Boundary Layer

ENME 432L: Section 02

Lab Report Checklist:

_____ Have you included the raw (handwritten) data sheet?

_____ Have you included your pre-lab report which has been signed by your TA or
instructor?
_____ Have you typed the measured data and included them into your report?
_____ Have you included enough data so that the instructor can calculate the final results
herself?
_____ Have you included detailed methods so that your younger brother or sister can
understand what you did?
_____ Have you included one or two figures for the experimental setup to help the
instructor
understand how you made those measurements?
_____ Have you included a description of your experimental protocol?
_____ Have you provided a table for all the parameters you obtained from other
textbook?
_____ Have you performed the uncertainty analysis on at least one indirectly measured
variables?
_____ Have each member of your group read the lab report?
Objective

The objective of this experiment was to determine the shear stress and boundary
layer thickness along a plate. This was done using two different methods, measuring the
pressure at different locations using a pitot tube, and performing a theoretical analysis.

Introduction

Boundary layer thickness and the shear stress applied to a surface can be very
important in mechanical engineering design. In aircraft design the boundary layer
thickness and the shear stress on the wing are very important to control. Both the
thickness of the boundary layer and the shear stress have a large impact on the amount of
drag experienced by the wing. The boundary layer increases the effective thickness of the
airplane wing. An increase in the effective thickness will causes the aircraft to have to
displace more air and in turn increase the drag on the aircraft do to pressure. An increase
in the shear stress on the wing will increase the friction drag that the aircraft experiences.
The shear stress and the boundary layer thickness will both be lower at laminar flow so
the best way to decrease both the boundary layer thickness and the shear stress is to
prevent turbulent flow. Figure one shows an example of a boundary layer. There is a

Figure 1

noticeable increase in thickness on the turbulent end of the boundary layer. A better
understanding of how to control the shear stress and boundary layer would create the
potential for more efficient and faster aircraft due to reduction in drag.

Materials and Methods

In order to collect all of the necessary data for this experiment the air bench was
used. Figure 2 shows a picture of the air bench.
 Figure 2

A flat piece of metal was fixed in the center of the flow of air in order to create a surface
for the boundary to be formed. Figure three shows the flat piece of metal on which the
boundary layer was formed.

Figure 3
 The air control on the air bench was first used to set the velocity of the air. Then pressure
readings were taken using the manometer for the static and total pressure above the test
section. All of the measurements to determine the boundary layer were made using the
pitot tube. The pitot tube is a small moveable tube connected to the manometer. This
allows the pressure to be determined at different locations along the y axis. Pressure
readings were taken at 4 different locations along the axis of the flat piece of metal, x
direction. From left to right on figure the notches represent x1, x2, x3, and x4. The
pressure readings were taken at the surface and then at every .25mm in the direction
perpendicular to the surface, y direction. In order to measure the distance that the pitot
was used for each reading a small caliper was used. This caliper is shown in figure 4.

Figure 4

Before beginning the experiment the critical Reynolds's number was used to determine
the first velocity to which the air bench would be set. This was done using equation one.

xV p
Re x = (1)
υ

Once the velocity was determined the wall tap for Ptotal and the wall tap for Pstatic were
each plugged into one side of the manometer. Bernoulli's equation could be determined
what the difference in their heights should be at the desired velocity. This is shown in
equation two.

1
p w g ( h2 − h1 ) = ρair V p 2 (2)
2

Once the velocity was set then the heights of the water in the manometer were obtained
for the Pstatic wall tap and the Ptotal wall tap individually in order to obtain the pressures at
each of those locations. Pstatic and Ptotal were then calculated using equations three and
four.

Pstatic = Pair + ρ water g ( hair − htotal ) (3)

Ptotal = Pair + ρ water g ( hair − htotal ) (4)

In these equation ρwater is the density of water g is gravity hair is the height of the
water in the side of the manometer open to air and htotal is the height of the water in the
side of the manometer hooked to the wall tap. After the total and static pressure were
determined above the test section the upstream velocity could be determined for each of
the cases using equation five.

2( Ptotal − Pstaic )
Vin = (5)
ρair

After determining the upstream velocity the pressures at each specific location had to be
determined. This was done using the readings taken from the pitot tube. The pressure was
determined at each of the y locations measured for all four of the x locations. All of the
pressures were determined in the same manner using equation six.

Pyi = Pair + ρwater g (hair − htotal ) (6)

In this equation Pyi is the pressure at each one of the y locations measured, Pair is
atmospheric pressure, g is gravity, hair is the height of the water in the manometer open
to air, and htotal is the height of the water in the side of the manometer connected to the
pitot tube. After the pressure at each location was determined the velocity of the air at
each location could be determined. The velocity of the air was determined using the total
pressure at each location and the pressure of air as shown in equation seven.

2( Pyi − Pair )
U ( x, y ) = (7)
ρair

In equation 7 U ( x, y ) is the velocity at each location, Pyi is the pressure determined

in equation 6, Pair is atmospheric pressure and ρair is the density of air. After the
velocity at each location was determined a curve fitting method was used to determine
the boundary layer thickness and the shear stress at each location. In order to do this a
dimensionless quantity for the velocity had to be determined. This was done by taking the
velocity calculated at each location and dividing t by Vp. Vp is the velocity far away from
the plate in the potential flow region. Figure 5 shows where Vp is located in relation to the
boundary layer.
 Figure 5

Vp is not always equal to the upstream velocity but in the case of a thin plate it is because
the effects of a thin plate on the flow of the air only affect a small area. After determining
this the dimensionless quantity was then calculated using equation eight.

U ( x, y )
DQ = (8)
Vin

In equation 8 Vin is the upstream velocity, U(x,y) is the velocity at each location and DQ
is the dimensionless quantity. The goal of the curve fitting was to determine an equation
that would give the best curve for the experimental data. The equation used to do this was
equation nine.
−y
(9)
1−e y0

In equation nine y is the location of the measurements taken in the y direction from the
flat bar and y0 is a variable quantity that is used to fit the equation to the given set of data.
In order to determine the correct value of y0 the error between equations eight and nine
was determined with different values of y0. This was done using equation ten.
−y
U ( x, y )
( − (1 − e y0 )) 2 (10)
Vin

This equation was done for the velocity at each y location for each of the x locations. The
sum of all of the errors at each x location was then calculated. This process was done for
different values of y0 until a minimum error was obtained at each x location. With a value
of y0 for each of the x locations for each flow rate the boundary layer thickness and the
shear stress could then be determined at each location. The thickness of the boundary
layer was determined using equation eleven.
 δ ( x) = 4.6 y 0 ( x ) (11)

The shear stress was then determined using equation twelve.

µV p
τ s ( x) = (12)
y 0 ( x)

After both the shear stress and the thickness of the boundary layer were calculated using
the experimental data they were both calculated using theoretical methods to determine
the accuracy of the experimental results. In order to determine the theoretical results the
distance to each of the x locations along the bar was determined. Using this distance and
the upstream velocity of the air they Reynold's number could be determined at each
location. The Reynold's number was determined using equation thirteen.

xV p ρ
Re x = (13)
µ

In equation 13 x is the distance to each of the locations along the plate, Vp is the upstream
velocity, ρ is the density of air, and µ is the dynamic viscosity of air. Once the
Reynold's number was determined the boundary layer thickness at each of the x locations
could be determined using equation fourteen if the flow is laminar and equation fifteen if
the flow is turbulent.

5x
δ ( x) = (14)
Re x

1
 µ 5
δ( x ) =.37 x
V ρx 
 (15)
 ∞ 

In equation fourteen x is the distance to the x location where the thickness is being
determined and Rex is the Reynold's number at that location. In equation fifteen V∞ is
the upstream velocity. After determining the boundary layer thickness for each of the
locations using the theoretical formula the shear stress was determined for each location
using the theoretical formula. This was done using equation sixteen for the locations with
laminar flow. For turbulent flow there isn't a good enough understanding of the flow to
determine a theoretical equation for the shear stress. The shear stress at these locations
must just be determined using experimental results.

V∞ ρ
τ s ( x ) = .332 µV∞ (16)
µx
After the shear stress was calculated for all of the trials with a laminar flow using
equation sixteen all of the calculations using both methods were finished. Listed below is
the experimental protocol used to complete the experiment.

Experimental Protocol:

1) Position the plate at the first notch.

2) Position the pitot tube against the plate.

3) Turn on air bench and adjust to desired flow.

4) Measure Ptotal,in and Pstatic,in

5) Take pitot tube manometer readings. After each reading, move the pitot tube away
from the plate in increments of 0.25mm and record the new manometer readings.

6) Repeat testing at other notch locations on the plate.

7) Repeat testing at a new velocity which creates mixed flow.

8) Turn off air bench.

Results

The first part of the results is all of the given values or parameters that were
obtained from the text book. All of these values are listed in table 1.

Table 1

ρair ρwater g pair μair νair

(kg/m3) (kg/m3) (m/s2) (Pa) (Ns/m2) (m2/s)
10132
1.204 995.7 9.81 1.82E-05 1.56E-05
5

Before beginning the experiment the critical velocity and the corresponding height
difference when the static and total wall taps were hooked to the manometer had to be
calculated. This was done using equations one and two. The actual calculation is shown
below.

xV p (. 255 m)V p
Re x = =
υ (1.56 x10 −5 )
 V p = 30 .71 m / s

1
(995 .7 kg / m 3 )( 9.81m / s 2 )( h2 − h1 ) = (1.204 kg / m 3 )( 30 .71m / s ) 2
2

∆h = 58mm

After determining all of the parameters needed from the text book and setting the air
bench to the correct velocity all of the experimental data was collected. The first data
collected from each of the trials was the total and static pressure. From this the upstream
velocity was calculated. Table two shows the total and static pressure for each of the
trials and the corresponding upstream velocity.

Table 2

Trial Pressure Hair (mm) Htotal (mm) Pressure (Pa) Vp (m/s)

Pstatic 100 96 101364.1
1 29.32503
Ptotal 129 72 101881.8
Pstatic 100 95 101373.8
2 32.64172
Ptotal 133 62.33 102015.3

The calculation for the static pressure was done using equation three. The calculation for
the static pressure for trial one is shown below.

Pstatic = Pair + ρ water g ( hair − htotal ) = 101325 Pa + 995 .7 kg / m 3 (.100 − .096 ) = 101364 .1Pa

The total pressure for each of the trials was calculated in the same manner. After
obtaining the static and total pressure for each of the trials the upstream velocity was
calculated for each trial using equation five. The calculation for the upstream velocity for
trial one is shown below.

2( Ptotal − Pstaic ) 2(101881 .8 − 101364 .1Pa )

Vin = = = 29 .32503 m / s
ρ air 1.204 kg / m 3

The experimental results collected for each of the trials using the pitot tube are shown in
tables three and four. Table three shows the results obtained from the pitot tube at each of
the y locations for all four of the x locations for trial one.
 Table 3

X1 (.105m) X2 (.155m)
Y Hair Δh Y Hair Δh
(mm) (mm) Htotal (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) Htotal (mm) (mm)
0 100 95 5 0 100 94 6
0.25 109 87 22 0.25 104 91 13
0.5 119 80 39 0.5 110 85 25
0.75 119 75 44 0.75 117 79 38
1 121 74 47 1 119 76 43
1.25 121 73 48 1.25 121 75 46
1.5 121 73 48 1.5 121 75 46
1.75 121 73 48 1.75 121 75 46
X3 (.205m) X4 (.255m)
Y Hair Δh Y Hair Δh
(mm) (mm) Htotal (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) Htotal (mm) (mm)
0 103 93 10 0 104 92 12
0.25 106 89 17 0.25 109 87 22
0.5 111 84 27 0.5 111 84 27
0.75 114 81 33 0.75 113 83 30
1 117 79 38 1 114 81 33
1.25 119 77 42 1.25 116 80 36
1.5 119 76 43 1.5 116 80 36
1.75 120 75 45 1.75 118 78 40
2 120 75 45 2 118 78 40
2.25 121 74 47 2.25 118 78 40
2.5 121 74 47 2.5 N/A N/A N/A
2.75 121 74 47 2.75 N/A N/A N/A

Table four shows the results obtained from the pitot tube at each of the y locations for the
all of the x locations for trial two.
 Table 4

X1 (.105m) X2 (.155m)
Y Hair Δh Y Δh
(mm) (mm) Htotal (mm) (mm) (mm) Hair (mm) Htotal (mm) (mm)
0 102 93 9 0 102 92 10
0.25 112 84 28 0.25 109 86 23
0.5 123 71 52 0.5 118 76 42
0.75 128 68 60 0.75 125 70 55
1 129 66 63 1 128 68 60
1.25 130 65 65 1.25 129 66 63
1.5 130 65 65 1.5 130 65 65
1.75 130 65 65 1.75 130 65 65
2 N/A N/A N/A 2 130 65 65
X3 (.205m) X4 (.255m)
Y Hair Δh Y Hair Δh
(mm) (mm) Htotal (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) Htotal (mm) (mm)
0 106 90 16 0 107 89 18
0.25 112 84 28 0.25 114 81 33
0.5 117 78 39 0.5 117 78 39
0.75 121 74 47 0.75 119 77 42
1 126 71 55 1 120 75 45
1.25 126 69 57 1.25 121 74 47
1.5 128 68 60 1.5 124 72 52
1.75 129 67 62 1.75 125 71 54
2 129 67 62 2 126 70 56
2.25 130 66 64 2.25 128 68 60
2.5 130 65 65 2.5 128 68 60
2.75 130 65 65 2.75 129 67 62
3 130 65 65 3 129 66 63
3.25 N/A N/A N/A 3.25 129 66 63
3.5 N/A N/A N/A 3.5 129 66 63

Once all of the experimental data was obtained the pressure, velocity, and the
dimensionless quantity needed for the curve fitting process could be calculated for each
of the y values at each of the x locations. In order to calculate the pressure at each
location equation six was used. The pressure calculation for the first y value at the first x
location for trial one is shown below.

Pyi = Pair + ρwater g (hair − htotal ) = 101325 Pa + (995 .7 kg / m 3 )( 9.81m / s 2 )(. 100 m − .095 m)

= 101373.8 Pa
After calculating the pressure the velocity was calculated at each location using equation
seven. The velocity calculation for the first y value at the first x location for trial one is
shown below.

2( Pyi − Pair ) 2(101373 .8Pa −101325 Pa )

U ( x, y ) = = = 9.006737 m / s
ρair 1.204 kg / m 3

With the velocity at each location calculated the dimensionless quantity for the curve
fitting could be calculated using equation eight. The dimensionless quantity calculation
for the first y value at the first x location for trial one is shown below.

U ( x, y ) 9.006737 m / s
DQ = = = .307135
Vin 29 .32503 m / s

The results for these calculations for all four x values for both trials are shown in tables
five and six. Table five shows the calculated results for the data obtained at each of the y
locations for the all of the x locations for trial one.

Table 5

X1 X2
Y (mm) Ptotal (Pa) U(x,y) (m/s) U(x,y)/Vp Y (mm) Ptotal (Pa) U(x,y) (m/s) U(x,y)/Vp
0.00 101373.84 9.01 0.31 0.00 101383.61 9.87 0.34
0.25 101539.89 18.89 0.64 0.25 101451.98 14.52 0.50
0.50 101705.94 25.15 0.86 0.50 101569.20 20.14 0.69
0.75 101754.78 26.72 0.91 0.75 101696.18 24.83 0.85
1.00 101784.09 27.61 0.94 1.00 101745.02 26.41 0.90
1.25 101793.86 27.91 0.95 1.25 101774.32 27.32 0.93
1.50 101793.86 27.91 0.95 1.50 101774.32 27.32 0.93
1.75 101793.86 27.91 0.95 1.75 101774.32 27.32 0.93
X3 X4
Y (mm) Ptotal (Pa) U(x,y) (m/s) U(x,y)/Vp Y (mm) Ptotal (Pa) U(x,y) (m/s) U(x,y)/Vp
0.00 101422.68 12.74 0.43 0.00 101442.21 13.95 0.48
0.25 101491.05 16.61 0.57 0.25 101539.89 18.89 0.64
0.50 101588.73 20.93 0.71 0.50 101588.73 20.93 0.71
0.75 101647.34 23.14 0.79 0.75 101618.03 22.06 0.75
1.00 101696.18 24.83 0.85 1.00 101647.34 23.14 0.79
1.25 101735.25 26.10 0.89 1.25 101676.64 24.17 0.82
1.50 101745.02 26.41 0.90 1.50 101676.64 24.17 0.82
1.75 101764.55 27.02 0.92 1.75 101715.71 25.47 0.87
2.00 101764.55 27.02 0.92 2.00 101715.71 25.47 0.87
2.25 101784.09 27.61 0.94 2.25 101715.71 25.47 0.87
2.50 101784.09 27.61 0.94 2.50 N/A N/A N/A
2.75 101784.09 27.61 0.94 2.75 N/A N/A N/A
Table six shows the calculated results for the data obtained at each of the y locations for
the all of the x locations for trial two.
 Table 6

X1 X2
Y Y
Ptotal (Pa) U(x,y) (m/s) U(x,y)/Vp Ptotal (Pa) U(x,y) (m/s) U(x,y)/Vp
(mm) (mm)
0.00 101412.91 12.08 0.37 0.00 101422.68 12.74 0.39
0.25 101598.50 21.31 0.65 0.25 101549.66 19.32 0.59
0.50 101832.93 29.05 0.89 0.50 101735.25 26.11 0.80
0.75 101911.07 31.20 0.96 0.75 101862.23 29.87 0.92
1.00 101940.37 31.97 0.98 1.00 101911.07 31.20 0.96
1.25 101959.91 32.48 0.99 1.25 101940.37 31.97 0.98
1.50 101959.91 32.48 0.99 1.50 101959.91 32.48 0.99
1.75 101959.91 32.48 0.99 1.75 101959.91 32.48 0.99
2.00 N/A N/A N/A 2.00 101959.91 32.48 0.99
X3 X4
Y Y
Ptotal (Pa) U(x,y) (m/s) U(x,y)/Vp Ptotal (Pa) U(x,y) (m/s) U(x,y)/Vp
(mm) (mm)
0.00 101481.29 16.11 0.49 0.00 101500.82 17.09 0.52
0.25 101598.50 21.31 0.65 0.25 101647.34 23.14 0.71
0.50 101705.94 25.16 0.77 0.50 101705.94 25.16 0.77
0.75 101784.09 27.62 0.85 0.75 101735.25 26.11 0.80
1.00 101862.23 29.87 0.92 1.00 101764.55 27.02 0.83
1.25 101881.77 30.41 0.93 1.25 101784.09 27.62 0.85
1.50 101911.07 31.20 0.96 1.50 101832.93 29.05 0.89
1.75 101930.60 31.72 0.97 1.75 101852.46 29.60 0.91
2.00 101930.60 31.72 0.97 2.00 101872.00 30.14 0.92
2.25 101950.14 32.22 0.99 2.25 101911.07 31.20 0.96
2.50 101959.91 32.48 0.99 2.50 101911.07 31.20 0.96
2.75 101959.91 32.48 0.99 2.75 101930.60 31.72 0.97
3.00 101959.91 32.48 0.99 3.00 101940.37 31.97 0.98
3.25 N/A N/A N/A 3.25 101940.37 31.97 0.98
3.50 N/A N/A N/A 3.50 101940.37 31.97 0.98

After all of the data for tables five and six was obtained the curve fitting could be done.
The curve fitting was done using equations nine and ten. In order to complete the curve
fitting various values of y0 were selected and input into equation nine along with the y
locations for each trial. The values calculated were then compared with U(x,y)/Vp values
calculated in the previous table. The errors for each x location were summed and the yo
value that yielded the lowest error was chosen for the curve fitting for each x location.
One of the y0 calculations for the first y value for the first x location of the first trial is
shown below.
−y −0
1− e y0
= 1 − e .26 = 0
 −y
U ( x, y )
( − (1 − e y0 )) 2 = (. 307135 − 0) 2 = .094332
Vin

These two calculations were performed for each y0 value selected at each y location for
each of the x locations. Table seven shows how the minimum error value was calculated
for the first x location for trial one.

Table 7

1-exp(-y/y0) 1-exp(-y/y0) 1-exp(-y/y0)

Error Error Error
(y0=.25) (y0=.26) (y0=.27)
0 0.094332 0 0.094332 0 0.094332
0.63212056 0.000147 0.61769573 0.000705 0.60383557 0.001633
0.86466472 4.74E-05 0.85384344 1.55E-05 0.84305374 0.000217
0.95021293 0.001529 0.94412372 0.00109 0.93782348 0.000714
0.98168436 0.001602 0.97863826 0.001368 0.97536787 0.001136
0.99326205 0.001734 0.99183332 0.001617 0.99024163 0.001491
0.99752125 0.002107 0.99687784 0.002048 0.99613408 0.001981
0.99908812 0.002253 0.99880639 0.002226 0.99846846 0.002195
Sum 0.103751 Sum 0.103401 Sum 0.103699

The results from table seven show that the sum of errors that is the lowest is for y0=.26 so
this value was selected for the first x location for trial one. The following eight graphs,
figures six through thirteen show the line created by the curve fitting versus the points
U ( x, y )
obtained from the calculation of Vp
. Table 8 shows the y0 values calculated for

each of the other locations.

Table 8

Trial 1 y0 Trial 2 y0
X1 0.26 X1 0.23
X2 0.41 X2 0.3
X3 0.43 X3 0.31
X4 0.47 X4 0.33
 Trial 1 X1 Curve Vs Actual

Nondimensional Quantity 1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Y location (mm)

Figure 6

Trial 1 X2 Curve Vs Actual

1.2
Nondimensional Quantity

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Y location (mm)

Figure 7
 Trial 1 X3 Curve Vs Actual

Nondimensional Quantity 1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Y location (mm)

Figure 8

Trial 1 X4 Curve Vs Actual

1.2
Nondimensional Quantity

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Y location (mm)

Figure 9
 Trial 2 X1 Curve Vs Actual

Nondimensional Quantity 1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Y location (mm)

Figure 10

Trial 2 X2 Curve Vs Actual

1.2
Nondimensional Quantity

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Y location (mm)

Figure 11
 Trial 2 X3 Curve Vs Actual

Nondimensional Quantity 1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Y location (mm)

Figure 12

Trial 2 X4 Curve Vs Actual

1.2
Nondimensional Quantity

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Y location (mm)

Figure 13

After obtaining the y0 value for each of the trials the experimental shear stress and
boundary layer thickness could be calculated for each of the trials. The boundary layer
thickness was calculated using equation eleven. The calculation for the boundary layer
thickness for the first x location for the first trial is shown below.

(4.6)(. 26 mm )
δ ( x) = 4.6 y 0 ( x) = = .001196 m
1000

The shear stress was then calculated using equation twelve. The calculation for the shear
stress first the first x location for the first trial is shown below.
 µV p (.000182 Ns / m 2 )( 29 .32503 m / s )
τ s ( x) = = = 2.052752
y 0 ( x) .26 mm
1000

After obtaining the shear stress and boundary layer thickness for all of the locations using
the experimental results the theoretical equations were applied for a basis of comparison.
First the Reynold's number for each of the x locations for each trial was calculated using
Vp and the x distance with equation thirteen. The calculation for the Reynold's number for
the first x location for the first trial is shown below.

xV p ρ (. 105 m)( 29 .32503 m / s )(1.204 kg / m 3 )

Re x = = = 203681 .6
µ (. 000182 Ns / m 2 )

After calculating the Reynold's number the boundary layer thickness could be calculated
using equation fourteen if the flow was laminar and equation fifteen if the flow is
turbulent. The calculation for the boundary layer thickness for the first x location of trial
one is shown below.

5x 5(. 105 m)
δ ( x) = = = .001163 m
Re x 203681 .6

After calculating the boundary layer thickness equation sixteen was then used to calculate
the theoretical shear stress. The calculation for the shear stress for the first x location for
the first trial is shown below.

V∞ ρ ( 29 .32503 m / s )(1.204 kg / m 3 )
τ s ( x ) = .332 µV∞ = .332 (. 0000182 Ns / m 2 )( 29 .32503 m / s )
µx (. 0000182 Ns / m 2 )(. 105 m)
= .761672

The theoretical and experimental results for the shear stress and boundary layer thickness
are all shown for trial one in table nine and for trial two in table ten.
Table 9

Vp=29.32503
Distance Delta Tau Delta Tau
Position Re
(mm) Experimental Experimental Theoretical Theoretical
x1 0.105 203681.6 0.001163278 0.761672199 0.001196 2.05275201
x2 0.155 300672.9 0.001413366 0.626898029 0.001886 1.30174518
x3 0.205 397664.1 0.00162542 0.545112101 0.001978 1.24119889
x4 0.255 494655.4 0.001812837 0.488756632 0.002162 1.13556494
Table 10
 Vp=32.64172
Distance Delta Tau Delta Tau
Position Re
(mm) Experimental Experimental Theoretical Theoretical
x1 0.105 226753.2 0.00110251 0.894478609 0.001058 0.001058
x2 0.155 334731 0.001339534 0.736204995 0.00138 0.00138
x3 0.205 442708.7 0.001540511 0.640158738 0.001426 0.001426
x4 0.255 550686.4 0.006707505 0.283393485 0.001518 N/A

These tables show all of the data calculated for both methods which are the final results
of the experiment. The Reynold's number column shows that all of the Reynold's number
were less than the critical number of 5x105 except for the last x location for the second
trial so the laminar flow calculation could be used for all of the trials except for that one.
The boundary layer calculation for the x4 for the second trial required the turbulent flow
calculation and the shear stress could not be determined.

Discussion

As with any experiment this experiment had limitations and sources of error. One
important source of error was the human error introduced when taking the measurements.
In the case of the air bench the air flow isn't always maintained at a steady level. This
could introduce error because the air isn't always flowing at the exact velocity that it
should be. This also makes the levels of the water in the manometers fluctuate slightly
because the pressure is going up and down. There is definitely error generated when a
human is trying to read the water level in a manometer when the meniscus is constantly
moving. The percent error between the theoretical boundary layer thickness and the
theoretical boundary layer thickness is shown in table eleven for the first trial and table
twelve for the second trial.

Table 11

Vp=29.32503
Distance Delta Delta Percent Tau Tau Percent
Position
(mm) Experimental Theoretical Error Experimental Theoretical Error
x1 0.105 0.001163 0.001196 2.812944 0.761672 2.052752 62.89507
x2 0.155 0.001413 0.001886 33.44033 0.626898 1.301745 51.84172
x3 0.205 0.001625 0.001978 21.69161 0.545112 1.241199 56.08181
 x4 0.255 0.001813 0.002162 19.26057 0.488757 1.135565 56.95917

Table 12

Vp=32.64172
Distance Delta Delta Percent Tau Tau Percent
Position
(mm) Experimental Theoretical Error Experimental Theoretical Error
x1 0.105 0.001058 0.001103 4.037155 2.582953 0.894479 65.36993
x2 0.155 0.00138 0.00134 3.020899 1.980264 0.736205 62.82289
x3 0.205 0.001426 0.001541 7.433319 1.916385 0.640159 66.5955
x4 0.255 0.001518 0.006708 77.36864 1.80024 0.283393 84.25802

The percent errors for the boundary layer thicknesses were based on the percent that the
experimental thickness was larger or smaller than the theoretical thickness. The percent
errors for the shear stress were based on the percent that the theoretical thickness was
larger or smaller than the experimental thickness. Although some of the errors were
relatively small there were some relatively high ones. This can be attributed to the human
error that was mentioned earlier and the fact that the curve fitting used isn't exact it is just
an estimate.

There is a certain amount of uncertainty introduced into values that are calculated
based on measured values. In the case of this lab there will be uncertainty introduced into
the calculation for Ptotal based on the two height measurements taken for the manometers.
In order to do this first the precision and bias error need to be determined. In this
experiment measurements of the height of the water in the manometers were made three
times so that a precision error could be obtained. The two heights taken in this case were
hair and htotal. The bias error for each of the measurements is .001m because each of the
measurements was taken using a ruler with the smallest increment being 1mm. The
uncertainties for the two measurements are calculated using equation 17.
U ∆t = P 2 + B 2 (17)
The calculation for the uncertainty of hair is shown in equation 18 and the calculation for
hs,1 is shown in equation 19.
U hair = .001 2 + .001 2 = .001414 (18)

U htotal = .001155 2 + .001 2 = .001528 (19)

After calculating the uncertainty for each of the heights the uncertainty for the pressure
was calculated using equation 20 and 21.
  ∂P 
2
 ∂Ptotal 
2

U Ptotal
  ∂(hair )
(
=   total U hair )  +  (Uhtotal )   (20)

   ∂(htotal )  

U Ps ,1 = (((995.7kg / m )(9.81m / s )(.001414 m) )

3 2 2
+ ( (995 .7kg / m 3 )(9.81m / s 2 )( .001528 m ) )
2
)
= 20 .3353 Pa (21)
This makes the final uncertainty for Ptotal 102015 .3 ± 20 .3353 Pa . This is a variation of
only .019% which is very small so the total pressure can be considered a measurement
that was taken with low uncertainty.

Conclusion
Any time that fluid flow is occurring it is important to know the boundary layer
around surfaces that it comes into contact with. This experiment shows both an
experimental and a theoretical way to determine the boundary layer and the shear stress
on a flat plate. The experimental way to obtain the shear stress on a plate under turbulent
flow is useful because there is no theoretical equation to solve for it. This knowledge
could be important for the design of something like an airplane wing where the shear
stress needs to be know but in many cases it will be under turbulent flow. The techniques
used to measure the boundary layer thickness and shear stress in this lab could be a
valuable design tool.
References

1.) Anderson, John (1992). Fundamentals of Aerodynamics (2nd edition ed.). Toronto:
S.S.CHAND. pp. 711–714.

2.) Munson, Bruce, Donald Young, Theodore Okiishi, and Wade Huebsch.
Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics. 6th. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2009.
Print.

3.) Zhu, L. 2009. Class notes. “Uncertainty.” ENME 432L. UMBC. Baltimore, MD