0
Research Papers: Flows in Complex Systems

Assessment of Cavitation Erosion With a URANS Method

[+] Author and Article Information
Zi-ru Li

Wuhan University of Technology,
Hubei 430063China;
Delft University of Technology,
Delft 6700 AA, The Netherlands
e-mail: lisayhw333@hotmail.com

Mathieu Pourquie

Delft University of Technology,
Delft 6700 AA, The Netherlands
e-mail: M.J.B.M.Pourquie@tudelft.nl

Tom van Terwisga

Delft University of Technology
Delft 6700 AA, The Netherlands;
Maritime Research Institute Netherlands (MARIN),
Wageningen 6700 AA, The Netherlands
e-mail: t.v.terwisga@marin.nl

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received December 20, 2012; final manuscript received December 3, 2013; published online February 28, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Olivier Coutier-Delgosha.

J. Fluids Eng 136(4), 041101 (Feb 28, 2014) (11 pages) Paper No: FE-12-1644; doi: 10.1115/1.4026195 History: Received December 20, 2012; Revised December 03, 2013

An assessment of the cavitation erosion risk by using a contemporary unsteady Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (URANS) method in conjunction with a newly developed postprocessing procedure is made for an NACA0015 hydrofoil and an NACA0018-45 hydrofoil, without the necessity to compute the details of the actual collapses. This procedure is developed from detailed investigations on the flow over a hydrofoil. It is observed that the large-scale structures and typical unsteady dynamics predicted by the URANS method with the modified shear stress transport (SST) k-ω turbulence model are in fair agreement with the experimental observations. An erosion intensity function for the assessment of the risk of cavitation erosion on the surface of hydrofoils by using unsteady RANS simulations as input is proposed, based on the mean value of the time derivative of the local pressure that exceeds a certain threshold. A good correlation is found between the locations with a computed high erosion risk and the damage area observed from paint tests.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Berchiche, N., Franc, J. P., and Michel, J. M., 2002, “A Cavitation Erosion Model for Ductile Materials,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 124(3), pp. 601–606. [CrossRef]
Brennen, C. E., 1995, Cavitation and Bubble Dynamics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Fortes-Patella, R., and Reboud, J. L., 1998, “A New Approach to Evaluate the Cavitation Erosion Power,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 120(2), pp. 335–344. [CrossRef]
Wang, Y. C., and Brennen, C. E., 1999, “Numerical Computation of Shock Waves in a Spherical Cloud of Cavitation Bubbles,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 121(4), pp. 872–880. [CrossRef]
Bensow, R. E., and Bark, G., 2010, “Implicit LES Predictions of the Cavitating Flow on a Propeller,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 132, p. 041302. [CrossRef]
Kato, H., Konno, A., Maeda, M., and Yamaguchi, H., 1996, “Possibility of Quantitative Prediction of Cavitation Erosion Without Model Test,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 118(3), pp. 582–588. [CrossRef]
Fortes-Patella, R., Reboud, J. L., and Briancon-Marjollet, L., 2004, “A Phenomenological and Numerical Model for Scaling the Flow Aggressiveness in Cavitation Erosion,” EROCAV Workshop, Val de Reuil, France.
Dular, M., and Coutier-Delgosha, O., 2009, “Numerical Modelling of Cavitation Erosion,” Int. J. Numer. Meth. Fluids, 61(12), pp. 1388–1410. [CrossRef]
Ochiai, N., Iga, Y., Nohmi, M., and Ikohagi, T., 2013, “Study of Quantitative Numerical Prediction of Cavitation Erosion in Cavitating Flow,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 135(1), p. 011302. [CrossRef]
Van Terwisga, T. J. C., Fitzsimmons, P. A., Li, Z., and Foeth, E. J., 2009, “Cavitation Erosion—A Review of Physical Mechanisms and Erosion Risk Models,” Proc. 7th Int. Sym. Cavitation, CAV2009, Ann Arbor, MI.
Bark, G., Berchiche, N., and Grekula, M., 2004, Application of Principles for Observation and Analysis of Eroding Cavitation-The EROCAV Observation Handbook, 3.1 ed., Chalmers University of Technology, Goteborg, Sweden.
Oprea, I. A., and Bulten, B., 2011, “Cavitation Modelling Using RANS Approach,” WIMRC 3rd Int. Cavitation Forum 2011, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Hoekstra, M., and Vaz, G., 2009, “The Partial Cavity on a 2D Foil Revisited,” Proc. 7th Int. Sym. Cavitation, CAV2009, Ann Arbor, MI.
Li, D., Grekula, M., and Lindell, P., 2010, “Towards Numerical Prediction of Unsteady Sheet Cavitation on Hydrofoils,” J. Hydrodyn., Ser B, 22(5), pp. 741–746. [CrossRef]
Asnaghi, A., Jahanbakhsh, E., and Seif, M. S., 2010, “Unsteady Multiphase Modeling of Cavitation Around NACA0015,” J. Mar. Sci. Tech., 18(5), pp. 689–696.
Reboud, J. L., Stutz, B., and Coutier-Delgosha, O., 1998, “Two Phase Flow Structure of Cavitation Experiment and Modeling of Unsteady Effects,” Proc. 3rd Int. Sym. Cavitation, Grenoble, France.
Coutier-Delghosa, O., Fortes-Patella, R., and Reboud, J. L., 2003, “Evaluation of the Turbulence Model Influence on the Numerical Simulations of Unsteady Cavitation,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 25(1), pp. 38–45. [CrossRef]
Hoekstra, M., Van Terwisga, T. J. C., and Foeth, E. J., 2011, “SMP11 Workshop-Case 1: DelftFoil,” 2nd Int. Sym. Marine Propulsors, Hamburg, Germany.
Van Rijsbergen, M., Foeth, E. J., Fitzsimmons, P., and Boorsma, A., 2012, “High-Speed Video Observations and Acoustic-Impact Measurements on a NACA0015 Foil,” Proc. 8th Int. Sym. Cavitation, CAV2012, Singapore.
Li, Z., 2012, “Assessment of Cavitation Erosion With a Multiphase Reynolds-Averaged Navier–Stokes Method,” Ph.D. dissertation, TUDelft, Delft, The Netherlands.
Menter, F. R., 1994, “Two-Equation Eddy-Viscosity Turbulence Models for Engineering Applications,” AIAA J., 32, pp. 1598–1605. [CrossRef]
Schnerr, G. H., and Sauer, J., 2001, “Physical and Numerical Modeling of Unsteady Cavitation Dynamics,” 4th International Conference on Multiphase Flow, New Orleans, LA.
ANSYS, Inc, 2009, FLUENT Theory Guide (12.0), Providence, RI.
Van Terwisga, T. J. C., 2009, “Criteria for Assessment of Cavitation Erosion Risk,” CRS EROSION II Working Group, Proprietary.
Celik, I., 2005, “Procedure for Estimation and Reporting of Discretization Error in CFD Applications,” Internal Report, Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department, West Virgina University, Morgantown, WV.
Celik, I., Klein, M., Freitag, M., and Janicka, J., 2006, “Assessment Measures for URANS/DES/LES: An Overview With Applications,” J. Turbulence, 7(48), p. N48. [CrossRef]
Sauer, J., 2000, “Instationär kavitierende strömungen - Ein neues modell, basierend auf front capturing (VoF) und blasendynamik,” Ph.D. thesis, Karlsruhe University, Karlsruhe, Germany.
Schnerr, G. H., Schmidt, S. J., Sezal, I. H., and Thalhamer, M., 2006, “Shock and Wave Dynamics of Compressible Liquid Flows With Special Emphasis on Unsteady Load on Hydrofoils and Cavitation in Injection Nozzles,” Proceedings of 6th International Symposium on Cavitation, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Koop, A. H., 2008, “Numerical Simulation of Unsteady Three-Dimensional Sheet Cavitation,” Ph.D. thesis, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Oprea, I., 2009, “Wärtsilä CFD Results: 2D NACA0015 Foil,” VIRTUE WP4 Workshop, Contribution From Wärtsilä.
Hoekstra, M., and Vaz, G., 2008, “FreSCo Exercises for NACA0015 Foil,” VIRTUE WP4 Workshop, Contribution From MARIN.
Sorguven, E., and Schnerr, G. H., 2003, “Modified k-ω Model for Simulation of Cavitating Flows,” Proc. Appl. Math. Mech., 2(1), pp. 386–387. [CrossRef]
Li, Z., Pourquie, M., and Van Terwisga, T. J. C., 2011, “On the Assessment of Cavitation Erosion on a Hydrofoil Using Unsteady RANS,” WIMRC 3rd International Cavitation Forum 2011, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Kawanami, Y., Kato, H., Yamaguchi, H., Maeda, M., and Nakasumi, S., 2002, “Inner Structure of Cloud Cavity on a Foil Section,” JSME Int. J., 45(3), pp. 655–661. [CrossRef]
Saito, Y. Y., Takami, R., Nakanori, I., and Ikohagi, T., 2007, “Numerical Analysis of Unsteady Behavior of Cloud Cavitation Around a NACA0015 Foil,” Comput. Mech., 40(1), pp. 85–96. [CrossRef]
Schmidt, S. J., Sezal, I. H., Schnerr, G. H., and Thalhamer, M., 2007, “Shock Waves as Driving Mechanism for Cavitation Erosion,” Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Experimental and Computational Aerothermodynamics of Internal Flows, Lyon, France.
Hammitt, F. G., 1963, “Observations on Cavitation Damage in a Flowing System,” ASME J. Basic Eng., 85(3), pp. 347–359. [CrossRef]
Nohmi, M., Iga, Y., and Ikohagi, T.2008. “Numerical Prediction Method of Cavitation Erosion,” Proceedings of FEDSM2008, Jacksonville, FL.
Flageul, C., Fortes Patella, R., and Archer, A.2012. “Cavitation Erosion Prediction by Numerical Cavitation,” Proc. of 14th International Symposium on Transport Phenomena and Dynamics of Rotating Machinery, ISROMAC-14, February 2012, Honolulu, HI.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Time histories of the (a) residuals and (b) mass transfer rate during two successive time steps for the NACA0015 hydrofoil at 6 deg angle of attack at σ = 1.0 for the fine grid G1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Contours of the vapor volume fraction during one cycle for a NACA0015 hydrofoil (AoA = 6 deg) at σ = 1.0 with the modified SST k-ω turbulence model on fine grid G1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Sequences of isosurface plots of the instantaneous vapor volume fraction with a contour value of α = 0.1 during one typical shedding cycle in (a) top view (flow from right to left) and (b) downstream view on the NACA0015 hydrofoil (3D representation) with the modified SST k-ω turbulence model (C = 60 mm, AoA = 8 deg, σ = 2.01, U = 17.3 m/s, Pout = 302.295 kPa, T = 16.3 °C)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Comparison between several typical instants obtained by (a) experimental observations and (b) numerical simulations (isosurface plots of the instantaneous vapor volume fraction with a contour value of α = 0.1) for the flow over an NACA0015 hydrofoil (3D representation) with the modified SST k-ω turbulence model (flow from right to left, C = 60 mm, AoA = 8 deg, σ = 2.01, U = 17.3 m/s, Pout = 302.295 kPa, T = 16.3 °C)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Schematic diagram of the transformation process of a horseshoe cloudy cavity from break-off to violent collapse (Kawanami et al. [34])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Comparison of three typical instants during the collapse of the horseshoe-shaped cloudy cavity between the (a) experimental observations, and (b) numerical simulations (isosurface plots of the instantaneous vapor volume fraction with a contour value of α = 0.1 for the flow over an NACA0015 hydrofoil (3D representation) with the modified SST k-ω turbulence model (flow from right to left, C = 60 mm, AoA = 8 deg, σ = 2.01, U = 17.3 m/s, Pout = 302.295 kPa, T = 16.3 °C)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Paint test result after re-application of paint and run no.26 and 27 (C = 60 mm, σ = 2.01, U = 17.3 m/s) on an NACA0015 hydrofoil at 8 deg angle of attack (30–60 min)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Paint test result on an NACA0018-45 hydrofoil at 6.5 deg angle of attack (C = 60 mm, σ = 0.72, U = 24.2 m/s) after 45 min

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Contours of ∂p/∂t at the moment when its maximum value is observed for two intervals and corresponding plots of the vapor volume fraction with an isovalue of α = 0.1 at the relevant time points

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Comparison between (a) a high erosion risk predicted by Eq. (16) with a threshold value of 3e +09 and (b) the damage area observed from paint tests (foil: NACA0015, AoA = 8 deg; flow from right to left). (a) Numerical results; (b) results from paint tests.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Comparison between (a) a high erosion risk predicted by Eq. (16) with a threshold value of 7e +08 and (b) the damage area observed from paint tests (foil: NACA0018-45, AoA = 6.5 deg; flow from right to left) (a)Numerical results, and (b) experimental results

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