Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-76mfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-20T13:45:42.990Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The dynamics of partial cavity formation, shedding and the influence of dissolved and injected non-condensable gas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 September 2017

Simo A. Mäkiharju Open the ORCID record for Simo A. Mäkiharju [Opens in a new window] ,
Harish Ganesh  and
Steven L. Ceccio
Simo A. Mäkiharju*
Affiliation:
Mechanical Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA
Harish Ganesh
Affiliation:
Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
Steven L. Ceccio
Affiliation:
Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
*
†Email address for correspondence: makiharju@berkeley.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the present study, the experimental set-up of Ganesh et al. (J. Fluid Mech., vol. 802, 2016, pp. 37–78) is used to examine the dynamics of a shedding cavity by examining the vapour production rate of the natural cavity and determining how minimal injection of non-condensable gas can substantially alter the vapour production rate, the resulting cavity flow and the cavity shedding process. The influence of the dissolved gas content on the shedding natural cavity flow is also examined. High-speed visual imaging and cinemagraphic X-ray densitometry were used to observe the void fraction dynamics of the cavity flow. Non-condensable gas is injected across the span of the cavity flow at two locations: immediately downstream of the cavity detachment location at the apex of the wedge or further downstream into mid-cavity. The gas injected near the apex is found to increase the pressure near the suction peak, which resulted in the suppression of vapour formation. Hence, the injection of gas could result in a substantial net reduction in the overall cavity void fraction. Injection at the mid-cavity did less to suppress the vapour production and resulted in less significant modification of both the mean cavity pressure and net volume fraction. Changes in the cavity void fraction, in turn, altered the dynamics of the bubbly shock formation. Variation of the dissolved gas content alone (i.e. without injection) did not significantly change the cavity dynamics.

JFM classification

Drops and Bubbles: Cavitation Drops and Bubbles: Drops and Bubbles Multiphase and Particle-laden Flows: Multiphase flow

Information

Type
Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 829 , 25 October 2017 , pp. 420 - 458
Check for updates
Copyright
© 2017 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Amromin, E. & Minize, I. 2003 Partial cavitation as drag reduction technique and problem of active flow control. Marine Engng 40 (3), 181–188.Google Scholar
Brennen, C. E. 2005 Fundamentals of Multiphase Flow. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brennen, C. E. 1995 Cavitation and Bubble Dynamics. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Briançon-Marjollet, L., Franc, J. P. & Michel, J. M. 1990 Transient bubbles interacting with an attached cavity and the boundary layer. J. Fluid Mech. 218, 355–376.Google Scholar
Budich, B., Schmidt, S. J. & Adams, N. A. 2016 Numerical investigation of condensation shocks in cavitating flow. In Proceedings of 31st Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics. Monterey, California, http://snh.stanford.edu/.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
Ceccio, S. L. & Brennen, C. E. 1991 Observations of the dynamics and acoustics of travelling bubble cavitation. J. Fluid Mech. 233, 633–660.Google Scholar
Chang, N., Ganesh, H., Yakushiji, R. & Ceccio, S. L. 2011 Tip vortex cavitation suppression by active mass injection. Trans. ASME J. Fluids Engng 133 (11), 111301.Google Scholar
Chanson, H. 1994 Aeration and deaeration at bottom aeration devices on spillways. Canadian J. Civil Engng 21 (3), 404–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duttweiler, M. E. & Brennen, C. E. 2002 Surge instability on a cavitating propeller. J. Fluid Mech. 458, 133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franc, J. P. & Michel, J. M. 2006 Fundamentals of Cavitation. Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
Ganesh, H., Mäkiharju, S. A. & Ceccio, S. L. 2016 Bubbly shock propagation as a mechanism for sheet-to-cloud transition of partial cavities. J. Fluid Mech. 802, 37–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gopalan, S. & Katz, J. 2000 Flow structure and modeling issues in the closure region of attached cavitation. Phys. Fluids 12 (4), 895–911.Google Scholar
Hsiao, C.-T., Ma, J. & Chahine, G. L. 2017 Multiscale two-phase flow modeling of sheet and cloud cavitation. Intl J. Multiphase Flow 90, 102–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyer, C. O. & Ceccio, S. L. 2002 The influence of developed cavitation on the flow of a turbulent shear layer. Phys. Fluids 14 (10), 3414–3431.Google Scholar
Karn, A., Arndt, R. E. & Hong, J. 2016 An experimental investigation into supercavity closure mechanisms. J. Fluid Mech. 789, 259–284.Google Scholar
Kawakami, D. T., Arndt, R. & Qin, Q. 2005 Water quality and the periodicity of sheet/cloud cavitation. In Proceedings of ASME 2005 Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting, pp. 19–23.Google Scholar
Kawakami, E. & Arndt, R. E. 2011 Investigation of the behavior of ventilated supercavities. Trans. ASME J. Fluids Engng 133 (9), 091305.Google Scholar
Lay, K. A., Yakushiji, R., Mäkiharju, S. A., Perlin, M. & Ceccio, S. L. 2010 Partial cavity drag reduction at high Reynolds numbers. J. Ship Res. 54 (2), 109–119.Google Scholar
Li, C. Y. & Ceccio, S. L. 1996 Interaction of single travelling bubbles with the boundary layer and attached cavitation. J. Fluid Mech. 322, 329–353.Google Scholar
Lee, I. H., Mäkiharju, S. A., Ganesh, H. & Ceccio, S. L. 2016 Scaling of gas diffusion into limited partial cavities. Trans. ASME J. Fluids Engng 138 (5), 051301.Google Scholar
Ma, J., Hsiao, C.-T. & Chahine, G. L. 2015 Modelling cavitation flows using an Eulerian–Lagrangian approach and nucleation mode. In 9th International Symposium on Cavitation, Lausanne Switzerland, December 6th–10th.Google Scholar
Mäkiharju, S. A., Elbing, B. R., Wiggins, A., Schinasi, S., Vanden-Broeck, J. M., Perlin, M. & Ceccio, S. L. 2013a On the scaling of air entrainment from a ventilated partial cavity. J. Fluid Mech. 732, 47–76.Google Scholar
Mäkiharju, S. A., Gabillet, C., Paik, B. G., Chang, N. A., Perlin, M. & Ceccio, S. L. 2013b Time-resolved two-dimensional X-ray densitometry of a two-phase flow downstream of a ventilated cavity. Exp. Fluids 54 (7), 1–21.Google Scholar
Parkin, B. & Ravindra, K. 1991 Convective gaseous diffusion in steady axisymetric cavity flows. Trans. ASME J. Fluids Engng 113 (2), 285–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shamsborhan, H., Coutier-Delgosha, O., Caignaert, G. & Nour, F. A. 2010 Experimental determination of the speed of sound in cavitating flows. Exp. Fluids 49 (6), 1359–1373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stutz, B. & Legoupil, S. 2003 X-ray measurements within unsteady cavitation. Exp. Fluids 35 (2), 130–138.Google Scholar
Stutz, B. & Reboud, J. L. 1997 Experiments on unsteady cavitation. Exp. Fluids 22 (3), 191–198.Google Scholar
Tomov, P., Khelladi, S., Ravelet, F., Sarraf, C., Bakir, F. & Vertenoeuil, P. 2016 Experimental study of aerated cavitation in a horizontal venturi nozzle. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 70, 85–95.Google Scholar
Wosnik, M. & Arndt, R. E. 2013 Measurements in high void-fraction bubbly wakes created by ventilated supercavitation. Trans. ASME J. Fluids Engng 135 (1), 011304.Google Scholar
Wu, X., Maheux, E. & Chahine, G. L. 2017 An experimental study of sheet to cloud cavitation. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 83, 129–140.Google Scholar
Young, Y. L., Harwood, C. M., Miguel Montero, F., Ward, J. C. & Ceccio, S. L. 2017 Ventilation of lifting bodies: review of the physics and discussion of scaling relations. Appl. Mech. Rev. 69 (1), 010801.Google Scholar
Yu, P. W. & Ceccio, S. L. 1997 Diffusion induced bubble populations downstream of a partial cavity. Trans. ASME J. Fluids Engng 119 (4), 782–787.Google Scholar
Zverkhovskyi, O. 2014 Ship Drag Reduction by Air Cavities. Delft University of Technology.Google Scholar

Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 1

Baseline case

Download Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 1(Video)
Video 4.3 MB

Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 2

Baseline case with extra processing

Download Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 2(Video)
Video 27.4 MB

Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 3

Apex injection, 𝑄𝐼 /𝑄𝑉,𝑥 = 0.07

Download Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 3(Video)
Video 3.5 MB

Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 4

Apex injection, 𝑄𝐼 /𝑄𝑉,𝑥 = 0.16

Download Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 4(Video)
Video 4.4 MB

Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 5

Cavity injection, 𝑄𝐼 /𝑄𝑉,𝑥 = 0.07

Download Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 5(Video)
Video 4.3 MB

Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 6

Cavity injection, 𝑄𝐼 /𝑄𝑉,𝑥 = 0.16

Download Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 6(Video)
Video 4.8 MB

Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 7

Cavity injection, 𝑄𝐼 /𝑄𝑉,𝑥 = 1.2

Download Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 7(Video)
Video 4.9 MB

Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 8

Effect of phase averaging, sample 1

Download Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 8(Video)
Video 532.3 KB

Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 9

Effect of phase averaging, sample 2

Download Mäkiharju et al. supplementary movie 9(Video)
Video 654.8 KB