See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/227236950

Power law and log law velocity profiles in fully developed turbulent pipe flow:
Equivalent relations at large Reynolds numbers

Article  in  Acta Mechanica · January 2001

DOI: 10.1007/BF01246916

CITATIONS READS

28 160

1 author:

Noor Afzal

104 PUBLICATIONS   1,361 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Heat Transfer on a Stretching Sheet View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Noor Afzal on 24 September 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ACTA MECHANICA
Acta Mechanica 151,171 - 183 (2001)
9 Springer-Verlag 2001

Power law and log law velocity profiles

in fully developed turbulent pipe flow:
equivalent relations at large Reynolds numbers
N. Afzal, Aligarh, India

(Received April 13, 2000; revised May 26, 2000)

Summary. The classical two layers (the inner and outer layers) from open equations of mean turbulent
motion, in a fully developed pipe flow, at large Reynolds number in MMX are matched by the application
of the Millikan-Kolmogorov hypothesis. In the overlap region, the classical solution of the open func-
tional equation for the velocity profile is the log law region. It is shown here that the open functional
equation also possesses another functional solution, the power law velocity profile in the overlap region.
The non-unique nature of the solution of the open functional equation predicts both a power law and log
law velocity profile. At large Reynolds number the equivalence of the power law and log law is analysed.
The comparison of the theory with classical data of Nikuradse and super-pipe data of Zagarola is
encouraging.

1 Introduction

Barenblatt et al. [1], [2] proposed two different self similar, inner and outer, power law layers
for turbulent boundary layer flow, in contrast to a classical single power law layer in pipe
flow. The proposal of Barenblatt [1] is reviving an issue which already can be found in Prandtl
[3] that the log law is the well-known limiting value obtained from the power law by making
the power index c~ tend to zero. This implies that the power law becomes the log law at suffi-
ciently large Reynolds numbers. Barenblatt [1] proposed that the power law velocity profile is
more fundamental and its envelope contains the log law at that Reynolds number. It m a y be
mentioned that Prandtl [3] and Barenblatt [1] had been looking at similar issues such that in
both cases the exponents in the power law are Reynolds number dependent whereas the con-
stants in the log law are not. Zagarola and Smits [4] pointed out that the scenario of Prandtl's
speculation does not appear to be the case, and it would become consistent if the Reynolds
number dependence was replaced by the wall variable y+ dependence. In the turbulent bound-
ary layer for open Reynolds equations, without closure, it is shown by Afzal [5] that the
matching in the overlap region by the Millikan-Kolmogorov hypothesis [6] - [8] gives an open
functional equation which possesses a non-unique solution of power law in addition to the
classical log law [6]. The equivalence of the non-unique functional form solution has been
analysed for large Reynolds numbers. Self consistent relations between the undetermined
constants in the power law velocity and classical log law velocity have been proposed. The
aim of this paper is to extend the work of Afzal [5] for fully developed turbulent pipe flow.
172 N. Afzal

Recently, primarily due to inconsistencies with the trend of experimental data several
researchers have investigated alternatives to the classical theory. The existence of the power
law has been investigated recently. The power taw velocity profile is described by

: cy;, : y+ : (1.1)

Based on Nikuradse's [9] data for 3.07 • 10 a < Re < 3.2 x 106, the power index c~ and multi-
plying constant C have been determined as functions of the Reynolds number Re = (?d/u
(based on the average velocity 0 and pipe diameter d : 2 a) by Nikuradse and Weighardt,
and the results are described in Schlichting [10], and Duncan et al. [11]. This old idea was
recently promoted by Barenblatt [1] and Kailasnath [12], and co-relations for c~ and C have
been proposed. The super-pipe data of Zagarola [13] for 3.17 x 104 < Re < 3.5 • 107 were
analyzed by Zagarola, Perry and Smits [14]. However, later Zagarola and Smits [4] proposed
that the power law velocity profile exists only for Re <_2.5 x 106, and C and c~ are the univer-
sal constants. The proposed constants in the power law velocity profile (1.1) have been sum-
marized below,

Barenblatt [1]: c~ = 1.5/in Re, C :: 0.577 3 In Re + 2.5, (1.2)

Kailasnath [12]: c~ = 0.314 Re -m , C : 2.8 Re m + 2.277, m = 0.077, (1.3)
Zagarota et al. [14]: c~ = 1.085/in Re + 6.535/(ln Re) 2 ,
C = 0.705 3 In Re + 0.305 5, (1.4)
Zagarota and Smits [4]: c~ = 0.137 C = 8.70. (1.5)

The power law velocity profile (1.2) and the dependence of the constants a: and C on the Rey-
nolds number proposed by Barenblatt [1] and Kailasnath [12] reveals a sharp departure from
the simple picture offered by the law of the wall. In fully developed turbulent pipe flow the
classical law of the wall is

u+ = k-1 in Y+ + t3. (1.6)

Here, ~ is the Karman constant and B the intercept, which are universal constants with
k = 0.41 and B = 5. In the difficult field of turbulence, which may remain beyond the scope
of the current theory and computations, the log law of the wall has been viewed as one of the
few certainties.
Zagarola, Perry and Smits [14] proposed power law constants a and C relations in terms
of the Reynolds number Re, for data of Zagarota in the Reynolds number range
Re = 3.1 x 104 to 3.52 x 107. In a later work, however, Zagarola and Smits [4] proposed that
the velocity profile exhibits the power law in between Reynolds numbers Re < 2.3 x 106
(/?~- < 4.2 x 104) and Re < 1.3 x 104 (R~ <__4. x 10~), where a and C were proposed as uni-
versal constants. There were seven Reynolds numbers in the data of Zagarola [13] that exhib-
ited both a tog law and a power law region. According to Zagarola and Smits [4], the scenario
that at sufficiently high Reynolds number the power law becomes the log law (as per specula-
tion of Prandtl [3]) does not appear to be the case. It was further suggested that the proposal
of Prandtl would be consistent with their observation, if the Reynolds number dependence in
the power law argument was replaced by the y~. dependence. The transition from the power
law to the log law was interpreted as a change in the y+ dependence (not a Reynolds number
dependence specifically) over a relatively short interval in y+. The analysis of the mean velo-
city profile indicated two overlap regions: a power taw for 60 < y+ < 500 or y+ < 0.15Rr and
a log law for 600 < y+ < 0,07R;, where the functional dependence in the transition of the
Power law and log law velocity profiles 173

power law region to the log law was not thought Of as two separate overlap regions as they
share the same scaling variables. The doubts have also been expressed on the existence of the
log law scaling at lower (but greater than 3 000) Reynolds numbers supported by the inves-
tigation based on measurements of Patel and Head [16]. It was proposed that the lowest
Reynolds number for the existence of the log law velocity profile is Re > 4.1 • 105
(R~ > 8.5 • 103). The log law revised universal constants k = 0.436 and B = 6.13 have been
proposed by Zagarola [12]. However, an inspection of Zagarola and Smits [4, Fig. 14, p. 61]
reveals that the measurements before run 13 (Re <_ 1.02 x 106) show agreement with the clas-
sical values/c = 0.41 and B = 5.2, and after run 13 (Re >_ 1.02 x 106) the constants depart in
the log region. The data departure increases with Re (for Re >_ 1.02 x 106), which Barenblatt
et al. [15] attributed to the effects of roughness.
In fully developed turbulent pipe flow the log law was proposed by Prandtl and Karman
around I930, by Nikuradse [9] and all other later works (see Schlichting [9]) extensively at
large Reynolds number, whereas Patel and Head [16] also observed the log law at lower Rey-
nolds numbers also. Barenblatt [1] and Kailasnath [12] analyzed Nikuradse pipe data and pro-
posed the power law relationship tbr all Reynolds numbers. It was pointed out that their
work reveals a sharp departure from the simple picture offered by the law of the wall (1), and
the envelope of the power law represents the log law. Zagarola's [I 3] super-pipe data for 26
velocity profiles in the Reynolds number range Re = 3.1 • 104 to 3.52 • 107 analyzed by
Zagarola, Perry and Smits [14] exhibited the power law region. Later, Zagarola and Smits [4]
proposed that out of 26 there where 7 Reynolds numbers in the range Re = 4.1 x 102 to
2.3 • 10~ that exhibited both a power law and log law regions; and for Re >_ 2.3 • 106 the
power law was not observed, whereas Barenblatt, Chorin and Prostokishin [15] proposed that
for Re > 1.02 • 106 the data of Zagarola [13] correspond to a rough pipe rather than a
smooth pipe. The noticeable disagreement between the data and scaling laws c~ and C for
(about six values of) the highest Reynolds numbers has been found. This systematic departure
of Zagarola's data from run 13 (Re = 1.02 • 106) onwards has been displayed in Fig. 21 on
p. 426 of Barenblatt et al. [16] suggesting that for Re > 1.02 x 106 the data of Zagarola corre-
spond to rough pipes rather than smooth pipes.
The open Reynolds equations for fully developed turbulent pipe flow at large Reynolds
number have been analyzed by MMX in the inner wall layer and the outer defect layer. In the
overlap region of inner and outer layers the matching has been carried out by the Millikan-
Kolmogorov ttypothesis (cited later as MKH) that leads to the open functional equations
whose solution function may be determined. The application of M K H predicted the velocity
profile in terms of the classical log law [6], [7] and composite log law [8]. It is shown here that
the functional equation also possesses another solution, the power law velocity profile, imply-
ing a non-unique solution. Therefore, in the overlap region, M K H leads to an open functional
equation whose functional solution is non-unique: and it predicts both a power law and a log
law velocity profile at large Reynolds numbers.

