See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/280699753

Toward numerical modeling of the stepped and non-stepped planing hull

Article  in  Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering · November 2014
DOI: 10.1007/s40430-014-0266-4

CITATIONS READS

18 1,789

4 authors:

Sajad Taj Golah Veysi Mohammad Bakhtiari

Amirkabir University of Technology Amirkabir University of Technology
4 PUBLICATIONS   48 CITATIONS    16 PUBLICATIONS   70 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Hassan Ghassemi Mahmoud Ghiasi

Amirkabir University of Technology Amirkabir University of Technology
254 PUBLICATIONS   1,166 CITATIONS    50 PUBLICATIONS   220 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Hydrodynamic coefficient, Marine propulsions View project

The effect of control surfaces on the hydrodynamicaly operation of the planing craft View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Hassan Ghassemi on 26 November 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng.
DOI 10.1007/s40430-014-0266-4
TECHNICAL PAPER
Toward numerical modeling of the stepped and non‑stepped
planing hull
Sajad Taj Golah Veysi · Mohammad Bakhtiari ·
Hassan Ghassemi · Mahmoud Ghiasi 
Received: 12 August 2014 / Accepted: 28 October 2014
© The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2014
Abstract  Drag increases rapidly with speed in high-speed
planing hull. During the last decades, many researchers
have tried to reduce hull drag in order to achieve the high-
est speed. Based on these researches, several methods have
been applied to reduce drag such as hull form optimization,
marine coating, and planing equipments. One of the most
efficient strategies is to use a step on the hull bottom that
leads to significant wetted surface reduction, resulting in a
considerable reduction in total drag. In the current study,
the numerical method is used to investigate the influence
of a step on the pressure distribution, hydrodynamics char-
acteristics, and wake profile of a modern high-speed chine
planing hull. The numerical results obtained show a good
agreement in comparison with the experimental results.
Keywords  Stepped hull · Pressure distribution · Drag ·
Wake profile
1 Introduction
Planing crafts are designed to run at the speed of the Froude
number greater than 1.2 (Fn > 1.2). Designers are trying
to obtain the hull form so that to reduce the drag in order
to increase the speed by changing the hull form and using
hydrodynamic physical support. Up to date, various config-
urations such as chine, step, strake, pad, and tunnels have
been set up to increase the speed and improve performance.
Technical Editor: Francisco Ricardo Cunha, Ph.D.
S. T. G. Veysi · M. Bakhtiari · H. Ghassemi (*) · M. Ghiasi 
Department of Ocean Engineering,
Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
e-mail: gasemi@aut.ac.ir
Blade runner craft and M-ships are practical good exam-
ples of these vessels types [1, 2].
Stepped hull are intended to reduce the amount of hull
surface in contact with the water (Fig. 1a). Steps can run
straight across the hull, or they can be V-shaped, with the
vertex facing forward or aft. They will have large apertures
on the outboard side of the hull to allow air to be sucked
down into and ventilate the step. In general, a speed rise of
about 10–15 % can be expected from a stepped hull over a
non-stepped hull with the same power.
The idea behind a stepped hull is to reduce wetted
surface by allowing the hull to plane on two or three
small wetted planing surfaces rather than one large, as
depicted in Fig. 1c. Since the lift is now spread to sev-
eral surfaces along the hull (see Fig. 1b) the longitudinal
stability becomes very large. Beside those advantages,
there is somewhat dangerous due to closing air by waves.
When the air supply is lost, a reverse flow occurs behind
the step causing an excessive increase in drag. The speed
rapidly drops and craft will turn suddenly, and possibly
even capsize. To avoid this problem, air is often sucked
through openings well above the waterline, or it may be
supplied through tubes in the deck level. Another possi-
bility is to discharge the exhaust gases through the step.
In this way, the gases will be sucked out, improving the
efficiency of the engine. Builders often provide large
inlets to the areas behind the steps, and a few even pro-
vide air paths through ducts that lead to the trailing verti-
cal edge of the steps [3–6].
Until now, hydrodynamics investigations of the plan-
ing hull, by virtue of different methodologies, have mainly
concentrated on the simple mono-hull, means without
chine, and step.
Savitsky [7] carried out comprehensively contribu-
tion to the understanding and modeling of planing crafts.
13

