Numerical Simulation of Flow around a Podded Propeller

Wei Li
1
and Chi Yang
2

1
School of Naval Architecture, Civil and Ocean Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University
Shanghai, China

2
Dept. of Computational and Data Sciences, George Mason University
Fairfax, Virginia, USA




ABSTRACT

In this paper the viscous steady flow around a podded propeller is
simulated using two CFD tools. Specifically, an open source CFD
toolbox, called OpenFOAM, is further developed to study the open
water hydrodynamic performance of the podded propeller and the
hydrodynamic interactions between the pod and the propeller. The
standard k- turbulence model is used in the viscous flow simulation. In
addition, the same simulation studies are also performed using
commercial CFD software FLUENT. Numerical results obtained using
two CFD tools are compares with experimental measurements. Fairly
good agreement is obtained. The interaction between the strut and the
propeller and the effect of the strut on the hydrodynamic performance
are analyzed by comparing the flows around the podded propeller and
the single propeller.

KEY WORDS: Podded-propeller; OpenFOAM; viscous flow.

INTRODUCTION

Podded propellers have recently been widely used in modern
commercial ships due to their relatively high efficiency and good sea-
keeping ability. As a new type of propulsion, podded propellers usually
have large hubs and good maneuverability. Podded propellers can
reduce noise, vibration and the fuel consumption of a vessel with the
proper design of the pod and the strut. The overall efficiency of a
podded propulsion system can have a gain in the order of 2% to 4%
over a conventional propeller. In addition, podded propellers can be
used in dynamic positioning systems of floating structures to provide
thrust in all horizontal directions by being mounted on the bottom of
the hull.

The performance of the podded propeller has been studied numerically
and experimentally. For example, Mewis (1998) investigated the open
water performance of podded propellers with different configurations.
The test was performed to study the total propeller thrust and the total
unit thrust, including scale effects leading to an accurate power
prediction. The effective wake fraction and the blade thrust were also
provided in this study. Poustoshniy et al. (1998) investigated the scaling
problems of the pushing-mode podded propeller.
The numerical methods based on potential flow theory have been used
widely and successfully to predict the performance of conventional
propellers. The modified wake model must be assumed in order to
predict the performance of podded propellers using potential-flow
based numerical method. The potential-flow method was used to
calculate the flow around podded propellers by Ghassemi and Allievi
(1999), Yang and Ma (2003) and Ma et al. (2006) with a modified
wake model. However, different wake models will affect the accuracy
of the prediction directly. With the development of computer hardware
and the numerical methods based on Euler/RANS solvers, many
difficult and complex flow phenomenons can be modeled directly,
including the detailed flow information in the wake of the flow around
a propeller. Kinnas et al. (2004)

applied the coupled Euler solver with a
potential flow method to analyze the performance of podded propellers.
Sanchez-Caja et al. (1999)

and Li et al (2007) applied viscous flow
methods to study the flow around a podded propeller.

OpenFOAM (Open Field Operation and Manipulation) is an object
oriented C++ toolbox for solving various systems of partial differential
equations using the finite volume method on arbitrary control volume
shapes and configurations. It includes preprocessing (grid generator,
converters, manipulators, case setup), postprocessing (using
OpenSource Paraview), and many specialized CFD solvers
(http://www.openfoam.org). The features in OpenFOAM are
comparable to what is available in the major commercial CFD codes.
Some of the more specialized features that are included in OpenFOAM
are: sliding grid, moving meshes, two-phase flow and fluid-structure
interaction. Since OpenFOAM is an open-source code, it is possible to
gain control over the exact implementations of different features and it
is reasonably straightforward to implement new models and fit them
into the whole code structure. Many researchers are using OpenFOAM,
which allows international exchange of development.

Based on the successful application of OpenFOAM in the simulation of
the flow around a conventional propeller, the OpenFOAM is further
developed in this study to investigate the open water hydrodynamic
performance of the podded propeller. The open water performance
results are compared to those measured in experiments and obtained by
other software. The effect of strut on the performance of the podded
propeller is analyzed and the hydrodynamic interactions between the
pod and the propeller are studied in the present paper.
Proceedings of the Nineteenth (2009) I nternational Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference
Osaka, J apan, J une 21-26, 2009
Copyright 2009 by The I nternational Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers (I SOPE)
I SBN 978-1-880653-53-1 (Set); I SSN 1098-618
756
SOLUTION METHOD

OpenFOAM is primarily designed to solve problems in continuum
mechanics, i.e. the branch of mechanics concerned with the stresses in
solids, liquids and gases and the deformation or flow of these materials.
OpenFOAM is therefore based in three dimensional space and time and
deals with physical entities described by tensors
(http://www.openfoam.org).

Finite volume methods are used in OpenFOAM CFD toolbox to solve
systems of partial differential equations described on any 3D
unstructured mesh of polyhedral cells. The incompressible flow solvers
are developed within a robust, implicit, pressure-velocity, iterative
solution framework.

Discretization Schemes

The finite volume method is used to solve the Reynolds-averaged
Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations described on three dimensional
unstructured polyhedral cells. The spatial discretization is defined in the
solution domain by a set of points that fill and bound a region of space.
The space domain is discretized into computational mesh on which the
PDEs are subsequently discretized. Dependent variable and other
properties are stored at the cell centre point P, and the cell is bounded
by a set of flat faces, as shown in Fig. 1. In OpenFOAM there is no
limitation on the number of faces bounding each cell, nor restriction on
the alignment of each face. This kind of mesh is referred to as
arbitrarily unstructured. Codes with arbitrarily unstructured meshes
offer greater freedom in mesh generation and manipulation in particular
when the geometry of the domain is complex. Most properties are
defined at the cell centre points; some are defined at cell faces.



Fig. 1: Parameters in finite volume discretization

A system of algebraic equations is generated in terms of discrete
quantities defined at specific location in the flow domain
(http://www.openfoam.org). For example, the convection term in
RANS equations is integrated over a control volume and linearized as
follows:
( ) ( ) ( )


= = =
f
f
f
f f f
S V
F U U dS dV U S (1)
Where V is cell volume, S
f
is surface area vector, and
f
represents
face field. The face field
f
can be evaluated using a variety of
schemes.

The Gamma scheme is a smooth and bounded blend between the
second-order central differencing (CD) scheme and the first order
upwind differencing (UD) scheme. CD is used wherever it satisfies the
boundedness requirements, and UD is used wherever CD is unbounded.
In an attempt to preserve boundedness with reasonable accuracy,
blended differencing (BD) scheme is used to combine UD and CD.
( )( ) ( )
CD
f
UD
f f
+ = 1 (2)
OpenFOAM has several implementations of the Gamma differencing
scheme to select the blending coefficient . The smooth transition
between the CD and UD schemes is controlled by a blending
coefficient . The smaller value the sharper switch and the larger value
the smoother switch between the schemes. For good resolution, this
value should be kept as low as possible, while higher values are more
numerically stable.

To the steady flow problem the dissipation terms of RANS Equations
are evaluated by taking the gradient of the resulting gradient field. And
the gradient term is performed using the standard method of applying
Gausss theorem to the volume integral. The explicit source terms are
incorporated into an equation simply as a field of values.

The multi-reference frame solver (MRFSimpleFoam) is developed to
simulate the rotational parts and is available as part of OpenFOAM.
The standard k- model with wall functions is used. In this case one
frame attributed to different parts of geometry is defined. And there are
two parts of fluid: one is surrounding the rotating propeller blades and
the remaining is stationary.

Structure of OpenFOAM

OpenFOAM is a C++ library primarily to create executables, known as
applications. Based on the standard applications provided in
OpenFOAM, the user applications can be created and organized as Fig.
2. In the working directory the source code is called podpropeller.C
and the header file with .H file extension are included. Each class used
in the source code requires a class declaration contained in this .H
header file. The Make subdirectory must contain two files, called files
and options. The file options defines the full directory path to locate
header files and library files used in the source code. The file files
defines the full list of .C source files. The wmake command is executed
to compile the source code.


Fig. 2: Directory structure of application

In OpenFOAM the format for input/output file is flexible. In the present
study, the software GAMBIT is used to generate mesh and define
boundary conditions. The mesh file is then exported and converted by
OpenFOAM converter to generate the mesh file and other input data
757
files which define initial condition, boundary condition, moving frame
condition, differential schemes etc. required by OpenFOAM. These
files are saved in pod-propeller directories.

The software Fluent is used as postprocessing software in this study to
obtain the performance results and display the detail flow information
around the podded propeller.

