Fluid Flow & Aerodynamics
why things fly, and why the usual explanation is wrong
Concept

Poiseuille flow — where it appears

The exact laminar solution for flow in a pipe or channel driven by a pressure gradient, parabolic in the cross-stream coordinate. It solves the equations at every Reynolds number and stops being the flow that occurs at about 2,300 in a pipe.

Named by 10 essays across 5 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The laminar line does not end; the flow leaves it. Friction factor against Reynolds number in a pipe. The laminar law f = 64/Re is exact and is drawn continuing past the transitional Reynolds number, faintly, because it remains a solution there — the flow simply stops taking it. The turbulent branch is Blasius' correlation and begins where experiments find transition, not where any calculation puts it.

The solutions stop being chosen

Hagen and Poiseuille's pipe profile is an exact solution of the Navier–Stokes equations at every Reynolds number, and it is linearly stable at every Reynolds number. Something else happens at 2300 anyway, and it is not that the solution stopped being one.

turbulence · Transition The chart, with one exact line on it. The friction factor of a pipe against Reynolds number, for five relative roughnesses. Every curve here except one is Colebrook's correlation, solved by iteration rather than read off a chart. The exception is the short straight line at the left: f = 64/Re is the laminar solution and it is exact. The curves flatten to the right because once the roughness pokes out of the viscous layer the Reynolds number has nothing left to change.

The roughness a wall cannot feel

A rough pipe and a polished one carry the same flow for the same pressure over three decades of Reynolds number, and then suddenly they do not. What changed is not the pipe. It is the thickness of the film of fluid at the wall, which is the only part of the flow that can see the roughness at all.

applied · Internal flow Two bills, and the radius that settles them. The cost of a vessel against its radius: the pumping power, which falls as the inverse fourth power, and the price of owning the fluid and the wall, which rises as the square. Their sum has a minimum, found here by golden-section search and agreeing with the closed form to eight figures. At that radius the pumping bill is exactly a third of the total — for every set of constants, because it follows from the two exponents alone.

The radius that costs least

A vessel that carries a flow costs two things to own — the power to push fluid along it and the price of the tissue itself. Minimising the sum gives a best radius, the best radius makes flow proportional to radius cubed, and the rule that follows is a statement about a photograph that came out of a cost function.

applied · Branching The parabola is the cheapest shape the walls allow. The dissipation of the profile u = A(1 − |y/h|ⁿ) carrying a fixed flux between fixed walls, against the exponent n, divided by the parabola's. Every member of the family satisfies the same boundary conditions and carries the same fluid; they differ only in shape. The minimum is at n = 2 exactly, which is not a coincidence — it is Helmholtz's theorem, and the parabola is a solution of the equations because it is the least dissipative shape rather than the other way round.

The cheapest shape the walls allow

The parabola in a pipe is usually presented as what the equations give. It is better understood the other way round — of every profile that could carry that flow between those walls, it is the one that destroys the least energy, and the equations give it for that reason.

viscous · Minimum-dissipation Two different moments of one distribution. The permeability and the specific surface of a log-normal bundle, against the width of its pore-size distribution at a fixed median. The permeability rises by five orders because it is a fourth moment and the widest tubes dominate it; the surface falls because it is a first moment and the narrowest tubes dominate that.

A permeability that is only the geometry

Kozeny–Carman says that a porous medium's permeability follows from its porosity and its specific surface. Both are real, both are exactly measurable, and they do not determine the answer: forty-nine tube bundles built with identical values of each span a factor of eighty-two in permeability.

applied · Porous The junction the minimisation is over. A parent vessel entering from the left and two daughters leaving to fixed points. The radii are settled by Murray's law; what is left free is where the branch point sits, and the cost of the junction depends on it. The point drawn is the one the minimisation finds.

The angle a junction chooses

Murray's law fixes the radii at a branching vessel and is where every account of it stops. The same minimisation fixes the angles completely — 74.93 degrees for a symmetric bifurcation, a right angle for a vanishing side branch — and it does so as a triangle of forces, with tensions proportional to the squares of the radii.

applied · Branching Three exponents for one dimensionless group. The local slope of each error, measured over one decade at a time. The duct's is exactly 1, the long wave's is exactly 2, and the slender body's drifts from 1.900 to 1.733 across the range and never reaches either. The same geometric ratio, in three problems that look alike, and the third one has no exponent at all.

One group, three exponents

Lubrication theory, shallow water and slender-body theory are taught in three places and are one expansion in one group — a ratio of two lengths, with no speed, no viscosity and no fluid in it at all. The error is supposed to be second order. In three problems that look alike it is first order, second order, and an exponent that does not exist.

regimes · Slenderness 100 metres of water, −1.98 MPa absolute at the top. The absolute pressure up a transpiring column 100 metres tall, with the sap rising at 0.25 mm/s through conduits 40 µm across. It starts at 1.3 kPa at the root, falls by 9.79 kPa a metre for gravity and 10.02 for friction, and reaches −1.98 MPa at the top — below zero, which is not a low push but a pull. The pale line is the same column with nothing flowing. The floor is not the vapour pressure but the pore a gas bubble could be drawn through: −2.81 MPa for a 50 nm pore, which this column would reach at 142 metres. A suction pump lifting the same water from a free surface stops at 10.1 metres, because it offers the water somewhere to boil.

Where a liquid does pull

A fluid cannot pull, and the essays that settle what suction is are right about every gas and every liquid with a free surface near it. A liquid with nothing in it to boil on is another matter. Every tree taller than ten metres depends on the difference, and the floor under it is set by the size of a pore rather than by the vapour pressure.

misconceptions · Suction Four fluids under the same stress, and the four profiles that result. Each fluid carries the same linear stress and answers it differently: a Newtonian fluid with a parabola, a shear-thinning one with a blunter profile, a shear-thickening one with a sharper one, and a Bingham plastic with a plug in the middle where the stress is below its yield point.

The stress a pipe knows

A capillary viscometer measures a pressure drop and a flow rate and reports a viscosity. The first half of that inference is a force balance and is exact for any fluid there is; the second needs the slope of a whole flow curve, which is the experiment the instrument was bought to avoid.

viscous · Non-newtonian The profile a diverging channel flattens into, and then cannot hold. Five purely outward profiles in a wedge of 0.2 radians, at rising flux, each normalised to its own centreline value. As the flux rises the profile flattens in the middle and steepens at the walls — and then it stops. The last one has zero slope at the wall, which is separation, and beyond it no purely outward profile of this form exists at all. Nothing was added to the equation to make that happen: the wall shear is the square root of a cubic and the cubic runs out.

One channel, one flux, two flows

Flow between two plane walls meeting at a line has an exact solution. Past a threshold that turns out to be a ratio of gamma functions, it has two — the same wedge carrying the same flux, once outward everywhere and once with the fluid running backwards along both walls, and nothing in the equations chooses.

viscous · Exact layer

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

MeasurementModel limitLaminar flowOptimisationScalingTurbulenceBoundary conditionCorrelationDissipationExact solutionFriction factorMisconception

All concepts