|
Items in cart [1] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 251
Slamming of Flat-Boftomec! Bodies Calculated
with Exact Free Surface Boundary Conditions
S. Falch
Norwegian Marine Technology Research Institute
Trondheim, Norway
ABSTRACT
OF
The impact of a flat-bottomed two-dimensional body which y
falls vertically towards initially calm water is studied
theoretically and numerically. The flow in the ~
compressible air layer between the body and the water °
surface is calculated by assuming that the air is
i nv i sc i d and t he f 1 ow i s one-d i dens i one 1 . The ca 1 cu 1 a - A,
tion of the flow in the water is based on potential
theory, and a boundary- i ntegra 1 -equat i on techn i que wi th
exact nom inear boundary conditions are used. The effect
of var i ous deadr i seang 1 es has
been studied. and the
pressure acting on the bottom of the body is calculated
unti 1 the body makes contact with the deformed water
surf ace .
L i st of symbol s
b
c
cO
cw
Cp
C+, C_
g
h
H
Ho
Ha
K
M
N
NA
NF
n2
p
SO
r
sl
SO
SF
So
t
u
V
VO
Half width of body
Ve 1 oc i ty of sound i n a i r .
Velocity of sound in air at atmospheric pressure.
Velocity of sound in water.
Constant in nondimensional momentum equation.
Family of characteristic curves.
Acce 1 erat i on of gray i ty.
Distance between body and water surface.
Elevation of the bottom of the body at centerl ine.
Value of H at start of the numerical calculation.
Amp 1 i tyde o f f o rc ed heave osc i 1 1 a t i on .
Number of elements on body.
Two-d i Dens i one 1 mass of body.
Number of e 1 events i n a i r ca 1 cu 1 at i on .
Number of surface elements between x = 0 and x = b.
Total number of boundary elements.
y-component of the unit normal vector.
Pressure i n the a i r.
Atmospheric Dressure.
Rad i us of cy 1 i nder .
Surface of body.
Cyl indrical surface of seal 1 radius.
Horizontal control surface far down.
The f ree surf ace of water.
Vertical control surface far away.
Time.
Velocity of air in x-direction.
Velocity of body.
Ve 1 oc i ty of body at start of the numer i ca 1 ca 1 cu 1 at i on .
251
Ax
At
Hor i zonta 1 soace coord i Rate.
x-coordinate of fluidparticle.
Vert i ca 1 space coord i nate .
ExDonent in the relationship between p and p.
Elevation of the water surface.
Deadr i se ang 1 e .
Dens i ty of a i r .
Density of air at atmospheric pressure.
Densi ty of water.
Velocity potential.
St reamf unc t i on .
Circular frequency of heave oscillation.
Width of element along the x-axis.
T i meper i ad be tween two t i mes teps .
CHA PT E R 1 . I NTRODU CT'ON
Section 1.1 Gener 1
a
The aim of this work is to calculate the pressure on a f lat-bottomed
body which is falling through air towards initially calm water and
subsequently penetrates into the water. The effect of the entrapped
air between the body and the water surface is specially studied.
This is a particular case of the general slamming problem where an
arbitrary shaped body hits the arbitrary shaped free surface of the
water, or it may be the water that hits the body. The pressure and
the force acting on the body due to this, will in several applications
be of signif icant interest to marine designers.
The classic example occurs when a ship is travelling at high speed or
i n heavy sea, and the bow moves out of and reenters the water. Severe
damage on shipbows has been reported as a consequence [8].
Considerable impact forces may also occur when large waves hit cross
members or deckstructures of offshore oilrigs.
Finally the situation must be mentioned where different kind of equip-
ment such as a mini-submarine is lowered or lifted through the splash-
zone. Soecia1 ly if the eauiDment is operated by a crane situated on
some king of floating platform, the relative motion between the water
surface and the equipment may in rough weather be considerable,
caus i ng s i gn i ' i cant i moact 1 cads .
The calculation of imoact loads in these situations is needed in order
to determine the "ecuired strength of the structures involved.
For the case of slamming of a ship bow or lowering of equipment
through the solash zone, knowledge of the impact loads is also
required in order to determine in what kind of weather condition cer-
tain operating may be carried out.
A better understanding of the whole phenomena of slamming wi 11 also
rove information on how to design the shape of the structures in order
to minimize the imoact loads.
OCR for page 252
To calculate the impact loads in the cases mentioned here, is very
difficult. The problem has to be simplified. The purpose of such
simplifications may partly be to find approximate solutions to the
real problems, and partly to be a step on the road to more sof isti-
cated methods. For this purpose i t seems reasonable that one way of
making the simplifications is to device the problem into sub-problems.
Special phenomenons can then be studied separately.
The most obvious simpl if ication wi 11 be to start to study two-
dimensional problems. Another simplification which seems reasonable,
is to assume that the real problem may be approximated by the entry of
a body into calm water with velocity equal to the relative velocity
between the body and the moving free surface. Such an approximation
is expected to be good if the dimensions of the body is small com-
pared to the wavelength.
Both the above approximat ions are made by several other authors.
The bodies involved may have various different forms. Some of them
lead to certain phenomenon which needs to be studied specially. In
this work it has been chosen to study flat-bottomed bodies.
This discussion leads to the conclusion that it is interesting to
study the fo1 lowing particular case, and which may be characterized
by :
The calculations will be two-dimensional. That means that the
resul ts wi 11 be approximately val id for a slender horizontal
body .
- The body wi 11 be symmetrical .
- The water is initial ly calm.
- The body is falling vertically under influence of gravity and the
pressure force on the bottom. (The body may also have prescribed
motion. )
- The body is completely rigid.
- The body is almost flit-bottomed. That means it may have a small
dead r i se ange 1 .
For this particular case, the aim is to calculate the pressure distri-
bu~ion on the surface of the body and the flow in the water and the
air as a function of time, both before and after the moment when the
body makes contact with the water surface.
The calculation wi 11 include both the effect of entrapped air and the
possibi 1 ity of large water surface elevation.
This is a theoretical and numerical study. No experiments have been
carried out, but the results of this work have been compared with
other works, both theoretical and experimental.
In the effort to achieve this aim, several simplifications, especially
on the properties of water and air, will be made. The introduction,
and the discussion of the justification, of these simplifications will
be done in the fol lowing chapter, but they wi 11 al 1 be of such a kind
that they will have more or less negligible influence on the results
of the calculation.
See t i on 1 . ? _Backoround
Unti 1 the beginning of the nineteensixties, the theories of van Karman
t1~ and Wagner t2] was used to predict hydrodynamic impact forces.
These theories neglected the influence from the air, and in the case
of a f lat-bottomed body, van Karman suggested that the maximum impact
pressure was the acoust ic pressure of water.
Then several experimental and theoretical works was done, which showed
that for the case of a f lat-bottomed body the effect of the air bet-
ween the body and the water surface has to be taken into account in
order to predict the impact pressure more correctly.
They found that the cushioning effect of the trapped air in the layer
between the fal 1 ing body and the water surface reduced the impact
pressure to approximately one-tenth of the acoustic pressure.
The most significant of these works was experiments made by Chuang
(3, 4] and Lewison and Maclean [5] and a theoretical and experimental
study made by Verhagen [6].
In 1977 Koehler and Kettleborough t7] presented a theoretical study
which shows in detai 1 the calculated pressure in the airgap and the
surface elevation for one of the cases used in the experimental study
of Lewison and Maclean.
Verhagen describes that pictures taken during his experiments shows
that the water elevation is at first noticeable at the edges of the
body just before the plate touches the water surface. Next, the air
layer breaks up into bubbles beginning at the edges and extending to
the center of the body with a speed in the order of magnitude equal to
the velocity of sound in air. With increasing time the bubbles drift
relatively slowly outwards.
Chuang [4] present some interesting sketches of the situation after
impact based on photographs taken during experiments. These sketches
are given in Fig. 1.1.
In the theoretical work of both Verhagen and Koehler and Kettleborough
a two-dimensional problem was studied. They assumed that a
compressible inviscid air layer exists between the body and the water
surface. As the body fal ls, the air in the layer flows one-
dimensional ly outwards from the centre of the body. The water is
assumed to be incompressible and Verhagen states that this is a good
approximation if the velocity of the body do not exceed a few meters
per second.
In both works the calculation of the flow in the water is based on
1 inear free surface condition. The pressure distribution is calcu-
1 ated unt i 1 the edge of the body makes contact wi th the elevated
water surface, and Koehler and Kettleborough assumes that the maximum
impact pressure is reached at this time-instant. Verhagen also calcu-
lates the pressure in the trapped air bubble after this time by a
simplified method assuming that the pressure in the bubble and the
downward velocity of the water surface within the bubble is only a
f unc t i on of t i me . Koeh 1 er and Kett 1 eborough makes the ca 1 cu 1 at i on
with different deadriseangles. The intention is to predict the uncer-
tainty in experiments due to the fact that in an experimental set up
-t is not Dossible to be sure that the bottom of the body is exactly
oaral lel tO the undisturbed water surface.
Some of the results Presented in the papers mentioned above wi ~ ~ us
used for comparison in the present work and wi 11 then be discussed in
more detai 1.
As mentioned in section 1.1 it was the intention in the present work
to calculate impact pressure both before and after the moment when
252
OCR for page 253
contact occurs. It is then clear from fig. 1.1 that the method used
for calculating the flow in the water must necessarily be based on
exactly non-linear boundary condition. Such a method has therefore
been used, and this is the main deviation from earlier works. It has
however not been possible within the l imit of the present research
project to ful ly develop a method which calculates the pressure on the
body during al l phases of the impact. The computer programme which
has been made, calculates the flow in the air and the water prior to
the moment when contact i s made between the body and the water sur-
~ace .
CHAPTER 2. OVERALL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM AND THE SOLUTION
The problem to be solved is the one described in section 1.1. Fig.
2.1 shows the situation at time t = 0 which is the starting point of
the numerical calculation.
y
-
,
H a
V
A right-handed, earth-f ixed coordinate system is used with the x-axis
horizontally, the y-axis vertically and positive upwards, and the ori-
gin at the intersection between the undisturbed water surface and the
centerl ine of the body. b is the halfwidth of the body and ~ is the
deadrise angle. The elevation of the keelpoint (that is the intersec-
tion coins between the centerline and the bottom of the body) is
designated H(t), and the velocity of the body V(t). V is defined to
be pos i t i ve cowards .
, he numer Cal calculation starts (t = 0) when the body has reached the
Dosition H = Ho, and the velocity is V = VO.
Because the effect of the viscosity in the water is confined to thin
boundary layers, the water may be regarded as inviscid. This means
gnat -~e 'low in the water will be irrotational and it may be charac-
terized by a velocity Dotentia1 ¢(x,y,t).
Ante- the moment when the bottom of the body has gassed the water sur-
face and continue to move downwards through the water, it is possible
that vorticity will be shed from the edge of the body. This effect,
however, will not be studied in this work. It will probably have
negl igible inf luence on the pressure on the bottom of the body. On
the other hand, if a study of the effect of a secondary impact as
shown in Fig. 1.1, as well as an exact calculation of the pressure
along the sidewal l of the body are to be carried out, it may be
necessary to take this vortex shedding into account.
Whether the water might be regarded as incompressible or not depends
on whether the duration of the impact is large compared to the time it
takes for a pressure shock wave in the water to travel a distance
equal to the hal f width of the body. If the width of the impact
pressure-time history curve is called At, the half-width of the body
is b and the velocity of sound in water is cw, then the condition for
the water to be regarded as incompressible becomes:
Experiments and earl ier works have shown that this condition holds for
the range of velocity which has been studied, so the water will be
t rea ted as a n i ncompress i b l e f l u i d .
253
Finally, it is assumed that the effect of surface tension can be
neg l ected .
For the same reason as for the water, it is assumed that the air may
be treated as inviscid.
However the compressibility of the air will not be neglected. This is
necessary because the calculation shows that the f low in the air beco-
mes superson i c .
Verhagen [6] assumes the flow in the air to be isentropic (=reversible
ad i abet i c ) wh i ch means that:
—= (~)r , y= 1.4
0 0
On the other hand Koehler and Kettleborough !7~ assumes that y is
closer to 1.0, which is the value for an isothermal process, and he
argues that the temperature wi l l be kept constant because of al l the
waterspray in the gap between the body and the water surface.
In this work both values are used. For the ideal ized case which is
studied here, and also for the experiments used to compare with, the
heat-transfer from the air in the gap to the surroundings will be
negligible during the very short time of the pressure build up, which
means that the flow in the air will be isentroic. This assumption
wi l l be used through the paper if not otherwise stated. On the other
hand in a more realistic slamming situation where the water is not
initially calm, and there is wind and waves, the situation will be
different. Because of the spray in the air, the contact-surface bet-
ween the air and the water will be very large, which means that the
heat transfer wi l l be much faster. It is possible that this causes
the flow in the air to be isothermal.
When the body approaches the water surface, the pressure in the air
between the body and the water starts to bui ld up at the same time as
the air starts to flow outwards from the centerline towards the edges
OF the body. The pressure rise causes the water surface to deform,
and this situation is illustrated in Fig. 2.2.
-
Y ~ 1
Lo
|h(x,t) ~ (x t)
F i g . 2 . 2
t is known that the pressure wi l l not exceed the
atmospheric Dressure significantly until H << b. This means that the
flow in the air may be regarded as one-dimensional, that is the flow
is paral lel l to the x-axis and al l quantities are a function of x and
t only. This assumption has also been made by other authors [6], [7].
The elevation of the water surface is designated :~(X,t), and the
distance between the body and the water surface is h(x,t). The rela-
tionship between these two is
h(x,t) = H(t) + ~ x - ((x,t) (2.2)
The one-dimensional flow in the air is characterized by the horizontal
ve l oc i ty u ( x, t ), t he pressure p ( x, t ) and t he dens i ty p ( x, t ) .
As mentioned above the pressure bui ld up in the gap under the body
causes the water surface to deform. Or in other words, before the
body makes contact the flow in the water and particular the free sur-
face elevation depends on the pressure in the air above the water sur-
face. On the other hand the calculation of the pressure in the air
OCR for page 254
depends on the width of the gap h(x,t) which partly depends on the p = Oo at x = + b
elevation of the water surface ((x,t). This may be illustrated like
this:
h(x,t) - p(x,t) - ((x,t) - h(x,t) (2.3)
I_
The first arrow will be treated in chapter 3 and the second arrow in
chapter 4. The third arrow is given by eq. (2.2), and the arrow from
o to h indicates that h depends on the pressure through the motion and
the force on the body.
Of course, to get a solution to our problem, al l calculations have to
be made simultaneously, which in the numerical procedures means that
all the calculations will be carried out in each timestep. How this
is done, is described in chapter 5.
CHAPTER 3. THE AIR REGION
The assumptions and simplifications made in chapter 1 and 2 which
regards the air region, may be summarised as:
The body is two-dimensional, symmetrical, rigid and flat-bottomed. It
f a l l s ver t i ca l l y under i n f l uence of gray i ty and pressure or has a
prescribed vertical motion. The flow in the air is one-dimensional,
inviscid, compressible and isentropic. The situation is shown in
Fig. 3.1 where the coordinate system and the symbols are the same as
introduced in chapter 2.
Y ~
b
(3.4)
However this boundary condition can only be used as long as the flow
is subsonic. Afted the flow has become supersonic, the problem will
be completely determined in the region we are interested in without
any boundary condition at x = + b.
The initial condition will be determined in the same way as in [6] and
[71. The initial height, Ho' of the falling body is assumed to be
sufficiently above the free surface so that the air is not behaving
compressible and the pressure distribution within the air layer is
essential ly atmospheric so that no initial effect wi l l be felt by the
water. At "his height the water free surface will be undisturbed and
for the case ~ = 0, h(x,O) will be a constant. Since p(x,O) also is
assumed to be constant, an initial velocity distribution may be derived
from the continuity equation (3.2) . Since the problem is symmetrical,
u will be zero at the centerline (x = 0), and the result is:
u(x,0) = ~ h = - ° x (3.5)
~t=0 0
and hence if the velocity is assumed constant:
at(x~o) = h2 at X ~ = O2 X
o
Using this initial velocity distribution and holding
p(x,0) constant = pO, an initial air pressure distribution can be
obtained from the equation of motion (3.1). With the boundary con-
dition p = pO at x = b, the result is:
1 e 1 D(X,O) po ~ po O2 (b2 - X2) (3.6a)
~ , H o
i ~ U(X,t)
p(X,t) and hence from eq. (3.3):
,, ,~ Q(X't)
For this f now the eacation of motion becomes
an au 1 so
U = _ _
at ax p ax
We eccet-,~n o' continuity:
aX(UP~) + at(pk) = 0
~he relationship between oressure and density is:
—= (or
0 0
In this chapter h(x,t) is assumed to be known, which means that there
are three equations for the three unknowns u, p, p. By the use of
equation (3.3) p may be eliminated from eq. (3.1), which means that
eq. (3.1) and (3.2) contains only the two unknowns u(x,t) and p(x,t).
These unknowns are to be determined in the region x c[-b,b],
t ~ [O. tkl, where tk is the time where the body has reached a point
where this calculation is no longer valid. The equation system is
hyperbol ic, and in order to solve the problem, initial-conditions at
t = 0 is needed for both the unknowns. As long as the flow is sub-
sonic, a boundary condition along x = ~ b for one of the unknowns is
a l so needed.
At the edge of the body the air will flow as a free jet (see [6] and
'7l ), which means that the following boundary condition should be
used:
254
(3.1)
3.2
H
(3 3) b << 1
p(x,o) = p (Pig )r
o
(3.6b)
The derivation of the initial condition was based on the assumption
that '`e oressure distribution is essential ly atmospheric
-hat:
v2
0 2
—2 b << 0
H °
o
which gives the fol lowing restriction on the choice of Ho
H V
_ >> 0
D i'p
O O
-h55 must hold at the same time as
Th i s means
which earl ier has been introduced as a restriction which is
necessary in order to use a one-dimensional model.
Initial-condition for the case ~ ~ O may be derived in a similar way
and it can be shown that the deviation from the above results is small
if
H
<< 0.
b
The problem described here has been solved using the method of charac-
teristics with specified time intervals, similar to the method used by
Verhagen [6]. The method together with a numerical scheme called
CHAR-S is described in ref . [ 17 ] .
OCR for page 255
CHAPTER 4. THE WATER REGION
Section 4.1 Introduction
The assumptions and simplifications made in chapter 1 and 2 which
regards the water region, may be summarized as:
The problem is two-dimensional and symmetrical and the water is
initial ly at rest. The water is assumed to be inviscid and
incompressible which means that the flow may be represented by a
velocity potential. The surface tension is neglected.
Two typical situations which will be treated, are illustrated in Fig.
~ . 1.
Y ~ ~
_ _ _ ^~ p(x,t)
Flg. 4.1 a) ¢~_ ~ ~ ~ (x,t)
b) ~ ~
'he coordinate system and the notation is the same as introduced in
chapter 2. In this chapter it is assumed that the pressure distribu-
tion over the water surface and/or the motion of the body is known,
and the f low in the water is examined. There are several methods
which may be ar,Dlied to obtain this flow. No detailed evaluation of
these methods has been made in this work. It was however a demand
that the method should not have any other restrictions than those men-
t i oned i n chanter 1 and 2 .
The method chosen is a boundary-integral-equation technique with exact
nom inear boundary condition based on Faltinsen [13] . This method is
described in section 4.2. Running of a computer program derived from
the method, shows that problems may occur in some situations. The
problems are connected to the intersection point between the body and
the free surface. This will be explained in more detail in section
4.4.
Some effort has been made to overcome this problems. A modified ver-
sion of the method used in section 4.2 has been developed. This is
described in section 4.3. The modifications have however not been
very successful in solving the intersection-point problem.
In section 4.4 some numerical examples are presented and compared by
the work of other authors.
ect_n 4.2 A boundarv-inteural-equation technique
Let the water be infinite in extent and be of infinite depth. Since
we have assumed irrotational flow in an incompressible fluid, there
wi l l exist a velocity potential ~ which satisfies the Laplace equation
in the fluid:
2 2 0
Ox ay
'he pressure p in the air over the water surface may differ from the
atmospheric pressure pO, and since the surface tension is neglected,
the dynamic free surface condition can be written as:
at + 2[(ax) + (ay) ] + go + Pw = 0 (4~2)
where g is the acceleration of gravity.
The kinematic free surface condition is:
~ _ ~ ~ ~ - O
at ay + ax ax ~
on y = ((x,t)
( 4.3 )
If there is a body penetrating the water surface, the boundary con-
dition on the wetted body surface will be:
(4.4)
where V as before is the vertical velocity of the body, 2n is the y-
component of the unit normal vector to the body, which is assumed to
be positive into the fluid, and — is the derivative along this normal
an
vector .
The i n i t i a l cond i t i on are set to be:
~ = 0 on the free surface $ = 0 (4.5)
The boundary value problem defined by eq. (4.1-4) has to be solved for
each timesteo. This will be done by applying Green's second identity
to t he ve l oc i ty potent i a l ~ and the f unct i on ~ def i ned by:
~ ~ (x,t) ¢(x,y) = in ~x-x1)2 + (y_y1)2
~ 1k ~
—x
where (x1, ye) is a point in the fluid-domain.
We can then or i te:
S'(~ Ids °
where S' = S + SO + SS + SF + S1
YE
~ ~XU`r
F
~ ~ S
n
Fig. 4.3
S:
(4~6)
l
,~'(X1rY:'
S is the wetted body surface, SO is a vertical control surface at
x = _=, SB is a horizontal control surface far down in the fluid, SF
is the free surface and S1 is a cylindrical surface of small radius
and with axis through (x1,yl) perpendicular to the x-y plane.
Since the problem is transient with the fluid initially at rest, the
contribution to (4.6) from So, and SB are both zero.
This means that eq. (4.6) can be written as
a (x,y x y ) ds x,
an (x ,y ) = J | (x,y) ¢(x,y;x ,y ) ~ (
1 1 s+sF an(X,y; 1 1 an(x,y)
(4~7)
For *x* > bF(t), where bF is large compared to the half width of the
body b, we can, since the problem is symmetrical, approximate ~ to the
velocity potential of a dipole with singularity in origo and axis
along the y-axis:
255
¢(x.y) ~ 2 2 (4.8)
x +y
where A at th i s stage i s unknown.
tF(t) is assumed to be so large that no wave has reached the points
x = +bF(t), which means that the free surface outside those points
OCR for page 256
OCR for page 258
OCR for page 259
OCR for page 260
OCR for page 261
OCR for page 262
OCR for page 263
OCR for page 264
OCR for page 265
OCR for page 266
OCR for page 267
OCR for page 268
Representative terms from entire chapter:
free surface
will coincide with the x-axis. Hence the contribution to (4.7) from
the part of SF with x > bF is:
J {~(x~y) an(x,y; 1 _ ¢(x,y;x1,yl) fix y']d~y=onAI(x1,y1) (4~9)
and the contribution from the part of SF with x ~ -bF is:
|Fl¢(X,Y) an(x y; 1 _ ¢(x,y;x1,yl) fix y,idxly=o.AJ(x1'y1) (4.10)
An analytical expression for I(x1,yl) and J(x1, Y1) are given in
ref. r13].
When solving the integral equation (4.7) at each timestep, a. will be
known on the body by the use of the boundary condition on the body
(4.4), and ~ will be known on the free surface. At the first timestep
~ will be known on the free surface from the initial condition (4.5),
which also determines the position of the free surface at this time.
When the problem has been solved for one timestep, the free surface
conditions are used to find ~ on the free surface and the position of
the free surface for the next timestep. This is done by the following
timestepping procedure: If we follow a fluid particle on the free
surface, we can write:
DO = a. a. a. a. a.
Dt at + ax ax + ay ay
Using the dynamic free surface condition (4.2) this becomes:
Dt = ~ 9: + 2[(a.)2 + (alp) 2] _ P-PO (4.11)
By the use of the kinematic free surface condition (4.3) we can
f urther or i te:
and
r
~ _
Ot ~ By
Ox
F a.
Ot ~ ax
where OF is the x-coordinate of the fluid particle. A fourth order
Runge-Kut~a method is used to perform the sidestepping. No investiga-
t~ons have been done in this work to f ind out whether any other
methods would have been useful.
(4.13)
When solving the integral equation (4.7), the wetted body surface and
that part of the free surface lying between x = -bF and x = bF are
divided into straight-line elements (see Fig. 4.4).
, . .
· ~ ~
F \ \ i, ~ ( X i ' Y i )
Fig . 4 . 4
The elements are symmetrical ly arranged. The total number of elements
are 2NF, whi le the number of elements on the body is 2K. (For the
situation illustrated in Fig. 4.'a, K will be equal to zero.)
The midpoint of element number i are denoted (x.,y. ), and the surface
of this element will be called Sj. It is assumed that both ~ and a`P
are constant over each element. For element no. i these constants
wi 11 be denoted ~ = ¢(x.,y. ) and a`P respectively. Due to the sym-
metry of the problem it is clear that Hi = ~ i and a. = a. where ~ jj is defined by:
If we now adultly the integral eq. (4.7) NF times, putting (x1,yl) equal
_ _
to (xj,yj ), i = 1,2,...,NF, the result is:
256
-27r¢(xj,y<) = ~ And J anin'/(x-xj) + (y-yj) ds(x,y)
an S IS lniX~Xi ) + (y-yj ) ds(x,y)
+ A I(xi,yj) + A J(Xj,yj) (4.14)
For I x I > bF, ~ is assumed to be given by eq. (4.8). We now assume
that am is determined by this expression also on the element NF:
al A
= —
anNF x 2
NF
Hence: NF anon
If this is inserted into eq. (4.14), and all the known parts are
gathered on the right-hand side of the equation, we will have for
2rrd,j ~ ~ is | anini(x-x,. ) + (y-y; ) ds
j-k+1 ,lnj J ; in (:x Xj ) + (y-yj ) ds
(4. 15)
- r;(xj,yj) + J(Xj'Yj)lXNF anNF (4~16)
-~+! is is anlniX Xj ) +(y-yi ) ds
. ~ _ ~
(4~12) j--1 an: S IS ~ni/(x Xj ) +(Y-Y; ) ds
-or i = !c+1, k+2,...NF, we will have similar equations but with 27r~j on the
ozone- s de of the eoual sign.
Reese ecuat offs may be written in matrix form as
A · x = b
where ~ he ;~:
djj
1 if i =
O if i '+ j
When the algebraic equation system (4.17) has been solved, the flow in
the f luid wi l l be determined for the actual time instant we are
dealing with. In order to step the solution forward, the substantive
derivatives given by eq. (4.11-13) will be applied to the fluid par-
ticle at the midpoint of each element on the free surface. We then
need to know as and a. for the midpoints, which can be calculated
when the equation system (4.17) has been solved. The Sidestepping
wi l l give new values for the velocity potentidal ~ on the free
surface, and new positions of the fluid particles where these ¢-values
are valid. Knowing these new positions for the fluid particles, new
elements have to be arranged. The midpoints of these new elements
will not always coincide with the positions of the fluid particles,
and in that case the value of ~ at the new midpoints will be deter-
mined by interpolation.
How the new elements are arranged and how the interpolation are
carried out, are explained in more detai l in Appendix A.
After the fluid motion has been determined, the Bernoulli equation may
be used to obtain the force on the wetted surface of the body.
However, another procedure is used. This is derived by Faltinsen [13]
and he finds that the force on the wetted surface of the body is:
F = Pw dt | finds + | pwGyndS (4~21)
Section 4.3 A Modif fed Method
As mentioned in section 4.1, some problems may occur at the intersec-
tion between the body surface and the water free surface. In an
attempt to overcome the problems some modifications to the pre-
viously described method has been developed. The modifications have
been based on the fol lowing considerations: In the method in section
4.2 new position of the free surface and new values of ~ on the free
surface are calculated by timestepping of fluid Canticles at the mid-
points of the old elements. It is then necessary to create new free
surface elements and calculate the value of ~ at the midpoints of
these. One way of doing this is described in Appendix A. However if
the curvature of the free surface is large, the position of the new
elements are strongly dependent on the detai ls of this new-element-
creation-orocedure. so avoid this it would have been better to use
the endpoints of the elements as fluidparticles which shall be given
new position and new ¢-value by the timestepping procedure. This
would have determined the new free-surface elements directly.
Another consideration which has been made, was inspired by Lin et.al.
[14~. They used the Vinje and Brevig [15] approach based on Cauchy's
theorem and made one modif ication to this method at the intersection
point. In these methods the velocity potential ~ and the stream func-
tion ~ varies linearly over each boundary element. ~ is known on the
body by the use of the body boundary condition, and ~ is known on the
water free surface in the same way as in section 4.2. Vinje and Bre-
vig chooses ~ to be the known function at the intersection point bet-
ween the body and the free surface. The modification made by Lin
et.al. [14] was that they assumed that both ~ and ~ was known at the
intersection point, and reduced the algebraic equation system with one
equation. Lin et.al. [14] found that this modifications improved the
method and that the problems at the intersection point was reduced.
'I a similar modification could be made to the method in section 4.2,
it would be worth trying.
,he above considerations has lead to the following modifications in
the method in section 4.2: The wetted surface of the body and that
part of the free surface which lies between x = -bF and x = bF are
divided into 2NF elements as before. Now the endpoints of element
no. ~ will be (xj,yj) and (xj+1,yi+l). The velocity potential
varies l inearly over each element. The value of ~ at the endpoint is
now denoted ¢; = ¢(Xj,yj ). However 3¢ is still assumed to be a
constant over each element. This corresponds to ~ varying l inearly
Over the elements. a
Aj = 2~6j + | w1 anini(x-xj) +(y-yj) dS(x,y)
~ -.
., = 1 V F
,
j=1
A jj - 2n5; ~ | wl aninix-x )2~(y_yj)2 dS ~ 2~ ASj - — = 0
~-2 3 k j 1 anj bF
/
+ J w a ln1/(x-x )2+(y_y )2 dS (4.25)
, -1 - ( j-1 )
A; = _ J lnix-xj ) +(y-yj ) dS
i= , NF ~ ~3
ink ~ 2, . . .NF
~ IS jNF rI (Xj All )+J(xj tyi )]XNF
The elements of the vector b is:
NF /-
i j=~+1 j [ S IS 1 an (x Xj ) (y yj ) dS
i=l, NF ~ ~
/-
- r W1 aan lnl//(x-xj)2+(y-yj)2 dS - 27r~jj]
/
J W2 an ln'/(x-xj )2+(y_yj )2 dS
/
J lni(x-x )2+(y_y )2 dS
5 5 1 1
B = ¢, - J w' an ~nix-xj) +(y-yj) dS - 2?TAj ]
i= ~ ~c
(4.26)
NF /
-2 i ~ t~ w1 an lni(x-xj )2+(y_y )2 dS
~ .+_
Sj 1+S 2 an ln/(/x-xj ) +(y_y; )2 dS - 27r,i ]
/
NF4~- J W2 an lni(x-xj )2+(y_yj )2 dS
NF -NF
+ ~ an | lnix-xj ) +(y-yj ) dS (4.27)
In order to step the solution forward,
given by eq. (4.11-13) will now be applied to the fluidparticles at
the endpoint for each element on the free surface. To carry out this,
a`P and a~p have to be known at the endpoints. However with the model
used here, a. and atP will generally be singular at the endpoints.
This means that 3$ and a. have to be calculated at the midpoints of
each element, and then the value at the endpoints are found by inter-
polat ion.
Another modification to the method in section 4.2 is also made. Since
the f luid is incompressible, we wi l l have that:
J an dS = 0
~ 8 5 x
(4.28)
258
If the diDole aDproximation, eq. (4.8), are used far away from the
body, it turns out that the contribution from SB and Sy' is zero. The
contribution from SF outside x = +bF may also be calculated by the use
of the dipole approximation in this area. Still assuming that a. is
constant over each element eq. (4.28) becomes:
( 4.29 )
where ASj is the length of element no. j.
Using the same expression for A as before (see eq. (4.15) ), this can
be rewritten as:
1 a s + — = - a sj 4.30
j_~+l anj ~Sj + anNF ( NF bF ) j-1 j ( )
witn the unknown terms on the left side.
This eauation may be used instead of one of the equations in the
equation system (4.24). [f equation no. i is interchanged, the new
coeff icients are:
A. . = 0
~ ,]
j=1, . . . ,k
Aj j = ~Sj + (jNF b
j=k+1, . . . NF
i j - 1 a n j j
(4.31)
The introduction of the eq. (4.30) corresponds to the use of ~ as
known at the intersection point in the Vinje-3revig-method. This may
be explained as fol lows. lf we look at that part of the free surface
SF having x > 0, it is true that:
Si an sJ aS ~x. *1 (4.32)
which means that St aPds will be known if ~1, which is ~ at the inter-
sect,on point, is given.
The method described in this section is used in a computer program.
This has been run for the case of a cylinder oscillating vertically
in the free surface. The method has been tried with and without
interchanging one of the equation in the equation system (4.24) with
the equation (4.30). The only way to avoid instability in the solu-
tion is to interchange equation (4.30) with equation number K+1. This
means that the equation formed by setting (x1,yl) equal to the inter-
sec'ion point (xk+1,yk+l) in the integral equation (4.7), is not used.
In this ~orm the modified method in this section has been compared
w,th the method in section 4.2 and with the numerical results obtained
by other authors. This is presented in section 4.4.
The numerical results shows that the modified method do not handle the
~ntersection Doint oroblem any better than the method in section 4.2.
If the modified method is used in the case k=O, which means that there
is no body penetrating the free surface, it is not possible to avoid
instability in the solution whether the equation (4.30) is used or
not .
Instability here means that a
AL
an
~-
Fi 9 . 4 . 5
cylinder with forced vertical oscillation (position of center:
y(t) = Ha sin at). The results are compared with results obtained by
Faltinsen using a programme based on the same method descried in sec-
tion 4.2 and Dresented in [133, and also with results presented by
Vinje and 8revig [15]. Fig. 4.6 shows the results for the three
values of the amplitude: Ha/r = 0.1, 0.3 and 0.6 (r is radius of the
cy 1 i nder ), ~r/g = 1. 0.
The good conformity between the results for Ha/r = 0.1 indicates that
there are no bugs in the programmed, but the deviation in the results
for Ha/r = 0.3 and 0.6 is difficult to explain.
The reason why the case Ha/r = 0.6 is not calculated for higher time
values, is that the calculation breaks down shortly after because of
problems with the element lying closest to the intersection point. In
Fig. 4.7 the elements on the cylinder and the free surface are shown
for the two last timesteps before the programme SLM breaks down.
As seen from the force curve in Fig. 4.6 the programme SLM-Mod. tends
to break down even before.
The second case which are used to test the programmed, is one which
are presented by Doctors [16]. He uses a triangular pressure-element
acting on the free surface of the water. The pressure-element as a
function of position x and time t is defined by Fig. 4.8. The free
surface elevation which is the result of the pressure-element, is
calculated by a method which is based on potential theory and with
1 i near f ree surf ace cond i t i on.
P-Po
pa
/
P-Po
pa
\ At~x = 1
_ \ _x/Ax o / , \ _ that
-1 0 1 0 1 2
Fig. 4.8
1
A
In fig. 4.9 results presented in [16] are compared with results
obtained by the programme SLM. Because SLM is based on exactly free
surface conditions, the value of the parameter Ax has to be chosen.
Since the intention is to compare with the linear case, the parameter
Ax has to be chosen in such a way that the slope of the free surface
is small. From the figure it is seen that the maximum value of
oW9(tPo is approximately equal to one. So the chaise has been made:
pw96x/po - 100 or ax = 1000 m.
The agreement in the results are good, and since this case are very
similar to the slamming case for the time-period before the body makes
contact with the water, the programme SLM seems to be well suited for
calculating f lat-bottomed slamming.
As mentioned before the programme SLM-Mod. is not able to calculate
this case proper 1y because a. on the free surface oscillates when
moving along the surface.
FORCE ON CYL I NOER I N HEAVE MOT I ON
u,
~ _
o
-
u,
o
o
o
u,
to
i
a?
Heave ampLetudo:
HA/r - O ~
FaLt~n.on /13/
V~nJo / t5/
' SLM
SLM-Mod
o
_ ~ . . . . I . · · · I ~ I r I I
'0 0 / 0 2 0 3 0 ~' 0 5 0
OMEGA ~
Fig. 4.6 a
FORCE ON CYL I NOER I N HEAVE HOT I ON
In
.
o
u,
o
_ if
Heave amplitude
HA/r = 0 3
I?
FaLLen6en /43/
Venue / 15/
' SLM
~ SLM Hod
T ~ ~ ~ , , I
1 0 2 0
OMEGA
Fig. 4.6 b
259
FORCE ON CYL I NDER I N HEAVE P1OT I ON
.
o
-
u'
o'
o
o'
up,
to
10.0
y
Heave sop ~ LtUde:
HA/r c 0.6
6: ~ F=~neon
\ / ~ V~nJ. /,S/
\ / — ' SLM
~ ~ SLM - ad
Fig. 4 .6 c
7
CHAPTER 5. CALCULATION OF FLAT-BOTTOMED SLAMMING
Sect ion 5.1 G-n_ral
As ment toned at the end of chapter 3 and ~ the programme CHAR-S which
was based on the method described in ref. [17] and the programme
SLM which was developed from section 4.2, will be used as subprogram-
mes in the overal l calculation of the f lat-bottomed slamming problem.
For each t imestep CHAR-S is used to calculate the pressure acting on
ah" water surface between x = -b and x - b. Outside these points the
reassure is Set equal to the atmospheric pressure. The value of the
pressure at the midpoint of each free surface element are then used in
eq~'atir~n (~.11) in order to step the solution in the fluid forward.
In the programme CHAR-S it is necessary to use much smaller timesteps
than wi l l be used in the overal l programme.
When the solut ion in the water region has been obtained at time tj,
then the pressure in the airgap at tj will be calculated. In this
cancellation h(x,t) will be needed, and it is found by the use of
'inPar interpolation between h(x,tj_1) and h(x,tj).
Oh. calcu'at~d pressure distribution in the airgap and the above
statement that the Dressure outside the gap is set equal to the
atmo~nheric pressure together results in a pressure distribution
acting on the water surface which is not smooth at the edge of the
body .
The pressure distribution before and after the flow in the air has
reached supersonic speed are i l lustrated in f ig. 5. I.
In a real case however the pressure distribution will probably be
smoothed out over a distance in the order of magnitude equal to the
width of the airgap at the edge (see [6l ). In the present numerical
r.~1r:~l;~, ion, only the value of the pressure at the midpoint of each
free surface element is used as input to the calculation of the flow
in the f luid. This means that the pressure distribution are smoothed
out over a distance equal to the size of the surface elements.
P ~
.~£tcr the f low has reached
Fig. 4.7 Boundary elements for circular cylinder in forced ~ supersonic speed
heave motion: y(t) = []asin(.`,t), lla/r ~ 0.6, .','r/q - 1.0 ,,~ ~
== ~
on
SURFACE ELEVATION DUE rc PRESSURE El£MLNT I I b ~ x
Up
o
o
to
in
o
to
_ -
10. t.
-b
Fig. 5. l
sec tick! 5 ? t)·mensiona1 analys_s
The Dressure, a, under the body and the surface elevation, A, will be
calculated as a function of x and t. The parameters involved in the
prob l em are:
~a'fwidth of the body
Her . se ang l e
"ass of hotly
Pos i t i on 0 f t he body when t he
numerical calcu'at ion starts
Velocity at this Point
VO
t)-ns. ty o' water Pw
Aemosr,her ic pressure ,Oo
Density of air at atmospheric pressure pa
Ad i aba t i c constant Y
Acceleration of gravity 9
260
b [m]
~ [ ]
M [kg/m]
He
[m]
[m/s ]
[kg/m' 3
[Da]
[kg/m']
[ _ ]
[m/s 2 3
One oQss;b~- choice is then to write that:
p/Do and fib are a 'unct ion of:
x tV VO V M H P
_ _0 _ 0 ~
YPo/Po ~ O b2 ' b , pa , v, r
~ _ _
Here Vo//ypO/po is again the Mach number, and VO/~; has the same
form as a Froude number. Instead of M/oWb2 it would have been
possible to use Mg/pob, but since the motion of the body will be domi-
nated by i ts Mass and the pressure force on the body rather than the
gravi ty force, the former wi l l be used.
In addition to these parameters which describes the physical problem,
the computer programme also contains parameters which def ines how the
free surface initia11y is divided into elements, as well as the
i nterva l At ( t ) between the t imesteps .
In the calculations which have been made with the programme, free
surface elements of eoual length have been used. The number of ele-
ments between x = 0 and x = b is Cal led NA, and NP is as before the
total number of elements along the positive x-axis. This means that
the end of the last element is at the position:
x = bF = NF NA
In the CHAR-S suburogramme, which calculates the pressure in the air,
the number of elements along the x-axis between x = 0 and x/b ~ 1.0 is
N - 2 NA.
Sect ion 5.3 Numerical results and_iscussion
Three cases which has been investigated in the l itterature wi l l be
used for comparison. The f irst one is one of the cases which was
measured experimental ly by Lewison and Maclean [53 . The same case was
also calculated numerical ly by Koehler and Kettleborough [7] . The
model used by Lewison and Maclean was completely flat-bottomed, but
Koehler and Kettleborough made calculations for the same body but with
three different deadrise angles (e = 0. '9 = 0.25 and ~ = 0.5 deg. ).
The two next cases was investigated both experimental ly and numeri-
ca, ly by Verhagen [fi1 . The model is the same for both cases but two
different drop heights are studied.
Data for al l the three cases are given in table 5.1.
___
Case
_ .
A
I 8
Lc
, .
-
b
[ml
._ _
1.5
0.2
0.2
[kg/m]
4014 ~ 0
20.0
20.0
_ _
Table 5.1
Drophe i gh t
[m]
1.52
0.04
0.40
[5], 17]
[6]
[6
In the present work the starting point of the numerical calculation is
selected so that Ho/b = 0.2 in case A and C, and Ho/b = 0.1 in case C,
and then VO is calculated by assuming that only gravity forces are
acting prior to this moment. For case ~ Ho was selected to be the
same as used by Koehler and Kettleborough. The values of Ho and
VO for the three cases are given in table 5.2.
Case Ho VO
[m] 1m/s ]
I A 0.3 -4.88
8 O .02 -O .626
C 0.04 2.66
Table 5.2
261
'n order to compare with the results presented by Koehler and
Kettleborough [71, case A in table 5.1 has been calculated with three
different deadrise-angles. In [7] y = 1.0 was used, but there is no
specific information about the number of elements. However the
f ;gures in [7] indicates that NA = 5. These values together with
NF = 20 has therefore been used in this comparison.
The results are presented in Fig. 5.2-8.
Fig. 5.2 compares the pressure-time history at the centerline. The
curves from [7] are translated along the t-axis so that the body has
the position H = 0.0 at the same time as in the present calculation.
In order to see the effect of the chaise of y, case A with ~ = 0.0,
NA = 5, NF = 20 has been calculated also with y = 1.4. In Fig. 5.10
the pressure at the centerl ine is compared for the two values of the
ad i abatconstant .
In section 5.1 it was mentioned that the discontinous pressure at the
edge of the body wi l l, in the present numerical model, be smoothed out
over a distance equal to the size of the surface elements. To see the
effect of this, case A with ~ = 0.0, y = 1.4 has also been calculated
with NA = 20, NF = 80. The results are given in Fig. 5.11-12. The
inf luence on the pressure and the surface elevation at the centerl ine
is seal l, but the shape of the free surface and the pressure close to
the edge of the body is very different.
NA = 5 is probably far to less to handle the steep pressure-curvature
at the edge of the body, and this value of NA has only been used in
the present work to make the comparison with the results presented by
Koehler and Kettleborough [7].
It may even be that NA = 20 is to smal l but further investigation of
this has not been done.
As mentioned before, case A has also been investigated experimentally.
In !5] time-history curves at x/b = 0.0, 0.5 and 1.0 are prestend. If
those curves sha1 l be compared with the present calculation, it is not
clear where the t-axis shal l start since the position of the body is
not 9 i ven . The same prob l em a l so occurs when pressure- t i me h i story
for case B and C are to be compared with the curves presented in [63.
Koehler and Kettleborough assumes that the maximum impact pressure is
reached a. She moment of contact between the body and the water sur-
face. This would of course solve the problem of locating the t-axis
since the time of maximum pressure is given in the curves presented in
[5] and [6] . However the maximum pressure wi l l probably not be
reached at the moment of contact. The argument for this is that at
the timeinstant when contact is made, results from the present numeri-
cal method shows that the downward velocity of the water surface has
not reached the same magnitude as the velocity of the body. Which
means that after the time of contact the airbubble under the body,
wi l l be compressed for some period of time.
Verhagen [6] uses a simplified method to calculate the pressure in the
airbubble after contact, but it is not indicated on the curves at what
time the contact is made.
Because of this problems, any direct comparison between the pressure-
time history curves presented in [5] and [6] and those calculated by
the present method has not been plotted.
'he results of the present calculation of case B and C are instead
given i Fig. 5.13-16.
The pressure on the centerl ine at the moment of contact as presented
in Fig. 5.12, 1`, 16 is significantly smaller than the maximum
pressure found in [5] and [6].
Koehler and Kettleborough explains this deviation for case A by
assuming that the larger maximum pressure obtained in experiments
occurs because the flat bottom of the body may not be completely
paral lel to the water surface. This explanations may wel l be true,
and the very large influence of small variations in the deadrise-
ans e, which has been calcualated both by Koehler and Kettleborough
r7l and in the oresent work, support this.
However the deviation between the pressure calculated at contact by
the Dresent method and the maximum pressure obtained in experiments
may also be partly explained by assuming that the maximum pressure
will not be reached until a short time-period after the calculated
contact. The argument for this was stated above.
PRESSURE-T I ME H I STORY CURVE
~ 1
o
~_
~o—
r~—
Pr~ont thooru
~ KoahLer /~/
o- I I.,,,I, I i I
0.110 0.115 0.180 0.185 0.190 0.195 0.200
t.VO/b
Fig. 5.2 Case A, ,=1.0, NA=5
SLIRFACE ELEVAT I ON AND POS I T I ON OF BODY
~
- l THETA - O .000 dog
b - 1.500 ~
n - ~o 1' . ooo kg/ -
. HO ~ O .300 n
~n- VO '~ -~.880 m/e
-
o- NA ~ 5
. NF - 20
tVO/b - 0.115000
0 - O. 185000
0_ 1 O. 191200
8-
o.
o'_ _~ttt~
o_ I ' I ' I ' 1 ' I ' I ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 t.4 1.6 t.8 2.0
x~b
Fig. 5.3 Case A, ~ = 1. 0
PRESSLIRE D I STR I BUT I ON
.,
P~ ~ THETA - 0.000 dog
b - 1.500 ~
A° M - 4014.000 koJa
.~ 11 HO - 0.500 ~
N I ~ VO '' ~ .~0 ~.
N I i tVO/b - 0.115000
1 o 1 o. 185000
1 A 1 o. 189000
I / ~ I 0.190000
. I / \ ~ 0.190400
j/ \l O 190800
o 11 \\
~A\\
o_ ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1
0.0 0.2 O.t 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.' 1.6 1.8 2.0
x/b
Fig. S . 4 Case A,
. .
SURFACE EL EVAT I ON AND POS I T I ON OF BODY
-
0
N
,~ 0.—
~ o
-
O- ~
o
O—
o
U)
O—
o
-
-
THETA - 0.250 dog
b - 1.500 ~
M - 4014.000 ko/a
HO s 0.500 ~
VO = - .880 m/e
NA - 5
NF - 20
t.VO/b - 0.180000
O. 190000
O. 195000
~n
oo.- ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 ~ .2 1.' 1.6 ~ .8 2.0
x/b
Fiq. 5.5 Case A, ,=1.0
262
- ~
PRESSURE D I STR I BUT I ON
.
~ THETA ~ 0.250 deg
o~ b - 1.500 ~
M - 4014 .000 kg/m
HO ~ 0.300 a
o_ ll VO- ;~.880~/e
I l (VO/b - O. 190000
I lt 1 0.195800
' ~ O 195000
o_ · 0 0 ~ ~ _',
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 l.2 1.' 1.6 f.8 2.0
x/b
Fig. 5.6 Case A, '=l.O
SURFACE ELEVAT I ON AND POS I T I ON OF BODY
N
0:
8
o
O— ~ I 1 1 1 ' 1 ' 1 - 1 ' 1 ' 1
t0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 o.e 1.0 1.2 1.4r 1.6 1.8 2.0
THETA - 0.500 deg
b - 1.500 ~
M - 40 ~ S.OOO kg/ -
HO ~ 0.500 ~
VO ~ -~.880 - /.
NA - 5
NF - 20
tVO/b - 0.180000
O. 190000
O. f91200
x/b
Fig. 5.7 Case A, >=1.0
PRESSURE D I STR I BUT I ON
0 ~n—
~ _
-
u)~
THETA - O .500 deg
b - ~ .500 n
M - 1014 .000 ko/.
HO = 0 .500 ~
vo ~ -''rr.880 111/8
NA - 5
NF - 20
tVO/b - 0.180000
O. 190000
O. 192000
O. 193000
O. 195600
O. 191200
- _'
o— I . I . I . I · I . I . I . I · I . I
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1 .`rr 1.6 1.8 2.0
x/b
Fig. 5.8 Casr~ A, ~r=1.0
MESSURE-T I ME H I STORY CURVE
0
o
r
o
ID
263
GAMMA
GAM1A
- 1.4r
.` - 1.0
O_ , , , , I , , , , I
8. ,5 0.180 0.185 0.190 0.195
tVO/b
Fig. 5.10 Case A, NA-5
r
SURFACE ELEVAT I ON AND POS I T I ON OF BODY
0
o-
~ 0
-
o-
o
o
o
o
u'
o
o
g
o
THETA - O .000 deg
b - l .500 m
M - 40 /~.000 kg/m
HO = 0 .300 m
VO = -~.880 m/e
NA 8 20
NF ~ 80
tVO/b - O. /15000
O. /83000
O. /88200
f;
o
o- I . I , I . I , I , I , I . I , I . I
0.0 0.2 0.' 0.6 0.8 /.0 1.2 1.' 1.6 1.8 2.0
x/b
Fig. 5.11 Case A, .=1.4
PRESSURE O I STR I BUT I ON
SURFACE ELEVAT I ON AND POS I T I ON OF BODY I
8
o ;
THETA ~ O .000 deo
b - O .200 m
n - 20 .000 kg/m
HO = 0 .020 m
VO = -O .626 m/c
NA - 20
NF - 80
(VO/b ~ O .0150
0.0840
0.0882
~_
o
_ · ~ · I · I · I · I -
0.0 0.2 O.' 0.6 0.8 t.0
l
1.2 l.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
x/b
Fig. 5.13 Case 8, ,=1.4
PRESSVRE D I STR I BUT I ON
THETA - 0.000 deg
b - /.500 ~
rl ~ 4014.000 kg~m
HO '5 0 . ~iOO ~
VO ~ -~.880 e/e
_ :./5
NA - 20
NF - 80
(VO/b - O. /15000
O. /83000
O. /85000
O. /86000
O. /81000
O. /81600
O. 188200
N
_
_ ~
_ ·~ ~
066000000~ ~ i
-
. ~ V
_.
o~ ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 ' I ' 1 ' I ' 1 ' I
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 /.6 1.8 2.0
x/b
Fig. 5.12 Case A, !=1.4
264
Fig. 5.14 Case B. `~51.4
THETA - O .000 deg
b - 0.200 ~
M - 20.000 ko/a
HO 5 0.020 ~
VO - -0.626 - /.
NA - 20
NF - 80
t-VO/b — 0.0800
0.0810
0.0860
O .0e82
0 0 12 0 14 0 16 0 18 1 10 1 12 1 11 1 16 1 18 2 1
U.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.' 1.6 1.8 2.0
x/b
SURFACE ELEVAT I ON AND POS I T I ON OF BODY
o.
~ 0
-
o
o
o
o-
o
8-
o
o
fir.
'0.0 0.2 0.' 0.6 o.e ,.o 1.2 l.'
Fig. 5.15 Case C, >=1.4
PRESSURE D I STR I BUT I ON
_ 1
THETA - 0.000 deg
b - 0.200 ~
M - 20.000 ko/-
HO ~ 0.040 ~
VO ~ -2.658 -/e
NA - 20
NF- 80
tV0/b - 0 .1820
0.1910
O. 1992
~ A_
`'NL:
_'
i
of I I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I ' I
0.0 0.2 0.t 0.6 0.8 t.0 1.2 I.S 1.6 f.8 2.0
x/b
Fig. 5.16 Case C, ,=1.4
THETA - O .000 deg
b - 0 .200 n
n - 20.000 kg/m
HO ~ O .040 a.
V0 = -2.658 a/e
NA - 20
NF- 80
(V0/b - 0. /9f0
0. /950
0.1910
0.998,
0. 1992
265
CHAPTER 6. CONCLUSIONS
The discussion at the end of the previous chapter shows that it is
necessary to calculate the pressure on the bottom of the body also
after the time of contact between the body and the elevated water sur-
face. Without such information it is not possible to compare the
pressure bui ld-up calculated in the time-period before contact by the
present numerical method with experimental results.
As regarding the calculation of the flow in the water, this work has
shown that the method described in section 4.2 may be used in the pre-
sent situation without instability problems, despite the fact that the
integral equation which is used is a Fredholm integral equation of 1.
kind along the entire boundary. The comparison with Doctors which was
made in section 4.4 also indicates that the surface elevation due to a
pressure distribution acting on the water surface is calculated quite
correct l y.
For the purpose of calculating the flow in the air, three methods have
been used. They suoDort each other, but no independent comparison
wi th other resu, ts has been made.
The resul ts of the present work shows that the inf luence of a seal l
dead r i seang 1 e i s very l a rge .
The present work also shows that the smoothening of the calculated
discontinuous pressure distribution has a large effect on the shape of
the water surface and the pressure close to the edge of the body.
REFERENCES
t1] van Karman, T.H., "The impact on Seaplane Floats during
Landing", NACA TN 321, 1929.
[2] Wagner, H., "Uber Stoss und Glei tvorgange an der Oberf lache van
F 1 uss i gke i ten", Ze i tschr . f . Angewandte Matheeat i k und
Mechanik, Band 12, Heft 4, 1932, pp. 193-215.
[3] Chuang, S. L., "Experimental Investigation of Rigid Flat-Bottom
Body Slamming", OTNSROC Report 2041, 1965.
[4] Chuang, S.L., "Experiments on Flat-Bottom Slamming", Journal
of Shin Research, Vol. 10, No. 1, 1966, pp. 10-17.
rS~
Lewison, G. and Maclean, W.M., "On the Cushioning of Water
Impact by Entrapped Ai r", Journal of Ship Research, Vol .
12, No. 2, 1968, pp. 116-130.
[6! Verhagen, J.H.G., "The Impact of a Flat Plate on a Water
Surface", Journal of Ship Research, Vol. 11, No. 4, 1967,
rho. 211-223.
r7l Koeh'e", B.R. and Kettleborough, C.F., "Hydrodynamic Impact of
a Fa, l ing Body upon a Viscous Incompressible Fluid", Jour-
~al of Ship Research, Vol. 21, No. 3, 1977, pp. 165-181.
~82 va~ammoto, Y., Iida, K., Fukasawa, T., Murakami, T., Arai, M.
and Ando, A., "Structural Damage Analysis of a Fast Ship
Due to Bow Flare Slamming", Int. Shipbuilding Progress,
Vol. 32, No. 369, 1985, pp. 124-136.
293 Abbot, M. B., "An Introduct ion to The Method of Characteris-
t i cs ", Amer i can E l sev i er, New York, 1966 .
rho! Ames, W.F., "Numerical Methods for Partial Differential
Eauatior;s", 2. edition, Academic Press, 1977.
[11] Landau, L.D
Press, 1959.
, and Lifshitz, E.M., "Fluid Mechanics", Pergamon
[12! Lister, M., "Mathematical Methods for Digital computers",
edited by Ralston, A. and Wilf, H.S., John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., 1960, pp. 165-180.
'i3! Faltinsen, O.M., "Numerical Solutions of Transient Nonl inear
Free-surface Motion outside or inside Moving Bodies, Proc,
Second Int. conf. Num. Ship Hydro., Berkeley, Sept. 1977,
Dp. 347-357.
f gal
. .
r;5l
Some of the endpoints cannot be found in this way. (See Fig. A.2. )
s Pi Ps
Q 6
A, W.M., Newman, J.N. and Yue, D.K., "Nonlinear Forced
Motions of Floating Bodies", Proc. 15th Symp. Naval Hydro-
dynamics, Hamburg, Sept. 1984, Session I, pp. 1-15.
Vinje, T. and Brevig, P., "Nonl inear Two-Dimensional Ship
Motions", Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Num. Ship Hydro., Paris,
June 1981, pp. 257-266 (See also "Nonl inear Two-Dimensional
Ship Motions", SIS Report No. 18, NHL, Trondheim, 1980).
x=bF
Y ~ ~
_ x
Fig. A.2
The endpoint P in Fig. A.2 is the intersection point between l
1 3 .
Endpoint P s the intersection point between l and
The y-coordinate of endpoint P is:
r'6l, Doctors, L.H., "Solutions of Two-Dimensional Slamming by Means
of Fini te Pressure Elements", Proc. 3rd Int. Conf . Num.
Shio Hydro., Paris, June 1981, pp. 559-577. Y(~36 ) = 2 y(Q ) - y(Ps )
217; Falch, S., "A Numerical Study of Slamming of Two-dimensional and the x-coordinate is:
Bodies", Dr.ing.thesis, Division of Marine Hydrodynamics,
The Norwegian Institute of Technology, 1986. x(P ) = Xb
Append i x A
This appendix describes how new elements on the free surface are
generated and how the velocity potential ~ at the midpoints of the new
elements is calculated in the programme SLM which is based on section
4.2.
Suppose that the fluid-particles at the midpoints of the old elements
on the free surface are given new positions by the use of the time-
stepping procedure described in section 4.2. These new positions are
designated Qj (i = 1,...4) in Fig. A.1.
~< ~
Fig. A. 1
12
Qua
For the new elements which will be generated, the position of the
-ight endpoint of an element is common with the position of the left
endpoint of the next element.
the position of the endpoitn P lying between Q and Q in Fig. A.1 is
f ound as to l l ows:
is the straight line through Q which is parallel with the line
between Q and Q .
3
1 is the straight line through Q which is parallel with the line
between Q and Q . s _s
2 ~ 't (new) = ~ ~ (¢ - ~ ) '
l is the normal at the midpoint on the line between Q and Q . 2 ~ 2 S IS
P is the intersection between l and l
~ a
P is the intersection between l and l
and f inal ly P is the midpoint between P and P .
1 2
_.d l .
~ 3
The y-coordinat of endpoint P is:
3
y(P3) = 2 Y(Qs) ~ Y(P )
and the x-coordinate of endpoint P is found by the condition that
P shal l be on the body surface.
The midpoints of the new elements will not coincide completely with
the points Q. which is the position the f luidparticles was given by
the sidestepping procedure. The time-steping also gives new values of
at the points Q. The value of ~ at the midpoints of the new ele-
ments are then calculated by l inear interpolation along the free sur-
face. An examples of how this is done in detail is illustrated in
Fig. A.3.
and ~ are the values of the velocity potential at Q and Q .
us \
51 \
P
F i g . A . 3
- S 3
:~( n ew )
Q2
P is a newly calculated endpoint, and we want to f ind ~ (new) at the
new midpoint Q (new). s is the distance PQ, s the distance
: · ~ 2
PQ and s is the distance PQ (new). The following expression for
2 3 2
the new velocity Dotential is then used:
266
DISCUSSION
_
by J. Matusiak
My question concerns the importance of air
cushioning loads.
It is obvious that in a case of flat plate
inspecting water surface it has a very
pronounced effect. However an increase of
deadrise angle might significantly increase an
"escape of air" and thus decrease its
influence on slamming loads. Did you conduct a
numerical experiment in which you calculated
loads (both pressures and total forces) for
the air cushioning being included and
disregarded. If so what is practical limit
value of deadrise angle for which air does not
cushion the slamming loads?
Author's Reply
This is of course a most interesting and
important question.
First of all, since I only carry on the
calculation until the moment when the body
makes contact with the water-surface, I do not
find the maximum pressure. Secondly, I did not
make any comparison with slamming loads
calculated without the effect of air cushion,
so I don't know the limit value of the
deadrise angle. But if you look at Figs 5.5-
5.8 in the paper, you can see that a change in
the deadrise angle of half a degree gives a
dramatic change in the result. So my guess is
that the effect of air cushion will be small
for a deadrise angle in the order of one, two
or three degrees.
267
