F.- 842 - DTICOffice of Naval Research (ONR 332) Dept. of Naval Arch. and Marine Engr. 800 North...
Transcript of F.- 842 - DTICOffice of Naval Research (ONR 332) Dept. of Naval Arch. and Marine Engr. 800 North...
F.- 8 842
THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGANI COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT OF NAVAL ARCHITECTUREAND MARINE ENGINEERING
M26X) DRAPER RD., NORTH CAMPUSANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN 48109-214531,17644470 FAX: 313 943-8820
Report on ONR Workshop on Nonlinear Sea Loads and Ship Response: A Basis for ShipStructural Design
Location: Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering University ofMichigan Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-2145
Date: July 7 - 8, 1994
The ONR Sea Loads-Ship Response (SLSR) program includes research areas related to nonlinearhydrodynamics, nonlinear dynamics, structural fatigue, elastic and plastic structural deformation,and a probabilistic or reliability-based analysis of ship structural design. Due to the diverse andmulti-disciplinary nature of the project, program researchers were brought together at theUniversity of Michigan to discuss the direction of their current and future research; the goalbeing to achieve a high level of coordination between the various efforts. This report containscopies of the presentations made at the workshop.
Thirty-one participants from various academic institutions, government laboratories and offices,and commercial companies attended. Presentations representing the state-of-the-art were madein the areas of hydrodynamic loading, structural analysis, design reliability, and simulation-baseddesign.
Experts in hydrodynamics (SAIC, MIT, AMI, and UofM) explained that by using variousnonlinear or partially nonlinear models, computer codes are capable of determininghydrodynamic loads, excluding bottom impact or flare slamming, in random seas. However,given the success of recent planing hull studies, the extension of planing hull hydrodynamics tothe impact problem should be straightforward thus allowing for the complete hydrodynamicloads time history in extreme seas to be made. From these time histories, the designhydrodynamic and inertial loading events can be determined.
Structural experts (CDNSWC, NAVESEA, Ross and McNatt, and ABS) explained how thehydrodynamic and inertial loads are currently estimated and used in the structural design ofships, both naval and commercial. Due to the complexity of a ship's structure and the need fortimely engineering answers, hydrodynamic load modeling is generally simpler than that availableas described by the previous hydrodynamic experts. It was agreed that hydrodynamic andstructural analysis code integration is a high priority of the SLSR project and means forachieving this integration were identified.
Finally, experts in reliability, virtual reality, and simulation (UofC, NRC, and UofM) gaveexamples of how the product of the SLSR program could fit into a larger computer environmentwhere simulation-based designs incorporating probabilistic methods would be possible.
In summary, the workshop was one of the few times where researchers of the disparatedisciplines were brought together to develop a coordinated program for ship structural design.Through the spirited discussions, a new awareness of the problems facing the different fields wasformed and in this respect, the workshop must be considered a success.
Prof. Armin W. Troesch, Project Director DIuC QUAUY Lý2 -,&UD 3July 14, 1994
I
I ONR WORKSHOP ON NONLINEAR SEA LOADS AND SHIP RESPONSE:A BASIS FOR SHIP STRUCTURAL DESIGN
College of Engineering Accesion ForUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor NTIS CRA&I
July 7 & 8, 1994 DTIC TABUnannounced
Boulevard Room, North Campus Commons Justification .........................
AGENDA By.....Disti ibution I
Thursday, July 7~ Availability CodesAvail arý,dlIor8:00 - 8:30 Coffee and doughnuts, registration Dist Special
Workshop Introduction
8:30 - 8:45 WelcomeProf. Michael G. Parsons, Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering,Associate Dean, College of Engineering, University of Michigan
8:45 - 9:00 Workshop FocusDr. Peter Majumdar, Office of Naval Research
9:00 - 9:15 NAVSEA Initiative in Wave Loads PredictionsMr. Allen H. Engle, Naval Sea Systems Command
Hydrodynamics
I 9:15 - 9:50 Large-Amplitude Motion and Wave-Load Predictions for Ship DesignAssessmentDr. Nils Salvesen, SAIC
9:50 - 10:25 Nonlinear Ship MotionsProf. Paul D. Sclavounos, Ocean Engineering, Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology
10:25 - 10:40 Break
I 10:40 - 11:15 Prediction of Nonlinear Loading of Flared Bodies Using a NumericalTowing Tank3 Dr. Brian Maskew, Analytical Methods, Inc.
11:15 - 11:50 Fully Nonlinear Hydrodynamic Loads Using De-Singularized MethodsProf. Robert F. Beck, Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering,University of Michigan
11:50 - 12:25 Loads Associated With the Hydrodynamic Impact of Flat WedgesProf. William S. Vorus, Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering,University of Michigan
12:25- 1:25 Lunch
I - • • .
I
I 1:25 - 2:00 Nor Hydrodynamic Forces on High Speed VesselsPro. ., rmin W. Troesch, Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering,
i University of MichiganStructures and Design
2:00 - 2:35 Ship Structures and NA VSEAMr. Jerome P. Sikora, CDNSWC
2:35 - 3:10 Integrated Ship Structural Design MethodologyMr. Tobin R. McNatt, Ross and McNatt and Prof. Owen Hughes,Aerospace and Ocean Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & StateUniversity
3:10- 3:25 Break
3:25 - 4:00 Probabilistic Loading of Ship St•r'. ures by SlammingProf. William Webster, Naval Architecture and Offshore Engineering,University of California, Berkeley (for Prof. Alaa Mansour)
4:00 - 4:35 Dynamic Loading Approach for Analyzing the Ship StractureDr. Yung-Sup Shin, American Bureau of Shipping
Friday, July 8
8:00 - 8:30 Coffee and doughnuts
Simulation-Based Design Environment
8:30 - 8:50 Use of Reliability in Structural DesignMr. Robert A. Sielski, Marine Board, National Research Council
8:50 - 9:25 Virtual Reality in Design and ManufacturingProf. K.-Peter Beier, Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering,University of Michigan
9:25 - 10:00 The Role of Simulation in Ship Design: Some Cautionary ExamplesProf. Armin W. Troesch, Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering,University of Michigan
10:00- 10:15 Break
10:15 - 10:50 Continued discussion:Dynamic Loading Approach for Analyzing the Ship StructureDr. Yung-Sup Shin, American Bureau of Shipping
Workshop Wrap-up
11:25 - 12:00 Dr. Peter Majumdar, Office of Naval Research
II
ONR WORKSHOP ON NONLINEAR SEA LOADS AND SHIP RESPONSE:A BASIS FOR SHIP STRUCTURAL DESIGN
JULY 7-8, 1994
LIST OF ATTENDEES
Prof. Robert F. Beck Prof. K.-Peter BeierDept. of Naval Arch. and Marine Engr. Dept. of Naval Arch. and Marine Engr.University of Michigan University of Michigan2600 Draper Road 2600 Draper RoadAnn Arbor, MI 48109-2145 Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2145t 313 764-0282 t 313 764-4296f 313 936-8820 f 313 936-8820
Prof. Michael M. Bernitsas Dr. Subrata ChakrabardDept. of Naval Arch. and Marine Engr. Chicago Bridge and Iron Research CenterUniversity of Michigan 1501 N. Division St.2600 Draper Road Plainfield, IL 60544Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2145 t 815 439-6000t 313 764-9317 f 815 436-8345f 313 936-8820
Mr. John Conlon Mr. John F. DalzellAmerican Bureau of Shipping CDNSWC 1561Two World Trade Center, 106th Floor Carderock Division, NSWCNew York, NY 10048 Bethesda, MD 20084-5000t 212 839-5052 t 301 227-1210f 212 839-5130 f 301 227-5442
Dr. Frank Dvorak Mr. Allen H. EngleAnalytical Methods, Inc. NAVSEA 03H32 (Room 3W68, NC-3)2133 152nd Ave., NE Naval Sea Systems CommandRedmond, WA 98052 2531 South Jefferson Davis Highwayt 206 643-9090 Arlington, VA 22202f 206 746-1299 t 703 602-9297
Mr. James A. Fein Prof. Owen HughesOffice of Naval Research (ONR 333) Dept. of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering800 North Quincy Street Virginia Polytechnic Institute & StateArlington, VA 22217-5660 Universityt 703 696-4713 Blacksburg, VA 24061-0203f 703 696-4716 t 703 231-5747
III
Dr. S. Liapis Dr. Brian MaskewDept. of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering Analytical Methods, Inc.Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State 2133 152nd Ave., NEUniversity Redmond, WA 98052Blacksburg, VA 24061-0203 t 206 643-9090t 703 231-6912 f 206 746-1299f 703 231-9632
Dr. Peter Majumdar Ms. Kathryn K. McCreightOffice of Naval Research (ONR 333) Office of Naval Research (ONR 333)800 North Quincy Street 800 North Quincy StreetArlington, VA 22217-5660 Arlington, VA 22217-5660t 703 696-1474 t 301 277-1242f 703 696-0308 f 301 227-5442
Mr. Tobin R. McNatt Mr. Nat NappiRoss / McNatt Naval Architects NAVSEA301 Pier One Road, Suite 200 2531 S. Jefferson-Davis Hwy.Stevensville, MD 21666 Arlington, VA 22202t 410 643-7496f 410 643-7535
Dr. E. Nikolaidis Prof. T. F. OgilvieDept. of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering Department of Ocean EngineeringVirginia Polytechnic Institute & State Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyUniversity Cambridge, MA 02139Blacksburg, VA 24061-0203 t 617 253-4330
f 617 253-8125
Prof. Michael G. Parsons Dr. Edwin P. RoodDept. of Naval Architecture and Marine Engr. Office of Naval Research (ONR 333)University of Michigan 800 North Quincy Street2600 Draper Road Arlington, VA 22217-5660Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2145 t 703 696-4305t 313 763-3081f 313 936-8820
Dr. Nils Salvesen Prof. Paul D. SclavounosSAIC Department of Ocean Engineering134 Holiday Court, Suite 318 Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyAnnapolis, MD 21401 Cambridge, MA 02139t 410 266-0991 t 617 253-4364f 410 224-2631 f 617 253-8125
III
Dr. Yung-Sup Shin Mr. Robert A. SielskiAmerican Bureau of Shipping Marine Board, National Research CouncilResearch and Development National Academy of SciencesTwo World Trade Center, 106th Floor 2101 Constitution Avenue, NWNew York, NY 10048 Washington, DC 20418t 212 839-5245 t 202 334-3397f 212 839-5211 f 202 334-3789
Mr. Jerome P. Sikora Prof. Annin W. TroeschCDNSWC 60 Dept. of Naval Arch. and Marine Engr.Carderock Division, NSWC University of MichiganBethesda, MD 20084-5000 2600 Draper Roadt 301 227-1757 Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2145f 301 227-1230 t 313 763-6644
f 313 936-8820
Dr. A.K. Vasudevan Prof. William S. VorusOffice of Naval Research (ONR 332) Dept. of Naval Arch. and Marine Engr.800 North Quincy Street University of MichiganArlington, VA 22217-5660 2600 Draper Road
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2145t 313 764-8341f 313 936-8820
Prof. William Webster Prof. Raymond A. YagleDept. of Naval Architecture and Offshore Dept. of Naval Arch. and Marine Engr.Engineering University of MichiganUniversity of California, Berkeley 2600 Draper RoadBerkeley, CA 94720 Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2145t 510 642-5464 t 313 764-9138f 510 643-8653 f 313 936-8820
Prof. R. K. P. YueDepartment of Ocean EngineeringMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, MA 02139t 617 253-4330f 617 253-8125
ONR WORKSHOP ON NONLINEAR SEA LOADS AND SHIP RESPONSE:A BASIS FOR SHIP STRUCTURAL DESIGN
JULY 7A,19.4
ADDITIONAL DISTRIBUTION
Dr. John Daidola Mr. Thomas GrootM. Rosenblatt & Son, Inc. ORINCON Corp.350 Broadway 9363 Towne Centre DriveNew York, NY 10013 San Diego, CA 92121-3017t 212 431-6900 t 619 455-5530
x 230f 619 453-9274
Prof. Dale G. Karr Mr. Harold KeaneDept. of Naval Arch. and Marine Engr. ORINCON Corp.University of Michigan 9363 Towne Centre Drive2600 Draper Road San Diego, CA 92121-3017Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2145 t 619 455-5530t 313 764-3217 x 271f 313 936-8820 f 619 453-9274
Prof. Dong Joon Kim Prof. Alaa MansourDept. of Naval Architecture Dept. of Naval Architecture and OffshoreNational Fisheries University of Pusan Engineering599-1 Daeyeon-Dong, Nam-Gu University of California, BerkeleyPusan, 608-737, KOREA Berkeley, CA 94720f 82-51-628-7433 t 510 642-5464
f 510 643-8653
Mr. Richard MooreMarine SystemsUniversity of MichiganTransportation Research Institute (UMTRI)Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2150t 313 763-2465f 313 936-1081
>.4U
01
000
0zz
0 -
00
0~0
)0 WU *0
Eu. u
0
V) w
- I0--
0 %Q4
z zI~ 0u 0
0 I>4I
U w
z Iwum Rr~nI
040oz
z
H Z
F-4
00
0I
........
z HI0I
H --- ---------
01J
o z 0~z c
u~z 0
0 (0 00o4 20-4 n
- 0 -Jel c
0 00
j )
0I0
I U.INE
HcV
ICIz
0Ic
0U
Olt,_ _ S _ _ _
CY
d d
IN OV a I IvW
IL z~zJ
0
ON0 00
00, Z
C~j co F
I s46cILBVV U3 0WO
010
Qz I=00
- 0
0 zOno !S.
C.) a00,
-NVO a3ZMO
0i0
CC
p.L 0
* -I4
Z CD
-Y 0 t0
*; 6 iINW 03IEYUO
.41 AD00
o - -
00
IMEI
H 0 0.LN3YOYY aznvmO
0 i0 1 _ _ _ _ _*
i II
0.
0
I zII 1 .11if
* d
0L3Vl 1 nW8 N0
>4 I0 i
0 z
I q
0 C2
U141 I
(SBIE10a) 31ONV 3SV~d
_ _ _ _ _1 ii0
Io
0 (n I
*M4 0
(IISNJ- Q~.LO INWMINO
Oilmi 7m
6 V)
0:a*
.( ~I~I t
~I~w
- -
ULIn
46-
L~z oV.OO NWO NII3
>4I0 z
Z Un
IiL
z>4m
00
;;1 ZZL>00
0 ,iO
U 1 If 0 U J . g
00 <I Orn
IjzC0Ic-C
I L
"o U
-0 z
zz
1 zJ
0 -
0.4-E- > 0 IIu (n I
In*___adU IZ IZI
01LZ
UcrU
- 00
040
I Fm
000 0z4
u 0 0 0- O**Wiz*4 (n U (n (nuJ
>4I0"' ;1 U
04 Mi
0 I
z ~zJ
0 C41.4 0uI
z gM 0 uI
_ _ _ _
U UIC) z 0IC)I
I
HH-
I o _g
E n o E -0
, z , :
*0U4 00
ZLZ
,z!
1.4Wr0.r u P-4
Z 0~H= uz
I
I I 0
I U,'z0
I -"
:I , .0 0 •.-I -- 0
!C -
cc cu
9z 00
I -~ zZ0
OnEn
IU
Moe-
Thi isex ctl w at e ite d t smulte
..... ..... ..... .........
*NII
Z w
1 il
i .'-I
cc 0*
4) _ ;4 1" 06
I "°
*
0 • ufp- ,I
i i
rAI
C,, ~rjAii
z1
"'I
0-4~
C-CI- I
wOuI
C,) p.~I
o I Io ;T
-- I
C,) I
III÷
I -
IU
I II I I le
-. -.
La
P,
oN 4'n/
00
it,~
I ,
1 OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION* _AND SPONSORSI
I. Status Report on IDEAS Motion and Load System
A. System Development1. ARPA (1988-90) * System Integration
* Large-Amplitude Code
2. USCG (1989-94) • Safety (IMO) and Capsizing
3. ABS (1992-94) • Motions and Loads for StructuralDesign
4. ONR (1992-94) • LAMP Development* Installation at Tech Center
* B. System Applications1. NAVSEA (1990-91) * CG47 AEGIS Calculations
2. ARPA (1993-94) • Simulation Based Design
3. ARPA (1994-97) • Hypercomputing and Design(Rutgers)
* C. Related Work
1. ONR/USCG (1992-94) • High-Speed Craft with
MARINTEK
2. ONR (1990-94) * Nonlinear Seakeeping RANS/Potential Flow Coupling
IH. Needed Improvements and Extensions
ISAn Eniploy.-Own~d Compalny
0 oil
-PENN
zIC*n
00 mM1
40a~min"u
0 -l~4uI)*PoC I qi)
I LAMP CODE FORMULATION
I
I1 FMaster Geometry
* ~Physical Domai
I Comput aton DomainFigure 2: Master Geometry and Panel Distribution in
both Physical and Computation Domains.
An Emnploy.-Owfld Conpany
E 0
COO 0E Go
E In
40'
.~~C P" _ _4) ID r0 -* =2
-j .-
43 44
.- 00
0
C:,b.) bO -d ,- n 0
rI
II
______________________________________ ¶1I -
I - C
0 -
rj� 0 4.)4.)
UI Cuo C,,
I - __ _____
II j ___
* Cu0
I ____
I z -0� 0
p -a.)3 a.)
C,, � <�� 1p4
- __ ______
I - - . . - - . - -
-� -1 3'..0
� E- Ct,..- � W
* bO.,-I,.�* 0'��
I -_______
II
IVALIDATION SERIES 60
!\pitch /
UMU
oii
A'
3 , S I
Heave Series 60. C, ,0.70'1A
u? LAMP-I d,0 SMP ,,I
SAbW/X=1/40 J Exp. "._._ _
' i xpLAMP-1
0Exp.
".. H eave --' . .....
S Pitch P a %,
a --
.c 0 6 a x["" I. ', I.
SLAMP-I "- -' 0 '-- SMP -----
w a oc h/X=1/50 Lo •"
A h/X=l40 "II = I I I I 10.5 0.7 0.9 1.1 1.3 0.4 0.7 1.0 1.3 1.6
L/l. L/X
An Employee.Owned Compan, •
+ 6
I 0~
+
+ +* C5u 1 0
I-- al 0* VSW *7. L3)0 6IP1 /- .
z cm) + 0 ;
M3 + +N0
5 0i
c,,
- + 0i
041 ++1 0. -'T, C
+ /E 6
I
MIDSHIP BENDING MOMENT UI
I
v LAMP-2, HogV L rAMP-2, Sag!U
cI LAMP-4, Hog
CL4 LAMP-4, Sag I
Fn, = 0.27S-X/ - L= 1.200
0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03h/)L
Comparison Between Linear (LAMP-i), ApproximateNonlinear (LAMP-2) and Fully Nonlinear (LAMP-4)
An Employee-Owned Company
* SAIC Large Amplitude Motion Program (LAMP)
AEGI'rS CRUISER IN WAVES
LAIP TII '
L..NIP-IIAM
--- -- -
171ITieI'(n (.
"° ! I
so
=o I
LO
o I
C6
0
C6
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0
t iT-ITime Record of Wave Elevation and Linear (LAMP-i,----) and Nonlinear (LAMP-2,--)Predictions of Pitch and Bending Moment for APL Containership at Fn = 0.244 in UnidirectionalIrregular Head Seas with hj3 = 6.261 meter.a,C)
*- LAMP-i
a LAMP-2. Hog •..
0.0 3.0 3. i.O 1z.
SlpfmaM Wm HeWd bw (
BM It,( as a Function of Hjr3 for APL Containership Body Plans for CG47 AEGISat F,, = 0.244 in Unidirectional Irregular Head Seas Cruiser and APL Containership
An Employee-Owned Company
w
I SIMULATION-BASED DESIGN* June '94 Demo
Sequence #7* Multi -Disciplinary Physics-Based Design
* Hydrodynamic Wave Loads... .... .-.
Stutua Response
:I u
.*mI I
rrJ
E4 L i• TI
olwI'm
'Pa
1.0
a m
' - . I IIJ..
* oz
PC 0
4aCu. . .
omom0 C. Cc
Iw 4m *PO OPIU P-- -WU 0 j
In 0
oIFOF
141
Z u~
zz -it196~ w
II SIMULATION OF PLANING CRAFT MOTIONS55' Patrol Boat at 40 knots In Sea State 5
IIIIIIIUIIUIIIIU
Ww w Th�
OIt
C0lCalal
E- a a
1000
0 ~0 u*-II -111*11MM0 V
0 0i
hiz.
Ci2 | - - - - I,lIOllllO
Lo io
U -
4 1
CDbIIocl)C
---------
iI
if
if'
if
iSr
CI,
*1 ii - -s I I iI
.. b '
H I, -n IIIIII III
0 "1
C gill.~ 1A 1 -I
~0 000
t I-.
ad -
Ad -Mo 0
I we- -•be
i . - 0
II /cis-- " -
AWN'ulaI i
Selm ' 1
L f Ii
JJI
U-31 I
UPA! V,.
w ý-A
0 ~
CIS (D
-k A
CUC 4zI
uI
II* SHIP MOTIONS
AND
WAVE INDUCED STRUCTURAL LOADS
I BY THE CODE
I SWAN
Iby Paul D. Sclavounos
MIT Department of Ocean Engineering
II
Presentation to
I ONR WORKSHOP
ON NONLINEAR SEA LOADS AND SHIP RESPONSE
A BASIS FOR SHIP STRUCRURAL DESIGN
College of EngineeringUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor
July 7&8. 1994
III
III
REVIEW
OF SHIP MOTION i
AND STRUCTURAL LOAD IPREDICTIONS
IBY THE
FREQUENCY DOMAIN CODE i
SWAN-1
IIiIIII
I ! tI
IIIIIIIIIIIIIII
0
I C2
II 40
I
'IIII
* II
=0.20 , _ IIIII
4 IF=0.20 , /7
wv�.= 5.o IIIUIII
IIIII
=3.0
IIIIIU
Fr='o.3, wfP=Loy
IIIIII
UI
0I
Ct0
_ _ - - " . - i"• - - '
* /OM
WOC; let•
m " ---- Strip Theory Exeiet
o. 6.. II I
0
*1 E x p e r im e n t s
10 SWAN~hor Strip Theory
-SWOA N• • - SWA
0 _ _ _ _ _
.4 , ; . .
°
/4
I I
0I
COa
Cb.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 Cb~s 1.0 1.5 2.02
AIL AIL
Figure 10 : Heave and pitch exciting forces and motion-- of a modified Wigley model advancing atFroude number F =0.3 through regular head waves.3
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIH Fipare 2: Hull and Free Surface Discretisation for 5-175 Hull.
II
I
- SWAM 4 -Me.. SWAM ( * 4
6 V,4m am I - * Ia
I'mI
• =,
'" I"is.5
j' I'=B I " m "U Iagem
-00=60000 in
IND
"" |
IIMI
n"s-. _ I
Figuro 10 H eave and Pitch Motions for the S-175 Hull in Head. Beam andQuartering Wa~ves at Fr = O.MT.I
is- S 4 I
III STRUCTURAL LOADS EVALUATED BY
* SWAN
III
I
I p(•)
I
I
U~~~ 14Fj E S~A R FOR CF B~-- (BTT
01M(1;, M, ME SENJO1ING MOMENT F RANM
m I
II
- - m.
swan
0.100.
14 S"i IIN I 154 N
3.00 -
* WM .... •, b- .m
OVWA
----- SWA0 ( 0 .
2. . . W
L -/,--,
Huil in Head Waves at Fr = 0.3.I*1
@9 'I n N I Ii . m . I i-l0 2. 30 0 SO 00 " 20 _ :•'0 .
Fiue9: eri~ SerFre n edngMmn a isi Scino."teS-SHuU n Hed Waes I Fr 0.3
l i , , , m m n mm I I I I I
IIIIIi SEAKEEPING BY THE
UTIME DOMAIN CODEI
l SWAN-2
IIIUIIIIII
I
Y distance traveIled=(Ut)/L=O 10 75
0.50 I
0.25 / I
-15 -1.0 0.5 U.0 0.5 I
AYS0,751 /
0.751(Ut)A.=OA
0.50
-10 ••.5••. K0.5 I
0Y \ . (Ut)/L=1.0
N I0.50
0.25 N "
0 00-h3
0.75, ,\ (Ut)/L= 6.0>\>0.75 , , \ ,
0.50 1
0.25
0.00 -1.,- -5 o. o,
Figure 5-2: Transient wave elevation and body pressure contours for the Series 60
hull in steady forward motion at F = 0.2. started impulsively from rest at t = 0.
78 3
IIIIII
I 4
I AI N 4'I
IIIIIIIII
- --
A.A
714
I .9Z
IIIIIIIII
IIIIII Figure 5-8: Radiated wave pattern for the Series 60 hull in forced. periodic heave at
Y = 0.2 and encounter frequency w/(g/L)i = 3.335, viewed from above and behindthe vessel. A snapshot of the steady-state periodic wave pattern taken at the middle
* of the heave cycle.
II I I I I II[ 7
1.25
2.001
--O -- I-
0.75-
1.00
0.50- C E0.nm5ns0-. . . . . . . . . S W A N I0 .5
SWAN2 I os
0.25
0.075- 0.150
0.050 - 0100
- - - -.. ...
0 025 0.050-
0.000 0.00020 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 50 S.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 35 40 :5 5Z 5.5w (Lig), 12 w~l (
Figure 5-12: Diagonal added mass and damping coefficients for the Series 60 hull inheave and pitch at -Y = 0.2.
91
III
:400o
3 0.025
.......... SWAN1 0.100
0.075,- SWAN2 .
ii 0.075 .
S: 0.100
0.050-
I00750
" -.1 00
•0050
I.
-02 -O.0-0.025-I
2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 40 45 50 55 2.0 25 3.0 3 5 40 4.5 5.0 5.5
w jug) W 2Lig): 2
I Figure 5-13: Crom-coupling added mass and damping coefficients for the Series 60
hull in heave and pitch at F = 0.2.
II
9')
I
.:stance IraveiIed=iU*, L=0.2I
3 25 1
.1 -05 . 0.5 T Oy (Ut)/L=O.4
0.006 - .
y(Ut 4/=1.00.75I
(t/=6.0I
0.50
Fieure - :Transient wave elevation and body e contours for a transom hullin steady forward motion at -F = 0.3. started impuisiveiy from rest at t = 0.
IrIIIIIIIIIIII"II
i Figure 5-14: Steady wave pattern for a transom hull at F" = 0.3, v'iewed obliquely
i from above and behind the vessel.
I 95
Heave
Diff actiI
Fiur 518 H av ad ifratin av aters ndliea bdyprssrepatenfora rasomhul t = .3an enoute fequnc a~gl )2= .2
102
W%1
I mIa ci U
IicU x 0I 0i
C~~-
coJ
i I,
C4u
- ~-UCu
0,£
w UU
0 CML0
XCI 0)
6 00
mC0CDc 0
Co U3
Ii 0001 1of panels along body WL
------.3 0i -. 40
o.0o0 50
.0.001
I IV
0.003 Sinkage
I -0.004
o}1o0
Ii 0.005
I ~ ~~0.000 V • •,•IIJA '•-/ Trim
1!.005 v
-.0,10
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30
t (gIL)"',
Figure 6-1: Convergence of heave and pitch motions with spatial discretization for themodified Wigley hull in the transition from rest to steady-state equilibrium position
at Y.= 0.3.
I109I
0.O01 time-step size. A t (g/L) "2
-------- 0.04
--------- 0.02
0.000 0.01 I
I0.001
'21%I/A
-0.003
-0.004 I
0.010 I0.005 I
A
0.000 I
40010VI
0.0 5.A 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30t (g/L)''2
Figure 6-2: Convergence of heave and pitch motions with temporal discretizationfor the modified Wigley hull in the transition from rest to steady-state equilibriumposition at T = 0.3.
110 I
I.-WI
I~II
F/-g __- -44-5A
Fp V ---50
I -----
-0.07S
F/pgV-0.100
II
-0.005
I-0.010 / -•..... •-:......=..
M/pgLV
40151
-.0w0!
10 20 Xt(GVL),-2
I Figure 5-16: Convergence of forces with spatial discretization for a transom hull insteady forward motion at Y = 0.3.
II
97I
III
-0 000 time-step size. A t (g/L)1 2
S---- 0.04
-o.oo'54 il- 0.02S- 0.0100I
-00100 --- -- -. .
.io I
, I-
0 I 0Il I
-0.020]
0 ~10 2
t (g4L)I 3Figure 5-17: Convergence of forces with temporal discretization for a transom hull in Isteady forward motion at T = 0.3. I
1
-- =• • I II II
I I_
_ _ _ _
_II__
_I_
_ _ _ _
_ _ ,
11.5
I011.0
i 0.5
---- SWANI7 SWAN2
0 Exunments. GemntsmaI 0.0
180-
I o120* 60-
-31
(deg) 0
-60
-120
10.50 1.00 1.50 2.00
X /L
I Figure 6-7: Magnitude and phase of the heave response amplitude operator for theSeries 60 at Y = 0.2.
117
7.5
"0so/ 0'
I Z.511.A .
2.5 '
------ SWANISWAN2
0O E-enments: Gemtsma
0.0180-
120
60z~s /
(deg)
-60
-120
-1800.50 1.00 1.50 2.00
X./L
Figure 6-8: Magnitude and phase of the pitch response amphitude operator for theSeries 60 at F = 0.2.
118
Ii C,)
0
0 Mw C,)
OccI ~ui-
*Z 6Pý0 0
.0 ~0 loW<ýjL
Si co 2, w
UUzE 0 qLUC
I *mZ z 0 ,) Z
<uiw LL 2-
v5 LU
0 0
IdLL0Ic
LL.
020
20LL.
(I) ow;C I
> LL 0 z
Fn Clo > Co
w C, 0-, O 2I--I
a. 0 Co
0U CA 4iI- a l l
C4 2l 0 0 Co )
CL 4~ Wi z
.j I- 0zW9 -0 Do
0m 4i 0.W 2
2U DLL2u W C
z* 0
M1 0 z3i 0
0 z0z LU
CL 0Z z Zw) -
* 0 0I- -
LUm u
LU 0 cr.*z > 0<
I LU 0 CZ F LU ZL
* 0 00L
I- Cc. LD < 0CZ*Z LU LUN
0L 00
I0 0A Cc 0 0
0
I-IL 0
LLU
00
Z ~ur
cow I
LUJ
LI. LL.0ow
00
cc nj m
0
ILU U-L
LU L LL* U LL u-r
cl Dz LA.Cf* 0 DU U
0 CO) LU 04 urn
a 4L (.) 0 Z
z~~ LU1-)
* 0 LU0 2zI j u- l L
0
LUULU >J x
cc 0z 0 >IU ClD LL 0<
2 ~~LU >
I . 0 n CL~E
*L 0 .D r. 0
Ihc > cIu
0
z U>
o zoz 0
z 0 Iý- 0
LU M.
0 Lu 0
Cl) 0LU 0o z cco 0 U. 00-LU _ LL. 0z 0 -a<: 0 0CLlU.. I- Clz 0- 4:wr.
Ul) 0U WO 0Z0 LL_a 0-(1)1- 0 cn c.0
> z xw0 1=0 Uc) 0=~ 0 < c0L .LL. >~ ca..
LU
-J LU
jLU L
U-LU cc'
I LU 0oz LL
SLL. 0U0 cc
Cl)lL LU
LU LU Z LU
ix < 0Ir LL Ow L..
* 2 w LU L-0 0 0
z 0 0-LUU0 LU Lw x2 ~C/) LU
IVI
W-4_
7~F.-]~ .'
kz~ n
UIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
I
I:2.0 - -�
N ____ - I-o
III
U IU
IU
II 3c.J'U I
I
IUII
II
IIIIIUIUIIIIIIIIIII
w /)
0 EUc0 14% E Mr *% qNL 6O LO6666o
0>I
C/) LLJ alwu
Z-/W N CWU LL =J
0Zo~ _ I <
xWL
LON 1Q0 0
C-4IQ LO E co,C\ E-I,
V 66
W b0oo
co 6
I I 0
1400 00
b cb0 0l 0U j%.Q~ 0
0
0@
C 0 0- 0 0 0;I 0
CN
o0 (0 co
I
!¼
iI,
ItII.
ItJ
~ ~. ji~3' g
II _______
IIIIIIIII UI
I,-LI�
III
I N�rII
II
II
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
I -tI r 4
P ~ 6
000
IIU
3 I___ ___ ___ I
I- IIUU
-
__ __ __ __ �iI.5 1
II
__ __ __ __ __K__ __ __ __ __ LJ� I
E I '0 10 - I I� I
0 0
60 0 0 30 0
0 0 0
U2 III
fA
100,
00 0
U / 0
o co'ad ,
ool* 6~o0
* *1*4
.0 \ dl14o,
CI Cq4 N i
t~.to00
.9N.
IiV 0 0
4* C1
C4
-4 '0
0I l
.00 . 01
.to
' . -. ...... ...... ..... . -. 9 -
1000.0. . . 00.. . -9
'- . ""...... .. - -
- / . . . . . . . . . ... "".. . .-.
.,, .... ....--.. - • I. O
-S ".--5.. I- *
r .. I..
ClU
In
-"..-""/ //0
-" ............. /S
.)"....
III I I
0 0 0 0 0 0-0
IN.N 0 00,
I I U
IlooI
N oh
C*4 C14
z
E E
ww
E- LLO I% ='ILU~ w
LI wL
C,) -w (7)W
LLJ 10Ocrccw
00
x
C14
-414
IC"Ito.
pSi
.. ~ .. ........
III IIUIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
101
z co0 0
0 LLU U. 0 z C; I< ýD 0
X<OX
LO 00
0iC
UL
~ 0
*J w0<~ -
> a.. OD 13
0 0Q~U-3
0 0
0~ 00
oo ssa00i ~
co)1
ICO
co co
0
a)
(Ma) :)J ~ (YOaAvaH
Ie
I....... ...
iEE
NNC
...
C12<o C1
Ioio aAa IS. H,
II
I I I'p
� $* II
-� I.1
I
� 1V\ \
�v. * III
A' II
44 Ia
* III
II
I --- -...
I - - -•
I - - _ _ _ _ _
I I
Elii
Ec:.
4 -Z 44 C;
z
x
Figure 1: Description of Coordinate Systems and Geometry of the Body
Figure 2: Photograph of the Oscillating Body and its Supporting Structure
AZIMUTHAL IMAGES Z
xI
10 IDE NL
ZI
TI
xI
SINGLE STRIP OF PANELSI
*ON BODY AND ON FREE SURFACE -
YI
* p44
0
F. (D -V4 -
00v
0..)0~ W~to
em .- GI
-0 )424
ORO
2A >c
III
*1 II
N I
II
0 II
-- _ _ I__ __ I_ _ _ _ _ _ I_ _ _ _ _ I
N Ot� _____
N
- 0
IU20I
II
E 0o �
i.1�
II
S~I
III
I
i~iII
II I
II0
ti
II
I
III
ICI7
m~
I
I
IIII
S~I
S~I
Io
U IIIIIIII
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGANI* FULLY NONLINEAR
HYDRODYNAMIC LOADS USING1 DESINGULARIZED METHODS
I Robert F. BeckI Armin W. Troesch
Yusong CaoI Steve ScorpioII Minglun Wang
I
I,
IIII
III
PROBLEM FORMULATION I• I
* Basic Assumptions:
1. Incompressible and Inviscid fluid
2. Irrotational flow I3. Surface tension neglected
* Initial boundary value problem: 10 = Uo(t)x +#(x,y,z,t) I
JKineratIC and - U(t)Dynamic Conditions
I I
, " u-U.(t)nl + v. ,Sol IV2.# = n"o n
/---=-U.(t)nj + v1, - I
Initial Conditions:
, =o (950),a~o {g•o)
FREE SURFACEBOUNDARY CONDITIONS
Kinematic condition:
(Vo - V). Vq U0 W C (on F.S.)St az ax
axst 'X (on F.S.)
8y V y (on F.S.)8t
Dynamic condition:
4 = -glq I V0. V0 + V. Vo La Uo(t)LO (on F.S.)8t 2 p ax
8 awhere T=-t 5i + v -v is the time derivative following
a node moving with velocity v.
Fixed Horizontal Nodes (v(0 0
Dt~
Vý. 1, -UO W(or F.S.)&~ az a
and 1
DSt -- +Vq•'VPt 0t
M Material Nodes (v = Ua(t)i + Ve)
DXF=UO(t). + V
IN I
where XF W) = (XF W), YF W), ZF(t)) is the position vector of
a fluid particle on F.S. and
is the material derivative.I
FULLY NONLINEARSOLUTION METHOD
Time-Stepping Procedure
1. Solve a mixed BVP at a given instant oftime by a desingularized boundary integralmethod.
2. Integrate the nonlinear free surface kinematicand dynamic conditions with respect to time.
3. For free body problem, must compute • or&
& at present time step, then integrate the bodyequations of motion.
I
DESINGULARIZED BOUNDARY IINTEGRAL METHOD
"* Simple sources can be used because of Udesingularization
"* Easy discretization (nodes only, no panels)
"* Desingularization distance related to the local nodespacing I
"* Simple algorithm, easy programming and highperformance on supercomputers
"• Can lead to O(N) algorithm II
z ySOURCE POINT
xI~xI
S°D.
Sgiven "
7 NoIOlLOCATION PomIT
II
HYDRODYNAMIC FORCES
Fi =-•IsP ni ds
where
p=-- Uo(t) 4-gz -Iv vý-V
- 021r-~ Yv-wy+-
_8St h gz-l2V
* - perturbation potential in moving coordinate system.
z V
II
APPLICATIONS OF THE IFULLY NONLINEAR
DESINGULARIZED METHOD I"Verification by comparison with analytic solutions for flows Igenerated by isolated singularities and bodies of simple geometry(Cao, Schultz, and Beck 1991 and Cao, Lee, and Beck 1992)
"* Shallow water solitons due to a moving disturbance I(Cao, Beck, and Schultz 1993a)
"• Two-dimensional wave tank with an adsorbing beach(Beck, Cao, and Lee 1993 and Cao, Beck, and Schultz 1993b)
"* Submerged spheroid traveling at constant forward speed(Bertram, Schultz, Cao, and Beck 1991) I
"* Two-dimensional added mass and damping for forced heave, sway Iand roll ( Lee 1992, and Beck, Cao, and Lee 1993 ) I
"• Two-dimensional heave, sway and roll motions of a rectangularbody due to incident waves (Cao, Beck, and Schultz 1994)
"* Three-dimensional cylinder in forced heave (Beck, Cao, and Lee 31993)
" Exciting forces on a Tension Leg Platform I
"• Calm water resistance and added mass and damping of a Wigley Ihull (Beck, Cao, and Lee 1993, and Beck, Cao, and Scorpio 1994)
II
Free Surface Elevationsfor a 2-d tank with a 45 degree
wedge shaped body
with and without spray damping
Area of Interest
4P
Spray damping area
L- =30H=3
B/2= 11PI =-0.1
B/2
(B/2) 2-g(0 g
3
30Spray root Undmpe
2.5 t*=50
2.0 I
1.5
t*=4I1.0
..... .............................I.........0.5
0.0 .... ............ t*=30
Spray damping area
-0.51 --5 -4 -3 -2 -1
Distance
Wave profiles near the wedge
Energy
.o .o 0o .o .
0
N
0
4%QQ
.0<
<I
0.08 - --- r- I-- -- IL .05 - Horizontal Drift Force A0.04 - Al *L
0.03- l r :C4 0.02 * 3Ca 0.01 -' .25(r)0 .. . .. .. :
S-0 .01 - it" dn"N. 1, , undamped-0.02 - , ,' ,:
i.. -0.03 - V-0.04 1 1 0 - 1 L , I I
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0.08 .,0Heave Force
• 0.06 - A it',#.% 0.04 -
!'i0 ... ... ... ... .. .... .... .. .... ......... g
-0.02 -f,, Io,,
II I I-0.04 -1 1 I
-0.060 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0.01- Roll Moment
0.005
-o0.005 : :::-0.01 1
gg g I I
-0.015 '
-0.02
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
B / -2)
III
Freely Floating Body Dynamics
IfdXF F
Hydrodynamic -=F1(X F, XG,VG)I problem dtF
- = F2(XF, •F, XG,VG)
I
Euler's equation dXG =-VGof motion
dV1dd-t = F3(XF,•,FXGVG,
dVGt
Iwhere the state variables are defined by the generalized vectors:
XF = location of free surface nodes
4F = potential of free surface nodesXG = location of vessel center of gravity in 6-degrees of freedomVG = 6 components of body velocity at center of gravity
IIIIU
II
Hydrodynamic force at present time step
Fi = -11p ni dsS
P= Uo(t) - gz - !t
I8_ - aOL z - vt t v t+
To evaluate or
"* Backwards differencing for - UStI
"* Direct solution of BVP 8
v2 0 in fluid I
-g. - - v -- on SF
Ia o-ý avlOSHSa f,,' an 5T, vH-)+n._a on SH, Ss
at) T H i',~ t
0 R -* oo
II
I
I* WAVE-INDUCED FREE BODY MOTIONS IN
A TWO-DIMENSIONAL WAVE TANKIIII
IPneumatic wavemaker Floating body Wave absorbing zone
IpI,
I
IIIIII
0.3 - ,
-. .=SwyO-a=O J
S..-... ,. io*,
0.15
0.1 I0.0 I
-0.05 I-0.1 0 10 20 30 40 so so
- Sway Force
4a-1~ IO~0.05
0 ........... ..... .
.0.05 I,.I
-0.1 1 - I0 10 20 30 40
Effect of error tolerance on sway (dt* = 0.2)
I
-- - * Heave d'= 0.2
I ..... e-iOr
0,06
I ... ............. ........ ..|I''
-0.05
I
I.0.1
_ _0 ~~ aBa. 05%s
S...... i. rs ON,
0... .... .. ..... .O. .......
I
-0.05
!0 .
0 10 20 30 40 50 s0
Effect of error tolerance on heave (dt* 0.2)
-i.0
02n =0. i0=26- Roll d 0.2I
0.15 ... .aI*.*
S..... caIO l -
0.1 a* I
0.05
-0.06
0.1 1
-0.2
0 10 20 40 so so
o.3,,0-.-- Roll Moment
a
02 a. .. .
0.2 .-... u 0
-0.31.I
IIIIa
a a
0.2 i )
0 10 20 30 40 0 60 1tVv7ff
IEffect of error tolerance on roll (dt* = 0.2)
I
0.3W1 - im~lSway =10-4
o.oo0.2
0.15
- ~ 0.1
I0.05
0I-0.05I
-0.1 s0 10 20 30 40 s0 o0
I.0.1
Edc'-o., Sway Force.... di'-O.2
-- dt'sl
1 .-0.05
I-0.10 10 20 30 40 50 60
,vf'TH
Effect of time step size on sway (e -- 10-6)
0.1
- dt'sO Heave - 10-4*.. d'suO.5
0.05 I
S........................... .. ... i0,06 I
•o i I
-0.06 I
0 10 20 30 40 so so
0.1
-- dHeave Force
0.05 -- di'l
0 ............. I
-0.05
0 10 20 40 40-soEe iz nh
Effect of time step size on heave (e• = 10-6)1
I
I0.2 - v Ioi va wI
I 01 ' '- duld..
I 0.0
i.0.21-
.0.10
I 1
0 .05
40.15I. .
-0.25
010 20 3 40 so O
1 ,,u... Roll Moment0.15 ... di'uU
OVOW
I,• 0.1•I
-0.05
-0.
I-4.1S
0 10 20 30 40 50 5o
I Effect of time step size on roll (e = 10-6)
0.3 'Sway I0.25 - Scbe A d11'u.2
S..... $Cos 8lO•
- Ischeme a~u0.2
0.15
0.1I
0.05I0. .... .. \
-0.05 I.0 .1 1 ., - 0 - - -
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
0.1 I I
Schem A dt'=O. Sway Force-- Scheme a 41s'=.I
...... Scheme a dln'O.2
. ... Scheme & dt'0i
0.05 I
-0.15I
0 10 20N30 40 s0 6o
Comparisons of sway using the two schemes I&!
0.1
-- Sb A 41.,J Heave- c I 1411.9I
.Schbme dalou
0.05
S...... -.. ......... ..-S-... . . . . . . .
-0.05
-0.1 I I p
0 10 20 30 40 s0 60
0.1 1 , 1
-- �m A dV.93 Heave Force--- ScbeMI41=0.1...... ScMeme B d',
Scheme a d4944
0.05
0 ..... .. ....... .-.-.-. .-.-.- * ~ - - - .
-0.1
0 10 20 30 40 50 so
Comparisons of heave using the two schemes&
. - Scbeee A O'.U Roll0.15 ..... S m, I 'dI
0.1 I
.0.11
-0.15 I
-0.200 I I I020 10 20 30 40 so so
020 :Sch A 49'-4.2 Roll Moment
--- Sckhe" a t•t.
0.15 IS&U a
Sc... . 3d a dt'=.oA
0.1 I
91, 0.05
- 0
•o.. I
-0.05
-0.15 II I
-0.21 I
0 10 20 30 40 so 0otvj71 I
Comparisons of roll using the two schemes II
Wigley Hull
B z 2
where L = model lengthB = model full beamT = model drafta2 = coefficient for bow fullness
- 0.0, standard hull= .2 for modified Wigley hull m
For both the standard hull and the modified hull III, LIB=10 and B/T=l.6.
II
yI
I
ISXi
Control PointI
Source Point0.l1*LdI
Desingularization near the leading edge of a Karman -Trefftz airfoil I
IIII
I
Desingularized distance at leading and trailing edge = 1. *LdEntrance half angle = 13.5 degrees
1.4,,,
I 1
0.48
02 -II
-2 -1.5 , -1 "0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
x
Desingularized distance at leading and trailing edge = 0.5*LdEntrance half angle = 13.5 degrees
1.4 '
1.2
Vt
I 0.4
02
I2 -1.5 -1 -O.S 0 O.S I I.s 2
x
The effect of desingularized distance on surface tangentialvelocity (vt) for a Karman - Trefftz airfoil
II
Desingularized distance at the bow => 0. -*Ld
0.5 *Ld..I
I0.50.40.30-:2
p* 0.1A
0-0.1 '
-0.2
-0.4
-0.3Poo
-10 -04.5
0-
I
0. 1*LdA -Beck et al. (1993)...
(no control points at the bow)
0.5
0.40.3
0.1 I
-10 I0 .- 1 z
x 0 IWigley hull double body solution
pressure on the forward half of the body
I
iIII
io0.04 Experiment
Present Calculation
I 0.... Beck et al. (1993)
I -. 2
-0.041
-1i.0 -03 0.0 0.5 1l0
2x/L
Wave profile along the standard Wigley hull* (Fr = 0.25, fixed sinkage and trim)
IIII
IIII
Wave Elevation Along Centedine and Wigley Hull, Fr-o.25 I
0.6 trg9L 21
0.4 -Experiment
0.2I
0 ....-.... 4......-...-.... ... .. . .... ... ...........
S-0.2 Numerical result
-0.4
-0.6Bow .sternm
-0.8 - o-20 -10 0 10 20 30 4
x(m)
IIII
III
C#1I
II -'
I �0
I 11
I I;.III .9.;.
'S..,
0
II C
II
I ira:
I I
IC
I I
II
IIIIIIIII
wU.� III
o
I' Idci; I
IIIII
Wave Resistance Components for Wigley Hull. Fr-wO.25
I 0.002
I0.0015()
0.001 r
w
.............
-0.0005 -~1P~-0.001a
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
IIII
Added Mass and Dampingin Heave and Pitch
for lModified Wigley Hull III I
IIIIIIIIIIII
0.006
0.006 aPOt4~
0.0040.004 .- Total Force
0.003
" 0.001
*- 0.0020 6 vi-2v2 3
:i , I I I
0 .. hl I. - s pitc excitationF r = 0 .3 . . .t c . . . m. . .t. .e.. . . . . ... " . l5 : • , i " 6I.o,9-.•: -r• pgz
.0.002' , p pI0 6 10 15 20 26 30
Modi fled Wigley hull III - surge force due to pitch excitation
Fr = 0.3, pitch amplitude = 1.5", oI/•i = 2.76642
IIII
oh _ .. , :; -.•... -pg0. / - :.006 -p-,
-0.016-P
40.015
-0.026 -Total Force
-0.03 I0 5 10 1s 20 2630
Modified Wigley hull Ill - heave force due to pitch excitationFr = 0.3, pitch amplitude = 1.5, w/'"JE = 2.76642 -
.• v \" I l, :• I"-" • "" -I
•.• I
0.015
0.01
- ,-0.005
001 i.0: 2 30I10
-od.0i Total Form
-pgz
I0 6 10 16 20 25 30
I ~Modified Wigley hull HI - pitch force due to pitch excitationFr = 0.3, pitch amplitude = 1.5% cofi4-E = 2.76642
I
1.2 'St* baouy - ' bow3-D Hybrd MW - 3-D HybridMe"
DSkAMiamd Meh*Dusmguuhnad M.edo*
23
0.6 2 ,
S-..I
~0.6/
0.4 ~
SI
0.2 0.5/A / I/
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 34 5 6 7
0.5 1 1 , , , 0.1 . . ..Suip'7 by -
-
3-D Hybrid Melod --- 3D Hybrid Me• d0.45 Deeogldaried Method * Meod
Ezpe~.eob + Eipeaimm +00.4 0I...--
0.35 -: +
0.3 A1
I•0..25 -0.2I
0.2502 ' /
0.1 //0.1 I
0.1 -0.4
0.05
00 -0.5 --05 6 2 0 1 2 4 5 6 7
Comparisons of experimental and theoretical added mass and dampingcoefficients for forced heave
(Wigley model III, Fr = 0.3, za/L= 0.00833 ) I
0.06 0.125 . .. .
3.D yk~iMe"ad 3-D HybniMOd0.046 Disgulaaminid Mad .
0.44 0.1
0.03 4
0.0.0- .
I0.02 0.075
0.025 \
~0.02 [> 4 0.06 4
"0.015
0.01 0.025
0.006
0 0 70 1 4 567 0 1234567
anu, o.• -J9I0.5 1 I I S
So* -by
0.1 o.is-3-D Hybid Me-thodDeouazdMto 0.45 'Deskwiagiuzd Muthod *
ExeiIo EapeinoWi +
0.40 +
025.0.11
0.3
-0.3 0.15
0.1 4.
-OA ~0.06
.0.5 - 0 . . . .0 ..5 5
0 1 23 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 :rLSA 6 7
Comparisons of experimental and theoretical added mass and dampingcoefficients for forced pitch
(Wigley model III, Fr = 0.3, pitch amplitude = 1.5*)
UIII
Forced Oscillation Uof I
Large-Flare Body I
Uo0= IIIIIIIIIIII
ICin
.. .. .. ..... -
.. ...... ..................•......... ,.,,
.. . .............
N O " .. ............
......-.-.. .. .. ... Y
H\ ...........
If I
. .. . . . . . . . . . .
0
Lu RI.
4-4~
34
I n ... ........ C• 0, -a,-
I , (q .) Z.
I~.v -- !•..
IIII
C')
II
I0 I
a) IC4J
I0a)Uo Io
4-bo
* - III
a) I0
I I I
In C') C�J 0 C�J 0)
(qj) ZtI
I
- ogn
Iin
0f cm0UmoC
'5l)z
C3
I I
co 0
4)ql U
In Wi
OD toI mI
* -'a- za
C.)j
4)
4) =
44)
O.) cm0C
(-q0-
III
LOADS ASSOCIATED WITH THEI HYDRODYNAMIC IMPACT OF
FLAT WEDGES (flat cylinders)
I
William S. Vorus
I The University of Michigan
IIIIIIIIII
II
a) Zero Viscosity
b) Zero Compressibility
c) Zero Gravity
Hydrodynamic Impact of: U1) Relatively Flat Cylinders (2D) )
2) of Otherwise Arbitrary (smooth) Geometry
3) Including Variable Impact Velocity U(with oscillatory perturbation)
4) Time Varying Contour Shape
5) Multiple Contours
IIIIIII
DEMONSTRATION IN TERMS OF SELF-SIMILAR SEMIf-INFIfiTEWEDGE RIMPACT
IItIpje
BIWI00 y
v z(t)
I WEDGE IMPACT FLOW* FIGUREl1
y ~z -c(t) z ch
Iv
V Z b(t)
CYLINDER IMPACT (CUW)MFIGURE la
yZ ch Ij
z
___ __ ___ __ __ ___ __ _y wi v
z Zb(t)I
CYLINDER PENETRATION (CW)MFIGURE l b
I C (ztt)
I a. Solution SpaceII =0
I J • ..... WL •Vs(z,t) I VtI zYw
- , Zb(t)
- Zct)Z b. kinematic linearizationz c(t) to z-axisIZ
C (z,t) I C=0
V v,(z,t) V,(z,t) V,(z1,t)(large) (small)
PHYSICAL APPROXIMATIONFIGURE 2
vortex sheets (bIZdZ d-b -1. 1 b
Ys 0 Ys 7(c) \c0y xA 0 CVn( ,O)O Cp (,O) = 0
MATHEMATICAL MODELFIGURE 4
I
FREE CONTOUR DYNAMIC BXIYVARV CCNDfTXO
ICp() - 0 on
ICp(0=1-V2()- (O+ 2zciJ 2,vY(o)eCo + CYC((]
II
0=1-v2(C)+2z b[J (Co)dC0 + Cos(0 1!9 ICb
This condition is clearly satisfied for Vs(•) = Vj, a constant in 1 < < Igiving:
Jb ý2V. IWith Zbt = Zctb,1
and Vj = -27s
IIII
WEDGE CONTOUR KINEMA TIC BOCNJDARY CONDITiON
1 1 _ _ '- 1 Yln _b2 -CC2
Solution:
Y 2
I+Y(2_ 1;LP;L;L+11-2_ I-c C2;,; 1 (b2 -1))~1
[r 2). - _ •""+ ,b._22 2 F J
Here, A a. and F is the hypergeometric function of one argument
with puatan-r(sin).
VELOC17Y CONTINUITY
Remove singular terms as:
LLY b2 ) F(•.•,;L,X + 1; 1- b2 0
ir 21.
DISPLACEMENT CON77NUITV
yI
y (Zt) I
VtI
- - -- - - - - - - --
dy (z)t+ 1 Icztsndt 2C
In terms of a displacement potential, :
yC(4)=1I+ tanP v(4)1y*(4sinPI
40 =c-d1+4ztanP0!491
2 CC
*(bt _o . tanos~ (1-t~( -L[
VX3 1 -L 2(30)
For continuous displacement at =z/zb = 1:
coýi n __)- I
I SYSTEM SOLUTIOV SUMMARY
II
UNKNOWNS: CONDITIONS:I
I Continuity of Displacementzb,_
'bt 3 r- t.an l(sinfi)2r(A)r(--L)cos/itanf 2 z
* 2
I Continuity of Pressure
I vj,
I Continuity of Velocity
* b (b =zb/zc)
1 + -71 (b~ F(;AAA;L+l1;l1-b2)= Y S -2Vj.9t 2X
Wedge Vortex DistributionI
Q I c( C)= L,2 Q tF ( A, A. 2 + 1;Q ) , w ith Q (C;b ) - (2 )
I Wedge Pressure Distribution
C (C()= ,2((C)Zctrc(1Xb-l)+ I ,c(CO)dC•+Cc(C)j = Zbt/b.I 'CO =C
I
COMPLrA TIONS
UWetting Factor ("jet rise") U
IW F= Vt =z z tan
IWF= 1!J(A) with, J(A). a F( and t=I3 - I2br(,X)r(!-..X)ms 2 i
2
I
WEDGE SOLUTION CHARACTERISTICSTABLE II I
13,degrees Vj b WF J Cf5 34.63 1.00063 1.512 .9629 846.310 16.65 1.00192 1.460 .9293 180.315 10.68 1.00340 1.413 .8997 68.9320 7.711 1.00491 1.373 .8740 33.5625 5.944 1.00640 1.338 .8519 18.6830 4.777 1.00790 1.308 .8328 11.32
IIIU
zc(t) Zb(t)
j z1 (t)I
TRUNCATED JET CHARACTERISTICSFIGURE 7
For continuity of mass, to second order:
I 2
I
II
3 From the displacement ptnil
I
II
8jt = 8j/t
.23 I
.1 1I
10 20 30 (degrees)
IJET THICKNESS AT JET-HEAD TRUNCATION
FIGURE8 8
Jet thickness distribution, for Cp = 0: 1( I I
SW86() V= -z-J Zbt :5! Zi (56)
I
For 8(zlt) = 0: I
(57) I
Smp Y - x f) ADDED MASS OF IMPACTING WEDGESI ½X(wi tanfif FIGURE 6
I2.4
I--- - von Karman' (1929)
2.0 -x-x-x-x-x Wagner (1932)+ - + -+ Wagner-Sydow, Sydow (1938)
Mayo (1945)Dobrovol'skaya (1969)
0 Hughes (1972)1. '-Zhao(1993)SIM1.6 A•-~---ZX Zhao(1993)ASYMP
S- - - Vorus (1993)
I *1.2
I~.8I
i .4
I
I 20 40 60 80
I Wedge Side-Angle, I (deg)
I
d(t)I
MORE GENERAL CONTOURSFIGURE 10
.51.
JETHED SPAATIN FJOIT, V(1,IAND FFST, c(,),, erss TmeI
JV)ETHA SEARTONCAVELOIY Vs(1¶)
.5 0I
.2 .4 .6 .8
* Cp(O,'O)
110.0 CKEEL
PRESSURE COEFFIC0ENT
Cp(V0) versus Time, 'IWG FIGURE 13
II
J I (,r)
II ___ __ _-,__ __ _ ._ .__ __ _- ___ __ __ __ ____,__ __
i .5 ¶mx1
I20.- NORMAL FORCE COEFFICIENT
Cf(¶z) versus Time, -T
I!
Figure 14
5 CONCAVE, OFT. 1.844
WEDGE, CFT- 1.739r=
.5 rmax I
WEDGE CONTOUR pRESSURE DISTRIBUTJI(ONIFIGURE 1
cpi II
20.
III
I, I
lp~q ..1,2,..., 11
II
91 13I
121.0
ywI10
103
I 96I 918681..
6II
I -1.0 2.0
FREE-SURFACE DISPLACEMENTWVEDGE CONTOUIR
FIGURE 12
I
FUTURE WORK I
Nonsymmetric Cylinders ULinear Gravity Flow Beyond the Jet Head ULifting Surface (3D) Corrections HExtraction (inverse impact) URapid Lateral Expansion of Thin Cylinders(vertical line-source) i
Gas Entrapment
III
IIII
C,., Cu
I -
C..)
�Im 4 c/�
I* �Ci�E '0 Q
� ?1�o- 0Z� � 0
�) � � 0I OCf)* o0� �* ,�C,2
�)*H
Iz -
U z0I z z
III
III
eSm
op-o
- I
0 P
0~ 0 00 a-A C,
Cu 0 Ic9 000 I- •J *• •0mon
o • r•rr C HQl
uI *• >E, E4i
II
_ rjA
Vq)0 a! 4..
W' c
Xwo
III
II
I• I
U , I
/° II I
II
I/ III
III
I
/ -U- U
* C!
Ii 0
.. . • II •,-- N " '"0
"" 0
I _
I, C-,__ ,-
i
ii
ii
I
III
I •. I4)
.C-
40
II W 4.
in I 0
III
I a)
IyI
.~ a C.)
U I - ,~0
ca a
a) -
II
I ... • ........ ........i • ----' • - .~ ..." ----" -" - " -'-. -. '- " ":. . ; --.. ....•
Cx.
i "-
= X)
Ci
!~x. . ., , I I I I-
0- U
-1:
It a
tcr) 0I*
a3
0*itq
0
to to 0t0o0v 0 0 0
UlU ccU
-u
CSoQ
S cq
. C'4 C.) IrFl LQ
co 0 00
I
1I
w ka-.-
0. -
X,~ S
co
ca ou
MI
- iO-
Itý
0-
Q) C9o EIE
o Oi 0LfCQ~
Leta
*00
00
SSCd~
00
0X
0*e q
it)I II
0 0 LO
0 0t 0Ci)
xI
-j C4
py,
zfCCIO
If X li-
WSU Pa'UOAI
ILI
-. ON"
3e c
rag;m('~ *VIU3 Pa:a
-4--
WS2 I 0 AI
u/
00
cc)~C CZ Uz ")cc z
o 4 )
ce)
-ce-
#.DU
IciII cri
C#OQ
00
IN CoI co2
In II I,, N
JII
Iq C,,
00~
A to Iq I
to I
I L6
3 00
QCQ C4
Il cvO 1102 C;
II
ccI
f ),j= ~/ ,'I'
// II
a)// - m,II1-4-- Ct
C 3
a) III ICQC
IVOE
I U 0
CJ 003 aW0 E- -o
0
I I- 3 I9
I# l
iiMon
a3 2
o oo0Lf C;I
PIC 00o koI
0 Q 'Q 0 C
III
UI -� * 1 CQ
I C I
uS J.� � I C�cJ�c�a I �I.aV a I -"
S I
I ��IL�I II * a
@5 I 0�
C) I 00 U I �
I �-I j >eII
II�a II IC) SI 00
* - I -o 6I -� I II* I
__________ IIo - I I I:-.IUIIII
Ix
**lo
H '-.4
41.R1
0. L O 3 1
0II 3I c
IL
a00
P- 0g
0 00
Q) C
co emo It Q 0c
-r 1 '-
I a1
C'2
aI 0 -= iIiii
0) 00
ci 0
II) cc C,- I
SHIP STRUCTURES
Jerome Sikora
CDNSWC
I CODE 66.1
I Bethesda, MD 20084-5000
---I
I - iPOE -
.13
0 U
0
"H A "-
0Hcc0
zI
I UUz0
CS,maa
ec 4*~ * <
mess eeg
ccI~ gee eee~~~~ 0
I I-II o
a. w
"I" III Suute0MWI
Anx lommicOtt fisa s iiat Jo"oL A.W (TO-W. izinii on ax mu
U)
1< z cus I--#HZ3 II. SM1
z tU~U
z
UZ +1
LLLOI3 W. wOO1
wZ
00
LLJ0
a (1oo10U wU03 3AMG4-)wk
LUU
00
L) Fg~iL)JN3 1Y.3
usIIU
co 00 Iid csI
JLNaN ~aznIO
IC____ ____ ____ ___ ___ ____ _ ___00
I --
I -00-
I -- S.
414
4,**
40 C4, U
4,3YY 0ZTrU
2SLOPE =0.986
..
0
... * ....-...................... ..................... . ................ .......
----. -- - ..-... ....
*DATA LINEARIE
-4 -2 0 12LN(WHIP MOMENT/CHARACTEFISTIC VALUE)
" 31 TYPICAL WE1BULL PLOTS OF 0G-el FULL SCALE MIDSHIP W4IPPING MOMENTSo) VERTICAL BENDING SEA STATE 6.20 2oKOTS, HEAD SEAS
SLOPE - 0.74M
-I -~ --------- - - -- - ------- .........-.-......
. 3. .. .....................................................
- I I I i I I1
-4 - -1 0 1 21LN(WHIP MOMENT/CHARACTERISTIC VALUE)
FIGURE 6 TYPICAL WEIBULL PLOTS OF CG-81 FULL SCALE MIDSHIP WHIPPING MOMENTS •CO VERTICAL BENDING, SEA STATE 6, 25 KNOTS, HEAD SEAS U
I
I(
I lop_ _ _ _ _ _ _
I * -b
L)
0.
I C 8U~ IC:4? V.'4O zmN1
MAXIMUM WAVE PLUS0LOW FREQUENCY WNW" MOj WAVE-INOUCED
NOD.N(tamSAG OFF SET
SLAfA4NOOlM
4) YvIADIIONAL BULL bOmmO Man MUACI
LOW FOK40UNM NA^- M ftA4
0 * 0. 6 so0.
A A
HMnm Frw UBC
-as &V %l m
b) CG-4 7 CLASS PHASE ANGL OWV FLARE IMPAMT
FIGURE 27 TYPICAL BENDING MOMENT TMgINE ISOpIES SNOWING pEAEANGLES BETWEEN ORDINARY WAVE ANID VWE IMP16
WI
I ,II~I *p I, ,
rp4
INhE HITORY
ORDN'Ry WAVETWE HISTORY *'ft" " .TA9I I
5RSPNS AMPU. TS -
~ us.. u.&qb
EXCEEDANLCE CUV -LTINAYI
EXCEEDDJ4CE URVE PLO&hIA A~lYS
PROFILE1 1MM £1AO8 8.6A &5*5636IL&L666
us4.
~ fls6WULm an 10s Mm -3
6511141 *do. own Iessmeamu
As5b
DWEEDANC
I Oumcm
UhI
VirginiaIN~ch
INTEGRATED SHIP STRUCTURAL DESIGNI METHODOLOGY
Prof. Owen HughesAerospace & Ocean Engineering Department
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
I Tobin R. McNattProteus Engineering
X vginia ~II
I
Program Objectives
"* Leveraging of past work in ship structural designconducted in the US into a practical, computer-basedsystem.
"* Resolution of important technical requirements related tofatigue, ultimate strength and reliability which willfacilitate the implementation of a reliability-based designsystem.
"* Utilization of ongoing efforts in predicting ship motionsand loads.
"* Preserving the technical leadership of the US in shipstructural design capabilities.
" Providing advances in the safety and cost effectiveness ofmilitary and commercial ship structures, offering dual-useof the integrated, computer-based structural design toolwhich will be produced by the research efforts.
" Enabling the rational, reliability-based structural design ofships from first principles, so that new or advancedgeometries (e.g. double hulls, SWATHs) can be practicallydesigned by non research groups such as shipyards andnaval architects.
II
I
XirginiaI Ip1ech
Overview of Research and Development Program
I Ship Structural Design Technology Developmen
Struglurgi-DisciD~lnes Focus Group
Task 1. Fatigue Design
(Task 2. Ultimate Strength
(Task 3. Damage Tolerance
T ansk 4. Slam-induced Structural Response
Structural Design Svstem Focus Grou,
CT Task 5. Structural Reliability Technology
Task 6. intertacing Hydro -Structures Cod"s
Task 7. Integrating Structural Design System
CTaskS8. MultI-Disciplinary Design Optimization
Year! I Year 2 Year 3 Ye 4 e
IVirginia
WTech
II
Years One/Two Tasking II
Task 1. Develop a Fatigue Design Procedure
Task 2. Improve Ultimate Strength Analysis Methods
Task 2. Develop Damage Tolerance Design Technology
Task 4. Computation of Slamming-Induced Structural UTask 5. Structural Reliability Technology m
IIIIIIIII
VirginiaI •I•Qpkech
Ii
Task 1. Develop a Fatigue Design Procedure
* Reformulatelextend the analysis method and the designmethod to include fatigue
I * Define fatigue-related load data as needed from a Hydroprogram (e.g. the influence of whipping)
* Define a modular interface with such a programI* Extend the stress analysis to get cyclic stress transfer
functions; initially for stiffeners and frames
IVirginia
&Tech
II
Task 2. Improve Ultimate Strength Analysis Methods
"* Member Level - top priority need: a better model forflexural-torsional buckling of beams I
"* Overall Level - further improve the current analysis model Ito better account for post-buckling stiffness I
IIIIIIIIIII
IVirginia
Tech
II
Task 3 Develop Damage Tolerance Design Technoloav
Define relevant load conditions for damage tolerant designII (e.g. grounded and/or flooded conditions)
II • Develop detailed plan for incorporation of DamageTolerance Approach into design practiceI
UUIIIIIIIII
IVirginia
II
Task 4 Computation of Slamming-Induced StructuralResponses
"* Define local and global slamming-related load data needed Ifrom Hydro program(s)
"* Later phases will address the computation of structuralresponse to slamming and the interfacing between slamload prediction codes and structural response codes I
IIIIIIIIII
II ••rgi
Tech
II
Task 5 Structural Reliability Technoloay
Define the basic technology requirements for a reliability-II based format for ship structures
II • Assess the state-of-art for the technology requirementsand determinelprioritize the development needsI
* Develop a plan for ensuing years' effortsI* Identify and establish liaison with current relevant3I research
IIIIIIIII
IVirginia
WTechII
Implementation of Results
"* Overall Objective: To incorporate these developments, itogether with the other components of design, into anintegrated structural design system which can be used bythe ship design community
"* ONR has decided that MAESTRO will be the vehicle forimplementing the results into an existing structural design Itool I
" MAESTRO integration with other design tools has beenselected under the Maritech Modular Tanker Consortiumproject
"* Our team will also be participating in the US-Norway iresearch project Dynamic Analysis of Surface Ships.
IIIIII
IuywlIi
aI-j ýj l-;:-
upI;-Y;ýII II iILI iiu i
ýeaij l
j)ýLý ýPýV4
by JILiI
Io
Ifj_ý4IWýd-4kj-JjbY.!-'m
I,7
Uij-ý iJ /jjy-
. . ... ..I
Jt)=cs~;s I ~
jŽJ ýj1XS l 'JIJ wjd) AI~
Uabj.r~j 916'I
I '4y
I W
W7I
s U~i :
-if f t fI
ACI
AD L/1ILLI 'Av I4DAI
elfL4U
fIiiA -w
I-
J!Jý Xi
SIOM M'd.issIPro cI/am Iin clsteI
eiiI0 rfcal endig wil b
0 kwtm amon ofown mpIrMI'MI
modoumdamminlockad rspoI
4ýI
II
0 CDi I..
.0.)coc
E C .> 0I 0. :(. -,
I lU-ll l IaI)I I
II
Representative Cargo Loading Conditions IIII
_____ _____ II
____ _____ III
_____ II
_____ II
CARGO OIL BALLAST I rULL OIL rmrsii w.
III
U)I
(0 0lE U) '-I (U)
o u) U)
ECuo Q0
0)c
0 Is-
4I 0 0r
I L
QLI___ I-
co ýI2L flO0. LJ>1I0. Wvj
*0 Uz ICD I.c
0ccnI
I-CDCla)
4..c 0 UCU as 4-J)
co o CO~c U)I
0' 0-tc> )C) CD).2t Ou'C CD
0( 0 b) c
a)U 0U)
Q).0E U)0
a)0- U). -1_olf (cu -CcIz C(/) C
C l)
SON 0ccIcCIcuc
ICX AA
cu V)0I
o a3- D
0) (10c
0)~o 0.0.CO m)
*0 ICoaD a
Lu. ) ~C cca
ac: 0 toL.0o E c- +
0) U) -o Co as
L.. 0U I0Lcu CO 41 C) U)
C. C.) () U):0 0a
CI
0
0 _ )IM c 0)
CC
Cu mZ
(0 U)
O~DDI 0 @
Co I~C/)
cD-2
czI
IIIII FE �,de1inq &
IUII -�
* -�
II -_
II �Jz
IEquivalent Wave in Partial Loading (67% LQAD(C))
DLP : Maxi�u� Hogging Condition
II
11
I
THE DYNAMIC LOADING APPROACH (DLA)
FOR IANALYZING SHIP STRUCTURE 1
1I1
Presented at ONR Workshop onNonlinear Sea Loads and Ship Response
Ann Arbor, Michigan
7-8 July 1994 1
I
Yung S. Shin I
AMERICAN BUREAU OF SHIPPING III1
UI
I ,
II
IIIIIIIIII
I
IIUIUIIIII
2" I
JY�J*�JJY�JJ�IW IIIIIIII
1 -W 40
04 CO M,;
aU)
Co
LIc
SC5
I- z
m~ (i
o Lo -
P4 m
u~-0
IIIII
CU III
o II
w ILL I
0 I(I!)
Icm, I
* -
0. I
III
4-J 0
-U 0 CD
IU -U 4 0
*E EU. 0
I%-+-' a, Uoo E+ _o
.0;u-. 0 m-E
0 n 0
I CD ' Wa CD
I. < a
0
LLEC
20E
LL -+ 4i
oc -co
C
0) E 0
EC LL CU
0 -3 cn)~
0 C
* 0 0 Iu
LU CL V I
IIII Internal Tank Pressure DistributionIII!IIIII
Pressure Components due to
i eVapor Pressurei e Roll and Pitch Inclination
* AccelerationsIII
II
External Pressure and Distribution
II
I
Pressure Components due to
" Wave I" Vertical Motion" Lateral Motion" Roll
III
I N. BALLAST/33% PARTIAL/
I0I LU•o
LL 30
0
*z FULL
20
I 100
I DISP.DISP.(FULL)
50 100
I ROLL ANGLE V.S. SHIP'S DISPLACEMENT(AT MAX. ROLL CONDITION)
IIII
Long Term Response andEquivalent Wave System
UI
IU I
I
U I
Log (Probability)I
Ix
-360 cos
I
3 Short Term ResponseI
I
_
_
_
_
__•
,
U
I
WAVE SPECTRUM
IS
I
.
FRF OF DESIGN LOAD PARAMETER
I SI
RESPONSE SPECTRUM
OF DiP
II
UJU
CL )00
I~LO
0. ~ 0
0~ - .
ULcJ -J - _ _ _ _ _ _
(D co _____
>z CCCC -o UQ
9L Lai2 LhICC0 :.I.
_ _cuj
CL 0 -
a)__0_CC0
0G-
LEE EE E0000000099990M L lMD M. M oiM. ll iMMMIMI 0) 0
0000
0-4+XO4-KN)-XXM-
I . . -
* _ _ _ _
riL~
*~~ L L.__
C 1l Osi OVI 06 *0 090 Oco "D 10cf
a)* 1.
UI
Equations of Motion6-Degrees of Freedom Motion
I* Surge* Sway I* Heave
* Pitch I* Roll* Yaw I
I
6I
IEC [(.Vij• + .••)•ik + Bi• + cik7]k=-1 F je w'; j = 1 . .
1731 1I2 I
-- /
n, = surge =3 = heave 71 = pitch772 = sway 74 = roll 76 = yaw
III
III0
IL CuuE* .
C)z
u~S2 L.).
LUJ*z oU .
Ec OLJ)
* C3
to-
0 LU
CL0 . _ _ _ _ _ _ __OSSTC N0 w
C/I
(M) ___ ___E _ _
WCL
CU0
o I34-d
1mm
U> I
0U-t6
U)) Ocu
C.)Cl)0 0
0 Cl) a)
*E a. w)00 (n 0l
ou cu .co0 cu 0.
w S- :
cII
am 1.2 I,- I
0MU
0
0 _ I
0
0
*" I0.
II
II APPLICATIONS AND BENEFITS
U • VIRTUAL PROTOTYPING :ft reduce or eliminate the need for costly and time
consuming physical prototypes- rapid virtual prototyping allows for fast creation and
modification of prototype
I • ENGINEERING ANALYSIS:Integration of analysis results (e.g., CFD, FEM) withvirtual prototypes
* OPERATIONAL SIMULATIONS:- direct Involvement of humans for ergonomic, human
factors, and performance studies- simulation of assembly, production, and maintenance
* tasks reveal problems at an early stage of thedesign process
- training for operation, maintenance, safety
CONCURRENT ENGINEERING:- explore all aspects of a design or a process by an
Interdisciplinary engineering team* -shared virtual environments allow for participation
from remote locations- VR as an integrating tool for: design - engineering -
analysis - production planning - manufacturing -marketing & sales - maintenance - training
* * OVERALL BENEFITS:savings in cost - savings in time - reduced designcycle - Improved market response - better product
II
1
IIIIII
i!;j� �K I5" I
jit ii'titt gill
I)t liii
ifs __________ Iiii. it
- I- 't.111 �i
� Ig,
ItRh. lii, I� gig
�%k. #m�s: ��*l
l� I*
*t *- At�4 *g
4 I -
�ti 4 I �'�-�- I
I I�1 � i�
* ?' � -j I
II
IIII
IHead mounted display(superposition)
3D sound cuing Multisensorydata space (3600)
I Virtual contol panel/telescience workstation
I ,
I
*I
6 DOF gesture
I and feedback
II
'I
I
i THE IMMERSIVE EXPERIENCE OF VRI
0 Convincing Illusion of Being Fully Immersed in an3 Artificial Three-Dimensional World
* Depth Perception through Stereo Viewing
• Full Look-Around & Walk-Around Capability
i Full Scale Representation of Virtual World
i Realistic Interactions with Virtual Objects
0 Strong Sense of Realism and Spatial Perception
II
ASSETS FOR DESIGN AND MANUFACTURINGIU Optimal Analysis Tool for Spatial Problems Involving
Complex Three-Dimensional Geometry(arrangements, mechanical systems, abstract systems)
* Realistic Integration of Humans with Virtual World(especially effective If humans are part of a system)
I . Optimal Communication & Demonstration Tool
III
IrlmI
i u
I
II
S'I
I
IFigure 2. Data glove with fiexion sensors and tracking receiver.
II
II THE ENABLING TECHNOLOGIES OF VR
II . Head-Mounted Display (HMD)
I Motion Tracking System
I0 Image Generation System
• Interactive Input Devices (Gloves, Suits)
I *Tactile and Forced FeedbackI
Additional Component Technologies
Eye Tracking Systems
Telepresence Technologies
Directional 3D Sound
3 Voice Recognition / Speech Synthesis
I* Alternative Display Technologies
3 Head-Coupled Display (HCD)
See-Through HMD/HCDI Shutter Glasses
Large Screen Projection
Retinal Laser DisplayI
I , i I I II
II1IIIIIIIIIIIIII1I
I | I IIIi
IIIIIS
II%:'.,
! -
I ~N
I
I
III. . I I I I IIII
Klaus-Peter Beler University of Michigan
II
VIRTUAL REALITY (VR)
VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS (VE) UIIN DESIGN AND MANUFACTURING
II
* The Enabling Technologies of Immersive VR
* Applications In Design and Manufacturing II* Virtual Prototyping (case study: automotive Interiors)
* Augmented Reality in Assembly and Maintenance II
* The University of Michigan Virtual Reality LaboratoryIIUI
I
I CMS-SSC STRUCTURALI RELIABILITY THRU ST
* OTHER RELIABILITY PROJECTS
I SSC 363 - 1992Uncertainties in Estimating Loads and Load Effects on
Marine StructuresEstratos NikoladisI[ Developed estimates of bias and uncertainty in loads and
load effects
SSC 371 - 1993I Establishment of a Uniform Format for Data Reporting of
Structural Material Properties for Reliability AnalysisI Fleet Technology Limited
Developed a standard format so that the properties ofI materials will be available in a probabilistic format
3 SR- 1338Uncertainty in Strength Models for Marine Structures
I Owen HughesObjective - Quantify bias and uncertainty in structural
I strength formulations in order to evaluate safety marginsand derive design criteria.I
SR-1344* Assessment of Reliability of Existing Ship Structures
Alaa Mansour* Will estimate the reliability levels associated with
important failure modes for several existing ships
I
UIII
CMS-SSC STRUCTURALRELIABILITY THRUST I
PHASE III- SR-1345Probability-based Ship Design: Implementation of Design I
Guidelines for ShipsAlaa Mansour I
Project began in May 1994 with the objective of developingship structural design procedures that are reliability-based.
PHASE IV - SR-1362 (New Phase) UProbability-based Design, Synthesis of the Reliability
Thrust AreaProject to begin in FY 1994
Have a group of experts produce a summary of the state ofthe art I
PHASE V (Old Phase IV)Probability-based Design: Novel Hull Forms and
EnvironmentsWill extend previous work to unconventional hull forms
and to unusual load situations IIII
II
CMS-SSC STRUCTURALI RELIABILITY THRUST
* 1983 DESIGN, INSPECTION AND REDUNDANCYSYMPOSIUM
Recommended a program of several projects to determine* and unify reliability of marine structural systems
June 1987 ad hoc Reliability CommitteeDeveloped Four-Phase Reliability Thrust
I SSC-351 - 1990Alaa E. Mansour and Paul F. WirschingA tutorial on structural reliability theory
The basis for SSC reliability work
PHASE I - SSC 368 - 1993I Probability Based Ship Design Procedures -
A DemonstrationAlaa Mansour
Demonstrated the use of probability-based design in the* analysis of a tanker and a combatant ship
* PHASE II - SSC 373 - 1994Probability-based Ship Design: Loads and Load
I CombinationsAlaa Mansour
I Developed standard loads necessary for a probability-baseddesign
II
III
II
COMMITTEE ON MARINESTRUCTURES
AND ISHIP STRUCTURE COMMITTEE
STRUCTURAL RELIABILITY THRUST
IRobert A. Sielski
Marine BoardNational Research Council
July 7, 1994
IIIII
cri 4-J
1.M 0 U)
E I6c0
4- 0) 0)
U) 0~ <) j
so L.
0 cc- Co
j 0
C Co
0)0C
coU CI)cu
Cl) oo C) W )
U0 L L . I0.j- ca > caO 0 I) Co
ti- 0
I c co -E-a J a: LL 0 0
oc~ 0)
*.2 a. (9 U 0u u C/) U) u )
......
CU D0E
*n -C
CD C CDC
Co cc2
a6 ..;CLL >C 0)M
Co M c~CDCL -CoCo
-t 0 W , W C
ca 0
CD LICZ: m E: IA 14 A CUA A
II
Design by Rule] Design by DLA
I Conventional Seakeeping AnalysisAnalysis
I [Dynamic & Static loads
ISFatigue LAStructuralAnalysisri lysis
j Fine Mesh Fine MeshZooming Analysis Zooming Analysisfor structural for Primary
Detail s Members
I- Faigue life IStress/BucklingI -II
FinalScantlings
Design Procedure Using Dynamic Load Approach
U-
CQ
0,
cnIV I
LL
CD
UA
II
16m
I 0
I C
4)
I I-
CL
,_m
I 0
I
4)l
*_o cco *co
0< 0
o V 0
CCo
Co on
0) 0
0<
U) 0
VIRTUAL PROTOTYPING
1 Replace costly and time-consuming physical mockups
• Rapid Virtual Prototyplng: fast creation and modification
i • Create virtual prototype from existing CAD/CAM data
• Apply rendering algorithms, lighting models, texturemapping, and other techniques for realistic appearance
* Realistic interactions with prototype via data glove, etc.
3 Combine virtual display with physical elements if correctforced feedback Is needed (e.g., simplified seating buck)
Examples of Extended Functionality :- employ transparent display techniques for Inspection
of hidden components3 - use prototype already for the analysis of Incompletedesigns (e.g., with parts floating In space)
3 -superimpose design alternatives for comparison- allow for interactive design modifications with
Immediate feedback
3 * Usage of Virtual Prototypes:- Design analysis (clearances, packaging efficiency,
connectivity, motion characteristics, collision, ...)- Human factors studies (visibility, reachabillty,
accessibility, comfort, human performance, appeal, ...)i - Base for other VR applications (engineering analysis.
operational simulations, concurrent engineering,,,mi shared virtual environments, training, marketing, ..)
II
I
CREATION OF VIRTUAL PROTOTYPES
I,GEOMETRY DEFINITION:
CAD/CAM Model : mathematical description through Isurface modeling, soltd modeling, and related methods
Virtual Model : approximation by computer graphicsprimitives (mainly polygons and polygon-meshes)
I* PROCESS: I
Access CAD/CAM database and extract geometry
Approximate boundaries by polygons (tessellation) USimplify geometry : reduce number of polygons forgraphics performance, decide on level of detail
Edit geometry : Identify and remove unnecessarygeometry, correct faulty geometry, Incorporate Itextures
Define display characteristics : color, reflectioncharacteristics (material properties), transparency,lighting configuration, rendering method, ....
Model the behavior of prototype (define Interactivefeedback mechanisms and trigger events, dynamic andother responses, motion restrictions, etc.)
Calibrate virtual environment with user, data glove and Iphysical elements
I
73 VW Super Beetle-H 10364 Vertices10514 Polygons
73 VW Super Beetle-L 1520 Vertices1602 Polygons
Polygonal representations
with different levels of accuracy
3
I ! ! !I • I II | |
II
I
SI,
III
II
II I• I I i= •I
______ I iftI 'mcr
IIIIIIIII
L I
-, IIIIIIIII
I0I
I S
*
IIII
I �. F
I
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
III
4, IIII
I
IIIIIIIUI
I
EXRATO
Approxi mation~o..
EDITOR
S~Geometry Simplification
Texture Dfihitioh
YU
S~VIEWER
CalEbrationS~Tracking I map Generation
Data Glove Control
I The process of generating
I 4
I
II
VIRTUAL REALITY LABORATORY
THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN - COLLEGE OF ENGINEERINGDepartment of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering
ICreated: April 1993 through an Initial grant from Chrysler
with cost sharing by The University of Michigan
Director: Klaus-Peter Beler I
Focus: VR as an Integrating concurrent engineering tool for:design - engineering - analysis - production planning -manufacturing - marketing & sales - maintenance
Goals: • Advance VR technology (cross the threshold of usability)"* Develop methods, algorithms, and software concepts 3"* Prove usefulness through demonstration projects"* Assist Industry with the Introduction of VR 3
ILaboratory Equipment:
- SGI Onyx with 2 processors and VTX graphics U(currently upgrading to 4 processors and Reality Engine graphics)
- Boom2C from Fakespace (currently upgrading to Color Boom3C)
- DataGlove from VPL, Isotrack from Polhemus I- IBM-RS/6000 with CAD/CAM system CATIA 3- SGI Indigo2/Extreme, SGI Iris, SGI Indy, HP and Sun workstations,
Macintoshes, Scanner, Video production equipment, others, ....
I
VIRTUAL REALITY LABORATORY
ONGOING PROJECTS:I* Virtual Prototyping of Automotive Interiors
- for design analysis and human factors studies- sponsored by Chrysler Corporation
* Vlrtual Environments as an Analysis Tool In ComputationalFluid Dynamics and Crash Simulations- focus on high performance computing applications- sponsored by DoE (CRADA)t- in cooperation with five National Laboratories and with
Chrysler, Ford, and General Motors
I Virtual Interior Arrangements for Sailing and Motor YachtsDepartment of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering
I• Virtual Model: Integrated Technology Instruction Center
future home of the Virtual Reality Laboratory, under constructionII IN PREPARATION:
Augmented Reality in Simulation-Based Design- applications In design, assembly, and maintenance- sponsored by ARPA- to be Integrated with Chrysler project on virtual Interiors
Shared Virtual EnvironmentsI - simultaneous Immersion of users on both sides of the Atlantic
- in cooperation with the Computer Graphics Center (ZGDV)Darmstadt, Germany, Ford/US, and Ford/Europe
* Virtual Diving- virtual models of underwater terrain, structures, ship wrecks- training of divers and ROV operators (M-ROVER)- planning of underwater operations
I
Ia
IR
I C
I~ -*
It
ClI
78 .2 OCý (7N
7ýI
I4
I9I0IcI0
IIIII
a
II1
- II
4 IIIIIII
coo
V-4
-It
--- --- 7ý5V-4
40-
PLI
14
Cox/ 10 1 (POW
..........01 AM
Ja -A-7
U
..........
IIII
II
IIIIIIIIII
41I0I
0 0
Mir
lb lbdw lo
I - Il-_I7
JOA
I0 Z-........" iVAR
MalI
a.I- F
.I .......... ....... .....=UI -
........................
Iu 1Iýý 7RA
0 U
4 I
4 01 . 0444Ai74
ICIw
IA
a)O
> CA-0 _z
C
0to
- rrq
"0 aý-4 )
0 70
o >o >
I z
mo
10 1ccI4ýI
0'4214
ccU
w) I
4-aa
,0
II
IIII
I II- o
I" .
- ccc
I0
!ON0 4Z
-n CA
+ot COO4-4 U% u r
'42_I .~ cia
0-0
II
0 12- 1-I
so"CA,
*Y04 0
I 0Z
IluI
I%I%
*i A
I ~ ) .LLct
CAm
ct2
4-
ma
U4 .
- - I I4) Col to
•'i-C40 U
IOU
0 S ~ ~ 0
0 0
ELI
III
I>
ccS s
I 0)4-4 4
0 = Cd
q V"CDa C0Ob
C;I
AJ 0
00
PLm4
40~
0~- oA It C
4 )Icc-
ciICI
cis00I
0*0
0~
0 C1.4>4- 0
o 0 04-4-
--o. w4- P.4
> cjz a) -0 r-.4ci 4N 0)
o >1c- -0.