Fig.  1  a Stepped planing craft,
b lift distribution, and c wetted
surface distribution [1]
He developed regression formulas based on prismatic hull
form model tests to estimate the hydrodynamic forces act-
ing on planing crafts. In 2007, Savitsky et al. have inves-
tigated the effect of the whisker spray at the bow and its
effect on the drag [8].
More recently, due to the market needs and in order to
gain more efficiency by the stepped hull, marine researchers
have rigorously pursued this topic and much effort has been
devoted to explore it numerically and experimentally. It can
be found a small number of contributions on the planing
stepped hull during 10 years ago; Savitsky et al. [9], Svahn
[10], Taunton et al. [11], Grigoropoulos and Damala [12],
Ghassemi et al. [13], and Garland and Maki [14].
Planing tunnel vessels are also especial type of the high-
speed vessels that is high lift-drag ratio and good seakeep-
ing performance [15, 16]. Nowadays, any works on this
field are very attractive and owners encourage the research-
ers to work on this topic. Ghassabzadeh and Ghassemi pre-
pared software to generate various hull form of the planing
tunnel vessel [17].
Finite volume method (FVM) and boundary element
method (BEM) are the most popular numerical techniques
for hydrodynamic analysis of the flow around planing
hulls. BEM is based on potential solver for lifting bod-
ies and planing hulls that the pressure force is dominant,
while FVM solves the Navier–Stokes equations that take
13
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng.
much consuming time. Comprehensive analysis techniques
for hydrodynamic simulations of high-speed planing hulls
have been categorized by Yousefi et al. [18].
Savander et al. [19] applied BEM to a planing plate
and obtained relationships between potential perturbation
and vortex distribution. They calculated the hydrodynamic
pressure, lift, and drag forces for the planing plate at dif-
ferent speeds. Ghassemi et al. have developed a computer
code, based on BEM in conjunction with boundary layer,
for hydrodynamic analysis of planing and non-planing
hulls [20–23]. One of the drawbacks of this code is that it
is based on the potential solvers (BEM), although the main
forces on the planing hulls and lifting bodies (hydrofoils
and propellers) are due to the pressure forces. Concern-
ing the effect of the viscous term, FVM is nowadays the
most popular and powerful method that can be used. Many
researchers employed FVM method for planing hull; see
Capennetto [24], Richard et al. [25], Savander and Rhee
[26], Kihara [27], Brizzolara and Serra [28], Fultz [29],
Akkerman et al. [30], and Yumin et al. [31]. Recently,
Ghassabzadeh and Ghassemi carried out numerical simula-
tion to multi-hull tunnel vessel [16]. This type of vessel has
the most complicated hydrodynamic calculations due to the
mixed flow in the tunnel.
In this study, the effect of step on the hydrodynamic
characteristics of a hard chinned planing hull is numerically
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng.

Fig. 2  Sketch of the C (non-stepped hull) and C1 (stepped hull) planing hulls

Table 1  Main dimensions of the models Based on the eddy viscosity hypothesis, Reynolds
Parameters Value stresses can be related to the mean velocity gradients and
eddy (turbulent) viscosity. Using this hypothesis, the Reyn-
Length overall (m) 2 olds averaged momentum equation becomes
Beam (m) 0.46   
∂ρui ∂ ∂P ∂ ∂ui ∂uj
Draft (m) 0.09 + (ρui uj ) = − + µeff + + gi ,
∂t ∂xj ∂xj ∂xj ∂xj ∂xi
Displaced weight (N) 243.4
Deadrise angle (°) 22.5 (3)
Distance of the step from transom (m) 0.62 where µeff is the effective viscosity defined by
Height of step (m) 0.02
µeff = µ + µt . (4)
2.1 Turbulent model
investigated. For this purpose, a high-quality unstructured
mesh is generated around the hull. The RANS equations In the present study, the standard two equation k–ε model
with standard k–ε turbulent model coupled with VOF mul- is used to model the turbulence in the flow. The k–ε model
tiphase model are solved in specific generated mesh for the assumes that the turbulence viscosity is related to the tur-
turbulent free surface flow. The numerical results for total bulence kinetic energy (k) and turbulence dissipation rate
drag are compared with available experimental data in dif- (ε) by
ferent Froude numbers. Then the pressure distribution con-
tours on hull are presented. Furthermore, the step effect on k2
µt = cµ ρ , (5)
the wetted surface area is illustrated. Finally, the wave pat- ε
tern generated by hull moving is presented and wake pro- where Cµ is a constant. k and ε are calculated from the fol-
file in stern is also compared with empirical equations. lowing transport equations:
  
∂(ρk) ∂ ∂ µt ∂k
+ (ρuj k) = µ+ + pk − ρε
∂t ∂xj ∂xj σk ∂xj
2 Governing equations
(6)
The fluid governing equations are described by the continu-   
∂(ρε) ∂ ∂ µt ∂ε ε
ity and Navier–Stokes equations. Using the Reynolds aver- + (ρuj ε) = µ+ + (Cε1 Pk − Cε2 ρε),
∂t ∂xj ∂xj σε ∂xj k
aging approach, the Navier–Stokes equations can be stated
(7)
as
∂ρ ∂ where Cε1 , Cε2 , σk , and σε are constant and Pk is the turbu-
+ (ρuj ) = 0 (1) lence production due to viscous forces.
∂t ∂xj

∂ρuj ∂ ∂P ∂ 2.2 Multiphase model

+ (ρui uj ) = − + (τij − ρui′ uj′ ) + gi , (2)
∂t ∂xj ∂xi xj
In order to capture the air–water interface, the volume of
where u, P, and g are the velocity, pressure, and gravita- fluid (VOF) model is implemented. In this case, the follow-
tional acceleration, respectively. The term −ρui′ uj′ repre- ing transport equation is used to compute the volume ratio
sents the Reynolds stresses. of the two phases:

13
 J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng.

Fig. 3  Computational domain
and boundary conditions

Fig. 4  Computational grid

∂α � u) = 0 In VOF method, the Navier–Stokes and continuity equa-

+ ∇·(α� (8)
∂t tions are solved for an effective fluid taking the following
effective properties in each cell:
0 < α < 1 is the volume fraction occupied by each phase
inside each computational cell where 2k=1 αk = 1.
 ρeff = α·ρ1 + (1 − α)·ρ2 (9)

13
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng.

υeff = α·υ1 + (1 − α)·υ2 . (10) 3 Computational domain and boundary conditions

If α = 1, the computational cell is inside fluid 1 and if In the present study, calculations are carried out on a new
α = 1, it is inside fluid 2. 0 < α < 1 Indicates that the cell high-speed hard chinned planing hull. Two models (stepped
is located at the free surface. and non-stepped hulls) are investigated. These models,
named C and C1 (the same name defined in Ref. [11],
have been tested by Taunton et al. [11] at the University
of Southampton and their experimental results are avail-
able for public use). Figure 2 shows the sketch of these two
models, whereas the main dimensions of the models are
presented in Table 1.
Flow around the ship hull is considered symmetrical
with respect to center plane of the hull, so the flow calcula-
tions are only performed in one side of the center plane.
The distances of solution domain boundaries from the hull
are selected large enough in order to apply correct bound-
ary conditions and consequently obtain more accurate
solution. Figure 3 shows the dimensions of computational
domain and boundary conditions applied. At the inlet, the
velocity is specified, equal to hull velocity. At the outlet,
the hydrostatic pressure is known based on water depth. An
Fig. 5  Total drag ratio as a function of mesh size for mesh independ- opening boundary condition is applied to the top bound-
ence study at 12.05 m/s ary, where the air is permitted to flow through the bound-
ary. The center plane of the hull is set to symmetry con-
dition. Wall boundary condition is applied to hull surface
Table 2  Solver setting
and free slip wall boundary conditions to bottom and side
Item Setting boundaries.
Analysis type Steady state
Turbulent model k–ε
Multiphase model Homogeneous
4 Computational grid
Spatial discretization scheme High resolution
Volume fraction coupling Coupled
An unstructured tetrahedral mesh is used for discretization
of whole solution domain, since the geometry is complex.
Body force averaging type Volume-weighted
Due to large velocity gradient in wall-normal direction near
Convergence criteria RMS 10e−4
the wall, an inflation layer mesh with high resolution (of

Fig. 6  Comparison between numerical and experimental results for drag ratio

13

about 20 layers) and y+ of about 50 (consistent with turbu-
lent model utilized) is used inside boundary layer region.
The mesh quality play an important role in accuracy of
numerical results and it is clear that smaller mesh cells
lead to more accurate solutions. On the other hand, this
increases the total cell number and consequently the com-
putational cost. Therefore, the current study mesh refine-
ment was only applied to the regions where larger gradi-
ent of the solution variables are expected to occur. For this
purpose, a refinement was applied to a region around free
surface to accurately capture air–water interface. Another
Fig. 7  Pressure distributions on hull with diagrams of pressure coefficients on keel line in different speeds for non-stepped hull
13
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng.
refinement also was applied to the same region near the
hull, where water separation and reattachment and water
spray occur. Figure 4 presents the computational grid and
refinement regions. In the same figure you can see inflation
layer mesh in the step and bow regions with more details in
a magnified view.
To ensure that the solution is independent of mesh size,
all calculations were performed in three different meshes
with different cell numbers. The mesh independence dia-
gram for drag–displacement ratio is shown in Fig. 5. This
diagram is for the maximum speed. It may be realized that
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng.
difference in drag between medium and fine mesh is very
small (smaller than 10 %) and mesh independence for solu-
tion is satisfied. The same convergence (smaller than 10 %)
was also occurred for other speeds. Solver settings used in
Ansys CFX v.14 for the simulations are presented in Table 2.
5 Results and discussion
In this section, the numerical results obtained for differ-
ent speeds from 4.05 to 12.05 with about 2-m/s intervals
Fig. 8  Pressure distributions on hull with diagrams of pressure coefficients on keel line in different speeds for stepped hull
are presented. For each speed, a different draft and trim
was considered based on experimental results obtained
by Taunton et al. [11] at the University of Southamp-
ton [11]. For validation, the numerical results are com-
pared with available experimental data. Working fluid of
water has density of ρ = 997 kg/m3 and dynamic vis-
cosity of µ = 8.899 × 10−4 kg/ms and air has den-
sity of ρ = 1.185 kg/m3, and dynamic viscosity of
µ = 1.83 × 10−5 kg/ms. To ensure the convergence of
solution in each calculation, iterations continue until residual
errors reduce below 10−4 and total drag reaches a steady state.
13

Fig. 9  Wetted surface for
stepped and non-stepped hull at
speed 8.13 m/s
Fig. 10  Comparison between numerical and experimental position
where the water spray crosses the chine at speed 12.05 m/s
In Fig. 6, comparisons between numerical and experi-
mental results for drag are illustrated for two cases (stepped
and non-stepped hulls). It may be observed that the inclu-
sion of the step causes a significant reduction in total drag.
As shown in Fig. 6, we have an acceptable average error
of approximately 10 % for all Froude numbers that show a
good agreement with experimental results.
13
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng.
Surely, accurate prediction of hydrodynamic forces
requires appropriate estimation of pressure distribution on
the body. Since there is no experimental data for pressure
distribution on the hull, only the numerical results for this
solution variable are presented here. Figures 7 and 8 present
the pressure distributions on the hull at different speeds for
both cases. In the same figures, diagrams of pressure coef-
ficients on the keel line are also presented. As expected
there are two maximum pressure points corresponding to
stagnation points on fore and aft bodies of the stepped hull
in Fig. 8. Minimum pressure occurs at step location where
water separates from fore body. It can be seen in Fig. 8 that
the pressure region on aft body decreases with speed growth
due to increasing of water separation. In Fig. 7 for the non-
stepped hull, pressure region is very larger in comparison
with stepped hull, since there is no water separation.
As mentioned before, the main effect of step is to reduce
wetted surface area on hull. This effect results in a sig-
nificant reduction of drag in comparison with non-stepped
hull. Figure 9 shows the calculated wetted area for speed
of 8.13 m/s, the difference in wetted area is quite obvious
between stepped and non-stepped hulls in this figure.
A more accurate simulation of free surface shape gener-
ated by hull moving leads to more accurate estimation of
wake region generated on stern, water spray drag, wetted
surface area, and wave pattern. In this study, we applied a
mesh with enough resolution to appropriately capture the
free surface shape. To demonstrate the strength of present
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng.

simulations, a numerical simulation of spray pattern at
12.05 m/s, as an example, is compared with a real photo-
graph taken from the model in towing tank in Fig. 10. It
should be noted that both images in this figure are at the
same view and scale that make it possible to do a visual
comparison. It can be seen that the calculated position
where spray cross the chine occurs at the same location
observed in the experiment.
Savitsky and Morabito [9] introduced a series of empiri-
cal equations to estimate the wake profile aft of a prismatic
stepped hull in centerline and 1/4 beam buttock. These equa-
tions were presented for deadrise angles of 10°, 20°, and 30°
[9]. Figure 11 shows wake profiles at centerline and 1/4 beam
in stern wave at speed of 6.25 m/s. In Fig. 12, these profiles
are compared by Savitsky’s formulae given as follows:
  1.5 
1.5 π X
H = 0.17[1.5 + 0.03Lk τ ]sin , for centerline
CV 3

(11)
  1.5 
1.5 π X
H = 0.17[0.75 + 0.03Lk τ ]sin ,
CV 3

Fig. 11  Wake profiles in stern at speed 6.25 m/s a centerline profile for 1/4 beam buttock, (12)
and b 1/4 beam profile

Fig. 12  Comparison of wake profile from transom between numerical results and Savitsky’s empirical equations a centerline and b 1/4 beam
buttock

13

Fig. 13  Wave pattern around the stepped hull for different speeds
where H is the height of wake profile above extended keel or
1/4 beam buttock, Lk is wetted keel length, τ is trim angle, X
√ Amirkabir University of Technology (AUT). Also, authors would like
is distance aft of transom, and CV (=VS / gB) is speed coef-
ficient. VS is craft’s speed and B is beam of the craft.
Wave patterns around the hull for different speeds are
presented in Fig. 13. As it can be seen from this figure, the
wave angle reduces with speed growth, while the height of
stern wave decreases that this trend shows a good compat-
ibility with actual physics.
6 Conclusions
Numerical method was used to investigate the influence of
step on hydrodynamic characteristics of a modern high-
speed chinned planing hull for speed range from 4.05 to
12.05 with approximately 2-m/s intervals. For this purpose,
standard k–ε turbulent model with VOF multiphase model
was utilized to simulate free surface flow around a high-
speed planing hull and the numerical results compared with
available experimental data and empirical relations that
showed a good agreement. These demonstrate that these
models can appropriately simulate turbulent flow around
the stepped and non-stepped planing hull. Calculated drag
from the CFD codes validated against experimental results
that showed an average error of approximately 10 %. So
the CFD codes used in this study can be offered for prop-
erly estimation of drag. Also, wake profile resulted from
these CFD codes was compared with empirical formu-
lae and showed a good consistency. Numerical results for
stepped hull was compared to non-stepped hull concluding
that using step can significantly decrease total drag in high
froude numbers.
This is our future plan to extend more activities concern-
ing the various forms of stepped hull and its performance in
calm and wave water.
13
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng.
Acknowledgments  The work presented in this paper was supported
by the High Performance Computing Research Center (HPCRC) at
to thank the marine research center of AUT for grant-in-aid.
References
1. http://www.lornecampbelldesign.com/bladeRunner.htm.
Accessed 8 Oct 2014
2. http://www.aeromarineresearch.com. Accessed 8 Oct 2014
3. Robert SK (2013) Advanced topics in stepped hull design,
IBEX2013. www.ocean5inc.com. Accessed 8 Oct 2014
4. Troesch A (2010) Dynamics and hydrodynamics of high speed
craft, PASI2010. Barranquilla, Colombia
5. Marshall R (2002) Powering your boat. All about powerboats:
understanding design and performance. McGraw-Hill Profes-
sional, New York
6. Faltinsen OM (2005) Hydrodynamics of high-speed marine vehi-
cles. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
7. Savitsky D (1964) Hydrodynamic design of planing hulls. Mar
Technol 1(1):71–95
8. Savitsky D, DeLorme MF, Datla R (2007) Inclusion of whisker
spray drag in performance prediction method for high-speed
planing hulls. Mar Technol 44:35–56
9. Savitsky D, Morabito M (2010) Surface wave contours associated
with the forebody wake of stepped planing hulls. Mar Technol
47(1):1–16
10. Svahn D (2009) Performance prediction of hulls with transverse.
Master thesis, Marina System Center for Naval Architecture,
KTH, Stockholm
11. Taunton D, Hudson D, Shenoi R (2010) Characteristics of a series
of high speed hard chine planing hulls—Part 1: performance in
calm water. Int J Small Craft Technol 152:55–75
12. Grigoropoulos GJ, Damala D (2011) Dynamic performance of
the NTUA double-chine series hull forms in random waves. In:
11th international conference on Fast Sea Transportation FAST
2011, Honolulu, HI, USA
13. Ghassemi H, Mansouri M, Zaferanlouei S (2011) Interceptor hydro-
dynamic analysis for handling trim control problems in the high-
speed crafts. Proc IMechE C. doi:10.1177/0954406211406650
14. Garland WR, Maki KJA (2012) Numerical study of a two-dimen-
sional stepped planing surface. J Ship Prod Des 28(2):60–72
J Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng.
15. Subramanian AV, Subramanian PVV, Ali NS (2007) Pressure and
drag influences due to tunnels in high-speed planing craft. IOS
Press, PAYS-BAS, Amsterdam
16. Ghassabzadeh M, Ghassemi H (2014) Determining of the hydro-
dynamic forces on the multi-hull tunnel vessel in steady motion.
Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng 36(4):1–12
17. Ghassabzadeh M, Ghassemi H (2013) An innovative method for
parametric design of planing tunnel vessel Hull form. Ocean Eng
60:14–27
18. Yousefi R, Shafaghat R, Shakeri M (2013) Hydrodynamic anal-
ysis techniques for high-speed planing hulls. Appl Ocean Res
42:105–113
19. Savander BR, Scorpio SM, Taylor RK (2002) Steady hydrody-
namic of planing surface. J Ship Res 46(4):248–279
20. Ghassemi H, Ghiasi M (2007) A combined method for the
hydrodynamic characteristics of planing crafts. Ocean Eng
35(3–4):310–322
21. Ghassemi H, Yumin S (2008) Determining the hydrodynamic
forces on a planing hull in steady motion. J Mar Sci Appl
7:147–156
22. Kohansal AR, Ghassemi H, Ghiasi M (2010) Hydrodynamic
characteristics of high speed planing hulls, including trim effects,
Turkish. J Eng Environ Sci 34:1–16
23. Kohansal AR, Ghassemi H (2010) A numerical modeling of
hydrodynamic characteristics of various planing hull forms.
Ocean Eng 37(5–6):498–510
View publication stats
24. Caponnetto M (2001) Practical CFD simulations for planing
hulls, HIPER2001. Hamburg, Germany
25. Richard P, Stephen T, Stephen W (2001) Free surface CFD simu-
lations of the flow around a planing plate, FAST2001. The Royal
Institution of Naval Architects, Southampton
26. Savander BR, Rhee SH (2003) Steady planing hydrodynamics:
comparison of numerical and experimental results. Fluent Users’
Group, Manchester
27. Kihara H (2006) A computing method for the flow analysis
around a prismatic planing-hull. In: 5th international conference
on high performance marine vehicles
28. Brizzolara S, Serra F (2007) Accuracy of CFD codes in the pre-
diction of planing surfaces hydrodynamic characteristics. In: 2nd
international conference on marine research and transportation,
Naples
29. Fultz ER (2008) CFD analysis of a penta-hulled, air entrapment,
high speed planing vessel. Mechanical Engineering, Naval Post-
graduate School, Monterey
30. Akkerman I, Dunaway J, Kvandal J, Spinks J, Bazilevs Y (2012)
Toward free-surface modeling of planing vessels: simulation of
the Fridsma hull using ALE-VMS. Comput Mech 50(6):719–727
31. Yumin S, Qington C, Hailong S, Wei L (2012) Numerical
simulation of a planing vessel at high speed. J Mar Sci Appl
11(2):178–183
13