Experiments in Fluids

, 59:47 | Cite as

Experimental investigation of the microscale rotor–stator cavity flow with rotating superhydrophobic surface

Research Article

Abstract

The flow characteristics of microscale rotor–stator cavity flow and the drag reduction mechanism of the superhydrophobic surface with high shearing stress were investigated. A microscale rotating flow testing system was established based on micro particle image velocimetry (micro-PIV), and the flow distribution under different Reynolds numbers (7.02 × 103 ≤ Re ≤ 3.51 × 104) and cavity aspect ratios (0.013 ≤ G ≤ 0.04) was measured. Experiments show that, for circumferential velocity, the flow field distributes linearly in rotating Couette flow in the case of low Reynolds number along the z-axis, while the boundary layer separates and forms Batchelor flow as the Reynolds number increases. The separation of the boundary layer is accelerated with the increase of cavity aspect ratio. The radial velocities distribute in an S-shape along the z-axis. As the Reynolds number and cavity aspect ratio increase, the maximum value of radial velocity increases, but the extremum position at rotating boundary remains at Z* = 0.85 with no obvious change, while the extremum position at the stationary boundary changes along the z-axis. The model for the generation of flow disturbance and the transmission process from the stationary to the rotating boundary was given by perturbation analysis. Under the action of superhydrophobic surface, velocity slip occurs near the rotating boundary and the shearing stress reduces, which leads to a maximum drag reduction over 51.4%. The contours of vortex swirling strength suggest that the superhydrophobic surface can suppress the vortex swirling strength and repel the vortex structures, resulting in the decrease of shearing Reynolds stress and then drag reduction.

Abbreviations

G

Cavity aspect ratio (−)

Z*

Axial position (−)

Vθ*

Circumferential velocity (−)

Vf*

Fluctuation intensity (−)

Tu

Radial perturbation (−)

ReL

Local Reynolds number (−)

DOC

Depth of correlation (−)

F

Fraction (−)

Re

Reynolds number (−)

r*

Radial position (−)

Vr*

Radial velocity (−)

T*

Reynolds shearing stress (−)

DR

Drag reduction (−)

λci

Vortex swirling strength (−)

D

Velocity gradient tensor (s−1)

t

Rotational time (min)

τ

Shear stress

Max

Maximum value of a parameter

s

Solid

Δ

Increment of a parameter

a

Air

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work is financially supported by the National Basic Research Program of China (2012CB934100).

Supplementary material

348_2018_2499_MOESM1_ESM.docx (1.6 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 1680 KB)

References

  1. Andersson HI, Lygren M (2006) LES of open rotor–stator flow. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 27:551–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cros A, Le Gal P (2002) Spatiotemporal intermittency in the torsional Couette flow between arotating and a stationary disk. Phys Fluids 14:3755MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Daniello RJ, Waterhouse NE, Rothstein JP (2009) Drag reduction in turbulent flows over superhydrophobic surfaces. Phys Fluids 21:085103CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Faller AJ (1991) Instability and transition of disturbed flow over a rotating disk. J Fluid Mech 230:245–269CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Gauthier G, Gondret P, Rabaud M (1999) Axisymmetric propagating vortices in the flow between a stationary and a rotating disk enclosed by a cylinder. J Fluid Mech 386:105–126MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Haddadi S, Poncet S (2008) Turbulence modeling of torsional Couette flows. Int J Rotat Mach 2008:1–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hara S, Watanabe T, Furukawa H, Endo S (2015) Effects of a radial gap on vortical flow structures around a rotating disk in a cylindrical casing. J Vis 18:501–510CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Iacovides H, Theofanopoulos I (1991) Turbulence modeling of axisymmetric flow inside rotating cavities. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 12:2–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jiji LM, Ganatos P (2010) Microscale flow and heat transfer between rotating disks. Int J Heat Fluid Flow 31:702–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Joseph P, Tabeling P (2005) Direct measurement of the apparent slip length. Phys Rev E 71:035303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Joseph P, Cottin-Bizonne C, Benoît J-M et al (2006) Slippage of water past superhydrophobic carbon nanotube forests in microchannels. Phys Rev Lett 97:156104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kang C-I, Baek S-E, Shim J-S (2004) A new seek servo controller for minimizing power consumption in micro hard disk drives. IEEE Trans Magn 40:3127–3129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kloosterman A, Poelma C, Westerweel J (2011) Flow rate estimation in large depth-of-field micro-PIV. Exp Fluids 50:1587–1599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Launder B, Poncet S, Serre E (2010) Laminar, transitional, and turbulent flows in rotor–stator cavities. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 42:229–248CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Lee J, Yong K (2015) Combining the lotus leaf effect with artificial photosynthesis: regeneration of underwater superhydrophobicity of hierarchical ZnO/Si surfaces by solar water splitting. NPG Asia Mater 7:e201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lee J, Jelly TO, Zaki TA (2015) Effect of Reynolds number on turbulent drag reduction by superhydrophobic surface textures. Flow Turbul Combust 95:277–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lee C, Choi C-H, Kim C-J (2016) Superhydrophobic drag reduction in laminar flows: a critical review. Exp Fluids 57:176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lu S, Yao Z, Hao P, Fu C (2010) Drag reduction in ultrahydrophobic channels with micro-nanostructured surfaces. Sci China Phys Mech Astron 53:1298–1305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Makino S, Inagaki M, Nakagawa M (2015) Laminar-turbulence transition over the rotor disk in an enclosed rotor–stator cavity. Flow Turbul Combust 95(2–3):399–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ou J, Rothstein JP (2005) Direct velocity measurements of the flow past drag-reducing surfaces. Phys Fluids 17:103606CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Ou J, Perot B, Rothstein JP (2004) Laminar drag reduction in microchannels using ultrahydrophobic surfaces. Phys Fluids 16:4635CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. Park H, Kim J (2016) The effects of superhydrophobic surfaces on skin friction drag. 23:357–365Google Scholar
  23. Park H, Park H, Kim J (2013) A numerical study of the effects of superhydrophobic surface on skin-friction drag in turbulent channel flow. Phys Fluids 25:110815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sakai M (2009) Effect of surface structure on the sustainability of an air layer on superhydrophobic coating in a water–ethanol mixture. Langmuir 25:13–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Schouveiler L, Le Gal P, Chauve M-P (1998) Stability of a traveling roll system in a rotating disk flow. Phys Fluids 10:2695–2697MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. Schouveiler L, Le Gal P, Chauve MP, Takeda Y (1999) Spiral and circular waves in the flow between a rotating and a stationary disk. Exp Fluids 26:179–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schouveiler L, Le Gal P, Chauve MP (2001) Instabilities of the flow between a rotating and a stationary disk. J Fluid Mech 443:329–350CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. Shi YP, Tang F, Wang XH (2013) Simulation research on micro-cavity flow field characteristics of liquid floating rotor gyro. Key Eng Mater. Trans Tech Publ, pp 490–495Google Scholar
  29. Wang C, Tang F, Hao P, Li Q, Wang X (2016a) Experimental study on the drag reduction effect of a rotating superhydrophobic surface in micro gap flow field. Microsyst Technol 23:3033–3040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wang C, Tang F, Li Q, Zhang Y, Wang X (2016b) Spray-coated superhydrophobic surfaces with wear-resistance, drag-reduction and anti-corrosion properties. Colloids Surf A 514:236–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Watanabe T, Furukawa H (2009) Flows around rotating disks with and without rim-shroud gap. Exp Fluids 48:631–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Watanabe T, Furukawa H (2010) The effect of rim-shroud gap on the spiral rolls formed around a rotating disk. Phys Fluids (1994–present) 22:114107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Weng R, Zhang H, Liu X (2014) The nanostructured super-oleophobic liquid-floated rotor gyroscope. Microelectron Eng 119:183–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Woolford B, Prince J, Maynes D, Webb BW (2009) Particle image velocimetry characterization of turbulent channel flow with rib patterned superhydrophobic walls. Phys Fluids 21:085106CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. Zhang J, Tian H, Yao Z, Hao P, Jiang N (2015) Mechanisms of drag reduction of superhydrophobic surfaces in a turbulent boundary layer flow. Exp Fluids 56:179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zhang J, Yao Z, Hao P (2016) Drag reductions and the air-water interface stability of superhydrophobic surfaces in rectangular channel flow. Phys Rev E 94:053117CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Precision Measurement Technology and Instruments, Department of Precision InstrumentTsinghua UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations