Nonsimilar solutions of the viscous shallow water equations governing weak hydraulic jumps

Ratul Dasgupta and Rama Govindarajan Citation: Phys. Fluids 22, 112108 (2010); doi: 10.1063/1.3488009 View online: View Table of Contents: Published by the American Institute of Physics.

Related Articles
Slip boundary for fluid flow at rough solid surfaces Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 074102 (2012) Wang’s shrinking cylinder problem with suction near a stagnation point Phys. Fluids 23, 083102 (2011) Sidewall and thermal boundary condition effects on the evolution of longitudinal rolls in Rayleigh-BénardPoiseuille convection Phys. Fluids 23, 084101 (2011) Optimal streaks in a Falkner–Skan boundary layer Phys. Fluids 23, 024104 (2011) A formula for the wall-amplified added mass coefficient for a solid sphere in normal approach to a wall and its application for such motion at low Reynolds number Phys. Fluids 22, 123303 (2010)

Additional information on Phys. Fluids
Journal Homepage: Journal Information: Top downloads: Information for Authors:

Downloaded 14 Mar 2012 to Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see

the Froude number must go through unity there.14. with an assumed self-similar velocity profile. and in the typical experiment the near-wall vorticity diffuses across the entire thickness much upstream of the jump. it is shown that two solutions are possible.00 22. In the standard approach.aip. and none beyond it. Jakkur.1063/1.21 The hope that the inclusion of viscous effects by this simplistic approach would rectify matters completely was thus belied. and experiments on hydraulic jumps aimed at understanding shocks may be found in Refs. Just as a shock results when flow transitions from supersonic to subsonic through the speed of sound. accepted 9 August 2010. This vertical averaging approach has frequently been used since. doi:10. 112108 2010 Nonsimilar solutions of the viscous shallow water equations governing weak hydraulic jumps Ratul Dasgupta and Rama Govindarajana Engineering Mechanics Unit. The process of vertical averaging leads to a well-known closure problem.16 who included a boundary layer type term in the shallow water equations. and show how they are related to the inviscid solutions. Inviscid shallow water theory however cannot explain why should a hydraulic jump necessarily occur: it only offers two possible solutions for film thickness at a given spatial location. There are several advantages to this ap© 2010 American Institute of Physics 1070-6631/2010/22 11 /112108/8/$30.200. in consonance with predictions of inviscid theory. see http://pof. IV. while in a circular geometry. The solution provides both the local velocity profile and the downstream evolution of the film height. India Received 9 March 2010. Here we propose a direct approach where. one subcritical and the other supercritical. In particular. Moreover the film is thin. 4–7. published online 4 November 2010 The steady viscous shallow water equations are often used for the study of hydraulic jumps. There is no immediate resemblance between the viscous spirals and the inviscid supercritical and subcritical solutions. This transformation was first shown for the one-dimensional case by Riabouchinsky1 and in two dimensions by Refs. it has therefore traditionally been considered important to include the effects of viscosity. 12 and in Ref.17–20 although what results is an unreal description of the height profile. The main contribution of the paper follows. We cast these as a single parametric ordinary differential equation with global continuity as a constraint. in Sec. The reader is also referred to a useful pedagogical summary in Ref.PHYSICS OF FLUIDS 22. known as a hydraulic jump. Despite this. Since these spirals have attracted a lot of attention. Other early work of note on the analogy is in Refs.14 so a Electronic mail: rama@jncasr. INTRODUCTION A layer of fluid flowing horizontally at high speed over a solid often displays an abrupt increase in height. 112108-1 Downloaded 14 Mar 2012 to 203. for example in estimating the location of standing jumps. At low Froude number. The study of viscous effects dates back to Tani–Kurihara15. a hydraulic jump is said to arise when a film flow decelerates from supercritical Froude number Fr 1 to subcritical Fr 1 through the small-amplitude surfacegravity wave speed gh for shallow water. The basis for this analogy lies in the transformation of the inviscid unsteady shallow water equations into their gas dynamics counterpart. A series solution of the velocity profile shows that the first correction to a streamwise-varying parabolic profile is a quartic term. without any assumptions other than those described by the adjectives “boundary layer” and “shallow water” . Flow downstream of a real hydraulic jump must switch to the second solution. Thus all that we may obtain from inviscid theory is that if a jump was to be assumed at a given location. 13. in contrast with existing approaches which encounter a closure problem and need In a planar geometry this assumption leads to two solutions up to a certain streamwise distance. one with a separated profile and one without. we obtain a height profile which is a spiral. The shock-hydraulic jump analogy is strictly valid only in the inviscid limit. viscous effects are likely to influence the jump dynamics substantially.35. Moreover this is an exact approach.3488009 I. calling into question the validity of the shallow water approach in resolving the region of the switch. II by discussing the origin of this unrealistic behavior. thus avoiding the region of turn around. Circular and planar solutions are qualitatively similar. closure is obtained by the assumption of a self-similar parabolic velocity profile.12. but no transition between the two is predicted. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright. in the form of a weird “turning around” instead of a jump. 21 provides a way of transitioning from one arm of the solution to another. 8–11. © 2010 American Institute of These equations are then integrated vertically to derive an evolution equation for the film height. we dwell briefly in the same section on them. There is only one solution which is supercritical initially. Jawaharlal Nehru Centre for Advanced Scientific Research. In order to explain a hydraulic jump. Bangalore 560064. 2 and 3. We begin in Sec. we express the boundary layer shallow water equations as a parametric ordinary differential equation. the shock fitting technique of Ref. the approach has proved . In inviscid theory this phenomenon is analogous to a gas-dynamic shock. This shows a jumplike behavior at a Froude number close to unity. We refer to this latter equation as the BLSWE.

a single solution is obtained. e. the vertically averaged shallow water equations yield19 15/Re dh = . or Pohlhausen profiles.35. who imposed a downstream boundary condition. ii The numerical solution of the boundary layer shallow water equations by Ref. 23 and show that there must be a switch from one solution to another in the numerical treatment. owes its origin to the vertical averaging procedure. Here u and v are the respective velocity components in the coordinates x and y. using global continuity as an additional constraint. This finding in a viscous case emphasizes the relevance of the inviscid Froude number criterion.23 are given by u u u 1 + v = − gh + x y u y = 0. Note also the different dimensions of Q. y=0 3 hx 2 where u2 0 u x . by using self-similar.. rather than a parabolic with constant coefficients. This is not realistic. 24 and those obtained by the vertical averaging approach of Ref. A study of strong jumps where streamline curvature causes dispersive effects to become important can be found in a forthcoming study where we derive a low-order equation describing the immediate vicinity of the jump and compare with our numerical simulations. . we must resort to modeling. so that there are two solutions for h below xmax and none beyond. In the case of planar geometry. y2 1 u y=0 = v y=0 = 0. 14 and 22. 25 that the wavy profile upstream of a circular jump can be a result of viscous-inviscid interaction influenced by surface-tension. The existence of multiple solutions downstream of the jump has not been pointed out earlier and it is our surmise that this is a key element in the reattachment of the flow that occurs dowsntream of the jump. There are only a small number of studies of the boundary layer shallow water equations which are able to obtain realistic height profiles. ensuring that we move inexorably toward a Froude number of unity. who obtain closure by modeling the velocity profile as a cubic whose coefficients change downstream. 23. We also compare our results with the experimental results of Ref. in a situation where there is none to begin with. Similar effects are also found by us in an ongoing preliminary Navier–Stokes computation. 25 . Finally. h 1. a good model would be a quartic polynomial with no cubic term. e.22 We will see that neither is representative of the actual velocity profile. see http://pof. we obtain a polynomial expansion of the BLSWE and show that these do not admit cubic profiles. 1 vertically. the same equation may be used to yield both the velocity profile as a function of the wall-normal coordinate y. An appealing feature is that. We then record a definite change in slope resembling a jump in the neighborhood of Fr= 1. The solutions are local. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright. The radial coordinate r is to be used in the latter in the place of the variable x. The Froude number Fr Q / gh3 1/2 and the Reynolds number Re Q / . Downloaded 14 Mar 2012 to 203. As a consequence. For practical purposes. and Q=2 r 0 udy. this model is sufficient. Equation 1 follows from Navier–Stokes equations under the assumption that streamwise variations are small.. which the boundary layer shallow water equations cannot capture. the viscous Eq. with a parabolic selfsimilar velocity profile. 112108 2010 proach. we obtain two solutions. However for the sake of simplicity the effects of surface-tension are neglected in the present study. the shear stress boundary condition appears in its simplified form and nonhydrostatic contributions to pressure are neglected. Ref. The counterpart of Eq. Fluids 22.. 14. THE CLOSURE PROBLEM AND ITS TRADITIONAL RESOLUTION The closure problem. we will see that a parabolic self-similar profile will suffice. We now have more unknowns than equations.e. It was found in Ref.12. beginning with the absence of modeling. see. 2 for planar and circular geometries. we obtain d u2 = − ghh − dx u y . respectively. The volumetric flow rate Q dictates global continuity according to hx hr Q= 0 udy. For closure. Govindarajan Phys.16. and u/ x u / y. II. thus. with an increasing film height. y dy. y=h x 2 u . 4 Refs. Surfacetension is known to have an influence on the jump-shape and the upstream height profile. In a region of very low Froude number. The two most relevant to the present discussion are i the recent work of Refs. is the kinematic viscosity. We compare our results to Ref. To compare it to the exact solution. Integrating Eq. Dasgupta and R. To do this. Note that the condition on h 1 restricts us to weak hydraulic jumps. The location of a jump is defined for a weak jump.200. 16 and 21 in a circular geometry is more interesting. unless we can relate u2 to Q / h. h dh / dx. and found this condition to be important. as well as the variation of the film height h in the downstream coordinate x. GOVERNING EQUATIONS and g is the acceleration due to gravity. i.112108-2 R.aip. While the inviscid limit provides two solutions of constant height at any streamwise location. it is to be observed that the shallow water equations restrict us to weak jumps. especially downstream. 4 affords an analytical solution19 which turns around at a finite value xmax of the downstream distance.g. Downstream of the jump. At high Froude number. but its connection with the inviscid solution is visible at low x. dx 6 − 5/Fr2 4 The steady viscous shallow water equations under the boundary layer approximation16.g. one of which displays a separated profile.

