q

© All Rights Reserved

0 views

q

© All Rights Reserved

- 141SAL
- Plant Design for Slurry Handling
- Tennekes & Lumley - A First Course in Turbulence
- fluid dynamics
- Datta Rakesh Case Study in s Truc 10
- MATHEMATICAL THEORY OF STEADY HEAT TRANSFER IN A THIN FILM FLOW OF A MICROPOLAR FLUID OVER AN INCLINED PERMEABLE BED
- Well Performance-3.pdf
- FFTMH
- Chevron 120 Psig
- Heat Exchanger Design
- Masterthesis2007 Cut CBEL
- Div Class Title Effect of Viscoelasticity on the Soft Wall Transition and Turbulence in a Microchannel Div
- J_AWWA_2009_101_9_Ho
- DIFFUSER ANGLE CONTROL TO AVOID FLOW SEPARATION
- Lesson 4slides(1)
- mathematics-03-01255.pdf
- Test 1 March-june 2012 Completed Scheme
- Viscous Flow in Pipes
- Experimental - Bubble column
- Fluids 2011 Lect 4 Web

You are on page 1of 9

Non-Newtoain

Fluid

Mechanics

ELSEVIER J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech., 59 (1995) 93 101

Short communication

Michael R e n a r d y

Department of Mathematics, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA 24061-0123, USA

Received 17th October 1994; in revised form 15 Febuary 1995

Abstract

vortices and the resulting Reynolds stresses play a significant role in both the transition to

turbulence and the near-wall turbulent flow. In this note, we show that viscoelasticity

introduces a negative feedback, so that the streamwise flow driven by a streamwise vortex

would have the effect of diminishing the vortex. The terms responsible for this effect are the

same as these that lead to a second normal stress difference.

I. Introduction

numbers well below those where linear stability analysis would predict them. While

nonlinearities are important in sustaining those instabilities, there are no initial

disturbances of sufficient magnitude that nonlinear terms would dominate over

linear ones, and therefore linear effects are largely responsible for the initial growth

of disturbances. Several recent works have elucidated this mechanism, which

involves the interaction of Orr-Sommerfeld and Squire modes [1-3]. Recall that

Squire's transformation transforms the three-dimensional linear stability problem

for parallel shear flow to the two-dimensional Orr-Sommerfeld equation. This

two-dimensional equation is for a velocity field which is in the plane spanned by the

wave vector of the disturbance and the wall-normal direction. We refer to the part

of the velocity field governed by the Orr-Sommerfeld equation as the Orr Som-

SSDI 0377-0257(95)013 57-1

94 M. Renard)' /J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 59 (1995) 93 101

merfeld mode. The third velocity component, perperdicular to the disturbance wave

vector, is governed by a separate equation, which is known to produce only stable

eigenvalues and is therefore often ignored in the study of linear stability. We refer

to this velocity component as the Squire mode.

At the root of the studies in Refs. [1 3] lies the observation that eigenvalues alone

can give a quite misleading picture of linear dynamics. This is because exponential

decay as time goes to infinity can mask a large transient growth at finite times, in

cases where the underlying linear operator is far from normal. In this context, it is

important that there is a coupling term between Orr-Sommerfeld and Squire modes;

the Orr Sommerfeld mode appears as a forcing term in the equation for the Squire

mode. This interaction vanishes for streamwise wave vectors and is largest for

spanwise wave vectors. Even though the interaction term has no effect on eigenval-

ues, it leads to linear growth of the Squire mode in the inviscid case [4,5]. For large

Reynolds numbers, this linear growth is still present over a large time interval and

it leads to amplification of initial disturbances by a factor on the order of the

Reynolds number. Essentially, the disturbances most affected involve a streamwise

vortex (this is the Orr Sommerfeld mode), which then drives a streamwise velocity

perturbation (the Squire mode) by moving high-speed fluid inward on one side

("sweep") and low-speed fluid outward on the other side ("ejection").

Some recent studies on turbulent boundary layers indicate that streamwise or

"hairpin" vortices continue to play a significant role after the transition to

turbulence has occurred. The ejection and sweep motions generated by streamwise

vortices are believed to contribute significantly to the Reynolds stress. Pairs of

streamwise vortices generate low-speed streaks, which are one of the principal

features seen in flow visualizations, and these low-speed streaks eventually lead to

"bursting" (see Ref. [6] for a review). Even though the evolution of hairpin vortices

and in particular their breakup involves highly nonlinear effects, the production of

drag by streamwise vortices can still be understood in terms of the linear mechanism

outlined above.

It is a consequence of Squire's transformation that the coupling between O r r -

Sommerfeld and Squire modes is in one direction only. The Orr-Sommerfeld mode

drives the Squire mode, but there is no coupling in the other direction. It is precisely

this feature which leads to the linear growth. Viscoelastic fluids, on the other hand,

do not necessarily have a Squire's transformation [7]. At the second-order fluid level,

the terms destroying Squire's transformation are the same as those that lead to a

second normal stress difference. In this note, we shall show that these terms destroy

the linear growth property. In a "pseudo-inviscid" limit, we shall find periodic rather

than linearly growing solutions, and we can generally expect a transient growth

factor on the order of x / - ~ W , where R is the Reynolds number and W is the

Weissenberg number. Even at small Weissenberg numbers x/R/W may be small

relative to R, so that there is an effective stabilization.

Qualitatively, we can describe the inviscid instability mechanism as follows: A

streamwise vortex generates a flow away from the wall on one side, and a flow

towards the wall on the other side. Where the flow is away from the wall, low-speed

fluid is convected outward, and the downstream flow decelerates. Where the flow is

M. Renardy /J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 59 (1995) 93-101 95

towards the wall, high-speed fluid is convected inward and the downstream flow

accelerates. In both cases a contribution to the Reynolds shear stress results from the

product of wall-normal and streamwise velocity, which enhances the drag. A second

normal stress difference creates a tension in the spanwise direction and a pressure in

the wall-normal direction. As we saw above, the effect of a streamwise vortex is to

decelerate the flow, i.e. to decrease the shear rate, where the flow is away from the

wall, and to increase the shear rate where the flow is towards the wall. With the

shear rate, the second normal stress is decreased, so that there is a reduced pressure

in the wall-normal direction which counteracts the flow of the streamwise vortex and

thus provides a negative feedback. This negative feed- back leads to an oscillation

instead of the unlimited linear growth in the inviscid case.

It is natural to wonder whether the mechanism identified here plays a role in drag

reduction. It has been known since the 1940s [8] that even very small concentrations

of polymers have a strong effect on the suppression of turbulence. There has been an

extensive literature on the subject, but the basic mechanisms are still not understood.

See Ref. [9], Section 10.7.3, for an overview. Conventional wisdom is that the

resistance of polymers to extension is important. The mechanism discussed here may

give an alternative explanation.

The analysis which follows is based on the second-order fluid, i.e. it pressumes

that the product of the shear rate and the relaxation time of the fluid is small. We use

the notation

A = v u + ( v u ) T, (1)

and we put the constitutive law in the dimensionless form

~d

T= A- Wt --~--~- W2A 2 (2)

Here ~ / ~ t denotes the upper convected derivative (in contrast to the usual

convention in the literature, where the lower convected derivative is used), and the

signs in front of the terms in (2) reflect the observed signs of normal stress

differences. We are interested in cases where W~ and W2 are small, and we only

want to carry terms which couple Squire modes into the equation for O r r - S o m m e r -

feld modes. Since the term involving @ A / ~ t preserves Squire's transformation, it

leads to no such coupling, and we shall drop it. Thus, we have the Reiner-Rivlin

law

T = A - W A 2, (3)

and we shall call W = W2 the Weissenberg number. Note that this is a Weissenberg

number based on second rather than first normal stresses, and we can therefore

expect it to be about one order of magnitude smaller than the usual Weissenberg

number.

96 M. Renardy / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 59 (1995)93-101

< )

R ~-~ + (u V)u = div T - Vp = z~u - W A Au - W ( A : ~2)lg -- Vff, (4)

where R is the Reynolds number, A :8 2 stands for Eij A u 82/8xg axj, and fi is a

modified pressure term; the tilde will henceforth be suppressed. In addition to the

momentum equation, we have the incompressibility condition

div u = 0. (5)

The linearized equations for the perturbations read

,,/~u

= A.- WVo(A e3 + A w < , ) - WVo[, + Vu)\

O2u ~w

-- 2 WU'o ~x ~----~- 2 W U ; ~ z e, - Vp. (6)

Here we have used components u = (u,v,w), and ei denotes the vector in the ith

coordinate direction.

We now consider modes proportional to ~ + i f l y ) and transform

u* = (~u + flv)/~*, v* = (~v - flu)/c~*, where c~* -- x/c~2 + f12. This yields the follow-

ing equations:

R( + U o i c ~ u * + ~ U'ow ) =Au*--i~*p

au* ~ aw

-- W ~ U o A w - 2 WU~ic~u* + WU~iflv* - 2 W U o i e ~ 2 W U ; ~ , Oz '

(7)

__ ~v* fl ~w

+ W fl U ' o A W - W U ' ~ i c ~ v * - 2 W U ' o i ~ - ~ z + 2 W U ' ~ c~* az

au* flav* aw

- WUDi~w- WU[~ - g _z 8+ WUo ~ , az 2WU'oi~ ~--7 "

Only those non-Newtonian terms which couple v* into the other variables will be

important. This simplifies (7) to

M. Renard), / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 59 (1995) 93 I01 97

/'OU* ~ / "' *

R ~ - ~ + Uoieu* +~-g U ' o w / = au* - ie*p + mUolflV ,

(~w ) ~p

R~-+ U0ic~w = A W - ~ z + WU'o - - Av* + W U ; ~fl, aV*az

condition ie*u* + wz = 0. In the usual way, we then obtain the system

on plane Couette flow, where Uo = 1. (2) Since spanwise wave vectors are the ones

most affected by transient linear growth, we concentrate on the case fl = ~*, ~ = 0.

With these simplifications, (9) becomes

~Aw

R -- f l 2 W A v * + AAw,

~t

(lO)

i~v*

R~=Av*+Rw.

~w ~v*

-0, =w, (11)

0t ~t

which implies that w stays constant while v* grows linearly. However, dissipation

leads to decay at a rate proportional to l/R, so that the linear growth will persist

only up to times of order R, followed by decay thereafter. We thus have transient

growth, with v* reaching a magnitude on the order of Rw(O). Let us now consider

the effect of the viscoelastic terms, and, for simplicity, we shall ignore dissipation.

Then the equations are

~Aw__ ~2 m

~t ~- Av*,

Or* (12)

~t

If w and v* satisfy the same boundary conditions (for example, zero at walls), we

can simplify the first equation to

~W f12 W

et = - ~- v*, (13)

98 M. Renardy / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 59 (1995) 93 101

v = v(o) cos

(g) 1

/~ t + w(0) s i n ( f l ~ - ~ t).

(14)

of order fl-lx/-R/W. We can expect this effect to be important if fl ~x/-R/W is

comparable to R, i.e. if flRRW is at least of order 1. Modes with fl on the order of

1 are the ones of interest. If fl >> 1, then viscous dissipation becomes large; on the

other hand, if fl << 1, then the incompressibility condition implies that u* is large

relative to w, i.e. only a small part of the disturbance is the w-component of the

velocity, which is responsible for driving the Squire mode. Thus the mechanism

discussed here is important if RW reaches order of magnitude 1.

The above analysis is rather crude and neglects many terms. The guiding

principle has been that inviscid terms dominate, viscous terms are small and

primarily act to provide a small dissipation, and viscoelastic terms are even smaller

than the viscous terms. Therefore, the viscoelastic terms have been taken into

account only in the one place where the inviscid and viscous terms make no

contribution, and this is in coupling the Squire mode back into the Orr Sommer-

feld equation. A more complete study of the linear dynamics, which takes into

account the additional terms, would require a numerical investigation.

lence at very small concentrations. A number of explanations for this effect have

been offered. Some early works tried to explain the phenomenon by a geometric

effect of long polymer molecules on small-scale eddies. This explanation, however,

does not seem to hold up to quantitative scrutiny, since polymer molecules are

about two orders of magnitude too small. More recent attempts have therefore

focused on "elasticity". There are, however, many ways in which elasticity may be

relevant (linear memory effects, elongational stresses, normal stresses in shear flow).

There is no consensus in the literature about the questions of which aspect of

elasticity and which feature of the turbulent flow are important. Many hypotheses

exist, and most "explanations" are vague; often they do not go much beyond a

comparison of time or velocity scales.

A much more detailed and quantitative theory has been developed by Goldshtik

et al. [10]. Their analysis is based on the equations of linearization at laminar flow.

However, they take account of the nonlinear contribution to the Reynolds shear

stress, and this nonlinearity enters the boundary conditions, which are formulated

on the basis of some ad hoc assumptions. For the velocity field, they take a

traveling wave with essentially streamwise propagation, superposed on the laminar

M. Renardy /J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 59 (1995) 93-101 99

flow. In the Newtonian case, their prediction of the logarithmic velocity profile

agrees with experiments, but the fluctuation amplitudes which they predict are

much too large. They study the viscoelastic case assuming Maxwell and Oldroyd B

rheology. They find a reduction of drag, which is primarily due to a reduction in

the wall-normal fluctuations. Such a reduction is consistent with experimental

trends. On the other hand, it has been claimed [11] that the primary effect in drag

reduction is not a reduction of fluctuation amplitudes, but a decrease in the

correlation between axial and radial components. The fluctuations considered in

Ref. [10] have a correlation which is too low; this is clearly evidenced by the fact

that the fluctuation amplitudes are much larger than the experimental values, while

the Reynolds shear stresses are in agreement with the experiment. On the other

hand, the mechanism considered above, in which a streamwise vortex generates a

streamwise speed, would lead to fluctuations with a high correlation. The effect of

viscoelasticity, as described in Section 2, would be to discourage these highly

correlated motions and also to reduce their correlation.

Observations of turbulent near-wall flows support the existence of streamwise

vortices, which generate low-speed "streaks". These streaks are intermittent and are

destroyed in a process known as "bursting." This bursting process is often linked

with the formation of inflection points in the mean profile and resulting instabilities.

A very clear and concise exposition of these ideas for near-wall turbulence is given

in the article by Clark [12]. I also refer to the survey article by Robinson [6].

Starting with the work of Black [13], there has been a substantial literature trying

to link drag reduction to a decrease in bursting activity. Experiments [14,15] show

an increase in the lateral streak spacing and a decrease in the frequency of bursts.

In terms of the analysis of Section 2, we can interpret the increased streak spacing

as a shift to smaller values of ft. At the same time, the Reynolds stresses produced

by the streamwise vortices are decreased, which would be expected to delay the

bursting. The suggestion of this paper is therefore that bursts are reduced not

because drag-reducing polymers inhibit bursting, as has often been suspected, but

because they interfere with the sequence of events which leads up to bursting. In

Ref. [15], the specific hypothesis is made that drag reduction results from the

inhibition of the formation of streaks. This conjecture is based purely on experi-

mental results, and no mechanism is offered. Interestingly, some streaks are

observed to disappear and then reform. This is consistent with the transition from

linear algebraic growth to oscillatory behavior which was found above.

The analysis of Section 2 gives a criterion when elastic effects should become

important. We try to apply this criterion to the viscous layer. The Reynolds number

of the pipe flow is defined by R=pUL/I~, and the wall shear stress is

=fp U2 =flt2R2/(pL2). Here L is the pipe diameter, U is the average speed, and

f i s the friction factor. Moreover, the Weissenberg number is a multiple of the shear

stress, and we can express this as W = E~. We expect drag reduction to become

relevant at a critical value of WRb, where R b is a Reynolds number associated with

the viscous sublayer. Since Rb is approximately a constant (on the order of 100), we

would expect significant drag reduction to start when W is on the order of 1/100.

Since our Weissenberg number was defined on the basis of second rather than first

100 M. Renardy / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 59 (1995) 93 101

order of magnitude larger. Since f varies slowly the Reynolds number, a fixed value

of W = ev translates into a critical Reynolds number R which is proportional to

L/x/-~, where E is presumably proportional to the concentration of the polymer.

These scalings appear to be roughly consistent with observations. The proportional-

ity with L can, for example, be seen in Figure 10.8 of Ref. [9], which gives a

schematic representation of experiments. The literature is more ambiguous on the

concentration dependence. I think it is important whether one defines "significant

drag reduction" in absolute or relative terms. That is, does "significant drag

reduction" commence when the drag is reduced by a given percentage, or by a

certain fraction of the maximum that can be achieved for the same concentration?

The absolute standard is roughly consistent with the square root dependence

predicted here; see e.g. the data reported in Figure 3.11-1 of Ref. [16]. On the other

hand, the relative interpretation leads to the conclusion that the wall shear stress at

which drag reduction commences is independent of concentration [17].

The use of the second-order fluid model in the analysis is open to question. Even

if elastic effects are "small", this does not necessarily mean that the use of the

second-order fluid is justified. For that, one needs the wall shear rate to be small

relative to the relaxation time of the polymer. Polymer relaxation times in aqueous

solutions are estimated to be on the order of 10 4 - 1 0 - 3 S (see e.g. Table I of Ref.

[18]), and inverse wall shear rates in drag reduction experiments are on both sides

of this range. Outside of the second-order fluid range, we cannot expect that the

second normal stress will continue to grow quadratically as a function of shear rate,

and we would therefore expect a relatively smaller effect. This is consistent with

observations showing that smaller concentrations, which need a higher wall shear

rate to become effective, have small drag reductions. Even for higher concentra-

tions, drag reduction has a tendency to "bottom out" at large wall shear rates.

Since Reynolds stress production from streamwise vortices is believed to be

important in transition to turbulence, drag-reducing polymers should also show a

tendency to extend the laminar regime. Indeed, some experiments show this; e.g. in

Ref.[18] this is observed for concentrations in excess of 1500 ppm. At lower

concentrations, the polymer is effective only at the higher wall shear rates which

occur in turbulent flow.

Joseph [19,20] has emphasized that the fluid speeds in the drag reducing regime

are comparable to the speed of shear wave propagation. Such an observation is not

inconsistent with the criterion found here; actually, it is consistent with a number

of mechanisms which do not necessarily involve wave speeds in an intrinsic way.

Regardless of the mechanism for drag reduction, it would be useful to have more

accurate values for relaxation times, and wave speeds can be helpful here. Litera-

ture values for relaxation times in dilute solution are often not measured, but

estimated from molecular theory.

" O f all the unusual phenomena observed with flow of non-Newtonian systems,

none has caused more scientific and economic speculation than drag reduction"

[21]. In this note, I have advanced a theory which provides a rational and specific

explanation of the way in which polymers might act to reduce drag. I believe that

M. Renardy / J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 59 (1995) 93 101 101

w o u l d be useful.

Acknowledgement

D M S - 9 3 0 6 6 3 5 a n d b y the Office o f N a v a l R e s e a r c h u n d e r G r a n t N00014-92-J-1664.

I a m grateful to the n o t so a n o n y m o u s referees for their c o n s t r u c t i v e c o m m e n t s . I n

p a r t i c u l a r , I w o u l d like to a c k n o w l e d g e E.J. H i n c h , w h o p r o v i d e d the v e r b a l

d e s c r i p t i o n o f the m e c h a n i s m w h i c h is p r e s e n t e d in the i n t r o d u c t i o n a b o v e .

References

[1] K.M. Butler and B.F. Farrell, Phys. Fluids, A4 (1992) 1637.

[2] D.S. Henningson, A. Lundbladh and A.V. Johansson, J. Fluid Mech., 250 (1992) 169.

[3] L.N. Trefethen, A.E. Trefethen, S.C. Reddy and T.A. Driscoll, Science, 261 (1990) 578.

[4] T. Ellingsen and E. Palm, Phys. Fluids, 18 (1975) 487.

[5] M.T. Landahl, J. Fluid Mech., 98 (1980) 243.

[6] S.K. Robinson, Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech., 23 (1991) 601.

[7] G. Tlapa and B. Bernstein, Phys. Fluids, 13 (1970) 565.

[8] B.A. Toms, Proc. Int. Congr. Rheol., North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1949.

[9] R.I. Tanner, Engineering Rheology, Clarendon, Oxford, 1988.

[10] M.A. Goldshtik, V.V. Zametalin and V.N. Shtern, J. Fluid Mech., 119 (1982) 423.

[11] P.S. Virk, AIChE J. 21 (1975), 625.

[12] D.G. Clark, in Turbulent Drag Reduction by Passive Means, Royal Aeronautical Society, London,

1988, p. 457.

[13] T.J. Black, in C.S. Wells (ed), Viscous Drag Reduction, Plenum, New York, 1969, p. 383.

[14] B.U. Achia and D.W. Thompson, J. Fluid Mech., 81 (1977) 439.

[15] D.K. Oldaker and W.G. Tiederman, Phys. Fluids, 20 (1977) S133.

[16] R.B. Bird et al., Dynamics of Polymeric Liquids I, Wiley, New York, 1977.

[17] P.S. Virk, J. Fluid Mech., 45 (1971) 417.

[18] C.B. Wang, Ind. Eng. Chem. Fund., 11 (1972) 546.

[19] D.D. Joseph, Fluid Dynamics of Viscoelastic Liquids, Springer, New York, 1990.

[20] D.D. Joseph and C. Christodoulou, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech., 48 (1993) 225.

[21] W.R. Schowalter, Mechanics of Non-Newtonian Fluids, Pergamon, Oxford, 1978.

- 141SALUploaded byjnkmeal
- Plant Design for Slurry HandlingUploaded byJose Bustos
- Tennekes & Lumley - A First Course in TurbulenceUploaded byStuart
- fluid dynamicsUploaded byARUNPRASADEEE
- Datta Rakesh Case Study in s Truc 10Uploaded byhazemismaeelradhi
- MATHEMATICAL THEORY OF STEADY HEAT TRANSFER IN A THIN FILM FLOW OF A MICROPOLAR FLUID OVER AN INCLINED PERMEABLE BEDUploaded byijsret
- Well Performance-3.pdfUploaded byWashoo Hasoo
- FFTMHUploaded byHarmanpreet Singh Randhawa
- Chevron 120 PsigUploaded bytexwan_
- Heat Exchanger DesignUploaded bycoldness_13
- Masterthesis2007 Cut CBELUploaded byvanhien99
- Div Class Title Effect of Viscoelasticity on the Soft Wall Transition and Turbulence in a Microchannel DivUploaded bysagarsrinivas
- J_AWWA_2009_101_9_HoUploaded bySulistyaEkaRachmawati
- DIFFUSER ANGLE CONTROL TO AVOID FLOW SEPARATIONUploaded byInternational Jpurnal Of Technical Research And Applications
- Lesson 4slides(1)Uploaded byBryan Scofield
- mathematics-03-01255.pdfUploaded byabdulqader
- Test 1 March-june 2012 Completed SchemeUploaded byMohd Khairudin Abdul Radzak
- Viscous Flow in PipesUploaded byShinee Jayasilan
- Experimental - Bubble columnUploaded bylrodriguez_892566
- Fluids 2011 Lect 4 WebUploaded bySanthosh Kumar Kodhandapani
- resumenUploaded byBenny Alconn
- 3Uploaded byKeshava Murthy A
- Chapter_7Uploaded bymustafa
- outcome3t4Uploaded byZoebair
- Achieving Hover Equilibrium in Free Flight With a Flexible Flapping WingUploaded byiwe1234
- TTT_10Uploaded bydist2235
- 920-4142-1-PBUploaded byJim Tsikas
- 4 - The Equations of Change - ChE 322Uploaded byPatricia de Leon
- CHAPTER_1.PDFUploaded byteknikpembakaran2013
- fluids secondaires.pdfUploaded bymohand_mindieta

- Shipping GlossaryUploaded byAnand Khisti.
- crUploaded byKURNIAWAN
- QualificationPart-1-JSPSUploaded byKURNIAWAN
- Basics LatexUploaded byOmisakin Adedayo
- AMM.819.335Uploaded byKURNIAWAN
- AMM.663.522 (1)Uploaded byKURNIAWAN
- 4633-12964-1-SMUploaded byKURNIAWAN
- 2476-6060-1-SMUploaded byKURNIAWAN
- rp011_RE033Uploaded byKURNIAWAN
- rp004_RE035Uploaded byKURNIAWAN
- 1-s2.0-S1350630704001281-mainUploaded byKURNIAWAN
- 1-s2.0-S0010938X13003685-mainUploaded byKURNIAWAN
- 1-s2.0-S1875510015303437-mainUploaded byKURNIAWAN
- 1-s2.0-S1350630708002203-main.pdfUploaded byKURNIAWAN
- UntitledUploaded byKURNIAWAN
- lec7.pdfUploaded byKURNIAWAN
- Chp1Uploaded byKURNIAWAN
- HABITAT_WINLOG_13_11_2013Uploaded byKURNIAWAN
- stomfinalUploaded byKURNIAWAN
- Vessel Maneuverability Guide E-Feb17Uploaded byKURNIAWAN
- Pivot PointUploaded bysanu
- 14-ME-tal_001Uploaded byAye Hlaing Min
- Cost GuardUploaded byKURNIAWAN
- Analysis of the ModelUploaded byKURNIAWAN
- m06_01_75_01Uploaded byKURNIAWAN
- General InformationUploaded byKURNIAWAN
- QIR 2017_Final (Wiwin S)_Proofread.docxUploaded byKURNIAWAN

- Conceptual Frameworks Without Validatory Metaphysics - Jason RheinsUploaded byFelipe
- Homology (Mathematics)Uploaded byHameed Khan
- snssnsnsUploaded byHazman Hassan
- The Square Root Function of a MatrixUploaded byIrving José
- CL 625 - Truck LoadingUploaded byAnonymous vGKYNSP
- Simens Timer MemoryUploaded byavinashsao
- Geological ModellingUploaded byErland Prasetya
- Aerospace Lean Six Sigma NadeemUploaded bySyedNadeemAhmed
- c2Uploaded bysonofalexander
- Urdu Morphology, Orthography and Lexicon ExtractionUploaded bycameron333
- CyberbullyingUploaded byCandice Zhang
- 309 Aristotle 3 EN 7.3-DM 3.9.pdfUploaded byFinnTeacher
- Ralph Menikoff and Thomas D Sewell- Constituent properties of HMX needed for mesoscale simulationsUploaded byKommissar1981
- chapter 11 robotics in manufacturing processes p182-197Uploaded byapi-152132438
- Free Sample of Portfolio OptimizationUploaded bypetrepetre2014
- 52784754-30-maths-starters.pdfUploaded byHeri Zo
- Magoosh GRE Math Formula eBookUploaded bySunny Manchanda
- Questions & AnswersUploaded byMarkWeber
- AJANCAMV6 User GuideUploaded byrazvan33
- ranke_leed_160104Uploaded byAman Rezaei
- Practice Problems 4 Newtons LawUploaded byAnonymous L3W8LlpMPW
- SAP2000 Block Foundation Soil Dynamic AnalysisUploaded bycurvedbrain
- Compact Heat Exchangers, Second EditionUploaded bychris2paul-3
- Maths in Everyday LifeUploaded byMahesh Tejani
- Theorem of ThalesUploaded by4gen_5
- Scilab5.4.1_ReleaseNotesUploaded byDenise Nelson
- ExtraUploaded byn
- Java Interview QuestionsUploaded byRaja Gopal Mani
- rvtiWomenAdmissionUploaded bySwapna Rasal
- Unit 4A Student Guide HONORS 16-17Uploaded byAurolver