Professional Documents
Culture Documents
PANEL METHOD
by
Julia Bustos
Master of Science
May 2015
Copyright 2015 by Julia Bustos
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Ananthakrishnan for providing insight, guidance and profound knowledge of the subject
throughout my masters program and the completion of this thesis. I have been amazingly
fortunate to work with such great teachers and advisors. Thank you for having me as a
student, for your help on this project and on school related matters, for your endless
In addition, I would like to thank my thesis committee member Dr Oscar Curet for
Also, I would like to thank the faculty and staff of the Department of Ocean and
graduate studies. Thank you Barbara Steinberg for your everyday good communicative
humor!
Finally, I am very grateful to have such amazing family and friends from all
around the world. Your support and encouragement has helped achieve my goals.
iv
ABSTRACT
Year: 2015
program developed in MatLab, the hydrodynamic forces (such as the lift and the drag) as
well as the propulsion thrust and efficiency are computed with this method. The
assumptions made in the analysis are that the flow around a hydrofoil is two-dimensional,
incompressible and inviscid. The analysis is first considered for the case of a deeply
submerged hydrofoil followed by the case where it is located in shallow water depth or
near the free surface. In the second case, the presence of the free surface and wave effects
are taken into account, specifically at high and low frequencies and small and large
amplitudes of flapping. The objective is to determine the thrust and efficiency of the
flapping foils under the influence of added effects of the free surface. Results show that
v
the free-surface can significantly affect the foil performance by increasing the efficiency
vi
HYDRODYNAMIC ANALYSIS OF FLAPPING FOILS FOR THE PROPULSION
METHOD
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1
vii
2.5 Body Boundary Conditions .................................................................... 16
4.2 Pitching................................................................................................... 39
viii
5.1 Boundary Conditions.............................................................................. 43
7. CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................... 63
BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................ 65
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1- Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 3T, ,
, St =0.3 and ............................................................................... 36
Figure 4.3- Time history of the lift coefficient at t = 3T, w*=1, Fn =0.32, St =0.1 and
=0.1, as obtained in the present work. ........................................................ 38
Figure 4.4- Time history of the drag coefficient and motion at t = 3T, w*=1, Fn =0.32, St
=0.1 and =0.1, as obtained in the present work .......................................... 38
Figure 4.5 - Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 3T, w*=1, Fn=0.1, St
=0.32 and =0.1 .......................................................................................... 40
Figure 4.6 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 3T, w*=1, Fn=0.32, St
=0.3 and =0.1 ............................................................................................ 40
Figure 4.7 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 3T, w*=1, Fn=0.1, St
=0.1 and =0.32 .......................................................................................... 41
Figure 4.8- Time history of the thrust, Torque and Motion at t = 3T, w*=1, Fn=0.1, St =1
and =0.03 .................................................................................................... 42
Figure 5.1 - AUV with flapping-foil propulsion near a free surface ................................ 43
Figure 5.2- Hydrofoil and its image above the free surface ............................................. 45
x
Figure 5.3 - Singularities and their images in the case of a small reduced frequency at low
Fn number ..................................................................................................... 46
Figure 5.4 - Motion of the hydrofoil and its image in case of a small reduced frequency 47
Figure 5.5 - Singularities and their images in the case of a high reduced frequency ....... 48
Figure 5.6 - Motion of the hydrofoil and its image in case of a high reduced frequency . 49
Figure 5.7 - Influence of a source panel j and its image on the panel i ............................ 50
Figure 6.1 - Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 3T, no FS, w*=2,
Fn=0.125, St =0.3 and =0.057 .................................................................. 55
Figure 6.2 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 3T, no FS, w*=2,
Fn=0.125, St =0.3 and =0.057 .................................................................. 55
Figure 6.3 - Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 1.5T, d=1, w*=2,
Fn=0.125, St =0.3 and =0.057 .................................................................. 56
Figure 6.4 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 3T, d=1, w*=2,
Fn=0.125, St =0.3 and ==0.047 ................................................................ 56
Figure 6.5- Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 1.5T, d=0.2, w*=2,
Fn=0.125, St =0.3 and =0.057 .................................................................... 57
Figure 6.6 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 3T, d=0.2, w*=2,
Fn=0.125, St =0.29 and =0.047 ................................................................ 57
Figure 6.7 - Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 2T, d=1, w*=3,
Fn=0.32, St =0.27 and =0.09 .................................................................... 58
Figure 6.8 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 2T, d=1, w*=3, Fn=0.32,
St =0.27 and =0.09 .................................................................................... 58
gure 6.9 - Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 2T, d=0.3, w*=3,
Fn=0.32, St =0.27 and =0.09 .................................................................... 59
Figure 6.10 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 2T, d=0.3, w*=3,
Fn=0.32, St =0.27 and =0.09 .................................................................. 59
Figure 6.11 - Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 3T, d=1, w*=10,
Fn=0.1, St =0.3and =0.009 ..................................................................... 60
xi
Figure 6.12 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 3T, d=1, w*=10,
Fn=0.1, St =0.3 and =0.009 .................................................................... 60
Figure 6.13 - Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 3T, d=0.5, w*=10,
Fn=0.1, St =0.3and =0.009 ..................................................................... 61
Figure 6.14 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 3T, d=0.5, w*=10,
Fn=0.1, St =0.3and =0.009 ..................................................................... 61
xii
NOMENCLATURE
Froude Number
g Acceleration of gravity
Water depth
Lift
M Moment
p Total pressure
Power
Torque
Strouhal Number
t Time
xiii
Period of flapping motion
Thrust
U Fluid velocity
Amplitude of heaving
Angle of attack
Vortex distribution
Total Circulation
Efficiency
Amplitude of pitching
Density
Source strength
Frequency of motion
xiv
Velocity potential
xv
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
propulsion and the panel method which is used in this project. The second part of this
chapter presents the objectives, scope and how this thesis is expected to contribute to the
studies.
1.1 Hydrofoil
The study of airfoil started in the late 1800s with the work of H.F Phillips (1884).
Since that time, many scientists have contributed to elaborate the theory of airfoil. An
the direction of motion called lift in addition to the component parallel to the direction of
motion called drag, when moved in a fluid. Foils designed to operate in the water are
called hydrofoils, which is the object of our study, in comparison to airfoils moving into
the air. Hydrofoil theories also take into account cavitation but it is not in the scope of
this thesis.
In the early 1900s, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA)
possible to determine the characteristics of these airfoils including their lift and drag
1
properties. Thus, NACA was able to propose families of airfoils whose shapes are best
suited for specific purposes. These shapes of airfoils have also been used in the
hydrofoil theory with the main distinction between airfoil and hydrofoil theories being
work of Anderson (1998), who considered heave and pitch motions of the foil. The
flapping foil propulsion is inspired by the observation of how fishes swim and, more
particularly, by the motion of their undulating fins. Nature offers the most efficient and
forthcoming for large ships in the near future, is well suited at present for small vehicles
2
Many numerical methods of modeling flow past a two dimensional body have
been considered to determine the characteristics of a hydrofoil. One of them is the panel
method. The panel method is also called the singularity method since it is based on the
hydrofoil.
Among the first scientists to work on the panel method were Hess and Smith
(1966). They proposed a method that determines the velocity and thereby the coefficient
of pressure at all points of the surface of the foil as well as the lift coefficient . The
theory consists of dividing the hydrofoil in a finite number of panels. Sources and
vortices, i.e. the singularities, are distributed on every panel to model the flow. The flow
conditions and the Kutta condition, one can find the strengths of these singularities and
thus the hydrodynamic characteristics. In the Hess and Smith method, the strength of the
source is constant for each panel, while the vortex strength can be assumed to be constant
on the whole airfoil. Since then, others methods have followed, notably the vortex panel
method using velocity potential formulation in1971 by Mavriplis and Stevens. The
difference with the Hess and Smith method is that the flow solution is determined by
distributing the vortices on the surface of the body in a uniform flow in the presence of a
rotational or circulatory flow. The distribution of vortices here varies from one panel to
another. Three other panel methods are well known, namely: vortex panel method using
the stream function formulation, panel methods with constant doublets using potential
formulation (Morino and Kuo) and the panel method with linear doublets using a
potential formulation (Moran). However, the method using both the distribution of
3
sources and vortex is found to be most suitable and straightforward for the analysis of
many sensors. For these sensors, to function properly, they need to be stable position
during the survey. The stability of the AUV is even harder to maintain for vehicles
operating in shallow water and near a free surface due to the presence of waves. To
improve the stability, one can consider selecting the shape of the body of the AUV
particular subject and wrote a thesis entitled Hydrodynamic of Underwater Bodies for
Efficient Station Keeping in shallow Waters with Surface Waves. Different shapes
would have influence on how the current and waves will interact with the body. Another
way is to consider the system of propulsion of the AUV. In the ocean, fish show strong
abilities for maneuvering or stabilizing thanks to their undulated fins. They are a source
of inspiration for the studies related to biomimetic propulsion. The undulating fin can be
modeled by a sine wave of varying amplitude, frequency and wavelength. From this
(1969) was among the first to propose this device as an alternative to screw propellers.
Rozhdestvensky and Ryzhov (2003) [1] studied the development of flapping foil
propulsor and its application to marine vehicles. Li, Zhu, and Lu (2012) [2] analyzed the
efficiency and thrust of the tail fins of fish. They closely investigated the behavior of the
caudal fin that acts like a flapping foil and the influence of the foil shape. By varying the
Strouhal number, which is a function of the frequency and amplitude of the flapping fin,
4
and the Reynolds number, they were able to determine the characteristics of thrust and
efficiency generated by a rectangular plate and a forked fin. Their analysis shows that the
thrust and efficiency generated by the forked fin is greater than that of the rectangular
plate at higher Reynolds number but there is no noticeable difference at low Reynolds
number. The above finding suggests that for example, efficient station keeping the
vehicle would not need a forked fin due to the low fluid velocity over the fin during
station keeping. It should be noted however that these studies do not include surface
effects.
flapping foil systems. By experimental and theoretical analysis, he showed that flapping-
foil thrusters can achieve high level efficiency under optimum conditions. He highlighted
the fact that the selection of Strouhal number is important to optimize the efficiency of a
flapping-foil.
