Professional Documents
Culture Documents
EEEMhhMhhhhEEE
MhMNSh1hh1iMNNEl
NIH
L 1 2 .
~*
L 40
1111.25
I1.41
jjjj
1.6
AFIT/CI/NR 84-66T
4. TITLE (and Subtite) S. TYPE OF REPORT 6 PERIOD COVERED
Approximate Solution For A Laminar Flow Over A THESIS/P)J))7?7/pI
Flat Plate With Suction And Pressure Gradient *. R O G.REPORT NUMBER
f
9 - PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
ORAN1ZTIONAREA
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT, TASK
6 WORK UNIT NUMBERS
AFIT STUDENT AT: California State University
Sacramento
--. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE
AFIT/NR 19A4
WPAFB OH 45433 13. NUMBER OF PAGES
~~82...
Ii' MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADORESS(I! dillerent ,fromControllind Office) IS. SECURITY CLASS. (of this report)
C. UNCLASS
00 DECL ASSI FICATION/ DOWNGRADING
SCHEDULE
SEP 13 1984 j
Ia. oI s U FlON
nm STATEMENT (of the Abstract entered In Block 20, It different toni Report)
..
). ABS I'RACT (Continue on reverse aide If nrecessary and Identify by block number)
LJ
--
~j
ATTACHED
of
by
Statement of Problem
2 This thesis derives and analyzes an approximate veloci-
ty solution that represents a suction flow over a flat
plate. The solution is derived from the momentum integral
equation in terms of the suction and pressure gradient pa-
rameters. These parameters are adjusted until flow separa-
tion is achieved. Further analysis is done with displace-
ment thickness, momentum thickness, and friction. Other
proven solutions are compared with this analysis.
Sources of Data
The information was collected through a literature
review of journals, books, and goverment publications. This
included the original studies dated from 1945 to present.
The solutions derived were analyzed through computer graph-
ics and data output.
Conclusions Reached
G The approximate solution is in good agreement with the
Blasius solution for zero suction and zero pressure gra-
dient. Increasing suction velocity prevents or delays flow
separation, and permits a flow to withstand higher adverse
pressure gradient. The solution is limited to a suction
parameter equal to -2 and consequently an optimum suction
velocity is found. Suction velocity decreases the boundary
layer thickness, and adverse pressure gradient increases the
boundary layer thickness. /I
iv
AFIT/CI/NR 84-66T
AFIT/NR
Wright-Patterson AFB OH 45433
RESEARCH TITLE: Approximate Solution For A Laminar Flow Over A Flat Plate With Suction
And Pressure Gradient
AUTHOR: George Francesco D'Amore
RESEARCH ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS:
1. Did this research contribute to a current Air Force project?
( ) a. YES C) b. NO
2. Do you believe this research topic is significant enough that it would have been researched
(or contracted) by your organization or another agency if AFIT had not?
( ) a. YES ( ) b. NO
3. The benefits of AFIT research can often be expressed by the equivalent value that your
agency achieved/received by virtue of AFIT performing the research. Can you estimate what this
research would have cost if it had been accomplished under contract or if it had been done in-house
in terms of manpower and/or dollars?
( ) a. MAN-YEARS ( ) b. $
4. Often it is not possible to attach equivalent dollar values to research, although the
results of the research may, in fact, be important. Whether or not you were able to establish an
equivalent value for this research (3.above), what is your estimate of its significance?
a. HIGHLY C) b. SIGNIFICANT ( ) c. SLIGHTLY ( ) d. OF NO
SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANCE
5. AFIT welcomes any further comments you may have on the above questions, or any additional
details concerning the current application, future potential, or other value of this research.
Please use the bottom part of this questionnaire for your statement(s).
ORGANIZATION LOCATION
STATEMENT(s):
APPROXIMATE SOLUTION FOR A LAMINAR FLOW OVER A FLAT
Captain, USAF
THESIS
ISTER OF SCIENCE
in
at
Sumner
1984
84 09 13 033
APPROXIMATE SOLUTION FOR A LAMINAR FLOW OVER A FLAT
THESIS
MASTER OF SCIENCE
in
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
at
Summer
1984
APPROXIMATE SOLUTION FOR A LAMINAR FLOW OVER A FLAT
A Thesis
by
Approved bys
___
__ __ ___ __ __ ___ __ __ _ , Advisor
II
Name of Student: Georce Francesco D'Amore
Accesslon Por
U nIn C,LAICC
-'.", J, !f iC I o
"' "lM !
Dirnt rbut ion/
A*.-.1 lilt. "lityr CudoS
DIs% L!p
pie Jal
-' -A
Abstract
of
by
Statement of Problem
This thesis derives and analyzes an approximate veloci-
ty solution that represents a suction flow over a flat
plate. The solution is derived from the momentum integral
equation in terms of the suction and pressure gradient pa-
rameters. These parameters are adjusted until flow separa-
tion is achieved. Further analysis is done with displace-
ment thickness, momentum thickness, and friction. Other
proven solutions are compared with this analysis.
Sources of Data
The information was collected through a literature
review of journals, books, and goverment publications. This
included the original studies dated from 1945 to present.
The solutions derived were analyzed through computer graph-
ics and data output.
Conclusions Reached
The approximate solution is in good agreement with the
Blasius solution for zero suction and zero pressure gra-
dient. Increasing suction velocity prevents or delays flow
separation, and permits a flow to withstand higher adverse
pressure gradient. The solution is limited to a suction
parameter equal to -2 and consequently an optimum suction
velocity is found. Suction velocity decreases the boundary
layer thickness, and adverse pressure gradient increases the
boundary layer thickness.
iv
Table of Contents
Page
List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . ix
List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi
Chapter
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
I
4.2 Suction and Pressure Gradient at
Separation ...... ............ 40
5. Conclusion . . . . ................ 6
Appendixes
Notes . . . . . . . . . . .................. 78
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
vi
Ii
Symbo I s
Symbol Description
CD Coefficient of Drag
M Suction Parameter, v0 /Y
2
N Pressure Gradient Parameter, S dU 0 /Ydx
p Constant Multiplied by N
P Pressure
t Time
x. Dimensionless Length of X
yf Dimensionless Length of Y
vii
C Boundary Layer Thickness, J x /U"'
Displacement Thickness
S2 Momentum Thickness
it Non-dimensional Length, y /6
PL Absolute Viscosity
Y Kinematic Viscosity
P Density
Figure Page
ix
4.11 Displacement Thickness Versus Length X
(inches) for Different Pressure Gradient%,
M - 0 . a 6 . . . . 0 . . . . . ... . . .. 53
x
Tab I es
Tabl Page
xi
Chapter 1
Introduction
at the wall.
zero and one. If u /U. were to exceed the set limits, the
/2 2 2
-+ u-+ v,-+ - --- + V 2 + + - (2)
at ax 4y 4z payx y )
at y - 0; u -6, v -6
at y -S; u- U0
3
4
The Navier-Stokes equations can be reduced to boundary
u v p
UO - ; V' - ; p, m
UM UM PUo,
x y
L L L
x- 1
y"=
Re 1I /S2
-- 1 I -- r o
2,
Sx2 S
av" S a2vt S I
. - = I ; = =- 1-
u- + v- = -- _ + V (5)
4x ay Pa~x aY2
- + - Me (7)
ax ay
Conditions outside the boundary-layer are:
4)u au dUcO J
u+ v- - U 0 -- + Y8
ax Cy dx 2
;_y
The boundary conditions are:
at y -0 uuB0 ,v -
at yi ; u -UW
7
%u )v
ax ay
hv ou
ay CNx
vl - V1-. = "'-d
v(y) - - dy (11)
Je Jx
The shear stress is known to be o -P(t u /6y) where 1o is
shear stress at the wall. To agree with the momentum equa-
au
o" -Pv- (12)
identified by y - h.
h au au fau dU - 3
ax ay CJ
) y U ) dy P
Integration by parts is used to resolve the normal
ndm
L mdn - mn
at y = 8, u - 8
at y = h, u = Ui
4
the momentum equation into:
u- dy - y +f u-dy r -dy = -
e ax Ufe Cx C)x - dx
dU u
+ U-
x(UL ) - ud -
4)x
a dx
then, Equation 14 can be rewritten as:
- (u) + -(uu., - +- u J dy -
axa x dx P
thickness:
S, =f I - dy
SI UN =f (UN - u)dy
Displacement thickness is the measure of the necessary
62 f - u dy
11
XX
Figure 2.1
measured.
d I 2 dU E U o
dx dx P
S2 + d * ( -2
dx U. \dx )/\ S P11w
Pohlhausen used this equation to solve his flow problem with
Equation 16 is:
'y
v(y) = v(8) -dy
tion is:
d
- E-2U OD2+ Sl m
dUN
+ U
U"
o - 0
dx dx P
udS2 dU o
+ (2-2 + Sl )UM-" + Uv O =-
dx dx p
Therefore the momentum equation with suction is:
2 L + 0 (17)
dx 2
U. dx S2 U0 PU0
U2 3 4
- all + b l + cl 3 + dil (1)
UW
13
14
at y - 0 (11 = 0), u = 8, v = B
= 1), u U, au /ay = a2u /4y = 8
at y = 9 (11
u-a x + v-ay + V ( 2)
P L4 (Wy )
IaP dUw
- -- - U- (3)
Pax dx
Equation 2, yields:
Ju dU* ( ,2u
V - = Um- +V
0 ay dxla2
tion at y - 8:
1)2 u 3u
Equation 1, yield:
15
4u 2 3
- = a + 2bql + 3c11 + 4d1 (5)
2u
Figure 3.1
,2u
4Y2
- - 6 2b + 6c + 12d (8)
U
- ==a +b + c d (9)
6 becomes:
43u
- = 6c + 24d1
3
r)
)3u
- = 6c (10)
,2u
- 2b (12)
4 y2
w-- - - - -- (13)
O)y a'4 ay d
therefore:
2u 1 42u
- - (14)
:) 3u j( 2 :2 3u) 4 a
-3 2-
S2 m2 ;12 la- 13 y
therefore:
:3u 1 :3u
a3 u Ia3
- -(15)
v dUW V
-(a) - U"- + -(2b) (16)
S dx S
I
VI
(17)
-(2b) T
n 6c)
suction is M = v0 9 /V. 8
The terms M and N will be incor-
3 /l.
Vo UO dUm V
3a) 3- - + (6b) (18)
S 3S dx ?
vo U= dUm V
;-(3a + 2b) - 3-d- +-6(b + c) (19)
6 S dx 6
To put Equation 19 in terms of th* coefficients b and c,
4 - c - 3a + 2b
vo Uc dU V
( 4
S2 - C) - 3-dx S 0 + C)
S dx S2
C "(26) 2
18v 6v v
v -4 + -S3 + -Z
vof /2
v4 /v will leave the coefficient c in terms of the suc-
3 UdUm ,3S
( v34
1ev V
dx
062
,Z
v,4
V,2}
Therefore:
3wd6 v. S 3vo2 2
dx V% V2
+ 2
v0
20
3C-3N + 4M]
b = 2 (22)
(18 + 6Mi + M 2 )
as:
4 - 2b - c
a =
3
24 + 6N + HN (23)
at 22
(18 + 6M + M )
6 = a + 2b + 3c + 4d (7)
gradients.
The shear stress at the wall where the flow begins sepa-
( = a and
is used.
yields:
/
Integrating S I S gives:
it - 2
- -
3
- 4 5 1
(27)
I
-(60 - 30a - 20b - 15c - 12d) (28)
66
thickness:
= dy
f w 1
o(
Uf Md
2 )()
S2 u_(u ) (30)
S M - M d11
(t)2
Equation 31, (u /U) 2, becomes:
5
=(al) + abl3 + act) + ad) + ba + b 1 + bcl
5 6 7 5
6
+ bd'l * call
4
+ cbl + c2 1 + cd'l + da)
7 8
+ db'1
6
+ dc') + d2q
6 7 8
+ 2bd)
6
+ c2I + 2cdq + d2 1
gives:
I
25
2 4 6
( 11 3 abl 2act, ad b2 q 5 bc16
- 3-d + - + - + - + - +
j2 3 5 3 5 3
2bd c2 cd d2
7 7 4 9
(33)
33 becomes:
+ 54c)
- ( 1/1269)( a(428a + 639b
f 2
do
+ b(429c + 252b) + c(188c)
(34)
26
The terms a, b, c, and d which are Equations 23, 22, 21, and
2 2
= (58464 - 729N + 94StN + 48832M + 12816 612N
I
i....
. .... ....
,..... . .. .., =... .............
..
CHAPTER 4
is used.
dr*2 * 2 (dx" I vO 1
dx dx (i~)
dx
2 +.~
S2 U ,PU,
a.~
pU02
Using the same assumptions as Blasius, where there is no
27
28
To ist
TO.. (# (3)
3 is revised as:
yieldst
I
29
_ _ _ (4)
coefficient of drag.
thickness S2 /6 as#
S 2 /S -- 9.143 (6)
S2 24 Vx
6.143-- -- (9)
2 18 UO
36
then becomes:
u 24/ ~6 . j 4
U 18 \4.318 vx 318
o S y 4 U. /vx S 5
1.0
0.6
UC
0.2
0.0 -A____
0 I 2 3 45
Figure 4.1
Comparison of Thesis and Blasius Velocity Solutions
No Suction, No Pressure Gradient
1--Tho~s
2--Blasius
32
o k18/\4.318ie x
S1 1.727 4 vX 750
1 (13)
almost exact. The same procedures used to find S1, I1, and
becomes:
6.8 percent.
condi tion.
Table 4.1
Comparison of the Integral Momentum Method
SWx - K1 .! -x /UW
S2 = K3
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
/
Q2
0.0
0I2 3 45
77
Figure 4.2
Comparison of Velocity Approximate Methods
with the Blasius Solution
1--Thesis
2--Linear Approximation
3--Blasius
4--Pohihausen
5--Prandtl
35
The coefficient of drag CD is a function of shear
C 0 (AREA)
CO , 2(1
- (15)
(1/2) PUO2(AREA) PUM
Re - Ucx /v.
/24dN+ MNI 1
CD " (.18 + 6N + 2 (17)
terms N and M are equated to zero. Figures 4.3 and 4.4 show
maximum value.
i
36
5o i6 2 5 2075
Re
Figure 4.3
CC2i
2
5 C
1-4
lO5 2 5 106 2 5 i0 2 5 o8
Re
Figure 4.4
3 - -wrd
39
4.
uJ 24 + 6N + MN
- -6t (19)
J11 0 I+(18 614 + M 2 )s
P1 -2 -1 6 1 2
Table 4.2
.I
42
4.2 shows that with the suction parameter being zero, the
u /UW a 2l 2 - A4 (21)
43
1.0
0.8
0.4
0. 0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
77
Figure 4.6
1.0
0.8
N=4.3
0;6
U
0.4 /
0.2-
0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
77
Figure 4.?
Velocity Distribution
Mi=e
Figure note: (u /U ,)
w ) 1, which is unsteady flow,
occurs when N > 4.3.
__A
45
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2 N-.
0. 0 L LII _I
77
Figure 4.8
M - -1
1.0
0.8
0.6
00
0.0 0.N. . . .
MiN=-2
0.2t we )40
47
thickness S! givings
(23)
reduces to
62
S + no_- ._
U dx ) (
Solving for the suction velocity yieldse
I
48
Equation 24 yieldst
ay
Y( o M dx
au Cu a uu
surface gives:
(3 2 u / y 2 ) ° ((/2
0-4(U /S2) (28)
tion thats
tion and keep the flow laminar until the critical stage of
/
N N & 9 (r* 262) EKI] £K2 I
Table 4.3
S - EK II-vdx /dU,
v. - [K 2 ] -vdU, /dx
thickness ass
one and not less than zero. Figure 4.10 graphically shows
4.12 show how the pressure gradient affects the mass flow
ness. The flow of a fluid near the surface where the suc-
2.0
0.8
0.4
0 2 4 6 810
x
Figure 4. 18
2.0 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1.G__ _ _ _
0.8
0.0 0
0 2 4 6 810
x
Figure 4.11t
Displacement Thickness~ Versus Length X (inches)
for Different Pressure Gradients
No Suction
M i
9
54
2.0__ _ _ _
1.2
0.4__ _ _ _
0.0
0 2 4 6 10I
x
Figure 4.12
lent.
4.1.
of separation.
56
1.0
0.8
0.6
N=O
82 N=-2-
0.4
0.2 __ _ _ ___ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _
0.0 ___
0 2 4 6 8 10
x
Figure 4.13
fr-
It
57
0.6__ _ _ ___ _ _ _
52 ~N =-2
N=-4
0.4__ _ _ _
0.2 _ _ _ _ _ N=_ _ _ _
0.0__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _
0 2 4 6 810
x
Figure 4.14
0.8
0.6
0.4
,' N=-I2
0.2 ___ _ _ ___ N=__ _ _ _
N=_12
0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10
x
Figure 4.15
(Pohihausen Solution)
59
slightly.
CHAPTER 5
drag caused by friction the thesis was less accurate for the
where v o /U* - 0.001 would keep the flow laminar for Reynolds
62
boundary conditions.
difference was with the value for MI the thesis value was
their methods.
zero.
u /U w m &I + bl C113 + d 4
where A - y /S
1W au dU a2u
u- + v+ --- " * I' (1)
ax dy dx ay
a wall &re:
t y -- (1 ) u ,, v mS,
therefore:
2
- a + 2bM + 3c + 4d1l (2)
2u
- 2b + 6cl1 + 12dA2 (3)
45
66
au
- - 1 + 2b + 3c + 4d
ay
1 S 1 2b + 6c + 12d
2
u
- I -- a+ b + c + d
UW
I a+ c + d (4)
giving: 1 - 3d 4 c (5)
a - 2, b - 0, c - -2p d - I
67
-,y IyinS
To analyze the velocity profile in terms of pressure gra-
At y f , (1 - 1):
u
"1 I - b' + c' + d' (9)
UM
68
Solving Equations 7 and 9 together leaves:
C' - -8
b' - 6
p" 6
Equation 2 at y - 6 ( - 6) yields:
au
- W 6 a
S - 2 + (-2)
By letting N equal the adverse pressure gradient, separation
can be found.
N
a - 2 -
69
N N N
b I- ; c - -2 +- ; d"1--
2 2 6
solution as:
I - d1l (12)
gives:
•" 1 11 - + -- N - _ +3 -
r6 2 5 24 5
9 3 N
is 126
I
76
S2 u u.
2 1 37 N N2)
63 5 15 144
/2
APPENDIX B
is:
:
-
UmV 1266
Part One
71
72
D - 18 + 6H + M2
to give:
Part Two
2
C 11348MN2 - 38241121 + 294 12N - 54432MN + 362886M2
+ 2016M 3 / D2 (7)
Part Three
C SOc)
terms, the solution 7
After expanding and combining similar
Part Four
Part Four is the expansion of the expression:
d(140d + 429a 4 369b + 315c) (9)
Taking each term from Expression 9 and expanding it gives:
14d- (-186 + 420N + 2861I4 - 848M - 420M2 )/D()
429a - (16880 + 2529N + 42891N) /D (11)
360b - (-3240N + 4329M) /D (12)
315c - (-94541 + 1269M2 ) /D (13)
Substituting Equations 10, 11, 12, and 13 into Expression
yields s
2 + 11 M 3 N + 4689M 3
+ 381 2 N
S2 d~l
S 6 (18 + 6M
6 + )
2
- C (186480 + 14461N + 699MN + 10512M + 31032
2
* 612N 2 + 393MN 2 + 12661N + 38 N2 + 11I1M
3
+ 468M + 36911 4 ) / (1269(18 + &M + 11) 2) I
au au 4i:*
r - IL - MP- - (notes J1 14Y - 1 /9)
IL3 4 N 2 3 4,
o .(21
- - 2 + q ) +( - 31 + 1 11
76
77
TO 24 * 6N + N
-l (3)
2
ILUN 18 + 6 M.
Grimson, p. 145.
J. Kestin, trans., Boundary-Layer Theory, by Hermann
p. 146.
5
G.V. Lachmann, ed., Boundary Layer and Flow Control,
Kestin, p. 369
9
Kesti, p. 266.
is Robert S. Brodkey, The Phenomena of Fluid Motions,
78
79
Grimson, p. 158.
12 Lachmann, p. 1691.
13 Lachmann, p. 1693.
14 Torda, p. 299.
Torda, p. 288.
16 p. 376.
17Kestin l
J. H. Preston, The Boundary-layer Flow Over a
p. 12.
BI BLI OGRAPHY
Journals
Government Publications
8e
--
---
81
An Exact
- Solution of the Boundary-layer
Equations Under Particular Conditions of Porous Surface
Suction, Aeronautical Research Council, Reports and
Memoranda, No. 2241, London: His Majesty's Stationery
Office, May 1946.
On Flow
- Past a Flat Plate with Uniform Suction,
Aeronoutical Research Council, Reports and Memoranda,
No. 2481, London: His Majesty's Stationery Office, 11
Feb. 1946.
Books
117N
UNCLASSIFIED AFIT/CI/NR-8 1
liiil I~
1.5 ii14
111.01.0.0
111IL2 L
82
Shevell, Richard S. Fundamentals of Flight. Englewood
Cliffs, Now Jersey, Prentice-Hali, 1983.
Whitt, Frank M. Fluid Mechanics. Nw York: McGraw-Hill,
1979.