Why P Is Incorrect

Incorrect unphysical explanation of drag by Prandtl

Arguments against Prandtl’s Boundary Layer Theory

Prandtl explains drag (and also ultimately lift) as an effect of a thin boundary layer.We show that this is incorrect by computing solutions of the Navier-Stokes equations with slip boundary condition without boundary layers which gives drag in close correspondence with observation. Hence drag does not come from boundary layers.

We show that instead drag results from 3d rotational separation without the high pressure of zero-drag potential flow 2d separation.

Large Effect from Small Cause: Tornado from  Butterfly

Prandtl’s boundary layer theory is an example of pseudo-science in the sense that it explains a large effect (lift and drag) from a very small cause (vanishingly thin boundary layer), a cause which is so small that it is beyond analysis and thus has no explanatory function.

A theory stating that tornados in Texas are generated by butterflies in the Amazonas, cannot be refuted but then also is empty of predictive power.

Read also:

2 thoughts on “Why P Is Incorrect

  1. That is not true. The drag you computed is due to artificial dissipation in the solver. Use spectral type incompressible solver with slip. Then make a comment.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s