Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-78bd46657c-9jmqz Total loading time: 0.336 Render date: 2021-05-09T16:41:29.377Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

Common features between the Newtonian laminar–turbulent transition and the viscoelastic drag-reducing turbulence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 August 2019

Anselmo S. Pereira
Affiliation:
MINES ParisTech, PSL Research University, Centre for Material Forming (CEMEF), CNRS UMR 7635, CS 10207 rue Claude Daunesse, 06904 Sophia-Antipolis CEDEX, France
Roney L. Thompson
Affiliation:
COPPE, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Centro de Tecnologia, Ilha do Fundão, 21945-970, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
Gilmar Mompean
Affiliation:
Université de Lille, Polytech’Lille, and Unité de Mécanique de Lille, UML EA 7512, Cité Scientifique, 59655 Villeneuve d’Ascq, France
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

The transition from laminar to turbulent flows has challenged the scientific community since the seminal work of Reynolds (Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A, vol. 174, 1883, pp. 935–982). Recently, experimental and numerical investigations on this matter have demonstrated that the spatio-temporal dynamics that are associated with transitional flows belong to the directed percolation class. In the present work, we explore the analysis of laminar–turbulent transition from the perspective of the recent theoretical development that concerns viscoelastic turbulence, i.e. the drag-reducing turbulent flow obtained from adding polymers to a Newtonian fluid. We found remarkable fingerprints of the variety of states that are present in both types of flows, as captured by a series of features that are known to be present in drag-reducing viscoelastic turbulence. In particular, when compared to a Newtonian fully turbulent flow, the universal nature of these flows includes: (i) the statistical dynamics of the alternation between active and hibernating turbulence; (ii) the weakening of elliptical and hyperbolic structures; (iii) the existence of high and low drag reduction regimes with the same boundary; (iv) the relative enhancement of the streamwise-normal stress; and (v) the slope of the energy spectrum decay with respect to the wavenumber. The maximum drag reduction profile was attained in a Newtonian flow with a Reynolds number near the boundary of the laminar regime and in a hibernating state. It is generally conjectured that, as the Reynolds number increases, the dynamics of the intermittency that characterises transitional flows migrate from a situation where heteroclinic connections between the upper and the lower branches of solutions are more frequent to another where homoclinic orbits around the upper solution become the general rule.

Type
JFM Papers
Copyright
© 2019 Cambridge University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Alizard, F. & Biau, D. 2019 Restricted nonlinear model for high and low drag events in a plane channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 864, 221243.10.1017/jfm.2019.14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armfield, S. W. & Street, R. L. 2000 Fractional step methods for the Navier–Stokes equations on non-staggered grids. ANZIAM J. 42(E), C134C156.10.21914/anziamj.v42i0.593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barkley, D. 2016 Theoretical perspective on the route to turbulence in a pipe. J. Fluid Mech. 803, 180.10.1017/jfm.2016.465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barkley, D., Song, B., Mukund, V., Lemoult, G., Avila, M. & Hof, B. 2015 The rise of fully turbulent flow. Nature 526, 550564.10.1038/nature15701CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bird, R., Curtiss, C. F., Armstrong, R. & Hassager, O. 1987 Dynamics of Polymeric Liquids. Volume 2: Kinetic Theory. Wiley-Interscience.Google Scholar
Choueiri, G. H., Lopez, J. M. & Hof, B. 2018 Exceeding the asymptotic limit of polymer drag reduction. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (124501), 15.10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.124501CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dubief, Y., Terrapon, V. E. & Soria, J. 2013 On the mechanism of elasto-inertial turbulence. Phys. Fluids 25, 110817.10.1063/1.4820142CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dubief, Y., Terrapon, V. E., White, C. M., Shaqfeh, E. S. G., Moin, P. & Lele, S. K. 2005 New answers on the interaction between polymers and vortices in turbulent flows. Flow Turbul. Combust. 74, 311329.10.1007/s10494-005-9002-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubief, Y., White, C. M., Shaqfeh, E. S. G. & Terrapon, V. E.2011 Polymer maximum drag reduction: a unique transitional state. arXiv:1106.4482v1.Google Scholar
Dubief, Y., White, C. M., Terrapon, V. E., Shaqfeh, E. S. G., Moin, P. & Lele, S. K. 2004 On the coherent drag-reducing and turbulence-enhancing behaviour of polymers in wall flows. J. Fluid Mech. 514, 271280.10.1017/S0022112004000291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckert, M. 2010 The troublesome birth of hydrodynamic stability theory: Sommerfeld and the turbulence problem. Eur. Phys. J. H 35, 2951.10.1140/epjh/e2010-00003-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elbing, B. R., Perlin, M., Dowling, D. R. & Ceccio, S. L. 2013 Modification of the mean near-wall velocity profile of a high-Reynolds number turbulent boundary layer with the injection of drag-reducing polymer solutions. Phys. Fluids 25, 085103.10.1063/1.4817073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fu, Z., Iwaki, Y., Motozawa, M., Tsukara, T. & Kawaguchi, Y. 2015 Characteristic turbulent structure of a modified drag-reduced surfactant solution flow via dosing water from channel wall. Intl J. Heat Fluid Flow 53, 135145.10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2015.03.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, M. D. 2014 Drag reduction and the dynamics of turbulence in simple and complex fluids. Phys. Fluids 26 (101301), 124.10.1063/1.4895780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, M. D. 2015 Turbulence spreads like wildfire. Nature 526, 508509.10.1038/526508aCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grundestam, O., Wallin, S. & Johansson, A. V. 2008 Direct numerical simulations of rotating turbulent channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 598, 177199.10.1017/S0022112007000122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, R. J. & Little, R. C. 1974 Early turbulence and drag reduction phenomena in larger pipes. Nature 252, 690690.10.1038/252690a0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henningson, D. S., Lundbladh, A. & Johansson, A. V. 1993 A mechanism for bypass transition from localized disturbances in wall-bounded shear flows. J. Fluid Mech. 250, 169207.10.1017/S0022112093001429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Housiadas, K. D. & Beris, A. N. 2013 On the skin friction coefficient in viscoelastic wall-bounded flows. Intl J. Heat Fluid Flow 42, 4967.10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2012.11.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, J. C. R., Wray, A. A. & Moin, P.1988 Eddies, stream, and convergence zones in turbulent flows. Center for Turbulence Research – Proceedings of Summer Program Report CTR-S88, 193–208.Google Scholar
Johansson, A. V., Alfredsson, P. H. & Kim, J. 1991 Evolution and dynamics of shear-layer structures in near-wall turbulence. J. Fluid Mech. 224, 579599.10.1017/S002211209100188XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, K., Li, C.-F., Sureshkumar, R., Balachandar, L. & Adrian, R. J. 2007 Effects of polymer stresses on eddy structures in drag-reduced turbulent channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 584, 281299.10.1017/S0022112007006611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Komminaho, J., Lundbladh, A. & Johansson, A. V. 1996 Very large structures in plane turbulent Couette flow. J. Fluid Mech. 320, 259285.10.1017/S0022112096007537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundbladh, A. & Johansson, A. V. 1991 Direct simulation of turbulent spots in plane Couette flow. J. Fluid Mech. 229, 499516.10.1017/S0022112091003130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Min, T., Yoo, J. Y. & Choi, H. 2003a Maximum drag reduction in a turbulent channel flow by polymer additives. J. Fluid Mech. 492, 91100.10.1017/S0022112003005597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Min, T., Yoo, J. Y., Choi, H. & Joseph, D. D. 2003b Drag reduction by polymer additives in a turbulent channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 486, 213238.10.1017/S0022112003004610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, J. S., Shekar, A. & Graham, M. 2018 Bursting and critical layer frequencies in minimal turbulent dynamics and connections to exact coherent states. Phys. Rev. Fluids 3 (014611), 118.10.1103/PhysRevFluids.3.014611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereira, A. S.2016 Transient aspects of the polymer induced drag reduction phenomenon. PhD thesis, pp. 1–211.Google Scholar
Pereira, A. S., Mompean, G. & Soares, E. J. 2018 Modeling and numerical simulations of polymer degradation in a drag reducing plane Couette flow. J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 256, 17.10.1016/j.jnnfm.2018.03.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereira, A. S., Mompean, G., Thais, L. & Soares, E. J. 2017a Transient aspects of drag reducing plane Couette flows. J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 241, 6069.10.1016/j.jnnfm.2017.01.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereira, A. S., Mompean, G., Thais, L., Soares, E. J. & Thompson, R. L. 2017b Active and hibernating turbulence in drag-reducing plane Couette flows. Phys. Rev. Fluids 2 (084605), 114.10.1103/PhysRevFluids.2.084605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereira, A. S., Mompean, G., Thais, L. & Thompson, R. L. 2017c Statistics and tensor analysis of polymer coil-stretch mechanism in turbulent drag reducing channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 824, 135173.10.1017/jfm.2017.332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereira, A. S., Mompean, G., Thompson, R. L. & Soares, E. J. 2017d Elliptical, parabolic, and hyperbolic exchanges of energy in drag reducing plane Couette flows. Phys. Fluids 29, 115106.10.1063/1.5010047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pomeau, Y. 1986 Front motion, metastability and subcritical bifurcations in hydrodynamics. Physica D 23, 311.Google Scholar
Pomeau, Y. 2015 The transition to turbulence in parallel flows: a personal view. C. R. Méc. 343, 210218.10.1016/j.crme.2014.10.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, O. 1883 An experimental investigation of the circumstances which determine whether the motion of water shall be direct or sinuous, and of the law of resistance in parallel channels. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A 174, 935982.Google Scholar
