Moleculer viscosity? Eddy viscosity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter hanson
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Viscosity
Click For Summary
Molecular viscosity refers to the viscosity of a fluid, defined as the transport of momentum through random molecular motion, and is equivalent to dynamic viscosity. Eddy viscosity, on the other hand, is a conceptual tool used to simplify the complex behavior of turbulent flow by relating turbulent Reynolds stresses to mean velocity gradients, although it is not a true physical property like molecular viscosity. The eddy viscosity hypothesis is criticized for its inaccuracies, as it assumes a linear relationship that does not hold true in all cases, particularly as revealed by direct numerical simulations (DNS). Despite its limitations, eddy viscosity is useful in computational fluid dynamics (CFD) for approximating turbulent flows through methods like RANS. Understanding both concepts is crucial for analyzing incompressible turbulent flow effectively.
hanson
Messages
312
Reaction score
0
Hi all.
I am learning things about incompressible turbulent mena flow.
I am completely confused by these terms: moleculr viscosity and eddy viscosity.
What are they?
Is molecular viscosity the same as the visocosity of the fluid we often use?
And what exactly is eddy viscosity? I know it is used to characterize the momentum transfer for eddies, but I don't understand it.
Please kindly me or recommend some good references I can look into.
I am currently using Frank White's book on viscous fluid flow, which I don't really understand...
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
The turbulent transfer of momentum by eddies creates internal fluid friction. It is the fundamental idea of how we define viscosity in turbulent flow, i.e. internal fluid resistance. Eddy viscosity explains what causes the internal friction.

Is molecular viscosity the same as the viscosity of the fluid we often use?

Molecular viscosity is the same as viscosity. The Coefficient of Molecular Viscosity is the same value as dynamic viscosity.

Molecular viscosity is the transport of mass motion momentum solely by the random motions of individual molecules not moving together in coherent groups. Molecular viscosity is analogous in laminar flow to eddy viscosity in turbulent flow.

Check out this link for a little more info...

http://oceanworld.tamu.edu/resources/ocng_textbook/chapter08/chapter08_01.htm
 
Good link there. Just a note that it looks like a type/font error in the viscosity section. They kept "n" as viscosity in the explanation of the stress equation instead of {\nu}.
 
Last edited:
Eddie Viscosity is an imaginary concept (also termed 'The Ansatz' in turbulence). It does not exist as the molecular viscosity, which is a well defined transport coefficient as stated by the Kinetic Theory. The Eddie Viscosity hypothesis was posed for making the things simpler, in the sense that the turbulent Reynolds stresses (which are ugly and nonlinear in velocity perturbations) are simplified to be proportional to the gradients of the mean velocity, as happens in Newtonian laminar flows with the viscous stresses. The coefficient of proportionality is termed the Eddie Viscosity, which far from being a constant or fluid property, is a magnitude dependant on the flow field and its solution. The Eddie viscosity hypothesis is inherently wrong, in that the Reynold stresses are in general not co-linear with the mean velocity gradients, as has being discovered by DNS solutions. However, the numerical methods stemming from this simplification (such as RANS methods) are low-time consuming and can be used, sometimes massively, by computational fluid dynamicists to obtain approximate solutions of turbulent flows.

Hope everybody is doing fine over here, I don´t stop too much, I have too much work to do in my office.
 
Clausius2 said:
Eddie Viscosity is an imaginary concept (also termed 'The Ansatz' in turbulence). It does not exist as the molecular viscosity, which is a well defined transport coefficient as stated by the Kinetic Theory. The Eddie Viscosity hypothesis was posed for making the things simpler, in the sense that the turbulent Reynolds stresses (which are ugly and nonlinear in velocity perturbations) are simplified to be proportional to the gradients of the mean velocity, as happens in Newtonian laminar flows with the viscous stresses. The coefficient of proportionality is termed the Eddie Viscosity, which far from being a constant or fluid property, is a magnitude dependant on the flow field and its solution. The Eddie viscosity hypothesis is inherently wrong, in that the Reynold stresses are in general not co-linear with the mean velocity gradients, as has being discovered by DNS solutions. However, the numerical methods stemming from this simplification (such as RANS methods) are low-time consuming and can be used, sometimes massively, by computational fluid dynamicists to obtain approximate solutions of turbulent flows.

Hope everybody is doing fine over here, I don´t stop too much, I have too much work to do in my office.
Of course, one might develop the idea of eddy viscosity into a general "eddy viscosity" matrix formulation, but that would hardly involve any simplifications at all..
Hope you're doing fine, Clausius2! :smile:
 
Had my central air system checked when it sortta wasn't working. I guess I hadn't replaced the filter. Guy suggested I might want to get a UV filter accessory. He said it would "kill bugs and particulates". I know UV can kill the former, not sure how he thinks it's gonna murder the latter. Now I'm finding out there's more than one type of UV filter: one for the air flow and one for the coil. He was suggesting we might get one for the air flow, but now we'll have to change the bulb...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
17K