0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Comparison of Computational Results Obtained From a Homogeneous Cavitation Model With Experimental Investigations of Three Inducers

[+] Author and Article Information
Imene Mejri

 Laboratoire d’Energétique et de Mécanique de Fluides Interne (LEMFI), Site Paris UMR CNRS 7067, Ecole Nationale Supérieure d’Arts et Métiers (ENSAM), 151 Boulevard de l’Hopital 75013 Paris, Franceimen.mejri@paris.ensam.fr

Farid Bakir

 Laboratoire d’Energétique et de Mécanique de Fluides Interne (LEMFI), Site Paris UMR CNRS 7067, Ecole Nationale Supérieure d’Arts et Métiers (ENSAM), 151 Boulevard de l’Hopital 75013 Paris, Francefarid.bakir@paris.ensam.fr

Robert Rey

 Laboratoire d’Energétique et de Mécanique de Fluides Interne (LEMFI), Site Paris UMR CNRS 7067, Ecole Nationale Supérieure d’Arts et Métiers (ENSAM), 151 Boulevard de l’Hopital 75013 Paris, Francerobert.rey@paris.ensam.fr

Thabet Belamri

 ANSYS Canada, 554 Parkside Dr., Waterloo, Ontario, Canadathabet.belamri@ansys.com

J. Fluids Eng 128(6), 1308-1323 (Feb 20, 2006) (16 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2353265 History: Received February 28, 2005; Revised February 20, 2006

The paper presents full 3D numerical simulations and experimental investigations of the cavitating flow through three axial inducers. These inducers are identified by the tip blade angle at the leading edge β1T=8, 10, and 13deg. The numerical and experimental investigations were carried out at the LEMFI laboratory (Laboratoire d’Energétique et de Mécanique de Fluides Interne) of the ENSAM-Paris center (Ecole Nationale Supérieure d’Arts et Métiers). A review of the cavitating regime modeling and the cavitation homogeneous model used for this paper’s calculations is first presented. The numerical model is based on a combination of the multiphase flow equations with a truncated version of the Rayleigh-Plesset model predicting the complicated growth and collapse processes of bubbles. The mass transfers due to cavitation are source/sink terms in continuity equations of the liquid and vapor phases. The cavitation model also features a solution methodology which implicitly couples the continuity and momentum equations together. The main results are presented for the inducers at a range of flow rates and cavitation numbers: (1) Experimental results concerning: (i) the overall performances: Pressure head coefficient and efficiency versus flow rates; (ii) critical cavitation number (5% and 15% of drop) versus the flow rate; (2) Numerical results concerning: (i) the overall performances; (ii) the numerically investigated water vapor volume fraction distributions and other CFD results, which enable us to explain the cavitating behavior for these inducers; (iii) the location and sizes of the blade cavity and backflow vortex. Finally, the comparisons between experimental and simulated results on the overall performances, cavity sizes and cavity location are discussed. A qualitative agreement between experimental and predicted results was found for two inducers for a range of flow rates. The head breakdown in the simulations started at a different cavitation coefficient than that in the experiment.

Copyright © 2006 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

(a) Velocity components in the 3D view. (b) Inducer face view. (c) Main definitions of the blade cascade.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Hydrodynamic test bench of the LEMFI - Paris

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Inducer 13deg (Q=83.3kg∕s and Pinlet=1bar): Numerical results of the static pressure distribution without (on the left) and with (on the right) the cross-piece

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

The overall performances in noncavitating regime for the three inducers

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Head-drop curves in cavitating regime for the three inducers—experimental results

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Blade angle influence on the performance in a regime of cavitation

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Inducer 8deg meridional view

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Overall control point position in a blade-to-blade view

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Inducer 13deg: Typical mesh used for the simulation, 320,000-structured mesh for one blade passage

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Numerical and experimental pressure head coefficients in noncavitating regime for the three inducers

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

(a) Calculated head-drop curves for the three inducers. (b) Experimental and calculated head-drop curves for the three inducers.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Computed magnitude and streamlines of Cl for three flow rates at σc∼0.2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Pictures of the studied inducers

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