Keystone laminar flow implied by the equations for friction, head loss and viscosity To add to moorea9's post on this, yes the paper focused on the Daqing and RMOTC tests. The 75% quoted in the article for Keystone is presented without all of the associated details and express confirmation that it is laminar.
However the two quite different equations that describe laminar and turbulent flow have general applicability including to Keystone.
What we know from the Eureka release is that on Keystone they achieved a 75% reduction in power use. If the flow was turbulent, then the relevant equation tells us that that maximum possible reduction in power is about 50%. as referred to in https://www.dropbox.com/sh/j0qj5i3lb5hqy6y/AAAiWH58qZc0l2qKEDQ8IVxRa?dl=0
Given that the news release says the power savings at Keystone were 75% the only possible explanation for this is that the turbulence has been suppressed and the flow is indeed laminar on Keystone with AOT turned on. Only the laminar equation permits savings beyond 50%.
This is a clear implication from the data and supported by the physics. Still we naturally want to hear definitively that this is so and I would hope that Professor Tao in his presentation today will expressly confirm laminar flow.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
