Theme

The thread: The exact theory is wrong — page 11

Page 11 of 22, continuing through the 193 essays this motif runs through.

193 essays carry this thread — page 11 of 22.

How hot seven films get. The peak temperature rise inside the film itself, on a logarithmic axis, for seven lubricated contacts with ordinary engineering numbers. A journal bearing runs tens of kelvin above its own housing, which is why lubrication systems are designed around heat rather than around load; a water-lubricated bush runs at a hundredth of a kelvin, because water conducts six hundred times better per unit of viscosity. The air bearing is marked: its gap is smaller than air's mean free path, so its film is not a continuum at all.

The film that heats itself

The oil in a bearing is not at the temperature of the metal around it. It is tens of kelvin hotter, the rise contains no length whatever, and whether the heating runs away or settles down depends on something that is not a property of the oil at all — whether the machine driving it holds the speed or holds the force.

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.

Ideal flow

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.

γ for air, against temperature. The ratio of specific heats for air as a mixture of nitrogen and oxygen, with the vibrational mode filling according to the Einstein function. It is 1.400 at room temperature, where only translation and rotation are available; 1.337 at a thousand kelvin; and 1.288 at six thousand. Every compressible result on this site has used 1.4, and that is the value for a gas that is not hot — which, behind any shock worth drawing, it is not.

Compressible flow

When gamma stops being a number

Every compressible result on this site has used γ = 1.4, which counts the ways a nitrogen molecule can hold energy at room temperature. Behind a Mach 10 shock the gas is at 3,800 kelvin and the count is different — and the pressure barely moves while the temperature falls by fifteen per cent.

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 terms, one with viscosity in it and one without. Ergun's two contributions to the pressure gradient, against the pore Reynolds number, on logarithmic axes. The viscous term rises with the first power of the velocity and the inertial one with the square, so on these axes they are straight lines of slope one and two and there is exactly one crossing. The second term contains no viscosity at all — it is the price of accelerating fluid into every pore and out again — which is why a linear resistance law has to fail eventually whatever the fluid is.

Fluids at work

Where Darcy stops

A linear resistance law has to fail eventually, because pushing fluid into a pore and out again costs energy that has nothing to do with viscosity. Where it fails is one dimensionless number, and that number is 150/1.75 — read out of a correlation's own constants rather than measured.

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.

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 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.

The same flow, from two different physics. Solid lines: the depth-averaged flow between two plates a small distance apart, with an obstacle standing between them. Dashed: the ideal-flow solution for the same obstacle. They are the same field to a part in ten billion, because averaging Stokes flow across a narrow gap gives a velocity that is the gradient of a harmonic potential. The cell has no inertia at all, which is the one hypothesis the ideal theory cannot do without.

Ideal flow

The exact theory, drawn by viscosity

Two flat plates a millimetre apart, syrup between them, an obstacle in the gap. The Reynolds number is a hundredth, inertia is absent, and the streamline pattern is the potential flow past that obstacle — exactly, to a part in ten billion. The one hypothesis ideal flow cannot do without is the one this flow most conspicuously breaks.

All themes