Talk:Inviscid flow

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Fluid Dynamics Taskforce.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rmason81, Forbisl. Peer reviewers: Nlhw13, Krbuw.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 00:46, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Page Creation

I started the page here, but it is just a stub. It, at least, needs the equations describing inviscid flow (as most of the other flow articles have such equations). MagiMaster 03:49, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Euler equations have been added, as well as the Reynolds number, and Navier Stokes equations. Included variables have also been defined. Forbisl (talk) 04:05, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of saying "fluids with a large Reynolds number" it might be better to say "flows with a high reynolds number." As is, the sentence implies that a reynolds number is a fluid property. A reynolds number is dependant on both fluid properties and flow conditions.

You're correct that Reynolds number is a flow property instead of a property of the fluid. This has since been changed, because I can find no mention of reynolds number referring to a fluid property in the current article. Forbisl (talk) 04:05, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

examples

Are (all and only) superfluids inviscid? Cesiumfrog (talk) 01:47, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Superfluids by definition have zero viscosity, due to this fact they exhibit inviscid flow. In fact, a superfluid section has since been added Forbisl (talk) 04:06, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Equation variable explanation

I'm new to fluid dynamics, and I have no idea most of the symbols in the article's equation mean. Could these be named/explained/linked to in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.21.81.232 (talk) 10:42, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have linked as many relevant articles as I could find upon their first mentioning. I have also included descriptions of any of the variables used in the mentioned equations. Forbisl (talk) 04:08, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

Format and spacing of the article looks appealing, tone is appropriately encyclopedic, and there is a good amount of content on the page. Sources need to be cited for the entire "Applications" section, however. Also, I would suggest maybe adding a couple more images or graphics. Overall, good progress on the assignment; just need to focus on citing reliable sources/data and little aesthetic adjustments.Nlhw13 (talk) 07:16, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback, we are working on getting graphics illustrating superfluidity and citing the applications section.Forbisl (talk) 20:42, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We have since added more visuals, and cited the sections in need of references. Forbisl (talk) 04:09, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

-Good amount of info and great buildup of the equations! -The actual writing has a few too many "unnecessary" words, such as "simply" in the first sentence, or this sentence: "Though only a small number of true inviscid fluids have been discovered, known as superfluids, inviscid flow has great significance in fluid dynamics." -The equations themselves are given too much importance in the article. Link to the page for Reynolds Number rather than give a paragraph explanation of it. -The "solid boundaries" section is written well, but should be somehow linked to inviscid flow within the section. -An image would be great in the "applications" section. -The use of "He" in the applications section is a bit obscure and doesn't read well, maybe it change to "helium".

The most important of the changes I'd suggest is removing focus from the Reynolds Number and the Navier Stokes equations (as mentioned above).

BlakeC90 (talk) 04:51, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll definitely work on removing "fluffy" words. I understand your view on the equations, I still believe discussing Reynold's number and Navier stokes is relevant to inviscid flow and should be briefly discussed, if more in depth information is sought after the links can be followed. I definitely need to work on tying the solid boundaries section back to inviscid flow, and I am working on including a picture illustrating the sublayers.Forbisl (talk) 20:52, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The applications section could definetly use a picture or two which will help visualize the applications. The primary use of Liquid helium in applications is cooling which are easy to find pictures for but the less used applications may be a bit more difficult. The wording could use some editing/fine tuning to make the overall article read better. Rmason81 (talk) 20:19, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We have worked on removing non technical "fluffy" words as you have suggested. We have changed He to Helium in all instances. I have included an image illustrating solid boundaries and have tied the section back to the concept of inviscid flow assumptions in fluid dynamics problems as is mentioned in the lead section. Forbisl (talk) 04:19, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

Overall, the article looks appealing to me. I like the part of including conventional units. However, try to write them appropriately like m^3. My suggestion is to make a table to include both SI and English units.

Also I do not know if mentioning Reynolds number here is a good thing or not as you demonstrated great ability to use hyperlink. Reynolds number is popular in fluid mechanics so I'm sure it has its own article.

In the description of Euler equations, the unit for pressure should be in standard as we all know Pa = kg/ms^2.

Great job at introducing applications.
Huywilliam (talk) 05:49, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing out the units, I work on that. You're right about the topics in fluid mechanics, however, I still believe a brief discussion is relevant to the topic, if more information is required the link can be followed.Forbisl (talk) 20:54, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have included the symbols and units in a table including both SI and Standard US units. I have also changed the units of pressure as you suggested. Overall the table looks much cleaner. Forbisl (talk) 04:22, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

The article does a good job in the lead section defining the subject and summarizing the information in the rest of the article. I appreciated the real world examples given in the applications section. The article also does a good job explaining relevant equations and connecting them to the topic. The examples about the situations when viscous forces can be assumed negligible for real life applications were useful. One change that could be made is making the sub topics exist independently so the article reads less like an essay. For instance, remove the word "later" from the first sentence of the Navier Stokes equations section.

I also think the Reynolds Number is not the best section to begin with in the body. A more detailed description of the topic or the applications would be helpful and make people more likely to continue reading the article. The applications section can be broken up into subtopics. The examples and definitions about inviscid flow are applicable to my article. An important part about entrance length is the inviscid core that exists in the entrance region. The core is important for wind tunnel design, to avoid turbulence around the test model. Good article!

Krbuw (talk) 06:38, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ideas about inviscid core and wind tunnels. We'll definitely work on restructuring the sections and increasing flow and readability.Forbisl (talk) 21:03, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We will be working on making read less like an essay and removing unnecessary words. Breaking up the applications into subtopics may work good. Also you helped with finding another application to inviscid flow. I will likely add a small section about wind tunnels to the applications section. Rmason81 (talk) 20:49, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We have moved the Superfluids and Applications section to the top of the article. Great suggestion, I also feel that this will increase interest in reading the rest of the article for the reader. Forbisl (talk) 17:42, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What does this sentence want to say?

"Cooling to these temperatures, with this fluid, is a very expensive system and there are few compared to other cooling systems" there are few, what? Is this english? 46.15.71.108 (talk) 20:00, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that this sentence is difficult to unravel. Thanks for drawing it to our attention. I have edited the offending sentence; hopefully it is now more easily comprehended; and hopefully it still reflects what is said in the cited source! Dolphin (t) 08:54, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]