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

The thread: What is conserved — page 16

Page 16 of 33, continuing through the 292 essays this motif runs through.

292 essays carry this thread — page 16 of 33.

A limit that exists and is never reached. The exponent of the best power law fitted across the overlap layer, against the friction Reynolds number. A logarithm is the zero-exponent member of that family, so the log law is what this sequence is heading for — and it heads there as 1/ln Re_τ, which is the slowest useful way of approaching anything. The exponent is still 0.102 at Re_τ = 10⁶, and driving it to a hundredth needs a Reynolds number with a hundred and fourteen in its logarithm. Regimes and numbers

A limit nothing reaches

A dimensional argument that succeeds says a variable has dropped out of the answer. The Blasius profile has no Reynolds number in its shape at any Reynolds number; the overlap layer's power-law exponent is still 0.102 at Re_τ of a million and falls as a logarithm, so the limit exists and nothing ever gets there.

 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. Ideal flow

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.

 One signature, aged four times. The pressure signature of a slender body at four distances, computed by the exact Lax formula for the nonlinear propagation. Each point of the waveform moves forward in proportion to its own overpressure, so the compression at the front catches the undisturbed air and a shock forms there, while the expansion at the rear falls behind and forms a second one. What is left is an N-wave: two discontinuities and a straight line between them, spreading and weakening. Compressible flow

The signature that forgets the shape

The pressure field near a supersonic aeroplane depends on every part of it. What reaches the ground has two parameters. Two bodies whose near-field signatures differ by fifty-five per cent in peak and by their whole shape age into the same N-wave, to two and a half per cent.

 The roughness function, and the asymptote in which the viscosity has gone. The whole effect of a rough wall on a turbulent boundary layer is one number: the downward shift of the logarithmic profile. It vanishes on a smooth wall, rises through a transitional band, and becomes (1/kappa)ln(k+) + B − 8.5 — at which point substituting it back leaves u+ = (1/kappa)ln(y/k) + 8.5, with the fluid's own length gone from the answer entirely. Transition and turbulence

A second length at the wall

The logarithm in a turbulent wall profile exists because a region of the flow is not allowed to know about any length except the distance to the wall. Roughen the surface and there is one it does know about, which belongs neither to the fluid nor to the flow — and the slope does not change at all.

 A double integral that comes out an integer. The Gauss linking integral evaluated on six pairs of closed curves. It is not constrained to be a whole number by anything in its own definition — it is a double integral of a smooth kernel — and it returns one to within two parts in ten thousand on two hundred points per curve, because what it is computing is a topological count. Flows and fields

The knot a flow cannot untie

Ideal flow conserves energy, circulation and impulse, and all three are what they look like. It conserves a fourth quantity that is not: a volume integral of the velocity dotted into the vorticity, whose value counts how many times the vortex lines are linked through one another.

 The one calculation in which the atmosphere really does push. How high a partial vacuum inside the tube will raise the liquid, against the absolute pressure achieved inside it. The lift is (p_atm − p_inside)/ρg and it is capped at the barometric height of 10.11 m, because below the vapour pressure the liquid boils and pulling harder buys nothing. The horizontal lines are five crown heights: a crown below a line's intersection with the curve can be primed by suction and one above it cannot, at any pump. This is the process the running siphon's argument explicitly excluded, and it is the one where the atmospheric account is the mechanism rather than a limit. What is taught wrongly

The one place the atmosphere pushes

The height of a siphon's hump is not in its flow rate, and the atmosphere holds the column together rather than driving it. That account excludes one process by name — starting. That is the process the atmospheric account describes correctly, and it is the only one in the whole device.

 A closed wake, and the loading of least drag on it. The wake of a box wing in the plane that decides its drag, with the circulation of least induced drag drawn as a thickness along it. The horizontal members carry a loading close to elliptic and the vertical ones carry a share that lifts nothing — they contribute no lift, since lift is Γ dy and dy is zero on a vertical, and they change the drag by changing where the wake's vorticity is. At a gap of 20 per cent of span this system costs 67.1 per cent of what a single wing of the same span and lift would. Circulation and lift

A wake that closes on itself

Prandtl's best wing system is a rectangle, not a wing. Solving for the loading on a closed wake turns up a circulation that costs nothing and does nothing — a gauge freedom in the middle of an optimisation — and a drag that keeps falling with no floor under it.

 The pressure drop stops rising at 0.213 m/s. The pressure drop across a bed of 500 µm sand, against the velocity through it, in units of the fluidisation velocity. The rising branch is Ergun's resistance and the flat one is the bed's buoyant weight, which the flow cannot exceed however hard it is pushed: past the corner the bed expands rather than resisting more. That flat line is the reason fluidisation is unmistakable in practice — the corner is a crossing of two curves rather than a gradual departure, and it can be read off a gauge. Fluids at work

The bed that weighs itself

Blow hard enough through a pile of sand and the pressure drop stops rising. It cannot rise — a control volume round the bed says the drop can never exceed the buoyant weight of the solid in it, and at the velocity where the two meet the bed stops being a structure and starts being a fluid.

 The one number that really is one. Three quantities against the Froude number. The upper line is the speed of a surface wave travelling downstream and the lower one the speed of the same wave travelling upstream, both in units of the wave speed itself; the second changes sign at Fr = 1 and not near it. That sign change is not a comparison of two term sizes going through unity — it is the moment a signal stops being able to reach upstream at all, so the equations change from elliptic to hyperbolic and the flow stops knowing what is ahead of it. The specific energy, drawn beneath, has its minimum at the same place, and for the same reason. Regimes and numbers

The number that really is one

Almost every threshold in this subject sits somewhere other than where its dimensionless group is one. The Froude number does not. At Fr = 1 a disturbance stops being able to travel upstream, the specific energy is least and the equations change type — three statements, one number, and no tolerance anywhere in it.

All themes