基于CFD评估尺度效应对V型网板水动力的影响

刘景彬; 唐浩; 许柳雄; 孙秋阳; 刘伟; 银利强; 张锋

doi:10.12131/20210355

基于CFD评估尺度效应对V型网板水动力的影响

doi: 10.12131/20210355

刘景彬^1,,
唐浩^{1, 2, ,},
许柳雄^{1, 2},
孙秋阳¹,
刘伟¹,
银利强¹,
张锋¹

1.
上海海洋大学海洋科学学院，上海 201306
2.
大洋渔业资源可持续开发省部共建教育部重点实验室/国家远洋渔业工程技术研究中心，上海 201306

基金项目: 国家自然科学基金项目 (31902426)；上海市青年科技英才扬帆计划 (19YF1419800)；农业农村部南极海洋生物资源开发利用项目 (D8002-17-0109)

详细信息

作者简介:
刘景彬 (1995—)，男，硕士研究生，研究方向为渔具渔法。E-mail: 18340803167@163.com

通讯作者:
唐　浩 (1988—)，男，副教授，博士，从事渔具水动力性能研究。E-mail: htang@shou.edu.cn

中图分类号: S 971.4
计量
- 文章访问数: 187
- HTML全文浏览量: 37
- PDF下载量: 3
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2021-11-28
- 修回日期: 2022-01-06
- 录用日期: 2022-02-07
- 网络出版日期: 2022-02-28

Evaluation of scale effect on hydrodynamic force of V-shaped otter board based on CFD

LIU Jingbin^1
,,
TANG Hao^{1, 2
, ,},
XU Liuxiong^{1, 2},
SUN Qiuyang¹,
LIU Wei¹,
YIN Liqiang¹,
ZHANG Feng¹

1.
College of Marine Sciences, Shanghai Ocean University, Shanghai 201306, China
2.
Key Laboratory of Sustainable Exploitation of Oceanic Fisheries Resources/National Engineering Research Center for Oceanic Fisheries, Shanghai 201306, China

摘要

摘要: 按相似准则等比例缩小网板构建物理模型测定其水动力，是研究网板水动力特征的主要方式。基于V型网板，利用计算流体力学 (Computational fluid dynamics, CFD) 对比分析了3种尺度比 (1∶2、1∶3和1∶4) 的网板和3种厚度 (2、5和10 mm) 下的升、阻力系数及流场分布，并将其与模型试验结果进行对比，探究不同物理模型尺度对估算网板水动力的影响。结果表明：1) 随着冲角的增加，各尺度的网板阻力系数逐渐增大，升力系数先增大后减小，升阻比逐渐减小；2) 在30°冲角之后，网板后部出现明显的分离涡，造成模拟升力减小；3) 随着网板模型尺度的增大，网板表面边界层分离效果和尾流区流场分离涡逐渐增强，网板升、阻力及升阻比亦呈增大趋势。网板厚度对流场及升、阻力影响较小，最大升力系数相对于模型试验平均误差为4.97%；4) 随着模型尺度增大，网板水动力的预测误差逐渐减小。
- V型网板 /
- 尺度效应 /
- CFD模拟 /
- 水动力 /
- 流场分布
Abstract: The main way to study the hydrodynamic characteristics of the otter board is to build a physical model to measure its hydrodynamic characteristics based on the similarity law. In this study, we analyzed the lift, drag coefficient and flow field distribution of V-type otter board with three scale ratios (1∶2, 1∶3 and 1∶4) and three thickness (2, 5 and 10 mm), then we compared them with the corresponding model test results to explore the influence of different physical model scales on hydrodynamic estimation of the otter boards. The results show that: 1) With the increase of the angle of attack, the drag coefficient of otter board with all scales gradually increased, while the lift coefficient first increased and then decreased, and the lift-drag ratio decreased gradually. 2) When the angle of attack reached 30°, the apparent separation vortex appeared at the back of the otter board, resulting in the decrease of simulated lift force. 3) With the increase of the otter board model scale, the separation effect of the boundary layer on the otter board surface and the separation vortex of the flow field in the wake area increased gradually, and the lift, drag and lift-drag ratio of the otter board also showed an increasing tendency. The thickness of the mesh plate had little effect on the flow field, lift and resistance, and the average error of the maximum lift coefficient relative to the model test was 4.97%. As the model scale increased, the prediction error of hydrodynamic force decreased gradually.
- V-type otter board /
- Scale effect /
- CFD simulation /
- Hydrodynamic /
- Flow field distribution

HTML全文

图 1 网板参数结构示意图

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of structural parameters of otter board models

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 模拟计算区域

Figure 2. Domain of simulation calculation

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 网板冲角为40°时周围网格划分

Figure 3. Computational grid partitions around otter board at angle of attack of 40°

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 网板模型动水槽试验

Figure 4. Flume tank test of otter board model

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 V型网板不同冲角下的升力系数、阻力系数与雷诺数的关系

Figure 5. Relationship between lift coefficient, drag coefficient and Reynolds number of V-type otter board at different angles of attack

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 网板模型试验和数值模拟水动力

Figure 6. Comparison of hydrodynamic force of model otter boards between flume tank test and numerical simulation

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 不同尺度比 (左)、厚度 (右) 水动力系数

Figure 7. Hydrodynamic coefficient of different scale ratio (Left) and thickness (Right)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 网板在不同冲角下的流场分布

Figure 8. Flow field distribution of otter board at different angles of attack

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 不同尺度比网板在40°冲角下的流场对比

Figure 9. Flow field comparison of otter board with different scales at 40° angle of attack

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 网板编号及试验参数

Table 1. Otter board number and experimental parameters

网板编号 Otter board No.	展弦比 λ Aspect ratio	板面夹角 Γ Dihedral angle/(°)	翼展 L Wing span/m	翼弦 C Chord/m	网板面积 S Area/m²	厚度 d Thickness/ mm	尺度比 Scale ratio	试验流速 Tested velocity/ (m·s⁻¹)	雷诺数 Reynolds number
1	0.5	10	0.232	0.464	0.102	2	1∶3	0.80	2.1×10⁵
2	0.5	10	0.350	0.690	0.240	2	1∶2	1.17	2.1×10⁵
3	0.5	10	0.174	0.348	0.060	2	1∶4	0.60	2.1×10⁵
4	0.5	10	0.232	0.464	0.102	5	1∶3	0.80	2.1×10⁵
5	0.5	10	0.232	0.464	0.102	10	1∶3	0.80	2.1×10⁵

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 不同尺度比和不同厚度网板水动力系数误差

Table 2. Hydraulic coefficient deviation of different scale ratio and thickness of otter board

	尺度比 Scale ratio			厚度 Thickness/mm
	1∶2	1∶3	1∶4	2	5	10
最大升力系数 Max lift coefficient	1.235	1.178	1.109	1.178	1.208	1.184
误差 Deviation	1.13	6.03	12.62	6.03	3.39	5.49
最大阻力系数 Max drag coefficient	1.211	1.138	1.068	1.138	1.134	1.146
误差 Deviation	1.48	7.99	15.07	7.99	8.37	7.24

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(31)

[1]	刘宏伟. 蝠翼式拖网网板的水动力特性研究 [D]. 大连: 大连理工大学, 2018: 1-9.
[2]	MELLIBOVSKY F, PRAT J, NOTTI E, et al. Testing otter board hydrodynamic performances in wind tunnel facilities[J]. Ocean Engin, 2015, 104: 52-62. doi: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.04.064
[3]	MELLIBOVSKY F, PRAT J, NOTTI E, et al. Otter board hydrodynamic performance testing in flume tank and wind tunnel facilities-Science Direct[J]. Ocean Engin, 2018, 149: 238-244. doi: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.12.034
[4]	刘健, 黄洪亮, 吴越, 等 2种立式曲面缝翼式网板水动力学性能的试验研究 [J]. 南方水产科学, 2015, 11(1): 68-74.
[5]	SU X, LU H S, FENG B, et al. Hydrodynamic characteristics of the double-winged otter board in the deep waters of the Mauritanian Sea[J]. Chin J Oceanol Limnol, 2018: 1417-1424.
[6]	YOU X X, HU F X, KUMAZAWA T, et al. Performance of new hyper-lift trawl door for both mid-water and bottom trawling [J]. Ocean Engin, 2020, 199:106989.
[7]	SALA A, FARRAN J, ANTONIJUAN J, et al. Performance and impact on the seabed of an existing- and an experimental-otter board: comparison between model testing and full-scale sea trials[J]. Fish Res, 2009, 100: 156-166. doi: 10.1016/j.fishres.2009.07.004
[8]	YOU X X, HU F X, Z X, et al. Effect of wingtip flow on hydrodynamic characteristics of cambered otter board [J]. Ocean Engin, 2021, 222:108611.
[9]	BALASH C, BLAKE W, STERLING D. Seeking maximum effectiveness and efficiency for large multi-sail penaeid otter boards [J/OL]. Ocean Engin, 2020, 200:107093.
[10]	宋科委, 郭春雨, 孙聪, 等. 实尺度船舶阻力计算及尺度效应研究[J]. 华中科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2021, 49(6): 74-80.
[11]	朴倉斗, 松田皎, 胡夫祥. 反り比の異なる湾曲板の流体特性に及ぼす底面の影響[J]. 日本水產學會誌, 1993, 59(4): 627-632.
[12]	XU Q C, HUANG L Y, LI X, et al. Parameter optimization of a rectangular cambered otter board using response surface method [J/OL]. Ocean Engin, 2021, 220: 108475.
[13]	CHU W H, CHEN G, YE X C, et al. Hydrodynamic performance and structural response characteristics of the double-slotted vertical cambered V-Type otter board[J]. Aquac Fish, 2020(5): 201-209.
[14]	XU Q C, HUANG L Y, ZHAO F F, et al. Study on the hydrodynamic characteristics of the rectangular V-type otter board using computational fluid dynamics[J]. Fish Sci, 2017, 83(2): 1-10.
[15]	刘宏伟, 赵云鹏, 毕春伟. 不同展弦比的矩形曲面网板水动力性能的数值模拟[C]//第十四届全国水动力学学术会议暨第二十八届全国水动力学研讨会文集(上册). 北京: 海洋出版社, 2017: 739-745.
[16]	TAKAHASHI Y, FUJIMORI Y, HU F, et al. Design of trawl otter boards using computational fluid dynamics[J]. Fish Res, 2015, 161: 400-407. doi: 10.1016/j.fishres.2014.08.011
[17]	YOU X X, HU F X, DONG S C, et al. Shape optimization approach for cambered otter board using neural network and multi-objective genetic algorithm.[J]. Appl Ocean Res, 2020, 100(C): 102148.
[18]	MATTHEW J, MCHUGH M K, BROADHURST D J, et al. Relative benthic disturbances of conventional and novel otter boards and ground gears[J]. Fish Sci, 2020, 86(6): 245-254.
[19]	刘志强, 许柳雄, 唐浩, 等. 立式双曲面网板水动力性能及流场可视化研究[J]. 水产学报, 2020, 44(8): 1360-1370.
[20]	李崇聪. V型网板水动力性能和数值模拟初步研究 [D]. 青岛: 中国海洋大学, 2012: 17-28.
[21]	SHIH T H, LIOU W W, SHABBIR A, et al. A new K-ε eddy viscosity model for high reynolds number turbulent flows[J]. Comput Fluids, 1995, 24(3): 227-238. doi: 10.1016/0045-7930(94)00032-T
[22]	刘志强. 中层网板水动力性能及流场可视化研究—以立式双曲面网板为例 [D]. 上海: 上海海洋大学, 2020: 34-51.
[23]	刘志强, 许柳雄, 唐浩, 等. 不同工作姿态下立式双曲面网板水动力及周围流场特性研究[J]. 南方水产科学, 2020, 16(2): 87-98. doi: 10.12131/20190221
[24]	朴倉斗, 松田皎, 東海正. タフト法による平板の周りの流れの可視化[J]. 日本水產學會誌, 1994, 60(2): 193-199. 朴倉斗, 松田皎, 東海正. タフト法による平板の周りの流れの可視化[J]. 日本水產學會誌, 1994, 60(2), 193-199.
[25]	朴倉斗, 松田皎, 胡夫祥. 縦横比の異なる平板の揚抗力特性に及ぼす底面の影響[J]. 日本水產學會誌, 1993, 59(1): 79-84.
[26]	SHEN X L, HU F X, KUMAZAWA T, et al. Hydrodynamic characteristics of a hyper-lift otter board with wing-end plates[J]. Fish Sci, 2015, 81(3): 1-10.
[27]	左玲玉, 司海清, 李耀, 等. 基于Richardson外推法的CFD离散误差分析 [J]. 指挥控制与仿真, 2022, 44(1): 58-62.
[28]	ROY C J, OBERKAMPF W L. Verification and validation in computational fluid dynamics[J]. Progr Aerospace Sci, 2002, 38(3): 209-272. doi: 10.1016/S0376-0421(02)00005-2
[29]	STERN F, WILSON R. Comprehensive approach to verification and validation of CFD simulations−Part 1: methodology and procedures[J]. ASME J Fluids Eng, 2002, 124(3): 810. doi: 10.1115/1.1492827
[30]	WILSON R V, STERB F, COLENAN H W, et al. Comprehensive approach to verification and validation of CFD simulations−Part 2: application for rans simulation of a cargo/container ship[J]. ASME J Fluids Eng, 2001, 123(4): 803-810. doi: 10.1115/1.1412236
[31]	康顺, 石磊, 戴丽萍, 等. CFD模拟的误差分析及网格收敛性研究[J]. 工程热物理学报, 2010, 31(12): 2009-2013.