Reynolds number — where it appears
Named by 52 essays across 8 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
One number decides which physics applies
A bacterium and a whale both swim, and they are not doing the same thing at different sizes. The ratio of inertia to viscosity separates them, and crossing it changes the rules rather than the magnitudes.
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.
The Reynolds number, and the length in it
The most useful number in fluid mechanics has an arbitrary quantity buried in it, and quoting one without saying which length was used makes it meaningless. That detail is where most misuse comes from.
The number that is not a number
Transition Reynolds numbers are quoted to three figures and vary by two decades. That is not sloppiness in the measurement — it is the honest report of a quantity that depends on the laboratory as much as on the fluid, and knowing which part is which decides what may be designed on it.
The two theories, side by side
The exact solution and the real flow, for the same body in the same stream. One is beautiful and predicts nothing has drag; the other is approximate and has a wake in it. Where they agree and where they part is the whole map of the subject.
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.
The model that cannot be matched
A scale model behaves like the real thing when its dimensionless numbers agree. With one number that is a matter of choosing the tunnel speed. With two it is usually impossible, and every wind-tunnel result ever published has been obtained in spite of that.
The world with no inertia
Drop the viscosity and the equations become exactly solvable and wrong about drag. Drop the inertia instead and they become exactly solvable again — and for a cylinder in an unbounded fluid there is no solution at all, which took fifty years to notice and longer to fix.
Counting what matters
Five quantities decide the drag on a sphere, and the experiment that measures it has one curve in it rather than a five-dimensional table. The reason is a rank: the matrix of dimensions has three independent rows, and what is left over is the number of dimensionless groups the answer can possibly depend on.
The drag that falls as it speeds up
There is a band of speeds in which a smooth ball experiences less drag the faster it goes. Not a smaller coefficient — a smaller force. Dimples move that band down to where a golf ball actually flies, and they do it by making the friction worse.
The grid nobody can build
Resolving every scale of a turbulent flow needs Re to the nine-quarters grid points and Re cubed point-updates. An airliner's wing comes to 2·10¹⁷ points against the 10¹² of the largest calculation ever run, and no amount of patience closes a gap of five orders of magnitude.
The cost of going turbulent
A turbulent boundary layer costs several times the friction of a laminar one, and the multiple is not a constant — it rises with Reynolds number, because the two laws have different exponents. That is why laminar flow is worth more on a long fast surface than on a short slow one.
Where a jet stops being a jet
A tap makes drops a few centimetres down, a garden hose makes a stream that carries, a sprayer makes a mist and a diesel injector makes fog. Same liquid, same mechanism, four regimes — and the number that separates them is not the jet's inertia but the surrounding air's.
The bee that cannot fly
The claim has a traceable origin and the calculation behind it was a real calculation done with the wrong velocity. Doing it with the right one gives a number an aerofoil might plausibly produce — and still leaves a gap, and the gap is what took another sixty years to close.
Every mode decays and it grows anyway
A stability analysis asks whether any mode of a flow grows, and for pipe flow the answer is no, at every Reynolds number, which the pipe disagrees with. The missing ingredient is that the modes are not perpendicular — a disturbance made of two nearly parallel decaying pieces can grow by a factor of Re²/16 before it dies.
The air a wing does not carry
No slip says the air touching a surface moves with it, and the usual reading is that a wing drags a blanket of air along. The blanket is 1.7 millimetres thick per metre of chord, it is different air every instant, and the drag it costs falls as it gets thicker.
What a jet keeps, and what it collects
A jet leaving a nozzle into still fluid has no boundary anywhere and one conserved quantity. Its momentum flux is exactly the same at every station downstream; its mass flux is not conserved at all and grows without limit, because a jet is a machine for acquiring fluid it did not start with.
How far before a duct forgets what was fed into it
A pipe is always drawn with its answer already in place. Getting there takes a distance proportional to the Reynolds number, which means a more viscous fluid is done sooner — and the entrance costs a fixed number of dynamic pressures however long the pipe is.
How small is small enough
Creeping flow drops the inertia terms and gets an exact answer for the drag on a sphere. The Reynolds number at which those terms are equal is one — and at one, Stokes' law is already sixteen per cent low. The honest boundary is 0.054, and the reason it is so far down is the same reason the theory needed repairing in the first place.
Where the heat of a drag is made
The power it takes to tow a body through a fluid becomes heat, all of it, eventually. None of the interesting words in that sentence are the first four. It is the "eventually" that decides how a wake behaves, how far a disturbance reaches, and why no box drawn round a body contains its own bill.
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 limit nothing reaches
A dimensional argument that succeeds says a variable has dropped out of the answer. The Blasius profile has no Reynolds number in its shape at any Reynolds number; the overlap layer's power-law exponent is still 0.102 at Re_τ of a million and falls as a logarithm, so the limit exists and nothing ever gets there.
A second length at the wall
The logarithm in a turbulent wall profile exists because a region of the flow is not allowed to know about any length except the distance to the wall. Roughen the surface and there is one it does know about, which belongs neither to the fluid nor to the flow — and the slope does not change at all.
The exact theory, drawn by viscosity
Two flat plates a millimetre apart, syrup between them, an obstacle in the gap. The Reynolds number is a hundredth, inertia is absent, and the streamline pattern is the potential flow past that obstacle — exactly, to a part in ten billion. The one hypothesis ideal flow cannot do without is the one this flow most conspicuously breaks.
What decay never forgets
Stir a box of fluid and stop. The turbulence decays, at a rate with no viscosity in it — so the rate cannot come from the fluid. It comes from an invariant of the very largest scales, fixed at the moment the stirring stops, and never revisited.
The range a real Reynolds number does not have
Kolmogorov's minus five thirds is a statement about a band of scales that has forgotten the forcing and does not feel the viscosity. Both conditions are about separation, and separation is exactly what a finite Reynolds number does not have much of.
The frequency a wake chooses
Bluff bodies shed at Strouhal numbers from 0.145 to 0.212, and the spread is not a fact about shedding — it is a fact about which length went into the number. Change the length to the wake's own width and three bodies agree to a tenth of a per cent. Then let the body move, and the number stops deciding anything at all.
A speed nobody imposed
Every regime number in this collection contains a velocity somebody chose. Natural convection has none: a warm plate makes its own flow, and the Grashof number is what is left when the speed is taken out. The Reynolds number of the result — six thousand, on an ordinary radiator — is an output of the solution rather than a setting on an apparatus.
The flow with no solution
Creeping flow past a sphere has a solution and everybody knows it. Creeping flow past a cylinder has none — not a difficult one, not one needing a clever method. The equations, the no-slip condition and the uniform stream at infinity are inconsistent, and the residual is exactly twice the free stream.
A puff that does not know how old it is
A patch of turbulence in a pipe below the critical Reynolds number dies at random, and its chance of dying in the next second does not depend on how long it has already lasted. The flow that contains it has a memory anyway, because the patches multiply — and where multiplying overtakes dying is a Reynolds number.
The margin friction lends a siphon
Without friction a draining siphon's crown pressure does not depend on the source level at all, and every real hose has friction. It turns out always to raise the crown pressure, by an amount the draining tank hands back pascal by pascal — and how much it lends is decided by where along the hose the crown sits, not by how rough or how narrow the hose is.
A cushion that changes its physics
A plate closing on a plane is resisted by the fluid it has to squeeze out, and the resistance is two different forces with two different laws — one from the fluid's inertia and one from its viscosity. They hand over at a gap of twenty-four kinematic viscosities per unit of closing speed, which for a wing in air is a third of a millimetre, and the two films disagree about whether the plate ever lands at all.
The length the limit invents
Prandtl's equations are parabolic, so nothing at one station can depend on anything downstream of it. Every experiment shows the pressure rising ahead of a shock or a step. The resolution is a region three eighths of a power of the Reynolds number long, which the limit that produced the equations was supposed to have removed.
The groups are not the only groups
Buckingham's theorem fixes how many dimensionless groups an answer can depend on and says nothing about which. Two of the infinitely many legitimate choices are used here on the same data: one manufactures a straight line through five decades out of a constant, and the other erases Stokes' law completely.
The profile Rayleigh cleared and viscosity did not
Flow between two plates has no inflection point, so without viscosity no wave on it can grow. With viscosity one does, above a Reynolds number of 5772. Taking the viscosity away again slows that wave and narrows the band it grows in, because the stress that feeds it is made by viscosity in the first place.
Universal, and one of five
A turbulence that has run its Reynolds number down stops being turbulent, the equations go linear, and the decay picks up a new exponent. That exponent is quoted everywhere as 5/2 and as universal. It is neither: it is the same corner of the same spectrum deciding the answer a second time.
The constant that travels
Every decay law in the subject rests on the dissipation being some constant times u³ over a length. The constant is not one. Letting it move the way grid measurements say it moves changes the decay exponent by a quarter — and lands one of the answers five per cent from another that is entirely different physics.
A relation with no turbulence in it
Isotropy and incompressibility alone fix the transverse structure function from the longitudinal one. Divide the relation through and it says the ratio of the two is one plus half the local slope — so the exponent everybody measures as 0.70 and the ratio everybody measures as 1.35 are one measurement, and a model spectrum with no intermittency in it produces both.
The decay inside the four-fifths law
The four-fifths law gives the dissipation of turbulence from one measured moment with no constant in it, which makes it the obvious way to measure how the dissipation coefficient travels during a decay. But the law is exact only in a limit, and a decaying flow is not in it. The decay itself takes a quarter off the moment at the Reynolds numbers grids reach — and the bias moves as the flow decays, by a sixth, in the direction opposite to the effect being looked for.
Leapfrogging rings end by merging, not by parting
Two smoke rings that leapfrog in an ideal fluid do it for ever, because their energy binds them. A real fluid drains the energy, and the obvious guess is that the rings drift out of the bound state and part. They do not: diffusion drains the pair's energy and the energy of every possible pair of free rings together, and the margin that binds them never goes negative. What viscosity does instead is fatten the cores until, as one ring threads the other, the two are close enough to merge. That takes a number of passes in proportion to the Reynolds number — one to three at the few thousand of a laboratory smoke ring.
Forcing at the integral scale leaves the cascade alone
A decaying flow's third moment falls a quarter short of the four-fifths law at the Reynolds numbers a grid reaches. A flow forced at its largest scales, on the same spectrum at the same Reynolds number, falls short by three and a half per cent. The shortfall is not what a finite Reynolds number does to every flow; it is what the source does, and how fast it closes is set by how far the source reaches into the inertial range.
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.
The sheath outlasts the body
A blunt hypersonic body wraps itself in a sheath of hot, thin gas from its nose's shock, and its boundary layer grows by eating that gas from the inside. The usual picture has the boundary layer through the sheath within a few nose diameters. It is not: a laminar boundary layer takes about a third of a Reynolds number of diameters to swallow the sheath at Mach 15, which is thousands to millions of diameters, and a turbulent one hundreds. On any body of ordinary length the boundary layer never sees the cooler gas outside, and it is heated by the sheath's gas all the way down.
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 point force makes a jet only when it is strong
Push on a fluid at one point and there is an exact solution of the full Navier–Stokes equations for what follows, at any strength. Weak, it is Stokes's point force: fluid pushed forward over a whole hemisphere and drawn in behind. Strong, it is Schlichting's slender jet, with fluid drawn in from every direction outside a narrowing cone. One constant joins them, and it says how strong a push must be before the boundary-layer jet everyone uses is right — at the axis by a jet Reynolds number of a hundred, at the edges only by a thousand.
At higher orders the bottleneck hides intermittency
At second order the spectral bottleneck makes a field with no intermittency look intermittent. At higher orders it does the opposite. Every moment's local slope is steepened by the same finite-Reynolds-number excess, multiplied by half the order, while the intermittency correction pulls the other way. At a laboratory Reynolds number a fitted sixth-order exponent therefore shows less than two-thirds of the anomaly the field carries, and a fourth-order one less than a quarter.
Moody's fifth root is true at one size
A model pump is less efficient than the full-size machine, and since 1925 the gap has been bridged with a fifth root of the size ratio. Built from its losses, a pump's inefficiency scales three ways at once — leakage as the inverse size where a clearance cannot shrink, friction as a fifth root until the passages go rough, and a fixed share not at all — so the exponent runs from a third down to a twentieth, and the fifth root is right only near one size. The same arithmetic says a duty should be split by speed, not by width.
A blunted cone eats its nose's sheath in a few hundred radii
A sphere-cylinder's boundary layer takes a third of a Reynolds number of diameters to get through the hot sheath its nose leaves, which on any real body is never. Put the same nose on a slender cone and the answer collapses: the cone's widening perimeter feeds the boundary layer so fast that it swallows the sheath in tens to hundreds of nose radii, growing only as the cube root of the Reynolds number. On a two-metre cone at Mach 15 that makes a nose of about two centimetres the line between a base still bathed in the nose's gas and one that has forgotten it.
The side that turns turbulent first decides who arrives first near the wall
Inside a laminar layer the upper parcel's lead over the lower grows with depth. Real wings are not laminar to the trailing edge: one surface's layer turns turbulent first, and a turbulent layer is full almost to the wall. At the incidences a wing flies at, the upper side goes first and the exaggerated lead survives to the trailing edge, smaller than the laminar one and shrinking with the Reynolds number. Below about one degree the lower side goes first, and a tenth of the way into the layer the lower parcel arrives first.
A blunted nose delays its cone's transition only so far, and the correlation decides how far
A blunted tip leaves a sheath of hot, slow gas along a hypersonic cone, and the boundary layer growing inside it sees a lower Reynolds number and a lower Mach number than a sharp cone's. That is why bluntness is said to push transition back. Read the layer's edge through the sheath and the push has a limit: the delay grows with the nose, peaks, and falls again once the transition point lies inside the sheath. How large the peak is depends on whether the transition correlation divides by the edge Mach number — five times the sharp distance at Mach 6 for the momentum-thickness Reynolds number alone, 1.4 for its ratio to the Mach number — and every peak sits forty to sixty-five nose radii from the tip.
Followed rather than held, the parcels near a wing nearly tie
Parcels held at a fixed fraction of a boundary layer's thickness made the side that turns turbulent first decide which arrives first near the wall, and at a wing's ordinary incidence they gave the upper parcel a lead ten times the one outside the layer. Real smoke is not held at a depth: it follows a streamline. Near the attachment point the layer is thinner than any filament's height, so every filament starts outside it and is swallowed later, and on the upper surface, whose turbulent layer grows faster, it is swallowed deeper. Followed this way, the deep parcels at 4° arrive nearly together, and at a Reynolds number of a million the lower one can come first.
The layer every airway restarts bends Murray's cube towards the turbulent pipe's
A laminar fork does not lose energy the way a turbulent one does, in a burst of mixing at the split. It loses it all the way down each daughter, because the boundary layer starts again at every flow divider and an airway a few diameters long ends before the layer has grown across it. Pedley measured that extra dissipation in 1970, and in the form he wrote it the radius cancels: it depends on the flow and the length alone. Price it into the cheapest tree and Murray's cube law gives way to a flow growing as the radius to the power twelve-fifths or thirteen-fifths, the band the turbulent pipe's exponent sits in, across the first eleven generations of a resting lung.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Model limitBoundary layerMeasurementDissipationTransitionCorrelationScalingSimilaritySpectrumCreeping flowInertial rangeModel validity