Comparison of acoustic and hydrodynamic cavitation: Material point of view

This study investigated the difference in mechanical response of martensitic stainless steel X3CrNiMo13-4/S41500/CA6 NM QT780 between hydrodynamic and acoustic cavitation erosion. The results show that erosion generates small pits at a high temporal frequency on material, while produces larger lower frequency. Acoustic tests have been performed using 20 kHz ultrasonic horn located 500 μm front specimen. experimental setup, known as an indirect method, is inspired from ASTM G32 standard. Hydrodynamic were conducted with classic conditions PREVERO device: number 0.87 corresponding to flow velocity 90 [Formula: see text] upstream pressure 40 bars. In addition, for given exposure time, percentage surface covered by smaller than cavitation. Three successive steps identified during damage process: persistent slip bands (PSB) first appear surface, cracks initiate propagate PSB locations nonmetallic interfaces, finally, parts matter are torn off. A careful time examination same area exposed sample scanning electron microscopy reveals faster