Is Potential Flow Unique in Real Life?

AI Thread Summary
Potential flow is not unique in real life, as different methods can produce the same external shape but yield different flow patterns. For example, both the panel sheet and vortex sheet methods can create identical airfoil shapes, yet they result in distinct flow characteristics. Similarly, a rotating cylinder and a non-rotating cylinder satisfy the same boundary conditions but exhibit different flows due to the arbitrary circulation in the rotating case. To achieve a unique solution in potential flow, specifying circulation is essential, particularly in applications like airfoils where the Kutta Condition must be met for proper lift generation. Ultimately, without defining circulation, the flow solution remains ambiguous and may not accurately represent reality.
flasherffff
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
there is something i can't seem to get about potential flow,

when we work with potential flows we combine some simple potential flows to satisfy some boundary condition (shape of the body and potential at infinity),
we get the resulting flow and we assume that that is the flow in reality

BUT (this is what bothers me) the potential flow that satisfies those boundary condition (shape of the body) is not unique.

example 1: the panel sheet method and vortex sheet method can produce the same external airfoil shape ,but have different flow patterns around them

example 2:the rotating vs the non rotating cylinder
both flows satisfy the same boundary conditions but are different

so... how can we assume that some solution to a given geometry is like reality ,when the solution isn't even unique mathematically
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
In potential flow, the solution to Laplace's equation is unique to within a specified constant. Therefore to obtain a unique solution it is necessary to specify this constant and this constant is the circulation. In the case of the rotating cylinder the circulation is completely arbitrary but must be specified. So even though the boundary conditions of the non-rotating cylinder and the rotating cylinder are the same the flows are different because for the rotating cylinder there is circulation.

For the airfoil you don't directly specify the circulation but rather you require that the circulation is chosen to satisfy the Kutta Condition which requires the flow to leave the trailing edge smoothly. So if you place panels on the airfoil surface and then place sources on the panels you can satisfy the boundary conditions and create the airfoil shape but there will be no circulation and therefore no lift. And if the airfoil is at an angle of attack the stagnation point on the trailing edge will be in the wrong place. If you instead use vortices on the panels and indirectly specify the circulation by using the kutta condition you will get the correct trailing edge stagnation point and lift will be generated.

So in summary you must specify the circulation in order to have a unique solution.
 
thank you!
this helped alot.
 
How did you find PF?: Via Google search Hi, I have a vessel I 3D printed to investigate single bubble rise. The vessel has a 4 mm gap separated by acrylic panels. This is essentially my viewing chamber where I can record the bubble motion. The vessel is open to atmosphere. The bubble generation mechanism is composed of a syringe pump and glass capillary tube (Internal Diameter of 0.45 mm). I connect a 1/4” air line hose from the syringe to the capillary The bubble is formed at the tip...
Thread 'What type of toilet do I have?'
I was enrolled in an online plumbing course at Stratford University. My plumbing textbook lists four types of residential toilets: 1# upflush toilets 2# pressure assisted toilets 3# gravity-fed, rim jet toilets and 4# gravity-fed, siphon-jet toilets. I know my toilet is not an upflush toilet because my toilet is not below the sewage line, and my toilet does not have a grinder and a pump next to it to propel waste upwards. I am about 99% sure that my toilet is not a pressure assisted...
After over 25 years of engineering, designing and analyzing bolted joints, I just learned this little fact. According to ASME B1.2, Gages and Gaging for Unified Inch Screw Threads: "The no-go gage should not pass over more than three complete turns when inserted into the internal thread of the product. " 3 turns seems like way to much. I have some really critical nuts that are of standard geometry (5/8"-11 UNC 3B) and have about 4.5 threads when you account for the chamfers on either...
Back
Top