ADES 378

Advances in Engineering Software Vol. 29, No. 79, pp. 717722, 1998 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd and Civil-Comp Ltd Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved PII: S 0 9 6 5 - 9 9 7 8 ( 9 8 ) 0 0 0 3 6 - 2 0965-9978/98/$19.00 + 0.00

Finite element analysis of uid motion with an oscillating structural system

Tienfuan Kerh a,*, J. J. Lee b & L. C. Wellford b
a

Department of Civil Engineering, National Pingtung University of Science and Technology, Pingtung 91207, Taiwan, R.0.C. b Department of Civil Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA (Received 25 October 1997; accepted 1 December 1997)

Analysis of unsteady ow through an oscillating structural system is carried out by using consistent penalty function nite element method and Newmark approach for both uid and solid. Physical variables including displacement, velocity, and acceleration are presented as a function of time to describe movements of the solid system. The resulting ow elds such as velocity vectors and pressure distributions are displayed for various time steps. The shear stress along channel walls and the pressure coefcient versus time are also shown in this paper. The results revealed that motion of the solid body which becomes a moving boundary had a signicant inuence on the ow elds. In a steady inlet ow, the structural system can be balanced by the uid force, and steady-state responses for both uid and solid are then reached for a sufciently long time. 1998 Elsevier Science Limited and Civil-Comp Limited. All rights reserved.

1 INTRODUCTION The motion of viscous uid through an oscillating structural system plays an important role in various engineering applications, especially in the cross-connection control eld, which safeguards the portable uid in complex piping networks from contamination by waste uid. Thus, control valves or back-ow preventers must be designed to assure their proper functioning. As listed in the manual by Lee and Schwartz,1 many contamination events in piping systems with backow preventers have been reported in the United States. In order to understand the phenomenon of uid structure interaction, this case is studied using computer simulation, which may provide reasonable results at a considerable saving of time and effort. It is not difcult to nd papers pertaining to uid structure interaction problems. Olson and Irain2 used the nite element method to solve the coupled stream function and motion equation of the elastic moving body. They focused on the response of added mass and damping coefcients as a function of frequency; details about the corresponding ow elds are not provided. Olson and Pattani3 also studied this topic and applied primitive variable formulations with nonlinear boundary conditions on the moving body. Numerical results were obtained for a square body
*Author to whom all correspondence should be addressed.
717

undergoing simple harmonic motion parallel to one of its sides. They compared their numerical results with experimental observations, and more insights into this problem are presented. Schulkes4 considered the motion of an incompressible, viscous uid in an open exible container, and modeled the container wall by an elastic solid. Linearized Navier Stokes equations coupled with the elasticity equations were derived to investigate the eigenmodes of the coupled uid structure system. The numerical results showed that viscosity of the uid is an important factor, which creates a boundary layer in the uid adjacent to the uidsolid interface. This study also lists many overviews of uid models (inviscid or viscous, incompressible or compressible) and structure models by various researchers (see papers cited in this reference), which show that compressibility and wall impedance also play an important role in the frequency domain for this particular problem. Although the ow congurations were simple and the results lacked the details necessary to describe the motion of the uid and associated motion of the solid, these studies stimulated further research in the eld of uidstructure interaction. Although there is no lack of studies dealing with uid structure interaction problems, there appears to be very little information on the simulation of viscous uid interaction with a structural system, which acts as a control valve in a piping system (see Kerh et al.5). Therefore, the objective of

718

T. Kerh et al. The symbol G is the boundary of domain Q, n x, n y are the x, y components of the outward unit normal vector on G. N j, N k are shape functions for the velocity of each element, M j are dened as shape functions for the pressure of each element, W i are the balancing diffusivity upwind weighting functions,6,7 and Re denotes the Reynolds number. If isoparametric element and Gauss quadrature8,9 are applied for the four-node element, 1 1 Gauss point is required to evaluate matrix C ij and 2 2 Gauss points are required for other matrices. For the continuity equation, the penalty function approach is introduced to reduce the degrees of freedom for each node and to save computational costs.1012 After assembly, the global consistent penalty type of motion equation becomes MU 1 l KU K U N(U)U F, Re mRe p (3)

the present work is to simulate unsteady ows through the structural system, which may reveal some unusual ow behaviors in the cross-connection control eld. Because the ow domain of this study is an unsymmetric conguration, the simulation may also provide a critical check for a numerical scheme. In the following sections, the governing equations for the uid are formulated by the consistent penalty function nite element method, and the Newmark approach is used to integrate the equilibrium equation for the structural system. The computation is performed after the boundary conditions are prescribed, and the numerical responses for both uid and solid are then analyzed accordingly.

2 FINITE ELEMENT MODELS The governing equations for the uid are the NavierStokes equations and the continuity equation. By employing the weighted residual method, the NavierStokes equations with normalized variables u, v, and p can be written in matrix form as H 11 I@ A H 11 I@ A 12 uj 0 Mij 1 d Kij Kij e uj d e Re K 21 K 22 22 vj vj 0 Mij ij ij H 1I H 11 I@ A V W ` Fi1 a uj Nij 0 Cij e , d e pj d X F2 Y 2 22 vj Cij 0 Nij i 1 where
11 Mij Q 22 Wi Nj dQ Mij ,

where K p CM
1

CT

(4)

Eqn (3) is a time-dependent and nonlinear equation, and requires special treatment on both terms. In this study, the Galerkin v 2/3 method is used for the time factor, and the Newton method is applied to treat the nonlinear term. Thus, the nal equations can be written as & ' 1 l K N(Un 1 ) J (Un )] Un 1 M vDt[ K Re mRe p & ' 1 l Kp N(Un )] Un M (1 v)Dt[ K Re mRe vDtJ (Un )Un DtFn v , and Pn 1 l 1 T M C Un 1 : mRe (6) 5

11 Kij

2(Wi )x (Nj )x (Wi )y (Nj )y dQ, (Wi )y (Nj )x dQ, (Wi )x (Nj )y dQ,

12 Kij 21 Kij 22 Kij

(Wi )x (Nj )x 2(Wi )y (Nj )y dQ, (Wi )x Mj dQ, (Wi )y Mj dQ,

1 Cij 2 Cij 11 Nij uk

Fi1 Fi2

22 Wi (Nj )x Nk dQ vk Wi (Nj )y Nk dQ Nij , Q & ' 2 1 Wi nx ( p ux ) ny [ (uy vx ] dG, G Re Re & ' 1 2 Wi nx [ (uy vx )] ny ( p vy ) dG, G Re Re Q

In the above equations, U is the velocity vector, P is the pressure vector, M represents the consistent mass matrix, M may refer to the pressure mass matrix, K refers to the viscous matrix, K p is the penalty matrix, N(U) is the nonlinear advection matrix, C is the pressure gradient matrix, C T is the divergence matrix, F is the force vector, and J (U n) is the derivative of the Jacobian matrix. In addition, m is the absolute viscosity of uid, Dt is the time step, and l is the penalty parameter. The relation l 10 6(1 t)mRe is used in the computation, where t denotes time marching, and this makes the penalty parameter grow with each timestep, to ultimately attain a value which is large enough to ensure that the continuity constraint is satised without affecting the solutions once they converge to a specied tolerance. For a single-degree-of-freedom oscillating structural system, the equation of motion can be written as h(t) 2zqn h(t) q2 h(t) f (t), n (7)

Fluid motion with an oscillating structural system where h(t), h(t), and h(t) represent acceleration, velocity, and displacement, respectively. In addition, z is the viscous damping factor, q n is known as the natural frequency of the system, and f(t) is an arbitrary excitation force which permits the denition of a nondimensional ratio of response to excitation. The excitation force can be considered as an external force which includes the force acting on the dynamic system caused by the acting uid. The direction of the force is downward if f(t) is positive, and upward if f(t) is negative. The directions of displacement, velocity and acceleration are also similarly dened. Among the methods of linear analysis, the Newmark approach13,14 provides an unconditionally stable scheme whose solution converges regardless of the initial conditions and the time step. Therefore, this method is applied to integrate the equilibrium equation of the structural system. After the boundary conditions are prescribed properly to the entire ow domain and the interfaces between uid and solid, eqns (5)(7) can then be used for solving ow elds and responses of the solid system. The computational results are shown in the following section.

719

consecutive time steps is less than 10 4. Based on three times the averaged inlet velocity (u 1.0) and height of the channel (h 1.0), the Reynolds number (Re uh/n, where n is the kinetic viscosity of the uid) is set to 1000 for this case. For the moving boundary, it should be noted that the compatibility constraints are imposed between the uid and solid by specifying that the vertical component of velocities at the interface are equal, and no horizontal component of velocities exists at the interface. Thus, the boundary conditions: inlet: u 2(y y 2), v 0; outlet: f x 0, f y 0 (traction free); walls: u 0, v 0 (no slip); interfaces: u 0, f y 0, are prescribed in this ow case to complete the calculations. By taking the steady-state solutions as initial guesses, transient responses are obtained for the chosen parameters of the structural system. The movement of the solid system
(a)
0.6

0.3

3 RESPONSES OF NUMERICAL RESULTS Before considering the uidstructure interaction case, the applicabilities of the present numerical models and computer codes are proved by comparing computational results with the experimental data for the case of ows over an obstruction as shown in Kerh et al.15,16 The same approach will be applied to the more complicated problem which follows. Consider now a structural system including two vertical thin fences which are placed on the x axis between 4.0 to 5.0 in a domain with dimension 20.0 1.0. The vertical fences are 0.4 and 0.6 high for the lower fence and upper fence, respectively. To simplify the simulation, it is assumed that q n 1.0, z 0.0, i.e. there is no damper within this system, and the solid body is balanced at a new position (initial opening, h 0.4 upward) by the pressure forces. As a result of the downward spring force, the structural system starts to move downward and provides negative velocities surrounding the moving boundary to the ow elds. Because of the moving boundary, the nite element mesh needs to be altered with every time step. To facilitate numerical computations, the ow domain in the vertical direction is divided into three portions, and six four-node elements are uniformly divided in each portion. Sixty fournode elements with non-uniform sizes are used along the horizontal direction. The sizes of the element in the x direction are (16 i)/30 for i 1,2,3,15; 0.1 for i 16,17,18,,25; and (i 25)/42 for i 26,27,28,,60. Thus, a total of 1044 elements (1129 nodes) with 2258 equations must be solved for each iteration. The time step Dt 0.25 was used to solve the unsteady ow case. The computer program will stop running if the difference in the computed displacement between two

0.3

0.6 0 1 2 3 4 5

t (b)
0.6

0.3

0.3

0.6 0 1 2 3 4 5

t (c)
0.6

0.3

0.3

0.6 0 1 2 3 4 5

Fig. 1. Responses of the structural system: (a) displacement versus time; (b) velocity versus time; (c) acceleration versus time.

720

T. Kerh et al.

Fig. 2. Velocity vectors for various time steps.

can be seen in Fig. 1(a) to (c). The results show that the solid element moves downward gradually, reaching a constant for t 2.75. Initially the velocity increases gradually, but after reaching a peak at about t 0.75 it decreases and approaches zero for t 2.75. The corresponding acceleration decreases gradually and turns negative for t 0.75, and reaches a negative peak, and then approaches zero for t 2.75. Therefore, the system is balanced by the uid
(a)
0.030

0.015

0.015

0.030 0 5 10 15 20

x (b)
0.030

0.015

0.015

0.030 0 5 10 15 20

Fig. 3. Shear stress along the channel walls: (a) upper wall; (b) lower wall.

force, the new equilibrium position is about 0.18 above its original static equilibrium level of zero displacement, i.e. h 0.0 or y 0.4 based on the denition. Displayed in Fig. 2 are the velocity vectors, at the rst time step (t 0.25); owing to zero velocity contribution from the moving boundary, the velocity eld exhibited the steady-state response. There are three major pairs of recirculation areas which occurred behind the structural system. The strength of the eddies is gradually decreased with unidirectional ow formed near the outlet. Another smaller vortex can be found under and near the right hand side of the moving body. As the time increases, the solid body moves downward and provides velocity contribution along the interface. Hence, the magnitude of velocity increases downstream. When the system is balanced by the uid force, a steady-state solution is obtained at t 5.0, and a small fourth pair eddy is established. One noticeable observation is that no oscillations upstream of the solid system are generated for velocity vectors. Thus, the upwind scheme with the applied nonuniform grid system was effective in eliminating the wiggles in this complicated time-dependent recirculating ow problem. The shear stresses along the upper and lower walls of the channel for the steady-state response (t 5.0) are shown in Fig. 3(a) and (b). For the upper wall, the maximum shear stress occurs behind the moving system and the minimum shear stress is found at the upper region of the recirculation. For the lower wall, the maximum shear stress occurs near the upstream of the obstruction and the minimum wall shear stress can be found behind the obstruction downstream at the place where the major recirculation is formed. It may be concluded that peak wall shear stresses (positive and negative) occur frequently in the changing ow geometry and in the recirculation area.

Shear stress

Shear stress

Fluid motion with an oscillating structural system

721

Fig. 4. Pressure distributions for various time steps.

