Accepted Manuscript

Brief communication

Convenient formulæ for the drag on a prolate ellipsoid moving along its axis of
symmetry perpendicular to a plane surface

David I. Verrelli

PII: S0301-9322(14)00091-3
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmultiphaseflow.2014.05.010
Reference: IJMF 2047

To appear in: International Journal of Multiphase Flow

Received Date: 16 October 2013

Revised Date: 9 April 2014
Accepted Date: 17 May 2014

Please cite this article as: Verrelli, D.I., Convenient formulæ for the drag on a prolate ellipsoid moving along its
axis of symmetry perpendicular to a plane surface, International Journal of Multiphase Flow (2014), doi: http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmultiphaseflow.2014.05.010

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers
we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and
review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process
errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 1 Submission to International Journal of Multiphase Flow
2
3
4 Brief Communication
5
6
7 TITLE
8 Convenient formulæ for the drag on a prolate ellipsoid moving
9 along its axis of symmetry perpendicular to a plane surface
10
11
12 AUTHOR
13 David I. Verrelli a *
14

15 a Visiting Scientist
16 CSIRO Process Science and Engineering
17 Bayview Avenue, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia
18

19 * Currently at Macquarie University

20 Email: David.Verrelli@mq.edu.au
21 Telephone: +61-2-9850-2755
22 Facsimile: +61-2-9812-3610
23 Post: Australian School of Advanced Medicine, 2 Technology Place,
24 Macquarie University, N.S.W. 2109, Australia
25

26

27

28
 1 ABSTRACT
2 The drag coefficients for a prolate ellipsoid moving along its axis of symmetry, in the
3 creeping flow regime, either towards or away from a plane surface are calculated.
4 The plane surface may have either a no-slip boundary condition, corresponding to a
5 solid wall, or a perfect slip condition, corresponding to a free surface.
6 First the analytical solutions are employed to obtain exact values for the full range of
7 feasible particle–plane gaps. Next, simple exact formulæ for the asymptotes at small
8 and large gaps are presented. Finally, some convenient approximate formulæ are
9 obtained that may be used across the full range of gaps.
10

11 KEYWORDS
12 Axisymmetric creeping flow; Colloidal particle; Global rational approximate
13 expressions; Laminar flow; Low Reynolds number hydrodynamics; Spheroid
14
 1 1 Introduction
2 Most simulations treat particles as if they were perfect spheres, because the formulæ
3 for other shapes are intractable, are unknown, require specialist mathematical
4 expertise, require specialised software, or are tiresome to compute. Yet particles
5 encountered in practice are seldom spheres (Brenner, 1962). It is also true that
6 natural particles are unlikely to be perfect ellipsoids; however, the availability of
7 convenient formulæ to model ellipsoids will enable comparisons to readily be made
8 as to the potential influence of particle shape on the particle’s motion.
9 The present work focuses on prolate ellipsoids as they move along their axes of
10 symmetry normal to an interface, in the creeping flow regime. Tangential and
11 rotational motions are not considered herein.
12 The aims are first to obtain precise evaluations of the drag factors for the entire span
13 of physically meaningful gaps, for a representative aspect ratio; secondly to obtain
14 analytical asymptotic formulæ for any aspect ratio; and finally to find rational
15 approximations to the drag correction factors that will be both quick to implement
16 and quick to evaluate.

17 2 Exact formulæ
18 2.1 Sphere
19 The drag on a solid sphere undergoing translational motion in creeping flow is given
20 by the well-known equation for Stokes drag:
21 Fsph, ∞ = 6 π µ Rp U , (1)

22 in which µ is the viscosity of the surrounding fluid, Rp is the radius of the particle, and
23 U is the speed of the particle relative to the (quiescent) bulk (Brenner, 1962).
24 In the presence of a boundary, the drag is multiplied by a factor that increases sharply
25 in magnitude as the gap between the particle and the boundary diminishes. This may
26 be written:
27 Fsph = Fsph,∞ f sph = 6 π µ Rp U f sph , (2)

28 in which fsph is a correction factor for the microhydrodynamic drag. Note the
29 implication that fsph,∞ = 1 identically.
30 Exact expressions for fsph were derived independently by Maude (1961) and Brenner
31 (1961) for either a solid surface or a free surface, and have been discussed extensively
32 in the literature (e.g. Cox and Brenner, 1967; Keh and Tseng, 1994; Nguyen and
33 Schulze, 2004).
34 Limiting approximations have been obtained for large gaps using the method of
35 reflections, and for small gaps using the lubrication approach (see Cox and Brenner,
 1 1967). Global rational approximations are also available (Nguyen and Evans, 2002;
2 Nguyen and Schulze, 2004; Verrelli et al., 2012).

3 2.2 Ellipsoid
4 The prolate ellipsoid is defined with major semi-axis a and minor semi-axis b (hence
5 a > b). The exact drag force in an unbounded fluid is given by:
6 Fell,∞ = 6 π µ b U f ell,∞ , (3)

7 f ell,∞ = { 3
4
[
ζ 2 − 1 (ζ 2 + 1) ar coth(ζ ) − ζ ]}
−1
, (4)

8 ζ = a / a 2 − b2 = 1 / 1 − 1 / A 2 , (5)

9 in which A ≡ a/b represents the aspect ratio.

10 When a boundary is present, the drag force is given by
11 Fell = 6 π µ b U f ell . (6)

12 Evaluation of fell is much more involved than for fsph. A helpful review of the various
13 approaches was presented by Hsu & Ganatos (1989):
14 • method of reflections — suffices only for large gaps;
15 • boundary collocation, truncated series — potential for arbitrary accuracy, but
16 difficult to apply to non-axisymmetric motion;
17 • finite element method — computationally inefficient;
18 • singularity method — the singularities can be Stokeslets, rotlets, Sampsolets,
19 etc. (Liron and Barta, 1992; Wu, 1984);
20 • boundary-integral method (integrate a Green function over the particle surface)
21 — computationally intensive, convergence to an accurate estimate is slow, and
22 may require analytical treatment in some of the domain to deal with
23 singularities (Keh and Tseng, 1994).
24 The finite volume techniques typical of CFD (computational fluid dynamics) software
25 packages will provide only numerical results, and require specialised resources.
26 In the present work, the results of Keh & Tseng (1994) are applied*, which are
27 available for interaction of the particle with a solid plane wall or a free surface, can (in
28 principle) attain arbitrary accuracy, and can be implemented following a numerical
29 ‘recipe’ consisting of closed-form equations. Their results use the approach
30 developed by Wu and co-workers (Wu, 1984; Yuan and Wu, 1987), in which a set of
31 Sampson spherical singularities (“Sampsonlets”) are distributed internally within the
32 particle, and the (no-slip) flow condition at the particle surface is satisfied by
33 applying the boundary colocation technique.

* A more recent publication by Keh & Chang (2010) uses the same general technique, but is
described as simpler and more accurate (Keh, 2013), and allows for varying degrees of slip on
the particle surface. However, the plane boundary cannot be a free surface.
 1 To date only a limited number of numerical evaluations have been presented in the
2 literature, for the purpose of demonstrating the respective techniques, and are hence
3 not directly useful for researchers wishing to conduct a simulation. While various
4 techniques for making the determinations have been presented, implementing the
5 computations is not trivial; moreover, in a typical simulation it will be necessary to
6 know the drag on the particle at a large number of arbitrary separations from the
7 bounding plane. Yet the evaluation becomes very time-consuming for small gaps.

8 3 Numerical evaluations, and approximate formulæ

9 3.1 Evaluations
10 As a representative case, a prolate ellipsoid of aspect ratio A = 2 is chosen. A
11 tabulation of numerical results for fell is presented in the Supplementary Material
12 online. The data are plotted in Figure 1(a) for no-slip and Figure 1(b) for free-slip
13 conditions at the plane boundary. The variable d is the shortest distance between the
14 particle’s centre and the plane boundary.
15

16 ***INSERT Figure 1***

17

18 3.2 Asymptotic formulæ

19 Asymptotic formulæ can be found for fell for either large or small gaps.

20 3.2.1 Large gaps

21 For large gaps, the method of reflections can be used to obtain estimates of the drag
22 force. Yuan & Wu (1987) cited an especially handy result due to Brenner (1962),
23 which provides a very simple and completely general correction to the drag force on
24 the unbounded particle of arbitrary shape, based on the corresponding correction for
25 the case of a spherical particle.
26 For the ellipsoid this yields:
f∞
27 f ell ≈ fBrenner = , (7)
k f∞
1−
A ( da )

28 in which the coefficient k is 9/8 for a solid plane, and 3/4 for a free surface. This is
29 plotted in Figure 1. On the log–log plot its maximum curvature occurs when the
30 dimensionless gap,
d−a
31 ε ell ≡ , (8)
a
 1 is equal to 1 − k f ∞ / A ; for ellipsoids of intermediate to large aspect ratios this is of
2 order 100, and is a rough guide to the lower limit of εell for applicability of the
3 approximation.

4 3.2.2 Small gaps

5 For small gaps, the appropriate asymptotic formulæ do not appear to have been
6 presented in the literature. One could undertake an analysis using lubrication theory
7 (cf. Cox and Brenner, 1967), but a much simpler approach is available.
8 For small gaps the drag force is dominated by the profile of the particle in close
9 proximity to the boundary. By numerical (curve fitting) or analytical (differentiation)
10 techniques it can be shown that this profile approaches that of a sphere, of radius
11 Rp = b/A, near to the boundary.
12 Equating the drag force on the equivalent sphere with the drag force on the ellipsoid,
13 one finds that
f sph
R p =b / A
14 f ell ≈ f equiv. sphere = . (9)
A
15 Equation 9 is also plotted in Figure 1.
16 Moreover, simple asymptotic forms for fsph can be recognised (Nguyen and Schulze,
17 2004; Verrelli et al., 2011) as
1
18 f sph → as ε sph → 0 , (10)
c εsph

19 in which the coefficient c is 1 for an immobile boundary surface, or 4 for a mobile

20 boundary surface, and εsph is the dimensionless gap pertaining to a sphere, namely
d − Rp
21 εsph ≡ . (11)
Rp

22 Specifying the dimensional gaps for the ellipsoid and the equivalent sphere to be
23 equal, comparison of equations 8 and 11 yields εsph = A2 εell; and insertion into
24 equations 10 and 9 then gives
1
25 f ell → as εell → 0 . (12)
c A 3 εell

26 This asymptote is also plotted in Figure 1.

27 3.3 Global approximations

28 3.3.1 Zero-parameter expression

29 A simple, zero-parameter expression for the drag coefficient is given by:
f sph −1
R p =b / A
30 f ell ≈ f zero param. ≡ + f Brenner . (13)
A
 1 This relies on the fact that fBrenner is negligible for small gaps, and the first term
2 approaches zero for large gaps. For an aspect ratio of 2 this simple approximation is
3 remarkably good, with the error typically less than 4 %, and never exceeding 9 %.
4 The estimates are plotted in Figure 1, while the associated errors are provided in the
5 online Supplementary Material.
6 Unfortunately, attainment of this accuracy is partly a matter of happenstance,
7 because the fit is only this good for aspect ratios close to 2. Nevertheless, as a basic
8 approximation it could be used for other aspect ratios, say in the range 1.5 < A < 5.
9 The main advantage is not requiring any additional data to determine a fitting
10 parameter.

11 3.3.2 One-parameter expression

12 To improve the range of aspect ratios which can be covered, it is necessary to
13 introduce at least one adjustable fitting parameter. The functional form chosen
14 should reproduce the correct asymptotic behaviours. The recommended form is:
1/2
  φ
1
  1  
2

≡ ( f ell,∞ ) + 
2
15 f ell ≈ f one param. 3

  +  3

  , (14)
  c A εell   c A εell  

16 in which φ is the unknown parameter.

17 For an aspect ratio of 2, the best fits are obtained with φ = 13.54 for an immobile
18 boundary condition, and φ = 13.26 for a mobile one. The predictions from this
19 formula are indistinguishable from the two alternatives plotted in Figure 1, at the
20 scale shown.
21 The associated errors are presented in the online Supplementary Material. For A = 2,
22 the error is always better than 3.1 % for the immobile boundary condition, and better
23 than 16 % for the mobile case. This may not seem much of an improvement over the
24 zero-parameter case, but the key point of distinction is found for other aspect ratios.
25 For the limiting situation where A = 1 (a sphere), fzero param. performs very badly, while
26 fone param. achieves errors smaller than 1.9 % (immobile case, φ = 2.550) and 1.3 %
27 (mobile case, φ = 5.818) for the entire range of dimensionless gaps. For other values
28 of aspect ratio up to A ≈ 5 the prediction provides a tolerable approximation across
29 the full range of gaps.
30 To tune the fitting parameter, the ends of the curve (small and large gap) should be
31 excluded, as the asymptotic behaviour is inherent to the form of fone param.. Rather,
32 published values of fell at intermediate values of the dimensionless gap, εell, should be
33 used (e.g. Keh and Chang, 2010; Keh and Tseng, 1994; Yuan and Wu, 1987).
34 As the errors in fzero param. and fone param. are generally uncorrelated (or even negatively
35 correlated), an estimate of the uncertainty can be obtained by comparing the two
36 approximations. Averaging the two approximations may result in reduced error.
 1 3.3.3 Four-parameter expression
2 If a sufficiently large number of precise estimates of fell are available at a wide range
3 of dimensionless gaps, εell, then a more precise functional form can be employed with
4 four adjustable parameters:
1/ 5
  φ1   φ2   φ3   φ4   1  
1 2 3 4 5

≡ ( f ell,∞ ) +   +   +   +   +   
5
5 f ell ≈ f four param. , (15)
  E   E   E   E   E  

6 in which E is a shorthand for c A 3 εell .

7 The parameters have been determined for A = 2, as given in Table 1. The resulting
8 estimates are plotted in Figure 1. Associated errors are negligible for most practical
9 purposes, never exceeding 0.4 % and 0.9 % respectively for the immobile and mobile
10 cases; details are given in the online Supplementary Material.
11

12 ***INSERT Table 1***

13

14 4 Discussion
15 While the system is described in terms of an infinite plane, in practice the boundary
16 merely needs to be much larger and much less curved that the particle (Maude, 1961).
17 Hence, the results could be applied, say, in mineral froth flotation, where small
18 particles interact with bubbles that are significantly larger (Verrelli et al., 2011).
19 Other applications include deposition/accretion, coalescence, erosion, fluidisation,
20 fouling/biofouling, and atomic force microscopy (AFM).
21 The equations can be used on their own, to simulate a single particle’s motion.
22 Alternatively, they will be very useful when implemented as sub-grid-scale (SGS)
23 models in computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis of particulate systems that
24 typically comprise millions, billions, or even many trillions of particles in a large
25 volume (Koh and Verrelli, 2014).
26 Another application is in the approach (or withdrawal) of two prolate ellipsoids along
27 their (mutually aligned) axes of symmetry, as in e.g. coagulation. In this symmetric
28 system there is no shear stress acting at the mid-plane, nor any perpendicular fluid
29 velocity component, and it corresponds to the case of single particle interacting with a
30 free surface (Maude, 1961).
31 Herein it is assumed that the ‘free surface’ has negligible surfactant present, as this
32 would affect the degree of effective slip experienced (Verrelli, 2012). Also,
33 deformation of the bounding surfaces is not considered; deformation could, in
34 principle, be accounted for in an independent calculation, provided significant
35 curvature was not introduced.
 1 5 Conclusions
2 The microhydrodynamic drag factor, fell, was evaluated for the full span of physically
3 relevant gaps, for the representative case of a prolate ellipsoid of aspect ratio, A, equal
4 to 2, given axisymmetric perpendicular translation with respect to either a planar free
5 surface or a plane wall. Additionally, completely general functions describing the
6 asymptotic behaviour at very small gaps were presented for the first time,
7 complementing the formula available for very large gaps.
8 The numerical results serve as an additional source of validation data. Moreover, the
9 numerical results can be used as a basis for curve fitting, and three alternative
10 functional forms of varying degrees of precision were presented. The simpler two
11 forms can be applied to approximate the drag factor for low to moderate aspect ratios
12 with very little effort. The more extended form requires more data for the adjustable
13 parameters to be found; the required values were presented for A = 2, and this serves
14 as a convenient and computationally efficient formula to estimate fell with quite high
15 accuracy for this stereotypical aspect ratio.
16 The results can be used directly in dedicated analytical calculations, or embedded in
17 sub-grid scale models within complex CFD simulations.

18 Acknowledgements
19 My thanks to individual CSIRO staff for organising my extended access to their
20 computational facilities.

21 References
22 Brenner, H., 1961. The slow motion of a sphere through a viscous fluid towards a plane
23 surface. Chemical Engineering Science 16, 242–251.
24 Brenner, H., 1962. Effect of finite boundaries on the Stokes resistance of an arbitrary particle.
25 Journal of Fluid Mechanics 12, 35–48.
26 Cox, R.G., Brenner, H., 1967. The slow motion of a sphere through a viscous fluid towards a
27 plane surface—II. Small gap widths, including inertial effects. Chemical Engineering
28 Science 22, 1753–1777.
29 Hsu, R., Ganatos, P., 1989. The motion of a rigid body in viscous fluid bounded by a plane
30 wall. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 207, 29–72.
31 Keh, H.-J., 2013. [Personal communication]
32 Keh, H.-J., Chang, Y.C., 2010. Slow motion of a general axisymmetric slip particle along its
33 axis of revolution and normal to one or two plane walls. Computer Modeling in
34 Engineering & Sciences 62, 225–254.
35 Keh, H.-J., Tseng, C.H., 1994. Slow motion of an arbitrary axisymmetric body along its axis of
36 revolution and normal to a plane surface. International Journal of Multiphase Flow 20,
37 185–210.
38 Koh, P.T.L., Verrelli, D.I., 2014. Influence of particle shape on flotation performance, in:
39 Yianatos, J. (Ed.), XXVII International Mineral Processing Congress (IMPC 2014). U.
40 de Chile / U. de Concepción / UTFSM / Colegio de Ingenieros de Chile / Gecamin,
41 Santiago, Chile.
42 Liron, N., Barta, E., 1992. Motion of a rigid particle in Stokes flow: a new second-kind
43 boundary-integral equation formulation. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 238, 579–598.
 1 Maude, A.D., 1961. End effects in a falling-sphere viscometer. British Journal of Applied
2 Physics 12, 293–295.
3 Nguyen, A.V., Evans, G.M., 2002. Axisymmetric approach of a solid sphere toward a non-
4 deformable planar slip interface in the normal stagnation flow — development of global
5 rational approximations for resistance coefficients. International Journal of Multiphase
6 Flow 28, 1369–1380.
7 Nguyen, A.V., Schulze, H.J., 2004. Colloidal Science of Flotation. Marcel Dekker, New York,
8 U.S.A.
9 Verrelli, D.I., 2012. Localised inducement of bubble surface mobility due to motion of a
10 nearby particle, in: Solnordal, C.B., Liovic, P., Delaney, G.W., Witt, P.J. (Eds.), Ninth
11 International Conference on Computational Fluid Dynamics in the Minerals and
12 Process Industries (CFD2012). CSIRO, Australia, Melbourne, Australia.
13 Verrelli, D.I., Koh, P.T.L., Nguyen, A.V., 2011. Particle–bubble interaction and attachment in
14 flotation. Chemical Engineering Science 66, 5910–5921 & Supplementary Material.
15 Verrelli, D.I., Lee, A., Schwarz, M.P., Koh, P.T.L., 2012. Forces arising during bubble–particle
16 interaction, in: Solnordal, C.B., Liovic, P., Delaney, G.W., Witt, P.J. (Eds.), Ninth
17 International Conference on Computational Fluid Dynamics in the Minerals and
18 Process Industries (CFD2012). CSIRO, Australia, Melbourne, Australia.
19 Wu, W.Y., 1984. A new approach of treating the Stokes flow of nonslender prolate arbitrary
20 axisymmetrical body. Scientia Sinica, Series A, Mathematical, physical, astronomical &
21 technical sciences XXVII, 731–744.
22 Yuan, F., Wu, W.-y., 1987. The Stokes flow of an arbitrary prolate axisymmetric body towards
23 an infinite plane wall. Applied Mathematics and Mechanics 8, 17–30.
24

25

26
 1

3 CAPTIONS for main text

4

5 Figure 1: Drag correction factors, fell, for prolate ellipsoid of aspect ratio 2, interacting with different
6 planar boundaries: (a) a plane wall; (b) a free surface. Individual numerical results from the literature
7 are included (Keh and Chang, 2010; Keh and Tseng, 1994; Yuan and Wu, 1987), along with asymptotic
8 results, and global approximations.

10

11 Table 1: Coefficient values in the four-parameter approximation of fell for A = 2.

12

13
 (a)

(b)

1
Parameter Immobile Mobile
φ1 66.85207746 215.39084113
φ2 −24.58749633 −22.40411619
φ3 6.29062436 4.51213214
φ4 2.52973114 2.28405822
1 Graphical Abstract
2

3
4
5
6
1 Highlights
2
3 • Precise evaluation of drag factor for ellipsoids far from and near to boundary
4 • Derivation of exact formulæ for drag force as function of gap for small gaps
5 • Presentation of two simple analytical approximations that don’t need iteration
6 • Identification of four-parameter model with correct limits and good accuracy
7 • Global approximations are much easier to implement and much faster to
8 evaluate
9