http://moffatt.

tc

LARGE SCALE MOTIONS I N A TURBULENT BOUNDARY IAYER; WAVES VERSUS EDDIES

by H. K. M o f f a t t

Abstract The dynamics of those f l u c t u a t i n g motions i n a turbulent boundary l q e r which have a s c a l e comparable with the scale of the mean flow i s considered. Motions on t h i s s c a l e , ' l a r g e eddies; can a r i s e through i n t e r a c t i o n s o f Fourier components of the v e l o c i t y f i e l d having a much smaller s c a l e ,
The l a r g e eddies

a r e convected and d i s t o r t e d by t h e mean f l o w and t h q l o s e energy t o small s c a l e turbulence by a process t h a t may ( f o r w a n t of b e t t e r ) be represented by an eddy viscosity, The equilibrium of these processes determines ( i n p r i n c i p l e ) the s t a t i s t i c a l s t r u c t u r e o f t h e , l a r g e eddies.

Two methods of analysis a r e

considered, the first o f which highlights the wave-nature of possible modes of motion, and the second of which places the emphasis on the d i s t o r t i o n and development of anisotropy i n c e r t a i n other modes of motion. The methods a r e t o some e x t e n t complementary, but i t i s argued t h a t the second method i s physically more appropriate i n t r e a t i n g disturbances t h a t a r e l o c a l i s e d i n the y d i r e c t i o n . Some of the f e a t u r e s of the c o r r e l a t i o n curves obtained by Grant (1958) a r e i n t e r p r e t e d i n terms of i n i t i a l l y i s o t r o p i c turbulence t h a t h a s been subjected t o a uniform mean shear. t h a t m e r i t s f u r t h e r study. The s h e a r induces an anisotropy t h a t admits comparison with experiment, and the indications a r e t h a t t h i s i s an approach

495

MOFFATT: WAVES VS- EDDIES

1.

Introduction
A great variety of experimental r e s u l t s aze now a v a i l a b l e concerning the

s t a t i s t i c a l s t r u c t u r e of the v e l o c i t y fluctuations boundary l a y e r , zero time delay),

~ ( 2 t ) i n a turbulent ,

For example, the two-point normalised c o r r e l a t i o n tensor ( a t

has been plotted by Grant (1958) f o r

i = j =

I, 2, 3,
1

and f o r separations

i n the three p r i n c i p a l d i r e c t i o n s , and by T r i t t o n (1967), p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r Space-time c o r r e l a t i o n s f o r

i = j =

i j = 12, 21.

have been extensively Several attempts have

studied by Favre, Gaviglio and Dumas (1957, 1958).

been made t o explain t h e curves i n terms of the dominance of p a r t i c u l a r s t r u c t u r e s at various depths i n the boundary l a g e r (see p a r t i c u l a r l y Townsend

1956), but as y e t no coherent theory i s available t o explain why any one

s t r u c t u r e i s i n t r i n s i c a l l y more l i k e l y t o appear than any others. Some of the curves obtained by Grant a r e reproduced i n f i g u r e l(a) and (b). I n ( a ) , the fixed probe i s i n the outer p a r t of the boundary l a y e r ( a t
y/$- = 0.66, the intermittency f a c t o r i s approximately 0.9), while i n ( b ) i t i s well within the constant s t r e s s region. The curves i n (a) bear some

q u a l i t a t i v e resemblance t o corresponding c o r r e l a t i o n curves f o r i s o t r o p i c turbulence [Batcbelor 1953, f i g u r e 3.23 i n t h a t the three curves

RI+, 0 , o>, R22(0, r , 0) and 0, r) a r e everywhere p o s i t i v e , and the other s i x a l l go negative f o r l a r g e r ( a requirement of mass conservation i n i s o t r o p i c turbulence). I n other respects however, the curves a r e i n d i c a t i v e of pronounced anisotropy. Notice ( i ) the large magnitude of Rlj(r, 0 , 0 ) f o r
large

33(0,

r compared with R (0, r , 0) and R ( 0 , 0, r ) , ( T r i t t o n (1967) h a s 22 33 extended the measurements of R (r, 0, 0) out t o r/& = 2.5, and finds 11 . t h a t Rll(r, 0 , 0) i s s t i l l about 01 at t h i s l a r g e s e p a r a t i o 4 ( i i ) t h e long R (0, r , 0) - curves t h a t would 33 be i d e n t i c a l i n i s o t r o p i c turbulence, (iii) the contracted s c a l e of q O , O , r ) ( ) r e l a t i v e t o ~ ~ ~ r , 00. ,
t a i l of

33

( r , 0, 0) compared with t h a t of

The curves i n (b) do not even bear a q u a l i t a t i v e resemblance t o the curves of i s o t r o p i c turbulence.

33

(0, 0, r ) now goes negative f o r

a, /.

R1,(O, r, 0 ) , R22(r, 0, 0), The most noticeable s i n g l e feature of the curves i s the very f o r all r pronounced tail on q l ( r , 0 , 0). The rapid f a l l - o f f of R22(0, 0 , r) i s a l s o

R22(0, 0, r ) and R33(r, 0 , 0)

0.3; and remain p o s i t i v e

>

496

MOFFATT: WAVES VS- EDDIES remarkable.

I t i s possible t o i n f e r from these curves c o r r e l a t i o n length s c a l e s f o r

the turbulence, which may be i n t e r p r e t e d as scales ( i n the three p r i n c i p a l d i r e c t i o n s ) of the energy containing eddies of the turbulence. I f w define e

then, from inspection of the curves, very approximately, i n the outer layer,

and i n the constant s t r e s s l a y e r ,

The estimates of

lX

a r e i f anything too s m a l l , due t o the uncertainty of

contributions from large

The simplest measures of the degree of anisotropy

of t h e turbulence me the s c a l e r a t i o s lx/ly7 ) t o values of order values of order ( from

'3

3 ,$

t o about

to .

( s,$

and these increase from

as

y/&,

decreases

The existence of motions elongated i n the x-direction has been shown by

+ The f i l m by Kline (1964) and the photographs of n i n e e t a1 (1967) y = 1.25. provide s t r i k i n g v i s u a l evidence of the growing importance of motions having
l i t t l e v a r i a t i o n i n the x-direction as the w a l l i s approached. The term ' l a r g e eddies' (Townsend 1956) i s usually used t o denote those motions having a scale comparable with the s c a l e of the mean v e l o c i t y p r o f i l e . I n the case of the turbulent wake, the l a r g e eddies a r e reasonably d i s t i n c t ( i n s c a l e ) from the energy containing eddies, but i n t h e case of the boundary l a y e r the d i s t i n c t i o n i s r e a l l y too f i n e t o be meaningful. Townsend has estimated t h a t about 20 per cent of the t o t a l turbulent energy i s contained i n motions having a s c a l e ( i n t h e y and z d i r e c t i o n s ) g r e a t e r than 0.4
1

Bakewell (f966) t o extend r i g h t down i n t o the viscous sublayer as far as

8,

; the

c o r r e l a t i o n s lengths would suggest t h a t about 50 percent of the turbulent energy i s contained i n motions having a scale about 0.1

(lye lz2)Z g r e a t e r than +

. 6

; and there i s no d i s c e r n i b l e gap i n t h e spectrum between l a r g e

eddies ( s c a l e

>

0.4

8, )

and energy containing eddies ( s c a l e , say s 0.1 o r

497

MOFFATT: WAVES VSe EDDIES

I n these circumstances, i t might be thought t h a t aay attempt t o decompose the turbulence i n t o ' l a r g e eddies' turbulence

dx,t )
c

~ ( x t) ,

on the one hand and 'small-scale

The great

on the other must be doomed at the outset.

merit of such a decomposition, if i t i s possible, i s t h a t since i n a sense the large eddies a r e weak r e l a t i v e t o the mean flow (though by no means i n f i n i t e s i m a l ) i t should be legitimate t o obtain equations t h a t a r e l i n e a r i n

V the non-linear turbulent effects being conveniently summarised i n t h e CI small-scale turbulence U . The r o l e of the small-scale turbulence i s two-fold;
f i r s t l y , interactions of Fourier components of wave-numbers (satisfying
t h a t , say,

,k, a,

,/ia > / sol >

k -2 continuously generate new Fourier companents

(lcl

of the velocity f i e l d with wave-vectors

I&, - k, /go = o(/ 1

2 k2) ; and i f i t s o happens then w have a source o f energy f o r large e

eddy motion.

