## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

CHBE 401

Project Paper

by: Mohammed AlMakhaita Instructors: Prof. Matteo Pasquali and Dr. Rolf Ryham

Due: December 04, 2009 by 5 PM

Table of Contents

1. 2.

Introduction..................................................................................................................................3 Understanding Drag Reduction...................................................................................................3 Reynold Number........................................................................................................................3 Fanning Factor..........................................................................................................................3 Wall Shear Stress.......................................................................................................................3 Slope Increment.........................................................................................................................5 Maximum Drag Reduction.........................................................................................................6

1

3. 4. 5. 6.

Elastic Sublayer............................................................................................................................8 Commercial Use............................................................................................................................9 Solution to modern day problem...............................................................................................10 References...................................................................................................................................11

Introduction: B.A Toms discovered the polymeric turbulent flow drag reduction phenomenon in 1948, upon finding that dilute polymethyl methacrylate solutions have the ability of reducing the Fanning friction factor of turbulent flow to about the half compared to the pure solvent flow. The experimental follow-ups of this discovery have shown that adding small concentrations of highmolecular polymers can reduce the turbulent pipe flow’s drag by 80% (Virk 1975). up to this date, it is still unclear to us how exactly those additives reduce drag. However, According to Virk et al (1997), the extension of the macromolecules seem more than likely to be what causing this phenomenon to occur. Understanding Drag Reduction:

2

To grasp the concept behind DR phenomenon, once must understand some important related parameters. One parameter is the Reynold Number (Re) which is used to measure the flow intensity. Re is dimensionless and is defined as below (I) Re = V × ID ν

Where V is the mean velocity, ID the pipe inner diameter, and ν is the fluid kinematic viscosity. Another parameter is the Fanning friction factor, f, which is related to the wall shear stress and is defined as below

f =

2τ w ρV 2

(II) (III)

Where ρ is fluid density and τw is wall shear stress, which is defined as

τw =

∆P × ID 4∆L

Where L is the distance across which the pressure drop is measured. At laminar flow, (Re<2000), there is no difference in skin friction between dilute polymer solutions and solvents. The solution follows poiseuille’s law for Newtonian fluids (IV)

1 f = Re ⋅ f 16

Virk (1975) describes three distinct regimes for fully developed turbulent flows in order of increasing flow rate. The first regime, called Newtonian regime, experiences no drag reduction, and its flow follows Prandtl-Karman (P-K) law for Newtonian fluids in turbulent flow 1 = 4.0log10 Re f − 0.4 f (V)

3

The second regime, called the Polymeric regime, depending on the nature of the polymer solution, it begins at a specific onset and is insensitive to concentration of polymer and ID (Virk 1975). Relation between friction factor decreases beginning at onset as the flow starts disobeying the P-K law as shown in (Figure 1) 1 = (4.0 + δ )log10 Re f − 0.4 − δ log10 2DW ∗ f (VI)

Fig. 1

Where W* is wave number at onset:

(τ * / ρ )1/ 2 W = w ν

*

(VII)

δ, Prandtl-Karman slope increment, denotes the difference in drag reduction between dilute polymer solution and solvent slopes. δ is directly proportional to concentration and molecular weight of the polymer and is independent of ID. δ is defined as below (VIII)

δ=

κ MW C Mw0

1/ 2

4

Where Mw0 is the molecular weight of an additive monomer. Fanning friction factor decreases as flow rate increases in the polymeric regime and the higher the δ the more drag reduction we get. From (equation VIII) we can see that δ varies as the square root of concentration. According to (Virk 1975), the onset of drag reduction occurs at a unique τw, (τw*). The higher the τw* the higher Re f the onset will exhibit. This Polymeric regime will hold true until the flow reaches a point where drag reduction changes its slope and that takes us to the third regime, called Maximum drag reduction regime or simply, MDR. all solutions reach a point where the slope alters to fit Virk’s asymptote governed by the equation below 1 = 19.0log10 Re f f − 32.4 (IX)

The reason behind limited drag reduction will be explained later on page 6. (Figure 2) is an illustration of flow of polymers of different Mw and C through different ID. In this case, polyethyleneoxide (PEO) and polyacrylamide (PAM) solutions plotted on P-K coordinates. We can see from the plot that laminar flow follows Poiseuille’s law mentioned in (equation IV). Also, (equation V) represents the Prandtl-Karman law for turbulent Newtonian flow and (equation IX) representing Virk’s asymptote for MDR. Moreover, the straight lines follow the Polymeric regime (equation VI) and it is noticed that MDR is a universal value independent of ID, type of polymer, concentration, or molecular weight.

5

Fig. 2

It drag bounded the weight and concentration, DR varies accordingly.

is shown that reduction is between two asymptotes, Prandtl-

Karman law and the Maximum drag reduction Asymptotes, and based on Polymer molecular

Elastic Sublayer: The mean velocity profile possesses three distinct zones. The Viscous sublayer zone occupies the area near the wall. And the Newtonian plug region, at the axis where velocity profile is shifted upwards from Newtonian law of the wall but remains parallel to it. In between these two regions there

6

is a region called, Elastic sublayer which is the main characteristic of drag reduction. (Figure 3) is a plot of the normalized mean velocity, U+, versus the natural logarithm of distance from inside wall, y+. the ABCD profile has the three different regions: (1) viscous sublayer AB where y+ ≤ yv+. B holds the value of yv+ = 11.6 based on our previous arguments about the onset of drag reduction. (2) elastic sublayer BC, where ye+ ≤ y+ ≤ R+ , which originates at onset and grows depending on concentration with increasing drag reduction starting at zero drag reduction at ( y+ = ye+ ). It is of a varying thickness perhaps that is why it is called “elastic”. The elastic sublayer continues to grow until it claims the entire cross section of the pipe at MDR. And since it cannot over expand, maximum drag reduction takes place. (3) the Newtonian plug region where y+ ≤ R+. The thickness of the elastic sublayer is related to a value called the effective slip, S+, by the following equation S+=Am- An ln( ye+yv+ ) Where Am and An are coefficients of maximum drag reduction and Newtonian plug region respectively.

7

Fig. 3

Commercial Use: Drag reducing agents were first introduced commercially in 1979 upon adding (DRA) to the flow of crude oil in the Trans Alaskan Pipeline (Motier et al., 1996). Trans Alaskan Pipeline System (TAPS) was designed with 12 pump stations along 1287 Km to transport 2 million barrels per day (MBPD) of Alaskan crude oil. However, with the use of DRA’s, TAP was able to pump 2.1 MBPD of crude oil using only 10 pump stations. The two remaining pump stations were never built. The TAPS used a DRA of 28 wppm polymer concentration. Nowadays, globally, crude oil pipelines use DRA mechanics to enhance the flow. According to Cuenca et al. (2008) the energy reduction estimate upon using 20 wppm polyolefin gel in a 307 mm ID and 84 Km pipe line in the Tarragona-Barcelona-Gerona pipeline is 42.6%. Also, better ways of using drag reduction in marine environments and blood flow are sought. Solutions to modern day problem:

8

The exponential increase in India’s population has led to find that the sewer systems are inadequate to their large numbers. So, DRA’s could be used to enhance the flow as an alternative to digging out the sewer system and replacing it with pipes of larger diameter. Unlike the latter solution, using DRA’s is fast and cost effective. Plus, instead of replacing the pipes with larger ones every time the population becomes too big for the municipal sewer system, DRA’s with higher concentrations can be added until we reach a point where even maximum drag reduction does not accommodate the insanely expanding population. But then, I think, inadequate sewer systems will be the least of our problems. Brostow et al. (2007)

References: Brostow, Witold, Haley E. Hagg Lobland, Taruna Reddy, Ram P. Singh, and Leslie White. “Lowering mechanical degradation of drag reducers in turbulent flow." Lowering mechanical degradation of drag reducers in turbulent flow

9

22.1 (2007): 56-60. Materials Research Society. J. Mater. Res., 3 Aug. 2006. Web. 30 Nov. 2009. Gomez Cuenca, F., Gomez Marin, M., and Folgueras Diaz, M. B. Energy-Savings Modeling of Oil Pipelines That Use Drag-Reducing Additives. Energy Fuels. 2008, 22 (5), 3293-3298. Motier, J. F.; Chou, L-C.; Kommareddi, N. Commercial drag reduction: past, present and future. International Symposium on Drag Reduction and Turbulence Modification, San Diego, CA, ASME Fluids Eng. Div. Conf. Proc. 1996, 237 (2) 229-234. Virk, P. S. Drag Reduction Fundamentals. AIChE J. 1975, 21 (4), 625-656 and references therein. Virk, P. S.; Sherman, D. C.; Wagger, D. L. Additive Equivalence During Turbulent Drag Reduction. AIChE J. 1997, 43 (12), 3257-3259.

