An Analysis and Comparison of the Hydrodynamic Behavior of Ships Using Mesh-Based and Meshless Computational Fluid Dynamics Simulations
Davide Caccavaro,
Bonaventura Tagliafierro,
Gianluca Bilotta,
José M. Domínguez,
Alessio Caravella,
Roberto Gaudio,
Alfredo Cassano,
Corrado Altomare,
Agostino Lauria
Affiliations
Davide Caccavaro
Department of Computer Engineering, Modelling, Electronics and Systems Engineering (DIMES), University of Calabria (UNICAL), Via P. Bucci, Cubo 42C, 87036 Rende, Italy
Bonaventura Tagliafierro
Department of Electrical Engineering, Uppsala University, 753 10 Uppsala, Sweden
Gianluca Bilotta
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Calabria, 87036 Rende, Italy
José M. Domínguez
Environmental Physics Laboratory, CIM-UVIGO, Universidade de Vigo, 34002 Ourense, Spain
Alessio Caravella
Department of Computer Engineering, Modelling, Electronics and Systems Engineering (DIMES), University of Calabria (UNICAL), Via P. Bucci, Cubo 42C, 87036 Rende, Italy
Roberto Gaudio
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Calabria, 87036 Rende, Italy
Alfredo Cassano
Institute on Membrane Technology, National Research Council, CNR-ITM, Via P. Bucci, Cubo 17C, 87036 Rende, Italy
This paper presents a comparison of two turbulence models implemented in two different frameworks (Eulerian and Lagrangian) in order to simulate the motion in calm water of a displacement hull. The hydrodynamic resistance is calculated using two open-source Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) software packages: OpenFOAM and DualSPHysics. These two packages are employed with two different numerical treatments to introduce turbulence closure effects. The methodology includes rigorous validation using a Wigley hull with experimental data taken from the literature. Then, the validated frameworks are applied to model a ship hull with a 30 m length overall (LOA), and their results discussed, outlining the advantages and disadvantages of the two turbulence treatments. In conclusion, the resistance calculated with OpenFOAM offers the best compactness of results and a shorter simulation time, whereas DualSPHysics can better capture the free-surface deformations, preserving similar accuracy.