Geometrical Model

The podded propeller considered in this study was designed at
Shanghai Jiao Tong University (SJTU). The experiments were
conducted at the cavitation tunnel of SJTU. This podded propeller is a
puller-type podded propeller, which means that the propeller is fixed in
front of the strut. The geometry parameters of the podded propeller
shown in Fig. 3 are defined as follows,

Number of Blades: 4
Diameter of Propeller: D = 0.24m
Pitch Ratio: (P/D)
r = 0.7
= 1.270
Height of Strut 0.19m



Fig. 3: Podded propeller model

The geometric model is set up by software GAMBIT. The sketch of the
flow domain is shown in Fig. 4. The whole podded propeller is laid
inside one big cylindrical domain. The upstream inlet is located at 2D
ahead of the propeller. The downstream outlet is located at the 5D
behind the propeller. The length of the computational domain is 7D,
and the diameter of the cylindrical computational domain is 5D.


Fig. 4: Sketch of computational domain

In order to define all boundary conditions correctly for OpenFOAM,
there are two fluid parts defined in GAMBIT for the computational
domain. The propeller part is surrounded by a small cylinder as shown
in Fig. 5. The close look of the local domain near the podded propeller
is shown in Fig. 6. The fluid inside the small cylinder is defined as a
rotating zone in GAMBIT so that the boundary conditions on the
propeller blades can be correctly captured and converted to
OpenFOAM. The rest of the fluid is stationary.

Fig. 5: Different fluid parts and boundary conditions

Fig. 6: The close look of the local domain near propeller

Grid

The grid used in the open-water podded propeller case is generated by
the GAMBIT software, and so are the boundary conditions. The mesh
data are then exported as a file with .msh extension. There is a
converter in OpenFOAM toolbox to convert the GAMBIT mesh data to
the required grid data and boundary conditions.

The surface grids are shown in Fig. 7. The grid dependence in
simulating the podded propeller case was studied in authors previous
work (Li et al., 2009). Based on the grid density from the previous
study, the grid points in the present study consist of 5,000 on the blade
surface, 8,000 on the strut surface, and 1,335,726 in the entire
computational domain. Specifically, the grid size near the leading edge
and trailing edge of the propeller are controlled by the size function in
GAMBIT in order to correctly capture the flow information.


Fig. 7: Surface grids
758
Boundary Conditions

In order to capture the rotating boundary condition by OpenFOAM
converter, the following boundary conditions are specified in GAMBIT:

Inlet: Velocity_inlet
Outlet: Pressure_outlet
Farfield: Velocity_inlet
Propeller: Wall
Strut & Pod: Wall
Slideface: Interior

which are corresponding to the boundary conditions shown in Fig. 5. It
is noted that the Slideface is the surface of the small cylinder
surrounding the propeller and its type is defined as interior. This is a
virtual interface used to capture the moving boundary of the propeller
blades.

The podded propeller rotates along z-axis. After the GAMBIT mesh file
is converted by OpenFOAM converter, the boundary conditions are
specified on each boundary of the domain for OpenFOAM, which can
be described as follows:

Inflow boundary condition

low
w v u w v u
inf
) , , ( ) , , ( = , 0 =

z
p


Outflow boundary condition

0
) , , (
=

z
w v u


Far field boundary condition

low
w v u w v u
inf
) , , ( ) , , ( = , 0 =

n
p


Propeller blade boundary condition

0 = r q
r
v
r


Solid boundary condition except propeller blades

0 = n q
r r
, 0 =

n
p


where ) , , ( w v u q =
r
, and
v
is angular velocity vector and r
r
is position
vector.

COMPUTATIONAL RESULTS

Validations

The present OpenFOAM code and the numerical algorithms are
validated by comparing the results with those measured at SJTU and
obtained using Fluent. More detailed results, including experimental
data, Fluent results and grid dependence studies can be found in
authors previous work (Li et al., 2007; 2009). The following parameter
and coefficients are defined to describe the numerical results discussed
hereafter:
Advance ratio:
nD
V
J
0
=
Thrust coefficient:
4 2
D n
T
Kt

=
Torque coefficient:
5 2
D n
Q
Kq

=
Efficiency:

2
J
Kq
Kt
=

where T is the thrust, Q is the torque, is the fluid density, n is the
propeller rotating speed, D is the diameter of the propeller, and V
0
is the
uniform inflow speed.

