostatic data particular
differences. 58
Table 3.10 Ship hydrostatic data particular difference from real model. 65
Table 3.11 Ship hydrostatic data particular difference from real model. 72
Table 3.12 The initial condition of the passenger ship model. 81
Table 3.13 The initial condition of the patrol boat ship model. 81
Table 3.14 The initial condition of the fast interceptor craft (MTC 112)
model. 82
Table 4.1 Workflow 1 - Total resistance difference of passenger ship
hull model. 88
hull model. 89
hull model. 90
xii
Table 4.4 Workflow 1 - Total resistance difference of patrol boat hull
model (Muhammad, 2019). 95
model. 96
model. 97
Table 4.7 Total resistance difference of fast interceptor craft (MTC
112). 101
Table 4.8 Measuring the maturity of software in open source software
(OSS). 111
Table 4.9 Draft of CAE workflow and Software setting. 113
Table 4.10 Meshing size element for Fast Interceptor Craft (FIC). 118
xiii
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE
Figure 2.1 Basic components of ship total resistance (Molland et al.,

2017). 8
Figure 2.2 Graph of resistance against Froude number (Lindholdt et
al., 2015). 9
Figure 2.3 Graph components of ship resistance against ship speed
(Harvald, 1983). 10
Figure 2.4 Behaviour of ship hull resistance against Froude number
(Marshall, 2002) 11
Figure 2.5 Planing hull forces (Molland et al., 2017). 12
Figure 2.6 Pre-planing hull (Almeter, 1993). 13
Figure 2.7 Pre-planing hull (Almeter, 1993). 13
Figure 2.8 Semi-planing hull (Almeter, 1993) 13
Figure 2.9 Semi-planing hull (Almeter, 1993). 14
Figure 2.10 Fully planing hull (Almeter, 1993). 14
Figure 2.11 Fully planing hull (Almeter, 1993). 14
Figure 2.12 Body plan of semi displacement hull (Giles, 2009). 15
Figure 2.13 Side view of semi displacement hull (Giles, 2009). 16
Figure 2.14 The wake image on the water surface (Rabaud and Moisy,
2014). 16
Figure 2.15 Kelvin ship wake theory (Bertram, 2011). 18
Figure 2.16 Start page in FreeCAD software. 20
Figure 2.17 Workbench feature in FreeCAD. 21
Figure 2.18 VariCAD layout in Linux. 22
Figure 2.19 The lines plan of the ship in FreeShip Plus (FreeShip Plus
Manual). 24
Figure 2.20 Operation mode setup in Gmsh software. 25
Figure 2.21 Mesh generation in OpenFOAM. 28
Figure 2.22 Visualization from ParaView of the phase fraction. 34
xiv
Figure 2.23 Boundaries of the computational domain. 34
Figure 2.24 Minimum dimension of computational domain by ITTC
(2011a). 35
Figure 3.1 Ship modelling and analysis flow process. 38
Figure 3.2 The multiple combination of Open Source software (OSS). 39
Figure 3.3 Workflow of the passenger ship hull resistance analysis. 43
Figure 3.4 CAE workflow 1 process in passenger ship hull form
resistance analysis. 44
Figure 3.5 2D lines plan of the passenger ship in FreeCAD. 45
Figure 3.6 The coordinate of the passenger ship in Phyton Script. 46
Figure 3.7 The passenger ship model in FreeShip Plus. 46
Figure 3.8 The lines plan of the passenger ship in FreeShip Plus. 46
Figure 3.9 Half passenger ship hull form in Blender software. 47
Figure 3.10 Full passenger ship hull form in Blender software. 47
Figure 3.11 The condition of the passenger ship in FreeShip Plus. 48
Figure 3.12 The passenger ship hull model in Gmsh software. 48
Figure 3.13 CAE workflow 2 process in passenger ship hull form
Figure 3.14 The 3D passenger ship hull model in FreeCAD software. 51
Figure 3.15 Explode the 3D passenger ship hull model in FreeCAD
software. 51
Figure 3.16 Lofting the 3D passenger ship hull model in FreeCAD
software. 52
Figure 3.17 Half body of the passenger ship hull model in Blender
software. 52
Figure 3.18 Full body of the passenger ship hull model in Blender
software. 53
Figure 3.19 The passenger ship model in Gmsh software. 53
Figure 3.20 The workflow 3 process of the passenger ship hull
Figure 3.21 The CAE workflow 3 for the passenger ship hull resistance
analysis. 54
Figure 3.22 2D lines plan of the passenger ship in FreeCAD. 55
xv
Figure 3.23 The coordinate of the passenger ship in Phyton Script. 55
Figure 3.24 The control points of the passenger ship model in FreeShip
Plus. 56
Figure 3.25 The passenger ship model in FreeShip Plus. 56
Figure 3.26 The passenger ship hull model in Gmsh software. 57
Figure 3.27 The hydrostatic data of the passenger ship model in
FreeShip Plus. 57
Figure 3.28 The resistance calculation of the passenger ship model in
FreeShip Plus. 58
Figure 3.29 The resistance results of the passenger ship model in
FreeShip Plus. 59
Figure 3.30 Workflow process of the patrol boat hull form resistance
analysis. 60
Figure 3.31 CAE workflow 1 process in the patrol boat hull form
Figure 3.32 2D lines plan (body plan view) of the patrol boat model in
FreeCAD. 62
Figure 3.33 2D lines plan (top view) of the patrol boat model in
FreeCAD. 62
Figure 3.34 2D lines plan (profile view) of the patrol boat model in
FreeCAD. 63
Figure 3.35 The coordinate of the patrol boat model in Phyton Script. 63
Figure 3.36 The patrol boat model in FreeShip Plus. 64
Figure 3.37 Half ship hull form of the patrol boat model in Blender
software. 64
Figure 3.38 Full the patrol boat model in Blender software. 64
Figure 3.39 The patrol boat model in Gmsh software. 65
Figure 3.40 CAE workflow 2 process in patrol boat hull form resistance
analysis. 66
Figure 3.41 Explode the patrol boat model in FreeCAD software. 67
Figure 3.42 Lofting the 3D patrol boat model in FreeCAD software. 67
Figure 3.43 Half body of the patrol boat model in Blender software. 68
Figure 3.44 Full body of the patrol boat model in Blender software. 68
xvi
Figure 3.46 The workflow 3 process of the patrol boat hull resistance
analysis. 69
Figure 3.47 CAE workflow 3 process in patrol boat hull form resistance
analysis. 70
Figure 3.48 The coordinate of the patrol boat model in Phyton Script. 70
Figure 3.49 The patrol boat model in FreeShip Plus. 71
Figure 3.51 The resistance calculation of the patrol boat model in
FreeShip Plus. 72
Figure 3.52 The resistance results of the patrol boat model in FreeShip
Plus. 73
Figure 3.53 CAE workflow process for fast interceptor craft resistance
analysis. 73
Figure 3.54 Workflow process of the Fast Interceptor Craft (MTC 112)
ship hull resistance analysis. 74
Figure 3.55 Fast Interceptor Craft (MTC 112) in Rhino software. 77
Figure 3.56 The body plan of Fast Interceptor Craft (MTC 112) in
Rhino software. 77
Figure 3.57 The profile plan of Fast Interceptor Craft (MTC 112) in
Rhino software. 78
Figure 3.58 The top plan of Fast Interceptor Craft (MTC 112) in Rhino
software. 78
Figure 3.59 Fast Interceptor Craft (MTC 112) in Gmsh software. 79
Figure 3.60 The structure of InterFoam cases directory. 80
Figure 3.61 The features of ParaView software. 83
Figure 3.62 The ParaView toolbar. 83
Figure 3.63 The ParaView features after select volume field and the
"apply". 84
Figure 3.64 The slice icon in ParaView features. 84
Figure 3.65 The ParaView features after slice step. 85
Figure 3.66 The "open" icon and import ship geometry step. 85
Figure 3.67 The top view of wave pattern in ParaView software. 86
Figure 3.68 The side view of wave pattern in ParaView software. 86
xvii
Figure 4.1 Workflow 1 - Graph of the total resistance against speed
between towing tank and OpenFOAM for passenger ship
model. 88
between towing tank and OpenFOAM for passenger ship
model. 89
between towing tank and FreeShip Plus for passenger ship
model. 90
Figure 4.4 Workflow 1 - Wave pattern of passenger ship hull model at
14 knot. 91
16 knot. 91
18 knot. 92
20 knot. 92
22 knot. 92
14 knot. 93
16 knot. 93
18 knot. 94
20 knot. 94
22 knot. 94
between towing tank and FreeShip Plus for patrol boat
model. 95
model. 96
model. 97
xviii
Figure 4.17 Workflow 1 - Wave pattern of patrol boat hull model at low
speed (Muhammad, 2019). 98
Figure 4.18 Workflow 1 - Wave pattern of patrol boat hull model at
medium speed (Muhammad, 2019). 98
Figure 4.19 Workflow 1 - Wave pattern of patrol boat hull model at high
speed (Muhammad, 2019). 99
Figure 4.20 Workflow 2 - Wave pattern of patrol boat hull model at 14
knot. 99
knot. 100
knot. 100
Figure 4.23 Graph of the total resistance against speed between towing
tank and OpenFOAM for fast interceptor craft (MTC 112)
model. 101
Figure 4.24 Graph of the total resistance against speed between towing
tank and OpenFOAM for fast interceptor craft (MTC 112)
model. 102
Figure 4.25 Wave pattern of fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) model at
10 knot. 103
12 knot. 103
12 knot. 104
15 knot. 104
16 knot. 104
17 knot. 105
18 knot. 105
25 knot. 105
35 knot. 106
40 knot. 106
xix
45 knot. 106
50 knot. 107
Figure 4.37 The potential CAE workflow module sets of Open Source
Software (OSS) into ship hull resistance analysis. 107
Figure 4.38 The most potential CAE workflow module set of Open
Source Software (OSS) into ship hull resistance analysis. 114
xx
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CAD - Computer Aided Design

CAE - Computational Aided Engineering
CFD - Computational Fluid Dynamics
FEM - Finite Element Method
IGES - Initial Graphics Exchange Specification
ITTC - International Towing Tank Conference
MTC - Marine Technology Centre
OSCAE - Open Source Computer Aided Engineering
OSS - Open Source Software
SME - Small and Medium Enterprise
STEP - Standard for the Exchange of Product Data
STL - Stereolithography
UTM - Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
VOF - Volume of Fluid
xxi
LIST OF SYMBOLS
α - Phase Fraction
B - Beam of the ship
CG - Centre of gravity
D - Draft of the ship
ℇ - epsilon
𝐹𝐻 - Hydrostatic force acting at the centre of hull
𝐹𝑛 - Froude number
𝐹𝑃 - Pressure force over the wetted surface
g - Gravity
L - Length of model
n - Normal vector
ρ - Fluid density
𝜌𝑔 - Fluid density of air
𝜌𝑖 - Fluid density of water
P - Pressure
∇P - Fluid flows in the change in static pressure
𝑅𝐹 - Frictional Resistance
τ - Trim angle
𝜏̿ - Turbulent stress tensor
U - Velocity vector (i j k)
UU - Velocity vector
µ - Fluid viscosity
V - Velocity
𝑉𝑖 - Velocity in liquid phase
𝑉𝑔 - Velocity in gas phase
∇ - Unit of vector
λ - Wave length of the ship
ω - omega
xxii
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX TITLE PAGE
Appendix A Lines Plan of Passenger Ship 129

Appendix B Lines Plan of The Patrol Boat 130
Appendix C Lines Plan of The Fast Interceptor Craft 131
Appendix D Trim Angle of Fast Interceptor Craft at Speed 10 Knot 132
Appendix E Trim Angle of Fast Interceptor Craft at Speed 12 Knot 133
Appendix F Trim Angle of Fast Interceptor Craft at Speed 13 Knot 134
Appendix G Trim Angle of Fast Interceptor Craft at Speed 15 Knot 135
Appendix H Trim Angle of Fast Interceptor Craft at Speed 16 Knot 136
Appendix I Trim Angle of Fast Interceptor Craft at Speed 17 Knot 137
Appendix J Trim Angle of Fast Interceptor Craft at Speed 18 Knot 138
Appendix K 0.orig folder : Speed (U) 139
Appendix L 0.orig folder : Turbulent Kinetic Energy (k) 140
Appendix M 0.orig folder : Specific Rate of Dissipation (omega) 141
Appendix N Constant folder : Transport Properties 142
Appendix O Constant folder : Turbulent Properties 143
Appendix P System folder : blockMeshDict 144
Appendix Q System folder : controlDict 147
Appendix R System folder : setFieldsDict 148
Appendix S System folder : snappyHexMeshDict 149
Appendix T System folder : surfaceFeatureExtractDict 154
Appendix U Allclean 154
Appendix V Allrun 155
Appendix W Fast Interceptor Craft Model (Rhino.3dm) Hydrostatic Data
Percentage Differences 156
Appendix X Software Evaluation Survey Form 157
xxiii
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Problem Background
Shipbuilding industry in Malaysia lacks in advanced capability, especially in

ship design and hull performance area. Over the decade, Jasak (2009), Yang et al.
(2009), Kim et al. (2010) and Seo et al. (2010) contend that the advancement of
computational analysis of ship hull performance by using computational fluid
dynamics (CFD) is being widely adopted and the results produced are being applied
to the actual design of ship in shipbuilding industry. However, ship design and hull
performance area is concurred by commercial software whose demand a high initial
cost and high maintenance cost. As a result of that, small and medium sized
shipbuilding enterprises (SME) in Malaysia was burdened with limited cost and budget
because of this situation.
Park et al. (2013) said owing to the high cost of commercial software packages,
interest in free computational fluid dynamics (CFD) codes has recently increased. Due
to the reason, the idea of this study is to use fully packaged of Open Source Software
(OSS) in evaluating and optimizing the ship hull form and the study of its generated
wave patterns. As the motivation for using Open Source or free CFD is primarily due
to the cost and time related. It is crucial because the CFD process can be sufficiently
accurate as experimental, but low in computational cost and total time taken.
The above description reflects the aims of this study which are to develop
multiple workflow of integrating open source software modules in ship performance
analysis so that an efficient work flow of hull development solution can be determined.
Besides that, to determine the potential workflow set of open source software for hull
form design and evaluation on selected number of model and to build a database that
will archive the details of ship models at MTC and keeping relevant design parameters
1
which have been studied, analysed and simulated by expert user who draw on open
source solution.
In order to achieve the objective of this study, an integration of alternative

workflow sets of open source software platform will be done in designing, meshing,
developing and testing the hull ship which is a complete process for any ship design
and hull performance test. The key of workflow set in this integration process is the
freedom to incorporate the hull form design and hull performance test with Marine
Technology Centre’s (MTC) which own 20- year collection of model testing data. This
requires the ability to access the code and compare them with the integration results.
The expected results of this research are an effective workflow complete

packaged of hull development which are passenger ship, patrol boat and fast interceptor
craft models and the ship hulls resistance performance analysis is determined. After
that, the potential workflow module sets of open source software for hull form design
and evaluation on selected number of model are determined. Lastly, a database that
will archive the details of ship models at MTC is build.
1.2 Problem Statement
Hawkins (2004) mentioned open source is the closest commercial rival which
Linux operating systems tests have been found to be more stable than Windows and
least comparable in performance and most interesting to economists. This statement
from Hawkins (2004) was supported by the fact that Windows 10 is slow in CFD
performance compared to Linux. Linux has good performance in CFD in term of time
which it is much quicker, fast and smooth even on the older hardware. However,
Thompson (2011) stated that open source software is not straightforward to use and if
this does not change, it could render them obsolete to many non-commercial users.
Rosenblum (2012) said open source operating systems cannot be learned in a day and
it require effort and training from expert people before someone able to master them.
Other than that, there is a shortage of workflow that run both open source and
commercial software, however to change the commercial platform to open source
2
platform creates confusion and sometimes the latest software are incompatible to the
open source platform. Hence, further study of the complete workflow process of open
source software in ship hull performance analysis is undertaken so that this study can
be a reference or guidance to the people who interested to use or learn the open source
software.
1.3 Research Questions
Develop an effective workflow of Open Source software for geometric

