d'Alembert's paradox — where it appears
Named by 25 essays across 5 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
The exact theory says nothing has any drag
Solve the flow past a body in a fluid with no viscosity and the answer is beautiful, closed-form, and predicts that a cyclist needs no legs and an airliner no engines. This is not a small error, and it is the most useful failure in the subject.
The force of getting going
The exact theory says a body moving steadily through an ideal fluid feels no force at all. It does not say the fluid is free. Accelerating the body has to accelerate the fluid too, and the bill for that is exactly the mass of fluid the body displaces.
How many things a flow must be told
The equations of motion do not have one answer. They have as many as the conditions on the edge allow, and the number of those is decided by the order of the equation — which is why viscosity does not make the same problem harder, it makes a different problem.
Drag with nothing to rub
d'Alembert's paradox says a closed body in a steady, inviscid flow has no drag, and four separate arguments establish it, none of them wrong. Above Mach one it is false — the flow is still inviscid, still steady, and the drag is real, finite and quadratic in incidence.
Three dimensions are kinder
The ideal flows usually drawn first are plane, and plane flow is the harsh case. Put the third dimension back and the fastest surface speed drops from twice the free stream to one and a half times, the disturbance dies as the cube of distance instead of the square, and the body cannot carry circulation at all.
The mean is not the flow
Average an unsteady flow and the result is a new object with its own properties, and it is not a solution of anything. An inviscid stream oscillating about zero has a mean velocity of exactly nothing everywhere, a mean pressure that reaches minus two dynamic pressures at the shoulders, and a missing term in its own momentum equation that can be written down in closed form.
A body with no lift, and a moment anyway
A fuselage in ideal flow carries no lift at any incidence and still tries to turn the aeroplane over. The couple is computable in one line, it is why tails are the size they are, and the line comes from applying the wall condition to a place where there is no wall.
What the far field remembers
Three numbers survive the journey to infinity — a circulation, a net outflow and a dipole — and nothing else about a body does. Two shapes with nothing in common can therefore make the same flow a few radii away, and the difference between them dies two orders faster than the disturbance either one makes.
Drag in the theory that forbids it
d'Alembert's paradox is a theorem about flows that close behind the body. Stop requiring that, let two streamlines leave the edges and never come back, and the same equations — no viscosity, no vorticity — produce a drag coefficient of 0.8798.
The limit that is not the value
Dissipation is viscosity times the square of a velocity gradient, so it ought to vanish as the viscosity does. It does not. The gradient rises by exactly the factor the viscosity falls by, the product stands still, and a fluid with no viscosity at all would dissipate nothing — which is why the limit and the value are different numbers.
A finite force from an infinite speed
Pressure on a flat plate can only act along the plate's normal. Kutta–Joukowski says the force is perpendicular to the free stream. Those two directions differ by the angle of attack, and the discrepancy is made up at a single point where the velocity is infinite and the area is zero.
The half that carries nothing
Thin-aerofoil theory splits a section into a camber line that carries all the lift and a thickness distribution that carries none — at any incidence, exactly none. That is very nearly true, and what it discards decides the peak suction, the critical Mach number and where the boundary layer gives up.
The constant a hole leaves behind
In a region without holes, Laplace's equation and the boundary values have exactly one solution. Cut a hole and they have a one-parameter family. Nothing in the mathematics chooses between its members, which is why the Kutta condition has to exist and why it cannot be derived.
The drag that is made of waves
D'Alembert's paradox says a body in a steady, irrotational, incompressible, inviscid flow feels no drag. Put a free surface above it and every one of those words still holds — and the drag is not zero. It is the energy walking away in the wave train behind.
One formula, and it does not ask what the shape is
Kutta–Joukowski gives the lift of any two-dimensional body from one number. Six bodies with nothing else in common are put at that number here and come out with identical lifts — and with pitching moments, load distributions and suction peaks that are not even close.
The vorticity a clean surface cannot refuse
A clean bubble's surface cannot hold a shear stress, and it is easy to conclude that it makes no vorticity. On a curved surface it must carry exactly 2κu — three times the speed over the radius at a sphere's equator, whatever the Reynolds number. That is so much weaker than a rigid wall's that the flow stays irrotational to leading order, and the bubble's drag is the dissipation of that irrotational flow: 48/Re, three to ten times below a rigid sphere's.
A drag that needs a discontinuity
A closed body in a steady inviscid flow has no drag, and the transonic equation obeys that as faithfully as any other — until a shock appears inside its own answer. Then the same pressure integral that was zero to five decimal places becomes four decades larger, with no viscosity added and nothing about the body changed.
Two eddies can stand behind a cylinder, but not for long
Ideal flow, which has no viscosity and no wake, can still hold a pair of eddies standing behind a cylinder — at any distance behind it, with a strength fixed by the distance. They cost the cylinder nothing. And they cannot stay: nudged sideways by a thousandth of a radius, the pair grows its displacement exponentially and leaves, which is the first step of shedding a wake.
The paradox is for the pair, not for each body
D'Alembert's paradox says a body in a steady ideal stream feels no force. Put two bodies in the stream and the theorem still holds — for the pair. Each cylinder on its own is pushed: side by side they pull together, with a force that grows without limit as the gap closes, and one behind the other they push apart, so that the front cylinder is driven upstream into the stream that is flowing past it. The forces are equal and opposite at every spacing and every angle, and their sum is exactly the zero the paradox promised.
A pair set free in a stream collides or parts
Two cylinders held in an ideal stream pull together side by side and push apart in tandem. Let them go and the forces become a motion, and the motion has a law of its own: the stream's force on each is exactly the slope of how large the pair looks from far away, so the pair moves to look bigger. Side by side that means closing, and the fluid squeezed out of the gap costs so little that nothing stops them: released four radii apart they collide in six and a half radii of stream. In tandem it means parting, for good.
A free pair turns, and forty-five degrees decides
Two cylinders in an ideal stream move to look bigger to it: side by side they close, in tandem they part. Free to turn as well, a staggered pair swings towards side by side — and does not stop there, because nothing in an ideal fluid damps the swing. Whether it then collides or flies apart is decided, far apart, by one angle and a theorem: the stream's pull on the pair falls as the inverse square of the spacing, and for such a force the sign of the energy alone decides, which changes at exactly forty-five degrees.
Drag makes every free pair meet
Two cylinders set free in an ideal stream swing towards side by side like a pendulum, and whether they collide or part is fixed, far apart, by forty-five degrees. Give each a drag on its motion relative to the stream and the pendulum stops swinging — but it does not stop the pair. A drag coefficient of order one turns the swing into a creep, lets no pair get far from where it started, and brings every one of them round to meet near side by side.
A trailing wake hurries a pair together
Two cylinders free in a stream and damped by their drag always end up meeting near side by side, and the obvious candidate for what holds real pairs apart is their wakes: a body beside another's wake is pushed towards the faster fluid, away from it. Give each cylinder a wake that carries its drag and the push is there — but it points the wrong way. It throws a following cylinder out of the leader's wake and round towards side by side, where neither is in the other's wake and nothing opposes the stream's pull. Near tandem the wakes make the pair meet seven to sixty times sooner, and the only balance they create is a saddle.
A step's face is pushed at its foot and pulled at its lip, equally
Ideal flow running up a step has two corners in it, and the local theory of corners says what each does: the inside corner at the foot brings the flow to rest, the outside corner at the lip sends it round at infinite speed. Solved exactly, the step's face feels both — a push of 2/π of a dynamic pressure times its height spread over its lower four-fifths, and a pull concentrated at the lip — and they cancel exactly, at every ramp angle, because one reflection of the mapping exchanges the two corners. A step has no drag in ideal flow for the same reason a flat plate's lift has no drag: a finite force carried by an infinite speed.
A block's front face is pulled upstream by its own lip
A forward-facing step's face is pushed at its foot and pulled at its lip by exactly equal amounts. Give the step a back — make it a block on the floor — and the balance goes. The two lips, a short top apart, each sit in the other's fast flow, and the suction at the front lip grows while the push at the foot hardly changes: a block as long as it is tall has its front face pulled upstream by three tenths of the dynamic pressure times its height, a block a quarter as long by two thirds. The back is pulled downstream by exactly as much, so the ideal block still has no drag; but every force that ideal flow assigns is now on the wrong face for separation to undo.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Potential flowModel limitAdded massDoubletInviscidPressure coefficientSeparationBoundary conditionBoundary layerCirculationConformal mapDrag