Interpolation Methods Used for One-Way Fluid Structure Interaction of Hydrodynamic Coupling

Article Preview

Abstract:

In the design and manufacturing process of the hydrodynamic coupling, the fluid pressure on the impeller is difficult to calculate when analyzing the strength of the impeller. We can use the one-way fluid-structure interaction analysis. When interpolate the pressure on the flow field and structural coordinate values, choosing reasonable interpolation method can reduce the amount of computation, improve accuracy, simplify product design and manufacturing process. This article is based on one-way fluid-structure interaction analysis. We compare the four interpolation method in MATLAB, conclude that the spline interpolation is better than others. It is the most suitable for practical applications, which can simplify the design of the manufacturing process of the hydrodynamic coupling.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Pages:

4298-4301

Citation:

Online since:

February 2014

Export:

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Permissions PLS:

Сopyright:

© 2014 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

[1] LIU Ying-cheng, YANG Nai-qiao. Application and energy-saving technology of hydrodynamic coupling [M]. Bei Jing: Chemical industry press, (2006).

Google Scholar

[2] YANG Nai-qiao. The New Development of Hydrodynamic Coupling Component [J]. Hydrodynamics Pneumatics and Seals, 2010 (9): 55-58.

Google Scholar

[3] LU Xiu-quan. Research on Fluid-Structure Interaction and Vibration Characteristic of Variable Speed Hydrodynamic Coupling [D]. Chang Chun: Jilin University, (2012).

Google Scholar

[4] HAN Dong-jing. Finite element analysis on the strength of the impeller of hydrodynamic coupling [J]. Colliery Mechanical and Electrical Technology, 2001 (6): 20-23.

Google Scholar

[5] SU Bo, QIAN Ruo-jun, YUAN Xing-fei. Advances in research on theory and method of data exchange on coupling interface for FSI analysis [J]. SPATIAL STRUCTURE, 2010, 16(1): 3-10.

Google Scholar