Power laws for rough wall turbulent boundary layers

2003 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 1396 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. A. Kotey ◽  
D. J. Bergstrom ◽  
M. F. Tachie
Keyword(s):  
Boundary Layers ◽  
Power Laws ◽  
Turbulent Boundary Layers ◽  
Rough Wall

scholarly journals Wall-drag measurements of smooth- and rough-wall turbulent boundary layers using a floating element

2016 ◽  
Vol 57 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
W. J. Baars ◽  
D. T. Squire ◽  
K. M. Talluru ◽  
M. R. Abbassi ◽  
N. Hutchins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Boundary Layers ◽  
Turbulent Boundary Layers ◽  
Rough Wall ◽  
Floating Element

Structure of rough-wall turbulent boundary layers

1988 ◽  
Vol 31 (7) ◽  
pp. 1877 ◽  
Author(s):  
Promode R. Bandyopadhyay ◽  
Ralph D. Watson
Keyword(s):  
Boundary Layers ◽  
Turbulent Boundary Layers ◽  
Rough Wall

Turbulent boundary layers on a systematically varied rough wall

2009 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 015104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael P. Schultz ◽  
Karen A. Flack
Keyword(s):  
Boundary Layers ◽  
Turbulent Boundary Layers ◽  
Rough Wall

Rough-Wall Turbulent Boundary Layers

1991 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. R. Raupach ◽  
R. A. Antonia ◽  
S. Rajagopalan
Keyword(s):  
Boundary Layers ◽  
Strong Support ◽  
Reynolds Numbers ◽  
Viscous Sublayer ◽  
Turbulent Boundary Layers ◽  
Rough Wall ◽  
Roughness Sublayer ◽  
Turbulence Structure ◽  
Wall Boundary ◽  
High Reynolds

This review considers theoretical and experimental knowledge of rough-wall turbulent boundary layers, drawing from both laboratory and atmospheric data. The former apply mainly to the region above the roughness sublayer (in which the roughness has a direct dynamical influence) whereas the latter resolve the structure of the roughness sublayer in some detail. Topics considered include the drag properties of rough surfaces as functions of the roughness geometry, the mean and turbulent velocity fields above the roughness sublayer, the properties of the flow close to and within the roughness canopy, and the nature of the organized motion in rough-wall boundary layers. Overall, there is strong support for the hypothesis of wall similarity: At sufficiently high Reynolds numbers, rough-wall and smooth-wall boundary layers have the same turbulence structure above the roughness (or viscous) sublayer, scaling with height, boundary-layer thickness, and friction velocity.

Self-preservation of rough-wall turbulent boundary layers

2001 ◽  
Vol 20 (5) ◽  
pp. 591-602 ◽  
Author(s):  
R.J. Smalley ◽  
R.A. Antonia ◽  
L. Djenidi
Keyword(s):  
Boundary Layers ◽  
Turbulent Boundary Layers ◽  
Rough Wall

The Application of Wall Similarity Techniques to Determine Wall Shear Velocity in Smooth and Rough Wall Turbulent Boundary Layers

2014 ◽  
Vol 136 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica M. Walker
Keyword(s):  
Boundary Layer ◽  
Turbulent Boundary Layer ◽  
Boundary Layers ◽  
Profile Analysis ◽  
Shear Velocity ◽  
Reynolds Numbers ◽  
Turbulent Boundary Layers ◽  
Rough Wall ◽  
Total Stress ◽  
Wall Shear

Smooth and rough wall turbulent boundary layer profiles are frequently scaled using the wall shear velocity u*, thus it is important that u* is accurately known. This paper reviews and assesses several wall similarity techniques to determine u* and compares results with data from the total stress, Preston tube, and direct force methods. The performance of each method was investigated using experimental repeatability data of smooth and rough wall turbulent boundary layer profiles at Reθ of 3330 and 4840, respectively, obtained using laser Doppler velocimetry (LDV) in a recirculating water tunnel. To validate the results, an analysis was also performed on the direct numerical simulation (DNS) data of Jimenez et al. (2010, “Turbulent Boundary Layers and Channels at Moderate Reynolds Numbers,” J. Fluid Mech., 657, pp. 335–360) at Reθ = 1968. The inner layer similarity methods of Bradshaw had low experimental uncertainty and accurately determined u* and ε for the DNS data and are the recommended wall similarity methods for turbulent boundary layer profile analysis. The outer layer similarity methods did not perform well, due to the need to simultaneously solve for three parameters: u*, ε, and Π. It is strongly recommended that the u* values determined using wall similarity techniques are independently verified using another method such as the total stress or direct force methods.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document