modelling, meshing, solving and post-processing on passenger ship (MTC 092), patrol
boat (MTC 101) and fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) hull form design. The research
questions in the study are:
• How many workflow of integrating sets of Open Source software can be done
through the study?
• How to determine the most potential module set of Open Source software for
hull form design and evaluation on selected number of models?
• Is this research will affect the accuracy and integrity of the design?
1.4 Research Objectives
Based on the research questions above, the research study embarks on the
following objectives:
• To develop multiple workflow of integrating Open Source software modules

for ship hull resistance analysis.
• To determine the most potential workflow module set of Open Source

software for hull form design and evaluation on passenger ship (MTC 092),
3
patrol boat (MTC 101) and fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) of the ship
model.
• To compare the hull resistance results of ship model by using Open Source
software with the towing tank experiment results.
Research Objectives
In order to achieve the objectives within the given period of time. The scope of
this research will limit to:
• In pre-processing stage, the open source software that will be used are
FreeShip Plus and FreeCAD for ship modelling part. Meanwhile, Gmsh
software will be used for meshing part.
• In solver stage, the study will use OpenFOAM software as a solver.
• In post-processing stage, the hull form will be visualized by using Salome

and ParaView.
• The hull form performance will be focusing on hull resistance and wave
pattern.
• The analysis process will be done on the selected number of hull which are
passenger ship (MTC 092), patrol boat (MTC 101) and fast interceptor craft
(MTC 112). The characteristic of passenger ship (MTC 092), patrol boat
(MTC 101) and fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) model as below:
– Passenger ship (MTC 092) is a planing hull and categorized as a

high speed ship.
– The Froude numbers of MTC 092 is within 0.38 to 0.59 and limit
into five numbers of speed which are 1.96, 2.24, 2.52, 2.80 and 3.08
m/s.
– Patrol boat (MTC 101) is a semi displacement hull and in the range
of 0.383 to 0.601 of Froude numbers.
4
– MTC 101 is limit into five numbers of speed which are 1.61, 1.84, 2.07,
2.30 and 2.53 m/s.
– Fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) is categorized as a high speed ship.
– Fast Interceptor craft is running into seven numbers of speed in

towing tank test which are 1.63, 1.95, 2.11, 2.44, 2.60, 2.77 and 2.93
m/s.
1.5 Significance
Participation of university as training centre for engineering professional to guide

the expertise in the use of Open Source Computer Aided Engineering (OSCAE), help
proliferate the acceptance and the use of OSCAE in professional working environment.
Other than that, this research will provide complete or details step of open source
workflow that can be referred or guidance to shipbuilding industry’s SME people.
5
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
In the shipbuilding industry, there are two different approaches can be taken for
the hull form performance which are experimental and mathematical. Asen (2014) stated
in his paper, experimental methods will be focusing on measuring the real model scale
behaviour either for a ship or part of it. Meanwhile, mathematical approaches will be
concentrated on modelling the behaviour of a ship.
Asen (2014) and Zhang et al. (2006) said the rapid growth of Computational Fluid
Dynamics (CFD) in the past fifty years has opened another practical application in
analysing and predicting the ship hull performance. There are two different type of CFD,
namely commercial software and open source software. However, in this study fully
workflow packaged of Open Source Software in predicting and analyzing the ship hull
performance will be used.
According to Shen and Wan (2013) and Orihara and Miyata (2003), the governing
equations of fluid flow are solved by numerical method. They also mentioned, with CFD the
free surface is treated by Volume of Fluid (VOF) in OpenFOAM software and the
turbulence model for ship hull performance cases is modelled with k − ω SST method.
Besides that, the wave pattern of the ship model will be observed based on kelvin wave
theory.
Noblesse et al. (2016) stated the waves created depend on the shape or speed of a
ship hull. Lastly, multiple workflow sets of Open Source software (OSS) will be generated
in this study starting from pre-processing, after that solver and until post-processing stage.
Different kind of software will be used in the study such as OpenFOAM, Salome, FreeShip
Plus and others.
7
2.2 Ship Resistance
According to Molland et al. (2017), the total resistance of a ship is made up of

form of the hull naked resistance, resistance of appendages and air resistance of the hull
above the water. Molland et al. (2017) also mentioned if we considering on the forces that
acting towards the wetted surface of the vessel, the total resistance of a ship is the total of
the tangential shear forces and normal pressure forces. Meanwhile, when considering on
energy dissipation, the total resistance of a ship is sum up of the energy dissipated from
ship’s wakes and the energy dissipated from the creation of the waves. As shown in Figure
2.1 below is the basic components of the ship total resistance.
Figure 2.1 Basic components of ship total resistance (Molland et al., 2017).
Lindholdt et al (2015) said the frictional resistance has a high proportion of the ship
total resistance which are up to 70% to 90% for slow speed ship and up to 40% for high
8
speed ship. Meanwhile, the wave making resistance for any type or size of ship should
be less than 50%. However, for high speed vessel it can reach 60% for wave making
resistance. These highlighted to show the significant of each component to the ship total
resistance.
Wave making resistance is a function of Froude number which varies due to the
length and velocities of a ship. Meanwhile, frictional resistance is a function of Reynolds
number which affected by the surface friction. These showed at low speed of a ship, the
frictional resistance will dominate while at high speed of a ship the wave making
resistance becomes significant to the total resistance as shown in Figure 2.2 below. Other
than that, as shown in Figure 2.2 below the skin friction resistance, or friction form
resistance, is also a major contributor to the total resistance. This is the friction between
the hull and the water. The form drag in the Figure 2.2 below or called the
pressure resistance or hydrodynamic drag is due to flow separations of the water around
the hull creating an adverse pressure field.
Figure 2.2 Graph of resistance against Froude number (Lindholdt et al., 2015).
Molland et al. (2017) stated air resistance can be defined as the resistance caused
by the flow of air (no wind) inflict on the ship when operated. Faltinsen (2005) said air
resistance is affected by several components which are the geometry shape of the ship
above the waterline, a total area of the ship exposed to the air itself and the ship’s speed
9
through the water. Therefore, high air resistance inflicted to the ship that has a high hull
and a large amount of sail area while low air resistance inflicted to the ship that has a low
hull and a small amount of sail area. Usually, the resistance that caused due to air is
typically 4-8% of the total resistance but may be as much as 10% in high sided ships such
as aircraft carriers.
Molland et al. (2017) proved that the resistance of a ship can be summarized as ship
total resistance is sum up of the wave making resistance, frictional resistance and air
resistance. In Figure 2.3, shows the total variation of resistance against ship speed. After
that, as shows in Figure 2.4, Yousefi et al. (2013) explained the behaviour of ship hull
resistance can be divided into three conventional modes of motion which are displacement
mode, semi planing mode (transition) and planing mode. Lastly, the Figure 2.4 also shows
the "hump region" which is there a transition between displacement and planing modes.
Figure 2.3 Graph components of ship resistance against ship speed (Harvald, 1983).
10
Figure 2.4 Behaviour of ship hull resistance against Froude number (Marshall, 2002)
2.3 Planing Hull
According to Yousefi et al. (2013), planing hull is a marine vessel supported by

hydrodynamic pressures at high speed motion. This characteristic of high speed vessels
made planing hull popular and it used for military, recreation and racing purpose. Yousefi
et al. (2013) concerned that the procedure of designing and analysing of planing hull is
crucial because of the high performances and high speed requirements. This statement
supported by Kim et al. (2013) who stated that a good resistance and seakeeping
performance is salient for a planing vessel for the safe operations in the rough seas area.
In addition, Kim et al. (2013) stated that the resistance and seakeeping performance for a
planing hull is depending on the shape hull forms.
Figure 2.5 shows the basic forces that acting towards wetted surface of planing
hull, where τ is for trim angle. Meanwhile, FP is the pressure force over the wetted surface
and FH is the hydrostatic force acting at the centre of the hull. Molland et al. (2017) said
for planing hull vessel, trim angle is very important and it has significant influence on
resistance. The efficient of planing hull has a small value of trim angle. Svahn (2009)
mentioned design for planing hull has trim about 4◦ to 5◦ degree and this trim is the most
11
conventional for planing hull. Yousefi et al. (2013) and Molland et al. (2017) shared same
thought, as the speed of planing hull increase, the wetted length of planing hull is decrease
and the hydrodynamic lift is increase which is FH << FP.
Figure 2.5 Planing hull forces (Molland et al., 2017).
In addition, Hassan et al. (2008) and Ahmad et al. (2017) stated forces that acting
on the planing hull surface is the numbers of drag that affected by the wetted surface,
buoyant force, transom pressure, weight of the vessel and air resistance. Other than that,
the hydrodynamic force is considered as the strong influential parameter in predicting the
hull resistance of a planing hull. Garland et al. (2012) and Ahmad et al. (2017) proved
this statement by states hydrodynamic force lead to the changes of draught and
displacement of the planing hull.
However, there are three different shape or type of planing hull which are pre-
planing, semi-planing and fully planing hull. These three shape or type of hull can be
differentiated by the speed regimens that can the drive hull shape. Almeter (1993) and
Yousefi et al. (2013) explained for pre-planing hull type as show in Figure 2.6 and 2.7, the
speed for pre-planing hull is equal to the Froude number approximately up to 2.5. Almeter
(1993) said pre-planing hull also including hump speed and the bulk of the planing hull is
supported by the buoyancy of the hull design.
12
Figure 2.6 Pre-planing hull (Almeter, 1993).
Figure 2.7 Pre-planing hull (Almeter, 1993).
After that, semi-planing hull as shown in Figure 2.8 and 2.9, Almeter (1993) and
Yousefi et al. (2013) explained the speed of semi-planing hull approximately equal to 2.5
until 4.0 of Froude number. This hull speed of range is supported by both hydrostatic and
dynamic forces. Hence, when the speed increases, the dynamic forces also increase,
meanwhile hydrostatic forces and dynamic trim is decreasing.
Figure 2.8 Semi-planing hull (Almeter, 1993)

13
Figure 2.9 Semi-planing hull (Almeter, 1993).
Lastly, for fully planing hull the speed is approximately equal to 4.0 and above of
Froude number. Almeter (1993) stated at this range number of Froude the planing hull
weight is fully supported by the dynamic forces. The trim at the speed tends to be much
lower than at hump speed. The Figure 2.10 and 2.11 below are representing the fully
planing hull design.
Figure 2.10 Fully planing hull (Almeter, 1993).
Figure 2.11 Fully planing hull (Almeter, 1993).
14
2.4 Semi-displacement Hull
Giles (2009) give a brief definition of semi-displacement hull which known as

semi-planing hull. Giles (2009) said semi-displacement hull is used to increase the
amount of storage and tankage. Munson (2012) mentioned this semi-displacement hull
shape is normally in between the displacement and planing hull. In addition, Broadhurst
(1989) explained that the semi-planing hull has flatter hull section that make it partially
lift and the weight of the vessel is supported by buoyancy. Same as planing, intervention
of semi-planing hull is to decrease the drag and increase the speed of the hull but not
as much as planing.
Reynolds (2003) supported this statement by mentioned intervention of the

semi-displacement hull significantly to reduce the wave making resistance at high
speed range. Tanaka et al. (1991) and Migoette and Hoppe (1999) said the range speed
of semi-displacement hull is about 1.5 to 2.5. However, Perry et al. (2009) said the
semi-displacement hull operate efficiently about 0.3 to 0.35 of Froude number which
the most convenient speed for the passenger and crew on board and Giles (2009) states
at these speed the ship hull produces a big pressure at the bottom of the hull and at the
stern section there has hydrodynamic lifting. Figure 2.12 and 2.13 shows the example
ship drawing of semi-displacement hull.
Figure 2.12 Body plan of semi displacement hull (Giles, 2009).
15
Figure 2.13 Side view of semi displacement hull (Giles, 2009).
2.5 Ship Wave Pattern
According to Pethiyagoda (2016), when a ship moves at constant speed through

calm it generates a wake. Lord (1887) was the one who explained the wave phenomenon and
showed that the wedge angle is constant and not dependent to the boat velocity.
Meanwhile, Rabaud and Moisy (2014) states ship moving on calm water generates waves
which presenting in a V-shaped pattern as shown in Figure 2.14.
Figure 2.14 The wake image on the water surface (Rabaud and Moisy, 2014).
Mohammad (2015) said as drag is a crucial factor in designing a ship hull

form, the study of wave drag is important because of wave drag is the one of main sources
of drag on a ship and the other one is called viscous drag. Based on the observation, the
larger the size of wake generated by a ship, the larger the drag force acting on the ship.
Therefore, the simulation process for various different ship hull form can help ship
designer to minimize the wave drag, in order to minimize the total of drag force. Since
then, Michell (1898), Tuck (1989) and Havelock (1919) said the computation of wave drag
has increase considerable interest. However, there is still a challenge for naval architects.
16
Rabaud and Moisy (2014) explained for a ship that have Froude number in the
range 0.2 to 0.5, the major part of the hydrodynamic drag is due to the wave drag. After
that, Wu et al. (2019) said for the high value of Froude number such as = 1.5, the wave
pattern appears usually divergent waves. Divergent waves mostly apparent inside the
transition of the kelvin wake due to the interference. Meanwhile, at the low Froude number
such as = 0.2, Wu et al. (2019) said the wave pattern appears outside the transition of the
kelvin wake.
In addition, Rabaud and Moisy (2014) concluded the large Froude number, a
decreased wave drag is observed. Jiayi et al. (2015) also mentioned a ship hull will not
create a ship waves longer that its length. According to classical analysis, Rabaud and
Moisy (2014) said the half angle of wave fix to be equal to 19.47◦, only wave length and
wave amplitude change with the velocity.
Kelvin Wake Pattern
According to Thomson (1887) and Pethiyagoda et al. (2014), the wave pattern
formed by a ship in deep water commonly remain at angle of 19.5 degrees for half- angle
as shown in Figure 2.15. This wake pattern known as kelvin wake pattern which explained
first mathematically by Lord Kelvin (1879) written as,
𝜔 = √𝑔𝑘
(2.1)
where g is the strength of the gravity field, ω is the angular frequency in radians
per second and, k is the angular wavenumber in radians per metre.
The equation (2.1) follows from the dispersion relation of deep-water waves.
"Deep" which means that the depth is greater than half of the wavelength. The two
parameters of velocity importance in wake pattern are ν and c. ν is the relative velocity of
the water and the surface object that causes the wake. Meanwhile c is the phase velocity
of a wave which vary with the wave frequency.
17
In classical analysis, Wu et al. (2019) also stated wave pattern is consisted of two
systems, which called transverse and divergent waves as shown in figure 2.15.
Figure 2.15 Kelvin ship wake theory (Bertram, 2011).
The kelvin wake pattern appears inside the wedge with half angle which equal
to 19.47° as shown mathematically in equation (2.2) and (2.3).
8
𝑐𝑜𝑠 2 𝜃 ° = (2.2)
9
1
tan 𝜃 ° = (2.3)
√8
Wu et al. (2019) also states Kelvin’s wake is not dependent to the ship length,
not dependent on the depth of the ship submerged and Kelvin’s wake is independent to
the Froude number. However, based on Rabaud et al. (2014), the wave pattern appears
is greatly influence by the Froude number and the value of Froude number is influenced
by the length and the speed of the ship as shown in equation (2.4) which v represent
velocity in x-direction and L represent length of ship.
18
𝑣
𝐹𝑛 =
√𝑔𝐿 (2.4)
where Fn is the Froude number, g is the strength of the gravity field, ν is the velocity
in x-direction and L is the length of ship.
2.6 Apparatus and Open Source Software
Fitzgerald et al. (2019) stated that the open source software (OSS) ecosystems such
as Linux have captured the attention of researchers and have a huge impact to the
computing systems and society. According to Fitzgerald et al. (2019), research on the open
source software (OSS) has substantially expanded for almost two decades and its has
popularity. Robles et al. (2019) said this open source software (OSS) has conquered the
software world and today some of this open source software (OSS) have become
mainstream in software engineering. Since this open source software (OSS) have been
expanded for almost two decades in computing systems and society as state above, there a
lot of research project have been performed by using open source software (OSS).
In this study, the ship hull performance was performed using complete set
workflow of open source software (OSS) from pre-processing until post-processing stage.
Based on previous study, Teixeira et al. (2019) also has performed a numerical modelling
of resin process that applied to the small vessel hulls using complete set workflow of open
source software (OSS). In Teixeira et al. (2019) research, they used Blender software to
build the 3D hull geometry, Gmsh software to discretise the 3D hull geometry by creating
a regular mesh, OpenFOAM software as a main solver and ParaView software was used
in results post-processing.
Pre-processor
Pre-processing stage is the beginner stage in Computational Fluid Dynamics

(CFD) workflow. The pre-processing stage was divided into two parts which are modelled
part and mesh generation part. Pre-processor software is used to model or remodel the
19
geometry and act as mesh generator. Examples of pre-processor software in mechanical
engineering area are FreeCAD, VariCAD, FreeShip Plus and Gmsh.
FreeCAD
According to Falck (2012), FreeCAD are building in purposed of modelling tool

which focusing on engineering world especially for Mechanical Engineering and Product
design. Riegel (2012) stated that FreeCAD is a complete development of 3D CAD modeler
in Open Source software. Riegel (2012) also shared the same information with Falck (2012)
which is he said that FreeCAD is a CAD software that directly aimed to mechanical
engineering, product design and the features is look like CatiaV4 and SolidWorks in
commercial software.
FreeCAD is one of the complete CAD packaged in open source software and act as
pre-processor in CFD project. Riegel (2012) stated in FreeCAD’s manual, FreeCAD
software is multiplatform which means it also can run on Windows, Mac OS and surely at
Linux platforms. Figure 2.16 below is the start page for FreeCAD software.
Figure 2.16 Start page in FreeCAD software.
20
Next is workbenches, which are groups of tools in FreeCAD that grouped together
based on the specialty of the interface controls. This Workbench interface is the most
important control of the FreeCAD software. Examples of workbench selector are Draft,
FEM, Arch and Ship as shown in Figure 2.17 below.
Figure 2.17 Workbench feature in FreeCAD.
Last but not least, there several common import and export file types in FreeCAD
such as STEP, IGES, DXF, DWG and STL. STEP file types are the most faithful import and
export file types format that’s available in FreeCAD. Havre (2013) stated that in FreeCAD,
STEP file types support solid geometry and it can be used whenever possible. Meanwhile,
for DXF file types only support 2D data either in import and export process. Lastly, STL is a
mesh based format which used for 3D solid geometry which will be converted to mesh on
export.
VariCAD
Baxter (2002) said that VariCAD is a system that provide all basic features for
contractors and designer who work in engineering world. This VariCAD also are included
3D modeling and 2D drawing and the system is very customizable and widely open. The
modules that are included in the system are solid modeling, mechanical part and symbol
libraries, parametric construction and etc.
21
Figure 2.18 is the VariCAD layout. The lower part of the layout is the command
window for communication. Each VariCAD control can be called by using a command in
which the command has minimum three characters and maximum until six characters.
Figure 2.18 VariCAD layout in Linux.
FreeShip Plus
FreeShip Plus is an open source software used in surface modeling program for
the design of ships. However, this FreeShip Plus software is designed for only thin hull
ship type. Ueng et al. (2008) thin ship hull can be defined based on their lengths (L),
widths (B), drafts (D) and the wave length (λ) of the ship. The thin hull ship shapes satisfy
the following constraints:
𝐵≪𝐿
(2.5)
𝐷 𝐷
= (2.6)
𝜆 𝐿
22
FreeShip Plus software feature modelling a ship surface. Besides that, FreeShip
Plus also can act as a post-processing since it can calculate ship resistance, design
hydrostatics and etc. After that, table 2.1 below is the list of file format that can be
imported or exported into FreeShip Plus software.
Table 2.1 The list of file format that can be import and export into Freeship Plus
software.
File Type Import Export

Part √
Carlson .hul file √
Import/Export .fef file √ √
Surface √
Chines √
VRML √
PlyCad files √
Michlet waves √ √
IGES √
DXF 3D mesh √
Lastly, FreeShip Plus software allows the user to view the completed format of a
lines plan of the ship. The lines plan of the ship can be viewed in two different modes which
are wireframe mode and the filled mode as shown in Figure 2.19 below:
23
Figure 2.19 The lines plan of the ship in FreeShip Plus (FreeShip Plus Manual).
Gmsh
According to Geuzaine et al. (2009), Gmsh is an open source software that

containing 3-D element grid mesh generator. Meanwhile, Kortelainen (2009) said that
Gmsh is an open source software that act as modeller and meshing tool for simple
geometric. Geuzaine (2009) also stated that Gmsh software is designed to provide a
fast, light and user friendly meshing tool with parametric input and advanced of
visualization capabilities.
Kortelainen (2009) contend that Gmsh has quite limited geometry creation in
which Gmsh can only modelled very simple geometry. He also said any imported CAD
geometries cannot be modified in Gmsh and only can further meshed. Meshing
capabilities in Gmsh, there are different operation meshing modes for different modelling
phases.
24
The operation mode can be setup from main menu window’s as shown in Figure
2.20. In order to use an imported CAD geometry, the model geometry needs to be created
.geo* file. Although the Gmsh software has limited import and export capabilities of read
CAD geometries file types format. It can only read the following file types format: IGES,
STEP, BREP and Gmsh own format which is GEO format.
Figure 2.20 Operation mode setup in Gmsh software.
Lastly, Kortelainen (2009) said that to use Gmsh with OpenFOAM there are two
ways to use mesh generated either in native Gmsh mesh format and using OpenFOAM
gmshToFoam utility or using I-deas UNV format or OpenFOAMIdeasUnvToFoam utility.
Salome
Kortelainen (2009) stated that Salome is a software that contains separate working
modes for geometry creation, mesh generating, solver and post processor. This Salome
software is an open source software under the GNU Lesser General Public License
(LGPL) which form for several Linux distributions and in source code. According to
Wang et al.(2015), Salome software is a user-friendly and effective pre- processing tool.
Salome supports the following solid geometry file types format such as IGES,
STEP and BREP in import activity. Besides that, the solid geometry that modelled in
25
Salome can be exported in IGES, STEP formats and STL file format. The mesh can be
exported from Salome in STL file format which known as mesh file format and accept by
all kind of software.
Kortelainen (2009) said that in Salome there is a good control of the mesh topology
in general. The mesh can be manually defined by the user and if there any anomalies in
mesh generated the user can manually fix this even. Salome software provides an
automatic mesh generation using tetrahedron element which relatively fast with both basic
methods, 2D surface and the 3D meshing (using Netgen meshing routine). However, the
meshing activity may require a lot of computer memory. In order to avoid the meshing
process becomes slow, we have to start from very coarse mesh density and increase it
gradually to reach the desired mesh density.
2.7 Solver
Mostly based on the previous study, the main solver that have been used in ship hull
performance in open source software (OSS) is OpenFOAM software. On the other hand,
Jasak (2009) said a numerical tool kit is used to assemble various physics solvers and each
solver is a stand-alone tool such as interDyMFoam, interFoam and icoFoam.
According to Garcia et al. (2020), the OpenFOAM solver have been used in their
studies to perform the hydrodynamics simulation in simulated an incompressible and two-
phase flow cases. Garcia et al. (2020) also stated that the top-level solvers in OpenFOAM
software is closely to the capabilities of commercial CFD software.
In addition, Liu (2020) also performed the numerical simulations using the
interFoam solver for static cases and interDyMFoam solver for dynamic cases that was
packages in OpenFOAM software. Lastly, Liu (2020) state that the interFoam and
interDyMFoam solver are incompressible multiphysics CFD solvers which based on the
volume of fluid (VOF) method.
26
OpenFOAM
System directory files contained the controlDict text file which there are entries
regarding the simulation settings. The simulation settings that control for what time step
to start and stop the simulation. Besides that, Jasak et al. (2007) stated the settings also
control time step to write the temporary results also known as time dumps. This control
setting is a steady state solver which refers to number of iterations instead of seconds of
simulation time. Once the solution is converged, the data can be used for analysis.
However, when the simulation starts OpenFOAM produces information regarding

the solving of differential equations such as Navier – Stokes equation which can deduce
whether the solution has converged or not. The first information is the initial residual
which the initial residue should be approached zero when the solution is convergence.
According to Jasak et al. (2007), second is the final residual is always remained small and
will always be less than the initial residual. The last one is the number iterations will show
how many times the matrix was solved for the current equation. The number iteration
should start to decrease automatically once the solution approach convergence.
Mesh generation is an important part of OpenFOAM. The accuracy and

convergence of the solutions depending to the mesh quality. However, OpenFOAM has its
own built mesh generation utility called blockMesh. BlockMesh is text based and works
by defining hexahedral blocks in a local, right-handed coordinate system. This block can
build more complex geometries. There is one challenge with the blockMesh which is
keeping track of the multiple coordinate points within a complex geometry. This problem
can be negated by using a CAD software to produce the complex geometry described with
STL surfaces. OpenFOAM can read these STL files and convert them into mesh as shown
in Figure 2.21. This solution can be used as the technique or strategy for this project.
27
Figure 2.21 Mesh generation in OpenFOAM.
2.8 Measuring The Maturity of Open Source Software
According to Houaich et al. (2015), the methods studied in the evaluation of Open
Source software are provided certain number of criteria such as the interoperability of the
software and model development on the software.Cristescu et al. (2015) stated that there
are three categories of quality models for software that are definition of the model,
assessment model and prediction model. Houaich et al. (2015) also stated that the
interoperability of the software is one of the important attributes of the software quality.
Interoperability has become necessary to select open source software. The interoperability
validate their ability to function and connect with other software.
Houaich et al. (2015) said that there are five level maturity for a model software. In
this study were used two different level of maturity, first level is strict meaning that
28
software stick to a particular set of rules and second is flexible which mean easy to modify
to adapt to different circumstance.
Lastly, according to Houaich et al. (2015) the assessment model are divided into
two categories which are practical and reliable. Practical meaning that the software is easy
to understand and easy to use. Meanwhile, reliable meaning that the software will work
properly in a specified condition.
2.9 The Continuity Equation
The theoretical background of this governing equation was elaborated by Asen

(2014). Asen (2014) stated that the main function of CFD is to solve the governing
equation of fluid flow which are the continuity equation and the Navier-Stokes equations.
These two equations will develop a closed system for the pressure and the velocity
components into three directions x, y and z direction.
Park et al. (2013) states with CFD the continuity equation or the conversation of
mass and conversation of momentum were solved to obtain the velocity and pressure
fields. The equation of the conversation of mass obtained from White et al. (2006), can be
written as
𝜕(𝜌)
+ ∇. (ρ𝑈 ) = 0 (2.7)
𝜕𝑡
where ρ is fluid density and U is the velocity vector. Meanwhile, the equation of
the conversation of momentum can be written as
𝜕(𝜌𝑈)
+ ∇. (ρ𝑈𝑈 ) = ∇P + ∇. 𝜏̅ (2.8)
𝜕𝑡
29
where P is the static pressure, UU is the tensor whose i j − th component Ui U j which is represent
x, y direction and (𝜏̅) is turbulent stress tensor.
2.10 The Navier - Stokes Equations
In general, Senocak and Iaccarino (2005) said there are two methods approaches
in representing the free surface in a Navier - Stokes equation simulation which are
interfaced tracking and interface capturing methods. Both of these methods aim to
compute the wave profile precise and accurately. Senocak and Iaccarino (2005) also stated
this is because, in the calculations of the drag that acting on the ship hull motion there also
wetted surface area appears on it.
According to Li et al. (2000) and Rhee and Stern (2001), interface tracking
methods are a kinematics boundary condition that applied on the free surface and the
equations are only solved for the water phase. Hence this method is not efficient for a ship
hull that have high Froude number flow due to it will break waves in high amplitude and
then the computational grid has also to conform to the free surface shape. Meanwhile,
interface capturing method is more flexible for free-surface flow cases. The interface
capturing method will solve for both phases, water and air.
Thus, the Navier - Stokes equation is written as
∂V (2.9)
ρ[ + (V · ∇)V ] = −∇P + ρg + µ∇2V
where P is pressure term and µ is fluid viscosity. Meanwhile this term of ρg is

represent body force that are the external forces act on the fluid such as gravity and µ∇2 V
term is viscosity that controlled velocity diffusion.
30
2.11 Turbulence
The most two equation turbulent models commonly used in naval architecture are
the standard k - ε model and the k - ω model. In these two equation models, Frisk and
Tegehall (2015) state that to obtain the turbulent viscosity, the transport equations for the
turbulent kinetic energy and its dissipation, ε or ω, are used.
According to Wilcox (2008), the standard k - ε model is good equation in

prediction free flows with small pressure gradients but limits its applicability to high
Reynolds number flows. Other than that, Moore (2010) observed that the standard k - ε
model cannot be used to describe the wake behind a moving hull accurately. Meanwhile
based on Frisk and Tegehall (2015), the k - ω model is valid in the low turbulent Reynolds
number region close to walls, however the k- ω model is sensitive to the choice of
boundary conditions and initial conditions.
Axner (2014) said that both of turbulence models should be used together to
improve prediction of the principal shear stresses which called k - ω SST model at the hull
surface and in the free stream outside the boundary layer. After that, Frisk and Tegehall
(2015) figure out that k - ε or k - ω models given results that differ from the experimental
result and proved that the SST k - ω model shown a better result for complex flows.
Turbulence Parameters
Previous study, the turbulence parameters that will be used in this study is
Reynolds-averaged stress (RAS) SST k - ω equation model. The values of turbulence
parameters such as k and ω values in OpenFOAM solver will be calculated and according
to Islam et al. (2018), the turbulence parameters were calculated as following equation:
−1
I = 0.16 ·𝑅𝑒 8 (2.10)
31
𝑚2 3 (2.11)
𝜅( 𝑠 2 ) = 2 (𝑢 · 𝐼)2
𝐶𝜇 = 0.09 (2.12)
1
𝜔 (𝑆) =
√𝑘 (2.13)
1
𝐶𝜇 4 · 𝑙
where I is the turbulence intensity and the default value of the turbulence intensity
in CFD software is 0.05 or 5%, k is the turbulence kinetic energy per unit mass, Cµ is an
empirical constant and ω is the turbulence specific dissipation rate.
2.12 The Volume of Fluid (VOF) Method
The volume of fluid method is used to approximate free boundaries in finite

difference numerical simulations. Hirt and Nichols (1981) said this method is simple but
powerful and more flexible. Hirt and Nichols (1981) also said it efficient than other
methods for treating complicated free boundary configurations. Meanwhile Sugalski
(2014) state that a volume of fluid is a numerical technique to track and localize the
interface of different fluids in CFD.
In this volume of fluid method, a phase fraction used to determine the amount of
each fluid of the cells. In this case study Hirt and Nichols (1981) and Sugalski (2014)
shared the same thought which is floating object at sea, the area that containing water will
32
have an α-value equal to 1 and the area contain air will have α-value equal to 0. Sugalski
(2014) mentioned the phase fraction α can be written as
𝜕𝛼
+ ∇(αV ) = 0 (2.14)
∂t
where t is time, V is velocity.
After that, to determine the density of the air or water mixture within each area can using
Equation 2.15, to solve the Navier-Stokes equations, the phase fraction α is used written as
below,
ρ = αρi + (1 − α)ρg (2.15)
𝜕𝛼
+ ∇(αVi) = 0 (2.16)
∂t
𝜕𝛼
+ ∇((1 − α)Vg) = 0 (2.17)
∂t
V = αVi + (1 − 𝛼)Vg (2.18)
where ρi is the density of water, ρg is the density of air and term of i, g represents
liquid and gas phase.
An example of two fluids divided using the volume of fluid method is shown in
Figure 2.22, where the water filled area with α = 1 are red and the air area with 𝛼 = 0 are
33
blue. Figure 2.22 also shown the water level or α-value of the surface cells. However,
Refvik (2016) contend the VOF method only calculates free-surface and not an exact
water level for the floating object.
Figure 2.22 Visualization from ParaView of the phase fraction.
The red surface is α = 1 while the blue surface is α = 0 and white areas with 0 < α <1
represent interface.
2.13 Boundary Condition
The boundaries of the computational domain used in the study are illustrated in
Figure 2.23. Frisk and Tegehall (2015) said the velocity of incident air and water was set
to the hull speed and the turbulent flow variables were set by specifying values of the
turbulent intensity and turbulent viscosity ratio at the inlet area.
Figure 2.23 Boundaries of the computational domain.
34
After that the outlet located behind the hull was set to a pressure outlet. The
boundary conditions are:
𝜕𝑈 (2.19)
𝑇𝑜𝑝 ∶ = 0, 𝑝 = 0, 𝛼 = 0
𝜕𝑛
𝜕𝑝 𝜕𝛼 (2.20)
𝐻𝑢𝑙𝑙 ∶ 𝑈 = 0, = 0, =0
𝜕𝑛 𝜕𝑛
𝜕𝑝 (2.21)
𝐼𝑛𝑙𝑒𝑡 ∶ 𝑈 = 𝑈∞ , = 0, 𝛼01
𝜕𝑛
𝜕𝑈 𝜕𝛼 (2.22)
𝑂𝑢𝑙𝑒𝑡 ∶ = 0, 𝑝 = 0, =0
𝜕𝑛 𝜕𝑛
where n is the outer normal vector and p is the pressure.
The computational domain was built as a rectangular block around the hull in deep
water. A large domain created to avoid the effect on water flow near the ship hull. Figure
2.24 shows the dimensions of domain with the minimum requirements based on ITTC
(2011a). In Figure 2.24, the domain’s dimensions are expressed in terms of the overall
hull length, LOA.
Figure 2.24 Minimum dimension of computational domain by ITTC (2011a).
35
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
The software integration into the ship hull resistance analysis will be follow
through "supported open source" model. It will be packaged the way Ubuntu Mate Linux
is packaged and then it will be distributed at OSCAE Inititive laboratory. It will be build
included utilities (FreeShip Plus and Michlet), pre-processor (FreeCAD and Gmsh),
solvers (OpenFOAM) and post-processors (Salome and ParaView). All of this software
will work on Linux platforms and are easy to install.
The following procedures will be used in the research of open source software
integration in hull form design and evaluation of hull resistance performance:
1. Selected numbers of model at MTC will be remodelled into Computer Aided

Design (CAD) software for surface modelling.
2. Obtained calculation of hydrostatic data model result from Computer Aided

Design (CAD) software and then compared against model testing hydrostatic
data results which done on towing tank years ago.
3. Exported the model into Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) software for
the resistance result, far-field wave elevation view and wave pattern from top
view.
4. Further hull design evaluation and analyzation will be based on CFD analysis
before being recycled back to step 1 for fine-tuning.
5. At the end of the study, the best of the combination of OSS will be
recommended and details, manuals on implementing workflows based on this
combination will be clearly written on the thesis.
37
This combination of Open Source software (OSS) is to find an optimal
combination of OSS in hull form design process and hull resistance performance test.
Verification part will be done by comparing the results from OSS combinations against
towing tank experiment result.
Last but not least, from the trained skills and helpful manuals the study foresees a
viable commercial opportunity to push OSS to ship building industry’s small and medium
enterprise (SME) who lack support and budget.
3.2 Flow Chart and Taguchi Designs of Research Study
Various combinations of pre-processor (PREP) + solver (SOLV) + post- processor

(POST) as shown in Figure 3.1 will be put through the steps and set up their input data
from step 1 to 4 as above. After that, most combinations of the solution will be packaged
with a solver which is OpenFOAM. The multiple combination of computer aided
engineering into ship hull resistance in this study will be probably packaged as shown in
Table 3.1. The multiple combination of Open Source software into ship hull resistance in
this study will be probably packaged as shown in Figure 3.2.
Figure 3.1 Ship modelling and analysis flow process.

38
Figure 3.2 The multiple combination of Open Source software (OSS).
Table 3.1 CAE workflow and Software setting.
Software/ WorkFlow 1 2 3 4
Pre-processing FreeShip FreeCAD FreeShip Plus Rhinoceros 5
Plus Blender Blender Gmsh Gmsh
Solver OpenFOAM OpenFOAM FreeShip Plus OpenFOAM
Post-processing ParaView ParaView FreeShip Plus ParaView
3.3 Description of The Selected Numbers of Ship Models
The ship models studied in this thesis is the ship models that developed by Marine
Technology Centre (MTC) which own 20 - year collection of model testing data. The ship
models that have been selected for this study are passenger ship, patrol boat and fast
interceptor craft (MTC 112). The main features of the ship geometry are reported below.
These selected ship models have been tested in towing tank MTC that have a collection
of experimental data in MTC, which is essential to validate numerical models.
39
The passenger ship was developed by Marine Technology Centre (MTC) which
own collection of experimental data of towing tank in MTC called MTC 092 and the lines
plan of this passenger ship model as presented in Appendix A. The hydrostatic data of the
passenger ship as reported below in Table 3.2 and the total resistance result in towing tank
test of this passenger ship as shown in Table 3.3. In this thesis, data provided by the Marine
Technology Centre (MTC) are considered to validate a CFD analysis.
Table 3.2 Main dimensions of the full scale passenger ship (MTC 092) and its
model.
Description Ship Model

Scale factor (λ) 13.5 1
Length between waterline [m] 36.979 2.7400
Breadth (B) [m] 6.924 0.5130
Draft (T ) [m] 1.650 0.1220
Wetted surface [m2] 274.200 1.5050
Displacement [tonne] 238.060 0.0944
Table 3.3 Resistance test results of the passenger ship (MTC 092) model values.
Speed, Vs (knot) Vm (m/s) Fn RT (N)

14 1.96 0.38 30.77
16 2.24 0.43 43.73
18 2.52 0.49 57.44
20 2.80 0.54 65.31
22 3.08 0.59 73.30
Experimental data will always refer to a scaled model of the passenger ship hull,
passenger ship model of MTC 092 presents a length between waterline of 2.740 m,
corresponding to a geometric scale factor λ of 1:13.5. This passenger ship (MTC 092) is
high speed ship model and designated to run at speed of 18 knots with the tank water
temperature 22.7◦C.
40
Next is the patrol boat model which called MTC 101. The lines plan of this patrol
boat model as shown in Appendix B. The particular data of the patrol boat geometry are
reported in Table 3.4. This patrol boat have been tested in towing tank experiment and
have a collection of experimental data as shown in Table 3.5, which is essential to validate
numerical models. This patrol boat (MTC 101) is designated to run at speed of 18 knots
with temperature of the tank water is 22.7°C and categorized as a high-speed boat.
Table 3.4 Main dimensions of the full scales patrol boat (MTC 101) and its model.

Scale factor (λ) 20 1
Breadth (B) [m] 7.00 0.35
Draft (T ) [m] 1.89 0.09
Wetted surface 256.52 0.64
Table 3.5 Resistance test results of the patrol boat (MTC 101) model values.
Speed, Vs (knot) Vm (m/s) Fn RT (N)

14 1.61 0.3827 6.9621
16 1.84 0.4374 9.8683
18 2.07 0.4920 12.2775
20 2.30 0.5467 14.6276
22 2.53 0.6014 16.4941
Lastly is the fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) model. The lines plan of the fast
interceptor craft model as shown in Appendix C. The particular data of the fast interceptor
craft geometry are reported in Table 3.6. Meanwhile, the total resistance result for towing
tank test of this ship model presented in Table 3.7. This fast interceptor craft is designated
41
to run at speed 16 knots with temperature of the tank water is 22.7◦C and categorized as
high -speed ship.
Table 3.6 Main dimensions of the full scale fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) and its
model.

Scale factor (λ) 10 1
Length Overall [m] 11.0 1.1
Breadth (B) [m] 2.2480 0.2248
Draft Amidships (T ) [m] 0.5250 0.0525
Draft at AP (T ) [m] 0.473 0.0473
Draft at FP (T ) [m] 0.577 0.0577
Wetted surface 14.9830 0.14983
Trim angle (+ve by stem) 0.5911 0.5911
[degree]
Table 3.7 Resistance test results of the fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) model values.
Speed, Vs (knot) Vm (m/s) Heave (mm) Pitch (degrees) RT (N)

10 1.612 -7.42897 3.13974 4.0503
12 1.960 -3.33628 3.47289 4.8686
13 2.134 -1.36796 3.96233 5.8042
15 2.469 2.17827 4.26292 6.4775
16 2.647 4.00370 4.54585 6.8452
17 2.758 6.94022 4.74228 6.7537
18 2.969 9.37917 5.39876 7.4589
42
3.4 The Workflow Process of The Passenger Ship Model (MTC 092) by Using
Open Source Software (OSS)
The passenger ship will be running into five different speeds which are 14, 16, 18,
20 and 22 knots. All those five speeds will go through into three different workflows which
will be explained in details in the following subsections. Besides that, this ship will be run
into three different time interval which are 100, 1000 and 4000. There is no basis specific
of time interval selected, it just multiple number and the used of three different time interval
to find the stability of unstable numerical methods for model convection or wave
phenomena. Lastly, the integration of workflow process for this passenger ship model by
using Open Source Software (OSS) in ship hull resistance analysis will be done through
the process as shown in Figure 3.3.
Figure 3.3 Workflow of the passenger ship hull resistance analysis.
43
Workflow 1 Process for The Passenger Ship Model
In this subsection, the details steps that have been done in this workflow as shown
in Figure 3.4 below. The workflow shown is difference from Figure 3.3 because there are
addition support software or utilities needed in this workflow. First of all, the lines plan of
this passenger ship (refer to Appendix A) was received in AutoCAD file format which one
of the commercial CAD. After that, the lines plan of this passenger ship will be imported
into FreeCAD software for digitized process and the coordinate will be extracted into XYZ
format in phyton script as shown in Figure 3.4. Lastly, the details explanation on every step
in this workflow process will be explained on the next subsections.
Figure 3.4 CAE workflow 1 process in passenger ship hull form resistance analysis.
44
3.4.1.1 Workflow 1: Pre-Processing for The Passenger Ship Model Geometry
The creation of CAD design for the passenger ship started with 2D lines plan
drawing from AutoCAD software (refer to Appendix A). After that, the 2D lines plan
drawing from AutoCAD software was imported into FreeCAD software as shown in Figure
3.5. Then, the lines plan drawing in FreeCAD software was digitized based on table of offset
format.
Figure 3.5 2D lines plan of the passenger ship in FreeCAD.
After that, the coordinate was extracted into phython script in *.txt file format as
shown in Figure 3.6. Next, the *.txt file was imported into FreeShip Plus software as shown
in Figure 3.7 and the control point from X-axis, Y-axis and Z-axis was moved until the ship
model design followed the lines plan given. Go to the Project menu > Lines plan and then
the lines plan was created as shown in Figure 3.8. Then, the passenger ship hull model in
*.stl file format was exported into Blender software.
45
Figure 3.6 The coordinate of the passenger ship in Phyton Script.
Figure 3.7 The passenger ship model in FreeShip Plus.
Figure 3.8 The lines plan of the passenger ship in FreeShip Plus.
46
Lastly, since the FreeShip Plus export only half hull of ship model as shown in
Figure 3.9 in Blender software and then the half hull ship model was mirrored into full hull
ship model in Blender software as shown in Figure 3.10.
Figure 3.9 Half passenger ship hull form in Blender software.
Figure 3.10 Full passenger ship hull form in Blender software.
47
In meshing stage, the ship model will automatically mesh in the FreeShip Plus
software and to check the meshing condition of the ship model, click Tools > Check model
and it will show the status of the model as shown in Figure 3.11. Besides that, after
completed the full ship hull of the passenger ship model in Blender software, the passenger
ship model was imported into Gmsh software as shown in Figure 3.12. Lastly, result from
Gmsh software shown that the ship model geometry is in a good condition and ready to
import into OpenFOAM software.
Figure 3.11 The condition of the passenger ship in FreeShip Plus.
Figure 3.12 The passenger ship hull model in Gmsh software.
48
Lastly, based on the hydrostatic data of the passenger ship model from towing tank
experiment, the percentage difference between the hydrostatic data from experimental and
hydrostatic data from FreeShip Plus software was calculated. The differences between
these two data as shown in Table 3.8 below:
Table 3.8 The passenger ship hull model hydrostatic data particular differences.
Hydrostatic Data Unit Ship Model FreeShip Plus Model Differences (%)
Displacement t 0.0944 0.094 0.00
Wetted Surface Area m2 1.505 1.470 2.33
WL length m 2.740 2.816 2.77
Beam m 0.513 0.511 0.39
In this workflow process, the passenger ship model will be remodelling in FreeCAD
software known as mechanical CAD software. The used of this FreeCAD software to test
the capability of the mechanical CAD software in modelling the ship geometry. The
workflow process as shown in Figure 3.13 below and the details explanation include the
pictures will be presented on the next subsections.
49
Figure 3.13 CAE workflow 2 process in passenger ship hull form resistance analysis.
3.4.2.1 Workflow 2: Pre-Processing for The Passenger Ship Hull Geometry
First of all, the passenger ship hull model is presented in 2D lines plan drawing in
AutoCAD software. Then, the passenger ship hull model was transformed into 3D ship hull
model in AutoCAD software. After that, the 3D the passenger ship hull model was exported
into FreeCAD software in *.iges file format as shown in Figure 3.14.
50
Figure 3.14 The 3D passenger ship hull model in FreeCAD software.
In FreeCAD software, the passenger ship model was exploded as shown in Figure
3.15 and then the passenger ship hull model had been lofted station by station to make a
half hull of the passenger ship model as shown in Figure 3.16.
Figure 3.15 Explode the 3D passenger ship hull model in FreeCAD software.
51
Figure 3.16 Lofting the 3D passenger ship hull model in FreeCAD software.
The next step is the passenger ship hull model was imported into Blender software
in *.obj file format as shown in Figure 3.17 and then the lofting part of the passenger ship
hull model was joined and mirrored in Blender sofware as shown in Figure 3.18. Lastly,
the condition of the passenger ship hull model has been checked in Gmsh software as shown
in Figure 3.19.
Figure 3.17 Half body of the passenger ship hull model in Blender software.
52
Figure 3.18 Full body of the passenger ship hull model in Blender software.
Figure 3.19 The passenger ship model in Gmsh software.
The workflow 3 process for the passenger ship model fully used FreeShip Plus
software as shown in Figure 3.20. The FreeShip Plus software is a software that allowing
the user to develop a hull form and to calculate hydrostatic, stability and hull performance
such as resistance. The FreeShip Plus software of ship calculations are based on the
systematic serial tests of models of the ships and boats. Meanwhile, the used of Gmsh
software is to check the ship model meshing condition that have been done in FreeShip
Plus software. In order to develop a hull form in FreeShip Plus software, there are several
steps in other CAE software needed as shown in Figure 3.21.
53
Figure 3.20 The workflow 3 process of the passenger ship hull resistance analysis.
Figure 3.21 The CAE workflow 3 for the passenger ship hull resistance analysis.
54
Firstly, the lines plan of this passenger ship hull is presented in AutoCAD file
format as shown in Appendix A. Then, the lines plan was imported into FreeCAD software
for digitized process as shown in Figure 3.22. After that, the coordinate was extracted in
XYZ format in phyton script as shown in Figure 3.23.
Figure 3.22 2D lines plan of the passenger ship in FreeCAD.
Figure 3.23 The coordinate of the passenger ship in Phyton Script.
55
The phyton script was imported into FreeShip Plus and then rearranged the ship
coordinate control point as shown in Figure 3.24 until a ship hull form developed as shown
in Figure 3.25. The next step is the hull form was exported into Gmsh software and the ship
hull meshing was checked as shown in Figure 3.26.
Figure 3.24 The control points of the passenger ship model in FreeShip Plus.
Figure 3.25 The passenger ship model in FreeShip Plus.
56
Figure 3.26 The passenger ship hull model in Gmsh software.
After that, the hydrostatic data of the passenger ship model was calculated in
FreeShip Plus software as shown in Figure 3.27 and compared with the ship hydrostatic data
from towing tank test model as shown in Table 3.9.
Figure 3.27 The hydrostatic data of the passenger ship model in FreeShip Plus.
57
Table 3.9 The passenger ship hull model hydrostatic data particular differences.
WL length m 2.7400 2.816 2.77
Beam m 0.5130 0.511 0.39
The resistance of the passenger ship was calculated by clicked on calculations

menu, clicked on resistance and then clicked calculation for pre-planing or planning hull
since this passenger ship model in planing type hull. Lastly, insert the passenger ship details
as shown in Figure 3.28, choosen the suitable calculation method which is mercier and
savitsky method in this case, clicked on calculator icon and then the result of resistance will
be shown as shown Figure 3.29.
Figure 3.28 The resistance calculation of the passenger ship model in FreeShip Plus.
58
Figure 3.29 The resistance results of the passenger ship model in FreeShip Plus.
3.5 The Workflow Process of The Patrol Boat Model (MTC 101) by Using Open
Source Software (OSS)
The overall workflow of the patrol boat model basically same as the workflow
process of the passenger ship hull model as shown in section 3.4. This patrol boat have
been run into five different values of speed and this ship was designated to run at speed 18
knot. Besides that, in order to improve the simulation data stability, three different value of
time interval have been used which are 100, 1000 and 4000. There is no basis specific of
time interval selected, it just multiple number and the used of three different time interval
to find the stability of unstable numerical methods for model convection or wave
phenomena. Lastly, the flowchart of this patrol boat ship hull resistance analysis have
been drafted as shown in Figure 3.30 below.
59
Figure 3.30 Workflow process of the patrol boat hull form resistance analysis.
In this subsection, steps in setting up the patrol boat model (MTC 101) in the open
source software tools will be presented in details. Same as the passenger ship model, the
lines plan of the patrol boat hull form (refer to Appendix B) was received in AutoCAD file
format which one of the commercial CAD and the lines plan of this patrol boat ship hull
will be imported into open source software CAD for the pre- processing steps. Other than
that, FreeCAD software and phyton script also involved in this workflow for digitize and
extract the coordinate of the lines plan. Then, the open source CAE complete workflow and
its software that used for this patrol boat hull form analysis are as shown in Figure 3.31.
Lastly, the details explanation on every steps in this workflow process will be explained on
the next subsections.
60
Figure 3.31 CAE workflow 1 process in the patrol boat hull form resistance analysis.
61
3.5.1.1 Workflow 1: Pre-Processing for The Patrol Boat Model Geometry
The patrol boat model (MTC 101) geometry is presented in 2D lines plan drawing
in AutoCAD software (refer to Appendix B). After that, the 2D lines plan drawing was
imported into FreeCAD software as shown in Figure 3.32 until Figure 3.34 and then the 2D
lines plan was digitized in FreeCAD software.
Figure 3.32 2D lines plan (body plan view) of the patrol boat model in FreeCAD.
Figure 3.33 2D lines plan (top view) of the patrol boat model in FreeCAD.
62
Figure 3.34 2D lines plan (profile view) of the patrol boat model in FreeCAD.
After that, the coordinate of the patrol boat was extracted into phyton script *.txt
file format as shown in Figure 3.35 and then the coordinate of the patrol boat ship model
was imported into FreeShip Plus software as shown in Figure 3.36. The control point from
X-axis, Y-axis and Z-axis was moved until the ship model design followed the lines plan
given. Since the FreeShip Plus export only half hull of ship model as shown in Figure 3.37.
Hence, the patrol boat model was imported into Blender software and mirrored the patrol
boat model into a complete ship hull model in Blender software as shown in Figure 3.38.
Then, the patrol boat model was imported into gmsh software as shown in Figure 3.39. The
result from Gmsh software shown that the ship model geometry is in a good condition and
ready to import into OpenFOAM software.
Figure 3.35 The coordinate of the patrol boat model in Phyton Script.
63
Figure 3.36 The patrol boat model in FreeShip Plus.
Figure 3.37 Half ship hull form of the patrol boat model in Blender software.
Figure 3.38 Full the patrol boat model in Blender software.
64
Figure 3.39 The patrol boat model in Gmsh software.
Lastly, based on the hydrostatic data of the patrol boat model from towing tank
experiment, the percentage difference between the hydrostatic data from experimental and
hydrostatic data from FreeShip Plus software was calculated. The differences between
these two data as shown in Table 3.10 below:
Table 3.10 Ship hydrostatic data particular difference from real model.
Displacement t 0.0250 0.024 4.000
WL length m 1.8050 1.774 1.717
Beam m 0.3500 0.344 1.714
65
The workflow process for the patrol boat ship model is same as the workflow of the
passenger ship model as shown in Figure 3.40. First of all, make a 3D patrol boat model
from the lines plan that received in AutoCAD file format. Then, import the 3D patrol boat
model into FreeCAD and lofting the patrol boat model section by section. After that, import
into Blender software to make a full body of patrol boat model and meshed the ship in gmsh
software. Lastly, run the patrol boat model in OpenFOAM software and observed the wave
pattern in ParaView software.
Figure 3.40 CAE workflow 2 process in patrol boat hull form resistance analysis.
66
3.5.2.1 Workflow 2: Pre-Processing for The Patrol Boat Hull Geometry
The patrol boat model was presented in 2D lines plan drawing in AutoCAD
software as shown in Appendix B. Then, the patrol boat model was transformed into 3D
ship hull model in AutoCAD software. After that, the patrol boat model was exported into
FreeCAD software in *.iges file format. In FreeCAD software, the patrol boat model was
exploded as shown in Figure 3.41 and then the patrol boat model have been lofted station
by station to make a half hull of the patrol boat model as shown in Figure 3.42.
Figure 3.41 Explode the patrol boat model in FreeCAD software.
Figure 3.42 Lofting the 3D patrol boat model in FreeCAD software.
67
The next step is the patrol boat model was imported into Blender software in *.obj
file format as shown in Figure 3.43 and then the lofting part of the patrol boat model was
joined and mirrored in Blender software as shown in Figure 3.44. Lastly, the condition of the
patrol boat model was checked in Gmsh software as shown in Figure 3.45 and then the
patrol boat model ready to be simulate in OpenFOAM software.
Figure 3.43 Half body of the patrol boat model in Blender software.
Figure 3.44 Full body of the patrol boat model in Blender software.
68
The steps for workflow 3 process of the patrol boat model same as the workflow 3
process of the passenger ship hull as shown in Figure 3.46 and the CAE workflow 3 as
shown in Figure 3.47. Firstly, the lines plan of this patrol boat model was presented in
AutoCAD file format as shown in Appendix B. Then, the lines plan was imported into
FreeCAD software for digitized process. After that, the coordinate was extracted in XYZ
format in phyton script as shown in Figure 3.48.
Figure 3.46 The workflow 3 process of the patrol boat hull resistance analysis.
69
Figure 3.47 CAE workflow 3 process in patrol boat hull form resistance analysis.
Figure 3.48 The coordinate of the patrol boat model in Phyton Script.
70
The phyton script was imported into FreeShip Plus and then rearranged the ship
coordinate control point until a hull form developed as shown in Figure 3.49. After that,
the hull form was exported into Gmsh software and the ship hull meshing was checked as
shown in Figure 3.50.
Figure 3.49 The patrol boat model in FreeShip Plus.
71
The next step was calculated the hydrostatic data of the patrol boat model in
FreeShip Plus software and compared with towing tank model of hydrostatic data as shown
in Table 3.11. After that, the patrol boat ship hull resistance was calculated by clicked on
calculations menu, then clicked on resistance and choose calculation for pre-planing or
planing hull since this patrol boat model is planing type hull.
Table 3.11 Ship hydrostatic data particular difference from real model.
WL length m 1.805 1.774 1.717
Beam m 0.35 0.344 1.714
Lastly, inserted the patrol boat model data details as shown in Figure 3.51, then
choose the suitable calculation method which is mercier and savitsky method for this case.
Then clicked on calculator icon and the result of the resistance will be shown as shown in
Figure 3.52.
Figure 3.51 The resistance calculation of the patrol boat model in FreeShip Plus.
72
Figure 3.52 The resistance results of the patrol boat model in FreeShip Plus.
3.6 The Workflow Process of The Fast Interceptor Craft (MTC 112) by Using
Open Source Software (OSS)
The workflow integration of open source software for fast interceptor craft (MTC
112) is different than passenger ship and patrol boat workflow integration as shown in
Figure 3.53. The fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) has been running at speed 10 to 18 knots
in the towing tank test experiment and the OpenFOAM simulation will be run at speed 10
until 40 knots as shown in Figure 3.54.
Figure 3.53 CAE workflow process for fast interceptor craft resistance analysis.
73
76
Figure 3.54 Workflow process of the Fast Interceptor Craft (MTC 112) ship hull resistance analysis.
The geometric model of fast interceptor craft has been received in Rhinoceros 5
software format as shown in Figure 3.55 to Figure 3.58 and then the fast interceptor craft
will be trimmed into the trim angle values as given by towing tank test at each speed as
shown in Table 4.7. The trimming angle of fast interceptor craft model at each speed in
Rhinoceros 5 software as shown in Appendix D until Appendix J.
Figure 3.55 Fast Interceptor Craft (MTC 112) in Rhino software.
Figure 3.56 The body plan of Fast Interceptor Craft (MTC 112) in Rhino software.
77
Figure 3.57 The profile plan of Fast Interceptor Craft (MTC 112) in Rhino software.
Figure 3.58 The top plan of Fast Interceptor Craft (MTC 112) in Rhino software.
The fast interceptor craft model will be meshed in Gmsh software as shown in
Figure 3.59. The meshing elements for this fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) are 8619
vertices and 15 731 elements. Lastly, the fast interceptor craft model will be imported into
OpenFOAM in .stl file format. Run the resistance analysis simulation and visualize the
analysis in ParaView software.
78
Figure 3.59 Fast Interceptor Craft (MTC 112) in Gmsh software.
3.7 Solver Workflow Process for The Ship Hull Model Analysis
The OpenFOAM software version 4.1 have been used in this studies for the ship hull
model performance simulation analysis. The solver that used in this simulation is called
InterFoam. InterFoam is one of the solver in OpenFOAM tool for simulating two phase
flow problem. InterFoam solver is evaluating the performance that have multiphase flow
and modifying cases based on volume of fluid (VOF) approach. This InterFoam solver run
simulation in steady state condition. Next, the OpenFOAM case will consist three main
directories which are 0.orig, constant and system. Besides that, it also contain two type of
script files which are Allrun and Allclean. The structure of this case directory as shown in
Figure 3.60 below.
79
Figure 3.60 The structure of InterFoam cases directory.
Firstly, 0.orig folder contains the boundary and initial condition for each of the
variables. In ship hull resistance cases, the values setup in 0.orig folder are value of
alpha.water, turbulent kinetic energy (k), turbulence viscosity (nut), specific rate of
dissipation (omega), pointDisplacement, p_rgh and speed (U). After that, there are some
initial condition need to be calculated such as turbulent kinetic energy (k) and specific rate
of dissipation (omega) by using the following equations (3.1) until (3.3):
𝑚 (3.1)
𝑈′ ( ) = 0.05 × 𝑈𝑂
𝑠
𝑚2 3 (3.2)
𝑘( 2 ) = |( 𝑈′ )|2
𝑠 2
80
1 √𝑘 (3.3)
𝜔( ) = 1
𝑠
𝐶𝜇 4 × (0.07 × ℎ𝑅𝑒𝑓)
where 𝑈′ is the velocity fluctuations and U◦ is the flow velocity. Meanwhile, C µ is

an empirical constant specified in the turbulence model (approximately 0.09) and hRef is
draught of the ship.
The initial condition script that need to modify in 0.orig folder are speed (U),
turbulent kinetic energy (k) and specific rate of dissipation (omega) based on ship model
data as shown in Appendix D to Appendix F. Hence, the Table 3.12, 3.13 and 3.14 below
is the initial condition for the passenger ship hull model, the patrol boat ship model and
the fast interceptor craft (FIC) model.
Table 3.12 The initial condition of the passenger ship model.
Ship Model Ship Model Turbulent Kinetic Specific Rate of

Speed, Vm (knot) Speed, Vm (m/s) Energy (k) Dissipation (omega)
14 1.96 0.01441 25.7
16 2.24 0.01882 29.3
18 2.52 0.02381 33.0
20 2.80 0.02940 36.7
22 3.08 0.03557 40.3
Table 3.13 The initial condition of the patrol boat ship model.
Ship Model Ship Model Turbulent Kinetic Specific Rate of

Speed, Vm (knot) Speed, Vm (m/s) Energy (k) Dissipation (omega)
14 1.61 0.00972 27.2
16 1.84 0.01270 31.1
18 2.07 0.01607 35.0
20 2.30 0.01985 38.9
22 2.53 0.02401 42.8
81
Table 3.14 The initial condition of the fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) model.
Ship Speed, Vm Ship Model Turbulent Kinetic Specific Rate of

(knot) Speed, Vm (m/s) Energy (k) Dissipation (omega)
10.00 1.63 0.00992 49.5
12.00 1.95 0.01429 59.4
13.00 2.11 0.01677 64.3
15.00 2.44 0.02233 74.2
16.00 2.60 0.02540 79.2
17.00 2.77 0.02868 84.1
18.00 2.93 0.03215 89.1
25.00 4.07 0.06202 123.7
35.00 5.69 0.12155 173.2
40.00 6.51 0.15876 198.0
45.00 7.32 0.20094 222.7
50.00 8.13 0.24807 247.4
Next, constant folder contains constant variables of the ship model such as
draught, ship model geometry, turbulence properties, transport properties as shown in
Appendix G and the polymesh folder which stores the blockMesh file used in the mesh
creation stage. The turbulence properties that used in this simulation is k - ω SST model
as shown in Appendix H. The ship model geometries were save in .stl file format.
After that, system folder contains the control dictionary which handles the time
step, solver settings and the script files that used to control the solver schemes and
tolerances of the variables. The script files that being modified in system folder can be refer
in Appendix I to Appendix M.
Last but not least, OpenFOAM directory case also contains Allclean script and
Allrun script can be refer in Appendix K and Appendix U. Allclean script file used to
clean the test case directory by deleting all files generated by OpenFOAM. Meanwhile,
Allrun script file used for running all the commands related to the OpenFOAM case. Both
of this file script command are in an efficient testing code and can be understood easily.
82
3.8 Post-Processor Workflow Process for The Ship Model Analysis
Post processor that have been used in this studied is ParaView software. ParaView
software is a multi-platform data analysis and visualization application which can quickly
build visualization to analyse the simulation data. The procedures to analyse and visualize
the ship simulation, first is open the ParaView software as shown in Figure 3.61.
Figure 3.61 The features of ParaView software.
After that, select all the volume fields and the "apply" on ParaView toolbar as
shown in Figure 3.62. Then, the ParaView features will be shown as Figure 3.63.
Figure 3.62 The ParaView toolbar.

83
Figure 3.63 The ParaView features after select volume field and the "apply".
The next step, slice the domain at water level as shown in Figure 3.64 and then the
ParaView features will be shown as shown in Figure 3.65.
Figure 3.64 The slice icon in ParaView features.
84
Figure 3.65 The ParaView features after slice step.
After that, import the ship model from constant folder in ParaView as shown in
Figure 3.66. Then, select the "alpha.water" on the menu bar and click "play". Lastly, the
ParaView shows the wave pattern from top view of the ship model as shown in Figure 3.67
and the wave pattern from side view of the ship model as shown in Figure 3.68.
Figure 3.66 The "open" icon and import ship geometry step.
85
Figure 3.67 The top view of wave pattern in ParaView software.
Figure 3.68 The side view of wave pattern in ParaView software.
86
CHAPTER 4
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Ship Resistance and Wave Pattern Result
OpenFOAM software was calculated the forces component acting on ship hull
models, namely pressure and viscous. Total between these two forces is total resistance. The
ship model was simulated following the experimental data and compared with
OpenFOAM resistance result. Next, the results of the wave pattern that visualized in
OpenFOAM simulation was observed at the top plan view at different speed of ship hull
models. Besides that, the total resistance of the ship model was calculated by FreeShip Plus
software by using a systematic series of planing hull form. Lastly, the systematic series
method for this case total resistance test calculations is Mercier and Savitsky’s method.
The Total Resistance Result of Passenger Ship Model
The resistance result in the workflow integration of Open Source software (OSS) for
passenger ship hull model have five different speeds which are 14, 16, 18, 20 and 22 knots.
The total resistance results data of the passenger ship as shown in Table 4.1 to Table 4.3
and the graph of total resistance against speed for this passenger ship as shown in Figure
4.1 to Figure 4.3 below.
87
Table 4.1 Workflow 1 - Total resistance difference of passenger ship hull model.
Froude Vs Towing Tank OpenFOAM Differences Time Taken

Number (Fn) (knot) (N) (N) (%)
0.38 14 30.77 34.94 13.552 32 hr 38 min
0.43 16 43.73 45.07 3.064 33 hr 16 min
0.48 18 57.44 56.51 1.619 33 hr 28 min
0.54 20 65.31 69.50 6.416 33 hr 26 min
0.59 22 73.30 83.38 13.752 34 hr 00 min
Total Resistance (N)
Figure 4.1 Workflow 1 - Graph of the total resistance against speed between towing
tank and OpenFOAM for passenger ship model.
As shown in Table 4.1 the differences total resistance for workflow 1 of passenger
ship hull model between experimental and numerical simulations are close which in
between range 1.619% to 13.752%. The curves of numerical simulation results as shown
in Figure 4.1 is increasing linearly towards the speed but as can see at total resistances
obtain from numerical simulation is an overestimate from experiment result except the total
resistance at speed 18 knot. The design speed of this passenger ship is 18 knot and the
differences between numerical simulation and towing tank test is the closer which is
1.619%. The discrepancies between CFD and experimental resistance results due to the
setup of the model condition is referring to the ship condition at design speed.
88

0.38 14 30.77 35.48 15.307 38 hr 59 min
0.43 16 43.73 46.03 5.260 40 hr 31 min
0.49 18 57.44 57.91 0.818 38 hr 46 min
0.54 20 65.31 70.05 7.258 33 hr 46 min
0.59 22 73.30 82.66 12.770 34 hr 12 min
tank and OpenFOAM for passenger ship model.
Next, the differences of total resistance result in workflow 2 for passenger ship
model between experimental and numerical simulations are in between range 0.818% to
15.307%. As shown in Figure 4.2 the graph total resistance (N) against speed (knot) for
workflow 2 is increasing linearly and mostly same pattern as workflow 1 and the result of
total resistance between workflow 1 and workflow 2 is very closed for every speed. The
result of total resistance at design speed 18 knot is 0.818% differences which is very
closed to the experimental resistance result. The discrepancies between CFD and
experimental resistance results due to the setup of the model condition is referring to the
ship condition at design speed.
89
Froude Vs Towing Tank FreeShip Plus Differences

0.38 14 30.77 21.65 29.640
0.43 16 43.73 40.35 7.730
0.49 18 57.44 59.35 3.325
0.54 20 65.31 72.40 10.856
0.59 22 73.30 81.66 11.405
tank and FreeShip Plus for passenger ship model.
Lastly, the differences of total result in workflow 3 for passenger ship model
between experimental and numerical are in between range 3.325% to 29.640%. The
differences of total resistance between numerical method and experimental method for
this passenger ship model in workflow 3 is quite big than workflow 1 and workflow 2.
The numerical software that used in workflow 3 also different than workflow 1 and
workflow 2 which is this workflow used FreeShip Plus software meanwhile the workflow
1 and workflow 2 used OpenFOAM software. However, same as workflow 1 and
workflow 2, at design speed 18 knot the total resistance value is the most closer to the
towing tank experiment which is 3.325% difference. The discrepancies between CFD and
experimental resistance results due to the setup of the model condition is referring to the
ship condition at design speed.
90
The Wave Pattern Result of Passenger Ship Model
The results of the wave pattern for workflow 1 that visualized in ParaView software
was observed at the plan view as shown in Figure 4.4 to Figure 4.8 at different speed of
passenger ship hull model. The Figures below emphasized that as the speed of the
simulation increases the amplitude and the length of the wave increase. After that, the wave
patterns of passenger ship hull model show the characteristics of Kelvin wave pattern
which start at the bow until stern region at an angle of 0◦ < θ < 19.47◦.
Figure 4.4 Workflow 1 - Wave pattern of passenger ship hull model at 14 knot.
91
92
Next, the wave patterns in ParaView software for workflow 2 of passenger ship
hull model as shown in Figure 4.9 until Figure 4.13. Lastly, the wave pattern in
ParaView software showed the characteristics of Kelvin wave pattern which start at the
bow until stern region at an angle of 0◦ < θ < 19.47◦.
93
94
The Total Resistance Result of Patrol Boat Model
The total resistance of patrol boat hull model in workflow 1 OpenFOAM software
simulation at five different speed are shown in Table 4.4 below. Meanwhile, Figure 4.14
shows the workflow 1 graph of total resistance by OpenFOAM and experimental data for
patrol boat hull model.
Table 4.4 Workflow 1 - Total resistance difference of patrol boat hull model
(Muhammad, 2019).

0.3827 14 7.27 7.930 9.110 33 hr 44 min
0.4374 16 10.91 9.890 9.310 33 hr 57 min
0.4920 18 12.71 12.080 4.900 33 hr 49 min
0.5467 20 14.78 14.640 0.950 34 hr 50 min
0.6014 22 16.46 17.050 3.560 34 hr 21 min
tank and FreeShip Plus for patrol boat model.
As shown in Table 4.4 and Figure 4.14, the differences total resistance of patrol boat
hull model between experimental and numerical simulations are close which in between
range 0.950% to 9.310% . The curves of numerical simulation results is increasing
95
linearly towards the speed. The design speed of this patrol boat hull model is at speed 18
knot which shown less than 5% difference of total resistance to the experimental result.
Besides that, the resistance data obtained in workflow 2 for patrol boat hull model
by OpenFOAM simulation at five different speed are as shown in Table 4.5 below.
Meanwhile, Figure 4.15 show the graph of total resistance by OpenFOAM and
experimental data for patrol boat hull model.
Table 4.5 Workflow 2 - Total resistance difference of patrol boat hull model.

0.3827 14 7.27 6.715 7.634 29 hr 14 min
0.4374 16 10.91 8.7513 19.786 29 hr 15 min
0.4920 18 12.71 11.455 9.874 29 hr 48 min
0.5467 20 14.78 14.335 3.014 30 hr 05 min
0.6014 22 16.46 15.606 5.187 35 hr 29 min
As shown in Table 4.5 and Figure 4.15, the differences total resistance of patrol boat
hull model between experimental and numerical simulations are in between range 3.014%
to 19.786%. The curves of numerical simulation results is increasing towards the speed.
96
The design speed of this patrol boat hull model is at speed 18 knot which shown less than
10% difference of total resistance to the experimental result.
Lastly, the total resistance result data obtained from FreeShip Plus software in
workflow 3 for patrol boat model as shown in Table 4.6. Meanwhile, the graph of total
resistance against speed for workflow 3 as shown in Figure 4.16. As shown in Table 4.6,
the total resistance data of the patrol boat from FreeShip Plus software are in range 0.135%
to 13.578%. The graph of total resistance against speed in Figure 5.16 shown it increasing
linearly from 14 knot to 20 knot.
Table 4.6 Workflow 3 - Total resistance difference of patrol boat hull model.
Froude Vs Towing Tank OpenFOAM Differences

0.3827 14 7.27 6.667 8.298
0.4374 16 10.91 9.428 13.578
0.4920 18 12.71 12.238 3.713
0.5467 20 14.78 14.800 0.135
0.6014 22 16.46 15.449 6.142
97
The Wave Pattern Result of Patrol Boat Model
The wave patterns of patrol boat hull model in workflow 1 as shown in Figure 4.17
until Figure 4.19 showed the characteristics of Kelvin wave pattern which start at the bow
until stern region at an angle of 0◦ < θ < 19.47◦.
Figure 4.17 Workflow 1 - Wave pattern of patrol boat hull model at low speed
(Muhammad, 2019).
Figure 4.18 Workflow 1 - Wave pattern of patrol boat hull model at medium speed
(Muhammad, 2019).
98
Figure 4.19 Workflow 1 - Wave pattern of patrol boat hull model at high speed
(Muhammad, 2019).
After that, the wave patterns of patrol boat hull model in workflow 2 as shown in
Figure 4.20 until Figure 4.22 showed the characteristics of Kelvin wave pattern which start
at the bow until stern region at an angle of 0◦ < θ < 19.47◦.
Figure 4.20 Workflow 2 - Wave pattern of patrol boat hull model at 14 knot.
99
Lastly, the wave patterns in workflow 1 and workflow 2 of this patrol boat model
emphasized that as the speed of the ship increase the amplitude and the wave length of the
ship wave also increase.
100
The Total Resistance Result of Fast Interceptor Craft (MTC 112)
The total resistance result of fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) workflow as shown
in Table 4.7 and the graph of total resistance against speed for fast interceptor craft (MTC
112) model as shown in Figure 4.23.
Table 4.7 Total resistance difference of fast interceptor craft (MTC 112).
Vs Towing Tank OpenFOAM Differences Time Taken

(knot) (N) (N) (%)
10 4.050 4.580 13.086 50 hr 28 min
12 4.869 5.223 7.270 56 hr 53 min
13 5.804 5.730 1.275 89 hr 55 min
15 6.478 6.964 7.502 62 hr 15 min
16 6.845 6.502 5.011 83 hr 53 min
17 6.754 6.846 1.362 99 hr 45 min
18 7.459 7.190 3.606 40 hr 34 min
25 - 12.678 - 73 hr 33 min
35 - 23.236 - 63 hr 52 min
40 - 29.938 - 67 hr 35 min
45 - 37.500 - 64 hr 17 min
50 - 46.000 - 67 hr 00 min
Figure 4.23 Graph of the total resistance against speed between towing tank and
OpenFOAM for fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) model.
101
Figure 4.24 Graph of the total resistance against speed between towing tank and
OpenFOAM for fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) model.
As shown in Table 4.7 the total resistance of the fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) at
speed 10 knot to 18 knot in between range 1.275% to 13.086%. The fast interceptor craft
(MTC 112) is simulated from 10 knot until 50 knot, meanwhile in towing tank test
experiment, the fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) have been run at speed 10 knot until 18
knot. Based on the Figure 4.23 and 4.24, the graph OpenFOAM simulation show that the
designated speed of this fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) at 15 knot.
Lastly, the OpenFOAM simulation proceeded run the fast interceptor craft (MTC
112) until 50 knot in OpenFOAM due to the FIC is actually designated to run until speed
50 knot, however towing tank at Marine Technology Centre (MTC) only capable run until
18 knot. Thus, the result of total resistance from 25 knot until 50 knot will be a reference
or bench mark for fast interceptor craft in actual situation.
102
The Wave Pattern Result of Fast Interceptor Craft (MTC 112) Model
The wave pattern of fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) model in OpenFOAM
software simulation at speed 10 knot to 50 knot are as shown in Figure 4.25 until Figure
4.36. As shown in Figures below the wave pattern image from top view is difference from
one speed to one speed due to every speed has been run into several different computer.
However, the Kelvin wave pattern angle still can be calculated. The Kelvin wave pattern
angle for fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) is start at bow until stern region at an angle of 0◦
< θ < 19.47◦ which agreed to the characteristic of Kelvin wave theory.
Figure 4.25 Wave pattern of fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) model at 10 knot.
103
104
105
106
4.2 The Potential Workflow Module Set of Open Source Software (OSS) into
Ship Hull Resistance Analysis
The potential workflow module sets of open source software (OSS) into the ship
hull resistance analysis that has been successful created in this study are as shown Figure
4.37 below:
Figure 4.37 The potential CAE workflow module sets of Open Source Software (OSS)
into ship hull resistance analysis.
107
As shown in chapter research methodology, there are also third party software that
used in the CAE workflow process such as FreeCAD and phyton script for dignitize and
extract the ship coordinate process in workflow 1 and workflow 3. Meanwhile, the
AutoCAD software is used to create 3D drawing before import to the FreeCAD in
workflow 2. The AutoCAD software is used in the project because all of line plans drawing
has been received in AutoCAD file format
Other than that, as shown in workflow 4 in Table 3.1 above, the Rhinoceros 5
software has been used in pre - processing stage. This is due to the requested from
the company Asia Marine Design Center (AMDEC) to use the fast interceptor craft model
from Rhinoceros 5 software in all simulation process either commercial software and open
source software. Lastly, this process shows that the open source computational fluid
dynamics (CFD) software is flexible and the ship model geometry from commercial CAD
also can be run into open source CFD software.
4.3 The Maturity of Open Source Software (OSS)
The measurement process for the maturity of Open Source Software (OSS) based
on the performance of modelling process for the CAD software, the meshing performance
for Gmsh and the performance of post processor to analyse and produce the data. Table
4.8 below shows the maturity of open source software CAD in ship modelling process.
As shown in Table 4.8 there are five different software that have been involved in
the pre-processing stage of the workflows integration of open source software (OSS) into
ship hull resistance analysis. All of the softwares are open source software (OSS)
excluding Rhinoceros 5 software is a commercial software with low rate or license fee
and software maintenance.
The computer aided design (CAD) softwares are practical with respect to the time
and cost constraints during this study. The FreeShip Plus, FreeCAD, Rhinoceros 5 and
Blender are considered as practical meaning it is easy to understand and free exclude
Rhinoceros 5. Besides that, the modelling process in this software done within time
estimation.
108
The Gmsh software is considered as a reliable software meaning this software
provide a good quality and performance of meshing. Gmsh software is a recommended
software, it is a goal of design a fast and light meshing tool and advanced in visualization
capabilities. The feature of this Gmsh software is very simple and easy to understand and
its provide a good quality result.
The strengths and limitation of the CAD software have been listed in Table 4.8. The
strength of the FreeShip Plus software are it is a ship CAD software because its built in ship
CAD engine and ship post processor. The software also have its own meshing tools and
the used of Gmsh software is to check the number of meshing element in FreeShip Plus
software geometry. However, this software is not interoperability meaning it cannot
connect very well with other softwares. FreeShip Plus software only can import the
geometry model but cannot received any other file format into the software.
FreeCAD software is an open source 3D modeler software that covers all the
engineering design such as architecture, mechanical engineering, product design and etc.
However the ship workbench in FreeCAD software is strict and the ship design that can
be used in the ship workbench is very limited to the ship library design in the ship
workbench. The ship modelling process in this software have done in manual technique
by lofting every station based on 3D line plans drawing. This technique is possible due to
the open source software (OSS) have a great support software which is Blender software.
Blender software is a free and open source 3D creation suite. This software support
the entire 3D design pipeline such as modelling, animation, simulation and other. This
software is very powerfull as it can join all the lofting surface of the ship in the FreeCAD
software without breaking the integrity of the ship modelling. However, the limitation of
this technique is the hydrostatic data cannot be calculated and validated with ship model of
the towing tank test. The ship geometry only can be validated by referring to the ship hull
performance results.
Other than that, Rhinoceros 5 is used due to the request from Asia Marine Design
Centre organization for the fast interceptor craft project. The organization request to use
the same ship model geometry in all type CFD simulation analysis. Rhinoceros is a 3D
109
modeler that is used to create, analyse, animate and other. However, the limitation of this
software is that the ship model have to be exported into MAXSURF software in order to
calculate the ship hydrostatic data as shown in Appendix W.
In the solver and post processing stage, the softwares that are used in this stage are
FreeShip Plus, OpenFOAM and ParaView software. As stated above, the FreeShip Plus is
a complete package of the open source software in modelling, evaluating and analizing of
the ship hull model. FreeShip Plus is a good post processor software, but it is using a
systematic series method for the ship resistance analysis. There are difficulties in using
this systematic series method in this software and there is no proper manual guide for ship
hull resistance calculation for this software.
The OpenFOAM solver is used in other workflow for the integration of open source
software (OSS). The good about OpenFOAM is it allows us to control every aspect of
computational fluid dynamics (CFD) process. The process to learn the OpenFOAM
software will took several months to truly understand the OpenFOAM coding and script
and a lot of trial and error will be done to get a good result. Other than that, to run one case
in OpenFOAM with well converged take more than 90 hours and needed an extremely large
capacity of computing memory about 100Gb to 600Gb per run. The hardware used to
perform the simulation are DELL PC, i7, 4GB RAM, 4 core run and MTCFOXX-
CoolMaster-i5 3330, 16GB RAM.
The ParaView software is used in post processing stage. ParaView is good post
processor software in which it can quickly build the visualizations to analyze the
simulation cases. ParaView is a flexible software and very easy to use and understand.
There are a lot of tutorials on ParaView software in the website and youtube.
Lastly, the maturity of the softwares have been done based on the researcher
experienced in this project and based on the survey form in the open source software
workshop at university with undergraduate student as shown in Appendix X.
110
Table 4.8 Measuring the maturity of software in open source software (OSS).
Software Function License Fee Assessment Time Taken Level Strengths Limitation/
Model Maturity weakness
Ship CAD software, calculate
Modelling ship hydrostatic data, own Does not
FreeShip Plus Post processing Free Practical 32 hr 00 min Flexible (4) meshing tool, automatically create interoperability
solid body of a ship model
Mechanical CAD and easy to Cannot calculate
FreeCAD Modelling Free Practical 24 hr 00 min Strict (2) loft ship surface and covered all the hydrostatic data
design area, of ship model
Create smooth surface of ship Cannot calculate
Rhinoceros 5 Modelling Low rate Practical 8 hr 00 min Strict (2) model and very low price of the hydrostatic data
(commercial) commercial software of ship model
Easily overwhelming to Not practical to
new users, mirrored and re-modelling a ship model
Blender Support Free Practical 1 hr 00 min Flexible (5) join multiple surface, that have more than
without break the 10 stations
integrity of the model
Gmsh Meshing Free Reliable 00 hr 30 min Flexible (5) A fast, light and -
user friendly meshing tools
OpenFOAM Solving Free Reliable 70hr 00min Flexible (4) Allows to control Take months to truly learn
(average) every aspect of the CFD process how to use OpenFOAM,
the CFD process Used large capacity
Paraview Post processing Free Practical 03hr 00min Flexible (5) Quickly build to -
visualization and analyze data
111
4.4 Number of Workflow Sets in Integrating Open Source Software (OSS) into
Ship Hull Resistance Analysis
In the beginning of this master project, the workflow sets of Open Source Software
(OSS) have been drafted as shown in Table 4.9 below. The workflow set A shows the used
of Salome software from the pre-processing to post-processing. This workflow set A
cannot perform the ship hull resistance analysis due to Salome software can only generate
a simple geometry such as box, cylinder, cube and etc, meanwhile the ship hull geometry
is a complex geometry.
After that, the Salome software can only import the solid geometry file type format
such as IGES, STEP and BREP. Because of that, Salome cannot be post processor software
in this study since the solid geometry from CAD software such as FreeCAD, Blender and
FreeShip Plus only .stl file format. Thus, the workflow A, B, C and D as shown in Table
4.9 below are not the potential set of workflows in this study. Next, as shown in workflow
C and F the VariCAD software is plan to use as a CAD modelling software. The VariCAD
software cannot read the lines plan drawing in AutoCAD file format. Thus, the workflow
C and F are not the potential workflow sets in this study.
Other than that, Michlet software in workflow H calculates the total (viscous +
wave) resistance of thin monohulls and multihulls. However, this software will run under
Windows and is a free for the users. Since FreeShip Plus can also calculate the total
resistance, this study preferred to use the FreeShip Plus software from pre- processing
until post-processing stage and to observe the wave pattern is recommended to use
ParaView software than Michlet software. Lastly, a lots of improvement and modifying
steps have been done on the early draft of CAE workflow sets to produce the complete
sets of OSS workflow into ship hull resistance analysis.
112
Table 4.9 Draft of CAE workflow and Software setting.
Software/ Work Flow A B C D E F G H

CAD Salome FreeCAD VariCAD FreeShip Plus FreeCAD VariCAD FreeShip Plus FreeShip Plus
Pre-processing Salome Gmsh Gmsh Gmsh Gmsh Gmsh Gmsh FreeShip Plus
Solver Salome OpenFOAM OpenFOAM OpenFOAM OpenFOAM OpenFOAM OpenFOAM FreeShip Plus
Post-processing Salome Salome Salome Salome ParaView ParaView ParaView FreeShip Plus + Michlet
4.5 The Most Potential Workflow Set in Integrating Open Source Software
(OSS) into Ship Hull Resistance Analysis
The most potential workflow set in integrating open source software (OSS) into the
ship hull resistance analysis is workflow 1 as shown in Figure 4.38 below. This workflow
used FreeShip Plus as a CAD modelling, the most stable for open source software in ship
geometry modelling. This FreeShip Plus software build especially for ship modelling and
ship hull analysis.
Figure 4.38 The most potential CAE workflow module set of Open Source Software
(OSS) into ship hull resistance analysis.
Other than that, the FreeShip Plus software limited the ship modelling length
overall size to the 12 meters, but then most of the ship model size are less than 12 meters.
After that, the Blender software act as support CAD software to the FreeShip Plus, since
FreeShip Plus only generated half hull body of ship hull. The function of the Blender
software in this workflow is to generate a full solid body of ship hull without affecting the
integrity of ship hull model.
114
Next, the full solid body of the ship model is exported into Gmsh software for
meshing process. The Gmsh software is the most faster, lighter and user friendly of
meshing tool. The Gmsh software is a very recommended meshing tool software with
advanced visualization capabilities. Besides that, the solver software that used in this
workflow is OpenFOAM software.
Personally, OpenFOAM software is the most recommended open source software

(OSS) solver for ship hull resistance analysis compared to Salome, FreeShip Plus and
others. First of all, OpenFOAM software is a computational fluid dynamic (CFD) same as
Salome software. However, Salome software cannot import ship model in .stl file format
and the Salome software can only generate a simple geometry. The Salome software
solver is only suitable for mechanical cases.
Even though FreeShip Plus software is a designated as a ship software for pre-
processing to post processing stage, at post processing stage the FreeShip Plus based on
the systematic serial test method for ship hull performance calculation. The FreeShip Plus
only produces the result of ship model resistance, but lack of the visualization capabilities
of ship flow and wave pattern.
Lastly, the ParaView software was used in post-processing stage. ParaView is an

open source software that used to analyze multi-platform data and to visualize application.
For your information, the ParaView software also built in the Salome software which
called as ParaVis. Both of this processor act in same function or role. ParaView can be run
in supercomputer that have extremely large memory computing resources.
4.6 The Effect of Accuracy and Integrity of The Workflow Design in This
Research
The interoperability of the workflows integration as shown in Figure 5.37 of the

open source software (OSS) into the ship hull resistance analysis in this research does not
affect the accuracy and integrity of the ship design. However, the addition of support
software such as Blender software, Phyton script and others improved the interoperability
115
of the workflows process and complying the accuracy and integrity of the ship design in
this research.
Refer to the ship total resistance result in chapter 5, the limitation and weakness in
FreeShip Plus and FreeCAD software in the ship modelling process are the FreeShip Plus
only generated a half body of ship hull form, the FreeCAD software does not generate a
solid body of ship model and the FreeCAD only generated the ship hull surfaces station
by station as shown in chapter 4.
Thus, the Blender software used to generate another half of ship hull body and
make it into full solid body of ship hull from FreeShip Plus software. After that, the
Blender software is used to join all the ship hull surfaces and make it into a solid body of
ship hull form without affect the accuracy and integrity of the ship model. Including the
Blender software into the workflow integration improved the interoperability of the
workflow process.
Different post processor software such as OpenFOAM software and FreeShip Plus
also does not affecting the accuracy and integrity of the ship design. The action to improve
the ship hull performance such as resistance, vibration and others is by improved the
technique in modifying OpenFOAM script based on the hull condition.
Lastly, in FreeShip Plus the user have to increase the knowledge and learn the
details of every systematic serial tests method due to there a lot of type systematic serial tests
method such as Holtrop-Mennen, D. Savitsky, Almeter and others to get the best results
of the ship hull performance.
116
4.7 Grid Independence Test (GIT) vs Courant-Friedrichs-Lewy (CFL)
Lee et al. (2020) stated the grid independence test was conducted as an essential
process for the optimal grid design of the CFD model. The grid independence test is a
process used to find the optimal grid condition that has the smallest number
of grids without generating a difference in the numerical results based on the evaluation
of various grid conditions. This grid independence test was introduced by people from
FLUENT and the FLUENT users advocating it among the CFD users. However, there is
no OpenFOAM user will do this grid independence test because OpenFOAM
automatically calculate the run’s Courant-Friedrichs-Lewy (CFL) condition or courant
number. People who go into CFD with strong background in the mathematics of discrete
methods for solving PDE will avoid wasting time running the multiple runs over the same
problem when one can simply estimate the convergence through CFL conditions.
Lewy et al. (1928) said the convergence condition by Courant-Friedrichs-Lewy is

a necessary condition for convergence while solving certain partial differential equations
(PDE) numerically. As a consequence, the time step setup in the code must be less than a
certain time. They also stated as a result, when the grid point separation is reduced, the
upper limit for the time step also decreases.
Lastly, the table 4.10 below is the meshing element size that produce automatically
by Courant-Friedrichs-Lewy in open source software. In this study only show the meshing
size element for fast interceptor craft for your reference, the code for other ship model
passenger ship and patrol boat have been deleted since this simulation extremely needed
large capacity of computing.
117
Table 4.10 Meshing size element for Fast Interceptor Craft (FIC).
Software Meshing Size Element

Ship Model Gmsh 8619 vertices 15 731 elements
Domain/Speed(knot) Software Number of Cells (Finer Meshes)
10 3 282 985
12 3 286 647
13 3 289 730
OpenFOAM
15 2 689 743
16 3 294 263
17 3 299 835
18 3 303 089
25 3 303 089
35 3 303 089
40 3 303 089
118
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Conclusion and Recommendation
The main goal of this project was to develop multiple workflow of integrating open
source software (OSS) modules for ship hull resistance analysis. In order to develop
multiple workflow of integrating open source software (OSS) need a lot of iteration try
and error in testing the interoperability of these open source softwares. The tutorials or
guidelines for open source software (OSS) either for CAD, solver or post-processor is
very limited, however there an active community forum for open source software user.
Based on experienced in using open source software (OSS), sometimes the

OpenFOAM simulations stops at the middle of the time interval, sometimes the
simulations completed run after 50 hours, but visualize nothing in ParaView and to resolve
all of these errors the user need a rich of experience on this software. Even though, the
FreeCAD software own ship workbench, the workbench cannot generate new ship models
only can use the ship models in their library and to remodel a ship hull form in mechanical
software is not easy since the OpenFOAM very strict in importing a geometry, the
geometry model must be in one solid body.
Blender and Gmsh software act as support software or third party software in this
study. The Blender software capable in modifying the ship geometry into one solid body
without affecting the accuracy and integrity. Meanwhile, the Gmsh software good in
meshing process and capable to generate mesh for the ship until three million elements in
short time without failed. Other than that, the Gmsh software capable verified the ship
model either the ship model geometry pass to simulate into the OpenFOAM.
119
The open source software (OSS) is an amazing tool with very low cost. However,
open source software is just a set of tools, the results does not depend on the tool but
depend on the skills of the people have. Several years in delivering open source software
(OSS) and many time face a new problem while working with it. and believe when learning
OSS there many things go wrong, there is a new environment, new terms and every new
step there a lots of uncertainty and many unknown elements.
The selection of potential workflows in integrating open source software (OSS)

modules of the ship hull resistance analysis have successfully built in this research as
shown in Figure 4.37 in chapter 4. The total resistance result from the workflow sets of
passenger ship, patrol boat and fast interceptor craft are generally in good agreement with
the total resistance data in towing tank tests experiment as shown in chapter 5. The wave
pattern also is well predicted based on Kelvin wave theory and the wavelength of the ship
model increase as the speed increase.
There still a lot of improvement can be done in future work with increase the
computations power of computer work station for research student, smallest time step to
improve the stability of simulation and run the ship analysis in dynamic simulation. In
addition, in future work is recommended to study the details performance of complete
systems of FreeShip Plus software due to the FreeShip Plus software have a high potential
in performing the ship hull performance analysis.
Last but not least, the extensively used of open source software in future will help
the engineer and SME in shipbuilding industries to complete various computations tasks
at low cost without lacks in advanced capability, especially in shipping hydrodynamics
applications, propulsions, resistance and other. Lastly, it can be concluded that the
objectives of the research were achieved.
120
REFERENCES
Ahmad, H. A., & Ayob, A. F. (2017). State of the Art Review of the Application of
Computational Fluid Dynamics for High Speed Craft. Science and Engineering,
39.
Almeter, J. M. (1993). Resistance prediction of planing hulls: state of the art. Marine
Technology-Easton Pa Then New York-, 30, 297-297.
Asen, P. (2014). Analysis of the flow around a cruise ferry hull by the means of
computational fluid dynamics.
Axner, L., Gong, J., Chiarini, A., & Mascellaro, L. (2014). SHAPE pilot Monotricat
SRL: Hull resistance simulations for an innovative hull using OpenFOAM.
PRACE Partnership for Advanced Computing in Europe, 1-8.
Banker, R. D., Datar, S. M., Kemerer, C. F., & Zweig, D. (1993). Software complexity
and maintenance costs. Communications of the ACM, 36(11), 81-95.
Baxter, M. (2002). VariCAD 8.2-02. Linux Journal, 2002(104), 15.
Bertram, V. (2011). Practical ship hydrodynamics. Elsevier.
Broadhurst, D. J. (1987). Recreational semi-displacement hull watercraft U.S. Patent
No. 4,660,490. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Cristescu, M. P., Stoica, E. A., & Ciovica, L. V. (2015). The comparison of software
reliability assessment models. Procedia Economics and Finance, 27, 669-675.
Eugenio Onate, Julio Garcia-Espinosa, Sergio R. Idelsohn and Borja Servan-Camas,
Ship Hydrodynamics, Encyclopedia of Computational Mechanics Second
Edition, (1-46), (2017).
Falck, B., Falck, D., & Collette, B. (2012). Freecad [How-To]. Packt Publishing Ltd.
Faltinsen, O. M. (2005). Hydrodynamics of high-speed marine vehicles. Cambridge
university press.
Fitzgerald, B., Mockus, A., & Zhou, M. (Eds.). (2019). Towards Engineering Free /
Libre Open Source Software (FLOSS) Ecosystems for Impact and Sustainability:
Communications of NII Shonan Meetings. Springer.
Frisk, D., & Tegehall, L. (2015). Prediction of High-Speed Planing Hull Resistance
and Running Attitude (Doctoral dissertation, Master Thesis, Chalmers
University of Technology).
Garland, W. R., & Maki, K. J. (2012). A numerical study of a two-dimensional stepped
121
planing surface. Journal of Ship Production and Design, 28(2), 60-72.
Garcia, S., Trueba, A., Boullosa-Falces, D., Islam, H., & Soares, C. G. (2020).
Predicting ship frictional resistance due to biofouling using Reynolds-averaged
Navier-Stokes simulations. Applied Ocean Research, 101, 102203.
Geuzaine, C., & Remacle, J. F. (2009). Gmsh: A 3-D finite element mesh generator
with built in pre- and post-processing facilities. International journal for
numerical methods in engineering, 79(11), 1309-1331.
Giles, D. L. (2009). Monohull fast ship or semi-planing monohull with a drag reduction
method. U.S. Patent No. 7,581,508. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office.
Hassan, G., & Su, Y. M. (2008). Determining the hydrodynamic forces on a planing
hull in steady motion. Journal of Marine Science and Application, 7(3), 147-
156.
Harvald, S. A. (1983). Resistance and Propulsion of Ships. Canada: John Wiley &
Sons Inc.
Havelock, T. H. (1919). Wave resistance: some cases of three-dimensional fluid
motion. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Containing
Papers of a Mathematical and Physical Character, 95(670), 354-365.
Hawkins, R. E. (2004). The economics of open source software for a competitive firm.
NETNOMICS: Economic Research and Electronic Networking, 6(2), 103-117.
Hirt, C. W., & Nichols, B. D. (1981). Volume of fluid (VOF) method for the dynamics
of free boundaries. Journal of computational physics, 39(1), 201-225.
Houaich, Y. A., & Belaissaoui, M. (2015, February). Measuring the maturity of open
source software. In 2015 6th International Conference on Information Systems
and Economic Intelligence (SIIE) (pp. 133-140). IEEE.
Islam, H., Soares, C. G., & Soares, G. (2018). Prediction of ship resistance in head
waves using OpenFOAM. In Maritime Transportation and Harvesting of Sea
Resources. Taylor & Francis Group.
International Towing Tank Conference (ITTC), 2011a. The specialist committee on
computational fluid dynamics—final report and recommendations to the 26th
ITTC. In: Proceedings of the 26th ITTC, vol. 2, pp. 337–377.
Jasak, H. (2009). OpenFOAM: open source CFD in research and industry.
Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, 1(2), 89-94.
Jasak, H., Jemcov, A., & Tukovic, Z. (2007, September). OpenFOAM: A C++ library
for complex physics simulations. In International workshop on coupled methods
122
in numerical dynamics (Vol. 1000, pp. 1-20). IUC Dubrovnik, Croatia.
Jiayi He., Zhang, C., Zhu, Y., Wu, H., Yang, C. J., Noblesse, F., ... & Li, W.
(2015). Comparison of three simple models of KelvinJs ship wake. European

Journal of Mechanics-B/Fluids, 49, 12-19.
Jones, D. A., Chapuis, M., Liefvendahl, M., Norrison, D., & Widjaja, R. (2016). RANS
Simulations using OpenFOAM Software (No. DST-Group-TR-3204). Defence
Science and Technology Group Fishermans Bend Victoria Australia.
Kelvin, L. (1879). Popular Lectures and Addresses. II. Geology and General Physics,"
Review of the Evidence regarding the Physical Condition of the Earth, 258-98.
Kim, D. J., Kim, S. Y., You, Y. J., Rhee, K. P., Kim, S. H., & Kim, Y. G. (2013).
Design of high-speed planing hulls for the improvement of resistance and
seakeeping performance. International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean
Engineering, 5(1), 161-177.
Kim, M. C., Park, W. G., Chun, H. H., & Jung, U. H. (2010). Comparative study
on the performance of POD type waterjet by experiment and computation.
International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, 2(1), 1-13.
Kortelainen, J. (2009). Meshing tools for open source CFD-a practical point of view.
VTT, Espoo, Finland, Tech. Rep.

Lee, M., Park, G., Park, C., & Kim, C. (2020). Improvement of Grid Independence
Test for Computational Fluid Dynamics Model of Building Based on Grid
Resolution. Advances in Civil Engineering, 2020.
Lewy, Math. Ann. Courant and Friedrichs. 100, 32 (1928). It is in this important paper
that these authors first published their discovery of the conditional stability of
the difference‐equation integration method for partial differential equations
Li, T., Matusiak, J., & Lehtimaki, R. (2001). Numerical simulation of viscous flows
with free surface around realistic hull forms with transom. International journal
for numerical methods in fluids, 37(5), 601-624.
Lindholdt, A., Dam-Johansen, K., Olsen, S., Yebra, D. M., & Kiil, S. (2015). Effects
of biofouling development on drag forces of hull coatings for ocean-going ships:
a review. Journal of Coatings Technology and Research, 12(3), 415-444.
doi:10.1007/s11998-014-9651-2.
Liu, C. (2020). Prediction of Forces and Moments in Multiphase Naval Simulations
(Master’s thesis, University of Waterloo).
123
Lord, R. (1887). XVII. On the maintenance of vibrations by forces of double
frequency, and on the propagation of waves through a medium endowed with a
periodic structure. The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine
and Journal of Science, 24(147), 145-159.
Magnani, M., Onorato, M., Gunn, D., Rudman, M., Kibler, B., Akhmediev, N., ... &
Chabchoub, A. (2018). On Steady Weakly Nonlinear Wave Envelopes in Deep
Water.
Marshall, R. (2002). All about powerboats: understanding design and performance.
McGraw Hill Professional.
Michell, J. H. (1898). XI. The wave-resistance of a ship. The London, Edinburgh, and
Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science, 45(272), 106-123.
Migoette, G., & Hoppe, K. G. (1999). Development in Hydrofoil Assistance for
Semi- Displacement Catamarans. In Fifth International Conference on Fast Sea
Transportation, Seattle, Washington, USA (pp. 631-642).

Mohammad, A., & Mousavi, M. (2015). A review on the drag reduction methods of
the ship hulls for improving the hydrodynamic performance. International
Journal of Maritime Technology, 4, 51-64.
Muhammad, F. I. (2019). Predictions of Wave Pattern and Hull Performance of
MTC101 Hull Form by Using OpenFOAM. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Moore, C. S. (2010). Principles of Naval Architecture Series-Intact Stability. Society
of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers.
Molland, A. F., Turnock, S. R., & Hudson, D. A. (2017). Ship resistance and
propulsion. Cambridge university press.
Munson, W. (2012). Watercraft with asymmetrical and symmetrical boat hull. U.S.
Patent No. 8,281,730. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Noblesse, F., Zhang, C., He, J., Zhu, Y., Yang, C., & Li, W. (2016). Observations and
computations of narrow Kelvin ship wakes. Journal of Ocean Engineering and
Science, 1(1), 52-65.
Orihara, H., & Miyata, H. (2003). Evaluation of added resistance in regular incident
waves by computational fluid dynamics motion simulation using an overlapping
grid system. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 8(2), 47- 60.
Park, S., Park, S. W., Rhee, S. H., Lee, S. B., Choi, J. E., & Kang, S. H. (2013).
Investigation on the wall function implementation for the prediction of ship
resistance. International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering,
124
5(1), 33-46.
Perry van Oossanen,Heimann, J., Henrichs, J., & Hochkirch, K. (2009). Motor yacht
hull form design for the displacement to semi-displacement speed range. In Proc.
10th International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation (FAST 2009).
Pethiyagoda R. Mathematical and computational analysis of Kelvin ship wave
patterns. Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of
Philosophy. Queensland University of Technology, 2016. 52 p. URL:
https://eprints.qut.edu.au/101167/ Ravindra_Pethiyagoda_Thesis.pdf.
Pethiyagoda, R., McCue, S. W., & Moroney, T. J. (2014). What is the apparent angle
of a Kelvin ship wave pattern?. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 758, 468-485.
Rabaud, M., & Moisy, F. (2014). Narrow ship wakes and wave drag for planing hulls.
Ocean Engineering, 90, 34-38.
Robles, G., Steinmacher, I., Adams, P., & Treude, C. (2019). Twenty Years of Open
Source Software: From Skepticism to Mainstream. IEEE Software, 36(6), 12-
15.
Rosenblum, J. (2012). Advantages and Disadvantages of Open-source. Retrieved from

http://www.cloudtweaks.com/2012/08/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-open-
source/
Refvik, H. (2016). Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) Study Investigating Wave
Loads on a Torus at Deep Sea (Master’s thesis, Norwegian University of Life
Sciences, As).
Reynolds, Z. M. (2003). Semi-displacement hull. U.S. Patent No. 6,668,743.
Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Rhee, S. H., & Stern, F. (2001). Unsteady RANS method for surface ship boundary
layer and wake and wave field. International journal for numerical methods in
fluids, 37(4), 445-478.
Riegel, J., Mayer, W., & van Havre, Y. (2012). About FreeCAD.
Senocak, I., & Iaccarino, G. (2005). Progress towards RANS simulation of free-
surface flow around modern ships. center for turbulence research annualresearch
briefs, 151-156.
Seo, D. W., Lee, S. H., Kim, H. C., & Oh, J. K. (2010)a. A Numerical study
for the efficiency of flow injection on the diminution of rudder cavitation.
International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, 2(2), 104-
111.
125
Seo, J. H., Seol, D. M., Lee, J. H., & Rhee, S. H. (2010)b. Flexible CFD meshing
strategy for prediction of ship resistance and propulsion performance.
International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, 2(3), 139-
145.
Shen, Z., & Wan, D. (2013). RANS computations of added resistance and motions of
a ship in head waves. International Journal of Offshore and Polar Engineering,
23(04), 264-271.
Srivastava, A. K., Akhtar, H., Gupta, A., & Kumar, R. (2016) Hydrodynamic Analysis
of the Ship Hull.
Sugalski, K. (2014). Fishing vessel hull design and towing resistance calculation by
the CFD methods. Zeszyty Naukowe/Akademia Morska w Szczecinie.
Svahn, D. (2009). Performance prediction of hulls with transverse steps. A Report
of Masters Thesis, The Royal Institute of Technology, KTH, Centre for Naval
Architecture.
Tanaka, H., Nakato, M., Nakatake, K., Ueda, T., & Araki, S. (1991). Cooperation
resistance tests with geosim models of a high-speed semi-displacement craft.
Journal of the society of Naval Architects of Japan, 1991(169), 55-64.
Teixeira, T. A., & Souza, J. A. (2019). Computational modeling of resin infusion
process applied to small vessel hulls. Journal of the Brazilian Society of
Mechanical Sciences and Engineering, 41(10), 445.
Thomson, W. (1887). I. On the waves produced by a single impulse in water of any
depth, or in a dispersive medium. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London,
42(251-257), 80-83.
Thompson, C. (2011). Build it. Share it. Profit. Can open source hardware
work. Work, 10(08).
Tuck, E. O. (1989). The wave resistance formula of JH Michell (1898) and its
significance to recent research in ship hydrodynamics. The ANZIAM Journal,
30(4), 365-377.
Ueng, S. K., Lin, D., & Liu, C. H. (2008). A ship motion simulation system. Virtual
reality, 12(1), 65-76.
Wang, Q., Yang, W., Li, F., Ren, X., & Tang, Y. (2015). M2P2: the pre-processing
software tool for Micro-Macro coupling fluid simulation. Advanced Science and
Technology Letters, 120, 727-734.
White, F. M. Viscous Fluid Flow 3rd edn. New York, NY, McGraw-Hill, 2006. ISBN
007-124493-XWilcox, D. C. (2008). Formulation of the kw turbulence model
126
revisited. AIAA journal, 46(11), 2823-2838.
Wilcox, D. C. (2008). Formulation of the kw turbulence model revisited. AIAA
journal, 46(11), 2823-2838.
Wu, H., He, J., Liang, H., & Noblesse, F. (2019). Influence of Froude number and
submergence depth on wave patterns. European Journal of Mechanics- B/Fluids,
75.
Yang, J., Rhee, S. H., & Kim, H. (2009). Propulsive performance of a tanker hull form
in damaged conditions. Ocean Engineering, 36(2), 133-144.
Yousefi, R., Shafaghat, R., & Shakeri, M. (2013). Hydrodynamic analysis techniques
for high-speed planing hulls. Applied Ocean Research, 42, 105-113.
Zhang, Z. R., Hui, L., Zhu, S. P., & Feng, Z. H. A. O. (2006). Application of CFD
in ship engineering design practice and ship hydrodynamics. Journal of
Hydrodynamics, Ser. B, 18(3), 315-32.
127
128
Appendix A Lines Plan of Passenger Ship
129
Appendix B Lines Plan of The Patrol Boat
130
Appendix C Lines Plan of The Fast Interceptor Craft
131
Appendix D Trim Angle of Fast Interceptor Craft at Speed 10 Knot
132
Appendix E Trim Angle of Fast Interceptor Craft at Speed 12 Knot
133
Appendix F Trim Angle of Fast Interceptor Craft at Speed 13 Knot
134
Appendix G Trim Angle of Fast Interceptor Craft at Speed 15 Knot
135
Appendix H Trim Angle of Fast Interceptor Craft at Speed 16 Knot
136
Appendix I Trim Angle of Fast Interceptor Craft at Speed 17 Knot
137
Appendix J Trim Angle of Fast Interceptor Craft at Speed 18 Knot
138
Appendix K 0.orig folder : Speed (U)
139
139
Appendix L 0.orig folder : Turbulent Kinetic Energy (k)
140
140
Appendix M 0.orig folder : Specific Rate of Dissipation (omega)
141
141
Appendix N Constant folder : Transport Properties
142
142
Appendix O Constant folder : Turbulent Properties
143
143
Appendix P System folder : blockMeshDict
144
144
145
145
146
146
Appendix Q System folder : controlDict
147
147
Appendix R System folder : setFieldsDict
148
148
Appendix S System folder : snappyHexMeshDict
149
149
150
150
151
151
152
152
153
153
Appendix T System folder : surfaceFeatureExtractDict
154
Appendix U Allclean
154
155
Appendix V Allrun
155
156
Appendix W Fast Interceptor Craft Model (Rhino.3dm) Hydrostatic Data

Percentage Differences
156
157
Appendix X Software Evaluation Survey Form
157
158
158
159
159
160
160
161
161
162
162
163
163
164
164
165
165
166
166
167
167
168
168
169
169
170
170
171
171
172
172
173
173
174
174
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS
Journal Mechanical Engineering Universiti Teknologi Malaysia:
a) Ummu Saiyidah Najihah Zainudin, Abu Hasan Abdullah and Nasrudin Haji Ismail
(2020), Geometric Modelling and Analysis of Passenger Ship Hull Model Using
FreeShip Plus.
175
175

Master Thesis Correction Ummu Saiyidah Najihah

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Master Thesis Correction Ummu Saiyidah Najihah

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTEGRATION OF OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE (OSS)

INTO THE SHIP HULL RESISTANCE ANALYSIS

UMMU SAIYIDAH NAJIHAH BINTI ZAINUDIN

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

DECLARATION OF THESIS / UNDERGRADUATE PROJECT REPORT AND

Date of Birth : 07 MAY 1995

Title : INTEGRATION OF OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE (OSS) INTO

Academic Session : 1 – 2020/2021

I declare that this thesis is classified as:

CONFIDENTIAL (Contains confidential information under the

RESTRICTED (Contains restricted information as specified by

✓ OPEN ACCESS I agree that my thesis to be published as online

1. I acknowledged that Universiti Teknologi Malaysia reserves the right as

SIGNATURE OF STUDENT SIGNATURE OF SUPERVISOR

MKM183009 NASRUDIN BIN HAJI ISMAIL

Date: 23 MAY 2021 Date: 23 MAY 2021

BAHAGIAN B - Untuk Kegunaan Pejabat Sekolah Pengajian Siswazah

Tesis ini telah diperiksa dan diakui oleh:

Nama dan Alamat Pemeriksa Dalam :

Nama Penyelia Lain (jika ada) :

Disahkan oleh Timbalan Pendaftar di SPS:

UMMU SAIYIDAH NAJIHAH BINTI ZAINUDIN

A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the

School of Mechanical Engineering

Every challenging work, needs self-efforts and self-determination as well as

I would like to express my deepest appreciation to the staff Marine Technology

In ship-building industry, the design field is dominated by commercial

Dalam industri pembinaan kapal, reka bentuk sesebuah kapal biasanya

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 7

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 37

CHAPTER 4 RESULT AND DISCUSSION 87

LIST OF PUBLICATIONS 175

TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE

FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE

Figure 2.1 Basic components of ship total resistance (Molland et al.,

CAD - Computer Aided Design

APPENDIX TITLE PAGE

Appendix A Lines Plan of Passenger Ship 129

1.1 Problem Background

Shipbuilding industry in Malaysia lacks in advanced capability, especially in

In order to achieve the objective of this study, an integration of alternative

The expected results of this research are an effective workflow complete

1.2 Problem Statement

1.3 Research Questions

Develop an effective workflow of Open Source software for geometric

1.4 Research Objectives

• To develop multiple workflow of integrating Open Source software modules

• To determine the most potential workflow module set of Open Source

• In solver stage, the study will use OpenFOAM software as a solver.

• In post-processing stage, the hull form will be visualized by using Salome

– Passenger ship (MTC 092) is a planing hull and categorized as a

– Fast interceptor craft (MTC 112) is categorized as a high speed ship.

– Fast Interceptor craft is running into seven numbers of speed in

Participation of university as training centre for engineering professional to guide

According to Molland et al. (2017), the total resistance of a ship is made up of

2.3 Planing Hull

According to Yousefi et al. (2013), planing hull is a marine vessel supported by

Figure 2.5 Planing hull forces (Molland et al., 2017).

Figure 2.7 Pre-planing hull (Almeter, 1993).

Figure 2.8 Semi-planing hull (Almeter, 1993)

Figure 2.10 Fully planing hull (Almeter, 1993).

Figure 2.11 Fully planing hull (Almeter, 1993).

Giles (2009) give a brief definition of semi-displacement hull which known as

Reynolds (2003) supported this statement by mentioned intervention of the