0
Research Papers: Flows in Complex Systems

Numerical Analysis of the Pressure Peak Position Shift With Deadrise Angle in Two-Dimensional Wedge Water Entry

[+] Author and Article Information
Xu Zhang

School of Aeronautic Science and Engineering,
Beihang University,
Beijing 100191, China
e-mail: zhangxu397@126.com

Peiqing Liu

School of Aeronautic Science and Engineering,
Beihang University,
Beijing 100191, China
e-mail: lpq@buaa.edu.cn

Qiulin Qu

School of Aeronautic Science and Engineering,
Beihang University,
Beijing 100191, China
e-mail: qql@buaa.edu.cn

Yunke Zhao

School of Aeronautic Science and Engineering,
Beihang University,
Beijing 100191, China
e-mail: zhao.yunke@163.com

Tianxiang Hu

School of Aeronautic Science and Engineering,
Beihang University,
Beijing 100191, China
e-mail: tianxiang.hu@buaa.edu.cn

Ramesh K. Agarwal

School of Engineering & Applied Science,
Washington University in St. Louis,
St. Louis, MO 63130
e-mail: rka@wustl.edu

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received September 18, 2017; final manuscript received April 17, 2018; published online May 18, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Moran Wang.

J. Fluids Eng 140(11), 111101 (May 18, 2018) (10 pages) Paper No: FE-17-1593; doi: 10.1115/1.4040067 History: Received September 18, 2017; Revised April 17, 2018

This study deals with the pressure peak position shift with deadrise angle during the initial phase of a two-dimensional (2D) wedge water entry. The finite volume method with volume of fluid (VOF) and dynamic mesh technique is used to simulate the water entry process of the 2D wedges with the moderate deadrise angles within the range α = 20 deg–60 deg. The results show that with the increasing deadrise angle, the pressure peak position shifts from the spray root to the wedge apex. And, the critical deadrise angle of pressure peak position shift is identified in the range between 40.8 deg and 41 deg, which is more precise than previous studies. In the initial stage of water entry of a 2D wedge, the pressure on wedge side is determined by the dynamic pressure term and unsteady term simultaneously. For the spray root position, at small deadrise angles, the unsteady term is stronger than the dynamic pressure term; at large deadrise angles, the former is weaker than the later.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Climent, H. , Benitez, L. , Rosich, F. , Rueda, F. , and Pentecote, N. , 2006, “ Aircraft Ditching Numerical Simulation,” 25th International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences, Hamburg, Germany, Sept. 3–8.
Toso, N. R. S. , 2009, “ Contribution to the Modelling and Simulation of Aircraft Structures Impacting on Water,” Ph.D. thesis, Universität Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany. https://elib.uni-stuttgart.de/handle/11682/3840
Shah, S. A. , 2010, “ Water Impact Investigations for Aircraft Ditching Analysis,” Master thesis, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, Melbourne, Australia. https://researchbank.rmit.edu.au/eserv/rmit:6137/Shah.pdf
Guo, B. D. , Liu, P. Q. , Qu, Q. L. , and Wang, J. W. , 2013, “ Effect of Pitch Angle on Initial Stage of a Transport Airplane Ditching,” Chin. J. Aeronaut., 26(1), pp. 17–26. [CrossRef]
Seddon, C. M. , and Moatamedi, M. , 2006, “ Review of Water Entry With Applications to Aerospace Structures,” Int. J. Impact Eng., 32(7), pp. 1045–1067. [CrossRef]
Faltinsen, O. M. , Landrini, M. , and Greco, M. , 2004, “ Slamming in Marine Applications,” J. Eng. Math., 48(3–4), pp. 187–217. [CrossRef]
Kapsenberg, G. K. , 2011, “ Slamming of Ships: Where are We Now?,” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A: Math., Phys. Eng. Sci., 369(1947), pp. 2892–2919. [CrossRef]
May, A. , 1975, “ Water Entry and the Cavity Running Behavior of Missiles,” NAVSEA Hydroballistics Advisory Committee, Silver Spring, MD, SEAHAC Technical Report No. 75-2. http://www.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA020429
Zou, L. , Zhu, G. X. , Chen, Z. , Pei, Y. G. , and Zong, Z. , 2017, “ Numerical Investigation on the Water Entry of Convex Objects Using a Multiphase Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics Model,” Int. J. Comput. Methods, 15(2), p. 1850008. [CrossRef]
Dyment, A. , 2015, “ Compressible Liquid Impact against a Rigid Body,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 137(3), p. 031102. [CrossRef]
Shi, H. H. , Itoh, M. , and Takami, T. , 2000, “ Optical Observation of the Supercavitation Induced by High-Speed Water Entry,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 122(4), pp. 806–810. [CrossRef]
von Kármán, T. , 1929, “ The Impact on Seaplane Floats During Landing,” National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Washington, DC, Report No. NACA TN 321. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19930081174
Wagner, H. , 1932, “ ÜberStoß- Und Gleitvorgänge an Der Oberfläche Von Flüssigkeiten,” Zeitschriftfür,” Angew. Math. Mech., 12(4), pp. 193–215. [CrossRef]
Dobrovol'skaya, Z. N. , 1969, “ On Some Problems of Similarity Flow of Fluid With a Free Surface,” J. Fluid Mech., 36(4), pp. 805–829. [CrossRef]
Cointe, R. , 1989, “ Two-Dimensional Water-Solid Impact,” ASME J. Offshore Mech. Arct., 111(2), pp. 109–114. [CrossRef]
Zhao, R. , and Faltinsen, O. , 1993, “ Water Entry of Two-Dimensional Bodies,” J. Fluid Mech., 246(1), pp. 593–612. [CrossRef]
Mei, X. , Liu, Y. , and Yue Dick, K. P. , 1999, “ On the Water Impact of General Two-Dimensional Sections,” Appl. Ocean Res., 21(1), pp. 1–15. [CrossRef]
Lu, C. H. , He, Y. S. , and Wu, G. X. , 2000, “ Coupled Analysis of Nonlinear Interaction Between Fluid and Structure During Impact,” J. Fluid Struct., 14(1), pp. 127–146. [CrossRef]
Wu, G. X. , Sun, H. , and He, Y. S. , 2004, “ Numerical Simulation and Experimental Study of Water Entry of a Wedge in Free Fall Motion,” J. Fluid Struct., 19(3), pp. 277–289. [CrossRef]
Peng, W. , and Wei, Q. , 2016, “ Solving 2D Water Entry Problems With a CIP Method and a Parallel Computing Algorithm,” Mar. Syst. Ocean Technol., 11(1–2), pp. 1–9.
Das, K. , and Batra, R. C. , 2011, “ Local Water Slamming Impact on Sandwich Composite Hulls,” J. Fluid Struct., 27(4), pp. 523–551. [CrossRef]
Guo, B. D. , Liu, P. Q. , Qu, Q. L. , and Cui, Y. L. , 2012, “ Turbulence Models Performance Assessment for Pressure Prediction During Cylinder Water Entry,” Appl. Mech. Mater., 224, pp. 225–229. [CrossRef]
Qu, Q. L. , Hu, M. X. , Guo, H. , Liu, P. Q. , and Agarwal, R. K. , 2015, “ Study of Ditching Characteristics of Transport Aircraft by Global Moving Mesh Method,” J. Aircr., 52(5), pp. 1–9. [CrossRef]
Yettou, E. M. , Desrochers, A. , and Champoux, Y. , 2006, “ Experimental Study on the Water Impact of a Symmetrical Wedge,” Fluid Dyn. Res., 38(1), pp. 47–66. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

The deadrise angle along the axial direction of the fuselage of a seaplane before the step: (a) side view of the fuselage of a seaplane and (b) the deadrise angles along the axial direction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Schematic of wedge water entry

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Sketch of the initial layout of the computational domain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Mesh layout around the wedge with deadrise angle of 30 deg: (a) the whole domain mesh (every 200th grid points are shown for clarity) and (b) zoomed-in mesh near the wedge (every tenth grid points are shown for clarity)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Locations of transducers

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

The comparison of the time histories of pressure coefficient for different meshes: (a) pressure transducer 1 and (b) pressure transducer 6

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Time histories of displacement and speed of the wedge from experiment and simulation: (a) displacement and (b) speed

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Time histories of pressure at transducers in the order from 1 to 12 from experiment and simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Pressure coefficient distribution along the wedge side at different times

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Pressure distributions on wedge side during the initial phase from the present simulation and Zhao and Faltinsen's results [16]: (a) α = 20 deg, (b) α = 40 deg, and (c) α = 60 deg

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Pressure coefficient contour and streamlines for the constant speed cases: (a) α = 20 deg, (b) α = 25 deg, (c) α = 30 deg, (d) α = 35 deg, (e) α = 40 deg, (f) α = 45 deg, (g) α = 50 deg, (h) α = 55 deg, and (i) α = 60 deg

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Water particle dimensionless speed distribution along wedge side for the constant speed cases

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Distributions of −V2,−∂Φ/∂t, and Cp along the wedge side: (a) dynamic pressure term, (b) unsteady term, and (c) pressure coefficient

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Pressure coefficients at the wedge apex and the spray root with deadrise angle

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Unsteady term −∂Φ/∂t with relative speed V

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Pressure coefficient at wedge apex and spray root for the deadrise angle range from 40.7 deg to 41.0 deg

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