Formation Design Systems Maxsurf Stability Tank Table
Formation Design Systems Maxsurf Stability Tank Table
Formation Design Systems Maxsurf Stability Tank Table
Edward Dawson
Maritime Division
DSTO-TR-2968
ABSTRACT
A verification and validation analysis was undertaken to prove that the Maxsurf Stability
software can be used to generate platform tank calibration data in a format and standard that
meets, or exceeds, the requirements imposed by the Maritime Institute of the Netherlands
(MARIN) and the Cooperative Research Navies (CRNAV) ship stability working group. The
results of the analyses show that the Maxsurf Stability software program (Version 20.00.00.59)
generates tank calibration data and a tank table output file that meets the aforementioned
requirements.
RELEASE LIMITATION
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Published by
Maritime Division
DSTO Defence Science and Technology Organisation
506 Lorimer St
Fishermans Bend, Victoria 3207 Australia
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Executive Summary
The FREDYN semi-non-linear time domain ship motion and manoeuvring simulation
program is currently used by the Defence Science and Technology Organisation
(DSTO) to conduct platform motion predictions, analyses and evaluations. An
important aspect of FREDYN’s functionality is its ability to simulate the effects of
internal flooding on the motion response of a ship, submarine or floating structure.
This development has been achieved through the combined efforts of the Cooperative
Research Navies (CRNAV) working group. The FREDYN flooding module requires a
database of the platform’s internal compartment and tank volumes to enable it to
compute the instantaneous internal flooding water level, centre of mass, free-surface
effect and other fluid volume specific parameters. This database is typically generated
from a three-dimensional computer aided design (CAD) model of the platform and its
internal volumes and is stored as an ASCII text data file. The file is referred to as a tank
table or tank calibration file. To date, the database file is generated using third party
software, in particular the Paramarine integrated naval architecture design and
analysis program.
In 2010 the DSTO Maritime Platforms Division (now the Maritime Division) contracted
Formation Design Systems Pty. Ltd. (FDS) to incorporate a tank table file generation
capability within its ship stability and hydrostatics software program then known as
Hydromax (now issued as Maxsurf Stability).
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
The scope of the verification and validation analysis was limited to the tank calibration
output file (*.OUT) generated by Maxsurf Stability. A simple box shaped barge with
four internal tanks was used as the test case in accordance with the requirement
specified by MARIN. Tank data were computed for the test case for a series of body-
fixed rotations (heel and trim) in addition to the upright condition. The analysis was an
objective evaluation of the tank calibration file’s data content, format and quality
against the data interface requirements specified by MARIN and a comparative tank
table file generated by MARIN using Paramarine V7.1.
The results of the verification analysis indicates that the data content and format of the
tank calibration file generated using Maxsurf Stability V20.00.01.59 meets all of the
requirements specified by MARIN in their two interface requirements documents. The
validation of the tank calibration data quality was completed by making a direct
comparison against the data generated using Paramarine V7.1. The comparison
indicated that there are several instances where the two data do not compare well and
there is a significant relative error. An independent data set was generated using the
three dimensional CAD modelling program Rhinoceros 3D V4.0 to provide an
objective comparison between it and the Paramarine and Maxsurf Stability data.
A comparison between the Maxsurf Stability and Rhinoceros 3D data sets indicated
that the data returned by Maxsurf Stability was predominantly (69%) accurate (with no
relative error). There were limited instances (29%) where the data was found to be in
error by less than one percent and only a few instances (2%) where the data was in
error by more than one percent but less than five percent. These errors are attributed to
both numerical rounding and the numerical discretization and integration method
used by Maxsurf Stability.
Based on the analyses conducted and the results of the verification and validation
study, it is recommended that Maxsurf Stability V20.00.01.59 be considered for
acceptance and endorsed by MARIN and the CRNAV as a method for generating tank
table database files.
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Author
Edward Dawson
Maritime Division
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
Contents
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background ................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Scope of the Verification and Validation ............................................................. 1
1.3 Acceptance Criteria ................................................................................................... 2
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
1. Introduction
This report presents the methodology and results of the configuration item verification
and validation (V&V) analysis of the Maxsurf Stability Advanced Version 20.00.01.59
(Maxsurf Stability) [1] tank calibration file generator. The independent V&V analysis was
conducted within the Defence Science and Technology Organisation’s (DSTO) Maritime
Division. The purpose of the V&V analysis was to provide objective evidence that the
Maxsurf Stability software can generate a tank calibration output file that meets the build-
to requirements and the prescribed interface requirements that will enable its use with the
existing semi-non-linear time domain ship motion simulation code, FREDYN [2].
1.1 Background
In recent years the Cooperative Research Navies (CRNAV) membership group has worked
to develop a flooding module within FREDYN to investigate the effects of hull damage
and subsequent flooding on a platform’s motion response, stability and survivability. To
enable these analyses, a database of the tank fluid volume properties is used in calculating
the flow of water and air within the platform’s compartments. The database is referred to
by the Maritime Research Institute of the Netherlands (MARIN) as a Tank Table and in the
context of Maxsurf Stability as a Tank Calibration file.
In 2010 DSTO contracted Formation Design Systems Pty. Ltd. (FDS), the developers of the
Maxsurf suite of naval architectural modelling and analysis software, to develop a tank
table database generator within their existing hydrostatics and stability analysis program
(then known as Hydromax but recently renamed Maxsurf Stability). The functionality
implemented by the developers allows the user to use the legacy tank and compartment
modelling tools and tank calibration analysis routine to generate a set of tank data for a
range of heel, trim and tank fill capacity conditions. This data is then able to be exported
from Maxsurf Stability as a tank calibration file (tank table) for further processing using
the MARIN Tank Table Processor. Once processed the output data is appropriate for use
by the FREDYN flooding module.
UNCLASSIFIED
1
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
V&V Boundary
UNCLASSIFIED
2
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
The MARIN barge and tank configuration is comprised of a simple box shaped hull
geometry with four internal, identically sized, cube shaped tanks. This geometry has been
modelled using Paramarine by researchers and software developers at MARIN to yield,
among other data, tank calibration files. Consequently, existing tank calibration data and
output files are available for comparison and reference purposes.
The MARIN barge SB Fwd tank was modelled in Rhinoceros 3D as a solid polyhedral for a
range of tank filling levels and a range of heel and trim angles. The filling levels and heel
and trim angles analysed correspond to those used by Ypma [3] and are presented in
Section 3 of this report. The relative error between the Paramarine and Maxsurf Stability
data and the Rhinceros 3D and Maxsurf Stability data were calculated for each parameter
and test condition. The results of the validation study are presented in Appendix B and
Appendix C for the Paramarine and Rhinoceros 3D comparisons respectively.
UNCLASSIFIED
3
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
3. Validation Analysis
It is important to note that the barge’s body-fixed coordinate system differs from the tank
body fixed system described above. As presented by Ypma [3], the barge body-fixed
coordinate system has the origin at the aft perpendicular, centreline and baseline. The
directions of the principal axes are: x axis is positive forwards, the y axis is positive to port
and the z axis is positive upwards.
The majority of the SB Fwd tank’s fluid volume properties are measured relative to the
body-fixed datum (origin of the coordinate system) in accordance with the coordinate
system presented in Section 3.1 and the reference conventions presented by Ypma [3]. The
tanks’ moments of inertia are calculated at the centre of volume of each tank using a
coordinate system that is aligned with the tanks’ body-fixed system.
UNCLASSIFIED
4
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
x
SB Fwd
Figure 2 MARIN Barge model with four independent tanks. The body-fixed coordinate system
shown corresponds to the tanks’ (SHCP tank data output system).
The location of the geometric centre of the SB Fwd tank with zero fluid content and in the
upright condition (no heel or trim) is presented in Table 3.
UNCLASSIFIED
5
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
A matrix of five heel and trim conditions corresponding to those presented by Ypma [3]
was used to conduct the validation analysis of the tank fluid volume properties. The
matrix is presented in Table 4.
Table 4 Heel and trim angle matrix used to conduct the validation analysis
Condition Heel [deg] Trim [deg]
No heel or trim 0.00 0.00
Heel to port only -1.00 0.00
Heel to starboard only 1.00 0.00
Trim by the Head only 0.00 -1.00
Trim by the Stern only 0.00 1.00
UNCLASSIFIED
6
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
The Capacity parameter of the tank was not explicitly analysed as the 1 tonne per cubic
metre fluid density results in a Capacity of equal numerical value to the Volume. The
Capacity results returned by Maxsurf Stability were found to be of an identical numerical
value to the corresponding Volume results for all heel, trim and fill conditions.
A colour indicator system was used to distinguish the magnitude of the relative error of
the Maxsurf Stability (and Paramarine) generated data. The indicator system and its
prescribed relative error ranges are presented in Table 6.
The results of the verification analysis presented in Appendix A show that the Maxsurf
Stability program is successful in generating a tank calibration file (tank table) that
complies with the build-to requirements prescribed by MARIN. In addition to this, the
MARIN Tank Table Processor V1.1 was successful in importing, processing and exporting
the Maxsurf Stability generated tank calibration files.
UNCLASSIFIED
7
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
The results of the quantitative analysis and validation of the Maxsurf Stability generated
tank calibration file has indicated a number of issues. The comparison between the
Paramarine V7.1 and Maxsurf Stability data has shown significant relative errors in the
following data:
1. Sounding data for the two trim conditions and all fill conditions
2. Longitudinal Centre of Gravity (LCG) data for both trim conditions and all fill
conditions (this error is most noticeable for the 0.1 percent fill condition and
becomes less significant as the fill level increases, nonetheless, the error is still
apparent)
3. Transverse Centre of Gravity (TCG) data for all heel, trim and fill conditions
4. Free-surface data for all heel, trim and fill conditions
5. product moments of inertia (Iyz and Ixz) for the two heel conditions and all fill
conditions.
The cause of these issues has been identified as two discrepancies between the Paramarine
data and the coordinate system requirements prescribed by Ypma [3]. The identified
causes that explain the relative errors observed in the validation analysis are:
1. The tank body-fixed sign convention that underpins the Paramarine data does not
comply with the system described by Ypma [3]. The sign (positive or negative) of
the Paramarine data corresponds to a convention system where the transverse
direction is positive to port and a trim by the bow is positive. The tank body-fixed
coordinate system prescribed by Ypma [3] requires the transverse axis to be
positive to starboard and the trim angle to be positive for a trim by the stern. These
two discrepancies explain the significant relative errors observed for the Sounding,
LCG, TCG, Iyz and Ixz data. It should be noted that if these two coordinate system
discrepancies are corrected, the result is that the Paramarine and Maxsurf Stability
data (Sounding, LCG, TCG, Iyz and Ixz) are in agreement and show minimal or no
relative error.
2. Paramarine does not return a calculated value for the free-surface moment
parameter whereas Maxsurf Stability does. Consequently, the comparison between
Paramarine and Maxsurf Stability results in an infinite relative error and the
meaningful validation of this data cannot be achieved. A result of ‘Cannot Be
Assessed” has been recorded for these comparisons in Table B6 to Table B10
inclusive in Appendix B.
In addition to these discrepancies, it was also observed that the Paramarine tank table file
Input Compartment Definitions data did not match the corresponding example data
presented by Ypma [3]. Details of these discrepancies are presented in Figure 3, Figure 4
and Figure 5.
UNCLASSIFIED
8
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
Figure 3 Coordinate system check: coordinate and rotation system description and reference
example indicating heel and trim conditions and resultant sign convention of Sounding,
LCG, TCG and VCG [3]. Refer to Table B1 to B5 inclusive to see Paramarine V7.1
results and the discrepancy in TCG tank data.
UNCLASSIFIED
9
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
Figure 4 Tank Table compartment bounding box data description and example for the MARIN
box barge [3].
Figure 5 Tank Table compartment bounding box data generated using Paramarine V7.1
(validation data set) provided by Ypma [8]. Highlighted text entries indicate the
discrepancy when compared to MARIN requirements document example (Figure 4).
Notwithstanding the observed discrepancies, only minimal relative error (RE < ±1 percent)
was observed for a minor number of the remaining tank parameters and test conditions.
These instances constitute only 24% of the total comparisons made. The source of these
differences can be attributed to the rounding (precision) and integration errors inherent in
the routines used in these computer programs.
The results of the comparison between Maxsurf Stability and Rhinoceros 3D data
(Appendix C) indicate that Maxsurf Stability is successful in calculating and outputting
accurate tank data. Of the thirteen parameters, five heel and trim conditions and five fill
levels tested for the SB Fwd tank, the analysis indicated that: 69% were error free; 29%
UNCLASSIFIED
10
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
were in error by less than ±1 percent; and 2% were in error by less than ±5 percent but
more than ±1 percent. Similar to the Paramarine and Maxsurf Stability comparison, the
sources of these errors are most likely to be the numerical rounding of the results and the
level of discretization used in the numerical integration technique programmed in
Maxsurf Stability. In five of the six results that were in error by more than ±1 percent the
error can be attributed to the numerical rounding. In these cases, the magnitude of the
difference between the Maxsurf Stability data and the objective data is large relative to the
absolute value of the result. This exacerbates the size of the error. Nonetheless, the result
of the Maxsurf Stability – Rhinoceros 3D validation analysis provides evidence that the
Maxsurf Stability program can successfully generate accurate tank table data.
Based on the outcomes of the verification and validation analyses presented in this report
and the related acceptance criteria imposed by MARIN, it is recommended that the
Maxsurf Stability (Version 20.00.01.59) software program be considered for acceptance by
MARIN and the Cooperative Research Navies working group as a method for generating
tank tables for use with FREDYN.
UNCLASSIFIED
11
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
References
1. Formation Design Systems, Maxsurf Stability Advanced. 2012, Bentley Systems:
Fremantle, Australia.
2. MARIN, FREDYN Version 10.3 Computer Program for the Simulation of a Steered Ship in
Extreme Seas and Wind. 2011, CRNAV, Maritime Research Institute Netherlands.
3. Ypma, E.L., Tank-table Generation: Variable Definitions & Rotation Sequence Check. 2011:
Wageningen, The Netherlands.
4. Ypma, E., FREDYN-PARAMARINE Interface Requirements. 2010: Wageningen, The
Netherlands.
5. Robert McNeel and Associates, Rhinoceros NURBS Modelling for Windows. 2011: Seattle,
Washington.
6. Formation Design Systems, Maxsurf Modeler Advanced. 2012, Bentley Systems:
Fremantle, Australia.
7. Formation Design Systems, Maxsurf Stability Windows Version 18 User Manual. 2012,
Bentley Systems, Incorporated: Fremantle, Australia.
8. Ypma, E., SHCP format tank data, E. Dawson, Editor. 2013, MARIN.
9. Ypma, E., Confirming the required axis convention for tank tables, E. Dawson, Editor. 2013,
MARIN.
10. Rosborough, J., SHCP Ship Hull Charcteristics Program User's Manual Version 4.3.6, 08
April 2005. 2005: West Bethesda, MD.
UNCLASSIFIED
12
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
UNCLASSIFIED
13
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
Req ID Document Document Document Document Sub- Requirement Verification Method Compliance Verification Evidence Comment
Section Section Title Sub-Section Section Title
1-6 2 Tank Tables 2.4 Tank Mass The table format will be Inspection Compliant For Maxsurf Stability generated output files: Observed for all No Comment.
Moment of Inertia completed with 6 columns in the generated files but for evidence 0.00 deg heel, 0.00 deg trim
Columns following order (left to right): [Filename: Maxsurf Stability Tank Table Verification 0 Heel 0
1. Ixx Trim.OUT].
2. Iyy The tank mass moments of inertia (Ixx, Iyy, Izz, Ixy, Iyz, Ixz) are
3. Izz recorded in the tank data table in the aforementioned order. The
4. Ixy tank mass moments of inertia are recorded for each tank for all %
5. Iyz FULL. The tank mass moments of inertia data is recorded in the
6. Ixz last six (6) columns in the output file for each tank (Column 10
through 15).
1-7 2 Tank Tables 2.5 Summary A single tank-table will have the Inspection Compliant For Maxsurf Stability generated output files: Observed for all Note that there is no FS
following columns: generated files but for evidence 0.00 deg heel, 0.00 deg trim column listed in the
FULL [Filename: Maxsurf Stability Tank Table Verification 0 Heel 0 requirement [4]. This
SOUNDING Trim.OUT]. The tank table contains the following columns (listed requirement is assumed to
VOLUME in sequence): FULL, SOUNDING, VOLUME, CAPACITY, LCG, be an ‘as a minimum’ type
CAPACITY VCG, TCG, FS, S, Ixx, Iyy, Izz, Ixy, Iyz, Ixz. requirement.
LCG
TCG
VCG
S
Ixx
Iyy
Izz
Ixy
Iyz
Ixz
1-8 2 Tank Tables 2.5 Summary The unit of the ‘mass moment of Inspection Compliant For Maxsurf Stability generated output files: Observed for all No Comment.
inertia’ is given in [m^5] generated files but for evidence 0.00 deg heel, 0.00 deg trim
[Filename: Maxsurf Stability Tank Table Verification 0 Heel 0
Trim.OUT].
The tank mass moments of inertia (Ixx, Iyy, Izz, Ixy, Iyz, Ixz) are
recorded in the tank data table with the unit of [m^5].
1-9 2 Tank Tables 2.5 Summary The unit of the ‘mass moment of Inspection Compliant Evidence of calculation methods and algorithms has been No Comment.
inertia’ [m^5] has to be supplied by the Developer and is presented in Appendix F. The
calculated as such algorithms illustrate the use of the volume moments method for
calculating the volume moment of inertia with the result being in
the units of m^5. Noting that the 'mass moment of inertia' stated
in the requirement is a pseudo-mass and is independent of fluid
density, consequently resulting in a m^5 output.
1-10 3 Geometry 3.3 Tank Data For each tank in the XML file Inspection Compliant For Maxsurf Stability generated output files: Observed for all No Comment.
Information there has to be a corresponding generated files but for evidence 0.00 deg heel, 0.00 deg trim
tank-table in the tank table file [Filename: Maxsurf Stability Tank Table Verification 0 Heel 0
Trim.OUT].
For each tank in the *.XML file (generated for the Barge using
Maxsurf Stability) there is a corresponding tank-table in the tank
table (*.OUT) file.
UNCLASSIFIED
14
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
Table A2 Tank Calibration File data format verification matrix: requirements transposed from the FREDYN variable definitions and rotation sequence check document presented by Ypma [3]
Req ID Document Document Document Document Sub- Requirement Verification Method Compliance Verification Evidence Comment
Section Section Title Sub-Section Section Title
2-1 6.2 Tank Table 6.2.1 SHCP Original The tank tables are generated in Inspection Complies For Maxsurf Stability generated output files: 1.00 deg heel Additional verification
Format the SHCP format. [Filename: Maxsurf Stability Tank Table Verification 1 Heel 0 evidence: the Maxsurf
Trim.OUT] the data format contained in the file matches the Stability tank calibration
SHCP format presented in Section 6.2.1 Table 1 and Section 6.3 output file was
Table 2 and the associated Extension described in Section 6.2.2 [3] successfully read in,
reviewed and processed
using the MARIN Tank
Table Processor
Version 1.1.
2-2 6.2 Tank Table 6.2.1 SHCP Original Based on the information Inspection Complies For Maxsurf Stability generated output files: 1.00 deg heel
Format provided in [3], the following [Filename: Maxsurf Stability Tank Table Verification 1 Heel 0
SHCP output body fixed Trim.OUT] and -1.00 deg heel [Filename: Maxsurf Stability Tank
coordinate system is required: Table Verification -1 Heel 0 Trim.OUT].
The origin occurs at amidhsips, With respect to Tank 102 Fwd SB: The output centre of volume for
centreline and baseline (keel). an upright barge condition has positive values of LCG, TCG and
The positive directions of the VCG indicating that the point of the centre of volume is positive
principal axes are: x is positive forward of amidships, positive to starboard and positive above
forward of amidships, y is the baseline.
positive to starboard, z is
positive upwards.
2-3 6.5 Quality Table Item 1 Description The filling percentage has to be Inspection Complies For Maxsurf Stability generated output files: Observed for all See Req 1-3
Definition defined from 0% to 100% generated files but for evidence 0.00 deg heel, 0.00 deg trim
[Filename: Maxsurf Stability Tank Table Verification 0 Heel 0
Trim.OUT].
The tank data is recorded for each tank for varying contents
ranging from 0% to 100% full inclusive. The % FULL data is the
leading column in the output file for each tank.
2-4 6.5 Quality Table Item 2 Description Strictly ascending level with Inspection Complies For Maxsurf Stability generated output files: Observed for all
Definition increasing volume generated files but for evidence 0.00 deg heel, 0.00 deg trim
[Filename: Maxsurf Stability Tank Table Verification 0 Heel 0
Trim.OUT].
The tank data is recorded for each tank for varying contents
ranging from 0% to 100% full inclusive in ascending order.
2-5 6.5 Quality Table Item 3 Description All tables have to be 100% filled Inspection Complies For Maxsurf Stability generated output files: Observed for all
Definition generated files but for evidence 0.00 deg heel, 0.00 deg trim
[Filename: Maxsurf Stability Tank Table Verification 0 Heel 0
Trim.OUT].
The tank data is recorded for each tank for varying filling values
ranging from 0% to 100% inclusive.
2-6 6.5 Quality Table Item 4 Description All tables have to be the same Inspection Complies For Maxsurf Stability generated output files: Observed for all Refer to Appendix C to
Definition size generated files but for evidence 0.00 deg heel, 0.00 deg trim view the contents of the
[Filename: Maxsurf Stability Tank Table Verification 0 Heel 0 Maxsurf Stability Tank
Trim.OUT]. Table Verification 0 Heel 0
The tank tables generated in the tank calibration output file are of Trim.OUT file.
identical size for all tanks/tables.
2-7 6.5 Quality Table Item 5 Description Compartment info shall be Inspection Complies For Maxsurf Stability generated output files: Observed for all Refer to Appendix C to
Definition included generated files but for evidence 0.00 deg heel, 0.00 deg trim view the input
[Filename: Maxsurf Stability Tank Table Verification 0 Heel 0 compartment description
Trim.OUT]. data and location within
The compartment information is contained in the output file the output file.
under the header INPUT COMPARTMENT DESCRIPTIONS
(starting at line 14).
UNCLASSIFIED
15
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
Req ID Document Document Document Document Sub- Requirement Verification Method Compliance Verification Evidence Comment
Section Section Title Sub-Section Section Title
2-8 6.5 Quality Table Item 6 Description Reliable ‘smooth’ free surface Analysis and Complies For Maxsurf Stability generated output files: Observed for all Refer to Appendix E for
Definition area inspection generated files but for evidence 1.00 deg heel, 0.00 deg trim and the plots of the SB Fwd
60.00 deg heel, 0.00 deg trim. tank free-surface area
The Maxsurf Stability tank calibration files were imported and versus filling percentage
processed using the MARIN Tank Table Processor V1.1 and the for starboard heel angles of
free-surface area (S) was plotted as a function of filling 1 degree and 60 degrees.
percentage. The plotted data possessed a smooth form and the
smoothness of the data was found to be reliable as it was observed
for a range of heel and trim conditions.
2-9 6.5 Quality Table Item 7 Description ‘tankTableProcessor’ application Execution and Complies For Maxsurf Stability generated output files: Observed for all
Definition is the format checker inspection generated files but for evidence 0.00 deg heel, 0.00 deg trim
[Filename: Maxsurf Stability Tank Table Verification 0 Heel 0
Trim.OUT].
All MARIN barge tank calibration files generated using Maxsurf
Stability were successfully opened, reviewed and processed using
Tank Table Processor Version 1.1.
UNCLASSIFIED
16
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
Appendix B: Maxsurf Stability Tank Calibration Output File – Comparison with Paramarine V7.1 Data
B.1. Comparison of Maxsurf Stability against Paramarine V7.1: Volume, Sounding, LCG, VCG and TCG
Table B1 SB FWD Tank at 0.10% Full.
Maxsurf Stability Advanced: V20.00.01.59 Paramarine V7.1 Relative Error
Volume Sounding Volume Sounding Volume Sounding
Heel [deg] Trim [deg] 3 LCG [m] VCG [m] TCG [m] 3 LCG [m] VCG [m] TCG [m] [%] LCG [%] VCG [%] TCG [%]
[m ] [m] [m ] [m] [%]
0.00 0.00 0.12 0.01 17.50 0.00 2.50 0.13 0.01 17.50 0.00 -2.50 -8.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 200.00
-1.00 0.00 0.12 0.03 17.50 0.01 0.56 0.13 0.03 17.50 0.01 -0.56 -8.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 200.00
1.00 0.00 0.12 -0.06 17.50 0.01 4.44 0.13 -0.06 17.50 0.01 -4.44 -8.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 200.00
0.00 -1.00 0.12 -0.32 19.43 0.01 2.50 0.13 0.29 15.56 0.01 -2.50 -8.33 210.34 -24.86 0.00 200.00
0.00 1.00 0.12 0.29 15.57 0.01 2.50 0.13 -0.32 19.44 0.01 -2.50 -8.33 190.63 19.92 0.00 200.00
UNCLASSIFIED
17
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
Table B5 SB FWD Tank at 99.9% Full.
Maxsurf Stability Advanced: V20.00.01.59 Paramarine V7.1 Relative Error
Volume Sounding Volume Sounding Volume Sounding
Heel [deg] Trim [deg] 3 LCG [m] VCG [m] TCG [m] 3 LCG [m] VCG [m] TCG [m] [%] LCG [%] VCG [%] TCG [%]
[m ] [m] [m ] [m] [%]
0.00 0.00 124.86 5.00 17.50 2.50 2.50 124.88 5.00 17.50 2.50 -2.50 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 200.00
-1.00 0.00 124.86 5.06 17.50 2.50 2.50 124.88 5.06 17.50 2.50 -2.50 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 200.00
1.00 0.00 124.86 4.97 17.50 2.50 2.50 124.88 4.97 17.50 2.50 -2.50 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 200.00
0.00 -1.00 124.86 4.71 17.50 2.50 2.50 124.88 5.32 17.50 2.50 -2.50 -0.02 11.47 0.00 0.00 200.00
0.00 1.00 124.86 5.32 17.50 2.50 2.50 124.88 4.71 17.50 2.50 -2.50 -0.02 -12.95 0.00 0.00 200.00
B.2. Comparison of Maxsurf Stability against Paramarine V7.1: Free-Surface Moment and Free-Surface Area
Table B6 SB FWD Tank at 0.10% Full.
Maxsurf Stability Advanced: V20.00.01.59 Paramarine V7.1 Relative Error
Free-Surface Moment 2 Free-Surface Moment 2 Free-Surface Moment [%]
Heel [deg] Trim [deg] Free-Surface Area [m ] Free-Surface Area [m ] Free-Surface Area [%]
[m-tonne] [m-tonne]
0.00 0.00 52.08 25.00 0.00 25.00 Cannot Be Assessed 0.00
-1.00 0.00 2.02 8.46 0.00 8.44 Cannot Be Assessed -0.24
1.00 0.00 2.02 8.46 0.00 8.44 Cannot Be Assessed -0.24
0.00 -1.00 17.79 8.54 0.00 8.44 Cannot Be Assessed -1.18
0.00 1.00 17.54 8.42 0.00 8.44 Cannot Be Assessed 0.24
UNCLASSIFIED
18
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
Table B9 SB FWD Tank at 75% Full.
Maxsurf Stability Advanced: V20.00.01.59 Paramarine V7.1 Relative Error
Free-Surface Moment 2 Free-Surface Moment 2 Free-Surface Moment [%]
Heel [deg] Trim [deg] Free-Surface Area [m ] Free-Surface Area [m ] Free-Surface Area [%]
[m-tonne] [m-tonne]
0.00 0.00 52.08 25.00 0.00 25.00 Cannot Be Assessed 0.00
-1.00 0.00 52.10 25.00 0.00 25.00 Cannot Be Assessed 0.00
1.00 0.00 52.10 25.00 0.00 25.00 Cannot Be Assessed 0.00
0.00 -1.00 52.09 25.00 0.00 25.00 Cannot Be Assessed 0.00
0.00 1.00 52.09 25.00 0.00 25.00 Cannot Be Assessed 0.00
B.3. Comparison of Maxsurf Stability against Paramarine V7.1: Volume moments of inertia (Ixx, Iyy and Izz) and Product moments of inertia (Ixy, Iyz and Ixz)
Table B11 SB FWD Tank at 0.10% Full.
Maxsurf Stability Advanced: V20.00.01.59 Paramarine V7.1 Relative Error
Heel Trim 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Ixx [m ] Iyy [m ] Izz [m ] Ixy [m ] Iyz [m ] Ixz [m ] Ixx [m ] Iyy [m ] Izz [m ] Ixy [m ] Iyz [m ] Ixz [m ] Ixx [%] Iyy [%] Izz [%] Ixy [%] Iyz [%] Ixz [%]
[deg] [deg]
0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
-1.00 0.00 0.02 0.26 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.26 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 0.00
1.00 0.00 0.02 0.26 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.26 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 0.00
0.00 -1.00 0.26 0.02 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.02 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 1.00 0.26 0.02 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.02 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
UNCLASSIFIED
19
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
Table B14 SB FWD Tank at 75% Full.
Maxsurf Stability Advanced: V20.00.01.59 Paramarine V7.1 Relative Error
Heel Trim 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Ixx [m ] Iyy [m ] Izz [m ] Ixy [m ] Iyz [m ] Ixz [m ] Ixx [m ] Iyy [m ] Izz [m ] Ixy [m ] Iyz [m ] Ixz [m ] Ixx [%] Iyy [%] Izz [%] Ixy [%] Iyz [%] Ixz [%]
[deg] [deg]
0.00 0.00 305.15 305.72 391.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 305.18 305.18 390.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 -0.18 -0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00
-1.00 0.00 305.18 305.74 391.15 0.00 1.70 0.00 305.20 305.21 390.62 0.00 -1.70 0.00 0.01 -0.17 -0.14 0.00 200.00 0.00
1.00 0.00 305.18 305.74 391.15 0.00 -1.70 0.00 305.20 305.21 390.62 0.00 1.70 0.00 0.01 -0.17 -0.14 0.00 200.00 0.00
0.00 -1.00 305.18 305.74 391.15 0.00 0.00 1.71 305.21 305.20 390.62 0.00 0.00 1.70 0.01 -0.18 -0.14 0.00 0.00 -0.59
0.00 1.00 305.18 305.74 391.15 0.00 0.00 -1.71 305.21 305.20 390.62 0.00 0.00 -1.70 0.01 -0.18 -0.14 0.00 0.00 -0.59
UNCLASSIFIED
20
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
Appendix C: Maxsurf Stability Tank Calibration Output File – Comparison with Rhinoceros 3D V4.0 Data
C.1. Comparison of Rhinoceros 3D V4.0 against Maxsurf Stability: Volume, Sounding, LCG, VCG and TCG
Table C1 SB FWD Tank at 0.10% Full.
Rhinoceros V4.0 SR9 Maxsurf Stability Advanced: V20.00.01.59 Relative Error
Volume Sounding Volume Sounding Volume Sounding
Heel [deg] Trim [deg] 3 LCG [m] VCG [m] TCG [m] 3 LCG [m] VCG [m] TCG [m] [%] LCG [%] VCG [%] TCG [%]
[m ] [m] [m ] [m] [%]
0.00 0.00 0.13 0.01 17.50 0.00 2.50 0.12 0.01 17.50 0.00 2.50 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
-1.00 0.00 0.13 0.03 17.50 0.01 0.56 0.12 0.03 17.50 0.01 0.56 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1.00 0.00 0.13 -0.06 17.50 0.01 4.44 0.12 -0.06 17.50 0.01 4.44 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 -1.00 0.13 -0.32 19.44 0.01 2.50 0.12 -0.32 19.43 0.01 2.50 4.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.00
0.00 1.00 0.13 0.29 15.56 0.01 2.50 0.12 0.29 15.57 0.01 2.50 4.00 0.00 -0.06 0.00 0.00
UNCLASSIFIED
21
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
Table C5 SB FWD Tank at 99.9% Full.
Rhinoceros V4.0 SR9 Maxsurf Stability Advanced: V20.00.01.59 Relative Error
Volume Sounding Volume Sounding Volume Sounding
Heel [deg] Trim [deg] 3 LCG [m] VCG [m] TCG [m] 3 LCG [m] VCG [m] TCG [m] [%] LCG [%] VCG [%] TCG [%]
[m ] [m] [m ] [m] [%]
0.00 0.00 124.88 5.00 17.50 2.50 2.50 124.86 5.00 17.50 2.50 2.50 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
-1.00 0.00 124.88 5.06 17.50 2.50 2.50 124.86 5.06 17.50 2.50 2.50 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1.00 0.00 124.88 4.97 17.50 2.50 2.50 124.86 4.97 17.50 2.50 2.50 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 -1.00 124.88 4.71 17.50 2.50 2.50 124.86 4.71 17.50 2.50 2.50 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 1.00 124.88 5.32 17.50 2.50 2.50 124.86 5.32 17.50 2.50 2.50 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C.2. Comparison of Rhinoceros 3D V4.0 against Maxsurf Stability: Free-Surface Moment and Free-Surface Area
Table C6 SB FWD Tank at 0.10% Full.
Rhinoceros V4.0 SR9 Maxsurf Stability Advanced: V20.00.01.59 Relative Error
Free-Surface Moment 2 Free-Surface Moment 2 Free-Surface Moment [%]
Heel [deg] Trim [deg] Free-Surface Area [m ] Free-Surface Area [m ] Free-Surface Area [%]
[m-tonne] [m-tonne]
0.00 0.00 52.08 25.00 52.08 25.00 0.00 0.00
-1.00 0.00 2.02 8.46 2.02 8.46 0.00 0.00
1.00 0.00 2.02 8.46 2.02 8.46 0.00 0.00
0.00 -1.00 17.64 8.46 17.79 8.54 -0.85 -0.95
0.00 1.00 17.64 8.46 17.54 8.42 0.57 0.47
UNCLASSIFIED
22
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
Note that the method of calculating the tank free-surface moment data presented under the Rhinoceros 3D column involved using the tank’s free-surface width and length dimensions measured directly
from the Rhinoceros 3D solid model and applying the standard formula: Free-Surface = fluid free-surface moment of inertia (m4) x density of the fluid in the tank (t/m3). As previously noted, the density of
3
the fluid in the tanks is 1 t/m (fresh water).
C.3. Comparison of Rhinoceros 3D V4.0 against Maxsurf Stability: Volume moments of inertia (Ixx, Iyy and Izz) and Product moments of inertia (Ixy, Iyz and Ixz)
Table C11 SB FWD Tank at 0.10% Full.
Rhinoceros V4.0 SR9 Maxsurf Stability Advanced: V20.00.01.59 Relative Error
Heel Trim 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Ixx [m ] Iyy [m ] Izz [m ] Ixy [m ] Iyz [m ] Ixz [m ] Ixx [m ] Iyy [m ] Izz [m ] Ixy [m ] Iyz [m ] Ixz [m ] Ixx [%] Iyy [%] Izz [%] Ixy [%] Iyz [%] Ixz [%]
[deg] [deg]
0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
-1.00 0.00 0.02 0.26 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.26 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1.00 0.00 0.02 0.26 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.26 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 -1.00 0.26 0.02 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.02 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 1.00 0.26 0.02 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.02 0.28 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
UNCLASSIFIED
23
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
Table C14 SB FWD Tank at 75% Full.
Rhinoceros V4.0 SR9 Maxsurf Stability Advanced: V20.00.01.59 Relative Error
Heel Trim 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Ixx [m ] Iyy [m ] Izz [m ] Ixy [m ] Iyz [m ] Ixz [m ] Ixx [m ] Iyy [m ] Izz [m ] Ixy [m ] Iyz [m ] Ixz [m ] Ixx [%] Iyy [%] Izz [%] Ixy [%] Iyz [%] Ixz [%]
[deg] [deg]
0.00 0.00 305.18 305.18 390.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 305.15 305.72 391.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 -0.18 -0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00
-1.00 0.00 305.18 305.16 390.63 0.00 1.70 0.00 305.18 305.74 391.15 0.00 1.70 0.00 0.00 -0.19 -0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00
1.00 0.00 305.18 305.16 390.63 0.00 -1.70 0.00 305.18 305.74 391.15 0.00 -1.70 0.00 0.00 -0.19 -0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 -1.00 305.17 305.19 390.64 0.00 0.00 1.70 305.18 305.74 391.15 0.00 0.00 1.71 0.00 -0.18 -0.13 0.00 0.00 -0.59
0.00 1.00 305.16 305.18 390.63 0.00 0.00 -1.70 305.18 305.74 391.15 0.00 0.00 -1.71 -0.01 -0.18 -0.13 0.00 0.00 -0.59
UNCLASSIFIED
24
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
D.1. Maxsurf Stability Tank Calibration output file (*.OUT): MARIN barge test case in an upright (zero heel and trim) condition
UNCLASSIFIED
25
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
UNCLASSIFIED
26
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
UNCLASSIFIED
27
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
Figure E1 Tank Table Processor plot of SB Fwd tank free-surface area (S) as a function of filling
percentage for a 1 degree heel to starboard condition.
Figure E2 Tank Table Processor plot of SB Fwd tank free-surface area (S) as a function of filling
percentage for a 60 degree heel to starboard condition.
UNCLASSIFIED
28
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
Figure E3 Tank Table Processor plot of tank free-surface area (S) as a function of filling percentage
for a combined 8 degree heel to port and 2 degree trim by the bow condition. Plot
indicates the undesirable and unacceptable lack of smoothness in the tank table data
(shown as the blue line) (Ypma [3]).
UNCLASSIFIED
29
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
UNCLASSIFIED
30
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
UNCLASSIFIED
31
UNCLASSIFIED
DSTO-TR-2968
UNCLASSIFIED
32
Page classification: UNCLASSIFIED
6a. DSTO NUMBER 6b. AR NUMBER 6c. TYPE OF REPORT 7. DOCUMENT DATE
DSTO-TR-2968 AR-015-954 Technical Report May 2014
8. FILE NUMBER 9. TASK NUMBER 10. TASK SPONSOR 11. NO. OF PAGES 12. NO. OF REFERENCES
2013/1232957/1 07-359 DGNPS 32 11
OVERSEAS ENQUIRIES OUTSIDE STATED LIMITATIONS SHOULD BE REFERRED THROUGH DOCUMENT EXCHANGE, PO BOX 1500, EDINBURGH, SA 5111
16. DELIBERATE ANNOUNCEMENT
No Limitations
19. ABSTRACT
This report presents the objectives, methodology and outcomes of the verification and validation analyses of the Maxsurf Stability tank
table generator software application. The fundamental objective of the analyses is to provide objective quantitative evidence that the
Maxsurf Stability software can be used to generate platform tank calibration data in a format and to a standard that meets, or exceeds,
the requirements imposed by the Maritime Institute of the Netherlands (MARIN) and the Cooperative Research Navies (CRNAV) ship
stability working group. The results of the analyses show that the Maxsurf Stability software program (Version 20.00.00.59) generates
tank calibration data and a tank table output file that meets the aforementioned requirements.