4.7 Article

Money versus time: evaluation of flow control in terms of energy consumption and convenience

期刊

JOURNAL OF FLUID MECHANICS
卷 700, 期 -, 页码 406-418

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/jfm.2012.139

关键词

drag reduction; turbulence control

资金

  1. German Research Foundation (DFG) [FR2823/2-1, 3-1]
  2. Cluster of Excellence 'Center of Smart Interfaces' at TU Darmstadt
  3. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS)
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [23760176] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Flow control with the goal of reducing the skin-friction drag on the fluid-solid interface is an active fundamental research area, motivated by its potential for significant energy savings and reduced emissions in the transport sector. Customarily, the performance of drag reduction techniques in internal flows is evaluated under two alternative flow conditions, i.e. at constant mass flow rate or constant pressure gradient. Successful control leads to reduction of drag and pumping power within the former approach, whereas the latter leads to an increase of the mass flow rate and pumping power. In practical applications, however, money and time define the flow control challenge: a compromise between the energy expenditure (money) and the corresponding convenience (flow rate) achieved with that amount of energy has to be reached so as to accomplish a goal which in general depends on the specific application. Based on this idea, we derive two dimensionless parameters which quantify the total energy consumption and the required time (convenience) for transporting a given volume of fluid through a given duct. Performances of existing drag-reduction strategies as well as the influence of wall roughness are re-evaluated within the present framework; how to achieve the (application-dependent) optimum balance between energy consumption and convenience is addressed. It is also shown that these considerations can be extended to external flows.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据