*I
‘\r
b
cr,
CD
I!
m
z
^{E}
CASE FILE COPY
NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS
TECHNICAL NOTE 3169
ON THE DRAG AND SHEDDING FREQUENCY OF
TWODIMENSIONAL BLUFF BODIES
By Anatol Roshko California Institute of Technology
Washington
July 1954
r
NATIONAL ADVISORY COlNLTTEE FOR AERONAUTICS
e
J
TECHNICAL NOTE 3169
ON THE DRAG AND
SHEDDING FREQUENCY OF
TWODIMENSIONAL
BLUFF BODIES
By Anatol Roshko
SUMMARY
A semiempirical study is made of the bluffbody problem.
Some experiments with interference elements in the wake close behind a cylinder demonstrate the need for considering that region in any complete theory.
Dimensional analysis of a simple model of the region leads to a universal Stromal number S* which is then experimentally determined
as a function of wake Reynolds nuniber This result, together with
R*.
freestreamline theory, allows the drag to be calculated from a measure
v ment of the shedding frequency and furnishes a useful correlation between different bluff cylinders.
By allowing for some annihilation of the vorticity in the free
I shear l/ayys, it is shown how to corribine the freestreamline theory with Karman's theory of the vortex street to obtain a solution dependent on only one experimental measurement.
INTRODUCTION
The problem of the drag of bluff bodies in incompressible flow is one of the oldest in fluid mechanics, but it remains one of the most important, for practical reasons as well as for its theoretical interest
The two major contributions toward/ altheoretical understanding are the wellknown ones of Kirchhoff and Karman. These attack two aspects of the problem that must be understood, namely, the potential flow in the vicinity of the cylinder and the wake farther downstream, but neither by itself can furnish a complete theory. Much of the work devoted to the problem through the years has been essentially the, elaboration and application of the theories of Kirchhoff and drman.
2
NACA TN 5169
It has become increasingly evident, however, that a complete solution will not be obtained until one is able to "join" the two parts of the problem and that this will require an understanding of the flow in the _{e}_{a}_{r}_{l}_{y} _{s}_{t}_{a}_{g}_{e}_{s} _{o}_{f} _{t}_{h}_{e} _{w}_{a}_{k}_{e}_{,} that is, the first few diameters downstream of the cylinder.
On the experimental side, there has also been a continued activity. It is surprising that the influence on theoretical developments has been rather small, for considerable useful information has been compiled, some as long ago as 20 or 50 years. Much of this is referred to in
chapters IX and XI11 of reference 1.
of the work of Fage and
Particular mention must be made
his coworkers (e.g., refs. 2, 3, and 4) who
made very useflil investigations of the flow near the cylinder and in
the early stages of the wake. The ideas of this report grew largely out of a study of their work.
_{T}_{h}_{e} interest at GALCIT in the flow past bluff bodies has been
connected not so much with the problem of the drag as with that of
turbulent wakes.
Many of the turbulent flows that are used for
experimental studies (e.g., behind grids) and almost all those that cause practical difficulties (e.g., buffeting) are produced in the wakes of bluff bodies. Much of the empiricism connected with these problems can be resolved only by a better understanding of how the wake is related to the body which produces it. This includes ques tions of wake scale, frequencies, energy, interference between wakes, and so forth. However, whatever the approach, one is led to consider the relation between the wake and the potential flow outside the wake and cylinder.
A short review of the theory of flow past bluff bodies is presented and some experiments are described which demonstrate how critically the whole problem depends on that part of the wake immediately behind the cylinder. In the remainder of the report the freestreamline theory of reference 5 is combined with some experimental results to obtain a much
needed correlation between bluff cylinders1 of different shapes.
furnishes at the same time some of the soughtafter relations between wake and cylinder.
This
I
4
b
The experiments were performed in the 20 by 20inch lowturbulence wind tunnel at GALCIT, under the sponsorship and with the financial assistance of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. Standard %he term "cylinder" is used throughout to denote a body whose crosssectional shape is the same at every section along the span. This is the socalled twodimensional body, which was the only kind for which measurements were made here. The term is applied to all crosssectional shapes, including the limiting case of a flat plate _{n}_{o}_{r}_{m}_{a}_{l} to the flow, in which case the crosssectional shape is simply a line.
NACA TN 3169
_{3}
hotwire equipment, manometry, and so forth were employed. The work is part of a broader program of turbulence research directed by Dr. H. W. Liepmann; the author is indebted to him and to other members of the GALCIT staff for many discussions.
