How to develop a Parabolic Velocity Profile in 3D tube/channel flow

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around developing a parabolic velocity profile for 3D tube or channel flow, building on a previously established 2D case. Participants explore the differences between 2D and 3D flow equations and seek appropriate formulations for the 3D scenario.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a 2D parabolic velocity profile equation and seeks a corresponding 3D formulation.
  • Another participant questions the definitions of 2D and 3D in the context of the flow, suggesting that the 3D case may refer to axial flow in a circular duct.
  • A participant introduces the concept of Poiseuille flow, providing a specific equation for the velocity profile in a circular tube under steady, fully-developed, laminar flow conditions.
  • The same participant notes that the axial velocity can also be expressed in a form similar to the 2D equation, relating it to the mean velocity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants have not reached a consensus on the exact formulation for the 3D parabolic velocity profile, and there are differing interpretations of the flow scenarios being discussed.

Contextual Notes

The discussion does not clarify the assumptions underlying the transition from 2D to 3D flow, nor does it resolve the specific conditions under which the provided equations apply.

ksbiefr
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
i am trying to develop a Parabolic Velocity Profile in 3D tube/channel flow. for the 2D case i use

u = 1.5*Um *(1-(2y/H)^2)
where

Um= fluid velocity
y = position of solid on "y" axis (x,y)
H = width of channel
The above equation is not possible to used for 3D case (x,y,z). i try to search for 3D case not i am not successful.

Any body suggest me a equation/formula for developing Parabolic Velocity Profile in 3D tube/channel flow.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your post is a little confusing. By 2D are you referring to flow between parallel plates, and by 3D are you referring to axial flow in a duct of circular cross section?

Chet
 
Are you familiar with how the equation you used was derived? If so, you can easily derive the equation for the velocity profile in a circular tube for a steady, fully-developed, laminar flow with constant pressure gradient. It is still parabolic. The flow is called Poiseuille flow. I won't go through the derivation, but here is the velocity profile for a circular tube:
u_z = \dfrac{1}{4\mu}\dfrac{dp}{dz}(r^2 -R^2).

Here, ##u_z## is the flow velocity, ##\mu## is the dynamic viscosity, ##r## is the distance from the centerline, ##R## is the inner radius of the tube, and ##dp/dz## is the pressure gradient through the tube.
 
boneh3ad said:
Are you familiar with how the equation you used was derived? If so, you can easily derive the equation for the velocity profile in a circular tube for a steady, fully-developed, laminar flow with constant pressure gradient. It is still parabolic. The flow is called Poiseuille flow. I won't go through the derivation, but here is the velocity profile for a circular tube:
u_z = \dfrac{1}{4\mu}\dfrac{dp}{dz}(r^2 -R^2).

Here, ##u_z## is the flow velocity, ##\mu## is the dynamic viscosity, ##r## is the distance from the centerline, ##R## is the inner radius of the tube, and ##dp/dz## is the pressure gradient through the tube.
To expand on what boneh3ad has said, that axial velocity can also be expressed in the same form as your "2D" equation (in terms of the mean velocity) by writing:

##u_z=2u_m\left(1-(\frac{r}{R})^2\right)##

Chet
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
25K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K