Pressure coefficient

For this complicated ow geometry, the corresponding pressure distributions for the same selected time steps can be seen from the three-dimensional surface plots as displayed in Fig. 4. It is found that the pressure drops gradually, varies in the recirculation area, and recovers at the outlet region. Although the tendency of pressure surface plots is similar for each selected time step, the magnitudes in p are different due to the effect of the moving boundary. Because the ow domain is sufciently long, the pressures at the inlet and outlet presented uniform values. Thus, the pressure loss coefcient, calculated from the averaged pressures at the inlet and outlet, can be expected to be found without loss of accuracy. This may not be the case if the cross sections are taken in areas of varying pressures. As shown in Fig. 5, the pressure loss coefcient increases with time, after reaching a peak, because the system is gradually balanced by the uid force. Finally, the pressure loss coefcient settles down and reaches a constant value for t 2.75. This veries the behaviors of the moving body in terms of displacement, velocity, and the acceleration plots which have been discussed earlier.

element which becomes a moving boundary has a signicant inuence on the ow elds. In a steady inlet ow, the structural system can be balanced by the uid force at a new position, steady-state responses for both uid and structure are then established for a sufciently long time. Although this study was performed for a structural system with an initial opening to simplify the calculations, the results provided an insight of this type of uidstructure interaction. The case of a system starting at rest and involving a periodic inlet ow is also investigated by the authors, but the results are not shown in this paper. In further studies, turbulent models may be considered to calculate ow with a higher Reynolds number. However, the use of turbulent models still presents many difculties in terms of reliability, particularly in a complicated ow conguration, and thus the simulation must be handled in a conservative manner.
5.00

3.75

4 CONCLUSION In this paper, a uidstructure interaction problem in the cross-connection control eld is investigated using computer simulation. The governing equations for both uid and solid are modeled by the consistent penalty function nite element method with the Newmark approach. The computational results show that the motion of the structural

2.50

1.25

Fig. 5. Pressure coefcient as a function of time.

722 REFERENCES

T. Kerh et al.
8. Cook, R. D., Malkus, D. S. and Plesha, M. E., Concepts and Applications of Finite Element Analysis, John Wiley, New York, USA. 9. Hinton, E. and Owen, D. R. J., Finite Element Programming. Academic Press, New York, USA. 10. Carey, G. F. and Krishnan, R., Convergence of iterative methods in penalty nite element approximation of the NavierStokes equations. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 1987, 60, 129. 11. Gould, N. I. M., On the convergence of a sequential penalty function method for constrained minimization. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 1989, 26(1), 107128. 12. Reddy, J. N., On penalty function methods in the niteelement analysis of ow problem. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids, 1982, 2, 151171. 13. Bathe, K. J., Finite Element Procedures in Engineering Analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA. 14. Chopra, A. K., Dynamics of Structures, Theory and Applications to Earthquake Engineering. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA. 15. Kerh, T., Numerical calculations for pulsating ow past a bluff body. International Journal of Modelling and Simulation, 1994, 14(3), 112116. 16. Kerh, T., Lee, J. J. and Wellford, L. C., Predictions of conned shear ows over a wall obstacle. International Journal of Modelling and Simulation, 1995, 15(1), 2329.

1. Lee, J. J. and Schwartz, P. H., Manual of Cross-Connection Control, Foundation for Cross-Connection Control and Hydraulic Research, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA, 1993. 2. Olson, M. D. and Irani, M. B., Finite element analysis of viscous owsolid body interaction, Numerical Methods in Laminar and Turbulent Flow, 1983, 1, 1424. 3. Olson, M. D. and Pattani, P. G., Nonlinear analysis of rigid bodyviscous ow interaction. Finite Elements in Fluids, 1985, 6, 307320. 4. Schulkes, R. M. S. M., Interactions of an elastic solid with a viscous uid: eigenmode analysis. Journal of Computational Physics, 1992, 100, 270283. 5. Kerh, T., Lee, J. J. and Wellford, L. C., Transient uidstructure interaction in a control valve. Journal of Fluids Engineering Transactions of the ASME, 1997, 119, 354359. 6. Kerh, T., Computer simulation of viscous uid through an obstruction by using the penalty function nite element scheme. In Proceedings of the VIII Congress of APDInternational Association for Hydraulic Research, Vol. III, Central Water and Power Research Station, Pune, India, October 1992, pp. 189200. 7. Zienkiewicz, O. C., Leohner, R., Morgan, K. and Nakazawa, S., Finite element in uid mechanicsa decade of progress. Finite Elements in Fluids, 1984, 5, 126.