ASD362 2019 WTT3 Wind Tunnel Calibration PDF

1/24/2019
Edited with the trial version of

Foxit Advanced PDF Editor
To remove this notice, visit:
www.foxitsoftware.com/shopping
Calibration of Wind Tunnels

Presentation Outline
 Introduction
 Test section speed
 Horizontal buoyancy
 Dynamic pressure variation
 Flow angularities
 Turbulence measurements and associated instrumentation
 Calibration of supersonic tunnels
 Mach number
 Total pressure
 Static pressure
 Flow angularities
 Turbulence
 Transition
 Test section noise
 Use of calibration results
ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Introduction
After a tunnel is constructed, the next step is to determine its flow characteristics and, to change
any that are not satisfactory for the purposes intended.
The low-speed "steady" airstream is usually considered to be defined when we know its
distribution of temperature T, pressure p, dynamic pressure q, and "turbulence" Tu.
There are several assumptions embedded in this statement.
We admit that the airstream is expected to be turbulent and therefore not strictly steady or time
invariant.
The time variability of the airstream is to be characterized by its level of turbulence, which is
commonly defined to be the rms of the variation of the longitudinal component from the mean
value of air speed.
The pressure and dynamic pressure are the mean values for these quantities averaged over a
time interval chosen as necessary to achieve the required precision of the mean.
The stream temperature is similarly considered.
Using the equation of state, we can then compute the density, and using the definitions of total
pressure and total temperature, we can compute these quantities and flow speed as well.
1
1/24/2019

Introduction
In the case of wind tunnels to be used for wind engineering, the temporal and
spatial variations must be considered in considerably more detail and will
include spectra and integral scales of the turbulent flow structures as well as a
profile to match appropriate types of planetary boundary layers.
We may also compute the Reynolds number for a particular model based on its
chosen characteristic length.
Much of our interest is centered on determining pressure, which can be
measured most simply by use of liquid manometers or more commonly by using
electronic data systems, including various instrumentation elements and
computer systems for data manipulation, storage, and presentation.
For subsonic testing, the precision with which measurement of stream
temperature are made are usually less demanding than the typical pressure
measurements.

Test Section Speed
Speed Setting
Setting the speed of a wind tunnel appears straightforward as we apply our basic
understanding of fluid dynamics. However, it turns our that this basic question absorbs
a considerable amount of attention even for experienced aerodynamicists. When there
is no model in the rest section, a measuring device, most commonly a Pitot-static tube,
can be put there to determine the air speed. One cannot, however, insert a Pitot-static
rube or other measuring device in the test section to measure dynamic pressure or
speed along with an object under test because the test object will cause changes in the
flow. These changes are referred to as "induced flow."
Consider the figure showing a schematic indication of the settling chamber, contraction
and test section of a typical wind tunnel. The tunnel speed is usually determined by
measuring either static or total pressure in the settling chamber ahead of the
contraction cone, as indicated by station L, and a static pressure ahead of the test
section, as indicated by station S. If honeycomb or screens are used in the settling
chamber, station L will be downstream of these devices. Using the subscripts L for the
bellmouth or settling chamber and S for the region before the test section, Bernoulli's
equation between the two stations will be
2
1/24/2019

Test Section Speed
Speed Setting
Typical measurement stations for

a wind tunnel “q” system

Test Section Speed
Speed Setting
3
1/24/2019

Test Section Speed
Speed Setting
A better approach would be to survey a volume of the test section that is occupied by the model.
If the Pitot-static tube used has a hemispherical nose, it can be equipped with two yaw heads at
90° to each other, and the distribution of the upflow and cross-flow can be obtained
simultaneously.
The survey of the lest section can be done with a simple Pitot-static tube assuming there is a
method to position it throughout the test section or a rake of Pitot statics can be used. lf there is
no method of remotely positioning the Pitot-static tube, the survey of the test section becomes a
very tedious operation. In any event, this is a critical operation and the effects of the manner of
holding and supporting any selected instrument must be carefully evaluated.
If a volume of the test section is surveyed and there are large variations in the dynamic
pressure, it may be desirable to use a weighted average of the measured dynamic pressure.
When the dynamic pressure calibration is completed, there is a relation established between the
indicated dynamic pressure (PL - PS) and the dynamic pressure q, in the clean test section.
There usually are a series of these calibrations for different test-section configurations. If the
tunnel has an external balance, calibrations are often made with and without the balance struts
and their fairings. If a ground plane is used often, calibrations are made for various heights of
the ground plane.

Test Section Speed
Speed Setting
It is desirable to obtain for each test-section configuration the distribution of the total
pressure, static pressure, upflow, and cross-flow throughout the region occupied by the
model. When the tunnel has an air exchanger or heat exchanger, the temperature
distribution should also be measured.
The pressure sources for the tunnel speed control should be, ideally, either a ring
around a tunnel station or at least a portion of a ring on the two side walls or the ceiling
and floor. The possibility of the model pressure field directly affecting the nearer of the
pressure sources at station S should always be kept in mind and evaluated if a larger
model than normal or an upstream mounting location is to be considered. The static
source should consist of either a series of static sources or a sealed tube flush with the
surface with many holes evenly spaced along its length.
The tubes or multiple static sources of the ring should be manifolded together to yield
an average static pressure at the station. If total pressure is used in the contraction
cone. It is desirable to have multiple sources also.
4
1/24/2019
C Calibration of Wind Tunnels

Test Section Speed
Speed Setting
The two pressure sources in the simplest case can be connected to a U-tube manometer
that is used for setting the tunnel speed. It is more common to use a high-quality differential
pressure transducer. Then the electrical output can be transmitted to any location
convenient for the tunnel operator and to the data system.
Extreme care must be taken to make sure that there are no leak in the tunnel dynamic
pressure system. In large tunnels, the leak checking can be a time-consuming process. It is
highly desirable and strongly suggested that the system should not be disturbed once it has
been leak checked. It is often useful to record the pressures at each of the two tunnel
stations as separate readings relative to atmospheric ambient pressure. Additional sources
for this use should be provided rather than tapping into the tunnel dynamic pressure system.
It is also desirable to have a simple method of periodically checking the system for leaks.
One way to do this is to use a calibration wing that can be installed easily. The wing can be
run through a pitch series at several dynamic pressures. If the slope of the lift curve does
not change, there is no change in the dynamic pressure calibration. This has the further
advantage of also checking the tunnel upfIow. If the drag polar does not rotate, the upflow
has not changed.

Horizontal Buoyancy
As the air proceeds along the test section, the boundary layer thickens. This action
reduces the effective area of the jet from that of the geometric dimensions and causes
an increase in the flow speed outside the wall boundary layers. If the geometric area is
constant, the speed increase in turn produces a drop in local static pressure, tending to
draw the model downstream. This added drag is commonly called "horizontal
buoyancy" as its action is analogous to the buoyancy due to the vertical pressure
gradient in the atmosphere and the ocean. If the cross-sectional area of the jet is
increased enough to allow for the thickening boundary layer, a constant value of the
static pressure may be maintained throughout the test section. No exact design
method is available that ensures the development of a constant static pressure. For a
first approximation the walls of a closed jet should diverge about to each; finer
adjustments may be necessary after the tunnel is built and the longitudinal static
pressure is measured. Some tunnels whose test sections have corner fillets have
these fillets altered until a constant static pressure is obtained. The advantages of such
a flow are enough to justify a moderate amount of work in obtaining it.
The amount of "horizontal buoyancy" is usually insignificant for wings, but for fuselages
and nacelles it is larger and becomes important. For large torpedo like bodies, it can be
of the order of the minimum drag in some tunnels.
5
1/24/2019

Longitudinal Pressure Gradient
Effect of the wall boundary layer in the test section


 The static pressure gradient along the test section must be known in order to
make necessary buoyancy corrections.
 It may be obtained by reading the local static pressure with a Pitot-static tube
that is progressively moved from entrance cone to exit cone.
 Care must be taken that the Pitot tube is aligned directly into the wind and that
no extraneous static pressure is created by the bracket holding the Pitot tube.
 This last proviso is not possible to satisfy exactly.
 Perhaps a more convenient method is to use a long static tube, as discussed
in the next paragraph.
 It is not desirable to measure the static pressure along the walls of the tunnel.
 It turns out that small variations in wall geometry associated with joints,
mounting holes, and the like cause local variations in the static pressure that
are typically too large to ignore and may change over time as various
mounting installations are put in and taken out of a facility.
6
1/24/2019

 Measuring wall pressures is a good adjunct to calibration and has become a
common practice to obtain input for boundary corrections, but it is not a good
idea to rely on wall pressure measurements for the baseline characterization.
 Long Static Tube: This is a long tube that extends through the test section.
 The tube is often suspended on a series of wires that are used to align and
tension the tube.
 The tube is equipped with a number of static pressure rings.
 These rings have four or more static ports around the circumference that are
manifolded together. If the flow angularity is small, then aft of the nose the
flow will be practically parallel to the tube. This then yields a static pressure
distribution along the length of the tube.

Dynamic Pressure Variation
The dynamic pressure is usually measured throughout selected regions of the test section by
means of a Pitot-static tube. The density is calculated from a barometric pressure
measurement. A test-section static pressure measurement relative to the atmosphere, and a
test-section temperature determination along with the equation of state.
The local velocities are then obtained from V=(2q/r)0.5 (7).
The velocities as calculated from the dynamic pressures or
the pressures themselves are plotted, and the points are
connected by "contour" lines of equal values.
The variation of q in the working range of the jet should be
less than 0.5% from the mean, which corresponds to a
0.25% variation in velocity.
Some tunnels have been built to tighter specifications.
But it is almost inevitable that custom tweaking of aspects
of the tunnel circuit will be required to do better.
A plot of the dynamic pressure distribution in a rectangular
test section is shown in Fig. 2.
Of interest is the asymmetry that is usually found, and the
maximum variation in this example is well above satisfactory Fig. 2 Distribution of dynamic pressure
limits. The survey should have been carried to the walls. in the test section
7
1/24/2019

Dynamic Pressure Variation
The correction of an excessive velocity variation is not as serious a problem as the correction of
excessive angular variation. There are more method of attack as well as less probability that the
variation will change with tunnel speed. There are several minor adjustments that may be
expected to improve a less than satisfactory speed distribution. There may be local flow
separations that must be found and corrected or improperly set turning vanes.
If the velocity variation is annular, the source may
be the propeller load distribution. Such local
problems in identifiable parts of the tunnel should
be corrected. Finally screens may be added in the
largest section of the tunnel with spatial mesh
densities varied so that they are more dense in the
sections that correspond to high-velocity regions in
the jet. The improvement in velocity distribution by
such screens is shown in Fig. 3. The loss in energy
ratio they cause is quite small and is far outweighed
by the improvement in testing conditions. Fig. 3 Effect of screens on velocity
distribution in the test section

Flow Angularities
The variation of flow angle in the jet can be measured by many devices.
Regardless of the device used, it is desirable to map the upflow and cross-flow
in a series of transverse planes along the longitudinal axis in the region
occupied by the model over the range of intended dynamic pressures. Often,
when the upflow and crossflow are plotted as flow direction vectors, regions of
vortex like flow can be seen in the test section. Such flow is often the result of
poor velocity distribution in the return duct before the third corner or the result of
improperly set fourth-corner turning vanes.
A variation of upflow across the span of a wing results in an effective
aerodynamic twist. A cross-flow gradient across the test section in the region of
the vertical tail will change the slope of the yawing moment versus side slip or
yaw angle. Thus it is desirable to have the upflow and cross-flow constant
across the tunnel. This is difficult to achieve. It would be desirable to have the
variation less than + 0.10O, but it is often necessary to accept the best values
that can be achieved. The maximum variation should be held to + 0.10O.
8
1/24/2019

Turbulence Measurements
Variations between results of tests made in different wind runnels at the same
Reynolds number and between tests made in wind tunnels and in flight have
indicated that some correction was needed for the effect of turbulence that
exists in wind tunnels. It has been argued that this turbulence causes flow
patterns in the tunnel to be similar to the flow pattern in free air at a higher
Reynolds number. Hence the tunnel test Reynold number could be said to be a
higher "effective Reynolds number.“
The physics of turbulent flow is far too complex to be captured by this simple
concept. There are some phenomena for which it "works" to some extent and
others for which it does not. This concept is dependent on the long-known fact
that spheres (and circular cylinders) have quite well-defined critical Reynolds
numbers near which the drag coefficient drops rather precipitously as the
Reynolds number increases.

Turbulence Measurements
It has been experimentally verified that the Reynolds number at which the drag
coefficient of a sphere decreases rapidly depends strongly on the degree of
turbulence in the wind tunnel. The Reynolds number at which the reduction
occurs decreases with increasing tunnel turbulence. There is also a strong
effect of surface roughness. We are considering only aerodynamically smooth
spheres. The decrease in drag coefficient with Reynolds number can be
understood as the result of increasing the Reynolds number, producing earlier
boundary layer transition from the laminar to turbulent state, which in turns
leads to a downstream shift in the separation point and corresponding higher
base pressure, a smaller wake, and less drag. Early night measurements on
spheres found that in the free atmosphere the critical Reynolds number for a
sphere is 3.85X105. This value is larger than is achieved in wind runnels,
although many low-turbulence tunnels approach this value. In the atmosphere
the turbulent eddies are so large relative to the sphere that they do not affect
the thin boundary layer of the sphere.
9
1/24/2019

Associated Instrumentation
Before the now common use of hot-wire
anemometry, a turbulence sphere was the
primary way to measure the relative
turbulence of a wind tunnel. It remains a very
useful and easy way to characterize the
turbulent environment in a tunnel and to
check if there is an indicated effect following Fig. 4 Turbulence sphere
Drag Coefficient of Sphere

0.5
changes in the tunnel configuration or special
installations that might affect the flow quality.
The configuration of a turbulence sphere is
0.3
shown in Fig. 4. The critical Reynolds
number for the sphere can be measured in Critical Reynolds
two ways. One method is to plot the Number=336,000
0.1 5 5 5
measured CD based on cross-sectional area 2x10 3x10
Reynolds Number of Sphere
4x10
versus Reynolds number, as shown in Fig. 5. Fig. 5 Variation of drag coefficient for a turbulence
sphere as a function of Reynolds number

From the plot the Reynolds number in the 1.4
Pressure Loss Coefficient, DP/q
tunnel for CD=0.3 is read. The second method

is to take the average of the four pressures on
the aft surface of the sphere and subtract this DP/q=1.22
1.2
value from the stagnation value at the leading
edge of the sphere, yielding DP.
A plot of DP/q versus Reynolds number is
1.0
prepared for the sphere and the Reynolds
number determined for DP/q=1.22, as indicated
Critical Reynolds
in Fig. 6. The pressure method has certain Number=299,000
advantages. It needs no drag balance with the 0.8 5 5 5 5 5
1.5x10 2.0x10 2.5x10 3.0x10 3.5x10
associated balance calibration and no Reynolds Number, Re
evaluation of support tares for the portion of the Fig. 6 Variation of pressure coefficient
support sting exposed to the airstream. Also, for a turbulence sphere as a
the sphere support sting can be stiffer as no function of Reynolds number
deflection is needed by the drag balance.
10
1/24/2019

The critical Reynolds number as defined by either force or pressure
measurements is then used to define a turbulence factor for the tunnel by
comparing the tunnel's critical Reynolds number to the atmospheric free-air
Reynolds number:
TF=385,000/Retunnel
Then the effective test Reynolds number is defined by Reeffective=TFXRNtest
The use of a turbulence sphere yields what may be thought of as an average
value of tunnel turbulence. It does not give any information on the magnitude of
turbulence in either the axial or lateral direction. The use of a turbulence sphere
may, however, prove to be a simple method of monitoring any change in tunnel
turbulence. Its use requires no prior calibrations and the installation and running
in a runnel can be designed to be simple and quick.
The relation between the critical Reynolds number of a sphere and turbulence
intensity as measured by a hot wire is shown in Fig. 7.

Turbulence spheres can be made from cue, duck, and bowling balls. Several sizes are
needed to enable the turbulence factor to be measured over a range of tunnel air speeds.
2.4
A brief examination of Fig. 7 might lead to the conclusion
that the higher the turbulence, the better the tunnel, as the
effective Reynolds number of the test would be higher,
Turbulence Intensity, TI (%)
This correction is not exact and if the tunnel has excessive 1.6
turbulence, the model may have a premature transition
from laminar to turbulent flow, which can be critical for
laminar flow airfoils. However, low-speed models are often
equipped with trip strips that fix the transition point on the 0.8
model and may reduce the requirement for extremely low
turbulence. The need for low test-section turbulence is not
as severe for small student tunnels as it would be for
larger tunnels that are used for research and development 0.01 2 3
Turbulence Factor, TF
tests. The screens and honeycomb elements are effective Fig. 7 Variation of turbulence factor with
for reducing turbulence in wind runnels. turbulence intensity from hot-wire
probe measurements
11
1/24/2019
12
1/24/2019

Calibration of Supersonic Tunnels: Mach Number
Whereas Mach numbers in nearsonic and transonic tunnels are usually
determined only on the tunnel centerline and at the tunnel walls, Mach numbers
in supersonic tunnels are usually obtained off the tunnel center lines as well.
The reason is that much larger non-uniformities of flow are possible in
supersonic nozzles because they can be caused by shock waves. An average
Mach number in the vicinity of a model is desired for testing and data reduction
purposes and the cross-sectional area survey will give a better average Mach
number than the centerline survey. If the centerline Mach number distribution is
constant or varies gradually but continuously, the centerline survey is usually
adequate. However, the characteristics of this distribution are not known when
the calibration is started.

Calibration of Supersonic Tunnels: Total Pressure
Pitot pressures are measured by using a simple device called a Pitot probe (tube).
The Pitot probe is simply a tube with a blunt end facing into the airstream.
The tube normally has an inside to outside diameter ratio of 0.5 to 0.8 (larger
ratio is preferred with smaller outside diameter) and a length aligned with the
airstream of 15 to 20 diameters.
The pressure orifice is formed by the inside diameter of the tube at the blunt end.
A rake of nine Pitot probes used for calibration traverses of a test section is
shown in Fig. 8.
A Pitot probe is both simple to construct and accurate to use.
It should always have a squared-off entry and the largest practical ratio of hole
diameter to outside diameter.
It is insensitive to angle of attack upto 10 deg. for an orifice diameter only 10% of the
outside diameter and 15 deg. for an orifice diameter only 98% of the outside diameter.
Calibration errors due to angle of attack and hole size within the above ranges
are much less than actual flow deviations found in any reasonable tunnel.
13
1/24/2019

Fig. 8 A traversing rake of nine Pitot tubes


At this point we may make the clarification that an open-ended tube facing into
the airstream always measures the stagnation pressure (a term identical in
meaning to “total pressure”) is sees. Above M=1, the shock wave that forms
ahead of the tube means that it sees not the freestream stagnation pressure but
the stagnation pressure behind a normal shock. This new value is called Pitot
pressure and in modern terminology implies a supersonic stream, although
there is no error in calling the pressure so measured in a subsonic stream “Pitot
pressure”. Pressures measured by Pitot probes are influenced by very low
Reynolds numbers based on the probe diameter. This effect is seldom a
problem in supersonic tunnels as a reasonably sized probe will usually have will
have a Reynolds number above 500 or 1000, which is the range above which
the trouble starts.
14
1/24/2019

Calibration of Supersonic Tunnels: Static Pressure
Static pressures in a supersonic flow are much more difficult to measure than static
pressures in a subsonic flow and Pitot pressures in a supersonic flow. The “static pipe”
used for calibrating nearsonic and transonic tunnels is rarely used as its presence in
the tunnel affects the flow in the test section. It changes the area ratio of the nozzle by
subtracting from the effective throat and test section area, and it also interferes with the
expansion pattern required for the development of uniform flow.
While static pressure probes are not used extensively for calibrating supersonic
tunnels, a great deal of effort has been devoted to the development of accurate static
pressures for other applications. The result has been the development of probes in
wind tunnel calibration and use.
The primary problem in the use of static pressure probes at supersonic speeds is that any
probe will have a shock wave at its forward end which a rise in static pressure. If the
probe consists of a cone tip followed by a cylinder, the air passing the shoulder will be
expanded to a pressure below stream static pressure. Then as distance from the shoulder
increased, the pressure on the probe will approach the stream true static pressure.

