Proceedings of

,,

BOUNDARY LAYER ANALYSIS WITH NAVIER-STOKES EQUATION

IN 2D CHANNEL FLOW

Yunho Jang
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
University of Massachusetts
Amherst, MA 01002
Email: yujang@ecs.umass.edu

ABSTRACT
The work on this theme will comprise a boundary layer analysis in channel flow. Here we will be looking at both the laminar and turbulent case of incompressible flow within the presence of shear stress and vorticity. This study for both cases is
a very important concept to understand for boundary layers in
channel flows. To accomplish this study, we used the Finite Element Method and Finite Volume Method, and compared with
Direct Numerical Simulation data for channel flow. Boundary
layer simulations of fully developed laminar and turbulent channel flow at two Reynolds numbers up to Re = 590 are reported.

layer in detail in this study. However, we could also approach the

turbulent channel flow solution diffusion term, and understand
the phenomena of boundary layer in turbulent channel flow with
modeling.
The Finite Element Method is widely used for numerical
analysis because it is not only accurate but also provides complex
mesh grids. Therefore, we could solve many other applications
of channel flows with Finite Element Method. In this study, we
solve two cases of channel flow. First one is the laminar case
(Re = 90) of channel flow. We can obtain analytical solutions
and compare with results from Finite Element Method (Ansys)
and Finite Volume Method (Fluent). For the next step, we solve
the turbulence case (Re = 590), and compare with results from
the FVM and MKM1 DNS (Direct Numerical Simulation) data.
We are interested in understanding the phenomena of the differences between a laminar and a turbulent flow, and also how
the finite element method can predict well the channel flow with
comparing to other data. For turbulent channel flow, the k
model has been employed.

INTRODUCTION
The plane channel, which is also called plane Poiseuille flow
or duct flow, is a canonical configuration for studying internal
flows. Understanding the structure of channel flow is obviously
of great engineering interest since this can be applied in many
applications. This flow is obviously a Newtonian fluid, so that
the important boundary problems are raised. To study the plane
channel flow, we need to understand the behavior of flow in
boundary layers for both laminar and turbulence flows.
For the laminar channel flow, we know the solutions since
we could calculate it analytically, but in turbulent case, we can
not get an analytical turbulent solution since turbulence is more
complex, high Reynolds number is applied, and becomes unstable. Moreover, the reason why turbulence is more complex is the
boundary layer starts off laminar, but at some critical Reynolds
number, it becomes unstable to disturbance, e.g. noise, vibration, surface, and so on. Therefore, we will discuss the boundary

Formulation
We begin with the equations for two dimensional steady continuity and Navier-Stokes equations.
u v
+
=0
x y

1 Moser,R.D.,Kim,J.and

(1)

Mansour,N,N(1999)

c by ASME
Copyright

u
u
1 p
2 u 2 u
+v =
+ ( 2 + 2 )
x
y
x
x
y

(2)

v
v
1 p
2 v 2 v
+v =
+ ( 2 + 2 )
x
y
y
x
y

(3)

From equation (5) and (6), we know the maximum horizontal velocity is 45m/s, and the mean velocity is 30m/s. Moreover,
we can calculate following quantities with this analytical solutions.

Rem =
Laminar channel flow
For laminar channel flow, the no-slip boundary condition has
been employed and we can apply the conservation of mass and
momentum, then we can get the solution for the horizontal velocity, average velocity, vorticity, and the shear stress at the bottom
wall;
h2

dp
y
u(y) = umax [1 4( )], umax =
h
8 dx

yx =

y
du
= 8umax 2
dy
h

yx =

y
du
= 8umax 2
dy
h

(4)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

r
u =

(11)

w
1
2
u
m
2

(12)

C f is skin fraction based on w and um

We also use equations for displacement thickness ( ) and momentum thickness ().

(5)

uc

where uc is centerline velocity, and C f is skin fraction based on

w and um .

where h, um , and umax are height of channel, mean velocity, and

maximum of horizontal velocity, respectively.

Re =

(10)

Rec =

Cf =
2
um = umax
3

um 2

Z
0

u
)dy
uc

(13)

u u
) ]dy
uc uc

(14)

(1

[(1

Turbulent channel flow

For turbulent channel flow, the k model has been used,
and Re is 590, and we introduce the standard k model which
is modeling the turbulent viscosity from the transport equation.
The turbulent (or eddy) viscosity, t , is computed by combining
k and as follows,
t = C

where and u are boundary layer thickness and wall shear velocity, respectively;
We use constant dynamic viscosity and density ( = 0.01111
and = 1) for incompressible flow so that we have constant kinematic viscosity ( = / = 0.01111). For this laminar case, the
height of channel is 2m, length of channel is 100m, the grid of
domain is 60*200, and Reynolds number based on u is 90.

k2

(15)

where C is a constant. In this study we follow default values of

the model constants, C1 ,C2 ,C , and , which have been determined from experiments with air and water for fundamental
turbulent flows and they have been found to work fairly well for
a wide range of wall-bounded and free shear flows. The model
constants are,
C1 = 1.44, C2 = 1.92, C = 0.09, = 1.3, k = 1.0
2

c by ASME
Copyright

For using k model, it is assumed that the flow is fully turbulent, and the effects of molecular viscosity are negligible. The
standard k model is therefore valid only for fully turbulent
flows.
The standard wall function has been used for wall boundary
treatment, resulting in,
1
u = ln(Ey+ )

Table 1. COMMONLY COMPUTED QUANTITIES

Method
Analytic solution

(16)

y+

1/4 1/2
C k p y p

(17)

w (pascal)

w (s1 )

1.0

-90

FVM

44.9313

0.987

-88.8

FEA

44.248

0.935

-84.144

Cfo

Cf

Analytic solution

0.00222

0.000987

0.333

FVM

0.00219

0.000974

0.356

FEA

0.00207

0.000923

0.338

Method

1/4 1/2

U pC k p
w /

45

Method

where

u+

umax (m/s)

Rem

Rec

Analytic solution

0.1333

5400

4050

FVM

0.1343

5400

4043

FEA

0.1338

5400

3982

(18)

and
= Von Karman constant (= 0.42)
E = empirical constant (= 9.81)
U p = mean velocity of the fluid at point p
k p = turbulence kinetic energy at point p
y p = distance from point p to the wall
= dynamic viscosity of the fluid
In turbulent channel flow, the kinematic viscosity and mean
velocity are reduced to get Re = 590 ( = 0.001695, um =
18.4539).

Results
Laminar channel flow
As mentioned before in this chapter, the data from Finite Element Method will be compared with an analytical solution and
the data from Finite Volume Method. From the analytical solution for laminar channel flow, we have predictable maximum
velocity, shear stress, vorticity, and so on. As shown in Table 1,
the quantities from the FEA and FVM simulations are very similar with those from analytical solution.
Figure 1 shows velocity profiles from FVM and FEA. The
mean velocity is 30 m/s in this case, and as shown this is the
maximum velocity which is centerline velocity is almost 45 m/s
(analytical solution) in both cases. Figure 2 and Figure 3 show
the behaviors of shear stress and vorticity in channel flow. The
shear stress and vorticity are at a maximum at the wall, then gradually decrease with distance. Those values are also very similar
with those of analytical solution.

Figure 1. VELOCITY PROFILES IN FULLY DEVELOPED LAMINAR

CHANNEL FLOW AT X/L = 1, Re = 90

Turbulent channel flow

In this part, we will discuss the results of turbulent channel
flow. As shown before, in this case Re is 590, and viscosity (
= 0.001695) has been reduced to match this Re .
The velocity profiles (Figure 4) are very different from the
laminar channel flow. As shown, the velocities in middle of channel level-off due to the behavior of turbulence viscosity. For FEA
data, the velocities in middle of channel are smaller than those of
FVM and Direct Numerical Simulation (DNS) data, however, as
3

c by ASME
Copyright

Figure 2. SHEAR STRESS PROFILES IN FULLY DEVELOPED LAMINAR CHANNEL FLOW AT X/L = 1, Re = 90

Figure 4. VELOCITY PROFILES IN FULLY DEVELOPED TURBULENT

CHANNEL FLOW AT X/L = 1, Re = 590

Figure 3. VORTICITY PROFILES IN FULLY DEVELOPED LAMINAR

CHANNEL FLOW AT X/L = 1, Re = 90

Figure 5. SHEAR STRESS PROFILES IN FULLY DEVELOPED TURBULENT CHANNEL FLOW AT X/L = 1, Re = 590

we approach the wall, they are much similar to DNS data. Figure 5 and Figure 6 show the shear stress and vorticity profiles
in turbulent channel flow. In this picture, turbulent channel flow
is not dominated by the shear stress and vorticity. At the wall,
vorticity is increasing compared with laminar channel flow.
Figure 7 shows the wall law plot for turbulent boundary layers with three sets of data. The logarithmic law for mean velocity
is known to be valid for y+ > about 30 to 60. In our case, the loglaw is employed when y+ > 11.225. When the mesh is such that

y+ < 11.225 at the wall-adjacent cell, FVM and FEA apply the
laminar stress-strain relationship that can be written as u+ = y+ .
In this picture, the velocities of FEA near wall are similar to DNS
data until y+ = 10 which is the viscous sublayer. In part of buffer
layer (5 < y+ < 30), the velocities of FVM are predicted with
creater accuracy.
4

c by ASME
Copyright

ble to apply different simulations to the boundary layer problems.

In the turbulent channel flow case, there are some errors
since we are using turbulent model (k ) which is not an exact solution. However, the data from FEA and FVM are believable and still going on right track. In order to understand about
the turbulent flow, we need to develop more exact model for this
flow.

REFERENCES
[1] Moser,R.D., Kim,J. and Mansour,N.N., Direct Numerical
Simulation of Turbulent Channel Flow up to Re = 590,
Phys.Fluid, Vol 11,No4, pp 943-945. 1999.
[2] Pope, Stephen B., Book: Turbulent Flows, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2000.
[3] Schetz, Joseph A., Book: Boundary Layer Analysis,
Prentice-Hall,Inc., New Jersey, 1993.
[4] Wilcox, David C., Book: Basic Fluid Mechanics, DCW Industries,Inc., California, 2000.
[5] Fluent 6.0 Manual.
[6] Ansys 5.7 Manual.

Figure 6. VORTICITY PROFILES IN FULLY DEVELOPED TURBULENT CHANNEL FLOW AT X/L = 1, Re = 590

Figure 7. Mean velocity profiles in fully developed turbulent channel flow

at X/L = 1, Re = 590

CONCLUSION
We simulated both laminar and turbulent channel flow using
FEA, and compared with data from FVM and DNS. As shown
in results, in the laminar case the data from FEA and FVM are
quite similar to the analytical solution; and velocity, shear stress,
and vorticity profiles are close to each other.
Therefore, we can say that the simulations of laminar flow
which is dominated by viscosity are well predictable in both Finite Volume Method and Finite Element Method, and it is possi5

c by ASME
Copyright