0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

RANS Simulation of Ducted Marine Propulsor Flow Including Subvisual Cavitation and Acoustic Modeling

[+] Author and Article Information
Jin Kim1

Iowa Institute of Hydraulic Research, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52246jkim@moeri.kr

Eric G. Paterson2

Iowa Institute of Hydraulic Research, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52246

Frederick Stern

Iowa Institute of Hydraulic Research, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52246

1

Present Senior Research Scientist, Maritime & Ocean Engineering Research Institute, Yuseong P.O. Box 23, Daejeon, Korea.

2

Presently Senior Research Associate, Applied Research Laboratory, Pennsylvania State University.

J. Fluids Eng 128(4), 799-810 (Dec 11, 2005) (12 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2201697 History: Received June 12, 2003; Revised December 11, 2005

High-fidelity Reynolds-averaged Navier Stokes (RANS) simulations are presented for the ducted marine propulsor P5206, including verification and validation (V&V) using available experimental fluid dynamics data, and subvisual cavitation, and acoustics analysis using the modified Rayleigh-Plesset equation along the bubble trajectories with a far-field form of the acoustic pressure for a collapsing spherical bubble. CFDSHIP-IOWA is used with the blended kωkε turbulence model and extensions for a relative rotating coordinate system and overset grids. The intervals of V&V analysis for thrust, torque, and profile averaged radial velocity just downstream of rotor tip are reasonable in comparison with previous results. The flow pattern displays the interaction and merging of the tip-leakage and trailing edge vortices. In the interaction region, multiple peaks and vorticity are smaller, whereas in the merging region, there is better agreement with the experiment. The tip-leakage vortex core position, size, circulation, and cavitation patterns for σi=5 also show good agreement with the experiment, although the vortex core size is larger and the circulation in the interaction region is smaller. The simulations indicate globally minimum Cp=σi=8.8 on the suction side of the rotor tip at 84% chord from the leading edge and locally minimum Cp=6.4 in the tip-leakage vortex at 8% chord downstream of the trailing edge, whereas EFD indicates σi=11 and the location in the tip-leakage vortex core 50% chord downstream of the trailing edge. Subvisual cavitation and acoustics analysis show that bubble dynamics may partly explain these discrepancies.

Copyright © 2006 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Cross plane velocity vectors and tangential velocity contours at S=1.02: (a) computation and (b) experiment

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

The grid convergence of radial velocity profile along the horizontal-cut line

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

The comparison error and validation uncertainty

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Comparison of the axial velocity profile at x∕D=−0.179

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Comparison of the axial velocity profile at x∕D=0.37

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Pressure on the surface of blade and hub

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Pressure on the duct surface

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

The flow structure of tip-leakage and trailing-edge vortices

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Vorticity contours at S=1.02: (a) computation and (b) experiment

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

The position of tip-leakage vortex core

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Vortex core size

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Pressure along the tip-leakage vortex

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

Numerical cavitation inception

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 19

Cavitation comparison with experiment: (a) experiment and (b) computation

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 20

Number of nuclei in a unit volume for the medium size water tunnel

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 21

SVC at σ=8.6 with R0=100μm: (a) response of the bubble radius and (b) response of the hydroacoustic pressure

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Schematic view of the experiments

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Comparison planes in the S coordinate system

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

The grid system: (a) the tunnel passage grid, (b) the blade grid, and (c) the refined grid in the leakage vortex area

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Schematic view of the boundary conditions for the ducted marine propulsor P5206: (a) tunnel passage blocks, (b) blade blocks, and (c) refined blocks

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In