00 voto positivo00 votos negativos

1 vistas52 páginasTeses sobre simulação de vários cilindros

Mar 02, 2018

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF o lea en línea desde Scribd

Teses sobre simulação de vários cilindros

© All Rights Reserved

1 vistas

00 voto positivo00 votos negativos

Teses sobre simulação de vários cilindros

© All Rights Reserved

Está en la página 1de 52

x UNIVERSITY
“or ABERDEEN
School of Engineering, University of Aberdeen
11.05.2012
Numerical Simulation of
Seaweed and Flow
Interaction
Author: Michael Bruce
Supervisor: Dr. Yakun Guo
Student ID: 50907653
This thesis was submitted as part of the requirement for MEng Degree
in EngineeringAbstract
This project looks at the hydrodynamic effects and velocity fields of different
seaweed patches and densities. A numerical simulation was set up to represent
seaweed hanging in a flow. When analysing the model, velocities were selected
to coincide with the conditions occurring in Loch Etive, Scotland where is being
considered as a location for Scotland's first seaweed farm.
The computational fluid dynamics programme FLUENT was used to simulate
results for this project. Arrays of cylinders were set up to see the change in
velocity profiles and the drag coefficient across a range of velocities.
Unfortunately due to complications of the software, a full range of results were
unable to be obtained.
This project found the highest drag coefficient occurred when there were more
objects to accelerate around. Some models experienced velocity increases of
cover 200% when flowing in-between cylinders.
As the outcome of this project, it is recommended further research should be
carried out looking into flow patterns of patch size and densities before a
decision can be made on the best approach to maximising growth rate.Table of Contents
Abstract
List of Figures...
‘Symbols and Notations
1 Introduction...
1.1 Background and Justification
1.2 Aims and Objectives.
2 Literature Review.
2.1 Hydrodynamics of Seaweed.....
2.2. Flow around Smooth Single Cylinders ........
2.3 Velocity Field....
2.4 Patch Size and Density.......
3 Set-up of Numerical Simulation.
3.1 Introduction ...
3.2 Governing Equations...
3.3 Numerical Model........
3.4 Geometry
3.4.1 Introduction...
3.4.2 Single Cylinder Model......
3.4.3 Row of Cylinders Model
3.4.4 Column of Cylinders Model.
3.4.5 Offset Cylinders Model
3.4.6 Triangular Formation of Cylinders Model.
3.4.7 Square Formation of Cylinders Model ..
3.5 Meshing Method...
3.6 Quality of Meshing,
4 ANSYS-FLUENT..
4.1 Introduction42
Pressure-Based Solver ....
4.3 Spatial Discretization Scheme.....
4.4 Boundary Conditions...
4.5 Solution Initialization.
4.6 Model Validation,
5 Results.
5.1 Single Cylinder model...
5.2 Cylinders in a row.......
5.3 Cylinders in a Column...
5.4 Cylinders at an offset formation...
5.5 Cylinders in a triangular formation
5.6 Cylinders in a square formation
5.7 Drag Coefficients.
6 Discussion.
61
6.2
6.3
64
65
66
66
67
68
7 Recommendation for future work...
8 Conclusion
References.
Introduction ...
Single Cylinder Model ...
Row of Cylinders Model ..
Column of Cylinders Model.....
Offset Cylinders Model
Triangular Formation of Cylinders Model
‘Square Formation of Cylinders Model...
Drag Coefficients.
Other data...
oe 24
oe 25
1 26
26
27
oe 32
2 35
1 36
38
39
44
42
2 43
2 43
oe 44
2 45
45
46
110 46
46
247List of Figures
Figure 1 - Harvested seaweed [1]....... 8
Figure 2 - Single cylinder model geometry created on ANSYS Design Modeler
soe 1B
Figure 3 - Row of cylinders model geometry created on ANSYS Design Modeler
eveeneeneeee 19
Figure 4 - Column of cylinders mode! geometry created on ANSYS Design
Modeler . . . soe 1D
Figure 5 - Offset cylinders model geometry created on ANSYS Design Modeler
20
Figure 6 - Triangular formation of cylinders model geometry created on ANSYS
Design Modeler... 20
Figure 7 - Square formation of cylinders model geometry created on ANSYS
Design Modeler... 121
Figure 8 - Mesh on x-z cross-sectional plane..... 22
Figure 9 - Cylinder drag coefficients at various Reynolds numbers... 28
Figure 10 - Comparison of simulated and measured time-averaged pressure
coefficients at cylinders surface. 28
Figure 11 - Angle on cylinder surface 29
Figure 12 - Comparison of simulated and measured time-averaged stream-wise
velocities at the symmetry line x/D=0.... 29
Figure 13 - Comparison of simulated & measured time-averaged stream-wise
velocities along z/D=3..... ... 30
Figure 14 - Comparison of simulated & measured time-averaged stream-wise
velocities along z/D=1 .... ... 30
Figure 15 - Single cylinder velocity vectors at 0.2m/s. 32
Figure 16 - Single cylinder velocity contours at 0.2m/s 32
Figure 17 - Single cylinder velocity vectors at 0.3 m/s 33
Figure 18 - Single cylinder velocity contours at 0.3m/s ... 33
Figure 19 - Single cylinder velocity vectors at 0.4 mis. 134
Figure 20 - Single cylinder velocity contours at 0.4 mis .. 134
Figure 21 - Row of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.2 mis. 35
Figure 22 - Row of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.3 mis... 1.35Figure 23 - Row of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.4 mis... 36
Figure 24 - Column of cylinders velocity profile at 0.2 m/s 36
Figure 25 - Column of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.3 mis ... 37
Figure 26 - Column of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.4 m/s 37
Figure 27 - Offset formation of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.2 MIS -avu-uee- 38
Figure 28 - Offset formation of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.3 m/s 38
Figure 29 - Offset formation of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.4 MIS sacs: 39
Figure 30 - Triangular formation of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.2 m/s. 39
Figure 31 - Triangular formation of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.3 m/S........ 40
Figure 32 - Triangular formation of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.4 m/s... 40
Figure 33 - Square formation of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.2 MIS -vsese- 41
Figure 34 - Square formation of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.3 m/s au
Figure 35 - Square formation of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.4 MIS .-.cueee- 42
Figure 36 - Comparison of drag coefficients for all models .... 142
List of Tables
Table 1 - Flow regimes for smooth circular cylinder in an undisturbed flow......13
Table 2 - Mesh quality in regards to value of maximum skewness........
Table 3 - Mesh Quality for the models createdSymbols and Notations
A- Measure of area (m*)
Ca - Coefficient of drag
D - Diameter (m)
f - Frequency (Hz)
F4- Drag force (N)
KC - Keulegan-Carpenter Number
p - Density (kg/m?)
Re - Reynolds number
S;- Strouhal Number
t- Time (s)
T - Period of oscillation (s)
U, - Free-stream velocity (m/s)
v - Kinematic Viscosity (m*/s)1 Introduction
1.1. Background and Justification
Seaweed is a loose umbrella term for many types of marine algae. Seaweed
can be used widely for a number of uses including food, medicinal purposes
and even by farmers as a fertilizer. It has been grown purposely for food in
China and Japan for over 2000 years. This is due to its availability, nutritional
values and it's relatively simple cultivation. Today seaweed cultivation is a major
economy in both Japan and China with 1,000,000 tonnes of dry seaweed being
sold a year at a total value of $3,000 million.
One area of seaweed that has not been researched extensively is its use as a
biofuel. Only in recent years has this been suggested as a use, due to an
increasing demand for alternate energy sources. Seaweed can be cultivated
extremely fast compared to other stocks therefore would be an economically
preferential source of fuel. Due to its relative low maintenance and quick growth
rate, seaweed can be seen as an economically viable way of producing a crop
that can be converted into a fuel that can help to cope with the earths increasing
demands for energy
Figure 1 — Harvested seaweed [1]
Seaweed growth rate depends on three vital components: Light intensity in
order to absorb photons for photosynthesis, all the nutrients required must be
8available in the flow of water that passes, and a regular flow of water. The water
motion is essential for plant growth as it cleans the plant, brings fresh nutrients
and applies hydraulic forces that stimulate plant growth.
The flow of water passing seaweed is a new topic and has not been studied
specifically before. Other similar topics such as mussel farming have some
parallels and can be used as good background information when looking at
similar details.
1.2 Aims and Objectives
This flow of water around the seaweed is what is to be investigated within this
project, looking at the details of the velocity flow field, the interaction of flow and
seaweed and the drag forces on the seaweed. After initial details are found on a
singular piece of seaweed the model will then be expanded to multiple pieces of
seaweed in different shapes and densities to investigate which patches are
most suitable for gaining maximum growth rate.
All these factors will be investigated using three-dimensional numerical software
FLUENT.2 Literature Review
2.1 Hydrodynamics of Seaweed
When flow comes into contact with seaweed there are several hydrodynamic
effects which must be considered. Due to the drag forces and low Young's
Modulus there will be a reconfiguration of the seaweed. The drag forces will
also result in a change in the velocity of the flow around, and at the lee-side of
the sea plant.
Sand-Jensen [2] describes the reconfiguration of five types of sea plants and
confirmed several predictions, One is that with increasing the flexibility of the
plant, the reconfiguration of the plant increases which, in tum, means a lower
drag coefficient. This means that the lower the Young's modulus of the plant,
the easier the plant would move with the flow and therefore would have a lower
drag coefficient. Conversely, Sand-Jensen comments that with increasing
velocities more flexible plants have a steeper decline in drag coefficient
Another point Sand-Jensen states is that plants on a horizontally flat substratum
bend over in the flow to attain a position of low drag
For this project however it has been decided that the seaweed will be hanging
from a structure on the surface of the sea. This means that in terms of Sand-
Jensen findings, the plant would be inverted and the flow would pass under and
around the plant as opposed to over and around. Sand-Jensen witnesses that
with enough velocity the plant would reconfigure to be aligned with the
horizontal plane; he proves this by carrying out experiments on 5 sea plants. As
the water velocity increased, the bending angle always decreased.
Denny and Gaylord [3] also describe their investigations into the mechanics of
wave-swept algae. The authors go into more detail describing how as the
seaweed bends not only because of its low stiffness but also due to the
seaweed having a lower cross sectional area and also a long length of stipe (in
‘comparison to the length of the blade). These factors of low stiffness, low cross-
sectional area and long length of stipe result in easy plant reconfiguration. The
journal points to the stipe of the giant bull kelp Nereocystis leutkeana as an
10example of how with a stiffness of SOMPa and small diameter (<1cm) acts more
like a rope as opposed to functioning as a branch of a tree.
Boller and Carrington [4] argue that streamlining is caused mainly due to frontal
area change and there is only a little reduction in drag coefficient. The journal
goes on to explain that the reconfiguration of macro algae is essential to the
survival of the plant.
Interaction of farms and hydrodynamics are important as culture installations
affect passing waves and therefore there is the transfer of energy [5] from the
flow to the structure. This transfer of energy is made up of several interacting
forces, one being the total drag force acting on the object in the flow. This drag
force can be assessed by the quadratic relationship:
Fa = 5Capau,? (1)
Where C,is a steady drag coefficient, p is the fluid density, A is a measure of
Area and U, is the mean streamline velocity. Stevens et al [6] states that the
choice of area is arbitrary but must be consistent with the choice of drag
coefficient.
Rearranging this formula we can gather that the Cy can be calculated by
C= @)
"AUS?"
This shows that the drag coefficient will be influenced by the area which the
force is projected on, the drag force of the body and the velocity at which the
flow travels at.
The total force on the structure will be a combination of the wave forces,
buoyancy and connections between each patch. Buck and Buchholz [7] confirm
that the length of the crop is the greatest surface area in terms of wet mass (in
contact with fluid) therefore the crop will sustain the majority of the loading
Demes et al [8] agree with the selection of the previous equations set for
determining the drag forces of solid objects in a moving fluid. Demes et al [8]
reverberates the concept that increasing the thickness of the blade will coincide
1with the increasing flexural stiffness and will also, in turn, increase the breaking
force of the crop
Applying the above knowledge to this project would mean that with using thicker
seaweed would result in the seaweed being able to resist higher hydrodynamic
forces occurring from the waves and currents,
2.2 Flow around Smooth Single Cylinders
When flow takes place around a solid body the boundary layer always
separates from the body [9], the place at which this takes place is known as the
separation point. Downstream of this point the flow is disturbed by large-scale
eddys caused by the unsteady separation of flow over the body. This
disturbance is known as the wake. The highly turbulent motion causes energy
dissipation and this results in a reduction in pressure around the body thus
causing an increase of pressure drag. The magnitude of this pressure drag
depends on the size of the wake behind the body. Therefore the point of
separation is pivotal in influencing the pressure drag around the body. The point
of separation is dictated by the non dimensional, Reynolds number
Re = (3)
where D is the characteristic length of the cylinder (the diameter) and v is the
kinematic viscosity of the fluid.
For very low Reynolds numbers, the flow is of a laminar regime and does not
apply to the current project. Fully turbulent flow occurs at extremely high values
of Reynolds number, therefore the transition between laminar and turbulent
consist of a series of transitional flow regimes.
Zdravkovich [10] describes the regimes of flows and how they are characterised
is briefly summarised below;
In the first region after laminar flow, as the Reynolds number is increasing
turbulence spreads upstream but the free-shear layers in the wake of the
circular cylinder remain laminar.
12The second region is when the free-shear layers in the wake become turbulent
as the Reynolds number increases again
The final region to become a turbulent flow is the cylinder boundary layer. The
transition between laminar and turbulent first starts with turbulence at the
separation point before then moving upstream then finally evoking the full
cylinder, after this regime the flow is fully turbulent.
Zdravkovich experimented with ranges of Reynolds numbers to see at which
number each regime is achieved for a smooth circular cylinder, the results are
shown in the table below:
State_| Description Re Range
L Laminar 0 to 180-200
Transition in the wake, elsewhere
TW | laminar 180-200 to 350-400
Transition in the shear-layers, turbulent
TrSL_ | wake 350-400 to 10°- 2 x 10°
105-2 x 10° to 6 x 10°-8 x
TrBL | Transition in the circular boundary layers | 10°
T Fully Turbulent Flow >Bx 10°
‘Table 2 -Flow regimes for smooth circular cylinder in an undisturbed flow, Zaravkovich [10]
In the current project, the viscosity and the diameter will remain constant, only
the change in velocity will have an effect on the Reynolds number.
One factor that must also be mentioned is the characteristic shedding of eddies.
This frequency of eddy shedding is denoted by the Strouhal number which is
given by
(4)
where f is the frequency of vortex shedding.
132.3 Velocity Field
A review by Sumer et al [11] discusses how placing a structure in a flow can
have several effects. One of these effects is the resulting horseshoe vortex that
can be created on the near side of the cylinder due to the rotation of the
incoming flow. Vortices are also created behind the cylinder; these are known
as lee-wake vortices. These vortices are created by the rotation of the boundary
layer on the surface of the circular cylinder. The journal also noted that if the
Keulegan-Carpenter number was below six then no horseshoe vortex would be
present.
Increasing Reynolds number means escalating the turbulence therefore the
effect of vortices on the lee-side of the object becomes much greater. Sumer et
al concludes that the horseshoe vortices exposed to waves are mainly
governed by the Keulegan-Carpenter formula,
vot
Kc =", (6)
where Up, T and D indicate the amplitude of the wave velocity, the wave time
period and the cylinder diameter.
In terms of velocity, Plew [12] investigates the effects of long-line mussel
droppers on flows. One conclusion the report drew was that mussel farms
caused a water velocity reduction between 47% and 67%. It should also be
noted that the water was diverted horizontally around the structure as oppose to
passing under the crop.
Telfer [13] describes a hydrographical report on Loch Etive. Tefler shows how
there is a change in flows at different depths in the Loch, with the highest
velocities experienced near the surface. This report was comissioned for a
client interested in starting up a fish farm. The regular flow of water through a
fish farm is essential to bring nutrients to the farm and get rid of waste; the
‘same applies to a patch of seaweed. At the surface of the water Tefler states
that the flow speed is rather slow and only varies from slightly above 0 mis to a
rare maximum of 0.4 mis. Based on this report, these will be the range of
14velocities that will be investigated in the current project. These velocities will
give the flow a range of Reynolds numbers from 4000 to 8000, which according
to Zdravkovich [10] will cause a transition in the shear layers meaning they are
becoming turbulent.
2.4 Patch Size and Density
Plew [12] also investigated the effects of multiple cylinders of different
roughnesses to monitor what effect they had on the flow. It was found that drag
increased with the spacing between the cylinders decreasing. Plew also shows
that the drag coefficient of rougher cylinders increase at a higher rate than
those of smooth cylinders, Peak turbulent Kinetic energy was also 49% higher
‘on rough cylinders than those on similarly spaced smooth cylinders. After the
spacing experiments were carried out Plew moved on to testing different angles
of placing the cylinders and configuring them in different orders. For double
rows of cylinders it is calculated that the drag would be significantly higher. Also
the direction of the line of mussels was investigated to see if that would have
had an effect on the flow.
153 Set-up of Numerical Simulation
3.1 Introduction
Guo, Zhang and Zhang [14] set up a numerical simulation looking at
overlapping cylinders to see the interaction between turbulent flow and deep-
sea marine structures. The structure was set up by placing a thinner diameter
cylinder on top of a larger one to see what affects these shapes had on the
velocity field. This study model used similar conditions as those required for this
project will be therefore the information can be used as suggestion for the
parameters to be set in ANSYS-FLUENT.
The purpose of the numerical simulation is to show the interaction between
seaweed and different velocities and patch shapes.
3.2 Governing Equations
In order to separate the large scale and small scale motions the three
dimensional, for incompressible flow the Navier-Stokes equation must be
filtered. This low-pass filtering allows only non-small scales to pass, reducing
the computational cost of the simulation. The governing equations are given by
Rogallo and Moin [15]
5a
0, (6)
ty = teil) — Ti, (8)
Where, iis the velocity component of the resolved scales and Re is the
Reynolds number. The filtered incompressible continuity equation (6) and the
filtered Navier-Stokes equations of the resolved values is the result of filtering
the continuity equation and Navier-Stokes equation respectively. The low-pass
16filtered momentum equation (8) has a value 1,, for the non resolvable subgrid
scale (SGS) code stresses. 14, describes the motion of smaller scaled
structures on the Larger Eddy's.
These SGS stresses are not known and therefore approximations are required.
Using the Boussinesq hypothesis, the SGS turbulent stresses can be calculated
by
(9)
where i, is the SGS eddy viscosity calculated as a function of the strain tensor
for the resolved scale. Represented by;
+) (10)
The governing equations mentioned previously are solved using the proposed
numerical model.
3.3. Numerical Model
Countless numerical models are used for the simulation of turbulent flows. For
this project it is difficult to find a comparable model of seaweed hanging from
the surface of a flow. A cylinder shape is chosen to represent the seaweed as it
reflects the vortex effects that will occur in the wake of the structure. A large
eddy simulation (LES) is chosen due its low-pass filter which eliminates small
scales in Navier-Scales equation mentioned previously.
The commercial finite-volume CFD code, FLUENT 12.0, is selected to study the
flow features around the formations of hanging circular cylinders. The
incompressible Navier-Stokes equations are used along with the SGS
Smogorinsky-Lilly in the LES. [16]
173.4 Geometry
3.4.1 Introduction
Bodies were set up in way that the cylinders would hang from the surface of a
channel with flow passing the body. The geometries were carried out in ANSYS.
Design Modeler. A three dimensional model was created in each of the cases.
All channel widths were of 0.1m and water depths of 0.3m. Each cylinder had a
length of 0.25m so that calculations underneath the structure could also be
taken into consideration. The diameter of the cylinder used was 002m which
represents the thickness of a stipe of seaweed. The length of the tank modelled
was 0.2m with the first cylinder placed proportionally closer to the velocity inlet
allowing full velocity flow field to be seen behind the structure. A distance of
5mm is used between cylinders on the same axis.
3.4.2 Single Cylinder Model
Figure 2 - Single cylinder model geometry created on ANSYS Design Mod!
183.4.3 Row of Cylinders Model
Figure 3 - Row of cylinders model geometry created on ANSYS Design Modeler
3.4.4 Column of Cylinders Model
Figure 4 - Column of cylinders model geometry created on ANSYS Design Modeler
193.4.5. Offset Cylinders Model
Figure 5 - Offset cylinders model goometry created on ANSYS Design Modeler
3.4.6 Triangular Formation of Cylinders Model
Figure 6 — Triangular formation of eylinders model geometry created on ANSYS Design Modeler
203.4.7. Square Formation of Cylinders Model
Figure 7 - Square formation of cylinders model geometry created on ANSYS Design Modeler
3.5 Meshing Method
Meshing was carried out with ANSYS meshing software. A triangular mesh was
chosen as a quadrilateral mesh of acceptable quality was not available. A
frozen body around the cylinder of 0.05m by 0.05m was chosen as a body
sizing for a refined mesh. In this body sizing the element size used was 0.004m,
Grids were also refined in the z-axis and x-axis of the body around the cylinder.
This is done in order to achieve a more accurate view of the velocity field
around and behind the cylinder. This outer refinement used was of element size
0.0075m. On the remaining body an element size used was of 0.009m. These
elements sizes were chosen to ensure that the mesh would provide sufficiently
accurate results. In order to improve the quality of results on the wall of the fluid,
in contact with the cylinder, had a mapped face to ensure that readings could be
taking from 360° around the cylinder at the same he ight. The mesh used can be
seen below in figure 8, An unstructured mesh is used as a structured mesh is
not available on the computers that are available for this project. The
21unstructured mesh causes a greater number of cells to be chosen and therefore
the quality of the mesh is sacrificed as the classroom computers can only
process up to 1 milion cells.
Figure 8 - Mesh on xz cross-sectional plane
3.6 Quality of Meshing
The quality of meshing is essential to ensure an accurate analysis of the
‘simulation. A fine mesh will only produce more accurate data than a coarse
mesh if the mesh elements are of the same or better quality. The quality of the
mesh is defined by three important factors; the maximum cell squish, the
maximum cell skewness and the maximum aspect ratio.
The value of skewness can be compared to the following table to see the cell
quality,
22Value of Skewness Cell Quality
7 Degenerate
0.9-<4 Bad (sliver)
0.75-0.9 Poor
0.5-0.75 Fair
025-05 Good
30-025 Excellent
0 Equilateral
Table Z- Mesh quality in regards to Value of maximum skewness [76]
Maximum cell squish accounts for the compressed ratio of the cell. The worst
cells have a value of close to 1, with the better quality cells tending to 0. The
maximum cell squish is recommended to be under 0.95 for tetrahedral cells.
Aspect ratio is the measure of how stretched the cell is. For flow simulation, like
we have in the current project, it is important to keep the aspect ratio below 35:1
[16].
Number of | Maximum | Maximum ) Maximum | a aity of
Model Elements | _ cel cell aspect | Mesh
squish_| skewness ratio
Single Cylinder | 477426 _| 0.7983 | 0.8358 18.68 Poor
Row 318662 | 0.7617 | 0.8089 16.34 Poor
Column 429583 | 0.7809 | 0.8072 18.71 Poor
Offset 279780 | 0.8019 | 0.8289 16.93 Poor
Triangle 350354 _| 0.7484 0.8168 15.62 Poor
‘Square 396973 | 0.7352 | 0.8146 16.17 Poor
Table 3 - Mesh Quality or the models created
Although the qualities of meshes above are classified as poor, the average
skewness is below 0.75 and proves to be of much better quality. Ansys user
guide states that is common for 3D models to experience some elements which
have a skewness with a value of above 0.9 [17]. For this project this can be
overlooked as a poor skewness value is only occurs in a minimal amount of
elements. Using the average cell skewness value for each model the mesh is of
fair quality according to table 3.
234 ANSYS-FLUENT
4.1 — Introduction
ANSYS FLUENT is an adaptable Computational Fluid Dynamic (CFD) software
which allows the simulation of heat transfer, model flow, turbulence and
reactions, The software has high-performance computing capabilities and can
model two-dimensional and three-dimensional structures capable of flows of
turbulent, transient, laminar, incompressible, compressible, and steady
behaviours. FLUENT is also capable of producing flows in a gas or liquid state
while being able to edit properties of the fluid/solid. The ANSYS version used in
this project is ANSYS 12 [16]
ANSYS Workbench contains all the steps required for the simulation. The
workbench houses individual components such as Design Modeler, Meshing
and FLUENT. All of these components are used in the current project and
linked to one another through the workbench interface. Having the Workbench
interface means that the analyses can be kept in one place and makes different
components easily accessible.
ANSYS FLUENT is professional package which is used in industry as well as
for research purposes. The software is supported by a users guide, theory
manuals and technical assistance online [17].
42 Pressure-Based Solver
Although ANSYS FLUENT has two solvers, the pressure-based solver and the
density-based solver, the pressure-based solver is chosen as the preferred
solver for this project. In both solvers, the velocity field is derived from a
pressure equation; this pressure equation is in turn derived from the continuity
and momentum equations [17]. For the selected pressure-based coupled
algorithm, the continuity and momentum equations are simultaneously solved
Iterations will continue until the solution converges. A pressure-based coupled
algorithm maybe used as oppose to a pressure-based segregated algorithm this
24maybe preferable due to a faster rate of convergence, however this comes at a
cost of computational expense.
A pressure-velocity coupling method must be used in order to define the
segregated algorithm used by FLUENT during its calculations. It is
recommended that for a Large Eddy Simulation, pressure implicit with splitting
of operator (PISO) is selected. The PISO pressure-velocity coupling is based on
the higher order of approximation in terms of the correlation relationship
between pressure and velocity. Limitations of the SIMPLE and SIMPLEC
pressure-velocity coupling methods [18] are that the new velocities with their
corresponding fluxes do not satisfy the momentum equation, PISO method
overcomes this with a neighbour correction and a skewness correction
The non-iterative time-advancement (NITA) scheme is used as this speeds up
the transient simulation by making the splitting error of the same order as the
truncation error.
43 Spatial Discretization Scheme
Fluent stores discrete scalar values of the cells by default, however, the face
scalar values of the cells are required to calculate convection terms in the
governing equations of the project. These are important in determining the
accuracy of the solution,
For the discretization of the momentum equation, the bounded central
difference scheme is automatically selected for LES in its view of low number
diffusion. This selection is performed by default by FLUENT and is therefore
seen as the best selection for the project.
For the discretization of the Pressure equations, the PRESTO! option is used
PRESTO! (PREssure Staggering Option) uses discrete continuity to stagger the
control volume and therefore calculates a staggered pressure.
All model settings were chosen with computational cost and accuracy in
consideration to get the best balance between an accurate yet relatively quick
solution.
254.4 Boundary Conditions
In setting the boundary conditions it is imperative that they best resemble the
actual scenario that will occur in the loch where the seaweed will be grown. If
boundary conditions differ from actual conditions that are in the loch then the
project research would not be valid. Boundary condition options vary dependent
‘on which boundary has been selected.
For this project the velocity flow inlet is set at one boundary closest to the
cylinder on the X-Y plane. From Tefler’s hydrographical report the velocities
used in the project can range between 0 and 0.4 m/s for near surface fluid in
Loch Etive, for the current project a range of velocities will be used of 0.2mis,
0.3m/s and 0.4m/s to see the velocity profiles at the higher velocities in the
Loch. The opposite facing boundary is set as the flow outflow. No-slip wall
boundary conditions are set for the solid surfaces. This applies to the cylinder
surface and also the base of the model. Applying a wall boundary condition
prevents fluid passing through it and therefore velocities of fluid would approach
zero towards the wall. This is the reason that the lateral and top boundaries are
set to symmetry conditions. Symmetry setting means that the boundary acts like
a mirror where fluid velocity does not reduce but does not cross the boundary
either. The symmetry condition is chosen for the lateral boundaries as the fluid
in the loch would not have wall boundaries close by unless the seaweed was
grown near a solid boundary (e.g. a rocky face).
4.5 Solution Initialization
Solution initialization is vital in ensuring that initial conditions are similar to the
values produced in the converged results. Solution initialization allows a
definition of flow variables and therefore the software initializes the flow field to
these values. Initial values are the values that are set for the beginning of the
flow from that boundary. ‘Compute from’ allows the user to compute values
from a particular zone, in terms of the current project all variables will be
calculated from a velocity set at the velocity inlet.
26Anon dimensional time-step (At U, / D) of 0.005 is used to simulate the full flow
cycle in the model.
Once these settings have been customised, the simulation can begin. After
each iteration FLUENT reports residuals, which are the sum of conserved
quantities, back to the user on a window which can also be used to view the
drag convergence history of the model. Both graphs can be used to predict how
the simulation is converging (or diverging) and can be used to observe initial
values of drag of the models.
4.6 Model Validation
Before results can be analysed the single cylinder model must be validated
against results from existing literature this is to ensure that the model settings
and under relaxation factors are correct. For the single cylinder model, a flow
Reynolds numbers of 1.4 x 10° is used as is used in the experimental data of
Cantwell & Coles [19].
The single model is also verified against experimental data concluded in the
experiments mentioned above. In their project they experimented with a circular
cylinder attached to the bottom surface of the tank, in this current project the
cylinder is hanging from the water, this difference must be excused in verifying
the model as there is a distinct lack of research investigating a hanging cylinder
in a flow. This exception has been allowed due to the Plew [12] showing that
fluid deflects around the patch and minimal flow goes under the cylinder.
In the validation study the single cylinder should compare well against Cantwell
& Coles well documented experiments.
At this Reynolds number the drag coefficient of the single cylinder body is
converged to 1.231 which coincides with the experimental data (Cs = 1.237) as
shown below:
27Key: é - Single Cylinder Co
lo 1 to 1 1 tots?
Re
Figure 9 Cylinder drag coofficients at various Reynolds numbers
Pressure Coefficient around Cylinder Surface
edge
Cantwell & Coles (1983)
me current Project
Degrees
Figure 10 - Comparison of simulated and measured time-averaged pressure coefficients at
cylinders surface
The minimum C, occurred at 90° and 270° on the circle when positi oned with
O° onto the oncoming flow as shown above. There is significant difference in the
pressure coefficient at the lee-side of the cylinder which may cause slight errors
28in the velocities of the measured data. This has been accounted for as the drag
coefficient of each model will still be able to be gathered and compared.
Figure 11 describes how the angle around the cylinder surface is obtained.
Flow of water (oy
Figure 11 - Angle on cylinder surface
The calculated Strouhal number S; = 0.192 was slightly higher than the
measured Strouhal number of S; =0.179, although it compares favourably with
Plews [12] calculated value of S,= 0.19.
Model Validation against Cantwell & Coles
(1983)
12
ra
os
. wm current Projet
206
3
Cantwell & Coles (1983)
oa
02
o
0 2 «6 8 4%
Figure 12 - Comparison of simulated and measured time-averaged stream-wise velocities at the
symmetry line x/D=0
29Model Validation against Cantwell & Coles
(1983)
‘© Cantwell & Coles (1983)
Velocity U/U,
4 Current project,
02
_
2 a ° 1 2
x/D
Figure 13 - Comparison of simulated & measured time-averaged stream-wise velocities along 2/D=3
Model Validation against Cantwell & Coles
(1983)
oa
Cantwell & Coles (1983)
mCurrent Project,
Figure 14 - Comparison of simulated & measured time-averaged stream-wise velocities along 2/D=1
From the previous Figures it can be seen that the simulated results and the
measured results show similar patterns but differ in magnitude. Figure 12 is a
plot of compared values of simulated and measure time averaged stream-wise
30velocities along the symmetry line (WD = 0). These results show a similar
tendency to rise fast and approach a maximum U/U,. For the measured results
the time-averaged velocities in the symmetry line only reach 80% of the
maximum stream-wise velocity but the simulated results approaches much
closer to 100%.
Figure 13 shows the simulated and measured time-averaged stream-wise
velocities along z/D = 3. In this graph it is clear to see the behaviour of the
velocity on the lee-side of the cylinder. In the simulated results the velocity
achieves a maximum velocity of around 80% where in the measured tests, the
lee-side velocities dropped to around 63%. Both results show a symmetric
range of velocities about the centre line symmetry x/D=0.
Figure 14 presents the simulated and measure time-averaged normal velocities
along z/D = 1 symmetry plane. Large normal velocities can be seen at the lee-
side of the cylinder, this conveys the strength of the vortices that should be
created,
Viewing Figures 12-14 it can be said that the LES settings chosen in FLUENT
are not entirely accurate as the values do not match perfectly, however, since
the graphs are of the similar trends they can be used as an estimate of the
velocity flow field and drag coefficient of the selected models.
315 Results
5.1 Single Cylinder model
Figure 15 — Single cylinder velocity vectors at 0.2m/s
Figure 16 - Single cylinder velocity contours at 0.2m/s
32Figure 17 - Single cylinder velocity vectors at 0.3 m/s
Figure 18 - Single cylinder velocity contours at 0.3m/s
33,Figure 19 - Single cylinder velocity vectors at 0.4 m/s
Figure 20 - Single cylinder velocity contours at 0.4 mis5.2 Cylinders in a row
Figure 21 ~ Row of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.2 mis.
Figure 22 - Row of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.3 mis
35Figure 23 - Row of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.4 mis
5.3 Cylinders in a Column
Figure 24 - Column of cylinders velocity profile at 0.2 m/sFigure 25 - Column of cylindors volocity vactors at 0.3 mis
Figure 26 - Column of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.4 mis
375.4 Cylinders at an offset formation
Figure 28 - Offset formation of cylinders volocity vectors at 0.3 misFigure 29 - Offset formation of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.4 mis
5.5 Cylinders in a triangular formation
Figure 30 - Triangular formation of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.2 mis
39Figure 32 - Triangular formation of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.4 mis
405.6 Cylinders in a square formation
Figure 34 - Square formation of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.3 m/s,
aFigure 35 - Square formation of cylinders velocity vectors at 0.4 mis
5.7 Drag Coefficients
3
25
g
Pp? single
Row
Bis oe"
= Column
5 1 Se oriset
se Triangle
os me Square
°
° 02 04 06
Free-Stream Velocity (m/s)
Figure 36 - Comparison of drag coefficients for all models
426 Discussion
6.1 Introduction
For the each cylinder a flow approached, a general pattern emerged. Flow
would reduce in velocity as it advanced towards a cylinder and then divert
around the body. The flow would increase in velocity around the cylinder
achieving a maximum velocity at 90° and 270° coinci ding with the maximum
pressure coefficients. The flow then decreases in velocity on the lee-side of the
cylinder with a minimum velocity at 180° just behind the cylinder surface. For
each of the different models tested, significantly different velocity patterns were
apparent. It should be noted that all velocity vectors have been scaled up to be
able to improve clarity of the velocity magnitudes.
62 Single Cylinder Model
From Figure 15, a free-stream velocity of 0.2mis is used with the single cylinder
model; the velocity profile shows a typical pattern without the vortices at the lee-
side of the model. As the flow approaches the body the velocity is reduced to
zero due to the affect of the boundary layer. The flow is diverted around the
body and acceleration takes place. This acceleration is due to having to travel a
further distance than the rest of the free-stream velocity.
On the outside of the cylinder surface where maximum pressure occurs, the
velocity increases to almost double the free-stream velocity. At maximum
pressure the velocities are not symmetrical either side of the cylinder, this is
probably due to the model being validated inaccurately.
In Figure 16 the contours of the velocity field are shown. Minimum velocities are
‘shown towards the surface of the cylinder with bulbous contours emerging from
the lee-side of the cylinder surface. It takes almost 2 full diameter lengths to
return to free-stream velocity.
Figures 17 and 19 show the vectors of free-stream velocity 0.3m/s and 0.4m/s
respectively. The velocity patterns are similar to that of Figure 15. The velocity
43reduces significantly at the frontal area of the cylinder and accelerates to a
velocity twice the magnitude of U,. The velocity then reduces significantly at the
lee-side of the cylinder where the wake should appear. In both figure 15 and 17
the velocity takes around 1.5 to 2 diameter length to return to U,,
Figure 18 represents the contours of the velocities at U, = 0.3m/s on the single
cylinder. The patter is similar to that of Figure 16. The flow is slow in front of
the cylinder and at the lee-side, maximum velocities occur at the points closest
to the tank walls. The velocity then accelerates once again to U,, like Figure 16
this occurs in bulbous-shaped contours.
Figure 19 illustrates the contours of the velocity profile at a U, = 0.4m/s. This
Figure shows a different pattern to that of Figures 18 & 19. Although the
contours close to cylinder surface are similar, the outermost contour after the
cylinder extends to the boundaries of the plane.
6.3 Rowof Cylinders Model
In Figures 21, 22 & 23 the velocity profiles of the flow around the modelled row
of cylinders are shown. Each model shows similar pattems where the flow
slows at the front of the cylinders and increases in velocity at the maximum
pressure locations on the cylinder. In the gap between the cylinders
accelerating flow is up to 4 times the magnitude of U,. This is due to flow being
diverted into this gap from flow approaching cylinders on the outside of the gap.
Interestingly Figure 23 shows a different flow pattern in the wake of the
cylinders. In Figure 21 & 22 the flow returns to U, almost immediately but in
Figure 23 this is not the case. A gentle parabola shows the return to U,, which
occurs approximately 1.5 diameter lengths behind the middle cylinder. This can
be explained by an increase in turbulence, therefore it takes longer for the
energy dissipate and resume normal flow.
In Figure 21, 22 & 23 on the outside of the outer cylinders the velocity increases
to twice the size of U,. This conveys a pattern where for each cylinder the flow
has to divert around the velocity will increase by twice, meaning in a spacing
44where there is only 1 cylinder to be diverted there will be an increase of double
U,. For a gap with 2 cylinders there will be an increase of quadruple U,.
6.4 Column of Cylinders Model
Figures 23, 24 & 25 show the velocity vectors of the model where the cylinders
are in a column aligned parallel to the oncoming flow. A clear pattern emerges
for all 3 velocities. As mentioned previously the flow slows to zero as it
approaches the first cylinder then increases as it diverts round the body. The
flow for these models continue with a 50% increased velocity then slows down
when the spacing between cylinders occurs. The flow then increases again
when diverting around the next cylinder in the column. This pattern repeats until
the final cylinder when the flow diverts round the last cylinder, at the lee-side the
flow slows, before increasing to U, within 1 to 1.5 diameter lengths, In the
spacing between cylinders, the flow is minimal. Interestingly the flow further out
from the cylinders is also increased by 25-30% even when up to 2 diameters
length away on the x-axis. This shows that the current formation has an effect
across the full flow and is not just specific to the relevant area in close proximity
of the cylinders,
6.5 Offset Cylinders Model
Figures 26, 27 & 28 show the velocity vectors of the model with cylinders in an
offset formation. These figures showed similar patterns across all 3 free-stream
velocities.
The flow experienced an increase of 250%, this was noted in the spacing
between the first row of cylinders. The flow velocity then occurs a reduction of
10-15% then increases once again to accelerate around the second row of
cylinders. Behind the second set of cylinders was the greatest distance to return
to free-stream, taking a length of approximately 1.5 diameter lengths. A bell-
shape profile is formed beyond the final row in which the flow returns to U,.
456.6 Triangular Formation of Cylinders Model
Figures 29, 30 & 31 display the velocity vectors of cylinders in a triangular
formation. During this simulation, there was little acceleration as the flow
diverted round the first cylinder; this did not match the pattern that emerged
from the single cylinder simulations. This was because the flow did not have to
divert dramatically to the next cylinder causing a smaller acceleration, Beyond
the first cylinder, there was acceleration around the next row of 50% on the
outer curves of the cylinders. A 100% increase in velocity occurred in the
spacing between the 2 cylinders in the 2" row of the model. The flow stays
relatively constant as it diverts round the 3" row of the model. Minimum
velocities are seen directly behind the 3° row of cylinders at 180° on the
cylinder surface. Flow returns back to free-stream velocity within half a
diameter, showing minimal interference on the flow by the structure.
6.6 Square Formation of Cylinders Model
Figures 32, 33 & 34 present the velocity vectors of cylinders arranged in a 3 x3
formation. During the simulation, the flow velocity increased 200% between
cylinders, and then proceeded to decrease to U,, then increase 200% in each
spacing of the cylinders as the flow accelerates. Minimal velocities are once
again seen immediately in the lee-side wake of cylinders. A bell-shape curve
shows the velocity returning to U,, the maximum distance taken to return to U,
is 2 diameter lengths away from the middle cylinder in the final row.
6.7 Drag Coefficients
Idealised drag coefficients were given by the drag convergence history on
FLUENT. These may not be entirely accurate due to the mesh limitations but
give a good indication of the trends and allow comparisons of drag coefficients
between models with the various velocities.
46The offset formation of seaweed shows the greatest change in drag coefficient
with an increase of 0.4 when velocity is changed from 0.2m/s to 0.3m/s this is
maybe due to the formation not being in a streamline formation as oppose to
the triangular formation. Here velocities do not increase rapidly when there is
little change to the direction of flow as it travels from one cylinder to another.
Also in Figure 36, the trend for all models tends to be that as the velocity
increases the drag coefficient increases slightly. This can be explained by the
increase of turbulence of the flow as the Reynolds number increases. An
increased turbulence in the wake of the flow means there will be a reduction in
pressure and a resultant increase in pressure drag [9]
The single cylinder model has the lowest drag coefficient, as the model
experiences the lowest drag force. The square of cylinders model experiences
the greatest drag coefficient. This is assumed to be because of the large wake
that will be caused by the formation of cylinders.
In terms of real life seaweed these drag coefficients would not represent the
above data because of the reconfiguration of seaweed. As seaweed is put
under larger velocities the seaweed, due to lack of stiffness, bends over with the
flow, therefore reducing the frontal area of the seaweed [4]. This reduction in
frontal area causes the seaweed drag coefficient to reduce with increasing
velocities therefore would show a trend with an inverse slope of the one show in
Figure 36. Limitations of the FLUENT software dictate that the stiffness of the
seaweed cannot be modelled therefore the idealised drag coefficient is shown.
6.8 Other data
Unfortunately due to the unstructured mesh, computer limitations and user
inexperience the vortices known to be seen in the wake of a circular cylinder in
a turbulent flow were not seen in the results. These vortices would provide the
project with vorticity graphs and would enable the information on the effects of
flow around the various models to be gathered.
477 Recommendation for future work
Firsly, a project of this magnitude must be carried out on a computer with a
large enough processor to run a finer mesh. This would enable the vortices to
been seen in the wake of the project. Having a finer mesh would also ensure
that the drag coefficients are of a much more accurate nature. For the current
project countless hours were spent trying to correct this error on classroom
computers with little success.
CFD software is improving all the time and hopefully, in the near future, the
stiffness and the change of frontal area of the seaweed will be able to be
modelled, This development would allow the drag coefficient to be compared
with measured data
In terms of expansion of the current project, the model must be extended to
include the structure that supports the seaweed. This change will greatly affect
the forces around the seaweed due to the structure and also provide a force of
its own including a gravitational force, drag through the flow and a pull on the
seaweed. The structure of the seaweed carrier will also have to be able to resist
change in wave height and also an inertia force. The investigation of forces on
the structure would involve enough research to be a project in its own entity.
Expanding on the size of the seaweed farm will cause the flow in the loch to
react differently in terms of the flow behaviour towards the farm. Increasing the
width of the farm would present an obstacle for the flow and a project could be
created on the effects of full seaweed farm on the overall pattern of flow in the
loch
It has been suggested that the vast majority of the flow diverts around the farm
as opposed to going under [12]. An investigation can be carried out to see
whether shape and density affects this theory. This would also lead to being
able to see how density affects the velocities in the centre of the patch. This is
important as a regular flow of water is required to ensure the seaweed gets the
nutrients it requires. This flow also ensures that the seaweed is moving and
therefore has a greater chance of absorbing more photons from the sun. The
48density is also an important factor in the aspect that if it is too high, seaweed
stipes will overlap one another and therefore restrict its availability to exposing
itself to the sun and to a passing flow.
Another development that can be considered is the effect of roughness of the
cylinders. For seaweed, the roughness of the skin would have an effect on the
flow around the patch. Patches with different roughnesses could be tested in
order to see how the velocity fields differ as oppose to this project where all the
cylinders are of a smooth nature.
One aspect that can also be considered would be to carry out experimental data
on the velocity fields around the seaweed. This would provide relevant data in
terms of drag coefficients and flow pattems which could be used to compare
against numerical simulations done in CFD programmes such as FLUENT.
498 Conclusion
A large eddy simulation was executed to study the interaction between turbulent
flow and different arrangements of circular cylinders. The main velocity paths
around the cylinders were simulated and results were discussed. Velocities
dramatically increased when diverting around cylinders as acceleration occurs,
this is because a longer path is followed than the free-stream velocity. This
acceleration causes an increase in drag force and subsequently an increase in
force coefficient when there are more cylinders to bypass around.
From this project it can be concluded that the best suited velocity fields would
be of a triangular formation or a column. This is due to their streamline
attributes, as this causes little interference to the surrounding flow.
Furthermore, extensive research needs to be carried out on the flow fields to
ensure that all conditions are accounted for. As this project only accounts for
the velocity flow fields around the seaweed bodies and not the influence of
support structure.
The project has not been completed to the full extents that the specification
required. This was due to computers available having not large enough
processors, a structured mesh package not being available on classroom
computers and each model taking a high computational run time. Results
obtained are achieved through the best means and resources available in the
University Engineering department.
50References
[1] Farming Seaweed Could Be a Cheap Way to Produce Biofuel
Photograph. New Microbe Turns Sugary Seaweed into Fuel. Bio Architecture
Lab, 19 Jan. 2012 Web. 14 Feb 2012
.
[2] SandJensen, Kaj. "Drag and Reconfiguration of Freshwater
Macrophytes." Freshwater Biology 48.2 (2003): 271-83.
[3] Denny, M., and B. Gaylor. "The Mechanics of Wave-swept Algae." The
Journal of Experimental Biology 205 (2002): 1355-362.
[4] Boller, M. L., and E. Carrington. "The Hydrodynamic Effects of Shape
and Size Change during Reconfiguration of a Flexible Macroalga.” Journal of
Experimental Biology 209.10 (2006): 1894-903.
[5] Buck, B., and C. Buchholz. "Response of Offshore Cultivated to
Hydrodynamic Forcing in the North Sea." Aquaculture 250.3-4 (2005): 674-91.
[6] Stevens, C., D. Plew, N. Hartstein, and D. Fredriksson. "The Physics of
Open-water Shellfish Aquaculture." Aquacultural Engineering 38.3 (2008): 145-
60.
(7) Buck, Bela Hieronymus, and Corneila Maria Buchholz. "The Offshore-
ring: A New System Design for the Open Ocean Aquaculture of
Macroalgae." Journal of Applied Phycology 16.5 (2004): 355-68.
[8] Demes, K. W., E, Carrington, J. Gosiine, and P. T. Martone. “Variation in
Anatomical and Material Properties Explains Difference in Hydrodynamic
Performances of Foliose Red Macroalgae (rhodophyta)."Phycological Society of
America 47 (2011): 1360-367.
51[9] Massey, B. S., and John Ward-Smith. "Chapter 8: Boundary Layers and
Wakes." Mechanics of Fluids. Cheltenham, England: S. Thornes, 1998. 312-75
[10] | Zdravkovich, M. M. (1990). "Conceptual overview of laminar and
turbulent flows past smooth and rough circular cylinders.” Journal of Wind
Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 33: 53-62.
[11] Sumer, B. M., N. Christiansen, and J. Fredsoe. "The Horseshoe Vortex
and Vortex Shedding around a Vertical Wall-mounted Cylinder Exposed to
Waves." The Journal of Fluid Mechanics 332 (1997): 41-70.
[12] Plew, David R. "The Hydrodynamics of Long-line Mussel Farms." Thesis.
University of Canterbury, 2005,
[13] Telfer, T. (2008). Hydrographic report for a potential fish farm site in
upper Loch Etive. Stirling: University of Stirling.
[14] Guo, Y., J. Zhang, and L. Zhang. "Numerical Simulation of 3D Flow
around an Overlapping Cylinder." Proceedings of the ICE - Maritime
Engineering 163.2 (2010): 49-56
[15] _ Rogallo, R. S., and P. Moin. "Numerical Simulation of Turbulent Flows."
Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 16.1 (1984): 99-137
[16] ANSYS. ANSYS FLUENT 12.0 Meshing Help. ANSYS Inc., release 12.1
edition, November 2009c.
[17] ANSYS. ANSYS FLUENT Theory Guide. ANSYS Inc., 13 edition,
November 2010
[18] ANSYS. ANSYS FLUENT 12.0 User's guide. ANSYS Inc., 13 edition, April
2009a
[19] Cantwell, Brian, and Donald Coles. "An Experimental Study of
Entrainment and Transport in the Turbulent near Wake of a Circular
Cylinder." Journal of Fluid Mechanics 136 (1983): 321-74.
52

## Mucho más que documentos.

Descubra todo lo que Scribd tiene para ofrecer, incluyendo libros y audiolibros de importantes editoriales.

Cancele en cualquier momento.