Computational Fluid Dynamics Modeling of a Commercial Diving Incident

Bart Kemper; Linda Cross

doi:10.51501/jotnafe.v38i1.66

Authors

Bart Kemper, PE Kemper Engineering https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4195-6263
Linda Cross, PE

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51501/jotnafe.v38i1.66

Keywords:

CFD, Marine, Diving, Simulation, V&V, Flow, Friction loss, flow resistance, friction loss, jetting, forensic engineering, biomechanics, computational fluid dynamics

Abstract

A commercial diver using surface-supplied air was “jetting” a trench, which was using high-pressure water via an industrial “jetting hose” connected to a pressure-compensated tool to cut trenches in silty sea bottoms. This tool used high-pressure water pumped from the tender boat down to the diver. It was reported that man-made objects in the area cut the jetting hose, resulting in uncontrolled diver movement and subsequent injury. There were no direct witnesses available. The subsequent forensic engineering investigation used traditional calculations, laboratory testing, ergonomics, biomechanics, and computational fluid dynamics (CFDs) to determine the limits of the physics involved in order to assess the feasibility of the reported scenario. Specifically, CFD modeled the mass flow exiting the tool’s two ends and the cut in the hose as well as modeled the diver’s flow resistance while propelled through the water. The results indicated the applicable physics precluded the events as described.

References

L. L. Liptai, “Forensic Engineering And The Scientific Method,” Journal of the National Academy of Forensic Engineers, vol. 26, no. 1, 01/01 2009, doi: 10.51501/jotnafe.v26i1.711.

OSHA Laws & Regulations, O. S. H. Administration 29 CFR 1910 Subpart T “Commercial Diving”, 2011.

International Consensus Standards For Commercial Diving And Underwater Operations, ADCI, Houston, Texas, 2011. [Online]. Available: https://www.adc-int.org/content.asp?contentid=173.

F1166-07 Standard Practice for Human Engineering Design for Marine Systems, Equipment, and Facilities, ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA, 2013. [Online]. Available: https://www.astm.org/Standards/F1166.htm.

Flow of fluids through valves, fittings and pipe: Technical Paper 410. Stamford, CT: Crane Valves, 2011.

M. A. Passmore and G. Rickers, “Drag levels and energy requirements on a SCUBA diver,” Sports Engineering, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 173-182, 2002, doi: 10.1046/j.1460-2687.2002.00107.x.

C. Harris and A. G. Piersol, Harris' Shock and Vibration Handbook, 2009, New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 6th ed., 2009, p. 1168.

M. M. Panjabi, P. C. Ivancic, Y. Tominaga, and J.-L. Wang, “Intervertebral Neck Injury Criterion for Prediction of Multiplanar Cervical Spine Injury Due to Side Impacts,” Traffic Injury Prevention, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 387-397, 2005/12/01 2005, doi: 10.1080/15389580500257100.

“Test methodology for protection of vehicle occupants against anti-vehicular landmine effects : final report of HFM-090 Task Group 25,” in “RTO technical report,” NATO Research & Technology Organisation;, Neuilly-sur-Seine, 9789283700685, 2007, vol. 90. [Online]. Available: https://www.tib.eu/de/suchen/id/TIBKAT%3A578708116.

A. M. Eiband, “Human tolerance to rapidly applied accelerations: a summary of the literature,” NASA, June 1959. [Online]. Available: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19980228043.

C. D. Walker. “Using Computer-Generated Animation and Simulation Evidence at Trial: What You Should Know.” American Bar Assocation. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/litigation/committees/products-liability/practice/2018/using-computer-generated-animation-simulation-evidence-at-trial/ (accessed October 17, 2019).

V. Webster and F. Bourn, “The Use of Computer-Generated Animations and Simulations at Trial,” Defense Counsel Journal, vol. 83, pp. 439-459, 10/01 2016, doi: 10.12690/0895-0016-83.4.439.

V&V 20 Guide For Verification And Validation In Computational Fluid Dynaics and Heat Transfer, ISBN 9780791873168, ANSI/ASME, New York, 2009.

A. V. Ivanov, T. V. Trebunskikh, and V. V. Platonovich. “Validation Methodology for Modern CAD-Embedded CFD Code.” Dassault Systemes. https://www.solidworks.com/sw/docs/Flow_Validation_Methodology-Whitepaper.pdf (accessed 18 December, 2019).

P. Hariharan, G. A. D’Souza, M. Horner, T. M. Morrison, R. A. Malinauskas, and M. R. Myers, “Use of the FDA nozzle model to illustrate validation techniques in computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations," PLOS ONE, vol. 12, no. 6, p. e0178749, 2017, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178749.

Neutrium. “Pressure Losses in Hoses.” https://neutrium.net/fluid_flow/pressure-loss-in-hoses/ (accessed 12 Sept., 2017).

“Series SS122 Lightweight Water Jetting Hose.” Parker Hoses. https://ph.parker.com/us/15551/en/lightweight-water-jetting-hose (accessed 12 Sept., 2017).

Firedepartment.net. “2.5" Fire Hose Friction Loss Calculator.” https://www.firedepartment.net/fire-dept-tools/printable-friction-loss-calculator/two-and-a-half-inch (accessed 21 Sept., 2017).

A. Pasha, A. Mushtaq, and K. Juhany, “Numerical Study of Heat Transfer of Water Flow through Pipe with Property Variations,” Athens Journal of Technology and Engineering, vol. 4, pp. 359-385, 12/01 2017, doi: 10.30958/ajte.4-4-4.

J. V. N. Sousa, A. R. L. Macêdo, W. Amorim Jr, and A. G. B. Lima, “Numerical Analysis of Turbulent Fluid Flow and Drag Coefficient for Optimizing the AUV Hull Design,” Open Journal of Fluid Dynamics, vol. 4, pp. 263-277, 09/01 2014, doi: 10.4236/ojfd.2014.43020.

G. M. Wilcox, “Drag Studies in Water Entry of the MK 13-6 Torpedo,” California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, July 1951 1951. [Online]. Available: https://authors.library.caltech.edu/57351/1/E-12.1.pdf.