4.7 Article

Experimental and numerical investigation of the fluid-structure interaction on a flexible composite hydrofoil under viscous flows

期刊

OCEAN ENGINEERING
卷 194, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.106647

关键词

Composite hydrofoil; Fluid-structure interaction; Tight CFD-FEM coupling; Optical fiber sensors; Flow-induced vibrations

资金

  1. High Performance Computing Institute (ICI) [E1703090]
  2. Naval Group [46E358616, 003/2015/DGA]
  3. DGA (Direction Generale de l'Armement) [46E358616, 003/2015/DGA]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This research investigates the fluid-structure interaction and hydroelastic response of a composite hydrofoil using an innovative joint experimental and numerical method. The main novelties are, first, the use of a state-of-the-art strain measurement technique, via a fully-distributed-optical fiber sensor directly embedded within the composite plies. This method allows for a finer representation of the structural deformations under hydrodynamic loading. Second, a tightly-coupled high-fidelity fluid-structure interaction numerical model taking into account the turbulent effects in the flow and the ply-by-ply modelling of the composite, is compared to the experimental results. A composite profile is specifically designed as a trapezoidal hydrofoil and is tested for moderate Reynolds number and pre-stall and post-stall incidences. High-speed imaging of the hydrofoil tip and vibrometer measurements are carried out to determine the experimental tip displacements and hydrofoil's vibrations. The numerical and experimental results show a very strong hydroelastic response, with a structural resonance even for low Reynolds numbers due to the high flexibility of the structure. Strong coupling of the fluid and the structure, with lock-in of the von Karman vortex-shedding to the structure for small incidences, and an excitation of the structure by leading-edge vortex-shedding for higher incidences, are also observed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据