Talk:Compressible flow

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Fluid Dynamics Taskforce.

Engineering Low‑importance

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Aviation

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Old message

I believe the first line in the article is incorrect. My aerodynamics text covers compressible flows in the regime under Mach 1. I suspect but do not know that supersonic flow is incompressible with shock waves resulting off the aircraft. Can you verify or explain why the lead line is accurate as is. Thanks mirwin

Mirwin removed that message two minutes after posting it. Today, no relevant comments on talk pages should be erased, so I've restored the comment. Graham87 07:11, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

I'm planning on majorly revamping this page as there's so much to discuss on this topic and nothing here. I'm knowledgeable on compressible fluid mechanics, but only slightly as it applies to aerodynamics. Any help on this side of things would be appreciated. Iron_Engineer (talk) 03:28, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a major revamp of the page. I've added a bit, especially on internal flows. I've also taken the liberty to remove the cleanup and no references templates. If anyone feels it still needs cleaning up, feel free to add the template back in. Thanks Alphanumeric Sheep Pig (talk) 07:12, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've also left in the original referencing style (where all the references are cited at the end) but added in text citations as well. It bugs me that two different styles are used. I prefer them all to be in text, especially since there are more than just one or two of them. Alphanumeric Sheep Pig (talk) 07:19, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The first sentence states that compressibility is defined as a variation in density, and the second sentence states that the threshold is that the Mach number "must be greater than 0.3". No justification is provided, and the Mach number section gives nothing of value to justify that number. Dimensional analysis does say that a Mach number >0.3 would yield a significant enough variation of density, but it is not proven in the article that the Mach number is necessary and sufficient. Low Mach number heated flows can have large density variations. Shouldn't the article specify that the Mach threshold is only valid for isentropic flows? 150.135.210.182 (talk) 19:55, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Review

This page really needs a review and revamping —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iyer.arvind.sundaram (talk • contribs) 04:15, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to first discuss here on the list of things to be put up on this page. I request comments on the same, and suggestions for the structure of the article. Iyer.arvind.sundaram (talk) 04:22, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for volunteering to do some work on this article. I think the structure of the article, as shown by the list of contents, is appropriate. However, the text throughout the article could do with some refinement to improve the scientific language and remove unnecessary jargon. Dolphin (t) 05:47, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Conservation of mass

{{\partial \rho } \over {\partial t}}=-\operatorname {div} (\rho \cdot {\vec {v}})

Generally written in the form below?

{{\partial \rho } \over {\partial t}}+\nabla \cdot (\rho \,{\vec {v}})=0

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Salih (talk • contribs) 08:15, 3 October 2010

If this is a question to which you want an answer, this Talk page is inappropriate and unlikely to produce an answer. Questions of a mathematical nature are regularly asked and answered at the Mathematics Reference Desk. Questions of a scientific nature are regularly asked and answered at the Science Reference Desk. Dolphin (t) 11:30, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it was not intended to be a question. I just wanted to show the editor who wrote the continuity equation above the common form of continuity equation. Salih (talk) 12:48, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Update needed?

I think this article may need updating to cover liquids as well as gases. See Theory of sonics. Biscuittin (talk) 19:00, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Combustion

While remaining at low Mach number, reactive flows involving heat release invoke compressibility and associated pressure waves. I think this is a major topic that should atleast be linked to from here. 69.157.141.151 (talk) 16:09, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One dimensional flow

Which of the listed references would this have come from as it seems misleading?

Ratio of duct length to width (L/D) is ≤ about 5 (in order to neglect friction and heat transfer

Please see following:

"Only a very short length of pipe is required (L/D about 5) to reach frictional choking when the inlet Mach number is 0.8. ref Fig.16"

Lack of awareness of the effect of friction caused a surprise in early jet engine testing. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/aeronautical-journal/article/abs/aircraft-propulsion-from-the-back-room/771675086CDE0E766BE700CD6B3198E7, p.191. Thanks.Pieter1963 (talk) 22:11, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]