Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T17:17:51.676Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The hydroelastic response of a surface-piercing hydrofoil in multi-phase flows. Part 1. Passive hydroelasticity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2019

Casey M. Harwood Open the ORCID record for Casey M. Harwood [Opens in a new window] ,
Mario Felli Open the ORCID record for Mario Felli [Opens in a new window] ,
Massimo Falchi Open the ORCID record for Massimo Falchi [Opens in a new window] ,
Steven L. Ceccio Open the ORCID record for Steven L. Ceccio [Opens in a new window]  and
Yin L. Young
Casey M. Harwood*
Affiliation:
IIHR – Hydroscience and Engineering, the University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA
Mario Felli
Affiliation:
CNR-INM, National Research Council, Institute of Marine Engineering, Rome 00128, Italy
Massimo Falchi
Affiliation:
CNR-INM, National Research Council, Institute of Marine Engineering, Rome 00128, Italy
Steven L. Ceccio
Affiliation:
Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA Office of the Associate Dean for Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
Yin L. Young
Affiliation:
Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA Department of Aerospace Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
*
†Email address for correspondence: casey-harwood@uiowa.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Compliant lift-generating surfaces have widespread applications as marine propellers, hydrofoils and control surfaces, and the fluid–structure interactions (FSI) of such systems have important effects upon their performance and stability. Multi-phase flows like cavitation and ventilation alter the hydrodynamic and hydroelastic behaviours of lifting surfaces in ways that are not yet completely understood. This paper describes experiments on one rigid and two flexible variants of a vertical surface-piercing hydrofoil in wetted, ventilating and cavitating conditions. Tests were conducted in a towing tank and a free-surface cavitation channel. This work, which is Part 1 of a two-part series, examines the passive, or flow-induced, fluid–structure interactions of the hydrofoils. Four characteristic flow regimes are described: fully wetted, partially ventilated, partially cavitating and fully ventilated. Hydroelastic coupling is shown to increase the hydrodynamic lift and yawing moments across all four flow regimes by augmenting the effective angle of attack. The effective angle of attack, which was derived using a beam model to account for the effect of spanwise twisting deflections, effectively collapses the hydrodynamic load coefficients for the three hydrofoils. A generalized cavitation parameter, using the effective angle of attack, is used to collapse the lift and moment coefficients for all trials at a single immersed aspect ratio, smoothly bridging the four distinct flow regimes. None of the hydrofoils approached the static divergence condition, which occurs when the hydrodynamic stiffness negates the structural stiffness, but theory and experiments both show that ventilation increases the divergence speed by reducing the hydrodynamic twisting moment about the elastic axis. Coherent vortex shedding from the blunt trailing edge of the hydrofoil causes vortex-induced vibration at an approximately constant Strouhal number of 0.275 (based on the trailing edge thickness), and leads to amplified response at lock-in, when the vortex-shedding frequency approaches one of the resonant modal frequencies of the coupled fluid–structure system.

JFM classification

Drops and Bubbles: Cavitation Multiphase and Particle-laden Flows: Multiphase flow
Type
JFM Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 881 , 25 December 2019 , pp. 313 - 364
Check for updates
Copyright
© 2019 Cambridge University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acosta, A. J. 1973 Hydrofoils and hydrofoil craft. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 5 (1), 161–184.Google Scholar
Acosta, A. J.1955 Note on partial cavitation of flat plate hydrofoils. Tech. Rep. E-19.9. US Office of Naval Research.Google Scholar
Akcabay, D. T., Chae, E. J., Young, Y. L., Ducoin, A. & Astolfi, J. A. 2014a Cavity induced vibration of flexible hydrofoils. J. Fluids Struct. 49, 463–484.Google Scholar
Akcabay, D. T. & Young, Y. L. 2014 Influence of cavitation on the hydroelastic stability of hydrofoils. J. Fluids Struct. 49, 170–185.10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2014.04.010Google Scholar
Akcabay, D. T., Young, Y. L., Lelong, A. & Astolfi, J. A. 2014b Cavity-induced vibrations of flexible hydrofoils and their susceptibility to lock-in and parametric excitations. In Proceedings of the 30th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics. Australian Maritime College.Google Scholar
Ausoni, P., Farhat, M., Avellan, F., Escaler, X. & Egusquiza, E. 2005 Cavitation effects on fluid structure interaction in the case of a 2D hydrofoil. In ASME 2005 Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting, vol. 2, pp. 617–622. ASME.Google Scholar
Ausoni, P., Farhat, M., Escaler, X., Egusquiza, E. & Avellan, F. 2007 Cavitation influence on von Kármán vortex shedding and induced hydrofoil vibrations. J. Fluids Engng 129 (8), 966–973.10.1115/1.2746907Google Scholar
Bearman, P. W. 1967 On vortex street wakes. J. Fluid Mech. 28 (4), 625–641.10.1017/S0022112067002368Google Scholar
Besch, P. K. & Liu, Y.1971 Flutter and divergence characteristics of four low mass ratio hydrofoils. Tech. Rep. 3410. Naval Ship Research and Development Center, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Besch, P. K. & Liu, Y. N.1973 Bending flutter and torsional flutter of flexible hydrofoil struts. Tech. Rep. 4012. Naval Ship Research and Development Center, Washington, DC.10.21236/AD0757645Google Scholar
Besch, P. K. & Liu, Y. N.1974 Hydroelastic design of subcavitating and cavitating hydrofoil strut systems. Tech. Rep. 4257. Naval Ship Research and Development Center, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Bishop, R. E. D. & Price, W. G. 1979 Hydroelasticity of Ships. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bisplinghoff, R. L., Ashley, H. & Halfman, R. L. 2013 Aeroelasticity. Dover Publications.Google Scholar
Blake, W. K. 1972 On the damping of transverse motion of free–free beams in dense, stagnant fluids. In The Shock and Vibration Bulletin – Part 4: Isolation, Damping, Prediction Experimental Techniques, vol. 42, pp. 41–56. The Shock and Vibration Information Center.Google Scholar
Blake, W. K. & Maga, J. 1975 On the flow-excited vibrations of cantilever struts in water. I. Flow-induced damping and vibration. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 57 (3), 610.10.1121/1.380477Google Scholar
Brennen, C. E. 2013 Cavitation and Bubble Dynamics. Oxford University Press.10.1017/CBO9781107338760Google Scholar
Breslin, J. P. & Skalak, R.1959 Exploratory study of ventilated flows about yawed surface-piercing struts. Tech. Rep. 2-23-59W. Naval Ship Research and Development Center, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Chae, E. J., Akcabay, D. T., Lelong, A., Astolfi, J. A. & Young, Y. L. 2016 Numerical and experimental investigation of natural flow-induced vibrations of flexible hydrofoils. Phys. Fluids 28 (7), 075102.Google Scholar
Chae, E. J., Akcabay, D. T. & Young, Y. L. 2013 Dynamic response and stability of a flapping foil in a dense and viscous fluid. Phys. Fluids 25 (10), 104106.Google Scholar
Chae, E. J., Akcabay, D. T. & Young, Y. L. 2017 Influence of flow-induced bend–twist coupling on the natural vibration responses of flexible hydrofoils. J. Fluids Struct. 69, 323–340.10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2016.12.008Google Scholar
De Graaf, K. L., Pearce, B. W. & Brandner, P. A. 2016 The influence of nucleation on cloud cavitation about a sphere. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Transport Phenomena and Dynamics of Rotating Machinery, Honolulu.Google Scholar
Di Napoli, I., Young, Y. L., Ceccio, S. & Harwood, C. 2019 Design and benchmarking of a low-cost shape sensing spar for in-situ measurement of deflections in slender lifting surfaces in complex multiphase flows. Smart Mater. Struct. 28 (5), 055038.10.1088/1361-665X/aaf03eGoogle Scholar
