| Literature DB >> 32732993 |
Liyan Wu1, Huan Wang1, Yuqiu Song1, Benhua Zhang1, Yan Xu1, Cuihong Liu1, Yuying Yan2,3.
Abstract
Underwater machinery withstands great resistance in the water, which can result in consumption of a large amount of power. Inspired by the character that loach could move quickly in mud, the drag reduction mechanism of Paramisgurnus dabryanus loach is discussed in this paper. Subjected to the compression and scraping of water and sediments, a loach could not only secrete a lubricating mucus film, but also importantly, retain its mucus well from losing rapidly through its surface micro structure. In addition, it has been found that flexible deformations can maximize the drag reduction rate. This self-adaptation characteristic can keep the drag reduction rate always at high level in wider range of speeds. Therefore, even though the part of surface of underwater machinery cannot secrete mucus, it should be designed by imitating the bionic micro-morphology to absorb and store fluid, and eventually form a self-lubrication film to reduce the resistance. In the present study, the Paramisgurnus dabryanus loach is taken as the bionic prototype to learn how to avoid or slow down the mucus loss through its body surface. This combination of the flexible and micro morphology method provides a potential reference for drag reduction of underwater machinery.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32732993 PMCID: PMC7393106 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-69801-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Microscopic morphology of loach body. (a) Loach; (b) "Scale" morphology; (c) Different regions on a single scale; (d) Groove structure; (e) Cross-section image of grooves.
Figure 23D model of bionic scales. (a) Structure and dimensions of grooves of bionic scales; (b) establishment of ICEM bionic Model.
Contrast between the drag forces of the smooth and bionic non-smooth surfaces.
| Velocity | Smooth surface | Bionic non-smooth surface | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pressure drag (N) | Viscous drag (N) | Total drag (N) | Pressure drag (N) | Viscous drag (N) | Total drag (N) | |
| 0.05 | 0 | 0.0010067 | 0.0010067 | 0.0004377 | 0.0005493 | 0.0009870 |
| 0.5 | 0 | 0.0108908 | 0.0108908 | 0.004592 | 0.0060618 | 0.0106547 |
| 1.0 | 0 | 0.0237039 | 0.0237039 | 0.0099905 | 0.0132042 | 0.0231947 |
| 1.5 | 0 | 0.0383821 | 0.0383821 | 0.0163724 | 0.0212631 | 0.0376355 |
| 2.0 | 0 | 0.0547412 | 0.0547412 | 0.0237191 | 0.0301941 | 0.0539132 |
| 2.5 | 0 | 0.0726247 | 0.0726247 | 0.0320074 | 0.0398022 | 0.0718096 |
| 3.0 | 0 | 0.0919406 | 0.0919406 | 0.0412286 | 0.0500343 | 0.0912629 |
| 3.5 | 0 | 0.1126005 | 0.1126005 | 0.0513640 | 0.060840 | 0.1122040 |
| 4.0 | 0 | 0.1345099 | 0.1345099 | 0.0623983 | 0.0721853 | 0.1345836 |
Figure 3Drag reduction rate at different flow velocity.
Figure 4Simulated results of Fluent numerical analysis. (a) Distribution of pressure; (b) distribution of velocity.
Figure 5Numerical analysis results. (a) Dynamic pressure; (b) velocity; (c) turbulence kinetic energy; (d) turbulence intensity.
Figure 6Bionic grooves with different flexible deformations. (D1 = 0.7 μm, D2 = 1.4 μm, D3 = 2.1 μm, D4 = 2.8 μm).
Figure 7Analysis of flexible deformation. (a) Pressure drag; (b) total drag reduction rate under different deformations.