The estimations of planing hull running attitude and resistance by using CFD and Goal Driven Optimization

  • ZHANG, Qi (Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Systems Engineering, Pukyong National University) ;
  • KIM, Dong-Joon (Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Systems Engineering, Pukyong National University)
  • Received : 2015.08.13
  • Accepted : 2015.08.31
  • Published : 2015.08.31


As a "kind of" mature ship form, planing hull has been widely used in military and civilian areas. Therefore, a reasonable design for planing hull becomes more and more important. For planing hull, resistance and trim are always the most important problems we are concerned with. It affects the planing hull's economic efficiency and maneuverability very seriously. Instead of the expensive towing tank experiments, the development of computer comprehensive ability allows us to previously apply computational fluid dynamics(CFD)to the ship design. In this paper, the CFD method and Goal Driven Optimization (GDO) were used in the estimations of planing hull resistance and running attitude to provide a possible method for performance computation of planing hull.


CFD;Goal Driven Optimization (GDO);Planing hull resistance;Planing hull running attitude


Supported by : Pukyong National University


  1. Arai M, Cheng L and Inoue Y. 1994. A computing method for the analysis of water impact of arbitrary shaped bodies. J Soc Nav Archit Jpn 176, 233-240. (doi:10.2534/jjasnaoe1968.1994.176_233)
  2. Anderson JD and Wendt J. 1995. Computational fluid dynamics. New York, McGraw-Hill, Springer.
  3. Battistin D and Iafrati A. 2003. A numerical model for hydrodynamic of planing surfaces. Proc.7th Int. Conf. Fast Sea Transportation FAST2003, Nanjing, p 33-38.
  4. Brizzolara S and Serra F. 2007. Accuracy of CFD codes in the prediction of planning surfaces hydrodynamic characteristics. 2nd International Conference on marine Research and Transportation, ICMRT'07. ISCHIA, p 28-30.
  5. Blount DL. 2011. Reflections on the significance of a landmark study of the hydrodynamics of planing craft. J Professional BoatBuilder, p 18-36.
  6. Hirt CW and Nichols BD. 1981. Volume of fluid (VOF) method for the dynamics of free boundaries. J comput phys 39(1), 201-225. (doi:10.1016/0021-9991(81)90145-5)
  7. ITTC-Recommended Procedures and Guidelines. 2011. Practical Guidelines for Ship CFD Applications, p 1-18.
  8. Konak A, Coit DW and Smith AE. 2006. Multi-objective optimization using genetic algorithms: A tutorial. J Reliab Eng Sys Safe 91, 992-1007. (doi:10.1016/j.ress.2005.11.018)
  9. Savitsky D. 1992. Overview of planing hull developments. Pro.HPM 92, Alexandria, Va: American Society of naval Engineers, p PC1-PC14.
  10. Soremekun GAE. 1997. Genetic algorithms for composite laminate design and optimization. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Blacksburg).
  11. Savander BR. 1997. Planing hull hydrodynamics, PhD thesis, Univ. of Michigan, USA
  12. Tulin MP. 1956. The theory of slender surfaces planing at high speed. Schiffstechnik 4, 125.
  13. Versteeg HK and Malalasekera W. 1995. An introduction to computational fluid dynamics. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
  14. Dong W, Huang X and Liu Z. 2004. Experimental determination of roll damping of deep-Vee planing craft. J Na Univ Eng 16(4), 26-29.
  15. Yang S and Gao L. 2008. Experimental study on resistance performance of an 11.8 meter gliding-hydrofoil craft. J Jiangsu Univ Sci Technol 22(2), 6-10.
  16. Zhao R, Faltinsen O and Haslum H. 1997. A simplified nonlinear analysis of a high speed planing craft in calm water. Proc. FAST 97Conf., Sydney, p 431.