THE APPLICABILITY OF A SINE SERIES VELOCITY PROFILE

z IN A TWO-DIMENSIONAL INCOMPRESSIBLE
LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER

By

G. KURYLOWICH

.;

JULY, 1959 UTIA TECHNICAL NOTE NO. 29

 THE APPLICABILITY OF A SINE SERIES VELOCITY PROFILE
IN A TWO-DIMENSIONAL INCOMPRESSIBLE
LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER

BY

G. KURYLOWICH

JULY, 1959 UTIA TECHNICAL NOTE NO. 29

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The author is grateful to Dr. G. N. Patterson, Director

of the Institute of Aerophysics, for the opportunity to pursue this interest-
ing topic.

Special thanks go to Dr. J. A. Steketee for his valuable

guidance and for his patient and thorough review of the final manuscript .
 SUMMARY

An account is given of the adaptibility of a sine velocity pro-

file by developing a solution similar to the fourth degree expansion of
Pohlhausen. The trigonometrie results are presented in tabular form
for the use in the determination of flow quantities in two dimensional
boundary layers and a eomparison is made with Pohlhausen and Thwaites.
Finally, the results are used in the analysis of the flow over an infinite
cylinder.
 (i)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

NOTATION ii

I. INTRODUCTION 1

1I. THEORETICAL DERIV A TION 1

2. 1 Develop!Dent of the Velocity Profile 1

2. 2 The M = 6 Profile 4
2.3 The M = 3, M = 5 and M = 10 Profiles 6

2.3.1 The M = 3 Profile 7

2.3.2 The M = 5 Profile 7
2.3.3 The M = 10 Profile 8

2. 4 Method of Solution and Observations of the Universal

Function Behaviour
2. 5 Flat Plate Analysis ( " = 0) 11
2. 6 The Flow Over a Cylinder 11

lIl. SUMMARY 13

REFERENCES 14

FIGURES 1 to 13
 (ii)

NOTATION

Schubauer distances defined by the following

diagram

U-o

x running variabie along the surface of the body with the

origin being at the stagnation point

U oo the flow velocity at infinity

u the potential flow velocity over the surface of the body

viscosity

Re Reynold's number

non-dimensional displacement thickness

non-dimensional momentum thickness

f(n) non-dimensional velocity profile through the boundary

layer

shear stress at the wall of the body

friction coefficient

a non-dimensional direction

non-dimensional parameter (a shape factor)

K a second shape factor

Symbols not listed above are defined at the point of use.

 ( 1 )

1. INTRODUCTION

In his solution of an incompressible two-dimensional boundary

layer, Pohlhausen assumed a polynomial approximation for the velocity
profile in order to solve for quantities as separation point, momentum
thickness, displacement thickness and shear stress. If the pressure
distribution over a continuous body is considered, this approximation
yields satisfactory results only up to that point on the body where the
velocity becomes a maximum; in other words, the Pohlhausen approxi-
mation provides accurate results in regions of favourable pressure gradients
and accelerated flows. In areas of unfavourable pressure gradients or
retarded flows, the method diverges from the exact solution producing
large errors between experimental and predicted results. This error is
proportional to the distance between the separation point and the point of
minimum pressure and in instanees where this distance is large,
Pohlhausen prediets separation much too late or sometimes not at all. A s
an exam ple of this, consider an elliptical cylinder whose major axes is
parallel to the direction of the free stream. G. B. Schubauer (Ref. 1)
found that for an ellipse with ratio a:b = 2.96: 1, separation took place at
x:b = 1. 99. A calculation based on Pohlhausen's results showed very good
agreement with measurements for velocity profiles up to the point of
minimum pressure but predicted no separation at all . Thus, the point of
separation can only be calculated with some degree of uncertainty.

On exam ining the various flat plate coefficients obtained by the

use of different profiles (see Fig. 1), it becomes evident that the Lamb
assumption approximates the exact flat plate profile more accurately than
any of the others; the polynomial results for 7 are 3% in error while
the sine assumption differs by only 1. 2% from that of the Exact Blasius
Solution . This suggests that a trigonometrie profile may be more suitable
with regard to a boundary layer flowapproximation and if so, a better
prediction of the separation point may possibly be obtained.

Il. THEORETICAL DERIV ATION

2. 1 Development of the Velocity Profile

If the equations of motion for the flow in a two-dimensional

incompressible boundary layer are integrated over the width of the
boundary layer, then the Von Karman Momentum Equation is obtained
(see Ref. 2). This equation may be written in the form:

( 1 )
U"1.~ + (2 s + <b") U~U -= ":fi,
d~ X ;0
To obtain the significant boundary layer parameters from
Eq. (1), a velocity profile must be selected, which to some extent
 (2)

equals the exact velocity profiles found in the boundary layer. We

shall, therefore, require that the velocity profile takes the form

r(~ ) = ~/ U
where ~ .. y/~

and the following conditions are satisfied:

( i )
( ii )
( iii ) ( 2 )
( iv )
(v )
at separation
( vi )

Condition (i) requires that the velocity profile vanishes

at the wall, in other words; there is no slip flow on the surface of
the body. The following three conditions join the boundary layer
profile smoothly to that of the free stream. Finally, condition ( v )
follows from the ordinary boundary layer assumption in that the pres-
sure difference across the boundary layer is negligible.

The form selected is the following:

.f(~ ) = ~ S~(f.f1) -i- b s/",2(fit) .; Co. S,.~ (f '1) (3)

in the range 0' ~ ~ I. fbr ~ > I , we are in the free stream so
that te,) '= ,

It is evident from Eq. (3) that condition (Eq. (2) ( i is

satisfied automatically so that constants a, band care determined by
satisfying the other conditions of Eq. (2).
 ( 3 )

Therefore, in order to satisfy Eq. (2) (ii) and (iii), etc.,

a, b, and c must be selected such that they satisfy the following
equations:

(6 )

( 7 )

yd~ :-udu:=r'J.Jb . ( 8 )
'}"2. ~ '2. ~2. .

If a new parameter ~ is introduced such that

~-=-b=-~ dU ( 9 )
"2 'f->n2.l)(.
th en the constants become on solving Eqs. (6), (7) and (8)

a tl
= t1-l + '>.. ( 2. H- "")
M-I
b = - 2.X
c = .1. ~
t'\- \ H-I
Substituting these values for a, band c into Eq. (3) gives the
velocity profile as the following: M
Y../tj :: f(r"\) = (~ \) ~ (~ ~) -(Fb/)..6\ n (trI, ~)
+}.. rL (2H-4)~iY\(1I.~)_
( M _I)
2 $1~2(!I:~\+ 2. s"nM(Ir..t\)]
'2. IJ (1'1-1)
'Z."'Z.
( 10 )

The velocity profiles so obtained form a one-parameter family

of curves with the dimensionless parameter ~ determining the shape of
the velocity profile. The parameter can be physically interpreted as
the ratio of pressure to viscous forces and is a function of the shape of
the body over which computations are being made.

It is easily found from condition (vi) and Eq. (10) that this
profile provides a separation point when

( 11 )

So far, the parameter M has been left free. However, if M

is taken to be very large, Eq. (10) becornes

This profile seem s to be the ideal profile for in the case

of no pressure gradient, it gives the Lamb solution. But, if .., 0
it is noticed that condition f" (1) = 0 is violated. It follows then that
this profile will be useful only for ,,=
0 which is the Lamb case. To
 ( 4 )

investigate the influence of the choice of M further, consider, in

the next sections , the values M = 3, 5, 6 and 10.

' Another generalization of Lamb 's profile would be a

Fourier -sine series of the type

f( ru -= -m# ~ S,"" ( m f ~) (m. I., 3,SN)

This type of velocity profile, however, cannot satisfy the condition
of the pressure gradient at the wall (vi) and has no use in the case
of curved surfaces .

2.2 The M = 6 Profile

With M ;;; 6, E q. (10) takes the form

f(I1)"O& t sn (f '1) ~ t SIn '(~17)

+[ism(ifl) - 2. S/I")2.(1[17) fo-}Sln'(!,,)] ~ 13)

while it is found from Eq. (11) that separation occurs for

~~ =: ...,. 0.75 ( 14 )

To use the momentum equation, we need to know U,

~ , ', . and "S'" in order that e
may be found as a function X.
U and~ ' are found from the potential flow around the body so that
1.", ~... and e have to be computed from Eq. (13).

By definition
I
t*- r[l-t(~)Jd~ ( 15 )

and

( 17 )
i':= . '2 9855to - /435'72

( 18 )

The first integral of Eq. (18) has been computed above,

the second integral becomes 011 using Eq. (13)
..
'

Substituting Eq. (19) and (16) into Eq. (18) produes

B/~ == ,1/2114 - ,o/'S008 -, o348b3 ~2 ;( 20)

Further, we have

-{ 21)

and one finds

I.SB4CjS~ + 2.S13274 ( 22 )

We now multiply the momentum equation by.JZ.. so th at

it appears in the non-dimensional form \0>

+ (z + l;'e) 12..2. dIJ

~Tx
== ( 23 )

If one lets
( 24)

( 25 )

( 26 )

( 27)

( 28 )

where

K is now a second shape factor connected with the momen-

turn thickness just as the first shape factor ~ was connected with the
boundary layer thickness b . .

To use Eq. (28) the expressions (24) to (27) respectively

have to be determined in terms of .
 (6 )

Now

K _ e'2. dO < 29 )
13'ax
A substitution of Eq . ( 9 ) gives

K ~ (~)2.7T2 ~ 30 )

Substituting Eq . (20) into Eq. (30) gives

2
K-= TT'l.[ , 112/14 -,OIS008-,034e~32.J (31)

In a similar fashion one obtains

f: (I-() fb;/$ ~ , 2'955' - 11435~2
..
J e b .112114 -,0150(8)\-,0348103)\'1 '32)
;'2. (K) == ~ (E) -- ( /,884 CJSCe, + 2,5/3274 )
~u T \2( 33 )
x(, 112114- ,0150(8).-.0348'3/\)
Equation (28) may now be written ih the form

~-~
( 34 )

where K=r~
and r(K)==- 2~(k)-4K-2K[-f(K)J
Equation (34) is a non-linear differential equation of the
first order for e" as a function of x.
~
Although F (k) is very complicated, tj:s does 'n ot const:j..tute
a major difficulty insofar as the ~olution is concerned as it is an
universal function whi.c h has only to be worked out once; the other
functions which appear are also universal and all fundions may be
plotted against the variable K. Separation occurs at ~ . . . 0.75 and
a variation of in the range between stagnation and separation
should provide an adequate working range for boundary layer compu-
tations (See Fig. 5). '

2.3 The M = 3, M =5 and M = 10 Profiles'

Since the reasoning, basic equations , and methods of

evaluation are the same as those in Sec ~ 2:. 2, the fulLpresentation
of the M = 3, M = 5 and M = 10 profiles is omitted in order to avoid
repetition. Only the important functions required to evaluate (Eq. 34)
are presented.
 ( 7 )

2.3.1 The M = 3 Profile (see Fig. 3)

lfi.,). (3/2.t~)Sjr"l(~rt) -2sinl(~rt) +(~-~)Sih3(l"') < 35)

~. ./~ . . I 2572. 77 - . Q , I 033 ( 36 ,)

e/~ ... ,/020"9 - . DoC)o48 ~ -, 00teJ724 2. ( 37 )

ti = 2. 35~'~S + /.5'707'97'\ ( 38 )
~u
K'Ia 7T2.[ ,/020~B- , oo~04BA-,oo'7241\~]' ( 39)
f; (K) .. I 2S72~~-, Q~/Q3~ ( 40 )
1/02.0 -,009049)\-, OO~7J.~)\'2..
(2.35~/~5+ /.'57 D 7'7\)
)<.. (, lo2DCJB- I oo~o48-. 00' 7.24)f) ( 41 )

~~ = -/,50 forseparation ( 42 )

The tables provided eaU for a working range of values

between stagnation and separation . '

2.3.2 The M = 5 Profile (see Fig. 4)

f(IJ)= (5/4 +">V4)S""(~IJ)-25i.,2(i~) .,.(~-t)5 ih (ft!)

5
( 43 )
_ <b'~ 'C:. , 28'/~ - ,/24t:,te, .. ( 44 )

=
S/~ ,lo9~4 - ,01408)...-,02680 \2. (45 )
l.t =- j. "34'} + 2,55"'\ -{ 46)
K -= TT'1~[ ,./0"54 -,OI40B~-,02'SO2.Jl. (47)

t,(K)= 12e'J3-,124'~ (48)

./0'54- ,o/40S>\-,02.6801)\%O
f~(K)-= (/. "':54' +2, !5'/c}~) (49 )

)(. ( , /0-'54-, 0140S\- ,02"SO>?-)

~'5 .. - e 3 3(3)
I for separation I 50 )

Thetables provided have a working range of between

stagnation and separation.
 ( 8 )

2.3.3 The M = 10 Profile (see Fig. 6)

tUt) =(IOI~ + / ~A4)5 i Y'\ (Ii '1) ... 2 5' n(lf.'l) +( ~ ... ~) S', ~(lil'l) ( 51 )
'*/~ = 3/ ~ ~c:; - /B~4fa\ ( 52 )

7~-== /,74537+2.7~2S'~ (54)

~U 4
K = 7T 2 \[.//Bt,O -. D/742 -_ QS~2B\'2.J c55 )

( 56 )
. /18~O-. O/742)\-.D5"~2B~

~ (K) = (I. 74~ 31 -t- 2. 7 ~ 2 3 ~) . ( 57 )

X (.118"0 - . 0/742 -. OS~~8'2.)
\~--.c:'25 for separation ( 58 )

The tables provided show a w orking range of Xbetween

s tagna tion and s epar a tion .

2.4 Method of Solution and Observations of the Universal Function

Behaviour

Before using the equations

d=t: ... F( KJ
orx ( 59 )
and
K=~LJ ( 60 )
dx.
some remarks must be made .

. The v'alues. of U (x)" and du(~~ to be used are obtained by

considering the flow of a perfect flu:P!round the object being con-
sidered. The variabIe x is the running variabIe over the surface of the
body. lts range is bounded by the s'tagnation point upstream and the
downstream point of separation. However, at the stagnation point,
U = 0 and oI~ ... 00 unless F (H> = O.
~-
If F (K) = 0 at stagnation, ~ becomes indeterminate so
that its value can be obtained by going o~er to the limit and using Eq.
(60). Since ~+O at stagnation unless the body possesses a sharp
. cusped velocity distribution with zero angle at the stagnation point,
we have

( 61 )
 ( 9 )

where das hes denote derivatives with respect to X while the subscript
o indicates stagnation values.

An exarination of the Pohlhausen F (K) curve shows

F (K) = 0 at stagnation. Thus no difficulty is encountered in following
the above method. However, the sine F (K) solutions behave irreg-
. ularly near and at this point. Most important of all, F (K) =ti:: 0 at
stagnation and this irregularity increases with increasing M. Therefore
E q. (59) cannot be integrated num erically as ~ __ c::c at stagnation
so that computations cannot be started at this bo&<'ndary positon.

However, the original momentum equation wasformulated

from the assumption that ca1culations are made at some distance from
the stagnation point. At and near stagnation, this assumption breaks
down so that the momentum equation becomes invalid. It is indeed
fortunate that this 'cliscontinuity does not reveal itself in the Pohlhausen
results , nevertheless, the sine profiles seem to be very sensitive to
its effect.

If the "stagnation irregularity" is neglected, it is found

that the F (K) as functions of K curves are practically straight lines
so that they can be approximated by

( 6 2 )

With this value for F (K), the integration can be performed straight
a way and we find
2. b-I r)(.
U~ .. US = .fL..
b I
U 0/><. ( 63 )
y:- U - 0 !
. On approximating F (K) by straight lines and forcing F (K) =
o at the stagnation point, equations (59) and (60) become the following
for t~e various profiles assumed.

M = 3 Profile

f
)I..

r -= .~ USdx
U&c:I
( 64 )
Ko= .0802 \\

Ks -== -, J4~7

at x-=o
 ( 10 )

M = 5 Profile

peK') - .440 - Ct, K

~ ~ .. 4~ (US"cI)(
U c ( 65 )
. Ko == ,0733

Ks--' -.8So
. ,.
Zo':: jO 0733 Iud at- )(. .... 0
M =6 Profile

F(K) = . 44o-taK
~ = .440. !u 5dx
U1i ~ ~
K)=.O,33 (66)
Ks~ -, ,9,
La-=' .0733/U~ at X--o

M = 10 ;Profile
F(K)-== .414 - Co K
)(

~ =- .~ ~ u d><.
5

U 0
1<0=. OIO
( 67 )
Ks = - 0.1'3
~o -= .0,0 lu 0' ~t )(-0

For purposes of comparison Thwaites and P ohlhausen

results are also given:

Thwaites (see Ref. 4)

Co '/..
e = .45\-"' U- ~o u'Sd~
2
( 68 )
K s = - 0.082
 ( 11 )

Pohlhausen (simplified by A. Walz, ;Ref. 2)

)<.

e'"= .470YU-~~U5dx - (69)

o
I<~ =- - o. /510 7
It is noticed, especially' for a larger M, that there is good
agreement with Thwaites resultp,. Since Thwaites values for separation
give gdod agreement with known exact solutions , we may conclude
that the M = 5, M = 6 and M = 10 cases will produce results 'which
are equally as satisfactory.

The above statement can be verified further if the shear

curve is examined (Fig. 10). In the region of accelerated flow, the
shear stress growth is roughly equivalent in each of the cases- ~ In
the region of retarded flows, the shear stress does not build up to
the same ' ,extent as that predicted by PCJblhalSen. Therefore, the sine
assumption will predit separation much earlier than the Pohlhausen
results . This is definite improvement as the Pohlhausen approxi-
mation fails there.

Tables provided for computational purposes (see Figs. 3,

4, 5 and 6) are the corrected values insofar as the "stagnation irreg-
ularity" is concerned. Figure 7 shows the general trend of this
irregularity as approaches the stagnation value. The "approximate"
and "irregular" curves are shown on each graph presented .
,.
2.5 Flat Plate Analysis ( = 0 ) (see Fig. 2)

Figure 2 contains a comparison between the exact Blasius

values of displacement thickness, shear stress, momentum thickness,
and friction with that of the approximate results developed. - It is seen
that agreement is very satis~actory especially ih the M = 5 case.

~. 6 The Flow Over a Cylinder

We now propose to compare the approximate res-ults of

the M = 5 and M = 10 cases with those obtained by Pohlhausen,
Thwaites and the exact Blasius solution for the two-dimensional
cylinder. The Pohlhausen curves shown in Figs. 11 to 13 respectiv~ly
are based on the straight line approximation developed by A . Waltz
(Ref.2); the exact curves are obtained by the use of the potenti-al
velocity, distribution expanded into a series containing five terms
(up to X 9 ).

The potential velocity distribution over a cylinder is as

follows:

( 70 )
 ( 12 )

U(><.}-= 2L.Jcocslh(~) (71) ,

\
.........
' \
J.

-, = ~Ue{~-~l~)3+t(~)S (72) :i
~L ( ~') ~( i)~j
'J )

- f- (used for the exac{ solution)

Substituting Eq. (71) into Eq. (63) produces , :. ' :.

ij Uoo e'2.,. 2 b ..6... - cos cp[ ~ sit"\q, +..ft_ + sin'4~o

'R'(> Sin''P 2 15 's l5' S
J1S (73 )
.
wher.e. 'f-~ and R = radius of the cylinder.

As X approaches zero , q approaches zero so ,_ that equation

( 73 ) becomes indefinite . However, Eq. (61) produces the stagnation
, limit and this becomes on using $q. (71)

f-o-= Kc R a..t x- 0 ,< 74)

2.Ucc
and. as a re.sult of this

4 0 00 92. -= 2 Ko at x-a ( 75 )
R'?
Equations (73) and (75) then yield the momentum distri-
bution over the cylinder as a function of the angle in degrees.

Since

( 76 )

the universal function K can be ca1culated and for each rspective K,

a value for .f 1 (K) and f 2 (K) can be se le.cted from the given tables .

The displacement thickness and shear buildup over the

cylinder can then be obtained as the following re lationships are true

~JuooRI - ( 77 )
R 'r'
2. 7;, JUcaR = 8 f. O<JSihtf) ( 78 )

r Uooz. 'r 2SJUooR

R -,::r- , '.
The parameters governing the flow over a two-dimensional
cylinder can now be plotted and are shown in Figs. 11, 12 and 13.

A study of the graphs reveals that in the region of favour-

able pressure gradients, the exact and approximate results are
. almost in complete agreement, hOWever, in the region of reta:r;ded
flow, the approximate values of e
and ~ ~are higher than the
respective exact values and the deviation increases as separation is
approached.
 ( 13 )

The stress curve reveals that the M = 5 profile predicts

a separation point ,equivalent to that of Thwaites while the M = 10
profile predicts a separation point which occurs much earlier. Thus,
even though the sine profiles produce the best approximation to the
exact momentum distribution, the separation point for a cylinder is
predicted too soon.

lIL SUMMARY

In this note, a new ass umption for the ve locity profile has
befi:n used for solving incompressible 'larninar boundary layers as de-
scribed mathematically by the momentum equation.

The velocHy profile assumed is of the form

M
+{- - .p(~') := ..tL S;~(lI:t't\ - -L 'Sin (rr.~)
u 1'1-/ "2:') H-I 2.

The M = 6 profile solution is presented in' full detail and

tables are prepared for each M selected.

In the case of the flat plate ( = 0), the sine appr-oximation

coefficients show a noticeable improvement over previous m ethods
(especially in the M = 5 solution) .

For :~O, the results agree well with Thwaites solution

and produce a separation prediction which is roughly equivalent to or
earlier than the Thwaites I separation point.

If one considers flows where the- distance between the point

of maximum velocity and the separation point is large, the divergence
between exact _and calculated results may not be as great as that ob-
tained in the cylindrical results so that a more reliable prediclion of
separation could be obtained.

N evertheless, the method is a definite improvement over

the Pohlhausen solution as it does predict separation much earlier
while still retaining good accuracy in regions of accelerated flow s .
 (14)

REFERENCES

1. Schubauer, G. B. Airflow in a Separating Laminar

Boundary Layer, NACA Rep. 527, 1935.

2. Schlichting, H . Boundary Layer Theory .

Published by McGraw-Hill Book Co. Inc.

3. Goldstein, S . Modern De,velopments in Fluid Dynamics,

Published by' the Oxford University Press.

4. Thwaites, B. Approximate Calculations of the Laminar

Boundary Layer, Aeronautical Quarterly,
Vol. I, p . 245-280, 1949.
Profile ~~J1'
~YJ Cf f(p . ~"'*Ie

.p(f1 )-fl 1. 732 .289 1.155 3 . 00

-F (~ ) _ '3/'2..J't - Y2.1'l3 1. 740 .323 1.292 2.70

f(r0- ~'1-';).~'5+'74 1. 752 .343 1.3-92 2.55

f(l'J) =- s/n(.fi}) [ La.mbJ 1. 741 .327 1. 310 2.66

The exact Bfasius solution 1.729 .332 1. 328 2 . 61

FIG. 1 FLAT PLATE COEFFICIENTS

Pref, Ie. sttJ1;

p.x Xi J~x
U Cf 'Re
...u U
<i~/e

Pohl. 1. 752 .343 1.392 2.550

Lamb 1. 741 .327 1. 310 2.660

M =3 1.748 .255 1.000 2.520

M =5 1. 731 .328 1. 312 2.639

M =6 1. 734 .324 1. 296 2.670

M = 10 1.736 .322 1.288 2.698

.
The Blasius Exact Solution 1. 729 .332 1.328 2.610

FIG. 2 FLAT PLATE ANALYSIS (= 0)

 K ~(K) fa(K) reK)
-1.50 -;14965 3.46949 .0000000 1. 63702
-1.45 -.146218 3.42079 .. 0079387 . 1.60111
-1.40 -. 142592 3.37371 .0159570 1.56441
-1.35 -.13878 1 3.32821 .0240468 1. 52700
-1.30 -.134792 3.28419 .0322002 1. 48893
-1.25 -.130633 3.24161 .0404093 1.45028
-1.20 -.126315 3.2004 1 .0486662 1.41111
-1.15 -.121844 3.16053 .0569629 1. 37149
-1.10 -. 117232 3.12191 .0652915 1. 33149
-1. 05 - .112486 3.08452 .0736441 1.29117
-1.00 -.10761'1 3.04830 .0820128 1. 25059
- .950 -.102635 3.01321 .0903896 1. 20984
- .900 -.0975487 2.97922 .0987667 1.16896
- .850 -.0923685 2.94627 .107136 1.12803
- .800 -.0871047 2.91435 .115489 1. 08710
- .750 -.0817675 2.88341 .123820 1. 04624
- .700 -.0763673 2.85342 . .132118 1.00552
- .650 -.0709145 2.82436 .140378 .964990 I
- .600 -.0654 195 2. 7961 9 .148590 .924709 I
I
- .550 -.0598928 2.76888 .156747 .884739 I
- .500 -.0543450 2.742 43 .164840 .845137
- .,450 - . 0487866 2.71 679 .11 28 63 .805960
- .400 -.043228 1 2.69195 .180807 .767263
- .350 -.0376799 2.66790 .188664 .729101
- .300 -.032 1526 2.64460 .196426 .691524
- .250 -.0266565 2.62205 .204085 .654585
- .200 -.0212018 2.60022 .211633 .618333 I
- . 150 -.015 7988 2.57910 .219 063 .582816 I
- . 100 -.0104575 2.55869 .226367 .548079
- .050 -.005 1880 2.538 95 .233536 .514168
.000 ' .000000 2.51990 .240562 .:481125
+ .050 .0050968 2.50150 .247439 .448991
+ .100 .0100931 2.4.8377 .: 254157 .417804
+ .150
+ .200
.0149794
.0197468
2.46667
2. 4:5022
.260709
.267087
.387601
.358418
I
+ .250 .0243865 2.43441 .273283 .330286
+ .300 .0288898 2.41922 .279289 .303237
+ .350 .0332485 2.40466 .285097 . 2:77.2 98
+ .400 .0374545 2 .39072 .290700 .. 252495
+ .450 .0415000 2.37741 .296089 .228852
+ .500 .0453778 2.36472 .301256 .206390
+ .550 .0490806 2.35266 .306194 .185126
+ . 600 .0526017 2.34122 .310895 .165077
+ .650 .0559349 2.33042 .315350 .146256
+ .700 .0590739 2.32026 .319552 .128674
+ .750 .0620134 2.31074 .323492 .112337
+ .800 .0647480 2.30189 .327164 .0972510
+ .850 .0672730 2.29370 .33055.9 .0834171
+ .900 .0695842 2.28619 .333668 .0708343
+ .950 .0716776 2.27938 .. 336485 .0595982

FIG 3 M = 3 ( Continued next page)

 ~ K ,,( K) f2 (K) F(\<)
+ 1. 00 .0735500 2.27328 .339001 -
+ 1. 05 .0751985 2.26793 .341208 -
+ 1. 10 .0766206 2.26333 .343099 -
+1. 15 .0778146 2.25952 .344665 -
+ 1. 20 . 0787793 2.25652 .345899 -
I + 1. 25 .0795139 2.25438 .346792 -
i + 1. 30 .0800184 2.25312 .347337 -
i + 1. 35 .0802931 2 . 25280 .34752
!I
-

FIG. 3 M =3
 - - . - . - -, ... ~ - ......
,
K f,( K) fa.( K) F(K)
'" . 0736
.0717
2.2733
2.2793
.3618
.2581
.0696 2 . 2862 .3539
.0673 2.2937 .3494
.0647 2.3019 .3443
.0620 2.3107 .3389
.0591 2.3203 .3332
.0559 2.3304 .3269
~
.0526 2.3400 .3204
.625 .050266 2.33980 .31018 .184069
.600 .0495 17 2.34388 .30882 .187450
.575 .048644 2.34870 .30721 .191358
.550 .047647 2.35424 .30536 .195801
.525 .046528 2.36049 .30328 .200788
.500 .045289 2.36743 .30096 .206327
.475 .043933 2.37504 .29841 .212421
.450 .042460 2.38331 .29565 .219075
. 425 .040874 2.39222 .29267 .226291
I
1
.400 .039178 2.40178 .28949 .234069
l .375 .037375 2.41197 .28610 .242409
l .350 .035467 2.42279 .28252 .251308
t .325 .033459 2.43422 .27874 .260762
I
i .300 .031353 2.44628 .27478 .270766
, .275 .029153 2.45894 .27065 .281314
.250 .026864 2.47223 .26634 .292398
I
I
.225 .024489 2.48612 .26186 .304009
. 175 .019~ 2.51577 .25244 .328770
.150 . 016 4 2.53153 .24750 .341896
.125 .014220 2.54791 .24242 .355502
.100 .011482 2.56493 .23720 .369571
I
.075 .008687 2.58259 .23185 .384089
:
.050 .005838 2.60089 .22638 .399039
.
, .025
000
.002940
00000
2.61986
2.63949
.22078
.21508
.414403
.430161
I
:- ~ 025 -.002978 2.65980 .20926 .446294
;- .050 - .004990 2.68080 .20335 .462782
i- .075 - .009029 2.70251 .19734 .479602
I
1- .100 -.012090 2.72493 .19124 .496733
i -
I
125 - .015167 2.74809 .18505 .514151
.17879 .531833 i
i- .150 - .018256 2.77201
1- .175 - .021350 2.79669 .17246 .549752
t
I
i -
\ . 200 - .024445 2.82216 .1.6 606 .567886
1-- .225 - . 027534 2.84845 .15960 . 586206 I
I
.250 - .030612 2.87556 .15309 .604687
1- .275 - .033673 2.90353 .14653 .623301 I
- .300 - .036712 2.93239 .13992 .642020
- .325 -.039724 2.96215 .13328 .660817
- .350 - .042703 2.99285 .12662 .679662
!- .375
I - .045643 3.02452
..--
.11992 .698525

FIG 4 M =5 (Continued next page)

",

~ K f,(K) f 2 (K) F(K)

- . 400 -.048539 3.05719 .113210 .717378
-. 425 - . 051386 3.09089 .106480 .736189
- .450 - .054179 3.12566 .099758 .754926
- .475 -.056912 3.16154 .093025 .773567
- . 500 -.059580 3.19858 .086299 .792070
-.525 -.062179 3.2368a .079583 .810409
-.550 -.064703 3.27626 .072884 .828551
- . 575 -.067147 3.31701 .066209 .846464
- .600 - . 069507 3.35911 .059562 .864117
- . 625 - . 071777 3.40259 .052950 .881477
- . 675 - .076035 3.49400 .039855 .915189
-.700 -.078013 3.54204 .033383 .931476
-.725 -.079885 3.59174 .026970 .947342
-.750 -.081648 3.64318 .020621 .962753
-.775 -.083297 3.69642 .014342 .977677
-.800 -.084829 3.75157 .00814'1 . 992083
-.825 -.086240 3.80871 .002021 1.00593
-.850 -.087529 3.86794 -.004011 1. 01920

F IG 4 M =5
 ),. K ~(K) fl.( K) F(K)
.0736 2.2733 .3618
.0717 2.2793 .3581
.0696 2.2862 .3539
.0673 2.2937 .3494
. '. 3443
. 0647 2.3019 .
.0620 2.3107 : .3389
.0591 2.3203 .3332
.0559 2.3304 ' .3269
.0526 2.3400. .3204
.550 .0472 66 2.,35314 .304879 .198244
-
.525 .046395 2.35845 .303220 .202015
.500 .045379 2.36468 .301260 .206390
.475 .044218 2.37182 .299006 .211382
.450 .042916 2.37983 .296467 .217000
.425 .041476 2.388"'0 .293851 .223250
.400 .039900 2.39841 .290566 .230137
I
.375 .038192 2.40894 .287220 .237664
.350 .036356 2.42029 .283621 .245831
.325 .034396 2.43243 .279779 .254635
.300 03231'1 2.44537 .275700 .264073
.275 .030123 2.45911 .271393 .274139
.250 .027819 2.47363 .266867 . 2,8 4825
225 025411 2.48894 .262129 .296120
200 .022903 2.50504 .257188 .308012
175 .020302 2.52192 .252052 .320488
150 .017614 2.53961 .246729 .333533
.125 01484'~ 2.55810 .241228 .347129
.100 .011999 2.57740 .235556 .361257
.075 .009086 2.59753 .229722 .375897
.050 .006110 2.61849 .223734 .391026
.025 .003079 2.64029 .217601 .406622
000 000000 2.66296 .211329 .422659
-.025 -. 003120 2.68651 .204929 .439112
-.050 - .006276 2.71096 .198408 .455952
-.075 -.009459 2.73633 .191773 .473151
-.100 -.012661 2.76265 .185034 .490678
-.125 -.015877 2.78993 .178199 .508503
-.150 -.019098 2.81821 .171275 .526593
-.175 -.022317 2.84751 .164272 .544915
-.200 -.025527 2.87786 .157196 .563435
-.225 -.028721 2.90931 .150057 .582117
-.250 -.031890 2.94188 .142863 .600925
-.275 -.035028 2.97561 .135621 .619823
-.300 -.038128 3.01055 .128341 .638772
-.325 -.041182 :3'004673 .121030 .657735
-.350 -.044183 3.08422 .113696 .676673
-.375 -.047125 3.12304 .106348 .695546
-.400 -.049999 3.16328 .098994 . .714313
-.425 -.052800 3.20497 .091642 .732935

FIG 5 M = 6 (Continued next page)

 ~ K i 0<) f1 (K) F(K)
-.450 -.055520 3.24818 .0843011 .751370
-.475 -.058154 3.29298 .0769781 .769577
-.500 -.060694 3.33944 .0696819 .787515
-.525 -.063135 3.38764 .0624207 .805142
-.550 -.065470 3.43765 .0552027 .822415
-.575 -.067693 3.48957 .0480362 .839292
-.600 -.069800 3.54350 .0409292 .855731
-.625 - . 071783 3,59952 .0338901 .871693
-.650 -.073639 3.65775 .0269271 .887127
-.675 -.075363 3.71832 .0200484 .902000
- . 700 -.076949 3.78134 .0132621 .916265
-.725 -.078393 3.84695 .0065766 .929882
-.750 -.079692 3.91530 . 0000000 .942810

FIG 5 M = 6
 ).. K f. (K) f1 (K) f'"(K)
.u70 2.2862 .3553
.0673 2.2937 .3497
.0647 2 . 3019 .3442
.0620 2 . 3107 .3385
.0591 2.32.03 .3324
. 0559 2 . 3304 .32572
.0526 2.3400 .3188
. 0495 2 . 3439 .3125
.0476 2.3542 .3083
- . 0453 2.3674 .3035
.0425 2.3833 .2976
.0409 2.3922 .2942
.0392 2.4018 .2907
. 0374 2.4120 .2869
.0355 2.4228 .2829
.300 .03473 2.4379 .27977 .25126
.275 .03257 2.4528 .27534 .26058
. 250 . 03025 2.4689 .27056 .2707 4
. 225 .02777 2 . 4862 .26545 .28172
. 200 .02514 2.5047 . 26002 .29351
.175 . 02238 2 . 5245 .25429 .30609
.150 .01948 2.5455 .24828 .31944
.125 . 01647 2.5677 .24199 .33353
. 100 ' .01335 2.5912 .23545 .34834
. 0750 .01013 2.6159 .22866 .36382
. 0500 . 006823 2.6420 .22165 .37995
.0250 . g03443 2.6693 .21442 .39669
.000 . 00000 2.6981 . 20700 .41400
-. D250 - . 003494 2.7281 .19939 .43182
- . 0500 - . 007027 2.7597 .19161 .450~1
- . 0750 - .01059 2.7927 .18368 .46883 -
-- . 100 - .01416 2.8272 .17560 .48792
- . 125 - .01773 2.8632 .16741 .50732
- .150 -.02130 2.9009 .15910 .52698
- .175 - . 02484 2 . 9403 .15070 .54685
-.200 - . 02834 2.9815 .14222 .56665
- . 225 -.03180 3 . 0245 .13367 .58693
-.250 - .03520 3.0694 .12507 .60702
-.275 - .03852 3.1164 .11644 .62706
- . 300 - .04176 3 . 1654 .10778 .64699
- . 325 - .04490 3.2167 .09912 .66673
-.350 - . 04794 3.2703 .09046 .686-23
-.375 - .05085 3.3264 .08183 .70540
- . 400 - .05364 3.3851 .07324 . 72418
- . 425 - .05628 3.4465 .06469 ,74250
~.450 - . 05878 3 . 5109 .05622 .. . 76029
- . 475 - .06111 3.5783 .04783 .77748

FIG 6 M = 10 ( Continued next page )

 K -t, (K) -'l.( K) F(K)
-.500 -.06328 3.6491 . O~ 9529 .79400
-.5 25 -.06527 ;5.7233 . 03 1342 . 80978
-.550 -.06707 3.8013 .023281 . 82475
-.575 - . 06868 3.8834 .015360 . 83884
-.600 - . 07009 3. 9697 .075953 . 85198
-.625 -.07129 4. 0606 .00000 .86410
- . 650 -.07228 4 . 1565 -.00741 . 87514
- . 675 -.07 ;:$ 05 4. 2577 -.014621 . . 88502
I -.7 00
-.8 00
- . 07 360
-.07355
4. ;) 647
4.8609
-.021618
-.047167
.89369
. 91493
- . 900 - . 06987 5 . 5000 -.068111 . 911 86
-1. 00 -.06276 6.3513 -.0 83505 .88116

FIG. 6 M :: 10

When ).. and r'k')are dashed in the above tables, \~) ft, ,,)
and ..z..(K) are the approximate "stagnation irregularity free" results.
The only exception to this occurs in the case of M = 3 (Fig . 3) . Here,
only r{\c.~ is affected by the irregularity; the universal functions K) f.O<)
and ~'K) are not affected by the stagnation problem.
 K f. (K) +L( KJ F(K)
M
""
=3
-

1. 00 .0736 2.2733 .3390 .0494

1. 10 .0766 2 . 2633 .3431 .0329
1. 20 .9787 2.2565 .3460 .02'1 1
1. 30 . 0800 2. 2531 .3473 .0140
1. 40 .0803 2.2535 .3474 .0113
1. 50 .0798 2.2580 .3459 .0126
1. 60 .0783 2.2671 .3429 .0176
1. 80 .0728 2.3025 .3319 .0371
2.00 .0644 2.3677 .3140 .0656

M =5
0.50 .0453 2.3674 .3010 .2063
0.60 .0495 2.3439 .3088 . 1875
0.70 .0518 2.3323 .3127 .1770
0.80 .0520 2.3347 .3122 .1739
O. 90 .0502 2.3541 3070 .1770
1. 00 .0465 2.3621 .2966 .1842

M =6
.40 .0399 2.3984 .2906 .2301
.50 .0454 2.3647 .3013 .2064
.60 .0486 2.3455 .3073 .1925
.70 .0494 2.3430 .3080 .1873
.80 . 0478 2.3611 .3031 .1893
.90 .0440 2.4063 .2198 .1960
1. 00 .0382 2.4897 .2738 .2042

M = 10
.30 .0347 2.4380 .2798 .2513
.40 .0416 2. 39-12 .2938 . 2223
.50 .0453 2.3665 .3010 .2064
.60 .0457 2.3680 .3007 .2017
.70 .0429 2.4035 .2917 .2053
.80 .0372 2.4885 .2732 .2123
.90 .0292 2.6541 .2442 .2165
1. 00 .0199 2. 9739 .2038 .2096

FIG. 7. THE GENERAL TREND OF THE STAGNATION "IRREGULARITY"

/:':" >.'. :" ",." :... :. . .: .. :~, ::' . . ."::' : .. :-'::: I~ :-:-:.' -:=-:..~. ~::::::::C -:-:::?:7c~':: r- ~-::. I :
.;;.: .
:; ::>
.

:~~:~'-~;r: :,;,~; :" i . .:~'~ :1118 : ~: ...:.:. -=-~~:~ ::':'':'-;'; ':';:-"-:-:+ ,-+..o. lili~~~ ''2;j-'" -F;;,-:;,;,..:.: Ji::'ji: .':!~",;r.p{
t~=~ ' :;
T.;:: ':+;: f-".t::;f~

~'"h

11
I

::
lil

FIG 8 THE UNIVERSAL FUNCTION F (K) VERSUS K CURVE

 :.; 1
b ~~H~~rT:: ~-:l:L.ii I'~; :;!.~ I :1-h~~ .,.:;~ :_"
I - l~ I::':::'::: I::: _~:::

I~?~:I-:~:: . ::""-:0-
'. = 'cc t~.; ~-':::~ f-:-F~

:.1 '
r..:': :
:::
I1ftrj:~
;:;= .;::
~ :.;

': ei!
I
Fi tt;-:
I

~!
, {;,
"i1fu!
1iiH-;$!:
h=1;tt;~

FIG 9 THE UNIVERSAL FUNCTION f (K) = 1:/ VERSUS K CURVE

e
FIG 10 THE UNIVERSAL FUNCTION f 2 (K) = 67 0
VERSUS K CURVE
,u. U
 1.4 29JU"'R'
R ~

1.2

1.0
Pohlhousen

0.8

0.6

0.4;
I ~
<.:~
0.2

o 60 70 80 90 100 110
14\0
'I' - - - - - ' J..
~

FIG 11 THE MOMENTUM DISTRIBUTION OVER THE SURFACE OF AN

INFINITE CY LINDER
 Ju:;;
1.4 RIT
1.2

Pohlhouse
1.0

0.8

0.6

M=IO
0.4

0.2

o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 ilO
o
~ ~
FIG 12 THE DISPLACEMENT THICKNESS DISTRIBUTION OVER THE
SURFACE OF AN INFINITE CYLINDER
 1.3 2;' ju..R
pU:O T

1.1

0.5

0.1

o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 tlO
,.
FIG 13 THE STRESS DISTRIBUTION OVER THE SURFACE OF AN
INFINITE CY LINDER