2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.03.054
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Numerical investigation of attached cavitation shedding dynamics around the Clark-Y hydrofoil with the FBDCM and an integral method

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
13
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 66 publications
0
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…where F c and F e are two empirical coefficients for the condensation and vaporization processes, and α nuc and R B respectively represent the volume fraction and the radius of the nucleation sites. These empirical constants in the ANSYS CFX (18.0 Version, ANSYS, Canonsburg, PA, USA) software [40] are set to F c = 0.01, F e = 50, α nuc = 5 × 10 −4 , and R B = 1 × 10 −6 m. The Zwart cavitation model has been widely used to simulate cavitating flows, and more descriptions about this popular numerical method can be found in [41][42][43][44]. Brief introductions of the simulation cases are listed in Table 1.…”
Section: Numerical Methods and Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where F c and F e are two empirical coefficients for the condensation and vaporization processes, and α nuc and R B respectively represent the volume fraction and the radius of the nucleation sites. These empirical constants in the ANSYS CFX (18.0 Version, ANSYS, Canonsburg, PA, USA) software [40] are set to F c = 0.01, F e = 50, α nuc = 5 × 10 −4 , and R B = 1 × 10 −6 m. The Zwart cavitation model has been widely used to simulate cavitating flows, and more descriptions about this popular numerical method can be found in [41][42][43][44]. Brief introductions of the simulation cases are listed in Table 1.…”
Section: Numerical Methods and Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the momentum and turbulent quantities 2 nd order discretization was applied in each instance. Turbulence closure model sensitivity as those produced over hydrofoils, there is strong interaction between the eddy vortices formed and the generated vapor phase, creating strong pressure fluctuations [50][51][52] . These complex turbulent features present significant modelling challenges; In studying a cavitating venturi, Reboud et al 46 made the argument that the standard k- model tends to produce high turbulent viscosity ( t ) predictions in the separation region, which acts to dampen unsteady effects, leading to the prediction of a stable, fixed separation bubble.…”
Section: Numerics and Convergence Strategymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Reynold-averaged Navier Stokes (RANS) equations are very popular in turbulent flow calculations because of their robustness and low computing power requirements. As RANS models were initially developed for incompressible single-phase fluids, many efforts have been made into the modification of the RANS model to expand their capabilities into unsteady cavitation simulations (Hong et al, 2015;Huang et al, 2013a;Long et al, 2017). To account for the drastic density variations in cavitating flows, Coutier-Delgosha et al (2003) reduced the turbulent eddy viscosity using the density-corrected model (DCM), and Johansen et al (2004) modified the turbulent eddy viscosity with a filter-based model (FBM).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%