Accurate and reliable numerical predictions of propeller performance are a fundamental aspect for any analysis and design of a modern propeller. Prediction of cavitation and of cavity extension is another important task, since cavitation is one of the crucial aspects that influences efficiency in addition to propagated noise and blade vibration and erosion. The validation of the numerical tools that support the design process, including open-source codes, is, consequently, essential. The public availability of measurements and observations which cover not only usual thrust and torque in open water conditions (including cavitation) but also unsteady functioning with pressure pulse measurements in the case of the Potsdam Propeller Test Case certainly represents an extremely useful source of information and an excellent chance for verification and validation purposes. In the present work, the prediction of the Potsdam Propeller Test Case propeller performance using the OpenFOAM computational fluid dynamics package is proposed. After a preliminary validation and calibration of the OpenFOAM native Schnerr–Sauer interphase mass transfer model for cavitating flow, based on the experimental results on a 2D NACA66Mod hydrofoil, open water propeller performance and cavitation predictions are carried out. The OpenFOAM results are finally compared both with the available experimental measurements and with calculations carried out with StarCCM+ and with a proprietary boundary element method code, in order to assess the accuracy and the overall capabilities of the open-source tools (from meshing to post-processing) available in the OpenFOAM package. The comparison, in addition to assessing the accuracy of the open-source approach, is aimed to verify its advantages and drawbacks with respect to widely used solvers and to further verify the reliability of traditional boundary element method approaches that are still widely adopted for design and optimization (thanks to their extremely higher computational efficiency) in a very demanding test case.
GaggeroSVillaDBrizzolaraS.RANS and panel method for unsteady propeller analysis. J Hydrodyn2010; 22(5): 564–569.
2.
GaggeroSVillaDVivianiM. An investigation on the discrepancies between RANS and BEM approaches for the prediction of marine propeller unsteady performance in strongly non-homogeneous wakes. In: Proceedings of ASME 33rd international conference on ocean, offshore and Arctic engineering (OMAE 2014), San Francisco, CA, 8–13 June 2014. New York: ASME.
3.
MorinoLKuoCC.Subsonic potential aerodynamic for complex configuration: a general theory. AIAA J1974; 12: 191–197.
4.
FineNEKinnasSA.A boundary-element method for the analysis of the flow around 3-D cavitating hydrofoils. J Ship Res1993; 37(3): 213–224.
5.
HsinCY.Development and analysis of panel methods for propellers in unsteady flows. PhD Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, 1990.
6.
VazGBosschersG. Modelling three dimensional sheet cavitation on marine propellers using a boundary element method. In: Proceedings of the international 6th symposium on cavitation (CAV2006), Wageningen, Netherlands, 11–15 September 2006.
7.
BertettaDBrizzolaraSGaggeroS. CPP propeller cavitation and noise optimization at different pitches with panel code and validation by cavitation tunnel measurements. Ocean Eng2012; 53: 177–195.
8.
GaggeroSRizzoCMTaniG. EFD and CFD design and analysis of a propeller in decelerating duct. Int J Rotat Mach2012; 2012: 823831.
9.
GaggeroSGonzalez-AdalidJPerez SobrinoM.Design of contracted and tip loaded propellers by using boundary element methods and optimization algorithms. Appl Ocean Res2016; 55: 102–129.
10.
GaggeroSTaniGVivianiM. A study on the numerical prediction of propellers cavitating tip vortex. Ocean Eng2014; 92: 137–161.
11.
BertettaDBrizzolaraSCanepaE. EFD and CFD characterization of a CLT propeller. Int J Rotat Mach2012; 2012: 348939.
12.
GaggeroSVivianiMTaniG. Comparison of different approaches for the design and analysis of ducted propellers. In: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on computational methods in marine engineering (MARINE 2013) (ed BrinkmannBWriggersP), Hamburg, 29–31 May 2013.
13.
LiDQ. Prediction of non-cavitating and cavitating performance of a SVA Potsdam propeller. In: Proceedings of the second international symposium on marine propulsors—workshop: propeller performance (SMP 2011), Hamburg, 17–18 June 2011. Institute for Fluid Dynamics and Ship Theory (FDS) - Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), German Society for Maritime Technology (STG).
14.
SipilaTSiikonenTSaistoI. FINFLO RANS-predictions for propeller performance. In: Proceedings of the second international symposium on marine propulsors—workshop: propeller performance (SMP 2011), Hamburg, 17–18 June 2011. Institute for Fluid Dynamics and Ship Theory (FDS) - Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), German Society for Maritime Technology (STG).
15.
MorgutMNobileE. Numerical predictions of the cavitating and non-cavitating flow around the model scale propeller PPTC. In: Proceedings of the second international symposium on marine propulsors—workshop: propeller performance (SMP 2011), Hamburg, 17–18 June 2011. Institute for Fluid Dynamics and Ship Theory (FDS) - Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), German Society for Maritime Technology (STG).
16.
MorgutMNobileE.Numerical predictions of cavitating flow around model scale propellers by CFD and advanced model calibration. Int J Rotat Mach2012; 2012: 618180.
17.
MorgutMNobileE.Influence of grid type and turbulence model on the numerical prediction of the flow around marine propellers working in uniform inflow. Ocean Eng2012; 42: 26–34.
18.
VazGHallyDHuuvaT. Cavitating flow calculations for the E779A propeller in open water and behind conditions: code comparison and solution validation. In: Proceedings of the fourth international symposium on marine propulsors (SMP 2015), Austin, TX, 31 May–4 June 2015.
19.
FerrandoMGaggeroSVillaD.Open source computations of planing hull resistance. Trans RINA: Int J Small Cr Technol2015; 157: 83–98. DOI: 10.3940/rina.ijsct.2015.b2.172.
20.
ShenZWanDCarricaPM. RANS simulations of free maneuvers with moving rudders and propellers using overset grids in OpenFOAM. In: Proceedings of the workshop on verification and validation of ship maneuvering simulation methods (SIMMAN 2014), Copenhagen, 810 December 2014. 8–10 December 2014..
21.
WoolliscroftMMakiK. Simulations of static and dynamic maneuvering tests using a linearized URANS method. In: Proceedings of the workshop on verification and validation of ship maneuvering simulation methods (SIMMAN 2014), Copenhagen, 8–10 December 2014.
HeinkeHJLubkeL. The SMP 2011 workshop on cavitation and propeller performance—case 2, propeller open water performance and cavitation behavior. In:Proceedings of the second international symposium on marine propulsors—workshop: propeller performance (SMP 2011), Hamburg, 17–18 June 2011. Institute for Fluid Dynamics and Ship Theory (FDS) - Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), German Society for Maritime Technology (STG).
24.
ShenYTDimotakisPE. The influence of surface cavitation on hydrodynamic force. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ATTC, St. Johns, NL, Canada, 8–11 August 1989, pp.44–53.
25.
SauerJ.Instationar kavitierende stromungen - ein neues modell, basierend auf front capturing (VOF) und blasenddynamik. PhD Thesis, University of Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, 2000.
26.
SauerJSchnerrG. Unsteady cavitating flows—a new cavitation model based on a modified front capturing method and bubble dynamics. In: Proceedings of the 2000 ASME fluid engineering summer conference, Boston, MA, 11–15 June 2000. New York: ASME.
27.
SchnerrGSauerJ. Physical and numerical modeling of unsteady cavitation dynamics. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on multiphase flow, New Orleans, LA, 27 May–1 June 2001. Karlsruhe: Karlsruhe Institute of Technology.
GaggeroSVillaDVivianiM. The Kriso container ship (KCS) test case: an open source overview. In: Proceedings of the VI international conference on computational methods in marine engineering (MARINE 2015), Rome, 15–17 June 2015. Barcelona, Spain: International Center for Numerical Methods in Engineering (CIMNE).
30.
MerkleCLFengJBuelowPEO. Computational modeling of the dynamics of sheet cavitation. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international symposium on cavitation, Grenoble, 7–10 April 1998.
31.
KunzRFBogerDAStinebringDR. A preconditioned Navier–Stokes method for two-phase flows with application to cavitation prediction. Comput Fluids2000; 29(8): 849–875.
32.
SinghalAKAthavaleMMLiH. Mathematical basis and validation of the full cavitation model. J Fluid Eng: T ASME2002; 124(3): 617–624.
33.
MorgutMNobileEBilusI.Comparison of mass transfer models for the numerical prediction of sheet cavitation around a hydrofoil. Int J Multiphas Flow2011; 37: 620–626.
34.
RuscheH.Computational fluid dynamics of dispersed two-phase flows at high phase fractions. PhD Thesis, Imperial College, London, 2002.
35.
MenterFREschT. Elements of industrial heat transfer prediction. In: Proceedings of the 16th Brazilian congress of mechanical engineering (COBEM), Uberlandia, Brazil, 26–30 November 2001.
36.
MenterFRKuntzMLangtryR.Ten years of industrial experience with the SST turbulence model. Turbul Heat Mass Transf2003; 4: 625–632.
HellstenA. Some improvements in Menter’s k-omega-SST turbulence model. In: Proceedings of 29th AIAA fluid dynamics conference, Albuquerque, NM, 15–18 June 1998, AIAA paper 98-2554. Reston, VA: AIAA.
40.
KisslingKSpringerJJasakH. A coupled pressure based solution algorithm based on the volume of fluid approach for two or more immiscible fluids. In: Proceedings of the V European conference on computational fluid dynamics, Lisbon, 14–17 June 2010. Institute for Fluid Dynamics and Ship Theory (FDS) - Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), German Society for Maritime Technology (STG).
41.
Coutier-DelgoshaOFortes-PatellaRReboudJL.Evaluation of the turbulence model influence on the numerical simulations of unsteady cavitation. J Fluid Eng: T ASME2003; 125: 38–45.
42.
LiZVan TerwisgaT. On the capability of multiphase RANS codes to predict cavitation erosion. In: Proceedings of the second international symposium on marine propulsors—workshop: propeller performance (SMP 2011), Hamburg, 17–18 June 2011.
43.
YuanWSauerJSchnerrG.Modeling and computation of unsteady cavitating flows in injection nozzles. Mec Ind2001; 2: 383–394.
44.
FarrellPEMaddisonJR. Conservative interpolation between volume meshes by local Galerkin projection. Comput Method Appl M2011; 200: 89–100.
MuzaferijaSPericMSamesP. A two-fluid Navier Stokes solver to simulate water entry. In: Proceedings of the twenty-second symposium on naval hydrodynamics, Washington, DC, 9–14 August 1998. The National Academies Press: U.S. Office of Naval Research (ONR).
47.
KimSERheeSH. Towards high-fidelity prediction of tip-vortex around lifting surfaces—what does it take. In: Proceedings of the 25th symposium on naval hydrodynamics, St. John’s, NL, Canada, 8–13 August 2004. The National Academies Press: U.S. Office of Naval Research (ONR).
48.
HsiaoCTChahineGL. Scaling of tip vortex cavitation inception for a marine open propeller. In: Proceedings of the 27th symposium on naval hydrodynamics, Seoul, Korea, 5–10 October 2008. U.S. Office of Naval Research (ONR).
49.
KuiperG.Cavitation inception on ship propeller models. PhD Thesis, Netherlands Ship Model Basin, Wageningen, 1981.
50.
FrancJPMichelJM.Fundamentals of cavitation. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004.
51.
VillatH.Sur la validité de certains problems d’hydrodynamique. J Math Pure Appl1914; 10: 231–290.
52.
BrillouinM.Les surfaces de glissement de Helmholtz et la resistance des fluides. Ann Chim Phys1911; 23: 145–230.
