Professional Documents
Culture Documents
829
MINISTRY OF AVIATION
AEl?ONAUTICAL RESEARCHCOUNCIL
CURRENT PAPERS
A Unified Theory
Transfer
Turbulent
of Friction, Heat
D. B. Spalding
Mechanical EngineeringDepartment,
LONDON:
in the
HER MAJESTYS
STATIONERY
1965
OFFICE
C.P. No.829
-i-
unified
theory
transfer
of
December, 1964
best
friction,
andwall.
jet
Mechanical
Engineering
Department,
Imperial
College of Science and Techcol-ogy,
London, S.W,7, Xngl.and.
General
equations
arc derived
is made possible
three-parameter
by means of:
(b)
into
flows
along
gradient;
smooth walls:
wall
in stagnant
realistic
layer.
with
to provide
transfer
reversal,
to further
entrainment
with
'
the
pressure
the wall
jet
in the absence
to be sufficiently
single
roughness,
cal.culation
operate
threeeffects.
is uncertainty
is influenced
variations,
* Professrx
of Heat Transfer.
Replaces A.R,c. 25, 325.
plate;
and variable-property
progress
entrainApplic-
and in conjunction
flow
appear
a simple
simultaneously
flat
mass transfer;
and heat
of
uniform-property
of an adverse
The assumptions
and flexible
method for
dimensional,
plate
and their
the boundary
plane
of
(a) introduction
the impermeable
surroundings;
of mass transfer.
property,
about
in the presence
the flat
the conservation
a hypothesis
impermeable
conserved
profiles.,
ations
for
by density
about
:
Contents
-page
1.
2.
--Introduction --.
1.1
The problem
I.2
1.3
Outline
1.4
Restrictions
2.2
a new theory
of the present
theory
of the present
Mathematical
---I-2.1
considered
4
paper
theoa
Definitions
and differential
Velocity
profile
equations
and drag
law (uniform
density)
2.3
The &profile
law (uniform
density)
12
2.4
The integral
2.5
A preliminary
2.6
Appreciation
expressions
entrainment
39
--The
law
boundary-layer
problem
development
The stationary-state
boundary
layer
turbulent
boundary
-la=
-- flat-plate
3.3
The nature
3.2
Equations
3.3
Deductions
from experimental
3.4
Derivation
of a local
flat
3.5
16
of the mathematical
of predicting
2.7
15
- 22
23
of the problem
23
24
data-for
,H
plate
27
The validity
of the stationary-state
28
_-wall;
influence
-- of
Eressuresadient
-_1_
WI-4.1
Comparison
30
with
the drag
law of
I&wieg
and Tillmann
4.2
4.3
25
the
hypothesis
4.
18
30
Stationary-state
boundary
adverse
gradient
pressure
Comparison
with
experimental
layer
with
an
31
l?2-I-J data
3*3
-iii-
page
4.4
5.
6.
Comparison
with
Head's
5.1
Prediction
5.2
The entrainment
5.3
An analytical
theory
mass transfer
on drag
of the local
38
6.2
The local
6.3
Variations
drag
drag law.
for
of
surroundins-
45
45
law
47
deduction
constant
48
w&l1 temperature
7.1
Equations
7.2
The isothermal
flat
7.3
Adiabatic-wall
temperature
7.4
the effect
42
Heat
transfer-------L----------in the absence
-
local
39
41
in the s-direction:
The adiabatic
39
law
6.4
8.
law
Yjass
in the absence
----I----- transfer
_I- of_pressure
---gadient;
theory.
--II
- quasi-stationary
-----
of the entrainment
7.
entrainment
52
of mass transfer
55
heat
plate
57
downstream
of a
sink
59
Summary
Discussion
------
55
63
oQossible
---up
-developments
-----
further
8.1
Plane uniform-property
8.2
Three-dimensional
8.3
The infl
64
flows
64
flows
uence of property
67
variations
68
71
10.
Acknowledgements
--------Nomenclature
----A-
ll.
References
------
77
9.
Figures
1 to .29.
Additional
Appendix.
encircled
Figures
72
numerals
A-l
toA-5.
notes,
referred
in the margins
to by
of the
text.
I.
Introduction.
---I,-,,
The Eroblem
------m------considered.
1,
I.1
Fig.
illustrates
a steady
stream
a porous
of fluid
enters,
direction
in the surface
pores
two;
near
the wall
exist
in this
yet
another
is
between
the surface,
stream;
composition
reactions
between
compressors
numerous
often
is
of the wall
be resorted
porous
occurs
processes
features
in a great
If
slot
wall;
which
or
only
one
porous
one of boundaryit
arises
wings,
devices.
Injection
and in
of fluid
so as to lower
of the slot
in diffusers,
the temp-
(film-cooling);
to ds a means of preventing
separation.
combustion,
The velocity
simultaneously,
on aircraft
provided
boundary-layer
mass-transfer
fluids;
and chemical
contains
through
downstream
similar
is the familiar
engineering
erature
hydrodynamically
the various
importance.
an impermeable
a slot
surface
existing
heating";
in Fig.
of-practical
through
may also
"kinetic
not usually
and turbines,
other
may,
between
(no injection
along
variations
the situation
flow
the
many circumstances
layer
through
differences
though
is present
the
temperature
represented
are present,
the.pores
to join
Large'property
differences
Through
The flow
as a result
i.e.
in the same
may flow
direction.
region
effects,
of a second fluid
may flow
fluid
exposed to
At the upstream
of velocity
fluid
turbulent.
influences;
surface),
extznt.
stream
alternatively,'
frictional
surface
following
it
a narrower
in the op?ositc
fluid
of large
havin g a component
at'; that
previous
solid
Injection
in transpiration
effects
of fluid
cooling;
are produced
as s*dbli.mation,
through
a
.
and
by such
vaporisation
and
2.
The ultimate
paper
is the provision
of a theory
the shear
stress
the wall,
in situations
1.2
Present
summarised
of:-
Schlichting
of turbulent
[4d , Lin
books,
[21].
which
ing theories
in these
for
is
example
those
[62] , Hinze
works,
[Is).,
much useful
it
is not
of the comprehensive-
to the boundary
ar e unsatisfactory..in
of these,
survey
611,
by Thompson
of predicting
gradient
is
which
that
be referred
by Thompson to be reasonably
whole
range
mentally.
Another
existing
theories
out by examination
8.3)';
be2n extended
Although
concerning
with
several
papers
stream
of an injection
little
success
experimental
profiles
a varying
wall
slot
such as that
data
theories
kd
have not
velocity.
been published
the flow
of Fig;
in rationalising
As an illustration
are not
main-stream
i.e.
of
out to involve
which
have recently
jet,
experi-
of compress-
turn
the so-called
over the
of the experimental
to deal
was
the effect
e.g. Ll66
the velocity
about
section
for
drag
successful
is that
accounting
below,
shortcoming
on flat-plate
implications
that
pressure
the method of
to again
found
of methods
in an adverse
only
One
by the thorough
the majority
growth
of conditions
exist-
sever,21 respects.
unreliable;
will
without
studied,
made manifest
boundary-layer
are decidedly
Head pa),
layer
(see
at
is desired.
injection,
borne
layers
Although
ibility
'
of Fig,
[24] , Thwaites
and Leont'ev
to extract
ness that
boundary
modern text
is to be found
possible
of
a new theory.
in several
information
the predictions
of heat
such as those
knowledge
and Kutateladze
for
in the present
of this
downI,
the
point,
Fig.
for
The theoretical
2
3
stress
from
the plausible
profile
from Sigalla
assumption
and Bradshaw
greater
shear
the shear
the point
of zero velocity
it
is usual
can be reconciled
Current
through
the wall
stances
of uniform
from
a slot.
data
into
success
disagreements
is
numbers than
the process
it
is
there
and other
theories,
the existing
methods
of prediction
and aesthetically
a single
particularised
seeks
retain
turbulent
set
merely
the scientist
their
flows
*See section
that
of general
by striking
a single
validity
near walls.
6.2 below.
meagre
qualitative
for
example,
the heat-transfer
all
at high
theories
Mach
of
tendency.
available
eer seeks
some major
by mass transfer
of currently
disadvantageous
these
injection
experimental
and experiment;
less
from
to circum-
the available
exist
flow
without
framework
the opposite
apart
and
of mass transfer
restricted
imply
Quite
all
theory
affected
Bradshaw
by
fact.
velocity,
theoretical
between
points,
exhibit
of turbulent
entirely
to fit
Moreover
form
are calculated
that
surprising
main-stream
Efforts
[5s] .
is
of the influence
is almost
a single
the velocity
to have a -w-m
finite
magnitude at
gradient;
none of the hypotheses
this
knowledge
who
"universal"
than
to base theories
with
velocity.
[13],
stresses
stress
number
the experimental
on which
that
Gee found
which
by Glauert
of maximum velocity;
p8]
Glauert*.
the Reynolds
zero main-stream
was deduced
started
appreciably
cas e with
line
up to the point
versus
set
over
individual
failures
the fragmentariness
of
is both practically
The engin-
displeasing.
equations
which
out irrelevant
of physical
can be
terms;
hypotheses
of
work
of Kutateladze
and Leont'ev
(i most ambitious
from
attempt
a unified
dimensional
theory
PI],
to treat
point
of view,
all
so far
the
boundary-layer
omits
effects.
is
wall-jet
phenomena
and three-
is evi&nt.
Outline
of the_prcsent
theorg.
-----The present paper describes
some aspects
1.3
theory
which
is being
described.
This
developed
theory
has resulted
the author
interest
mixing
in tur'bulent
the absence
heat
of walls
transfer
53,
data
- [50, 3d ;and
the flow
of a wall,
that
c561
could
while
others
near
layer,
in boundary
in friction,
layers
be reconciled
52,
jet
experimental
by postulating
in tha absence
with
any spatial
[51,
without
an
a turbulent
the wall
of
phenomena in
behaved like
the flow
boundary
data
colleagues:
[67,
the interplay
an interest
of study
to rationalise
on film-cooling
that
and his
by an attempt
from
and entrainment
541 0
of a new
two preoccupations.of
the view
laws of the
effects
of tha jet
is that
profiles
rests
with
have both
The second is
prove'to
with
for
that
fluid
when adequately
of momentum, heat
accounting
thus
the general
and "jet"
is
entrained
is
into
into
components.
the wall
a turbulent
quantitative
expressed
two main
"boundary-layer"
similar
be strong
effects
laws.
jet
a theory
layer
and in
These assump-
in mathematical
enough to support
The
and concentration
having
tions,
by formulae
to the wall,
interactions
accordance
temperature
one accounting
profiles
the velocity,
can be described
components,
for
which
form,
covering
all
WE:have discussed
interesting
applicability
is
namely
new liy&t
layer.
the
of
to be throwing
of the turbulent
boundary
became appartint
that
the description
however
for
[38]
should
and Colzs
b]
to exploit
that
the
function
Head's
theory
other
in predicting
entrainment
postulate
about
freedom
from detailed.
advantageous
and reliable,
author
It
together
experimental
no guide
entrainment
may
inaccurate)
growth.
linked
of the
than
any
However,
his
although
this
assumption
left
the
or refine
function.
'to regard
the present
with
form
as to how to extrapolate
be helpful
and Coles
of
therefore
of the profile
author
to any particular
profiles;
commitments
contribut-
been mentioned,
with
empirical
if
was not
out
This
to be more successful
the velocity
profile
significant
an approximate
boundary-layer
hypothesis
had
because
was a function
As has already
has proved
discovery
by Head h8] .
of entrainment
empirically.
authors
hypothasis.turned
in a highly
and obtained
these
circumstances.
theory,
rato
out
of entrainment
to boundary-layer
turned
their
about
supposed
profiles
findings;
in any particular
a form
soon
as a means of systematising
of experimental
Further,
it
put forward
a hypothesis
exist
elements
the velocity
lacked
its
to thosa
[3g , Rotta
Rotta
to extend
to a new set
appears
problems
ion
theory
the wall-jet,
on classical
What is
an attempt
of boundary-layer
phenomena,
they
that
so far.
(though
assumptions
the entrainment
theory
historically
as a putting
of Ross andRobertson,
hypothesis
of Head,
his
6.
followed
by an extension
transfer
and injection
of further
entrainment
Horton,
1.4
to flows
hypothesis
heat'and
with
the handling
and Turner
[74],
the promise
three-dimensional
and
of the
by studies
phenomena of meteorology
Taylor
mass
and carrying
Further,
effects.
some turbulence
with
from slots,
extensions
varying-property
to flows
of
by Bntchelor[72],
and Morton
[75,
761.
Restrictions
of the present
paper.
-is of course
The development
of the new-theory
major
undertaking,
For this
will
and implications
in the pr osent
with
take
some time
and so as to exhibitmore
reason,
main elements
dealt
which
to complete.
clearly
the
of the theory,
the flows
arti subject
to the foliow-
paper
ing rastrictions:(i)
The density,
thermal
viscosity,,specific
of the fluid
conductivity
heat
are uniform
and
throughout
the stream.
$3 2 wall
(ii)
(iii)
given
The velocity
normal
It
should
is
that
thrqugh
lie
in a single
be understood
that
it
radically
new hypotheses.
2.
2.1
these
points
on a
plane.
restrictions
are
the present
and three-dimensional
will
all
roughness
matters
smooth.
vectors
to the wall
not necessarxi
theory
is hydrodynamically
'ba found
effects
A brief
in section
without
discussion
of these
8 below.
\
Pisthernatical
-----v-atheor;ll.
--Dzfinitions ------__I
and differential
Some of the notation"
requiring
which
equations+.
will
be used is
Underlines
dznotz italics.
' Note to printer:
howeverbzen
omitted
from equations,
wherein
should be italicised
except d, In, cos, sin,
*Footnote:
A full
list
of notation
will
be found in section
IO below.
and its
illustrated
They have
all letters
exp.
significance
7.
in Eli@;, 3, showing
velocity
profiles
g and of a conserved
against
the non-dimensional
The subscript
script
G denotes
S denotes
The distance
a quantity
xG is
which
specification
(section
2.2 below);
and composition
quantity
or for
of the
for
conservation
to the wall.
significant
are regarded
by math-
for
mixture
property
be concerned
with
temijerature
the stagnation
which
three
is subject
important
Q,
I?= s o (p/p,)
Z dC
valid
for
1
c
(P/P~)
L3E s,
z2dE;
section
for
We remark
are related
theory,
uniform
however,
also
to a
integral
I2 and I+'
These
. . . . ..(2.1-1)
0.0...(2.1-2)
present
enthalpy,
by:
omitted;
The
of some chemically
Of course,
layer'1g
as uniform.
the composition
are defined
sub-
law.
We shall
properties
while
for
<.
of the mi;rture,
any other
state
of the boundary
rendered
of the fluid
component
adjacent
"thickness
only
@ may stand
0, plotted
distance
of the fluid
the
is
property
the main-stream
that
ematical
inert
of the non-dimensional
to
density,
the term
the definitions
(i.e.
varying
three
be expkessed
density,
in pa ssing
that
familiar
the displacement
since
it
concepts
in the
in a form
is easy to do this.
the quantities
thickness
o/pG may be
and equations
will
2.1)
. o e.. . (2.1-3)
z dE
Ll and L2
of boundary-layer
g, by:
6&t
= 1 - 11
.,...;(2.1-4)
b2/Y(3
= II
.00w(2.1-5)
H-'
yS2
-12
= (1 - Iq)/(Iq
54
. . . . ..(2.1-6)
8.
Five
differ6n.t
used at various
relate
definitions
points
to a single
while
the fifth
wall.
of Reynolds
in the analysis.
section
through
(Rx) relates
number will
The first
the boundary
to the distance
be
four
layer,
along
the
They are:-
RG E
PG "G :T,/i+G
R2 =
pG UG "2&G=
RmI
YG
5 o (P'dj+Y
. . . . .-(2.1-7)
(Iq-12)tiG
. . . ..(2.1-8)
. . . ..(2.1-y)
= 11 RG
. . . ..(2.1-IO)
. . . ..(2.1-II)
Three conservation
having
equations
equation.
ordinary
expresses
each
differential
of
mass:
z-
1
Here p! is
+ 'mGEJ2-
the non-dimensional
the boundary
layer
mr
The quantity
entrainment
layer,
mG is
by
through
;'I/(
defined
that
d(lnw)/dzx
w is
proportional
. . . ..(2.1-13)
that
-his
the rat2
into
of
the boundary
may be regarded
as being
(2.1-'12).
w is
the distance
parallel
vanishes.
between
adjacent
to the surface
For two-dimensional
flows,
2 is
equation
of momentum applied
represents
stream-
and normal
constant
For axially-symmetrical
to the distance
it
into
by:-
PGuG>
pGsG;
in the direction
to the flow.
. . . ..(2.1-72)
of mass transfer
the wall',
so defined
by equation
The quantity
lines
rate
divided
defined
= -mG + m 1
so
flows
of symmetry.
the law
to the boundary
layer.
9.
It
is:
d(lnuG)
+ (1 -t H)R2----d%
dR2
-dRx
Here 2 is defined
d(lnw)
+ R2 ----d Rx
=. s +, m
by:
the significance
that
quantity
T is
equation
close
the shear
shortly
functions
letter
stress
replace
of ttshear'l).
at the wall.
it
The
The momentum
in a form which
one for
by noting
is
sufficiently
to be recognised;
however,
The last
differential
conservation
the L'S,
equation
of the property
This .equation
pI.
since
there
ferred-substance
explanation
directly
Equations
if
transfer
state",
a concept
in
@ brought
about
(2.1-12),
predictions
which
of friction,
for
unless
betwocn
these
consider
these
and mass
counting
will
We shall
rate
have to be
transfer
solution
be found.
if
the flow
and (2.1-16)
However a simple
more relations
trans-
at the wall.
"the
is explained,
itf$3, is
heat
of Em and
counter-
by the fluxes
(2.'1-14)
are to be made.
T stands
; thus
i$j
law of
in terms
are no conventionally-used
be needed,
of the entity
exprcs%csthe
It'is:
solved
s would be
of 2 may be remembered
we shall
for
symbol
s is the initial
to the usual
parts
. . . ..(2.1-15)
the fact
. . ..(2.1-14)
of the
not be possible
quantitias
can
in the following
sections.
2.2
V_elocity
It
will
uniform-density
the velocity
density),
profile,
may be represented
under
with
IO.
sufficient
accuracy
by the relation:
z=sL++(1-
0
3
z&:1
Here SE is
later,
a parameter
and g+ is
distance
from
y-+z
a function
will
. . . ..(2.2-1)
assum
great
importance
defined
by:
. . . ..(2.2-2)
Yh P >%iJ-
The function
region
which
the wall
ig/2
- COSTt
g+(y')
is
immediately
obtained
adjacent
to the wall,
ment or by semi-thoorotical
of mass transfer
well-known
analysis.
shall
we
by study
experimental
m=O:
either
Thus,
assume,
findings
of the flow
in the absence
in accordance
with
and idealisations
= 2.5ln(Ey+)
U+
by experi-
[41]:
. . . ..(2.2-3)
where E, is a constant*.
When mass transfer
the more general
Sarnecki
p]
we shall
l'bi-logarithmic't
This
holds.
u+ = 2.5
is present,
law of Black
and
is:
+-;-;;T
.
ln(E'y')
presume'that
[ln(wy+)]
")
. ..(2.2-4)
we obtain
2.1-7),
general
in a sufficiently
It
for
form for
the velocity
of
and
profile
the present
purposes.
&n(E1TiG's3E;
)]
is:
1
~d.5~~
ln(EtRGs*
r> + 1.5625m
+ (IThis
relation
transfer
clearly
modifies
the wall.
*Footnote.
-cos
z&l
takes
the stress
account
,....(2.2-5)
of the fact
variation
along
that
a normal
mass
to
t
E, is
often
taken
however
remain
uncommitted
,present
stage,
and shall
gives
n;t3/2
2 +
the best
fit
with
as equal
to 9.025.
to any particular
dettirmine
experimental
E, later
We shall
number at the
in a way which
drag data.
11.
The corresponding
the time
being
effect
neglected,
since
it
is
justified
near
rises
The experimental
Ludwieg
and Tillmann
neglect
of the pressure-gradient
discussed
further
. Equation
and 5 are both
the boundary
resulting
p5)
more rapidly
velocity
to the
than
distance
profiles
of
in support
effect.
This
of the
matter
is
values
drsg -- law,
at the outer
when z
limit
A convenient
of
form
of the
is:
s g (0.4
wherein
is proportional
namely unity.
equation
that
to the velocity,
the -----local
their
layer,
small.
4.
yields
given
is for
by the facts
can be cited
in section
(2.2-5)
is relatively
effect
the wall.
gradient
is proportional
the -pressure-gradient
distance;
of pressure
-!F
- 0.625ml)*
. . . ..(2.2-6)
Equation
to render
(2.2-6)
the latter
fiGsi)
. . . . . (2.2-7)
can be re-introduced
into
(2.2-5)
There
results:
z = (2.5s3+
3.125ml)lng
+ 1.5625m(lnc)*
f- zE + (1 - zE)(l
For the purpose
(2.2-8)
accuracy
05
z --,Dlnc
wd can drop
. ..(2.2-8)
- eos 76<)/ii?
of evaluating
is unnccesssrily
the L-integrals,
elaborate.
With
little
equation
loss
+ zE + ('l-
z,)(l-
cosz<)/2
. . . ..(2.2-9)
where:
DS 2.5~2
2.5(s+
+ 3.125ml
mzE)-3
. . . ..(2.2-IO)
of
12.
Possibly
the
last
of these
it
th:lt
implies
the logarithmic
alternative
portion
the shear
for
quantity
2 is
stress
of the velocity
g, but that
stress
forms
profile
augmented by
the stress
mzr;
---I which is necessary to raise the injected
mass to th3 (non-dimensional)
velocity
gE.
Inspection
equation
of equation
reprc:aents
the parameters
be +
profile
hand,
It
will
property
2 and n/s.
by equation
family;
zz
to choose.
law (uniform
be assumed that
g through
or zE,
a two-parameter
parameters
this
of'profiles;;
represented
is
The @-profile
1-p-- and flux
2.3
that
family
KG and ;,
family
on the other
G--Y),
reveals
a three-paramekr
might
The approximate
(2.2-8)
density)
the variation
the boundary
layer
of the conserved
can bs represented
by:
+ @G
c9
. . . ..(2+I)
whcra tt
is ;I function
obtained
of y+,
Couette-flow
analysis
similar
to that
Sincethe-t+
function
appears
less
than
the g+ function,
derived.
finite
we shall
mass-transfer
Jayatillaka
for
entering
rates
hcrc
flow,
small
made by Spalding
transfer
rates
the only
laws represent
the wall.
how it
is
as an extension
by definition,
the cons,ervation
_ .
y+
in the literature
indicate
of that
vanishingly
In a Couette
often
out a
+-to
relating-2
can be regarded
The analysis
by carrying
fluxes
to
and
[551.
- c
terms
normal
to
equdion'are:z
+ 1;1"u = /$
. . . ..(2.3-2)
du/dy
and
. *. . .
where
-fit
is the
VotaF
(i.e.
laminar
plus
turbulent)
(2, 3-9)
13.
viscosity
i.e.
\
;
and
rt
is the corresponding
diffusion
coefficient
divided
by specific
ivity
appropriate
times
heat,
to the property
Division
leads
coefficient,
density
or thermal
according
to which
conductis
@.
of corresponding
and (2.3-T)
exchange
terms
in equations
(2.3-2)
to:
du
dlZ1 =
M---ww--e
"t u + r/k'"
a - eiT
. . . ..(2.3-4)
rt
. . . ..(2.3+)
where
= /"it/
rt
Prandtl
throughout
wall,
apart
the so-called
ld - Ids
a--@s - !$
where
P-=
evaluated
u)
cr"exp(;":
t+ =
close
WC
to the
if
2'
PJ - 1
. ..(2.3-6)
. . . ..(2.3-7)
1 + ms--h+
is defined
a Couette
as (a-@S)(z
flow,
wO
I+
mu+
( -d
S
du+
"t - "0
-w---c0
for
region
sub-layer.
CFJ
s
Hence,
a thin
as:
= (1 +$
L
number,
from
laminar
(2.3-4)
or Schmidt
the flow
equation
rt,
-B--N
~)*/{i~~(@S-plTt
we have:
OXP(2
r --------Pm-
, . .(2
3
.
8)
-
m/s a
The quantity
Schmidt
g is
number,
a function
measures
the extra
It
must be admitted
exists
In equation
value
5
lzminar
it
currently
of ths
resistance
however
about
from
quantity
of the laminar
absolutely
the influence
(2.3-l),
of @ evaluatad
that
Prandtl
sub-layer.
no knowledge
of m/s3
on g.
--
or
1
r.~/s~;
for
of the
expression
which
u,+ is
when
equal
This
the
expression
mey be regarded
l~drivingforceformasn
mass-transfer
will
rate
transfer
; and other
become clearer
as will
as the flux
law connecting
in terms
of @ ",with
Its
quantities,
when particular
the
significance
be done shortly.
Equ;ltion
(2.3-l),
coupled
and (2.3-q),
(2.3-8)
insertion
has a rrlther
in the integral
approximate
as it
must be with
inconvenient
Me therefore
Lg.
equations
form for
introduce
the
form:
. . . ..(2.+10)
exprLasion
bourhood
I$
to ugr?e with
of the point
entiation
that
these
desirable
2.5wo
general
for
the forms
small
. . . ..(2.3-11)
enthalpy.
are novel,
to which
they
Eirst
Then equation
it
reduce
the specific
enthalpy
flux
$replacing
-"(Q-a,),
$3
reduces
(P + u')
to
h, in place
. . . ..(2.3-12)
equation
(2.3-Y)
hE-hS=
equation
the
and suppose
(2.3-8)
in
[55]:
With
desired,
is
we consider
mass transfer,
-t+ = To
If
by differ-
I$ is:
rela-tions
case of vanishingly
form
may be verified
(@E--V
simplicity.
the familiar
-2
(s + m z-~)
to exhibit
for
It
expression
cases of particular
to stand
the exact
Y = 1.
a suitab:Le
D%=
Since
-is
becomes:
. . . ..(2.3-13)
2 can of course
in favour
be eliminated
of & by reference
from
this
to the drag
law,
equation
(2.2-G),
with
JIJplacad
equal
to zero.
has?rsadily
2.3-13)
icular
cask,
equation
2.5 co
DPI = ----I(d
to unity
rzducs:s
(2.341)
in this
part-
to:
;s
--
. . . ..(2.3-14)
casti is thct
throughout.
Equation
in which
Then 2 equals
zero,
rt
is
and we
find:
This
equation
(2.3-8)--s
equation
(2.3-q)--+
equation
(2.3-11)----t
corrtisponds
. . ..(2.3-17)
over
of the layer,
for
which
2, appearing
ic-ance will
be explained
below
difference
0 and
(section
and (2,1-2),
@ difference
in equations
between
analogy
the Couette-flow
the relevant
velocity
is a. number lying
(2.3-IO),
. . . ..(2.3-16)
and &transport
portion
2.4
of the Reynolds
friction
The quantity
. ..e.(2.3-15)
to the validity
between
-0,
is CJE
t+ = u+
into
is gEgG.
(2.3-l)
I,
and
The signif-
6.4).
equation
(2.2-l)
yields:
II
= $-(I
+k zE) - D
. ..*.(2.4-1)
and
12=g+3
>
Related
II-
~zE+PE
- D(O.411+
1.589
zE) + 2D2
. . . ..(2.4-2)
usefuiexpressions
12= i(l-
arz:
zE)(l,+jzE)+D(l.589zE-0.589)-2D2
. . . ..(2.4-3)
1 - I,,
= $(I-
zB) +D
. . . ..(2.4-4)
I6.
I-12
= ;(I
-z#) (5'.-3zE)+D(iS.411.t1.539
zs)-
2D2
. . . ..(2.4-5)
Insertion
definition
-of equations
(2,2-v)
IpI= (k&4,>
@Cl + z&-g
- Da (0.2055
These equations
terms
into
the
yit?lds:
(2.1-j)
expressed,
and (2.3-10)
the L-intk;grzls
equations
of the varirtbles:
+ 0.791c5zx) + *D Da . . . (2.44)
permit
through
(2.2-10)
to be
and (2.3-11);
in
1, m, and P;E' -
T.
2.5 a A preliminary
-I_.-
entrainmc:nt
-I-------- law.
to obtain a rtilstion
betwlza~ the dimansion-
In order
less
entr.%inment
turn
to information
1ayc.r which
entering
is formed
a stagnant
the plane
p3j
free
at the boundary
fluid
(Fig.
we first
turbulent
mixing
of a large
4).
properties,
stream
The velocity
profiles
and by Licpmsnn
[34]
and
represented
by
the formula:
z = $(I
- cosx <)
of the entering
to the stream
from
correspondingly
Reichardt
0.21,
while
value
of 0.26.
fitting
is
a certain
profile
if
entrainmant
having
and xG is
The data
equal
imply
the
about
numbers.
each of those
-gGstill
of cor,tinuity
stands
into
of
to
dats,
the mixing
for
there
and
the nonregion
from
gG:
-m G = g (y&d
=
p3]
normal
to the experimental
rati
velocity
layer-
approximately
there
of the equations
that,
boundary
and Laufer
since
the
the distance
of thti
yG/x is
arbitrariness
momentum implies
the stream
that
Of course,
Application
dimensional
width
of Liepmann
thl; cosine
y is
the zero-velocity
imply
those
of 2 and < , u,
is
-\T
stream,
th6 total
pq
. . . ..(2.5-1)
0.0787
. . . ..(2.5-2)
or 0.0974
17.
according
to which
Sabin
more general
with
velocity
;G issues
He reports
20 2G
proportional
reported
to
which
into
that
results
a stream
is
zo).
on the
with
velocity
thickness
The profile
can be fitted
taken.
the mixing-layer
(I-zo)/(l+
by Sabin
~$5
out measurements
layer
mixihg
for
quite
well
is
shapes
by the
formula:
z = *{(I
In this
case,
the continuity
3+z
- mG =
Hence,
mm8
in view
. . . ..(2.$-3)
imply:
. . . ..(2.5-4)
of the variation
of yG/x with
zo, we can
write:
-m G =,c
where 2 stands
for
whether
Reichardt's
taken.
Sabin's
second
z()m
either
should
ment rate
or 0.0974
hd
according
Laufer's
incidentally,
be noted
from
lend
to
constant
support
Obviously
zc
an absolute
stream,
from
The relation
(lz&3
-----m-s(1 f
the entrainment
when i.
the non-dimensional
determinable
momentum equations.
mO
that
the lower-velocity
InO, is also
equal
0.0787
or Liepmann
data,
. . . ..(2.5-5)
is
to the
It
call
+ 37))
-(1 f y-j>
(I-
Equations
(2.5-5)
the continuity
z())
zo>
rates
only
which
and
. . . ..(2.5-6)
are numerically
zOm@qua&jzero, go has
one third
and (2.5-6)
as great.-as
about
obtained
in experiments
in which z.
However,
formulae
for
_M~.
findings
valid
we shall
is:
equals unity;..when
magnitude
entrsin-
lay
which were
between
0 and 1.
~~ is
18.
greats?? than
notation.
unity
cran be obtained
-rnGbecomes
by l/g,.
There result
-mG=
71:
m. =. c
(z,-1)(1+3a,>
------II(1 +Q
(20 - w3+
----m-e-
y)>
. . . .
\ .
formulaec~op~y
that
numerically
equal
when 20 is/to
unity;
to infinity,
magnitude
is
tempting
layor
With
and (2.5-7)
to identify
with
this
the arithmetic
into
would
furnish
the two.;situations.
to
(1+go)/2;
it
may lie
and with
C taken
and 0.0974,
as, say,
equations
(2.5-5)
lsw of entrainment
the plane
of maximum shesr
at which
in the boundary
is discussed
agsinin
..
information
about entrainment
z is
in the free
stress
co-
approximately
layer,
to the plane
matter
on the othclr
where 2 equals
section
3.3,
into
boundary
equal
hand,
-%.
This
where empirical
layers
is used
of cntr3inment.law.
2.6
.AJErecintion
-~--~----.~~~-~~of the m?thematict:l
bound:lry-lcxyer
devslopmlznt.
Let us now enumarate
to establish
the boundary
For example,
the plane
the choice
the
however
defer judgment
*- ._
are obvious differences
sinc:d there
nearer
gE for
~0 for
We shall
between
to guide
the numerical
the required
layer,
mzttcr,
layer,
.
with
the quantity
identification
on this
incides
tines
but whan 20
the quantity
mean of 0.0787
a boundary
mixing
of rnG.
mixing
layer.
.(2.5-8)
(1 f (j>
those
free
the
. . . ..(2.5-7).
drice agsin,
It
mO/~0;
. ..
and
tends
by a change of
z. 71:
z.
simply
equations
the conGtions
problem
can be solved.
suppose
that
velocity
of predict-
end unknowns,
under-which
In the first
the mainstrezm
problem
so as
tha mathematical
instnnce
u-G,
th*
we shall
stream
width
19.
E and the injection
the length
rate
co-ordinate
the hydrodynamic
prior
x,.
problem
to the thermal
equations
first
it
problem
is
from
(2.1-14)
(I-
12)Rm
is
values
ensures
separately
of
that
from
and
problem.
constituted
algebraic
equation
at all
condition
can be solved
and several
differential
be derived
The last
or concentration
The hydrodynamic
ential
s are prescribed
by two differ-
equations.
The
(2.1-12).
(2.1-6);
is:
Rm .23L
d(lnuG)
-w--wdRx
= -_lf---
- =2
d Rx
I2
w-m
from
N2/dzE
equations
for
(2.2-10)
2.
leads
to regard
to negligible
variation
always
being
connexion,
known
quantities
(2.4-l),
extremely
of
the
is preferable
sides,
the latter
because
are thus
step
the
to R2 since
it
is always
appczring
in equations
to $
and Em or to
may be related
following
and (2.2-10)
(2.4-2)
it
equation
slow.
variables
by moans
with
right-hand
in practice,
quantities
nnd(2.6-1)
(2.1-12)
possible
somewhat preferable
The other
positive.
coupled
1. as a constant;.
errors
of 1 is
1 . . . ..(2.6-1)
and (2.4-2),
In the latter
"E
aI,/
a12
'1
and
(2.4-l)
mG - 12m- 1,s
- '2)
---
bzE
The quantities
(I,
which
equations:-
relate
the &Is
to ZE &, a-rid5;
(2.2-6)
which
which
relates
can conveniently
2 to s,
be written
and m.
-At this
point
decision
concerning
equation
(2.2-7).
expressed
as
it
is
The argument
yG/\y(~
p )-S(I')-)]
gE, 1:
a
to make/provisional
appropriate
the quantity
of I&,
E,' which
appears
of the logarithm
.
The quantity
in
cm be
in
20.
curly
brackets
terms
it
measures
the length
is present,
differs
from that
leaving
at-the
where
determined?
It
it
would
p(Tp)-3E-l
?? is some suitable
d1
average
value.
lie
coming;
too
we can expect
small
usually
lizs
outsido
this
between
1 = ln,EI
I.
Of course,
logarithm
(2.6-2)
-:
?E
y--
as being
equal
nevertheless,
. . . ..(2.6-2)
by small
variations
until
to
deferred
It
iteration
given
of Em,
so little
in the argument,
ba
equation
function
of 1 is
convergent
of the value
of the
to the logarithm,
the value
be
equations
2E
becomes:
tha argument
1 as an explicit
will
than
of equations
f 1.5625ml
within
The question
rather
the help
(2.2-T)
1 appears
as well
influenced
is forth-
since
and g;
7 equals
whare 2 equals
and with
0.4
and
region.
equation
j(
be
7 and
evidence
the location
in the boundary
further
the viscous
9) and (2.2-IO),
(2.1-
bracket,
at the wall
to be too large
assumption,
be
How can
presume that
until
this
since
a. value,
With
we shall
at least
+ ,m-&s>,
therefore
prevails
for m = 0. Clearly
z 5E_' is equal to (?)$
must certainly
Accordingly,
sub-layer
in the curly
z + Iil"u
- -G' the former being the stress
the latter
the gr eatzst possible
stress
layer.
,and viscous
in the laminar
which
i.e.
wall;
to insert
E, at the value
we should
by shear
stress
in physical
of the turbulence,
sub-layer.
the shear
inappropriate
scale
as influenced
in the laminar
of length;
to the
that
(2.6-2)
formula.
constant
E,
later.
the determination
points
along
as functions
that
we have sufficient
of the unknowns
the surface,
when EC,
of the longitudinal
31.
We insert
one,
at this
point
of the suitability
Clausar
three
5, defined
latter
considerable
boundary
in equation
being
denoted
for
G were 6.q
10.1
and 19.3;
12.0
respectively.
assumption
(also
a weak
(3.3-2)
family.
attention
has reported
above,
and
reported
as 6.8 in Clauser
as already
values
paper.
of
the
(l-P,)~-T,
in C13usor's
The values
pg
-4 were 3.6,
of (I-I?)s
to
by icl,/6
),
6.4 and
velocity-profile
sisen:
$A2+ 3.9'725A +
-----P-P+A + 2.5
albeit
experimental
layers.and
the values
implies,
G
test,
of thti velocity-profile
[4-j devoted
different
another
12.5
. . . ..(4.1-2)
and:
(1 - 1,),-t
Fig.
9 contains
a plot
line
represents
equations
(4.1-2)
Clausor's
data.
full
the circles
reprc3,~c,nt
crosses
near
would
lie
greatly
between
dependent
by the noarntiss
of the shear-stress
straight
4.2
line
no test
rnG substituted
the implicstions
from
[38]
it
as is
for
indicated
the profile
which,
in prtisent
equation
. . . . ..(4.1-4)
at all
since
of the accuracy
the curve
cuts
any
too obliquely.
boundary
Erossure
gradient.
-ep
-Results of much greater
considering
however,
+ (A - zE)<
the origin
The stationary-state
the
as:
pradiction,
through
and
Evidentally
valid
and Rotta
9 provides
Fig.
The
not
to find good agreement,
for
-the ordinate
and abscissa is not
BT]
2 = zE + Din<
5.
and (4.1,3),
Once again
cran be expressed
Of course,
-3, versus
. . . ..@-.I-3)
of (7-&,)s
to the curve.
the relationship
-$A + 2.5
layer
significance
(2.7-l).
g placed
'
an w-w
adverse
are obtained
of equation
(3.3-5),
with
by
With
equal
to
22.
d
--dK X
d(lnw)
m ----dXx
m (a,
--P-L-u----s_
= m t@~-JQ>
- if&)>
COP-1
,,>
being
is the equation
which
we must note
vaporization,
( i.e.
that,
in problems
etc.,
In such cases,
those
has to be integrated,
@.
variable.
condensation,
the data.
. ..(2.6-3
----a
-- E
This
all
involving
m is not
specified
-I
three
differential
in
equations
for
@ might
stand
concentration,
enthalpy,
in the other
and a surface-equilibrium
be needed to link
remains
for
well
condition
within
for
However,
modest
would
the problem
computational
facilities.
Now that
it
mathematical
of the
2.7
structure
general
mathematical
equation.
only
dzE/dRx
and sign
small
call
(c.f.
certain
neglect
side
that
a flow
to be precisely
chemistry
further
discussion
can be dispenszd
of equation
in the
(2.6-l)
with.
may
the
may be neglected,
error.
by analogy
&zer,--
a complete
boundary
layer.
-- L--AL-the terms appearing
We shall
for
problem
of the right-hand
be of such size
with
The
- -------'stationary=state----In some circumstances,
numerator
that
with
for
zero
of chain
equation
(2.6-l)
shows
a stationary-state
I_-- bounda=
phenomena in physics and
similar
Bodenstein's
classes
which
"stationary-state"
reactions
it
may r,ot
[2]
hypothesis
).
When we
equal
zero
23.
precisely,
the consequent
stationary".*
theory
theory
The foundation
is therefore
will
be termed
"quasi-
of the quasi-stationary
the degenerate
form of equation
(2.6-l),
namely:
--dzE
dRx
(1 -
=r 0 :
R,
12>
d(ln uG>
---- (I1 -12)mG -12m-IAs=
d Rx
/
. . . ..(2.7-1)
of eliminating
govern
permits
the local
without
ential
equation
many local
remainder
properties
0
11
theory,
without
since
surface
the presence
may be characterised
for
example
the flow
any other,
immersed
of a differ-
with
permits
of the full
---- boundary
of the problem
than
Moreover,
contained
this
flat-plate
The nature
-I---------We first
consider
impermeable
solution
be conducted
many implications
3. The
-- turbulent---
more attention
will
layer.
of the paper
into
the great
of the layer,
to -E
z and without
the quasi-stationary
3.1
of the wall
of course
the hydrodynamics
equation.
insight
brings
in the
the aid
of
a swift
equations.
layer--
on a smooth plane
in a stream
of injection
mathematically
with
from
of uniform
slots.
velocity,
The situation
by the conditions:
m=O
d(lnuG)/dRx
= 0
d(lnw)/dRx
= 01
number of experimental
. . . ..(3.1-1)
data which
that the
exist for this flow, we can not only confirm
I_-----------w
*Footnote:
The stationary-state
boundary layer is not quite
[4].
boundary layer"
of Clauser
the same as the "equilibrium
l-zE
is independent
of gx; for
For the stationary-state,
is
Clauser's
equilibrium
layer,
it may be shown, (1-3)~~
independent
of zx.
24.
some
it
-use
Equations.
-.
