Velocity of water across depth

In summary: Can...In summary, the water at the top surface moves faster than the water at the bottom because the friction at the top surface is zero, while the friction at the bottom surface is due to the non-slip boundary condition.
  • #1
fonseh
529
2

Homework Statement


Here's the velocity profile of the water across the depth . I don't understand why The max velocity occur at the top surface[/B]

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


Is it because the friction on the top surface of water only comes from the below , whereas for the water below the top surafce , it has higher friction from the moving on the top , and moving water beneath it ... Is my concept correct ? [/B]
 

Attachments

  • 584.PNG
    584.PNG
    4.4 KB · Views: 489
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hi.
What's holding back the water ? The viscous friction with something that doesn't move, namely the bottom. So all transport of horizontal momentum takes place in a vertical direction - as you can see from the variation in velocity going from 0 at the bottom to max at the surface.
 
  • #3
fonseh said:

Homework Statement


Here's the velocity profile of the water across the depth . I don't understand why The max velocity occur at the top surface[/B]

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


Is it because the friction on the top surface of water only comes from the below , whereas for the water below the top surafce , it has higher friction from the moving on the top , and moving water beneath it ... Is my concept correct ? [/B]
The friction at the top surface (i.e., the shear stress) is zero. There is friction at the bottom surface because of the non-slip boundary condition.
 
  • Like
Likes fonseh
  • #4
Chestermiller said:
The friction at the top surface (i.e., the shear stress) is zero. There is friction at the bottom surface because of the non-slip boundary condition.
Do you mean as the depth increases , the shear stress increases, causing the velocity to decreases parabolically from top surface to the bottom >
 
  • #5
fonseh said:
Do you mean as the depth increases , the shear stress increases, causing the velocity to decreases parabolically from top surface to the bottom >
Yes
 
  • Like
Likes fonseh
  • #6
Chestermiller said:
Yes
can you explain further why the shear stress will increase with depth ?
 
  • #7
fonseh said:
can you explain further why the shear stress will increase with depth ?
You do understand that the shear stress is zero at the upper surface, correct? And you do understand that the fluid does not slip at the wall, correct.
 
  • Like
Likes fonseh
  • #8
y
Chestermiller said:
You do understand that the shear stress is zero at the upper surface, correct? And you do understand that the fluid does not slip at the wall, correct.
yes , i understand both ... Why the shear stress will incresae down the depth ?
 
  • #9
fonseh said:
y

yes , i understand both ... Why the shear stress will incresae down the depth ?
Since the fluid at the wall is stationary (the velocity at the wall is zero), and you have a volumetric flow rate, the velocity has to be higher away from the wall. This means that the velocity gradient at the wall must be positive. From Newton's law of viscosity, that means that there is a shear stress at the wall. So you have shear stress at the wall and no shear stress at the interface with the air. So the shear stress must be increasing with distance from the wall.
 
  • Like
Likes fonseh
  • #10
Chestermiller said:
Since the fluid at the wall is stationary (the velocity at the wall is zero), and you have a volumetric flow rate, the velocity has to be higher away from the wall. This means that the velocity gradient at the wall must be positive. From Newton's law of viscosity, that means that there is a shear stress at the wall. So you have shear stress at the wall and no shear stress at the interface with the air. So the shear stress must be increasing with distance from the wall.

why ? ?
 
  • #11
fonseh said:
why ? ?
If the velocity were zero everywhere, there would be no flow.
 
  • #12
Chestermiller said:
If the velocity were zero everywhere, there would be no flow.
why it has to increase parabolically ? Why the shape of graph can't be others ? I mean the graph has still positive gradient ...
 
  • #13
fonseh said:
why it has to increase parabolically ? Why the shape of graph can't be others ? I mean the graph has still positive gradient ...
To obtain that result, you need to actually solve the flow problem involving the differential force balance and Newton's law of viscosity.
 
  • Like
Likes fonseh
  • #14
Chestermiller said:
To obtain that result, you need to actually solve the flow problem involving the differential force balance and Newton's law of viscosity.
I still doesn't get it . Can you show the problem involving the differential force balance and Newton's law of viscosity?
 
  • #15
fonseh said:
I still doesn't get it . Can you show the problem involving the differential force balance and Newton's law of viscosity?
It's too extensive to show here. Are you familiar with the derivation of the Hagen-Poiseuille law for laminar viscous flow in a pipe.
 
  • Like
Likes fonseh
  • #16
Chestermiller said:
It's too extensive to show here. Are you familiar with the derivation of the Hagen-Poiseuille law for laminar viscous flow in a pipe.
Can you provide some link and explain briefly here ?
 
  • #17
fonseh said:
Can you provide some link and explain briefly here ?
Google is your friend.
 
  • Like
Likes fonseh
  • #18
Bird Stewart and Lightfoot are even better friends. Whole derivation in 2.2 in my edition.
 
  • Like
Likes fonseh and Chestermiller
  • #19
BvU said:
Bird Stewart and Lightfoot are even better friends. Whole derivation in 2.2 in my edition.
What do you mean ?
 
  • #21
Chestermiller said:
Since the fluid at the wall is stationary (the velocity at the wall is zero), and you have a volumetric flow rate, the velocity has to be higher away from the wall. This means that the velocity gradient at the wall must be positive. From Newton's law of viscosity, that means that there is a shear stress at the wall. So you have shear stress at the wall and no shear stress at the interface with the air. So the shear stress must be increasing with distance from the wall.
Do you mean the shear stress increase to max from the wall to the center ? Which means the shear stresss is max at the center at particular depth ?
 

Attachments

  • 586.png
    586.png
    2.2 KB · Views: 348
  • #23
fonseh said:
Do you mean the shear stress increase to max from the wall to the center ? Which means the shear stresss is max at the center at particular depth ?
No. It is zero at the top and maximum at the wall. It decreases linearly with distance from the wall.
 
  • #24
Chestermiller said:
No. It is zero at the top and maximum at the wall. It decreases linearly with distance from the wall.
can you show the graph of shear stress ? I'm very confused now ... Do you mean the shear stress increases from zero at the top down to the bottom ?

The red part means for a particular depth , the shear stress decreases from the wall to the center ?
 
  • #27
fonseh said:
can you show the graph of shear stress ? I'm very confused now ... Do you mean the shear stress increases from zero at the top down to the bottom ?
Yes.
 
  • #28
In the Wiki article on viscous laminar flow in a tube, they do an axial force balance on the shell of fluid between radial locations r and r+Δr. An easier way to analyze the problem is to do an axial force balance on the plug of fluid between r = 0 and arbitrary radial location r:
$$\pi r^2\Delta p+2\pi r L\tau_{rz}(r)=0$$where ##\Delta p## is the pressure drop between the inlet and outlet of the the section of pipe under consideration, L is the axial length of the section of pipe, and ##\tau_{rz}(r)## is the shear stress the radial surface of the plug (i.e., at constant r in the z direction). From this equation, we get that:
$$\tau_{rz}=-\frac{\Delta p}{2L}r$$
This tells us that, for steady flow in a pipe, the shear stress varies linearly with radial distance from the axis.
 
  • #29
Chestermiller said:
In the Wiki article on viscous laminar flow in a tube, they do an axial force balance on the shell of fluid between radial locations r and r+Δr. An easier way to analyze the problem is to do an axial force balance on the plug of fluid between r = 0 and arbitrary radial location r:
$$\pi r^2\Delta p+2\pi r L\tau_{rz}(r)=0$$where ##\Delta p## is the pressure drop between the inlet and outlet of the the section of pipe under consideration, L is the axial length of the section of pipe, and ##\tau_{rz}(r)## is the shear stress the radial surface of the plug (i.e., at constant r in the z direction). From this equation, we get that:
$$\tau_{rz}=-\frac{\Delta p}{2L}r$$
This tells us that, for steady flow in a pipe, the shear stress varies linearly with radial distance from the axis.
Can you point out which part of the wiki article shows that the velocity profile of water across depth is parabolic shape ?
 
  • #30
fonseh said:
Can you point out which part of the wiki article shows that the velocity profile of water across depth is parabolic shape ?
The entire section Putting It Together, culminating with the next-to-last equation which gives the parabolic velocity profile.
 
  • Like
Likes fonseh
  • #31
Chestermiller said:
In the Wiki article on viscous laminar flow in a tube, they do an axial force balance on the shell of fluid between radial locations r and r+Δr. An easier way to analyze the problem is to do an axial force balance on the plug of fluid between r = 0 and arbitrary radial location r:
$$\pi r^2\Delta p+2\pi r L\tau_{rz}(r)=0$$where ##\Delta p## is the pressure drop between the inlet and outlet of the the section of pipe under consideration, L is the axial length of the section of pipe, and ##\tau_{rz}(r)## is the shear stress the radial surface of the plug (i.e., at constant r in the z direction). From this equation, we get that:
$$\tau_{rz}=-\frac{\Delta p}{2L}r$$
This tells us that, for steady flow in a pipe, the shear stress varies linearly with radial distance from the axis.

Where do you get this equation actually ?
 
  • #32
fonseh said:
Where do you get this equation actually ?
It's just a force balance (you remember, like in freshman physics). Please show us what you think the free body diagram looks like.
 
Last edited:
  • #33
Chestermiller said:
It's just a force balance (you remember, like in freshman physics). Please show us what you think the free body diagram looks like.
i know that A = pi(r^2) , so dA = 2pi(r)dr , so in $$\pi r^2\Delta p+2\pi r L\tau_{rz}(r)=0$$ , why there is L ? shouldn't it $$= 2\pi r \tau_{rz}(r)=0$$ only ?
 
  • #34
fonseh said:
i know that A = pi(r^2) , so dA = 2pi(r)dr , so in $$\pi r^2\Delta p+2\pi r L\tau_{rz}(r)=0$$ , why there is L ? shouldn't it $$= 2\pi r \tau_{rz}(r)=0$$ only ?
There are pressure forces on the two ends that have to be balanced by the viscous frictional (tangential) force.
 
  • Like
Likes fonseh
  • #35
fonseh said:
i know that A = pi(r^2) , so dA = 2pi(r)dr , so in $$\pi r^2\Delta p+2\pi r L\tau_{rz}(r)=0$$ , why there is L ? shouldn't it $$= 2\pi r \tau_{rz}(r)=0$$ only ?
There are pressure forces on the two ends that have to be balanced by the viscous frictional (tangential) force.
 

Similar threads

  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
138
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
319
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
207
Views
3K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
25
Views
2K
Back
Top