Marine Technology, Vol. 41, No. 2, April 2004, pp.

60-66

A Study of Hydrodynamic Characteristics of Boundary Layer With

Algae Roughness
C h e l a k a r a S. S u b r a m a n i a n , ~ N a g a h i k o S h i n j o , 2 and S a t h y a N. G a n g a d h a r a n 3

Filamentous algae fouling, such as Enteromorpha clathrata, is a soft and hairylike roughness that some-
times grows even thicker than a normal boundary layer. Typically, such fouling has been treated as
traditional roughness functions to yield hydrodynamic characteristics. This technique has been success-
fully used for a thin fouling layer. However, it may not be applicable on a thicker layer, as the present study
found substantial fluid flow within the layer. For such cases, the roughness cannot be treated simply as a
passive geometric variable, but its kinematics and interactions with the flow must be considered. The inner
law (log law) dynamics may be abnormal to yield any meaningful roughness function if it is calculated in
the traditional way as the departure of a rough-wall log law profile over a smooth-wall log law profile. In the
present research, velocity measurement of the E. clathrata roughness boundary layer using pitot-static tube
and laser Doppler velocimeter (LDV) were compared. Large discrepancies in the velocity profiles within
and in the vicinity of the roughness layer were observed between the two methods. The pitot-static tube
data showed significantly high velocities (60% to 80% of the free stream) in the inner layer as compared
to a smooth wall boundary layer. This local increase in velocity is believed to be the result of elastic transfer
of free-stream energy to the near-wall motions by the E. clathrata filaments. Consequently, the usual
assumption of the normal pressure gradient as a negligible second-order term for a normal zero-pressure
gradient boundary layer may not be valid for the present kind of roughness. The LDV velocity measure-
ments near and within the roughness layer have large uncertainties due to interference of the probe
volume by the E. clathrata filaments. Above the roughness, the pitot-static tube and LDV profiles show
relatively good agreement. It is concluded that for accurate prediction of the wall shear stress with E.
clathrata-type of bio-fouling roughness, the Clauser velocity loss function should include a form drag factor
instead of only the viscous drag factor.

Introduction eral recent studies, such as Keirsbulck et al (2002), Krogstad

THE ENERGYLOSScaused by biofouling translates to millions
of dollars of added cost to marine operations because of lack
of better u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the effects of their roughness on
hydrodynamics. The algae type of biofouling (Fig. 1) is gen-
erally randomly distributed roughness in space, which also
varies in shape and texture.
Following the early works of N i k u r a d s e (1933~ a n d
Schlichting (1936), most random roughnesses are commonly
expressed in terms of an equivalent sand-grain roughness,
k~, or some variations thereof to relate to the hydrodynamic
velocity loss function. For example, Townsin and Dey (1990)
developed a n empirical equation using the average hull
roughness to predict the resistance increase from the Inter-
national Towing Tank Conference (ITTC) 57 values due to a
change in hull roughness. This method of t r e a t m e n t works
well for most rigid roughnesses that are small enough to be
confined within the inner layer of the boundary layer. How-
ever, when the roughness is severe (at high Reynolds num-
bers) or/and irregular, large variations in the k~ values have
been found (Coleman et al 1984). The main reason for the
inconsistencies is due to underestimating the roughness ef-
fect on the pressure drag. All the scaling laws used so far are
based only on its effect on the viscous drag even though sev-
' Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department, Florida In-
stitute of Technology, Melbourne, Florida, USA.
Ocean Engineering Program, Department of Marine and Envi-
ronmental Systems, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne,
Florida, USA.
:3Engineering Science Department, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical
University, Daytona Beach, Florida, USA.
Manuscript received at SNAME headquarters July 2003.
and Antonia (1994, 1999), and Shaft and Antonia (1995,
1997), suggest that the turbulence structural changes caused
by the roughness are very profound in the inner layer. Su-
b r a m a n i a n et al (2003) are the first ones to propose an alter-
native inner-layer scale based on the roughness-induced
pressure gradient. Such scales have proved effective in ad-
verse pressure gradient boundary layers (Durbin & Belcher
1992), where the viscous drag is less pronounced than the
pressure drag. Schultz (2000), in a study of an E. clathrata
roughness similar to the present, observed that this filamen-
tous roughness on average occupied 10% to 20c~ of the bound-
ary layer thickness. Such layers are also permeable and pli-
able to cause transport of mass, momentum, and energy
between the roughness and outer layers. Lewkowicz and Das
(1981) used nylon tufts to simulate the biological layer. A
hypodermic pitot tube and a x-wire probe were used to mea-
sure the velocity profiles and t u r b u l e n t stresses, respectively.
Their results indicated substantial logarithmic inner regions
for a zero-pressure gradient flow. Clauser law of the wall was
used to determine skin friction coefficient, which was 18~
more with the roughness as compared to without the rough-
ness.
Schultz and Swain (1999) used a laser Doppler velocimeter
(LDV) to m e a s u r e the velocity field of the b i o f o u l i n g -
roughened boundary layer. The LDV measurement within
the roughness layer is almost impossible to take because the
moving algae filaments interfere with the beam pairs that
caused the probe volume. With such rough surfaces, the y
origin is not known a priori because the wall has asperities
(Perry & Joubert 1963). Therefore, the profile was adjusted
to a virtual origin by forcing it to fit linear log law. Then, by
using the Clauser method (Winter 1977), they found that
average skin friction increased by 33% to 187% due to bio-

60 APRIL2004 0025-3316/04/4102-0060S00.39/0 MARINE TECHNOLOGY


Fig, 1 Enteromorpha clathrata algae-ladentest plate
film. Here, an inherent assumption of the existence of the log
law is made. However, it is possible that flow within the
rough layer may affect the flow properties outside the fouled
layer and alter or destroy the i n n e r log-law region. The dy-
namics of the filaments may also add some complexity to the
flow.
Loeb et al (1984) found an increase in frictional resistance
of 10% to 20% due to slime films on a rotating disk, whereas
Lewthwaite et al (1985) measured skin friction on an actual
ship and found that cfincreased from 0.0023 to 0.0042 due to
1-mm-thick slime film. Haslbeck and Bohlander (1992) found
an 18% decrease in required shaft Hewlett Packard to propel
the ship at same speed after removing fouling. All the other
studies are believed to involve biofouling roughness much
smaller than the present study.
S u b r a m a n i a n et al (2001) developed a method employing
image processing for geometric m e a s u r e m e n t of large-scale
biofouling roughness. In this study, two independent flow
m e a s u r e m e n t techniques, pitot-static tube and LDV, were
used to characterize the t u r b u l e n t boundary layer on the soft
biological fouling and the results are compared.
Experimentaldescription
The experimental work was carried out at the Harbor
Branch Oceanographic I n s t i t u t i o n (HBOI) water t u n n e l
(Gangadharan et al 1996, 2001, Senocak et al 2000). The
t u n n e l is 2.44 m in height, 8.53 m in length, and 1.22 m in
width, and is constructed of mild steel coated with marine
polyamide epoxy. The test section is 0.60 m by 0.60 m and is
2.54 m in length. The contraction ratio of the t u n n e l is 4 to 1.
Flow m a n a g e m e n t devices include t u r n i n g vanes placed in
the t u n n e l corners and a polycarbonate honeycomb flow
straightener in the entrance to the contraction section. Arti-
ficial saline water (21 ppm) was used for the fluid medium to
prolong the life of E. clathrata over the course of the experi-
ment.
The biofilm was grown on a specimen plate insert at the
HBOI aquaculture facility. This insert was flush mounted in
a larger flat plate, as shown in Fig. 2.
The larger plate was 0.58 m in width, 2.34 m in length, and
54 mm thick. It was constructed of polyvinylchloride and
stainless steel and was mounted horizontally in the tunnel's
test section. The leading edge of the plate was shaped to
mimic the forward portion of a NACA 0012-64 airfoil. The
initial 280 m m of the plate was covered with no. 36 grit sand-
paper to hasten development of a t u r b u l e n t boundary layer
(Klebanoff & Diehl 1951). The specimen plate insert was fab-
ricated from a cast acrylic sheet. The insert measured 0.56 m
in width, 1.17 m in length, and 12.7 mm in thickness. The
leading edge of the specimen plate was located 0.71 m from
the leading edge of the m a i n plate. Seven rows (three per
row) of 1.67-mm static pressure taps were provided on the
APRIL 2004
i. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.75m .................................... -i
- 1.60m
1.45m
i 1.30m i
,~ 1.15m i / I
1.00m
i - - 0.85m
::. " #36 grid
0.58m
_ _ If" ill ~sandpaper
:.i
~.28rr~r
-!
~ t e s t plate
0.77m
I
2.34m -!
Fig. 2 Plan view of boundarylayer test surface
specimen plate. The test fixture also has a 0.28-m adjustable
tail flap to control the pressure distribution along the plate.
In the present study, the flap angle was set at 0 deg.
The test consisted of seven velocity profiles measured at
0.85 m, 1.00 m, 1.15 m, 1.30 m, 1.45 m, 1.60 m, and 1.75 m
from the leading edge of the test fixture (corresponding port
numbers were P2, P5, P8, P l l , P14, P17, and P20, respec-
tively). The pitot-static tube measurements were made at
about 90 mm forward of the LDV profiles due to the extension
of the tube.
Pitot-staticprofiles
Each pitot-static velocity profile consisted of about 30
points, at l-ram increments from the wall to 20 mm height
and at 2-mm increments for above 20 ram. The pitot-static
tube was 6.35 mm in diameter, 1 m long with 90-ram hori-
zontal section; a Validyne differential digital manometer
(PS309) was used for the pressure measurements. An elec-
tronic integrating device built in-house was used to obtain a
1-minute average at 1-Hz sampling rate of the manometer
readings. All pressure readings were corrected for the free-
stream fluctuations by averaging the free-stream pressures
taken before and after each profile measurement. The bound-
ary layer parameters were then calculated using these ad-
justed pressure data. The skin friction coefficient was com-
puted using the Preston tube calibration (Head & Vasanta
Ram 1971). It is worth noting here Patel's (1965) remark that