b'
CD
cP
cPS
SYMBOLS
distance between outer edges of free shear layers
drag coefficient
pressure coefficient
basepressure coefficient
C distance *om back of cylinder to trailing edge of inter ference element
d cylinder diameter or breadth
d' distance between free streamlines
h width of vortex street
k basepressure parameter, U,/U,
or \Ilcpi
"r 
basepressure parameter, uncorrected for tunnel blockage 
2 
longitudinal vortex spacing 
n 
vortex shedding frequency 
PS 
base pressure 
R Reynolds number based on cylinder diameter,
Ud/v
RT
R*
Reynolds nurdber uncorrected for tunnel blockage
Reynolds number based on wake parameters,
Usd'/v
S cylinder Strouhal number, nd/U,
ST
S*
Strouhal number uncorrected for tunnel blockage
wake Strouhal number, nd'/U,
NACA TN 3169
5
the freestream pressure. It is known, however, that the pressure on the base, behind the separation points, is actually much lower, which
c. corresponds to a velocity on the free streamline which is higher than
the freestream value.
This lower base pressure accounts for the
_{h}_{i}_{g}_{h}_{e}_{r} _{d}_{r}_{a}_{g} _{a}_{c}_{t}_{u}_{a}_{l}_{l}_{y} _{o}_{b}_{s}_{e}_{r}_{v}_{e}_{d}_{.} Kirchhoff's theory has been applied, by a long line of successors, to many other cylinder shapes; and indeed it can be applied in principle to any shape whatever, the difficulty _{b}_{e}_{i}_{n}_{g} _{o}_{n}_{l}_{y} _{o}_{f} _{c}_{o}_{m}_{p}_{u}_{t}_{a}_{t}_{i}_{o}_{n}_{.} (In cases such as the circular cylinder,
where there is not a welldefined, fixed separation point, an additional
assumption must be made.)
of drag much lower than those observed, and always for the reason that the value assumed for the separation velocity is too low.
In all cases, however, the theory gives values
Kardn, in his famous theory of the vortex street, attacked the problem by way of another characteristic feature of flow past bluff bodies, that is, the phenomenon of periodic vortex shedding. The theory is incomplete in that it cannot by itself relate the vortex
street dimensions and velocities to the cylinder dimension and free
/
stream velocity.
come from elsewhere, usually from experiment.
Two additional relations are required, and these must
These two examples by Kirchhoff and _{d}_{&}
are, however, represent
ative of the two parts of the flow that will have to be considered in
any complete theory.
While each part  the potential field and the wake 
may be considered separately, the complete solution will only be found by
discovering how to join them.
obtain such a closed solution by joining the Kirchhoff solution to
K6rdn's vortex street.
good agreement with that for a flat plate set normal to the flow, but
it also gives the same value for any other cylinder shape, as pointed
out by Ka'rdn
tency in the theory in that the Kirchhoff flow, which is taken as one element in the synthesis, predicts a drag coefficient which is different _{(}_{l}_{o}_{w}_{e}_{r}_{)} _{f}_{r}_{o}_{m} _{t}_{h}_{e} _{f}_{i}_{n}_{a}_{l} _{r}_{e}_{s}_{u}_{l}_{t}_{.} _{I}_{n} _{s}_{h}_{o}_{r}_{t}_{,} the Kirchhoff flow is not a
suitable starting point for such solutions unless it is modified to allow more realistic base pressures.
Indeed, Heisenberg (ref. 6) attempted to
His solution gives a value for the drag in
in a footnote to the same paper. There is an inconsis
In reference 5 it was shown how such a modification may be made. Instead of restricting the separation velocity to the freestream
value U,, it is allowed to assume an arbitrary value
basepressure coefficient is then _{C}_{p}_{s} _{=} _{1} _{} _{k}_{2}_{.} For
reduces to the Kirchhoff case, but for agreement with experiment
must be greater than 1. This modified Kirchhoff theory will be referred to as the notchedhodograph theory, after the hodograph upon which it is based.
Us _{=} kUm. The k _{=} 1 this
k
6
NACA TN 3169
Another method by which the potential part of the flow might be "joined" to the wake is to use the momentumdiffusion theory which has been applied in calculations of base pressure on supersonic projectiles (refs. 7 and 8) . These calculations are made on the basis of a mixing theory, wherein the pressure deficiency on the base _{i}_{s} _{a}_{s}_{s}_{u}_{m}_{e}_{d} _{t}_{o} _{b}_{e} "supported" entirely by the diffusion of momentum across the shear layers. In fact, it appears inevitable that some such calculation will be neces sary before a complete theoretical formulation of the problem can be obtained. The mechanism of the wake immediately downstream of the cylinder is the main item in the coupling between wake and potential flow, _{a}_{n}_{d} _{i}_{t} will probably be essential to understand it. Unfortunately, the idea of simple momentum diffusion across the shear layers, which appears _{t}_{o} _{b}_{e} suitable for the supersonic flows, is not by itself sufficient for the incompressible flow past a bluff cylinder. The "coupling region" imme diately downstream of the body is also that in which the vortices are formed, and they are an essential part of the mechanism, _{a}_{s} _{w}_{i}_{l}_{l} _{b}_{e} _{s}_{h}_{o}_{w}_{n} in the following sections.
EFFECT OF VORTEX FORMATION
Figure 1 shows a pressure traverse made along the _{c}_{e}_{n}_{t}_{e}_{r} _{l}_{i}_{n}_{e} _{o}_{f} _{t}_{h}_{e} wake behind a flat plate set normal to the flow. The measurement is not simple to make because of the large transverse velocity fluctuations
associated with the vortex shedding.
center line of the wake experiences a nonstationary crossflow, fluctu
ating at the shedding frequency.
A static probe oriented along the
far as
the mean flow is
concerned,
As
the pressure is constant over the circumference of the cylindrical probe, since its dimensions are small compared with the flow field. Because of the crossflow, however, there is a pressure variation over the circumfer
ence, jhst as there is for a cylinder placed normal to a stream with
periodic velocity.
position of the orifice on the circumference of the probe. When the
orifice is at one of the stagnation points of the crossflow the pressure is the highest, and when it is at 90° from the stagnation point the pres sure is the lowest. The pressures measured with the orifice at these limiting positions are shown in figure 1. The correct pressure should
be somewhere between.
coefficient is zero at 30' in potential flow and at about 35' in real _{f}_{l}_{o}_{w}_{s}_{.} It was simply assumed that the latter is also the correct position
for the oscillating crossflow. The intermediate curve in figure _{1} _{i}_{s} the result with the orifice at 35O from the stagnation point; it is believed _{t}_{h}_{a}_{t} _{t}_{h}_{i}_{s} gives very nearly the correct value for the mean static pressure.
"herefore
the pressure measured varies with the
Now on a cylinder in steady crossflow the pressure
In any case,
what _{i}_{s}
important is the lowpressure
that
is,
region at about
the pressure on the base is not the
This measurement had already been made by
2 plate widths downstream;
lowest pressure in the wake.
NACA TN 3169
7
J
b
Schiller and Linke in 1933 (ref. 9), but does not seem to have been noted
since.
ated with a lowpressure
Its significance seems clear  that the low pressure is associ
region at the
center of the vortex which is
being formed. This low pressure must fluctmte, of course, as the vortices form alternately, and it is the mean effect which has been measured. It
_{s}_{e}_{e}_{m}_{s} likely then that a large part of the low pressure on the base of the flat plate is associated with the vortex pressure, that is, that the main mechanism for the base pressure is to be found not in the diffusion of momentum across the shear layers but in the dynamics of the vortices. In fact, the momentmdiffusion theory could predict only a monotonically increasing pressure from the base.
Now if
the vortex dynamics are indeed
important,
then interference
with their formtion should have a strong effect on the base pressure. This was easily investigated by placing a "splitter" plate along the ten
ter line of the wake. Figure 2 shows pressure distributions with and
without the splitter plate.
circular cylinder instead of the flat plate.)
(The results given in this figure are for _{a}
With the splitter plate
the periodic vortex formation is inhibited and the base pressure increases
considerably. It is still below freestream pressure, but whether this residual underpressure can be accounted for by the momentumdiffusion theory is not certain. It is possible that a kind of standing vortex is formed on each side, but this point was not investigated further. In any case, the momentumdiffusion theory _{i}_{s} indifferent to the omission or inclusion of a partition along the central streamline. It is clear that without the splitter plate the periodic formation of vortices _{i}_{s} an essential part of the basepressure mechanism.
Figure 3 shows how the splitter plate affects the pressure distribu
tion over the whole cylinder circumference.
in the
that in the wake.
It
shows that interference
_{a}_{s} well _{a}_{s}
"coupling region" changes the outer potential flow,
EFFECT OF INTERFERENCE ELEMENT ON RELATIONS BETWEEN
BASE PRESSURE AND SHEDDING FREQUENCY
In the experiment of figure 2 the chord of the splitter plate was
almost 5 diameters. One immediately asks how the interference changes
with changing chord.
Accordingly,
some measurements were made with a
splitter plate whose chord was about 1 diameter. This was found not to
inhibit the vortex formation at all, _{t}_{h}_{o}_{u}_{g}_{h} _{i}_{t} _{d}_{o}_{e}_{s} _{c}_{h}_{a}_{n}_{g}_{e} _{t}_{h}_{e} _{s}_{h}_{e}_{d}_{d}_{i}_{n}_{g}
frequency slightly. plate downstream,
The effect is to decrease the shedding frequency and to increase the base
pressure,
becomes a minimum, and the base pressure a maximum,
of the interference element is 3.85 diameters downstream of the cylinder
More interesting is the effect of moving this short
leaving a gap between it and the
lower part of
figure 4.
cylinder.
that is,
as
shown in the
The shedding frequency when the trailing edge
base. It is clear that such a minimum must be reached, for when the element is very far downstream of the cylinder its upstream influence should be negligible. What is remarkable is the abrupt jump that occurs
there, practically to the original value. Qualitatively, _{i}_{t} appears that close to the cylinder the element has _{a} streamlining effect; that is, it extends the shear layers and forces the vortices to form downstream of
I
its trailing edge.
_{u}_{p}_{s}_{t}_{r}_{e}_{a}_{m} _{s}_{i}_{d}_{e}_{,} in the normal position close to the cylinder, and the
element has only a slight effect.
tion where the flow must choose between one of the two configurations. _{I}_{t} _{i}_{s} _{o}_{b}_{s}_{e}_{r}_{v}_{e}_{d}_{,} in fact, that when the interference element _{i}_{s} at this critical position, the flow does jump, intermittently, from one configu
ration to the other, as shown by the double values measured there.
When it
is far downstream,
the vortices form on its
There must then be some critical posi
_{A}_{t}
drawn for
c/d = 1.13
_{t}_{h}_{e}_{r}_{e}
is a point that does not fall on the line
Cps.
This was thought to be an error, but
further checks and
readjustments indicated that it is real. This point corresponds to the case where the splitter plate was touching the back of the cylinder; that is, the gap was completely closed. However, the joint was by no means pressuretight. It seemed, rather, that some other kind of com munication through the qap becomes effective _{a}_{t} some finite gap width.
At present,
this has
not been thoroughly
investigated.
Experiments
such as these may lead to information useful for under
standing the mechanics of the vortex formation.
An initial step in this
c
direction has been made by investigating the relationship between the base pressure and the shedding frequency (see the following section).
BLUFFBODY
SIMILARITY
Although a complete theoretical solution seems _{r}_{e}_{m}_{o}_{t}_{e} _{a}_{t} _{p}_{r}_{e}_{s}_{e}_{n}_{t}_{,}
I
there
ent bluff bodies, on a semiempirical basis. _{S}_{u}_{c}_{h} _{a} _{c}_{o}_{r}_{r}_{e}_{l}_{a}_{t}_{i}_{o}_{n} _{m}_{u}_{s}_{t} _{b}_{e}
is
still the possibility of
finding a correlation between differ
based on,
are indeed the main features of the flow past bluff cylinders:
and must account for,
the following qualitative facts, which
(1) The "bluffness"
of a cylinder is
related to the width of
the
wake,
the bluffer body tends to diverge the flow more, and to have larger drag.
compared with the cylinder dimension.
_{I}_{t}
_{i}_{s} almost intuitive that to create a wider wake,
(2) The shedding frequency is related to the width of
the wake,
the
relation being roughly Strouhal numbers.
inverse,
so that the bluffer bodies have the lower
(3) For a given cylinder the shedding frequency
is
base pressure.
Generally,
an increase in base pressure
related to the is accompanied
NACA TN 3169
_{9}
by a decrease
in shedding frequency.
This
is well illustrated
in the
case of figure 4 with the interference element (although there an anoma
lous behavior is observed for C/d > 3.85).
a decrease in wake width corresponds to an increase in drag, which seems at variance with intuition. However, the decrease in width is associated with an increase in "wake velocities," the net effect being an increased wake energy corresponding to the increased drag.
Thus,
for a given cylinder
Figure
5 shows measurements
of
Strouhal number made on three differ
ent cylinder shapes. These were a circular cylinder, a goo wedge, and a "flat plate" normal to the flow. The shedding frequencies were measured
by a hotwire
cylinders used are given in table I. (For the circular cylinder, the
_{c}_{u}_{r}_{v}_{e} _{h}_{a}_{s} _{b}_{e}_{e}_{n} _{t}_{a}_{k}_{e}_{n} _{f}_{r}_{o}_{m} _{r}_{e}_{f}_{.} 10). At present, one is concerned only
is
distinctly different for the different cylinders, though approximately constant for each individual one. The figure shows that the circular cylinder, goo wedge, and flat plate are increasingly bluff, in that order.
with the higher Reynolds
anemometer placed
numbers,
in the wake.
The dimensions
of
the
_{S}
for which the Strouhal number
Figure 6 is
a plot
of basepressure
coefficient
_{C}_{p}_{s}
for the same
three cylinder shapes. The base pressure ps _{w}_{a}_{s} measured at static orifices on the backs of the cylinders. In the case of the circular
cylinder the measurement was made at about 130° from the stagnation point, which is in a region of constant pressure (cf. fig. 3) and is believed to be a more significant point for the base pressure than the one at 180°.
Figure 6 shows that the differences
cylinders are not so marked as are the shedding frequencies and that they cannot be ordered in terms of bluffness. Included in the figure are two cases with wake interference  a circular cylinder and a flat plate  for
which the
elements which were used are sketched in table I.
in base pressure
for the different
increase
in base pressure
is quite marked.
The interference
The results
of
figures 5 and 6 have been
corrected for tunnel block
age. 
in figure 6 is rather 
large, 
for the probable error 
in 

the 
The scatter calculation of 
Cps 
is inherently large; 
1percent accuracy in meas 

urement of pressure 
and velocity gives only about 5percent 
accuracy 

in 
Cps. 
Now it
is wellknown
that the wakes
of
different bluff
bodies
are
similar in structure.
of the cylinder, creating free shear layers which continue _{f}_{o}_{r} _{a} short distance downstream and then "roll up" into vortices, alternately on either side. The region where this occurs, which extends only _{a} few diameters downstream, was referred to in the section "Review of Theory of Flow Past Bluff Bodies" as the coupling region. Because of the similar ity in all bluffcylinder wakes, one would expect to find a parameter to
compare the wakes of different cylinders. The clue is in the shedding frequency, as may be demonstrated by a simple dimensional analysis.
In every case the flow separates on the two sides
10
NACA TN 3169
Consider two parallel. shear layers
(sketch 1) which may be
US
d'
imagined to
Sketch 1
have been formed by some bluff
the sign of
this
Strouhal number
cylinder.
The circular arrows indicate
the vorti.city.
The characteristic frequency associated with
_{U}_{s}_{/}_{d}_{'}
and one can define a wake
configuration
is proportional to
S*
= nd'/Us
where
Strouhal number
n
is the shed.ding frequency.
_{S}
by
It
is related to the usual cylinder
S
d'
=Ed
1
The wake Strouhal number S* is expected to be universal, that is, to be the same for all bluffcylinder wakes. Of course this idea is based on an idealized model in. which the shear layers are surfaces of discontinuity, whereas actually the condition of the free shear layers _{w}_{i}_{l}_{l} differ from one cylinder to another, depending on their histories up to the point of vortex formation. This may, however, be a secondary effect, and it is sufficient at first to assume that S* depends only on a wake Reynolds number
R* = Usd'/v
= Rk d'/d
NACA TN 5169
11
L.
b
The idea of such a similarity is essentially the same as that given by Fage and Johansen (ref. 3), but they omitted the characteristic wake
velocity Us. Their parameter is S' = nb'/Um, where b' is a wake
width measured between the outer edges of
a good correlation,
the shear layers.
They found
S'
0.26,
for several different
cylinder shapes,
in spite of
the fact that,
very nearly the same. number.
the omission of
_{a} wake velocity.
This seems to be due to
the wake velocities
for the cases of
good correlation,
Also, they did not
introduce a wake Reynolds
were
the wake similarity is studied on the basis of the
parameter S*(R*). The method, which is quite different from that of Fage and Johansen, depends essentially on the results of the notched
hodograph theory (referred to in the section "Review of Theory of Flow
Past Bluff Bodies").
at separation and on the initial part of the free streamline is Us = kU,
In what follows,
These results are briefly as follows:
The velocity
(sketch 2).
The base pressure
is the same as that at separation,
and the
T
d'
Sketch 2
basepressure coefficient is therefore
of k, the potential flow outside the wake is completely determined, and
so the drag coefficient
Cps
=
1 
k2.
k.
For a given value
The important
CD
is a function only of
result for the present consideration is that a wake width d' is defined. This also depends only on k. Figure 7, which has been computed from the
results of reference 5, shows how d'/d varies with k
cylinder shapes being considered. It gives the "measure of bluffness"
alluded to earlier; that is, the bluffer cylinders have the wider wakes
at a given value of
with increasing k (i.e., increasing drag).
for the three
k,
but
for a given cylinder the wake width decreases
The shedding frequencies and base pressures which had been measured
a
for figures 5 and 6 were used to compute
calculated
from the measured basepressure coefficient.
d'/d is found in figure 7. With these and measured values of S and R the corresponding values of S* and R* are easily calculated from
S*(R*)
for the various
is
cyl
k = 4
inders. The computation
is straightforward:
The corresponding value of
12
NACA TN 3169
_{e}_{q}_{u}_{a}_{t}_{i}_{o}_{n}_{s} 
_{(}_{1}_{)} _{a}_{n}_{d} 
_{(}_{2}_{)}_{.} 
The results 
are listed 
in 
table I and plotted 
in figure 
_{8}_{.} 
"4
It is necessary to draw attention to several points:
(1) The characteristic wake velocity,
k,
is not measured,
but
is
which in dimensionless
form is
This
simply
computed from the base pressure.
may be regarded as the essential step in the
and the outer potential flow.
coupling between the wake
(2) The wake width
(3) In computing
is not measured but
is obtained from the theory.
S*,
the shedding frequency and base pressure
4
should not be first corrected for tunnel blockage. That is, 
the wake 

parameters 
that are used must correspond to the wake that is actually 

observed. 
Blockage gives only a secondorder 
effect in this 
computation. 
The uncorrected
respectively.
parameters
are listed
in table
I
_{(}_{4}_{)}_{T}_{h}_{e} errors that
even though small individually
error of
_{h}_{e} made in measuring
(about 1 percent),
4 percent
in
S*.
as
ST,
RT,
and
and
k~,
contribute to a possible
_{(}_{3}_{)} _{A}_{t} _{R}_{*} _{<} _{8}_{,}_{0}_{0}_{0} there is a large discrepancy between the values for the wedge and for the circular cylinder. It is not clear whether this is real or due to experimental difficulties. The small wedge used to obtain these points did not have a proper basepressure orifice. Instead, a small tube with an open mouth was cemented to the back of the wedge, and it is not certain that this measures the correct base pressure. Otherwise, the similarity parameter S* does give a good correlation for a fairly wide range of Reynolds number. It is probable that it can be extended to higher Reynolds numbers, say another order of magnitude, up to the critical Reynolds number of the circular cylinder.
It will be noted that the similarity plot (fig. 8) includes the cases with wake interference. For these the base pressure and corresponding
wake velocity differ considerably from those without interference.
they fit fairly well into the similarity plot is taken as evidence for
the suitability of the parameter S*(R*) . Nevertheless, an examination of an individual case shows that there actually is a systematic variation
_{o}_{f}
That
S*.
In the upper part of figure 4 the data of the lower part have
been used to calculate S*, which is seen to vary systematically with the
position of the interference element.
section "Relations Between Base Pressure and Shedding Frequency" fit this curve either.)
(The "bad point" referred to in the
does not
.*
NACA TN
3169
_{1}_{3}
1
JOINING TRE FREE STREAMLINES AND VORTEX S’I!REXT
IC
To close the K&rdn
theory of
the vortex street,
two additional
relations
are needed to relate the velocities
and dimensions of
the
street to the freestream 
velocity and cylinder dimension. 
The notched 
hodograph theory may furnish these additional two relations, 
provided _{a} 
realistic way can be found to
join the results
of the two theories.
_{O}_{n}_{e} _{r}_{e}_{l}_{a}_{t}_{i}_{o}_{n} _{i}_{s} obtained by considering how circulation
is related to the vorticity
in the free shear layers.
in the vor The rate at
tices
which circulation flows past any plane section of
a shear layer is
where
(I
L2
u12
 u;! 2
CU dv
=
2 

U1 
and 
U2 
is the vorticity and
are the velocities
at the
edges of the shear layer; for the freestreamline case these are
Us
= kU,
and 0, respectively, and the rate of flow of circulation is k%,2/2.
_{O}_{n} _{t}_{h}_{e} _{o}_{t}_{h}_{e}_{r} _{h}_{a}_{n}_{d}_{,} the rate at which Circulation is carried downstream
where
is the shedding frequency. indicate that only a fraction
is found in the individual vortices farther downstream. They estimated
by the vortices
The experiments
is
nr,
I?
is the circulation per vortex and
of Fage and Johansen
n
(ref.
E of the vorticity
in the shear layers
E to be about 1/2. relation between the
carried downstream by the vortices.
It
is necessary to allow for this
in writing the
circulation produced at the cylinder and that
Thus
3)
or 

where 
u 
is the velocity of the vortices relative to the free stream 

and 
2 
is the spacing along a row. 
Finally, 
in dimensionless 
form, 
NACA TN 3169
15
_{t}_{h}_{a}_{t} _{t}_{h}_{e} centers of vorticity in the vortex street are the same distance
apart as 
in the free shear layers. 
This then gives the second relation, 
simply 
CD d/h
= CD
d/d'
To finL solutions,
the left
and righthand
of
k.
The intersections are the solutions.
sides are piotted as functions
The lefthand
side
CD(d/h)
gives a family of
another family in which the cylinder shape _{i}_{s} the parameter.
shows the result.
curves with
E
as parameter.
The righthand
side gives
Figure _{9}
The following points
should be noted:
(1) The family of
curves for different cylinders
is actually a single
curve (within the width of the line on fig.
9)
up to about
_{k}
_{=} _{1}_{.}_{5}_{.}
(2) There are two possible intersections for each value of _{E}_{.} 
_{T}_{h}_{e} 

upper 
intersections correspond to 
u/Um > 0.5 and the lower ones, 
to 

U/Um C 0.7. The latter are the observed values. This empirical fact 

determines the choice of u/Um above. sign for the square root in the equation for 

(3) There are no solutions for 
E 
greater than about 1/2. 

To choose the correct value of 
E, 
some reference to experiment 
is 
necessary; but the circumstance that there is only one curve for all the cylinders reduces the empirical aspect to _{a} minimum, for _{i}_{t} is necessary, in principle, to find E experimentally for only one cylinder shape.
Another way of
expressing this
is that the value of
k
is the same for
all cylinders having the same value of E. In fact, it is observed (fig. _{6}_{)} _{t}_{h}_{a}_{t} _{t}_{h}_{e} _{v}_{a}_{l}_{u}_{e}_{s} _{o}_{f} k, or of Cps, are approximately the same
interference in the for cylinders without
wake).
for the different cylinders (but not when there is
From that figure an average value of
k
wake interference is 1.4,
which gives the solution
CD(d/d')
= 0.96,
U/Um
= 0.18,
and
E
=
0.43.
The corresponding values of the drag coef
ficient are 1.10, 1.32 and 1.74, for the circular cylinder, 90° wedge,
and flat plate, respectively. These may be compared with experimental
values:
this range of Reynolds number, while for the goo wedge and flat plate it
is about 1.3 and 1.8, respectively, also varying somewhat but less than for the circular cylinder.
For the circular cylinder
CD
varies from about 0.9 to 1.2
in
16
NACA TN 3169
The shedding frequencies may also be terms,
S = nd/Um
calculated.
In dimensionless
where again use has been made of
assumption
The universal Strouhal number
the relation
h/2
n = (U,
 u)/Z
and the
d'
=
h.
The ratio
is the drdn spacing ratio of 0.281.
is then
s* = (l0.281
k
 k)
Using the
solution obtained above,
this gives
S*
= 0.164, and for the
cylinder Strouhal numbers the values 0.206, 0.167, and O.l27, respectively.
These may be compared with the experimental results of figure
5.
DISCUSSION
The similarity parameter S*(R*) , together with the notchedhodograph theory, reduces to one the number of parameters that must be found empiri
cally in order to have a complete
drag to be determined from a measurement of
solution.
Essentially,
it allows the
the shedding frequency.2
2To determine the drag for a given cylinder and Reynolds
number
_{R}_{,}
the procedure is as follows: On the S*(R*) plot a value of
picked off
be expected to be a little higher than
ber
S*
is
at a value
of
R*
which must be guessed,
R.
Then the
at first,
but which may
cylinder Strouhal num
The ratio
S
is
computed from the measured shedding frequency.
S/S* = k d/d' (eq. (1))essentially gives k from the plot of k d/d'
versus k (which has not been included here but may easily be obtained
from fig. 7). Once k has been determined, the value of
may be computed.
a new value of S* Is found, and the procedure
the one iteration is necessary, for S* varies quite slowly with R*.
Once k is determined, the drag is found from the plot of CD(k) in reference 5.
_{t}_{h}_{e}_{n}
R*
= Rk d'/d
If
it
does not
check the original assumed value,
is repeated.
No more than
given
_{(}_{I}
4
3v
h
NACA TN 3169
17
The range of Reynolds numbers for which the similarity is valid has not been established. At the upper end similarity will probably exist so
long as there is periodic
shedding, which for the circular cylinder is
_{u}_{p} _{t}_{o} _{R} _{=} _{1}_{0}_{5}_{.} At
the lower end it
is not certain whether the discrep
ancy of figure 8 is due only to the experimental difficulty mentioned in
? the section "BluffBody Similarity." More probably, _{i}_{t} _{i}_{s} insufficient
in that range to lump all the Reynolds number effects into the one param eter R*. An example of the details that may have to be considered is
the problem of transition in the free shear layers.
numbers the layers are turbulent almost from separation, but at lower
_{v}_{a}_{l}_{u}_{e}_{s} they remain laminar for some distance downstream.
transition may be expected to be different for different cylinders even
_{a}_{t} _{t}_{h}_{e} _{s}_{a}_{m}_{e}
pressure gradients, and _{s}_{o} forth.
At higher Reynolds
The point
of
R*,
since the shear layers will have experienced different
The present solution my be a suitable
starting point for a more detailed study of such effects.
The solution obtained by joining the freestreamline
flow to the
vortex street might also be regarded as a kind of similarity solution,
The Reynolds number
dependence does not appear explicitly.
on E, the fraction of the shearlayer vorticity that appears in indi vidual vortices. The interesting result _{i}_{s} _{t}_{h}_{a}_{t} for _{a} given _{E} the different cylinders have the same value of k, that is, of base pressure, their drag coefficients then being simply proportional to the wake widths and inversely proportional to the shedding frequencies.
depending on only a single experimental measurement.
Instead,
there
_{i}_{s}
_{a} dependence
In both cases the need for an additional emp'irical relation appears to be connected with the need for more understanding of the flow in the region of vortex formation. For this, the technique of wake inteference may prove to be useful.
The results obtained may be applied to cylinder shapes other than the three that were considered so long as they are of comparable
"bluffness."
For instance,
they probably cannot be applied directly to
bodies of small percentage thickness, such as a thin wedge, for which
the history of the boundarylayer development is quite different from that on bluffer cylinders.
California Institute of Technology,
Pasadena,
Calif.,
August 13, 1953.
C
I)
TABLE I
CALCULATED AND MEASURED FLOW PARAMETERS FOR TEST CYLINDERS
~
~
Cylinder and symbol (as plotted in
pigs. 4, 5, 6, and 8)
A
B
0
8
D
0
0
d=2.22c
E
UaD 0
d=0.638
ST
%kT

d'
d


S*
R*
3.144C 8,030 1.48: 1.633 ).15919,50C
.1411
,142f
.1445
.1441
.1442 L7,900 1.44: 1.710 .17144,2OC
.141C
.14gC
.142C
.144C
.14K 6,320 1.45(
.142C 6,610 1.42; 1.742
.142C 7,950 1.45t 1.682
,143C
.1425
.141e
.1407
.1401
.1401
.141C 9,630 1.441 .140t! 0,630
1.46;
1.700
.16617,40C
1.46: ~.678 .16314,40C
.16419,50C
.16121,70c
.165ii,80c
.168 9,50C
.16419,50c
.17416,50c
L.700 .16615,60c
L1,OW
~2,130
1.48t 1.625
.15426,60c
1.46: 1.674 .16229,70C
.I6733,50C
~3,640 1.46( 1.680
L5,950 1.451 1.682 .16639,loC
3,220
1.42; 1.742
173 8703C
3,900
1.45( 1.700
175 9,61C
1.747 .17410,44C
4,190 1.42t
5,670 1.47~ 1.659
.162 13,800~
3,850 1.45t 1.700 4,790 1.45: 1.690
5,860
7,060 1.44; 1.706
7,900 1.45:
8,860
L.675
~.721
.I6923,gOC
.140?
1,110
1.44E L 705
.16627,40C
.2060
1.36E
.2065
.2067 9,920 1.385
.2041 .1,650
5,850
7,150
.1% 9,400
.i7411,250
.16815,500
.16418,200
1.40C L.116 .16020,600
1.397
1.334
L.206
L.151
t.12a
L.120
L. 114
L.093
t .096
.2010
.2015
.j,200
.4,200 1.401
1.421
.16022,200
.i5426,700
.15625,800
.2004 7,130
.2020
5,220 1.42C
.2100
.2110
.2097 1,078
885 1.395
956
1.3&
1.35~
2097 1,270 1.325
L.120
t.148
L.179
215
.169 1,380
.176 1,510
.18j 1,720
.i92 2,050
.2124
1,510
1.342 t.190 .188 2,420
1.322
1.311
1.322
i.230
t.250
t.230
193 2,770
_{}_{1}_{9}_{7} 3,180
194 3,500
1.322 ~.230
1* 334
t.205
.196 4,800
.18a 5,250
.195 6,060
1.W
L .I95
1.33E
L.2O0
2075 1,700
.2065 1,935
2,145
2,950
.2103
.2090 3,250
.2091 3,675 1.33~ t.243
.2090 3,950
.2081
.2050
.2088
4,330
4,890 1.34C .195


&No basepressure measurements made.
 
 
S
R
k
  
cPS

).135
.I33
.I33
.136
135
.135
.I33
.140
.I33
7,53c 1391 0.94
0,32c
2,EQC
.6,80c
.95
.1,40C 1.37; .68
.88
4,536~ 1.36E .87
1* 35f
3,02C
3,6& 1.36~ .85 3,93c 1.34C .80
1.396
1 37C
1335
.a4
.ea
*
135
.132
5,32c
5,93c
1.3&
.go
1.36~ .85
*
133
133
6,20c
7,45c
.I37 3,69c
.136
,136 5,610
.135 6,76c
.134
1.335
.eo
.93
.g1
.go
e92
1.36t .88
1.392
.94
.95
1.40c
1* 391
1.38:
4,59c
7,570 1* 39C
1.3&
1.38:
.93
1.40C .96
* 135 8,500 .I35 9,22C
0,200
0,60c
135
135
*
.202
.203
.205
.200
197
.198
197
.71
7,000
.85
.88
1,400 1* 37c 2,900 1* 372
3,900 1.375
6,800 1.394 .94
.89
1* 392 .94
9,720
1.360
5,730
1309
1.34c
.80
.88
.198 4,900
.209
.210
.209
.209 1,265 1.324
1,070 L.345
880
950
L 390
1.375
.93
.89
.81
.75
.212
1,500 L.337 .79
.74
1,930 1.306
.74
2,940 L.317 .74
3,240 L. 334 3,660 1.325
1. 335
4,310 L. 333
.78
3,930
.78
.78
L.317
2,135
.207 1,690 1 317
.206
.208
.210
.208
.20a
.208
.207
.204 4,870
.71
.76
.78
1.335

NACA TN 3169
21
t
_{2}_{2}
W
a
W
I
 I
J
a
a
I
3
0
X
I 
3
0
NACA TN 3169
_{?}
'.
NACA TN 3169
Q
3
0
Q.
0
t
0
0
_{2}_{3}
_{2}_{4}
NACA 'I"
5169
.I 8
S*
.I 6
.I 4
.22
.20
S
.I 8
.I6
0
. 2
CPS
. 4
.I4 
.6 
.I 2 
. 8 
.I 0 
 1.0 
C
4
c/d
5
6
7
Figure 4. Wake interference.
,4v
_{2}_{6}
NACA TN 3169
a
771"
^{}^{0}
a0
0
cu
*
5v
8
NACA TN 3169
3.5
3.c
d
COX
2.5
d
CDji
2.0
I .s
I .o
.5
0 I,
NACALangley
 1154
 1000
k
Figure 9. Wake solutions.
Muito mais do que documentos
Descubra tudo o que o Scribd tem a oferecer, incluindo livros e audiolivros de grandes editoras.
Cancele quando quiser.