J M a r s . Techno, (1998) 3 .

4 - 1 0 1 ^ 6 SCieilCe
and Technology
©SNAJ1998

Fully three-dimensional ship seakeeping computations with a

surge-corrected Rankine panel method
V O L K E R B E R T R A M * and GERHARD THIART

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Stellenbosch, 7600 Stellenbosch, South Africa

Abstract: A 3-d seakeeping code uses first-order Rankine harmonic potentials three-dimensionally. For a recent
panels witti special numerical integration on the ship's hull survey of Rankine panel methods for forward-speed
and Rankine point source clusters above the free surface. The seakeeping, we refer to Bertram and Yasukawa.^ Our
code computes the motions of the ship in regular waves of method captures all forward-speed effects, so in addi-
small height (Knearized). The steady flow is captured without tion to the change in encounter frequency, we capture:
simplification by solving the fully nonlinear wave-resistance
problem first. A special treatment of the surge motion con- dynamic trim and sinkage;
siders the influence of periodic quantities on thrust and resis- steady wave profile (average wetted surface) and gener-
tance, and improves surge motion predictions. Radiation and ally the steady wave elevation on the free surface;
open-boundary conditions are enforced by staggered grids. local steady flow field.
Results f o r the I T T C standard test case S-175 containership
agree well with experiments except f o r very long waves. The
importance of capturing the three-dimensional steady flow Pliysical model
contributions is also demonstrated.
We consider a ship with average speed J7 i n a regular
Key words: seakeeping, panel method, containership, surge wave of smafl amphtude h. The boundary conditions
correction w i f l be linearized with respect to h (and all other related
time-harmonic quantities). We refer to Bertram^for an
extensive derivation of the boundary conditions.
The fundamental differential equation for the as-
sumed ideal flow is Laplace's equation, which can be
Introduction interpreted as describing conservation of mass. I n addi-
tion, we formulate the following boundary conditions:
I n their 1950 milestone paper,^ Weinblum and St. Denis
said: "The present hydrodynamic methods used in 1. water does not penetrate the ship hull;
studying problems of seaworthiness are based largely 2. water does not penetrate the free water surface;
on the powerful concept of sources and sinks." Almost 3. there is atmospheric pressure on the free surface;
half a century later, this statement still describes the 4. there is undisturbed flow far away f r o m the ship;
state of the art. O f course, today's methods are far more 5. waves created by the ship propagate away f r o m the
powerful, with the main advances being in capturing ship; for T > 0.25 these waves are limited to a sector
nonlinearities and the three dimensionality of the flow. downstream;
We present here a " f u l l y " three-dimensional Rankine 6. waves created by the ship must leave an artificial
panel method, capturing both the steady and the time- boundary of the computational domain without
reflection;
7. the forces on the ship result in periodic motions. (We
assume that the time-averaged added resistance is
Address correspondence to: V . Bertram, T U H H , Lammersieth compensated by increased propulsion forces, i.e., the
90, 22305 Hamburg, Germany average speed remains constant.)
Received f o r publication on Oct. 6,1997; accepted on Jan. 28,
1998 The radiation condition (5) deserves a more detailed
* Visiting scientist discussion. To date, our method is limited to cases
V . Bertram and G. Thiart: Surge-corrected 3-d seakeeping computations 95

where the parameter T = (O.UIg is larger than 0.25. co, is A l l motions are assumed to be of first-order small.
the encounter frequency, g = 9.81 m/s^. While a number A perturbation formulation for the potential is used
of techniques exist^ to extend Rankine panel methods to omitting higher-order terms,
arbitrary T, these require considerably higher computa-
0? = 0W+0W (1)
tional effort and wih be the subject of a separate future
investigation. For the test case selected here, as for most where 0'"' is the part of the potential independent of
ships, a restriction to T > 0.25 excludes only fohOwing the wave amphtude h. It is the solution of the steady
waves (Fig. 1). For r > 0.25, the radiation condition is wave-resistance problem. is proportional to h and
analogous to the steady wave resistance problem in accounts (linearized) for the contributions of the sea-
shallow water f o r undercritical depth Froude numbers. way. Higher-order (seaway) terms are neglected.
The numerical "shifting" or "staggered grid" technique, We describe the elevation of the free surface ^ i n a
developed originally f o r the steady wave-resistance similar f o r m as the potential, where we exphcitiy specify
case, can be adapted without problems to the time- that quantities are time-harmonic i n O), (solution i n the
harmonic problem" and also automatically fulfills the frequency domain):
open-boundary condition (6).
The problem is formulated i n right-handed Cartesian
4>t(x, y, z; f ) = 0W(x, z]
coordinate systems. The inertial Oxyz system moves
uniformly with velocity U. x points forward and z points + ^ W ( x , y, z; ^) = 0(")(x, y, z]
downward. The Oxyz system is fixed at the ship and
follows its motions. When the ship is at the rest position, + Re(4>^'\x, y, z)e"''' (2)
X, y, and z coincide with x, y, z. The angle of encounter
jJL between the body and the incident wave is defined C'(x, y; ^) = f W ( x , + y; t)
such that jl = 180° denotes a head sea and ji = 90°
denotes a sea f r o m the starboard. = i;^'\x,y) + Re[^^'\x, yy--' (3)
The ship has six degrees of freedom for rigid body
motion, expressed in the motion vector ü = { M J , HJ, U^Y The symbol """ denotes the generally complex ampli-
and the rotational motion vector « = {«4, « 5 , u^Y-{«i, «21 tude of a time-harmonic quantity.
The harmonic potential is decomposed into the
potential of the incident wave f \ the diffraction poten-
«1 is the surge motion of O i n the x-direction, relative
tial ^ , and six radiation potentials
to O;
6
«2 is the sway motion of O in the y-direction, relative to
-h^^'ii. (4)
O;
t=i
H3 is the heave motion of O i n the z-direction, relative
I t is convenient to divide </)"' and <p'' into symmetrical and
to O;
antisymmetrical parts to take advantage of the (usual)
« 4 is the angle of roll = angle of rotation around the
geometrical symmetry:
'x-axis;
is the angle of pitch = angle of rotation around
0'"(x, y, z) + - y , z)
the j-axis;
Wg is the angle of yaw - angle of rotation around the
z-axis.

(5)
T= 0.25 '

/
; i = 45
/ /I = 135°

/
\ ) (6)

T< 0.25 \ T > 0.25

The steady potential can be computed by a " f u l l y
nonlinear" wave resistance program which also yields
second derivatives of the potential using higher-order
F„ = 0.275
panels on the huU.' The second derivatives of the poten-
A/i X/L tial i n the x-direction are limited to the maximum value
at 80% of the ship's length in the aftbody to avoid
Fig. 1. The parameter T= öJ.Wg depends on the angle and
wavelength of the incident wave. Only f o r following and very unrealistically high values at the stern, reflecting to
long quartering waves does T become smaller than 0.25 some extent the effect of viscosity in reality.
96 V . Bertram and G. Thiart: Surge-corrected 3-d seakeeping computations

Tlie linearized potential of the incident wave on fulfilled in a collocation scheme. The cohocation
water of infinite depth is expressed i n the inertial system scheme forms eight systems of linear equations in the
unknown source strengths. The four symmetrical (and
( also the four antisymmetrical) systems of equations
^S^'^ „-ik(x cos fi~y sia tiyicz iai^l
=Re
share the same coefficient matrix with only the right-
hand side being different. A h four cases are solved
(7) simultaneously using Gauss elimination. Then the com-
putation of all potentials and their derivatives at aU
where co = is the frequency of the incident wave, collocation points is straightforward. However, f o r the
co^= {co - kU cos fl I is the frequency of encounter, and total potential, the so-far unknown motion amplitudes
k is the wave number. stih need to be determined.
So the remaining unknowns are the diffraction and The expressions f o r this final step are derived i n prin-
(unit motion) radiation potentials. These are deter- ciple f r o m "force = mass x acceleration" to
mined by solving the Laplace equation subject to the
boundary conditions given below. m\Li + axx ---ax G
A t the average free surface {z =
+
(-£02+5r£»,)^W

ix_g X ïi j -I- / a = -Xg xiaxG

+ V0W(V0WV)V0W = O (8)
+ J i - p{üas + a[xxas)jj(x x «) dS (11)

This equation corresponds to Eq. 3-23 of Newman.*^

a = (V0('')V)V</)(°) is the steady particle acceleration,
a^ = d - { 0 , 0, g}\ B = -(l/af)i(V0(«)fl«). The unsteady pressure is decomposed into contribu-
Let the ship's hull be defined in the ship-fixed sys- tions f r o m the incident wave, diffraction, and radiation,
tem by 5(1) = 0. Then after introducing the m terms
m = {fN)V(f°\ the boundary condition at S{x) = 0
^ p + p<i,s + p U'^ + p d ^ + ^ p ' U i (12)
becomes
where each unsteady pressure component on the right-
hand side is computed i n the linearized f o r m as

^y<pi°)v^i)' (13)

(9) where G= (0, 0, jngY is the ship's weight, in the dis-

placement mass,Xg is the center of gravity, and / is the
matrix of mass inertia moments with respect to the
This equation corresponds to Eq. 3-30 of Newman.** origin of the ship-fixed system. Equation 11 yields a
I n Eqs. 2 and 4, the total velocity potential has been system of linear equations for u, ( i = 1 , . . . , 6) which is
decomposed: quickly solved by Gauss elimination.
|- ^ ^ ^ 6 ^

0' =0(°' +Re + +tpd-" Corrections for surge

'=1 ; J (10)
This equation contains eight unknown potentials (0''-", So far we have considered only the potential flow influ-
and the 0')- These potentials are solved i n a Rank- ences. As well as viscosity, the resistance and propulsion
ine panel method which uses first-order panels (plane characteristics and autopilots (trying to keep the ship on
and constant strength) on the hull (up to a height above a constant course and possibly at a constant speed or
the average wetted surface) and around the ship. The r.p.m.) introduce additional restoring and damping i n -
Laplace equation and the decay condhon (4) are then fluences. We now present an ad hoc approach to correct
automatically fulfihed. surge for the propulsion characteristics.
For the diffraction problem, all and «; are set to The thrust and resistance forces acting on the ship are
zero. For a radiation problem, the relevant motion am- affected by the motion. One could include thrust and
plitude is set to 1. A l l other motion amplitudes, f \ and resistance vectors similar to the weight vector G to ac-
0'' are set to zero. Then the boundary conditions at the count for all motion. However, the main effect comes
free surface (Eq. 8) and the hull condition (Eq. 9) are f r o m surge motions i n long waves, and this allows a
 V . Bertram and G. Ttiiart: Sm-ge-corrected 3-d seakeeping computations 97

somewhat simpler treatment. Surge motions change the Application to the S-175 containership
longitudinal velocity of the ship. The correspondingly
changed resistance and propulsion characteristics of the The S-175 containership (Table 1) was chosen as a test
ship will induce considerable damping of surge motions, case because it is one of the recommended I T T C test
especially for long waves. Also the local orbital velocity cases for seakeeping, and f o r this ship there are also
of the waves may have some influence. I f these effects relatively extensive experimental data for motions i n
are neglected, surge motions may be overestimated by obhque waves.'-^" The tests were carried out at various
the computation. The thrust T,, depends on the instanta- times (and possibly for various unrelated purposes)
neous speed of advance of the propeUer v„: in four Japanese towing tanks (the Ship Research
Institute, Nippon Kokan, Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy
v„ = ( l - w){u + ^ - ( 0 - (x^) + <t>i (x^)), Industries, and Sumitomo Heavy Industries). Owing to
the voluntary nature of the work, the coverage of the
= iVo+Av„ (14)
specified matrix of headings and responses is uneven.
where v„o = (1 - w)U is the speed of advance of the The differences between testing estabhshments were
propeUer at steady speed U, w is the Taylor wake usually relatively small, so that no distinction between
fraction, and the location of the propefler is x^. For the various sources of data has been made here.
long waves, the contribution of the incident wave A l l cases were computed for the design condition with
w i f l dominate and the diffraction part may be ne- F„ = 0.275.
glected.' T,, is developed in a linear Taylor expansion We approximate the propulsion data i n Table 1,
around v„o: based on the propefler data of Zhou.'

