Measurement of 

shear viscosity
A variety of methods are available for the measurement of shear viscosity. One standard
method involves measurement of the pressure gradient along a pipe for various rates of
flow and application of Poiseuille’s equation. Other methods involve measurement
either of the damping of the torsional oscillations of a solid disk supported between two
parallel plates when fluid is admitted to the space between the plates, or of the effect of
the fluid on the frequency of the oscillations.

The Couette viscometer deserves a fuller explanation. In this device, the fluid occupies
the space between two coaxial cylinders of radii a and b (> a); the outer cylinder is
rotated with uniform angular velocity ω0, and the resultant torque transmitted to the
inner stationary cylinder is measured. If both the terms on the right-hand side of
equation (148) are taken into account, the shear stress in the circulating fluid is found to
be proportional to r(dω/dr) rather than to (dv/dr)—not an unexpected result, since it is
only if ω, the angular velocity of the fluid, varies with radius r that there is any slip
between one cylindrical lamina of fluid and the next. The torque transmitted through
the fluid is therefore proportional to r3(dω/dr). In the steady state, the opposing torques
acting on the inner and outer surfaces of each cylindrical lamina of fluid must be of
equal magnitude—otherwise the laminae accelerate—and this means that r3(dω/dr)
must be independent of r. There are two basic modes of motion for a circulating fluid
that satisfy this condition: in one, the liquid rotates as a solid body would, with an
angular velocity that does not vary with r, and the torque is everywhere zero; in the
other, ω varies like r−2. The angular velocity of the fluid in a Couette viscometer can be
viewed as a mixture of these two modes in proportions that satisfy the boundary
conditions at r = a and r = b. The torque transmitted per unit length of the cylinders

turns out to be given by

It may be added that if the inner cylinder is absent, the steady flow pattern consists only
of the first mode—i.e., the fluid rotates like a solid body with uniform angular velocity
ω0. If the outer cylinder is absent, however, and the inner one rotates, it then consists
only of the second mode. The angular velocity falls off like r−2, and the velocity v falls off
like r−1.

In the equation of motion given in the following section, the shear viscosity occurs only
in the combination (η/ρ). This combination occurs so frequently in arguments of
fluid dynamics that it has been given a special name—kinetic viscosity. The kinetic
viscosity at normal temperatures and pressures is about 10 −6 square metre per second
for water and about 1.5 × 10−5 square metre per second for air.

Navier-stokes equation
One may have a situation where σ11 increases with x1. The force that this component
of stress exerts on the right-hand side of the cubic element of fluid sketched in Figure
9B will then be greater than the force in the opposite direction that it exerts on the left-
hand side, and the difference between the two will cause the fluid to accelerate along x1.
Accelerations along x1 will also result if σ12 and σ13 increase with x2 and x3, respectively.
These accelerations, and corresponding accelerations in the other two directions, are
described by the equation of motion of the fluid. For a fluid moving so slowly compared
with the speed of sound that it may be treated as incompressible and in which the
variations of temperature from place to place are insufficient to cause significant
variations in the shear viscosity η, this equation takes the form

Euler derived all the terms in this equation except the one on the left-hand side
proportional to (η/ρ), and without that term the equation is known as
the Euler equation. The whole is called the Navier-Stokes equation.

The equation is written in a compact vector notation which many readers will find
totally impenetrable, but a few words of explanation may help some others. The symbol
∇ represents the gradient operator, which, when preceding a scalar quantity X,
generates a vector with components (∂X/∂x1, ∂X/∂x2, ∂X/∂x3). The vector product of this
operator and the fluid velocity v—i.e., (∇ × v)—is sometimes designated as curl v [and
∇ × (∇ × v) is also curl curl v]. Another name for (∇ × v), which expresses particularly
vividly the characteristics of the local flow pattern that it represents, is vorticity. In a
sample of fluid that is rotating like a solid body with uniform angular velocity ω0, the
vorticity lies in the same direction as the axis of rotation, and its magnitude is equal to
2ω0. In other circumstances the vorticity is related in a similar fashion to the local
angular velocity and may vary from place to place. As for the right-hand side of
(155), Dv/Dt represents the rate of change of velocity that one would see if the motion of
a single element of the fluid could be followed—that is, it represents the acceleration of
the element—while ∂v/∂t represents the rate of change at a fixed point in space. If the
flow is steady, then ∂v/∂t is everywhere zero, but the fluid may be accelerating all the
same, as individual fluid elements move from regions where the streamlines are widely
spaced to regions where they are close together. It is the difference between Dv/Dt and
∂v/∂t—i.e., the final (v · ∇)v term in (155)—that introduces into fluid dynamics the
nonlinearity that makes the subject so rife with surprises.
Potential flow
This section is concerned with an important class of flow problems in which the vorticity
is everywhere zero, and for such problems the Navier-Stokes equation may be greatly
simplified. For one thing, the viscosity term drops out of it. For another, the nonlinear
term, (v · ∇)v, may be transformed into ∇(v2/2). Finally, it may be shown that, when (∇
× v) is zero, one may describe the velocity by means of a scalar potential ϕ, using the
equation
Thus (155) becomes which may at once be integrated to show

that

This result incorporates Bernoulli’s law for an effectively incompressible fluid ([133]), as

was to be expected from the disappearance of the viscosity term. It is more powerful
than (133), however, because it can be applied to nonsteady flow in which ∂ϕ/∂t is not
zero and because it shows that in cases of potential flow the left-hand side of (157) is
constant everywhere and not just constant along each streamline.

Vorticity-free, or potential, flow would be of rather limited interest were it not for
the theorem, first proved by Thomson, that, in a body of fluid which is free of vorticity
initially, the vorticity remains zero as the fluid moves. This theorem seems to open the
door for relatively painless solutions to a great range of problems. Consider, for
example, a stream of fluid in uniform motion approaching an obstacle of some sort. Well
upstream of the obstacle the fluid is certainly vorticity-free, so it should, according to
Thomson’s theorem, be vorticity-free around the obstacle and downstream as well. In
this case a flow potential should exist; and, if the fluid is effectively incompressible, it
follows from equations (152) and (156) that it satisfies Laplace’s equation,

This is perhaps the most frequently occurring differential equation in physics, and

methods for solving it, subject to appropriate boundary conditions, are very well
established. Given a solution for ϕ, the fluid velocity v follows at once, and one may
then discover how the pressure varies with position and time from equation (157).

The physicists and mathematicians who developed fluid dynamics during the 19th

century relied heavily on this reasoning. They based splendid achievements upon it, a
notable example being the theory of waves on deep water (see below). There was a touch
of unreality, however, about some of their theorizing. If carried to extremes, the
argument of the previous section implies that water initially stationary in a beaker can
never be set into rotation by rotating the beaker or by stirring it with a spoon, and this is
clearly nonsense. It suggests that vorticity-free water remains vorticity-free if it is
squeezed into a narrow pipe, and this too is plainly nonsensical, for the well-established
parabolic profile illustrated by Figure 10 is not vorticity-free. What is misleading about
the argument in situations like these is that it pays inadequate attention to what
happens at interfaces. Following the work of Prandtl, physicists now appreciate that
vorticity is liable to be fed into the fluid at interfaces, whether these are interfaces
between the fluid and some solid object or the free surfaces of a liquid. Once the
slightest trace of vorticity is present, it destroys the conditions on which the proof of
Thomson’s theorem depends. Moreover, vorticity admitted at interfaces spreads into the
fluid in much the same way that a dye would spread, and whether or not the results of
potential theory are useful depends on how much of the fluid is contaminated in the
particular circumstances under discussion.
Potential flow with circulation: vortex lines
The proof of Thomson’s theorem depends on the concept of circulation, which Thomson
introduced. This quantity is defined for a closed loop which is embedded in, and moves
with, the fluid; denoted by K, it is the integral around the loop of v · dl, where dl is an
element of length along the loop. If the vorticity is everywhere zero, then so is the
circulation around all possible loops, and vice versa. Thomson showed that K cannot
change if the viscous term in (155) contributes nothing to the local acceleration, and it
follows that both K and vorticity remain zero for all time.

Reference was made earlier to the sort of steady flow pattern that may be set up by
rotating a cylindrical spindle in a fluid; the streamlines are circles around the spindle,
and the velocity falls off like r−1. This pattern of flow occurs naturally
in whirlpools and typhoons, where the role of the spindle is played by a “core” in which
the fluid rotates like a solid body; the axis around which the fluid circulates is then
referred to as a vortex line. Each small element of fluid outside the core, if examined in
isolation for a short interval of time, appears to be undergoing translation without
rotation, and the local vorticity is zero. Were it not so, the viscous torques would not
cancel and the flow pattern would not be a steady one. Nevertheless, the circulation is
not zero if the loop for which it is defined is one that encloses the spindle or core. In
such situations, a potential that obeys Laplace’s equation outside the spindle or core can
be found, but it is no longer, to use a technical term that may be familiar to some
readers, single-valued.

Readers who recognize this term are likely to have encountered it in

the context of electromagnetism, and it is worth remarking that all the results of
potential flow theory have electromagnetic analogues, in which streamlines become the
lines of force of a magnetic field and vortex lines become lines of electric current.
The analogy may be illustrated by reference to the Magnus effect.

streamlines for potential flow with circulation past a rotating cylinder

This effect (named for the German physicist and chemist H.G. Magnus, who first
investigated it experimentally) arises when fluid flows steadily past a cylindrical spindle,
with a velocity that at large distances from the spindle is perpendicular to the spindle’s
axis and uniformly equal to, say, v0, while the spindle itself is steadily rotated. Rotation
is communicated to the fluid, and in the steady state the circulation around any loop
that encloses the spindle (and encloses a layer of fluid adjacent to the spindle within
which the vorticity is nonzero and potential theory is inapplicable) has some nonzero
value K. The streamlines that describe the steady flow pattern (outside that “boundary
layer”) have the form suggested by Figure 11, though the details naturally depend on the
magnitude of v0 and K. The flow pattern has stagnation points at P and P′ and, since the
pressure is high at such points, the spindle may be expected to experience a downward
force perpendicular both to its axis and to the direction of v0. Detailed calculations
confirm this expectation and show that the magnitude of the force, per unit length of the
spindle, is

This so-called Magnus force is directly analogous to the force that a transverse magnetic
field B0 exerts upon a wire carrying an electric current I, the magnitude of which, per
unit length of the wire, is B0I.

The Magnus force on rotating cylinders has been utilized to propel experimental yachts,
and it is closely related to the lift force on airfoils that enables airplanes to fly (see
below Lift). The transverse forces that cause spinning balls to swerve in flight are,
however, not Magnus forces, as is sometimes asserted. They are due to the asymmetrical
nature of the eddies that develop at the rear of a spinning sphere (see below Boundary
layers and separation). Cricket balls, unlike the balls used for baseball, tennis, and golf,
have a raised equatorial seam that plays an important part in making the eddies
asymmetric. A bowler in cricket who wants to make the ball swerve imparts spin to it,
but he does so chiefly to ensure that the orientation of this seam remains steady as the
ball moves toward the batsman.

It may be shown, by reference to the magnetic analogue or in other ways, that straight

vortex lines of equal but opposite strength, ±K, which are parallel and separated by a
distance d, will drift sideways together through the fluid at a speed given by K/2πd.
Similarly, a vortex line that has joined up on itself to form a closed vortex ring of

radius a drifts along its axis with a speed given by where c is the

radius of the line’s core, with ln standing for natural logarithm. This formula applies, for
example, to smoke rings. The fact that such rings slow down as they propagate can be
explained in terms of the increase of c with time, due to viscosity.