lecture notes on wind tunnel testing

277
1 C0NTENTS Page Introduction 1 Chapter - 1 Wind Tunnel 10 1.1 Introduction 10 1.2 Wind Tunnel Classification 10 1.2.1 The Type of Test Section 10 1.2.2 The Type of Return Circuit 11 1.2.3 The Speed of Flow in the Test Section 12 1.3 Types of Wind Tunnels 13 1.3.1 Subsonic Wind Tunnels 13 1.3.2 Transonic Tunnel 15 1.3.3 Supersonic Tunnel 16 1.3.4 Hypersonic Tunnel 17 1.3.5 Full Scale Tunnel 18 1.3.6 Compressed Air Tunnel 19 1.3.7 Other Tunnels 19 Chapter - 2 Wind Tunnel Intrumentation 20 2.1 Introduction 20 2.2 Pick-up or Transducer 21 2.2.1 Variable Resistance Transducer 21 2.2.1.1 The Wheatstone Bridge Principle 25 2.2.1.2 Summing Circuit 25 2.2.1.3 Differencing Circuit 28 2.2.2 Variable Capacitance Transducer 29 2.2.3 Variable Reluctance Transducer 30 2.2.4 Piezoelectric Transducer 31 2.3 Signal Conditioner 32 2.3.1 Signal conditioner for Variable Resistance Transducer 33 2.3.1.1 Excitation Supply 33 2.3.1.2 Bridge Balance 33 2.3.1.3 Shunt Calibration 34 2.3.1.4 Signal Amplification 35 2.3.2 Signal Conditioner for Variable Capacitance Transducer 36 2.3.3 Signal Conditioner for Variable Reluctance Transducer 37 2.3.4 Signal Conditioner for Piezoelectric Transducer 38 2.4 Data Acquisition System 39 2.4.1 Analog System 40 2.4.2 Digital System 41

Upload: aseem-taneja

Post on 16-Apr-2015

374 views

Category:

Documents


5 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

1

C0NTENTS

Page

Introduction 1

Chapter - 1 Wind Tunnel 10

1.1 Introduction 10

1.2 Wind Tunnel Classification 10

1.2.1 The Type of Test Section 10

1.2.2 The Type of Return Circuit 11

1.2.3 The Speed of Flow in the Test Section 12

1.3 Types of Wind Tunnels 13

1.3.1 Subsonic Wind Tunnels 13

1.3.2 Transonic Tunnel 15

1.3.3 Supersonic Tunnel 16

1.3.4 Hypersonic Tunnel 17

1.3.5 Full Scale Tunnel 18

1.3.6 Compressed Air Tunnel 19

1.3.7 Other Tunnels 19

Chapter - 2 Wind Tunnel Intrumentation 20

2.1 Introduction 20

2.2 Pick-up or Transducer 21

2.2.1 Variable Resistance Transducer 21

2.2.1.1 The Wheatstone Bridge Principle 25

2.2.1.2 Summing Circuit 25

2.2.1.3 Differencing Circuit 28

2.2.2 Variable Capacitance Transducer 29

2.2.3 Variable Reluctance Transducer 30

2.2.4 Piezoelectric Transducer 31

2.3 Signal Conditioner 32

2.3.1 Signal conditioner for Variable Resistance Transducer 33

2.3.1.1 Excitation Supply 33

2.3.1.2 Bridge Balance 33

2.3.1.3 Shunt Calibration 34

2.3.1.4 Signal Amplification 35

2.3.2 Signal Conditioner for Variable Capacitance Transducer 36

2.3.3 Signal Conditioner for Variable Reluctance Transducer 37

2.3.4 Signal Conditioner for Piezoelectric Transducer 38

2.4 Data Acquisition System 39

2.4.1 Analog System 40

2.4.2 Digital System 41

Page 2: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

2

Chapter - 3 Tunnel Characteristics 43

3.1 Introduction 43

3.2 Air Speed Calibration 43

3.3 Determination of Velocity Variation in Test Section 47

3.4 Determination of Angular Flow Variation in Test Section 49

3.5 Turbulence Level 50

3.5.1 Drag Sphere 50

3.5.2 Pressure Sphere 51

Chapter - 4 Flow Visualisation 54

4.1 Introduction 54

4.2 Incompressible Flow Visualisation Techniques 54

4.2.1 Smoke Method 54

4.2.2 Tuft Method 56

4.2.3 Oil Flow Method 57

4.2.4 Evaporation Method 57

4.3 Compressible Flow Visualisation Techniques 58

4.3.1 Shadowgraph Method 58

4.3.2 Schlieren Method 58

4.3.3 Interferometer Method 59

`

Chapter - 5 Pressure Measurement by Mechanical Device 60

5.1 Introduction 60

5.2 Measurement of Cp 61

5.2.1 Without Pre–Calibration of the Tunnel 61

5.2.2 With Pre–Calibration of the Tunnel 63

5.3 Pressure Distribution on Circular Cylinder Model 63

5.4 Pressure Distribution on Elliptical Cylinder Model 67

5.5 Pressure Distribution on Spherical Model 70

Chapter - 6 Force and Moment Measurement by Mechanical Balance 72

6.1 Introduction 72

6.2 Calibration 72

6.3 Measurements of Forces and Moments 78

6.4 Evaluation of the Tare and Interference Drag 80

6.4.1 Evaluation of the Tare and Interference Drag Separately 81

6.4.2 Evaluation of the Sum of the Tare and Interference Drag 82

Chapter - 7 Pressure Measurement by Transducer 84

7.1 Introduction 84

7.2 Time Response 86

7.3 Pressure Scanning 86

7.4 Measurement of Cp 89

7.4.1 With Pre–Calibration of Tunnel 89

7.4.2 Without Pre–Calibration of Tunnel 89

Page 3: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

3

Chapter - 8 Force and Moment Measurement by Internal (Sting) Balance 91

8.1 Introduction 91

8.2 Measurement of Lift 92

8.3 Measurement of Pitching Moment 95

8.4 Simultaneous Measurement of Lift and Pitching Moment 98

8.5 Other Forces and Moments 100

8.6 Interactions Effect 103

8.7 Factors Affecting the Accuracy of Measurement 104

8.7.1 Surface Preparation and Bonding of Strain Gauges 104

8.7.2 Noise Suppression 106

8.7.3 Thermal Effect 108

8.7.4 Optimising Excitation Level 111

Chapter - 9 Force and Moment Measurement by External Balance 114

9.1 Introduction 114

9.2 General Description 114

9.3 Operation 117

9.4 Calibration 118

9.5 Wind Tunnel Testing 123

Chapter - 10 Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections (2D Flow) 124

10.1 Introduction 124

10.2 Horizontal Buoyancy 125

10.3 Solid Blocking 128

10.4 Wake Blocking 130

10.5 Streamline Curvature Effect 133

10.6 Summary of Two–Dimensional Boundary Corrections 135

Chapter - 11 Wind Tunnel Boundary Corrections (3D Flow) 138

11.1 Introduction 138

11.2 Horizontal Buoyancy 138

11.3 Solid Blocking 139

11.4 Wake Blocking 140

11.5 Streamline Curvature Effect 140

11.6 Downwash Effect 142

11.7 Summary of Three-Dimensional Boundary Corrections 143

Chapter - 12 Drag Measurement on 2D Circular Cylindrical Body 144

12.1 Introduction 144

12.2 Drag by Pressure Distribution on the Cylindrical Surface 145

12.3 Drag by Measuring Distribution in the wake of the Cylinder 149

12.4 Drag by Direct Weighing 153

Chapter - 13 Flow about an Aerofoil Section 156

13.1 Introduction 156

13.2 Formulation of the Problem 157

Page 4: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

4

13.3 Solution 159

13.3.1 Exact analytical Solution 159

13.3.2 Approximate Solution 159

13.3.3 Exact Numerical Solution 160

13.4 Lanearised Theory 160

13.4.1 Thickness Effect 161

13.4.2 Camber Effect 161

13.5 Exact Numerical Method (Panel Method) 163

13.6 Overall Aerodynamic Characteristics 166

13.6.1 Lift, Drag and Pitching Moment Coefficient 167

13.6.2 Location of Aerodynamic Centre 171

13.6.3 Location of Centre of Pressure 171

13.7 Wind Tunnel Testing 172

Chapter – 14 Measurement of Laminar Boundary Layer 177

14.1 Introduction 177

14.2 Boundary Layer Parameters 178

14.2.1 Displacement Thickness (s*) 179

14.2.2 Other Parameters 180

14.3 Laminar Boundary Layer in Zero Pressure Gradient 183

14.3.1 Theoretical Calculation 183

14.3.2 Wind Tunnel Testing 184

14.4 Laminar Boundary Layer in Favourable Pressure Gradient 188

14.4.1 Theoretical Calculation 189

14.4.2 Wind Tunnel Testing 190

14.5 Laminar Boundary Layer in Adverse Pressure Gradient 192

Chapter - 15 Measurement of Turbulent Boundary Layer 194

15.1 Introduction 194

15.2 Structure of Turbulent Boundary Layer 194

15.3 Log Law Relation 196

15.4 Power Law Relations 197

15.5 Wind Tunnel Testing 199

Chapter - 16 Flow about Rectangular and Swept Wings 202

16.1 Introduction 202

16.2 Theory 205

16.3 Prandtl’s Lifting Line Theory 206

16.4 Vortex Lattice Method 208

16.5 Wind Tunnel Testing 210

16.5.1 Measurement of Pressure Distribution 210

16.5.2 Measurement of Overall Forces and Moments Using Balance 215

Chapter - 17 Flow about a Slender Delta Wing 217

17.1 Introduction 217

17.2 Slender Wings in Attached Flow 217

Page 5: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

5

17.3 Slender Wings in Separated Flow 219

17.4 Wind Tunnel Testing 221

17.4.1 Measurement of Pressure Distribution 221

17.4.2 Measurement of Overall Forces and Moments 223

Chapter - 18 Flow about Composite Wings 224

18.1 Introduction 224

18.2 Straked Configuration 225

18.3 Canard Configuration 228

Chapter - 19 Drag Measurement of Sphere 231

19.1 Introduction 231

Chapter - 20 Supersonic Aerodynamics 235

20.1 Introduction 235

20.2 Shock Visualisation 237

20.3 Run Time of Tunnel 238

20.4 Determination of Mach Number 241

20.4.1 By using Area-Local Mach Number Relation 241

20.4.2 By Static Pressure Measurement on the Wall of the Test Section 242

20.4.3 By using Rayleigh-Pitot Formula 242

20.4.4 By using θ-β-M Relation (Shock Wave over a Wedge) 243

20.5 Variation of Mach Number along the Axis of Divergent Section of C-D

Nozzle 244

20.6 Variation of Mach Number along Diffuser Axis 245

20.7 Determination of the Exit Velocity 246

Appendix – 1 Notations 252

Appendix – 2 Note on Units 253

Appendix – 3 List of Facilities 255

Appendix – 4 2100 System : Strain Gage Conditioner and Amplifier System 256

References 281

Page 6: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

6

INTRODUCTION

The basic aim of aerodynamics is to obtain the flow quantities (especially, pressure

distribution and skin friction) about a body immersed in fluid. Very often, the interest is

limited only to obtain the overall forces and moments acting on the body.

