A Multi-objective Optimization Method for Resistance Performance of an Icebreaker Bow Based on Fully Parameterized Modeling

Abstract

The form of an icebreaker bow is numerically optimized using a platform that relies on three methods ship geometry morphing under a fully parameterized modeling approach, a cyclic process of contact compression bending failure to calculate the icebreaking loads, and a differential evolution algorithm for optimization. The main objectives of this study are to optimize the total resistance and the average pressure in the ice zone. Surface sensitivity analysis based on an adjoint solver is used to identify the most significant regions of the hull. The hull in these regions is then formed using a cubic nonuniform rational B-spline technique. The differential evolution algorithm is employed to optimize the objectives associated with the hull form and determine the corresponding optimized variables. The optimal values are obtained by comparing the Pareto optimal designs. The optimization results show that the acquired hull form reduces the total resistance by 4.2% and decreases the average pressure in the ice zone by 0.6%. The main modifications introduced by the optimization process are to increase the buttock angle and the waterline angle.

Keywords

Icebreaker / Fully parameterized modeling / Optimization / Total resistance / Average pressure in the ice zone

References

[1] Ab WahabMN, Nefti-MezianiS, AtyabiA. A comprehensive review of swarm optimization algorithms. PLOS ONE, 2015, 10(5): e0122827

[2] AhmadMF, IsaNAM, LimWH, AngKM. Differential evolution: A recent review based on state-of-the-art works. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 2022, 61(5): 3831-3872

[3] AliMZ, AwadNH, SuganthanPN, ReynoldsRG. An adaptive multipopulation differential evolution with dynamic population reduction. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, 2017, 47(9): 2768-2779

[4] AngJH, GohC, LiY. Key challenges and opportunities in hull form design optimisation for marine and offshore applications. 2015 21st International Conference on Automation and Computing (ICAC), 20151-6

[5] AnzaiK, HinoT, YamauchiY, MizunoS. Hull form optimization of an icebreaker ship considering the performance in ice and open water conditions. Journal of the Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers, 2022, 35: 1-12

[6] Chen J, Chen Z, Ma Q, Zhang Y, He Y (2025) Hull form optimization for polar carrier based on navigation state recognition model. Journal of Ocean Engineering and Science, Available online 22 January 2025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joes.2024.12.004

[7] ChenJ, ChenZ, WangD, ZhangY, HeY. Prediction and empirical formula correction for brash ice resistance using CFD-DEM based on invisible bulbous bow ship. Ocean Engineering, 2024, 310: 118752

[8] DuanF, ZhangL, ChenG, JiangH, ZhangQ. Polar vessel hullform design based on the multi-objective optimization NSGA II. Chinese Journal of Ship Research, 2017, 12(6): 66-72(in Chinese)

[9] FasseG, SacherM, HauvilleF, AstolfiJ-A, GermainG. Multiobjective optimization of cycloidal blade-controlled propeller: An experimental approach. Ocean Engineering, 2024, 299: 117363

[10] ForresterAIJ, KeaneAJ. Recent advances in surrogate-based optimization. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 2009, 45(1): 50-79 117363

[11] GaoLT, WangJW, WangQ. Numerical simulation method for motions of the icebreaker in level ice. Engineering Mechanics, 2019, 36(1): 227-237(in Chinese)

[12] GuanG, ZhuangZ, YangQ, JinS. Design parameter sensitivity analysis for SWATH with minimum resistance at design and service speeds. Ocean Engineering, 2021, 240: 109961

[13] GuanG, ZhuangZ, YangQ, WangP, JinS. Hull form optimization design of SWATH with combination evaluations of resistance and seakeeping performance. Ocean Engineering, 2022, 264: 112513

[14] HanS, YanL, SunJ, DingS, LiF, ZhouL. Automatic unberthing for underactuated unmanned surface vehicle: Modelbased planning and control approaches in constricted harbors. Ocean Engineering, 2024, 312: 119059

[15] HanY, ZhuX, ZhouL. A numerical procedure for calculating ice-induced fatigue damage for ship hulls in level ice. Ocean Engineering, 2024, 312: 119342

[16] HisetteQ, MylandDMethodology to investigate the icebreaking process of ships with nontypical icebreaking bow shapes, 20201-8OMAE2020

[17] HuB, LiuL, WangDY, JiSY. GPU-based DEM simulations of global ice resistance on ship hull during navigation in level ice. China Ocean Engineering, 2021, 35(2): 228-237

[18] HuangY, HuangS, SunJ. Experiments on navigating resistance of an icebreaker in snow covered level ice. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 2018, 152: 1-14

[19] HuangY, SunJ, LiW. Experimental observations of the flexural failure process of snow covered ice. Cold Regions Science and Technology, 2016, 129: 14-30

[20] KimHS, HaMK, AhnD, MolyneuxD. Hull form designs for icebreaking tankers. SNAME 7th International Conference and Exhibition on Performance of Ships and Structures in Ice, Alberta, Canada, 2006

[21] KimHS, LeeCJ. A study on the bow shape of ice breaking vessel. Journal of the Society of Naval Architects of Korea, 2010, 47(3): 469-475

[22] KimJH, RohMI, YeoIC. Hull form optimization of fully parameterized small ships using characteristic curves and deep neural networks. International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, 2024, 16: 100596

[23] KimMC, LeeWJ, ShinYJ. Comparative study on the resistance performance of an icebreaking cargo vessel according to the variation of waterline angles in pack ice conditions. International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, 2014, 6(4): 876-893

[24] KimSH, BoukouvalaF. Machine learning-based surrogate modeling for data-driven optimization: a comparison of subset selection for regression techniques. Optimization Letters, 2020, 14(4): 989-1010

[25] KondratenkoAA, KujalaP, HirdarisSE. Holistic and sustainable design optimization of Arctic ships. Ocean Engineering, 2023, 275: 114095

[26] LeifssonL, KozielS. Surrogate modelling and optimization using shape-preserving response prediction: A review. Engineering Optimization, 2016, 48(3): 476-496

[27] LillaAD, KhanMA, BarendseP. Comparison of Differential Evolution and Genetic Algorithm in the design of permanent magnet Generators. 2013 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology (ICIT), Cape Town, South Africa, 2013266-271

[28] LiuJJ, WuHY, YuL. Hull form optimization of polar expedition cruise ship considering transoceanic characteristics and brash ice effect on resistance and propulsion. Chinese Journal of Ship Research, 2024, 19(2): 62-70(in Chinese)

[29] LuY, GuZ, LiuS, ChuangZ, LiZ, LiC. Scenario-based optimization design of icebreaking bow for polar navigation. Ocean Engineering, 2022, 244: 110365

[30] MustafiD, SahooG. A hybrid approach using genetic algorithm and the differential evolution heuristic for enhanced initialization of the k-means algorithm with applications in text clustering. Soft Computing, 2019, 23(15): 6361-6378

[31] MylandD, EhlersS. Influence of bow design on ice breaking resistance. Ocean Engineering, 2016, 119: 217-232

[32] MylandD, HisetteQ. Experimental investigations on the level ice resistance of ships with non-typical icebreaking bow shapes. Ships and Offshore Structures, 2021, 16(sup1): 225-236

[33] MylandD, HisetteQ, CilkayaE, ÖzhanYSExperimental investigation of aspects influencing the level ice resistance of ships with non-typical icebreaking bow shapes, 20211-8OMAE2021

[34] PedersenR, MolnesD, StokkelandL, EhlersS. Structural optimization for ice-strengthened vessels. Proceedings of the MARTECH, 2014449-454

[35] PlagianakosVP, TasoulisDK, VrahatisMN. A Review of Major Application Areas of Differential Evolution. Advances in Differential Evolution, 2008197-238

[36] RahnamayanS, TizhooshHR, SalamaMMA. A novel population initialization method for accelerating evolutionary algorithms. Computers & Mathematics with Applications, 2007, 53(10): 1605-1614

[37] RenY, ChenZ, HeY, ChenC, LiuY, ZhengG. Numerical analysis of continuous icebreaking performance of icebreakers with different bow types. Ocean Engineering, 2023, 269: 113712

[38] RenaudP, SacherM, ScolanYM. Multi-objective hull form optimization of a SWATH configuration using surrogate models. Ocean Engineering, 2022, 256: 111209

[39] Ruiz CapelS, RiskaK, Gutiérrez RomeroJE. A methodology for designing light hull structure of ice class vessels. Journal of Ocean Engineering and Marine Energy, 2023, 9(2): 341-357

[40] SuSJ, JieT, LiuB. Multidisciplinary optimization design on ship principal dimensions based on resistance and EEDI. Journal of shanghai maritime university, 2018, 39(1): 25-30(in Chinese)

[41] SunJ, HuangY. Experimental Study on the Ice Resistance of a Naval Surface Ship with a Non-Icebreaking Bow. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 2023, 11(8): 1518

[42] TangL, MingJ, WuL. Multi-objective Optimization on Demihull Dimensions of Small Water-plane Area Twin Hull Vessel Based on EEDI. Ship Engineering, 2020, 42(9): 36-43(in Chniese)

[43] TušarT, FilipičBDifferential evolution versus genetic algorithms in multiobjective optimization, 2007, Berlin, Heidelberg, Evolutionary Multi-Criterion Optimization: 257-271

[44] WalkerJM, CoradduA, OnetoL. A review on shape optimization of hulls and airfoils leveraging Computational Fluid Dynamics Data-Driven Surrogate models. Ocean Engineering, 2024, 312: 119263

[45] WangG, FengY, DaiY, ChenZ, WuY. Optimization design of a windshield for a 12 000 TEU container ship based on a support vector regression surrogate model. Ocean Engineering, 2024, 313: 119405

[46] WangGG, ShanS. Review of Metamodeling Techniques in Support of Engineering Design Optimization. Journal of Mechanical Design, 2006, 129(4): 370-380

[47] WangJStructural design and optimization of an ice breaking platform supply vessel, 2013, Rostock, Germany, University of Rostock

[48] WangP, FengY, ChenZ, DaiY. Study of a hull form optimization system based on a Gaussian process regression algorithm and an adaptive sampling strategy, Part II: Multi-objective optimization. Ocean Engineering, 2023, 286: 115501

[49] WangSM, DuanF, LiY, XiaYK, LiZS. An improved radial basis function for marine vehicle hull form representation and optimization. Ocean Engineering, 2022, 260: 112000

[50] WangX, LiS, LongX, LinC, LiuZ. Ice-breaking performance sensitivity of the polar icebreaker to structure, control and ice parameters under different prediction models. Ocean Engineering, 2021, 236: 109453

[51] WangZ, HaoZ, WuC, JiS, TianY. Bow optimization of a polar oil tanker considering drag reduction of sailing in open water. Journal of Wuhan University of Technology (Transportation Science and Engineering), 2018, 42(2): 257-262(in Chinese)

[52] WeiHG, ChenHM, ZhangYF, CaoCG. Bow line optimization of a polar icebreaker. Ship and Boat, 2021, 5: 17-24(in Chinese)

[53] WeiY, ChenX, WangJ, WanD. Multi-objective hull form optimization utilizing sequential sampling optimization method. Ocean Engineering, 2024, 310: 118667

[54] XuW, WangY, WeiJ, SuJ. The optimization design for twin-skeg stern forms based on parametric modeling. Ship Science and Technology, 2023, 45(22): 56-60

[55] YuHC, KimS, YookRH, LeeDY, JungHC, SeoJS. The effect of icebreaking bow on the open water performance of a large arctic ore carrier. SNAME 9th International Conference and Exhibition on Performance of Ships and Structures in Ice, 2010

[56] ZhangQ, JiangD, ZhangM, FanT. Parametric modeling and hull line optimization for twin-skeg vessel. Ship & Boat, 2021, 32(04): 24-30(in Chinese)

[57] ZhangY, MaN, GuX, ShiQ. Geometric space construction method combined of a spline-skinning based geometric variation method and PCA dimensionality reduction for ship hull form optimization. Ocean Engineering, 2024, 302: 117604

[58] ZhangY, TaoL, WangC, YeL, SunS. Numerical study of icebreaking process with two different bow shapes based on developed particle method in parallel scheme. Applied Ocean Research, 2021, 114: 102777

[59] ZhouL, ZhangA, DingS, HanS, LiF, KujalaP. Numerical study of the cavitation performance of an ice-blocked propeller considering the free surface effect. Water, 2024, 16(22): 3260

[60] Zhou ZM, Sheng ZY, Fen WS (1983) On manoeuvrability prediction for multipurpose cargo ship. Ship Engineering (6): 21–29+36 (in Chinese). https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/1052/1/012001

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Harbin Engineering University and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature