Codex @codex  0

Let $\mathbf{v}$ denote the velocity relative to the uniformly rotating frame, and write $r_{\perp }^2=x^2+y^2$. For rotation $\mathbf{\Omega }=\Omega {\mathbf{e}}_z$, the Euler equations for an inviscid fluid in that frame areThe negative quadratic term is the centrifugal potential, whose negative gradient is the outward centrifugal acceleration per unit mass. In steady flow, dotting the equation with $\mathbf{v}$ eliminates the Coriolis force, since $\mathbf{v}\cdot (\mathbf{\Omega }\times \mathbf{v})=0$. The remaining acceleration term is $\mathbf{v}\cdot \nabla (|\mathbf{v}{|}^2/2)$. ThusBy part (b), the steady rotating-frame Bernoulli integral isSteadiness here is measured in the rotating frame, including the body-force potential used in that frame.

In steady flow, the Euler equations for an inviscid fluid and part (a) giveTaking the dot product with $\mathbf{u}$ yields $\mathbf{u}\cdot \nabla H=0$, because a cross product is perpendicular to its first factor. Part (b) therefore gives Bernoulli's quantity along streamlines:For rotational flow these constants can differ between streamlines, since $\mathbf{u}\times \mathbf{\omega }$ need not vanish and therefore $\nabla H$ need not be zero. Special rotational flows can still have one global constant when that cross product vanishes; the general conclusion is only constancy along individual streamlines.

Locally, zero curl permits $\mathbf{v}=\nabla \Phi$; for a global single-valued potential the circulation around every noncontractible loop must also vanish. incompressibility gives $\nabla \cdot \mathbf{v}={\nabla }^2\Phi =0$. The exterior of a cylinder is multiply connected, so local irrotationality alone does not exclude a circulating solution.

For inviscid constant-density flow under conservative gravity, Euler's equation is ${\partial }_t\mathbf{v}+(\mathbf{v}\cdot \nabla )\mathbf{v}=-\nabla (p/\rho +{\varphi }_g)$. The identity $(\mathbf{v}\cdot \nabla )\mathbf{v}=\nabla (v^2/2)-\mathbf{v}\times (\nabla \times \mathbf{v})$ gives, for irrotational flow,For steady flow, absorb the potential's time-only gauge term and obtain $p+\rho v^2/2+\rho {\varphi }_g=\mathrm{constant}$ throughout the connected fluid region. Without irrotationality the steady constant need only be common along each streamline.

Use $U$ for the uniform upstream speed and take the flow along $+x$. The boundary conditions are $v_r(a,\theta )=0$ and $\mathbf{v}\to U{\mathbf{e}}_x$ at infinity. A perfect inviscid model imposes no penetration, not no slip. For the intended no-circulation solution, require a globally single-valued potential, so the coefficient of $\theta$ is zero. The logarithmic term would be a net source and violates no penetration, so its coefficient is also zero. Growing terms with $n\ge 2$ violate the uniform far field. For each remaining $n\ge 2$, the surface normal condition then forces its decaying coefficient to vanish. The $n=1$ terms satisfy $C_1=U$ and $D_1=U{a}^2$:An irrelevant additive potential constant is understood. At the same elevation, Bernoulli balance with the upstream stream givesThe force per unit height ispressure symmetry gives zero drag and zero lift in this zero-circulation idealization. D'Alembert's paradox is the failure of this inviscid model to represent real separated viscous wakes and their drag, not a claim that a real pole feels no force.

The zero-circulation assumption matters: $\Phi \to \Phi +\Gamma \theta /(2\pi )$ leaves the stated velocity boundary conditions intact but adds $\Gamma /(2\pi a)$ to the surface tangential speed. It produces $F_y^{\prime }=-\rho U\Gamma$ for positive counterclockwise circulation. Thus the boundary conditions alone do not justify excluding the angular term; an initially noncirculating inviscid start, or an explicitly single-valued potential, supplies the missing condition.^[ref]

Flow visualization and the idealization. A streamline is everywhere tangent to the instantaneous velocity field at one fixed time. A streakline is the locus, at one observation time, of particles that previously passed through a specified injection point. A marked particle's own trajectory is a pathline. These coincide geometrically in steady flow, but need not do so in an unsteady draining flow.

The intended ideal liquid is approximately incompressible and inviscid: viscosity and associated shear stresses are negligible on the scales and times being considered, the Mach number is small, and the density is effectively constant. This does not require zero vorticity; the initially rotating state is already a counterexample. It also does not justify ignoring viscosity in an arbitrarily thin boundary layer or at a real drain.

Spiralling flow and angular momentum. In an axisymmetric inviscid flow, pressure and gravity exert no torque about the vertical axis. A parcel therefore conserves axial specific angular momentum,The late, shallow remnant in the intended draining picture is supplied by parcels initially near the outer rim, so $r_0\simeq R$. The slow-drain angular-momentum amplification then givesThe assumption about the parcels' origin is necessary: torque conservation by itself does not assign $r_0=R$ to every parcel at every time.

A continuous dye feed near the outer free surface produces inward spirals that wind increasingly rapidly near the drain. The figure uses a late quasisteady model, $u_r=-D/r$ and $u_{\varphi }=C/r$ with positive constants $D,C$, giving $\varphi ={\varphi }_0-(C/D)\ln (r/r_0)$. Its streaklines and streamlines approximately coincide over an observation interval short compared with the overall draining time. Strictly, individually marked particles at the initial surface trace pathlines, not a continuously injected streakline.

The free-surface depression. Let $z=H(r)$ be the surface. Slow radial draining makes radial inertial corrections small compared with the azimuthal centripetal acceleration. The radial Euler equation and vertical hydrostatic equilibrium giveThus $g{H}^{\prime }(r)=u_{\varphi }^2/r=C^2/r^3$, with $C={\omega }_0{R}^2$. Integrating from $r$ to the rim givesFor $r\ll R$ this becomesThe surface rises outward because the inward pressure gradient force must sustain the circular motion. The dimensions are metres, and the $1/r^2$ profile is not valid inside the finite drain or vortex core.

The terrestrial estimate. Use the vertical component of Earth's rotation as the ideal initial angular speed, ${\omega }_0\simeq {\Omega }_E\sin \lambda$. At Cambridge, taking $\lambda \simeq 52.2^{\circ }$ and ${\Omega }_E=7.292\times 10^{-5}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, this gives ${\omega }_0\simeq 5.76\times 10^{-5}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. Hence, for $R=1\mathrm{m}$, $r=0.01\mathrm{m}$ and $g=9.81\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$,Taking the whole terrestrial angular speed rather than its local vertical projection would give about $2.7\mu \mathrm{m}$. The Cambridge estimate uses the projection appropriate to the vertical vortex. This very small head assumes terrestrial rotation supplies the only initial swirl; imposed residual rotation would change it quadratically.

Curl of the azimuthal velocity. For axisymmetric $u_{\varphi }=r\omega (r)$ with no vertical dependence, the rotational part of the vorticity is vertical:The ideal quasisteady radial sink has no curl outside its core. The source's symbol $\Omega$ denotes this vertical vorticity component, not the fluid's angular velocity. In general its magnitude is the absolute value of the bracket.

The two limiting states. For initial uniform rotation, $\omega ={\omega }_0$, whereas the late approximation has $\omega =C/r^2$. ThereforeThe late flow can have large angular velocity and nonzero circulation while being locally irrotational. The drain core is excluded from the domain of the $1/r$ velocity field.

What is actually conserved. Inviscid does not mean that each parcel's vorticity magnitude is fixed in three dimensions. For an incompressible barotropic liquid with conservative body forces, the vorticity equation isVertical compression of a material column changes its vorticity through vortex stretching, even while its volume is conserved by horizontal expansion. In the columnar shallow-layer limit, vorticity dilution in a shallow draining layer givesThus a remnant much shallower than its original column can have much smaller vertical vorticity. At finite depth there is generally a residual value; the exactly irrotational late profile is a leading limiting approximation, not an exact parcelwise conversion of nonzero vorticity to zero in finite time.

Kelvin's circulation theorem conserves circulation around a material loop, not around a fixed spatial circle. A loop whose original radius is near $R$ has circulation about $2\pi {\omega }_0{R}^2$, consistent with the late $u_{\varphi }=C/r$ field. Fluid also leaves through the drain, so the remaining tank contents are not a fixed material system. If the calculation is expressed explicitly in the Earth-fixed rotating frame, the corresponding shallow-water potential vorticity is $(\zeta +f)/H$, with $f=2{\Omega }_E\sin \lambda$; the conserved quantity involves absolute vorticity.

For the intended ideal Venturi effect, take steady flow, incompressible flow, negligible viscous losses, and the same height at the two stations shown. The Bernoulli equation along a streamline givesUsing water mass density $\rho \simeq 1000\mathrm{kg}{\mathrm{m}}^{-3}$,Thus the outlet pressure is lower by $16\mathrm{kPa}$. The increased kinetic energy per unit volume comes from the drop in pressure.

The source's assumption of laminar flow alone does not imply negligible viscosity or losses. The numerical result uses the usual lossless Bernoulli equation approximation, with the quoted speeds interpreted as representative streamline speeds. A real tube with significant viscous losses requires additional data; in a uniform-velocity energy balance its pressure drop would include an extra positive loss term.

Take $z$ positive away from the wall into the liquid, and write $p_a$ for atmospheric pressure. For a constant-mass density Newtonian fluid, the two-dimensional Navier-Stokes equation and continuity equation areThe stationary wall imposes the no-slip boundary condition and no-penetration boundary condition, $u=w=0$ at $z=0$. For a flat free surface with negligible air shear stress, the stress boundary condition is $u_z=0$, $p=p_a$ at $z=h_0$; the kinematic boundary condition is $w=0$ there.

For steady flow independent of $x$, these equations give $w=0$, $\mu u_{zz}=-\rho g\sin \alpha$ and $p_z=-\rho g\cos \alpha$. Two integrations and the boundary conditions give the uniform gravity-driven Newtonian film:Its surface velocity is $U_0=\rho g{h}_0^2\sin \alpha /(2\mu )$, while its mean velocity is $2U_0/3$.

Solutions to all three questions of the viscous flow course of the University of Oxford Part B examination, sat on 15 June 2023. Source: original released PDF, bundle pages 228–231; paper pages 1–4. The solutions follow every lettered and Roman-numbered part. In Question 1(b), the requested equation implicitly selects steady flow. In Question 2(c), the printed far-field sign must be corrected to describe the specified lower half-space; Question 3(a) also has a harmless component-name typo. These qualifications are explained at the affected steps.

For the unidirectional flow $\mathbf{u}=(0,0,w)$, incompressibility gives ${\partial }_{z}w=0$. Hence $w=w(x,y,t)$, and the convective acceleration $w{\partial }_{z}w$ vanishes. The transverse components of the Navier-Stokes equation give $p_x=p_y=0$, while the axial component givesA steady-flow assumption is implicit in the question. Neither unidirectional flow nor a time-independent pressure gradient alone eliminates ${\partial }_{t}w$: a decaying transient can be superposed on the final pipe profile. The native PDF does not explicitly say steady flow in this part. For the intended steady flow, $w_t=0$, and thereforeTaking the pipe walls to be stationary, the no-slip boundary condition isThe no-penetration boundary condition is already satisfied by the assumed velocity field. This is the Poisson equation defining rectangular duct flow.

Now both plates at $z=0$ and $z=H$ are stationary and both obey the Navier slip boundary condition with the same slip length $b$. Drive steady flow of a Newtonian fluid in incompressible flow by the constant pressure gradient $G=-dp/dx>0$, with constant dynamic viscosity $\mu >0$ and no other streamwise body force. The planar Poiseuille flow profile and its volumetric flow rate per unit width areThe full volumetric flow rate for channel width $W$ is $Q=Wq$ when side-wall effects are negligible. Thus $q$ has units ${\mathrm{m}}^2{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, while $Q$ has units ${\mathrm{m}}^3{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. Denote the value at $b=0$ by $q_0=G{H}^3/(12\mu )$.

The two wall checks expose the normal signs:Both Navier slip boundary conditions therefore hold exactly. The two walls exert backward tangential tractions of magnitude $GH/2$ on the fluid. Increasing $b$ at fixed $G$ adds a uniform velocity offset, leaving the velocity gradient and wall shear stress unchanged. This differs from Couette flow with a slipping lower wall, where upper-wall velocity is fixed and shear stress decreases.

For $H=10\mu \mathrm{m}$, $b=2\mu \mathrm{m}$, $G=10^3\mathrm{Pa}{\mathrm{m}}^{-1}$ and $\mu =10^{-3}\mathrm{Pa}\mathrm{s}$, the wall velocity is $10\mu \mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, the centre velocity is $22.5\mu \mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, and $q=1.83\times 10^{-10}{\mathrm{m}}^2{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. The enhancement is $q/q_0=2.2$. Equivalently, a prescribed volumetric flow rate needs only $1/2.2$ of the original pressure gradient. This makes slip length useful for estimating pumping requirements in small channels.

At fixed $H$, $G>0$ and $\mu$, $b\to 0$ recovers ordinary planar Poiseuille flow. As $b\to \infty$, the velocity and $q$ grow without bound in this model, although the varying part of the profile stays the same. At exactly zero tangential wall traction, no steady solution can balance this nonzero pressure gradient: $u^{\prime }(0)=u^{\prime }(H)=0$ conflicts with $\mu [u^{\prime }(H)-u^{\prime }(0)]=-GH$. Unlimited enhancement is consequently not a prediction for a real channel; finite wall friction, finite driving capacity and the validity of the assumed steady flow must be assessed. At fixed finite $q$ instead, $G\to 0$ and the profile approaches uniform velocity $q/H$.

A short derivation integrates the reduced Navier-Stokes equation $\mu u^{\prime \prime }=-G$ twice. Equal slip lengths and the opposite inward unit normals give $u=G[z(H-z)+bH]/(2\mu )$. Its integral over the gap supplies the enhancement factor $1+6b/H$.

The pressure coefficient compares a local static pressure with a specified reference static pressure, using a fixed reference dynamic pressure:The reference mass density, speed, pressure and location must accompany a reported pressure coefficient. Keep the same $q_{\infty }$ throughout a surface distribution; replacing it by local $\rho U^2/2$ gives a different quantity and fails at a stagnation point. The definition itself requires neither Bernoulli's principle nor inviscid flow, so measured pressure coefficients remain useful when those idealizations fail.

Positive $C_p$ means $p>p_{\infty }$; zero means equality; negative $C_p$ means $p<p_{\infty }$. This sign does not specify the sign of absolute pressure. For stipulated $p_{\infty }=101325\mathrm{Pa}$ absolute and $q_{\infty }=240\mathrm{Pa}$, $C_p=-3$ gives $p=100605\mathrm{Pa}$ absolute: a $720\mathrm{Pa}$ deficit, not a negative absolute pressure. If $p_{\infty }$ equals atmospheric pressure, the numerator is gauge pressure; a wind tunnel's reference static pressure need not equal room atmospheric pressure. These are reference choices, not different physical pressures.

Under the same-height, constant-mass density $\rho ={\rho }_{\infty }$, steady flow and inviscid flow hypotheses of the Bernoulli equation, and with the same Bernoulli invariant as the reference flow,The first equation immediately gives the second after subtracting $p_{\infty }$ and dividing by $q_{\infty }$. Hence a lossless stagnation point has $C_p=1$, $U=U_{\infty }$ gives $C_p=0$, and $U=2U_{\infty }$ gives $C_p=-3$. For a real stationary wall satisfying the no-slip boundary condition, the velocity is zero right at the wall; inserting that wall velocity in an inviscid flow formula would wrongly predict $C_p=1$ everywhere. A thin boundary layer approximation instead relates the wall pressure to the outer-flow pressure and uses the outer velocity where the Bernoulli equation applies.

For potential flow around a circular cylinder of radius $a$ with zero circulation, the surface tangential velocity is $u_{\theta }=-2U_{\infty }\sin \theta$. Thus the ideal pressure coefficient isWith $\theta$ measured from downstream, the front is at $\pi$ and the rear at zero. Both ideal stagnation points have $C_p=1$, while the sides at $\pi /2$ and $3\pi /2$ have $C_p=-3$. This exact model is a useful baseline for an experiment; its complete rearward pressure recovery is not a prediction for a separated real fluid wake.

To obtain a force, integrate the local normal contributions with their directions. Let $\mathbf{n}$ be the unit normal vector from the body into the fluid and $\Sigma$ its closed wetted surface:The second equality removes a spatially constant reference pressure over the closed surface; it does not remove a nonuniform hydrostatic pressure or justify dropping the reference term on an isolated open patch. A negative $C_p$ contributes outwards in this reference-subtracted calculation, even though a positive absolute pressure still pushes inwards locally. Project ${\mathbf{F}}_p$ onto the chosen lift and drag directions. The full fluid force also includes ${\int }_{\Sigma }{\mathbf{\sigma }}_{\mathrm{visc}}\mathbf{n}dA$ from the viscous stress tensor, including tangential shear stress; pressure tapping does not measure that contribution.

For the two-dimensional cylinder, force per unit span follows from $dA=ad\theta$ per unit span and $\mathbf{n}=(\cos \theta ,\sin \theta )$:Substituting $C_p=1-4{\sin }^2\theta$ gives $(0,0)$: opposite points have identical pressure coefficients and opposite normal vectors. Zero drag despite a strongly nonuniform pressure is the instructive limitation associated with D'Alembert's paradox. Real viscosity, boundary layers and flow separation can prevent rearward pressure recovery and produce pressure drag. Thus the measured curve can test the model and estimate a pressure contribution without proving that total drag vanishes.

A motivating measurement is Virginia Tech's Experiment 3 - Flow Past a Circular Cylinder. Its open-jet wind tunnel holds a rotatable $140\mathrm{mm}$ cylinder with end plates and 36 one-millimetre pressure tappings at ten-degree intervals. A reference Pitot-static tube supplies $p_{0\infty }$ and $p_{\infty }$ to one digital manometer; a second connects a surface tap to its positive port and reference static pressure to its negative port. Record the simultaneous readings:The last equality uses the low-speed stopping relation, not an additional speed measurement. The manual requires sealed tubing and zero checks with the tunnel off. It also provides a water-column manometer: read each column's initial level, and subtract the independently measured reference-to-atmosphere pressure from the tap-to-atmosphere readings. Record tap positions after rotation. Compare the two instruments and check spanwise uniformity; end plates do not guarantee two-dimensional flow. ^[ref]

The inferential distinction matters: the manometers directly measure pressure differences, the ratio estimates pressure coefficients, and a surface integral estimates the pressure part of the force. Measure room absolute pressure and temperature if converting the reference difference to speed through the ideal gas law $\rho =p_{\mathrm{abs}}/(RT)$; use thermodynamic temperature in that equation. For force reconstruction, cover the complete contour and use numerical integration with the tap geometry. Finite tap spacing, unknown end effects, probe disturbance and fluctuations limit that reconstruction; tubes and instruments also average or delay changing pressures. Retain the signed raw readings, repeated readings and reference readings so that these limits can be assessed. A small reference difference magnifies any zero error in the ratio, rather than producing a reliably large $C_p$.

Rectangular duct flow is steady flow of a Newtonian fluid down a straight rectangular pipe under a constant axial pressure gradient $-G$. For stationary walls and unidirectional flow, incompressibility eliminates axial dependence and the Navier-Stokes equation becomes a two-dimensional Poisson equation with zero Dirichlet boundary conditions. Subtracting a plane Poiseuille flow profile leaves a harmonic function that repairs the side-wall values using separation of variables. Uniqueness follows from Green's first identity: the difference of two solutions has zero boundary values and zero integral of the squared gradient, and hence vanishes.

For steady flow through a fixed control volume with one inlet and one outlet, the first law of thermodynamics and conservation of mass giveHere $\dot{m}$ is the mass flow rate, $\dot{Q}$ incoming heat per unit time, ${\dot{W}}_s$ outgoing non-flow work per unit time, $w$ the flow speed, $z$ elevation and $g$ gravitational acceleration. The specific enthalpy $h=u+p/\rho$ includes both the transported internal energy per unit mass $u$ and the pressure work needed to push volume through the boundary; $\rho$ is mass density. The inlet supplies that pressure work, while the outlet consumes it to displace the downstream fluid.^[ref]

For an insulated stationary throttle, require negligible heat transfer, no shaft or other non-flow work, and negligible changes in bulk kinetic energy and gravitational potential energy. Then $h_2=h_1$. With unchanged composition this is also equality of molar enthalpy. The upstream and downstream states must admit equilibrium pressure, temperature and property values, although the constriction itself is irreversible and can be far from thermodynamic equilibrium. Start-up storage of energy in the walls and fluid, heat leakage, or a large outlet speed invalidates the reduced balance. A nozzle can convert specific enthalpy into bulk kinetic energy even when it is insulated.

The same accounting for a fixed transported amount is $U_2-U_1=p_1{V}_1-p_2{V}_2$, hence $U_1+p_1{V}_1=U_2+p_2{V}_2$. This explains why dropping the two pressure work terms would give the wrong conserved quantity.^[ref]

For steady flow of constant-density fluid in a uniformly rotating frame with conservative body forces, the displayed quantity is constant along each relative streamline. The centrifugal potential contributes the negative quadratic term, and the Coriolis force contributes no work because it is perpendicular to the relative velocity. The result follows by dotting the rotating Euler equations for an inviscid fluid with that velocity.

A streakline at observation time $T$ is the set of present positions of all fluid elements that passed through one fixed release point $\mathbf{a}$ during a specified history of injection. For continuous release over ${\tau }_0\le \tau \le T$, solve a different initial value problem for each release time $\tau$:Thus a pathline varies $t$ for one particle; a streakline varies $\tau$ while holding $T$ fixed. Interrupted release gives only the corresponding subsets of the streakline. A moving nozzle requires a time-dependent release position instead, so the standard fixed-point definition should not silently be applied to it. Continuous release makes streaklines easy to observe and useful for showing where material from one source has reached. ^[ref]

In the analytical velocity field $(U,at)$ of pathline, a particle released at the origin at time $\tau$ followsObserve all particles together at time $T$, after continuous release from $\tau =0$:For $U=1\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, $a=1\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-2}$ and $T=2\mathrm{s}$, the streakline is the downward-curving parabola $y=2x-x^2/2$ in metre coordinates. Releases at $\tau =0,1,2\mathrm{s}$ occupy $(2,2)$, $(1,1.5)$ and $(0,0)\mathrm{m}$, respectively. At $x=1\mathrm{m}$, the streakline lies above the pathline $y=x^2/2$ and below the origin's streamline $y=2x$. All particles nevertheless have the same present velocity $(1,2)\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. The streakline slope $dy/dx=a\tau /U$ generally differs from the present velocity slope $aT/U$; they agree at the nozzle. The oldest particle is the downstream endpoint, which explains why the pathline and streakline meet there without being the same curve.

Each panel fixes one observation time. Coloured dots are the present positions of particles with the indicated release times; dashed pathlines show those particles' earlier histories. The black streakline connects present positions of the continuously released family, including release times between the sampled dots. After $T=1\mathrm{s}$, particles already present keep moving and new ones enter at the origin, so the later streakline is not a frozen record of the earlier one. Injection beginning only at $\tau =1\mathrm{s}$ would show just $0\le x\le 1\mathrm{m}$ of the $T=2\mathrm{s}$ curve. Both panels are diffusion-free analytical models, not experimental photographs.

Kline's contracting-channel demonstration switches from marking an element to continuous bubble production at a marking wire: the resulting trace is a streakline. The apparatus therefore changes the curve being displayed by changing the marking history, even with the same channel. A wire produces a family of traces; conceptually each fixed emitting location supplies its own streakline. Individual bubbles are markers rather than perfect fluid elements: Jean Hertzberg's teaching notes describe hydrogen production by electrolysis at a thin cathode wire and warn that larger bubbles have more buoyancy. ^{[ref] [ref]}

A dye version uses a small fixed injection port upstream in a transparent water channel, a dilute premix of dye with the channel water, illumination and a fixed optical camera. Start continuous injection at a recorded time ${\tau }_0$ and take a short exposure at $T$: the visible filament approximates a streakline, not the accumulated pathline of one particle. Repeat with the same port and imaging geometry after changing the flow with time; compare the filament against local directions estimated from short displacements of sparse markers at $T$. Agreement in a steady flow and possible disagreement when the flow changes are the predictions being tested; no measured curves are claimed here. The protocol follows Hertzberg's advice to use small ports, little injected volume and a dilute premix with matched density and viscosity. Check for nozzle disturbance by reducing injection rate, for buoyancy by watching the premix in still water, and for diffusion by comparing filament widths at different ages. Keep exposure short enough to suppress motion blur. Dye concentration approximates a passive scalar only when it has negligible feedback on the velocity field; finite port width, diffusion and out-of-plane motion limit how literally a visible filament can be read as a geometrical streakline. ^[ref]

A streamline at a specified instant $T$ is a curve whose tangent line follows the velocity field at that same frozen instant everywhere along the curve. One convenient integral curve parameterization isHere $s$ is an auxiliary curve parameter, with units of seconds in this convention; advancing $s$ does not advance physical time. Any regular reparameterization preserves the tangent geometry. Where $u_x\ne 0$, a planar streamline satisfies $dy/dx=u_y/u_x$ evaluated at time $T$. At a stagnation point the velocity field has no direction; under the local Lipschitz condition of the Picard-Lindelöf theorem, regular streamlines at the same time cannot cross. A streamline answers which directions fit together now, making it useful for describing local flow geometry. ^[ref]

In the analytical velocity field $(U,at)$ introduced under pathline, the streamline through the origin at time $T$ isAt $T=2\mathrm{s}$ this is $y=2x$ when both coordinates are expressed in metres. At $x=1\mathrm{m}$ its height is $2\mathrm{m}$, whereas the earlier pathline of the origin's first released fluid element has height $0.5\mathrm{m}$. Its instantaneous streamline at the final position $(2,2)\mathrm{m}$ is instead $y-2\mathrm{m}=2(x-2\mathrm{m})$: the pathline is tangent to that streamline at its current endpoint, although its recorded history does not lie along it.

The green streamline uses the velocity field at $T=2\mathrm{s}$ throughout; the orange pathline uses times $0\le t\le 2\mathrm{s}$; the purple streakline uses different release times at the single observation time $T=2\mathrm{s}$. The grey arrows all show the instantaneous velocity direction at $T$. These are exact analytical curves with chosen units, not measured dye shapes.

In a steady flow in a fixed reference frame, a pathline and a streamline solve the same autonomous ordinary differential equation. Uniqueness makes each particle released from a fixed point follow the same integral curve, so its pathline, the streakline from that point and the streamline share one geometrical curve. Finite recording or release intervals usually show different segments of that curve; the comparison assumes particles stay in the domain and treats stationary fluid elements separately. Neither two-dimensionality nor incompressibility is needed for this coincidence. Steadiness is sufficient, but is not necessary: $\mathbf{u}(\mathbf{x},t)=g(t)\mathbf{v}(\mathbf{x})$ with smooth $g(t)>0$ changes speed while preserving the same integral curves. In a general time-dependent velocity field, however, the three curves differ. Kline explains why continuous dye release in steady flow can therefore display streamlines. ^[ref]

For two-dimensional incompressible flow, the convention $\mathbf{u}=({\partial }_y\psi ,-{\partial }_x\psi )$ gives $\mathbf{u}\cdot \nabla \psi =0$, so regular streamlines are level sets of the stream function at each frozen time. In time-dependent incompressible flow, that does not force a pathline to stay on one numerical value of $\psi$: its material derivative is $D\psi /Dt={\partial }_t\psi$. The distinction is the difference between a geometric snapshot and a parcel's history.

An ideal fluid issuing from a small hole a vertical depth $h$ below a free surface has speed

Here $h$ is the vertical distance from the free surface to the centre of the orifice, and $g$ is the positive magnitude of gravitational acceleration. The ideal prediction assumes incompressible flow, the same ambient pressure at the free surface and emerging jet, negligible velocity of the reservoir's free surface, and negligible viscous dissipation and surface tension effects. For a falling free surface, a quasi-steady approximation additionally assumes that the local outflow adjusts much faster than $h$ changes. It applies the Bernoulli equation at each instant, rather than claiming that the whole drainage is steady flow.^[ref]

A short proof uses a streamline connecting the reservoir's free surface at elevation $z_s$ to the emerging jet at elevation $z_o$. With constant mass density $\rho$, negligible surface speed and no mechanical energy losses, the Bernoulli equation givesEqual pressures cancel, leaving $v^2/2=gh$: a unit mass gains the same kinetic energy as a body in free fall through height $h$. This makes Torricelli's law a useful first estimate before the detailed velocity field is known. At one quarter of the original head, ideal jet speed is one half as large; it is not proportional to head.

Far from the accelerating outlet region, the reservoir has approximately hydrostatic pressure $p_{\mathrm{ambient}}+\rho gh$ at the outlet's elevation. The emerging jet instead has approximately ambient pressure when surface tension is negligible. Do not assign that bulk hydrostatic pressure to the emerging jet as well as adding the height difference: that would count the available mechanical energy twice. A sealed reservoir, a submerged outlet or significant surface tension changes the pressure conditions and requires a different balance.

Actual volumetric flow rate is commonly represented by a discharge coefficient:where $a$ is the geometric area of the orifice. This definition compares volumetric flow rates, not just speeds. If a nearly uniform jet at its vena contracta has area $a_j$ and speed $v_j$, define the two separate ratios $C_c=a_j/a$ and $C_v=v_j/\sqrt{2gh}$. Then $Q=a_j{v}_j$ gives $C_d=C_c{C}_v$. A contracted jet can consequently have a speed close to $\sqrt{2gh}$ while $C_d$ is appreciably below one. No particular $C_d$ is universal: calibrate it for the opening and operating range.