0
Research Papers: Multiphase Flows

Enhancing the Aggressive Intensity of a Cavitating Jet by Means of the Nozzle Outlet Geometry

[+] Author and Article Information
H. Soyama

Department of Mechanical Engineering,  Tohoku University, 6-6-01 Aoba, Aramaki, Aoba-ku Sendai, 980-8579, Japan

J. Fluids Eng 133(10), 101301 (Sep 26, 2011) (11 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4004905 History: Revised August 16, 2011; Received September 18, 2011; Published September 26, 2011; Online September 26, 2011

In order to enhance the aggressive intensity of a cavitating jet for practical applications, the effect of the geometry of the nozzle through which the jet is driven on the aggressive intensity was investigated. The nozzle under test was cylindrical and consisted of a plate and a cap with a hole bored through it. The aggressive intensity of the jet was estimated by the erosion suffered by pure aluminum test specimens. The parameters varied were the bore diameter, D, and length, L, the standoff distance, the nozzle throat diameter, d, and the upstream and downstream pressures of the nozzle. The mass loss at the optimum standoff distance, where the mass loss was at a relative maximum, was found for each bore diameter and length, and then the optimum bore diameter and length were obtained. The optimum ratio of d : D : L was shown to be 1 : 8 : 8, and this was the optimum for both d =1 mm and d =2 mm. It was also the optimum ratio for upstream pressures of 15 MPa and 30 MPa, and downstream pressures of 0.1 MPa and 0.42 MPa.

Copyright © 2011 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Cavitating jet apparatus

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Nozzle geometry for the cavitating jet

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Appearance of the eroded surface (d = 2 mm, p1  = 30 MPa, σ = 0.014, t = 30 s, D = 16 mm, L = 16 mm, s = 85 mm)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Mass loss as a function of standoff distance for various nozzle geometries

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Normalized optimum standoff distance as a function of normalized bore diameter at L/d = 8

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Normalized optimum standoff distance as a function of normalized bore length at D/d = 8

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Mass loss rate as a function of normalized standoff distance at D/d = 8 and L/d = 8

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Mass loss at optimum standoff distance varying with bore diameter and length

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Mass loss rate at optimum standoff distance as a function of normalized bore diameter at L/d = 8

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Mass loss rate at optimum standoff distance as a function of normalized bore length at D/d = 8

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Introduction of compressive residual stress by using cavitating jet at various bore diameters and lengths (d = 2 mm, p1  = 30 MPa, σ = 0.014)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Relation between residual stress at tp  = 1 s/mm and mass loss at optimum standoff distance (d = 2 mm, p1  = 30 MPa, σ = 0.014)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Residual stress as a function of distance from surface (d = 2 mm, p1  = 30 MPa, σ = 0.014, D/d = 8, L/d = 8)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Relation between frequency defined by outlet bore and frequency of cavitation cloud shedding

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Mass loss rate at optimum standoff distance varying with Strouhal number

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Mass loss as a function of erosion time at each cavitating condition (L/d =8, D/d = 8, s = sopt )

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