Journal of
Marine Science
and Engineering
Article
Thrust Characteristics of Ducted Propeller and Hydrodynamics
of an Underwater Vehicle in Control Motions
Jiaming Wu 1, *, Yizhe Dou 1 , Haiyan Lv 2 , Chenghua Ma 2 , Le Zhong 1 , Shunyuan Xu 1 and Xiangxi Han 3






Citation: Wu, J.; Dou, Y.; Lv, H.; Ma,
C.; Zhong, L.; Xu, S.; Han, X. Thrust
Characteristics of Ducted Propeller
and Hydrodynamics of an
Underwater Vehicle in Control
Motions. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 940.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9090940
Academic Editors: Angelo Odetti,
Gabriele Bruzzone and
Roberta Ferretti
Received: 12 August 2021
Accepted: 27 August 2021
Published: 30 August 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 940. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9090940
1 Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, South China University of Technology,
Guangzhou 510641, China; 201510101274@mail.scut.edu.cn (Y.D.); le.zhong@smoorecig.com (L.Z.);
202010101624@scut.edu.cn (S.X.)
2 Guangzhou Shunhai Shipyards Ltd., Guangzhou 511440, China; Lvhaiyan@shunhaiship.com (H.L.);
friedma@shunhaiship.com (C.M.)
3 School of Mechanical and Marine Engineering, Beibu Gulf University, Qinzhou 535011, China;
hanxiangxi@bbgu.edu.cn
* Correspondence: ctjmwu@scut.edu.cn; Tel.: +86-153-6082-2992
Abstract: A numerical technique to simulate the hydrodynamic behavior of ducted propellers at-
tached to an underwater vehicle traveling under the mutually interacting flow fields of the vehicle
and the propellers is proposed; the hydrodynamic performance of the propellers and the hydrody-
namic loading on the main body of the vehicle when it is in different kinds of motion is investigated
numerically. In the research, 3D geometric models of the duct, propeller, and main body of the vehicle
are first constructed according to their geometrical features. A computational fluid dynamics (CFD)
technique based on the hybrid algorithm of dynamic mesh-nested sliding mesh is applied to solve
the Navier–Stokes equations that govern the fluid motion around the duct, propeller, and main body
of the vehicle when it is in motion. These equations are solved numerically with the CFD code Fluent.
With the proposed numerical simulation technique, the hydrodynamic characteristics of the thrusts
generated by the ducted propellers and the loading on the main body in the vehicle system under
the mutually interacting flow fields are observed. The results of our numerical simulation indicate
that the hybrid algorithm of dynamic mesh-nested sliding mesh can simulate multiple degrees of
freedom of motion in underwater vehicle systems. In different motion states, the main body exerts
a significant influence on the investigated flow fields; during the vehicle motions, negative wakes
are formed on both sides of the main body, which lead to a decrease in the thrusts generated by the
propellers on both sides. The thrust of the middle propeller is greater than that of the normal single
one because of the obstructing effect in the tunnel caused by the main body.
Keywords: underwater vehicle; ducted propeller; CFD; dynamic mesh; sliding mesh; Multi-DOF mo-
tion
1. Introduction
The underwater robot, known as a remotely operated vehicle, is a working robot. It
can do the work normally completed by humans by diving into the water to complete
underwater operations; thus, it is also known as a diving instrument. An underwater robot
usually comprises a main body and several ducted propellers. In some cases, the horizontal
and vertical wings are set up to control the balance, which increases its stability [1]. Ducted
propellers are the primary actuators controlling the motion of the underwater robot. At
present, the research on underwater vehicles is mainly carried out through model tests and
numerical simulation. Model tests can directly reflect the performance of the underwater
vehicle, and many scholars have carried out research on the underwater robot through
model tests [2]. However, model tests can be limited by a test site such as a towing tank,
and making a test model is a complex job, costing time and money. At the same time, it is
restricted by monitoring equipment and technology such as sensors. Sometimes we cannot
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/jmse
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 940 2 of 19

get the data we want. The reliability of CFD simulation needs to be verified by physical
tests. This is because the accuracy of the calculation results of CFD technology usually
depends on whether the definitions of the boundary conditions and physical parameters
in the pre-processing of complex flow field simulations are truly consistent with reality,
and whether the calculation methods and post-processing are accurate. In a numerical
simulation, a model can be quickly and easily established and modified, and CFD software
has a substantial number of post-processing modules that acquire the data of specific areas
at specific times easily and accurately. Scholars have implemented additional functions
with UDFs and other secondary developments of CFD software [3,4].
In current numerical simulation methods for the underwater robot system, using the
principle of relativity to simulate motion is the most common practice. The underwater
robot is placed in the center of the computational domain, and the rotation motion of the
propellers is simulated by the sliding mesh technique. The motion of the underwater robot
is simulated by changing the velocity conditions. Scholars have studied various types of
propellers using sliding mesh, and the results showed that sliding mesh technology can
effectively simulate the working conditions of a propeller at different rotation speeds [5].
However, as a quasi-static numerical analysis method, sliding mesh technology is an
equivalent motion realized by a relative motion principle; the object is stationary and the
grid rotates around the object, so it cannot reflect the actual movement. Dynamic mesh
technology can realize the multi-degree-of-freedom motion of the robot itself in water [4],
nevertheless, as the propeller speed increases and the mesh deformation rate increases,
negative volume occurs easily, which leads to calculation failure. Using the dynamic mesh
technique in conjunction with sliding mesh is another method of realizing the linear motion
of the underwater robot and the rotating motion of the propeller. It is a more practical
and feasible numerical simulation method that overcomes some of the shortcomings of
dynamic mesh or sliding mesh alone [6]. However, laminating technology is used to update
the mesh in this method, which can only realize forward and backward movement [7].
In this paper, three-dimensional underwater robot motion with multiple degrees of
freedom was simulated through the hybrid technique of dynamic mesh and sliding mesh.
The sliding mesh was used in the propeller rotation area, which solved the problem of
negative volume of the dynamic mesh encountered in past research, and through spring
smoothing and local remeshing, the mesh could be updated to overcome the limitation of
the robot to only linear motion and realize its multi-degree-of-freedom motion in the fluid
domain. According to the method, the hydrodynamics of the underwater robot system
under different motion states and the thrust characteristics of each position propeller were
studied. Firstly, the 3D geometric model was constructed according to selected geometric
elements of the underwater robotic system [8]. Secondly, a hybrid computational domain
of structural and unstructured meshes was constructed, and then the N-S equations were
solved with the hybrid mesh technique and computational fluid dynamics method in the
whole computational domain [9]. The hydrodynamic characteristics of the underwater
robot system under different motion states were simulated and observed.

2. Mathematical Models and Calculation Methods

2.1. Governing Equations and Turbulence Models
The fluid in the research was assumed to be incompressible viscous fluid. The equa-
tions governing the fluid motions around the duct, propeller, and underwater vehicle in an
unsteady motion are given as follows:
1. Continuity equation:

∂u x ∂uy ∂uz
+ + = 0. (1)
∂x ∂y ∂z
2. Momentum equation:
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 940 3 of 19

 2
∂2 u x ∂2 u x
  
∂ux ∂ux ∂ux ∂ux ∂p ∂ ux
ρ + ux + uy + uz = − + νρ + + , (2)
∂t ∂x ∂y ∂z ∂x ∂x2 ∂y2 ∂z2
!
∂ 2 uy ∂ 2 uy ∂ 2 uy
 
∂uy ∂uy ∂uy ∂uy ∂p
ρ + ux + uy + uz = − + νρ + + , (3)
∂t ∂x ∂y ∂z ∂y ∂x2 ∂y2 ∂z2
 2
∂ 2 uz ∂ 2 uz
  
∂uz ∂uz ∂uz ∂uz ∂p ∂ uz
ρ + ux + uy + uz = − + νρ + + . (4)
∂t ∂x ∂y ∂z ∂z ∂x2 ∂y2 ∂z2
where x, y, z are the three-dimensional space coordinates of the flow field, ux , uy , uz the
three-dimensional velocity components of the fluid, p the pressure of the flow field, ρ the
density of the fluid, and ν the viscosity coefficient of the fluid motion.
A standard RNG k-ε turbulence model was applied to describe turbulence within the
flow field; the turbulence equations are as follows:

∂ρk ∂ ∂ ∂k
+ (ρkui ) = (a µ ) + Gk + Gb − ρε − YM + Sk , (5)
∂t ∂xi ∂x j k e f f ∂x j

∂ ∂ ∂ ∂ε ε
∂t ( ρε ) + ∂xi ( ρεu j ) = ∂x j (αε µe f f ∂x j ) + C1ε k ( Gk + Cε3 Gb )
2 (6)
−C2ε ρε εk − Rε + Sε
In these equations, Gk represents the generation of turbulence kinetic energy due to
the mean velocity gradients, calculated as described in Modeling Turbulent Production
in the k-ε Models. Gb is the generation of turbulence kinetic energy due to buoyancy,
calculated as described in Effects of Buoyancy on Turbulence in the k-ε models. YM
represents the contribution of the fluctuating dilatation in compressible turbulence to the
overall dissipation rate, calculated as described in Effects of Compressibility on Turbulence
in the k-ε models. The quantities αk and αε are the inverse effective Prandtl numbers for k
and ε, respectively. SK and Sε are user-defined source terms.

2.2. Mesh Update Mode

In our research, simulations of the underwater vehicle motion were accomplished
by applying dynamic mesh-nested sliding mesh in the computational domain; that is, the
area where the propellers are located was set as sliding mesh, while the area outside the
propellers was set as dynamic mesh. The dynamic mesh technique mainly utilizes mesh
stretching, compressing, increasing, reducing, and remeshing to change the computational
domain [10,11]. In updating dynamic mesh, three techniques are usually used, i.e., spring
smoothing, layering, and remeshing [12].
Selection of mesh update methods was based on the physical nature of our simulation
regarding the number and type of mesh, accuracy of calculation, time spent on calculation,
and sub-regional division in the computational domain [13]. After several trial calculations,
we decided to combine the spring smoothing and remeshing methods, forming a composite
dynamic updating mesh system to achieve accurate and fast computation.
In the simulation, the CFD code Fluent was used for determining the thrusts generated
by the ducted propellers and the loading on the main body at every time step. There are
two main ways to specify the motion of the boundary of dynamic mesh in Fluent: using
transient Profile files or UDFs (User-Defined Functions). Some simple motion forms or
constant motion can be specified directly using Profile files, while UDFs are needed to
describe more complex functional motions [14]. For consistency, all motion assignments in
the simulation were described by UDFs.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 940 4 of 19

3. Comparison between Numerical and Experimental Results of a Single Ducted

Propeller Hydrodynamics
Due to the high speed rotation of the propeller, the deformation and update speed
of the grid around the propeller far exceeds that of other parts of the underwater vehicle.
Thus, the rotation of the propeller is the most significant and critical influence factor on the
calculation of the underwater vehicle system based on a lot of previous research. Limited
by test conditions, funding, time, etc., we could not conduct a model test of the underwater
robot. Although the validation of the underwater vehicle calculation cannot be validated
from the model test, it is a good option to validate the most critical and significant part of
the validation. Therefore, in this paper, we compared the calculation of a single ducted
propeller with the model test, and carried out the calculation of the underwater vehicle
based on it.
To validate the effectiveness of the hybrid algorithm of dynamic mesh-nested sliding
mesh that was used in the analysis of the underwater vehicle system, existing experimental
data on the representative ducted propeller of type Ka 4-70/19A [15] were taken as a
reference. Comparisons between the numerical results of the hydrodynamic characteristics
of the ducted propeller and those of the laboratory experimental data in [15] under the
same condition were made. In computation, the parameters of the ducted propeller and
the operation condition were made consistent with those of model test, and the primary
parameters of the test ducted propeller are given in Table 1.

Table 1. Primary parameters of the test ducted propeller.

Diameter (mm) 47.3

Disk ratio 0.7
Pitch ratio 0.99
Leaf angle (◦ ) 8
Hub diameter ratio 0.18
Number of leaves 4
Catheter length(mm) 23.6
Catheter inlet diameter (mm) 61

3.1. Computational Domain Construction and Boundary Conditions

To perform the comparison computation, four kinds of computational domains were
constructed: Domains I to IV. The four domains were all constructed in cylindrical form
sharing the same axis. Domains I to III were nested together by volume in descending order
from Domain III to Domain I, constituting an integrated motion domain with the centers
located at the midpoint of their common axis. In numerical computations, the integrated
motion domain consisting of Domains I to III traveled along the axis of Domain IV to
simulate the linear motion of the ducted propeller, and Domain IV acted as the background
domain.
The four computational domains possessed different structures: Domain I comprised a
cylindrical rotating flow field induced by the rotating propeller in the duct with its domain
axis and domain length consistent with those of the duct, its outer boundary equal to 105%
diameter of the propeller, and the fluid rotating speed in the domain the same as that of
the propeller; Domain II comprised a thin flow field surrounding Domain I describing the
detail of the flow field; Domain III was an outer flow field of Domains I and II; and Domain
IV acted as the background domain. The relationships of the four domains are shown in
Figure 1.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 940 5 of 19
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 19

(a) Global mesh (b) Mesh of ducted propeller

Figure1.1.Calculation
Figure Calculationdomain
domaingrids
gridsofofthe
thetest
testducted
ductedpropeller.
propeller.(a)(a)Global
Globalmesh;
mesh; (b)
(b) Mesh
Mesh ofof
ducted
ducted propeller
propeller.

Toensure
To ensurecontinuity
continuityofofthe
the flow
flow fields
fields across
across the
the boundaries
boundaries of Domains Ⅰ
of Domains Ⅳ,the
I totoIV, the
interface technique was adopted along the boundaries to combine the
interface technique was adopted along the boundaries to combine the domains, forming domains, forming
anintegral
an integralcomputational
computationalone.one. InInthis
thisboundary
boundarycondition
conditiontechnique,
technique,thetheoriginal
originalouterouter
boundaryof
boundary ofDomain
DomainIV Ⅳbecame
becamethe theboundary
boundaryof ofthe
theintegral
integraldomain
domainwhile
whilethe
theoriginal
original
boundary conditions of Domains Ⅰ
boundary conditions andIIⅡand
I and andthose
thosebetween DomainsIIⅡand
betweenDomains andIII Ⅲwere
were
determined automatically
determined automatically with
with the
theinterface
interfacetechnique.
technique. InInthe
thefour
fourdomains,
domains,the thesliding
sliding
meshtechnique
mesh techniquewas was adopted
adopted in Domain
in Domain Ⅰ, the
I, while while the dynamic
dynamic mesh technique
mesh technique was adopted was
adopted
in Domains in Domains Ⅱ tofundamental
II to IV. The Ⅳ. The fundamental parameters
parameters and techniques
and techniques appliedapplied
in the in the
four
four domains
domains are given
are given in Table
in Table 2, and2,theand the boundary
boundary conditions
conditions in the in the computational
computational domains do-
mains applied
applied in this research
in this research are givenareingiven
Tablein 3. Table 3.

Table2.2.Fundamental
Table Fundamentalparameters
parametersand
andtechniques
techniquesapplied
appliedininthe
thefour
fourdomains.
domains.

Domain
Domain I Ⅰ II Ⅱ III Ⅲ IVⅣ
Geometric dimensions
Geometric φ 49 .7 × 26 φ 68 × 50 φ 150 × 300 φ 300 × 1000
(mm)
dimensions φ49.7 × 26 φ68 × 50 φ150 × 300 φ300 × 1000
(mm)technique
Mesh
Sliding mesh Dynamic mesh Dynamic mesh Dynamic mesh
applied
Mesh technique
Sliding mesh Dynamic mesh Dynamic mesh Dynamic mesh
applied Unstructured Unstructured Unstructured
Type of mesh Structural mesh
Type of mesh
Unstructuredmesh mesh
Unstructured mesh
Unstructured
Structural mesh
mesh mesh mesh
Table 3. Boundary conditions of the computational domains.

Item
Table Limits of
3. Boundary conditions of Boundary Definition of Boundary Conditions
the computational domains.
1 Surface of the propeller Moving non-slip boundary condition
Item Limits of Boundary Definition of Boundary Conditions
2 Spatial contour of the duct Non-slip boundary condition
1 Surface of the propeller Moving non-slip boundary condition
3 Peripheral boundary of Domain Ⅳ Non-slip boundary condition
2 Spatial contour of the duct Non-slip
Velocity boundary
inlet condition
boundary condition
43 Inlet boundary of Domain Ⅳ
Peripheral boundary of Domain IV Non-slip boundary condition
coinciding with inflow velocity
5 Outlet boundary of Domain Ⅳ Pressure
Velocityoutlet boundary
inlet boundary condition
condition
4 Inlet boundary of Domain IV
Interfaces among Domain I to Domain coinciding with inflow velocity
6 Interface technique
5 Ⅳ of Domain IV
Outlet boundary Pressure outlet boundary condition
Interfaces among Domain I to
6 Interface technique
3.2. Results of Comparison Domain IV
To examine the independence of the mesh number in the calculation results, different
numbers
3.2. Resultsand types of meshes in computation were used to compare the numerical results
of Comparison
withTothe laboratory experimental data
examine the independence of thetomesh
find anumber
suitableinnumber of meshes
the calculation to achieve
results, the
different
goals of accuracy and low computation time. The mesh information of the
numbers and types of meshes in computation were used to compare the numerical results three compu-
tational
with the cases is provided
laboratory in Table data
experimental 4. to find a suitable number of meshes to achieve
the goals of accuracy and low computation time. The mesh information of the three
Table 4. Mesh information
computational in the three
cases is provided cases.4.
in Table
Domain Number of Meshes (105)
J.J.Mar.
Mar.Sci.
Sci.Eng.
Eng.2021,
2021,9,9,940
x FOR PEER REVIEW 66 of
of 19
19

