Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Hydroelastic Analysis Procedure For Ships

    Uploaded by

    Victor Daggers
    79 views42 pages
    This document provides an introduction to hydroelastic analysis of ships. It discusses how traditional hydrodynamic studies that treat ships as rigid bodies differ from hydroelastic studies, which combine structural mechanics and hydrodynamics. The key aspects of hydroelasticity covered include its history, 2D and 3D theories, and applications to global load prediction and ship design. Hydroelasticity accounts for ships' flexibility and allows analysis of phenomena like acoustic responses, vibrations, and fatigue not captured by rigidity assumptions. Later sections describe steady state analyses of a bulk carrier in regular waves using hydroelastic methods.

    Original Description:

    This is a presentation showing the steps involved in hydroelastic analysis of ships

    Original Title

    Hydroelastic analysis procedure for ships

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document provides an introduction to hydroelastic analysis of ships. It discusses how traditional hydrodynamic studies that treat ships as rigid bodies differ from hydroelastic studies, which combine structural mechanics and hydrodynamics. The key aspects of hydroelasticity covered include its history, 2D and 3D theories, and applications to global load prediction and ship design. Hydroelasticity accounts for ships' flexibility and allows analysis of phenomena like acoustic responses, vibrations, and fatigue not captured by rigidity assumptions. Later sections describe steady state analyses of a bulk carrier in regular waves using hydroelastic methods.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    79 views42 pages

    Hydroelastic Analysis Procedure For Ships

    Uploaded by

    Victor Daggers
    This document provides an introduction to hydroelastic analysis of ships. It discusses how traditional hydrodynamic studies that treat ships as rigid bodies differ from hydroelastic studies, which combine structural mechanics and hydrodynamics. The key aspects of hydroelasticity covered include its history, 2D and 3D theories, and applications to global load prediction and ship design. Hydroelasticity accounts for ships' flexibility and allows analysis of phenomena like acoustic responses, vibrations, and fatigue not captured by rigidity assumptions. Later sections describe steady state analyses of a bulk carrier in regular waves using hydroelastic methods.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
    of 42

    Introduction

    to
    Hydroelasticity analysis of Ships

    By
    Raghu Varier
    19NA60R06

    Department of Ocean Engineering and Naval Architecture


    IIT Kharagpur
    Traditional Hydrodynamic Study Method: Hydro-elastic Study Method:

    • Maneuvering • Combining structural mechanics


    and hydrodynamics right at
    • Sea-keeping problem definition

    • Strength analyses
    Hydroelastcity in Ships
    • Ship is really a flexible structure and could be modelled as an elastic beam was
    considered in a paper by Inglis in 1929

    • Hydroelasticity is concerned with the phenomena involving mutual interactions among


    inertial, hydrodynamic and elastic forces’.

    • Acoustic radiation and scattering, underwater free vibration and shock responses.

    • Concepts such as mode shapes, natural and resonant frequencies, fatigue, etc are not
    encompassed by rigidity restriction, hence the need for hydroelasticity

    • Theories of hydroelasticity:

     2 D theories

     3 D theories
    Hydroelastcity for Global dynamic load prediction
    Hydroelasticity Theories
    • 2D theories started with Bishop and Price establishing basic theory for flexible-beam
    like hulls subject to steady state and transient wave-induced loads, combining
    Timoshenko beam and strip theories.

    • 2 stage approach of dry and wet analyses leads to a direct evaluation of dynamic loads
    and responses for a vessel travelling at an arbitrary heading in regular and irregular
    seaways.

    • It incorporates both rigid body motions as well as distortions.

    • Successfully applied to a variety of beam-like merchant and naval ships and its
    capability to simulate:
    • Symmetric
     Dynamic behavior • Anti Symmetric
    • Asymmetric

     Modal analysis • Steady State


    • Transient State(Slamming)
    2 D Hydroelasticity Theories
    • Importance of Hydroelasticity is attributed to the duration of loading.

    • Bishop-Belik discussed problem of transient responses due to slamming in regular


    as well as irregular head waves using impact and momentum slamming theories

    • Indirect time domain simulations of the behavior of ships were found to agree well
    with full scale measurements . Later on bow flare slamming was also considered on
    destroyers.

    • In early 1990s, potential benefits with regard to excessive cracking and catastrophic
    failures observed in MV Derbyshire and Onomichi Maru.

    • Further research showed maximum dynamic global responses can occur anywhere
    as against the conventional reasoning that it would be only amidships.
    Which Ships?

    • Zhao-Faltinsen studied wedge shaped cross sections penetrating an initially calm


    water surface using a hydroelastic theory that combines orthotropic plate model
    with Wagner type of flow model.

    • Local hydroelastic effects on local strains due to impact must be considered when
    wedge rise angle is > 5deg

    • Local effects matter for all ship lengths however global longitudinal bending effects
    should be considered for vessels >50 m length

    • 30 m long Ulstein Catamaran test by Aarsnes and Hoff showed that even for a small
    vessel, wet deck slamming would induce whipping at period corresponding to 2
    node bending mode.
    2.5 D Hydroelasticity Theories

    • Wu and Moan employed the higher order strip theory (2½-D theory) together with
    Vlasov beam idealisation to study the symmetric hydroelastic responses in head waves
    and irregular seas generated by ISSC wave spectra.

    • Hermundstad applied the linear part of this method to predict the fluid-structure
    interaction induced symmetric responses of a catamaran structural model, that was
    modelled by means of beam and shell elements.

    • His work has shown that the influence of the interactions between the hulls on the
    predicted responses is important.

    • Limitation:

    • The comparisons with experimental results for a range of speeds and headings,
    however, has been shown not to be so good, most probably due to the slender body
    assumption of the theory used
    2.5 D to 3 D
    • Xia and Wang presented a three-dimensional time domain linear hydroelasticity theory
    in which the radiation and diffraction potentials are decomposed into instantaneous and
    memory parts.

    • This theory was then simplified in two dimensions using a beam idealisation (for the dry
    analysis) and a slender body strip theory (for the wet analysis). Only symmetric motions
    and distortions were considered.

    • Predicted vertical bending moments and motions were found to be in good agreement
    with experimental measurements of an elastic warship and the S175 containership
    models in head waves and irregular seas.

    • The non-linear time domain hydroelastic analysis by Xia illustrates the importance of
    non-linearities in hydrodynamic actions.

    • The predicted bending moments for the S175 containership models show improved
    agreement with experimental measurements, especially for the flared model.
    3 D Hydroelasticity Theories
    • Beam like idealization of hull is not suitable for evaluation of global dynamic loads

    • Bishop, Price and Wu – 3D FEM (dry analysis) and pulsating source distribution over its
    mean wetted surface (wet analysis).

    • Because of the nature of the hydrodynamic coupling in the mathematical model, all
    principal coordinates are excited at each frequency with the dominant principal
    coordinate occurring at resonance.

    • At low frequencies, principal coordinates associated with bodily motions are excited as
    well as those with distortions.

    • The structure therefore continuously flexes in all seaways and the dynamics of distortion
    are not confined to resonances.

    • At higher frequencies (e.g. resonance) a principal coordinate with corresponding


    principal mode dominates with the other coordinates excited to a lesser degree
    3 D Hydroelasticity Theories
    • Ergin developed an alternative time domain analysis to describe the effects of
    impulsively loading a flexible cylindrical shell in air whilst submerged.

    • Time history effects were included in the mathematical model and iterative procedures
    were developed so that the time dependent response signals generated could be directly
    compared with experimental data

    • Studies incorporating the responses to transient excitation in irregular head and oblique
    waves were also carried out by Aksu following the earlier two dimensional work on
    slamming by Belik .

    • Comparisons of responses derived from two and three-dimensional hydroelasticity


    theories for a slender structure experiencing slamming in head waves showed good
    agreement.

    • However, as the dimensions of the vessel changed (i.e. the beam approached length) the
    two-dimensional slamming theory produced less accurate results in contrast to the
    three-dimensional approach.
    Hydroelasticity in design stages
    Theoretical Background

    • Inviscid

    • Incompressible

    • Irrotational

    • W is incident wave frequency

    • We is encounter frequency

    • X is heading angle
    Generalised response for 2D and 3 D FSI
    domains
    • Total deflection = still water + time dependent bodily motions + flexible distortions

    Mass matrix Added inertia

    Structural damping Hydrodynamic Damping

    Stiffness Fluid Restoring Force/Moment

    Wave Excitation Vector Principal Coordinate Vector


    • Total no of modes allowed = 6 + N…………………N is no of distortional modes included

    • Allows for both rigid body motions and distortions which are coupled

    Fixed Space Reference Frame

    Equilibrium frame of reference moving with a ship whilst remaining parallel


    to fixed Space reference frame

    Body fixed axis system in disturbance


    • An element of the diagonal generalised stiffness matrix is crr=ωr2arr , for r=7,….N.

