Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of underwater high-voltage pulse discharge experiment system
Fig. 2. Typical voltage and current waveform of high voltage pulse discharge in water
Fig. 3. Plasma channel development process
Fig. 4. Results of deposited energy calculation
Fig. 5. Flowchart of the optimization search analysis
Fig. 6. Spatial distribution of the 20 initial sample points
Fig. 7. Cross-validation of the computational process
Fig. 8. Variation of root mean square error with the number of additions
Fig. 9. Multi-peak characteristics of deposited energy
Fig. 10. Global optimization search flow chart
Fig. 11. Comparison between experimental results and optimal deposited energy
voltage/kV | electrode spacing/mm | conductivity/(mS·cm−1)
| 13−17 | 2−5 | 0.2−0.8 |
|
Table 1. Experimental variables and their scope
voltage/kV | conductivity/(mS·cm−1)
| electrode spacing/mm | deposited energy/J | 14.1 | 0.26 | 4.53 | 40.46 | 13.4 | 0.77 | 4.37 | 26.00 | 16.2 | 0.33 | 2.16 | 62.3 | 15.1 | 0.45 | 4.68 | 46.87 | 15.7 | 0.64 | 2.32 | 51.81 | 14.5 | 0.52 | 2.00 | 41.74 | 13.8 | 0.39 | 2.79 | 40.09 | 16.8 | 0.55 | 2.95 | 59.76 |
|
Table 2. Some of the initial sample points after inverse normalization and the corresponding experimental results
voltage/kV | conductivity/(mS·cm−1)
| electrode spacing/mm | deposited energy/J | 17 | 0.331 | 2.28 | 67.41 | 17 | 0.425 | 2 | 66.78 | 17 | 0.2 | 2.04 | 66.51 | 17 | 0.8 | 3.5 | 65.6 | 17 | 0.65 | 2.19 | 66.93 |
|
Table 3. After the normalization of some of the new points and the corresponding experimental results
conductivity/(mS·cm−1)
| spacing variation Δd/mm
| deposited energy variation/J | 0.2 | 4 | 17.59 | 0.4 | 4 | 5.04 | 0.6 | 4 | 8.96 | 0.8 | 4 | 13.56 | 1 | 4 | 11.4 |
|
Table 4. Effect of electrode spacing variation on deposited energy at different conductivities
voltage/kV | conductivity/(mS·cm−1)
| electrode spacing/mm | optimal deposited energy/J | 17 | 0.8 | 2.28 | 68.73 |
|
Table 5. Global optimal solution of the model