Upload
others
View
4
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Benchmarkon the numerical simulation
of a tube bundle vibration under cross flowFabien Huvelin (University of Lille & EDF R&D)
Marcus Vinicius Girao de Morais (University of Cergy-Pontoise & CEA)Franck Baj (CEA)Jean-Paul Magnaud (CEA)Elisabeth Longatte (EDF R&D )M’hamed Souli (University of Lille)
2
INTRODUCTION
CREATIF Program :Comprehension of the vibratory Response of an Array of Tubes in Interaction
with a Fluid.
water
steam
3
Experiment AMOVI (CEA)
L=70 mm
H=100 mm
D=12.15 mm
Strain gage
• 24 fixed tubes (Plexiglas, f>300Hz)• 1 moving tube (steel, f=14.3Hz)• P/D = 1.44• Single phase flow (flow rate from 0 to 5 m3.h-1) contact : [email protected]
4
CONTENTS
1 – Methodology
2 – Real case (2D model)
3 – Numerical case (2D model)
4 – Real case (3D model)
6
1.1 Boundary conditionsMETHODOLOGY | REAL CASE (2D MODEL) | NUMERICAL CASE (2D MODEL) | REAL CASE (3D MODEL)
Boundary conditions at fluid-structure interface
⋅==
⋅ nu
nu
f
f
s
s
σσ
Partitioned coupling
Coupling scheme
LoadDisplacement/Velocity
FLUIDSOLVER
STRUCTURESOLVER
7
1.2 ToolsMETHODOLOGY | REAL CASE (2D MODEL) | NUMERICAL CASE (2D MODEL) | REAL CASE (3D MODEL)
Structure solver (rigid body)
• 1 degree of freedom oscillator for EDF tool• Finite element method with Lagrangian formulation for CEA tool
Fluid solver
• Finite volume method with Eulerian formulation (EDF tool)• Finite element method with Eulerian formulation (CEA tool)⇒ Use of an ALE technique to follow the structure interface (both cases)
Partitioned procedure
• Fluid solver needs structure data at time tn+1
• Structure solver needs fluid data at time tn+1
⇒ Prediction : the position of the structure interface at time tn+1
8
1.3 Improved serial staggered procedureMETHODOLOGY | REAL CASE (2D MODEL) | NUMERICAL CASE (2D MODEL) | REAL CASE (3D MODEL)
Fluid solverMesh updating
Structure solver
Prediction of the fluid structure interface
next
tim
e st
ep
Initialization
nstructure
nstructure
npredfluid VtXX
21, ∆+=+
Prediction of the fluid forceacting on the structure
npredstructurefluid
npredstructure FFF ,1, 2 −=+
(Piperno et al. ,2001)
10
2.1 Geometry (experiment AMOVI, CEA)IN
LET
FLO
W
WALL
WALLMETHODOLOGY | REAL CASE (2D MODEL) | NUMERICAL CASE (2D MODEL) | REAL CASE (3D MODEL)
FREE
OU
TLET
MOVINGTUBE
11
2.1 Geometry (experiment AMOVI, CEA)METHODOLOGY | REAL CASE (2D MODEL) | NUMERICAL CASE (2D MODEL) | REAL CASE (3D MODEL)
WALL
INLE
T FL
OW
WALL
FREE
OU
TLET
MOVINGTUBE
12
2.2 ParametersMETHODOLOGY | REAL CASE (2D MODEL) | NUMERICAL CASE (2D MODEL) | REAL CASE (3D MODEL)
12.15(mm)Diameter
0.298(kg.m-1)Mass
0.25(%)Natural damping
14.3(Hz)Natural frequency
Structure properties
10-3(kg.m-1.s-1)Dynamic viscosity
103(kg.m-3)Density
Fluid properties
[0.03 ; 0.15](m.s-1)Inlet velocity1.44(-)P/D
[1200;6000](-)Reynolds number[0.5 ; 2.8](-)Reduced velocity
13
2.3 Quiescent fluid : water frequencyMETHODOLOGY | REAL CASE (2D MODEL) | NUMERICAL CASE (2D MODEL) | REAL CASE (3D MODEL)
11.8
Analytical
11.55
EDF
11.63
CEA
(Hz)Water frequency
14
2.4 Quiescent fluid : water dampingMETHODOLOGY | REAL CASE (2D MODEL) | NUMERICAL CASE (2D MODEL) | REAL CASE (3D MODEL)
1.18
Analytical
1.215
EDF
1.216
CEA
(%)Water damping
extrapolation
15
2.5 Vibration under cross-flowMETHODOLOGY | REAL CASE (2D MODEL) | NUMERICAL CASE (2D MODEL) | REAL CASE (3D MODEL)
Re = 1200 Re = 3000 Re = 4800
• Numerical problem ?
• Physical problem ?
17
3.1 ParametersMETHODOLOGY | REAL CASE (2D MODEL) | NUMERICAL CASE (2D MODEL) | REAL CASE (3D MODEL)
10.00(mm)Diameter0.298(kg)Mass
0.04372.5
(%)(Hz)
Natural dampingNatural frequency
Structure properties
10-3(kg.m-1.s-1)Dynamic viscosity
103(kg.m-3)Density
Fluid properties
[0.001 ; 0.035](m.s-1)Inlet velocity1.44(-)P/D
[30 ; 1200](-)Reynolds number[0.1 ; 4.5](-)Reduced velocity
18
3.2 DisplacementMETHODOLOGY | REAL CASE (2D MODEL) | NUMERICAL CASE (2D MODEL) | REAL CASE (3D MODEL)
)( 13.0m.s 001.0 -1
−==
red
inlet
vv
)( 62.2m.s 02.0 -1
−==
red
inlet
vv
)( 93.3m.s 03.0 -1
−==
red
inlet
vv
19
3.3 Frequency and dampingMETHODOLOGY | REAL CASE (2D MODEL) | NUMERICAL CASE (2D MODEL) | REAL CASE (3D MODEL)
21
4.1 GeometryMETHODOLOGY | REAL CASE (2D MODEL) | NUMERICAL CASE (2D MODEL) | REAL CASE (3D MODEL)
• 7.5 Millions of elements • 2048 processors
22
4.2 Preliminary resultsMETHODOLOGY | REAL CASE (2D MODEL) | NUMERICAL CASE (2D MODEL) | REAL CASE (3D MODEL)
Displacement with 3D simulation
Displacement with 2D simulation
Reynolds = 3000 and DNS
23
4.3 3D effectMETHODOLOGY | REAL CASE (2D MODEL) | NUMERICAL CASE (2D MODEL) | REAL CASE (3D MODEL)
3D effects
Pressure Velocity
24
CONCLUSION
Catch the 3 behaviors of the structure
Used of an extrapolation method for the damping
Over-estimation of force fluid with 2D simulation (3D simulation is required)
3D simulation for numerical case
3D simulation with turbulent model for real case
Comparison of the real case to the experiment AMOVI (CEA)