0
Research Papers: Flows in Complex Systems

Postswirl Maneuvering Propulsor

[+] Author and Article Information
Stephen A. Huyer

Naval Undersea Warfare Center,
Newport, RI 02841
e-mail: stephen.huyer@navy.mil

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received February 26, 2014; final manuscript received November 21, 2014; published online January 13, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Bart van Esch. This material is declared a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

J. Fluids Eng 137(4), 041104 (Apr 01, 2015) (10 pages) Paper No: FE-14-1100; doi: 10.1115/1.4029225 History: Received February 26, 2014; Revised November 21, 2014; Online January 13, 2015

This research examines the novel use of a postswirl propulsor to generate side forces sufficient for undersea vehicle control. Numerical simulations using the commercial computational fluid dynamics (CFD) code Fluent® were used to predict the side forces for open and ducted, post-swirl propulsors configured with an upstream rotor and movable downstream stator row. By varying the pitch angles of the stator blade about the circumference, it is possible to generate a mean stator side force that can be used to maneuver the vehicle while generating sufficient roll to counter the torque produced by the rotor. A simple geometric configuration was used to minimize body geometry effects to better understand the flow physics with simulations conducted in a water tunnel environment. Flow computations highlighted the component forces and were used to characterize the velocity fields between the rotor and stator blade rows as well as the velocity field in the stator wake. There was significant coupling between the rotor and stator blade rows as demonstrated by the rotor wake velocity profiles. While the flow fields were coupled, there was not a significant difference in rotor axial or side forces except for the largest pitch amplitudes. Predictions showed that the maneuvering propulsor generated side forces predominantly by the stator and body that significantly exceeded those produced by conventional undersea vehicle control surfaces with side force coefficients on the order of 0.5. These forces are approximately three times larger than those generated by conventional control surfaces on 21 in. unmanned undersea vehicles (UUV's). Even for zero flow velocities, side forces were produced due to the induced flow produced by the rotor over the stator, further demonstrating the potential for this technology to be used for undersea vehicle maneuvering.

Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Huyer, S. A., Dropkin, A., Dick, J., and Beal, D., 2010, “A Method to Generate Propulsor Side Forces,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 132(2), p. 021101. [CrossRef]
Huyer, S. A., Dropkin, A., Beal, D., Farnsworth, J., and Amitay, M., 2012, “Preswirl Maneuvering Propulsor,” J. Oceanic Eng., 37(1), pp. 122–138. [CrossRef]
Farnsworth, J., Amitay, M., Beal, D., and Huyer, S., 2011, “Measurements of a Stator-Induced Circumferentially-Varying Flow,” Exp. Fluids, 51(2), pp. 423–442. [CrossRef]
Roddy, R. F., 2003, “Investigation of the Resistance, Propulsion, Stability, and Control Characteristics of the NUWC/ARL UUV IMP From Captive Model Experiments,” Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division, Report No. NSWCCD-50-TR-2003/010.
Welch, J. R., 2007, “Design & Implementation of a Simulink Based Test Bed for Developing Prototype Algorithms for the Midsized Autonomous Research Vehicle (MARV),” Naval Undersea Warfare Center, Report No. NUWC TR-11822.
Panish, R., 2009, “Dynamic Control Capabilities and Developments of the Bluefin Robotics AUV Fleet,” Proceedings of the 16th International Symposium on Unmanned Untethered Submersible Technology (UUST), pp. 1–8.
ANSYS Inc., 2014, ANSYS Fluent® Users Guide, Version 15.0, www.ansys.com.
Gorski, J. J., 2004, “Evolving Computational Capability for Ship Hydrodynamics,” Naval Surface Warfare Center, Technical Report No. NSWCCD-50-TR-2004/058.
Rhee, S. H., and Joshi, S., 2005, “Computational Validation for Flow Around a Marine Propeller Using Unstructured Mesh Based Navier–Stokes Solver,” JSME Int. J. Series B, 48(3), pp. 562–570. [CrossRef]
Morgut, M., and Nobile, E., 2012, “Influence of Grid Type and Turbulence Model on the Numerical Prediction of the Flow Around Marine Propellers Working in Uniform Inflow,” Ocean Eng., 42, pp. 26–34. [CrossRef]
Gaggero, S., Villa, D., and Brizzolara, S., 2010, “RANS and PANEL Method for Unsteady Flow Propeller Analysis,” J. Hydrodyn., 22(5), pp. 547–552. [CrossRef]
Chase, N., and Carrica, P. M., 2013, “Submarine Propeller Computations and Application to Self-Propulsion of DARPA Suboff,” Ocean Eng., 60, pp. 68–80. [CrossRef]
Peng, H., Qiu, W., and Ni, S., 2013, “Effect of Turbulence Models on RANS Computation of Propeller Vortex Flow,” Ocean Eng., 72, pp. 304–317. [CrossRef]
Miller, R., Gorski, J., Xing, T., Carrica, P., and Stern, F., 2006, “Resistance Predictions of High Speed Mono and Multihull Ships With and Without Water Jet Propulsors Using URANS,” 26th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, pp. 1–16.
Dropkin, A., Huyer, S. A., and Henoch, C., 2011, “Combined Experimental/Numerical Development of Propulsor Evaluation Capability,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 133(8), p. 081105. [CrossRef]
ASME, 2008, “ASME Guide on Verification and Validation in Computational Fluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer,” ANSI Standard V&V-20, Technical Report ASME Committee No. PTC-61.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Maneuvering propulsor concept