    • The generalised structural damping is assumed diagonal such that brr=2 ωrνrarr , for
    r=7,…N, where νr denotes the structural damping factor.

    • The 6×6 symmetric matrix [aR] contains mass, moments of mass and moments and
    products of inertia corresponding to the six rigid body motions of surge (r=1), sway
    (r=2), heave (r=3), roll (r=4), pitch (r=5) and yaw (r=6).

    • The diagonal matrix [aD] contains the generalised masses arr (for r=7,…N) for the
    distortional mode shapes.

    • When investigating the linear dynamic behaviour of vessels with port-starboard


    symmetry the symmetric (surge, heave and pitch motions and distortions in the vertical
    plane of symmetry).

    • Antisymmetric (sway, roll and yaw motions and distortions involving horizontal
    deflection and twisting) dynamic behaviours are uncoupled.
    • Having obtained the principal coordinates in regular waves, distortions and
    internal actions, such as bending moments and stresses, are obtained using
    modal summation.

    • The vertical displacement including rigid body motion and distortion is

    • The Vertical Bending Moment is

    • The Longitudinal Direct Stress is


    Ex.1. Steady State linear hydroelastic analyses of
    a bulk carrier in regular waves
    (a) Mass variation
    (b) Moments of Inertia variation
    (c) Torsional constant variation
    (d) Sectional Moment of Inertia variation
    (e) Shear centre distance and CG distance from keel
    (f) C/s area and effective shear areas
    (g) Deck and Keel section modulii
    (h)Torsional moment of Inertia about CG
    Wet Analysis
    • The following 3 flexible FSI models are generated:

    1. Shell3d

    • 3D shell finite element sued in conjunction with a pulsating source


    distribution over the mean wetted surface of hull.
    • Discretized using 952 4-cornered hydropanels.

    2. Beamfde

    • Timoshenko finite difference beam idealization with 46 equal sections


    along the ship is used in conjunction with modified strip theory by
    Salvesen
    • Lewis conformal mapping technique employed to evaluate motions

    3. Beam3d

    • Timoshenko beam idealization along with pulsating source


    distribution over mean wetted hull area
    Ex.2. Hydroelastic Response of a catamaran due
    to wet deck slamming
    • Wet deck slamming occurs when relative heaving amplitude is larger than the clearance
    between the transverse connecting structure of the two side hulls of catamaran.

    • For this specific problem, a large extent 2 D model is adopted and so adequate
    idealization is subject to incorporation of physical features of fluid flow on maximum
    slamming-induced structural stresses.
    Simplified Modelling approach
    • Use FEM to calculate natural frequencies and eigen modes for later response
    analysis by modal superposition method.

    • Flexibility controlled by use of springs.

    • Rayleigh Ritz condensation method used.


    Steady State Hydroelasticity

    • Lowest modes represent coupled rigid body heave and pitch motions

    • Third and fourth modes correspond to the 2 and 3 node VBM

    • Mode 5 and 6 correspond to shear displacements at the connecting beams


    Transient hydroelastic responses

    • Assumptions:

    • Flow assumed 2D in a longitudinal cross section plane

    • Transverse section of wet-deck is horizontal and water simultaneously hit


    the deck in transverse direction

    • Incompressible flow

    • Irrotational Flow

    • Typical time scale for wet-deck slamming: 0.01 sec

    • Global Effects: 1 sec


    Slamming Mathematical Modeling
    • Relative Velocity:

    • Vertical Impact Force:

    • Pitch Moment:
    Q & A session

    Thank You! 
    Source:

    Lloyd’s Register Technical Association - Paper No. 8, Session 2004-2005

    Review & Introduction to Hydroelasticity of Ships

    Authors:

    Spyridon E. Hirdaris, BEng, MSc, PhD, AMIMechE, GMRINA

    Chunhua Ge, BEng, MSc, PhD, GMRINA

    You might also like