Dimensional Analysis Scaling

chemical engineering research and design 8 6 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 835868
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Chemical Engineering Research and Design
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ cher d
Review
On dimensionless numbers
M.C. Ruzicka
Department of Multiphase Reactors, Institute of Chemical Process Fundamentals, Czech Academy of Sciences,
Rozvojova 135, 16502 Prague, Czech Republic
This contribution is dedicated to Kamil Admir al Wichterle, a professor of chemical engineering, who admitted to feel a bit lost in the
jungle of the dimensionless numbers, in our seminar at Za Plhalovic ohradou
a b s t r a c t
The goal is to provide a little review on dimensionless numbers, commonly encountered in chemical engineering.
Both their sources are considered: dimensional analysis and scaling of governing equations with boundary con-
ditions. The numbers produced by scaling of equation are presented for transport of momentum, heat and mass.
Momentum transport is considered in both single-phase and multi-phase ows. The numbers obtained are assigned
the physical meaning, and their mutual relations are highlighted. Certain drawbacks of building correlations based
on dimensionless numbers are pointed out.
2008 The Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Dimensionless numbers; Dimensional analysis; Scaling of equations; Scaling of boundary conditions;
Single-phase ow; Multi-phase ow; Correlations
Contents
1. Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836
2. Two sources of dimensionless numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836
2.1. Source onedimensional analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836
2.2. Source twoscaling of equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 837
3. Dimensional analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838
3.1. How DA works. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 838
3.2. Comments on DA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839
3.2.1. Choice of variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839
3.2.2. Variables with independent dimensions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840
3.2.3. Similarity and modelling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 840
3.2.4. Neglecting variables in DA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841
3.2.5. Limits of DA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841
3.2.6. DA versus SE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841
4. Scaling of equations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841
5. Transport of momentum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 841
5.1. Mass equation of uid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842
5.2. Momentum equation of uid. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 842
5.3. Energy equation of uid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844
5.4. Boundary conditions: no slip and free-slip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845
5.4.1. Normal component of free-slip BC. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845
5.4.2. Tangential component of free-slip BC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845
Tel.: +420 220 390 299; fax: +420 220 920 661.
E-mail address: ruzicka@icpf.cas.cz.
Received19 June 2007; Accepted2 March2008
0263-8762/$ see front matter 2008 The Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.cherd.2008.03.007
836 chemical engineering research and design 8 6 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 835868
5.5. Multi-phase ow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847
5.5.1. Microscale description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 847
5.5.2. Mesoscale description (Euler/Lagrange) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 848
5.5.3. Macroscale description (Euler/Euler) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 849
5.5.4. Retention time distribution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850
6. Transport of heat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 852
7. Transport of mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 853
8. Correlations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854
9. Remark on literature. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857
10. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859
Appendix A. Concept of intermediate asymptotics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859
A.1. Motivation example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859
A.2. Two kinds of similarity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859
A.2.1. Complete similarity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 859
A.2.2. Incomplete similarity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860
A.3. Two kinds of self-similarity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 860
A.4. Relation between DA and IA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861
A.5. Beyond IA? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 861
A.6. Broader horizons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862
Appendix B. Suggestions for using and teaching DA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 863
Appendix C. New areas in chemical engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864
C.1. Microreactors and microuidics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864
C.1.1. Microsystems in chemical technology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864
C.1.2. Prevailing forces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864
C.1.3. Governing equations and boundary conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 864
C.2. Biosystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865
C.3. Multiscale methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 865
1. Introduction
I have always beenpuzzledwiththe plethora of dimensionless
numbers (DN) occurring in the various branches of chemi-
cal engineering. From sincere discussions with my peers as
well as with students an impression has arose that I am not
the only puzzled person in this eld. Consequently, the main
motivation of this contribution is to try to briey review DN
commonly encountered at the transport of momentum, heat,
and mass, as for their origin, physical meaning, interrelation
and relevance for making correlations. The selection of DN
is neither objective nor exhaustive, being biased by working
mainly in the area of the multi-phase hydrodynamics.
The dimensionless (nondimensional) numbers (criteria,
groups, products, quantities, ratios, terms) posses the follow-
ing features. They are algebraic expressions, namely fractions,
where in both the numerator and denominator are powers of
physical quantities with the total physical dimension equal to
unity. For example, the Reynolds number, Re =LV/v, has dimen-
sion [1], also denoted as [-].
The dimensionless numbers are useful for several reasons.
They reduce the number of variables needed for descrip-
tion of the problem. They can thus be used for reducing
the amount of experimental data and at making correla-
tions. They simplify the governing equations, both by making
them dimensionless and by neglecting small terms with
respect large terms. They produce valuable scale estimates,
whence order-of-magnitude estimates, of important physical
quantities. When properly formed, they have clear physical
interpretation and thus contribute to physical understanding
of the phenomenon under study. Also, choosing the relevant
scales, they indicate the dominant processes. There are two
main sources of DN: dimensional analysis and scaling of gov-
erning equations.
2. Two sources of dimensionless numbers
(DN)
2.1. Source onedimensional analysis (DA)
Ageneral way howto formally describe the surrounding world
consists of several steps. First, for the thing under study
(system), dene all possible qualities of interest. Second,
select those qualities that can be quantied, i.e. their amount
in the thing can be expressed by numbers, or some other
mathematical constructs. Call these measurables the phys-
ical quantities. Choose the etalons (measuring sticks, units)
to measure each of them. Each physical quantity has four
attributes: name, notation, dening relation, and physical unit
that determine its physical dimension(unit anddimensionare
often used interchangeably). The rst two are only our labels,
the second two are physically substantial. There are seven
basic physical quantities (length, mass, time, electrical current,
thermodynamic temperature, luminous intensity, amount of
substance). They are measured by seven basic units of the SI
systemof units (meter, kilogram, second, ampere, Kelvin, can-
dela, mole), which is canonical nowadays. All other quantities
are called derived quantities and are composed of the seven
basics. Depending on the research area, usually only fewbasic
quantities are used. In mechanics, we have three (length L,
mass M, time T), plus one (temperature O) for thermal effects,
if these are considered.
Having the physical quantities, we want to nd the rela-
tions among them. We either have the governing equations
(physical laws) or not. The very basic laws (axioms of nature)
cannot be derived: they must be disclosed or discovered. There
is nowhere they could be derived from: they are already here,
existing silently, demonstrating themselves through a variety
of diverse or even disparate effects. Lacking the knowledge
chemical engineering research and design 8 6 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 835868 837
Nomenclature
1
a variable in DA; acceleration (m/s
2
)
b variable in DA
c concentration (kg/m
3
)
c
p
heat capacity (J/kgK)
C coefcient (drag, added mass); concentration
scale (kg/m
3
)
d length, size, particle diameter (m)
D diameter (m); mass diffusivity (m
2
/s)
D
t,ax
turbulent/axial dispersion (m
2
/s)
e voidage, volume fraction of dispersed phase (-)
E bulk modulus of elasticity (=1/K) (Pa); energy (J)
f function symbol (f)
F force (N); function symbol; factor
g gravity (m/s
2
)
g
/
reduced gravity (=(L,/,)g) (m/s
2
)
h height, depth (m)
j ux, of heat (J/m
2
s), of mass (kg/m
2
s)
k transfer coefcient (J/m
2
s K); rate constant (e.g.
s
1
)
K compressibility (Pa
1
)
l length (m)
L length scale (m)
m mass (kg)
M mass scale (kg)
p pressure (Pa)
P pressure scale (Pa); period of oscillation (s)
Q ow (m
3
/s)
r radius, position (m); reaction rate (kg/m
3
s)
R reaction rate scale (kg/m
3
s)
S (cross-section) area (m
2
)
t time (s)
T time scale (s)
u velocity (dispersed phase) (m/s); master quan-
tity (u)
v velocity (continuous phase) (m/s)
V velocity scale, mean speed (m/s)
x coordinate, distance, position (m)
z coordinate, distance, position (m)
Greek letters
thermal expansivity (K
1
)
concentrational expansivity (kg
1
)
, shear rate (s
1
)
L difference, variation
temperature (K)
O temperature scale (K)
k heat diffusivity (z/,c
p
) (m
2
/s)
z heat conductivity (J/ms K)
z
C
capillary length (m)
j dynamic viscosity (uid) (Pas)
v kinematic viscosity (uid), momentum diffu-
sivity (m
2
/s)
i
Pi-term
, density (uid) (kg/m
3
)
o interfacial tension (N/m, J/m
2
)
t time (s); stress (N/m
2
)
angle
function symbol ()
frequency (s
1
or 2/s); vorticity (s
1
)
frequency, its scale (s
1
); vorticity scale (s
1
);
ow domain with boundary
Nabla operator (m
1
)
Others
BC boundary condition (s)
DA dimensional analysis
DN dimensionless number (s)
Hyb unit of momentum (SI) (kgm/s) =(Ns)
IC initial condition (s)
N number
O(1) order of unity
SE scaling of equations
1D one-dimensional
[] physical dimension
* dimensionless, basic DN
Subscripts
a added mass
b bulk
f uid (continuous phase); ow
mix mixture
p particle (dispersed phase)
r relaxation
s, S surface, interface
w wall, interface
0 reference value
about the basic laws, we must try to nd them using the other
available methods. One such a method is DA.
Dimensional analysis consists of three steps. First, make a
list of relevant variables, the physical quantities that describe
the system. Second, convert these dimensional quantities
into DN. Third, nd a physically sound relationship (scale-
estimate) of these DNwithout helpof any governing equations
(physical laws). The mainproblemis to make the list of the rel-
evant variables that is complete and independent. Here the
science meets the art: the choice of the variables is highly
subjective, beyond any rigour. The other two steps are simple
in principle owing to the fact that DA is a rigorous math-
ematical method operating precisely on the lists of chosen
variables. DA relies on several assumptions that are needed
for the mathematical proof of its very core, the Pi-theorem.
The assumptions are the following. The physical equations are
dimensionally homogeneous. The physical equations hold for
different systems of units. The dimensions of physical quan-
tities have form of power-law monomials (dimensions like
[sin(L) log(T) +e
M
] are not allowed). There are quantities with
independent dimensions and their list is complete. Beside
these, we tacitly presume: the problem is amenable to DA.
2.2. Source twoscaling of equations (SE)
The scaling of equations (SE) means nondimensionalizationof
the equations describing the system under study (equations
of motion, fundamental equations, governing equations, etc.).
It is a technically simple and transparent procedure, which
1
Since many symbols appear in the text, only those of general
use are listed here. At multiple meaning, the context talks. Those
of the local meaning, apply usually within one paragraph only, are
omitted.
yields the dimensionless equations and the list of relevant DN.
It does not give the relation among these DN.
The dimensionless equations have certain advantages.
They are independent of the system of units. The dimen-
sionless numbers are relevant for the problem. The proportion
between individual terms can be seen. These equations apply
to all physically similar systems, so they are useful for scale-
up/down.
The process of scaling proceeds as follows. For instance,
take the equation of linear mass-spring oscillator:
m
d
2
x
dt
2
= kx [kgm/s
2
]. (2.2.1)
where all the four quantities (x, t, m, and k) are dimensional.
Separate them into two classes: parameters (m, k) and variables
(x, t). Choose the scales (characteristic values) for the variables,
length scale L and time scale T. Make substitution x Lx*,
t Tt* in (2.2.1) to obtain
mL
T
2
d
2
x
dt
2
= (kL)x
[kgL/T
2
]. (2.2.2)
Although (2.2.2) has dimension, the quantities are sepa-
rated into dimensionless variables (x*, t*) and dimensional
parameter groups (mL/T
2
, kL). Dividing (2.2.2) by any parameter
group yields the dimensionless equation. Dividing by (kL):
m
kT
2
d
2
x
dt
2
= x
[-] (2.2.3)
produces one DN, namely the number N=(m/kT
2
), the propor-
tion (inertia)/(elasticity).
Generally, DN show the proportion between the individual
terms in an equation correctly only when the dimensionless
variables (*) are scaled so well to be of order of unity O(1).
Then the magnitude of the terms is solely represented by the
parameter groups. With the above pendulum, at the choice
L amplitude and Tperiod P, we have x* 1, 1) and t* 0,
1) (one swing), which both are O(1). Consequently, Nshows the
(inertia)/(elasticity) proportion correctly.
For an equilibrium motion like oscillations, where
the both counter-acting forces are somehow balanced,
one would expect that their ratio should be unity, i.e.
N=(inertia)/(elasticity) =1. However, this is generally not true.
The particular value of Ndepends onthe choice of scales. Realiz-
ing that (k/m)
1/2
is the oscillator angular frequency , which is
denedby=(2)/P, thenN=(P/2T)
2
. For the particular choice
of the time scale T=P, we have N=(P/2P)
2
=1/(2)
2
0.025.
Thus, the actual force ratio is N0.025:1=1/40, far from unity.
The reason is that DN is a very rough estimate of the effects it
compares. For instance, at the laminarturbulent ow regime
transition in pipes, the ratio Re =(inertia)/(viscosity) is not
exactly 1, but 10
3
. It is therefore better to use a vague
language and say low Re and high Re, upon strong under-
standing that everybody knows what it does mean.
Conclude that the diversity of the original four-
dimensional problem (2.2.1) described by four quantities
(x, t, m, k) is reduced to a single number (m/kT
2
) at the price of
lacking all details that are below the resolution of the scale
considerations.
3. Dimensional analysis (DA)
3.1. How DA works
Choose one physically dependent variable a and choose fur-
ther (k +m) independent variables, a
i
and b
i
, on which we
presume a depends. a
i
have mutually independent dimen-
sions, of which the dimensions of all remaining variables a
and b
i
can be obtained by combination. We want to nd the
unknown physical law, the function f, we presume it does
exist:
u = (u
1
. u
2
. . . . . u
k
; b
1
. b
2
. . . . . b
m
) [u] = [ ]. (3.1.1)
To reproduce the dimensions of a and b
i
, we combine a
i
in
form of power monomials:
[u] = [u
1
]
p01
[u
2
]
p02
[u
3
]
p03
[u
k
]
p0k
A [u]. (3.1.2)
[b
i
] = [u
1
]
pi1
[u
2
]
pi2
[u
3
]
pi3
[u
k
]
pik
B
i
[b
i
]. (3.1.3)
where the exponents p
ij
are found for each row by compar-
ing the dimensions on both sides, based on the dimensional
homogeneity of physical equations. Dividing a and b
i
by the
corresponding composites of the same dimension, denoted
for brevity as A and B
i
, and rewriting (3.1.1) in dimensionless
form for another unknown function , we get
u
A
=
b
1
B
1
.
b
2
B
2
.
b
3
B
3
. . . . .
b
m
B
m
[-]. (3.1.4)
This equation is usually written in the following notation
as the similarity law for :
= (
1
.
2
. . . . .
m
) [-]. (3.1.5)
where the dimensionless terms (Pi-terms, similarity param-
eters) are a/A,
i
b
i
/B
i
. The famous Buckingham
Pi-theorem says: It is possible to get from (3.1.1) to (3.1.5).
The main gain is the reduction of the number of variables
from (k +m) in (3.1.1) to only (m) in (3.1.5). All k variables a
i
are hidden in the denominators of and
i
. In mechanics,
we have only three basic dimensions, L, M, T, so that k 3.
Another advantage is that (3.1.5) is dimensionless. According
to experimental convenience, any quantity involved can be
used to change the value of
i
. DA merely transforms f into
. Rewriting (3.1.5) in the dimensional form, as the similarity
law for a:
u = A (
1
.
2
. . . . .
m
) [u]. (3.1.6)
We see a certain progress as compared to (3.1.1): f is written
as a product of two things, f =A. The rst one is the known
dimensional function A that contains the rough essence of f.
It is called the scale estimate (basic scaling, scaling law) for a,
and we write
u A = u
p01
1
u
p02
2
u
p03
3
u
p0k
k
[u]. (3.1.7)
The second one is the unknown dimensionless function
that is the ne tuning of the scale estimate, to convert
(3.1.7) into the equality a=A. Finding does not belong to
the frame of DA; this must be done by some other means (e.g.
experimentally or numerically).
As an example, consider a ow in a pipe. The dependent
variable is the drag force F. The independent variables are pipe
dimensions (D, L), uid properties (,, j), and speed (V). Eq.
(3.1.1) now takes form
F = (D. L. ,. j. V) [N]. (3.1.8)
Variables with independent dimensions are D (length), V
(time), , (mass). Variables with dependent dimensions are L,
F, j. Eq. (3.1.4) applied to this example becomes
F
,V
2
D
2
=
L
D
.
j
,DV
[-]. (3.1.9)
Consequently, Eq. (3.1.7) for the basic scaling becomes
F ,V
2
D
2
[N]. (3.1.10)
which is the dynamic uid pressure (,V
2
) times the cross-
section area (D
2
). The correcting dimensionless term (L/D,
j/,DV) in(3.1.9) is the formula for the frictioncoefcient C(L/D,
Re), which remains for experiments. DA thus produces a great
deal of the total solution of the whole problem.
Whenno exceptional variable a labelledas physically inde-
pendent is or can be explicated, (3.1.1) is simply written as
f =0, where the variable a becomes b
m+1
. This notation is suit-
able when it is not clear what is the master quantity, or, when
several of them can play this role, depending on our angle of
view at the problem.
3.2. Comments on DA
3.2.1. Choice of variables
It is the main problem of DA, since there is no rigorous pro-
cedure for it. The quantities must be physically relevant and
independent, and their list must be complete. The choice
is highly subjective and needs profound understanding of
the problem, experience with usage of DA, intuition, and
good luck. As a guideline, there are recommendations of
what should be taken into account (e.g. system geometry,
material properties, kinematic and dynamic aspects, exter-
nal conditions, etc.). Very helpful are the governing equations
related to the problem. Even when we cannot solve them (e.g.
NavierStokes equation), they indicate the relevant quantities.
A simple example demonstrates how the choice of vari-
ables affects the output of DA. Consider the mathematical
pendulum in Fig. 1. The period P depends on two variables,
the length l and gravity g:
P(l. g) = 2
l
g
1,2
[s]. (3.2.1)
Suppose we do not know it, and we try to nd it by DA. Let
us try different choices of variables. At the proper choice, P(l,
g), we get the correct result, the basic scaling for the period,
P(l/g)
1/2
. Here, the correcting function in (3.1.6) contains
no argument and equals 2. With lesser variables than is due,
P(l) and P(g), the DA fails. The type of failure is the logical con-
tradiction of kind 1=0, since it is impossible to make up time
dimension of P (s) from the length l (m) only. When we try
to substitute for the missing correct variable (g) another vari-
able which is not relevant, the following may happen. DA fails
by a contradiction, with P(l, m), P(l, j). DA works but gives an
incorrect result, Pl
2
/v, with P(l, v), which is the worst case,
since there is no indication that things go wrong. With more
Fig. 1 Denition sketch. Pendulum of mass m and hanger
length l swings under gravity g in a medium of viscosity
(or ).
variables than necessary, DA either recovers the correct result
by eliminating the extras, P(l, g, m) and P(l, g, j), or, DA fails
by insolubility, i.e. having more unknowns than equations, P(l,
g, v). A subtle point is considering several quantities of the
same dimension, P(l, d, g). Using the same length scale L for
both l and d, DA fails by insolubility. Using one scale L
1
for the
correct variables (l, g) and another scale L
2
for the extra vari-
ables (d), DA works and eliminates the extras. However, using
L
1
for one part of the correct variables (l) plus some extras, and
another scale L
2
for the second part of the correct variables
(g) plus some extras, DA fails by contradiction. The result is
summarized in Table 1.
To sum up, DA either works or fails. When it works, it gives
either good or bad result. When it gives good result, either
the choice of variables is correct or the extra variables are
eliminated. When it fails, it is either by logical contradiction
(dimension of l.h.s. cannot be made up of dimensions of r.h.s.)
or by insolubility (extra variables bring more equations but not
new dimensions). This simple example is purely demonstra-
tive; not a general statement proven for all possible situations.
Table 1 Application of DA for nding period of
pendulum, P=2(l/g)
1/2
Variables Features Action Output
P(l, g) Proper choice Work Correct result
P(l) Missing variable (g) Fail Contradiction
P(g) Missing variable (l) Fail Contradiction
P(l, m) Incorrect substitute (m) Fail Contradiction
P(l, j) Incorrect substitute (j) Fail Contradiction
P(l, v) Incorrect substitute (v) Work Wrong result
P(l, g, m) Extra variable (m) Work Elimination
P(l, g, j) Extra variable (j) Work Elimination
P(l, g, v) Extra variable (v) Fail Insolubility
P(l, g, d) Extra variable (d)
P(L
1
, g(L
1
), L
1
) Uniscale L
1
Fail Insolubility
P(L
1
, g(L
1
), L
2
) Two scales L
1,2
Work Elimination
P(L
1
, g(L
2
), L
1
) Two scales L
1,2
Fail Contradiction
P(L
1
, g(L
2
), L
2
) Two scales L
1,2
Fail Contradiction
First column: variables chosen for pendulum period P. Second col-
umn: features of our choice. Third column: what DA does? Fourth
column: note on result. Denition sketch in Fig. 1.
3.2.2. Variables with independent dimensions
Of the physically independent variables of f in (3.1.1), we must
choose those with independent dimensions (a
i
), and leave
the rest for b
i
. The task reduces to nding k linearly inde-
pendent vectors in R
k
. For instance, the three mechanical
dimensions generate 3D space (L MT) with the base vec-
tors {1, 0, 0}, {0, 1, 0}, {0, 0, 1}. All mechanical quantities
are represented by vectors in this space: speed has coordi-
nates {1, 0, 1}, density has {0, 1, 3}, force has {1, 1,
2}, etc. We can choose any three non-coplanar vectors for
a
i
, but the simpler the better. For different choices of a
i
, DA
produces different DN, but the resulting physical informa-
tion is identical. Based on the dimensional homogeneity of
(3.1.1), the powers p
ij
in (3.1.2) and (3.1.3) are determined
by the standard routine of solving a set of linear algebraic
equations.
3.2.3. Similarity and modelling
One paradigm says: If systems are similar, DA gives same
description. This statement forms the basis for the the-
ory of similarity (similitude) and modelling (scale-up/down).
The physical similarity consists in correspondence in geom-
etry, kinematics, dynamics, etc. One may ask: Can dissimilar
systems have same description? Consider four physically dif-
ferent systems shown in Fig. 2. Despite their difference, they
all share the same description, the formula for drag force given
by DA in (3.1.9). Consequently, different systems can have the
same description within the framework of dimensional con-
siderations. DA is ambiguous with respect to physical kind
of systems, it cannot see the physical difference. DA is not
ambiguous with respect to manipulation with symbols repre-
senting the input variables, owing to the unicity theorem for
the solution of linear algebraic systems.
Modelling usually means nding a description of a small
model system on a laboratory scale by DA (model M), where it
is easy to do measurements, and, to transfer the result on to a
similar but bigger system (prototype P), where it is difcult to
experiment. Without similarity, the model and prototype are
described by two different relations:
M
=
M
(
M
i
) (model).
P
=
P
(
P
i
) (prototype).
(3.2.2)
With similarity, the following holds:
M
=
P
(similarity law for modelling).
M
i
=
P
i
i (similarity criteria).
M
=
P
. (3.2.3)
For instance, DA gives the scale estimate (3.2.1) for
pendulum period P(l/g)
1/2
. Applying the similarity law,
P
M
/(l
M
/g)
1/2
=P
P
/(l
P
/g)
1/2
, gives the relation between the peri-
ods of big and small pendula: P
P
/P
M
=(l
P
/l
M
)
1/2
(scaling rule).
Increasing pendulumlength25 times gives only 5 times longer
period, in virtue of (l
P
/l
M
)
1/2
(scaling coefcient). Knowing this
may be helpful for designers of big clocks.
The similarity criteria may not always be met. With a
simple pendulum, the tuning function in (3.1.6) has no
arguments
i
, and is constant, =2, see (3.2.1). With more
complex systems, there can be several Pi-terms (e.g. two in
(3.1.9)), whose model-prototype equality required by (3.2.3)
may be difcult to guarantee. The demands of the similarity
criteria for different
i
may not be fully compatible. Models
with these contradictions are called distorted, in contrast
with the true model, where we can satisfy all demands. For
instance, in hydraulic engineering, we have modelling based
on two Pi-terms, namely the Froude and Reynolds numbers,
1
=Re,
2
=Fr. Their equality (Fr
M
=Fr
P
, Re
M
=Re
P
) implies a
severe requirement on the kinematic viscosity of the model
and real uids, v
P
/v
M
=(L
P
/L
M
)
3/2
. Considering the great dis-
parity in size of hydraulic models L
M
and real water works L
P
,
it is difcult to nd suitable uids. With L
P
/L
M
=10
2
we need
Fig. 2 Ambiguity of DA. Four different ow situations with identical description. (Case A) Innite pipe of diameter D and
wall roughness L. (Case B) Finite pipe of diameter D and length L. (Case C) Finite plate of size DL. (Case D) Liquid piston of
length L oscillating in a cylindrical orice of diameter D. Fluid has density , viscosity and speed V.
v
P
/v
M
=10
3
. The phenomenon of distortion is often qualied
as a drawback of DA.
3.2.4. Neglecting variables in DA
There are two reasons for neglecting some variables that can
apparently play a role in the description of the problem. First,
based on our subjective choice, we do not want some variables
in the model. Our experience says, that they may be problem-
atic for the smooth operation of DA. Second, we want them,
but the corresponding ND are either small or large. The tra-
dition says that these variables are irrelevant, which is rather
counter-intuitive. The rationale is, however, the following. The
DN usually are ratios of two effects. If this ratio is either too
small or too big, one of the effects is simply negligible. There-
fore, it can be neglected as a category, and thus excluded from
further considerations. For instance, consider the Reynolds
number. When it is too small or too large, we have either the
viscous ow or the potential ow, and this parameter enters
neither of these two limiting theories. When we neglect the
inertia effects completely, there is no sense to compare them
with the viscous effects, and vice versa. The act of omitting
some variables looks rather subjective, but there are rules for
it, see Appendix A.
3.2.5. Limits of DA
It was believed that DA is a universal tool whose potential
is limited only by the skill of the user. However, like any
other mechanism, DA too can operate only under certain
circumstances: there are physical problems that cannot be
solved by DA, in principle. As a brief guideline, few contra-
indications to applicationof DAare the following. The problem
involves information about the initial and boundary condi-
tions: the system behaviour in the initial times, details of
process generation, its behaviour near the system bound-
aries, decay via equilibration, energy dispersion or dissipation
during the process evolution. There are variables related to
the presence of the internal sources/sinks of mass, heat,
momentum, energy, in the environment in which the process
occurs. Some global conservation characteristics (integrals)
of the system are not constant during solution but vary due
to the sources. Parameters related to variable properties of
the (micro)structure/texture of the medium carrying the pro-
cess are present. The independent variables are involved in
a complicate way (in exponent, in argument of function,
etc.). Regime transitions occur during the solution of the
problem (some variables lose relevance and new ones come
into play). All these are potentially bad variables, we may
not want. Consequently, more sophisticated tools must be
developed and employed to cope successfully withthese prob-
lems. Fortunately, there is one, the theory of intermediate
asymptotics, which can be considered as a generic exten-
sion of DA. The basic idea of this concept is presented in
Appendix A.
3.2.6. DA versus SE
As for the subjectivity of choices, the comparison between
DA and SE goes in favour of the latter. With DA, one must
choose all the quantities, whose relevance and completeness
is not guaranteed. With SE, these quantities are given by the
equations (plus initial and boundary conditions). In equa-
tions, we only must choose the variables to be scaled, and
the parameters to be left intact. Also, we must choose suit-
able characteristic scales to get the dimensionless variables
O(1), to see the proportion between different terms. Both are
basically doable, when little care is taken. As for the output,
DA can reproduce all the numbers obtained by SE, if we feed
it with the proper variables. On the other hand, DA can gen-
erate numbers that cannot be obtained by SE, whose physical
relevance may be difcult to assess. In addition, DA gives the
scale-estimate of the unknown relation between the quanti-
ties. It is convenient to apply SE rst, to get the proper list
of DN, and then use DA to nd the scaling relations between
them.
4. Scaling of equations (SE)
The motivation for SE and the procedure were briey intro-
duced in Section 2.2. In sake of simplicity, a brief notation
is used further. The starred dimensionless O(1)-variables are
omitted, and only the parameters and scales are retained in
the scale equations. These are not the true equations, but
relations that indicate the relative proportions between the
individual terms. As an example, we recover (3.2.1) by SE. The
governing equation is the conservation of angular momen-
tum, Fig. 1:
(ml) x (mg)x = 0 [Nm]. (4.1)
where the mass cancels:
(l) x (g)x = 0 [m
2
/s
2
]. (4.2)
Choose the variables (x, t) and parameters (l, g). Scaling of
variables by general scales L and T gives
lL
T
2
gL = 0 (scale equation) [L
2
/T
2
]. (4.3)
Choosing the particular scales, L =l and T=P, which are rel-
evant and make x* and t* O(1), indeed recovers P(l/g)
1/2
.
Here, relation (4.3), l
2
/P
2
+gl =0, means l
2
/P
2
gl, so that
P(l/g)
1/2
.
Further, in sake of simplicity, the complicated issues
related to the presence of multiple scales and directional scal-
ing are mostly omitted (except for an example in Section 8).
In the same system, different processes can take place, each
having distinct scales of length, time, speed, etc. Different pro-
cesses can dominate along different spatial directions, having
different scales. The ow domain itself can be highly ani-
sometric, having different dimension in different directions.
We face multiplicity of relevant scales, and their directional
dependence. For instance, in a boundary layer different pro-
cesses along and across can be identied. A body moves
along the vertical and its wake grows in the horizontal direc-
tion. Likewise, a spiralling bubbles rises up and exerts periodic
deection in the horizontal plane. We will not resolve the
many possible scales and, instead, a single scale will be
employedfor eachquantity. This uniscale approachis accept-
able at the general level of description, but must be rened
when particular ow situation is analysed. Thus, length xL
(but not L
x
, L
y
, L
z
), speed vV (but not V
x
, V
y
, V
z
), nabla
1/L, etc.
5. Transport of momentum
Transport of momentum is a synonym for uid dynamics.
Conservation of mass and (linear) momentum of uid are the
governing equations.
5.1. Mass equation of uid
The mass balance (continuity equation) for a compressible
uid reads
,
t
(,v) = 0 [kg/m
3
s]
(unsteadiness) (convection) = 0. (5.1.1)
Choosing the variables (,, v, x, t), their scales (,
0
, V, L, T), and
the parameters (), we get by scaling the dimensional scale
equation:
,
0
T

,
0
V
L
= 0 [M/L
3
T]. (5.1.2)
Dividing by ,
0
the density scale disappears, and we get
1
T

V
L
= 0 [1/T]. (5.1.3)
Dividing nally by the convection term (V/L) we get the
dimensionless scale equation:
L
VT
1 = 0 (5.1.4)
with one DN, namely (L/VT) (unsteadiness)/(convection).
Usually, we can nd suitable scales for length L and speed V.
The problemoftenis howto scale the time, i.e. what to take for
T. There are fewgeneral choices: velocity scaling (T=L/V), peri-
odic scaling (T=1/frequency), relaxationscaling (T=relaxation
time), energy scaling (T=L(M/E)
0.5
), diffusion scaling (T=L
2
/D),
etc. We take the rst, since nothing indicates that the ow is
periodic or relaxing. Moreover, this choice also follows from
(5.1.3), in the state of balance. Taking the basic scaling T=L/V
turns the scale equation into
1 1 = 0. (5.1.5)
This should be read: unsteadiness (accumulation) and con-
vection are in balance (same order of magnitude), 1/T=V/L.
This balance is due to our choice of T, which may not be jus-
tied in reality. In case of incompressible uid, (5.1.1) reduces
to v = 0, which after scaling gives V/L =0, meaning that the
convection term is zero order, O(0), as expected.
5.2. Momentum equation of uid
The momentum (force) balance for an incompressible Newto-
nian single-phase uid reads
,
v
t
,(v.)v = p j
2
v ,g [Hyb/m
3
s] = [N/m
3
]
(unsteadiness) (convection)
= (pressure) (viscosity) (gravity). (5.2.1)
Unlike force [Newton] or energy [Joule], momentum does
not have a single-word unit: let us call it Hyb [kgm/s] =[Ns],
provisionally. The two l.h.s. terms, (unsteadiness) and (con-
vection) are also called the inertial forces, namely the latter
one. They are called the Eulerian and Lagrangian (convec-
tive) accelerations, too. Choosing the variables (v, p, x, t), their
scales (V, P, L, T), and the parameters (,, j, g), we get by scaling:
,V
T

,V
2
L
=
P
L

jV
L
2
,g [M/L
2
T
2
]. (5.2.2)
Dividing by the convective (inertia) term(,V
2
/L), because of
tradition, we get
L
TV
1 =
P
,V
2

j
,LV

gL
V
2
. (5.2.3)
The magnitude of the convective (inertia) force is thus
unity. Assigning the four DN their proper names we get
Sr 1 = Eu
1
Rc

1
Fr
. (5.2.4)
We can divide (5.2.2) by any term, but DN would not have
the usual names. The convection (inertia) term is the most
ow-like, so it is the natural scaling basis. The four DN have
a clear physical meaning in terms of forces:
Strouhal number. Sr =
L
TV
(unsteadiness)
(convection)
.
Euler number. Eu =
P
,V
2
(pressure)
(convection)
.
Reynolds number. Rc =
,LV
j
(convection)
(viscosity)
.
Froude number. Fr =
V
2
gL
(convection)
(gravity)
.
(5.2.5)
The relevance and use of these numbers follow from their
denitions and physical content. The Froude number is some-
times (namely in physical literature) dened as (V
2
/gL)
1/2
. For
instance, Fr is important where the gravity (buoyancy) and
inertia interplay (open channel ow, free surface problems,
hydraulic engineering, oating vessels, surface waves at long
length scalesnot capillary waves; buoyancy driven ows).
The problem is how to scale time and pressure. Few scal-
ings for T were presented at (5.1.4). Others come from the
dynamic equation. We can compare the unsteady term L/TV
with the other terms in (5.2.2), to express their similar order
of magnitude:
Convection scaling : T =
L
V
. Sr = 1.
Pressure scaling : T =
,VL
P
.
Viscosity scaling : T =
L
2
v
.
Gravity scaling : T =
V
g
.
(5.2.6)
The basic scaling T=L/V follows from the denition of
Sr =L/TV and also from comparing the unsteady and convec-
tion terms, ,V/T,V
2
/L. Using the basic scaling makes the
Strouhal number equal to unity, Sr =1. The unsteady and con-
vective forces are thus comparable, as a direct consequence
of our choice of scaling. This may not always correspond to
reality.
Similar holds for the pressure scale P (P also means LP).
We can compare the pressure term P/L with the other terms
in (5.2.2), to express their similar order of magnitude:
Unsteady scaling : P =
,LV
T
. for T =
L
V
it is P = ,V
2
.
Eu = 1.
Convective scaling : P = ,V
2
. Eu = 1.
Viscous scaling : P =
jV
L
.
Gravitational scaling : P = ,gL.
(5.2.7)
Their use depends on the ow situation, and the rele-
vance of the forces involved. Similarly, we can obtain other
scaling relations between quantities in (5.2.2), comparing the
corresponding terms. For instance, the so-called gravitational
scaling for speed comes fromequating convection and gravity,
,V
2
/L ,g, which yields V(g/L)
1/2
. It also comes from deni-
tion of Fr =V
2
/gL. This scaling is useful, e.g. in sedimentation,
when particle speed V is not known beforehand, but particle
size L is.
Note the following. Using the convective (inertial) pres-
sure scaling, which is nothing but the dynamic pressure, the
Euler number turns to unity, Eu=1. The pressure and convec-
tive forces are then comparable, as a direct consequence of
our choice. This may not always correspond to reality. Simi-
lar happens when using the convective scaling for both time
T=L/V and pressure P=,V
2
, yielding Sr =1 and Eu=1, so that
the unsteady, pressure and convective forces are comparable.
When some of these DNare missing in books and papers, the
authors likely used certain specic scaling that made them
unity, perhaps without notifying the reader. To trace it back,
one needs to read carefully what kinds of scales were actu-
ally employed. The gravity scaling recovers the primary-school
formula for hydrostatic pressure, p=,gh.
Since we customarily divided (5.2.2) by the convective (iner-
tia) term, all numbers in (5.2.5) relate to the inertia force. If we
want other combinations of forces, we must compose them:
pressure
viscosity
= EuRc.
pressure
gravity
= EuFr.
viscosity
gravity
=
Fr
Rc
. Cu =
Rc
2
Fr
Ar = Cu
L,
,
.
(5.2.8)
Note the following. The ratio (gravity)/(viscosity) is often
introduced as the Galileo number:
Cu =
Rc
2
Fr
=
gL
3
v
2
. (5.2.9)
where the square of Re is used for a practical reason: the veloc-
ity cancels. This is helpful, when V is difcult to estimate, or
when the speed is a part of the problemsolution. For instance,
in many applications (e.g. sedimentation, uidization, bubble
columns, etc.), we look for speed of bodies and particles mov-
ing in uids (bubbles, drops, solids). When buoyancy effects
are relevant, as it usually is in these applications, Ga is cor-
rected by (L,/,) and the product is called the Archimedes
number:
Ar =
L,
,
Cu =
L,
,
gd
3
v
2
. (5.2.10)
This number is also (and more naturally) obtained by scal-
ing the Newton force law for a body falling/rising in a uid
under gravity (see Section5.5.2). The buoyant correction(L,/,)
of Ga is equivalent to replacing in (5.2.9) the gravity g with the
reduced gravity g
/
=(L,/,)g in Fr, which is usual in buoyancy
driven ows (see Section 6). The uniform part of the density
eld can be absorbed in the gradient pressure term (modied
pressure p
/
=p+,gz), thank to the fact that gravity has poten-
tial. Then, the buoyancy term is directly proportional to the
density difference L, =, ,
0
. The cause of density variations
within a (incompressible) uid can be, e.g. heat or solute con-
centration (see Sections 6 and 7). When the solute particles
are so big that they are endowed with their own momentum,
they form the macroscopic dispersion, and we speak about
multi-phase ow (see Section 5.5). Note that (5.2.1) contains
only two material properties, density and viscosity. The third
one, the surface tension, enters only via the boundary condi-
tions (Section 5.4).
There are many DN arising in particular ow situations,
and some of them are mentioned here. For instance, the ow
through curved pipes and sharp bends is characterized by the
Dean number, Dn=Re(r/r
c
)
1/2
, where r is pipe radius and r
c
is radius of curvature. This correction to Re accounts for the
effects of the secondary ow driven by the centrifugal force
(Dean vortices). Fast liquid ows with large pressure variance
can experience cavitation, where the liquid pressure p comes
close to or falls belowthe vapour pressure p
v
. Here, the Cavita-
tionnumber Cv=LP/,V
2
compares the liquidvapour pressure
difference LPpp
v
with the dynamic uid pressure ,V
2
.
There are numbers related to rotational effects, where cen-
trifugal (,
2
R) and Coriolis (2,v) forces arise in (5.2.1),
where is rotation frequency and R distance from rotation
axis. The Ekman number Ek =(v/L
2
) is the force ratio (vis-
cous)/(Coriolis). The Rossby number Ro =(V/L) is the force
ratio (inertia)/(Coriolis). Like with the uniform density, also
the centrifugal force can be absorbed in the pressure term,
because it can be put into the gradient form. When Ek and
Ro are small, a balance between pressure and Coriolis forces
is reached (geostrophic ows). With these numbers, certain
phenomena are connected (strong collocations: Ekman lay-
ers, Rossby waves), which are important in geophysical uid
mechanics (meteorology, oceanography). While these num-
bers reect the forces due tononinertial reference frame (Earth
rotation), another rotational effects are studied too, e.g. in
TaylorCouette ow between two coaxial cylinders, where we
canmeet the Taylor number, Ta=(4
2
L
4
/v
2
). The simplest rota-
tional effect is perhaps encountered in the process of mixing,
with an impellor in a container, where both the gravity (g) and
centrifugal (
2
r) accelerations interplay in (5.2.1).
There are numbers related to rheology of complex u-
ids with non-Newtonian behaviour, where the stress tensor
takes complicated forms. Depending on the given stress ten-
sor and the ow situation, specic numbers can arise. For
instance, the Weissenberg number (rst normal stress differ-
ence N
1
)/(shear stress), which can also be dened in terms of
(relaxationtime)/(shear rate). Another one is, e.g. the Bingham
number (yieldstress)/(viscous stress). There alsois anumber,
related to a very general concept, the Deborah number:
Dc =
T
r
T
f
. (5.2.11)
It compares two time scales: material relaxation time T
r
and time of ow or deformation T
f
. The former scale is a con-
stitutive property of the material under study and says how
quickly it responds to deformation: T
r
=0 for ideal uid with
instantaneous response, 10
12
s for water molecules, 10
6
s
for thick lubrication oil (tribology), few seconds for polymer
melts, and T
r
= for ideal solid that does not deform at all.
The later scale is a property of the deformation process: the
length of the deformation experiment, the length of obser-
vation of the material under load, etc. The simple fact that
all real materials have T
r
<has an important consequence:
everything ows. To witness it, we must perform/watch the
experiment on large enough time scales T
f
, to ensure T
f
>T
r
,
whence low De. Water is solid when we hit it very fast, faster
than it can open. Thus, any ordinary mortal can walk over
water, provided one paces faster than 10
12
s. This walking
is due to relaxation times of water molecules. Walking sup-
ported by surface tension is mentioned in Section 5.4.1. On
the other hand, the things we consider solid in our everyday
life (T
f
hours, days, years), canowduring centuries andmil-
lennia (e.g. under its own gravity: glass tables in windows of
cathedrals, lead pipes in old buildings). The scale T
f
for geo-
logical processes is evenlonger. To see it, one should spanvery
long period, aeons. For instance, the Lord with T
f
eternity
could see mountains owing before Him
2
. Summing up, we
see/feel the material liquid at low De (De _1) and solid at high
De (De 1).
When dealing with conducting uids (magnetohydro-
dynamicsconducting uids in magnetic eld; metallic and
ionic melts, Earth core, interior of stars, plasma), specic
numbers appear, e.g. N=(magnetic permeability)
2
(magnetic
eld)
2
(electrical conductivity) L
2
/,v, or the Alfvennumber.
When dealing with compressible uids, the Mach number
Mc =V/V
s
is of paramount importance. Density variations in
a uid can be estimated by L,/, KLp, where K is the uid
compressibility and Lp pressure variation, Lp,V
2
, using
the inertial pressure scaling. The compressibility effects are
important whenL,/, >1, i.e. V>1/(K,)
2
. Realizing that 1/(K,)
1/2
is the speed of sound V
s
, we have Mc >1. Since 1/K is the
bulk modulus of elasticity E, we can introduce the Cauchy
number Ch=,V
2
/E, to nd that Ch=Mc
2
. Other related number
is the Eckert number, Ec =V
2
/c
p
O(kinetic energy)/(enthalpy),
which arises from scaling the full energy equation (tempera-
ture rise by adiabatic compression). A relation holds, Ec Mc
2
.
When dealing with rareed uids (gases), there is a limit,
where our hypothesis about their continuous nature breaks:
when the mean free path L
m
of the uid molecules is compa-
rable with the domain size L
d
. There are not enough mutual
collisions between molecules to ensure the statistically sta-
ble averages. In terms of the Knudsen number, Kn=L
m
/L
d
, the
corrections to rarecation are needed when Kn is large (gas at
low pressure, in small domainporous media, membranes,
microchannels). One such correction is the Cunningham (slip)
factor F, which relates the drag coefcients in the dilute
and normal (atmospheric pressure, room temperature) u-
ids, C
dilute
=C
normal
/F. Not surprisingly, F depends on Kn, e.g.
2
This is often quoted in the reology literature with reference to
the Deborah song (The Old Testament, Book of Judges, Chapter 5,
Verse 5). Reiner (1964) introduced the concept of De with
reference to the owing mountains in this song. It is right that
the original Hebrew word means to ow (root nzl = ,
Hed anek, 2007). However, the mountains ew not because of
the very long observation time (only 1 (human) day; God
subdued Jabin, the king of Canaan, on that day), but because of
the short-time and intense anger of God. Therefore, the
expressions to quake or to melt, which appear in different
translations, are closer to the original message. This note is not
to undermine the great concept of De, but to show that it does
not have its recourse in the Deborah song (and that the Lord was
likely not the very rst rheologist).
like F =1+Knf(Kn), or similar. Also, Kn relates to Re and Mc, by
KnMc/Re. Note that the macroscopic no-slipconditiononthe
wall also breaks, when the ow is highly rareed and events
on microscale become relevant.
5.3. Energy equation of uid
The derivation of the full energy equation is cumbersome,
and often not necessary. When we neglect the dissipation
and thermal effects and take the steady ow, the conserva-
tive Bernoulli equation results, which is the rst integral of
the corresponding momentum equation:
1
2
,v
2
p ,gn = const. [J/m
3
]
(convection) (pressure) (gravity) = const. (5.3.1)
Choosing the variables (v, p, h), their scales (V, P, L), and the
parameters (,, g), we get by scaling:
,V
2
P ,gL = const. [M/LT
2
]. (5.3.2)
Here, we can see the convective and gravitational scaling
for the pressure directly, P,V
2
and PgL. Dividing by the
convective term (,V
2
), because of tradition, we get
1
P
,V
2

gL
V
2
= const. (5.3.3)
Assigning the DN their proper names we get
1 Eu
1
Fr
= const. (5.3.4)
It is a counterpart of the steady and inviscid (5.2.4), so only
Eu and Fr are present.
Like the energy, also other quantities can be derived from
the velocity eld, and their equations obtained by manipulat-
ing (5.2.1). The vorticity equation is obtained by taking Curl of
momentum equation (5.2.1):
,
,(v.) = ,(.)v j
2
[Hyb/m
4
s]
(unsteadiness) (convection)
= (vortex stretching) (vorticity diffusion).
,
T

,V
L
=
,V
L

j
L
2
. (5.3.5)
The pressure and gravity disappear due to their gradient
nature (they generate no torque), and the vortex stretch-
ing term emerges. It is important for the energy ow down
the turbulent cascade, and is zero in 2D case, causing some
anomalous phenomena. Note that the transport coefcient for
diffusionof bothmomentumandvorticityis the same (namely
j). Some estimates of can be made, e.g. the easiest one,
=V/L. Note that the convection and vortex stretching terms
are comparable, when the same scales are used for these two
physically different terms.
Related to energy is so-called enstrophy. Energy per unit
mass is the square of velocity ((1/2)v
2
), enstrophy is the square
of vorticity ((1/2)
2
). The cross-product is called helicity
((1/2)v). These scalar quantities are oftenusedinturbulence.
Their equations can easily be scaled and the corresponding
DN formed. It is not sure, whether the terminology (if any) of
numbers thus produces is established and settled.
5.4. Boundary conditions: no slip and free-slip
Initial and boundary conditions inseparably pertain to the
governing equations, and should also be scaled. The initial
conditions (IC) are given functions of the spatial distribution of
the variables in the initial time. There is actually nothing to
scale. On the other hand, the boundary conditions (BC) can be
more elaborate. BC are equations that the variables must full
at the boundary of the ow domain , during the whole
process of solution. As such, they must also be scaled.
In single-phase ow, bounded by a rigid wall, the no-slip
BC applies, which is simple and merely says that the speed is
zero at the wall, v=0. There is not much to scale, besides v,V,
which is kind of unnecessary.
In multi-phase ow, where deformable uid interfaces
separate immiscible phases with certain interfacial (surface)
tension o, the free-slip BC applies, which is far from being
trivial. It is a force balance at the uiduid interface. Decom-
posing the force into normal (normal stress, pressure) and
tangential (shear stress) components, BC says: jump in uid
pressure is balanced by tension o, and jump in uid stress
is balanced by surface gradient of tension
S
o (i.e. gradient
along interface). There are important DN stemming from the
free-slip BC that relate to deformation of uid particles and
interfaces.
5.4.1. Normal component of free-slip BC
By scaling, the normal component gives a number that com-
pares the uid pressure and the Laplace pressure produced by
the interface tension, N=P/(o/L), sometimes called the Laplace
number, La. It follows from the physical situation, that the
length scale L cannot be chosen arbitrarily but must relate to
the curvature of the interface that produces the correspond-
ing capillary pressure o/L [Pa]. Choosing something else would
be physical nonsense. Consequently, for L should be taken the
radius of curvature, the size of a bubble or drop, or perhaps
even the capillary length. What can be put for the uid pres-
sure scale P? Generally, anything from (5.2.7), provided that it
corresponds to the physical situation in question. Upon differ-
ent scalings for pressure P, the number N takes the following
forms and names:
Unsteady scaling of P : Un =
,L
2
V
oT
(unsteadiness)
(capillarity)
.
Convective scaling of P : Wc =
(L),LV
2
o
(inertia)
(capillarity)
.
Viscous scaling of P : Cu =
jV
o
(viscosity)
(capillarity)
.
Gravitation scaling of P : Bo = Eo =
(L),gL
2
o
(gravity or buoyancy)
(capillarity)
.
(5.4.1)
Here (L), means that both , and L, can be used, putting
stress either on gravitational or buoyant aspect of We and Bo.
The unsteady number Un turns into the Weber number upon
the convective scaling for time T=L/V.
The Weber number We compares the inertia and capillary
forces. It applies to deformation of bubbles and drops at
free rise or on collisions with an obstacle where dynamic
effects are important. Typical situations are, e.g. bouncing
at a wall and path instability of rising/falling uid parti-
cles, where the deformation and the motion can strongly
be coupled. Since We stems from the Lagrangian accelera-
tion term, it also reects the particle deformation due to the
converging/diverging streamlines. Low We means low defor-
mation, and vice versa. Other situation is walking over water
(hydrophobic feet assumed), where the inertia force (dynamic
load) produced by the walker must not exceed the bear-
ing power of the exible membrane of the surface tension,
whence low We is required. Note that other mechanisms of
water walking exist, well beyond the bearing capacity of the
surface tension. For instance, small reptiles (genus Basiliscus)
canrunover water using a supporting impulse froma liquidjet
created by a specic shape of their feet. Here, other numbers
besides We play a role too.
The Capillary number Ca compares the viscous and capillary
forces. It is relevant when viscous forces dominate, i.e. slow
ows and small scales. The typical situation is drainage of a
thin liquid lm between two interfaces, at least one of them
is uid (to have o in play). The typical applications abound:
interactions of uid particles with themselves, with solids,
and with rigid walls (coalescence, bouncing, adhesion), fre-
quently encountered in bubble columns, otation columns,
extractors, etc.
The Bond number Bo and the Eotvos number Eo mean the
same: the ratio of gravity (,) or buoyancy (L,) forces to the
capillary forces. The typical situation is deformation of a stag-
nant drop sitting on a horizontal plane, where Bo compares
the hydrostatic pressure across the drop (,gL) with the capil-
lary pressure (o/L) inside the drop. Naturally, the length scale
L must be the drop size. Similar situation is when bubbles or
drops are entrapped below a horizontal wall, or attached to a
needle (L orice size). From the equilibrium deformation of
bubbles and drops, the static value of o can be obtained. Other
situation is standing on the water surface, where the static
loadof the stander must not exceedthe strengthof the surface
tension, whence low Bo is required. An important quantity
relates to Bo, the capillary length z
C
. Consider that gravity
forces dominate on large length scales at Bo 1, and capillary
forces dominatedonsmall lengthscales at Bo 1. Findthe crit-
ical (capillary) lengthscale z
C
, where Bo =1. Quickly we see that
the capillarity prevails over gravity when L z
C
=(o/(L),g)
1/2
.
The typical situationis the capillary elevationof the water sur-
face near the wall of the glass, which occurs in the range up
to z
C
from the wall. Beyond this, the gravity prevails and the
surface is at.
Besides the four DN arising from the normal component of
the BC in (5.4.1), another composite number is often used. The
Morton number Mo is an articial conglomerate that combines
Re and Fr from the governing equations, and We from the BC,
in such a way, that it contains only the material properties of
uids (plus gravity):
Mo =
Wc
3
Rc
4
Fr
. (5.4.2)
The buoyant versionreads Mo =(L,)
3
j
4
g/,
4
o
3
=g(L,)
3
v
4
/o
3
,
and gravity version reads Mo =gj
4
/,o
3
=gvj
3
/o
3
. It can also be
obtained by DA, by forming a dimensionless group of (g, j, ,,
o).
5.4.2. Tangential component of free-slip BC
By scaling, the tangential component gives a number that
compares the surface gradient of the interface tension
S
o
and the uid shear stress t, N=
S
o/t. Since the quantity
S
o
is called the Marangoni stress t
Ma
, the number N is called the
Marangoni number Ma:
Mu =
t
Mu
t
. (5.4.3)
In case of a at surface, where a tension difference Lo
develops over a lengthL, the surface gradient canbe estimated
as
S
o Lo/L. The uid stress can be estimated by the viscous
scaling as t jV/L, which gives
Mu =
Lo,L
jV,L
Lo
jV
. (5.4.4)
It may be difcult to estimate the velocity scale V for com-
plex motions near interfaces on the convection basis, and the
diffusive scaling is therefore applied. V is expressed with help
of the diffusivity of the agent that causes the interface tension
variance (heat, surfactant), V(diffusivity)/L. It is consistent
with using the viscous scaling for the uid stress: in both
cases, the molecular transport is reected.
The specic formulation depends on the physical process
that causes the variation of o along the interface. Two situa-
tions usually occur: variation of o is caused by a difference in
temperature or in surfactant concentration c. In the former
case, it is Lo =(do/d)(/) and V=k/L. In the latter case, it
is Lo =(do/dc)(c/) and V=D/L. The Marangoni number then
reads
Mu =
L
jk
do
d
(thermocapillarity).
L
jD
do
dc
(surfactants).
(5.4.5)
where is the angle along the interface of a bubble or drop,
and L corresponds to their size. To close the problem, we must
nd the dependence of the interface tension on the agent con-
tent, o() and o(c), as well as the spatial distribution along the
interface of the agent itself, (x)
S
and c(x)
S
. The help comes
fromthe thermodynamics and physical chemistry of surfaces,
where the relation between o and (, c)
S
at the interface is
determined, and the relation between (, c)
S
at the interface
and that in the bulk (, c)
bulk
are established too. Often, the
equilibrium between the bulk and interface is assumed (for-
mulas are then called isotherms). The problem of nding the
interfacial distribution of (x)
S
and c(x)
S
is much more compli-
cated. Under severe assumptions on the ow and transport of
and c we can make simplied theories. Otherwise, we are on
mercy of numerical experiments by CFD, where all processes
are strongly coupled (ow, transport, adsoption/desorption
kinetics).
The signicance of the Marangoni number is that its large
value indicates the presence of strong Marangoni stresses.
They are important in several situations. They delay the rise
of drops and bubbles in contaminated water. They delay
the drainage of the lm between interfaces, which suppress
the coalescence (bubble columns, extractors) and adhesion
(otation). Besides, it generates many other interesting phe-
nomena. For instance, at the thermocapillary migration, ne
bubbles can rise down in a liquid with inverse temperature
gradient (hot-bottom cold-top arrangement). Similar is the
electrocapillary motion, where the surface variation of o is
caused by the electric charges.
Surface tension effects are very complex and very tricky.
Surfactants cause large effects even at trace amounts. It is
difcult to separate the effect of o and that of
S
o. One
may suspect that effects of the latter are more frequent and
more important. The most of the common liquids (either
pure or in mixtures or with surfactants) have o in the range
0.020.08N/m, i.e. differing by factor of 4. The effects pro-
duced by surfactants in gasliquid systems are enormous,
within orders of magnitude. Moreover, o itself inuence
directly only relatively few hydromechanical processes. Con-
sider for instance, the bubble formation process. The resulting
bubble size depends directly on o only at the very low-gas ow
where the equilibrium between buoyancy and surface force is
reached during the quasi-steady ination. This is not the case
of real gasliquid contactors, where the bubble size depends
on many other effects, involved in violent breakup of irregular
gas jets producedby the gas distributor. Onthe other hand, the
magnitude of
S
o is difcult to estimate. Taking it Lo/L, we
have Lo within the factor of 4 (i.e. almost constant for all liq-
uids), but the relevant length scale L can cover very vast range
of values. Consider a bubble of size L. The surface gradient
can develop over any distance, from 0 to L, making Lo/L very
much varying quantity. Moreover, the gradient formation and
evolution is a dynamic process, with fast temporal changes,
which depends on the ow situation (unlike o, which is mate-
rial property of static equilibrium). Also, all real processes
take place in systems that contain impurities, which read-
ily act as surface active agents (most of chemical compound,
e.g. reactants). Therefore, no surprise, that bubbling into two
extremely different liquids with o =0.02 and 0.08N/m gives
almost identical results, while re-distilled water and tap water
may differ by tenth of percents in gas holdup. For these rea-
sons, the gas holdup correlations involving o are extremely
unreliable, with respect to this particular variable.
Better understanding the surface processes and their
proper scaling is needed. A qualitative sketch of the surfac-
tant action is shown in Fig. 3. Based on their tendency to
gather at the interface, two classes of surfactants can be dis-
tinguished: positive and negative. The positive surfactants are
attracted to the interface, their surface concentration is larger
than the bulk concentration (c
s
>c
b
). Typically, they are organic
substances (emulsiers, detergents, tensides, wetting agents,
etc.) that decrease the surface tension signicantly. The neg-
ative surfactants are repelled from the interface, their surface
concentration is smaller than the bulk concentration (c
s
<c
b
).
Typically, they are inorganic substances (salts of mineral acids,
electrolytes, ionic solutions, etc.) that increase the surface ten-
siononly slightly. During the bubble rise, its nose feels the bulk
concentration (c
b
). Its tail feels a generally different concen-
tration, resulting from the adsorption/desorption transport
processes occurring between the bulk and the interface, as
the liquid passed around the bubble. When an equilibrium is
reached, the rear concentrationcanbe denotedas equilibrium
concentration (c
e
). Obviously, the positive surfactants have
c
e
>c
b
, while the negative c
e
<c
b
. However, despite the opposite
concentration proles along the interface of the positive and
negative surfactants, their surface tension prole is the same.
In both cases, the rear o is low and the front o is large. This
interfacial surface tension gradient (
S
o) is a tensile force that
generates the Marangoni stresses. These stresses move the
liquid material elements along the interface, in the direction
opposite to the main ow over the bubble. The increase in the
resistance force is the natural result (retardation of bubble rise
in contaminated media). At the rst guess, the students (and
not only them!) wouldsay, that if the positive surfactant delays
the bubble rise, so the negative surfactant will accelerate it,
which is, however, not so.
Fig. 3 Positive and negative surfactants in airwater system. (a) Positive surfactants are attracted to surface: nonpolar parts
point to nonpolar air, polar parts remain in polar water. Negative surfactants are repelled from surface: polar ions are
repelled by nonpolar air and attracted by polar water. (b) Concentration prole perpendicular to surface: positive surfactants
have c
s
>c
b
, negative surfactants c
s
<c
b
. (c) Positive surfactants decrease surface tension (much). Negative surfactants
increase surface tension (little). (d) Concentration prole along surface of rising bubble: positive surfactants have c
e
>c
b
,
negative surfactants c
e
<c
b
. (e) Surface tension prole along bubble surface: both positive and negative surfactants have
same prole. Surface tension gradient (
S
) corresponds to rubber sheet with variable thickness: thicker regions shrink,
making thinner regions expand (surface gradient is seen in (a)).
5.5. Multi-phase ow
5.5.1. Microscale description (DNS)
On the microscopic level, the ow is fully resolved, in both
phases: inside N discrete dispersed particles (bubbles, drops;
solidsno ow inside), and around them in the one con-
tinuous carrying uid. We should write (N+1) NavierStokes
equations, and solve them simultaneously. They are coupled
by sharing the same boundary condition at the particleuid
interface. We obtain the ow eld in every point of the disper-
sion. The interface forces move the particles and deform the
interfaces. We have the full information about the problem.
This ne microscale approach is in the CFD jargon called the
direct numerical simulation (DNS).
There are no extra forces, as compared with the single-
phase ow. However, there is a difference: the surface tension
force is moved from the boundary condition (Section 5.4)
directly into the momentum equation (Section 5.2, Eq. (5.2.1)).
Usually, this new term contains the following ingredients:
surface force [N/m
3
] interface tension o [N/m], interface cur-
vature [m
1
], interface area [m
2
/m
3
]. As for the scaling, this
termcouldbe inertially scaledby (,V
2
/L), like any other termin
(5.2.1). This would yield (o/L)/(,V
2
), which is nothing but We
1
.
The specic way how this surface force is converted into a
volumetric force and implemented depends on the modelling
approach to the DNS. Currently there are several numeri-
cal strategies, how to describe interfaces and their motion
(e.g. front tracking method, level set method, volume of uid
method).
5.5.2. Mesoscale description (Euler/Lagrange)
On the mesoscopic level, the ow eld is resolved only in
the continuous phase, using the single-phase equationone
NavierStokes (Eulerian view). The dispersed particles (bub-
bles, drops, solids) are considered being pointwise, as seen by
the uid. Their motion is described by set of N equations of
motion of system of bodies in space (Largangian view). This
intermediate-resolution approach is in the CFD jargon called
the Euler/Lagrange simulation (E/L).
The many kinds of hydrodynamic forces acting on the par-
ticles are given by various closure formulas, obtained by other
means (e.g. experiment, DNS). The forces depend on the local
ow eld near the particles. The particles can also affect the
uid motion, as a feedback (coupling). As compared with the
single-phase ow, there are many new equations with new
forces. All of them can be scaled, and new DN will appear.
Consider only the simplest case of a sedimenting particle in a
stagnant unbounded uid, without (particleuid) coupling,
which is the paradigm of sedimentation:
m
du
dt
= gravity buoyancy drag [Hyb/s]. (5.5.1)
Substituting the typical closures for the forces, it reads
m
du
dt
=

6
d
3
,
p
g

6
d
3
,
f
g
1
2
d
2
4
,
f
u
2
C [Hyb/s]. (5.5.2)
First, consider a steady particle motion, under the force
equilibrium:
6
gd
3
L, =
1
2
d
2
4
,u
2
C (L, = ,
p
,
f
) [N]
(gravity) (buoyancy) = (drag). (5.5.3)
Choosing the variables (d, u), their scales (L, V), and the
parameters (,, L,, g, C), we get by scaling:
6
gL
3
L, =
1
2
L
2
4
,V
2
C [N]. (5.5.4)
Note that L must keep the meaning of the particle size d.
Dividing mercenarily by ,v
2
=jv, we get dimensionlessly
6
L,
,
gL
3
v
2
=
1
2
4
L
2
V
2
v
2
C. (5.5.5)
which is nothing but
Ar =
3
4
CRc
2
. (5.5.6)
This is an important criterial equation for problems with
falling/rising particles, where gravity, buoyancy, and drag play
the main role. It indicates a close relation between Re and Ar
in this type of problems, where an equilibrium is established
between the driving forces (Ar, l.h.s.) and the resistance force
(Re, r.h.s.). The former are produced by an external eld (e.g.
gravity), while the latter involves speedas the mainingredient.
Since the speed in Re is often the part of the solution, the grav-
itational scaling is employed V(g/L)
1/2
, which transforms Re
into Ga=Re
2
/Fr. Here, the concept of buoyancy reected by Ar
has much clearer interpretation than in the single-phase ow:
the effect of particlefuid density difference is obvious. Note
that bothparticle size L andspeedVare involvedinRe(L, V) and
only size in Ar(L
3
). It leads to an iteration procedure in solving
the sedimentation problem, where the speed depends on the
particle size. A usual trick is to separate these two with help
of a new suitably dened number. The Lyjascenko number,
Ly(V
3
) =Re
3
/Ar =(V
3
/gv)(,/L,), converts (5.5.6) into
Ar
1,3
=
3
4
CLy
2,3
. (5.5.7)
where L stands on l.h.s. and V
2
on r.h.s., so that the size
and speed are decoupled. Another problem of course is with
C=C(Re(L, V)).
Second, consider an unsteady motion, when the resistance
force consumes the initial momentum of a particle:
m
du
dt
=
1
2
d
2
4
,
f
u
2
C (IC : t = 0. u = u
0
) [Hyb/s]. (5.5.8)
In the simplest case of the Stokes drag, we have a linear
relaxation process and (5.5.8) becomes
m
du
dt
= 3jdu [Hyb/s] (unsteadiness) = (drag). (5.5.9)
This is a rare occasion in two-phase ow when we can
nd the relaxation time (original disturbance is reduced by
1/e64%; a stable equilibrium presumed, a node). Choosing
the variables (u, t), their scales (V, T), and the parameters (m,
d, j), we get by scaling:
mV
T
= jdV [ML,T
2
]. (5.5.10)
By turn, we have the relaxation time:
T
r
=
m
jd
[T]. (5.5.11)
Substituting for the particle mass m=(/6)d
3
,
p
, the time is
T
r
=

6
,
p
d
2
j

,
p
d
2
j
[T]. (5.5.12)
Another way is to solve the linear problem (5.5.9) directly:
u(t) = u
0
exp
3jd
m
t
[m/s]. (5.5.13)
The exponent should be of the form (t/T
r
), in order, at t =T
r
,
the ratio u/u
0
be exp(1) =1/e. Accordingly, the relaxation time
is
T
r
=
1
18
,
p
d
2
j

,
p
d
2
j
[T]. (5.5.14)
The variance of (3) between(5.5.12) and(5.5.14) is the mod-
est price for bypassing the exact solution by the scaling, which
is acceptable.
The relaxationtime just found is useful for a variety of situ-
ations, where time scales of different processes are compared,
to distinguish between the fast and the slow, which in turn
leads to the time decoupling, making the problem easier to
handle. One important case is the concept of the Stokes num-
ber St. It compares two time scales: particle relaxation time T
r
and time of ow change T
f
:
St =
T
r
T
f
. (5.5.15)
The former says how fast the particle relaxes back to the
steady state, when accelerated with respect to the surround-
ing (viscous) uid. The latter says how fast the ow eld
changes. Without a priori knowledge, the basic estimate of T
f
can be made, T
f
L/V. Since the particle must feel the changes
in the uid, we couple them by the common length scale,
clearly given by the particle size, L =d. Then, the Stokes num-
ber is
St =
,
p
dV
j
. (5.5.16)
In other words, St is the ratio (particle inertia)/(uid iner-
tia). More correctly, the particle mass used above should also
contain the added mass C
a
, m=((/6)d
3
) (,
p
+C
a
,), especially
here, when unsteady effects are considered. Then the particle
density becomes: ,
p
(,
p
+C
a
,). We appreciate it namely in
case of bubbles in liquids, where ,
p
/, 10
3
, so that the bub-
ble inertia is represented by the added mass, i.e. by the liquid
inertia, ,
p,effective
,, since C
a
is O(1). Then, the Stokes num-
ber becomes the Reynolds number, St =,
p
dV/j,dV/j=Re,
meaning(particlejoint uid inertia)/(viscous uid inertia).
The Stokes number measures the willingness of the car
to get off the road when you turn the stirring wheel sud-
denly. As such, it is used in many situations when we want
to know how much the dispersed particles tend to follow the
streamlines of the carrying uid. The total ow-follower has
St =0 (passive scalar, tracer). On the other hand, particles with
large St easily hit the wall in bendings of a duct. It is used
in devices (impactors) where aerosol particles are sorted out
by their value of St, being expelled from the main stream to
the wall by their inertia, in multiple progressively narrowing
U-bends. The adhesion efciency of the otation process also
depends on the value of St, with which a bubble collides with
particles: the lower St, the better for adhesion (no bouncing).
Other numbers appear in specic areas of multi-phase
ows, at this mesoscale level of description. For instance, the
Bagnold number in granular ows, Ba=,
p
,d
2
/j, compares the
effect of the interstitial uid on the motion of the granules
(grains). In terms of stresses, it is a ratio of the collisional
stress in the particulate phase, which by the kinetic theory
is ,
p
V
2
, where V,d, where , is the velocity gradient and d
the particle size, and the viscous uid stress j,. With, V/L,
and L d, Ba=,
p
dV/j, which actually is St. Equivalently, it
can be recasted in terms of the friction forces (particle col-
lisional)/(uid viscous). The presence of the interstitial uid
can be neglected at large Ba, to reach the limit of so-called
dry granular ows.
5.5.3. Macroscale description (Euler/Euler)
On the macroscopic level, the dispersed particles (bubbles,
drops, solids) are considered as a phase smoothly distributed
in space, forming a pseudo-continuum. The particles are
then assigned continuous concentration and velocity elds.
This approximation is acceptable when we describe the sys-
temon length scales much larger than the discrete scales. The
particles and their spacing must be much smaller than the
system size, and than the smallest scales we want to resolve.
In the single-phase ow, estimate the discrete (atomic) scales
by 10
9
m, and the beginning of the continuum by 10
6
m,
say. We have three orders of magnitude to bridge the gap.
Accordingly, with 1cm bubbles, the reactor should be of
10-m size, to consider the bubbles as the continuous phase.
Further, presence of many bubbles is anticipated, for their
spacing be small, e.g. comparable with bubble size. Now, the
governing equations should be twice NavierStokes: one for
the continuous phase and one for the dispersed phase (two
interpenetrating continua, twice Eulers view). These equa-
tions are coupled via the interphase momentum transfer.
This coarse macroscale approach is in the CFD jargon called
the Euler/Euler simulation (E/E).
The governing equations for single-phase ow are often
said to be derived fromthe rst principles. These mechanical
principles are known for a single continuum, namely in case
of simple uids, but are only in the process of development
for the multi-phase systems. Here, we lack a universally valid
equation, which would be of practical use. There are many
general equations suggested, but they are too monstrous,
and the many closures needed for them are still missing.
On the other hand, there also are many simple equations,
suggested for specic systems and particular ow situations,
which are practical, yet of limited use. As a compromise, here
we write the two-phase owequations purely formally, as two
NavierStokes-like equations:
Continuous phase:
/
,
/
(
/
,
/
v) = 0 (mass) [kg/m
3
s]. (5.5.17)
/
,
/
v (v.)(
/
,
/
v) =
/
/
,
/
f S
(momentum) [Hyb/m
3
s]. (5.5.18)
Dispersed phase:
//
,
//
(
//
,
//
u) = 0 (mass) [kg/m
3
s]. (5.5.19)
//
,
//
u (u.)(
//
,
//
u) =
//
//
//
,
//
f S
(momentum) [Hyb/m
3
s]. (5.5.20)
The continuous phase has density ,
/
, velocity v, stress ten-
sor
/
, volume fraction
/
. The dispersed phase has density
,
//
, velocity u, stress tensor
//
, volume fraction
//
. The mass
conservationfor the two-phase mixture needs
/
+
//
=1. The
mainmulti-phase problemis to formulate the stress tensors
//
and the interactiontermS. As for the scaling, two kinds of
new DN could appear, as compared with single-phase ow.
One comes fromscaling the stress term
//
, which very likely
will not reduce tosimple Newtonianformulationyielding Eu
and Re. The other comes fromthe momentumtransfer term
S. The latter would indicate how strong the phase coupling
is.
If the dispersed phase constitutes a macroscopic dispersion,
the particles are the mechanical individuals (small bodies)
and have their own momentum, inertia, gravity, buoyancy,
whence the momentum equation (5.5.20) applies. If the dis-
persed phase constitutes a microscopic dispersion, the particles
lack these qualities, and (5.5.20) is needless. The individual
particles passively follow the ow (St =0); very ne particles
called passive scalars and used for ow visualization (trac-
ers). The true chemical solutions (salt or dye in water) surely
belong to this category (sub-colloidal). There is a legitimate
question: what is between these two extremes, the macro
and micro. When the dispersed phase earns the right to be
awarded the full momentum equation? Likely, there are no
strict and unequivocal criteria, to decide. Probably, it depends
on our choice, what effects and on which scales we wish
to study. In the molecular dynamics, very small particles
(solute/solvent molecules) are moved by force laws of vari-
ous degrees of resolution. Some forces are derived directly
from molecular potentials, some are modelled as random
thermal noise to account for Brownian effects, there is a
resistance force, and the overall formulation can be within
the Langevine ansatz (random forcing, stochastic differential
equations). In the Stokesian (hydro)dynamics, very small par-
ticles (ne particles suspended in uid) are moved by forces
of both hydrodynamic (Stokes limit) and nonhydrodynamic
(Brownian, colloidal, interparticle, etc.) origin. Another aspect
is reected by rheology, where the dispersed phase affects the
intrinsic momentum transport substantially.
For microscopic dispersions, Eq. (5.5.20) is omitted and
(5.5.19) is modied accordingly. The quantity (
//
,
//
) is replaced
with the scalar concentration c. The speed u is identied with
v. The molecular diffusion termis added to the r.h.s., since the
macroscopic particles did not have this molecular transport
mechanism.
3
Eq. (5.5.19) then becomes:
Dispersed phase:
c
t
(v.)c = D
2
c (mass) [kg/m
3
s]. (5.5.21)
These modications must also be reected by Eqs. (5.5.17)
and (5.5.18). Since the dispersion does not exist on the
macroscale, the carrying uid occupies the whole volume,
/
=1. Omit the apostrophe at ,
/
and
/
. Set S=0, since the
uid does not receive momentum from the dispersed par-
ticles. For Newtonian uid equations, (5.5.17) and (5.5.18)
become
3
But there is a concept of hydrodynamic diffusion of
macroscopic particles, due to (mostly repulsive) interaction
forces, see e.g. Davis (1996).
Continuous phase:
,
t
(,v) = 0(mass) [kg/m

3
s]. (5.5.22)
,v (v.)(,v) = p j
2
v ,f
(momentum) [Hyb/m
3
s]. (5.5.23)
While a single dispersed particle does not affect the ow,
a large number of them can exert collective buoyancy effects.
These macroscopic effects consist in uid density variations
caused by distribution of the particle concentration, , =,(c).
The interphase coupling is as follows. The (micro) dispersed
phase imports the uid velocity v from (5.5.23) into (5.5.21),
andexports the concentrationc from(5.5.21) intothe uidden-
sity in (5.5.22) and (5.5.23). This is the convectionbuoyancy
two-way coupling.
Note that Eqs. (5.5.21)(5.5.23) formally coincide with those
for heat and mass transport considered in Sections 6 and
7. Indeed, these equations represent the non-inertial micro-
disperse limit of the governing equations (5.5.17)(5.5.20)
derived for the macro-dispersed multi-phase mixtures. This
simple fact opens an interesting window of research: build-
ing analogies betweenthe well-understoodsingle-phase ows
with heat and mass transport, and much less understood
multi-phase ows. The buoyant coupling from (5.5.21) to
(5.5.22)(5.5.23) can be facilitated by any buoyant agent that
behaves like a passive scalar (true solute, heat, ne particles,
etc.). As the next step, the rst-order inertial effects can be
added to this base state. For instance, the buoyancy-driven
instabilities in sedimenting layers, uidized, beds, and bubbly
columns may shear certain common features with phenom-
ena of thermal convection or halinoconvection. As for the
scaling, DN related to heat and mass transport is introduced
in Sections 6 and 7, together with the coupling to the hydrody-
namics. They naturally apply also to (5.5.21)(5.5.23). Another
issue is what is the relevant density of a multi-phase mixture,
when evaluating the buoyancy force acting on a submerged
body. Usually, one takes either the pure uid density or the
effective mixture density. It seems however, that both can be
relevant, depending on the relation between the body size
and the size and spacing of the dispersed particle in the
mixture.
5.5.4. Retention time distribution
A brief note is in place, on the retention time distribution
(RTD) in equipments. It is the very rst thing one must do,
before starting any kind of thoughts about the processes in
a given apparatus. We assume that the tracer concentration
obeys (5.5.21), being one-way coupled with(5.5.22) and (5.5.23).
Strictly speaking, the diffusion term (D) in (5.5.21) is inconsis-
tent with the role of a pure ow follower. The proper tracer
should stick to a uid particle, and not to diffuse. Therefore, it
should obey:
Dc
Dt
= 0(mass) [kg/m
3
s]. (5.5.24)
which is (5.5.21) with D0. This can directly be solved
numerically, together with (5.5.22) and (5.5.23), to get the full
information about the ow and concentration elds. Then, it
is easy to monitor numerically the tracer content at the exit, to
create the RTD response curve. This is not the way we wish to
go in practical applications of RTD. Let us treat the unwanted
diffusion term in (5.5.21). One cure would be the assumption,
that the ow is much faster than the tracer diffusion. This is
not usually done, and even if, this is usually not true. Another,
andmore practical cure, is toassume that the tracer is simulta-
neously transported by two mechanisms, molecular diffusion
(D
m
) andturbulent dispersion(D
t
). Eq. (5.5.21) canbe treatedas
follows. Upon the Reynolds decomposition, the actual veloc-
ity eld splits into the mean and uctuating parts, v=V+v
/
.
The convective term in (5.5.21) becomes (V)c +(v
/
)c, keep-
ing the physical meaning of the convective mass ux, j =J +j
/
.
The mean term, J =(V)c, is harmless. The uctuating term is
modelled as the mass ux driven by the turbulent dispersion,
j
/
=D
t
2
c. Eq. (5.5.21) thus reads
c
t
(V )c = (D
m
D
t
)
2
c (mass) [kg/m
3
s]. (5.5.25)
Sufce to require that D
m
_D
t
, which can even be realistic,
at least insome owsituations. This must, however, very care-
fully be checked in slow ows in microchannels. In case of 1D
dominant main ow, we have V=V=Q/S, and the tracer equa-
tion is uncoupled from the ow equation, and can be solved
independently:
c
t
c
x
= D
t
2
c
x
2
(mass) [kg/m
3
s]. (5.5.26)
Fixing the coordinates to the mean owVdeletes the mean
convection term and yields
c
t
= D
t
2
c
x
2
(mass) [kg/m
3
s]. (5.5.27)
which is diffusion in stagnant medium. At absence of turbu-
lent uctuations, the axial dispersion is zero, D
t
=0, and the
equation
c
t
= 0(mass) [kg/m
3
s]. (5.5.28)
solves to c =c
0
=const. It is the plug ow, where the cross-
sectionarea markedwithc
0
is carriedthroughthe systemwith
the mean speed V. Anticipating the scaling applied to Eq. (7.1),
(5.5.26) becomes the RDT analogue of Eq. (7.4):
Fo Pc = 1. (5.5.29)
Here, the numbers are dened using the turbulent diffusiv-
ity:
Fourier number. Fo =
L
2
D
t
T
(unsteadiness)
(turbulent mass diffusion)
.
Peclet number. Pc =
LV
D
t
(hydrodynamic convection)
(turbulent mass diffusion)
.
(5.5.30)
Two ways leads to the exclusivity of the Pe number occur-
rence in the RTD problems. First, use the basic time scaling,
T=L/V, and the Fourier number becomes the Peclet number,
Fo =Pe. This makes Eq. (5.5.29): 1+1=1/Pe. Second, xing the
coordinates to the mean ow V deletes the convection term
(Pe), and by the same scaling Fo becomes Pe. This makes Eq.
(5.5.29): Pe +0=1, which corresponds to (5.5.27). Thus, Pe is
the only important number in RTD, with the 1D dominant
main ow. Contrasting all these assumptions with the real-
ity of the actual ows through real technological systems, it
would rather be naive to expect that Pe, whence the single
scalar quantity D
t
(also called: axial dispersion D
ax
), can con-
tain the whole truth about the hydrodynamics. We are in need
of something smarter.
Actually, there has been an attempt is this direction, and a
kind of Smart RTD (SRTD) has been suggested. Imagine that a
uid particle has a watch that measures its age t, being set to
zero at entering the equipment. Thus, t is the retention time
of the uid particle. At non-relativistic motions, the time on
the watch coincides with the common time t on the labora-
tory clock. The trivial and seemingly useless physical fact that
t =t can be recasted into a useful form. Because the watch is
xed to the moving uid particle, its age t must follow the
convective derivative:
Dt
Dt
= 1 (retention time) [-]. (5.5.31)
which is already dimensionless. Here, we assume that the
quantity t can be considered to be the eld quantity. It is rather
counter-intuitive, but any uid particle located at time t in
place x can be assigned the amount of time t(x, t) it has spent
inthe equipment. Thus solving the above equationfor conser-
vation of particle age, we obtain the real distribution of the
local retentiontime withinthe equipment. Having the eld t(x,
t), we can easily calculate the eld of concentration, reaction
rate, conversion, etc. Eq. (5.5.31) canbe treated ina similar way
like (5.5.24). It candirectly be solvednumerically, together with
(5.5.22) and (5.5.23), to get the full information about the ow
and RTDelds. It can also be simplied, to save the computing
power. After the decomposition, V+v
/
, we have the following
counterpart of (5.5.25):
t
t
(V )t (v
/
)t = 1 (retention time) [-]. (5.5.32)
The mean ux of age, (V)t, is physically plausible, since
the stream passing through a given location contains parti-
cles of various age. The uctuating part, (v
/
)t, can either
be modelled by a turbulent diffusion term, j
/
=D
ts
2
t, or left
as it is and take a suitable closure for the uctuating veloc-
ity v
/
. It can be modelled, e.g. by random functions reecting
truly the local structure of the turbulence. There is wealth of
information about the scaling behaviour of turbulent velocity
uctuations in various ow situations, in the literature. This
brings us naturally to the stochastic modelling of RTD. Con-
sidering the 1D dominant main ow, where the mean speed
is a constant, V=V=Q/S, we have the counterpart of (5.5.26):
t
t
(V v
/
)
t
x
= 1 (retention time) [-]. (5.5.33)

In fully 1D case, both V and v
/
are scalars. Fixing the coor-
dinates to the mean ow V deletes the mean convection term
and yields the following counterpart of (5.5.27):
t
t
v
/
t
x
= 1 (retention time) [-]. (5.5.34)

which can be treated within the framework of the stochas-
tic differential equations, with a suitable random v
/
= (x. t).
At absence of turbulent uctuations, v
/
= 0, the equation
becomes
t
t
= 1 (retention time) [-] (5.5.35)

and solves to t =t. It is the plug ow, where all uid particles
in the moving coordinate system have age t =t. This age cor-
responds to the position x =Vt from the inlet, measured in the
stationary coordinate. With pipe of length L, the particles exit
at age t =t =L/V.
6. Transport of heat
For the transport of heat in a moving environment, three bal-
ances must be considered together: uid mass balance (5.1.1),
uid momentum balance (5.2.1), and the heat balance, which
can be written as
(v ) = k
2
[K/s]
(unsteadiness) (convection) = (diffusion). (6.1)
Choosing the variables (, v, x, t), their scales (O, V, L, T),
and the parameters (k), we get by scaling:
O
T

VO
L
=
kO
L
2
[O/T]. (6.2)
Dividing by Othe temperature scale disappears, and we get
1
T

V
L
=
k
L
2
[1/T]. (6.3)
Dividing by the diffusion term (k/L
2
), because of tradition,
we get
L
2
kT

LV
k
= 1. (6.4)
We can divide by any term, but then the DN would not
have their usual names. The diffusion term is the most typi-
cal one for heat and mass transport phenomena, so it is the
natural scaling basis. Assigning the DN their proper names
we get
Fo Pc = 1. (6.5)
The following DN arise, having a clear physical meaning in
terms of process rates:
L
2
kT
(unsteadiness)
(heat diffusion)
.
Peclet number. Pc =
LV
k
(heat diffusion)
.
(6.6)
When using the basic time scaling, T=L/V, the Fourier
number becomes the Peclet number, Fo =Pe. The unsteady
and convective effects are then comparable, as a direct
consequence of our choice of scaling. This may not always cor-
respond to reality. The Peclet number facilitates the coupling
between the hydrodynamics and heat transfer: it compares
the transport by hydrodynamic convection(owof medium, V)
and the molecular diffusion of heat (heat diffusivity k). Amod-
ied version of Pe is the Graetz number, Gr =(mass ow)c
p
/zL,
where the convective speed is recasted into the mass
ow.
Since we customarily divided (6.3) with the diffusion term,
both numbers are based on the diffusion rate. If we want other
combinations, we must compose them. These compositions
can contain thermal and hydrodynamic quantities to reect
their coupling. One route leads to the Prandtl number:
Prandtl number. Pr =
v
k
(momentum diffusion)
(heat diffusion)
. (6.7)
The Prandtl number is prepared as follows. Take the Peclet
number, Pe =LV/k. Replace the hydrodynamic convection (LV)
with the hydrodynamic diffusion (v) with help of Re, LV=v Re,
to get Pe =v Re/k. Divide by Re, since it is dimensionless, to get
Pe =v/k. Give the product a new name: the Prandtl number,
Pr =Pe/Re. This number is often used in thermal processes,
where the ratio of two material properties of uid determines
how much the ow is affected by heat diffusion (thermal con-
vection, boiling, etc.).
Another route leads to the heat Grashof number, which is
typical for heat-driven buoyancy effects:
Grashof number. Cr =
LOgL
3
v
2
(buoyancy force)
(viscous force)
. (6.8)
Take the hydrodynamic Archimedes number, Ar =(L,/,)Ga.
Replace the general expression for the density difference L,
with a specic expression for the thermal expansivity of uid,
L,/, =LO, where is the coefcient of thermal expansion.
Plug it into Ar to get Ar =(LO)Ga. Give it name the heat
Grashof number, alias the thermal Archimedes number. Gr
is encountered in thermouid mechanics. It is essentially a
hydrodynamic number, where the heat enters as the buoyant
agent, to produce density gradients.
A close derivative of Gr is the thermal Rayleigh number,
Ra=Gr Pr:
Rayleigh number. Ru =
LOgL
3
vk
(buoyancy force)
(viscous force)
. (6.9)
This number is decisive for the onset of thermal convection
and its evolutionvia series of bifurcation. It compares the driv-
ing thermal disturbance LO acting on a parcel of uid, with
rates of transport processes that tend to smear it out (diffusion
of momentum v and heat k).
The way the above composite numbers are derived by
making various combinations and replacements seems to be
neither transparent nor free from ambiguity and subjectivity.
Actually, they can be obtained correctly, from the correspond-
ing governing equations. For instance, Pr, Gr and Ra appear
naturally by scaling the coupled equations for ow and heat
transfer, under a useful approximation (Boussinesq), where
the only buoyancy-affected density is that at the external
force eld term (,f). Often, the linearization near a uniform
base state is considered (stability studies), or the uniform part
of the density eld is absorbed in the pressure term, which
gives the buoyancy termproportional to the density difference
L, =, ,
0
. Depending on the scales employed, the numbers
appear in different places, as either Pr and Ra, or Pr and Gr.
Note that, based on the physical analogy and scaling argu-
ments, it is possible to introduce Ra also for dispersed layers,
e.g. for bubbly layers in bubbly columns, Ra=g
/
eL
3
/v
mix
D
hydro
(g
/
is the reduced gravity, e volume fraction of bubbles
(voidage, gas holdup), v
mix
effective viscosity of bubbly mix-
ture, D
hydro
hydrodynamic diffusivity of bubbles).
Other numbers are also related to buoyancy effects. A
basic quantity is the buoyant (BruntVaisala) frequency
of the density difference driven oscillator, (d
2
z/dt
2
) =
2
z,
where =((g/,)(d,
0
/dz))
1/2
. It is an elementary prototype for
internal gravity waves in stratied environments. Here we
can encounter the Richardson number, in several variations.
The gradient Richardson number Ri =
2
/(u/z)
2
. The global
Richardson number is Ri =g
/
L/V
2
. Note that it relates to the
Froude number Fr =V
2
/g
/
L =1/Ri, whenFr is correctedfor buoy-
ancy (apostrophe). Other kinds of Ri also exist. When both
buoyancy (stratication) and rotation are present, there are
numbers indicating their relative effects (stratication param-
eter, Burger number). The buoyant frequency also follows from
the gravitational time scaling T=V/g in (5.2.6). Taking V=L/T,
the time scale becomes T=L/gT, which in terms of frequency
1/T reads
2
=g/L. Employing the reduced gravity g g
/
to
account for the density variance, and designating L,/L the
scale estimate for (d,
0
/dz), we get what was due.
Boundary conditions in heat transfer are of two kinds. Either
the temperature
w
is given at the boundary or the heat
ux j
w
through it. The former case is simple to scale,
w
/O.
The latter is given by
j
w
= z()
w
[J/m
2
s]. (6.10)
where z is the heat conductivity. To calculate the ux, the tem-
perature eld must be known, which is not always the case.
Therefore, another expression for the ux is introduced, with
help of the empirical heat transfer coefcient k
h
:
j
w
= k
h
(L)
w
[J/m
2
s]. (6.11)
where (L)
w
is the bulkboundary temperature difference.
Equating (6.10) and (6.11) yields the formula for the coefcient:
k
h
=
z()
w
(L)
w
[J/m
2
s K]. (6.12)
A simple scaling of (6.12) by (z/L) leads to the Nusselt num-
ber Nu (also Biot number, Bi):
Nu =
k
h
z,L
. (6.13)
which is nothing but the dimensionless heat transfer coef-
cient. The length scale L comes from the near-interface
temperature gradient in (6.10), ()
w
1/L, and should relate,
e.g. to the thickness of the thermal boundary layer. Although
Nu does not present any intellectual challenge on the grounds
of scaling, it is the most desired quantity in the heat transfer,
since everyone wants to know how much heat passes through
the interface, without computing the temperature and ow
elds. Numerous correlations do exist for Nu in the engineer-
ing literature.
7. Transport of mass
For the transport of mass of a solute in a moving environment,
three balances must be considered together: uid mass bal-
ance (5.1.1), uid momentum balance (5.2.1), and the solute
mass balance, which can be written as
c
t
(v )c = D
2
c r [kg/m
3
s]
(unsteadiness) (convection) = (diffusion) (reaction). (7.1)
Choosing the variables (c, v, r, x, t), their scales (C, V, R, L,
T), and the parameters (D), we get by scaling:
C
T

VC
L
=
DC
L
2
R [C,T]. (7.2)
Dividing by the diffusion term(DC/L
2
), because of tradition,
we get
L
2
DT

LV
D
= 1
RL
2
DC
. (7.3)
We can divide by any term, but then the DNwould not have
their usual names. The diffusion term is the most typical for
heat and mass transport phenomena, so it is natural to take it
as the scaling basis. Assigning the DN their proper names we
get
Fo Pc = 1 Du
2
. (7.4)
The following DN arise, having a clear physical meaning in
terms of process rates:
L
2
DT
(unsteadiness)
(mass diffusion)
.
Peclet number. Pc =
LV
D
(mass diffusion)
.
Damkohler number. Du =
RL
2
DC
1,2
(reaction)
(mass diffusion)
.
(7.5)
When using the basic time scaling, T=L/V, the Fourier
number becomes the Peclet number, Fo =Pe. The unsteady
and convective effects are then comparable, as a direct con-
sequence of our choice of scaling. This may not always
correspond to reality. The Peclet number facilitates the cou-
pling between the hydrodynamics and mass transfer: it
compares the transport by hydrodynamic convection (ow of
the medium, V) and the molecular diffusion of mass (mass
diffusivity D).
Since we customarily divided (7.2) by the diffusion term,
the numbers are based on the diffusion rate. If we want other
combinations, we must compose them. These compositions
can contain diffusion and hydrodynamic quantities to reect
their coupling. One route leads to the Schmidt number:
Schmidt number. Sc =
v
D
(momentum diffusion)
(mass diffusion)
. (7.6)
The Schmidt number is prepared as follows. Take the Peclet
number, Pe =LV/D. Replace the hydrodynamic convection (LV)
with the hydrodynamic diffusion (v) with help of Re, LV=v Re,
to get Pe =v Re/D. Divide by Re, since it is dimensionless, to get
Pe =v/D. Give the product a new name: the Schmidt number,
Sc =Pe/Re (also: mass or diffusionPr). This number is oftenused
in mass transfer processes, where the transport rate is large
enough to affect the ow(e.g. fast-phase changes, boiling, dis-
tillation, etc.). In turbulence, the viscosity and diffusivity can
be not molecular but turbulent (eddy viscosity; coefcient of
dispersion), hence turbulent Schmidt number.
Another route leads to the mass Grashof number, which is
typical for mass-driven buoyancy effects:
Grashof number. Cr =
LcgL
3
v
2
(buoyancy force)
(viscous force)
. (7.7)
Take the hydrodynamic Archimedes number, Ar =(L,/,)Ga.
Replace the general expression for the density difference L,
with a specic expression for the concentration expansivity of
uid, L,/, = Lc, where is the coefcient of concentrational
expansion. Plug it into Ar to get Ar =( Lc)Ga. Give it name the
mass Grashof number, alias the diffusionArchimedes number.
Gr is encountered in ows with ineligible concentration gradi-
ents, whichmay interfere withthe ow(e.g. halinoconvection,
double diffusive convection, thermosolutal convection). It is
essentially a hydrodynamic number, where the mass enters
as the buoyant agent, to produce density gradients.
Aclose derivative of Gr is the concentration (salinity, mass)
Rayleigh number, Ra=Gr Pr:
Rayleigh number. Ru =
LcgL
3
vD
(buoyancy force)
(viscous force)
. (7.8)
The physical picture is similar like with the thermal Ra:
concentrationally buoyant uid parcel driven by Lc moves,
and diffusion of momentum (v) and mass (D) tend to oppose
the motion and to weaken the driving force. Instead of Lc,
more simple choice Lc/c
0
can also be used. Mass Ra is decisive
for halinoconvection. Boththermal andmass buoyancy effects
are present indouble diffusive convection, which, besides oth-
ers, has application in oceanology (hot/cold, more/less salty
water) and geology (layering in magna chambers).
Besides the above coupling between diffusion and hydro-
dynamics via Pe, there is also coupling between the diffusion
and reaction via Da. A typical situation occurs in heteroge-
neous catalysis, where the diffusion and reaction interplay.
Solving the corresponding equation in case of a model situ-
ation (a cylindrical pore in a catalyst, a spherical pellet), we
obtain the concentration prole, whose mean value c
m
nor-
malized by the bulk concentrationc
0
is the effectiveness factor
F =c
m
/c
0
, which also is (mean reaction rate)/(maximumrate).
The model solution for a pore gives F tanh(Th)/Th, where
the Thiele number (modulus) is Th=L(k/D)
1/2
. Here, L is the
pore length and k the rate constant. Note that for r =kc, the
Damkohler number coincides withthe Thiele number, Da=Th.
Often, a generalized Th is introduced, to retain the last equal-
ity also for reactions of higher orders. Reaction and mass
transfer is combined in the Hatta number, Ha. There also are
numbers typical for the reaction kinetics itself. For instance,
the Arrhenius number Ah compares the activation energy and
kinetic energy of molecules.
Boundary conditions in mass transfer are of two kinds. Either
the concentration c
w
is given at the boundary or the mass
ux j
w
through it. The former case is simple to scale, c
w
/C. The
latter is given by
j
w
= D(c)
w
[kg/m
2
s]. (7.9)
where Dis the (mass) diffusivity. To calculate the ux, the con-
centration eld must be known, which is not always the case.
Therefore, another expression for the ux is introduced, with
help of the empirical mass transfer coefcient k
m
:
j
w
= k
m
(Lc)
w
[kg/m
2
s]. (7.10)
where (Lc)
w
is the bulkboundary concentration difference.
Equating (7.9) and (7.10) yields the formula for the coefcient:
k
m
=
D(c)
w
(Lc)
w
[m/s]. (7.11)
A simple scaling of (7.11) by (D/L) leads to the Sherwood
number Sh (also Sherman number, Sm):
Sn =
k
m
D,L
. (7.12)
which is nothing but the dimensionless mass transfer coef-
cient. The length scale L comes from the near-interface
concentration gradient in (7.9), ()
w
1/L, and should relate,
e.g. to the thickness of the concentration boundary layer.
Although Sh does not present any intellectual challenge on
the grounds of scaling, it is the most desired quantity in the
mass transfer, since everyone wants to know how much mass
passes through the interface, without computing the concen-
tration and ow elds. Numerous correlations do exist for Sh
in the engineering literature.
8. Correlations
In the preceding sections, many important DN were intro-
duced and commented, and most of themare listed in Table 2.
They can be divided into two classes. First, the basic (primary)
DN that follows directly from scaling the balance equations
and their BC. Second, the other (secondary) DN that are
derived from the basic, or formed by their combinations, or
created articially. The basic DN are the following: momen-
tum transport (Eu, Fr, Re, Sr) and BC (Bo, Ca, We, Ma); heat
transport (Fo, Pe) andBC(Nu); mass transport (Da, Fo, Pe) andBC
(Sh). The basic numbers and their link to their closest relatives
is shown in Fig. 4.
All the numbers obtained by the equation scaling (Section
4) can be reproduced by the dimensional analysis (Section
3). However, we must know beforehand the relevant physi-
cal quantities that should be grouped. It seems that most of
DN in engineering were rst obtained by DA. Here, we prefer
to relate them to the equations, to give them better physical
interpretation.
Regardless of their origin, DN are used for making corre-
lations. There are two main problems encountered. First, to
choose suitable DN. We need a complete list of independent
numbers. Second, to choose suitable characteristic scales to
evaluate the DN. Both the numbers and the scales must be
relevant for the problem. It is very difcult to choose them
correctly without the sound knowledge of the underlying
processes and the physical meaning of the numbers. Here,
the numbers generated by scaling of equations have a great
advantage over those produced by dimensional analysis. They
containthe correct quantities andhave a clear meaningratio
of different effects in terms of common physical quantities
(force, rate, time, speed, etc.). However, the problem with the
scales still remains. The procedure of equationscaling cangive
certain hints what should the proper scales be, but this is not
always sufcient.
Some choices of scales are apparently wrong. For instance,
consider the Bond number, Bo =L, gL
2
/o, which comes from
the normal component of the free-slip boundary condition.
This number is highly relevant for behaviour of bubbles in
liquids. Accordingly, it enters numerous correlations for bub-
ble size and speed, interfacial area, mass transfer coefcient,
which are designed for bubble column reactors. Which length
scale L is appropriate? The physics strongly recommends the
bubble size. Despite this, many authors have been using the
bubble column size, which is apparently wrong. When we look
at books andreviewpapers onbubble columns, it is easytond
Table 2 List of dimensionless numbers
Archimedes number Ar =(L,/,)gL
3
/v
2
(=(L,/,)Ga)
Bagnold number Ba=,
p
,L
2
/j
Biot number Bi =Nu
Bodenstein number Bd=VL/D
ax
Bond number* Bo =(L),gL
2
/o (=We/Fr)
Capillary number* Ca=jV/o
Cauchy number Ch=,V
2
/E (=Mc
2
)
Cavitation number Cv=LP/,V
2
Damkohler number* Da=(RL
2
/DC)
1/2
Dean number Dn=Re(r
pipe
/r
curv.
)
1/2
Deborah number De =T
r
/T
f
Eckert number Ec =V
2
/c
p
O
Ekman number Ek =v/L
2
Eotvos number Eo =Bo
Euler number* Eu=P/,V
2
Fourier number* Fo =L
2
/kT (heat)
Fourier number* Fo =L
2
/DT (mass)
Froude number* Fr =V
2
/gL
Galileo number Ga=gL
3
/v
2
(=Re
2
/Fr)
Grashof number Gr =LOgL
3
/v
2
(heat)
Grashof number Gr = LCgL
3
/v
2
(mass)
Knudsen number Kn=L
molec
/L
domain
Laplace number La=P/(o/L) (=EuWe)
Lewis number Le =k/D (=Sc/Pr)
Ljascenko number Ly =(,/L,)(V
3
/gv) (=Re
3
/Ar)
Mach number Mc =V/V
sound
Marangoni number* Ma=Lo/jV
Morton number Mo =gj
4
L,/,
2
o
3
(=We
3
/Fr Re
4
)
Nusselt number* Nu=k
heat
/(z/L)
Peclet number* Pe =LV/k (heat)
Peclet number* Pe =LV/D (mass)
Prandtl number Pr =Pe
heat
/Re =v/k
Rayleigh number Ra=LOgL
3
/vk (heat) (=Gr Pr)
Rayleigh number Ra= LCgL
3
/vD (mass) (=Gr Sc)
Rayleigh number Ra=g
/
eL
3
/v
mix
D
hydro
(dispersion)
Reynolds number* Re =,LV/j=LV/v
Richardson number Ri =(L,/,)(gL/V
2
) (=(L,/,)/Fr)
Rossby number Ro =V/L
Schmidt number Sc =v/D (=Pe
mass
/Re)
Sherwood number* Sh=k
mass
/(L/D)
Stanton number Sn=(k
heat
/V)(k/z) (heat) (=Nu/Pe
heat
)
Stanton number Sn=k
mass
/V (mass) (=Sh/Pe
mass
)
Stokes number St =,
p
LV/j
Strouhal number* Sr =L/TV
Sebestov a number

Se =1/Mc
Thiele number Th=L(k
reac
/D)
1/2
Weber number* We =(L),LV
2
/o
Basic numbers are marked by an asterisk (*) (L), means , or L,.
Note large diversity both in names and notation of dimensionless
numbers in literature. Those used here are by no means the best or
obligatory.
that this mistake occurs in a great number of correlation for-
mulas published over more than 30 years, some of them even
became the classics. These correlations are used for design-
ing factories and plants, and they work well. Imagine howthey
would work, if the correlations would be correct.
Some choices of scales are ambiguous. We suffer from the
presence of more that one candidate for the length scale. For
instance, consider the Rayleigh number, Ra=LOgL
3
/vk L
3
,
for a natural convection in a horizontal uid layer heated from
below. In case of innite layer of height H, the obvious choice
is L =H. In case of a layer conned also by two lateral walls
separated by distance A, both H and A may be chosen. Thus,
there are several possibilities, L
3
H
3
, H
2
A, HA
2
, A
3
. Which
one is correct? Finally, when the layer is inside a nite con-
tainer ABH, the combinations grow. We can resort to the
(rather subjective) argument of importance. For instance, we
can think that the smallest dimension is the most important.
However, taking L =H
3
and ignoring the lateral walls at a thin
layer, simply because A>H, gives a wrong result. The failure is
especially evident in stability considerations. The presence of
walls reduces the spectrum of possible wavenumbers (modes)
substantially, and in effect, stabilizes the layer with respect
to the onset of convection. Therefore, the critical value of Ra
depends on both H and A. The stability issues are very sen-
sitive to the proper choice of scales. For instance, the critical
value of Ra is different for rectangular and circular nite con-
tainers, of the same size. Thus, the argument of importance
may work, provided that it is physically based: resolve the
processes occurring along different directions, nd their inter-
relation, andassess their relevance ina givensituation. Incase
of convection, the buoyant rise is vertical, and the heat and
momentum diffusion is horizontal, say, to the rst approxi-
mation. It is unlikely, that the same choice of scales applies
equally well to convection in innite horizontal layer and in
thin vertical slots.
Some choices of scales are evenmore ambiguous. By select-
ing the scales, we can select the view of the world. For
instance, imagine a two-phase owina long thinelectrolysing
microchannel of size ABC=100m10mm1m. In
these days of the scale-down boom, such an equipment is
not unusual. At the wall, there are electrodes and bubbles
are produced by electrolysis. The spectrum of bubbles sizes is
quite broad, fromfewmicrons, as they are formed, to fewcen-
timetres, as they coalesce. The point is to choose the proper
length scale and to dene Re for making correlation formulas
designed for the operational quantities (e.g. liquid ow, bub-
ble size andconcentration, pressure drop, wall shear, etc.). The
choice L =A means the side view at the channel. We see the
ow between two virtually innite parallel horizontal planes,
100m apart. This situation is known as the Poiseuille ow.
The choice L =B means the top view at a segment of the chan-
nel. We see the ow between two nite and closely spaced
walls, 1cm1m in size. This situation is known as the ow
throughthe HelleShawcell. The choice L =C means the global
view at the channel. We see the ow between two nite par-
allel plates, which are narrow and 1-m long. This situation
corresponds to the development of boundary layers in a rect-
angular channel. In these cases, different ow proles along
different directions are relevant. What length scale should
then be chosen for the ow correlations? One way around
this severe anisometry (1:100:10,000) seems to be the hydraulic
radius 2AB/(A+B) =99m, which, however, leads to nowhere.
Taking this gure actually means selecting the picture of a
ow through a 99m dia capillary, which is far from being
related to any possible view at our ow situation. So far, the
L for a single-phase ow has only been considered. The case
with the bubbles is left as a homework for students; enough to
tease them is to ask for introducing the correct Re for a bubble
column.
In correlations, the composed numbers are often used,
obtained by combining several simple numbers with clear
physical meaning. The product, however, can have no clear
meaning. What cansafely be combined? In(5.2.9), we combine
two numbers, Fr and Re, generated by the same govern-
ing equation (5.2.1), to compose Ga. It is acceptable, when
they share the same scales. If not, then Ga would, for
instance, be Ga=Re
2
/Fr ={(,V
/ 2
/L
/
)/(jV
//
/L
// 2
)}
2
/{(,V
/ 2
/L
/
)/(,g)},
where we correctly discriminate between the inertial (
/
)
and viscous (
//
) scales for length and speed. Even with the
Fig. 4 Flow-chart of scaling governing equations (momentum, heat, mass) and boundary conditions.
uniscale (L =L
/
=L
//
), we encounter the problem of DN alge-
bra. Ga actually is {(inertia)/(viscosity)}
2
/{(inertia)/(gravity)} =
(inertia)(gravity)/(viscosity)
2
, which is in a variance with the
usual interpretation(gravity)/(viscosity), where the powers are
ignored. Can we ignore them? This dubious algebra is also
encountered when we try to eliminate (speed from Fr using
Re) or separate (speed and size in sedimentation using Ly)
some inconvenient quantities. In this spirit, we can create
any thinkable combination of DN, since their dimension equals
unity [1]. For instance, the combinationEu
2
Re Fr would usually
be interpreted as (pressure)/(viscosity)(gravity). Upon insert-
ing the physical meanings, it becomes: (p,i) (p,i) (i,v) (i,g) =
(p,v) (p,g) = p
2
,vg. in brief notation (i inertia, v viscos-
ity, g gravity, p pressure). With the viscous (p v) and
gravitational (pg) scaling for pressure, we have: (vg,vg) =
DNU. This means that the physical meaning of the combina-
tion equals unity, the dimensionless number unity (DNU),
since the physical meanings of the individual numbers can-
cel. These manipulations are formally correct, but where is
the physics? Actually, the combination Re Fr Eu
2
is equal to
P
2
/g,jV, where the group (g,jV) is not very transparent, far
from the expected (viscosity)(gravity). Only after unravelling
it, g,jV=(g,L)(jV/L), we can recognized the gravitational and
viscous scaling for P, see (5.2.7).
There are combinations of numbers originating from
different governing equations, which can express their cou-
pling (Pr =Pe/Re; Ra=Gr Pr), or only comparison of analogous
material properties (Pr =Pe
heat
/Re =v/k; Sc =Pe
mass
/Re =v/D;
Le =Sc/Pr =k/D).
There are combinations of numbers coming from equa-
tions and boundary conditions, which sometimes, fortunately,
belong together (Bo =We/Fr; La=EuWe; Mo =We
3
/Fr Re
4
, Stan-
ton (Margoulis) number Sn=Nu/Pe
heat
or Sh/Pe
mass
). The
Morton number is often used in bubbly research. A closer look
reveals that the physical meaning is: Mo = (i,c)
3
,(i,g) (i,v)
4
=
(gv
4
),(c
3
i
2
), in brief notation (c capillarity), which becomes
(gv),(ci), at the usual ignoring of powers. In literature, Mo is
interpreted as capillarity/buoyancy, viscosity/capillarity, etc.
Which one is correct? How then to interpret the Tadaki num-
ber, Td=Re Mo
0.23
?
There can be combinations of numbers belonging to dif-
ferent physical contexts. Why not to eliminate the speed from
Fr by the Mach number? Ga=Mc
2
/Fr thus obtained is formally
correct, but hardly applies to a free rise of a bubble in a col-
umn. There are no strict rules what canbe combined and what
cannot, and common physical sense is highly welcome when
making these combinations.
In correlations, some quantities or effects are often
neglected, as being small. It is tempting to say that inertia
dominates when Re >1. It is however not completely right.
First, this number is only a scale estimate of two forces, the
roughest assessment we can have. There also are possible
numerical factors missing in this formula, reecting the tun-
ing of Re for a particular ow situation. Its value also depends
on the choice of scales. Second, this number stands in the
ow equation at a dimensionless term that is O(1) but not
exactly=1. Accordingly, it is better to say small and large Re,
instead of Re <1 and Re >1. Support for this suggestion comes
from the following. The laminarturbulent (viscousinertial)
transition occurs not exactly at Re =1, but at about Re 10
n
,
where n34 for pipes, 56 for at plate, and varies in a wide
range for owpast different bodies. Likewise, the onset of ther-
mal convection does not occur exactly at Ra=1, but at Ra10
2
to 10
3
(depending on BC, etc.). The ow in microchannels is
not completely free molecular at Kn>1 and no-slip continuous
at Kn<1, but at about Kn>10
1
and Kn<10
2
say. Compress-
ibility effects are encountered not exactly at Mc =1, but the
recommended gure is about 0.3.
Conclude that building sensible and reliable correlations is
far from being trivial. Besides choosing the proper dimension-
less numbers, one must also choose the proper characteristic
scales. Choosing these scales is problematic due to our (either
intentional or not) ignorance of the underlying physics, pres-
ence of processes operating in different spatial directions, and
multiscale nature of the system. Care should be taken when
combining different numbers, and their origin and physical
compatibility should be kept in mind.
9. Remark on literature
In sake of the text cohesion, there are almost no references
to the literature through the previous chapters, and the com-
ments on the main information sources are lumped into this
part.
In the rst part of the Reference section (1. Dimen-
sional analysis), there are books fully devoted to DA and the
related problems like similarity and modelling (1.1. Books on
DA): Baker et al., 1973, Barenblatt, 1987, 1996, 2003, Becker,
1976, Birkhoff, 1960, Bluman and Cole, 1974, Bridgman, 1922,
Clement-OBrien and Lawler, 1998, Craig, 2003, Curren, 2005,
De Jong, 1967, Dolezalik, 1959, Duncan, 1953, Focken, 1953,
Gukhman, 1965, Hornung, 2006, Huntley, 1952, Ipsen, 1960,
Isaacson and Isaacson, 1975, Jerrard and McNeill, 1992, Kline,
1965, Kozesnik, 1983, Kurth, 1972, Land, 1972, Langhaar,
1951, Loebel, 1986, Massey, 1971, Murphy, 1950, Palacios,
1964, Pankhurst, 1964, Perry and Chilton, 1973, Porter, 1946,
Schuring, 1977, Sedov, 1959, Skoglund, 1967, Stubbings, 1948,
Szirtes, 1998, Taylor, 1974, Weast and Astle, 1981, Zierep, 1971,
Zlokarnik, 1991. These are useful for familiarizing with the
many aspects of this powerful method, as well as with its his-
torical development and many practical examples of its use.
Two book chapters are also included. One from the Perrys
canonical handbook, and the other from the Birkhoff (1960)
classical account on uid mechanics. They represent two lim-
its of the spectrum, with the practicality on one side, and the
deep theoretical footing on the other. The important concept
of similarity solution to spatio-temporal problems lacking
explicit length scales is treated, e.g. in Bluman and Cole (1974),
and, in brief, this topic is covered in many texts on partial
differential equations. The uneasy concept of the interme-
diate asymptotics, which transcends the traditional DA, is
strongly presented in the book of Barenblatt (1996), which
is based on the original Russian edition from the seventies.
Its simplied version (Barenblatt, 2003) is especially suitable
for students. Besides the books, there is a selection of arti-
cles on DA and its applications (1.2. Articles on DA): Astarita,
1997, Boucher and Alves, 1959, 1963, Buckingham, 1914, 1915,
Cheng and Cheng, 2004, Dodds and Rothman, 2000, Gunther,
1975, Gunther andMorgado, 2003, Klinkenberg, 1955, Lykoudis,
1990, Macagno, 1971, Prothero, 2002, Rozen and Kostanyan,
2002, Sandler, 1970, Sjoberg, 1987, Stephens and Dunbar, 1993,
Vogel, 1998, Wesson, 1980, West, 1984. The references relate
to both the area of the chemical engineering and also other
research areas, to broaden the horizon, and for inspiration
(biology, cosmology, ecology, economy, geology, medicine, psy-
chology). The topic of DA and scaling is the rm ground of the
chemical engineering literacy. Scale-up and design of tech-
nologies is based on scaling consideration and active use of
DA in a variety of particular situations. Therefore, several ref-
erences on scale-up are also presented (1.3. Books on scale-up):
Euzen et al., 1993, Grassmann, 1971, Johnstone and Thring,
1957, Stichlmair, 2002, Zlokarnik, 2006. The scale-up is in
certain respect easier than the scale-down. Considering the
lab scale 1m, the big equipments are typically 10
1
m in
size, i.e. variation within one order only. The microtechnol-
ogy goes down to sub-micron ranges, i.e. more than 6 orders
beyond our everyday experience. The chance that new phe-
nomena will be encountered along this way is very high.
The importance of surface phenomena, hence surface sci-
ences, is not surprising. A long list of various DN is available,
e.g. in Boucher and Alves (1959, 1963), Jerrard and McNeill
(1992), Land (1972), Johnson (1998) and Weast and Astle
(1981).
In the second part of the Reference section, the balance
equations for the transport phenomena are presented (2.
Transport phenomena). They form the very core of the chemical
engineering and are in all texts of this sector, so it is needles to
list them all. There is a selection of sources that relates to this
paper. The local standard textbook by Mika (1981) was used
for the equations and some basic scaling, and several other
books were also consulted (e.g. Aris, 1989; Bird et al., 1965;
Carslaw and Jaeger, 1947; Crank, 1956; Cussler, 1997; Deen,
1998; Rohsenov and Choi, 1961; Slattery, 1972; Slavicek, 1969;
Thomson, 2000; Welty et al., 1969).
Most space in this paper is devoted to the momentum
transport, i.e. the uiddynamics, bothsingle-phase andmulti-
phase (Section 5). This eld is close to the author, and also
underlines the remaining two transport processes of heat
and mass. There are several groups of authors writing about
uid mechanics, according to their background: pure and
applied mathematicians, physicists and engineers (chemical,
civil, environmental, mechanical, metallurgy, mining, nuclear,
urban, etc.). The rst choose simple problems and solve them
completely on the fundamental level. For the last, complex
problems are chosen, whichcanbe solved only approximately.
The engineering books are well-known to our community
(e.g. Cengel and Cimbala, 2006; Massey, 1998; Munson et
al., 1990; White, 1974; Wilkes, 1999), so only the others are
mentioned, when used. A more theoretically minded reader
may wish to consult, e.g. Doering and Gibbon (1995), Sohr
(2001), and Temam (2001). The common RTD treatment is pre-
sented in many standard books (e.g. Levenspiel, 1962). The
smart variant of RTD is presented, e.g. by Ghirelli and Leckner
(2004).
Rarely is found a title with proper and transparent
treatment of the interface boundary conditions within the
engineering literature. The corresponding very important
numbers (Bo, Ca, Eo, Ma, Mo, We) are usually presented either
without any comment on their origin (hence physical mean-
ing), or as a result of DA (again lacking the physical meaning).
The book by Sadhal et al. (1997) was used, together with that
by Edwards et al. (1991). Instructive is the paper by Cuenot et
al. (1997), which deals with a single bubble rise in a contam-
inated liquid, where Ma and other DN play important roles.
Macroscopic effects of a surfactant on real bubbly mixtures
are demonstrated too (e.g. Ruzicka et al., 2008).
In engineering, the hydrodynamic stability is usually
neither taught in courses, nor included in the books on hydro-
dynamics. We tend to assume that things are mean, steady
and stable, since we want have them like this in appli-
cations. However, this is not always the case. Few books
relate to the stability issue, which is difcult but impor-
tant (e.g. Chandrasekhar, 1961; Drazin and Reid, 1981; Drazin,
2002suitable for students). Equations of vorticity andenstro-
phy are often used in turbulence (Davidson, 2004; Frisch, 1995;
Pope, 2000), but not only there, since the vorticity is a subject
of its own importance (Saffman, 1992).
The rotational effects are presented by geophysically
minded authors (Kundu, 1990; Tritton, 1988; see also
Pedlosky, 1982). Magnetohydrodynamics is not a usual part
of our curriculum, and is mentioned only informatively
(Chandrasekhar, 1961; Moffat, 2000). On the other hand, com-
pressible and rareed ows are commonly encountered, and
the idea behind Mc and Kn is familiar to engineers (many
books exist on gas dynamics). Buoyancy effects in uids are
omnipresent andare coveredbyseveral texts, namelythe ther-
mal convection (Turner, 1979; Koschmieder, 1993). Analogy
between buoyancy effects in single-phase and multi-phase
systems has also been pointed out, and multi-phase Ra dis-
cussed (Ruzicka and Thomas, 2003). A suitable effective
density should be used to evaluate correctly the Archimedes
force acting on a body immersed in dispersion, depending
on a dimensionless parameter (Ruzicka, 2006). Rheology is a
vast area, with its own bibliography. The book by Barnes et
al. (1989) is a suitable introduction into the eld (De num-
ber included). There are profound texts where dimensional
aspect are treated on the fundamental level (Astarita and
Marrucci, 1974) as well as recent textbooks (Macosko, 1994;
Morrison, 2001). A set of reviews on the present state of sev-
eral important branches of uid mechanics is also included
(Batchelor et al., 2000). There is awealthof literature onmotion
of animals in uids (e.g. Childress, 1981; Pedley, 1977; Vogel,
1998, 1994). With curiosities, the water-walking miracle of the
Basiliscus lizards is also presented (Glasheen and McMahon,
1996a,b).
It is not easy to nd a general and accessible and phys-
ically sound book on multi-phase ow (if any). There are
only several titles currently available in this growing area
(e.g. Brennen, 2005; Crowe et al., 1998; Ishii and Hibiki, 2006;
Kleinstreurer, 2003; Kolev, 2002; Soo, 1990), where the assis-
tance was obtained from. Other sources were also consulted
for specic areas (Friedlander, 2000; Hinds, 1999; Nguyen and
Schulze, 2004). The important issue is to formulate the stress
tensor and the interphase interaction force. This leads to
investigation of the microstructure of dispersions, easier to
perform in the dilute viscous limit. The problems come with
strong multiple interactions in dense suspensions (e.g. Brady
and Bossis, 1988; Stickel and Powel, 2005). The exciting area
of granular ow and powder technology is a traditional part of
engineering (e.g. Brown and Richards, 1970; Nedderman, 1992)
with deep roots in soil mechanics (e.g. Taylor, 1948; Terzaghi,
1943). Presently, it witnesses a great boom after being dis-
covered by physicists, as a unique and highly specic state
of matter (Duran, 2000; Hinrichsen and Wolf, 2004; Forterre
and Pouliquen, 2008). The concept of Ba number is useful in
granular ows.
In the third part of the Reference section, several important
particular areas are covered in very brief (3. Other topics). The
phenomenon of interface becomes increasingly important
nowadays, owing to the progressive scale-down, where the
(volume/area) seems to be a more relevant parameter than the
usual (area/perimeter), known as hydraulic diameter. There-
fore, few references to the surface aspects are mentioned
(3.1. Surfaces and surfactants): Adamson, 1960, Adamczyk, 2006,
Davies and Rideal, 1963, Fawcett, 2004, de Gennes et al., 2004,
Israelachvili, 1992. These are useful for multi-phase ows as
well as for microows, and were employed at writing about
these topics. Microtechnology surely deserves a little section
of references (3.2. Microows and microsystems), which were
used for preparing Appendix C: Berthier and Silberzan, 2005,
Bruus, 2008, Ehrfeld et al., 2000, Gad-el-Hak, 1999, Hessel et
al., 2004, van Kampen, 1992, Karniadakis and Beskok, 2002,
Karniadakis et al., 2005, Kockmann, 2006, Li, 2004, Madou,
2000, Maynard, 2008, Neto et al., 2005, Nguyen and Wereley,
2002, Slattery et al., 2004, Stone et al., 2004, Tabeling, 2005,
Thompson and Troian, 1997; see also the periodical Microuid
Nanouid and others. They are valuable sources of informa-
tion, reecting the state-of-the-art in this inating area. The
effect of rarecation of gases and granulation of liquids
needs the adequate description, where gas/molecular dynam-
ics and stochastic processes are the vital ingredients. DA and
SE on microscale are considered, e.g. in Kockmann (2006,
chapter 2). Several links to biological systems are also offered
(3.3. Biology and biosystems), related to the material presented
in Appendix C: McMahon, 1973, Pilbeam and Gould, 1974,
McMahon and Bonner, 1983, Hjortso, 2005, Nopens and Biggs,
2006, Thompson, 1943, Perthame, 2006, Ramkrishna, 2000. The
scaling concept is well known for biologists, which may be
surprising for engineers. The population balance modelling is
also included into this short section, since the term popula-
tion has strong biological connotation. Self-similar aspects
of these models are treated, e.g. by Ramkrishna (2000). In
biology, thoughts of hierarchy of scales, structures, and func-
tions are most appealing. Many penetrating perceptions of the
early times were later physically based and formalized. The
pressure from the micro-needs pushes engineers into these
dangerous waters, where long-term everyday experience and
intuition, whichare our traditional arms, may be near-useless.
Fewitems were therefore selected, for the engineer to gain the
inspiration from the philosophers, and to combine it with the
rigour of the physicists (3.4. Multiscale science and hierarchy):
Bergmann, 1944, Furusawa and Kaneko, 1998, Garnett, 1942,
Glimmand Sharp, 1997, Henle, 1942, Hoover and Hoover, 2003,
Li and Ge, 2007, Li and Kwauk, 2004, Koplik and Banavar, 1995,
Lowry, 1974, Marin, 2005, Pattee, 1973, Sewell, 2002, Simon,
1965. The last subsection (3.5. Education) is devoted to the
pedagogical aspects of DA and relates directly to Appendix
B: Andrews, 1984, Bloom, 1956, Cadogan, 1985, Calder, 1984,
Churchill, 1997, Comenius, 1657, Imrie, 1968, Krantz, 2000,
Krathwohl et al., 1964, Marzano and Kendall, 2006, Morrison
and Morrison, 1994, Sides, 2002.
10. Conclusions
A brief guided tour through the eld of scaling and dimen-
sionless numbers is presented, with respect to their use in
chemical engineering. The numbers are listed in Table 2. Two
sources of these numbers are considered, the dimensional
analysis and the scaling of governing equations with their
boundary conditions. The apparent advantage of the equation
scaling is twofold: (i) we know the relevant physical quanti-
ties and (ii) the numbers thus obtained have clear physical
meaning. This meaning must be kept in mind when using
the numbers and the scales they involve for making empirical
correlations. The mutual relations between different numbers
are highlighted. A ow-chart of numbers closely related to the
basic equations for momentum, heat, and mass transport is
shown in Fig. 4.
Acknowledgements
The author will highly acknowledge the readers forbearance
in case of possible mistakes, errors and shortcomings that
may occur in this text (like in any other one), and will sin-
cerely appreciate comments, suggestions, and constructive
criticismthat could help himto produce something much bet-
ter in the future. The nancial support by GACR (grant nos.
104/06/1418, 104/07/1110), by GAAV (grant nos. IAAX00130702,
IAA200720801), by MSMT CR (grant no. KONTAKT ME 952) and
byAVCR-CNRS(grant no. 11-20213) is gratefullyacknowledged.
Appendix A. Concept of intermediate
asymptotics
This appendix is to offer the reader a brief exposure of the con-
cept of the intermediate asymptotics (IA). The presentation is
intermediate-precise, in the sense that it is more precise than
a popular text aimed at the common public, and, at the same
time, less precise than it should be for its physical correctness
and mathematical rigour. Only few, hopefully typical, aspects
of IA are mentioned, without claim of generality and exhaus-
tiveness. The text is based on the two books by Barenblatt
(1996, 2003), withsome demonstrative examples by the author
(see gures).
A.1. Motivation example
Vaguely speaking, the intermediate asymptotic is a
timespace dependent solution of an evolution equation
that already forgot its initial conditions, but still does not
feel the limitations imposed by the system boundary or by
extinguishing its internal dynamics. Consider a body of a
still water in a rectangular tank. Let the surface waves be
generated at the centre, by an oscillating triangular element,
see Fig. A1. Near the centre, the waves are triangular since
they bear the ngerprint of the initial condition, the shape
of the generator (phase G). As they propagate outwards, they
gradually obtain the natural circular shape,
4
being undis-
4
Why the circular shape is natural? A mathematician would
say because of the symmetry reason; a physicist would say that
there is no force to make it non-circular and, even if, the circle is
Fig. A1 Demonstration of IA. Surface wave generated by
vibration of triangular element on surface of originally still
liquid conned in rectangular container (top view). Wave
moves from generator to boundary. Shape of wave (dotted
line): triangular (phase G) circular (phase I) rectangular
(phase B). Circular wave is intermediate asymptotic (IA).
turbed by either boundary. This happens at the intermediate
distance between the container centre and container wall
(phase I). As the waves begin to feel the container walls, the
circles turn into rectangles, to accommodate to the shape of
the boundary (phase B). The solution describing the happy
circles is the intermediate asymptotic (IA) of the system:
demonstration of pure physics, unaffected by geometrical
constraints, by the past and future.
The three stages (G, I, B) correspond to three different
regimes of the system behaviour, where different effects,
hence variables, come to play. DA is able to cope with a sin-
gle regime only. The easiest is the intermediate regime (IA)
where besides the physics, which is in all of them, no addi-
tional variables are present to account for the geometry of
wave generator and the container boundary. DA may be able
to describe certain rough aspects of the intermediate stage,
by providing scale estimates of some main features of the cir-
cular waves. Whether DA can really do so, depends on the
physical nature of the problem and on the type of the physi-
cal quantities involved. There can be a solution in form of IA,
which cannot be obtained by DA. In this sense, the concept of
IA transcends the concept of DA, as pointed out in Section 3.2
of the main text. DA applies to problems having the complete
similarity.
A.2. Two kinds of similarity
A.2.1. Complete similarity (CS)
The relation between the master quantity and the variables,
u=f(a
1,. . .,k
, b
1,. . .,m
) can be converted using DA into the dimen-
a stable conguration; a chemical engineer would argue that one
has seen only circles, so far. They are all basically right.
sionless form:
= (
1
.
2
. . . . .
m
). (A.1)
where we want to reduce the number of variables by neglect-
ing some Pi-terms. Usually, too small and too large terms
are omitted, without further justications. Correctly, the
behaviour of inthe limit of
i
0 or must be investigated.
The neglection is permitted only when tends fast enough
a nite non-zero limit. Then it is possible to replace with
another function of less variables representing the limit of :
=
1
(
1
.
2
. . . .
n-m
) (complete similarity). (A.2)
Since is usually not known beforehand, at least an a pos-
teriori check is in order. The case where we can go from (A.1)
to (A.2) is called the complete similarity (CS), or the similarity
of the rst kind of the phenomenon in the neglected variables
(h+1, h+2, . . ., m). In reality, this is a rare situation and a worse
case is encountered.
A.2.2. Incomplete similarity (IS)
If behaves badly, the condition for CS is not satised and
the Pi-terms cannot be neglected. They inuence the problem
regardless how small or big they are. But even here a sim-
plication can exist. If our problem possesses certain special
features, it may be possible to take some Pi-terms out of , as
the power-law factors. In this case, (A.2) becomes
= (
.n1
n1

.m
m
)
2
.1
n1

.1
m
. . . . .

n
.n
n1

.n
m
. (A.3)
which can briey be written as
=
2
(
1
.
2
. . . . .
n-m
) (incomplete similarity). (A.4)
The number of arguments of is reduced at the price of
the power-law factors and several unknown exponents (
n
,
n
, . . .,
n
). Such a case is called the incomplete similarity
(IS), or the similarity of the second kind of the phenomenon
in the extracted variables (h+1, h+2, . . ., m). Although (A.2)
and (A.4) are formally similar, there is a substantial differ-
ence. The former witnesses the generalized homogeneity of
the dimensional function f, which is a consequence of the
general physical covariance principle (the platform on which
DAoperates). The latter witnesses the generalized homogene-
ity of the nondimensional function itself, which is a lucky
coincidence, the consequence of the presence of some special
properties of the problem under study. Neither the extracted
variables nor the exponents in (A.3) can be obtained by DA,
in principle. They must be found by some other means, e.g.
by numerical solution of the full model, by experiments. The
following two special cases of (A.3) can be met:
=
m
.
2
. . . . .
m1
.
=
2
(
1
.
2
. . . . .
m1
).
(A.5)
where only one small or large Pi-termspoils the complete sim-
ilarity, namely the term
m
, which stems from the variable
b
m
. Note that IS is a much weaker quality than CS, yet more
widespread. On the other hand, even IS is still a rather excep-
tional property. It seems to be difcult being more quantitative
about the distribution of special properties within the natu-
ral phenomena we observe, and in models we use to describe
them. A rule of thumb says: The better the property, the
rarer it occurs. Consequently, we may expect that the typical
case will be the lack of similarity where no further simpli-
cation of (A.1) is possible. It should be attacked directly, via
experiments, numerical calculations, or approximate analyt-
ical techniques.
A.3. Two kinds of self-similarity
In many cases, (A.2) represents the nal result produced by
DA, which can be re-written as
u = U (
1
.
2
. . . .
m
) (output of DA). (A.6)
In most of our applications, DA nishes here and delivers
the scaling law uU. The tuning function is then obtained
by measurements. These applications typically describe
steady states of complex processes, in complex geometries,
timespace averaged problems with lumped parameters. Less
often are studied evolution problems in space and time, prob-
lems with distributed parameters. Certain class of problems,
in a certain intermediate range, admit self-similar (similarity)
solutions, in terms of self-similar variables. These variables
for problems with complete similarity can be found by DA.
Consider a problem described by a complicated governing
equation for function u=u(x, t). The scaling law (A.2), (A.6)
obtained by DA can be written as
u
U
= F
x
X
.
i
(self-similar ansatz for CS). (A.7)

where X(t) and U(t) are the self-similar variables. They are
the scale estimates for the spatial coordinate x and the mas-
ter quantity u(x, t) that ensure the geometrical similarity of
the spatial prole of u. Putting (A.7) into the original govern-
ing equation, we get a simplied equation that solves for the
functionF(), where is the single compoundvariable, x/X, pro-
vided that the
i
-terms do not interfere. The solutionu/U=F(,
i
) is the exact solution to the simplied equation, and is
called the self-similar solution of the rst kind. Because the sim-
ilarity solution holds only in the intermediate range where
the problem lack internal length scales, it represents IA of the
original problem.
When our problem has not the complete similarity, but
only the incomplete similarity, the similarity variables must
be produced by means other than DA. Namely this holds for
the scaling of the master quantity (A.3). In the simple case of
(A.5), we have
u
U
=
x
X
.
i
(self-similar ansatz for IS). (A.8)

where the dimensionless parameter typically contains infor-
mation about the initial stage of the process. Putting (A.8) into
the original governing equation, we get a simplied equation
whose solution is called the self-similar solution of the second
kind. The solution typically leads to the nonlinear eigenvalue
problem (NEP) for the function F:
N(F) zF = 0 (nonlinear eigenvalue problem). (A.9)
where N is a nonlinear operator. The eigenvalue z depends
on the exponents of IS (
n
,
n
, . . .). Often, nonlinear differen-
Fig. A2 Guidance for application of DA and similarity
analysis. Right branch deals with idealized problem, where
problematic variables are neglected. Dimensionless
formulation follows from DA. By complete similarity (CS),
variables are fewer and similarity law is obtained. With
governing equations (GE), self-similar solution (rst kind)
can be found. Left branch deals with realistic problem.
Incomplete similarity (IS) is encountered and self-similar
solution (second kind) is obtained by nonlinear eigenvalue
problem (NEP) (based on Barenblatt, 1987, 1996, 2003).
tial equations must be solved, with more boundary conditions
than is due (overdetermination). Such a special value of z
is seeked, for which the solution does exist. The qualitative
methods for nonlinear systems can be used, and the phase
portrait of the problem can be analysed. Due to the overdeter-
mination, the solution can correspond a singular objects (e.g.
separatrix line). The ow-chart summary is given in Fig. A2.
A.4. Relation between DA and IA
DA is a simple effective method for nding the rough scale
estimate of a master quantity, uU, in problems having the
complete similarity. This estimate can be used for construct-
ing the self-similar variables. IA is a general concept, a kind of
universal behaviour that many systems of different origin can
produce. It is a spatio-temporal phenomenon, existing within
a certain intermediate range of the independent variables. It
is an approximate solution to a complex problem, valid in a
certain range. It can be represented by the self-similar solu-
tion, which is the exact solution to a simplied problem, valid
in the whole range, see Fig. A3. The action radius of the above-
discussed concepts is shown in the diagram in Fig. A4.
Fig. A3 Relation between self-similar solution and IA.
Real process with three stages: initial generation (G),
intermediate stage (I), nal stage affected by boundary (B).
Self-similar solution for simplied problem is in whole
range and exact; for real problem it is approximation in
intermediate range.
A.5. Beyond IA?
There may exist even a weaker type of similarity than IS, in
the solutions to the general evolution problems on interme-
diate ranges of time and space (or even more sophisticated
variables) that will be sufcient to earn the status of IA, at
least in the intuitive sense, see the grey zone in Fig. A4. If the
opposite is true, the grey zone shrinks to zero. Paradoxically,
the opposite may be true owing to the terminology reasons. If
the notion of IA is anchored in the fact that the weakest simi-
larity that IA can bear is IS, there is no room for anything else.
Such a denition nds its support in the fact that the concept
of similarity is equivalent to the invariance of the governing
equations with respect to certain groups of transformations
(symmetry). Since the nondimensionalization and scaling
means changing the norm of the measuring units (etalons),
the important role of the renormalization group is a little sur-
prise. With such a denition, IA and the group that reects
the actual degree of symmetry in the problem are equivalent.
Consequently, the insolubility of the IS problem in terms of
the self-similar solution of the second kind is equivalent to
the indeterminacy of the group, and can be interpreted as the
Fig. A4 Nesting of similarity concepts. DA: dimensional
analysis; CS: complete similarity; IS: incomplete similarity;
IA: intermediate asymptotic; AI: absence of
intermediateness. Phenomena fall into two classes: AI and
IA. Within IA, further division is possible.
Fig. A5 Life cycle of population. Genesis at early times (G),
internal dynamics in intermediate range (I), decay due to
bounds set on its existence (B). In middle range, IA
behaviour is expected. Vertical axis: characteristic
parameter describing state of system (large ensemble of
interacting units; evolution of biological species,
population, culture, civilization, empire).
absence of IA, in the given problem. The insolubility can be
caused by unavailability of certain integral quantities, either
explicit or implicit, reecting the conservation principles.
Their absence can be for several reasons: they do not exist,
they do exist but we do know them, we do not know whether
they do exist. In mechanics, which is an axiomatic discipline,
5
we can prove or disprove their existence, which leads to the
consistent statement about the existence of IA. In other sci-
ences, where we lack this strong axiomatic footing, we face the
undecidability. This links back to the need of an operational
denition of IA, suitable also for other and less formalized
research areas, where the governing equations are either
fully absent, or reect only a small fragment of truth. Exer-
cising them would be tempting for applied mathematicians,
but the results obtained would likely be largely misleading.
A.6. Broader horizons
Inhis books, Barenblatt mentions that althoughthe concept of
IA is a part of the mathematical physics, it has important sig-
nicance for variety of general situations that are multiscale
in nature. As an example, he presents few situations from our
everyday life, to demonstrate this conceptual generality (e.g.
perception of visual art, visual perception generally, analogy
in poetry, intermediate description of historical events, etc.).
To contribute to these efforts, the following three exam-
ples are introduced, that hopefully comply with the concept
of IA, at least on the intuitive level. The rst shows the nat-
ural cycle of a culture or civilization, see Fig. A5. It takes off
fromzero, builds up, reaches astatus quo(sustainability), and
eventually degenerates. The intermediate stage canbe consid-
ered as IA, because here the mechanisms driving its internal
dynamics are revealed. The culture has already reached cer-
5
From the fundamental point of view, the mechanics is science
about something that does not exist. There are no elementary
particles (mechanons) that would mediate the mechanical
interactions. Mechanics merely is a demonstration of the
electromagnetic and gravitational forces on the macroscale. On
the same argument, the physicists would state that Romeo and
Juliet were not in love: there are no elementary particles
(loveons) mediating this type of interaction.
Fig. A6 Life cycle of individual. IAunaffected by
beginning and end (the picture is reproduced with kind
permission by The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust).
tain degree of independence and autonomy, while it is still far
from its inevitable end (e.g. internal decay; the Roman Empire
in the past, the West in the near future).
What happens with big populations (phylogeny) can repeat
on the level of a one single individual (ontogeny). This is
demonstrated by the second example. In Fig. A6, we see the
youth, maturity and age. The child bears the ngerprint of its
birth and the care delivered by the surrounding, to facilitate
its early existence (phase G). The adult is believed to be able
to behave at least to a certain degree independently of the
experience from the early period, according to ones free will,
if any (phase I). Getting older, the feeling of the presence of
the severe upper bound on the length of the current life cycle
comes to play, and affects our behaviour strongly (phase B).
Totopthis appendixonthe philosophical level, let us follow
the third example. By convention, the common people distin-
guish three parts of the time axis: past, present, and future,
see Fig. A7. The present is represented by one singular point
only, separating the vast past from the equally vast future.
Note that both the past and future do not exist: past already
was, future will only be. The practical relevance of this pic-
ture is that we keep living in a virtual world, generated of
our memories, and bounded by our future expectations and
plans. The mental training suggested by many a philosophi-
cal schools is aimed at expanding the present, since it is the
only reality we can actually perceive, and the way how to lib-
erate ourselves from the diktat of the past and the future. The
Fig. A7 Mental training: development of extended
perception of present, in form of IA. Singularity of present
is unfolded, by suppressing the virtual past and future.
extended present is thus our IA, which, in its ultimate form,
can be experienced as the timelessness.
Appendix B. Suggestions for using and
teaching DA
This appendix concerns the problem how to use DA and sim-
ilarity analysis, which may also be useful for educational
purposes. The basic facts about usage of DA are widely avail-
able in the open literature (see the Reference section). The
practical recipe belowfor the applicationof the similarityanal-
ysis is taken from Barenblatt (1987, 1996, 2003). A selection of
the educational literature is in References section 3.5.
DAWhat it is, how it works?
It is a very standard issue, with enormous coverage by
books, handbooks, monographs, etc.
See Sections 2 and 3 of this paper.
DAFor which purpose?
We canuse DAfor several reasons, differing inthe expected
outputs:
scaling law for a master quantity;
similarity law for modelling and scale up/down;
similarity variables needed for seeking similarity solution
of governing equations;
grouping parameters into DN to reduce experimental data
and to make correlations.
Note: Obtaining the scaling law for a quantity may, but also
may not be our ultimate goal. With these scale estimates we
can build valuable models.
DA versus scaling of equations (SE):
DA
does not give any variables (they must be chosen subjec-
tively, relevance not assured);
does give dimensionless numbers (all combinations, rel-
evance not assured);
does give relation between the numbers (scale-estimate
of master quantity).
SE
does give relevant variables (from equations, initial and
boundary conditions);
does give some relevant numbers (maybe not all, equa-
tions are only a model of reality);
does not give relation between the numbers.
Recommendation. First obtain relevant numbers by SE, then
apply DA to nd similarity laws.
DARecipe for similarity analysis (after Barenblatt; slightly
adapted, see Fig A2):
1. Specify relevant variables (using model equations; choose
yourself).
2. Choose system of units, choose variables with indepen-
dent dimension (those most relevant).
3. Apply DA to get similarity law, =(
1
,
2
, . . .,
m
).
4. Choose suitable scales for your problem, estimate magni-
tude of Pi-terms (small/large?).
5. Assume complete similarity andcancel small/large terms.
Check result versus data. Problems?
6. Assume incomplete similarity and cancel small/large
terms. Check result versus data.
7. Formulate similarity and scaling laws with fewest vari-
ables [nal output I].
8. Formulate similarity variables, use model equations, nd
similarity solution [nal output II].
9. Relate similarity solution to IAbehaviour of your problem,
delimitate intermediate region.
10. Does your result comply with data? Can it be generalized?
11. Improve this recipe, based on your own experience.
DAGlossary
For the readers convenience, a brief glossary of frequent
terms is also included. The expressions are listed, as they
appear in the text (place of denition):
similarity parameter (3.1.5) (also: Pi-term, -term, dimen-
sionless number);
similarity law for (3.1.5);
similarity law for a (3.1.6);
scale estimate for a (3.1.7) (also: basic scaling for a, scaling
law for a);
similarity theory (Section 3.2) (also: similitude theory, mod-
elling, scale-up/down);
similar systems (Section 3.2);
similarity law for modelling (3.2.3);
similarity criterion for modelling (3.2.3);
scaling law: power-law dependence, y =ax
b
;
scaling rule for modelling (3.2.3);
scale coefcient for modelling (3.2.3);
scale (4.3) (also: characteristic/typical/representative quan-
tity, parameter, value);
scale equation (4.3);
complete similarity (A.2);
incomplete similarity (A.4);
self-similar: variable, coordinate, solution (A.7) and (A.8)
(also: similarity variable/coordinate/solution).
Teaching aspects in general are covered by wealth of ped-
agogical literature devoted to education at the tertiary level
(university), spanning several centuries. Starting with the
paradigmatic treatment by the father of modern education
Comenius (1657), we can arrive at the numerous volumes of
the present literature. To name one, Bloom (1956; see also
Krathwohl et al., 1964, Marzano and Kendall, 2006) is espe-
cially useful at preparing the knowledge tests for students.
The taxonomy indicates how difcult our questions are, and
which students skills are required for generating the answers.
Students should not only be taught Know how, but also
Know why.
Teaching aspects in particular are broadly covered by the
quarterly published periodical Chemical Engineering Educa-
tion. There are articles directly relatedto teaching DA. Written
by professional teachers and active researches at the same
time, they are of great didactical value (see e.g. Andrews, 1984;
Churchill, 1997; Krantz, 2000; Sides, 2002; also Imrie, 1968). To
attract the students attention to problems of scales, few pop-
ular books are available too (e.g. Cadogan, 1985; Calder, 1984;
Morrison and Morrison, 1994).
Postscript. Students are forced to produce a number of
papers to defend their PhD thesis (Publish or perish). To
reduce the increasing information noise in the peer-reviewed
literature, remember also the complementary saying: Better
to perish than publish rubbish.
Appendix C. New areas in chemical
engineering
Far be it from the author to tend to have any kind of visionary
ambitions. Instead, some comments are presented, related to
the current topics suggested as being topical.
C.1. Microreactors and microuidics
C.1.1. Microsystems in chemical technology
Flows and transport phenomena in microscopic and
nanoscale channels are under intense research. The typ-
ical features are: low Re regimes, strong surface effects, break
down of continuum concept, multiscale nature, presence of
many kinds of forces. There are some aspects already known,
that make the micro-world different from ours. Others are
only awaiting their discovery. We still have the well-dened
physical quantities and the power of the conservation
equations, so that both DA and SE can be applied.
In chemical technology, the microreactors enable better
control of system behaviour. The ow is usually laminar (low
Re owing to small L and V), with all the advantages of the
Stokes equation (linearity hence superposition, reversibility,
strong theoremsminimum dissipation, reciprocity). Such
ows may not be prone to hydrodynamic instabilities. On the
other hand, we lack the advantage of the effective large-scale
convective mixing (strong bulk turbulence), and the ow
basically is in the boundary layer regime. This increases the
resistance to the transport processes. They must be enhanced
by clever design of the system geometry and ow. Thanks to
the fast heat transfer in systems with large (surface/volume)
ratios L
2
/L
3
1/L, we can manage the exo/endo-thermic
reactions. The mass diffusion can be complemented by
micro-convection in several ways (micromixing). Controlling
the transport and reaction, we can improve the selectivity
and increase conversion. This higher efciency together
with safe smaller units close to user might compete with
the huge volumes produced by present plants on one spot.
As ever, common sense should be used to prevent us from
miniaturizing everything.
C.1.2. Prevailing forces
There are different kinds of forces, with different ranges of
action. The shortest are the interaction forces between two
small molecules in vacuum. The force range usually increases
with the molecule size, polarity, number of molecules, and is
larger in material environment, where strong cumulative and
collective effects can play a role. Starting from few nanome-
tres (nm), these molecular forces in large ensembles can reach
to 100nm, say. When the system size is larger than this g-
ure (microchannels), the molecular forces can be considered
as localized, i.e. concentrated in a plane of zero thickness. We
have the usual macroscopic description, with the common
surface effects. Whenthe systemsize is comparable or smaller
than this gure (nanochannels), the molecular forces cannot
be considered as localized; they are distributed in space and
time. We have to abandonthe usual macroscopic description,
and develop something smarter. An analogy emerges here.
In macro-hydrodynamics the boundary effects can be local-
ized into a thin boundary layer negligible with respect to the
bulk volume, while in micro-hydrodynamics the whole bulk
is the boundary layer. In micro-hydrodynamics the molecu-
lar forces can be localized into a thin surface layer, while in
nano-hydrodynamics, these forces penetrate the whole bulk.
Note that the commonshear viscosity jincreases enormously
on nanoscale, when the sheared uid layer is only several
nm thick. The common surface tension o decreases, when
the drop size shrinks to nanometric scales. Both j and o are
macroscopic quantities that can loose their usual meaning
when transferred from large local-equilibrium ensembles on
to sparse families of particles, out of statistical balance.
It is useful to knowhowdifferent forces and physical quan-
tities scale withthe lengthL (systemsize). Expectedly, the body
or volume forces fall quickly with decreasing L (gravity, iner-
tia, centrifugal, etc.). In contrast, the molecular and surface
forces become important. Consequently, the force equilibria in
microsystems are createdbyabalance of forces others thanwe
are used to. In small systems, intense electrical elds can be
produces, andimportant electro-phenomenaoccur (electroos-
mosis, electrophoresis, streaming potential, sedimentation
potential, dielectrophoresis). The Debye length becomes the
relevant length scale. The force balance may result frominter-
play between the viscous, pressure, and electrostatic forces.
The electrostatic-Ra may thenappear. Newkinds of owinsta-
bility can also be produced.
C.1.3. Governing equations and boundary conditions
The continuum approach is based on the notion of the uid
particle, a virtual mesoscale object having the proper number
of molecules, not too small, not too large. This alibistic de-
nition may well work for students, but largely fails when we
have to know how this particle compares with the size of our
microchannel. Since this basic concept is presented in the rst
lecture on hydrodynamics, all of us surely know how big it is.
When it is smaller than the system, the continuum approach
can be applied, and vice versa. Since gases are thinner than
liquids, their particles must be larger. Consequently, gases
are more prone to discontinuous behaviour in microsystems.
Note that all uid properties must be continuous.
6
There may
be different length scales for kinematics (speed, acceleration),
thermodynamics (pressure, density), transport (diffusion), etc.
Also, even when the uid is continuous, the ow may be not
(shocks, extreme shearing, etc.).
There are some recommendations for microows in terms
of the Knudsen number. One effect is rarecation, which likely
occurs when Kn is larger than 10
3
to 10
2
. This holds for
gases, where the free path is a well-dened concept. In liq-
uids, it is not so, and the molecular interaction distance can
be taken instead of the free path. This distance could be taken
10 smaller than the path, based on the density argument,
(distance/path) (,
gas
/,
liquid
)
1/3
. Another effect is the molecu-
lar slips of uid at rigid wall, where the no-slip BC condition
6
See e.g. Nguyen and Wereley (2002), Section 2.1.3.
loses validity. The continuum approach and no-slip BC can
apply for Kn<10
2
, say. The continuumapproach and free-slip
BC is recommended for Kn10
2
to 10
1
. The NavierStokes
fails for Kn10
0
and other models should be used (e.g. Bur-
nett and Woods equations). Statistical approach (Boltzmann
equation) or molecular dynamics of free discrete particles
should be employed for Kn>10
1
. The Knudsen number can
serve as the expansion parameter in building approximate
models. Different effects can be important for gases (rareca-
tion, compressibility, viscous heating, thermal creep, Knudsen
pump, diffuse/specular reection at wall) and liquids (wet-
ting, adsorption, eletrokinetics, hydrophobicity). Other effects
canbe common(entrance effects, uidstructure interactions,
relaxation times upon disturbing, surface roughness).
The diversity and novelty of micro-phenomena need
new forces to be included, modied equations and adequate
boundary conditions. After scaling, they will produce new
or different DN, than we would expect. For instance, the slip
boundary condition on rigid wall for compressible ows leads
to Ec, Kn, Pr, Re (cf. with numbers in Sections 5.4.1 and 5.4.2).
Other numbers may be encountered too (e.q. Squeeze num-
ber, Bearing number, etc.). Some DN important on macroscale
may loose their relevance. The common DA is expected to
work also for microsystems, one difculty being our much
less experience with the world of small, where things often
go straight against our intuition. It is exactly the experience
and intuition that facilitate the crucial step in DA, the choice
of relevant variables.
Literature used and recommended: References sections 3.1
and 3.2.
C.2. Biosystems
Biology witnesses long-term tradition in using various scal-
ing laws. Observations suggest that animals are small and
big, slow and fast, eating little and much, etc. Efforts were
spent to relate these properties and to nd some rules.
Resulting empirical correlations shows power-law depen-
dence between various quantities (body size, body weight,
proportions, metabolic rate, heat production, characteristic
biological times, etc.). Metabolic heat is produced in the
body bulk L
3
and is released by body surface L
2
. The
(loss/production) ratio is 1/L, indicating that big animals may
have problem with overheating, while small with under-
heating (beyond the limit of thermal regulation, they are
cold-blooded). The weight goes like L
3
and the force gener-
ated by the stress in muscles L
2
. The (force/weight) ratio is
1/L, indicating that small animals may be relatively stronger
than the big ones. The human weight is also expressed by a
power-law, as the surface density M/L
2
[kg/m
2
], with the opti-
mum value currently set to 21 (BMI =body mass index). These
are results based on observations or on elementary scaling
considerations.
Biotechnology, like chemical technology, applies the bal-
ance equations, which can be scaled. With well-dened
physical quantities, DA can operate. Some specic situations
do exist at biosystems. There are crucial qualities that are
difcult to dene and quantify, whence to subject to DA.
For instance, the physiological state of living matter is of
paramount importance. Further, there are metabolic patterns,
pathways of such a complexity that a mere set of mass equa-
tions fromSection 7 for their description is ineffective. Rather,
the graph theory is used to capture their topology and for-
malize the problems at least qualitatively, in terms of the
corresponding matrixes. The populationbalance models (used
not only for living units, but also for lifeless particles, like bub-
bles, drops) are statistical tools, providing us with equations
for probability distribution of certain property within the pop-
ulation (age, size, weight, wealth, health, etc.). It may not be a
priori clear what good comes from their possible scaling and
howtouse the DNthus obtained. Similarlyinother areas (ecol-
ogy, economy, medicine, pharmacology, psychology, sociology,
etc.), the following points should be made clear. Do we have
well-dened physical quantities? Are they directly related via
certain physical processes? Or even better: Do we have gov-
erning equations? If so, we can try our best at applying DA,
and possibly also SE.
Literature used and recommended: References section 3.3.
C.3. Multiscale methodology
Multiscale approach is fashionable currently, but the basic
idea is very old. In your system, choose proper characteris-
tic scales for relevant quantities (time, length, force, speed,
etc.), estimate the magnitude of individual terms inyour equa-
tions, neglect some terms with respect to others, under given
conditions. Change the conditions systematically, to select
individual simple processes and study them thoroughly. This
is what physicists have been doing for centuries. The time and
length scales (T and L) can be obtained by spectral analysis, of
either the physical signals (measured or computed by CFD)
or the governing equations (modal dynamics). The physical
quantity u(x, t) is a function, an element of an abstract func-
tionspace. It canbe representedusing the basis functions. One
common basis are the harmonic functions (Fourier). Another
basis are wavelets (Haar), which basically are wave packets.
The force scale relates to L and T, depending how short/long
range it is, and how fast it responds/decays. When the scales
are separated by a large gap, the corresponding processes are
likely only weakly coupled, and can possibly be studied sepa-
rately. When the scales are not separated, the corresponding
processes are likely strongly coupled and it may be difcult or
even impossible to decompose them, without corrupting the
model (scales inturbulence are typically strongly intertwined).
Almost all things around us are multiscale systems, at least
for the simple reasonthat theyare made of atoms 10
9
mand
we are bodies 10
0
mliving inspace of 10
xx
m. Fromthe hier-
archy of scales follows the hierarchy of functions, as known
fromcomplexsystems. Hierarchical systems display one spec-
tacular feature: existence of emergent properties. The whole
is more than the sum of its parts (in symbols: 1+1,=2). The
additional qualities that do not exist on the level of the indi-
vidual components are the collective modes of behaviour of
the whole system that emerges through the interactions of its
components. They cannot be predicted fromthe knowledge of
the single components itself (if in principle, is a philosophical
question). The quality of houseness is not present in each
single brick the house is composed of. One practical conse-
quence for microtechnologists: a huge production block built
up from many small active elements of various types will
always have potential for producing unpredictable emergent
behaviour. Once you create your LEGO-plant from your micro-
bricks, it will start its own life. It will be ready to surprise the
creator,
7
any time.
Literature used and recommended: References section 3.4.
7
There might even be a precedent for this in human history.
References
8
1. Dimensional analysis
1.1. Books on dimensional analysis
Baker, W.E., Westine, P.S. and Dodge, F.T., (1973). Similarity Methods
in Engineering Dynamics: Theory and Practise of Scale Modeling.
(Hayden Book Company, Rochelle Park).
Barenblatt, G.I., (1987). Dimensional Analysis. (Gordon and Breach
Science Publishers, NY).
Barenblatt, G.I., (1996). Scaling, Self-Similarity, and Intermediate
Asymptotics. (Cambridge University Press).
Barenblatt, G.I., (2003). Scaling. (Cambridge University Press).
Becker, H.A., (1976). Dimensionless Parameters. (Applied Science
Publishers, London).
Birkhoff, G., (1960). Hydrodynamics: A Study in Logic, Fact and
Similitude. (Princeton University Press) [Chapter 4]
Bluman, G.W. and Cole, J.D., (1974). Similarity Methods for
Differential Equations. (Springer, NY).
Bridgman, P.W., (1922). Dimensional Analysis. (Yale University
Press, New Haven).
Clement-OBrien, K. and Lawler, G.M., 1998, Applying medication
math skills: a dimensional analysis approach, CENGAGE
Delmar Learning.
Craig, G.P., (2003). Quick Guide to Solving Problems Using Dimensional
Analysis. (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins).
Curren, A.M., 2005, Dimensional analysis for meds, CENGAGE
Delmar Learning.
De Jong, F.J., (1967). Dimensional Analysis for Economists.
(North-Holland, Amsterdam).
Dolezalik, V., (1959). Similarity and Modelling in Chemical Technology.
(SNTL Press, Prague, CZ) [in Czech]
Duncan, W.J., (1953). Physical Similarity and Dimensional Analysis:
An Elementary Treatise. (Edward Arnold, London).
Focken, C.M., (1953). Dimensional Methods and Their Applications.
(Edward Arnold, London).
Gukhman, A.A., (1965). Introduction to the Theory of Similarity.
(Academic Press, NY).
Hornung, H.G., (2006). Dimensional Analysis: Examples of the Use of
Symmetry. (Dover, NY).
Huntley, H.E., (1952). Dimensional Analysis. (Macdonald, London).
Ipsen, D.C., (1960). Units, Dimensions, and Dimensionless Numbers.
(McGraw-Hill, NY).
Isaacson, E. and Isaacson, M., (1975). Dimensional Methods in
Engineering and Physics. (Edward Arnold, London).
Jerrard, H.G. and McNeill, D.B., (1992). Dictionary of Scientic Units
Including Dimensionless Numbers and Scales. (Chapman & Hall,
London).
Kline, S.J., (1965). Similitude and Approximation Theory.
(McGraw-Hill, NY).
Kozesnik, J., (1983). Theory of Similarity and Modelling. (Academia,
Prague, CZ) [in Czech]
Kurth, R., (1972). Dimensional Analysis and Group Theory in
Astrophysics. (Pergamon Press, Oxford).
Land, N.S., (1972). A Compilation of Nondimensional Numbers, NASA
SP-274. (NASA Sci. Technol. Info. Ofce, Washington DC, USA).
Langhaar, H.L., (1951). Dimensional Analysis and Theory of Models.
(John Wiley, NY).
Loebel, A., (1986). Chemical Problem-Solving by Dimensional Analysis.
(Houghton Mifin Company, Boston).
Massey, B.S., (1971). Units, Dimensional Analysis and Physical
Similarity. (Van Nostrand, London).
Murphy, G., (1950). Similitude in Engineering. (The Ronald Press
Company, NY).
Palacios, J., (1964). Dimensional Analysis. (Macmillan, London).
Pankhurst, R.C., (1964). Dimensional Analysis and Scale Factors.
(Chapman & Hall, London).
Perry, R.H. and Chilton, C.H., (1973). Chemical Engineers Handbook.
(McGraw-Hill Book Company, NY), pp. 8185 [Chapter 2]
8
Selection of literature sources is provided below. Since many
of the listed books exist in several editions, to reference is given
to the rst edition or the edition currently available to the author.
Porter, A.W., (1946). The Method of Dimensions. (Methuen, London).
Schuring, D.J., (1977). Scale Models in Engineering: Fundamentals and
applicatIons. (Pergamon Press, Oxford).
Sedov, L.I., (1959). Similarity and Dimensional Methods in Mechanics.
Skoglund, V.J., (1967). Similitude Theory and Applications.
(International Textbook Company, Scranton).
Stubbings, G.W., (1948). Dimensions in Engineering Theory. (Crosby
Lockwood, London).
Szirtes, T., (1998). Applied Dimensional Analysis and Modeling.
(McGraw-Hill, NY).
Taylor, E.S., (1974). Dimensional Analysis for Engineers. (Clarendon
Press, Oxford).
Weast, R.C. and Astle, M.J. (Eds.). 1981, CRC Handbook of Chemistry
and Physics (pp. 306323 [Chapter F]). (CRC Press, Boca Raton,
Florida)
Zierep, J., (1971). Similarity Laws and Modeling. (Marcel Dekker, NY).
Zlokarnik, M., (1991). Dimensional Analysis and Scale-Up in Chemical
Engineering. (Springer, Berlin).
1.2. Articles on dimensional analysis
Astarita, G., 1997, Dimensional analysis, scaling, and orders of
magnitude. Chem Eng Sci, 52: 46814698.
Boucher, D.F. and Alves, G.E., 1959, Dimensionless numbers.
Chem Eng Prog, 55(9): 5564.
Boucher, D.F. and Alves, G.E., 1963, Dimensionless numbers-2.
Chem Eng Prog, 59(8): 7583.
Buckingham, E., 1914, On physically similar systems; illustrations
of the use of dimensional equations. Phys Rev, 4: 345376.
Buckingham, E., 1915, Model experiments and the forms of
empirical equations. Trans ASME, 37: 263296.
Cheng, Y.T. and Cheng, C.M., 2004, Scaling, dimensional analysis,
and indentation measurements. Mater Sci Eng R, 44:
91149.
Dodds, P.S. and Rothman, D.H., 2000, Scaling, universality, and
geomorphology. Ann Rev Earth Planet Sci, 28: 571610.
Gunther, B., 1975, Dimensional analysis and theory of biological
similarity. Physiol Rev, 55: 659699.
Gunther, B. and Morgado, E., 2003, Dimensional analysis
revisited. Biol Res, 36: 405410.
Klinkenberg, A., 1955, Dimensional systems and systems of units
in physics with special reference to chemical engineering.
Chem Eng Sci, 4, 130140, 167177
Lykoudis, P.S., 1990, Non-dimensional numbers as ratios of
characteristic times. Int J Heat Mass Transf, 33: 15681570.
Macagno, E.O., 1971, Historico-critical review of dimensional
analysis. J Franklin Inst, 292(6): 391402.
Prothero, J., 2002, Perspectives on dimensional analysis in scaling
studies. Perspect Biol Med, 45(2): 175189.
Rozen, A.M. and Kostanyan, A.E., 2002, Scaling-up effect in
chemical engineering. Theor Found Chem Eng, 36(4):
307313.
Sandler, H., 1970, Dimensional analysis of the heartA review.
Am J Med Sci, 260: 5670.
Sjoberg, L., 1987, Review: Psychometric considerations in the
dimensional analysis of subjective picture quality. Displays,
210212.
Stephens, D.W. and Dunbar, S.R., 1993, Dimensional analysis in
behavioral ecology. Behav Ecol, 4(2): 172183.
Vogel, S., 1998, Exposing lifes limits with dimensionless
numbers. Phys Today, 51(11): 2227.
Wesson, P.S., 1980, The application of dimensional analysis to
cosmology. Space Sci Rev, 27: 109153.
West, G.B., 1984, Scale and dimension. Los Alamos Sci,
11(Summer/Fall): 221.
1.3. Books on scale-up
Euzen, J.P., et al., (1993). Scale-Up Methodology for Chemical
Processes. (Gulf Publ. Co, Houston, Texas).
Grassmann, P., (1971). Physical Principles of Chemical Engineering.
(Pergamon Press, Oxford).
Johnstone, E.R. and Thring, M.W., (1957). Pilot Plants, Models, and
Scale-Up Methods in Chemical Engineering. (McGraw-Hill, NY).
Stichlmair, J.G., (2002). Scale-up Engineering. (Begell House Inc, NY).
Zlokarnik, M., (2006). Scale-Up in Chemical Engineering. (Wiley,
Weinheim).
2. Transport phenomena
Astarita, G. and Marrucci, G., (1974). Principles of Non-Newtonian
Fluid Mechanics. (McGraw-Hill, NY).
Aris, R., (1989). Vectors, tensors, and the basic equations of uid
mechanics. (Dover, NY).
Barnes, H.A., Hutton, J.F. and Walters, K., (1989). An Introduction to
Rheology. (Elsevier, Amsterdam).
Batchelor, G.K., Moffatt, H.K., & Worster, M.G. (eds) 2000,
Perspectives in Fluid Dynamics. (Cambridge University Press).
Bird, R.B., Stewart, W.E. and Lightfoot, E.N., (1965). Transport
Phenomena. (John Wiley, NY).
Brady, J.F. and Bossis, G., 1988, Stokesian dynamics. Ann Rev Fluid
Mech, 20: 111157.
Brennen, C.E., (2005). Fundamentals of Multiphase Flow. (Cambridge
University Press).
Brown, R.L. and Richards, J.C., (1970). Principles of Powder
Mechanics. (Pergamon Press, Oxford).
Carslaw, H.S. and Jaeger, J.C., (1947). Conduction of Heat in Solids.
(John Wiley, NY).
Cengel, Y.A. and Cimbala, J.M., (2006). Fluid Mechanics.
(McGraw-Hill, NY).
Chandrasekhar, S., (1961). Hydrodynamic and Hydromagnetic
Stability. (Oxford University Press).
Crank, J., (1956). Mathematics of Diffusion. (Clarendon Press,
Oxford).
Crowe, C., Sommerfeld, M. and Tsuji, Y., (1998). Multiphase Flows
with Droplets and Particles. (CRC Press, Boca Raton, USA).
Childress, S., (1981). Mechanics of Swimming and Flying. (Cambridge
University Press).
Cuenot, B., Magnaudet, J. and Spennato, B., 1997, The effects of
slightly soluble surfactants on the ow around a spherical
bubble. J Fluid Mech, 339: 2553.
Cussler, E.L., (1997). Diffusion Mass Transfer in Fluid Systems.
(Cambridge University Press, UK).
Deen, W.M., (1998). Analysis of Transport Phenomena. (Oxford
University Press, NY).
Davidson, P.A., (2004). Turbulence. An Introduction for Scientists and
Engineers. (Oxford University Press).
Davis, R.H., 1996, Hydrodynamic diffusion of suspended particles:
a symposium. J Fluid Mech, 310: 325335.
Doering, C.R. and Gibbon, J.D., (1995). Applied Analysis of the
NavierStokes Equations. (Cambridge University Press).
Drazin, P.G., (2002). Introduction to Hydrodynamic Stability.
(Cambridge University Press).
Drazin, P.G. and Reid, W.H., (1981). Hydrodynamic Stability.
Duran, J., (2000). Sands, Powders, and Grains. (Springer, NY).
Edwards, D.A., Brenner, H. and Wasan, D.T., (1991). Interfacial
Transport Processes and Rheology. (Butterworth-Heinemann,
Boston).
Forterre, Y. and Pouliquen, O., 2008, Flows of dense granular
media. Ann Rev Fluid Mech, 40: 124.
Friedlander, S.K., (2000). Smoke, Dust, and Haze: Fundamentals of
Aerosol Dynamics. (Oxford University Press).
Frisch, U., (1995). Turbulence. (Cambridge University Press, UK).
Ghirelli, F. and Leckner, B., 2004, Transport equation for the local
residence time of uid. Chem Eng Sci, 59: 513523.
Glasheen, J.W. and McMahon, T.A., 1996, A hydrodynamic model
of locomotion in the Basilisk Lizard. Nature, 380: 340342.
Glasheen, J.W. and McMahon, T.A., 1996, Size-dependence of
water-running ability in basilisk lizards (Basiliscus basiliscus). J
Exp Biol, 199: 26112618.
Hed anek, J., 2007. Private communication (NBK Endowment Fund,
New Czech Bible translation, based on the original Hebrew,
Aramaic, and Greek texts, www.nbk.cz)/see Deborah number/.
Hinds, W.C., (1999). Aerosol Technology. (John Wiley, NY).
Hinrichsen, H. and Wolf, D.E., (2004). The Physics of Granular Media.
(Wiley, Weinheim).
Ishii, M. and Hibiki, T., (2006). Thermo-Fluid Dynamics of Two-Phase
Flow. (Springer, NY).
Johnson, R.W. (ed) 1998, The Handbook of Fluid Dynamics.
Kleinstreurer, C., (2003). Two-Phase Flow: Theory and Applications.
(Taylor and Francis, NY).
Kolev, N.I., (2002). Multiphase Flow Dynamics (Springer, Heidelberg).
Koschmieder, E.L., (1993). Benard Cells and Taylor Vortices.
Kundu, P.K., (1990). Fluid Mechanics. (Academic Press, SD, USA).
Levenspiel, O., (1962). Chemical Reactor Engineering. (J. Wiley, NY).
Massey, B., (1998). Mechanics of Fluids. (Chapman & Hall, London).
Mika, V., (1981). Fundamentals of Chemical Engineering. (SNTL Press,
Prague, CZ) [in Czech]
Macosko, C.W., (1994). Rheology. Principles, Measurements, and
Applications. (Wiley/VCH, NY).
Moffat, H.K., 2000, Reections on magnetohydrodynamics, in
Perspectives in Fluid Dynamics, Batchelor, G.K., Moffatt, H.K.,
& Worster, M.G. (eds) (Cambridge University Press), pp.
347391.
Morrison, F.A., (2001). Understanding Rheology. (Oxford University
Press, NY).
Munson, B.R., Young, D.F. and Okiishi, T.H., (1990). Fundamentals of
Fluid Mechanics. (John Wiley, NY).
Nedderman, R.M., (1992). Statics and Kinematics of Granular
Materials. (Cambridge University Press).
Nguyen, A.V. and Schulze, H.J., (2004). Colloidal Science of Flotation.
(Marcel Dekker, NY).
Pedley, T.J., (1977). Scale Effects in Animal Locomotion. (Academic
Press, London).
Pedlosky, J., (1982). Geophysical Fluid Dynamics. (Springer, NY).
Pope, S.B., (2000). Turbulent Flows. (Cambridge University Press).
Reiner, M., 1964, The Deborah number. Phys Today, 17(1): 62.
Rohsenov, W.M. and Choi, H.Y., (1961). Heat, Mass and Momentum
Transfer. (Prentice Hall, London).
Ruzicka, M.C., 2006, On buoyancy in dispersion. Chem Eng Sci, 61:
24373446.
Ruzicka, M.C. and Thomas, N.H., 2003, Buoyancy-driven
instability of bubbly layers: analogy with thermal convection.
Int J Multiphase Flow, 29: 249270.
Ruzicka, M.C., Vecer, M., Orvalho, S.P. and Drahos, J., 2008, Effect
of surfactant on homogeneous regime stability in bubble
column. Chem Eng Sci, 63: 951967.
Sadhal, S.S., Ayyaswamy, P.S. and Chung, J.N., (1997). Transport
Phenomena with Drops and Bubbles. (Springer, NY).
Saffman, P.G., (1992). Vortex Dynamics. (Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, UK).
Slavicek, E., (1969). Theoretical Foundation of Chemical Engineering.
(SNTL Press, Prague, CZ) [in Czech]
Slattery, J.C., (1972). Momentum, Energy, and Mass Transfer in
Continua. (McGraw-Hill, NY).
Sohr, H., (2001). The NavierStokes Equations. (Birkhauser, Basel).
Soo, S.L., (1990). Multiphase Fluid Dynamics. (Science Press, Beijing).
Stickel, J.J. and Powel, R.L., 2005, Fluid mechanics and rheology of
dense suspensions. Ann Rev Fluid Mech, 37: 129149.
Taylor, D.W., (1948). Fundamentals of Soil Mechanics. (John
Wiley/Chapman & Hall, NY/London).
Temam, R., (2001). NavierStokes Equations: Theory and Numerical
Analysis. (Am Math Soc, USA).
Terzaghi, K., (1943). Theoretical Soil Mechanics. (John Wiley, NY).
Thomson, W.J., (2000). Introduction to Transport Phenomena.
(Prentice Hall, NJ).
Tritton, D., (1988). Physical Fluid Dynamics. (Clarendon Press,
Oxford).
Turner, J.S., (1979). Buoyancy Effects in Fluids. (Cambridge
University Press).
Vogel, S., (1994). Life in Moving Fluids. (Princeton University Press).
Welty, J.R., Wicks, C.E. and Wilson, R.E., (1969). Fundamentals of
Momentum, Heat, and Mass Transfer. (John Wiley, NY).
White, F.M., (1974). Viscous Fluid Flow. (McGraw-Hill, NY).
Wilkes, J.O., (1999). Fluid Mechanics for Chemical Engineers. (Prentice
Hall, NJ).
3. Other topics
3.1. Surfaces and surfactants
Adamson, A.W., (1960). Physical Chemistry of Surfaces.
(Interscience, NY).
Adamczyk, Z., (2006). Particles at Interfaces: Interactions, Deposition,
Structure. (Elsevier).
Davies, J.T. and Rideal, E.K., (1963). Interfacial Phenomena.
Fawcett, W.R., (2004). Liquids, Solutions, and Interfaces. (Oxford
University Press).
de Gennes, P.G., Brochard-Wyart, F. and Quere, D., (2004).
Capillarity and Wetting Phenomena. (Springer).
Israelachvili, J.N., (1992). Intermolecular and Surface Forces.
(Academic Press, London).
3.2. Microows and microsystems
Berthier, J. and Silberzan, P., (2005). Microuidics for Biotechnology.
(Artech House).
Bruus, H., (2008). Theoretical Microuidics. (Oxford University Press).
Ehrfeld, W., Hessel, V. and Lowe, H., (2000). Microreactors.
(Wiley-VCH, Weinheim).
Gad-el-Hak, M., 1999, The uid mechanics of microdevices. J
Fluids Eng, 121: 533.
Hessel, V., Hardt, S. and Lowe, H., (2004). Chemical Micro Process
Engineering. (Wiley, Weinheim).
van Kampen, N.G., (1992). Stochastic Processes in Physics and
Chemistry. (North-Holland, Amsterdam).
Karniadakis, G.M. and Beskok, A., (2002). Micro Flows. (Springer,
NY).
Karniadakis, G., Beskok, A. and Aluru, N., (2005). Microows and
Nanoows: Fundamentals and Simulation. (Springer).
Kockmann, N. (ed) 2006, Micro Process Engineering.
Li, D., (2004). Electrokinetics in Microuidics. (Elsevier, London).
Madou, M., (2000). Fundamentals of Microfabrication. (CRC Press).
Maynard, R., 2008, Ethics of nanotechnology or nanoethics?
Europhys News, 38(6): 89.
Neto, C., et al., 2005, Boundary slip in Newtonian liquids: a review
of experimental results. Rep Prog Phys, 68: 28592897.
Nguyen, N.T. and Wereley, S., (2002). Fundamental and Applications
of Microuidics. (Artech House).
Slattery, J.C., Oh, E.S. and Fu, K., 2004, Extension of continuum
mechanics to the nanoscale. Chem Eng Sci, 59: 46214635.
Stone, H.A., Stroock, A.D. and Ajdari, A., 2004, Engineering ows
in small devices. Ann Rev Fluid Mech, 36: 381411.
Tabeling, P., (2005). Introduction to Microuidics. (Oxford University
Press).
Thompson, P.A. and Troian, S.M., 1997, A general boundary
condition for liquid ow at solid surfaces. Nature, 389:
360362.
3.3. Biology and biosystems
McMahon, T., 1973, Size and shape in biology. Science, 179:
12011204.
Pilbeam, D. and Gould, S.J., 1974, Size and scaling in human
evolution. Science, 186: 892901.
McMahon, T.A. and Bonner, J.T., (1983). On Size and Life. (Scientic
American Library, NY).
Hjortso, M., (2005). Population Balances in Biomedical Engineering.
(McGraw-Hill).
Nopens, I. and Biggs, C.A., 2006, Advances in population balance
modelling. Chem Eng Sci, 61(1): 1305 [special issue]
Thompson, D.W., (1943). On Growth and Form
9
. (Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK).
9
One may ask: Why topologically equivalent drawings do
represent biologically different species?
Perthame, B., (2006). Transport Equations in Biology. (Birkh auser,
Basel).
Ramkrishna, D., (2000). Population Balances: Theory and Applications
to Particulate Systems in Engineering. (Academic Press).
3.4. Multiscale science and hierarchy
Bergmann, G., 1944, Holism, historicism, and emergence. Philos
Sci, 2(4): 209221.
Furusawa, C. and Kaneko, K., 1998, Emergence of rules in cell
society: differentiation, hierarchy, and stability. Bull Math Biol,
60: 659687.
Garnett, A.C., 1942, Scientic method and the concept of
emergence. J Philos, 39(18): 477486.
Glimm, J. and Sharp, D.H., 1997, Multiscale science: a challenge
for the 21-st century. SIAM News, 30(8): 4.
Henle, P., 1942, The status of emergence. J Philos, 39(18): 486493.
Hoover, W.M.G. and Hoover, C.G., 2003, Links between
microscopic and macroscopic uid mechanics. Mol Phys, 101:
15591573.
Li, J. and Ge, W. (eds) 2007, Frontier of chemical engineering -
multiscale bridge between reductionism and holism. Chem.
Eng. Sci, 62(13): 32833627, 16111904 [special issue].
Li, J. and Kwauk, M. (eds) 2004, Complex systems and multi-scale
methodology, Chem Eng Sci, 59(89): 16111904 [special issue].
Koplik, J. and Banavar, J.R., 1995, Continuum deductions from
molecular hydrodynamics. Ann Rev Fluid Mech, 27: 257292.
Lowry, A., 1974, A note on emergence. Mind, 83: 276277.
Marin, G.B. (ed) 2005, Multiscale analysis, Adv Chem Eng, 30.
Pattee, H.H. (ed) 1973, Hierarchy Theory. The Challenge of Complex
Systems.
Sewell, G.L., (2002). Quantum Mechanics and its Emergent
Macrophysics. (Princeton University Press, Princeton, USA).
Simon, H.A., 1965, The architecture of complexity. Gen Syst, 10:
6376.
3.5. Education
Andrews, G.F., 1984, Dimensionless education. Chem Eng Educ,
1984(Summer): 112115.
Bloom, B.S. (ed) 1956, Taxonomy of educational Objectives. The
Classication of Educational Goals. Handbook I: Congnitive Domain.
Cadogan, P.H., (1985). From Quark to Quasar. (Cambridge
University Press).
Calder, N., (1984). Timescale. (The Hogarth Press, London).
Churchill, S.W., Summer 1997, New approach to teaching
dimensional analysis. Chem Eng Educ, 31(3): 158165.
Comenius, J.A., (1657). The Great Didactic, published in Holland [in
Latin]. See also Keatinge, M.W., (1992). Great Didactic of
Comenius. (Kessinger Publishing LLC, London).
Imrie, B.W., 1968, The dimensionless efciency of teaching
dimensional analysis. Bull Mech Eng Educ, 7: 227235.
Krantz, W.B., 2000, An alternate method for teaching and
implementing dimensional analysis. Chem Eng Educ,
2000(Summer): 216221.
Krathwohl, D.R., Bloom, B.S. and Masia, B.B., (1964). Taxonomy of
Educational Objectives. The Classication of Educational Goals.
Handbook II: Affective Domain. (David McKay Co. Inc, NY).
Marzano, R.J. and Kendall, J.S., (2006). The New Taxonomy of
Educational Objectives. (Corwin Press).
Morrison, P. and Morrison, P., (1994). Powers of Ten. (Scientic
American Library, NY).
Sides, P.J., 2002, Scaling of differential equations. Chem Eng Educ,
2002(Summer): 232235.

Dimensional Analysis Scaling

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dimensional Analysis Scaling

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

chemical engineering research and design 8 6 ( 2 0 0 8 ) 835868

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

(,v) = 0(mass) [kg/m

= 1 (retention time) [-]. (5.5.33)

= 1 (retention time) [-]. (5.5.34)

= 1 (retention time) [-] (5.5.35)

(self-similar ansatz for CS). (A.7)

(self-similar ansatz for IS). (A.8)

You might also like