A puller-type podded propeller at zero degree angle of attack subject to
the uniform inflow is first considered. It is noted that the results
obtained using OpenFOAM is based on the quasi-steady approach, and
the results obtained by Fluent is based on mixing plane approach. The
hydrodynamic performance results of the propeller including the thrust
and torque coefficients K
tp
, K
q
predicted by OpenFOAM and Fluent are
shown in Fig. 8, respectively. The corresponding experimental
measurement is also plotted in Fig. 8. One can observe from Fig. 8 that
OpenFOAM is sufficient accurate and can be used in practice.

J
K
t
p
,
1
0
K
q
0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
OpenFOAM
Fluent
exp.
10Kq
Ktp


Fig. 8: Hydrodynamics performance curve of propeller

Fig. 9 shows the pressure contours on the blade surfaces at advance
ratio J = 0.6. Fig. 10 shows the pressure contours on all solid surfaces
of the podded propeller at J = 0.8. For the lower advance ratio, the
attack angle of inflow increases, so the propeller load increases. By
comparing the pressure contours on the back face of the propeller
blades at J = 0.8 with these at J = 0.6, one can observe that the pressure
near the leading edge of the back blade face is higher at J = 0.8 than
that at J = 0.6, which further demonstrates that the load decreases with
the increase of the advance ratio.

The velocity and pressure contours in the center plane are shown in Fig.
11 and Fig. 12, respectively, for J=0.8. It can be observed from Fig. 11
that the flow is accelerated after it passes the propeller plane. Due to the
block of the strut, the increase of the flow velocity on the top of the
propeller is not as larger as that on the bottom. After the strut the flow
is accelerated further. The wake is observed clearly after the pod. It can
be observed from Fig. 12 that the strut produces a force that is opposite
to the thrust of the propeller. The reason is that the inflow approaches
to the strut with an angle of attack due to the existence of the propeller
in front of the strut.
759




Front blade face

Back blade face

Fig. 9: Pressure contours of podded propeller at J=0.6



Fig. 10: Pressure contours of podded propeller at J=0.8



Fig. 11: Velocity contours in the center plane of podded propeller at
J=0.8



Fig. 12: Pressure contours in the center plane of podded propeller at
J=0.8

Interaction between Propeller and Strut

The total force and force components are shown in Table 1, where K
t
is
the total thrust coefficient, K
tp
is the thrust coefficient of the propeller,
and K
ts
is the thrust coefficient of the strut. It can be seen from Table 1
that the influences of the strut on the total force become more obvious
with the increase of the advance ratio J. The force ratio of the strut
force over the total force is about 8.3% at J=1.0. This result shows that
it is very important to study the influence of the strut to the propeller at
the high advance ratio case in the design of the podded propeller.

Table 1: Comparison of force components

J 0.6 0.8 1.0
K
tp
0.319 0.213 0.118
K
ts
-0.014 -0.011 -0.009
K
t
0.305 0.202 0.109
K
ts
/K
t
4.5% 5.1 8.3%


In order to study the influences of the strut on the performance of the
podded propeller, the open-water performance of a single propeller is
simulated. According to the recommendation of the 23
rd
ITTC
committee, the hub influence can be ignored if it is taken as the one
shown in Fig. 13. The same numerical model and grid generation
technique as these described above for the podded propeller case are
used for this single propeller case.


Fig. 13: Single propeller model

The velocity contours in the center plane are shown in Fig. 14 for J=0.8.
By comparing the velocity contours plotted in Fig. 11 and Fig. 14, one
760
can find that the velocity contour patterns are quite different for the
podded propeller case and the single propeller case. Without the block
influence of the strut the wake flow behind the single propeller is
almost symmetric about the propeller axis.




Fig. 14: Velocity contours in the center plane of single propeller
at J=0.8

The comparison of the hydrodynamic performances between the
podded propeller and the single propeller is plotted in Fig. 15. It can be
seen from Fig. 15 that the podded propeller has larger values in both
thrust coefficient and torque coefficient for all advance ratios in
comparison to the single propeller due to the block effect of the strut. In
addition, the increase of the thrust of the podded propeller is more
dominant at higher advance ratio, where the gain in the propeller thrust
is much larger than the drag induced by the strut. The comparison of
the propulsion efficiencies between the podded propeller and the
single propeller is plotted in Fig. 16. It can be seen from Fig. 16 that the
efficiency varies with advance ratio J. The efficiency of the single
propeller is higher than that of the podded propeller at lower advance
ratio, and it is opposite at the higher advance ratio.

J
K
t
p
,
1
0
K
q
0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
with strut
without strut
Ktp
10Kq

Fig. 15: Comparison of the hydrodynamic performance
with and without strut


CONCLUSIONS

A new numerical model for evaluating the viscous flow around the
podded propeller has been developed in the OpenFOAM CFD platform.
The model has been validated against the experimental data obtained at
Shanghai Jiao Tong University and the numerical results obtained by
the authors using Fluent. It has been shown that the OpenFOAM CFD
toolbox can predict the hydrodynamic performance of the podded
propeller with sufficient accuracy.

J
p
r
o
p
u
l
s
i
o
n
e
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
0.5
0.55
0.6
0.65
0.7
0.75
with strut
without strut

Fig. 16: Comparison of the propulsion efficiency
with and without the strut


Podded propellers have recently been widely used in modern
commercial ships due to their relatively high efficiency and sea-
keeping ability. It is important to study the performance of this new-
type of propulsion. The interaction between the strut and the propeller
and the effect of the strut on the hydrodynamic performance are
analyzed in this study by comparing the performance of the podded
propeller and the single propeller. Numerical results show that the
podded propeller has slightly larger values in both thrust coefficient and
torque coefficient for all advance ratios in comparison to the single
propeller due to the block effect of the strut. The gain in the propeller
thrust due to the strut is larger than the drag induced by the strut at high
advance ratio. The efficiency of the single propeller is higher than that
of the podded propeller at lower advance ratio, and it is opposite at the
higher advance ratio.

The OpenFOAM CFD toolbox is able to generate good computational
results in an efficient way for the simulation of the flow around a
podded propeller. Furthermore, the open-source OpenFOAM common
platform can facilitate international collaborations. The future work
will concentrate on further developing OpenFOAM, including
implementing the mixing-plane approach and moving grid approach for
true unsteady flow simulation in OpenFOAM, and compare the results
with these obtained already using Fluent with these two approaches.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The present research was partially supported by the National 863-Plan
of China (Project Contract 2008AA09Z313). All supports are greatly
acknowledged. The first author would also like to acknowledge George
Mason University for hosting her as a visiting scholar. The authors
would also like to thank Prof. Chen-Jun Yang for his valuable
discussions and suggestions.

REFERENCES

Ghassemi, H, Allievi, A. (1999), A Computational Method for the
Analysis of Fluid Flow and Hydrodynamic Performance of Conventional
and Podded Propulsion Systems, Oceanic Engineering International,
761
Vol. 3, No 1, pp. 101-115.
Kinnas, S.A., Gu, H., Gupa, A. and Lee, H.S.(2004). Numerical prediction
of the performance podded propulsors and ducted propellers, The 13th
offshore symposium: The Application of Emerging Technologies
Offshore, Texas Section of The Society of Naval Architects & Marine
Engineers, Houston, TX, pp. 19-34.
Li, W, Wang, L, Yang, C.J. and Yang, C. (2009). Study on Steady
Hydrodynamics Performance of Pod-Propeller, Journal of Shanghai
Jiao Tong University, Vol. 43, No 2.
Li, Wei, Wang, Guoqiang, Wang, Lei (2007). Numerical Simulation on
viscous flow of propeller, Journal of Shanghai Jiao Tong University,
Vol. 41, No 7.
Ma, C., Qian, Z.F., Yang,C.J., Zhang, X., Du, D., Huang, S. (2006).
Numerical prediction of unsteady performance of podded propellers,
Proceeding of T-POD 2006, France.
Mewis, F. (1998), Podded Drives im Vormarsch hydrodynamicse
Aspekte, Schiff & Hafen, Vol. 50, No 11.
Poustoshniy, V A, Haberzettel, F I (1998), Investgation of Flow Around
Pushing Thrusters, Proceeding of ISC98, Section B, St. Petersburg.
Sanchez-Caja, A. Rautaheimo, P, and Siikonen, T. (1999). Computation of
the incompressible viscous flow around a tractor thruster using a sliding-
mesh technique, Proceeding of Seventh International Conference on
Numerical Ship Hydrodynamics, France.
Yang, C.J., Qian, Z. and Ma, C. (2003). Effect of pod on performance of
propeller, Journal of Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Vol. 37, No 8, pp.
1229-1233.

762