Global Warming Rough Draft Environmental Sciences Essay

In recent discussions on the topic of Global Warming, a controversial issue has been whether the facts support this as a real issue and that the worlds temperature is in fact warming or one of this being a myth and the planets overall temperatures are not raising any more or less than in any other time in history. On the one hand, some argue that patterns of climate change have always existed in history and that does not show that the planet is warming at all. From this perspective, many factors can effect climate change and the planet has a cycle of warming and cooling that has continued throughout history. On the other hand, others argue that the use of fossil fuels such as (oil, gas, and coal) have created excess Co2 in the atmosphere creating a greenhouse effect that has helped to raise temperatures of the planet substantially. In the words of most reputable scientists, one of this view’s main proponents, “Al Gore” author of the inconvenient truth, states global warming is indeed a serious issue in our world and is not just a myth. According to this view, climate change is an excepted fact and the planet is indeed warming as a result of human beings burning fossil fuels. In sum, then, the actual issue is whether global warming is real or a myth. Most scientists agree that this is not debatable and see it as more of fact.

Get Help With Your Essay
If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!
Essay Writing Service

The dispute of global warming can be narrowed into two parallel debates. One is scientific, which focuses on the analyses of complex data that is hard for the lay person to understand and the other political side which is addressing what the proper response governments should take to a hypothetical risk. To add to this complex issue, large energy companies are lobbying against global warming in an effort to manipulate the truth, making even more grey areas and casting doubt on its veracity. Each side of the debate provides abundant scientific evidence that attempts to prove there point. Proponents of an instantaneous and all-encompassing regulatory response insist that the scientific debate has long been settled.
Some scientific skepticism can be beneficial for scientists to challenge themselves to improve the understanding of the science behind global warming. Thus far this is not what materializes with climate change denial. Disbelievers dynamically censure any evidence that supports the issue that human beings are the main cause of global warming and yet embrace any argument, article, study, or blog that proposes disproving global warming or the affects individuals are partaking on global warming. The deniers and skeptics have used similar deceitful schemes that they have used for years. They continue to attack the messenger, proposing that a worldwide plot of officials and environmental scientists are trying to safeguard their funding using a one-sided portrayal of the IPCC process. Their attempts are to highlight any specific downgrade in the predictions and lift that out of context to suggest a less dire overall picture. Casting a fortified doubt and confusion, following the model of the “experts” employed for years by the tobacco industry to debunk the effects of smoking direct relation to cancer. This is why Global Warming still has many controversies surrounding the topic that draw attention away from the real issue.
Global warming still has many controversies surrounding the topic that draw attention away from the real issue. One example would be the resent “Climatgate” scandal where scientists were accused of manipulating and possible destroying data on climate change. According to an anonymous hacker with the pseudonym “FOIA” hacked into email accounts gathering over 1000 personal emails. The hacker then leaked small details of the emails in a way that at first looked like two chief researchers had manipulated or omitted parts of the data in order to present their findings. They later found the researchers did nothing wrong in the research or no evidence was found of foul play or manipulation. This shows the ongoing struggle at what lengths the individuals are willing to go to debunk the research. Many discussions still continue on the topic of Global Warming with both sides taking a stand on whether the facts support this as a real issue and the world’s temperature is in fact warming or one of this being a myth and the planets overall temperatures are not raising any more or less than in any other time in history. According to the latest report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the product of hundreds of leading scientists from around the globe, confirms that global warming is happening now and needs to be addressed quickly to avoid costly and difficult problems.
Many consider human caused global warming to be a myth, just an excuse for the record temperatures and other weather patterns. There are two main sides to the argument of the cause of global warming; those who believe that global warming is just a natural phase in the climatic habits of earth, and those who believe humans are the direct cause through the burning of fossil fuels and other processes. In an article released by the Dept. of Commerce, NASA claims the solar increases do not have the ability to cause large global temperature increases greenhouse gasses are indeed playing a dominant role. As the leading global scientific institution of the US Government, NASA’s point is highly accepted by the community. In the same article, the Dept. of Commerce says that only a quarter of the amount of global warming can be attributed to the sun. That one-quarter is the natural part of global warming; the rest is from human activity.
