Mathematical Procedure for Obtaining Velocity Profile in Laminar Flow

  • Level: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Andrea Vironda
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integration
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
8 replies · 2K views
Andrea Vironda
Messages
69
Reaction score
3
Hi guys,
i'm trying to find the velocity profile for a laminar flow in a round pipe.
Starting from a force balance, we can obtain the first equation high in the left. I started with a procedure but i think I'm making mistakes.
Can you suggest me the mathematical procedure?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20190130_074231.jpg
    IMG_20190130_074231.jpg
    12.2 KB · Views: 403
Physics news on Phys.org
Andrea Vironda said:
Hi guys,
i'm trying to find the velocity profile for a laminar flow in a round pipe.
Starting from a force balance, we can obtain the first equation high in the left. I started with a procedure but i think I'm making mistakes.
Can you suggest me the mathematical procedure?

Shouldn't the force balance look like this:

$$\underbrace{-\mu\frac{du}{dr}}_{\tau}\underbrace{2\pi r}_{P} = \frac{\partial p}{\partial x} \underbrace{\pi r^2}_{A}$$

- no gravity
- no acceleration
- no viscous normal stresses
 
Hi,
i considered a ring-shaped volume element, so $$(2\pi r dr P)_{x}-(2\pi r dr P)_{x+dx}+(2\pi r dr \tau)_{r}-(2\pi r dr \tau)_{r+dr}=0$$ I divided by ##2\pi r dr dx## and took the limit ##dr, dx \to 0##
 
Andrea Vironda said:
Hi,
i considered a ring-shaped volume element, so $$(2\pi r dr P)_{x}-(2\pi r dr P)_{x+dx}+(2\pi r dr \tau)_{r}-(2\pi r dr \tau)_{r+dr}=0$$ I divided by ##2\pi r dr dx## and took the limit ##dr, dx \to 0##

I don't understand your 3rd and 4th term, I would have written them as

$$(2\pi r dx \tau)_{r}-(2\pi r dx \tau)_{r+dr}=0$$

since the shear stresses act on the surface of the sleeve, not on the front and back.
 
Last edited:
Andrea Vironda said:
Hi guys,
i'm trying to find the velocity profile for a laminar flow in a round pipe.
Starting from a force balance, we can obtain the first equation high in the left. I started with a procedure but i think I'm making mistakes.
Can you suggest me the mathematical procedure?
Your 2nd integration was done incorrectly. First you solve for du/dr:
$$\frac{du}{dr}=\frac{r}{2\mu}\frac{dp}{dx}+\frac{C_1}{r}$$du/dr is zero at r = 0 so ##C_1=0##. So you now have:
$$\frac{du}{dr}=\frac{r}{2\mu}\frac{dp}{dx}$$
What do you get when you integrate that, subject to the boundary condition u = 0 at r = R?
 
stockzahn said:
I don't understand your 3rd and 4th term, I would have written them as

$$(2\pi r dx \tau)_{r}-(2\pi r dx \tau)_{r+dr}=0$$

since the shear stresses act on the surface of the sleeve, not on the front and back.
Yup, you're right

Chestermiller said:
Your 2nd integration was done incorrectly. First you solve for du/dr:
$$\frac{du}{dr}=\frac{r}{2\mu}\frac{dp}{dx}+\frac{C_1}{r}$$du/dr is zero at r = 0 so ##C_1=0##. So you now have:
$$\frac{du}{dr}=\frac{r}{2\mu}\frac{dp}{dx}$$
What do you get when you integrate that, subject to the boundary condition u = 0 at r = R?

I obtain $$\Delta u=\frac{r^2}{2}\frac{1}{2\mu}\frac{dP}{dx}+C_2$$ how can i arrange accourding to boundary conditions? is ##\Delta u=u(R)-u(0)##?
 
Last edited:
Andrea Vironda said:
Yup, you're right
I obtain $$\Delta u=\frac{r^2}{2}\frac{1}{2\mu}\frac{dP}{dx}+C_2$$ how can i arrange accourding to boundary conditions? is ##\Delta u=u(r)-u(0)##?
When you have a constant of integration, there is no need to write ##\Delta u##. You simply can write u:
$$u=\frac{r^2}{2}\frac{1}{2\mu}\frac{dP}{dx}+C_2$$To determine the constant of integration ##C_2##, you simply make use of the non-slip boundary condition at the wall u(R)=0, where R is the radius of the tube.
 
Chestermiller said:
When you have a constant of integration, there is no need to write ##\Delta u##. You simply can write u
Ok the procedure is clear, but why i shouldn't write as ##\Delta u##?
 
Andrea Vironda said:
Ok the procedure is clear, but why i shouldn't write as ##\Delta u##?
Because you didn't use a ##\Delta r## on the other side of the equation. I guess what you did is OK if you say (as you suggested) that ##\Delta u=u(r)-u(0)##, but then you could have moved u(0) over to the other side of the equation and absorbed it into ##C_2##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Andrea Vironda