There are two main ways these quantities can be found; theoretically and experimentally.

Both the procedures have their relative advantages and disadvantages and have acted and

are going to act as supplementary to each other in foreseeable future

The limitation of theoretical methods basically stems from the fact that the governing

equation of real fluid about a body – the Navier-Stokes equation can not, in general, be

solved theoretically. The theoretical methods are usually based on some simplified form

of this equation. With the assumption of inviscid (infinite Reynolds Number) and

incompressible (zero Mach number) flow, i.e., the ideal flow, the Navier Stokes equation

can simplified to Laplace’s equation. The solution of this ideal flow, because of the above

simplification, differs from the experimental results. Efforts are then made to employ

some ‘corrections’ due to the effects of viscosity and compressibility.

Even with simplification of inviscid incompressible flow, it is not easy to solve the

problem. For a few simple configurations, exact analytic solutions exist (Chap. 5).

Configurations of arbitrary shape are not amenable to analytic methods and demand

numerical solution. In the early days, a variety of approximate numerical methods were

developed. Examples are the different variants of linearised theory by Munk, Weber etc.

for aerofoil problems, Prandtl’s lifting line theory, Multhopp’s lifting surface theory,

Jone’s slender wing theory etc. for wing problems. With the advent of high speed digital

computers, more sophisticated exact numerical methods (Panel method) have been

developed. A variety of computer based theoretical schemes are also developed for

effecting the corrections due to viscosity and compressibility to these solutions.

Alternatively, attempts have been made to develop Euler as well as Navier-Stokes codes

with or without turbulence modeling.

Page 7: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

7

It is almost certainly the case that – however sophisticated these theoretical methods may

eventually become – the engineer will always wish to validate his design, prior to

manufacture, by means of physical experiment. In this respect, in aircraft industry, the

wind-tunnel experimentation will always play the superior role of the two.

Wind-tunnel testing, like the theoretical calculations, has its own deficiencies and

difficulties. Broadly speaking these are : the high capital and running cost associated with

a wind tunnel, the expenses, elapsed time and skill needed in manufacturing accurate

scale models, the difficulty in obtaining the adequate data (forces, pressure distribution

etc.), the difficulty of interrogating this data.

Students of aeronautical engineering are well aware of the fact that the forces and

moments etc. experienced in flight on an aircraft depends primarily on two non-

dimensional parameters : Reynolds number and Mach number. Reynolds number

expresses the relative contributions of inertia and friction forces in the motion of the

fluid. The Mach number is the ratio of the flight speed and the speed of sound. In general

it can be stated that only a full scale model operating at full scale speed can give a totally

correct simulation of a real aircraft in flight. However, because of power conservation

problem (specially for high-speed flow) the wind-tunnel model is generally constructed at

a much smaller scale than the real aircraft. This in itself presents numerous difficulties

associated with the acquisition of sufficiently detailed data on such a small model.

However a more serious problem arises in simultaneously recreating the Mach number

and Reynolds number experienced in flight.

If the working medium and its temperature are the same in the wind-tunnel as in full-

scale flight in the atmosphere, then proper matching of the Mach numbers requires the air

speeds to be the same in both cases. If this is not achieved, then at Mach numbers of

interest of most aircrafts, the effects of compressibility will be different between the

wind-tunnel and flight.

On the other hand, if the speeds are kept same for Mach number simulation, the Reynolds

number in the wind-tunnel will be reduced (proportional to the geometric scale of model)

relative to the real aircraft. Clearly, if the wind-tunnel speed is increased to approach

full-scale Reynolds number then the Mach number will be incorrectly simulated.

Page 8: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

8

Now many vital phenomena depend strongly on the Reynolds number and these include :

development of boundary layer, transition from laminar to turbulent boundary layer,

separation of boundary layer, vortex formation at high angle of attack etc. If the Reynolds

number is not matched properly, viscosity will be incorrectly simulated.

Numerous technological approaches have been proposed to overcome such difficulties.

One of these consists of modifying the properties of working medium and in particular

working at very low temperature or at high pressure. These approaches, in turn, present

other difficulties. However, since the present study is restricted to low speed regime

where compressibility effects are negligible, matching of both parameters is not

necessary and simulation of Reynolds number alone is sufficient.

The other difficulties associated with wind tunnel testing arise from the fact that the flow

conditions inside the tunnel are not exactly the same as those in the free air. Primarily, the

air in the tunnel is considered to be more turbulent than the free air this turbulence being

produced in the tunnel by propeller, vibrations of the tunnel walls etc. This consequently

increases the effective Reynolds number of the tunnel (Section 3.5). Excessive turbulence

makes the test data unreliable and difficult to interpret.

Secondly, the wind-tunnel model experiences spurious ‘constraint’ effects due to wind-

tunnel walls (chapter 10 and 11) which will be absent in free air. These extraneous forces

must be calculated and subtracted out. These forces arise from two sources. Due to

formation and growth of boundary layer in the test section, the effective area is

progressively reduced resulting in increase of velocity and decrease of static pressure

downstream. This variation of static pressure produces a drag force known as ‘horizontal

buoyancy’. Again, the presence of a model in the test section reduces the area through

which air flows. This ‘blockage’ caused by the model and its wake effectively increases

the average air speed in the vicinity of the model than they would be in free air, thereby

increasing all forces and moments at a given angle of attack.

Thirdly, the model in a tunnel is usually installed by some supports which in turn affect

the flow. The effect of this supports (the so-called ‘Tare’ and ‘Interference’ effects,

section 6.4) need to be calculated carefully and eliminated from observed values.

Page 9: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

9

The procedure involved in wind-tunnel testing may now be summarized. The prerequisite

of any experimental work is the calibration and evaluation of the tunnel (Chapter – 3)

itself. The wind-tunnel must be pre-calibrated to give the velocity of air flow during any

testing (since it is not practical to measure the velocity by pitot-static tube while the

model is in tunnel). The flow characteristics of the tunnel must be ascertained by

measuring the variation of velocity (static pressure) in the test section, flow angularity

and the turbulence level of the tunnel.

Wind-tunnel testing, then, involves model making, installation of model in the tunnel and

measuring forces, moments, pressure distribution etc. the forces and moments may be

obtained by any of the three methods :

a) Measuring the actual forces and moments with wind-tunnel balance

b) Measuring the effects that the model has on the airstream by wake survey (profile

drag, section 12.2)

c) Measuring the pressure distribution over the model by means of orifices

connected to manometer and integrating the pressure distribution over the model

surface.

The data acquired is then to be corrected for the tunnel boundary and support effects.

Page 10: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

10

Chapter 1

WIND-TUNNEL

1.1 Introduction :

The wind-tunnel is one of the most important facilities available for experimental work in

aerodynamics. Its purpose is to provide a region of controlled airflow into which models

can be inserted. This region is termed the working section or test section. For aeronautical

work, the flow in the test section should ideally be perfectly uniform in speed, direction

and vorticity. Such perfection can never be achieved in practice and the quality of a wind-

tunnel is related to the closeness to which the airflow in the test section approaches the

ideal.

1.2 Wind Tunnel Classification :

Wind-tunnels are usually classified according to the three main criteria :

i) the type of test section

ii) the type of return circuit

iii) the speed of flow in the test section

1.2.1 The type of test section:

The cross sectional form of a test section may be square, rectangle, octagonal, circular or

elliptic. Again, it can be closed or open. A closed test section is one which is completely

enclosed within solid walls, the airflow therefore being constrained by these walls. An

open test section is one which is not enclosed within solid walls (Fig. 1.1). Because the

flow is not constrained, it usually tends to expand, partly due to pressure difference and

partly due to mixing between the air in the test section and that outside. To allow for this

expansion, the downstream part of the tunnel is bell-mouthed.

Page 11: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

11

Figure 1.1 Open test section

Comparing these two types of test section, the closed type has the following advantages :

a) greater efficiency (i.e. reduced power losses)

b) better control of air flow

c) no loss of air

d) less noise

On the other hand, the open type of test section allows easier access to the model and

easier visual study of the flow.

1.2.2 The type of return circuit

A wind tunnel may either be open-circuit or closed-circuit tunnel. The open circuit tunnel

which is open at the both ends has no guided return of the air (Fig. 1.2). After the air

leaves the tunnel it circulates by devious paths back to intake.

Page 12: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

12

Figure 1.2 Open circuit tunnel

The closed circuit tunnel has, as the name implies, a continuous path for the air (Fig. 1.3).

The whole circuit, except possibly the test section, is enclosed.

1.2.3 The speed of flow in the test section:

Five categories of speed are usually recognized :

a) low speed (up to about 60 or 70 m/s)

b) high speed subsonic (but Mach number less than 0.9)

c) transonic (Mach number between 0.9 and 1.2)

d) supersonic (Mach number between 1.2 and 5)

e) hypersonic (Mach number greater than 5)

Page 13: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

13

Figure 1.3 Close circuit tunnel

The first two categories, low speed and high speed subsonic, are often taken together as

subsonic tunnels.

1.3 Types of Wind Tunnel :

1.3.1 Subsonic Wind Tunnel :

The simplest kind of subsonic tunnel consists of a tube, open at both ends, along which

the air is propelled. The propulsion is usually provided by a fan downstream of the test

section (a fan upstream would create excessive turbulence in the working section. Fig. 1.2

represents a tunnel of this type.

The following description relates to Fig. 1.2. The mouth is shaped to guide the air

smoothly into the tunnel; flow separation here would give excessive turbulence and non-

uniformity in velocity in the test section.

To make the flow parallel and more uniform in speed and top give a little time for

turbulence to decay, the mouth is followed by a settling chamber. The settling chamber

usually includes a honeycomb and wire-mesh screens.

Page 14: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

14

A honeycomb is a coarse mesh made of thin, broad plates set edgewise to the flow. It has

two purposes. First, it helps to guide the air to flow parallel to the tunnel axis. Second, if

there are any large eddies in the incoming flow, the honeycomb ‘cuts’ them into smaller

ones which can decay more rapidly than would the original larger ones.

The mesh-screens are fitted to reduce non-uniformities in flow speeds. A typical

installation might have one or two. The effects of screens on dynamic pressure variation

in the test section is shown in Fig. 1.4. The screen also serves to reduce the turbulence

level of the tunnel.

Figure 1.4 Effect of screen

The contraction followed by the settling chamber improves the quality of flow in the test

section. The air flows from the mouth of the tunnel at low speed into a comparatively

short settling chamber with a honeycomb and mesh screens. It is then accelerated rapidly

in the contraction. The contraction reduces turbulence and also non-uniformities in flow

speed and direction.

The test section is followed by a divergent duct, the diffuser. The divergence results in a

corresponding reduction in the flow speed, which has two principle effects. Firstly, it

enables an increased fan efficiency to be achieved. Secondly, the reduction in dynamic

pressure leads to reduced power losses at the exit from the tunnel in the laboratory.

Page 15: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

15

Leaving the diffuser, the air enters the laboratory, along which it flows slowly back to the

mouth of the tunnel.

A typical tunnel will have a working section of about 1 meter square and an overall

length of some 5 to 7 meters. The speed in the test section, will be controllable, upto

about 30 m/s.

1.3.2 Transonic Tunnel:

The main special feature of a transonic wind-tunnel is its test section. In this, test section

walls are neither open nor closed but a combination of both. The walls usually have

perforation or streamwise slots. The reason is as follows :

If, as an Fig. 1.5 an aerofoil is being tested in a transonic flow, shock waves occur. If the

walls were solid these shockwaves would be reflected from them and would impinge on

the model. The flow over the model would therefore be very different from that in free

flight and the test would be invalid.

If the test section were open, there would be a boundary between the jet and the

surrounding atmosphere; the shock (compression) waves would be reflected from this

boundary as expansion (rarefaction) waves. These would impinge on the model, so again

the test would be invalidated.

Figure 1.5 Reflection of shock wave

Page 16: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

16

If the walls are perforated or slotted (i.e., the test section is partly opened and partly

closed), the reflections are mixtures of compression waves and rarefaction waves and so,

depending on the degree of perforation, these tend to cancel each other out. The flow

over the model therefore approximates more closely to that in free flight.

1.3.3 Supersonic Wind Tunnel:

The simplest form of supersonic wind-tunnel is the blow-down type (Fig. 1.6). It consists

of a convergent-divergent duct whose upstream end is connected to a tank filled with

compressed air. The downstream end is usually open to the atmosphere. The air in the

tank then discharges through the duct. This means, of course, that the pressure in the tank

fall continuously, and therefore a reducing valve is fitted to maintain a constant pressure

at the inlet of the duct. The duration of each test run is necessarily limited with this type

of tunnel.

The blow-down type of tunnel is relatively cheap. In particular, a relatively low-powered

pump can be used to pressurize the tank taking, of course, a correspondingly long time to

do so. The power expanded in driving the tunnel during a test is many times greater than

the power of the pump.

The test section of this type of tunnel is followed by a convergent-divergent duct. It can

be shown that if the pressure ratio between the two ends of a convergent-divergent duct

exceeds 1.892, the flow is sonic (M=1) at the throat and supersonic downstream. A plane

downstream of the throat can therefore be used as a test section in which the flow is

supersonic.

Figure 1.6 Supersonic wind tunnel

Page 17: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

17

The Mach number at the test section will depend only on the cross-sectional areas at the

throat and the test section.

32

.

6

51

M

MA

A ST (1.1)

This shows that the test section Mach number is determined solely by the shape of the

tunnel (provided the pressure ratio is sufficient to maintain supersonic flow through the

test section). Because of this supersonic tunnels frequently consist of a basic ‘frame’ to

which various liners can be fitted. Each liner gives a unique area ratio and therefore a

unique Mach number in the test section. The shapes of some different liners for various

Mach number are illustrated in Fig. 1.7.

Figure 1.7 Shapes of liners

1.3.4 Hypersonic Wind Tunnel :

The main special feature of hypersonic wind tunnel is that provision must be made for

preheating the air before entering the tunnel.

Page 18: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

18

By suitable design of lines i.e. providing the large area ratio AT*S/ A* for generating high

Mach number, the Mach number in the test section of a supersonic wind-tunnel may be

increased to hypersonic regime. But another consequence of expanding air to high speed,

namely its change in temperature, becomes limiting criterion. The equation for the

temperature ratio along a streamline originating in a region where the flow is at rest with

temperature T0 and terminating where the temperature is T is given by

5

12

0 M

T

T (1.2)

For M = 10, this equation gives T =T0/21. Now if T0 be the absolute temperature 228k

then the wind temperature in the test section will be 13.5K. This is well below the

temperature where air becomes liquid. Thus a limiting Mach number in the test section

would be one at which air remains gaseous.

The obvious choice for increasing this limiting Mach number is not preheat the air to be

used in the tunnel to such an extent that the very low temperature in the test section is not

realized. Another choice is to use a gas which has very much lower condensation

temperature than air, e.g. helium. The majority of hypersonic tunnels, however use the

preheating method. The preheating of air may be done by heating the reservoir air or

alternatively to allow the air to pass through a heat exchanger as it leaves the reservoir to

enter the working section.

Apart from these wind tunnels, other types of wind tunnels are also designed and

fabricated. The effort to simulate both Mach number and Reynolds number of free flight

in wind-tunnel has resulted in development of two types of tunnels :

1. Full Scale Tunnel

2. Compressed Air Tunnel

1.3.5 Full Scale Tunnel :

The Full Scale Tunnel is capable of testing actual aircrafts of moderate size under near

flight condition. The wind tunnel, developed at Langley Field, U.S.A., attains wind

velocities up to 53m/s with an open jet 18m wide and 9m high. Apart from providing a

Page 19: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

19

total simulation of Mach number and Reynolds number, such wind tunnels also serve a

useful purpose in giving a correlation between flight and small model tests.

1.3.6 Compressed Air Tunnel :

The use of high pressure and therefore a high density in the test section can help to

achieve full scale Reynolds number with relatively small and low speeds. Some tunnels

are therefore completely enclosed in a large tank which can be pumped up to several

times atmospheric pressures. Such tunnels are termed compressed air tunnels.

It is worth mentioning that high pressure is no cure-all for getting a high Reynolds

number since model strength may be a limiting factor.

1.3.7 Other Tunnels :

There are also other types of tunnels built for various purposes. Some of these tunnels

are:

Smoke tunnel : For flow visualization

Spin Tunnel : For studying spin recovery

Low Turbulence tunnel : For testing at high Reynolds number

Stability Tunnel : For studying dynamic stability

Gust Tunnel : For studying effects of gust on models

V/STOL : For studying V/STOL configurations

Ice Tunnel : For studying formation and removal of ice on models

subjected to icing condition.

Automobile Wind Tunnel : For testing full scale automobiles.

Page 20: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

20

Chapter 2

WIND TUNNEL INSTRUMENTATION

2.1 Introduction

Instrumentation plays an important role in wind tunnel testing. The accuracy of

experimental results depends not only on the quality of the tunnel but also on the

performance of he measuring equipments.

The quantities which are frequently measured in wind tunnel testing are generally

pressure distribution and over all forces and moments acting on a model. Velocity, in

general, can be calculated from the pressure and hence need not be measured. However,

in some cases velocity itself (for example, fluctuating velocity components in turbulent

flow) may be of importance and need to be measured. Also, measurement of skin friction

may be necessary in some experiments.

Measuring instruments may, broadly, be classified as two types: mechanical and

electronic. Examples of mechanical type of instruments are the liquid-level manometers

for pressure measurement and wind-tunnel mechanical balances for measurement of

overall forces and moments. Such instruments lack the first response, capability of

measuring high and low values and amenability to automation required for unsteady or

short-duration high speed tunnel.

All these limitations may be overcome in electronic instrumentation system. An

electronic system usually consist of:

a) pick-up or transducer

b) signal conditioner

c) data acquisition system

The pick-up or transducer receives the physical quantity (pressure/force) under

measurement and delivers a proportional electrical signal to the signal conditioner. Here

the signal is amplified, filtered or otherwise modified to a format acceptable to the data

acquisition system. The data acquisition system may be a simple indicating meter, an

oscilloscope or a chart recorder for visual display. Alternatively, it may be a magnetic

Page 21: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

21

tape recorder for temporary or permanent storage of data or a digital computer for data

manipulation or process control.

2.2 Pick-up or Transducer:

A transducer may be defined as a device which provides an electrical output signal for a

physical quantity (pressure/force), whether or not auxiliary energy is required. Many

other physical parameters (such as heat, light, intensity, humidity) may also be converted

into electrical energy by means of transducers. Transducers used in wind tunnel testing

may be classified according to the electrical principles involved, as follows:

1) Variable resistance transducer (resistance strain gauge)

2) Variable capacitance transducer

3) Variable reluctance transducer

4) Piezoelectric transducer

Of all these transducers, resistance strain gauge, because of its unique set of operational

characteristics, has dominated in transducer field for the past twenty years.

2.2.1 Variable Resistance Transducer:

The strain gauge is an example of variable resistance transducer that converts a physical

quantity into a change of resistance. A strain gauge is a thin, wafer-like device that can be

attached (bonded) to a variety of materials. Metallic strain gauges are manufactured from

small diameter resistance wire such as constantan, or etched from thin foil sheets (Fig.

2.1). For simultaneous measurement of strain in more than one direction, two-element or

three-element rosettes are used. The resistance of the wire or metal foil changes with

length as the material to which the gauge is attached undergoes tension or compression.

In a gauge diaphragm pressure transducer, strain gauges are directly bonded on the

diaphragm while in a sting balance used for force measurement, strain gauges are bonded

on he sting (Fig. 2.2). While the load is applied, the resistances of the strain gauges

increase or decrease, depending on nature of stress (tensile or compression). The

sensitivity of a strain gauge is described in terms of characteristics called the gauge

factor, G, defined as the unit change in resistance per unit change in length

Page 22: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

22

Or, G = (RR) (L/L) (2.1)

where G = Gauge factor

R = Gauge resistance

R = change in gauge resistance

L = normal length (unstressed condition)

L = change in length.

The term L/L is the strain , so that equation (2.1) may be written as

G = (RR) (2.2)

Where = strain in the lateral direction.

Figure 2.1 Strain gauges (a: wire, b: foil)

The resistance R of a wire of length L can be calculated by using the expression for the

resistance of conductor of uniform cross-section.

2

4d

L

area

lengthR

(2.3)

Where = specific resistance of conductor material

L = length of the conductor

d diameter of the conductor

Page 23: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

23

Figure 2.2 Sting balance

Tension on the conductor causes an increase L in its length and a decrease d in its

diameter. The resistance of the conductor then changes to

ddd

LLL

dd

LLRR

214

1.

4.

22

(2.4)

Equation (2.4) may be simplified by using Poisson’s ratio, , defined as a ratio of strain

in lateral direction to strain in axial direction. Therefore,

LLdd (2.5)

Substituting equation (2.5) in equation (2.4) gives

)21(

1

4 2 LL

LL

d

LRR

LLLLR 211

LLR 211 [neglecting higher order term]

The gauge factor can now be obtained as

21/ LLRRG (2.6)

Page 24: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

24

Poisson’s ratio for most metals vary from 0.25 to 0.5 and the gauge factor is then of the

order of 1.5 to 2.0. For strain-gauge application, a high sensitivity is very desirable. A

large gauge factor means a relatively large resistance change which can be more easily

measured than a small resistance change. Semi-conductor gauges are now developed,

which have gauge factor of the order of 120.

The semi-conductor strain gauges are however neither so practical nor so widely used as

the conventional metallic gauges in general purpose, high accuracy transducers. It is

worth nothing that semi-conductor gauges were originally considered advantageous

because of their high output. This has less importance today because the same

semiconductor technology which created the type of gauge has also created smaller and

less expensive amplifiers high gain for use with conventional strain gauges.

Conventional metallic strain gauges are generally of four types : Constantan, Karma,

Isoelastic and platinum-tungsten. Constantan, a copper nickel alloy, of gauge factor 2.0 is

the most popular alloy for transducer gauges. It possesses an exceptional linearity over a

wide strain range and is readily manufactured. It is also easily solderable. Its primary

limitation in precision applications is a slow irreversible drift in grid resistance when

exposed to temperature above 75 C. Because the drift rate increases exponentially with

temperature, Constantan is not recommended for transducers operating continuously at

high temperature.

