1
$\begingroup$

Good afternoon everyone. In defining the shear velocity at the wall $u_\tau=\sqrt{\frac{\tau_w}{\rho}}$ for the incompressible turbulence, $w$ being the wall, I found in some literature that this relation holds: $$\tau_w=\mu \frac{\partial U}{\partial y}|_{y=0}= -\frac{\partial p_w}{\partial x}$$ $p$ being the pressure, $\mu$ the dynamic viscosity and $x$ the direction of the flow velocity $U$. However I don't know neither if the second equality is correct or where it comes from. Could anyone help?

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

I'm trying to show the second equality, what I've done so far:

From Navier-Stokes (incompressible) in the x direction (take z also along the wall and y orthogonal to them, assuming no field forces) and let $\mathbf{u} = u \mathbf{i} + v \mathbf{j} + w \mathbf{k}$:

$$\rho \frac{D u}{Dt} = \mu \Delta u - \frac{\partial p}{\partial x} + \rho g_x$$

notice that the particle is stopped (zero constant velocity and partial derivatives of it along x and z) along the wall ("no slip") and therefore, from the Lagrangian frame, it has zero (material) derivative. It will reduce to:

$$\mu \frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial y^2} = \frac{\partial p}{\partial x}$$

but I don't know what to do from here. Maybe the sign will be reversed since the shear stress in the fluid is a reaction to the shear stress in the wall?

Edit: checking the dimensions, could it happen that something is wrong with the equality? Since the first two terms evaluate to Pa, and the final one to Pa/m.

Using the reasoning above, could it be something like $$\frac{\partial \tau_w}{\partial y} = -\frac{\partial p_w}{\partial x}$$?

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Thanks for the reply. Yes, the minus could come from the fact that there is a pressure drop in the flow due to friction while the stress is positive; however have you thought how to solve the fact of the second derivative? About the dimensions, I think you're true and this formula can't be correct then. $\endgroup$ Dec 31, 2020 at 15:33
  • $\begingroup$ I wrote a small edit few secs ago, maybe it is related to the derivative of shear stress $\endgroup$
    – Petrini
    Dec 31, 2020 at 15:34
  • $\begingroup$ Got it. Yes, it sounds reasonable. Thank you $\endgroup$ Dec 31, 2020 at 15:35

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.