Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 24

|_

AIAA-2000-2392
Review

of Skin Friction

Measurements

Including Recent High-Reynolds


Number
Results from NASA Langley NTF
R. D. Watson, R. M. Hall, and J. B. Anders
NASA, Langley Research Center
Hampton, VA 23681

Fluids 2000
19-22 June 2000 / Denver, CO
For permission

to copy or republish,

1801 Alexander

Bell Drive, Suite 500, Reston,

contact

the American
VA 20191

Institute

of Aeronautics

and Astronautics

AIAA PAPER 2000-2392


REVIEW

OF SKIN FRICTION MEASUREMENTS


INCLUDING RECENT HIGHREYNOLDS NUMBER RESULTS FROM NASA LANGLEY NTF
Ralph D Watson"
Flow Physics and Control Branch
Robert
Configuration

M. Hall*

Aerodynamics

Branch

John B. Anders"
Flow Physics

and Control

Branch

NASA, Langley Research Center


Hampton, Virginia
23681

ABSTRACT
This
from

paper

early

reviews

correlations

to measurements
The

NASA

(NTF)

flat

skin

Langley
with

friction

of drag on plates

in the cryogenic
National

in late 1996.

gradient

plate

Transonic
(zero

surface

in

assessing

measurements,

and

aerodynamics

of

correlation

of zero

as
large

scale

pressure

Reynolds
due to its

accuracy

skin

in complex

by Schoenherr

flows.

for a range

A
friction

numbers,

contained

large

surprisingly
Subsequent

accurate
in
measurements

carefully

R e, from
scatter,

controlled

data compiled

of momentum

Reynolds

more

Early
860
but

thickness
to

370,000

has

proved

its correlated
in wind tunnels

conditions

form.
under

have provided

inputs to this database,


usually to a maximum
Re
of about 40,000.
Data on a large axisymmetric
model

in the

Facility

extends

NASA
the

Langley
upper

limit

National

The
data

NTF

Preston

accuracy

about

tube

is estimated

and

Clauser

to be within

600,000.

1. INTRODUCTION

the

data minimizing
extraneous
effects between
tests
is often used as the first step in the calculation
of
skin friction

detail.

of
to

vehicles.

gradient

in

- 2 percent
of a power-law
curve fit, and falls
above the Spalding
theory
by 1 percent
at R e of

pressure

important

Re to 619,800
using the van Driest transformation.
Previous
data, test techniques,
and error sources
are discussed,
and the NTF data will be discussed
inferred

curvature)

the
being

of

Facility

incompressible
skin friction
at high
numbers
is emphasized
in this paper,
importance

in water

environment

The flat plate

negligible

data

The design
of transport
aircraft
accurate
estimates
of skin friction
length

numbers

around

109 and

Mach

numbers
of approximately
0.8, corresponding
cruise conditions 1. This estimate
is often made
first calculating
the flat plate incompressible
friction and then correcting
for various effects
as pressure
gradient,
three-dimensionality
flow,
compressibility,
etc.
Several
theories/correlations
are available,
most
differ

in the

Reynolds
of data.

Transonic

in incompressible

Reynolds

requires
that
be made at

As

will

correlations

skin

friction

level

predicted

numbers

where

there

has been

be

shown,
of skin

the
friction

most
do

commonly
not

agree

to
by

skin
such

of the
baseline
of which
at

high

a dearth
used
to the

* Senior Member AIAA


"Associate Fellow AIAA
Copyright' 2000 by the American Institute of Aeronauticsand Astronautics,Inc. No copyright is asserted in the United States under
Title 17, U.S. Code. The U.S. Government has a royalty-free license to exercise all rights under the copyright claimed herein for
government purposes. All other rights are reserved by the copyright owner.

American

1
Institute of Aeronautics

and Astronautics,

Inc.

desired
accuracy
athighReynolds

numbers,

is not clear which method


Over the years, compilations

is the
and

most accurate.
critical reviews

of the

been

made,

available

recently
Reynolds
recent

data

has
skin
numbers

data

exception

have

friction
become

is usually

of the

tunnel

present

a large axisymmetric
An experiment

data
at
available.

Reynolds
National

purpose

of the

but
very
The

data,

distance

temperature

velocity,

only
high
most

with

was taken

shear

u_
u*

to provide

fps

velocity,

axial distance

on

coordinate

y"

y u_/v

cc

angle of attack

fiat plate skin friction

of model

(._,/p)1/2

U/U_

numbers was conducted


in the
Transonic
Facility,
NTF.
The
test was

along surface

the

model,

to measure

at flight
Langley

wall

data which

and it

Clauser
(6"/_)

skin friction

along

normal

model

to surface

of model

pressure

gradient

boundary

layer thickness

Gu

thickness

at u/ue =0.99

effects

G"

displacement

early.

6+

value

In addition to the usual problems associated


with
testing at high Reynolds numbers, the cryogenic
environment
of the tunnel affected both the model

momentum

dynamic

and instrumentation

kinematic

obtained,

and

density

skin friction

data

data at very high Reynolds


with
existing
theories.
measuring

skin friction

and to the desired

numbers to compare
The
difficulties
in

free of extraneous

accuracy

was recognized

and complicated

description

of the test,

comparison

with other

the results
available

the test.

shear

will be discussed.
A factor
Reynolds

to be considered
in testing at high unit
numbers
is the difference
in scales

between the wall and the outer region.


the turbulent
scales
are
so small
roughness
wall must

may be an important
factor
be very carefully
machined

roughness-induced
engineering
adequate

effects.

purposes
wall smoothness

high Reynolds
problems
is

be

thickness,

viscosity

stress

roll angle on model,

see Figure

adiabatic

--i.e.,
the
to avoid

e
i

at edge of boundary

for

stagnation

at wall

based on x coordinate

most

considered

may not be the case

at

spaced
closely
region.

layer

inches

viscosity

aw

numbers 2. Another
of the many
the
difficulty
of manufacturing

boundary
layer rakes with tubes
enough to capture the law-of-the-wall

thickness

of y* at edge of boundary

subscripts

At the wall,
that
wall

What

would

parameter,

(dp/dx)

wall condition
layer

incompressible

condition

based on 0
freestream

oo

condition

superscript

2.
Cf

friction

Driest

NOMENCLATURE

integral

coefficient

pressure

coefficient

constant

in equation

outside

diameter

of Preston

model

diameter,

12.75

constant

shape

van Driest

Mach

tube

inches

Reynolds

_*/0

constant,

radial

unit Reynolds

or by Sommer
5) for

and

Short

temperature-dependent

3. NTF EXPERIMENT
The
measure

equation

numbers
to

number

quantities,

form by Van
velocities
and

in equation
factor,

to incompressible
(equation
6) for

method
(equation
quantities

Cp

reduced
method

NTF test was designed


to accurately
adiabatic
flat plate skin friction values at
numbers

as high

corresponding

extend

the

as possible

to flight

existing

skin

conditions

and

Mach

in order

friction-Reynolds

number database.
The highest Reynolds
numbers
obtainable
in Langley
Research
Center
tunnels

coordinate
number,

pulp_

American

are produced

Institute

2
of Aeronautics

in the

and Astronautics,

cryogenic

Inc.

transonic

tunnels,

NTFand0.3MTransonic
Tunnel.Forthistest,
unitReynolds numbers as high as 94 x 106/ft were
run, and length
the downstream
model

were

measuring
made

Reynolds
numbers
measurement
measured.

The

skin friction
even

difficult

difficult

instrumentation

problems

low

of the flow.

related

of

tunnels

by

model

to the

presented

planning

the

the model

in

this

NTF test,

on which

major

were

in the early

dimensional

flat plate posed

planning

difference
stage

too

mounting
and maintaining
surface in the high dynamic

many

in

being
It was

that

a two-

problems

in

the accuracy
of the
pressure
environment.

4.1

Theories

the data

surprisingly,

the

plotted

at

Mach
numbers
as high
as 0.8 in order
to
transform
the data to an equivalent
incompressible
state.

techniques

test, since
consuming

development
was considered
for an experiment
in NTF.

required

to measure

as possible,
make,

at

standard
that

be developed

the skin friction

a notoriously

even

different
rationale

would

skin

ambient

difficult

with the
provide

consistency

among

inadequacies

in the

experiment.

balance

was

used

since

measure
Preston

skin
tubes

friction
directly.
Also used
and boundary
layer surveys,

which
skin friction
was
Clauser
method.
There

or

point

only

out

inferred
by a modified
has been
a renewed

law

of the

wall

is used

extensively

here

and

when
When

of von Karman,
carefully-controlled
later,

the

in 1953,

published

the

6, describing

boundary

layers

the

of Spalding

method

the

was

derived

7 was

from

but did not account

boundary

constants
answer

is

layer.

This
of
wall

are used in Spalding


s cf equation
incorrect,
since
the wake
is

the
not

the
S palding-Chi
method to produce

does

Schoenherr

not

usual

portion

law of the

accounted
for correctly.
adjusted
for use as the

R,

published.

his sublayer-buffer-log
for the outer

If the

The constants
were
incompressible
theory
in

compressible
skin
a more reasonable

cf vs

to

scatter

number.

of turbulent

way

were
from

large

years
was

By adjusting
the constants
can be changed,
but, more

interest
in the validity of the law of the wall lately4,
as evidenced
in the report of George and Castilto.
The

exhibits

friction

A skin

it is the

to

Three

data

published

a shear law that agreed closely


with
of Schoenherr.
Nine years after this,

profile,

measurement

techniques
were used
they
would
either

characteristics

for this

temperature.

AND

and deriving
the method
method

as accurately

themselves

in

from the drag of plates


in water
and,
not

of Reynolds

Twenty

by Landweber

friction

too timeIt was also

of his own

an equation
with
most

experiments.
the

data

as a function

for compressibility

effects

DATA

to 18725 was

was obtained
sizes
towed

to account

it was

dating

Skin friction
of various

necessary

measuring

is shown

almost
70 years
ago, but is still used
in its
correlated
form, except at low Reynolds
numbers.

paper

In addition,

new

in NTF

FRICTION

s correlation

layer.

no

SKIN

of others

boundary

that

profile

necessary

and Correlations

predicted

decided

also

layer integral quantities


and
displacement

of the model

Schoenherr

correlated
with
results
agree

was

velocity

were

1.

For this reason


an axisymmetric
model
was
designed
for which transverse
curvature
effects
were
small,
based
on the thickness
of the

It

cf from

THEORY

used

cf was to be measured.

determined

A photograph
Figure

high Reynolds

report

the

to infer

The surveys

extreme

c4 data in NTF is not new, and in fact, a


to do so was outlined
by Saric 3. The

ideas

and

to determine
the boundary
such
as
the
momentum
thicknesses.

is
and

data

measurements.

4. FLAT PLATE

The idea of a test for obtaining


number
program

task

in the cryogenic

more

temperature

of 940 x 106 at
station
on the

present

match

correlation

friction
c,f level.

of course,
the level
important,
the slope of
that
over

of

the

the

Karmancomplete

Reynolds
number
have
been
used

range.
Other methods
are Ludwieg-Tillmann

recently,

and Finley 10, which

Fernholz

both inner and outer similari_


and
with data to Re of 200-300 x 10 _.

which
9, and

is based

on

is compared

to

The Karman-Schoenherr

equations

are:

.og,0(2.0)
(I)

American

Institute

3
of Aeronautics

and Astronautics,

Inc.

whereCFistheaverage
skinfriction
The local skin friction

coefficient,

cf, was obtained


The Spalding

R/elI 1ekU
u
_

12

coefficient.

by differentiating
equations

the first of the two equations.

are

I,u;/'/,u;/
1'
I0
/kUe
6_,u+/,u;/'
121 (_u;
e

12

20

60

252

(2)
Re

ku+
e

where

c. =-t

iu:/_
The Ludwieg-Tillmann

equation

is

cf = 0.246 x 10 -678Hx Re268

The Fernholz

and Finley

equations

+cN+/;

where

= In(Rx)

_-In

In (-_--_-)

(u_

l-Y

z_ = I_
Ju

and

u)

= 0.3

In/Y]
\L-l}

k=0.4,

(4)
dy

_=-2.7

for

Re > 2000

tn(Re)+O.37
C=5.1,

for4252<R

M=4.70,

Spalding,

of

Karman-Schoenherr,

Ludwieg-Tillmann,

and

and

Finley are shown


obvious
that the

in Figure 2. From the figure, it is


theories
do not agree with each

other
over
numbers.

complete
methods

and

Spalding

the
The

show

range
of Reynolds
of Karman-Schoenherr

opposite

trends

American

at low

Institute

Reynolds

occurring

Fernholz

and

e <2000

andN=6.74

high
methods

+In(Re)

U_

_---0.404

The

are

c{,

--_--

(3)

at

numbers,
Re between

Karman-Schoenherr
data to Re of about
The

Spalding

at high

Reynolds

are shown

4
of Aeronautics

relies

and thus
numbers

to be the

and Astronautics,

crossover
and

point

7000.

The

correlation
includes
Kempf s
370,000
(Rx of 450 x 106.)

method

the law-of-the-wall,

the
6000

same

Inc.

on the
might

unless

constants
be in question

these

constants

as for lower

Reynolds

of

numbers. Ludwieg-Tillmann
deviatesfrom
5. NTF EXPERIMENT
- RESULTS
AND
KarmanSchoenherr
belowReabout3000and
DISCUSSION
aboveReabout20000. Fernholz
andFinleyis
lowerthantheothertheories.
5.1 Tunnel, Model, Instrumentation,
and Test
Conditions
4.2 Data
5.1.1
Tunnel
The
range
of operating
Overthepast30 yearsexcellent
reviewsof
conditions
for
the
National
Transonic
Facility
availableincompressibleand compressible
(NTF)
at
Langley
Research
Center
23
is
as
follows:
boundary
layerdatahavebeencompiled.These
include
thecompilation
forincompressible
flowsby Mach numbers from 0.2 to 1.2, total pressure from
total
temperature
from
ColesandHirstfromtheStanford
Conference
in one to 9 atmospheres,
--320
to
150deg.
F,
and
Re/ft
from
3.7
to
146
x
196811
, thecompilations
ofcompressible
flowdata
byFernholz
andFinleyin197712,
and198113,
and 106 at Mach 1. For cryogenic operation, liquid
theexamination
ofIncompressible
datato1996by nitrogen is injected into the flow downstream of the
Fernholz
andFinley
1.Sincethattime,otherdata test section, and vaporized to maintain low tunnel
Intermediate
temperatures
can be
hasbeenpublished,
mosthighReynolds
number temperatures.
data havingbeentakenon the wall of wind attained by regulating the amount of liquid nitrogen
tunnels.Thesedataappearto bedifferent
from injected. The tunnel can also be run using air if no
cooling
is required.
For the present
tests, both
flatplateboundary
layerdataTM, i.e., the boundary
layer has developed
and strong
adverse
gradients,

and

equilibrium

flat

sufficiently

long

has

is usually
plate

not

not

been

been

ambient temperatures
were used to obtain

curvature
pressure

characteristic

boundary

run has

apparently

entering

in regions
of wall
and favorable
layers
made.

of

until

completed

before

the test section.

Reference

15

from

1996,

listed

range.
The

Relaxation

data

in

test

section

square

24, making

models

in the

tunnel

The test section

model

Mach 0.8 on the sidewall


of the RAE 8 ft by 8 ft
wind tunnel and reexamined
the data of reference

skin friction

was

data are
tabulated
and

not measured

in all cases

not used
for comparison
data of Fernholz,
Krause,

Schober

19 is compared

however,
and the

here.
The
Nockemann,

in Figure

3 with

high

Reynolds
number
data of Gaudet,
low Reynolds
number
data of Coles 2 and Purtel121, and the
methods

of

Karman-Schoenherr

(K-S)

and

Spalding.
For this figure the compressible
profiles
of Gaudet,
were re-reduced
and transformed
by
the van Driest transformation
22, which was also
used for the
the figure
on

an

data

transformation.

is the R e range

axisymmetric

following
The
Spalding
data,

NTF

Noted

of the data taken

model,

and

in

in NTF

reported

methods

of

will be used

since

they

best experimental
a large range

to compare

agree
data

Karman-Schoenherr
reasonably
available

at this

with
time

of F_.

Standard

Institute

worked

length

described

uniform,

ft

long
here

is slotted
were
area

to

3.3%
ratio.
that the

validating

that

as expected.

data

25 were

reduction
used;

and

tunnel

however,

local

values
of flow
parameters
on the model
were
recalculated
from
measured
model
conditions
using

the

Fortran

routines

Bridgemann
equation
calculate the properties
5.1.2

Model

of NTF.

large length
was required

The Beattie-

of state
was
used
to
of both nitrogen and air 26.

The design

compromise
among
several
desirable
to have a long model

of the

model

factors.
in order

was

It was
to produce

Reynolds
numbers.
The diameter
to be large enough so that the model

would not deflect significantly


under its own weight
and to allow
room for the balance
and other
instrumentation

to

and

transverse
curvature
affect skin friction.

the

8.2

very

demonstrated

was

tunnel

instrumentation

model

it

loads

be

needed

and

mounted

to

be

internally.

large

enough

In
that

effects would not significantly


It could not be too large, or
blockage

effects

would

be

excessive.

over

A sketch
steel

American

design

addition,

with the present


well

the slotted

pressures

model

in a

section.

model

blockage
effects,
which
on an inviscid
geometric

over

and

large

feet long.

17.28

the

flow;

produce

was

flow

in compressible

to

long,

to mount

The

Measured

to 106,000

feet

numbers.

addition to that of reference


10, but did not present
skin friction
measurements
at high
Reynolds
numbers.
In 1984, Gaudet 16, published
data at

26,000

is 25

it possible

Reynolds
minimize
based

17.
Other
data
was
published
in 1994
by
Motallebi TM on the wall of a wind tunnel for Re from

and cryogenic
temperatures
the desired
Reynolds
number

5
of Aeronautics

model

of

the

is shown

and Astronautics,

axisymmetric
in Figure

Inc.

347
4.

stainless
It was

an

axisymmetric
cylinder12.75inchesin diameter
havinga nosedescribed
bya superellipse,
and7
cylindrical
sections
downstream
ofthenose.Ports
wereinstalled
inthemodelatStations
1and2, at
x=73.95and121.95inches,respectively.Skin
frictionwas measured
by a balanceand by
Prestontubesat Station2, andby rakesat
Stations
1 and2. Thewholemodel,including
the
nose,waspolished
to a surfacefinishof4 I_ in.

taken
would

No

ensure

transition

trips

were

used

on the

nose.

model
was sting-mounted
boundary
layer interference

in order
effects,

be caused

The NTF sting

by model

had roll and angle


used

to set the

attack.

of attack

model

Initially,

around

nonuniformity
attack.

model

that could

and

zero

adjust

the

of

the

predicted

determined
from
layer
calculations

nose

using

and
CFD

methods.

in measuring

of
the

It was

flat plate

skin

friction.
Similarly,
the ratio of the boundary
layer
to the model radius was estimated 27 to be 0.25 at
the second
curvature
than

measurement
effects

station,

on cf were

and

transverse

estimated

to be less

1.5 %, at R0 of about 600,000.


5.1.3

Instrumentation

determining

skin

friction

on the model

a skin friction balance,


Preston
profiles from which skin friction
Clauser
method.
instruments
used
Figure
balance

on

5.
Preston
were tested

methods
were

of
used:

tubes, and velocity


was inferred by the

Photographs
the model

of
are

the three
shown
in

tubes
and the skin friction
at Station 2 at both hot and

cold flow conditions.


The boundary
layer rake was
used at Station 1 at the hot flow condition
and at
Station

2 at hot and cold flow conditions.

The

problems

measurement
known 28.
operating
a
environment
experiment

associated

of skin friction
Additional

done

greatly

were

device
that
a

influenced

Preston
calculations.

tubes

than

the design
were

They were

was in the logarithmic

from

tunnel

--

the

Tunnel.
reduction

anticipated

and

of the final balance.

sized from
designed

region

are well

in a cryogenic
risk
reduction

in a smaller

larger

direct

resulting

Langley
0.3 Meter Transonic
Cryogenic
The problems
encountered
in the risk
experiment

the

by balance

problems

mechanical
required
be

with

boundary

American

layer

so that the tube

of the boundary

Institute

polished,
diameter

that no mounting

into the flowfield


The only

The

and
nose

did
was

and the ratio


of
was 0.6.
Care was

apparatus

(see Figure

would

protrude

5 b).

set of Preston

from Laval
set

layer

of

calibration
Superpipe

tube

data

know

to the

University

3. Rather

data,

high

than

Reynolds

rely on a
number

was made at Princeton


University
in the
Facility 2. The data from the Princeton

was

cast

calibration

in the

methods

parameters

of four

different

3134 to see if any one

method

gave superior
results in determining
skin friction
from known inputs.
It was found that all methods
gave the same results.
number
calibration
was
Princeton
data at
was used to reduce

Patel s high Reynolds


found
to predict
the

high Reynolds
the NTF data.

numbers,

and

Inference
of skin friction from velocity
surveys
is most accurate
if tubes on the boundary
layer
rake

Three

in diameter,

portion.

in mounting
the probes
so that the tubes
be firmly attached
to the surface
and to

single

these calculations
and boundary
27 that the pressure
gradient

not be a factor

inches

the outer

that

the

over

0.058

of

angle

flow

into

unchamfered
and
internal
to external

test

design

were

not extend

be

mounted

to measure

shown 29 that the

authors
covering
the range of Reynolds
numbers
for which
measurements
were to be made was

angle

were

the model

of the flow

were

would

capability
tubes

the tubes

The

mount

It has been

tube can extend well into the wake portion


of the
boundary
layer with no adverse
effects;
however,

to minimize
which would

at nominally

Preston

circumferentially

The

struts.

at all test conditions.

are

of the
edge

positioned

turbulent

within

of the boundary

that the integral


calculated
from
calculations
guidelines

the

boundary
layer

previously

on each
a

pressures

were

scanned

provided

were

measured

system,

pressure

as

by

and

an

model

(Type
T)
K. One port

was dedicated

reference

the

polished,

by copper-constantan
accurate
to 1 degree

ESP module

known

so

The tips of the pitot

tubes were not chamfered,


and
was done for the Preston tubes

temperatures
thermocouples

the

be defined

quantities
(_ and (_ are accurately
the profiles.
The boundary
layer

discussed

Model

portion

In addition,

should

for tube placement.

electronically

logarithmic

layer.

to measuring
that

was

also

measured
by a secondary
standard.
Whenever
the reference
pressure
difference
deviated
by
- 0.19% of full scale the modules
were re-zeroed
online.
5.1.4

Test Conditions

Mach numbers
numbers
from

The model

was tested

at

from 0.2 to 0.85 and unit Reynolds


6 x 106 to 94 x 106 per foot.
A

matrix of the test conditions


is shown in Figure
The highest unit Reynolds number was attained

6.
at

Mach

at

6
of Aeronautics

0.6.

The

highest

and Astronautics,

Inc.

unit

Reynolds

number

which

data could

be obtained

x 106, a consequence

at Mach

of the

load

0.85 was 65

constraints

for

this

method

such

as p and

temperature-dependent

quantities

in parameters

the model.
Noted in the figure are the conditions
at which data was obtained
on Preston tubes, the

equations
intermediate

balance,
and the
tunnel conditions,

layer rake.
At most
devices
were tested,

values -- the
Sommer
and

tubes were run.

and Johnson
equation
with constants
for Mach 3.82 in air 35. The Sommer

boundary
all three

but at Mach 0.7 only Preston


Due

to the

tunnel,

finite

it was

blockage

of the

necessary

to

model

calculate

in the

the

local

Mach
number,
which
could be slightly
different
from the freestream
Mach number.
This was done
by averaging
pressures
of Station 1 and using
static

pressure

number.

To

vicinity
around

the nominal

the

model

local

These

averaged

pressure

pressures

in

in calculating

Twl

were

used

data positions

the

model

were averaged

and Tw2.

Representative
over

pressures
are

and

shown

in

temperatures

Figure

7.

It is

evident
that the pressure
gradient
is sufficiently
close to zero and that its effect on the local shear
stress

can be considered

accurately
evident

quantified
that

there

is little

variation

at ambient

temperature,

5.2 Factors affectinq


Measurements
are at

This

change

is small,

in this
The

report

for

equation

M_e+ 0.45(-_--

In order to present

is more

transform

velocity

all

defining

1. /

profiles

velocity

profiles

in the

(5)

and

outer

adiabatic
wall boundary
layers
at
helium 36. Velocities
are transformed
to the density

variation

the boundary

layer by this

coordinate,

region

of

Mach
11 in
in proportion

from the wall to the edge


method;

of

i.e., the vertical

y, is not transformed.

Called
generalized
McDonald 37, the van
defined as

velocities
by Maise
Driest
transformation

u': i0

more

uniform

and
is

be expected.

With the transformed

used

factors

associated

du
velocity

profile and the

density evaluated
at the wall, new
and ue result.
These transformed
to calculate

was coupled
seven

determined
and Short T-

It is also

NTF Skin Friction


least

used

Allen used the


is the Rubesin

integral quantities
in an equivalent
incompressible
form, velocity
profiles were transformed
using the
Van
Driest
method 21, which
was
shown
to

not as uniform
the
model

being

as would

was

in the pressure

number.
While
distribution,

temperature

There

negligible.

in later discussion.

gradient
with Mach
as
the
pressure

method

T-"re = 1.+ 0.035

the

as the local static pressure


in calculating
cp at their
respective
stations.
Similarily,
three temperatures
near the two primary

T-prime
condition.
Short method,
which

Mach

of the measurement
stations,
11 orifices
Station
1 and 11 around
Station 2 were

averaged.

and

their
values
at a temperature
between
the wall and freestream

Preston
tube reductions.
the T condition is

at three orifices just ahead


this pressure
as the local

to calculate
define

prime

by

IJ are replaced

shear

stress

R e and

with the

c f. The

Clauser

from velocity

values of e, (5"
properties
are
transformation

method

profiles

to infer

the

by an interactive

with the conditions


of the NTF test that can have
an effect
on measured
surface
shear.
These

graphical
method.
plotted
along with

factors

wall, and the data was fit to the law of the wall by
iteration.
It is estimated
that the data could be fit
to the law of the wall with a resolution
of about

are compressibility,

transfer,

surface

pressure

curvature,

gradient,

surface

lateral
divergence
(three-dimensionality)
flow, and the freestream
disturbance
scale.
All
effects,
disturbance
level, were
test

was

begun

controlled/minimized
skin friction could
5.2.1
conducted
Above
effects

to

heat

roughness,
of the
level and

except
the
freestream
examined
before the NTF

insure

that

to the extent
be measured.

they

Tests
0.2 to

the wall,

defined

were
0.85.

approach,
and the one used by Allen in Preston
tube reductions 2931, is the use of the T method.
In

Institute

as

be

0.3, compressibility
in the flow.
One

American

profile was
law of the

0.5 % in cf by this method.


The accuracy
of the
results are a function of the constants
in the law of

--=-In
u_
k

that a flat plate

Compressibility
Effects
at Mach numbers
from

approximately
Mach
must
be considered

could

The incompressible
the incompressible

where

k=0.41

yu_
_w

+C

(7)

and C=5.5

The profile

data

were

originally

reduced

with

C=5.0,
however
it was found that C=5.5 gave a
better fit to the Preston tube data and skin friction
theory.

7
of Aeronautics

and Astronautics,

Inc.

5.2.2

Pressure

Preliminary

Gradient-Relaxation

tests

Meter

Transonic

effects

of both

were

run

Cryogenic
and

on

This was accomplished

measured

skin

wall of the test section

of I], the pressure

0.6

and

numbers,
by using

at

to produce

were
the

pressure

Figure
measured

gradient

two

the

pressure

by moving

different

and Reynolds

not

removed

completely

correlation

should

pressure
conditions

gradient

using

be adequate

effects

are

I_ however,

the

for estimating

effects.

For

local

these

test

= 1. - 0.7

I_,

(8)

(Cf)_=0

on

As shown

in Figure

the

is strongly

nose

strongly

adverse

7(a), the pressure

about

favorable
x=13

gradient

switching

inches,

to

and relaxing

to very small
x=30
inches.

adverse
pressure
gradient
about
The pressure
gradient
is zero at

x=50

The question

inches.

the outer

arises

part of the boundary

as to whether

layer had relaxed

to

the equilibrium
zero pressure
gradient state by. the
first measurement
station.
Station
1 was located
at x=73.95 inches, 44 inches from
small adverse gradient.
Measured
e were
and

1.3-1.5

630

and

e from

.065-.075

the

the beginning
of
values of (5 and

inches

beginning

here,

of small

31 (5

adverse

gradient

and

pressure
relaxation

gradient.
for flows

The distance
required
for
with adverse pressure
gradient

by zero

17 (5 and

or

pressure

followed

pressure

340 e from

gradient

is about

zero

5-10

(339"

5.2.3

foot

Heat

nonadiabatic
friction
were

Transfer
wall
also

Effects

temperature
measured

The

layer

long

be

effect

of

effects
on skin
in the 0.3 Meter

0.25

at the

5.2.5

determine
Figure

most

results

2-

pressure

to measure
are shown

data

theory,
radii of 3

acquisition

station,
or equal

to

In order

to

Effects

normal

y in inches

to the surface.

plotted

case,

that

smooth,
used
to

against

at

When
friction

constructed,
balance

y* for

highest

Reynolds
number.
Based on this figure,
wall roughness
should
be smaller
than

unit
the rms
30 pin.

the complete
model and skin
element
had
a measured

roughness
of 4 p inches and a value of y* of about
one.
Based
on the
y'=5
criterion,
surface
roughness
should not have
the skin friction measurements

significantly
of this test.

affected

5.2.6
Lateral
Diverqence
Effects
Three
dimensionality
of the flow is evident
even in flat
plate

experiments

taken

to insure

flow.

From

flow,

plots

where

velocity

keeping
with skin
same
locations
component.
in the

This

transition

near-wall
inducing

great

care

the two-dimensionality
profiles

of e are always

may

measured

across
ragged,

be due

process,

In

dimensionality
the
was

been

somewhat

to the

and/or

the
in

raggedness

the

presence

in the
boundary
pattern
in the flow.

there
is finite three
dimensionality
effects
are added
to the usual two
raggedness.

has

of the outer

friction
measurements
at the
and variations
in the wake

structures
a standing

in

The

model

Rouqhness

severe

could

of T,fraw.

radius.
using

Newtonian
impact
locations,
and model

the y* = 5 height

approximately

a range

The
effect

made

the model was hydraulically


layer
calculations
were

9 shows

c_

over

were

noses,

second

Surface

insure that
boundary

down

it possible

of $ to model

resulting
in an increase
in cf less than
1.5%, based on the calculations.

cylinder,
weight

100 K, making

ratio

calculations

the

Effects

is a geometric

elliptical

Tunnel.
The total temperature
of this tunnel can
be rapidly varied from above ambient temperature
to

to outside

effect

by the

Boundary

then

Curvature

curvature

characterized

the
Cf

Transverse

transverse

and

and 6 inches
to estimate
the magnitude
of this
effect. The measured
ratios of (_r were found to

Reynolds

number

5.2.4

the wall,

used

and l]_ is a transformed


value obtained
the van Driest transformed
value of (5".

Compressibility

behind

distributions
from
estimated
transition

equilibrium
numbers
of

unit

chamber
tunnel.

8 (a)
cf in

parameter

to generate
self-similar
Data are shown
at Mach
0.8

where

friction

gradients
of different
magnitude.
shows the effects on Preston tube
by Clauser
profiles 38.

0.3

adverse

examined.

terms

Langley

Tunnel,

favorable

gradients
upper

Effects

in the

order
of

to

the

in the flow,
dimensional

minimize

flow

on

of

layer,
When

the

three

longitudinal

expected
droop due to the model
calculated
and
found
to
be
0.25

be adjusted

degree.
within

0.1

Since

the

degree,

model

it was

felt

Figure
8 (b) for
Mach
0.6
and
Mach
0.8.
Repeatability
is shown by the agreement
between

that the
alignment

effect
could
be minimized
by careful
of the model.
Initial runs were devoted

two

different

to

alignment.

the

wall

transfer

was

runs.

For most

slightly

through

the

runs

nonadiabatic
tunnel

wall

American

in this
due
to

tunnel,
to

heat

plenum

model

and
made

8
Institute of Aeronautics

Preston

tube

in the

same

and Astronautics,

In addition,
measurements
azimuthal

Inc.

plane,

rake,

balance,

were

always

which

will

be

shownto bean

important

issue

in a later

Transformed

section

11 along

of this report.
5.2.7

Freestream

dependence
layer

of turbulent

parameters

intensity
and
nonlinear.
4
level

Disturbance
on

Levels

cf and

rms

other

The

boundary

freestream

turbulence

length scale has been shown to be


For NTF the freestream
turbulence

is not

known,

so this

parameter

remains

potentially
important
parameter
of skin friction measurements

in the assessment
made in this tunnel.

The

in NTF

main

sources

identified

41

fluctuations
is noted
wind

by

measuring

the

fluctuating

5.3 Profile

NTF

have

surface

places

within

in comparison

tunnels,

Clauser

noise

at several
that,

section

of

with

has

low

It

levels

of

test

Measurements

--

Skin Friction

from

coefficients
by

were

first

incompressible

inferred

from

transforming

form

transformation
of fitting

did not affect

factors

the velocity

the

by applying

and then

using

profile

velocity

the

data
van

Driest

the Clauser

to the

to

method

law of the wall.

Pitot pressures
were
assuming
isentropic,

reduced
to Mach
ideal gas flow,

gamma,

and constant

Ps throughout

layer 42.

Since

numbers
constant

Tt was not measured,

Inferred

0.41

in the

literature

present

locate

rake

tubes

very

near

point in the velocity

the

profile

model

to

wall,

the

was well within

the

logarithmic
layer of the boundary
layer, as shown
in the velocity
profile data of Figure 10 (a) plotted
in law-of-the-wall
coordinates.
In order
to
accurately

calculate

boundary

layer

integral

quantities
such as ,5* and e, the theoretical
of East, also used by Gaudet 16, was used
the profile

from

the wall to the first data

The

since,

profile
to fill in

point.

constants

was

of

used

taken

used

value

as pointed

by the

function
of
skin
friction

for

in

to be

reducing

C chosen

by

their data usually


This variation
is not

out by Coles,

the outer

part of the boundary


layer is extremely
sensitive
to
extraneous
effects in the flow.
A value of C=5.5
was

used for the final

since

this

value

reduction

gave

of the profile

data

agreement

with

better

Preston tube data, the theory of Spalding,


results from finite-difference
calculations
5.0.

To decrease

Schoenherr,

the

an even

necessary.
and

5.0 gave
numbers

cf level

higher

5.5

is shown

values
between

to that

value

Reduction

data.

first

and

data.

temperature
from
the

efforts

a
of

of k is usually

data exists,

and velocity profiles can be obtained


Mach
number
profile
along
with

of

12 shows

profiles

on the

used

Despite

Figure

velocity

plotted
as
The value

The value

was

Tw.

Friction
from

is dependent

other

of Tt and

Skin

7.

C=5.0

the local total

data

number
a zero

of transformed

equation

temperature
in the boundary
layer was estimated
by the
Rotta relation 43.
By this means,
both

measurement

the values

obtained

been

the boundary

in Figure

number

significantly.

of c f inferred

surprising

5.3.1
Transformed
Velocity
Profiles
The pitot
rake was mounted at both Stations
1 and 2.
Skin
profiles

shape

various
authors
to describe
varies between
5.0 and 5.5.

Method

friction

of C used

the

static pressure.

are shown

Reynolds

the higher
Reynolds
and the results
from

Clauser
method
transformed
R0.

transonic

factors

low

pressure gradient
boundary
layer calculation.
For
the calculation
of shape factors for data, the value

5.3.2

pressure

other

the

and Purtell,
of Gaudet,

values

been

the tunnel.

Coles
data

shape

with

of Karman-

of C would

of the

in Figure

data

12. A value

and for this reason

for the

final

a value

reduction

of the

behavior,
conversely,

o_=0 at _ increments

i.e.,

as 0

decreases,

are replotted

of 5.5
present

of 15 degrees

13 (a).
Measured
values
of Re show

as e increases,

The cf data

The

of

To check
were taken

rolling the model.


Data from the pitot
reduced
to boundary
layer parameters,
shown
in Figure
coefficients
and

have
using

of c_ too high
at Reynolds
30,000
and 100,000
where

5.3.2 Circumferential
Measurements
for non-uniform
flow effects, rake data
at nominal

and the
than did

by

rake were
and are

skin friction
a consistent
cf increases;

c_ decreases.
as a function

of R e in

have been
and C=5.5

used.
were

Figure13
(b). From this figure,
it was concluded
that when the skin friction is plotted as a function

used.
The strength
of the wake component
2.2 for the present
data, in agreement
with

was
other

of

profile of Spalding _ could also


For the law of the wall k=0.41

high

Reynolds

number

Reference

44.

traditional

defect

in the coordinates

data

Transformed

profiles

coordinates
of Reference

as

shown

are plotted

in Figure

in

10 (b) and

4 in Figure

American

in

Institute

10 (c).

Re,

removed,

variations
and

in
also

circumferential
that

measuring
devices
should
circumferential
location

data

from

flow

are

different

be taken at the
on a model.

same
Two

dimensional
standing
patterns on tunnel walls and
models
have been found, and the variation
is not

9
of Aeronautics

and Astronautics,

Inc.

always

insignificant.

was always

There
is
circumferential
vicinity
were

For this test, skin friction

taken at (I)=0 and nominal


a

significant
skin
friction

of q)=0, where
made.
The

measurements
measurements,
having
subtended

gradient
coefficient

element

an angle

provide

inches

for

methods,

5.4.1
model

Tube

27 degrees.

compared
Spalding

Aliqnment

with the

incoming

flow,

to

Preston

align

tubes

skin

friction

function
zeroed

values

geometry.

and

plotting

of the local
to be more

could

the

adjustment

sting-mounting

the model

were

results

as a

of attack, the model could be


to the flow, not the test section

No yaw

the tunnel

the

flow
angularity
than
surface
By reducing
Preston
tube data to

of angle
in relation

was

possible

arrangement;

be adjusted

with

however,

in angle of attack.

Several
runs were devoted
initially
to aligning
the model,
with
results
at Station
2 shown
in
Figure

14.

It was

zero
angle
independent
with the

installed

increments

Skin

tubes

were

taken

in both

nitrogen
which
Superpipe

the

Friction

mounted
ambient

0.07deg,

calibration

at Station

temperature

be

data

Figure

air

valid

and

cold

comparison
form, the

transformed
method,

at

the

high
of

the same

Institute

to

also

transformed

as

Re in Figure

with
theory.
compressible
cf

incompressible

location.

Reynolds

and

by

the

from velocity

In most

cases

In
was

T-prime
profiles

the data

at

appear

to be significantly
higher
than incompressible
theory,
even at Reynolds
numbers
of 40,000
50,000.
The reasons
for this
could
not
determined,
problems

however,

in

encountered

view

of

in running

the

the

to
be

severe

balance

at

cryogenic
temperature
same problems
might

in the 0.3 Meter TCT, the


be expected
in NTF.
Also,

the

footprint

balance

than that
susceptible
flow.

Data

element
of

was

much

larger

the other devices,


making
it more
to variations
in the circumferential

from

of Three

Preston

Methods

tubes,

velocity

profiles,

and

the skin friction balance


are shown in Figure
t7.
Data from the Preston
tubes and velocity
profiles
agreement.

Balance

the other data at the highest


however
there is large scatter
The Preston
cf agreed
power

well

data

tube

and Clauser-inferred

with

each

other

the following

Cf = 0.0097

and

Spalding

10
of Aeronautics

with

value

and

Inc.

of

fit to a

Re (-144)

3% above

value at R e =600,000.
value at Re=30,000.

and Astronautics,

values
were

equation:

The data scatter about this line


as shown in Figure 18. Equation
the

agrees

Reynolds
numbers,
in the balance data

to 200,000.

law, having

Schoenherr
the Spalding

American

at Station

unit

(a),

and R e was taken

was used,
Princeton

this test.
Compressibility
for by the T method

tested

tunnel

16

16
(b)
for
incompressible

are in good

were

was

cf against

Preston

2 and

balance

cf against

in

at Re of 40,000

Measurements

to

in

essentially
the same
tubes 1 and 25 as the

flow.
The calibration
of Patel
was
determined
from
the

Reynolds
numbers
of
effects
were accounted
Sommer and Short 35.

rolled

and

15 (b)o

Measurements

5.6 Comparison

confirmed

Karman-Schoenherr

incompressible

nominal

degrees,
Later runs

and the model

at _= --

these
results
by giving
pressure
patterns
on rake
model was rolled.
5.4.2

that

of attack
was
--0.07
of tunnel Mach number.

pitot rake

15 degree

determined

the

in Figure

as compressible

positions
stations.

tube pressures,
a measure
shear,
have
been shown
to
18.

are

number

In order

The spread

at both hot and cold flow conditions.


The resulting
data are shown in Figure 16. The data are plotted

were

Data

mounted
on plugs at six circumferential
at the two skin friction
measurement

sensitive
pressures

with
theories

5.5 Balance

with

runs

Re/ft.

effects.
In order to plot the data
Re, values
of e at each
test

of

The skin friction

of attack.

of tunnel

condition
were calculated
from the boundary
layer
survey data. The data in incompressible
form are

Data

Model

Preston
surface

of compressibility
as a function

the counterlower on the

additional

the resulting
calculated
numbers
of 0.4, 0.6, 0.7

in cf at the lowest unit Reynolds


number between
the Mach 0.4 and Mach 0.85 data is an indication

diameter,

comparison

made with the model at angle


available from the authors.
5.4 Preston

and 0.85 as a function

the
the

point
balance,

in

of approximately

data

computational

Figure
15 (a) shows
compressible
cf at Mach

skin friction measurements


Preston
tube
and
rake

The skin
friction
was
higher
on
clockwise
side than at _=0, and
clockwise
side.
To

in
in

were
essentially
however
the skin friction

an

data

c(=0.

(9)

is within - 2%,
9 is 1% above
the

Karman-

It is equal

to

This equationis for incompressible


skin
friction,beingderivedfromthetransformed
NTF
datain the range32,680< R e < 619,800. For

3.

of High-Reynolds-Number
Flat-Plate
in the NTF,"
Paper AIAA-84-0588,

Experiments
AIAA 13th

application

Aerodynamics

San

to

compressible

prime equation

could

flow,

suitable

T-

CA,

be used 35.

4.
6.

have

friction

data

been

shown

incompressible
Reynolds

data

to

theories

R0 of 619,800

agree
within

with

existing

3% at the

At R0=30,000,

the

highest

data

are in

with the theory of Spalding


and slightly
Karman-Schoenherr
correlation.
The

obtained

good

at transformed

number.

agreement
above the

by two

agreement;

different

however,

methods
these

were

data

did

in
not

agree as well with direct measurements


made with
a skin friction balance.
The scatter in the balance
measurements,
attributed
to mechanical
with
the
balance,
is
a strong
deemphasizing

problems
factor
in

this data.

The data is free from pressure


gradient
effects,
but has transverse
curvature
effects
which
can
increase

c_ by

roughness

as

should

affecting
turbulence

the
of

turbulence

much
not

data
the

level

indications
however

W. S. and

Peterson,

Testing

March

J. B., Jr.,

Conference,

George,

W. K. and Castillo,

as

be

an

1.5%.

Surface

issue.

factor

may
be the
freestream
NTF
tunnel,
both
in rms
and

in

scale.

that the turbulence


its effect
on the

There

level
data

are

is not large,
cannot
be

quantified.

December,
1997,
5.
Schoenherr,
Surfaces
SNAME,
6.

L.,

Plates

L.,

"The

in Zero

Spalding,

MA

D. B.,

"A New

for the Drag of a Flat


Turbulent
and Laminar
Journal of Heat
1133-1138.
8.

Spalding,

Architects

May

and

of

Spring
and

Marine

7 & 8, 1953,
Analytical

Plate Valid
Regimes,"

Mass

Flat

Resistance

Gradient,"

of Naval

Boston,

of

Transactions

Frictional

Pressure

of Society

Engineers,
32.
7.

"Zero-pressure-

layer,"
Applied
no
12, part
1,

Moving Through
a Fluid,"
40, 1932, pp 279-313.

Meeting

Deigo,

pp 689-729.
K. E.,
"Resistance

Landweber,

Flat

"Design

5-7, 1984.

gradient
turbulent
boundary
Mechanics
Reviews,
vol 50,

CONCLUSIONS

Skin

Saric,

pp 5-

Expression
for Both the
International

Transfer,

5,

1962,

pp

D. B. and Chi, S. W.,

"The drag of a

compressible
turbulent
boundary
smooth flat plate with and without

layer
on a
heat transfer,"

Journal
1964,
9.

of Fluid

Mechanics,

vol 18, pt 1,

January,

pp 117-143.

Ludwieg,

H. and

of the Wall-Shearing
Layers,"

Tillmann,
Stress

NACA

W.,

"Investigations

in Turbulent

-TM-1285,

Boundary

National

Advisory

Committee
for Aeronautics,
May, 1950.
10.
Fernholz,
H. H. and Finley,
P.

J.,

incompressible
flow at M=0.2 to compressible
flow
at M=0.85.
The van Driest transformation
and T-

Incompressible

Turbulent

prime

Proqress

The

data

were

method

obtained

appear

the compressibility

many

helpful

presentation

nominally

to be adequate

to remove

effects.

Acknowledqements
Dr. Richard
Campbell
the NTF model.
Also
for

from

Boundary

Layer:

Smits,

The authors
wish to thank
for designing
the nose for
thanks to Dr. Arild Bertelrud

suggestions

concerning

of data and content

A. J. and Marusic,
Flows:

Simulation,"

A Challenge
Paper

Fluid Dynamics

the

of this paper.

M.

Turbulent

Flow,

Pipe

and Aerospace
June 1996.

I.,

"High

Turbulent

Boundary

V.,

30th

Norfolk,

VA,

Mean-Flow
Ph.D.

Engineering,

and
AIAA

June 28

Scaling

Thesis,

Mechanical

Princeton

University,

of

Institute

the

Data,

Sciences

32,

E.A.,

"Computation

Layers

University,
CA 1968.
12. Fernholz,
H. H. and

- 1968,

13.

AGARDograph

Fernholz,

H. H., Finley,

"A Further
Layer

Compilation

Data

AGARDograph
1981.
14.

Bushnell,

B.,

"Mixing

Compressible

11
of Aeronautics

Finley,

of Compressible

Data,"

Journal,

American

of

The

No.

4,
of

AFOSR-IFP-

Stanford
Conference,
Volume
II Compiled
Data,"
1968 AFOSR-IFP-Stanford
Conference
Stanford

Layer
1977.

Reynolds

for Experiment

AIAA-99-3530,

Conference,

- July 1, 1999.
2.
Zagarola,

Assessment

August, 1996, pp 245-311.


11. Coles, D. E. and Hirst,

REFERENCES
Number

An

in Aerospace

Compilation

1.

Zero-Pressure-Gradient

with

P. J.,

"A Critical

Turbulent
No.

Boundary

223,

P. J. and

AGARD,
Mikulla,

of Compressible

a Survey

of Turbulence

No.

AGARD,

263,

Data.,"

November,

D. M., Cary, A. M., Jr. and Holley,


Length

in

Turbulent

Low

and As[ronautics,

Inc.

Reynolds

Boundary

13, No. 8, August,

1975,

V.,

Boundary

Layers,"

B.

Number
AIAA

pp 1119-1121.

15.

Dussauge,

Smith,
R.
"Turbulent
Supersonic
1996.
16.

J.-P.,

Flow,"

Gaudet,

Turbulent
Numbers

Fernholz,

W., Smits,
Boundary

L.,

"Experimental

Establishment,

17.

K. G.

Numbers
Ministry
18.

and

Motaltebi,

F.,

Layers,"
AIAA
2153-2161.

Journal,

Fernholz,
Schober,

at

High

of the

32,

7190,

Ozarapoglu,

H. H., Krause,

Reynolds

Laval

1973.

University,

Measurements
Flows,

in

Ph.D.

Thesis,

Council,

31. Allen, J. M., "Reevaluation


of CompressibleFlow Preston
Tube Calibrations,"
NASA
TM X-

of

3488, February 1977.


32. Patel, V. C., "Calibration

Two-

Boundary
1994,

and
pp

E., Nockemann,

"Comparative

V.,

Turbulent

November,

Compressible
1-5, 1976.

May, 1973.

30.

Incompressible

Study

of the techniques
of skin friction
in

boundary
layers,"
Boundary
Layers
March

limitations

Journal

of

measurements

on

its use

Fluid

September,
M,

1982.

29.
Allen, J. M.,
"Evaluation
of CompressibleFlow Preston
Tube Calibrations,"
NASA
TN D-

0.2 and 2.8,"

Turbulent

February,

"Turbulent

Research
Flow

Langley,

turbulent
Turbulent

1970.

"Mean

Subsonic

19.

July,

1984.

L.,

between

December,

Dimensional

and

Gaudet,

Aeronautical

of Defence,

335,

September,

Numbers

R. & M. No. 3712,

No.

Investigation

Studies

at Mach

NASA,

28. Winter,
K. G.,
"An outline
available
for the measurement

Layer
at High
Reynolds
Number of 0.8," TR 84094,

Royal Aircraft
Boundary-Layer

P. J.,

and Spina,
E. F.,
in Subsonic
and

AGARDpgraph

Boundary
and a Mach

Winter,

H., Finley,

A. J.
Layers

1965,

of the Preston

in pressure

Mechanics,

tube

gradients,"
23,

pt

1,

pp 185-208.

33.
Bertelrud,
A.,
"Pipe
Flow Calibration
of
Preston Tubes of Different
Diameters
and Relative

in

the canonical
boundary
layer at Re,theta
< 6 x
10"'4 on the wall of the German-Dutch
windtunnel

Lengths

(title slightly different


from this entry),"
Fluids, 7, June, 1995, pp 1275-1281.

of

Aeronautical
Research
Institute of Sweden,
1974.
34. Bradshaw,
P. and Unsworth,
K., "A Note on

in

Preston

Tube

IC Aero

Report

20.

Coles,

D.,

"The

Turbulent

a Compressible
Fluid,"
September,
1962.

Physics

Boundary

R-403-PR,

Layer

Rand

Corp.,

35.

School,

Friction
Heating

Maryland,

Engineering,

University

1978.

22. van Driest,


in Compressible
Aeronautical

E. R., "Turbulent
Boundary
Layer
Fluids,"
Journal
of the

Sciences,

pp 145-160, 216.
23.
Bruce,
W.

E.,

18,

no.

Jr.,

3,

March,

"The

U.S.

1951,

National

Transonic
Facility,
Parts I and II. Papers No. 14
and 15," AGARD-R-722,
AGARD, April, 1985.
24. Fuller, D. E., "Guide for Users of the National
Transonic

Facility,"

NASA Technical

83124, July, 1981.


25. Foster, J. M. and Adcock,
for the

National

System,"

NASA

Memorandum
"User's

Guide

Research

Data

Transonic

Facility

Technical

Memorandum

Nitrogen,"
76.

NASA

TN

27. Harris, J. E. and Blanchard,


Program
for Solving
Laminar,
Turbulent
Equations
Flow,"

Compressible
for Two-Dimensional
NASA

Technical

73-07,

110242,

D-8274,

NASA,

D. K., "Computer
Transitional,
or
Boundary-Layer
and Axisymmetric

Memorandum

American

Institute

83207,

College

Flow,"

B. J.,

"Free-Flight

of Turbulent-Boundary-Layer

Region

Skin

of Severe
Aerodynamic
from 2.8 to 7.0," NACA-

of

Hypersonic

Layers,"
AIAA Journal,
1979, pp 919-921.
37.

Maise,

and

Kinematic

boundary
January,

G. and

17, Number
H.,

Viscosity

Layer,"
AIAA
1968, pp 73-80.
F.

H.,

Advances

pp 1-51.
39. White,
40.

Turbulent

McDonald,

Eddy

Clauser,

Layer,

F. M.,

Hancock,

The

Viscous

in the

Boundary
8,

August,

"Mixing

Length

in a Compressible
Journal,

6,

Turbulent

in Applied

Company,

Fluid

No.

1,

Boundary

Mechanics

IV,

Flow,

1956,

McGraw-

1974,

P. E. and Bradshaw,

of Free-Stream
Layers,"
September,

125,

of Science

TN-3391,
NASA, Ames, March, 1955.
36. Watson, R. D., "Generalized
Velocities
Outer

Data

Report

1973.

S. C. and Short,

in the Presence
at Mach Numbers

Hill Book
Associated
Flow
of

on

FFA

in Compressible

Imperial

September,

Sommer,

38.
J. B.,

April 1996.
26. Adcock,
J. B., "Real-Gas
Effects
With
One-Dimensional
Transonic
Cryogenic
December,

Calibrations

Measurements

of

Recommendations

for Best Accuracy,"

and Technology,

21. Purtell, L. P., The Turbulent


Boundary
Layer
at Low Reynolds
Number, PhD Thesis,
Graduate
Mechanical

Including

Presentation

Turbulence

Journal
1983,

P.,

"The Effect

on Turbulent

of Fluids
pp 284-289.

Boundary

Engineering,

105,

41.
Igoe, W. B., "Analysis
of Fluctuating
Static
Pressure
Measurements
in the National Transonic
Facility,"
NASA
March, 1996.
42.

12
of Aeronautics

Staff,

Technical

A. Ro,

and Astronautics,

"Equations,

Inc.

Paper
Tables,

3475,
and

NASA,
Charts

1967.
for Compressible
Flow,"NACAReport1135, 10,905,
44. Gad-eI-Hak,
M. andBandyopadhyay,
P.,
NASA,
1953.
43. Rotta,
J. C., "Critical
Review
ofExperimental"Reynoldsnumbereffects in wall-bounded
flows,"Applied Mechanics Reviews, Vol.
Heat TransferCoefficientsand Temperature turbulent
distributions
in TurbulentBoundaryLayersat 45, No. 8, August, 1994, pp 307-365.
Supersonic
and,Hypersonic
Flow,"NASATTF

American

13
Institute of Aeronautics

and Astronautics,

Inc.

Figure
1. Photograph
ofModelinNTF.

0.007
0 004

_ ,_

Kam_n-Schoenherr
,_

Crossover

Spalding
0.006

Point

_'

0005

m
e

Fefnho_z,
etal
Gaudet
Coles Te,bu_atlon
SpaldingTabulatmoll
Purt_

0004

0 003
C

0002

NTF
0 001

0001
1000

10"

10 _

I0_

......
t 000

100

Figure

2.

10 _

Range

10 _

10 n

Flat Plate Skin Friction


and Correlations.

Theories

Figure

3.

Comparison
with Theory.

14
American

Data

Institute of Aeronautics

and Astronautics,

Inc.

of Flat Plate

Data

STATION

STATION

STUB

49.200

12.75
--,

48.000

48.000

dis

STING

#3

-"-

"
FAIRING
/

/>A*

24.000
--,,
..125.951

30.000

-"

(4

sects)

27.425

28,_

_'_

,,.-

convention

TOP VIEW

"=

looking

into

flow

207.376
17.28

ft

_'fff[fffUfff_ffffffu_rffffff_"fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff(f[fff
dimensions

in

Figure

(a)

inches

4.

fffffffffffffffffffl

unless

noted

Sketch

of Model.

Figure

Rake.

5. Continued.

(b)

Preston

Tube.

09

08

07

06
M
0.5

04

03
Balance, Station 2
r sto
TUbe. Station

.-

_r% g,......

02

(c) Skin Friction

_"_

Balance.

Rake.

Stalion

01
0

20

40

60

80

100

Re,if1

Figure

5.

NTF Model

Figure

Instrumentation.

American

Institute

15
of Aeronautics

6.

Mach-Reynolds

and Astronautics,

Number

Inc.

Test

Conditions.

ill

02

1 05

01

o
^-'

M=06
M=0 7
M=04
M=085

M--04,
M=04,
M=0.4,
M---04,
M=04.
M--07
M=O 7.
M=0.7,
M=O 7.
M=O 7,

,>
^
v

Point

2243

T =1202
TIT

Longludlnal
Span 1
n 2
_k)n
1
Statbon 2
Longnu6ir_l
Span1
S,p,an 2
S_t_n
1
Slat_
2

-01

_,

Station

Station

T
Point

-02

73.95
_,

Nose-cylinder
2595

576

121,95
T =-2503

junction

095

-0 3
0

50

1O0

150

50

x, inches

(a) Pressures.

(b) Temperatures.

Figure 7. Representative

Pressures and Temperatures

1 08

170

M=0.6,

106
_
"_'

100
x, inches

R=15x

10 e

M:0 8' R=15 x 10_


M=0 6, R=347 x 10 a

M=0 8, R=34 7 x 10 e

1 04

On Model.

10 _

Rt_ 37, M=0 6


Run 34. M=0 8
Run 37. M=0 8

16510

J
R/ft=64

x 10 _

c
1 02
cfllc_)

1 60 104

Tasl

365,

0.3M-TCT

1
st 358,

0.3M-TCT

0 98

096

c/(cr)

o-1 - 07

_e_
d(c )/d(T./T

0 94
-0 15

150
-0 I

-005

0 05

0 1

015

10 _
0 98

)= 1 15 10 3

..............
1

1.02

1 04

1 06

1 0B

T IT
w

(a) Pressure Gradient Effects.

(b) Wall Temperature

Effects.

Figure 8. Effects of Pressure Gradient and Wall Temperature on Measured cf.

16
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc.

4O

35
A(u/u)=22
3O

k=0

M=09

Layer

Calculation
U'/U

RJff=SO 48 x 10 _

C=55

._/

25
Boundary

41,

20

15

10

E_I Pro_le
_4=_85R =32 68O
M=O_ R =3975O

M_040 R =26G300

M:O_0 R =465400

_4=O60 R -619a00
a_r_

or Wake

.................

0 10 o

10 106

20 108

30 104

40

10 _

50 106

10

60 10 e

100

1000

y, inches

Figure

9.

Calculated

104

10 _

y*

Turbulent

Figure

Wall Scaling.

(a) Law-of-Wall.
Transformed
Velocity

10.

Profiles.

0_4

|
v.^?

0.3

A
-4

M=O 85, R '=32 680


M=O 20 R '=39750

_:_0

0.2

M=O 40 R '=84 O30

t_

M=O 20, R '=56 260

M=O 40 R '=123,400

M=O 40 R '=266300

M=O20 R '=313,000

(u,'-u')tu'
0.1

Solid

symbols denote

Open

symbols,

data 8t Station

data al Stabon

"'_

M=O 60 R '=465 40C ;

55

M=060

R '=551 900

M=060

R '=a_a aoo

-10

" :::::::::::::
: :::::::::::::I

=- Law of wat_e
-12

M=040

_ ......
0

R '=123350

M=060

-01
02

04

06

0.01

08

0.1
y16

Y/6 u

(b)

Law-of-Wake.
Figure

American

(c)
10.

Institute

Transformed

17
of Aeronautics

Velocity

Outer

Region

Profiles.

and Astronautics,

Inc.

R '=619820

10 _

16

li

30

.............

1 :

15

S,lahen
Gaudel

_',,

ZPG

Boundary

Layer

103

Calculation

26

103

C=55.

Equation

C=50.

Equalion

X,

Ct

20

101
-

11
100

1000

10 +

10 _

15

10

10

103

10 +

" ['1E_ '

104

10 _

R e '

Figure

200

11.

Transformed

.El

10 '_

R'

Shape

Factors

Figure

10 _

1 90

10"

12.

Effect of C on cf Obtained
Clauser Method.

22

10 _

21

10

by

+
Karman-Sd_oenherr

1 8510
18010'

Spalding

v-n

2010

1 80

103
19103

60

I0 _

"
C I'

140

10 s

Ct,

"_
17

! 20

10 _

M=0.4,
Rtlt=15

Station
x

170

10 J

1 65

10 _

M=0.4,

F-q

1 5

16010
t20

2
10 _'

10010"
180

10

-60

60

120

10 _

Station

R/ft=15

10 _

14103

t80
1105

12105

(a)
Figure

Variation
13.

14105

1610

_-

R'

e
of cf with _.

Variation

American

of Boundary

(b) Variation
Layer

Properties

18
Institute of Aeronautics

of c4 with R_.

from Rake with Roll Angle.

and Astronautics,

Inc.

18

10 _'

2510

2.10102

M=

Nominal
20010

Zero

_.07

deg

Top
Tube.
M=O 4
Bollom
M=085
Top
Tube,Tui0e M---OB54_

_lld
Cold

BOltom

M=7

Cold

Cold

Tube

M=O

2010

85

mP-f
CT

190103

185

HOI

Hot

M85_
M= 4,
M=6.

19510

M=7
o

205107

103
1.510

III I
1 80

10 -_

1 7510

O_

10

170103
-03

-02

-01

01

02

10 _
107

10 _

03

10 B

10 +

Rift
O

Figure

3010

14.

(a)Compressible
Figure 15. Preston

Determination
of Nominal
Zero Angle of Attack.

2510
M=

4.

Hot

M= 7.
M85,

Hot
Hot

M=4
M=6.
M=7.

Cold
Cold
Cold

MBS,

Cold

Data.
Tube Data.

M=0+20
o

M=060
M=0

BalaFce

Karrna_-Scbeenbe_

NTF

Spalding

20

40

Data
Test

83

103
Stabon

CI

15
1510

103

o
o

1010

....

1 0

104

10 _

10 _

10

+
10 _

107

Rer

(b)

Data in Transformed
Figure

10 u

109

Rift

15.

Parameters.

(a) Compressible
Figure 16. Balance

Concluded

American

Institute

19
of Aeronautics

and Astronautics,

Inc.

Data.
Data.

30

103

30

103

........

I
2510

:
o
^

M=040
M=O 60
M=0185

, C=55

I
25

109

20

10 _

Preston

Tube

Spalding

el'

2OLO,

_
Ela_ance

1510

from

1t

Data

NTF Tes_3 ta
Station 2
R

survey data.

7o

c.

15 lo_

Stal_)n 2

from T method

1 0 10

1 0 10 _
10 _

10"

10 _

10 _

10 _

(b)

Data in Transformed Parameters.


Figure 16. Concluded.

Figure

17

Comparison
Techniques.

of Three

0 0024
"",

"

Cla ....

C=55

0 0022

o 002
ct
00018

o oo16

Frt to Data
0 0014

c t = 0 0097

_'_

6;.._,,

R e * o _44_

-, -_

0 0012
104

lO 5

10 _

R'

Figure

18.

fit to Preston

10 t

R u'

Re

Tube

and

Crofile

cf Data.

2O
American

Institute of Aeronautics

and Astronautics,

Inc.

Measurement