Validated Frequency-Domain Seakeeping Analysis of Coupled Heave–Pitch Response of an S-175 Container Ship for Structural Reliability Screening

Coupled heave and pitch motions dominate the vertical-plane dynamic response of displacement ships in head and near-head seas and drive global hull-girder loads, yet frequency-domain analyses often treat RAOs, added mass, damping and excitation in isolation; this study therefore develops and experimentally validates a mesh-converged three-dimensional linear potential-flow boundary-element model of the S-175 containership (LWL = 170.566 m, ≈12 480 panels) first against published RAOs at Fr = 0.275 and then applies it at 12.5 knots (Fr ≈ 0.157) to compute coupled heave–pitch RAOs, frequency-dependent hydrodynamic coefficients and Froude–Krylov/diffraction forces while retaining rigid-body characteristic frequencies (0.0866, 0.1111 and 0.1221 Hz) only as independent references, thereby addressing the persistent gaps of incomplete pre-speed-change validation, circular modal severity indices and limited coupled-response corridor identification through a non-circular equal-weight (0.5) severity index that excludes modal data and reveals a clear critical frequency–heading corridor of elevated demand in which heave RAOs reach 1.4–1.5 m/m and pitch RAOs reach 2.2–2.5 °/m (heave added mass ≈ 5.3 × 10⁷ kg), with validation yielding MAPE of 8–12 % (heave) and 6–10 % (pitch) together with R² = 0.92–0.97, ultimately furnishing a validated rigid-body basis for objective structural screening.

S-175 containership; seakeeping; heave–pitch coupling; response amplitude operator; boundary-element method; structural reliability; wave-induced loading; frequency-domain analysis

1. ANSYS, Inc. (2024). ANSYS AQWA theory manual. ANSYS, Inc. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Bishop, R. E. D., & Price, W. G. (1979). Hydroelasticity of ships. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bowker, J. A., Öster, A., & Townsend, N. C. (2025). Wave energy scavenging performance of heaving and pitching ship bow foils. Renewable Energy, 256, 124615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2025.124615 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Chang, X., Chen, Z., Jiao, J., & Ma, B. (2025). Experimental and numerical investigation on springing and whipping responses of a 21000 TEU containership. Ocean Engineering, 338, 121979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2025.121979 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Chen, C.-Z., Wang, Z.-H., Zou, L., Zou, Z.-J., Zhou, X., & Liu, X.-J. (2026). Data-driven modeling and prediction of ship motion in irregular waves using HODMD-CI. Ocean Engineering, 358, 125777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2026.125777 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Elakpa, A. A., Emmanuel, D. I., Ezebuchi, A., & Festus, D. I. (2018). Development of preliminary ship motion prediction tool for coupled heave and pitch. American Journal of Engineering Research, 7(12), 195–204. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Faltinsen, O. M. (1990). Sea loads on ships and offshore structures. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Feng, Z., Wang, H., Zhang, J., Deng, C., & Chang, Z. (2025). Dynamics of wave powered boat considering the heave and pitch motion excited by waves. Ocean Engineering, 335, 121541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2025.121541 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Ghadimi, P., Tavakoli, S., & Dashtimanesh, A. (2016). Coupled heave and pitch motions of planing hulls at non-zero heel angle. Applied Ocean Research, 59, 286–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2016.05.009 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Guo, H., Wang, S., Yu, L., Li, Y., Liu, X., Li, L., & Yang, M. (2026). Extremely short-term ship motion prediction using real-sea motion datasets based on the VMD-LSTM-FDR network. Ocean Engineering, 353, 124762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2026.124762 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Hanaki, T., & Minoura, M. (2022). Identification of ship motion performance of coupled heave and pitch using experimental irregular time-series data. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 27(2), 971–988. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00773-022-00887-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Hirdaris, S. E., Lee, Y., Mortola, G., Incecik, A., Turan, O., Hong, S. Y., Kim, B. W., Kim, K. H., Bennett, S., Miao, S. H., & Temarel, P. (2016). The influence of nonlinearities on the symmetric hydrodynamic response of a 10,000 TEU container ship. Ocean Engineering, 111, 166–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.10.049 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Hou, L., Wang, Q., & Liu, D. (2025). Real-time prediction of ship motion based on iTransformer with EWT-SampEn data processing. Ocean Engineering, 342, 122987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2025.122987 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Huang, L., Li, M., Chen, H., Sun, G., Wang, X., & Ma, X. (2026). A spectral-temporal Transformer framework for very short-term ship motion prediction with industrial applicability and cross-domain transferability. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 176, 114609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2026.114609 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Im, H.-I., Vladimir, N., Malenica, Š., & Cho, D.-S. (2017). Hydroelastic response of 19,000 TEU class ultra large container ship with novel mobile deckhouse for maximizing cargo capacity. International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, 9(3), 339–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnaoe.2016.11.004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. International Towing Tank Conference. (2014). Recommended procedures and guidelines: Numerical seakeeping calculations. International Towing Tank Conference. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. International Towing Tank Conference. (2017). Recommended procedures and guidelines: Seakeeping experiments. International Towing Tank Conference. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Jiao, J., Jiang, Y., Zhang, H., Li, C., & Chen, C. (2019). Predictions of ship extreme hydroelastic load responses in harsh irregular waves and hull girder ultimate strength assessment. Applied Sciences, 9(2), 240. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9020240 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Jiao, J., Huang, S., Wang, S., & Guedes Soares, C. (2021). A CFD–FEA two-way coupling method for predicting ship wave loads and hydroelastic responses. Applied Ocean Research, 117, 102919. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2021.102919 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Kara, F. (2015). Time domain prediction of hydroelasticity of floating bodies. Applied Ocean Research, 51, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2015.02.001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Khatibani, M. J., Ghassemi, H., & Ghiasi, M. (2025). Numerical study on coupled heave-pitch motions of multi-body wave-energy systems. Energy Conversion and Management. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Kim, J.-H., & Kim, Y. (2014). Numerical analysis on springing and whipping using fully-coupled FSI models. Ocean Engineering, 91, 28–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2014.08.001 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Lakshmynarayanana, P. A., & Temarel, P. (2020). Application of a two-way partitioned method for predicting the wave-induced loads of a flexible containership. Applied Ocean Research, 96, 102052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2020.102052 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Lang, X., Wu, D., & Mao, W. (2024). Physics-informed machine learning models for ship speed prediction. Expert Systems with Applications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Malenica, Š., Senjanović, I., Vladimir, N., Tomić, M., & Hadžić, N. (2014). Global hydroelastic analysis of ultra large container ships by improved beam structural model. International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, 6(4), 1041–1063. https://doi.org/10.2478/ijnaoe-2013-0230 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Mei, S., Fei, S., Qian, X., Li, J., & Wang, K. (2026). Transforming metocean data into motion predictions: A review of very short-term predictions of floating body motions. Applied Ocean Research, 167, 104934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2026.104934 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Newman, J. N. (1977). Marine hydrodynamics. MIT Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Palma, G., Serani, A., Aram, S., Wundrow, D. W., Drazen, D., & Diez, M. (2025). Bayesian Hankel dynamic mode decomposition for ship motion digital twinning. Applied Ocean Research, 165, 104863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2025.104863 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Price, W. G., & Bishop, R. E. D. (1974). Probabilistic theory of ship dynamics. Chapman and Hall. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Rajendran, S., Fonseca, N., & Guedes Soares, C. (2016). A numerical investigation of the flexible vertical response of an ultra large containership in high seas compared with experiments. Ocean Engineering, 122, 293–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2016.06.014 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Salvesen, N., Tuck, E. O., & Faltinsen, O. (1970). Ship motions and sea loads. Transactions of the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, 78, 250–287. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Schirmann, M. L., Collette, M. D., & Gose, J. W. (2022). Data-driven models for vessel motion prediction and the benefits of physics-based information. Applied Ocean Research, 120, 102916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2021.102916 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Schirmann, M. L., Gose, J. W., & Collette, M. D. (2023). A comparison of physics-informed data-driven modeling architectures for ship motion predictions. Ocean Engineering, 286, 115608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.115608 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Senjanović, I., Malenica, Š., & Tomašević, S. (2009). Hydroelasticity of large container ships. Marine Structures, 22(2), 287–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marstruc.2008.04.002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Si, H., Tian, C., Yang, J., Geng, Y., Zhao, N., Hu, J., & Zhan, J. (2025). Experimental investigation of nonlinear springing of ultra-large container ship in regular waves. Marine Structures, 99, 103697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marstruc.2024.103697 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Song, C., Zhang, X., & Zhang, G. (2022). Attitude prediction of ship coupled heave–pitch motions using nonlinear innovation via full-scale test data. Ocean Engineering, 264, 112524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.112524 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Storhaug, G. (2007). Experimental investigation of wave-induced vibrations and their effect on the fatigue loading of ships [Doctoral dissertation, Norwegian University of Science and Technology]. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Temarel, P., Bai, W., Bruns, A., Derbanne, Q., Dessi, D., Dhavalikar, S., Fonseca, N., Fukasawa, T., Gu, X., Nestegård, A., Papanikolaou, A., Parunov, J., Song, K. H., & Wang, S. (2016). Prediction of wave-induced loads on ships: Progress and challenges. Ocean Engineering, 119, 274–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2016.03.030 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Vijith, P. P., & Rajendran, S. (2023). Hydroelastic effects on the vertical bending moment of a container ship in head and oblique seas. Ocean Engineering, 285, 115385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.115385 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Wang, H., Duan, W., Chen, J., & Ma, S. (2022). A numerical method to compute flexible vertical responses of containerships in regular waves. Ocean Engineering, 266, 112828. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.112828 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Wei, Q., Wu, B., Li, X., Guo, X., Teng, Y., Gong, Q., & Wang, S. (2024). Short-term motion prediction of a semi-submersible platform based on a combined prediction model. Ocean Engineering, 307, 118039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2024.118039 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Wu, Y.-S., & Cui, W.-C. (2009). Advances in the three-dimensional hydroelasticity of ships. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment, 223(3), 331–348. https://doi.org/10.1243/14750902JEME159 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Xia, J., Wang, Z., & Jensen, J. J. (1998). Non-linear wave loads and ship responses by a time-domain strip theory. Marine Structures, 11(3), 111–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8339(98)00008-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Ye, Y., Jiang, J., Zhang, S., Fu, S., Pan, Z., Wu, S., et al. (2026). Global and structural hydroelastic analysis of a large container ship with forward speed using multi-module method. Journal of Ocean Engineering and Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joes.2026.01.007 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]