Velocity profiles in laminar boundary layers often are approximated by the equations
u y
Linear:
U
u y
Sinusoidal: sin
U 2
2
u y y
Parabolic: 2
U
Compare the shapes of these velocity profiles by plotting y/ (on the ordinate) versus u/U
(on the abscissa).
b) Find
Compare these three approximated velocity profiles by plotting.
2. System Diagram
It is not necessary for this particular problem.
3. Assumptions
Laminar boundary layer
4. Governing Equations
None. Just plot them.
5. Detailed Solution
There is no detailed discussion for this problem. Just plot and compare them.
Using MatLab the plots look like:
Ghosh - 550 Page 2 12/27/2017
0.7
0.6
y/
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
u/U
By common sense, it can be said that the linear profile is not very close approximation to the
actual shape of boundary layer velocity profile. The plot for the parabolic profile is the
closest approximation to the Blasius solution for velocity profile.
6. Critical Assessment
Note that the velocity profiles are only useful for 0<y<. Although the given equations
hold outside this range, the curves have no meaning for y> in boundary layer theory.
Velocity profiles in laminar boundary layers often are approximated by the equations
u y
Linear:
U
u y
Sinusoidal: sin
U 2
2
u y y
Parabolic: 2
U
8. System Diagram
Approximated velocity profiles in laminar boundary layer
1
Linear
0.9 Sinusoidal
Parabolic
0.8
0.7
0.6
y/
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
u/U
9. Assumptions
Steady state condition
Laminar boundary layer
y
Let , then dy = d because = (x).
Ghosh - 550 Page 4 12/27/2017
* (Displacement thickness)
1 d
1
0
1
1
2
2 0
1
2
1
2
cos
2 0
2
1
parabolic 1 2 dy
*
0
1 2 d
1
2
0
1
1
2 3
3 0
1
3
(Momentum thickness)
y y
linear
0
1 dy
1 d
1
0
1
2 d
0
1
1 1
2 3
2 3 0
1
6
parabolic 2 1 2 dy
0
1
2 2 1 2 2 d
0
1
4 4 3 5 2 2 d
0
1
1 5
5 4 3 2
5 3 0
2
15
Comparison
*/ /
Linear 1/2 = 50% of B.L. 1/6 = 16.7% of B.L.
Sinusoidal 1-2/ = 36.3% of B.L. -1/2+2/ = 13.7% of B.L.
Parabolic 1/3 = 33.3% of B.L. 2/15 = 13.3% of B.L.
Ghosh - 550 Page 6 12/27/2017
Air flows in the entrance region of a square duct, as shown. The velocity is uniform, V1 = 30
m/s, and the duct is 80 mm square. At a section 0.3 m downstream from the entrance, the
displacement thickness, *, on each wall measures 1.0 mm. Determine pressure change
between sections and .
V1
80 mm
80 mm
*2 = 1.0 mm
1. Statement of the Problem
a) Given
Working fluid is air which has air = 1.23 kg/m3 at T = 15C.
Uniform flow at the entrance, V1 = 30 m/s.
Duct is H = 80 mm square.
Displacement thickness, *2 = 1.0 mm, on each wall at a section L = 0.3 m
downstream from the entrance.
b) Find
Pressure change between sections and .
2. System Diagram
L = 0.3 m
V1
3. H = 80 mm
Assumptions
H = 80 mm
*2 = 1.0 mm
Ghosh - 550 Page 7 12/27/2017
4. Governing Equations
0
t
CV
dV
V dA … Integral version of mass conservation
CS
Incompressible fluid flow problem, the equation above 0 V dA CS
5. Detailed Solution
Use the displacement-thickness concept to find the effective flow area for the freestream flow
outside the thin wall boundary layers. Replace the actual boundary-layer velocity profiles
with uniform velocity profiles as sketched in the following figures.
V V
H - 2 *
*
H - 2 *
(a) Actual velocity profile (b) Hypothetical velocity profile (c) Cross section of duct
Apply the continuity and Bernoulli equations to freestream flow outside the boundary-layer
displacement thickness, where viscous effects are negligible.
V22 V12
1
p1 p 2
2
From the continuity equation, we have
A1
0 V1 A1 V2 A2 V2 V1
A2
Thus,
H 2
2
1 2
p1 p 2 V1 1
2 H 2 * 2
6. Critical Assessment
To solve this problem, it is critical to understand the meaning and physical
interpretation of displacement thickness concept.
2. System Diagram
U
y
u y
x, u
U
3. Assumptions
Steady state condition
Incompressible fluid flow
4. Governing Equations
Momentum integral equation
w
d
dx
U 2 *U
dU
dx
where
u
* 1 dy … displacement thickness
0
U
u u
1 dy … momentum thickness
0 U U
5. Detailed Solution
For the special case of flow over a flat plate, U = constant. From Bernoulli's equation, we
see that for this case, p = constant, and thus dp/dx = 0.
d d u u
w U 2
dx
U 2 1 dy
dx U U
0
u y
Define y dy d x
U
Ghosh - 550 Page 10 12/27/2017
d u u
w U 2
dx 0 U
1 dy
U
d 1
1 d
dx 0
U 2
d 1
U 2
dx 0
2 d
1
d 1 2 1 3
U 2 2 3
dx 0
d 1 1
U 2 0 0
dx 2 3
1 d
w U 2
6 dx
u
On the other hand, the shear stress can be calculated by w
y .
y 0
u y U
And u y , thus
U
U
w y
y y 0
U
y
y y 0
U
1
y 0
U
w
Comparing (equating) this shear stress equation with the previous shear stress expression,
U 1 d
W U 2
6 dx
d 6 1
dx U
6
d dx
U
6
d U dx
1 2 6
x const
2 U
When x = 0, = 0 const = 0.
12 12 x 2
2 x
U U x
Ghosh - 550 Page 11 12/27/2017
12
x 0
Ux
12 12 3.46
x Ux Re x Re x
w
Cf
Skin friction coefficient is defined as 1 .
U 2
2
Using the result obtained above,
1 d
U 2
Cf 6 dx
1
U 2
2
1 d
3 dx
1 d 12
x
3 dx U
1 12 1 1
3 U 2 x
1 12
6 Ux
1 12
6 Ux
12 1 0.577
C f
6 Re x Re x
6. Critical Assessment
This problem dealt with linear velocity profile as an approximate solution. The results
obtained are rough. However the exercise illustrates the use of the momentum integral
method. Practice this method with other types of approximated velocity profile, such as
parabolic, sinusoidal, … etc.
Water at 15 C flows over a flat plate at a speed of 1 m/s. The plate is 0.4 m long and 1 m
wide. The boundary layer on each surface of the plate is laminar. Assume that the velocity
profile may be approximated as linear. Determine the drag force on the plate.
2. System Diagram
U = 1 m/s
L = 0.4 m
3. Assumptions
Steady state condition
Incompressible fluid flow
Laminar boundary layer
4. Governing Equations
w
Cf
Skin friction coefficient definition: 1
U 2
2
Ux
Reynolds number definition for a flat plate: Re x
5. Detailed Solution
u y
We know that for a linear velocity profile ,
U
0.577
Cf
Re x
0.577 w 1 0.577
Cf U 2
Re x 1 2 w
U 2 Re x
2
1 0.577
w U 2
2 Ux
0.577 1 L 1
2
U 2 w
x
0
x
dx
L
0.577 1 1
U 2 w 2 x 2
2 x 0
0.577 1
FD U 2 w 2 L
2 x
Plug in values into this expression obtained above for FD, FD 0.3894 N.
For both sides of the plate FD ,Total 2 FD 0.779 N.
6. Critical Assessment
Problem says, "the boundary layer on each surface of the plate is laminar." Let us
double check that this is true.
UL
Re L 592.05 << 500,000 = Recr Obviously it is a laminar flow.
(Note: This problem could be solved by first obtaining the Overall Skin Friction
Coefficient, C f . In that case, the calculation will proceed by obtaining
1
C f C f ( x)dx , where the integration limits will be set at x = 0 and x = L.
L
1
Then C f w U .C f FD 2 w . Aw , where, Aw (=W.L) indicates the wet
2
2
area on each face of the plate.)
Ghosh - 550 Page 14 12/27/2017
2. System Diagram
D
Water line
3. Assumptions
Model a flat-bottomed barge as a flat plate
Steady state condition
Incompressible fluid flow
Neglect separation
4. Governing Equations
Ghosh - 550 Page 15 12/27/2017
FD
CD
Drag Coefficient Definition: 1
V 2 A
2
5. Detailed Solution
xcr
5 10 5 10 1.14 10 N s / m 0.25678m << 25 m
5 5 3 2
V 999kg / m 2.222m / s
3
This xcr shows that the effect of laminar flow is negligible. It can be said that the flow is
turbulent from the leading edge.
6. Critical Assessment
Drag coefficient must be chosen depending upon the value of Reynolds number for a
particular flow condition. Some of CD expressions are derived by analytical calculation,
and others are empirical formulas.
Ghosh - 550 Page 16 12/27/2017
Two hypothetical boundary-layer velocity profiles are shown. Obtain an expression for the
momentum flux of each profile. If the two profiles were subjected to the same pressure
gradient conditions, which would be more likely to separate first? Why?
U U
2
u y y
2
u U
2. System Diagram
U U
2
u y y
u y 2
u U
U
3. Assumptions
(a) (b)
Steady state condition
Incompressible fluid flow
4. Governing Equations
Definition of Momentum Flux (mf)
Ghosh - 550 Page 17 12/27/2017
d mf V V d A
Ghosh - 550 Page 18 12/27/2017
5. Detailed Solution
Since the flow is 1 - D (positive x direction) and dA = w dy, the momentum equation can be
written as
d mf u u dA u u w dy
mf 0 u u w dy 0 u u w dy
The integrand is essentially zero for y .
Linear Velocity Profile
u y U
u y
U
U U
mf linear y y w dy
0
U2
w y 2 dy
2 0
U 2 1 3
w y
2 3 0
U 2 w
Finally, mf linear .
3
y u 1
Let . Then 2 2 and d dy x .
U
Now,
mf parabolic u u w dy
0
1
u u w d
0
1
w u 2 d
0
1
w U 2 2
0
2
d
1
w U 2 4 2 4 3 4 d
0
Ghosh - 550 Page 19 12/27/2017
1
4 1
w U 2 3 4 5
3 5 0
8 U 2 w
Finally, mf parabolic .
15
As shown in this figure below, the momentum of the fluid near the surface is greater for the
parabolic velocity profile.
0.8 0.8
Linear
0.6 Linear 0.6
y/
y/
0 0
0 0.5 1 0 0.5 1
u/U 2
(u/U)
U w 2
8 U 2 w
Our previous calculation also shows mf linear < mf parabolic .
3 15
Consequently, the parabolic velocity profile is better able to resist separation in the same
pressure gradient condition.
6. Critical Assessment
Review and understand how the flow separation occurs. Flow separation occurs only
when there exists an adverse pressure gradient.
A small sphere (D = 6 mm) is observed to fall through caster oil at a terminal speed of 60
mm/s. The temperature is 20 C. Compute the drag coefficient for the sphere. Determine the
density of the sphere. If dropped in water, would the sphere fall slower or faster? Why?
Ghosh - 550 Page 20 12/27/2017
2. System Diagram
Vt
3. Assumptions
Steady state condition
Incompressible fluid flow
4. Governing Equations
FD
CD
Drag Coefficient Definition: 1
V 2 A
2
dP
Newton's Second Law:
dt
F , where P is momentum.
When the mass is constant, ma F 1 - D in y direction ma y Fy
VD
Reynolds Number for Sphere: Re D
Ghosh - 550 Page 21 12/27/2017
5. Detailed Solution
Drag Coefficient
First of all, calculate Reynolds number:
oilVt D S .G.oil water Vt D 0.969 1000kg / m 3 0.06m / s 0.006m
Re D
0.9 N s / m 2
ReD = 0.3876 < 1 There is no flow separation from a sphere. The wake is laminar and the
drag is predominantly friction drag.
Stokes has shown analytically, for very low Reynolds number flows where inertia forces may
be neglected, that drag force on a sphere of diameter D, moving speed V, through a fluid of
viscosity , is given by
FD 3VD
The drag coefficient, CD, is then
FD 3VD 24 24
CD
1 1 VD Re D
V 2 A V 2 D 2
2 2 4
2
(Note: For sphere, the area, A, is just a cross-sectional area, which is D .)
4
Thus,
24 24
CD 61.92
Re D 0.3876
FD 3 oilVt D
y FB Woil oilVs g
displaced
4 D 3
3 oil Vt D S .G.oil water g
3 2
s
4 D 3
g
3 2
If dropped in water …
Because w = 1 10-3 Ns/m2 << oil = 0.9 Ns/m2, the author guesses the sphere drops faster
in water than in caster oil.
FD = 3VD cannot be used because the equation works only for very low Reynolds
number which we don't know whether this is appropriate or not any more for this case.
Now, guess a value of CD from Figure 9.11 (Drag coefficient of a smooth sphere as a function
of Reynolds number) and calculate VtW. Then calculate ReD and verify the chosen CD was
appropriate or not.
1
Guess CD = 0.4 FD wVtW2 A C D
2
1 2
FD wVtW A C D
2
y
FB Wwater wVs g
displaced
W
4 D 3
s w g
s w Vs g 3 2
VtW
1 1 2
w AC D w D CD
2 2 4
wVtW D
With this new terminal speed, Reynolds number is Re D 4383 .
w
Figure 9.11 says when CD = 0.4, ReD 4 103, which is about right for this case. This shows
the new terminal speed is a valid number.
VtW = 0.732 m/s > Vt = 0.06 m/s The sphere drops faster in water than in caster oil.
6. Critical Assessment
Drag coefficient depends upon the value of Reynolds number. Be careful with choosing a
right CD depending on a particular flow condition.