I Fluid Viscosity & Viscous Friction Between Plates

AI Thread Summary
When a fluid is placed between two parallel plates, with one plate moving and the other stationary, viscous friction arises due to the fluid's viscosity, described by the equation F = -ηA(dv/dy). The viscosity reflects the intermolecular forces within the fluid, while the no-slip boundary condition at the plates ensures that there is no relative motion at that interface. The discussion emphasizes that all shear occurs between fluid molecules, not between the fluid and the plates, making viscous friction dependent solely on the fluid's viscosity. The terminology around this phenomenon can be misleading, as it is more accurately described through shear stresses rather than traditional friction concepts. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for clarity in fluid mechanics.
Dario56
Messages
289
Reaction score
48
When fluid is placed between two parallel plates such that one plate is moving and other is stationary, fluid will start flowing. Between plate and the fluid there is viscous friction given by equation: $$ F = -\eta A \frac {dv} {dy} $$

where $ \eta $ is fluid viscosity, $A$ is area of a plate and $\frac {dv} {dy} $ is a velocity gradient

Since fluid viscosity is a measure of intermolecular or cohesive forces in a fluid how can its value determine viscous friction between fluid and the plate since interactions between fluid and the plate aren't the same like between fluid molecules?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
At the plates, the boundary condition is no-slip (perfect adhesion). That is all that is required.
 
  • Like
Likes Lord Jestocost, Dario56 and vanhees71
Dario56 said:
Yes, there is no relative motion between fluid and the plate at that point. However, this doesn't really answer my question.
All the shear is between fluid and fluid. There is no shear movement between metal and fluid.
For that reason the viscous friction is a function of fluid viscosity only.

If we misunderstand your question, then you may need to ask your question again in a different way.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and Dario56
Baluncore said:
All the shear is between fluid and fluid. There is no shear movement between metal and fluid.
For that reason the viscous friction is a function of fluid viscosity only.

If we misunderstand your question, then you may need to ask your question again in a different way.
Everything is understood. No slip condition explains my question.
 
This is why I don't like when textbooks call this phenomenon "friction." It is, I suppose, related to static friction, but that makes it confusing to some because everything is moving so students tend to get a bit wishy washy. I prefer describing it through shear stresses.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
Back
Top