0
Research Papers: CFD and VIV

RANS Simulation Versus Experiments of Flow Induced Motion of Circular Cylinder With Passive Turbulence Control at 35,000 < RE < 130,000

[+] Author and Article Information
Wei Wu

Department of Naval Architecture and
Marine Engineering,
University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, MI
e-mail: wuwei@umich.edu

Michael M. Bernitsas

Professor
CTO of Vortex Hydro Energy,
Department of Naval Architecture and
Marine Engineering,
University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, MI
e-mail: michaelb@umich.edu

Kevin Maki

Assistant Professor
Department of Naval Architecture and
Marine Engineering,
University of Michigan,
Ann Arbor, MI
e-mail: kjmaki@umich.edu

Contributed by the Ocean, Offshore, and Arctic Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF OFFSHORE MECHANICS AND ARCTIC ENGINEERING. Manuscript received August 17, 2011; final manuscript received June 19, 2014; published online July 29, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Solomon Yim.

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 136(4), 041802 (Jul 29, 2014) (10 pages) Paper No: OMAE-11-1076; doi: 10.1115/1.4027895 History: Received August 17, 2011; Revised June 19, 2014

Two-dimensional (2D) Unsteady Reynolds-Averaged Navier–Stokes equations (URANS) equations with the Spalart–Allmaras turbulence model are used to simulate the flow and body kinematics of the transverse motion of spring-mounted circular cylinder. The flow is in the high-lift TrSL3 regime of a Reynolds number in the range 35,000 < Re < 130,000. Passive turbulence control (PTC) in the form of selectively distributed surface roughness is used to alter the cylinder flow induced motion (FIM). Simulation is performed using a solver based on the open source Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) tool OpenFOAM, which solves continuum mechanics problems with a finite-volume discretization method. Roughness parameters of PTC are chosen based on tests conducted in the Marine Renewable Energy Lab (MRELab) of the University of Michigan. The numerical tool is first tested on smooth cylinder in vortex-induced vibration (VIV) and results are compared with available experimental measurements and URANS simulations. For the cylinder with PTC cases, the sandpaper grit on the cylinder wall is modeled as a rough-wall boundary condition. Two sets of cases with different system parameters (spring, damping) are simulated and the results are compared with experimental data measured in the MRELab. The amplitude ratio curve shows clearly three different branches, including the VIV initial and upper branches, and a galloping branch. The numerical branches are similar to those observed experimentally. Frequency ratio, vortex patterns, transitional behavior, and lift are also predicted well for PTC cylinders at such high Reynolds numbers.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Close-up of the structured-medium grid S2 for smooth cylinder

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Configuration of sand strips (PTC) along the cylinder [7]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Grid R1 for a cylinder with PTC

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Amplitude ratio A* (AMax/D) (m*ζ = 0.013, m* = 2.4) compared with Ref. [9]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Frequency ratio fo/fn,water (m*ζ=0.013, m* = 2.4) compared with Ref. [10]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

(a) Double-peaked spectrum of amplitude Re = 3000 (Ur,air = 3, Ur,water = 3.57) in Quasi-Periodic sub-branch and (b) single-peaked spectrum of amplitude Re = 3800 (Ur,air = 3.8, Ur,water = 4.52) in periodic sub-branch

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Different vortex patterns for smooth cylinder in VIV (m*ζ = 0.013, m* = 2.4)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Amplitude ratio (ARMS*) comparison between present study and Ref. [7], University of Michigan (K = 2000 N/m, ζharn = 0.08)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Frequency ratio comparison between present study and Ref. [7], University of Michigan (K = 2000 N/m, ζharn = 0.08)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Different vortex patterns for PTC cylinder in VIV and galloping (m*ζ = 0.013, m* = 2.4)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Displacement ratio (y(t)/D) and lift coefficient for different Re (K = 1600 N/m, ζharn = 0.08)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Amplitude ratio comparison between present study and Ref. [7], (K = 1600 N/m, ζharn = 0.08)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Force comparison between current study and Ref. [11] (2D-URANS k-ω): (a) Maximum lift coefficient and (b) mean drag coefficient

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Time traces of displacement ratio and lift coefficient for smooth cylinder: (a) Re = 5000 (Ur,air = 5, Ur,water = 5.95) and (b) Re = 9000 (Ur,air = 9, Ur,water = 10.71)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

FFT analysis of displacement ratio (y(t)/D) and lift coefficient for different Re (K = 1600 N/m, ζharn = 0.08)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Frequency ratio comparison between present study and Ref. [7], University of Michigan (K = 1600 N/m, ζharn = 0.08)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In