Fluid Flow Problem-Viscous Flow

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a fluid mechanics problem involving viscous flow through a small tube connected to a pressure vessel. Participants explore the implications of high viscosity on flow characteristics, the application of various equations, and the challenges faced in calculating flow speed and pressure.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the initial setup and calculations for flow speed, noting that the assumption of inviscid flow leads to unrealistically high velocities.
  • Another participant suggests that the high viscosity of the fluid may cause clogging in the small tube and recommends using a larger tube or reducing the viscosity.
  • A different participant mentions that the fluid flows well despite the viscosity due to a high pressure gradient and references the Stokes and Hagen–Poiseuille equations for low Reynolds numbers.
  • Some participants point out that the Bernoulli equation is not valid at low Reynolds numbers, emphasizing the need for alternative approaches.
  • One participant acknowledges the limitations of their previous approach and shifts to using the Poiseuille equation for flow calculations.
  • Another participant recommends setting up the Navier-Stokes equations with simplifying assumptions, providing hints about boundary conditions and flow characteristics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of the Bernoulli equation at low Reynolds numbers, with some agreeing on its limitations while others focus on alternative equations. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to accurately model the flow.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight issues such as the dependence on viscosity, the challenges of using small tube diameters, and the need for iterative calculations that may lead to unrealistic results. The discussion reflects uncertainties in assumptions and the complexity of the fluid dynamics involved.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals interested in fluid mechanics, particularly those dealing with viscous flow in small conduits or exploring the application of various fluid dynamics equations in practical scenarios.

RGNEM
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I am working on a fluid mechanics problem modeling something I've come into contact with at work.


I have an open to atmosphere reservoir of a fluid with properties as follows

SG=1.48
Viscosity= 47000 Cp
Height of fluid column, 3 inches or so. i.e. Neglible


I then have a pressure vessel with air inside of it at

190 Torr = 3.67 psi

If I immerse a plastic tube in the fluid, connect it to the pressure vessel, and open the clamp, I will establish some flow.

Inner Diameter of Tube is .19 in

I have been trying to determine the flow speed and pressure in the flow.


I have been using the equation

\frac{P_1}{\gamma} + \frac{V_1^2}{2*g} + Z_1= \frac{P_2}{\gamma} + \frac{V_2^2}{2*g} + Z_2

Considering change in height to be negligible (only a few inches), my equation reduces to

\frac{P_1}{\gamma} + \frac{V_1^2}{2*g} = \frac{P_2}{\gamma} + \frac{V_2^2}{2*g}

Taking initial fluid velocity to be zero, as it is coming from the reservoir of fluid, my equation further simplifies to

\frac{P_1}{\gamma}= \frac{P_2}{\gamma} + \frac{V_2^2}{2*g}

Plugging in values, I find my V_2 to be about 399 in/s

This is too high, but it must be due to the incorrect assumption of inviscid flow.

My next step is to add head loss to my equation:

\frac{P_1}{\gamma} = \frac{P_2}{\gamma} + \frac{V_2^2}{2*g} + H_L

To determine this, I first calculate my Reynolds Number using the equation

R_e=\frac{ρVD}{\mu}

then Friction Factor using the equation

f=\frac{64}{R_e}

Using this value I find my Head Loss using the equation

HL=f\frac{l}{D}\frac{v^2}{2g}


My problem is that, after using an assumed initial velocity to begin the iterative process,
my Reynold's Number comes out very low, my Friction Factor very high and my Head Loss astronomical.

For example, for an assumed V1 of 20 in/s
Re= .077
f=828.99
HL=4043058523 in


Plugging into the next iteration of my flow equation, the inside of the eventual square root required for solving for V_2 comes out to be negative, which is just a small problem...

I hope I'm missing something obvious, and after spending many hours just to get to this point, I'd appreciate any ideas/comments/help that any of you could provide.

Thank you in advance.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Your fluid is so thick, it is probably going to clog such a small tube (ID = 0.19 in). Use a bigger tube or see if the viscosity can be reduced. When highly viscous products like residual fuel oil or asphalt have to be pumped, they must be heated to reduce viscosity sufficiently to allow pumping (residual FO approx. 200 F, asphalt approx. 400 F).
If neither approach is acceptable, you'll probably have to slice your fluid up into chunks and insert it into whatever manually.
 
The problem is not making it work.
It flows quite well in this small tube, due to the high pressure gradient.

I am simply trying to describe the process in a quantifiable way.

I've been looking at the Stokes equation and Hagen–Poiseuille equation this morning.
These seem to be the correct equations for flow with a Reynold's number below 1.
 
If you are running at a low RE bernoullis equation will not be valid as it is only a good approximation for the limit as Re goes to infinity.
 
Aero51 said:
If you are running at a low RE bernoullis equation will not be valid as it is only a good approximation for the limit as Re goes to infinity.

Yes, I've come to realize that.
I was trying to compensate for that problem by incorporating HL from friction, but that was incorrect.

I'm now using the Poiseuille equation:

\upsilon \pi R^2 = \frac{\pi R^4}{8\eta} (\frac{|\Delta P|}{\Delta x})

Any additional suggestions?
 
I would recommend setting up a full NS equation in the direction of fluid motion and make some simplifying assumptions. I do not have a PC with internet access so I cannot provide an example. The good news is that you know your boundary conditions in the tube and the net pressure gradient, dP/dz.

As another hint, solve the NS 3d polar equation the the z direction. Off the top of my head, you know:

-The flow is constant in time. d()/dt=0
-V_theta = 0 (irrotational)
-Viscosity is only significant in the radial direction
-You have a pressure gradient in 1 direction (dP/dz =/= 0)
-no slip condition at walls
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
7K