Numerical simulation of planing hull motions in calm water and waves with overset grid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents simulations of planing hull motions in calm water and waves with the unsteady RANS solver and the overset grid in Star-CCM+. The calm-water simulations were performed for the Fridsma planing hull model at Froude numbers from 0.59 to 1.78. Convergence studies were first carried out on dimensions of overset domain, grid resolution, time step and turbulence model , including k – ɛ , Realizable k – ɛ , k – ω , and SST k – ω models. Uncertainties in numerical solutions due to spatial discretization were examined. The best-practice settings were summarized and used for simulations of the Fridsma planing hull with calm water and regular waves, as well as the investigations of scale effect . For the calm-water simulations, resistance, sinkage and trim of the Fridsma planing hull and LRI-II hull were compared with experimental data and empirical results based on the Savitsky method. Additionally, the recommended settings were also applied to two full-scale planing hulls, LRI-II and OTH-Vp, in irregular waves. Convergence studies were also carried out on wave generation. Predicted motions and vertical accelerations were compared with sea trial data. Validation studies show that the predictions are in good agreement with experimental data.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".