Cover Image

HARDBACK
$198.00



View/Hide Left Panel

The method is systematically validated through a series of tests varying the geometry from the simple 2-D profile to 3-D rectangular foil and propeller and also covering the steady and unsteady cavitation phenomena. The numerical formulation and procedure is evidenced robust and stable.

The cavity behavior predicted for the propeller operating behind a model ship and that operating in screen-generated wake shows good correlations with experiments.

The CPU for a typical six-bladed propeller is about 4 hours on the CRAY YMP2(16 GFLOPS) supercomputer for 5 rotations of propeller. This is the only drawback of the current procedure, which may still be considered to be a strong and reliable candidate to substitute the model experiments in saving the cost and time.

Figure 1: Coordinate system

References

[1] Kerwin, J.E. & Lee, C.-S., “Prediction of steady and unsteady marine propeller performance by numerical lifting surface theory,” Trans. SNAME, Vol. 86, 1978, pp. 218–258

[2] Lee, C.-S., “Prediction of steady and unsteady performance of marine propellers with or without cavitation by numerical lifting surface theory,” Ph.D. Thesis, M.I.T., Cambridge, Mass., 1979.

[3] Kinnas, S.A., “Leading edge correction to the linear theory of partially cavitating hydrofoils,” J. of Ship Research, Vol. 35, No. 1, March 1991, pp. 15–27.

[4] Lee, C.-S., “A potential-based panel method for the analysis of a 2-dimensional partially cavitating hydrofoil,” J. of Soc. of Naval Arch. of Korea(SNAK), Vol. 26, No. 4, 1989, pp. 27–34.

[5] Uhlman, J.S., “The surface singularity method applied to partially cavitating hydrofoils, ” J. of Ship Research, Vol. 31, No. 2, June 1987, pp. 107–124.

[6] Lee, C.-S., Kim, Y.-G. & Lee, J.-T., “A potential-based panel method for the analysis of a two-dimensional super- or partially cavitating hydrofoil,” J. of Ship Research, Vol. 36, No. 2, June 1992, pp. 168–181

[7] Morino, L. and Kuo, C.-C., “Subsonic potential aerodynamic for complex configurations: a general theory,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 12, No. 2, 1974, pp. 191–197.

[8] Kinnas, S.A. & Fine, N.E., “Nonlinear analysis of the flow around partially or supercavitating hydrofoils by a potential based panel method,” IABEM-90 Symposium of the International Association for Boundary Element Methods, Springler-Verlag, Rome, Italy, 1990, pp. 289–300.

[9] Kim, Y.-G., Lee, C.-S. and Suh, J.-C., “Surface panel method for prediction of flow around a 3-D steady or unsteady cavitating hydrofoil,” Cavitation '94, The Second International Symposium on Cavitation, Tokyo, Japan, 1994, pp. 113–120.

[10] Fine, N.E., “Nonlinear analysis of cavitating propellers in nonuniform flow,” Ph.D. Thesis, M.I.T., Cambridge, Mass., 1992.

[11] Kim, Y.-G., “Prediction of unsteady performance of marine propellers with cavitation using surface panel method,” Ph.D. Thesis, Chungnam National University, Taejon, Korea, 1995.

[12] Kim, Y.-G. and Lee, C.-S., “Prediction of unsteady cavity behavior around a 2-D hydrofoil in heave or gust,” The second Japan-Korea Joint Workshop on Ship and Marine Hydrodynamics , Osaka, Japan, June 28–30, 1993, pp.299–308.

[13] Boswell, R.J., “Design, cavitation performance, and open-water performance of a series of research skewed propellers,” DTNSRDC Report 3339, March 1971.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement