Numerical analysis of the high skew propeller of an underwater vehicle

Abstract

A numerical analysis based on the boundary element method (BEM) was presented for the hydrodynamic performance of a high skew propeller (HSP) which is employed by an underwater vehicle (UV). Since UVs operate at two different working conditions (surface and submerged conditions), the design of such a propeller is a cumbersome task. This is primarily due to the fact that the resistance forces as well as the vessel efficiency under these conditions are significantly different. Therefore, some factors are necessary for the design of the optimum propeller to utilize the power at the mentioned conditions. The design objectives of the optimum propeller are to obtain the highest possible thrust, minimum torque, and efficiency. In the current study, a 5-bladed HSP was chosen for running the UV. This propeller operated at the stern of the UV hull where the inflow velocity to the propeller was non-uniform. Some parameters of the propeller were predicted based on the UV geometrical hull and operating conditions. The computed results include the pressure distribution and the hydrodynamic characteristics of the HSP in open water conditions, and comparison of these results with those of the experimental data indicates good agreement. The propeller efficiency for both submerged and surface conditions was found to be 67% and 64%, respectively, which compared to conventional propellers is a significantly higher efficiency.

Keywords

boundary element method (BEM) / hydrodynamic analysis / high skew propeller / surface and submerged conditions

References

[1] Andersen P, Kappel JJ, Spangenberg E (2009). Aspects of propeller developments for an underwater vehicle. First International Symposium on Marine Propulsor, Trondheim, Norway, WB2-2.

[2] Benini E. Significance of blade element theory in performance prediction of marine propellers. Ocean Engineering, 2004, 31: 957-974

[3] Breslin J.P., Andersen P. Hydrodynamics of ship propellers, 1994, Cambridge, UK: University Press

[4] Burcher R., Rydill L. Concepts in underwater vehicle design, 1994, London: Department of Mechanical Engineering, University College press

[5] Carlton J. Marine propeller and propulsion, 2006, London: Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd

[6] Chang X., Zou J., Huang S., Guo C. Influence on the hydrodynamic performance of a variable vector propeller of different rules of pitch angle change. Journal of Marine Science and Application, 2007, 6(4): 32-36

[7] Felice FD, Felli M, Liefvendahl M, Svennberg U (2009). Numerical and experimental analysis of the wake behavior of a generic underwater vehicle propeller. First International Symposium on Marine Propulsors, Trondheim, Norway, WB2-2.

[8] Ghassemi H. Effect of the wake flow and skew angle onto the hydrodynamic performance of ship propeller. Journal of Science and Technology (Scientia Iranica), 2009, 16(2): 149-158

[9] Ghassemi H., Kohansal A.R. Numerical evaluation of various levels of singular integrals, arising in BEM and its application in hydrofoil analysis. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 2009, 213(2): 277-289

[10] Hsin CY, Kerwin JE, Kinnas SA (1991). A panel method for the analysis of the flow around highly skewed propellers. Proceedings of the Propllers/Shafting’91 Symposium, Virginia Beach, Virginia, 1–13.

[11] Kinnas S.A., Hsin C.Y. Boundary element method for the analysis of the unsteady flow around extreme propeller geometry. AIAA Journal, 1992, 30(3): 688-696

[12] Kim Y.C., Kim T.W., Pyo S., Suh J.C. Design of propeller geometry using streamline-adapted blade sections. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 2009, 14: 161-170

[13] Morino L., Kuo C.C. Subsonic potential aerodynamics for complex configuration: a general theory. AIAA Journal, 1974, 12(2): 191-197

[14] Schlichting H., Gersten K. Boundary-layer theory, 2000, 8th revised edition, Berlin: Springer-Verlag

[15] Ukon Y, Kudo T, Yuasa H, Kamiirisa H (1991). Measurement of pressure distribution on full scale propellers. Proceedings of the proepllers/Shafting’91 Symposium, Virginia Beach, Virginia, USA, 111–123.