Discussion

In this experiment we are studying the effect of surface roughness on the development
of boundary layer on a flat plat. The flat plate used is 3 mm in thickness with a sand paper fix
on one of its side to simulate rough surfaces. The sand paper is of grade 120. The experiment
is done using an airflow bench where the plate is tested at distances x = 0.06 m and x = 0.16 m
from the leading edge. The velocity profile is measured using the manometer along the airflow
bench placed at a 0.25 mm increment.
Firstly, we will discuss about the velocity profile form at the flat plate. For both
distances, our initial observation show that smooth surface produced a more laminar flow than
rough surface where the flow is more turbulent. When considering the Reynold number, when
x = 0.06 m from leading edge the flow is turbulent while when x = 0.16 m form leading edge
the flow change to laminar for both surfaces. Thus, we can say that transition flow happens
between these two distances in both surfaces. From this we can conclude that the flow for both
smooth and rough surface starts as turbulent and end as laminar in which the transition flow
may happen earlier in smooth surface.
Next, we will discuss all the experimental and theoretical values. The calculated values
for experimental are:
 = 3.00 x 10-3 m  = 0.40 x 10-3 m
*=1.00 x 10-3 m H = 2.5 m
Our result for both smooth and rough surface produce almost similar results at both distance,
thus we will discuss the result in terms of distance and flow (laminar and turbulent) altogether.
The static pressure is 9.4 mBar at x = 0.06 m and 9.2 mBar at x = 0.16 m. At 60 mm from the
leading edge, the free stream velocity is higher for rough surface than smooth surface while at
160mm the free stream velocity is higher for smooth surface than rough surface.
At x = 0.06 m, the boundary layer,  is reduced by 0.01×10-3 m in rough surface as
compared to smooth surface for both laminar and turbulent flow. While there is no difference
for boundary thickness,  there exist a difference of 0.7% for boundary thickness, * in
turbulent flow when compared against smooth surface. The value of shape factor, H is the
same for both surfaces. When compared with the experimental value, all the values have a
different. At x = 0.16 m, all the values for both smooth and rough surface has no difference.
Thus, we can conclude that at this point both the surface form a similar velocity profile.
Therefore, we can conclude that a rough surface does affect the development of boundary layer.
A rougher surface will reduce the thickness of the boundary layer, although it can not really be
seen in our experiment.
The error existed in this experiment probably come from the plate used in the
experiment. The plate used is not frictionless thus it is not perfectly smooth. Also, the
manufacturing of the plate requires the edge to be pointed but as it is manufactured using only
hand tools we can say that the plate may still have defects as to be used as a specimen especially
at the leading edge. For future experiment, we recommend using a frictionless plate as a
specimen. Secondly, the plate can be manufactured using machine that can ensure the 45o angle
cut at the leading edge to be pointed eliminating error in the experiment.