Jmse 07 00346 v2

Journal of
Marine Science
and Engineering
Article
Experimental and Numerical Research on the
Influence of Stern Flap Mounting Angle on
Double-Stepped Planing Hull
Hydrodynamic Performance
Jin Zou 1 , Shijie Lu 1, * , Yi Jiang 2 , Hanbing Sun 1, * and Zhuangzhuang Li 1
1 College of Shipbuilding Engineering, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin 150001, China;
zoujing19@163.com (J.Z.); lzz1834583233@163.com (Z.L.)
2 China Ship Scientific Research Center, Wuxi 214000, China; q691895901@126.com
* Correspondence: lushijie@hrbeu.edu.cn (S.L.); sun-han-bing@163.com (H.S.);
Tel.: +86-188-451-42429 (S.L.); +86-137-966-29437 (H.S.)

Received: 30 June 2019; Accepted: 19 September 2019; Published: 1 October 2019
Abstract: In the current hydrodynamic research relating to planing hulls, the stern flap and steps are
generally considered to be two independent resistance reduction measures. Limited research has
focused on the coupled effects of flaps and steps. Therefore, experimental and numerical simulation
methods are carried out in this paper to explore the influence of the flap mounting angle coupled
with the steps. A series of model towing tests were implemented for a double-stepped planing hull
with 2◦ , 3◦ and 4.5◦ flap angles. The test results show that, as the mounting angle increased, the
low speed resistance performance was improved and the porpoising critical speed was delayed,
with a slight resistance cost. Based on the tests, a numerical simulation method was established
with volume Froude numbers ranging from 0.88 to 5.20. The simulated hull flow field showed
good agreement with the testing data. The simulation results suggest a cavity induces the negative
pressure after the steps; the cavity core region is the air phase, and this expands with the air–water
mixture flow. The cavity also causes wetted surface reduction and pressure distribution changes.
Finally, comparisons of cavities after-steps and load coefficients of different planing surfaces among
models were considered. Numerical results analysis gave distinct interpretations for the experimental
phenomenon of porpoising critical speed increasing with a slight resistance increment.
Keywords: experimental and numerical research; stern flap; stepped planing hull; cavity; porpoising;
wetted surface; hydrodynamic performance
1. Introduction
The stern flap, also known as the stern baffle, is always shaped as a flat plate with a high aspect
ratio, fixed or angle adjustable, and attached to the rear of a high speed transom stern hull. During the
navigation process, the hydrodynamic lift generated by the stern flap can affect the motion attitude
of the hull, to a certain extent [1]. As a result, the pressure distribution at the hull bottom and
the wave-making property of the wake field are changed, while the resistance performance is also
improved [2]. The stern flap can also be introduced to the planing hull, regulating the motion attitude
to a specific attack angle for optimal hydrodynamic performance [3,4]. The research on planing crafts
with a stern flap shows that it can improve the resistance performance, and also enhance the motion
stability performance at high speed, for instance by inhibiting the inception of porpoising [5,6].
As an independent resistance reducing method from the stern flap, steps are introduced to improve
the resistance and efficiency of the planing hull [7–10]. At present, research into stepped planing
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346; doi:10.3390/jmse7100346 www.mdpi.com/journal/jmse

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 2 of 25
hulls has mainly been carried out through model tests conducted by different researchers focusing
on resistance performance, cavity formation processes, and influencing factors of the double-stepped
planing hull. Garland has carried out tests on NSWC (Naval Surface Warfare Center, USA) series
models with steps to investigate the effects of the stepped planing hull [11]. A comparison of the
resistance and motion attitude of the modified and non-stepped hull was carried out, along with
investigations into the cavity shape after the step. Lotf et al. also investigated a one-stepped planing
hull, and validated their simulations with experimental works [12]. A series of model tests on a
double-stepped planing hull were carried out to research the resistance performance influencing factors
of the hull. Besides the numerical method, other research has also been conducted focusing on the
stepped planing hull [13–15].
As a derivative high speed planing hull type, the stepped planing hull has obvious resistance
advantages in the planing state, as compared with the same series of non-stepped hull. However, in
low speed segments, the stepped hull has an obvious trim and resistance peak [16,17]. As discussed
above, the stern flaps can improve the resistance and navigation stability performance of the planing
hull. Therefore, in order to improve the resistance and seakeeping performance, as well as increase the
porpoising inception speed as far as possible, stern flaps can also be introduced to the stepped planing
hull attitude adjustment.
The research mentioned above covers multiple aspects of the stern flap and stepped planing
hull. However, in the current hydrodynamics research on planing hulls, stern flaps and steps are
generally treated as two independent resistance reduction measures. Relatively few researchers have
focused on the effects of stern flaps and steps coupling [17–19]. The coupling effects of the flaps
and steps are inevitably related to the motion and resistance characteristics of the hull. Therefore, in
the current paper, the focus is on the double-stepped planing hull with different mounting angles.
By combining experimental and numerical methods, the effects of the stern flaps on reducing low
speed resistance and inhibiting porpoising of the double-stepped planing hull are investigated. Based
on the experimental and numerical simulation results, the flap action mechanism and influence on
hydrodynamic performance, coupled with the effects of the steps, are discussed and summarized.
In Section 2, a brief description of the hull and the towing test arrangement is introduced, and
the experimental results and analysis of the experiment are also shown in detail. In Section 3, the
numerical method is developed; the boundary conditions and mesh generation process are carried out.
In Section 4, the numerical simulation results are validated. Further, based on the numerical analysis
and results, the action mechanism and influence of the flaps coupled with the steps on hydrodynamic
performance are discussed. In Section 5, the conclusions are briefly summarized.
2. Towing Test
2.1. Geometrical Description of the Hull Model

Teng [19] discussed the height of steps and the longitudinal step position of series DSPBM
(double-stepped planing boat model) models. Based on that work, we selected DSPBM as the parent
ship, and combined with the performance and research experience, an optimized model was introduced.
The geometry of the hull and step configuration are shown in Figure 1. It can be seen that two V-type
steps are introduced to the planing hull bottom along the longitudinal direction. Hence, the planing
bottom is divided into three segments, which are identified as the first, second and third planing
faces, abbreviated as P1, P2 and P3 from the bow to rear. In addition, to study the effects of stern flap
mounting angle on the stepped planing hull, two stern flaps with a length of 4.5% L were mounted
to both sides of the bottom. The lifting surface was connected to the planing face, and the chine line
was adapted to the flap at the bilge, so as to remain consistent with the hull. During the test, the stern
flap mounting angle is defined as the spatial acute angle between the surface of P3 and the stern flap.
The flap was mounted in a fixed form with angles of 2◦ , 3◦ and 4.5◦ . The principal dimensions of the
hull are defined as follows: The overall length L was 2370 mm, and the beam between the chine line B
Length overall (mm) L 2370
Beam between chine line (mm) B 646
Longitudinal step-A (from rear) (mm) LA 1000
Longitudinal step-B (from rear) (mm) LB 600
Longitudinal center of gravity (from rear) (mm) Xg 700
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 3 of 25
Height of steps (mm) H 8
Deadrise angle/ (°) β1 18
was 646 mm.Angle As for between steps & middle
the longitudinal lineofplane/
center (°) it has a significant
gravity, β2 impact80on both resistance
and stability Mounting
performance. angles of stern flap/
Therefore, (°) gravity center was setβat 0.3 L, referring
the hull 2, 3, 4.5 to the set value
Average width projection of stern flap (mm)
of the parent hull, which has both appropriate resistance and stability performance B f 138 [19]. The exact
longitudinal center of gravity X g was 700 mm. The rest of the main characteristics100
Length of stern flap (mm) Lf are given in Table 1.
Figure 1. Model of the double-stepped planing hull.

Figure 1. Model of the double-stepped planing hull.
Table 1. Main dimensions of the hull and flap.
2.2. Experimental Setup
Main Feature Symbol Value
The towingLength
tank test of the
overall (mm) double-stepped planing hull model Lwas carried
2370out in the towing
tank of the China Special Vehicle Research
Beam between chine line (mm) Institute (also called theB NO. 605 Subsidiary Research
646
Institute, Aviation Industry of
Longitudinal China
step-A Group).
(from rear) The
(mm)main dimensionsLwere:
A length
1000 510 m × width 6.5
Longitudinal step-B (from rear) (mm) L 600
m × depth 6.8 m. As the corollary carriage towing system can reach Ba speed range of 0.1 m/s to 22
Longitudinal
m/s, with a stable speed errorcenter
underof0.1%,
gravity
the(from rear) (mm)
maximum length towing 700 adequately met
X gtank in China
Height of steps (mm) H 8
the requirements of the test. Figure 2 shows a setup schematic overview of the experimental test. The
Deadrise angle/(◦ ) β1 18
Angle between steps & middle line plane/(◦ ) β2 80
Mounting angles of stern flap/(◦ ) β 2, 3, 4.5
Average width projection of stern flap (mm) Bf 138
Length of stern flap (mm) Lf 100
2.2. Experimental Setup

The towing tank test of the double-stepped planing hull model was carried out in
the towing tank of the China Special Vehicle Research Institute (also called the NO. 605
Subsidiary Research Institute, Aviation Industry of China Group). The main dimensions were:
length 510 m × width 6.5 m × depth 6.8 m. As the corollary carriage towing system can reach a speed
range of 0.1 m/s to 22 m/s, with a stable speed error under 0.1%, the maximum length towing tank in
China adequately met the requirements of the test. Figure 2 shows a setup schematic overview of the
experimental test. The double-stepped planing hull model was fixed to the carriage with the pitch
and heave set to two degrees of freedom. In detail, the measuring device and sensors were arranged
as follows:
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 4 of 25
double-stepped
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7,planing
346 hull model was fixed to the carriage with the pitch and heave set to two
4 of 25
degrees of freedom. In detail, the measuring device and sensors were arranged as follows:
Figure 2. Schematic view of the towing test set up.

Figure 2. Schematic view of the towing test set up.
Two guide rods were introduced and mounted in the front and back of the model, preventing
Two guide rods were introduced and mounted in the front and back of the model, preventing
yaw and roll motions. The towing point at both broadsides aligned with the gravity center, avoiding
yaw and roll motions. The towing point at both broadsides aligned with the gravity center, avoiding
a longitudinal movement being produced during the towing process. During the towing tests, a
a longitudinal movement being produced during the towing process. During the towing tests, a
resistance dynamometer was mounted on the carriage to measure the resistance, a cable-extension
resistance dynamometer was mounted on the carriage to measure the resistance, a cable-extension
displacement sensor was mounted at the gravity center, measuring the value of sinkage, and the trim
displacement sensor was
angle was measured mounted
by an at theattached
angle sensor gravity to
center, measuring
the foredeck. the value
All devices usedof for
sinkage, and the trim
data acquisition
angle
have regularly been calibrated. After these device and sensor arrangements were set up, to acquisition
was measured by an angle sensor attached to the foredeck. All devices used for data monitor
have regularly been calibrated. After these device and sensor arrangements
the wave-making characteristics, two cameras were mounted before and after the model. were set up, to monitor
the wave-making characteristics, two cameras were mounted before and after
The towing test was strictly conducted following the ITTC Recommended Procedures and the model.
The towing
Guidelines test During
[20,21]. was strictly conducted
each run, followingdata
the experimental the ITTC
such asRecommended Procedures
resistance, sinkage and trimand
Guidelines [20,21].
acquisition began During each run,
after a steady thehad
speed experimental
been reached.dataAs
such
for as
theresistance, sinkage andthe
data post-processing, trim
experimental
acquisition begandata is the
after mean value
a steady speedderived fromreached.
had been an integration
As forof the instantaneous measuredthe
data post-processing,
values overdata
experimental the is
same measuring
the mean valueinterval,
derived with
from the zero measurements
an integration being subtracted
of the instantaneous from values
measured the
average
over values.
the same In the model
measuring interval,tests,
withthree different
the zero stern flap mounting
measurements angle conditions
being subtracted were
from the average
considered for β = 2°, 3° and 4.5°. Calm water towing tests were carried out at speeds
values. In the model tests, three different stern flap mounting angle conditions were considered ranging from for
0.44 to 6.13 in Froude numbers. For each angle condition, when the porpoising
β = 2 , 3 and 4.5 . Calm water towing tests were carried out at speeds ranging from 0.44 to 6.13 in
◦ ◦ ◦ phenomenon
occurred, the towing test process was terminated.
Froude numbers. For each angle condition, when the porpoising phenomenon occurred, the towing
test process was terminated.
2.3. Experimental Results and Analysis
2.3. Experimental Results
In this paper, and Analysis
a series of tests were carried out under different conditions of heave, pitch, and
total resistance, at different speeds. In addition, according to the camera records, the hull wave-
In this paper, a series of tests were carried out under different conditions of heave, pitch, and total
making and motion attitudes were also observed. This information was advantageous to the auxiliary
resistance, at different speeds. In addition, according to the camera records, the hull wave-making and
analysis of the results. Test data dimensionless processing was carried out as follows:
motion attitudes were also observed. This information was advantageous to the auxiliary analysis of
Non-dimensional resistance is defined by the resistance to weight ratio (R/Δ). Non-dimensional
thespeed
results. Test data
is defined bydimensionless
volume based on processing
the Froudewas carriedfollowing
number, out as follows:
the equation:
Non-dimensional resistance is defined by the resistance to weight ratio (R/∆). Non-dimensional
V ,
Fr∇ =number, following the equation:
speed is defined by volume based on the Froude (1)
g (∇ )
1/ 3
V of the model. Non-dimensional sinkage is

where V is the test speed, and ∇ is theFrdisplacement
∇ = q (1)
defined by the equation: ( ) 1/3
g ∇
δ
δ = exp , (2)
where V is the test speed, and ∇ is the displacement ofT the model. Non-dimensional sinkage is defined
by where
the equation:
δexp is the experimental trim angle and sinkage value, and T is the static average draft. In
addition, the positive value of trim angle θ and
δexp
δ δ=represent
, the increase of the up-pitch and heave. (2)
T
where δexp is the experimental trim angle and sinkage value, and T is the static average draft.
In addition, the positive value of trim angle θ and δ represent the increase of the up-pitch and heave.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 5 of 25
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 5 of 25
During the the

towing test, models with ◦ 3◦ and 4.5◦ were carried out,
During towing test, models withflap
flapmounting
mountinganglesangles of of 2
2°,, 3° and 4.5° were carried out,
respectively. In order
respectively. to facilitate
In order the the
to facilitate discussion
discussionin this paper,
in this paper,the the
series models
series areare
models named
namedM1,M1,M2M2 and
M3 with
and M3thewith
increasing angle ofangle
the increasing the stern
of theflap.
sternIn Figure
flap. 3, the3,non-dimensional
In Figure the non-dimensional resistance, trim,
resistance, and
trim,
heaveandare plotted
heave are as functions
plotted of the volume
as functions Froude
of the volume number,
Froude individually.
number, It can
individually. It be
canseen that,that,
be seen after
increasing the stern flap
after increasing the angle, the trim
stern flap andthe
angle, heave
trimofand the model
heave of weretheboth reduced.
model were Simultaneously,
both reduced.
Simultaneously,
before porpoising, the before porpoising,
maximum Froude thenumber
maximum thatFroude
M1 could number
reachthat
wasM1 could
5.20, whilereach
the was 5.20,
maximum
while
velocity of the
M2 maximum
increased to Fr5 = 5.69;
velocity of M2andincreased
M3 to 6.13. to Fr ▽ = 5.69;
Thus, for theand M3 to 6.13. Thus,
double-stepped for the
planing boatdouble-
studied
stepped
in this paper,planing boat the
increasing studied in this angle
mounting paper,stern
increasing the mounting
flap angle can clearlyangle sternthe
inhibit flapporpoising
angle can clearly
motion.
inhibit the porpoising motion.
0.3
0.25
0.2
R/Δ
0.15 No flaps
M1
0.1
M2
0.05
M3
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Fr▽
(a)
14
No flaps
12
M1
10
M2
8 M3
θ/°
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Fr▽
(b)
0.8
0.6
No flaps
0.4
M1
δ
M2
0.2
M3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
-0.2
Fr▽
(c)
Figure
Figure 3. Comparisons
3. Comparisons of experimental
of experimental resultswith
results withincreasing
increasing speed.
speed. (a)
(a)Non-dimensional
Non-dimensionalresistance;
resistance;
(b) trim angle; (c) non-dimensional sinkage.
(b) trim angle; (c) non-dimensional sinkage.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 6 of 25
Table 2 shows the comparison of the dimensionless experimental resistance among different
models. The resistance increasing rate is also compared in Table 2, reflecting the effects of flap mounting
angle on resistance. A positive value indicates increasing resistance and a negative value indicates
reducing resistance. A symbol of “–” indicates when porpoising occurred. At that time, there existed
no stable resistance value. It can be observed that when the Froude number was under 3.94, the stern
flap played a positive role in improving the resistance performance. Both M2 and M3 achieved a
certain resistance reduction effect in this segment of speed. The resistance reduction of M3 was more
obvious. At the speed of Fr5 = 0.88, M3 reached a resistance reducing benefit of 8.9%, while at the
resistance hump, the value was 4.9%. With the increase of speed, under the condition of Fr5 > 3.94, the
stern flap had a limited effect on the hull resistance performance. The resistance increased to a slight
extent. Compared with the experimental data of M1, the maximum resistance increase was just 1.7%.
Table 2. Comparisons of experimental resistance between different models.
M1 M2 M3
Fr∇
R1 /∆ R2 /∆ (R2 −R1 )/R1 R3 /∆ (R3 −R1 )/R1
0.44 0.0073 0.0069 −5.5% 0.0076 4.1%
0.88 0.0715 0.0709 −0.8% 0.0652 −8.9%
1.31 0.1971 0.1940 −1.6% 0.1875 −4.9%
2.19 0.2370 0.2340 −1.3% 0.2263 −4.5%
2.63 0.2106 0.2070 −1.7% 0.2024 −3.9%
3.07 0.1891 0.1879 −0.6% 0.1824 −3.5%
3.50 0.1799 0.1781 −1.0% 0.1736 −3.5%
3.94 0.1780 0.1777 −0.2% 0.1741 −2.2%
4.38 0.1803 0.1827 1.3% 0.1816 0.7%
4.82 0.1924 0.1941 0.9% 0.1921 −0.2%
5.20 0.2025 0.2057 1.6% 0.2060 1.7%
5.69 – 0.2187 – 0.2286 –
6.13 – – – 0.2534 –
According to the experimental data and observations, the stern flap improved the fluid field around
the double-stepped planing hull and the longitudinal movement generated by the hydrodynamic lifting
force, which not only optimized the double-stepped planing hull motion attitude but also extended
the porpoising critical speed. With the flaps’ and steps’ coupled effects, the resistance performance
was impacted by the distribution and state of the cavity after the steps, as well as the wetted surface.
Specifically, in the medium and low speed segment, the resistance performance was improved, while
in the high speed segment, the porpoising inception speed was delayed, with a slight resistance cost.
3. Numerical Simulation Setup

According to the experimental data analysis and observations above, the tested planing hull
coupled flaps and double steps show favorable resistance performance at medium and low speed.
Furthermore, they also play a positive role in inhibiting porpoising, with a slight resistance cost.
However, the mechanism and process of the coupling effect deserve in-depth analysis and research.
For this reason, the numerical simulations were carried out based on the model tank towing test.
The Froude number ranged from 0.88 to 5.20.
3.1. Mathematical and Numerical Models

As mentioned, the numerical simulations were carried out at the whole speed segment, where
the Froude number ranged from 0.88 to 5.20. The speed distribution and stern flap mounting
angles were consistent with the trial conditions. In order to establish the solving system of the
incompressible viscous flow field surrounding the hull, FVM (finite volume method) software CFX
was adapted for use in this paper. As for the simulation of incompressible viscous flow, the RANS
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 7 of 25
(Reynold-Averaged Navier–Stokes) equation method was adopted for solving the Navier–Stokes (N–S)
equations. The continuity equations and Reynolds average from the N–S equations are written as:
∂ρ ∂(ρui )
+ = 0, (3)
∂t xi
∂(ρui ) ∂(ρui u j ) ∂p ∂ ∂u
+ =− + (µ i − ρu0i u0j ) + ρgi , (4)
∂t ∂xi ∂xi ∂x j ∂x j
where ui, uj represent the components of the velocity vector, p is the pressure, ρ is the density of the
fluid, µ is the coefficient of dynamic viscosity, and ρu0i u0j is the Reynolds stress.
The SST (shear stress transfer) k-ω turbulence model was introduced to close the system, and the
wall function was used for the near wall treatment. The coupling of pressure and velocity was realized
with the SIMPLE algorithm. Concretely, the transport equations for k and ω are written as:
∂ ∂ ∂ ∂k
(ρk) + (ρkui ) = ( Γk ) + Gk − Yk , (5)
∂t ∂xi ∂xi ∂xi
∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ω
(ρω) + (ρωui ) = ( Γω ) + Gω − Yω + Dω , (6)
∂t ∂xi ∂xi ∂xi
where Gk and Gω represent the turbulence kinetic energy generation items, and Yk and Yω represent
the turbulence dissipation rate of k and ω, respectively.
As for the free surface, the VOF (volume of fluid) method was introduced to simulate the evolution
procedure. At the initial moment, the free-surface height was defined as Hw , while the mesh height
was Z. Further, the volume fraction of air–water was defined as:
Vair = step(Z − Hw ), (7)
Vwater = 1 − Vair , (8)
If Z-Hw > 0, then Vair = 1. This indicates a total air phase mesh; if Z-Hw < 0, then Vwater = 1.
This situation indicates a total water phase mesh. When Z-Hw = 0, Vair = Vwater = 0.5, it represents the
distribution here is a free surface. Thus, the air–water phase in the whole flow domain is decided.
In the process of finding the discrete flow field by using the finite volume method, due to the strong
directivity of the convection, a high resolution scheme was adopted to discretize the convection term.
In the towing test, the heave and trim angle were measured to describe the motion. Thus, during
the numerical simulation process, in order to remain consistent with the towing test setups, 2-DOF
(2 degrees of freedom, heave and pitch) motions were released. The following force and moment
equilibrium motion equations were introduced to solve the resistance, and motion of the hull:
→
→ d2 X
F= m 2 , (9)
dt
 →
→ d  d θ 
M = I , (10)
dt  dt 
→ →
where I is the gravity center inertia mass matrix of the hull. F and M are the forces and moments
calculated by the equations below:
Z
→ → →
F= ([τ] − p[I ])• n dS − G, (11)
s
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 8 of 25
Z
→ → → → →
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346
M= r − r G × τ − p[I ] · n dS, (12)
8 of 25
s
→ 
where [τ], [pτ[]I，
where [ I ] ,G,
], pand and G , respectively,
respectively, represent
represent the shear
the shear stress,
stress, pressure,
pressure, andand gravity.
gravity. S represents
S represents the
→ → 
hullthe hull surface, and the vectors r G and rG represent the displacements of the mesh nodes and
surface, and the vectors r and r represent the displacements of the mesh nodes and gravity
center. The main dynamic solver simulating procedure is shown in Figure 4, and the numerical process
gravity center. The main dynamic solver simulating procedure is shown in Figure 4, and the
is mainly carried out as follows:
numerical process is mainly carried out as follows:
Figure
Figure 4. 4.Solving
Solvingprocedure
procedureof
ofthe
the algorithm.
algorithm.
First,
First, the N–S
the N–S equation
equation system
system andcontinuity
and the the continuity equation
equation were were
solvedsolved
basedbased
on theon the initial
initial meshes
meshesAfter
inputted. inputted. After
that, the that,stress
shear the shear
fieldstress field andfield
and pressure pressure
aroundfield around
the the hullwere
hull surface surface were
integrated
integrated
to calculate thetoforces
calculate
andthe forces and
moments moments
acting on the acting
hull,on
as the hull, as in
described described in Equations
Equations (7) Third,
(7) and (8). and
(8). Third, by solving Equations (5) and (6), the parameters of velocity, motion
by solving Equations (5) and (6), the parameters of velocity, motion acceleration, and displacementacceleration, and
weredisplacement
calculated and were calculated
obtained. and obtained.
Subsequently, the Subsequently,
hull positingtheandhull
meshpositing
node and
couldmesh
thennode could
be updated.
then be updated. With updated hull position and mesh nodes, a loop computation was carried out to
With updated hull position and mesh nodes, a loop computation was carried out to solve the fluid
solve the fluid field. The termination criteria of this algorithm were variations of forces and moments
field. The termination criteria of this algorithm were variations of forces and moments stabilizing to
stabilizing to approach 0, which suggests that the hull has achieved an equilibrium state and the
approach 0, which suggests that the hull has achieved an equilibrium state and the numerical process
numerical process can be terminated.
can be terminated.
3.2. Boundary Conditions
3.2. Boundary Conditions
To simulate the flow field around the double-stepped planing hull, a CFD (Computational Fluid
To simulate
Dynamics) the flow field
simulation basedaround
on the the double-stepped
rigid planing hull,
body motion technique a CFD (Computational
was applied, and the calculatingFluid
Dynamics)
domain simulation
was primarily based on the rigid
established. body motion
Concerning technique
the symmetry of thewas applied,
flow, and themodel
a symmetrical calculating
and
domain was primarily established. Concerning the symmetry of the flow,
domain were introduced, as shown in Figure 5. The dimensions have a significant impact a symmetrical model and
on the
domain were introduced, as shown in Figure 5. The dimensions have a significant
computation accuracy and time consumption. Hence, in this study, the domain was established with impact on the
computation accuracy
a total length and
of about time
6 L, consumption.
which Hence,the
extends 1 L before in front
this study, the domain
of the model, and 4was established
L after with
the rear. The
a total length
width ofdomain
of the L, which
about 6was about 1.5extends
L. Water1 Ldepth
before the the
under front
freeofsurface
the model,
was 1 and
L, and4L after the
a length rear.
of 0.5
The Lwidth
extends above.
of the The initial
domain attitude
was about 1.5 of the hull
L. Water was upright
depth under the floating, whichwas
free surface is consistent
1 L, and awith theof
length
0.5 Linitial model
extends attitude
above. Theininitial
the tank trial. of the hull was upright floating, which is consistent with the
attitude
initial model attitude in the tank trial.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 9 of 25
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 9 of 25
Figure5.5.Computational
Figure Computational domain.
domain.
TheThe boundary
boundary conditionswere
conditions werespecified
specified asas follows:
follows: The
Thetop,top,bottom,
bottom,and andside planes
side planesof of
thethe
domain
domain were
were defined
defined as free-slip
as free-slip walls.
walls. The The plane
plane in front
in front of theofbow
the was
bow considered
was considered the velocity
the fluid fluid
velocity
inlet, whereinlet, where the
the velocity wasvelocity wastrial
set as the set as the trial
speeds. Onspeeds. On the opposing
the opposing side
side of the of the domain,
domain, the plane the
was
plane was considered the outlet of pressure. As for the hull, a rigid and no-slip
considered the outlet of pressure. As for the hull, a rigid and no-slip wall boundary condition was wall boundary
conditionDue
considered. was to
considered. Due toprinciple,
the symmetry the symmetry principle, thecenter
the longitudinal longitudinal center
plane was plane was
specified as aspecified
symmetry
as a symmetry plane. Furthermore, the volume fraction function of water and
plane. Furthermore, the volume fraction function of water and air at both the inlet and outletair at both the inlet and
plane
outlet plane was applied to determine the location of the free surface.
was applied to determine the location of the free surface.
3.3.3.3.
MeshMesh Generation
Generation and
and DependencyAnalysis
Dependency Analysis
As shown in Figure 6, the whole calculating domain was discretized by a series of structured
As shown in Figure 6, the whole calculating domain was discretized by a series of structured
meshes, and the mesh cells approached the free surface and the hull, as the meshes were refined to
meshes, and the mesh cells approached the free surface and the hull, as the meshes were refined to
accurately capture the flow. Moreover, boundary layer meshes were also carried out around the hull
accurately capture the flow. Moreover, boundary layer meshes were also carried out around the hull
body. As a result, a high resolution inflation layer mesh with dimensionless y+ was near the hull
body. As a result,
bottom a high resolution
wall around 70, while inflation layeraround
the y+ was mesh with dimensionless
50 at y+ whole
the bow. The was near thenear
hull hull bottom
wall
walldimensionless
around 70, while y+ was thearound
y+ was50~300.
around In50 at the bow.
addition, Theindependence
a mesh whole hull near wall
study wasdimensionless
conducted to y+
wasdecide
aroundan50~300. In addition,
appropriate a mesh independence study was conducted to decide an appropriate
mesh size.
mesh size.
J. Mar.As
Sci. for
Eng. the
2019,mesh
7, 346 size, a finer mesh always indicates more precise results, but conversely, it
10 of 25
sometimes increases the computational consumption and time cost, due to the large number of mesh
elements. Therefore, in order to determine the mesh size with acceptable numerical accuracy and
mesh number, a mesh convergence study was carried out, based on a Froude number of 5.20. The
mesh at the steps and on hull bottom were gradually refined since the flow around the planing
surface has direct influence on the hydrodynamic characteristic of the step. The initial minimum
mesh size adopted in the current investigation was 6‰ L. Four mesh plans were made according the
refinement ratio of 2 [22]. The total mesh number of each plan and the calculated resistance error
(also defined by R / Δ , comparing with the experimental data) were plotted and are shown in Figure
7. As shown in the figure, when the mesh was as fine as Grid3, further refinement would lead to a
large increment of element number and hence require more computational time. However, the
difference between grid plan 3 and plan 4 was not significant. Therefore, Grid3 was selected as the
optimum mesh plan.
Figure6.6.Surface
Figure Surface mesh
mesh distribution
distribution on
onthe
thehull.
hull.
AsThe
for total mesh number was about
mesh 9.42 × 10 indicates
. During the computing
precise course,
results,the
butphysical time it
5
the mesh size, a finer always more conversely,
step was set at 5 × 10 −3 s, and the total simulation time step number was 2000.
sometimes increases the computational consumption and time cost, due to the large number of mesh
elements. Therefore, in order to determine the mesh size with acceptable numerical accuracy and mesh
number, a mesh convergence study was carried out, based on a Froude number of 5.20. The mesh
0.3 18
at the steps and on hull bottom were gradually refined since the flow around the planing surface
0.275 16
has direct influence on 0.25 the hydrodynamic characteristic of the step. The initial minimum mesh size
sh Number (1x10^5)
14
0.2 0.209 12
0.169 0.165
10
Error
0.15
8
12.737
0.1 6
9.421
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 10 of 25
adopted√in the current investigation was 6% L. Four mesh plans were made according the refinement
ratio of 2 [22]. The total mesh number of each plan and the calculated resistance error (also defined
by R/∆, comparing with the experimental data) were plotted and are shown in Figure 7. As shown in
the figure, when the mesh wasFigure
as fine6.as
Surface mesh
Grid3, distribution
further on the would
refinement hull. lead to a large increment of
element number and hence require more computational time. However, the difference between grid
The total mesh number was about 9.42 × 105. During the computing course, the physical time
plan 3 and plan 4 was not significant. Therefore, Grid3 was selected as the optimum mesh plan.
step was set at 5 × 10 s, and the total simulation time step number was 2000.
−3
0.3 18
0.275 16
0.25
Mesh Number (1x10^5)

14
0.2 0.209 12
0.169 0.165
10
Error
0.15
8
12.737
0.1 6
9.421
4
0.05 6.173 6.891
2
0 0
Grid1 Grid2 Grid3 Grid4
Mesh number Error
Figure7.7.Results
Figure Results of
of the
the mesh
mesh dependency
dependencystudy.
study.
4. The
Results
totaland Discussion
mesh number was about 9.42 × 105 . During the computing course, the physical time
step was set at 5 × 10−3 s, and the total simulation time step number was 2000.
4.1. Validation of the Numerical Method
4. Results
Theand Discussion
evaluation of the numerical simulation was implemented by comparing the wave-making
profile between the model test and numerical solution at different velocities. This was also the case
4.1. Validation of the Numerical Method
for the numerical and experimental resistance values. The numerical method showed an accurate
simulation of theseofcharacteristics
The evaluation the numericalwith better anastomosis.
simulation Five wave-making
was implemented profile
by comparing thesnapshots
wave-makingof
different conditions of model M1 are listed in Figure 8, ranging from a Froude number
profile between the model test and numerical solution at different velocities. This was also the case of 0.88 to 5.20.
At the Froude
for the numerical andnumber of 0.88, the
experimental hull trimvalues.
resistance was small,
Theand the bowmethod
numerical generated a water-pushing
showed an accurate
effect. A wave was generated along the hull, with the wave trough distributed at
simulation of these characteristics with better anastomosis. Five wave-making profile snapshots the midship, while of
the peak was at the hull stern. With the speed increasing to the Froude number of 2.19, the trim was
different conditions of model M1 are listed in Figure 8, ranging from a Froude number of 0.88 to 5.20.
intensified. An enormous wake flow crest formed at the longitudinal mid-section near the hull stern.
At the Froude number of 0.88, the hull trim was small, and the bow generated a water-pushing
At the Froude number of 3.07, the hull stern was lifted by hydrodynamic and aerodynamic lift. The
effect. A wave was generated along the hull, with the wave trough distributed at the midship, while
hull reached the planing condition gradually, with trim angle decreasing distinctly. The wake flow
the peak was at the hull stern. With the speed increasing to the Froude number of 2.19, the trim
crest also departed from the stern and the crest value also showed a slight decrease. The hull had
wasalready
intensified. Anthe
entered enormous wake flow
planing condition crest
at the formed
Froude at theof
number longitudinal mid-section
3.94. The trim near the
angle decrement was hull
stern. At the
slight, andFroude number of 3.07,
the wave-making kept the hull stern
extending was lifted
toward by hydrodynamic
the downstream. With theandFroude
aerodynamic
numberlift.
The hull reached the planing condition gradually, with trim angle decreasing distinctly. The wake
flow crest also departed from the stern and the crest value also showed a slight decrease. The hull
had already entered the planing condition at the Froude number of 3.94. The trim angle decrement
was slight, and the wave-making kept extending toward the downstream. With the Froude number
increased to 5.20, the hull kept planing condition. The trim angle decrement was not obvious, while
the hull side wave-making extended to the back slightly.
increased to 5.20, the hull kept planing condition. The trim angle decrement was not obvious, while
the hull side wave-making extended to the back slightly.
By comparing the experimental phenomenon with the simulation results, it can be seen that the
numerical calculation simulated the flow field accurately. All of the details of the flow field were well
demonstrated,
J. and
Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, the flow field change of the model test and simulation results were11 also
7, 346 of 25
synchronous.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
Figure 8. Comparison between experimental and computational flow field at different speeds, M1. (a)
different speeds,
Fr5▽ == 0.88;
0.88; (b) Fr▽5==2.19;
(b) Fr (c)FrFr▽5= =
2.19;(c) 3.07; (d)
3.07; FrFr
(d) ▽=5 =
3.94; (e)
3.94; Fr
(e) Fr
▽ =5 =
5.20.
5.20.
By
Thecomparing
computed theandexperimental phenomenon
numerical errors with the
are summarized simulation
in Table 3. results, it can be seen that
the numerical calculation simulated the flow field accurately. All of the details of the flow field
Table 3. Comparison
were well demonstrated, between
and the flowexperimental
field changeand
of computational
the model testresistance coefficients.
and simulation results were
also synchronous.
The computed and numerical errors are summarized in Table 3.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 12 of 25
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 12 of 25
Table 3. Comparison between experimental and computational resistance coefficients.

Table 3. Comparison between experimental and computational resistance coefficients.
M1
M1 M2
M2 M3
M3
Fr∇
Fr∇ Cmpt. Exp. Err. Cmpt. Exp. Err. Cmpt. Exp.
Exp. Err.
Cmpt. Exp. Cmpt. Exp. Err. Cmpt. Err.
0.88
0.88 0.068
0.068 0.072
0.072 5.62%
5.62% 0.069
0.069 0.071
0.071 2.69%
2.69% 0.065
0.065 0.065
0.065 0.36%
0.36%
1.31
1.31 0.191
0.191 0.197
0.197 3.24%
3.24% 0.189
0.189 0.194
0.194 2.77%
2.77% 0.184
0.184 0.188
0.188 1.85%
1.85%
2.19
2.19 0.240
0.240 0.237
0.237 –1.22% 0.225
−1.22% 0.225 0.234
0.234 3.96%
3.96% 0.223
0.223 0.226
0.226 1.38%
1.38%
2.63
2.63 0.206
0.206 0.211
0.211 2.20%
2.20% 0.205
0.205 0.207
0.207 1.00%
1.00% 0.197
0.197 0.202
0.202 2.55%
2.55%
3.07
3.07 0.170
0.170 0.189
0.189 9.87%
9.87% 0.177
0.177 0.188
0.188 5.76%
5.76% 0.167
0.167 0.182
0.182 8.20%
8.20%
3.50
3.50 0.172
0.172 0.180
0.180 4.23%
4.23% 0.167
0.167 0.178
0.178 6.53%
6.53% 0.164
0.164 0.174
0.174 5.65%
5.65%
3.94 0.162 0.178 8.80% 0.166 0.178 6.68% 0.158 0.174 9.22%
3.94 0.162 0.178 8.80% 0.166 0.178 6.68% 0.158 0.174 9.22%
4.38 0.164 0.180 9.02% 0.165 0.183 9.70% 0.161 0.172 11.44%
4.38
4.82 0.164
0.169 0.180
0.192 9.02% 0.165
12.40% 0.172 0.183
0.194 9.70%
11.63% 0.161
0.171 0.172
0.192 11.44%
10.82%
4.82
5.20 0.169
0.168 0.192
0.203 12.40% 0.172
16.97% 0.173 0.194
0.206 11.63%
15.89% 0.171
0.177 0.192
0.206 10.82%
14.16%
5.20 0.168 0.203 16.97% 0.173 0.206 15.89% 0.177 0.206 14.16%
It can be be
It can seen from
seen fromTable
Table3 and
3 andFigure
Figure9 9that,
that,under
under most
most conditions,
conditions, thethecurrent
currentnumerical
numerical
simulations underestimate the test data. The numerical error of the resistance between
simulations underestimate the test data. The numerical error of the resistance between the simulation the simulation
andand
testtest
data of of
data M1, M2
M1, M2andandM3
M3varies
varies from 0.36% to
from 0.36% to15.89%.
15.89%.However,
However, thethe resistance
resistance curve
curve trend trend
is
is synchronous for the whole speed segment. In the low speed segment,
synchronous for the whole speed segment. In the low speed segment, the computational and the computational and
experimental
experimentalresult difference
result is limited.
difference With With
is limited. the increase of speed,
the increase the proportion
of speed, of splash
the proportion ofresistance
splash
among the total
resistance resistance
among increases
the total gradually.
resistance The mesh
increases precision
gradually. The is not enough
mesh precisionto is
simulate the splash
not enough to
simulate the
phenomenon splash phenomenon
accurately. Therefore, accurately. Therefore,
the error increases the error However,
gradually. increases gradually. However,
by vertically comparing by
the vertically
data of eachcomparing
model, athe data of each
consistent model,
variation a consistent
trend variationcan
of the resistance trend of the resistance
be observed. Moreover,can both
be
observed. Moreover, both the resistance humps at the speed Froude numbers of 2.19
the resistance humps at the speed Froude numbers of 2.19 and 5.20 of the three models are accurately and 5.20 of the
three models
predicted are accurately
by the numerical predicted
simulation. by thethe
Generally, numerical
numericalsimulation.
simulation Generally, thethe
results reflect numerical
resistance
simulation results reflect the resistance characteristics of the double-stepped planing
characteristics of the double-stepped planing hull well, and the resistance difference and variation hull well, and
the resistance difference and variation trend between different models can also be captured precisely.
trend between different models can also be captured precisely.
0.3 0.25
0.25 0.2
0.2
0.15
R/Δ
R/Δ
0.15
M1 Exp. 0.1 M2 Exp.
0.1
M1 Cmpt. M2 Cmpt.
0.05
0.05
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Fr▽ Fr▽
(a) (b)
0.25
0.2
0.15
R/Δ
0.1 M3 Exp.
M3 Cmpt.
0.05
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Fr▽
(c)
Figure
Figure 9. Comparison
9. Comparison between
between experimentaland
experimental andcomputational
computational resistance
resistancecoefficients.
coefficients.(a)(a)
Resistance
Resistance
curves
curves of M1;
of M1; (b)(b) resistance
resistance curves
curves ofof M2;(c)
M2; (c)resistance
resistancecurves
curves of
of M3.
M3.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 13 of 25
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 13 of 25
It can bebe
It can seen
seen ininFigure
Figure1010that,
that,compared with the
compared with thecorresponding
correspondingsimulation
simulation results,
results, thethe testing
testing
data of the
data of trim and sinkage
the trim are underestimated
and sinkage in most
are underestimated in cases. With the
most cases. Withincrease of speed,
the increase of the calculated
speed, the
calculated
sinkage valuessinkage
increase values increase
gradually andgradually andthe
they exceed they exceed
test data atthethe
test data interval
speed at the speed interval
of Froude of
number
Froude
2~3. number
Both the trim and2~3.sinkage
Both the trim and sinkage
discrepancies between discrepancies
the experimental betweenandthe experimental
calculated and
data increase
calculated
gradually data
with theincrease
speed. gradually
However,with the speed.
a good However,
agreement a good
still can agreement
be found still can
between the betwofound
groups
between the two groups of curves. The numerical simulation accurately predicts
of curves. The numerical simulation accurately predicts the trend of the two results. Therefore, the trend of the twothe
results. Therefore, the validity of the numerical method is approved. The results
validity of the numerical method is approved. The results have a certain credibility and can be used have a certain
forcredibility and can be used for further flow field analysis.
further flow field analysis.
1 14
0.8 12
10
0.6 M1 Sinkage Exp.
M1 sinkage Cmpt. 8
0.4 M1 Trim Exp.
θ/°
δ
M1 Trim Cmpt. 6
0.2
4
0 2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
-0.2 0
Fr▽
(a)
1 14
0.8 12
10
0.6 M2 Sinkage Exp.
θ/°
M2 Sinkage Cmpt. 8
0.4 M2 Trim Exp.
δ
M2 Trim Cmpt. 6
0.2
4
0 2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
-0.2 0
Fr▽
(b)
Figure 10. Cont.

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 14 of 25
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 14 of 25
0.8 12
10
0.6
M3 Sinkage Exp.
M3 Sinkage Cmpt. 8
θ/° 0.4 M3 Trim Exp.
M3 Trim Cmpt. 6
δ
0.2
4
0
2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
-0.2 0
Fr▽
(c)
Figure10.
Figure 10.Comparison
Comparison between
between experimental
experimentalandandcomputational
computational trim andand
trim sinkage coefficients.
sinkage (a) (a)
coefficients.
Trim and sinkage curves of M1; (b) trim and sinkage curves of M2; (c) trim and sinkage curves of
Trim and sinkage curves of M1; (b) trim and sinkage curves of M2; (c) trim and sinkage curves of M3.M3.
4.2.Cavity
4.2. Cavityand
andWetted
Wetted Surface
Surface Analysis
Analysis
4.2.1.
4.2.1.Cavity
CavityBehind
Behind the
the Step
Duringthe
During thenavigation,
navigation, with
with the
the increase
increaseofofspeed,
speed,thethecavity
cavityafter both
after steps
both stepsgradually takestakes
gradually
shape. To study the formation process and action mechanism of the cavity, the fluid field
shape. To study the formation process and action mechanism of the cavity, the fluid field distribution distribution
andmorphology
and morphologyevolution
evolution under
under step-B
step-Bof ofM1
M1along
alongthe longitudinal
the longitudinal center plane
center at different
plane speeds
at different speeds
is extracted. As shown in Figure 11a, the color scale values air volume fractions 0 and 1
is extracted. As shown in Figure 11a, the color scale values air volume fractions 0 and 1 represent therepresent the
completewater
complete waterphase
phaseand
andgas
gasphase,
phase,respectively.
respectively.ItItcan
canbebeobserved
observedthat thatat
atthe
theFroude
Froudenumber
number of of 1.31,
1.31, only the water phase exists after the step. A small amount of water–air mixture appears at Fr▽
only the water phase exists after the step. A small amount of water–air mixture appears at Fr5 = 1.75,
= 1.75, and with the increase of the speed, the component of the gas phase increases gradually. At the
and with the increase of the speed, the component of the gas phase increases gradually. At the Froude
Froude number of 2.63, a cavity with a core region entirely in the gas phase is formed. The cavity
number of 2.63, a cavity with a core region entirely in the gas phase is formed. The cavity extends
extends along the longitudinal direction, presenting a sharp wedge-shape with a gas-phase
along the longitudinal direction, presenting a sharp wedge-shape with a gas-phase composition that
composition that decreases gradually. With Fr▽ continuing to increase, the cavity keeps expanding
decreases gradually.
to the rear With
at the speed Fr5 continuing
of Froude to increase,
number 5.20, shown inthe cavity
Figure keeps
11b. expanding to
The longitudinal the rear
length at the
of the
speed of Froude number 5.20, shown in Figure 11b. The longitudinal
cavity gas-phase core region reaches its maximum at about 2.5 times H. length of the cavity gas-phase
core region reaches its maximum at about 2.5 times H.
We now discuss the cavity formation and evolution process according to the above analysis.
To discuss the formation mechanism, a typical flow field around step-B of M1 was further analyzed at
a Froude number of 4.38. Figure 12 shows the pressure distribution of the bottom at the longitudinal
center section. The inflow flows through the step, and a low-pressure area is primarily formed behind
it, while a distinct high-pressure area is formed at the region whereFrthe flow scuds the step and contacts
▽ = 1.31
the planing surface again. Due to the effect of two adjacent pressure difference areas, a backflow is
developed, as shown in Figure 13. Simultaneously, the flow at both sides of the hull is pushed to the
Fr▽ = 1.75
hull bottom along the step. With increasing speed to a certain extent, the terminal of the step is exposed
to the air with the hull lifting. As a result, a suction effect is generated by the pressure difference,
Fr▽ = 2.19
and the air is pumped into the hull bottom in a cyclone formation. The cavity, as stated, is in essence
generated by the low-pressure induced cyclone.
Fr▽ = 2.63
Fr▽ = 3.07
tracted. As shown in Figure 11a, the color scale values air volume fractions 0 and 1 represent Fr▽ =the
3.94
Fr▽ = 3.94
plete water phase and gas phase, respectively. It can be observed that at the Froude number of
only the water phase exists after the step. A small amount of water–air mixture appearsFrat▽ =Fr4.38 ▽
5, and with the increase of the speed, the component of the gas phase increases gradually.Fr ▽ = 4.38
At the
de number of 2.63,J. aMar.
cavity with a core region entirely in the gas phase is formed. The cavity
Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 15 of 25
Fr▽ = 5.20
nds along the longitudinal direction, presenting J. Mar. Sci. aEng.
sharp
2019, 7,wedge-shape
346 with a gas-phase
Fr▽ = 5.20 15 of 25
(a)
position that decreases gradually. With Fr▽ continuing to increase, the(a) cavity keeps expanding
e rear at the speed of Froude number 5.20, shown in Figure 11b. The longitudinal length of the
y gas-phase core region reaches its maximum at about 2.5 times H.
Fr▽ = 3.50
Fr▽ = 3.94
(b) Fr▽ = 4.38

(b)
Figure 11. Cavity morphology and distribution
Fr▽ = 1.31 of M1. (a) Cavity evolution with different velocities
Figure 11. Cavity morphology and distribution of M1. (a) Cavity evolution with different velocities
of step-B, M1; (b) cavity distribution on the hull bottom, Fr▽ = 5.20, M1. Fr▽ = 5.20
of step-B, M1; (b) cavity distribution on the hull bottom, Fr▽ = 5.20, M1.
Fr▽ = 1.75 (a)
We now discuss the cavity formation and evolution process according to the above analysis. To
discuss the formation mechanism, a typical flow field around step-B of M1 was further analyzed at a
Froude number of 4.38. Figure 12 showsFrthe ▽ = 2.19
pressure distribution of the bottom at the longitudinal
Froude number of 4.38. Figure 12 shows the pressure distribution of the bottom at the longitudinal
it, while a distinct high-pressure area is formed
Fr▽formed
= 2.63 atat the region where the flow scuds the step and
it, while a distinct high-pressure area is the region where the flow scuds the step and
contacts the planing surface again. Due to the effect of two adjacent pressure difference areas, a
backflow is developed, as shown in Figure 13. Simultaneously, the flow at both sides of the hull is
backflow is developed, as shown in Figure Fr▽ =13.
3.07Simultaneously, the flow (b)at both sides of the hull is
pushed to the hull bottom along the step. With increasing speed to a certain extent, the terminal of
pushed to the hull bottom along the step. With increasing speed to a certain extent, the terminal of
the step is exposed to the air with
Figure the hull lifting.
11.distribution
Cavity As a Cavity
result, a suction effect is generated byofthe different velocities
theFigure
step 11. Cavity morphology
is exposed to the air and
with the hullmorphology
lifting. As(a)and
of M1. distribution
a result, evolutionof M1.
a suction with
effect (a) Cavity
different evolution
bywith
velocities
is generated the
pressure
step-B, difference,
M1; (b) and
cavity theofair
distributionis pumped
step-B,on M1;
the(b) into
cavity
hull the hull bottom
=
distribution
bottom, Fr 5 on in
the
5.20, M1.a cyclone
hull bottom,formation.
Fr ▽ = The
5.20, cavity,
M1. as
pressure difference, and the air is pumped into the hull bottom in a cyclone formation. The cavity, as
stated, is in essence generated by the low-pressure induced cyclone.
Froude number of 4.38. Figure 12 shows the pressure distribution of the bottom at the longitudina
it, while a distinct high-pressure area is formed at the region where the flow scuds the step and
backflow is developed, as shown in Figure 13. Simultaneously, the flow at both sides of the hull is
pushed to the hull bottom along the step. With increasing speed to a certain extent, the terminal o
the step is exposed to the air with the hull lifting. As a result, a suction effect is generated by the
pressure
Figure 12. Localdifference, and the airbehind
pressure distribution is pumped
the stepinto
of the hull
M1, Fr bottom in a cyclone formation. The cavity, as
Figure Local
12.12.
Figure Localpressure
pressuredistribution
distribution behind the
behind the stepof
step ofM1,
M1,FrFr▽▽5== =
4.38.
4.38.
4.38.
Figure 13. Velocity vector distribution of the mid-plane section M1, Fr▽ = 4.38.
Figure 13. Velocity vector distribution of the mid-plane section M1, Fr▽ = 4.38.
Figure 13. Velocity vector distribution of the mid-plane section M1, Fr5 = 4.38.
Figure 12. Local pressure distribution behind the step of M1, Fr▽ = 4.38.
4.2.2. Influence of Steps on the Wetted Surface
To determine the influence of a double step on the wetted surface of the planing bottom, the
distribution of the wetted area of the hull M1 under different speeds was extracted. The forms of
water volume fraction were used to represent the air–water mixture situation. In order to provide a
direct observation of the wetted surface evolution, a bottom view of the hull is displayed in Figure 14.
The color scale values 0 and 1 represent the complete gas phase and water phase state, respectively.
A value between 0–1 represents corresponding weight gas–water mixtures of the volume fraction.
It can be observed that the wetted surface changes are mainly caused by two factors: one is the change
Figure 13. Velocity vector distribution of the mid-plane section M1, Fr = 4.38. ▽
of the air–water mixture component caused by the cavity, and the other factor is the shape change of
the wetted surface caused by the navigation state.
where Awet represents the wetted area and Vwater represents the water volume fraction at each
differential element. The ratio of the calculated wetted area and bottom area Awet/A was introduced
o represent the wetted surface reducing effect. The result is plotted as a function of the Froude
number and is shown in Figure 15. The wetted surface reduces rapidly with the increase of speed.
After the Froude number exceeds
J. Mar. Sci. 4.38,
Eng. 2019, the ratio remains at a fairly stable value of 0.23. The ratio
7, 346 16 of 25
suggests an obvious effect of the step, which also indicates the action mechanism of the double-step
n this study.
Fr▽ = 1.31
Fr▽ = 2.63
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 17 of 25
Fr▽ = 3.94 Fr▽ = 5.20
Figure 14. Contour of the water–air phase distribution of different velocities, M1.
Figure 14. Contour of the water–air phase distribution of different velocities, M1.
For the first factor, with the increase of speed, the component of the gas phase increases continuously.
Especially at the planing surface of P3, the gas phase 0.95 increases and forms a relatively complete air
0.90
cavity. The cavity near the step terminal bulges to the rear, while the middle is sunken to the bow.
Correspondingly, the wetted surface is concentrated 0.75at the stern
0.75and draws close to the middle plane.
The wetted surface distribution on planing surface P2 is similar, but clear wetted surface is observed.
0.63
Awet /A
For the second factor, with the hull lifting and trim variation
0.55
caused by increasing speed, the stagnation
0.53
line (the intersecting line of the bow and water surface) collapses gradually. This factor mainly affects
0.43
the wetted surface variation on planing surface P2.
0.35 0.37
For further study of the performance of the wetted surface reduction, the wetted 0.30surface calculation
0.24 0.23 0.23
equation was introduced. The bottom wetted area was computed by integrating the water volume
fraction over bottom S. The equation is written as: 0.15 1 2 3 4 5 6
Fr▽
x
A =
wet of the calculated
Figure 15. Ratio water V ds, (13)
wetted area and bottom area curve with the speed, M1.
s
where Awet represents the4.3. Hydrodynamic

wetted area and Characteristics
Vwater representsof the
theStern
waterFlap
volume fraction at each differential
element. The ratio of the calculated wetted area and bottom area A
During navigation, the stern flap is, in essence, wet /A was introduced
a planing to represent lift is generated
plane. Hydrodynamic
the wetted surface reducing
undereffect. TheMeanwhile,
the flap. result is plotted
due toas thea function
mountingofangle,
the Froude number
when the and isthrough the flap a
fluid flows
shown in Figure 15. Theretardative effect occurs
wetted surface reduces inrapidly
the flowwith
field.the
Asincrease
a result, the pressure
of speed. and the
After movement
Froude distribution adjust
number exceeds 4.38, the and vary.
ratio The flow
remains at afield of stable
fairly stern flap
valueM3ofat0.23.
the Froude number
The ratio of 5.20
suggests is taken as an example for
an obvious
further analysis. As shown in Figure 16, the incoming flow
effect of the step, which also indicates the action mechanism of the double-step in this study. velocity vector line direction shows
deflection at the connection of the hull bottom and stern flap. The pressure distribution of the flow
field is automatically changed by this effect, shaping a distinct high-pressure region. In addition, a
bottom view of the flap is shown in Figure 17. A high-pressure region forms in the shape of a belt.
This region has a relatively uniform distribution in the transverse direction. The region covers most
of the anterior part of the stern flap in the longitudinal direction.
Figure 16. Pressure and velocity vector distributions at the center plane of the stern flap.
Fr▽▽==5.20
Fr 5.20
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 17 of 25

Figure14.
Figure 14.Contour
Contourofofthe
thewater–air
water–airphase
phasedistribution
distributionofofdifferent
differentvelocities,
velocities,M1.
M1.
0.95
0.95
0.90
0.90
0.75 0.75
0.75 0.75
0.63
0.63
AAwet /A/A
0.55
wet
0.55 0.53
0.53
0.43
0.43
0.35 0.37
0.37
0.35
0.30
0.30 0.24 0.23 0.23
0.24 0.23 0.23
0.15
0.15
1 2 3 4 5 6
FrFr
1 2 3 ▽
4 5 6
▽
Figure Ratio
15.15.
Figure ofofthe
Ratio thecalculated
calculatedwetted
wetted area
area and bottomarea
and bottom areacurve
curvewith
withthe
the speed,
speed, M1.
M1.
Figure 15. Ratio of the calculated wetted area and bottom area curve with the speed, M1.
4.3. Hydrodynamic Characteristics of the Stern Flap
4.3.Hydrodynamic
4.3. HydrodynamicCharacteristics
Characteristicsofofthe
theStern
SternFlap
Flap
During navigation, the stern flap is, in essence, a planing plane. Hydrodynamic lift is generated
Duringnavigation,
During navigation,the thestern
sternflap
flapis, is,in
inessence,
essence,aaplaning
planingplane.
plane.Hydrodynamic
Hydrodynamiclift liftisisgenerated
generated
under
under thethe
flap.
flap. Meanwhile,
Meanwhile, due
due to
to the
the mounting
mounting angle, when
angle, whenthe thefluid
fluidflows
flowsthrough
through thethe flapflap a
under the flap. Meanwhile, due to the mounting angle, when the fluid flows through the flap aa
retardative effect
retardativeeffect occurs
effectoccurs
occursinin the
inthe flow
theflow field.
flowfield.
field.AsAs a result,
Asaaresult, the
result,the pressure
thepressure
pressureand and movement
andmovement distribution
movementdistribution
distributionadjust adjust
adjust
retardative
andandvary. TheThe
vary. flowflowfieldfield
of stern
of flapflap
stern M3 at M3 theat Froude
the number
Froude numberof 5.20
of is taken
5.20 is as anasexample
taken an examplefor further
for
and vary. The flow field of stern flap M3 at the Froude number of 5.20 is taken as an example for
analysis. As shown
further analysis.
analysis. As in Figure
As shown
shown in 16, the
in Figure incoming
Figure 16, 16, the flow
the incoming velocity
incoming flow vector
flow velocity line
velocity vector direction
vector line shows
line direction deflection
direction shows shows
further
at deflection
the connection
deflection atatthe of the hull of
theconnection
connection bottom
ofthe
thehull
hulland sternand
bottom
bottom flap.
and The
stern
stern pressure
flap.
flap. distribution
Thepressure
The pressure of theof
distribution
distribution offlow field is
theflow
the flow
automatically
field changedchanged
fieldisisautomatically
automatically by this effect,
changed bythis
by thisshaping a distinct
effect,shaping
effect, shaping high-pressure
aadistinct
distinct region.
high-pressure
high-pressure In addition,
region.
region. Inaddition,
In a bottom
addition, aa
viewbottom
of the view
flap of
is the
shown flap inis shown
Figure in
17. Figure
A 17. A
high-pressure high-pressure
region region
forms
bottom view of the flap is shown in Figure 17. A high-pressure region forms in the shape of a belt.in forms
the in
shape the
of ashape
belt. of
Thisa belt.
region
This
hasThis regionhas
a relatively
region has aarelatively
uniform relatively uniform
distribution
uniform distribution
indistribution
the transverse inthe
in the transverse
direction.
transverse The direction. Theregion
region covers
direction. The region covers
mostcovers
of the most most
anterior
partof
of ofthe
thetheanterior
stern part
anterior part
flap of of the
in the stern
the stern flap
longitudinal in
flap in the the longitudinal
direction. direction.
longitudinal direction.
Figure 16. Pressure and velocity vector distributions at the center plane of the stern flap.
Figure 16. Pressure and velocity
velocity vector
J. Mar. Sci.Figure
Eng. 2019,
16. 7,Pressure
346 and vector distributions
distributionsatatthe
thecenter plane
center of of
plane thethe
stern flap.
stern flap. 18 of 25
Figure
Figure 17.17.Pressure
Pressuredistribution
distribution of
of the
the flap
flap surface,
surface,bottom
bottomview.
view.
As mentioned
As mentioned previously,
previously, the stern
the stern flaps an
flaps have have an obvious
obvious influenceinfluence on the pressure
on the pressure and
and movement
movement distribution. Clarifying the characteristics of stern flaps is important in the analysis of
distribution. Clarifying the characteristics of stern flaps is important in the analysis of the flap action the
flap actioninmechanism,
mechanism, in order the
order to evaluate to evaluate the hydrodynamic
hydrodynamic characteristics
characteristics of the
of the stern stern
flap. A flap. A of
series
series of non-dimensional evaluation coefficients were applied during our data process. The non-
dimensional pressure coefficient Cp and torque coefficient CMΔ are specified in Equations (14) and (15):
P - Pref
Cp = ,
1 (14)
ρVref2
2
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 18 of 25
non-dimensional evaluation coefficients were applied during our data process. The non-dimensional
pressure coefficient Cp and torque coefficient CM∆ are specified in Equations (14) and (15):
P − Pre f
Cp = , (14)
2 ρVre f
1 2
M
, CM∆ = (15)
B∆
where P is the local absolute pressure, Pref is the reference pressure, or atmospheric pressure, Vref
represents the velocity of the inlet flow, ρ represents the water density and M is the movement generated
by the stern flap, referring to the transom axis of the gravity center.
Figure 18 shows the influence of the stern flap mounting angle on pressure distribution along the
centerline of the stern plate at a Froude number of 5.20. The non-dimensional pressure coefficient Cp is
plotted with a lateral axis of the ratio between longitudinal coordinates of the pressure monitor point
and hull length, L. The first monitor point is located at the trailing edge of step-B, while the last monitor
point is located at the trailing edge of the flap. The positive coordinates point to the direction of the
bow. It can be seen that there are two pressure peaks along the longitudinal direction. The frontal peak
is near step-B. As discussed in Section 4.2, this is mainly caused by the flow scudding over the step
and making contact with the planing surface again. The latter peak represents the local high-pressure
caused by the retardation effect of the flap. Comparing the peak values among M1, M2 and M3, the
peak shows a positive correlation relationship with the increasing mounting angle. The peak value
and longitudinal range of the high-pressure region gradually increase with an increasing mounting
angle, suggesting
J. Mar. that
Sci. Eng. 2019, the lift is also magnified.
7, 346 19 of 25
0.12
M1
0.08 M2
M3
0.04
Cp
-0.04
-0.08
-0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
X/L
Figure 18. Pressure distribution on the center line of the flaps with different mounting angles (positive
Figure 18. Pressure distribution on the center line of the flaps with different mounting angles (positive
directions point to the bow).
directions point to the bow).
During navigation, the motion attitude of the hull is mainly adjusted by the hydrodynamic
During navigation, the motion attitude of the hull is mainly adjusted by the hydrodynamic
lifting force
lifting and
force andtrimming
trimming moment.
moment.The Thetorque
torque coefficients of flaps
coefficients of flapswith
withdifferent
differentmounting
mounting angles
angles
are are
plotted in Figure 19, as a function of the Froude number. The minimum trim
plotted in Figure 19, as a function of the Froude number. The minimum trim moment is locatedmoment is located
at the speed
at the speed point
point Fr5Fr=
of of ▽ 1.31.
= 1.31.After
Afterthat,
that, with
with the
the increase
increase ofof speed,
speed,the
thetrim
trimmoment
moment increases
increases
gradually.
gradually. Moreover, the mounting angle increase makes the trim moment generated by thethe
Moreover, the mounting angle increase makes the trim moment generated by flap
flap
increase.
increase.Synchronously,
Synchronously, not only the trim
not only the moment but also
trim moment butitsalso
increasing amplitude
its increasing increaseincrease
amplitude obviously
withobviously
the speed, rising
with under rising
the speed, the high speed
under the segment.
high speedCorrespondingly, the motionthe
segment. Correspondingly, attitude
motionadjustment
attitude
adjustment
ability abilitybyisenlarging
is improved improved the
by enlarging
mountingthe mounting angle.
angle.
0.05
0.04
M1
M2
0.03 M3
CMΔ
0.02
are plotted in Figure 19, as a function of the Froude number. The minimum trim moment is located
at the speed point of Fr▽ = 1.31. After that, with the increase of speed, the trim moment increases
gradually. Moreover, the mounting angle increase makes the trim moment generated by the flap
increase. Synchronously, not only the trim moment but also its increasing amplitude increase
obviously
J. Mar. with7,the
Sci. Eng. 2019, 346speed, rising under the high speed segment. Correspondingly, the motion attitude
19 of 25
adjustment ability is improved by enlarging the mounting angle.
0.05
0.04
M1
M2
0.03 M3
CMΔ
0.02
0.01
0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Fr▽
Figure Moment
19.19.
Figure Momentcoefficient
coefficientofofstern
sternflaps
flaps with different mounting
with different mountingangles.
angles.
4.4. 4.4.
Influence of the
Influence Mounting
of the Angle
Mounting Angleononthe
theStepped
SteppedPlaning
Planing Hull
Hull
As Asdiscussed
discussed in inSection
Section4.2,4.2,salutatory
salutatorychanges
changes were introducedtotothe
were introduced thestepped
steppedhull hull bottom.
bottom.
When the inflow flows through the steps, cavities are formed on account
When the inflow flows through the steps, cavities are formed on account of the pressure difference. of the pressure difference.
TheThecavities cover
cavities coverthethehull bottom,
hull bottom,which
whichdecreases
decreasesthe the wetted surfacearea,
wetted surface area,andandreduces
reducesthe the friction
friction
resistance.
resistance. Therefore,
Therefore, the size
the of theof
size cavity
the is an important
cavity factor that
is an important affects
factor theaffects
that resistance
the performance
resistance
of stepped
performance planing hulls. Inplaning
of stepped this section,
hulls.the models
In this of M1,
section, theM2 and M3
models with
of M1, M2different
and M3mounting angles
with different
mounting angles are examined and compared to evaluate the evolution
are examined and compared to evaluate the evolution process and mechanism of cavitation under process and mechanism of
cavitation
different angleunder different angle configurations.
configurations.
As shown
As shown in Figure
in Figure 20,20, a comparisonofofthe
a comparison thecavity
cavity morphology
morphology after afterstep-B
step-Bhas been
has beencarried
carried out.
out.
The cavity morphologies are grouped by different velocity cases in which
The cavity morphologies are grouped by different velocity cases in which the Froude number is 2.63, the Froude number is 2.63,
3.50,3.50,
4.38 4.38
and
J. Mar.
and 5.20.
Sci. 5.20.
It can
It can
Eng. 2019,
still be observed that the core region of the cavity is dominated by the gas
7, 346still be observed that the core region of the cavity is dominated by the gas
20 of 25
phase, while the periphery of the core region is a mixture of water and gas. As the speed increases,
phase, while the periphery of the core region is a mixture of water and gas. As the speed increases,
the cavity
the cavity expands expands
toward toward the rear.
the rear. As different
As for for different models
models at at
thethe same
same speed,when
speed, whenin inthe
thecrossing
crossing
(Fr5 =(Fr
mode mode ▽ = 2.63),
2.63), the cavities
the cavities arethe
are in in the initial
initial shaping
shaping stage
stage where
where thethecavity
cavityshape
shapeandandsize
size are
are not
significantly different from each other. With the increase of the speed, after
significantly different from each other. With the increase of the speed, after the hull enters the planing the hull enters the planing
state≥(Fr
state (Fr ▽ ≥ 3.50), the cavitation expanding rate varies in each model. The expanding rate of M3 is the
3.50), the cavitation expanding rate varies in each model. The expanding rate of M3 is the
5
most rapid,
most rapid, and M2 andisM2 is second,
second, while while
M1 M1is theis the minimum.
minimum. Therefore,
Therefore, afterthe
after thehull
hullenters
entersthe
theplaning
planing
state, the cavity expands with the increasing flap mounting angle. Similarly, the expanding of the
state, the cavity expands with the increasing flap mounting angle. Similarly, the expanding of the
cavity reduces the wetted surface and friction resistance, which indicates that the resistance increase
cavity reduces the wetted surface and friction resistance, which indicates that the resistance increase
caused by the flap mounting angle increasing is small in scale.
caused by the flap mounting angle increasing is small in scale.
(a) Fr▽ = 2.63 (b) Fr▽ = 3.50
(c) Fr▽ = 4.38 (d) Fr▽ = 5.20
FigureFigure 20. Comparisons

20. Comparisons ofcavities
of air air cavities between
between different
different models
models at at variousspeeds.
various speeds.
To study the influence of stern flap mounting angle on the hydrodynamic performance of the
hull curves, the load coefficient is plotted as a function of the Froude number. The curves are divided
into three groups based on the difference of the planing surface. The load coefficient is defined as:
Δn
CΔn = , (16)
Δ
where Δn is the load on each planing surface. The subscript n is valued as 1, 2, and 3, representing
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 20 of 25
To study the influence of stern flap mounting angle on the hydrodynamic performance of the hull
curves, the load coefficient is plotted as a function of the Froude number. The curves are divided into
three groups based on the difference of the planing surface. The load coefficient is defined as:
∆n
C∆n = , (16)
∆
where ∆n is the load on each planing surface. The subscript n is valued as 1, 2, and 3, representing
different planing surfaces. C∆1,2,3 correspond to P1, P2 and P3, as defined in Figure 1. As is shown in
Figure 21, the load coefficient curve of different models has basically the same trend in every specific
planing surface. The load of the planing surfaces is mainly affected by the flap mounting angle in the
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 21 of 25
following two modes.
0.30 0.50
0.25 0.40
0.20
0.30
CΔ2
CΔ1
0.15
0.20
M1
0.10 M1
M2
0.10 M2
0.05 M3
M3
0.00 0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Fr▽ Fr▽
(a) (b)
0.70
0.60
0.50
CΔ3
0.40
M1
0.30 M2
M3
0.20
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Fr▽
(c)
Figure
Figure 21. 21.
LoadLoad coefficient
coefficient ofof differentplaning
different planingsurfaces.
surfaces. (a)
(a) Load
Load coefficient
coefficientofofP1;
P1;(b)
(b)load coefficient
load coefficient
of P2; (c) load coefficient of
of P2; (c) load coefficient of P3. P3.
TheThe
firstother
mode mode affects
directly the planing
affects the loadsurface
on the load indirectly
planing by changing
surface the shape
by changing of the cavity.
the motion attitude.
This mode acts on P2 and P3 and is reflected in the curves of C Δ2 and CΔ3. Combined with the cavity
This mode mainly acts on P1 and is reflected in the curves of C∆1 . Due to the increase of the stern flap
morphology
mounting angle,comparison
the trim and in Figure 20, due navigation
heave during to the increaseareof the reduced.
both mountingThisangle, theinevitably
will cavity expands
lead to
to the hull rear, resulting in a decrease of the wetted surface and the load
the increase of the wetted surface at P1, and correspondingly, the load coefficient C∆1 coefficient. Thus,
alsowith the
increases
increase of the mounting angle, an opposite trend is obtained in CΔ2 and CΔ3 from the load coefficient
with the increasing mounting angle.
variation trend of CΔ1.
The other mode affects the planing surface load indirectly by changing the shape of the cavity.
Furthermore, among the curves from CΔ1 to CΔ2, the uniformity of the load distribution before
This mode acts on P2 and P3 and is reflected in the curves of C∆2 and C∆3 . Combined with the cavity
and after the gravity center is improved with the increasing flap angle. As discussed above, after the
morphology comparison in Figure 20, due to the increase of the mounting angle, the cavity expands
hull enters the planing state, the cavity expands with the increasing flap mounting angle. The main
to the hullshould
cause rear, resulting
be that inthea decrease of the
flaps reduce thewetted surface
trim angle byand the loadthe
improving coefficient.
planing Thus,
surfacewith
loadthe
increase of the mounting angle, an opposite trend is obtained in C and
distribution, which in turn leads to the cavity length increasing. As∆2a result,∆3 C from the load coefficient
once the hull is disturbed
variation trend
from its of C∆1 . position, the planing surfaces can provide a fairly effective restoring movement.
equilibrium
Under the action of the restoring movement, the hull can rapidly return back to the equilibrium
position, which suggests that increasing the stern flap mounting angle can achieve the delaying of
porpoising.
5. Conclusions
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 21 of 25
Furthermore, among the curves from C∆1 to C∆2 , the uniformity of the load distribution before
and after the gravity center is improved with the increasing flap angle. As discussed above, after the
hull enters the planing state, the cavity expands with the increasing flap mounting angle. The main
cause should be that the flaps reduce the trim angle by improving the planing surface load distribution,
which in turn leads to the cavity length increasing. As a result, once the hull is disturbed from its
equilibrium position, the planing surfaces can provide a fairly effective restoring movement. Under the
action of the restoring movement, the hull can rapidly return back to the equilibrium position, which
suggests that increasing the stern flap mounting angle can achieve the delaying of porpoising.
5. Conclusions
In this paper, an experimental and numerical combined study for the double-stepped planing
hull has been carried out, and the focus has been mainly on the hydrodynamic characteristics of the
step and stern flap, as well as the coupling effect on the hull body. The cavity formation and evaluation
process after the step have been captured with acceptable accuracy. Furthermore, the effects of coupled
steps and stern flap mounting angles have been investigated, and their action mechanism and effects
on resistance performance and porpoising inhibition have been discussed and summarized. Based on
the presented results and analysis, the main conclusions can be drawn as follows:
(1) The low-pressure region caused by the step saltation is the immediate induction of the cavity.
With a speed increase, the cavity expands toward the rear, increasing the cavity coverage area.
Conversely, the wetted surface area decreases. As for the distribution, the wetted surface is mainly
concentrated in the post-median part of a planing surface. After the Froude number exceeds
4.38, the ratio of the wetted area and bottom area Awet /A remains at a fairly stable value of 0.23.
The decrease of the wetted surface indicates the steps’ friction resistance reducing mechanism.
(2) The stern flap is an effective resistance and motion regulating device. Enlarging the stern flap
mounting angle within the variation range improves the resistance performance obviously.
Moreover, it has a significant porpoising inhibition effect, with a slight cost of resistance during
the high speed segment. The maximal porpoising critical speed extends with the increase in the
mounting angle.
(3) The connection position of the stern flap and hull is a high-pressure concentration area. With the
increase of the mounting angle, the pressure value and the trim moment of the stern flap also
increase. Correspondingly, the hull motion regulating ability is also improved.
(4) Increasing the stern flap mounting angle reduces the trim, and intensifies the cavity expansion
speed. The wetted surface area shrinks; the friction resistance is reduced. Therefore, the total
resistance amplification is slight. In the meantime, the load among the planing surfaces distributes
more uniformly with the increasing flap angle, which is also beneficial for inhibiting porpoising.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.Z.; Formal analysis, Y.J. and S.L.; Investigation, S.L., Z.L. and Y.J.;
Methodology, S.L., J.Z. and H.S.; Resources, Y.J. and Z.L.; Supervision, J.Z.; Validation, H.S.; Writing—Original
draft, S.L.; Writing—Review and editing, S.L. and J.Z.
Funding: The research was funded by Opening Foundation of State Key Laboratory of Ocean Engineering of
China (1617), Key Laboratory Fund (614222303030917) and National Science of Foundations of China grant
numbers 51509055.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the
study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to
publish the results.
Appendix A
In the mesh independent study, the total resistance is the main studied and analyzed element.
Furthermore, the domain dependence study is also conducted to confirm a sufficiently large and
acceptable computational domain.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 22 of 25
The initial computational domain size is chosen referring to a similar stepped-planing hull
simulation study [12]. The domain is established with a total length of about 6 L, which extends 1 L
before the front of the model, and 4 L after the rear. The width of the domain is about 1.5 L. Water
depth under the free surface is 1 L, and a length of 0.5 L extends above.
Appendix A.1. Width and Length Study of the Domain

Due to the symmetry principle, the practical simulating width is about 3 L, while in the experiment,
the width of the towing tank is 6.5 m (2.74 L). It indicates that the domain width is wide enough to
simulate the experimental facility. The side wall is defined as free slip walls. With the initial domain
setup, several speed conditions of M1 are simulated. The results of the wave making after the hull of
model M1 at different speeds are shown in Figure A1. It can be seen that the wave making is slightly
more toward the side wall. With the speed increase, the wave-making area is narrowed down from the
side wall and is extended along the longitudinal direction. However, the wave making area is still
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 23 of 25
distributed in the calculation domain. Therefore, the waves reflect off the side boundaries and have
very
sidelimited
boundariesinfluence.
and haveAdditionally, theinfluence.
very limited domain outlet, the size
Additionally, ofdomain
the the domain
outlet,that
theissize
downstream
of the
from the hull,
domain enlarged to 4from
that is downstream L, making theisresults
the hull, insignificant
enlarged for this
to 4 L, making size. Therefore,
the results thefor
insignificant width
this and
length of the domain
size. Therefore, is accepted.
the width and length of the domain is accepted.
Fr▽ = 2.63
Fr▽ = 4.38
Fr▽ = 5.20
Figure A1. Wave making after the hull of model M1 at different speeds.
Appendix A.2. Depth Study of the Domain
The initial depth of the calculation domain is 1 L, while the towing tank depth is 6.8 m (2.87 L).
Thedomain
To verify initial depth
depthof independence,
the calculation domain is 1 L, while
a simulation thehull
for the towing tankwith
model depth
theisinitial
6.8 m (2.87 L). and
depth,
To verify domain depth independence, a simulation for the hull model with the initial depth, and
another calculation domain, where the domain depth matches the experimental facility, is carried out.
another calculation domain, where the domain depth matches the experimental facility, is carried
out. The remaining parts of the domain setup stay the same. Figure A2 below shows the comparison
of domain depth.

J. Mar. Sci.The
Eng.initial
2019, 7,depth
346 of the calculation domain is 1 L, while the towing tank depth is 6.8 m (2.8723L).
of 25
To verify domain depth independence, a simulation for the hull model with the initial depth, and
another calculation domain, where the domain depth matches the experimental facility, is carried
The remaining parts of the domain setup stay the same. Figure A2 below shows the comparison of
out. The remaining parts of the domain setup stay the same. Figure A2 below shows the comparison
domain depth.
of domain depth.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 24 of 25

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 24 of 25
Figure A2. Depth comparison between original and deeper domain.
The calculated results between original and deeper domains are shown in Figures A3 and A4.
It can beThe calculated
seen results
that using the between
deeper original and deeper domains are shown in Figuresaccuracy
A3 and A4. It
The calculated results betweendomain
originalcould slightly
and deeper improve
domains the numerical
are shown in Figures A3 and A4.in drag
It
can be
prediction seen that
and weakenusing the
thethe deeper
influence domain could slightly improve the numerical accuracy in drag
can be seen that using deeper of hull body
domain couldonslightly
the domain bottom,
improve which makes
the numerical the simulation
accuracy in drag
prediction
closer to the and weaken thedata.
experimental influence of hull body
However, on the domain bottom, which ofmakes
the the simulation
prediction and weaken the influence of hullby comparing
body the wave
on the domain bottom,pattern
which makes free surface and
the simulation
closer to the experimental data. However, by comparing the wave pattern of the free surface and
numerical
closer toresistance data, the data.
the experimental enlargement
However,of the deeper domain
by comparing does pattern
the wave not show of obvious improvement
the free surface and
numerical resistance data, the enlargement of the deeper domain does not show obvious
withnumerical
the mesh resistance
increasingdata,
sharply.
the Therefore,
enlargement theofresults of the initial
the deeper domain domain
does depth still satisfy
not show obviousthe
improvement with the mesh increasing sharply. Therefore, the results of the initial domain depth still
improvement
research with the mesh increasing sharply. Therefore, the results of the initial domain depth still
requirements.
satisfy the research requirements.
satisfy the research requirements.
Figure A3. Calculated resistance and numerical accuracy.

Figure A3.Calculated
A3.
Figure Calculatedresistance
resistance and
and numerical accuracy.
numerical accuracy.
Figure A4. Calculated wave-making of the original domain (upper half) and deeper domain (lower
Figure A4. Calculated wave-making of the original domain (upper half) and deeper domain (lower
Calculated
Figure
half)A4.
M1 at Fr▽ = 5.20.wave-making of the original domain (upper half) and deeper domain (lower
half) M1 at Fr = 5.20.
half) M1 at Fr5 =▽5.20.
Appendix A.3. Conclusions
As discussed above, the domain dependence study shows good results for the original domain.
The width and length of the initial domain meet the accuracy demands for the simulation. Although
The width and length of the initial domain meet the accuracy demands for the simulation. Although
the calculating domain is physically shallower than the towing tank and the deepened domain can
the calculating domain is physically shallower than the towing tank and the deepened domain can
slightly improve the numerical accuracy, the original domain can also capture the flow field details
slightly improve the numerical accuracy, the original domain can also capture the flow field details
and trends well, and with less cost. Therefore, the initial domain is selected as the calculation domain.
and trends well, and with less cost. Therefore, the initial domain is selected as the calculation domain.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 24 of 25

The width and length of the initial domain meet the accuracy demands for the simulation. Although the
calculating domain is physically shallower than the towing tank and the deepened domain can slightly
improve the numerical accuracy, the original domain can also capture the flow field details and trends
well, and with less cost. Therefore, the initial domain is selected as the calculation domain.
References
1. Zheng, Y.; Dong, W.C.; Yao, C.B. Experimental study on resistance reduction of displacement type Deep-V
hull model using stern flap. J. Shanghai Jiaotong Univ. 2011, 45, 475–479.
2. Maki, A.; Arai, J.; Tsutsumoto, T.; Suzuki, K.; Miyauchi, Y. Fundamental research on resistance reduction of
surface combatants due to stern flaps. J. Mar. Sci. Technol. 2016, 21, 344–358. [CrossRef]
3. Savitsky, D. Hydrodynamic design of planing hulls. Mar. Technol. 1964, 1, 71–95.
4. Villa, D.; Brizzolara, S. A systematic CFD analysis of flaps/interceptors hydrodynamic performance.
In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation FAST, Athens, Greece, 5–8
October 2009; pp. 1032–1038.
5. Karimi, M.H.; Mohammad, S.S.; Majid, A. A study on vertical motions of high-speed planing boats with
automatically controlled stern interceptors in calm water and head waves. Sh. Offshore Struct. 2015, 10,
335–348. [CrossRef]
6. Celano, T. The prediction of porpoising inception for modern planing craft. Trans. Soc. Nav. Archit. Mar. Eng.
1998, 106, 269–292.
7. Lee, E.; Pavkov, M.; McCue, W.L. The systematic variation of step configuration and displacement for a
double-step planing craft. J. Sh. Prod. Des. 2014, 30, 89–97. [CrossRef]
8. Garland, W.; Maki, K.J. A numerical study of a two-dimensional stepped planing surface. J. Sh. Prod. Des.
2012, 28, 60–72. [CrossRef]
9. Morabito, M.G.; Pavkov, M.E. Experiments with stepped planing hulls for special operations craft. Trans.
Roy. Inst. Nav. Archit Part B Int. J. Small Cr. Technol. 2014, 156, 87–97. [CrossRef]
10. DeMarco, A.; Mancini, S.; Miranda, S.; Scognamiglio, R.; Vitiello, L. Experimental and numerical
hydrodynamic analysis of a stepped planing hull. J. Appl. Ocean Res. 2017, 64, 135–154. [CrossRef]
11. Garland, W.R. Stepped planing hull investigation. Trans. Soc. Nav. Archit. Mar. Eng. 2012, 119, 448–458.
12. Lotf, P.; Ashrafzaadeh, M.; Kowsari, E.R. Numerical investigation of a stepped planing hull in calm water.
Ocean Eng. 2015, 94, 103–110. [CrossRef]
13. Makasyeyev, M.V. Numerical modeling of cavity flow on bottom of a stepped planing hull. In Proceedings
of the 7th International Symposium on Cavitation, Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 17–22 August 2009. CAV2009-116.
14. Morabito, M.G. Empirical equations for planing hull bottom pressure. J. Sh. Res. 2014, 58, 185–200. [CrossRef]
15. Ghadimi, P.; Tavakoli, S.; Dashtimanesh, A.; Zamanian, R. Steady performance prediction of a heeled planing
boat in calm water using asymmetric 2D+t model. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part M J. Eng. Marit. Environ. 2016,
231, 234–257. [CrossRef]
16. Dashtimanesh, A.; Esfandiari, A.; Mancini, S. Performance Prediction of Two-Stepped Planing Hulls Using
Morphing Mesh Approach. J. Ship. Prod. Des. 2018, 34, 236–248. [CrossRef]
17. Veysi, S.J.; Bakhtiari, M.; Ghassemi, H.; Ghiasi, M. Toward numerical modeling of the stepped and non-stepped
planing hull. J. Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. 2015, 37, 1635–1645. [CrossRef]
18. Ghadimi, P.; Panahi, S.; Tavakoli, S.J. Hydrodynamic study of a double-stepped planing craft through
numerical simulations. Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. Eng. 2019, 41, 2. [CrossRef]
19. Xin, T. Analysis on Hydrodynamic Performance of Double-stepped Planing Craft and its Appendages.
Master’s Thesis, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin, China, 2014.
20. ITTC. Recommended Procedures and Guidelines: General Guidelines for Uncertainty Analysis in Resistance,
7.5-02-02-02. In Proceedings of the International Towing Tank Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark,
1–5 September 2014.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 25 of 25
21. ITTC. Recommended Procedures and Guidelines: Testing and Extrapolation Methods Resistance
Resistance Test, 7.5-02-02-01. In Proceedings of the International Towing Tank Conference, Wuxi, China,
18–22 September 2017.
22. Celik, I.B.; Ghia, U.; Roache, P.J.; Freitas, C.J. Procedure for estimation and reporting of uncertainty due to
discretization in CFD applications. ASME J. Fluids Eng. 2008, 130, 078001. [CrossRef]
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Jmse 07 00346 v2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jmse 07 00346 v2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346; doi:10.3390/jmse7100346 www.mdpi.com/journal/jmse

2.1. Geometrical Description of the Hull Model

Figure 1. Model of the double-stepped planing hull.

2.2. Experimental Setup

Figure 2. Schematic view of the towing test set up.

V of the model. Non-dimensional sinkage is

During the the

Table 2. Comparisons of experimental resistance between different models.

3. Numerical Simulation Setup

3.1. Mathematical and Numerical Models

Vair = step(Z − Hw ), (7)

Vwater = 1 − Vair , (8)

Mesh Number (1x10^5)

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 12 of 25

Table 3. Comparison between experimental and computational resistance coefficients.

Figure 10. Cont.

(b) Fr▽ = 4.38

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 17 of 25

Fr▽ = 3.94 Fr▽ = 5.20

where Awet represents the4.3. Hydrodynamic

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 17 of 25

(a) Fr▽ = 2.63 (b) Fr▽ = 3.50

(c) Fr▽ = 4.38 (d) Fr▽ = 5.20

FigureFigure 20. Comparisons

Appendix A.1. Width and Length Study of the Domain

Appendix A.2. Depth Study of the Domain

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 346 24 of 25

Figure A3. Calculated resistance and numerical accuracy.

Appendix A.3. Conclusions

You might also like