Sphere falling in countercurrent liquid flow

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the velocity of a sphere falling through a liquid with an upward countercurrent flow. The existing equation for stagnant flow is given as v(t) = [(p_s - p_f)*V*g/b]*[1-exp(-b*t/m)], where parameters include sphere density (p_s), fluid density (p_f), volume (V), gravitational acceleration (g), time (t), mass (m), and a drag coefficient (b). Participants clarify that the terminal velocity of the sphere can be determined by subtracting the countercurrent velocity from the terminal velocity in stagnant conditions. The Stokes drag applies for Reynolds numbers under 1, which is crucial for accurate calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of fluid dynamics principles, particularly Stokes drag.
  • Familiarity with Reynolds number and its significance in flow regimes.
  • Basic knowledge of physics equations related to motion and forces.
  • Ability to manipulate equations involving density, volume, and gravitational forces.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research "Stokes drag and its applications in low Reynolds number flows."
  • Study "Calculating terminal velocity in fluid dynamics."
  • Explore "Force balance equations in fluid mechanics."
  • Learn about "Reynolds number and its impact on flow behavior."
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, mechanical engineering, and fluid dynamics who are interested in understanding the dynamics of objects moving through fluids, particularly in countercurrent flow scenarios.

Bakery87
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
I'm attempting to find the velocity of a sphere falling through a liquid with an upward countercurrent flow. I already have the velocity as a function of time in a stagnant flow regime, but do not have one with countercurrent flow.

Here is the equation without countercurrent flow:
v(t) = [(p_s - p_f)*V*g/b]*[1-exp(-b*t/m)]

where:
p_s = density of sphere
p_f = density of fluid
V = volume of sphere
g = 9.8 m/s^2
t = time
m = mass of sphere
b = 6(Pi)(fluid viscosity)(sphere radius)

The information can be found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viscous_resistance
(under very low reynold's number - stokes drag)

I know the stokes drag will work for reynolds numbers under 1, which may not be the case.

The addition of a countercurrent flow I assume cannot be added by simply finding the terminal velocity of a falling sphere and then subtracting the countercurrent velocity. I assumed a force balance on the system by subtracting the momentum of the fluid (before the derivation to the above) but the equation doesn't seem to properly identify the velocity. I also wasn't sure if the momentum needed to be applied to the projected area of the sphere (Pi*r^2) or half the total surface area (2*Pi*r^2).

Any help would be appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Bakery87 said:
I'm attempting to find the velocity of a sphere falling through a liquid with an upward countercurrent flow. I already have the velocity as a function of time in a stagnant flow regime, but do not have one with countercurrent flow.

Here is the equation without countercurrent flow:
v(t) = [(p_s - p_f)*V*g/b]*[1-exp(-b*t/m)]

where:
p_s = density of sphere
p_f = density of fluid
V = volume of sphere
g = 9.8 m/s^2
t = time
m = mass of sphere
b = 6(Pi)(fluid viscosity)(sphere radius)

The information can be found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viscous_resistance
(under very low reynold's number - stokes drag)

I know the stokes drag will work for reynolds numbers under 1, which may not be the case.

The addition of a countercurrent flow I assume cannot be added by simply finding the terminal velocity of a falling sphere and then subtracting the countercurrent velocity.
Wrong. That's exactly what can be done.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
3K