A Is there a stagnation point in turbulent flows not involving solids?

AI Thread Summary
When two free jets collide at an angle, a stagnation point typically forms in the impingement zone, around which streamlines are deflected. Recent analyses indicate that the collision may not be completely elastic, suggesting energy loss and potential turbulence in this zone. The presence of turbulence raises questions about the existence of a stagnation point, as it may be dynamically moving due to the turbulent flow. However, it is argued that a stagnation point can still exist as a fixed point where fluid velocity is zero, even in turbulent conditions. The discussion emphasizes the complexity of fluid dynamics in collisions and the potential for multiple fixed points in turbulent flows.
rdemyan
Messages
67
Reaction score
4
TL;DR Summary
Is there a stagnation point in turbulent flows not involving solids?

Reference: https://www.physicsforums.com/forums/classical-physics.61/post-thread
When two free jets collide at some impingement angle (not necessarily a head on collision), the usual assumption is that in the impingement zone there is a stagnation point around which stream lines are deflected. From this stagnation point, a thin liquid sheet is created, which eventually breaks down into droplets at some distance downstream. Originally, all analyses assumed that there was no loss of energy in the impingement zone. However, more recent results seem to suggest that the collision is not 100% elastic. My question is: if there is in fact turbulence created in the impingement zone of colliding free jets (as a result of an energy release), can there be a stagnation point? Is a stagnation point possible in a turbulent impingement zone especially when only two liquids are involved and there is no solid object.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF.

If a steady flow is separated, by any collision, into one or more different paths, there must be a stagnation point. That stagnation point may be moving dynamically as a result of the turbulence.

Where there is counterflow, or an eddy, there must also be a fixed point.
 
I don't understand your comment regarding a fixed point. I assume you are stating that the fixed point is the stagnation point.
 
rdemyan said:
I assume you are stating that the fixed point is the stagnation point.
I am saying the inverse, that the stagnation point is a fixed point. The fluid there has zero velocity.

There may be other fixed points in a turbulent flow. If the flow divides into two paths at one of those points, then it is also a stagnation point.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brouwer_fixed-point_theorem
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'
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...
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...
Back
Top