10

- Matlab2 Pa 7
- The air
- thmt09_conjht
- Matlab2 Pa.v2
- Principles of Flight in Action 9 12
- Orifice Prelim 2
- Kim_computational Fluid Mechanics
- Turbulence-Kolmogorov
- Performance-Energy Excess Power
- 1-s2.0-S0142727X10000937-main.pdf
- Mechanical
- Modeling of a Simple Pendulum
- Cobem-eli
- ELSIVIER - Transportation of Heavy and Extra-heavy Crude Oil by Pipeline a Review
- Mini Project Wrd
- 2 Using Conditions
- Boundary Layer Separation
- ES912 Assign 04
- Diemnsionless No. in Fluid Mechanics
- CFD
- Flow Structure Investigations in a "Tornado" Combustor
- 2001v97n4p73-75
- Fluent12 Turbulence[1]
- 06_SavvySeparator_Feb16
- mel713-4
- This Experiment is About Fluidization of a Bed
- Term Project Report CFD
- Turbulence Modelling for CFD by Hrvoje Jasak
- Intl Journal Endovascular Cutting
- 2007-03-24_TPC_DD_CFDOverviewOct2010

Skip carousel

- R/C Soaring Digest - Mar 2003
- A Review on Design Optimization of Air Dam for Lift Reduction of a Car Using in Wind Tunnel and CFD Analysis
- The Weekender 03-28-2012
- Facet Mobile
- Cloth Tow Target Sleeve (1991)
- R/C Soaring Digest - Jun 2003
- Cloth Tow Target Sleeve (1940)
- 2 Ringed flyer
- Army Aviation Digest - Jul 1969
- Beaver Cloth Cutting MacHines Inc. v. H. Maimin Co., Inc., 343 F.2d 442, 2d Cir. (1965)
- R/C Soaring Digest - Sep 2011
- R/C Soaring Digest - Jan 2007
- Olympic swimming explained
- R/C Soaring Digest - Mar 2004
- Vintage Airplane - Jul 1989
- Truth and Myths about the Essence of Swimming
- Study Of Functional And Airodynamic Design For Blade Parameters Of NERL Series
- Exploring in Aeronautics
- Army Aviation Digest - Aug 1969
- Army Aviation Digest - Feb 1957
- Development and Qualification of Gemini Escape System
- Aerial Advertising Banner (1933)
- R/C Soaring Digest - Sep 2002
- R/C Soaring Digest - Jan 2003
- Computational Study of Turbulent Flow around a Generic Car Body (Ahmed BODY)
- Design and Performance Analysis of Airfoil By Low Reynolds Number Method Using CFD
- Cloth Tow Target Low Drag Sleeve (1944)
- Model Rocketry Projects
- Rocket Altitude Prediction Charts
- tmp53C2.tmp

Skip carousel

- An Overview of Vortex Tube on CFD with Straight and Helical Nozzle
- NASA Facts ACLAIM Airborn Coherant LIDAR for Advanced in-Flight Measurement
- tmpA422.tmp
- tmpCFAB
- tmp7E6C.tmp
- tmpA063.tmp
- tmp6BEE
- CFD Analysis of Convergent-Divergent Nozzle using Standard K-ÃŽâ€¢ Model
- John J. Magan v. Lufthansa German Airlines, 339 F.3d 158, 2d Cir. (2003)
- Investigation On Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Simulation for Wind Effects On Tall Tapered Buildings
- Tmp 2924
- tmpFAEF.tmp
- Comparative Assessment of Aerodynamic Forces Generated Due to Wind Deflector of Passenger Car by CFD and Experimental Method
- 090610_mandelbrot
- Computational Study of Turbulent Flow around a Generic Car Body (Ahmed BODY)
- tmp734D

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot usefulRead Free for 30 Days

Cancel anytime.

Close Dialog## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Close Dialog## This title now requires a credit

Use one of your book credits to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

Loading