Theme

The thread: A smooth picture proves nothing — page 5

Page 5 of 20, continuing through the 172 essays this motif runs through.

172 essays carry this thread — page 5 of 20.

The street, as two rows of point vortices. The exact velocity field of a staggered double row of point vortices at the stable spacing ratio, with the row spacing and the circulation of one core printed from a line integral of the field rather than from the number that built it. This is a model of a wake. It contains no body, no viscosity and no mechanism that would shed anything, and the viscous stepper used here does not produce a street at any Reynolds number.

The street this site cannot draw

The alternating wake behind a cylinder is the most photographed structure in fluid mechanics, and this site's solver does not produce one. What can honestly be drawn instead is a model of it — and the model settles one thing exactly, which is the spacing.

45° of corner, and an infinite number of eddies in it. The creeping flow in a corner of 45 degrees, drawn from Moffatt's similarity solution. Each eddy turns the opposite way to its neighbours and is 3.17 times smaller and 1.6e+3 times weaker than the one outside it. The contour levels are rescaled inside each eddy, because they differ in strength by three orders of magnitude per step and a single set of levels would show the first and nothing else — which is itself the reason nobody has seen the third. The dividing lines between eddies are drawn where the stream function changes sign, and the dots are the centres, both found from the solved field.

Viscosity

The eddies nobody stirs

A slow flow past the mouth of a sharp corner does not simply fail to get in. The corner fills with an infinite sequence of counter-rotating eddies, each about three times smaller and sixteen hundred times weaker than the last, and the whole structure is decided by one complex number.

A steady pressure field, from a flow with no steady part. The time-averaged pressure round a cylinder in a stream that oscillates as U₀cos ωt. The mean velocity is exactly zero at every point — the flow spends as long going one way as the other — and the mean pressure is not, because pressure depends on the square of the speed and a square has no sign. The mean coefficient reaches -2.00 at the shoulders and averages -1.00 over the surface, and its resultant is 6.6e-16: a real field with no force in it. The pale lines are the instantaneous streamlines, which reverse every half cycle.

Flows and fields

The mean is not the flow

Average an unsteady flow and the result is a new object with its own properties, and it is not a solution of anything. An inviscid stream oscillating about zero has a mean velocity of exactly nothing everywhere, a mean pressure that reaches minus two dynamic pressures at the shoulders, and a missing term in its own momentum equation that can be written down in closed form.

Four turns of a wave, and the parcel is not back. Two parcels traced through four periods of a linear deep-water wave of steepness 0.1, by integrating the exact velocity field. Each orbit is very nearly a closed circle and misses closing by a little, every time, in the same direction — that miss is the whole of the Stokes drift. The near-surface parcel advances 0.0357 of a wavelength over the four cycles and the one a tenth of a wavelength down advances 0.0122, a third as far — because the drift falls off twice as fast with depth as the orbit's own size does.

Flows and fields

The drift in a wave that has none

The velocity at any fixed point under a passing wave averages to exactly zero, and every parcel of water in it moves steadily forward anyway. The orbits do not close, they miss by the same amount every time, and the missing amount is the square of the steepness times the wave speed.

A millionth, doubling every three-quarters of a second. The separation of two trajectories started a millionth apart, on log axes against time. It grows as a straight line until it saturates at the size of the attractor, and the slope of that line is the largest Lyapunov exponent — measured here on the system by renormalising a nearby pair, not quoted. Sensitive dependence is what the straightness of the line means.

What is taught wrongly

The randomness that is not in the equations

Turbulence is described in the language of statistics — means, variances, spectra, probability distributions — and none of that language appears in the equations it is a description of. The Navier–Stokes equations have no random term anywhere in them. What is random is the observer's ignorance of the initial data, and the flow's habit of amplifying it.

Three contours, one force, three different accounts of it. The same vortex, and the same total force on it, computed by a momentum balance over three contours of the same area. All three give ρUΓ to eight figures. What differs is the bookkeeping: the tall box gets 16 per cent of it from pressure and the rest from momentum flux, the wide box gets 84 per cent from pressure, and the circle gets exactly half. Neither part converges on its own as the contour is enlarged — each falls off like 1/r while the contour grows like r — so the split is a property of the shape of the limit rather than of the flow.

Ideal flow

Where the reaction to a wing's lift is

The force on a body can be computed on any contour drawn round it, and the answer is the same every time. How much of that answer is pressure and how much is momentum flux is not — it runs from three per cent to ninety-seven, and the difference is the shape of the contour.

One flow, two observers, two pictures. The same ideal flow past a circular cylinder, drawn in the frame of the tunnel and in the frame of the undisturbed air. The two are related by subtracting one constant velocity. On the left the flow arrives from infinity, divides at a stagnation point on the nose and closes at another on the tail. On the right the air is at rest far away, the body pushes through it, the streamlines are closed loops, and there is no stagnation point anywhere in the field. Every force, every pressure and every measurement either observer can make is identical.

Flows and fields

The picture belongs to whoever is watching

Photograph the flow past a cylinder from the tunnel and it has two stagnation points. Photograph the same flow from a frame moving with the air and it has none at all, and its surface speed is exactly the free stream at every angle. Both pictures are correct and no measurement distinguishes them.

What is taught wrongly

An hour for every tenfold

Turbulence is deterministic and unpredictable, and the exchange rate between those two is exact: measuring the initial state ten times better buys the same extra forecast time every time, for ever. A constant, and it belongs to the flow rather than to the instrument.

One field, and the two parts the theorem splits it into. A velocity field made of a smooth source, a smooth vortex and a uniform stream, and the two fields the Helmholtz decomposition returns for it. The first carries the whole divergence and has no curl anywhere; the second carries the whole curl and has no divergence. They are computed by solving two Poisson problems on a grid, with the divergence and the vorticity differenced from the field rather than taken from the expressions that built it. Adding the two back together does not recover the field.

Flows and fields

Every flow is two flows

Any velocity field splits into a part carrying all of the divergence and a part carrying all of the vorticity. The theorem says so and does not say which split — the two halves can be moved between each other by anything harmonic, and on a bounded region that is an infinite family.

All themes