Show that the Poiseuille field of flow is rotational

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ben2
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    equations
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on demonstrating that the Poiseuille field of flow is rotational by analyzing the velocity field and its characteristics. Participants reference Halliday's textbook, specifically problem 18.20, which outlines the criteria for identifying rotational flow through line integrals. The key takeaway is that a velocity gradient in the transverse direction does not necessitate a transverse velocity component, and the flow is confirmed to be rotational if the line integral around a closed path yields a non-zero result.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of fluid dynamics concepts, specifically Poiseuille flow.
  • Familiarity with rotational and irrotational flow principles.
  • Knowledge of line integrals and their application in vector fields.
  • Access to Halliday's textbook, particularly sections related to rotational flow.
NEXT STEPS
  • Review Halliday's problem 18.20 for mathematical tests of rotational flow.
  • Study the concept of velocity gradients in fluid dynamics.
  • Learn about the application of line integrals in determining flow characteristics.
  • Examine examples of closed paths in fluid flow to visualize rotational behavior.
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in fluid dynamics, particularly those studying rotational flow and its mathematical characterization. This discussion is also beneficial for anyone preparing for exams involving fluid mechanics concepts.

Ben2
Messages
37
Reaction score
9
Homework Statement
From Halliday & Resnick, "Physics for Students of Science and Engineering", Problem 18.21: "The so-called Poiseuille field of flow is shown in Fig. 18-20. The spacing of the streamlines indicates that although the motion is rectilinear, there is a velocity gradient in the transverse direction. Show that such a flow is rotational."
Relevant Equations
A_1*v_1 = A_2*v_2 (Equation of continuity)
p_1 + (1/2)\rho*v_1^2 + \rho*g*y_1 = p_2 + (1/2)\rho*v_2^2 + \rho*g*y_2
I tried using these equations, but it's not clear if we should hold y_1 = y_2. A transverse velocity vector would produce a flow at some angle to the horizontal, but How do they known there's such a vector?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ben2 said:
I tried using these equations, but ....
Is there a relevant equation from the textbook related to "rotational flow"?

Ben2 said:
A transverse velocity vector would produce a flow at some angle to the horizontal, but How do they known there's such a vector?

Note that the homework statement says that there is a velocity gradient in the transverse direction. This does not imply that the velocity itself has a transverse component. You can have a velocity gradient in the transverse direction even though the velocity at every point is horizontal.

Can you describe Fig 18-20?
 
Set \mathbf{u}(x,y,z) = u(y)\mathbf{e}_x and compute the curl. Does it vanish identically?
 
I had a look at an old copy of Halliday's text. See if problem 18.20 contains information about how to check that a velocity field is irrotational or rotational by considering the line integral of the velocity field around closed paths: ##\oint \vec v \cdot \vec {ds}##. Then apply that to problem 18.21.
 
TSny said:
Is there a relevant equation from the textbook related to "rotational flow"?
Note that the homework statement says that there is a velocity gradient in the transverse direction. This does not imply that the velocity itself has a transverse component. You can have a velocity gradient in the transverse direction even though the velocity at every point is horizontal.

Can you describe Fig 18-20?
Thanks for your timely response! I've not previously heard of a velocity gradient. Figure 18-20 features ten horizontal streamlines, where the spacing narrows from top and bottom to the middle three. Theorem 10, Chapter 13 of Stewart's "Calculus" gives the curvature k(t) = |r'(t) x r"(t)|/|r'(t)|^3. But if there's no vector in the transverse direction, I don't see how to prove the flow is rotational.
 
Ben2 said:
Thanks for your timely response! I've not previously heard of a velocity gradient. Figure 18-20 features ten horizontal streamlines, where the spacing narrows from top and bottom to the middle three. Theorem 10, Chapter 13 of Stewart's "Calculus" gives the curvature k(t) = |r'(t) x r"(t)|/|r'(t)|^3. But if there's no vector in the transverse direction, I don't see how to prove the flow is rotational.
I’m not sure what edition of the textbook you have. I found a very early edition. In section 18-1 it gives a qualitative description of rotational and irrotational flow. Then, in problem 18.20, a mathematical test is described for rotational flow. It says,

“A flow is a potential flow (hence irrotational) if ##\oint \vec V \cdot \vec{ds} =0## for every closed path in the field.”

In problem 18.21, you want to show that the flow shown in Fig. 18-20 is rotational. So, you need to show that there exists a closed path for which ##\oint \vec V \cdot \vec{ds} \neq 0##.

1701118463961.png


In the figure, the flow is horizontal everywhere. From the spacing of the lines of flow, you can see that the speed changes as you move transversely to the direction of flow. This is the "velocity gradient in the transverse direction" mentioned in the problem statement. Can you visualize a closed path for which ##\oint \vec V \cdot \vec{ds} \neq 0##?
 
Thanks to Tsny and pasmith for help with this! Will do Problem 18.20 as suggested.
Ben2
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: TSny

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
6K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
4K
Replies
35
Views
2K