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

The thread: Taught wrongly, everywhere — page 6

Page 6 of 14, continuing through the 124 essays this motif runs through.

124 essays carry this thread — page 6 of 14.

The same reading, and only one of them gives it back. A Venturi and an orifice plate at the same diameter ratio, with the pressure along the axis drawn beneath each. Both narrow the flow by the same amount, both read the same difference between the pipe and the narrowest section, and both infer the same flow rate from it. Downstream they part company: the Venturi's diffuser turns the throat's speed back into pressure, and the orifice's jet expands into the pipe and destroys 73% of the reading. The picture is a section rather than a solved field: nothing here computes the jet, and the recirculating corner is not drawn. Fluids at work

The price of knowing the flow rate

Two flowmeters can narrow a pipe by the same amount, read the same pressure difference and infer the same flow rate, and cost pressures that differ by an order of magnitude. What separates them is not viscosity, and not workmanship — it is whether the flow is decelerated or abandoned.

 A material region, and the dye that stays inside it. The same fluid at four times, carried by an unsteady straining flow whose strain rate oscillates. The outline is a circle of the fluid at the first instant, tracked by integrating the velocity field; the shading is a blob of passive dye. The region is stretched to nearly seven to one and its area is unchanged to fifteen decimal places, because the flow is incompressible. The amount of dye inside it is unchanged to thirteen, because the dye is carried by the same fluid. Flows and fields

A rate of change that will not hold still

Three boxes drawn in one flow at one instant give three different answers to how fast the dye inside them is changing — one falling, one falling twice as fast, one rising. All three reconcile with a single material rate, and that rate is zero.

 Where the suction on a cylinder is actually made. The share of the surface's pressure deficit generated within a given distance of it. Twelve per cent comes from the first twentieth of a radius, half from within a third, and a tenth of it from beyond one and a half radii. There is no thin layer doing the work: the suction is made by the curvature of the whole outer field. What is taught wrongly

The effect that is real, and where it stops

The Coandă effect has a genuine mechanism, and it is the same equation that makes the suction on a wing. What separates the two is where the integral comes from: a wall jet generates all of its pressure deficit inside a layer two per cent of the radius thick, and a cylinder in a stream needs a third of a radius for half of it.

 The tunnel makes the stream 7.4% faster. The flow past a cylinder between two walls, solved from the closed form of an infinite image row rather than from a truncated sum. The walls are streamlines exactly — that is what the images are for, and the normal velocity on them is zero to the last bit — and the flow beside the body is squeezed between the body and the wall, which is the whole of the blockage effect. The stream at the model is 7.40% faster than the speed the tunnel's own instruments report far upstream. Fluids at work

The instrument in the answer

A model in a wind tunnel is not a model in the sky. The walls are supplied by an infinite row of reflections, the stream at the model is faster than the tunnel's own instruments report, and the correction is not an empirical fudge — it is a series with a closed form.

 One sheared stream, and the total pressure across it. A parallel shear flow is an exact steady solution of the Euler equations, and the momentum equation requires its static pressure to be uniform. So the total pressure is entirely the dynamic pressure, which varies with the speed — by three and a fifth dynamic heads across this layer, on a flow where the static pressure does not vary at all. What is taught wrongly

Four Bernoullis and one name

"Bernoulli's equation" names at least four statements with four different constants, three domains of validity and one shared reputation for being misapplied. A single sheared stream separates the first three: its total pressure is constant along every streamline, varies by three dynamic heads across them, and its static pressure never moves at all.

 A falling drop is a bun, not a tear. The shape of a drop pressed on by the air it is falling through, computed by matching the Legendre component of a sphere's own potential-flow pressure distribution against the change in curvature it produces. The result is oblate — flattened along the direction of travel — because the pressure is high at the poles and low round the equator. The teardrop of every illustration has the wrong symmetry entirely: a drop in free fall has no up, and one at terminal speed is being pressed on from in front. Regimes and numbers

The drop that is not a tear

A falling raindrop is flattened along the direction it is going, by the pressure of the air passing it rather than by its own weight, and the group that decides is the Weber number. The teardrop of every illustration has the wrong symmetry entirely — there is no up in the problem it is drawn for.

 Which speed the number is formed on. The fractional change in air density at three places on a body, against the free-stream Mach number. At a stagnation point the density rises, and it reaches five per cent at M = 0.314 — which is where the familiar 0.3 comes from, and it is a five per cent tolerance rather than a physical boundary. At the suction peak the density falls instead, and how fast depends on the body: a lightly loaded section is milder than its own nose, and one working at cp₀ = −2 reaches five per cent at M = 0.22 and is at Mach 0.55 over its shoulder while the free stream is at 0.3. Regimes and numbers

Which speed goes in the number

The most quoted threshold in the subject — air is incompressible below Mach 0.3 — is a five per cent tolerance on the density at a stagnation point wearing a physical boundary's clothes. A wing working for its living is at Mach 0.55 over its shoulder while the free stream is still at 0.3.

 The Kirchhoff flow past a flat plate. A uniform stream meeting a flat plate held across it, with two streamlines leaving the edges and never returning. Between them is a wake of fluid at rest at a constant pressure. The equations solved are the same equations that give d'Alembert's paradox for a closed body, and this flow has a drag coefficient of 0.8798. Ideal flow

Drag in the theory that forbids it

d'Alembert's paradox is a theorem about flows that close behind the body. Stop requiring that, let two streamlines leave the edges and never come back, and the same equations — no viscosity, no vorticity — produce a drag coefficient of 0.8798.

 Q and the vorticity along a radius of one vortex. Two candidate measures of where the vortex is, along a radius of a Lamb–Oseen vortex. The vorticity is a Gaussian: positive at every radius, so a threshold on it puts the edge wherever the threshold is put. Q — the excess of rotation over strain — changes sign exactly once, at 1.121 core radii, and that radius is a property of the flow rather than of the person drawing it. Inside it, 71.5 per cent of the circulation. Flows and fields

Where a vortex stops

Four criteria decide where a vortex ends, and in two dimensions three of them are the same criterion. The fourth is a knob. And the one that is not a knob is not objective: a co-rotating pair of vortices occupies two per cent of a window to one observer and twenty-five to another.

All themes