2004
DOI: 10.1115/1.1792265
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Roughness Effects on the Mixing Properties in Open Channel Turbulent Boundary Layers

Abstract: This paper investigates the effects of surface roughness on the transport and mixing properties in turbulent boundary layers created in an open channel. The measurements were obtained on a smooth and two different types of rough surfaces using a laser Doppler anemometer. The results show that surface roughness enhances the levels of the turbulence kinetic energy, turbulence production, and diffusion over most of the boundary layer. The distributions of the eddy viscosity and mixing length are also strongly mod… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
13
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This peak value (i.e., σ u ,max / u * ) has been called a “universal constant” [ Nezu and Nakagawa , 1993] and typical values range from 2.2 to 2.8. Most studies, however, have focused on small relative roughness, i.e., h ≫ k s [ Kironoto and Graf , 1994; Song et al , 1994; Wang and Dong , 1996; Nikora and Goring , 2000; Tachie et al , 2000, 2004; Wu and Yang , 2004] or hydraulically smooth beds [e.g., Nezu and Rodi , 1986]. We are aware of only four studies that have measured σ u ,max / u * for a wide range of relative roughness [ Bayazit , 1975; Wang et al , 1993; Dittrich and Koll , 1997; Carollo et al , 2005].…”
Section: Potential Slope Dependent Effectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This peak value (i.e., σ u ,max / u * ) has been called a “universal constant” [ Nezu and Nakagawa , 1993] and typical values range from 2.2 to 2.8. Most studies, however, have focused on small relative roughness, i.e., h ≫ k s [ Kironoto and Graf , 1994; Song et al , 1994; Wang and Dong , 1996; Nikora and Goring , 2000; Tachie et al , 2000, 2004; Wu and Yang , 2004] or hydraulically smooth beds [e.g., Nezu and Rodi , 1986]. We are aware of only four studies that have measured σ u ,max / u * for a wide range of relative roughness [ Bayazit , 1975; Wang et al , 1993; Dittrich and Koll , 1997; Carollo et al , 2005].…”
Section: Potential Slope Dependent Effectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One of the approaches relating the flows and the geometrical factor is the roughness density [25] but the changes in turbulence structure depend on the geometry of individual roughness elements [26]. Although the flows over rough and smooth surfaces share the same similarity [27,28], the conventional smooth-surface scaling is inapplicable to its roughsurface counterpart [29,30].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Balachandar and Patel (2002) demonstrated that the velocity profiles measured in a rough open channel flow conform to the classical log-law with an appropriate velocity shift. Tachie et al (2004) showed that surface roughness increases the skin friction coefficient and thickness of the roughness sublayer in an open channel flow. Open channel flows with mobile beds, with and without bedforms, add more complexity to the overlying turbulent flow.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%