Group Title: 7th International Conference on Multiphase Flow - ICMF 2010 Proceedings
Title: 3.1.3 - Supression of Tip vortex cavitation with active mass addition
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00102023/00073
 Material Information
Title: 3.1.3 - Supression of Tip vortex cavitation with active mass addition Cavitation
Series Title: 7th International Conference on Multiphase Flow - ICMF 2010 Proceedings
Physical Description: Conference Papers
Creator: Ganesh, H.
Chang, N.
Ceccio, S.
Publisher: International Conference on Multiphase Flow (ICMF)
Publication Date: June 4, 2010
 Subjects
Subject: tip vortex cavitation
mass addition
polymer
PIV
 Notes
Abstract: TVC suppression via mass injection in the core of the vortex was studied with an elliptical plan-form hydrofoil NACA-66 modified in a re-circulating water tunnel with known nuclei distribution. The chord base Reynolds number was O (106) for all the experiments. The solutions injected were water and Polyox WSR 301 solution with concentrations of 32 wppm and 125 wppm at a relative flow rates of Qjet / Qcore = 0.13. It was found that TVC suppression effect was more pronounced for inception than for desinence. For inception, a suppression effect was observed for all cases of mass injection. The baseline inception cavitation number, σI = 3.3, was higher than the average minimum pressure coefficient, -Cp = 2.3 inferred from the average vortex flow properties near the location of TVC inception. Injection of mass into the core reduced the observed inception cavitation number to a value that was consistent with the average value such that σΙ < σD ~ –Cp. Particle Imaging Velocimetry measurement of the flow the field near the vicinity of TVC inception were obtained to reveal how mass injection modifies the flow and leads to a reduction in the inception cavitation number.
General Note: The International Conference on Multiphase Flow (ICMF) first was held in Tsukuba, Japan in 1991 and the second ICMF took place in Kyoto, Japan in 1995. During this conference, it was decided to establish an International Governing Board which oversees the major aspects of the conference and makes decisions about future conference locations. Due to the great importance of the field, it was furthermore decided to hold the conference every three years successively in Asia including Australia, Europe including Africa, Russia and the Near East and America. Hence, ICMF 1998 was held in Lyon, France, ICMF 2001 in New Orleans, USA, ICMF 2004 in Yokohama, Japan, and ICMF 2007 in Leipzig, Germany. ICMF-2010 is devoted to all aspects of Multiphase Flow. Researchers from all over the world gathered in order to introduce their recent advances in the field and thereby promote the exchange of new ideas, results and techniques. The conference is a key event in Multiphase Flow and supports the advancement of science in this very important field. The major research topics relevant for the conference are as follows: Bio-Fluid Dynamics; Boiling; Bubbly Flows; Cavitation; Colloidal and Suspension Dynamics; Collision, Agglomeration and Breakup; Computational Techniques for Multiphase Flows; Droplet Flows; Environmental and Geophysical Flows; Experimental Methods for Multiphase Flows; Fluidized and Circulating Fluidized Beds; Fluid Structure Interactions; Granular Media; Industrial Applications; Instabilities; Interfacial Flows; Micro and Nano-Scale Multiphase Flows; Microgravity in Two-Phase Flow; Multiphase Flows with Heat and Mass Transfer; Non-Newtonian Multiphase Flows; Particle-Laden Flows; Particle, Bubble and Drop Dynamics; Reactive Multiphase Flows
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00102023
Volume ID: VID00073
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: 313-Ganesh-ICMF2010.pdf

Full Text

7th International Conference on Multiphase Flow
ICMF 2010, Tampa, FL USA, May 30-June 4, 2010

Suppression of tip vortex cavitation by active mass addition

Harish Ganesh, Natasha Chang*, and Steven L Ceccio

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
gharish@umich.edu


Keywords: Tip vortex cavitation, mass addition, polymer, PIV


Abstract

TVC suppression via mass injection in the core of the vortex was studied with an elliptical plan-form hydrofoil NACA-66
modified in a re-circulating water tunnel with known nuclei distribution. The chord base Reynolds number was O (106) for
all the experiments. The solutions injected were water and Polyox WSR 301 solution with concentrations of 32 wppm and
125 wppm at a relative flow rates of Qje / Q.or = 0.13. It was found that TVC suppression effect was more pronounced for
inception than for desinence. For inception, a suppression effect was observed for all cases of mass injection. The baseline
inception cavitation number, ao = 3.3, was higher than the average minimum pressure coefficient, -Cp = 2.3 inferred from the
average vortex flow properties near the location of TVC inception. Injection of mass into the core reduced the observed
inception cavitation number to a value that was consistent with the average value such that oa < aD ~ -Cp. Particle Imaging
Velocimetry measurement of the flow the field near the vicinity of TVC inception were obtained to reveal how mass injection
modifies the flow and leads to a reduction in the inception cavitation number.


*Currently at Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division, USA

Introduction

Tip vortex cavitation (TVC) can occur in the concentrated
shed vortices of propellers, turbo machines, and other lifting
surfaces. It is desirable to delay the onset (inception) of
TVC; hence, this phenomenon has received considerable
study. In particular, TVC on a stationery hydrofoil has been
studied extensively mainly because of its similarity to
propellers and other forms of vortex cavitation. Arndt
(2002) provides a recent review of vortex cavitation.

Studies by various researchers have revealed the importance
of various factors that influence TVC inception. Among
these, the nuclei content of the ambient stream and the flow
mechanisms of the vortex roll up process are found to have
profound effect on the TVC inception. TVC inception can
be delayed by modifying the flow field in the vicinity of the
vortex roll up location in order to increase the core size or
reduce the shed circulation of the vortex. Such passive
methods include surface treatments and tip treatments which
in effect modify the flow in the vicinity of the tip. Active
methods of TVC suppression can be affected via the
injection of mass into the core of the trailing vortex. Platzer
and Sounders (1979) gives an account of different methods
of TVC suppression. The present study concerns with TVC
suppression by active mass addition.

Injection of water, glycerine or aqueous polymer solutions
into the vortex core has been found to influence the
inception and desinence of TVC. Platzer and Sounders
(1981) injected free stream water of DO 40% in to the
vortex core and achieved a 40% reduction in the inception
cavitation number. They defined inception as the first
observation of a bubble at one chord downstream when the
free stream pressure was reduced.


Fruman and Affalo (1989) and Fruman et al. (1995) injected
water, water/glycerine mixtures and high-molecular weight
polymer solutions into the core of a tip vortex generated by
an elliptical plan form hydrofoil for a Reynolds numbers
ranging from 105 to 106. They found that cavitation
desinence was suppressed by polymer injection, whereas the
injection of water and water/glycerine mix did not have any
effect. Laser Doppler Velocimetry (LDV) measurements in
the vortex core at several locations downstream of the foil
revealed that the injection of the water and water/glycerine
mixture altered the axial flow within the vortex core region
creating a velocity deficit, while the injection of polymer
solution altered the axial flow as well as reduced the
maximum tangential velocity. Also, the magnitudes of the
axial velocity fluctuations were reduced when additional
mass was injected into the vortex core. In all the cases of
mass injection the vortex circulation remained unchanged.

Injection of water, water glycerine mix and polymer
solution on TVC suppression on a five- bladed propeller
was studied by Chahine et al. (1993). It was found that
polymer injection produced a significant TVC suppression
when compared to water and water/glycerine mix. Also, the
injection location on the blade tips was found to be a crucial
parameter.

Chang et al. (2009) studied TVC suppression by injecting
water and polymer solution for both inception and
desinence. A range of injection flow rates and polymer
concentrations were injected into a tip vortex generated by a
modified NACA 0066 hydrofoil of elliptical plan form at 8
degrees angle of attack. The flow Reynolds number was of
the order of 106. Stereo Particle Imaging Velocimetry (PIV)
measurements were conducted to resolve the tangential
velocity of the vortex at various locations downstream from
the foil tip along the vortex axis. The change in the









inception or desinence cavitation number is compared with
the average minimum pressure coefficient in the vortex
core, Cp,,, estimated by stereo PIV measurements. They
observed inception at cavitation numbers much greater than
-Cpin, while the cavitation number at desinence was much
closer to -Cpin. With mass injection, the inception
cavitation number was reduced, and it approached a value
of-Cp,.i

It was postulated that the observed difference in the
inception cavitation number and -Cp,,n was due to flow
unsteadiness in the vortex core that led to transient
reductions in fluid pressure that would produce the required
tension for inception. It was suggested that mass injection
suppressed the unsteadiness thereby reducing the inception
cavitation number.

