Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T22:52:35.981Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Near-contact approach of two permeable spheres

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 August 2021

Rodrigo B. Reboucas
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520-8286, USA
Michael Loewenberg*
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520-8286, USA
*
†Email address for correspondence: michael.loewenberg@yale.edu

Abstract

An analysis is presented for the axisymmetric lubrication resistance between permeable spherical particles. Darcy's law is used to describe the flow in the permeable medium and a slip boundary condition is applied at the interface. The pressure in the near-contact region is governed by a non-local integral equation. The asymptotic limit $K=k/a^{2} \ll 1$ is considered, where $k$ is the arithmetic mean permeability, and $a^{-1}=a^{-1}_{1}+a^{-1}_{2}$ is the reduced radius, and $a_1$ and $a_2$ are the particle radii. The formulation allows for particles with distinct particle radii, permeabilities and slip coefficients, including permeable and impermeable particles and spherical drops. Non-zero particle permeability qualitatively affects the axisymmetric near-contact motion, removing the classical lubrication singularity for impermeable particles, resulting in finite contact times under the action of a constant force. The lubrication resistance becomes independent of gap and attains a maximum value at contact $F=6{\rm \pi} \mu a W K^{-2/5}\tilde {f}_c$, where $\mu$ is the fluid viscosity, $W$ is the relative velocity and $\tilde {f}_c$ depends on slip coefficients and weakly on permeabilities; for two permeable particles with no-slip boundary conditions, $\tilde {f}_c=0.7507$; for a permeable particle in near contact with a spherical drop, $\tilde {f}_c$ is reduced by a factor of $2^{-6/5}$.

Information

Type
JFM Papers
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. Schematic showing (a) two particles with radii and permeabilities $a_i$ and $k_i$$(i=1,2)$, respectively, with velocities $\pm \frac {1}{2}W$, and separated by a gap $h_0$; (b) profile of near-contact region between the particles showing cylindrical coordinate system.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Pressure distribution between permeable particles with no-slip boundary conditions, $q$ as indicated; classical (a) and permeable-sphere (b) lubrication variables; two-term large-$q$ expansion (4.1) for $q=5$ (dashed line); inset: curves depicting $\bar {p}^{(0)}(\bar {r})-\bar {p}(\bar {r})$, far-field expansion (4.10) (dash-dotted lines).

Figure 2

Figure 3. Intraparticle flux distribution into permeable particles with no-slip boundary conditions and $q$ as indicated in terms of classical (a) and permeable-sphere (b) lubrication variables; leading-order large-$q$ expansion (4.2) (dash-dotted line) in (a) and curve for $q=5$ (dashed line) in (b); insets show $2\bar {j}\bar {r}^{3}$ (a) and $2\tilde {j}\tilde {r}^{3}$ (b) with far-field expansion (4.9) (dashed lines).

Figure 3

Figure 4. Hydrodynamic resistance coefficients (4.14a,b) vs. $q$ for permeable particles with no-slip boundary conditions; formulas (4.15)–(4.16) for large and small $q$ (dashed lines).

Figure 4

Figure 5. Contact resistance as a function of slip parameter; $\hat {\alpha }_1=0$ (case 1), $\hat {\alpha }_1=\hat {\alpha }_2$ (case 2); limiting formulas (4.39)–(4.42) (dashed lines).

Figure 5

Figure 6. Effect of slip parameter on contact time for permeable particles; numerical evaluation (solid line), (4.48)–(4.49) (dashed lines).

Figure 6

Figure 7. Hydrodynamic force between a permeable sphere and an impermeable wall vs. gap, $K_1=2K$ as indicated, $\alpha _1 =1$; (a) exact calculations (Burganos et al.1992) $\bullet$, lubrication theory (lines); (b) errors of lubrication approximation (5.1) (dashed straight lines between calculations $\bullet$).

Figure 7

Figure 8. Lubrication resistance $\tilde {f}$ vs. $q$; exact calculations (Burganos et al.1992) $K_1=2K$ as indicated, $\alpha _1=1$; lubrication theory with $\hat {\alpha }_1=0.25$.

Supplementary material: File

Reboucas and Loewenberg supplementary material

Reboucas and Loewenberg supplementary material

Download Reboucas and Loewenberg supplementary material(File)
File 2.9 KB