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

Exact layer — the series

6 essays on one idea, from the one that introduces it to the one that assumes the rest.
  1. A wave that dies within one wavelength — 100 Hz in air. The velocity profile above an oscillating wall, at eight phases of one cycle, with depth in units of δ = √(2ν/ω). The motion is a wave travelling into the fluid, and its amplitude falls by 1/e in the same distance it turns by one radian — so it is dead within about one wavelength, and the fluid three δ up hardly knows the wall is moving at all. This is one of the very few exact solutions the Navier–Stokes equations have. The dashed line is one fixed distance above the wall in millimetres: in these units it climbs as the square root of the frequency, which is the whole of how far the motion reaches.

    The wall that shakes

    Slide a wall back and forth in its own plane and the fluid above it does not follow — a wave travels upwards into the fluid and dies within one wavelength. The depth it reaches is √(2ν/ω), it contains no length from the geometry at all, and the whole thing is one of the very few exact solutions the Navier–Stokes equations have.

    part 1 · viscous
  2. A boundary layer with no x in it. The velocity profile over a porous wall with uniform suction: U(1 − e^{−Vy/ν}), exactly, at every station along the wall. The displacement thickness is ν/V, the momentum thickness is half of it, and the shape factor is two — all of them constants, none of them a function of distance. It is the cleanest demonstration there is that a boundary layer's thickness is a balance rather than an accumulation.

    The layer that stops growing

    Blasius' boundary layer thickens as the square root of distance and never stops. Suck fluid through the wall at a uniform rate and it stops immediately — the profile becomes a single exponential with no x anywhere in it, and the friction comes out exactly equal to the momentum of the fluid that was taken away.

    part 2 · viscous
  3. What the fluid at one height is listening to. The weight the fluid two millimetres above a moving wall gives to the wall's velocity a given delay earlier, in water. It peaks at two thirds of a second and has a tail that falls as the delay to the power minus three halves — so the fluid is responding to a broad stretch of the wall's past rather than to a moment of it.

    The wall the fluid is listening to

    Water two millimetres above a moving wall is responding to what the wall did two thirds of a second ago — most likely. Half of its response is older than four and a half seconds, a tenth is older than two minutes, and the average age of what it is responding to does not exist at all.

    part 3 · viscous
  4. 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.

    part 4 · viscous
  5. 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.

    part 5 · viscous
  6. 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.

    part 6 · viscous

All series