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

Every essay — page 19

Page 19 of 39, continuing through the fields in the same order.

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

Flows and fields

Streamlines, particle paths and the field that carries them. What is conserved, what a picture of a flow can show, and what it cannot.

Two centres, two saddles, and a sum of nothing. A separation pattern: a uniform stream with two counter-rotating cored vortices in it, which reproduces the arrangement of critical points behind a body at a Reynolds number of a few tens. There are exactly four — a saddle where the flow divides, a centre in each recirculating cell, and a saddle where it closes — and their indices sum to 0. The winding number of a loop enclosing all of them is 0, which is what a uniform stream far away requires. A bubble costs nothing in this bookkeeping, which is why one is free to appear.

The count a pattern cannot break

A picture of a flow has stagnation points in it, and they are not free to be arranged as anybody likes. Their kinds and their number obey an integer constraint that has nothing to do with the equations of motion — and an incompressible flow in a plane is allowed only two kinds of them in the first place.

8 figures One more condition, and the price of it. The model problem ε u″ + u′ = 0 with a condition at each end, at three values of ε. The outer solution is the flat line at one — that is the whole of the answer when ε is zero, and it is a first-order equation that can meet one condition, so it meets the one at the far end and misses the one at the wall by the whole range. Restoring ε restores the second condition and pays for it with a layer of thickness ε, inside which the gradient is of order 1/ε. The product of those two — which is what a stress is — does not depend on ε at all: it is 1.0000 at every value tried, to nine decimal places. Drag does not vanish as viscosity does. It converges.

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.

8 figures The wall makes vorticity at a rate with no viscosity in it. At a stationary wall the momentum equation collapses to ν ∂²u/∂y² = (1/ρ) ∂p/∂x, and the left-hand side is the diffusive flux of vorticity out of the surface. So the pressure gradient along the wall is the vorticity source, and the viscosity that made the no-slip condition necessary has cancelled out of what the condition produces. The curve is that flux across the Falkner–Skan family, computed from profiles solved by shooting and differenced at the wall; the straight line is the pressure gradient each of those flows has. They agree to 2.3e-14. At zero pressure gradient the flux is exactly zero: a flat plate creates no vorticity at all after its leading edge, and everything in its layer arrived from there.

Where vorticity comes from

Every scrap of vorticity in a flow past a body entered through its surface, and the rate at which it enters contains no viscosity at all — it is the pressure gradient along the wall. A flat plate makes none, and a closed body makes exactly as much of each sign.

7 figures A steady pressure field, from a flow with no steady part. The time-averaged pressure round a cylinder in a stream that oscillates as U₀cos ωt. The mean velocity is exactly zero at every point — the flow spends as long going one way as the other — and the mean pressure is not, because pressure depends on the square of the speed and a square has no sign. The mean coefficient reaches -2.00 at the shoulders and averages -1.00 over the surface, and its resultant is 6.6e-16: a real field with no force in it. The pale lines are the instantaneous streamlines, which reverse every half cycle.

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.

8 figures Four turns of a wave, and the parcel is not back. Two parcels traced through four periods of a linear deep-water wave of steepness 0.1, by integrating the exact velocity field. Each orbit is very nearly a closed circle and misses closing by a little, every time, in the same direction — that miss is the whole of the Stokes drift. The near-surface parcel advances 0.0357 of a wavelength over the four cycles and the one a tenth of a wavelength down advances 0.0122, a third as far — because the drift falls off twice as fast with depth as the orbit's own size does.

The drift in a wave that has none

The velocity at any fixed point under a passing wave averages to exactly zero, and every parcel of water in it moves steadily forward anyway. The orbits do not close, they miss by the same amount every time, and the missing amount is the square of the steepness times the wave speed.

8 figures One number instead of a porous medium. The velocity through the bottom of a channel whose lower wall is a porous block of permeability 1e-4. Inside the block the flow decays over the pore scale √K = 1.0e-2 to Darcy's seepage velocity; above it the channel profile arrives at the interface with a slip velocity rather than at rest. A channel told nothing but u = √K du/dy at a flat wall reproduces that profile to 0.058 per cent of the flow rate, against 3.03 per cent for a wall told to hold the fluid still. The grid solve of the coupled problem agrees with the closed form to 0.0077 per cent.

A wall that is not quite there

A porous surface has structure on every scale below the pore, and no calculation resolves it. The whole of it can be replaced by one length — the square root of the permeability — and the replacement is exact to first order, with what it leaves out identifiable as the flow the wall itself carries.

8 figures One flow, two observers, two pictures. The same ideal flow past a circular cylinder, drawn in the frame of the tunnel and in the frame of the undisturbed air. The two are related by subtracting one constant velocity. On the left the flow arrives from infinity, divides at a stagnation point on the nose and closes at another on the tail. On the right the air is at rest far away, the body pushes through it, the streamlines are closed loops, and there is no stagnation point anywhere in the field. Every force, every pressure and every measurement either observer can make is identical.

The picture belongs to whoever is watching

Photograph the flow past a cylinder from the tunnel and it has two stagnation points. Photograph the same flow from a frame moving with the air and it has none at all, and its surface speed is exactly the free stream at every angle. Both pictures are correct and no measurement distinguishes them.

8 figures One field, and the two parts the theorem splits it into. A velocity field made of a smooth source, a smooth vortex and a uniform stream, and the two fields the Helmholtz decomposition returns for it. The first carries the whole divergence and has no curl anywhere; the second carries the whole curl and has no divergence. They are computed by solving two Poisson problems on a grid, with the divergence and the vorticity differenced from the field rather than taken from the expressions that built it. Adding the two back together does not recover the field.

Every flow is two flows

Any velocity field splits into a part carrying all of the divergence and a part carrying all of the vorticity. The theorem says so and does not say which split — the two halves can be moved between each other by anything harmonic, and on a bounded region that is an infinite family.

8 figures A material region, and the dye that stays inside it. The same fluid at four times, carried by an unsteady straining flow whose strain rate oscillates. The outline is a circle of the fluid at the first instant, tracked by integrating the velocity field; the shading is a blob of passive dye. The region is stretched to nearly seven to one and its area is unchanged to fifteen decimal places, because the flow is incompressible. The amount of dye inside it is unchanged to thirteen, because the dye is carried by the same fluid.

A rate of change that will not hold still

Three boxes drawn in one flow at one instant give three different answers to how fast the dye inside them is changing — one falling, one falling twice as fast, one rising. All three reconcile with a single material rate, and that rate is zero.

8 figures Two flows with the same rate of strain, doing different things to a blob. A circle of fluid carried by two flows chosen to have exactly the same rate-of-strain magnitude, drawn at four times. Pure strain pulls it into an ellipse whose axes stay put; simple shear pulls it into an ellipse whose axes rotate as fast as they stretch. Both have zero divergence, so both preserve the area. The difference between them is not the strength of the straining but what the rotation does to the direction being stretched.

Longer, with nothing pulling it

Two flows with exactly the same rate of strain. In one a line of fluid grows by a factor of 148 in five time units; in the other it grows by 10. Turn the straining axes faster than the strain rate and no line grows at all, however hard the fluid is being strained.

8 figures Q and the vorticity along a radius of one vortex. Two candidate measures of where the vortex is, along a radius of a Lamb–Oseen vortex. The vorticity is a Gaussian: positive at every radius, so a threshold on it puts the edge wherever the threshold is put. Q — the excess of rotation over strain — changes sign exactly once, at 1.121 core radii, and that radius is a property of the flow rather than of the person drawing it. Inside it, 71.5 per cent of the circulation.

Where a vortex stops

Four criteria decide where a vortex ends, and in two dimensions three of them are the same criterion. The fourth is a knob. And the one that is not a knob is not objective: a co-rotating pair of vortices occupies two per cent of a window to one observer and twenty-five to another.

8 figures A flow that is incompressible and carries a density that varies three to one. Ideal flow past a cylinder, shaded by a density that is constant along each streamline and runs from one to three across the field. Every parcel keeps the density it started with, so the divergence is zero — measured at 10⁻¹⁰, which is the differencing — and the flow is incompressible in the only sense the word has. The density is not uniform anywhere. Incompressible is a statement about what the flow does to a parcel's volume, not about what the fluid is made of.

Incompressible is not a property of the fluid

A flow whose density varies three to one across it, with a divergence of 10⁻¹⁰ everywhere. And a flow of air at Mach 0.1, whose divergence is three per cent of U/a and which every textbook calls incompressible. The word is about what the flow does to a parcel's volume, and about nothing else.

8 figures