For convenience the independent coordinate in the slope h of the interface is retained as the dimensional x. = ¯ dr 3s + 2 7 h with s ¯ /¯. which collapses very sharply into the critical point. THE BOUNDARY LAYER SHALLOW WATER EQUATIONS A. we must also have f 1 . As mentioned above. ¯ = r / rc − 1. This is then nondimensionalized as = Qf . = 0. 1. In a planar geometry FIG. Eq. while is used everywhere else. = 1. 21. 14 and 22 proposed a model for resolving the issue. IV. since only select values of h Re will satisfy f 1 . Here r and h are nondimensional. rather than vertical averaging. 9 is the boundary layer shallow water equation in coordinates which lend it to solution as successive ordinary differential equations in and . and can be scaled out of Eq.21 For inviscid flow. 1 in a form conducive for further analysis. The evolution of the film height is predetermined here and we are able to obtain realistic jumplike transitions. It is known16. − h Re = 0. Let us now discuss the high and low Froude number limits. 5 gives r2 = 1 ch − 5h3/3 Fr2 0 2 so that u = Uf . the lower arm rolls in at decreasing radial locations to give rise to spirals.12. We conclude this section by presenting an analytical solution in the neighborhood of the critical point.112108-3 Nonsimilar solutions Phys. but to evolve the height profile of the film downstream. h x Re For the circular case.35. we recast the boundary layer shallow water equations as a parametric ordinary differential equation and introduce a solution procedure.5 5 0 1 0. would be preferred. consistent with the arguments of Ref. With increasing viscosity. this quantity is completely determined. r0 and h0 0 0 being scales at some upstream location. we have ¯ dh s − 2 . hx d = dx . Not only must the above equation satisfy the three boundary conditions specified. 1 − f2 = f f Fr2 f 0. and to simplification at various limits. Thus. 5 dr 2 3 1− rh 6 Fr2 0 5 To rewrite Eq. Initial Froude Fr0 = 2. and U Q / h. the first term within the square bracket in Eq.5 r 0 5 r 10 15 The spiral-like solutions are not consistent with the shallow water approximation of small h . we first use incompressibility to replace the velocity components in terms of the streamfunction . In the next section. Eq. We have seen that h Re depends on the Froude number alone. This is a modified logarithmic spiral. For Fr 1. Fluids 22. see http://pof. which is constant for a given flow. This may be solved h r r to give ¯= r K 3s + s + 2 2 exp − 3 23 tan−1 1 + 6s 23 . with no recourse to modeling. = y . given a starting Froude number. given a Froude number. but to conserve the global mass flow rate. Color online The rolling away of the critical point as the initial Reynolds number Re0 increases from 10 for the leftmost spiral in powers of 10 up to 104 for the righmost spiral. Second. notice that the Reynolds number. as there exist locations where h → . h Re is not a free parameter. and ¯ = h / hc − . f . 112108 2010 2 1. Downloaded 14 Mar 2012 to 203. 9 . Last curve and inset: inviscid solution. The viscous upper arm looks like the inviscid one up to a certain radius. v = U h f − f .21 that any solution of this equation spirals into a critical point rc . This provides a constraint using which we may determine h . we may march either downstream or upstream to get the height profile. = 1. h(r) h(r) 5 h r− Re0 r dh = . Equation 1 is then f f 0. 9 = 0. hc where the slope dh / dr is indeterminate of the form 0/0 . merely causes a rescaling of x. We thus argue that our procedure. 8 where K is the constant of integration. 9 may be solved not only to obtain the velocity profile at a given streamwise location. 1 . beyond which the height drops to negative values very rapidly. the local Reynolds number is redefined as Re0 = Qh0 / r2 and the local Froude number as Fr2 0 0 = Q2 / 4 2r2gh3. In fact. Referred to above and hereafter as BLSWE. 5 about the critical point. This radius tends to as Re0 → . We also discuss how the downstream conditions affect the description. Refs. respectively see inset in Fig.aip. First. With the Froude number no longer present in the equation. 9 may be dropped. Since we obtain local velocity profiles and slopes. Linearizing Eq.16. since the additional constraint of global mass balance must be satisfied. f −f 1. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright. . . h Re in this limit is a constant. This is an appealing feature of a well-known equation but pertains to an unphysical solution. Eq. 6 For each c these are U-shaped curves21 whose upper and lower arms are subcritical and supercritical solutions.

The approach is based on the fact that the BLSWE is derived by neglecting the nonhydrostatic pressure terms. where a jump is seen.35. Thus the height increases linearly at high Fr. However. At x 22. the separated region becomes larger and larger. 23. and integrate the equation up to the film surface. labeled thus to denote that the slope of the height profile is negative in this case.22 and the Froude number Fr= Q / g1/2h3/2 decreases as x−3/2 with the downstream distance. at low Froude numbers. The line with symbols is obtained from Higuera’s simulations.71. which is the critical value for a jump in the inviscid case. we compute a new . 23. where we obtain. use the same right hand side . h Re 1. f at the wall. Up to Fr= 0.19. Repeating this procedure until the right hand side converges forms loop I3. We assume an h Re and begin at the innermost loop I1. 3. As the Froude is further decreased. The P solution is however Downloaded 14 Mar 2012 to . which amounts to neglecting second and higher-order derivatives in and retaining only the first derivative. Fr 1. = 0 is satisfied at the film surface. where S is the inverse of Froude number. At high Fr. which is usually a better approximation than the previous guess. We now have a local solution.1 Fr 1 10 FIG. Fr 1. Thus starting at large Froude number. The entire height profile. f being negligible implies that f = f were known. which is denoted here by P since it is of positive h . Since we do not know it a priori we obtain iteratively. since the equation reduces to f = h Re . 4 to be quite large. the P solution is the only possibility. 22 linear increase in height upstream of the jump.aip. Fr2 h Re = − 3 Fr2. The slope of the height goes through a sudden increase in the neighborhood of Fr= 1. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright. We now examine which of these solutions will be manifested. as seen in Fig.12. as discussed below. Fr → 0. which enables us to proceed downstream or upstream as we wish by performing a quadrature in . The complete solution to Eq. 2 of Ref. and repeat loops I1 and I2. 9 to zero would reduce it to the similarity equation of Watson.200. Notice the well-known Ref. most loop I3 is designed to obtain As a first approximation at the beginning of the computation.e. At = 0. We go to an incrementally downstream location + . then Eq. i. FIG. Fluids 22.e. 112108 2010 15 200 10 h/hi h′Re Fr=1 5 0 -5 100 0 0 20 x/(Re hi) 40 60 80 100 0. We guess a slope for the velocity profile.73 is seen in Fig. Setting the right hand side to zero.71. Thick line: P solution of Eq. for his case S = 2. in the regime of Fr 0. 2. The middle loop I2 is meant for arriving at the correct interface slope h . We next enter loop I2. may be obtained to excellent accuracy in a few seconds on a small computer.112108-4 R. hi is the film height at the inlet. we iterate our guess for f 0 . Loop I3 is approached differently. Govindarajan Phys. see http://pof.8138 in agreement with Ref. 9 . 9 is negligible compared to the first. Fig.. By the Newton–Raphson technique. and downstream. At very low Froude numbers on the other hand. we set to 0 at every . 9 would be just an inhomogeneous ordinary differential equation in . 10 The expression for h Re is obtained by integrating the first equation above in and using the boundary conditions. since for exfunction of alone. the second term in the square bracket in Eq. until the stress-free boundary condition f 1 . the solution inevitably evolves toward Fr= 1. 9 .26 Upon solving this and imposing the mass flux condition. The solution procedure uses three embedded iterative loops I1 to I3. In addition to the P solution. The squares are the analytical solution 10 at low Fr. again by Newton–Raphson technique. The thin lines are obtained by setting the right hand side of Eq. It appears at first glance that the P solution would be sufficient at lower Froude as well. and the outer. 9 is now obtained at a given streamwise location. 3 .8138 see Fig. as well as the velocity profiles at each location. The separated region at a Froude number of 0. Color online The slope of the film height as a function of the local Froude number. 2.. as in the gravity-free solution of Watson. we have an N solution. This means we may treat the right hand side as a . At high Froude numbers only one solution is obtained.23. 9 admits two solutions. as one moves downstream. Setting the right hand side of Eq. Thus the height shows a slight downstream decrease at low Froude numbers. f f − f f . With the two neighboring velocity profiles. Eq.71. 9 to zero. If ample. the correct h Re which ensures the satisfaction of global mass conservation. i. the P solution constitutes a highly separated velocity profile. it is found that h Re= 1. the unphysical turning around of the height profile is absent. 3 in terms of h Re versus the Froude number. as well as a knowledge of the downstream variation of the height profile. qualitatively consistent with experimental findings. Thick dashes: N solution for Fr 0. Downstream of the jump. Dasgupta and R. These two are shown in Fig. Color online Variation of film height h with downstream distance of the P solution of Eq. Further. we may obtain another self-similar solution in the form of a parabolic velocity profile. we specify the starting Froude number Fr0.

Profiles at various Froude numbers are shown in the same figure. It is better and better approximated by a parabolic profile as Fr decreases. 3 and 5 are the slope of the height profile and the wall-shear stresses that we derive from Ref. as per the behavior of solution N. since it is possible that more solutions of the BLSWE exist. The line with symbols is extracted from Ref. The local solution of the BLSWE thus fails in the immediate vicinity of the jump. 23 is able to go through. and much less unstable. To estimate how much the right hand side affects the answers. The extreme right of the curve of Higuera corresponds to the most upstream location. profiles with large separation are likely to be unstable. i. The present work indicates a negative answer. two such solutions.7 and 0.53 0.75 4 3 14. The vertical line at Fr= 1 is provided to guide the eye. including the finding that a self-similar parabolic profile is a good assumption at very low Froude numbers. Thus. Note that both the analytical and the numerical solution reach a Froude number between 0. This is in analogy with the Falkner–Skan equations for adverse pressure-gradient boundary layers.8. and initial results indicate that the P solution is extremely unstable at low Froude numbers. We compare our results with those obtained in the numerical simulations of Ref. downstream of the reattachment point.12. and its slope appears to diverge in the negative direction. 23. For the P solution.24.112108-5 Nonsimilar solutions Phys. presumably because of numerically introduced effective higher-order derivatives which are barred in the BLSWE. but does not constitute a proof.4 1. Given the highly nonparallel nature of the flow. the solution of Ref. 2. Shown by symbols in Figs. Fig. 112108 2010 1 0. Fr 2 3 4 not separated at Froude numbers above 0. a solution with the right hand side set to zero is shown in the same figure. as listed. the slope of the height profile is usually small and negative.23. Figure 4 also underlines that the assumption of self-similar velocity profiles is only reasonable for Froude numbers above 1. The predictions above are consistent with experimental observations. the slope may be obtained locally. that study is cumbersome and will be presented separately.14. one separated and very unstable. Figure 5 shows the shear stress at the wall of the P and N solutions as functions of the Froude number. 23 transitions from the P solution to the N solution. and x increases monotonically as one moves along the line with symbols from this point. at FIG. i.. Given their inflexional nature. h 0.25 fηη(0. and so Fr= Q / g1/2h3/2 decreases monotonically. so the simulated curve turns around and traces it from left to right for increasing x.e. where the flow usually reattaches downstream. The Froude number thus rises again downstream although slowly. Dashes: N solution. which displays. The switching from the N to the P solution and the detailed behavior in the region of this switching cannot be captured by the BLSWE. the P solution becomes untenable. Notice in Fig. It also supports our argument that away from the immediate neighborhood of the jump. a neglect of the right hand side does not imply that the solution is self-similar. The divergence of the N solution as it reaches Fr 0. It is seen that the P solution flow separates downstream of Fr= 1. Fr 1.aip.27.28 Moreover.ζ) 0. 5.5 1 1. The agreement with Higuera in the upstream and downstream regions is a check of our prediction that the slope for a given solution depends on the Froude number alone. but the quantitative behavior is different. There is a sudden rise in the slope of the height profile near Fr= 1 in the numerical results too.5 η 2 1 0 -1 -2 0 1 0 0 . 3 that downstream of the jump. 3 is consistent with the singularity in the downstream boundary condition of Refs.5 2 2. see http://pof. whereas the numerical procedure of Ref. the height is a monotonically increasing function of x. The question now is whether the complete physics in the immediate vicinity of even a weak jump is contained in the shallow water theory. a stability study is underway. The N solution on the other hand is seen to be unseparated. along with its consequences.5 fη FIG. Further evidence from elaborately designed computations is needed and is being obtained. where the local Froude number is around 1.35. Solid line: P solution. f 0 .93 0. For the present solutions. 4.62 is taken from the N solution and is practically parabolic. up to a certain value of the pressure-gradient. The rapidly increasing severity of separation in the P solution below Fr= 0. and the other not. We therefore surmise that at some location downstream of the jump.. as a function of local Froude number. Color online Velocity profiles for various Froude numbers. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright. 14 and 23. The curve for Fr= 0. this is the first time the existence of multiple solutions downstream of the jump is reported. Except for minor differences in the vicinity of Fr= 1. Fluids 22. For the N solution on the other hand. 23. To our knowledge.5 or so. Note the difference between the parabolic profile and the selfsimilar one at high Froude. at the jump and upstream of it. and the flow switches to the N.62N 0. al- Downloaded 14 Mar 2012 to 203. indicating a connection between the jump and flow separation. we find good agreement. Higuera’s curve with increasing x thus traces the P solution from right to left. 23 as functions of Fr. case S = 2. . Note that since h Re and Fr vary with x.7 in Fig.73 0.200.8 at the most downstream location. where the height rapidly decreases. Color online Wall-normal derivative of streamwise velocity at the wall.e.8 is evident.

200. 9 . Note that the limiting case corresponds to the N Downloaded 14 Mar 2012 to 203..35. where Re h + h / r = 1.813 in the circular BLSWE 12 . Dasgupta and R. 7. Govindarajan Phys. We return to Eq. In simulations too. Thus both approaches predict a linear height profile far upstream. a minimum in the height.8.e. Color online The shear stress at the wall in circular geometry. both equations give h Re= −3 Fr2. 12 2/3 −1/3 − h Re h 2 f = Re f f 2 + Re h + Fr r −f f . In a region of low Froude number and large radius. The overall behavior of the P solution too is qualitatively the same as the planar case. this means in particular that we do not need boundary conditions in the streamwise direction. respectively.12.. it is well-known that downstream conditions can affect the location of the jump and other behavior upstream. Since the solution for a given Froude number is completely specified. Fluids 22. The solutions for the slope of the interface and the wall-shear stress are shown in Figs.ζ) h′Re 4 3 1 2D 50 10 1 0 2 1 0 5 10 -1 0. i. In a circular geometry It is instructive to compare predictions obtained from the vertically averaged equations with the self-similar assumptions to the present. 6 and 7. similar to the planar case of Eq. 112108 2010 6 5 2D 50 10 1 2 f ηη(0. we would have.6 0. the N solution predicts an FrL 0. = y / h r is which gives Re h + h / r = 5 / 2 for high Fr. scaled by the height there. namely.4 1. 23 sees an effect of the prescribed downstream condition. Thus. This is evident when the Froude number is large. more realistic. an obstacle of a certain height H is placed at some downstream location L. FIG. 11 would demand a long distance between x j and L. 5 dr 1− 6 Fr2 13 The viscous shallow water equation under the boundary layer approximation for the circular geometry. the solution upstream and downstream of the jump may be obtained to good approximation by a homogeneous ordinary differential equation. Eq. f though we have no need to take recourse to it. 4 and compare it with Eq. Since the velocity profile is parabolic in the low Froude number limit.7. 10 .2 1.6 1. it looks very much like the planar N solution. Similarly Eq. moreover. Ref. When L is long enough and H is not too intrusive. we expect the present predictions to hold. from Eq. and we impose Fr j = 1 at the jump location x j. 9 and d = dr / h r . If the obstacle height H is large. 10 . POHLHAUSEN AND EXPERIMENTS 11 where FrL Frm. In most experiments. 6. The legend indicates the initial radial location at a Froude number of 100. so at r = h / 1.813. Now. this equation gives h Re= 5 / 2 whereas the planar BLSWE 9 predicts a value of 1. the radial location for a given Froude number.8 1 1. a parabolic profile is a very good assumption. The N solution for the slope h is not shown since. so the jump may be pushed upstream if L is inadequate. 11 is unsurprisingly just the scaling of Refs. if the downstream solution involves a sharp turning around. which determines the maximum Froude number possible there as Frm = Q / g1/2H3/2 . Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright. This quantity is again 1. If one could make the low Froude number assumption everywhere downstream of the jump. providing local solutions for a given Fr. given that Fr is small and r is large.112108-6 R. We fix the upstream Froude number as 100 and examine the solution for different upstream radii. In this case.e. L − xj Q g Re −8/3 FrL − 1 . it is in effect a parametric ordinary differential equation. 5 for the axisymmetric case is rewritten as 5 h − dh 2 Re r = . so we must discuss how this may affect present predictions. COMPARISON WITH SELF-SIMILAR. Color online The slope of the film height as a function of the local Froude number in the circular case. although the BLSWE is a partial differential equation. V. ones. Flow separation is slightly delayed as compared to the planar case. 19 and 22. In the other limit of low Froude number and large radius. since the height of the fluid interface there must be at least H. B. Some nonmonotonic behavior is possible for the P solution in the circular case when the starting radius is small. In the limit of high Fr. i.8 Re we must have h = 0.aip. Eq. 12 There is an additional parameter now. Upstream of this radial location the height is a decreasing function of the radius. with the same boundary conditions as in Eq.8 2 Fr Fr FIG. with different slopes. the downstream conditions not to have a significant . see http://pof.

