Prediction of cavitation erosion with different erosion risk indicators

被引:17
作者
Geng, Linlin [1 ]
Zhang, Desheng [1 ]
Chen, Jian [1 ,2 ]
De la Torre, Oscar [2 ]
Escaler, Xavier [2 ]
机构
[1] Jiangsu Univ, Natl Res Ctr Pumps, Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, Peoples R China
[2] Univ Politecn Cataluna, Barcelona Fluids & Energy Lab, Av Diagonal 647, Barcelona 08028, Spain
关键词
Unsteady cloud cavitation; Cavitation erosion risk indicator; Time derivative; Material derivative; NUMERICAL-SIMULATION; LOAD SPECTRA; AGGRESSIVENESS; DYNAMICS; FLOWS; CLOUD;
D O I
10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.110633
中图分类号
U6 [水路运输]; P75 [海洋工程];
学科分类号
0814 ; 081505 ; 0824 ; 082401 ;
摘要
This present work devoted to simulate the unsteady cavitating flow around a hydrofoil and assess its erosion power predicted by different erosion risk indicators. For that, the behavior of unsteady cloud cavity is numer-ically reproduced using density corrected Shear Stress Transport (SST) k-omega turbulence model and the mass transfer between vapor and water phases is modelled with the Schnerr-Sauer cavitation model. The definitions of different erosion risk indicators are mathematically derived and their performance on predicting erosion power is compared systematically. The results demonstrate that indicator, defined only with the rapid temporal variations of the pressure, is unable to distinguish the erosion area caused by cavity collapse. And the erosion risk indicator defined by time derivative of flow properties is unable to capture the main erosion occurred on the cavity closure region because the high erosion power on such area is mainly contributed by the advection term. In addition, it is founded that the full form of erosion power definition, defined by material derivative, is the best erosion indi-cator which can well predict the most eroded area and thus is recommended to be applied in the industrial and practical applications.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 43 条
[21]  
Leclercq C, 2017, THESIS U GRENOBLE AL
[22]  
Leclercq Christophe, 2017, International Journal of Fluid Machinery and Systems, V10, P254
[23]   Numerical assessment of the erosion risk for cavitating twisted hydrofoil by three methods [J].
Lei, Ting-ting ;
Cheng, Huai-yu ;
Ji, Bin ;
Peng, Xiao-xing .
JOURNAL OF HYDRODYNAMICS, 2021, 33 (04) :698-711
[24]  
Li Z. R., 2012, Ph.D. thesis
[25]   Assessment of Cavitation Erosion With a URANS Method [J].
Li, Zi-ru ;
Pourquie, Mathieu ;
van Terwisga, Tom .
JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING-TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASME, 2014, 136 (04)
[26]  
Melissaris T, 2018, P 10 INT S CAV BALT, P326
[27]   On the Applicability of Cavitation Erosion Risk Models With a URANS Solver [J].
Melissaris, Themistoklis ;
Bulten, Norbert ;
van Terwisga, Tom J. C. .
JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING-TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASME, 2019, 141 (10)
[28]   Cavitation erosion prediction based on analysis of flow dynamics and impact load spectra [J].
Mihatsch, Michael S. ;
Schmidt, Steffen J. ;
Adams, Nikolaus A. .
PHYSICS OF FLUIDS, 2015, 27 (10)
[29]   Numerical prediction of potential cavitation erosion in fuel injectors [J].
Mouvanal, Sandeep ;
Chatterjee, Dhiman ;
Bakshi, Shamit ;
Burkhardt, Axel ;
Mohr, Volker .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTIPHASE FLOW, 2018, 104 :113-124
[30]  
Nohmi M., 2008, P ASME 2008 FLUIDS E