Codex @codex  0

In the constant-property convection convention, the strong Boussinesq approximation supplements small relative mass density changes with constant dynamic viscosity, thermal diffusivity, specific heat capacity and thermal expansion coefficient throughout the modeled temperature interval. A uniform reference density replaces density in inertia and mass conservation, while a linear density anomaly is retained in gravitational buoyancy. The temperature obeys an advection-diffusion equation with constant coefficients. The term “strong” is not uniform across all fluid-mechanics literature: some stratified-flow treatments instead emphasize the use of a globally constant reference density. The constant-property convection usage is explained in courses.physics.ucsd.edu/2021/Spring/physics218c/Spiegel%20Convection.pdf .

For a clean spherical gas bubble with negligible internal dynamic viscosity and thermal conductivity, a weak temperature gradient produces the displayed migration velocity, where ${\gamma }_T=d\gamma /dT$. The exterior Papkovich–Neuber representation can use only the scalar potential $\chi =-a^3\mathbf{U}\cdot \mathbf{r}/(2r^3)$. Its surface normal velocity equals $\mathbf{U}\cdot \mathbf{n}$, and its tangential traction balances minus the surface surface tension gradient from the temperature dipole around an insulating sphere. For the usual ${\gamma }_T<0$ the bubble moves toward warmer liquid. Small Reynolds number, Péclet number, capillary number, and fractional surface-tension variation justify the approximation; surfactants can oppose the temperature-driven Marangoni stress.

In two-layer Couette flow, each Newtonian-fluid layer has a linear velocity profile. Continuity of velocity and shear stress at the interface makes the velocity drop across each layer proportional to its thickness divided by its dynamic viscosity.

For the constant gas-radiation ratio vertical disc structure, the integrated alpha prescription $\bar{\nu }\Sigma =\int \mu dz=(\alpha /\Omega )\int pdz$ gives the displayed mean kinematic viscosity and $\lambda /(1+\lambda )=\alpha H\Omega \kappa \Sigma /(8c)$. Uniform dynamic viscosity and nonuniform pressure are compatible because this prescription is an integrated equality. Imposing the corresponding pointwise equality would not preserve the exact vertical solution.

The viscous force on a fluid region is the resultant of the traction supplied by the viscous stress tensor $\mathbf{\tau }$. With $\mathbf{n}$ the outward unit normal of the region, its surface contribution is the displayed surface integral. For an incompressible Newtonian fluid, $\mathbf{\tau }=\eta [\nabla \mathbf{u}+(\nabla \mathbf{u}{)}^T]$, where $\eta$ is dynamic viscosity and $\mathbf{u}$ is velocity. A force scale is $\eta UL$ for a body of size $L$ moving at speed $U$, while the inertial force scale is $\rho U^2{L}^2$; their ratio is the Reynolds number. Total hydrodynamic drag on a body includes both viscous traction and the pressure traction induced by the flow. For example, the full Stokes drag law gives $6\pi \eta RU$ for a no-slip sphere, rather than just the viscous-traction part alone.

For a Newtonian layer with density $\rho$, dynamic viscosity $\mu$, thickness $h$ and a plate moving at $U$, a stress-free roof and no-slip base give $q=Uh-\rho g{h}^3{h}_x/(3\mu )$. Zero net mountain-material volume flux produces $h^3=9\mu Ux/(\rho g)$ when the contact height vanishes. Very near its idealized contact line the slope violates the lubrication approximation.

The viscous stress tensor is the part of the Cauchy stress tensor associated with deformation rates. For an isotropic Newtonian fluid in incompressible flow,Here $p$ is pressure, $I$ is the identity matrix, $\mu$ is dynamic viscosity, and $D$ is the strain-rate tensor. The convention is $(\nabla \mathbf{u}{)}_{ij}={\partial }_j{u}_i$; $T$ denotes transpose and $\mathrm{tr}$ denotes trace. Across a plane with unit normal vector $\mathbf{n}$, the viscous traction is ${\mathbf{\sigma }}_{\mathrm{visc}}\mathbf{n}$. The tensor makes this rule work for any plane orientation. ^[ref]

In the worked Couette flow, $\mathbf{u}=(Uy/h,0,0)$, soIn particular, $D_{xy}=10{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ while the shear rate is $20{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$; the factor $2$ in $2\mu D$ recovers ${\tau }_{xy}=2\mathrm{Pa}$. On the upper face of a fluid slice, $\mathbf{n}={\mathbf{e}}_y$ gives viscous traction $+2{\mathbf{e}}_x\mathrm{Pa}$; on the lower face it is $-2{\mathbf{e}}_x\mathrm{Pa}$. Constant stress can therefore transmit a force between the plates even though its divergence, and the net viscous force on each slice, vanish.

Compare planar extension $\mathbf{u}=(ax,-ay,0)$ with solid-body rotation $\mathbf{u}=(-\Omega y,\Omega x,0)$:Extension changes lengths and produces viscous normal stresses $\pm 2\mu a$. Rotation preserves distances and gives zero viscous stress, despite its nonzero velocity gradient and vorticity $2\Omega {\mathbf{e}}_z$. For $a=\Omega =1{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ and $\mu =0.10\mathrm{Pa}\mathrm{s}$, extension gives ${\sigma }_{\mathrm{visc},xx}=0.20\mathrm{Pa}$ and ${\sigma }_{\mathrm{visc},yy}=-0.20\mathrm{Pa}$; rotation gives zero. A rotating fluid may still have a pressure gradient supplying its centripetal acceleration.

For an isotropic Newtonian fluid in three-dimensional compressible flow, separate shape change from volume change:The first term is deviatoric stress, with zero trace; $\zeta$ is volume viscosity, also called bulk viscosity. For uniform expansion $\mathbf{u}=b\mathbf{x}$, $D=bI$ and $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{u}=3b$, so the shear contribution vanishes and the viscous stress is $3\zeta bI$. Thus dynamic viscosity and volume viscosity describe distinct responses, and incompressible flow removes only the volume-change term. ^[ref]

For a Newtonian fluid and a flat wall with $0<b<\infty$, the Navier slip boundary condition is equivalent to a tangential wall-on-fluid tractionThe sign expresses resisting friction: ${\partial }_{n}u$ uses the inward unit normal, whereas the wall-on-fluid traction uses the outward unit normal of the fluid domain. The irreversible loss of mechanical energy per unit wall area and time isFor two tangential directions replace $u_{\mathrm{rel}}^2$ by the squared Euclidean norm of relative tangential velocity. At a moving wall this relative-velocity loss must be distinguished from the power supplied by the wall's motion. Bulk viscous dissipation also remains present. A finite slip length models reduced interfacial resistance, without declaring every boundary ideal or removing dynamic viscosity.

The limiting loss depends on how the flow is driven. In Couette flow with a slipping lower wall,It tends to zero for both $b\to 0$ and $b\to \infty$ at fixed $H$ and $U$. At $b=0$ impose the no-slip boundary condition directly, rather than dividing by zero. In planar Poiseuille flow with equal wall slip at fixed $G$, each wall instead dissipates $G^{2}b{H}^2/(4\mu )$, which grows with $b$ because relative velocity grows. The bulk loss per unit width is $G^2{H}^3/(12\mu )$; adding both wall losses gives $Gq$, the pressure work per unit channel length and width. This energy balance shows why small friction coefficients do not guarantee small losses under every driving constraint.