”CFD USE IN AKER YARDS, TURKU”

Numerical Ship Hydrodynamics/Maritime Institute of Finland/8.3.2006

Raimo Hämäläinen, Head of Hydrodynamics, Turku

Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group

 ”CFD USE IN AKER YARDS, TURKU”
--> Some latest CFD examples from Color Fantasy, Freedom, Color Line Superspeed, Genesis etc.

1. HULL FORM DESIGN

*Potential and viscous. Wave Damping Afterbody.

2. POWER PREDICTIONS
*SEATECH 2000+, own examples.

3. APPENDAGE DESIGN
4. MANOEUVRING DESIGN
5. PROPELLER DESIGN
6. WIND FORCES
7. SEAKEEPING
Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group

Aker Finnyards/March 2006
1. HULL FORM DESIGN
Potential flow (OK)
Hull form design:
Viscous flow (?)
*Parametric hull definition way
*Normal specialist way
The Optimisation workload:

Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group

Aker Finnyards/March 2006
1. HULL FORM DESIGN BY CFD
New Wave Damping Aftbody was possible to develop by potential flow CFD-tool

Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group
5-Mar-06 Slide 4
© 2006 Aker Yards
 1. HULL FORM DESIGN BY CFD

Aker Yards has developed the new HULLFORM OPTIMISATION BY CFD

Wave Damping Aftbody (WDA)
PRESSURE FIELD
Traditional hullform:
The WDA has been used NO WAVE DAMPING EFFECT
successfully in FAST ROPAX
FERRIES, BIG CRUISE LINERS
AND CRUISE FERRIES.

The WDA significantly decreases

the power requirements. Power
savings:
A Big Cruise Liner 3-7 %
A Medium Speed Ferry 5-10 %
A Fast Ferry 10-15%

New hullform:
WAVE DAMPING EFFECT
Preferred for Innovation
part of the Aker group
5-Mar-06 Slide 5
© 2006 Aker Yards
1. HULL FORM DESIGN BY CFD:

CRUISE FERRY EXAMPLE:

More than 800 hull form
varations (semi-automated hull
form design were used) were
calculated by CFD-tools
(Shipflow, Rapid, Shallo) in
order to reach the best possible
WDA afterbody and bow form
for deep and shallow waters
The best compromise was
selected for both water depths

Optimisation by ”normal
specialist way”

Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group
5-Mar-06 Slide 6
© 2006 Aker Yards
1. HULL FORM DESIGN BY CFD
FAST ROPAX EXAMPLE:
Forebody waves, hump and
hollow waves were well
predicted.
Also transom waves were quite
well predicted.
Propeller effect, wedge lift, trim
is important

More information is
needed from CFD trim,
posible lift effects with
actuator disk propeller
etc. --> work continues !

Transom/wedge/interceptor
design by model tests
Preferred for Innovation
part of the Aker group
5-Mar-06 Slide 7
© 2006 Aker Yards
 1. HULL FORM DESIGN BY CFD
WAVE PROFILE EXAMPLES:
Wave profiles for different vessel
types: large ro-ro, LPG, LNG, fast
ropax:

The bow waves:

underestimated POTENTIAL FLOW
The stern waves: CALCULATIONS -->
Good way to optimise
overestimated
hull form taking into
account experiences,
the limitations of the
methods

Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group
5-Mar-06 Slide 8
© 2006 Aker Yards
1. HULL FORM DESIGN BY CFD
TWIN SKEG EXAMPLE:
The potential (Shipflow,
Rapid) and viscous flow
(Finflo, Parnassos)
calculations for twin skeg
LNG
The potential flow codes
good for skeg location and
angle optimisations.
The viscous flow codes
improve accuracy in
optimisation and give
excellent estimation from
wake field.

Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group
5-Mar-06 Slide 9
© 2006 Aker Yards
 2. POWER PREDICTIONS BY CFD

2500
The power predictions by the help of the potential
2000
flow calculations and good references improve
1500
Rw kN
predictions for the future better hull forms.
Rv kN
1000

The appendage effects by normal reference way.

500

0
A2 B2 A B C D E Original design

A2 B2 A B C D E
Rv kN 1481 1481 1481 1489 1531 1571 1630
Rw kN 337 245 355 264 304 382 585
Rt kN 1818 1725 1835 1753 1836 1953 2215

The example from case, where the

reference data was available/starting
point for the new design.

Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group

2. POWER PREDICTIONS BY CFD
•SEATECH 2000+ EXAMPLE:
•AKER’S CALCULATIONS FOR 3 VESSEL TYPES
CW / CR COEFFICIENT COMPARISON CW / CR COEFFICIENT COMPARISON CW / CR COEFFICIENT COMPARISON

1000
0,0013 0,0019
0,0012 CW_Sipflow CW_Shipflow 900 CW_Shipflow
0,0011 0,0017 800
0,001 0,0015 CR_2Dmet
0,0009 CR_2DMet CR_3Dmen 700

CW OR CR
CW OR CR
CW OR CR

0,0008 0,0013 600

0,0007 0,0011 500
0,0006 0,0009
0,0005 400
0,0004 0,0007 300
0,0003 0,0005 200
0,0002
0,0001 0,0003 100
0 0,0001 0

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26
20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

SPEED (kn) SPEED (kn) SPEED (kn)

SHIPFLOW: CT(Total resist. coeff.) = CF(Frictional resist.

coeff.) + CPV(Viscous pres. resist. coeff.) + CW(Wave resist.
coeff.)

