Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T01:29:43.021Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Direct numerical simulations of turbulent flows over superhydrophobic surfaces

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2009

MICHAEL B. MARTELL ,
J. BLAIR PEROT  and
JONATHAN P. ROTHSTEIN
MICHAEL B. MARTELL
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, USA
J. BLAIR PEROT*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, USA
JONATHAN P. ROTHSTEIN
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003, USA
*
†Email address for correspondence: perot@ecs.umass.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Direct numerical simulations (DNSs) are used to investigate the drag-reducing performance of superhydrophobic surfaces (SHSs) in turbulent channel flow. SHSs combine surface roughness with hydrophobicity and can, in some cases, support a shear-free air–water interface. Slip velocities, wall shear stresses and Reynolds stresses are considered for a variety of SHS microfeature geometry configurations at a friction Reynolds number of Reτ ≈ 180. For the largest microfeature spacing studied, an average slip velocity over 75% of the bulk velocity is obtained, and the wall shear stress reduction is found to be nearly 40%. The simulation results suggest that the mean velocity profile near the superhydrophobic wall continues to scale with the wall shear stress but is offset by a slip velocity that increases with increasing microfeature spacing.

Type
Papers
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 620 , 10 February 2009 , pp. 31 - 41
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

Bechert, D. W., Bruse, M., Hage, W., VanderHoeven, J. G. T. & Hoppe, G. 1997 Experiments on drag-reducing surfaces and their optimization with an adjustable geometry. J. Fluids Mech. 338, 59–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daniello, R., Waterhouse, N. E. & Rothstein, J. P. 2008 Turbulent drag reduction using superhydrophobic surfaces. Submitted to Phys. Fluids.Google Scholar
Fukagata, K., Kasagi, N. & Koumoutsakos, P. 2006 A theoretical prediction of friction drag in turbulent flow by superhydrophobic surfaces. Phys. Fluids 18, 051703:1–051703:4.Google Scholar
Gogte, S., Vorobieff, P., Truesdell, R., Mammoli, A., van Swol, F., Shah, P. & Brinker, C. J. 2005 Effective slip on textured superhydrophobic surfaces. Phys. Fluids 17, 051701:1–051701:4.Google Scholar
Hahn, S., Je, J. & Choi, H. 2002 Direct numerical simulation of turbulent channel flow with permeable walls. J. Fluid Mech. 450, 259–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joseph, P., Cottin-Bizonne, C., Benot, J.-M., Ybert, C., Journet, C., Tabeling, P., & Bocquet, L. 2006 Slippage of water past superhydrophobic carbon nanotube forests in microchannels. Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (15), 156104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, J. 1999 Active control of turbulent boundary layers for drag reduction. Lect. Notes Phys. 529, 142–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lauga, J. & Stone, H. 2003 Effective slip in pressure-driven stokes flow. J. Fluid Mech. 489, 55–77.Google Scholar
Lumley, J. L. 1969 Drag reduction by additives. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 1, 367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martell, Michael B. 2008 Simulations of turbulence over ultrahydrophobic surfaces. Master's thesis, The University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.Google Scholar
Maynes, D. & Webb, B. W. 2003 Fully developed electro-osmotic heat transfer in microchannels. Intl J. Heat Mass Transfer 46 (8), 1359–1369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Min, T. & Kim, J. 2004 Effects of hydrophobic surface on skin-friction drag. Phys. Fluids 16 (7), L55–L58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Min, T. & Kim, J. 2005 Effects of hydrophobic surface on stability and transition. Phys. Fluids 17, 108106:1–108106:4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mittal, R. & Moin, P. 1998 Suitability of upwind-biased finite difference schemes for large-eddy simulation of turbulent flows. Am. Inst. Aeronaut. Astronaut. J. 35 (8), 1415–1417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moser, R., Kim, J. & Mansour, N. 1998 Direct numerical simulation of turbulent channel flow up to Reτ = 590. Phys. Fluids 11 (4), 943–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ou, J., Perot, J. B. & Rothstein, J. 2004 Laminar drag reduction in microchannels using superhydrophobic surfaces. Phys. Fluids 16 (12), 4635–4643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ou, J. & Rothstein, J. 2005 Direct velocity measurements of the flow past drag-reducing ultrahydrophobic surfaces. Phys. Fluids 17 (10), 13606:2–13606:10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perot, J. B. 2000 Conservation properties of unstructured staggered mesh schemes. J. Comput. Phys. 159, 58–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Philip, J. R. 1972 Integral properties of flows satisfying mixed no-slip and no-shear conditions. J. App. Math. Phys. (ZAMP) 23, 960–968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tretheway, D. C. & Meinhart, C. D. 2002 Apparent fluid slip at hydrophobic microchannel walls. Phys. Fluids 14 (3), L9–L12.Google Scholar
Ybert, C., Barentin, C. & Cottin-Bizonne, C. 2007 Acheiving large slip with superhydrophobic surfaces: Scaling laws for generic geometries. Phys. Fluids 19, 123601:1–123601:10.Google Scholar