Every essay — page 34
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.
A cloud folds where a saddle is strong, not when
When every saddle of a lattice strengthens and weakens together, a cloud of heavy particles folds in one step, at the strain's first strong excursion. Give each saddle its own random strength and the folding spreads out into a steady rate — and falls, because a particle now has to be at a saddle while that saddle is strong. The rate follows the Gaussian tail of the strain, at about a tenth of the time the strain spends past its fold condition, and a longer-lived strain helps only up to a few strain times.
A bowed meniscus keeps most of its slip until the groove floods
The slip lengths of a striped superhydrophobic surface are computed with flat gas surfaces. Press the liquid against the texture and every meniscus bows into its groove as an arc pinned at the solid's edges, and the slip falls. It falls by less than the obvious worry says: at the pressure where a groove wall advancing at 120° lets the liquid in, a surface four-fifths gas still keeps 88 per cent of its slip, and even at a 150° wall's flood three-quarters remains. A striped surface does not lose its slip gradually under pressure. It keeps most of it, and then loses all of it when the groove floods.
An edge no observer can move still depends on what it is averaged against
The Q-criterion puts a co-rotating vortex pair in four per cent of a window for one observer and in more than half of it for another. The cure is to average, along each fluid path, how far the vorticity departs from its mean — a number no observer's rotation can change — and take the outermost convex level of it round each core. Computed, it works: both observers find two discs of radius 1.00, twice the core radius, and no fluid inside them strays from its core in an orbit. But the edge has a setting of its own. The mean must be taken over some region, and as that region grows from a radius of 4 to 20 the edge moves from 0.90 to 1.13.
A gas's viscosity ignores its pressure until the free path reaches the walls
Maxwell predicted in 1860 that a gas's viscosity does not depend on its density — halve the pressure and half as many molecules carry momentum across the flow, each twice as far — and measured it with swinging discs in 1866: unchanged from an atmosphere to a sixtieth of one. Solved across every pressure with the kinetic equation, the shear a gas transmits between two plates obeys him over five decades and then, once the free path reaches the gap, falls in proportion to the pressure. A millimetre gap reads half the true viscosity at fifteen pascals, and a vacuum gauge reads pressure from exactly that fall.
A stagnation point can leave the flow through the wall, and the count is kept by halves
A no-slip wall is a sheet of zeros, so the index count that holds for a flow in open space has nothing to count there. Divide the velocity by the height and the wall's zeros shrink to the skin friction's nodes, foci and saddles; reflect the result through the wall and each of them is counted once while every point in the fluid is counted twice. That is why the points on a wall are halves, and an exact swirling flow onto a plate shows the halves doing their job: a stagnation point in the fluid can disappear without a partner by sinking into the wall, where the skin friction's focus changes from attachment to separation to pay for it. A section through the flow sees none of this, because in the section every one of the points is a saddle.
A stagnation point off the axis can land only on a saddle or a node, and turns it inside out
In a swirling flow onto a plate every stagnation point lived on the axis, so one sinking to the wall always met the wall's single critical point. Without the symmetry it might seem free to land anywhere — on an ordinary stretch of skin-friction line, leaving a pair of new points behind. It cannot. Divided by the height, the velocity is continuous down to the wall, where it becomes the skin friction, so a point can only reach the wall where the skin friction already vanishes. It lands on a saddle or a node, and the count does the rest: the point it lands on turns from separation to attachment. An oil-flow picture of the wall, which shows the same pattern before and after, cannot tell which it is looking at.
Roll waves stop merging at a spacing their fronts choose
On a steep chute the uniform flow breaks into a train of surges, and the train coarsens: a taller surge runs faster, catches the one ahead and swallows it, so the spacing grows down the chute. If the merging never stopped, the spacing in a photograph would only record how far the water had come. Marched down a long channel from noise, it stops. After a few hundred units of travel the surges stop catching each other and the train keeps its spacing for as long as it is followed. The spacing it keeps is not set by the chute or the noise but by the dissipation inside the surge fronts — which is the one part of the flow the shallow-water equations describe only roughly.
What is taught wrongly
Equal transit time, Bernoulli misapplied, and the rest. Each stated fairly, then tested against a solved flow and found false.
The story about air meeting up again
The most repeated explanation of lift says that air parting at the nose must rejoin at the tail, so the longer upper path forces a higher speed. The premise is false, and the speed it predicts is wrong by a factor of twenty.
Where Bernoulli's equation applies
The equation is right. Its hypotheses are strict, and almost all misuse is a correct formula carried somewhere it does not hold — across streamlines, through a fan, or into the one layer where friction is the whole story.
Air must be pushed down, and the usual sum is wrong
The momentum explanation of lift is the one physicists reach for, and it is right — a wing does hold itself up by throwing air downwards. The version usually given then does the accounting badly, and the face of the control volume it keeps turns out to carry the least of it.
What a photograph of a flow shows
Wind-tunnel pictures are the evidence this whole subject is argued from, and hardly anybody says which quantity a given technique records. They are not interchangeable — smoke, tufts, oil and pressure taps measure four different things, and none of them is the velocity field.
What the airspeed indicator believes
A pitot tube measures the difference between two pressures, correctly, at every speed. Everything wrong with an airspeed reading is in the arithmetic applied to that difference — and the error is 2.3 per cent at Mach 0.3 and 19.4 per cent at Mach 0.85.