the Preston tube accuracy is not much affected even when the
log law is affected by pressure gradients. No profile shifting
was made on the pitot-static tube profiles for any wall dis-
placement effect by the algae film.
LDV profiles
Velocity profiles consisted of about 50 m e a s u r e m e n t points
across the boundary layer at 1-mm increments from the wall
to 20 mm, and at 2-mm increments for 20 m m and above.
Velocity measurements were made using a two-component
TSI fiber-optic laser Doppler velocimeter (LDV) system (TS1,
Inc., St. Paul, MN). The LDV probe was mounted on an AM-
PRO System 1618 three-axis traverse unit. Only a single
component was used for the present experiments, and veloc-
ity data were collected in random mode with 10,000 random
samples per point. However, near the wall, low data rates
made it impractical to acquire as m a n y samples, so a time-
out window of 5 minutes was enforced.
Real-time velocity data were stored on a personal computer
system, and the FIND for Windows software, version 1.3 by
TSI, Inc., was used to process the data offline. For 15 to 30 of
the n e a r - w a l l d a t a p o i n t s , f i l a m e n t o u s a l g a e moved
MARINE TECHNOLOGY 61
through the probe volume during the measurements. This Table 1 Experiment matrix
caused the raw data histogram to be bimodal, as shown in
Fig. 3. The signal associated with the zero nmde was the CLDV1 Experiment 1, clean LDV profiles
motion of the filamentous algae, whereas the nonzero mode FLDV1 Experiment 1, fouled LDV profiles
represented the fluid nmtion itself. Because the algae signal CPIT1 Experiment 1, clean pitot-static profiles
FPIT1 Experiment 1, lbuled pitot-static profiles
skewed the fluid velocity, especially at close to the top of the CLDV-M Experiment 2, clean LDV profiles
E. clathrata layer, this signal was filtered out using a Matlab FLDV-M1 Experiment 2, fouled LDV profiles (set 1~
m-script (Schultz 1998), and the basic velocity statistics were FLDV-M2 Experiment 2, fouled LDV profiles (set 2)
then calculated for each of the data files. It should be noted FLDV2 Present experiment, fouled LDV profiles
that removing the zero mean velocity from the bimodal his- FPIT2 Present experiment, fouled pitot-static profiles
togram resulted in an inability to resolve the flow velocity
less than cutoff frequency. Typical low cutoff velocity was LDV = laser Doppler velocimeter.
0.1 m/second.
1 T ~ 1 T r r 1
1.0
Results
o o o o o o o o •° °•° ° ° ° ~ % ~ ' ° ~ •° • ~ °" °" ° ~
The experiments were conducted over a period of several 0.8 v-
days, and care was taken not to stress the fouling organisms. f Vv ••
The average thickness of this fouling layer along the center- 0.6
line in flowing water was about 20 mm. There were several
low spots on this layer at other locations where velocity 0.4
profiles were not acquired. Nominal free-stream velocity in
the experiment varied from 1.1 to 1.4 m/second, and the
0.2:
free-stream turbulence intensity in the test section varied
Port 2 (x = 850 mm)
between 3% and 5%. Profile measurements at seven longitu-
dinal centerline locations, roughly 0.15 m apart, were ana- 0.0
lyzed. 1.0
• • eve~ ~ Vb°o° ~
o tlg~
Three different experimental results were included for
comparison. Table 1 shows the designations of the data sets. 0.8 vvvvvV v i.o,b~O .° o
The E x p e r i m e n t 2 results are those of Shultz (2000). It
should be noted that some of the profile data consisted of only
five stations (ports 8, 11, 14, 17, and 201.
The main difference between the present study and Ex- 0.4
periment 1 is in the thickness of the biological layer. The
estimated average thickness of the layer with flow is as fol-
lows. Note t h a t Shultz's algae l a y e r thickness is much 0.2
smaller than in the current experiments. Port 14 ( x = 1450 mm)
0.0
• Experiment 1:10 mm 1.0 • ~ . , c ~ c ~ c ~ o ~ o O ~ o.
• Experiment 2 (set 1): 5 mm
• • • ,.,f, O 0 0 ~ O u ~
• Experiment 2 (set 2): 3 mm 0.8
• Present experiment: 20 mm. wVv v ~o~°O
oiOO~ o ~ °
Figure 4 shows the mean velocity profiles of clean and 0.6
fouled plates. Pitot tube profiles suggest a constant velocity
0.4 • Fouled ( F L D V 2 )
region within the algae layer. This velocity at x = 0.85 m was
o Fouled (FPIT2)
about 80% of free-stream velocity, above the smooth wall
• Clean (CLDV-M)
value, and it reduced to 60c~ of free-stream velocity, below 0.2
the smooth wall value, at downstream positions. Because the
Port 20 (x = 1750 mm'
velocity should go to zero at the surface, the presence of the 0.0
constant velocity region implies an existence of severe veloc- 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 .1
ity gradient near the wall. This will encourage turbulence
Y/599
0 0000 [ Fig. 4 Mean velocity profiles of clean and fouled plates

production. In addition, the extent of the constant velocity

Algae>;ignal region is reduced for the downstream profiles even though
the thickness of the fouled layer remained nearly constant.
% However, the thickness of the overall boundary layer was
Jill Fluid ,~lglltl]
growing downstream. This may suggest the existence of sec-
ondary flow and a mixing layer at the edge of the algae layer,
and this mixing layer grows toward the downstream position.
It should also be noted that the velocity profiles did not revert
to the clean surface profile even at the most downstream
0 0000 position. Similar results were obtained from previously con-
-0 5000 VEL(I) 2 0000 ducted (Experiment 1) LDV profiles (FLDVI~.
Fig. 3 Bimodal raw velocity histogram s h o w i n g algae a n d fluid motion Unlike typical smooth plate velocity profiles, the fouled

62 APRIL 2004 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

profiles showed a linear increase in velocity beyond the con- 1.1
s t a n t flow region. At the upstream position, this linear profile 1.0
merged with the smooth plate profile at about 50% of the ooOO0 O • •
0.9
boundary layer thickness. This profile merging is delayed
toward the downstream positions. The pitot tube profiles also 0.8
indicated higher velocity for the fouled plate than for the
0.7
clean plate at the upstream location. Also here, comparison
between the pitot tube and LDV data showed a significant 0.6
difference in the i n n e r regions presumably because of the E 0.5
effects of a relatively thick algae layer on LDV measure-
0.4
ments. Both the pitot tube and LDV velocities were, however,
similar for the downstream locations. This flow behavior re- 0.3
sembles the wake behind an object. 0.2 •
Figure 5 shows the combined LDV and pitot tube velocity
plots of the present study and Experiments 1 and 2 at x = 0.1 ~,~jf • P5(x= lOOOmm) J
1.45 m. As seen in the graph, the velocity profiles of the 0.0 llHu ,
fouled plate are consistently lower than those of the clean 0.0 0.1 0.2 0:3 0:4 0:5 0:6 0:7 0:8 0:9 1.0
plate.
Prior to the data processing, the raw LDV profiles were Y/'~'99
examined for the effect of the biological layer (Fig. 6). The Fig. 6 Raw velocity profile (FLDV2, port 5)
profiles showed a shift toward the top of the layer, and there
was no data point registered in the near wall region. This "no
data" region was first thought to be an indication of the ef- 35 Clean (CLDV1) • P5
fective algae layer thickness. However, this was inconsistent o P8
with the constant velocity region in the pitot tube profiles. 30 • Pll
The "no data" region in the LDV profiles increased in size v P14
25 P17
from 15 mm to 20 mm toward the downstream locations •

while the "constant velodty region" in pitot tube profiles de- u P20
20
creased in size.
Figure 7 shows the turbulence intensity profile from clean 15
and fouled LDV data. It should be noted that the initial data lO 1
points on FLDV1 plot (middle plot on Fig. 7) were shifted
above the surface of the algae layer. Both fouled data showed 5
linear increase in the intensity and peaked at 23% and 35%
0 [
for the FLDV1 and FLDV2, respectively. Closer examination >, ) = ( ( ( I I i

of FLVD2 shows the profile shifting with longitudinal dis- ~ 35

Fouled (FLDV1) I • P8
tance; the peak intensity is decreased and occurs at higher o Pll
3O
y/$99 for lower x values. In addition, the turbulence intensity • P14
v P17
of the last three ports (ports 14, 17, and 20) is significantly 25 • P20
higher near the free stream t h a n the corresponding clean
20
plate values. This behavior is consistent with the existence of -5
severe mean velocity gradients at the wall, as discussed 15
above. Strong production and diffusion of turbulence are ex- ~-
pected to occur just above the algae layer. These profiles sug- 10
gest that the velocity field of a strong roughness is a multi-
variable function and single-wall scaling laws are inadequate © • . . . . ; : i
to completely describe its characteristics, n 0 = I I I I I L I I

35 • • Fouled (FLDV2) • P2
v
W o P5
3O
,• co • v • • P8
OOo a~• v Pll

1°I
25
;O • 0 • P14
o.o o.o _
20 ~7 v V v,,v ~ u P17
o °e- r ~ ' ~ VO ~ E~ A 1~ • P20
0.8 I
..••
~ •
~oO ~,~I~...v • • _ • Vo ~
I ~9 0 ~ ~ ~ - 15

