You are on page 1of 20

Fluid-Structure Interaction using

STAR-CCM+ and Abaqus Co-Simulation

Alan Mueller
The Challenges of FSI
Mapping data techniques
Finding neighbors and interpolating
Protocols and formats for exchanging data
Getting data from Code A to Code B
Coupling methods
Algorithms for accuracy, stability
Dynamic fluid mesh evolution
Topology changes in the fluid domain
Validation of FSI results

2
Abaqus/STAR-CCM+ Co-Simulation
Coupling via Abaqus Co-Simulation API of SIMULIA
Manages Coupling Synchronization/Exchange/Mapping
Abaqus v6.11/STAR-CCM+ v6.06
Abaqus v6.12/STAR-CCM+ v7.04 (implicit coupling)

Surface to Surface Mapping


STAR-CCM+ Abaqus (explicit or standard)
Initial geometry
Pressure(relative or absolute pressure)
Shear traction
Surface heat flux
Abaqus STAR-CCM+
Displacement, velocity
Temperature
3
Abaqus/STAR-CCM+ Co-Simulation Interface

Hit the Step or Run


button to commence the
co-simulation

4
Benchmark: VIV of Cylinder/Cantilevered Plate

FSI3 Benchmark of Turek & Hron


heavy fluid interacting with light and compliant solid

Loads and Displacements within 10% of


Benchmark Numerical Results

5
Co-Simulation: Plate Vortex Induced Vibration

Elastic plate perpendicular to air stream


10 cm x 8 cm x 2.5mm
density and modulus such that
1st bending mode @ 4Hz
1st twisting mode @ 20 Hz
Compressible air moving at 10 m/s, Re=5e4
K- turbulence model, Unsteady RANS
Rigid plate, computed Cd=2.0, Str=0.156
Vortex shedding frequency @ 19.5 Hz
Produces very small twisting moment

6
Long Term VIV Response

Only twisting mode is not completely damped!


7
Experimental Validation: Wedge Drop In Water

Comparison of Experiments and Models


Peterson, Wyman, and Frank: Drop Tests to Support
Water-Impact and Planing Boat Dynamics Theory,
Dahlgren Division Naval Surface Warfare Center,
CSS/TR-97/25
STAR-CCM+ VOF with different bodies
Rigid Body (6DOF, DFBI)
Elastic Body (FV stress)
Elastic Body (Abaqus Co-Simulation)

8
Wedge Drop In Water: VOF and Mises Stress

9
Wedge Drop In Water

Vertical acceleration (m/s2)


Angular acceleration (rad/s2)

All Methods give good agreement to experiments


10
6DOF + FEA of Tanker and Offshore Platform

11
Wind Turbine Under Steady Wind

Blade deformation negatively impacts efficiency: trade-off on


costs for stiff blades versus less efficient power generation

Windward Displacement
AeroElastic Prediction Workshop: HIRANASD

Fluid and Structural Models for FSI Simulations


Aerodynamic Equilibrium Wing at different AOA

Static Structure, Steady airflow at deformed shape


Ma=0.8, Re=23.5x106, q/E=0.48x10-6
Lift Coefficient Wing Tip Displacement
HIRANASD: AEC Lift, Drag and Cp
q/E = 0.48e-6; M = 0.8; Re = 23.5e6

STAR-CCM+/Abaqus FUN3D
15
HIRANASD Forced Wind-on Vibration
Change in Cp relative to the tip acceleration
STAR-CCM+/Abaqus Sofia

Quantity CCM+ SOFIA Error,% Exp.#270 Error,%

f, Hz 29.54 29.50 0.1% 29.10 1.5%

-Cp' / acc15/1 1.79E-04 1.99E-04 -9.9% 2.23E-04 -19.6%


Co-Simulation DOT Tank Impact

Experimental Test Facility 17


DOT Tank Impact Simulations

Von Mises Stress (Abaqus Explicit) STAR-CCM+ Pressure

STAR-CCM+ :14 cores, Abaqus Explicit: 1 core


Elapsed Time 48 Hours
18
DOT Tank Impact Comparisons

1400
Impact Force (kips)

1200

1000
Star-CD/Abaqus
Direct Coupling
800

600

400

200

Time (seconds)
Thank You For Your Attention & Enjoy

20

You might also like