Sano, M. & Tamai, K. 2016 A universal transition to turbulence in channel flow. Nat. Phys. 12, 249253.10.1038/nphys3659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shekar, A., McMullen, R. M., Wang, S.-N., McKeon, B. J. & Graham, M. D. 2019 Critical-layer structures and mechanisms in elastoinertial turbulence. Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 124503.10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.124503CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sid, S., Terrapon, V. E. & Dubief, Y. 2018 Two-dimensional dynamics of elasto-inertial turbulence and its role in polymer drag reduction. Phys. Rev. Fluids 3 (011301), 19.10.1103/PhysRevFluids.3.011301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sureshkumar, R., Beris, A. N. & Handler, R. A. 1997 Direct numerical simulation of the turbulent channel flow of a polymer solution. Phys. Fluids 9, 743755.10.1063/1.869229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thais, L., Gatski, T. B. & Mompean, G. 2012 Some dynamical features of the turbulent flow of a viscoelastic fluid for reduced drag. J. Turbul. 13, 126.Google Scholar
Thais, L., Gatski, T. B. & Mompean, G. 2013a Analysis of polymer drag reduction mechanisms from energy budgets. Intl J. Heat Fluid Flow 43, 5261.10.1016/j.ijheatfluidflow.2013.05.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thais, L., Gatski, T. B. & Mompean, G. 2013b Spectral analysis of turbulent viscoelastic and newtonian channel flows. J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 200, 165176.10.1016/j.jnnfm.2013.04.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thais, L., Tejada-Martinez, A., Gatski, T. B. & Mompean, G. 2011 A massively parallel hybrid scheme for direct numerical simulation of turbulent viscoelastic channel flow. Comput. Fluids 43, 134142.10.1016/j.compfluid.2010.09.025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toms, B. A. 1948 Some observations on the flow of linear polymer solutions through straight tubes at large Reynolds numbers. In Proceedings of the International Congress of Rheology, Holland, pp. 135141. North-Holland.Google Scholar
Tuckerman, L. S., Kreilos, T., Schrobsdorff, H., Scneider, T. M. & Gibson, J. F. 2014 Turbulent-laminar patterns in plane poiseuille flow. Phys. Fluids 26 (114103), 114.10.1063/1.4900874CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vinogradov, G. V. & Mannin, V. N. 1965 An experimental study of elastic turbulence. Colloid Polym. Sci. 201, 9398.Google Scholar
Virk, P. S. 1975a Drag reduction by collapsed and extended polyelectrolytes. Nature 253, 109110.10.1038/253109a0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Virk, P. S. 1975b Drag reduction fundamentals. AIChE J. 21, 625656.10.1002/aic.690210402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Virk, P. S., Mickley, H. S. & Smith, K. A. 1967 The Toms phenomenom: turbulent pipe flow of dilute polymer solutions. J. Fluid Mech. 22, 2230.Google Scholar
Virk, P. S., Mickley, H. S. & Smith, K. A. 1970 The ultimate asymptote and mean flow structure in Toms’ phenomenon. Trans. ASME J. Appl. Mech. 37, 488493.10.1115/1.3408532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waleffe, F. 2001 Exact coherent structures in channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 435, 93102.10.1017/S0022112001004189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warholic, M. D., Massah, H. & Hanratty, T. J. 1999 Influence of drag-reducing polymers on turbulence: effects of Reynolds number, concentration and mixing. Exp. Fluids 27, 461472.10.1007/s003480050371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watanabe, T. & Gotoh, T. 2013 Hybrid Eulerian-Lagrangian simulations for polymer–turbulence interactions. J. Fluid Mech. 717, 535574.10.1017/jfm.2012.595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whalley, R. D., Park, J. S., Kushwaha, A., Dennis, D. J. C., Graham, M. D. & Poole, R. J. 2017 Low-drag events in transitional wall-bounded turbulence. Phys. Rev. Fluids 2 (034602), 19.10.1103/PhysRevFluids.2.034602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, C. M., Dubief, Y. & Klewicki, J. 2012 Re-examining the logarithmic dependence of the mean velocity distribution in polymer drag reduced wall-bounded flow. Phys. Fluids 24, 021701.10.1063/1.3681862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, C. M. & Mungal, M. G. 2008 Mechanics and prediction of turbulent drag reduction whit polymer additives. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 40, 235256.10.1146/annurev.fluid.40.111406.102156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xi, L. & Graham, M. D. 2010 Active and hibernating turbulence in minimal channel flow of Newtonian and polymerc fluids. Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 218301.10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.218301CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xi, L. & Graham, M. D. 2012 Dynamics on the laminar–turbulent boundary and the origin of the maximum drag reduction asymptote. Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 028301.10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.028301CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xiong, X., Tao, J., Chen, S. & Brandt, L. 2015 Turbulent bands in plane-poiseuille flow at moderate Reynolds numbers. Phys. Fluids 27 (041702), 17.10.1063/1.4917173CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Common features between the Newtonian laminar–turbulent transition and the viscoelastic drag-reducing turbulence
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Common features between the Newtonian laminar–turbulent transition and the viscoelastic drag-reducing turbulence
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Common features between the Newtonian laminar–turbulent transition and the viscoelastic drag-reducing turbulence
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *