Big "thumb's up" to the cameraman. Kept the prof and whiteboard within perfect frame/zoom.
@osama_alsafi3 жыл бұрын
I wish I could, one day, meet this professor just to tell him how good of a job he's doing. Thank you from DOWN UNDER
@samedbodur14963 жыл бұрын
I can't possibly tell how much these videos help me with my studies. I hope I will have the chance to thank Prof. Biddle in person one day. His way of teaching makes all these complex topics very simple to understand.
@user-pb8yw8cw3s4 жыл бұрын
At 15:23 there's no U but only 0.332.U^(3/2)(rho.mu/x)^(1/2) in the expression of the shear stress. Also 23:50 , the integral of the shear stress should provide us with: Dx=0.664.b.x^(1/2).(rho.mu)^(1/2).U^(3/2) Then when equating with DL, Cd will have the right answer Cd=1.328/Re^(1/2).
@Vygrith3 жыл бұрын
A man of culture as well
@egas995 жыл бұрын
I wish all professors could be like this guy! Thank you sir! From Portugal
@miguelburgos80214 жыл бұрын
online sucks. Reading off slide shows and going 10x faster . Not even answering questions properly 😒. Thank you for your videos they helped a lot!
@cakefactoryy4 ай бұрын
His delivery is amazing
@edelyndorvilus60455 жыл бұрын
This is a super excellent lecture! I just want to point out that there is an extra U in the Blasius equation that makes the exponent of the velocity 5/2. It should be 3/2 total.
@cassieshjsjx44085 жыл бұрын
Thank you so much for the video! He is so detailed in his explanation. I wish he was my fluid prof
@vicentereiman368 Жыл бұрын
Thank you very much Dr. Biddle!!!
@AlexJoneses3 жыл бұрын
Very good explanation of the topic, useful for a quick study session before the final
@bgs25143 жыл бұрын
you're my hero...
@lukailic66114 жыл бұрын
I think you've made a mistake in formula for sheer stress at 15:07. You wrote U in front of the square root that shouldn't be there. Also I think you're missing the x under the square root at 24:00
@arkhandaud Жыл бұрын
Saya mewakili Griffon Engine 21 mengucapkan terima kasih banyak doktorr Biddle. Yellboysss!!!
@disruptivegarage3 жыл бұрын
good stuff, i still have trouble viualizing the boundary layer depth, is there maybe a rule of thumb i could use for fast approximation?
@MishaSwetow4 ай бұрын
What book is used for this course?
@pepefrogic30342 жыл бұрын
Very good
@mohamedyateh912 Жыл бұрын
How can be get the values in the tabular form
@marquez23905 жыл бұрын
I'm not sure why an equation around 9:30 is called "x-momentum" equation. Is momentum not defined to be mass (density) times velocity? du/dx and du/dy aren't mass though so I'm confused.
@NostalgiaGames_Gamer5 жыл бұрын
go back to navier-stokes equation, it is just an algebraic manipulation of the equation nothing else
@eliot3275 жыл бұрын
wait you guys have fluids 1? this is my first fluids class...
@junzheng87914 жыл бұрын
why don't mention the Blasius equation?
@muhammedsalih65825 жыл бұрын
this video is very important,how can i gate the full lecture
@Vygrith3 жыл бұрын
There's no U power of 1 there in the shear stress Equation keep just the one U with power of 3/2 alone, he forgot the square X too in the drag force D. Overall it was so helpful thanks !
@bubulusahu32644 жыл бұрын
Useful videos 👌👌👌
@thandekajili91696 жыл бұрын
Very good. No need to go to the book now
@CPPMechEngTutorials6 жыл бұрын
Reading the book adds a lot of additional information and context... Dr. Biddle certainly read many fluid mechanics textbooks over the years. :)
@rache1sc1236 жыл бұрын
Super helpful video!
@CPPMechEngTutorials6 жыл бұрын
We're glad it was helpful!
@sitanshutiwari93855 жыл бұрын
Need more videos on laminar and turbulent flow
@xavierbower71776 жыл бұрын
great lecture
@CPPMechEngTutorials6 жыл бұрын
Thanks
@michaelli85234 жыл бұрын
There is an error to write the Froude number as V/(gL) in the last similarity problem. The dimensions do not match, should be v^2/(gL) or v/sqrt(gL).
@joninakiabaroaschilling25544 жыл бұрын
Thanks
@mubtasemalmaqadma12205 жыл бұрын
Table 7.1 from which book ?
@madelinepernat85415 жыл бұрын
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe he is talking about Chap. 9... not chap.7 (from Munson, Young, and Okiishi's Fundamentals of Fluids book) and he's referring to Table 9.1 (not 7.1)!
@michaelli85234 жыл бұрын
The book is Fluid Mechanics (8th) by Frank M. White.
@salahmattar72958 ай бұрын
I love you sir
@CPPMechEngTutorials8 ай бұрын
@marquez23905 жыл бұрын
Where do I get the notes for this so I can follow this better where you leave gaps.
@CPPMechEngTutorials5 жыл бұрын
Sorry, Dr. Biddle's lecture notes are not available.
@joshuacharlery58264 жыл бұрын
Ric Flair teaches fluid mechanics?
@siddhartharaja94136 жыл бұрын
Why does the height of boundary layer increases as we move along x axis?
@balupakki49955 жыл бұрын
More fluid is in contact with wall.....so there is more effect of wall stress
@CPPMechEngTutorials5 жыл бұрын
As you move along the wall, the influence of the wall (no slip boundary condition) has more time to impact the flow near the wall.
@faheemk11115 жыл бұрын
Due to Viscosity
@khawarali27582 жыл бұрын
What assumption are involved in the derivation of momentum eq and energy eq for laminar boundary layer?
@marquez23905 жыл бұрын
What does the letter "nu" represent
@CPPMechEngTutorials5 жыл бұрын
Kinematic viscosity... it is (absolute viscosity / density)
@marquez23905 жыл бұрын
@@CPPMechEngTutorials Thank you very much.
@shirleysanchez30744 жыл бұрын
I wish I had you as my professor
@marquez23905 жыл бұрын
Please can you help me? I commented here weeks ago and am still really struggling with the derivation of the boundary layer equations. I don't understand why we can get rid of the terms you mentioned in the video. If you could explain I would be extremely grateful. I found a video (link below) that had an explanation without going in depth about order of magnitude which was good for me as I'm a beginner in this area but it's reasoning for dp/dy = 0 makes no sense. Also if you could explain why the pressure gradient is zero that would be helpful too. This other video gave an explanation but I can't follow his reasoning. (his reasoning is at 2:28 of this video link if you are interested in helping a stressed student kzbin.info/www/bejne/nmS1pnyeh5uHirc).
@NostalgiaGames_Gamer5 жыл бұрын
the analysis of order of magnitude in that video is totally valid. as the whole point of that analysis is to non-dimensioalize the navier-stokes equation to actually obtain the order of magnitude of the pertaining values. and if you are still confused about what is the order of magnitude is all about, the reasoning goes something like this: first we analyze the navier-stokes for the x component which is the most prominent id we are dealing with a uniform fluid velocity (Uo) then we can obtain through non-dimensionlaization that the partial second order derivative of the velocity (u in respect to x is 1:1) which means that suppose that the velocity is 2m/s then the change of x is in the same order of magnitude (ie something like 5m or something) however, when we analyze the partial second order derivative of velocity u in respect to the horizontal height of the boundary layer, then through the nondimeonalized equation, we can observe that the previously assumed velocity in x (Uo) is 5m/s but the change in boundary layer is something like 0.000001 for example which gives us a way larger value than the (delsquared(u)/del(x)squared) and thus we can ignore it accordingly. the same thing goes with the navier-stokes in the y direction, you can see from the nondimenosionalized equation that (dp over the change in y) is by sandwiching the order by the previous analysis that have been done in the video is going to be something like 0.00001 and thus we can ignore the change in the pressure over the vertical displacement overall as it shows no significant change overall. and if the change in pressure over the vertical is almost insignificant then we can assume that navier-stokes is only viable for the horizontal direction only
@marquez23905 жыл бұрын
@@NostalgiaGames_Gamer Many many thanks for exaplining that. Two questions: 1. Do you need a pressure change to make NS equation viable? 2. Now that we have the boundary layer equation, how do I go about solving it? I'm relatively basic level and the PDE looks very complex.
@NostalgiaGames_Gamer5 жыл бұрын
@@marquez2390 no worries, 1) a pressure change is negligible in the x direction because of the constant uniform flow velocity U, an thus can be ignored in the xmomentum equation of NS, thus we will have the equation that the professor wrote down, and also the pressure change in the y direction is similarly neglected when we talk about the y-momentum in general, and thus pressure change in the BL theorem equations are mostly neglected in laminar flow, however, in general (not related to BLT) we of course have to take the NS equation with all it's glory, however solving it requires computational power and it is beyond our ability without numerical approximations 2) Don't worry about the partial differentials for now in the BLT, blasius has already done the job by using a similarity solution (i advise you to watch (Mod-01 Lec-12 Laminar External flow past flat plate (Blasius Similarity Solution) ) video, very informative, and yielded a beautiful simple approximate solution for laminar BLs , but as a general note please review the partial differential equation solving methods as they will be helpful later on. Greetings .
@marquez23905 жыл бұрын
@@NostalgiaGames_Gamer Thank you a lot.
@parikshitghosh13196 жыл бұрын
Thnks sir..
@CPPMechEngTutorials6 жыл бұрын
You're welcome.
@sitanshutiwari93855 жыл бұрын
Owsome
@xiaosun91114 жыл бұрын
why is D-x not a function of x! another typo or what!
@vlatkopopovski26852 жыл бұрын
The authors have two wrong scientific approaches: researching the creation of Lift force and Low pressure at upper side of the wing, relative to the ground surface and Earth. I explain the aerodynamic cavitation and existence of Lee side aerocavern, and creation of Aerodynamic force.
@emmal40954 жыл бұрын
Who's here from The University of Sydney CIVL3612 2020 cohort?
@emmal40954 жыл бұрын
Me.
@tuanle49585 жыл бұрын
Froude number equations are wrong
@CPPMechEngTutorials5 жыл бұрын
Can you provide a timestamp?
@tuanle49585 жыл бұрын
@@CPPMechEngTutorials 53:08
@tuanle49585 жыл бұрын
@@CPPMechEngTutorials Fr=v/(Lg)^0.5
@CPPMechEngTutorials5 жыл бұрын
@@tuanle4958 You are correct. We will place a correction in the video comments. Thanks for catching this!