Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T17:08:32.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The influence of pressure-dependent density and viscosity on the elastohydrodynamic collision and rebound of two spheres

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 April 2006

Guy Barnocky  and
Robert H. Davis
Guy Barnocky
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309-0424, USA
Robert H. Davis
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309-0424, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A theoretical description of the low-Reynolds-number collision and rebound of two rigid or elastic spheres separated by a thin layer of viscous fluid with pressure-dependent physical properties is presented. It has previously been shown by Davis et al. (1986) that the hydrodynamic pressure which builds up in the thin fluid layer must become large enough to elastically deform the spheres near the axis of symmetry, if they are to rebound subsequent to colliding. Under these extreme pressures, however, it is expected that the fluid may also compress and that its viscosity may increase by several orders of magnitude. It is shown that these pressure-dependent effects may significantly alter the minimum separation reached during approach of the spheres, as well as the maximum separation and relative velocity attained during rebound of the spheres. In particular, the pressure buildup during the collision process is predicted to become sufficiently large under some conditions so that the corresponding viscosity increase causes the fluid in the gap between the colliding spheres to behave nearly as a solid and to limit the close approach of the opposing surfaces. Also, the storage of energy via the compression of the fluid in the gap allows rigid spheres to bounce as this energy is released subsequent to their collision. However, it is found that this rebound is very weak relative to that which is predicted for elastic spheres.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 209 , December 1989 , pp. 501 - 519
Copyright
© 1989 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ASME 1953 Viscosity and density of over 40 fluids at pressures to 15,000 p.s.i. and temperatures at 425 °F. Research Committee on Lubrication. ASME.
Barnocky, G. 1988 Collisions between elastic particles or spherical drops in viscous fluids. Ph.D. thesis, University of Colorado.
Barnocky, G. & Davis, R. H. 1988a The effect of Maxwell slip on the aerodynamic collision and rebound of spherical particles. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 121, 1.Google Scholar
Barnocky, G. & Davis, R. H. 1988b Elastohydrodynamic collision and rebound of spheres: experimental verification. Phys. Fluids 31, 1324.Google Scholar
Butler, H. 1960 The hydrodynamic effect between approaching surfaces with interposed viscous fluid films and its influence on surface deformations. J. Inst. Petrol. 46, 435.Google Scholar
Christensen, H. 1962 The oil film in a closing gap. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 226, 312.Google Scholar
Christensen, H. 1970 Elastohydrodynamic theory of spherical bodies in normal approach. Trans. ASME F: J. Lubric. Tech. 92, 1.Google Scholar
Chu, P. S. Y. & Camerson, A. 1962 Pressure viscosity characteristics of lubricating oils. J. Inst. Petrol. 48, 147.Google Scholar
Dahneke, B. 1971 The capture of aerosol particles by surfaces. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 37, 342.Google Scholar
Davis, R. H., Serayssol, J.-M. & Hinch, E. J. 1986 The elastohydrodynamic collision of two spheres. J. Fluid Mech. 163, 479.Google Scholar
Dowson, D. & Higginson, G. R. 1977 Elastohydrodynamic Lubrication. Pergamon.
Dowson, D. & Taylor, C. M. 1979 Cavitation in bearings. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 11, 35.Google Scholar
Finkin, E. F. 1973 Experimental investigation of spherical impact, both dry and with a fluid film. Trans. ASME F: J. Lubric. Tech. 95.Google Scholar
Gal, E., Tardos, G. & Pfeffer, R. 1985 A study of inertial effects in granular bed filtration. J. Fluid Mech. 31, 1093.Google Scholar
Grubin, A. N. & Vinogradova, I. E. 1949 Central Scientific Research Institute for Technology and Mechanical Engineering, Book 30, Moscow. (DSIR Translation No. 337).
Herrebrugh, K. 1970 Elastohydrodynamic squeeze films between two cylinders in normal approach. Trans. ASME: J. Lubric. Tech. 92, 292.Google Scholar
Hersey, M. D. & Hopkins, R. F. 1954 Viscosity of lubricants under pressure, report to ASME Research Committee on Lubrication.
Hocking, L. M. 1973 The effect of slip on the motion of a sphere close to a wall and of two adjacent spheres. J. Engng Maths 7, 207.Google Scholar
Lee, K. M. & Cheng, H. S. 1973 The pressure and deformation profiles between two normally approaching lubricated cylinders. Trans. ASME F: J. Lubric. Tech. 95, 308.Google Scholar
Loffler, F. 1980 Problems and recent advances in aerosol filtration. Separ. Sci. Technol. 15, 297.Google Scholar
Love, A. E. H. 1927 A Treatise on the Mathematical Theory of Elasticity, 4th edn. Dover.
Serayssol, J.-M. & Davis, R. H. 1986 The influence of surface interactions on the elastohydrodynamic collision of two spheres. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 114, 1.Google Scholar
Tabor, D. 1949 Collisions through fluid layers. Engineering 2, 145.Google Scholar
Weast, R. C. (ed.) 1974 Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. CRC Press.