Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machineread text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapterrepresentative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 59
Numerical Simulation of ThreeDimensional Viscous Flow
arounct a Submersible Body
CI Yang
David Taylor Research Center
Bethesda, USA
PM. Hartwich and P. Sundaram
NASA Langley Research Center
Hampton, USA
Abst ract
A secondorder accurate, implicit, high resolution up
wind scheme has been used to solve the threedi~nensional
incompressible NavierStokes equations in general curvilin
ear coordinates for the steadystate computation of the flow
field around axisym~netric hull geometries at high Reynolds
numbers. A hybrid algorithm with relaxation in the stream
wise direction and approximate factorization in the cross
flow plane is used to reduce the temporal splitting error.
Three axisymmetric bodies with different stern shapes have
been chosen for the present investigation to highlight the
boundary layer development and to pinpoint flow separa
tion in the stern regions of the hull geometries. Three
dimensional viscous grids of CO topology have been gen
erated around each body using a transfinite interpolation
technique. Turbulence is simulated using algebraic eddy
Hi I tv m Nazi cif Rn1H wi ', T.nm em
J ... CAM The computed re
sults are compared with the available experimental data
for onbody pressure distribution and radial and axial ve
locity profiles in the afterbody boundary layers with and
without propeller in operation. The computed results show
close agreement with the measurements in most cases.
I. Introduction
The flow in the stern region of a submersible is char
acterized by the presence of a thick and possibly sepa
rated turbulent boundary layer. There is an increase in
the stern pressure drag and skinfriction drag, called thrust
deduction, due to tl~e upstream suction produced by the
propeller when operating. Accurate numerical prediction
of the flow in the stern region of the hull both with and
without the propeller operating is important to evaluate
the afterbody thrust deduction, thus limiting the expen
sive resistance and selfpropulsion model experiments in a
towing tank. Although several numerical algorithms have
been so far developed for computing the two and three
dimensional incompressible NavierStokes equations, most
of then are prohibitively expensive for very high Reynolds
number flows typical in marine hydrodynamics.
Several panel methods such as VSAERO (1) ale used
In aircraft design and analysis practices. However, their
true application in marine flows, particularly for comput
ing the flow field in the stern region, is limited because of
the presence of fairly thick boundary layers in the stern
.
region. A viscousinviscid interaction procedure Night be
once again inadequate because of the possible presence of
flow separation in this region. Hence, an accurate compu
tational method for Ellis problem should attempt to solve
the inco~npressible NavierStokes equations.
Aziz and IIellums (2) proposed a vector potential vor
ticity formulation to solve the threedi~nensional inco~n
pressible NavierStokes equations. Because of its large stor
age requirements and the necessity to solve three Poisson
equations at each time level, the method is not very popu
lar. The direct extension of timedependellt methods, both
explicit and implicit, developed for the compressible Navier
Stokes equations to incompressible flows is not possible be
cause of the 'stiffness' of the physical problem associated
with low speed viscous flow. 'ho circumvent this problem,
Chorin (3) proposed the use of artificial compressibility
when solving the equation of continuity, thus introducing
an unsteady term to make the system hyperbolic as in flee
case of compressible flows.
In this paper, we compute complex flow fields around
various axisym~netric bodies by obtaining numerical so
lutions of the incompressible NavierStokes equations in
primitive variable formulation. A hybrid secondorder ac
curate implicit high resolution upwind scheme is used to
solve the system of conservation laws in general curvilin
ear coordinates. Tllree axisymmetric bodies with different
stern shapes to highlight specific flow details ill that region
have been chosen for the present study, primarily because of
the availability of well documented experimental results for
these bodies (4,5,G,7). Body fitted threedimensional grid
systems of CO topology have been generated around these
bodies using an algebraic grid generator based on transf~lnite
interpolation procedure. The computed onbody pressures
together with axial and radial velocity profiles are compared
with the experimental data. In addition, the flow around
the stern region of one of the bodies with a propeller in oper
ation is computed. The propeller is simulated by imbedding
body forces in a disk located at propeller plane as suggested
by Stern et all. Finally, in order to illustrate the ability
of this scheme to simulate a separated flow, the results of
a low speed vertical flow about a 3.5 caliber tangentogive
cylinder at an angle of attack are presented.
59
OCR for page 59
II. Governing Equations and the Jacobian of the coordinate transformation is given
by
Using Chorin's (3) artifical compressibility formula
tion, flee incompressible NavierStokes equation are written
in conservation law form for threedimensional flow as
Qua + (E*  Evict + (F*  Felt + (G*—Gall = 0 (1)
In Equation (1) the dependent variable vector Q is defined
as
Q = (p, a, v, W)T
and the inviscid flux vectors E*,F*,G* and the viscous
shear flux vectors EV,FV,GV are given by
E* = Ala, u2 + p, uv, uw)T
F = (pv, uv, v2 + p, VW)T
G = (pw, uw, vw, W2 + p)T
Ev = Re (0, As, sexy, ~z)T
Fv = Re~l(O,ty=~7yy'tyz)T
Gv = lle (O. The, Tzy'[zz)
(2)
The coordinates x, y, z are scaled with an appropriate char
acteristic length scale L. In Eq. (2), the Cartesian velocity
components a, v, w are nondimensionalized with respect to
the free stream velocity TOO, while the normalized pressure
is defined as p = (P  poO)/pV2 . The kinematic viscosity
z, is assumed to be constant, and the Reynolds number is
defined as Re = vow. The artificial compressibility pa
rameter,6 monitors the error associated with the addition
of the unsteady pressure terns If in the continuity equa
tion which is needed for coupling the mass and momentum
equations in order to make the system hyperbolic.
For large values of,0 or when the solution of Eq. (1) leas
approached asymptotically a steady state, the continuity
equation is accurately satisfied. However, the choice of ,B
is also dictated by the important constraint of the stiffness
of the partial differential equation as discussed in Ref. 9.
Hence, ,5 = 1 has been chosen uniformly in the present
computations.
To develop the equations in a general curvilinear coor
dinate system, a coordinate transformation of the form
~ = ((x,y,z), ~ = <(x,y,z) and ~ = y~x,y,z)
with
and
where
x; y; z:
Ji = det x~ ye z:
x~ ye zig
The Cartesian derivatives of the shear fluxes are obtained
by expanding them using chain rule expansions in the (, I, 71
directions.
The Jacobians of the inviscid fluxes E, F and G are
needed for the fluxdifference splitting and for the implicit
algorithm. The Jacobian matrices in the different coordi
nate directions are obtained as the linear combination of
the Cartesian Jacobian matrices as
D = a1A* + a2B* + a3C*
where D = A, El, or C with A = All, B = Ale, C = Ail
, and (a~,a2,a3) are the row vectors of the T matrix. For
the Jacobian matrix A, al = (x/J' a2 = ¢y/J, as = (z/J'
and so on. The Jacobians in the Cartesian coordinates
themselves are
O
BE* 1
A* = =
am O
O
a
B* = i7 = O
~Q 1
O
o
* dG* O
C = act = O
The eigenvalues of D are
A = allay (~1,>27~3,>~)
2u
v
w
o
v
o
o
o
w
o
1 0
o
a
u
O u
a
a
n
U
U 0
2v 0
w u
O p~
O u
w v
0 2w
= diag (U  S,U + S,U,U)
where U is the contravariant velocity component in the cor
responding coordinate direction given by
U = alu+a2v+a3w
has been considered. Eq. (1) is rewritten in strong conser
vation law form as
(Q/J)'+ (E—Ev)< + (F—Fv)` + (G—Gv)?7 = 0 (3)
(E,F,G)T = [T] (E* F* G*)T
(E,F,G)T = [T] (E* F* G*)T
and
S = [U2 + p~a2 + a2 + at] / = S(U,V,W,ai,a2,a3)
The Jacobian matrices in different directions are diag
onalized using a similarity transformation D = RARt to
obtain the eigenvalues of D. The rows of Ri and the
columns of R are computed such that they give an or
thonormal set of left and right eigenvectors. The gener
alized similarity matrices R and Ri are given by (Ref.
tT] = [be (y (z ~ R = ~ alp + Ail alp + UA2 a2 as
BY 71z at+ V>l a2,B + V>2 al + as —as
~3,0 + we) as p + W>2 —a2 al + a2
60
OCR for page 59
and
—A2/p al a2 as
1 1 —>1/~ al a2 as
R = S2 (~2d1 + Ald2)/p —2$2/k—aids —2S2/k—a2d5 —a3ds
L(~2d3 + gilds)/> —2S2/k  ald6 —a2d6  2S2/k—a3d6
where 1; = al + a2 + as al = a' _ etc and
d1 = (T31—r2l )/k, d2 = (r32  r22)/1c, d3 = (r41  r2l )/k,
d4 = (r42—r22)/k, d5 = d1 + d2, and do = d3 + d4
Quantities such as rid represent the ith row and jth column
of the R matrix and S = S(u,v,w,c`~,a2,a3).
In hilly Reynolds number flows, it is appropriate to
make use of the thinlayer approximation. The justification
for such a simplification can be found in Bullions and Steger
(10). Consequently, all viscous derivatives in the ~ and
direction (along the body) are neglected. The viscous
shear flux Gv (normal to the body) and its Jacobian can
be derived after Steger (11). That produces the coefficient
matrices
Gv (Re ]) : ~:lvr' + ¢277
¢1Wn + ¢29z
and
with
~O O O O ~
AGE  1 0 Z22 Z32 Z42
Z=0Q=(Re'J) LOZ39Z33Z43~
O Z42 Z43 Z44 Using (G) we can write (5) as
Discretization of the Inviscid Fluxes
Consider a system of quasi onedimensional, hyperbolic
partial differential equations
(Q/ J)t + He = 0 (4)
where ~ = (, (,or y. Defining computational cells with
their centroids at I = ,,8~ and their cell interfaces at I ~ 1/2,
a discrete approximation to (4) is written as,
( ~ )^Qn+/\lH=0 (5)
where At is the time step ,/~Qn = Qn+1 _ Qn and /\I( ) =
t( )I+~/2  ( )I1/24/~8 · Superscript denotes the time level
at which the variables are evaluated.
To construct an approximate Riemann solver for the
initial value problem in Eq. (5), each variable is regarded
as an averaged state in each cell so that the flux difference
is preserved in each cell and Eq. (5) can be regarded as an
integral rather than a differential law. According to Roe's
scheme (12), the flux at interface I it 1/2 call be expressed
in terms of the left and right travelling waves,
¢1 = 71~' + 71y + 71~
Z29 = 39= + By + hz Z32 = 39X9y
Z42 = 3r1=r/z Z33 = 71x + 371y + hz
Z43 = 3 rack Z44 = 71x + By + 3 id
¢2 = 3(~Un + hymn + flown)
The inviscid fluxes, the viscous shear fluxes and their Jaco
bians just obtained in Ellis section are ready for discretiza
tion later.
III. Numerical Flux Differencing
It is well known that upwind schemes possess an in
herent solutionadaptive dissipation that eliminates the ad
dition and fine tuning of artificial dissipation terns for nu
merical stability and accuracy required in schemes based
on central diIferencing. In the present approach the invis
cid fluxes are discretized by using Roe's fluxdifferencing
splitting concept (12) and the viscous fluxes are discletized
lay the central differencing technique. We shall discuss the
numerical disc~etization scheme in one din~e~sio~ arid as
seml~le them together for three`lin~ensions.
Hl+~/2 = Hi :t (OH F I/2) (6)
(~`J)~\Q + I\HI+1/2 + /\HI1/2 = 0 (7)
Equation (7) relates the development of Q at the centroid
to the waves at the interfaces according to their propagation
directions. Defining a mean value matrix according to Roe
(12)
so that
Dl+l/~ = D(QI, Ql+1 )
Dl~l/~Al~l/2Q = AHI+1/2,
Using the above we can write (7) in delta form as
[(,Nt])  (Dl+l/2) ~1+1/2 + (Dl+1/2) ~11/2] AQ
= (Dl+l/2) /\I+1/2Q —(Dl+ l/2) /\I1/2Q
where
and
with
61
Dl~l/2 = (RAR )I+l/~ = tR(A+—A)Rl~l l/2'
(Dl+l/2 ) = (RAR1 )1+1/o
(Dl+l/2) = (RA+R )
A =(~A~+A)/2.
(8)
OCR for page 59
The construction of D' /2 is accomplished in two
steps. First, the analytic Jacobian D = dH/0Q is formed.
D is found to be a function of metric coefficients, of the
parameter ill, and of the state vector Q
D = D(a, b, c, id, Q )
where a,b,c are the metric quantities <2/J, (y/J, (z/J,
etc. Second, the local values aim, balm, cam, and
All ~/2 are computed at interfaces and fed into D to form
Do ~/2. In addition, in order to ensure that the flux di~er
ences taken over the six bounding surfaces, (i at 1/2,j,~),
(i, j ~ 1/2, k) and (i, j, ~ it 1/2) of a threedimensional cell
at (i,j,~) cancel out completely so that the present finite
difference formulation essentially becomes a finite voulme
method, a special weighted averaging procedure has been
adopted (9), for example,
(¢~/J)iJk = t(~k~jY)~j{hZ) (~j{~Y)~{jZ)]i
where
with
ktjY = [({j§~+1 + ([jy)~_1]/2
fj( ~ = [( ~j+1  ( )j1]/2
The advantage of the delta form formulation is that
the steadystate solution is independent of the time step
size At. The justification for the accuracy of Eq. (8) as
the approximate Rie~nann solver for the present problem is
given in Ref. 9.
In order to ensure that the present scheme has a high
resolution capability, which is equivalent to preserving To
tal Variation Diminishing (TVD) property for a nonlin
ear equation, it is necessary to construct a quantity sub
ject to TV requirement. For a linear problem such as the
one described above, the TV of the characteristic variable
W = RiQ can be forced to diminish in tine. Assuming
R,Ri and A to be constant and using Else definition for
the characteristic variables, the scheme given in Eq. (8)
can be rewritten as
[aim ~ Arn^~/2] twin = ~ ~777~/214 In (9'
(at= 1,2,3,4)
The above equation comprises four scalar linear equations.
To enhance the accuracy up to third order, Else characteris
tic variables lF,in at the cell interfaces are reconstructed by
using piecewise linear distributions as described in Ref. 9.
We then obtain a family of implicit TVD scenes
[( ^t Jo r7t iTI/2] Adorn
[~\7n ]~ l wj~r7I, + (~l + ~~>r+n)
Ghan ~+~ — ¢7n ~/4~ /\~+~/2W'n
[>m + {(~l In + (
OCR for page 59
Tilde Differencing and the Inexplicit Scheme
The backward Euler time differencing of the three
dimensional conserva,tio~ equations with the tl~inlayer a,p
. . .
prox~n~at~on Is
/\ Q =—t/\~(En+i ~ + A`~(Fn+~ ~ + A71l(G7~+i—Gv+i )]
(13)
Linearizing it about time level n, we obtain
+~9En'~` + (0Fn)~\ + ¢~9Gn _ ~GV )A Amen
=—f/~(En) + /\~(Fn) + ,/\~(Gn _ Gn)]
The left hand side is the implicit part and the piglet
hand side is the explicit part of the for~nulatio~. The ex
plicit part is the spatial derivatives in Eq. 3 evaluated at
the known time level n; its value diminishes as the steady
state solution is approached. Hence, it is also called the
residual . The L2 Noreen of the residual is often used as
a measure of convergence of a solution. Discretize the in
viscid and viscous fluxes according to upwind difEerencing
scheme and central differencing scheme respectively in (,
and ~ coordinate direction independently according to Eq.