Ducoin, A., Andre, A. J. & Gobert, M.-L. 2012 An experimental study of boundary-layer transition induced vibrations on a hydrofoil. J. Fluids Struct. 32, 37–51.10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2011.04.002Google Scholar
Faltinsen, O. M. 2005 Hydrodynamics of High-speed Marine Vehicles. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Felli, M., Falchi, M. & Pereira, F. J. A. 2010 Distance effect on the behavior of an impinging swirling jet by piv and flow visualizations. Exp. Fluids 48 (2), 197–209.Google Scholar
Franc, J.-P., Franc, J.-P., Michel, J.-M. & Michel, J.-M. 2004 Fundamentals of Cavitation. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Fu, Y. & Price, W. G. 1987 Interactions between a partially or totally immersed vibrating cantilever plate and the surrounding fluid. J. Sound Vib. 118 (3), 495–513.10.1016/0022-460X(87)90366-XGoogle Scholar
Ganesh, H., Makiharju, S. A. & Ceccio, S. L. 2016 Bubbly shock propagation as a mechanism for sheet-to-cloud transition of partial cavities. J. Fluid Mech. 802, 37–78.10.1017/jfm.2016.425Google Scholar
Gault, D. A.1957 A correlation of low-speed, airfoil-section stalling characteristics with Reynolds number and airfoil geometry. Tech. Rep. 3963. National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, Ames Aeronautical Lab., Moffett Field, CA.Google Scholar
Harwood, C.2016 The hydrodynamic and hydroelastic responses of rigid and flexible surface-piercing hydrofoils in multi-phase flows. PhD thesis, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Harwood, C. M., Felli, M., Falchi, M., Garg, N., Ceccio, S. L. & Young, Y. L.2020 The hydroelastic response of a surface-piercing hydrofoil in multi-phase flows. Part 2. Modal parameters and generalized fluid forces. J. Fluid Mech. (in press).10.1017/jfm.2019.871Google Scholar
Harwood, C. M., Stankovich, A. J., Young, Y. L. & Ceccio, S. L. 2016a Combined experimental and numerical study of the free vibration of surface-piercing struts. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Transport Phenomena and Dynamics of Rotating Machinery, Honolulu.Google Scholar
Harwood, C. M., Young, Y. L. & Ceccio, S. L. 2016b Ventilated cavities on a surface-piercing hydrofoil at moderate Froude numbers: cavity formation, elimination and stability. J. Fluid Mech. 800, 5–56.Google Scholar
Helmbold, H. B. 1942 Der unverwundene ellipsenflugel als tragende flanche. Jahrbuch I111–I113.Google Scholar
Kawakami, D. T., Fuji, A., Tsujimoto, Y. & Arndt, R. E. A. 2008 An assessment of the influence of cavitation instabilities. J. Fluids Engng 130 (March), 1–8.Google Scholar
Kim, Y.-H., Vandiver, J. K. & Holler, R. 1986 Vortex-induced vibration and drag coefficients of long cables subjected to sheared flows. J. Energy Resour. Technol. 108 (1), 77–83.10.1115/1.3231245Google Scholar
de Lange, D. F. & de Bruin, G. J. 1997 Sheet cavitation and cloud cavitation, re-entrant jet and three-dimensionality. Appl. Sci. Res. 58 (1/4), 91–114.Google Scholar
Lelong, A., Guiffant, P. & André Astolfi, J. 2017 An experimental analysis of the structural response of flexible lightweight hydrofoils in cavitating flow. J. Fluids Engng 140 (2), 021116.Google Scholar
Liu, Z. & Young, Y. L. 2009 Utilization of bending-twisting coupling effects for performance enhancement of composite marine propellers. J. Fluids Struct. 25, 1102–1116.Google Scholar
Liu, Z. & Young, Y. L. 2010 Static divergence of self-twisting composite rotors. J. Fluids Struct. 26 (5), 841–847.10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2010.05.002Google Scholar
Morch, K. A. 2009 Cavitation nuclei: experiments and theory. J. Hydrodyn. 21 (2), 176–189.Google Scholar
Olofsson, N.1996 Force and flow characteristics of a partially submerged propeller. PhD thesis, Chalmers University of Technology.Google Scholar
Pearce, B. W., Brandner, P. A., Garg, N., Young, Y. L., Phillips, A. W. & Clarke, D. B. 2017 The influence of bend-twist coupling on the dynamic response of cavitating composite hydrofoils. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium on Marine Propulsors, vol. 3, pp. 803–812. VTT Technical Research Center of Finland LTD.Google Scholar
Prandtl, L.1918 Tragflugeltheorie. Nachrichten Von Der Gesellschaft Der Wissenschaften Zu Gottingen, Mathematisch-physikalische Klasse (pts. 1–2).Google Scholar
Rothblum, R. S.1977 Investigation of methods of delaying or controlling ventilation on surface-piercing struts. PhD thesis, University of Leeds.Google Scholar
Rothblum, R. S., Mayer, D. A. & Wilburn, G. M.1969 Ventilation, cavitation and other characteristics of high speed surface-piercing struts. Tech. Rep. 3023. Naval Ship Research and Development Center, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Sallet, D. W. 1969 On the spacing of karman vortices. J. Appl. Mech. 36 (2), 370–372.10.1115/1.3564657Google Scholar
Sarpkaya, T. 1995 Hydrodynamic damping, flow-induced oscillations, and biharmonic response. J. Offshore Mech. Arctic Engng 117 (4), 232–238.10.1115/1.2827228Google Scholar
Smith, S. M., Venning, J. A., Giosio, D. R., Brandner, P. A., Pearce, B. W. & Young, Y. L. 2019 Cloud cavitation behavior on a hydrofoil due to fluid-structure interaction. J. Fluids Engng 141 (4), 041105–041105–8.Google Scholar
Swales, P. D., Wright, A. J., Mcgregor, R. C. & Rothblum, R. 1974 The mechanism of ventilation inception on surface piercing foils. J. Mech. Engng Sci. 16 (1), 18–24.10.1243/JMES_JOUR_1974_016_005_02Google Scholar
Tulin, M. P.1953 Steady two-dimensional cavity flows about slender bodies. Tech. Rep. 834. Bethesda. USN David Taylor Model Basin, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Waid, R. L.1968 Experimental investigation of the ventilation of vertical surface-piercing struts in the presence of cavitation. Tech. Rep. AD0738493. Naval Ship Research and Development Center, Washington DC.10.21236/AD0738493Google Scholar
Ward, J., Harwood, C. & Young, Y. L. 2018 Inverse method for hydrodynamic load reconstruction on a flexible surface-piercing hydrofoil in multi-phase flow. J. Fluids Struct. 77, 58–79.10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2017.12.001Google Scholar
Ward, J. C., Harwood, C. M. & Young, Y. L. 2016 Inverse method for determination of the in situ hydrodynamic load distribution in multi-phase flow. In Proceedings of the 31st Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, Monterey. Stanford University.Google Scholar
Williamson, C. H. K. & Govardhan, R. 2004 Vortex-induced vibrations. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 36 (1), 413–455.Google Scholar
Young, Y. L. & Brizzolara, S. 2013 Numerical and physical investigation of a surface-piercing hydrofoil. In Third International Symposium on Marine Propulsors, pp. 1–8. Australian Maritime College, University of Tasmania.Google Scholar
Young, Y. L., Garg, N., Brandner, P. A., Pearce, B. W., Butler, D., Clarke, D. & Phillips, A. W. 2018a Load-dependent bend-twist coupling effects on the steady-state hydroelastic response of composite hydrofoils. Compos. Struct. 189, 398–418.10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.09.112Google Scholar
Young, Y. L., Garg, N., Brandner, P. A., Pearce, B. W., Butler, D., Clarke, D. & Phillips, A. W. 2018b Material bend-twist coupling effects on cavitating response of composite hydrofoils. In 10th International Cavitation Symposium, pp. 690–695. ASME.Google Scholar
Young, Y. L., Harwood, C. M., Miguel, M. F., Ward, J. C. & Ceccio, S. L. 2017 Ventilation of lifting bodies: Review of the physics and discussion of scaling effects. Appl. Mech. Rev. 69 (1), 010801.10.1115/1.4035360Google Scholar
Young, Y. L., Motley, M. R., Barber, R. B., Chae, E. J. & Garg, N. 2016 Adaptive composite marine propulsors and turbines: progress and challenges. Appl. Mech. Rev. 68 (6).10.1115/1.4034659Google Scholar
Young, Y. L., Yoon, H., Wright, T. & Harwood, C. 2018c The effect of waves and ventilation on the dynamic response of a surface-piercing hydrofoil. In 32nd Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics. Hamburg University of Technology.Google Scholar
Zarruk, G. A., Brandner, P. A., Pearce, B. W. & Phillips, A. W. 2014 Experimental study of the steady fluid-structure interaction of flexible hydrofoils. J. Fluids Struct. 51, 326–343.10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2014.09.009Google Scholar