Numerical Investigation of Interceptor Bulb to Improve Trim Control

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Naval Architecture Department, Diponegoro University, Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia

Abstract

This study addresses interceptor devices to improve the hydrodynamic characteristic of autonomous unmanned surface vehicle (USV). The bulb and rectangular interceptors had molded on a planning hull. This research aims to mitigate drag impact on rectangular interceptors at high speeds. According to this study, a bulb interceptor had a better impact than a rectangular interceptor. This research is based on the finite volume method (FVM) with dynamic fluid-body interaction (DFBI), which captured the ship’s dynamic trim and sinkage. The simulation used an overset mesh technique with two domains as a donor-acceptor cell. Furthermore, numerical calculations using the Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes equation and the k-turbulence model predict the turbulent flow. Grid independence studies and international towing tank conference (ITTC) recommendations have been applied to ensure simulation accuracy. This study reported that the bulb interceptor had effectiveness between 9%-25% compared to the rectangular interceptor at high speed. This research showed that the bulb interceptor had better effectiveness than the rectangular interceptor.

Graphical Abstract

Numerical Investigation of Interceptor Bulb to Improve Trim Control

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Han J, Cho Y, Kim J, Kim J, Son Ns, Kim SY. Autonomous collision detection and avoidance for ARAGON USV: Development and field tests. Journal of Field Robotics. 2020;37(6):987-1002. https://doi.org/10.1002/rob.21935
  2. Perera LP, Ferrari V, Santos FP, Hinostroza MA, Soares CG. Experimental evaluations on ship autonomous navigation and collision avoidance by intelligent guidance. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering. 2014;40(2):374-87. https://doi.org/10.1109/JOE.2014.2304793
  3. Tang P, Zhang R, Liu D, Huang L, Liu G, Deng T. Local reactive obstacle avoidance approach for high-speed unmanned surface vehicle. Ocean engineering. 2015;106:128-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.06.055
  4. Du X-x, Wang H, Hao C-z, Li X-l. Analysis of hydrodynamic characteristics of unmanned underwater vehicle moving close to the sea bottom. Defence Technology. 2014;10(1):76-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dt.2014.01.007
  5. Campana EF, Diez M, Liuzzi G, Lucidi S, Pellegrini R, Piccialli V, et al. A multi-objective DIRECT algorithm for ship hull optimization. Computational optimization and applications. 2018;71:53-72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10589-017-9955-0
  6. Diez M, Serani A, Campana E, Stern F, Campana E, editors. CFD-based stochastic optimization of a destroyer hull form for realistic ocean operations. 14th International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation, Nantes, France; 2017.
  7. Budiyanto MA, Novri J, editors. Analysis of convergent and divergent-convergent nozzle of waterjet propulsion by ansys fluent simulation. RINA, Royal Institution of Naval Architects-5th International Conference on Ship and Offshore Technology: Development in Ships Design and Construction, ICSOT 2017; 2017: Royal Institution of Naval Architects.
  8. Yaakob O, Shamsuddin S, King KK. Stern flap for resistance reduction of planing hull craft: a case study with a fast crew boat model. Jurnal Teknologi. 2004;41:43-52. https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v41.689
  9. Budiarto U, Samuel S, Wijaya AA, Yulianti S, Kiryanto K, Iqbal M. Stern flap application on planing hulls to improve resistance. International Journal of Engineering, Transactions C: Aspects. 2022;35(12):2313-20. https://doi.org/10.5829/IJE.2022.35.12C.06
  10. Yanuar Y, Fatimatuzzahra F, Alief M, Akbar M, Gunawan G, Wibisono IG, editors. The characteristics of variation the angle of attack hydrofoil on winged air induction pipe toward ship drag reduction using numerical method. AIP Conference Proceedings; 2020: AIP Publishing.
  11. Suneela J, Krishnankutty P, Subramanian VA. Hydrodynamic performance of planing craft with interceptor-flap hybrid combination. Journal of Ocean Engineering and Marine Energy. 2021;7:421-38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40722-021-00211-0
  12. Samuel S, Yulianti S, Manik P, Trimulyono A, Firdhaus A, Tuswan T, et al. Numerical Research on the Influence of Interceptor Flaps on the Planing Hydrodynamic Performance. NAŠE MORE: znanstveni časopis za more i pomorstvo. 2023;70(4):219-27. https://doi.org/10.17818/NM/2023/4.4
  13. Samuel, Trimulyono A, Manik P, Chrismianto D. A numerical study of spray strips analysis on fridsma hull form. Fluids. 2021;6(11):420. https://doi.org/10.3390/fluids6110420
  14. Lakatoš M, Sahk T, Andreasson H, Tabri K. The effect of spray rails, chine strips and V-shaped spray interceptors on the performance of low planing high-speed craft in calm water. Applied Ocean Research. 2022;122:103131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2022.103131
  15. Molchanov B, Lundmark S, Fürth M, Green M. Experimental validation of spray deflectors for high speed craft. Ocean Engineering. 2019;191:106482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.106482
  16. Park J-Y, Choi H, Lee J, Choi H, Woo J, Kim S, et al. An experimental study on vertical motion control of a high-speed planing vessel using a controllable interceptor in waves. Ocean Engineering. 2019;173:841-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.01.019
  17. Seok W, Park SY, Rhee SH. An experimental study on the stern bottom pressure distribution of a high-speed planing vessel with and without interceptors. International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering. 2020;12:691-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2020.08.003
  18. Deng R, Chen S, Wu T, Luo F, Jiang D, Li Y. Investigation on the influence induced by interceptor on the viscous flow field of deep-Vee vessel. Ocean Engineering. 2020;196:106735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.106735
  19. Samuel S, Mursid O, Yulianti S, Kiryanto K, Iqbal M. Evaluation of interceptor design to reduce drag on planing hull. Brodogradnja: Teorija i praksa brodogradnje i pomorske tehnike. 2022;73(3):93-110. https://doi.org/10.21278/brod73306
  20. Jangam S. CFD based prediction on hydrodynamic effects of Interceptor and flap combination on planing hull. Ocean Engineering. 2022;264:112523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.112523
  21. Sahin OS, Kahramanoglu E, Cakici F. Numerical evaluation on the effects of interceptor layout and blade heights for a prismatic planing hull. Applied Ocean Research. 2022;127:103302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2022.103302
  22. Samuel S, Yulianti S, Manik P, editors. A Study of the Resistance Components of Planing Hull Using Interceptors. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; 2023: IOP Publishing.
  23. Chew Y, Pan L, Lee T. Numerical simulation of the effect of a moving wall on separation of flow past a symmetrical aerofoil. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power and Energy. 1998;212(1):69-77. https://doi.org/10.1243/0957650981536736
  24. Bouak F, Lemay J. Passive control of the aerodynamic forces acting on a circular cylinder. Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science. 1998;16(1-2):112-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0894-1777(97)10010-3
  25. Mansoori M, Fernandes A. Interceptor and trim tab combination to prevent interceptor's unfit effects. Ocean engineering. 2017;134:140-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.02.024
  26. Ju K, Krounbi MT. United States Patent to. 1995.
  27. Wei Z, Zang B, New T, Cui Y. A proper orthogonal decomposition study on the unsteady flow behaviour of a hydrofoil with leading-edge tubercles. Ocean Engineering. 2016;121:356-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2016.05.043
  28. Fu Y, Yuan C, Bai X. Marine drag reduction of shark skin inspired riblet surfaces. Biosurface and Biotribology. 2017;3(1):11-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bsbt.2017.02.001
  29. Kim DJ, Kim SY, You YJ, Rhee KP, Kim SH, Kim YG. Design of high-speed planing hulls for the improvement of resistance and seakeeping performance. International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering. 2013;5(1):161-77. https://doi.org/10.2478/ijnaoe-2013-0124
  30. ITTC R. procedures and guidelines: practical guidelines for ship CFD applications, 7.5. ITTC: Boulder, CO, USA. 2011.
  31. Yulianti S, Samuel S, Nainggolan T, Iqbal M, editors. Meshing generation strategy for prediction of ship resistance using CFD approach. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science; 2022: IOP Publishing.
  32. De Marco A, Mancini S, Miranda S, Scognamiglio R, Vitiello L. Experimental and numerical hydrodynamic analysis of a stepped planing hull. Applied Ocean Research. 2017;64:135-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2017.02.004
  33. Sukas OF, Kinaci OK, Cakici F, Gokce MK. Hydrodynamic assessment of planing hulls using overset grids. Applied Ocean Research. 2017;65:35-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2017.03.015
  34. Hosseini A, Tavakoli S, Dashtimanesh A, Sahoo PK, Kõrgesaar M. Performance prediction of a hard-chine planing hull by employing different cfd models. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering. 2021;9(5):481. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9050481
  35. Brizzolara S, Serra F, editors. Accuracy of CFD codes in the prediction of planing surfaces hydrodynamic characteristics. 2nd International Conference on Marine Research and Transportation; 2007.
  36. Avci AG, Barlas B. An experimental investigation of interceptors for a high speed hull. International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering. 2019;11(1):256-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2018.05.001
International Journal of Engineering
Volume 37, Issue 8
TRANSACTIONS B: Applications
August 2024
Pages 1475-1485

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics