• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Numerical simulation unsteady cloud cavitating flow with a filter-based density correction model*

    2014-06-01 12:29:59HUANGBiao黃彪WANGGuoyu王國玉ZHAOYu趙宇
    關(guān)鍵詞:趙宇王國

    HUANG Biao (黃彪), WANG Guo-yu (王國玉), ZHAO Yu (趙宇)

    School of Mechanics and Engineering, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China, E-mail: huangbiao@bit.edu.cn

    Numerical simulation unsteady cloud cavitating flow with a filter-based density correction model*

    HUANG Biao (黃彪), WANG Guo-yu (王國玉), ZHAO Yu (趙宇)

    School of Mechanics and Engineering, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China, E-mail: huangbiao@bit.edu.cn

    (Received September 19, 2012, Revised November 20, 2012)

    In this paper, various turbulence closure models for unsteady cavitating flows are investigated. The filter-based model (FBM) and the density correction model (DCM) were proposed to reduce the turbulent eddy viscosities in a turbulent cavitating flow based on the local meshing resolution and the local fluid density, respectively. The effects of the resolution control parameters in the FBM and DCM models are discussed. It is shown that the eddy viscosity near the cavity closure region can significantly influence the cavity shapes and the unsteady shedding pattern of the cavitating flows. To improve the predictions, a Filter-Based Density Correction model (FBDCM) is proposed, which blends the FBM and DCM models according to the local fluid density. The new FBDCM model can effectively represent the eddy viscosity, according to the multi-phase characteristics of the unsteady cavitating flows. The experimental validations regarding the force analysis and the unsteady cavity visualization show that good agreements with experimental visualizations and measurements are obtained by the FBDCM model. For the FBDCM model, the attached cavity length and the resulting hydrodynamic characteristics are subsequently affected by the detail turbulence modeling parameters, and the model is shown to be effective in improving the overall predictive capability.

    CFD, cavitating flows, resolution control parameter, turbulence model

    Introduction

    The cavitation plays an important role in the design and operation of fluid machinery and devices because it causes performance degradation, noise, vibration, and erosion. The cavitation involves complex phase-change dynamics, large density ratio between phases, and multiple time scales. The homogeneous two-phase Navier-Stokes equations were successfully applied for the simulations of cavitating flows[1]. The accuracy, stability, efficiency and robustness of the modeling strategies are a big challenge because of the complex interactions associated with unsteady turbulent cavitating flows.

    The turbulence closure model plays a very significant role in the simulations of the cavitating flows, with typically a high Reynolds number and with mass transfer between a two phase medium. The Reynoldsaveraged Navier-Stokes (RANS) turbulence models, such as the originalkε- model, were initially developed for fully incompressible fluids. Hence, they are not suitable for highly compressible two-phase mixture flows, which is why they were found to be unsatisfactory for predicting cavitating flows with high compressibility in the vapor region. The re-entrant jet instability is often attributed to the cavity destabilization and the transition to the unsteady cavitation. In experiments, it was demonstrated that the re-entrant jet in the closure region is the basic mechanism that triggers the break up and shedding of unsteady cavity clouds[2,3]. To account for the large density jump caused by cavitation and re-entrant jet near the closure region, Coutier-Delgosha et al.[4]modified the turbulent viscosity to simulate the cloud cavity shedding in a Venturi-type duct. They found that the influence of the compressibility of the two-phase medium was significant in simulating the turbulence effects on the cavitating flow. The modified turbulent viscosity model could predict the unsteady re-entrant jet and the shedding of the vapor cloud, but the length and the shedding frequency were not accurately predicted for cases with high cavitation numbers. This is due to thefact that the Coutier-Delgosha’s turbulence modification can not completely account for all complex flow features present in the cavity closure region. Recently, to capture the unsteady characteristics between the quasi-periodic large-scale and turbulent small-scale features of the flow field, a large eddy simulation (LES) model was used to simulate the sheet/cloud cavitation on a NACA0015 hydrofoil[5]. However, it is fundamentally difficult to find a grid independent LES solution unless one explicitly assigns a filter scale. Moreover, the computational cost of the LES is very high. The very large eddy simulation (VLES) attempts to strike a compromise between the RANS and the LES. The detached eddy simulation (DES) was widely used as a modified hybrid RANS-LES approach. Huang et al.[6]evaluated an enhanced turbulence modeling scheme based on the DES, the results showed that a standard RANS model fails to predict marginally the stable cavities whereas the DES model appeared to provide more accurate flow modeling, possibly because the DES can better handle the large scale closure dynamics. Johansen et al.[7]formulated a filterbased model (FBM) to avoid some of the known deficiencies of the RANS approaches, and the difficulties in the application of the LES. Wu et al.[8]assessed the validity of FBM turbulence models through unsteady simulations of different geometries, including a square cylinder, a convergent-divergent nozzle, a Clark-Y hydrofoil, and a hollow-jet valve. They found that the FBM can better capture the unsteady features, and yield a stronger time-dependency in the cavitating flows, than the originalkε- model. Kim and Brewton[9]compared the numerical predictions with RANS, LES, and RANS/LES hybrid approaches for the sheet/cloud cavitation, the LES and the RANS/ LES hybrid results closely reproduced the salient features such as the breakup of the sheet cavity by a reentrant jet, and the formation and collapse of the cloud cavity.

    Previous researches showed that the adopted turbulence model has a strong effect on the predicted cavity shape and stabilities[4,9]. The physical mechanisms are not well understood due to the complex cavitating flow structures. Hence, better modeling approaches are highly in demand. In the following sections, differentkε- based turbulence models from the literature are summarized followed by an introduction of a filter-based density corrected model (FBDCM) based on the unsteady characteristics of the cavitating flow. The objective of this paper is to present a new FBDCM for improving the numerical predictions of turbulent cavitating flows, and to investigate the accuracy and stability of various turbulent closure models for the unsteady cavitating flows by comparing the numerical predictions with experimental measurements.

    1. Numerical model in cavitation computation

    1.1Continuity and momentum equations

    The Navier-Stokes equations for a Newtonian fluid without body forces and heat transfers, in their conservative form, in the Cartesian coordinates, are as follows: whereρmis the mixture density,ρlis the liquid density,ρvis the vapor density,αvis the vapor fraction,αlis the liquid fraction,uis the velocity,pis the pressure,μmis the mixture laminar viscosity,μlandμvare the liquid and vapor laminar viscosities,μTis the turbulent viscosity. The subscripts (i,j,k) denote the components related to the appropriate Cartesian coordinates. The source termm˙+, and the sink termm˙-, in Eq.(3) represent the condensation and evaporation rates, respectively. In the present study, the phenomenological Kubota cavity transport model is used:

    wherenuc.αis the nucleation volume fraction,BRis the bubble diameter,vpis the saturated liquid vapor pressure, andpis the local fluid pressure.destCis the rate constant for the vapor generated from the liquid ina region where the local pressure is less than the vapor pressure. Conversely,Cprodis the rate constant for reconversion of the vapor back into the liquid in the regions where the local pressure exceeds the vapor pressure. As shown in Eqs.(6) and (7), both the evaporation and condensation terms are assumed to be proportional to the square root of the difference between the local pressure and the vapor pressure. In this work, the assumed values for the model constants areαnuc.=5× 10–4,RB=1×10–6m,Cdest=50 andCprod=0.01.

    1.2Summary ofkε--based turbulence model

    Thekε- andkω- turbulence models are the most commonly used of all two-equation turbulence models. The primary disadvantage of thekω- model, in its original form, is that boundary layer computations are very sensitive to the values of the vorticityωin the free stream. In the case of unsteady cavitating flows, this sensitivity might cause inaccurate predictions of the fluid physics.

    1.2.1 Model-1: Originalkε- turbulence model

    The originalkε- turbulence model falls within this class of turbulence models and has been the workhorse of practical engineering flow calculations since it was proposed by Launder and Spalding. The benefit of thekε- model is that it is not as sensitive to the free streamω,s in thekω- model. Thekεmodel includes two partial differential equations for the transport of the turbulent kinetic energykand the dissipation rateε:

    The originalkε- model was originally developed for fully incompressible single phase flows, and was not intended for flow problems involving highly compressible multiphase mixtures. Previous researches[4]show that the two-equation model over-predicts the turbulence kinetic energy, and hence the turbulent viscosity, which results in an over-prediction of the turbulent stresses, causing the reentrant jet in the cavitating flows to lose momentum. Thus, the re-entrant jet can not cut across the cavity sheet, which significantly modifies the cavity shedding behavior.

    Hence, a systematic method to lower the turbulent viscosity in the vapor region is necessary to improve the prediction of the reentrant jet and the vapor dynamics in unsteady cavitating flows.

    1.2.2 Model-2: Filter-based turbulence model (FBM)

    (from Refs.[7])

    Johansen et al.[7]proposed a special filter to help reduceTμ, if the turbulent scales are smaller than a set filter size, they will not be resolved. Specifically, the level of the turbulent viscosity is corrected by comparing the turbulence length scale and the filter sizeλ, which is selected based on the local meshing spacing

    1.2.3 Model-3: Density corrected model (DCM) (from Refs.[4])

    To improve numerical simulations by taking into account the influence of the compressibility of the two-phase mediums on the turbulence, Coutier-Delgosha et al.[4]proposed to reduce the mixture turbulent viscosity based on the local liquid volume fractionlα:

    In the above equations, all the parameters, except for the functionDCMf, are set to the values originally proposed by Launder and Spalding.

    Fig.1 Boundary conditions for Clark-Y hydrofoil

    The capabilities for simulating unsteady cavitating flows of the different models are further investigated. The computational domain with 42 000 cells and boundary conditions are considered according to the experimental setup in Ref.[10], as shown in Fig.1. A no-slip boundary condition is imposed on the hydrofoil surface, and no-slip symmetry conditions are imposed on the top and bottom boundaries of the tunnel. The foil has a uniform cross-section with an Clark-Y thickness distribution with a maximum thickness-to-chord ratio of 12%, the Clark-Y foil is located at the center of the test section with the angle of attack of 8o, and the chord length of the hydrofoil is =c0.07 m, and the span length is =s0.07 m. The two important dimensionless parameters are the Reynolds numberReand the cavitation numberσ, the saturated vapor pressurevp, and the inlet velocityU∞are expressed as in Eq.(15). Computations are made for the cloud cavitation condition (σ=0.8), and the outlet pressure is set to vary according to the cavitation number. A constant velocity is imposed at the inlet,U∞=10 m/s, with the corresponding Reynolds number ofRe=7×105. The density and the dynamic viscosity of the liquid are taken to beρl=999.19 kg/m3andμl=ρlvl=1.139× 10–3Pa·s, respectively, for fresh water at 25oC. The vapor density isρv=0.02308 kg/m3and the vapor viscosity isμv=9.8626×10–6Pa·s. The vapor pressure of water at 25oC ispv=3 169 Pa.

    Based on the eddy-to-laminar viscosity ratio at the inlet,μT/μL|inlet, the inlet turbulent quantities can be computed as follows

    whereIis the inlet turbulence intensity, which is set to 0.02, according to the experiment[1].

    2. Results and discussions

    2.1Effect of FBM resolution control parameter (the filter size λ)

    The general strategy of the FBM model is to limit the influence of the eddy viscosity based on the local numerical resolution. In the FBM model, the level of the turbulent viscosity is corrected by comparing the turbulence scalek3/2/εand the filter sizeλ, based on the local meshing spacing. The filter size Δ can be considered as the resolution control parameter. The value of this parameter depends on the desire physical resolution and the numerical cost associated with it.

    To investigate the sensitivity of the solution to the value of the filter size, four filter sizes are examined here: 10Δgrid,maxo, 3.23Δgrid,maxo, 1.61Δgrid,maxo, and 1.05Δgrid,maxo. Here, Δgrid,maxois the largest grid size of theOshape grid around the hydrofoil in the computation domain, which is around 0.012c.

    Fig.2 Time-averaged_FBMTμ contours for different filter sizes λ for the FBM model

    It is immediately evident from Eq.(13) that reducing Δ leads to a linear decrease ofμT. For a largerλ,fFBMis limited to 1 because the simulation is expected to filter out most of the excessive eddy viscosity, resulting in a reduced unsteadiness of the computed flow field. However, the FBM strongly relies on the DNS on the grid resolution, as shown in Figs.2(a) and 2(d), due to the intrinsic dependence ofμTFBMon the grid size.

    Fig.3 Time-averaged streamlines and vapor fraction for different filter sizes λ for the FBM model (=σ0.8, =Re 7×105, =α8o)

    Figure 3 shows the time-averaged streamlines and vapor fraction contours. It is clear that the filter size Δ has a significant impact on the time-averaged cavity patterns.

    (1) The visualizations of the time-averaged cavity show very similar pictures when the filter sizes are large (such as 10Δgrid,maxo, 3.23Δgrid,maxo), where the numerical predictions fail to simulate the detached cavity near the trailing edge.

    (2) As the filter size decreases, the time-averaged cavity size increases. For Δ=1.61Δgrid,maxoand Δ= 1.05Δgrid,maxo, the cavitation structures consist of two parts, an attached cavity at the leading edge and a detached cavity near the trailing edge, which is formed because the re-entrant jet is not impeded by the excessively highμT.

    In order to compare the space-time evolution of the cavity shapes predicted by different schemes, the vapor volume fractions of the cavity are plotted against the time and space. Figure 4 shows comparisons between the shedding processes predicted by the FBM model of different filter sizes. In Fig.4,TrefandLrefare defined as

    wherecis the chord length andU∞is the free stream velocity.ref/=x L0 corresponds to the foil leading edge, andref/=x L1.0 corresponds to the foil trailing edge. The Strouhal numbercStcharacterizing the shedding frequency can be defined as

    As seen from Fig.4, the transient evolutions are almost all periodic. One may focus on details of the fluctuation period for different filter sizes in the case of the cloud cavitation:

    Fig.4 Time evolution of the water vapor fraction in various sections for different filter sizes λ for the FBM Model (=σ0.8, =Re7×105, =α8o)

    (1) Forλ=10Δgrid,maxoandλ=3.23Δgrid,maxoas shown in Figs.4(a) and 4(b), respectively, the mean fluctuation periods are approximately 7.0Trefand 6.2Tref, respectively. The correspondingStcare 0.14 and 0.16, respectively, which are low compared to the experimentally measured value ofStc=0.18[10].

    (2) Forλ=1.61Δgrid,maxoandλ=1.05Δgrid,maxo, the maximum attached cavity reaches a slightly large length of more than 1.1c, which is substantially greater than that predicted for the highλvalues. With the smaller filter size, the FBM model gradually weakens the turbulent dissipation so that the detached cavities are well captured. The Strouhal numbers predicted for the cases ofλ=1.61Δgrid,maxoandλ=1.05Δgrid,maxoseem almost the same, they are both approximately 0.185, as in good agreement with the experimental measurements.

    2.2Effect of DCM resolution control parameter (the

    parameter n)

    The originalk-εmodel was intended for fully incompressible flows. To simulate a multiphase flow where the local compressibility near the cavity collapse region is important, the turbulent viscosity can be corrected using the DCM model as shown in Eq.(14).

    In the general scheme of the DCM model, the mixture density can be corrected byρm1=ρv+(αl)n· (ρl-ρv).The time-averaged modified density contours for different values of the parameternin the DCM model are shown in Fig.5. For the DCM model, generally speaking, the density correction function has a significant impact onμTin the cavitation region near the wall, and it has no influence in the region away from the cavity because there is no phase change. The DCM directly makes an aggressive nonlinear reduction ofμT, while the FBM makes a minor linear reduction of the eddy viscosity in the detached cavity region.

    For the DCM model, the value ofnhas a significant influence on the time-averaged cavity shapes. Forn=10 andn=20, the smaller eddy viscosity, which covers entire cavity region in Figs.5(b) and 5(c) will lead to an easier cavitation.

    Fig.5 Time-averaged modified variable contours for different n values for the DCM model (=σ0.8, =Re7×105, =α 8o)

    Figure 6 compares the shedding processes predicted by the DCM model for different values ofn, with focus on the details of fluctuation periods of cavity shapes and re-entrant flows.

    (1) As shown in Fig.6, for the case ofn=2, the mean fluctuation period is about 6.8Tref, and the corresponding Strouhal number is equal to 0.145, which is lower than the measured value of 0.18. On the other hand, the Strouhal numbers predicted whenn=10 andn=20 are about 0.185, in agreement with the measured value.

    2.3Introduction of a filter-based density correct

    model (FBDCM) for cavitating flows

    The mathematical differences in the FBM and DCM approaches lead to a major difference in the modeling results. The FBM does not correct the eddy viscosity directly near the near-wall region. As for thedensity correction function, generally speaking, it has no influence in the region away from the cavity since there is no phase change, an excessiveTμis still possible in the region surrounding the cavity.

    Fig.6 Time evolution of the water vapor in various sections with different values of n for the DCM model (=σ 0.8, =Re7×105, =α8o)

    Considering the unsteady flow characteristics of the cavitation around the hydrofoil, the cavitation area around the hydrofoil can be divided into two sub-areas, those with attached and detached cavity, respectively[12]. The attached cavity is located in the leading edge of the hydrofoil with a relatively higher vapor volume fraction. In this region, the compressibility of the two-phase flow must be considered. While, the detached cavity contains the large-scale unsteady motion of the liquid-vapor mixture, and the local turbulent structures should be taken into account in this region.

    It is clear that different models should be applied to amend the turbulent viscosity in different regions. Here, a hybrid turbulence model that combines the strengths of the FBM and DCM models is proposed below:

    whereχ(ρm/ρl) is the hybrid function which continuously blends the FBM and DCM approaches.C1is chosen to be 4. An analysis of the hybrid model can indentify a favorable value ofC2, which regulates the affected region between the FBM model and the DCM model. Figure 7 shows the distribution of the hybrid function for the cases whenC2is equal to 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, respectively. In the FBDCM model, the filter sizeλin Eq.(9) is chosen to be 1.05Δgrid,maxo., and the parameternis chosen to be 10.

    Fig.7 Distribution of hybrid function χ with different values of2C for the new hybrid FBDCM model

    In order to study the differences and similarities of the resolution between different turbulence models, the time evolutions of the eddy viscosity distributions are compared. The temporal snapshots ofμTcounters are shown in Fig.8. Among the CFD results, theμTd istribu tions a re pl aced s ide by sid e according to 20%,50%,70%,and90%ofeachcorrespondingcycle. As is well known, the originalkε- model fails to reproduce the unsteady cavity development because this model yields a consistently higher eddy viscosity, resulting in a reduced unsteadiness of the computed flow field. For the FBM in Fig.8(b), based on an imposed filter, the conditional averaging is adopted for the Navies-Stokes equation to introduce one more parameter into the definition of the eddy viscosity. For the DCM in Fig.8(c), the eddy viscosity decreases intensively in the high vapor fraction areas. Although the calculated results take account of the interaction between the vapor and the mixtures, the inadequacy of the DCM under-predicts the turbulent viscosity of the tail. Compared with the simulated results with the DCM, it is clear that the FBM yields consistently a higher eddy viscosity in the recirculation region. But this model does not take into account the density fluctuations and compressibility effects in the attached cavity. As shown in FigS.8 (d)-8(e), the new FBDCM model combines the advantages of the DCM and the FBM. This new model can effectively modulate the eddy viscosity, around the leading edge of the hydrofoil, where the eddy viscosity of the DCM is used, to obtain a relatively lower density. The FBM is chosen around the rear of the hydrofoil, and produces much better resolution in capturing the unsteady features. In the FBDCM model, the value of2Ccan adjust the proportion between the FBM and DCM models in the flow field calculations.

    Fig.8 Time evolution ofTμ contours for different turbulence models (=σ0.8, =Re7×105, =α8o)

    The differentTμdistributions will lead to diffe- rent cavity shapes, particularly, in the cavity closure region. The temporal evolutions of the cavity shapes around the hydrofoil under the cloud cavitation condition are shown in Fig.9 along with experimental observations. In experiments, the development of the cavitation can be divided into two stages: the first stage is the growth of the attached cavity immediately after a vortex shedding event, and the second stage is the detachment of the cavity due to the re-entrant flow and it overlapswith the recirculation zone near the trailing edge. The cloud cavitation predicted shows a self-oscillatory behavior characterized by sheddings of large vapor clouds, and the cavity exhibits a pronounced periodic size variation.

    As the results, the originalkε- model can not capture the detached cavity during 90% of the cycle. As for the attached cavity, the maximum cavity length is no more than 50%c. For the other models, the features of every stage in experiments can be well-captured, including the detached cavity in the trailing edge, which is more consistent to the experimental observations. Although all the turbulence models predict an unstable cavity expanding and shrinking, some differences are noticeable: a bigger cavity size and a longer attached cavity length are predicted with the DCM, especially, after the cavity length reaches its maximum. The general trends for differentC2values for the FBDCM model are summarized below:

    (1) Bigger cavity sizes are predicted forC2=0.3, especially, after the cavity length reaches its maximum. This is because the hybrid function of the FBDCM tends to use more portion from the DCM model forC2=0.3.

    (2) During 70% and 90% of the cycle, the largescale detached cavity shedding on the rear part of the sheet cavity is captured asC2=0.1 and 0.2, but notC2=0.3.

    Fig.9 Time evolution of cloud cavitation for different turbulence models (=σ0.8, =Re7×105, =α8o)

    Time evolutions of the attached cavity length predicted by the hybrid model with different2Cvalues and experimental data are shown in Fig.10(a). In the numerical simulations,αl=0.9 is defined as the attached cavity boundary. The cavity lengthlis made non-dimensional by the chord lengthc. In the first stage, the length of the attached cavity increases linearly with the time. Although the comparisons of the numerical results with experimental data show that the trend is captured reasonably well for all threeC2values, the case ofC2=0.2 is compared best with the experimental data. At beginning of the second stage, a recirculation zone will include a re-entrant flow in the lower part, and the front of the re-entrant jet can be used to determine the cavity detachment point. The development of the re-entrant flow in Fig.10(b) also shows a noticeable agreement between the numerical and experimental results forC2=0.2.

    Fig.10 Time evolutions of the attached cavity length and the development of the reverse flow for different values of C2for the FBDCM model (σ=0.8, Re=7×105, α=8o)

    From the above discussions, the features of cavity shapes and the dynamic behaviors are highly inter-related. The agreements between the CFD and the experimental data in terms of frequency are good except the originalkε- model, as shown in Table 1. One can see clearly in the case of thekε- model, there is a clear dominant frequency according to the lift history, while a lower frequency as compared with the experimental data is obtained. The frequencies are almost the same for the FBM and FBDCM models, which is because the re-entrant jet, which triggers the shedding and unsteady motion, basically consists of a high liquid volume fraction, and the FBM is more influential than the DCM model in this area.

    3. Conclusions

    This paper establishes a predictive tool for turbulent cavitating flows, the modeling framework consists of a transport-based cavitation model with ensemble-averaged fluid dynamics equation and turbulence closures. As for the turbulence closures, a FBM, a DCM and a FBDCM that blends the previous two models are used along with the originalkε- model. The following conclusions can be made:

    (1) Traditional RANS turbulence closure models tend to over-predict the turbulent eddy viscosity in the cavitating region, which will lead to very different cavity dynamic processes, as compared to the experimental visualization results. The FBM and DCM models are utilized to reduce the eddy viscosity systematically based on the meshing resolution and density, respectively in comparison to the originalkε- model. There is noticeable effect of the resolution control parameters in the FBM and DCM models on the cavity shapes and flow structures, and the choice of the control parameters can significantly affect the dynamic behavior of the detached cavity.

    (2) The FBM can reduce the eddy viscosity due to the lower filter function in the rear region of the hydrofoil, as for the DCM model, the smaller eddy viscosity, which covers the entire cavity region, will create a strong cavitation phenomenon, while it has little effect in the region away from the near-wall region. With the reduction of the turbulent viscosity with the FBM and DCM models, the re-entrant jet is allowed to develop underneath the cavity and move upstream to the leading edge of hydrofoil. Consequently, the cavities tend to be slightly longer and more unsteady with the modifications of the eddy viscosities.

    (3) The FBDCM model blends the FBM and the DCM according to the density, the hybrid function regulates the affected region between the FBM model and the DCM model. The detail parameter in the FBDCM model affects the resulting hydrodynamic outcome, such as the attached cavity length and the unsteady cavity shapes. In general, the predicted cavity dynamics results obtained using the FBDCM model with appropriate parameters compare well with experimental measurements and observations. This new model can effectively modulate the eddy viscosity, and improve the overall capabilities. Results from the numerical simulations suggest the reduction of the turbulent eddy viscosity based on the local meshing resolution and the local fluid density tends to promotethe unsteady shedding of the cavities of the turbulent cavitating flows.

    In summary, our current study provides some insight for further modeling modifications. Furthermore, as investigated by Shyy et al.[13], the uncertainties associated with the overall turbulence characteristics can be better addressed by using a global sensitivity evaluation of the model parameter based on surrogate modeling techniques[14,15]. These are great opportunities to improve the fundamental understanding, and predictive capabilities of the unsteady cavitating flows.

    Table 1 Comparisons of predicted and measured lift coefficient (lC) and cavity shedding frequencyf

    [1] WANG G., SENOCAK, I. and SHYY W. Dynamics of attached turbulent cavitating flows[J]. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 2001, 37(6): 551-581.

    [2] KUNZ R. F., BOGER D. A. and STINEBRING D. R. et al. A preconditioned Navier-stokes method for two phase flows with application to cavitation prediction[J]. Computers and Fluids, 2000, 29(8): 849-875.

    [3] LACALLENAERE M., FRANC J. P. and MICHEL J. M. et al. The cavitation instability induced by the development of a re-entrant jet[J]. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 2001, 444: 223-256.

    [4] COUTIER-DELGOSHA O., FORTES-PATELLA R. and REBOUD J. L. Evaluation of the turbulence model influence on the numerical simulations of unsteady cavitation[J]. Journal of Fluids Engineering, 2003, 125(1): 38-45.

    [5] WANG G., OSTOJA-STARZEWSKI M. Large eddy simulation of a sheet/cloud cavitation on a NACA0015 hydrofoil[J]. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 2007, 31(3): 417-447.

    [6] HUANG Biao, WANG Guo-yu and YU Zhi-yi et al. Detached-eddy simulation for time-dependent turbulent cavitating flows[J]. Chinese Journal of Mechanical Engineering, 2012, 25(3): 484-490.

    [7] JOHANSEN S. T., WU J. and SHYY W. Filter-based unsteady RANS computations[J]. International Journal of Heat and fluid flow, 2004, 25(1): 10-21.

    [8] WU J., WANG G. and SHYY W. Time-dependent turbulent cavitating flow computations with interfacial transport and filter based models[J]. International Journal for Numerical Methods for Fluids, 2005, 49(7): 739-761.

    [9] KIM S., BREWTON S. A multiphase approach to turbulent cavitating flows[C]. Proceedings of 27th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics.Seoul, Korea,2008.

    [10] WANG G., ZHANG B. and HUANG B. et al. Unsteady dynamics of cloudy cavitating flows around a hydrofoil[C]. Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Cavitation. Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA, 2009.

    [11] LEROUX J. B., ASTOLFI J. A. and BILLARD J. Y. An experimental study of unsteady partial cavitation[J]. Journal of Fluids Engineering, 2004, 126(1): 94-101.

    [12] GOPALAN S., KATE J. Flow structure and modeling issues in the closure region of attached cavitation[J]. Physics of Fluids, 2000, 12(4): 895-911.

    [13] SHYY W., CHO Y.-C. and DU W. et al. Surrogatebased modeling and dimension reduction techniques for multi-scale mechanics problems[J]. Acta Mechanica Sinica, 2011, 27(6): 845-865.

    [14] GOEL T., HAFTKA R. T. and SHYY W. et al. Ensemble of surrogates[J]. Journal of Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2007, 33(3): 199-216.

    [15] GOEL T., VAIDYANATHAN R. and HAFTKA R. T. et al. Response surface approximation of pareto optimal front in multi-objective optimization[J]. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2007, 196(4): 879-893.

    10.1016/S1001-6058(14)60004-4

    * Project support by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 11172040, 51306020).

    Biography: HUANG Biao (1985-), Male, Ph. D., Lecturer

    WANG guo-yu,

    E-mail: wangguoyu@bit.edu.cn

    猜你喜歡
    趙宇王國
    一滴水中的王國
    趣味(語文)(2020年5期)2020-11-16 01:34:54
    地下王國
    她的2000億打工王國
    逃離鼠王國
    伴你闖蕩是愛,放你獨處也是愛
    37°女人(2019年12期)2019-12-19 06:09:11
    伴你闖蕩是愛,放你獨處也是愛
    分憂(2019年10期)2019-09-20 03:00:06
    伴你闖蕩是愛,放你獨處也是愛
    建立新王國
    NBA特刊(2018年21期)2018-11-24 02:47:48
    你了解大氣壓嗎
    動 靜(短篇小說)
    少妇的逼好多水| 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2| 亚洲美女搞黄在线观看| 久久6这里有精品| 国产精品,欧美在线| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 插阴视频在线观看视频| 草草在线视频免费看| 成人特级黄色片久久久久久久| 97超碰精品成人国产| 国产 一区 欧美 日韩| 人妻系列 视频| 春色校园在线视频观看| 一级毛片久久久久久久久女| 亚洲av成人av| eeuss影院久久| 插逼视频在线观看| 少妇高潮的动态图| 可以在线观看毛片的网站| 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频 | 国产欧美日韩精品一区二区| 久久精品国产亚洲网站| 免费大片18禁| 舔av片在线| 久久久久久大精品| 在线免费观看的www视频| 欧美bdsm另类| 日产精品乱码卡一卡2卡三| 国产av在哪里看| 亚洲精品亚洲一区二区| 一个人看的www免费观看视频| 91精品一卡2卡3卡4卡| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| 一个人看的www免费观看视频| 日韩视频在线欧美| 精品一区二区三区视频在线| 日本爱情动作片www.在线观看| 91久久精品国产一区二区三区| 亚洲国产欧洲综合997久久,| 五月玫瑰六月丁香| АⅤ资源中文在线天堂| 国产精品国产三级国产av玫瑰| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 亚洲av男天堂| 日韩人妻高清精品专区| 人妻制服诱惑在线中文字幕| 国产单亲对白刺激| 秋霞在线观看毛片| 日本一二三区视频观看| 国产黄片视频在线免费观看| 99在线人妻在线中文字幕| 国产亚洲5aaaaa淫片| 熟女电影av网| 夫妻性生交免费视频一级片| 少妇高潮的动态图| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 亚洲欧美成人精品一区二区| 可以在线观看毛片的网站| 国产午夜精品一二区理论片| 欧美最黄视频在线播放免费| 性欧美人与动物交配| 久久午夜福利片| 精品久久国产蜜桃| 亚洲一区二区三区色噜噜| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱 | 亚洲性久久影院| 国产乱人偷精品视频| 熟女人妻精品中文字幕| 丝袜美腿在线中文| 丰满乱子伦码专区| 中文欧美无线码| 2022亚洲国产成人精品| 国产亚洲5aaaaa淫片| 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 亚洲性久久影院| 中文字幕久久专区| 国产单亲对白刺激| 午夜激情欧美在线| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器| 在线观看午夜福利视频| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 欧美bdsm另类| 日韩欧美 国产精品| 成年版毛片免费区| av在线老鸭窝| 青春草国产在线视频 | 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 国内少妇人妻偷人精品xxx网站| 国产欧美日韩精品一区二区| 99热这里只有精品一区| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频| 最近视频中文字幕2019在线8| 免费av毛片视频| 久久欧美精品欧美久久欧美| 久久精品91蜜桃| 大香蕉久久网| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 内射极品少妇av片p| 久久这里有精品视频免费| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 国产一级毛片在线| 亚洲欧美日韩高清专用| 夜夜爽天天搞| 国产黄片视频在线免费观看| a级毛片a级免费在线| 床上黄色一级片| 少妇人妻一区二区三区视频| 久久国产乱子免费精品| 热99在线观看视频| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 日韩人妻高清精品专区| 欧美+亚洲+日韩+国产| 欧美日本亚洲视频在线播放| 成人毛片a级毛片在线播放| 亚洲国产高清在线一区二区三| 国产高潮美女av| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 久久精品人妻少妇| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 搡女人真爽免费视频火全软件| 99热网站在线观看| 我的女老师完整版在线观看| 男插女下体视频免费在线播放| 免费不卡的大黄色大毛片视频在线观看 | 天堂中文最新版在线下载 | 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看| 18禁黄网站禁片免费观看直播| 国产乱人视频| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费| 国产精品1区2区在线观看.| 亚洲经典国产精华液单| 久久久久国产网址| 赤兔流量卡办理| 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验 | 一区福利在线观看| 精品人妻视频免费看| 亚洲av中文av极速乱| 深夜a级毛片| 午夜a级毛片| 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久| 99热网站在线观看| 热99在线观看视频| 一边亲一边摸免费视频| 综合色丁香网| 在现免费观看毛片| 日本黄色片子视频| 观看免费一级毛片| 国产在线男女| 国产精品99久久久久久久久| 12—13女人毛片做爰片一| 日韩中字成人| 色吧在线观看| 99热网站在线观看| 中文精品一卡2卡3卡4更新| 久久这里只有精品中国| 婷婷六月久久综合丁香| 国产精品一及| 精品久久久久久久久av| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 精品欧美国产一区二区三| 国产精品伦人一区二区| 亚洲天堂国产精品一区在线| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 日韩在线高清观看一区二区三区| av.在线天堂| 在线观看av片永久免费下载| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 国产亚洲91精品色在线| 国产黄片视频在线免费观看| 麻豆国产av国片精品| 欧美丝袜亚洲另类| 九九爱精品视频在线观看| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频| 日韩视频在线欧美| 成人综合一区亚洲| 国产成人一区二区在线| av福利片在线观看| 色哟哟哟哟哟哟| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 黄片无遮挡物在线观看| 亚洲精品成人久久久久久| 亚洲av.av天堂| 国产精品女同一区二区软件| 中国美女看黄片| 国产人妻一区二区三区在| 干丝袜人妻中文字幕| 亚洲av中文字字幕乱码综合| 1000部很黄的大片| 少妇的逼好多水| 一本久久中文字幕| 亚洲av不卡在线观看| 久久精品国产亚洲av涩爱 | 青青草视频在线视频观看| 欧美色视频一区免费| 国产色爽女视频免费观看| 人体艺术视频欧美日本| 亚洲av男天堂| 最后的刺客免费高清国语| 日韩欧美国产在线观看| 国产熟女欧美一区二区| 亚洲欧洲国产日韩| 岛国在线免费视频观看| 人妻久久中文字幕网| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影| 一区福利在线观看| 18禁在线无遮挡免费观看视频| 色尼玛亚洲综合影院| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看| 成人国产麻豆网| 一区二区三区免费毛片| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| 欧美三级亚洲精品| 长腿黑丝高跟| 性欧美人与动物交配| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久 | 亚洲精品乱码久久久久久按摩| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 18+在线观看网站| www.色视频.com| 久久99热6这里只有精品| 欧美三级亚洲精品| 好男人视频免费观看在线| 亚洲成av人片在线播放无| 99热网站在线观看| 亚洲人成网站在线播| 亚洲精品亚洲一区二区| 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 大香蕉久久网| 中国国产av一级| 中文字幕人妻熟人妻熟丝袜美| 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| 五月伊人婷婷丁香| 久久人人爽人人片av| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 亚洲欧美日韩卡通动漫| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 欧美精品国产亚洲| 精品久久久久久久久久久久久| 久久人人精品亚洲av| 精品欧美国产一区二区三| 国产精品.久久久| 激情 狠狠 欧美| 国内久久婷婷六月综合欲色啪| 亚洲精品久久久久久婷婷小说 | 日韩一区二区三区影片| 国产精品综合久久久久久久免费| 国产精华一区二区三区| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 在线观看美女被高潮喷水网站| 日韩视频在线欧美| 99热只有精品国产| 在线播放国产精品三级| 自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇| 一本一本综合久久| 成人特级黄色片久久久久久久| 国产黄片视频在线免费观看| 在线播放无遮挡| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 国产色爽女视频免费观看| 国产不卡一卡二| 中文字幕精品亚洲无线码一区| 亚洲人成网站在线播放欧美日韩| 夜夜爽天天搞| 白带黄色成豆腐渣| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 免费不卡的大黄色大毛片视频在线观看 | 久久久精品94久久精品| 中文字幕久久专区| 亚洲国产欧洲综合997久久,| 在线播放国产精品三级| 亚洲欧美成人综合另类久久久 | 国内精品一区二区在线观看| 免费看美女性在线毛片视频| 99热精品在线国产| 亚洲av成人av| 国产色婷婷99| 五月玫瑰六月丁香| 精品久久久久久久久久免费视频| 国产精品免费一区二区三区在线| 国产av一区在线观看免费| av免费观看日本| 欧美xxxx性猛交bbbb| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2| 少妇猛男粗大的猛烈进出视频 | 最后的刺客免费高清国语| 看免费成人av毛片| 日日干狠狠操夜夜爽| 日韩成人伦理影院| 中文字幕熟女人妻在线| kizo精华| 中国国产av一级| 99精品在免费线老司机午夜| 国产亚洲91精品色在线| 黄色欧美视频在线观看| 久久99热这里只有精品18| 毛片女人毛片| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| h日本视频在线播放| 色吧在线观看| 简卡轻食公司| 国产免费男女视频| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 在线观看午夜福利视频| 国产综合懂色| 亚洲电影在线观看av| 免费电影在线观看免费观看| 亚洲国产精品成人综合色| 久久精品久久久久久久性| 91精品一卡2卡3卡4卡| av国产免费在线观看| 欧美成人a在线观看| av在线老鸭窝| 麻豆久久精品国产亚洲av| 我要看日韩黄色一级片| 99热这里只有是精品在线观看| 狠狠狠狠99中文字幕| 国产精品嫩草影院av在线观看| 高清在线视频一区二区三区 | 日韩 亚洲 欧美在线| 久久久精品大字幕| 九九在线视频观看精品| 国产精品av视频在线免费观看| 亚洲va在线va天堂va国产| 精品久久久噜噜| 久久久久久九九精品二区国产| 国产一区二区激情短视频| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区 | 国产老妇女一区| 美女大奶头视频| 国产精品女同一区二区软件| 狂野欧美白嫩少妇大欣赏| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 在线a可以看的网站| eeuss影院久久| 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 秋霞在线观看毛片| 久久久久久久久中文| 身体一侧抽搐| 亚州av有码| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 国产91av在线免费观看| 黄色配什么色好看| 国产真实伦视频高清在线观看| 精品久久国产蜜桃| 国产片特级美女逼逼视频| 国产精品麻豆人妻色哟哟久久 | 国模一区二区三区四区视频| 国产精品久久电影中文字幕| 成人高潮视频无遮挡免费网站| 亚洲成人中文字幕在线播放| 亚洲高清免费不卡视频| 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 久久久久国产网址| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜| 天天躁日日操中文字幕| 久久精品国产亚洲av天美| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区| www.色视频.com| 毛片女人毛片| 中文字幕久久专区| 男女啪啪激烈高潮av片| 十八禁国产超污无遮挡网站| 国产av在哪里看| 美女xxoo啪啪120秒动态图| 日本在线视频免费播放| 国产极品精品免费视频能看的| 国产黄a三级三级三级人| 成人二区视频| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2| 国产一区二区亚洲精品在线观看| 欧美3d第一页| 国产老妇女一区| 亚洲av免费在线观看| 一进一出抽搐动态| 国产伦在线观看视频一区| 最新中文字幕久久久久| 日本一二三区视频观看| 免费一级毛片在线播放高清视频| 久久99精品国语久久久| 我要搜黄色片| 欧美成人免费av一区二区三区| 日韩成人伦理影院| 日韩欧美 国产精品| 亚洲精品粉嫩美女一区| 丝袜美腿在线中文| 国产综合懂色| 亚洲精品乱码久久久久久按摩| 我要搜黄色片| 国产 一区 欧美 日韩| 91午夜精品亚洲一区二区三区| 成人无遮挡网站| 97超碰精品成人国产| 男女下面进入的视频免费午夜| 国产精品一区www在线观看| 尾随美女入室| 久久精品国产自在天天线| 毛片女人毛片| 国产午夜精品一二区理论片| 亚洲自拍偷在线| 免费搜索国产男女视频| 又爽又黄a免费视频| 麻豆久久精品国产亚洲av| 色综合站精品国产| 国产一级毛片在线| 国产精品一区二区在线观看99 | 长腿黑丝高跟| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 免费无遮挡裸体视频| 国产精品人妻久久久影院| 热99re8久久精品国产| 伦精品一区二区三区| 国产不卡一卡二| 精品一区二区三区视频在线| 亚洲,欧美,日韩| 久久久成人免费电影| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器| 91狼人影院| 日韩欧美一区二区三区在线观看| 亚洲国产色片| 伊人久久精品亚洲午夜| 久久久久久久久久黄片| 国产日本99.免费观看| 国产老妇女一区| 淫秽高清视频在线观看| 99热这里只有精品一区| 自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇| 久久午夜福利片| 免费看光身美女| 亚洲精品日韩av片在线观看| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| 联通29元200g的流量卡| 中文欧美无线码| 欧美色视频一区免费| 精品少妇黑人巨大在线播放 | 亚洲乱码一区二区免费版| 最后的刺客免费高清国语| 又黄又爽又刺激的免费视频.| 男女啪啪激烈高潮av片| а√天堂www在线а√下载| 国产 一区 欧美 日韩| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 老司机影院成人| 国产毛片a区久久久久| or卡值多少钱| 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕| 国内揄拍国产精品人妻在线| 韩国av在线不卡| 成人亚洲欧美一区二区av| 成人漫画全彩无遮挡| 国产在线精品亚洲第一网站| 看非洲黑人一级黄片| a级毛色黄片| 成年女人看的毛片在线观看| 综合色av麻豆| 在线播放国产精品三级| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 一边摸一边抽搐一进一小说| 国产午夜精品论理片| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 亚洲不卡免费看| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 寂寞人妻少妇视频99o| 波多野结衣高清无吗| 亚洲精品久久国产高清桃花| 日韩成人伦理影院| 国产一区亚洲一区在线观看| 极品教师在线视频| 亚洲精品亚洲一区二区| 好男人在线观看高清免费视频| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看| 黄色视频,在线免费观看| 久久久精品大字幕| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄 | АⅤ资源中文在线天堂| 亚洲欧美精品综合久久99| 欧美精品一区二区大全| 91久久精品国产一区二区成人| 不卡视频在线观看欧美| 最近视频中文字幕2019在线8| 精品久久久噜噜| 国产蜜桃级精品一区二区三区| 成人鲁丝片一二三区免费| 不卡一级毛片| 日日摸夜夜添夜夜爱| 人人妻人人看人人澡| 日韩欧美三级三区| 国产乱人偷精品视频| 国产真实伦视频高清在线观看| 亚洲欧美日韩高清专用| 欧美不卡视频在线免费观看| 激情 狠狠 欧美| 中文字幕久久专区| 国产高清激情床上av| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| 成年女人看的毛片在线观看| 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 夜夜爽天天搞| 亚洲无线观看免费| 九九热线精品视视频播放| 天堂网av新在线| 美女黄网站色视频| 日本在线视频免费播放| 亚洲欧美精品专区久久| 可以在线观看的亚洲视频| h日本视频在线播放| 18禁在线播放成人免费| 看片在线看免费视频| 最新中文字幕久久久久| 亚洲图色成人| 色吧在线观看| 国产又黄又爽又无遮挡在线| 3wmmmm亚洲av在线观看| 午夜激情欧美在线| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 日韩av在线大香蕉| 国产亚洲精品av在线| 深夜精品福利| 中文字幕免费在线视频6| 少妇人妻一区二区三区视频| 能在线免费观看的黄片| 在线观看66精品国产| 国产视频首页在线观看| 亚洲在线自拍视频| eeuss影院久久| a级毛色黄片| 成年女人看的毛片在线观看| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av| 成人欧美大片| 国产一区亚洲一区在线观看| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片| 在线观看av片永久免费下载| 国产精华一区二区三区| 黄色一级大片看看| 亚洲精品国产成人久久av| 国产又黄又爽又无遮挡在线| eeuss影院久久| 麻豆av噜噜一区二区三区| 悠悠久久av| 欧美xxxx黑人xx丫x性爽| 国产伦在线观看视频一区| 深夜精品福利| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 国产亚洲5aaaaa淫片| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说 | 我的女老师完整版在线观看| 如何舔出高潮| 国产精品福利在线免费观看| 99riav亚洲国产免费| 亚洲欧美成人精品一区二区| 国产av不卡久久| av黄色大香蕉| 一区福利在线观看| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| ponron亚洲| 午夜精品在线福利| 插逼视频在线观看| av卡一久久| 成年版毛片免费区| 亚洲av熟女| 国产免费男女视频| 欧美一区二区亚洲| 久久久久久久久久成人| 九九热线精品视视频播放| 青春草视频在线免费观看| 黑人高潮一二区| 男女那种视频在线观看| 免费av毛片视频| 九九爱精品视频在线观看| 亚洲精品成人久久久久久| 性欧美人与动物交配| 国产真实伦视频高清在线观看| 啦啦啦啦在线视频资源| 免费看a级黄色片| 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 国产午夜精品久久久久久一区二区三区| 非洲黑人性xxxx精品又粗又长| 人妻夜夜爽99麻豆av| 少妇人妻精品综合一区二区 | 国产精品一区二区三区四区久久| av在线老鸭窝| 爱豆传媒免费全集在线观看| 亚洲人成网站高清观看| 深夜精品福利| 久久久精品大字幕| 亚洲av成人av| 免费人成在线观看视频色| 长腿黑丝高跟| 国产在线男女| 国产黄色小视频在线观看| 内射极品少妇av片p| 国产精品精品国产色婷婷| 成人永久免费在线观看视频| 最近中文字幕高清免费大全6| 白带黄色成豆腐渣| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频| 欧美三级亚洲精品| 亚洲国产精品成人久久小说 | 六月丁香七月| 九九在线视频观看精品| 国产亚洲av嫩草精品影院| 日本黄大片高清| 国产淫片久久久久久久久| 国产女主播在线喷水免费视频网站 | 久久99热6这里只有精品| 亚洲乱码一区二区免费版|