O the other hand, there i s a t r a n s f e r of energy back from t h e n

a r e quite d i s t i n c t , t h i s e f f e c t m a y reasonably be

large eddies t o the small eddies, and if i t i s assumed (unjustifiably!) t h a t

the s c a l e s of ,Y and

The picture then i s t h a t large represented by an eddy viscosity % ( y ) eddies are i n i t i a t e d by random i n t e r a c t i o n s of neasly equal Fourier components
o f the velocity f i e l d , d i s t o r t e d by i n t e r a c t i o n with the mean flow, and

attenuated by something l i k e an eddy v i s c o s i t y mechanism.

The equilibrium of

these processes w i l l determine a steady s t a t i s t i c a l s t r u c t u r e . The hope f o r such a description of l a r g e eddy dynamics l i e s t o some extent i n t h e q u a l i t a t i v e nature of the c o r r e l a t i o n curves of f i g u r e 1. There can be l i t t l e doubt t h a t t h e anisotropy i s due t o the p e r s i s t e n t e f f e c t of the mean shear, and the obvious thing t o do i s t o see what happens t o i s o t r o p i c turbulence when it is sheared, and when the non-linear self-modulation of t h e velocity f i e l d i s represented by an eddy viscosity. response of turbulence
$0

A calculation of the

uniform shear for

( a y , 0, 0) neglecting viscous and non-

l i n e a r e f f e c t s (Moffatt 1965) shows t h a t the dominant contribution t o the turbulent energy ultimately (i.e.

at

>>

I ) comes from those Fourier

components whose wave vectors are neazly i n t h e y t r a t e d i n the x-component of velocity.

z plane, i.e.

from eddies

with negligible v a r i a t i o n i n the x-direction; moreover t h i s energy i s concenI f v i s c o s i t y i s included i n t h i s calculation (and t h i s may include t h e eddy v i s c o s i t y of small s c a l e turbulence) then the turbulence ultimately decays (a r e s u l t $ recorded by Pearson 1 9 5 9 ) ;
if the Reynolds number

R based on a t and on the i n i t i a l length s c a l e of the turbulence i s large however, then a high degree of anisotropy develops before
A stationasy random i s o t r o p i c driving force generates a

the ultimate decagr.

s t a t i o w y random, but anisotropic, turbulent velocity f i e l d ; the greater t h e .

498

MOFFATT: WAVES VSa EDDIES

value of

the g r e a t e r the degree of anisotropy.

The hope i s t h a t f o r

s u i t a b l e choice of

, the

c o r r e l a t i o n tensor o f the sheared turbulence w i l l

compare favourably w i t h the measured c o r r e l a t i o n tensor a t a given value of i n t h e boundary layer. communication) suggest t h a t t h i s hope i s well-founded.

y/&,
(1470)> 1 3 1

Preliminary numerical calculations (Townsend, p r i v a t e

L $ . f h d &I&, hl c

The above type of approach puts the emphasis on the change of s t r u c t u r e of a disturbance as i t i s sheared by the mean flow.
A n a l t e r n a t i v e , and t o some

extent, complementary approach, which likewise involves a l i n e a r i s e d treatment

o f the v e l o c i t y f l u c t u a t i o n s , has been developed by Landahl (1967) and ( i n the

context of the sublayer) by Schubert and Corcos (1967). I n Landahlls theory, no d i s t i n c t i o n i s made between large s c a l e and small s c a l e turbulence, but the d i s t i n c t i o n i s t o some extent i m p l i c i t i n t h a t the non-linear terms i n the equation of motion are t r e a t e d as f o r c i n g terms, independent of the response. I n t h e theory of Schubert and Corcos, the non-linear terms are neglected, with slender j u s t i f i c a t i o n , and the velocity f l u c t u a t i o n s are driven by t h e pressure f i e l d which i s conceived as being imposed a t the outer edge of the sublayer. Both t h e o r i e s give r i s e t o an Orr-Sommerfeld equation involving the mean p r o f i l e

U (y)

and a f o r c i n g term,

The f r e e modes of the equation a r e a l l damped waves,

and a s t a t i o n a r y random forcing term therefore again gives r i s e t o a s t a t i o n a r y random response. f o r which
lJlz

A notable feature of the numerical r e s u l t s of Schubert and

Corcos i s the marked anisotropy of the response; f l u c k a t i o n s i n the sublayer

i s l a r g e a r e more e a s i l y excited than those f o r which

lx/lz

is

0(1).
The development of an a r b i t r a r y l o c a l i s e d disturbance on a s c a l e of s a y

$8,

, and

imbedded i n the outer l a y e r ( s a y !f/

&. %

fr),

m a y be followed by two
Method I

methods which should give equivalent r e s u l t s i f suitably i n t e r p r e t e d ,

i s t o t r e a t the disturbance a s a s m of eigenfunctions of the Orr-Sommerfeld u

equation, i n t h e s p i r i t of Landahl (1967), the c o e f f i c i e n t s i n the sum being determined by t h e i n i t i a l s t r u c t u r e of the disturbance. emphasis on those aspects of t h e disturbance which do e s t i n g t h a t a wavy s t r u c t u r e m a y ultimately emerge. scale

This approach puts t h e

change w i t h time; and

not

the eigenfunction with the weakest damping r a t e w i l l ultimately dominate suggMethod I1 i s t o t r e a t the mean shear as l o c a l l y uniform (an approximation t h a t of course improves as the

of t h e disturbance decreases) and t o follow the d i s t o r t i o n of the 1 Y disturbance i n the manner adopted by Moffatt (1965). This method puts the
emphasis on the changing s t r u c t u r e of the disturbance, and t h e r e i s no suggestion of a wavy s t r u c t u r e developing a t any stage.

I n order t o i l l u s t r a t e the merits and l i m i t a t i o n s of the two methods, a

499

MOFFATT: WAVES VSo EDDIES

p a r t i c u l a r l y simple example w i l l be worked out ( i n s e c t i o n (and the r e s u l t s shown t o be the same). a l l y more illuminating than method I .

3 ) by both methods

The calculation suggests t h a t , under However, method I1 h a s c e r t a i n severe be used; but the inference i s

circumstances where method I1 i s applicable, it gives r e s u l t s which a r e physicl i m i t a t i o n s ( f o r example, i t emnot cope with the e f f e c t s of curvature of the mean velocity p r o f i l e ) , and then method I caution.

t h a t r e s u l t s derived by t h i s method must then be i n t e r p r e t e d w i t h extreme

*a a s
2.

Llijhkd,

p&dCl'

Qt Q M + y c i U W * S

!Che equations describing large eddy development

With a mean v e l o c i t y f i e l d

=(u(y),

O , o j t h e equation f o r the

turbulent f l u c t u a t i o n

ui(z, t ) may be w r i t t e n

where

the overbax denoting the usual time average. over some s c a l e

Let

5, ,

If (2.1) i s averaged

<....> l i n e a r i s e d i n and

where

E <<

, and

<....> an average denote

let
s

(%>,+=3-$

, we

obtain

Physical considerations, a s outlined i n

81, suggest now t h a t we write

where

W O

represents the source term f o r the $ - f i e l d , Ti includes the kinematic viscosity 3.

and the eddy v i s c o s i t y

500

MOFFATT: WAVES VSo EDDIES

Equations (2.4) and (2.6)) together w i t h

2q >Xi

0,
V;

(2.7)

are l i n e a r equations which determine ( i n p r i n c i p l e ) the response and field

if

Ti

3,.

(y)

a r e known.

In p r a c t i c e , of course, only the s t a t i s t i c a l properties

of the f i e l d

Ti

w i l l be a c c e s s i b l e , and only t h e s t a t i s t i c a l properties o f the

p (2, t ) may be i n f e r r e d . ;
and eliminate

If now, f o r simplicity of n o t a t i o n , w replace e

(U,

*,

U )>

LA

, nJ

( lJl vL,
~

and

<p)

by v ) 3 from (2.4) and ( 2 . 7 ) )

w obtain ( c f Landahl 1967) the inhomogeneous Orr-Sommerfeld equation e

where

(2.9)

Defining the Fourier transform

-00

and s i m i l a r l y for

'$ ,

(2.8) becomes

where now

For given

, this

should be solved subject t o the boundary conditions

MOFFATT: WAVES VSa EDDIES

3. Waves o r Eddies? A simple example

It is natural as a preliminary, to s t u d y the free modes associated with the homogeneous form of (2.11), with 6 0 To simplify the discussion, and to throw some light on the relation between wave-modesof the type discussed by Landahl (1967) and the distorting eddies discussed by Townsend (1956), we shall ) suppose that the scale of the disturbance G(y, t * in the y-direction is small compared with 8, (its scale in the x- and z-directions being unrestricted), i.e. that

If the disturbance is localised near the level y linear approximation to I J y : .()

y0

, we may

then make a

The disturbance is convected at velocity ()(ye) where a = ( dUldy)ysye and distorted by the uniform shear a y If we take axes moving in the ( yo) x-direction with velocity U (, , the effect of the convection disappears, y) ancl only the distortion remains.

The variation of 9 , with y may also be ignored if the scale of the disturbance in the y-direction is sufficiently limited; writing Y = y y, equation (2.11) (with = 0) becomes

<

The analysis of the development of

(Y, t) from a given initial distribution,

is particularly simple and illuminating in the inviscid limit

3~

0; the

The dependence on kl and k

will be omitted unless explicitly required.

502

MOFPATT: WAVES VS. EDDIES

two methods mentioned in $1 will be illustrated in detail f o r this case. The effects of eddy viscosity will then be briefly considered. It will be assumed that yo is in the outer layer (say ye/&, , 5 ) and that the disturbance, " localised near y = yo , is negligibly influenced by the wall. Where convenient, it will then be legitimate to replace the conditions ( 2 . 1 3 ) by the conditions

Inviscid development Method I The equation

admits solutions of the form

representing wave modes travelling with velocity c in the direction (k,, 0, k3) The function 8 ( Y ) must be a linear combination of ewy and e-KY except possibly at the 'critical' point where

Since V must certainly be continuous across Y the conditions (3.5) is

, the solution satisfying

For varying where V(7 ) is the amplitude of the mode centred on Y = 7 we have a continuous spectrum of modes with wave speed given by ( . ) 37.

503

MOFFATT: WAVES VS- EDDIES

m e general s o l u t i o n of ( 3 . 5 ) s a t i s f y i n g superposition of such modes, viz.

I+/

as

1 y l 4 0 0 is a

!The i n i t i a l condition g i v e s

an i n t e g r a l equation f o r

V(7 )

with s o l u t i o n

Hence (3.9) gives Method I1 Equation

G ( Y , t ) e x p l i c i t l y i n terms of i t s i n i t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n .

(3.5) a l s o admits s o l u t i o n s of t h e form

+, ( Y ,

t)

~ ( t e )

i k ( t )y

(3.12)

Substitution i n (3.5) gives

and t h i s can be s a t i s f i e d ( f o r a l l

Y ) only i f

(3.13)
where

kZ0 = k2(0)

, and

MOFFATT: WAVES VS. EDDIES

Hence, i f the i n i t i a l disturbance i s represented i n terms of i t s Fourier t r a n s form,

(3.15)
then

T h i s must of course be equivalent t o (3.9); the two expressions axe shown t o be

the same i n the Appendix. The important t h i n g t o n o t i c e about (3.16) i s t h a t f o r

V (kl
A

, Y,

at

>> 1 ,

k 3, t ) w i l l be
kl/kzo = O(at)-'

O(at)-2.

except f o r the small range of wave numbers

A

f o r which

, f o r which

ll

remains

O(1).

This simply r e f l e c t s

the f a c t t h a t the disturbance i s drawn out i n the x-direction, i t s s c a l e increasi n g asymptotically as x-direction. The effect; of eddy v i s c o s i t y Both of t h e above methods may be extended t o t h e case when $ , *

at

After s u f f i c i e n t shearing a c t i o n , the disturbance

i s domimtedby those Fourier components which have l i t t l e o r no v a r i a t i o n i n t h e

0. For

method I , t h e eigenfunctions of equation (3.3) with the boundary conditions

(2.13) may be obtained i n - t e r m s of Airy functions ( s e e , f o r example, Reid 1965);

the wave speeds a r e s l i g h t l y changed ( f o r l a r g e Reynolds number) and each mode

i s weakly damped.
function (3.8) at

The d i s c o n t i n u i t y i n t h e

(Y)

corresponding t o the eigen-

1s smoothed out through a c r i t i c a l l a y e r through the

influence of v i s c o s i t y .

The s i m p l i f i e d boundary conditions ( 3 . 5 ) cannot be used

f o r t h i s method, since t h e r e a r e no n o n - t r i v i a l s o l u t i o n s of (3.3) s a t i s f y i n g

(3.5).

This may be regarded as an i n d i c a t i o n of t h e inappropriateness of the

method, s i n c e i t i s scareely conceivable t h a t the w a l l can have any s i g n i f i c a n t y yo i n t h e outer l a y e r ; moreover i t i s hard t o see why t h e complicated s t r u c t u r e of an eigenmode across
E

e f f e c t on a disturbance t h a t i s l o c a l i s e d near y = yc y

a c r i t i c a l l a y e r a t some l e v e l

(where y

i s very d i f f e r e n t from y 0 )

can be r e l e v a n t t o the development of a disturbance which i s vanishingly small outside some close neighbourhood of
0 '

Method 11, by c o n t r a s t , is modified i n a r e l a t i v e l y simple way when account

i s taken of eddy v i s c o s i t y ; a l l t h a t i s required i s the i n c l u s i o n of a f a c t o r

505

MOFFATT: WAVES VS- EDDIES

(where which

ko2 = )c2
k at =

1 I ) i s damped out a f t e r a time of order (qT k t A l o c a l i s e d disturbance of i n i t i a l s c a l e i s damped

ko2') i n the expression (3.14) f o r A ( t ) A mode f o r O(ko2) ( t h e only kind t h a t contributes t o 3 (Y, t ) f o r

at

>>

I-'.
QUt

a f t e r a time of order

tv = &*/qT ; a t t h i s stage, i t s degree of anisotropy q ( i . e . t h e r a t i o of i t s s c a l e i n the x-direction t o i t s s c a l e i n the y- or z-directions) i s of

order

at

d2/QT and

t h i s i s simply t h e turbulent Reynolds number based on

the s c a l e of the disturbance i n ( s a y ) the y-direction and the l o c a l mean v e l o c i t y gradient.

o(

The turbulent Reynolds number

RS

= a

/QT

(with (the

fk /K$,
4 10.8)

) can be estimated from the mean v e l o c i t y p r o f i l e (Townsend

and i s i n the neighbourhood of 130. With

1956,

e Z 4 s,

r a t i o of t h e two terms i n (3.1) being then approx.O.W), ani s o t ropy

w g e t a degree of e

corresponding t o eddies of extent

-8,

i n t h e x-direction.

This is a l i t t l e

g r e a t e r t h a n the estimates given i n

f lof t h e degree of anisotropy based on

c o r r e l a t i o n measurements; t h i s may be p a r t l y due t o the general c r u d i t y of t h e estimates, but a possible f u r t h e r reason is' t h a t the neglected terms non-linear 'in (i.e. t h a t p a r t of the non-linearity of t h e turbulencethat cannot be represented by an eddy v i s c o s i t y ) have the general e f f e c t of r e s i s t i n g s h e a r , and t h e r e f o r e of decreasing the a c t u a l degree of anisotropy of the turbulence under s t a t i s t i c a l l y steady conditions,

4.

The generation of Reynolds s t r e s s by streamwise v o r t i c e s Since both experimental observations and t h e considerations of t h e preced-

i n g s e c t i o n suggest t h a t the l a r g e eddies depend only weakly on t h e x-coordina t e , i t i s n a t u r a l t o look i n p a r t i c u l a r a t motions which a r e q u i t e independent of x

The simplest form of (2.4), l i n e a r i s e d , and with

f i = 0,

'3

0,

i s then

Moreover, since

v.2 = 0 , v'(p)

, and

f o r a l o c a l i s e d disturbance

506

MOFFATT: WAVES VS- EDDIES

w i t h i n t h e boundary l a y e r , t h i s r e q u i r e s <p> = 0

Hence, with

y. =(U>V,AJ),
(4.2)

(4.3)

Equation

(4.4) expresses

t h e simple Prandtl mechanism whereby

If

fluctuations i n C v o ( y , z)

t h e x-component of v e l o c i t y a r e generated through t h e t r a n s p o r t of mean momentum by f l u c t u a t i o n s normal t o t h e wall. u0(y, z )

=

(so

t h a t i n i t i a l l y the plahes o f c i r c u l a t i o n w i t h i n t h e eddies a r e at an angle

'$

tan- 1C

t o the x-axis) then

(4.5)
s o t h a t a t time

t h e streamlines o f t h e disturbance l i e i n t h e s u r f a c e s

cy + t U ( y ) =

const.

