Impact of Surface Roughness on Interference Resistance in Delft 372 Catamarans
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15282/ijame.22.3.2025.1.0958Keywords:
Catamaran, Ship Resistance, Interference Factor, Surface Roughness, Computational Fluid DynamicsAbstract
Surface roughness from marine biofouling significantly compromises catamaran performance, yet current models fail to predict its speed-dependent interference effects, a critical gap in sustainable vessel design. This study employs validated Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes-based computational fluid dynamics with the k-ω Shear Stress Transport turbulence model to quantify hydrodynamic impacts across Froude numbers ranging from 0.1 to 0.8. Four different biofouling conditions were systematically analyzed, with rigorous experimental validation against towing-tank data. Key results demonstrate that heavy fouling increased total resistance by 35% at Fr 0.8 versus hydrodynamically smooth surfaces, yet paradoxically generated favorable interference, IF = -0.08, through turbulence-mediated wave suppression. Conversely, hydraulically smooth surfaces exhibited peak detrimental interference, IF = 0.15, at Fr 0.5 due to constructive wave reinforcement. Concurrently, the heavy slime surface reduced inter-hull wave amplitude by 14.5% at Fr 0.5, while expanding the wetted area by 1.24%. The findings address the biofouling paradox by demonstrating that surface roughness facilitates a net reduction in resistance at Fr ≥ 0.65, challenging traditional beliefs regarding the uniformly negative impact of fouling. This study presents the inaugural predictive framework for strategic fouling management, emphasizing bow and midship interference zones, thereby addressing a significant gap in hydrodynamic prediction within realistic operational contexts.
References
[1] A. Fitriadhy, S. A. Azmi, N. Aqilah Mansor, and N. Adlina Aldin, “Computational fluid dynamics investigation on total resistance coefficient of a high-speed “deep-V” catamaran in shallow water,” International Journal of Automotive and Mechanical Engineering, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 4369–4382, 2017.
[2] R. W. Yeung and H. Wan, “Multi-hull and surface-effect ship configuration design: A framework for powering minimization,” Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, vol. 130, no. 3, p. 031005, 2008.
[3] R. Yeung, G. Poupard, J. O. Toilliez, H. Söding, A. S. Gotman, and H. F. Hemmen, “Interference-resistance prediction and its applications to optimal multi-hull configuration design,” Transactions - Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, vol. 112, pp. 142–169, 2005.
[4] A. Aubault and R. W. Yeung, “Interference resistance of multi-hull vessels in finite-depth waters,” in Volume 4: Offshore Geotechnics; Ronald W. Yeung Honoring Symposium on Offshore and Ship Hydrodynamics, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, pp. 721–730, 2012.
[5] Yanuar, Ibadurrahman, S. Karim, and M. Ichsan, “Experimental study of the interference resistance of pentamaran asymmetric side-hull configurations,” in AIP Conference Proceedings, American Institute of Physics Inc., vol. 1826, no. 1, p. 020025, 2017.
[6] A. Souto-Iglesias, D. Fernández-Gutiérrez, and L. Pérez-Rojas, “Experimental assessment of interference resistance for a Series 60 catamaran in free and fixed trim-sinkage conditions,” Ocean Engineering, vol. 53, pp. 38–47, 2012.
[7] T. Castiglione, W. He, F. Stern, and S. Bova, “URANS simulations of catamaran interference in shallow water,” Journal of Marine Science and Technology, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 33–51, 2014.
[8] A. Farkas, N. Degiuli, I. Tomljenović, and I. Martić, “Numerical investigation of interference effects for the Delft 372 catamaran,” Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment, vol. 238, no. 2, pp. 385–394, 2023.
[9] A. Doğrul, E. Kahramanoğlu, and F. Çakıcı, “Numerical prediction of interference factor in motions and added resistance for Delft catamaran 372,” Ocean Engineering, vol. 223, p. 108687, 2021.
[10] A. Firdhaus, K. Kiryanto, G. Rindo, and A. Trimulyono, “Analysis of interference factor in hydrofoil-supported catamarans (HYSUCAT),” Kapal: Jurnal Ilmu Pengetahuan dan Teknologi Kelautan, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 1–9, 2024.
[11] S. Song, Y. K. Demirel, C. De Marco Muscat-Fenech, T. Sant, D. Villa, T. Tezdogan, et al., “Investigating the effect of heterogeneous hull roughness on ship resistance using CFD,” Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, vol. 9, no. 2, p. 202, 2021.
[12] M. Insel and A. F. Molland, “An investigation into the resistance components of high speed displacement catamarans,” PhD dissertation, University of Southampton, 1990.
[13] R. Ravenna, A. Marino, S. Song, Y. Demirel, M. Atlar, and O. Turan, “Experimental investigation on the effect of biomimetic tubercles on the hydrodynamics of a flat plate,” in 6th International Conference on Advanced Model Measurements Technologies for The Maritime Industry (AMT’19), 2019.