2 Analysis

The Reynolds equation of mean motion, in a fully developed pipe flow is

// ~ - - T ~:~,c 2 (2.1)
174 N. Afzal

Here, u and r are the mean axial velocity and appropriate kinematic Reynolds shear stress, y
is the normal coordinate measured from the wall, and d is the pipe diameter. Further, Ur is the
friction velocity, u is the molecular kinematic viscosity, and U is the velocity at the pipe axis.
The boundary conditions at the wall require u and r to vanish there, and the conditions at the
axis are those of symmetry,

y=O, u=r=O, y=d/2, u=U or du/dy=O=r, (2,2)

The appropriate friction Reynolds number R~ and the parameter e are defined as

I?., = ~,,(5/u , ~~ = R r -I , 5=d/2.

2,1 Two flow layers

The flow field is divided into two layers: the inner wail layer and the outer defect layer at large
Reynolds numbers. In the inner region a law of the wall (scaling on ~Jand u,) and in the outer
region a velocity defect law (scaling on 5 and u~) are considered as follows:

Walt layer: ~/u~ = f(y+, c) , r/u~? = F(y+, e) , y+ = yu~/u , (2.3)

Defect layer: (U - u)/u.~ = 9(Y, a), r/v,~5 = G(Y, r Y = y/6. (2.4)

Equation (2. l) in the wall and defect layers of the pipe flow become

df
@+ F=l-ey+, e ddg
y G=~-Y. (.9.5)

The asymptotic expansions for vetociV and Reynolds stress profiles in the inner and outer
layers are:

f = k (V+) + < h (y+) + - - - , Y = t;~ (y+) + eF~ (y+) + - - - , (2.6)

g = ~ ( Y ) + ~g2(Y) + . . . . . , ~ = G~(Y) + ~2.(Y) ~. . . . (2.7)

.~ The Mitlikan-Kotmogorov hypothesis

Solutions in the inner limit (y~ fixed, R~ -+ e,~) yielding the inner wall law (2.3), and the outer
limit (Y fixed, .R~ -* co) yielding the defect law (2.4) may be matched by M K H to obtain the
functional equation [4]- [6], and to lowest order the functional equation is
U
k(v+ --+ oc) = - - - gi(Y--~ 0). (2.s)
a4, r,

At large Reynolds numbers R.~-+ eo, we have U/u.~-+ co, therefore the function J)~(y+)
should be unbounded. The functional equation (2.8) may be differentiated with respect to y to
obtain

ok _yogt (2.9)
Y+ ~ = OF

as y+ --~ ~ , Y ~ 0 for Re, ~ ~ . It will now be shown that the functional equations (2.8) and
(2.9) have nonmnique solutions.
Power law and log law velocity profiles 175

(a) Classical log solution: Equation (2.9) is of separable variable form: let each side equal
1/h. The integral of Eq. (2.9) then gives the log laws

f~ = k -1 lny~_ + B , (2.10)
91 = - h 1 In Y + D, (2.11)

and matching of the velocity from relation (2.8) gives the skin friction relation

U/u,~ = k - I In R~ + B + D . (2.12)

The uniformly valid solution for the velocity profile, above the sublayer, may be obtained
from a union of the inner wall layer (2.10) and the outer layer (2.11) and subtracting the
common part to get

u/u~ : k 11ny+ + B + DW(Y), (2.13.1)

(U - u)/u~- = - k -1 lnY + D[1 - W(Y)]. (2.13.2)

Here the wake function W ( Y ) , such that W(0) = 0, W(1) = 1, is given by

~/V(Y): [-ga(Y) - ]~ 1 1 n Z @ D]/D. (2.14)

The uniformly valid solution for the Reynolds stress is

"r/T.w = 1 -- (ky+) -x -- c(y+ + D d ~ ' / d Y ) , (2.15.1)

T/T~ = 1 - Y - c[(kY) -1 + D d W / d Y ] . (2.15.2)

The composite log law solutions for the velocity distribution in the overlap region,
obtained from the matching relation (2.19), are described in Appendix A.
(b) Power law solution: Another possible solution to (2.9) may be expressed as

f , ( v + ) = c v ,~ . (2.16)
Likewise, let relation (2.11) also be expressed as

g l ( Z ) = - C , Yc~ + C1 + C 2 . (2.17)

Evaluating the two sides of the matching relation (2.9) we get

LHS = Y + f l (Y+) = Cay~_, RHS :: - Y g 1 ' ( Y ) = ClaY ~ 9 (2.18)

The matching relation (2.9) is satisfied if

C y ~ = C l Y c~ or C - - CIR~--~. (2.19)

The matching condition (2.8) based on power law velocity profiles (2.16) and (2.17) yields
the skin friction power law relation
U/u~- -- C R , '~ + E . (2.20)
The composite solution of the power law (2.16) and the outer defect layer (2.17) may be
obtained from a union of the inner wall layer and the outer layer and substracting the
common part to get
u / u r = C'y~. + E f 2 ( Y ) , (2.21.1)

(U - u)/u~- : C1(1 - y a ) + El1 - .Q(Y)]. (2.21.2)

176 N. Afzal

Here, s called the power wake function, such that 22(0) = 0, 22(1) = 1, is given by
n(z) : (Y) + c (I - + z]/E. (2.22)
The composite solution for the Reynolds stress is
~/% = 1 - Copy,.-1 - e(y+ + E d n / d Y ) ,

T/T~, : 1 -- Y - s [ C I c ~ Y ~-I + E d 2 2 / d Y ] . (2.2a.2)

In pipe flow the skin friction relation may be expressed in terms of the average velocity as
A = 8(~L.~/U)2. The integration of the velocity profile (2.21) gives the skin tu power
law

A = mRe-~[1 - E1 (A/8)~/2] 2-~ , (2.24)

r~ = 2c~/(1 + c~), m = 812a-1(1 + c~) (2 + ~)/C] 2/(1-~c~), (2.25)
1
Ea = E l ) , f? = f(1 - Y) D(Y) dY. (2.26)
0

Further, under the "main body of flow" approximation (Barenblatt [10]), the weak outer
defect layer may be ignored by setting E = 0, and relation (2.24) reduces to a simple skin
friction power law.
P o w e r i n d e x a: If the ratio C1/C is a constant independent of R~, then the relation
(2.19) demands R~~ = const. -~ exp(~). Consequently, the power law index a is given by
relation

~/ (2.27)
a - lnRr ,
where ",/is a universal constant, which may be determined from data. In the power law
velocity profile the multiplication constants C in the inner layer and C~ in the outer defect
layer do depend on the Reynolds number, but the present expression (2.19) regards their
behavior analogous such that C~/C is a constant to the lowest order.

This shows that the solution of the functional equation (2.8) is not unique. This is not
surprising as we are dealing with open functional equations.

3 Relation between power and log laws

Barenblatt [1], Kailasnath [12], and Zagarola, Perry and Smits [14] considered a single (wall)
layer in a pipe. It was argued by Barenblatt that it constitutes the "main body of flow", with
the log law appearing as the envelope of the power law profile at different Re. The power law
typifies incomplete self similarity, and Barenblatt emphasized that the power law results,
while different from the classical log law, have an equally rigorous basis.
According to the scenario of Prandtl [3], we consider c~ ~ 0. In the power law relation
(1.2), there is a range of y+ > 1 but not too large such that
u/u~ : Cexp(o~lny.~ ) - C(1 + ~lny+ + . . - ) , (3.1)
and the asymptotic power law appears as logarithmic to leading order. For lny+ : o(c~-~),
equating relation (3.1) with the log law (1.1), we have

k -1 l n y , + B ~ C(1 + a~lny+ + . . . ) . (3.2)

Power law and tog law velocity profiles 177

Relation (3.2) connecting the power law with the tog law requires

Cc~ -+ k -1 , C --+/3. (3.3)

The data of Nikuradse show that it is not possible to satisfy the relations (3.3). This is because
at large Reynolds numbers the log law intercept B tends to a universal number _~ 5.5 whereas
the power-law coefficient C is large [1].
If In y+ = O(c~-1) the expansion (3.1) is not valid. In this case let c~In y+ be of order unity.
The corresponding connection between the power law and the log law requires

C exp (/3) = koz + / 3 ' (3.4)

c~In y+ = 2. (3.5)

The equivalence of the friction factor log law (2.12) and the power law (2.20) requires

U k._IlnRT+B+ D Cexp(celnRr)+E. (3.6)

Ur

If In R~ = O(ct,-*) the expansion of the right hand side of (3.6) is not valid. In this case c~In R~
is of order unity, and relation (3.6) between the power law and the log law requires

7 +B+D-E
C exp (@ = kc~ (3.7)

c~In Rr = 7, (3.8)

where 7 is of order unity. The equality of C from relations (3.4) and (3.7) requires 7 =/3 and
D = E. Following Afzal [4], matching the derivatives of the power law and log law velocity
profiles yields
= ^/= 1 - kBc~. (3.9)

The behavior of the two equality solutions (3. I) and (3.6) has been analogous with respect to
y+ a n d / ~ in the overlap region, which may be summarized as

C = (k~ + B ) e x p ( - 7 ) , c~ = l n7A ' A=y+ or Rr. (3.10)

The prediction of 7 from relation (3.9) is given by

= , A=y+ or R~. (3.11)

4 Results and discussion

The inner wall and outer defect layers on matching of the velocity profile by MKH in the
overlap region predict the following:

Inner wall (power) law: U/Ur = Cy~_ (4.1)

Outer defect (power) taw: (U - u)/u~ = C1(1 - Y~) + E , (4.2)
Skin friction (power) law: U/u~ = CRy- ~ + E , C1 = CRy% (4.3)
178 N. Afzal

The inner wall and outer layers solutions fbr the Reynolds stress are

~/~ = 1 - c { ~ y ~ -1 - ~ v + , ~-/~,~, = : 1 - Y - ~ c ~ ( ~ Y ~-~ . (4.4)

The maximum of the Reynolds stress %~axand its location yT .... are given by

<..~/%, : 1 - 2 - o, [c,.(t - ~) c1-~11/(2-~) (4.5)

i--(~

y. mo:~ : [C~(i - ~)/4 ~/';~-~) . (4.6)

The connection between the power law and log law constants,

C1. : C e x p ( 7 ) = ! + B a = ---7-- (4.7.1,2)

kc~ ' in ir't,~. '

implies an equivalence of the power law with the log law, Cy~ = k -1 In y+ + B for the wall
layer velocity, and CR~ ~ = k -1 In/% + B, for the skin friction. Further, at large Reynolds
numbers c~ ~ 0, and the indeterminate Nnction is estimated as

G ( - Y ~ + t) =- k ~lnY (4.8)

which predicts the equivalence of the outer vetocib, defect power law and the tog law also.
Consequently, the power law relations (2.20)- (2.23) redtlce to the classical tog taw expres-
sions (2.12) and (2.15) for skin friction, vetociG profile and Reynolds shear stress at large
Reynolds numbers. Further, the wake (power) function g?(Y) = W ( Y ) , Cotes wake function,
for which standard expressions [10] are

ttinze: W ( Y ) = [1 - cos(TrY)l/2, Moses: W ( Y ) = 3 Y a - 2 Y 2 . (4.9)

The expression (2.26) for the above two wake functions predicts S) = 0.596 9 and f) :~ 0,6.
In the work of Barenblatt, Kailasnath and Zagarola et al., if Re is eliminated in favor of
a, we get

C :: A n + A12 ; (4.10)
C~

and values of A n and A12 are also summarized in [5, Table 1]. The different K, B values
show some uncertainty with the data, for example, k = 0:436 and B = 6.13 proposed by
Zagarola [13I. However, an inspection of Zagarota and Smits [4, p. 61, Fig. 14] reveals that
the measurements before run t3 (Re < t.02 x 10s of Zagarola [t3]) show agreement with the
classical constants k = 0.41 and B = 5.2, and after run 13 ( R e > 1.02 x 10s) the data depart
tu the classical constants in the tog region. The data departure increases with R e (for
Re >_ 1.02 x 106). In case of universal values k = 0.4 and B = 5.5 the expressions (4.7)
become

C e x p ( 3 0 : ~ 7o . 4 ~ + 5 . 5 , a = in ffr ~ ' ~ ~ 1. ( 4 . 1 1 . 1 - 8)

The C predicted by relation (4.11) has been compared in Figs. 1 and 2 with the data. Figure 1
shows computations of Zagarola, Perry and Smits [14] based on super-pipe data (Zagarota
[12]), whereas Fig. 2 shows computations of Barenbtatt [I] from Nikuradse's data. The C rela-
tion (4.1 t) based on universal constants compares welt with data of Nikuradse and Zagarola.
Further, the data of Zagarola et al. [i4] in Fig. t fitted by the least squares method predict

C = 0.832 4/a: + 2.645 7. (4.12)

Power law and log law velocity profiles 179

14
c ~• (1) = ( o . 4 a ) - ' + 5.5

o Data of Zagarola eL al ~ L ~
/ { 3 -

: O ~
o o
8 Fig. I. Comparison of the present rela-
tion (4.tl) for the power law constant
with computations of Zagarola, Perry
L and Smits [14] based on super-pipe data
k.

6 8 10 12
of Zagarola [13] for 26 different Rey-
-1
nolds numbers between 3.1 x 104 < Re
Ot < 3.5 x 107

Ce
25
c/
Ce=2-5/~+5-5
Fig. 2. Comparison of the present rela-
tion (4.11) for the power law constant
C based on data of Nikuradse [9] for
different Reynolds numbers between
6 B ~0
3 . 0 7 x 1 0 3 < R e < 3 . 2 x 1 0 6 . Compu-
1
tations of Barenblatt [1]

The power index a relation (4.11.2) expressed as

-- 3 , z , z = (in R~) -~ (4.18)

has been c o m p a r e d in Fig. 3, with a least squares fit to data also predicts 3, = 1.11. Further,
some d a t a m a y also be fitted by the relation 3, -= 1 + 1 - 12Z. However, the relations (3.11)
show 3, --, 1 for RT --+ oo, and 3, < 1 at moderately large Reynolds numbers. Eliminating
In R~ from the skin friction log law (2.12), in the expressions (4.7.1,2) for C and c~ we get

3, A C A exp (3,) = 1 - Dz~ z~ = ~uT. ( 4 . 1 4 . 1 - 3)

~- h 1-(B+D)A'
Interestingly, the power index c~ turns out to be o f the order o f the classical p a r a m e t e r A, the
n o n d i m e n d i o n a l friction velocity. The relation (4.14.1) shows that A/kc~ is a linear function
of A as shown in Fig. 4. The least squares linear fit to d a t a [14] predicts 3, = 0.987. A d o p t i n g
3' = 1 estimating the constant in relation (4.14.1) from a d a t a point we obtain
1 A
k 1 - 8.25A ' (4.15)
180 N. Afzal

0,201

0.15

o Dataof Zagarolaet. ai
0.10

Fig. 3. The power taw index c~ against

0.05 i i I ~ I I .tL~ I ~ i I i i i i 1 I I 1_1 t I I_~ i t l

0.05 0,10 0.15 0.20 Z from data of Zagarola, Perry and

Z Smits [14]

1.0

o
~ : b o ~ C e•

0.8

(~ k U/u~)-~
0.6

o Data of Zagarola et. al

Fig. 4. The prediction of the power law

constant C (4.16) and the power index
a (4.15) against the nondimensional
0.4 i ~ ~ i ! i i i ] a_J_ i i i i i , i I i 1 ~.~/ 1 i i ~_s.iJ

0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 friction velocity z~ from data of Zaga-

UT/U rola, Perry and Stairs [14]

which compares well in Fig. 4 with the data of Zagarola et al. The relation (4. I4.2) shows that
C is of the order/3 '~ , the inverse of the nondimensional friction velocity. The Zagarola, Perry
and Smits [14] data for C A e x p (1) have also been displayed against /_3 in Fig. 4. A least
squares linear fit predicts "7 = 1,085. With 7 = 1 and estimation of the constant in relation
(4,14.1) from a data point we obtain

Cz3 exp (1) = 1 - 2.75A.

The relations (4.15) and (4.16) also agree with turbulent boundary layer data [5].
The velocity distribution from the inner power law (4.1), along with the present C' and c~
from relation (4.11) have been compared in Fig. 5 with the data of Zagarola [13] for 4 Rey-
nolds numbers. The present relations for the power law compare well with the data in the
entire log region, but a departure is observed in the outer (defect) layer emphasizing the two
Power law and log taw velocity profiles 181

I Re = 3 . 1 x l O e / ' ~

Re ~ 3 l x 1 0 ~ /' / ,'~
//

2s k-
, Re = 3,1x10
2/4

u+

Fig. 5. Comparison of the velocity pro-

15
j
J
.f
._<~ file from the power law (4.1) based on
the present relations (4.11) of the multi-
plicative constant C and the power
index c~ with data of Zagarola [13] for
5 itHlll_ i T IIH~,I ~ ~aa.~x~lL_L~,,,,,I , , ,,,,,~1
1 10 10 ~ t0 ~ 10 ~ 10 ~ 10 ~ 4 different Reynolds numbers in the
Y+ range 3.1 x 10 4 < Re _< 3.5 x 10 7

N[KURADSE
ZAOAROLA
A
~uu
q~.,.~a-':,aD t~------" E = 6 Z

u a D

g
-2

Fig. 6. Intercept outer power law E in

-4 ....... 1......... ~ I I I
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 the defect layer (4.2) from pipe data of
Z Nikuradse [9] and Zagarola [I3]

12 I

!.0,
a
+ ~m a

u NIKURADSE
0.8 o ZAGAROLA
+ TOONER
Fig. 7. Comparison of ( = Ae/A, the
ratio of the experimental to the pre-
dicted friction factor with data of
0"63 4
i . . . .
5
L~
6
{ Nikuradse [9], Zagarola [13] and Toon-
log Re der and Nieuwstadt [17]
182 N. Afzal

layer structure of the turbulent flow. In the outer layer the power law velocity defect profile
(4.2), the additive constant intercept E estimated from the pipe friction data of Nikuradse [9]
and Zagarola [13] has been displayed in Fig. 6 against the power index a. The extensive data
show that E is positive for moderately large Reynolds numbers and becomes zero at or
around c~ = 0.11 or Re = 10~. For a _< 0.11, the data of Nikuradse [9] are within scatter and
may be represented by

E = 6Z. (4.17)

The data of Zagarola [13] for c~ <_ 0.11 show that the data at large Reynolds numbers
may be represented by E = - 2 . 8 + 30Z, whereas according to Barenblatt et al. [t6] for
Re _> 1.02 x 106 the data [13] correspond to a rough pipe rather than a smooth pipe.
The friction factor ), may be compared with the experimental value A,~, by the relation
= A~/A. Nikuradse [9] conducted extensive measurements on a pipe and reported 125 points
in his Table 9 for Re = 3.07 x 10 a to 3.24 x 106. The data of Toonder and Nieuwstadt [17]
reported 7 points for Re = 4.9 • 103 to 2.53 x 104, and Zagarola and Smits [4] reported 26
points for Re = 3.1 x 104 to 3.52 • 10 z. The variables (4.41) for C and a were adopted from
skin friction relations (4.24) for E = 0, and the results for ~ are displayed in Fig. 7 against the
Reynolds numbers. For E = 0 the skin friction variable ~ was found to be a little better when
compared with the results from a by Barenblatt and Kailasnath. Using the additive constant
(4.17) in the outer (defect) power law with E1 = 0.6E the friction factor would further
improve the predictions of 4- However, Fig. 7 shows that Zagarola's [13] data for
(Re > 1.02 • 106) depart from the line ~ = 1 such that ~ > 1, which physically represents
either an overestimate in the experimental data values or an underestimate in the theoretical
predictions. Data of Zagarola and Smits [4] for Re >_ 1.02 x 106 analysed by Barenblatt et al.
[15] showed that they correspond to a rough pipe, and estimations of the smooth pipe correc-
tions are displayed in Barenblatt et al. [15, p. 926, Fig. 21]. If these corrections are taken into
account in Fig. 7, then the data of Zagarola [13] for Re >_ 1.02 x 106 would also fall nearly on
line ~ = 1.

5 Conclusions

(i) The open functional equation also possesses another functional solution represented by
an inner power law layer velocity profile, an outer velocity defect layer, and a skin friction
power law in the overlap region. The non-uniqueness of the functional tbrm in the solu-
tion of the (open) functional equation leads to the power law and classical log law for the
velocity profiles and the skin friction at large Reynolds numbers. This is not surprising as
we are dealing with an open functional equation.
(ii) In dealing with open equations of turbulent shear flows, the matching of inner and outer
layers in the overlap region by the Millikan-Kolmogorov hypothesis leads to non-unique
solutions of the power law in addition to the classical log law where in both situations the
matching relation (2.9) tends to the same limit l i b at large y+. Consequently, relations
(4.7) predict self consistent relations for c~ and C for the equivalence of non-unique solu-
tions at large Reynolds numbers. The comparison of the theory with classical data of
Nikuradse and super-pipe data of Zagarola is encouraging.
 Power law and log taw velocity profiles 183

References

[1] Barenblatt, G. I.: Scaling laws for fully developed turbulent shear flows. Part I: Basic hypothesis and
analysis. J. Fluid Mech. 248, 513-520 (1993).
[2] Barenblatt, G. I.: Scaling laws for turbulent wall bounded shear flows at very large Reynolds num-
bers. J. Engng Math. 36, 361-384 (1999).
[3] Prandtl, L.: The mechanics of viscous fluid. In aerodynamics theory (Durand, W. F., ed.) vol. 3,
pp. 34-208 (1935).
[4] Zagarola, M. V., Smits, A. J.: Mean-flow scaling of turbulent pipe flow. J. Fluid Mech. 373, 33-79
(1998).
[5] Afzal, N.: Power law and log law velocity profiles in turbulent boundary-layer flow: equivaIent rela-
tions at large Reynolds numbers. Acta Mech. 151, 195-216 (2001).
[6] Millikan, C. B.: A critical discussion of turbulent flow in channels and circular pipes. Proc. 5th Int.
Conference of Applied Mechanics, pp. 386-396. Cambridge: MIT-Press 1938.
[7] Afzal, N,: Millikan argument at moderately large Reynolds numbers. Phys. Fluids 19, 600-602
(1976).
[8] Afzat, N.: Wake layer in a turbulent boundary layer with pressure gradient: a new approach (invited
lecture). In: Asymptotic methods for turbulent shear flows at high Reynolds numbers (Gersten, K.,
ed.) pp. 95-118. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher I996.
[9] N]kuradse, J.: GesetzmfiBigkeiten der turbulenten Str6mung in glatten Rohren. VDt Forschungsheft
N-356, 1932 (English translation NACA TTF-I0, p. 359).
[I0] Schlichting, H.: Boundary layer theory. New York: McGraw Hilt 1968.
[11] Duncan, W. J., Thorn, A, S., Young, A. D.: Mechanics of fluids. Belfast: ELBS Edward Arnold
1967.
[12] Kailasnath, P.: Reynolds number effect and the momentum flux in turbulent boundary layer. Ph.D.
Thesis, Mason Lab., Yale University, 1993.
[13] Zagarola, M. V.: Mean-flow scaling of' turbulent pipe flow. Ph.D. Thesis, Princeton University,
1996.
[14] Zagarola, M. V., Perry, A. E., Smits, A. J,: Log law or power law: the scaling in overlap region.
Phys. Fluids 9, 2094-2100 (1997).
[I5] Barenblatt, G. I., Chorin, A. J., Prostokishin, V. M.: Scaling laws for fully developed turbulent flow
in pipes. Appl. Mech. Rev. 50, 413 -429 (1997).
[16] Patel, V. C., Head, M. R.: Some observations on skin friction and velocity profile in fully developed
pipe and channel flow. J. Fluid Mech. 38, 181 --201 (1969).
[17] Toonder, J. M. J. den, Nieuwstadt, F. T. N.: Reynolds number effects in a turbulent pipe flow for
low to moderate Re. Phys. Fluids A 9, 3398-3409 (1997).

Author's address: N. AfzaI, Faculty of Engineering, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 202002, India

View publication stats