0
Research Papers: Multiphase Flows

Combined Numerical and Experimental Investigation of the Cavitation Erosion Process

[+] Author and Article Information
Wang Jian

Research Center of Fluid Machinery
Engineering and Technology,
Jiangsu University,
Zhenjiang 202013, China
e-mail: kin.jian.wang@gmail.com

Martin Petkovšek

Laboratory for Water and Turbine Machines,
University of Ljubljana,
Askerceva 6,
Ljubljana 1000, Slovenia
e-mail: martin.petkovsek@fs.uni-lj.si

Liu Houlin

Research Center of Fluid Machinery
Engineering and Technology,
Jiangsu University,
Zhenjiang 202013, China
e-mail: liuhoulin@ujs.edu.cn

Brane Širok

Laboratory for Water and Turbine Machines,
University of Ljubljana,
Askerceva 6,
Ljubljana 1000, Slovenia
e-mail: brane.sirok@fs.uni-lj.si

Matevž Dular

Laboratory for Water and Turbine Machines,
University of Ljubljana,
Askerceva 6,
Ljubljana 1000, Slovenia
e-mail: matevz.dular@fs.uni-lj.si

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received May 30, 2014; final manuscript received January 7, 2015; published online February 9, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Olivier Coutier-Delgosha.

J. Fluids Eng 137(5), 051302 (May 01, 2015) (9 pages) Paper No: FE-14-1281; doi: 10.1115/1.4029533 History: Received May 30, 2014; Revised January 07, 2015; Online February 09, 2015

We are comparing results of numerical simulations against high-speed simultaneous observations of cavitation and cavitation erosion. We performed fully compressible, cavitating flow simulations to resolve the formation of the shock waves at cloud collapse—these are believed to be directly related to the formation of the damage. Good agreements were noticed between calculations and tests. Two high pressure peaks were found during one cavitation cycle. One relates to the cavitation collapse and the other one corresponds to the cavitation shed off, both contributing to a distinctive stepwise erosion damage growth pattern. Additional, more precise, simulations with much shorter time step were performed to investigate the processes of cavitation collapse and shedding off in more detail. There the importance of small cavitation structures which collapse independently of the main cloud was found. The present work shows a great potential for future development of techniques for accurate predictions of cavitation erosion by numerical means only.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Yamada, H., and Uchiumi, M., 2008, “A Case Study of Fluid-Dynamic Vibrations of Rocket Turbopumps,” Turbomachinery, 36(2), pp. 3–9.
Liu, H. L., Wang, J., Wang, Y., Zhang, H., and Huang, H., 2014, “Influence of the Empirical Coefficients of Cavitation Model on Predicting Cavitating Flow in the Centrifugal Pump,” Int. J. Nav. Archit. Ocean Eng., 6(1), pp. 119–131. [CrossRef]
Dular, M., Bachert, B., Stoffel, B., and Širok, B., 2004, “Relationship Between Cavitation Structures and Cavitation Damage,” Wear, 257(11), pp. 1176–1184. [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]
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]
Franc, J. P., Karimi, A., Chahine, G. L., and Riondet, M., 2011, “Impact Load Measurements in an Erosive Cavitating Flow,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 133(12), p. 121301. [CrossRef]
Franc, J. P., 2009, “Incubation Time and Cavitation Erosion Rate of Work-Hardening Materials,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 131(2), p. 021303. [CrossRef]
Franc, J. P., Riondet, M., Karimi, A., and Chahine, G. L., 2012, “Material and Velocity Effects on Cavitation Erosion Pitting,” Wear, 274, pp. 248–259. [CrossRef]
Crum, L. A., 1995, “Comments on the Evolving Field of Sonochemistry by a Cavitation Physicist,” Ultrason. Sonochem., 2(2), pp. 147–152. [CrossRef]
Wang, Y. C., and Brennen, C. E., 1994, “Shock Wave Development in the Collapse of a Cloud of Bubbles,” ASME Paper No. FED Vol. 194, pp. 15–19.
Fortes-Patella, R., Archer, A., and Flageul, C., 2012, “Numerical and Experimental Investigations on Cavitation Erosion,” IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci., 15(2), p. 022013. [CrossRef]
Fortes-Patella, R., Challier, G., Reboud, J. L., and Archer, A., 2013, “Energy Balance in Cavitation Erosion: From Bubble Collapse to Indentation of Material Surface,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 135(1), p. 011303. [CrossRef]
Bark, G., and Bensow, R. E., 2014, “Hydrodynamic Processes Controlling Cavitation Erosion,” Advanced Experimental and Numerical Techniques for Cavitation Erosion Prediction, K.-H.Kim, G.Chahine, J.-P.Franc, and A.Karimi, eds., Springer, New York.
Bark, G., and Bensow, R. E., 2013, “Hydrodynamic Mechanisms Controlling Cavitation Erosion,” Int. Shipbuild. Prog., 60(1), pp. 345–374 [CrossRef].
Bensow, R., Bark, G., and Lu, N. X., 2012, “Hydrodynamic Mechanisms in Cavitation Erosion,” Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium Cavitation, CAV2012, Singapore.
Bensow, R. E., and Bark, G., 2010, “Implicit LES Predictions of the Cavitating Flow on a Propeller,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 132(4), p. 041302. [CrossRef]
Chen, Y. L., and Israelachvili, J., 1991, “New Mechanism of Cavitation Damage,” Science, 252(5009), pp. 1157–1160. [CrossRef]
Petkovšek, M., and Dular, M., 2013, “Simultaneous Observation of Cavitation Structures and Cavitation Erosion,” Wear, 300(1), pp. 55–64. [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]
Li, Z. R., Pourquie, M., and Terwisga, T. V., 2014, “Assessment of Cavitation Erosion With a URANS Method,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 136(4), p. 041101. [CrossRef]
Luo, X., Ji, B., Peng, X., Xu, H., and Nishi, M., 2012, “Numerical Simulation of Cavity Shedding From a Three-Dimensional Twisted Hydrofoil and Induced Pressure Fluctuation by Large-Eddy Simulation,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 134(4), p. 041202. [CrossRef]
Huang, B., Young, Y. L., Wang, G., and Shyy, W., 2013, “Combined Experimental and Computational Investigation of Unsteady Structure of Sheet/Cloud Cavitation,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 135(7), p. 071301. [CrossRef]
Ochiai, N., Iga, Y., Nohmi, M., and Ikohagi, T., 2012, “Study of Quantitative Numerical Prediction of Cavitation Erosion in Cavitating Flow,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 135(1), p. 011302. [CrossRef]
Dular, M., and Coutier-Delgosha, O., 2009, “Numerical Modelling of Cavitation Erosion,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids, 61(12), pp. 1388–1410. [CrossRef]
Schnerr, G. H., Sezal, I. H., and Schmidt, S. J., 2008, “Numerical Investigation of Three-Dimensional Cloud Cavitation With Special Emphasis on Collapse Induced Shock Dynamics,” Phys. Fluids, 20(4), p. 040703. [CrossRef]
Cencic, T., Hocevar, M., and Sirok, B., 2014, “Study of Erosive Cavitation Detection in Pump Mode of Pump-Storage Hydropower Plant Prototype,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 136(5), p. 051301. [CrossRef]
Escaler, X., Ekanger, J. V., Francke, H. H., Kjeldsen, M., and Nielsen, T. K., 2014, “Detection of Draft Tube Surge and Erosive Blade Cavitation in a Full-Scale Francis Turbine,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 137(1), p. 011103. [CrossRef]
Dular, M., Bachert, B., Stoffel, B., and Sirok, B., 2004, “Relationship Between Cavitation Structures and Cavitation Damage,” Wear, 257(11), pp. 1176–1184. [CrossRef]
Dular, M., and Osterman, A., 2008, “Pit Clustering in Cavitation Erosion,” Wear, 265(5), pp. 811–820. [CrossRef]
Keil, T., Pelz, P. F., Cordes, U., and Ludwig, G., 2011, “Cloud Cavitation and Cavitation Erosion in Convergent Divergent Nozzle,” WIMRC 3rd International Cavitation Forum 2011, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Coutier-Delgosha, 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., 125(1), pp. 38–45. [CrossRef]
Zwart, P., Gerber, A. G., and Belamri, T., 2004, “A Two-Phase Model for Predicting Cavitation Dynamics,” Proceedings of the ICMF2004 International Conference on Multiphase Flow, Yokohama, Japan.
Dular, M., Bachert, R., Stoffel, B., and Širok, B., 2005, “Experimental Evaluation of Numerical Simulation of Cavitating Flow around Hydrofoil,” Eur. J. Mech. B/Fluids, 24(4), pp. 522–538. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

The Venturi geometry

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Instantaneous image of the aluminum foil (top images), measured damage of the foil up to this instant (middle images) and instantaneous image of cavitation (bottom images) [18]. The flow is from the right to the left.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Computational domain. The flow is from the left to the right.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Simulated (top) and observed (bottom) cavitation structure evolution, the flow direction is from right to left. σ = 1.48 and v = 24.7 m/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Monitor points ((a) lies 5 mm, (b) 22 mm, (c) 48 mm, and (d) 65 mm downstream of the throat of the Venturi)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Number of pits, integral damage extent, and absolute pressure at the monitor points A, B, C, and D (see Fig. 5 for positions) as a function of time. At cavitation number σ = 1.48 and velocity at the Venturi throat v = 24.7 m/s, Reynolds number Re = 247,000.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Instantaneous simulated absolute pressure on the venturi surface (top images), measured damage of the foil (middle images), and instantaneous image of cavitation (bottom images). σ = 1.48 and v = 24.7 m/s. The flow direction is from right to left.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Comparison of absolute pressure between different time step simulations at monitor D when cavitation cloud collapsing. σ = 1.48 and v = 24.7 m/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Absolute pressure at the Venturi surface at times (a)–(f) during cavitation cloud collapse. σ = 1.48 and v = 24.7 m/s. The flow direction is from right to left.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Comparison of absolute pressure between different time step simulations at monitor A at cavitation shedding off. σ = 1.48 and v = 24.7 m/s.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Absolute pressure on Venturi surface at times (a)–(f) during cavitation shedding process. σ = 1.48 and v = 24.7 m/s. The flow direction is from right to left.

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