TURBULENT VELOCITY PROFILES FOR S M O O T H

AND R O U G H O P E N CHANNEL F L O W
By M. Salih Kirkgoz 1
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ABSTRACT: Velocity measurements, using a laser-doppler anemometer, are car-

ried out in a fully developed, rectangular, subcritical open channel flow on smooth
and rough beds. The average roughness heights of the "rough" surfaces, used in
the experiments, are 1 mm, 4 mm, 8 mm, and 12 mm. A model is presented for
determining the reference level of the velocity distribution on "rough" surfaces.
The shear velocities are determined from velocity profiles measured close to the
bed. The calculated shear velocities show an increasing tendency as the wall rough-
ness increases. In the fully turbulent inner region on a "smooth" wall, the coef-
ficients in the logarithmic law-of-the-wall distribution take values of 2.44 and 5.5;
the former corresponds to 0.41 for the von Karman constant. The velocity-defect
expression of Coles has a profile parameter of 0.1, rather than 0.55. For "rough"
channels, the representation of the overall data in terms of law-of-the-wall distri-
bution seems reasonable; however, the velocity-defect distribution is not satisfac-
tory.

INTRODUCTION

In the two-dimensional analysis of fluid flow, the mean velocity distri-

butions in the plane perpendicular to the solid boundary are of great interest
to engineers, particularly in determining the surface resistance to flow, which
has practical consequences, such as in the estimation of sediment transport
rates in open channels. Because of the practical importance of the problem,
a number of analytical (Sill 1982; Vedula and Achanta 1985; Willis 1985)
and experimental (Bayazit 1976; Kamphuis 1974; Nezu and Rodi 1986; Sarma
et al. 1983; Steffler et al. 1985; Zippe and Graf 1983) investigations in re-
cent years have sought to determine the vertical distributions of velocities
for turbulent shear layers on both "smooth" and "rough" surfaces. In some
of the experiments, highly sophisticated velocity-measuring devices have been
employed, namely, the hot-film anemometer (Zippe and Graf 1983) and the
laser-doppler anemometer (Nezu and Rodi 1986). The laser-doppler tech-
nique, which permits measurements to be taken without disturbing the flow,
is especially suited to the measurements of the kinematic properties of the
near-wall boundary flow. The results of these recent measurements do not
seem to differ much from those obtained earlier by Nikuradse (1932, 1933).
However, the contribution made by Coles (1956) to predict the mean ve-
locity distribution over almost 95% of the boundary layer thickness is im-
portant.
In the present study, mean velocity measurements, using a laser-doppler
anemometer, are taken in the fully developed turbulent shear layers of sub-
critical open channel flows on both "smooth" and "rough" surfaces. The
mean-velocity measurements are extended well into the viscous sublayer,
and special attention is given to the determination of the shear velocities that
'Assoc. Prof, of Hydr., Civ. Engrg. Dept, Cukurova Univ., Adana, Turkey.
Note. Discussion open until April 1, 1990. To extend the closing date one month,
a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Journals. The manuscript
for this paper was submitted for review and possible publication on September 6,
1988. This paper is part of the Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, Vol. 115, No.
11, November, 1989. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-9429/89/0011-1543/$1.00 + $.15 per
page. Paper No. 24025.
1543

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

 are obtained using the measured velocity distributions. A model is presented
for determining the true bed level, where the velocity is zero in the case of
"rough" walls. With the results obtained from the present tests, the "law-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

of-the-wail" and the velocity-defect distributions of the mean velocities on

"smooth" and "rough" beds are reexamined. In the following section, some
of the theoretical information related to the present study is reviewed.

REVIEW

Fully developed turbulent shear layers consist of inner and outer regions
(Cebeci and Smith 1974). In the inner region the mean velocities are gen-
erally controlled by the wall shear stress, wall roughness, distance from the
wall, density, and viscosity of the fluid.
The inner region consists of two distinct parts, namely: the viscous sub-
layer and the fully turbulent part. Experiments by Klebanoff (1954) showed
that the total shear stress at some small distance from the wall is constant
and equals the wall shear T0. Therefore the integration of Newton's law of
viscosity (T = jx du/dz with T = T 0 ), gives the velocity distribution in the
viscous sublayer as
U UifX
- =— (D
«* v
where u* (= V T 0 / P ) = the shear velocity; p = the density; v = the kinematic
viscosity of the fluid; and z = the distance from the solid boundary.
In the fully turbulent part of the inner region, the logarithmic velocity
distribution equation of von Karman-Prandtl (von Karman 1930; Prandtl 1932)
is universally recognized as the logarithmic portion of the "law of the wall."
The equation takes the following form:
U U*Z
— = A In — + B (2)
W* V

in which A = 1/K (K' is the universal von Karman constant, which is in-
dependent of the nature of the wall, whether smooth or rough); and B = a
constant whose value depends on the nature of the wall surface (Schlichting
1968). The constants of Eq. 2 were found to be A = 2.5 and B = 5.5 from
Nikuradse's (1932) experiments for hydraulically "smooth" pipe flow. Keu-
legan (1938) assumed that in the plane normal to the boundary of any open
channel shape, the mean velocity distribution for fully developed turbulent
flow could be expressed by Eq. 2 with Nikuradse's values of constants.
Subsequently, investigations were made to determine the velocity distribu-
tion in the inner turbulent region of boundary layers on a flat wall with zero
pressure gradient. Several authors found through their own experiments or
adopted different values for the constants A and B in Eq. 2—for example,
Klebanoff (1954: 2.44, 4.9), Townsend (1956: 2.44, 7), Huffman and Brad-
shaw (1972: 2.44, 5), and more recently Steffier et al. (1985: 2.5, 5.5), and
Nezu and Rodi (1986: 2.43, 5.29). As may be seen from these findings, A
has a range of variation between 2.43 and 2.5, and B between 4.9 and 7.
It is seen that the constants for "plane" boundaries do not seem to differ
much from those found for channels of circular cross section (Nikuradse

1544

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

 1932), indicating the similarity of the flow in the near-wall region of both
cases.
In the outer region of turbulent boundary layers, the velocities are mainly
controlled by the turbulent shearing and the velocity distribution can be de-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

scribed by the velocity-defect law

um — u \ z
= — In - (3)
Uit K 8

in which um = the maximum velocity in the distribution; 5 = the thickness

of the boundary layer; and K = 0.41. Eq. 3, originally given by Prandtl
(1925), is supposed to apply to both "smooth" and "rough" walls (Hinze
1975). Later on, however, in order to have a better fit with experimental
data, a correction term was added to Eq. 3 which has a value of 2.5 (Clauser
1956).
Coles (1956) extended the law of the wall, Eq. 2, by introducing a purely
empirical correction function. He gave the following expression, which can
be used to predict velocities in the fully turbulent part of inner region as
well as in outer region
u 1 u*z II (z\
— = - In — + B + - w - (4)
M* K V K \8/

where II = the "profile" parameter (which was given as 0.55 with K = 0.4
and B = 5.1), and w(z/8) is called the "law of the wake" and is given by
2 sin2(-n-z/28) for zero pressure gradient. Eq. 4, in fact, represents the com-
bined effect of velocity control mechanisms that exist in the inner and outer
regions. When Eq. 4 is written at the edge of the boundary layer, and Eq.
4 is then subtracted from it, the following velocity-defect distribution, due
to Coles, can be obtained
um - u i z n ,/ITA
= — In - + - 2 cos2 - (5)
M* K 8 K \28/

Rough Walls
The velocity distribution on rough surfaces is affected by the grading,
shape, and spacing of the surface's roughness elements. In dealing with the
velocity distribution in rough-boundary flows, the most common practice has
been to use Nikuradse's (1933) expression for fully rough turbulent flow in
pipes

— = 2.5 In - + 8.5 (6)

in which k5 — Nikuradse's original uniform sand grain roughness—it rep-

resents the equivalent sand roughness for any type of rough surface; and z
= the distance from the bottom of the roughness elements. However, par-
ticularly for large-scale roughnesses, some investigators (Bayazit 1976;
Kamphuis 1974) hold the view that the actual reference level for z, called
the "hypothetical" bed (i.e., where the mean velocity is zero along the wall)
lies between z = 0 and z = k, the average height of the roughness elements.
It was suggested that the velocity-defect law is also valid for rough surfaces
1545

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

 (Cebeci and Smith 1974; Hinze 1975). In a recent experimental study, Zippe
and Graf (1983) showed that Coles's wake law suitably describes the tur-
bulent velocity distribution within rough-plane boundary layers.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Rotta (1962) applied the law of the wall to the inner region of the bound-
ary layer on a rough surface by assuming that the action of the roughness
can be interpreted as being equivalent to a velocity reduction across the vis-
cous sublayer. He gave the velocity distribution as
u 1 udz + Az) AM
— = - In — +B (7)
K* K V U*.

In Eq. 7, AM represents the velocity jump across the viscous sublayer cor-
responding to the Az reference shift from the top of average roughness height,
which gives the location of the hypothetical bed level. By using van Driest's
(1956) expression, Rotta gave the continuous representation of the velocity
distributions in the inner region for different roughness conditions.
The formulas given are the most commonly used ones to represent the
mean velocity distributions in "smooth" and "rough" bedded turbulent flow.
It is seen, however, that the constants appearing in these formulas have a
wide range of values found by various investigators. The purpose of this
study is to compare the measured turbulent velocity profiles for "smooth"
and "rough" open channel flow with those obtained using the "law of the
wall" and the velocity-defect distributions, which are given in this section.

EXPERIMENTS

Experiments were performed in a glass-walled laboratory channel which

was 12 m long, 0.3 m wide, and 0.3 m deep. The existing channel bed was
used directly for "smooth-wall" experiments. For "rough-surface" experi-
ments, plywood boards, which had a single layer of aggregate glued to them,
were laid on top of the channel bottom. For the four different "rough" sur-
faces, namely, Rough 1, Rough 2, Rough 3, and Rough 4, four different
aggregates having sizes of d90 = 2.36 mm, 5 mm, 10 mm, and 20 mm were
used (dgo is the particle diameter so that 90% of the particles in the total
grain-size distribution are smaller than d90). Fig. 1 shows the four rough beds

tt:?-i r» *'V: '?>J.. -''•

!.,!•'•, , ,>-. I
•/•', V ' .' .
t' \ i - • • !
i •*
! , .,-• : {•.--,'
I,.' ... :.:• '>:;'• t\l_'
Rough 1 Rough 2 Rough 3 Rough 4
d9Q= 2.36 mm 5 mm 10 mm 20 mm

FIG. 1. Four Different Rough Beds Used in Experiments

1546

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

 co CN ^,
X
0
~-i
sac a
n, 60 o
O C "O
I * H CO
i^ </J
o\
w-i
1~-
00
•*t
Tf
m on o i—i o
CT\ »n m CN CN 4 m en o m en
t ~ ^ f CN 0 0 o
ON • f l -
CN CN
ON en ON
0 0 en o
•fl-
I—
•fl-
00
ON . — 1
00 T f
en
NO
IN
00
o
•fl-
r-
ON
00
o
o en
•^ r-CN •fl-
t-
en en
O
S 7 13 X ""
CO "co
o E,
CO < N o in v> 0 0 M- r-~
H
^
^H
CN
•
CN
o 0 0 en o
*
cn cn ^^
en C3N
^^ ^H CN
en en O N •fl- 00
*~*CN
en 00 ^H
^H
r-
• '

CN I N ON
CN en
en
^H • ' CN
-fl-
cn
i u o
60 g o 3 60
•«oo
l£.s 5eo MH
<5 3
co - r j 00
F S
o
CN
IO vi o o •n i n o O O o o
r- en 0 0 0 0 *o cn T f en en T i - • *

o o O en O o
r- 0 0 en l ~ - en eo
O
NO
O
f-
o
e'-
o o O en en o en en en O en
eo r- eo en en en eo en • f l - I— en
•^ > <n > CO
X 3
£•§ ° >< %£ 'c?
e § m <T\ vo IN •n o\ o \r> 0 0 en en m en r- en r~- en en Ti- o en O in en en ON I N ON en r— O eo
O ,3 _ CJ Q C O ° a a EPS oo • * (N m I-~ o \u r~ r^ cn ONo o en CN ON
o • f l - •fl- ON en CN
r~- • f l - eo en o en •en
CN
o •fl- CN
en en - H
x a CN cn cn ^r en r- en en en cn f l - r- en •fl- r -
i
CO ^ 6 u0

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

3 ^ ^ ^ a se
t
^ &
O - G CO CO o o o O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O o o o
CO X I U 3 CM T3 co CN CN
r-- V£> >n r~- en 00 • f o 00 •fl- IN IN
m ON en n en en •fl- ON r- en en 0C">0 oo tON IN o ON r-
&a a £p CN i~- r- i n vo -*
en 0 0 ^ f t~- ee eo ON NO eo o en r- o en eo O - - en en o eo eo
r- ^^ o en T^^ en I N r- ^ H I^«
CO O C CO DC g o vn r- N en eo ^ H D en I N • f l - e n
fl * co 00 00 IN 00 ON
- 2 •*-> £ UI T-H t ^ H f ^H IN
CO en cn en 0 0 ^H
CN CN CN r- CN en en 00 o eN en I— Ov CN en eo r-- ^ CN en en r - —•
-
• *
c K X!
*-< ~ H „N o • ^ CO
CO
b ^ ^_, •fl- ^
c5 I"
-* -5 11"° CO CO O 3
* > _eo o
§"•3 CN
? VO
l~
O
o
m 00
en vfi
Tt
IN
r~ o
ON O N
00
00
m en o D r- r~-
• r- I N en O N I N
*

en en 0 0 eo en
vn ON o\ r- e n
IN
IN oo r-
•fl-
o
ON
IN IN
en en
o CN
en
NO
CN
ON
eo
a^
I
t i . CO o CN cn en t ~ o ^^ - H CN • f l - o o ^ H CN • f l -
• " CO
- H ^H
^ o • *
•* ON ^-i
^^ oCN •fl- eo -* CN •fl- eo
O 5 X <o X O-H X «" O o o o o o O o o o O o o o o o o o o o o O O o O o o o o o
wi -a co c"^;
•*-• o X Xco "is
""
X .2
T 3 CO * •? g _ >o o 00 o Vf3 D eo r- m en en o IN •fl- 0 0 o 00 o o en en en en • f l - eo en o 1— en o o
• 3 •—
CO CO 2 a °X o O) \ uo ^J-
--< en en oo oo VO O CN en r~ r- en
^< cn CN O cn o r- en en r- 0 0 0 0 oe eo 0 0 o
• M ^ H
en ON O
X
£

3
CO
6 0 CO
^ C
C

3 c
CO CO
T). 5? CO
•fi co"

^ x
cSx
. •*
I •S S ?

-
r^
CN
t~~
00

t-~
o
"*

CN
Tt
o

CN
r~-
o

cn
IN
00

\D
O r-~
en en

en •cn cn CN
IN
l-~

*
in
00
o
oo
O
00
o
IN

CN
en r-

CN CN
en • f l -
NO
IN

en CN CN CN CN en cn en CN cn cn T f
o
o
00
o
o
IN
o
IN
o en
ON
00
r-
00
l—
IN
O
IN
00
00
1—
en
r—

•fl-
IN
r-

en cn T f
en t— en
00 c-- r-
CO •a " a
CJ
a '—'
o 0 0 T i - 0 0 en oo I N ^ 0 0 • f l - en NO en o ON • f l - en o o
CO ?
XI r— o T t V) 0 0 0 0 rt • * 00 en !-> CN NO
O m « j *r> r- r- o o as IN m M- en M- o en O N o 0 0 en en en ON O N ON 1— r- e n en r— eo -H
S CO O l -_ ^i c •o— • • o o »^ r- r- r-
* • *
o r- r- o ON eo ON •fl1 I— o r- t - - - f l - o T f NO en ON 0 0 e n r- - H en CJN
m
CJ O CN en cn cn cn cn NO o CN en e'- CN CN CN en r~- oe CN CN en 0 0 0 0 CM CN en eo
£2 .Co o < •"* in ON
CN
00 CN
CO
3 T3.2 M
. 2 -H" J" cn "

number
ex 5
to O co

Test
X > CO
- cn -ch m eo r~ o - en •* en - en "fl- en - en en - en

(2)
CN 00 ON CN CN CN CN •fl- CN •fl- en
0) K
go* -
a u -
60
X CO ft o O O C*H
O. o
co J 5 CO T3 a
O en en en en en
B *-*to CJ co n CN (N CN CN CN •fl- •fl- •fl- •fl- -fl-
T3
CO
L,
3 g< o o u
is a
§
0 Q . -t-
CO . > > ' — p

C3 c c c ,.C ,.c ,.c ,.c 43 X! .c

.G J3 J3 J3
01 Bl; 01 01,
S 3 3 3
XI
01
3

J3 J3 X I X I
01 01 01 0/
3 3 3 3

XI XI XI XI XI X! XI XI X! XI
o i : 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 0 0
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

XI
00
3
co o
CO . 3 j 5
CO
t- VI(- H H H H f= h h H h 0p0 O f) C) O O C) f ) o f) f) O o f) f) o O n O O O
3 « 00 CO on CO to cn oo 0 0
t/3 00
at OS CA OS a! o; OS OJ OS OS OS OS OS OS OS os OJ OS OS OS
co co T 2
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
 cally), h is the water depth, b/h is the flow aspect ratio, F (= vVgh) is
the Froude number, V is the average velocity of flow, R (= 4VR/v) is the
Reynolds number, and R is the hydraulic radius. The tests shown in Table
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1 are numbered in increasing order of Reynolds number.

RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

The results of the tests described in Table 1 are presented separately for
"smooth" and "rough" surfaces. A number of symbols used for the flow,
and the present assumption for the hypothetical bed in uniform roughness,
along with Rotta's model (Rotta 1962), are shown in Fig. 2. Fig. 3 gives
the measured velocity distributions for "smooth," and the four different "rough"
surfaces. It is apparent from this figure that the nondimensional velocity
distributions are consistently, albeit gradually, diverging from near unifor-
mity as the average uniform roughness height increases.

Results for Smooth Surface

Determination of Shear Velocity

Because of the difficulties associated with direct measurement of the wall
shear stress, T0, the shear velocity, w*, is usually calculated by indirect meth-
ods. Among the common practices are the use of the water surface slope in
u = VghS, where S is the water surface slope (Kamphuis 1974), the use
of an assumed velocity distribution, such as the law of the wall (Steffler et
al. 1985; Zippe and Graf 1983), or a power law (Sarma et al. 1983), and
the use of the total shear stress, T = JJI du/dz — pu'v', where u' and v' are
the turbulent velocity fluctuations (Nezu and Rodi 1986; Steffler et al. 1985).
In this study the shear velocities for smooth surfaces have been obtained
using the measured velocity distributions in the viscous sublayer given in
Fig. 4. Assuming that the velocity distribution in the vicinity of the smooth
wall is linear, then the shear velocity can be obtained from Eq. 1. That is

V u
v-

The calculated values of the shear velocities using Eq. 8 are given in Col.
(8)

10 of Table 1. These values seem to compare well with those given by Nezu
and Rodi 1986, who found values between 4.4 and 39.9 mm/s for the sim-
ilar range of Reynolds numbers. It is clearly seen from the velocity distri-
bution of test 1 in Fig. 4 that the viscous sublayer is quite large for R =
5,220, indicating a (laminar-turbulent) transitional flow regime. A somewhat
similar feature may also be detected from test 2 in the same figure. The
thickness of the viscous sublayer tends to decrease with increasing Reynolds
number, from about 2 mm down to approximately 0.5 mm.

"Law-of-the-Wall" Distribution
With known values of shear velocities, the "law-of-the-wall" distributions
are calculated and given in Fig. 5. Disregarding the data for test 2 (R =
8,770), the overall data in the turbulent part of inner region are best rep-
resented by
1548

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(<•) (b)

FIG. 2. Definition Sketch

U UifZ
— = 2.44 In — + 5.5 (9)
w# v
In Eq. 9, the value 2.44 in the first term confirms that in these tests the von
Karman universal constant K has a value of 0 . 4 1 . From Figs. 5 and 6 it may
be suggested that for the range of Reynolds number conditions tested Eq. 9
is valid in the range 50-80 ^ u*z/v :£ 200-600. Fig. 6 shows only two
test data that correspond to the velocity distributions of flows with "low"
and "high" Reynolds numbers. The value of u*z/v marking the measured
velocity distribution from Eq. 9 at lower and upper limits depends on the
Reynolds number in that it increases with increasing Reynolds number. Hinze
(1975) suggested u*z/v = 500 to 1,000 for the upper bound. The lower and
upper limits for the fully turbulent inner region correspond to the following
proportions of the boundary layer thickness: 0.14-0.05 < z/8 < 0.6-0.5.
These values are higher than that which is normally quoted in the literature
(Cebeci and Smith 1974).
In the lower part of Fig. 5, the velocity distributions seem to conform
well with Eq. 1, showing a viscous sublayer for u*z/v ^ 5-12, which again
increases with an increase of Reynolds number. These values correspond to
the viscous sublayer thickness of 1-1.5% of the whole boundary layer thick-
ness (decreasing with increasing Reynolds number).

Velocity-Defect Distribution
The velocity defect distributions of the mean velocities are given in Fig.
7, wherein Eq. 3 and Eq. 5 are also included. The data seem to conform
reasonably well for z / 8 & 0.03. While the prediction of the velocity defect
distribution by Eq. 3 is reasonable, Coles's expression, Eq. 5, falls com-
pletely outside the data points. Graf (1984) argued that the second term in
Coles's wake law must have another constant in order to fit the channel data.
In supporting this view, Nezu and Rodi (1986) found that for R > 105 the
profile parameter II in Eq. 5 was constant at a value of approximately 0.2,
which was considerably smaller than the Coles's value of 0.55. They also
reported that the II-values found by Steffler et al. (1985) were even lower
(varying between 0.08 and 0.15). In Fig. 7, Coles's velocity-defect law is
drawn with values K = 0.41 and II = 0 . 1 . As may be seen from the figure,
Coles's expression with the aforementioned values follows the experimental

1549

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

-«irr-

i o o,

O n N 5 " (A
eg m in t^ •- O
o © a> e e
3

-*t-
<Se
I
tJ
o O
0 0 CO
o Q o>
V
e(3
CM CO to r^
«
—
~^S"

-«r IS
1
E *

oC> <*>
o -3o <n
o t^
o
o in c- o en
fDMON N
. - N S Cs OJ

a
»o &
° i% » • » j l &
o
s ^ - ^e8><i
f
ra
e
o
to o> o> to o
r- CO (M O) O ._
CM ro in co <- £
0)
E
V e ol %
o 4 c
o

(3
-. 9 ° o -oi-3
assess
to oo ;£ io MT csj
o in.oo
CN e r - rei S-
e

o
NtO

1550

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

0 0.4 0.8 0 0.1 0.8 0 0.4 0.8

FIG. 4. Measured Velocity Distributions near "Smooth" Bed

points reasonably well. This leads to the conclusion that in open channel
flow the profile parameter II can be below the 0.55 value given by Coles.

Results for Rough Surfaces

Determination of Shear Velocity
In previous investigations of rough surface velocity measurements, the de-
termination of the reference level where the mean velocity is zero along the
wall has been of considerable concern. The actual point where the velocity
is zero remains below a certain proportion of the roughness elements. Rotta's
(1962) model gave approximately Az = 0.035 k for sand grain roughness.
Later, several investigators have experimentally found values for Az that var-
ied between 0.3 k (Kamphuis 1974) and 0.7 k (Bayazit 1976), based on
different roughness shapes.
As illustrated in Fig. 2, in this study it is assumed that: (1) The reference
level shifts by an amount Az from the top of the average roughness level,
1551

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

wo e*j o- sj- in <£> t- 00 Ol o - CM

x o e o e < < > & ' D a

c

ap >
4. in
& in

N
+
•o
1
In m
c
_J

<olL

lb X
II
i *
I
_ c
^fc ? x o
^
1 <di
M» * «>
St® < 10

•\ 5
0 *( X
< 35
X
0)
a u
X N 1
X
xe
St.|jj- K. 1
Ss.
f'S*" H*
"B»
X*
/
'^Gc'l / <3

X
\

\
= |d»

1552

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

 Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

G
\\

•
\
\
v
\
\
• \
V
0E

0Vg

rV
\

•
TT
A_.
Nl

_J
c
+

-J-
m
in

—i\
\
=V

!' •

»l^
\
^

1553
\
0

\ o

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

/
/—
N
l
0

\
0
1*1' ^

!
3

6
5

CD
CO
o
o
o
o
w
•a

ra
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 7. Velocity-Defect Distribution for "Smooth" Bed

making the water depth, in effect, h + Az; and (2) the fictitious flow through
the depth Az is in laminar condition (this is identical with Rotta's assump-
tion). The values of Az have been determined from the experimental velocity
profiles given in Fig. 8 for the near-wall region. As may be seen from the
figure, Az is obtained by extending the velocity profiles below the lowest
velocity reading AM to intercept the u = 0 line. The experimental values of
Az have been found to lie between 0.25 mm and 0.75 mm. With known
values of AM and Az, shear velocities can be calculated using Eq. 8 (see
Table 1). It may be noticed that the size of roughness elements is reflected
in the values of u* in that the value of M* increases with increasing roughness
size. From Fig. 8 the following points seem to be significant: (1) Az, which
represents the thickness of the fictitious viscous sublayer, is small compared
to the thickness of the smooth surface sublayer given in Fig. 4 (this fact was
also reported by Rotta 1950); and (2) Az is more sensitive to Reynolds num-
ber than the range of values of the uniform roughness height used in this
study.
Some of the variations of AM and Az are presented nondimensionally in
Figs. 9 - 1 2 . Fig. 9 shows that the ratio Au/um remains practically between
0.3 and 0.4 throughout the experimental range. It has average values of
0.32, 0.33, 0.35, and 0.37 for the rough surfaces, and an overall average
of 0.34. Fig. 10 gives the variation of AW/M* (or M#AZ/V) with u*k/v. The
best-fit expression for the data presented in this figure is
AM {u*k\
— = 3.50 (10)
«* \ V /

Fig. 11 shows the variation of the relative shift Az/k with u*k/v. The equa-

1554

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 8. Measured Velocity Distributions near Four Different "Rough" Beds

' •
A
•
•
V
0
*0 A
G
•
A )
f (I A

0.2
0
I " ^ = 0.34 o Rough 1
A Rough 2
yi, „
7 Rough 4

12X104
4VR
Re

FIG. 9. Variation of Au/u„ with Reynolds Number

1555

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

 nv 7
0 &
, 0 ^ V
Au 5. -
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

U.AZ
V
v3-5^)
A Rough 2
a Rough 3
V Rough 4

100

FIG. 10. Variation of A«/«* with u*k/v

tion of the line through the data points is given by

Az = tu*
(11)
k \v
Fig. 12 shows the variation of the relative shift with relative roughness,
k/b. The variation seems to depend on Reynolds number, and in this figure
two lines are tentatively drawn to represent R = 20,000 and 100,000. The
variation may be represented by
Az n (k
(12)

in which K(R) = a Reynolds-number-dependent coefficient that has values

of 0.011 and 0.005 for the two aforementioned Reynolds numbers.

v O
••
^ = 3.25
/ k sf
Az
//
A^ y
k

V
0 Rough 1 ^U
A Rough 2

V Rou 3h « \J'
7

Y
FiQ. 11. Variation of &z/k with ujc/v

1556

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

 ^
•\7 7xirf
o^
™ V5 , -0.96
3%
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

^ = 0.0,1 ( | )
^
(i1 T1^
1.( xK^
\ ^ 2.(
A
5.3

// «.A a ^
. / ,,-P 96 B \
U.' 2.1-
8 6 v
A 33^
o Rough 1
A Rough 2 •V/.bB 5.2X
11
• Rough 3 ?!?.,
V Rough 4 7.5 N
11.4
0.01 0.1 0.4
k/ I

FIG. 12. Variation of Az/k with k/b

"Law-of-the-Wall" Distribution
Fig. 13 shows the "law-of-the-wall" distribution of the mean velocities on
the "rough" surfaces. The distribution is quite different from that of the
"smooth" wall (see Fig. 5). Compared to the smooth wall results, the values
of u/u* are much lower for "rough" surfaces. Rotta (1962), using his the-
oretical model, gave the velocity profiles that varied depending on u*k/v
for sand-grain roughnesses. Such a systematic distinction, however, does not
seem to exist in Fig. 13. As may be seen from the figure, the point where
the law-of-the-wall distribution becomes applicable (with K = 0.41) moves
to a higher value, about u*z/v = 100, in comparison to the "smooth wall"
case. This point was mentioned also by Hinze (1975). In the fully turbulent
part of the inner region (that is, between u*z/v = 1 0 0 and 400), the data
seem to follow the expression

