Sloshing Analysis of Single Impact Wave & Irregular Motions in a 2D Tank – Experiments & Numerics

Louis Diebold & Eric Baudin

Research Department, Marine & Offshore Division, Bureau Veritas
Neuilly-sur-Seine, France

ABSTRACT and the tests considered in this paper (Baudin et al., 2013 and Loysel
(b) et al., 2013). The third one presents some free surface comparison
This paper aims to complete the work carried out so far within the between CFD and experiment for the single impact wave test C16. The
framework of the first and second ISOPE sloshing experimental fourth one presents some comparisons regarding liquid global forces
benchmark by presenting some further comparisons between the between CFD and experiments for the single impact wave tests C16 &
experimental measurements and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) C17 and the irregular test C13. In order to assess the good agreement
calculations (see Baudin et al., 2013, Diebold, 2014, Loysel (a) et al., between experiments and CFD for this irregular test C13, dedicated
2012 and Loysel (b) et al., 2013). These comparisons between statistical post-processing of the liquid global forces maxima is
experiments and CFD will be carried out on free surface elevation, presented. At last but not least, comparisons between experiments &
liquid global forces and time pressure histories. CFD are carried out for time pressure histories (local flow) for the
single impact wave tests C16 & C18, which show very good
KEY WORDS: Sloshing, benchmark, sloshing model tests, liquid repeatability (see Loysel (b), 2013).
global forces, single impact wave, air pocket, CFD, OpenFOAM.
CFD CALCULATIONS
INTRODUCTION
All CFD calculations carried out in this paper use OpenFOAM. The
Since the first edition in 2011, the ISOPE experimental benchmark solvers used for this study are interDyMFoam and
(Baudin et al., 2013, Loysel (a) et al., 2012 & Loysel (b) et al., 2013) compressibleInterDyMFoam from OpenFOAM.
has gathered all the major experts of the sloshing community and has
led them to build a comprehensive set of good practices for the sloshing Solver interDyMFoam
model tests. In particular, during the second benchmark, launched in The interDyMFoam solver is a solver for two incompressible,
2012, the input tests have been decided to produce well-defined types isothermal immiscible fluids using a VOF (volume of fluid) phase-
of impacts (single impact wave) with a high level of repeatability. For fraction based interface capturing approach, in a moving mesh domain.
the assessment of this repeatability, specific instrumentation was This solver solves the well known Navier-Stokes equations,
clearly needed and required within the benchmark specifications such recombined for a moving mesh. Following are presented the equation
as high speed video camera and an independent measurement system of in the punctual versions and written for a moving control volume:
the rig motion. In addition, the authors have settled a global force
measurement system and an alternate peak capture device previously ∇ ⋅ U = 0
described in (Baudin et al., 2012). 
 ∂ρU (1)
 ∂t + ρU ⋅ ∇U = ∇p + µ∆U + f
All these measurements lead to a unique experimental database for
 ∇ ⋅ U dV = ∇ ⋅ U G dV
∫ ∫
sloshing model tests available for everyone. The objective of this paper
is to present some comparisons between these sloshing model tests and
the corresponding CFD calculations using OpenFOAM. These   ∂ρU 
∫  + ρU ⋅ ∇U  dV = (2)
comparisons are performed for the single impact wave and irregular   ∂t 
tests that were considered in this benchmark. Global flow (such as free = (∇p + µ∆U + f ) dV + (ρU ⋅ ∇U ) dV
surface elevation and liquid global forces) and local flow (such as time  ∫ ∫ G

pressure histories) quantities are both considered for comparison

between experiments and CFD. This paper is divided in five main
sections.
The first one describes the considered CFD solvers (incompressible and
compressible). The second one presents briefly the experimental setup
The term UG represents the velocity of the mesh. Basically a new
virtual flux is added to the equation to take in account the moving of
the mesh. The time marching is performed with an Eulerian implicit
approach, that increases the stability of the solution. This solver uses a
volume of fluid (VOF) method to track the interface between the two

Due to copyright restrictions only the first page is available