Theoretical Pipe Flow: Understanding Poiseuille's Law

AI Thread Summary
Poiseuille's Law describes volumetric flow rate in laminar flow, relying on differential pressure, pipe radius, and fluid viscosity. Its limitations arise in turbulent flow due to the presence of eddies and unpredictable flow patterns, which affect shear stress at the pipe wall. In turbulent flow, the coupling between radial and axial velocity fluctuations leads to higher shear stress compared to laminar flow, as momentum is not solely directed axially. This coupling results in a non-zero average product of radial and axial velocity fluctuations, contributing to shear stress. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for accurately evaluating flow rates in various piping systems.
ATKrank
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hey guys, I am doing an internship and I have had some thoughts about fluid flow that have come up and I am having trouble fully grasping some concepts due to no one being able to thoroughly explain any answer that they might come up with.

So I have a crude understanding of some fluid dynamics already, but here is my dilemma and I would like any answers or clues to help me fully understand these principles.

According to Poiseuille's Law, the volumetric flow rate is a function of differential pressure, pipe radius, and fluid viscosity. However this is only applicable to laminar flow situations. So with this calculable flow rate, it is possible to evaluate/design large piping systems as long as the flow stays laminar.

What precisely makes Poiseuille's Law ineffective at calculating flow rates in turbulent flow even though the fluid is still incompressible? I understand that there are eddies and unpredictable flow patterns associated with turbulent flow. But the way I am thinking about it is that since the fluid is still incompressible, the differential pressure would still drive the same flow rate of the fluid. Basically saying that the flow rate should be independent of the flow pattern. Why is this wrong?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
The thing that determines the pressure drop is the shear stress at the wall. Although the Newtonian flow equations apply to turbulent flow as well as laminar flow, there are fluctuations in the velocity components in turbulent flow, and there is a fluctuating radial velocity component that is not present in laminar flow. The radial velocity fluctuations are somewhat coupled with the axial velocity oscillations. The momentum effect of this coupling translates into a radial transport of momentum, equivalent to a shear stress. So the average shear stress distribution in turbulent flow is different from that in laminar flow, and, more importantly, the shear stress at the wall is higher in turbulent flow than in laminar flow (for the same volumertic flow rate).
 
I think I get what you are saying. It helps for me to think of fluids as molecules in instances like this so I am going to re-cap it like that. I believe what you are saying is that if we look at a molecule of water in turbulent flow, we know that not all the velocity of the molecule is in the axial direction of the pipe. I am picturing the molecule carrying momentum into the wall and that is what is causing there to be a larger shear stress than it would with laminar flow.

So basically another way to say it is that in laminar flow, the shear stress in the pipe wall is purely caused by static pressure of the fluid since all the momentum is in the axial direction. While with turbulent flow the shear stress is caused by a summation of the static pressure, and a portion of dynamic pressure of the fluid since a portion of the momentum is not in the axial direction. Is this a correct analysis?
 
I always like to use the example of 50 rabbits into the pipe mean 50 rabbits out.
 
ATKrank said:
I think I get what you are saying. It helps for me to think of fluids as molecules in instances like this so I am going to re-cap it like that. I believe what you are saying is that if we look at a molecule of water in turbulent flow, we know that not all the velocity of the molecule is in the axial direction of the pipe. I am picturing the molecule carrying momentum into the wall and that is what is causing there to be a larger shear stress than it would with laminar flow.

So basically another way to say it is that in laminar flow, the shear stress in the pipe wall is purely caused by static pressure of the fluid since all the momentum is in the axial direction. While with turbulent flow the shear stress is caused by a summation of the static pressure, and a portion of dynamic pressure of the fluid since a portion of the momentum is not in the axial direction. Is this a correct analysis?
No. It is the coupling (correlation) between the radial and axial velocity fluctuations that give rise to the higher shear stress in turbulent flow. It has nothing to do with dynamic pressure. If u'(t) is the radial velocity fluctuation at time t in turbulent flow, and w'(t) is the axial velocity fluctuation at time t, then the time average of the product u'w' is not equal to zero. Multiplying this time average by the density gives the rate of axial momentum transfer radially (per unit volume), and is also the shear stress.

If you want to learn more about this, see Transport Phenomena by Bird, Stewart, and Lightfoot.
 
Thread 'Turbocharging carbureted petrol 2 stroke engines'
Hi everyone, online I ve seen some images about 2 stroke carbureted turbo (motorcycle derivation engine). Now.. In the past in this forum some members spoke about turbocharging 2 stroke but not in sufficient detail. The intake and the exhaust are open at the same time and there are no valves like a 4 stroke. But if you search online you can find carbureted 2stroke turbo sled or the Am6 turbo. The question is: Is really possible turbocharge a 2 stroke carburated(NOT EFI)petrol engine and...
I need some assistance with calculating hp requirements for moving a load. - The 4000lb load is resting on ball bearing rails so friction is effectively zero and will be covered by my added power contingencies. Load: 4000lbs Distance to travel: 10 meters. Time to Travel: 7.5 seconds Need to accelerate the load from a stop to a nominal speed then decelerate coming to a stop. My power delivery method will be a gearmotor driving a gear rack. - I suspect the pinion gear to be about 3-4in in...
Back
Top