2010
DOI: 10.1016/s1001-6058(10)60049-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Numerical study of periodically forced-pitching of a supercavitating vehicle

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This pressure difference is constructed in a dimensionless form as P = (P out − P in )/q = P out −P in , where q (= 1/2ρU 2 ) is the dynamic pressure of water in the test section andP in andP out are the dimensionless static pressures inside and just outside the cavity at the closure, respectively (illustrated in figure 11). Note that P in may deviate from the mean cavity pressure due to the internal flows of the supercavity (Pan et al 2010). We hypothesize that the change of Fr, C Qs , B or type of experimental facility leads to the change of P , resulting in the variation of closure modes.…”
Section: Hypothesis and Explanation Of Observationsmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…This pressure difference is constructed in a dimensionless form as P = (P out − P in )/q = P out −P in , where q (= 1/2ρU 2 ) is the dynamic pressure of water in the test section andP in andP out are the dimensionless static pressures inside and just outside the cavity at the closure, respectively (illustrated in figure 11). Note that P in may deviate from the mean cavity pressure due to the internal flows of the supercavity (Pan et al 2010). We hypothesize that the change of Fr, C Qs , B or type of experimental facility leads to the change of P , resulting in the variation of closure modes.…”
Section: Hypothesis and Explanation Of Observationsmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Li [9] measured the hydrodynamic forces and the pressure distribution of a forced-pitching supercavitating vehicle in a circular cavitation tunnel, and discussed the interaction between the supercavity and the slender vehicle. Pan et al [10] simulated supercavitating flow in a close cavitation tunnel for both steady and dynamic cases, and the computational results agreed well with the experimental data.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 64%
“…Many efforts devoted to studying the cavity behavior are widely based on two main methods: the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and the boundary element method (BEM) (Mirzaei et al 2015). CFD method is more accurate than BEM, but it requires a higher computational cost (Yu et al 2012;Pan et al 2010).…”
Section: Introdutionmentioning
confidence: 99%