Assessment of Computational Fluid Dynamic for Surface Combatant 5415 at Straight Ahead and Static Drift β = 20 deg

  • S. Bhushan
    Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mississippi State University, Starkville, MS 39759 e-mail:
  • H. Yoon
    IIHR Hydroscience and Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52246 e-mail:
  • F. Stern
    IIHR Hydroscience and Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52246 e-mail:
  • E. Guilmineau
    LHEEA—UMR6598 CNRS, Centrale Nantes, Nantes 44321, France e-mail:
  • M. Visonneau
    LHEEA—UMR6598 CNRS, Centrale Nantes, Nantes 44321, France e-mail:
  • S. L. Toxopeus
    Maritime Research Institute Netherlands, 6708 PM, Wageningen, The Netherlands e-mail:
  • C. Simonsen
    FORCE Technology, DK-2605 Brøndby, Denmark e-mail:
  • S. Aram
    Naval Surface Warfare Center Carderock Division, West Bethesda, MD 20817 e-mail:
  • S-E Kim
    Naval Surface Warfare Center Carderock Division, West Bethesda, MD 20817 e-mail:
  • G. Grigoropoulos
    National Technical University of Athens, Zografou 15780, Greece e-mail:

Description

<jats:p>Collaboration is described on assessment of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) predictions for surface combatant model 5415 at static drift β = 0 deg and 20 deg using recent tomographic particle image velocimetry (TPIV) experiments. Assessment includes N-version verification and validation to determine the confidence intervals for CFD solutions/codes, and vortex onset, progression, instability, and turbulent kinetic energy (TKE) budget analysis. The increase in β shows the following trends. Forces and moment increase quadratically/cubically, and become unsteady due to shear layer, Karman and flapping instabilities on the bow. Wave elevation becomes asymmetric; its amplitude increases, but the total wave elevation angle remains same. The vortex strength and TKE increase by about two orders of magnitude, and for large β, the primary vortices exhibit helical mode instability similar to those for delta wings. Forces and moment for both β and wave elevation for β = 0 deg are compared within 4% of the data, and are validated at 7% interval. Wave elevation for β = 20 deg, and vortex core location and velocities for both β are compared within 9% of the data, and are validated at 12% interval. The vortex strength and TKE predictions show large 70% errors and equally large scatter and are not validated. Thus, both errors and scatter need reduction. TKE budgets show transport of turbulence into the separation bubble similar to canonical cases, but pressure transport is dominant for ship flows. Improved CFD predictions require better grids and/or turbulence models. Investigations of solution-adaptive mesh refinement for better grid design and hybrid Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes/large eddy simulation models for improved turbulent flow predictions are highest priority.</jats:p>

Journal

Citations (1)*help

See more

Report a problem

Back to top