Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wzw2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-29T13:56:28.846Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the interfacial instabilities of a ventilation cavity induced by gaseous injection into liquid crossflow

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 February 2024

Chengwang Xiong Open the ORCID record for Chengwang Xiong [Opens in a new window] ,
Shengzhu Wang ,
Qianqian Dong ,
Shi-Ping Wang  and
A-Man Zhang Open the ORCID record for A-Man Zhang [Opens in a new window]
Chengwang Xiong
Affiliation:
College of Shipbuilding Engineering, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin 150001, PR China
Shengzhu Wang
Affiliation:
College of Shipbuilding Engineering, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin 150001, PR China Marine Design and Research Institute of China, Shanghai 200011, PR China
Qianqian Dong
Affiliation:
College of Shipbuilding Engineering, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin 150001, PR China College of Aerospace and Civil Engineering, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin 150001, PR China
Shi-Ping Wang
Affiliation:
College of Shipbuilding Engineering, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin 150001, PR China
A-Man Zhang*
Affiliation:
College of Shipbuilding Engineering, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin 150001, PR China
*
†Email address for correspondence: zhangaman@hrbeu.edu.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study gives insights into the interfacial instabilities of a ventilation cavity by injecting gas vertically into the horizontal liquid crossflow through both numerical and experimental investigations. We identified four distinct regimes of the ventilation cavity based on their topological characteristics: (I) discrete bubble, (II) continuous cavity, (III) bifurcated cavity, and (IV) bubble plume. The boundaries for these regimes are delineated within the parameter space of crossflow velocity and jet speed. A comprehensive analysis of the flow characteristics associated with each regime is presented, encompassing the phase mixing properties, the dominant frequency of pulsation, and the time-averaged profile of the cavity. This study conducted a detailed investigation of the periodic pulsation at the leading-edge interface of the cavity, also known as the ‘puffing phenomenon’. The results of local spectral analysis and dynamic mode decomposition indicate that the high-frequency instability in the near-field region exhibits the most significant growth rate. In contrast, the low-frequency mode with the largest amplitude spans a broader region from the orifice to the cavity branches. A conceptual model has been proposed to elucidate the mechanism behind the pulsation phenomenon observed along the cavity interface: the pulsation results from the alternate intrusion of the crossflow and the cavity recovery at the leading edge, being governed mainly by the periodic oscillating imbalance between the static pressure of gas near the orifice and the stagnation pressure of crossflow at the leading edge.

JFM classification

Drops and Bubbles: Cavitation
Type
JFM Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 980 , 10 February 2024 , A44
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acharya, S., Tyagi, M. & Hoda, A. 2001 Flow and heat transfer predictions for film cooling. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 934 (1), 110–125.Google Scholar
Alves, L.S.B., Kelly, R.E. & Karagozian, A.R. 2008 Transverse-jet shear-layer instabilities. Part 2. Linear analysis for large jet-to-crossflow velocity ratio. J. Fluid Mech. 602, 383–401.Google Scholar
Arora, P. & Saha, A.K. 2011 Three-dimensional numerical study of flow and species transport in an elevated jet in crossflow. Intl J. Heat Mass Transfer 54 (1), 92–105.Google Scholar
Bagheri, S., Schlatter, P., Schmid, P.J. & Henningson, D.S. 2009 Global stability of a jet in crossflow. J. Fluid Mech. 624, 33–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, M.J. & Colella, P. 1989 Local adaptive mesh refinement for shock hydrodynamics. J. Comput. Phys. 82, 64–84.Google Scholar
Broumand, M., Birouk, M. & Mahmoodi, J.S.V. 2019 Liquid jet primary breakup in a turbulent cross-airflow at low Weber number. J. Fluid Mech. 879, 775–792.Google Scholar
Ceccio, S.L. 2010 Friction drag reduction of external flows with bubble and gas injection. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 42, 183–203.Google Scholar
Chai, X., Iyer, P.S. & Mahesh, K. 2015 Numerical study of high speed jets in crossflow. J. Fluid Mech. 785, 152–188.Google Scholar
Choi, K.W., Lai, C.C.K. & Lee, J.H.W. 2016 Mixing in the intermediate field of dense jets in cross currents. J. Hydraul. Engng ASCE 142, 04015041.Google Scholar
Cortelezzi, L. & Karagozian, A.R. 2001 On the formation of the counter-rotating vortex pair in transverse jets. J. Fluid Mech. 446, 347–373.Google Scholar
Dong, P., Lu, B., Gong, S. & Cheng, D. 2020 Experimental study of submerged gas jets in liquid cross flow. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 112, 109998.Google Scholar
Dong, P., Wang, K., Cheng, D. & Lu, B. 2021 Submerged gas jet in liquid cross flow: modeling and flow structures analysis. Ocean Engng 242, 110128.Google Scholar
Elbing, B.R., Mäkiharju, S.A., Wiggins, A., Perlin, M., Dowling, D.R. & Ceccio, S.L. 2013 On the scaling of air layer drag reduction. J. Fluid Mech. 717, 484–513.Google Scholar
Fric, T.F. & Roshko, A. 1994 Vortical structure in the wake of a transverse jet. J. Fluid Mech. 279, 1–47.Google Scholar
Gan, N., Yao, X., Cheng, S., Chen, Y. & Ma, G. 2022 Experimental investigation on dynamic characteristics of ventilation bubbles on the surface of a vertical moving body. Ocean Engng 246, 110641.Google Scholar
Gevorkyan, L., Shoji, T., Peng, W.Y. & Karagozian, A.R. 2018 Influence of the velocity field on scalar transport in gaseous transverse jets. J. Fluid Mech. 834, 173–219.Google Scholar
Gruber, M.R., Nejad, A.S., Chen, T.H. & Dutton, J.C. 1997 Compressibility effects in supersonic transverse injection flowfields. Phys. Fluids 9 (5), 1448–1461.Google Scholar
Hakki, I., Insel, M. & Helvacioglu, I. 2010 Flow analysis of an air injection through discrete air lubrication. In International Conference on Ship Drag Reduction 2010.Google Scholar
Hirt, C.W. & Nichols, B. 1981 Volume of fluid (VOF) method for the dynamics of free boundaries. J. Comput. Phys. 39, 201–225.Google Scholar
Ilak, M., Schlatter, P., Bagheri, S. & Henningson, D.S. 2012 Bifurcation and stability analysis of a jet in cross-flow: onset of global instability at a low velocity ratio. J. Fluid Mech. 696, 94–121.Google Scholar
Jiang, Y., Shao, S. & Hong, J. 2018 Experimental investigation of ventilated supercavitation with gas jet cavitator. Phys. Fluids 30 (1), 012103.Google Scholar
Kelso, R.M., Lim, T.T. & Perry, A.E. 1996 An experimental study of round jets in cross-flow. J. Fluid Mech. 306, 111–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, I.R. 2015 Scaling of gas diffusion into limited partial cavity and interaction of vertical jet with cross-flow beneath horizontal surface. PhD thesis, The University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Logvinovich, G.V. 1969 Hydrodynamics of flows with free boundaries. PhD thesis, Naukova Dumka, Kiev.Google Scholar
Mahesh, K. 2013 The interaction of jets with crossflow. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 45 (1), 379–407.Google Scholar
Mäkiharju, S.A. & Ceccio, S.L. 2018 On multi-point gas injection to form an air layer for frictional drag reduction. Ocean Engng 147, 206–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mäkiharju, S.A., Lee, I.R., Filip, G.P., Maki, K.J. & Ceccio, S.L. 2017 The topology of gas jets injected beneath a surface and subject to liquid cross-flow. J. Fluid Mech. 818, 141–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, S.H. 1992 Air bubble formation from an orifice with liquid cross-flow. PhD thesis, University of Sydney.Google Scholar
