Design of a Bio-inspired Hull Shape for an AUV from Hydrodynamic Stability Point of View through Experiment and Numerical Analysis
Source abstract
Abstract
The hydrodynamic characteristics and body shape of catfish, Hypostomus, are used to design and develop an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) named ZRAUV for subsea pipeline and cable inspection. Among the hydrodynamic characteristics, stability of this bio-inspired AUV, which may be adversely affected by disturbances such as marine currents during inspection process, is taken into consideration and evaluated both numerically and experimentally. Concerning numerical investigation, computational fluid dynamics based on Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes equations are applied to compute the hydrodynamic damping derivatives needed for stability analysis. In order to verify the numerical predictions, computations are also performed for the well-known submarine body with a typical axisymmetric hull shape, SUBOFF. Experiments are also carried out for both proposed AUV and a conventional axisymmetric one using self-propulsion tests. Measurements of turning rate in turning circle maneuver are in reasonably good agreement with those of numerical estimations and indicate that the turning rate of conventional bodies like SUBOFF is approximately 3.8 times as great as that of bio-inspired AUV. In other words, the findings reveal that in comparison with common axisymmetric bodies, the proposed AUV with biological hull shape is more stable by about 99%, thus, it is highly suitable for subsea pipeline and cable inspection.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Underwater Vehicles and Communication Systems · Biomimetic flight and propulsion mechanisms · Aerospace Engineering and Energy Systems
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (38)
Show source-provided references
1. Parsons J S, Goodsont R E, Goldschmiedt F R. Shaping of axisymmetric bodies for minimum drag in incompressible flow. Journal of Hydronautics, 1974, 8, 100–107.10.2514/3.48131 ↗
2. Myring D F. A theoretical study of body drag in subcritical axisymmetric flow. Aeronautial Quarterly, 1976, 27, 186–194.10.1017/S000192590000768X ↗
3. Jackson H A. Fundamentals of submarine concept design. SNAME Transcations, 1992, 100, 419–448.
4. Lutz T, Wagner S. Numerical shape optimization of natural laminar flow bodies. 21st Congress of International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, Melbourne, Australia, 1998.
5. Liu T, Liu Y, Zhang L, Zhang H, Wu Z, Wang Y. Hydrodynamic shape genealogy for teardrop-shaped autonomous underwater vehicles. Proceedings of 2017 IEEE OCEANS, Aberdeen, UK, 2017.
6. Gao T, Wang Y, Pang Y, Cao J. Hull shape optimization for autonomous underwater vehicles using CFD. Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics, 2016, 10, 599–607.10.1080/19942060.2016.1224735 ↗
7. Alvarez A, Bertram V, Gualdesi L. Hull hydrodynamic optimization of autonomous underwater vehicles operating at snorkeling depth. Ocean Engineering, 2009, 36, 105–112.10.1016/j.oceaneng.2008.08.006 ↗
8. Phillips A B, Turnock S R, Furlong M. The use of computational fluid dynamics to aid cost-effective hydrodynamic design of autonomous underwater vehicles. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part M: Journal of Engineering for the Maritime Environment, 2010, 224, 239–254.10.1243/13506501JET669 ↗
9. Nouri N M, Zeinali M, Jahangardy Y. AUV hull shape design based on desired pressure distribution. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 2016, 21, 203–215.10.1007/s00773-015-0343-0 ↗
10. Perrault D, Bose N, O’Young S, Williams C D. Sensitivity of AUV added mass coefficients to variations in hull and control plane geometry. Ocean Engineering, 2003, 30, 645–671.10.1016/S0029-8018(02)00041-0 ↗
11. Perrault D, Bose N, O’Young S, Williams C D. Sensitivity of AUV response to variations in hydrodynamic parameters. Ocean Engineering, 2003, 30, 779–811.10.1016/S0029-8018(02)00043-4 ↗
12. Yeo D J, Rhee K P. Sensitivity analysis of submersibles’ manoeuvrability and its application to the design of actuator inputs. Ocean Engineering, 2006, 33, 2270–2286.10.1016/j.oceaneng.2005.11.015 ↗
13. Honaryar A. Investigation on the Effect of Body Form on Autonomous Underwater Vehicle Maneuverability, Master Thesis, Amirkabir University of Technology, Iran, 2014. (in Persian)
14. Chandran P P, Parameswaran K, Kumar P P. Effect of slenderness ratio and aft fins on the hydrodynamic forces for an underwater body in oblique flows. Ships and Offshore Structures, 2017, 13, 256–264.10.1080/17445302.2017.1357962 ↗
15. Nesteruk I, Passoni G, Redaelli A. Shape of aquatic animals and their swimming efficiency. Journal of Marine Biology, 2014, 2014, 47071510.1155/2014/470715 ↗
16. Wang Z, Li J, Hang G, Wang Y. A flexible hingeless control surface inspired by aquatic animals. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2010, 7, 364–374.10.1016/S1672-6529(10)60268-5 ↗
17. Nguyen P L, Lee B R, Ahn K K. Thrust and swimming speed analysis of fish robot with non-uniform flexible tail. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2016, 13, 73–83.10.1016/S1672-6529(14)60161-X ↗
18. da Silva Costa G, Ruiz A, Reis M A, da Cunha Lima A T, de Almeida M P, da Cunha Lima I C. Numerical analysis of stability and manoeuvrability of Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUV) with fishtail shape. Ocean Engineering, 2017, 144, 320–326.10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.08.030 ↗
19. Kim H, Jeong K, Seo T. Analysis and experiment on the steering control of a water-running robot using hydrodynamic forces. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2017, 14, 34–46.10.1016/S1672-6529(16)60376-1 ↗
20. Garavello J C, Garavello J P. Spatial distribution and interaction of four species of the catfish genus Hypostomus Lacépède with bottom of rio SÃO Francisco, Canindé do SÃO Francisco, Sergipe, Brazil (Pisces, Loricariidae, Hypostominae). Brazilian Journal of Biology, 2004, 64, 591–598.10.1590/S1519-69842004000400006 ↗
21. Birindelli J L O, Zanata A M, Lima F C T. Hypostomus chrysostiktos, a new species of armored catfish (Siluriformes: Loricariidae) from rio Paraguaçu, Bahia State, Brazil. Neotropical Ichthyology, 2007, 5, 271–278.10.1590/S1679-62252007000300006 ↗
22. Abkowitz M A. Stability and Motion Control of Ocean Vehicles, The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, Cambridge, USA, 1969.
23. Jagadeesh P, Murali K, Idichandy V G. Experimental investigation of hydrodynamic force coefficients over AUV hull form. Ocean Engineering, 2009, 36, 113–118.10.1016/j.oceaneng.2008.11.008 ↗
24. Pan Y, Zhang H, Zhou Q. Numerical prediction of submarine hydrodynamic coefficients using CFD simulation. Journal of Hydrodynamics, Ser. B, 2012, 24, 840–847.10.1016/S1001-6058(11)60311-9 ↗
25. Zhang J T, Maxwell J A, Gerber A G, Holloway A G L, Watt G D. Simulation of the flow over axisymmetric submarine hulls in steady turning. Ocean Engineering, 2013, 57, 180–196.10.1016/j.oceaneng.2012.09.016 ↗
26. Wu X C, Wang Y W, Huang C G, Hu Z Q, Yi R W. An effective CFD approach for marine-vehicle maneuvering simulation based on the hybrid reference frames method. Ocean Engineering, 2015, 109, 83–92.10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.08.057 ↗
27. Leong Z Q, Ranmuthugala D, Penesis I, Nguyen H D. RANS-based CFD prediction of the hydrodynamic coefficients of DARPA SUBOFF geometry in straight-line and rotating arm manoeuvres. International Journal of Maritime Engineering, 2015, 157, 41–52.10.3940/rina.ijme.2015.a1.308 ↗
28. Cao L, Zhu J, Wan W. Numerical investigation of submarine hydrodynamics and flow field in steady turn. China Ocean Engineering, 2016, 30, 57–68.10.1007/s13344-015-0076-1 ↗
29. Renilson M. Submarine Hydrodynamics, 1st ed, Springer, Launceston, Australia, 2015.10.1007/978-3-319-16184-6 ↗
30. Chen C, Jiang Y, Huang H, Ji D, Sun G, Yu Z, Chen Y. Computational fluid dynamics study of the motion stability of an autonomous underwater helicopter. Ocean Engineering, 2017, 143, 227–239.10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.07.020 ↗
31. Sahu B K, Subudhi B, Gupta M M. Stability analysis of an underactuated autonomous underwater vehicle using Extended- Routh stability method. International Journal of Automation and Computing, 2018, 15, 299–309.10.1007/s11633-016-0992-4 ↗
32. Niu W, Wang S, Wang Y, Song Y, Zhu Y. Stability analysis of hybrid-driven underwater glider. China Ocean Engineering, 2017, 31, 528–538.10.1007/s13344-017-0061-y ↗
33. Groves N C, Huang T T, Chang M S. Geometric Characteristics of DARPA Suboff Models (DTRC Model Numbers 5470 and 5471), Ship Hydromechanics Department Report-1298-01, David Taylor Research Center, Bethesda, USA, 1989.
34. Roddy R F. Investigation of the Stability and Control Characteristics of Several Configurations of the DARPA SUBOFF Model (DTRC Model 5470) from Captive-Model Experiments, Ship Hydromechanics Department Report-1298-08, David Taylor Research Center, Bethesda, USA, 1990.
35. Toxoteus S, Atsavapranee P, Wolf E, Daum S, Pattenden R, Widjaja R, Zhang J T, Gerber A. Collaborative CFD exercise for a submarine in a steady turn. Proceedings of ASME 31st International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2012, 761–772.
36. Jesse M. Plecostomus Information, [2018-03-03], https://aquaticmag.com/freshwater/plecostomus-information
37. Weber C, Covain R, Fisch-Muller S. Identity of Hypostomus plecostomus (Linnaeus, 1758), with an overview of Hypostomus species from the Guianas (Teleostei: Siluriformes: Loricariidae). International Journal of Ichthyology, 2012, 36, 195–227.
38. Jiang C, Wan L, Sun Y. Design of motion control system of pipeline detection AUV. Journal of Central South University, 2017, 24, 637–646.10.1007/s11771-017-3464-2 ↗