AD-A169 275 CAVITATION SUSCEPTIBILITY MEASURMENTS OF OCEN LAIE in1

ANM LABORATORY MATERS(U) DAVID N TAYLOR NAVAL SHIP

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER BETHESDA ND
UNCLASSIFIED Y T SHEN ET RL. NAY 86 DTNSRDC-86/019 F/O 26/4

mosmmommommomm
mommommommosom
mommommommosom
 44

I.p- 2.

11111IL

.66.

MIC~n4-..'.

P- AL
 I LL

In

frt.
AW

a 1~m~CL.
CD SHIP PERFOMANEDEATMN
REERHADDVLPETRPR
cc LAJ~

8.
Ii PRVE O ISU ~IB DS9=O 1 M i

002
86700 w
 UNCLASSIFIED
SECURITrY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PA-E

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

la REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION lb RESTRICT E
UNCLASSIFIED A7 f
9'
2a SECURITY CLASSIFICATION AUTHORITY 3 DISTRIBUTION /AVAILABILITY OF REPORT

2b DEC LASSIFCATION/DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE; DISTRIBUTION

IS UNLIMITED.
4 PERFORMIN6 ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)- 5 MONITORING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)

DTNSRDC-86/019

6a NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 6b OFFICE SYMBOL 7a NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATION

David W. Taylor Naval Ship (if applicable)
R&D Center Code 1542
6( ADDRFSS (City, State. and ZIPCode) 7b ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code)

Bethesda, Maryland 20084-5000

Ra NAME OF FUNDiNG, SPONSORING

ORGANIZA t;ON
Naval Sea Systems Command
J8b OFFICE SYMBOL
(If applicable)
05R
9 PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER

3 .1 " - (Cty State and ZIP Code) 10 SOURCE OF FUNDING NUMBERS

PROGRAM PROJECT TASK WORK UNIT
Washington, D.C. 20262 ELEMENT NO NO NO ACCESSION NO

62543N SF 43-434 DN378001

I I (Include Security Classification)

CAVIFATION SUSCEPTIBILITY MEASUREMENTS OF OCEAN, LAKE AND LABORATORY WATERS

2 ,RSOn AL A,THOR(S)
Shen, Young T., Gowing, Scott, and Eckstein, Bruce P C
a TyPi-F FPORT 13b TIME COVERED 14 DATE OF REPORT (Year, Month, Day) 5 PAGE COUNT %
'i-i'j
iFROM_ _ TO __ 1986, May 51
S. 0 "IF 4TARY NOTATION

' (SA/i CODJFS 18 SUBJECT TERMS (Continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number)
" (,R,P SUB-GROUP Cavitation Measurement
...... ,rCavitation Susceptibility .
Cavitation in Ocean, Lakes, and L.aboratory Waters
1 ' C,-n'nrue in reverse :f nere'ary .,i, 1IY-r0 y by bloik number)

Xperirnents have been Irrid out in laboratories to relate cavitation inception

ii - ci disLtribution, lie existence of a strong relationship between cavitation
. is
*nd nour1,,i has, bee'i 1ocumented for laboratorv waters, but little information
va i Lji le cihout ocean waters. T'owards this end, ocean and lake measurements were
(.1rri ( out in Exuma Sound, the Gulf Stream off the coast of Florida, and Lake Pend
rtille to provide comparative results in different bodies of water. The test program
system, nuclei population
i:Cluded cavitation susceptibility measurements by a venturistandard
ne ,ur,':,'~nts by a light scattering device, and a series of oceanographic

iIle,w !rermnts. lhe depths covered ranged from 10 to 200 m, deeper than ever before for
th,,,
S t vpkcs ,f- measurements. To provide a reference for comparison between laboratory
'and natural waters, the same measuring devices were used in the DTNSRI)C 12-in. variable
res sure, water tunnel. (Continued on reverse side)

. , -: ," 'j A A LAR'L iTY OF ABSTRACT 21 ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

A I' ) W4jL NI TED fo SAME AS RPT E]DIC uSERS UNCLASSIFIEI)
"' ,).- S ()S RiF NUIVID jAL 22r) TELEPHONE (Include AreaCode) 22c OFF i(E SY'MBOL
Young T. Shen (301) 227-1339 Code 1542
DO FORM 1473,84 MAR 83 APR ed,tn, -ay t)e A, jt, ,xha,.ted d_
[CURITY ( LASSIFI(ATW) N o0 "i S ,A(,
All other ed.t. nl j'e ,jbsowete UNCLASS f F I El)

--.. * . .'.. *. ,-..'

• --* -... " " - .,-, - ,
.
- -
- - -"- -
-'- -
.,,. - *
- - .. -----..
'
"-. .--."."-
-*i.". % .'.
, %
. **. *'*.-.
.- -. . --. " .- -". "
-
-".
.' '
.% . .
. '' .v
"
.-.- .,:
 .- .7. - -
-- , - . . - .I - -- - - -
L . . .wp

UNCLASSIFIED
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE

(Block 19 continued)
-There was no difficulty inducing cavitation throughout the test matrix. At
depths less than 100 m, the water in the Gulf Stream was found to cavitate more
easily than the water in Exuma Sound. At deeper depths, the opposite trend was

found. Depending on the nuclei populations, variations of the cavitation inception

indices with depth took different forms in Exuma Sound, the Gulf Stream, and
Lake Pend Oreille waters. Except at the shallow depths, the lake water was found
to be less susceptible to cavitation than the ocean waters. Bubble instability
theory and the Rayleigh-Plesset dynamic equation provide good explanations of many
of the observed phenomena. The postulation of a critical bubble radius is used
to explain the unexpected phenomenon that the concentration of unstable bubbles
can increase with depth.

I
I.

§I

UNCLASSIFIED
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE

w" d- . ... - ** . .- . . ' . . . . -

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
LIST OF FIGURES.............................................................. ii
LIST OF TABLES...............................................................

ABSTRACT .................................................................... I

ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION............................................... I
INTRODUCTION ........................................................ ........ I
TENSILE STRENGTH OF A REAL VERSUS AN IDEAL FLUID...................... 3
CAVITATION SUSCEPTIBILITY MEASURING SYSTEM ............................... 4
MICROBUBBLE AND PARTICLE MEASURING SYSTEM.......................... 5
OCEANOGRAPHIC DATA MEASURING SYSTEM................................ 6

CAVITATION SUSCEPTIBILITY AND BUBBLE MEASUREMENTS

IN THE 12-INCH WATER TUNNEL ................................................ 6

OCEAN MEASUREMENTS ............................... 8

OCEANOGRAPHIC MEASUREMENTS .......................................... 9
MICROBUBBLE MEASUREMENTS ...... ...................................... 10
CAVITATION MEASUREMENTS............................................... if
THEORETICAL INTERPRETATION............................................ 14
CAVITATION SUSCEPTIBILITY MEASUREMENTS IN A LAKE ........................ 16

TENSILE STRENGTH DERIVED FROM VENTURI MEASUREMENTS.................... 17

CONCLUSIONS.................................................................. 18

RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................... 22

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .......................................................... 22

*REFERENCES................................................................... 45

LI1ST Of: FIGURES

I- Cavitation System ............................................................ 23

2 - Motor-Pump Assembly ........................................................ 23

*3 - Susceptibility Measurements of the 12-Inch Water Tunnel ............................. 24

 LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)

Page

4 - Ocean Sampler .............................................................. 25

5 - Overview of Microbubble Detector .............................................. 25
6 - Water Tunnel Microbubble Spectra, P0 = 1.17 bars................................ 26
*7 - Ocean Test Stations .......................................................... 27
*8 - Temperature Distribution in Ocean.............................................. 28
9 -Water Density Distribution in Ocean ............................................ 29

10 - Oxygen Saturation in Ocean at Standard Temperature and

*Atmospheric Pressure......................................................... 30 4

11I- Ocean Microbubbles at 10 Meter Depth.......................................... 31 1

Q2 - Nuclei Spectra Measured in Sea Water........................................... 32

*13 - A Typical Acoustic Signal from Single Bubble Bursting............................. 33

14 -Cavitation Event Frequency Versus Flow Rate at Exuma Sound Station 6 ............... 34

15 - Influence of Venturis on Cavitation.............................................. 35

16 - IFrequency of Cavitation Events Versus Flow Rate ................................. 36

-Critical Bubble Radius Versus Throat Velocity .................................... 38
.4 - Measured Cavitation Inception Index at Exuma Sound.............................. 39

*19 - Measured Cavitation Inception Index at Gulf Stream ............................... 40

20 - P~ressure Distribution in the Venturi ............................................. 41

21 - Measured Loss Coefficient Versus Reynolds Number ............................... 41

22 -- Lake Pend Oreille Test Sites ................................................... 42

23 Nuclei Spectra Measured at Lake Pend Oreille .................................... 43

:4 Frequency of Cavitation Events Versus Flow Rate at Lake Pend Oreille................. 43

25- Measured Cavitation Inception Index at Lake Pend Oreille ........................... 44

iv

AL . -
 As r .FV

* LIST OF TABLES

1Water Tunnel Bubble Concentrations ........................................... 7

14
2- Measured Critical Throat Speeds and Cavitation Inception Indices
in the 12-Inch Water Tunnel .................................................. 7
3-Tensile Strength of Ocean Water (*Bar) Exuma Sound (Spring 1983)................... 19

-ITensile Strength of Lake Pend Oreille (*Bax-) (Spring 1985).......................... 19

5 - Critical Pressure Measured at Sea by Venturi Method .............................. 20

Justificatioll.... ..........

a-~~B . . . .....
..................... , . . ....
 0*.?

