p p 15 W.
Rieman, "The Value of the Hagenbach Factor in the De-
Table 2 Kinetic energy correction factor h defined by ^ ^ = 64Z* + 2/i
pv/x
Calculated
This investigation 1.090
Siegel (cubic profile) [8] 1.040
Siegel (quartic profile) [8] 1.053
Schiller [7]
Boussinesq [4]
1.080
1.120
Langhaar [2] 1.140
Atkinson and Goldstein [3] 1.205
Experimental
Schiller (7] (1.058-1.225) 1.159
Knibbs [15] 1.135
Rieman [15] (1.110-1.134) 1.124
useful in viscometry. Experimental and theoretical values of this
factor are given in Table 2. Differences between theory and
experiment may again be attributable to the assumption of a
uniform velocity at the tube inlet.
4 Conclusion
a Equations (20), (23), and (24) are the best over-all descrip-
tion of velocity profiles within the inlet section of a tube cur-
rently available.
f> In this problem, it is more important to account for viscous
dissipation within the boundary layer by applying the mechanical
energy balance to all of the fluid in the tube than it is to employ
a more elaborate description of the velocity profiles.
Acknowledgment
One of the authors ( W . D . C . ) wishes to thank the D o w Chemical
Company for financial assistance during the course of this
work.
Reterences
1 W. D. Campbell, MS thesis, Northwestern University, 1960.
2 H. L. Langhaar, "Steady Flow in the Transition Length of a
Straight Tube," Journal of Applied Mechanics, vol. 9, TRANS. ASME,
vol. 64,1942, pp. A-55-58.
3 S. Goldstein, "Modern Developments in Fluid Dynamics,"
vol. 1, Clarendon Press, Oxford, England, 1938.
4 J. Boussinesq, "Sur la maniere dont les vitesses, dans un tube
cylindrique de section circulaire, evase a son entrSe, se distribuent
depuis cette entree jusqu'aux endroits ou se trouve etabli un regime
uniforme," Comptes Rendus, vol. 113, 1891, pp. 9-15, 49-51.
5 T. Tatsumi, "Stability of the Laminar Inlet-Flow Prior to the
Formation of Poiseuille Regime," Journal of the Physical Society of
Japan, vol. 7, No. 5, Sept.-Oct. 1952, pp. 489-495.
6 R. B. Bird, "The Equations of Change and the Macroscopic
Mass, Momentum, and Energy Balances," Chemical Engineering
Science, vol. 6, 1957, pp. 123-131.
7 L. Schiller, "Die Entwichklung der laminaren Geschwindig-
keitsverteilung und ihre Bedeutung fUr Zahigkeitmessungen."
Zeitschrift filr Angewandle Mathematik und Mechanik, vol. 2, 1922,
pp. 96-106.
8 R. Siegel, "The Effect of Heating on Boundary Layer Transi-
tion for Liquid Flow in a Tube," DSc thesis, Massachusetts Insti-
tute of Technology, 1953.
9 A. H. Shapiro, R. Siegel, and S. J.Kline, "Friction Factor in the
Laminar Entry Region of a Round Tube," Proceedings of the Second
U. S. National Congress of Applied Mechanics, ASME, 1954, pp.
733-741.
10 B. Thwaites, "Approximate Calculation of the Laminar
Boundary Layer," The Aeronautical Quarterly, vol. 1, 1949, pp. 245-
280.
11 L. Prandtl and O. G. Tietjens, "Applied Hydro- and Aero-
mechanics," McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, N. Y.,
1934, p. 27.
12 E. Reshotko, "Experimental Study of the Stability of Pipe
Flow, I. Establishment of an Axially Symmetric Poiseuille Flow,"
Progress Report No. 20-364, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California
Institute of Technology, Oct. 24, 1958.
13 W. Pfenninger, "Further Laminar Flow Experiments in a 40-
Foot-Long 2-Inch-Diameter Tube," Report No. AM-133, Northrop
Aircraft, Hawthorne, California, Feb. 20, 1951. See also Reports
AM-128 and AM-147.
14 F. Kreith and R. Eisenstadt, "Pressure Drop and Flow Charac-
teristics of Short Capillary Tubes at Low Reynolds Numbers," TRANS.
ASME, vol. 79, 1957, pp. 1070-1078.
Journal of Basic Engineering
Copyright © 1963 by ASME
termination of Viscosity by the Efflux Method," Journal of the
American Chemical Society, vol. 50, 1928, pp. 46-55.
DISCUSSION
W. Pfenninger 3
During 1950 and 1951 the discusser conducted laminar flow
experiments in the inlet length of a tube at high Reynolds num-
bers at low Mach numbers. The results of this investigation were
published in references [16 and 17]. The theoretical results of
Campbell and Slattery agree closely with the experimental results
of references [16 and 17]. Further transition experiments in the
inlet length of laminar flow tubes were run at higher speeds (ref-
erences [17 and 18] by W . A. Meyer and this discusser). Com-
pressibility effects caused a slightly stronger flow acceleration, as
compared with the results of references [16 and 17], which were
obtained at lower flow speeds in the tube. Full length laminar
flow was observed during these experiments up to 53 X 106 length
Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/fluidsengineering/article-pdf/85/1/45/5763513/45_1.pdf by guest on 13 February 2024
Reynolds number.
Additional References
16 W. Pfenninger, "Experiments With Laminar Flow in the Inlet
Length of a Tube at High Reynolds Numbers With and Without
Boundary-Layer Suction," Northrop Corporation, Norair Division
Report, May, 1952.
17 G. V. Lachmann (editor), "Boundary Layer and Flow Con-
trol," vol. 2, Pergamon Press, Inc., New York, N. Y., 1961, pp. 970-
980.
18 W. Pfenninger and W. A. Meyer, "Transition Experiments in
the Inlet Length of a 1-Inch Tube at High Reynolds Numbers and
Low Turbulence," Northrop Corporation, Norair Division Report
BLC-24, November, 1953.
Ascher H. Shapiro4
The main point of interest in this paper, in the opinion of the
discusser, is not so much the calculation of the entry flow, which
had already been quite well established, but rather the use of a
new idea in boundary-layer theory. Since the integral methods of
boundary-layer calculation have been so well explored, the authors
are to be congratulated for conceiving the idea that it may be
better to calculate the pressure gradient by an energy integral over
the whole flow (including the inviscid portion) than by an appli-
cation of Euler's equation of inviscid motion to the flow outside
of the boundary layer.
Nikuradse's results are, for many reasons indeed, open to ques-
tion. Hence it would be risky to draw conclusions from Figs. 1,
2, and 3. Regarding Fig. 5, it seems that the results of reference
[9] remain the most accurate for the range of experimental values
reported (10~ 6 < z < 10 ~ 3 ). The authors' curve shows some
peculiar wiggles (could there possibly be numerical errors in calcu-
lation?) as well as observable but small deviations from the
measured results.
For the future, perhaps the most important question is whether
this means of calculating the streamwise pressure gradient can be
adapted to external flows, and whether there is any advantage in
so doing. Here the writer does not have in mind the energy inte-
gral of the boundary layer, but an energy integral which includes
at least some of the external flow. Would the authors please
comment on this question.
James H. Whitelaw 5
The authors are to be complimented on their improvement to
the Schiller method of defining the flow in the entrance to a round
tube. This improved treatment provides a solution which is
* Director, Boundary Layer Research, Northrop Corporation,
Hawthorne, Calif.
* Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Cambridge, Mass. Mem. ASME.
6 Research Associate, Division of Engineering, Brown University,
Providence, R. I.
MARCH 1963 / 4 5
 Fig. 7 Comparison of theoretical and experimental
values of pressure drop

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/fluidsengineering/article-pdf/85/1/45/5763513/45_1.pdf by guest on 13 February 2024

more than satisfactory for most practical applications, although v. dv,/dz,
it should be remembered that the original assumption of a
velocity profile composed of a straight line and a parabola exists. from the authors' equation (1) is assumed to be
One of the few applications where a more precise formula is re- V dv./dz
quired is transpiration viscometry and in this, although the cal-
culated values of the "kinetic energy correction factor"—Table 2 This hypothesis linearizes the equation of motion and leads to an
in the paper—are useful, the boundary conditions employed in exponential solution of the form
the various theoretical evaluations are seldom fulfilled in practice.
The characteristics of the individual capillary viscometer and, in
particular, the shape of the capillary ends may cause the value of v,(z, r) = 2
2(1 - rVK )

the kinetic energy correction factor to be outside the limits sug-

gested by the various theoretical investigations. The experi-
mental values obtained b y Schiller indicate the scatter which may
be obtained from one bell-mouthed tube to another while the
-'S'^t'-W]-*
careful experiments of J. F. Swindells, J. R . Coe, and T . B . R 1 » -WMS-|
Godfrey 8 show mean values ranging from 1.12 to 1.17 for bp/dz = -SpV/R2 1 + I V e "VR'
various tubes whose ends had been ground off at right angles to L 2 m-1 J
the axis of flow.
Some years ago, at the University of Glasgow, the writer
together with L. D . Savage made some measurements of the pres- where ym is a root of the algebraic equation Ji{y) = 0 and
sure drop across a series of glass tubes from a plenum chamber to R y/PmpV/p. = iym.
atmosphere. These measurements were not of sufficient accuracy The results obtained from this solution have been compared
to yield reliable values of the kinetic energy correction factor but with those of other authors in a graph available [7]. A study of
when graphed as shown in Fig. 7—the pressure drop being that this graph shows that the trends of vJV with respect to Z* are
from the capillary entrance to exit and not that from the plenum similar to those in the present paper for values of r / R > 0. H o w -
chamber to exit—it may be seen that in the range 2 X 10~ J < ever, the center-line velocities appear to be slightfy greater than
z those displayed in the present paper.
2R2Vp/n ^ va^ues roughly between the suggested

curve of Atkinson and Goldstein and that of Langhaar. The

eight glass tubes used in these experiments had their ends ground
at right angles to the axis of flow. I t would be of interest if the
authors were to indicate their values of pressure drop with respect
to the figure which is more suitable for comparison purposes than
Fig. 5 given in the paper.
An alternative approach to the problem was brought to the
writer's attention by Prof. J. Kestin. This is presented b y N . A.
Slezkin' and is a solution of the usual equations in which the
term
• J. F. Swindells, J. R. Coe, and T. B. Godfrey, Journal of Research
of the National Bureau of Standards, vol. 48, no. 1, January, 1952, p. 1.
7 N. A. Slezkin, "Dynamics of Incompressible "Viscous Fluids,"
Gos. tech.-teor. izdat., Moscow, USSR, 1955, p. 357 (in Russian).
Authors' Closure
Professor Shapiro's suggestion that the streamwise pressure
gradient might be calculated by means of an energy integral
over the boundary layer and a portion of the external flow is in-
teresting. The obvious difficulty is deciding what portion of the
external flow to include in the energy balance. Such a decision is
complicated b y the fact that, while the pressure gradient normal
to the b o d y is negligible within the boundary layer, this may not
be true in the external flow.
As Dr. Whitelaw requested, the results of our computations
have been added to Fig. 7. Our results asymptotically approach
those of Schiller as z* goes to zero.

46 / MARCH 1963 Transactions of the AS M E