In the research of performance of flapping-foil propulsion, one can find the work
kinematics of the foil was indicated to be a key factor affecting efficiency of the system,
and so oscillation frequency, pitch amplitude, heaving amplitude, phase angle between
the heave and pitch motions have to be correctly chosen. Also, they succeeded in
identifying the parametric range in which adequate efficiency and high thrust are both
achieved.
5
vehicles. The research established necessary conditions for optimal performance (i.e,
high thrust and high efficiency) are Strouhal number in the range of 0.25 to 0.35 and the
wave unsteady parameter (where U is the forward speed of the vehicle, the
flapping frequency and g acceleration of gravity) in the supercritical regime (> 0.25) so
that the waves are propagating downstream. The research also showed that at sub-critical
frequencies, upstream propagating waves adds to the drag of the vehicle and do not
contribute to thrust. At all frequencies, the proximity to the free surface decreased the
thrust coefficient of the flapping foil. At supercritical frequencies, it was found that
The present thesis complements above research and findings by examining two-
dimensional effects of a flapping foil in the free surface using computationally efficient
vortex and panel methods. Special focus is on determining foil performance at high and
To solve a problem involving both lifting and thickness effects, a method with
vortex and source singularity distribution can be used to model the flow. This method is
known as the Panel Method, from the fact that the profile of the body is discretized using
panels. Several panel methods have been developed and the main difference between
them resides in the choice of singularities (source, vortex, doublet) employed. Among
the pioneers of this subject are Hess and Smith (1966) [6]. They used a mixed panel
method by coupling sources and vortices distributions on each panel of the profile. The
strengths of the singularities are determined by the boundary conditions. Once the
6
strengths are known, one can determine the velocity field and pressure distribution
around the body. Mavriplis (1971), developed a panel method using only vortex
distribution on the panels. Morino and Kuo (1974) [7] used the Green function theory and
doublets distribution. Masson and Paraschivoiu (1990) [8] compared the difference
between the various panel methods. In their experience, the original method of Hess is
the most complex in term of evaluation of the influence coefficients. The methods that
use one type of singularities (vortices or doublets) appear to be less costly in time of
calculation. However, after comparing five methods mixed or not, they arrived to the
conclusion that pretty much all the methods worked equally well. In the present work, the
mixed coupled method with source and vortex distributions will be applied to our
problem. There are two main reasons for this choice. Firstly, many works have been done
so that the results obtained without free surface effects can be validated. Secondly, for the
free surface problem, a mixed method is more adaptable and more efficient.
The panel method of Hess and Smith was originally developed for steady flow
solution. Many studies have been conducted to extend the technique to unsteady flow,
notably those of Katz and Plotkin (1991) [9] and Basu and Hancock (1978) [10]. In the
unsteady problem, the motion of the hydrofoil continuously shed vortices into the trailing
wake. This vortex shedding process has to take into consideration the influence of the
wake vortices on the flow over the hydrofoil which in turn alters the vortex shedding as
the hydrofoil moves in time. An iterative type of solution is therefore needed for this non-
linear problem. In the present work, for developing the MATLAB code to solve these
equation governing the panel method, the works done by Teng (1987)[11] and Melli
7
1.4 Free Surface Effects
Some surveys require that AUVs operate in shallow water or near the surface of
the water. Hence, the interactions with the free surface and the incident waves have to be
taken into consideration in studying the efficiency and the thrust of the system of
propulsion of the AUV. Recent works have been done concerning the effect of free
surface on flapping-foil propulsion. Bal (1997) [13] applied a potential based method on
an oscillating body moving beneath the free surface. The hydrofoil is modeled by
constant source distribution and constant doublet distribution on each panel and a
Dirichlet condition is used. The free surface condition is determined by the method of
images applicable in the limiting cases of large or small Froude numbers or frequencies
existing in the literature to good agreement. Filippas and Belibassakis (2013) [14]
continued the work of Bal by including the effects of incident waves. They first
performed an analysis of a non-lifting body beneath a free surface and then extended the
method to a flapping foil in the presence of waves. Their works show that the free surface
effects cannot be neglected and that the thrust and efficiency of flapping foil thrusters are
therefore wavelength and depth of submergence of the foil below the free surface.
supercritical for then the momentum transfer of downstream radiating waves to improve
developed a boundary integral method based on dipoles and the equations were
8
established for the complex velocity potential and the dipole strength. The formulation
was tested for steady and unsteady two-dimensional problems including spilling and
plunging wave breaking. Chen (1990) [16] investigated the free surface effect problem by
using a vortex panel method around a cylinder partially or totally submerged which
followed the work of Vorus (1996) concerning the vortex sheet model.
The principal objective of this thesis is to determine the combined effect of wake
vortices and surface waves on the hydrodynamic performance of 2-D flapping foils for
near-surface underwater vehicles. To carry out this study, a numerical method using the
vortex and source panel method will be developed. The study would be divided into two
steps. The first one consists of determining the propulsive characteristics of a flapping-
foil in an unbounded fluid. Once this step is completed, we will proceed to determine the
hydrodynamic characteristics of a given hydrofoil near the surface water by taking into
account the free surface and wave effects. The obtained values will be compared to the
(Ananthakrishnan, 2014).
Several tasks and skills will be involved in order to achieve the objectives of this thesis:
water
water surface.
9
1.6 Scope and Contribution of this Thesis
vehicles which operate in shallow water of near surface, the effects of the free surface
and surface waves and their interactions with the wake of the body have to be considered
As literature review suggests, numerous researches have been carried out on the
study of hydrofoil in deep water using the vortex-source panel method as a numerical
method to calculate the hydrodynamic coefficients which characterize a foil but not in
shallow water. The original contribution of the present thesis will be to study the
performance of flapping foils near the surface waves. This work aims to complement
previous work on the hydrodynamic performance of a flapping-foil near the free surface
10
CHAPTER 2
In this chapter, we begin by introducing the problem and presenting the governing
equations used in the panel method. We also defined the boundaries and their equations.
As discussed in the previous chapter, the first part of this project involves
submerged in deep water. The study is carried out first in a steady flow (static foil) and
maximum width and fitted with flapping foil advancing with forward speed U (or
stationary in a uniform current of speed U in the opposite direction) and with as the
chord length. Let be the density of water and the acceleration of the gravity. In the
present work, the focus will be on determining the thrust and efficiency of the foil for a
11
U
D
c
D
Several assumptions are made concerning the flow field in which the method is
developed.
The flow is assumed to be an incompressible, and except for finite regions of vorticity, to
assumption leads us to an irrotational flow (since this is the viscous forces that
(2.1)
- The density of the fluid is constant. Thus, the flow is incompressible and so that
(2.2)
- The flow is irrotational, this means that the velocity derives from a potential and
that
12
(2.3)
By substituting (2.3) in the equation of continuity for an incompressible fluid (2.2), one
0 (2.4)
the following Eulers integral which after solving the Laplace equation is used to
(2.5)
In the case of steady flow, the expression for the pressure coefficient is given by:
(2.6)
(2.7)
(2.8)
With ,
13
(2.9)
(2.10)
According to the principle of superposition, one can use fundamental solutions called
singularity solutions to model a particular flow governed by the Laplace equation. The
panel method described here follows the work proposed by Hess and Smith. The
singularity elements used are two dimensional constant strength sources, constant
strength vortex distribution and point vortex. The distributed elements are used on the
solid bodies, whereas the point vortices are used in the unsteady wake.
14
For illustration, let us consider the source panel spanning coordinates on the x
is given by:
(2.11)
(2.12)
(2.13)
(2.14)
(2.15)
(2.16)
Point vortex
The velocity potential and velocity induced at a point due a vortex of strength is
given by:
15
(2.17)
(2.18)
(2.19)
Above singularities satisfy the Laplaces equation away from the singularities.
In case of flow about a foil, the velocity potential around the foil can be decomposed as
follows:
(2.20)
The body of the hydrofoil constitutes boundary condition for the flow. For impermeable
foil, the flow doesnt go through the surface of the hydrofoil, just slide along, in other
words:
(2.21)
16
(2.22)
where is the normal vector of the body surface and the gradient of potential is related to
the source and vortex strengths (disturbance flow). In infinite fluid flow, we can suppose
that perturbation induced by the foil will be negligible far away from this body and thus
as .
Application for the Kutta condition allows for viscosity effect for small angles of
attack, requiring that the velocity of the flow must remain finite and tangent to the foil at
the sharp trailing edge. This implies that the pressures on the upper and lower sides at the
trailing edge of a foil must be equal in order to make the flow leave the trailing edge
17
CHAPTER 3
for a stationary hydrofoil. Next, we extend the method to a moving foil, which we call the
unsteady state case. At the end of this chapter, the results found are presented and
The Source Vortex Panel Method (SVPM) uses the principle of superposition of
singularity elements to model the flow around a stationary hydrofoil. The panel code
developed here follows the work proposed by Hess and Smith and consists by
3.1.1 Geometry
calculates the foil coordinates. The coordinates are determined according to the NACA
The first element is the lower trailing edge and the last one on the upper trailing
edge point. The points in between are distributed clockwise and monotonously. In total,
we have elements.
18
All nodes are connected with line segments that constitute the N panels. On the
middle of each panel, a control point or node is placed. At each of these control points,
- The Panel Frame with the normal vector of each panel that points
away from the foil and the origin at the control point.
z n
t
x
The influence coefficients are defined as the velocity induced at a field point by a
singularity of unit strength placed anywhere in the flow field. Here, we will compute the
velocity induced at the ith control point by the uniform source and vortices distribution on
all the panels . The strength of the sources varies from panel to panel whereas the
19
vorticity strength remains the same on all the panels. The normal components of
velocities are essential to satisfy the normal condition while the tangential ones are
The velocity induced at a control point by the panel of source intensity and
(3.1)
(3.2)
(3.3)
(3.4)
coordinates:
(3.5)
(3.6)
20
where is the angle between the panel system and global system and are
coordinates:
(3.7)
(3.8)
(3.9)
(3.10)
If we project these matrices on the normal and tangential vectors of panel , we get:
and .
The velocities induced by a vortex and source are identical except that the
21
(3.11)
(3.12)
(3.13)
(3.14)
: and with
(3.15)
(3.16)
The Neumann condition must be fulfilled in each of the control point. Hence, we get a
system of N equations:
22
(3.17)
where is the flow velocity projected onto the normal vector of each panel.
The Kutta condition implies that the total tangential velocity on the upper and lower side
(3.18)
(3.19)
(3.20)
(3.21)
(3.22)
(3.23)
We finally get the following system of equations for source and vortex strengths:
23
(3.24)
(3.25)
With this linear system, one can solve for the source and vortex strengths and the velocity
The steady solution doesnt contradict the Kelvin Condition, in viewing the steady state
solution as limit of unsteady start. The unsteady starting vortex corresponding to the
steady lift is convected very far downstream to reach steady state, such that the influence
The unsteady case, as in flapping motion, involves a time dependency of the terms in the
velocity , oscillating harmonically with a heave motion and with a pitch motion
24
which is the instantaneous angle between the chord of the hydrofoil and the flow
velocity .
(3.26)
(3.27)
where is the phase angle between the heave and pitch motions, the heave amplitude,
the pitch amplitude and the flapping angular frequency (in radians /s).
(3.28)
The important parameters to consider here are the phase angle , which is set to 90
here, the heave amplitude and the Strouhal number . The Strouhal number indicates
how often vortices are created in the foil wake and how close they are to each other:
25
(3.29)
The Kelvins theorem states that in an ideal fluid flow the total circulation in a flow
domain cannot change in time. This implies that any change in bound vortices on the foil
(3.30)
That means that for a step time k, the circulation of the shed vortex is equal to:
(3.31)
The above equation defines the vortex shedding process. This shed vorticity takes place
through a small line wake element attached to the trailing edge of the foil and may be
considered as an additional panel with index N+1. At every time step, a panel vortex with
uniform and constant vorticity is formed at the trailing edge and then convected as a
The wake panel is defined by its length and its inclination with the x axis of the
(3.32)
26
(3.33)
Furthermore, according to the assumptions made by Basu (1978), one can define the
(3.34)
(3.35)
where and are the velocity components of the wake panel in the inertial
coordinate frame.
The presence of the wake panel and the shed vortices influence the singularity
distributions on the body. Similarly, the wake panel and shed vortices are influenced by
the source and vorticity distributions of the hydrofoil together with the free-stream
velocity. This modifies the linear equations used for the steady state case to non-linear
ones and requires a coupled or an iterative solution method to determine the strengths of
singularity distributions.
As described previously, a panel wake is shed as a discrete vortex into the wake to satisfy
the Kelvin condition. The velocity induced by the shed vortex with coordinates
( ) and with circulation at field point in the initial frame is given by:
27
(3.36)
(3.37)
The normal velocity induced in the control points due to the shed vortex at time step
is . The tangential velocity induced in the control points due to the shed vortex
at time step is .
strengths on the foil, one constant vortex strength on the foil and the vortex strength of
the wake panel. We use no-flux conditions on the N body panels, pressure continuity
across panel 1 and panel and the Kelvins theorem of D /Dt = 0 to determine the
unknowns.
As the shed vortices and the wake panel induce velocity in control points, one have to
take them into account in the Neumann condition. Also, the kinematic velocity of the
That leads to
(3.37)
28
One can represent this equation in the index notation as
(3.38)
The unsteady Kutta condition states that the velocity difference due to the vortex sheet
should be equal to the difference in the tangential velocities at the upper and lower
To determine the vortex strength on the foil, let us again consider the unsteady
Bernouillis equation:
(3.39)
With
(3.40)
we obtain,
(3.41)
The square of the fluid velocity can be obtained by summing the square of the tangent
(3.42)
Likewise,
29
(3.43)
(3.44)
(3.45)
(3.46)
At each time step, the discrete vortices formed previously are moving with the flow. The
(3.47)
(3.48)
30
Their positions are updated for the next time step with the following equation:
(3.49)
(3.50)
(3.51)
For unsteady case, we need to also evaluate the change of velocity potential in time.
By integrating the pressure over the body, one can found the overall force and moment
acting on the center of mass of the foil. Using Newtons laws, one can determined that
(3.52)
(3.53)
(3.54)
(3.55)
31
Finally, the velocities found are given by
(3.56)
(3.57)
Since, these forces act on the motion of the foil, we have to adjust the position of the
(3.58)
(3.59)
The aim of this study is to investigate the efficiency of flapping-foil propulsion. To do so,
We define first the thrust and lift coefficients per unit length as:
(3.60)
(3.61)
(3.62)
32
The torque for a flapping foil is given as:
(3.63)
(3.64)
(3.65)
The solution is advanced in time as illustrated in the flow chart on the next page.
33
tk = tk-1 + t
No
Convergence of the
wake panel parameters?
Yes
34
CHAPTER 4
The profile used to validate the code is a NACA 0012 for the principal reason that a lot of
studies have been carried on this profile and many results are available. The results are
provided after 3 cycles and the last cycle is used to calculate the efficiency.
Results are obtained for a range of different keys parameters such as the Strouhal
Number, Froude Number and the amplitude and frequency of oscillation of the hydrofoil.
Also, the results corresponds to body stationary in an uniform current which is equivalent
The variables are in a non-dimensional form with respect to and (even though g is
not a governing factor in the infinite fluid case. But to be consistent with the results in
the next chapter which includes free surface, where g is a factor and used for non-
here also).
(4.1)
35
(4.2)
We started to look at a pure heaving motion. The motion is described by the following
formula:
(4.3)
We run cases with different values for the amplitude and look at the efficiency obtained.
We compare our results with the work of Platzer and Tuncer Thrust generation due to
airfoil flapping.
Figure 4.1 - Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 3T, ,
, St =0.3 and
36
Figure 4.2 - Results obtained by Tuncer and Platzer.
potential flow solution (UPOT) and a combined Navier-Stokes / Potential Flow solution
(NSPOT).
37
2
Cl
1.5
0.5
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time (x/U)
Figure 4.3 - Time history of the lift coefficient at t = 3T, w*=1, Fn =0.32, St =0.1
and =0.1, as obtained in the present work.
0.15
Cd
Motion
0.1
0.05
-0.05
-0.1
-0.15
-0.2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Time (x/U)
Figure 4.4 - Time history of the drag coefficient and motion at t = 3T, w*=1, Fn
=0.32, St =0.1 and =0.1, as obtained in the present work
38
Except the phase that differes from the two results, the amplitude of both drag and lift
coefficient are the same. So, a good correlation is obtained. The efficiency obtained by
4.2 Pitching
We then look at a pure pitching motion. Once again, different cases are run and we
(4.4)
Case
1 1 0.1 0.3 43%
2 1 0.03 0.1 x
3 1 0.32 1 29%
The choice of the parameters were mainly focused on the range of the Strouhal number.
Results show that the best efficiency is obtained for for a Strouhal Number close to 0.3.
For a high Strouhal number ( ), high trhust is obtained but the efficiency is lower. On
the other hand, for a low Strouhal number ( ), there is only drag and no efficiency
can be computed.
39
Case 1
Figure 4.5 - Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 3T, w*=1, Fn=0.1, St =0.32 and
=0.1
6
Thrust
Motion
4 Torque
-2
-4
-6
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Time (x/U)
Figure 4.6 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 3T, w*=1, Fn=0.32, St =0.3 and
=0.1
40
Case 2
0.15
Thrust
Motion
0.1
Torque
0.05
-0.05
-0.1
-0.15
-0.2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Time (x/U)
Figure 4.7 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 3T, w*=1, Fn=0.1, St =0.1 and =0.32
41
Case 3
5
Thrust
4 Motion
Torque
3
-1
-2
-3
-4
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Time (x/U)
Figure 4.8- Time history of the thrust, Torque and Motion at t = 3T, w*=1, Fn=0.1, St =1 and =0.03
42
CHAPTER 5
consider the flapping foil l located near the surface of the water.
U d h
D
c
D
As for the problem in infinite fluid, we will look closer at the motion of the flapping foil
and the efficiency created by it, without considering the presence of the AUV.
43
(5.1)
At the mean free surface position , the linearized dynamic condition is given by,
(5.2)
Along with the kinematic condition = , one can obtain the combined free surface
boundary condition as
(5.3)
The free surface adds a new boundary condition to the system of equation. Indeed, the
singularities present on the body and in the wake are influenced by the free surface effect
and vice versa. So, singularities are induced in such a way to satisfy the boundary
For the linear time-harmonic case, the potential corresponding to flapping foil can be
condition becomes
(5.4)
44
(5.5)
Finally, we obtain,
(5.6)
In the limiting case of small frequency ( <0.1) and large frequency ( >10)
In both cases, the solution can be obtained by introducing an image body above the free
surface. The motion of the image body together with the sign of the images source
As seen on the following picture, the foil is underwater at a distance d from the free
surface, and the image body is located at a same distance d above the free surface.
Image Body
d
Free Surface
d
Body
Figure 5.2 - Hydrofoil and its image above the free surface
45
5.2 First Limiting Case: Small Frequency
simplified to
(5.7)
This means that the surface behaves like a wall and its a symmetry condition. The effect
of the free surface can be included by distributing images sources of same strengths and
vortex of opposite strength above the free surface. The velocity induced on the body has
Free Surface
Source Vortex
46
As its a symmetry condition, the motion of the image body is the same as the body itself.
The image wake panel, symbolized in black, has the same motion that the wake panel
itself.
Image Body
d
Free Surface
Body
becomes
(5.8)
which means that the surface behaves like an anti-symmetric plane. In this case, the effect
of the free surface can be included by distributing image sources of opposite strengths
47
and vortex of same strength above the free surface. The velocity induced on the body has
Free Surface
Source Vortex
As its an anti-symmetry condition, the motion of the image body is opposite to the one
of the body. The image wake panel, symbolized in black, has also an opposite motion.
48
Image Body
d
Free Surface
Body
We now have to take into account the Free Surface Boundary Condition into our
code. Some added equations have to be inputted. The main modification is in the process
of the calculation of the influence coefficients. The solution would result from these new
influence coefficients.
First, we have to create the image body. Its the exactly same body but translated
from a distance of over it. So then, the body is from a distance under the free
surface and the image body is from a distance above the free surface. Depending on the
considered limit case, the motion of the image body would be different. If we are looking
at the case of a small frequency, the image body would have exactly the same motion.
For large frequencies, the motion of the image body would the exact opposite of the one
of the body.
49
Once the image body is created, we can determinate the influence coefficients.
The image body has the same source strengths and vortex circulation as the body, only
their sign will change in accordance with the case. So, we still have unknown source
wake panel (in summary, unknowns). Only the distance will be changed
Collocation point
50
(5.9)
We added the influence from the image sources, image vortex, image wake panel
51
CHAPTER 6
parameter need to be added. This parameter is called the unsteady frequency parameter
and is defined as
(6.1)
With regard to the Strouhal number, the cases will be run in the optimum range of
52
The depth of submergence of the vehicle now steps in the parameters governing the
Also since the parameters are numerous, we take water to be deep ( ) with the
Results are thus presented for high and low reduced frequency the angular amplitude
In this section we consider the case of pure pitching motion of the foil. The foil is
Case d .
1 No FS 2 0.125 0.057 0.3 0.25 10%
2 1 2 0.125 0.057 0.3 0.25 23%
3 0.2 2 0.125 0.057 0.3 0.25 33%
4 1 3 0.32 0.09 0.27 0.96 13%
5 0.3 3 0.32 0.09 0.27 0.96 19%
6 1 10 0.1 0.009 0.3 1 9%
7 0.5 10 0.1 0.009 0.3 1 17%
The efficiencies found are low compared to past studies (e.g., Ananthakrishnan, 2014)
which may be due to incomplete modeling of the free surface here by which the free
53
surface is set to remain flat and perhaps because the present model is valid only in the
liming case of infinite frequency. However, the most important observation made here is
that the free surface does affect the propulsive characteristics of the flapping foil. In
Figures 6.1 to 6.6, results with and without free-surface effects on the flow structures and
thrust are compared. In Figures 6.1, 6.3 and 6.5 the flow structures with and without free
surface at two different depths or submergence are compared. The wake vortex structure
is almost symmetric about the centerline without the free surface; both positive and
negative vortex structures are of same intensity as to be expected. On the other hand, in
the presence of the free surface, the symmetry is lost and the (as one can observe in the
thrust curves of Figure 6.3, for example, the vortex wake not aligned along the centerline
of the foil. Such evolution of the vortex wake in the presence of the free surface can be
observed in the cases presented in subsequent Figures 6.7 to 6.14. The alignment of the
vortex structures determine if the wake is jet like, which creates thrust, or wake like due
to drag. The influence of the free surface on the evolution of the wake vortex structures
thus affect the thrust creating ability of the foil. Another interesting observation from the
results is that at high frequency of oscillation in the presence of free surface, the
generation of the second harmonic component of the thrust is suppressed (as one can
observe in the thrust curves of Figure. 6.2 which is without free surface and Figure 6.4
which is with the free surface. The present results point to the significance of the free
complete modeling of the free surface, in order to determine the free-surface effects in a
more quantitatively accurate manner. The extension of the numerical model and possible
topics for future research in this area are discussed in the next chapter.
54
Case 1 (without free surface)
Figure 6.1 - Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 3T, no FS, w*=2, Fn=0.125, St
=0.3 and =0.057
Figure 6.2 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 3T, no FS, w*=2, Fn=0.125, St =0.3
and =0.057
55
Case 2 (with free surface)
Figure 6.3 - Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 1.5T, d=1,
w*=2, Fn=0.125, St =0.3 and =0.057
Figure 6.4 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 3T, d=1, w*=2,
Fn=0.125, St =0.3 and ==0.047
56
Case 3 (with free surface)
Figure 6.5- Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 1.5T, d=0.2, w*=2, Fn=0.125, St
=0.3 and =0.057
Figure 6.6 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 3T, d=0.2, w*=2, Fn=0.125, St =0.29
and =0.047
57
Case 4 (with free surface)
Figure 6.7 - Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 2T, d=1, w*=3, Fn=0.32, St
=0.27 and =0.09
Figure 6.8 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 2T, d=1, w*=3, Fn=0.32,
St =0.27 and =0.09
58
Case 5 (with free surface)
Figure 6.9 - Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 2T, d=0.3,
w*=3, Fn=0.32, St =0.27 and =0.09
Figure 6.10 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 2T, d=0.3, w*=3,
Fn=0.32, St =0.27 and =0.09
59
Case 6 (with free surface)
Figure 6.11 - Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 3T, d=1, w*=10, Fn=0.1, St
=0.3and =0.009
Figure 6.12 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 3T, d=1, w*=10, Fn=0.1, St =0.3 and
=0.009
60
Case 7 (with free surface)
Figure 6.13 - Motion of the flapping foil with the wake pattern at t = 3T, d=0.5, w*=10, Fn=0.1, St
=0.3and =0.009
Figure 6.14 - Time history of the thrust, torque and motion at t = 3T, d=0.5, w*=10, Fn=0.1, St
=0.3and =0.009
61
6.2 Second Limiting Case: Low Reduced Frequency
In order to perform the second case, one need to take a low reduced frequency ,
, the Froude Number has be at least equal to 2.5 and this places the case in a
supercritical flow.
with . The code only works for small amplitude of oscillation and 40 deg is not
With very low frequency needed for the algorithm to work in the limiting case,
one cannot achieve optimal range of Strouhal number and unsteady wave parameter.
Therefore, the algorithm is not used to study low frequency cases with free surface.
62
CHAPTER 7
CONCLUSION
propulsion in unbounded fluid and in the presence of a free surface. The unbounded fluid
case results compare favorably with that given in earlier works, thus validating the
method and the numerical algorithm. High and low frequency oscillations near the free
surface is modeled through the method of images. Results confirm that free surface
effects can be significant even at low Froude number. At high frequencies, and low
Froude number, the results show that for Strouhal number in the range of 0.25 to 0.35 and
wave unsteady parameter larger than 0.25, the efficiency increases because of the
momentum transfer in the downstream propagating waves. Also, the free surface breaks
the symmetry of the foil motion resulting in higher harmonic frequency component of the
thrust less significant. The case of low frequency with free surface was not analyzed
because the parameters do not fall within optimal range of Strouhal number and wave
unsteady parameter for very low frequency unless the amplitude of oscillation is too large
for the assumptions made in the analysis to hold good. Our results show that effect of the
free surface is significant. But for the momentum transfer of waves to contribute to the
thrust, a model has to allow the generation of waves by the flapping foil. In the present
work, we let the free-surface to remain flat, in order to determine the image of the foil,
63
and do not consider the generation of waves. Further works that will allow the
generation of waves may shed more light on the effect of the free surface on the flapping
As future work, one may extend the algorithm for all ranges of frequency and
Froude number, for example by combining the present algorithm with the vortex
algorithm for nonlinear free-surface flows (as developed in Baker, Meiron and Orszag,
1982) and then obtaining the results for all ranges of parameters. One can also
incorporate the presence of the vehicle hull to study the wake effects of the hull on the
propulsive performance of the flapping foil and vice versa. One may then pursue three
dimensional analysis with proper choice vortex filaments such as horseshoe vortices to
64
BIBLIOGRAPHY
[2] Li, G., L. Zhu, X. Lu, Numerical Studies on Locomotion Performance of Fish-like
Tail Fins, Journal of Hydrodynamics, 2012. Vol. 24. 488-495.
[3] K.D von Ellenrieder, K. Paker, J. Soria, Fluid Mechanics of flapping wings,
Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science,2008. Vol 32 1578-1589
[6] Hess J.L., Smith A.M.O., Calculation of Potential Flow about Arbitrary Bodies,
Progress in Aeronautic Sciences, 1966, Vol.8, 1-138
[7] Morino L, Kuo C.C, Subsonic Potential Aerodynamics For Complex Configurations
- A General Theory, AIAA Journal 1974. Vol. 12, 191-197
[9] Katz J., Plotkin A., Low-Speed Aerodynamics from Wing Theory to Panel Methods,
Mc-Graw Hill, Inc. 1991.
[10] Basu BC, Hancock GJ, The Unsteady Motion of a Two-Dimensional Aerofoil in
Incompressible Inviscid Flow, J Fluid Mech 1978. Vol. 87(1), 15978.
[11] Teng NH., The Development of a Computer Code (U2DIIF) for The Numerical
Solution of Unsteady, Inviscid and Incompressible Flow over an Airfoil, 1987
[12] Melli J., A Hierarchy of Models for the Control of Fish-like Motion, PhD
Dissertation, Princeton University, 2008, 236p.
65
[13] Bal S., A Potential Based Panel Method for 2-D Hydrofoils, Ocean Engineering,
1999, Vol.26, 343-361
[14] Filippas E.S., Belibassakis K. A., Free Surface Effects on Hydrodynamic Analysis
of Flapping Foil Thruster in Waves, Engineering Analysis with Boundary Elements ,
2014, Vol. 41, 47-59
[15] Baker G., Meiron D., Orszag S., Generalized Vortex Methods for Free-Surface
Flow Problems, Journal Fluid Mechanics, 1982. Vol. 123, 477-501
[16] Chen L., Application of a Vortex Method to Free Surface Flows, PhD Dissertation,
University of Michigan 1990, 169p.
66