ABSTRACT
Experiments have been carried out in laboratories to relate cavitation
inception and nuclei distributions. The existence of a strong relationship
between cavitation and nuclei has been documented for laboratory
waters, but little information is available about ocean waters. Towards
this end, ocean and lake measurements were carried out in Exuma
Sound, the Gulf Stream off the coast of Florida, and Lake Pend Oreille
to provide comparative results in different bodies of water. The test pro-
gram included cavitation susceptibility measurements by a venturi system,
nuclei population measurements by a light scattering device, and a series
of standard oceanographic measurements. The cepths covered ranged
from 10 to 200 m, deeper than ever before for these types of measure-
ment. To provide a reference for comparison between laboratory and
natural waters, the same measuring devices were used in the DTNSRDC
12-in. variable pressure water tunnel.
There was no difficulty inducing cavitation throughout the test
matrix. At depths less than 100 m, the water in the Gulf Stream was
found to cavitate more easily than the water in Exuma Sound. At deeper
depths, the opposite trend was found. Depending on the nuclei popula-
tions, variations of the cavitation inception indices with depth took
different forms in Exuma Sound, the Gulf Stream, and Lake Pend
Oreille waters. Except at the shallow depths, the lake water was found to
be less susceptible to cavitation than the ocean waters. Bubble instability
theory and the Rayleigh-Plesset dynamic equation provide good explana-
tions of many of the observed phenomena. The postulation of a critical
bubble radius is used to explain the unexpected phenomenon that the
concentration of unstable bubbles can increase with depth.

ADMINISTRATIVE INFORMATION
This project was supported by the Ship and Submarine Technology Program Element 62543N
Propulsor Subproject SF 43-434 at NAVSEA.

INTRODUCTION
Most hvdrofoils or propellers \wil develop tip vortex and ,urface ca\itation at high speeds. The
occurrence of cavitation leads to undesirable changes in h\drodynanic performance, noise generation,
and physical damage from vibration and erosion. Fherefore, the ability to predict the occurrence of
cavitation is an important engineering problem. The prediction of cavitation inception performance
has relied heavily on model experiments and extrapolation of the model results to full scale because of
, the complexit of physical processes in\ol\ed \\ith cavitation inception. Full-scale evaluations are often
conducted and correlated with the model data.
Present k no\Icdgc is inadequate to lv5 ax accurately caluate ald predict cas itation performance

hoth in laboratories and in oceans. In laboratorie,,, it has otten been obscr\cd that cavitation take,, a
variety of forms which may differ from facility to facility \\ith similar model, or even the same
model. E"xperimental data collected for the International ro\\ing Tank (ion ference (ITTC) headform

. t-l'. ~ . . . -Sv~-
.,

are a good example. Cavitation inception indices on this headform ranged from 0.3 to 0.6. Even the
appearance of the cavitation varied, some forms looking totally dissimilar from others. It was pointed
out by Acosta and Parkin I* that boundary layer characteristics and free stream nuclei are responsible
for producing the varied appearance of cavitation on a single test model. Sensitivity to air content is
also observed in model propeller tip-vortex cavitation experiments. Due to the lack of nuclei, difficulty
in producing cavitation in a depressurized towing tank has been observed 2. With the introduction of
bubbles by electrolysis ahead of the propeller, the occurrence of tip-vortex cavitation was significantly
enhanced. This fact raises the question "Which cavitation number measured in model tests should be
used to scale the prototype inception?"
In the ocean, propeller cavitation inception data from the same class of ships have been known to
exhibit a wide range of scatter. The causes are many. However, laboratory studies suggest that
environmental effects may contribute partly to the scatter. The understanding of physical phenomena
governing the cavitation inception process, especially the influence of cavitation nuclei on bubble
bursting, is important for assisting a propeller designer in dealing with cavitation.
In the present investigation, the environmental effects of ocean, lake, and laboratory waters on
cavitation were examined. Ocean measurements were conducted at several locations in the early spring
of 1983 in Exuma Sound near the Bahamas and the Gulf Stream off the coast of Florida. Lake
measurements were conducted in April of 1985 at two locations in Lake Pend Oreille, Idaho. i ne
laboratory measurements were made in the DTNSRDC 12-in. water tunnel to provide a reference for
comparison between ocean, lake, and laboratory waters.
rhe environmental effect on cavitation was measured by a cavitation susceptibility meter
consisting of a venturi, a hydrophone, a pressure transducer, and a flow-rate sensor. It is important to
remark that the cavitation experiments were conducted in situ. Nuclei concentrations and size distribu-
tions were measured by a microbubble light detector. Water samples examined by the microbubble
detector were obtained from a sample collector which maintained in situ water pressure. In the ocean
investigation, 3 a full range of other types of oceanographic data was also collected. The range of
depth covered in the ocean and lake was 10 to 200 m. Related holographic measurements of cavitation
4
nuclei in the ocean have been reported by O'Hern, J. Katz and Acosta.
Experimental results show the influence of geographic locations and depths on both nuclei
distributions and cavitation inception. Bubble instability theory and the Rayleigh-Plesset dynamic
equation are used to assist the interpretation of the test results. Conclusions and recommendations are
given to complete the report.

*A complete listing of references is given on page 45.

.42
TENSILE STRENGTH OF A REAL VERSUS AN IDEAL FLUID .9
Pure liquids at ambient temperature are known to withstand very large tensile stresses before they 0
rupture to form cavities. However, in realistic circumstances a liquid contains weak spots or nuclei,
which allow a phase change of the liquid at much lower tensile stresses or even at positive pressures.
Cavitation inception indices measured on a lifting body or a headform are known to exhibit a wide
range of inception values with respect to the "quality" of the water.
The pressure distribution on a lifting surface can be described by a pressure coefficient,

P0 - P(x) (1)
C(x) (1/2) QV(

where P0 P, Q, and V o are the reference pressure, local pressure on the body surface, fluid density,
and the reference velocity, respectively. The symbol x denotes the spatial coordinate in the flow direc-
tion. The pressure coefficients are mainly functions of foil geometry and the foil angle of attack.
Cavitation measurements on a body or lifting surface are generally expressed in terms of a cavita-
tion number a, given by
P0O- P%
-0 0 (2)
(1/2) QV02

where P,, is the vapor pressure of the liquid. It has generally been assumed that cavitation inception
occurs when the local pressure falls to or below the vapor pressure of the fluid. One of the main goals
in the present investigation is to examine the validity of this assumption.
Cavitation inception on full scale propellers operated at a given depth often occurs at different
ship speeds V0 . Similarly, for a ship operated at different depths, the measured cavitation inception
speeds do not follow strictly the square root of depth or reference pressure relation which follows
from Equation (2) above. Thus, there is a large scattering of the inception data at sea. Similar
phenomena are found in laboratory cavitation experiments. These observations have led to the
hypothesis of cavitation occuring only on specific sites or nuclei.
Itis a plausible assumption that cavitation inception occurs at the spot on a body or lifting
surface corresponding to the minimum pressure. We can define the ca'itation inception index o by

0 - Pmin _ P
°i Cpnmn (I/*2)V (1/2) QV " .3

\%here Pmin is the minimum pressure occurring on the hod\. If \%c h\pothc,,i,e that inception is
actually the process of cavitation nuclei blov,ing up, then 1m represent,, the critical pressure P. of
the %weakestnucleus that transits through the lo\, pre,,sure ione. The term P. reflects the tensile

3-
.. . . .. . . - . .. . . .

strength required of a real fluid to have the phase change occur. If PC = Pv, then cavitation inception
represents vaporization and the classic cavitation scaling law follows. In general, however, Pc is
different from Pv. By carrying out cavitation susceptibility measurements in ocean and lake waters,
the environmental effects of nuclei on cavitation can be evaluated.

CAVITATION SUSCEPTIBILITY MEASURING SYSTEM

The device used to measure the cavitation susceptibility of ocean water must be simple to operate
and able to produce very low pressures for cavitation at deep depth. Headforms have been used in
laboratories for susceptibility measurements. 5 ,6 However, it is extremely difficult to produce a suffi-
ciently low pressure on a headform to cavitate at deep depths. An orifice is a good cavitator which is
very simple in geometry and readily produces low pressures; but the vorticity of an orifice flow
includes Reynolds number effects that would be difficult to distinguish from nuclei effects.
A venturi, which satisfies the above requirements with ease, was selected as the cavitator in the
present study. Based on the requirement of a smooth surface finish and accurate contour fabrication
of the venturi throat, the device recently developed by Lecoffre of Neyretec in Grenoble was selected
for the present application. This venturi has a 16:1 area contraction ratio and a throat diameter of
2 mm. Further discussion of this venturi is given in Reference 7
The cavitation susceptibility measuring system used in the sea and lake has two major
components: an underwater unit, which causes and detects cavitation, and a shipboard sub system
which controls the underwater unit and conditions data signals for recording and display. The two
components are interconnected by a multiconductor cable. Figures 1 and 2 are sketches of this under-
%%ater system which is deployed vertically to a designated depth. Sea water is drawn through a filter
screen which filters out particles larger than I mm that can damage the venturi. The flow then passes
through the venturi, the pump, a flow straightener, and finally the flow meter before exhausting to
the outside.
!he flow rate is regulated by a motor-speed controller in the shipboard subsystem. The cavitation
signals are detected by a wideband high frequency hydrophone and then band-pass filtered between 10
and 100 kHz. The acoustic signal is multiplexed with the engineering-sensor data of flo%% rate and
ambient pressure, and together they are transmitted to the shipboard electronics via an electro-
mechanical cable. The signals are then processed on board for displa\ and recording bk the shipboard
electronics.
The flow-rate sensor, a Flo-Tech Model FSP-375 turbine tlosmneter, has an accuracy of _0.5'0o
of flow rate. The pressure is measured by a Sensotec Model 2988 prcssure transducer for 0 to 3.4 bars"
(0 to 50 psia) and Model 1926 for 0 to 34 bars (0 to 500 psia) \kith an accuracy of ± 0.250' of full
scale. The flow meter and the pressure sensors have been indepcndentl\ calibrated at DTNSRDC.

4
 In the 12-in. water tunnel, the same venturi unit was used but the pressure sensors were replaced
by mercury and water manometers. A pipe parallel to the water tunnel flow was used to transfer
water from the center of the test section to the venturi. A sketch of this circulating system is shown in
Figure 3. A major difference between the ocean and the 12-in. water tunnel set-up is that the light- ,,%,
scattering microbubble detector was in-line with the venturi system in the 12-in. water-tunnel

experiments, whereas the microbubble detecting system and venturi systems were deployed separately
in the ocean and lake experiments.

MICROBUBBLE AND PARTICLE MEASURING SYSTEM

The nuclei measuring system consists of two major components: an underwater sample collector
and a shipboard-light scattering bubble detector. In the water tunnel experiments, only the bubble
detector was used. In the ocean and lake, nuclei were measured by examining the microbubbles
retrieved from depth in a large sampler. The retrieval device is a 100-L pressure tank with an internal
bladder and a large valve at the bottom. After pressurizing the bladder with shipboard nitrogen to the
pressure at which the water sample is to be collected, the tank is then lowered to the desired depth.
The nitrogen in the bladder bubbles out from a top hose while the ocean water slowly fills the tank
through the bottom valve as the bladder collapses. The exit of the top hose is over 2 m above the
water intake as seen in Figure 4. The filling is stopped with a residual amount of nitrogen left in the
bladder to act as a pressure reservoir.
Upon retrieval to shipboard, the microbubble detector is connected to the bottom valve of the
tank and a pressurized nitrogen supply line is connected to the bladder. The 76 to 95 L water sample
then exhausts through the detector as the bottom valve is opened and the bladder expands inside the
tank. The entire process maintains the ocean water sample at in situ pressure until the water sample
passes downstream of the detector. A diagram of the device is shown in Figure 4. This device is
designed for deep-depth applications.
The size and concentration of microbubbles in the 12-in. water tunnel, and the ocean and lake
8
waters were measured with the same light-scattering bubble detector described by Gowing and Ling.
In this device, two rectangular white light beams from an incandescent lamp shine across the water
sample that flows through a 3.8-cm I.D. pipe, around which the instrument is built. A diagram of the
instrument is shown in Figure 5. Two light beams are used to measure the elapsed time for a bubb!c
to cross between the beams, which yields the bubble's velocity. A series of lenses and masks define the
optical-detecting volumes in the center of the pipe, and the light scattered trom the bubbles is focused
onto photo-multiplier tubes in the recei ing optics. The angle of the scartered light use tile specular
suitaLe reflection of bubbles to distinguish them from the diffuse reflection of particles. hus, the
device is insensitive to particles if the particulate content is not e\tremel\ high.
 The voltage pulses from the bubbles are recorded on a Racal tape recorder and then played back
through a Nicolet oscilloscope and A/D converter. A PDP-I I computer sorts and counts the digitized
pulses and the resultant spectrum is produced. Further discussion on this subject is given by Ling,
Gowing and Shen 9 . To evaluate the reliability of the present device for bubble measurements, a
comparison test of this device with an in-line holographic camera was carried out at a California
Institute of Technology (CIT) water tunnel and reported in a paper by Katz et al 10 .
For the 12-in. water-tunnel tests, the bubble detector was connected to a pipe that transferred
water from the center of the tunnel test section to the detector and then to the venturi. After flowing
2-m through a 2-cm I.D. rubber hose to the venturi, the water went through a pump and a flowmeter
and then back to the tunnel. The pump and flowmeter were the same ones used .u the ocean sub-
system. Pressure losses in the flow circuit upstream of the venturi were negligible, and the bubbles
were measured at a pressure of about 0.1 bar less than the static pressure upstream of the venturi.
Also, in the water tunnel tests, the bubbles in the I- to 2.5-iAm radius range as well as the particles in
the ]- to 7-Wm radius range were measured with an Elzone Counter from Particle Data Systems, Inc.
The I- and 2.5-1Am bubble counts were distinguished from the particle counts by examining the nuclei
spectra in a batch of water sampled from the water tunnel immediately after the test and then by
re-examining after about 2 days to allow the bubbles to rise out.

OCEANOGRAPHIC DATA MEASURING SYSTEM

Standard oceanographic data were collected on the sea trip as continuous water column
measurements made with a Neil Brown conductivity-temperature-depth probe equipped with a
transmissometer. A General Oceanics Rosette sampling device collected water samples from discrete
depths. The temperature, water density, oxygen content, etc., from the oceanographic data were
mapped throughout the ocean tests. Further discussion of the data was recorded by Zsolney, et al.
Surface tension measurements were made using a capillary-tube apparatus from the Fisher Scientific
Company The water samples used in these tests came from the Rosette sampling device or the
microbubble sample collector.

CAVITATION SUSCEPTIBILITY AND BUBBLE MEASUREMENTS IN THE

12-INCH WATER TUNNEL
The same venturi used in the ocean and lake %%as used in the 12-in. water tunnel to measure the
variation in cavitation susceptibility of laboratory water. The test set-up is shown in Figure 3. The
light scattering device used for bubble measurements was also installed in-line with the venturi unit.
Six test results, denoted by WTI through WT6, are presented in this report. The measured
numbers of bubbles per cubic centimeter, N/cm 3 , for these runs are shown in Table I. The symbol

-a. -, , a - - -A
 aST denotes the dissolved air saturation relative to 201C and 1 bar pressure measured by a Van Slyke
device. The symbol aE denotes the same air content but relative to the actual pressure in the tunnel.
The symbol R0 denotes the bubble radius.
Because of the large deaerator tank on this tunnel, a factor of 30 difference in the bubble concen-
trations can be produced. The bubble concentrations and air contents measured at a constant ambient

pressure of 1.17 bars are given in Figure 6.

The flow characteristics at cavitation inception, as "called" by a hydrophone, are given in Table
2. The measured mean throat velocity V0 , the corresponding Reynolds number Re, the minimum
throat pressure coefficient - Cpmin, the cavitation inception index oi, and the throat pressurc PT at
inception are listed here. The negative sign with the throat pressure PT denotes a compression and a.
positive sign denotes tension. The first three test runs correspond to supersaturated air content condi-
tions at standard temperature and pressure, and the last three test runs correspond to medium and low
air content conditions.

TABLE I -WATER TUNNEL BUBBLE CONCENTRATIONS

Bubble Concentration N/cm3

Test PO R >
No. T (bar) 0 10!.m
Ro > 15m R > 20j*m Ro > 30pm

WTI 1.05 0.5 2.10 3.6 1.0 0.32 0.08

WT2 1.20 1.17 1.02 2.8 1.0 0.52 0.10
WT3 1.20 1.87 0.65 1.4 0.36 0.14 0.028
WT4 0.60 1.17 0.53 - - - -
WT5 0.50 1.17 0.42 0.39 0.18 0.10 0.020
WT6 0.07 1.16 0.06 0.15 0.028 0.0085 0.0011

I- TABLE 2 - MEASURED CRITICAL THROAT SPEEDS AND CAVITATION INCEPTION

INDICES IN THE 12-INCH WATER TUNNEL

Test aST PO aE Vo 0i Re - Cpmin Pt

No. (bar) (m/s) (Pa)

WTI 1.05 0.5 2.10 8.47 1.31 1.8 x 104 1.28 -0.04 x 10"
WT2 1.20 1.17 1.02 13.0 1.39 2.6 x l04 1.25 -0.11 x l05
WT3 1.20 1.87 0.65 19.1 1.02 3.8 x 104 1.23 0.37 x 105
WT4 0.60 1.17 0.53 15.3 0.96 3.0 x 104 1.24 0.28 x 105
WT5 0.50 1.17 0.42 16.3 0.86 3.3 X 104 1.23 0.47 x 105
WT6 0.07 1.16 0.06 21.6 0.48 4.3 x 104 1.22 1.69 x 105

7
 Consider the test series consisting of runs WT2, WT4, WT5 and WT6. These four test runs were
conducted at the same test pressure. The bubble concentrations in terms of air contents are given in
Table 1 and plotted in Figure 6. The decrease in bubble concentration with air content is evident. The
measured cavitation index o i varied from 0.48 at an extremely low air content to 1.38 at the super-
saturated conditions. A dramatic change in o i, of almost a factor of three, was measured. A large
variation in o i with air content and bubble distribution has also been observed in headform
measurements 9 .
From the series of 12-in. water tunnel tests, the following observations are made:
1. A factor of 30 difference in the bubble concentrations can be produced.
2. The bubble size distributions and inception indices follow air contents in a systematic pattern.
3. Depending on the bubble concentrations, oi can vary by a factor of three. Such a large varia-
tion in oi makes bubble cavitation scaling from model to prototype difficult without taking nuclei into
account.
4. The venturi used in the present program can detect relative changes in bubble concentrations
by its indication of different oi values. The variation of o i with bubble concentration is systematic.
5. The measured water tensile strength of 0.3 to 1.7 bars is compatible with the values measured
by Knapp..

OCEAN MEASUREMENTS
Sea measurements were carried out in Exuma Sound and the Gulf Stream near the coast of
Florida to provide comparable susceptibility results in natural bodies of water. To investigate the
effect of depth on susceptibility, measurements were made at depths from 10 to 200 m. The cruise
track and station locations are shown on the map of Figure 7. The cruise took place between
25 March and 5 April, 1983.

