Numerical Modeling of Unsteady Cavitating Flows around a Stationary Hydrofoil

Ducoin, Antoine; Huang, Biao; Young, Yin Lu

doi:10.1155/2012/215678

Cited by 59 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The model is called the bubble two-phase flow (BTF) cavity model. Until today, many researches [13,14] use the model as a reference point in their investigations. Kubota formulated the local homogeneous model (LHM) equation of motion…”

Section: The Development Paths Of Numericalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of numerical models of cavitating flows with the use of the homogeneous approach

Niedźwiedzka¹,

Schnerr²,

Sobieski³

2016

Archives of Thermodynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The focus of research works on cavitation has changed since the 1960s; the behaviour of a single bubble is no more the area of interest for most scientists. Its place was taken by the cavitating flow considered as a whole. Many numerical models of cavitating flows came into being within the space of the last fifty years. They can be divided into two groups: multifluid and homogeneous (i.e., single-fluid) models. The group of homogenous models contains two subgroups: models based on transport equation and pressure based models. Several works tried to order particular approaches and presented short reviews of selected studies. However, these classifications are too rough to be treated as sufficiently accurate. The aim of this paper is to present the development paths of numerical investigations of cavitating flows with the use of homogeneous approach in order of publication year and with relatively detailed description. Each of the presented model is accompanied by examples of the application area. This review focuses not only on the list of the most significant existing models to predict sheet and cloud cavitation, but also on presenting their advantages and disadvantages. Moreover, it shows the reasons which inspired present authors to look for new ways of more accurate numerical predictions and dimensions of cavitation. The article includes also the division of source terms of presented models based on the transport equation with the use of standardized symbols. Boldface lower-case letters refer to vectors while boldface capital letters and Greek lowercase letters refer to matrices.

show abstract

Section: The Development Paths Of Numericalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of numerical models of cavitating flows with the use of the homogeneous approach

Niedźwiedzka¹,

Schnerr²,

Sobieski³

2016

Archives of Thermodynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A few researchers have adopted the Merkle model proposed by [24] (e.g., see [28,41]), which has been presented in both the volume fraction form and the mass fraction form. It was derived primarily based on dimensional arguments for large-bubble clusters instead of individual bubbles.…”

Section: 3mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1. In [5,25,42], it is recommended to use n = 3 for the better simulation of dynamic cavitating flow around a hydrofoil, because they obtained favorable agreement between numerical and experimental results for this value.…”

Section: 4mentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigation of Cavitation Models for Steady and Unsteady Cavitating Flow Simulation

Tran¹,

Nennemann²,

Vu³

et al. 2015

International Journal of Fluid Machinery and Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this paper is to evaluate the applicability of mass transfer cavitation models and determine appropriate numerical parameters for cavitating flow simulations. CFD simulations were performed for a NACA66 hydrofoil at cavitation numbers of 1.49 and 1.00, corresponding to steady sheet and unsteady sheet/cloud cavitating regimes using the Kubota and Merkle cavitation models. The Merkle model was implemented into CFX by User Fortran code. The Merkle cavitation model is found to give some improvements for cavitating flow simulation results for these cases. Turbulence modeling is also found to have an important contribution to the prediction quality of the simulations. The relationship between the turbulence viscosity modification, in order to take into account the local compressibility at the vapor/liquid interfaces, and the predicted numerical results is clarified. The limitations of current cavitating flow simulation techniques are discussed throughout the paper.

show abstract

“…[8,9]) that RANS models are unable to correctly predict the transient shedding behaviour of cavitation without further modification, which is attributed to an overprediction of turbulent viscosity in the cavity closure region [10]. Therefore, the formation of a re-entrant jet does not occur, leading to the cavity remaining attached.…”

Section: Turbulent Viscosity Modificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of a pressure based CFD code with mass transfer model based on the Rayleigh equation for the numerical simulation of the cavitating flow around a hydrofoil with circular leading edge

Deimel

Günther

Skoda

2014

EPJ Web of Conferences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The most common method for simulating cavitating flows is using the governing flow equations in a form with a variable density and treats both phases as incompressible in combination with a transport equation for the vapour volume fraction. This approach is commonly referred to as volume of fluid method (VoF). To determine the transition of the liquid phase to vapour and vice versa, a relation for the mass transfer is needed. Several models exist, based on slightly differing physical assumptions, for example derivation from the dynamics of single bubbles or large bubble clusters. In our simulation, we use the model of Sauer and Schnerr which is based on the Rayleigh equation. One common problem of all mass transfer models is the use of model constants which often need to be tuned with regard to the examined problem. Furthermore, these models often overpredict the turbulent dynamic viscosity in the two-phase region which counteracts the development of transient shedding behaviour and is compensated by the modification proposed by Reboud. In the presented study, we vary the parameters of the Sauer-Schnerr model with Reboud modification that we implemented into an OpenFOAM solver to match numerical to experimental data.

show abstract

Numerical Modeling of Unsteady Cavitating Flows around a Stationary Hydrofoil

Cited by 59 publications

References 16 publications

Review of numerical models of cavitating flows with the use of the homogeneous approach

Review of numerical models of cavitating flows with the use of the homogeneous approach

Investigation of Cavitation Models for Steady and Unsteady Cavitating Flow Simulation

Application of a pressure based CFD code with mass transfer model based on the Rayleigh equation for the numerical simulation of the cavitating flow around a hydrofoil with circular leading edge

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About