# Presure range of the Navier Stokes Equations

 Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 May 21, 2001, 08:32 Presure range of the Navier Stokes Equations #1 Dr. Tsimento Guest   Posts: n/a Sponsored Links For which Pressure Range are the Navier Stokes equations valid? Are they valid in mTorr range? thanks in Advance Dr. Tsimento

 May 22, 2001, 01:14 Re: Presure range of the Navier Stokes Equations #2 Ibrahim Mustafa Guest   Posts: n/a Navier Stokes Equations are independent of the pressure range. Please look at how those equations are derived.

 May 22, 2001, 09:17 Re: Presure range of the Navier Stokes Equations #3 Jim Park Guest   Posts: n/a My texts derive the NS equations under the assumption of a continuum medium (individual molecular effects can be averaged). For a gas, this implies pressures greater than some minimum. The governing parameter is the Knudsen number, which relates the 'average' distance between molecules (the mean free path) to physical dimensions of the flow situation (duct sizes, boundary layer thickness, tube diameter, etc). Higher Knudsen numbers imply deviations from the assumption of continuum flow. Often, Kn < 0.01 is used as the cutoff. Low pressures and high mean free paths are correlated, so the pressure does matter. For flows with large Mean Free Path, things get a bit more complicated. A nice basic understanding can be gained from the little book by Present, "Kinetic Theory of Gases", McGraw-Hill. It may be out of print. Check your institution's library for current texts.

 May 22, 2001, 09:20 Re: Presure range of the Navier Stokes Equations #4 Jim Park Guest   Posts: n/a Opps! Forgot to change my e-mail address. This should be posted with the correct address.

 May 22, 2001, 18:49 Re: Presure range of the Navier Stokes Equations #5 Barney Guest   Posts: n/a Fundamental Equations of Fluid Mechanics (Hoffmann,Chiang,Siddiqui,Papadakis) -------------------------------------------------- Navier-Stokes Kn <= 0.03 Modified Navier-Stokes 0.03 <= Kn <= 0.2 --------------------------------------------------

 May 22, 2001, 21:02 Re: Presure range of the Navier Stokes Equations #6 Dave Guest   Posts: n/a You mean p ~ 1 mTorr = 1/760 Atm ? Gas, liquid? It seems probable NS eqs are good, but you should give T or density in addition, to know if continuum hipothesis is good. I recommend a Book in Kinetic Theory, or Gas Dynamics or some Fluid Dynamics text book if it explains NS eqs. derivation from scratch (I mean, not the Euler type derivation considering a small fluid box, which assume continuum, but from kinetic theory). Cheers, Dave

 May 22, 2001, 21:07 Re: Presure range of the Navier Stokes Equations #7 Dave Guest   Posts: n/a PS. Additionally, for liquids you can have cavitation effects when pressure gets small (then P

 May 23, 2001, 10:12 Re: Presure range of the Navier Stokes Equations #8 I. Dotsikas Guest   Posts: n/a Hi, Your pressure range should be above 10 Torr. From this range you can be sure that your fluid behaves accord the laws of continuum mechanics and you have a Mexwell distribution of the velocity molekules. If your pressure range is bolow this pressure, then your calculations are false. The more you deminish the pressure the wrongest are your calculations. In this range your modell equations (Navier Stokes) are wrong (not valid) and you must use something like Monte Carlo. Donīt try to spring from the five meter tower to the children swimming pool. It will work (the computer gives you always an answer) but you might get hurt. Jannis

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is OffTrackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post dandalf Main CFD Forum 7 November 17, 2010 10:21 misabel Main CFD Forum 0 February 10, 2010 07:06 vinayender Main CFD Forum 2 December 1, 2009 01:12 sharad_shevate Main CFD Forum 0 August 3, 2009 01:25 J.J. Main CFD Forum 2 June 29, 2000 09:31