Rough-Wall Turbulent Boundary Layers

By John Kim. 2004

535 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ce81fef1fe2c9d20681f4d8addaa217e351cad68

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Computational Mechanics

Citations in the corpus

Direct numerical simulation of the turbulent boundary layer over a cube-roughened wall (2010, methodology): “If we employ the formula U+ = (1/κ) ln k+s − 3.2 suggested by Raupach et al. (1991), the equivalent 412 J. H. Lee, H. J. Sung and P.-Å. Krogstad sand roughness heights, k+s = ksuτ /ν, are 57.9 for the 3-”
An experimental and numerical study of channel flow with rough walls (2005, background): “As a rule-of-thumb it is frequently assumed (see e.g. Raupach et al. 1991) that k+s needs to be higher than about 70 for the flow to be considered fully rough, i.e. where the viscous shear at the wall may be neglected compared to the form drag produced by the roughness elements.”
The influence of wall permeability on turbulent channel flow (2006, methodology): “For both smooth and rough walls, λ is usually found to be approximately 0.4 (Raupach et al. 1991).”
Direct numerical simulation of the turbulent boundary layer over a rod-roughened wall (2007, background): “They show that outside the roughness sublayer, both the defect form and the turbulent stresses normalized by a friction velocity are unaffected by roughening of the surface, consistent with Townsend’s wall similarity hypothesis. In further support of this similarity hypothesis, Schultz & Flack (2003”
Hydrodynamics of aquatic ecosystems: An interface between ecology, biomechanics and environmental fluid mechanics (2010, background): “…for aquatic vegetation is appealing from both physical and ecological perspectives and it has already been extensively studied and promoted (e.g. Raupach et al., 1991, 1996; Finnigan, 2000; Ghisalberti and Nepf, 2002, 2004, 2006; Poggi et al., 2004a, b; Sukhodolov and Sukhodolova, 2006; Nepf…”
A Simple Parameterisation for Flux Footprint Predictions (2004, methodology): “The depth of the roughness sublayer, z∗, was estimated as z∗ = 2 hr to 5 hr ≈ 16 z0 to 39 z0, hr being the mean height of the roughness elements (Raupach et al., 1991). As suggested by Rotach (2001a), Raupach’s higher limit of z∗ was selected for z0 = 0.”
Observations of turbulent secondary flows in a rough-wall boundary layer (2014, result): “This latter notion is consistent with Townsend’s wall similarity hypothesis (Townsend 1976), extended to rough-wall turbulence by Raupach et al. (1991), which states that at high Reynolds number (Re), the surface conditions set the wall shear stress and δ, while the turbulence outside the roughness…”
Using genetic programming to determine Chèzy resistance coefficient in corrugated channels (2004, background): “…experiments on corrugated pipes or largescale roughness in channels of non-circular section already exist (Streeter 1936; Powell 1944; Morris 1955; Perry et al. 1969; Marone 1970; Shipton & Graze 1976; Pyle & Novak 1981; Ead et al. 2000), but a formula for the Chèzy resistance coefficient for…”
Rough-wall boundary layers: mean flow universality (2007, background): “We are not concerned here with the nature of the relationship between geometry and the resulting y0 (but see the Jiménez 2004 and Raupach et al. 1991 reviews for some examples of such work).”
Structure of turbulent flow over regular arrays of cubical roughness (2007, methodology): “…scale Lx ≈ 3h deduced by Castro et al. (2006) from wind-tunnel measurements over a much longer distance (see § 2), or more than 2.5 times larger than the eddy separation length scale 2πLz ≈ 6h (Raupach et al. 1991), the two-point correlation does not quite decay to zero in half the domain length.”
Effect of Roughness on Wall-Bounded Turbulence (2004, background): “[1] present other data, laboratory and atmospheric, that reinforce the outer-layer similarity hypothesis.”