10

5 oeo -~ • •
o FLDV1
0.4 4 • FPIT2 o
0
v FLDV2 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
• FLDV-M1
u FLDV-M2
0.2 • CLDV-M Y/5~9
Fig. 7 Turbulence nntensity profiles
Port t4 ( x = 1450 turn
0.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 03 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 Figure 8 shows the fouled plate skin friction coefficient
from pitot tube and LDV measurements (FPIT2, FLDV-M1,
Y/~99 and FLDV-M2). For the pitot tube data, the coefficients were
Fig. 5 Combined velocity profiles determined by the Preston method, whereas the modified

APRIL 2004 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 63

 0.012 • FPIT2 40
• P5
o FPIT1 o P8
35
• FLDV-M1
• Pll
0.010 v FLDV-M2
30 P14
• CPIT1 l
• P17
25 o P20
0.008
20
0.006
15

10
0.004
5
Clean (CLDV1)
0.002 • o 8 ]
o 0
© 4O
• P2
5 0 000 - - [ I I I -- I
o P5
35
0.012 1 • Pll
• FPIT2 (Preston)
3O v P14

0.010
o FPIT2 (Clauser)
J 25
•
o
P17
P20
20
0 008
15

0.006 10

5
0.004 Fouled (FPIT2
0 J
I
© • 4O
P2
0 002 ,

©
35 P5
P8
f
0.000 . ~ o ~o r o ~ ~ 30 Pll
600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 P14
25 P17
X (mm)
P20
20
Fig. 8 Skin friction coefficient 4
[3 • o
15 ©
#
Clauser method (Schultz & Swain 1999) was used for the 10
LDV data. As shown in Fig. 8, when the Clauser method was 5
used on the pitot tube data, it gave unrealistic skin friction Fouled (FLDV2
coefficient values, suggesting anomalies in the low law. The
10 100 1000 10000
skin friction coefficients (Preston tube) estimated from pitot
tube data ranged from 0.001 to 0.004. Skin friction coeffi-
yu r/v
cients from the LDV data were difficult to estimate because
the y origin is not known exactly. Several different methods Fig. 9 Semdog plot of veloc,ty profile

were employed to determine c/. from the LDV profiles; how-

ever, not one yielded a meaningful result. For this reason, c/.
from the Preston tube were used for all profiles. The LDV
profiles were then shifted by matching the slope of the log-
l i n e a r p o r t i o n of profiles. U s i n g the a b o v e - m e n t i o n e d
method, log-law plots of both LDV a n d pitot tube data
showed a similar trend (Fig. 9).
Figure 10 shows the streamwise variations of boundary
layer thickness, ~,~, displacement thickness, ~ , shape factor,
H, and m o m e n t u m thickness, 0. Because the present rough-
ness is quite strong as compared to earlier measurements,
the boundary layer growth is nonlinear. The displacement
thickness and m o m e n t u m thickness variations also show a
similar behavior. The average shape factor value is about 1.4,
typical of a t u r b u l e n t boundary layer.
Discussion and conclusions
Present experiments were conducted on a previously used
system setup (Schultz 2000). In the previous investigations,
the modified Clauser method was successfully used on a mod-
erately thick algae layer to estimate the skin friction coeffi-
cient. This, and most of other similar studies, showed signifi-
cant increase in skin friction due to biofihn, in contrast to the
present investigation. A significant difference from other ex-
periments was the thickness of biofilm. The present study
had significantly denser and thicker biological fouling and
used the traditional methods to determine that the skin fric-
tion led to inconsistent results.
Two velocity m e a s u r e m e n t techniques, pitot tube and
LDV, were compared on the biological roughness layer. The
velocity profiles had significant differences, especially in the
upstream and inner regions of the boundary layers. However,
the two profiles became linear and coincided with each other
toward the downstream positions. This linear trend of the
profiles suggested that the typical t u r b u l e n t boundary layer
log law may not be valid in the present case. This may have
led to the difficulties of computing skin friction coefficients
using the Clauser method from the LDV data. The modified
Clauser method, which assumes a log law, was first used to
determine the skin frictions from the LDV data by finding
virtual origin utilizing log-law region. In most of the cases,
the c/.value was an order of magnitude higher than the Pres-
ton tube c/. value, and that did not show consistency among
the different stations. The Preston tube determination of c/.
has been previously used (Patel 1965) for adverse pressure
gradient flow where the log-law region was inconspicuous.
An attempt was made to match the LDV profiles with pitot-
static profiles. Significant differences in the inner part of the
profile made it difficult to match the profiles. Then, it was
decided to utilize the same skin friction coefficient of the pitot
tube profiles to corresponding LDV profiles, and they were

64 A P R I L 2004 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

 90 Acknowledgments
• CPIT1
8O o FPIT2
• FLDV-M1 These experiments were conducted at the Harbor Branch
7O FLDV-M2 Oceanographic Institution water tunnel facility with the help
E of Mr. Lawrence Borne, the Research Engineer. This re-
E 60 search work is funded by National Science Foundation Grant
(3 BES-9713110.
50 V
Y

40 o ~y References
30 I b J I COLE,XtAX,H. W., HOD(;E, B. K., ANDTAYLOR,R. P. 1984. A re-evaluation of
16 Schlichting's surface roughness experiments, ASME Journal of Fluids
0 0
Engineering, 106, 60-65.
14
DURBIN, P. A., AND BEL('HER, S. E. 1992. Scaling of adverse-pressure gra-
12 dient turbulent boundary layers, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 238,
0 0 699-722.
E GANGADHARAN, S., WIMBERLY, C. R., CLARK,A., ANI) COIAANO, B. 1996. De-
sign, construction and operation of a cost effective water tunnel at
8 V Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution, Proceedings, SNAME
0 V Southeast Section Meeting, October, Fort Pierce, FL.
6 GANGADHARAN, S. N., SCHULTZ,M., COLLINO,B., CI,ARK,A., AND WIMBEI{LY,
O
C. R. 2001. Experimental investigation ofEnteromorpha clothrata bio-
4 fouling on lifting surfaces of marine vehicles, MARINETECHNOLOGY,38,
O 1, 31--50.
2 I I I
HASLBECK, E. G., AND BOHLANDER, G. 1992. Microbial biotllm effects on
1.8
drag--lab and field, Proceedings, SNAME Ship Production Symposium.
t.7 HEAl), M. R., ANDVASANTARAM,V. 1971. Improved Presentation of Preston
Tube Calibratmn, Department of Aeronautical Engineering, Indian
1.6 Institute of Technology, Kanpur, India, AE-10/1970, Aeronaut. Q.
XXII, 3.
V V KEIRSBULCK, C., LABRAGA, L., MAZOI~Z,A., AND TOURNIER, C. 2002. Surface
• 0 roughness effects on turbulent boundary layer structures. ASME Jour-
~7
1.4 0 0 nal of Fluids Engineering, 124, 127-135.
0 I~,Et~ANOFF, P. S., AND DIEHL, F. W. 1951. Some Features of Artificially
1.3 Thickened Fully Developed Tnrbulent Boundao, Layers with Zero Pres-
sure Gradient, National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics, NACA
1.2 TN 2475.
0 KROGSTAD,P. A., ANDANTONIA,R. A. 1994. Structure of turbulent bound-
1.1 J t r
ary layers on smooth and rough walls, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 277,
12 1-21.
I~OC,STAD, P. A., aND ANTON]A,R. A. 1999. Surface roughness effects in
10 turbulent boundary layers, Experiments in Fluids, 27, 450-460.
LEWKOWlCZ, A. K., AND DAS, D. K. 1981. Turbulent boundary layers on
rough surfaces with and without a pliable overlayer: a simulation of
E s marine fouling, Proceedings, ASME/ASCE Bioengineering, Fluid and
g Applied Mechanics Conference, Boulder, CO, 174-186.
6 V
LEWTHWArrE, J. C., MOLLAND,A. F., ANDTHOMAS,K. W. 1985. An investi-
v
gation into the variation of ship skin frictional resistance with fouling,
0 • Transactions of Rqval Institute of Naval Architects, 127, 269-284.
LOEB, G. h, LAS'n,;R, D., AND GRACIK,T. 1984. The influence of microbial
fouling films on hydrodynamic drag of rotating disks, in Marine Bio-
0 deterioration, An Interdisciplinal:v Study, Naval Institute Press, An-
600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 napolis, MD.
NIKURADSE, J. 1933. Laws of Flow in Rough Pipes, National Advisory
X (mm) Committee on Aeronautics, NACA TM 1292.
PATEL, V. C. 1965. Calibration of the Preston tube and limitations on its
Fig, 10 Boundary layer parameters use in pressure gradients, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 23, 185-209.
PERI~Y, A. E., AND JOUBERT, P. N. 1963. Rough-wall turbulent boundary
layers, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 37, 383-413.
SHAFI, H . S., AND ANTONIA, Z . A. 1995. Anisotropy of the Reynolds stress
shifted by matching the slope of the linear portion the pro- in a turbulent boundary layer on a rough wall, Experiments in Fluids,
18, 213-215.
files.
SHAFL H. S., ANn ANTONIA,R. A. 1997. Small-scale characteristics of a
It is evident from the pitot tube profiles that the flow turbulent boundary layer over a rough wall, Journal of Fluid Mechan-
within the algae layer exists and it had some effects on the ics, 342, 263-293.
outer region of the boundary layer, as indicated by the lin- SCHLICHTING,H. 1936. Experimental Investigation of the Problem of Sur-
earity of the profiles. The relatively high velocity flow regions face Roughness, National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics, NACA
TM 832.
were observed within the layer, the extent of which dimin-
SCHULTZ, M. P. 1998. The Effect of Biofilrns on Turbulent Bounda~ Layer
ished for the downstream locations. Increased turbulence in- Structure, Ph.D. dissertation, Ocean Engineering Program, Depart-
tensity may be an indication of the promotion of turbulent ment of Marine and Environmental Systems, Florida Institute of Tech-
mixing of flow by this biological layer. It is conjectured that nology, Melbourne, FL.
the unsteady oscillations of the E. clathrata filaments may SCHULTZ,M. P. 2000. Turbulent boundary layers on surfaces covered with
have an energizing influence on the algae layer fluid. As a filamentous algae, ASME Journal of Fluids Engineering, 122, 357-
363.
result, the conventional inner region of the boundary layer SCHULTZ,M. P., AN|)SWAIN,G. W. 1999. The effect ofbiofihns on turbulent
may have been altered to make the modified Clauser method boundary layers, ASME Journal of Fluids Engineering, 121, 44-51.
unreliable to estimate skin friction values. SENO('AK, I., TAKU5, S., SHYY, W., AND GANGADHARAN, S. 2000. Computa-