Pressure measurements on a cone-cylinder probe with a 7-deg. included angle cone
followed by a cylinder 30 diameters in length are presented in Fig. 9. These results
show negligible errors in static pressure measurements for orifices located 10
diameters downstream of the shoulder.
Another type of probe designed for the accurate measurement od static pressures over
a large Mach number range is shown in Fig. 10. Errors in static pressures measured
with this probe are presented in Fig. 11. They were obtained by reference to a static
pressure calculated from a measured Pitot and total pressure. Flow angularity during
these tests was of no consequence, since the tunnel employed had extremely even
flow. However it was found impossible to get consistent results until the Pitot probe
mentioned above and the static probe were mounted in the test section on a vertically
moving support system so that either could be moved into centerline calibration
position without a tunnel shutdown and with little time interval between measurements.
Evidently the extreme accuracy being sought (of the order of 0.01% of q or 0.1% of p),
minute tunnel changes due to controls or thermal expansion became significant.
15
1/24/2019

Fig. 9 Effect of orifice distance from shoulder on measured static pressure


Static pressures on the walls of supersonic tunnels are often used for rough estimation
of test section Mach numbers. It is noted, however, that wall pressures do not
necessarily correspond to pressures on the centerline because of the possibility of
compression or expansion waves between the wall and the centerline. When Mach
number is to be determined from static pressure measurements, the total pressure of
the stream is measured in the settling chamber simultaneously with the test section
static pressure. Mach number is then calculated from the two pressures.
Fig. 10 Approximate dimensions of supersonic static pressure probe

There are three interdigitated rings of holes at a, b and c
16
1/24/2019

Fig. 11 Error in static pressure measured pm as a fraction of the true static pressure

Results of calibrations to determine Mach number from tunnel wall static
pressures and tunnel axis Pitot pressures are presented in Fig. 12. This figure
illustrates the difference that may exist between the tunnel wall and centerline due
to expansion waves between the two. Results of a very thorough Mach number
survey at one axial station of a tunnel are presented in Fig. 13 and an even more
complete survey along the plane of the horizontal axis is shown in Fig. 14.
The importance of calibrating over the range of Reynolds numbers (pressures if
the temperature is constant) at which the tunnel will be operated is shown in Fig.
15. A change in Reynolds number from 0.06 to 0.4x106 per inch causes a Mach
number deviation of 0.06 at a nominal Mach number of 5. As mentioned
previously, this effect results from changes in boundary layer thickness and
consequently effective nozzle area ratio.
As a matter of interest, many supersonic tunnels run at constant dynamic pressure
throughout their Mach number range. This is in contradiction with the test parameter,
V2. Constant q helps with handling balance loads, and with data reduction.
17
1/24/2019

Fig. 12 Wall and tunnel axis calibration data from M=2 nozzle

Fig. 13 Contour plot of M=3 nozzle Fig. 14 Mach number distribution the AEDC M8 B tunnel
18
1/24/2019

Calibration of Supersonic Tunnels
0.00
Mach number deviation, DM M=1.5
M=2.5
M=3.5
M=4.5
-0.08 M=5.0
M=5.5
-0.16
M=6.0
-0.24
0.1 0.2 -6
0.3 0.4
Reynolds number per inchX10
Fig. 15 Variation of centerline Mach number with Reynolds number

Calibration of Supersonic Tunnels: Flow Angularity
The flow angularity in a supersonic tunnel is usually determined by using either
cone or wedge yawmeters. The sensitivities of several yawmeters for use in
supersonic tunnels are presented in Fig. 16. The sensitivities of these
yawmeters are maximum when the wedge or cone angles maximum. They work
below Mach numbers for which wave detachment occurs, and are so used. The
cone yawmeter is used more exclusively than the wedge yawmeter because it
is easier to fabricate and more robust. A photograph of a wedge yawmeter is
shown in Fig. 17.
The use of the yawmeter at supersonic speeds requires a calibration to
determine the aerodynamic error. A typical summary of results from tests to
determine flow angularity in a wind tunnel is presented in Fig. 18.
19
1/24/2019

Fig. 16 Sensitivity of several yaw meters at supersonic speeds, pressure ratio per degree

Fig. 17 A wedge yawmeter Fig. 18 Maximum up and down flow in a supersonic

tunnel for about 0.7 tunnel height
20
1/24/2019

Calibration of Supersonic Tunnels: Turbulence Level
Measurements with a hot-wire anemometer Table 1: Turbulence in settling chamber and
demonstrate that there are high-frequency test section of a supersonic tunnel
fluctuations in the airstream of supersonic Settling Chamber Test Section
tunnels that do not occur in free stream. Mach number All 2.2 4.5
These fluctuations, broadly grouped under Sound, DPt/Pt Less than 0.1% 0.2% 1%
the heading, “turbulence”, consists of small
Entropy, DTt/Tt Less than 0.1% Less than 0.1%
oscillations in velocity, stream temperature
(entropy) and static pressure (sound). Vorticity, DV/V 0.5 to 1% Less than 0.1%
Values obtained from one tunnel are presented in Table 1.

The fluctuations arise from a variety of causes, mostly from the pressure regulator
valve, the drive system, the aftercooler, and the test section boundary layer. Velocity
fluctuations emanating from upstream causes may be reduced at low and moderate
Mach numbers by the addition of screens in the settling chamber. At high Mach
numbers, upstream pressure and velocity effects are usually less, since the large
nozzle contraction ratios damp them out. Temperature fluctuations are unaffected by
the contraction ratio. The existence of such fluctuations is of less interest than their
effect. Here the calibration procedure has been to determine the transition Reynolds
number on smooth cones and compare this value with values obtained in other tunnels.

Calibration of Supersonic Tunnels: Determination of Transition
By common usage, transition cones have either 5- or 10-deg included angles and
highly polished surfaces. Various methods have been used to determine the point of
transition on the cone. These have been (1) optical methods in which Schlieren
pictures or shadowgraphs were made and inspected to determine the point at which a
sudden thickening of the boundary layer occurred; (2) traversing along the cone a
constant distance away from the surface with a small Pitot probe that is within the
turbulent boundary layer and noting the point at which the probe pressure changes
from a steady to a fluctuating pressure; (3) making similar traverses with a hot-wire
anemometer and (4) measuring temperatures of the surface by using thermocouples
on the inner surface of a thin walled cone.
The dimensions of a cone for use with the surface temperature technique are
presented in Fig. 19.
Surface temperatures of this cone were used to obtain a recovery factor, Rr=(Taw-T)/(Tt-T).
where Taw =adiabatic wall temperature, OK Tt=stream total temperature, OK
and T =stream static temperature, OK
The resulting data, which indicates the method of locating the point of transition is
shown in Fig. 20.
A summary of transition Reynolds numbers in several wind tunnels is presented in Fig. 21.
21
1/24/2019

Fig. 19 Dimensions of JPL transition cone

Fig. 20 Typical determination of transition Reynolds number on a cone

Freestream Reynolds number per foot, 4.31x105
22
1/24/2019

Fig. 21 Transition Reynolds number on 5- and 10-degree cones as measured in several facilities

Calibration of Supersonic Tunnels: Test Section Noise
Test section “noise” is defined as pressure fluctuations. Noise may result from unsteady
settling chamber pressure fluctuations due to upstream flow conditions. It may also be
due to weak unsteady shocks originating in a turbulent boundary layer on the tunnel
wall. Such weak shocks to which noise is attributed are illustrated by the shadowgraph
of Fig. 22. Noise in the test section of a wind tunnel is very likely to influence the point
of boundary layer transition on a model. Although it is possible that other effects on
tests results may exist, there has not been evidence showing that they do.
Test section noise can be detected by either hot-wire anemometer measurements or by
high-response Pitot pressure measurements. The method used to determine if the noise
is coming from the test section boundary layer is to make measurements in the tunnel
settling chamber as well as in the test section. It is then possible to determine if
fluctuations in the two places are related. It has been found that test section noise
generally increases as tunnel operating pressure increases, and, that test section noise
originating in the settling chamber generally decreases as tunnel Mach number increases.
23
1/24/2019

Calibration of Supersonic Tunnels: Test Section Noise
Fig. 22 Noise emanating from the turbulent boundary layer on a missile model
M=3.5; Re=2x106/inch. Note the diminution of wavelet strength as the distance from the source is increased.
24

ASD362 2019 WTT3 Wind Tunnel Calibration PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

ASD362 2019 WTT3 Wind Tunnel Calibration PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1/24/2019

Edited with the trial version of

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

Typical measurement stations for

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

C Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

Effect of the wall boundary layer in the test section

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

Drag Coefficient of Sphere

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

tunnel for CD=0.3 is read. The second method

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

Fig. 8 A traversing rake of nine Pitot tubes

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

Fig. 9 Effect of orifice distance from shoulder on measured static pressure

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

Fig. 10 Approximate dimensions of supersonic static pressure probe

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019

Calibration of Wind Tunnels

ASD362 Wind Tunnel Techniques Jan.-April 2019