r „ » T „ ( v , o ) + Av„r,:(v„,), (15)
Steady flow computation
The calm-water resistance R at an instantaneous
speed is similarly developed i n a Taylor expansion Figure 2 shows the hull grid with 631 elements. The hull
around U\ was modified in the aft region by integrating the rudder
into the huU. For symmetric motions, this will have only
a negligible effect, but for antisymmetric motions it
R ^ R ( U ) + AUR'(U) = R(U) + (Ü,-V,,^)R'(U] (16)
should capture the physics better than omitting the rud-
der totally. A better modelling of this region would
V = (17) require the inclusion of viscous effects and the propeller
action as well, which is beyond the scope of our current
S} ' ,(0)
abihties.
I n a first step, the nonlinear wave-resistance problem
where v^^f approximates the influence of the orbital ve- was solved to determine the steady potential and its
locity averaging over the wetted surface of the ship. For derivatives. The structured grid on the free surface used
short waves, this wifl lead automatically to negligible 1430 elements. The steady computation converged rap-
values, leaving contributions only f o r long waves.
Thrust and resistance at calm-water speed cancel out,
yielding
Table 1. Principal particulars of S-175 containership
(l-t)T,-R = ((l-t)(l-w)T,:-R')u,
Length 175.00 m
- ( 1 - t)(l - w)T,:(^^' (x^) + 0i {x^)) + v,,R' (18) Width B 25.40 m
Draft AP T 9.50 m
D r a f t FP 9.50 m
This expression is added as a correction on the right-
Block coeff. 0.5716
hand side o f t h e first component of vector Eq. 11. The lij Wetted surface 5540 m2
term can be interpreted as surge damping; the remain- before L^p/l 2.48 m
ing terms contribute to the exciting surge force. T,', R', Zg below C W L -0.02 m
thrust deduction fraction t, and w are taken f r o m model Mass m
tests or—if these are not avaflable—approximated Radius of inertia 8.33 m
Radius of inertia K 42.00 m
by empirical formulas.^ We used a resistance estimation
Radius of inertia K 42.00 m
following Guldhammer-Harvald in our results. Radius of inertia 0.00 m
Numerical tests for our case, however, showed that Resistance slope R' 500000 Ns/m
the inclusion of the last two terms in Eq. 18 always Reduced thrust slope (1 - 0(1 - -150000 Ns/m
affects the resuhs by less than 1 % and may therefore be Propeller location -87.5 m
4.8 m
omitted. ^p
98 V . Bertram and G. Ttiiart: Surge-corrected 3-d seakeeping computations

idly, reducing the error on the free surface to 0.03% of i.e., no trim and sinkage, flat free surface, uniform flow,
the hnear solution within three iterative steps. Sinkage and integration only to the calm-waterline. This ap-
was 0.0025 L^^ and trimT).00045aft, which appears plau- proximation yields differences in the heave and phch
sible, although no experimental data are available for motions of up to 20% for medium wave lengths, which
comparison. The wave pattern appeared plausible with- are simflar to recent M I T results" with a time-domain
out any noticable reflections at the open boundary (Fig. code that captures the higher-order seakeeping contri-
3). Overafl, the result of the steady computation gave no butions, but only approximates the steady flow contri-
indication of undue errors. butions. The results for the two computational methods
for very long and short waves show better agreement.
Similar effects were observed for a Series-60 ship."^"
Sea keep ing compu ta tions
These pubhcations also demonstrate that the local pres-
The same discretized hufl model was used for the sures in the bow change by up to 20% between a "fully
seakeeping computations. The grid on the free surface 3-d" solution and a 3-d seakeeping solution based on
had about 1300 elements (on the starboard half only). the classical approximation of the steady flow compo-
Figure 4 shows the response amplitude operators for nents. The surge correction has a significant effect only
motions. The results of our panel method generally for long waves (low frequencies). This effect is naturally
agree well with experiments for all motions and all fre- most pronounced for the surge motions, where it re-
quencies, in both absolute values and phases. Only for duces the surge motion for the longest wave by 20%,
higher frequencies do experimental and computed but due to cross-coupling a smafler effect is also appar-
phases differ, sometimes considerably. However, in ent for pitch motions.
these cases the absolute values are almost zero, and in There are several steady free-surface effects which in
this case the phase is insignificant. sum create these differences. One of these effects can be
The heave motion f o r low frequency shows a slight incorporated relatively simply in all seakeeping meth-
inflection, but is stifl close to the experimental values. ods, i.e., dynamic trim and sinkage. The dynamic trim
We suspect that this may be induced by discretization and sinkage may be computed by any Rankine panel
errors. Other ships, hke a Series-60 of similar block method or estimated by simpler methods. Then for the
coefficient, did not exhibit this behavior. resulting geometry a Green function method grid or a
The computed surge motions for low frequencies are strip method grid may be created. To illustrate the influ-
somewhat higher than those measured. The reason is ence of just the effect of trim and sinkage, the computa-
unclear, but could lie in nonlinear effects or margins of tions were repeated with trim and sinkage suppressed
errors i n the experiments. in the steady computations. Figure 5 compares the
For comparison, we also show results for the same results. The influence, on heave is negligible in this
grids, but with the classical steady-flow approximation. case except for one rather low frequency. However, for

Fig. 2. Discretization of a S-175 container

ship, including the rudder
V . Bertram and G. Tliiart: Surge-corrected 3-d seakeeping computations 99

1.0

.3 4 ^^/L/g

-90

tl.Y

[h\/kh
\Ü3\/h
1.(1

1.0 1

0.5 ^
0.5

Fig. 4. Response amplitude operators for S-

175, \i = 180°, F„ = 0.275. • , experiment; o,
4 ui^/Lfg Rankine panel method ( R P M ) with all forward-
speed effects; *, R P M with classical uniform
90 90 flow approximation; +, R P M without surge cor-
0 rection. The classical approximation introduces
-90 -90 differences of up to 20% i n the medium fre-
quency (medium wavelength) region

\ü,\/kh
\Ü3\/h
1.0

1.0

0.,5
0.5

3 4 w^yL/g 2 3 4 uWL/g
« .
90-1 90 ^
Fig. 5. Response amplitude operators f o r
0 0 S-175, fl = 180°, F„ = 0.275. •, experiment;
-90-1 -90 o, R P M with all forward-speed effects; *,
R P M with trim and sinkage suppressed

pitch in medium to long waves, about half of the The results for oblique waves (ji = 150°) show a simi-
discrepancy between the results, considering all larly good agreement f o r the symmetric motion modes
forward-speed effects and the classical approximation, (Fig. 6). For the antisymmetric modes, computation and
can apparently be attributed to not capturing trim and experiment agree well f o r rolling. For very long waves,
sinkage. the response amplitude operator rises sharply. While
100 V . Bertram and G. Thiart: Surge-corrected 3-d seakeeping computations

\Ü2\lh
1,0

\uMh

1.0 0.5 ^

4 wi/i/s 1 2 3 4 wyjLlg

90 901

-90 o o o o -90

2.0

1.0 -

1.0

0.5-

I O • O p O-
1 2 3 4 i^^/Lfg 1 2 4 WT/L/a

901 90

-90- -90

kh
1.0- 1.0

0.5 1 0.5

1 2 3 4 w^L/g 3 4 ujyjLjg

90- 90

0 Fig. 6. Response amplitude operators for

-90- -90 S-175, [I = 150°, F„ = 0.275. •, experiment;
o, R P M with all forward-speed effects

there is no experimental data for the lowest frequency Conclusion

(longest wave) computed, the computed value of 12 is
unreahstically high. This is attributed to the neglect of As far as the results obtained so far ahow any con-
viscous damping and nonhnear effects, and will be sub- clusions, capturing the steady flow in seakeeping
ject to further investigation. Yaw and sway look plau- computations apparently increases the accuracy of
sible except f o r a similar sharp increase for the longest predictions considerably. The agreement with experi-
wave. ments seems good, at least for slender ships, with
V . Bertram and G. Thiart: Surge-corrected 3-d seakeeping computations 101

the exception of resonance regions f o r the antisymmet- 2. Bertram V, YasUkawa H (1996) Rankine source methods for
ric modes of motion. The investigated surge correction is seakeeping problems. Jahrbuch Schiffbautechn. Gesellschaft,
Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 411^25
easy to implement, especially i f the last two terms, which
3. Bertram V (1996) A 3-d Rankine panel method to compute added
were found to contribute less than 1 % i n numerical tests, resistance of ships. IfS Report 566, University of Hamburg
are omitted. Stih many open questions remain. System- 4. Bertram V (1990) Fulfilling open-boundary and radiation condi-
atic grid refinement tests were performed. W h i l e the tion in free-surface problems using Rankine sources. Ship
Technol Res 37(2):47-52
investigated grids were close to the computer capacity
5. Hughes M , Bertram V (1995) A higher-order panel method
available to us (EWS), and the grids were fine enough for steady 3-d free-surface flows. IfS Report 558, University of
for what is today's standard i n steady computations, we Hamburg
cannot exclude the possibihty that discretization errors 6. Newman JN (1978) The theory of ship motions. Adv Appl Mech
may still play a role. M o r e important is that viscous 18:222-283
7. Zhou Y (1989) Bestimmung der im Seegang zusatzlich
effects are not yet included f o r the antisymmetric erforderlichen Antriebsleistung von Schiffen. IfS Report 490,
modes, and that the method is stih hmited to T > 0.25. University of Hamburg
M u c h more research and development work w i h 8. Schneekluth H (1988) Hydrodynamik zum Schiffsentwurf.
be necessary before the method can be regarded as a Koehler, Hamburg
9. ITTC (1978) Seakeeping committee report. 15th International
practical tool. I n the meantime, it allows numerical Towing Tank Conference, The Hague, pp 55-114
study of the effects of widely adapted simplifications, 10. ITTC (1981) Seakeeping committee report. 16th International
and some of the techniques presented can be included i n Towing Tank Conference, Leningrad, pp 185-247
other approaches such as strip methods or Green-func- 11. Huang Y, Sclavounos P (1997) Nonlinear ship wave simulations
by a Rankine panel method. 12th International Workshop Water
tion methods. Waves and Floating Bodies, Marseilles
12. Bertram V (1997) Vergleich verschiedener 3D-Verfahren zur
Berechnung des Seeverhaltens von Schiffen. Jahrbuch Schiff-
bautechn. Gesellschaft, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg
13. Bertram V (1997) The influence of the steady flow in seakeeping
computations. 5th International Symposium Nonlinear and Free-
References
Surface Flows, Hiroshima, pp 29-32
14. Bertram V (1998) Numerical investigation of steady flow effects
1. Weinblum G, St Denis M (1950) On the motions of ships at sea. in 3-d seakeeping computations. 22nd Symposium Naval Hydro-
SNAME Trans 58:184-248 dynamics, Washington