Journal of Bionic Engineering

, Volume 15, Issue 1, pp 160–172 | Cite as

Design and optimization of bionic Janus blade in hydraulic torque converter for drag reduction

Article

Abstract

The chief aim of the present work was to achieve drag reduction in stator blades with liquid using boundary layer control. A stator blade of hydraulic torque converter with bionic grooves in suction side and hydrophobic surface in pressure side was designed. The hydrophobic surface was created using anodic oxidation method and irregular Al2O3 thin films were found on the surface. They formed hierarchical structure consisting of mini porous structures and microscopic pore spaces, resulting in the hydrophobicity. The bionic groove was designed by Computational Fluids Dynamics (CFD) method. Multi-Island Genetic Algorithm (MIGA) was adopted for groove multi-objective optimization. Through optimization, the maximum drag reduction was close to 12% in oil. In addition, the drag reduction calculation was verified by closed channel experiment and “Tire Vortex” was proposed to explain the drag reduction mechanism. The bionic Janus blade could maintain its initial profile without any additional device, which had lower risk and less cost. The results are encouraging and show great potential to apply in other flow machineries.

Keywords

hydraulic torque converter bionic blade boundary layer control drag reduction 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgment

National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51675219) and China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (Grant No. 2016M590261) and Key Scientific and Technological Project of Jilin Province (20170204066GX).

References

  1. [1]
    Denton J D. Loss mechanisms in turbomachines. Journal of Turbomachinery, 1993, 115, 621-656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Dean B, Bhushan B. Shark-skin surfaces for fluid-drag reduction in turbulent flow: A review. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 2010, 368, 4775–4806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    By R R, Kunz R, Lakshminarayana B. Navier-Stokes analysis of the pump flow field of an automotive hydraulic torque converter. Journal of fluids engineering, 1995, 117, 116–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Ejiri E, Kubo M. Performance analysis of automotive hydraulic torque converter elements. Journal of fluids engineering, 1999, 121, 266–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Kim G, Jang J. Effects of Stator Shapes on Hydraulic Performances of an Automotive Hydraulic Torque Converter with a Squashed Torus, SAE Technical Paper, Hyundai Motor Co., 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Liu C, Untaroiu A, Wood H G, Yan Q, Wei W. Parametric analysis and optimization of inlet deflection angle in hydraulic torque converter. Journal of Fluids Engineering, 2015, 137, 031101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Wu G Q, Wang L J. Multi-objective Optimization Employing Genetic Algorithm for the Hydraulic Torque Converter with Dual-blade Stator, SAE Technical Paper, Tongji University, Shanghai, China, 2015.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Bar-Cohen Y. Biomimetics-using nature to inspire human innovation. Bioinspiration & biomimetics, 2006, 1, P1–P12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Bhushan B. Biomimetics: Lessons from nature–An overview. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 2009, 367, 1445–1486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Bixler G D, Bhushan B. Fluid drag reduction and efficient self-cleaning with rice leaf and butterfly wing bioinspired surfaces. Nanoscale, 2013, 5, 7685–7710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Choi K S, Yang X, Clayton B R, Glover E J, Atlar M, Semenov B N, Kulik V M. Turbulent drag reduction using compliant surfaces. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, The Royal Society, 1997, 453, 2229–2240.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Bechert D W, Bruse M, Hage W, Van Der Hoeven J G T, Hoppe G. Experiments on drag-reducing surfaces and their optimization with an adjustable geometry. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 1997, 338, 59–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Luo Y, Liu Y, Zhang D Y. Advanced progresses in nature gas pipelining applying different drag reduction/energy saving technologies: A review. European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering, 2015, 19, 931–949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Luo Y H, Xu X, Li D, Song W. Recent developments in fabricating drag reduction surfaces covering biological sharkskin morphology. Reviews in Chemical Engineering, 2016, 32, 93–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Bixler G D, Bhushan B. Fluid drag reduction with shark-skin riblet inspired microstructured surfaces. Advanced Functional Materials, 2013, 23, 4507–4528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Bixler G D, Bhushan B. Shark skin inspired low-drag microstructured surfaces in closed channel flow. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 2013, 393, 384–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Bixler G D, Bhushan B. Bioinspired micro/nanostructured surfaces for oil drag reduction in closed channel flow. Soft Matter, 2013, 9, 1620–1635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Darmanin T, Guittard F. Superhydrophobic and superoleophobic properties in nature. Materials Today, 2015, 18, 273–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Shunsuke N, Bharat B. Bioinspired self-cleaning surfaces with superhydrophobicity, superoleophobicity, and superhydrophilicity. RSC Advances, 2013, 3, 671–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Bhushan B. Nanotribology and Nanomechanics: An Introduction, 2nd ed, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, Germany, 2008.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    Nosonovsky M, Bhushan B. Multiscale Dissipative Mechanisms and Hierarchical Surfaces: Friction, Superhydrophobicity and Biomimetics, 1st ed, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, Germany, 2008.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Bhushan B, Her E K. Fabrication of superhydrophobic surfaces with high and low adhesion inspired from rose petal. Langmuir, 2010, 26, 8207–8217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    Bhushan B, Nosonovsky M. The rose petal effect and the modes of superhydrophobicity. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences, 2010, 368, 4713–4728.MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    Xue Z X, Liu M J, Jiang L. Recent developments in polymeric superoleophobic surfaces. Journal of Polymer Science Part B: Polymer Physics, 2012, 50, 1209–1224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    Waghmare P R, Gunda N S K, Mitra S K. Under-water superoleophobicity of fish scales. Scientific Reports, 2014, 4, 7454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    Cheng Q F, Li M, Zheng Y M, Su B, Wang S T, Jiang L. Janus interface materials: Superhydrophobic air/solid interface and superoleophobic water/solid interface inspired by a lotus leaf. Soft Matter, 2011, 7, 5948–5951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    Cui J, Fu Y B. A numerical study on pressure drop in microchannel flow with different bionic micro-grooved surfaces. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2012, 9, 99–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    Bechert D W, Bruse M, Hage W. Experiments with three-dimensional riblets as an idealized model of shark skin. Experiments in Fluids, 28, 403–412.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    White F. Viscous Fluid Flow, 3rd ed, McGraw Hill Higher Education, New Jersey, USA, 2006.Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    Liu C B, Liu C S, Ma W X. Rans, detached Eddy simulation and large Eddy simulation of internal Torque converters flows: A comparative study. Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics, 2015, 9, 114–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    Lu H, Rutland C J. Structural subgrid-scale modeling for large-eddy simulation: A review. Acta Mechanica Sinica, 2016, 32, 567–578.MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    Jin R, Chen W, Simpon T W. Comparative studies of meta-modelling techniques under multiple modeling criteria. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 2001, 23, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. [33]
    Chen H, Ooka R, Kato S. Study on optimum design method for pleasant outdoor thermal environment using genetic algorithms (GA) and coupled simulation of convection, radiation and conduction. Building and Environment, 2008, 43, 18–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. [34]
    Hu X, Chen X, Zhao Y, Yao W. Optimization design of satellite separation systems based on Multi-Island Genetic Algorithm. Advances in Space Research, 2014, 53, 870–876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. [35]
    Ooka R, Komamura K. Optimal design method for building energy systems using genetic algorithms. Building and Environment, 2009, 44, 1538–1544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. [36]
    Krieger K. Do pool sharks swim faster? Science, 2004, 305, 636–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. [37]
    Bechert D W, Bruse M, Hage W. Experiments with three-dimensional riblets as an idealized model of shark skin. Experiments in Fluids, 2000, 28, 403–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. [38]
    Walsh M J. Riblets as a viscous drag reduction technique. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1983, 21, 485–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Jilin University 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chunbao Liu
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Chuang Sheng
    • 1
    • 2
  • Hualong Yang
    • 1
  • Zhe Yuan
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Mechanical Science and EngineeringJilin UniversityChangchunChina
  2. 2.Key Laboratory of Bionic Engineering, Ministry of EducationJilin UniversityChangchunChina
  3. 3.State Key Laboratory of Automotive Simulation and ControlJilin UniversityChangchunChina

Personalised recommendations