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

Every essay — page 39

Page 39 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

Viscosity

The thin layer next to a surface that ideal flow ignores, and which supplies drag, separation and the wake.

How fast a duct forgets each part of its inlet. The decay rate along the duct for each mode of a disturbance to the developed profile. It goes as the square of the mode number, so the third mode is forgotten nine times faster than the first and the tenth a hundred times faster.

A duct that forgets everything but one number

Whatever is fed into a pipe, what survives a little way down it is one shape. The disturbance's higher modes decay as the square of their mode number, so the sixth is gone in thirteen centimetres where the first survives four and a half metres — and the entrance length is that one mode's decay rate and an arbitrary threshold.

8 figures Three profiles that do not depend on the radius. The radial, azimuthal and axial velocities of the flow above a rotating disc, as functions of one similarity variable. The radial one is a jet: fluid thrown outward by the swirl it has picked up, peaking at 0.181 of the local disc speed a fifth of the way through the layer. The azimuthal one falls from the disc's own speed to nothing. And the axial one is the surprise — it does not vanish far from the disc but tends to a constant, so the disc draws fluid down onto itself at 0.8845 times the square root of the viscosity times the rotation rate, at every radius and for ever.

The solution that keeps its nonlinear term

Every exact solution before this one has been exact because the nonlinear term vanished. A rotating disc's does not vanish — at the wall it is the whole of the balance — and the reduction is exact anyway, because the radius divides out of all three momentum equations at once.

9 figures The profile a diverging channel flattens into, and then cannot hold. Five purely outward profiles in a wedge of 0.2 radians, at rising flux, each normalised to its own centreline value. As the flux rises the profile flattens in the middle and steepens at the walls — and then it stops. The last one has zero slope at the wall, which is separation, and beyond it no purely outward profile of this form exists at all. Nothing was added to the equation to make that happen: the wall shear is the square root of a cubic and the cubic runs out.

One channel, one flux, two flows

Flow between two plane walls meeting at a line has an exact solution. Past a threshold that turns out to be a ratio of gamma functions, it has two — the same wedge carrying the same flux, once outward everywhere and once with the fluid running backwards along both walls, and nothing in the equations chooses.

8 figures Six that are symmetries and five that look like them. Each transformation applied to an exact solution, with the Navier-Stokes residual recomputed from the transformed field by finite differences — nothing differentiated by hand. The six symmetries leave the residual at the differencing floor, a few parts in 10^8. The five near-misses leave between 0.048 and 4.3, which is six to nine orders of magnitude larger. The gap is what makes this a test rather than an illustration: a transformation that is nearly a symmetry does not exist here, and every one of the five is something a reader might reasonably believe.

Why the list is this long

Every textbook list of exact solutions of the Navier–Stokes equations is about a dozen long, and the usual explanation is that the equations are hard. It is not the reason. A similarity reduction is a solution invariant under a subgroup of the equations' own symmetries, so the catalogue of possible reductions is the catalogue of subgroups — and that is a finite, countable object.

9 figures