ON THE ACCOUNT OF THE HYDRODYNAMIC FORCES IN

NONLINEAR WAVE – SHIP INTERACTION SIMULATION

Sergei V. Suslov

Ukrainian State Maritime Technical University, Nikolajev, Ukraine

АННОТАЦИЯ
Анализируется возможность использования концепции гидродинамических коэффициентов
присоединенных при определении гидродинамических сил в нелинейной теории, учитывающей большие
перемещения корпуса судна относительно воды. Предлагается уточненный метод учета
гидродинамических сил при расчетах экстремальных величин волнового изгибающего момента,
основанный на использовании ”ударных” присоединенных масс, определяемых с учетом изменения
формы свободной поверхности. Полученные с использованием метода результаты сравниваются с
результатами численных исследований гидродинамики вертикального движения шпангоутного контура
по методу граничных элементов.
ABSTRACT
The adequacy of the added mass concept for hydrodynamic forces determination in the case of large
amplitude ship motions is studied. A more accurate method for account of hydrodynamic forces in extreme
values of wave bending moment calculations is proposed. The method is based on usage of the ‘”impact” added
massr, which accounts the free surface lifting. Results of the method are compared with the results obtained by
BEM numerical simulations of ship section vertical movement hydrodynamic are presented.
 1. INTRODUCTION
The hydrodynamic forces account is the most
difficult part of the problem solution when the wave
induced motions and loads are calculated. The
difficulties and accuracy demands grow if the
extreme values induced by steep waves are
considered. Nowadays the strip theory approach still
remains a basic way for practical solution of the
problem It means that the hydrodynamic forces for
each ship frame section are determined from the
two–dimensional flow problem solution in the
sectional plane.
In the linear theory the hydrodynamic forces are
determined with the assumption that the frame and
liquid movements are infinitely small, steady-state,
and harmonic. Under these conditions an exact
solution for the hydrodynamic forces can be
obtained. For the vertical harmonic frame
hesitations the hydrodynamic reaction is also
harmonic and due to the free surface presence
includes two components. The inertial component is
proportional to acceleration and the damping one –
to velocity of the frame,
R gd   V  V (1)
calculations showed [1,2], may play dominant role
in the maximum wave bending moment value.
Beyond doubt that the paradoxical difference of
the expressions (2) and (3) does not disprove the
basic theorems of the classic mechanics. The
“paradox” is put in the expressions of the
momentum and kinetic energy, which can’t be
determined only with the added mass when a free
surface is present.
.The aim of this work was to obtain expressions
for the hydrodynamic reaction , which are simple
enough like (2) or (3) to be used in non-linear wave
loads calculations and have distinct hydrodynamics
validity.
2. THEORETICAL BACKGROUNDS
A two-dimensional potential flow of ideal
uncompressible ponderable liquid in an unbounded
region with a free surface is considered; the flow
being caused by vertical movement of a
symmetrical impenetrable contour with the velocity
VC (see Figure 1).
y
SS

The coefficient  is considered as added mass

x
of the liquid and depends upon frequency of the
hesitations. The damping term in (1) presents the SF D
energy consumption for the free surface waves
radiation
F
igu
re1
.Im
mersin
gco
nto
ura
n dfre
esu
rfa
ce
In the non-linear theories the frame movement is
generally assumed neither harmonic nor small. The momentum B and the kinetic energy of the
However, the added mass approach is commonly liquid flow are determined with the following
used with the account of the added mass variation in expressions.
time; the mass being calculated for the immersed
part of the frame by the linear theory methods. The B    V dD 
expressions for the hydrodynamic inertial reaction is D
obtained either from the momentum theorem ,
    grad  dD       n dS
dB d d D S
R HD    V   V  V , (2) (4)
dt dt dt
or from the kinetic energy theorem V2 
T   dD      grad  ndS
D
2 2S
1 dT
R HD  
V dt where  is the liquid density,  t velocity
, (3) potential ( V   grad ), D is the flow region,
1 d  V 2  1 d
    V  V
V dt  2  2 dt and S is its boundary.
The flow caused by the contour movement in
where B - the liquid momentum and T kinetic an infinite region vanishes in the distance and the
energy connected with the relative frame movement contour integrals in (4) may be calculated only over
velocity V . the immersed part of the frame contour S F and
It attracts attention that the second terms with the over the sufficient part of the free surface S S .
added mass derivatives in (2) and (3) are different.
These terms take in account slamming loads and, as
 The time derivative of the liquid momentum
with the gravity forces account is expressed as  gyV n dS expresses the flow of gy
SS
follows.
through the free surface that is equal to the time
dB dV derivative of potential energy U of the water lifted
  dD 
dt dt
D over the zero level. With account of this: the
   grad  p  g  y    dD 
y 0hydrodynamic reaction equals
D

   p  g  y  y0   n dS 1 d
S R HD   T  U  . (8)
, (5) VC dt
where p is the pressure, g the gravity Thus, with the gravity forces account the time
acceleration , and y 0 - in the common case a time derivative of the liquid momentum is equal to the
dependent value, which can be determined by the entire liquid reaction, whereas the energy change
hydrostatic conditions. theorem gives the hydrodynamic component.

Hereafter the constant atmospheric pressure 3. EXPRESSION OF ENERGY AND

component is taken out of consideration so p is the
excess of the pressure over the atmospheric and on
the free surface p  0 . For the conditions given by
the Figure .1 y 0  0 . Due to the symmetry only the
vertical component of momentum is not zero and the
liquid reaction is is vertical
dB y
   pdx  g  ydx  R (6)
dt SF S connected to the free surface movement. The
The pressure integral in (6) is taken only over
immersed part of the frame contour because of the
pressure zero value on the free surface and equals
the liquid reaction. The second integral equals 0 due
to the liquid incompressibility.
Thus if the gravity forces are taken into account,
the time derivative of the momentum is equal to the
total liquid reaction, which includes the hydrostatic
component. This is not at variance with the utmost
case when both the contour and the liquid do not
move and the time derivative of the momentum is
equal to nil whereas the reaction is not nil due to the
hydrostatic component. In these conditions the time
dependant variable y 0 is not 0, but equals the
thickness of the liquid layer that is displaced by the
contour immersion. So the second integral in(6)
gives a negative value of the hydrostatic reaction.
MOMENTUM WITH IMPACT ADDED
MASS
The expressions for the liquid momentum and
kinetic energy can be obtained in suitable for
calculations forms with the approach used by V. G.
Logvrinovich in [3]. The flow potential is
represented by a sum    1   2 of an “impact”
potential  1 and a potential  2 , which is
potential  1 determines at every moment of time
the liquid flow, which would come into being if both
the frame contour and the liquid were instantly
stopped with congelation of the free surface, and the
contour was put in motion with the same speed again
by an instant impact. Consequently the potentials
 1 and  2 must satisfy the next boundary
conditions on the frame contour::
 1  2
 S F   Vn , SF   0
n n
(9)
and on the free surface 1  0 .
~ is the “impact” potential for VC  1 .
Let  1
~ and it follows from (9) that on
Then  1  VC  1

~1
The time derivative of the kinetic energy with the the frame contour   n y . For the
gravity forces account is expressed as follows: n
momentum vertical component from (4) this gives
dT d V 2  dV
    dD    V
 dD  B y      1   2  n y dS 
dt D
dt  2  D
dt
S
   V grad  p  gy   dD     p  gy V n dS  ~
~  1 dS    dx 
D S  V C   1 n
  2
 VC   p  gy  dx   gyV n dS
SF S

SF SS   1VC     2 dx  B1 y  B 2 y
(7) S
(10)
The first integral in the right part of (7) gives
the hydrodynamic reaction. The integral
 ~ 4. HYDRODYNAMIC REACTION
where  1     ~1 1 dS is an- “impact” EXPRESSIONS
SF
n
The “impact” added mass depends not only upon
added mass for the vertical frame movement, B1 y
the form of the contour immersed part but also upon
is the momentum part that is connected with 1 , the instant form of the free surface. To compute the
and B 2 y is the rest part of the momentum.that is free surface movement and the “impact” added
connected with the free surface movement. mass, the modern numerical methods could be used.
For this aim and also for the validation of the result
It worth to mention that the “impact” added mass presented here, the author used a specially developed
is determined only by the instant forms of immersed computer program based on the boundary elements
part of the frame and of the free surface, and it does method [4-6]. The program realizes time step
not depend upon the free surface particles velocities. computing of the liquid flow caused by
Thus all of the “memory” effects are accounted only predetermined movement of the contour intersecting
by the form of free surface. the free surface. The computations start from given
contour position and free surface conditions. At each
Using conditions (9) reduces integration in the
time step the instant quasi-steady-state liquid flow is
calculation of B 2 y to the free surface determined and from the free surface particles
velocities the surface form and boundary conditions
 ~ 
B2 y     2 dx     2  n y  1 dS . on it are calculated for the next step.
S SS  n  The direct application of this method to the wave
load calculations is not advisable because of
For the kinetic energy the similar unacceptable computation time. Besides that,
transformations of (4) give. considerable difficulties may be met with the jet-
forming zone for a frame with flare. In this zone
   1  2 
T 
2   1   2  
n

n 
dS  calculations of the free surface movement show
tendency to instability due to big velocities of the
S

  1   2 flow. Though the zone length is relatively small, the

   1 dS    2 dS  flow in it influences the pressure distribution over
2 SF n 2 SS n the frame contour and thus the hydrodynamic
reaction. This influence becomes stronger with the
 T1  T2 frame flare grows. The time step shortening and
(11) more exact approximation of the free surface by the
boundary elements are not a complete decision of
  1 1
where T1  
2  1 n
dS   1VC2 is the
2
the problem at last for two reasons. Firstly the
mathematical model becomes ineffective due to the
SF
identical treatment of two flows with the different
kinetic energy part that is connected with the
time and space scales. Secondly, and this is more
“impact” potential and T2 - is the rest part of important, the flow in the jet forming zone is not
the.kinetic energy that is connected with the free really potential what is well seen in the real process.
surface movement. With the speed in the jet zone grows the flow
Subtracting the hydrodynamic component becomes turbulent and later falls to drops.
obtained by (8) from the total liquid reaction by (6) Hence in this work when the integral
with the account of (10) and (11) after some characteristics of the flow are calculated, the zone of
transformations gives the following equation for the solution instability is cut off close to the free
integral characteristics of the both flow components surface turn point; the flow in the cut being
accounted approximately with the aid of the
1 d 1 1  dT2 dU  dB 2 y cinematic dependencies obtained by H. Wagner [7]
VC      R HS
2 dt VC  dt dt  dt and V. G. Logvrinovich [3], as well as equation
(12). Furthermore the frame movements considered
, (12)
here are limited to quick enough immersion when
where R HS  R  R HD is the hydrostatic the deformations of the free surface by the
component of the reaction gravitation forces are relatively small and may be
neglected. This means that the “impact” added mass
This equation remains true for any movement does not depend upon the movement history. As
low of the contour and will be used further to obtain numerical experiments shows, this is true if
expressions for practical calculations of the VC gh  0,6 , where h is the frame draught.
hydrodynamic reaction.
 Having investigated the jet forming zone flow As the integration contour S is moving with the
for a wedge immersion, H. Wagner found that the liquid everywhere but the jet cutting, the convective
liquid velocity in the jet may be taken as follows term in (14) is equal to the flow of momentum into
db the jet and the one in (15) is equal to the flow of
V SP  2 , where b is the width of the wedge kinetic energy into the jet. This gives the following
dt
wetted part with the account of the free surface approximations for (14) and (15)
lifting (see Figure 2.). dB2 y B2 yS
  QVSPy ;
dt t
(16)
VSP
b VS dT2 T2 S 1 2
  QVSP ,
dt t 2
(17)

Vb For the immersion velocities considered here the

influence of gravity forces on the free surface
movement is small and the components of the
 momentum B2 yS and kinetic energy T2 S
connected with the free surface movement are of less
n order than the “impact” components. This means
that the convective components in(16) and (15)
Figure 2. Velocities in jet zone connected with the flow to the jet are dominant.
Then the exact equation (12) can be approximated as
In accordance with the theory of the free surface follows
turn region stated by V. G. Logvrinovich in [3],
1 d 1 1 1 2 1 dU
the following expressions for velocity components VC  QV SP  QV SPy  RCT 
will be used: 2 dt VC 2 VC dt
db (18)
V S  Vb   VC tg
dt This equation differs from the one proposed by
V. G. Logvrinovich in [3] by the last two terms<
   which are connected with the gravitational forces.
V SP  2Vb cos   (13)
4 2 Solving the equation for the flow of liquid in the jet
gives
The flow of momentum into the jet is QV SPy
and the flow of kinetic energy into the jet is cos 2   d 1 2  1 dU 
Q    RCT  
1 2 2 sin   sin   1  dt VC  VC dt 
QV SP , where V SPy is the vertical component
2 (19)
of the liquid velocity in the jet, Q is the flow of
Expressing the hydrodynamic reaction from
liquid mass to the jet, It may be assumed that these
dependencies are true also for arbitrary form of the either (6) or (8) with the account of (10)-(19) gives
frame if the flare angle changes slowly enough. dVT 1  sin  d 1
R HD    1  VC 
The time derivatives of B 2 y and T2 , which
dt 2 dt
.
1  sin  dU
are calculated by integration on a moving boundary  RCT sin  
contour can be expressed as follows VT dt
dB2 y B2 yS (20)
    VyV n dS ; (14)
dt t 1  sin 
S The coefficient for the “impact”
2
dT2 T2 S V2 term in (18) equals 0.5 when vertical parts of the
   V n dS , (15)
dt t 2 contour plunge in water (   0 ) and grows with
S
the flare increases up to 1.0 (for     2 ).
where B2 yS and T2 S are the values determined
A similar to (20) expression was proposed by
without the jet zone. V. G. Logvrinovich in [3] but that was based on a
concept of “seeming” added mass connected with
the “impact” one by integral correlation, and the
gravity forces were not taken into account. h (m)
5. PRACTICAL METHOD 15
For the calculation convenience the expression of
the hydrodynamic reaction in (18) may be 12,5
transformed in the following way.
10
 dV  dV
RHD  h,VC , C    1 C    h VC2  P h   h 
 dt  dt
, (21) 5
where h is the frame draught., P  h  is the weight
of the displaced by the frame liquid, y C is the
center of gravity ordinate for this liquid, and all the 5 10 x (m)
others values are determined by the following
formulae Figure 3.Frame and free surface form
at different droughts
1  sin  d1
  h  ,
2 dh
  h     h  1  sin   h    sin   h  ,
(22)
y C  h  dy C  h 
  h   ,
h  h  dh
where   h  is the sectional area coefficient for the
immersed frame part.
Thus to use the expressions (21) and (22) the
dependencies P  h  ,   h  , y C  h  ,  1  h  are to
be determined beforehand. The first of them is
calculated simply from the frame geometry. For the
others a numerical simulation of the frame
immersion with constant velocity can be used. As it
is explained before, the velocity of immersion
must be big enough for the deformation of the free
surface by gravitation may be neglected.
6. NUMERICAL RESULTS
The method was verified against the BEM
simulation of contours with real frame forms and
wedges. Figure 3 shows the form of the third
theoretical frame of the “Mariner” ship and
computed forms of the free surface for thee draughts
which were obtained by the simulations.. It was
found that for i velocity more than 10 m/sec the free
surface form depended only on drought but
immersion “history”. This form and a respective
undisturbed water level is presented, the latter is
drawn with the dashed line.
 RHD  10 3 kN / m

4 8 12 16 h (m)

Figure 4. Hydrodynamic reaction vs draught for constant immersion velocity m/s

calculated with the expression (21);
calculated with the expression (21) without the gravitation term;
calculated by the pressure integration;
calculated with formula (2);
calculated with formula (3).

Results of the hydrodynamic reaction прочности и эксплуатационной надежности

calculations for the frame immersion with constant
velocity of 20 m/sec are presented in Figure 4. The
2.
results of the method (21) are very close to those
obtained by the pressure integration in the boundary
element method simulation. This shows that the
assumptions made for the method development are
valid at last from the boundary elements theoretical
model point of view. The curve obtained without the 3.
last gravitation term of the expression (21) is drawn
to estimate its contribution.
For the calculations with expressions (2) and (3) 4.
the simplest added mass expression was used, it is
half of the ellipse added mass in the infinite liquid.
Thou the results of the expression (2) seem to be
quite good, it should be used with care. For one
thing it must be determined what kind of the added
5.
mass is to be used. Then, as this expression doesn’t
account the free surface lifting, it continues to give
the reaction increase even after the frame deck has
sunk.
As stated before, the method presented here is
6.
developed to determine the hydrodynamic reaction
for frame immersion with big velocity. This is actual
for bow frames if the extreme wave loads are
calculated.
REFERENCES
1. Суслов В.П., Суслов С.В. Нелинейный метод 7.
расчета волновых нагрузок//Труды
международной конференции Проблемы
судов. -Владивосток, 1996, -С. 8-15.
Суслов С.В. Численные исследования
экстремальных волновых нагрузок
//Материалы международной конференции
SOOP-98, Часть III, Владивосток, 1998, -С.
50-55.
Логвинович В.Г. Гидродинамика течения со
свободными границами. - Киев: Наукова
думка, 1969б –208 с.
Суслов С.В. Численное моделирование
гидродинамики вертикального шпангоутного
сечения на основе МГЭ.//Новые
информационные технологии:. Сб.науч.тр.,
-Николаев: УГМТУ. 1997, -С.35-38./
Суслов С.В. Використання комп’ютерного
моделювання у дослідженнях
гідродинамічних сил, що діють на корпус
судна.// Труди н.т. конференції МФ
НАУКМА,-Миколаїв, 1999.
Суслов С.В. Граничные элементы с
непрерывными производными первого
порядка для компьютерного моделирование
движения жидкости.// Сборник научных
трудов УГМТУ, -Николаев: УГМТУ, 1999,
с.106-112.
Wagner H. Űber Stoss- und Gleitvorgänge und
der Oberfläche von Flüssigkeiten, -Z. Ang
Math. Und Mech., 1932, Band 12, Heft 4, S.
193 – 215.