Some stuff on fluid mechanics

Looking for the originals I contacted one of the writers. They might be lords of mathematics but they are only people too neither.

(He might say "Get lost".) …

The application of Lobe Dynamics to Baratrophic wave breaking.
Tieh-Yong Koh

The title is a fair mouthful is it not?
I couldn’t understand much of what the article e was discussing but the diagrammes were self explanatory. (I hope.)
They come at the end of the PDF on pages 22 to 26.

It looks like “vortex shedding” is an adjunct to the rotation of pressure systems.

Imagine an onion that has started to sprout.
If you cut it across the top the section will show that the inner layers have developed into two units. (You get the outer layers; so many skins of onion that wrap around the whole sphere, then inside two onions, ellipsoids. One of them the sprouting one the other waiting its turn.)

Apparently the same sort of thing develops in rotating liquids. The model depicted what appears something in the shape of a sprouting legume. Conchoidal, spiralling out around the skins, breaking through one at a time.

The figures go on to show the successful cell as resembling jet streams. The “shoot” breaking off the parent as excrescences, joining up with the outer layers.

In the model this happens in about 7 days. Which is something in the vicinity of the length of an unmoderated weather spell – a lunar phase. Keeping the model going –as would happen if there are two or more similar phases running consecutively (and little to spoil the other “parameters”) the active ellipse breaks out from the mutual centre.

OK. This all took place from day ten to seventeen or so. The figures show the whole development which isn't nearly the same – but hell the earth has been running the real thing since Adam was a lad.

It actually explains the "5 day wave phenomenon" that is seen over many continents. Actually it is occasionally seen over the North Atlantic too -in my opinion but there is so much to see at sea that it is easy to miss.

Day 1 the fluid revolves about its common centre.
Day 2 the centre becomes off-set leaving another ellipse to form in the slack.
By day 5 the active “centre” is now an ellipse displaced toward the outside.

By day 7 it is elongating to form “trough”.
And by day 10 the trough becomes a spur that curves around the spheroid.
Day 15 the spur breaks off.

That’s it.
Figure 1 apparently depicts the forces of the dynamics involved. It is good their model gives figures they can work on.

But more interesting, to me at least, is it gives some inclination why at low levels, there should be a Low at Iceland whilst there is an High over the Arctic.

And never the twain shall meet.

Take a look for yourselves:

There is another one here at:

This one is actually discussing a sea current. The computer I am using had siezed up so I have to close it to get a restart I think.

Damn I am going to have to get an internet connection at home. The thing is, I am going to move soon, once again so I don't want to set one up just yet.

This is annoying though!


3 thoughts on “Some stuff on fluid mechanics

  1. Anonymous writes:Thank you for sharing this information.It will really helpful to solve my confusionProcess $ Chemical Engineering

  2. Beats me what chemical engineering has to do with it. But thanks for visiting and you are more than welcome, not that I did any of the work.You can teach a science to degree level in 2 to 4 years depending on the complexity of the subject.The fact is given the student has the will to learn you can cover the theory in just about every complex subject that we know about in 3 or 4 years.An expert bean counter, pencil pusher with a will to learn can swallow anything in any text book. But without the touch of genius, that special inspiration that only god gives, one can only become a scientist.Which is about the highest grade of life form a civil servant can hope for outside the Royal Navy; Royal Air Force or the Royal Marines.And it doesn't mean that a scientist cant make inspired guesses. The fact is that there isn't a better road to insightful research than climbing that ladder.But Michael Faraday would never have made it. And there wasn't anyone in his line of work to match him till Frank Whittle.You want to know what the trick is?You won't find it in a library nor in any text book in any schoolroom. Nor can you be taught it in any classroom or lecture theatre.It's just a matter of cogitation. ANd looking at patterns.With Newton, famously, it was an apple. It wasn't any particular apple, tree or even season for apples, it wass something in nature that fit the pattern.The same was true with James Watt and the steam engine. He was looking at a kettle on day and…Hell no he wasn't, he was looking at boiling kettles all his life and one day the problem and the sequence promised by what he saw in front of him came together in his head.Of course he still had to face the heart-ache involved with all the mistakes in putting it together. And in his case he had to find the wherewithal to get his ideas onto a workbench.Newton had a similar problem he never solved, lunar co-ordinates. Without the ephemerides needed from the Royal Astronomer, he couldn't solve the three body problem.That had to wait for the 19th century and even then it took half a century for the penny to drop. prior to that:Originally posted by Wikipedia:

    Jean d'Alembert and Alexis Clairaut attempted to analyze the problem in some degree of generality, using differential equations resolved with successive approximations. Submitting their first analyses to the Académie Royale des Sciences in 1747.

    Another Frenchie took it to a new level of Maths:Originally posted by Wikipedia:

    In his research on the three-body problem, Poincaré became the first person to discover a chaotic deterministic system which laid the foundations of modern chaos theory.

    Where it remains to this day.Several clever men working on Poincaré's formulae reduced the problem by cutting out some of the steps. The point is thaat these people are famous because their minds were different to most of their contemporaries.Once a problem is solvable and known to be soluble, others are only required to look hard enough, to also find what the genius discovered.This is the basis of a lot of military accomplishment, for instance:Once the USA realised a satellite can be launched it was just a matter of time and money before the USA came up with the ability to do so too.

  3. Originally posted by anonymous:

    It will really help solve my confusion about Chemical Engineering Processes

    I just looked that up.It reminds me of the difficulties at Oak Ridge Tennessee in the development of the nuclear bomb.Research there depended on enriching uranium to make the weight of a batch of Uranium small enough to be transported by air and reactive enough to explode before it diffused.They used powerful magnets to separate Uranium Fluoride into successively heavier and lighter isotopes in nickel chambers.I wonder if they had known about deteriorating trajectories they might have devised a centrifuge that would trough out the particles in the beam at exactly the "whatever" angle to get a better yield.I wonder if anyone has though of that yet.(I hope there are no terrorists reading this self indulgent crap.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s