Skip to main content
6 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Aug 15, 2023 at 21:24 answer added jgraber timeline score: 2
Jul 17, 2023 at 1:09 comment added TimWescott Another difficulty with finding a precise theoretical solution starting with, e.g., the smallest pipe possible is that -- at least in a fish tank -- it may work as predicted when it is clean and if it is built exactly to specification, but even slight deviations from the design -- whether built-in or acquired -- will cause large deviations from the design intent. So if you do find the necessary math to solve this, be sure to anticipate some possible problems in manufacturing or use, and find the sensitivity of the flow at the holes to these variations.
Jul 15, 2023 at 22:18 comment added RocketScience If your end goal is to design something that has to work in reality, you cannot neglect friction and turbulent losses, especially with fluids, because they tend to change the whole flow field of the fluid. Due to that, finding an analytical solution can get very hard. As an example, if your holes are big enough and not far apart enough, the whole flow becomes kind of messy and the common equations start becoming more and more imprecise. You can read about Darcy-weisbach equation and head loss coefficients to get an idea of how such losses are usually estimated with a nice enough flow.
Jul 15, 2023 at 21:44 history migrated from physics.stackexchange.com (revisions)
Jul 14, 2023 at 17:37 comment added Jared @TimWescott: Thanks for your comment. I'm a mathematician, so I didn't view this problem as practically as you did, which is very helpful. I'm still interested in a theoretical solution for various sizes of pipes and holes, so I'll try to migrate the question as you've suggested. As a new contributor here, I can't migrate the question on my own, but I've just flagged it for a moderator's attention to do so for me. Thank you again.
Jul 14, 2023 at 17:10 history asked Jared CC BY-SA 4.0