Experimental and numerical study of the adsorption performance of a vortex suction device using water-swirling flow
Source abstract
Abstract
An electrically activated underwater suction device is designed to form an amazing amount of negative pressure by generating water swirling flow, which can make underwater wall-climbing robot stick to the wall surface allowing a ground clearance. For the purpose of a full understanding of the mechanism of the suction device, a series of experimental tests are carried out and a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model is established. The results show that the suction force F is consistent between experimental tests and simulations. An insight into the flow phenomena of vortex suction device, including spatial velocity and pressure distribution, is given through numerical simulation analysis. Furthermore, the crucial parameters, i.e., the rotation speed ω and gap clearance h, are studied. Then the relationships of F-ω and F-h are clarified. It reveals that with the increasing of rotation speed, the suction force increases quadratically. And with the increasing of gap clearance, the suction force increases firstly and then decreases, so that a reasonable design interval of gap clearance can be got to obtain the required suction force for the engineering applications.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Aerosol Filtration and Electrostatic Precipitation · Fluid Dynamics Simulations and Interactions · Underwater Vehicles and Communication Systems
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (42)
Show source-provided references
1. Zhang H X, Zhang J W, Zong G H, et al. Sky cleaner 3: A real pneumatic climbing robot for glass-wall cleaning. IEEE Robot Automat Mag, 2006, 13: 32–4110.1109/MRA.2006.1598051 ↗
2. Schmidt D, Berns K. Climbing robots for mauntenance and inspections of vertical structures—A survey of design aspects and technologies. Robotics Autonomous Syst, 2013, 61: 1288–130510.1016/j.robot.2013.09.002 ↗
3. Hillenbrand C, Schmidt D, Berns K. Cromsci: Development of a climbing robot with negative pressure adhesion for inspections. Ind Robot, 2008, 35: 228–23710.1108/01439910810868552 ↗
4. Kalra L P, Gu J, Meng M. A wall climbing robot for oil tank inspection. In: Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics. Kunming, 2007. 1523–152810.1109/ROBIO.2006.340155 ↗
5. Kermorgant O. A magnetic climbing robot to perform autonomous welding in the shipbuilding industry. Robotics Comput-Integrated Manufacturing, 2018, 53: 178–18610.1016/j.rcim.2018.04.008 ↗
6. Akinfiev T, Waldron K J, Armada M, et al. Climbing cleaning robot for vertical surfaces. Ind Robot, 2009, 36: 352–35710.1108/01439910910957110 ↗
7. Tavakoli M, Viegas C, Marques L, et al. Omniclimbers: Omni-directional magnetic wheeled climbing robots for inspection of ferromagnetic structures. Robotics Autonomous Syst, 2013, 61: 997–100710.1016/j.robot.2013.05.005 ↗
8. Guan Y, Zhu H, Wu W, et al. A modular biped wall-climbing robot with high mobility and manipulating function. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron, 2013, 18: 1787–179810.1109/TMECH.2012.2213303 ↗
9. Kim S, Spenko M, Trujillo S, et al. Smooth vertical surface climbing with directional adhesion. IEEE Trans Robot, 2008, 24: 65–7410.1109/TRO.2008.924946 ↗
10. Wang Y, Yang X, Chen Y, et al. A biorobotic adhesive disc for underwater hitchhiking inspired by the remora suckerfish. Sci Robot, 2017, 2: eaan807210.1126/scirobotics.aan8072 ↗
11. Davis S, Gray J O, Caldwell D G. An end effector based on the Bernoulli principle for handling sliced fruit and vegetables. Robotics Comput-Integrated Manufacturing, 2008, 24: 249–25710.1016/j.rcim.2006.11.002 ↗
12. Brun X F, Melkote S N. Modeling and prediction of the flow, pressure, and holding force generated by a Bernoulli handling device. J Manuf Sci E-T ASME, 2008, 131: 351–358
13. Li X, Kagawa T. Theoretical and experimental study of factors affecting the suction force of a bernoulli gripper. J Eng Mech, 2014, 140: 0401406610.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000774 ↗
14. Li X, Kawashima K, Kagawa T. Analysis of vortex levitation. Exp Thermal Fluid Sci, 2008, 32: 1448–145410.1016/j.expthermflusci.2008.03.010 ↗
15. Zhao J, Li X. Development of wall-climbing robot using vortex suction unit and its evaluation on walls with various surface conditions. Intelligent Robotics and Applications. ICIRA 2017. In: Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Cham: Springer, 2017. 179–19210.1007/978-3-319-65298-6_17 ↗
16. Li X, Li N, Tao G, et al. Experimental comparison of Bernoulli gripper and vortex gripper. Int J Precis Eng Manuf, 2015, 16: 2081–209010.1007/s12541-015-0270-3 ↗
17. Zhao J, Li X. Effect of supply flow rate on performance of pneumatic non-contact gripper using vortex flow. Exp Thermal Fluid Sci, 2016, 79: 91–10010.1016/j.expthermflusci.2016.06.020 ↗
18. Li X, Kagawa T. Development of a new noncontact gripper using swirl vanes. Robotics Comput-Integrated Manufacturing, 2013, 29: 63–7010.1016/j.rcim.2012.07.002 ↗
19. Li X, Dong L. Development and analysis of an electrically activated sucker for handling workpieces with rough and uneven surfaces. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron, 2016, 21: 1024–103410.1109/TMECH.2015.2501539 ↗
20. Zhou Q, Li X. Design of wall-climbing robot using electrically activated rotational-flow adsorption unit. In: Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). Daejeon, 2016. 5758–576310.1109/IROS.2016.7759847 ↗
21. Iio S, Umebachi M, Li X, et al. Performance of a non-contact handling device using swirling flow with various gap height. J Vis, 2010, 13: 319–32610.1007/s12650-010-0045-y ↗
22. Jo C H, Lee K H, Yim J Y. A study on the interference effects for tidal current power rotors. Sci China Tech Sci, 2010, 53: 3094–310110.1007/s11431-010-4117-y ↗
23. Pei J, Yuan S Q, Yuan J P. Numerical analysis of periodic flow unsteadiness in a single-blade centrifugal pump. Sci China Tech Sci, 2013, 56: 212–22110.1007/s11431-012-5044-x ↗
24. Guo T Q, Lu Z L, Tang D, et al. A CFD/CSD model for aeroelastic calculations of large-scale wind turbines. Sci China Tech Sci, 2013, 56: 205–21110.1007/s11431-012-5028-x ↗
25. Li X, Iio S, Kawashima K, et al. Computational fluid dynamics study of a noncontact handling device using aur-swirling flow. J Eng Mech, 2011, 137: 400–40910.1061/(ASCE)EM.1943-7889.0000237 ↗
26. Li X, Horie M, Kagawa T. Pressure-distribution methods for estimating lifting force of a swirl gripper. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron, 2014, 19: 707–71810.1109/TMECH.2013.2256793 ↗
27. Zhang G, Chen Z, Sui Z, et al. A cell-based smoothed radial point interpolation method with virtual nodes for three-dimensional mid-frequency acoustic problems. Int J Numer Methods Eng, 2019, 119: 548–56610.1002/nme.6062 ↗
28. Wang S, Cau Y, Zhang G, et al. A coupled immersed boundary-lattice Boltzmann method with smoothed point interpolation method for fluid-structure interaction problems. Int J Numer Meth Fluids, 2018, 88: 363–38410.1002/fld.4669 ↗
29. Zhuang C, Yang G, Long T, et al. Numerical comparison of removal and deposition for fully-distributed particles in central- and split-type aur-conditioning rooms. Building Environ, 2017, 112: 17–2810.1016/j.buildenv.2016.11.027 ↗
30. Sun Z, Zhang G Y, Zong Z, et al. Numerical analysis of violent hydroelastic problems based on a mixed MPS-mode superposition method. Ocean Eng, 2019, 179: 285–29710.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.03.032 ↗
31. Yang G W, Zheng G N, Li G B. Computational methods and engineering applications of static/dynamic aeroelasticity based on CFD/CSD coupling solution. Sci China Tech Sci, 2012, 55: 2453–246110.1007/s11431-012-4935-1 ↗
32. Zhang G, Wang S, Lu H, et al. Coupling immersed method with node-based partly smoothed point interpolation method (NPS-PIM) for large-displacement fluid-structure interaction problems. Ocean Eng, 2018, 157: 180–20110.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.03.031 ↗
33. Yakhot V, Smith L M. The renormalization group, the ε-expansion and derivation of turbulence models. J Sci Comput, 1992, 7: 35–6110.1007/BF01060210 ↗
34. Joshi J B, Nere N K, Rane C V, et al. CFD simulation of stirred tanks: Comparison of turbulence models. Part i: Radial flow impellers. Can J Chem Eng, 2011, 89: 23–82
35. Durbin P A. Near-wall turbulence closure modeling without “damping functions”. Theor Comp Fluid Dyn, 1991, 3: 1–1310.1007/BF00271513 ↗
36. Jawarneh A M, Tlilan H, Al-Shyyab A, et al. Strongly swirling flows in a cylindrical separator. Miner Eng, 2008, 21: 366–37210.1016/j.mineng.2007.10.012 ↗
37. Wu Q, Ye Q, Meng G X. Application and comparison of different turbulence models in the three-dimensional numerical simulation of non-contact swirl sucker. In: Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Fluid Power and Mechatronics. Beijing, 2011. 144–14910.1109/FPM.2011.6045746 ↗
38. Ma W, Xu L, Yu H. Study on flow field characteristics of non-contact vortex negative pressure carrier. In: Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Measuring Technology and Mechatronics Automation. Changsha, 2010. 3: 587–591
39. Almohammadi K M, Ingham D B, Ma L, et al. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) mesh independency techniques for a straught blade vertical axis wind turbine. Energy, 2013, 58: 483–49310.1016/j.energy.2013.06.012 ↗
40. Gupta A, Kumar R. Three-dimensional turbulent swirling flow in a cylinder: Experiments and computations. Int J Heat Fluid Flow, 2007, 28: 249–26110.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2006.04.005 ↗
41. Liu C C, Ferng Y M, Shih C K. CFD evaluation of turbulence models for flow simulation of the fuel rod bundle with a spacer assembly. Appl Thermal Eng, 2012, 40: 389–39610.1016/j.applthermaleng.2012.02.027 ↗
42. Franklin W S, Deimel R F. Pressure energy in an incompressible fluid and Bernoulli’s principle. Science, 1925, 62: 39710.1126/science.62.1609.397 ↗