Abstract
Cavitation typically occurs when the fluid pressure is lower than the vapor pressure in a local thermodynamic state, and the flow is frequently unsteady and turbulent. The Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) approach has been popular for turbulent flow computations. The most widely used ones, such as the standard k - ε model, have well-recognized deficiencies when treating time dependent flow field. To identify ways to improve the predictive capability of the current RANS-based engineering turbulence closures, conditional averaging is adopted for the Navier-Stokes equation, and one more parameter, based on the filter size, is introduced into the k - ε model. In the Partially Averaged Navier-Stokes (PANS) model, the filter width is mainly controlled by the ratio of unresolved-to-total kinetic energy f 1. This model is assessed in unsteady cavitating flows over a Clark-Y hydrofoil. From the experimental validations regarding the forces, frequencies, cavity visualizations and velocity distributions, the PANS model is shown to improve the predictive capability considerably, in comparison to the standard k - ε model, and also, it is observed the value of f 1 in the PANS model has substantial influence on the predicting result. As the filter width f 1 is decreased, the PANS model can effectively reduce the eddy viscosity near the closure region which can significantly influence the capture of the detach cavity, and this model can reproduce the time-averaged velocity quantitatively around the hydrofoil.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
UTTURKAR Y., WU J. and WANG G. et al. Recent Progress in modeling of cryogenic cavitation for liquid rocket propulsion[J]. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 2005, 41(7): 558–608.
CHEN Hui, LI Sheng-cai and ZUO Zhi-gang et al. Direct numerical simulation of bubble-clusters dynamics characteristic[J]. Journal of Hydrodynamics, 2009, 21(6): 807–813.
KUBOTA A., KATO H. and YAMAGUCHI H. et al. Unsteady structure measurement of cloud cavitation on a Foil section using conditional sampling technique[J]. Journal of Fluid Engineering, 1989, 111(2): 204–210.
SENOCAK I., SHYY W. Interfacial dynamics-based modeling of turbulent cavitating flows, Part-1: Model development and steady-state computations[J]. International Journal for Numerical Method in Fluids, 2004, 44(9): 975–995.
KUNZ R. F., BOGER D. A. and STINEBRING D. R. et al. A preconditioned Navier-stokes method for two phase flows with application to cavitation prediction[J]. Computers Fluids, 2000, 29(8): 849–875.
JI Bin, LUO Xian-wu and PENG Xiao-xing et al. Numerical analysis for three dimensional unsteady cavitation shedding structure over a twisted hydrofoil[J]. Chinese Journal of Hydrodynamics, 2010, 25(2): 217–223(in Chinese).
LIU De-ming, LIU Shu-hong and WU Yu-lin. LES numerical simulation of cavitation bubble shedding on ALE 25 and ALE 15 hydrofoil[J]. Journal of Hydrodynamics, 2009, 21(6): 807–813.
GIRIMAJI S., ABDOL-HAMID K. S. Partially averaged Navier Stokes model for turbulence: Implementation and validation[R]. AIAA paper 2005-502, 2005.
JOHANSEN S. T., WU J. Y. and SHYY W. Filter based unsteady RANS c omputational[J]. International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, 2004, 25(1): 10–21.
WANG G. Y., SENOCAK I. and SHYY W. Dynamics of attached turbulent cavitating flows[J]. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 2001, 37(6): 551–581.
WANG G. Y., HUANG B. and ZHANG B. k - ε Based turbulence models for simulation of cloud cavitating flows[J]. Modern Physical Letter B, 2010, 24(13): 1357–1360.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Project supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 50679001, 50979004) the Fundation from State Key Laboratory of Explosion Science and Technology, Beijing Institute of Technology.
Biography: HUANG Biao (1985-), Male, Ph. D. Candidate
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Huang, B., Wang, Gy. Partially Averaged Navier-Stokes Method for Time-Dependent Turbulent Cavitating Flows. J Hydrodyn 23, 26–33 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-6058(10)60084-4
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-6058(10)60084-4