Determination of discharge coefficients for a cross-flooding duct

On the calculation of cross-flooding time

“…Recently also NMRI in Japan has carried out model tests in scale 1:10 and performed comparative CFD calculations, IMO (2010), in order to validate the regression formulae, presented by Pittaluga and Giannini (2006). Contrary to the results of Stening et al (2011), both the initial experimental and CFD results slightly over-estimated the pressure losses in the duct. It is noteworthy that the stiffeners were not included in the NMRI study.…”

“…The discharge coefficient of a typical cross-duct arrangement was evaluated by using CFD tools. The investigated design is exactly the same that was used in the experimental study in scale 1:3 by Stening et al (2011). Therefore the results are fully comparable.…”

“…Based on the experimental results, the structural stiffeners inside the cross-duct and on the single girders increase the value of the discharge coefficient remarkably, Stening et al (2011). On the other hand, the influence of the inclination and the web-frame in the middle of the cross duct, were found to be negligible.…”

“…A systematic experimental study on determination of discharge coefficient for a cross-flooding duct in scale 1:3 pointed out the importance of structural stiffeners inside the duct Stening et al (2011). In the experiments the addition of the stiffeners increased the discharge coefficient of the duct by 7.5%.…”

Advanced Damage Stability Analyses for Design of Cargo Ships

“…The coefficient can be evaluated experimentally, Stening et al [13], or with CFD, Ruponen et al [14]. However, in practical design work, the simplified regression equations for various typical duct and pipe arrangements in the appendix of MSC.362(92) can be applied.…”