pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.02398 · v1 · pith:7ZMYSOKGnew · submitted 2026-07-02 · ⚛️ physics.flu-dyn

Direct numerical simulations of turbulent drag reduction via piezoelectric actuation

Amir Amjadimanesh , Aman Kidanemariam , David Chappell , Mahdi Bodaghi , Amirreza Rouhi This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-03 04:40 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.flu-dyn
keywords turbulent drag reductionpiezoelectric actuationdirect numerical simulationspanwise waveschannel flowturbulence controlsurface deformation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Piezoelectric surface deformations reduce turbulent drag by up to 27 percent via spanwise waves.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper runs direct numerical simulations of turbulent half-channel flow at friction Reynolds number 200 over surface shapes taken from finite-element models of piezoelectric actuators under an aluminum sheet. The actuators operate across practical voltage and frequency ranges to produce upstream, downstream, and spanwise travelling, standing, and hybrid waves. Spanwise waves create transverse shear and alternating high- and low-momentum streaks that weaken the near-wall turbulence regeneration cycle, while streamwise waves produce only small net drag change because adverse and favorable pressure gradients largely cancel. The largest measured reduction reaches 27.6 percent for a realistic spanwise hybrid wave.

Core claim

Surface deformations generated by piezoelectric actuators beneath an aluminum sheet produce spanwise hybrid waves that introduce transverse shear and high-low streamwise-momentum zones, thereby disrupting the near-wall turbulence-regeneration cycle and yielding up to 27 percent net drag reduction at Re_tau = 200.

What carries the argument

The spanwise hybrid wave, which imposes transverse shear on the near-wall flow and creates alternating high- and low-momentum streaks that attenuate the turbulence regeneration cycle.

If this is right

  • Streamwise waves produce only marginal net drag change because local drag increases and decreases from alternating pressure gradients largely cancel.
  • Spanwise waves achieve the largest reductions (up to 27.6 percent) by generating transverse shear that breaks the near-wall turbulence cycle.
  • The hybrid spanwise wave from a realistic actuator geometry already reaches 27 percent reduction, showing that unconventional surface shapes can be effective.
  • Drag reduction occurs across the tested actuation frequencies and voltages without requiring idealized sinusoidal walls.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If two-way fluid-structure coupling were added, the actuator deformation amplitude and phase might shift enough to change the reported reduction percentages.
  • The same actuator geometry could be tested at higher Reynolds numbers to check whether the spanwise-wave mechanism scales to practical engineering flows.
  • Combining the spanwise hybrid wave with other near-wall control techniques might produce additive reductions beyond the 27 percent shown here.

Load-bearing premise

The surface shapes computed from finite-element analysis of the actuator can be imposed directly as time-dependent wall boundary conditions without two-way fluid-structure interaction or extra modeling error.

What would settle it

A simulation or experiment that includes two-way coupling between the deforming surface and the flow and then measures whether the spanwise-wave drag reduction stays above 20 percent.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.02398 by Aman Kidanemariam, Amir Amjadimanesh, Amirreza Rouhi, David Chappell, Mahdi Bodaghi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Surface oscillation and wall deformation. Spanwise (a) surface oscillation, (b) oscillation with streamwise travelling wave. Wall-normal deformation with (c) streamwise travelling wave, (d) spanwise travelling wave. The black arrow shows the flow direction. achieved so far for spanwise surface oscillation is 49% by Jung et al. (1992) (Fig. 1a), for spanwise oscillation with streamwise travelling wave is 48… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: displays DR against 𝑅𝑒𝜏 , 𝜔 +, and 𝜂 + max for wall-normal deformation with streamwise and spanwise idealized TW. The literature includes studies of both turbulent boundary layer and turbulent wall-bounded flow using experimental setups (Yousefi et al. 2020; Itoh et al. 2006; Klumpp et al. 2010; Musgrave et al. 2018), Direct Numerical Simulation (Deskos et al. 2022; Zhang et al. 2024; Yang and Shen 2017; N… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Piezoelectric actuation configuration. 3D view of AL sheet with 2 × 5 arrays of piezoelectric actuators beneath it for (a) Musgrave et al. (2018) setup, (b) our setup. (c) Z-view of our actuated sheet. 𝜂 is the sheet deformation. 𝐿, ℎ𝑠 , 𝐷, 𝑓nat are sheet length, thickness, flexural rigidity, and natural frequency, respectively. 𝑙 0 , 𝛽 are the spacing and phase difference between actuator rows. 𝑞1,2 are t… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Al sheet’s rate of deformation contours of the experimental study by Musgrave et al. (2018) and the present FEA at six actuation phases. There is a phase difference of 100𝑜 between the top and bottom actuator rows. The actuation voltage and frequency are ±350𝑉 and 310𝐻𝑧, respectively. 2. Methodology 2.1. Piezoelectric setup We employed FEA in ANSYS® Mechanical to simulate piezoelectric actuation and the re… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Piezoelectric actuation map. Variation of the wall deformation against actuation frequency and voltage force as the abscissa and ordinate, respectively (all in dimensionless form). Gray, blue, and red spectra bullets denote the TW, SW, and HW, respectively. The black solid and dashed graphs denote the variation of 𝑙𝑜𝑔(𝜂max∕𝐿) with 𝐺2 𝑖 𝑓act∕𝑓nat and 𝑄𝐿3∕𝐷, respectively. where 𝑓nat denotes the system’s natu… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Schematic of wave types and envelopes. From Left to right: travelling waves to hybrid and standing waves. Green-shaded area presents the wave envelope. The maximum attainable amplitude can be simplified to: 𝜂max = [ 𝜂 2 1 + 2𝜂1 𝜂2 cos(3𝜙1 ) + 𝜂 2 2 ] 1∕2, 𝑓 𝑜𝑟 𝑇 𝑊 , (7a) 𝜂max = 𝜂1 + 𝜂2 , 𝑓 𝑜𝑟 𝐻𝑊 , (7b) 𝜂max = 𝜂1 + 𝜂2 , 𝑓 𝑜𝑟 𝑆𝑊 . (7c) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Computational domains for (a) Zhang et al. (2024)’s fast case, (b) streamwise wave case of the present study, and (c) spanwise wave case of the present study. The black arrow indicates the flow direction. The contour field plots the streamwise fluctuating velocity (𝑢 ′+) at 15 viscous units away from the wall. Case 𝜂 + max 𝜔 + 𝜅 + 𝑐 + Domain size 𝑅𝑒𝜏 𝑅𝑒𝑏 Grid Δ𝜉 + Δ𝜁 + 𝑤 Δ𝑧 + Slow 12.03 0.04 1.08𝑒−2 3.69 2… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison of the streamwise mean velocity profiles (a,c), and Reynolds shear-stress profiles (b,d) from the validation cases of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Schematic illustration of the physical mechanisms underlying drag reduction for (a) upstream, and (b) spanwise waves. Panel (a) shows the side view of the harmonic streamwise velocity profiles (̃𝑢 + ) and harmonic pressure gradient (𝑑 ̃𝑝+∕𝑑𝑥+ ). Panel (b) presents a front view of the spanwise-wave case, including the harmonic spanwise velocity profiles (𝑤̃ + ). 3. Results and discussions 3.1. Overall flow … view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: DR of case studies. DR versus 𝜔 + for the (a,b,c) upstream waves, downstream waves, and spanwise waves, respectively. DR versus 𝜂 + max 𝜔 + for the (d,e,f) upstream waves, downstream waves, and spanwise waves, respectively. Blue, gray, and red bullets denote standing, travelling, and hybrid waves, respectively. The numbers next to the bullets correspond to the wave amplitude (𝜂 + max ). The highlighted bu… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Streamwise mean velocity profiles for (a) upstream waves, (b) downstream waves, and (c) spanwise waves. Profile colors transition from pink to red to brown, representing increasing values of 𝜂 + max 𝜔 + . Black profiles denote the smooth-channel flow as a reference. In [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Turbulent statistics for upstream waves. (a) Streamwise, (b) wall-normal, and (c) spanwise harmonic Reynolds normal stress. (d) Streamwise, (e) wall-normal, and (f) spanwise turbulent Reynolds normal stress. Profile colors transition from pink to red to brown, representing increasing values of 𝜂 + max 𝜔 + . Black profiles denote the smooth-channel flow as a reference. ’×’ symbols in panel (a) denote the c… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Side view contour plots of harmonic streamwise velocity (panels a-c, g-i) and pressure gradient (panels d-f, j-l) over upstream wave (panels a-f) and downstream wave (panels g-l) at wave trough (panels a,d,g,j), flat (panels b,e,h,k), and crest (panels c,f,i,l) configuration. The red profiles in panels (d-f,j-l) present the pressure gradient corresponding to (19). In [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p01… view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Conditional averaged streamwise velocity profile based on adverse and favorable pressure gradient for (a) Upstream wave, (b) Downstream wave. Gray-shaded areas denote negative spanwise-averaged velocities. Conditional averaged streamwise Reynolds normal stress based on adverse and favorable pressure gradient for (c) upstream wave, (d) downstream wave. (𝑑 ̃𝑝+∕𝑑𝑥+ > 0) for the upstream and downstream waves … view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Contour plots of Reynolds shear stress at 𝜁 + = 8. Panels (a–c) show the upstream wave for the trough, flat, and crest configurations, respectively, while panel (d) presents the smooth-wall reference case. Panels (e–g) display the downstream wave for the trough, flat, and crest configurations, respectively. Regions of APG (wave-shielded) and FPG (wave-exposed) are indicated over the waves. 3.5.2. Spanwise… view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_18.png] view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Contour plots of Reynolds shear stress for (a) the smooth-wall reference case, (b) the spanwise wave at the wave trough, (c) the spanwise wave in its locally flat configuration, and (d) the spanwise wave at the wave crest, all plotted at 𝜁 + = 15. (riblets, spanwise plane oscillation). Turbulence statistics were weakly affected by the streamwise waves, but they were significantly attenuated by the spanwis… view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Validation of DNS solver for half-channel flow at 𝑅𝑒𝜏 = 395. (a) streamwise mean velocity profile (b) streamwise fluctuating stress (c) wall-normal fluctuating stress (d) spanwise fluctuating stress. We compare our results with the DNS of Moser et al. (1999) for turbulent channel flow at matched 𝑅𝑒𝜏 = 395 ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_20.png] view at source ↗
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: Validation of DNS solver for full-channel flow with bottom wavy wall at 𝑅𝑒𝜏 = 215. (a) streamwise mean velocity profile (b) streamwise fluctuating stress (c) wall-normal fluctuating stress (d) spanwise fluctuating stress. García-Mayoral, R., Jiménez, J., 2012. Scaling of turbulent structures in riblet channels up to re𝜏 ≈ 550. Phys. Fluids 24. Hasegawa, Y., Kasagi, N., 2011. Dissimilar control of momentum… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We have conducted Direct Numerical Simulations of turbulent half-channel flow over realistic surface deformations at friction Reynolds number $Re_\tau=200$. We generated the surface deformations using piezoelectric actuators. We simulated the piezoelectric actuation over the practical actuation frequency range $(119Hz\le f_\mathrm{act}\le543Hz)$ and voltage range $(250V\le Q \le500V)$ beneath an Aluminum sheet using Finite Element Analysis. The sheet deformation amplitude and actuation frequency in viscous units vary within the range $2 \le \eta^+_\mathrm{max} \le 34$, and $-0.58 \le \omega^+ \le 0.70$. The vertical surface deformations from our actuation setup generate three types of waves: travelling, hybrid, and standing waves. Surface deformations are applied as bottom-wall boundary conditions of the turbulent channel flow to generate waves in the upstream, downstream, and spanwise directions. We achieved maximum drag reductions of 1.6\%, 5.4\%, and 27.6\% for upstream, downstream, and spanwise waves, respectively. The streamwise waves generate alternating adverse and favorable pressure gradients, which locally increase and decrease drag, leading to a marginal net change in drag. In contrast, spanwise waves introduce transverse shear, accompanied by high- and low-streamwise-momentum zones that respectively attenuate and energize the near-wall turbulence. Such disruption of the near-wall turbulence-regeneration cycle produces up to $27\%$ drag reduction for the realistic spanwise hybrid wave; such an outcome demonstrates the efficacy of unconventional realistic surface deformations in achieving significant drag reduction.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports direct numerical simulations of turbulent half-channel flow at Re_τ=200 over surface deformations obtained from finite-element analysis of piezoelectric actuators. These deformations are imposed as time-dependent Dirichlet boundary conditions to generate upstream, downstream, and spanwise (including hybrid) waves with amplitudes 2 ≤ η_max^+ ≤ 34 and frequencies -0.58 ≤ ω^+ ≤ 0.70. The simulations yield maximum drag reductions of 1.6%, 5.4%, and 27.6% for the three wave directions, with the spanwise hybrid wave claimed to disrupt the near-wall turbulence regeneration cycle via transverse shear and momentum zones.

Significance. If the one-way coupling approximation holds, the work provides quantitative evidence that realistic, FEA-derived actuator deformations can produce substantial drag reduction (up to ~27%) at moderate Reynolds number, bridging actuator physics with flow-control outcomes and extending beyond idealized traveling-wave studies.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and methods: Surface deformations are generated via standalone FEA and imposed directly as time-dependent boundary conditions on the DNS without two-way fluid-structure interaction. At Re_τ=200 and η_max^+ up to 34, turbulent pressure fluctuations produce hydrodynamic loads comparable in magnitude to actuator forces; these loads can alter instantaneous amplitude and phase of the waves. Because no estimate or sensitivity study of the back-effect is provided, the reported drag reductions (1.6–27.6%) rest on an unverified kinematic assumption that directly affects the claimed attenuation of the near-wall cycle.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: The manuscript states that DNS were performed but supplies no grid-resolution metrics (Δx^+, Δy^+, Δz^+), domain size, or validation against established Re_τ=200 channel-flow statistics (e.g., mean velocity profile, Reynolds stresses). These quantities are load-bearing for any quantitative claim of drag reduction percentages.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract refers to “turbulent half-channel flow” while the title mentions “turbulent drag reduction”; clarify whether the setup is a half-channel or full channel and ensure consistent terminology throughout.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and valuable comments. We address the major comments point-by-point below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to improve clarity and completeness.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and methods: Surface deformations are generated via standalone FEA and imposed directly as time-dependent boundary conditions on the DNS without two-way fluid-structure interaction. At Re_τ=200 and η_max^+ up to 34, turbulent pressure fluctuations produce hydrodynamic loads comparable in magnitude to actuator forces; these loads can alter instantaneous amplitude and phase of the waves. Because no estimate or sensitivity study of the back-effect is provided, the reported drag reductions (1.6–27.6%) rest on an unverified kinematic assumption that directly affects the claimed attenuation of the near-wall cycle.

    Authors: We acknowledge the validity of this concern regarding the one-way coupling approximation. Our study focuses on the flow response to prescribed realistic deformations derived from FEA, which is a standard approach to evaluate potential control strategies before full FSI. However, to address the referee's point, in the revised version we will add a discussion estimating the hydrodynamic loads (using the pressure fluctuations from the DNS) compared to the actuator forces from the FEA. This will help quantify the potential back-effect. A complete two-way coupled simulation is beyond the current scope due to computational cost but is noted as future work. We believe this addition will strengthen the manuscript without altering the main conclusions. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The manuscript states that DNS were performed but supplies no grid-resolution metrics (Δx^+, Δy^+, Δz^+), domain size, or validation against established Re_τ=200 channel-flow statistics (e.g., mean velocity profile, Reynolds stresses). These quantities are load-bearing for any quantitative claim of drag reduction percentages.

    Authors: We agree that these details are essential for reproducibility and credibility of the results. The revised manuscript will include a dedicated subsection in the Methods describing the computational domain (streamwise and spanwise extents), grid resolutions in viscous units, and validation of the uncontrolled channel flow against reference DNS data at Re_τ=200, including comparisons of the mean velocity profile and Reynolds stress components. This information was omitted in the initial submission but is available from our simulations. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: simulation results from independent FEA-to-DNS pipeline

full rationale

The paper performs FEA to obtain surface deformations from piezoelectric actuation, then imposes those deformations as time-dependent Dirichlet boundary conditions in DNS of channel flow at Re_tau=200. Reported drag reductions (1.6%, 5.4%, 27.6%) are direct numerical outcomes against external turbulence statistics benchmarks. No derivation, prediction, or uniqueness claim reduces by construction to fitted parameters or self-citations; the one-way coupling is an explicit modeling choice, not a self-referential loop. No load-bearing self-citations, ansatzes, or renamings appear in the provided text.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations, the validity of one-way coupling between actuator deformation and flow, and the assumption that the reported actuation parameters produce the stated wave types without additional modeling.

axioms (2)
  • standard math Incompressible Navier-Stokes equations govern the flow at the simulated Reynolds number.
    Standard governing equations for DNS of incompressible turbulent channel flow.
  • domain assumption Surface deformations from separate FEA can be imposed directly as time-dependent wall boundary conditions.
    One-way coupling assumption between actuator mechanics and fluid; location: abstract description of boundary-condition application.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5834 in / 1249 out tokens · 28496 ms · 2026-07-03T04:40:42.819102+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

16 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A study on steady-state traveling waves in one-dimensional non-dispersive finite media. J. Sound Vib. 528, 116907. Bai,H.,Zhou,Y.,Zhang,W.,Xu,S.,Wang,Y.,Antonia,R.,2014. Activecontrolofaturbulentboundarylayerbasedonlocalsurfaceperturbation. J. Fluid Mech 750, 316–354. Chorin, A.,

    2014

  2. [2]

    Characteristics of drag-reduced turbulent boundary layers with pulsed-direct-current plasma actuation. J. Fluid Mech 915, A113. doi:10.1017/jfm.2021.167. Duong,A.,Midya,S.,Corke,T.,Hussain,F.,Thomas,F.,2019. Turbulentboundarylayerdragreductionusingpulsed-dcplasmaactuation. J.Fluid Mech . Endrikat, S., Modesti, D., Garcia-Mayoral, R., Hutchins, N., Chung, D.,

    work page doi:10.1017/jfm.2021.167 2021

  3. [3]

    Dissimilarcontrolofmomentumandheattransferinafullydevelopedturbulentchannelflow

    Hasegawa,Y.,Kasagi,N.,2011. Dissimilarcontrolofmomentumandheattransferinafullydevelopedturbulentchannelflow. J.FluidMech.683, 57–93. Hussain, A., Reynolds, W.,

    2011

  4. [4]

    The largest scales of turbulent wall flows. J. Fluid Mech. 842, P1. doi:10.1017/jfm.2018.144. Jiménez, J., Moin, P.,

    work page doi:10.1017/jfm.2018.144 2018

  5. [5]

    The minimal flow unit in near-wall turbulence. J. Fluid Mech. 225, 213–240. doi:10.1017/S0022112091002033. Jung, W., Mangiavacchi, N., Akhavan, R.,

    work page doi:10.1017/s0022112091002033

  6. [6]

    Fluid Mech

    J. Fluid Mech. 759, 432–471. doi:10.1017/jfm.2014.575. Maaß, C., Schumann, U.,

    work page doi:10.1017/jfm.2014.575 2014

  7. [7]

    Wall-bounded turbulent flows at high reynolds numbers: recent advances and key issues. J. Fluid Mech. 716, R3. doi:10.1017/jfm.2012.426. A.Amjadimanesh et al.:Preprint submitted to ElsevierPage 22 of 24 DNS of DR via piezo actuation 𝑊 𝑎𝑣𝑒(𝐶𝐹[%])𝜅 + × 104 𝜔+ 𝜂1 + max, 𝜂+ 2 max 𝜙1, 𝜙2 𝑅𝑒𝜏 𝐿𝑥∕ℎΔ𝑥 +,Δ𝑧 + 𝐷𝑅[%] DSHW-90* 5.010.146.81,6.15 0.73,-0.83 196 63.79 (...

    work page doi:10.1017/jfm.2012.426 2012

  8. [8]

    Fluids 11, 943–945

    Phys. Fluids 11, 943–945. Musgrave,P.,Borggaard,J.,Devenport,W.,Kochersberger,K.,Kurdila,A.,2018.TURBULENTBOUNDARYLAYEROVERAPIEZOELECTRI- CALLYEXCITEDTRAVELINGWAVESURFACE.Phdinmech.eng..VirginiaPolytechnicInstituteandStateUniversity.Blacksburg,Virginia. Musgrave,P.,Tarazaga,P.,2017. Skinfrictiondragreductioninturbulentflowusingspanwisetravelingsurfacewave...

    work page doi:10.1117/12.2260272 2018

  9. [9]

    Large-eddy simulation of high-reynolds-number turbulent channel flow controlled using streamwise travelling wave-like wall deformation for drag reduction. J. Fluid Mech 1003, A2. doi:10.1017/jfm.2024.1183. A.Amjadimanesh et al.:Preprint submitted to ElsevierPage 23 of 24 DNS of DR via piezo actuation Nabae, Y., Kawai, K., Fukagata, K.,

    work page doi:10.1017/jfm.2024.1183 2024

  10. [10]

    Int J Heat Fluid Fl 35, 152–159

    Relaminarization of turbulent channel flow using traveling wave-like wall deformation. Int J Heat Fluid Fl 35, 152–159. Park,H.,Sun,G.,etal.,2014. Superhydrophobicturbulentdragreductionasafunctionofsurfacegratingparameters. J.FluidMech747,722–734. Quadrio, M.,

    2014

  11. [11]

    Critical assessment of turbulent drag reduction through spanwise wall oscillations. J. Fluid Mech. 521, 251–271. doi:10.1017/S0022112004002149. Quadrio, M., Ricco, P., Viotti, C.,

    work page doi:10.1017/s0022112004002149

  12. [12]

    Riblet-generated flow mechanisms that lead to local breaking of reynolds analogy. J. Fluid Mech 951, A45. Rouhi,A.,Fu,M.,Chandran,D.,Zampiron,A.,Smits,A.,Marusic,I.,2023. Turbulentdragreductionbyspanwisewallforcing.part1:Large-eddy simulation. J. Fluid Mech. 968, A6. Rouhi, A., Hultmark, M., Smits, A.,

    2023

  13. [13]

    The characteristics of low-speed streaks in the near-wall region of a turbulent boundary layer. J. Fluid Mech. 129, 27–54. doi:10.1017/S002211208300116X. Smith, J., Brown, L., Müller, T.,

    work page doi:10.1017/s002211208300116x

  14. [14]

    Timoshenko, S., Woinowsky-Krieger, S.,

    Sovran,G.,1983.Tractive-energy-basedformulaefortheimpactofaerodynamicsonfueleconomyovertheepadrivingschedules.SAETransactions , 1039–1050. Timoshenko, S., Woinowsky-Krieger, S.,

    1983

  15. [15]

    2nd ed., McGraw-Hill

    Theory of Plates and Shells. 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill. Tomikawa,Y.,Adachi,K.,Hirata,H.,Suzuki,T.,Takano,T.,1990. Excitationofaprogressivewaveinaflexurallyvibratingtransmissionmedium. Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 29,

    1990

  16. [16]

    Near-wallstreakmodificationbyspanwiseoscillatorywallmotionanddrag-reductionmechanisms

    Touber,E.,Leschziner,M.,2012. Near-wallstreakmodificationbyspanwiseoscillatorywallmotionanddrag-reductionmechanisms. J.FluidMech 693, 150–200. Weller, H., Tabor, G., Jasak, H., Fureby, C.,

    2012