Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/heattransfer/article-pdf/97/2/249/5909136/249_1.

pdf by Universidad De Guanajuato (UGTO) user on 23 October 2019

M. J. Lewis An Elementary Analysis for
Abteflung fur die Sicherheit der Kernanlagen,
Wurenilngen, Switzerland
Predicting the Momentum- and
Heat Transfer Characteristics of a
Hydraulicaily Rough Surface
A simple model is presented which approximates the turbulent shear flow over a well-
defined rough surface as a series of attached and separated flow regions. An elementary
analysis applied to the model provides values for the well-known momentum- and heat-
transfer roughness functions R(h+) and g(h+, Pr), respectively. In order to use the calcu-
lation method the exact shape^ and distribution of the roughness elements are required
together with a form drag coefficient and a characteristic separation length. These may
be found in the literature for many roughness shapes of interest.

Introduction unity or greater, provides local heat transfer coefficients in the at-
tached flow regions. Empirical information from cavities and steps
The purpose of this paper is to present an analytical model for [12-16] supplies coefficients in the separated flow areas.
the flow over a rough surface. This model complements the work of Attention is restricted to the steady, incompressible, turbulent
Kays [I], 1 Kacker [2], Lavalee and Popovitch [3], and Perry, et al. flow of a constant property, single-phase, Newtonian fluid in a
[4]. It fills the gap between the wholly empirical treatment of channel of constant cross section with rough walls. Any curvature
rough surfaces [5, 6] and the extensive investigations on single ele- of the channel is small and a constant mean heat-flux is applied at
ments [7]. The analysis provides a quick and simple means of eval- the surfaces. Extensions of the simple model to other roughness
uating or optimizing rough surfaces [8], it should help to avoid un- shapes and to other flow situations, and a fuller development of
necessary and costly experiments [9], and it will provide a frame- the equations presented here, may be found elsewhere [17].
work for more sophisticated methods.
A simple surface—equally spaced, rectangular ribs—is consid- T h e Physical Nature of the Flow Over a Rough
ered and the flow is represented by a series of attached and sepa- Surface and an Approximate Flow Model
rated flow regions. For widely spaced roughness the flow reattach- We consider a fully developed channel flow and ribs with h « D.
es between the elements, but for closely spaced roughness the flow The flow may be divided into two layers; one of thickness 5, which
does not reattach in the gaps and each element shields the one is of order h and which envelopes the roughness elements, and the
downstream. Wall shear stresses for the attached flows are deter- other the core between the roughness elements and the channel
mined from an assumed velocity profile, a logarithmic law-of-the- center line. We are concerned solely with the former layer. T h e
wall [10] for a smooth surface, which also provides the dynamic basic pattern of the flow over the ribs is illustrated by Pig. 1(a).
pressure for the form drag [11] of each element. This dynamic The channel Reynolds number is assumed to be high enough and
pressure is reduced by the shielding effect of closely spaced ele- the ribs widely spaced such that the separated flow regions shown
ments. A modified Reynolds analogy [10], which restricts the heat- are formed. Separation and reattachment imply that the shear
transfer analysis to fluids with Pr (see Nomenclature) of order stress, wall temperature, and velocity profiles are cyclic functions
of z in the vicinity of the roughness.
To simplify the problem the physical flow in Fig. 1(a) is re-
placed by the model of Fig. 1(b), where four regions 1, 2, 3, and 4
1
are indicated. The separation "bubble" on top of each rib in region
Numbers in brackets designate References at end of paper. 1 is now completely ignored. Separated flow regions are specified
Contributed by the Heat Transfer Division for publication in the JOUR-
NAL OF HEAT TRANSFER. Manuscript received by the Heat Transfer by characteristic separation lengths C3 and e 4 . The flow is assumed
Division May 29,1974. Paper No. 75-HT-JJ. to remain attached to the top of the rib giving a mean wall stress

Journal of Heat Transfer Copyright © 1975 by ASME MAY 1975 / 249

 FULLY TURBULENT
FLOW CORE

SEPARATED FLOW REGIONS

Fig. i(a) Physical flow over roughness elements, not to scale—HP
High Pressure, LP = Low Pressure

Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/heattransfer/article-pdf/97/2/249/5909136/249_1.pdf by Universidad De Guanajuato (UGTO) user on 23 October 2019

Fig. 1(b) Approximate model p - b > ca + c4

TI, over b. Similarly T2 is defined for region 2. Both TI and r<i are
smaller than the total average wall shear stress rw which contains
contributions from the form drag of each element. ; u(6)
i ^
As the pitch of the ribs is reduced the flow will no longer reat- 8
!© ©
tach between the ribs and a cavity will be formed. This occurs ! +y
when p — 6 5 C3 + C4. The dynamic pressure acting on the front-
face of each element is reduced, as well as the area over which this
pressure acts, by the shielding from each upstream element. Flow
777Y. bmjraa^

in the cavity is approximated by the model of Fig. lfcj where re-

gion 2 is now lost altogether. A solution of the Navier Stokes equa-
tions for the separated flows would provide the dimensions C3 and
c 4 as well as the cavity flow. Here we specify these regions and lin-
Fig. 1 (c) Approximate model p — b < 03 + c4
early approximate the flow dipping into the cavity by the dimen-
sion k which is assumed to be directly related to C3 and c 4 as indi-
cated.

Basic Analysis, p - b > c 3 + c 4 . A force balance over a length small compared with Df. Contributions to TW from the shear stress-
L of channel of unit width containing a large number of ribs gives es in the separated flow regions are assumed to be incorporated in

(1) We need to relate Df and the shear stresses to characteristic ve-

A„rw = S^in + 2^2T2 + S2),
locities and dimensions of the flow field in each region. We define
a form drag coefficient CD through Df = Copu2Apl/2. The dy-
where Aw, defined as Aw = L X 1, is an overall mean surface area namic pressure term arises naturally from momentum balance
X indicates a sum over L, and the drag, caused by any change in considerations over a control volume enclosing a roughness ele-
the channel flow static pressure across each element, is assumed ment:

A _- surface area, or constant (2.5) L length of channel thickness of rough surface

in log-laws m exponent v = kinematic viscosity
b = width of roughness element n exponent P = density
B = constant in log-laws P pitch of roughness elements T = mean surface shear stress
c = C3 + d, characteristic separa- Pr Prandtl number 2 = sum over L
tion length Pr, turbulent Prandtl number
C = specific heat q" heat flux per unit area
Co = form drag coefficient R momentum transfer roughness
d Subscripts
= p - b for p - b < c 3 + c 4 and function
c otherwise T temperature 1, 2, 3, 4 = regions 1, 2, 3, 4, mean quan-
D = hydraulic diameter T+ (T„, - T)pCu,w/qw", dimen- tities
Df = form drag sionless temperature a = adiabatic wall
8 = heat-transfer roughness func- u velocity c = cavity empirical information
tion UT (r/p) 1 ' 2 , friction velocity e = effective
+
h = height of roughness element u u/u r,dimensionless velocity F = projected frontal area
h+ = hu-rw/i>, roughness Reynolds u average velocity i = 1, 2, 3, 4, R, or S
number £/» velocity upstream of cavity R = mean over rear of element
k = conductivity coefficient, or W empirical function S = mean over effective front of
length characterizing the X characteristic length element
flow dipping into the cavity y distance from surface SA = perturbed hydraulically smooth
I = viscous or laminar sublayer y+ y UTW jv, dimensionless y wall
thickness z flow direction SM = unperturbed hydraulically
I* = liir/v dimensionless sublayer a heat transfer coefficient smooth wall
thickness 5 characteristic displacement w = overall mean surface quantity

250 / MAY 1975 Transactions of the ASME

 yrh
hu' f ' M22rf>'2 (2)
*2= FLOW.
The definition of shear velocity ur = ir/p)l/2 enables us to rewrite
equation (1), for uniformly distributed elements, as 7
Y?
2
u\ = n\ b/p + u\\p - b - (c 3 + c,)]/p +
CDpW h/2p /,
(3) 7f77/, V7777/-
The layer adjacent to the wall, which encloses the roughness ele-
Fig. 2 A rough wall and its origin uncertainly
ments, is of thickness 5 with a mean velocity u(5) at its edge. It is
not possible to define the origin for y and <5, Fig. 2, but we can as-
sume that, in the physical flow over the elements, Fig. 1, u(<5) is Velocity Profiles
To evaluate the integrals in equation (2) and (7) and to deter-

Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/heattransfer/article-pdf/97/2/249/5909136/249_1.pdf by Universidad De Guanajuato (UGTO) user on 23 October 2019

also, to a first approximation, the velocity at ,yi = y 2 = &. This
gives the coupling between the physical flow and overall surface mine the surface mean parameter u+(<5) from equations (4) or (8),
quantities. velocity profiles u i + , u 2 + , and it 3 + are required. An assymptotic
Defining the velocity u+ = u/uT and dividing equation (3) by profile, for very widely or closely spaced elements, is a smooth wall
[u(<5)]2 gives one, typically [10]

k ( 6 ) ] " 2 = k * ( 6 ) ] - V / > + l V ( 5 ) H / > - b - (c-3 + ct)]/p / = Alny* + B s

(10)
+ CDp[it/u{S)fh/2p (4) Subscript SM indicates that we are referring to a smooth wall in
We see that u + (5) is a velocity in a dimensionless form suitable for the presence of a turbulent shear flow in which no artificial distur-
characterizing the average properties of the whole surface, while bances are introduced, for example, by upstream separated flows.
u i + and u 2 + are velocities for the smooth wall regions 1 and 2. We assume that equation (10) remains representative for regions 1,
u+(S) may be related to the well-known roughness function R(h+) 2, and 3 (for y3 > k) except that BSM is modified because of turbu-
[18]. lence generated by the separated flows. Thus a representative ve-
locity USA+ is introduced as
A heat balance over the length L may be written

Ajlu," = SArf!" + S A ^ z " + SAtf3" + W / 4 " uSA* = Alny* + BSA = ufiyi) = u2*(y2) = u3%y3) (11)
+ T,AFqs" + ^AFqR" (5)
with the origin for u 3 taken from y 3 = k.
where q{' are mean wall heat transfer rates per unit area in regions To determine BSA we recall that BSM is defined in terms of a
1, 2, 3, 4, and over the front S and rear R faces. Defining the tem- laminar sublayer thickness ISM^ i~ 11.63)
perature T+(6) = [T,„ - T(S)]pCurJqw", where Tw - T(S) is the
temperature difference a t y i = <5 a n d y 2 = <5, and introducing T+(<5) Bstt - ^sti Alnlsil ~ 5,5 (12)
into equation (5) gives
and, by analogy,
pCuT /T + (5) = afi/p + ot2(p - 6 - c 3 - cA)/p + a,c 3 //> B
SA = lSA*-AlnlSA* (13)
+ afjp + ciji/p + aRh/p (6)
+
where ISA is representative of the laminar sublayer thickness in
where m is an average heat-transfer coefficient for each region, de- regions 1 and 2. We assume that any increase in local turbulence
fined by at = qi"l[Tw - T(<5)], and the convective transport intensity, generated by the separated flows, is reflected by a de-
through the ends of the control volume is neglected. crease in ISA+ and that this decrease is given by
T+(<5) is a parameter suitable for characterizing the average
heat-transfer properties of the whole rough surface and may readi- hA* = hn\SA/Urw = W«W«s/(5) (14)
ly be related to the roughness function g(h+, Pr) [18]. The a; are
determined from empirical relations for cavities and steps. T h e H e a t T r a n s f e r C o e f f i c i e n t s «,•
Employing the modified Reynolds analogy [10] to the layer be-
M o d i f i c a t i o n s f o r p - b < c3 + c 4 tween ISA+ and 8 in each region 1 and 2, we obtain
We extend the foregoing equations to this case by simply assum-
ing that each element shields its downstream neighbor, reducing
a , = a 2 =pCuT u*(5)/{Pvt[us/{5)f
its effective frontal area. Also, because the flow outside the sepa- IV

rated flow region 3 is a shear layer, the dynamic pressure acting on + Zs/Ms/(6)[PrM~Prt]} (15)
the effective area is reduced. For the flow field of Fig. 1(c), the ef-
fective height he of each element is he = (h - k), and u now takes For regions 3, 4, and for R and S, we use Seban's [12-14] experi-
the form: mental information for rectangular cavities, which is summarized
2
in Fig. 3. The variation of etc in the cavity is given by
(/, - k)u = / ' " Vrfj-3 (7)

where y 3 is measured from the base of the cavity and uz is the pro- «c s Q«"/{T« - Ta) = iu„x/vnm/X)iPr/o.nr (ie)
file in region 3. Strictly, a separated flow profile should be em-
where, following Presser [16], the Prandtl number is introduced to
ployed for U3, but we retain simplicity by assuming us = u% with
generalize Seban's results in air. [/», X, and Ta define a flat plate
U3 = 0 for 0 < yz < k. Equations (4) and (6) now take the form:
heat-transfer coefficient upstream of the cavity itself, and the vari-
[H*(5)]-2 = [«, + (6)]-V/> + CDp\uVu(6)]Vij2p (8) ation of ac is determined from the given variation of W. From Se-
ban's information it is difficult to estimate the effect on ac of the
and
cavity length d = (p — b). We infer this effect from the results of
pCuryT*(5) = afi/p + a3c3he/hp + otiCihe/hp Charwat, et al. [15], where a linear approximation gives ac a (0.5 +
0.5d/c) until the flow reattaches in the cavity, that is, until p — b>
+ ashjp + aRh/p (9) C3 + C4. We have anticipated the result that ac is a maximum when
with he = (h - k) = hip - fe)/(c3 + c 4 ). The contribution to the d = c. This, in fact, contradicts Charwat's measurements for d > c
heat transfer of the frontal area between 0 < y3 ^ k is assumed and is a weakness of the present model in which region 2 is sud-
negligible. denly introduced. Combining Charwat's and Seban's results gives

Journal of Heat Transfer MAY 1975 / 251

 ac = (£/ = o X/t/)"(Pr/0.71)'"(W£/X)(0.5 + 0.5d/c) (17)
DATA FROM 1 2 1 ]
where d = c for p — b > c.
We make the transformation from the single cavity experiments h / b = 1 p / h = 61.5'
to the present rough surface model by assuming that the heat-
transfer coefficient distribution is the same in both cases when £/«,, h/b=2.7 p/h=29,7
X, and Ta are replaced by u(d), 5, and T(8), respectively. Then,
taking the average values for W from Fig. 3, we obtain D <H n — ———_?

h/b =1 p/h = 6
a3= Ui = 0.025(fe/o)(M(6)6/i;]"(Pr/0.71)" , (0.5 + 0 . 5 d / e )
(18) CD= 1.2
12
" X\
c/h= 8.5 -
^ *xtun,

Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/heattransfer/article-pdf/97/2/249/5909136/249_1.pdf by Universidad De Guanajuato (UGTO) user on 23 October 2019

with cvR = 0.8«3 and as = 2a 3 , and d = c for p — b > c. Equation
(18) may be written with more convenient variables as 10
x
8
a^pCiir 0.025[« + (6)l n (0.5
W
6
+ 0.5d/c)/[0.'llmPrUm(h+&/h)1-*] (19)
4
again, d = c for p — b > c.
2
THEORY -• h*
Roughness Functions
The fundamental parameters controlling the momentum- and 10 100 1000
heat-transfer properties of a rough surface are R(h+) and g(h+, Fig. 4 Comparison with experiment, rectangular rib
Pr), respectively [18]. We have expressions for surface average pa-
rameters u+(&) and T+(<5), at some mean distance & from an unde- From equation (11), after substituting for S/h from (21), USA+(&) is
fined mean origin for the surface. We need to relate these to the given by
roughness functions. The mathematical representation of a rough
surface in terms of R(h+) and a log-law « s / ( 6 ) =Alnh*a*(8)/uSA*(6) + A + Bs (24)

: Alny/h + R(h*\ (20)

with BSA evaluated from equations (13) and (14). For a given ge-
ometry, Co and c, equations (23) and (24) may be solved for u+(S),
does not allow us to specify the origin for y. We avoid the origin then equations (15) and (19) for the <*;, giving T+(S) from equation
problem by assuming that R(h+) is a mean velocity found by inte- (6). R and g are readily evaluated from equations (21) and (22).
grating equation (20) over the surface mean control volume of When p - 6 < C3 + c 4 , equations (7) and (8) give, after substi-
thickness <5. This gives <5 the character of a displacement thickness tuting for u from equation (11) and integrating,
for a rough surface. Integration gives
[uSA*(6)/u*(6)Y = b/p + CD[{MSA*(6) - 2A
u*(S) = R(h*) + A and AlnS/ft = A (21)
+ Alnip - b)/cf + A2]h(p - b)/2pc (25)
It immediately follows from the modified Reynolds analogy that
which, together with equations (13), (14), and (24), may be solved
T*(6) = g{h+, P r ) + PrtA (22) for u + (6). Equation (19) is solved for 0:3. The remaining a; are de-
termined as above and T+(6) is given by equation (9). R and g
Our solution procedure for p — b > a + c± is to substitute equa- readily follow from equations (21) and (22).
tion (11) into (2). Equation (4), after substituting for u and multi-
plying by [us,i+(i5)]2, becomes Comparison With Experiments and Discussion
+ J 2 2
When the geometry p , h, and 6 of the ribs is given, values of R
[«SJ1*(6)/M (O)] = l-c/p + CD[(USA*(5) - 2A) + A ]h/2p
and g may be determined as functions of h+, from the equations
(23) presented, provided Pr ( , m, n, c/h, and Co are known. We follow
Seban and choose n = 0.8. A mean value of Presser's measure-
/IW AIR \ ments gives m = 0.5. An acceptable mean value for Pr ( is 0.9 [10].
0,06 - Hoerner [11] gives Co = 1.2 for rectangular ribs with sharp edges.
SPR From Abbott and Kline [19] we estimate C3//1 » 7.5 and from Lu-
\w\vc E A D OF
0,05 ^\\\ INFORMATION zhanskiy and Solntsev [20] cjh « 1.0. These and the cavity mea-
surements suggest that c/h = 8.5 is a representative value. Both
0,04

0,03
1
AVERAGE W
^ $ ^ r\
CD and c/h are expected to be functions of some local Reynolds
number and, possibly, of the rib width [10], but we assume here
that they are constants. The constants A, BSM, and ISM+ are cho-
sen 2.5, 5.5, and 11.63, respectively.
0,02
Predicted values of R are compared with some representative
measurements [21] from an annulus test rig in Fig. 4. This compar-
-
0,01
-A 1jA 1
CAVITY FLOOR D' D
ison is typical of the discrepancy between theory and experiment
with good agreement at high values of h+, but too high values of R
at lower values of h+. Correct trends are shown: R increasing with
decreasing h+ for closely spaced elements but decreasing with h+
for widely spaced elements. The reason for this behavior is not
clear. To give some idea of the discrepancies over a very wide range
of roughness shapes a comparison is made in Fig. 5 between pre-
dicted values of R and a correlation of experimental information
[22]. Considering the approximations in the theory and the wide
scatter (not indicated on the correlation) in the experiments the
Fig. 3 Heat transfer distribution in a shallow rectangular cavity 2 < d/h <
5, after Seban, ei al. [12-14] agreement is very reasonable. The theory indicates R ^ R(b) for p

252 / MAY 1975 Transactions of the ASME

 9 _ 1 i i l l i r~ ~i 1—r
8 - tI R A h * = 1000 Pr= 37.6
7 B B \ 140

^ -
6
cC\Nx\\ „
120
b v \ \ \ \ \ y^X
100
4
80
i
**""~~- *-**'
<;>
60

40 a = 11.63 P r 2 / 3 _ 2 . 5 Prt[17
mk^m
CD=1.2
20 c/h = 8.5

Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/heattransfer/article-pdf/97/2/249/5909136/249_1.pdf by Universidad De Guanajuato (UGTO) user on 23 October 2019

EXPERIMENT //// ll||||| S^ [ 251 . + _|
J l_l 1 i i i i i ~T* I
10 100
Fig. 7 Comparison with experiment, rectangular rib

corresponds to region 1. The experiments indicate that a separa-

tion bubble forms near D and after this bubble reattachment oc-
curs. Not only will such separated flows influence the separated
flow regions 3 and 4, but high heat-transfer rates may be associ-
ated with the reattachment. These mechanisms are not considered
2 4 6 8 10 20 30 in the theory.
Fig. S Comparison with experiment, rectangular rib The minimum in g that occurs for high values of Pr and at h+ ~
20, Fig. 7, is not predicted by the theory. This is because Seban's
correlation is for a fully turbulent separated flow. As the local
Reynolds number is reduced the separated flow probably becomes
— b > c and this appears to be qualified by the experiments. Fur- transitional then laminar and corresponding changes in the heat
thermore, both theory and experiment suggest that R ^ R(D), al- transfer mechanism occur. A transition from a turbulent to a lami-
though Baumann [23] has shown that this is true only when h « nar separated flow, with decreasing h+, offers a possible explana-
D. tion for a rough wall acting like a thermally smooth wall before it
Most measurements of R and g have been performed in annuli, becomes hydraulically smooth. The concept of a low local Reyn-
which has introduced unknown errors when transformations are olds number also leads to the suggestion that a hydraulically
employed [18]. Consistency of results [24] has indicated that trans- smooth wall is one at which the flow at the surface is a Stokes flow.
formation errors in R are small, so that experimental results in This is also supported by the work of Richardson [27].
Figs. 4 and 5 may be considered representative of both circular Improvements to the model can be envisaged. The attached flow
tube and annulus measurements. However, significant errors [24] regions need not be treated as regions of constant shear stress, al-
are indicated in transformed values of g. Therefore predicted though the type of boundary layer formed in the turbulent shear
values of g are compared only with those measured in circular flow is not clearly understood. Better velocity profiles could be em-
tubes. Representative results [25] are given in Figs. 6 and 7. The ployed for the attached and separated flow regions. A region 5
agreement is very reasonable at Prandtl numbers of order unity could be introduced to encompass the separation bubble at the
but discrepancies occur at higher Prandtl numbers, probably be- front of the sharp edged elements, but all turbulent separated
cause of the very simple power law used for the Prandtl number flows [28] are extremely difficult to analyze. The influence of up-
dependency. stream and downstream separated flows on the attached flow re-
Some idea of why discrepancies occur may be obtained from Fig. gions is not clearly understood—it was very crudely included in
8, where a comparison is made between the measured [26] and pre- the analysis. Solution of the turbulence energy equation will pro-
dicted local heat-transfer coefficient a;. The a distribution was re- vide useful information on these influences. Significant progress
covered from the average values of W by scaling Fig. 3. There is will only follow detailed local measurements of the basic phenome-
evidence that by taking average values some discrepancies cancel. na.
The greatest discrepancy occurs over the top of the rib DA which

REYNOLDS N0=sl0 5
30 p/h h/b THEORY C D c/h 4£L_ THEORY
i#SSS 10 1-4 1.2 8.5 r
SM H^j EXPERIMENT '////////,[ 261
7" y////,. 20 2 1.2 8.5 h/b = 1
llll 40 2 1.2 8.5
Pr = 0.71 p/h
20
DATA FROM [251
m h h/b

l«4in
,r \
10
i_L
AA
i I
A A'
ii
D" D A
: FLOW v y FLOW
g= 0 6 3 P r 2 / 3 - 2.5 Pr t [171 A it. D A
— h+
-J 1 I
V77777777777777777777T/. 3 O T XMr #7/7777//' W77
10 100 A' D'
Fig. 8 Comparison with experiment—local heat-transfer coefficient ratios
Fig. 6 Comparison with experiment, rectangular rib over rectangular ribs

Journal of Heat Transfer MAY 1975 / 253

Concluding Remarks 11 Hoerner, S. F., "Fluid Dynamic Drag," Published by the Author, 148
The main purpose of this paper has been to lay some founda- Busteed Drive, Midland Pk., N. J., USA, 1958.
12 Seban, R. A., and Fox, J., "Heat Transfer to the Air Flow in a Surface
tions for analyzing the momentum- and heat-transfer characteris- Cavity," International Deuel, in Heat Transfer, ASME, 1962, pp. 426-431.
tics of rough surfaces. Simple equations have been developed to 13 Seban, R. A., "Heat Transfer to the Turbulent Separated Flow of Air
account, in a rather crude fashion perhaps, for the separated flows Downstream of a Step in the Surface of a Plate," JOURNAL OF HEAT
and turbulence phenomena found on rough surfaces. Although the TRANSFER, TRANS. ASME, Series C, Vol. 86, No. 2, May 1964, pp
259-264.
present analysis is for evenly spaced rectangular-ribs, its extension
14 Seban, R. A., "Heat Transfer and Flow in a Shallow Rectangular
to nonrectangular ribs has been carried out [17]. Further exten- Cavity With Subsonic Turbulent Air Flow," International Journal of Heat
sions to unevenly spaced elements, to three dimensional elements, and Mass Transfer, Vol. 8,1965, pp. 1353-1368.
to flow situations other than fully developed pipe flows [29], and to 15 Charwat, A. F., Dewey, C. F., Jr., Roos, J. N., and Hitz, J. A., "An In-
vestigation of Separated Flows—Part II: Flow in the Cavity and Heat
variable property situations [30] are readily envisaged. The pres-
Transfer," Journ. Aerospace Scs., Vol. 28, No. 7, July 1961, pp. 513-527.
ent model cannot be used where large adverse static pressure gra-

Downloaded from https://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/heattransfer/article-pdf/97/2/249/5909136/249_1.pdf by Universidad De Guanajuato (UGTO) user on 23 October 2019

16 Presser, K. H., "Empirische Gleichungen zur Berechnung der Stof-
dients are imposed which might cause overall flow separation with- fund Warmeiibertragung fur den Spezialfall der abgerissenen Stromung,"
out reattachment. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 15, 1972, pp. 2447-
2471.
17 Lewis, M. J., "An Elementary Analysis for Predicting the Momen-
tum- and Heat-Transfer Characteristics of a Hydraulically Rough Surface,"
Acknowledgments EIR Wurenlingen, CH, Report TM-IN-569,1974.
The author expresses his grateful thanks to the E I R for allowing 18 Lewis, M. J., "Roughness Functions, the Thermohydraulic Perfor-
mance of Rough Surfaces and the Hall Transformation—an Overview," In-
him sufficient time to complete this work. Many thanks are ex- ternational Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 17,1974, pp. 809-814.
tended to P. Buettiker, friend and colleague, for his constructive 19 Abbott, D. E., and Kline, S. J., "Experimental Investigation of Sub-
criticism and advice throughout the course of this work. sonic Turbulent Flow over Single and Double Backward Facing Steps,"
Journal of Basic Eng., Vol. 84, Sept. 1962, pp. 317-325.
20 Luzhanskiy, B. Ye., and Solntsev, V. P., "Experimental Study of
Heat Transfer in the Zone of Turbulent Boundary Layer Separation Ahead
References of a Step," Heat Transfer—Soviet Research, Vol. 3, No. 6, Nov.-Dec, 1971.
1 Kays, W. M„ "Compact Heat Exchanger," AGARD-LS-57-72, Heat 21 Dalle Donne, M., and Meerwald, E., "Heat Transfer From Rough
Exchangers, J. J. Ginoux, editor, Von Karman Inst., Belgium, Jan. 1972. Surfaces, Latest Results," Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe report, pre-
2 Kacker, S. C , "Estimation of Friction Factor of Rough Surfaces sented at the heat transfer specialist meeting, Windscale, May 1972.
From the Pressure Distribution Around a Roughness Element," CEGB, 22 Maubach, K,, "Rough Annulus Pressure Drop—Interpretation of Ex-
Berkeley, RD/B/N1967, Apr. 1971. periments and Recalculation for Square Ribs," International Journal of
3 Lavallee, H. C , and Popovitch, A. T., "Fluid Flow Near Roughness Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 15,1972, pp. 2489-2496.
Elements Investigated by Photolysis Method," Chem. Eng. Sc, Vol. 29, 23 Baumann, W., "Pressure Drop Performance of Artificial Roughness
1974, pp. 49-59. as a Function of Roughness Geometry," International Meeting on Reactor
4 Perry, A. E., Schofield, W. H., and Joubert, P. N., "Rough Wall Tur- Heat Transfer, Karlsruhe, Oct. 1973.
bulent Boundary Layers," Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 37, Part 2, 24 Lewis, M. J., "Errors that Arise When Estimating the Heat-Transfer
1969, pp. 383-413. Characteristics of Rough Surfaces From 'Bulk' Measurements in Annular
5 Nikuradse, J., "Laws of Flow in Rough Pipes," VDI Forsch. 361, 1933 Channels," EIR Wurenlingen, CH, TM-IN-535, May 1973.
or NACA TM-1292,1965. 25 Webb, R. L., Eckert, E. R. G., and Goldstein, R. J., "Heat Transfer
6 Dipprey, D. F., and Sabersky, R. H., "Heat and Momentum Transfer and Friction in Tubes With Repeated Rib Roughness," International Jour-
in Smooth and Rough Tubes at Various Prandtl Numbers," International nal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 14,1971, pp. 601-617.
Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, Vol. 6,1963, pp. 329-353. 26 Williams, F., and Watts, J., " T h e Development of Rough Surfaces
7 Sedney, R., "A Survey of the Effects of Small Protuberances on With Improved Heat Transfer Performance and a Study of the Mechanisms
Boundary-Layer Flows," AIAA Journal, Vol. 11, No. 6, June 1973, pp. 728- Involved," Proc. 4th Int. Heat Transfer Conf., Paris, Vol. II, Paper FC 5.5,
792. 1970.
8 Lewis, M. J., "Optimising the Thermohydraulic Performance of 27 Richardson, S., "On the Non-Slip Boundary Conditions," Journal of
Rough Surfaces," to be published in the International Journal of Heat and Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 59, Part 4,1973, pp. 707-719.
Mass Transfer, 1975. 28 Chang, P . K., Separation of Flow, Pergamon, 1970.
9 Wilkie, D., "Forced Convection Heat Transfer From Surfaces Rough- 29 Dirling, R. B., Jr., "A Method for Computing Roughwall Heat Trans-
ened by Transverse Ribs," I. Mech. E. Int. Heat Trans. Conf., Chicago, Vol. fer Rates on Reentry Nosetips," AIAA Paper 73-763,1973.
3,1966. 30 Nijsing, R., "Predictions on Momentum, Heat and Mass Transfer in
10 Schlichting, H., Boundary Layer Theory, McGraw Hill, New York, Turbulent Channel Flow With the Aid of a Boundary Layer Growth—
1968. Breakdown Model," Warme und StoffiXbertragung, Vol. 2,1969, pp. 65-86.

254 / MAY 1975 Transactions of the ASME