MARIN (2D): CTm = CFm + CRm

MARIN (3D): CTm = (1+K)*CFm+CWm
MARINTEK (3D): CTm = CVm + CRm + CBD + CAA =
(1+k)* CFm + CR + CBDm + CAA

Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group
5-Mar-06 Slide 11
© 2006 Aker Yards
2. POWER PREDICTIONS BY CFD
•SEATECH 2000+ EXAMPLE:
•TKK’S VISCOUS FLOW CALCULATIONS: Ropax,Cruise Liner, Tanker

CTmodel / CTFinflo COEFFICIENT COMPARISON

0,004
CT_model

0,0035
CT_Finflo
CTm OR CTF

0,003

0,0025

0,002
20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

SPEED (kn)

Fn Error CT Fn Error CT Fn Error CT

0.27 -1.2 % 0.19 +7.1 % 0.11 +2.7 %
0.32 +2.3 % 0.22 8 -2.8 % 0.15 -0.7 %
0.35 +2.7 % 0.25 -4.5 % 0.18 +0.5 %

CFD tools can evaluate quite accurately the resistance of the vessels in most cases. Typical
accuracies in bare hull resistance are under 3 – 5 % and resistance curve form is quite similar
with model test results. The calculations need too much time and are difficult to do.
Preferred for Innovation
part of the Aker group
5-Mar-06 Slide 12
© 2006 Aker Yards
2. POWER PREDICTIONS BY CFD
•SEATECH 2000+ EXAMPLE:
•TKK’S VISCOUS FLOW CALCULATIONS FOR 3 VESSELS

WAVE PROFILES: TANKER CRUISE LINER

M a sa-ris te ilijä 1 9 s o lm ua
Masa-tankkeri 10 solmua
0.0 0 6
0.006
FINFL O -S H IP
10 solmua RA PID 0.0 0 5 RA P ID
0.005 10 solmua
0.0 0 4
0.004

0.003
0.0 0 3

WH/Lpp
WH/Lpp

0.002 0.0 0 2

0.001
0.0 0 1
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0
-0.001 -0 .2 0 0 .2 0. 4 0 .6 0.8 1
- 0.0 0 1
-0.002

-0.003 - 0.0 0 2
Sta tion S ta ti on

ROPAX
Masa-Ropax 26 solmua
RAPID=SHIPFLOW
2.5 FINFLO
Koe

1.5
2 RAPID
--> Earlier experiences help to interpret the
1 calculations by correct way
WH [m]

0.5

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
-0.5

-1

-1.5
Station
Preferred for Innovation
part of the Aker group
5-Mar-06 Slide 13
© 2006 Aker Yards
 3. APPENDAGE DESIGN BY CFD Original design

Model scale calculation Full scale calculation Full scale calculation

Parnassos No.: c0585 - Vs = 21.00 knots - Rn = 2 * 107 - Fn = 0.243 - CT = 0 - PDR = 0 - Model Scale (1:22.713) - Tf/Ta = 6.91/7.03 m - Waterdepth = inf - Turb. mod. = Menter 9
Parnassos No.: c0585 - Vs = 21.00 knots - Rn = 2 * 10 - Fn = 0.243 - CT = 0 - PDR = 0 - Full Scale - Tf/Ta = 6.91/7.03 m - Waterdepth = inf - Turb. mod. = Menter Parnassos No.: c0585 - Vs = 21.00 knots - Rn = 2 * 109 - Fn = 0.243 - CT = 0 - PDR = 0 - Full Scale - Tf/Ta = 6.91/7.03 m - Waterdepth = inf - Turb. mod. = Menter

TRANSVERSE VELOCITY COMPONENTS VECTOR LENGTH OF CORRESPONDS TO 0.1 OF THE SPEED TRANSVERSE VELOCITY COMPONENTS VECTOR LENGTH OF CORRESPONDS TO 0.1 OF THE SPEED TRANSVERSE VELOCITY COMPONENTS VECTOR LENGTH OF CORRESPONDS TO 0.1 OF THE SPEED
PROPELLER POSITION: 2845 mm upstream APP DISTANCE TO CENTRE PLANE 6500 MM PROPELLER POSITION: 2845 mm upstream APP PROPELLER POSITION: 2845 mm upstream APP
DISTANCE TO CENTRE PLANE 6500 MM DISTANCE TO CENTRE PLANE 6500 MM

0
180 0 0
180 180

Viscous flow

90
0
270
0
calculation for
900 2700 0 0

twin screw
(PORT) (STDB) 90 270

2615 MM
(PORT) (STDB) (PORT) (STDB)

2615 MM

2615 MM
PROPELLER
DIAMETER
5200 MM PROPELLER PROPELLER
vessel flow
DIAMETER

guide vane
BASE LINE DIAMETER
5200 MM 5200 MM

BASE LINE BASE LINE

0
0

0
7 0 00
Parnassos No.: c0585 - Vs = 21.00 knots - Rn = 2 * 10 - Fn = 0.243 - CT = 0 - PDR = 0 - Model Scale (1:22.713) - Tf/Ta = 6.91/7.03 m - Waterdepth = inf - Turb. mod. = Menter

Relative skin friction coefficient cf = τ*w / (0.5 * 0.370 * (log Rex)-2.584) with Rex = Vs Lpp / 2ν

cf: 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2
9
Parnassos No.: c0585 - Vs = 21.00 knots - Rn = 2 * 10 - Fn = 0.243 - CT = 0 - PDR = 0 - Full Scale - Tf/Ta = 6.91/7.03 m - Waterdepth = inf - Turb. mod. = Menter

Relative skin friction coefficient cf = τw / (0.5 * 0.370 * (log Rex)

* -2.584
) with Rex = Vs Lpp / 2ν
Parnassos No.: c0585 - Vs = 21.00 knots - Rn = 2 * 109 - Fn = 0.243 - CT = 0 - PDR = 0 - Full Scale - Tf/Ta = 6.91/7.03 m - Waterdepth = inf - Turb. mod. = Menter

Relative skin friction coefficient cf = τ*w / (0.5 * 0.370 * (log Rex)-2.584) with Rex = Vs Lpp / 2ν
Appendage
cf: 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2
cf: 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2
definition is not
easy
ÆScale Effect ?
ÆGood
indication from
scaling risks!

Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group

3. APPENDAGE DESIGN BY CFD
EU’S EFFORT EXAMPLE:

The ambitious goals. A step forward in computaion

of full scale viscous flow around ship hull and
its appendages.

The resistance prediction is not yet accurate enough

For the wave elevation: calculate the overall wave

pattern with potential flow solver and to study the
height of the transom, wedges and interceptor with
RANS method.

The wake field predicted show surprisingly good

agreement with measurements.

A RANS calculation can give valuable information

about the flow, which can not be captured by model
tests.

Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group

3. APPENDAGES BY CFD
Original stabilizer + recess

Original stabilizer + medium recess

Original stabilizer + big recess The viscous flow calculations in model

and full scale. The results should be
looked very carefully. The validation can
help to do good desicisions!

Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group

 3. APPENDAGES BY CFD

The viscous flow calculations for sea chests

--> Reliability ?

The viscous flow calculations for bow thruster openings

Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group

4. MANOEUVRING BY CFD

The potential flow calculations for

channel bank effects
The viscous flow calculations for bow
thrusters

ÆA lot of model test data from same

subjects
ÆGood way to validate calculations

Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group
5-Mar-06 Slide 18
© 2006 Aker Yards
4. MANOEUVRING BY CFD

The viscous flow manoeuvring calculations are flexible

and can give more insight into the physics (cross-flow,
separations etc.).

Both the calculations and model tests are needed and

more experiences has to collect from calculations.

Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group
5-Mar-06 Slide 19
© 2006 Aker Yards
5. PROPELLER BY CFD
The Shipyard’s main propeller makers are using MPUF code (a vortex
lattice method)
The viscous flow methods are coming, but seems to be today too
demanding for practical design yet
The shipyard use Procal panel method code (=is under development).
For propeller excitation calculations extended Holden (own
development for twin screw and single screw ships), Propulse and
reference technology are used

The most important propeller

calculation/model test subjects
are: ”High Comfort Class” +
Wake tangential component +
Propeller Noise + Tip vortex +
Scaling + Broadband excitations

The inception speed of the tip vortex is lower in FS

The POD flow simulation by FINFLO
Preferred for Innovation
5-Mar-06
© 2006 Aker Yards
compared with MS. The tip vortex is more
pronounced in FS -->
• Cavitation inception test at different propeller
designs
• Cavitation test at reduced cavitation
number, a tip vortex pattern closer to FS
part of the Aker group
Slide 20
6. WIND FORCES BY CFD

The wind force and wind comfort calculations

by CFD are coming
CFD gives good view from air flow
CFD is more expensive than the wind tunnel
tests
The validation is needed for the calculations

Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group

7. SEAKEEPING
CFD is coming also to the seakeeping
calculations: wave impact problems, green
water on deck,...
--> Not yet own experiences, but validation is
needed for calculations

Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group

CONCLUSION / AKER YARD’S VIEW
*CFD is routine tool in hull form optimisation
*The appendage definition of CFD is difficult. Is more and more
important (fuel economy) in future. The co-operation with makers
are needed. The validation and more experiences are needed
from the appendage calculations
*In the power predictions is partly used but more experiences
are needed
*Can help in some manoeuvring items, but the validation and
experiences are needed
*Is coming to the propeller design, but more experiences are
needed
*The validation is needed for CFD wind force calculations and
seakeeping calculations

--> CFD IS USEFUL AND CAN HELP DESIGNER !

Preferred for Innovation

part of the Aker group

 THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION !
Preferred for Innovation
part of the Aker group
5-Mar-06 Slide 24
© 2006 Aker Yards