4.7 Article

Experimental study of the evolution of water-entry cavity bubbles behind a hydrophobic sphere

期刊

PHYSICS OF FLUIDS
卷 32, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/5.0011414

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China Projects [51679037, 51639003, 51709042]
  2. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2019T120211, 2018M631791]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Liaoning Province of China [20180550619]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper describes an experimental investigation of the cavity evolution and shedding wake behind a hydrophobic sphere during the water-entry process. Two distinct shedding phenomena are confirmed by varying the impact velocity and sphere size: regular air-bubble shedding and unstable air-cloud shedding. Both of these modes are highly dependent on the Weber and Bond numbers. Under the air-bubble shedding mode, approximately periodic big bubble shedding and low-frequency oscillation signals are observed. The relationship between big bubble shedding events and the corresponding acoustic signals is derived, and an empirical method for predicting the shedding period is proposed. The in-phase relationship between small bubble shedding and cavity rippling is confirmed, and we refer to the cavity shedding phenomenon as acoustic shedding. Unlike the observations of air-bubble shedding, the air-cloud shedding mode produces a group of disordered small bubbles from the rear of the cavity. Moreover, the cavity seal type has a significant effect on the cavity shedding mode. A deep seal always promotes the onset of air-cloud shedding, whereas surface seals with relatively low Bond numbers result in the air-bubble shedding mode. A surface seal suppresses resonance in the cavity volume. By observing the cavity motion, we find that air-cloud shedding is always accompanied by severe cavity resonance and a rapid decrease in cavity length. Under the air-bubble shedding mode, the cavity motion exhibits relatively weak oscillations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据