Numerical investigation on the effect of interceptor mechanism on maneuvering derivatives

References

• Abkowitz MA. 1964. Lectures on ship hydrodynamics steering and maneuverability technical report. Technical Report Hy-5. Lyngby (Denmark): Hydro and Aerodynamic Laboratory.
   Google Scholar
• Cakici F, Kahramanoglu E, Duman S, Alkan AD. 2018. A new URANS based approach on the prediction of vertical motions of a surface combatant in head waves. Ocean Eng. 162:21–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Çelik I, Ghia U, Roache P, Fretias CJ, Coleman H, Raad PE. 2008. Procedure for estimation and reporting of uncertainty due to discretization in CFD applications. J Fluids Eng 130(7):078001–078001–4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Day AH, Cooper C. 2011. An experimental study of interceptors for drag reduction on high-performance sailing yachts. Ocean Eng. 38(8–9):983–994.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Luca F., Mancini S., Miranda S., Pensa C. 2016. An extended verification and validation study of CFD simulations for planning hulls. J Ship Res. 60(2):101–118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Luca F, Pensa C. 2012. Experimental investigation on conventional and unconventional interceptors. Trans RINA Part B Int J Small Craft Tech. 153:B65–B72.
   Google Scholar
• De Luca F, Pensa C. 2017. The Naples warped hard chine hulls systematic series. Ocean Eng. 139:205–236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duman S, Bal S. 2019. Prediction of maneuvering coefficients of Delft catamaran 372 hull form. Presented at the 18th International Maritime Association of the Mediterranean; Varna, Bulgaria.
   Google Scholar
• Duman S, Bal S. 2022. Turn and zigzag manoeuvres of Delft catamaran 372 using CFD-based system simulation method. Ocean Eng. 264:112265.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foroushani JA, Sabzpooshani M. 2021. Determination of hydrodynamic derivatives of an ocean vehicle using cfd analyses of synthetic standard dynamic tests. Appl Ocean Res. 108:102539.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fossen TI. 1994. Guidance and control of ocean vehicles. New York: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Ghadimi P, Panahi S. 2019. Numerical investigation of hydrodynamic forces acting on the non-stepped and double-stepped planing hulls during yawed steady motion. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part M J Eng Marit Environ. 233(2):428–442.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghadimi P, Sajedi SM, Tavakoli S. 2019. Experimental study of the wedge effects on the performance of a hard-chine planning craft in calm water. Scientia Iranica. 26(3):1316–1334.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ITTC. 1999. Final report and recommendations to the 22nd ITTC.
   Google Scholar
• Jangam S. 2021. Pressure distribution on planing hull bottom with stern interceptor. Appl Ocean Res. 117(4):102953.
   Google Scholar
• Jangam S, Sahoo P. 2021. Numerical investigation of interceptor effect on seakeeping behaviour of planning hull advancing in regular head waves. Brodogradnja. 72(2):73–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Judge C. 2000. A theory for asymmetric vessel impact with horizontal impact velocity [PhD dissertation]. University of Michigan.
   Google Scholar
• Kahramanoğlu E. 2021. The effect of forward speed on sway force and yaw moment for planing hulls. GMO J Ship Mar Technol. 220:192–208.
   Google Scholar
• Kahramanoğlu E, Çakıcı F, Doğrul A. 2020. Numerical prediction of the vertical responses of planing hulls in regular head waves. J Mar Sci Eng 8(6).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karimi MH, Seif MS, Abbaspoor M. 2013. An experimental study of interceptor’s effectiveness on hydrodynamic performance of high-speed planing crafts. Pol Marit Res. 20(2):21–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katayama T, Kimoto R, Ikeda Y. 2005. Effects of running attitudes on manoeuvring hydrodynamic forces for planing hulls. International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation (FAST); St. Petersburg, Russia.
   Google Scholar
• Katayama T., Taniguchi T., Fujii H., Ikeda Y. 2009. Development of maneuvering simulation method for high speed craft using hydrodynamic forces obtained from model tests. In: 10th International Conference on Fast Sea Transportation (FAST). Athens, Greece.
   Google Scholar
• Kazerooni MF, Seif MS. 2017. Experimental evaluation of forward speed effect on maneuvering hydrodynamic derivatives of a planing hull. Sci J Marit Univ Szczec. 49(121):40–53.
   Google Scholar
• Kimoto R, Ikeda Y, Katayama T. 2004. Effects of running attitude on hydrodynamic forces for oblique towed planing craft. Proceedings of the 2nd Asia-Pacific Workshop Hydrodynamics; p. 115–122.
   Google Scholar
• Lewandowski EM. 1994. Trajectory prediction for high-speed planing craft. Int J Shipbuild Prog. 41:137–148.
   Google Scholar
• Lewandowski EM. 1995. The transverse dynamic stability of hard chine planing craft. Paper Presented at: Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Practical Design of Ships and Mobile Units; Seoul, Korea.
   Google Scholar
• Lewandowski EM. 1996. Prediction of the dynamic roll stability of hard-Chine planing craft. J Ship Res. 40:144–148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansoori M, Fernandes AC. 2015. Hydrodynamics of the interceptor on a 2-D flat plate by CFD and experiments. J Hydrodynam. 27(6):919–933.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansoori M, Fernandes AC. 2016. The interceptor hydrodynamic analysis for controlling the porpoising instability in high speed crafts. Appl Ocean Res. 57:40–51.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansoori M, Fernandes AC, Ghassemi H. 2017. Interceptor design for optimum trim control and minimum resistance of planing boats. Appl Ocean Res. 69:100–115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morabito MG. 2015. Prediction of planing hull side forces in yaw using slender body oblique impact theory. Ocean Eng. 101:47–57.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norrbin NH. 1970. Theory and observation on the use of a mathematical model for ship manoeuvring in deep and confined waters. 8th symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics; USA.
   Google Scholar
• Park J-Y, Choi H, Lee J, Choi H, Woo J, Kim S, Kim DJ, Kim SY, Kim N. 2019. An experimental study on vertical motion control of a high-speed planing vessel using a controllable interceptor in waves. Ocean Eng. 173:841–850.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plante M, Toxopeus S, Blok J, Keuning A. 1998. Hydrodynamic manoeuvring aspects of planing craft. International Symposium and Workshop on Forces Acting on a Manoeuvring Vessel; Val de Reuil, France.
   Google Scholar
• Roache PJ. 1998. Verification of codes and calculations. AIAA J. 36(5):696–702.
   Google Scholar
• Sahin OS, Kahramanoglu E, Cakici F. 2022. Numerical evaluation on the effects of interceptor layout and blade heights for a prismatic planing hull. Appl Ocean Res. 127:103302.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sahin OS, Kahramanoglu E, Cakici F, Pesman E. 2023. Control of dynamic trim for planing vessels with interceptors in terms of comfort and minimum drag. Brodogradnja. 74(1):1–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savitsky D, Brown WP. 1976. Procedures for hydrodynamic evaluation of planning hulls in smooth and rough water. Mar Technol. 13(4):381–400.
   Google Scholar
• Seok W, Park SY, Rhee SH. 2020. An experimental study on the stern bottom pressure distribution of a high-speed planing vessel with and without interceptors. Int J Naval Architect Ocean Eng. 12:691–698.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SNAME. 1950. Nomenclature for treating the motion of a submerged body through a fluid. The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers. Technical and Research Bulletin No 1–5.
   Google Scholar
• Sukas OF, Kinaci OK, Bal S. 2019. Theoretical background and application of MANSIM for ship maneuvering simulations. Ocean Eng. 192:106239.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sukas OF, Kinaci OK, Bal S. 2021. Asymmetric ship maneuvering due to twisted rudder using system-based and direct CFD approaches. Appl Ocean Res. 108:102529.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sukas OF, Kinaci OK, Cakici F, Gokce MK. 2017. Hydrodynamic assessment of planing hulls using overset grids. Appl Ocean Res 65:35–46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yasukawa H, Yoshimura Y. 2015. Introduction of MMG standard method for ship maneuvering predictions. J Mar Sci Technol 20:37–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoon H, Simonsen CD, Benedetti L, Longo J, Toda Y, Stern F. 2015. Benchmark CFD validation data for surface combatant 5415 in PMM maneuvers – part I: force/moment/motion measurements. Ocean Eng. 109:705–734.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoshimura Y. 2005. Mathematical model for manoeuvring ship motion (MMG model). Workshop on Mathematical Models for Operations Involving Ship-Ship Interaction; Tokyo, Japan; p. 1–6.
   Google Scholar