Meyer, K.E., Pedersen, J.M. & Özcan, O. 2007 A turbulent jet in crossflow analysed with proper orthogonal decomposition. J. Fluid Mech. 583, 199–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mirsandi, H., Smit, W.J., Kong, G., Baltussen, M.W., Peters, E.A.J.F. & Kuipers, J.A.M. 2020 Bubble formation from an orifice in liquid cross-flow. Chem. Engng J. 386, 120902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicoud, F. & Ducros, F. 1999 Subgrid-scale stress modelling based on the square of the velocity gradient tensor. Flow Turbul. Combust. 62, 183–200.Google Scholar
Paryshev, E. 2006 Approximate mathematical models in high-speed hydrodynamics. J. Engng Maths 55, 41–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patankar, S.V. & Spalding, D.B. 1972 A calculation procedure for heat, mass and momentum transfer in three-dimensional parabolic flows. Intl J. Heat Mass Transfer 15, 1787–1806.Google Scholar
Peplinski, A., Schlatter, P. & Henningson, D.S. 2015 Global stability and optimal perturbation for a jet in cross-flow. Eur. J. Mech. (B/Fluids) 49, 438–447.Google Scholar
Pescini, E., Francioso, L., De Giorgi, M.G. & Ficarella, A. 2015 Investigation of a micro dielectric barrier discharge plasma actuator for regional aircraft active flow control. IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 43 (10), 3668–3680.Google Scholar
Peterson, S.D. & Plesniak, M.W. 2004 Evolution of jets emanating from short holes into crossflow. J. Fluid Mech. 503, 57–91.Google Scholar
Regan, M.A. & Mahesh, K. 2017 Global linear stability analysis of jets in cross-flow. J. Fluid Mech. 828, 812–836.Google Scholar
Regan, M.A. & Mahesh, K. 2019 Adjoint sensitivity and optimal perturbations of the low-speed jet in cross-flow. J. Fluid Mech. 877, 330–372.Google Scholar
Rek, Z., Gregorc, J., Bouaifi, M. & Daniel, C. 2017 Numerical simulation of gas jet in liquid crossflow with high mean jet to crossflow velocity ratio. Chem. Engng Sci. 172, 667–676.Google Scholar
Rowley, C.W., Mezić, I., Bagheri, S., Schlatter, P. & Henningson, D.S. 2009 Spectral analysis of nonlinear flows. J. Fluid Mech. 641, 115–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saïd, N.M., Mhiri, H., Palec, G.L. & Bournot, P. 2005 Experimental and numerical analysis of pollutant dispersion from a chimney. Atmos. Environ. 39 (9), 1727–1738.Google Scholar
Schlüter, J. & Schönfeld, T. 2000 LES of jets in cross flow and its application to a gas turbine burner. Flow Turbul. Combust. 65, 177–203.Google Scholar
Schmid, P.J. 2010 Dynamic mode decomposition of numerical and experimental data. J. Fluid Mech. 656, 5–28.Google Scholar
Schmid, P.J. 2022 Dynamic mode decomposition and its variants. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 54, 225–254.Google Scholar
Shoji, T., Harris, E.W., Besnard, A., Schein, S.G. & Karagozian, A.R. 2020 On the origins of transverse jet shear layer instability transition. J. Fluid Mech. 890, A7.Google Scholar
Silberman, E. & Song, C.S. 1961 Instability of ventilated cavities. J. Ship Res. 5 (2), 13–33.Google Scholar
Socolofsky, S.A. & Adams, E.E. 2002 Multi-phase plumes in uniform and stratified crossflow. J. Hydraul. Res. 40 (6), 661–672.Google Scholar
Thielicke, W. & Stamhuis, E.J. 2014 PIVlab – towards user-friendly, affordable and accurate digital particle image velocimetry in MATLAB. J. Open Res. Softw. 2 (1), e30.Google Scholar
Vigneau, O., Pignoux, S., Carreau, J.L. & Roger, F. 2001 Influence of the wall boundary layer thickness on a gas jet injected into a liquid crossflow. Exp. Fluids 30 (4), 458–466.Google Scholar
Wace, P.F., Morrell, M.S. & Woodrow, J. 1987 Bubble formation in a transverse horizontal liquid flow. Chem. Engng Commun. 62 (1–6), 93–106.Google Scholar
Wang, L., Huang, B., Qin, S., Cao, L., Fang, H., Wu, D. & Li, C. 2020 Experimental investigation on ventilated cavity flow of a model ship. Ocean Engng 214, 107546.Google Scholar
Zhang, A.-M., Li, S.-M., Cui, P., Li, S. & Liu, Y.-L. 2023 A unified theory for bubble dynamics. Phys. Fluids 35, 033323.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Xiong et al. supplementary movie 1

The animation of bubble development in DB regime, corresponding to case 4 in Table 1.
Download Xiong et al. supplementary movie 1(File)
File 24.6 MB
Supplementary material: File

Xiong et al. supplementary movie 2

The experimental and numerical obserbvations of interface instability in BC regime, corresponding to the cases shown in figure 15 and 14(a), respectively.
Download Xiong et al. supplementary movie 2(File)
File 13.4 MB
Supplementary material: File

Xiong et al. supplementary movie 3

The comparison of cavity topology develoment with an incresse of jet velocity, corresponding to figure 24.
Download Xiong et al. supplementary movie 3(File)
File 31.7 MB