Shark Skin Drag Reduction

2395

Shark Denticles
Shark Skin Drag Reduction

Shark Skin Drag Reduction

Amy Lang1, Maria Laura Habegger2 and Philip Motta2 1 Department of Aerospace Engineering & Mechanics, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA 2 Department of Integrative Biology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA
Shark Skin Drag Reduction, Fig. 1 Lateral view of sectioned placoid scales of a shortn mako shark Isurus oxyrinchus in the region midway between the leading and trailing edge of the pectoral n. Note the relatively long scale base relative to the crown length. The pulp cavity (PC) of the scale on the left is visible, and the base of the scales is anchored by collagen bers to the dermis (D) of the skin

Synonyms
Riblets; Shark denticles; Shark skin separation control

Definition
The scales, or denticles, on fast-swimming sharks have evolved two mechanisms for controlling the boundary layer ow over the skin surface leading to a reduction in drag. The rst, and most widely known and studied, consists of the small streamwise keels covering the surface of the scales also known as riblets which reduce turbulent skin friction drag. The second mechanism is attributed to loosely embedded scales that are located on key regions of the body. When actuated to bristle by the ow, these scales potentially act as a means of controlling ow separation, thereby minimizing pressure drag during swimming maneuvers. Shark scales display a wide variation in geometry both across species while also varying with body location, but on faster swimming sharks, they typically range in size from 180 to 500 mm in crown length. the stratum laxum (Fig. 1). The interlocking crowns of each scale make up the surface of the shark exposed to the water, and it is on the crown where many species have developed small riblets, or keels, orientated in the streamwise direction of the ow (Fig. 2). A reduction in the length of the base relative to the length of the crown and a change of shape of the base for some species over certain regions of the body appear to be the means by which certain scales have developed the capability to bristle or erect upon ow reversal (Fig. 3; ow would normally pass over the surface from left to right; ow reversal proceeding right to left can induce scale bristling as shown in Fig. 4 with a schematic shown in Fig. 5). The length of the scales is typically xed for specic regions of the body within a species but differs among regions and species. Similarly, the number of keels per scale is also consistent per location for a species. For instance, on the fast-swimming shortn mako (Isurus oxyrinchus), the ank scales have a crown length of approximately 0.18 mm; each crown typically has three keels, each having a height of 0.012 mm and a spacing of 0.041 mm. The slower swimming blacktip shark (Carcharhinus limbatus) has ank scales typically 0.32 mm in length; each crown typically has ve keels with a height of 0.029 mm and a spacing of 0.065 mm (Fig. 2).

Overview
The Shark Skin Sharks are covered with minute scales, also known as denticles or placoid scales because of their tooth-like nature. The scales have a pulp cavity and a hard enameloid covering and are anchored at the base of the scale to the collagenous layer of the skin known as

2396

Shark Skin Drag Reduction

Shark Skin Drag Reduction, Fig. 2 Scanning electron micrograph (200) of the placoid scales of a shortn mako shark Isurus oxyrinchus (left) and blacktip shark Carcharhinus

limbatus (right) from the dorsal body wall anterior to the dorsal n. The mako shark scale has three keels or riblets, whereas the blacktip shark has ve. Anterior is to the left

Shark Skin Drag Reduction, Fig. 3 Lateral view of sectioned placoid scales in the ank region of a shortn mako shark Isurus oxyrinchus in the region midway between the dorsal n and the pectoral n. Note the relatively long scale crown relative to the shorter base length

Shark Skin Drag Reduction, Fig. 4 Side view through the shortn mako skin (from the exible ank area) showing scales that have been manually erected. Because of the individual manual erection, not all scales are erected to the same degree. Flow would normally pass over the skin from left to right, and reversed ow, as occurs during separation, is hypothesized to cause bristling as shown

Specifications and Fluid Dynamics A shark swimming through water experiences two major sources of drag due to the viscous resistance of the uid ow in the direction of motion. It is generally accepted that faster swimming sharks, such as the shortn mako (Isurus oxyrinchus), have the capability to reduce both types of drag through evolutionary adaptations to their denticles. The rst source of drag is skin friction drag; though not necessarily the largest contributor to overall drag, it is the one most associated with friction of the ow moving over the body of the shark. Skin friction drag is a result of the no-slip boundary condition between the water and the surface of the shark which results in the formation of a boundary layer. Because of the high speeds a shark

can achieve (often greater than U 10 m/s), this leads to a very high Reynolds number (Re Ux/n, where x is length and n is kinematic viscosity) in the boundary layer forming over most portions of the body and indicates the development of turbulent ow over most of the sharks body. For instance, at this speed, the typical transition location when the local Re 5 105 occurs at a location just x 5 cm from the nose. While a turbulent boundary layer is less prone to separate from the body, it will have a skin friction magnitude 510 times larger than if the ow were to remain laminar. This riblet drag reduction mechanism has demonstrated the potential to reduce the turbulent skin friction drag by approximately 810% in manmade applications [1, 2]. The size and spacing of the

Shark Skin Drag Reduction

2397

Shark Skin Drag Reduction, Fig. 5 Schematic showing forward ow in the boundary layer (blue arrows) subject to an adverse pressure gradient causing ow reversal (red arrows). The reversed ow close to the scales causes localized bristling to occur

riblets are indicative of the speed at which a shark may swim with faster species having closer spaced keels. The second type of drag, and the most important to be controlled, is due to a difference in pressure around the body and is often referred to as form drag. It is highly dependent on whether the ow remains attached or separates during swimming. Flow separation causes regions of low pressure on the downstream portions of the body leading to an imbalance of the pressure fore and aft, and thus a dramatic increase in drag. The rst means of decreasing pressure drag is streamlining, which consists of smoothing sharp corners and elongating the body with a tapered downstream portion. As a result, sharks and other marine animals have evolved a very streamlined body shape. Body proportions for fast-swimming sharks such as the shortn mako are in part determined by its thunniform swimming ability. However, when it undergoes turning maneuvers, the fusiform body will undergo relatively greater body curvature than when swimming in a straight line. Turning may thus induce ow separation, but recent experimental evidence suggests that loosely embedded scales on the ank and behind the gills, in the region of maximum girth and further downstream, may act as a means of ow control. Flow separation rst involves a reversal of the uid particles in a thin section adjacent to the surface; this is induced by a region of adverse pressure gradient occurring aft of the point of maximum girth in the streamwise direction. In other words, a suction pressure upstream induces the ow with the least momentum, that closest to the surface, to reverse. Scale bristling likely inhibits the process leading to reversed ow which thereby can control ow separation.

Preventing separation will also favorably affect the ow further downstream over the caudal n which can lead to higher thrust production. While for a swimming shark, the production of thrust and drag occur simultaneously over the body and are inexorably linked; evidence signies that sharks have evolved mechanisms within the structure of their skin to reduce drag leading to increased thrust production and allow greater maneuverability at high speeds. Reif, a German biologist, working in the late 1970s is generally considered to be the rst to report in literature the hypothesis as to the drag-reducing properties of shark skin [3]. Engineering research began at about the same time in both America [4] and Germany [5] as to the functional aspect of riblet surfaces for reducing skin friction drag. Seminal work into riblet design was completed by Bechert et al. in 1997, which demonstrated a maximum turbulent skin friction drag reduction for man-made, blade-like riblets of 9.9% [6]. The bristling of shark scales leading to a mechanism for separation control was always hypothesized to function in a manner similar to a man-made technique known as vortex generators utilized since the 1940s [7, 8]. In more recent years, Lang et al. [9] have posited a new mechanism, whereby ow reversal leads to a region of localized scale bristling, leading to a owactuated separation control method which can be derived from the shark skin and for which research is ongoing.

Key Research Findings

Since the 1970s when studies began, riblets have become a well-accepted means of reducing turbulent skin friction drag with an upper limit of reduction just below 10%. As previously stated, the most exhaustive testing of various riblet geometries, with comparisons made to other researchers working in the eld, was completed in 1997 by Bechert et al. [6]. Previous work by Walsh [4] had focused on a sawtooth geometry, which resulted in a maximum drag reduction of about 5%. While ow eld measurement and visualization were not carried out to fully understand the mechanism behind the drag reduction, an exhaustive series of drag measurement experiments was carried out in a specially designed oil channel facility [6]; these measurements allowed for a determination of the most effectual geometry for man-made riblet applications.

2398

Shark Skin Drag Reduction

Bernard and Wallace provide a summarization of the basic research that has been performed to map out the key characteristics found in turbulent ows [10]. To understand the mechanism whereby drag is reduced by surface modications, some basic aspects of a turbulent boundary layer ow eld need to be understood. A wall-bounded turbulent ow consists of a layer of vorticity within which uid located further away from the surface is moving faster than that nearer to the surface due to the no-slip condition, and this results in an overall rotational characteristic of the ow in the clockwise direction for ow moving from left to right where the surface itself is stationary (this is the common reference frame to be used for studying a boundary layer ow). Within this layer, a complex assortment of horseshoe- or hairpin-shaped, vortices of various sizes and stages of growth/decay are formed and interact. Scaling of the ow within the boundary layer can be achieved by considering a viscous length scale dened as dv n/u, where u is the friction velocity. The friction velocity is a function of the shear stress, or skin friction, at the surface (t) and the uid density (r) such that u (t/r)1/2. The viscous length scale determines the characteristic sizing of the uid scales found in the boundary layer. For instance, in a given ow with xed viscosity, n, and at a particular downstream location, x, within a boundary layer consider a variation in free-stream velocity, U. As U is increased, the thickness of the boundary layer at that location will decrease, and the local average shear stress at that same location will increase. This results in an increase in the friction velocity and thus a decrease in the viscous length scale. The resulting decrease in viscous length scale reduces the characteristic sizing of the vortices forming within the boundary layer. In the region close to the surface, longitudinal vortices with an axis of rotation in the streamwise direction are found to form and persist. These vortices have a characteristic diameter of approximately 30dv and a streamwise length ranging from a few hundred up to 1,000 viscous length scales. When these vortices pair up, a region of low-speed uid is lifted up from the wall, resulting in the formation of a low-speed streak. It is the instability of these streaks located in a region of high shear that leads to the process known as a turbulent burst and subsequent turbulent sweep. A burst is a sudden ejection of low-speed uid up into the boundary layer, and a sweep is a sudden

injection of high-speed uid down toward the wall. It is the sweep of this high-momentum uid onto the surface that results in localized, time-varying patches of high skin friction that are the main causation of increased drag in a turbulent boundary layer. It is the interaction of the shark skin with these components of the boundary layer ow that is essential to controlling the ow. Results from the work of Bechert et al. [6] plotted the relative change in skin friction (Dt/t) (compared to a at surface) versus spacing (s+), where riblet spacing (s) is nondimensionalized such that s+ s/dv. They found that the reduction in skin friction increases and reaches a maximum in the vicinity of s+$16 and thereupon begins to decrease such that larger spacing can actually result in an increase in drag. It is noteworthy that this value corresponds to half the characteristic diameter of the longitudinal vortices forming close to the wall. Thus the riblets sized correctly restrain these near-wall vortices, which for reduced skin friction and reduced viscous length scale will now form at a slightly larger size, and these in turn induce the formation of low-speed streaks [1]. It was also found that a height of the riblets corresponding to half the spacing (h 0.5 s) gave optimal results. The other key result to garner from these experiments is the variation in maximum decrease with geometry, where a bladelike shape provided the upper limit for skin friction reduction (9.9%). However, for durability of the surface in real applications, a trapezoidal conguration was tested and found to provide improved performance over the sawtooth geometry. Finally, it is remarkable that the geometry found on shark skin scales, with keels of a scalloped shape closely resembling the trapezoidal shape but with smoothed corners, was also tested by Bechert et al. [6] and found to perform comparably to that of the trapezoidal shape. Many shark species also appear to have the approximate h 0.5 s ratio found to be optimal in experiments. Both of these are indicators that sharks have indeed evolved a scale and riblet geometry for turbulent skin friction reduction; however, the keels may play a role in separation control as well. Experiments to discern the benets of shark scale bristling began with Bechert et al. [8]; they used a shark skin replica whereby an overlapping array of individual shark scales was built and tested in their oil tunnel facility. In this man-made model of the shark skin, they meticulously built 800 small replicas of

Shark Skin Drag Reduction

2399

a hammerhead (Sphyrna zygaena) shark denticle scaled up 100 times in size (resulting in a crown length of 19 mm and riblet spacing of 4 mm). Each scale was anchored with a compliant spring with variation in stiffness to discern if denticle bristling could result in any additional mechanism to further decrease turbulent skin friction drag. The model was used for cases where the scales laid at or were wholly bristled at a collective angle of attack. Bristled cases only resulted in increased drag, with higher spring stiffness resulting in higher drag. Flat, aligned scales gave comparable results to riblet surfaces with the only difference being that the greatest drag reduction achieved around s+ 15 had a value of about 3%. This decrease in performance was attributed to the construction of the model with small gaps and other imperfections preventing a smoother surface. Thus if bristling of the scales is to be advantageous to the shark, it must be something that is only activated upon demand and thus concurs with the postulation that bristling is utilized as a means to control ow separation. Initial speculation began with the hypothesis that bristled shark scales act as vortex generators [8]. These devices produce streamwise vortices which energize the ow close to the surface. Vortex generators need to be placed at a specic downstream location within a boundary layer for maximum performance and typically upstream of the point of separation [9]. Another method of controlling ow separation, used to date at a more global scale, consists of movable aps; for airfoil applications, these are placed close to the trailing edge ($10% of chord length or larger) and have been shown to delay the onset of stall resulting in greater lift [8]. When the ap itself was given a 3D jagged trailing edge, they were also found to act more effectively. More recent work by the authors [1113] has investigated the mechanism by which shark skin bristling may lead to the development of a passive, owactuated mechanism for separation control. The current working hypothesis is that the passive, exible scales of the shark work as microaps to locally control ow separation as needed on crucial regions of the body where it most often occurs during swimming maneuvers. Recent observations on shark skin bristling angles on the shortn mako (Isurus oxyrinchus) indicate that, for this particular species known for its swimming capability, only certain portions of the body have very exible scales. Bristling capability

was measured on dead specimens, and the effect of body pressurization was also considered as a potential bristling mechanism. However, results showed that subcutaneous skin pressurization did not cause scale bristling and had no effect on bristling angles; furthermore, such scales have no muscles attached to them as they lie in the deeper layer of the skin, the dermis. Because the ank scales are very loosely attached to the skin and highly mobile, these observations led us to infer that the scales are most likely bristled by reverse ow actuation. Sixteen body locations [12, 13] were considered, six on ns and ten on the body. Scales were manipulated by a ne acupuncture needle and remained bristled once manipulated as shown in Fig. 4. Scale angles vary with body location, but the most exible scales are found along the ank of the body extending behind the gills to the tail; here scales are found to be easily exible with slight manipulation on dead specimens to angles of 50 or greater. Highly exible scales are also found at the trailing edge of the pectoral ns as compared to the leading edge where there was zero scale exibility; this indicates the scales may be used to control dynamic stall (unsteady separation) to maintain lift forces on these surfaces during swimming and thereby maintain control. Contragility during swimming, or the ability to change direction quickly and easily, requires low pressure drag as well as high musculature control. These recent ndings, herein reported as to variation in scale exibility, corroborate the hypothesis that the ank region, extending from the location of maximum girth to the tail, is where a shark with a side-to-side swimming motion requires separation control to increase contragility. The scale exibility appears to be a result of a reduction in size of the scale base anchored in the skin and a change in the shape of the base (as can be seen by the histological data shown in Figs. 1 and 3). The reduction appears to occur in the length of the base relative to its width, where the portion of the base that would pivot up and out of the skin at high bristling angles shows a decrease in length. Thus the scales with greater bristling angles are less rmly anchored in the anterior to posterior direction and can pivot more freely within the skin. Cassel et al. [14] describe the process leading to unsteady ow separation, as would occur in a turbulent boundary layer. In the presence of an adverse pressure gradient, the uid closest to the wall, which also has the lowest momentum, is where ow reversal is rst initiated (Fig. 5). This region of uid moves back

2400

Shark Skin Drag Reduction

upstream and thickens and then subsequently erupts from the surface leading to a patch where the ow is separated from the surface. In a turbulent boundary layer, the uid with the lowest momentum is that contained in the low-speed streaks, and separation of a streak results in the formation of a horseshoe-shaped structure as observed in computational studies of a separating turbulent boundary layer [15]. Thus for the shark skin, made up of a staggered array of scales, ow reversal in long, thin patches of uid may locally bristle the scales, thereby interrupting the ow separation process. This feature of shark skin resulting in a surface with a favored ow direction is likely key to its capability to inhibit ow separation. Furthermore, previous experiments over a bristled shark skin model established the existence of embedded cavity vortices, axis of rotation in spanwise direction, forming between replicas of the scales [11]. Thus if ow is induced to form between the scales when bristled, there are two supplementary mechanisms that may aid to control the ow. The formation of embedded vortices, similar as occurs for golf ball dimples, would allow the ow to pass over the surface with an ensuing partial slip condition, thereby leading to higher momentum adjacent to the skin. Secondly, with a turbulent boundary layer ow forming above the cavities, there may be added momentum exchange whereby high-momentum uid is induced at a greater rate to move toward the skin and into the cavities. This latter mechanism, resulting in turbulence augmentation [1], is another possible means to enhance the momentum overall in the ow closest to the wall. These three mechanisms may be working in combination to control ow separation over the skin of the shark.

weight, and maintenance of the riblet lm (particularly with respect to particulates clogging the surface) with only an associated total decrease in drag of 13% have prevented widespread use in most aircraft applications [1]. Separation control cannot only reduce drag but can also lead to increased maneuverability for vehicles. Decreasing drag overall can lead to increased fuel efciency, payload and range in both military and commercial applications. Flow separation is also an important issue for maintaining use of control surfaces on vehicles (i.e., prevention of stall), which can also have relevance to helicopter rotors and turbine/ compressor blades. Passive control mechanisms, including those found on shark skin, have been and will continue to be applied in all these applications.

Cross-References
Biomimetics BioPatterning Shark Skin Effect

References
1. Gad-el Hak, M.: Flow Control: Passive, Active and Reactive Flow Management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK (2000) 2. Bhushan, B.: Shark skin effect. In: Encyclopedia of Nanotechnology. Springer, Berlin (2012) 3. Reif, W.-E.: Protective and hydrodynamic function of the dermal skeleton of elasmobranchs. Neues Jahrb. Geol. Palaontol. Abh. 157, 133141 (1978) 4. Walsh, M.: Drag characteristics of V-groove and transverse curvature riblets. In: Hough, G.R. (ed.) Viscous Flow Drag Reduction. Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, vol. 72, pp. 168184. AIAA, New York (1980) 5. Bechert, D., Hoppe, G., Reif, W.: On the drag reduction of the shark skin. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) Paper No. 85-0546 (1985) 6. Bechert, D., Bruse, M., Hage, W., Van der Hoeven, J., Hoppe, G.: Experiments on drag-reducing surfaces and their optimization with an adjustable geometry. J. Fluid Mech. 338, 5987 (1997) 7. Bushnell, D., Moore, K.: Drag reduction in nature. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 23, 6579 (1991) 8. Bechert, D., Bruse, M., Hage, W., Meyer, R.: Fluid mechanics of biological surfaces and their technological application. Naturwissenschaften 80, 157171 (2000) 9. Lin, J.: Review of research on low-prole vortex generators to control boundary-layer separation. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 38, 389420 (2002)

Past and Future Applications

The application of drag-reducing techniques to vehicles in both air and water has obvious advantages and at the same time limitations. Typical riblet spacing for both water and air applications, at speeds normally encountered, falls in the range of $0.035 mm. Thin plastic lms with adhesive on one side and riblets on the other have been made commercially available; thus a wide array of testing and use on aircraft has already taken place where drag reduction was documented. However, practical limitations from cost, added

Shark Skin Effect 10. Bernard, P., Wallace, J.: Turbulent Flow: Analysis, Measurement, and Prediction. Wiley, Hoboken (2002) 11. Lang, A., Motta, P., Hidalgo, P., Westcott, M.: Bristled shark skin: a microgeometry for boundary layer control? Bioinspir. Biomim. 3, 046005 (2008) 12. Lang, A., Habegger, M., Motta, P.: Shark skin boundary layer control. In: Proceedings of the IMA Workshop Natural Locomotion in Fluids and on Surfaces: Swimming, Flying, and Sliding, 15 June 2010. IMA Volumes in Mathematics and its Applications (2012) 13. Lang, A., Motta, P., Habegger, M., Hueter, R., Afroz, F.: Shark skin separation control mechanisms. Mar. Technol. Soc. J. 45(4), 208215 (2011) 14. Cassel, K., Smith, F., Walker, J.: The onset of instability in unsteady boundary-layer separation. J. Fluid Mech. 315, 223256 (1996) 15. Na, Y., Moin, P.: Direct numerical simulation of a separated turbulent boundary layer. J. Fluid Mech. 374, 379405 (1998)

2401

Shark Skin Effect

Bharat Bhushan Nanoprobe Laboratory for Bio- & Nanotechnology and Biomimetics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA

Synonyms
Low uid drag surface

Definition
The shark skin effect is the reduction of the uid drag during swimming at fast speeds and protection of its surface against biofouling. The presence of surface microstructure on the skin surface is responsible for this effect.

making the sh slide across objects rather than scrape, and it makes the surface of the sh difcult for microscopic organisms to adhere to [28]. It has been known for many years that by adding as little as a few hundred parts per million guar, a naturally occurring polymer, friction in pipe ow can be reduced by up to two thirds. Other synthetic polymers provide an even larger benet [18]. The compliant skin of the dolphin has also been studied for drag-reducing properties. By responding to the pressure uctuations across the surface, a compliant material on the surface of an object in a uid ow has been shown to be benecial. Studies have reported 7% drag reduction [12]. Another set of aquatic animals which possess multipurpose skin is fast swimming sharks [14]. The skin of fast swimming sharks reduces the drag experienced by sharks as they swim through water and protects against biofouling. The tiny scales covering the skin of fast swimming sharks, known as dermal denticles (skin teeth), are shaped like small riblets and aligned in the direction of uid ow (Fig. 1). Shark skininspired riblets have been shown to provide a drag reduction benet up to 9.9% [5]. The spacing between these dermal denticles is such that the riblets may not be very effective against very small (micro-) organisms they probably work best against larger organisms such as mussels, algae, and barnacles. Prevention of undesirable accumulation of microorganisms protects the surface against biofouling. Slower sharks are covered in dermal denticles as well, but these are not shaped like riblets and do not provide much drag reduction benets. The effect of riblet structures on the behavior of uid drag, as well as the optimization of their morphology, is the focus of this entry.

Mechanisms of Fluid Drag and Role of Riblets in Drag Reduction

Fluid drag comes in several forms, the most basic of which are pressure drag and friction drag [14]. Pressure drag is the drag associated with the energy required to move uid out from in front of an object in the ow, and then back in place behind the object. Much of the drag associated with walking through water is pressure drag, as the water directly in front of a body must be moved out and around the body before the body can move forward. The magnitude of pressure drag can be

Overview
Many structures, materials, and surfaces found in nature can be exploited for commercial applications. As an example, nature has created ways of reducing drag in uid ow, evident in the efcient movement of sh, dolphins, and sharks [10, 14]. The mucus secreted by sh causes a reduction in drag as they move through water, and also protects the sh from abrasion by