• No results found

The color contours of the pressure at 𝑅𝑒 = 1 Γ— 10' are presented in Figure 5.4. The pressure contour values seen in Figure 5.4 (a) represents the kinematic pressure 𝑃 = 𝑝/πœŒβ€ž, where πœŒβ€ž is the constant mass density. Due to the block effect of the structures to the flow, there is a high-pressure region in front of the structure because of the energy conservation. Furthermore, due to the conservation of mass, a high-speed velocity region forms after the separation point above the structure. Hence, due to the Bernoulli’s principle, the high-speed velocity region creates a local negative pressure region around the right top edge of the structure as seen in Figure 5.4.

It can be observed that the intensities of both the positive and negative pressure regions reduces with increasing 𝛼. This is due to the fact that the reducing blocking effect, associated with higher 𝛼, causes lower velocity drop over the structure, hence resulting in weaken pressure regions due to the Bernoulli’s principle.

47

a) b)

c) d)

e)

Figure 5.4 Pressure contours for wall-mounted squares in tandem with gap ratios of: a) G/D = 2, b) G/D = 3, c) G/D = 6, d) G/D = 10 and e) G/D = 14

48

The contours of the horizontal velocities at 𝑅𝑒 = 1 Γ— 10' are presented in Figure 5.5 for all 𝛼.

The velocity at the front face of the structure is zero and propagates further upstream due to the blocking effect. After the separation point at the top left corner of the structure, the velocity is accelerated due to the conservation of mass. A shear layer is generated with a high-speed region above the structure and a recirculation region behind the structure. The area of the high-speed region reduces with decreasing 𝛼. The negative velocity region downstream close to the bottom wall implies that recirculation takes place.

a)

b)

49

c)

d)

e)

Figure 5.5 Horizontal velocity contours at Re = 1 Γ— 10' for varying 𝛼: (a) 0Β°, (b) 15Β°, (c) 30Β°, (d) 45Β° and (e) 60Β°

50

The contours of vertical velocity are presented in Figure 5.6 for all angles 𝛼. There is an increase in the vertical velocity along the front face of the structure due to the conservation of mass, accelerating the mass above and past the structure to maintain conservation of energy.

The intensity of the high vertical velocity region around the top left corner reduces with increasing 𝛼, as seen in Figure 5.6 (b) - (e). This is because the trapezoidal structures shift the direction of the flow more gradually. There is also a slight positive vertical velocity region at the rear face of the structure, indicating that a recirculation region forms behind the structures.

a)

b)

51

c)

d)

e)

Figure 5.6 Vertical velocity contours at Re = 1 Γ— 10' for varying 𝛼: (a) 0Β°, (b) 15Β°, (c) 30Β°, (d) 45Β°

and (e) 60Β°

52 5.5 Bed shear stress and Scour

In actual subsea environment, bed shear stress is closely related to the scour process, which is removal of sediment around the base of subsea structures. High absolute values of 𝜏 πœβ„ N close to the structure can indicate a significant scour process, which is a typical source for failures in subsea operations (Zhao et al.,2012). Therefore, the present study investigates the bed shear stress on the seabed surfaces adjacent to the structures with different configurations of 𝛼.

Figure 5.7 shows the non-dimensional bed shear stress 𝜏 πœβ„ N, where 𝜏N is the undisturbed bed

shear stress, along the bottom wall surface. 𝜏 πœβ„ N stagnates towards zero close to the front faces of the structures which are located π‘₯/𝐷 = (βˆ’0.5, βˆ’0.768, βˆ’1.077, βˆ’1.5, βˆ’1.732) for 𝛼 = (0Β°, 15Β°, 30Β°, 45Β°, 60Β°), respectively. Figure 5.7 (b) shows small negative 𝜏 πœβ„ N regimes in front of the structure for all 𝛼 due to the backflow and the adverse pressure gradient caused by the conservation of energy. It can be observed that these negative regimes have lower amplitudes and are shorter in streamwise direction with increasing 𝛼. This behavior is due to the smooth flow transitions which is associated with larger 𝛼. The bed shear stress has a large negative region behind the structures due to the recirculation motions for all configurations.

This negative region is also reduced with increasing 𝛼, which is consistent with the declining recirculation length. It is also worth noting that the absolute minimal value of the bed shear stress also decreases with increasing 𝛼 and its location shifts closer to the structure as seen in Figure 5.7 (a).

a) b)

Figure 5.7 Bed shear stress along the bottom surface at Re = 1 Γ— 10' for: a) the whole domain. b) the front face of the structures

53 5.6 Streamlines

To further investigate the flow around the five configurations with different 𝛼, streamlines are plotted at 𝑅𝑒 = 1.19 Γ— 10& in 5.9 and at 𝑅𝑒 = 1.0 Γ— 10' in Figure 5.8 and Figure 5.10. There are three main recirculation motions around the square structure seen in Figure 5.8. The first vortex (1) forms because the fluid particle hits the structure, flows downward and reverses its direction due to the bottom wall. A large recirculation is generated by the shear layer separation after the front top edge of the square (2), which also induces a smaller one in the downward corner of the square (3). For both Reynolds numbers, with increasing 𝛼, the length of the dominating vortex behind the structure decreases, seen in Figure 5.9 and Figure 5.10. In addition, as the flow tend to follow the angle of the front face after separation, the height of the recirculation reduces as the structure becomes flat. Furthermore, the increasing 𝛼 gradually suppresses the vortices (1) and (2) from 5.8 (a), of the structure because the flow tends to be attached to the structure surface as seen in Figure 5.8 (b).

a) b)

a)

1 2 3

Figure 5.8 Detailed stream lines for Re=1Γ—106 for (a) Ξ±=0Β° and (b) Ξ±=60Β°

54 b)

c)

d)

e)

Figure 5.9 Stream lines at Re = 1.19 Γ— 10& for varying Ξ±: (a) 0Β°, (b) 15Β°, (c) 30Β°, (d) 45Β° and (e) 60Β°

55 a)

b)

c)

d)

e)

Figure 5.10 Stream lines at Re = 1 Γ— 10' for varying Ξ±: (a) 0Β°, (b) 15Β°, (c) 30Β°, (d) 45Β° and (e) 60Β°

56

6 Results and Discussion for Tandem Case

This chapter presents and discusses the results for the tandem case. The chapter presents the convergence study with respect to 𝐺/𝐷 and investigates the hydrodynamic coefficients, pressure distributions, streamlines and velocity profiles by varying the parameters of 𝐺/𝐷 and 𝛼. All charts in this section are based on the data from Table 6.1, Table 6.2, Table 6.3 and Table 6.4. This chapter will use Square 1 and Square 2 when referring to the first and second square in tandem, respectively. Structure 1 and Structure 2 will similarly be used when referring to all trapezoidal configurations, including the square configuration.

Table 6.1 Results of convergence study for hydrodynamic coefficients for Square 1 and Square 2

Mesh 𝐺/𝐷 𝐢SQ 𝐢TQ 𝐢SE 𝐢TE

57 6.1 Convergence

Convergence studies with all gap ratios, 𝐺/𝐷 = 2, 3, 6, 10 and 14, are performed with respect to hydrodynamic quantities for both squares in tandem to ensure mesh independence. First, 4 different mesh densities with 𝐺/𝐷 = 2 were constructed to establish converged results for the original mesh set up, which was found for the normal mesh at 54135 cells. Thereafter, three

𝛼 𝐢SQ 𝐢TQ 𝐢SE 𝐢TE

Table 6.2 Hydrodynamic coefficients for Structure 1 and Structure 2 with G/D = 6 for trapezoidal configurations using mesh number of 66855

Table 6.3 Hydrodynamic coefficients for Structure 1 and Structure 2 with 𝐺/𝐷 = 14 for trapezoidal configurations using mesh number of 89115

Table 6.4 Hydrodynamic coefficients for Structure 1 and Structure 2 with G/D = 10 for trapezoidal configurations using mesh number of 76395

58

meshes of different densities; coarse, normal and dense were constructed for each 𝐺/𝐷 as shown in Table 5.1 where all the normal meshes for square configurations were found to provide sufficient mesh resolution, with difference less than 5% for any hydrodynamic coefficient from its corresponding dense mesh. Figure 6.1 shows the variation of hydrodynamic coefficients with the grid numbers. The converged trapezoidal mesh configurations from the single structure case were combined with the converged mesh configuration with 𝐺/𝐷 β‰₯ 6 from Figure 6.1 to study the trapezoids in tandem as well. Investigations with 𝐺/𝐷 < 6 are not carried out for trapezoids in tandem because of the high skewness of the current mesh set up for trapezoidal geometries at low 𝐺/𝐷.

a) b)

c) d)

Figure 6.1 Convergence study for wall-mounted squares in tandem with 𝐺/𝐷 = 2,3,6,10 and 14 for the hydrodynamic quantities: a) 𝐢SQ for Square1, b) 𝐢SE for Square2, c) 𝐢TQ for Square1 and d) 𝐢TE for Square2

59

6.2 Effects of 𝐺/𝐷 and 𝛼 on hydrodynamic quantities

Figure 6.2 presents the variation of the hydrodynamic quantities for the structures of same configuration at 𝐺/𝐷 at 𝑅𝑒 = 1.19 Γ— 10&. The drag coefficient of Square 1 is increasing towards 𝐺/𝐷 = 6 however declining for higher 𝐺/𝐷 as seen in Figure 6.2 (a). The opposite is occurring for Square 2, seen in Figure 6.2 (b), where a distinct maximum absolute minimal value for the 𝐢SE is found at 𝐺/𝐷 = 6 and hence increasing linearly with the 𝐺/𝐷. This relationship can be explained by the shielding effect, from Square 1, on Square 2 and the retarded vortex development between the squares which will be further explained in Chapter 6.3 and 6.5. The lift coefficients for Square1 is maximum with 𝐺/𝐷 = 3 and is monotonically decreasing with increasing 𝐺/𝐷. Furthermore, 𝐢SQ and 𝐢TQ for Structure 1 decrease as 𝛼 becomes larger with 𝐺/𝐷 > 6 for all configurations. 𝐢TE is decreasing with the 𝐺/𝐷 for all structures and its variation tends to be flat out for higher 𝐺/𝐷.

60

The variations of hydrodynamic quantities with 𝛼 = 0Β°, 15Β°, 30Β°, 45Β° and 60Β° are investigated with 𝐺/𝐷 = 6,10 and 14 and presented in Figure 6.2. Both 𝐢SQ and 𝐢TQ are decreasing, while 𝐢SE and 𝐢TE are increasing, with larger 𝛼. The effects of the additional Structure2 are compared to the single structure case in Figure 6.2 (a) and (c). Here 𝐢SQ follows the same trend as the single structure case by declining with increasing Ξ±. Furthermore, the hydrodynamic effects of the gap ratios for the square configuration increase between 2 ≀ 𝐺/𝐷 ≀ 6 and the 𝐢SQ has a maximum deviation of 13.6% at 𝐺/𝐷 = 6 compared to the single square case. Moreover, it can be seen in Figure 6.2 (a) that the discrepancy of 𝐢S between the single square and 𝐺/𝐷 = 14 is 0.004%, which indicates that the tandem drag effects on Structure1 has disappeared.

a) b)

c) d)

Figure 6.2 Investigation of gap ratios 𝐺/𝐷 for different configurations of 𝛼 for the hydrodynamic quantities: a) 𝐢SQ for Square 1, b) 𝐢SE for Square 2, c) 𝐢TQ for Square 1 and d)

𝐢TE for Square 2

61

However, Figure 6.3 (c) shows that the 𝐢Tfor the single structure is most compatible with 𝐺/𝐷 = 10 while 𝐺/𝐷 = 14 have lower values of 𝐢T for all 𝛼. This indicates that the lift effects of Structure2 on Structure1 not have fully disappeared. From Figure 6.2 (b), the absolute value of 𝐢SE slightly decreases with larger 𝛼 and has negative values for 𝐺/𝐷 = 6 and 10. However, with 𝐺/𝐷 = 14, the 𝐢SE becomes positive and increases with larger 𝛼. From Figure 6.2 (d), it is clear that 𝐺/𝐷 = 6 have the largest values of 𝐢TE compared to the other 𝐺/𝐷. 𝐢TE for 𝐺/𝐷 = 6 has its maximum value at 𝛼 = 45Β°, and slightly declines when 𝛼 = 60Β°. This is not the situation for 𝐺/𝐷 = 10 and 14, where the 𝐢TE is only slightly decreasing with larger 𝛼.

a) b)

c) d)

Figure 6.3 Investigation of 𝛼 for gap ratios of 𝐺/𝐷 = 6,10,14 as well as for singular structures, for the hydrodynamic quantities: a) 𝐢S for Square 1, b) 𝐢S for Square 2, c) 𝐢T for Square 1 and d) 𝐢T for Square 2

62 6.3 Pressure distribution

The pressure distributions for all 𝐺/𝐷 = 2,3,6,10 and 14 for squares in tandem have been investigated and presented in Figure 6.4. It is worth to note that the pressure plotting scale for the tandem case has been adjusted from the single square case with the maximum positive pressure of 0.29 in front of Structure 1. Therefore, the pressure contour cases are not adequate for comparison.

6.3.1 Pressure distribution for squares in tandem

A large positive pressure region is observed at the front face of Square 1 due to the conservation of energy. Furthermore, for all 𝐺/𝐷, two negative pressure zones are formed. One is formed in between the squares and the other one is formed behind Square 2. The negative pressure zone between the squares is associated with the vortex motions, seen from the streamline plots in Figure 6.5.2, and contributes most to the total drag force. The main contribution of the drag is from the pressure difference between the front and back face of the structures, which is the reason why 𝐢SE is negative for all the 𝐺/𝐷 for square configurations. Dai et al. (2017) has also observed that the pressure zone between the structures imposes a suction force on Square 2, hence results in negative 𝐢SE due to the pressure difference. For 𝐺/𝐷 = 14, 𝐢SE is almost zero and the pressures adjacent to Square 2 has reached equilibrium.

The strength of the negative pressure zone between the two square increases in the range of 2 < 𝐺/𝐷 < 6 and decreases in the range of 6 < 𝐺/𝐷 < 14 as indicated in Figure 6.4 (c) – (e), which can be associated with the drag coefficient variations in Square 1 and Square 2. The second pressure zone, forming at π‘₯/𝐷~5 behind Square 2 as seen in Figure 6.4 (a) and (b) disappears in Figure 6.4 (c) - (e). For 𝐺/𝐷 = 6, it seems that the two negative pressure zones consolidate and a negative pressure zone between the squares is formed, hence imposing the highest pressure on both structures. Moreover, the strength of the negative pressure zone decreases for 𝐺/𝐷 is 6 to 14 and seems to be less affected by Square 2.

63

a) b)

c) d)

e)

Figure 6.4 Pressure contours for wall-mounted squares in tandem with gap ratios of: a) 𝐺/𝐷 = 2, b) 𝐺/𝐷 = 3, c) 𝐺/𝐷 = 6, d) 𝐺/𝐷 = 10 and e) 𝐺/𝐷 = 14

64 6.3.2 Pressure distribution for trapezoids in tandem

Figure 6.5 shows the pressure contours of all trapezoidal configurations with 𝐺/𝐷 = 6, which is found to impose the most drag on the both squares in tandem. The pressure distribution at the front face of Structure 1 is, as for the single structure case, decreasing with increasing 𝛼. The strength of the negative pressure zone between the structures is also decreasing for increasing 𝛼 and this trend is also observed for all configurations with 𝐺/𝐷 > 6 seen in Figure 6.5 and Figure 6.6. The low negative pressure zone forming behind Structure 2 is slightly increasing in size with increasing 𝛼 disparate to the negative pressure zone behind Structure1. This is because the pressure zone behind Structure 2 is depending on the flow velocity over Structure 2 which again is governed by the shielding effect from Structure1. Structure 2 will be subjected to higher flow velocities with reduced shielding effect from Structure1, hence creating a higher negative pressure zone because of Bernoulli’s principle.

The negative pressure region behind Structure 1 decreases in strength which is similar to 𝐺/𝐷 = 6 and 𝐺/𝐷 = 14. The increased negative pressure zone behind Structure 2, associated with increasing 𝛼, is obvious for 𝐺/𝐷 = 10 as seen in Figure 6.6. Here, the strength of the negative pressure region is clearly increased behind Structure 2 seen in Figure 6.6 (d) and (e).

Figure 6.7 presents the pressure contours with all Ξ± configurations with 𝐺/𝐷 = 14. Here, the negative pressure region behind Structure 1 seems to behave identical to that of a single configuration at 𝑅𝑒 = 1 Γ— 10'. This is further supported by the fact that the drag coefficient is

almost the same for the cases of single square and squares in tandem with 𝐺/𝐷 = 14. For Structure 2 with α > 0° the pressure on its front face shifts to be positive and becomes larger with increasing α, which leads to a positive drag on Structure 2 shown in

. This is because the vortex motions behind Structure 1 are different for each trapezoidal configuration, hence creating different downstream flows which Structure 2 is subjected to. It is observed in Figure 6.7 (e) that pressure contours behind Structure 2 is formed in a similar manner as Structure 1 since the flow profile it is subjected to has started to recover from the

𝛼 𝐢SQ 𝐢TQ 𝐢SE 𝐢TE

65

effects of Structure 1. This subsequently results in similar hydrodynamic quantities on Structure 2 to those on Structure 1 due to Bernoulli’s principle.

a) b)

c) d)

e)

Figure 6.5 Pressure contours for 𝐺/𝐷 = 6 for varying trapezoidal configurations α: (a) 0°, (b) 15°, (c) 30°, (d) 45° and (e) 60°

66

a) b)

c) d)

e)

Figure 6.6 Pressure contours for 𝐺/𝐷 = 10 for varying trapezoidal configurations α: (a) 0°, (b) 15°, (c) 30°, (d) 45° and (e) 60°

67

Figure 6.7 Pressure contours for 𝐺/𝐷 = 14 for varying trapezoidal configurations α: (a) 0°, (b) 15°, (c) 30°, (d) 45° and (e) 60°

a) b)

c) d)

e)

68 6.4 Horizontal velocity contours

6.4.1 Horizontal velocity contours for squares in tandem

The horizontal velocity profiles for wall-mounted squares in tandem for 𝐺/𝐷 = 2,3,6,10 and 14 is presented in Figure 6.8. A high-speed region V1 is formed at (π‘₯/𝐷, 𝑦/𝐷) = (0,2) above the shear layer shown in Figure 6.8 (a). It is obvious that 𝐺/𝐷 = 6 have a squeezed V1, however, the strength of its core region is the largest of all gap ratios and can be seen with contours inside V1. Moreover, for 𝐺/𝐷 > 6 V1 is expanded with increasing 𝐺/𝐷 following Square 2. The low-speed region between the two squares are coherent with the vortex motions shown in Figure 6.11. For 𝐺/𝐷 = 2, 3 and 6 the core of the low-speed region is located close to the left top edge of Square 2. However, when 𝐺/𝐷 > 6 the core of the low-speed region is expanded and is attached to the bottom wall.

a)

b)

V1

69

c)

d)

e)

Figure 6.8 Horizontal velocity contours for wall-mounted squares in tandem with gap ratios of:

a) 𝐺/𝐷 = 2, b) 𝐺/𝐷 = 3, c) 𝐺/𝐷 = 6, d) 𝐺/𝐷 = 10 and e) 𝐺/𝐷 = 14

70

6.4.2 Horizontal velocity contours for trapezoids in tandem

The streamwise velocity contours for all Ξ± with 𝐺/𝐷 = 6 and 14 are presented in Figure 6.9 and Figure 6.10, respectively. The high-speed velocity core V1, present for 𝐺/𝐷 = 6, is visible by contours for 𝛼 ≀ 30Β° in Figure 6.8 (a) – (c). However, as 𝛼 increases, the area of this region is decreasing and the maximum velocity in the core of the high-speed region also decreases.

a)

b)

71

c)

d)

e)

Figure 6.9 Horizontal velocity contours for 𝐺/𝐷 = 6 for varying trapezoidal configurations α:

(a) 0Β°, (b) 15Β°, (c) 30Β°, (d) 45Β° and (e) 60Β°

72

a)

b)

c)

73

d)

e)

Figure 6.10 Horizontal velocity contours for 𝐺/𝐷 = 14 for varying trapezoidal configurations α: (a) 0°, (b) 15°, (c) 30°, (d) 45° and (e) 60°

74 6.5 Streamlines

The streamlines for 𝐺/𝐷 = 2, 3, 6, 10 π‘Žπ‘›π‘‘ 14 are plotted for squares in tandem, and vortexes are denoted Rx, where x is the number of the vortex explained in Figure 6.11. Moreover, the streamlines for all trapezoidal configurations have been plotted for 𝐺/𝐷 = 6 and 14.

6.5.1 Streamlines over tandem squares

The streamlines over the square configurations, presented in Figure 6.11, shows 7 visible vorticities whose appearances changes with different 𝐺/𝐷. Figure 6.11(a), where 𝐺/𝐷 = 2 , shows that the small R1 at the front face of Square 1 is developed in the same manner as the single square case. However, the vorticities downstream of Square 1 is varying with 𝐺/𝐷. The elongated R2 is located on top of the two tandem squares and induces R3 in a counter clockwise direction in the gap between the two squares. At the back surface of Square 2, there is a small counterclockwise R4 which is induced by the large downstream R5, similar to the single square case. Increasing the gap distance from 𝐺/𝐷 = 1 (a) to 𝐺/𝐷 = 2 (b), the R2 starts to suppress R3 and becomes a larger vortex attached to the bottom wall. R3 additionally induces two small vorticities: R6 and R7 in a counter clockwise direction.

Figure 6.11 Time-averaged streamlines over wall-mounted squares in tandem with gap ratios of: a) 𝐺/𝐷 = 2 , b) 𝐺/𝐷 = 3 and c) 𝐺/𝐷 = 6

Figure 6.12 shows the whole domain of interest with 𝐺/𝐷 = 2, 3, 6, 10 and 14 for the squares in tandem. It can be observed that R6 and R7 have been reduced significantly in size when increasing 𝐺/𝐷 to 10 and 14. The long downstream R5 behind Square 2 also decreases in size

R1 R2 R4

R6 R7

R5 R3

75

due to its position downstream of Square 1 with large 𝐺/𝐷. This is because the turbulent shear layers above R2, formed at the left top corner edge at Square 1, no longer reaches past Square 2 and affects R5 as seen Figure 12 (d) and (e). This subsequently leads to a highly reduced velocity profile over Square 2 which can be linked to the pressure and velocity contours discussed in Chapter 6.3.1 and Chapter 6.4.1, respectively.

a)

b)

c)

d)

76 6.5.2 Streamlines over trapezoids in tandem

Figure 6.3 and Figure 6.4 shows the streamlines for all trapezoidal configurations in tandem with 𝐺/𝐷 of 6 and 14, respectively. With 𝐺/𝐷 = 6, the R6 and R7 are suppressed with increasing 𝛼. R2 recirculates over the top of Structure2 when 𝛼 < 45Β° , however for larger 𝛼, R2 seem to be shaped according to the gap shape between the two structures and is attached to its surrounding walls, as seen in Figure 6.3 (e).

The gap shape trend seems to be followed with 𝐺/𝐷 = 14 when 𝛼 is 0Β° and 15Β°, but there is a steady drop in R2Β΄s attachment to the front face of Structure 2 with increasing 𝛼, as clearly seen in Figure 6.14 (d) and (e). This is obviously due to the reason that the reduced high-speed region above the structures for larger 𝛼 has not reach Structure 2. Finally, R5 is increasing in size in the streamwise direction with increasing 𝛼, clearly seen in Figure 6.14.

a)

b) e)

Figure 6.12 Streamlines for wall-mounted squares in tandem with gap ratios of: a) 𝐺/𝐷 = 2, b) 𝐺/𝐷 = 3, c) 𝐺/𝐷 = 6, d) 𝐺/𝐷 = 10 and 𝐺/𝐷 = 14

77

c)

d)

e)

a)

b)

Figure 6.13 Streamlines for G/D = 6 for varying trapezoidal configurations Ξ±: (a) 0Β°, (b) 15Β°, (c) 30Β°, (d) 45Β° and (e) 60Β°

78

c)

d)

e)

Figure 6.14 Streamlines for G/D = 14 for varying trapezoidal configurations Ξ±: (a) 0Β°, (b) 15Β°, (c) 30Β°, (d) 45Β° and (e) 60Β°

79

7 Conclusions

This chapter outlines the conclusions and main findings for the study on the single and tandem cases. It also discusses the possibilities of future work on the concept of square and trapezoidal structures in both single and tandem configurations.

This chapter outlines the conclusions and main findings for the study on the single and tandem cases. It also discusses the possibilities of future work on the concept of square and trapezoidal structures in both single and tandem configurations.