Inviscid Flow around a Cone

  • Thread starter member 428835
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Cone Flow
In summary, the conversation discussed the streamlines around a submerged cone being pulled at a velocity ##V##. The classmates considered the inviscid flow and the streamlines at station 2, wondering if they would be uniform or faster at the exit port. A diagram was attached and the group agreed that the streamlines outside ##A_1## would wrap around the cone, while those inside the cone would be flat. The streamlines would adhere to the shape of the wall and condense, resulting in a jet-like flow beyond station 2. The group also discussed the validity of Bernoulli's equation and the stream function satisfying Laplace's equation. They also considered the flow patterns around sloping surfaces and how they could be approx
  • #1
member 428835
Hi PF!

Some classmates and I were talking about the streamlines around a submerged cone being pulled at a velocity ##V##. The picture is attached. Can someone shed some light on the streamlines of this flow, assuming it is inviscid? I take a frame of reference that moves with the cone.

Specifically, would the flow at station 2 be uniform vertically, or would the flow be faster at the exit port forever? Would the streamline profiles be straight upon exit or would they bend a little?

Any insight is greatly appreciated!
 

Attachments

  • Cone.png
    Cone.png
    28 KB · Views: 500
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
What do you think the streamline pattern would look like?
 
  • #3
Chestermiller said:
What do you think the streamline pattern would look like?
I think the streamlines outside ##A_1## will wrap around the cone and at station 2 all be flat. I think the streamlines in the cone, at station 2, will all be flat too. Before station 2 and in the cone I think the streamlines will adhere to the shape of the wall and condense. I think these streamlines will exit condensed relative to those outside the cone. Since the flow is inviscid, I think streamlines beyond station 2 directly behind ##A_2## will always be closer together than those outside ##A_2##. So a sort of jet.
 
  • #4
joshmccraney said:
I think the streamlines outside ##A_1## will wrap around the cone and at station 2 all be flat. I think the streamlines in the cone, at station 2, will all be flat too. Before station 2 and in the cone I think the streamlines will adhere to the shape of the wall and condense. I think these streamlines will exit condensed relative to those outside the cone. Since the flow is inviscid, I think streamlines beyond station 2 directly behind ##A_2## will always be closer together than those outside ##A_2##. So a sort of jet.
Any chance of a diagram?
 
  • #5
Chestermiller said:
Any chance of a diagram?
Totally, I've attached one. I've tried drawing all the streamlines equidistant before station 1. Notice after station 2 they are closer together behind ##A_2## then before. Do you agree with this sketch?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3994.JPG
    IMG_3994.JPG
    58.1 KB · Views: 485
  • #6
joshmccraney said:
Totally, I've attached one. I've tried drawing all the streamlines equidistant before station 1. Notice after station 2 they are closer together behind ##A_2## then before. Do you agree with this sketch?
I think that further downstream (after station 2), they will become equidistant again.
 
  • #7
Chestermiller said:
I think that further downstream (after station 2), they will become equidistant again.

What would cause the streamlines to separate after station 2?
 
  • #8
Do you believe that the stream function satisfies Laplace's equation for inviscid flow?

What causes the stream lines to even out again downstream of flow over a cylinder?
 
  • #9
Chestermiller said:
Do you believe that the stream function satisfies Laplace's equation for inviscid flow?
I believe the streamfunction does provided the flow is also incompressible (which we assume it is) so yes, I believe the streamfunction ##\psi## follows ##\nabla^2\psi=0##.

Chestermiller said:
What causes the stream lines to even out again downstream of flow over a cylinder?
Yea, I'm not sure about this. Any help?

Also, and I know this is off topic a little, but when deriving Bernoulli's equation from Navier Stokes, how do we know it is only valid along a streamline? At the very end of my derivation, assuming Newtonian, incompressible, inviscid, irrotational flow I have ##\nabla(\partial_t \phi + |\vec{u}|^2/2+p/\rho + g z) = \vec{0} \implies \partial_t \phi + |\vec{u}|^2/2+p/\rho + g z = const.## where I think the constant implies something about which streamline you're on. Also, ##\vec{u}=\nabla \phi##.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
joshmccraney said:
I believe the streamfunction does provided the flow is also incompressible (which we assume it is) so yes, I believe the streamfunction ##\psi## follows ##\nabla^2\psi=0##.
Well, if the stream function satisfies Laplace's equation and the streamlines become parallel at large x, then ##\partial \psi /\partial x=0##. Therefore, we are left with ##\partial^2\psi /\partial y^2=0##. That automatically gives equal streamfunction spacing.
Yea, I'm not sure about this. Any help?
Yeah, me neither. It certainly comes out the mathematics (i.e., the vorticity is zero), but it is certainly hard to track down from the Euler equations using physical reasoning. I don't know whether it is worth it spending time trying to do this.
Also, and I know this is off topic a little, but when deriving Bernoulli's equation from Navier Stokes, how do we know it is only valid along a streamline? At the very end of my derivation, assuming Newtonian, incompressible, inviscid, irrotational flow I have ##\nabla(\partial_t \phi + |\vec{u}|^2/2+p/\rho + g z) = \vec{0} \implies \partial_t \phi + |\vec{u}|^2/2+p/\rho + g z = const.## where I think the constant implies something about which streamline you're on. Also, ##\vec{u}=\nabla \phi##.
Can you please submit this as a separate thread.
 
  • Like
Likes member 428835
  • #11
Chestermiller said:
Well, if the stream function satisfies Laplace's equation and the streamlines become parallel at large x, then ##\partial \psi /\partial x=0##. Therefore, we are left with ##\partial^2\psi /\partial y^2=0##. That automatically gives equal streamfunction spacing.

Yeah, me neither. It certainly comes out the mathematics (i.e., the vorticity is zero), but it is certainly hard to track down from the Euler equations using physical reasoning. I don't know whether it is worth it spending time trying to do this.
Thanks a ton! This makes sense.
 
  • #12
(1) If you look at a simplified version of this problem translated into 2D then the sloping surfaces look very similar to aircraft wings - one normal and one inverted .

There have been many studies of the air flow around wings - both for proper wings profiles and for flat plates . There have also been studies about water flow around hydrofoils though these are harder to find . For water flow and for pseudo incompressible flow of air the flow patterns are similar at lower speeds .

Using information from these sources it should be possible to sketch a reasonable 2D approximation to the flow patterns around the sloping surfaces provided that the two surfaces are well separated .

It may also be possible to sketch an approximation of the full axisymmetric flow pattern by sweeping the 2D pattern for anyone surface around the central axis .

Flow patterns can be expected to alter depending on the angle of attack of the sloping surface . Accuracy of sketched flow patterns would probably be quite good for low angles of attack and less good for high angles of attack .

(2) Studies have also been done regarding flow of air through a wind sock and flow of water through the draught tube of a submerged turbine . Interesting background reading .

(3) There is software available for drawing idealised flow streamline patterns . Drawing these patterns is much less computationally demanding than for full CFD analysis .

(4) Sketching flow patterns used to be one of the skills learned by young engine designers . Usually the flow net was sketched rather than just the streamlines .
 

1. What is inviscid flow around a cone?

Inviscid flow around a cone is a type of fluid flow in which the fluid has no viscosity, meaning there is no resistance to shear forces within the fluid. A cone is a three-dimensional geometric shape that tapers smoothly from a flat base to a point at the top.

2. How is inviscid flow different from viscous flow?

Inviscid flow is characterized by a lack of viscosity, while viscous flow is characterized by the presence of viscosity. Viscosity is a measure of the internal friction within a fluid, which causes it to resist deformation and flow smoothly. Inviscid flow is idealized and does not occur in real fluids, while viscous flow is more common.

3. What are the applications of studying inviscid flow around a cone?

Studying inviscid flow around a cone has several practical applications. It can be used to model the aerodynamics of aircraft and missiles, as well as the flow of liquids in pipes and channels. It is also relevant in the design of wind turbines and other fluid machinery.

4. What are the governing equations for inviscid flow around a cone?

The governing equations for inviscid flow around a cone are the Euler equations, which describe the conservation of mass, momentum, and energy in a fluid. These equations are based on the assumption of inviscid flow and do not take into account the effects of viscosity.

5. What are some limitations of studying inviscid flow around a cone?

One major limitation of studying inviscid flow around a cone is that it does not accurately represent real-world fluid flow, as all real fluids have some level of viscosity. Additionally, the assumption of inviscid flow neglects important effects such as boundary layers and turbulence, which can significantly impact flow behavior.

Similar threads

  • Classical Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
688
  • Mechanical Engineering
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Classical Physics
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
7K
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top