Kayak blade–hull interactions: A body force approach for self-propelled simulations

Abstract

A sprint kayak experiences an unsteady flow regime due to the local influence of the paddle. However, kayak designs are usually optimised for steady-state, naked hull resistance. To determine whether unsteady paddle effects need to be included in kayak design, the hydrodynamic interactions between a kayak paddle and a hull are assessed using computational fluid dynamics. A body force model of a drag-based paddle stroke is developed using a blade element approach and validated against experimental data. This allows the paddle-induced local velocities to be simulated without the need to fully resolve the detailed flow around a moving paddle geometry. The increase in computational cost, compared to the naked hull simulation, is 8%. A case study investigating the impact of different paddle techniques on the hydrodynamic forces acting on a self-propelled kayak is conducted. A 0.23% difference in self-propelled resistance was observed, while an estimated 0.5% additional increase can be attributed to paddle-induced draught increases. An estimate of small changes in resistance on race times indicates that reductions of even a fraction of a percent are worth pursuing, indicating that the developed methodology may provide a useful design tool in the future.

Keywords

Kayak paddle computational fluid dynamics unsteady flow paddle–hull interaction performance

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

London 2012. Canoe sprint results from London 2012 Olympic Games, http://www.london2012.com/canoe-sprint/schedule-and-results (2012, accessed 10 August 2012).

Molland

Turnock

Hudson

. Ship resistance and propulsion: practical estimation of ship propulsive power. Cambridge University Press, 2011. New York

Jackson

. Performance prediction for Olympic kayaks. J Sport Sci 1995; 13(3): 239–245.

Lazauskas

Tuck

. Low drag racing kayaks. Adelaide, SA, Australia: Department of Applied Mathematics, The University of Adelaide, 1996.

Lazauskas

Winters

. Hydrodynamic drag of some small sprint kayaks John Winters’ sprint kayak. Adelaide, 1997.

Bugalski

. Development of the new line of sprint canoes for the Olympic Games. In: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on fast sea transportation (FAST 2009), 2009, pp.1039–1049. Athens: FAST Organizing Committee. Athens, Greece: October 5–8, 2009.

Day

Campbell

Clelland

. Realistic evaluation of hull performance for rowing shells, canoes, and kayaks in unsteady flow. J Sport Sci 2011; 29(10): 1059–1069.

Sumner

Sprigings

Bugg

. Fluid forces on kayak paddle blades of different design. Sports Eng 2003; 6: 11–19.

Ritchie

Faizal

Selamat

. Comparison of blade designs in paddle sports. Sports Tech 2010; 3(2): 141–149.

10.

Morgoch

Tullis

. Force analysis of a sprint canoe blade. Proc IMechE, Part P: J Sports Engineering and Technology 2011; 225(4): 253–258.

11.

Leroyer

Barré

Kobus

J-M

. Influence of free surface, unsteadiness and viscous effects on oar blade hydrodynamic loads. J Sport Sci 2010; 28(12): 1287–1298.

12.

Sliasas

Tullis

. The dynamic flow behaviour of an oar blade in motion using a hydrodynamics-based shell-velocity-coupled model of a rowing stroke. Proc IMechE, Part P: J Sports Engineering and Technology 2010; 224(1): 9–24.

13.

Phillips

Furlong

Turnock

. Accurate capture of rudder-propeller interaction using a coupled blade element momentum-RANS approach. Ship Tech Res 2010; 57(2): 128–139.

14.

Phillips

Turnock

Furlong

. Evaluation of manoeuvring coefficients of a self-propelled ship using a blade element momentum propeller model coupled to a Reynolds averaged Navier Stokes flow solver. Ocean Eng 2009; 36(15–16): 1217–1225.

15.

Turnock

Phillips

Banks

. Modelling tidal current turbine wakes using a coupled RANS-BEMT approach as a tool for analysing power capture of arrays of turbines. Ocean Eng 2011; 38(11–12): 1300–1307.

16.

Peric

Ferziger

. Computational methods for fluid dynamics. 3rd ed. Springer, 2002. Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.

17.

OpenFOAM^®. OpenFOAM – the open source CFD toolbox: user guide (version 2.01). 2011. [This user guide is provided by the OpenFOAM Foundation from www.openfoam.org].

18.

Menter

. Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications. AIAA J 1994; 32(8): 269–289.

19.

Larsson

Stern

Bertram

. Benchmarking of computational fluid dynamics for ship flows: the Gothenburg 2000 workshop. J Ship Res 2003; 47: 63–81.

20.

Hino

. In: CFD workshop Tokyo 2005, Tokyo, Japan, 2005 March 9-11, National Maritime Research Institute.

21.

Kendal

Sanders

. The technique of elite flatwater kayak paddlers using the wing paddle. Int J Sport Biomech 1992; 8: 233–250.

22.

Ellison

Turnock

. Investigation into the effect of the kayak paddle stroke on elite kayak performance. 3rd year Research Project, University of Southampton, UK, 2010.

23.

Hoerner

. Fluid-dynamic drag. 3rd–16th ed. Midland Park, NJ: Published by the author, 1965.

24.

International Canoe Federation. Results from ICF Canoe Sprint World Championships, http://results.digicorp.hu/competition/16777217/races.

25.

WS Atkins Consultants. Best practice guidelines for marine applications of computational fluid dynamics. 2003. Published by MARNET-CFD, accessable from https://pronet.wsatkins.co.uk/marnet/publications/bpg.pdf

26.

Wolfson Unit for Marine Technology and Industrial Aerodynamics (WUMTIA). Confidential experimental test data. University of Southampton, UK. (This has not been published in the public domain).

27.

Insel

Molland

Wellicome

. Wave resistance prediction of a catamaran by linearised theory. In: Fifth international conference on computer aided design, manufacture and operation (CADMO’94), Southampton, UK, September 13-15, 1994.

28.

Comstock

. Principles of naval architecture. New York: The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, 1976.

29.

Day

Campbell

Clelland

. An experimental study of unsteady hydrodynamics of a single scull. Proc IMechE, Part M: J Engineering for the Maritime Environment 2011; 225(3): 282–294.