Unsteady periodic evolution of cavitation is a common phase transition phenomenon in the field of hydraulic machinery, which easily induces blade surface erosion, deformation, and noise. In this study, a passive jet control method is proposed based on the Clark-Y hydrofoil to suppress the suction surface cavitation without reducing the hydraulic performance. The unsteady cavitation flows around the hydrofoil are numerically investigated using the large eddy simulation and volume of fluid model, and the results are compared with high-speed photography experiments. Introducing the passive jet alters the detailed evolution of cavitation on the suction surface. Accordingly, the sheet cavitation changes from linear growth to three-stage growth, weakening the intensity of cloud cavitation and reducing the time-average cavitation by 37.5%. The passive jet effectively prevents or even eliminates the further development of the re-entrant jet. Moreover, the interaction between the passive and the re-entrant jets causes the rapid collapse of the cavitation. The passive jet accelerated the transition from the sheet vortex to the hairpin vortex, delayed the separation position and time of the boundary layer at the leading edge of the hydrofoil, and enhanced the ability of the hydrofoil to resist velocity separation. The maximum flow resistance coefficient is reduced by 5.80%, maintaining the lift–drag ratio of the hydrofoil.
GuoMLiuCLiuS, et al. On the transient cavitation characteristics of viscous fluids around a hydrofoil. Ocean Eng2023; 267: 113205.
2.
LiuHGuoQShiL, et al. Lift-drag characteristics of S-shaped hydrofoil under different cloud cavitation conditions. Ocean Eng2023; 278: 114374.
3.
TavakoliSKhojastehDHaghaniM, et al. A review on the progress and research directions of ocean engineering. Ocean Eng2023; 272: 113617.
4.
JiaJZhangJHuangZ.Cavitation flow and broadband noise source characteristics of NACA66 hydrofoil with a V groove on the suction surface. Ocean Eng2022; 266: 2–112889.
5.
GuYZhangJYuS, et al. Unsteady numerical simulation method of hydrofoil surface cavitation. Int J Mech Sci2022; 228: 107490.
6.
ShaYXuYYangQ, et al. Research on pressure reconstruction of cavitation hydrofoil surface based on compressed sensing. Ocean Eng2022; 260: 112036.
7.
PhamTMLarrarteFFrumanDH.Investigation of unsteady sheet cavitation and cloud cavitation mechanisms. J Fluid Eng1999; 121(2): 289–296.
8.
WangZChengHJiB.Numerical investigation of condensation shock and re-entrant jet dynamics around a cavitating hydrofoil using a dynamic cubic nonlinear subgrid-scale model. Appl Math Model2021; 100: 410–431.
9.
LiuMTanLLiuY, et al. Large eddy simulation of cavitation vortex interaction and pressure fluctuation around hydrofoil ALE 15. Ocean Eng2018; 163(May): 264–274.
10.
PantCSFrankelSH.Interaction between surface blowing and re-entrant jet in active control of hydrofoil cavitation. Ocean Eng2021; 242: 110087.
11.
YuAQianZTangQ, et al. Numerical investigation of pulsating energy evolution in ventilated cavitation around the NACA0015 hydrofoil. Ocean Eng2022; 257: 111685.
12.
KadivarETimoshevskiyMVPervuninKS, et al. Cavitation control using cylindrical cavitating-bubble generators (CCGs): experiments on a benchmark CAV2003 hydrofoil. Int J Multiphase Flow2020; 125: 103186.
13.
KunduP.Numerical simulation of the effects of passive flow control techniques on hydrodynamic performance improvement of the hydrofoil. Ocean Eng2020; 202: 107108.
14.
KunduPSarkarANagarajanV.Improvement of performance of S1210 hydrofoil with vortex generators and modified trailing edge. Renew Energy2019; 142: 643–657.
15.
YuMTimoshevskiyMVPervuninKS.Effect of an end-clearance width on the gap cavitation structure: experiments on a wall-bounded axis-equipped hydrofoil. Ocean Eng2022; 254: 111387.
16.
KarnAEllisCHongJ, et al. Investigations into the turbulent bubbly wake of a ventilated hydrofoil: moving toward improved turbine aeration techniques. Exp Therm Fluid Sci2015; 64: 186–195.
17.
EscalerXFarhatMAvellanF, et al. Cavitation erosion tests on a 2D hydrofoil using surface-mounted obstacles. Wear2003; 254: 441–449.
18.
WangXBaiXChengH, et al. LES investigation of cavitation harmonic tone around a Delft twist-11 hydrofoil. Ocean Eng2022; 253: 111313.
19.
RodiW.Comparison of LES and RANS calculations of the flow around bluff bodies. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodynamics1997; 69-71: 55–75.
20.
RoohiEZahiriAPPassandideh-FardM.Numerical simulation of cavitation around a two-dimensional hydrofoil using VOF method and LES turbulence model. Appl Math Model2013; 37(9): 6469–6488.
21.
PendarMREsmaeilifarERoohiE.LES study of unsteady cavitation characteristics of a 3-D hydrofoil with wavy leading edge. Int J Multiphase Flow2020; 132: 103415.
22.
MovahedianAPasandidehfardMRoohiE.LES investigation of sheet-cloud cavitation around a 3-D twisted wing with a NACA 16012 hydrofoil. Ocean Eng2019; 192: 106547.
23.
YanHLiJWuM, et al. Study on the influence of active jet parameters on the cavitation performance of Cl ark-Y hydrofoil. Ocean Eng2022; 261: 111900.
24.
WangWTangTZhangQD, et al. Effect of water injection on the cavitation control:experiments on a NACA66 (MOD) hydrofoil. Acta Mech Sin2020; 36(5): 999–1017.
25.
WangWZhangQTangT, et al. Numerical study of the impact of water injection holes arrangement on cavitation flow control. Sci Prog2020; 103(1): 36850419877742.
26.
LerouxJBCoutier-DelgoshaOAstolfiJA.A joint experimental and numerical study of mechanisms associated to instability of partial cavitation on two-dimensional hydrofoil. Phys Fluids2005; 17(5): 1–20.
27.
HongFYuanJZhouB.Application of a new cavitation model for computations of unsteady turbulent cavitating flows around a hydrofoil. J Mech Sci Technol2017; 31(1): 249–260.
28.
ZhengMMLiuYDTangYY, et al. Two-dimensional hydrofoil hydrodynamic performance and waveform evolution studies in density stratification and homogeneous fluid. Ocean Eng2022; 263: 263.
29.
ZhiYZhanJHuangR, et al. Numerical investigations into the ventilation elimination mechanism of a surface-piercing hydrofoil. Ocean Eng2022; 243: 110225.
30.
ZahiriAPRoohiE.Anisotropic minimum-dissipation (AMD) subgrid-scale model implemented in OpenFOAM: Verification and assessment in single-phase and multi-phase flows. Comput Fluids2019; 180: 190–205.
31.
LarKermaniERoohiEPorté-AgelF.Evaluating the modulated gradient model in large eddy simulation of channel flow with OpenFOAM. J Turbulence2018; 19(7): 600–620.
32.
ZhangSWangCYaoZ, et al. Evaluation of a modified URANS prediction of unsteady cavitating flow around a hydrofoil by comparing with LES results and experimental results. Int J Multiphase Flow2023; 162: 104405.
33.
ZwartPGerberABelamriT. A two-phase flowmodel for predicting cavitation dynamics. Fifth International Conference on Multiphase Flow-Yokohama, Japan, 2004.
34.
KumarPSinghSReddySR.Assessment of unsteady cavitating flow around modified NACA4412 hydrofoil. Ocean Eng2022; 266(P4): 113039.
35.
ChenYLiJGongZ, et al. Large eddy simulation and investigation on the laminar-turbulent transition and turbulence-cavitation interaction in the cavitating flow around hydrofoil. Int J Multiphase Flow2019; 112: 300–322.
36.
CelikIBCehreliZNYavuzI.Index of resolution quality for large eddy simulations. J Fluid Eng2013; 127: 949–958.
37.
PopeSB.Book review of turbulent flows. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
SunTLiXJiangQ, et al. Evaluation of effect of micro-vortex generator on dynamic characteristics of unsteady partial cavitating flow over hydrofoil. Ocean Eng2022; 257: 111601.
