CFD

© All Rights Reserved

12 views

CFD

© All Rights Reserved

- Cirkulac Pumpe BUHLER De370001
- lab 3-FREE N FORCE VORTEX.doc
- Introduction to Steam Turbines
- Simulation of Gas-Solid Flow & Design Modifications of Cement Plant Cyclones
- Shaft Vibration Measurement
- Influence of Endplate on Aerodynamic Characteristics of Low-Aspect-ratio Wing in Ground Effect
- r050210201 Fluid Mechanics and Hydraulic Machinery
- AERO2358_Propeller_Blade_Element_2011
- icacsesp56
- Numeric Simulation on the Performance of an Undulating Fin in the Wake of a Periodic Oscillating Plate
- H13_1110
- Smith AHS04
- 10.1.1.133
- Thermal Engineering.pptx
- 290-2120-1-PB
- Design and Computational Studies on Plain Flaps
- Abstract
- Morphing BlDE Final
- 0613.2.K
- Aerothermodynamics of Tight Rotor Tip Clearance Fl

You are on page 1of 9

Energy

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

method modeling migration from propulsion to turbine energy

Pengfei Liu*

Institute for Ocean Technology, National Research Council Canada, 1 Kerwin Place and Arctic Avenue, Box 12093, St. Johns, Newfoundland and Labrador, A1B 3T5 Canada

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: A computational hydrodynamics method was formulated and implemented for horizontal axis tidal

Received 27 November 2009 turbines. This paper presents a comparative analysis between screw propellers and horizontal axis

Received in revised form turbines, in terms of geometry and motion parameters, inow velocity analysis and the implementation

8 March 2010

methodologies. Comparison and analysis are given for a marine propeller model and a horizontal axis

Accepted 9 March 2010

turbine model that have experimental measurements available in literature. Analysis and comparison are

Available online 22 April 2010

presented in terms of thrust coefcients, shaft torque/power coefcients, blade surface pressure distri-

butions, and downstream velocity proles. The effect of number of blades from 2 to 5, of a tidal turbine

Keywords:

Panel method

on hydrodynamic efciency is also obtained and presented. The key implementation techniques and

Propeller methodologies are provided in detail for the propeller based panel method tool to migrate as a prediction

Wind turbine tool for tidal turbine. While the method has been proven to be accurate and robust for many propellers

Tidal turbine hydrodynamics tested in the past, this numerical tool could be validated further for turbines. To further rene and

validate the panel method for various turbines, it requires substantial additional experimental

measurements. These measurements include downstream velocity prole by using LDV and/or SPIV,

which are essential for numerical wake vortices descritization.

Crown Copyright 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Hoogedoorn et al. [4]. To the authors knowledge, these few panel

methods for turbine simulation and prediction include a 2D panel

Computational methods have been widely used for wind or tidal method by Drela et al. mentioned in [1], a 3D time-domain panel

turbine research and development. A comprehensive review of method for wind turbine by Hampsey [5], a rudderepropeller

these methods and their merits and limitations, for example, was interaction panel code by Turnock [6] and a design based simula-

given by Nicholls-Lee et al. [1]. Among these methods, the panel tion work by Greco et al. [7]. Formulation and implementation of

methods, in the most advanced and complicated method group, these panel methods for both wind turbines and tidal turbines are

have both high computing efciency and prediction accuracy as an basically the same though different uid properties such as

engineering tool for turbine simulation and design optimization. viscosity/density and hence Reynolds number, require different

While probably the blade element methods (BEM) are the most scheme and numerical treatment. The primary difference for panel

widely used as preliminary simulation tools for wind and tidal methods as tools for wind turbine and for tidal turbine is that tidal

turbines, much fewer panel methods could be found for turbine in turbines are often exposed to cavitation that would cut off the

literature. One of the many examples of BEM methods is Kishinami negative pressure spike and reduce the energy extraction efciency

et al. [2] that used a combination of momentum, energy and blade substantially even if there does not exist stall or separation. For

element theory and produced some results which agree relatively wind turbine under high speed inow conditions, compressibility

well with available experimental measurements. Another example might be a problem, at least in terms of turbine efciency correc-

of the BEM method is the one by Lanzafame and Messina [3] that tion. A bare panel method developed from scratch also needs many

produced some hydrodynamic characteristics which agree closely other essential numerical components for different application

with the model test data. Other combined methods also have been cases. Establishing these numerical components for a newly

used to simulate exible turbine blades, for example, by developed bare panel method require substantial effort and

implementation development, as described later in this section. In

this paper we provide an efcient turn-key solution that a well-

* Tel.: 1 709 772 4575; fax: 1 709 772 2462. established propeller panel method can be quickly turned into

E-mail address: pengfei.liu@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca a turbine simulation code.

0360-5442/$ e see front matter Crown Copyright 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.energy.2010.03.013

2844 P. Liu / Energy 35 (2010) 2843e2851

Kq shaft torque coefcient

a angle of attack of blade section Ksp blade spindle torque

a0 angle of attack of blade section with added induced Kip blade in-plane bending moment

velocity Kop blade out-of-plane bending moment

aP geometric angle of attack of blade section n shaft rotational speed (revolution per second)

ao angle of zero lift of blade section p absolute pitch value at local radius r

aV angle of inow velocity (hydrodynamic angle of attack) pD normalized pitch (p/D) at local radius r

a0V angle of inow velocity with added induced velocity r blade section local radius

ae effective angle of attack of blade section R blade radius

Ct thrust coefcient of turbine TSR blade tip speed ratio

CPOW turbine power coefcient va advance speed of propeller shaft or inow velocity of

CP pressure coefcient turbine

D diameter of turbine or propeller v0a advance speed or inow velocity with added induced

EAR expanded area ratio of blades of propeller disk, or velocity

solidity of turbine. vt induced tangential velocity at blade section

hD hub diameter to blade diameter ratio vr induced radial velocity at blade section

J shaft advance coefcient

Panel methods, are called the boundary element methods, or interacting with an ice body at variable proximity (transient

boundary integral methods (BEM in short as well). Lifting surface hydrodynamic response of a propeller moving towards an ice

and panel methods have been widely used in research and devel- sheet) [21].

opment of aircraft wings, hydrofoils and both aerial and marine In the past decades, many panel methods have been developed

propellers. Zero thickness propeller blade simulated and computed and these panel methods along with their associated numerical

by lifting surface theory in the computational uid dynamics (CFD) schemes and techniques for propellers are well established. These

eld has a history of over 60 years. The use of the surface panel existing panel methods with a minor or moderate revision, could be

method for a simple body surface mesh can be traced back to the quickly used for tidal and wind turbine prediction. The aim of this

early 1960s. Hess and Vararezo [8] probably made the rst panel work is to present the physics and numerical similarities and

method computation for propellers. To deal with complete aircraft difference between propeller and turbine panel methods and then

geometry, panel method codes, PMARC (Panel Method Ames provide detailed implementation techniques and treatments.

Research Center) developed by Ashby et al. [9] and VSAERO by

Maskew [10] are the early examples of panel methods for aircraft 2. Method

wings and propellers. On the other hand, panel methods have also

been used for marine propeller research development and early The current panel method is a multiple-body interaction panel

examples among those are publications by Greeley and Kerwin [11] method. The fundamentals of panel method have been presented in

and Hoshino [12], just to name a few. A time-domain unsteady detail in some textbooks, including the ones by Moran [22] for 2D

panel method code OSFBEM (oscillating foil boundary element foil sections and by Katz and Plotkin [23] for unsteady 3D body and

method) was developed by the author for oscillating propulsors of wings. A detailed formulation and implementation for a low-order,

both chordwise and spanwise exibility to simulate marine time-domain panel method, were given by the author [13].

animals propulsion [13]. To respond the need in simulation of

uid-structure interactive hydrodynamics to predict ice blockage 2.1. Flow physics similarity and differences between propeller and

effects between ice sheet and ice-class propellers, a panel method tidal turbine

code, PROPELLA [14] was developed in 1996, based on OSFBEM.

Since then, continued efforts were made to maintain and enhance Being rotary wings, ow around both propeller and turbine

the capability of the code. The capability of unsteady oblique ow blade sections has both similarities and differences. Flow condi-

and inow wake were presented in early 1998 [15]. Automatic body tions around a wing section determine the hydrodynamic charac-

surface generation for a propeller of arbitrary number of blades, teristics of the wing section. These characteristics are mainly

nozzle, rudder, ice blockage etc., was presented in 2001, along with determined by the effective angle of attack of the blade section. The

velocity prole downstream prediction and wake vortices roll-up similarity and differences of the ow around a blade section

enhancement [16]. Cavitation predictive capability via an empirical between propeller and turbine are shown in the velocity diagrams

formulation was established for PROPELLA and presented in 2001 in Figs. 1 and 2, respectively.

[17]. In the meantime, a pre- and postprocessor were developed for In Fig. 1, blade geometric pitch angle of attack is represented as

the code by using OpenGL and Visual C of Microsoft Foundation aP, and the angle of zero lift of the blade section is a0 due to the

Class, as a 3D unsteady data visualization tool [18] to view the camber of the blade section. Therefore the effective geometric

geometry motion and colour blended results. A novel and robust angle of pitch is aP a0. The inow velocity angle of attack, also

numerical Kutta condition using Broydens iteration was developed called hydrodynamic angle of attack in the literature, is aV tan1

and presented in 2002 [19]. This panel method was used to predict (Va/2prn), where Va is propeller shaft forward velocity, also called

the hydrodynamic characteristics of the wing-in-ground effect for inow velocity in some literature, and r is the blade section local

a dual-foil counter-phase propulsor [20]. Since 2003, this propeller radius and n is the shaft rotation speed in revolutions per second.

panel method has been redeveloped with a multiple-body inter- However, even in open water, as a propeller is rotating, the inow

action formulation to deal with a propeller with pod and strut, velocity to the propeller plane is not unidirectional because of the

called a podded propeller unit and recently for a podded propulsor induced tangential velocity Vt and radial velocity Vr. In fact, these

P. Liu / Energy 35 (2010) 2843e2851 2845

now interchanged, i.e., the suction side and pressure side of the

blade section are swapped for a turbine. The effective angle of

attack now becomes ae aV aP a0 when the induced veloci-

Fig. 1. Propeller blade section velocity schematic diagram.

ties are taken into account and a aV aP when the induced

velocities and angle of zero lift are both neglected. It is also obvious

induced velocities are not in the same plane as shown in the gure. that the effective angle of attack must be positive for the blade

The total inow velocity relative to the local blade section in 3D section to be in turbine mode. Now using the propeller code PRO-

! ! !

space is then V a V t V r with the resultant velocity angle of PELLA for turbine prediction is reduced to two key modications

attack aV . Therefore, the effective angle of attack of the blade

when preparing for input, that is, the blade sectional coordinates

section, that determines the hydrodynamic characteristic of a blade interchange and the formulation and implementation of the angle

section, is ae aP a0 aV for which induced velocities have of shed wake vortices. Using the same motion and geometric

been taken into account and is a aP aV without including the variables for propellers, the angle of shed wake vortices for

induced velocities and angle of zero lift. The back side of a propeller a turbine is taken as a at local radius of 0.7 R. In the following non-

blade is often referred to suction side and the face side is referred to dimensional analysis, the wake pitch angle of the turbine was

the pressure side, when operating in the propulsion mode at the obtained as follows:

rst quadrant (positive rotational speed and positive forward

p

speed). It is obvious that for a propeller to produce positive thrust, i. Va np JnD D

a tan1 tan1 tan1 tan1 D

e., to be in propulsion mode, the effective angle of attack must be 2prn 2prn 2prn 2pr

positive. In the current version of the code PROPELLA, the angle of J 1 pD

tan1 r tan

shed wake vortices at the blade trailing edge is taken as a at pR pRr

r 0.7 R, where R is the radius of the propeller, when the angle of

(1)

zero lift is neglected. When shed wake vortices roll-up is taken into

account, the angle of shed wake vortices is modied by the induced where J is the advance coefcient, J Va/nD, of turbine and PD is the

velocity during a wake vortex relaxation procedure. While the pitch local non-dimensional pitch, pD p/D, based on the diameter of the

angle of shed wake vortices has substantial effect on the accuracy of turbine. The same as propeller simulation, turbine is moving in

thrust and torque predictions, it is even more important to the a quiescent uid; the pitch angle is taken for wake vortices

accuracy of the eld velocity prediction downstream of a propeller. formulation as pWD J pD, where PD is the pitch to diameter ratio

In addition, to avail of a multiple-body computational capability, all at 0.7 R. The angle of shed wake vortices for a propeller by using the

bodies in the uid domain move individually in a quiescent uid. similar formulation gives good thrust and torque prediction and

A similar blade section velocity diagram for a turbine is shown induced velocity estimation downstream. However, for turbine

in Fig. 2. With all the same variables as those for a propeller, the mode after extensive numerical test runs, the angle of shed wake

offset coordinates of the surfaces of the propeller blade section are vortices with an additional angle of inow taken as pWD 2J pD

2846 P. Liu / Energy 35 (2010) 2843e2851

gave better results. Hoshino [12] recommended a wake vortex Therefore, for a desired TSR a value of corresponding advance

descritization formulation based on LDV measurements down- coefcient J can be obtained for a propeller code. When the results

stream of a propeller, including wake pitch, wake contraction, Kt and Kq are obtained from a propeller code, they can be inter-

ultimate wake region, and transition. This formulation is valid only polated as Ct and Cpow, respectively, for turbine as a function of non-

for propulsion mode, not turbine mode. For turbine, if this wake dimensional speed TSR.

vortex descritization is used, wake contraction becomes

a substantial ination (800 times). This occurred at a low tip speed 3. Results and discussion

ratio of about TSR 4.0 corresponding to J 0.7855, with a ratio of

J/[p/D] at about 3, in the tidal turbine example (see the results and 3.1. Geometry and motion parameters

discussion section below).

Fig. 3 shows the discretized wake vortices behind a 3-blade Predictions for turbine hydrodynamic characteristics were

P4119 propeller [24] at J 0.8330 and a 20 root pitch tidal turbine obtained for a tidal turbine base model plus two root pitch offsets.

at TSR 7.0 (J 0.4488). In this paper, the tidal turbine refers to the For these models, experimental measurements are available for

tidal turbine model by Bahaj et al. [25]. For presentation purposes, comparison. Table 1 shows, as an example, a list of coordinates for

wake vortices in Fig. 3 are shown only for one blade. a foil section with 18% thickness and a section prole shape of the

NACA 63-8xx [26]. The turbine blades sectional maximum thick-

2.2. Parametric interpolation between propeller and tidal turbine ness varies from 24% at the root section to 15.6% at the tip section.

A model propeller P4119 by David Taylor Model Basin (DTMB)

The geometric parameters between a propeller blade and a tidal along with its results is used for comparison [24,27]. A surface

turbine are the same. For example, the expanded area ratio EAR is panel mesh arrangement for the propeller and the tidal turbine

the ratio of the total blade area to the area of the propeller disk. model [15] are shown in Fig. 4.

Therefore the solidity of a turbine rotor is equivalent to the EAR of To obtain a range of tip speed ratio TSR from 4 to 10, corre-

a propeller. For a tidal turbine calculation using a propeller code sponding input values of J and required shaft revolution speed N in

such as PROPELLA, the only geometry manipulation needed to rpm for a 0.8-m diameter tidal turbine model were obtained. These

prepare for code input, is to interchange the blade upper side with J values were calculated based on a constant inow speed of 1.5 m/s

the lower side, i.e., to swap the suction side and the pressure side. to simulate the actual cavitation tunnel test conditions by Bahaj

However, to extrapolate the results in propeller format corre- et al. [25] and are listed in Table 2.

sponding to a turbine convention, three major variables need to be Table 3 shows the sectional effective angle of attack (AOA) at

correlated. They are advance coefcient J versus tip speed ratio TSR, shaft speed of n 4 rps corresponding to a TSR of 6.7021. The values

propeller thrust coefcient Kt versus turbine thrust coefcient Ct,

and propeller torque coefcient Kq versus power coefcient Cpow.

With the denitions of propeller advance coefcient, J Va/nD, Table 1

Blade section coordinates of NACA 63-818.

propeller thrust coefcient Kt Tthrust/rn2D4, propeller shaft torque

coefcient Kq Qtorque/rn2D5, turbine tip speed ratio, TSR uR/Va, Xup/c % Yup/c % Xlow/c % Ylow/c %

turbine thrust coefcient Ct Tthrust =1=2rVa2 A, and turbine 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

power coefcient Cpow Qtorque uR=1=2rVa3 A, the three parame- 0.1180 0.3830 0.0971 0.4639

0.6380 0.7660 0.1943 0.9278

ters for tidal turbine in terms of propeller, are then

1.4525 1.4020 0.3885 1.9963

2.5572 1.9886 1.2782 3.1285

uR 2pnR pnD p 4.3138

TSR ; (2) 4.0489 2.5317 2.5561

Va Va Va J 5.8763 3.0233 4.2510 5.5421

8.0182 3.4889 6.3561 6.7491

10.4830 3.8984 8.8287 7.9177

Tthrust Kt rn2 D4 8Kt 13.2733 4.2623 11.6263 9.0046

Ct ; (3)

1=2 rVa2 A 1=2 rVa2 pR2 pJ 2 16.3429 4.5514 14.7503 10.0473

19.6417 4.8009 18.2008 10.9646

23.2062 4.9687 21.8870 11.7551

and 26.9727 5.0470 25.8143 12.4000

30.9059 5.0316 29.9560 12.8741

Qtorque uR K rn2 D5 2pnR 16Kq n3 D3 16Kq 34.9885 4.9166 34.2642 13.1506

Cpow q 3 : (4) 39.1988 4.6685 38.6933 13.1997

1=2 rVa3 A 1=2 rVa3 pR2 Va3 J

43.5016 4.2981 43.2089 13.0304

47.8647 3.8230 47.7721 12.6568

52.2564 3.2669 52.3428 12.1006

Performance curves for the 15 pitch turbine (0 offset) 56.6441 2.6568 56.8814 11.3890

60.9941 2.0207 61.3497 10.5519

Ct experiment Ct numerical

65.2710 1.3861 65.7122 9.6201

Cpow experiment Cpow numerical 69.4376 0.7816 69.9365 8.6241

Thrust and power coefficients

77.3220 0.2318 77.8207 6.5546

80.9707 0.6097 81.4227 5.5540

0.8

84.3683 0.8867 84.7744 4.6091

87.4984 1.0145 87.8379 3.7278

0.6

90.3285 1.0823 90.5957 2.9261

92.8330 0.9976 93.0286 2.2125

0.4 94.9842 0.9183 95.1243 1.5961

Tip speed ratio TSR

96.7612 0.5934 96.8698 1.0256

0.2 98.1696 0.3354 98.2310 0.5796

4.4 4.9 5.4 5.9 6.4

99.1837 0.1496 99.2111 0.2585

99.7955 0.0375 99.8024 0.0647

Fig. 3. Shed wake vortices descritization for (a) the DTMB propeller P4119 and (b) the

100.0000 0.0000 100.0000 0.0000

20 root pitch tidal turbine.

P. Liu / Energy 35 (2010) 2843e2851 2847

1.0 AOA of the 0.8 m diameter turbine blade sections with a shaft speed of n 4, inow

velocity Va 1.5 m/s, TSR 6.7021 and corresponding J 0.4688 (induced velocities

Thrust and power coefficients

0.8

r/R ur Vresutant tan1 a a a

(Va/ur) (15 pitch) (20 pitch) (25 pitch)

0.6

0.2000 2.0106 2.5085 36.7244 21.7244 16.7244 11.7244

0.2500 2.5133 2.9269 30.8301 18.7301 13.7301 8.7301

0.4 0.3000 3.0159 3.3684 26.4439 16.9439 11.9439 6.9439

Ct experiment Ct numerical 0.3500 3.5186 3.8250 23.0889 15.4889 10.4889 5.4889

Cpow experiment Cpow numerical 0.4000 4.0212 4.2919 20.4565 14.3565 9.3565 4.3565

0.2 0.4500 4.5239 4.7661 18.3441 13.4441 8.4441 3.4441

0.5000 5.0265 5.2456 16.6159 12.7159 7.7159 2.7159

Tip speed ratio TSR 0.5500 5.5292 5.7291 15.1783 12.0783 7.0783 2.0783

0.0

4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 0.6000 6.0319 6.2156 13.9650 11.5650 6.5650 1.5650

0.6500 6.5345 6.7045 12.9283 11.0283 6.0283 1.0283

0.7000 7.0372 7.1953 12.0327 10.5327 5.5327 0.5327

Fig. 4. Surface panel mesh for (a) the DTMB P4119 propeller and (b) the 3-blade tidal

0.7500 7.5398 7.6876 11.2517 10.0517 5.0517 0.0517

turbine models.

0.8000 8.0425 8.1812 10.5648 9.6648 4.6648 0.3352

0.8500 8.5451 8.6758 9.9562 9.3562 4.3562 0.6438

0.9000 9.0478 9.1713 9.4132 9.0132 4.0132 0.9868

of the effective angle of attack are estimated when the induced 0.9500 9.5504 9.6675 8.9260 8.7260 3.7260 1.2740

velocity and angle of zero lift are neglected. In the work by Bahaj 1.0000 10.0531 10.1644 8.4864 8.4864 3.4864 1.5136

et al. [25], a base turbine model has a root pitch angle of 15 with an

offset degree of 5 and 10 to add another two more turbine

models.

higher the TSR, the worse the stall and separation and hence the

Examining the sectional effective AOA for the 15 , 20 and 25

larger the discrepancy between the method and measurements).

root pitch angle turbines, it can be seen that the 15 root pitch

This indicates that the 15 root pitch angle turbine is operational

turbine is the most heavily loaded. The effective AOA at the tip

only in a narrow range of tip speed ratio with relatively poor

section is about 8.5 , which will most likely result in a poor cavi-

hydrodynamic efciency.

tation (cavitation analysis is a different topic so it is omitted here

In Fig. 7, a better hydrodynamic performance is shown for the

though PROPELLA has the capability to do so). The best sectional

20 root pitch angle turbine. The current method produced

effective AOA among these three turbines is the 20 root pitch one,

a slightly lower thrust coefcient and higher power coefcient,

though a slight increase of effective AOA up to 5 at the tip might

compared with the measurements, than that of the 15 root pitch

give a better hydrodynamics efciency. The 25 root pitch turbine

turbine, especially operating under a large tip speed ratio close to

would give the poorest hydrodynamic efciency because the blade

10. It noted that the maximum power coefcient occurred at the tip

sections from r/R 0.8 to the tip are all in propulsion mode (the

speed ratio TSR of 6 for measurements but occurred at about a TSR

effective AoA is negative by turbine AoA denition).

of 7.5 for the prediction.

A general agreement between the measurements and the

prediction by the current method can also be seen for the 25 root

3.2. Turbine Ct and Cpow versus propeller Kt and Kq

pitch angle turbine. As mentioned earlier in this section, blade tip

sections at more than 80% R radial locations have negative effective

Figs. 5e7 show the thrust and power coefcient of the hori-

angle of attack and hence they do negative work. This produced

zontal axis turbine with a root pitch angle of 15 , 20 and 25 .

a much smaller power coefcient compared with the 20 one

As mentioned earlier in this section, the effective angles of

(0.3900 versus 0.4500).

attack of the blade section of the 15 root pitch turbine are

As mentioned earlier for wake vortices descritization, the wake

abnormally large. These large values could most likely cause ow

pitch angle has a strong inuence on the prediction accuracy of the

separation and stall. The separation and stall simulation is not

method. Taking a proper value of wake pitch will ensure not only

implemented in the current method. It is noted too that the

the accuracy of predicted thrust and power coefcients but also for

maximum power coefcient of the 15 root pitch turbine attains

the velocity prole downstream. At the moment, lack of sufcient

a maximum value of about 0.4 and then begins to decrease near

a TSR of about 6. This small production of power coefcient can

most likely be attributed to separation and stall which potential

ow based methods like the panel methods could not simulate (the Performance curves for the 25 pitch turbine (10 offset)

1.0

Thrust and power coefficients

Ct experiment Ct numerical

Table 2 0.8

Cpow experiment Cpow numerical

Input turbine motion parameters in terms of J and N.

4.5000 0.6981 2.6857 161.1444 0.4

5.0000 0.6283 2.9842 179.0493

5.5000 0.5712 3.2826 196.9542 0.2

6.0000 0.5236 3.5810 214.8592 Tip speed ratio TSR

6.5000 0.4833 3.8794 232.7641

0.0

7.0000 0.4488 4.1778 250.6690

4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0

7.5000 0.4189 4.4762 268.5740

8.0000 0.3927 4.7746 286.4789

Fig. 5. Comparison of thrust coefcient Ct and power coefcient Cpow predicted by

9.0000 0.3491 5.3715 322.2888

PROPELLA with the measurements [25] for the base turbine model of 15 root pitch

10.0000 0.3142 5.9683 358.0986

angle.

2848 P. Liu / Energy 35 (2010) 2843e2851

Comparison between experimental data and Pressure coefficient Cp on the pressure side of a blade

computation for P4119 propller for propeller P4119

8.0

St1L St2L St3L St4L

6.0 St5L St6L St7L St8L

10Kt_exp St9L St10L St11L St12L

Thrust and power coefficient

Cpow_exp

4.0

10Kt_PT Cpow_PT

-0.2

Pressure Coefficient Cp

2.0

-0.1

0.0 0.0

0.50 0.90 1.30 1.70 2.10 0.1

-2.0

0.2

-4.0 0.3

0.4

-6.0 St10L

0.5

St7L

0.075

Advance coefficient

0.175

-8.0

0.275

St4L

0.375

0.475

0.575

0.675

Fig. 6. Comparison of predicted thrust coefcient Ct and power coefcient Cpow with St1L

0.775

0.875

0.975

the measurements [25] for the turbine model of 5 offset angle relative to the base

model.

Chord Location x/c from the LE

tidal turbine measurements on thrust and power coefcients, and Fig. 8. Comparison of predicted thrust coefcient Kt and power coefcient Cpow with

experimental data by LDV or PIV for the velocity prole down- the measurements for the DTMB P4119 propeller [24].

stream of a tidal turbine, makes it difcult for numerical method

validation. Fig. 8 shows a set of thrust and power coefcient for the

DTMB propeller by the current method PROPELLA. (positive rotational speed and positive forward speed). After

It can be seen that prediction by PROPELLA agreed very well a robust numerical Kutta condition was applied, the pressure

with the measurements. As described above, the wake pitch was difference between the suction side and the pressure side at the

taken as the value of the angle of attack at 0.7 R and this wake pitch trailing edge, as can be seen in the gure, is close to zero.

seems a proper one based on the close agreement between the Fig. 10 shows colour blended pressure distribution on the

prediction and the measurements. Further comparison will be suction side of the DTMB P4119 propeller blade (viewing from

given for the induced velocity at a location downstream of upstream). Both the propeller and turbine were modelled as right-

propeller and turbine. handed revolution propeller/rotor viewing from downstream.

Fig. 11 shows the pressure distribution on a blade of the 20 root

pitch tidal turbine at TSR 7. It is noted that, contrary to a propeller,

3.3. Pressure distribution of a propeller versus the a tidal turbine the values of the pressure coefcients on the back side of the tidal

DTMB P4119 propeller at an advance coefcient of J 0.8330. It can

be seen that the values of the pressure coefcient on the back side

of the blade (viewing from downstream) are mainly negative and

vise versa. Therefore the back side of a propeller blade is often

referred to suction side and the face side is referred to the pressure

side, when operating in the propulsion mode at the rst quadrant

for propeller P4119

-0.8

Pressure Coefficient Cp

St9U St10U St11U St12U

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

0.2

0.025

0.125

0.225

0.325

Blade Strip

0.425

St10U

0.525

0.625

St7U

0.725

No.

St4U

0.825

0.925

St1U

Fig. 7. Comparison of predicted thrust coefcient Ct and power coefcient Cpow with

the measurements [25] for the turbine model of 10 offset angle relative to the base Fig. 9. (a) Blade suction (upper) and (b) pressure (lower) side sectional pressure

model. distribution of the DTMB P4119 propeller at J 0.8330.

P. Liu / Energy 35 (2010) 2843e2851 2849

Root Pitch Turbine

-0.2

0.0

Pressure Coefficient Cp

0.2

0.4

St1U St2U St3U

0.6 St4U St5U St6U

St7U St8U St9U

St10U St11U St12U

0.8 St13U St14U St15U

St16U St17U St18U

1.0

Blade Strip

St16U

1.2

St13U

St10U

0.042

0.208

No.

St7U

0.375

0.542

St4U

0.708

0.875

St1U

the LE

Fig. 10. Colour blended pressure distribution on the DTMB P4119 propeller blades.

on face side are mainly negative. The back side now becomes Fig. 12. Blended colour presentation of the pressure coefcient distribution on the

pressure side and vice versa. It also can be seen that the values of surface of the 20 root pitch tidal turbine.

the suction side pressure of the tidal turbine could possibly cause

severe cavitation that would reduce the hydrodynamic perfor-

mance substantially, if the shaft immersion depth of a tidal turbine predicted by the current panel method PROPELLA compared with

is sufciently small. the measurement by using LDV [24]. It is noted that the tangential

Fig. 12 shows the colour blended pressure coefcient distribu- velocity is in the same direction with the direction of rotation of the

tion on the surface of the right-handed rotation tidal turbine propeller shaft. The direction of the axial velocity at the plane was

blades, viewing from downstream. It can be seen that high pressure dened as positive when pointing at downstream and the radial

occurs at the trailing edge of the blade sections and the pressure velocity is dened as positive when going out to larger radius. The

coefcient decreases with the chord location towards the leading negative radial velocity means that the shed wake vortices at this

edge. plane are in contraction.

Fig. 14 presents the predicted velocity prole at a plane of

0.16405 diameter downstream of the tidal turbine at TSR 7.

3.4. Downstream velocity prole: propeller versus tidal turbine Contrary to propeller, the radial velocity at the plane is positive

which means that the wake vortices tend to inate. The tangential

A comparison of velocity prole downstream of the propeller velocity is opposite to the rotation of the turbine with negative sign

and the tidal turbine is discussed below. Fig. 13 shows the velocity except at the tip. The axial velocity is negative as well indicating

prole in a plane at 0.16405 diameter behind the propeller that the ow past the blades of the turbine has a decrease in

velocity.

The opposing direction of the downstream velocities of

Pressure coefficient Cp on the sucton side of a blade for the 20 Root

Pitch Turbine

a propeller against that of a turbine also indicates that propeller in

-3.0

operation transfers energy to the uid to accelerate the inow,

St1L St2L St3L

St4L St5L St6L

-2.5 St7L St8L St9L

Pressure Coefficient Cp

St10L St11L St12L at J=0.833 at x=0.16405D, PROPELLA versus 2-D LDV measurements

-2.0 St13L St14L St15L

Vx/Va-1_ Exp.

St16L St17L St18L 0.35

Vx/Va-1_PROPELLA

-1.5 Vt/Va_Exp.

Normalized Velocities Based on Forward

0.3

Vt/Va_PROPELLA

-1.0 Vr/Va_Exp

0.25 Vr/Va_PROPELLA

0.2

-0.5

0.15

0.0

speed

0.1

St16L

Blade Strip

0.5

St13L

St10L

0.125

0.292

No.

St7L

0

0.458

0.625

St4L

0.792

St1L

0.958

-0.05

the LE -0.15

Fig. 11. Unfolded blade section pressure distribution of the 20 root pitch tidal turbine Fig. 13. Velocity prole at a disk plane of 0.16405 times the diameter of the DTMB

at TSR 7. P4119 propeller downstream at J 0.8330, prediction versus experiment [24].

2850 P. Liu / Energy 35 (2010) 2843e2851

Circumferential averaged axial, tangential and radial velocities of the 20 Power Coefficients C of the 20 root pitch turbine with 2, 3, 4 and 5 blades at the

pow

root pitch turbine model at TSR = 7.0 at x = 0.16405D (downstream) same EAR 0f 0.0669

-0.60

3-blade 2-blade 4-blade 5-blade

Vx/Va-1_PROPELLA -0.65

Normalized Velocities Based on Shaft

Vt/Va_PROPELLA

-0.40 Vr/Va_PROPELLA

-0.55

Power coefficients

Forward speed

-0.20 -0.45

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 -0.35

0.00

-0.25 Tip speed ratio TSR

0.20

-0.15

Turbine Radial Location r/R

Fig. 16. Power coefcients of 2-, 3-, 4- and 5-blade tidal turbines of 20 root pitch

0.40

angle.

Fig. 14. Velocity prole at a disk plane of 0.16405 times of the diameter of the 20 root

pitch tidal turbine at TSR 70.

methodology and techniques were presented for propeller panel

method applied to migrate to simulation for turbines. Predictions

while a turbine extracts energy by absorbing the momentum of the for a propeller and a turbine model were obtained and compared.

uid and ends up slowing down the inow. These predictions showed a general agreement with available

measurements. Blade surface pressure distributions and the

3.5. Number of blade effect on hydrodynamic efciency of tidal downstream velocity prole of the tidal turbine model obtained are

turbines shown to be opposite to those of a propeller. A numerical investi-

gation was performed for 4 turbines with the same geometry shape

A numerical investigation was also made to examine the effect and same expanded area ratio with a different number of blades

of number of blades on the hydrodynamic efciency (power coef- ranging from 2 to 5. Results indicate that with the increase of the

cient) for a turbine of 2-, 3-, 4- and 5-blades with the same number of blades, the power coefcients decrease dramatically and

solidity, i.e., expanded area ratio EAR 0.0669. Fig. 15 shows the proportionally. It was also noted that the optimum TSR at which the

surface solid modeling of the turbine geometry for the 4 turbines of highest power coefcient occurs shifts left (reduces) with the

different number of blades. increase of the number of blades, from TSR 8 to 6.5. While the

Fig. 16 presents a comparison of the hydrodynamic efciency propeller panel method was developed with a huge amount of

(power coefcients) among the 2-, 3-, 4- and 5-blade tidal turbines. measurement data to validate it, there is a need for substantial

The geometry of the 4 tidal turbines was generated by a constant experimental data on wake vortices and downstream velocity

expanded area ratio the same as the 3-blade tidal turbine model. proles measured by LDV and/or SPIV to validate the turbine

The chord length of the turbine blades was enlarged proportionally model.

for the 2-blade turbine and reduced for the 4- and 5-blade turbines.

It shows in Fig. 16, with the increase of the number of blades, that

Acknowledgement

power coefcients dropped gradually and proportionally. With the

increase of the number of blades, the TSR values at which the

The author thanks the National Research Council Canada for its

maximum power coefcients TSR occur, shift to the left (reduced),

support. He is also grateful to Mr. Derek Yetman, Drs. Bruce Par-

from TSR 8 for the 2-blade tidal turbine to TSR 6.5 for the 5-

sonsand Christopher D. Williams, respectively, for their proof-

blade one.

reading of the manuscript.

4. Conclusion

References

A time-domain, low-order panel method was developed for

tidal turbine performance evaluation, design and optimization, [1] Nicholls-Lee RF, Turnock SR, Boyd SW. Simulation based optimization of

marine current turbine blades. In: Betram V, Rigo P, editors. 7th International

based on a well established and robust propeller code PROPELLA. conference on computer and IT applications in the marine industries (COM-

Familiarities and differences in hydrodynamic characteristic PIT08), Liege; 21e23 April 2008. p. 314e28.

between propeller and turbine were discussed in terms of blade [2] Kishinami K, Taniguchi H, Suzuki J, Ibano H, Kazunou T, Turuhami M. Theo-

retical and experimental study on the aerodynamic characteristics of a hori-

section ow velocity diagram and effective angle of attack. Detailed

zontal axis wind turbine. Energy 2005;30:2089e100.

[3] Lanzafame R, Messina M. Power curve control in micro wind turbine design.

Energy 2010;35:556e61.

[4] Hoogendoorn E, Jacobs GB, Beyene A. Aero-elastic behaviour of a exible blade

for wind turbine application: a 2D computational study. Energy

2010;35:778e85.

[5] Hampsey M. Multiobjective evolutionary optimization of small wind turbine

blades. PhD thesis, University of Newcastle, Australia; August; 2002. 468 p.

[6] Turnock SR. Economic viability of a simple tidal stream energy device. UK

Department of Trade and Industry; 2007. Contract No.TP/3/ERG/6/1/15527/

REP.

[7] Greco L, Testa C, Salvatore F. Design oriented aerodynamic modeling of wind

turbine performance. Journal of Physics; 2007;. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/75/1/

012011. Conference Series 75: 012011.

[8] Hess JL, Vararezo WO. Calculation of steady ow about propellers by mean of

surface panel method. In: Proceedings of Research and Technology. Long

Fig. 15. Solid surface modeling of the 4 tidal turbines of different number of blades. Beach, CA: Douglas Aircraft Company; 1985.

P. Liu / Energy 35 (2010) 2843e2851 2851

[9] Ashby DL, Dudley MR, Iguchi SK, Browne L, Katz J. Potential ow theory and [18] Liu P. Design and implementation for 3D unsteady CFD Data visualization

operation guide for the panel code PMARC. NASA TM 102851; 1991. 99 p. using object-oriented MFC with OpenGL. Journal of Japan Society of Compu-

[10] Maskew B. Program VSAERO theory document, NASA Contractor Report 4023; tational Fluid Dynamics 2002;11(3):335e45.

1986. [19] Liu P, Bose N, Colbourne B. A broyden numerical Kutta condition for an

[11]. Greeley DS, Kerwin JE. Numerical methods for propellers design and analysis unsteady panel method. International Shipbuilding Progress 2002;49

in steady ow. SNAME Transactions 1982;90:415e53. (4):263e73.

[12] Hoshino T. Hydrodynamic analysis of propellers in steady ow using a surface [20] Liu. P. Propulsive performance of a twin-rectangular-foil propulsor in

panel method. In: 2nd Report, ow eld around propeller, autumn meeting of a counter-phase oscillation. Journal of Ship Research 2005;49(3):207e14.

the society of naval architects of Japan; Nov. 1989. p. 79e92. [21] Liu P, Akinturk A, He M, Islam M, Veitch B. Hydrodynamic performance

[13] Liu P. A time-domain panel method for oscillating propulsors with both evaluation of an ice class podded propeller under ice interaction, OMAE2008-

chordwise and spanwise exibility, PhD Thesis, Memorial University of 57013. In: Proceedings of 27th international conference on offshore

Newfoundland, Canada; 1996. mechanics and arctic engineering; 2008. 9 p.

[14] Liu P. Software development on propeller geometry input processing and [22] Moran J. Introduction to theoretical and computational aerodynamics. New

panel method predictions of propulsive performance of the R-Class propeller. York: John Wiley and Sons; 1984.

In: Progress report on transport canada ice-class propeller research project [23] Katz J, Plotkin A. Low-speed aerodynamics: from wing theory to panel

(TDC Contract #T8200-6-6507-001/XSD), MMC Engineering & Research, methods. McGraw-Hill; 1991.

Newfoundland, Canada; 1996. [24] Jessup J. An experimental investigation of viscous aspects of propeller blade

[15] Liu P, Bose N. An unsteady panel method for highly skewed propellers in non- ow, PhD Thesis, The Catholic University of America; 1989. 249 p.

uniform inow. In: 22nd ITTC propulsion committee propeller RANS/Panel [25] Bahaj AS, Batten WMJ, McCann G. Power and thrust measurement of marine

method workshop, 5e6 April, Grenoble, France; 1998, p. 343e49. current turbines under various hydrodynamic ow conditions in a cavitation

[16] Liu P, Bose N, Colbourne B. Automated marine propeller geometry generation tunnel and a towing tank. Renewable Energy 2007;32:407e26.

of arbitrary congurations and a wake model for far eld momentum [26] Abbot IH, von Doenhoff AE. Theory of wing sections. Dover Publications, Inc;

prediction. International Shipbuilding Progress 2001;48(4):351e81. 1949. 693 p.

[17] Liu P, Base N, Colbourne B. Incorporation of a critical pressure scheme into [27] Gindroz B, Hoshino T, Pylkkanen JV. Proceedings of 22nd ITTC propulsion

a time-domain panel method for propeller sheet cavitation. In: International committee propeller RANS/Panel method workshop, Grenoble, France;

workshop on ship hydrodynamics, Wuhan, China; 2001. p. 1e9. 1998.

- Cirkulac Pumpe BUHLER De370001Uploaded bysealion72
- lab 3-FREE N FORCE VORTEX.docUploaded byfahmirased
- Introduction to Steam TurbinesUploaded byalagurm
- Simulation of Gas-Solid Flow & Design Modifications of Cement Plant CyclonesUploaded byNael
- Shaft Vibration MeasurementUploaded byrmsr_7576
- Influence of Endplate on Aerodynamic Characteristics of Low-Aspect-ratio Wing in Ground EffectUploaded byVyssion
- r050210201 Fluid Mechanics and Hydraulic MachineryUploaded bySRINIVASA RAO GANTA
- AERO2358_Propeller_Blade_Element_2011Uploaded byDaniel 'funkD' Quan
- icacsesp56Uploaded byPavan Kishore
- Numeric Simulation on the Performance of an Undulating Fin in the Wake of a Periodic Oscillating PlateUploaded byAurel GS
- H13_1110Uploaded byMustafa Alasady
- Smith AHS04Uploaded byjackie_chieng
- 10.1.1.133Uploaded byZiliang Cai
- Thermal Engineering.pptxUploaded byGinu Thomas
- 290-2120-1-PBUploaded byPaulo Augusto Strobel
- Design and Computational Studies on Plain FlapsUploaded byBONFRING
- AbstractUploaded byAlexander Bennett
- Morphing BlDE FinalUploaded bySoumian Narayanan
- 0613.2.KUploaded byVinodh Kumar L
- Aerothermodynamics of Tight Rotor Tip Clearance FlUploaded byGiang Nguyễn Trường
- HYD-1980-0242Uploaded byjamjam75
- 2Uploaded byaziz1297
- GE OIL &GAS TURBOCOMPRESSOR TRAINS ON FIRST FLOATING LNG PLANT.pdfUploaded byihllhm
- 3241 Exam 2 (1)Uploaded byAbhinash Kumar
- TRANSIENT MODELING.pdfUploaded byTércio Moreira
- Paper IAHR 2016 SammartanoUploaded byNilxon Alejandro Jaramillo Díaz
- Ship Motion Model DescriptionUploaded bydmzoly
- Product Guide wartsila w31dfUploaded byfarhan
- Ship SeaKeeping.pdfUploaded byswaroopkumarnagnoori
- ur-z3rev7Uploaded byproject_work

- Experimental Demonstration of a Bilayer Thermal CloakUploaded byvictoria
- ACOUSTICS Now You Hear Me Now You DontUploaded byvictoria
- A Metasurface Carpet Cloak for Electromagnetic, Acoustic and Water WavesUploaded byvictoria
- pignotti1983Uploaded byvictoria
- Presentación1Uploaded byvictoria
- Plantilla Para La Presentacion Examen de GradoUploaded byvictoria
- CIERMMI-ECORFAN_2016_LETTER 5 (1)Uploaded byvictoria
- 3-CMLT-1097 REV E Manual, Instr, Install Skyview, SS37Uploaded byvictoria
- Unit I Basic ConceptsUploaded bySaravana Kumar
- Turbulent Compressible Flow in a Slender Tube.pdfUploaded byvictoria
- Dupont Suva 134a Thermodynamic Properties - SIUploaded byAbdalhady Joharji
- Poster ABWR ESBWR Simulators Workshop UNAMUploaded byvictoria
- Diferentes Software Para Simular CavitacionUploaded byvictoria
- Ejemplo Tunel HidrodinamicoUploaded byvictoria
- Study of Unsteady Cavitation on NACA66 HydrofoilUploaded byvictoria
- Airfoil Families for HAWTsUploaded byjthomas2008
- Innovative Design Approaches for Large Wind Turbine BladesUploaded byvictoria
- Flatback Airfoil Wind Tunnel ExperimentUploaded byvictoria
- Analisis de Diferentes Perfiles Nrel Riso Naca Para HidroturbinasUploaded byvictoria
- Hydrodynamic Optimization Method NRELUploaded byvictoria
- Design of High-efficient and Universally Applicable Blades of TidalUploaded byvictoria
- Assessment of the Impacts of Tidal Stream Energy ThroughUploaded byvictoria
- Water Tunnel Flow VisualizationUploaded byvictoria
- Water Tunnel Flow Visualization NASAUploaded byvictoria
- Model 0710 & Experiment OverviewUploaded byproxymo1
- A Study of Axial FlowUploaded byvictoria
- Muestra Expo Del Nrel Ara Congreso Turbina MarinaUploaded byvictoria
- Why Are Fluids Non-NewtonianUploaded byvictoria
- Coordinate TransformationsUploaded bykgupta27

- TiseanUploaded byDavidWilliam
- TVT-TD2304SE_TD2308SE_TD2316ME.pdfUploaded bygino27_pe
- Describe the Concept of Six SigmaUploaded byMichael Tuazon Labao
- Designing and Testing a Blended Wing Body With Boundary-Layer Ingestion Nacelles.Uploaded byAri Garcia Oscos
- Physics of Sound1Uploaded bysoundkat
- Jithin PortfolioUploaded byJithin Cyril
- 9A04306 Digital Logic DesignUploaded bysivabharathamurthy
- HQSoftware Rated Amongst World’s Top IoT and Virtual & Augmented Reality DevelopersUploaded byPR.com
- Cics Training Class 01Uploaded bySudheer.rb
- 01-SAIP-06Uploaded bymalika_00
- 6066_chap01Uploaded byVipul Saxena
- Php Code for Online QuizUploaded byAjai Kumar
- How-toaaUploaded byAhmad Zamri Osman
- HP 8640-1Uploaded byk6may
- NX19_ABBUploaded bysengtak_goh
- Biochemical EngineeringUploaded byjiw_18
- T1 E1 OverviewUploaded byEl-Hussein Hegazy
- Simultaneous Determination of Ofloxacin and Ornidazole in Solid Dosage Form by RP-HPLC and HPTLC TechniquesUploaded byKamilo Álvarez
- Ip Prod Dtro Lam Credit Card 20070109 2Uploaded byarunbharat
- The Control of QualityUploaded byvanuyen
- Refrigeration and Air ConditioningUploaded byboyzone75
- new mock test ssc (3).docxUploaded byAnuj Deswal
- 03_drdc Interior_schedule of QtyUploaded byAnonymous 1uGSx8b
- Autodesk Viz 2007 User Reference Vol1Uploaded bywee-man-eng
- HY14-2500_12-11_Pressure_Control_Valves.pdfUploaded byPartsGopher.com
- LiteEdit 4.4 Reference GuideUploaded bydaly2daly
- hdlcUploaded byUsman Nisar
- OM Beta GB Dosing PumpsUploaded bypearlcityrjt
- AG-300-V24-02Uploaded byChristian Zevahc
- Exp 7 - Activated Carbon AdsorptionUploaded bySPE-SC CnA