Humans are the dominant force behind the sharp global warming trend seen in the 20th century. Natural factors like volcanic eruptions and fluctuations in the suns emissions, which were powerful influences on temperatures in past centuries, can account for only 25 percent of global warming. The rest of the warming was caused by human activity, particularly rising levels of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases. According to author, Thomas J. Crowley a Texas A&M geologist “natural variability” plays only a subsidiary role in the 20th century warming and that the most parsimonious explanation for most of the warming is that it is due to the anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gases. Crowley proposes the most direct link to date between people and the 1.1 degree Fahrenheit rise in average global temperatures over the last 100 years is due to something called the greenhouse effect. The greenhouse effect is a process by which thermal radiation from a planetary surface is absorbed by gases trapped in the atmosphere. Part of this re-radiation is reflected back towards the surface and the lower atmosphere. This results in an elevation of the average surface temperature above what it would be in the absence of the gases. Increase in weather phenomena is another effect of global warming. One theory is that global warming may be contributing to stronger hurricanes in the Atlantic over the past 30 years. FSU geography Professor James B. Elsner, University of Wisconsin-Madison Professor James P. Kossin and FSU postdoctoral researcher Thomas H. Jagger have used global satellite data to find that the strongest tropical cyclones are, in fact, getting stronger and ocean temperatures play a role in driving this trend. This is consistent with the “heat-engine” theory of cyclone intensity which is all a result of the warming of our planet. Drought As global warming increases it will alter many climatic patterns of the planet. As far as rainfall is concerned, it will rise equatorially in both polar and sub-polar regions, and decrease in subtropical areas. This change in precipitation pattern will generate a drought in certain areas, while floods in other areas. Warming of the atmosphere will escalate the temperature in the planets seawaters, which will endure continued elevated temperatures for centuries. Warm water will lead to frequent natural disasters like hurricanes. Overall, the planet will experience extreme weather conditions, characterized by flood and droughts, heat waves and cold waves, and extreme storms like cyclones and tornadoes.
A rise in global temperature will also hamper the lavish biodiversity of innumerable ecosystems. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on (IPCC), an increase in global temperature by 1.5 to 2.5 degrees will make 20 to 30 percent of species vulnerable to extinction, while a rise of about 3.5 degrees will make 40 to 70 percent species vulnerable to extinction. Climate change will result in loss of habitat for many animal species like polar bears, tropical frogs and coral reefs just to mention a few. More importantly, any alteration in the planets weather patterns will seriously affect the migration patterns of various species. Unstable patterns of rainfall will affect animals and humans equally. For humans, global warming will affect our foodstuff and water supplies as well as our health conditions. Changes in precipitation will affect basic necessities such as agriculture, power production etc. Increase in the temperature of ocean waters will hamper fisheries. The sudden change in climate patterns will have a hazardous effect on the human body which won’t be able to endure the extreme conditions, a hint of which can be seen in form of frequent heat waves and cold waves. Upsurge in natural catastrophes such as storms, will lead to substantial human casualties. Communicable illnesses will rise to a noticeable degree as infection transmitting insects will adapt more quickly to extreme conditions carrying with them many diseases. Many people will die of malnutrition as food production will decrease due to frequent droughts and floods. The ever increasing stress it will have on our system will create less aid for those that rely on our kindness to feed themselves.
As a nation, we are attributed as the leading cause of global warming, with the most greenhouse emissions anywhere in the world. As the most influential country in the world, we can choose to sit by and watch it happen, or we can decide to become a more environmentally aware population, setting an example for the entire world to see. The debate of the causes of global warming should not matter, because the fact is that we are contributing to global warming through our activities, adding on to any natural climatic phase that the earth is experiencing. By not releasing so much greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere, we can end the global warming scare, and end the most debated environmental topic of the world today. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change (IPCC), estimates are that it will take $1.375 trillion per year to keep the effects of climate change at a sustainable level keeping the global temperature increase to less than two degrees Celsius (3.6 Degrees Fahrenheit). Having a well-coordinated tax on co2 emissions will benefit the world as a whole and help to sustain countries by allowing them to purchase tax credits from underdeveloped countries which they can then use for an innovative and more sustainable future. A carbon tax is a pay as you go plan with carbon credits and being traded in an open market for current polluters to have time to retool for a sustainable energy source. Trade caps would invite civil war between the extreme groups of polluting nations and those that are more environmentally conscious. Monitoring of large pollution sources is already in place with a satellite and checks in surveillance and fiscal and economic policies. By taxing a relatively small number of large sources we can move forward to a cleaner more sustainable earth. Maybe add something on Sustainable Biofuels find alternatives to fossil fuels and Carbon sinks to reduce the effects of Co2 emissions from burning carbon based fuel. To summarize the most significant scientific findings of the preceding few years, scientists have added extensively to the vast body of evidence that demonstrates heat-trapping gases such as carbon dioxide that are fashioned primarily from the burning of fossil fuels are most certainly changing the global climate, rising temperatures and unsettling environments around the earth. My own view is that Global warming does exist and that humans have caused this increase due to the use of fossil fuels creating a greenhouse effect. Though I concede that specific variations of climate change can be on a cycle of the earth’s history, I still maintain that recent increase in climate changes are caused by an excess Co2 emission. For example, the burning of (oil, gas, and coal) is causing Co2 to build up in the atmosphere creating a greenhouse affect trapping gases that would not normally be there. This is rising the overall temperature of the earth and we are unsure of the negative side effects this may be causing for the future. Although some might object that the earth’s climate has a history of cycles and with no clear data as to what effect it will have on human’s lives, I would reply that more research is needed and that we need to start looking for innovative ways to lesson our use of fossil fuels and look for renewable sustainable energy sources with less emissions. The issue is important because we all only have one planet and waiting until it is to late would not really be a viable option.
 

Control of the Rough Wall Turbulent Boundary Layer

Introduction
Turbulence is encountered in the various fluid dynamics operations. It is a very undesirable phenomenon that directly affects efficiency. Turbulence is the introduction of the irregularities in the airflow as well as the pressure distribution. This induces the skin friction drag which is known to significantly reduce the efficiency of the device. Turbulence cannot be dismissed completely, it can only be minimized up to a certain amount. Considering the scope in this area, lot of research is conducted in this field. It is very important to minimize the amount of turbulence as much as possible and it can be achieved by modelling the airflow around the device. The process of modelling the airflow around the device to get maximum efficiency is called turbulence modelling. Turbulence modelling is more practiced in the aerospace and automotive sector. This is very important to model a flow around the cars, airplanes to limit the usage of fuel.

Get Help With Your Essay
If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!
Essay Writing Service

The region closer to the outer surface of the aerodynamic device is considered to be the boundary layer. The boundary layer plays a big part in the behaviour of the turbulence. The boundary layer has a region where the flow is in line or laminar, which is a laminar boundary layer. The region where the flow is disturbed and not linear is called a turbulent boundary layer. The primary reason to study a boundary layer theory is to find the friction drag. The friction drag is calculated by evaluating the pattern of the shear stress distribution over the surface of the wall. Finding the shear stress distribution, velocity profile, and the thickness of the boundary layer are essential for controlling the boundary layer. These terms are calculated for different flows; as mentioned by Hibbeler (2017), for laminar flows by using the Blasius approach and for Turbulent flows by using Prandtl’s one-seventh power law along with a formulation by Prandtl’s and Blasius.
Turbulence modelling is considered to be one of the most difficult topics to study due to its math-heavy basics as well as its dependency on the numerical methods. It may not provide the exact results. It is very important to explore the basic structures before moving to advanced complexities. Considering the difficulties more attention is given to the flow over basics structure, with the less complex flow. Significant research has been conducted on the turbulent boundary layers over a smooth wall surface in the past few years (Kovasznay 1970; Willmarth 1975; Kline 1978; Cantwell 1981; Sreenivasan 1989; Kline and Robinson 1990). Less research has been conducted on the advanced structures where the skin friction is increased due to the introduction of the roughness on the surface (Raupach, Antonia & Rajagopalan 1991).
Based on the results one of the most impressive methods proposed for the control of the flow over a smooth wall was the wall suction method. In this method, region on the wall surface where the turbulent boundary layer formed and then subjected to the wall suction using suction blower. The effect has been studied by comparing the results with or without wall suction. The produced results show that the turbulent boundary layer can be relaminarized by using this method. Limited researchers have tried applying these methods (developed for control of the turbulent boundary layer over the smooth wall) to the rough wall to see the effect.
Boundary Layer Theory
Background
At the beginning of the 20th century, the branch fluid mechanics started getting developed in two directions, theoretical hydrodynamics and hydraulics. The study originated based on application of motion equations to ideal, frictionless and non- viscous fluid. This method always questioned the practicality of the experiments. On the other hand, the science of hydraulics based on the practical approach (Considering all non-ideal factors) to the problems was developed (Schlichting 1960). At the beginning of the current century Ludwig Prandtl worked on the unification of these two branches, and successfully found the co-relation between these two and updated the field of fluid mechanics with the effective amalgamation of these two streams. 
In 1904 Prandtl presented a paper, “On the Motion of Fluids with Very Little Friction” in a Mathematical Congress held at Heidelberg which is considered to be the first document identifying the boundary layer phenomenon. In his eight pages paper, he talked about the theoretical aspects of the boundary layer (Schlichting 1960; Anderson 2005). He showed that the analysis of the much important viscous flows is possible, with some theoretical considerations and with the help of some simplified experiments, he proved that the flow passing over a rigid body can be divided into two different regions, one is the thin layer which sticks to the surface called as boundary layer and the other region away from the body where the effect of friction can be neglected (Anderson 2005).
In 1914 Prandtl showed the results of his famous spheres experiment which depicted the classification of the boundary layer into laminar and turbulent. This discovery was based on the Reynolds founding’s of the classification of flow in fluid dynamics into laminar and 
Turbulent (Schlichting 1960; Dryden 1995). Von Kármán One of the students of the Prandtl in 1921 proposed his well-known equation which involves integration, claiming the computation (approximate) of the boundary layer from the surface (Dryden 1995). After several years of experiments, W. Tollmein was successful in finding the critical value of the Reynolds number, after which the flow starts the transition from the laminar to turbulent. This theory was later verified by H. L. Dryden.
After 1930 the boundary layer theory got popularity and efforts were made by many researchers from all over the world (England, U.S.A, etc.) to understand this important phenomenon directly related to efficiency. At the end of the last century, the rate of papers published on the boundary layer theory is increased by the factor of two.
Boundary layer
Prandtl (1904), proved that fluid flow around the solid body can be divided into two different regions, first one would be the very thin layer close to the solid body which can be called as the boundary layer. The second one would be the region outside this particular layer. In the first region, the friction is considered as its around the surface of the solid body. The second region friction is neglected considering the large distance from the outer surface of the solid body.

Figure 1-1. Boundary-Layer Formation on Smooth Wall (Schlichting 1960).
Figure-1 shows the side view of the boundary layer, where Uꝏ is defined as the free stream velocity. Every fluid particle in the given flow will have its velocity. As the flow proceeds in the X- the direction from the Y-Axis the velocity of the fluid particle increases from the smallest value (Which is 0), when the value of the fluid particle becomes 99% of the free stream velocity that particular point is marked. When all suitable points are marked and drawn in the X-direction, the formed line is called a boundary layer, in figure-1 the boundary line is shown by region below the dotted line. The dotted line is called to be an edge of the boundary layer. δx is defined as the thickness of the boundary layer.
Turbulent Boundary Layer

Figure 1-2. Boundary-Layer Classification (Comsol 2019).
For the external wall-bounded flows, the nearest thin layer to the surface is considered to be a boundary layer. But the boundary layer is a broad term, as there are several parts/regions of the boundary layer. Whenever the fluid passes over the surface (let’s assume the surface as a smooth wall for ease of understanding) up to a certain length, the fluid flow is parallel to the surface in an orderly manner. Eventually, the flow begins to get disturbed and changes to a turbulent flow in which the fluid particles jump from one plane to another. This transition from laminar to turbulent is not sudden. After the demolition of the laminar flow, and before the generation of turbulent flow, a phase occurs where the flow is neither laminar nor turbulent, and this flow/phase is defined to be transitional flow/phase.
In Figure 1-2, the laminar region has particles flow in an orderly manner, and the turbulent region has the fluid particles revolving around their axis. The region in-between the laminar and turbulent is called a transition region where the transition from laminar to turbulent begins. The turbulent boundary layer is the area of interest because it’s the origin of the turbulence. In this work, the objective is to use wall suction just below the turbulent boundary layer region and try to convert the boundary layer into the laminar boundary layer, as much as possible. This can also be called as relaminarization.
The above figure 1-2 is the visual representation of the phases of the boundary layer, but the boundary layer whether it is laminar or turbulent is described using the Reynolds Number. The Reynolds Number is dimensionless quantity gives an idea about the nature of the flow or boundary layer.
Table 1. Boundary-Layer and Reynolds Number (Critical Reynolds Number 2019).

Boundary Layer

Reynolds Number

Laminar

Re

Transitional

2000

Turbulent

Re > 3500

Smooth Wall and Rough Wall
The smooth wall is the flat plate with the plain surface. There are no irregularities introduced. Since the smooth wall comes with no elements that produce roughness on the surface of contact, there is negligible friction with fluid. The rough walls, on the other hand, have irregularities on the surface, which increases the friction and eventually leads to high turbulence. This irregularity could be anything such as cylindrical rods, square-shaped rods, etc. In the last century, a number of researchers has worked on smooth surfaces with very small friction. Rough surfaces were ignored due to the high turbulence introduced by the roughness elements. In which it is very difficult to predict and compute the flow pattern.
The review paper by Raupach, Antonia & Rajagopalan (1991) gives the glimpse of work on turbulent boundary layer in external flows on the smooth wall with a zero pressure gradient (e.g. Kovasznay 1970; Willmarth 1975; Kline 1978; Singh, Radhakrishnan, & Narayan 1988; Antonia, Zhu & Sokolov 1995). The basic turbulence research gives more importance to work on smooth walls, before exploring the advanced complexities such as rough walls or adverse pressure gradient. It is important to study the formation of the boundary layer on smooth surfaces.
The initial hypothesis by Townsend (1976) states that, the outer region of the turbulent boundary layer is the same in both the cases, for a smooth wall as well as for rough wall. The outer region has low shear strength and this is the reason why the outer region is less sensitive to turbulence. Therefore, the outer region is considered to be a region where the turbulence phenomenon is absent. But in the region close to the wall where the shear is large, a significant difference can be observed depending on the smoothness or roughness of the surface. The roughness increases skin friction and alters the structure of the boundary layer (Raupach, Antonia & Rajagopalan 1991).
Krogstad and Antonia (1999) proved that transition from the smooth wall to rough wall causes non- negligible changes in the outer layer. This questions the Townsend (1976) and Raupach, Antonia and Rajagopalan’s (1991) claim on the matter and explains the unpredictability and uncertainty of results in this field of research. Lee and Sung (2007) found the normalization of the turbulent quantities by friction velocities, the roughness introduces the turbulent stresses and vertical turbulent transport in the outer layer (Lee et al. 2009). 
Control of the turbulent boundary layer
In 1976, Furuya, Miyata, and Fujita investigated the turbulent boundary layer formed on the surface introduced to the roughness in the form of the wires which were placed at equal distance. The effect of this advancement on the flow resistance along the boundary layer was observed. The aluminium plate with the small wires of the cementing elements measuring 2 m long and 1m wide fitted with the right angle to the plate at an equal distance throughout. The whole setup was placed in the wind tunnel and measurements performed using a probe. The pressure distribution around the roughness measured, which revealed that the pressure drag acting on the roughness is a major contributor to the surface roughness and the other frictions were observed to be as same as the smooth wall. 
Antonia, Zhu, and Sokolov (1995) relaminarized the wall using the wall suction through the porous strip method, they observed the sufficiently high suction rate causes the pseudo-laminarization of the boundary layer downstream the strip for a very short distance, up to 70 δ0 (δ0 is the boundary layer thickness at the porous strip). Away from the strip, the boundary layer starts to return to the fully turbulent nature. The skin friction coefficient cf decreases in the value below the value of cf obtained when there was no suction. The relaminarization largely depends upon the Reynolds number/suction rate. The required stream wise distance of the full development of the boundary layer decreases with increasing Reynolds Number (Re) for suction rate (σ). The velocity profiles such as mean and RMS longitudinal apart from the undisturbed profiles of Re and σ. The Skewness and flatness factor dont depend upon Re but subject to changes as per the change in turbulence structure. 
The ‘Direct Numerical Simulation’ method was tested by Lee et al. (2009) to understand the structure of the turbulent boundary layer over a wall roughened by rods. The instantaneous flow field obtained by using the DNS was used to inspect the boundary layer over the given surface. The roughness used was two-dimensional rectangular rods placed equidistant from each other with k/δ = 0.05 (where δ boundary layer thickness). The comparison of characteristics of the turbulent boundary layer over a smooth wall and rough wall gives the details about the effect of surface roughness. Friction velocity is affected with the insertion of the roughness on the smooth wall it has very little effect on outer layer vorticity fluctuations.
Later in 2014, Kamruzzaman et al. changed the roughness elements from rectangular to circular. This study was based on the turbulent boundary layer over a circular bar with two-dimensional transverse. The rod with diameter k was arranged with the same spacing of along the line λ/k of 8 (λ is the distance between two circular bars) which resulted in maximum form drag. For measurements of the mean and fluctuating velocities hot wire anemometry was used, to find out the values of drag. The friction velocity is the measure contributing factor to the roughness effect, there is more importance to this value, and it was measured by using the two methods and the results were compared. The first method was to use the momentum integral equation while the other one was based on measuring the distribution of pressure around the rods. The results obtained from both methods showed consistency for friction velocity to within 3%. Further observation revealed that the drag coefficient is independent of the Re, as it didn’t show the change in static pressure over a change in Re. the displacement height also remained unchanged over this range of Re. the mean velocity showed collapse when scaled with friction velocity and thickness. Which explains that these are the better parameters for the scaling of the rough wall.
The recent work in this area is performed by Djenidi, Karuzzaman, and Dostal (2019). Where the two-dimensional rough wall turbulent boundary layer was subjected to the wall suction. The Hot- wire anemometry is used for the measurements such as velocity fluctuations. The wall suction was applied to the turbulent boundary layer through a porous strip. The roughness was of the circular rods, placed in the entire length of the wall in the wind tunnel, with a diameter of k = 1.6 mm and were placed uniformly at the distance of 24 mm which is with the ratio λ/k of 15 (this choice of wavelength by k ratio ensures the roughness of the turbulent boundary layer). This showed that after the impact on the roughness element close to the suction strip, the outer part of the boundary layer was diverted towards the inner part. The formation of the vortices due to the introduction of the roughness elements ultimately results in the increase in drag coefficient, which demands more energy at the input or in other words decreases the efficiency significantly. The relaminarization of the boundary layer was not achieved (which was the key point behind this experiment). Also, not much change was observed in the turbulent boundary layer.
Conclusion
Turbulence reduction is desired in the aerospace and automobile industry as it directly affects the efficiency. Since the discovery of a boundary layer theory, much attention has been given to the flows over a smooth surface. In the present literature review, the aim is to understand the concept of the turbulent boundary layer and to study the control strategies developed for the control of the turbulent boundary layer over a smooth wall. The control strategies developed for the smooth wall will be applied to the rough wall to minimize the effect of turbulence.
References
Akinlade, OG, Bergstrom, DJ, Tachie, MF & Castillo, L 2004, ‘Outer flow scaling of smooth and rough wall turbulent boundary layers’, Experiments in Fluids, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 604-612.
Anderson, JD 2005, ‘Ludwig Prandtl’s boundary layer’, Physics Today, vol. 58, no.12, pp. 42-48.
Antonia, RA, Zhu, Y & Sokolov, M 1995, ‘Effect of concentrated wall suction on a turbulent boundary layer’, Physics of Fluids, vol. 7,no. 10, pp. 2465-2474.
Cantwell, BJ 1981, ‘Organized motion in turbulent flow’, Annual review of fluid mechanics, vol. 13, no.1, pp.457-515.
Critical Reynolds Number 2019, viewed 11 November 2019, https://www.nuclear-power.net/nuclear-engineering/fluid-dynamics/reynolds-number/critical-reynolds-number/
Djenidi, L, Kamruzzaman, M & Dostal, L 2019 ‘Effects of wall suction on a 2D rough wall turbulent boundary layer’ Experiments in Fluids, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 43.
Dryden, HL 1995, ‘Fifty years of boundary-layer theory and experiment’, Science, 121(3142), pp.375-380.
Gad-el-Hak, M 1989, ‘Flow control’, Applied mechanics reviews, vol. 42, no. 10, pp. 261-293.
Hibbeler, RC 2017, Fluid Mechanics in SI Units. Pearson Education India.
Kamruzzaman, Md 2016, ‘On The Effects of Non- Homogeneity On Small Scale Turbulence’, The University of Newcastle NSW, Australia.
Katz, Y, Nishri, B & Wygnanski, I 1989, ‘The delay of turbulent boundary layer separation by oscillatory active control’, Physics of Fluids A: Fluid Dynamics, vol. 1, no. 2, pp.179-181.
Kline, SJ 1978, ‘The role of visualization in the study of the structure of the turbulent boundary layer’, Coherent Structure of Turbulent Boundary Layers, pp.1-26.
Kline, SJ & Robinson, SK 1990, ‘Quasi-coherent structures in the turbulent boundary layer’, I-Status report on a community-wide summary of the data, Near-wall turbulence, pp.200-217.
Kovasznay, LS 1970, ‘The turbulent boundary layer’, Annual review of fluid mechanics, 2(1), pp.95-112.
Krogstadt, PÅ & Antonia, RA, 1999, ‘Surface roughness effects in turbulent boundary layers’, Experiments in fluids, vol. 27, no. 5, pp.450-460.
Kumbhar, S 2019, MECH 6840A ‘Control of Rough Wall Turbulent Boundary Layer’, Literature Review 1, Semester 2 2019, The University of Newcastle.
Lee, SH & Sung, HJ, 2007, ‘Direct numerical simulation of the turbulent boundary layer over a rod-roughened wall’, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, vol. 584, pp.125-146.
Lee, JH, Lee, SH, Kim, K & Sung, HJ 2009, ‘Structure of the turbulent boundary layer over a rod-roughened wall’, International Journal of Heat and Fluid Flow, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 1087-1098.
Leonardi, S, Orlandi, P & Antonia, RA 2007, ‘Properties of d-and k-type roughness in a turbulent channel flow’, Physics of fluids, vol. 19, no. 12, p. 125101.
Oyewola, O, Djenidi, L & Antonia, RA 2003, ‘Combined influence of the Reynolds number and localised wall suction on a turbulent boundary layer’, Experiments in fluids, vol. 35, no. 2, pp.199-206.
Pailhas, G, Cousteix, J, Anselmet, F & Fulachier, L 1991, ‘Influence of suction through a slot on a turbulent boundary layer’, In Symposium on Turbulent Shear Flows, 8th, Munich, Federal Republic of Germany, pp. 18-4.
Turbulence isn’t just a science problem 2019, viewed 7 September 2019, https://phys.org/news/2018-06-turbulence-isnt-science-problem.html/
Raupach, MR, Antonia, RA & Rajagopalan, S 1991, ‘Rough-wall turbulent boundary layers’, Applied mechanics reviews, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 1-25.
Schlichting, H 1960, Boundary layer theory (Vol. 960), New York: McGraw-Hill.
Singh, P, Narayan, KA & Radhakrishnan, V 1989, ‘Fluctuating flow due to unsteady rotation of a disk’, AIAA journal, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 150-154.
Sreenivasan, KR 1989, ‘The turbulent boundary layer’, Frontiers in experimental fluid mechanics, Springer, Berlin, pp. 159-209.
Townsend, AA 1976, ‘The structure of turbulent shear flow’, Cambridge University.
Wallis, RA 1950, Some characteristics of a turbulent boundary layer in the vicinity of a suction slot, Aeronautical Research Laboratories.
Willmarth, WW 1975, ‘Structure of turbulence in boundary layers’, In Advances in applied mechanics, Elsevier, Vol. 15, pp. 159-254.