APRIL 2004 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 65

 tional investigation of the water tunnel tests, Proceedings, 3rd Inter-
national Conference on Nonlinear Problems Aviation and Aerospace
(ICNPAA-2000), 2, May 10-12, Embory-Riddle Aeronautical Univer-
sity, Daytona Beach, FL, 593-598.
SUBRAMANIAN,C. S., KING, P. I., REEDER, M. F., Ou, S., AND RIVIR, R. B.
2003. Effects of strong irregular roughness on turbulent boundary
layer, Proceedings, Fete Antonia: An International Conference on Fluid
Mechanics, July 18-19, University of Newcastle, Dalwood, NSW, Aus-
tralia.
StTBRAMANIAN, C. S., OSTREM, T. O., AND GANGADHARAN,S. N. 2001. A
66 APRIL 2004
technique of determining marine bio-fouling roughness, ASME Forum
on Fluid Measurements and Instrumentation (FEDSM 2001), 254,
1-10.
TOWNS1N, R. L., AND DEY, S. K. 1990. The correlation of roughness drag
with surface characteristics, Proceedings, International Workshop in
Marine Roughness and Drag, Royal Institution of Naval Architects,
London.
WINTER, K. G. 1977. An outline of the techniques available for the mea-
surement of skin friction in turbulent boundary layers, Proceedings of
Aerospace Science, 18, 1-57.
MARINE TECHNOLOGY