Case 1.1: KVLCC2 Deep water, forces & moments
CASE 1.1 (case 1.1.1 and 1.1.2)
1.1 Description of case
- KVLCC2 hull shape
- Fixed in surge, sway, roll and yaw. Upright condition (Ø=0). The experimental results are obtained free to trim and sink
- Calm water
- Deep water. The results will be compared to experiments carried out at a water depth to draught ratio 13.4.
- LPP = 6.893 m (scale 46.426)
- Vmodel=1.1702 m/s, Fn = 0.142 (corresponding to full scale 15.5 knots)
- g = 9.81 [m/s2], ρ=1000 [kg/m3]; ν=1.27×10-6 [m2/s]
- Propeller present. The propeller should work at the propeller point so that there is self propulsion at Vmodel=1.1702 m/s, Fn = 0.142 (corresponding to full scale 15.5 knots). During the model tests, the propeller was working at 9.9 rev/s.
- Rudder present, but at zero rudder angle (exactly zero).
1.2 Experimental data
The submissions will be compared to model tests carried out by HMRI (Hyundai Maritime Research Institute) in 2013. These model tests were with propeller.
Reference: Sung, Y.J., Park,S-H., Ahn, K-S., Chung, S-H., Shin, S.S. and Jae-Hyoung, J. “Evaluation on Deep Water Manoeuvring Performances of KVLCC2 Based on PMM Test and RANS Simulation” Hyundai Heavy Industries Co., Ltd and CD-Adapco Korea, Republic of Korea. Proceedings of SIMMAN 2014
1.3 Requested computations
The requested info comes in 2 cases.
- You can only submit case 1.1.2 when you delivered case 1.1.1
- You can only deliver case 1.1.2 package 2 when you deliver case 1.1.2 package 1.
- You can only deliver case 1.1.2 package 3 when you deliver case 1.1.2 package 2.
Forces and moments should be supplied as follows:
- The N-moment (moment around the z-axis) should be supplied w.r.t. the midship.
- Only the hydrodynamic forces are to be supplied: the inertial forces are not to be included.
- Forces and moments are to be given non-dimensional:
| Package |
Drift angle
(β=-atan(v/u) |
Non-dimensional rate of turn r’ |
Requested quantities |
| Case 1.1.1 |
16° |
0 |
X’, Y’, N’ |
| 12° |
0 |
X’, Y’, N’ |
| 9° |
0 |
X’, Y’, N’ |
| 6° |
0 |
X’, Y’, N’ |
| 4° |
0 |
X’, Y’, N’ |
| 0° |
0 |
X’, Y’, N’ |
| -2° |
0 |
X’, Y’, N’ |
| Case 1.1.2, package 1 |
0° |
0.2985 |
X’, Y’, N’ |
| 4° |
0.2985 |
X’, Y’, N’ |
| 8° |
0.2985 |
X’, Y’, N’ |
| 12° |
0.2985 |
X’, Y’, N’ |
| 16° |
0.2985 |
X’, Y’, N’ |
| Case 1.1.2, package 2 |
0° |
0.6023 |
X’, Y’, N’ |
| 4° |
0.6023 |
X’, Y’, N’ |
| 8° |
0.6023 |
X’, Y’, N’ |
| 12° |
0.6023 |
X’, Y’, N’ |
| 16° |
0.6023 |
X’, Y’, N’ |
1.4 Format
Link to an excel file, which a submitter can download.
The yellow fields in the excel sheet should be filled in. The excel sheet should be send to the organizing committee per email address “
simman2019host@gmail.com”.
1.5 Example
For KVLCC2 deep water, we elaborated an actual example of an actual submission compared to actual experimental data.
Table below gives an example of the data that we would be getting for the KVLCC2 for case 1.1.1 and 1.1.2. Submitters should generate an excel sheet in the format of the Table below. The submitter has to type the calculated X’, Y’ and N’ ..
Table: Data from “submission 1”, (this is an actual case, where an empirical method is used to generate the forces and moments).
The organisers will compare the submitted results to experimental data. Comparing the above submission (above table) to experimental data will give the below figure. It is the intention to have many submissions in the same type of figure to learn about the prediction capabilities for which combinations of r’ and β.
Comparison of submission “prediction method xx” to the experimental data of HMRI for KVLCC2 in deep water for pure drift and yaw and drift (case 1.1.1 and case 1.1.2 combined together in one figure)
