0
Research Papers: Multiphase Flows

Cloud Cavitating Flow That Surrounds a Vertical Hydrofoil Near the Free Surface

[+] Author and Article Information
Chang Xu, Chenguang Huang, Jian Huang

Key Laboratory for Mechanics in
Fluid Solid Coupling Systems,
Institute of Mechanics,
Chinese Academy of Sciences,
No. 15 Beisihuanxi Road,
Beijing 100190, China;
School of Engineering Science,
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences,
No. 19(A) Yuquan Road,
Shijingshan District,
Beijing 100049, China

Yiwei Wang

Key Laboratory for Mechanics in
Fluid Solid Coupling Systems,
Institute of Mechanics,
Chinese Academy of Sciences,
No. 15 Beisihuanxi Road,
Beijing 100190, China;
School of Engineering Science,
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences,
No. 19(A) Yuquan Road,
Shijingshan District,
Beijing 100049, China
e-mail: wangyw@imech.ac.cn

Chao Yu

Key Laboratory for Mechanics in
Fluid Solid Coupling Systems,
Institute of Mechanics,
Chinese Academy of Sciences,
No. 15 Beisihuanxi Road,
Beijing 100190, China
School of Engineering Science,
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences,
No. 19(A) Yuquan Road,
Shijingshan District,
Beijing 100049, China

1Present address: Room 201, Building 2, No. 15 Beisihuanxi Road, Beijing 100190, China.

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received December 15, 2016; final manuscript received April 12, 2017; published online July 10, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Hui Hu.

J. Fluids Eng 139(10), 101302 (Jul 10, 2017) (12 pages) Paper No: FE-16-1827; doi: 10.1115/1.4036669 History: Received December 15, 2016; Revised April 12, 2017

Unstable cavitation presents an important speed barrier for underwater vehicles such as hydrofoil craft. In this paper, the authors concern about the physical problem about the cloud cavitating flow that surrounds an underwater-launched hydrofoil near the free surface at relatively high-Froude number, which has not been discussed in the previous research. A water tank experiment and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulation are conducted in this paper. The results agree well with each other. The cavity evolution process in the experiment involves three stages, namely, cavity growth, shedding, and collapse. Numerical methods adopt large eddy simulation (LES) with Cartesian cut-cell mesh. Given that the speed of the model changes during the experiment, this paper examines cases with varying constant speeds. The free surface effects on the cavity, re-entry jet location, and vortex structures are analyzed based on the numerical results.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Cavity length changes with time from t = 0 s to t = 0.014 s. Three stages of the cavity evolution are marked.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Typical cavitation in cavity growth stage 1 (0.002, 0.006 s). The re-entry jet inside the cavity which is deflected from and is located parallel to the free surface is pointed out by the arrow.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Typical cavitation at t = 0.006 s. The white foam like re-entry jet inside cavity is marked by the line.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Speed of the tested hydrofoil changes with time in the water tank experiment from t = 0.001 s to t = 0.014 s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

The Split–Hopkinson pressure bar technology. Three parts the incident bar, the transfer bar, and the test model are included. The launch process is shown.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Typical cavitation in cavity shedding stage 2 (0.008 s, 0.009 s, 0.01 s, and 0.011 s)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Typical cavitation in cavity collapsing stage 3 (0.013 s and 0.014 s). The horseshoe cavity structure induced by the re-entry jet is pointed out by the arrows.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Comparison of the cavity length between the experiment results and the simulation results of cases with constant speeds of 16 m/s, 18 m/s, and 20 m/s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Resulted cavity evolution process of the simulated cases and water tank experiment. The characteristics of the cavitating flow are pointed out by the arrows.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparison of the cavity length among the experimental, original mesh, and refined mesh simulated results

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Comparison of the cavity evolution between the original mesh and refined mesh simulated results. The detailed structure of the cavity is shown and pointed out by the arrows.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Calculated domain and boundary conditions. Boundary conditions that contain inlet, outlet, and wall are marked.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Comparison of the re-entry jet length among the simulation results of 16 m/s, 18 m/s, and 20 m/s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Comparison of the structure of the broken bubble ring at the end of the cavity at t = 0.004 s in the water tank experiment and at t = 0.006 s for the simulation results with and without free surface when the model speed is 16 m/s. Pressure distribution is shown on the surface of the hydrofoil.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Comparison of the experiment image at t = 0.006 s and the velocity contour chart of the cases with and without free surface for the model speed at 16 m/s at t = 0.008 s. The direction of the re-entry jet inside the cavity is pointed out by the arrows.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Comparison of the horseshoe cavity structure at t = 0.008 s in the water tank experiment and at t = 0.01 s for the simulation results with and without free surface when the model speed is 16 m/s. Pressure distribution on the surface of the hydrofoil is shown. The horseshoe cavity structure induced by the re-entry jet is pointed out by the arrows.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Velocity distribution on the added isosurface of Q = 50,000 s−2 at t = 0.008 s, t = 0.01 s, t = 0.012 s, and t = 0.014 s for the simulated cases at constant speed 16 m/s, 18 m/s, and 20 m/s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Velocity distribution on the added isosurface of Q = 50,000 s−2 at t = 0.008 s, t = 0.01 s, t = 0.012 s, and t = 0.014 s of the simulated cases with and without free surface when the model speed is 16 m/s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Velocity distribution on the added isosurface of vortex-stretching magnitude is 50,000 at t = 0.008 s, t = 0.01 s, t = 0.012 s, and t = 0.014 s of the simulated cases with and without free surface when the model speed is 16 m/s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Velocity distribution on the added isosurface of vortex-dilatation magnitude is 50,000 at t = 0.008 s, t = 0.01 s, t = 0.012 s, and t = 0.014 s of the simulated cases with and without free surface when the model speed is 16 m/s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Velocity distribution on the added isosurface of baroclinic torque magnitude is 50,000 at t = 0.008 s, t = 0.01 s, t = 0.012 s, and t = 0.014 s of the simulated cases with and without free surface when the model speed is 16 m/s

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