This paper focuses on the development of a three-dimensional panel method in time and frequency domains combined with the finite element method for analyzing the hydroelastic responses of rotating marine propellers in the wake of ships. A fully non-penetration boundary condition imposed on the deformed blade surface is conducted, in which the corrections of both the incoming flow velocities and the normal vectors imposed on the deformed and undeformed blade surface are taken into account. The added-mass and -damping matrices due to strongly coupled fluid-structure interaction are considered. Results of the present method are compared with experimental data available in the literature. It is observed that the fully non-penetration boundary condition applied on the deformed blade surface should be imposed to predict the unsteady performance of elastic propellers, which is due to the change of the added damping predicted by considering different non-penetration boundary conditions.
HeXDHongYWangRG.Hydroelastic optimisation of a composite marine propeller in a non-uniform wake. Ocean Eng2012; 39: 14–23.
7.
HongYHeXDWangRG, et al. Dynamic responses of composite marine propeller in spatially wake. Polym Polym Compos2011; 19: 405–412.
8.
MartioJSánchez-CajaASiikonenT. Evaluation of propeller virtual mass and damping coefficients by URANS-method. In: International Symposium on Marine Propulsors, Austin, Texas, USA, June 2015.
9.
MartioJSánchez-CajaASiikonenT.Open and ducted propeller virtual mass and damping coefficients by URANS-method in straight and oblique flow. Ocean Eng2017; 130: 92–102.
10.
NeugebauerJAbdel-MaksoudMBraunM. Fluid-Structure interaction of propellers. In: IUTAM Symposium on Fluid-Structure Interaction in Ocean EngineeringJune 2008, 8: pp.191–204.
11.
LampeTRadtkeLAbdel-MaksoudM, et al. A partitioned solution approach for the simulation of dynamic behaviour and acoustic signature of flexible cavitating marine propellers. Ocean Eng2020; 197: 106854–106854.
12.
LinHJTsaiJF.Analysis of underwater free vibrations of a composite propeller blade. J Reinforced Plast Compos2008; 27: 447–458.
13.
MaljaarsPKaminskiMden BestenH.Boundary element modelling aspects for the hydro-elastic analysis of flexible marine propellers. J Mar Sci Eng2018; 6: 67–67.
14.
MaljaarsPJGrassoNden BestenJH, et al. BEM–FEM coupling for the analysis of flexible propellers in non-uniform flows and validation with full-scale measurements. J Fluid Struct2020; 95: 102946–102946.
15.
RadtkeLLampeTAbdel-MaksoudM, et al. A partitioned solution approach for the simulation of the dynamic behaviour of flexible marine propellers. Ship Technol Res2020; 67: 37–50.
16.
ZhiqiangSRixiuG.Hydroelasticity of rotating bodies—theory and application. Mar Struct1996; 9(6): 631–646.
17.
ZouDJiaoCTaN, et al. Theoretical study on the axial excitation force transmission characteristics of marine propellers. Ocean Eng2019; 189: 106364–106364.
18.
ZouDZhangJLiuG, et al. Study on characteristics of propeller exciting force induced by axial vibration of propulsion shafting: theoretical analysis. Ocean Eng2020; 202: 106942–106942.
19.
ZouDZhangJTaN, et al. The hydroelastic analysis of marine propellers with consideration of the effect of the shaft. Ocean Eng2017; 131: 95–106.
20.
ZouDZhangJTaN, et al. Study on the axial exciting force characteristics of marine propellers considered the effect of the shaft and blade elasticity. Appl Ocean Res2019; 89: 141–153.
21.
LiJQuYChenY, et al. Investigation of added mass and damping coefficients of underwater rotating propeller using a frequency-domain panel method. J Sound Vib2018; 432: 602–620.
22.
LiJQuYHuaH.Hydroelastic analysis of underwater rotating elastic marine propellers by using a coupled BEM-FEM algorithm. Ocean Eng2017; 146: 178–191.
23.
LiJQuYZhangZ, et al. Parametric analysis on hydroelastic behaviors of hydrofoils and propellers using a strongly coupled finite element/panel method. J Mar Sci Technol2020; 25: 148–161.
24.
XieZZhuW. An investigation on the lubrication characteristics of floating ring bearing with consideration of multi-coupling factors. Mech Syst Signal Proc2022; 162: 108086.
25.
XieZWangXZhuW. Theoretical and experimental exploration into the fluid structure coupling dynamic behaviors towards water-lubricated bearing with axial asymmetric grooves. Mech Syst Signal Proc2022; YMSSP_108624.
26.
QuFChenJSunD, et al. A new all-speed flux scheme for the Euler equations. Comput Math Appl2019; 77: 1216–1231.
27.
LiJRaoZSuJ, et al. A numerical method for predicting the hydroelastic response of marine propellers. Appl Ocean Res2018; 74: 188–204.
28.
MorinoLKuoCC.Subsonic potential aerodynamics for complex configurations: a general theory. AIAA J1974; 12: 191–197.
29.
JessupSD. An experimental investigation of viscous aspects of propeller blade flow. Catholic University of America, Washington, DC, 1989.
30.
HoshinoT.Hydrodynamic analysis of propellers in unsteady flow using a surface panel method. J Soc Naval Architects Jpn1993; 1993(174): 71–87.
31.
HoshinoT. Experimental data for unsteady panel calculations and comparisons(Seiun-Maru HSP). In: Proceedings of the 22nd ITTC propulsion committee propeller RANS/Panel method workshop proceedings, Grenoble, France, 1998, pp.5–6.
32.
RaoZQYangCJ.Numerical prediction of effective wake field for a submarine based on a hybrid approach and an RBF interpolation. Journal of Hydrodynamics Ser B2017; 29: 691–701.
33.
YangYTuHSongL, et al. Research on accurate prediction of the container ship resistance by RBFNN and other machine learning algorithms. J Mar Sci Eng2021; 9: 376.