In the present circumstances,
3.2
equations.reduce
(2.1-12)e
(2.2-6)
subsequently
flow.
to:
- dR,/dRx = -mG
-
(2.2-10)
. . . ..(3.2-I)
= (o.4+1)2
. . . ..(3.2-2)
D= zE;/l
--+w
(2.4-l)
theory,
. . . ..(3.2-3)
. . . ..(3.2-4)
(2.4-2)--+12=
2 + ZE(& - q"
1.589
_I-
> + zjpg
+ -$T>
..:..(3.2-5)
-m
(2.7-l)-+
= ----II s
. . . ..(3.2-6)
II - I;,
implying
in this
provisional
entrainment
it
pILate.
law
to be proportional
proportional
likely
to (Ithat
after
to
2,));
(zl-
These considerations,
(2.5-5)
implies
(if
(I-zE)
that -EG
unity
question,
(2.'4-3)
makes
to ('I-ZE);
when zE is near
taken together,with
iS
is itself
(I-gE)
is also proportional
22)
conventional
are fairly
moreover equation
meanwhile, $ is approximately
aid investigation
all,
successful
likely
case; for,
I.
equation
(3.2-6)
to (l-~~)~.
To
WCdefine
the quantity
A,, by:
. . . ..(3.2-7)
It is interesting
to note that,
if the equations
flat-plate
indeed
25.
boundary
first
layer,
the present
success;
for
theory
equation
will
(3.2-7)
have scored
can be re-arranged
UG- UE
7;s
= A
The left-hand
velocity
side
profile
outer
measures
from
by Schultz-Grunow
value
3.3
p3]
of around
the deviation
2.3 for
profile,
and it
this
difference
flat-plate
at the'
was established
has a constant
boundary
layers.
Deductions
data for
H.
--s-1-- from exp erimental
--u
-Substitution
of equation
(3.207),
into equations
and (3.2-5),
together
leads
(2.1-6)
with
to the interesting
3.9725A
+ 12.5)
-w(+A+ 2.5)
velocity
coefficient
profiles
H
where G is
taken
with
Clauser
recommended variously
suggested
a value
of the experimental
by the velocity
5 illustrates
curves
drawn for
comparison
I41 consid&red
profile
after
of 4 appearing
transfer
We therefore
and pressure
deduce that,
gradient:
Coles
extensive
be
and
c5) had
examination
6.4 is implied
[4a.
the value
of 6.5 for
and (3.3-2)
in the former
of g should
The value
(3.3-7)
6.5
6.0,
a less
we adopt
data collected
c =1 5.5,
Earlier,
and 6.8.
of equations
the function
to the drag
thti
of Schultz-Grunow
paper
of measured
. . . ..(3.3-2)
the value
literature.
In the present
Since
Fig.
of 7.1,
of the form:
- Gs3)
6.1
can be related
as 6.1.
and
.,.,.(3.3-l)
l/(1
a constant.
by Hama, together
and 7.0.
that
by an equation
(3.2-3)
--
=--
- $7;
----
(3.2-4)
equation:
1
H
that
of the actual
layer;
that
as:
. . . ..(3.2-8)
the logarithmic
its
value
g.
shows
is equal
of A_; it
in the absence
is
of mass
to
26.
This
UG ---
?I3
(z/p
>3
agreement
profile
is
(2.2-l)
which
6 shows.
Of course,
signify
that
the family
of profiles
described
profiles
by equation
reasonably
that
equal
in question;
then
(3.2-51,
- m
--- G
With
0.1
review,
about
it
is
entrainment
with,
and (3.2-7)
imply:
in all
that
fit
of
hypothesis.
('l-g%)
Suppose
in the region
(3.2-f-I-),
. . . ..(3.3-4)
we d&tuce
that
Since
value
quite
equal
" 3 lies
.which
a constant
the data
C1 is
to
between
equaI
ad~~quat~ly.
to
So an
-me.0
to (I- +) conforms
G proportional
and may even bc thought to explain,
the observations
and Hama.
is an appropria-tz
recommendation
for
just
In section
have led
obtained
Possibly
2.5,
at which
law,
0.059,
directly
we should
identify
when zE is
identificntion
a li%tle
from
to make a firmer
valid
to a value of C1 equal
i.e.
0.088x(4/3)+2,
point
the entrainmznt
than unity:
go would
layers.
the measured
law giving
This
value
(3.2-3),
the experiments
clear
of Schultz-Grunow
less
merely
1
1
(-@
+
2.5)
~2
. ------a
e--m
1 - Gs--5-
g5)/(l-6.5s*i.
would
Oil4
of
author's
the conformity
times
(3.2-21,
and G = 6.5,
3.671
&nd 0.034
facts
C' , say
A = 2.342
0.1163(1-
that
fits
our entrainment
A(+A + 2.5)
=
-
insertion
with
which
equations
= ------
1 - ZE
from
(2.2-l),
to a constant
(3.2-G)
Indead ?
wzll,
of i?, with
-mGis
section.
these
of Schultz-
in good agretiment
as Pig.
that
that
results
data,
i.e.
with
velocity
(3.3-3)'into
s-3
. . ..r(3.3-3)
in exctillent
Grunow mentioned
the whole
=- (I - ZE)
= 2.342
.
is
result
less
of z3 with
than
consideration
(I-3,)
to about
half
of the
of boundary
with
approx-
27.
imatcly
one half
region
free
of the boundary
mixing
9 it
zer0
of (I-SO),
layer.
layer
is
like
On the othar
just
hand,
on the grounds
region
as zo;
maximum shear
stress
an entrainment
it
the
layer
the boundary-layer
of
We can devise
in the middle.
which
the mixing
one half'of
now both
mixing
roughly
formula
requirements;
for
that
approximately
fits
both
these
is:
,.
-mG=
~~'(1:
If
now we require
that
cp
- ZE) (1 t: *z,)
equation
value
we deduce that
Equation
(3.3-5),
the paper.
C,, equal
law for
this
study
of all
ultimately
may be necessary
of 0.1023.
will
require
other
quantities
the % function.
the present
hypothesis
and plausible
worth
ular
testing
values
It
further.
involves
-m G -+
Howover,
on,e, which
the followhg
partic-
of EG:.
2,-d
of
refinement
is
be
to introduce
a simple
when
to 6.5 and
than zE (for
is
(3.3-5)
in the remainder
will
available
G equal
to CilZ3,
z.~CLI,
practice
when a closer
it
with
with
is satisfied
(3.3-4,)
of 0.0015,
0.1363
('1 - z$J
. . . ..(3e3-6)
Z~ = O :
3.4
Derivation
Combination
leads,
g=
for
0.0015
of equation
law -----for
(3.2-j)
with
g2 introduced
the flat
drag.
the constant
By taking
and g2 = 5030,
pleta.
equstion
via
(2.2-6)
(2.1-8),
of a lbcal -s drag
; = 0 and with
for
S
- m(; = 0.1023
to:
. . . ..(3.4-.I)
E, by reference
as typical
extracted
to experimental
the pair
from the
of values
"best-fit"
table
28.
of Spalding
derived
and Chi
above,
corresponds
ary flow
s
the following
on a smooth
CO.4
well
as the curve
Fig.
7 shows.
The value
012
of the fact
that
a valua
near
the wall.
that
the velocity
the experimental
some error
is
the thoory,
it
empirically
integrations
3.5
data
and Chi
data
just
[57],
as
examination
proffle
of velocity
is more appropriate
may arise
does not
(2.2-l)
respscts;
but probably'
as
as surpris-
The discrepancy
At a later
will
. . . ..(3.4-2)
of 9.025
in all
attributable
ary hypothesis.
plate:
E can be regarded
to the region
fit
flat
there
quasi-station-
th (3 experimental
for
show that
To this
6.542.
dr ag law for
by Spalding
of 6.542,
of A, and G
(I-~.?s+)}]~
to fit
fitted
low in view
data
local
{4.55H2/
appears
the values
E; equals
impermeable
/ln
relation
-profile
and with
we deduce that
This
ingly
[57],
quasi-station-
in the development
of.
be necessary
to re-adjust
all
the
determintid
constants
by reference
to exact
of both
the differential
equations.
The valid*
of the stationary-state
hypothesis.
e-m----e-m--now that a stationary-state
theory
It is necessary,
for
the general
has a satisfactory
the flat-plate
equations
boundary
to see if
layer,
to
the hypothesis
foundation.
In the present
circumstances,
equiltion
can
(2.6-l)
be written:
d(12/Il)
Rm --m-v
-mG (II
follows
_ s
. . . ..(3.5-1)
II
dRX
Now it
-I*>,
---
from
the quasi-stationary
hypothesis
I? = 1 - @A + 2.5)~~
that:
. . . ..(3.5-2)
I2 = I -, (A f 5) 33 + (+A+2.5)Gs
43.5-3)
Since
we know that
gt is considerably
less
than
unity
in
29.
the situation
in
question,
we can write:
s i!
- (SA tr 2.5)
2&l
. . . ..(3.5-4)
II
IlR2-
m --
Rm
II-
R2
----
G$A + 2.5)
I2
s3
and so:
= ,_R1_
d(12'14
*In B-m-dRx
of equation
(3.4-2)
differentiation
ds
. ----
-1
---a
further
that
dR,
simply
imply
approximately
that
we can obtain
dR2
--
2.5
G I__
by
equals
re-written
for
the flat
2, equations
the left-hand
(3.5-7)
dR_p!&
(3.5-7)
influence,
of the logarithm
equation:
dR,
2s3/2
the argument
has little
of this
. . . ..(3.5-6)
dRx
2s
Since
Since
ds
side
plate
(3.5-6)
of (3.5-l)
shows
and
can be
as follows:
d(12/Il
Rm w-m-
> =2.5
s3'2
. . . ..(3.5-8)
on the validity
of the quasi-
dRX
stationary
hypothesis;
equation
(3.5-I)
2, while
the left-hand
0.1
times
Thus,
if
is
10% larger
for
conducted
will
It
value
than
that
that
that
2.5s3",
_
i.e.
around
of the equation
investigations
paper;
of
the quasi-stationary
the quasi-stationary
the retention
of magnitude
approximation.
obtained
in the present
of
as a first
of C1 might
exploratory
necessitate
is only
but only
side
on the right
of the order
follows
justified,
We conclude
useful
side
the left-hand
neglected,the
are obviously
as great.
assumption
for
3.3.
hypothesis
is
analysis
term.
30.
4.
4.1
by a boundary-layer
ient.
subjected
As a result
following
of their
approximate
0.123
s.. . =
Their
IO3
skin
x IO -0.678H
(
R2
covered
between
in terms
the'value
6.542
with
and 2 is
lines
represbnt
(4.1-I))
their
extent
is
care
only
if
data,
a fairly
fit
in Fig.
approximctd'.
poor
agreement
to ensure
fits
that
8; the broken
appropritite,
and the
as rather
of the fact
However,
that'the
it
would have
of the velocity-profile
with
formula
theory
the experimental
.good agreement
The
by those'authors.
may be regarded
in view
together
3.4.
the area
explored
the present
particularly
of velocity
give
between
itself
curves
withComput-
equations
E insection
roughlk
and
in terms
by (2.2-6).
these
theory;
connected
for
covering
formula
been surprising
solely
(2.4-l)
the iudwieg-Tillmann
1 conditions
Ludwieg-Tillmann
satisfactory,
(2.1-6),
given
out using
as full
straight
latter
at the hig.her
m =' 0; 1 is
derivid
are plotted
The agreement
13
up
of the present
equations
to the experimenta
about-l.2
results
occurred
assumption
,H may be expressed.via
with
ations
a
. . . ..(4.1-1)
of 2 from
mainly
the
numbers.
A relation
(2.4-2)
a-range
grad-
friction:
-0.268
and Q range
X104,
Ii-l
the larger7values
Reynolds
to an 3dvcrse pressure
* studios,
they propounded
law of local
experiments
to about.
to 1.8;
for
of px~ssure
--
data
data
the experimental
for
family
fairly
will
well;
still
drag
31.
We insert
one,
at this
point
of the suitability
Clausar
three
5, defined
latter
considerable
boundary
in equation
being
denoted
for
G were 6.q
10.1
and 19.3;
12.0
respectively.
assumption
(also
a weak
(3.3-2)
family.
attention
has reported
above,
and
reported
as 6.8 in Clauser
as already
values
paper.
of
the
(l-P,)~-T,
in C13usor's
The values
pg
-4 were 3.6,
of (I-I?)s
to
by icl,/6
),
6.4 and
velocity-profile
sisen:
$A2+ 3.9'725A +
-----P-P+A + 2.5
albeit
experimental
layers.and
the values
implies,
G
test,
of thti velocity-profile
[4-j devoted
different
another
12.5
. . . ..(4.1-2)
and:
(1 - 1,),-t
Fig.
9 contains
a plot
line
represents
equations
(4.1-2)
Clausor's
data.
full
the circles
reprc3,~c,nt
crosses
near
would
lie
greatly
between
dependent
by the noarntiss
of the shear-stress
straight
4.2
line
no test
rnG substituted
the implicstions
from
[38]
it
as is
for
indicated
the profile
which,
in prtisent
equation
. . . . ..(4.1-4)
at all
since
of the accuracy
the curve
cuts
any
too obliquely.
boundary
Erossure
gradient.
-ep
-Results of much greater
considering
however,
+ (A - zE)<
the origin
The stationary-state
the
as:
pradiction,
through
and
Evidentally
valid
and Rotta
9 provides
Fig.
The
not
to find good agreement,
for
-the ordinate
and abscissa is not
BT]
2 = zE + Din<
5.
and (4.1,3),
Once again
cran be expressed
Of course,
-3, versus
. . . ..@-.I-3)
of (7-&,)s
to the curve.
the relationship
-$A + 2.5
layer
significance
(2.7-l).
g placed
'
an w-w
adverse
are obtained
of equation
(3.3-5),
with
by
With
equal
to
32.
is
pressure
R*
absent,
gradient,
d (lnuGl
-----
namely:
U1
ir
.. . . . (4.2-q)
-I
+ .jZE, _ (II
qu
Equation
values
can be used,
(4.2-2)
mentioned
in the previous
of g2 for
various
of such computations
constant
gradient
partly
among others,
dominant
influence;
separation
present
theory
also,
appreciably
_
and LeonPeG.
_
emerges is
First
>2
- 121
(4.2-2)
with
those
the computation
in Fig.
of
The results
IO;
lines
this
of
always
value
one of the
vary
layer,
I?2 plays
an important
role
in the
although
the critical
constant--gg
.and
the pressure-gradient
Clauser
lower
than
that
with
C4I.l ), will
layer,
such boundary
Reynolds
of Fig.
g will
$/s
therefore
which
IO is strictly
by ensuring
downstream
parameter
Fig.
boundary
lines
of course
value
We
of Kutaceladze
that
of z;
argue,
around
changes with
slightly
authors
oocurs
in the laboratory
gradient
exerts
of g.being
ZE independent
can be contrived
p'il ,
quantity
these
must be emphasised
.
only'the
stationary-state
with
and Leont'ev
that
it
for
the layer
(e.g.
, . . . .
of g and g2.
in particular,
shall
boundary
for
Kutateladze
have suggested
the corresponding
g will
section,
are displayed
0.01,
pressure
in conjunction
values
because
boundary-layer
with
I?2
valid
results:
A 0.1023 (1 - z&l
for
- b
- .
I
d"G
---dx
2
e--e
d R*
there
i.e.
layers
that
the
number in accordance
IO. ; Obviously
distance
eventually
in such a
vanish-;
widely.
. .
33.
The main conclusions
Fig.
of
IO are as follows:
(i)
At any particular
momentum-thickness
correspond
dimensional
(ii)
gradient
At low values
gradients)
only
between
one value
not be discussed
can,
in principle
Probably
for
a givennon-
adverse
for
with
in the present
pressure
which
another
layers
at least,
vzdues of g
l?2.
of H exists
will
state
of -l?2 (mildly
negative
two possible
to the stationary
pressure
Reynolds
-% lies
one exists
reverse-flow
for
regions
report,
although
into
the framework
be fitted
they
of the theory.
(iii)
At somewhat higher
of g can satisfy
without
involving
(iv)
no real
finite;
such high
quantity
of about
0.006,
is
involving
a lower
value
different
considerations.
Comparison
---Fig.
Fig.
10.
several
with
-In
addition
It
it
experimental
an arrow
fall
It
follows
shows that
So for
-g2 in
prodiction,
and Leont'ev
will
is
number,
layer
of the same
PI],
but
based on quite
be interesting
to make
data.
contains
curves
investigations.
indicating
in the experiments;
which
data.
experimental
F3-K
-A------c
the same curves as are shown on
with
contains
of lZ2
is bound to be
(2.6))
experimental
11
dzE/dRx
a striking
of Kutateladze
4.3
value,
exists.
be negative.
as that
with
layer
equation
character
a comparison
value
of -l?2,
-% will
This
separate.
at a fixed
somewhat with.Reynolds
of
must indeed
two values
a given
boundary
values
of -g2,
-g2 exceeds
re-examination
excess
will
flow
stationary-state
for
this
(4.2-2)
rcverse
When however
near 0.006
that,
equation
values
points
the direction
deduced
from
Each curve
is marked
in which
lZx increased
5x'103
by circles
remembered
the possible
that,
experiments
with
of Clauser
layers
were not
indeed
the variation
surface
[4],
we do not expect
The lower
within
position
for
higher
curve
data
Possibly
the pressure
short.
is
layer
longer;
curves,
the l?2~values,
layer
The data
obtained
for
an ac-:,,-ofoil
an incidence
data
curves
of '10').
runs
fairly
in the upstream
exceeded
increases
theory
0.004,
which
close
region;
interof
of H.
variation,
that
the
to conform
state,
and Tetervin
The curve
the
state
value
DO} were
(FACA 65(216)-222
the curve
the value
departure
high
In any case it
of vcn Doenhoff
this
the upstream
the stationary
well
the predicted
although
of the main-stream
with
lies
changes so as eventually
closely
two
although
in exactly
has a surprisingly
a differentiation
fairly
lie
layer.
considerably
It
curves;
a stationary-state
however
boundary
on Fig.
(approx.)
at
11 representing
to the stationary-state
however,
suddenly
According
bends
back
so that
to the quasi-stationary
of zE would be about
0.52
where the
occurs.
The data
foil,
near the
[4] provide
11 is
these
the
Therefore
to lie
in which
of Clauser
the stationary-state
the boundary
14
cases.
curves
one on Fig.
where I32 is
sects
along
breakaway
of the five
in regions
state;
profiles
point
boundary.
boundary-layer
the experimental
must be
changes slowly.
curves.
of the
velocity
in three
The experimental
from
that
ones except
gradient
exception
the experimental
in their
occurred
theoretical
It
was so extreme
eventually
and squares.
and those
of Newman [29]
of Schubauer
, also
obtained
and Klebanoff
for
[42],
an aerowhich
H .
35.
relate
to a specially
similar
constructed
behaviour.
conforms
In both
fairly
closely
(i)
that
II
the experimental
and its
layers
gradients
the experiments
as great
separation;
for
will
with
and Leont'ev
(for
Fig.
to cause boundary-layer
boundary-layer
4.2
phenomenon.
provides
support
separation.
of the lower
add plausibility
boundary-layer
separation
avoided,
it
would probably
theory
value
neglected
of the velocity
strength
of -l?2 also
of the observations
is less than,
separation
for
is to be,
the lowness
needs to be established.
seems plausible.
of the pressure
profile
close
systems,
to conclude
explanation
the influence
of the experiment-
is 2 phenomenon to be
thereafter.
governs
may be judged
of engineering
be sufficient
The following
it
which
in which
the present
the view
quantity
branches
of the design
of the critical
are
of Kutateladze
for
Moreover,
For purposes
expected
of
Thus both
the dimensionless
the positions
say, 0.0035,
of the curves
II
is indeed
al curves
of withstanding
-E.,
-4- is 2)s grest as
that values only
suggest
suffice
implies
which
the pressure
However,
which
the latter
of section
estimate
seems
associated
(ii)
implications
are caprble
for
cited
the argument
form
curves
hypothesis
Doenhoff/Tetcrvin,
that
curves;
conclusions:-
boundary
pressure
' two-thirds
15
0.0037,
of Fig.
the following
turbulent
0,006,
to the stationary-state
adverse
that
region
to justify
that
show very
about
Consideration
all
surface,
gradient
to the wall,
of Ludtiieg
We have
on the
on the
and Tillmann
1251
36.
(see section
2.2).
However,
and theoreti-
gradients,
this
ular,
shear
stress
profile,i.n
the experimental
high
adverse
neglect
is unjustified;
in partic-
gradient
is sufficiently
high,
at the w&L
falls
the immediate
the
vicinity
of the wall
obeys the
law:
u
where g is
a mixing-length
Tt follows
gradient
. . . ..(4.3-*I)
$,
that,
for
Now if
stress,
g iven
z2E
in section
differential
gr;ldionts.
performance
only
for
The actual
for
only
profile
for
expect
that
can reprdscnt
val.ues
of -g2 which
be
from
exists
10
of -B2 o is
could
no solution
equation
value
. . . ..(4.3-2)
- $1
crl
2.2;
the pressure-
by:
Wa must therefore
prulamented in Fig.
-E2,0*
(iii)
F
-2,o
(K/2)2
wall
as a result
curves
zero
pressure
constant,
of
such high
the
stationary-state
are
less
obviously
than
around
0.004,
Fig.
according
11
these
0.55.
but,
to the experimental
in this
values
of gX at which
range,
it
as equal
the present
However,
paper),
Townsend
(4.3-2)
occurs
so high
only
just
of
g = O.'j75.
that
,K is
throughout
I;z should
the value
this
Since,
zero-wall-stress
outside
E2,
circumstances
a value
with
Substitution
yields:
@3] h as argued
in
on
is around
of course
0.16.
boundary-layer
value
suggests:
deduced lies
around
it
collected
larger-than-usual
indeed
is
in equation
in more conventional
taken
data
range,
have a
layers,
which
and
we have
3'7.
Fig. 12 provides
further
influence
it
mental results
obtained by Stratford
argument is fairly
In lz'ter
modify
boundary layars
to
Evidently
it will
of the effects
10
-E2 /{z$
with K = 0.575,
Meanwhile
the constsnt
drawn on it.
ws
merely
of constant
Equation
Tar
The foregoing
why Kutatelzdze
discussion
(4.302),
a unity
boundary layer
of
for their
it
(among
authors contains
too high a
theory implies
value of gE*
these
less than
value of -E2;
other things)
account
-R2 curves
0.0827, a limit
critical
be desirable,
bk regarded as valid
(iv)
clearly
theory of
so as to take full
of pressure gradient.
the
is interesting
or "wake" component.
to comparz the degree
the latter
IO
of Fig. 13a,
rsview paper by
3'0.
equilibrium
boundary
interesting
to note
to the
e-xperimental
curiously
enough,
the earliest
4.4
layers
represented
l?ig.
with-Head's
entrainment
in section
into
1.2,
law.
is defined
The first
HI =
for
Also
family
in'
(yG - b1)b2
-m+
-i2)
versus
. . . ..(4.4-1)
&,O
The circles
represent
represent
data
drawn on Figs.
of the present
14 represent
of velocity
here
by:
[42].
Those on Fig.
his
and Klcbanoff
the prediction
and
the empirical
reproduced
Schubauer
by Schubauer
El- verse
notation
= 11/(11
The second plots
by Head
Head presented
plots
in the present
of entrainment
theory
reported
law.
boundary-layer
of 6.n entrainment
is
pJ3].
the idea
deduction
12;
prcdiction
of Buri
data
.on
unrealistic
Hlebanoff
Figs.
is
data
results
It
much relation
namely that
to '104.
the least
As mentioned
I?2 equal
that
of all,
Comparison
with
solely
profiles;
represent
the implications
function.
The following
theory,
from
representing
R-2 being
the parameter.
the i.mplications
on Fig.
those
of the
15 in addition
appear
to be
justified:(i)
mainly
The scatter
of velocity
the outer
curves
of the points
profiles,
which
14 show that
not to be expected
significant
of deciding,
location
on Fig.
to lie
Reynolds-number
on Pig.
'I4 is probably
from inspection
shall
However,
be adopted
the
the experimental
on a single
influence.
curve;
for
"theoretical"
points
are
there
is a
Then these
two
39.
facts
are taken
provides
into
no reason
assurucd family
matter
under
(ii)
here
closer
It
present
entirely
should
that
layer,
a band of points,
curve.
into
account,
the presumed
at which mass
or that
the predicted
since
input
difficulty
As already
mentioned,
which
than
I$ on these
should
is
exist
Mickley
experimental
plate
there
this.
theory
of boundary
to dcvclop
that
Since
the influence
in the
present
a calculation
than that
in the absence
quasi-stationary
Prediction
-m,,
[61].
is regarded
on the postulate
is recognised
be possible
and presumed
in doing
between
functions
work to procure
the latter
Read's
the
on the
to the theory,
rests
any other
Mass transfer
of future
explana-
again
gradient
the measured
be no serious
relations
the latter
However,,
development,
is that
of pressure
between
laws.
successful
flat
the only
of 3, applies
a single
the rate
view
as an empirical
(iii)
5.1
cithcr
agreement
entrainment
5,
of the
being
are taken
the boundary
of the influence
law.
whiah
than
facts
neglect
it
14
is
unique
rather
law over-estimates
The author's
layer
this
suggests
wall
Fig.
suitability
in the evaluation
entrainment
tion
the
that
test.
14 definitBly
values
can be said
profiles,
the parameter,
However,
it
doubting
of velocity
15 also;
being
Fig.
for
The uncertainty
to Fig.
$
account,
of
theory,
procedure
of Head.
of pressure
gradient;
theory.
of the local
and Davis
study
through
drag law.
of the boundary
which
air
layer
is injected
on a smooth
towards
the
40.
main air
stream.
Their
measurements
equations
(3.3-5);
However,
encouraged
here
are:-
by our success
of mass transfer
algebraic
equation,
with
z,$(l+~zE)(l,,
0.1023(1-
and
the flat
plate
3))
and so
by a single
which
-12)
(2.6-l).
we shall
assumption,
(2.7-l),
law
(2.1-12)
(section
equations
namely
of the
entrainment
equations
replace
a useful
theory.
in the.abscnce
afford
here reduces
- 12m - I?s
to:
= G
.00..(5&1)
The results
displayed
R-2 for
of computations
in Fig.
various
ment between
using
values
of m_. It
prediction
and experiment
systematic
sufficient
to justify
a modification
(2.6-2)
The agrcemcnt
is not
gratifying,
underlying
that
Mickley
[39]
throughout;
recently,
and neglected
versus
the outer
various
it
has to be admitted
satisfactorily
with
words,
Rubesin
17 contains
g2 for
for
the theory
the data
were appropriately
be characterised
like
thought
that
as differing
gE equals
unity
of authors
of the wall
layer
represent
when
chosen.
the majority
only
though
of the assumptions
showed that
might
is not
and expcrimcnt,
vindication
one in implying
in other
exists
themselves
constants
of Rubesin
Pig.
agreed
satisfactory;
example.
theory;
and Davis
the agree-
to the argument
theory
a complete
the present
of Rubesin
until
betwocn
for
that
is very
error
are
of 2 versus
is evident
what little
to equation
equations
16,
certainly,
leading
these
the
H,
'
41.
experimental
data
correspond
theory
to the present
and experiment
However,
this
theory.
is less
may imply
satisfactory
no more than
layers
state
as might
theory
finite
adjusted
of data
to do so (section
any further
Values
to the quasi-stationary
that
they
ing
that
to note
previous
ones.
reconcile
deducted
unique
This
deductions
for
with
equations,
pressure
for
expressed
in terms
(3+ &3*
This
definitions
of &,, and $
with
those
experiments;
I$ to enter;
It
to the
could
which
not
he
we see that
is
between
form,
each of these
it
may be recognised
and equation
of entraincorrect.
inconvenient
quantities
fact
for
is interest-
H-H
- -1 or -m-G -H -1 relations
is not to say, however, that
to allow
curves
data
platewith
gradient.
may explain
the relations
according
the calculated
if
the flat
on Figs.
from impermeable-wall
are desired
differential
hypothesis.
theory
This
Of course,
fits
been
has
the Mickley/Davis
ment function
g = 0 as
curve
case because it
for
3).
are plotted
impermeable
the disagreement
law.
of H,, versus
mass transfer,
case.
to the stationary
as great
The entrainment
----------
between
the Nickley-'
the theoretical
that
for
is
in this
the curves
in this
as close
and experiment
Clearly,
Davis
are not
the majority
while
The agreement
boundary
for
15
and Davis,
Davis
between
of Mickley
e.g.
can be
gE and
by examining
(2.2-10)
for
the
D,.
42'.
5.3
An
------analytical
theory
for
---- the effect
of mass transfer
----m
-on drag.
The effect
of mass transfer
in a particularly
Leont'ev
convenient
[Zl] ; these
formula
authors
by Kutateladze
and
deduce:
- * 2L
. . . ..(5.34)
%
Here 50 is
a function
of s appropriate
for
from
in the absence
gradient.
We shall
the present
set
for
layer
with
(2.2-6)
a fixed
is
the value
Reynolds
derive
number
and
a comparable
formula
of equations.
value
m = 0:
of 2 and 2E which
of &, for
with
it
of mass transfer
be the values
Let g* and 2;
valid,
specifically
to the momentum-thickness
a smooth wall
pressure
of F$;
are
the smooth-wall
to zero.
Then,
from
boundary
..
equation
s* =
. ..*. .(5.3-S)
Also
from equation
(2.2-6),
4
( )
-- S
.- zE
S*
with
Am
ZEy
4-
. (
g* has practically
as go by demonstrating
m at fixed
R,2.
substitutions,
. . . . .
We write
,I
as:
(5..3-3)
the same .
that
equation
1 varies
(2.6-2),
little
by simple
.-
l= In
. . . ..(5.3-4)
3.2,
boundary
layer
gradient
will
after
re-capitulating
m&s transfer
aporoximately
II-
that
I2
the arguments
a stationary-state
but no pressure
(s + mzE) 3
. . . ..(5.3-5)
43.
It
I
follows
little
that
with
Exact
the argument
m and therefore
computations.bear
equate
of the logarithm
1 itself
this
varies
out.
varies
still
Therefore
less.
we may
~0 to s* approximately;
by zE 0 which signifies
9
at the given R,2, in the absence
the counterpart
of mass transfer.
of the Kutateladze/Leont'ev
Thus.
formula
is:
(5.3-l)
. . . ..(5.3-6)
A study
of equations
the following
conclusions
to be drawn:-
two equations
are identical
(i) The
and%,o are
unity.
Reynolds
number.
moderate
R,2ls;
all
This
occurs
Equation
may influence
terms
drag
on the right-hand
an influence
also,
that
which
flows
earlier
authors.
as the specific
that
2 will
does.
implies,
computed
which
It
for
on Fig.
16
is
and Leont'ev
of
that
mass transfer
corresponding
to the two
this
data.
in equation
relation;
(5.3-l)
as in respect
is
the aspect
has receivedtmost
The first
contribution
cause a reduction
assumption
manifests
effects,
boundary-layer
implies
side.
of the us&y+
pressure-gradient
from
in two ways,
to unity
the predictions
implies
(5.3-6)
zE
of infinite
close
when both
between
not surprising
permits
at the limit
However gF
-J is fairly
for example, the' points
have gE-values
therefore
and (5.3-6)
(5.3-l)
term might
of the prosent
be decreased
if
in gE, as indeed
through equation
,,
of
of
attention
be regarded
theory;
mass transfer
it
should
the stationary-state
(2.7-l),
that
it
44.
Fig.
It
18 emphasises
contains
2 placed
zero
in evaluation
expresses
equal
The
a finite
value
on the curve
the neglect
physical
of the
(iii)
LxJ),
t~all
ultimately
component
provide
on drag
theories
w&h
low,
effect
equal
mixing
at iew;
study
relation
for
The latter,
s = 0:
value
if
of z/20,
is found
it
in
turned
out
of the
entrainment.
question
lies
How-
beyond the
made in
prompts
(ii)
above,
the reflection
from thti
m ~4s
of mass
inhibited
equation
existing
alond predict
the reverse
of this
pcper.
The observation,
is different
layer
that
Specifically,
at a given
much lower
of
may
the fact
would be explained
stress.
value,
the detailed
(iv)
layer
the influence
tfie u+ my'
has a smaller
high-Mach-number
ever,
for
predict
consider
This
(bec3usa
of the changing
of the role
practice.
is disregarded.
an explanation
transfer
at high
wall
of zero -% has
of the boundary
do not correctly
s/%
stationary-
the
zero.
theories
that
and.
attainable
both
curve
hypothesis,
the point
since
to
arc physically
The recognition
mixing-layer
that
(0.0341).
si,gnificance,
to zero when ~~ is
is
This
&A and $.
of the ,entrainmcnt
to note
(5.1-l)
point
fe attains
important
interaction.
g based on equation
of the quantities
requirement;
points
to zero;
the influence
the continuity
state
of zE versus
a plot
with
the last-mentioned
condition
(5.3-6)
0
that
z falls
-E
this
of zero wall
implies,
zE/zE2 90
that
occurs
when:
. . . . . (5.3-7)
45.
Since
-%/&O
value
stress
is
than
of the order
connexion
it
is
experiments
of Hacker
rates
caused complete
which
boundary
layer
from
of ,m appropriate
considerably
The value
admittedly
rather
layers
entrainment
He found
lies
that
Values
by invoking
the fact
the values
between
0.02
range,
which
in this
large.
canbe
of the turbulent
phenomenon lay
0.0341
in excess
that
of 0.0341
Hacker's
law gives
explained
2 rather
former's
value
state.
value
zero -E
2 would be one-third
still
the lower
but
6.
The wall
6.1
Velocity
profiles.
We here
consider
injected
immersed
This
is
Glauert
jet
in a large
the "wall-jet"
pfl
our
2.5);
if
the
of g for
0.0266.
of Hacker's
This
range,
surroundings..
---
,
the situation
a slot
along
reservoir
situation
Schauer
[60]
in which
a wall,
of fluid
and experimentally
Myers,
that
it.
in stagnant
through
Values
of lieichdrdt
i.e.
limit
can
of -EG at
the value
of 0.0787,
is
boundary
by observing
higher
the
the blowing
by the experiments
2E = 0 than is justified
c34] and Liepmann and Lzufer
p3] (section
is
less
to recall
separation
the wall.
were certainly
below 0.0341
interesting
who measured
@4],
to this
and 0.04.
be explained
17
i.e.
0.0341.
In this
of 0.006,
this
which
studied
and others.
is
being
is
at rest.
theoretically
by Sigalla
nnd Eustis
a fluid
p8],
[48],
of course
Bradshaw
Stratford,
The wall
by
is
no pressure
46.
The equations
are the general
which
ones,
are relevant
with
however
to this
-s tending
situation
to infinity.
Thus we deduce:
Prom equations
-I-z
(2.2-9)
=
zE
From equation
and (2.2-40):
1 + cos (xc)
lnzf,
t $-
. . . ..(6.1-1)
(2.24):
. . . ..(6.1-2)
From equations
(2.2-IO),
and (2.4-2):
(2.4-l)
. . . ..(6.1-3)
and
-?-=F
From equations
--I
(2.2-$0)
(ra,-$9,)
I.529
_ ------1
. . . . .(6.1-4)
t 7l2
and (2.4-6):
-0*2oSSn)]
$(T
n
ZTi:
equations,
hand side
in order
Equation
-that all
implies
(6.1-I)
the terms
that
to the left-
should
2 passes
maximum value,
quantities
. . . ..(6el+)
2/l)
sin(aEmax)
cmax,
be finite.
through
these
= 2/l
. . . ..(6.1-6)
and
z max
-__I-
91
FE
lncn;ax L
. . . ..(6.1-7)
Since
cmax is
of
max is
x5
follows
always
much smaller
than
equal
to its
approxima-tely
from equation
(6.1-6)
that:
unity,
the sine
argument.
It
I
2
3
E max z--7L ( 1 )
. . . ..(6.1-8)
obtained by taking
function,
is:
c maxG-k
Fig.
(+-)
{,- -$ (+)+]-
presents a plot
19
according to equation
of 9.94
( rmax =
are experimental
Gee
the ordinate,
19
and originally
[3)
profile
(6.1-l),
0.145,
. . . . . (6.1-g)
of the velocity
078
one
reported
where 6
5&p
3; in plotting
It will
be observed that
in the llwall-law*'
represented
versus
g( T p )+/p.
interesting
Similar
co-ordinate
data,
ii
system: u/(r/p)
fJ3],
maximum, fails
to predict
the
Let
21
shows a plot
of
versus R
-max'
by means of the
~/(pg~~,x)
fl3]
of
4%.
Sigalla
@8], together
experiments
of Bradshaw
ment between
rl
b19
with points
and Gee [3].
experimental
data
,
extremely satisfactory,
the location
of-the
%6 may conclude
possible
to find
represent
the present
satisfactorily.
are abqut
precise
Variations
----
6.3
are all
guided
[28-J report
than
constant.
those
flow
g9 d(lnw)/dgx
to b;t placed
equal
to zero.
(2.5:7),
that
evidently,
circumstances.
of thg
3 govern
and (2.6-1);
drag law
of Sigalla;
deduction--
_.
to
measurements of drag
equation s which
by equation
local
be mentioned
of the wall-jet
is
19 shows,
the cosine
The differential
(2.1-12)
however
15% higher
entrainment
---------Me
. -
theory
of the velocity
predicts.the
should
measurements
than
component
function
theory
It
th e mixing4ayer
profile,
the agree-
that,
a better
the
Evidently
very accurately.
..
representing
that&the
the growth
are equations
and d(lnu,)/dR_,
-u
We shall presume,
I
entrainment
law is
given by:
L1
gE:-fCV
-m G=
The differential
dRm
----.-
zE dH,
'E
. . . ..(6.3-1)
:~
. . . ..(6.3-2)
"2
and
. . . ..(6.3-3)
1 and i/-G
vary
slightly
considerably
smaller
with
(6.3-3)
Rx.
However,
will
prove
since
to be
we here treat
these
49.
quantities
as constants
~,,,=1.085x104,
R
equation
having
RmdzE
appropriate
to
Then
- c2 - 0.00305
-.
Z-Z
To solve
values
becomes:
(6.3-3)
eliminate
the
- C2(1+E.),
equations
dRx.
then
-(1&E)
= Rm
where .a is an integration
(6.3-5)
into (6.3~2).now
. . . ..(6.3-4)
and (6.3,4),
(6.3-2)
Integration
zE/a
say
we first
yields:
. . . ..(6.3-5)
constant.
Substitution
of
yields:
l/(2+(9
Rm =
Pinally,
c (2 + E)C2aRx
substitution
in
a
53
yields:
(6.3-5)
{(2+
. ..(6.3-6)
E)
C*aq-(1+w(2+~)
. . . ..(6.3-7)
It
is interesting
jet.
together
of spread
with
of the
the definition
of
1 = 9.94,
to:
= 2.502(2+~)~~
yG/x
As we shall
order
of 0.1.
neglect
it
shortly
It
see,
. . . ..(6.3-8)
the quantity
is therefore
the influence
of wall
then
5
Rm ';= (2C2 oRx)
zE/a =
(2C2aXx)
Y(/X =
5c,
Ecis
convenient
In physic&l
altogether.
to neglecting
flux.
temporarily
terms,
shezr
reduce
of the
this
to
amounts
on thz momentum
to:
. . . . . (6.3-9)
-&
. . . ..(6.3-10)
i
These equations
preliminary
..,..(6.3-11)
are probably
evaluation
sufficiently
of C2 from
precise
experimental
for
data.
the
50.
Most experimenters
terms
of 13/z
distance
have reported
from
of the fluid
is the width
of the slot.
to 0.54xG,
similarly,
this
emerging
in
being
necessary
to make still
the shear
stress
and yc into
at nny section
and xc
yq as approximately
--H
precise
for L=9.94;
3s 0.7544gE.
the relations
In order
however,
it
at the wall
is neglected,
We may t&e
result
introduce
stress
results
the velocity
equal
their
is
small.
we can equate
If
this
to
is
that
shear
SO
obtaining:
2
UG
= F
Rm 2
---em
uc
------
1 = 9.94
i....(6.3-12)
I-
II
With
Yc
agrlin,
we deduce:
a
-UC'UG
p"C 'C
u-----s
P
= 1.65
. . . ..(6.3-13)
needs to bc retained,
u,
even though it tends to
--iT
because, like z+, 2 tends
in the case in quastion,
wherein
zero
to infinity,
Substitution
-1'3)
now yields:
(6.3-10)
--s--m Rm
P UC Yc &
and,
of (6.3
with
into
(6.3-g)
and
3
g/i ,837
u-max = 0.7544%
.,...(6.3-14)
-3
. . . ..(6.3-15)
Equations
for
data.
(6,3-'il)
the approximata
The former
and (6.3-15)
determination
c2.n be re-written
provide
convenient
of CY2from
avenues
experimental
as:
. . . ..(6.3-16')
51
while
the latter
becomes:
c2=z0.4825{
The experimental
Gee [3],
Nyers,
Schauer
columns
I.
I.
y-&/x
Bradshawetal
Myers eta1
Stratfordetal
It
loss
0.03.
0.0296
3.45
0.0405
0.064
0.0237
3.6
0.0372
that
the C2 values
that
the wall
chosen.
and Golesworthy
may
entrainment;
ment velocity"
is
3bout
implies
3n entrainment
(2.5-7)
for
the free
due to
0.04
report
times
& = 9.94)
constant
mean,
a final
Stratford,
that
Jawar
measurements,
the "entrain-
~m3x/zE is
s2 of 0.03.
layer,
regard
but shall
before
to make direct
they
mixing
arithmetic
is that
[GO] attempted
(for
in ~&3x is
be considered
The first
with
z.
may
is not
of the ratesof
Since
friction
We shall
of G2 is
This
column.
as to entrainment.
over-estimated.
'
deduced in the
in th;;! first
so the raduction
facts
the jet.
or 0.0615
0.08
Two further
value
c2
0.0615
in the first
namely
3
Umax x
uc Cdc
3.45 or 2.8 0.0405
2.8
is
a value
data
0.0259
of momentum as well
adopt
two
0.07
negligible;
the values
by the first
0.0241
by the fact
of the latter
scatter.
0.065
entirely
3nd Strstford,
considerable
summarised
is noticeable
be explained
Bradshclw and
s2 ------mm
deduced from ezrimental
------mm
Author
Sigalla
[48],
[28j,
[601 exhibit
be roughly
Table
-w-v
of Sigaila
and Eustis
cy;f} -2 . . . . .(6.3-lj)
%;x
data
.-
about
in
$, this
Equation
tending
to
52,
infinity
and s having
0.0767
z.
and 0.0974,
can reasonably
0.03
for
C2 is
Bafors
that
both
further
than it
this
with
therefore
surfzcz
having
probable
will
analysis
is plane.
that
the effect
of curvature)
however,
6.4
this
we will
consider
wall
equals
is
for
film
adiabatic.
zero
an EG-function
(see
equation
these
rasults
(2.3-13));
arguments.
the following
. I
&ided.by
the
of section
2,5:-
. . . ..(6.3-18)
.
cooling.
juncture
for
(2,3-14)),
together
of thz fore-
implies
and that
with
we
enthalpy,
condition
of
to make a
In particulsr,
g'stands
The latter
(see equation
unity,
.Ultimately
of the implications
fact.
be -present,
than
--
for
this
will
baing
The
ndiabntic
~~~11 tcmzcraturz.
-------I_
I_--It is convenient
at th2 prtisent
equations
is
take
examination
is
Undoubtedly
as one of its
function,
rate
flows
------------
preliminary
going
Jewar and
to work with
I
Of course
of
to note
the entrainment
is rtisponsible
-zE>l:
20
important
when -F
z J is less
boundary-lzyc;r
flows.
the entrainment
foregoing
choice
be necessary
yG G (radius
for
is
sign,
In th;: meantime
form
it
over
field
reversed
it
Ed, thz
in conventional
i.e.
topic,
seems highly
albeit
with
since
confirmed.
the centrifugsl-force
.It
0.02932~;
-_mC
when the
convex
imply:
be identified
Bradshaw
Golesworthy
greater
woyld
leaving
the arithmetic
and the
that
I$
%.=h,+,
equation
(6.1-5),
imply:
1 zE:
hS - hG =- -s---u---------- d
1 - n
7-z
c! '8---i- I (1 - 0.2055~)
. . . . ..(6.4-?)
Now equation
(2.6-3)
a
m-m-
---I@
(
dHx
On integration
r?duccs
Rm
simply
to:
. . . ..(6.4-2)
II
we have:
I- I'
II
R = const
m
= (hC - hGj P uc Y&
the latter
through
term representing
the injection
(6.4,3),
for
(6.4-l)
slot.
and (6.1-3)
the dimensionless
- hs - hG
of course
=:
b-
flux
of equations
then
a useful
yields
relation
enthalpy:
11
--- -F -
--
+--g-
Rm
hC - hG
the enthalpy
Combination
adiabatic-wall
p uc yc
---I--
. . . ..(6.4-3)
-IL,---,--,
0.2055n)
+(I-
. . . ..(6.4-4)
from equations
hS -------
6,3,,namely
a quantity
assumed #-profile
to account
shown,
for
heat
which
expression
the fact
and matter
(equation
that,
are transferred
of spread
would be equal;
is very
to lie
between
zero
(6.4-5)
implies
that
usually
constant
lying
and unity.
the quantity
times
between
(z/x)',
have
more rapidly
If
fast
; were equal
with
indeed;
Consequently,
equation
cooling,is
of this
It
therefore
is
to
we expect
the value
than
p; = 0,
(h+-hG)/(hC-hG),
of film
the
in order
as many experiments
unity,
equal
into
(2.3-I))
flows.
of @ transfer
we have:
turbulent
the rate
= 0.03.
. ..(6.4-5)
momentum in free
the rates
the
s,
= --------- 3.14
1 - 0.251n
hC - hG
Now g is
1 = 9.94,
and (6.4~4),
(6.3-14)
hG
and insert
54,
satisfactory
to note
experimental
data
this
that
for
corresponds
which
to an n-value
this
We therefore
been sufficiently
of what n-value
We consider
which
is
(2.2-9).and
to zero.
Thus we hava:
is
this
gratifying
which
is
introducing
turbulent
expected.
a discuss-
E - +(I
flows,
in
may be described
with
(2.3-IO),
z-z-
for
appropriate.
and @-profiles
equations
for
the velocity
enough,
rigorous,
of magnitude
opportunity
3.6;
in equation
0.51
of 2, but it
is the order
use this
about
as a --determination
----
that
is
of about
data
report
b5]
the constant
The experimental
(6.4-5).
ion
by
Q and D placed
-%
z.,>(l
equal
. ..(6.4-6)
- cosx~)
and
g-p&
= (la,--@,>
It
arithmetic
for
cos -1
' Schlichting
dimensional
jet
show that
profile,
Hinze
b91
and Falkner
utions
being
p2]
reports
issuing
about
1.4,
The corresponding
which
z has the
of the half-widths"
(2/1;;)cos
measurements
into
-1
i (n-l)/r~]
by Reichardt
distributions
stagnant
profile
measurements
for.the
is
profile,
broader
cylinder
th c tompersture
the "ratio
of i; is
profilo
[34]
These
than
the velocity
about
held
a two-
1.42..
and Fage
k4]
and temperature
in good agrezmcnt
value
for
surroundings.
by Townsend
velocity
is -$;
when 7ci$
of the half-widths".being
once again
the velocity
for
(%+-@,)/2
the:raforz
and \ velocity
"ratio
reports
to
the stream;
than
is
the temperature
the
The "ratio
1)/e]
[41]
of the temperature
of
. . . ..(6.4-7)
hand is equal
r
u- nthe two profiles
equals
the value
maan of its
fl on the other
p -$-(l-cosTIq
distrib-
normal
to
is wider
of the half-widths",
with
0.63;
the data
WC shall
for
jets.
use this
55.
in subsequent
Fig.
obtain
work.
between
the mixing-layer
boundary
layars;
included.
It
rather
is
true
of course
is no reason
error
-I-
to suppose that
our purpose
namely
eable
heat
which
proposed
their
equations
(R&f+
e-----c---
with
I211
4
dRx
(L,., - $)
restricted
studied,
replace
numerical
are relevant
and (3.2-5)
The
latter
(2.6-l),
since
integrations
implications.
are
and the
is here
it
is not
of the equations,
Equation
(2.1-14)
2 = 0, iis:
(1 -
I21
d(lnw)
---dRx
RG
=I
with
theory,
which
(2.'3-14).
genersl
a.
is in conform-
therefors,we
(3.2-4)
Blternative
to consider
property
h.
-
(3.2-3j,
to its
but rather
the wall.
the pres&nt
is here
a fluid
section
enthalpy-
equations
preferred
the conscrvhd
attention
between
(3.2-21,
differential
any
of the
The fluid-dynamic
equations
of the
through
in application,
In the present
@ by the specific
However,
introduce
to show that
general
transftir
wall.
will
involving
modern knowledge,
to the process
is
the existence
of the transfer
is mainly
to btiing
ance with
are also
form has
equations
in addition
our
the @profile
its
to
--I_-
We now consider
differential
cited
easy integration.
in calculation
7* He%t transfer
7.1 E_guntions.
-m--
presume
of all
just
boundary;
"corneP
Since
data
that
at thz outer
great
components
unrealistic
there
which we thus
and (I-12)
expressible
as:
.-.(7.1-l)
56.
-O;589) -
I1 -12=&+z&-
p(&
. . (7
l,rss
+ +,
1
1
q-3
and
The quantity
1 = ln(2.5168
The equations
the heat
to
-py(puo)
facilitated
first
side
The writing
defined
cnthcllpy
and
(2.4-6)
and
(2.3,ILC),
of the latter
out of these
by introduction
is &,
. . . ..(7.1-4)
the specific
(2.3~'13))
are:
the right-hand
' (2.6-31,
RGzE/l)
governing
transfer
becomes:
(Z.&l?),
reducing
equations,is
by analogy
the Stanton
to zE as:
. . . ..(7.1-$)
number S, defined
?l;/(hG
S ~ --_)I_---The above equations
The
GE -----h:~ - hs
hG - hs
The second is
simply
then
as:
- hs>
. . . ..(7.1-6)
imply:
----'h
= (I - r,)-{;
h -h
S
G
SE
-I- -;-;-;-4p'-
- &i,
+ z&
=E --e-m
Gp,Z,(l
$}
+ 0.7945 ZE - 2zE
-7
. . (7.1-7)
1 >
11-s
- ; - 1 + 0.2055
*.
+0.4P/l)
, . .
(7.143)
and
d(lhRG)
-dR*
+ IhRG
evaluated
Jayatillaka
transfer
from
dRx
(h
g, which-measures
The-quantity
to heat
d(lnw)
-I---
exerted
the formula
[55],
namely:
G-hs)S
tht: extra
by the laminar
(7.1-9)
resistance
sub-layer,
recommended by Spalding
may be
and
57.
I? =
9.24
{ (dcro$
I]
{I
+ O~28sxp(-0.007w~cro)~
. . . . . (7.1-10)
where T0 is equal
to 0.9,
andcr
is the
laminsr
Prandtl
number.
7.2
The
isothermal
-u_-em------The situation
flat
@at".
covered
by the title
is
characterised
by:
d(ln
------
UC>
=r
=;
dRx
-- d.(lnd
dR X
dH X
these
consider
case in which
are both
to,unity;
is the
general
n slight
considered
'
the
numbers
to be able
relation.
to
approximation
= I (deynolds
is made so as
analogy)
equation
reduces
(7.1-B)
---S
The differential
be written
with
the discussion.
Case fir:
crt = r.
a--In the present
coefficient
is
Prandtl
here we expect
the "Reynolds-analogyl'
one;
First
and turbulent
derive
to east
of the equations
in two cas3s.
the laminar
equal
= 0
the implications
substitutions
.(7.2-1)
. . . .
II
d(hG - hs)
-----I--
We shall
P is equal
to unity.
to zero
Then
to:
= --Icl3
e..
to one half
to gB (N.B.
(7.1-I)
. .
(7.2-2)
the drag
2 = 3/2).
and (7.1-9)
may
as:
d
--_IdRx
. . . ..(7.2-3)
Substitution
equations
(7.2-3)
are equal.
there
by reason
and (7.2-4)
are identical
We conclude
is complete
enthalpy
shows that,
that
similarity
distributions.
agreement
with
equation
of
(7.2-21,
when 2. and
cE
i.e.
between
and the
the velocity
The equations
are therefore
that
in
exgectntions.
Case
(ii):
--
cctj
P#O;
uti+l;
rl#l
It
has
3 that -% and 1
\ already been shown in section
very slowly with distance,
R,x; we may expect the same
vary
to be true
treat
of
also.
the quantities
equations
r E
------
It
m-
is possible
in tarms
equations
(7.1-2)
be re-arranged
quantities.
Ib/(hG
*
= ----,--
to express
of -s,
to yield
Thereafter
that,
for
equal
to 2.342
cE,
follows
the flat
Division
and
. . . ..(7.2+)
that
the resulting
the Stanton
equation
of 2 via
3.3);
(3.2-2)
the equations
equation
can
of the
other
its
here be noted
holds
aid,
with
1. can be
as:
0.9368
of the present
S; in terms
side
in terms
It
(7.1-a).
plate,
to yield
of this
and p by means of
cE explicitly
(see section
in terms
be re-arr,ulged
alone.
in
may be moved
the right-hand
1 = 0.4~~+It
they
- hs>
1, ;,
and (7.1-7);
by way of equation
expressed
so that
to
(1 + 0.4I?/%)
equation
ated
permissible
of the differential
operators.
,.
of (7.1-B)
then yields:
introduction
co
is therefore
and (7.1-g),
(7.19)
to the left
It
. . . . . (7,2-6)
section
of 2, n_, ~b and r
can
59.
As a test
for
the prediction
isothermal
flat
R-x= 9.8X10>,
of the temperature
plats.
the tests
report
temperature
to the present
for
while
It
is evident
between
the significance
a broken
is
line
also
with
shown;
as the temperature
employing
profile
theory
the flat
in thl; form
In connecting
Chi
7.3
the wall
fluid
extreme
6.4
that
is
2 with
ed through
narrow
tht? table
exhibit
number which
in which
sink
on2
the flow
dominated.by
number versus
numbers of the
of Spalding
and
the effects
of
ari- familiar
makes
that
extreme
in thd region
in which
near
the fluid
contribution
nt,3-ligible
wz thus coasidcr
it,
case of
on an insulated
of strength
of a --local
the slot.
be considered,
the slot
downstream
considertid
was
through
distribution
heat
clnolysis
msda by means of
Przndtl
The curves
gx,
tumoerature
entirely
entering
will
+ 5.5)
workers.
In stiction
cooling,
P)*/$A]
of Stimton
various
Adiabatic-.wsll
~~~--m."i---L----uheat si:>k.
-7
film
appreciated,
would be predicted.
predictions
plat e with
to heat-trtinsfel
which
better
bti
that
analogy.
fluid.
Reynolds
is cxhlbited
In order
by a Couetto-flow
24 shows further
the present
can
(2.5111 {y(~
the line
is
the Reynolds
Fig.
3, for
ag recment
ordinate
this
agreement
of this
line,
satisfactory
the predictions
according
23 by a full
data points
very
[35]
is shown in Fig.
that
to
'Phc prediction
with
the experimental
are:
cy = 0.7, so as to conform
profiles.
recommended above,
be used
on a smooth
chosen
which Reynolds,
theory,
will
profile
The conditions
2 = 0.0018,
one of
the equations
wall
measured
injectto the
of a
in heat units
60.
per unit
will
time
again
width
and width
be regarded
w.
Fig.
terms
therefore
The stream
as uniform,
25 illustrates
Downstream
third
of plate.
as will
also
the stream
the situation.
of equation
velocity
(7.1-q)
may be integrated
both
are zero;
immediately
theeequation
with
the result:
IhRG = constant
= - i$
The enthalpy
obtained
of the fluid
from this
stitution
adjacent
equation
GE= 0 since
. . . ..(7.3-1)
to the wall
and (7.1-7),
the heat
flux
is then
with
is
the sub-
zero.
We have:
. . . ..(A+2)
Here R2/(Iq
R2 is more directly
calculable
in place
and is
of EG, since
sometimes
reported
by experimenters.
The expression
has a value
it,
in.the
which
(3.4-2),
In order
the distance
integration
of pressure
(3.2-7)
along
of
We can evaluate
E2.
gradient,
(7.3-2)
by the use of
and (7,2-6).
a relation
the wall
to relate
-hs and
GG
of the heat sink,
between
downstream
g2 to R_x. This
can be done by
suffices
for
drag
present
together
law for
purposes
with
the flat
dR2/dRx
Integration
side
somewhat with
to establish
is necessary
however
varies
absence
equations
it
on the right-hand
equations;
to make use of
the well-known
plate,
namely:
= s = 0.0296Rx-"'2
.(7.3-3)
yields:
R2
= 0: 037R,o"
. ..*.(7.3-4)
61.
The final
expression
for
the adiabatic-wall
enthalpy
is
therefore:
hG- hS
--mm
= .27.02~-O*~
X
iv&
I
. . . ..(7.3-5)
Finally
we make connexion
terminology,
which
noting
introduces
that
the "heat
fluid
of enthalpy
sink"
is
less
than
mainstream.
width
then
a slot
that
of the
by pC&(_hG-$)yC
in the film-cooling
the enthalpy
hG- hS =
--hG- hC
stream.
C relates
We find
that
ratio
since
finite
as a result
from upstream
momentum deficit
Theories
(or
excess)
various
being
values
Provided
authors
that
the
quantity
circumstances
for
example
pii;,
that
(?5O$);there
in which
in the wall
neither
jet
which
of the
fluid.
that
the
have
78, 46,
561 ,
the proportionality
(7.3-5)
in the square
good predictions
imply
for
Equation
discussion
layer
be
to (pC~CyC/,,)~~'8
given
constant;
usually
and because
which
is proportional
by several
will
of the injected
cooling
been presented
be the slot
of the boundary
of the slot,
of film
effectiveness
going
not ordinarily
there,
flows
of 2 will
bracket
the injected
are however
of section
does not
fluid
the theories
condition
theories.
give
fairly
many practical
is fulfilled,
6.4.
does not
as
62.
Since
we test
equation
(7.3-2)
the former,
using
and b2 reported.by
is more reliable
than
the measurements
(7.3-6),
of (h-%)/(%-l+)
relate
est values
so that
of YJ~
ary layers
on flat
about
of a slot
correspond,
it
g.,,
-I = 0,903, 2 = S,77; with
the quantity
in the square bracket
(7.3-2),
be quite
It
It
the best
the
appropriate
that
could
origin
correspond
from the
that
slot;
equation
fashion,
405 in excess
of those
values
which
that
shown
good.
correspond
neither
0.63
equation
of
of
may not
gxwere
that
their
40$ greater
with
of
values
than
immediately
conclude
interpreted
in this
Since
the
cx measured
of the effectiveness
measured*
about
ExEaination
x.
(7.3-4)
(7.3-6)
some doubt
reveals
we can therefore
would yield
quite
although
were about
if
is
be chosen.
measurements
(7.3-6),
the
of the n - values
however
to equation
is
is clear
of the distance
r~- = 0.63,
(7.3-2)
to check
with
sam-3 data,
(7.3-2)
as circles;
lines
would be acceptable,
would be possible
against
with
straight
in equation
was
as before,
in equation
The agreement
region
to 0.210.
prediction
of equation
. .
as a full straight
line.
these
n = 0.63
Fig.
inch
values:
bound-
were inade in
of l/l6
3002 to which
gX and 1
to equilibrium
The measurements
downstream
The value
about
appropriate
plates.
one foot
width.
disturbances
to the larg-
are likely
air
Those measure-
it
about
is not in-
630
tended
to provide
equations
tinuing
numerical
in the present
the comparison
In section
effectiveness
case,
it
before
extremes.
may be erected
Fig.
iation
at a velocity
stream.
when fluid
appreciably
slope
of -l/2,
6.4;
at 1argc-x Z/Q,
layer
character
sketched,
values
ho?zcver
equations
4 the slope
it
downstream
than
distance
th-rough
that
which
the
slot
of the main
has the
with
of section
the findings
wall-jet
the
behaviour
changing
var.i,ation
of -z-ji:, which
easier
to solve
dis-
boundary-
therefore
and (2.6-j)
are to be plotted
curves
this;
treads
i-t is necessary
( 2.1-12)
mentioning,
situations
Of course,
worth
nany practical
greater
The correspcnding
- 0.8.
cases therefore
is injected
in accordance
tkese
both
u-m.- the above tendencies.
versus
At moderate
appears
that
illustrating
of efiectiveness
than
may therefore'be
to exhibit
is to be expected
both
topic,
2'7 is a sketch
the film-cooling
equation.(7.+6)
to g -0.8 e
In the
second,
It
in con-
here,
velocity
in the
tZ.s
is no point
to 5 -I';
lrfas neglected;
leaving
there
proportional
the injection
fluid
of the differential
Was
represent
further
6.4 it
that
jected
p'aper,
was proportional
predicted
first
solutions
ever
to
is also
to understand.
the diKerentia1
numerically
ii'
This
accurately.
the two
will
not be
done here.
7.4 Summery
----A
Although,
in the foxgoing
has only
been considered
gradient
and mass-transfer
be clear
that
sections,
in flows
the differential
effects
heat
transfer
and auxiliary
it
should
equations
64.
are sufficiently
Although
it
programme
-al
flexible
will
be necessary
of tests
findings
empirical
to cover
to carry
out an extensive
of the predictions
9 probably
constants
coupled
of g, entrainacnt
clear
that
against
with
and functions
value
correct
experiment-
adjustment
(e.g.
function),
the predictions
qualitatively
the general~ca~e~also.
it
of the
-pro*file
should
of the theory
shapes,
by now be
are already
also
qui.te
good quantitatively.
8. giscussion
ofmlble
further
8.1. Plane
~m.ifo~~-properl
--I*Although
plane
flotrs
--- flows
been possible
it
will
exact
numerica
-ions
and to dispense
the best
As indicated
it
has not
All
require
the topics
further
to rely
study;
solely
on
of the differential
equat-
with
approCmations
such as the
hypothesis.
Eoreover,
the extensive
firmer
possible
to
theory.
be necessary
needs to bE examined
literature
ally 3 so that
indicate
will
integratioas
stationary-state
experimental
properties,
of the unified
in particular
of uniform
to do more than
and implications
which
developments
conclusions
entrainment
in
systematic-
certain
-Ithat modifications
can usefully
be made to the I&;PWhat are
relation
to account for pressure
gradient.
needed are a velocity
which
accord
exhibit
limit
With
section
profile
those
desirable
Although
to -t&e
[59]
seems quite
and corresponding
drag law
zero,
and which
,
to the zero-wall-stress
as -k.+ increases;
simultaneous
the development
it
a smooth -j;ransition
of Stratford
4,3,
account
it
will
be
of mass transfer.
of such modifications
will
65.
certainly
raise
new questions
to in section
2.6,
the pressure
-ulatiOn
now include
gradient?),
and appeal
Of the easier
a judicious
oxtcnsions
It
far
law in its
than
too crude
radius
of curvature
study;
quite
possible
properties
perties
to do justice
for
as well
If
they
gramme embodying
and other
of
quantitative
body forces
it
as on the local
such influences
strong
flows.
is
of change of local
can bc built
is
, is prob-
In addition,
into
the differential
some-
the effect
and requires
as ~11.
dG/dz$
md quantified,
one
though
to real
that
6.3),
buoyancy
themselves.
form,
of Tiead pa]
nm+depends on rates
(e.g.
of speo-
make this
present
may be large
probably
that
from
combination
should
that
(section
need to be accounted
5, referred
to the theory.
Should
some contribution
to experiment
The entrainment
-ably
(e.g.:
pro-
are detected
the computer
equations;
pro-
the frame-
enough to support
many such
elaborations.
There
by the performance
specially
eqcriments;
contrived
of hygothcses
concerning
In the latter
connexion
whether
light
existing
of the boundary
implications
will
theories
on how rnG is
the m+ function
for
of entrainment.
be interesting
energy
to examine
can throw
by the various
Thus,
of
of turbulent-s
affected
layer.
and analysis
the mechanism
it
the entrainment
one might
any
properties
explore
the
of Truckenbrodt's
equation
combined
with
@5]
Clauser's
recently
elaborated
by Mollor and
Cl4 observation,
kinematic
viscosity
Gibson k6] , that the effective
the outer
part
of the boundary
layer
is
equal
to a
in
66.
constant
(around
velocity
In-the
present
to situations
as occurs
0,0:16)
work,
in which
after
can certainly
(with
there),
simply
Whether
the equLations
general
family
will
upstream,
Such flows
zT -to take
--La
accurately
detailed
of velocity
flo?js
separation.
obvious
by allowing
require
of the stream
thickness.
no attention
be descri.bed
will
the product
bounSary-layer
set of equations
flows
times
study;
here
negative
values.
describe
reverse
probably
profiles
and
will
a more
need to be
invented.
The drag laws and all
paper
have related
siderable
about
mount
22
outer
of information
appears
(3
to smooth walls.
I?-$
that
combine this
It
is truly
should
information
certainly
equations;
to justify
this
effect,
whenever
component
term
along
to re-examine
convection
the present
themselves
the
it
on the
the
"mixing-
easy matter
the theory
adjective
"unified".
as an influence
has of course
(e.g.
It
on the
a more obvious
gravity)
in providing
to
general
must be done if
i.e.
the present
of interest
natural
It
both
influence
layer,
the ambitious
function.
available
influences
be a fairly
with
a con-
f41,9,31,30,22]:
already
has no direct
of the boundary
region.
layer"
roughness
in the present
Yowever,
is
relations
roughness
portion
-IAle examples
have a
an additional
will
therefore
be
from a heated
theory.
Several
as likely
to provide
wall
further
useful
in the light
problems
tests,
of
suggest
for
57.
example the
This
would
e.g.
a long
"natural-convection
consist
adiabatic
of a linear
horizontal
wall;
jet"
source
flame,
or cooled
concentration
wall
(Fig.28).
of hot gas,
from measurements
at the wall,
of the gas
the entrainroent
rates
could
be deduced.
As a last
mention
suggestion
the industrially
in which
pinges
the present
important
flow
an axi-symmetrical
on a surface
causing
under
heat
inclined
to it
to see firstly
the reported
can predict
ditions
not yet
three-dimensional
air
flows
swept-back
effects
layer
fore
tion
wings
introcluce
profile
which
con-
layers;
three-dimensional
as all
scrupulous
it
is very
It
plane.
that
the present
in which
always
comgre,3sors,
is truly
example,
boundarydifficult
is there-
theory
the fluid
moves in a different
is
in the
a 'lskewed-waket'
might
unavoidable
to flows
for
are nearly
in the boundary
to note
extensible
from that
under
In axial-flow
have discovered,
a flow
layer,
t:ie theory
out on plane
there
indeed,
of importance
That
practice
inwards
researchers
boundary
to see whether
is carried
effects.
on aircraft;
easily
fits
flows
radially
to contrive
theory
most research
in engineering
flows,
to examine
investigated,
8.2 Three-dimensional
--I_
---Although
the present
and secondly
the behaviour
thereby
eqerimental
is necessary
whether
data
im-
jet
at an angle,
Several
investigations
we
configurations
or two-dimensional
and theoretical
heading,
of these
direc-
68.
flows
was clearly
stated
by Coles
[G] ; however,
author
properties
It
hypothesis
is however
which
development.
to be described
entrainment
hypothesis
dependent
tude
on (say,
tions
(for
define
to)
along
rate
the absolute
gE.
and -the
two directions
is
magni-
Then the
momentum equa-
the wall)
suffice
to
the flow.
The hypothesis
on for
long.
layers
fications
will
tainly
just
lead
is
that
be the case,
with
along
the slot,
There
flows
in much detail
entrainment
already
this
is
which
prove
indeed
true,
in
as seems to
with
instructive
be made good.
three-dimensional
One that
near
component
can quickly
complexity.
hypothesis
as cer-
of entrainment
has a velocity
omission
is that
will
veri-
is no need to start
of great
should
it
no study
experimental
and these
descriptions
If
a stream
to three-dimensional
surely
be forthcoming;
to better
relevance
recognised,
such circumstances.
mixing
described
Once its
boundary
It
however
u,
-4.2 now has
the obvious
the entrainment
proportional
of the vector
mass-conservation
is that
the
of boundary-
the velocity
by two comgonents;
was
completes
computation
Of course
layer
the
an entrainment
and which
needed for
about
boundary
easy to invent
i s plausible
set of equations
as the
no hypothesis
of such altskewed=wakefl
provided.
layer
because
knows,
so far
no
a rotating
disc
to begin
by testing
against
the facts
I:117J
.
the
which have
been ascertained.
of property
theory
variations
be extended
to situa-
63.
tions
in which
through
the boundary
is easy;
which
the density
in part
it
shares
new questions
and other
layer?
In part
but
vary
the modification
possesses
old ones;
to which
propcrtiss
also
difficulties
it
throws
up
lc-;L?ow
the
answers.
The easy part
concorns
valid
there
(e.g.
for
differential
Morcover,
as is
which
is
used in this
will
increase
however,
rather
the time
the increasing
digital
computers
relate
trhich
appears
the
are a
assumption"
connexion
[set
e,g.
the 2's
581.
by numerformulae
relation
ultimately
and availability
this
disadvantage.
with
existing
or "law
is uncertainty
of the wall";
about
the viewoint
and Chi
the constant
[57]
previous
as is clear
.
of tho unified
for
of
theories
by Gpalding
advantageous;
these
they
from algebraic
shared
one manifestation
than
alleviates
The difficulties
properties.
certainly
to evaluate
means
assumptions)
"Reynolds-analogy
the necessity
to
possess
for.example,
satisfactory;
on the
proper-
by refcronce
of these
shown by l?ig023,
so often
the s's
to other
and profile
improvement
quadrature
In all
great
ical
ccan bo evalu-
the distributions
Admittedly
the latter
and composition)
equations
establishing
The f ormcr
can be related
information;
equations
therein.
difficulty.
p, which
cnthalpy
thermodynamic
(the
change;
essential
appears
ties
appearing
iCthout
ated without
the differential
Eowever,
theory
authors,
the whole
suppos-
70.
boundary
law,
layer
and wishing
Thus,
the theory
and Chi
to provide
a reliable
to unacceptable
of Van Driest
conclusions.
[66]
is
shown by Spalding
of drag;
laycr
profile
is described
by the law:
+
where p is related
tion.
Yet Fig.29,
from tho
profiles
the supersonic
flow
in a mannor,
valid
work
from reality
displays,velocity
plotted
would reduce
of
ttlis
II@31
reported
of air
which
along
if
to a single
(8.3-l)
straight
line
In extending
fied
theory,
however,
the assumptions
velocity-profile
data
region,
which
then be subjected
is precisely
-x+ region;
largely
in attonpting
to extend
region
the cxtcnt
of current
inportant
unifrom
sufficient
sections
suggests
of the velocity
in variable-property
property
ones;
experimental
303, by which
can
study.
nixing-layer
component
to the
drag law,
to cover
layer"
the
the
hypothesis
Pig.29
uni-
the l=aminar
entrainment
wall,
were
our existing
that
workers
so as to fit
contributes
to separate
it
outside
about
momentum thickness
However it
in the low
is;
the present
g can be devised
- 1)
an adiabatic
equation
region.
l'constantl'
poj
by various
sub-layer
mixing-layer
(8.3
assump-
assumption
the
sub-layer
505
*.0.
to u, by the Reynolds-Analogy
for
drag
profile
boundary
but there
studios
that
this
layers
have simply
for
the entrainment
ignor-
as in
not been
the procedure
constant
as
of
for
low-speed
flow
WCS deduced,
numbers
appreciably
matter,,
have free-mixing-layer
in excess
of large
seems certain
that
low-density
fluid
of entrainment
difference)
density
difference-
divided
opinion
of the present
will
not be achieved
experimental
out
It
fluid
(in
by
terms
by imposed velocity
are uniform;
the effect
but
it
quantitatively.
-l&it
t-he cxtehflows
a considerable
amount of
does
characteri,
formulated
carried
to varying-density
without
that
such as
so rapidly
is therefore
theory
study.
seem to offer
for
of high-density
to express
sion
seems
2.5,been
The autho@'s
Nor,
saction
which
of zero.
entrcinment
vclocit2-
out at Mach
measurements,
in
guidance
conditions
to ho carried
so far;
the theories
its
further
which
have been
development
therefore
be worthsrhile..
to
9. kcknowled~~emcnts
The author
viding
wishes
the processed
and Schubaucr
.are
preparing
themselves.
which
appear
in Pig-11.
the computo.tions
pro-
and Klcbanoff
assistance
on which
in proparing
M.F. Steele
the diagrams
the diagrams
7Cb
10. Nomenclature
Symbol
IYeaning
A constant
Typical
units
connected
velocity
with
the
Equation
of first
mention
(3.2
(6.3
7)
profile
Constant
in entrainment
law
(2.5
- 5)
- 5)
Constant
in entrainment
law
(3.3
- 4)
Constant
in entrainment
1CiW
(3.5
- 5)
Constant
in entrainment
law
(4.2
- 1)
Specific
hetct at constant
Integration
constant
(Btu/lb
degF)
>
pressure
Friction
factor
Constant
in approximate
profile
formula
Constant
Various
formula
(2.3
-10)
in s+- x+ relation
(2.2
- 3)
Constant
in 2+-y+
relation
(2.2
- 4)
parameter
(4.2
- 1)
(4*3
21
(3.3
2)
Shape factor
(2.1
- 6)
Head's
shape factor
(4.3
- 1)
Specific
enthalpy
(2.3
-13)
Intcgrel
quantities
Value
of E2 causing
shear
stress
A constant
velocity
with
zero wall
connected
with
the
profile
the velocity
(Stub b)
associated
and density
(2.1-1,2)
profiles
Integral
with
quLantity
the velocity,
associated
density
Mixing-length
and
Various
&profiles
E.
- 9)
Constmt
Pressure-gradient
-46
(2.2
in approximate
@-profile
&,L2
velocity-
conskant
(2.1
3)
(4*3 - 1)
73.
STymbol
Meaning
-c1
Abbreviation
Dimensionless
.-mG
for
units
a logarithm
rate
through
Negative
of dimensionless
the wall.
stream
- 6)
(2.1
-12)
(2.1
-12)
rate
from mainstream
Rate of entrainment
velocity
(2.2
of mass
transfer
of entrainment
Equation
of first
mention
T!cNpiCCl
from low-
in free
mixing
(2.5 - 6)
Rate of mass transfer
into
from wall
main stream
Constant
(2.1
(Ib/ft2h)
in the @-profile
(2.3 - 1)
formula
Dimensionless
additional
measure
Prandtl/Schmidt
to @-transfer
that
pressure
Newton's
the laminar
number differs
of the turbulent
Fluid
of the
resistance
that
times
constant
per unit
of stream
control
(2.3 - 6)
in
flux
from
fluid.
Heat extracted
Beat
width
towards
wall
volume in fluid
(lb/fth2)
(4.3-l)
(Btu/fth).
(7*3 -1)
through
adjacent
(Btu/ft2
Reynolds
layer
R2
in the boundary
-RmaxReynolds
velocity
(2.3 -13)
(2.1 - 7)
thickness
Reynolds
h)
thickness
Reynolds
layer
to wall
-RG
-13)
- 8)
(2.1
- 9)
rate
layer
in the boundary
(2.1
and
74.
Meaning
Symbol
the distance
Typical
units
of the location
of
-X
Peynolds
along
s
s
%
(2.1
- 10)
(2.1
- 11)
(7.1
- 6)
(2.1
- 14)
(4.3
- 1)
(5.3
-2)
(2.3
- 1)
(2.1
- 7)
(2.2
- 1)
(2.1
- 12)
WI
(2.1
- 11)
mJ
(2.1
- 4)
(2.2
- 2)
(2.1
- 1)
(2.2
- 1)
(5.3
- 6)
the wall
Xtanton
number
Dimensionless
Value
shear
of 2 which
the prescribed
stress
would
g,,
if
(zcf/2)
exist,
at
mass transfer
were absent
s*
Value of 2 which
the prescribed
i*Tould exist
A, if
at
mass transfer
were absent
t+
Dimensionless
measure
Couette-flow
u
u+
Velocity
analysis
Dimensionless
Width
-X
Distance
of velocity
analysis
along
wall
in main-
direction
Distance
normal
to the wall
IYon-dimensional
form of x appearing
in Couette-flow
analysis
Non-dimensional
velocity
Yarameter
(l-gE)
tude
ponent
value
( ft/h)
of stream
stream
zE,O
direction
measure
in Couette-flow
z
s+
of@ in
in main-stream
-W
Equation
of first
mention
in velocity
measures
of the
(=I&)
profile.
the relative
free-mixing-layer
of the velocity
of zE at the
magnicom-
profile
se-me I$ in the
75.
Keaning
Symbol
Typk31
u-ii t s
Value
of gz at the same 1
of other
by velocity
in free
coefficient
times
@5
3)
(2.3
- 3)
(f-Q
(2.1
- 4)
W)
(2.1
- 5)
(6.3
- 4)
la&nar)
(E diffusion
density,
condwtivitg
or
divided
at constant
he2t
by
pressure).
(+'ft
thickness
E'lomentuzn thickness
A smzll
2)
(g+)
plus
coefficient
Displacement
layer
exchange
si;ecific
(5.3
divided
of main stream
mixing
thermal
transfer
stream
ttTotal:'(i.e.turbulent
h)
quantity
Parawter
such that
measures
the relative
of
(l-&)
r~agrit-~de
the free-mixing-layer
ponent
of the
Viscosity
'lTotall'
com-
(la.U.na*)
turbulent
viscosity
Dimensionless
c7:1 - 5)
o-profile
of fluid
(i.e.
laminar)
h)
(2.1
- 7)
(lb/ft
h)
(2.3
- 2)
(2.1
- 1)
(2.1
- 1)
(2,3
- 4)
(2.3
- 4)
(2.3
plus
of fluid
distance
(lb/f-t
from
7JKxL @&(g)
Fluid
(lb/ft3)
density
Prandtl
or Schmidt
nuraber,
laainar
l?PcSalE1Erandtl
or Schmidt
number
Value
Equation
of first
mention
ofcrt
turbulent
valid
region
for
the fully
6)
76.
Symbol
121
Meaning
Shear stress
exerted
on the wall.,
times
Typical
units
Equation
of first
mention
by the fluid
tIIe
constant
in jlkwton's
A conserved
property
(lb/ft
h*)
(various)
(2.1
-15)
(2.1
- 3)
Subscript2
E
State
which
would
layer
component
exist
at the wall
of the boundary
layer
if
the free-mixing
existed
itself.
G
Main-strcF
state
State
of fluid
State
of transfsrred
mrw
adjacent
the wall.
substance.
profile
exhibits
a maximum.
'h
of its
maximum
by
77.
11.
References.
1
Cl
Black,
T.J.
boundary
and Sarnecki,
layer
with
A.J.,
suotion
"The turbulent
or injectionV1.
rid2
Bodenstein,
M.,
"Eine
Theorie
der Photochemischen
Reaktionsgeschwindigkeitenlt.
vol.
[I3
85, p. 329,
Bradshaw,
with
and without
Clauser,
verse
JUIC,
pressure
gradients".
5
Ll
Coles,
D.,
layers
J. Aero.
in ad-
Sci.,
vol.
See also
layer"
[4a]
in
llAdvahces- in
Press,
Kew York,
J.H.,
F.,
and louvers.
5, pp. 181-202,
boundary
(1954).
J. Fluid
Mech.,
vol.
lp
L.E.
and
(1956).
Skirvin,
S.C.,
"Film
cooling
Parts
J. Heat Transfer,
.
of the turbulent
vol.
laycrq'.
Burgraf,
(1961).
boundary
pp. 191-226,
Chin,
R.
"The problem
D.,
boundary
7
Cl
A.R.C.
Academic
Z.A.M.P.,
Coles,
stream!',
0956).
layer".
[I6
jets
(1954).
boundary
l!echanicsl!,
pp. l-51,
wall
$960,
ItTurbulent
Applied
"Turbulent
an external
F.H.,
"The turbulent
Chem.,
(1913).
4
Cl
2. Phys.
Hayes,
with
I and II!!.
vol.
83,
multiple
Trans.
pp. 281-285
slots
ASNE,
and 286-292,
78.
PI
Chin,
J.H.,
Silver,
Skirvin,
of a single
Dipprey,
D.F.
[I10
ious
Prandtl
fer,
vol.
cl11
A.E.
of general
13
Cl
boundary
Dorfmann,
LA.
heat
of rotating
loss
tubes
at var-
resistance
solidstr,
and Boyd,
V.M.
Engl.
and the
transl.
by
London,1 (1963).
Wotes
and velocity
heated
obstaclon9
cylindrical
of
layers,
A. and Falkner,
N. ltDeterminathe behaviour
Hydrodynamic
on experiments
in the wake of a
Proc.
Roy. SCE, A
M.D.
Hacker,
D.S.
W-iterferometric
Hama, F.X.
Univ.
Mech, 3
@at@,
investigation
of
a turbulent
mass addition",
flat
J. Fluid
1, p. 625, (1956).
the stability,of
l5
t1
for
on the temperature
vol.
14
Cl
and Tetervin,
turbulent
Fag9,
-R.H.,
Int.
relations
N. Kemmer, Oliver
Ll12
slot.
von Doenhoff,
tion
down-
(1958)
and
injection
and Sabersky,
entum transfer
LE.
temperature
tangential
9
Cl
Hayes,
Adiabatic-wall
A.H.
stream
S.C.,
!lTurbulent
boundary
Rep. Izstitute
of Tokyo,
(1947) --quoted
vol.
Sci.
layer
along
and Tech.,
by D, Ross (1953).
79.
1
C61
Hartnett,
J.B.,
"Velocity
distributions,
for
air
Birkebak,
injected
turbulent
boundary
Hatch,
J.E.
cal flow
tion
vol.
Trans.
S.S.
an adiabatic
Head, M.R.
1
Hinze,
CgJ
film
cooling
by tangential
injec-
fluid
propertiesI'.
November 1959.
in the turbulent
Aero..Res.
Sq+mbtir,
"Use of a theoreti-
wall
"Entrainment
into
A,S,M.E.
data for
of gases of different
slot
3, 1961.
83, no.
model to correlate
NASA TN D-130,
t-181
layer".
E.R.G.
distributions
a tangential
and L'apell,
or heating
Eckert,
temperature
through
J. Heat Transfar,
17
Cl
R.C.,
bound-
1958.
J.O.
tlTurbulencell
McGraw Hill,
New York,
1959.
\
20
Cl
HUgel,
H.E.
pressible
"Velocity
flow".
profiles
D.I.C.
in turbulent
Thesis,
Imperial
comCollege,
1963.
21
c1
Kutateladze,
boundary
22
L-1
t-231
S.S.
layers
transl.
by D.R.
Levich,
V.G.
English
transl.
Liepmann,
free
1947.
and Leont'ev,
in compressible
Spalding,
publ.
mixingtl.
Bngl.
London,
1964.
hydrodynamics".
by Prentice-Hall,
J.
ItTurbulent
gasesl'.
Arnold,
"Physicochemical
,
turbulent
A.&.
B.J.,
"Investigations
NACA Tech.
Note 12579
1962.
of
80.
24
r-1
Lin,
Oxford
25
Kl
CTurbulent
C.C.
Univ.
Ludwieg,
dber
Press,
H.,
London,
299, 1949,
shearing
stress
Vol.
in turbulent
1950,
Mellor,
and Gibson,
G.J.,
boundary
Dept.Aerospace
Reipp. 28%
17.,
Investigations
as,
NACA TM 1285,
bulent
Turbulenten
Archiv.
transl.
I~Untersuchungen
W.
die Wardschub-spannung,in
Ing.
transfer".
1959.
and Tillmann,
bungsschichten".
26
Cl
and heat
flows
boundary
of the wall
layers.
ltEquilibrium
D.M.
Princeton
layersft.
tur-
University,
November 1963.
27
L-3
Mickley,
H.S.
and Davis,
for
over
a flat
flow
TN 4017,
28
Cl
Myers,
G.E.,
plane
turbulent
Schauer,
wall
Part
jet.
"The _
R.9.
Jet
develop-
Univ,,
Dept.
boundary
to the study
Aust.
layerll.
Dept.
W.
"&rmetibergang
Rohren".
und Druckabfall
VDI Forschungsheft.
1.
Stanford
factor'!.
the turbulent
Nunner,
NACA
blowingll.
and Xustis,
"Some contributions
rauben
31
Cl
J.J.
Newman, B.G.
Supply
cl30
pl_ate with
1957.
ment
and friction
f
Mech. Eng. Tech.
cl29
'lMomentum transfer
R.S.
rough
pp. 321-334,
surfacesl'
(196%
J. Fluid
"Heat
455,
in
1956.
transfer
Mech. vol.
15,
of
87.
c-1 Pappas,
32
skin
friction
of the compressible
ary layer
on a cone with
J. Aero/Space
33
Cl
Papcll,
Sci.
S.S.
vestigation
wall
foreign
A.M.
of air-film
bulenzll.
(1960)
llExperimental
in-
to an adiabatic
discharging
slotrt.
1959.
August
H.
bound-
gas injectiontl.
cooling
by means of an axially
Reichardt,
turbulent
vol.
and Trout,
NASA TN D-9,
34
Cl
Weasurements of
"Gesetzmdssigkeit
VDI Forschungsheft
414,
der freien
Tur-
(1942),
2nd Ed.
1951.
35
Cl
Reynolds,
W.C.,
transfer
36
Cl
in the turbulent
layer.
I - constant
12-l-58
W.
Ricou,
F.P.
entrainment
37
L-1
Kays,
wall
and Spalding,
Mechanics,
Ross,
D. and Robertson,
alysis
of the turbulent
pressure
incompressible
boundary
temperature!'.
NASA Memo
vol.
gradient".
"Measurements
D.B.
by axisymmetrical
Fluid
"Heat
S.J.
turbulent
11, Part
of
jets",
J.
1, pp. 21-32,
1961.p
"A superposition
layer
boundary/in
an adverse
J.M.
J.
Appl.
Mech.,
vol.
an-
18,
c381 Rot-ta,
J.
-schichten
Forsch.
derturbulenten
Nr.
1. (1950),
of the turbulent
(1953).
boundary
@?cnztransl.
layer".
82.
39 .Rubcsin,
I:1
effect
fer
'IAn analytical
M.W.
of transpiration
cooling
and skin-friction
sible
turbulent
estimation
on the hcat-trans-
characteristics
boundary
of the
of a
compres-
NACA TN 3341,
layer".
(1954).
c.1
40-
Sabin,
G.14.
'IAn analytical
and experimental
of the plane
incompressible
turbulent
layer
with
arbitrary
gradient".
Report
[41 3
Stanford
Univ.,
JCD-9, October
Schlichting,
Ii.
McGraw, Hill,
c42 1 Schubauer,
tion
velocity
free
ratio
shear
and pressure
1963.
"Boundary
New York,
Layer
Theory",
4th Ed.
1960.
of separation
study
f'Investiga-
P.S.
of the turbulent
boundary
layeP,
r1
43
Schultz-Grunow,
et2 far
glatte
17, pp.
239-246,
tional
"1Teues Reibungswiderstandsges-
G.
Platten!'
Luftf
(1940),
resistance
ahkforschung,
transl.
law for
as;
vol;
"Wew fricNACA
smooth plate&
TM,986 (1941).
c441
&ban,
a turbulent
boundary
injection".
Trans.
fer,
c45.1
"Heat
R.A.
vol.
Transfer,
vol.
tangential
ASME, Series
and- Back,
profiles
and effectiveness
layer*with
Seban, R.A.
ture
transfer
in a wall
L.H.
for
fluid
C. J. I-Yea-t Tsans-
(1960)
!jVelocity
jet".
3, pp. 255-265,
Int.
0961).
':
46.
CJ
Seban, R.A.
ture
profiles
tangential
k
and Back,
injection".
R.A.
transfer
48
Cl
ity'!.
Trans.
vol.
84, no.
Sigalla,
134,
4
cgl
50
Spalding,
Spslding,
D.B.
and heat
layer
with
free-stream
data
Engineering,
tanveloc-
on turbulent
30, pp.
vol.
"Convective
wall
131-
mass transfer".
1963.
f'Thcory
turbulent
of the rate
pre-mixed
of spread
flames".
Butterworth's,
Seventh
London,
of
sym-
pp.
1959.
S-pal-ding,
D.B.
"A single
J. kppl.
pp. 455-458,
Spalding,
stream
boundary
~~Experimental
London,
the wall".
52
"Effectiveness
C. J. Heat Transfer,
I
3, pp. 235-244,
(1962).
D.B.
595-603,
cJ
(1962).
ASME, Series
posium on Combustion,
51
C, J.
(1958).
confined
cJ
with
ASME, Series
and variable
Aircraft
Arnold,
cI
L.H.
a turbulent
A.
jetsf'.
layers
and Back,
injection
and tempera-
boundary
Trans.
vol.
for
gential
llVeloeity
in turbulent
Heat Transfer,
c4 73 Saban,
L.H.
Sept.
D.B.
Mech. Trans.
in wall
elopments
in tleat
kSME,
York.
New
for
the law of
ASME, Series
E,
1361.
llReat
_
transfer
from a surface
tinuity
formula
with
to a turbulent
a step-wise
temperature!!.
Transfer"
discon-
International
Part
II,
Dev-
pp. 439-446.
\. 84.
53
11
Spalding,
heat
transfer
turbulent
Phys.,
54
Cl
c51
"Contribution
D.B.
from an isothermal
fluid
vol.
Spalding,
no.3,
Int.
J. Ileat
pp. 21-33,
across
56
CJ
boundary
and Jayatillaka,
C.L.V.
Stollery,
pressible
turbulent
Fluid
Spalding,
boundary
D.B.
Auslsnder,
'IThe calculation
of heat
the turbulent
.high
Mach numbers,
actionf';
with
'lSupersonic
and Radiative
Olse,
boundary
Transfer".
pp. 211-276,
in incomof existing
Mech. Eng.
18, 1964,
Jain,
1963.
S.W.
and without
PIech. vol.
E.H.,
College,
Jan.
and Chi,
with
Cole,
examination
Imperial
IC/HRJ/lO,
D.B.
ilate
to h,eat
Y?ilm cooling
flow:
data".
Spalding,
flat
1954,
on
sub-layer
J.L.,
S.J.
turbulent
Report
Dept.
layer'!.
To be published.
and Peerless,
experimental
'
IrA survey
of the laminar
D.B.,
of
VoE. 7, pp;-T4>'?61,
the resistance
pressible
58
t-1
1963.
and experimental~information
Spalding,
to a
J. %"ng.
of theoretical
V.K.
57
Cl
plate
mmh
a turbulent
of
to the theory
Nass Transfer;
D.B.
flat
In Russian.
"Contribution
D.B.
transfer
Spalding,
streamlt.
6,
heat
to the theory
on a smooth.
transfer".
pp. 114-143.
J.
..
layer
on a flat
and without
Flow,
Pergamon Press,
plate
at
chemical
Chemical
Editors
through
re-
Processes
V. Zakkay,
London,
D.B.
1964.
[I59
[I60 /.
Stratford,
B.S.
skin
friction
rise".
J.
l%n experimental
throughout
Fluid
Stratford,
B.S.
"The mixing
its
Thompson,
boundary
62
CJ
.
6
CJ
Jawar,
and Golesworthy,
with
ambient
air
B.G.J.
layers!
Univ.
G.T.
airstresm
CP No, 687.
l'Calculations
of turbulent
Two Volumes.
Cambridge
Townsend,
Press,
LA.
London,
Ph.D.
boundary
layers
J . ?luid
Xoch. vol.
with
negligible
8, 1960,
C.
Berechnung
bei
Tollmien,
p. 257.
"2in
ebener
Ing.
Layer
Theoryl'
Braunschweig.
Journal
Quadra turverfahren
vol.
Reibung-
symmetrischer
20, (1952),
number".
1949.
BUT
und turbulenten
'IThe turbulent
Prandtl
turbulent
Australian
und rotations
Arch.
Z.K.
variable
Boundary
stress%
pp. 143-155,
vol.
der l'aminaren
Van Driest,
with
wall
cylinder",
Research,
Truckenbrodt
Strbmung.
of turbulent
A. A. "The fully-developed
Townsend,
schicht
1960.
;tnlhe development
of Scientific
66
Cl
PP= 17 - 35.
of a cold
h.R.C.
wake of a circular
65.
tJ
of pressure
(1959)
Z.lil.
zero
review of existing
Thesis,
1963. Also, ItA critical
methods of calculating
the turbulent
boundary layer",
A.R.C. Report 25,109, August, 1964.
Thwaites,
B. (Ed.)
t'Incompressible
aerodynamics?
Oxford
63
Cl
region
with
Mech. vol.5
in a c~?ntrifugal"ficldlt.
61
I:1
flow
p. 211.
boundary
layer
In "50 Years
Ed. H. GUrtler
of
and W.
86.
[67 I. Wieghardt
A.A.F.
68
cl
llHot-air
It,
Transl.
de-icing!'.
"The normal
jet
on a flat
Soptembcr,
air
flow
impingement
ARC
surface".
'I 959.
!tInvestigations
Huang G.C.
for
of a circular
-c69 I
discharge
of he,at-transfer
efficients
for
through
ing normal
to a heat-transfer
round
co-
jets
impingASME
surface."
Schauer
J.J.
and Eustis
R;H.-
71
L-I
Schrader
tels
II:
72
University,
"Trocknung
feuchter
Oberflachen
StrbmungsvorgWge
Warmuluftstrahlen;
Batchelor
of plane
Stanford
jetsn.
Tech.
VDI - Forschungsheft
StoffUbertragung".
cI
"Heat
.G.IC.
effects
in fluids".
logical
Sot.
vol.
convection
Buri
A.
zdgerter
Morton
lent
"Eine
July
345.
1954,
Bercchnungsgrundlage
Grenzschicht
B.R.
Taylor
gravitational
234 (1956)
far
bei beschennigter
GrundstrE)munglt.
and instantaneous
vol
484,
1961.
pp.
* *
bulente
74
Cl
and
J. Roy. Meteoro-
Quarterly
t30. no.
mit-
and buoyancy
358.
73
r3,
develop-
characteristics
impinging
"The flow
Diss.
G.I..pnd
convection
sourcesll.
pp. l-23.
1931.
Turner
J.S.
"Turbu-
from maintained
Proc.
Roy. Sot.
A.,
339-
f37l.
cl75
Morton
B.R.
J. Fluid
76.
c3
Norton
vol.
77.
Cl
Rotta
I'lech. Vol.
l3.R.
5.
plumes in a moist
2.
Vorced
atmosphere?
pp. 127-144.
(1957)
plumes?
J, Fluid
Nech.
J.C.
pressible
"Turbulent
flowtv
Sciencestv.
Sterne
"Buoyant
L.H.G.
in
boundary
Vrogress
Ed. by Ferri.
layers
in incom-
in Aeronautical
A.,
Pergamon 'Press,
Kflchemann D. and
London,
1962.
Fig. 1.
Fig.
1. Illustration
of the
type of process which is
considered.
ooolant
Illuatratlon
of
and 8' profiles.
I
I
I, Mainstream
".
..
-.
Illustration
plane free turbulent
layer.
of
mixing
Fig. 2. Demonstration
of discrepancy
between theory and experiment
for
the local drag law of the wall jet.
25
2.0
7.5
1.0
lo
Fig.
15
5.
Shape-factor
Haa
[15]
I
20
*-J5
25
layer collected
(3.3-2).
30
by
15
\,
A
\
10
t
(u,-4
(++
5
--
0
-2.0
Fig.
6.
Comparison of velocity
profile
predicted
by present
theory
" boundary layer on a flat plate
for a "stationary-state
(full
curve) with experimental
data of Schultz-Grunow
[43]
(points).
IO3
2x1G2
Fig.
7.
IO4
-0
2
points
collected
by
the
1Latter
authors.
3x?o-3
2XlO-3
2flO-4
1.2
2.0
1.5
B
Fig.
8.
8 as a function
of B for various R2
&cording to the present theory.
The broken lines represent the formula
of Ludwfeg and Tillmann.[25]
2.5
25
20
ear Profi;Le
ation (4.1-4)
15
10
0 represent,c
experimertal
data of Clauser
1
---.
10
15
20
25
30
some data
of Clauser
35
Fig.
9.
A test
of the velocity
profile
against
[4].
2
I
0.006
0.003
Fig.
10.
-*2
Shape factor
vermm pressure-grdient
to the stationary-atate
theory.
parander
according
I
I
Ii
0.001
I
olaflo
0.002
0.004
1
0.005
I
0.006
OF2
Fig.
11.
Shape factor
versw
pressure gradient;
experimental
data.
1.0
0
l /
. P
.7
.6
05
.4
93
.2
.I
0
01
Fig.
12.
.8
.6
.7
.5
J
Comparison of%data of Stratford
with equation
(2.2-l),
modified
explained
in text.
.2
.3
./
.4
.g
[59]
as
1.0
3*5
3.0
2.5
H
2.c
I.5
1.c
0
Fig. 13.
0.001
0.002
I
0.003
0.004
0.00'~
OF2
Display of values of -F,/\z,2(1,
-I$}f
Separation
is expected
boundary layer.
reaches a crit+xl
value,
say 0.0827.
' 0.006
or quasi-stationary
when this quantity
Persh
Spence
3- Schuh
4- Haskell
i- z!;ienbrodt
l-
2-
71 Zaat
8- Doenhoff&Tetervin
_
9- Gruschwitz
1.0
IO
Fig.
0.001
13a.
.0.002
0.003
o.ooJ+
0.005
0.006
OF2
.
Shape factor
versus pressure-gradient
parameter,
for
equilibrium
boundary layers;
comparison with earlier
theories,
after Rotta [77].
Fig.
14.
H, versus
prediction
H; comparison of present
with data collected
by Head p83
ce with
=
-germe&le'surfac
0.08
0,06
Newmanl
e Schuba erkKleb
9
off
, -
-m G
0.02
Fig.
15.
rates predicted
by
collected
by Head FE?].
,
2XlC
-3
*2
Fig.
16.
Comparison
to the quaalflat
plate
with
data of Mickley
[27].
I.
I
1.8
107
1.6
H
1.5
I*4
1.3
Fig.
17.
Comparison of predictions
if H for the flat plate with mass
transfer
with the experimental
data of Mickley and Davis [2g.
1,
0,
0,
z-4d
0,
0,
0.001
Fig.
18.
c.002
0.003
0.004
o.oc5
0.006
o.co7
m
Variation
of gE with g deduced from the stationary-state
hypothesis,
with a -and D placed equal to zero.
Theycurve
depends on the en%ainm&t
hypothesis
and on the laws of
conservation
of mass and momentum, and can be regarded as
valid for very high Reynolds numbers.
0. 62
max
0.
002
0.4
0.6
0,8
r:
Fig,
19.
zJgmax versus
< according
to equations
6.1-l),
(6.1-G)
and (6.G7),
for
compared
with
data
of
I -9.94,
Bradshaw and Gee [ 31.
1.0
20
U
Gz
IO
P
/
/
Illll
lllll,
IIIII
5 x 10-3
c
I
+-
ma::
2x10-3-
2x&
59103
IO4
2x10'
P"maxyrnax~ /
Fig.
21.
0.8
and
1 -z
1-z
0.6
E
0.4
-----i00
I
I
lo
1.1
4
Fig.
22.
The "mixing-layer"
components of the
velocity
and 6 profiles,
according to
equations (6.4-6),
and (6.4-7) with
Data from Hinze u9].
E equal to 0.63.
8O
10
IO4
IO2
y+ (z RG 2)
Fig.
23.
Temperature profile
predict&d
by present theory (full
the stationary-state
boundary layer on an isothemal
data (trian
les) reported
compared with e erimental
?I for
Rx=0.378
x 10 g .
curve)
flat
for
plate,
by Reynolds,
10
-2
0.3
1.5
2.0
~~liizz--profileFig
25Illustr
hot &as
stream-
/////////////d////J
Insulated
section
- Thin
cooling
device
effectiveness
of film
cooling to be expected
when the injected
fluid adds appreciably
to the momentum flux
of the fluid in the.
boundary layer.
/
/
/
I,
/
/
'7
/
/
/
Wall /
temperature
Fig.
wall
d
/
I
Atmosphere
at rest
28.
jet.
The buoyant
0.2
0.2
Fig.
26.
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Film-cooling
effectiveness
related
to
momentum thickness;
comparison of
prediction
of equation
(7.3-2)
with
experimental
data of Seban and Back [46].
26
16
14
12
IC
1 1
10
Fig.
29.
Experimental velocity
profiles
collected by Hiigel[26l
for turbulent
boundary layers on adiabatic
impermeable
walls in the absence of a pressure gradient.
"Ma
signifies
Mach number.
A-l
A
unified
---------
heat transfer
w----------P--
transfer
in the turbulent
--------------------.-~-------
boundary
APPBMDIX:
Additional
notes
--II_------w---.---------L---,
Professor
Glauert
ed to him.
(the
which
use of an eesz-viscosity
------I--
with
out that
assumptiontt
The practice
to the universal
velocity
The viscosity
question,
1364)
the t'theoretical
should
not be attribut-
he really
recommended
distribution
appropriate
profile)
gives
better
agreement
that
of
numbers;
pG should
for
example,
out of this
reference
flow;
tne mainstream
is
this
practice
to be strictly
valid.
The simple
is to replace
PG by pref,
which
adopt
at --A
entry
is
for
a constant
jLref
that
first
If
PI.
appropriate
only
zero,
distribution
the "law
two-term
velocity
they
profiles
in present
equal
employed
linear
the whole
of the
of the wall"
to unity,
If
and
here
only
distribution
flow.
the
is then
the shear
stress
the velocity
form.
and Rotta
in which
notation,
some
the terminolog
has a sinusoidal
[37]
way
of equation
be written,
gE is
to a Couette
words,
side
the velocity
term is finite:
that
with
(2.1-12),
in question.
of Coles
for
the viscosity
to the region
can be associated
the "law
requires
equation
it
of 2 if
viscosity
one-might
is unwise;
in
of the
be independent
difficulty
main stream
at the section
/uc,
Reynolds
is
Jet
-
experiment.
is
layerandwall
(November
has pointed
line"
and mass
p8]
introduced
as (l-zE)c
wake laws.
Coles
; in other
[6] deduced
A-2
the form
experimental
velocity
ed profile
the function
differs
(2.2-l),
Equation
very
term is
the influence
in that
in excess
negative
(2.2-l),
several
-E=
z
for
layer
in an accelerating
are to be found
against
values
of wall
flow
with
as typical
while
layers
while
of boundary
la.yers
with
those
profiles
(for
to the wall.
It
is
the graphs
profile
po ssesses
The
1000.
of a boundary
for
0 <zE
with
that,
arise
z
-E
flow,
reverse
as appear
co-ordinate
also,
the
text,
the universality
for
the well-known
and so in Figs.
0.4 for
in
system
walls)
LZE= 1, the
logarithmic
form.
Throughout
<I
pressure
negative
smooth impermeable
clear
some
than unity
used for
from
including
adverse
exhibiting
A-1,
of the velocity
those
z,, greater
jets,
conventionally
the distance
in boundary
Profiles
The first
of unity;
A-2 represents
velocity
than
expressions
of zE,
Fig.
close
of having
or less
graphical
may be regarded
curve
are typical
term is
and (2.2-4).
E plotted
Fig.
flow),
downstream
The
we include
as capable
(jet-like
(2,2-3)
c , for
gradients.
ideas.
the wake-law
as an obvious
flow).
A-l
of equations
recommendation.
in that
regarded
:is
of unity
(separated
Figs.
zE
recommend-
in equation
well-established
generalised,
his
but
be regarded
of mass transfer;
generalised,
zero
from his
can thus
of already
flow
of numbers;
of < appearing
little
(2.2-l)
generalisation
values
he expressed
by means of a table
(1 - cosn<)/2,
Couette
profiles;
of many
the "mixing-length"
A-3
constant
k which
from which
appears
equations
in the differential
(2.2-3)
equation
and (2.2-4).may
be derived,
namely:shear
Thus 2.5 is
l/0.4,
0.625
(4~ 5.4),
is
It
= k 2P12((au/aY[)2
stress
1.6 is 4 x 0.4,
etc.
The choice:
paper
however
in a Compressible
g = 7.7.
The incorporation
reduce
19621,
referred
difficulty
of deciding
of this
data,
are reported
is very
great,
(e.g..
difficulty
of a comprehensive
04it
field
is
appreciably
and in accordance
mixing-length
largely
because
with
hypothesis,
of
the
with
increases
operation.
available;
the
Coles'
but he has
work without
making
to other
The
of conflicting
more accessible
in the text.
below.
be adopted
sifting
of his
and
should
immensely
the best
the conclusions
is accorded
and @
on small-scale
data)
of &
prediction
literature
and because
supplementary
work in this
what values
inadequate
data
the
k = 0.41,
new value
between
in the published
experimental
basic
with
recommends:
to in notes
constants
the prevalence
reported
has
[63, along
Coles
the disagreement
experiment
data
k = 0.4,
0.4),
Boundary
1:"The Turbulent
Project
Rand Report
Fluidl',
September
these
2.5+(4-x
-.
R-403-PR,
for
past
is
%.
In a later
would
in,the
recommended by'Coles
7.7 for
Layer
I.5625
the
workers.
treatment
than
the derivation
to write
from Prandtl's
equation
(2.2-3)
as:
m=O:
while
becomes:
")"
>
.....
(2.2-3a)
R-4
U
-m---
----+(It/pl)~
. . . ..(2.2-4a)
The negative
positive
sign
It
valid
sign
is
to be taken
the
when gE is positive.
is therefore
for
when zE is negative,
-%3
proper
for
0 only;
z =- [2.5s3(1+ln
to accept
zE<O
equation
we have,
as
instead:
E,)+1.~625m(1-+1nZ,)*]
+ (1 - ZE)(l
(2.2-5)
+
. . . ..(2.2-5a)
cosTGE;)/2
the definition
to read:
(2.1-15)
. . . ..(*.I-&)
Insertion
for
of <= 1 into
(2.2-5a)
yields
law valid
gE C 0, namely:
s3 =(-0.4zE/1)-
Equations
the following
(2.2-8),
forms,
0.625
(2.2-g)
valid
for
3.125ml)ln<
z= -(2.5$+
., -.
Z%
-Dlnc+
D s 2.5~4
= -
zg/l
then
take
- l.56*5m(ln4)2
+
. . ..(2.2-8a)
-&OS+/2
'
. . . ..(*.*+a)
+ 3.125ml
. . . ..(2.2-IOa)
+ 1.5625ml
I nowregard
of 2.
Ji
it
as preferable
This
1 '5
so that
. . . ..(2.2-6a)
~~~40:
zE + (I-zE)(l-cos~~)/2
= 2.5(s-m%)3
in place
ml
and (2.2-10)
+ z,+(+-Z,)(?
1'
the drag
the approximate
>
to employ
is defined
the quantity
by:
I ZE/DI
profile
+ (1 - z-E>
becomes:
. ..(2.2-qb)
A-5
Equation
system
(2.2-10)
then
ZEp0:
takes
the form:
+ 3.125ml
+ 1.5625ml
= 2.5(s
+ n(z,()'
For an impermeable
varies
but little
in practice;
value
I& by contrast,
sign
with
-c>
6
is
identical
1.
boundaries
which
between
7 and 12.
usually
a wider
with
range;
and it
It
arise
changes
z-,.
-.h
Equation
try
1'
turbulent
lies
covers
(2.3-l)
requires,
wall,
in the
its
. . . ..(2.2-lob)
than
for
its
ready
is supplied
now to disentangle
understanding,
in the text.
the strands
from
which
which
exists
I
it
is
woven.
(i)
between
the friction,
processes,
heat-transfer
suggests
that
the @-profile
conforms
law"
with
(2.2-l);
corresponding
expression
expression
"wall
and mass-transfer
suggestion,
should
at least
it
respectively
Equation
to
(2.3-1)
thus:
$3 - Zs =
(@,- gE)$<l
- coslg)
wake component
wallcomponent
. . . ..(2.3-la)
(ii)
it
equals
when
zE is
(@,-
zero;
eX) corresponds
of the velocity
the significance
section
y= 1.
magnitude
I-
To tackle
G.4 (pages
of n?
This
it
we notice
equals
to I-+;
($3G - @&
it is the
of the fl profile,
explained
just
What however
profile.
is
that
If
in the text
the equations
as
is
in
of
A-6
g-transfer
it
would be reasonable
it
is known that
more rapidly
hea%,and concentration
we may expect
the valocity
4.
(iii)
The first
can be written
in curly
into
The subscript
explained
bracket
then
processes)
from
T denotes
with
&II as a rule.
$3 stands
It
of t-his
the fluid
for
unfortunate
that
import,ance
it
necessitate
special
convenience
The definition
is
this
transfer
(iIt = 0) wall;
simply
equals
Just
the case
to
iacrifice
of
of generality,
when t+ is
boundary,
equal
given
where
of itI,
of page
earlier,
An equivalent
y = 1, the quantity
across
definition
13
have
is
that,
to the outer
{(@S - @,) ~'~t'/d
which
so !Z&-pl' Ll is the $3 increase
a Couette flow having the same
ed by the boundary
E, and
and could
to jZ$ygs;
exist
of subscript
at the foot
values
The most
which proves
interpretation;
so of Q?
would
the curly
unwisely.
(iv)
is
in
and ($S~@,,)i"
practical
ought
state,
of greatest
perhaps
the
phase.
to an impermeable
enthalpy
is rather
across
[4-g] .
from
of transfer
the l'transferred-substance't
the quantity
illustration
the
the neighbouring
elsewhere
of
(2.3-la)
Here,
that
it2
- 4"s.
cf equation
be noted
important
the form
can take
and by molecular
the fluid
should
between
the rate
in detail
It
to exist
these
however
mixing
of $3 (b,y convection
interface
turbulent
as
since
are transferred
differences
and $3 profiles;
a non-unity
quantity
n as unity;
processes,
at rate
to take
of momentum transfer,
layer.
An important
as arc possessconsequence,
made
A-7
manifest
by equation
(2.3-g),
whenever
(@S-@T)i"
is equal
(v)
term
of equation
equals
is
zero,
(2,3-la),
If
E, >I,
to unity,
the @ profile
is
ively
that
in equation
sufficient
by Fig.
adopt
with
in
the present
paper.
is no more than
a temporary
convenience,
at the earliest
opportunity.
objectionable
profile
by a polynomial
(vi)
the "friction
analysis
by
transfer",
fluid
The
and contains
of preliminary
work
seems
which
also
c3n be regarded
B. Squire
I.IYech.
Generalisation
general
tf,
temperaturetl
H.
qunlitat-
to be discarded
probable
is
that
a less
expressed
5.
The quantity
lsw expression,
is
can be devised.which
in
in
observations?
the purposes
It
arise
which
e2s.y integration,
for
flexibility
at
example.
a profile
for
we
2 is not equal
do not
adopted
permits
if
22 for
experimental
the formula
. . . ..(2.3-lb)
a discontinuity
such discontinuities
(2.3-l)
such as that
that,
must exhibit
Why therefore
answer is
from equation
in the mainstream,
follows
d.isplayed
in conflict
(ldG-gE)n
at points
@G. It
We know that
practice.
%-!Z$=
i.e.
fl equals
This
equals
f13
Z, = 1, that:
know that
y = 1.
to 8,
of the second
we can conclude
<= 1, (%s-%T)itl=O:
Now for
equal
to zero.
stated,
by putting
fis is
to consideration
(2.3-la).
as just
that
E.,
in the wall-
as a generalisation
introduced
("General
into
of
heat-transfer
discussion
on heat
A.S.K.E.,
is involved
property
appears
London,
1951, page 185).
.
because we are dealing with a
@, and allowing
mass transfer
to
exist.
(vii)
Figs.
equation
(a=&,
wall,
(2.3-l)
for
the specific
no mass transfer
the particular
enthalpy),
(2 = 0),
some implications
case of:
low velocities,
; = '0.63,
heat
of
transfer
a smooth
A-8
number taken
the turbulent
region.
to -%, defined
Qg -
with
&M&G
Figs.
The parameter
later
-
&s>
in the paper
allowance
which
ures
the Reynolds
from
(viii)
is
(section
In equations
the differences
modifications
value
of:
this
I-
represent
theory,
Further
appears
quantity).
It
is
turbulent
the quantity
the numerical
of the
quantities
that
it
to disregard
condition
satisfy
theoretical
Press,
1963.
would
be wiser
to describe
no experimental
order
N.I.T.
I nowthink
i.e.
both
g has been
and experimental,
jets",
"equilibrium"
which
t+,
quadrature.
the values
information,
may be found
defining
depart-
to regard
and (214-3)
by numerical
A-5 represents
Fig.
zero,
for
as influenced
by zE and 1';
II -I2 and l-r,,
taken as 7.7 and k as 0.4 in the computations.
0IO
the
08
as
Analogy.
(2.4-2)
0.589
the counterpart
7.1)
equations
when -E
z is negative:
it suffices
s and2 3 as being invariably
positive.
07
in
be compared
Oniy slight
and 0.9
k,
and A-2;
A-l
region
layers
the difference
and that
boundary
for
employed
layers
"Theory
to adopt
which
the term
dgE/dx_ equals
between
by Clauser.
have so far
of
this
Certainly
been studied
either
condition
with a precision
of the
e-v
of the difference
between the two conditions.
A-9
'Part of this section
is
0II
layers
on rough plates
also;
section
12
for
of smoothness
I now regard
indeed
is
only
in
that
the
is introduced.
adopted
in this
of the entrainment
E, as giving
results
which
uncertainties
in
the flat-plate
therefore
it
boundary
of E, is derived,
the procedure
the determination
are rather
section
constant
and of
too dependent
experimental
on the
data.
It
seems preferable
experimental
value
with
condition
concerned
data
for
implicitly
recommended by Coles
of such a study);
the entrainment
mined from
study
direct
the boundary
equation
layer.
estimates
of the rate
with
a simpler
is
best
of increase
study
C,, =0.1023
the entrainm#ent
would sup-port
const,ant
Such a direct
(3.3-5),
[I6 , as a consequence
of flow
shows that
considerably
rates;
over-
the experimental
relation
giving
-m G = 0.06
(I - zE>
deter,
lower
data
values,
such 3s:
zvu <I
013
to in note
(But
012
, actually
than E = 6,542,
a direct
and since
assumption,
the cosine
quite
conflict
it
which
appears
between
and Tillmann,
good
itself
fits
that
input
the velocity
there
exists
has been
profiles
a certain
based on velocity-profile
of Coles
urbikrary
the recommendations
experimental
less
1.
our only
wake law,
well,
referred
law is
. . . ..(3.3-5a)
for
and
[61.
through
velocity
data,
the reported
profiles
and processed
and drag,
the
in
A-10
more anomalies
one finds.
a further,
perhaps
which
identify
will
main question
systematic
fin::l,
is:
Are they
in velocity-profile
there
014
of reference
for
The
inaccuracies
not yet
or
accounted
Such a factor
referred
also
data.
for
might
to at the foot
exist*serious
for
be
of
disagreements
flows
without
gradients.
Some minor
sinc,e
experimental
effect
need for
of the anomalies.
expressions?
However,
an urgent
of the available
of a factor
the pressure-gradient
pressure
study
the sources
expressions
page 35.
There is
errors
the qualitative
the correctly
them on Fig.
conclusions
processed
the data
However,
11.
data,
Fig.
II
amended.
0I2
A still
more plausible
entrainment
rates
are lower
closer
experimental
causes
explanation
than
(3.3-5a)
of the pressure
boundary-layer
on the wall
Exact
influence
integrations
closely
with
The shape-factor
modifications
ality
explanati.ons.
is however
of the pressure
not
gradient
(by W. B. Nicoll);
the results
of the quasirstationary
remains
to the value
in the experiments
which
equations
anomaly
to
about
to zero
discourage
unexplained;
of E, and
Uncertainty
gradient
of the differential
those
predicts.
(3.3-5)
12
), gives
0
the predicted
and
This
separation.
the direct
16
the
(see note
to say that
equation
agreemen t between
values
is that
reasonable
the entrainment
the two-dimension-
of the pressure
further
theory.
attempts
gradient
to find
law
A-II
This
another
a suitable
respect
accord
with
is
with
in which
the present
two further
K. A. Smith
Turbulent
Boundary
theory,
that
Layer'l,A.I.A.A.
Journal,
page 1500.
The first
reports
concerning
the velocity
profile
together
with
with
blowing,
part
of the boundary
layer,
Zmax/PP
versus
for
shear
stress
report
that
the impermeable
it
for
is rather
Mickley/Smith
C >O.l,
these
+-II)*
f(
layer
<) is
(I
by algebraic
l-z
Since,
is
manipulation;
=i
in the region
of the order
not differ
exhibited
of Mickley
away from
...
law"
flat
for
the result
is:
This
equation
f( y)
_z has an average
(A16-I)
is significant,
by the data.
..(A16-2)
the equilibrium
plate.
with
by an amount which
data
comparable
of zE, equations
do not
. . . ..(A16-1)
+ +j}=f(r,
<>O.l,
the maximum
in the form:
* + (s+~z)~]
(s+m)
to
as:
in the region
on an impermeable
identical
= (s+m~)~f(~)
the "defect
of
Hence the
the velocity-profile
the outer
p~~(~+~~~*
can be expressed
plate
in the form
the authors
quantity,
the wall,
where again
layer;
1-z
[27]
that
Here z max is
say:
takes
2, 1964,
flat
a curve
can be expressed
and Davis
boundary
5 , gives
to
vol.
a porous
finding
Stevenson
2;+{k
close
Boundary
new experiments
when plotted
this
1, 1963,
"Turbulent
the conclusion
in the boundary
any values
vol.
Journal,
for
plate.
and
a Transpired
of T. N. Stevenson,
paper
do
-to make connexion
of H. S. Nickley
Law for
A.I.A.A.
that
data
and also
Transpirationf',
(yu)/(
to mention
the Cckley/Davis
Defect
and that
with
at which
publications;
f'Velocity
page 1685;
Layers
point
equation
(Al6-I)
. . . ..(~16-3)
value
and ,(Al6-3)
having
which
do
regard
A-12
Now the velocity
represented
1-i
profile
by equation
adopted
(2.2-g),
in the present
can be written
theory,
as:
~"-z~~l+~cm~~]
-i ---(s + m zE>
(~+mzE)~2.51nF;
[
. . . ..(s16-4)
The quantity
if
(I
A repetition
however
(l-
from
unity;
to zero, indeed
+ g $1 3 is a constant
g*>&
2.342
this
constant
from
impermeable
We may conclude
and those
satisfactory;
for
the value
portion
Stevenson's
The differences
order
as the scatter
the limits
since
for
to arrange
,must
be that
velocity
it
is
mixing
will
to note
are
4 as 2.7
to < =
are
(deduced
and
I);
2.2.
of the same
data.
question
has practical
possible,experimentaliy,
magnitude.
will
take
The answer
a shape appropri-
of large
However
that
the nrescnt
theory cannot
--a-----qucntitativelv,
because the equations
------L
in such a case.
p resumably
that
profile
layer
the process
------
have no solution
requirement
c:Lezrly
the velocity
important
extension;
is
the predictions
an A_-value of about
in the text?
it
gradients
describe
-me
is:
and Smith,
values
reilort
m
_ to have any desired
ate to 2 free
with
question
3.3.
of Mickley
in the experimental
indicated
significance
2.7,
the result
in section
law is extrapolated
between
with
of e( 5) gives
An interesting
17
and Smith
obtained
defect
version
data
of 1-z
of their
plate
the findings
Mickley
3.2,
yields
are in accordance
theory.
of Y, alone
when -E
z is not too far
which we derived the
is &, for
that
of Stevenson,
of the present
from
of section
that
value
of the analysis
a function
the first
the velocity
Clearly
step
profile
the theory
requires
must be to relax
the
obeys equation
(2.2-4).
'
A-13
The differences
18
and that
for
of the present
large
values
are always
(6.1-'I)
opinion,
that
description
in particular,
It
the cosine
form
Probably
family
into
and comprehensive
necessary
if
restores
k = 0.41
that
elaborate;
moreover,
ment rates
for
be more reasonable
30th
will
be reported
hypothesis
these
leads
agrees
fairly
such a
however
a-careful
da-ta is
theory'and
of
formula
referred
exercises
experiment
= 0.4 approx-
to over-estimate
than unity.
-1)
entrainIt
would
. . . ..(6.3-18a)
out and
The Clauser-hellor-Gibson
elsewhere.
to the entrainment
well
to
is unjustifiably
- rnG*i 0.03(+
in
of zZ.
to adopt:
ZE <I
This
as
(2.2-l)
incorporating
of g = 6.542,
instead
appears
zE;>l:
to be
by a polynomial
of experimental
prove
quo.
this
it
to wall-
the term
theory;
between
the status
I now think
in my
imately
20
the present
the functions
The use of
about
than
to the
would be functions
examination
worse.
will
replaced
above,
suited
contribution
expression;
of which
would be no difficulty
,019
is not well
it
maxima
certain,
to abandon equation
in the future,
the coefficients
observed
the wall
therefore
therefore
a --auniversal
velocity-profile
might be better
u - cosn%)/2
profile
nearer
is
profile
the velocity
to be significantly
implies.
profiles.
There
are consistently
of the free-turbulence
necessary,
5,
theory
of +;
found
equation
jet
between
law:
-mGe0.07(1with
experiment.
zE)
A-14
The Truckenbrodt
integral"
leads
seriously
with
recommendation
to an entrainment
the experimental
data
be that
Truckenbrodt's
this
new proposal
agrees
with
for
the entrainment
each has.an
function,
exists
has made it
is
that
to devise
function
input,
in the other
result
as the present
one,
as consisteqt
equation;
the dissipation
of the present
theory
are likely,
to dissipation
at least
being
good
theories.such
two functions.
The extension
to
which
D 42694/l/wt.61
values
appears simply
.'
is not a very
between
currently
disagrees
small
possible
data.
these
022
for
the dissipation-integral
of the exploration
with
recommendation
recognition
the. tldissipation
law which
of ZE'
one;
for
integral;
Future
a relation
developments
in my opinion,
to refer
as much as to entrainment.
of the theory
carried
out.
K4 lo/65
R & CL
to rough
walls
is
Fin.
A-l.
Graphical
representation
profiles;
of velocits
linear
distance
co-ordinate.
I
.
91
3
! +&f= 1000
k.0:
E = 7.7
valid
for a smooth
wallwith
zero mass
transfer
r
Fig.
Graphical
of velocity
----------- representation
logarithmic
distance
co-ordinate.
---
A-2.
40
profiles;
--
d=
-UG
yF
1000
30 _
kl.
0.4
E = 7.7
valid
for a smooth
wall with zero mass
transfer
3
20
3
5
Q
I
10
-5
N--E
-15
Ii
20
50
III1
/I
3
y@
/I
10'
(P y')
/
/ '
/
/
/'
Ill
10"
Pig.
representation--linear
distance
--
of enthalpy
co-ordinate.
R,s3 = 1000
3*c
n=O-63
m=O
c
(
u = 0.7 k=o.b
Ufi=0.9 E=6*542
= hA
hc- h, ,
2-c
Pig.
A-4.
Graphical
logarithmic
t+
representation
of enthalpy
distance
co-ordinate.
1
-/
T\
1 /-(h- h,Xqd \
Ordinate
RGs*=lOOO
n= O-63 u=O.7 k=O.4
= 5-5 + 2-y
I
Lny+
profiles;
Fig.
0.4
0.2
A-5.
of the
Note that
= S,/yG.
CR No. 825
0 Crown
copyright
1965
STATIONERY
OFFICE
To be purchased from
49 High Holborn, London w.c.1
4;!3 Oxford Street, London w.1
13~ Castle Street, Edinburgh 2
109 St. Mary Street, Cardiff
Brazennose Street, Manchester 2
50 Fairfax Street, Bristol 1
35 Sm.allbrook, Ringway, Birmingham 5
80 Chichester Street, Belfast 1
or through any bookseller
Printed in England
S.O.
Code No.
23-9016-I
C.P. No. 82