|
[Sponsors] |
July 2, 2008, 08:22 |
Why do we treat incompressible flow for Mach
|
#1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Hi, I have one query. Why do we treat incompressible flow for Mach less than 0.3 Is there any reason??
Thanks all for your time |
|
July 2, 2008, 08:28 |
Re: Why do we treat incompressible flow for Mach
|
#2 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
for mach 0.3 the variation in density is so less that it is essentially constant so that u can treat it as nearly incompressible flow
|
|
July 2, 2008, 08:46 |
Re: Why do we treat incompressible flow for Mach
|
#3 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
It was explained to me years ago that
"compressibility goes like Mach Number squared. 0.3^2 = 0.09, or about 10%. Since most engineering calculations have 10% error anyway, M < 0.03 can be treated as incompressible." You have to decide for yourself if this statement is in fact true. Then you decide if you can accept a 10% error in your calculations. The payoff for accepting the error is of course that the energy conservation equation uncouples from the NS equations. |
|
July 2, 2008, 09:34 |
Re: Why do we treat incompressible flow for Mach
|
#4 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
hi the density change associated with increase in mach number gets underestimated largely above m=0.3.typically if u take the isentropic eqn for density and plot it wrt mach no,u will get an increase in density ratio ( i.e total/static)of 4.5% for m=0.3 which is 1 for incompressible flows(contant density).also the rate of decrease in static density wrt to mach number follows a parabolic curve such that at higher mach numbers the variations becomes much larger.as otd said this error on density is not very significant for practical purposes till m=0.3 and the flow can be assumed incompressible provoided this is the max mach number encountered in your flow domain.
|
|
July 2, 2008, 14:52 |
Re: Why do we treat incompressible flow for Mach
|
#5 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Simple rule for subsonic compressible flows says that you can scale forces according to the factor ((1/(1-M^2))^0.5. At M=0.3, this compressibility factor = 1.048, i.e. just about 105%. 5% change in force is an arbitrary, but convenient, threshold value of "significant" compressible effects. M=0.3 is also close to 100 m/s, or close to 200 knots (at sealevel), which also makes it a convenient cut-off point for low-speed aerodynamics.
|
|
July 3, 2008, 02:57 |
Re: Why do we treat incompressible flow for Mach
|
#6 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Thanks all
|
|
July 3, 2008, 03:56 |
Re: Why do we treat incompressible flow for Mach
|
#7 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
... And there is another point. Most compressible solvers will have convergence difficulties as M approaches 0, unless special techniques are used. This gives the motivation (besides what was also said before) to assume incompressibility for M<0.3.
|
|
July 7, 2008, 13:58 |
Re: Why do we treat incompressible flow for Mach
|
#8 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
I wonder that Mach number is the value at certain point or averaged or the lowest or the highest value within a domain. Could you advice me how to determine the stage that compressible solvers may be troublesome? I am really curious about the moment when we can consider a stage as to be incompressible. Thanks in advance!
|
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Can 'shock waves' occur in viscous fluid flows? | diaw | Main CFD Forum | 104 | February 16, 2006 05:44 |
Incompressible and compressible flow. | John. | Main CFD Forum | 1 | December 15, 2004 11:29 |
AMR with Incompressible Flow | Shahriar | Main CFD Forum | 7 | March 7, 2003 08:53 |
mass flow inlet | Denis Tschumperle | FLUENT | 7 | August 9, 2000 02:19 |
How Fluent treat the pressure term in imcompressible flow | Ray | FLUENT | 1 | May 24, 2000 16:50 |