u u*z
— = 2.44 In 0.8 (13)
K* V

Velocity-Defect Distribution
The velocity-defect distribution of the data for the four "rough" surfaces
considered is shown in Fig. 14. As may be seen from the figure, the data
are so scattered that it is difficult to draw a single line to fit the data, even
for an individual rough surface. This is, perhaps, due to the fact that the
outer region of the turbulent boundary layer is influenced by the wall rough-
ness that affects the flow with increasing roughness height and Reynolds
number. Consequently, the velocity distribution becomes increasingly non-
uniform, with the considerable scatter that is seen in Fig. 3.
The velocity distribution for "rough" surfaces is not given in terms of z/
k because such presentations exhibit a separate tendency for each roughness.
It is known that the velocity distribution, especially in the inner region, is
essentially independent of the channel aspect-ratio (Kirkgoz and Darici 1986;
1557

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

gh 3
gh 4
— CM

V cn cn
• o o o o
\ cr cr cr cc
\ 1 0 0 <] D >
\ E
\\ \ b "6 5 "VIODN
c
'd V,
\ t& ° \ D
t FPKH
\ '&
\ ^
>m
w Lfl
00
\ d in
•Q
I
\ % N1
\ c
\ —1
3
\ O
\ CM'
K
\ 0^ gfiiH 11

\ o 0
\
\
*.-.N 0 6 » h
a. /
\l'* / 3
\ / *\>
L\ H)1- /
% <* / (A

^ 5
3
^ m
• ^

-4
;\ \
1 \ N|
a>
it
v
%• \ §
\ ,3>c \
\ \ «3
\ w I
\ ^Ch;
\ ^w
>
\
\
\
<\
\
\
\
\

1558

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

 a
A a
A a
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

D
va o
V a i
° 8° 7 'D
A
' D
57
^
L
3' o
A D V
o V
V *> °[
A Aw
A
O
• 0s
° A
D
AO a
V
( hi B v D Va
v A V
P
O • AO
A
\ []

O A A° V {:* av
T
O A V O „ v
8 a

O ' 8 <f " A "

°°o° ° o S
°"'a(l a
o Rough 1
A Rough 2 0
a Rough 3 ° " 1'? ft"
8
V Rough 4 » o "
9© i*
o.ot o.i i
2/ 8

FIG. 14. Velocity-Defect Distribution for "Rough" Beds

Sarma et al. 1983). Accordingly, the results of the present study, which
covers a wide range of aspect ratios (see Table 1), apply to channels that
are frequently encountered in civil engineering practice.

CONCLUSIONS

From the study of mean velocity distributions in smooth- and rough-boundary

open channel flows, the following conclusions are drawn.

1. In the inner region of turbulent flow, the nondimensional velocity distri-

bution becomes increasingly nonuniform as the average uniform roughness height
increases from 1 mm to 12 mm.
2. In the fully turbulent part of the inner region of flow on a "smooth" bed,
the logarithmic law-of-the-wall distribution of von Karman-Prandtl holds true,
with coefficients of 2.44 and 5.5, respectively, and a value for the von Karman
constant of 0.41. The coefficient 2.44 differs slightly from Nikuradse's value of
2.5 for pipe flow. The coefficients (2.44 and 5.5) found in this study are within
the range of the values given in the recent literature.
3. The thickness of the inner region of flow on a "smooth" bed is about 5 0 -
60% of the entire boundary-layer thickness. This value decreases with an in-
crease in Reynolds number, which had a maximum value of 172,640 in the
present tests.
4. On "smooth" beds, Coles's velocity-defect equation appears to represent
the measured velocities better when the profile parameter is taken as approxi-
mately 0.1.
5. The thickness of the reference shift, which represents the fictitious viscous

1559

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

 sublayer on a "rough" wall, decreases with increasing Reynolds number, but it
does not seem to be affected by the roughness height.
6. On "rough" beds, the "law-of-the-wall" representation of the velocity dis-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

tribution is quite reasonable for the particular roughnesses used in this study. On
the other hand, the velocity-defect distribution shows considerable scatter.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work was partly accomplished at the Leichtweiss-Institut fur Was-

serbau at the Technical University of Braunschweig, in Braunschweig, Ger-
many, under a fellowship program sponsored by the Alexander von Hum-
boldt Foundation. The writer would like to express his gratitude to the AvH
Foundation for its support. He is also most grateful to Prof. Dr.-Ing. A.
Fiihrboter for helpful discussions.

APPENDIX I. REFERENCES

Bayazit, M. (1976). "Free surface flow in a channel of large relative roughness." J.

Hydr. Res., 14(2), 115-126.
Cebeci, T., and Smith, A. M. O. (1974). Analysis of turbulent boundary layers.
Academic Press, New York, N.Y.
Clauser, F. H. (1956). "The turbulent boundary layer." Advances in Appl. Mech.,
4, 1-51.
Coles, D. (1956). "The law of the wake in the turbulent boundary layer." / . Fluid
Mech., 1, 191-226.
Graf, W. H. (1984). Discussion of "Velocity distribution in smooth rectangular open
channels," by K. V. N. Sarma, P. Lakshminarayana, and N. S. L. Rao. J. Hydr.
Engrg., ASCE, 110(2), 206-208.
Hinze, J. O. (1975). Turbulence. McGraw-Hill, New York, N.Y.
Huffman, G. D., and Bradshaw, P. (1972). "A note on von Karman's constant in
low Reynolds number turbulent flows." J. Fluid Mech., 53(1), 45-60.
Kamphuis, J. W. (1974). "Determination of sand roughness for fixed beds." J. Hydr.
Res., 12(2), 193-203.
Keulegan, G. H. (1938). "Laws of turbulent flow in open channels." J. Res., Nat.
Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C., 21, D e c , 707-741.
Kirkgoz, M. S., and Darici, G. (1986). "Velocity measurements in open channel
flow with a Laser Anemometer." J. Fac. of Engrg. and Arch., Cukurova Univ.,
Adana, Turkey, 1(1), 19-33.
Klebanoff, P. S. (1954). "Characteristics of turbulence in a boundary layer with zero
pressure gradient." NACA Technical Notes No. 3178, Washington, D.C.
Nezu, I., and Rodi, W. (1986). "Open channel flow measurements with a Laser
Doppler Anemometer." J. Hydr. Engrg., ASCE, 112(5), 335-355.
Nikuradse, J. (1932). "Gesetzmassigkeiten der turbulenten Stromung in glatten Roh-
ren." Forsch. Geb. Ing.-Wes., Heft 356, Berlin (in German).
Nikuradse, J. (1933). "Stromungsgesetze in rauhen Rohren." Forsch. Geb. Ing.-
Wes., Heft 361, Berlin (in German).
Prandtl, L. (1925). "fiber die ausgebildete Turbulenz." Z. Angew. Math. Mech.,
Bd. 5, 136-139 (in German).
Prandtl, L. (1932). "Zur turbulenten Stromung in Rohren und langs Platten." Er-
gebnisse der Aerodynamischen Versuchsanstalt zu Gottingen, 4, 18-29 (in Ger-
man).
Rotta, J. (1950). "Das in Wandnahe giiltige Geschwindigkeitsgesetz turbulenter
Stromungen." Ing.-Arch., 18, 277-280 (in German).
Rotta, J. (1962). "Turbulent boundary layers in incompressible flow." Prog, in Aer-
onautical Sci., 2, 1-219.
Sarma, K. V. N., Lakshminarayana, P., and Rao, N. S. L. (1983). "Velocity dis-

1560

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561

 tribution in smooth rectangular open channels." J. Hydr. Engrg., ASCE, 109(2),
270-289.
Schlichting, H. (1968). Boundary layer theory. McGraw-Hill, New York, N.Y.
Sill, B. L. (1982). "New flat plate turbulent velocity profiles." J. Hydr. Engrg.,
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati on 02/25/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ASCE, 108(1), 1-15.

Steffler, P. M., Rajaratnam, N., and Peterson, A. W. (1985). "LDA measurements
in open channel." J. Hydr. Engrg., ASCE, 111(1), 119-130.
Townsend, A. A. (1956). The structure of turbulent shear flow. Cambridge Univ.
Press, New York, N.Y.
Vedula, S., and Achanta, R. R. (1985). "Bed shear from velocity profiles: a new
approach." J. Hydr. Engrg., ASCE, 111(1), 131-143.
van Driest, E. R. (1956). "On the turbulent flow near a wall." J. Aeronautical Sci.,
23, 1007-1011.
von Kdrman, T. (1930). "Mechanische ahnlichkeit und turbulenz." Gottinger
Nachrichten, Math. Phys. Klasse, 58-60 (in German).
Willis, J. C. (1985). "Near-bed velocity distribution." J. Hydr. Engrg., ASCE, 111(5),
741-753.
Zippe, H. J., and Graf, W. H. (1983). "Turbulent boundary-layer flow over perme-
able and non-permeable rough surfaces." J. Hydr. Res., 21(1), 51-65.

APPENDIX SI. NOTATION

The following symbols are used in this paper:

b = width of channel;
"90 = particle diameter so that 90% of particles are smaller;
9 = gravitational acceleration;
h = depth of flow;
k = average height of roughness elements;
R = hydraulic radius;
u = mean flow velocity;
Au = mean velocity measured at z = Az;
um = maximum mean velocity in distribution (i.e., u at z = 8);
u* = shear velocity;
V = average flow velocity;
z = distance above bed;
Az = reference shift;
8 = thickness of boundary layer;
K = von Karman constant;
M- = dynamic viscosity;
V = kinematic viscosity;
p = density; and
T = shear stress.

1561

J. Hydraul. Eng., 1989, 115(11): 1543-1561