The six-degrees-of-freedom ship motions of a ship at speeds other than zero are always measured in terms of encounter frequency, and often, the incident waves in experimental data are also measured only in the encounter frequency domain. Using these measured data to obtain transfer functions from irregular following sea ship motions is complicated by the combined effects of very low encounter frequencies and the “folding” of the sea spectra. This results in having both overtaking and encountered waves of the same encounter frequency but different wavelengths. Computing transfer functions becomes untenable when the ship speed approaches the wave phase velocity, where the encounter spectrum has a mathematical singularity. St. Denis and Pierson (1953, “On the Motions of Ships in Confused Seas,” Soc. Nav. Archit. Mar. Eng., Trans., 61, pp. 280–357) suggested the basic relationships between response ship motions or moments that can be developed in the wave frequency domain at the outset. The St. Denis–Pierson method is based on a linear theory and works well when the ship response regime is linear or weakly nonlinear. However, for high-speed craft operating at different headings where the problems are nonlinear, especially strongly nonlinear, the St. Denis–Pierson assumptions will break down inducing error (1953, “On the Motions of Ships in Confused Seas,” Soc. Nav. Archit. Mar. Eng., Trans., 61, pp. 280–357). Furthermore, using the frequency resolution method to remove the singularity point may also induce errors, especially when the singularity point is located near the peak of stationary frequency. How to obtain the correct frequency resolution in the local region of singularity point is still an unsolved problem. In this study, we will propose a new method capable of predicting ship response motions for crafts with nonlinear or strongly nonlinear behaviors quantitatively. For example, using this method, one can use measured ship motion data in head seas to predict the motions of the ship at high speed in following seas. The new method has six steps, including using a filter to eliminate those unexpected modes that are not from incident waves, inertial motions, or nonlinear interactions, and applying a higher-order Taylor expansion to eliminate the singularity point. We refer to the new method as the Lin–Hoyt method, which agrees reasonably well with computations of the nonlinear “digital, self-consistent, ship experimental laboratory ship motion model,” also known as DiSSEL (2006, “Numerical Modeling of Nonlinear Interactions Between Ships and Surface Gravity Waves II: Ship Boundary Condition,” J. Ship Res., 50(2), pp. 181–186). We also use experimental head sea data to validate the simulations of DiSSEL. The Lin–Hoyt method is fast and inexpensive. The differences in the results of the numerical simulations obtained by the Lin–Hoyt method and other linear methods diverge rapidly with increased forward ship speed due to the nonlinearity of ship motion responses.

1.
St. Denis
,
M.
, and
Pierson
,
W. J.
, 1953, “
On the Motions of Ships in Confused Seas
,”
Soc. Nav. Archit. Mar. Eng., Trans.
0081-1661,
61
, pp.
280
357
.
2.
Güntther
,
H.
,
Hasselmann
,
K.
, and
Janssen
,
P. A. E. M.
, 1993, “
The WAM Model Cycle 4
,”
DKRZ WAM Model Documentation
,
DKRZ
,
Hamburg, Germany
.
3.
Lin
,
R. -Q.
, and
Perrie
,
W.
, 1997, “
A New Coastal Wave Model. Part III: Nonlinear Wave-Wave Interaction
,”
J. Phys. Oceanogr.
1520-0485,
27
, pp.
1813
1826
.
4.
Lewis
,
E. V.
, 1989, “
Motions in Waves and Controllability
,”
Principles of Naval Architecture
, Vol.
3
,
The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers
,
Jersey City, NJ
.
5.
Lin
,
R. -Q.
, and
Kuang
,
W.
, 2006, “
Numerical Modeling of Nonlinear Interactions Between Ships and Surface Gravity Waves II: Ship Boundary Condition
,”
J. Ship Res.
0022-4502,
50
(
2
), pp.
181
186
.
6.
Lin
,
R. -Q.
,
Kuang
,
W.
, and
Reed
,
A. M.
, 2005, “
Numerical Modeling of Nonlinear Interactions Between Ships and Surface Gravity Waves I: Ship Waves in Calm Water
,”
J. Ship Res.
0022-4502,
49
(
1
), pp.
1
11
.
7.
Lin
,
R. -Q.
, and
Kuang
,
W.
, 2009, “
Solid-Body Motion in Fully Nonlinear Ship Motion Model
,” US Patent pending, Navy Case No. 97293.
8.
Lin
,
R. -Q.
, and
Kuang
,
W.
, 2008, “
Modeling Nonlinear Roll Damping With a Self-Consistent, Strongly Nonlinear Ship Motion Model
,”
J. Mar. Sci. Technol.
0948-4280,
13
, pp.
127
137
.
9.
Hoyt
,
J. G.
, III
, 1994, “
Test and Evaluation of the Propulsion System Demonstrator
,” Report No. CRDKNSWC/HD-1452-01.
10.
Lin
,
R. -Q.
, and
Engle
,
A.
, 2005, “
Wave-Wave Interactions Between a High-Speed Vessel and Surface Waves in a Nonlinear Time Dependent Six-Degree Ship Motion Model
,”
Proceedings of the FAST2007
, Ischia, Italy.
11.
Lin
,
R. -Q.
, and
Hoyt
,
J.
, III
, 2007 “
Fast Ship in Coastal Region
,”
Proceedings of the FAST2007
, Shanghai, China.
12.
Hoyt
,
J.
, III
, and
Lin
,
R. -Q.
, 2007, “
Numerical Simulation of the “Plow-In” Phenomena
,”
Proceedings of the ICMRT2007
, Ischia, Italy.
13.
Engle
,
A.
, and
Lin
,
R. -Q.
, 2007, “
A Comparison of Roll Prediction Algorithms With Model Test Data of a High Speed Catamaran
,”
Proceedings of the FAST2007
, Shanghai, China.
14.
Lin
,
W. M.
,
Zhang
,
S.
,
Weems
,
K.
, and
Treakle
,
T.
, 1986, “
Steady and Unsteady Ship Waves Predicted by the Large-Amplitude Motion Program (LAMP)
,”
Proceedings of the First Symposium on Marine Applications of Computational Fluid Dynamics
.
15.
Lin
,
R. -Q.
, and
Chubb
,
S.
, 2006, “
Energy Cascades in The Upper Ocean
,”
Chinese J. Oceanology and Limnology
,
24
, pp.
225
235
.
16.
Lin
,
R. -Q.
, and
Perrie
,
W.
, 1999, “
Wave-Wave Interactions in Finite Water Depth
,”
J. Geophys. Res.
0148-0227,
104
(
C5
), pp.
11193
11213
.
17.
Phillips
,
O. M.
, 1977,
The Dynamics of the Upper Ocean
,
Cambridge University Press
,
Cambridge
, p.
336
.
You do not currently have access to this content.