8 has a very small negative slope. see http://pof. some deviation is seen in the vicinity of the jump. This is to be expected since dispersive and surface-tension effects. 25 in greater detail. 1981 P solution Tani 1949. can significantly influence the shape of the jump. respectively.112108-7 Nonsimilar solutions Phys. in a real flow. we have a0 = a1 = 0. 1993 N solution h/hi 10 5 equations.12. since as one proceeds well downstream of a jump. since we cannot predict where the transition should occur. The second parameter is completely dependent on the first and may be obtained by imposing global continuity. 1 x / (Rei hi) 2 3 substituting into the BLSWE 9 . Writing the streamfunction in the BLSWE as a power series in whose coefficients are functions of . The present study on the other hand focuses on the regions away from the jump. Downloaded 14 Mar 2012 to 203. VI. The exact nature of the switch and the behavior in its vicinity is beyond the reach of the BLSWE. 8. 12 with the experiments of Ref. the BLSWE does not admit a cubic term in the velocity profile. 6 Fr2 a4 = 0. the Froude number may never become too small. We also compare our results with experiments and find good agreement upstream and downstream. However. Bohr et al.35. The solid line and the dashed-dotted line are our P and N solutions. The remaining coefficients may be obtained from the recursion relation solution whereas in our numerical procedure we are able to obtain a P solution as well for quite small Froude numbers. The dashed line represents the vertically averaged solution obtained from Eq. Downstream of the jump.14 While the averaged equations admit cubic profiles with variable coefficients. our N solution does a good job of matching the experimental profile but unlike in the experimental profile. 112108 2010 20 15 Craik et al. for Fr 0. This enables us to obtain the velocity profile at a given Froude number. 8 the solution of the circular BLSWE 12 is compared to the experimental observations of Ref. both of which are neglected here. but only their moments.71. The experimental data extracted from Craik are for the case Q = 18 ml/ s obtained with dyed water as the working . That comparison focused on the precise shape of the jump itself with the jump height as input parameters. Due to this assumption. and equating coefficient of each power of . 24 was compared by Ref. 24 and the vertically averaged solution of Refs. FIG. In Fig. In a numerical study being concluded. In addition. and having the obtained the interface slope. 25 to their theory. Far downstream. 23 to support our surmise that there is a switch from one solution to the other at a Froude number below 1. Note that the present solution does better than the spiral in this region. we will show below that the governing equations themselves do not admit a cubic term in its solution. as f . we compare with the work of Ref. a3 = h Re . It is also seen that our solution improves over the vertically averaged model.200. the Froude number increases again. The jump is shown to occur at Fr 1 even in the viscous case. 16 and 21. dispersive effects are seen to be important in this region. 14 and 22 assume the with velocity profiles to be cubic polynomials in streamwise-varying coefficients. we have chosen a location which matches well with the experiment. We note that the same experimental data of Ref. Fluids 22. two solutions are obtained and we show evidence from numerical simulations of Ref. All an for n 5 may be written in terms of the hitherto undetermined coefficient a2 and h Re/ Fr2. The initial condition for both equations was obtained from the experimental data in the figure. The only parameters are the local Froude number Fr and a product h Re of the interface slope and the Reynolds number. Note that since a4 = 0. Color online Comparison of the P and N solutions of Eq. Note that the N solution in Fig. 24. In a forthcoming study of strong jumps and the near-jump region. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright. CONCLUSION The BLSWE is cast as a parametric ordinary differential equation at a given streamwise location and a novel solution method is proposed. 13 . The solution from the vertical averaging procedure is shown as well. We have mentioned that Refs. = j=0 aj j . The global mass balance may now be used to obtain a2. Downstream. However. Instability of the separated profile is suggested as a reason for this switch. no smooth transition between the P and N solution is achieved. march either downstream or upstream to obtain the height profile for a weak hydraulic jump. It is seen that the height profile is reasonably close to the experimentally observed one both upstream and downstream of the jump. the solution obtained does not directly satisfy the governing n n − 1 n − 2 an n−3 = p=2 pa p n − p − 1 an−p−1 − an−p−1h Re − p + 1 an−p−2 .aip. we have seen that both the spiral solution and the present one will give qualitatively the same behavior: of a sudden and sharp decrease in height at some radial location.

1960 . Tani. Phys. 145 1992 . 601. Stoker. W. “Gas-wave analogies in open channel flow. 1175 1978 .35. “Hydraulic jump in one-dimensional flow. “A hydraulic analogue study of the Hartmann oscillator phenomenon.” J. 489. 14 S. November 2002. R. 16 I. A. Riabouchinsky. Gribbon. “Studies on the validity of the hydraulic analogy to supersonic flow. of the Research Institute for Fluid Engg. Gilmore. Bulletin 27. edited by S.” C. “On radial film flow on a horizontal surface and the circular hydraulic jump. 998 1932 . Acad. Kasimov. University of Iowa. 19 S. the limits of its existence and its gasdynamic analogue. Higuera. 5 A. Encyclopedia of Physics Vol. Fluid Mech.” NACA TM Report No. Kyusyu Imperial University. G. B 48. 1943. Troyan. Fluid Mech. 3.” J. 480. D. and A.” Int. 8 A. 69 1994 . R. 4. 417 2005 .. A. Jpn. J. as of August 2010. Fluid Mech. Studies in Engineering. 9 L. 1–9.” J. and V.112108-8 R. Nakoryakov. “Applications of the methods of gas dynamics to water flows with free surfaces: Part I. Harleman Donald. 481 1964 . 2 E. V. Bhattacharya. I. Dasgupta and R. Flugge Springer-Verlag. 21 T. J. 1949 . C. 12 J. J. Ray. 618. 6 F. Bohr. “Shallow-water approach to the circular hydraulic jump. Singha. and V. B. “Hydraulic jumps in a channel. 935. Putkaradze. V. 1. CA. 233 2003 . Crossley. Bowles and F. “Integral methods for shallow free-surface flows with separation. We also thank the referees for their comments which helped us improve this paper. J. see http://pof. 112108 2010 pp. and T. 73 1996 . W. Hydraulic Analogy to Supersonic Flow–Lab Notes.” J. J. Higuera. “Water jump in the boundary layer. M. Bush and J. M.” Proceedings of the Second Hydraulics Conference. 17 J.” Phys. 22 D. Sheshadri. and P. Euroavia Symposium. 7 R. Einstein and E. “Applications of the methods of gas dynamics to water flows with free surfaces: Part II. Craik. J. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright.12. 195. and E. Smith. K. E on shallow-water waves. Brussels. 10 J. 1946. “Hydraulic analogy for isentropic flow through a nozzle. Phys. 243 1950 .” J. E. 18 J. Govindarajan Phys. M. Pasadena. An Appraisal of the Hydraulic Analogue to Gas Dynamics Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Pokusaev. J. V. “The circular hydraulic jump. Preiswerke. 71 2009 . 212 1949 .aip. “Sur lanalogie Hydraulic des Movements dun Fluid Compressible. 1938. E. Carbonaro and V. 27 V. 446–778. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We express our gratitude to Tomas Bohr for his useful comments. Bonn. Watson. 229 2003 . Dimon. 33. J.” J. F. Wehausen and E. Bohr. 1476 1997 . pp.” J. T. D.” Proceedings of the Rep. Soc. “The hydraulic jump in a viscous laminar flow. B. H. 9. Guided Missiles Program. Phys. Baird. T. Laitone.” J. Fluid Mech. Bohr. 23 F. 97 1983 . Solomon. 4 H. 11 M. Shapiro. 1 Downloaded 14 Mar 2012 to 203. Vol.” J. Plesset. F. J. 20.” Massachusetts Institute of Technology AF Technical Report No. M. 1940. Belgium. 635 1993 . Fluid Mech. 934. Watanabe. Heat Mass Transfer 21. 274.” J. 20 A. 347 1981 . Fluid Mech. freely available online at http://coe. Fluids 22. Fluid Mech. N. MA. Chap. K. Fluid Mech. “The influence of surface tension on the circular hydraulic jump.” NACA TM Report No. 25 R.” Appl. “On hydraulic jumps. “Impingement of an axisymmetric liquid jet on a barrier. V. 1957 .” Def. 76. “The circular hydraulic jump. H. 26 E. Berlin 21. Fluid Mech. S. Ippen. Sci. Rao. Jr. and H. 112.” J. Rao.” J. in Surface Waves. Von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics. 1950. Arakeri and A. Aristoff. Van der Haegen. 3 E. Fawkes. see Sec. Rao. Preiswerke. Fluids 9.” Eur. D. J. 189 2008 . 28 . Indian Inst. 15 M. Latham. V. 28. 13 J. “The standing hydraulic jump: Theory. Putkaradze. “A stationary circular hydraulic jump. Progress Report of the Analogy Between Surface Shock Waves on Liquids and Shocks in Compressible Gases California Institute of Technology. G. S. Kurihara.200. 1946 . Fluid Mech. Berlin. 11–33. R.berkeley.. Sci. Sci. Cambridge. “The analogy between hydraulic jumps in liquids and shock waves in gases. P. 24 A. 261 1967 . J. 254. R. pp. computations and comparisons with experiments. and T. Water Waves: The Mathematical Theory with Applications Wiley-Interscience. New York. “The radial spread of a liquid jet over a horizontal plane. 5985. 242.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful