CHARACTERISTICS OF TURBULENT FLOW:

Turbulence can be generated by frictional forces at the confining solid walls or by the flow of layers of
fluids with different velocities over one another. The turbulence generated in these two ways are considered
to be different. Turbulence generated and continuously affected by fixed walls is designated as wall tur-
balance, and turbulence generated by two adjacent layers of fluid in absence of walls is termed as free
turbulence.

One of the effects of viscosity on turbulence is to make the flow more homogeneous and less
dependent on direction. If the turbulence has the same structure quantitatively in all parts of the
flow field, the turbulence is said to be homogeneous. Turbulence is called isotropic if its statistical
features have no directional preference and perfect disorder persists. Its velocity fluctuations are
independent of the axis of reference, i.e. invariant to axis rotation and reflection. Isotropic
turbulence is by its definition always homogeneous. In such a situation, the gradient of the mean
velocity does not exist. The mean velocity is either zero or constant throughout. However, when
the mean velocity has a gradient, the turbulence is called anisotropic.

In homogeneous turbulence, the rms values can all be different, but each value must be constant
over the entire turbulent field. It is also to be understood that even if the rms fluctuation of any
component, are constant over the entire field, the instantaneous values of u may differ from point
to point at any instant. In addition to its homogeneous nature, if the velocity fluctuations are
independent of the axis of reference, i.e., invariant to axis rotation and reflection, the situation
leads to isotropic turbulence, which by definition as mentioned earlier, is always homogeneous. In
isotropic turbulence fluctuations are independent of the direction of reference.

MEAN MOTION AND FLUCTUATIONS:

Derivation Of Governing Equation For Turbulent Flow :

For incompressible flows, the Navier-Stokes equations can be rearranged in the

form

(1a)
 (1b)

(1c)

and

(2)

Express the velocity components and pressure in terms of time-mean values and
corresponding fluctuations. In continuity equation, this substitution and
subsequent time averaging will lead to

or,

Since,

(3a)
We can write

From Eqs (3a) and (2), we obtain

(3b)
It is evident that the time-averaged velocity components and the fluctuating
velocity components, each satisfy the continuity equation for incompressible flow.
Imagine a two-dimensional flow in which the turbulent components are
independent of the z -direction. Eventually, Eq.(3b) tends to

(4)

On the basis of condition (4), it is postulated that if at an instant there is an increase

in u' in the x -direction, it will be followed by an increase in v' in the negative y -
direction. In other words, is non-zero and negative. (see Figure )

Now, forming time averages and considering the rules of averaging we discern the

following. The terms which are linear, such as and vanish when they are
averaged . The same is true for the mixed terms like , or , but the
quadratic terms in the fluctuating components remain in the equations. After
averaging, they form , etc.

If we perform the aforesaid exercise on the x-momentum equation, we obtain

using rules of time averages,

We obtain

Introducing simplifications arising out of continuity Eq. (3a), we shall obtain.

Performing a similar treatment on y and z momentum equations, finally we obtain the
momentum equations in the form.

In x direction,

(5a)

In y direction,

(5b)

In z direction,

(5c)

Comments on the governing equation:

1. The left hand side of Eqs (5a)-(5c) are essentially similar to the steady-state
Navier-Stokes equations if the velocity components u, v and w are replaced by
, and .
2. The same argument holds good for the first two terms on the right hand side of
Eqs (5a)-(5c).
3. However, the equations contain some additional terms which depend on
turbulent fluctuations of the stream. These additional terms can be interpreted
as components of a stress tensor.

Now, the resultant surface force per unit area due to these terms may be considered as

In x direction,

(6a)
In y direction,

(6b)

In z direction,

(6c)

Comparing Eqs (5) and (6), we can write

(7)

It can be said that the mean velocity components of turbulent flow satisfy the same Navier-
Stokes equations of laminar flow. However, for the turbulent flow, the laminar stresses must
be increased by additional stresses which are given by the stress tensor (7). These additional
stresses are known as apparent stresses of turbulent flow or Reynolds stresses. Since
turbulence is considered as eddying motion and the aforesaid additional stresses are added to
the viscous stresses due to mean motion in order to explain the complete stress field, it is often
said that the apparent stresses are caused by eddy viscosit . The total stresses are now

(8)

and so on. The apparent stresses are much larger than the viscous components, and the viscous
stresses can even be dropped in many actual calculations.
Turbulent Boundary Layer Equations:

For a two-dimensional flow (w = 0)over a flat plate, the thickness of turbulent boundary layer
is assumed to be much smaller than the axial length and the order of magnitude analysis may
be applied. As a consequence, the following inferences are drawn:

The turbulent boundary layer equation together with the equation of continuity becomes

(9)

(10)

Boundary Conditions:

All the components of apparent stresses vanish at the solid walls and only stresses which act
near the wall are the viscous stresses of laminar flow. The boundary conditions, to be satisfied
by the mean velocity components, are similar to laminar flow.

A very thin layer next to the wall behaves like a near wall region of the laminar flow. This layer
is known as laminar sublayer and its velocities are such that the viscous forces dominate over
the inertia forces. No turbulence exists in it.
For a developed turbulent flow over a flat plate, in the near wall region, inertial effects are
insignificant, and we can write from Eq.10

which can be integrated as

= constant

We know that the fluctuating components, do not exist near the wall, the shear stress on the
wall is purely viscous and it follows

However, the wall shear stress in the vicinity of the laminar sublayer is estimated as

where 𝑈𝑠 is the fluid velocity at the edge of the sublayer. The flow in the sublayer is specified
by a velocity scale (characteristic of this region).

We define the friction velocity also known as shear velocity,

𝜏𝑤 1/2
𝑢∗ = ( )
𝜌

as our velocity scale. Once 𝑢∗ is specified, the structure of the sub layer is specified. It has
been confirmed experimentally that the turbulent intensity distributions are scaled with 𝑢∗ . The
relationship between 𝑢∗ and the 𝑈𝑠 can be determined from above equations as

𝑈𝑠
(𝑢∗ )2 = 𝜐
𝛿𝑠
Let us assume Now we can write
𝑈
(𝑢∗ )2 = 𝐶̅ 𝜐 𝑠, where 𝐶̅ is proportionality constant.
𝛿𝑠

Hence, a non-dimensional coordinate may be defined as,

+ 𝑦𝑢∗
𝑦 =
𝜐

which will help us estimating different zones in a turbulent flow. The thickness of laminar
sublayer or viscous sublayer is considered to be
5𝜐
𝑦 + ≈ 5 Therefore we can write 𝛿𝑠 = , approximately.
𝑢∗

Turbulent effect starts in the zone of 𝑦 + > 5 and in a zone of 5 < 𝑦+ < 70, laminar and
turbulent motions coexist. This domain is termed as buffer zone. Turbulent effects far out
weight the laminar effect in the zone beyond

𝑦 + = 70 and this regime is termed as turbulent core.

Experimental results of Nikuradse’s revealed that the thickness of laminar sublayer is given by

𝟏𝟏.𝟔 𝝊
𝜹𝒔 = , ( use this equation for numericals)
𝒖∗

Theories of Turbulence :

1. Reynolds Theory of Turbulence : Osborne Reynolds (1895) was the first

scientist to show that the shear stress in turbulent flow is the result Of not
viscosity but the transverse momentum exchange in the turbulent mixing
process.
Consider an arbitrary plane AB between two layers of fluid separated by a distance
∆𝑦 or 𝑙 as shown in Fig 9.3(a). At the point of intersection of the plane with the
̅
𝜕𝑢
velocity profile, let the velocity gradient be . The velocities shown are all temporal
𝜕𝑦
means. Let 𝑀 be the mass of a small fluid element composed of a few molecules.

A fluid mass Of momentum 𝑚(𝑢̅) gains a momentum Of 𝑚(∆𝑢̅) as it

crosses the plane AB to another level where the momentum is 𝑚(𝑢̅ + ∆𝑢̅)
Similarly a mass M moving in the opposite direction loses a momentum Of 𝑚(∆𝑢̅)
This transfer Of momentum across AB produces a shear force on AB.
Let 𝑣 ′ be the transverse turbulent fluctuation Of velocity and dA area Of the
element.
Mass per second moving across AB = 𝜌 𝑑𝐴 𝑣 ′
Turbulent shear force = rate of change of momentum
= mass per second x change of velocity = 𝜌 𝑑𝐴 𝑣 ′ (∆𝑢̅)
𝑆.𝐹
Therefore Turbulent shear stress = = 𝜌 𝑣 ′ (∆𝑢̅)
𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎

If ∆𝑦 is so chosen that ∆𝑢 = 𝑢′ , the longitudinal turbulent fluctuation, then

an equation in terms of the more convenient R.M.S values Of 𝑢′ 𝑣 ′ , then the
instantaneous values may be formulated as follows.

̅̅̅̅̅̅
𝜏𝑡 = − 𝜌𝑢 ′𝑣′
The negative sign is because, the moment at which is positive, is more likely
to be negative and conversely when is negative, is positive.

The above equation is called Reynolds equation for turbulent shear stress. The
production of turbulent shear due to the transverse momentum exchange can be
best comprehended by the transfer of coal pieces between two open railway wagons
moving at different speeds in the same direction along parallel tracks.
The slower wagon gains speed and therefore momentum by the throwing,
and the faster train loses momentum. The result would be the same as when
the two wagons rubbed against each other in their differential motion, generating a
shear force.

2. Boussinesq's Theory of Turbulence:

Boussinesq's hypothesis (1877) is centred around what he called "molar"

or "eddy viscosity" which is useful in defining shear stress in turbulent flow in
a manner similar to Newton's equation Of shear stress in laminar flow. He did
not discuss the laminar shear term, but included it in the equation for total
shear stress as follows:
𝜕𝑢̅ 𝜕𝑢̅
𝜏 = 𝜏𝑙 + 𝜏𝑡 = 𝜇 + 𝜂
𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦

Where 𝜏𝑙 is the laminar shear stress, 𝜇 is the molecular viscosity, 𝜂 is the eddy
̅
𝜕𝑢
viscosity, is the velocity gradient at any point (Fig 9.3) The term u is used here
𝜕𝑦
to represent the temporal mean velocity. While 𝜇 depends on (1) fluid density,
(2) turbulence degree of flow and (3) distance from the boundary. Evidently
at low Reynolds numbers and in the regions of a boundary, the influence Of 𝜇 is
significant and as momentum of transport due to turbulence increases, 𝜂 assumes
greater importance.

Like the kinematic viscosity which is a ratio of 𝜇 and 𝜌, the ratio of 𝜂 and 𝜌 is
called the kinematic eddy viscosity, 𝜖 (epsilon).

𝜂 𝐸𝑑𝑑𝑦 𝑉𝑖𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦
𝜖= =
𝜌 𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦
Like 𝜇 and 𝜐, the units of 𝜂 and 𝜖 are 𝑁𝑠⁄𝑚2 and 𝑚3 ⁄𝑠 respectively. 𝜖 may
be treated as a measure Of the transporting capacity Of the turbulent mixing
process.

3. Prandtl's Mixing Length Hypothesis :

Consider a fully developed turbulent boundary layer. The stream wise mean velocity
varies only from streamline to streamline. The main flow direction is assumed
parallel to the x-axis, as in fig.

The time average components of velocity are given by

. The fluctuating component of transverse velocity 𝑣 ′ transports mass and

momentum across a plane at 𝑦1 from the wall. The shear stress due to the
fluctuation is given by

𝜕𝑢̅
̅̅̅̅̅̅
𝜏𝑡 = − 𝜌𝑢 ′𝑣′ = 𝜂
𝜕𝑦
Where 𝜂 is the eddy viscosity.

A lump of fluid, which comes to the layer 𝑦1 from a layer (𝑦1 − 𝑙 ) has a positive
value of 𝑣 ′ . If the lump of fluid retains its original momentum then its velocity at its
current location 𝑦1 is smaller than the velocity prevailing there. The difference in
velocities is then

𝜕𝑢̅
Δ𝑢1 = 𝑢̅ (𝑦1 ) − 𝑢̅ (𝑦1 − 𝑙) ≈ 𝑙 ( )
𝜕𝑦 𝑦
1

The above expression is obtained by expanding the function 𝑢̅ (𝑦1 − 𝑙) in a Taylor

series and neglecting all higher order terms and higher order derivatives. 𝑙 is a small
length scale known as Prandtl's mixing length . Prandtl proposed that the
transverse displacement of any fluid particle is, on an average, ' 𝑙 ' .

Consider another lump of fluid with a negative value of 𝑣 ′ . This is arriving at 𝑦1

from (𝑦1 + 𝑙) ≈. If this lump retains its original momentum, its mean velocity at the
current lamina 𝑦1 will be somewhat more than the original mean velocity of 𝑦1 .
This difference is given by

𝜕𝑢̅
Δ𝑢2 = 𝑢̅ (𝑦1 + 𝑙) − ̅𝑢 (𝑦1 ) ≈ 𝑙 ( )
𝜕𝑦 𝑦
1

The velocity differences caused by the transverse motion can be regarded as the
turbulent velocity components at 𝑦1 .

We calculate the time average of the absolute value of this fluctuation as

Suppose these two lumps of fluid meet at a layer 𝑦1 . The lumps will collide with a
velocity 2𝑢′ and diverge. This proposes the possible existence of transverse velocity
component in both directions with respect to the layer at 𝑦1 . Now, suppose that the
two lumps move away in a reverse order from the layer at 𝑦1 with a velocity 2𝑢′ .
The empty space will be filled from the surrounding fluid creating transverse
velocity components which will again collide at 𝑦1 . Keeping in mind this argument
and the physical explanation accompanying

, we may state that

or,

along with the condition that the moment at which is positive, is more likely
to be negative and conversely when is negative. Possibly, we can write at this
stage

where C1 and C2 are different proportionality constants. However, the constant

C2 can now be included in still unknown mixing length and equation may be
rewritten as

For the expression of turbulent shearing stress we may write

𝜕𝑢̅ 2
̅̅̅̅̅̅
𝜏𝑡 = − 𝜌𝑢 ′ 𝑣 ′ = 𝜌𝑙 2 ( )
𝜕𝑦
After comparing this expression with the eddy viscosity equation , we may arrive at
a more precise definition,
 𝜕𝑢̅ 𝜕𝑢̅ 𝜕𝑢̅
𝜏𝑡 = 𝜌𝑙 2 | |( ) = 𝜂
𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦

where the apparent viscosity may be expressed as

𝜕𝑢̅
𝜂 = 𝜌𝑙 2 | |
𝜕𝑦

The decision of expressing one of the velocity gradients in terms of its modulus
̅
𝜕𝑢 ̅
𝜕𝑢
as was made in order to assign a sign to according to the sign of .
𝜕𝑦 𝜕𝑦

Note that the apparent viscosity and consequently, the mixing length are not
properties of fluid. They are dependent on turbulent fluctuation.

But how to determine the value of the mixing length 𝑙 ? Several correlations, using
experimental results for 𝜏𝑡 have been proposed to determine 𝑙.

However, so far the most widely used value of mixing length in the regime of
isotropic turbulence is given by
𝑙 = 𝜆𝑦
where 𝑦 is the distance from the wall and 𝜆 is known as von Karman
constant .

4. Karman's Similarity Hypothesis for Turbulence:

Theodore Von Karman ( 1936) developed a mathematical expression for the

mixing length 𝑙 of Prandtl. in terms Of the derivatives Of the temporal mean
velocity. The final result Of Karman's hypothesis Which is based on similarity
considerations is:

𝜕𝑢̅
𝜕𝑦
𝑙=𝜆 2
𝜕 𝑢̅
𝜕𝑦 2

so that
𝜕𝑢̅ 4
𝜕𝑢̅ 2 ( )
𝜕𝑦
𝜏𝑡 = 𝜌𝑙 2 ( ) = 𝜌𝜆2 2
𝜕𝑦 𝜕 2 𝑢̅
( 2)
𝜕𝑦

where 𝜆 is called the Karman's mixing length coefficient.

Hydraulically Smooth And Rough Boundaries:

Any boundary such as the internal surface of a pipe, however smooth it might be,
possesses tuberculations or roughness projections of some magnitude. If these
roughness projections are submerged inside the laminar sublayer to such an extent
that they do not influence the turbulent mixing process in any way, the boundary is
said to be "hydraulically smooth"

In case the roughness projections approach or exceed the thickness Of the laminar
sublayer, so that they serve to promote the process of turbulence, the boundary
may be called " hydraulically rough" The thickness of laminar sublayer (LSL) is
not an absolute constant. It inversely varies with Reynolds number (Re).
Consequently, it is quite likely that a particular boundary which is smooth at a low
Re when the thickness of ISL is large, behaves as a rough boundary at high values
of Re when the thickness of LSL is small. It is for this reason that smooth and
rough surfaces are classified based not on the absolute roughness (𝜖𝑝 ) but on the
𝜖𝑝
ratio ′ .
𝛿

Experimental Observations have shown that a boundary behaves as a

𝜖𝑝
smooth surfaces if ≤ 0.25. and
𝛿′

𝜖𝑝
rough surface if ≥ 6.0.
𝛿′

𝜖𝑝
In the range of 0.25 < < 6.0 . the boundary is said to be in transition.
𝛿′

Another way of classification may be like.

𝑢∗ 𝜖𝑝
< 5. hydrodynamically smooth
𝜈

𝑢∗ 𝜖𝑝
5< < 70 . Transition
𝜈

𝑢∗ 𝜖𝑝
> 70. hydrodynamically rough
𝜈
Universal Velocity Distribution Law And Friction Factor In Duct Flows For
Very Large Reynolds Numbers :

For flows in a rectangular channel at very large Reynolds numbers the

laminar sublayer can practically be ignored. The channel may be assumed to have
a width 2h and the 𝑥 axis will be placed along the bottom wall of the channel.
Consider a turbulent stream along a smooth flat wall in such a duct and denote the
distance from the bottom wall by y ,while u(y)will signify the velocity. In the
neighbourhood of the wall, we shall apply

𝑙 = 𝜆𝑦

According to Prandtl's assumption, the turbulent shearing stress will be

𝜕𝑢̅ 2
2 2
𝜏𝑡 = 𝜌𝜆 𝑙 ( )
𝜕𝑦

At this point, Prandtl introduced an additional assumption which like a plane

Couette flow takes a constant shearing stress throughout, i.e

𝜏𝑡 = 𝜏 𝑤

where 𝜏𝑤 denotes the shearing stress at the wall.

1⁄
∗ 𝜏𝑤 2
Invoking once more the friction velocity 𝑢 = [ ] we obtain
𝜌

𝜕𝑢̅ 2
(𝑢∗ )2 2 2
=λ y ( )
𝜕𝑦
̅
𝜕𝑢 u∗
Or =
𝜕𝑦 λy

On integrating we find
𝑢∗
𝑢̅ = ln 𝑦 + C (a)
λ
We could see that the velocity varies directly with the logarithm of distance from
the boundary; the velocity distribution in turbulent flow is logarithmic in nature

Despite the fact that the above equation is derived on the basis of the friction
velocity in the neighbourhood of the wall because of the assumption that
𝜏𝑡 = 𝜏𝑤 = constant, we shall use it for the entire region. At y = h (at the horizontal
mid plane of the channel), we have 𝑢̅ = U𝑚𝑎𝑥

The constant of integration is eliminated by considering

𝑢∗
U𝑚𝑎𝑥 = ln ℎ + C
λ
𝑢∗
Or C = U𝑚𝑎𝑥 − ln ℎ
λ

Substituting C in Eq. (a), we get

̅
U𝑚𝑎𝑥 −𝑢 1 ℎ
= λ ln (𝑦) (b)
𝑢∗

Equation (b) is called universal velocity defect law of Prandtl and the term
(U𝑚𝑎𝑥 − ̅̅̅
𝑢) is called the Velocity Defect.
Here, we have seen that the friction velocity 𝑢 ∗ is a reference parameter for
velocity. Equation (a) can be rewritten as
̅
𝑢 1 1
= ln 𝑦 + C , where we assume × 𝐶 = 𝐶 ……..( c )
𝑢∗ λ 𝑢∗

The no-slip condition at the wall cannot be satisfied with a finite constant of
integration. This is expected that the appropriate condition for the present problem
should be that 𝑢
̅ = 0 at a very small distance y = 𝑦0 from the wall. Hence, Eq.
(c) becomes
̅
𝑢 1
= (ln 𝑦 − ln 𝑦0 ) (d)
𝑢∗ λ

+ 𝑢
̅ + 𝑦𝑢∗
We will now introduce dimensionless terms 𝑢 =
𝑢∗
and 𝑦 = as
𝜐
parameters.
The distance 𝑦0 is of the order of magnitude of the thickness of the viscous layer.
Now we can write Eq. (d) as
̅
𝑢 1 𝑦𝑢∗
= (ln − ln 𝛽)
𝑢∗ λ 𝜐

1
Or, 𝑢+ = (ln 𝑦+ − ln 𝛽) (e)
λ

Or, 𝑢+ = A ln 𝑦+ + D

Eqn. (e) is generally known as Karman-Prandtl Universal Velocity Distribution

Law and it is applicable from moderate to a very large Reynolds number. The
aforesaid profile is not only valid for channel (rectangular) flows, it retains the
same functional relationship for circular pipes as well. Constants are obtained
from experimental results.

Velocity Distribution in Smooth Pipes.

Flow inside Laminar Sub Layer:

The logarithmic velocity distribution cannot be used in a region close to the

boundary of a smooth pipe because of the presence of the laminar sublayer (LSL).
Flow within the LSL is purely laminar and within its small thickness, no great error
is involved by assuming the normal parabolic velocity distribution to be linear (see
Fig).
 𝜕𝑢̅ 𝑢̅
𝜏𝑤 ≈ 𝜏 = 𝜇 ≈𝜇
𝜕𝑦 𝑦

Or
𝜏𝑤 𝑢̅
=𝜈
𝜌 𝑦

But
𝜏𝑤 𝑢̅
𝑢∗ 2 = =𝜈
𝜌 𝑦

Therefore
𝑢 𝑢∗ 𝑦
= 𝑜𝑟 𝑢+ = 𝑦 +
𝑢∗ 𝜈
For 𝑦 + < 5

This is the equation for velocity profile in LSL. This is also called Law of Wall.

Flow in Buffer Zone:

Von Karman suggested experimental correlation for velocity profile in buffer zone
(5 < 𝑦 + < 70) as

𝑢+ = 11.5 𝑙𝑜𝑔10 (𝑦 + ) − 3.0

Flow in Turbulent Core:

Experiments, performed by J. Nikuradse, showed that Eq. (e) is in good agreement

with experimental results. Based on Nikuradse's and Reichardt's experimental data,
the empirical constants of Eq. (e) can be determined for a smooth pipe as

𝑢+ = 2.5 𝑙𝑛(𝑦 + ) + 5.5

(Note: λ = 0.4 so that A=2.5)

Velocity Distribution for Rough Pipes:

In rough pipes experiments indicate that the velocity profile may be expressed as:

𝑢 𝑦
= 2.5 𝑙𝑛 ( ) + 8.5
𝑢∗ 𝜖𝑝

At the centre-line, the maximum velocity is expressed as

𝑈𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑅
= 2.5 𝑙𝑛 ( ) + 8.5
𝑢∗ 𝜖𝑝

Note that 𝜈 no longer appears with R and 𝜖𝑝 . This means that for completely
rough zone of turbulent flow, the profile is independent of Reynolds number and a
strong function of pipe roughness 𝜖𝑝 .
Average Velocity Distribution for Smooth and Rough Pipes:

1) For Smooth Pipes:

𝑢 𝑢∗ 𝑦
= 2.5 𝑙𝑛 ( ) + 5.5
𝑢∗ 𝜈
Note: y in the above equation is from the wall of pipe.
𝑅 0
2 ∗
𝑢∗ 𝑦
𝑄 = 𝜋𝑅 𝑈𝑎𝑣 = ∫ 𝑢̅ 2𝜋𝑟 ⅆ𝑟 = ∫ 𝑢 [2.5 𝑙𝑛 + 5.5] 2𝜋(𝑅 − 𝑦)(− ⅆ𝑦)
𝜈
0 𝑅

Up on integration we get,

∗
𝑢∗ 𝑅
𝑈𝑎𝑣 = 𝑢 (2.5 𝑙𝑛 ( ) + 1.75)
𝜈
Or
∗
𝑢∗ 𝑅
𝑈𝑎𝑣 = 𝑢 (5.75 𝑙𝑜𝑔10 ( ) + 1.75)
𝜈

2) For Rough Pipes:

𝑢 𝑦
= 2.5 𝑙𝑛 ( ) + 8.5
𝑢∗ 𝜖𝑝

Proceeding in the similar way as above we can obtain,

∗
𝑢∗ 𝑅
𝑈𝑎𝑣 = 𝑢 (5.75 𝑙𝑜𝑔10 ( ) + 4.75)
𝜈

Relation between wall shear stress and friction factor:

Equating the forces in a fully developed turbulent flow gives

Using head loss equation in a pipe

𝑓𝑙𝑣 2 𝛥𝑃
ℎ𝑓 = =
2𝑔𝐷 𝜌𝑔

ⅆ𝑃 2
𝜌𝑓𝑈𝑎𝑣
We can arrive at − ⅆ𝑥 = 2𝐷
𝑓
Comparing we get 𝜏𝑤 = 8 𝜌𝑈2𝑎𝑣

𝑢∗ 𝑓
Or =√
𝑈𝑎𝑣 8

Friction factor for Smooth and Rough Pipes / (Resistance

equations):

For Smooth pipes:

1
= 2.0 𝑙𝑜𝑔10 (𝑅𝑒 √𝑓) − 0.8
√𝑓
This is the formula obtained with respect to the experiments performed
by Nikuradse.

𝑢∗ 𝑓
If you substitute = √ to average velocity formulas you may arrive
𝑈𝑎𝑣 8
at these equation with little changes in the value of constants.

For Rough pipes:

1 𝜀𝑝 18.7
= 1.74 − 2.0 𝑙𝑜𝑔10 [ + ]
√𝑓 𝑅 𝑅𝑒 √𝑓

where R is the pipe radius

For , this equation produces the result of the smooth pipes For , it
gives the expression for friction factor for a completely rough pipe at a very high
Reynolds number which is given by

Fully Developed Turbulent Flow In A Pipe For Moderate Reynolds Number:

We already know the relation between wall shear stress and friction factor i.e,

𝑓 2
𝜏𝑤 = 𝜌𝑈𝑎𝑣
8
H. Blasius conducted a critical survey of available experimental results and
established the empirical correlation for the above equation as

where
It is found that the Blasius's formula is valid in the range of Reynolds number of
Re ≤105. At the time when Blasius compiled the experimental data, results for
higher Reynolds numbers were not available. However, later on, J. Nikuradse
carried out experiments with the laws of friction in a very wide range of
Reynolds numbers, 4 x 103 ≤ Re ≤ 3.2 x 106. The velocity profile in this range
follows:

where is the time mean velocity at the pipe centre and is the distance from the
wall . The exponent n varies slightly with Reynolds number. In the range of Re ~
105, n is 7.

The ratio of and for the aforesaid profile is found out by considering the
volume flow rate Q as

or
or

or

or

Now, for different values of n (for different Reynolds numbers) we shall obtain

different values of .On substitution of Blasius resistance formula in wall

shear stress equation, the following expression for the shear stress at the wall can be
obtained.

putting

and where
or

or

For n=7, becomes equal to 0.8. substituting in the above

equation, we get

Finally it produces

or

7⁄ ν 1⁄4
(u∗ )2 = 0.0225(𝑢̅) 4 ( )
R

here u∗ is friction velocity. However, (u∗ )2 may be spitted

into (u∗ )1/4 and (u∗ )7/4 and we obtain
𝑢̅ 7/4 u∗ 𝑅 1/4
( ∗ ) = 44 ⋅ 44 ( )
u ν
Or
 𝑢̅ 𝑢∗ 𝑅 1/7
= 8.74 ( )
𝑢∗ 𝜈

Now we can assume that the above equation is not only valid at the pipe axis (y =
R) but also at any distance from the wall y and a general form is proposed as

𝑢̅ 𝑢∗ 𝑦 1/7
= 8.74 ( )
𝑢∗ 𝜈
This is the 1/7th Power Velocity Distribution Law derived from Blasius
Resistance formula.

This equation gives the shear stress relationship in pipe flow at a moderate
Reynolds number Re < 10^5. Unlike very high Reynolds number flow, here
laminar effect cannot be neglected and the laminar sub layer brings about
remarkable influence on the outer zones.

Turbulent Boundary Layer Thickness and Skin Friction Coefficient:

From 1/7th Power Velocity Distribution Law, the growth of boundary layer for
turbulent flow over flat plate is given by

δ
= 0.37(𝑅𝑒𝑥 )−1/5
x
Average skin friction coefficient on the entire plate (smooth plate) of length L ,
determined using experimental results is given by,

̅̅̅
𝐶𝑓 = 0.074(𝑅𝑒𝐿 )−1∕5

For Turbulent flow over a rough plate the average skin friction coefficient is,
−2.5
𝐿
̅̅̅
𝐶𝑓 = (1.89 + 1.62 𝑙𝑜𝑔10 )
𝜖𝑝