210 likes | 300 Views
Simulation of Internal Wave Wakes and Comparison with Observations J.K.E. Tunaley London Research and Development Corporation, 114 Margaret Anne Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K0A 1L0, Tel: 1-613-839-7943 http://www.London-Research-and-Development.com /. Outline. Objectives Modelling
E N D
Simulation of Internal Wave Wakes and Comparison with Observations J.K.E. Tunaley London Research and Development Corporation, 114 Margaret Anne Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K0A 1L0, Tel: 1-613-839-7943 http://www.London-Research-and-Development.com/
Outline • Objectives • Modelling • Loch Linnhe Trials • Hull Designs • Simulations • Discussion
Objectives • Towards an evaluation of use of internal wave wakes in wide area maritime surveillance • Towards understanding their generation from surface ships • Start with simplest scenario • Surface ship with stationary wake (in ship frame) • The effect of hull form on the wake
Modelling • Layer models • Discrete (e.g. loch, fjord) • Diffuse • Internal wave wake model • Linearized • Far wake
Loch Linnhe Trials • Trials from 1989 to 1994 in Scotland • Ship displacements from 100 to 30,000 tonnes • Shallow layer • Ship speeds typically 2 to 4 m/s • Wake angles 10 to 20º • Airborne synthetic aperture radars From Watson et al, 1992
Wigley Hull • Canoe shaped: Parabolic in 2-D, constant draft • Useful theoretical model but block coefficient is 4/9
Practical Hulls • Taylor Standard Series • Twin screw cruiser • David Taylor Model Basin Series 60 • Single screw merchant • National Physical Laboratory • Round bilge, high speed displacement hulls • Maritime Administration (MARAD) Series • Single screw merchant, shallow water • British Ship Research Association Series • Single screw merchant
Taylor Offsets Stern Bow
Sir Tristram, 2m/s From Watson, Chapman and Apel, 1992
Observed Surface Velocity From Watson et al, 1992
Simulated Surface Velocity Wigley: h=3.0 m, δ=0.004) Wigley: h=5.0 m, δ=0.0024
Simulated Surface Velocity Taylor CB=0.48 DTMB CB=0.6 DTMB CB=0.8 Taylor CB=0.7
Effect of Hull Model • In this application: • Minor changes to velocity profile as a function of hull model • Minor changes to velocity profile as a function of CB • Shifts shoulder downwards in plots as CB increases
Olmeda (cf Stapleton, 1997) Layer: h = 3 m, δ = 0.004 Length = 180 m Beam = 26 m Draft = 9.2 m Speed = 2.2 m/s Wake Angle 18º Taylor CB=0.7
Conclusions • Simulations are reasonably consistent with observations • Sir Tristram observed maximum water velocity at sensor is about 3 cm/s; same as simulations • Olmeda observed maximum velocity at sensor is about 5 cm/s; same as simulations • Wake determined mainly by block coefficient • Structure in first cycle appears to be similar in observations and simulations