Station I was designated as the "shake down" station to check the instrumentation. Station 2 was
* used to tune the instruments. The data from these two stations were not used in this report. Suscepti-
bility measurements covered Stations 3 to 6 in Exuma Sound, and 7 to 9 in the Gulf Stream in the
Straits of Florida. Station 6 was the same location as Station 3 but 4 days later. Because of the
strong current and ship drift in the Gulf Stream, difficulties were experienced in obtaining deep depth
data there. However, with good weather throughout the whole test program, the fluctuations in
surface elevation were relatively small and the ambient pressures seen by the pressure sensors were
almost constant at a given depth.
The sequence of data collection follows. Once on station, the Neil Brown conductivity-
temperature-depth probe equipped with a transmissometer was used to collect standard oceanograhic
data. This was followed by the deployment of the General Oceanics Rosette sampling device to collect

. ...
. K. .** , *.*..: . :... ., . . .. : : .- , . .. i
 water samples from discrete depths. All of the oceanographic tests took only 2 to 3 h/station.
Immediately after the completion of the oceanographic tests, the cavitation susceptibility meter was
deployed.
The underwater venturi unit was deployed to a specified depth while monitoring the pressure on
the transducers. Cable markers provided general guidance on the overall depth. Once at depth, the
flow rate was set just below the critical speed such that no acoustic signals were detected for
3 to 5 min. The flow was then gradually increased until high amplitude acoustic signals were detected,
and then tuned to attain a specific frequency of cavitation events. The flow rate, ambient pressure,
and acoustic signals were recorded on tape and displayed on the shipboard readout unit for
3 to 5 min, with a few 10 min runs.
Except at Station 6, three flow rates corresponding to three different frequencies of cavitation
events were measured at each depth. It took approximately 3 h to complete cavitation susceptibility
measurements at one station. The microbubble and particle measurements then followed. The deploy-
ment and retrieval of the water sample collector and the measurements of nuclei distributions by the
light scattering device consumed a lot of time. This limited the data on nuclei distribution.

OCEANOGRAPHIC MEASUREMENTS
The temperature, water density, and dissolved oxygen distributions relative to 1-bar pressure are
given in Figures 8, 9 and 10 as a function of depth. (The other important oceanographic data such as
nitrogen, salinity, carbon, and biological parameters etc. are given and discussed in Reference 12.) In
the ocean, the biological parameters such as photoplankton, zooplankton and living cell distributions
etc. may play a role in cavitation. Nevertheless, the evaluations in this report are limited to relating
cavitation to bubble measurements.
The water temperature distribution is shown in Figure 8. The temperature near the surface was
about 24°C and dropped to 211C at 200-m depth in Exuma Sound. In the Gulf Stream, the
temperature at the surface was about 25°C and dropped to 15'C at 200-m depth. 3 The influence of
geographic locations on water temperature was very small in Exuma Sound during the tests. On the
other hand, the water temperature in the Gulf Stream showed significant variation with geographic
locations. The thermoclines in Exuma Sound occurred at around 150-m deep and in the Gulf Stream
at around 75 to 100-m deep (see Figure 9).
The dissolved oxygen distribution in Exuma Sound was relatively insensitive to geographic loca-
tion (Figure 10). Furthermore, the percent of oxygen saturation dropped very gradually with increases
in water depth. At the surface, the water was about 10000 saturated with oxygen. Even at 200 m, 8307o
saturation was measured in Exuma Sound. On the other hand, the oxygen saturation distribution in
the Gulf Stream was very different. The percent of' saturation decreased markedly at depths greater
than 100 m. At 200 m, a value of less than 500'o saturation %%as measured)1 The significance of this
9

m"q-°b
. ,"°,I•
. . ~~~~.
. . ° .... ,. , . . . . . -. . .-.. '- • ". .. . - .
 parameter, "dissolved oxygen", is that quite often biological activity is related to oxygen balances and
microbubble distributions may well be a consequence of biological activity.
The surface tension of the ocean and lake waters was measured using a capillary device from
Fisher Scientific Co. The device consists of a 0.5-mm diameter borosilicate glass capillary tube,
graduated from 0 to 10 cm in 1-mm increments. Using a reading glass, the distance between the lower
meniscus in the outer tube and the upper meniscus in the capillary tube gives the surface tension. In
the ocean, the water sample was taken from the microbubble sample collector or the Rosette Sampling
device. The test results, not given in this report, showed that the surface tension of the sea water was
invariant throughout the test within the accuracy of measurement. The same was true with Lake Pend
Oreille water.

MICROBUBBLE MEASUREMENTS
The size and concentration of microbubbles in the 12-in. water tunnel, the ocean, and the lake
were measured with the same light scattering bubble detector. The ocean and lake microbubble spectra
were measured by examining the microbubbles retrieved from depth in the large water sampler, and
the measurements were then carried out on shipboard. However, it is important to point out that the
entire sampling process maintained the ocean water sample at in situ pressure until the sample passed
downstream of the bubble detector. Because of the time involved in the deployment and retrieval of
the sample collector, the number of microbubble measurements is relatively limited compared to the
cavitation measurements.
From the nuclei measurements on board the container ship "Sydney Express" and other
- oceanographic investigations, Weitendorf 13 found that a great number of cavitation nuclei are always
present in the ocean. Experiments by Medwin 1 4 in coastal waters indicate that bubbles with radii
between 15 and 200 jAm are present to depths of 40 m.
The ocean microbubble measurements at the 10-m depth are given in Figure 11. The same data
are replotted in Figure 6 for comparison with the water-tunnel data. The ocean bubble concentrations
fall between those corresponding to supersaturation and medium air content conditions for the water
tunnel. Note that these laboratory bubble measurements were at 1.17 bars ambient pressure while the
ocean data were measured at 2.09 bars. The difference in bubble size because of these pressure
differences would be about 2107o. Because of the significant effect of ambient pressure on microbubble
instability, however, the comparison given in Figure 6 can only be interpreted qualitatively. The nuclei
size distributions with depth in Exuma Sound and the Gulf Stream are given in Figure 12.
The existence of gas bubbles near the ocean surface, down to 40 m, has been \\ell documented 15 .
But, the existence and persistence of gas bubbles at deep depths of 200 m has not been previously
reported. Gas absorption physics would predict rapid absorption of bubbles at these depths and low

10

% . i. '. . + % . % ' + %. . • ",t" .. ..

 relative air saturation levels. For this reason, it is felt that the word "nuclei" may be more proper
than the word bubble to describe the light scatterers detected at the deep depths. It is quite possible
that in addition to gas bubbles, cavitation nuclei can consist of organic matter such as plankton or
other microscopic biological matter that serves as a discontinuity in water. Nevertheless, most of the
signals seen on the oscilloscope during the ocean-water measurement resembled those of bubbles
measured in laboratory water. The possible existence of gas bubbles at deep depths is therefore strong-
ly suggested. This is a very important result. Further work should be carried out to verify it, perhaps
by a holographic or photographic device in parallel with the present set-up.
The bubble concentrations in the Gulf Stream are greater than those in Exuma Sound (see Figure
12). This correlates with biological activity which also was greater in the Gulf Stream than in Exuma
Sound. In both bodies of water, the nuclei concentration for a given bubble size decreased with deeper
depths. However, the rate of decrease seems steeper in the Gulf Stream than in Exuma Sound. For
cxample, at 150 m, the measured nuclei concentrations in Exuma Sound are greater than those in the
Gulf Stream. This observation is consistent with the oceanographic measurements, namely that the
oxygen saturation measurements given in Figure 10 show a similar trend. The slope of the bubble
concentrations as a function of bubble size is similar to the size-concentration distributions found by
other investigators for bubbles in water tunnels or the ocean. This consistency of the shape of the
bubble distributions at various sites has been previously noted. 10
No attempt is made here to rationalize why nuclei populations are different at the two ocean loca-
tions. In the next section, however, an attempt will be made to correlate the measured nuclei and the
ca~ itat ion measurements.

CAVITATION MEASUREMENTS
Two types of acoustic signals were detected in the cavitation measurements. The first, due to
single and multiple bubble bursting in the venturi throat away from the venturi wall, appeared on an
o)scilloscope as a signal that rose very sharply above the background noise level and then decayed
gradually. If bubble bursting took place near or on the venturi wall, as in surface sheet cavitation, the
second type of signal resulted. This signal rose quickly, and persisted at the same level. The acoustic
*intensity of the surface cavitation was much higher than that of the background noise but significantly
* lower than that of the single bubble bursting. For the cavitation susceptibility study, only cavitation
from a single bubble or multi-bubble bursting was of interest. Surface sheet cavitation did occur in the
\venturi occasionally -but it was easily removed by reducing the throat velocity. Increasing the throat
clocitv again usually did not restart the surface cavitation.
* the background noise of the acoustic channel \,\as about 100 mV peak-to-peak. The bursting
noise of a cavitation bubble was generally a fe\% volts or more; hence the signal to noise ratio was

II.
 much greater than 10. As a result, it was not difficult to detect cavitation bursting acoustically. To
determine the frequency of cavitation events, a threshold of 1 V was set as the trigger to count cavita-
tion bursting in the counter. The oscilloscope trace indicated that the rebound of the bubble bursting
was less than I ms. To distinguish the bursting of multibubbles from the rebound signals of a single
bubble, a time lapse of 1.5 ms was set to trigger the counting of another event. Typical acoustic
signals of a single bubble bursting .re shown in Figure 13.
The test matrix at Station 6 was more extensive than at other stations. The measured frequency of
cavitation events and flow rates at Station 6 are shown in Figure 14 at four depths. The vertical axis
shows the averaged frequency of cavitation events per minute for a typical test run of 3 to 5 min. The
horizontal axis gives the corresponding flow rate measured in the middle of the test run. Plots are _
shown for water depths of 75, 100, 125 and 150 m, respectively. Note that as the ambient pressure
increases with depth so does the required flow rate to induce cavitation.
Laboratory experiments indicate that the occurrence of bubble cavitation is related to the
available nuclei content which is not uniformly distributed in space. In a separate report under
preparation, the nuclei distributions measured in the ocean and laboratory are found to follow a
Poisson distribution within a 95070 confidence level. This fact has also been reported by Lecoffre, et
15 Consequently, the frequency of cavitation events per unit time at a given
al., for laboratory water.
flow rate should also be Poisson distributed. Occasionally, a small increase in flow rate produced a
lower frequency of cavitation events as seen in Figure 14, but overall, the general trend is very clear.
At a given depth or ambient pressure, there existed a critical flow rate below which no cavitation was
detected. For a flow rate greater than this critical value, a slight increase in flow rate resulted in a
significant increase in the frequency of cavitation events.
To investigate the influence of different venturis on cavitation, the first venturi was replaced by a
second venturi. Both venturis were purchased in the same lot from Neyretec in Grenoble. Cavitation
" susceptibility measurements were carried out at a 25-m depth at Station 6. The test results are shown
in Figure 15. The first venturi is denoted as Venturi 1. and the second as Venturi 2. Due to a slight
difference in ambient pressure between these two test runs, the nondimensional cavitation number is
used for comparison. Both venturis gave the same trend. This result adds to the confidence in the test
data. To add a remark, the original Venturi I was reinstalled in the cavitation susceptibility meter and
used in the subsequent tests in the Gulf Stream and Lake Pend Oreille.
For completeness, the cavitation frequency versus flow rates for Stations 3, 4, and 5 in Exuma Sound
and 7 and 9 in the Gulf Stream are given in Figure 16. The same conclusion obtained previously can also
be made from Figure 16, that, at a given depth, there existed a critical flow rate below which no
cavitation bursting was detected. A slight increase in flow rate beyond the critical value produced a

*.64.
 large increase in the frequency of cavitation events. The question arises whether this is a real fluid
phenomenon or an intrinsic property of the venturi that was used as a cavitation generator.
As mentioned previously, the existence of gas bubbles down to 40 m has been well documented.
Bubble dynamic theory should be applicable to investigation of cavitation events at least down to a
40-in depth. Based on the Rayleigh equation, bubble instability curves have been constructed and are
given in Figure 17. The effect of the pressure drop due to viscous losses in the venturi throat has been
t
included. Further discussions are given in Reference. 1
The free parameter in Figure 17 is the ambient pressure PO. The bold line is a special case
corresponding to the 10-m depth pressure of 2.09 bars. The horizontal axis corresponds to bubble size.
The vertical axis corresponds to the critical velocity at which the bubble becomes unstable. The curves
are referred to as static bubble instability curves. Similar figures of bubble instability have been com-
puted by d'Agostino and Acosta assuming potential flow. 1 8 In the case of Figure 17, for bubbles
larger than 7 pm, the curve is almost flat. For bubbles smaller than 7 Am, a substantial increase in
throat velocity is needed for small bubbles to become unstable.
Figure 17 clearly shows that at a given depth or ambient pressure there exists a critical velocity
belowk Mhich all the bubbles are stable and bubble cavitation would not be expected to occur. When
the critical velocity is reached, all the bubbles greater than 7 Am become unstable and a large number
of bursting bubbles is expected. Different cavitators would have different critical velocities, but the
general characteristics of instability curves should remain the same. This instability theory supports the
idea that the sudden increase in cavitation frequency with flow rate is a consequence of bubbles
becoming unstable and hence this is a real fluid phenomenon. Even though the existence of micro-
bubble-, at deep depths has not been proved conclusively, the same cavitation frequency trends
observcd in Figure 16 occurred at the deep depths, which supports the possible existence of bubbles.
1 he measured cavitation inception indices in Exuma Sound and the Gulf Stream are given in
F-igures 18 and 19, respectively. The corresponding geographic stations have been given in Figure 7.

Cavitation inception must be defined here. Although the definition of cavitation inception is sub-
jcctive, it is simply assumed in this report that cavitation inception occurs Mhen the bursting signals
are detected at an average frequency of 10 events per minute. (0.17 e\ents per second.) Fhe corre-
spondinL l%%rate is called the critical fhok rate Qi and the mean throat elocit\ i Called the
:ritical throat xclocit\. The cavitation inception index o i,, defined as
P
P(0
()V P)
'
°,.,. (1 '2) O (4)

Basically l'quafion (4) is the same as [quat ion (2). Ihc onlIs difference is that the critical throat
velocity instead of free stream velocity is used for normali/ation Ilhe curve denoted \ C inll

13

°. . . . . . . . . .
* Figures 18 and 19 corresponds to the measured minimum pressure coefficient on the venturi surface at
* different Reynolds numbers.
From Figures 17, 18, and 19, the following observations can be made:
* 1. There was no difficulty to induce in situ cavitation throughout the test matrix, even down to
*200 m; hence, deep ocean water cavitates readily.
* 2. At 10 m, the values of oi exhibit a large variation with geographic location. They range from
0.92 to 1.16 in Exuma Sound among 4 stations and 1.13 to 1.24 in the Gulf Stream. A relatively large
* variation in 01 was also observed at 25 m.
* 3. At 75 m, the measured values of a. at 4 stations ranged from 1.17 to 1.21 in Exuma Sound.
The total variation of ai among these stations is within 3016. The same statement holds true at depths
greater than 75 m. Cavitation nuclei populations were also similar between stations in Exuma Sound,
* at least at depths greater than 75 m. This indicates that the venturi meter responds to similar nuclei
concentrations reasonably well and that similar nuclei populations yield similar cavitation results.
* 4. In Exuma Sound, the average value of oi among 4 stations increased at 200 m. This trend was
not originally expected and cannot be currently explained.
* 5. In the Gulf Stream, the peak value of ai was measured at 100 m and a. decreased at deeper
- depths. This trend is opposite to the one noted for Exuma Sound.
6. In Exuma Sound, oax = 1.26 was measured at 200 m and omin = 0.92 was measured at 10
m. This gives a total variation in a. of 370;'. Below 25 m, the lowest value of a = 1.16 was measured
at 75 m depth. This gives a total variation in oi of 907 between 75 to 200 m.
7. In the Gulf Stream, omax = 1.28 was measured at 100 m, and ommn = 1.15 was measured at
*200 m. This gives a total variation in aiof 1207 between 75 to 200 m.
8. Between 10 and 100 m of depth, oi is higher overall in the Gulf Stream than in Exuma Sound.
Hence, the Gulf Stream is seen to be more susceptible to cavitation than Exuma Sound. At depths
greater than 100 m, the opposite is true.
9. A comparison of oi measured between the ocean and the 12-in, water tunnel indicates that high
air contents are needed in the laboratory to produce the same cavitation susceptibility as the ocean.
This point will be further amplified in the following theoretical studies.

THEORETICAL INTERPRETATION
It is the purpose of this section to see whether some theories can be used to interpret some of the
test results. Water tunnel data show that gas bubbles produce cavitation bursting in the venturi throat.
It is assumed that both static and dynamic bubble theories are therefore applicable to the present
study.

14
 At shallow depths the Gulf Stream was seen to be more susceptible to cavitation than Exuma
Sound. At deep depths the opposite trend was noticed. Microbubble measurements shown in Figure 12
give higher bubble concentrations in the Gulf Stream than in Exuma Sound at shallow depths, and the
opposite at deeper depths. Cavitation data are thus supported by nuclei measurements. This result %
compliments the water tunnel data for which cavitation was very closely related to the concentration
of cavitation nuclei. %
One of the unexpected results is the increase in oi with depth in Exuma Sound. Another unex-
pected result is that variation of oi among 4 stations is significantly greater at a 10-ni depth than say
at a 100-m depth, while the measured nuclei as seetn in Figure 12 are more abundant at shallow depth
than at deep depth. It was anticipated that oi would vary more with sparser nuclei populations than
abundant ones. Furthermore, the measured oi value greater than 1.0 was not expected.
In a recent paper by Shen, Gowing and Pierce, t 7 bubble instability curves, in terms of the
ambient pressure, were computed and they are repeated here in Figure 17. The curve denoted by 2.09
bars corresponds to an ocean depth of 10 m. The curve is almost flat for bubble sizes Ro greater than
7 pm. With only . minute increase in throat velocity, all bubbles greater than 7 ;Am will become
unstable, and this radius is termed the critical radius. The locus of critical bubble radii is also shoNsn
in Figure 17.
rhe critical radii are seen to decrease significantly with an increase in ambient pressure or depth.
For example, the critical radius is seen to be around 0.4 Mm at 200 m deep (21.7 bars). All bubbles
greater than 0.4 Mm would then be candidates for cavitation bursting. Recall that the bubble concen-
tration drops almost linearly with increasing bubble size on a logarithmic scale. Consequently, the con-
centration of bubbles eligible to cavitate can theoretically increase with depth if the plots in Figure 12
can be extrapolated to smaller sizes. This may explain the fact that o i increases with depth as it did in
Exunia Sound. Because the relatively large bubbles measured by the detector would only form a small
fraction of the total bubbles eligible for cavitation if the plots in Figure 12 were extrapolated, this
hypothesis may not be proved as the direct niiamrcincnt ol hiuhhlc ,ic, Ics thmin 5 pn lia not
successfully been made.
The cavitation inception index o, defined in Equation (4) is based on the mean vcnturi throat
velocity when the occurrence of bubble bursting was detected. According to potential flo\' theor\, o
should not be greater than unity. Ocean measurements gien in Figures 18 and 19 shom other\mise. lhe
viscous effect of a real fluid is seen to pla\ an important role in caitai ion Susceptibilit.\
measurements. This subject has recently been studied by Chahine and Shen, 19 and Shen and
Gowing.2 )
As flow passes through the ' enturi throat there \\ill be an enerey loss because of the
viscous effect. Furthermore, the boundar layer gro\ws and the potential core in the throat shrink,,.
This results in an accelerating flo%% in the potential corc along the throat. The \elocity in the potential
core will be substantially higher than the ican ihtoat \clocit\
15

. "
 The measured pressure distribution along the 'enturi throat is given in Figure 20. Because of the
energy loss, the pressure coefficient based on the mean throat velocity is seen to be substantially
higher than unity. This fact explains why the measured o, from the ocean can be higher than unity.
The minimum pressure coefficient in the throat occurs at the exit and is shown in Figure 20. The
measurements show a 20 to 300,'o energy loss, which is about the value given by Schlichting in a pipe
flon. 2 1 The minimum pressure coefficients - CPTUII) corresponding to different flow rates at different
depths are plotted in Figures 18 and 19 along with the cavitation data. By comparing the measured oi
and - Cpmin some of the test data are seen to coincide with the classic assumption that Pmin = P\, at
the state of cavitation inception. On the other hand, a significant portion of test data shows the
noticeable error induced by the classic assumption.

CAVITATION SUSCEPTIBILITY MEASLREMENTS IN A LAKE

Lake measurements were carried out at Lake Pend Oreille in Idaho at the end of April 1985 to
provide results comparable with ocean and laboratory measurements. The hydrophone, flow meter and
electric cable used in the ocean cruise had been replaced with new units. The measurements covered
two locations. The first station was located next to a yellow barge, and the second station next to a
deep mooring. The geographic locations of these two stations are shown in Figure 22.
An expendable Bathythermograph System was used to profile the lake temperature. The
temperature measurements were made next to the deep mooring. The temperature was found to
remain within 5.6'C of the surface temperature down to 100 m deep. Surface tension measurements
yielded values for the lake that were, within instrument accuracy, the same values as for the ocean.
-. Microbubble and particle measurements were conducted in September of 1984 and April of 1985.
Due to some technical problems associated with the water sample collector, the April data are not yet
available. For reference purposes the September 1984 data are given in Figure 23.
A comparison of Figures 12 and 23 indicates that more nuclei were measured in the lake than in
the ocean. This result was not expected. However, the ocean water was more clear than the lake water
because the sampler device could be seen at deeper depths in the ocean than in the lake. A substantial
amount of particles included in Figure 23 is suspected.
Cavitation data are shown in Figures 24 and 25. Again, a threshold or critical flow rate required
to produce cavitation is evident. The following observations can be made through a comparison of
Figures 18, 19 and 25.
1. At 10 m, tho values of o i are 1.05 and 1.26, respectively. These values are similar to those
measured in the Gulf Stream and are higher than those measured in l-'ama Sound.

16

;~~~~~~~~~~~~.....,......_.,................,...................,,...............,......... +.,...,,...•
 2. At 100 m deep, the measured oi are 1.07 and 1.08 in the lake, 1.23 and 1.28 in the Gulf
Stream, and 1.18 to 1.21 in Exuma Sound. Lake water is seen to be less susceptible to cavitation than
ocean water at that depth.
3. At 200 m deep, the measured o is 1.14 at the lake, 1.15 in the Gulf Stream, and 1.20 to 1.26
* in Exuma Sound. The difference between the lake and Exuma Sound can be as high as 120.
In summary, lake measurements indicate that there w'ould be no difficulty in producing bubble
cavitation at 100- and 200-m depths. However, it was found that the flow rates required to induce
cavitation were higher at Lake Pend Oreille than at Exuma Sound.
The discussions so far are centered on the cavitation inception index and nuclei distribution.
Acoustic intensity generated by the bubble bursting has also been briefly investigated. One noticeable
distinction between ocean and lake data is that the acoustic intensities measured in the lake at 150-
and 200-i depths were significantly lower than those measured at the shallow depths. This
phenomenon was not observed in the case of the ocean measurements. Tile reason for different
acoustic signals in the two different bodies of water is not clear.

I ENSILE STRENGTH DERIVED FROM VENTURI MEASUREMENTS

At a given depth the flow rate required to induce cavitation differs among ocean, lake and
laboratory waters. No direct measurements were made to determine the corresponding tensile strength
at caitation inception. Nevertheless, it may be estimated by the following indirect method. The tensile
strength Pt is computed by

+
P, P0 K V--2 (5)

The negative sign on the right hand side is used to yield positi\e \alues for tension and negative values
for compression. The symbol K includes the loss coefficient due to viscosity. Tile actual \alue of K
depends on the venturi geometry and the friction coefficient. In this study, it is approximated by the
measured value of - Cpmin.
The computed tensile strengths of laboratory water at different air contents are given in Table 2.
,\t ,upersaturation conditions, compression was measured at the state of cavitation inception. At lo er'

air contcnts and bubble populations, tile tIUIleC \,,atcr ,ho\ed tcilstion at inception..A t ensile Irengh "Ii
of 1.69 bars, corresponding to 24.5 psi was computed at the 7% air content. A,, lhovn in I-able 2,tie
range of tensile strengths computed for the 12-in. \%ater tunnel is in tile sanle tangc as those measured
*" h\ Knapp at tile California Insitute of'l-echnology.
The computed tensile strengths of the ocean and lake \saters are given in 1 ables 3 and 4, respec-
tielv. The magnitudes of tensile strength mcasured in the ocean kater airc compatible \\itlh thosc of

. . . .. . . . . . . . . . .

. . . ,
 7TT

laboratory water. The compression computed for the 200-m depth in Exuma Sound was not expected.

Further studies are being made to investigate this phenomenon. As a remark, susceptibility works by
Crump 2 2, 23 and Knapp I also showed large compression in some of their test measurements.
The critical pressure data obtained at sea by the U.S. Navy17 and French Navy 24 are summarized
in a recent report of the 18th ITTC Cavitation Committee and given in Table 5. It is noted that the
data given in Reference 16 only cover the depths of 10 and 25 m. The tensile strengths measured near
the Mediterranean and Britanny coasts were found to be higher than the values in the Gulf Stream,
and less than the values in the Exuma Sound. The existence of tension at the state of cavitation is
evident.
The tensile strength computed by Equation (5) does account for the energy loss due to viscosity

by using the measured -C value to substitute the value of K. However, the influence of boundary
layer growth and potential core acceleration in the throat are not considered. Hopefully, this
correction is not large. Further refinements of the theoretical analysis are needed to improve values
given in Tables 2, 3, and, 4.

CONCLUSIONS
For the first time, cavitation susceptibility and nuclei distributions were measured in ocean, lake,
and laboratory waters. The depths covered in this test program ranged from 10 to 200 m. To provide
a reference for comparison, the water in the 12-in. water tunnel was measured with the same devices
used in both ocean and lake.
, The important results obtained from the ocean measurements can be summarized as follows:
* 1. In the Gulf Stream, the water temperature and oxygen distributions were found to vary
significantly with change in depth and geographic location. In Exuma Sound, they were less sensitive
to change in depth and geographic location.
2. Measured nuclei populations decrease xith increased depth. The rate of decrease of nuclei
population with depth is qualitatively indicated b\ the oxygen levels.
3. Correlation between nuclei concentrations and cavitation inception indices was observed. At
depths of less than 100 m, bubbles were more abundant in the Gulf Stream than in Exuma Sound,
and cavitation was found to occur more easily in the Gulf Stream than in :xuma Sound. At depths
deeper than 100 in, there were more nuclei in ELxLma Sound than in the Gulf Stream, and cavitation
was found to occur more easily in Exuma Sound.
4. Depending on the nuclei populations, variations of ca itation inception indices with depth can
take different forms in different bodies of water, as noted il lxima Sound. the Gulf Stream, and (as
noted in the following paragraph) lake Pend Oreille.
 TABLE 3 - TENSILE STENGTH OF OCEAN WATER EXUMA SOUND
(SPRING 1983)
Tensile Strength (bar)*
~~Depth""
lOm 25m 75m 100m 125m 150m 200m
*Station "

3 0.73 0.76 0.37 0.08 0.01 0.06 -0.58

4 0.46 0.47 0.44 0.27 0.43 - 0.08 - 1.11
5 0.64 0.17 0.36 0.28 0.32 0.51 -0.28
6 0.11 0.55 0.07 0.02 0.19 0.21 0.07

GULF STREAM (SPRING 1983)

7 0.21 0.20 -0.43 -0.90 0 0.35 1.04**

89 0.19
0.23 0.54
0.24 0
-0.37 0.10
-0.29 0.11

*Negati,e sign denotes compression.

**Cavitation inception obtained from 10 cavitation events per minute.

TABLE 4 - TENSILE STRENGTH OF LAKE PEND OREILLE

(SPRING 1985)
Tensile Strength (bar)*

lOm 25m 50m 100m 150m 200m

Stat ion

1 0 0.11 0.73 1.38 1.01**

0.35 0.40 0.74 0.16 0.77 1.08

*Negatike sign denotes compression.
*Cavitation inception obtained from 10 cavitation events per minute

19

I
TABLE 5 - CRITICAL PRESSURE MEASURED AT SEA BY VENTURI METHOD
(TAKEN FROM 18th ITTC CAVITATION COMMITTEE REPORT)

Ambient Critical R
Station P PL equivalent 2
(bar) (bar) (tim)

10 2.09 0.21 1.47

A
25 3.73 0.27 1.07

Straits of 10 2.07 0.31 1.13

Florida* -.

25 3.70 0.38 0.85

10 2.08 0.21 1.47

25 3.69 0.31 0.98

10 2.09 0.84 0.53

Bahama 25 3.75 0.83 0.47

Coast
10 2.14 0.64 0.65

25 3.77 0.55 0.65

1-rench 10 2.12 0.50 0.79
xlediterrancan
Coast 25 3.40 1.47 0.31
(Summer)-
30 4.17 1.33 0.32

1(0 2.00 0.30 1.16

25 3.50 0.13 1.74

35 4.43 0.19 1.28

Britton
Coat -4 10 1.97 0.69 0.62

It 20 2.96 0).
5( 0.73

(.pi inf ) () 3.9(1 . I( 1.97

50 5.94 1.S 0.23

65 .13 2.1(1 0.20

"( !lOI in,'ception b kacd oli /Clo c\cI f,, i IIIIIItC i .l \lHO, (il jfl .

2--
 i : -.- W:, , ', *,,i .,', . - ,. ~. S, ,ti,, 2 WJ ..5 .. *,. -- W
' WI
. W; VL
,- . .i.P ,. ':, ,. ,i - . . -. 'F ,-.: .- ' -- "- --

5. Bubble dynamic and static instability theories show that, given an ambient pressure and speed,
there exists a critical minimum bubble radius for cavitation bursting to occur. The sudden appearance
of cavitation with increasing speed is borne out by the measurements.
6. The unstable bubble population may actually increase with depth. This idea may be used to
explain why cavitation inception indices are higher at deep depths than at shallow depths in Exuma
Sound.
7. In Exuma Scind Omax = 1.26 was measured at 200 m and omin 0.92 was measured at
10 m. Thus, a total variation in oi of 37076 was observed.
8. In the Gulf Stream Omax = 1.28 was measured at 100 m and O n =i 1.15 was measured at
200 m. This gives a variation of 12o of o i between 100 to 200 m.
9. The classic assumption of Pmin = P, at the state of cavitation inception can be seriously in
error, as noted by the difference between measured values of a and - C
The fcllowing summary can be made of the lake measurements:
1. More nuclei were measured in the lake than in the ocean. This was not originally expected.
2. Particle measurements indicate that nuclei measured in the lake may consist of a substantial
amount of particles. This fact was supported by the observation of reduced visibility of the sample
collector at shallow depths, relative to the ocean visibility, and further supported by the light trans-
mission measurements taken with a transmissometer.
3. At the shallow depths of 10 and 25 m, cavitation inception indices measured at the lake are
compatible Aith the Gulf Stream measurements and slightly higher than the values measured at Exuma
Sound.
4. At depths greater than 25 m, the lake water was found to be less susceptible to cavitation than
in Exuma Sound.
5. At a 2(X) m depth, the measured value of o is 1.14 in the lake, 1.15 in the Gulf Stream, and
1.20 to 1.26 in Exuma Sound. The difference in a between the lake %ater and Exuma Sound \kater
can be as high as 12°0o.
The important results obtained in the 12-in. ,,ater tunnel can be sumnarited as follo\, s:
1. Because of the deaerator, a factor of 30 difference in the bubble concentration,, can be
produced.
2. The bubble concentration and size distributions follo\% the air content, in a systenatic s'as.

3. Depending on the bubble concentrations, c i ,aried from 0.49 to 1.38. his is almost a factor
" of 3 in o variation and makes cavitation scaling from model to prototype difficult.
4. A comparison with the ocean measurements indicate,, that high air contents are is needed i,
water tunnels to produce the same cavitation inception index as measured in the ocean at deep depth,.

21

....'... -.... t -*. -.. . -. . .-...

. . .:-. .".-. ..- ....- . .- . . .- . "- .- ..'.. . .
.
. . ...--. .'-.".".
. . .. '- ..- ..- '7.-..;
.-.-. -, ;i
 .1*

5. From bubble dynamics and static instability theories, a critical bubble radius, strongly depen-
dent on pressure and velocity, may be computed. At deep depths and high ambient pressures, the
population of unstable bubbles can become very large. The bubble instability theory seems to suggest
that the cavitation scaling problem can be significantly minimized by testing the model at high ambient
pressUres and high test speeds.

RECOMMENDATIONS
Many important results have been obtained in this test program. Further work is recommended to
improve the level of confidence of cavitation susceptibility predictions. It must be noted that the con-
clusions given in the previous section have been based on limited test data. The influence of seasonal
variation and different geographic locations on cavitation should be further investigated.
Lake data clearly show that additional nuclei measurement devices, such as holography, 4 may
have to be used in line with the present measuring system so that particles and gas bubbles can be
distinguished in nuclei population counts. Further improvements are needed to enhance flow-rate
regulation and eliminate flow-rate fluctuations.
The importance of micro-organisms such as zooplankten and their influence on cavitation
inception has not been investigated in the present report.
The importance of viscous effects on cavitation measurements by a venturi system has been
partially investigated. More theoretical xork is needed to separate the viscous effects from nuclei
effects.
The report so far is concerned with the effect of nuclei on cavitation inception. The effect of
different nuclei on the acoustics of cavitation has not been included.
The present study uses a venturi device as a cavitator. Analytical works are recommended to
interpret results obtained in the \enturi relati\c to vortex-type cavitation.
Finally, the present work shows a qualitati e correlation bet\keen nuclei measurements and cavita-
(ion. As pointed out in recent ITTC and AT reports, guidance to relate nuclei distributions and
ca±itatlon testing procedures in laboratoric, i,needed. I hik iP an area that rCLuircs further
illS cstigation.

A(KN\()\ I IDI) IN IS
-he authors express their deep appreciation to l)r. A. Zsolna\ at NORDA for his support of the
scli nitise, and to Mr. D. Gerzina at I)TNSRI)C for hi', support of lake measurements. The
co1ntinuous, support and encouragement o .1. If.NIc(arth, and Dr. F. B. Peterson throughout
Mi.
tic course of this project are greatl. appiiicd I inall\ lhc benefits of technical discussions with
l)r. T. I. I luang are greatly apprccia[tcd.

22 ..

7-.
 P LU
_jJ

I-
-j

z z 0-
00 D
0 -i
U z
I- CLI

2 >
0 0. C

UI
CL V
Z- <

LuL
> LL CL
o co

IL 0
uI-

x UjL
0u D

00.

0.0

t2

5,.

~~~~~~~~~~.~.-.5-
. .~. .-. . .2
1...i2.5. L u . ~ L ih . ...
 Cz
0<

0. M 0

oa
cr0
UAI

Kc
yc

CO L)

CO C-
LAC)

LUf

zr

42
.5~z

24N
. . . . .. . . .. ...

*
.,

CHECK VALVE
AIR HOSE
PRESSURE
SOLENOID
GUAGE VALVE
N2 INLET

PRESSURE
(SAMPLE)
I I TANK

BLADDER)

PRESSURE
RESERVOIRS BL
SOLENOID
VALVE PNEUMATIC
ACTUATOR

Fiigure 4 - Ocean Sampler

IMAGE FORMING LENS

GLASS WINDOWS
\01 DARK CAVITIES 3.8 cm PIPE"

WTER ,
~~BUBBLES -
y -1 TO 20 cm /s/

SAMPLING VOLUME
DEFINING SLITS
PROJECTION LENS
' N ":,
,,
-- PHOTOMULTIPLIER
/TBsPOOUTPIR:

LIGHT BEAM DEFINING MASK '-

KOEHLER LAMP j
"

-. "
Iiguic 5 - ( ,.r, .'ol \li,:r. hb
'lC,.
IDclvclol .
 50% AIR CONTENT, \ 1139
0.86

5.0 a.o0-48\ \ \
7% AIR CONTENT
7%AR
4.03 OTET \ - .

4.5 -
zE
O 1
"- .

Z E-
.0

0
-J 3.5

WATER TUNNEL TESTS

3.0 WT2 -
WT5 0-"-o
WT6

2.5 OCEAN 10 METER DEPTH

EXUMA SOUND ---
GULF STREAM

2.0
5 10 20 30 40
RADIUS (,m)
,- ~ i~lti,,.
~~~~I6 \\ ai,.rInn.c! \Ii,:i,.htih-b-[c Sp,,.,.tla. J) J J I, .

S.,
26

* . - '
,".~
 I

q
*1

800,

790 780 770 760 750

GRAND BAHAM N
987 ISLANDN
FT.
260 -LAUDERDALE + 260
S

250

-0 BUOY
ISLAND 250

'
240 240
. 240

Boo 790 780 770 760 750

F~igure 7 - (cean Test Stations

27
 I.-

-LJ

0<10

a.

0<00

Pt'i) Hid3C 831AA

*ST

CLC

7
50

0 3 n0

2100 % L

1.024 1.025 1.026

SPECIFIC DENSITY OF WATER".

Figure 9 - ater Density Distribution in Ocean

29

. .. . ..... .... .......... .

. - ,-._..+.,, ... .. .
.- _Z ..-,
:, A.- ,A,. . , . . . . . . .. . + . . : +. . . . . . . ,. . . . . .., .. +
 w o

I-L

0
00 (70
01 <10

0.

I 00

ol
 1'

1 7I I I I

106

EGULFSTREAM
2E (10 m DEEP)
z
z 5
o 10

4
10 EXUMA
C.)J
SOUND
(10 m DEEP) .-

0,

3
1o I I I I I

10 100
RADIUS (pm)

Figure II - Ocean Microbubble,, at 10-Meter Depth

,,

.... *.
 . . . . . .. . . . . . . ...
. .. . .. .

cc m

U,

co0

CD

CD Nj
U-

(LilIN30
it" Oin
N) OIIV
 z
0

Loo
(A) 0 istig
AJISN3NI 31ene osno-

33 .~~
 30 30

- , NOMINAL DEPTH = 75 m 125 m

20 P = 128.7 PSIA 20 P 203 PSIA

10 10

oW 0L 0
1.5 1.75 2.0 2.0 2.25 2.5
FLOW RATE (gpm) FLOW RATE (gpm)

z 30 30

20 P =163.5 PSIA 20 p 240OPSIA

0
W
C.

10 10

1.75 2.0 2.25 2.25 2.5 2.75

41-4
FLOW RATE (gpm) FLOW RATE (gpm)

1I'LV 14 t lion 1 l I i mcc mj..fC\ Ve\11\ I- Itk Ratc

I[ I \tliili ' )1flld Stu ~ii 6
 %'

30

z 20
* 0

Ow
wz

u.= uu OVENTURI 1
L.I cc
10 A VENTURI 2
0 L0
CL.

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5

CAVITATION NUMBER, o,

Figure 15 - Influence of Venturis on Cavitation

35

* .. . '.' ...
-. .. .,,........* ,**.*"*"., ** ' ) * *.'****
." ,"," . ,"'. _.., 1 * .. " . .. * y. - ,-
 0EE E

E= 0

*- E E-

LL~

-E

E E vi

E 0) Ef 0

LnL

00

0. cr 0
C')

NIIIAV 10 ZZ -D3

0.3 I
 I--

EE I

CL

LUe
cc)

SU

(A6

UnNIWH~d
IN3Q
NOIIAO30ANnSl

37 4
 1 1 1 1 I 0 0I

M) CO (L CL v

Nn >

I-I

00

cc 0
4.u

w A

LL.
0oU

COn

38
 m qw -ot

Cu

oo

000

0 'X0NI OI.L3D~lNOIIIIAV

39u
 ~CCL
Sbi

S
S.

400
 UjRe SYMBOL

UU.8x1'
0. 1

.08.34 x104 t

SFLOW

leb

II I I I I1',

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
X Imm)

CONTRACTION THROAT DIFFUSION ZONE

ZONE REGION
Figure 20 - Pressure Distribution in the Venturi

0.4

p0.3
z
CONTRACTION~
THOA DIFSOZNE.
LL 0.2
0

o 0.1
-j

0107 2 3 4 5 6 7890
............................... 0.4 ... * '

Re

Figure 21 Measured Loss Coefficient Versus Reynolds Number

41
 340

302

349

311 DEEP
MOORING

342

298 317

325

LAKE
243 PEND OREILLE
BASE, ,

YELLOW
294
J' 241 (oBARGE28

* DEPTHS INDICATED IN METERS

Figure 22 -lake Pend Oreille Vest Sites

42
 0*

Olj

E cz.

.00,
woe

'000

op 0 0

(CUtulN
NN -4.N3N

434

.4 . . . .
 LU.

(D z

0
0

010

x
xwwI -U
zz

Ca

CD

CD01
H39vy~~a nNNIVIV
44
 - .o

REFERENCES
1. Acosta, A.J. and B.R. Parkin, "Cavitation Inception - A Selective Review," 17th American
Towing Tank Conference Calif. Int. of Technology, Pasadena, Ca. (June 1974).
2. Kuiper, G. "Cavitation Inception on Ship Propeller Models," Ph.D. dissertation, Netherlands
Ship Model Basin, Waginengen, Netherlands (March 1981).
3. Zsolnay, A., D.M. Lavoie, D.A. Wiesenburg, and D. Reid, "Environmental Parameters in
Exuma Sound and the Straits of Floridas," Naval Ocean Research and Development Activity,
Technical Note 252 (1984).
4. O'Hern, T.J., J. Katz, and A.J. Acosta, "Holographic Measurements of Cavitation Nuclei in
the Sea," Cavitation and Multiphase Flow Forum, American Society of Mechanical Engineers,
Albuquerque, N.M. (1985).
5. Brockett, T., "Computational Method for Determination of Bubble Distributions in
Liquids," DTNSRDC Report No. 2798 (April 1969).
6. Ripkin, J.R. and A.P. Killen, "Gas Bubbles: Their Occurrence, Measurement, and Influence
in Cavitation Testing," Proceedings IAHY Symposium, Sendai, Japan (1962).
7. LeGoff, J.P. and Y. Lecoffre, "Nuclei and Cavitation," 14th Symposium on Naval
Hydrodynamics, Ann Arbor, Mich. (1982).
8. Gowing, S. and S.C. Ling, "Measurements of Microbubbles in a Water Tunnel," 19th
American Towing Tank Conference at University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich. (July 1980).
9. Ling, S.C., S. Gowing, and Y.T. Shen, "The Role of Microbubbles on Cavitation on Head-
forms," 14th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics. Ann Arbor, Mich. (1982).
10. Katz, J., S. Gowing, T. O'Hern, and A. Acosta, "A Comparative Study Between
Hologiraphic and Light Scattering Techniques of Microbubble Detection," International Union of
I heoretical and Applied Mechanics Symposium-Measuring Techniques in Gas-Liquid Two-Phase
l-lovs, Nancy, France (1983).
II- Knapp, R.T., J.W. Daily, and F.G. Hammitt, "Cavitation," McGraw-Hill, New York (1970).
12. Medwin. H., "In Situ Acoustic Measurements of Microbubble at Sea," Journal of
Geophysics Research, Vol. 82 (1977).
13. Weitendorf, E.A., "Conclusions from Full-Scale and Model Investigations of the Free Air
Content and of the Propeller-Excited Hull Pressure Amplitudes Du, to Cavitation," International
Symposium on Cavitation Inception, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York City
(Dec 1979).
14. NMedwin, H., "Acoustic Bubble Spectra at Sea," Proceedings of First International
Conference on Cavitation and Inhomogeneitics in Underwater Acoustics, Gottingen, Fed. Republic of
(ermany (1979).

45

. e.°
o , • .o% .o, o , . ° ° . . . , . . --. . a ..- .a a . .k.. ... . - .. . ao
 15. Shen, Y.T. and F.B. Peterson, "Cavitation Inception - A Review - Progress Since 19th

ATTC," 20th American Towing Tank Conference, Stevens Int. of Technology, Hoboken, N.J. (1983).
16. Godefroy, H.W., R.J. Jansen, A.P. Keller, Y. Lecoffre, D.M. Oldenziel, and
R.L. van Renesse, "Comparison of Measuring and Control Methods of the Water Quality with
Respect to Cavitation Behavior," Delft Hydraulic Laboratory, Delft, Netherlands (1981).
17. Shen, Y.T., S. Gowing, and R. Pierce, "Cavitation Susceptibility Measurements by a
Venturi," International Symposium on Cavitation Inception, Winter Annual Meeting of American
Society of Mechanical Engineers, New Orleans, La. (Dec 1984).
18. d'Agostino, L. and A.J. Acosta, "On the Design of Cavitation Susceptibility Meters," 20th
American Towing Tank Conference, Stevens Int. of Technology, Hoboken, N.J. (1983).
19. Chahine, G. and Y.T. Shen, "Bubble Dynamics and Inception in Cavitation Susceptibility
Meters," Winter Annual Meeting of American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Miami, Fla. (1985).
20. Shen, Y.T. and S. Gowing, "Scale Effect on Bubble Growth and Cavitation Inception in
Cavitation Susceptibility Meters," Cavitation and Multiphase Flow Forum, American Society of
Mechanical Engineers, Albuquerque, NM (1985).
21. Schlichting, H., "Boundary Layer Theory," McGraw-Hill, New York (1979).
22. Crump, S., "Determination of Critical Pressures for the Inception of Cavitation in Fresh and
Sea Water as Influenced by Air Content of the Water," DTMB Report 575 (1949).
23. Crump, S., "Critical Pressures for the Inception of Cavitation in a Large-Scale Numachi
N['tzzle as Influenced by the Air Content of the Water," DTMP Report 770 (1951).
24. Ligneul, P., "Influence of Nuclei on Cavitation of Marine Propellers," Association Techni-
CIue Maritime et Aeronautique, Paris, France (1984).

46

.........................................................................
 INITIAL DISTRIBUTION Ja

Copies CENTER DISTRIBUTION

1 NOP 21T3 (A. Bisson) Copies Code Name
5 NAVSEA 1 012.3 Moran
1 05R 1 15 Morgan
2 55N
1 55W33 1 1504 Monacella
56X12 1 152 Lin
1 CONR 23 3 1522 Remmers, Lawler, Hsu

1 CONR 432/Arlington (C. Lee) 1 154 McCarthy

1 1540.2 Cumming
1 ONR 425 (D.L. Bradley) 1 1541 Rispin

1 NORDA/Mississippi (A. Zsolnay) 1 1542 Huang

20 1542 Shen
10 NORDA/Mississippi (B. Eckstein) 15 1542 Gowing

1 1543 Rood
1 NOSR 2501 (J. Hoyt)
1 1544 Peterson
1 U.S. Naval Academy (R. Johnson) i 1544 Jessup

12 DTIC 1 156 Cieslowski

1 19 Sevik
CIT (A. Acosta) 1 19 Strasberg

1 MIT (J. Kerwin) 1 1905 Blake

'"1 192 Smith [
1 Univ of Iowa (F. Stones)
1 194 Archibald
I Univ of Michigan (W. Vorus) 1 1944 Maga

I Univ of Minnesota (R. Arndt) 1 1946 Spina

1 Penn State Univ (B. Parkin) 10 5211.1 Reports Distribution

1 522.1 TIC (C)

1 Penn State Univ (W. Holl)
1 522.2 TIC (A)
1 Penn State Univ (M. Billet)

1 Purdue Univ (J. Katz)

1 Traco Hydronautics (G. Chahine)

47

.................................................
.~ .* .(* ~