Casecases.
Table 4. Mesh information in the three 1 Case 2 Case 3
Ⅰ 0.56 1.01 1.6
Ⅱ 0.55 Number of Meshes (105 )
0.93 1.65
Domain
Ⅲ Case
0.261 Case
0.45 2 Case
0.48 3
ⅣI 0.39
0.56 0.39
1.01 0.39
1.6
Total
II 1.76
0.55 2.78
0.93 4.12
1.65
III 0.26 0.45 0.48
Table 5 shows the numbers and types of meshes. The mesh in case 1 was sparse and
IV 0.39 0.39 0.39
the mesh in case 2 was fine. The finer mesh was used in this section. Figures 2–4 show the
results ofTotal
the numerical simulation 1.76 and model test of 2.78 the ducted propeller when 4.12 the rota-
tional speed was set at 1500 rpm and the incoming velocity was zero for the mesh numbers
1.76 × 10 5 , 52.shows
Table 78 × 10 5the
, and 4.12 ×10
numbers
5
and , respectively [15]. Figure
types of meshes. 5 shows
The mesh the 1variation
in case was sparsecurve
andof
the mesh in case 2 was fine. The finer mesh was used in this section.
the ducted propeller torque coefficient and efficiency when the ducted propeller had dif- Figures 2–4 show
the results
ferent of the numerical
Va speeds with zero velocitysimulation and model
incoming test of
flow, and thethe ductedspeed
propeller propeller
was when the
1500 rpm.
rotational
In Figuresspeed2–4, we was
seeset thatatthe
1500 rpm and
numerical the incoming
simulation velocity
calculation wasdecreased
error zero for the mesh
gradually
numbers × 10in 5 , 2.78 × 105 , and 4.12 × 105 , respectively [15]. Figure 5 shows the
with the 1.76increase the number of meshes: the average error was 30% when the total
variation
number of curve
meshesof the wasducted
1 .76 ×propeller torque coefficient
10 5 ; the average error wasand 25%efficiency
when thewhen total the ducted
number of
propeller had different 5 Va speeds with zero velocity incoming flow, and the propeller
meshes was 2.78 × 10 ; and the average error was 18% when the total number of meshes
speed
was 4was.12 ×1500
10 5 . rpm. In Figures
Therefore, 2–4 we see
the accuracy thatnumerical
of the the numerical simulation
simulation calculation
increased error
with the in-
decreased gradually
crease in mesh fineness. with the increase in the number of meshes: the average error was 30%
when the total number of meshes was 1.76 × 105 ; the average error was 25% when the total
number of meshesTable was 2.78 × 10 5 ; and the average error was 18% when the total number
5. Mesh information.
5
of meshes was 4.12 × 10 . Therefore, the accuracy of the numerical simulation increased
with the increase in mesh fineness. Number of Meshes (105)
Computational Geometric
Meshes Used in Type of Mesh
Domain Dimensions (mm) Example
Table 5. Mesh1 information.
Example 2
This Section
Ⅰ φ 49.7 × 26 0.56 Number 1.01
of Meshes (105 ) 1.6 unstructured mesh
Ⅱ
Computational φ 68× 50
Geometric Dimensions 0.55 0.93 1.65 unstructured
Type of Mesh mesh
Meshes Used in
Domain
Ⅲ φ 150(mm)
× 300 Example
0.26 1 Example
0.45 2 0.48
This Section unstructured mesh
Ⅳ φ 300 × 1000 0.39 0.39 0.39 structural mesh
I φ49.7 × 26 0.56 1.01 1.6 unstructured mesh
Total mesh 1.76 2.78 4.12
II φ68 × 50 0.55 0.93 1.65 unstructured mesh
III × 300
φ150 As 0.26
shown in Figure 0.45 torque coefficient
5, the propeller’s 0.48 graduallyunstructured meshthe
decreased with
IV × 1000
increase
φ300 in the advance0.39
speed, which 0.39 0.39
means that the propeller structural
generated more mesh
thrust by
Total mesh absorbing the same torque1.76 when the advance
2.78 speed increased.
4.12 The efficiency curve is con-
sistent, and the efficiency increases with the increase in inlet velocity.

Figure2.2. Example
Figure Example11comparison
comparisonresults.
results.
J.J.Mar.
Mar.Sci.
Sci.Eng. 2021,9,
Eng.2021, 9,940 7 of
of 19
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 77 of 19
19
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 19

Figure 3.
Figure 3. Example
Example 22 comparison
comparison results.
results.
Figure 3. Example 2 comparison results.

Figure 4.
4. The mesh
mesh comparison results
results used in
in this paper.
paper.
Figure 4. The
Figure The meshcomparison
comparison resultsused this paper.
used inthis paper.

Figure 5.
Figure 5. The propeller
propeller efficiency
efficiency curve
curve at
at 1500
1500 rpm.
rpm.
Figure5.5. The
Figure Thepropeller
The propellerefficiency
efficiencycurve
curveat
at1500
1500rpm.
rpm.
Figures 66 and
Figures and 77 show
show thethe numerical simulation
simulation results
results of
of the
the thrust coefficient
coefficient of
of the
the
As shown
Figures in Figure
6 and 7 show 5, the numerical
propeller’s torque coefficient
numerical simulation of the thrust
results gradually decreased
thrust with
coefficient ofthe
the
ducted
ducted propeller and model test results when the rotation speed was 500 rpm and 1000
ducted propeller
increase propeller and
and model
in the advance speed,
model test results
which
test when
means
results when the
that rotation
the
the speed
propeller
rotation was
was 500
generated
speed rpm
500more and
and 1000
rpmthrust by
1000
rpm, respectively,
rpm, respectively,
the sameandand the incoming
the incoming
when theflowflow velocity
velocity was
was zero while
zero whileThetheefficiency
the inlet velocity
velocity (Va)
absorbing
rpm, respectively, torque
and the incoming advance
flow speed
velocity wasincreased.
zero while the inlet
inlet velocity (Va)
curve is
(Va)
differed
differed
consistent, [15].
[15].
and the efficiency increases with the increase in inlet velocity.
differed [15].
Figures 6 and 7 show the numerical simulation results of the thrust coefficient of
the ducted propeller and model test results when the rotation speed was 500 rpm and
1000 rpm, respectively, and the incoming flow velocity was zero while the inlet velocity
(Va) differed [15].
By comparing the results of Figures 4, 6 and 7, we found that the numerical calculation
results from the ducted propeller were slightly smaller than the experimental results. The
average error was 18%, and with the inlet velocity increased, the error decreased in a general
trend, and when the inlet velocity was 1 kn, the error was less than 8%. Furthermore, the
thrust measured in the model test included some components and connecting components
attached to the duct and the propeller. Unfortunately, we could not obtain the detailed
dimensional data of these components, so these components were not included in the
Figure 6.
6. Rotation
simulation
Figure Rotation speed
in thisspeed
paper;attherefore,
at 500 rpm.
500 rpm. the actual error should have been smaller. Nevertheless,
Figure 6. Rotation speed at 500 rpm.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 940 8 of 19

Figure 5. The propeller efficiency curve at 1500 rpm.

the curve trends of numerical simulation and the model test results were consistent. Thus,
the results reflected
Figures 6 and 7the
showthrust variation and
the numerical trend ofresults
simulation the propeller, which
of the thrust could be of
coefficient used
the
as a supplement to the model test. It also indicated that the hybrid technique
ducted propeller and model test results when the rotation speed was 500 rpm and 1000 of dynamic
mesh and sliding mesh
rpm, respectively, and used in this paper
the incoming flowwas suitable
velocity wasfor thewhile
zero numerical simulation
the inlet velocitywith
(Va)
spring smoothing
differed [15]. and remeshing.

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 19

Figure 6.
Figure 6. Rotation
Rotation speed
speed at
at 500
500 rpm.
rpm.

Figure 7. Rotation speed at 1000 rpm.

The longitudinal
By comparing thecomparison is made4,of6,the
results of Figures and numerical
7, we foundsimulation
that theresults in Figures
numerical calcula-4,
6, and 7: with the increase in inlet velocity, the thrust value of
tion results from the ducted propeller were slightly smaller than the experimental results. the ducted propeller
decreased
The average gradually
error was under
18%, theandsame
with rotational speed. increased,
the inlet velocity For example, the when the rotational
error decreased in a
speed
general was 1000and
trend, rpm, the thrust
when the inletcoefficient
velocitywas was0.3257 at 0.2
1 kn, the kn and
error was0.0687 at 1.0
less than 8%.kn. It was
Further-
reduced
more, thebythrust
78.9%. This wasinmainly
measured because
the model test the thrust some
included of thecomponents
ducted propeller is directly
and connecting
related to theattached
components velocity at to the
the surface
duct and of the
the propeller
propeller.and the axial-induced
Unfortunately, velocity
we could of the
not obtain
propeller. With the increase in inlet velocity, the axial induction
the detailed dimensional data of these components, so these components were not in- velocity decreases, resulting
in less propeller
cluded thrust. Table
in the simulation in6 this
shows the corresponding
paper; therefore, thedata of axial-induced
actual error shouldvelocity
have beenand
inlet velocity produced by the propeller when it was moving straight
smaller. Nevertheless, the curve trends of numerical simulation and the model test results at different speeds.
were consistent. Thus, the results reflected the thrust variation and trend of the propeller,
Table The axial
which6.could induction
be used as avelocity
supplementat different
to thespeeds.
model test. It also indicated that the hybrid
technique of dynamic mesh 0.2
Inlet velocity (kn)
and sliding mesh 0.4
used in this
0.6
paper was 0.8
suitable for1.0the nu-
merical simulation with spring smoothing and remeshing.
Axial-induced
The longitudinal comparison 0.155 is made of the numerical
0.144 0.125 simulation results in 0.072
0.097
velocity(m/s)
Figures 4, 6, and 7: with the increase in inlet velocity, the thrust value of the ducted pro-
peller decreased gradually under the same rotational speed. For example, when the rota-
tionalFigure
speed8was
shows 1000 the mesh
rpm, theupdate process when
thrust coefficient wasthe inletatvelocity
0.3257 was0.0687
0.2 kn and 0.4 knatand1.0 the
kn.
rotational speed of the ducted propeller was 1000 rpm.
It was reduced by 78.9%. This was mainly because the thrust of the ducted propeller is
directly related to the velocity at the surface of the propeller and the axial-induced velocity
of the propeller. With the increase in inlet velocity, the axial induction velocity decreases,
resulting in less propeller thrust. Table 6 shows the corresponding data of axial-induced
velocity and inlet velocity produced by the propeller when it was moving straight at dif-
ferent speeds.

Table 6. The axial induction velocity at different speeds.

Inlet velocity (kn) 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Axial-induced
J.J.Mar.
Mar.Sci.
Sci.Eng. 2021,9,9,940
Eng.2021, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of
of1919

(a) t = 0 s (b) t = 0.1 s

(c) t = 0.3 s (d) t = 0.5 s

Figure8.8.Mesh
Figure Meshupdate
updateprocess.
process.(a)
(a)tt==00s;s;(b)
(b)tt== 0.1
0.1 s;
s; (c)
(c) tt == 0.3
0.3 s;
s; (d)
(d) tt =
= 0.5
0.5 s.
s.

Figure88shows
Figure showsthat thatthe
theinitial
initialmesh
meshofofthethecomputational
computationaldomain domainwas wasregular
regularand and
high-quality.As
high-quality. Asthe
thetime
timesteps
stepsprogressed,
progressed,the themotion
motioncalculation
calculationofofDomain
DomainIIIIcontaining
containing
theducted
the ductedpropeller
propellermovedmovedininthe thecalculation
calculationDomain
DomainIII. III.The
Theregularity
regularityofofthe themesh
meshwas was
destroyedand
destroyed andthethequality
qualitybegan
begantotoworsen.
worsen.The Themesh
meshdistortion
distortionraterateand
andskewness
skewness(the (the
parametercharacterizing
parameter characterizingthe the mesh
mesh quality
quality and and
thethe range
range is between
is between 0 and0 and
1; the1;smaller
the smaller
the
parameter, the better
the parameter, the mesh
the better quality)
the mesh was always
quality) controlled
was always belowbelow
controlled 0.7, which indicated
0.7, which indi-
that thethat
cated quality of the updated
the quality mesh met
of the updated meshthemet
calculation requirement
the calculation as longas
requirement aslong
the mesh
as the
quality control control
mesh quality parameters were setwere
parameters reasonably. For the numerical
set reasonably. result error,
For the numerical the following
result error, the
factors are relevant:
following factors are relevant:
(1)
(1) InIn this
this paper,
paper, wewe essentially
essentially discretized
discretized thethe governing
governing equation
equation of of the
thefluid
fluidand
and
solved
solved the discrete governing equation. The obtained numerical
discrete governing equation. The obtained numerical solution met the con- solution met the
convergence condition,
vergence condition, andand therethere
waswas
an an error
error between
between thethe numerical
numerical solution
solution andandthe
the analytical solution.
analytical solution.
(2)
(2) The
The numerical
numerical calculation
calculation was was based
based onon the
thefluid
fluidmicelle-mesh,
micelle-mesh,the theminimum
minimumcom- com-
puting
puting unit.
unit. The
The quality
quality of of the
themesh
meshdirectly
directlyaffected
affectedthe theaccuracy
accuracyofofthe thenumerical
numerical
results.
results.
(3)
(3) Considering
Consideringthe thetime
timecost
costofofcalculation,
calculation, the
thenumber
number of of
meshes
meshes cannot
cannotbe too
be toolarge, so
large,
the mesh quality needed to be further improved. Moreover, due
so the mesh quality needed to be further improved. Moreover, due to the mesh up- to the mesh updates
in the in
dates form of spring
the form smoothing
of spring smoothingandand remeshing,
remeshing, thethemesh
mesh quality
qualitywaswasreduced
reduced
compared with the initial mesh
compared with the initial mesh over time. over time.

4. Numerical Simulation Analysis of the Underwater Robotic System

4. Numerical Simulation Analysis of the Underwater Robotic System
The thrust characteristics of the ducted propeller were analyzed as above, and the
The thrust characteristics of the ducted propeller were analyzed as above, and the
influence of the main body of the underwater robot on the propeller was not considered.
influence of the main body of the underwater robot on the propeller was not considered.
In fact, this effect was significant for the thrust of the propeller [4]. The whole underwater
In fact, this effect was significant for the thrust of the propeller [4]. The whole underwater
robotic system was numerically simulated to obtain the coupling relationship between the
robotic system was numerically simulated to obtain the coupling relationship between the
main body of the underwater robot and the propeller of the control mechanism.
main body of the underwater robot and the propeller of the control mechanism.
4.1. Construction of the Geometric Model of the Underwater Robotic System
4.1. Construction of the Geometric Model of the Underwater Robotic System
In this paper, the main body of the underwater robot was a water droplet streamline
In this
cylinder paper, The
structure. the main body
overall of the
length of underwater
the main body robot
was was
L =a 510
water droplet
mm. streamline
The maximum
cylinder
width wasstructure.
320 mm,The overall
about 3/5 Llength
from ofthethe mainand
stern, body
thewas
totalLheight
= 510 mm.
was The maximum
240 mm. The
width
port andwas 320 mm,were
starboard about 3/5 L from thearranged
symmetrically stern, and theatotal
with height
ducted was 240which
propeller, mm. The port
mainly
and starboard
controlled were symmetrically
the direction of motion. The arranged
stern waswith a ducted
arranged propeller,
with a ductedwhich mainly
propeller, con-
mainly
trolled
to producethe forward
directionorofbackward
motion. The sternThe
thrust. wasducted
arranged with a ducted
propellers adoptedpropeller, mainly to
the Ka 4-70/19A
producefor
standard forward
ductedor backward
propellers, as thrust.
shown in The ducted
Figure propellers
9, and adopted
the specific the Ka
parameters are4-70/19A
shown
standard
in for ducted
Table 7. The propellers, model
three-dimensional as shown inducted
of the Figurepropeller
9, and thewasspecific parameters
constructed are
using the
 shown in Table 7. The three-dimensional model of the ducted propeller was constructed
using the method of converting the shape value to the three-dimensional space coordinate
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 19
point [16]. The 3D geometric model of the underwater robotic system is shown in Figure
10.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 940 10 of 19

shown
(a) Frontinview
Table 7. The three-dimensional model of the ducted propeller was constructed
(b) Cubic diagram
using the method of converting the shape value to the three-dimensional space coordinate
point [16].
method The 3D geometric
of converting the shapemodel
valueof
tothe
theunderwater roboticspace
three-dimensional system is shownpoint
coordinate in Figure
[16].
10. 3D geometric model of the underwater robotic system is shown in Figure 10.
The

(a) Front view (b) Cubic diagram

Figure 9. Geometrical model of the ducted propeller. (a) Front view; (b) Cubic diagram

The coordinate system was defined uniformly here, as shown in Figure 10b: the di-
rection of the z-axis was defined as the forward and backward direction of the underwater
robot, where the positive value was forward and the negative value backward. The Y di-
Figure
rection
Figure 9.9.was
Geometrical model
the left model
Geometrical and ofthe
right
of the ductedpropeller.
direction
ducted propeller. (a)Front
Frontview;
of the underwater
(a) view; (b)Cubic
robot,
(b) Cubicdiagram.
where diagram
the positive value
was right and the negative value was left. The X direction was the heave direction of the
Table The
underwater coordinate
robot,
7. Primary system
where
parameters was
thethe
of defined
positive
ducted valueuniformly
was rising
propeller. here,
andas shown
the negative in Figure
value was10b:sinking.
the di-
rection of the z-axis was defined as the forward and backward direction of the underwater
robot,
Table 7.where
PrimaryDiameter
the positive(mm)
parameters value
of thewas
ducted forward and the negative value
propeller. 86 backward. The Y di-
rection was the left and right
Disk ratio direction of the underwater robot, where
0.7 the positive value
Diameter (mm) 86
was right and thePitchnegative value
ratio Disk ratio
was left. The X direction was the
0.99
heave direction of the
underwater robot, where the positive value was rising and the negative value 0.7was sinking.
Leaf angle (◦Pitch
) ratio 8 0.99
Table 7. PrimaryHub diameterLeaf
parameters ratio angle
of the ducted(°) propeller. 0.18 8
Number of Hub diameter ratio
leaves 4 0.18
Diameter (mm) 86
Number
Catheter length Disk of
(mm) ratio leaves 43 4
0.7
Catheter length (mm) 43
Catheter inlet diameter
Pitch (mm)
ratio 113.7 0.99
Catheter inlet diameter (mm) 113.7
Leaf angle
Catheter outlet diameter (mm) (°) 100.03 8
Catheter outlet diameter (mm) 100.03
Hub diameter ratio 0.18
(a) Planform
Number of
(b) Cubic diagram
leaves 4
Catheter length (mm) 43
Catheter inlet diameter (mm) 113.7
Catheter outlet diameter (mm) 100.03

(a) Planform (b) Cubic diagram

Figure10.
Figure 10.Geometrical
Geometricalmodel
modelofofthe
theunderwater
underwaterrobot.
robot.(a)
(a)Planform;
Planform;(b)
(b)Cubic
Cubicdiagram.
diagram

4.2. The
Computational
coordinate Domain
systemand
wasBoundary
definedConditions
uniformly here, as shown in Figure 10b: the
direction the z-axis
The computational domain, the position ofand
of was defined as the forward backward
ducted direction
propellers, andofthe
themain
underwater
body of
robot, where the positive value was forward
the underwater robot are shown in Figure 11. and the negative value backward. The Y
direction
Figure 10.was the left and
Geometrical right
model direction
of the of therobot.
underwater underwater robot,
(a) Planform; (b)where
Cubic the positive value
diagram
was right and the negative value was left. The X direction was the heave direction of the
4.2. Computational
underwater Domainthe
robot, where and Boundary
positive Conditions
value was rising and the negative value was sinking.
The computational domain, the position of ducted propellers, and the main body of
4.2. Computational Domain and Boundary Conditions
the underwater robot are shown in Figure 11.
The computational domain, the position of ducted propellers, and the main body of
the underwater robot are shown in Figure 11.
According to the characteristics of the problems studied in this paper, the computa-
tional domain was divided into four computational domains. Domain I was the rotating
flow field with the propeller shaft as the rotating axis, its length Lc and its diameter up to
105% of the propeller diameter. In this paper, I-I, I-II and I-III represent the computational
domains of the three ducted propellers, where I-I and I-II are the computational domains of
 J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 19

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 940 11 of 19

the left- and right-ducted propellers, and I-III is the computational domain of the middle-
ducted propeller. The motion in computational Domain II includes the robot body and the
ducted propellers; Domain III is made up of unstructured mesh and includes Domain II;
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, x FOR PEERDomain
REVIEW IV is composed of the structural mesh including Domain III. Table 8 shows 11 of
the19
types of boundary conditions between each computational domain.

Figure 11. Computational domains of the underwater robot system.

According to the characteristics of the problems studied in this paper, the computa-
tional domain was divided into four computational domains. Domain Ⅰ was the rotating
flow field with the propeller shaft as the rotating axis, its length Lc and its diameter up
to 105% of the propeller diameter. In this paper, I-I, I-II and I-III represent the computa-
tional domains of the three ducted propellers, where I-I and I-II are the computational
domains of the left- and right-ducted propellers, and I-III is the computational domain of
the middle-ducted propeller. The motion in computational Domain II includes the robot
body and the ducted propellers; Domain III is made up of unstructured mesh and includes
Figure
Domain
Figure 11.II;
11. Computational
Computational domains
Domain IV domains
is composedofthe
of theof
underwater robotmesh
the structural
underwater robot system.
system. including Domain III. Table 8
shows the types of boundary conditions between each computational domain.
According
Table 8. Boundary to conditions
the characteristics of the problems
of the underwater studied in this paper, the computa-
robot system.
tional
Tabledomain was divided
8. Boundary conditionsinto four
of the computational
underwater domains. Domain Ⅰ was the rotating
robot system.
Serial Number flow fieldBoundary
with the Scope
propeller shaft as the rotating Definition of length
axis, its Boundary LcConditions in the up
and its diameter
Definition of BoundaryDomain
Computational Conditions in the
Serial Number to 105% of the propeller
Boundary Scope diameter. In this paper, I-I, I-II and I-III represent the computa-
1 Surface ofofpropeller Movement Computational Domain
tional domains the three ducted propellers, where I-Inon-slip
and I-II boundary
are theconditions
computational
1 domainsSurface
of the of propeller
left- and right-ducted Movement
propellers, and I-III non-slip
is the boundary
computational conditions
domain of
2 Internal and external surfaces of ducts Fixed non-slip boundary conditions
2 Internal
the and external
middle-ducted surfaces of ducts Fixed non-slip boundary conditions
3 The main surface of the propeller.
underwaterThe robotmotion in computational
Fixed non-slip Domain
boundary II includes
conditionsthe robot
3 The mainbodysurface
and the of ducted
the underwater
propellers;robot
Domain III is made Fixed
up ofnon-slip boundary
unstructured meshconditions
and includes
4 Computational Domain IV side Fixed non-slip boundary conditions
4 Computational
Domain II; Domain Domain IV IV side
is composed Fixed
of the structural meshnon-slip boundary
including Domainconditions
III. Table 8
5 5 Computational
shows theDomain
Computational Domain
types ofⅣ IV lowersurface
boundary
lower surface
conditions betweenPressure outlet
each computational
Pressure outletboundary conditions
domain.
boundary conditions
6 6 Computational
Computational Domain
Domain ⅣIV uppersurface
upper surface Speed
Speed entry
entry boundary
boundary conditions
conditions
Table 8. Boundary conditions of the underwater robot system.
7 7 Transition boundary
Transition boundary between
between regions
regionsIIand
and IV Interface
Interface
Definition of Boundary Conditions in the
Serial Number Boundary
4.3.The
The Scope Domain Mesh of the Underwater Robotic System
Computational
4.3. Computational Domain Mesh of the Underwater Robotic System Domain
Computational
1 Figure
Surface
Figure 12of
12 shows theoverall
propeller
shows the overallcomputational
computational domainbody
Movement
domain body meshboundary
non-slip
mesh andthe
and thesurface
surface mesh
conditions
mesh
2 ofthe
of
Internal the
and underwater
underwater roboticof
robotic
external surfaces system.
system. Table99shows
ducts Table showsthe
thetypes
types
Fixed andnumbers
and
non-slip numbers
boundaryofofconditions
meshesofofthe
meshes the
3 computational
computational
The main domains.
domains.
surface of the underwater robot Fixed non-slip boundary conditions
4 Computational Domain IV side Fixed non-slip boundary conditions
(a) Volume mesh of computational domain (b) Surface mesh of the robot
5 Computational Domain Ⅳ lower surface Pressure outlet boundary conditions
6 Computational Domain Ⅳ upper surface Speed entry boundary conditions
7 Transition boundary between regions I and IV Interface

4.3. The Computational Domain Mesh of the Underwater Robotic System

Figure 12 shows the overall computational domain body mesh and the surface mesh
of the underwater robotic system. Table 9 shows the types and numbers of meshes of the
computational domains.

(a) Volume mesh of computational domain (b) Surface mesh of the robot
Figure12.
Figure 12. Computational
Computational domain
domain meshes
meshes for
for the
theunderwater
underwaterrobot
robotsystem.
system.(a)(a)Volume
Volumemesh
meshofof
computational domain; (b) Surface mesh of the robot.
computational domain; (b) Surface mesh of the robot.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 1

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 940 12 of 19

Table 9. Information about the underwater robot system’s calculation domain meshes.

Computational
Table 9. Information aboutGeometric Dimensions
the underwater Number
robot system’s calculation domain meshes. of Meshes
Mesh Type
Domain (mm) (106)
Computational Geometric Number of Meshes
Ⅰ-Ⅰ Dimensionsφ 90 .3 × 49 Mesh Type
unstructured mesh (106 ) 0.36
Domain (mm)
Ⅰ-Ⅱ
I-I φ
φ90.3 × 4990 . 3 × 49 unstructured
unstructured mesh mesh 0.36 0.36
Ⅰ-Ⅲ
I-II
φ
φ90.3 × 49
90 . 3 × 49 unstructured
unstructured mesh mesh 0.36 0.367
I-IIIⅡ φ90.3700
× 49× 625 × 300 unstructured mesh
unstructured mesh 0.367 1.276
II
Ⅲ φ1700× 3500 unstructured
700 × 625 × 300 unstructured
mesh mesh 1.276 1.0
structural structural
III Ⅳ φ1700 ×φ 3000
3500 × 8000 unstructured mesh 1.0 0.718
mesh
IV φ3000 × 8000 structural structural mesh 0.718
Total 4.081
Total 4.081

4.4. Linear Motion

4.4. Linear Motion
Figure1313shows
Figure shows thethe thrust
thrust of three
of the the three ducted
ducted propellers
propellers and theand
fluidthe fluid resistanc
resistance
curveofofthe
curve themain
main body
body with
with the the coupling
coupling of theofmain
the main body
body and and ducted
ducted propellerpropeller
when when
theunderwater
the underwater robotic
robotic system
system advanced
advanced at different
at different speeds;
speeds; the rotational
the rotational speed ofspeed
each of each
propellerwas
propeller was 1200
1200 rpm.
rpm.

Figure13.
Figure 13.Straight
Straight advance
advance of each
of each propeller
propeller thrustthrust
curve.curve.

AsAsseen
seeninin Figure
Figure 13, 13,
no matter
no matter howhow the forward speed speed
the forward changed, the thrust
changed, theofthrust
the of th
propeller located behind the underwater robotic system was greater than the thrust of a
propeller located behind the underwater robotic system was greater than the thrust of
single propeller. Moreover, the proportion of increase grew sharply, as the advance speed
single propeller. Moreover, the proportion of increase grew sharply, as the advance speed
increased. It increased from 9.9% at 0.2 kn to 349% at 2.0 kn. Meanwhile, as the forward
increased.
speed It increased
increased, the thrustfrom 9.9% at
generated by 0.2
the kn
reartopropeller
349% atdecreased
2.0 kn. Meanwhile,
from 7.462 Nasatthe0.2 forward
speed
kn increased,
to 5.426 N at 2.0 the
kn, athrust
decreasegenerated
of 27.3%.by the rear propeller decreased from 7.462 N at 0.
kn toThe5.426 N atis 2.0
reason thatkn, a decrease
under of 27.3%.
the influence of the main body, the water flow in the area
behind The
thereason
main body is that under
is slow. the influence
It leads of the
to the decrease in main body,
the axial the water
average advance flow
speedin the are
at the rearthe
behind propeller
main body surfaceis and
slow. theItincrease
leads tointhe
the decrease
axial-induced velocity
in the axial produced by the speed
average advance
propeller.
at the rear Thus, the thrust
propeller of the rear
surface and propeller is greater
the increase in thethan that of a singlevelocity
axial-induced propeller. At
produced b
the same time, when the underwater robotic system advances in a straight line at different
the propeller. Thus, the thrust of the rear propeller is greater than that of a single propeller
speeds, the flow field behind the underwater robot is extremely uneven because of the
At the same time, when the underwater robotic system advances in a straight line at dif
influence of the main body. The uneven variation of the flow field causes the thrust of the
ferent
rear speeds,
propeller tothe flow field
fluctuate behind
greatly, the underwater
more than that of a singlerobot is extremely
propeller. When theuneven
speed because
is o
the influence
high, of the the
the flow behind main mainbody.
bodyThe willuneven
producevariation of the flow field
a reflux phenomenon, whichcauses the thrust o
intensifies
the decrease in the axial flow velocity in this area and reduces the velocity of water flowthe speed
the rear propeller to fluctuate greatly, more than that of a single propeller. When
is high, the
perceived flow
at the behind
surface the main Finally,
of propeller. body willthe produce a reflux
rear propeller phenomenon,
sends which inten
out greater thrust
than
sifiesa the
single propeller.
decrease in the axial flow velocity in this area and reduces the velocity of wate
flowThe propellers
perceived atonthethesurface
left andof right sides of the
propeller. underwater
Finally, the rear robotic systemsends
propeller have theout greate
same thrust curve height, but they do not completely coincide. Moreover, each thrust was
thrust than a single propeller.
The propellers on the left and right sides of the underwater robotic system have th
same thrust curve height, but they do not completely coincide. Moreover, each thrust wa
 smaller than that of a single propeller. The decrease proportion rose with the inc
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 940 forward speed, from 2.6% at 0.2 kn to 135% at 2.0 kn. 13 of 19

The reason for this result is that the underwater robotic system is a symme
rangement. Although the underwater robotic system moves forward at different
smaller
the flowthan thatbetween
field of a singlethe
propeller. Theright
left and decrease proportion
propellers rose withidentical.
is almost the increase in
Moreover,
forward speed, from 2.6% at 0.2 kn to 135% at 2.0 kn.
of the complexity of the flow field and the error in the numerical calculation it
The reason for this result is that the underwater robotic system is a symmetrical
calculation Although
arrangement. results cannot be completely
the underwater consistent
robotic system moves with
forwardexperimental results. As t
at different speeds,
body
the flowoffield
thebetween
underwater
the left robot system
and right moves
propellers forward,
is almost theMoreover,
identical. flow near the two sid
because
main
of body has backward
the complexity velocity,
of the flow field and theforming
error in athe
negative
numerical wake. Therefore,
calculation itself, the
the axial v
calculation results cannot be completely consistent with experimental
of the left and right propellers increase, and the thrusts of the propellers results. As thedecreas
main body of the underwater robot system moves forward, the flow near the two sides
over, with the rise in forward speed, the velocity of negative wake also increase
of the main body has backward velocity, forming a negative wake. Therefore, the axial
makes the
velocities proportional
of the reduction
left and right propellers of propeller
increase, thrustofgradually
and the thrusts increase.
the propellers decrease.
From
Moreover, thethe
with resistance curvespeed,
rise in forward of thethe
main bodyofin
velocity Figurewake
negative 13, wealsosee that with the
increases,
which makes the proportional reduction of propeller thrust gradually increase.
in forward velocity, the fluid resistance of the main body increased sharply. This w
From the resistance curve of the main body in Figure 13, we see that with the increase
sistent with the geometric relationship where the fluid resistance was proportion
in forward velocity, the fluid resistance of the main body increased sharply. This was
square ofwith
consistent thethevelocity
geometricof the object in
relationship the the
where fluid.
fluid resistance was proportional to
the square of the velocity of the object in the fluid.
4.5. Vertical Deep Motion
4.5. Vertical Deep Motion
Figure 14 shows the thrust curve of the ducted propellers and the ducted pr
Figure 14 shows the thrust curve of the ducted propellers and the ducted propellers
under
under the the influence
influence ofmain
of the the body,
mainwhenbody,thewhen the underwater
underwater robotic
robotic system heavedsystem
he at
different
different speeds;
speeds; the rotational
the rotational speed
speed of of each was
each propeller propeller was 1200 rpm.
1200 rpm.

Figure
Figure The
14.14. vertical
The deep deep
vertical motionmotion
of each propeller thrust curve.
of each propeller thrust curve.
Figure 14 shows that the thrust curves of each propeller are very different, and the
Figure
regularity is not14 showswhen
apparent thatthethe thrust curves
underwater robotic of eachheaves.
system propeller are curves
The thrust very different,
of
regularity
the is not
left and right apparent
propellers when
on both sidesthe underwater
of the main body alsorobotic
show system heaves.The
great differences. The thrus
fundamental
of the left and reason for propellers
right this is that the
onshape
bothofsides
the underwater
of the main robot is a also
body flat streamline
show great diff
body, and the upper surface of the main body is an elliptical plane. When the underwater
The fundamental reason for this is that the shape of the underwater robot is a flat
robot system heaves, the relative downward flow meets the resistance of the main body
linedisperses
and body, and the upper
randomly to bothsurface of the
sides, which mainthebody
makes is anenvironments
flow field elliptical plane. When th
on both
water
sides robot
of the main system heaves,
body clearly the relative downward flow meets the resistance of t
different.
body and disperses randomly to both sides, which makes the flow field environm
4.6. Two-Dimensional Linear Motion
both sides of the main body clearly different.
A numerical simulation of the two-dimensional linear motion of the underwater
robotic system is discussed in this section. The UDF control program was written to control
4.6.specified
the Two-Dimensional Linear
motion of the Motion
underwater robot. By changing the value of Va, the different
two-dimensional linear motion velocity
A numerical simulation of the of the underwater robot linear
two-dimensional system motion
was altered. The underw
of the
speed of motion is shown in Formula (7) below:
botic system is discussed in this section. The UDF control program was written to
the specified motion of the underwater robot. By changing the value of Va, the d
vel[0] = Va
(7)
two-dimensional linear motion velocity of the underwater robot system was alte
vel[2] = Va
speed of motion is shown in Formula (7) below:
vel[0] = Va
vel[2] = Va .
 thrust of the single propeller. Additionally, the thrust of the rear propeller also d
with the increase in the absolute speed. The reduction ratio had a decrease of 14.3
7.131 N at an absolute speed of 0.282 kn to 6.112 N at 2.828 kn. The thrust curv
left and right propellers coincide, which was reduced overall by 112.4%. With the
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 940 14 of 19
in absolute speed, their thrust decreased from 6.612 N at an absolute speed of 0.2
-0.822 N at 2.828 kn. In addition, their combined thrust was less than the thrust of
propeller. The reason for these outcomes is basically the same as those mentione
Figure 15 shows the thrust curve of the ducted propellers and the thrust curve of
as they are the result of the change in the movement speed and the influence of t
the ducted propellers in each position under the influence of the main body, when the
body. Thus,
underwater thesystem
robot negative
madewake formed around
the two-dimensional the
linear mainatbody,
motion which
different speedsincreased
and th
ityrotational
the of flow at theofpropeller
speed surface
each propeller was and reduced the thrust from the propeller.
1200 rpm.

Figure
Figure TheThe
15.15. two-dimensional linear motion
two-dimensional linearofmotion
each propeller
of eachthrust curve.
propeller thrust curve.
It can be seen from Figure 15 that when the underwater robot system performed
As the rear
two-dimensional propeller
linear is behind
motion, the therear
thrust of the main bodywas
propeller of the
alwaysunderwater
greater thanrobot,
the the
locityofof
thrust thethe flow
single field inAdditionally,
propeller. this area was less of
the thrust affected
the rear by the change
propeller in the veloci
also decreased
with the increase in the absolute speed. The reduction ratio had a
underwater robotic system. It decreased the change in the velocity of flow decrease of 14.3%, from at the r
7.131
peller surface. Furthermore, it reduced the proportional change in thethe
N at an absolute speed of 0.282 kn to 6.112 N at 2.828 kn. The thrust curves of thrust of
left and right propellers coincide, which was reduced overall by 112.4%. With the increase
propeller
in beyond
absolute speed, that
their of decreased
thrust a single propeller.
from 6.612 N at an absolute speed of 0.282 kn to
−0.822 N at 2.828 kn. In addition, their combined thrust was less than the thrust of a single
4.7. Two-Dimensional
propeller. Circular
The reason for these Motion
outcomes is basically the same as those mentioned above,
as they are the result of the change in the movement speed and the influence of the main
The circular motion velocity of the underwater robot system is changed by t
body. Thus, the negative wake formed around the main body, which increased the velocity
offlow
of Va.atThe underwater
the propeller robot
surface was controlled
and reduced the thrust by
froma the
UDF program to move along th
propeller.
fiedAscircle. Thepropeller
the rear speed of is motion
behind the is main
as follows
body of(8):
the underwater robot, the axial
velocity of the flow field in this area was less affected by the change in the velocity of
the underwater robotic system. It decreasedvel[1] the = Va ∗ cos(M_PI
change ∗ time)
in the velocity of flow at the rear
propeller surface. Furthermore, it reduced vel[2] the=proportional
Va ∗ sin(M_PIchange∗intime)
the thrust of the rear
.
propeller beyond that of a single propeller.
Figure 16 shows the thrust curve of the ducted propellers in each position u
4.7. Two-Dimensional Circular Motion
influence of the main body and the fluid resistance curve of the main body, w
The circular motion velocity of the underwater robot system is changed by the value
underwater
of robotic
Va. The underwater system
robot made aby
was controlled two-dimensional circular
a UDF program to move alongmotion at differen
the specified
and the rotational speed of propeller
circle. The speed of motion is as follows (8): was 1200 rpm.
vel[1] = Va ∗ cos(M _PI ∗ time)
(8)
vel[2] = Va ∗ sin(M _PI ∗ time)

Figure 16 shows the thrust curve of the ducted propellers in each position under the
influence of the main body and the fluid resistance curve of the main body, when the
underwater robotic system made a two-dimensional circular motion at different speeds
and the rotational speed of propeller was 1200 rpm.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 940 15 of 19
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 19

(a) Va = 0.2 kn (b) Va = 0.5 kn

(c) Va = 1.0 kn (d) Va = 1.5 kn

Figure16.
Figure 16. Thrust
Thrust curves
curves of
of the
thetwo-dimensional
two-dimensionalcircular
circularmotion of of
motion thethe
underwater robot
underwater system.
robot system.
(a) Va = 0.2 kn; (b) Va = 0.5 kn; (c) Va = 1.0 kn; (d) Va = 1.5
(a) Va = 0.2 kn; (b) Va = 0.5 kn; (c) Va = 1.0 kn; (d) Va = 1.5 kn.kn.

In Figure
In Figure 16, we
wesee
seethat
thatthe
thethrust curve
thrust of each
curve propeller
of each evidently
propeller changes
evidently at dif-at
changes
ferent velocities.
different velocities.
(1) The
(1) The thrust
thrust curve
curve of
of the
the rear
rear propeller.
propeller.
At low speed, the thrust curve of the rear propeller shows obvious regularity. With
At low speed, the thrust curve of the rear propeller shows obvious regularity. With
the increase in linear velocity, the curve begins to fluctuate. Although the thrust curve of
the increase in linear velocity, the curve begins to fluctuate. Although the thrust curve of
the rear propeller fluctuates sharply when the linear velocity exceeds 0.5 kn, the shape
the rear propeller fluctuates sharply when the linear velocity exceeds 0.5 kn, the shape
and trend of the curve does not change fundamentally. The reason is that the flow field of
and trend of the curve does not change fundamentally. The reason is that the flow field of
the underwater robot system changes fundamentally when the linear velocity of circular
the underwater robot system changes fundamentally when the linear velocity of circular
motion is less than 0.5 kn. With the increase in the linear velocity of circular motion, the
motion is less than 0.5 kn. With the increase in the linear velocity of circular motion, the
influence on thrust regularity of propeller passes the inflection point. This means that the
influence on thrust regularity of propeller passes the inflection point. This means that
increase in linear velocity will not fundamentally change the thrust regularity of the pro-
the increase in linear velocity will not fundamentally change the thrust regularity of the
peller.
propeller.
(2) The thrust curves of single, left, and right propellers.
(2) The thrust curves of single, left, and right propellers.
At low speed, the thrust curves of the single propeller, left propeller, and right propel-
Atclose
ler are low speed,
in shapethe thrust
and trend.curves of the single
Nevertheless, propeller,
according left propeller,
to the numerical and right
simulation pro-
results
peller are close in shape and trend. Nevertheless, according to the numerical
in this paper, this consistency is destroyed when the linear velocity increases to a certain simulation
results in this paper,
value (greater than 1.0this
kn).consistency is destroyed
When the angle of motionwhen the linear
θ is greater than velocity
1.5, each increases
curve shows to a
certain
its ownvalue
unique (greater than 1.0which
characteristics, kn). When the angle
are obviously of motion
different is greater
fromθ the than 1.5,
other curves. Thiseach
is
curve
mainlyshows
becauseits when
own unique characteristics,
the linear which
velocity is high, are obviously
the flow field becomesdifferent fromirregular
extremely the other
curves.
and the This
flow is mainly
field becauseof
environment when the where
the area linear the
velocity is high,
propeller the flow
is located in a field becomes
different po-
extremely irregular
sition results and thrust
in different the flow field environment
regularities of the area where the propeller is
of the propellers.
located in a different position results in different thrust regularities of the propellers.
Figure 17 shows the mesh update image of the underwater robotic system when the
linear velocity (Va) was 2.0 kn. It can be seen from Figure 17 that with the increase in the
circular motion angle, the influence of the underwater robotic system on the flow field in
its region gradually diffused from around the robot to the whole flow field area. As the
angle θ of circular motion increased, the meshes became more and more irregular, which
showed the deterioration of mesh quality. The deterioration of the mesh quality led directly
to fluctuations in the numerical calculation results.
 linearFigure
linear velocity
velocity 17(Va)
shows
(Va) was
wasthe mesh
2.0
2.0 kn. update
kn. ItIt can be
can beimage of theFigure
seen from
seen from underwater
Figure thatrobotic
17 that
17 with the
with system
the when
increase
increase the
in the
in the
circular motion angle, the influence of the underwater robotic system on the flow field the
linear
circular velocity
motion (Va) was
angle, the2.0 kn.
influenceIt canofbe
theseen from
underwater Figure 17
robotic that with
system the
on theincrease
flow in
field in
in
circular
its region motion angle,
gradually the
diffusedinfluence
from of
aroundthe underwater
the robot to robotic
the whole
its region gradually diffused from around the robot to the whole flow field area. As thesystem
flowon the
field flow
area. field
As in
the
its region
angle θ of gradually
circular diffused
motion from
increased, around
the the
meshes robot
becameto the
more whole
angle θ of circular motion increased, the meshes became more and more irregular, which and flow
more field area.
irregular, As
whichthe
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 940
angle θ the
showed
showed of
thecircular motionof
deterioration
deterioration increased,
of mesh quality.
mesh the meshes
quality. became moreof
The deterioration
The deterioration ofand
themore
the meshirregular,
mesh which
quality led
quality led
16 di-
ofdi-
19
showed
rectly
rectly to the deterioration
to fluctuations
fluctuations theof
in the
in mesh quality.
numerical
numerical The deterioration
calculation
calculation results.
results. of the mesh quality led di-
rectly to fluctuations in the numerical calculation results.
(a) θθ == 00
(a) (b) θθ == 0.4
(b) 0.4 ππ (c) θθ == 0.8
(c) 0.8 π π
(a) θ = 0 (b) θ = 0.4 π (c) θ = 0.8 π

(d) θθ == 1.2
(d) π
1.2 π (e) θθ == 1.6
(e) π
1.6 π (f) θθ == 2.0
(f) π
2.0 π
(d) θ = 1.2 π (e) θ = 1.6 π (f) θ = 2.0 π

Figure17.
Figure
Figure 17.Underwater
17. Underwaterrobot robotsystem
robot systemcircular
system circularmotion
circular motionmesh
motion meshchange
mesh changeunder
change underVa
under Vaequals
Va equals
equals 2.0
2.0
2.0 kn.
kn.
kn. (a) (a)
(a)
θ= θθ0;==
0; (b)
Figure
0; (b)
(b) θ =
17.
θ =θ0.4 0.4
= π; π; (c)
Underwater
0.4(c)π;θ(c) θ = 0.8
robot
θ =π;0.8
= 0.8 π; (d)
system
θ =(d)
(d)π; θ =
1.2θπ; 1.2 π;
circular
(e) π;
= 1.2 motion
(e)
θ =(e) θ = 1.6 π;
mesh
1.6θπ;
1.6θπ;= (f)
change
(f) θ = 2.0 π.
under
2.0θπ.= 2.0 π.
= (f)
Va equals 2.0 kn. (a) θ=
0; (b) θ = 0.4 π; (c) θ = 0.8 π; (d) θ = 1.2 π; (e) θ = 1.6 π; (f) θ = 2.0 π.
4.8. Fluid
4.8. Fluid
4.8. Resistance
Resistance Analysis
Fluid Resistance Analysis of
Analysis of the
of the Main
the Main Body
Main Body of
Body ofthe
of theRobot
the Robot
Robot
4.8. Fluid
FiguresResistance
Figures 18 18
18 and Analysis
and 19
19 show of
show thethethe
thefluidMain
fluid Body
fluidresistance
resistanceof
resistancein the
in Robot
inthe
thedirection
the directionof
direction ofofthe
the
the z-axis
z-axis and
and y-axis
y-axis in
Figures z-axis and y-axis in
in the circular
Figures
the circular
the circularmotion motion
18 and 19
motionprocessprocess
show
process of of
the the
ofthe main main
fluid
mainbody body
resistance
bodyat atindifferent
atdifferent the linear
direction
differentlinear ofvelocities.
the
linearvelocities.
velocities.Thez-axisThe
and positive
The positivey-axis
positivevalue
valuein
value
the
of
of the
the of the
circular
figures figures
figuresmotion indicates
process
indicates
indicates thatthe
that the that
of the the
direction
direction direction
main body
offluid
of fluid of fluid
at different
resistance
resistance resistance
linear was
velocities.
wasconsistent
was consistent
consistentwithThe with
withpositive the
value
the direction
the direction
direction
of
of the of
figures
z-axis the
or z-axis
indicates
the or
y-axis,the
that
and y-axis,
the the and
direction the
negative of negative
fluid
value value
resistance
indicates indicates
was
the the
consistent
opposite
of the z-axis or the y-axis, and the negative value indicates the opposite direction. opposite
with the
direction. direction.
direction
of the z-axis or the y-axis, and the negative value indicates the opposite direction.

Figure18.
Figure
Figure 18. Z-directional
18. Z-directionalfluid
Z-directional fluidresistance
fluid resistanceof
resistance ofthe
of theunderwater
the underwaterrobot.
underwater robot.
robot.
Figure 18. Z-directional fluid resistance of the underwater robot.

Figure19.
Figure 19. Y-directional
Y-directionalfluid
Y-directional fluidresistance
fluid resistanceof
resistance ofthe
of theunderwater
the underwaterrobot.
underwater robot.
robot.
Figure 19. Y-directional fluid resistance of the underwater robot.
The figures illustrate that the fluid resistance in both the Z direction and the Y direction
increased with the increase in the linear velocity of the circular motion. Moreover, the
range of increase widens. At low linear velocity, the resistance curve fluctuates slightly.
In contrast, at high linear velocity, the fluctuation is noticeable. It is consistent with the
physical law that states fluid resistance is proportional to the square of velocity. At the same
time, we also see that the shape and trend of the fluid resistance curve at different linear
velocities are basically the same. The difference is that the upper and lower amplitude of
the curve are much larger at high speeds than that at low speeds.

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 940
tion increased with the increase in the linear velocity of the circular motion. Moreover, the
range of increase widens. At low linear velocity, the resistance curve fluctuates slightly.
In contrast, at high linear velocity, the fluctuation is noticeable. It is consistent with the
physical law that states fluid resistance is proportional to the square of velocity. At the
same time, we also see that the shape and trend of the fluid resistance curve at different
17 of 19
linear velocities are basically the same. The difference is that the upper and lower ampli-
tude of the curve are much larger at high speeds than that at low speeds.

4.9.
4.9.Three-Dimensional
Three-DimensionalCircular
CircularMotion
Motion
The
Thespecified
specifiedthree-dimensional
three-dimensional circular
circular motion
motion speed
speed of
of the
the underwater robot is
underwater robot is
shown
shownininthe
thefollowing
followingEquation
Equation(9):
(9):

vel [0] ==0.257

vel[0] 0.257
vel [1] ==Va
vel[1] ∗ cos(M_PI
Va∗ cos ∗ time)
(M _PI ∗ time ) (9)
(9)
vel [ 2 ] = Va ∗ sin ( M _PI ∗
vel[2] = Va ∗ sin(M_PI ∗ time)time )
.
By
Bychanging
changingthe
thevalue
valueofofVa,
Va,the different
the differentthree-dimensional
three-dimensional circular motion
circular velocities
motion veloci-
ofties
theof
underwater robot system
the underwater can becan
robot system altered. When the
be altered. underwater
When robot system
the underwater moved
robot system
inmoved
a three-dimensional circular motion
in a three-dimensional circular at different
motion linear velocities,
at different thrust curves
linear velocities, thrust of each
curves
propeller ensured that
of each propeller are shown
ensured that areinshown
Figurein20.
Figure 20.

(a) Va = 0.2 kn (b) Va = 0.5 kn

(c) Va = 1.0 kn (d) Va = 1.5 kn

Figure20.
Figure 20. Thrust
Thrustcurves
curves of of
thethe
three-dimensional circular
three-dimensional motion
circular of the underwater
motion robot. (a)robot.
of the underwater Va =
0.2 kn; (b) Va = 0.5 kn; (c) Va = 1.0 kn; (d) Va = 1.5 kn.
(a) Va = 0.2 kn; (b) Va = 0.5 kn; (c) Va = 1.0 kn; (d) Va = 1.5 kn.

ItItcan
canbebeseen
seenininFigure
Figure2020that
thatthe
the linear
linear velocity
velocity of
of circular
circular motion
motion had had aa major
major
influence on the thrusts of the propellers at different positions. With
influence on the thrusts of the propellers at different positions. With the increase the increase in the
in
linear
the linearvelocity of circular
velocity motion,
of circular the fluctuation
motion, amplitude
the fluctuation of theofthrust
amplitude curvecurve
the thrust of eachof
propeller
each begins
propeller to increase.
begins WhenWhen
to increase. the linear velocity
the linear is high,
velocity is the
high,flow
thefield
flowisfield
veryisdisor-
very
dered, which
disordered, leadsleads
which to thetoobvious fluctuation
the obvious of the thrust
fluctuation of thecurve.
thrustItcurve.
also reflects
It alsothe deci-
reflects
sive
the influence
decisive of the velocity
influence on the on
of the velocity complexity of the flow
the complexity of thefield.
flowMoreover, the thrust
field. Moreover, the
thrust curves of the single propeller, the left propeller, and right propeller cross many
times, which means that the negative wake around the main body changed because of the
three-dimensional circular motion. Additionally, the negative wake no longer reduced the
thrust of the propeller at certain periods, and it, conversely, had a positive effect.
The thrust curve of the rear propeller is almost above the thrust curve of the single
propeller, left propeller, and right propeller. This is mainly because the rear propeller is
located behind the main body, where the blocking effect of the main body on the water flow
still exists. Therefore, the flow in the rear propeller area becomes slower and the thrust
from the propeller becomes larger.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 940 18 of 19

Comparing the hydrodynamic characteristics of two-dimensional circular motion

(Figure 16) with those of three-dimensional circular motion (Figure 20), we found that the
motion parameters of multiple dimensions had a significant effect on the thrust charac-
teristics of the propeller control mechanism of the underwater robot system. They led to
a drastic fluctuation of the curve. The main reason for this is that when the underwater
robotic system makes a deep vertical motion, the upper surface of the main body hinders
the flow of water, which eliminates the flow along both sides of the main body. Further-
more, it intensifies the complexity of the flow field in the propeller area, obviously causing
the thrust to fluctuate. In addition, the disturbance of water flow is more obvious when the
linear velocity increases.

5. Discussion and Conclusions

In this paper, three-dimensional motions with multiple degrees of freedom of the
underwater robot system were numerically simulated and the thrust characteristics of the
ducted propeller under different motion forms were studied and analyzed. Through the
previous numerical simulation research and analysis, the following conclusions can be
drawn:
(1) The dynamic mesh was used in the motion of the underwater robot in the computa-
tional Domain III and the sliding mesh was used in the rotation motion of the ducted
propeller. The technique of combined mesh allowed the underwater robot system to
perform complex three-dimensional motions with multiple degrees of freedom.
(2) When comparing the numerical simulation results with the experimental results,
we determined that the hybrid technique of dynamic mesh and sliding mesh, using
the mesh update method of spring smoothing and remeshing, met the engineering
requirements.
(3) Numerical simulation results showed that the flow field environment around the
underwater robot system was obviously different when different motion modes were
carried out at different motion speeds. Affected by this flow field environment,
there were obvious differences in the hydrodynamic characteristics and the thrust
characteristics of the control mechanism ducted propeller. At low speed, the fluid
resistance of the main body increased sharply with the increase in motion speed.
Additionally, the left and right propellers were influenced by the negative wake
of the main body, and the thrust value was reduced; the thrust value of the rear
propeller increased from the blocking effect of the main body on the flow. This
obvious regularity changed fundamentally at high speed, and the thrust of the left,
right, and rear propellers all fluctuated significantly.
(4) Similar to the circumstance of thrust behaviors issued from a ducted propeller without
the effects of the vehicle, for a given heading angle and a specific yawing motion,
there is a roughly corresponding relationship between the thrust generated from
the ducted propeller and the mean axial advance velocity on the propeller disk in
the integrated system of the underwater vehicle and ducted propellers: the smaller
the advance velocity, the greater the thrust. For the same rotating speed, the thrust
generated by the propeller in the integrated system of underwater vehicle and ducted
propellers is greater than that of the propeller without the effects of the vehicle, since
the mean axial advance velocity met by the propeller disk in the integrated system
under the influence in the vehicle’s flow field is smaller than that without the effects
of vehicle’s flow field.
In this paper, because of the limitations of computer performance and calculation
time cost, the quality of the mesh caused a large error in the results. In future research, we
will refine the mesh size and improve the mesh type, for example, by using a polyhedral
mesh instead of the tetrahedral mesh for more accurate results. In addition, the pressure
distribution at the ducted propeller surface and the underwater influence on the flow near
the propeller location are also worthy of study.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 940 19 of 19

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.W. and Y.D.; methodology, Y.D., J.W. and L.Z.; software,
Y.D. and L.Z.; validation, Y.D. and H.L.; formal analysis, Y.D. and L.Z.; investigation, C.M. and
X.H.; resources, L.Z.; data curation, Y.D. and L.Z.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.D. and
L.Z.; writing—review and editing, Y.D., J.W. and X.H.; visualization, S.X.; supervision, H.L. and
C.M.; project administration, J.W.; funding acquisition, J.W. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This paper is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation (51979110) of China,
the National Key Research and Development Program (2018YFC1406602) of China and the Guangxi
Natural Science Foundation (2018GXNSFBA281138, 2019GXNSFAA185044).
Acknowledgments: The authors would like to acknowledge the programming assistance from
Yinghao Zhao of South China University of Technology and Yan Long of The Ohio State University.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Kong, F.; Guo, Y.J.; Liu, W.H. Dynamics modeling and motion control of an new unmanned underwater vehicle. IEEE Access
2020, 8, 30119–30126. [CrossRef]
2. Manjunatha, M.; Selvakumar, A.A.; Godeswar, V.P.; Manimaran, R. A low cost underwater robot with grippers for visual
inspection of external pipeline surface. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2018, 133, 108–115. [CrossRef]
3. Liu, Y.H.; Yang, Y.P.; Zhang, H.W.; Zhang, L.H. Computational fluid dynamics prediction of the dynamic behavior of autonomous
underwater vehicles. IEEE J. Ocean. Eng. 2020, 45, 724–739. [CrossRef]
4. Abhra Roy, C.; Wang, X.; Manasa Ranjan, B.; Panda, S.K. Hydrodynamics study of a BCF mode bioinspired robotic-fish underwater
vehicle using Lighthill’s slender body model. J. Mar. Sci. Tech. 2016, 21, 102–114.
5. Wu, J.M.; Li, J.W.; Lin, Y.S.; Lai, Y.F.; Xu, Y. Hydrodynamic Relationship between Thrust and Velocity Component around
Ducted Propellerin an underwater vehicle. In Proceedings of the Twenty-sixth (2016) International Ocean and Polar Engineering
Conference, Rhodes, Greece, 26 June–1 July 2016; pp. 595–602.
6. Zhu, Z.F. Numerical study of effect of the number of propeller blades on cavitating flow. Adv. Mater. Res. 2013, 76, 739–743.
[CrossRef]
7. Mi, B.G.; Zhan, H.; Zhu, J. Simulation of Aerodynamic Drag of High-Speed Train in Evacuated Tude Transportation. Chin. J. Vac.
Sci. Technol. 2013, 33, 877–882. (In Chinese)
8. Djodikusumo, I.; Diasta, I.N.; Koeshardono, F. The modeling of a propeller turbine runner in 3D solid using 3D equation curve in
Autodesk Inventor 2015. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2016, 842, 147–163. [CrossRef]
9. Li, Y.H.; Wu, B.S.; Zhang, H. Research on application for unsteady maneuvering motion of underwater vehicle by dynamic mesh
technique in CFD. J. Ship Mech. 2010, 14, 1100–1108. (In Chinese)
10. Liu, Z.S.; Zhang, Y.F. Analysis and enhancement on lineal spring and torsional spring based dynamic mesh method. J. Harbin Inst.
Technol. 2005, 37, 1098–1102.
11. Liu, X.Q.; Li, Q.; Chai, J.Z. A new dynamic grid algorithm and its application. ACTA Aeronaut. Astronaut. Sin. 2008, 29, 817–822.
12. ANSYS. Ansys Fluent 15.0 User’s Guide; ANSYS Inc.: Canonsburg, PA, USA, 2013.
13. Wu, J.M.; Xu, Y.; Tao, L.B.; Yu, M.; Dou, Y.Z. An integrated hydrodynamics and control model of a tethered underwater robot.
China Ocean Eng. 2018, 32, 557–569. [CrossRef]
14. ANSYS. Ansys Fluent UDF Manual; ANSYS Inc.: Canonsburg, PA, USA, 2011.
15. Spry, S.C.; Empey, D.M.; Webster, W.C. Design and characterization of a small-scale azimuthing thruster for a mobile offshore
base module. Mar. Struct. 2001, 14, 215–229. [CrossRef]
16. Zhang, H.W.; Wang, S.X.; Hou, W.; He, M.L. Research on 3D M odeling of Propeller. Mach. Tool Hydraul. 2006, 5, 60–62.
(In Chinese)