System disruptions
We are currently experiencing disruptions on the search portals due to high traffic. We are working to resolve the issue, you may temporarily encounter an error message.
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Review and comparison of methods to model ship hull roughness
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden.
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden.
Jotun A/S, Norway.
SSPA Sweden AB, Sweden.
Show others and affiliations
2020 (English)In: Applied Ocean Research, ISSN 0141-1187, E-ISSN 1879-1549, Vol. 99, article id 102119Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

There is a large body of research available focusing on how ship hull conditions, including various hull coatings, coating defects, and biofouling, influence the boundary layer, and hence resistance and wake field of a ship. Despite this there seems to be little consensus or established best practice within the ship design community on how to model hull roughness for ship-scale CFD. This study reviews and compares proposed methods to model hull roughness, to support its use in the ship design community. The impact of various types of roughness on additional resistance and wake fields are computed and presented for the well-established test case KVLCC2. The surfaces included in the review are divided into three groups: 1) high quality, newly painted surfaces, 2) surfaces with different extent of poor paint application and/or hull coating damages; and 3) surfaces covered with light slime layers. The review shows the use of a variety of roughness functions, both Colebrook-type and inflectional with three distinct flow regimes, as well as a variety of strategies to obtain the roughness length scales. We do not observe any convergence within the research community towards specific roughness functions or methods to obtain the roughness length scales. The comparison using KVLCC2 clearly illustrates that disparities in surface texture cause large differences in additional resistance, and consequently no strong correlation to a single parameter, e.g. AHR (Average Hull Roughness). This implies that, to be able to select a suitable hull roughness model for a CFD-setup, more details of the surface characteristics are required, such as hydrodynamic characterization of hull coating and expected fouling. © 2020 The Authors

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier Ltd , 2020. Vol. 99, article id 102119
Keywords [en]
Fouling, Hull roughness, KVLCC2, Roughness function, Ship-scale CFD, Boundary layers, Coatings, Computational fluid dynamics, Electromagnetic wave propagation in plasma, Ship models, Shipbuilding, Surface roughness, Textures, Wakes, Additional resistances, Comparison of methods, Hydrodynamic characterization, Paint applications, Research communities, Strong correlation, Surface characteristics, Hulls (ship), comparative study, hull, literature review, numerical model, roughness, shipping
National Category
Mechanical Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ri:diva-71843DOI: 10.1016/j.apor.2020.102119Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85083896369OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ri-71843DiVA, id: diva2:1839257
Note

Funding details: National Science Council, NSC; Funding details: Energimyndigheten, 38849-1, 38849-2; Funding details: Trafikverket, TRV 2018/76560; Funding text 1: This research is supported by the Swedish Energy Agency (grant number 38849-1 and 38849-2 ), the Swedish Transport Administration (grant number TRV 2018/76560 ) and Kongsberg Maritime Sweden through the University Technology Centre in Computational Hydrodynamics hosted by the Department of Mechanics and Maritime Sciences at Chalmers. The simulations were performed on resources at Chalmers Centre for Computational Science and Engineering (C3SE) and National Supercomputer Centre in Sweden (NSC), both provided by the Swedish National Infrastructure for Computing (SNIC).; Funding text 2: This research is supported by the Swedish Energy Agency (grant number 38849-1 and 38849-2), the Swedish Transport Administration (grant number TRV 2018/76560) and Kongsberg Maritime Sweden through the University Technology Centre in Computational Hydrodynamics hosted by the Department of Mechanics and Maritime Sciences at Chalmers. The simulations were performed on resources at Chalmers Centre for Computational Science and Engineering (C3SE) and National Supercomputer Centre in Sweden (NSC), both provided by the Swedish National Infrastructure for Computing (SNIC).

Available from: 2024-02-20 Created: 2024-02-20 Last updated: 2024-02-20Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus
In the same journal
Applied Ocean Research
Mechanical Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 8 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf