Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Author Note
Preliminary Conditions
Firstly, the flow is steady, that is, ∂/∂t = 0. Another aspect is that the
temperature is considered constant due to the thermally tranquil state of air. This trait
will be an essential concept in later section, considering it affects the kinematic viscosity
of air. The pressure of air is assumed as 760 mmHg (101325 Pa). Kinematic viscosity is
µ RT µ
defined as ν = ρ
= P
= 2.1849 × 10−5 m2 /sat 292.15 K. Another essential aspect
regarding the flow is that the flow is parallel past a flat plate. A couple of assumptions
should be made to avoid any conjectures. One of which is that while doing the
momentum calculations pressure is assumed to be constant. Furthermore, flow is
incompressible due to it being around 10 m/s which is way below the speed of sound at
19◦ C.
Theoretical Analysis
First of all, flow’s characteristic should be determined. The results will vary
whether the flow is laminar or turbulent. For example, for a turbulent flow the
u y 1/7
boundary layer’s velocity profile should be set to U
= δ(x)
= Y 1/7 for Y ≤ 1and
u = U for Y > 1. This formula is common among experimentations for plates; however,
for very narrow experiments this approximation fails to have a physical meaning since
∂u
∂y
goes to infinity as you get close to the point y = 0. The flow’s trait can be
Vx
determined based on the Reynolds number: Re = ν
. Reynolds number is calculated as
follows: (0.1301, 0.2451, 6.2335, 0.0623, 0.1174) × 106 . This shows that the flows are
all laminar because Reynolds number is lower than the threshold value that is 5 × 105 .
Z Z
−D = ρU (−U ) dA − ρu2 dA
COMPUTATIONAL LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER ANALYSIS 3
bis the width of a plate. Let’s rearrange the equation further to get a simpler result.
Zδ
D = ρb u(U − u) dy
0
Rδ
since U h = u dy. We can implement the momentum thickness, that is
0
R∞ u
Θ= U
(1 − u ) dy,
U
in this rearranged momentum equation. This results in this
0
following equation:
dΘ
τw = ρU 2 (1)
dx
dD
τ is the wall’s shear stress and defined as dx
= bτw . Equation 1 gives flexibility to
approximate the wall’s shear stress, however Equation 1 requires an approximated
velocity profile ın order to achieve satisfying outcomes, nevertheless a rough velocity
profile would be sufficient. Correlation between different concepts such as momentum
thickness, shear stress and velocity profile can be obtained by combining their
respective equations. Another way to obtain τw is to define a new function, i.e.,
u u
g(x) = U
for 0 ≤ Y ≤ 1and U
= 1for Y > 1along with a dimensionless parameter
y
Y = δ(x)
. Therefore, the momentum equation can be written as
Zδ Z1
2
D = ρb u(U − u) dy = ρbU δ(x) g(Y )[1 − g(Y )] dY = ρbU 2 C1 (2)
0 0
∂u µU dg µU
τw = µ = = C2 (3)
∂y y=0 δ(x) dY y=0 δ(x)
dg
where C1 is a dimensionless parameter that is constant that is C2 = dY Y =0
. The
following equation is obtained by combining Equations 2 and 3:
µC2
δ(x)dδ(x) = dx
ρU C1
We obtain the following shear stress equation by substituting Equation 4 into Equation
3:
√
C1 C2 3/2 ρµ
τw = µ (5)
2 x
Equations 4 and 5 are yet another approximated result, nonetheless approximated
velocity profile is not required. In spite of this, constants C1 and C2 are still obligated to
be found. Even though Equation 4 gives an accurate approximation for boundary layer
thickness, certain constant have to be dealt with and this particular portion would be
beyond the scope of this paper. Hence, the equations should be set aside and a detailed
velocity profile must be established by using a technique called as Prandtl/Blasius
Solution if desired.
In 1908, Paul Richard Heinrich Blasius, who is one of the first students of Ludwig
Prandtl, found an accurate approximation for a laminar flow past a flat plate that is
parallel to the same flow. Firstly, he introduced a self-similar variable, i.e.,
q
y U
η= g(x)
=y νx
for this problem because in reality, g(x) ∼ ( 2νx
U
)1/2 . Stream function of
a flow can be interpreted as either ∂ψ = u∂y or ∂ψ = −v∂x. If the self-similar variables
were to be implemented in a stream function, following equation would be found:
Zy Zη
ψ= u dy = U g(x)f 0 (η) dη = U g(x)f (η)
0 0
where u = U f 0 (η) and f (0) = 0. As a further matter, ∂u/∂y, ∂u/∂x and ∂ 2 u/∂y 2 can
be determined with ease along with speed parameters.
u = U f 0 (η) (6)
∂ψ
v=− = U (ηf 0 (η) − f (η))g(x) (7)
∂x
∂u ∂η yg(x)0 ηg(x)0
= U f 00 (η) = U f 00 (η) = U f 00
(η) (8)
∂x ∂x g(x)2 g(x)
00
∂u ∂η U f (η)
= U f 00 (η) = (9)
∂y ∂y g(x)
2 000
∂ u f (η)
2
=U (10)
∂y g(x)2
COMPUTATIONAL LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER ANALYSIS 5
∂u ∂v
+ =0 (11)
∂x ∂y
∂u ∂v ∂ 2u
u +v =ν 2 (12)
∂x ∂y ∂y
Boundary layer condition for Equation 13 would result in the following statements:
f (0) = f 0 (0) = 0 and f 0 (1) = ∞ while f 00 (0) = 0.4696 due to the numerical calculations
made by means of the code in Appendix A entitled "ODE Approximation". The
simplification process has a specific feature that is making g(x)g 0 (x) constant. g(x)g 0 (x)
ν
is assumed to be U
in order to obtain an ordinary differential equation. Integration of
g 2 (x)
g(x)g 0 (x) results in 2
= xν
U
+ d. d is set to zero to avoid any analytical disturbance
that may arise. One good outcome is that U f 00 x(η) becomes becomes undefined. This
leads to velocity changing from U∞ to zero after the leading edge, In this case the the
leading edge is at the the point x = 0. So, g(x) can be singled out from this point on.
New parameters we got from the latter calculations are as follows:
s
2xν
g(x) =
U
y
η=q
2xν/U
boundary layer thickness is 99%, therefore some of the equations have to be rearranged:
1/2
2xν 5x
δ(x) ≈ 3.5 ≈√
U Rex
Velocity profiles is obtainable via the formulas that are already established. Equation 6
and Equation 14 is going to be the foundation of Figure 2. Figure 2 is the visualization
of velocity profiles on a flat plate. Cyan rectangle in Figure 2 represents a flat plate.
s
xν
y = ηδ(x) = η (14)
U∞
gives the magnitude of velocity relative to the distance. Other than that, normal
velocity is also plotted by evaluating Equation 7 as Figure B1 in Appendix B,
nevertheless it is not entirely necessary for this paper to be explicit.
Experimentation
Experimentation Setup
A flat plate was placed on the flow bench to perform this experiment. A probe
close to the surface was positioned to locate velocities at points close to this plate
surface. One tube was connected to both ends of the pressure sensor to measure the
pressure difference. The voltage values measured with the help of the pressure
transducer powered by the power supply, which has an input voltage of 22-30 V and
output voltage of ±2.5 V, on the flow bench transfer the data to the connector board to
be processed and redirected to data acquisition card. The data transferred to the
computer is read with the help of the LabVIEW software. Velocity measurements were
recorded by increasing the distance of the probe to the surface under constant flow rate.
The experiment was repeated at 2 different plate height and 2 different flow rates.
Evaluation of Data
The code that is used to evaluate the experimental data is packed together with
the code that is used to evaluate theoretical analytical and numerical analysis which is
located in the appendix entitled "MATLAB Code for Various Numerical Calculations".
Figure 4 represents the experimental data characteristic over a flat plate.
Discussion
and the experiment that was conducted. The reasons for this are the calibration errors
of experimental setup and assumptions in Blasius Boundary Layer equation. If the
experiment were conducted under more flawless conditions such as better calibrated
setup, the theoretical results would be much closer to the experimental ones we
obtained.
Summary
Table 1
Comparison of Boundary Layer Thicknesses
Distance 8.2 m/s 15.4 m/s 8.2 m/s 15.4 m/s 8.2 m/s 15.4 m/s
Note. The speed values are free stream velocities that are provided to the system by an
air flow bench. The distance indicates the horizontal distance along a flat plate. The
resulting elements of the table, which are in centimeters, denotes the boundary layer
thicknesses of various combined factors.
COMPUTATIONAL LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER ANALYSIS 11
Table 2
Boundary Layer Experimentation Attributes
Note. Different measurement factors that are decided for this experiment can be
examined from the table. Velocity values are in m/s, distance values are in centimeters,
sampling times are in seconds and step sizes are in millimeters. The distance indicates
the horizontal distance along a flat plate. If desired, values between the safe zone can
be taken and this the experimentation would correspond similarly. Although, the
calculations and computation should be done according to the newly acquired
parameters.
12
COMPUTATIONAL LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER ANALYSIS
Figure 1 . Numerical approximation by means of 4th order Runge-Kutta method for Blasius’ Equation is visualized in this figure.
COMPUTATIONAL LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER ANALYSIS
Figure 2 . Velocity Profiles for different locations along with boundary layer thickness is visualized in the plot. Cyan rectangle
represents a flat plate.
13
14
COMPUTATIONAL LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER ANALYSIS
Figure 3 . Velocity Profiles for different locations along with boundary layer thickness is visualized in the plot. Cyan rectangle
represents a flat plate.
COMPUTATIONAL LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER ANALYSIS
Figure 4 . Experimental velocity values obtained from the data that are gathered by LabVIEW and worked on by means of MATLAB
programming.
15
16
COMPUTATIONAL LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER ANALYSIS
Figure 5 . Velocity profiles for different factors which are indicated in the legend section combined together for a laminar flow.
COMPUTATIONAL LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER ANALYSIS
Figure 6 . VVelocity profiles for different factors which are indicated in the legend section combined together for a turbulent flow.
17
COMPUTATIONAL LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER ANALYSIS 18
Appendix A
MATLAB Code for Various Numerical Calculations
1 clc;close all
3 nu = 18.08*10^−6/0.827506044905009;
4 fileID = fopen('C:\Users\hyper\OneDrive\Belgeler\MATLAB\evaluation.dat'
,'w');
5 %% ODE Approximation
9 eta = 0:0.01:30;
10 x = 0:0.01:30;
11 y0 = zeros(1,3001);
12 y1 = zeros(1,3001);
13 y2 = zeros(1,3001);
14 y2(1) = 0.4696;
15 for i = 1:(length(eta)−1)
23 end
28 ylabel('\eta');
29 grid on
32 figure;hold all
33 delta = 5.*sqrt(x.*nu./U_infty(1));
34 delta(2,:) = 5.*sqrt(x.*nu./U_infty(2));
\n');
37 for i = 1:2
38 for j = 1:i:i+1
vpa(round(delta(i, x==position(j)),3,'significant')),
position(j), vpa(round(U_infty(i),2,'significant')));
40 end
41 end
43 for i = 1:2
44 for j = 1:i:i+1
45 y = eta.*sqrt(2*position(j)*nu/U_infty(i));
COMPUTATIONAL LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER ANALYSIS 20
46 y = y(1:find(y>delta(i,find(x==position(j))+100),1));
47 plot(y1(1:size(y,2))+position(j), y)
48 end
49 end
minor
15.4', 'x = 11.4 for U_{\infty} = 8.2', 'x = 23.8 for U_{\infty}
= 8.2', 'x = 11.4 for U_{\infty} = 15.4', 'x = 25.1 for U_{\infty
} = 15.4');
54 k1 = gca;
55 k1.TickLabelInterpreter = 'latex';
56 S = sym(k1.XLim(1):1:k1.XLim(2));
57 S = sym(round(vpa(S/1))*1);
58 k1.XTick = double(S);
'$');
61 figure;hold all
62 delta = 0.37.*(nu./U_infty(1)).^(1/5).*x.^(4/5);
63 delta(2, :) = 0.37.*(nu./U_infty(2)).^(1/5).*x.^(4/5);
64 fprintf(fileID,'\r\n');
\r\n');
66 for i = 1:2
67 for j = 1:i:i+1
COMPUTATIONAL LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER ANALYSIS 21
vpa(round(delta(i, x==position(j)),3,'significant')),
position(j), vpa(round(U_infty(i),3,'significant')));
69 end
70 end
72 fclose(fileID);
74 for i = 1:2
75 for j = 1:i:i+1
76 y = y1.^7*0.37*(nu/U_infty(i)).^(1/5).*position(j).^(4/5);
77 plot(y1+position(j), y)
78 end
79 end
minor
15.4', 'x = 11.4 for U_{\infty} = 8.2', 'x = 23.8 for U_{\infty}
= 8.2', 'x = 11.4 for U_{\infty} = 15.4', 'x = 25.1 for U_{\infty
} = 15.4');
84 k1 = gca;
85 k1.TickLabelInterpreter = 'latex';
86 S = sym(k1.XLim(1):1:k1.XLim(2));
COMPUTATIONAL LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER ANALYSIS 22
87 S = sym(round(vpa(S/1))*1);
88 k1.XTick = double(S);
'$');
90 %% Normal Velocity
91 figure;hold all
92 for i = 1:2
93 v = sqrt(2*U_infty(i).*x.*nu/100).*(eta.*y1−y0);
94 for j = 1:i:i+1
95 y = eta*sqrt(position(j).*nu./U_infty(i)/2);
96 plot(v, y)
97 end
98 end
grid on
, 2, 0);
, 2, 0);
'', 2, 0);
'', 2, 0);
uzak_2(:,4)./U_infty(2), uzak_2(:,1)./100)
108 legend('x = 11.4 for U_{\infty} = 8.2', 'x = 23.8 for U_{\infty} =
8.2', 'x = 11.4 for U_{\infty} = 15.4', 'x = 25.1 for U_{\infty} =
15.4','Location','Best')
117 y = eta.*sqrt(2*position(j)*nu/U_infty(i));
118 plot(y1, y)
119 end
120 end
123 legend('x = 11.4 for U_{\infty} = 8.2', 'x = 23.8 for U_{\infty} =
8.2', 'x = 11.4 for U_{\infty} = 15.4', 'x = 25.1 for U_{\infty} =
15.4');
128 y = y1.^7*0.37*(nu/U_infty(i)).^(1/5).*position(j).^(4/5);
129 plot(y1, y)
130 end
131 end
COMPUTATIONAL LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER ANALYSIS 24
134 legend('x = 11.4 for U_{\infty} = 8.2', 'x = 23.8 for U_{\infty} =
8.2', 'x = 11.4 for U_{\infty} = 15.4', 'x = 25.1 for U_{\infty} =
15.4','Location','NorthWest');
COMPUTATIONAL LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER ANALYSIS 25
Appendix B
Normal Velocity
Figure B1 . Normal velocity values for different locations are stated in the given figure.