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

CFD predictions of the total (rotor, stator, and body) force and moment coefficients for a baseline open and ducted propulsor

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Post-MP geometry; all dimensions in cm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Axial and side force iterative convergence

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Unsteady axial and side force coefficients taken over four propulsor rotations with comparisons to steady state predictions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Post-MP surface meshes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Cross section of the volume mesh taken between the rotor and stator blade rows and close-up view highlighting the structured mesh.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Post-MP performance curves

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Surface pressure distributions for the open and ducted post-MP configurations for A = 9 deg and J = 1.4

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Axial velocity contour plot midway between the rotor and stator blade rows for A = 9 deg and J = 1.4 for the open and ducted configurations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Axial velocity contour plot immediately aft of the stator blade row for A = 9 deg and J = 1.4 for the open and ducted configurations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Tangential velocity contour plot midway between the rotor and stator blade rows for A = 9 deg and J = 1.4 for the open and ducted configurations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Tangential velocity contour plot immediately aft of the stator blade row for A = 9 deg and J = 1.4 for the open and ducted configurations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Post-MP axial force coefficients as a function of pitch amplitude for J = 1.43

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Post-MP normal (y) force coefficients as a function of pitch amplitude for J = 1.43

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Post-MP orthogonal (z) force coefficients as a function of pitch amplitude for J = 1.43

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Axial velocity contour plot midway between the rotor and stator blade rows for A = 9 deg, zero freestream velocity (Bollard condition), and 1500 rpm rotational velocity for the open and ducted configurations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Axial velocity contour plot midway aft of the stator blade row for A = 9 deg, zero freestream velocity (Bollard pull), and 1500 rpm rotational velocity for the open and ducted configurations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Axial velocity contour plot in the x-y plane for A = 9 deg, zero freestream velocity (Bollard pull), and 1500 rpm rotational velocity for the open and ducted configurations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Axial velocity contour plot in the x-z plane for A = 9 deg, zero freestream velocity (Bollard pull), and 1500 rpm rotational velocity for the open and ducted configurations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Post-MP normal (y) force coefficients as a function of advance ratio (J) for A = 9 deg and 1500 rpm rotational velocity

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Post-MP axial forces (N) as a function of flow velocity (m/s) for A = 9 deg and 1500 rpm rotational velocity

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Post-MP normal (y) and side (z) forces (N) as a function of flow velocity (m/s) for A = 9 deg and 1500 rpm rotational velocity

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