Head-to-head hydrodynamic performance comparison of six foil setups with four and two foil configurations on trimarans in different operational conditions

被引:0
|
作者
Ghadimi, Aliakbar [1 ]
Ghassemi, Hassan [1 ,2 ]
Ghadimi, Parviz [1 ]
机构
[1] Amirkabir Univ Technol, Dept Maritime Engn, Hafez Ave 424,POB 15875-4413, Tehran, Iran
[2] Harbin Inst Technol, Sch Ocean Engn, Weihai, Peoples R China
关键词
FREE-SURFACE; HYDROFOIL; SIMULATION; DESIGN; VERIFICATION; OPTIMIZATION; DYNAMICS; FLOW;
D O I
10.1063/5.0262446
中图分类号
O3 [力学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0801 ;
摘要
Achieving high efficiency and performance is essential in both the commercial and maritime sectors, where the selection of foil configurations significantly influences a vessel's overall effectiveness. This study begins with a comprehensive analysis of a six-foil setup on a trimaran, followed by a head-to-head performance comparison against four-foil and two-foil configurations, all aimed at identifying the most effective solution for enhancing vessel performance in different operational conditions. Numerical simulations were conducted using computational fluid dynamics with validation performed against available experimental data for two catamaran models. The research explores the impact of six-foil setup and compares it with four-foil and two-foil configurations across both semi-planing and planing regimes, analyzing trim, sinkage, lift-to-drag ratio, shear drag, pressure drag, total drag, and rooster tail formation. It is ascertained that adding hydrofoils enhances vessel's hydrodynamic performance, with effectiveness varying based on foil type and configuration. In the semi-planing regime, the two-foil National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) 6612 configuration stands out for its superior trim control and reduced sinkage, while four-foil and six-foil setups provide greater stability. In the planing regime, the NACA 6612 in two- or four-foil configurations offer the best trim control and minimal sinkage. Additionally, the two-foil NACA 6612 configuration demonstrates higher efficiency in terms of lift-to-drag ratio and reduced frictional resistance. Overall, this comparative study shows that for high-speed applications, the two-foil NACA 6612 configuration offers ideal balance of hydrodynamic efficiency and stability, while the four-foil NACA 0012 configuration is ideal for reducing rooster tail effect, improving performance and sustainability.
引用
收藏
页数:29
相关论文
共 25 条
  • [1] Influence of bow wave-foil on the hydrodynamic performance of oil tankers in head waves
    Hussien M. Hassan
    M. M. Moustafa
    Marine Systems & Ocean Technology, 2025, 20 (1)
  • [2] Head-to-head comparison of two different angiographyderived FFR techniques in NSTEMI patients
    Skalidis, Ioannis
    Wongo, Ohm
    Meier, David
    De Bruyne, Bernard
    Collet, Carlos
    Sonck, Jeroen
    Mahendiran, Thabo
    Eeckhout, Eric
    Muller, Olivier
    Fournier, Stephane
    SWISS MEDICAL WEEKLY, 2023, 153 : 52S - 52S
  • [3] Head-to-Head Comparison of Two Different AngiographyDerived FFR Techniques in NSTEMI Patients
    Skalidis, Ioannis
    Meier, David
    De Bruyne, Bernard
    Collet, Carlos
    Muller, Olivier
    Fournier, Stephane
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2022, 80 (12) : B92 - B92
  • [4] Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale: head-to-head comparison of two different devices
    Meier, JM
    Delabays, A
    De Benedetti, E
    Roguelov, C
    Girod, G
    Vogt, P
    Eeckhout, E
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2003, 24 : 131 - 131
  • [5] Head-to-head comparison of two different ultrasound systems to measure the liver attenuation parameter
    De Rosa, Laura
    Cappelli, Simone
    Petralli, Giovanni
    Salvati, Antonio
    Ricco, Gabriele
    Oliveri, Filippo
    Coco, Barbara
    Colombatto, Piero
    Bonino, Ferruccio
    Brunetto, Maurizia
    Faita, Francesco
    JOURNAL OF HEPATOLOGY, 2024, 80 : S549 - S549
  • [6] Head-To-Head Performance Comparison of Two Deep Learning Segmentation Algorithms for Radiotherapy Planning: A Study in Prostate
    Martinez, H.
    Rich, B.
    Young, L.
    Yang, F.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2021, 48 (06)
  • [7] A Head-to-Head Comparison Study of the First-Day Performance of Two Factory-Calibrated CGM Systems
    Denham, Douglas
    JOURNAL OF DIABETES SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2020, 14 (02): : 493 - 495
  • [8] Head-to-Head Comparison of Two Computer Aided Detection (CAD-e) Systems on Colonoscopy Performance Metrics
    Cooper, John
    Norwood, Dalton A.
    Evers, Charles D.
    Mulki, Ramzi
    Sanchez-Luna, Sergio
    Sarkis, Fayez
    Cartee, Amanda
    Ajayi-Fox, Patricia
    Hameed, Anam
    Russ, Kirk B.
    Morgan, Douglas
    Peter, Shajan
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2024, 119 (10S): : S362 - S363
  • [9] Clinical Performance of Three Bolus Calculators in Twenty-Four Subjects with Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: A Head-to-Head Comparison
    Freckmann, Guido
    Zisser, Howard
    Pleus, Stefan
    Haug, Cornelia
    Jendrike, Nina
    Parkin, Christopher
    Schweitzer, Matthias
    Wagner, Robin
    DIABETES, 2010, 59 : A145 - A145
  • [10] Accuracy of two continuous glucose monitoring systems: a head-to-head comparison under clinical research centre and daily life conditions
    Kropff, J.
    Bruttomesso, D.
    Doll, W.
    Farret, A.
    Galasso, S.
    Luijf, Y. M.
    Mader, J. K.
    Place, J.
    Boscari, F.
    Pieber, T. R.
    Renard, E.
    DeVries, J. H.
    DIABETES OBESITY & METABOLISM, 2015, 17 (04): : 343 - 349