Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 53 (2006) 179 – 188

www.elsevier.com/locate/petrol

Drag reduction characteristics in straight and coiled

tubing — An experimental study
Subhash N. Shah a,⁎, Ahmed Kamel b , Yunxu Zhou b
a
Well Construction Technology Center, Mewbourne School of Petroleum and Geological Engineering, University of Oklahoma, USA
b
Mewbourne School of Petroleum and Geological Engineering, University of Oklahoma, USA
Received 25 July 2005; received in revised form 10 May 2006; accepted 16 May 2006

Abstract

An excessive friction pressure loss due to the small tubing diameter and curvature (which is believed to cause secondary flow)
of Coiled Tubing (CT) often limits the maximum obtainable fluid flow rate in most CT operations. Good drag reduction property
becomes a desirable quality for drilling, completion and workover fluids for CT applications. Yet, the drag reduction phenomenon
in coiled tubing has not been well understood.
This paper presents an experimental study of drag reduction performance of commonly used drag reducing agent, high
molecular weight, anionic, AMPS copolymer (Nalco ASP-820) in straight and coiled tubing. The flow loop used consisted of three
1/2-in. OD coiled tubing reels with curvature ratios of 0.01, 0.019, and 0.031. A 1/2-in. OD, 10-ft straight section was also included
to compare the drag reduction behavior between straight and coiled tubing. Various concentrations of drag reducing fluid were
tested. The optimum concentration was then determined from the results of drag reduction exhibited by the fluid. The differential
pressure versus flow rate data were reduced in terms of Fanning friction factor and solvent Reynolds number for estimating drag
reduction characteristics.
The results show that the drag reduction in coiled tubing are significantly lower than in straight tubing. As curvature ratio
increases, the drag reduction decreases. A new drag reduction envelope (which is parallel to the Virk's envelope for drag reduction
in straight pipes) is proposed to evaluate the essential characteristics of drag reduction in coiled tubing. The test data plotted on this
new envelope clearly show the delayed onset of drag reduction and the effects of curvature and polymer concentration on drag
reduction.
Presently, the correlations for accurately predicting drag reduction characteristics of a commonly used drag reducing fluid in
coiled tubing are non-existent. In this study, new drag reduction correlations are developed that can be used for the engineering
design of coiled tubing hydraulics. The correlations are also evaluated using the experimental data from full-scale coiled tubing
flow experiments and results showed the good agreement with the predictions from the developed correlations.
© 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Drag reduction; Coiled tubing; Friction pressure; Well completions; Drilling; Non-Newtonian fluids

1. Introduction
⁎ Corresponding author. T-301Sarkeys Energy Center, 100 E. Boyd
St., Norman, OK 73019-1003, USA. Tel.: +1 405 325 6871; fax: +1
Fluids are widely used in various petroleum industry
405 325 7477. processes. These fluids are pumped through straight as well
E-mail address: subhash@ou.edu (S.N. Shah). as coiled tubing during operations such as hydraulic
0920-4105/$ - see front matter © 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.petrol.2006.05.004
180 S.N. Shah et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 53 (2006) 179–188

fracturing, acidizing, wellbore cleanup, cementing and centrifugal force. The slower part along the wall is forced
drilling which usually are executed under turbulent flow inwards, where the pressure is lower causing secondary
conditions. High friction pressure losses are encountered flow right angle to the main flow.
when fluids are pumped through straight and coiled tubing. Significant curvature may cause strong secondary
Excessively high friction pressure losses due to small flows resulting in higher resistance to flow and higher
diameter of tubing and secondary flows generated due to pressure drop (Dean, 1927, 1928). In recent years, the
the curvature in coiled tubing tend to limit the pumping rapid increase in use of coiled tubing has created increased
capacity of fluids. interest in research activities on coiled tubing hydraulics
It has been observed that adding a small amount of using full-scale experiment (McCann and Islas, 1996;
specific high molecular weight polymer known as “Drag Azouz et al., 1998; Shah and Zhou, 2003; Zhou et al.,
Reducers” under turbulent pipe flow condition can 2006). Therefore, this investigation is an attempt to study
drastically decrease the friction pressure gradient and the characteristics of one of the most widely used drag
thus, increase pumping capacity. These drag reducing reducing polymers, i.e. high molecular weight, anionic
fluids include polymers, surfactants, and fibers. They are AMPS copolymer (Nalco ASP-820) in both straight and
known to lower the friction pressure losses up to 80% coiled tubing with different curvature ratios.
over solvent. Since the discovery of drag reduction
phenomenon of polymer solution in pipe flow (Toms, 2. Experimental work
1948), there have been numerous studies (Lumley, 1969;
Virk, 1975; Berman, 1978; Hoyt, 1990) that provide 2.1. Experimental setup
extensive reviews on this topic.
Drag reduction phenomenon under turbulent flow in The experimental setup used in this study is shown in
straight tubing has been studied extensively but there is Fig. 1. The flow loop consists of the following
very little information on drag reducing fluids flowing components:
through coiled tubing. It is known that fluids behave
differently in straight and coiled tubing. In curved pipes, • A 1000-gallon polyethylene tank for fluid mixing
the central part of the fluid is forced outwards due to the and storage.

Fig. 1. Schematic of the fluid flow loop.

 S.N. Shah et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 53 (2006) 179–188 181

Table 1 After fluid was prepared, water was first circulated

Specifications of coiled tubing used in flow loop through straight and coiled tubing to calibrate the system.
OD, ID, Core diameter ⁎, Ratio No. of Length, The flow rate versus pressure drop data were recorded.
in. in. (ft) (r/R) turns (ft) The results of water tests were used as the baseline for
0.5 0.435 3.608 0.010 3 36.14 data analysis.
0.5 0.435 1.878 0.019 3 18.83 The water in the system was then completely displaced
0.5 0.435 1.168 0.031 6 23.26
by pumping the test fluid. The flow rate was set at a
* Measured from the center of core to the center of tubing. desired value and the steady state pressure drop data
across the straight and coiled tubing were recorded. The
• A centrifugal feeder pump to feed the fluid to Moyno flow rate was increased and the corresponding pressure
pump. drop was noted. A similar procedure was followed at
• A Moyno pump to pump the fluid. various flow rates. At each flow rate, adequate time was
• A 1/2-in. tubing used as flow conduit (0.435-in. ID). allowed for the fluid to achieve steady state conditions.
Flow system has a 15 ft straight section (with 3 ft and This was confirmed by monitoring the live display of the
2 ft as entrance and exit lengths respectively) and measured flow rate and pressure drop signals.
three replaceable coiled tubing reels with different Another coil with different curvature ratio was then
curvature ratios. The specifications of the coiled installed in the system. A similar procedure was
tubing reels used are shown in Table 1. The curvature followed to obtain the pressure drop — flow rate data.
ratios shown in this table cover the range used in the Five different concentrations of the polymer were
field operations. tested in this study as shown in Table 2. Because of low
• Pressure transducers for the measurement of frictional viscosity of these polymeric solutions, Cannon–Fenske
pressure losses in straight section of the tubing and in Capillary Viscometer was used to measure their viscos-
coils. The measurement range can be selected between ities. However, for the highest concentration fluid, i.e.
0 and 100 psi. 0.15% and 0.10% by vol., attempt was made to obtain the
• An absolute pressure sensor to measure the working power law model fluid constants, n and Kv using CS-50
pressure of the system. The maximum working Bohlin rheometer. Table 2 lists viscosities and the power
pressure of the system is 1000 psi. law fluid constants of the fluids tested. For lower
• A MicroMotion® Elite Model CMF050 Sensor capable concentrations, it was assumed that the fluid behavior is
of measuring flow rate in the range of 0–30 gal/min, nearly Newtonian, i.e. n ≈ 1.0 and the viscosities from the
fluid density with accuracy of ±0.0005 g/cc and tem- capillary viscometer were converted to Kv.
perature with accuracy of ±1 °C or ±0.5% of reading
in °C. 3. Results and discussion
• The wireless Fluke Hydra data logger system is used
for the data acquisition. The data are transmitted 3.1. Data reduction and analysis
to a personnel computer in the control room and
displayed live on the screen. This helps monitor the The data recorded from the wireless logger consist
quality control of the data being gathered during mainly of flow rate (gal/min), pressure drop across
testing. straight and coiled tubing (psi), fluid density (lb/gal) and
temperature (°F). The data values in the stabilized
2.2. Test procedure region were averaged and used in the analysis.

The test fluid was prepared and stored in the 1000-gal Table 2
polyethylene tank. The mixing procedure recommended Viscosities of fluids tested
by the polymer product supplier was followed. Adequate Fluid description Average Absolute Power law fluid
time was allowed for gel to fully hydrate. The fluid efflux viscosity, constants
containing friction reducer was not subjected to time, (s) (cP)
n Kv, lbf sn/ft2
excessive shear and also was not re-circulated as it can
Tap water 73 1.0927 1.0 2.28 × 10− 5
degrade. All tests were conducted in a single-pass mode 0.01% polymeric fluid 81 1.215 ≈ 1.0 2.54 × 10− 5
and at ambient temperature and pressure. Fluid sample 0.05% polymeric fluid 113 1.7 ≈ 1.0 3.55 × 10− 5
was collected from tank at the start of the test for vis- 0.07% polymeric fluid 152 2.28 ≈ 1.0 4.76 × 10− 5
cosity measurement. Another fluid sample was collected 0.10% polymeric fluid 183 2.75 0.946 9.0 × 10− 5
0.15% polymeric fluid 301 4.515 0.814 3.0 × 10− 4
from tank at the end of the test and analyzed.
182 S.N. Shah et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 53 (2006) 179–188

The pressure drop data were converted to Fanning straight section during tests with different coils were very
friction factor, f, a dimensionless variable using the close to each other exhibiting good reproducibility.
following expression: As shown in Fig. 2, the friction factors of water in

 straight section matches well with the predictions from
di D p
f ¼ 25:8 ð1Þ the following Drew correlation (Drew et al., 1932) for
lqm2 turbulent flow of Newtonian fluids in straight tubing.
where l is either the straight or coiled tubing length
across which the differential pressure is measured. f ¼ 0:0014 þ 0:125ðNRe s Þ−0:32 ð4Þ
Drag reduction can be calculated (Shah and Zhou,
For coiled tubing, secondary flow effects increase as
2003) as:

 curvature increases and hence, the Fanning friction
ft factors are higher than those for straight pipe. Predic-
DR ¼ 1− ð2Þ
fs tions from the published correlations (Ito, 1959;
Srinivasan et al., 1970) were compared with the present
where, ft and fs are Fanning friction factors of the treated results. Although both correlations cover the investigat-
fluid (drag reducing fluid) and solvent (water) respec- ed range of Dean Number, NDe, (NDe = NRes(r / R)0.5),
tively. Both can be calculated using Eq. (1). water data were in a closer agreement (as seen in Fig. 2)
The drag reduction characteristics of fluid can be with the following Srinivasan correlation for turbulent
examined from the plot of Fanning friction factor versus flow of Newtonian fluids in coiled tubing.
Reynolds number. The Reynolds number is determined
from the following equation: 0:084ðr=RÞ0:1

 f ¼ 0:2
ð5Þ
qmdi NRe s
NRe ¼ 928 ð3Þ
ls
3.3. Effect of fluid concentration on drag reduction
3.2. Water test
Figs. 3 and 4 depict the plots of drag reduction as a
Fig. 2 is a composite plot of Fanning friction factor function of solvent Reynolds number for 0.01, 0.05, 0.07,
versus Reynolds number for the straight tubing and three 0.10, and 0.15% polymeric fluid in straight tubing (ST)
coils. It should be noted that during testing, only the coil and coiled tubing (CT) with curvature ratio (r / R = 0.01)
was replaced, whereas the straight section remained the respectively. These plots reveal the effect of polymer con-
same. It was found that the pressure drop readings in centration on drag reduction in straight and coiled tubing.

Fig. 2. Fanning friction factor versus solvent Reynolds number plot for water data.
 S.N. Shah et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 53 (2006) 179–188 183

Fig. 3. Effect of polymer concentration on drag reduction in straight tubing.

As can be seen in Fig. 3, except for 0.01% fluid, all centration increases and reaches its maximum value at
fluids at other concentration exhibit approximately the the optimum concentration (0.07% by vol.). Beyond this
same percent drag reduction. However, overall, 0.07% concentration, the drag reduction decreases. This is
fluid shows the highest drag reduction for straight tubing probably because the turbulent intensity is suppressed
at all solvent Reynolds number considered; therefore it by more viscous fluid at higher concentration. The per-
appears to be the optimum concentration. The percent drag cent drag reduction is in the range from 40% to 65%
reduction increases as the turbulent intensity increases, i.e. which is significantly lower than 60% to 75% observed
as the flow rate or Reynolds number increases. The for straight pipe.
percent drag reduction observed is between 60% and 75% It appears that 0.07% by vol. is the optimum con-
for the Reynolds number range investigated. centration for anionic AMPS copolymer for both straight
Fig. 4 shows that for coiled tubing with curvature and coiled tubing. Hence, the further analysis was
ratio of 0.01, the drag reduction increases as the con- performed only with the data of 0.07% polymeric fluid.

Fig. 4. Effect of polymer concentration on drag reduction in coiled tubing (r / R = 0.01).

184 S.N. Shah et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 53 (2006) 179–188

3.4. Effect of curvature ratio on drag reduction tubing is significantly lower than in straight tubing. At
lower Reynolds numbers, the difference can be as much as
Fig. 5 shows the plot of Fanning friction factor versus 40% but at higher Reynolds numbers, it is 20%. It can be
solvent Reynolds number for 0.07% polymeric fluid. The seen that percent drag reduction decreases with increasing
experimental data gathered are for Reynolds number coiled tubing curvature. The fluid flowing through coiled
greater than 2100 indicating that the flow regime was tubing with the maximum curvature, i.e. 0.031, shows the
turbulent. The drag reduction effect is evident in both least drag reduction. The secondary flow effect generated
straight and coiled tubing since the data points of straight in coiled tubing becomes more prominent with the
tubing lie below the Drew correlation (Drew et al., 1932) increase in curvature.
for Newtonian fluid and for coiled tubing they lie below The drag reduction behavior of fluid can be better
the Srinivasan correlation (Srinivasan et al., 1970) for understood when the friction factor and Reynolds number
Newtonian fluid.  are plotted 
data on the Prandtl–Karman coordinates,
1 pffiffiffi
It can also be seen from this figure that the data points pffiffiffi vs: NRes f , since the data are plotted along with
for straight tubing are much closer to the following f
Virk's (Virk, 1975) maximum drag reduction asymptote the drag reduction envelope. For the coiled tubing data, it
for straight tubing which indicates that the drag reduction was necessary to modify Virk's drag reduction envelope
in straight tubing is higher than in coiled tubing. for straight pipe by replacing the following zero-drag
pffiffiffi reduction line for straight pipe based on Prandtl–Karman
p
P1ffiffiffi ¼ 19:0log NRes f −32:4 ð6Þ law (Eq. (7)) by Srinivasan correlation (Eq. (5)) for
10
f turbulent flow of Newtonian fluids in coiled tubing.
pffiffiffi
It is also evident that as the curvature ratio increases, p
P 1ffiffiffi ¼ 4:0log NRes f − 0:40 ð7Þ
10
the Fanning friction factor increases, thus, lowering the f
percent drag reduction. Fig. 7 shows the combined effect of polymer concen-
Fig. 6 shows the plot of percent drag reduction versus tration and curvature ratio for the data of 0.07% and 0.1%
solvent Reynolds number for 0.07% polymeric fluid in polymeric fluids on Prandtl–Karman coordinates with the
straight and coiled tubing. It is important to note that the modified drag reduction envelope. As shown in this
drag reduction in straight tubing was calculated using the figure, the data points for both straight tubing and coiled
Drew correlation for fs in Eq. (2) while for coiled tubing, fs tubing exhibit linear trend but the straight tubing data have
was calculated from the Srinivasan correlation. The higher position (higher drag reduction). As the curvature
difference in drag reduction behavior between straight ratio increases, the data lines of coiled tubing become
and coiled tubing is obvious. The drag reduction in coiled lower and with slightly decreased slopes indicating lower

Fig. 5. Plot of Fanning friction factor vs. solvent Reynolds number for 0.07% polymeric fluid.
 S.N. Shah et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 53 (2006) 179–188 185

Fig. 6. Drag reduction of 0.07% polymeric fluid in straight and coiled tubing.

drag reduction. So, the drag reduction in coiled tubing is that increasing fluid concentration from 0.07% to 0.1%, the
reduced with increasing curvature ratio. Furthermore, it onset of drag reduction moves further towards the right
decreases with polymer concentration beyond 0.07%. indicating delay in the onset of drag reduction. The onset of
drag reduction occurs first in straight tubing followed by
3.5. Onset of drag reduction the coiled tubing with the lowest curvature ratio. As the
curvature ratio increases the onset of drag reduction delays.
On Prandtl–Karman coordinates, the intersection of It is noted that for all polymer concentrations used in this
data points or their extrapolation with the bottom base line study, there were no data points below the bottom base
in Fig. 7 indicates the onset of drag reduction, which occurs line; indicative of some level of drag reduction occurring
only in turbulent flow regime. It can be observed in Fig. 7 even at the lowest polymer concentration.

Fig. 7. Effect of curvature ratio and polymer concentration on drag reduction.

186 S.N. Shah et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 53 (2006) 179–188

Fig. 8. Comparison between experimental data and predicted values of Fanning friction factor for 0.07% polymeric fluid.

3.6. Development of correlations centration of 0.07% (by vol.) and over the entire range of
data [0.01 < (r /R)< 0.031 and 22,000 <NRes < 155,000].
Correlations have been developed to predict the Fig. 8 shows a comparison between the predicted and
friction factor values as a function of solvent Reynolds experimental Fanning friction factors as a function of
number for both straight and coiled tubing using the data solvent Reynolds number for both straight and coiled
of an optimum concentration of 0.07% polymeric fluid. tubing. It can be seen that there is a good agreement
A straight tubing correlation predicts the value of between the experimental and predicted values. The
friction factor (ft) as a function of solvent Reynolds lowest percentage deviation was less than 3% for 0.01
number (NRes) while for coiled tubing, it predicts the curvature ratio and the highest was less than 6% for 0.019
value of friction factor (ft) as a function of solvent curvature ratio while the percentage deviation was less
Reynolds number (NRes) and curvature ratio (r / R). than 1% for straight tubing. It can also be seen that as the
The correlation for straight tubing is: curvature ratio increases, the friction factor increases


 which means the percentage drag reduction decreases. It
B C
ft ¼ A− þ ð8Þ should be noted here that 0.07% anionic AMPS co-
lnðNRes Þ 0:5
NRes polymer does not exhibit the maximum drag reduction as
The correlation for coiled tubing is: predicted by Virk's maximum drag reduction asymptote.
B V

½
ft ¼ A V
r
R
1:0
CV
NRes
ð9Þ
3.7. Comparison with full-scale test

In Fig. 9, the data obtained from full-scale test with 1-in.

The values of correlation coefficient obtained for the straight and coiled tubing using polymeric fluid at optimum
above two equations were very close to unity (R2 = 0.9998 concentration (0.07% by vol.) are plotted together with the
for ST and R2 = 0.9908 for CT) indicating excellent agree- values predicted from the correlations developed using lab-
ment between the data and correlations. The constants A, B scale tests. In the full-scale experimental setup, a 1-in.
and C in Eq. (8) and A′, B′ and C′ in Eq. (9) are presented straight tubing of 20-ft length and also a 1-in. coiled tubing
elsewhere (Shah and Ahmed Kamel, 2005). of 1000 ft length spooled on a drum of 72-in. diameter were
Knowing ft from either Eqs. (8) or (9), one can calculate used. The inside diameter of 1-in. tubing was 0.810-in.,
the percent drag reduction using Eq. (2) knowing fs either thus providing a curvature ratio of 0.0113.
from Drew or Srinivasan correlation. These correlations are Fig. 9 shows that the Fanning friction factor values
valid for smooth pipes at the optimum polymer con- calculated using the correlations developed in this study
 S.N. Shah et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 53 (2006) 179–188 187

Fig. 9. Comparison between full-scale experimental data and predicted values of Fanning friction factor for 0.07% polymeric fluid.

