0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

An Experimental Investigation of Cavitation Inception and Development on a Two-Dimensional Eppler Hydrofoil

[+] Author and Article Information
J.-A. Astolfi, P. Dorange, J.-Y. Billard

Laboratoire d’Hydrodynamique de l’Ecole Navale, 29240 Brest-Naval, France

I. Cid Tomas

University of Valladolid, Valladolid, Spain

J. Fluids Eng 122(1), 164-173 (Oct 13, 1999) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.483239 History: Received March 06, 1998; Revised October 13, 1999
Copyright © 2000 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Valentine, D. T., 1974, “The effect of Nose Radius on the Cavitation Inception Characteristics of Two-Dimensional Hydrofoils,” Report 3813 of the Naval Ship Research and Development Center, Bethesda, MD 20034.
Eppler,  R., and Shen,  Y. T., 1979, “Wing Sections for Hydrofoils—Part 1. Symmetrical Profiles,” J. Ship Res., 25, pp. 209–217.
Eppler,  R., and Shen,  Y. T., 1981, “Wing Sections for Hydrofoils—Part 2. Non-Symmetrical Profiles,” J. Ship Res., 25, pp. 191–200.
Eppler, R., 1990, Airfoil Design and Data, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Mishima,  S., and Kinnas,  S. A., 1996, “A Numerical Optimization Technique Applied to the Design of Two-Dimensional Cavitating Hydrofoil Sections,” J. Ship Res., 40, pp. 28–38.
Arakeri,  V. H., 1975, “Viscous Effects on the Position of Cavitation Separation from Smooth Bodies,” J. Fluid Mech., 68, pp. 779–799.
Huang,  T. T., and Peterson,  F. B., 1976, “Influence of Viscous Effects on Model/Full-Scale Cavitation Scaling,” J. Ship Res., 20, pp. 215–223.
Blake,  W. K., Wolpert,  M. J., and Geib,  F. E., 1977, “Cavitation Noise and Inception as Influenced by Boundary Layer Development on Hydrofoils,” J. Fluid Mech., 80, pp. 617–640.
Arakeri,  V. H., Carrol,  J. A., and Holl,  J. W., 1981, “A Note on the Effect of Short and Long Laminar Separation Bubbles on Desinent Cavitation,” J. Fluids Eng., 103, pp. 28–32.
Billet,  M. L., and Holl,  J. W., 1981, “Scale Effects on Various Types of Limited Cavitation,” J. Fluids Eng., 103, pp. 405–414.
Huang,  T. T., 1981, “Cavitation Inception Observations on Six Axisymmetric Headforms,” J. Fluids Eng., 103, pp. 273–279.
Arndt,  R. E. A., 1981, “Cavitation in Fluid Machinery and Hydraulic Structures,” Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 13, pp. 273–328.
Franc,  J.-P., and Michel,  J.-M., 1985, “Attached Cavitation and the Boundary Layer: Experimental Investigation and Numerical Treatment,” J. Fluid Mech., 154, pp. 63–90.
Huang,  T. T., 1986, “The Effect of Turbulence Stimulators on Cavitation Inception of Axisymetric Headforms,” J. Fluids Eng., 108, pp. 261–268.
Kawanami, Y., Kato, H., Yamaguchi, H., and Maeda, M., 1995, “An Experimental Investigation of Flow Field around Sheet Cavity on Foil Section,” Private communication, Société Hydrotechnique de France, Section cavitation, Réunion du 26 October 1995, LEGI Grenoble.
Tassin Lager,  A., and Ceccio,  S. L., 1998, “Examination of the Flow near the Leading Edge of Attached Cavitation. Part 1. Detachment of Two-Dimensional and Axisymmetric Cavities,” J. Fluid Mech., 376, pp. 61–90.
Zhang, Y., Gopalan, S., and Katz, J., 1998, “On the Flow Structure and Turbulence in the Closure Region of Attached Cavitation,” 22th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, Washington D.C., August.
Kinnas, S. A., 1998, “The Prediction of Unsteady Sheet Cavitation,” Third International Symposium on Cavitation, Grenoble, France, April 7–10.
Kubota,  A., Kato,  H., and Yamaguchi,  H., 1992, “A New Modeling of Cavitating Flows: a Numerical Study of Unsteady Cavitation on a Hydrofoil Section,” J. Fluid Mech., 240, pp. 59–96.
Kinnas,  S. A., and Fine,  N. E., 1993, “A Numerical Nonlinear Analysis of the Flow around Two and Three-Dimensional Partially Cavitating Hydrofoils,” J. Fluid Mech., 254, pp. 151–181.
Deshpande,  M., Feng,  J., and Merkle,  C. L., 1994, “Cavity Flow Predictions Based on the Euler Equation,” J. Fluids Eng., 116, pp. 36–44.
Brewer, W. H., and Kinnas, S. A., 1995, “Experimental and Computational Investigation of Sheet Cavitation on a Hydrofoil,” The 2nd Joint ASME/JSME Fluids Engineering Conference On Laser Anemometry, Hilton Head Island, SC, August 12–13.
Shen,  Y. T., 1985, “Wing Sections for Hydrofoils—Part 3: Experimental Verification,” J. Ship Res., 29, pp. 39–50.
Young, A. D., and Horton, H. P., 1966, “Some Results of Investigation of Separation Bubbles,” Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development Conference Proceeding No. 4, Part 2, Technical Editing and Reproduction, Ltd, London, pp. 785–811.
Astolfi, J. A., Billard, J.-Y., Dorange, P., and Fruman, D. H., 1998, “Pressure Fluctuations Associated with Tip Vortex and Surface Cavitation,” Proceedings ASME, FEDSM98-5064, Washington D.C., June 21–25.
Head,  M. R., and Bandyoapadhyay,  P., 1981, “New Aspects of Turbulent Boundary Layer Structure,” J. Fluid Mech., 107, pp. 297–338.
Le,  Q., Franc,  J.-P., and Michel,  J.-M., 1993, “Partial Cavities: Global Behavior and Mean Pressure Distribution,” J. Fluids Eng., 115, pp. 243–248.
Kinnas, S. A., Mishima, S., and Brewer, W. H., 1994, “Non-linear Analysis of Viscous Flow Around Cavitating Hydrofoils,” 20th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, August 21–26.
Farhat, M., 1994, “Contribution à l’étude de l’érosion de cavitation: mécanismes hydrodynamiques et prédiction,” Thèse N°1273, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Switzerland.
Kawanami, Y., Kato, H., and Yamaguchi, H., 1998, “Three-Dimensional Characteristics of the Cavities Formed on a Two-Dimensional Hydrofoil,” Third International Symposium on Cavitation, Grenoble, France, April 7–10.
Dang, J., and Kuiper, G., 1998, “Re-entrant Jet Modelling of Partial Cavity Flow on Two Dimensional Hydrofoils,” Third International Symposium on Cavitation, Grenoble, France, April 7–10.
Dorange, P., Astolfi, J. A., Billard, J.-Y., Fruman, D. H., and Cid Tomas I., 1998, “Cavitation Inception and Development on Two Dimensional Hydrofoils,” Third International Symposium on Cavitation, Grenoble, France, April 7–10.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
E817 foll section and coordinate axis
Grahic Jump Location
Theoretical cavitation bucket for the E817 foil 3
Grahic Jump Location
Theoretical pressure coefficient for the E817 foil
Grahic Jump Location
Profiles of the modulus of velocity U/U versus the normal direction to the suction side, from the leading edge up to the trailing edge: α=6 deg, Re=5×105. Filled symbols are data for which the vertical component was not measurable. Uncertainties: ΔU/U=±1.5 percent, Δα=±0.14 deg, Δn*=±0.0005.
Grahic Jump Location
Profiles of U/Ue as a function of η=(n/x)Uex/v: α=6 deg, Re=5×105. Uncertainties: ΔU/U=±1.5 percent, Δα=±0.14 deg, Δn*=±0.0005.
Grahic Jump Location
Velocity profiles at the leading edge for three angles of incidence, Re=5×105. Uncertainties: ΔU/U=±1.5 percent, Δα=±0.14 deg, Δn*=±0.0005.
Grahic Jump Location
Velocity profile at the leading edge α=10 deg, Re=5×105. Uncertainties: ΔU/U=±1.5 percent, Δα=±0.14 deg, Δn*=±0.0005.
Grahic Jump Location
Velocity vectors at the foil leading edge showing the separated flow, α=10 deg, Re=5×105. Uncertainties: ΔU/U=±1.5 percent, Δα=±0.14 deg, ΔX*=±0.0005,ΔY*=±0.0005.
Grahic Jump Location
Experimental and numerical distributions of Cp along the suction side: (▵) experimental; (—) theoretical. (Δ)Cp/Cp=±3 percent, Δα=±0.14 deg, Δx*=±0.001.
Grahic Jump Location
Isocontours of nondimensional spanwise vorticity, ωz*zclU, (computed from u and v velocity data): (a) α=6 deg, 8 deg and 10 deg; (b) α=10 deg in cavitating and noncavitating flow, (c) α=6 deg, in cavitating and noncavitating flow. The step between two curves is 20 for 10 deg and 5 for 6 deg. Re=5×105. Uncertainties ΔΩz*z*=±3 percent, Δα=±0.14 deg.
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison between the cavitation number at inception and the minimum of the pressure coefficient obtained from experiments (Re=5×105) and potential theory, Δα=±0.14 deg, ΔCp/Cp=±3 percent, Δσi=±0.04.
Grahic Jump Location
Acoustic method to determine the angle of cavitation inception for a given cavitation number. Uncertainties Δprms/prms=±0.05, Δα=±0.14 deg.
Grahic Jump Location
Cavitation pattern on the E817 foil, Re=5×105.Δσ=±0.04, Δα=±0.14 deg.
Grahic Jump Location
Example of image obtained from superposition of the surface foil trace image (noncavitating) together with the cavity image. Flow is from the right.
Grahic Jump Location
Reduced length cavity as a function of σ/2α collected in the literature for various flow conditions (numerical or experimental) and foils together with the present results. α in radians, vertical bars correspond to the uncertainty range.
Grahic Jump Location
Relative cavity lengths as a function of σ/2α,σ/2(α−αn) or σ/2(α−αi〈σ〉) in logarithmic coordinates. Plain lines correspond to power-law fits with m as the exponent. Angles in radians. Same uncertainties as Fig. 15.
Grahic Jump Location
(a)–(b) Velocity profiles and (c)–(d) angles of the mean flow in the (X*,Y*) plane near the leading edge in noncavitating flow and slightly cavitating flow (α=6 deg and σ=2.45, α=10 deg and σ=3.25), Re=5×105.ΔU/U=±1.5 percent, Δα=±0.14 deg, Δn*=±0.0005.
Grahic Jump Location
Isocontours of urms/U at the leading edge of the suction side in the plane (x*,n*) with and without cavitation: α=6 deg, Re=5×105. Interval between two lines is 0.05. Uncertainties Δurms/urms=±1.5 percent, Δα=±0.14 deg.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In