Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T15:13:00.268Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ventilated cavities on a surface-piercing hydrofoil at moderate Froude numbers: cavity formation, elimination and stability

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2016

Casey M. Harwood Open the ORCID record for Casey M. Harwood [Opens in a new window] ,
Yin L. Young  and
Steven L. Ceccio
Casey M. Harwood*
Affiliation:
Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
Yin L. Young
Affiliation:
Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
Steven L. Ceccio
Affiliation:
Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
*
†Email address for correspondence: cmharwoo@umich.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The atmospheric ventilation of a surface-piercing hydrofoil is examined in a series of towing-tank experiments, performed on a vertically cantilevered hydrofoil with an immersed free tip. The results of the experiments expand upon previous studies by contributing towards a comprehensive understanding of the topology, formation and elimination of ventilated flows at low-to-moderate Froude and Reynolds numbers. Fully wetted, fully ventilated and partially ventilated flow regimes are identified, and their stability regions are presented in parametric space. The stability of partially and fully ventilated regimes is related to the angle of the re-entrant jet, leading to a set of criteria for identifying flow regimes in a laboratory environment. The stability region of fully wetted flow overlaps those of partially and fully ventilated flows, forming bi-stable regions where hysteresis occurs. Ventilation transition mechanisms are classified as formation and elimination mechanisms, which separate the three steady flow regimes from one another. Ventilation formation requires air ingress into separated flow at sub-atmospheric pressure from a continuously available air source. Ventilation washout is caused by upstream flow of the re-entrant jet. The boundary denoting washout of fully ventilated flow is expressed as a semi-theoretical scaling relation, which captures past and present experimental data well across a wide range of Froude and Reynolds numbers.

JFM classification

Drops and Bubbles: Cavitation Multiphase and Particle-laden Flows: Gas/liquid flow Multiphase and Particle-laden Flows: Multiphase flow
Type
Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 800 , 10 August 2016 , pp. 5 - 56
Check for updates
Copyright
© 2016 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

Acosta, A. J.1955 Note on partial cavitation of flat plate hydrofoils. Tech. Rep. E-19.9. California Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Acosta, A. J. 1973 Hydrofoils and hydrofoil craft. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 5 (1), 161–184.Google Scholar
Akcabay, D. T. & Young, Y. L. 2014 Influence of cavitation on the hydroelastic stability of hydrofoils. J. Fluids Struct. 49 (0), 170–185.Google Scholar
Brennen, C. E. 1995 Cavitation and Bubble Dynamics. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Breslin, J. P. 1958 Discussion of paper by K. L. Wadlin. In Proceedings of the Second Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, vol. 1, pp. 434–440. US Office of Naval Research.Google Scholar
Breslin, J. P. & Skalak, R.1959 Exploratory study of ventilated flows about yawed surface-piercing struts. Tech. Rep. 2-23-59W. NASA Tech. Mem., Washington, DC, USA.Google Scholar
Callenaere, M., Franc, J.-P., Michael, J.-M. & Riondet, M. 2001 The cavitation instability induced by the development of a re-entrant jet. J. Fluid Mech. 444, 223–255.Google Scholar
Chang, P. K. 1960 Laminar separation of flow around symmetrical struts at zero angle of attack. J. Franklin Inst. 270 (5), 382–396.Google Scholar
Chang, P. K. 1961 Separation of flow. J. Franklin Inst. 272 (6), 433–448.Google Scholar
Coffee, C. W. Jr. & McKann, R. E. 1953 Hydrodynamic drag of 12- and 21-percent-thick surface-piercing struts. Tech. Rep. 3093. NACA Tech. Note, Washington, DC, US.Google Scholar
De Lange, D. F. & De Bruin, G. J. 1998 Sheet cavitation and cloud cavitation, re-entrant jet and three-dimensionality. In Fascination of Fluid Dynamics, pp. 91–114. Springer.Google Scholar
Elata, C.1967 Choking of strut-ventilated foil cavities. Tech. Rep. 605-2. Hydronautics, Inc.Google Scholar
Emmons, H. W., Chang, C. T. & Watson, B. C. 1960 Taylor instability of finite surface waves. J. Fluid Mech. 7, 177–193.Google Scholar
Faltinsen, O. M. 2005 Hydrodynamics of High-Speed Marine Vehicles. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Franc, J. P. & Michel, J. M. 2006 Fundamentals of Cavitation. Springer.Google Scholar
Gault, D. A.1957 A correlation of low-speed, airfoil-section stalling characteristics with Reynolds number and airfoil geometry. Tech. Rep. 3963. NACA Tech. Note.Google Scholar
Glauert, H. 1943 The Elements of Aerofoil and Airscrew Theory. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Green, S.1988 Tip vortices – single phase and cavitating flow phenomena. PhD thesis, California Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Green, S. I. & Acosta, A. J. 1991 Unsteady flow in trailing vortices. J. Fluid Mech. 227, 107–134.Google Scholar
Harwood, C. M., Brucker, K. A., Miguel, F., Young, Y. L. & Ceccio, S. L. 2014 Experimental and numerical investigation of ventilation inception and washout mechanisms of a surface-piercing hydrofoil. In Proceedings of the 30th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, Hobart, Tasmania.Google Scholar
Harwood, C. M. & Young, Y. L. 2014 A physics-based gap-flow model for potential flow solvers. J. Ocean Engng 88, 578–587.Google Scholar
Hecker, R. & Ober, G.1974 Flow separation, reattachment, and ventilation of foils with sharp leading edge at low Reynolds number. Tech. Rep. AD-787500. Naval Ship Research and Development Center, USA.Google Scholar
Helmbold, H. B. 1942 Der unverwundene Ellipsenflugel als tragende Flanche. In Jahrbuch 1942 der Deutsch Luftfahrtforsch, pp. I111–I113. R. Oldenberg.Google Scholar
Kiceniuk, T.1954 A preliminary experimental study of vertical hydrofoils of low aspect ratio piercing a water surface. Tech. Rep. E-55.2. California Instute of Technology.Google Scholar
Laberteaux, K. R. & Ceccio, S. L. 2001a Partial cavity flows. Part 1. Cavities forming on models without spanwise variation. J. Fluid Mech. 431, 1–41.Google Scholar
Laberteaux, K. R. & Ceccio, S. L. 2001b Partial cavity flows. Part 2. Cavities forming on test objects with spanwise variation. J. Fluid Mech. 431, 43–63.Google Scholar
Larsson, L. & Raven, H. C. 2010 Principles of Naval Architecture Series – Ship Resistance and Flow (ed. Paulling, J. R.). Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers (SNAME).Google Scholar
Perry, B.1955 Experiments on struts piercing the water surface. Tech. Rep. E-55.1. California Instute of Technology, Pasadena.Google Scholar
Pogozelski, E. M., Katz, J. & Huang, T. T. 1997 The flow structure around a surface piercing strut. Phys. Fluids 9 (5), 1387–1399.Google Scholar
Rothblum, R. S.1977 Investigation of methods of delaying or controlling ventilation on surface-piercing struts. PhD thesis, University of Leeds.Google Scholar
Rothblum, R. S., Mayer, D. A. & Wilburn, G. M.1969 Ventilation, cavitation and other characteristics of high speed surface-piercing strut. Tech. Rep. 3023. Naval Ship Research and Development Center, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Rothblum, R. S., McGregor, R. C. & Swales, P. D. 1974 Effect of roughness, wettability and speed on the ventilation characteristics of surface piercing hydrofoil struts. In Proceedings of the International Hovering Craft, Hydrofoil, and Advanced Transit Systems Conf., pp. 235–243.Google Scholar
Swales, P. D., Wright, A. J., McGregor, R. C. & Cole, B. N. 1973 Pressure, flow visualisation and ventilation. Hovering Craft Hydrofoil 13 (1), 11–16.Google Scholar
Swales, P. D., Wright, A. J., McGregor, R. C. & Rothblum, R. 1974 Mechanism of ventilation inception on surface piercing foils. J. Mech. Engng Sci. 16 (1), 18–24.Google Scholar
Tassin-Leger, A. & Ceccio, S. L. 1998 Examination of the flow near the leading edge of attached cavitation. Part 1. Detachment of two-dimensional and axisymmetric cavities. J. Fluid Mech. 376, 61–90.Google Scholar
Taylor, G. 1950 The instability of liquid surfaces when accelerated in a direction perpendicular to their planes I. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 201, 192–196.Google Scholar
Tulin, H. P.1953 Steady two-dimensional cavity flows about slender bodies. Tech. Rep. 834. United States Navy Department – David W. Taylor Model Basin, Bethesda.Google Scholar
Wadlin, K. L. 1958 Mechanics of ventilation inception. In Proceedings of the Second Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, vol. 1, pp. 425–445. US Office of Naval Research.Google Scholar
Waid, R. L.1968 Experimental investigation of the ventilation of vertical surface-piercing struts in the presence of cavitation. Tech. Rep. AD0738493. Naval Ship Research and Development Center.Google Scholar
Wetzel, J. M.1957 Experimental studies of air ventilation of vertical, semi-submerged bodies. Tech. Rep. 57. St. Anthony Falls Hydraulic Laboratory, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Young, Y. L. & Brizzolara, S. 2013 Numerical and physical investigation of a surface-piercing hydrofoil. In Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Marine Propulsors SMP, Launceston (ed. Binns, J., Brown, R. & Bose, N.), pp. 1–8. Australian Maritime College, University of Tasmania.Google Scholar

Harwood et al. supplementary movie

Two-perspective video (suction surface below water, looking down along trailing edge) of spontaneous ventilation formation (inception, followed by stabilization) on the surface-piercing hydrofoil. The hydrofoil accelerates from rest at α=15 deg, ARh=1.0. Ventilation formation is initiated by leading-edge stall very early in the run.

Download Harwood et al. supplementary movie(Video)
Video 36.2 MB

Harwood et al. supplementary movie

Two-perspective video of tip-vortex-induced ventilation formation on the surface-piercing hydrofoil at α=15 deg, Fnh=3.5, ARh=1.0. Bubble coalescence occurs at the trailing edge of the free tip, where air is entrained in the tip vortex.

Download Harwood et al. supplementary movie(Video)
Video 17.3 MB

Harwood et al. supplementary movie

Three-perspective video (suction-surface above water, suction-surface below water, and looking down along the trailing edge) of perturbation-induced ventilation formation on the surface-piercing hydrofoil at α=10 deg, Fnh=2.75, ARh=1.0. The perturbation in question is the high-pressure air-jet located at the junction of the free surface and hydrofoil leading edge. Formation follows activation of the air-jet, with inception and stabilization occurring in rapid succession.

Download Harwood et al. supplementary movie(Video)
Video 16.2 MB

Harwood et al. supplementary movie

Two-perspective video of ventilation elimination (washout, followed by reattachment) on the surface piercing hydrofoil undergoing deceleration at α=15 deg, ARh=1.0. Washout is initiated by the re-entrant jet, which destabilizes the FV cavity, causing large-scale cavity shedding and a transition to PV flow.

Download Harwood et al. supplementary movie(Video)
Video 32.3 MB