0
$\begingroup$

In fluid dynamics, when I have to compute Reynolds number, I was taught to differentiate between two cases: $$ 1)\space \frac{\rho\cdot v\cdot d}{\mu}$$ or $$2)\space \frac{v\cdot d}{\mu}$$

but, why do I have to do this? Why shouldn't I simply use the first formula? what is the criteria to use in order to include or omit the density (i.e $\rho$)?

$\endgroup$
7
  • $\begingroup$ Is diameter always the characteristic length? what happens if the duct is rectangular? $\endgroup$
    – Solar Mike
    Jun 25, 2023 at 13:41
  • $\begingroup$ @SolarMike It doesn't matter, diameter can be circular or rectangular, I guess $\endgroup$ Jun 25, 2023 at 13:42
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Have you checked out any books like Mechanics of Fluids by Massey? $\endgroup$
    – Solar Mike
    Jun 25, 2023 at 14:01
  • $\begingroup$ yes, but it uses only the first formula, it always includes density $\endgroup$ Jun 25, 2023 at 14:14
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Are you sure the symbol in the denominator in the second case is $\mu$ and not $\nu$? $\endgroup$ Jun 25, 2023 at 16:36

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

I've never seen the second formula. It's incorrect, unless it's a specific application like water where density is numerically 1 g/cc and they just don't write it.

The first formula

$$\mathrm{Re} =\frac{\rho vd}{\mu}$$

is the definition of Reynolds number and is always true. But you may sometimes see it written in terms of kinematic viscosity $\nu$ which is equal to $\mu/\rho$, and so you will see:

$$\mathrm{Re} =\frac{vd}{\nu}$$

In other more specialized geometries like a porous bed or perforated plate, you may see the Reynolds number defined in terms of other parameters like the mass flow rate and some dimension. But for flow in a pipe, the first formula is always true.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.