See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/12097825

Hydrodynamic Cavitation for Sonochemical Effects

Article  in  Ultrasonics Sonochemistry · April 1999

DOI: 10.1016/S1350-4177(98)00030-3 · Source: PubMed

CITATIONS READS

103 907

3 authors, including:

Aniruddha Bhalchandra Pandit

Institute of Chemical Technology, Mumbai
428 PUBLICATIONS   15,053 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Ultrasound assisted enzymatic Desulphurization View project

Enzyme Technology View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Aniruddha Bhalchandra Pandit on 09 January 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 6 (1999) 53–65

Hydrodynamic cavitation for sonochemical effects

V.S. Moholkar*, P. Senthil Kumar, A.B. Pandit
Chemical Engineering Division, University Department of Chemical Technology, University of Bombay, Matunga, Bombay – 400 019, India

Abstract

A comparative study of hydrodynamic and acoustic cavitation has been made on the basis of numerical solutions of the
Rayleigh–Plesset equation. The bubble/cavity behaviour has been studied under both acoustic and hydrodynamic cavitation
conditions. The effect of varying pressure fields on the collapse of the cavity (sinusoidal for acoustic and linear for hydrodynamic)
and also on the latter’s dynamic behaviour has been studied. The variations of parameters such as initial cavity size, intensity of
the acoustic field and irradiation frequency in the case of acoustic cavitation, and initial cavity size, final recovery pressure and
time for pressure recovery in the case of hydrodynamic cavitation, have been found to have significant effects on cavity/bubble
dynamics. The simulations reveal that the bubble/cavity collapsing behaviour in the case of hydrodynamic cavitation is accompanied
by a large number of pressure pulses of relatively smaller magnitude, compared with just one or two pulses under acoustic
cavitation. It has been shown that hydrodynamic cavitation offers greater control over operating parameters and the resultant
cavitation intensity. Finally, a brief summary of the experimental results on the oxidation of aqueous KI solution with a
hydrodynamic cavitation set-up is given which supports the conclusion of this numerical study. The methodology presented allows
one to manipulate and optimise of specific process, either physical or chemical. © 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Acoustic cavitation; Bubble dynamics; Hydrodynamic cavitation; Sonochemistry

1. Introduction Hydrodynamic cavitation is the cheaper alternative

Cavitation as a source of energy input for chemical
processes is increasingly being studied owing to its
ability to generate high temperatures and pressures (hot
spots) under nearly ambient conditions. The possibility
of exploitation stems from the fact that millions of
cavities grow and collapse simultaneously at different
locations. Until now, ultrasound was the only tool used
for the generation of cavities that has been studied
extensively in the past. In this method ultrasound gener-
ates, grows and collapses the cavities. The whole process
of generation, growth and collapse of cavities occurs in
an extremely short period of time, of the order of few
microseconds. In spite of extensive research, there is
hardly any chemical processing carried out on an indu-
strial scale owing to the lack of expertise required in
such diverse fields as material science, acoustics, chemi-
cal engineering, etc., for scaling up successful lab-scale
processes.
* Corresponding author. Present address: Department of Chemical
Engineering, University of Twente, P.O. Box 217, 7500 AE Enschede,
The Netherlands. e-mail: v.s.moholkar@ct.utwente.nl.
for the above processes. Here, cavitation is generated
by the flow of a liquid under controlled conditions
through simple geometries such as venturi-tubes and
orifice plates. When the pressure at the throat falls
below the vapor pressure of the liquid, the liquid flashes,
generating a number of cavities which subsequently
collapse when pressure recovers downstream of the
mechanical constriction. Although the phenomenon has
been extensively studied in the past decade, the main
effort was concentrated on the suppression of cavitation
due to its destructive nature in liquid transportation.
Our effort is to use the conditions generated by hydrody-
namic cavitation for beneficial purposes. A number of
studies made earlier, such as hydrolysis of fatty oils [1]
cell disruption [2] and polymerization/depolymerization
of aqueous polymeric solutions [3], proved the process
to be more energy-efficient than its counterpart.
In the following work, we have made an attempt to
analyze acoustic and hydrodynamic cavitation by study-
ing the bubble behavior in both types of cavitation and
tried to develop an analogy between the two. Also, the
possibility of using hydrodynamic cavitation as a surro-
gate for acoustic cavitation has been discussed.

1350-4177/99/$ – see front matter © 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S1 3 5 0 -4 1 7 7 ( 9 8 ) 0 0 03 0 - 3
54 V.S. Moholkar et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 6 (1999) 53–65

2. Mathematical modeling study of acoustic and hydrodynamic cavitation, such a

The first analysis of a problem in cavitation and
bubble dynamics was made by Rayleigh [4], who solved
the problem of the collapse of the cavity in a large mass
of liquid. With the neglect of surface tension and viscos-
ity and with the assumption of liquid incompressibility,
Rayleigh showed from the momentum equation that the
bubble boundary R(t) obeyed the equation,
complication is not justified at this stage.
2.1. Analysis of acoustic cavitation
Acoustic cavitation is a result of pressure variation
in the liquid when ultrasound waves pass through it.
The molecules of the cavitating medium under the action
of an acoustic field will vibrate about their mean posi-

A B
d2R 3 dR 2 P(R)−P tions and an acoustic wave will be superimposed upon
R + = 2 (1)
dt2 2 dt r the already existing ambient pressure present in the
liquid.
where r is the density of the liquid, P is the pressure During the compression cycle, the average distance
2
in the liquid at infinity and P(R) is the pressure in the between the molecules is decreased while during the
liquid at the bubble boundary. rarefaction cycle the distance increases. If a sufficiently
The pressure in the liquid is readily found to obey large negative pressure is applied to the liquid, such that
the relation, the average distance between the molecules exceeds the
R critical molecular distance necessary to hold the liquid
P(R, t)=P + [P(R)−P ] intact, the liquid will break down and voids or cavities
2 r 2
will be created – i.e., cavitation bubbles will be formed.

A BC A BD
1 R dR 2 R 3 Once produced, these cavities or bubbles may grow
+ r 1− . (2) in size until the maximum negative pressure has been
2 r dt r
reached. In the succeeding compression cycle of the
While Rayleigh neglected surface tension and liquid wave, however, they will be forced to contract, i.e.,
viscosity and kept the pressure P constant, his dynami- decrease in volume, and some of them may even collapse.
2
cal equation can readily be extended to include these The shock waves produced on total collapse of the
effects. bubbles have been estimated to be of the order of several
For a spherical bubble the viscosity affects only the thousands of atmospheres.
boundary conditions so that it becomes, Estimates of the acoustic pressure necessary to cause
cavitation in water has led to a value of approximately

A B
2s 4m dR
P(R)=P − − (3) 100 atm. In practice, cavitation occurs at considerably
i R R dt lower values ( less than 20 atm) and this is undoubtedly
where now P is the pressure in the bubble and P(R) as due to the presence of weak spots in the liquid that
i lower the liquid’s tensile strength.
before is the pressure in the liquid at the bubble bound-
ary. The surface tension constant and the coefficient of Here we attempt to study the acoustic cavitation in
viscosity are s and m, respectively. By allowing P to the air–water system, investigating the factors that affect
2 acoustic cavitation with the help of numerical simula-
be a function of time, one can find out the radius–time
history of bubble oscillations. tions of the Rayleigh–Plesset equation.
With the inclusion of surface tension and viscosity
effects the equation of bubble dynamics becomes, 2.1.1. Mathematical modeling of acoustic cavitation

A B C A BD
d2R 3 dR 2 1 2s 4m dR When an ultrasound wave of pressure amplitude P and
R + = P −P − − . A
i 2 frequency f passes through a cavitating medium, the
dt2 2 dt r R R dt
pressure P in the liquid at any time is given as,
(4)
P(t)=P −P sin(2pft). (5)
This equation, famous as the Rayleigh–Plesset equation, o A
forms the basis of our analysis [5]. Now, in order to study the effect of such an oscillating
The current numerical scheme simulations of bubble field on bubble behavior, we can substitute P(t) as P
behavior were compared with those reported by Miksis 2
in the Rayleigh–Plesset equation, and this equation can
and Ting [6 ] and found to be identical. later be solved by the Range–Kutta method to find the
The Rayleigh–Plesset equation is valid only up to the radius and pressure pulse history of bubble oscillation.
point when the bubble wall velocity is less than the The pressure amplitude of the sound field P is a
sonic velocity in the cavitating medium. The equation A
function of the acoustic intensity and is given as
developed by Gilmore [7] can take into account the
liquid incompressibility effects, but for a comparative P =앀2IrC (6)
A
 V.S. Moholkar et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 6 (1999) 53–65
where r is the density of the cavitating medium and C
is the velocity of sound through the liquid.
2.2. Analysis of hydrodynamic cavitation
Cavitation can also be achieved by throttling a valve
downstream of a pump. This phenomenon can be eluci-
dated as follows.
If a liquid is flowing through an orifice, the reduction
in cross-section of the flowing stream increases the
velocity head at the expense of the pressure head. During
the re-expansion of the flow the fluid stream gets sepa-
rated at the lower end of the orifice and eddies are
generated. Owing to this turbulence and the large friction
loss generated by the eddies, a permanent pressure loss
is inevitable and full pressure restoration does not take
place. The static pressure at the vena contracta is less
than the bulk pressure downstream of the flow.
However, as velocity is increased, the pressure drop
across the orifice increases and the pressure at the vena
contracta decreases. At a particular velocity the pressure
may actually fall below the vapor pressure of the liquid
being pumped, thus causing partial vaporization of the
cavitating fluid.
Also with the reduction of pressure at the orifice
there is liberation of the gases which are dissolved in
the cavitating liquid. These gas bubbles also oscillate
and then give rise to the pressure and temperature pulses.
2.2.1. Cavitation number
Before we start discussing the mathematical modeling
of hydrodynamic cavitation, let us ponder over a dimen-
sionless parameter called the cavitation number. The
cavitation number is generally used in hydrodynamic
cavitation and is defined as
P −P
C= 2 v (7)
i 1/2rV2
where P is the downstream pressure, P is the vapor
2 v
pressure of water, r is the density of water and V is the
average velocity near the orifice. According to this, the
pressure downstream of the orifice will fall below the
vapor pressure of the liquid when the cavitation number
is 1 or lower. This is the cavitation inception number.
The characteristics of cavitation number are as fol-
lows [8]:
(1) it is independent of the velocity in the pipe and
shows a dependence on the orifice size in the same
pipe;
(2) it increases linearly with the diameter ratio of orifice
to pipe; and
(3) cavitation inception occurs at C =1 to 2.5, depend-
i
ing on the size of the constriction, and the severity
of the cavitation increases with decreasing cavita-
tion number.
55
2.2.2. Mathematical modeling of hydrodynamic
cavitation
As explained in the analysis of hydrodynamic cavita-
tion, it is the result of a reduction in pressure down-
stream of the orifice. In the present study, the basis for
calculation is the cavitation number as 1.25.
The pressure recovery profile downstream of the
orifice is assumed to be linear, and the experimental
measurements of Yan et al. [8] agree with this assump-
tion. A typical pressure recovery profile is shown in
Fig. 1. The distance of the pressure recovery is usually
eight pipe diameters downstream of the orifice. The time
for pressure recovery is a function of orifice diameter,
pipe diameter, the ratio of orifice to pipe diameter,
discharge pressure of the cavitating pump and the
cavitation number. A detailed calculation of the recovery
time is described by Moholkar [9], and in this work
typical values of pressure recovery times have been
taken for analysis.
Next, with the knowledge of the time of pressure
recovery (t), the linear pressure recovery profile
becomes,
(P −P )
P =P + 2 v t. (8)
2 v t
This value of P can now be substituted into the
2
Rayleigh–Plesset equation to determine the radius and
pressure recovery pulse history of bubble dynamics in
hydrodynamic cavitation.
3. Results and discussion
Simulations of the Rayleigh–Plesset equation for both
hydrodynamic and acoustic cavitations were carried out
for conditions similar to an experiment. The effect of
various parameters on bubble behavior under both
acoustic and hydrodynamic cavitation was found out.
The time interval for integration of the Rayleigh–Plesset
equation has been selected so as not to exceed the
computer memory. One might get the intermediate
values of bubble behavior and a greater number of
pressure pulses by reducing the time interval of integ-
ration, but they are certainly not more than what we
have obtained.
The following assumptions were made during
analysis.
(1) Only one bubble is considered at a time. The effects
of collective oscillations of the bubble are neglected.
(2) The liquid was assumed to be incompressible and
the iterations were stopped at the point where the
bubble wall velocity exceeded the velocity of sound
in water.
(3) There is no interference from dissolved gases.
56 V.S. Moholkar et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 6 (1999) 53–65
Fig. 1. Mechanism of pressure recovery across an orifice.
(4) Collapse was assumed to be adiabatic and the heat
and mass transfer effects at the time of collapse
were neglected.
(5) In the case of hydrodynamic cavitation, turbulence
effects were neglected.
The effects of various parameters in acoustic and
hydrodynamic cavitation are given below.
3.1. Acoustic cavitation
In the case of acoustic cavitation, the effect of the
following parameters on the bubble dynamics was
investigated:
(1) intensity of irradiation;
(2) frequency of irradiation; and
(3) initial cavity radius.
The results of each of these parameters are given below.
3.1.1. Intensity of irradiation
Calculations were done to study the effect of the
intensity of an ultrasonic horn. The intensities of the
ultrasonic horn were taken as 10 and 120 W cm−2,
typical of available equipment on the market. By increas-
ing the intensity of the ultrasound we basically increase
the amplitude of the ultrasound. The results of simula-
tions reveal that the ratio of maximum radius reached
to the initial radius increases with increasing intensity,
other parameters remaining constant. Also, the lifespan
of a bubble goes on increasing with an increment in the
intensity of the ultrasound. For an adiabatic collapse,
the pressure pulse obtained is directly proportional to
the ratio of the radii at the beginning and at end of the
collapse. Therefore the magnitude of the pressure pulse
also increases with intensity. The conditions and the
results of the simulations, i.e., the radius and pressure
pulse history of the bubble oscillations, are shown
in Fig. 2.
3.1.2. Frequency of irradiation
Simulations were done to study the effect of frequency
of the ultrasonic horn on the bubble behavior. The
frequencies chosen for simulations were 22.7 and
33 kHz, again typical of the commercial equipment
available on the market. The conditions and the results
of the simulations are shown in Fig. 3. With increasing
frequency the bubble life is found to increase. This is
because with higher frequencies the time required to
collapse a bubble is longer than the time available during
the compression cycle. But, the intensity remaining the
same, there is no significant rise in the maximum radius
reached before collapse. Similarly, for sound waves with
high frequencies, the time required to create a bubble
may be longer than that available during the rarefaction
cycle. Thus for sound waves with higher frequencies,
higher intensity is required for the production of cavita-
tion bubbles.
 V.S. Moholkar et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 6 (1999) 53–65
Fig. 2. Radius history and pressure pulses of bubble oscillations – effect of the intensity of the ultrasound during acoustic cavitation: (A)
R =10 mm, I=10 W cm−2, f=33 kHz; (B) R =10 mm, I=120 W cm−2, f=33 kHz.
0 0
3.1.3. Initial cavity radius
Calculations were done for initial cavity sizes of 5
and 10 mm. These are the typical bubble sizes formed
during acoustic cavitation. The other parameters and
the results of simulations are shown in Fig. 4. The
bubbles when formed are in mechanical equilibrium
with their surroundings, i.e., the pressure inside the
bubble is equal to (P +2s/R ), the surrounding pressure
o 0
in the stream. In simulations it was found that smaller
cavities grow larger (i.e., typically about 200 times their
original size) while larger cavities do not grow that
large. But the lifespan of the smaller cavities was shorter.
The maximum bubble size reached is more or less equal
to the resonance size of the bubble corresponding to the
driving frequency. As such, for adiabatic collapse, where
the pressure pulse produced is directly proportional to
the ratio of initial radius to the final radius at the
57
beginning of the collapse, the magnitudes of the pressure
pulses given out by smaller bubbles are higher.
3.2. Analysis of hydrodynamic cavitation
Simulations were done to find out the bubble behavior
under hydrodynamic cavitation conditions. The effects
of the following parameters on the bubble behavior
were elucidated:
(1) final recovery pressure downstream of the orifice;
(2) time of pressure recovery; and
(3) initial bubble radius.
The results of the simulations are given below.
3.2.1. Final recovery pressure
Simulations were performed to find out the effect of
final recovery pressure downstream of the orifice. The
58 V.S. Moholkar et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 6 (1999) 53–65
Fig. 3. Radius history and pressure pulses of bubble oscillations – effect of the frequency of the ultrasound during acoustic cavitation: (A)
R =5 mm, I=240 W cm−2, f=22.7 kHz; (B) R =5 mm, I=240 W cm−2, f=33 kHz.
0 0
recovery pressures were 3 and 5 atm. As described
earlier, a linear pressure recovery profile was assumed.
Unlike a transient, unstable behavior in the case of
acoustic cavitation, the bubble behavior in hydrody-
namic cavitation was found to be stable and oscillatory.
The bubble was found to undergo many oscillations
with recovery of pressure downstream of the orifice,
thus giving rise to a large number of pressure pulses of
relatively smaller magnitude. The amplitude of the oscil-
lations of the bubble and hence the magnitude of the
pressure pulses resulting from them also increased with
increasing recovery pressures. The conditions and the
result of the simulations are given in Fig. 5.
3.2.2. Time of pressure recovery
Simulations were done to find out the dependence of
bubble behavior on the time of pressure recovery. As
explained earlier, typical times for pressure recovery
were taken for the analysis. With decreasing recovery
times (i.e., faster pressure recoveries) the bubble life was
found to increase; also, the magnitude of the pressure
pulses obtained from the oscillations increased. The
conditions and the result of simulations (radius and
pressure pulse history) are shown in Fig. 6.
3.2.3. Initial cavity radius
Vaporization of the liquid as well as liberation of the
dissolved gas give rise to a large number of bubbles of
a wide range of sizes. The typical size range of the
bubbles is 10–200 mm. In this case also the bubbles are
in mechanical equilibrium with their surroundings and
the pressure inside the bubble is P +2s/R . Simulations
v 0
were done to find out the dynamics of the bubbles under
same conditions. The conditions and the result of the
simulations are shown in Fig. 7. It was found that not
all bubbles enjoy longevity in the flow with recovering
 V.S. Moholkar et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 6 (1999) 53–65 59

Fig. 4. Radius history and pressure pulses of bubble oscillations – effect of initial cavity radius during acoustic cavitation: (A)
R =5 mm, I=10 W cm−2, f=22.7 kHz; (B) R =10 mm, I=10 W cm−2, f=22.7 kHz.
0 0

pressures. The bubbles that are in mechanical equilib-
rium last until full pressure recovery while those that
are not collapse prematurely, before full pressure
recovery.
4. Analogy between acoustic and hydrodynamic
cavitation
From simulation studies an analogy between sonic
and hydrodynamic cavitation can be developed. As
depicted earlier, sonic cavitation is the result of a passage
of ultrasound waves through the medium while hydrody-
namic cavitation is as the result of a velocity variation
in the flow due to changing geometry of the path of
flow. In spite of this difference in the generation of these
two types of cavitation, the bubble behavior shows
some similar trends with the variation of parameters in
both types of cavitation. This forms the basis for the
analogy.
The two main aspects of bubble behavior in cavita-
tion are:
$ the amplitude of oscillations of bubble radius, which
are reflected in the magnitude of the resultant pressure
pulses; and
$ the life of the bubble, which is reflected in the distance
traveled and hence the extension of the zone of
cavitational influence from its point of inception.
The two parameters in the cases of acoustic cavitation
and hydrodynamic cavitation which affect these two
aspects and also can be manipulated are:
Acoustic cavitation:
$ intensity of the ultrasound and
$ frequency of the ultrasound.
60 V.S. Moholkar et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 6 (1999) 53–65
Fig. 5. Radius history and pressure pulses of bubble oscillations – effect of the recovery pressure during hydrodynamic cavitation: (A)
R =100 mm, P =3 atm, 1/t=0.5 kHz; (B) R =100 mm, P =5 atm, 1/t=0.5 kHz.
0 2 0 2
Hydrodynamic cavitation:
$ recovery pressure downstream of the orifice and
$ time of pressure recovery.
The trends shown by bubble behavior as a result of
variations in intensity of the ultrasound in the case of
acoustic cavitation and recovery pressure in the case of
hydrodynamic cavitation are the same. In both cases,
increments in the amplitude of the oscillations of the
bubble are seen with increasing intensities/recovery
pressures.
In a similar way, the frequency of the acoustic wave
in the case of acoustic cavitation and the recovery time
of pressure in the case of hydrodynamic cavitation have
similar effects on bubble behavior; i.e., the increase in
frequency of the acoustic wave (the reduction in dura-
tion of the compression and rarefaction cycles) and the
reduction in time of pressure recovery result in an
increment in the life of the bubble.
With this, we can say that the intensity of ultrasound
in the case of sonic cavitation and the recovery pressure
in the case of hydrodynamic cavitation are analogous
to each other. Similarly, the frequency of the ultrasound
in the case of sonic cavitation and the time of pressure
recovery in the case of hydrodynamic cavitation are
analogous to each other.
5. Scale-up potential for cavitation-based reactors
Cavitation offers a very powerful tool to designers in
terms of the local hot spots of high temperatures and
pressures that are produced after collapse of the bubbles.
Therefore reactions that require very high temperature
and pressures can be carried out at ambient conditions
by initiating cavitation in the reaction mixture bulk. As
far as efficient scale-up of any laboratory scale equip-
 V.S. Moholkar et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 6 (1999) 53–65
Fig. 6. Radius history and pressure pulses of bubble oscillations – effect of time of pressure recovery during hydrodynamic cavitation: (A)
R =100 mm, P =3 atm, 1/t=0.3 kHz; (B) R =100 mm, P =3 atm, 1/t=0.5 kHz.
0 2 0 2
ment is concerned, this task becomes easier if all the
parameters that affect the efficiency of the equipment
are quantified amply. We shall now compare reactors
using acoustic and hydrodynamic cavitations.
5.1. Acoustic cavitation
Although no industrial-scale application of any cavi-
tation-based reactor using acoustic cavitation has been
reported to date, some attempts have been made to
effectively scale-up these reactors [10,11].
The major shortcoming of the acoustic-cavitation-
based reactor lies in its directional sensitivity: the cavities
once formed do not travel very far from the point of
inception as they collapse within a very short period
after inception (the typical lifetime of a cavity is around
50 ms or so). Therefore the cavitational effect (i.e., the
61
high temperature and pressure pulses produced because
of the bubble collapse) pertains to a very small area
near the transducer. Another shortcoming of these reac-
tors is erosion of the reactor walls because of the cavity
collapses near them. In order to prevent this, the material
of construction of the reactor should either be titanium
or nickel alloy.
Because of these two deficiencies, the scale-up of
sonic reactors becomes difficult and uneconomical. Some
attempts have been made to alleviate these problems by
having tubular or hexagonal reactors where the acoustic
intensity is concentrated at the center. But such a system
is difficult to scale-up to meet industrial-scale demands
and also the power required to operate such reactors
will also be very high. There have been some attempts
to produce resonance in the sonic reactors itself, thus
having uniform cavitation throughout the reactor, but
62 V.S. Moholkar et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 6 (1999) 53–65

Fig. 7
Radius history and pressure pulses of bubble oscillations – effect of initial cavity radius during hydrodynamic cavitation: (A)
R =50 mm, P =5 atm, 1/t=0.5 kHz; (B) R =100 mm, P =5 atm, 1/t=0.5 kHz.
0 2 0 2

such a technique fails in the case of large reactors layer of the bulk liquid and hence the material erosion
because their resonance frequency is very small, of the problems are less severe.
order of a few Hertz.

5.2. Hydrodynamic cavitation reactor 6. Possibility of using hydrodynamic cavitation as a

A typical hydrodynamic cavitation reactor is shown
in Fig. 8. Such a reactor is very easy to design and
operate. The cavities are formed downstream of the
orifice and then collapse with the recovery of pressure,
giving rise to a large number of pressure pulses of
relatively smaller magnitude. Therefore less severe reac-
tions will have a good opportunity of being carried out
in a hydrodynamic cavitation reactor. One major advan-
tage of hydrodynamic cavitation is that cavitation is
uniform through out the reactor due to efficient mixing
and hence there is no problem of directional sensitivity.
Another advantage is that cavitation is at the shear
surrogate for acoustic cavitation
The principal outcome of a cavitation reactor is the
localized high temperature and pressure conditions
achieved through production of local hot spots during
the collapse of cavities. Therefore, the efficiency of a
cavitation-based reactor is higher if the magnitude of
the pressure and temperature pulses and the fraction of
the volume of the reactor over which these are felt are
high. As written earlier, the scale-up of the reactor is
easy if the parameters that can affect its efficiency are
quantified amply. Also, good control over the parame-
ters which affect the cavitation can enable the operator
 V.S. Moholkar et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 6 (1999) 53–65
Fig. 8. Hydrodynamic cavitation reactor.
to produce pressure and temperature pulses of the exact
magnitude required for a specific reaction. If we were
to compare the acoustic cavitation and hydrodynamic
cavitation based reactors on these grounds, the fact
emerges is that the latter are far more efficient and
promising for an effective scale-up to meet industrial-
scale demands.
The following justification can be given for the above
statement.
6.1. Directional sensitivity
Like acoustic cavitation reactors, hydrodynamic cavi-
tation reactors do not have any problem of directional
sensitivity since the cavities formed are swept away from
the orifice and hence a very large volume is affected by
cavitation. Also, cavitation in the case of a hydrody-
namic cavitation reactor being at the shear layer, the
problem of erosion of the reactor is also less severe than
in an acoustic cavitation reactor.
6.2. Quantification of parameters
The major energy loss in the case of hydrodynamic
cavitation reactors is in terms of the irreversible loss of
pressure head. Ample information is available in this
area. This loss, being a major function of the orifice-to-
pipe diameter ratio, can be manipulated by changing
this value. Plots of irreversible pressure head loss as a
function of this ratio are available.
In the case of acoustic cavitation reactors the major
losses are in the form of heat and friction loss at the
63
horn, and damping of the acoustic wave as it passes
through the cavitating medium. The net useful consump-
tion of energy is just a fraction of that which is applied.
Very little literature is available in this area. Thus the
designer has to cope up with the paucity of the data.
6.3. Control over parameters
The major parameters affecting the result of cavita-
tion in the case of acoustic cavitation are intensity of
the ultrasound, frequency of the ultrasound and the
initial cavity size. In the case of hydrodynamic cavitation
these are the recovery pressure, time of pressure recovery
and the initial bubble size.
In the case of hydrodynamic cavitation, by varying
the discharge and hence recovery pressure, the magni-
tude of the pressure pulses can be controlled. Also, by
changing the pipe size downstream of the orifice, the
time for pressure recovery can easily be manipulated
and hence the extent of the cavitation zone downstream
of the orifice can be controlled. A change in size of the
orifice can alter the size of the bubbles generated in situ.
Above all, the major advantage of hydrodynamic cavita-
tion is the possibility of introducing external bubbles. If
the size of the bubbles is not large enough to produce
temperature and pressure pulses of the desired magni-
tude, external bubbles in the form of steam or gas
bubbles can be introduced.
An acoustic cavitation reactor does not offer all this
flexibility in terms of the design parameters. The inten-
sity of the acoustic wave cannot be increased indefinitely
since an unusual rise in intensity may cause the horn or
transducer to vibrate at such large amplitudes that it
can physically damage the system. The frequencies of
ultrasound horn/transducers are usually fixed and not
easy to change. Acoustic cavitation does not allow the
introduction of external bubbles.
What all this adds up to is that hydrodynamic
cavitation reactors offer a far better flexibility in their
design parameters and thus great control over the cavita-
tional effects in terms of the production of temperature
and pressure pulses of exact magnitude as required for
a specific reaction. Thus, optimization in the case of a
hydrodynamic cavitation reactor is more feasible.
7. Some recent experimental results on studies in a
hydrodynamic cavitation reactor
Independent studies carried out in our laboratory
using a hydrodynamic cavitation reactor as described in
this paper and two orifice plates with different configu-
rations as shown in Fig. 9 support the simulations
presented in this paper. Senthil Kumar [12] has tried to
quantify experimentally the effects of hydrodynamic
cavitation on the decomposition reaction of aqueous KI
64 V.S. Moholkar et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 6 (1999) 53–65
Fig. 9. Orifice plate configuration.
solution to liberate I with two orifice plate configura-
2 easier to generate and less sensitive to the geometric
tions as described above. A summary of the results is
given here. Details can be found in Ref. [12].
Iodine liberation was found to increase with increas-
ing orifice flow area. This can be attributed to the
increase in the area of the shear layer in the flow. Senthil
Kumar [12] has defined a parameter a for the indirect
s pressure head loss which occurs after expansion of
measurement of the shear layer. It is given as
Total perimeter of the holes
a= .
s Total flow area of the holes
With increasing flow area the shear layer area also
increases and hence so does the cavitation intensity.
Iodine liberation was studied as a function of the
inlet pressure. Inlet pressure affects the number of passes
that the fluid stream undergoes with time. The variation
of iodine liberation with inlet pressure goes through a
maximum. There are two possible explanations for
this effect:
(1) degasification and hence a reduction in the cavita-
tion nuclei of the fluid stream due to the reduction
in pressure downstream of the orifice; and
(2) a temperature rise due to dissipation of turbulent
energy in the zone of pressure recovery.
Iodine liberation as a function of cavitation number
was studied for different orifice plates and the optimum
range of cavitation number was found to be a function
of orifice configuration. Nearly 70–80% of the pressure
head is lost during passage of the fluid stream and hence
turbulent energy dissipation is more or less the same for
different orifice configurations. Therefore, Senthil
Kumar [12] has predicted the role played by some other
parameter to have an influence on the performance of
the orifice plates. This is attributed to the shear layer
formed in the two different cases.
Finally, a comparison has been made of the energy
efficiency of acoustic and hydrodynamic cavitation based
on the yield of the decomposition reaction of aqueous
KI and the actual energy input to the system. After a
detailed analysis which also took into consideration the
mechanical and electrical efficiency of the reactor, it was
found that the hydrodynamic cavitation was at least
two times more energy-efficient than acoustic cavitation.
8. Conclusions
Based on the above analysis the following conclusions
can be made.
$ Cavitating conditions identical to acoustic cavitation
can be generated in hydrodynamic cavitation.
$ Hydrodynamic cavitation offers better control over
operating parameters than an acoustic cavitation
reactor.
$ Hydrodynamic cavitation is more energy-efficient,
details of the reactor. Hence its scale-up to meet
industrial-scale operations has better opportunities
than the ultrasonic reactor although it suffers from
its own shortcomings and limitations in terms of the
maximum achievable rate of pressure recovery, large
the stream passing through the orifice and lower
magnitude of pressure pulses resulting from bubble
oscillations. Many times bubbles show a tendency of
existing in the form of clusters and not individually,
and the actual magnitude of the pressure pulse result-
ing from the collective oscillations of the bubbles is
a bit lower than that indicated by the simulation of
a single cavity.
$ The simulations procedure described enables one to
select optimum operating conditions by estimating
the magnitude of the pressure pulse and the temper-
atures reached, to carry out a specific reaction requir-
ing a specific operating condition.
Nomenclature
C velocity of sound in water (m s−1)
C cavitation number (dimensionless)
i
f frequency of ultrasound ( Hz)
I intensity of ultrasound ( W cm−2)
P pressure amplitude of the acoustic wave
A
(N m−2)
P pressure inside the bubble (N m−2)
i
P pressure in the ambient liquid
o
surrounding the bubble (N m−2)
P vapor pressure of cavitating liquid
v
(N m−2)
P recovery pressure downstream of the
2
pump (N m−2)
P pressure in the liquid far from the
2
bubble (N m−2)
P(R) pressure in the liquid at the bubble
boundary (N m−2)
 V.S. Moholkar et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 6 (1999) 53–65
R bubble radius at any time t (m)
R initial cavity radius (m)
0 [4] Lord Rayleigh, On the pressure developed in a liquid during the
b orifice-to-pipe diameter ratio
(dimensionless)
c ratio of specific heats (dimensionless)
r density of the cavitating liquid
(kg m−3)
s surface tension (N m−1)
t time of pressure recovery (s)
v angular frequency of ultrasound (s−1)
References
[1] J.B. Joshi, A.B. Pandit, Hydrolysis of fatty oils: effect of cavita-
tion, Chem. Eng. Sci. 48 (19) (1993) 3440–3442.
[2] S.S Save, J.B. Joshi, A.B. Pandit, Microbial cell disruption in
hydrodynamic cavitation, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 75 (Part C )
(1997) 41–49.
[3] M.M. Chivate, A.B. Pandit, Effect of sonic and hydrodynamic
View publication stats
65
cavitation on aqueous polymeric solutions, Ind. Chem. Engr. 35
(1993) 52–57.
collapse of spherical cavity, Philos. Mag. 34 (1917) 94–98.
[5] M.S. Plesset, Dynamics of cavitating bubbles, J. Appl. Mech.,
Trans. ASME 16 (1949) 277–282.
[6 ] M.J. Miksis, L.J. Ting, Nonlinear radial oscillations of bubbles
including thermal effects, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 76 (1984) 897–899.
[7] F.R. Gilmore, Hydrodynamic Laboratory Report 26-4, California
Institute of Technology, 1954.
[8] Y. Yan, R.B. Thorpe, A.B. Pandit, Cavitation noise and its sup-
pression by air in orifice flow, Proceedings of International Sym-
posium on Flow Induced Vibration and Noise, ASME, Chicago,
IL, 1988.
[9] V.S. Moholkar, Studies in cavitation phenomena: design and
scale-up of the sonic and hydrodynamic cavitation reactors, M.
Chem. Eng. thesis, University of Bombay, 1996.
[10] M.J. Berlan, T.J. Mason, Sonochemistry: from research laborato-
ries to industrial plants, Ultrasonics 30 (1992) 203–212.
[11] P.D. Martin, L.D. Ward, Reactor design for sonochemical engi-
neering, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 70 (A3) (1993) 296–299.
[12] P. Senthil Kumar, Studies in hydrodynamic cavitation, M. Chem.
Eng. thesis, University of Bombay, 1997.