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

Euler rotational — the series

3 essays on one idea, from the one that introduces it to the one that assumes the rest.
  1. 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.

    part 1 · inviscid
  2. 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.

    part 2 · inviscid
  3. 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.

    part 3 · inviscid

All series