An experimental study was conducted to examine the effects of surface roughness and adverse pressure gradient (APG) on the development of a turbulent boundary layer. Hot-wire anemometry measurements were carried out using single and X-wire probes in all regions of a developing APG flow in an open return wind tunnel test section. The same experimental conditions (i.e., T∞, Uref, and Cp) were maintained for smooth, k+ = 0, and rough, k+ = 41–60, surfaces with Reynolds number based on momentum thickness, 3,000 < Reθ < 40,000. The experiment was carefully designed such that the x-dependence in the flow field was known. Despite this fact, only a very small region of the boundary layer showed a balance of the various terms in the integrated boundary layer equation. The skin friction computed from this technique showed up to a 58% increase due to the surface roughness. Various equilibrium parameters were studied and the effect of roughness was investigated. The generated flow was not in equilibrium according to the Clauser (J Aero Sci 21:91–108, 1954) definition due to its developing nature. After a development region, the flow reached the equilibrium condition as defined by Castillo and George (2001), where Λ = const, is the pressure gradient parameter. Moreover, it was found that this equilibrium condition can be used to classify developing APG flows. Furthermore, the Zagarola and Smits (J Fluid Mech 373:33–79, 1998a) scaling of the mean velocity deficit, U∞δ*/δ, can also be used as a criteria to classify developing APG flows which supports the equilibrium condition of Castillo and George (2001). With this information a ‘full APG region’ was defined.
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
A special thanks to Victoria University and Dr. Turan for the use of their facility and Dr. Roosevelt Johnson from NSF-AGEP for making this international collaboration possible. And finally to Dr. Ronald Joslin from the Office of Naval Research for continuously funding this project.
Akinlade OG, Bergstrom DJ, Tachie MF, Castillo L (2004) Outer flow scaling of smooth and rough wall turbulent boundary layers. Exp Fluids 37:604–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson C, Turan ÖF, Brzek B, Castillo L (2004) Adverse pressure gradient turbulent boundary layer flows, Part 1: flow development. AFMC, Sydney, NSW. AFMC15-259Google Scholar
Antonia RA, Krogstad PÅ (2001) Turbulence structure in boundary layers over different types of surface roughness. Fluid Dyn Res 28:139–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aubertine CD, Eaton JK (2005) Turbulence development in a non-equilibrium turbulent boundary layer with mild adverse pressure gradient. J Fluid Mech 532:345–364zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergstrom DJ, Kotey NA, Tachie MF (2002) The effects of surface roughness on the mean velocity profiles in turbulent boundary layer. J Fluids Eng 124:664–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradshaw P (1966) The turbulence structure of equilibrium boundary Layers. NPL Aero Rep 1184, Tabulated data reproduced in ‘Proceedings Computation of Turbulent Boundary Layers-1968 AFOSR-IFP-Stanford Conference’ as ‘Flow 2500’ (Kline et al. 1968)Google Scholar
Bradshaw P (1967) The response of a constant pressure turbulent boundary layer to a sudden application of an adverse pressure gradient. NPL Aero Rep 1219. Tabulated data reproduced in ‘Proceedings Computation of Turbulent Boundary Layers-1968 AFOSR-IFP-Stanford Conference’ as ‘Flow 3300’ (Kline et al. 1968)Google Scholar
Chao D (2007) Effect of roughness in the development of an adverse pressure gradient turbulent boundary layer. MS thesis, Rensselaer Polytechnic InstituteGoogle Scholar
Clauser FH (1954) Turbulent boundary layers in adverse pressure gradients. J Aero Sci 21(2):91–108. Tabulated data of two 1954 experiments reproduced in ‘Proceedings Computation of Turbulent Boundary Layers-1968 AFOSR-IFP-Stanford Conference’ as ‘Flow 2200’ and ‘Flow 2300’ (Kline et al. 1968)Google Scholar
Coles DE (1962) The turbulent boundary layers in a compressible fluid. RAND Corp Rept R-403-PRGoogle Scholar
DeGraaff DB, Eaton JK (2000) Reynolds-number scaling of the flat-plate turbulent boundary layer. J Fluid Mech 422:319–346zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elsberry K, Loeffler J, Zhou M, Wygnanski I (2000) An experimental study of a boundary layer that is maintained on the verge of separation. J Fluid Mech 423:227–262zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
George WK, Castillo L (1997) Zero-pressure gradient turbulent boundary layer. Appl Mech Rev 50:689–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herring HJ, Norbury JF (1967) Some experiments on equilibrium turbulent boundary layers in favourable pressure gradients. J Fluid Mech 127:541–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Indinger T, Buschmann MH, Gad-el-Hak M (2006) Mean velocity profile of turbulent boundary layers approaching separation. AIAA J 44(11):2465–2474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ludwieg H, Tillmann W (1950) Investigations of the wall shearing stress in turbulent boundary layers. NACA TM, No. 1285Google Scholar
Lueptow RM (1988) Computer-aided calibration of X-probes using a look-up table. Exp Fluids 6:115–118Google Scholar
Maciel Y, Rossignol KS, Lemay J (2006) Self-similarity in the outer region of adverse pressure-gradient turbulent boundary layers. AIAA J 44(11):2450–2464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagib H, Chauhan K, Monkewitz P (2005) Scaling of high Reynolds number turbulent boundary layers. 4th AIAA Theoretical fluid Mechanics Meeting, AIAA-2005-4810, Toronto, CanadaGoogle Scholar
Nikuradse J (1933) Gesetzmäß igkeit der turbulenten Strömung in glatten Rohren. Forsch. Arb. Ing.-Wes.H. 356Google Scholar
Newman BG. Somce contributions to the study of the turbulent boundary near separation. Austr Dept Supply Rep ACA-53, 1951 Tabulated data reproduced in ‘Proceedings Computation of Turbulent Boundary Layers −1968 AFOSR-IFP-Stanford Conference’ as ‘Flow 3500’ (Kline et al. 1968)Google Scholar
Österlund J (1999) Experimental studies of zero pressure-gradient turbulent boundary layer flow. PhD thesis, KTH, StockholmGoogle Scholar
Pailhaus G, Touvet Y, Auxpoix B (2008) Effects of Reynolds number and adverse pressure gradient on a turbulent boundary layer developing on a rough surface. J Turbul 9(43):1–24Google Scholar
Perry AE (1966) Turbulent boundary layers in decreasing adverse pressure gradients. J Fluid Mech 26(3):481–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samuel AE, Joubert PN (1974) A boundary layer developing in an increasingly adverse pressure gradient. J Fluid Mech 66:481–505. Tabulated data reproduced in ‘Proceedings Computation of Turbulent Boundary Layers-1980 AFOSR-IFP-Stanford Conference’ as ‘Flow 141’CrossRefGoogle Scholar