(4.6)

These surfaces a r e t i l t e d progressively backwards ( r e l a t i v e t o t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t h e s h e a r ) contrary t o t h e d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e process given i n Townsend (1956)

8 6 1 ).

I f , . i n t h e neighbourhood of

y = y0

, we

write

U0

+ a(y

- Yo>

t h e s u r f a c e s (4.6) are t h e planes

xi.e.

(c-*t)(y-y.)

Cmc&.,

(4.7)

t h e plane o f c i r c u l a t i o n i n a t y p i c a l eddy r o t a t e s anticlockwise, and y = y

0

asymptotes t o t h e plane

(figure 2).

For a random s u p e r p o s i t i o n o f eddies of t h e above kind, t h e i n i t i a l p l a n e s

of c i r c u l a t i o n being randomly o r i e n t e d , t h e s h e a r w i l l cause a l l t h e planes of c i r c u l a t i o n t o t i l t backwards, as i n d i c a t e d i n figure 2 . Eddy v i s c o s i t y causes

an u l t i m a t e decay of each eddy, and i t s magnitude w i l l determine t h e o r i e n t a t i o n

of the plane o f c i r c u l a t i o n , when t h e energy of t h e eddy i s a maximum.

if

i s randomly d i s t r i b u t e d with

Clearly,

= 0

, the

average plane of c i r c u l a t i o n

w i l l be t i l t e d backwards as i n f i g u r e 3 , although n o t n e c e s s a r i l y a t t h e angle

4 5 '

t o the x-axis suggested by Townsend.

507

MOFFATT: WAVES VS" EDDIES I t i s easy t o s e e how eddies of t h i s kind c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e Reynolds s t r e s s .

From (4,4),

(4.8)
The l i n e a r growth f o r a s i n g l e eddy lasts only s o l o n g as t h e eddy v i s c o s i t y i s
n e g l i g i b l e ( o r as l o n g as t h e l i n e a r i s e d d e s c r i p t i o n i s v a l i d ) ; a f t e r a time of order

tV

= f2

9 , "

, the

by t h e body f o r c e

For a random d i s t r i b u t i o n of eddies a t d i f f e r e n t s t a g e s Ti of growth and decay, and such t h a t a t t h e i r i n i t i a t i o n U 0 and V , a r e unc o r r e l a t e d , (4.8) g i v e s

eddy decays,

N w eddies axe continuously generated e

where

i s a measure of t h e mean l a r g e eddy l i f e t i m e , and t h i s i s t h e c o n t r i b -

u t i o n t o the Reynolds s t r e s s from eddies having n e g l i g i b l e v a r i a t i o n i n the streamwise d i r e c t i o n . The c o n t r i b u t i o n t o & e development of t h e mean flow i n t h e x - d i r e c t i o n from t h i s c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e Reynolds s t r e s s i s given by

(4.10)

a d i f f u s i o n equation with d i f f u s i v i t y
V

Av'

a function of

Although t h e y ) as t h e

i n t h i s equation r e f e r s only t o the large eddy v e l o c i t y , i t seems l i k e l y

V'

that

- has t h e same q u a l i t a t i v e behaviour (as a f u n c t i o n of

mean square of t h e t o t a l - n o d v e l o c i t y f l u c t u a t i o n

v,+uz. Equation (4.10)

then r e f l e c t s (i)t h e t r a p p i n g of mean flow v o r t i c i t y near i t s source at t h e

w a l l where

i s very small, and (ii) t h e e f f e c t i v e mixing o f mean flow

momentum towards t h e o u t e r edge o f the constant s t r e s s l a y e r and i n t h e o u t e r l a y e r , p a r t i c u l a x l y around value.

y/f,

y"

0.25

where

( VLt

has i t s g r e a t e s t

MOFFATT: WAVES VSu EDDIES

Appendix: Equivalence of (3.16) and (3.9) The inverse o f (3.15) i s

and s u b s t i t u t i o n i n (3.16) gives

where

Contour integration gives, for

9 4 y,

and, f o r

9 >Y,

Substitution i n (A2) gives

\.

T h i s expression may equally be obtained from (3.9) on

and integration by parts. lished.

substitution of (3.11) Hence the equivalence of (3.9) and (3.15) i s estab-

509

(q)
f'l

2.1

0.1

8.0 "9.0

CQ

20

0 0 2.0

t.0 9.0
8.0 0.1