Parametric Investigation on the Influence of GM, Roll Damping, and Above-Water Form on the Roll Response of Model 5613

Abstract

0S~Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 'ublic reporting burden for this collection of information is ostimated to average 1 hour per response, inctuding the time for reviewing instructions, searching exsting data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be sublect to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently ývaltd OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. REPORT DATE (MM/DDIYYYY)2. REPORT TYPE DATES COVERED (From

Procedures for Early-Stage Naval Ship Design Evaluation of Dynamic Stability: Influence of the Wave Crest

“…The influence of these features, such as flared bow, is reflected in the position of the maximum of the calm‐water GZ curve. This can be illustrated by a comparison of the GZ curve of two notional ships from ONR topside series (Bishop et al 2005). These ships have exactly the same hull shape below the calm‐water waterline, but differ in topside configuration, one with flare and one with tumblehome.…”

“…The ships also included the ONR tumblehome topside hull, which is known to be vulnerable to decreased stability near a wave crest (Bishop et al 2005; Bassler et al 2007; Hashimoto 2009). This was intended to provide a verification of the assessment method.…”

“…For the ONR tumblehome topside configuration, the stability failure caused by pure loss of stability is known from a number of numerical and experimental studies (Bishop et al 2005; Bassler et al 2007; Hashimoto 2009). The fact that the present method was capable of determining the increased risk of pure loss of stability for the ONRTH, compared to other ships of similar size, also demonstrates the robustness of the method.…”

On the Parametric Resonance of Tumblehome Hullforms in a Longitudinal Seaway

“…The ONR 3 Topsides hullforms were used for a study of the influence of above‐waterline shape on the parametric resonance of a destroyer‐sized vessel. The vessel underbody is similar in size and characteristics to the DDG51 with three different topside shapes, one with 10° flare (model 5613), one with 10° tumblehome (model 5613‐1), and one wallsided (model 5613‐2) (Bishop et al 2005). The three topsides are designed to match the same underbody.…”

“…Experimental tests were conducted for the three topside hullforms pictured in Figure 1 at two loading conditions corresponding to a calm water GM , that is, GM 0 , of 1.5 m and 2.5 m. Additionally, the hulls were studied as bare hulls and with bilge keels running 1/3 of the ship length centered amidships of 1.25 and 1.75 m span (Bishop et al 2005). For the purpose of this work, data were employed for the three hulls loaded to a calm water GM 0 of 1.5 m with 1.25 m bilge keels.…”