Recent from talks
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Boundary layer
View on WikipediaThis article needs additional citations for verification. (March 2020) |

In physics and fluid mechanics, a boundary layer is the thin layer of fluid in the immediate vicinity of a bounding surface formed by the fluid flowing along the surface. The fluid's interaction with the wall induces a no-slip boundary condition (zero velocity at the wall). The flow velocity then monotonically increases above the surface until it returns to the bulk flow velocity. The thin layer consisting of fluid whose velocity has not yet returned to the bulk flow velocity is called the velocity boundary layer.
The air next to a human is heated, resulting in gravity-induced convective airflow, which results in both a velocity and thermal boundary layer. A breeze disrupts the boundary layer, and hair and clothing protect it, making the human feel cooler or warmer. On an aircraft wing, the velocity boundary layer is the part of the flow close to the wing, where viscous forces distort the surrounding non-viscous flow. In the Earth's atmosphere, the atmospheric boundary layer is the air layer (~ 1 km) near the ground. It is affected by the surface; day-night heat flows caused by the sun heating the ground, moisture, or momentum transfer to or from the surface.
Types of boundary layers
[edit]
Laminar boundary layers can be loosely classified according to their structure and the circumstances under which they are created. The thin shear layer which develops on an oscillating body is an example of a Stokes boundary layer, while the Blasius boundary layer refers to the well-known similarity solution near an attached flat plate held in an oncoming unidirectional flow and Falkner–Skan boundary layer, a generalization of Blasius profile. When a fluid rotates and viscous forces are balanced by the Coriolis effect (rather than convective inertia), an Ekman layer forms. In the theory of heat transfer, a thermal boundary layer occurs. A surface can have multiple types of boundary layer simultaneously.
The viscous nature of airflow reduces the local velocities on a surface and is responsible for skin friction. The layer of air over the wing's surface that is slowed down or stopped by viscosity, is the boundary layer. There are two different types of boundary layer flow: laminar and turbulent.[1]
Laminar boundary layer flow
The laminar boundary is a very smooth flow, while the turbulent boundary layer contains swirls or "eddies." The laminar flow creates less skin friction drag than the turbulent flow, but is less stable. Boundary layer flow over a wing surface begins as a smooth laminar flow. As the flow continues back from the leading edge, the laminar boundary layer increases in thickness.
Turbulent boundary layer flow
At some distance back from the leading edge, the smooth laminar flow breaks down and transitions to a turbulent flow. From a drag standpoint, it is advisable to have the transition from laminar to turbulent flow as far aft on the wing as possible, or have a large amount of the wing surface within the laminar portion of the boundary layer. The low energy laminar flow, however, tends to break down more suddenly than the turbulent layer.
The Prandtl boundary layer concept
[edit]

The aerodynamic boundary layer was first hypothesized by Ludwig Prandtl in a paper presented on August 12, 1904, at the third International Congress of Mathematicians in Heidelberg, Germany. It simplifies the equations of fluid flow by dividing the flow field into two areas: one inside the boundary layer, dominated by viscosity and creating the majority of drag experienced by the boundary body; and one outside the boundary layer, where viscosity can be neglected without significant effects on the solution. This allows a closed-form solution for the flow in both areas by making significant simplifications of the full Navier–Stokes equations. The same hypothesis is applicable to other fluids (besides air) with moderate to low viscosity such as water. For the case where there is a temperature difference between the surface and the bulk fluid, it is found that the majority of the heat transfer to and from a body takes place in the vicinity of the velocity boundary layer. This again allows the equations to be simplified in the flow field outside the boundary layer. The pressure distribution throughout the boundary layer in the direction normal to the surface (such as an airfoil) remains relatively constant throughout the boundary layer, and is the same as on the surface itself.
The thickness of the velocity boundary layer is normally defined as the distance from the solid body to the point at which the viscous flow velocity is 99% of the freestream velocity (the surface velocity of an inviscid flow).[2] Displacement thickness is an alternative definition stating that the boundary layer represents a deficit in mass flow compared to inviscid flow with slip at the wall. It is the distance by which the wall would have to be displaced in the inviscid case to give the same total mass flow as the viscous case. The no-slip condition requires the flow velocity at the surface of a solid object be zero and the fluid temperature be equal to the temperature of the surface. The flow velocity will then increase rapidly within the boundary layer, governed by the boundary layer equations, below.
The thermal boundary layer thickness is similarly the distance from the body at which the temperature is 99% of the freestream temperature. The ratio of the two thicknesses is governed by the Prandtl number. If the Prandtl number is 1, the two boundary layers are the same thickness. If the Prandtl number is greater than 1, the thermal boundary layer is thinner than the velocity boundary layer. If the Prandtl number is less than 1, which is the case for air at standard conditions, the thermal boundary layer is thicker than the velocity boundary layer.
In high-performance designs, such as gliders and commercial aircraft, much attention is paid to controlling the behavior of the boundary layer to minimize drag. Two effects have to be considered. First, the boundary layer adds to the effective thickness of the body, through the displacement thickness, hence increasing the pressure drag. Secondly, the shear forces at the surface of the wing create skin friction drag.
At high Reynolds numbers, typical of full-sized aircraft, it is desirable to have a laminar boundary layer. This results in a lower skin friction due to the characteristic velocity profile of laminar flow. However, the boundary layer inevitably thickens and becomes less stable as the flow develops along the body, and eventually becomes turbulent, the process known as boundary layer transition. One way of dealing with this problem is to suck the boundary layer away through a porous surface (see Boundary layer suction). This can reduce drag, but is usually impractical due to its mechanical complexity and the power required to move the air and dispose of it. Natural laminar flow (NLF) techniques push the boundary layer transition aft by reshaping the airfoil or fuselage so that its thickest point is more aft and less thick. This reduces the velocities in the leading part and the same Reynolds number is achieved with a greater length.
At lower Reynolds numbers, such as those seen with model aircraft, it is relatively easy to maintain laminar flow. This gives low skin friction, which is desirable. However, the same velocity profile which gives the laminar boundary layer its low skin friction also causes it to be badly affected by adverse pressure gradients. As the pressure begins to recover over the rear part of the wing chord, a laminar boundary layer will tend to separate from the surface. Such flow separation causes a large increase in the pressure drag, since it greatly increases the effective size of the wing section. In these cases, it can be advantageous to deliberately trip the boundary layer into turbulence at a point prior to the location of laminar separation, using a turbulator. The fuller velocity profile of the turbulent boundary layer allows it to sustain the adverse pressure gradient without separating. Thus, although the skin friction is increased, overall drag is decreased. This is the principle behind the dimpling on golf balls, as well as vortex generators on aircraft. Special wing sections have also been designed which tailor the pressure recovery so laminar separation is reduced or even eliminated. This represents an optimum compromise between the pressure drag from flow separation and skin friction from induced turbulence.
When using half-models in wind tunnels, a peniche is sometimes used to reduce or eliminate the effect of the boundary layer.
Boundary layer equations
[edit]The deduction of the boundary layer equations was one of the most important advances in fluid dynamics. Using an order of magnitude analysis, the well-known governing Navier–Stokes equations of viscous fluid flow can be greatly simplified within the boundary layer. Notably, the characteristic of the partial differential equations (PDE) becomes parabolic, rather than the elliptical form of the full Navier–Stokes equations. This greatly simplifies the solution of the equations. By making the boundary layer approximation, the flow is divided into an inviscid portion (which is easy to solve by a number of methods) and the boundary layer, which is governed by an easier to solve PDE. The continuity and Navier–Stokes equations for a two-dimensional steady incompressible flow in Cartesian coordinates are given by
where and are the velocity components, is the density, is the pressure, and is the kinematic viscosity of the fluid at a point.
The approximation states that, for a sufficiently high Reynolds number the flow over a surface can be divided into an outer region of inviscid flow unaffected by viscosity (the majority of the flow), and a region close to the surface where viscosity is important (the boundary layer). Let and be streamwise and transverse (wall normal) velocities respectively inside the boundary layer. Using scale analysis, it can be shown that the above equations of motion reduce within the boundary layer to become
and if the fluid is incompressible (as liquids are under standard conditions):
The order of magnitude analysis assumes the streamwise length scale significantly larger than the transverse length scale inside the boundary layer. It follows that variations in properties in the streamwise direction are generally much lower than those in the wall normal direction. Apply this to the continuity equation shows that , the wall normal velocity, is small compared with the streamwise velocity.
Since the static pressure is independent of , then pressure at the edge of the boundary layer is the pressure throughout the boundary layer at a given streamwise position. The external pressure may be obtained through an application of Bernoulli's equation. Let be the fluid velocity outside the boundary layer, where and are both parallel. This gives upon substituting for the following result
For a flow in which the static pressure also does not change in the direction of the flow
so remains constant.
Therefore, the equation of motion simplifies to become
These approximations are used in a variety of practical flow problems of scientific and engineering interest. The above analysis is for any instantaneous laminar or turbulent boundary layer, but is used mainly in laminar flow studies since the mean flow is also the instantaneous flow because there are no velocity fluctuations present. This simplified equation is a parabolic PDE and can be solved using a similarity solution often referred to as the Blasius boundary layer.
Prandtl's transposition theorem
[edit]Prandtl observed that from any solution which satisfies the boundary layer equations, further solution , which is also satisfying the boundary layer equations, can be constructed by writing[3]
where is arbitrary. Since the solution is not unique from mathematical perspective,[4] to the solution can be added any one of an infinite set of eigenfunctions as shown by Stewartson[5] and Paul A. Libby.[6][7]
Von Kármán momentum integral
[edit]Von Kármán derived the integral equation by integrating the boundary layer equation across the boundary layer in 1921.[8] The equation is
where
- is the wall shear stress, is the suction/injection velocity at the wall, is the displacement thickness and is the momentum thickness. Kármán–Pohlhausen Approximation is derived from this equation.
Energy integral
[edit]The energy integral was derived by Wieghardt.[9][10]
where
- is the energy dissipation rate due to viscosity across the boundary layer and is the energy thickness.[11]
Von Mises transformation
[edit]For steady two-dimensional boundary layers, von Mises[12] introduced a transformation which takes and (stream function) as independent variables instead of and and uses a dependent variable instead of . The boundary layer equation then become
The original variables are recovered from
This transformation is later extended to compressible boundary layer by von Kármán and HS Tsien.[13]
Crocco's transformation
[edit]For steady two-dimensional compressible boundary layer, Luigi Crocco[14] introduced a transformation which takes and as independent variables instead of and and uses a dependent variable (shear stress) instead of . The boundary layer equation then becomes
The original coordinate is recovered from
Turbulent boundary layers
[edit]The treatment of turbulent boundary layers is far more difficult due to the time-dependent variation of the flow properties. One of the most widely used techniques in which turbulent flows are tackled is to apply Reynolds decomposition. Here the instantaneous flow properties are decomposed into a mean and fluctuating component with the assumption that the mean of the fluctuating component is always zero. Applying this technique to the boundary layer equations gives the full turbulent boundary layer equations not often given in literature:
Using a similar order-of-magnitude analysis, the above equations can be reduced to leading order terms. By choosing length scales for changes in the transverse-direction, and for changes in the streamwise-direction, with , the x-momentum equation simplifies to:
This equation does not satisfy the no-slip condition at the wall. Like Prandtl did for his boundary layer equations, a new, smaller length scale must be used to allow the viscous term to become leading order in the momentum equation. By choosing as the y-scale, the leading order momentum equation for this "inner boundary layer" is given by:
In the limit of infinite Reynolds number, the pressure gradient term can be shown to have no effect on the inner region of the turbulent boundary layer. The new "inner length scale" is a viscous length scale, and is of order , with being the velocity scale of the turbulent fluctuations, in this case a friction velocity.
Unlike the laminar boundary layer equations, the presence of two regimes governed by different sets of flow scales (i.e. the inner and outer scaling) has made finding a universal similarity solution for the turbulent boundary layer difficult and controversial. To find a similarity solution that spans both regions of the flow, it is necessary to asymptotically match the solutions from both regions of the flow. Such analysis will yield either the so-called log-law or power-law.
Similar approaches to the above analysis has also been applied for thermal boundary layers, using the energy equation in compressible flows.[15][16]
The additional term in the turbulent boundary layer equations is known as the Reynolds shear stress and is unknown a priori. The solution of the turbulent boundary layer equations therefore necessitates the use of a turbulence model, which aims to express the Reynolds shear stress in terms of known flow variables or derivatives. The lack of accuracy and generality of such models is a major obstacle in the successful prediction of turbulent flow properties in modern fluid dynamics.
A constant stress layer exists in the near wall region. Due to the damping of the vertical velocity fluctuations near the wall, the Reynolds stress term will become negligible and we find that a linear velocity profile exists. This is only true for the very near wall region.
Heat and mass transfer
[edit]In 1928, the French engineer André Lévêque observed that convective heat transfer in a flowing fluid is affected only by the velocity values very close to the surface.[17][18] For flows of large Prandtl number, the temperature/mass transition from surface to freestream temperature takes place across a very thin region close to the surface. Therefore, the most important fluid velocities are those inside this very thin region in which the change in velocity can be considered linear with normal distance from the surface. In this way, for
when , then
where θ is the tangent of the Poiseuille parabola intersecting the wall. Although Lévêque's solution was specific to heat transfer into a Poiseuille flow, his insight helped lead other scientists to an exact solution of the thermal boundary-layer problem.[19] Schuh observed that in a boundary-layer, u is again a linear function of y, but that in this case, the wall tangent is a function of x.[20] He expressed this with a modified version of Lévêque's profile,
This results in a very good approximation, even for low numbers, so that only liquid metals with much less than 1 cannot be treated this way.[19] In 1962, Kestin and Persen published a paper describing solutions for heat transfer when the thermal boundary layer is contained entirely within the momentum layer and for various wall temperature distributions.[21] For the problem of a flat plate with a temperature jump at , they propose a substitution that reduces the parabolic thermal boundary-layer equation to an ordinary differential equation. The solution to this equation, the temperature at any point in the fluid, can be expressed as an incomplete gamma function.[18] Schlichting proposed an equivalent substitution that reduces the thermal boundary-layer equation to an ordinary differential equation whose solution is the same incomplete gamma function.[22] Analytic solutions can be derived with the time-dependent self-similar Ansatz for the incompressible boundary layer equations including heat conduction.[23]
As is well known from several textbooks, heat transfer tends to decrease with the increase in the boundary layer. Recently, it was observed on a practical and large scale that wind flowing through a photovoltaic generator tends to "trap" heat in the PV panels under a turbulent regime due to the decrease in heat transfer.[24] Despite being frequently assumed to be inherently turbulent, this accidental observation demonstrates that natural wind behaves in practice very close to an ideal fluid, at least in an observation resembling the expected behaviour in a flat plate, potentially reducing the difficulty in analysing this kind of phenomenon on a larger scale.
Convective transfer constants from boundary layer analysis
[edit]Paul Richard Heinrich Blasius derived an exact solution to the above laminar boundary layer equations.[25] The thickness of the boundary layer is a function of the Reynolds number for laminar flow.
- = the thickness of the boundary layer: the region of flow where the velocity is less than 99% of the far field velocity ; is position along the semi-infinite plate, and is the Reynolds Number given by ( density and dynamic viscosity).
The Blasius solution uses boundary conditions in a dimensionless form:
- at
- at and

Note that in many cases, the no-slip boundary condition holds that , the fluid velocity at the surface of the plate equals the velocity of the plate at all locations. If the plate is not moving, then . A much more complicated derivation is required if fluid slip is allowed.[26]
In fact, the Blasius solution for laminar velocity profile in the boundary layer above a semi-infinite plate can be easily extended to describe Thermal and Concentration boundary layers for heat and mass transfer respectively. Rather than the differential x-momentum balance (equation of motion), this uses a similarly derived Energy and Mass balance:
Energy:
Mass:
For the momentum balance, kinematic viscosity can be considered to be the momentum diffusivity. In the energy balance this is replaced by thermal diffusivity , and by mass diffusivity in the mass balance. In thermal diffusivity of a substance, is its thermal conductivity, is its density and is its heat capacity. Subscript AB denotes diffusivity of species A diffusing into species B.
Under the assumption that , these equations become equivalent to the momentum balance. Thus, for Prandtl number and Schmidt number the Blasius solution applies directly.
Accordingly, this derivation uses a related form of the boundary conditions, replacing with or (absolute temperature or concentration of species A). The subscript S denotes a surface condition.
- at
- at and
Using the streamline function Blasius obtained the following solution for the shear stress at the surface of the plate.
And via the boundary conditions, it is known that
We are given the following relations for heat/mass flux out of the surface of the plate
So for
where are the regions of flow where and are less than 99% of their far field values.[27]
Because the Prandtl number of a particular fluid is not often unity, German engineer E. Polhausen who worked with Ludwig Prandtl attempted to empirically extend these equations to apply for . His results can be applied to as well.[28] He found that for Prandtl number greater than 0.6, the thermal boundary layer thickness was approximately given by:

- and therefore
From this solution, it is possible to characterize the convective heat/mass transfer constants based on the region of boundary layer flow. Fourier's law of conduction and Newton's Law of Cooling are combined with the flux term derived above and the boundary layer thickness.
This gives the local convective constant at one point on the semi-infinite plane. Integrating over the length of the plate gives an average
Following the derivation with mass transfer terms ( = convective mass transfer constant, = diffusivity of species A into species B, ), the following solutions are obtained:
These solutions apply for laminar flow with a Prandtl/Schmidt number greater than 0.6.[27]
Naval architecture
[edit]Many of the principles that apply to aircraft also apply to ships, submarines, and offshore platforms, with water as the primary fluid of concern rather than air. As water is not an ideal fluid, ships moving in water experience resistance. The fluid particles cling to the hull of the ship due to the adhesive force between water and the ship, creating a boundary layer where the speed of flow of the fluid forms a small but steep speed gradient, with the fluid in contact with the ship ideally has a relative velocity of 0, and the fluid at the border of the boundary layer being the free-stream speed, or the relative speed of the fluid around the ship.[29]
While the front of the ship faces normal pressure forces due to the fluid surrounding it, the aft portion sees a lower acting component of pressure due to the boundary layer. This leads to higher resistance due to pressure known as 'viscous pressure drag' or 'form drag'.[29]
For ships, unlike aircraft, one deals with incompressible flows, where change in water density is negligible (a pressure rise close to 1000kPa leads to a change of only 2–3 kg/m3). This field of fluid dynamics is called hydrodynamics. A ship engineer designs for hydrodynamics first, and for strength only later. The boundary layer development, breakdown, and separation become critical because the high viscosity of water produces high shear stresses.
Boundary layer turbine
[edit]This effect was exploited in the Tesla turbine, patented by Nikola Tesla in 1913. It is referred to as a bladeless turbine because it uses the boundary layer effect and not a fluid impinging upon the blades as in a conventional turbine. Boundary layer turbines are also known as cohesion-type turbine, bladeless turbine, and Prandtl layer turbine (after Ludwig Prandtl).
Predicting transient boundary layer thickness in a cylinder using dimensional analysis
[edit]By using the transient and viscous force equations for a cylindrical flow you can predict the transient boundary layer thickness by finding the Womersley Number ().
Transient Force =
Viscous Force =
Setting them equal to each other gives:
Solving for delta gives:
In dimensionless form:
where = Womersley Number; = density; = velocity; frequency of oscillations; = length of transient boundary layer; = viscosity; = characteristic length.
Predicting convective flow conditions at the boundary layer in a cylinder using dimensional analysis
[edit]By using the convective and viscous force equations at the boundary layer for a cylindrical flow you can predict the convective flow conditions at the boundary layer by finding the dimensionless Reynolds Number ().
Convective force:
Viscous force:
Setting them equal to each other gives:
Solving for delta gives:
In dimensionless form:
where = Reynolds Number; = density; = velocity; = length of convective boundary layer; = viscosity; = characteristic length.
Boundary layer ingestion
[edit]Boundary layer ingestion promises an increase in aircraft fuel efficiency with an aft-mounted propulsor ingesting the slow fuselage boundary layer and re-energising the wake to reduce drag and improve propulsive efficiency. To operate in distorted airflow, the fan is heavier and its efficiency is reduced, and its integration is challenging. It is used in concepts like the Aurora D8 or the French research agency Onera's Nova, saving 5% in cruise by ingesting 40% of the fuselage boundary layer.[30]
Airbus presented the Nautilius concept at the ICAS congress in September 2018: to ingest all the fuselage boundary layer, while minimizing the azimuthal flow distortion, the fuselage splits into two spindles with 13-18:1 bypass ratio fans. Propulsive efficiencies are up to 90% like counter-rotating open rotors with smaller, lighter, less complex and noisy engines. It could lower fuel burn by over 10% compared to a usual underwing 15:1 bypass ratio engine.[30]
See also
[edit]- Boundary layer separation
- Boundary-layer thickness
- Thermal boundary layer thickness and shape
- Boundary layer suction
- Boundary layer control
- Boundary microphone
- Blasius boundary layer
- Falkner–Skan boundary layer
- Ekman layer
- Planetary boundary layer
- Perturbation theory
- Logarithmic law of the wall
- Shape factor (boundary layer flow)
- Shear stress
- Surface layer
References
[edit]- ^ Young, A.D. (1989). Boundary layers (1st publ. ed.). Washington, DC: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. ISBN 0930403576.
- ^ Schlichting, Hermann; Gersten, Klaus (2017). "2.1 Boundary–Layer Concept". Boundary-Layer theory (Ninth ed.). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer. p. 29. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-52919-5_2. ISBN 978-3-662-52917-1. Retrieved 5 August 2023.
Frequently the boundary is arbitrarily given as being at the point where the velocity reaches a certain percentage of the outer velocity, e.g. 99%. For clarity, an index is often used, e.g δ99.
- ^ Prandtl, L. (1938). "Zur Berechnung der Grenzschichten". Zeitschrift für Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanik. 18 (1): 77–82. Bibcode:1938ZaMM...18...77P. doi:10.1002/zamm.19380180111.
- ^ Van Dyke, Milton. Perturbation methods in fluid mechanics. Parabolic Press, Incorporated, 1975.
- ^ Stewartson, K. (1957). "On Asymptotic Expansions in the Theory of Boundary Layers". Journal of Mathematics and Physics. 36 (1–4): 173–191. doi:10.1002/sapm1957361173.
- ^ Libby, Paul A.; Fox, Herbert (1963). "Some perturbation solutions in laminar boundary-layer theory". Journal of Fluid Mechanics. 17 (3): 433. doi:10.1017/S0022112063001439. S2CID 123824364.
- ^ Fox, Herbert; Libby, Paul A. (1964). "Some perturbation solutions in laminar boundary layer theory Part 2. The energy equation". Journal of Fluid Mechanics. 19 (3): 433–451. Bibcode:1964JFM....19..433F. doi:10.1017/S0022112064000830. S2CID 120911442.
- ^ von Kármán, T. (1921). "Über laminare und turbulente Reibung". Zeitschrift für Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanik. 1 (4): 233–252. Bibcode:1921ZaMM....1..233K. doi:10.1002/zamm.19210010401.
- ^ Wieghardt, K. On an energy equation for the calculation of laminar boundary layers. Joint Intelligence Objectives Agency, 1946.
- ^ Wieghardt, K. (1948). "Über einen Energiesatz zur Berechnung laminarer Grenzschichten". Ingenieur-Archiv. 16 (3–4): 231–242. Bibcode:1948AAM....16..231W. doi:10.1007/BF00548007. S2CID 119750449.
- ^ Rosenhead, Louis, ed. Laminar boundary layers. Clarendon Press, 1963.
- ^ Tollmien, Walter; Schlichting, Hermann; Görtler, Henry; Riegels, F. W. (1961). "Bemerkungen zur Hydrodynamik". Ludwig Prandtl Gesammelte Abhandlungen. pp. 627–631. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-11836-8_49. ISBN 978-3-662-11837-5.
{{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) - ^ von Kármán, T.; Tsien, H. S. (1938). "Boundary Layer in Compressible Fluids". Journal of the Aeronautical Sciences. 5 (6): 227–232. doi:10.2514/8.591.
- ^ Crocco, L. "A characteristic transformation of the equations of the boundary layer in gases." ARC 4582 (1939): 1940.
- ^ von Karman, T. (1939). "The analogy between fluid friction and heat transfer". Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. 61 (8): 705–710. doi:10.1115/1.4021298. S2CID 256805665.
- ^ Guo, J.; Yang, X. I. A.; Ihme, M. (March 2022). "Structure of the thermal boundary layer in turbulent channel flows at transcritical conditions". Journal of Fluid Mechanics. 934 A45. Bibcode:2022JFM...934A..45G. doi:10.1017/jfm.2021.1157. ISSN 0022-1120. S2CID 246066677.
- ^ Lévêque, A. (1928). "Les lois de la transmission de chaleur par convection". Annales des Mines ou Recueil de Mémoires sur l'Exploitation des Mines et sur les Sciences et les Arts qui s'y Rattachent, Mémoires (in French). XIII (13): 201–239.
- ^ a b Niall McMahon. "André Lévêque p285, a review of his velocity profile approximation". Archived from the original on 2012-06-04.
- ^ a b Martin, H. (2002). "The generalized Lévêque equation and its practical use for the prediction of heat and mass transfer rates from pressure drop". Chemical Engineering Science. 57 (16): 3217–3223. Bibcode:2002ChEnS..57.3217M. doi:10.1016/S0009-2509(02)00194-X.
- ^ Schuh, H. (1953). "On Asymptotic Solutions for the Heat Transfer at Varying Wall Temperatures in a Laminar Boundary Layer with Hartree's Velocity Profiles". Journal of the Aeronautical Sciences. 20 (2): 146–147. doi:10.2514/8.2566.
- ^ Kestin, J. & Persen, L.N. (1962). "The transfer of heat across a turbulent boundary layer at very high prandtl numbers". International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer. 5 (5): 355–371. Bibcode:1962IJHMT...5..355K. doi:10.1016/0017-9310(62)90026-1.
- ^ Schlichting, H. (1979). Boundary-Layer Theory (7 ed.). New York (USA): McGraw-Hill.
- ^ Barna, Imre Ferenc; Bognár, Gabriella; Mátyás, László; Hriczó, Krisztián (2022). "Self‑similar analysis of the time‑dependent compressible and incompressible boundary layers including heat conduction". Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry. 147: 13625–13632. arXiv:2101.08990. doi:10.1007/s10973-022-11574-3.
- ^ Rossa, Carlos (2023). "Energy losses in photovoltaic generators due to wind patterns". Nature Communications Engineering. 2 (66) 66. Bibcode:2023CmEng...2...66R. doi:10.1038/s44172-023-00119-7. PMC 10956078.
- ^ Blasius, H. (1908). "Grenzschichten in Flüssigkeiten mit kleiner Reibung". Zeitschrift für Mathematik und Physik. 56: 1–37. (English translation)
- ^ Martin, Michael J. (2001). "Blasius boundary layer solution with slip flow conditions". AIP Conference Proceedings. Vol. 585. pp. 518–523. doi:10.1063/1.1407604. hdl:2027.42/87372.
- ^ a b Geankoplis, Christie J. Transport Processes and Separation Process Principles: (includes Unit Operations). Fourth ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall Professional Technical Reference, 2003. Print.
- ^ Pohlhausen, E. (1921). "Der Wärmeaustausch zwischen festen Körpern und Flüssigkeiten mit kleiner reibung und kleiner Wärmeleitung". Zeitschrift für Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanik. 1 (2): 115–121. Bibcode:1921ZaMM....1..115P. doi:10.1002/zamm.19210010205.
- ^ a b "Resistance and Powering of Ships" (PDF). usna.edu. Retrieved 14 February 2024.
- ^ a b Graham Warwick (Nov 19, 2018). "The Week In Technology, November 19-23, 2018". Aviation Week & Space Technology.
- Chanson, H. (2009). Applied Hydrodynamics: An Introduction to Ideal and Real Fluid Flows. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, Leiden, The Netherlands, 478 pages. ISBN 978-0-415-49271-3.
- A.D. Polyanin and V.F. Zaitsev, Handbook of Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations, Chapman & Hall/CRC Press, Boca Raton – London, 2004. ISBN 1-58488-355-3
- A.D. Polyanin, A.M. Kutepov, A.V. Vyazmin, and D.A. Kazenin, Hydrodynamics, Mass and Heat Transfer in Chemical Engineering, Taylor & Francis, London, 2002. ISBN 0-415-27237-8
- Hermann Schlichting, Klaus Gersten, E. Krause, H. Jr. Oertel, C. Mayes "Boundary-Layer Theory" 8th edition Springer 2004 ISBN 3-540-66270-7
- John D. Anderson Jr., "Ludwig Prandtl's Boundary Layer", Physics Today, December 2005
- Anderson, John (1992). Fundamentals of Aerodynamics (2nd ed.). Toronto: S.S.CHAND. pp. 711–714. ISBN 0-07-001679-8.
- H. Tennekes and J. L. Lumley, "A First Course in Turbulence", The MIT Press, (1972).
- Lectures in Turbulence for the 21st Century by William K. George
External links
[edit]- National Science Digital Library – Boundary Layer
- Moore, Franklin K., "Displacement effect of a three-dimensional boundary layer". NACA Report 1124, 1953.
- Benson, Tom, "Boundary layer". NASA Glenn Learning Technologies.
- Boundary layer separation
- Boundary layer equations: Exact Solutions – from EqWorld
- Jones, T.V. BOUNDARY LAYER HEAT TRANSFER
- "The revolutionary concept of "boundary layer" and its prevalence in aeronautics by Sourabh S. Diwan". YouTube. International Centre for Theoretical Sciences. February 18, 2022.
Boundary layer
View on GrokipediaFundamentals and History
Definition and Physical Concept
In fluid dynamics, the boundary layer refers to a thin region of fluid adjacent to a solid surface where the fluid velocity transitions from zero at the surface—due to the no-slip condition—to the free-stream velocity farther away, resulting in significant velocity gradients and shear stress induced by viscosity.[1] This layer arises because fluid molecules in direct contact with the surface adhere to it, creating a drag effect that propagates outward through viscous interactions, diminishing with distance from the surface.[4] The no-slip condition ensures that the fluid velocity at the wall matches the surface velocity (typically zero for a stationary wall), leading to rotational and viscous effects that dominate within this region.[5] Physically, the boundary layer's velocity profile illustrates this transition: for instance, in simple Couette flow between parallel plates, the profile is linear, reflecting constant shear stress across the gap, while in developing pipe flow, it evolves from a thin layer near the entrance to a parabolic profile fully developed downstream.[6] The layer's thickness, denoted as δ, is conventionally defined as the distance from the surface where the velocity reaches 99% of the free-stream value, marking the boundary between the viscous-dominated inner region and the outer flow.[4] This thickness varies with factors like flow speed and fluid properties but remains relatively thin compared to the overall flow domain, confining viscous influences to a localized area near the surface. The boundary layer distinguishes itself from the inviscid outer flow, where viscosity is negligible and Euler's equations apply, allowing ideal potential flow predictions that often fail to match real observations without accounting for viscous effects.[8] By incorporating this layer, discrepancies between inviscid theory and experiments—such as unpredicted drag or separation—are resolved, as the boundary layer generates skin friction drag through wall shear stress and can lead to flow separation when adverse pressure gradients cause the profile to reverse near the wall, increasing form drag.[1][9] This physical concept, first conceptualized by Ludwig Prandtl in 1904, underpins modern aerodynamics by bridging viscous and inviscid regimes.[2]Historical Development and Prandtl's Contribution
In the 18th and 19th centuries, the study of fluid dynamics was dominated by ideal flow theory based on the Euler equations, which assumed inviscid, incompressible fluids and predicted no drag on bodies moving through them—a result formalized as d'Alembert's paradox in 1752 by Jean le Rond d'Alembert, highlighting the discrepancy between theoretical predictions and observed resistance in real fluids.[10] Early attempts to incorporate viscosity, such as George Gabriel Stokes' 1851 derivation of drag on a sphere in creeping flow (now known as Stokes' law), and Osborne Reynolds' 1883 experiments on pipe flow that introduced the dimensionless Reynolds number to distinguish laminar and turbulent regimes, provided insights into viscous effects but struggled to explain drag on streamlined bodies at higher speeds.[11][12] These limitations persisted into the late 19th century, as viscous terms in the Navier-Stokes equations rendered solutions intractable for most practical flows, leaving ideal theory dominant yet inadequate for engineering applications like aerodynamics.[13] Ludwig Prandtl, a German physicist and engineer, addressed these challenges during his early career as professor of mechanics at the Technical University of Hanover from 1901 to 1904,[14] where he explored viscous flows experimentally and theoretically, including studies on heat transfer and pipe flow that foreshadowed his later innovations.[13] In a pivotal 1904 presentation at the Third International Congress of Mathematicians in Heidelberg, titled "Über Flüssigkeitsbewegung bei sehr kleiner Reibung" (On fluid motion with very small friction), Prandtl introduced the boundary layer concept: a thin region near solid surfaces where viscous effects dominate, confining shear and drag to this layer while allowing the outer flow to approximate inviscid Euler flow.[15] This matched asymptotic approach resolved d'Alembert's paradox by attributing form drag to boundary layer separation and skin friction drag to velocity gradients within the layer, enabling practical approximations for high-Reynolds-number flows.[13] Prandtl's idea revolutionized fluid mechanics, shifting focus from full viscous solutions to simplified boundary layer equations.[16] Following Prandtl's breakthrough, his student Heinrich Blasius provided the first exact solution to the laminar boundary layer equations in 1908 for flow over a flat plate at zero incidence, using a similarity transformation to reduce the problem to a solvable ordinary differential equation, which yielded profiles for velocity and skin friction as functions of the Reynolds number.[17] In the 1920s, Theodore von Kármán, building on Prandtl's framework while serving as director of the Aeronautical Institute at RWTH Aachen,[18] developed the momentum integral equation in 1921, integrating the boundary layer equations across the layer to approximate thickness and drag using assumed velocity profiles—a method that proved computationally efficient for engineering design.[19] These advances profoundly influenced early 20th-century aerodynamics; for instance, the U.S. National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA, predecessor to NASA) applied boundary layer theory from the 1910s onward to airfoil design, reducing drag and enabling faster aircraft, as seen in wind tunnel tests and theoretical reports throughout the 1920s.[13] By the mid-20th century, Prandtl's contributions had established boundary layer theory as a cornerstone of modern fluid dynamics.[15]Classification and Types
Laminar Boundary Layers
Laminar boundary layers exhibit smooth, orderly flow with parallel streamlines, where viscous forces dominate over inertial forces, leading to a velocity profile shaped primarily by viscous diffusion. These layers form under low Reynolds number conditions, specifically when the Reynolds number based on distance along the surface is less than a critical value of approximately for flow over a flat plate. In such flows, the absence of random fluctuations ensures predictable transport of momentum, with the streamwise velocity increasing monotonically from zero at the wall to the free-stream value outside the layer. The boundary layer thickness , defined as the distance where the velocity reaches 99% of the free-stream speed, grows proportionally to the square root of the streamwise distance from the leading edge, as , according to the Blasius solution for steady, incompressible flow over a semi-infinite flat plate. This growth arises from the balance between convection and diffusion in the boundary layer equations. Key integral measures include the displacement thickness , which quantifies the outward displacement of streamlines due to the velocity deficit and is defined as , effectively representing the increase in the body's apparent thickness for inviscid outer flow calculations. The momentum thickness measures the momentum loss relative to uniform flow and directly relates to the skin friction drag on the surface. The exact velocity profile in a laminar boundary layer over a flat plate is obtained by solving the Blasius equation, a third-order nonlinear ordinary differential equation , where is the dimensionless stream function, subject to boundary conditions and . This similarity solution applies to canonical cases such as uniform flow over a flat plate or near the leading edge of an airfoil, where pressure gradients are negligible. Stability analyses reveal that laminar boundary layers become unstable to small perturbations via Tollmien-Schlichting waves, which are viscous, streamwise-propagating disturbances originating near the critical layer within the profile; the neutral stability curve indicates a minimum critical Reynolds number of about 520 based on displacement thickness for the onset of these instabilities. Transition to turbulence typically occurs at higher Reynolds numbers around , influenced by environmental disturbances that amplify these waves.Turbulent Boundary Layers
Turbulent boundary layers arise in flows at high Reynolds numbers, typically exceeding 10^6, where random velocity fluctuations dominate due to the amplification of instabilities, leading to chaotic eddy motions that enhance momentum transfer and mixing compared to the orderly laminar regime. These fluctuations create an intermittent structure, with bursts of turbulence originating near the wall and propagating outward, resulting in a thicker boundary layer profile that grows more rapidly along the surface. Unlike laminar layers, turbulent ones exhibit significantly higher shear stress at the wall, driven by both viscous and turbulent stresses, which profoundly impacts drag and flow separation in engineering applications.[20] The internal structure of a turbulent boundary layer is often divided into distinct regions based on distance from the wall: the viscous sublayer, buffer layer, and logarithmic layer. In the innermost viscous sublayer, where y^+ < 5 (with y^+ = y u_τ / ν, the wall-normal distance in wall units), the mean velocity follows a linear profile u^+ = y^+, dominated by molecular viscosity. The adjacent buffer layer (5 < y^+ < 30) serves as a transitional zone where viscous and turbulent effects balance. Further out, in the logarithmic layer (y^+ > 30), the mean velocity adheres to the law-of-the-wall: with von Kármán constant κ ≈ 0.41 and additive constant B ≈ 5.0, reflecting a balance between production and dissipation of turbulent kinetic energy.[21] This multi-layer model captures the universal near-wall behavior observed across various wall-bounded turbulent flows. The boundary layer thickness δ in zero-pressure-gradient turbulent flow scales approximately as δ ~ x^{4/5}, slower than the laminar δ ~ x^{1/2} but still leading to greater overall thickness due to enhanced entrainment.[22] A common empirical representation is the 1/7th power law velocity profile, u / U_e = (y / δ)^{1/7}, which approximates the mean flow in the outer region and facilitates integral estimates. Transition to turbulence typically occurs via amplification of small disturbances in the laminar boundary layer, such as Tollmien-Schlichting waves, exacerbated by free-stream turbulence levels above 0.1% or surface roughness elements with height comparable to the laminar thickness.[23] These mechanisms lower the critical Reynolds number for transition, often to Re_x ≈ 5 × 10^5, promoting earlier onset of the turbulent state.[24] Turbulent boundary layers impose higher skin friction drag, with the local coefficient C_f scaling as Re_x^{-1/5} (approximately 0.059 Re_x^{-1/5} for smooth walls), contrasting the laminar C_f ~ Re_x^{-1/2} and resulting in drag levels up to five times greater at comparable Reynolds numbers.[25] This elevated friction arises from the intensified near-wall turbulence production, underscoring the need for roughness-tolerant designs in high-speed applications.Mathematical Modeling
Governing Boundary Layer Equations
The governing equations for the boundary layer are derived from the Navier-Stokes equations under the assumptions of high Reynolds number flows, where viscous effects are confined to a thin region near the solid surface. Ludwig Prandtl introduced these approximations in 1904, recognizing that for thin boundary layers, the streamwise diffusion of momentum is negligible compared to the transverse diffusion (∂²u/∂x² ≪ ∂²u/∂y²), and the pressure variation across the layer in the normal direction is small (∂p/∂y ≈ 0).[27] These simplifications reduce the full elliptic Navier-Stokes system to a more tractable parabolic form, enabling marching solutions in the streamwise direction.[28] The continuity equation remains unchanged for incompressible, two-dimensional flow: where and are the streamwise and normal velocity components, respectively.[28] The streamwise momentum equation simplifies to with the pressure gradient imposed from the inviscid outer flow solution. The normal momentum equation reduces to , implying constant pressure across the boundary layer.[28] These equations capture the balance between convective acceleration, pressure forces, and viscous diffusion in the transverse direction. Boundary conditions for the velocity field include the no-slip condition at the wall: , at , and matching to the outer flow as : , .[28] For thermal boundary layers, an analogous energy equation governs temperature : where is the thermal diffusivity, derived under similar approximations neglecting streamwise conduction.[29]Integral Approximations and Theorems
Integral approximations provide practical methods for solving the boundary layer equations by integrating them across the layer thickness, yielding ordinary differential equations that can be solved numerically or analytically with assumed profiles. These approaches, developed in the early 20th century, simplify the complex partial differential equations while capturing essential features like growth of boundary layer thickness and skin friction under varying pressure gradients. They are particularly useful for engineering calculations where exact similarity solutions are unavailable.[30] The von Kármán momentum integral equation represents the integrated form of the boundary layer momentum equation, balancing the rate of change of momentum flux with wall shear and convection effects. It is expressed as where is the momentum thickness, is the displacement thickness, is the external flow velocity, and is the skin friction coefficient with wall shear stress . This equation, derived by integrating the streamwise momentum equation from the wall to the edge of the boundary layer, assumes steady, incompressible flow and neglects transverse pressure gradients within the layer. It was first formulated by Theodore von Kármán in 1921 and forms the basis for many approximate solutions.[31][32] Prandtl's transposition theorem extends the utility of integral methods to flows over non-flat surfaces by demonstrating the invariance of the boundary layer equations under certain coordinate transformations. Specifically, for a body with shape function , the theorem states that the boundary layer flow can be mapped to an equivalent flat-plate problem by shifting the transverse coordinate and adjusting the transverse velocity , preserving the form of the governing equations. This allows solutions for pressure gradient effects, such as those in Falkner-Skan wedge flows where the external velocity varies as with determining the wedge angle, to be applied to arbitrary body geometries without resolving the full curvilinear coordinates. The theorem, introduced by Ludwig Prandtl in the context of boundary layer invariance, facilitates practical computations for airfoils and other streamlined bodies.[33] For thermal boundary layers, the energy integral equation provides an analogous integrated form of the energy equation, linking convective heat transfer to the growth of the thermal layer. It is given by where is the energy thickness, is the thermal displacement thickness, St = is the Stanton number representing dimensionless heat transfer, is the wall temperature, and the external flow temperature. This equation arises from integrating the convective energy balance across the thermal layer, assuming constant properties and negligible viscous dissipation. It was developed concurrently with momentum integrals in early boundary layer studies to predict heat transfer rates.[34][35] These integral methods rely on assumed functional forms for the velocity and temperature profiles within the boundary layer to close the equations, as the integrals require explicit expressions for and . For laminar flows, common assumptions include polynomial profiles, such as the quartic velocity profile (with ) proposed by Pohlhausen, or simpler sinusoidal forms . Similar cubic polynomials are used for temperature profiles in thermal layers. These assumptions satisfy boundary conditions like no-slip at the wall and matching to external flow, enabling evaluation of thicknesses and shear. While exact solutions like Blasius provide benchmarks, integral approximations yield engineering estimates accurate to within 5-10% for skin friction and heat transfer on flat plates and mild pressure gradients, making them valuable for design despite simplifications.[36][37]Coordinate Transformations
Coordinate transformations play a crucial role in simplifying the boundary layer equations, particularly for obtaining analytical or numerical solutions by mapping the physical domain to more convenient coordinates. These transformations often leverage the stream function to eliminate the continuity equation and recast the momentum equation in a form that highlights its hyperbolic or parabolic character. Such approaches are especially useful for steady, two-dimensional flows along curved surfaces, where traditional Cartesian or body-fitted coordinates may complicate the analysis.[38] The von Mises transformation introduces body-fitted coordinates using the stream function as one independent variable and the arc length along the body surface as the other. This change of variables transforms the boundary layer momentum equation into a nonlinear diffusion equation resembling: where is the velocity component tangent to the surface, is density, is pressure, and is kinematic viscosity. Introduced by Richard von Mises in 1927, this formulation eliminates the need to solve the continuity equation separately and renders the problem analogous to a one-dimensional heat conduction equation in the -direction, with acting as a time-like parameter, making it suitable for marching solutions along the body. The transformation is particularly effective for incompressible flows and has been extended to compressible cases.[39][40] For compressible boundary layers, Crocco's transformation provides a powerful tool, especially when the Prandtl number Pr equals 1, as in many gases. This method employs variables derived from the stream function and an integral involving total enthalpy , where is static enthalpy. The key relation is the integral form: with representing the component related to the enthalpy gradient, effectively eliminating convective terms in the energy equation and reducing the system to a single equation for the velocity or enthalpy field. Developed by Luigi Crocco in the 1940s, this transformation simplifies the coupling between momentum and energy equations for adiabatic walls, allowing exact solutions like linear profiles for total enthalpy in certain cases. It assumes steady flow and Pr = 1, which aligns well with air at moderate temperatures.[41][42] Prandtl's transposition, originally proposed by Ludwig Prandtl, serves as a foundational coordinate shift that facilitates similarity analyses by interchanging streamwise and normal directions in thin boundary layers. This brief transformation underscores the validity of neglecting normal pressure gradients and enables the reduction of partial differential equations to ordinary ones for self-similar flows, as seen in wedge geometries. It provides a conceptual bridge to more advanced similarity solutions without altering the core equations.[43] These transformations offer significant advantages, such as enabling similarity solutions like the Falkner-Skan equation for power-law external flows, where the velocity profile becomes independent of the streamwise position through scaled coordinates and . This reduces computational complexity and reveals universal behaviors in boundary layer development. However, limitations arise in three-dimensional flows, where stream function definitions become ambiguous, or in separated regions, where the parabolic assumption fails and reverse flows invalidate the marching procedure. For such cases, more general numerical methods are required beyond these analytic tools.[44][45]Transport Phenomena
Heat Transfer in Boundary Layers
The thermal boundary layer is the region adjacent to a solid surface in a fluid flow where the temperature varies from the wall temperature to within 99% of the free-stream temperature , characterized by its thickness . This thickness is influenced by the interplay between convection and thermal diffusion, and it relates to the hydrodynamic boundary layer thickness through the Prandtl number , where is the kinematic viscosity and is the thermal diffusivity. For fluids with , such as oils, the thermal boundary layer is thinner than the hydrodynamic one, with the approximate relation , arising from the scaling of momentum and energy transport in the boundary layer.[46] The application of the energy equation within the boundary layer governs the temperature profile, derived from the conservation of energy under the boundary layer approximations. The steady-state energy equation for incompressible flow with constant properties is subject to boundary conditions at (no-slip wall) and as . This equation captures the convective transport of thermal energy by the velocity components and , balanced against conduction normal to the surface, enabling the prediction of temperature gradients and heat flux at the wall , where is the thermal conductivity. Analogies between momentum and heat transfer provide simplified methods to estimate convective heat transfer coefficients from known skin friction data. The Reynolds analogy, valid for (e.g., gases like air), equates the Stanton number (where is the heat transfer coefficient, density, specific heat, and free-stream velocity) to half the skin friction coefficient , i.e., , based on the similarity of eddy diffusivity for momentum and heat in turbulent flows. For other Prandtl numbers, the extended Colburn analogy modifies this to , accounting for differences in boundary layer development and applicable over a range of .[47][48] In laminar boundary layers over a flat plate, the local Nusselt number (with the streamwise distance) is given by the similarity solution valid for and constant wall temperature, reflecting the square-root growth of the boundary layer and the Prandtl number influence on thermal diffusion. For turbulent boundary layers, enhanced mixing leads to thicker effective transport layers and higher heat transfer rates, typically increasing the Nusselt number by factors of 2–5 compared to laminar conditions at the same Reynolds number, though exact correlations depend on turbulence models.Mass Transfer and Convective Constants
In mass transfer processes, a concentration boundary layer forms adjacent to a surface where the species concentration varies significantly due to diffusion, analogous to the thermal boundary layer in heat transfer. The thickness of this concentration boundary layer, δ_c, scales with the hydrodynamic boundary layer thickness δ as δ_c ~ Sc^{-1/3} δ, where Sc is the Schmidt number defined as Sc = ν / D, with ν the kinematic viscosity and D the mass diffusivity. This scaling arises because high Sc values (typical in liquids, Sc ≈ 10^3) result in a thinner concentration layer compared to the momentum layer, as momentum diffuses faster than mass.[49] The governing equation for the concentration field within the boundary layer, under the assumptions of steady, two-dimensional flow with constant properties and negligible axial diffusion, is the convection-diffusion equation: where c is the species concentration, u and v are the streamwise and normal velocity components, and x and y are the streamwise and normal coordinates, respectively. This equation is solved using similarity transformations similar to those for the Blasius velocity profile, yielding concentration profiles that depend on Sc. For gases where Sc ≈ 1, the concentration and velocity profiles are nearly identical, facilitating direct analogies to momentum transfer.[49] Analogies between momentum, heat, and mass transfer enable the derivation of convective mass transfer coefficients from known friction factors. The Chilton-Colburn analogy extends the Reynolds analogy to account for molecular diffusion effects, stating that the mass transfer j-factor j_m equals the skin friction coefficient divided by 2: j_m = Sh / (Re Sc^{1/3}) = C_f / 2, where Sh is the Sherwood number, Re the Reynolds number, and C_f the skin friction coefficient.[50] This holds for 0.6 < Sc < 60 and turbulent flows, linking the mass transfer Stanton number St_m = Sh / (Re Sc) to the momentum transfer via St_m Sc^{2/3} ≈ C_f / 2. For laminar flow over a flat plate, boundary layer analysis yields the local Sherwood number Sh_x = 0.332 Re_x^{1/2} Sc^{1/3}, and the average over length L is Sh_L = 0.664 Re_L^{1/2} Sc^{1/3}, valid for Sc > 0.6.[49] In turbulent regimes, the local Sherwood number increases to Sh_x ≈ 0.0296 Re_x^{0.8} Sc^{1/3} (or average Sh_L ≈ 0.037 Re_L^{0.8} Sc^{1/3}), reflecting enhanced mixing by eddies that thicken the effective diffusion layer but boost transfer rates. These correlations derive from integrating the governing equation with empirical turbulence models, such as the 1/7th power law for velocity profiles. Convective mass transfer constants emerge from these analyses, defining the mass flux n as n = h_m (c_w - c_∞), where h_m is the mass transfer coefficient and c_w, c_∞ are the wall and freestream concentrations. The coefficient h_m = Sh D / L, with D the diffusivity, quantifies the convective enhancement over pure diffusion. Turbulent corrections often incorporate a factor like (1 + corrections for unsteadiness or roughness), but the Sc^{1/3} dependence persists due to the thin diffusive sublayer near the wall. In practice, these constants are applied to processes such as evaporation from liquid surfaces, where vapor mass transfer follows Sh correlations with naphthalene sublimation experiments validating the models, or dissolution of solids, where solute release rates scale with flow-induced h_m. When heat and mass transfer couple, as in drying or combustion, the Lewis number Le = Sc / Pr = α / D (with α the thermal diffusivity) governs their interaction; Le ≈ 1 in gases implies similar boundary layer thicknesses, simplifying simultaneous predictions via shared analogies.Engineering Applications
Hydrodynamics and Naval Architecture
In hydrodynamics and naval architecture, the boundary layer theory is applied to predict and minimize drag on ship hulls and marine vehicles, where skin friction constitutes a significant portion of total resistance, typically 60-70% for fully submerged bodies like submarines.[51] The flat plate analogy treats the hull's wetted surface as an equivalent flat plate to estimate skin friction drag, calculated as the integral of the local skin friction coefficient over the wetted area , yielding frictional resistance , where is fluid density and is velocity.[52] This approach underpins the ITTC-57 correlation line, a semi-empirical formula for turbulent frictional resistance derived from model tests and validated against full-scale data, expressed as for high Reynolds numbers, enabling extrapolation from scaled models to operational ships while accounting for turbulence effects.[53] Boundary layer separation on ship hulls occurs due to adverse pressure gradients, where decelerating external flow increases static pressure, reducing momentum in the near-wall fluid and leading to flow reversal and stall, particularly at the stern or appendages. This separation contributes to viscous pressure drag (form drag), as the detached flow creates low-pressure wakes that amplify resistance beyond pure skin friction. In surface ships, separation also influences wave-making resistance by altering the effective hull geometry and flow distribution, potentially generating larger transverse waves and increasing overall power requirements by 10-20% in poorly designed forms.[54][55] To mitigate these effects, naval architects employ hull shaping techniques such as bulbous bows, which protrude forward to cancel interfering wave systems and smooth the boundary layer onset at the bow, reducing total resistance by up to 15% at design speeds through minimized wave energy without significantly altering frictional components. Surface roughness from biofouling or coatings advances the transition from laminar to turbulent boundary layers, increasing skin friction by promoting earlier momentum transfer, with roughness heights exceeding 30-100 μm potentially raising drag by 5-10% over smooth hulls. Historically, William Froude's 1870s towing tank experiments separated frictional and wave-making resistances using scaled models, providing empirical foundations that later integrated with boundary layer concepts to refine hull design and resistance prediction methods.[55][56] In modern practice, computational fluid dynamics (CFD) validates boundary layer codes against experimental data for submarine hull optimization, enabling precise simulation of separation and transition to achieve drag reductions of 5-10% via streamlined appendages and coatings.[57]Boundary Layer Ingestion and Control
Boundary layer ingestion (BLI) is a propulsion integration technique that involves capturing the low-momentum fluid from an aircraft or marine vehicle's surface boundary layer directly into the engine inlet, thereby reducing the wake's kinetic energy deficit and enhancing overall propulsive efficiency by minimizing drag. This approach leverages the boundary layer's slower velocity relative to the freestream to decrease the energy required for thrust generation, as the propulsor accelerates this pre-slowed fluid rather than uniform freestream air. The concept, first proposed in 1947, gained significant attention through NASA wind tunnel experiments in the 1970s, which tested fan performance under distorted inflow conditions to assess BLI's feasibility for reducing propulsion power needs.[58][59] The primary benefits of BLI include substantial improvements in fuel efficiency, with studies indicating potential reductions in aircraft fuel burn of up to 15% through decreased ram drag and higher propulsive efficiency. For instance, computational analyses of BLI-integrated systems have shown an 8% decrease in required engine power during cruise compared to conventional podded engines. However, challenges arise from flow distortion caused by the ingested low-total-pressure boundary layer, which can lead to uneven rotor loading, reduced stall margins, and efficiency losses in the compressor stages. To mitigate these, vortex generators are often deployed at the inlet to energize the flow and reduce circumferential distortion indices from levels as high as 0.055 to below 0.010.[60][61][62] Active control methods play a crucial role in managing boundary layer behavior during ingestion, particularly to prevent separation and optimize inflow quality. Suction removes low-energy fluid near the surface, stabilizing the boundary layer and delaying separation, while blowing injects high-momentum air to re-energize the flow profile. Synthetic jets, which generate zero-net-mass-flux oscillations through alternating suction and blowing cycles, provide a compact, actuator-based solution for adding momentum without external fluid supply, effectively modifying the boundary layer velocity profile in real time. These techniques are especially relevant in embedded propulsion systems for blended-wing-body (BWB) aircraft, such as NASA's N3-X concept, where distributed propulsors ingest boundary layer along the aft fuselage to achieve integrated aerodynamic-propulsive benefits. As of 2025, recent transonic wind tunnel tests and conceptual designs, such as aft-fuselage BLI systems for mid-range aircraft, continue to explore BLI for further efficiency gains.[63][64][65][66] Analysis of BLI performance often employs integral methods to quantify the ingested momentum deficit, integrating the boundary layer equations over the inlet control volume to evaluate drag reduction and power savings. These approaches, based on the von Kármán momentum integral equation, compute the momentum thickness—a measure of the boundary layer's momentum loss relative to freestream conditions—to predict the kinetic energy recovery potential from the ingested flow. Such methods facilitate rapid assessment of propulsor off-design operation under distorted conditions, confirming BLI's net benefits for transport aircraft while highlighting the need for distortion-tolerant fan designs.[67][68]Boundary Layer Turbines
Boundary layer turbines are specialized micro-turbines designed to extract energy from the shear forces within fluid boundary layers, typically by positioning cascades of small components—such as closely spaced discs or blades—directly in the velocity gradient region near a surface or within a duct. This principle relies on the viscous adhesion and drag in the boundary layer to transfer momentum to the turbine elements, enabling energy harvesting from low-speed, high-shear flows without obstructing the main free-stream velocity. Unlike conventional turbines that interact primarily with uniform high-speed flows, boundary layer turbines capitalize on the inherent velocity profile, where fluid speed increases from zero at the wall to the free-stream value, allowing for compact integration into existing flow systems like channels or vehicle surfaces. The design features very small chord lengths for blades or disc spacings on the millimeter scale (e.g., 0.4 mm gaps between elements) to match the boundary layer thickness in laminar or turbulent regimes, ensuring optimal interaction with the velocity gradients. In prototypical configurations, multiple parallel discs form the rotor, sometimes augmented with thin blade-type strips on the disc surfaces to enhance torque through combined boundary layer drag and lift effects, while inlet nozzles direct flow tangentially to initiate spiral motion. This setup avoids full blockage of the free-stream, permitting efficiencies derived solely from shear energy conversion, with rotor diameters typically under 200 mm for micro-scale applications. Smooth surfaces and precise spacing are critical to minimize parasitic losses, and materials like stainless steel or composites are used for durability in varied fluids such as air or water.[69] Applications include augmentation in wind tunnels, where small units harvest shear energy from wall boundary layers to power instrumentation or supplement flow control without disrupting test conditions, and marine current harnessing in channels or rivers, where prototypes integrate into low-head hydro systems to capture energy from near-bed shear layers. Experimental prototypes have demonstrated efficiencies of approximately 20-30%, with one water-driven model producing 100 W at 140 RPM under controlled inlet pressures, highlighting viability for distributed, low-power generation in constrained environments.[70] Key limitations stem from high sensitivity to variations in boundary layer thickness, which can arise from surface roughness, flow turbulence, or Reynolds number changes, leading to mismatched spacing and reduced torque. Scaling challenges further constrain practical power output, as larger designs suffer from increased viscous losses and structural demands, confining most implementations to micro- or small-scale systems below 1 kW despite theoretical potentials exceeding 60% efficiency in optimized conditions.[69][71]Specialized Analyses
Transient Boundary Layer Thickness Prediction
In unsteady flows within pipes or cylinders, such as those induced by the sudden opening of a valve, the boundary layer initiates at the wall and grows temporally with thickness δ(t) until approaching a quasi-steady regime.[72] This transient development is governed by viscous diffusion, distinct from steady-state growth along a length scale.[73] Dimensional analysis provides a framework for predicting this growth, considering the primary parameters: kinematic viscosity ν, time t since inception, and a characteristic velocity U (or acceleration a in non-constant cases).[74] Application of the Buckingham π theorem yields the dimensionless form δ / √(ν t) = f(Re_t), where the transient Reynolds number is Re_t = U √(t / ν).[73] This scaling highlights how viscous diffusion sets the natural length √(ν t), modulated by the ratio of inertial to viscous effects over the elapsed time.[74] For an impulsive start to constant velocity U, the prediction simplifies to δ ≈ c √(ν t), where c is a constant (typically 3–5 depending on the 99% velocity criterion), and the velocity profile follows the complementary error function solution u/U = erfc(y / (2 √(ν t))).[73] In cylindrical geometries like pipes, radial curvature introduces additional effects, altering the profile via Bessel function expansions in the exact solution and slowing growth relative to planar cases once δ nears the pipe radius R.[72] These predictions align with laminar boundary layer thicknesses observed in steady flows but emphasize temporal rather than spatial evolution.[75] Validation draws from the Rayleigh problem, an exact analogy for flat-plate transients where an infinite plate impulsively moves at U in a quiescent fluid, confirming the √(ν t) scaling and error function profile through similarity transformation of the unsteady diffusion equation.[73] Numerical and analytical solutions for pipe startups similarly demonstrate this diffusive growth until the layers from opposite walls interact, typically at t ∼ R² / ν.[72]Convective Flow Prediction Using Dimensional Analysis
In internal forced convection within cylindrical pipes, dimensional analysis provides a framework for predicting heat transfer rates by identifying key dimensionless groups that govern the process. The relevant parameters include the pipe diameter , mean flow velocity , kinematic viscosity , thermal conductivity , and pipe length . Applying the Buckingham Pi theorem to these variables yields the Reynolds number , which characterizes the flow regime, and the Prandtl number (where is the thermal diffusivity), which relates momentum and thermal diffusion. The convective heat transfer coefficient is nondimensionalized as the Nusselt number , expressing the ratio of convective to conductive heat transfer across the pipe diameter.[76] For steady, fully developed flow, the Nusselt number depends primarily on and , such that . In turbulent pipe flow (typically ), the widely adopted Dittus-Boelter correlation estimates the average Nusselt number as for heating ( for cooling), applicable to , , and smooth pipes with constant wall temperature or heat flux. This empirical relation, derived from experimental data on turbulent flow, predicts enhanced heat transfer due to mixing in the boundary layer, with typical values yielding for air () at . Local Nusselt numbers near the entrance are higher, decreasing axially to the fully developed value.[77][78] Pipe geometry introduces entrance effects that influence boundary layer development and convection predictions. In the hydrodynamic entrance region, the boundary layer grows from the wall until it merges at the centerline, typically over a length for laminar flow and for turbulent flow, beyond which the velocity profile becomes invariant with axial distance. The thermal entrance length follows similarly, often for laminar cases, shorter for turbulent due to eddy diffusion. For predictions assuming fully developed conditions, correlations like Dittus-Boelter apply downstream of these lengths; otherwise, average convection coefficients must integrate local variations, often 20-50% higher in the entrance region.[79][80] Unlike external flow over a flat plate, where the boundary layer thickness grows continuously as without confinement, pipe flow confines the layer within diameter , halting growth upon filling the cross-section in the fully developed regime. This confinement alters momentum and thermal boundary layer evolution, leading to parabolic (laminar) or logarithmic (turbulent) velocity profiles across the entire radius rather than a free-stream core, and enhances average shear and heat transfer rates for equivalent . Curvature effects are minor unless , but the enclosed geometry promotes earlier transition to turbulence and uniform fully developed convection absent in open flat-plate flows.[81]References
- https://www.grc.[nasa](/page/NASA).gov/www/k-12/BGP/boundlay.html
- https://ntrs.[nasa](/page/NASA).gov/api/citations/19800017127/downloads/19800017127.pdf
