DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/kapal.v22i1.69453

The Effect of Speed On Bow Thruster Tunnel Acoustics Using Computational Fluid Dynamics Methods

*Dedy Wahyudi  -  Department of Naval Architecture, Universitas Muhammadiyah Surabaya, Indonesia
Ardan Nagra Coutsar  -  Faculty of Defence Science and Technology, Indonesian Defense University, Indonesia
Putro Adi Nugroho  -  Department of Mechanical Engineering, Diponegoro University, Indonesia
Received: 21 Dec 2024; Revised: 25 Mar 2025; Accepted: 17 Apr 2025; Available online: 21 Apr 2025; Published: 21 Apr 2025.
Open Access Copyright (c) 2025 Kapal: Jurnal Ilmu Pengetahuan dan Teknologi Kelautan
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Citation Format:
Abstract

The increasing global emphasis on sustainability and environmental conservation has driven the maritime industry to adopt technologies aimed at minimizing ecological impacts, particularly underwater noise pollution. As a significant environmental issue, underwater noise affects marine ecosystems, altering the behavior, physiology, and survival of marine fauna, while contributing to broader ecological shifts. This research investigates the acoustic properties of a vessel's bow thruster tunnel, focusing on noise generation at varying operational speeds. The study utilizes Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations with ANSYS Fluent to analyze the relationship between fluid flow and acoustic behavior within the tunnel. Simulations conducted using CFD ANSYS Fluent reveal that high acoustic concentrations occur at the tunnel due to significant pressure differences between the interior and exterior. Results show that acoustic levels increase with ship velocity, ranging from 81.39 dB at 10 knots to 108.86 dB at 28 knots. To mitigate noise, a cone ring inlet design is proposed to reduce pressure differences and the ship's acoustic signature. These findings underscore the importance of vessel speed in influencing underwater noise levels, which can affect operational efficiency, marine ecosystems, and ship performance. The study highlights the need for a multi-faceted approach, incorporating hull design, propulsion systems, and operational strategies, to minimize acoustic impacts and promote sustainable maritime practices.

Fulltext
Keywords: Acoustics; Computational Fluid Dynamics; Pressure; Speed

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Research Articles
Language : EN
Recent articles
A Review of Systematic Methodologies for Shipyard Facility Layout Design The Application of Nanocoating and Cold-Dip Galvanization on Mitigating Corrosion for Ship and Offshore Mooring Chains Numerical Simulation of Sedimentation Patterns at the Tallo River Estuary (Case Study of New Makassar Container Terminal 2) Implementation of Failure Mode and Effects Analysis in the Maintenance Strategy for the Main Engine Cooling System Pump of Fishing Vessels More recent articles
Most cited articles
KAJIAN PENGGUNAAN PROGRAM APLIKASI DESAIN KAPAL TRADISIONAL PADA GALANGAN KAPAL KAYU DI KABUPATEN BATANG Karakteristik Geometri dan Pengaruhnya Terhadap Stabilitas Kapal Ferry Ro-Ro Indonesia PEMANFAATAN TENAGA ANGIN DAN SURYA SEBAGAI ALAT PEMBANGKIT LISTRIK PADA BAGAN PERAHU ANALISIS KEKUATAN STRUKTUR PADA KAPAL WISATA SUNGAI KALIMAS Estimation of Effective Wave Slope Coefficient of Ships with Large Breadth and Draught Ratio More cited articles
  1. J. A. Hildebrand, “Anthropogenic and natural sources of ambient noise in the ocean,” Mar Ecol Prog Ser, vol. 395, pp. 5–20, 2009, doi: 10.3354/MEPS08353
  2. M. A. McDonald, J. A. Hildebrand, and S. M. Wiggins, “Increases in deep ocean ambient noise in the Northeast Pacific west of San Nicolas Island, California,” J Acoust Soc Am, vol. 120, no. 2, pp. 711–718, Aug. 2006, doi: 10.1121/1.2216565
  3. R. Bruintjes and A. N. Radford, “Context-dependent impacts of anthropogenic noise on individual andsocial behaviour in a cooperatively breeding fish,” Anim Behav, vol. 85, no. 6, pp. 1343–1349, Jun. 2013, doi: 10.1016/J.ANBEHAV.2013.03.025
  4. A. A. Y. H. Chan and D. T. Blumstein, “Attention, noise, and implications for wildlife conservation and management,” Appl Anim Behav Sci, vol. 131, no. 1–2, pp. 1–7, Apr. 2011, doi: 10.1016/J.APPLANIM.2011.01.007
  5. C. R. Kight and J. P. Swaddle, “How and why environmental noise impacts animals: An integrative, mechanistic review,” Ecol Lett, vol. 14, no. 10, pp. 1052–1061, Oct. 2011, doi: 10.1111/J.1461-0248.2011.01664.X
  6. K. C. Buckstaff, R. S. Wells, J. G. Gannon, and D. P. Nowacek, “Responses of bottlenose dolphins (tursiops truncatus) to construction and demolition of coastal marine structures,” Aquat Mamm, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 174–186, 2013, doi: 10.1578/AM.39.2.2013.174
  7. R. Williams, C. Erbe, E. Ashe, and C. W. Clark, “Quiet(er) marine protected areas,” Mar Pollut Bull, vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 154–161, Nov. 2015, doi: 10.1016/J.MARPOLBUL.2015.09.012
  8. R. T. Buxton, R. Galvan, M. F. McKenna, C. L. White, and V. Seher, “Visitor noise at a nesting colony alters the behavior of a coastal seabird,” Mar Ecol Prog Ser, vol. 570, pp. 233–246, Apr. 2017, doi: 10.3354/MEPS12073
  9. C. D. Francis, N. J. Kleist, C. P. Ortega, and A. Cruz, “Noise pollution alters ecological services: Enhanced pollination and disrupted seed dispersal,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, vol. 279, no. 1739, pp. 2727–2735, Jul. 2012, doi: 10.1098/RSPB.2012.0230
  10. H. P. Kunc, K. E. McLaughlin, and R. Schmidt, “Aquatic noise pollution: Implications for individuals, populations, and ecosystems,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, vol. 283, no. 1836, Aug. 2016, doi: 10.1098/RSPB.2016.0839
  11. J. P. Jalkanen, L. Johansson, M. H. Andersson, E. Majamäki, and P. Sigray, “Underwater noise emissions from ships during 2014–2020,” Environmental Pollution, vol. 311, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.1016/J.ENVPOL.2022.119766
  12. M. F. McKenna, D. Ross, S. M. Wiggins, and J. A. Hildebrand, “Underwater radiated noise from modern commercial ships,” J Acoust Soc Am, vol. 131, no. 1, pp. 92–103, Jan. 2012, doi: 10.1121/1.3664100
  13. J. M. Jones, K. H. Westdal, A. J. Ootoowak, S. M. Wiggins, and J. A. Hildebrand, “Impact of ship noise on the underwater soundscape of Eclipse Sound in the northeastern Canadian Arctic,” Mar Pollut Bull, vol. 195, p. 115534, Oct. 2023, doi: 10.1016/J.MARPOLBUL.2023.115534
  14. S. A. Patil and R. R. Arakerimath, “Parametric Optimization of Biodiesel Fuelled Engine Noise using the Taguchi Method,” Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 6076–6079, 2020, doi: 10.48084/etasr.3595
  15. A. Dunstrom and F. Skjernov, “Development and study of noise generation from propellers,” KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 2022
  16. S. Ekinci, “A Practical Noise Prediction Method for Cavitating Marine Propellers,” Brodogradnja, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 359–366, 2010, [Online]. Available: http://hrcak.srce.hr/file/94695
  17. M. H. Park, S. Yeo, J. H. Choi, and W. J. Lee, “Review of noise and vibration reduction technologies in marine machinery: Operational insights and engineering experience,” Applied Ocean Research, vol. 152, p. 104195, Nov. 2024, doi: 10.1016/J.APOR.2024.104195
  18. R. Cui, Z. Liu, X. Wang, Z. Yang, S. Fan, and Y. Shu, “The impact of marine engine noise exposure on seafarer fatigue: A China case,” Ocean Engineering, vol. 266, p. 112943, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1016/J.OCEANENG.2022.112943
  19. J. M. Daniel, M. G. Schuster, G. Andresen-Paulsen, F. Holz, K. Wittekind, and S. Ehlers, “An Advanced Prediction Model for Underwater Noise Emissions of Ships,” Journal of Ship Production and Design, vol. 38, no. 04, pp. 220–238, Nov. 2022, doi: 10.5957/JSPD.06210017

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2025-04-26 18:16:21

No citation recorded.