The hydrodynamic characteristics of the planing hulls in particular at the planing regime are completely different from the conventional hull forms and the determination of these characteristics is more complicated. In the present study, calm water hydrodynamic characteristics of planing hulls are investigated using a hybrid method. The hybrid method combines the dynamic trim and sinkage from the Zarnick approach with the Savitsky method in order to calculate the total resistance of the planing hull. Since the obtained dynamic trim and sinkage values by using the original Zarnick approach are not in good agreement with experimental data, an improvement is applied to the hybrid method using a reduction function proposed by Garme. The numerical results obtained by the hybrid and improved hybrid method are compared with each other and available experimental data. The results indicate that the improved hybrid method gives better results compared to the hybrid method, especially for the dynamic trim and resistance. Although the results have some discrepancies with experimental data in terms of resistance, trim and sinkage, the improved hybrid method becomes appealing particularly for the preliminary design stage of the planing hulls.
FridsmaG. A systematic study of the rough-water performance of planing boats. NJ: Defense Technical Information Center, 1969.
2.
BegovicEBertorelloC. Resistance assessment of warped hullform. Ocean Eng2012; 56: 28–42.
3.
BegovicEBertorelloCPenninoS. Experimental seakeeping assessment of a warped planing hull model series. Ocean Eng2014; 83: 1–15.
4.
De LucaFPensaC. The Naples warped hard chine hulls systematic series. Ocean Eng2017; 139: 205–236.
5.
TauntonDJHudsonDAShenoiRA. Characteristics of a series of high speed hard chine planing hulls – Part 1: performance in calm water. Int J Small Craft Technol2010; 152: 55–75.
6.
MetcalfBFaulLBumillerE, et al. Resistance tests of a systematic series of U.S. coast guard planing hulls. Report, Carderock Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Maryland, 2005.
7.
SavitskyD. Hydrodynamic design of planing hulls. Mar Technol1964; 1(1): 71–95.
8.
SavitskyDDeLormeMFDatlaR. Inclusion of whisker spray drag in performance prediction method for high- speed planing hulls. Mar Technol2007; 44(1): 35–56.
9.
BertorelloCOlivieroL. Hydrodynamic resistance assessment of non-monohedral planing hull forms based on Savitsky’s methodology. Aust J Mech Eng2007; 4(2): 209–223.
10.
SchachterRDRibeiroHJCda ConceiçãoCAL. Dynamic equilibrium evaluation for planing hulls with arbitrary geometry and variable deadrise angles – the virtual prismatic hulls method. Ocean Eng2016; 115: 67–92.
PenninoSManciniSScamardellaA. Dynamic equilibrium and resistance evaluation for warped planing hulls. In:
Presented at the FAST2017, Nantes, France, 2017.
13.
PenninoSScamardellaA. Dynamic equilibrium and resistance assessment for warped hulls by means of total pressure distribution. Part B2018; 160: 10.
14.
ZarnickE. A nonlinear mathematical model of motions of a planing boat in regular waves. David Taylor Naval Ship Research and Development Center, Maryland, 78/032, 1978.
15.
ZarnickE. A nonlinear mathematical model of motions of a planing boat in irregular waves. David Taylor Naval Ship Research and Development Center, Maryland, SPD-0867-01, 1979.
16.
AkersRH. Dynamic analysis of planing hulls in the vertical plane. In: Presented at the Meeting of the New England Section of The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, Portland, 1999.
17.
van DeyzenA. A nonlinear mathematical model of motions of a planing monohull in head seas. In: Proceedings of the 6th international conference on high performance, Marine Vehicles, Report, Naples, Italy, 2008.
18.
KeuningJA. Non-linear behaviour of fast mono-hulls in head-waves. PhD Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands, 1994.
19.
GarmeK. Improved time-domain simulation of planing hulls in waves by correction of the near-transom lift. Int Shipbuild Prog2005; 52(3): 201–230.
20.
KanyooPTauntonDJBlakeJIR. Development and optimization of mathematical model of high speed planing dynamics. In: FAST2015, Washington, DC, September2015.
21.
AlgarinRTasconO. Hydrodynamic modeling of planing boats with asymmetry and steady condition. In: Presented at the HSMV 2011, Naples, Italy, 2011.
22.
AlgarinRTasconO. Analysis of dynamic stability of planing craft on the vertical plane. Ship Sci Technol2014; 8.
23.
GhadimiPTavakoliSDashtimaneshA, et al. Steady performance prediction of a heeled planing boat in calm water using asymmetric 2D+T model. Proc IMechE, Part M: J Engineering for the Maritime Environment2017; 231(1): 234–257.
24.
GhadimiPTavakoliSDashtimaneshA. Calm water performance of hard-chine vessels in semi-planing and planing regimes. Pol Marit Res2016; 23(4): 23–45.
25.
BilandiRNManciniSVitielloL, et al. A validation of symmetric 2D+ T model based on single-stepped planing hull towing tank tests. J Mar Sci Eng2018; 6(4): 136.
26.
Di CaterinoFBilandiRNManciniS, et al. A numerical way for a stepped planing hull design and optimization. In: MarinòABucciV (eds) Technology and Science for the Ships of the Future. Netherlands; Clifton, VA: IOS Press, 2018, pp.220–229.
27.
BilandiRNDashtimaneshATavakoliS. Development of a 2D+T theory for performance prediction of double-stepped planing hulls in calm water. Proc IMechE, Part M: J Engineering for the Maritime Environment. Epub ahead of print September2018. DOI: 10.1177/1475090218797784.
28.
DashtimaneshATavakoliSSahooP. A simplified method to calculate trim and resistance of a two-stepped planing hull. Ships Offshore Struct2017; 12(Suppl 1): S317–S329.
29.
MatveevKI. Hydrodynamic modeling of planing hulls with twist and negative deadrise. Ocean Eng2014; 82: 14–19.
30.
MatveevKI. Hydrodynamic modeling of semi-planing hulls with air cavities. Int J Nav Archit Ocean Eng2015; 7(3): 500–508.
31.
SunHFaltinsenOM. Dynamic motions of planing vessels in head seas. J Mar Sci Technol2011; 16(2): 168–180.
32.
SunHFaltinsenOM. The influence of gravity on the performance of planing vessels in calm water. J Eng Math2007; 58(1–4): 91–107.
33.
MousaviraadSMWangZSternF. URANS studies of hydrodynamic performance and slamming loads on high-speed planing hulls in calm water and waves for deep and shallow conditions. Appl Ocean Res2015; 51: 222–240.
34.
SukasOFKinaciOKCakiciFGokceMK. Hydrodynamic assessment of planing hulls using overset grids. Appl Ocean Res2017; 65: 35–46.
35.
De LucaFManciniSMirandaS, et al. An extended verification and validation study of CFD simulations for planing hulls. J Ship Res2016; 60(2): 101–118.
36.
DumanSSenerBBalS. LCG effects on resistance, lift and trim characteristics of R/V athena hull. Int J Small Craft Tech2018; 160: B43–B56.