(8) and then assemble then together. Eq. (14) becomes
tf /\~J)—A:+~/27Ni+~/' + A+ i/~/\i~/2
—BJ+~/2Ai+~/2 + B}_~/~Aj_~/o
(C + Z)~+~/2~+~/9 + (C + Z)k—I/~k—I,/2]n~Qn
=  Res(Qn)
(15)
where i, j, and ~ are spatial indices associate with the (, it
and ~ coordinate direction. A+,B+,C+, arid Z are 4 x4
block matrices ~ flux Jacobians) associated with implicit
spatial differencing in the coordinate directions by evalu
ating the metric terms at cell interfaces in each direction.
Eq.~15) is solved by an implicit hybrid algorithm, where
a symmetric planar GaussSeidel relaxation is used in the
streamwise direction ~ in combination with approximate
factorization in the remaining two coordinate directions ~
and y. It is used to avoid the At3 spatial splitting error
incurred in fully threedimensio~a,l approximate fa,ctoriza
tion methods. The hybrid scheme is unconditionally stable
for linear systems and offers tl~e advantage of being con~
pletely vectorizable like a conventional threedimensional
approximate factorization algoritl~n. As a result, Eq. (15)
becomes
[M—(B )j+~/2~j+~/2 + (B+ )j~/2^j~/24~Q
=—Res(Qn,Qn+~)
iM—(C + Z)~+~/~+~/2 + (C + Z)k—1/2~k—I/2~Q
=Mi\Q
Qn+1 = Qn + Chin
with
M = t~J + (A ji+1/~ + (A+)il/2]
and the residual on the RHS indicates the nonlinear up
dating of Else residual by using Q7~+~ whenever it becomes
availabe while sweeping in the ¢ direction back awl forth
through the computational do~na,i~.
Turbulence Modeling
For la~ninar flow computations Else coefficient of molec
ular viscosity ,u = Ill is obtained front Sutherland's law.
Turbulence is simulated using the BaldwinLon~ax algebraic
turbulence model. For turbulent flow computations the
lan~inar flow coefficients are replaced by,
~ = pi +pt
(14) The turbulent viscosity coefficient lit iS computed by using
the isotropic, twolayer Cebeci type algebraic eddyviscosity
model as reported by BaldwinLo~nax. In Ellis formulation
. .
At IS given by
~1 = { (tinner Y < Yc
(lit )O?tter lY > Yc
where y is the local distance measured normal to the lady
surface and Yc is tl~e smallest value of y at Chicle the val
ues front the inner and outer region viscosities are equal.
Within the inner region, the Pra,ndtlVan Driest for~nula
tion is used
(let )inner = I ~~
where I = kyt1 e(Y /A )] and ~~ is the magnitude of
vorticity given by
/( Al dv )2 + ( do _ bW )2 + ( Ho _ 0ll )2
N/ By 0,~ fez by ()x 0z
and y+ = (rW/,tGw)Y ~
In the outer region, for attached and separated boundary
layers, the turbulent viscosity coefficient is given by
(lit )outer =It CcpFwa~eFI~ leb(Y)
Forage =~7lin(ilmaXFmax, CWk~lmaXUdif /I;37~2ax)
FI`leb(Y) =[1 + 5 5(C~leb/Yntax) ]
In the above equation k~ and cop are constants and
Unlay = 77la~[l~ly(l —e (A /A ))]
and Y7nax is the value of y at which F''~,aX occurs. Tile quaII
tity Waif is Else difference between ~naxi~nu~n and minilDUTn
total velocity in Else profile
U4if = \/(U2 + V2 + W2)n7,ax— V(tG2 + V2 + W2)77tin
The various constants in the model are given in Ref. 15 as
( 16) and
63
A+ = 26, ~ = 0.4, It'= 0.0168,
Ccp = 1.6, Cat = 0.25, CI`leb = 0 3
OCR for page 59
IV. Grid Generation
An algebraic grid generation procedure based on trans
finite interpolation technique has been used to generate
the viscous grid around the hull geometry y. The three
dimensional grid generated around the body is of CO type.
The CO grid is particularly needed to adequately resolve
the wake region. Details of the theoretical aspects of the
transfinite interpolation ~ncthod and the various mapping
functions and their behavior in grid control is highlighted
in Ref. 10. The method is fundamentally a two body grid
generation procedure. The stern shape could be either open
or closed. A modified osculating interpolation Injunction has
been used in the present programs.
V. Results and Discussion
The hydrodynamic characteristic of the boundary layer
flow around the stern of a ship is quite different with and
without a propeller in operation. The action of a propeller
produces suction that accelerates the flow upstream. As a
result, the pressure and the skill friction drag around the
stern increase and the thicl;ness of the boundary layer de
creases. The knowledge of the effective flow profile near the
propeller plane and the amount of the added drag is essen
tial for designing an efficient propulsor. In the past, exten
sive efforts have been made to study the interaction between
a propeller and a thick boundary layer experimentally and
computationally (4,5,C,7,8,17,184. For the reason of sim
plicity, in most cases, axisymmetric bodies were chosen. At
present, we perforce the numerical simulations of flow over
DTRC Afterbodies 1, 2 and S without a propeller. In addi
tion the flow over afterbody 1 with a propeller in operation
is analyzed. The results are then compared with available
experimental data. The purpose of the simulations is to
develop and validate a numerical scheme for analyzing the
complex interaction between boundary and propeller. The
details of the afterbodies are shown in Fig. 1, where rmaX
is the maximum radius of the body, r is the radial distance
measured from the body axis, ~ is the axial distance from
the nose and L is the total body length. The afterbody
length to ma:;i~num diameter ratios of all three afterbodies
are different; they are 4.308, 2.247 and 2.018 for Afterbodies
1 2 and 5, respectively. ITere, the afterbody length is de
fined as the distance between the end of the parallel middle
body and the after perpendicular. Furthermore, Afterbody
5 has an inflected stern. The hubs of all three afterbod
ies are identical at the position where the propeller can be
mounted. The different stern shapes generate a large data
base variation of stern flow suitable for the purpose of val
idation of the computational scheme.
Flow over Axisy~n~netric Bodies
Flow variables such as pressure and velocity co~npo
nents of an axisymmetric flow are independent of circumfer
ential variation. They can be obtained through a. set of de
generated equations based only on two spatial dimensions.
However, in order to validate the three dimensional for~nu
lation we have just presented, full three dimensional com
putations over three different segments of a body ale per
formed. The sizes of the segments are 45°, 90° and 180° .
A viscous grid with C  O topology around tlte body is gen
erated by a transfinite interpolation method. Grid domain
extends to three body lengths both upstream arid down
stream of the body. Figure 2 shows a partial view of a
C  O grid around a generic body. The grid size used
for presented simulations is 91 x 25 x 49 in ~ (stream
wise), ~1 (circumferential) and ~ (normal) direction. In
the ~ direction, the grid is clustered near the body with the
smallest grid spacing 5 x 104 of the body length. In the
direction, the grid is clustered near the bow and the stern.
Grid sizes used for all three segments (45°,90°and 180° ~
are identical. Consequently, we can perform computations
based on three different grid densities in the ~ direction.
The differences among the solutions are negligibly small,
therefore, only the results based on the 90° segment will
be presented here. In all our axisymmetric flow computa
tions, the mixing length of the turbulence model has been
modified according to IIuang et al (5~.
A detailed analysis of Else measurement accuracies is
not available. Ilowever, else standard deviations of mea
sured data were estimated from repeat runs. The standard
deviation of the measured static wall pressure was less than
5 percent of their mean values and the deviation of the mea
sured velocities was less than 2 percent of the free stream
velocity (19~.
The experiments of flow over Afterbodies 1, 2 and 5
were carried out at Reynolds numbers of 6.60 x 106 ,6.80 x
106 and 9.30 x 106, respectively (based on total body
length). Figures 3, 4 and 5 show the comparisons of the
computed and the measured pressure distributions over the
surfaces for Afterbodies 1, 2 and 5, respectively. The body
profiles are included in the figures in order to show the
relationship between the pressure gradients and the stern
shapes. At the region near the end of the body where the
stern and the hub meet, the computed pressure shows a
sharp decrease followed by a equally sharp increase. Based
on some different numerical schemes, this peculiar feature
has also been encounted by Chen and Patel (18) and Lee et
al (20) in their computations. Chen and Patel attributed
such phenomenon to the rapid change of geometry near the
hullhub juncture as well as the upstream influence of the
complex pressure interactions in the tail region. A solution
we obtained with a panel method exhibited the same fea
ture, as long as enough panel resolution around the hullhub
juncture region was provided. Unfortunately, the experme
ntal data lack the resolution needed to verify this feature.
Figures 6, 7 and 8 show the comparisons between the
computed and the measured velocity components at sev
eral streamwise locations for afterbodies 1, 2 and 5, respec
tively, where rO denotes the radius of body surface . For
Afterbody 1, the agreement is very good. The computa
tion predicted the development of the boundary layer very
well. For Afterbodies 2 and 5, the agreement in general is
good, except the radial velocity profiles which are less sat
isfactory. The agreement deteriorates as the measurement
location moves further downstream. The radial velocity
component is relatively small and is more difficult to mea
sure accurately. For both Afterbodies 2 and S. the maxi
mum difference between computed and measured values is
about At percent of freestream velocity. The error bound of
64
OCR for page 59
the measurement is 2 percent. The measured axial veloc
ities for Afterbodies 2 and 5 are progressively slower than
the computed velocities as the end of stern is approached,
although the difference is small. Near the end of the stern,
the measured axial velocities for both Afterbodies 2 and 5
show an inflection point which is not captured by the com
putations. The pressure gradient of the stern boundary
layer is directly affected by the fullness of the stern shape.
The stern of Afterbody 1 is the least full among all three
bodies studied here. It caused only a mild adverse pres
sure gradient in the boundary layer surrounding the stern
region. This may explain the reason why the simulation for
Afterbody 1 is the most successful.
In each computation presented above, 220 iteration
steps were taken. The L2 norm of the residual dropped
two orders of magnitude from 103 to 105 . 220 iteration
steps were chosen since further iterations produced only in
significant variations. Each computation requires 17 CPU
minutes on a CRAYYMP machine.
Flow over an Axisymmetric Body with a Propeller
Flow experiment for an axisyn~netric body with a pro
peller were conducted at DTRC by Huang et al(4,G,7~. A
propeller was mounted on Afterbody 1 at x/L = 0.983 .
The geometrical and hydrodynamic characteristics of the
propeller are given in Huang et al (4) and Huang and Groves
(7~. The experiment was performed at a Reynolds number
of 6.6 x 106 (based on body length).
Numerically, the propeller effect is simulated by imbed
ding body forces in a disl; of finite thickness located in the
propeller region. The details of this type of formulation
can be found in Stern et al (8~. Distribution of body forces
depends on the propeller's characteristics such as, thrust
coefficient CT, torque coefficient Icy, advance coefficient
J and radial circulation distribution G(r). The axial and
circumferential body force per unit volume are obtained
from the following equations:
CTR9pG(r)
MY IR P G(, )? d
4It R3G(r)
1rrJ2 /YX .fR P G(r)' do
where f bx and f be are the body forces per unit volume in
the axial and circumferential directions, respectively, Rh
and RP are the radii of propeller hub and blade, respec
tively, and AX is the thickness of Else disk. The following
propeller data were used ill our computation:
J = 0.370, It T = 0.227, It q = 0.0453, CT = 0.370
The computed body forces are then incorporated into the
right Lund side of Eq. 16 and forms a part of the residual.
Based on the identical grid size and grid distribution used
previously, a computation was carried out for 220 iteration
steps. The L2 Noreen of tl~e residual dropped two orders of
magnitude from 103 to 105 without suffering frown any
numerical instability.
From the results of the computation, the influence of
propeller action can be detected up to about two propeller
diameters upstream. The differences between axial veloc
ity components /\u=/VOO Title and without the propeller
in operation at two streamwise locations are shown in Fig.
9 . The measurement locations are at X/L = 0.954 and
X/L = 0.977 . The agreement between the computed and
the measured values is very good. The differences in pres
sure distribution on the afterbody surface upstream of the
propeller plane are shown in Fig. 10. The results of the
computation are to the same degree of accuracy as those
reported by Huang and Groves (7~. The swirl velocity was
also computed but due to lack of experimental data to com
pare with, it is not presented here.
Flow over TangentOgive Forebody
NVith the same numerical scheme discussed above and a
modified turbulent model the flow over a 3.5 caliber tangent
ogive forebody was studied (21) at angles of attack of 20°
and 30° and at Reynolds Lumbers in the range 0.2 
3.0 x 106 . The purpose of the study was to investigate the
Reynolds number effect on low speed vertical flow and to
validate the numerical scheme. A C  O type grid was
generated for the purpose of computations. The grid size
was 97 x 40 x 91 in ~ (streamwise), ~ (normal) and
~ (circumferential) direction. Fig. 11 shows a comparison
of the computed and the measured surface flow patterns
at a Reynolds number of 0.S x 106 (based on diameter)
and an angle of attack of 20° . The lines indicate that
the primary separations are in good agreement. Top views
show two distinct regimes in which the surface streamlines
appear to collocate. Figure 12 shows a comparison of the
computed and the measured circumferential surface pres
sure distributions. The Reynolds numbers are 0.S x 106
and 0.3 x 106 and the angle of attack is 30°. The Reynolds
number effect is snore pronounced on the leeward side, near
the nose. The agreement is good.
VI. Conclusion
The 3—D incompressible NavierStokes equations was
discretized by the flux(lifference splitting and the implicit
high resolution schemes. A discretized system of equa
tions was solved by an implicit hybrid algorithm, where
a symmetric planar GaussSeidel relaxation was used in
the streetwise direction in combination with approxi~na
tion factorization in the two remaining directions. The al
gorithn~ is highly vectorizable and suitable for computation
on a modern superco~nputer.
For the simulation of afterbody boundary layer flows,
this method is proven to be effective. Inclusion of the body
force propeller model poses no additional problem. To ob
tain a converged solution with the propeller model included,
it does not require snore iteration steps in comparison with
the case without including a propeller model. The method
was also shown to simulate low speed vertical flow with
good results.
Acknowledgement
This study was supported by The Office of Naval Tech
nology. The computing time of CRAYYMP was provided
generously by NASA Antes Numerical Aerodynamic Sin~u
lation (NAS) Program.
65
OCR for page 59
References
1. Maskew, B.M., "Prediction of Subsonic Aerodynamic
Characteristics  A Case for Low Order Panel Meth
ods", AIAA J. of Aircraft, Vol 19 (2), Feb. 1982,
ppl57163
Aziz, K., Hellums, J. D., "Numerical Solution of the
ThreeDimensional Equations of Motion for Rectangu
lar Natural Laminar Convection", Physics of Fluids,
Vol. 8, Dec. 1965, pp 21822189.
3. Chorin, A. J., "A Numerical Metltod for Solving In
compressible Viscous Flow Problems", Journal of Com
putational Physics, Vol. 2, No. 1, Aug. 1967, pp 1226.
4. Huang, T. T., Wang, H. T., Santelli, N., Groves, N. C.,
"Propeller/Stern/Boundary Layer interaction on Ax
isymmetric Bodies, Theory and Experiment", DTRC
Report 760113, 1976.
5. Huang, T. T., Santelli, N.,Belt, G., "Stern Bound
ary layer Flow on Axisy~nn~etric Bodies", Proceedings,
12th Office of Naval Research Symposium on Naval Hy
drodynamics, Washington D.C., 1978, pp 127157.
6. Huang, T. Y.,Groves, N.C., Belt, G. , "Boundary Layer
Flow on an Axisymmetric Body with an Inflected Stern
DTRC Report 80/064, Aug. 1980.
7. Huang, T.T., Groves, N.C.,"E~ective Wake: Theory
and Experiment", Proceedings, 13th Office of Naval
Research Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, Tokyo]
1980, pp 651673.
8. Stern, F., Kim, H.T., Patel, V.C., Chen, H.C.,"A Vis
cous Flow Approach to the Computation of Propeller
Hull Interaction", Journal of Ship Research, Vol.32,
No. 4, Dec. 1988, pp 246262.
9. Hartwich, P.M., Hsu, C. H., "High Resolution Up
wind Schemes for the ThreeDi~nensional, Incompress
ible NavierStokes Equations", AIAA Journal, Vol. 26,
No. 11, Nov. 1988, pp 13211328.
10. Pulliam, T. H., Steger, J. L., "An implicit Finite Dif
ference Solution of ThreeDimensional Flow", AIAA
Paper 7810, Jan. 1978.
11. Stager, J.L.,"Implicit Finite Difference Simulation of
Flow about Arbitrary TwoDimensional Geometries",
AIAA Journal, Vol. 16, No. 7, Jul. 1978, pp 679686.
12. Roe, P.L.,"Approximate Riemann Solvers, Parameter
Vectors, and Difference Schemes", Journal of Compu
tational Physics, Vol. 43, No. 2, Oct. 1981, pp 357
372.
13. Roe, P.L.,"CharacteristicBased Schemes for the Euler
Equations", Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech., Vol. 18, 1986, pp
337365.
14. Yee,H.C.,"Construction of Explicit Symmetric TVD
Schemes and Their Applications", Journal of Compu
tational Physics, Vol. 68, 1987, pp 151179.
15. Baldwin, B.S., Lomax, H.,"Thin Layer Approximation
and Algebraic Model for Seperated Turbulent Flows",
AIAA Paper 78257 Jan. 1978.
16. Eriksson, LE., Rizzi, A.,"Practical Three Dimensional
Mesh Generation Using Transfinite Interpolation",VKI
Lecture Series 198304 Vol. 1, Mar. 1983.
17. Zhou, LD., Yuan, JL.,"Calculation of the Turbulent
Flow around the Stern and the Wake of a Bocly of Rev
olution", Proceedings, 15th Office of Naval Research
Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, Hamburg, Ger
many, Sep. 1984 pp 279290.
66
18
20
BL
8.6
Chen, H.C., Patel, V.C.,"Calculation of Stern Flow by
a TimeMarching Solution of the PartiallyParabolic
Equations", Proceedings, 15th Office of Naval Research
Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, Ila~nburg, Ger
many, Sep. 1984 pp 505522.
19. Huang, T.T., Cox, B.D.,"Interaction of Afterbody Bo
undary Layer and Propeller", Symposium on 'Hydro
dynamics of Ship and Offshore Propulsion System',
Hovik Outside Oslo, Mar. 2025 1977.
Lee,Y.T.,Huang, T.T., Sung, CH., "Flow Prediction
about an Appended Body of Revolution", Gth Interna
tional Conference on Numerical Methods in Laminar
and Turbulent Flow", Jul. 1989, Swansea, U.K.
21. Hartwich, PM., Hall R.M.,"NavierStokes Solutions
for Vortical Flows over a TangentOgive Cylinder",
AIAA Paper No. 890337, Jan. 1989
2 _
e i_ rrterxrg ~ ~ =

Att~~b~g 2
8.65 8.7 a.7s
z/L
I 1 1
8.8 e.8s 8.9
Fig. 1 Axisymmetric afterbodies
8.95 1
Fig. 2 Partial View of a C—O Grid around a Body
84sr
8.375 _
8.3 _
8.225 _
8.15 _
x x x Experiment
 NS Solution
C'' I
x/L
Fig. 3 Pressure Distribution on Afterbody 1
OCR for page 59
B.375
8.3
8.225
8.15
8.875
. .875
~.15
8.225
_a ~
_ ._
a.375
8.45 9,45
 x x ~c Experiment
NS Solution
xT
;;C~8 _ C ~ ~
_ ~1
8.45 1 1 1 1 ~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 _
8 ~ 8 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 ~ 8.6 B.7 8.8 8.9 ~ 1 ~ 9.45
x/L
Fig. 4 Pressure Distribution on Afterbody 2
O.1 s 0 0 0 Experiment
NS Solution
B.375
S _
0.3 _
B.22s
8.15
e.07s
;338 _
C.875 _
~.15 _
3 .225
_D ~
_._ _
a.37s _
x x x Experiment
NS Solution
~x.
, , ,
8 8.t 8.2
8.3 8.4
8.5 8.6 8.7 8.8
1 1
8.9 1 1.1
z/L
Fig. 5 Pressure Distribution on Afterbody 5
(6a) Axial Velocity Profiles
x/L = 0.846 ~/L = 0.914 ~/L = 0.934 x/L = 0.964 x/L = 0.977
_
~ ,
~,1 0
0.os
o.oo
5 ,
1 ~'t 1
1
~7
0 1 0 1
0 1 0 1 0 1
ulV~
0 0 0 Experiment (6b) Radial Velocity Profiles
O. l 5 NS Solution
r/r = n 8~46 z/L = 0.914 =/L = 0.934
0.10
0.05
0.00
x/L = 0.964 z/L = 0.977
~, ~
~___ ~ ~ ~ ~
O.O 0.1 O.O 0.1 O.O 0.1 O.O 0.1 O.O . 0.1
~Ur /Vgo
Fig. 6 Velocity Profiles on Afterbody 1
67
OCR for page 59
oO

~:
o
:^
. 
o

~ 11
~  ~
~ ~ 

.  o
~ u)
P. CQ
~ l
co
o
11
o ~

~2
o
l
~ o
. .
o o
~o
o
l
~ o
. .
o o
t—
O
U)

C~
o
O :
._
C~
o

._
~_
t—
_'
. O ~ U)
~ Z
O
O O 0 0~2~  O
O
o
o
o
7/(°~—~)
o
o
t—
00
cg ~
~ o
'=o C 11
~ ~2
._
O _ _
O
¢ 11' ~ ~ U VV: ,
_' .
CD
o
C~
11 0 0  0 0 ~ ~  ~8
co
1°1  o 0 0 0 0 0 0  ,
:: , _ ~
~ cn _
~ u, _
~ Z oo
o 1 1l ooooo oooo~ ,
~2
0 0 0 0 O~ '
.
o
o
T/(°.1  .l)
co
G)
o
r~
o
_~_
11 ~ [
° ° ° ° °°od
o
t—
G)
,~N
/~^
/oOO
 o
11
.
o
n
0
~: °
_
n ~ 0
U)
~ cn
X
o
o
o
O
o
o
O U~,
68
:0
O
O
'
o
oo
° o°~
11 o
1 ~H 1 o ,~~
~ 0 Ln 0
~ ~ 0 0
. . . .
O 0 0 0
7/(°d—.1)
7/(°~—~)
c~
0 0
f~
0 ~

° c
o
0 cn
~o ~
~ ~ z
0 ~ 0
~ ILl
~ P~,
0 .~
0 0

0
~o
· 
o
o
0
o
o
c~
o
o
o
o
o
O ;:s
i
o
o
u:
o
X
o
u)
~:
o
:^
._
c;

0 tl4
o
o
o
o
o
OCR for page 59
x/L = 0.954
a.06 L 0.06
.05
.04
D...01 _
=/L = 0.977
.05
.04
.03
0.01 _
x x x Experiment
NS Solution
1 x
_ _ ~
_~
a l l l l
1 3 0.05 0.1 D.15 ~ 8.05 8.1 0.1S D.2
Au~ /VOO
Fig. 9 Measured and Computed Axial Velocity Increase on
Afterbody 1 Due to Propeller Suction
~ 4
a) top vlow
~//.~
y
compahtlon
//~
b) side view
O.2
5
_ . _ _
t<)~.1 _
0.05
x x Experiment
NS Solution
. X 1 1
7 D.8 D.S 1 1.1
x/L
Fig. 10 Measure and Computed.Surface Pressure Decrease
on Afterbody 1 Due to Propeller Suction
1.C
x/D = 6.0
.5
.,[ ~ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 20 40 60 80 100 1 = 140 160 180
~_
1.C,
.s .
n
1
x/D = 3.5
— _,ia'
.5 ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 20 40 60 ~0 1 00 1 20 1 40. 1 60 1 80
'~:x~=2.0 ~
_~
.751 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 20 40 60 ~ 100 120 1" 160 180
·7sr
.25
y
Fig. 11 Surface Flow Paterns  25
__
_.7~
69
~_o
~ a~
CZ}