Analysis of Variations in Bow Design and Vessel Speed on the Response Amplitude Operator (RAO) of a Crew Boat Using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)

Arnova Chandra Cahya Kirana, Aldias Bahatmaka, Dina Malsyage, Joung Hyung Cho, Seo Ou Ttum

Abstract

The performance and stability of crew boats in dynamic maritime environments are significantly influenced by hull geometry, particularly the design of the bow. This study investigates the influence of various elliptical bulbous bow configurations and vessel speeds on the Response Amplitude Operator (RAO) in heave and pitch motions. Using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations via ANSYS AQWA, four bow configurations, including a bare hull and three bulbous bow variants, were analyzed at speeds of 6, 12, and 18 knots under regular wave conditions defined by the Joint North Sea Wave Project (JONSWAP) spectrum. To validate the accuracy and reliability of the simulation method employed in this study, a comprehensive validation procedure was undertaken. For heave motion, the RAO deviation was 3.71%, and for pitch, 4.59%, both within acceptable CFD validation standards. Results indicate a minimal impact at lower speeds; however, at 18 knots, Bow 3 achieved the most significant reduction in RAO, with reductions of up to 9% in heave and 22.4% in pitch. These findings confirm the importance of optimized bow geometry in enhancing seakeeping performance.

Full Text:

PDF

References

  1. O. V. Zakharchenko, D. I. Bedrii, O. V. Bileha, O. Y. Savina, and O. V. Haidaienko, “Crewing of sea vessels taking into account project risks and technical condition of ship equipment,” J. Rev. Glob. Econ., vol. 9, pp. 130–140, 2020.

  2. M. R. Davis, N. L. Watson, and D. S. Holloway, “Measurement of response amplitude operators for an 86 m high-speed catamaran,” J. Ship Res., vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 121–143, 2005.

  3. M. G. Chiţu, R. Zăgan, and E. Manea, “Analysis for the amplitude oscillatory movements of the ship in response to the incidence wave,” IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng., vol. 95, no. 1, article no. 012076, 2015.

  4. M. K. Sanchana, R. Vijayakumar, and V. V. S. Prasad, “Design approach for reducing the wave added resistance by hull form optimisation,” Lect. Notes Civ. Eng., vol. 22, pp. 385–400, 2019.

  5. R. Sharma and O. P. Sha, “Hydrodynamic design of integrated bulbous bow sonar domes for naval ships,” Def. Sci. J., vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 21–36, 2005.

  6. J. Westphalen, D. M. Greaves, A. Raby, Z. Z. Hu, D. M. Causon, C. G. Mingham, P. Omidvar, P. K. Stansby, and B. D. Rogers, “Investigation of wave–structure interaction using state-of-the-art CFD techniques,” Open J. Fluid Dyn., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 18–43, 2014.

  7. T. Gaggero, F. Bucciarelli, G. Besio, A. Mazzino, and D. Villa, “A method to assess safety and comfort for different ship types in a region of interest,” Ocean Eng., vol. 250, article no. 110995, 2022.

  8. A. Bahatmaka, M. Y. Wibowo, A. A. Ghyfery, M. Harits, S. Anis, D. F. Fitriyana, R. F. Naryanto, A. Setiyawan, R. Setiadi, A. R. Prabowo, and K. D. Joon, “Numerical approach of fishing vessel hull form to measure resistance profile and wave pattern of mono-hull design,” J. Adv. Res. Fluid Mech. Therm. Sci., vol. 104, no. 1, pp. 1–11, 2023.

  9. P. O. Vangbo, CFD in Conceptual Ship Design, Trondheim: Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 2011.

  10. Y. Lu, X. Chang, and A. K. Hu, “A hydrodynamic optimization design methodology for a ship bulbous bow under multiple operating conditions,” Eng. Appl. Comput. Fluid Mech., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 330–345, 2016.

  11. A. I. Wulandari, I. K. A. P. Utama, A. Rofidayanti, and D. Hudson, “A hydrodynamic optimization design methodology for a ship bulbous bow under multiple operating conditions,” CFD Lett., vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 1–15, 2024.

  12. Jamal, A. Sulisetyono, and W. D. Aryawan, “Review of the seakeeping criteria for the study of a passenger ship criteria in Indonesian water,” IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng., vol. 982, no. 1, article no. 012041, 2020.

  13. ANSYS, “ANSYS AQWA user manual,” ANSYS Inc., 2022.

  14. Kiryanto, D. Chrismianto, E. S. Hadi, and A. Firdhaus, “Study of the effect on the addition of anti-slamming bulbous bow to total resistance in tugging supply vessel using CFD,” IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci., vol. 698, no. 1, article no. 012007, 2021.

  15. A. M. Kracht, “Design of bulbous bows,” SNAME Trans., vol. 86, pp. 197–217, 1978.

  16. M. Javadi, M. D. Manshadi, S. Kheradmand, and M. Moonesun, “Experimental investigation of the effect of bow profiles on resistance of an underwater vehicle in free surface motion,” J. Mar. Sci. Appl., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 53–60, 2015.

  17. W. Seok, G. H. Kim, J. Seo, and S. H. Rhee, “Application of the design of experiments and computational fluid dynamics to bow design improvement,” J. Mar. Sci. Eng., vol. 7, no. 7, article no. 226, 2019.

  18. T. G. Tran, C. V. Huynh, and H. C. Kim, “Optimal design method of bulbous bow for fishing vessels,” Int. J. Nav. Archit. Ocean Eng., vol. 13, pp. 858–876, 2021.

  19. M. A. Budiyanto, M. A. Murdianto, and M. F. Syahrudin, “Study on the resistance reduction on high-speed vessel by application of stern foil using CFD simulation,” CFD Lett., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 35–42, 2020.

  20. Samuel, D. J. Kim, M. Iqbal, A. Bahatmaka, and A. R. Prabowo, “Bulbous bow applications on a catamaran fishing vessel for improving performance,” MATEC Web Conf., vol. 159, article no. 02057, 2018.

  21. K. T. Waskito and Yanuar, “On the high-performance hydrodynamics design of a trimaran fishing vessel,” J. Adv. Res. Fluid Mech. Therm. Sci., vol. 83, no. 1, pp. 17–33, 2021.

  22. S. Zhang, Q. Wu, J. Liu, S. Li, and H. Yasukawa, “Impact of bulbous bow shapes on hydrodynamic derivatives due to hybrid drifting and circular motion tests,” Ocean Eng., vol. 289, article no. 116182, 2023.

  23. S. Tavakoli, R. N. Bilandi, S. Mancini, F. De Luca, and A. Dashtimanesh, “Dynamics of a planing hull in regular waves: Comparison of experimental, numerical and mathematical methods,” Ocean Eng., vol. 217, article no. 107959, 2020.

  24. A. I. Wulandari, A. Sulisetyono, I. K. A. P. Utama, B. Ali, P. Virliani, E. Arianti, Nurhadi, M. A. Mudhoffar, A. K. Arifah, and H. Zen, “Seakeeping performance of warship catamaran under varied hull separation and wave heading conditions,” Pomorstvo, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 275–296, 2024.

  25. T. Tezdogan, A. Incecik, and O. Turan, “Operability assessment of high-speed passenger ships based on human comfort criteria,” Ocean Eng., vol. 89, pp. 32–52, 2014.

  26. ANSYS, Workshop 2.1: ANSYS AQWA Hydrodynamic Diffraction, Pennsylvania: ANSYS Inc., 2013.

  27. K. Maki, F. Zhao, P. Horn, J. Banks, J. Martio, B. Starke, S. Zaghi, D. Villa, M. Vitola, H. S. Yoon, Y. Jiang, and S. Shingo, “ITTC Quality System Manual recommended procedures and guidelines: Uncertainty analysis in CFD verification and validation, methodology and procedures,” in Proc. Int. Towing Tank Conf., Tasmania, Australia, 2024.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.20961/mekanika.v24i2.106779

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.