See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/364493259

Validation of Strip Theory Based Frequency-Domain Ship Motion Code

Conference Paper · October 2022

CITATION READS

1 478

3 authors, including:

Ferdi Çakıcı Prasanta Sahoo

The Hamburg Ship Model Basin UNSW Canberra
53 PUBLICATIONS 322 CITATIONS 82 PUBLICATIONS 717 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Prasanta Sahoo on 21 October 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 15th International Symposium on Practical Design of Ships and Other Floating Structures PRADS 2022

Dubrovnik, Croatia, October 9th – 13th 2022

Validation of Strip Theory Based Frequency-Domain Ship Motion Code

Alper Olmez1, Ferdi Cakici1, Prasanta Sahoo2

1 Yıldız Technical University, Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, Faculty of Naval Architecture
and Maritime,
2 UNSW, Canberra, School of Engineering and IT, Australia

Abstract. An attempt has been made to validate the frequency-domain seakeeping code presented in this paper.
Two-dimensional hydrodynamic added mass and damping coefficients are calculated by using Ursell [1] and
Tasai’s [2], [3] multipole expansion theory and conformal mapping. Lewis conformal mapping technique is
used to obtain the hydrodynamic coefficients. Excitation terms for pitch and heave motions are computed by
using head seas approximation. A user-friendly code interface is designed for presenting frequency-domain
computations. Response Amplitude Operators for the motions of AMECRC hulls are plotted at different
advance speeds and in head waves. The results are compared with those obtained by experiments and a good
agreement is observed. The entire process has been conducted using MATLAB code.

Keywords: Motion Simulation, Frequency Domain, MATLAB

1. Introduction
As technology has advanced, the power of computers has increased and the time for ship motion analysis has
decreased. However, fast and cost-effective solutions are still an attractive proposition for the shipbuilding
industry. Several studies have been and are still being conducted to study and understand ship motions. The first
mathematical models were based on linear theory with one degree of freedom. Hence, the first study that form the
basis of ship motions were conducted by Ursell [1] in 1949. He studied the vertical motion of a circular cylinder
and tried to explain the hydrodynamic effects that occur in water as a result of the oscillatory motion. The velocity
potential of heave motion and the conjugate stream function in two dimensions were obtained by Ursell [1] under
the assumptions of the potential theory. He used the theory of multipole expansion.

Ursell's [1] studies were further developed in 1959 and 1961 by Tasai [2], [3] using the "Lewis Conformal Mapping
Method [4]". According to this method, ship cross sections are expressed in analogy to circular sections and round
bilge hulls can be represented with circular cross sections. Another study was carried out by Porter [5] and a linear
approach was developed for the added mass, damping and pressure distributions for the vertically oscillating
cylinder.

Bishop et al. [6] summarized the multiple expansion methods from Lewis Conformal Mapping (two parameters)
to Close-Fit Mapping (from two parameters to ten parameters) and computed the hydrodynamic coefficients. In
1967, W. Frank [7] focused on obtaining hydrodynamic coefficients for ship forms that are difficult to be studied
using the Lewis approach. His study proposed a very different approach from previous studies. The velocity
potential is obtained using a source distributed over the underwater volume of the ship. In this approach, the
velocity potential of the unknown source density is represented using Green's function, which satisfies the linear
free surface condition. By solving the integral equations arising from the use of the boundary conditions of the
body, the transition to the unknown source densities was completed.

On the other hand, researchers have also conducted studies that reveal the hydrodynamics of 3D ship forms.
Korvin-Kroukovsky [8], presented "The Ordinary Strip Theory, an approach to express hydrodynamic coefficients
for a ship in three dimensions, using multiple expansion and mapping techniques. Salvesen et al. [9] then
introduced a method called New Strip Theory, which uses the Close-Fit method. With the strip theory, added mass,
damping and excitation terms (Froude-Krylov and diffraction) that are calculated for ship sections are obtained in
a three-dimensional manner for the ship.