[14] I. K. A. P. Utama, I. K. Suastika, and M. L. Hakim, “The phenomenon of friction resistance due to streamwise heterogeneous roughness with modified wall-function RANSE,” in Applications of Computational Fluid Dynamics Simulation and Modeling, IntechOpen, 2022.
[15] S. Song, S. Dai, Y. K. Demirel, M. Atlar, S. Day, and O. Turan, “Experimental and theoretical study of the effect of hull roughness on ship resistance,” Journal of Ship Research, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 62–71, 2021.
[16] W. Amiruddin et al., “Prediction of the impact of biofouling roughness on a full-scale planing boat performance using CFD,” Ocean Engineering, vol. 301, p. 117457, 2024.
[17] A. Firdhaus, P. Manik, M. L. Hakim, and K. Kiryanto, “CFD analysis of the influence of marine fouling on the performance of high-speed planning craft,” Journal of Advanced Research in Fluid Mechanics and Thermal Sciences, vol. 110, no. 2, pp. 124–137, 2023.
[18] M. L. Hakim, B. Nugroho, T. Putranto, K. Suastika, and I. K. A. P. Utama, “Assessment of drag penalty resulting from the roughness of freshly cleaned and painted ship-hull using computational fluid dynamics,” 11st International Conference on Marine Technology MARTEC 2018, 2018.
[19] M. L. Hakim, B. Nugroho, M. N. Nurrohman, I. K. Suastika, and I. K. A. P. Utama, “Investigation of fuel consumption on an operating ship due to biofouling growth and quality of anti-fouling coating,” IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci, vol. 339, no. 1, 2019.
[20] H. Kawashima, H. Mieno, T. Hiroi, and T. Hamada, “Effect of Roughness Shape Parameter of Painted Surface on Frictional Resistance,” in Practical Design of Ships and Other Floating Structures, T. Okada, K. Suzuki, and Y. Kawamura, Eds., Singapore: Springer Singapore, pp. 227–245, 2021.
[21] Y. K. Demirel, O. Turan, and A. Incecik, “Predicting the effect of biofouling on ship resistance using CFD,” Applied Ocean Research, vol. 62, pp. 100–118, 2017.
[22] C. Gallin, “Inventiveness in Ship Design,” TU Delft, Faculty of Marine Technology, OEMO, Published in: North East Coast Institution of Engineers and Shipbuilders, Bolbec Hall, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, Oct. 1977, Accessed: May 30, 2022. [Online]. Available: http://resolver.tudelft.nl/uuid:94565129-2c80-4504-9414-68f2494a9218
[23] M. P. Schultz, “Effects of coating roughness and biofouling on ship resistance and powering,” Biofouling, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 331–341, 2007.
[24] F. R. Menter, “Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications,” AIAA Journal, vol. 32, no. 8, pp. 1598–1605, 1994.
[25] F. R. Menter, “Influence of freestream values on k-omega turbulence model predictions,” AIAA Journal, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 1657–1659, 1992.
[26] F. Menter, “Zonal two equation k-w turbulence models for aerodynamic flows,” in 23rd Fluid Dynamics, Plasmadynamics, and Lasers Conference, in Fluid Dynamics and Co-located Conferences, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1993.
[27] F. R. Menter, “Performance of popular turbulence model for attached and separated adverse pressure gradient flows,” AIAA Journal, vol. 30, no. 8, pp. 2066–2072, 1992.
[28] ITTC, “Recommended Procedures and Guidelines Practical Guidelines for Ship Resistance CFD,” 2014.
[29] ITTC, “Recommended Procedures and Guidelines Practical Guidelines for Ship CFD Applications,” 2011.
[30] John. D. Anderson, Computational Fluid Dynamics; The Basic With Applications. 1995.
[31] R. Broglia, B. Jacob, S. Zaghi, F. Stern, and A. Olivieri, “Experimental investigation of interference effects for high-speed catamarans,” Ocean Engineering, vol. 76, pp. 75–85, 2014.
[32] M. L. Hakim, B. Nugroho, I. K. Suastika, and I. K. A. P. Utama, “Alternative empirical formula for predicting the frictional drag penalty due to fouling on the ship hull using the design of experiments (DOE) method,” International Journal of Technology, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 829–842, 2021.
[33] M. L. Hakim, B. Nugroho, R. C. Chin, T. Putranto, I. K. Suastika, and I. K. A. Pria Utama, “Drag penalty causing from the roughness of recently cleaned and painted ship hull using RANS CFD,” CFD Letters, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 78–88, 2020.
[34] S. Zaghi, R. Broglia, and A. Di Mascio, “Experimental and numerical investigations on fast catamarans interference effects,” Journal of Hydrodynamics, vol. 22, no. 5 SUPPL. 1, pp. 528–533, 2010.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 The Author(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
