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

Every essay

One idea per essay, ordered so that the earlier ones set up the later ones — but nothing here depends on being read in sequence.

Flows and fields Ideal flow Circulation and lift Viscosity Regimes and numbers Compressible flow Transition and turbulence Fluids at work What is taught wrongly Series Concepts Regimes Refutations Search

Fluids at work

Turbines, pipes, weirs, balls, sails, arteries and blades. What the conservation laws say about machines, which is more than a designer expects and less than a brochure claims.

The tube widens because the air slows. The streamtube through an actuator disc at an induction factor of 0.333. The three radii are not drawn to taste: each is fixed by requiring the same mass to pass every station, and the slowest station is therefore the widest. The tube widening in front of a wind turbine is why some of the wind goes round it rather than through it, and it is the whole reason a disc cannot take everything.

The most a disc can take

A wind turbine cannot extract more than sixteen twenty-sevenths of the energy passing through the circle its blades sweep. That is not a limit on turbines — it is a limit on anything at all, and it follows from three conservation laws and no engineering.

8 figures Efficiency is decided before the engine is chosen. Froude's propulsive efficiency against the ratio of jet speed to flight speed. It is 2/(1+σ) and nothing else — no engine, no fuel, no combustion. A turbojet with a jet at three times flight speed cannot exceed 50% however good its core is, and a propeller moving a great deal of air slowly is above 90% before anybody has designed anything.

A big slow push

The same thrust can be had from a lot of air moved a little or a little air moved a lot, and the two are not equivalent. One number decides which, it contains no engine, and it is why every airliner built since 1970 has a fan far larger than the machine driving it.

8 figures Betz's ceiling, and the rotor that cannot reach it. The power coefficient of Glauert's optimum rotor against tip-speed ratio, with Betz's 16/27 drawn as the ceiling it is. The gap is wake rotation: a rotor that extracts power applies a torque, a torque leaves the wake spinning, and that rotational energy never reaches the shaft. It falls as the rotor is geared up and is never zero — which is why large wind turbines turn so slowly and yet have such fast tips.

The wake that has to spin

A rotor that takes power out of the wind must apply a torque to it, and a torque applied to air is angular momentum left behind. The axial theory has nowhere to put that energy, so Betz's ceiling is unreachable at every finite tip-speed ratio — and the gap is computable.

8 figures 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.

8 figures The box, and the one thing assumed about it. The control volume across a sudden enlargement. Mass and momentum crossing the two ends are known exactly. The only modelling statement in the whole derivation is written on the annular step: the pressure there is taken to be the upstream pressure, because the fluid in the corner is nearly stationary. Measurement supports it well. Nothing else is assumed, and in particular nothing at all is assumed about the eddy that lives in that corner — which this figure therefore does not draw.

A loss with no viscosity in it

Where a pipe suddenly widens, energy is destroyed. The amount is exact, it has been known since 1766, and the derivation never mentions viscosity, Reynolds number or roughness — because momentum does not care where the energy went, only that it left.

9 figures Two depths, and a gap the model will not describe. The surface either side of a hydraulic jump at an arriving Froude number of 5.05. Both depths are exact consequences of the momentum balance. The distance between them is not: the shallow-water model has no length scale in it and cannot say how far the transition takes, so the region between the two levels is left blank and the six-depth rule of thumb beside it is somebody's measurement rather than this site's result.

The shock in a river

Shallow water is a gas whose ratio of specific heats is two. The white water below a weir is a shock wave, momentum is conserved across it exactly, energy is not, and one direction is forbidden for the same reason an expansion shock is forbidden — which makes the analogy exact to first order and wrong at the second.

8 figures Two depths for the same energy, and one for the least. Specific energy against depth for a discharge of 0.5 square metres per second per metre of width. Every energy above the minimum is carried by two different depths — one fast and shallow, one slow and deep — and the minimum is carried by exactly one. That depth is the critical depth, the Froude number there is one, and the least energy is three halves of it; all three are found here by search and checked against their closed forms.

The depth that costs least

For a given flow there are two depths that carry it at any energy above a floor, and exactly one at the floor. That one depth is where the Froude number is one, the least energy is exactly three halves of it, and a bump in the bed that asks for more than the flow has does not thin the water — it backs it up.

8 figures The cliff a rough ball reaches sooner. The drag coefficient of a sphere against Reynolds number, on log axes. The smooth curve is Morrison's correlation, which is a fit to measurements and is drawn in the colour this site reserves for a borrowed claim. The other is the same curve shifted along the Reynolds axis by a factor of 6 — a stated model of what roughness does, which is to trip the boundary layer early, and not a measurement of any real ball.

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.

8 figures Two sides of one ball, at different pressures. The surface pressure coefficient round a ball, measured from the front stagnation point, on the side the seam trips and on the side it does not. Up to separation both follow the exact potential-flow distribution 1 − (9/4)sin²θ. After it both take the same wake pressure, which is what a manometer measures rather than what the ideal theory predicts. The asymmetry is the shaded area between them, and integrating it gives a side force of 0.2949 towards the later-separating side.

A ball that swings without spinning

A cricket ball curves in flight with no spin about any useful axis. The mechanism is not the Magnus effect; it is a seam tripping the boundary layer on one side so that side lets go later. Which way the ball then goes depends on one borrowed number, and this site's own inviscid solver supplies the value that gets it wrong.

9 figures Three times the wind, on a reach. The polar diagram: boat speed in every direction, as a multiple of the true wind speed, for drag angles of 14 and 6 degrees. The shaded wedge at the top is the no-go zone, whose half-angle is exactly the sum of the two drag angles. Everywhere outside about twice that angle the boat is faster than the wind, and the maximum is 2.92 times the wind at 110 degrees — which is 1/sin λ at 90° + λ, both checked.

Faster than the wind that drives it

An ice yacht in a fifteen-knot breeze does forty. That is not a trick and it does not need a special sail — it follows from two drag angles and a triangle, and the best speed a boat can reach is one over the sine of their sum.

8 figures The fastest course is never the one towards the mark. Boat speed and speed made good against the course sailed. Speed rises steadily as the boat bears away, but what counts is the component along the direction wanted, and that has a maximum well off the straight line — at 55.0 degrees going upwind and 145.0 going down. Both optima are found here by search and agree with 45° + λ/2 and 135° + λ/2 to six figures.

The fastest way is not the straight one

A boat racing to a mark dead upwind sails seventy per cent further than the distance to it, and arrives first. The best angle is forty-five degrees plus half the apparent wind angle, it comes out of one line of trigonometry, and the same argument says to gybe downwind rather than run.

9 figures 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.

8 figures