represent the trend of the full-scale test data well. The tubing and it is a function of solvent Reynolds num-
calculated friction factor values for straight tubing are ber and curvature ratio in case of coiled tubing. A
in a reasonably good agreement with the full-scale test 20% increase in calculated friction factor for coiled
data while they are 20% higher for coiled tubing. The tubing is recommended to account for pipe roughness
primary reason for this may be the contribution of pipe usually encountered in field operations.
roughness of coiled tubing in full-scale test to higher
friction pressure losses and hence friction factors. It Nomenclature
is, therefore, recommended that in field applications, CT Coiled tubing
the proposed correlations for straight tubing and DR Drag reduction, [1 − ft / fs]
coiled tubing are used but for coiled tubing the friction di Inside diameter, in.
factor be increased by 20% to account for the pipe f Fanning friction factor
roughness. FR Friction reducer
ID Inside diameter, in.
4. Conclusions Kv Consistency index from viscosmeter, lbf sn/ft2
l Pipe length, ft
1. The high molecular weight, anionic, AMPS copol- n Flow behavior index, dimensionless
ymer, (Nalco ASP-820) at optimum concentration of NDe Dean number, NDe = NRes(r / R)0.5
0.07% (by vol.) reduces the solvent friction pressure NRes Solvent Reynolds number (ρvdi / μs)
by up to 75% in straight tubing and 65% in coiled OD Outside diameter, in.
tubing. Better drag reduction is seen in straight pipe p Pressure, psi
than coiled tubing for a given fluid and at a particular Δp Pressure drop, psi
solvent Reynolds number. r Radius of coiled tubing, in.
2. The increase in flow rate results in an increase in drag R Radius of coiled tubing reel, in.
reduction while the increase in curvature ratio of ST Straight tubing
coiled tubing results in a decrease in drag reduction. v Average velocity, ft/s
3. Increasing the concentration of drag reducing fluid or μ Fluid viscosity, cP
curvature ratio of the coiled tubing delays the onset μs Solvent viscosity, cP
of drag reduction. ρ Fluid density, lbm/gal
4. Correlations have been developed to predict the fric-
tion factor values for drag reducing polymer as a Subscripts
function of solvent Reynolds number and coiled t Treated fluid
tubing curvature ratio. The correlation is a function of s Solvent
solvent Reynolds number only in case of straight i Internal
188 S.N. Shah et al. / Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 53 (2006) 179–188

Acknowledgments Ito, H., 1959. Friction factor for turbulent flow in curved pipes. J. Basic
Eng. 81 (2), 123–131.
Lumley, J.L., 1969. Drag reduction by additives. Annu. Rev. Fluid
The authors acknowledge gratefully the research Mech. 1, 367–384.
team, especially Joe Flenniken, of the Well Construction McCann, R.C., Islas, C.G., 1996. Frictional pressure loss during
Technology Center for their help with the experiments. turbulent flow in coiled tubing. SPE 36345 presented at the SPE/
They are also thankful to the members of the Coiled ICoTA North American Coiled Tubing Roundtable held in
Montgomery, TX.
Tubing Consortium for their continued support.
Shah, S.N., Ahmed Kamel, A.H., 2005. Drag reduction in straight and
References coiled tubing. The University of Oklahoma, Coiled Tubing
Consortium Annual Meeting, Houston, TX.
Shah, S.N., Zhou, Y., 2003. An experimental study of drag reduction
Azouz, I., Shah, S.N., Vinod, P.S., Lord, D.L., 1998. Experimental
investigation of frictional pressure losses in coiled tubing. SPE of polymer solutions in coiled tubing. SPE Prod. Facil. 280–287.
Prod. Facil. 91–96. Srinivasan, P.S., Nandapurkar, S.S., Holland, F.A., 1970. Friction
Berman, N.S., 1978. Drag reduction by polymers. Annu. Rev. Fluid factors for coils. Trans. Inst. Chem. Eng. 48, 156–161.
Toms, B.A., 1948. Some observations on the flow of linear polymer
Mech. 10, 47–67.
Dean, W.R., 1927. Note of the motion of fluid in curved pipes. Philos. solutions through straight tubes at large Reynolds numbers. Proc.,
Mag. 20 (20), 208–223. First Intl. Congress on Rheology. North Holland, Amsterdam.
Virk, P.S., 1975. Drag reduction fundamentals. AIChEJ 21 (4),
Dean, W.R., 1928. The streamline motion of fluid in curved pipes.
Philos. Mag. 5 (30), 673–695. 625–656.
Drew, T.B., Koo, E.C., McAdams, W.H., 1932. The friction factor for Zhou, Y., Shah, S.N., Gujar, P.V., 2006. Effect of coiled tubing
clean round pipes. Trans. AIChE 28, 56–72. curvature on drag reduction of polymeric fluids. SPE Prod. Oper.
134–141.
Hoyt, J.W., 1990. Drag reduction by polymers and surfactants.
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Washington,
D.C.