Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:42:58.764Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Slippery interfaces for drag reduction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 November 2013

Peichun Amy Tsai
Peichun Amy Tsai*
Affiliation:
Soft Matter, Fluidics, and Interfaces Group, University of Twente, 7500 AE Enschede, The Netherlands
*
†Email address for correspondence: p.a.tsai@utwente.nl
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Inspired by natural interfaces with surprising transport properties, innovative modifications of surfaces have been engineered to reduce drag. The common theme across these new developments is the presence of lubricant patches or layers that decrease the direct contact of viscous liquid with non-slippery solid walls. For laminar flow, the traditional assumption regarding the lubricant layer is a constant shear rate or a steady pressure gradient, implying a net flow rate of the lubricant film. By challenging this assumption, Busse et al. (J. Fluid Mech., vol. 727, 2013, pp. 488–508) rigorously found that the hydrodynamic slip is reduced by the presence of a reversal of lubricant flow close to the wall. The analytical results for velocity field and change in drag provide insight into the optimal design of slippery surfaces with lubricant layers for drag reduction.

JFM classification

Flow Control: Drag reduction Micro-/Nano-fluid dynamics: Microfluidics Multiphase and Particle-laden Flows: Multiphase flow
Type
Focus on Fluids
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 736 , 10 December 2013 , pp. 1 - 4
Copyright
©2013 Cambridge University Press 

References

Bocquet, L. & Lauga, E. 2011 A smooth future. Nat. Mater. 10, 334–337.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Busse, A., Sandham, N. D., McHale, G. & Newton, M. I. 2013 Change in drag, apparent slip and optimum air layer thickness for laminar flow over an idealized superhydrophobic surface. J. Fluid Mech. 727, 488–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, A. M. J. & Lauga, E. 2009 Geometric transition in friction for flow over a bubble mattress. Phys. Fluids 21, 011701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyväluoma, J., Kunert, C. & Harting, J. 2011 Simulations of slip flow on nanobubble-laden surfaces. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 23, 184106.Google ScholarPubMed
Karatay, E., Haase, A. S., Visser, C. W., Sun, C., Lohse, D., Tsai, P. A. & Lammertink, R. G. H. 2013 Control of slippage with tunable bubble mattresses. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 110, 8422–8426.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lauga, E. & Stone, H. A. 2003 Effective slip in pressure-driven Stokes flow. J. Fluid Mech. 489, 55–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quéré, D. 2008 Wetting and roughness. Annu. Rev. Mater. Res. 38, 71–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothstein, J. P. 2010 Slip on superhydrophobic surfaces. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 42, 89–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sbragaglia, M. & Prosperetti, A. 2007 A note on the effective slip properties for microchannel flows with ultrahydrophobic surfaces. Phys. Fluids 19, 043603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seddon, J. R. T. & Lohse, D. 2011 Nanobubbles and micropancakes: gaseous domains on immersed substrates. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 23, 133001.Google ScholarPubMed
Steinberger, A., Cottin-Bizonne, C., Kleimann, P. & Charlaix, E. 2007 High friction on a bubble mattress. Nat. Mater. 6, 665–668.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vinogradova, O. I. 1999 Slippage of water over hydrophobic surfaces. Intl J. Miner. Process. 56, 31–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar