0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Sensitivity Evaluation of a Transport-Based Turbulent Cavitation Model

[+] Author and Article Information
Rajkumar Vaidyanathan, Inanc Senocak, Jiongyang Wu, Wei Shyy

Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-6250

J. Fluids Eng 125(3), 447-458 (Jun 09, 2003) (12 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1566048 History: Received January 31, 2002; Revised October 30, 2002; Online June 09, 2003
Copyright © 2003 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Arndt,  R. E. A., 1981, “Cavitation in Fluid Machinery and Hydraulic Structures,” Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 13, pp. 273–328.
Brennen, C. E., 1995, Cavitation and Bubble Dynamics, Oxford University Press, New York.
Knapp, R. T., Daily, J. W., and Hammitt, F. G., 1970, Cavitation, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Gopalan,  S., and Katz,  J., 2000, “Flow Structure and Modeling Issues in the Closure Region of Attached Cavitation,” Phys. Fluids, 12, pp. 895–911.
Singhal, A. K., Vaidyan, N., and Leonard, A. D., 1997, “Multi-dimensional Simulation of Cavitating Flows Using a PDF Model for Phase Change,” ASME Paper No. FEDSM97-3272.
Merkle, C. L., Feng, J., and Buelow, P. E. O., 1998, “Computational Modeling of the Dynamics of Sheet Cavitation,” 3rd International Symposium on Cavitation, Grenoble, France.
Kunz,  R. F., Boger,  D. A., Stinebring,  D. R., Chyczewski,  T. S., Lindua,  J. W., Gibeling,  H. J., Venkateswaran,  S., and Govindan,  T. R., 2000, “A Pre-conditioned Navier-Stokes Method for Two-Phase Flows With Application to Cavitation Prediction,” Comput. Fluids, 29, pp. 849–875.
Ahuja,  V., Hosangadi,  A., and Arunajatesan,  S., 2001, “Simulations of Cavitating Flows Using Hybrid Unstructured Meshes,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 123, pp. 231–340.
Senocak,  I., and Shyy,  W., 2002, “A Pressure-Based Method for Turbulent Cavitating Flow Computations,” J. Comput. Phys., 176, pp. 363–383.
Senocak, I., and Shyy, W., 2001, “Numerical Simulation of Turbulent Flows With Sheet Cavitation,” CAV2001 4th International Symposium on Cavitation, Paper No. CAV2001A7.002.
Senocak, I., 2002, “Computational Methodology for the Simulation of Turbulent Cavitating Flows,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
Launder,  B. E., and Spalding,  D. B., 1974, “The Numerical Computation of Turbulent Flows,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 3, pp. 269–289.
Shyy, W., Thakur, S. S., Ouyang, H., Liu, J., and Blosch, E., 1997, Computational Techniques for Complex Transport Phenomena, Cambridge University Press, New York.
Wang,  G., Senocak,  I., Shyy,  W., Ikohagi,  T., and Cao,  S., 2001, “Dynamics of Attached Turbulent Cavitating Flows,” Prog. Aerosp. Sci., 37, pp. 551–581.
Myers, R. H., and Montgomery, D. C., 1995, Response Surface Methodology—Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiment, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Senocak, I., and Shyy, W. 2002, “Evaluation of Cavitation Models for Navier-Stokes Computations,” ASME Paper No: FEDSM2002-31011.
Singhal,  A. K., Li,  H., Athavale,  M. M., and Jiang,  Y., 2002, “Mathematical Basis and Validation of the Full Cavitation Model,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 124, pp. 617–624.
Shyy, W., 1994, Computational Modeling for Fluid Flow and Interfacial Transport, Elsevier, Amsterdam (revised printing 1997).
Thakur, S. S., Wright, J. F., Shyy, W., and Udaykumar, H., 1997, “SEAL: A Computational Fluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer Code for Complex 3-D Geometries,” Technical Report, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
Shyy,  W., and Thakur,  S. S., 1994, “A Controlled Variation Scheme in a Sequential Solver for Recirculating Flows. Part I. Theory and Formulation,” Numer. Heat Transfer, Part B, 25(3), pp. 245–272.
Shyy,  W., and Thakur,  S. S., 1994, “A Controlled Variation Scheme in a Sequential Solver for Recirculating Flows. Part II. Applications,” Numer. Heat Transfer, Part A, 25(3), pp. 273–286.
SAS Institute Inc., 1995, JMP Version 3, Cary, NC.
Microsoft Corporation, 1985–1999, Microsoft Excel 2000.
Lasdon,  L. S., Waren,  A., Jain,  A., and Ratner,  M., 1978, “Design and Testing of a Generalized Reduced Gradient Code for Nonlinear Programming,” ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 4:1 .
Kim, J., Kline, S. J., and Johnston, J. P., 1978, “Investigation of Separation and Reattachment of a Turbulent Shear Layer: Flow over a Backward-Facing Step,” Report No. MD-37, Thermosciences Division, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Rouse, H., and McNown, J. S., 1948, “Cavitation and Pressure Distribution, Head Forms at Zero Angle of Yaw,” Studies in Engineering, Bulletin 32, State University of Iowa.
Reboud, J. L., Stutz, B., and Coutier, O., 1998, “Two-Phase Flow Structure of Cavitation: Experiment and Modeling of Unsteady Effects,” 3rd International Symposium on Cavitation, Grenoble, France.
He,  X., Senocak,  I., Shyy,  W., Gangadharan,  S. N., and Thakur,  S., 2000, “Evaluation of Laminar-Turbulent Transition and Equilibrium Near-Wall Turbulence Models,” Numer. Heat Transfer, Part A, 37, pp. 101–112.
Shen, Y., and Dimotakis, P., 1989, “The Influence of Surface Cavitation on Hydrodynamic Forces,” Proceedings of 22nd ATTC, St. John, Newfoundland, Canada, Aug., pp. 44–53.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Comparing the Cp values for the best, the worst and the baseline CFD cases with the experimental results for the axisymmetrical body (σ=0.4)
Grahic Jump Location
Sensitivity of Cdest and Cprod for the hemispherical fore-body
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of response surface prediction of the objective function to the actual values obtained from CFD computations for the hemispherical object (the values are not normalized)
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison of CFD computations with experimental results for different σ for the axisymmetrical object (β1=0.9,β2=1.15,Cdest=0.89 and Cprod=1.33)
Grahic Jump Location
(a) Sensitivity of Cdest and Cprod for the NACA66(MOD) foil section, (b) comparing the Cp values on the suction side. A: Nonequilibrium k-ε turbulence model. B: Original k-ε turbulence model.
Grahic Jump Location
Comparing the Cp values on the suction side. A: Nonequilibrium k-ε turbulence model.B: Original k-ε turbulence model.
Grahic Jump Location
Design space and objective function for different β1 and β2 (black dots represent the design points)
Grahic Jump Location
(a) Comparison of response surface prediction of the objective function to the actual values obtained from CFD computations for the flow over a backward-facing step (the values are not normalized), (b) comparison between CFD and response surface (in parenthesis) predictions of the objective function
Grahic Jump Location
Grid distribution around (a) an axisymmetrical body with a hemispherical fore-body, (b) around a NACA66(MOD) foil section

Tables

Errata

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