New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Why Some Fluids Flow Slower when Pushed Harder

A transparent rock experiment shows how stretchy molecules kick up eddies

Thomas Fuchs

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

For most fluids, an increase in pressure should lead to a burst of speed, like squeezing ketchup from a tube. But when flowing through porous materials such as soil or sedimentary rock, certain liquids slow down under pressure. Pinpointing the cause of this slowing would benefit industries such as environmental clean-up and oil extraction, where pumping one liquid into the ground forces another out; however, such movement is challenging to observe directly.

Princeton University chemical engineer Christopher Browne and physicist Sujit Datta offer a solution to this puzzle. By tweaking a special liquid to be transparent and pumping it through the pores of an equally transparent artificial rock, they documented how the liquid’s movement becomes chaotic, causing swirling eddies that gum up the pores and slow the flow.

The fluids of interest, called polymer solutions, are dissolved versions of large stretchy molecule chains common in biology as well as the cosmetics and energy industries. Theoretical studies have suggested that when the chains stretch through a nearly flat channel and then recoil, they generate forces that stir up eddies. But whether that turbulence “arises in realistic 3-D soils, sediments and porous rocks has been hotly debated,” Datta says.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


To resolve the controversy, the researchers pumped a synthetic polymer solution into a simulated “sedimentary rock” built from a box filled with tiny glass beads. They tweaked the polymer solution’s precise chemistry by diluting it slightly to change how light refracts, rendering the “rock” fully transparent even when saturated.

The scientists laced the polymer with fluorescent chips and tracked its movement through the pores under a microscope, recording patchy regions of eddies and measuring how the solution flowed under differing pressure. This confirmed that the macroscale slowing had its microscopic origins where researchers had suspected: polymer chains stretching out and then coiling back as they passed through pores. The findings appeared in Science Advances.

“Visualizing flow inside a 3-D porous media literally gives a window into something that was impossible to see,” says University of Pennsylvania biochemical engineer Paulo Arratia, who was not involved in the study. As a next step, “if you could actually see the molecules stretching and recoiling, that would be wonderful [to] connect the molecular point of view to the microscopic.”

Industrial applications require knowing which specific pressures are needed to push a polymer solution through a porous material at a given flow rate. The study provides a physical model describing that relation and could predict, for example, how much contaminant can be retrieved from a chemical site by injecting a solution. “Without predictability,” Datta says, “injection operations are trial and error.”

Rachel Berkowitz is a freelance science writer and a corresponding editor for Physics Magazine. She is based in Vancouver, British Columbia, and Eastsound, Wash.

More by Rachel Berkowitz
Scientific American Magazine Vol 326 Issue 3This article was published with the title “Unusual Flow” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 326 No. 3 (), p. 19
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0322-19

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe