A Brief Overview of Research Methods

  • Can KangEmail author
  • Haixia Liu
  • Ning Mao
  • Yongchao Zhang


Theoretical, experimental and numerical methods are three primary methods that are commonly used in fluids engineering. For the theoretical method, it requires a sound base of mathematical and mechanical knowledge. Meanwhile, the gap between theoretical results and applications is often remarkable. In contrast, the latter two methods can be easily exercised and the results can be transplanted into practical design. In this chapter, a brief overview of the two methods is presented. For each method, we do not intend to trace its origin or to explain its fundamental principles; these have been documented in detail. Only those contents that are much related to fluids engineering are presented here. In the following chapters, different cases will be introduced and the function of these methods will be substantiated then.


  1. 1.
    Versteeg H, Malalasekera W. An Introduction to Computational Fluid Dynamics. ‎London: Pearson Education Limited; 1995.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anderson JD. Computational Fluid Dynamics, The Basics with Applications. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1995.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mani KV, Cervone A, Hickey JP. Turbulence modeling of cavitating flows in liquid rocket turbopumps. J Fluids Eng Trans ASME. 2017;139:011301–1–011301–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Menter F. Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications. AIAA J. 1994;32:1598–1605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jiang W, Li G, Liu P, Lei F. Numerical investigation of influence of the clocking effect on the unsteady pressure fluctuations and radial forces in the centrifugal pump with vaned diffuser. Int Commun Heat Mass Transfer. 2016;71:164–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Limbach P, Skoda R. Numerical and experimental analysis of cavitating flow in a low specific speed centrifugal pump with different surface roughness. J Fluids Eng Trans ASME. 2017;139:101201–1–101201–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yakhot V, Orszag SA. Renormalization group analysis of turbulence. J Sci Comput. 1986;1:3–51.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rodio MG, Abgrall R. An innovative phase transition modeling for reproducing cavitation through a five-equation model and theoretical generalization to six and seven-equation models. Int J Heat Mass Transf. 2015;89:1386–1401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Roohi E, Zahiri AP, Zahiri AP, Passandideh-Fard M. Numerical simulation of cavitation around a two-dimensional hydrofoil using VOF method and LES turbulence model. Appl Math Model. 2013;37:6469–6488.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gülich JF. Centrifugal pumps. 3rd ed. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag; 2014.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li X, Zhu Z, Li Y, Chen X. Experimental and numerical investigations of head-flow curve instability of a single-stage centrifugal pump with volute casing. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part A: J Power Energy. 2016;230:633–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Peng G, Okada K, Yang C, Oguma Y, Shimizu S. Numerical simulation of unsteady cavitation in a high-speed water jet. Int J Fluid Mach Syst. 2016;9:66–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Peters A, Sagar H, Lantermann U, el Moctar O. Numerical modelling and prediction of cavitation erosion. Wear. 2015;338–339:189–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kozubková M, Rautová J, Bojko M. Mathematical model of cavitation and modelling of fluid flow in cone. Procedia Engineering. 2012;39:9–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Morgut M, Nobile E, Biluš I. Comparison of mass transfer models for the numerical prediction of sheet cavitation around a hydrofoil. Int J Multiph Flow. 2011;37:620–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Saha K, Li X. Assessment of cavitation models for flows in diesel injectors with single–and two–fluid approaches. J Eng Gas Turbines Power Trans ASME. 2016; 138:011504–1–011504–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Charrière B, Decaix J, Goncalvès E. A comparative study of cavitation models in a Venturi flow. Eur J Mech B/Fluids. 2015;49:287–297.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kim J, Lee JS. Numerical study of cloud cavitation effects on hydrophobic hydrofoils. Int J Heat Mass Transf. 2015;83:591–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zuo Z, Liu S, Liu D, Qin D, Wu Y. Numerical analyses of pressure fluctuations induced by interblade vortices in a model Francis turbine. J Hydrodyn. 2017;27:513–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zwart PJ, Gerber AG, Belamri T. A two-phase flow model for predicting cavitation dynamics. In: ICMF 2004 International conference on multiphase flow, Yokohama, Japan; 2004.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Liu D. The numerical simulation of propeller sheet cavitation with a new cavitation model. Procedia Eng. 2015;126:310–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liu M, Xia H, Sun Lin, Li B, Yang Y. Vibration signal analysis of main coolant pump flywheel based on Hilbert-Huang transform. Nucl Eng Technol. 2015;47:219–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science Press, Beijing and Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Can Kang
    • 1
    Email author
  • Haixia Liu
    • 2
  • Ning Mao
    • 3
  • Yongchao Zhang
    • 4
  1. 1.School of Energy and Power EngineeringJiangsu UniversityZhenjiangChina
  2. 2.School of Materials Science and EngineeringJiangsu UniversityZhenjiangChina
  3. 3.School of Energy and Power EngineeringJiangsu UniversityZhenjiangChina
  4. 4.School of Energy and Power EngineeringJiangsu UniversityZhenjiangChina

Personalised recommendations