Reynolds Number and Turbulence in Atmospheric Boundary Layers

AI Thread Summary
To compute the Reynolds number for flow around a house in a valley with wind at 5 m/s, the characteristic dimension should be chosen based on the specific flow aspect being studied, such as the house's height or width. For analyzing the wake behind the house, the width may be more relevant, while the height could be more appropriate for other contexts. The atmospheric boundary layer is typically turbulent, making the Reynolds number less useful for determining flow state in open environments. Additionally, a 2D analysis may not accurately represent the complexities of the actual 3D flow around the house. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for accurate turbulence assessment.
Martina835
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi people! I'm studying the problem of a house in a valley with a wind at 5m/s. If I'd like to compute Reynolds number here and know if the flow is laminar or turbulent which is the charateristic dimension? The height of the house?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
The height or the width, yes. If they differ too much, then it will need more thought (in doubt, I would take the smaller one).
 
This depends on what portion of the flow you wish to study, as the Reynolds number requires a characteristic length scale and selecting that length scale depends on the geometry of the problem. So what part of the flow are you hoping to check for turbulence? If it is the wake created by the house, then it is likely the width of the house that should be used. If you want to know whether the atmospheric boundary layer itself is turbulent, the answer is almost invariably yes. Even if it is not, Reynolds number is itself meaningless for determining the laminar/turbulent state of an open flow like a boundary layer.
 
I am studying a 2D geometry so I just have the length and the height! Yes I wish to know if the flow around the house is turbulent...much away from the house (1-1.5km up) I have an unperturbated flow.
 
Okay, but you still haven't really unambiguously described what you mean by "the flow around the house" in this context. Do you mean the incoming boundary-layer flow or the wake behind the house? Like I said before, the wake would indicate the use of some spatial dimension of the house as the characteristic length in the Reynolds number. In this case it would be hard to say whether the height or width would be more appropriate, but I would suspect the height is more appropriate based solely on experience.

Otherwise, if you just want to know if the incoming flow is turbulent, I also said that the answer is essentially just "yes" with an atmospheric boundary layer. An atmospheric boundary layer is essentially always turbulent. Even if it wasn't, Reynolds number does not tell you whether a boundary layer is laminar or turbulent.

I'll also caution you that a 2D flow here will be very irrelevant when comparing to the actual, 3D flow around a house.
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top