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

Every essay — page 23

Page 23 of 61, 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

Ideal flow

The exact theory of a fluid with no viscosity — closed-form, elegant, and predicting no drag at all. Its failure is the most useful thing in the subject.

The hodograph plane, where the unknown boundary is the known one. The same flow drawn in the plane of its own velocity, ζ = (u − iv)/U. The plate, whose shape is known in the physical plane, becomes a segment of the imaginary axis; the axis of symmetry becomes a segment of the real one; and the free streamline — whose shape nobody knows — becomes an arc of the unit circle, because the speed on it is exactly the free stream. The unknown and the known have changed places, which is why the problem can be solved at all.

Where the unknown boundary is the known one

A free surface is the hardest kind of boundary — its shape is part of the answer, so the region the problem is posed in is not known until the problem is solved. Draw the same flow in the plane of its own velocity and the shape becomes an arc of a circle, known in advance and exactly.

7 figures The momentum of the fluid, against the shape of the region it is added up over. Momentum of the fluid around a cylinder moving through it, divided by the body's hydrodynamic impulse, against the aspect ratio of the rectangle the integral was taken over. Every rectangle has the same area and contains the same body. A tall region gives minus the impulse, a long one gives plus it, a square gives exactly zero, and the limit of a large region is whichever of those the region was shaped like. The momentum of an unbounded ideal flow is not a number.

The momentum with no value

A cylinder is pushed from rest to a steady speed. Work was done, energy went into the fluid, something was pushed. How much momentum does the fluid carry? The integral converges, the answer is finite, and it is a different finite number for every shape of region it is summed over.

7 figures A cylinder in a uniform shear, K = 0.4. A stream whose velocity increases with height, meeting a circular cylinder. The oncoming profile is drawn at the left. The flow carries uniform vorticity −K, so it is a solution of Euler's equations and not of Laplace's, the pattern is no longer symmetric top to bottom, and the body feels a lift towards the fast side with no circulation anywhere.

Inviscid does not mean irrotational

Dropping viscosity gives Euler's equations. Assuming nothing is spinning gives Laplace's — one scalar, linear, unique. The second step is a separate hypothesis about the flow's history, and a flow that fails it is still an inviscid flow with exact solutions of its own.

8 figures Hill's spherical vortex. A sphere of rotating fluid travelling steadily through fluid at rest, drawn in the frame that moves with it. Outside the sphere the flow is the ordinary potential flow past a sphere; inside, the vorticity is proportional to the distance from the axis and the fluid recirculates. The two solutions match in value and in slope across the surface, and there is no body anywhere — the boundary is a streamline and nothing else.

The one rotational solution anybody can write down

A sphere of spinning fluid travelling steadily through fluid at rest, with no body anywhere in it — the boundary is a streamline and nothing else. It is exact, it is two lines long, and the reason it is the famous one turns out to be the reason it is the only one a real fluid can settle into.

8 figures Two exact solutions of the same problem. Two steady Euler flows in the same square cell with the same boundary condition, differing only in the function relating vorticity to streamfunction. On the left the vorticity is proportional to the streamfunction, which is the textbook cellular flow; on the right it is uniform. Both satisfy the equations exactly. Nothing in the ideal theory prefers either, and at the same peak streamfunction their kinetic energies differ by thirty-one per cent.

The vorticity nothing decides

A streamline that comes from upstream carries its vorticity with it. A closed one comes from nowhere, so nothing determines what it carries — the ambiguity is not one number per body but a whole function. What closes it is a limit, and setting the viscosity to zero gives a different answer from letting it go to zero.

7 figures The same flow, from two different physics. Solid lines: the depth-averaged flow between two plates a small distance apart, with an obstacle standing between them. Dashed: the ideal-flow solution for the same obstacle. They are the same field to a part in ten billion, because averaging Stokes flow across a narrow gap gives a velocity that is the gradient of a harmonic potential. The cell has no inertia at all, which is the one hypothesis the ideal theory cannot do without.

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.

8 figures The wall the outer flow is really solving for. A flat plate, the edge of its boundary layer, and the line the outer flow behaves as though the plate were on. The displacement thickness is the mass deficit divided by ρU — checked here against the profile's own integral rather than quoted — and moving the wall out by that much reproduces exactly the flow rate the viscous layer lets past. It is a third of the visible thickness of the layer and it is the only part of the layer the outer problem knows about.

The body the outer flow actually sees

A boundary layer lets less fluid past than an inviscid one would. The outer flow can be given exactly the same reduced flow rate by leaving the fluid inviscid and moving the wall out — so the potential flow that matters is not the flow past the body, but the flow past the body plus a thickness the boundary layer computes.

8 figures Four vortices, and the end of prediction. The same three vortices as before with a fourth, weaker one added near the middle. Three point vortices have three independent invariants for three degrees of freedom and cannot be chaotic; four have the same three invariants and one more degree of freedom, and generically are. The energy and the impulses are conserved here to fourteen digits over the whole run, which is what makes the tangle a property of the system rather than of the arithmetic.

Three is the most that can be predicted

Point vortices are the simplest dynamical system fluid mechanics has — no cores, no viscosity, no approximations, four exactly conserved quantities. Three of them are integrable and cannot be chaotic. Add a fourth and the same equations, conserving the same quantities to fourteen digits, stop being predictable at all.

8 figures Four corners, and what the flow does in each. The local flow in corners of four different interior angles, drawn from the exact local solution ψ = r^(π/α) sin(πθ/α). The exponent of the speed is π/α − 1 and depends on nothing else: at a right angle the corner is stagnant, at a flat wall nothing happens, and at any angle greater than a straight line the speed has no bound at the corner. The last panel, at 360 degrees, is the flow round the edge of a plate.

Nothing turns a sharp corner

Near a corner the flow is fixed by the angle and by nothing else — not by the size of the corner, not by the flow far away, not by the fluid. The exponent is π/α − 1, and every sharp edge in aerodynamics is the one case where it comes out at minus one half.

7 figures A tube opened at the foot of a reservoir. Speed in a two-metre tube fed by a one-metre head, from the instant it is opened. The quasi-steady answer — Torricelli's √(2gh), which is what dropping the time derivative from Bernoulli's equation gives — is reached at the instant of opening, before any fluid has moved. The true answer is a hyperbolic tangent with a time constant of 2L/√(2gh), and it takes 2.4 seconds to come within one per cent. The whole of that transient is one term.

The pressure that depends on the past

Bernoulli's equation for an unsteady flow has a term nobody writes down and a right-hand side that is a function of time rather than a constant. The term is exactly zero once a flow has started and is the whole of the flow while it is starting, which is why it never appears in an answer and is never negligible in getting to one.

8 figures The pressure of a sum against the sum of the pressures. Ten points around a cylinder with circulation, with the pressure coefficient of the combined flow plotted against what adding the two flows' separate coefficients would give. Nothing lies on the diagonal. The gap is exactly −1 − 2u_A·u_B/U², an identity checked to the last digit at every point, and it is not small: at one of these points the two answers differ by 1.92, which is more than the whole range of a suction peak.

The one thing that does not add up

Laplace's equation is linear, so flows can be laid on top of one another and almost every classical result is built that way. The two things anybody actually wants out of a flow — the pressure and the force — are quadratic in the velocity, and neither of them adds at all.

8 figures The growth rate a discretised sheet has, at every wavelength it can carry. Kelvin–Helmholtz gives a growth rate proportional to the wavenumber and without bound. A sheet represented by N point vortices has pi m (1 − m/N) instead — the same rate at long waves and half of it at the shortest wave the grid carries, with the fastest-growing mode at the grid scale itself. Smoothing the kernel over a length delta moves that mode back to a wavelength the physics chose.

A sheet that cannot stay a sheet

Let a shear layer's thickness go to zero and it becomes a surface across which the velocity jumps. The model is used everywhere in this subject, it is unstable at every wavelength, and the thing it does next is worse: it develops a singularity in its own shape, at a finite time, from a smooth start.

8 figures