Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T00:42:36.805Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of turbulent boundary layers over smooth and rough surfaces up to high Reynolds numbers – ERRATUM

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 May 2016

D. T. Squire ,
C. Morrill-Winter ,
N. Hutchins ,
M. P. Schultz ,
J. C. Klewicki  and
I. Marusic
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Type
Erratum
Information
Journal of Fluid Mechanics , Volume 797 , 25 June 2016 , pp. 917
Check for updates
Copyright
© 2016 Cambridge University Press 

In the published version of figure 7 errors were unfortunately introduced in the data sets shown. Figure 7 should be replaced by the figure shown below. The publisher apologises to the authors, editors and readers for this error.

Figure 7. The streamwise velocity variance for all smooth- and rough-wall data. A linear abscissa is used in (a) and a logarithmic abscissa is used in (b). In the inset of (b), the highest Reynolds number smooth-wall profile ( ${\it\delta}_{99}^{+}=21\,430$ ) is compared to the highest Reynolds number rough-wall profile ( ${\it\delta}_{99}^{+}=29\,900$ ).

References

Squire, D. T., Morrill-Winter, C., Hutchins, N., Schultz, M. P., Klewicki, J. C. & Marusic, I. 2016 Comparison of turbulent boundary layers over smooth and rough surfaces up to high Reynolds numbers. J. Fluid Mech. 795, 210–240.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Figure 7. The streamwise velocity variance for all smooth- and rough-wall data. A linear abscissa is used in (a) and a logarithmic abscissa is used in (b). In the inset of (b), the highest Reynolds number smooth-wall profile (${\it\delta}_{99}^{+}=21\,430$) is compared to the highest Reynolds number rough-wall profile (${\it\delta}_{99}^{+}=29\,900$).