Couette flow
Theory and Physics
Overview
Professor, what is Couette flow?
It's a shear flow of a viscous fluid between two parallel plates, driven by one plate moving at velocity $U$. Since an exact solution exists, it's one of the most fundamental problems used for verifying the accuracy of CFD codes.
Exact Solution
What does the exact solution look like?
For fully developed plane Couette flow, the velocity profile becomes a simple linear distribution.
Here, $h$ is the distance between plates, and $y$ is the distance from the stationary plate.
The shear stress is uniform regardless of distance from the wall,
where $\dot{\gamma} = U/h$ is the shear rate.
So the velocity just changes linearly. That's simple.
Couette-Poiseuille Flow
When a pressure gradient exists in addition to plate movement, it becomes Couette-Poiseuille flow.
The first term is the Couette component (linear), and the second term is the Poiseuille component (parabolic). Depending on the sign and magnitude of the pressure gradient, diverse velocity profiles such as favorable pressure gradient, adverse pressure gradient, and reverse flow can occur.
So it's a superposition of Couette and Poiseuille flows.
Taylor-Couette Flow
Couette flow between coaxial double cylinders is called Taylor-Couette flow, driven by the rotation of the inner cylinder. When the Taylor number
exceeds the critical value $Ta_c \approx 1708$, Taylor vortices appear. This is a bifurcation phenomenon due to centrifugal instability and is a classic problem in pattern formation.
Taylor vortices are those beautiful ring-shaped patterns, right?
Yes. As Re increases further, it transitions to wavy vortex, modulated wavy vortex, and turbulent Taylor vortex. This route is a textbook case of turbulent transition.
Why Couette Flow Supports Food Factories
Couette-type rheometers—devices that sandwich a sample between two plates and rotate one—are standard equipment for viscosity measurement in the food and cosmetics industries. Mayonnaise, chocolate, shampoo, toothpaste... these are non-Newtonian fluids whose viscosity changes with shear rate, so they cannot be measured with simple tube viscometers. By assuming the theoretical solution of Couette flow (linear velocity distribution), viscosity under the same shear rate conditions can be accurately derived. In the quality control departments of food manufacturers, checking product viscosity with a Couette-type rheometer every morning is a daily routine. The seemingly mundane theory supports our daily dining tables.
Physical Meaning of Each Term
- Time Term $\partial(\rho\phi)/\partial t$: Imagine the moment you turn on a faucet. At first, water comes out in an unstable, spluttering manner, but after a while, the flow stabilizes, right? This "period of change" is described by the time term. The pulsation of blood flow due to heartbeats, and flow fluctuations each time an engine valve opens and closes—all are unsteady phenomena. So what is steady-state analysis? Looking only at "after sufficient time has passed and the flow has settled down"—in other words, setting this term to zero. Since computational cost is significantly reduced, solving first in steady-state is a basic CFD strategy.
- Convection Term $\nabla \cdot (\rho \mathbf{u} \phi)$: What happens if you drop a leaf into a river? It gets carried downstream by the flow, right? This is "convection"—the effect where fluid motion transports things. Warm air from a heater reaching the far end of a room is also because the "carrier," air, transports heat via convection. Here's the interesting part—this term contains "velocity × velocity," making it nonlinear. That is, as the flow becomes faster, this term rapidly strengthens, making control difficult. This is the root cause of turbulence. A common misconception: "Convection and conduction are similar things" → They are completely different! Convection is carried by flow, conduction is transmitted by molecules. There is an order of magnitude difference in efficiency.
- Diffusion Term $\nabla \cdot (\Gamma \nabla \phi)$: Have you ever put milk in coffee and left it? Even without stirring, after a while, they naturally mix. That's molecular diffusion. Now, next question—honey or water, which flows more easily? Obviously water, right? Honey has high viscosity ($\mu$), so it flows poorly. When viscosity is large, the diffusion term becomes strong, and the fluid moves in a "thick" manner. In low Reynolds number flows (slow, viscous), diffusion is dominant. Conversely, in high Re number flows, convection overwhelmingly dominates, and diffusion plays a supporting role.
- Pressure Term $-\nabla p$: When you push the plunger of a syringe, liquid shoots out forcefully from the needle tip, right? Why? Because the piston side is high pressure, and the needle tip is low pressure—this pressure difference provides the force that pushes the fluid. Dam discharge works on the same principle. On a weather map, where are isobars tightly packed? That's right, strong winds blow. "Where there is a pressure difference, flow is generated"—this is the physical meaning of the pressure term in the Navier-Stokes equations. A point of confusion here: "Pressure" in CFD is often gauge pressure, not absolute pressure. When you switch to compressible analysis and suddenly get strange results, it might be due to confusion between absolute/gauge pressure.
- Source Term $S_\phi$: Warmed air rises—why? Because it becomes lighter (lower density) than its surroundings, so it is pushed up by buoyancy. This buoyancy is added to the equation as a source term. Other examples: chemical reaction heat generated by a gas stove flame, Lorentz force acting on molten metal in a factory's electromagnetic pump... all these are actions that "inject energy or force into the fluid from the outside," expressed by source terms. What happens if you forget the source term? In natural convection analysis, if you forget to include buoyancy, the fluid doesn't move at all—you get a physically impossible result where warm air doesn't rise in a room with the heater on in winter.
Assumptions and Applicability Limits
- Continuum Assumption: Valid for Knudsen number Kn < 0.01 (molecular mean free path ≪ characteristic length)
- Newtonian Fluid Assumption: Linear relationship between shear stress and strain rate (viscosity model needed for non-Newtonian fluids)
- Incompressibility Assumption (for Ma < 0.3): Treat density as constant. For Mach number 0.3 and above, consider compressibility effects
- Boussinesq Approximation (Natural Convection): Consider density variation only in the buoyancy term, using constant density in other terms
- Non-applicable Cases: Rarefied gas (Kn > 0.1), supersonic/hypersonic flow (shock capturing required), free surface flow (VOF/Level Set, etc. required)
Dimensional Analysis and Unit Systems
| Variable | SI Unit | Notes / Conversion Memo |
|---|---|---|
| Velocity $u$ | m/s | When converting from volumetric flow rate for inlet conditions, pay attention to cross-sectional area units |
| Pressure $p$ | Pa | Distinguish between gauge pressure and absolute pressure. Use absolute pressure for compressible analysis |
| Density $\rho$ | kg/m³ | Air: approx. 1.225 kg/m³@20°C, Water: approx. 998 kg/m³@20°C |
| Viscosity Coefficient $\mu$ | Pa·s | Be careful not to confuse with kinematic viscosity coefficient $\nu = \mu/\rho$ [m²/s] |
| Reynolds Number $Re$ | Dimensionless | $Re = \rho u L / \mu$. Indicator for laminar/turbulent transition |
| CFL Number | Dimensionless | $CFL = u \Delta t / \Delta x$. Directly related to time step stability |
Numerical Methods and Implementation
Numerical Methods
How do I solve Couette flow numerically?
Plane Couette flow reduces to a 1D problem, so it's very simple.
Discretization of Plane Couette Flow
Under fully developed conditions, $\partial u/\partial x = 0$, so the governing equation becomes
For pure Couette flow ($dp/dx = 0$), then
Discretizing this with central differences gives
So it can be solved with a tridiagonal matrix.
Yes. Boundary conditions are $u(0) = 0$ (stationary plate), $u(h) = U$ (moving plate). Even with second-order central differences, it matches the exact solution regardless of cell count. That's why it's used for verification.
Numerical Methods for Taylor-Couette Flow
Taylor-Couette flow is axisymmetric, but the emergence of Taylor vortices is a 3D phenomenon, so all three components $(r, \theta, z)$ are necessary.
Choice of numerical method:
- Spectral Method: Fourier in circumferential direction, Fourier in axial direction (periodic BC), Chebyshev in radial direction
- Finite Volume Method: Structured grid in cylindrical coordinates. Refine near walls in $r$ direction
What resolution is needed to capture Taylor vortices with the finite volume method?
A minimum of 20-30 cells in the radial direction and 10-15 cells per Taylor vortex wavelength in the axial direction is a guideline. The axial length of the computational domain should be an integer multiple of the vortex wavelength (typically 4-8 wavelengths) and use periodic boundary conditions.
Comparison with Stability Analysis
To determine the critical Ta number for Taylor vortices via numerical computation, start from an initial condition with a small perturbation and observe the growth/decay of the perturbation over time. If it matches the theoretical $Ta_c = 1708$ within 2%, the code's validity is confirmed.
Reproducing the critical stability value numerically is a good test of accuracy.
What Taylor Vortices Teach Us: "The Harbinger of Numerical Instability"
In numerical calculations of Couette flow, when you increase the rotation speed, at some point the velocity field may develop periodic striped patterns. This is a phenomenon called "Taylor vortices," a structural instability that occurs when centrifugal force exceeds viscous force. When vortices suddenly appear in the calculation, it's easy to think, "Is this a bug?" but it's actually the physically correct solution. If you calculate the Taylor number $Ta$, the transition should occur at the theoretical critical value. In other words, you can use Couette flow to benchmark "whether your code can correctly capture vortex generation." It is also used to verify the operation of turbulence models.
Upwind Scheme
First-order upwind: Large numerical diffusion but stable. Second-order upwind: Improved accuracy but risk of oscillations. Essential for high Reynolds number flows.
Central Differencing
Second-order accurate, but numerical oscillations occur for Pe number > 2. Suitable for low Reynolds number diffusion-dominated flows.
TVD Schemes (MUSCL, QUICK, etc.)
Maintain high accuracy while suppressing numerical oscillations via limiter functions. Effective for capturing shocks and steep gradients.
Finite Volume Method vs Finite Element Method
FVM: Naturally satisfies conservation laws. Mainstream in CFD.FEM: Advantageous for complex shapes and multiphysics. Mesh-free methods like SPH are also developing.
CFL Condition (Courant Number)
Explicit methods: CFL ≤ 1 is the stability condition. Implicit methods: Stable even for CFL > 1, but affects accuracy and iteration count.LES: CFL ≈ 1 recommended. Physical meaning: Information should not travel more than one cell per time step.
Residual Monitoring
Continuity Equation, momentum, and energy residuals decreasing by 3-4 orders of magnitude indicates convergence. The mass conservation residual is particularly important.
Relaxation Factor
Pressure: 0.2-0.3, Velocity: 0.5-0.7 are typical initial values. If diverging, lower the relaxation factor. After convergence, increase to accelerate.
Internal Iterations for Unsteady Calculations
Iterate within each time step until a steady solution converges. Internal iteration count: 5-20 iterations is a guideline. If residuals fluctuate between time steps, review the time step size.
Analogy for the SIMPLE Method
The SIMPLE method is an "alternating adjustment" technique. First, velocity is tentatively determined (predictor step), then pressure is corrected so that mass conservation is satisfied with that velocity (corrector step), and velocity is revised using the corrected pressure—this back-and-forth is repeated to approach the correct solution. It resembles two people leveling a shelf: one adjusts the height, the other balances it, and they repeat this alternately.
Analogy for the Upwind Scheme
The upwind scheme is a method that "stands in the river flow and prioritizes upstream information." A person in the river cannot tell where the water comes from by looking downstream—it's a discretization method reflecting the physics that upstream information determines downstream. Although first-order accurate, it is highly stable because it correctly captures flow direction.
Practical Guide
Practical Guide
Please teach me the specific method for using Couette flow for CFD verification.
Let's proceed step by step.
Step 1: Plane Couette Flow (Code Verification)
Related Topics
なった
詳しく
報告