Dynamic fluid–structure interaction using finite volume unstructured mesh procedures

A three-dimensional finite volume, unstructured mesh (FV-UM) method for dynamic fluid–structure interaction (DFSI) is described. Fluid structure interaction, as applied to flexible structures, has wide application in diverse areas such as flutter in aircraft, wind response of buildings, flows in elastic pipes and blood vessels. It involves the coupling of fluid flow and structural mechanics, two fields that are conventionally modelled using two dissimilar methods, thus a single comprehensive computational model of both phenomena is a considerable challenge. Until recently work in this area focused on one phenomenon and represented the behaviour of the other more simply. More recently, strategies for solving the full coupling between the fluid and solid mechanics behaviour have been developed. A key contribution has been made by Farhat et al. [Int. J. Numer. Meth. Fluids 21 (1995) 807] employing FV-UM methods for solving the Euler flow equations and a conventional finite element method for the elastic solid mechanics and the spring based mesh procedure of Batina [AIAA paper 0115, 1989] for mesh movement. In this paper, we describe an approach which broadly exploits the three field strategy described by Farhat for fluid flow, structural dynamics and mesh movement but, in the context of DFSI, contains a number of novel features: • a single mesh covering the entire domain, • a Navier–Stokes flow, • a single FV-UM discretisation approach for both the flow and solid mechanics procedures, • an implicit predictor–corrector version of the Newmark algorithm, • a single code embedding the whole strategy.

Dynamic fluid-structure interactions using finite volume unstructured mesh procedures

A three-dimensional finite volume, unstructured mesh (FV-UM) method for dynamic fluid–structure interaction (DFSI) is described. Fluid structure interaction, as applied to flexible structures, has wide application in diverse areas such as flutter in aircraft, wind response of buildings, flows in elastic pipes and blood vessels. It involves the coupling of fluid flow and structural mechanics, two fields that are conventionally modelled using two dissimilar methods, thus a single comprehensive computational model of both phenomena is a considerable challenge. Until recently work in this area focused on one phenomenon and represented the behaviour of the other more simply. More recently, strategies for solving the full coupling between the fluid and solid mechanics behaviour have been developed. A key contribution has been made by Farhat et al. [Int. J. Numer. Meth. Fluids 21 (1995) 807] employing FV-UM methods for solving the Euler flow equations and a conventional finite element method for the elastic solid mechanics and the spring based mesh procedure of Batina [AIAA paper 0115, 1989] for mesh movement. In this paper, we describe an approach which broadly exploits the three field strategy described by Farhat for fluid flow, structural dynamics and mesh movement but, in the context of DFSI, contains a number of novel features: a single mesh covering the entire domain, a Navier–Stokes flow, a single FV-UM discretisation approach for both the flow and solid mechanics procedures, an implicit predictor–corrector version of the Newmark algorithm, a single code embedding the whole strategy.

Dynamic fluid-structure interactions using finite volume unstructured mesh procedures

A three-dimensional finite volume, unstructured mesh (FV-UM) method for dynamic fluid–structure interaction (DFSI) is described. Fluid structure interaction, as applied to flexible structures, has wide application in diverse areas such as flutter in aircraft, wind response of buildings, flows in elastic pipes and blood vessels. It involves the coupling of fluid flow and structural mechanics, two fields that are conventionally modelled using two dissimilar methods, thus a single comprehensive computational model of both phenomena is a considerable challenge. Until recently work in this area focused on one phenomenon and represented the behaviour of the other more simply. More recently, strategies for solving the full coupling between the fluid and solid mechanics behaviour have been developed. A key contribution has been made by Farhat et al. [Int. J. Numer. Meth. Fluids 21 (1995) 807] employing FV-UM methods for solving the Euler flow equations and a conventional finite element method for the elastic solid mechanics and the spring based mesh procedure of Batina [AIAA paper 0115, 1989] for mesh movement. In this paper, we describe an approach which broadly exploits the three field strategy described by Farhat for fluid flow, structural dynamics and mesh movement but, in the context of DFSI, contains a number of novel features: a single mesh covering the entire domain, a Navier–Stokes flow, a single FV-UM discretisation approach for both the flow and solid mechanics procedures, an implicit predictor–corrector version of the Newmark algorithm, a single code embedding the whole strategy.

Comparison of crash dynamics of articulated and non-articulated trains

This paper presents a comparison of impact dynamic performance between articulated trains and non-articulated trains. This is carried out by investigation of the characteristics of the two trains types and analysis of their effects on impact dynamics. The analysis shows that the differences in bogie support positions on the carbody and coupling devices lead to differences in several structural and compositional characteristics. These characteristics result in different impact responses for the two types of train and are directly related to their impact stablity. Articulated trains have stiff connection and integral performance in collisions but with less capability for absorbing impact energy between carriages, whereas non-articulated trains show loose connection and scattered performance in collisions but with more options for energy absorber installation between carriages.