4.7 Article

Two-degrees-of-freedom vortex-induced vibration of cylinders covered with hard marine fouling

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2022.107624

关键词

Vortex-induced vibration; Marine fouling; Two-degree-of-freedom system; Circular cylinder; Poison cluster process

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Marine fouling has a significant impact on the Vortex-Induced Vibration (VIV) of marine structures. This study investigates the two-degree-of-freedom (2-DoF) VIV of fouled cylinders through towing tank experiments. The results show that marine fouling reduces the oscillation amplitudes and several key parameters associated with VIV.
Marine fouling quickly covers the submerged surfaces of the man-made structures and affects the flow regime around them. Many important studies have already been conducted on the Vortex-Induced Vibration (VIV) of bluff bodies, but the two-Degree-of-Freedom (2-DoF) VIV of marine-fouled cylinders has received no previous attention. The current towing tank experimental study tries to fill this gap in the context of mechanical sciences. A Poisson Cluster Process (PCP) is used to model aggregated spatial distributions of artificial marine fouling on test cylinders. The Reynolds number ranges between 6.4 x 103 and 5.2 x 104. The results show that in the fouling presence, the super-upper branch disappears from the 2-DoF VIV response of the cylinders. The maximum oscillation amplitudes in the in-line and cross-flow DoFs are reduced up to 37% and 50%, respectively, as compared to those of the smooth cylinder. Marine fouling moderately reduces the maximum lift force coefficient, whereas remarkably decreases the maximum drag force coefficient, the lock-in range, the lower branch length, and the reduced velocity (U*) marking the beginning of the lower branch. The highest mitigation occurs with the most sparsely marine-fouled cylinder examined (33% coverage). The aforementioned fouling effects generally reduce as the fouling coverage ratio increases.

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