The present study aims to investigate the claim that injection
alters the flow unsteadiness in the vortex core responsible
for premature inception. Planar PIV measurements in a
plane parallel to the free stream in the vicinity of the
average inception location of 0.20 chord lengths
downstream of the hydrofoil tip and roughly parallel to the
axis of the vortex, are conducted for the flow rates and
polymer concentrations of Chang et al. (2009). The flow
fields are then compared between the baseline (no injection)
flow and the flow during injection.


Test cases

Chang et al. (2009) reported that the suppression for both
inception and desinence for water injection was saturated at
the injection ratio Qje/Qe.. = 0.13. Here Qj, refers to the
volume flow rate of the injected flow, and Qcore is the
nominal volume flow rate thorough the vortex core
calculated using free stream velocity and vortex core
diameter determined with the stereo PIV measurements.
The non-dimensional flux of injectant is given by C Qje/Qcor
where C is the concentration on the injectant. They found at
the volume flux of QjeI/Q,, = 0.13, injection of polymer
solution of non-dimensional concentration of 4 and 16
produced an effect in both inception and desinence. In the
present study, we replicated theses conditions with water
and polymer solutions with net non-dimensional polymer
fluxes of 0 (e.g. water only), 4, and 16 are injected with a
flow rate of QjeT/QCre = 0.13. This corresponds to injection
flow rate of 11.3 cc/s with polymer concentration of 32
wppm for flux 4 and 125 wppm for flux 16.

The flow speed in the test section was set to 8 m/s and the
pressure was set to achieve a free stream cavitation number
of 5.0, well above the pressure for inception. The water was
de-aerated prior to the tests to ensure that there were no
bubbles present while taking the PIV images. The flow field
without injection was first recorded followed by injecting
water, 32 wppm polymer solution and then 125 wppm
solution. The development of the background polymer
concentration in the test section was less than 1 wppm for
all tests.


7th International Conference on Multiphase Flow
ICMF 2010, Tampa, FL USA, May 30-June 4, 2010

Experimental Facility

All the tests were conducted at the University of Michigan
9-Inch recirculating water tunnel. The inlet of the test
section measures 0.22 m approximately 9-Inches which
smoothly transitions to a 0.22 x 0.22 m rounded rectangular
test section. Length of the test section is 1 m. Four Acrylic
windows of 0.93 x 0.1 m provide viewing and optical
access. Both the flow speed and the static pressure at the
test section can be varied from 0 to 18 m/s and from near
vacuum to 200 kPa. Dissolved oxygen content of water can
be controlled using a de-aeration system. The capacity of
the tunnel including the de-aeration system is around 3.8 m3
with the tunnel alone holding approximately 3.2 m3 of
water. A 1 micron filter is used at the tunnel inlet for
filtering the incoming water.


Figure 1: A schematic drawing of the experimental set up in
the water tunnel test section.

An elliptical plan form hydrofoil with a NACA 66 profile
modified in a similar manner to that reported by with
Platzer and Sounders (1981)was used with a chord to half
span ratio of 1 and maximum thickness to chord ratio of
0.09. The chord length at the root is c = 0.11 m. A tube
passing through the hydrofoil of tube diameter 2.36 mm at
root of the foil and narrowing down to 1.39 mm to match
injection nozzle of the aqueous solution at the tip of the foil
was used for water/polymer injection. Surface on the
suction side, 6 mm from the leading edge was roughened by
gluing aluminium dioxide particles.




F Injection hole
12 7



( =16Inchh)


%u 3 5.
LE TE.
FBrae S: h c h




Figure 2: The elliptical hydrofoil and injection port.









The hydrofoil was mounted on top acrylic window of the
test section at an angle of attack of 8 +/- 0.1 degrees. The
flow velocity at the test section, V, was 8 +/- 0.3 m/s which
corresponds to a chord based Reynolds number of 0.91 x
106. Free stream static pressure was maintained at 160 kPa
which corresponds to a oq = 5.0. The free-stream cavitation
number, o3, is defined as


a = 2
(0.5pV 2)

Dissolved oxygen content of the flow was kept between
20% and 30% of saturation. An Orion dissolved oxygen
meter with a 081010MD probe was used to measure the
dissolved oxygen content of the flow.

The polymer used was poly (ethylene oxide) (PEO) with a
mean molecular weight of 4 million (Polyox WSR 301).
The polymer solution was prepared with distilled water.
Water and polymer was weighed before making a 2000
PPM base solution. This solution was then diluted
appropriately to make 31 wppm and 125 wppm solutions.

The injection system comprised of a pressure vessel with an
outlet tube inner diameter of 7.9 mm with a single valve
between the vessel and the injection port on the foil. Inlet
air pressure from the house supply to the vessel was
regulated using an Omega PRG101-120 pressure regulator.
Pressure in the vessel was adjusted in accordance with the
test section static pressure. Flow rate was calculated by
measuring the change in the mass of the vessel before and
after injection for a specific period of time, given a pressure
level between the vessel and the test section. This was
repeated for four different time intervals to account for
repeatability. The error in the flow rates was around +/- 1
cc/s. Polymer degradation due to shear in the injector
system was considered, and the shear-rates in the delivery
systems were well below the critical limit reported by
Winkle et al. I "i

Particle Image Velocimetry

Two-dimensional planar PIV was used to measure the flow
field in a plane parallel to the free stream. The light sheet
was roughly parallel to the axis. The plane was positioned at
20 mm from the tip of the foil with the lateral dimension
extending 4.5mm above and 7 mm below the tip. The
location was such that the location of average inception
reported by Chang et al. ,2 I' i"' was in the field of view. The
plane did not contain the axis of the vortex and was further
away from the axis inbound along the span. The plane was
well within the downwash region of the core. Figure 4
shows a schematic of the experimental set up with the PIV
light sheet.

A double-pulsed light sheet 3-4 mm thick was created at the
above mentioned location with two pulsed Nd:YAG lasers
(Spectra Physics model Pro-250 Series), and three
cylindrical lenses (60 mm, -150 mm and 200 mm focal
length. The thickness of the light sheet was less than the
vortex core diameter reported by Chang et al. (2009).
Double pulsed images of the light sheet were obtained using


7th International Conference on Multiphase Flow
ICMF 2010, Tampa, FL USA, May 30-June 4, 2010

a Flowmaster 3S camera mounted with a Lens of variable
focal length. Pair of images of size 1280 x 1024 pixels was
taken with a lag of 0.25 seconds that was sufficient to have
the successive image pairs un-correlated.


Figure 3: Schematic of the PIV setup with the laser sheet
position relative to the vortex core and the foil.

The camera image was calibrated to correct for optical
distortion by immersing a rectangular target at the location
of the light sheet. The target had crosses that were separated
by 4 mm. Calibration procedure was done with the target
immersed in water. The flow was seeded using silver
coated glass spheres of 10 micron diameter. The seeding
was close to 20 wppm of the particles in terms of the mass
of the water in the tunnel. Seeded water was not drained for
14 days with the water being de aerated before every use
and flow being seeded with the amount required for a given
run.

Raw images from the camera were processed to produce
PIV vectors using DaVis 7.2 from LaVision. Images were
processed using a non linear filter to remove any ambiguity
arising from the background. This proved to be effective as
the particles had higher count with respect to the
background. Multi-window interrogation with an initial
interrogation size of 128 x 128 pixels with a zero overlap
was used to produce a final interrogation window size of 32
x 32 with 50% overlap. This produced a vector field of 81 x
65 vectors. 1000 pairs of images were recorded to get the
averaged flow fields. The uncertainty in the in=plane
velocity components were +/- 3%.










Results and Discussions


The injection of mass into the core of the vortex produced
measurable difference in the flow fields measured with the
PIV setup. The orientation of the light sheet produces an
image of vortical flow as the vortex is rolling up near the
tip. Figures 4, 5, and 6 show the average streamwise (z)
velocity contours for the baseline, water and polymer
injection cases.


Velocities, both averaged and RMS are non-dimensionalised
with the free stream velocity V- = 8.0 m/s and the distances
along the co-ordinate directions are non-dimensionalised by
the chord length, c. Compared with the no injection case,
the injection of water increased the stream wise velocity, V,
by about 6%. This could be due to vortex core moving
inbound towards the root, thereby making the light sheet
shine closer towards the core. Green and Acosta (1997)
reported that the axial velocity surplus is greater as the core
is approached. Also, the change could be due to the
injection of water altering the vortex roll up process, thereby
altering the axial flow.


0 01 F


Avg Vz
1.43
1.35
- 1.28
- 1.21
1.14
1.06
0.99
0.92
0.84
0.77
0.70
0.63
0.55
0.48


02 025 03
zlc


Figure 4: Contours of V, for the baseline (no injection)
condition.




004

003- Ag Vz
o UO -1.50
1.43
002 1.35
1.28
1.21
001 -
/- 1 .14
1 06
Z01 0.99
0.92
0.84
0 01 0.77

0.55
-0 03 0.48

-0 04
-0 05
II I
02 025 03
zic


7th International Conference on Multiphase Flow
ICMF 2010, Tampa, FL USA, May 30-June 4, 2010



0 04 -
Avg Vz
003 1.50
1.43
002 1.35
1.28
1.21
0 01 -1.14
1.06
0.92
( 0 0.92
AD3 0.84
-0 01
00 0.77
0.70
-0 02 0.63
S- 0.55
-0 03 0.48

-0 04 -

-0 05 -
02 025 03
z/C


Figure 6: Contours of V, for polymer injection with Flux
16.


For the case of polymer injection, the axial velocity remains
the same for Flux 16 injection and decreased by 4% for flux
4 injection. Comparing with the case of water injection, it
can be been seen that polymer injection substantially alters
the flow field, even considering the possible displacement
of the core due to mass injection.


Figure 7: Variation of average V with y/c for z/c =0.20


Figure 7 shows the profile of the V, along y/c at a z/c = 0.20,
the average inception location reported by Chang et al.
(2009). Negative values of y/c correspond to the region of
the flow field farther most from the root with the positive
values moving inbound. A clear wave pattern is observed on
the positive side. This region is in the wake of the foil and
this pattern could be associated with the transient roll up
process. Such a wave like pattern was also observed
downstream Figure 8. Such a pattern was not found for PIV
measurements taken without the foil in the test section.


Figure 5: Contours of V, for water injection.


13




N12




1.1


-0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04
y/c






7th International Conference on Multiphase Flow
ICMF 2010, Tampa, FL USA, May 30-June 4, 2010


13



N 1.2



11


Figure 8: Variation of Average V, with y/c for z/c = 0.27


Figure 9 presents the variation of V, with z/c at y/c = 0.01.
The mass injection has altered the axial flow pattern in the
core. Particularly, the injection of polymer corresponding to
the condition of Flux 16, the axial velocity slowed down by
10%. This is another indication that polymer injection alters
the flow field. Fruman et al. (1992) reported that the
injection of mass resulted in the increase of axial velocity
deficit downstream and the present results are consistent
with that observation.


Figure 10: Contours of V, for the baseline (no injection)
condition.

Similar changes were observed in the cross-stream velocity
component, Vy. Figures 10, 11, and 12 show the average Vy
contours for the baseline, water injection and polymer
injection conditions. Comparing the profiles of V, for case
of water and polymer injection corresponding to Flux 16, it
can be seen that polymer injection has a profound effect on
the Vy profile. As the vortex core motion is expected to be
the same for both the cases, the observable changes clearly
indicate that polymer injection alters the tangential
component of the velocity during the vortex roll-up. This is
in agreement with Fruman et al. (1992) where they
observed a similar behavior for polymer injection using
LDV measurements. Figure 13 presents profiles of V, that
illustrate this significant change in the cross-stream
velocity.


Figure 11: Contours of Vy for water injection


NoInjecton
SWater
Flux 4
Flux16


Figure 9: The variation of average V, with z/c for y/c = 0.01



































Figure 12: Contours of V, for polymer injection (Flux 16)


0.3 1


0.25 I


0 04


-0.04 -002 000O
y/c


002 004


Figure 13: The variation of average V, with z/c for y/c =
0.01


The variation in the flow fields was also measured with the
PIV data. The velocity fluctuation of both the Vz and Vy
components of the in-plane velocity fields were determined
and compared to the baseline conditions. Figures 14 and 15
show the scatter plot of root mean square (RMS) of V, and
Vy at z/c = 0.2. Injection reduced the magnitude of the V,
fluctuations to 60% for water injection, 55% for polymer
corresponding to Flux 4, and 50% by polymer injection
corresponding to Flux 16. For Vy, water injection produced
a reduction of RMS to 75%, polymer injection
corresponding to Flux 4 caused a reduction by 60% while
for Flux 16 it was reduced by 50%. The reduction of RMS
is more prominent in Vy than in V.


Figure 14: Variation of RMS of velocity fluctuations in V,
with y/c for z/c= 0.20.


No Injection
0.5 --- Water
Flux4
Flux16

0.4



> 0.3 -



0.2



0.1


0 .;iI.
-0.04 -0.02 0 002 004
y/c


Figure 15: Variation of RMS of velocity fluctuations in Vy
with y/c for z/c = 0.20.

Figures 16 and 17 show the variation of velocity
fluctuations of V, and Vy with z/c, the streamwise co-
ordinate at y/z = 0.01. This shows that the instantaneous
flow fields were primarily modified near the region of
injection when compared with the region downstream. This
is a clear effect of injection which manifests differently for
each of the specific injection cases. The reduction of V,
fluctuations with mass injection is not in agreement with the
observations of Fruman et al. (1992).


7th International Conference on Multiphase Flow
ICMF 2010, Tampa, FL USA, May 30-June 4, 2010


No Injection
----- Wate
S Fux4
---- Flux6








i



- f, -"1

r y


Co


0.2 0.25 0.3
zic


. .


:. --- i -- i-i ----- -- --- i ---- i ----- --- i ---- i --- -- --


Avg Vy
034
023
0.17
O 12
0.06
001
40.05
4 10
4).16
)21
).27
)33
138
'.44









0.3


0.25


0.2
N

15
nt.


0.05


Figure 16: Variation of RMS of velocity fluctuations in Vz
with z/c for y/c = 0.01.

The injection process alters the fluctuations of both the axial
and tangential component of the velocity. Particularly for
polymer injection the change in the instantaneous flow field
change is substantial. It is important to note that the
changes observed in RMS are a due to local phenomena,
which does not significantly in the average flow fields.


Figure 17: Variation of RMS of velocity fluctuations in Vy
with z/c for y/c = 0.01.



Conclusions

The effect of mass injection on the flow field near the
vicinity of the tip of a hydrofoil was studied using planar
PIV, after fixing Qjet/QCre = 0.13, the flow rate at which the
effect of injection on TVC suppression was pronounced. It
was found that injection had an effect in both the averaged
as well as the instantaneous flow fields in the vicinity of the
foil tip and the tip vortex. As far as the averaged flow fields
are concerned the changes observed with injection could be


7th International Conference on Multiphase Flow
ICMF 2010, Tampa, FL USA, May 30-June 4, 2010

due to change in the vortex trajectory which cannot be
answered from the present study. But comparing the cases
of mass injection, it can be inferred that polymer injection
has a measurable effect on the average flow field in the
vicinity of the injection location. The changes observed
were consistent to those reported by Fruman et al. (1995),
except for the reduction of RMS of Vz. These changes in
the mean flow, however, are not sufficient to account for the
significant difference in the observed inception conditions
with and without injection, as discussed by Chang et al.
(2009).

More strikingly, the instantaneous flow field was modified
sufficiently, with the RMS of the fluctuations reducing to
nearly 50% of its initial value without any injection. This
drop is very unlikely to be attributed to the change in the
location of the vortex core. The suppression of the flow
unsteadiness near the tip region may be a contributing
mechanism through which TVC suppression is achieved
through mass injection.


Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Office of Naval Research
under grant number N00014-07-1-0471, Dr. Ki-Han Kim
program manager, and the National Science Foundation
through the Michigan Alliance for Graduate Education and
the Professoriate.


References

Arndt, R.E.A., "Cavitation in vortical flow", Annual
Review of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 34, pp 143-175 (2002).

Arndt, R.E.A. and Keller, A., "Water quality effects on
cavitation inception in a trailing vortex", Journal of Fluids
Engineering, Vol. 114, Sept. (1992).

Arndt, R.E.A. and Maines, B.H., "Further studies of tip
vortex cavitation," The Second International Symposium
on Cavitation, Tokyo, Japan (1994)

Arndt, R.E.A. and Maines, B.H., "Nucleation and bubble
dynamics in vortical flows," Journal of Fluids Engineering,
Vol. 122, pp 488-493 (2000)

Brennen, C.E. Cavitation and Bubble Dynamics. Oxford
University Press, New York, pp 65-91 (1995)

Chahine G. L., Frederick, G. F., Bateman, R. D.,
"Propeller tip vortex cavitation suppression using selective
polymer injection," Journal of Fluids Engineering, Vol.
115, pp 497-503 (1993)

Chahine, G.L. and Fruman, D.H., "Dilute polymer effects
on bubble growth and collapse," Physics of Fluids, Vol.
22(7), pp 1406-1407 (1979)





7th International Conference on Multiphase Flow
ICMF 2010, Tampa, FL USA, May 30-June 4, 2010

Chang N. A., Yakushiji, R., Ganesh, H., and Ceccio, S. L.
"Mechanisms and Scalability of Tip vortex cavitation
suppression by mass injection," Proceedings of the 7th
International Symposium on Cavitation, Ann Arbor, USA
(2009)

Fruman, D.H., and Aflalo, S.S., "Tip vortex cavitation
inhibition by drag-reducing polymer solutions", Journal of
Fluids engineering, Vol. 111, pp 211-215 (1989)

Fruman, D. H., Dugue, C., and Cerrutti, P. "Tip vortex
roll-up and cavitation," Cavitation and Multiphase Flow
Forum, ASME FED, Vol. 109, pp 43-48 (1991)

Fruman, D. H., Dugue, C., Pauchet, A., Cerrutti, P.,
Brianson-Majollet, L., "Tip vortex roll-up and cavitation,"
Proceedings of the 19th International Symposium on Naval
Hydrodynamics, Seoul, Korea (1992)

Fruman, D. H., Pichon, T., Cerrutti, P., 1995, "Effect of
drag reducing polymer solution ejection on tip vortex
cavitation," Journal of Marine Science and Technology,
Vol. 1, pp 13-23 (1995)

Green, S.I. & Acosta, A.J. "Unsteady flow in trailing
vortices," Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 227, pp 107 -
134 (1991)

Gopalan, S., Katz, J. and Knio, O. "The flow structure in
the near field of jets and its effect on cavitation inception,"
Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 398, pp 1-43 (1999)

Oweis, G., van der Hout, I. E., Iyer, C., Tryggvason, G.
and Ceccio, S. L. "Capture and Inception of Bubbles Near
Line Vortices," Physics of Fluids, Vol. 17, No. 2, Art. No.
022105 (2005)

Platzer G. P. and Souders W.G. "Tip Vortex Cavitation
Delay with Application to Marine Lifting Surfaces. A
Literature Survey," DTNSRDC Technical Report 79/051
(1979)

Platzer G. P. and Souders W.G., "Tip vortex cavitation
characteristics and delay of inception on a three-
dimensional hydrofoil," DTNSRDC Technical Report
81/007 (1981)

Ting, R.Y., "Cavitation Suppression by Polymer
Additives: Concentration Effect and Implication on Drag
Reduction," AIChE Journal, Vol. 20(4), pp 827-828 (1974)

Winkel, E. S., Oweis, G. F., Vanapalli, S. A., Dowling,
D.R., Perlin, M., Solomon M.J. and Ceccio S. L. "High-
Reynolds number turbulent boundary layer friction drag
reduction from wall-injected polymer solutions," Journal
of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 621, pp 259-288 (2009)

Yakushiji, R. "Mechanism of Tip Vortex Cavitation
suppression by water and polymer injection," Ph. D.
Thesis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs