LDV

LASER DOPPLER
VELOCIMETRY

K T Madhavan
Experimental Aerodynamics Division

Lecture Course on
Advanced Flow Diagnostic Techniques
National Aerospace Laboratories
Bangalore
17-19 Sept. 2008

Laser Doppler Velocimetry 1

Lecture Course On Advanced Flow Diagnostic Techniques, NAL, Sept 2008
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 2
2. BASIC PRINCIPLES OF LDV............................................................................................. 3
2.1 Doppler effect and optical heterodyning.............................................................................. 3
2.2 Basic optical configurations................................................................................................. 4
2.3 Forward and backscatter modes........................................................................................... 5
2.4 Flow direction sensing using Bragg cell.............................................................................. 5
2.5 Particle size measurement using Phase Doppler Analyzer .................................................. 6
2.6 Signal Processing................................................................................................................. 6
2.7 Biasing errors and corrections ............................................................................................. 7
3. LDV SYSTEM MODULES .................................................................................................. 9
3.1 Laser..................................................................................................................................... 9
3.2 Transmitting and receiving optics modules ......................................................................... 9
3.3 Signal Processing Systems................................................................................................. 10
3.4 LDV data processing and presentation .............................................................................. 11
3.5 LDV traversing system...................................................................................................... 12
3.6 Flow seeding and particle generation ................................................................................ 13
4. APPLICATIONS OF LDV AT NAL.................................................................................. 14
4.1 Development of schemes for determination of Turbulence Intermittency........................ 14
and zone averages using from LDV data
4.2 Control of flow separation in an axisymmetric flow......................................................... 15
4.3 Control of flow separation in an axisymmetric flow with shear layer............................... 17
closure occurs in near-wake
4.4 Control of flow separation in a 2D flow............................................................................ 17
4.5 Phase-averaged LDV measurements in a bluff-body wake............................................... 18
5. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................... 20


1. INTRODUCTION
Ever since the invention of laser in 1958, there have been rapid developments in many
scientific and engineering applications of this phenomenal tool. One of the remarkable
applications of laser for flow measurements has been the Laser Doppler Velocimeter (LDV).
The first application of laser-based flow measurement was done by Yeh and Cummins
1
in
1964 with a laser-based Fabry-Perrot interferometer, which they called He-Ne spectrometer.
Several laboratory applications of the laser Doppler velocimetry technique were developed.
The period between 1970 and 1990 saw rapid improvements in terms of the capability and
versatility of the system. Commercial systems were manufactured worldwide, leading
manufacturers being Dantec, and Denmark, TSI, USA. Since then, LDV has undergone many
quantum jumps and has resulted in a matured system not only for velocity measurements, but
also for important applications like particle size measurements using the concept of phase-
Doppler analysis.
Modern LDV systems have the capability for applications in a wide variety of flows under
different situations: low speed flows to supersonic flows, natural free convection, internal
flows, steam and gas turbines, reacting flows, atmospheric flows, high temperature plasmas
and many others. The large number of applications of the tool is mainly due to its now
famous advantages (as compared to conventional tools) of being non-intrusive, able to sense
flow direction, free of calibration, highly spatially resolvable, insensitive to temperature
effects, among many. Several books written from late 70s onwards, present detailed accounts
of principle of the technique, optical configurations, signal processing and data processing
methods
2-5
. Good accounts of the modern LDV/PDA systems are also available in the
websites of two major manufacturers, TSI and Dantec
42-43
. A large number of applications
are also available in the literature today, in Theses, International Conferences as well as
Journals, all of which cannot be cited here because of the number. References
6-17
gives a few
applications, specifically devoted to development of the system, although they do not
represent the topics extensively. The purpose of this lecture is to give a brief exposure to the
powerful tool of LDV/PDA, including optical configuration, direction sensing/electronic
frequency shifting and signal processing using DSP based frequency domain analysis. Some
applications of the tool are discussed, specifically of aerodynamics measurements. These
include the work carried out at NAL in the areas of research in turbulent jets involving LDV
measurement of turbulence intermittency and zone averages, control of flow separation using
a new concept of D-type tangential blowing in axi-symmetric and 2D cases and phase-
averaged LDV measurements in a bluff body flow to demonstrate the application of a
Forward Splitter Plate (FSP) for drag reduction.


2. BASIC PRINCIPLES OF LDV
Laser Doppler Velocimeter, as the name indicates, is an instrument which performs
measurement of velocity of a fluid, based on the famous Doppler-Fizeau effect. Velocity of
the fluid is measured by measuring the velocity of micron-sized particles, present in the fluid,
naturally occurring or by seeding.
2.1 Doppler effect and optical heterodyning
Let us consider a particle P (as shown in Fig.1) moving with a velocity U, illuminated by a
laser beam of frequency f
0
and wavelength
0
;
i
is the unit vector corresponding to the
propagation direction of laser beam. Let us consider light scattered in the direction of the unit
vector s, having a frequency f
s
and wavelength
s
.
The Doppler shift f
D
can be written as
f
D
= f
0
- f
s

(2.1)
The relative speed between the wavefronts of illuminating beam and the particle is
c U.
i,
where c, the velocity of light = f
0
.
0
.
The moving particle intercepts the wavefront at a rate
f = (c- U.
i
)/
0
= f
0
- U.
i
/
0
(2.2)
The observer intercepting the scattered light along
s
intercepts the wavefront at a rate
f
s
= (c + U.
s
)/
s
= f + U.
s
/
s
= f
0
+ U.(
s
/
s
-
i
/
0
)... (2.3)
It may be noted that s 0; Eq.2.3 then reduces to
f
s
= f
0
+ U/
0
.(
s
-
i
)

(2.4)
Hence the net change in frequency (Doppler shift) of incident light observed by a stationary
observer, due to the relative speed of particle and orientation of particle path w.r.t. the
illumination direction i and scattered light direction
s
can be written as
f
D
= f
s
- f
0
= (U/
0
).(
s
-
i
)

(2.5)

Eq.2.5 represents the basic principle of LDV. By measuring the Doppler shift fD, flow
velocity can thus be determined.
It may be noted that the typical values of Doppler are of the order of 300KHz/m/s, which is
extremely small compared to the laser frequency of 1014 Hz. Hence, to measure f
D
, optical
heterodyning or mixing (the principle used in radios) is adopted in LDV. The resultant sum
and difference frequencies (f
0
f
D
) are optically heterodyned on the photodetecor (PD)


surface. Since the photo-detector cannot respond to laser frequency f
0
of the order of 1014
Hz, the Doppler shift is detected by PD surface which converts this to electrical signal.

2.2 Basic optical configurations

There are three distinct optical modes in which the optical heterodyning can be carried out:
reference beam mode, differential beam mode and dual scatter mode. The most efficient and
hence most popularly used among these is the differential beam mode (also called fringe
mode); we will restrict ourselves to this method. In this configuration, two laser beams of
equal intensity illuminate the moving particle P, resulting in two beams (
s1
, f
s1
) and (
s2
, f
s2
)
scattered in the direction
s
, as shown in Fig.2.

Following Eq.2.4 and Eq.2.5,
f
s1
= f
0
+ U/
0
.(
s1
-
i1
) ---- (2.6)
f
s2
= f
0
+ U/
0
.(
s2
-
i2
) ---- (2.7)

and the combination of two beams results in shifted frequency
f
D
= f
s2
- f
s1
= U/
0
.(
i1
-
i2
) ---- (2.8)
It can be seen from Eq.2.8 that the detected frequency is no more dependent on the direction
of scattering; the scattered light can be collected in any direction, thus making it possible to
collect the scattered light in wide solid angles. This results in higher scattered light intensities
and hence higher Signal-to-Noise ratio (SNR).

The differential beam mode can also be analysed using fringe mode. As shown in Fig.3,
two illuminating laser beams cross at the point of measurement at an angle. The crossing of
two coherent laser beams result in the formation of an interference fringe pattern of spacing
= /2.sin(/2), as shown. Particles crossing the fringe pattern modulate the light intensity on
the PD surface. If is the time taken by a particle to cross a fringe,

= 1/ f
D
= /U ---- (2.9)

and hence
U = {/2.sin(/2)}.f
D
---- (2.10)


2.3 Forward and backscatter modes
Based on the method of collection of the scattered light, there are two modes of LDV
operation, viz., forward and backscatter modes
2
. Fig.4a and show the schematics of the
differential beam optical configurations in the two modes. The system consists of a
continuous wave laser, a Bragg cell (the function of this will explained in the next section),
transmitting optics consisting of fiber optic cables, converging achromatic lenses, etc. The
receiving section (Fig.5) consists of wide aperture convex lenses, pinhole section and the
photo detector modules. In Fig.4a, the scattered light collection is done in the direction of
transmission, where the scattered light intensities are high. In the back scatter mode shown in
Fig.4b, the transmitting and receiving optical modules are on the same side; the scattered
light intensity is lower in this angle. However, this configuration is preferred from the point
of traversing convenience.
Fig.5 shows a photograph of the fiber optics based LDV system with laser, fiber couplers and
transmitting and receiving optical modules. Fig.6 shows details of the transmitting optics
modules of a single-component LDV. The optics mainly consists of a beam splitter to derive
two coherent beams, a beam expander for deriving narrow beams at the crossing point of the
corrected high-quality achromatic lens system, which converge the beams at the point of
measurement.
2.4 Flow direction sensing using Bragg cell
It may be noted from Eq.2.8 and Eq.2.10 that the measurement of Doppler shift can give only
the magnitude of the flow velocity; Particles moving in either the forward or reverse direction
will produce identical signals and frequencies. This results in directional ambiguity of the
velocity measurement. In order to resolve this ambiguity, the technique of fringe shifting is
often adopted. There are different ways to achieve the fringe shifting; the most popular
technique is by employing an acousto-optic modulator, viz., a Bragg cell, shown
schematically in Fig.7. It consists of a peizo-electric transducer, vibrated inside an acoustic
cell at a precise frequency f
B
(usually 40MHz), creating moving wavefronts at this frequency.
When the laser beam passes through this, the beam undergoes Bragg diffraction. The first
order diffracted laser beam crossing with unshifted beam results in a fringe pattern moving at
the rate of Bragg cell frequency. Thus the interference fringes appear to move at a velocity,
Us corresponding to the frequency f
B
in positive or negative direction, based on the direction
of Bragg shift, as shown in Fig.7. Now if the flow direction is in the same direction as that of
fringe movement, the f
D
gets subtracted from f
B
; if they are in opposite directions, the
frequencies get added. Thus by determining the sum or difference, flow direction can be
determined. Fig.8 gives a graphical representation of the concept.
Apart from optical frequency shift, it is also usual to add further positive or negative


frequency shifts electronically; these shifts are much lower than the optical shift, usually
within 10MHz. This helps to measure very low velocities (~mm/s) by adding a desired
(optimum) frequency so that the shift is within measurable range. Similarly, if the Doppler
frequency is in higher range, it can be optimally downshifted so that measurements can be
carried out effectively.
2.5 Particle size measurement using Phase Doppler Analyzer
One of the important developments in LDV development in later years is that of particle size
measurements. A tool popularly used for this measurement is the Phase Doppler Analyser
(PDA), also called Phase Doppler Particle Analyser (PDPA). PDA systems can be used to
measure on-line the size, velocity and concentration of spherical particles, droplets or bubbles
suspended in gaseous or liquid flows. A very common application is in the analysis of
atomized liquids (sprays), in e.g. fuel injection, spray painting, liquid metal spray and
pharmaceutical sprays.
The greatest advantage of using this technique is that it can be combined with LDV as
hardware and software modules. The Phase Doppler method is based on the principles of
light scattering interferrometry. Measurements are made at a small, non-intrusive optical
probe volume defined by the intersection of two laser beams. As a particle passes through the
probe volume, it scatters light from the beams into a multi-detector receiving probe,
strategically located at an off-axis collection angle. The phase shift between the Doppler burst
signals from different detectors is proportional to the size of the spherical particles.
The basic principle of Phase Doppler Analyser is illustrated in Fig.9a. The measurements are
performed at the intersection of two laser beams, where there is an interference fringe pattern
of alternating light and dark planes A . Fig.(b) shows a Dantec PDA system. Particles scatter
the light, which appears to flash, as the particles pass through the bright planes of the
interference pattern B. Receiving optics placed at an off-axis location focus scattered light
onto multiple detectors C.. Each detector converts the optical signal into a Doppler burst with
a frequency linearly proportional to the particle velocity D . The processor measures the
phase difference between the Doppler signals from different detectors. This is a direct
measure of the particle diameter. Results are processed by the BSA Flow Software Packages
E .
2.6 Signal Processing
Fig.10(a) shows the typical LDV output signal from a photosensor (usually a photomultiplier
tube). It may be noted that the signal (in a simple form) is modulated by a Gaussian envelope;
because of the laser output intensity follows a Gaussian distribution. More importantly, it
contains components of random noise (white noise); the Signal-to-Noise Ratios (SNRs) are


determined by laser beam quality (TEM
00
mode), optical alignment, stray reflections into the
photosensor surface, efficiency of photosensor etc. The signals are in the form of discrete
bursts, corresponding to the particle arrival rate in the measurement volume. Hence there is
a need of processing the LDV signals.
The first step in LDV signal processing is passing the signals through a band pass filter,
which will remove noise below and above the filter bandwidth. Fig.10(b) shows the bandpass
filtered signal. However, the signals are to be further processed before extract the Doppler
frequency information. There are two main methods to derive the Doppler frequency from the
bursts, viz., Time domain analysis and Frequency domain analysis. In time-domain
analysis, as shown in Fig.11, the burst signals are converted to square waves by threshold
detector circuits. Time periods for N1 and N2 pulses, TN1 and TN2 are then compared (N1
and N2 are usually 5 and 8); if the condition
(TN1/N1) - (TN2/N2) ---- (2.11)
where ( is the allowable error) is satisfied, the signals are validated and the zero-crossing
frequency (Doppler frequency) is determined digitally.
Modern LDV signal processors are based on frequency domain analysis in which the
Doppler bursts are detected first
14
; frequencies of these bursts are then determined by
hardware FFTs, based on Digital Signal Processors. Since the signal and noise peaks are
easily distinguishable in frequency spectrum, this technique has the high advantage of ability
to work under very low SNRs, where in counter-processors may fail.

2.7 Biasing errors and corrections

In LDV data processing the mean velocities are determined by ensemble-averaging several
instantaneous velocity data realizations. However, it may not be always correct to assume
that straightforward averaging gives the mean velocities. This is because of the
disproportionate number of measurements recorded between higher and lower velocities;
more particles pass through measurement volume at higher velocities compared to lower. In
other words, there is a bias towards higher velocities that lower velocities. This is called
velocity bias. Corrections generally followed for this bias involve the weighting
instantaneous by residence time of the particle in the measurement volume and measurement
rate (obtained from computation of expected arrival rates of k
th
velocity)
18-19
.



In general, the corrected nth moment of the particle is given by

<
n
> =(W
k.
k
n
W
k
----- (2.12)

N
k= 1

where W
k
is the appropriate weighting factor.


3. LDV SYSTEM MODULES
3.1 Laser
One of the most important subsystems of LDV is the laser. The laser used for LDV
applications are ion-lasers: He-Ne laser is used for single-component, low velocity
measurements, like biological flows. Diode laser are also used in flows of low and medium
ranges. For aeronautical applications (measurements in wind tunnels, jets etc.) where 2 or 3
velocity components of flow are to be measured, Ar-ion lasers, which has multiple
wavelengths and much higher powers are used. The most popularly used lasers in LDV are
made by Spectra Physics, USA and Coherent Lasers, USA. A photograph of the Spectra
Physics Ar-ion laser is shown in Fig.12a. As the working principle of laser is well known, no
attempt is made here to explain it detail. Referring to the schematic sketch of laser in Fig.12b,
it may be noted that stimulation of atoms is achieved inside the ionized Argon plasma tube
(excited by the high voltage supply) and the partially and fully reflecting mirrors provide the
optical amplification inside the resonance cavity. Fig.12c shows all the wavelengths of light
emitted by the Argon laser operating in multi-mode. Every wavelength is a monochromatic
light source of itself and each wavelength has a very narrow bandwidth. The two dominant
wavelengths, of 514nm green and 488nm blue make up about 67% of the total beam output
power and are used in LDV applications. For 3-component applications, the purple line of
wavelength 351nm is used. Single line operation is also possible by inserting prisms,
diffraction gratings and other optical devices to "filter out" the unwanted wavelengths. Of
course, when single line operation is required, the total output power decreases dramatically
as well.
The important requirements of the lasers used in LDV are high coherence length, frequency
stability and power stability and importantly, its ability to maintain the operation in TEM
00

mode, which is a prime requirement for fringe formation in the measurement volume. For
LDV wind tunnel applications, 2 or 5 watts laser is used. Higher frequency stability and
mode stability can be achieved by using an etalon; however, this leads to reduction in the
laser power.

3.2 Transmitting and receiving optics modules
Fig.13 and shows a schematic of a 2D LDV system from TSI Inc., USA and Fig.14, a 3-
component LDV system from TSI.
Scattered light from the receiving fiber(s) is separated by wavelength using custom dichroics
and other optics, eliminating color contamination but maximizing throughput. Light bars are
easily interchangeable, making it a simple matter to go from two-probe 3D LDV to single


receiver 3D LDV. The individual channel outputs are available for connecting to the signal
processor. The photo-detector voltage is controlled and monitored via software to optimize
the signal quality. A built-in control circuit prevents photomultiplier tube saturation. The pre-
configured typical three-component (3D) LDV system is used to get all three components of
velocity, simultaneously. The fiber optic transceiver probes offer point-and-shoot velocity
measurement capability, with large 61 mm collection apertures. The probes are attached to
convenient rotating mounts for easy setup. Alignment devices are included for obtaining high
coincident data rates. Processing electronics can be pre-selected and configured for a wide
range of velocity measurements.
3.3 Signal Processing Systems
As mentioned earlier, present day LDV systems employ frequency domain analysis for signal
processing. LDV systems made by TSI Inc. and Dantec Dynamics use patented signal
processing systems named as FSA and BSA. These processors are based on hardwared/
firmwared DSP modules to detect valid Doppler bursts, perform burst correlation and
determination of Doppler frequency using FFT/DFT techniques and are optimized for high
speed performances. They also work under drastically reduced SNRs (at times, at signal
levels lower than noise levels). They also have advanced post processing and presentation
facilities. In the following paragraphs, the FSA system is described s an example.
Fig.15 shows the TSI FSA signal processor system. The FSA 4000 is a state-of-the-art digital
burst correlator designed especially for gleaning frequency and phase information from the
most demanding fluid mechanics and particle diagnostics applications. It is specially suited to
high speed and/or high density flows with short transit times. The high speed FSA 4000
allows measurements to be made in flows that were previously impossible to measure, like
diesel sprays, pulsed fuel injectors, and supersonic wind tunnels. The FSA employs an 8-bit
digitizer to continuously sample the incoming signal. The FSAs burst detector (patented
DFT with look up tables) is designed to identify bursts based on signal-to-noise ratio (rather
than amplitude and envelope), and the corresponding results are unbiased measurements with
higher data rates and increased accuracy of flow turbulence levels. The burst detector also
estimates the frequency of every burst so that each burst can be sampled at the optimum
sampling rate (using multiple A/D Converters). As a result, sampled bursts have an optimum
number of cycles (patented). The burst detector also locates the beginning and the end of each
burst so that each sample data block is centered on the burst where the signal quality is the
best. Frequency and phase are measured by a unique firmware based autocorrelation/cross
correlation technique. It also uses both the Fourier transform and autocorrelation techniques,
for uses PDPA signal processor for the highest sensitivity and resolution. All communication
and data transfer are handled by a true plug-and-play IEEE 1394 (FireWire) interface, which
is built-into modern PCs. The many features and attributes of the FSA are summarized below.


A block schematic of the FSA processor is shown in Fig.16. The burst detector dynamically
determines the SNR of the input signal and validates the burst based on its coherency (not on
amplitude). Thus all particles going through the measurement volume can give detectable
bursts, which results in unbiased measurements with higher data rates and increased accuracy
of flow turbulence levels. It also measures the approximate frequency of each and every burst
so that the optimum sampling rate can be selected dynamically (using multiple samplers)
based on 10-15 cycles per burst. The burst detector also locates the beginning and end of the
burst so that the envelope can be centered on the signal where the signal quality is the best.
This procedure ensures that each sample envelope for each burst contains data from the best
part of the burst, and never contains noise from outside the burst.
Automatic sampling rate and optimization of each burst : multiple samplers perform the 8-bit
A/D conversion on each burst simultaneously. Using the frequency measured by the burst
detector, the optimum sampling rate is selected, resulting in a sample size spread over 10 -15
cycles for every burst. All the while, the number of samples used for each burst is
automatically optimized (up to 256 per burst), to prevent noise from ever being processed.
This procedure maximizes the frequency resolution for all Doppler bursts.
3.4 LDV data processing and presentation
The basic fluid flow data to be extracted from LDV measurements are the instantaneous
velocity data, burst intervals, particle arrival rates and phase information of aprticles (for
PDA). From the instantaneous velocity data (typical two-component, u
i
,v
i
), mean (U,V) and
fluctuations (u or v) are determined by ensemble averaging as

U = (u
i
)/N ---- (3.1)
N
i =1

V = (v
i
)/N ----- (3.2)
N
i =1

u
2
=
1
2
= (u
i
-

U)
2
/N ----- (3.3)
v
2
=
2
2
= (v
i
-

v)
2
/N ----- (3.4)
From Eq,3.3 and Eq.3.4, it can be shown that Reynolds shear stress

-u.v = (
1
2
-
2
2
)/2 ----- (3.5)


and turbulent kinetic energy
u
2
+
v
2
= (
1
2
+
2
2
)/2 ----- (3.6)
The major manufacturers of LDV (Dantec and TSI) provide their software packages for LDV
data acquisition, preprocessing, post-processing and presentation, based on Windows. Dantec
Burst Spectrum Analyzer (BSA) Flow Software Windows software package, in combination
with Dantec Dynamics' LDV processors and optical LDV systems, provide integrated,
flexible solutions for fluids experiments along with Particle Sizing add-on the BSA Flow
Software package.
BSA Flow Software features include End-results on-line, Project-explorer, Wizards for quick
system set-up, On-line Doppler burst monitor and Integrated measurement interface. The
software supports: MATLAB
link, Particle sizing, Cyclic Phenomena, Spectrum, Correlation

and Tecplot
Data Loader.
Package also has features like Fast access to data with the project explorer, Wizards for quick
system set-up. Wizards can be used for:
- Traverse mesh generation, to optimization of mesh density and system set-up for the flow
conditions
- System configuration, including LDA optics, processors, traverse and optional hardware
- Processor set-up to suit expected flow velocities
The flow data loader is used to load data to Tecplot that gives the user direct access to
project files created by the BSA Flow software package, elimination the need to export data.
Data is loaded directly from inside Tecplot using pop-up windows; the loader also allows
individual accommodation of the data and execution of macros during loading.
The Flow data processing software combined with the Particle sizing add-on and additional
hardware, allows the user to upgrade an LDA system to a Particle Dynamics Analysis (PDA)
system.
3.5 LDV traversing system
As mentioned earlier, LDV is a point measurement system; the optical probe has to be
traversed in the required axes (X, Y, Z or all) to move the LDV measuring point to the
required position. This is done by using a 2D or 3D traverse system. A schematic of 3D
traverse supplied by TSI Inc., USA is shown in Fig.17a. A 3D traverse with particle density
analyzer (Dantec Dynamics) mounted is shown in Fig.17b. The traverse is automated; 2D or
3D traverse coordinates can be is stored as a matrix. Under software control, it can
automatically move the measuring point (the while optimally selecting the system operating
parameters at each location. This provides a fully automated, optimized measurement system


for mapping the flow field efficiently.

3.6 Flow seeding and particle generation
The correct choice of seed particles is critical to the successful execution of LDV
experiments. Seed particles should be such that they follow the flow faithfully, with no
relative velocity gradients. They have to satisfy even the most difficult measurement
requirements, including those in supersonic flows, where the particle sizes should be of sub-
micron sizes. It is also important to ensure that the seeding particles do not cause health
hazard. Available seed particle materials include silicon carbide, nylon, polystyrene, titanium
dioxide, and glass, to name a few. Hollow particles are also used for improved density
matching with the flow medium, as well as coated particles for maximizing the reflected light
component. Standard particle sizes range from 1 micron to 12 microns. Fig.18 shows a
photograph of TSI seed generator. This is a relatively large-particle aerosol generator and
produces highly concentrated aerosol in a broad particle-size range, from 0.1 to 10 m in
diameter. It produces potassium chloride (KCl) or other aerosols.
At NAL, we have used several types of seeding materials, which included glycerin-water
mixture, oil particles, smoke made from liquid paraffin, titanium dioxide, polystyrene latex
spheres and fog fluid. The fog fluid is being used extensively for PIV; most of the recent
LDV measurements were also carried out with the well known Eurolite smoke fluid (using
Antari Fog Generator) which provided good particle concentration even within the
recirculating zones of the flow.


4. APPLICATIONS OF LDV AT NAL
Since the installation of the Dantec 2-component LDV system at NAL
20
in 1988, the unique
capabilities of the system have been exploited by applying it to a variety of flow
measurements, including turbulent jets, separated axisymmetric and 2-D flow fields and
unsteady flow field in bluff body wakes. Attempts were also made to develop some
indigenous LDV signal processors, based on time-domain and frequency domain analysis
techniques
21-23
. The salient features of this work are presented briefly in the following
sections.
4.1 Development of schemes for determination of Turbulence Intermittency
and zone averages using from LDV data
It is well-known that conditional sampling and short-time averaging can bring out certain
important features of turbulent flows, and in such cases, long-time averaging of the flow
parameters can be of limited value
10
. A variety of conditional sampling and averaging
schemes exist for continuous data from a sensor like hot-wire or pressure transducer
24-25
.
However, schemes are rather limited for laser velocimetry, which is an ideal diagnostic tool
for vortex flows and separated flows. This is primarily due to the difficulties one encounters
in LDV measurements, such as non-uniformity in sampling and the presence of white noise
in the signal. The present work involved the development of schemes for the determination of
turbulence intermittency factor and zone averages corresponding to the turbulent/non-
turbulent zones in a circular jet, using derivative scheme
10
.
Derivative scheme involves the determination of a criterion function C
u
defined as
C
u
= (
2
u
i
/t
i
2
)
2
---- (4.1)
where
2
ui/ti
2
corresponds to the finite-difference analogue of the second derivative of u
i
. A
discrete-time analogue of VITA
26
called Variable Window Averaging (VWA) was developed
to smooth the effects of randomness in sampling and noise in instantaneous LDV velocity
data
27-28
. A detector function I(t) is then obtained from C
u
and rms velocity data, such that
I(t) = 1, if C
u
> .u
rms
2
/(t)
4 -------
(4.2)
= 0, otherwise
where indicates the threshold of comparison.
Turbulence intermittency factor (defined as the ratio of the time for which the flow was
turbulent to the total time) is then calculated from
= t
i.
I(t
i
)/t
i
., i = 1,N ----- (4.3)



and the zone averages <u>
t
and <u>
n
corresponding to the turbulent and non-turbulent
regions of the flow respectively
<u>
t
= t
i.
I(t
i
).u
i
/(t
i
.) ----- (4.4)
<u>
n
= {t
i.
(1-I(t
i
)).u
i
/{t
i
.(1-)} ---- (4.5)
were determined in a circular jet flow using the above scheme
29
.
LDV measurements were carried out in a turbulent jet at a Reynolds number (based on jet
exit diameter) of 75,000 in the self-preserving region of the jet. Fig.20 shows the
comparisons of intermittency factors obtained by present scheme with those of Wygnanski
and Fiedler with similar measurements with hotwire
30
; results can be seen to compare very
well. Zone averages corresponding to the turbulent and non-turbulent regions of the flow
(present scheme and those of Chevrey and Tutu
31
) are compared in Fig.21, which show very
good agreement, thus validating the scheme
32
.
4.2 Control of flow separation in an axisymmetric flow
Separation control by passive or active means is widely employed for improving
aerodynamic performance. Tangential blowing, which involves injection of fluid parallel to
the wall through a narrow slot, is generally known to be an effective means of separation
control; the injected mass energizes the boundary layer near the wall providing sufficient
kinetic energy to negotiate adverse pressure gradients. Since blowing involves injection of
additional mass and momentum into the boundary layer, the parameters affecting its
performance include the jet velocity, density and the slot height (in two-dimensional flows).
2-component LDV measurements were carried out to assess in detail the effectiveness of D-
type injection in a low speed separated flow
33-34
. Turbulent boundary layer separation
occurred on an axisymmetric contoured afterbody due to sustained adverse pressure
gradients. Based on surface pressure and detailed flow field measurements with LDV, it was
explicitly demonstrated that D-type tangential injection can be an effective means of
separation control, considering both wall and wake flow reversals. Experiments were
performed in the 0.91 m dia. Low speed wind tunnel at a freestream velocity (U
) of 20 m/s.
The axisymmetric model configuration employed had a diameter (D) of 122 mm and a total
length of 1420 mm with a tangent ogive nose 300 mm long. Fig.22 shows the afterbody
model with facility for tangential blowing with an annular axisymmetric slot height (h) 2.5
mm. Measurements of the mean and turbulent quantities were made using a three-beam, two-


component Dantec laser Doppler velocimeter, shown in Fig.19. The LDV was used in the
forward scatter mode to achieve higher signal-to-noise ratio.
The mean velocity profiles (normalized by freestream velocity, U
) at four critical
streamwise stations as affected by blowing are displayed in Fig.23; x = 28 and 39 mm
correspond to the separation and reattachment locations without blowing. The elimination of
the reversed flow in the separated zone (x = 18 mm, 25 mm: Fig. 23) at both values of U
j

(=1.25 and 1.55U
) is consistent with the observed features of the surface pressure

distributions discussed above. At all four stations, increased mean velocities all across the
layer suggest sufficient mixing of the injected jet with the surrounding flow. The jet mass
flow at Uj = 25 and 31 m/s correspond to 13% and 16% (respectively) of the mass flow in the
boundary layer at separation (x
s
) =28 mm.
The variations of the normalized turbulent shear stress and 2-component turbulent kinetic
energy profiles at the highest jet velocity ratio of 1.55 are presented in Fig.24 and Fig.25
respectively. The complex qualitative nature of the shear stress profiles can be explained
from the corresponding mean velocity profiles shown in Fig.23. At x = 28 and 18 mm (i.e.,
ahead of the slot location), the downward shift of the location of maximum shear stress is
consistent with the increased mean velocities and velocity gradient near the wall due to
blowing. At x = 25 and 39 mm, the shear stress profiles exhibit two peaks corresponding to
the positive and negative maximum (normal) velocity gradients which can be observed in the
mean velocity profiles (Fig.23); these profiles resemble 2D wake flow with a velocity
minimum. A third peak in the shear stress which is to be expected close to the wall in the (jet)
wall boundary layer has not been captured in the measurements since it occurs very lose to
the wall (y < 0.5 mm); in fact, at = 39 mm, measurement at the first y location from the wall
reveals positive shear stress as expected. The turbulent kinetic energy profiles at x = 28 and
18 mm show features qualitatively similar to the shear stress profiles (Fig.24); in particular,
the downward shift of the y location corresponding to k
max
may be seen. The increased k
levels near the wall at x = 25 and 39 mm obviously arise form the increased (normal) velocity
gradients and s levels in the attached boundary layer with blowing.
Thus it has been demonstrated through detailed flow measurements with a 2-component
LDV, for the first time that tangential blowing through a narrow slot downstream of
separation, but within the bubble, can be an effective means of separation control.


4.3 Control of flow separation in an axisymmetric flow with shear layer
closure occurs in near-wake
The concept of tangential blowing inside the separation bubble was extended to an
axisymmetric separated flow with shear layer closure occurs in near-wake
12
. Details of the
model are shown in Fig.26. The mean velocity profiles with and without blowing, obtained
using the 2-component LDV, shown in Fig.27, demonstrate again the elimination of both
wall and wake flow reversals at jet velocity ratio of 1.55 and hence the effectiveness of D-
type blowing in situations where shear layer closure occurs in the wake.

4.4 Control of flow separation in a 2D flow
The applicability of this new concept of tangential blowing inside the bubble for separation
was extended to control with shear layer or wake closure occurring in the near-wake of an
airfoil-like body ; such a flow situation will be relevant to separation control on airfoils and
wings. Detailed flow-field measurements using 2-component LDV system were made for two
positions of blowing slot, thus optimizing the blowing performance
35-36
. Blowing mass and
momentum requirements for the suppression of wall and wake flow reversals were estimated.
It was demonstrated that tangential blowing inside the bubble can be an effective means of
separation control for trailing-edge separated flows as well.
The experimental study was conducted in the 0.55mX0.55m low speed wind tunnel. The
model configuration employed was a long 2D flat-plate (spanning the tunnel width) with a
contoured aft-section (Fig.28) ; the aft-section (with a length of 0.108m) has a circular arc on
the upper surface with a radius of curvature of 0.135m, providing adequate adverse pressure
gradients for the turbulent boundary layer to separate well ahead of the trailing-edge. Initial
experiments revealed that boundary layer separation occurred on the basic contoured aft-
section model (without blowing slot) around x = 853mm and shear layer closure at x =
907mm. The experiments were performed at a freestream velocity (U
) of 25m/s, providing a
model chord Reynolds number of 1x10
6
. Two blowing jet velocity (U
j
) of 0.75U

and 1.0U

were used to assess injection effectiveness.
Fig.29 shows the mean velocity profiles with and without blowing. The velocity profile at
separation (x=853mm) show the beneficial effects of blowing are more clearly at x = 875 and
890mm. The wake closure is naturally eliminated with blowing. The outer layers at x = 875
and 890mm show visible retardation of the boundary layer flow since the adverse pressure
gradient on the contoured section is much steeper and extended compared to the no blowing


case. Since the pressure recovery is higher at the trailing edge, the boundary layer edge
velocities at x = 875 and 890mm are slightly lower compared to the no blowing case.
Results of normalized turbulent shear stress and 2-component turbulent kinetic energy
profiles are shown at Uj = U
, except at x=930mm and x=890mm (lower surface) in Fig.30

and Fig.31 respectively. The complex qualitative nature of the shear stress profiles can be
explained from the corresponding mean velocity profiles with blowing; the behavior is
otherwise seen to be similar at both values of Uj. At x = 853mm, the shear stress profiles
show features typical for a retarded attached boundary layer. The shear stress profiles at
x=875 and 890mm show two peaks corresponding to the positive and negative maximum
(normal) velocity gradients of the mean flow ; these profiles result from a wake-like behavior
of the velocity field with a velocity minimum (Fig.29). A third peak in (positive) shear stress
very close to the wall in the jet-boundary layer has not been captured in the measurements
since it occurs very close to the wall (y<0.5mm). Following merging of the top and bottom
shear layers at the trailing edge, the profiles show lower normal shear stress gradients and
lower values for the two peaks, as expected (x = 907mm). The shear stress peaks further
diminish at x = 930mm as a result of the wake growth and the profile is appreciably
asymmetric.
The kinetic energy profiles show certain features similar to the shear stress profiles which is
to be expected. The changes in kinetic energy profile at x = 853mm are small consistent with
the changes in the velocity profile. At x = 875 and 890mm, two peaks are seen corresponding
to the wall jet-boundary layer and outer layer and the levels are significantly higher due to
increased mixing in the presence of blowing. As with shear stress profiles, following
merging, the normal gradients of kinetic energy are lower and the peak values are reduced as
the wake develops downstream. The above features of turbulent shear stress and kinetic
energy profiles with blowing show significant similarities with those observed in an axi-
symmetric separated flow with blowing.
Thus the 2-component LDV measurements have been used to establish a novel concept of has
considerable potential as a means of controlling separated flows in other situations.
4

.5 Phase-averaged LDV measurements in a bluff-body wake
A new technique for phase-averaging of 2-component LDV data was developed. The work
was initiated with the objective of developing a phase-averaging technique for 2-component
LDV, considering its advantages particularly in the application to vortex and separated
flows
37-38
. The scheme is based on a 'time-series approach', unlike earlier schemes involving


sampling approach
39
, in which all valid LDV samples are acquired along with the periodic
signal of the flow phenomenon in synchronization. Ensemble averaging with reference to the
selected phases of the periodic signal is then carried out off-line. Time series approach has
definitive advantages over the sampling approach, in particular when applied to LDV
measurements. It enables collection of a larger time. Software modules developed at NAL
include those for the synchronized acquisition of data from LDV and hotwire (vortex
shedding cycle), preprocessing of data and computation of phase-averages with reference to a
periodic flow phenomenon
40
. These modules were validated initially with simulated data and
hotwire and LDV measurements. Comparison of single-component phase-averaged LDV and
hotwire velocity data obtained using this technique showed good agreement.
The above technique has been utilized to document the phase-averaged velocity field in the
near-wake of a 2D circular cylinder, both with and without a forward splitter plate (FSP), at a
subcritical Reynolds number where vortex shedding dominates. It was shown by Viswanath
et al
41
that the presence of a FSP can provide appreciable drag reduction and hence an
interesting application of the technique being developed here. Fig.32 shows the experimental
details. Hotwire measurements in the near-wake are used to validate the phase-averaged LDV
results. Fig.33 shows a comparison of phase-averaged LDV measurements with and without
FSP. It can be seen hat the velocity defect is generally lower in the presence of FSP at all
phases of the vortex shedding cycle, consistent with the observed drag reduction.
The study thus reveals that the phase-averaged wake velocity field in the presence of a FSP
has lower momentum defect relative to the basic 2D cylinder, consistent with the observed
total drag reduction. Further, the results suggest that the introduction of a FSP results in a
lower momentum defect not only in the time-averaged sense but also in an instantaneous
sense.
The technique can also be applied for phase-averaged LDV measurements in other classes of
periodic flows also.



5. REFERENCES
1. Yeh Y and Cumins H Z (1964), Localized fluid flow measurements with a He-Ne
laser spectrometer, Appl.Phy.Lett, Vol 4, pp.176-178.
2. Durst F, Melling A and Whitelaw J H (1976), Principles and Practice of Laser-
Doppler Anemometry, Academic Press, New York.
3. Greated C A and Durrani T S (1977), Laser Systems in flow Measurement, Plenum
Press, New York.
4. Chu B (1974), Laser Light Scattering, pp.271-290, Academic, New York, 1974.
5. Goldstein R J (1983), Fluid Mechanics Measurements, Hemisphere Publishing
Corporation.
6. Menon R K (1982), "Laser Doppler Velocimetry: Performance and Applications",
TSI Incorporated, American Laboratory.
7. Menon R K and Larson C and Tamburrino A (1989), "Turbulence Measurements in
Liquid Flows Using a Dedicated LDV System", Presented at the Tenth Australasian
Fluid Mechanics Conference, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
8. Ramaprian B. R., and Chandrasekhara M S (1985), "LDA Measurements in Plane
Turbulent Jets", ASME, June.
9. Chung J. T., Simon T. W., and Buddhavarapu J (1991), "Three-Dimensional Flow
near the Blade/End wall Junction of a Gas Turbine: Application of Boundary Layer
Fence" SAE Paper 91-GT-45.
10. Madhavan K T (1992), Development of data processing techniques for laser Doppler
velocimeter based flow measurements, Ph.D. Thesis, IISc, Bangalore.
11. Goldstein R J and Kreid D K (1967), Measurement of laminar flow development in a
square duct laser Doppler flowmeter , J.Appl.Mech.,Vol.34, pp.813-817.
12. Madhavan, K.T (2001), Conditionally sampled measurements using LDV. Proc. Of
the NAL-DLR Workshop on Experimental Fluid Mechanics and Turbomachinery,
National Aerospace Laboratories, Bangalore, pp.56-60.
13. Ramesh G, Madhavan K.T and Viswanath P R (1995) LDV Measurements in an
axisymmetric separated flow, Part I: without flow control, National Aerospace
Laboratories, Report PD EA 9505.


14. Arik E and Buchhave P (1987),Burst Spectrum Analyser: A Unique Signal Processor
with Unique Applications, Proc. of ICALEO.
15. Pfifer H J (1981),Review Lectures on various topics of laser velocimetry, Report
CO 204/81, German-French Research Institute, St.Louis, France.
16. Krishnan V, Buetefisch K A and Sauerland K H (1987),Velocity and turbulence
measurements in the shock region using the two-component laser Doppler
anemometer, Proc. of Intntl. Conf And Optical Methods in Flow and Particle
Diagnostics, San Diego, California, USA, pp.61-67.
17. Pallek D (1992),Fast Digital data acquisition and analysis of LDA Signals by means
of a transient recorder and an array processor, Proc. of ICASF Record, Stanford
Univ.
18. Buchhave P and George W K Jr. (1978), Bias corrections in turbulent measurements
by the Laser Doppler Anemometer., Laser Anemometry and Particle Sizing, Proc. Of
the Third Int. Workshop on Laser Velocimetry, pp.110-122, Hemisphere Pub. Corp.,
Washington, D.C.
19. Buchhave P (1975), Biasing error corrections in individual particle measurements
with the LDA-counter signal processor, Accuracy of Flow Measurements by Laser
Doppler Methods, Proc.Of the LDA-Symp., Copenhagen, pp.258-278.
20. Madhavan K T, Ramesh G, Ramesh C R and Yajnik K S (1987), The two-component
Laser Doppler Velocimeter system at NAL, NAL PD FM8722.
21. Ramesh G, Madhavan K T and Prasada Rao K (1995), LDV data acquisition and
processing techniques: Recent Improvements, NAL Project Document PD EA 9510
22. Ramesh G, Madhavan K T, Geetha E and Kusuma S (194), PC based data acquisition
and processing software for two-component Laser Doppler Velocimeter, Proc. Of the
Natl. Symp on Instrum. S V Univ. Tirupathi.
23. Madhavan K T, Veena S, Ramesh G and Madhu T (2004), A DSP-based Signal
Processor for Laser Doppler anemometer system, Pres. at the 30th National
symposium on Instrumentation, Cochin Univ. of Sci. and Tech., Kochi.
24. Antonia, R.A., (1981), Conditional sampling in turbulence measurements, Annual
Rev of Fluid Mechanics, 13, pp.131-156
25. Antonia R.A., Prabhu A. and Stephenson S.E.,(1975), Conditionally sampled
measurements in a heated turbulent jet, J. Fluid Mech, 72, pp.455-480


26. Morrison, J.F., Tsai, H.M. and Bradshaw, P., (1989), Conditional sampling schemes
for turbulent flow, based on Variable Interval Time Average (VITA) algorithm. Exp.
in Fluids, 7(3), pp.173-186
27. Manjula Vani S C, Madhavan K T and Yajnik K S (1989), An LDV signal
processing system with selective sampling technique, Proc. Of the Natl. Conf.on
Electronic Circuits and Systems, Roorkee Univ., Roorkee.p.216.
28. Madhavan K T and Yajnik K S and Jayavinayaka S (1990), Variable window
averaging technique for LDV Data processing , Pres. at the workshop on App of
LDV to Flow Measurements, NAL, Bangalore.
29. Madhavan K T , Yajnik K S (1991), Measurement of turbulence intermittency with a
single-component LDV, Laser Anemometry: Advances and Applications, Proc. of
the Fourth International Conf. on Laser Anemometry, Ohio,Vol.3, p.23.
30. Wygnanski I and Fiedler H E (1969), Some measurements in self-preserving jet, J.
Fluid Mech., Vol 38, p.577.
31. Chevray R and Tutu N K (1978), Intermittency and preferential transport of heat in a
round jet, J. Fluid Mech., Vol 88, p.133.
32. Madhavan K T , Yajnik K S (1992), Conditional sampling techniques for LDV data
processing, Proc of the Sixth International Symp. on Laser Techniques to Fluid
Mech., Lisbon, p.23.
33. Viswanath P R, Ramesh G, Madhavan K T (2000), Separation control by tangential
blowing inside the bubble, Exp. in fluids, pp.96-102.
34. Viswanath P R, Ramesh G, Madhavan K T (1997), Proc. of the Seventh Asian
Congress of Fluid Mech., Chennai, p.37.
35. Viswanath P R and Madhavan K.T (2004), Control of trailing edge separation by
tangential blowing inside the bubble, The Aeronautical Journal, Paper No.2887,
August, pp.419-425
36. Viswanath P R and Madhavan K.T (2003), Control of trailing-edge separation by
tangential blowing inside bubble : a novel approach, AIAA Rep. No. 2003-223, 41st
Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 6-9 January 2003, Reno, Nevada
37. Madhavan K T (2002), New Technique for Phase-Averaged LDV Measurements,
Proc. Of the Ninth Congress of Fluid Mechanics.
38. Madhavan K.T. (2001), Phase-averaged LDV measurements in a bluff-body wake.
National Aerospace Laboratories Project Document PD EA0107.


39. Cantwell, B. and Coles, D., (1983), An experimental study of the entrainment and
transport in the turbulent near-wake of a circular cylinder. J. Fluid Mech., 136, 321-
374
40. Madhavan K.T. and Shalini K., (2000), Development of data processing software for
phase-averaged LDV measurements, National Aerospace Laboratories Project
Document PD EA 0005.
41. Viswanath P.R., Prabhu A. and Srinivas T., (1991), Drag reduction of circular
cylinder with a forward splitter plate Recent Advances in Experimental Fluid
Mechanics Ed: F G Zhuang, Proceedings of the First International Conference on
Experimental Fluid Mechanics, Chengdu , China, 293-297.
42. TSI Inc., USA - website : http://www.tsi.com/
43. Dantec Measurement Technology, Denmark - website : http://www.dantecmt.com/



P

Fig.1 Basic Doppler-Fizeau effect

P
(

Fig.2 Differential or Fringe mode



(

f
D
= U/
= /{2.sin(

/2
U
)}

Fig.3 Differential or Fringe mode: Velocity in terms of fringe spacing



Transmitting
optics
Flow
Receiving optics
Receiving optics
with Detector
Flow
Laser
Bragg
cell
Detector
Photo-
Detector
Transmitting and
receiving optics
with detector

Bragg
Cell
Laser
a) Forward scatter mode
b) Back scatter mode
Fig.4 Dual beam LDV configurations
Photo
multiplier
Interference filter
Fig.5 Fiber optic LDV System configuration

Laser Doppler Velocimetry


27
f
L
0
th
order
Laser
Piezoelectric
transducer
f
s
= 40 MHz
Absorber
Wave front

f
L +
f
B
Fig.7 Frequency shifting using Bragg cell
first order +ve
f
L-
f
B
first order -ve
Fig.6 Transmitting optics
Laser

Bragg
Beam
Splitter
F
D E

D
D
L
Lens


Fig.8 Doppler frequency to velocity transfer function for a
frequency shifted LDA system

(a)

(b)

Fig.9 Phase Doppler Analyser (PDA): (a) Basic Principle (b) Dantec PDA system


(a) (b)

Fig.10 Characteristics of LDV signal
Fig.11 Measurement of burst time using counter-processor
Signal pedestal Noise LDV burst signal after bandpass filtering

Laser Doppler Velocimetry

30

Fig.12 Ar-ion laser, basic schematic and the emission spectra of
the laser

(b)
(a) Photograph of Spectra Physics 2020 Argon-ion laser
(c)


Copyright 2002 TSI Incorporated
TSI Incorporated
Two Component Fiberoptic LDV System Two Component Fiberoptic LDV System

Laser beam
Fiber probe Fiber probe
fiberlight fiberlight
PDM PDM
OPR or Encoder
signal
Temp
Pressure
EIC EIC
FSA FSA
Fig.13 Block schematic of a 2D LDV system: TSI Inc., USA
Fig.14 A new state-of-the-art of a PDPA/ LDV system: TSI Inc., USA



Fig.15 TSI FSA 4000 LDV Signal Processor

Fig.16 Block schematic of TSI FSA 4000 LDV Signal Processor



Fig.17 Block Schematic of 3D LDV Traversing system
(a)TSI) and (b) Dantec with PDA mounted

Fig.18 LDV seed generator (TSI



Fig.19 Block schematic of the old LDV system (based on non-fiber
opticsmodules and counter-type signal processing systems)
Fig.20 Comparison of intermittency factors in a turbulent jet



Fig.21 Comparison of zone averages in a turbulent jet



Fig.22 Schematic of axisymmetric model

Fig.23 Mean velocity profiles in separated zone, with and
without tangential blowing : effect of blowing



Fig.24 Effect of blowing on Reynolds shear stress

Fig.25 Effect of blowing on turbulent kinetic energy profiles



Fig.26 Sketch of axisymmetric forerbody with circular arc afterbody; shear layer
closure occurs in near-wake; tangential blowing slot at x = -38mm

Fig.27 Mean velocity profiles in separated zone, with and
without tangential blowing at U
j
=1.55U



Fig.28 Geometric details of flat plate-contoured aft-section
8
U
j
/U
x = 860mm
0
875

0.00
1.00
0
Injection Slot
y
1
8
U/U
0
50mm

0
0
0
x,mm = 853
930
907 890

Fig.29 Mean velocity profiles in the flow with and without separation control



Fig.30 Reynolds shear stress profiles in the flow with and without
separation control
Fig.31 Turbulence kinetic energy profiles in the flow with and
without separation control



FSP
Circular
cylinder

D L
FLOW

Fig.32 Experimental set up


x/D
y
/
D
3 4 5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
With FSP
Without FSP
2.4
1.2
-1.2
5.4
Fig.33 Phase-averaged LDV measurements of mean velocities in the
wake of a 2D circular cylinder with and without splitter plate

LDV

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

LDV

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LASER DOPPLER

link, Particle sizing, Cyclic Phenomena, Spectrum, Correlation

) is consistent with the observed features of the surface pressure

, except at x=930mm and x=890mm (lower surface) in Fig.30

You might also like