Glimpses of Flow Development and Degradation During Type B Drag Reduction by Aqueous Solutions of Polyacrylamide B1120

Article
  • 4 Downloads

Abstract

Flow development and degradation during Type B turbulent drag reduction by 0.10 to 10 wppm solutions of a partially-hydrolysed polyacrylamide B1120 of MW \(=\) 18x106 was studied in a smooth pipe of ID \(=\) 4.60 mm and L/D \(=\) 210 at Reynolds numbers from 10000 to 80000 and wall shear stresses Tw from 8 to 600 Pa. B1120 solutions exhibited facets of a Type B ladder, including segments roughly parallel to, but displaced upward from, the P-K line; those that attained asymptotic maximum drag reduction at low Re f but departed downwards into the polymeric regime at a higher retro-onset Re f; and segments at MDR for all Re f. Axial flow enhancement profiles of S\(^{\prime }\) vs L/D reflected a superposition of flow development and polymer degradation effects, the former increasing and the latter diminishing S\(^{\prime }\) with increasing distance downstream. Solutions that induced normalized flow enhancements S\(^{\prime }\)/S\(^{\prime }_{\mathrm {m}} <\) 0.4 developed akin to solvent, with Le,p/D \(=\) Le,n/D \(<\) 42.3, while those at maximum drag reduction showed entrance lengths Le,m/D \(\sim \) 117, roughly 3 times the solvent Le,n/D. Degradation kinetics were inferred by first detecting a falloff point (Ref, S\(^{{\prime }\wedge }\)), of maximum observed flow enhancement, for each polymer solution. A plot of S\(^{{\prime }\wedge }\)vs C revealed S\(^{{\prime }\wedge }\)linear in C at low C, with lower bound [S\(^{\prime }\)] \(=\) 5.0 wppm− 1, and S\(^{{\prime }\wedge }\) independent of C at high C, with upper bound S\(^{\prime }_{\mathrm {m}} =\) 15.9. The ratio S\(^{\prime }\)/S\(^{{\prime }\wedge }\) in any pipe section was interpreted to be the undegraded fraction of original polymer therein. Semi-log plots of (S\(^{\prime }\)/S\(^{{\prime }\wedge }\)) at a section vs transit time from pipe entrance thereto revealed first order kinetics, from which apparent degradation rate constants kdeg s− 1 and entrance severities −ln(S\(^{\prime }\)/S\(^{{\prime }\wedge }\))0 were extracted. At constant C, kdeg increased linearly with increasing wall shear stress Tw, and at constant Tw, kdeg was independent of C, providing a B1120 degradation modulus (kdeg/Tw) \(=\) (0.012 \(\pm \) 0.001) (Pa s)− 1 for 8 \(<\) Tw Pa \(<\) 600, 0.30 \(<\) C wppm \(<\) 10. Entrance severities were negligible below a threshold Twe \(\sim \) 30 Pa and increased linearly with increasing Tw for Tw \(>\) Twe. The foregoing methods were applied to Type A drag reduction by 0.10 to 10 wppm solutions of a polyethyleneoxide PEO P309, MW \(=\) 11x106, in a smooth pipe of ID \(=\) 7.77 mm and L/D \(=\) 220 at Re from 4000 to 115000. P309 solutions that induced S\(^{\prime }\)/S\(^{\prime }_{\mathrm {m}} <\) 0.4 developed akin to solvent, with Le,p/D \(=\) Le,n/D \(<\) 23, while those at MDR had entrance lengths Le,m/D \(\sim \) 93, roughly 4 times the solvent Le,n/D. P309 solutions described a Type A fan distorted by polymer degradation. A typical trajectory departed the P-K line at an onset point Re f* followed by ascending and descending polymeric regime segments separated by a falloff point Ref, of maximum flow enhancement; for all P309 solutions, onset Re f* = 550 \(\pm \) 100 and falloff Ref = 2550 \(\pm \) 250, the interval between them delineating Type A drag reduction unaffected by degradation. A plot of falloff S\(^{{\prime }\wedge }\) vs C for PEO P309 solutions bore a striking resemblance to the analogous S\(^{{\prime }\wedge }\) vs C plot for solutions of PAMH B1120, indicating that the initial Type A drag reduction by P309 after onset at Re f* had evolved to Type B drag reduction by falloff at Ref. Presuming that Type B behaviour persisted past falloff permitted inference of P309 degradation kinetics; kdeg was found to increase linearly with increasing Tw at constant C and was independent of C at constant Tw, providing a P309 degradation modulus (kdeg/Tw) \(=\) (0.011 \(\pm \) 0.002) (Pa s)− 1 for 4 \(<\) Tw Pa \(<\) 400, 0.10 \(<\) C wppm < 5.0. Comparisons between the present degradation kinetics and previous literature showed (kdeg/Tw) data from laboratory pipes of D \(\sim \) 0.01 m to lie on a simple extension of (kdeg/Tw) data from pipelines of D \(\sim \) 0.1 m and 1.0 m, along a power-law relation (kdeg/Tw) \(=\) 10− 5.4.D− 1.6. Intrinsic slips derived from PAMH B1120 and PEO P309-at-falloff experiments were compared with previous examples from Type B drag reduction by polymers with vinylic and glycosidic backbones, showing: (i) For a given polymer, [S\(^{\prime }\)] was independent of Re f and pipe ID, implying insensitivity to both micro- and macro-scales of turbulence; and (ii) [S\(^{\prime }\)] increased linearly with increasing polymer chain contour length Lc, the proportionality constant \(\beta =\) 0.053 \(\pm \) 0.036 enabling estimation of flow enhancement S\(^{\prime } =\) C.Lc.β for all Type B drag reduction by polymers.

Keywords

Drag reduction Turbulent flow Polyelectrolyte solutions Polymer degradation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

A sample of GE/Betz AP1120 flocculant was kindly provided by Chris Deeley, GE Power & Water, Foxborough, MA.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interests

The author declares he has no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Virk, P.S., Mickley, H.S., Smith, K.A.: The ultimate asymptote and mean flow structure in Toms’ Phenomenon. ASME Journal of Applied Mechanics 37, 488–493 (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Virk, P.S.: Drag reduction by collapsed and extended polyelectrolytes. Nature 253, 109–110 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hoyt, J.W., Fabula, A.G.: The effect of additives on fluid friction. In: Proceedings 5th symposium on naval hydrodynamics, Bergen, ONR ACR-112, pp 947–974 (1964)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Virk, P.S., Merrill, E.W., Mickley, H.S., Smith, K.A., Mollo-Christensen, E.L.: The Toms Phenomenon – turbulent pipe flow of dilute polymer solutions. J. Fluid Mech. 30, 305–328 (1967)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Paterson, R.W., Abernathy, F.H.: Turbulent flow drag reduction and degradation with dilute polymer solutions. J. Fluid Mech. 43, 689–710 (1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Horn, A.F., Motier, J.F., Munk, W.R.: Apparent first order rate constants for degradation of a commercial drag reducing agent. In: Sellin, R.H.J., Moses, R. (eds.) Drag reduction in fluid flows: techniques for friction control, pp 255–262. Ellis Horwood Ltd, Chichester (1989)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Horn, A.F., Merrill, E.W.: Midpoint scission of macromolecules in dilute solution in turbulent flow. Nature 312, 140–141 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Virk, P.S., Shields, A.L.: Flow development and degradation in the polymeric and maximum drag reduction regimes. In: Proceedings of the European drag reduction and flow control meeting - EDRFCM 2015, pp. 67–68, Cambridge (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Min, T., Choi, H., Yoo, J.Y.: Maximum drag reduction in a turbulent channel flow by polymer additives. J. Fluid Mech. 492, 91–100 (2003)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Min, T., Yoo, J.Y., Choi, H., Joseph, D.D.: Drag reduction by polymer additives in a turbulent channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 486, 213–238 (2003)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Virk, P.S.: Drag reduction fundamentals. AIChE J 21, 625–656 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Virk, P.S., Chen, R.H.: Type B drag reduction by aqueous and saline solutions of two biopolymers at high Reynolds numbers. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international symposium on seawater drag reduction, pp. 545–558, Busan (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schlichting, H.: Boundary layer theory, 7th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (1979)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Virk, P.S., Sherman, D.C., Wagger, D.L.: Additive equivalence during turbulent drag reduction. AIChE J 43, 3257–3259 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Motier, J.F., Chou, L -C, Kommareddi, N.: Commercial drag reduction: past, present and future. International symposium on drag reduction and turbulence modification, San Diego, ASME Fluids Eng. Div. Conf. Proc. 237(2), 229–234 (1996)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Virk, P.S.: An elastic sublayer model for drag reduction by dilute solutions of linear macromolecules. J. Fluid Mech. 45, 417–440 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Virk, P.S., Chen, R.H.: Macroscale insensitivity of Type B drag reduction by two biopolymers at high Reynolds numbers. In: Proceedings of the European drag reduction and flow control meeting - EDRFCM 2006, Ischia, paper POL2-3 (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Virk, P.S., Wagger, D.L.: Aspects of mechanisms in type B drag reduction. In: Gyr, A. (ed.) The structure of turbulence and drag reduction, pp 201–213. Springer, Berlin (1990)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Inoue, Y., Fukutomi, T., Chujo, R.: Carbon-13 NMR analysis of the tacticity of polyacrylamide. Polym. J. 15, 103–105 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lee, E.J., Chandrasekaran, R.: X-ray and computer modeling studies on gellan-related polymers: Molecular structures of welan, S-657, and rhamsan. Carbohydr. Res. 214, 11–24 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rao, V.S.R., Qasba, P.K., Balaji, P.V., Chandrasekaran, R.: Conformations of carbohydrates. Harwood Academic Publishers, Amsterdam (1998)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Moorhouse, R., Walkinshaw, M.D., Arnott, S.: Xanthan gum - molecular conformation and interactions. In: ACS symposium series, vol. 45, pp 90–112 (1977)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kang, K.S., Petit, D.J.: Xanthan, Gellan, Welan and Rhamsan. In: Whistler, R.L., BeMiller, J.N (eds.) Industrial gums, 3rd edition, pp 341–397. Academic Press, New York (1993)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chandrasekaran, R., Radha, A.: Molecular modelling of Xanthan:Galactomannan interactions. Carbohydr. Polym. 32, 201–208 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gasljevic, K., Aguilar, G., Matthys, E.F.: On two distinct types of drag-reducing fluids, diameter scaling, and turbulent profiles. J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech. 96, 405–425 (2001)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hoving, J.P.: An experimental study on drag reduction by fibres in turbulent pipe flow. M. Sc. Thesis Report MEAH-247 cited in Fig 1.3 p5 of Gillessen, J.J.J.: Numerical simulation of fibre-induced drag reduction in turbulent channel flow. Doctoral Thesis, Promotors Boersma, B.J., Andersson, H.I. TU Delft (2008)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lee, P.F., Duffy, G.G.: Relationships between velocity profiles and drag reduction in turbulent suspension flow. AIChE J 22, 750–753 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bilgen, E., Boulos, R.: Friction reduction by chemical additives in the turbulent flow of fibre suspensions. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 51, 405–411 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sharma, R.S., Seshadri, V., Malhotra, R.C.: Turbulent drag reduction by injection of fibres. J. Rheol. 22, 643–659 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    McComb, W.D., Chan, K.T.J.: Laser-doppler anemometer measurements of turbulence structure in drag-reducing fibre suspensions. J. Fluid Mech. 152, 455–478 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pirih, R.J., Swanson, W.M.: Drag reduction and turbulence modification in rigid particle suspensions. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 50, 221–227 (1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Virk, P.S.: Drag reduction fundamentals: a brief recapitulation. In: Colwell, R.R., Pariser, E.R., Sinskey, A.J (eds.) Biotechnology of marine polysaccharides, pp 149–193. Hemisphere Publ. Corp., Washington (1985)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Chemical EngineeringMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations