doi: 10.52899/24141437_2026_02_149
UDK: 532.582.5

Mitigation of tip vortex cavitation through selective roughness placement: a numerical study on the INSEAN E779A propeller

Ризк М. А., Али Р. М.
Article language:
Citation Link: Rizk MA, Ali RM. Mitigation of Tip Vortex Cavitation Through Selective Roughness Placement: A Numerical Study on the INSEAN E779A Propeller. Transactions of the Saint Petersburg State Marine Technical University. 2026;5(2):149–158. DOI: 10.52899/24141437_2026_02_149 EDN: RXQNAJ

Annotation

Background: Tip vortex cavitation is a common hydrodynamic phenomenon that significantly impairs the performance of marine propellers and leads to several negative effects, including increased underwater radiated noise, accelerated blade surface erosion, as well as reduced thrust and hydrodynamic efficiency. Therefore, developing methods to suppress tip vortex cavitation is of great practical importance. Aim: This study aims to investigate the effect of roughness location on tip vortex cavitation and the hydrodynamic characteristics of the four-bladed, fixed-pitch INSEAN E779A propeller using computational fluid dynamics. Methods: Different roughening scenarios were tested, including applying roughness to the pressure side, the suction side, and both sides of the blade. The flow around the four-bladed fixed-pitch propeller INSEAN E779A was numerically modelled and simulated at an advance ratio J = 0.77 and cavitation number σ = 2.082. The RANS method was used for turbulence modelling, and the well-known SST k-ω turbulence model was used to close the RANS equations. The numerical results were validated against available experimental data, and good agreement was observed. Results: The results consistently demonstrated that the location of roughness application is crucial for effective cavitation mitigation. Applying uniform roughness exclusively to the suction side emerged as the most effective strategy, reducing the blade surface area exposed to vapor by 21.3%. Conversely, applying roughness solely to the pressure side increased cavitation extent, while roughening both sides reduced cavitation but incurred the largest propulsive efficiency penalty of 7.34%. Conclusion: Strategic application of surface roughness, specifically on the suction side, offers a favorable balance between cavitation suppression and hydrodynamic efficiency loss. This approach represents a practically feasible passive method for mitigating tip vortex cavitation in ship propellers. Keywords: tip vortex cavitation, roughness, marine propeller, INSEAN E779A, CFD, RANS

Bibliography

Berger S, Bering RM, Steden M, et al. Numerical study on the evolution of vortex structures at the propeller tip and their influence on cavitation inception. Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Marine Propulsors (SMP’24). Trondheim: Norwegian University of Science and Technology; 2024. P. 345–363.
Gao H, Zhu W, Liu Y, Yan Y. Effect of various winglets on the performance of marine propeller. Applied Ocean Research. 2019;86:246–256. doi: 10.1016/j.apor.2019.03.006
Shin KW, Andersen P. CFD analysis of cloud cavitation on three tipmodified propellers with systematically varied tip geometry. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 2015;656(1):012139. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/656/1/012139
Cheng H, Long X, Ji B, et al. Suppressing tipleakage vortex cavitation by overhanging grooves. Experiments in Fluids. 2020;61(7):159. doi: 10.1007/s00348-020-02996-6 EDN: GXQIKM
Yang J, Gao H, Yan Y. A numerical investigation into the influence of bionic ridge structures on the cavitation performance of marine propellers. Journal of Marine Science and Technology. 2024;29(1):105–122. doi: 10.1007/s00773-023-00976-z EDN: DDETQB
Stark C, Shi W, Troll M. Cavitation funnel effect: bioinspired leadingedge tubercle application on ducted marine propeller blades. Applied Ocean Research. 2021;116:102864. doi: 10.1016/j.apor.2021.102864 EDN: PBDXGD
Belhenniche SE, Rizk MA, Imine O, et al. Effect of pressure pores size on hydrodynamic and hydroacoustic marine propeller performances under cavitating case. Ocean Engineering. 2024;307:118164. doi: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2024.118164 EDN: BULRTV
Arndt REA, Ellis CR, Paul S. Preliminary investigation of the use of air injection to mitigate cavitation erosion. Journal of Fluids Engineering. 1995;117(3):498–504. doi: 10.1115/1.2817290
Chang N, Ganesh H, Yakushiji R, Ceccio SL. Tip vortex cavitation suppression by active mass injection. Journal of Fluids Engineering. 2011;133(11):111301. doi: 10.1115/1.4005138
Kadivar E, Kumar P. A review of hydrodynamic cavitation passive and active control methods in marine engineering applications. Symmetry. 2025;17(11):1782. doi: 10.3390/sym17111782 EDN: OKVINW
Li L, Roy S. Fundamental investigation using active plasma control to reduce bladevortex interaction noise. International Journal of Aeroacoustics. 2021;20(8):870–900. doi: 10.1177/1475472X211052699 EDN: DVLEQT
Zhu W, Li Z, Ding R. Effect of pitch ratio on the cavitation of controllable pitch propeller. Ocean Engineering. 2024;293:116692. doi: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2024.116692 EDN: MZFSXY
Xue Y, Dong XQ, Yang CJ. Numerical prediction of cavitation performance of controllable pitch propellers with different pitch adjustment velocities. Proceedings of the ASME 2020 39th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering (OMAE2020). doi: 10.1115/OMAE2020-18548
Smith D, Carter O. An investigation of machine learning capabilities for cavitation detection. Proceedings of the 8th Underwater Acoustics Conference and Exhibition (UACE 2025). Halkidiki, Greece; 2025. P. 91–96.
Svennberg U, Asnaghi A, Gustafsson R, Bensow RE. Experimental analysis of tip vortex cavitation mitigation by controlled surface roughness. Journal of Hydrodynamics. 2020;32(6):1059–1070. doi: 10.1007/s42241-020-0073-6 EDN: UKRJYR
Krüger C, Kornev N, Greitsch L. Influence of propeller tip roughness on tip vortex strength and propeller performance. Ship Technology Research. 2016;63(2):110–120. doi: 10.1080/09377255.2016.1205293
Ali RM, Rizk MA. Analysis of the influence of turbulence models, mesh topology and flow characteristics on the accuracy of predicting hydrodynamic performance of an isolated propeller. Bulletin of the Engineering School of the Far Eastern Federal University. 2025;(2):15–25. doi: 10.24866/2227-6858/2025-2/15-25 EDN: DFFEYF
Schnerr GH, Sauer J. Physical and numerical modeling of unsteady cavitation dynamics. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Multiphase Flow (ICMF 2001). New Orleans, LA, USA; 2001.
Lee YH, Yang CY, Chow YC. Evaluations of the outcome variability of RANS simulations for marine propellers due to tunable parameters of cavitation models. Ocean Engineering. 2021;226:108805. doi: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.108805 EDN: CRFFLT
Cebeci T, Bradshaw P. Momentum Transfer in Boundary Layers. New York: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation; 1977. 391 p.
Pereira F, Salvatore F, Di Felice F. Measurement and modeling of propeller cavitation in uniform inflow. Journal of Fluids Engineering. 2004;126(4):671–679. doi: 10.1115/1.1778716