This paper reports on the comparison between computational simulations and experimental measurements of a surface vessel in steady turning conditions. The primary purpose of these efforts is to support the development of physics-based high fidelity maneuvering simulation tools by providing accurate and reliable hydrodynamic data with relevance to maneuvering performances. Reynolds Averaged Unsteady Navier Stokes Solver (URANS): CFDSHIPIOWA was used to perform simulations for validation purposes and for better understanding of the fundamental flow physics of a hull under maneuvering conditions. The Propeller effects were simulated using the actuator disk model included in CFDShip-Iowa. The actuator disk model prescribes a circumferential averaged body force with axial and tangential components. No propeller generated side forces are accounted for in the model. This paper examines the effects of actuator disk model on the overall fidelity of a RANS based ship maneuvering simulations. Both experiments and simulations provide physical insights into the complex flow interactions between the hull and various appendages, the rudders and the propellers. The experimental effort consists of flow field measurements using Stereo Particle-Image Velocimetry (SPIV) in the stern region of the model and force and moment measurements on the whole ship and on ship components such as the bilge keels, the rudders, and the propellers. Comparisons between simulations and experimental measurements were made for velocity distributions at different transverse planes along the ship axis and different forces components for hull, appendages and rudders. The actuator disk model does not predict any propeller generated side forces in the code and they need to be taken into account when comparing hull and appendages generated side forces in the simulations. The simulations were compared with experimental results and they both demonstrate the cross flow effect on the transverse forces and the propeller slip streams generated by the propellers during steady turning conditions. The hull forces (include hull, bilge keels, skeg, shafting and strut) predictions were better for large turning circle case as compared with smaller turning circle. Despite flow field simulations appear to capture gross flow features qualitatively; detailed examinations of flow distributions reveal discrepancies in predictions of propeller wake locations and secondary flow structures. The qualitative comparisons for the rudders forces also reveal large discrepancies and it was shown that the primary cause of discrepancies is due to poor predictions of velocity inflow at the rudder plane.

This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.