1
Another development, which is considered a milestone in ship motion problems, was the transition from solutions
for ship motion in regular waves to irregular waves with a new method presented by Manley St. Denis and Pierson
[10]. The statistical energy distribution method presented by these two researchers is revolutionary and allowed
the linearization of irregular waves. This theory, also known as the theory of random processes, makes two basic
assumptions: The sea surface is normally distributed and there is a linear relationship between wave amplitude and
ship motions.

Nomenclature
𝑈 Ship speed 𝜓𝐴02𝑚 , 𝜓𝐵0𝑠 , 𝜓𝐵0𝑐 The conjugate stream functions
𝐿𝐶𝐵 Longitudinal Center of Buoyancy 𝑎𝑧 Sectional added mass for heave
motion
𝐿𝐶𝐺 Longitudinal Center of Gravity 𝑏𝑧 Sectional damping for heave
motion
𝜌 Water density 𝑎𝑧𝐴 The added mass coefficient of the
transom section
𝑔 Gravitational acceleration 𝑏𝑧𝐴 The damping coefficient of the
transom section
𝜔𝑒 Encounter frequency 𝐴𝑖𝑗 Global added mass coefficients
𝜔0 Wave circular frequency 𝐵𝑖𝑗 Global damping coefficients
𝜁𝑎 Wave amplitude 𝐶𝑖𝑗 Restoring coefficients
𝑁 Mapping parameter 𝐹𝑖𝑗 Excitation Wave Terms
𝑀𝑠 Scale factor 𝜂̈ 𝑘 , 𝜂̇ 𝑘 , 𝜂𝑘 The acceleration, velocity, and
displacement of the motion
respectively
𝑎1 , 𝑎3 Mapping coefficients 𝛿 The phase angle of the
excitation term
𝜉 Distance of section to LCB 𝑀𝑗𝑘 The mass matrix
𝐵 Breadth of the ship 𝐼5 Inertia moment of pitch
motion
𝑥𝐴 The distance of the transom from 𝑋3𝑅 , 𝑋5𝑅 Real part of heave and pitch
the LCB response respectively
𝑀0 , 𝑁0 The function of integration over 𝑋3𝐼 , 𝑋5𝐼 Complex part of heave and
quadrant of cross-section in circle pitch response respectively
plane
𝑃2𝑚 , 𝑄2𝑚 The multipole coefficients DOF Degree of Freedom
𝜙𝐴02𝑚 , 𝜙𝐵0𝑠 , 𝜙𝐵0𝑐 The various velocity potential RAO Response Amplitude Operator
components

Within the scope of this study, 2-DOF ship motions in the frequency domain are coded and validated with
experimental data in order to examine the seakeeping performance of displacement type ships in the design phase
quickly and almost inexpensively. Model hulls created as part of the AMECRC project [11] are used for validation.
These model series, with their high-speed displacement hull forms (HSDHF) are subjected to extensive tests in
waves.

2. Mathematical Model of AME CRC Series

2.1. Model of AME CRC Series

All models (Figure 1 shows an example) have the same length of 1.6 m, and the effect of changing the series
parameters on the hull shape features are given in Table 1 (only 7 of a total of 14 models), where all models body
plans are presented in same scale. The model tests were conducted in the towing tank at the Ship Hydrodynamics
Center (SHC) at the Australian Maritime College in Launceston, Tasmania. The towing tank is 60 m long, 3.5 m
wide and 1.5 m deep.

2
The standard set of regular head wave tests for each model is as follows:
- standard design displacement, level trim
- pitch radius of gyration: 0.25 L (L = 1.6 m, for all models)
- forward model speeds: 1.13, 2.26 and 3.39 m/s (Fn = 0.285, 0.57 and 0.856)
- Frequency range of model waves: 0.6 to 1.4 Hz
- nominal model wave height: 30 mm

Further details on the experimental setup and data analysis, as well as some comments on the limitations of SHC
instrumentation at the time, can be found in IR 95/25 [11]. It should be noted that the regular head wave
experiments are based on certain assumptions, the most important of which is the linear motion behaviour, meaning
that the motion amplitude is proportional to the wave amplitude.

Table 1. AMECRC Systematic Series - Model Parameters

Wetted
LWL Displacement
Model L/B B/T CB Surface
[m] [kg]
Area [m2]
#01 8.00 4.00 0.396 1.60 0.3034 6.338
#02 6.512 3.51 0.395 1.60 0.3849 10.882
#03 8.00 2.50 0.447 1.60 0.3626 11.454
#04 8.00 4.00 0.447 1.60 0.3064 7.159
#05 4.00 4.00 0.395 1.60 0.6087 25.347
#06 8.00 2.50 0.395 1.60 0.3566 10.124
#07 4.00 2.50 0.396 1.60 0.7175 40.527

In this study, seven hull models in Table 1 are analyzed for regular head waves at the Fn = 0.285 and 0.57. The
offset tables of the models are detailed, then the coefficients to be used in the mathematical model are calculated
in the frequency domain for each hull form with the developed code. This 'parameter space' and body plan of series
are shown in Figure 2. The parameters of each of fourteen models can be identified from this Figure.

Figure 1. Model #05 Ship Form

Figure 2. AMECRC Systematic Series Parameter Space and Body Plans

3
2.2. Lewis Conformal Mapping Method
In order to calculate the hydrodynamic coefficients of vertical ship motions, the added mass and damping
coefficients, in two dimensions, the cross sections of the hull should be mapped to be compatible with the unit
circle. The velocity potential around an arbitrarily chosen surface, such as a ship form, can be calculated by
switching to a more appropriate circular plane. Thus, hydrodynamic problems can be solved directly with the
mapping function.

The Lewis Conformal Mapping method [4] is the expression for ship sections on the unit circle with two
parameters, namely N=2. Thus, ship sections can be modelled mathematically quickly and easily. In the code, the
sectional hydrodynamic coefficients for heave motion in the frequency domain are calculated for 41 ship cross
sections (first section is the bow, last section is the stern) (Figure 3 shows an example).

Figure 3. The model #03 contour of section 20 and 30 by conformal mapping approximated

3. Computing the hydrodynamic coefficients for vertical motions

The multipole expansion theory, conformal mapping method and integral equations are coded to calculate the
hydrodynamic coefficients of arbitrary ship sections. The calculation of the added mass and the damping
coefficients should be done with the encounter frequency. The reason for this is that the radiated waves, which
cause the damping and contribute to the added mass, are generated by the ship motion, which is assumed to occur
at the encounter frequency and not at the natural frequency of the excitation waves.

In Equation (1-7), Bishop Integrals [6] are expressed. It can be seen that the series converge uniformly as the value
of m increases. For practical reasons, the maximum value of “𝑚” remains limited to “𝑀”. It is founded that “𝑀 =
7” is sufficient for the values to converge.

𝜋/2
𝑀𝑠 𝑀(𝜃)𝑊(𝜃)
𝑀0 = ∫ 𝑑𝜃 (1)
𝐵 ⁄2
0
𝜋/2
𝑀𝑠 𝑁(𝜃)𝑊(𝜃)
𝑁0 = ∫ 𝑑𝜃 (2)
𝐵 ⁄2
0
𝑀

𝑀(𝜃) = 𝜙𝐵0𝑠 (𝜃) + ∑ 𝑄2𝑚 𝜙𝐴02𝑚 (𝜃) (3)

𝑚=1
𝑀

𝑁(𝜃) = 𝜙𝐵0𝑐 (𝜃) + ∑ 𝑃2𝑚 𝜙𝐴02𝑚 (𝜃) (4)

𝑚=1
𝑁

𝑊(𝜃) = 𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝜃) + ∑(−1)𝑛+1 (2𝑛 − 1)𝑎2𝑛−1 𝑐𝑜𝑠(2𝑛 − 1)𝜃 (5)

𝑛=1
∞

𝐴0 = 𝜓𝐵0𝑐 (𝜋⁄2) + ∑ {𝑃2𝑚 𝜓𝐴02𝑚 (𝜋⁄2)} (6)

𝑚=1

4
 ∞

𝐵0 = 𝜓𝐵0𝑠 (𝜋⁄2) + ∑ {𝑄2𝑚 𝜓𝐴02𝑚 (𝜋⁄2)} (7)

𝑚=1

The added mass "𝑎𝑧 " and the damping coefficients "𝑏𝑧 " for the relevant ship sections are calculated as follows, as
expressed in the following equation.

𝜌(𝐵/2)2 (𝑀0 𝐵0 + 𝑁0 𝐴0 )
𝑎𝑧 = (8)
2(𝐴0 2 + 𝐵0 2 )
𝜌(𝐵/2)2 𝜔𝜋 2
𝑏𝑧 = (9)
4(𝐴0 2 + 𝐵0 2 )

The following process is carried out to establish the energy balance relationship:

𝜋2
𝑀0 𝐴0 − 𝑁0 𝐵0 = (10)
2

The authors suggest that readers should visit the original paper published by Bishop et al. [6] for further
information on the process given above. The results of the code for the sectional and global hydrodynamic
coefficients are compared with the "Maxsurf program [12]" and a very good agreement was found [13].

3.1. Strip theory

The estimation of ship motions in the presence of regular waves, arbitrary heading, and constant forward speed of
the ship, as well as the calculation of wave-induced horizontal and vertical shear forces, bending moments, and
torsional moments, are based on “Strip Theory”. The theory was first developed by Salvesen et al. [9] in the 1970s
and, unlike more advanced methods, is relatively simple to use and computationally straightforward.

Strip theory is expressed mathematically in the frequency domain. According to the theory, the coefficients of the
related ship in the ship motion equations in two dimensions are calculated, then integrated throughout the ship
length and transformed into the three-dimensional global coefficients.

The global added mass and damping coefficients can be calculated with the method which was developed by
Salvesen et al. [9]. The hydrodynamic global coefficients with transom effects are shown as follows:

𝑈 𝐴
𝐴33 = ∫ 𝑎𝑧 𝑑𝜉 − 𝑏 (11)
𝜔𝑒2 𝑧
𝐵33 = ∫ 𝑏𝑧 𝑑𝜉 + 𝑈𝑎𝑧𝐴 (12)
𝑈 𝑈 𝐴
𝑈2 𝐴
𝐴35 = − ∫ 𝜉𝑎𝑧 𝑑𝜉 − 𝐵33 + 𝑥𝐴 𝑏𝑧 − 𝑎 (13)
𝜔𝑒2 𝜔𝑒2 𝜔𝑒2 𝑧
2
𝑈
𝐵35 = − ∫ 𝜉𝑏𝑧 𝑑𝜉 + 𝑈𝐴33 − 𝑈𝑥𝐴 𝑎𝑧𝐴 − 2 𝑏𝑧𝐴 (14)
𝜔𝑒
𝑈 𝑈
𝐴53 = − ∫ 𝜉𝑎𝑧 𝑑𝜉 + 2 𝐵33 + 2 𝑥𝐴 𝑏𝑧𝐴 (15)
𝜔𝑒 𝜔𝑒
𝐵53 = − ∫ 𝜉𝑏𝑧 𝑑𝜉 − 𝑈𝐴33 − 𝑈𝑥𝐴 𝑎𝑧𝐴 (16)
𝑈2 𝑈 𝑈2
𝐴55 = ∫ 𝜉 2 𝑎𝑧 𝑑𝜉 + 2
𝐴33 − 2 𝑥𝐴2 𝑏𝑧𝐴 + 2 𝑥𝐴 𝑎𝑧𝐴 (17)
𝜔𝑒 𝜔𝑒 𝜔𝑒
2 2
𝑈 𝑈
𝐵55 = ∫ 𝜉 2 𝑏𝑧 𝑑𝜉 + 2 𝐵33 + 𝑈𝑥𝐴2 𝑎𝑧𝐴 + 2 𝑥𝐴 𝑏𝑧𝐴 (18)
𝜔𝑒 𝜔𝑒

Please note that the integrations are performed along the ship length. The term 𝑥𝐴 in Equation (11-18) represents
the distance of the transom from the longitudinal center of buoyancy (𝐿𝐶𝐵 assumes equal to 𝐿𝐶𝐺), the added mass

5
coefficient of the transom section 𝑎𝑧𝐴 , the damping coefficient of the transom section 𝑏𝑧𝐴 . 𝜉 represents distance of
section to 𝐿𝐶𝐵. The restoring global coefficients are calculated as follows:

𝐶33 = 𝜌𝑔 ∫ 𝐵𝑑𝜉 (19)

𝐶35 = 𝐶53 = −𝜌𝑔 ∫ 𝜉𝐵𝑑𝜉 (20)

𝐶55 = 𝜌𝑔 ∫ 𝜉 2 𝐵𝑑𝜉 (21)

The Salvesen et al. [9] method relates the added mass and damping coefficients calculated for the cross section to
the global excitation wave terms.

Both wave heave excitation force 𝐹3 and wave pitch excitation moment 𝐹5 can be calculated with transom terms.
𝜁𝑎 denotes wave amplitude, 𝑑 denotes sectional draft, 𝑠 denotes section area coefficient “𝑠 = 𝐴𝑠 ⁄𝑏𝑑”, 𝜔0 denotes
wave circular frequency. The excitation heave force and pitch moment can be calculated as follows by using
Salvesen et al. [9] head sea approximation:

𝐹3 = 𝜁𝑎 ∫ 𝑒 𝑖𝑘𝜉 𝑒 −𝑘𝑑𝑠 {𝜌𝑔𝐵 − 𝜔0 (𝜔𝑒 𝑎𝑧 − 𝑖𝑏𝑧 )}𝑑𝜉

𝑈 𝑖𝑘𝑥 −𝑘𝑑𝑠 (22)
− 𝜁𝑎 𝑒 𝐴𝑒 𝜔0 (𝜔𝑒 𝑎𝑧𝐴 − 𝑖𝑏𝑧𝐴 )
𝑖𝜔𝑒
𝐹5 = −𝜁𝑎 ∫ 𝑒 𝑖𝑘𝜉 𝑒 −𝑘𝑑𝑠 {𝜉[𝜌𝑔𝐵 − 𝜔0 (𝜔𝑒 𝑎𝑧 − 𝑖𝑏𝑧 )]
𝑈
− 𝜔 (𝜔 𝑎 − 𝑖𝑏𝑧 )} 𝑑𝜉 (23)
𝑖𝜔𝑒 0 𝑒 𝑧
𝑈 𝑖𝑘𝑥 −𝑘𝑑𝑠
+ 𝜁𝑎 𝑒 𝐴𝑒 𝜔0 𝑥𝐴 (𝜔𝑒 𝑎𝑧𝐴 − 𝑖𝑏𝑧𝐴 )
𝑖𝜔𝑒

4. Computing of the 2-DOF ship motion in the frequency-domain

The generalized 6-DOF ship motion equations are as follows:
6

∑{(𝑀𝑗𝑘 + 𝐴𝑗𝑘 )𝜂̈ 𝑘 + 𝐵𝑗𝑘 𝜂̇ 𝑘 + 𝐶𝑗𝑘 𝜂𝑘 } = 𝐹𝑗 𝑒 𝑖𝜔𝑒𝑡 ; 𝑗 = 1, 2, … , 6 (24)

𝑘=1

𝑀𝑗𝑘 represents the mass matrix . 𝐴𝑗𝑘 is the added mass matrix, 𝐵𝑗𝑘 is the damping matrix, and 𝐶𝑗𝑘 is the restoring
matrix. 𝐹𝑗 represents the vector of excitation wave terms. The term 𝜂̈ 𝑘 in the equation represents the acceleration,
the term 𝜂̇ 𝑘 represents the velocity, and the term 𝜂𝑘 represents the displacement of the motion. The ship is assumed
to be no static trim during the calculations so 𝐿𝐶𝐵 assumes equal to 𝐿𝐶𝐺.

Using the coefficients obtained by strip theory, calculations of the coupled heave and pitch motions in the
frequency domain are performed. The mathematical model created for vertical motions has linear properties for a
ship with constant forward speed in regular waves. Accordingly, the oscillations of the vertical motion are also
linear and harmonic. 2-DOF vertical couple motion (heave and pitch motions) equation is as follows:

(𝑀 + 𝐴33 )𝜂̈ 3 + 𝐵33 𝜂̇ 3 + 𝐶33 𝜂3 + 𝐴35 𝜂̈ 5 + 𝐵35 𝜂̇ 5 + 𝐶35 𝜂5 = 𝐹3 𝑒 𝑖𝜔𝑒 𝑡 (25)

(𝐼5 + 𝐴55 )𝜂̈ 5 + 𝐵55 𝜂̇ 5 + 𝐶55 𝜂5 + 𝐴53 𝜂̈ 3 + 𝐵53 𝜂̇ 3 + 𝐶53 𝜂3 = 𝐹5 𝑒 𝑖𝜔𝑒𝑡 (26)

Defined as a transfer function, the Response Amplitude Operator, briefly RAO, expresses how the ship's response
to the wave changes with frequency. In this study, heave and pitch motions per one meter amplitude wave
amplitude is computed using the following mathematical model:

[𝐴][𝑋] = [𝐹] (27)

6
The set of Equations (25-26) are converted into the form of matrices, the corresponding RAOs are determined
from the solutions of these matrices. The matrice forms are given as follows:

−𝜔𝑒2 (𝑀 + 𝐴33 )+𝐶33 −𝐵33 𝜔𝑒 −𝜔𝑒2 𝐴35 +𝐶35 −𝐵35 𝜔𝑒

𝐵33 𝜔𝑒 −𝜔𝑒2 (𝑀 + 𝐴33 )+𝐶33 𝐵35 𝜔𝑒 −𝜔𝑒2 𝐴35 +𝐶35
𝐴= (28)
−𝜔𝑒2 𝐴53 +𝐶53 −𝐵53 𝜔𝑒 2
−𝜔𝑒 5 + 𝐴55 )+𝐶55
(𝐼 −𝐵55 𝜔𝑒
[ 𝐵53 𝜔𝑒 −𝜔𝑒2 𝐴53 +𝐶53 𝐵55 𝜔𝑒 −𝜔𝑒2 (𝐼5 + 𝐴55 )+𝐶55 ]
𝑋3𝑅
𝑋
[𝑋] = [ 3𝐼 ] (29)
𝑋5𝑅
𝑋5𝐼
𝐹3 𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝛿3 )
𝐹 𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝛿3 )
[𝐹] = 3 (30)
𝐹5 𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝛿5 )
[ 𝐹5 𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝛿5 )]

The subscript 𝑅 represents the real part of the response, while the subscript 𝐼 represents the complex part. 𝛿
represents the phase angle of the excitation term.

Calculation of RAOs and vertical acceleration are performed according to the following formula:

𝑋5 = √(𝑋5𝑅 )2 + (𝑋5𝐼 )2 (31)

𝑋3 = √(𝑋3𝑅 )2 + (𝑋3𝐼 )2 (32)
𝑋5
𝑃𝑖𝑡𝑐ℎ 𝑅𝐴𝑂 = 𝑃′ = (33)
𝑘𝜁𝑎
𝑋3
𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑣𝑒 𝑅𝐴𝑂 = 𝐻′ = (34)
𝜁𝑎
2
𝑋 3 𝜔𝑒 𝐿 𝜔𝑒2 𝐿
𝑉𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑅𝐴𝑂 = 𝐴′ = = 𝐻′ (35)
𝜁𝑎 𝑔 𝑔

5. Results
The RAO results of the current ship motion program (SPM) are given for heave, pitch and acceleration at center
of gravity in this section. The numerical data is created by using SMP and compared with the experimental results
of AMECRC model series. The comparison is made in the case of head seas at two different forward speed using
data from heave RAO, pitch RAO and vertical acceleration RAO. The results obtained with models #01, #03, #05,
and #07 are shown in Figure 4-27, where the wave frequency is in the range of 0.6 Hz-1.4 Hz.

The RAO graphs consist of three main regions: inertia, damping and hydrostatic dominated. The results obtained
are discussed in this section considering these regions. In the low frequency region, i.e., the region where the
wavelength is larger than the ship length, hydrostatic effects dominate. The RAO values here are about one. This
can be explained by the fact that the ship follows the wave regime with hydrostatic effects. Since the contribution
of hydrodynamic effects is small in this region, errors in the hydrodynamic coefficients cannot significantly change
the state of the system. As can be seen in the RAO graphs, the peaks form the damping region where the ship's
natural period is located. This region is also called the resonant region, and the motion response of the ship is
larger than the wave amplitude. As can be clearly seen, the responses in the high-frequency region, i.e., the inertial
region, tend to zero because the wavelength remains very small compared to the ship's length.

On the other hand, when examining the experimental results that served as a reference for the validation study, it
was found that there was more than one value at some frequencies, and these values distorted the trend that the
RAO graphs were supposed to follow. In addition, the test results are not available at high frequencies, as seen in
some RAO graphs with non-dimensional vertical acceleration.

As stated in the test report, the reasons for this are the fact that the support personnel performing the tests are
performing a seakeeping test for the first time, and some uncertainties in the measurements. It is clear that the
7
experimental results with the potential theory-based seakeeping code developed gave sufficiently similar results
despite the mentioned shortcomings.

Figure 4. Model #01 Heave RAO at Fn = 0.285 Figure 5. Model #01 Pitch RAO at Fn = 0.285

Figure 6. Model #01 Non-dimensional vertical acceleration at Fn = 0.285

Figure 7. Model #01 Heave RAO at Fn = 0.57 Figure 8. Model #01 Pitch RAO at Fn = 0.57

8
Figure 9. Model #01 Non-dimensional vertical acceleration at Fn = 0.57

Figure 10. Model #03 Heave RAO at Fn = 0.285 Figure 11. Model #03 Pitch RAO at Fn = 0.285

Figure 12. Model #03 Non-dimensional vertical acceleration at Fn = 0.285

Figure 13. Model #03 Heave RAO at Fn = 0.57 Figure 14. Model #03 Pitch RAO at Fn = 0.57

9
Figure 15. Model #03 Non-dimensional vertical acceleration at Fn = 0.57

Figure 16. Model #05 Heave RAO at Fn = 0.285 Figure 17. Model #05 Pitch RAO at Fn = 0.285

Figure 18. Model #05 Non-dimensional vertical acceleration at Fn = 0.285

10
Figure 19. Model #05 Heave RAO at Fn = 0.57 Figure 20. Model #05 Pitch RAO at Fn = 0.57

Figure 21. Model #05 Non-dimensional vertical acceleration at Fn = 0.57

Figure 22. Model #07 Heave RAO at Fn = 0.285 Figure 23. Model #07 Pitch RAO at Fn = 0.285

11
Figure 24. Model #07 Non-dimensional vertical acceleration at Fn = 0.285

Figure 25. Model #07 Heave RAO at Fn = 0.57 Figure 26. Model #07 Pitch RAO at Fn = 0.57

Figure 27. Model #07 Non-dimensional vertical acceleration at Fn = 0.57

12
6. Development of Seakeeping Code
In this section, a brief introduction to the frequency domain part of the seakeeping code YTU DEEP is given. It is
still under development, taking into account the user interface design criteria.

Figure 28. YTU DEEP User Interface

1. Create: This page can be thought of as the main page. New analyzes are created from this area.
2. Account: This page contains account information such as the user's name and email address.
3. Load Analysis: This is the page that contains the previous analysis.
4. Settings: On this page, the unit settings for the analyzes are made. The results of the analyzes can be
accessed in tables on this page also.
5. The offset table created in an Excel file can be used for analysis. Important note for users: the first column
of the offset table created in the Excel sheet should contain the waterline heights. The first row of this column
should contain the baseline height, and the last row should be the draft.
6. An offset table can be created manually.
7. This is the part where the data inputs for the analysis are made. According to the domain of the analysis,
the corresponding inputs become active or inactive. All active data entries must be made.
8. This is the page where the analyzes are presented in graphs.

7. Conclusion
The test results of the AMECRC model series [12] were examined to validate the seakeeping code developed in
the frequency domain in this study. The detailed offset table created for each model was expressed mathematically
using the Lewis Conformal Mapping method [5]. The two-dimensional hydrodynamic terms were obtained by
using the mapping coefficients and multipole expansion theory. Global hydrodynamic coefficients and excitation
terms for couple heave and pitch motions were calculated with strip theory [10]. All calculations were made in
regular waves, the head seas and different forward speed, as well as experimental studies. The ship motion program
(SMP), which performs 2-DOF seakeeping analysis in the frequency-domain with a user-friendly interface coded
in MATLAB software created as part of the study, has been provided quick and effective results.

Experimental and SMP results (Heave RAO, Pitch RAO, and Non-Dim. Ver. Acceleration) for seven hull models
were illustrated in Figure 4-44. The test results contained some scatter or omissions, which can be explained by
the fact that they were performed by a large number of people, most of whom had no experience with towing tank

13
 testing. The numerical data were compared with the test data, taking into account the uncertainties of the
experimental situation, and good results were observed.

Acknowledgments
This study was supported by the project number FKD-2021-4529 of Yildiz Technical University Scientific
Research Project Coordinator.

References
[1] Ursell, F., (1949): “On the heaving motion of a circular cylinder in the surface of a fluid”, Quart. J. Mech. Appl. Math, 2:
218-231.

[2] Tasai, F., (1959): “On the Damping Force and Added Mass of Ships Heaving and Pitching”, Technical Report, Research
Institute for Applied Mechanics, Kyushu University, Japan, 7(26):131-152.

[3] Tasai, F.,(1961): ‘Hydrodynamic Force and Moment Produced by Swaying and Rolling Oscillations of Cylinders on the
Free Surface, Technical Report, Research Institute for Applied Mechanics’, Kyushu University, Japan,9(35).

[4] Lewis, F.M., (1929): “The inertia of water surrounding a vibrating ship”, Transactions, Society of Naval Architects and
Marine Engineers, 27: 1-20.

[5] Porter, W.R., (1960): ‘Pressure Distributions, Added Mass,, and Damping Coefficients for Cylinders Oscillating in a
Free Surface,’ University of California, Institute of Engineering Research, Report 89.16, Berkeley, California

[6] Bishop, R.E.D., Price, W.G. and Tam, P.K.Y., (1978): “Hydrodynamic coefficients of some heaving cylinders of arbitrary
shape”, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, Vol 13, pp17-33.

[7] Frank, W., (1967): “Oscillation of Cylinders in or Below the Free Surface of Deep Fluids”, DTNSRDC Report No.
2375.

[8] Korvin-Kroukovsky, B.V., (1955): "Investigation of Ship Motiono in Regular Waves," Trans. of the Society of Naval
Architects and Marine Engineers, Vol. 68, pp. 886-485

[9] Salvesen, N. Tuck, O. and Faltinsen,O., (1970): “Ship Motions and Sea Loads”, Trans. of the Society of Naval Architects
and Marine Engineers, 78:250-287

[10] St Denis M. and Pierson,W., (1953): “On the motions of ships in confused seas”, Trans. of the Society of Naval Architects
and Marine Engineers Nav. Architechts and Marine Engineers, 61: 280-354

[11] Bojovic, Predrag (1995): Regression analysis of AME CRC systematic series calm water testing results: (report on research
under Project 1.1. 2). Australian Maritime Engineering CRC Limited

[12] Maxsurf Motion Windows Version 20 User Manual

[13] Olmez, A. and Cakici F., (2021): “Development of a quick and efficient time-domain ship motion code,” 2nd International
Shipbuilding and Marine Technology Congress, Istanbul, TURKEY, 16 - 17 September 2021, pages.1-10

14

View publication stats