Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T14:54:31.665Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

High-Reynolds-number turbulent boundary layer friction drag reduction from wall-injected polymer solutions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2009

E. S. WINKEL ,
G. F. OWEIS ,
S. A. VANAPALLI ,
D. R. DOWLING ,
M. PERLIN ,
M. J. SOLOMON  and
S. L. CECCIO
E. S. WINKEL
Affiliation:
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
G. F. OWEIS
Affiliation:
American University of Beirut, Lebanon
S. A. VANAPALLI
Affiliation:
Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, USA
D. R. DOWLING
Affiliation:
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
M. PERLIN
Affiliation:
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
M. J. SOLOMON
Affiliation:
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
S. L. CECCIO*
Affiliation:
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
*
†Email address for correspondence: ceccio@umich.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A set of controlled high-Reynolds-number experiments has been conducted at the William B. Morgan Large Cavitation Channel (LCC) in Memphis, Tennessee to investigate the friction drag reduction achieved by injecting aqueous poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) solutions at three different mean molecular weights into the near-zero-pressure-gradient turbulent boundary layer that forms on a smooth flat test surface having a length of nearly 11m. The test model spanned the 3.05m width of the LCC test section and had an overall length of 12.9m. Skin-friction drag was measured with six floating-plate force balances at downstream-distance-based Reynolds numbers as high as 220 million and free stream speeds up to 20ms−1. For a given polymer type, the level of drag reduction was measured for a range of free stream speeds, polymer injection rates and concentrations of the injected solution. Polymer concentration fields in the near-wall region (0 < y+ < ~103) were examined at three locations downstream of the injector using near-wall planar laser-induced-fluorescence imaging. The development and extent of drag reduction and polymer mixing are compared to previously reported results using the traditional K-factor scaling. Unlike smaller scale and lower speed experiments, speed dependence is observed in the K-scaled results for the higher molecular weight polymers and it is postulated that this dependence is caused by molecular aggregation and/or flow-induced polymer degradation (chain scission). The evolution of near-wall polymer concentration is divided into three regimes: (i) the development region near the injector where drag reduction increases with downstream distance and the polymer is highly inhomogeneous forming filaments near the wall, (ii) the transitional mixing region where drag reduction starts to decrease as the polymer mixes across the boundary layer and where filaments are less pronounced and (iii) the final region where the polymer mixing and dilution is set by the rate of boundary layer growth. Unlike pipe-flow friction-drag reduction, the asymptotic maximum drag reduction (MDR) either was not reached or did not persist in these experiments. Instead, the nearest approach to MDR was transitory and occurred between the development and transitional regions. The length of the development region was observed to increase monotonically with increasing polymer molecular weight, injection rate, concentration and decreasing free stream speed. And finally, the near-wall polymer concentration is correlated to the measured drag reduction for the three polymer molecular weights in the form of a proposed empirical drag-reduction curve.

Type
Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 621 , 25 February 2009 , pp. 259 - 288
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Almeida, T. G., Walker, D. T., Leighton, R. I., Alajbegovic, A., Pankajakshan, R., Taylor, L. K., Whitfield, D. L. & Ceccio, S. L. 2006 A Reynolds-averaged model for the prediction of friction drag reduction by polymer additives. In Proceedings of the 26th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, Rome.Google Scholar
Bailey, F. E. & Callard, R. W. 1959 Some properties of poly(ethylene oxide) in aqueous solutions. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 1 (1), 56–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batchelor, G. K. 1957 Diffusion in free turbulent shear flows. J. Fluid Mech. 3 (1), 67–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beris, A. & Dimitropoulos, C. 1999 Pseudospecrtral simulation of turbulent viscoelastic channel flow. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 180, 365–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brungart, T. A., Petrie, H. L., Harbison, W. L. & Merkle, C. L. 1991 A fluorescence technique for measurement of slot injected fluid concentration profiles in a turbulent boundary layer. Exp. Fluids 11, 9–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, L. R., Dunlop, E. H. & North, A. M. 1974 Role of molecular aggregates in liquid drag reduction by polymers. Nature 249 (5454), 243–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dealy, J. M. & Larson, R. G. 2006 Structure and Rheology of Molten Polymers. Hanser Gardener Publications.Google Scholar
Dubief, Y., White, C. M., Terrapon, V. E., Shaqfeh, E. S. G., Moin, P. & Lele, S. K. 2004 On the coherent drag-reducing and turbulence-enhancing behaviour of polymers in wall flows. J. Fluid Mech. 514, 271–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunlop, E. H. & Cox, L. R. 1977 Influence of molecular aggregates on drag reduction. Phys. Fluids 20, S203–S213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Etter, R. J., Cutbirth, J. M., Ceccio, S. L., Dowling, D. R. & Perlin, M. 2005 High Reynolds number experimentation in the U. S. Navy's William B. Morgan Large Cavitation Channel. Measur. Sci. Technol. 16 (9), 1701–1709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faraone, A., Magazu, S., Maisano, G., Migliardo, P., Tettamanti, E. & Villari, V. 1999 The puzzle of poly(ethylene oxide) aggregation in water: Experimental findings. J. Chem. Phys. 110, 1801–1806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fontaine, A. A., Petrie, H. L. & Brungart, T. A. 1992 Velocity profile statistics in a turbulent boundary layer with slot-injected polymer. J. Fluid Mech. 238, 435–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fruman, D. H. & Tulin, M. P. 1976 Diffusion of a tangential drag-reducing polymer injection on a flat plate at high Reynolds number. J. Ship Res. 20 (3), 171–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ho, D. L., Hammouda, B. & Kline, S. R. 2003 Clustering of poly(ethylene oxide) in water revisited. J. Polym. Sci. B 41, 135–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, A. F. & Merrill, E. W. 1984 Midpoint scission of macromolecules in dilute solution in turbulent flow. Nature 312, 140–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Housiadas, K. D. & Beris, A. N. 2003 Polymer induced drag reduction: effects of the variations in elasticity and inertia in turbulent viscoelastic channel flow. Phys. Fluids 15 (8), 2369–2384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jimenez, J. & Pinelli, A. 1999 The autonomous cycle of near-wall turbulence. J. Fluid Mech. 389, 335–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalashnikov, V. N. 1994 Shear-rate dependent viscosity of dilute polymer solutions J. Rheol. 38, 1385–1403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalashnikov, V. N. 1998 Dynamical similarity and dimensionless relations for turbulent drag reduction by polymer additives. J. Non-Newton. Fluid Mech. 75, 209–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lotto, B. & El Riedy, O. K. 1981 Effects of sampling rate on concentration measurements in non-homogeneous dilute polymer solution flow. J. Rheol. 25 (6), 583–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patel, V. C. 1965 Calibration of the Preston tube and limitations on its use in pressure gradients. J. Fluid Mech. 23, 185–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petrie, H. L., Brungart, T. A. & Fontaine, A. A. 1996 Drag reduction on a flat plate at high Reynolds number with slot-injected polymer solutions. In Proceedings of the ASME Fluids Engineering Division 237, 3–9.Google Scholar
Petrie, H. L., Deutsch, S., Brungart, T. A. & Fontaine, A. A. 2003 Polymer drag reduction with surface roughness in flat-plate turbulent boundary layer flow. Exp. Fluids 35, 8–23.Google Scholar
Petrie, H. L. & Fontaine, A. A. 1996 Comparison of turbulent boundary layer modifications with slot-injected and homogeneous drag-reducing polymer solutions. In Proceedings of the ASME Fluids Engineering Division 237, 205–210.Google Scholar
Petrie, H., Fontaine, A., Money, M. & Deutsch, S. 2005 Experimental study of slot in injected polymer drag reduction. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Seawater Drag Reduction. Busan 605–620.Google Scholar
Polverari, M. & van de Ven, T. G. M. 1996 Dilute aqueous poly(ethylene oxide) solutions: clusters and single molecules in thermodynamic equilibrium. J. Phys. Chem. 100, 13687–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poreh, M. & Cermak, J. E. 1964 Study of diffusion from a line source in a turbulent boundary layer. Intl J. Heat Mass Transfer 7 (10), 1083–1095.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poreh, M. & Hsu, K. S. 1972 Diffusion of drag reducing polymers in a turbulent boundary layer. J. Hydronaut. 6 (1), 27–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ptasisnski, P. K., Boersma, B. J., Nieuwstadt, F. T. M., Hulsen, M. A. , M. A., van den Brule, A. & Hunt, J. C. R. 2003 Turbulent channel flow near maximum drag reduction: simulations, experiments and mechanisms. J. Fluid Mech. 490, 251–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, W. C., Winkel, E. S., Dowling, D. R., Perlin, M. & Ceccio, S. L. 2006 Bubble friction drag reduction in a high-Reynolds number flat-plate turbulent boundary layer. J. Fluid Mech. 552, 2006, 353–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz-Grunow, F. 1941 New frictional resistance law for smooth plates. NACA Tech. Memorandum 17 (8), 1–24.Google Scholar
Sellin, R. H. J. 1982 The effect of drag-reducing additives on fluid flows and their industrial applications part 2: present applications and future proposals. J. Hydraul. Res. 20 (1), 29–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sommer, S. T. & Petrie, H. L. 1992 Diffusion of slot injected drag-reducing polymer solution in a LEBU modified turbulent boundary layer. Exp. Fluids 12, 181–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tirtaatmadja, V., McKinley, G. H. & Cooper-White, J. J. 2006 Drop formation and breakup of low viscosity elastic fluids: effects of molecular weight and concentration. Phys. Fluids 18, 043101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanapalli, S. A. 2007 Polymer chain scission in extensional and turbulent flows and implications for friction drag technologies. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Vanapalli, S. A., Ceccio, S. L. & Solomon, M. J. 2006 Universal scaling for polymer chain scission in turbulence. In Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 103 (45), 16660–16665.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vanapalli, S. A., Islam, M. T. & Solomon, M. J. 2005 Scission-induced bounds on maximum polymer drag reduction in turbulent flow. Phys. Fluids 17,1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vdovin, A. V. & Smol'yakov, A. V. 1978 Diffusion of polymer solutions in a turbulent boundary layer. J. Appl. Mech. Tech. Phys. 19 (2), 66–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vdovin, A. V. & Smol'yakov, A. V. 1981 Turbulent diffusion of polymers in a boundary layer. J. Appl. Mech. Tech. Phys. 22 (4), 98–104.Google Scholar
Virk, P. S. 1975 Drag reduction fundamentals. J. Am. Inst. Chem. Eng. 21 (4), 625–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Virk, P. S., Merrill, E. W., Mickley, H. S., Smith, K. A. & Mollo-Christensen, E. L. 1967 The Toms phenomenon: turbulent pipe flow of dilute polymer solutions. J. Fluid Mech. 30 (2), 305–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Virk, P. S., Mickley, H. S. & Smith, K. A. 1970 The ultimate asymptote and mean flow structure in Toms' phenomenon. Trans. ASME: J. Appl. Mech. 37 (2), 488–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vlachogiannis, M. & Hanratty, T. J. 2004 Influence of wavy structured surfaces and large scale polymer structures on drag reduction. Exp. Fluids 36, 685–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vlassopoulous, D. & Schowalter, W. R. 1994 Steady viscometric properties and characterization of dilute drag-reducing polymer solutions J. Rheol. 38, 1427–1446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, D. T., Tiederman, W. G. & Luchik, T. S. 1986 Optimization of the injection process for drag-reducing additives. Exp. Fluids 4, 114–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warholic, M. D., Massah, H. & Hanratty, T. J. 1999 Influence of drag-reducing polymers on turbulence, effects of Reynolds number, concentration, and mixing. Exp. Fluids 27, 461–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, F. M. 2005 Viscous Fluid Flow (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
White, C. M., Somandepalli, V. S. R. & Mungal, M. G. 2004 The turbulence structure of drag reduced boundary layer flow. Exp. Fluids 36, 62–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winkel, E. S., Oweis, G., Vanapalli, S. A., Dowling, D. R., Perlin, M., Solomon, M. J. & Ceccio, S. L. 2006 Friction drag reduction at high Reynolds numbers with wall injected polymer solutions. In Proceedings of the 26th Symposium on Naval Hydrodynamics, Rome.Google Scholar
Wu, J. & Tulin, M. P. 1972 Drag reduction by ejecting additive solutions into pure-water boundary layer. Trans. ASME: J. Basic Engng 94, 749–756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar