Referee's report by Henry Selby Hele-Shaw, on a paper 'A determination by a thermal method of the variation of the critical velocity of water with temperature' by Howard Turner Barnes and Ernest George Coker

Description

Sectional committee: [Engineering sciences]

He has concluded that the experimental method adopted by the authors is open to at least two serious objections, firstly that the insertion of a thermometer in the centre of the pipe where the velocity would be highest, cannot be without effect on the critical velocity of the stream. The author's refer to the use of colour bands as corroborating the point of critical velocity in their experiments, and indicate that they are sure that the sudden jump of the thermometer takes place at the same time that the colour band would break up, but he does not see sufficient evidence to justify this confidence in the accuracy of the method of taking observations by an inserted thermometer. Thinks varying lengths of tube should be used and the position of the thermometer altered to see how this affects the results. The second objection to the experimental method is that the influence of the hot water jacket must be felt in producing convection current in the stream.

He would be sorry to say that his objections to the method had any practical weight if their results had been at all consistent and had agreed with the mathematical theory which is generally accepted. However, the results as shown on the plotted curve of figure two, are such as might be represented by curves of quite a different form to that shown by the authors.He is sorry that the first paper sent to him for an opinion by the Society is not one he can recommend for publication. It would in his humble judgement take a much more extended series of observations in order to justify the acceptance of the formula suggested on the bottom of page 14 for the author's temperature curve.

Would prefer to see the paper sent to another referee without any notice being taken of his own views. Notes that he consulted his colleague Professor Wilberforce before coming to the conclusions stated, and Wilberforce agreed with him. Hopes the authors will be encouraged to pursue their work which should give most valuable results ultimately. The publication of a new law under the circumstances is premature.

[Not published].

Endorsed on recto as received 16 October 1901.

Reference number

RR/15/154

Earliest possible date

15 October 1901

Physical description

Letter on paper

Page extent

7 pages

Format

Typescript