Karma (gauge factor 2.1) is a nickel-chromium alloy used in a variety of modified forms

for strain sensing. Like Constantan it displays extremely good linearity over a wide strain

range. It has greater resistivity than Constantan making higher grid resistance feasible. A

major advantage is its improved resistive stability, particularly at high temperature.

Isoelastic alloy offers exceptionally good fatigue life and a gauge factor 3.1, about 50%

higher than Constantan or Karma alloys. It has limited use in transducers because of its

poor zero stability with temperature variation. Because of its good fatigue life, it is

normally used for dynamic measurements.

Platinum-tungsten alloys, like Isoelastic, find their primary use in dynamic transducer

applications. With a gauge factor approximately two times greater than Constantan and

Karma, and with very good fatigue life, platinum-tungsten gauges are used almost

exclusively in ‘fatiguerated’ dynamic transducers.

Page 25: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

25

2.2.1.1 The Wheatstone Bridge Principle :

The change in resistance due to applied load can be converted into a change in voltage by

the Wheatstone bridge circuit. Two types of Wheatstone bridge circuits are possible :

‘summing circuit’ and ‘differencing circuit’. Generally, in wind tunnel testing,

differencing circuit is used for measuring moment.

2.2.1.2 Summing Circuit :

In the summing circuit, resistance undergoing tension and compression are connected in

opposite sides of the Wheatstone bridge. Four unstressed strain gauges R1, R2, R3, R4 are

connected to form a Wheatstone bridge in summing circuit is shown in Fig. 2.3.

The current passing through the resistance R1 and R3 is I13 where

31

13RR

VI

(2.7)

Similarly, the current passing through resistances R4 and R2 is I42 where

24

42RR

VI

(2.8)

Figure 2.3 Summing circuit

The voltage at A is therefore,

Page 26: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

26

1

31

113 .RRR

VVRIVVA

The voltage at B is,

4

24

442 .RRR

VVRIVVB

The voltage across A and B is,

4

21

1

31

RRR

VVR

RR

VVVVVV BAAB

31

1

4

4

2 RR

R

R

RV

4231

2143

RRRR

RRRRV

or, 4231

2143

RRRR

RRRRVV

(2.9)

Now, the output voltage V will be exactly zero, if

(1) 02143 RRRR or, 2

4

3

1

R

R

R

R

or, (2) RRRRR 4321 (say)

no matter what the input voltage V may be.

If any of the resistance changes due to applied load, the output voltage V will change.

Provision may be made to change only one resistance (quarter active bridge) or two

resistance (half active bridge) or three resistance (three-quarter bridge) or all four

resistances (fully-active bridge).

For the fully active bridge (Fig. 2.2), the output voltage due to applied load is calculated

in a simple manner. The resistance R1 and R2 are subjected to compression and will

therefore have a decrease in resistance value while resistance R4 and R3 will have a

increase in resistance.

The changed values of the resistances may be written as

Page 27: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

27

RRR

RRR

RRR

3

2

1

RRR 4 (2.10)

RR , are the changes in resistances due to changes in strain at positions 1 and 2 (Fig.

2.2).

Substituting the values in equation (9) yields

RRRRRRRR

RRRRRRRR

V

V

)(

))((

224

22

RRR

RRRR

r

RRR

4

2

R

RR

2

(2.11)

If the strain gauges are bounded very close to each other, it can be assumed

RRR

and the equation (2.11) is reduced to

24

4

R

RR

V

V

or, R

R

V

V (2.12)

The equation shows a linear relationship. However, for quarter-bridge and half bridge a

non linearity appears in the expression for output voltage. For example, if only R4 is

active (quarter-bridge) and the other three resistance are passive (not bonded on the

sting), the expression for output voltage is

RR

R

V

V

4 (2.13)

For a half-bridge (taking only R4 and R3 active)

RR

R

V

V

2 (neglecting higher order terms) (2.14)

Page 28: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

28

Similarly, for a three-quarter bridge (taking R4, R3 and R2 )

RR

R

V

V

4

3 (2.15)

Because of the linearity in relationship, fully-active bridge is usually used in

measurement techniques. It also has another advantage compared to others i.e. the

temperature compensation effect. In a fully active bridge, all resistances have same

temperature (neglecting the thermal e.m.f. effect) while in other bridges, the temperature

of active gauges may be different from those of the passive gauges which will cause a

change in resistance values resulting in further non-linearities.

2.2.1.3 Differencing Circuit :

The arrangement of resistance in the Wheatstone bridge in ‘differencing circuit’ is shown

in Fig. 2.4. Using the similar procedure, the output voltage V in this circuit is obtained

as

Figure 2.4 Differencing circuit

3421

3142

RRRR

RRRR

V

V

Page 29: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

29

= RRRRRR

RRRRRRRR

2.2

(

224

2

RRR

RRR

24

2

R

RRR

[neglecting 2

RR with respect to 4R2]

R

RR

2

(2.16)

If the strain gauges are pasted close to each other, the output voltage will be virtually zero

since R will be almost equal to R.

2.2.2 Variable Capacitance Transducer :

The capacitance of parallel-plate capacitor is given by

)(.. 0 faradsd

AkC

Where A = area of each plate (m2)

d distance between the plates (m)

0 = 9.85 10 -12

(F/m)

k dielectric constant

Since the capacitance is inversely proportional to the spacing of the parallel plates, d, any

variation in d causes a corresponding variation in the capacitance. This principle is

applied in the variable capacitance pressure transducer (Fig. 2.5). A pressure, applied to a

diaphragm that functions as one plate of a simple capacitor changes the distance between

the diaphragm and the static plate. The resulting change in capacitance can be measured

with an AC bridge but it is usually measured with an oscillator circuit. The transducer, as

a part of the oscillatory circuit, causes a change in the frequency of the oscillator. This

change in frequency is a measure of the magnitude of the pressure applied.

Page 30: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

30

Figure 2.5 Variable capacitance transducer

2.2.3 Variable Reluctance Transducer :

Such transducers employ magnetic diaphragms as sensing element (Fig. 2.6). When a

differential pressure deflects the magnetic diaphragm, the air gaps (initially about 0.025

mm) also changes differentially and so does the reluctance. The two coils are connected

on a two-active arm bridge so that an output proportional to pressure is obtained.

Figure 2.6 Variable reluctance transducer

Page 31: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

31

Another type of variable reluctance transducer is based on linear variable differential

transformer (LVDT). The LVDT is a three-coil device with a movable magnetic core

(Fig. 2.7). Two outer coils are connected in ‘opposition’ so that induced voltages are 180

out of phase with each other. When the armature is centered, these voltages are equal in

magnitude giving zero output. The pressure activates the diaphragm and when it moves

the magnetic fluxes are unbalanced to produce an output proportional to the pressure

applied.

Figure 2.7 Linear variable differential transducer

2.2.4 Piezoelectric Transducer:

The Greek word piezo means ‘to squeeze’. The piezoelectric effect is appropriately

described as generating electricity by squeezing crystals. This type of sensor is self-

generating, that is, it does not require external electrical power as do the variable

resistance or variable reluctance sensors.

A piezoelectric transducer is illustrated schematically in Fig. 2.8. The sensitivity can be

enhanced at the expense of resonant frequency by ‘stacking’ a series of elements together

with the appropriate electrical connection.

Page 32: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

32

Figure 2.8 Schematic diagram of piezoelectric transducer

A variety of piezoelectric materials are used, with quartz being most popular. Although

piezo-electric transducers may be used for near static pressure measurements, they are

more frequently employed for transient measurement.

2.3 Signal Conditioner:

Signal originating from the transducer is fed to the signal conditioner in which it is

transformed into a form acceptable to the data acquisition system. Broadly speaking, the

signal conditioner provides circuitry for amplification, noise suppression, filtering,

excitation, zeroing, ranging, calibration and impedance matching. Because the operating

principles of the different transducers are different, a variety of signal conditioners have

been developed. The different types of signal conditioner for different transducers are

outlined below.

2.3.1 Signal conditioner for Variable Resistance Transducer :

The signal conditioner usually provides supporting circuitry for resistance strain gauge

transducer. Usually, the equipment is able to accept quarter-bridge, half-bridge and full-

bridge by providing appropriate dummy gauges. The circuitry usually provides excitation

power, balancing circuits, calibration elements, signal amplification etc.

2.3.1.1 Excitation Supply :

Normally DC excitation is used for resistance strain gauge transducer. Although AC

excitation can be used, the disadvantages outweigh the advantages. The accuracy of an

AC system is not as good as that of DC system. Also the noise rejection near the carrier

frequency is poor. Earlier DC amplifier circuit was based on the ‘chopper’ principle in

Page 33: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

33

which the DC is first converted to AC and then amplified and later converted to DC.

Such a DC amplifier is fairly expensive. However, with the advent IC chips, DC

amplifiers are no longer more costly than AC system.

However, the DC power supplied must have high stability. To achieve this, the power

supply should be isolated from all other ‘common lines’ and from the AC power line. In

the other words, it should have a very low coupling to the power line and to the ground.

2.3.1.2 Bridge Balance :

The Wheatstone bridge circuit should ideally have zero voltage output under no load

condition, equation (2.9). However, because of normal gauge-to gauge resistance

variations and additional resistance changes during gauge installation, the bridge circuit is

usually in a resistively unbalanced state when first connected. It is advantageous to have

a balancing network to nullify any residual signal.

Figure 2.9 Parallel balance network

The most common arrangement uses a shunt on one side of the bridge as shown in Fig.

2.9, the fixed resistor in the potentiometer wiper lead being used to omit the loading

effect on the active arms of the bridge.

If all the resistance strain gauges are of exact equal values, the voltage at A and B will be

0.5 V and the output V will be zero. In this hypothetical case, the potentiometer wiper

Page 34: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

34

lead will be at the center (position C) and the voltage there will also be 0.5 V and

therefore there will be no current through R4.

However, if due to any of reasons mentioned above, the output V is not zero, the voltage

at A is then either higher or lower than the voltage at B. in either case, bridge can be

balanced by moving the wiper lead downward (C2) or upward (C1) respectively.

The range of the balance network is given by

44R

R

V

V

if R4>>R

where V is the maximum out-of –balance (zero offset) that can be nullified. The range

can be extended by decreasing the value of R4. However, R4 can not be decreased

indefinitely because it will then have loading effect on the power supply. Usually, to limit

the loading effect, R4 is many times higher than R (of the order of 75 k to 100 k ).

2.3.1.3 Shunt Calibration :

Usually, in all signal conditioners, shunt resistors are provided across the arms connected

to balance network. The shunt resistor, when connected, can usually accommodate a

0.4% change of resistance of the arm shunted. This actually amounts to simulating 2000

strain on the arm shunted as shown in Fig. 2.10. From equation (2.2), = (R/R)/G. For

R = 120 , G = 2.0, R = 0.48, becomes 0.002 or 2000.

Page 35: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

35

Figure 2.10 Shunt calibration

2.3.1.4 Signal Amplification :

Signal amplification is the major function of a signal conditioner. Usually, the output

voltage V (equations 2.12, 2.16) of a wheatstone bridge circuits is of the order of

microvolts since the change in resistance is usually of the order of 10 –5

to 10 –6

ohms.

Such a weak signal may not be accepted by the data indicator or recording system

(although microvoltmeters are now available) and therefore the signal originating from

transducer need to be amplified.

Signal requirements for amplifier are quite stringent. These include impedance matching

with the data indicator or recording device, high signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), low drift

(change in output voltage with time is called drift) etc.

With low impedance devices such as resistance strain gauges, no special problems arise

in the operational mode. A fairly conventional voltage amplifier with an input impedance

of 100k or greater in suitable for use with the data indicator system (such as DVM) or

Page 36: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

36

C.R.O. For bridge circuits in which neither output terminal is grounded, a differential

amplifier is needed. Such amplifiers offer good common mode rejection characteristics.

The philosophy underlying noise cancellation is outlined in Fig. 2.11.

Figure 2.11 Noise cancellation by amplifier common-mode rejection

If the common mode rejection ratio is of the order of 105,

the noise that appears at the

output terminal is largely eliminated. Such transducers have the ability to handle direct

coupled signals, the D.C. drift being less than 10Vhour after allowing one hour warm-

up. Low drift rates are fairly difficult to achieve and the cost of D.C. amplifier with this

sort of performance is comparatively high.

2.3.2 Signal Conditioner for Variable Capacitance Transducer :

A number of signal conditioner is available based on the following schemes

i) D.C. polarization as the input circuit for an amplifier.

ii) An A.C. bridge circuit for use with and amplitude modulation system.

iii) A frequency modulating oscillator circuit.

iv) A pulse modulating circuit.

The D.C. polarization circuit, the simplest of these, is described here. It is effected by the

circuit shown in Fig. 2.12. in which C represents the capacitance of the transducer

together with that of the connecting cable and any stray parallel capacitance. The

polarizing voltage V is usually a few hundred volts. If it is assumed that the capacitance

C can be represented by a constant portion C0 plus a sinusoidally varying part C1 sinwt,

then

Page 37: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

37

C = C0 + C1 sinwt

If C1<< C0 as will usually be the case with a transducer and the resistance R is made very

large then, it can be shown that

0

1

C

C

V

V

sin wt.

The output voltage thus follows the change in capacitance, which is dependent on the

pressure applied.

Figure 2.12 Simple D.C. polarization circuit

The limit of R is usually set by the leakage resistance in the circuit and the insulators in

the transducer must be stable and of high quality. With care, a ‘flat’ response down to a

few hertz can be obtained but a D.C. response is not possible with this circuit.

2.3.3 Signal Conditioner for Variable Reluctance Transducer :

Variable reluctance transducers require an external source of alternating current. The

output is an amplitude-modulated signal at the same frequency as the excitation and this

has to be ‘processed’ to recover the ‘pressure’ information. A block diagram of a typical

system is shown in Fig. 2.13.

The transducer is excited by an A.C. supply which is amplitude-modulated by the

transducer. A balance network is used to nullify the initial unbalance in the system and

the resistive component in the network is used to adjust the zero of the amplifier. The

band-pass filter, centered at the excitation frequency, removes ‘noise’. The signal is then

Page 38: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

38

amplified by an A.C. amplifier and demodulated. It is then filtered to remove any ripple

from the carrier wave.

Figure 2.13 Carrier wave amplifier system

2.3.4 Signal Conditioner for Piezo-electric Transducer :

Piezo-electric transducers are self-generating; they do not require an external source of

energy. However, using them poses some special problem. In order to measure the charge

separation which occurs when the piezo-electric material is mechanically strained, a

measured circuit must be connected to it. The measuring circuit draws some current so

that the charge, Q, leaks away. To minimize this leakage, the input impedance of the

circuit must be made very large. Early approaches to this problem involved the use of

‘valve voltmeters’. The input impedance of such valves are very high so that negligible

current is drawn less than 10-12

Amp. Used in a simple voltage amplification circuit, Fig.

2.14, the output signal is function of cable capacitance CC, and any stray capacitance CS

between the input and ground as well as on the range- setting capacitor C1

Page 39: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

39

Figure 2.14 Voltage amplifier

Thus, CS CCCC

mQV

10

This strong dependence on cable and stray capacitance is circumvented by using a

‘charge-amplifier’. This is an operational amplifier, in which the high input impedance is

retained but strong negative capacitive feedback is employed as shown in Fig. 2.15.

For such an arrangement, the output voltage V is given by

inF CmmC

QV

111

If the open loop gain –m, of the amplifier is very large (m > 50000), the output becomes

FC

QV

Thus a voltage proportional to charge Q is produced.

Figure 2.15 Charge amplifier

2.4 Data Acquisition System :

Data acquisition systems are used to measure, indicate and/or record signals originating

from transducers and signal conditioning process. Such systems can be categorized into

Page 40: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

40

two major classes : analog system and digital system. The type of data acquisition

system, whether analog or digital, depends largely on the intended use of the recorded

input data. In general, analog systems are used when wide bandwidth is required or when

lower accuracy can be tolerated. Digital systems are used when the physical process

being monitored is slowly varying (narrow bandwidth) and when high accuracy and low

pre-channel cost is required. Digital data acquisition systems are in general more

complex than analog systems both in terms of instrumentation involved and the volume

and complexity of input data they can handle.

2.4.1 Analog System

An analog system may be defined as continuous function such as a plot of voltage versus

load (Fig. 2.16) or displacement versus pressure. Examples of the analog systems are the

analog panel meter, CRO, strip-chart recorder, X-y plotter etc.

Figure 2.16 Analog system

A complete analog instrumentation system used in wind tunnel testing may consist of

some or all of the following elements :

a) Transducers: for translating physical parameters into electric signal.

b) Signal Conditioners: for amplifying, modifying etc. of these signals.

Page 41: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

41

c) Visual Display Devices: for continuous monitoring of the input signals. These

devices may include single or multi-channel CRO, storage CRO, panel meter,

numerical display and so on.

d) Graphic Recordings Instruments: for obtaining permanent records. These

instruments include strip chart recorder to provide continuous records on paper

charts, X-y plotter, ultraviolet recorders etc.

e) Magnetic Tape Instruments: for acquiring data, preserving their original

electrical form and reproducing them at a later data for more detailed analysis.

2.4.2 Digital System :

Digital systems handle information in digital form. A digital quantity may consist of a

number of discrete and discontinuous pulses (Fig. 2.17) which contains information about

the magnitude or nature of quantity. Digital system may consist of digital panel meter,

data-logger, computer etc. It is worth noting that if a digital system is employed, an

analog-to-digital (A/D) converter must be used before since the output signal from the

signal conditioner is in analog form.

Figure 2.17 Digital system

A complete digital instrumentation system may include some or all of the following

elements (Fig. 2.18).

a) Transducers: for translating physical parameters into electrical signals.

b) Signals Conditioners: for amplifying, modifying, etc. of these signal.

Page 42: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

42

c) Scanner or Multiplexer: for sequentially connecting multiple analog signals to

one measuring/recording system.

d) Signal Converter: translates the analog signal to a form acceptable by analog-to-

digital converter. An example of signal converter is an amplifier for amplifying

log-level voltages generating by strain gauges.

e) Analog to Digital (A/D) converter: converts the analog voltage to its equivalent

digital form.

f) Digital Recorder: records digital information on punched cards, perforated

paper tape, magnetic tape, or a combination of these systems.

g) Auxiliary Equipment: this section contains instruments for system

programming functions and digital data processing. These functions may be

performed by individual instruments or by a digital computer.

Figure 2.18 Complete digital instrumentation system

Transd-

ucer

Signal

Condit-

ioner

Scanner/

Multiple-

xer

Signal

Conver

-ter

A/D

Conver

-ter

Digital

Record-

er

Auxiliary Equipment

and

System Programming

Page 43: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

43

Chapter 3

TUNNEL CHARACTERISTICS

3.1 Introduction :

Once a wind tunnel is designed and constructed, the primary task is to calibrate and

evaluate the tunnel characteristics in terms of uniformity in wind speed and direction, and

also level of turbulence. A wind tunnel can be considered to have good characteristics if

the flow in the test section has uniform speed, no angular variation in direction and low

level of turbulence. Four tests are generally necessary for calibrating and evaluating a

tunnel. These are:

1. Air speed calibration.

2. Determination of velocity variation in the test section.

3. Determination of angular flow variation in the test section.

4. Determination of turbulence level.

3.2 Air Speed Calibration :

In any experiment, the wind tunnel flow speed (or dynamic pressure) must be known for

calculation of flow quantities. However, it is not desirable top insert a pitot-static tube in

the tunnel in the presence of a model. This is because of two reasons; firstly, the tube will

interfere with the model and secondly the tube will not read true owing to the effect of

model on it. It is therefore necessary to determine the airflow speed during an experiment

without using the pitot-static tube. This is possible by a prior calibration of a wind tunnel

manometer with respect to air speed.

The pitot-static tube (Fig.3.1) at station J is considered. If P0 be the total pressure, pj be

the static pressure and UJ be the oncoming flow speed at the test section, then from

Bernoulli’s equation

2

02

1JJ UpP

or, JJ PPU 02 (3.1)

Page 44: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

44

Figure 3.1 Calibration of wind tunnel manometer

The pitot-static tube is connected to manometer M1 which shows a difference in water-

level of hJ , then

ghPP JwaterJ 0

The manometer M1 is inclined at an angle of 600,

gSinhPP JWaterJ 0

0 60 (3.2)

From equation (3.1) and (3.2)

gSinhU JWaterJ 0602 (3.3)

The air flow speed at test section can now be calculated from equation (3.3)

Page 45: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

45

The calibration of flow speed UJ or dynamic pressure

2

2

1JJ Uq can now be

calibrated with the help of another manometer M2 . Applying Bernoulli’s equation at L

and S stations gives

22

2

1

2

1SSLL UpUp

or, SSLL qpqp where q is the dynamic pressure.

If the pressure drop between S and L stations due to friction is considered, total head at L

will be slightly smaller by an amount (say qSK1 where K1is he loss coefficient), then

1kqqpqp SSSLL

or, LSSL qkqpp 11

Applying equations of continuity between stations L and S

LLSS UAUA ; SLSL UAAU

Therefore, 2

11 LSSSL AAkqpp (3.4)

Applying equation of continuity between S and J

JJSS UAUA ; JSJS UAAU

or, JSJS qAAq2

Putting in equation (3.4)

2

1

21 LSJSJSL AAkqAApp

jqk2

or, 2kppq SLJ where k2 is a constant.

Now, if another manometer M2 is connected to stations L and S, then

ghpp LSwaterSL

or, 2kghq LSwaterJ

LSkh (3.5)

where k is a constant.

Equation (3.5) shows that the free stream dynamic pressure is linearly proportional to the

pressure difference in terms of manometer water level difference hLS. Free stream speed

Page 46: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

46

(U) at station J Is also therefore directly related to pressure difference (in terms of hLS )

between two points L and S.

The lows peed wind tunnel (LSWT) in the department can be run at 11 different speed

setting. For 11 different speeds a table can be made concerning free stream speed C at

station J and hLS, as shown in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1. : Calibration of tunnel speed

No. of runs hJ (cm) qJ (N/m2) U at J (m/s) hLS(cm)

1.

2.

3.

-

-

11.

Calibration graphs (Fig. 3.2) can now be made in terms of q vs hLS and U vs hLS. Using

these graphs velocity or dynamic pressure in any subsequent experiment can be obtained

simply from hLS (without using pitot-static tube).

q U

(N/m2) (m/s)

hLS (cm) hLS (cm)

Figure 3.2 calibration graphs

Page 47: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

47

3.3 Determination of Velocity variation in test section :

Velocity in the test section, even in the absence of model, is not uniform either in

horizontal or vertical direction. Owing to the effects of viscosity, the velocity near the

tunnel wall will be slower than the velocity on the centerline and velocity at downstream

will be greater than at upstream. To achieve uniformity of speed various means like using

guide vanes, breathers or screens are used.

To check uniformity of speed in vertical direction velocity at different vertical positions

(for example, points 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, in Fig. 3.3) can be measured by pitot-static tube.

Velocity at these points for a particular tunnel speed setting can be obtained from

ghU water 060sin2 (3.6)

Tunnel Roof

0 5 Test Section

Exit 0 4 Entrance

0 0 0 3 0 0

5

4 3

2

1

0 2

0 1

Tunnel Floor

Figure 3.3 Velocity measurement at five vertical and five horizontal positions

Velocity in the wind tunnel varies in longitudinal directions (i.e. along the axis of the test

section) because of viscous effects. As the flow progresses towards the exit, the boundary

layer is thickened resulting in an effective reduction of area, increase in velocity and

decrease in static pressure. Because of the decrease of static pressure there is tendency of

the model to be drawn downstream. This creates a drag force acting on the body, termed

horizontal buoyancy (chapter 10, 11), which is to be calculated and subtracted in any drag

measurement experiment.

Velocities (dynamic pressure) at different points along the tunnel center line (1,

2, 3,

4,

5 in Fig. 3.3) can be measured using the pitot-static tube as before. Subtraction of

Page 48: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

48

dynamic pressure from total pressure (atmospheric pressure) will give static pressure at

these points.

A table can now made for calculation of velocity variation in vertical and horizontal

directions as shown below.

Table 3.2: Calculation of velocity at 9 points

Stations y cm h cm U m/s Stations x cm h cm U m/s p (N/m2)

1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.

4. 4.

5. 5.

U U (m/s)

(m/s) p (N/m2)

Height from floor, Distance along tunnel

y (cm) Centerline, x (cm)

Figure 3.4 Velocity variation in vertical and horizontal direction

Page 49: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

49

Velocity variation with tunnel height (y) and velocity and static pressure variation with

distance along tunnel center line (x) can now be plotted (Fig. 3.4). Static pressure

gradient (p/x) should be calculated and noted.

3.4 Determination of Angular Flow Variation in the Test Section :

Due to defectiveness in design and construction, the flow in the test section may not be

horizontal. It is therefore necessary to know whether such angularity in flow exists and if

it exists then to measure it so as to allow compensations due to this angularity of flow.

The angular variation in the flow can be checked by using a spherical yawhead as shown

in Fig. 3.5. The yawhead has two smooth orifices usually 900 apart on the forward face of

a sphere. Obviously, if they are exactly placed, they will read equal pressure when the

flow is directed along the axis of the yawhead. If the pressure at the two points a and b

are not equal then it will indicate that the flow is inclined at an angle. This angle of yaw

may then be determined by simply rotating the yawhead till the pressures at these points

become equal. The angle of rotation of yawhead is then the angle of yaw of the flow. A

similar procedure can be adopted for measuring yaw in the horizontal plane by measuring

pressure at two other points a and b in the horizontal plane again 900 apart.

Figure 3.5 Spherical yawhead

An alternative way of measuring yaw angle is to fix yawhead in tunnel and to determine

the flow angularity by reading the pressure difference between two orifices and

comparing with a previous calibration of the yawhead.

It is believed that accurate testing can not be done if the variation in angle is greater than

Page 50: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

50

5.0 degree. The larger angles of yaw distorts the span load excessively.

Unfortunately, the variation of flow angle across the jet may change with the tunnel

speed. If such a change is noted, a testing speed must be selected and the guide and anti-

twist vanes should be adjusted to give smooth flow at that speed.

3.5 Turbulence Level :

The flow conditions inside the wind tunnel are not exactly same as those in free air. The

flow inside the tunnel is more turbulent than the free air because of the effects of the

propeller, the guide vanes and the vibrations of tunnel walls. This discrepancy in the

turbulence level results in disagreement of tests made in the wind-tunnel and in the free

air at the same Reynolds number. By the same reasoning, tests made in different tunnels

at the same Reynolds number may not agree. A correction factor is therefore necessary

for compensating the turbulence created in the tunnel.

It is found that the flow pattern in the tunnel at a given Reynolds number corresponds

closely to the flow pattern in the free air at a higher Reynolds number. The increase ratio

is called the ‘turbulence factor’ and the effective Reynolds number RNe of the tunnel can

be obtained from the calculated Reynolds number using the turbulence factor of the

tunnel from

RNTFRN e (3.7)

The turbulence may be found with a sphere in two ways :

a) Drag sphere

b) Pressure sphere

3.5.1 Drag Sphere :

The drag coefficient of sphere is affected greatly by change in velocity. Contrary to the

layman’s guess, CD for a sphere decrease with increasing airspeed since the result of

earlier transition to turbulent flow is that the air sticks longer to the surface of the sphere.

This action decreases form or pressure drag, yielding a lower total drag coefficient.

Obviously, the Reynolds number at which the transition occurs at a given point on the

sphere is a function of the turbulence already present in the air and hence the drag

coefficient of a sphere can be used to measure turbulence . The method is to measure the

Page 51: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

51

drag, D, for a small sphere 15 or 20 cm in diameter, at many tunnel speeds. After

subtracting the ‘horizontal buoyancy’ drag DB the drag coefficient may be computed

from

22 42

1

Ud

DDC B

D

(3.8)

Figure 3.6 Variation of CD with Reynolds Number

The sphere drag coefficient is then plotted against the calculated Reynolds number, RN

(Fig.3.6). The Reynolds number at which the drag coefficient equals 0.30 is noted and

termed the critical Reynolds number, RNC. The above particular value of the drag

coefficient occurs in free air at RN = 385000, so it follows that the turbulence factor may

be given by

TF = 385000/RNC (3.9)

Once the turbulence factor (TF) is obtained from equation (3.9), the effective Reynolds

number, RNe, can now be calculated from equation (3.7).

Page 52: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

52

3.5.2 Pressure Sphere :

An alternative method (which will be used) of measuring turbulence makes use of

‘pressure sphere’. No force tests are necessary and the difficulty of finding the support

drag is eliminated. The pressure sphere has an orifice at the front stagnation point and

four more interconnected and equally spaced orifices at

0

2

122 from the theoretical rear

stagnation point (Fig.3.7).

Figure 3.7 Pressure Sphere

A lead from the front orifices is connected across a manometer to the lead from the four

rear orifices. After the pressure difference due to the static longitudinal pressure gradient

is subtracted, the resultant pressure difference, p for each Reynolds number is divided

by the dynamic pressure for the appropriate Reynolds number, and the quotient is plotted

against Reynolds number (Fig. 3.8). It has been found that the pressure difference p/q

is 1.22 when the sphere drag coefficient is 0.30 and hence this value of p/q determines

the critical Reynolds number RNC. Once the turbulence factor is determined, the

turbulence factor may then be determined, as before, from equation (3.9).

Page 53: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

53

Figure 3.8 Variation of p/q with Reynolds number

This experiment is carried out on a sphere of diameter 20 cm. The following table may be

made for plotting p/q vs Reynolds number.

Table 3.3 : Experimental measurement of turbulence factor

No.of

Runs

hLS

(cm)

U from Fig.

1.2 b (m/sec)

q from

Fig.1.2 a

(N/m2)

hj

(cm)

p

= hjwg.sin600

(N/m2)

p/q RN

= UD/

1.

2.

3.

-

11.

Turbulence factor usually varies from 1.0 to 3.0. Values above 1.4 indicate that the tunnel

has too much turbulence for reliable testing. Low turbulence factor is necessary for the

test data to be reliable.

Page 54: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

54

Chapter 4

FLOW VISUALISATION

4.1 Introduction :

Flow visualization techniques are a means of obtaining the qualitative pattern of the flow

about a body. Flows encountered in engineering application are often complex in nature.

Such techniques of flow visualization helps in obtaining a better understanding of the

flow characteristics. Many a times suitable mathematical methods have been developed

for a particular flow problem based on such qualitative studies.

Flow visualisation techniques can be classified as follows :

Flow visualisation techniques

Incompressible flow Compressible flow

Entire flow field Only on model Flow pattern Shock visualisation

1. Smoke 1. Tuft 1. Oil flow 1. Shadowgraph

2. Tuft on wire mesh 2. Oil flow 2. Interferometer

3. Evaporation 3. Schlieren

4.2 Incompressible Flow Visualisation Techniques :

4.2.1 Smoke Method :

Flow visualisation with smoke is achieved in a smoke tunnel with a facility to emit

cleaned smoke in streamer form (Fig. 4.1). Smoke is generated by burning kerosene or

paraffin. Particular care is needed in introducing the smoke in the tunnel by a blower

without disturbing the flow in the tunnel. This smoke follows the air flow and makes the

Page 55: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

55

flow pattern visible. Smoke tunnels are usually low-velocity tunnels and most of them

have two dimensional test sections. Such tunnels are usually open circuit type to prevent

accumulation of smoke in the tunnel. The walls of test section are made of glass so that

the flow can observed (Fig. 4.2) and/or photographed.

Figure 4.1 Smoke Tunnel

Figure 4.2 Flow separation at high angle of incidence

Page 56: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

56

4.2.2 Tuft Method :

Tufts are simplest and most often used. A large number of silk tuft are pasted at one end

on the surface of the wing. The length of each tuft is taken about 2 cm. The most rapid

method of installing the tufts is to attach them about every one inch to the tape and

pasting the tape on the model (Fig. 4.3). To obtain clear photography the model is usually

painted black while the tufts used are white. Since the open ended tufts align with the

flow the general direction of he tufts indicate the direction of the flow on the surface of

the body. Motion of tufts usually means that the flow in the boundary layer has become

turbulent. Violent motion or tendency a tendency to lift from the surface and point

upstream indicates separation.

If the tufts are to be used to examine the entire flow field they may be supported on wires

on a mesh installed inside the tunnel. Complete grids of wires normal to the flow can be

fixed in the tunnel behind a wing model. Tufts attached on one end on the mesh junctions

will align with the flow direction and show up trailing vortices.

Figure 4.3 Visualisation of flow over a straked wing by tuft method

Page 57: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

57

4.2.3 Oil Flow Method :

In this method the model is pasted with a semi-liquid mixture of mobil oil and grease

and a dye. The dye taken for this purpose is a chemical known as Rhodamin B. When the

model is installed in the tunnel, the air flow spreads the mixture along the streamlines so

that after the tunnel has been stopped the flow pattern remains. The process requires

about 30 minutes of continuous air flow in the tunnel. The model is thereafter removed

from the tunnel and the flow pattern (Fig. 4.4) can be examined afterwards under

ultraviolet light.

An alternative approach is to mix mobil oil and titanium dioxide (dye) and paste on the

model. In this case the mixture gets dried up in a few minutes and the flow pattern can be

observed without using ultraviolet light. Care must be taken so that the oil does not

follow machining marks on the surface.

Figure 4.4 Visualisation of flow over a straked wing by oil flow method

4.2.4 Evaporation Method :

Napthaline may be dissolved in acetone and pasted on a model. When the tunnel runs

naphthalene evaporated quickly from the turbulent portion making that portion white. If

the model is painted black, transition from laminar to turbulent flow can be observed

easily.

Among the incompressible flow visualization techniques it may to be noted that tuft, oil

flow and evaporation method gives pattern of flow on the surface of the model only while

the smoke method (and tuft on mesh screen) gives the picture of the entire flow field.

Page 58: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

58

Among the compressible flow visualization techniques, only the oil flow method,

described in section 4.2.3, can be used. Other methods are not suitable because of the

high speed involved.

4.3 Compressible Flow Visualisation Techniques :

4.3.1 Shadowgraph Method :

A parallel beam of light is produced by a point source. It is passed through a converging

lens and then through the working section. Since the flow in the working section is

compressible, refraction of light rays through the compressible medium will be different.

The screen will be illuminated where rays have converged. Shock waves then appear on

the screen as two adjacent bands, one dark and one light, corresponding to the sudden

increase in density gradient at the front of the shock and the sudden decrease in gradient

at the rear.

Figure 4.5 Shadowgraph picture of flow about a sphere

4.3.2 Schlieren Method :

Schlieren method is most widely used. It is sensitive to density changes whereas

shadowgraph method is sensitive to change in density gradient. The light rays passing

Page 59: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

59

through the varying density area (test section) will be deflected. The screen will be

illuminated or darkened depending on the deflection of the light beam. This method is

described in details in chapter 20.

4.3.3 Interferometer Method :

A direct response to density changes is given by the interferometer which depends on the

interference fringes formed on the recombination of two light rays from the same source

which have taken different times to make the journey.

If the two path lengths are same, interference fringes may be produced. The light paths

are adjusted with no airflow disturbance to produce a uniform and parallel set of

interference fringes on screen giving uniform illumination. When the tunnel is run with

model installed, fringe spacing will change by an amount proportional to the phase

change by the disturbance at any point which is in turn proportional to the change of fluid

density integrated along the light path. If the interferometer is pre-calibrated, it will give

absolute values of density.

Figure 4.6 Schematic diagram of the interferometer system

Page 60: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

60

Chapter 5

PRESSURE MEASUREMENT BY MECHANICAL DEVICE

5.1 Introduction :

Pressure, at different points on the surface of model, can be obtained by drilling holes on

the surface and connecting tubes from these points to a mechanical device like a multi-

tube liquid level manometer (Fig. 5.1). liquid levels, which are initially in the same level,

undergo changes in height proportional to the pressure applied and pressure at different

points in the surface can be calculated from the heights of the columns.

Figure 5.1 Liquid level manometer

Multi-tube, indicated schematically in Fig. 5.1 may be used in vertical position. For

increased sensitivity the manometer may be inclined at various angles in which readings

are multiplied by appropriate factors. Also, in stead of water, liquid of specific gravity

less than 1.0 may be used.

Page 61: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

61

The reservoir for manometer liquid is usually mounted on a vertical rod at a height which

is adjustable. It is recommended that the reservoir be normally left open to atmospheric

pressures. Pressures p1, p2, p3,….are then gauge pressures i.e., pressures relative to

atmospheric datum. Pressure relative to some other chosen datum may be obtained by

connecting the reservoir and one manometer tube to the required datum.

Manometers are generally graduated so that height of liquid level may be read in cm and

the pressure is calculated from the height of the liquid column in the relevant tube. Some

manometers are graduated directly in N/m2 or in millibar (1mb = 100 N/m

2 ).

5.2 Measurement of Cp :

Pressure is usually expressed in non-dimensional form as pressure coefficient Cp . by

definition Cp is given by

2

2

1

U

ppC p

(5.1)

Using a liquid-level manometer as shown in Fig. 5.1, pressure coefficient Cp can be

obtained in two ways depending on whether the tunnel is precalibrated or not.

5.2.1 Without Pre-Calibration of the Tunnel :

If the tunnel is not pre-calibrated to give U, two holes are to be drilled on the walls of

the settling chamber and the test section and directly connected to the manometer in

addition to connecting pressure port of the configuration.

Now, by Bernoulli’s theorem,

SPUpP

2

02

1

where PS is the settling chamber pressure.

Or, ppU S

2

2

1

If the manometer is graduated in N/m2 ,(p - p) and (PS - p) can be obtained directly in

units of N/m2 and Cp can be obtained as the ratio of the two given by

pP

ppC

S

p (5.2)

Page 62: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

62

Non-dimensional pressure coefficient is thus obtained simply as a ratio of pressure

differences and value of U is not needed. If U is needed (e.g., to calculate Reynolds

number) U can be obtained in a simple manner by assuming no frictional loss between

settling chamber and test section.

Under this assumption, U can be obtained as

pPU S2 (5.3)

If the manometer is graduated to give height of liquid column, Cp can be obtained as ratio

of column heights as shown below.

ghhpp liquid

and hhppU SliquidS 2

2

1

Where,

hS = height of column in the tube connected to settling chamber.

h = height of the water column in the tube connected to the pressure port on the

configuration where pressure is being measured.

h = height of the column in the tube connected to test section

This gives ,

pP

ppC

S

p

hhg

hhg

Sliquid

liquid

hh

hh

S

(5.4)

Cp is then obtained as ratio of height difference of liquid columns.

By assuming zero frictional loss between settling chamber and test section U can be

obtained as

pPU S2

ghhSliquid 2 (5.5)

Page 63: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

63

5.2.2 With Pre-Calibration of the Tunnel :

If the tunnel is pre-calibrated to give U, pressure coefficient can be derived in terms of

U.

22

2

1

2

1

U

ghh

U

ppC

liquid

p

If the manometer is inclined at 600, then

2

0

2

1

60sin

U

ghhC

liquid

p

If the liquid is water, height is graduated in cm and density of air is taken as 1.225 kg/m3,

then

2225.12

1

866.081.91000

U

hhC p

270.138 Uhh (5.6)

Experimental measurement of pressure distribution on a few simple models are described

in the following sections. In all models several holes are drilled on the surface and

connected to the multi-tube manometer. Pressure distribution can then be obtained from

equation (5.4) or (5.6) depending on whether the tunnel is pre-calibrated or not. These

models include :

a) Circular cylinder model

b) Elliptical cylinder model

c) Spherical model

5.3 Pressure Distribution on Circular Cylinder Model :

Exact analytical solutions are available for limited cases of direct potential flow

problems. The problem of two dimensional flow about a cylindrical body is one of such

problems. For steady, inviscid, incompressible irrotational flow, for which the governing

equation is Laplace’s equation, the non lifting two dimensional flow about a cylindrical

Page 64: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

64

body can be simulated by placing a doublet in uniform flow. The total velocity at any

point P (Fig. 5.2) is obtained as

sin2 Uqt (5.7)

Figure 5.2 Circular cylinder in uniform flow

The pressure distribution can be obtained from Bernoulli’s equation,

2

2

2

sin411

2

1

U

q

U

ppC t

P (5.8)

It may be noted that the expression for total velocity or pressure is independent of the

diameter of the cylinder.

The ‘ideal’ pressure distribution, given by equation (5.8), over the surface of the cylinder

will be symmetrical about the axis in the direction of the flow and about the plane normal

to it. Consequently, the net forces, lift and drag, are zero.

An experimental study can be undertaken to check how far the ‘real’ solution deviates

from the ‘ideal’ solution. For the case of uniform flow of real fluid, both the effects due

to compressibility and viscosity are to be taken into account. For the low speed test case

(0.1 Mach number) the effect due to compressibility may be justifiably ignored.

However, effect of viscosity alone will change the flow pattern considerably.

Primarily, the flow will be asymmetric about the axis normal to the uniform stream and

hence pressure distribution will also be asymmetric resulting in a net force (drag) acting

Page 65: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

65

on the cylinder along the flow direction. However, the flow is still symmetrical about the

axis in the direction of the flow and hence no lift force acts on the cylinder.

Secondly, while the ‘ideal’ flow is always attached to the body surface, in real fluid, the

flow may separate under adverse pressure gradient. In the forward face of the cylinder (

between 00

to 900), the flow speed increases and pressure decreases, hence the flow is not

likely to separate in this region. In the backward face, ( between 900 to 180

0), the speed

decreases and pressure increases. Under the action of this increasing pressure (i.e.

adverse pressure gradient), the flow is likely to separate.

This separation is the so-called ‘boundary layer separation’. Since the flow velocity is

less in the boundary layer than in the free stream outside the boundary layer, the flow

separates in the boundary layer. The exact process of separation is yet little understood.

Generally speaking, at low speed the flow in the boundary layer is laminar and will be

attached to the body. Since the flow speed is less, kinetic energy associated with the flow

is also less, and the laminar flow is more susceptible to separation. As the flow speed is

increased, the boundary layer becomes turbulent. Transition for laminar to turbulent flow

is governed primarily by the Reynolds number of the flow.

The model chosen for experimental work is a circular cylinder of diameter 10.8 cm and

span 60.8 cm which extends from wall to wall (so that the flow is two dimensional).

Sixteen pressure holes are equally spaced at

0

2

122 apart (Fig. 5.3) on the surface of the

cylinder and are connected to a multi-tube manometer.

Advantage, however, can be taken for this circular cylinder model. Only one hole can be

drilled and pressure at different points on the circular section can be obtained by simply

rotating the model (chapter –12).

Page 66: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

66

Figure 5.3 Pressure holes on cylinder surface

Both the theoretical and experimental Cp distribution can now be obtained from equation

(5.8) and equation (5.4) or (5.6) and plotted against . The difference is due to viscous

effects.

The following table may be made for plotting Cp vs. (Fig. 5.4).

Table 5.1 : Pressure distribution on circular surface

Tap

points

hLS U h h Cp

(Theoretical)

eq. (5.7)

Cp

(Experimental)

eq. (5.6)

1. 0

2. 22.50

3. 450

-

16. 337.50

Page 67: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

67

Cp

-Ve

0 90 180 270 300 330 360

Figure 5.4 Pressure distribution on cylinder surface

5.4 Pressure Measurement on Elliptical Cylinder Model :

Exact analytical solution exists also for the case of potential flow about elliptical;

sections. Using conformal transformation, flow around a circular section can be

conformed into a flow around an elliptical section in such a way that the condition at

infinity is unaltered.

The flow at any point (r, ) on the surface of a circular section is given by equation (5.7)

sin2 uqt (5.7)

The flow past a circular section can be transformed into the flow past an elliptical section

by a conformal transformation (Fig. 5.4)

Z

bZ

2

(5.9)

Page 68: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

68

Figure 5.5 Conformal Transformation

The velocities for corresponding points can be related by

d

dz

q

q

circle

ellipse (5.10)

Now, iea

b

z

bdzd 2

2

2

2

2

11 [since z = aei

]

2sin2cos12

2

ia

b

Therefore,

2

1

2

2

22

2

2

2sin2cos1

a

b

a

b

dz

d

2

1

4

4

2

2

2cos2

1

a

b

a

b

or, 2

1

4

4

2

2

2cos2

1

a

b

a

b

d

dz

Therefore,

Page 69: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

69

2

1

4

4

2

2

2cos2

1

a

b

a

b

qq circle

ellipse

[from eq. (5.9)]

2

1

4

4

2

2

2cos2

1

sin2

a

b

a

b

U

(5.11)

The pressure distribution of the surface of the ellipse may be obtained from Bernoulli’s

equation,

2

1

U

qc

ellipse

p (5.12)

The pressure distribution on the ellipse can be experimentally determined by a elliptical

model extending from tunnel wall to wall so that two dimensional flow is obtained. The

major and minor axis of the elliptical model are 15.75 cm and 10.9 cm respectively.

Static pressure holes are made at sixteen points on the surface for measurement of

pressure. Cp at these sixteen points can be obtained from water level in the manometer.

A table can be made, as shown, for plotting of theoretical and experimental pressure

distribution vs .

The comparison of theoretical and experimental pressure distribution may be shown in a

similar manner as for circular cylinder.

Table 5.2 : Pressure distribution on elliptical cylinder surface

Tapping

points

hLS U h h cp

(Theoretical)

eq. (5.12)

cp

(Experimental)

eq. (5.6)

1. 0

2. 22.50

3. 450

-

-

16. 337.50

Page 70: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

70

5.5 Pressure Measurement on Spherical Model :

The potential flow about a spherical body can be mathematically simulated by placing a

three-dimensional point doublet in a uniform stream. The flow about a sphere of radius

‘a’ can be shown to be generated by placing a doublet of strength (=2a3U) in

uniform stream U (Fig. 5.5).

The perturbation velocity components due to a doublet of strength , placed at origin, at

any point (x, y, z) are

5

5

22

5

4

3

4

3

)3(4

r

xzw

r

xyv

rxr

u

(5.13)

where,

222 zyxr

and = 2a3U

Taking doublet strength = 2a3U the perturbation velocity components on the surface

of the sphere at the center section are obtained as

Uu

2

1cos

2

3 2 [putting x = acos, y=0 and z = asin]

v = 0

Uw sincos2

3 (5.14)

The total velocity components due to the combined flow is

sincos2

3

12

1cos

2

3 2

UW

UU

The total velocity is given by

Page 71: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

71

sin2

322

UWUqt (5.15)

The pressure distribution can be obtained from Bernoulli’s equation

2

1

U

qc t

p

2sin4

91 (5.16)

The spherical model undertaken for experimental work is drilled at 16 equally spaced

points for pressure measurement (Fig. 5.6)

Figure 5.6 Pressure holes on spherical surface

A table similar to that used for previous two experiments can be made and theoretical

(equation 5.16) and experimental (equation 5.6) pressure distribution can be plotted. The

theoretical pressure distribution is symmetrical over the surface of the sphere and hence

no force or moment acts on the sphere. The discrepancy with experimental results is due

to viscous effects.

Page 72: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

72

Chapter 6

FORCE MEASUREMENT BY MECHANICAL BALANCE

6.1 Introduction :

A three component mechanical balance (Fig. 6.1) is basically designed to measure two

force components along mutually perpendicular axes (lift and drag) and a single moment

about an axis perpendicular to those of the forces (pitching moment). This type of

balance is usually a roof-top balance to be installed on the top wall of the tunnel. The

model is suspended from three vertical struts – two forward and one at the rear. Only

these vertical struts emerge in the tunnel.

The main lift beam, in conjunction with the pitching unit beam, gives the total lift. The

two front struts are connected to the main lift beam through hinges. The main lift beam

has two scale-pans for placing weights and two riders moving along a graduated scale.

The two front struts are to be attached to the main lifting surface of the model and they

transfer the lift force to the main lift beam. The weight placed in the beam scale pan

together with the rider displacements required to balance the torque imposed on the main

lift beam by the lift force gives a measure of the lift force provided the beam is properly

pre-calibrated. The rear strut also gives a part of the lift, which is measured in the same

way as in the main lift beam.

The pitching wheel, when rotated, guides a block along a threaded rod. As the block

travels up or down the attitude of the model in pitch is changed.

The drag beam comes under a torque due to the horizontal force on the front struts. This

horizontal force or drag is transferred from the front struts to the drag beam through

appropriate linkages. The moment on the drag beam is balanced by beam pan weights

and rider movement which gives a measure of the drag force encountered by the model.

Page 73: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

73

Figure 6.1 Wind tunnel mechanical balance

6.2 Calibration :

The calibration of a balance require certain equipments and the idea is to make these

equipment as permanent as possible since calibration checks are needed many times

during the life of a balance.

The first equipment needed for calibration is a loading ‘TEE’ (Fig. 6.2). The tee

facilitates the application of static loads in order to simulate the lift and drag forces as

they arise from model tests in the tunnel. The tee is fitted to the struts of the balance, its

head to the two front struts and its tail to the rear strut.

Page 74: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

74

Figure 6.2 Loading TEE for calibration

To simulate drag, a horizontal force is applied to the tee in the direction of the drag force

through a string attached to the tail of the tee. The string passes over a pulley and carries

drag weights in a scale pan attached to the free end of the string. Static lift forces are

simulated by dead weights placed in a weight pan hanging from the middle of the tee’s

head.

Riders are provided for minute adjustment in balancing. For the lift and pitching unit two

riders (left rider and right rider) are provided while for the drag beam one rider is

provided. Rider movements need to be calibrated. This is done for the lift unit in the

following way.

The step is initially balanced with no weight in either dead weight pan (which is hanging

from the tee via the pulley) or in the main lift beam pan (Fig. 6.3) and the rider positions

are recorded. Next, 50 gms of static lift is provided by placing this weight in the dead

weight pan. The set-up is again balanced first by moving the right rider (keeping left rider

stationary) and then by moving the left rider (keeping the right rider stationary) and these

displacements are then recorded.

Page 75: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

75

Figure 6.3 Simulation of lift and drag by dead weight

Table 6.1 : Rider calibration

Load in dead weight pan Left Rider (mm) Right Rider (mm)

0 80 80

50gms 80 90

50 gms 70 80

The table shows that each rider movement of 1 mm is equivalent of 5 gms of load. It may

be noted that the riders move from left to right in balancing the static load. The combined

load from dead weight pan and rider movement is termed equivalent lift and this is

plotted against the load in beam pan.

Table 6.2 : Calibration of lift beam

Initial Positions : Left Rider = mm; Right Rider = mm

1 mm of rider displacement = 5 gms of static loa

Page 76: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

76

Load (lift)

weight pan

(gms)

1

LR

mm

2

RR

mm

3

dLR

mm

4

dRR

mm

5

Load from

rider

(gms)

6

Load

In beam

weight pan

7

Equivalent

lift (gms)

(1)+(6)

1+6

169.62 60 100 0 0 0 16.81 169.62

250 60 65 0 35 165 34.64 415

450 60 65 0 0 0 50 450

750.8 60 85 0 -20 -100 78.23 650.8

Similarly, tables can be prepared for drag beam and pitching unit.

Table 6.3 : Calibration of drag beam

Initial positions : Rider = mm

1 mm of rider displacement = gms of static load

Load in dead

weight pan

(gms)

(1)

Rm

mm

(2)

dR

mm

(3)

Drag load

from rider

(gms)

(4)

Load in

beam weight

pan

(5)

Equivalent

drag (gms)

(1+4)

Table 6.4 : Calibration of pitching unit

Initial position : LR = mm ; RR = mm

1 mm of left rider displacement = gm of static lift load.

1 mm of right rider displacement = gm of static lift load.

Page 77: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

77

Load (lift)

in dead

weight pan

(1)

LR

Mm

(2)

RR

Mm

(3)

dLR

mm

(4)

dRR

mm

(5)

Load from

rider (gms)

(6)

Load in beam

weight pan

(gms)

(7)

Equivalent

lift (gms)

(1)+(6)

Calibration charts may now be made for lift, drag and pitching unit as shown below.

Equivalent lift

Load in beam weight pan

Figure 6.4 Calibration of main lift beam

Equivalent drag

Load in beam weight pan

Figure 6.5 Calibration of drag beam

Page 78: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

78

Equivalent lift

Load in beam weight pan

Figure 6.6 Calibration of pitching unit

6.3 Measurement of Forces and Moments :

Once the balance is calibrated, forces and moment acting on a model installed in the

tunnel can be computed easily from the beam weight pan load and calibration chart and

rider displacements. Tests are carried out on two models

1) a flat plate of dimensions 45.75 cm 30.5 cm

2) A rectangular wing of dimensions 61 cm 30.5 cm

(which spans the jet width) with NACA 0012 as its aerofoil section.

The interest is in finding the variations of CL, CD and CM with angle of incidence . The

tests with these models are carried out at the same speed for different angles of incidence

determined from the pitching screw settings.

Table 6.5 : Flat plate lift from main lift beam

Initial position: LR = mm, RR = mm

Incidence

(1)

LR

(2)

RR

(3)

dLR

(4)

dRR

(5)

Lift from

rider

(6)

Load in

beam

weight pan

(7)

Lift

from

Fig. 6.4

(8)

Total lift

L2 (gms)

(6) + (8)

Page 79: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

79

Table 6.6 : Flat plate lift from pitching unit

Initial position : LR = mm, RR = mm

Incidence

(1)

LR

(2)

RR

(3)

dLR

(4)

dRR

(5)

Lift from

rider

(6)

Load in

beam

weight pan

(7)

Lift

from

Fig. 6.6

(8)

Total lift

L2 (gms)

(6) + (8)

Table 6.7 : Flat plate lift coefficient

Incidence

(degrees)

Total lift

(L1 + L2 )

gms

Total lift (L)

(L1 + L2 ) + 9.81

1000

Newton

½ ? 2

U (N/m2)

SU

LCL

2

2

1

Table 6.8 : Flat plate drag coefficient

Initial position : R = mm

Incid-

ence

(1)

R mm

(2)

dR

mm

(3)

Drag

load

from

rider

gms

(4)

Load in

drag

beam

pan gms

(5)

Drag

from

Fig.

6.5

gm

(6)

Total

drag D

gms

(4)+(6)

Total

drag =

(D9.8)/

1000

Newton

CD

221

U

D

Page 80: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

80

Table 6.9 : Flat plate pitching moment coefficient

Incid-

ence

degree

LR

mm

dLR

mm

(4)

dRR

mm

(5)

Lift

due to

rider

gms

Load

in

beam

pan

Lift

from

Fig. 11.6

gms

Total

pitch-

ing

lift

M0.25C

N.m

Results can now be presented in graphical form. On the graph, the value of CLmax should

be noted.

Similar table can be created for the wing model.

6.4 Evaluation of the effects of the Support (Tare and Interference Drag) :

In any wind tunnel the model needs to be supported in some manner and the supports, in

turn, affects the drag measurement. Any strut connecting the model will add three

quantities to the forces read. The first is obvious drag of the exposed strut (tare) the

second is the effect of the strut’s presence on the free air flow about the model and the

third is the effect of the model on the free air flow about the strut. The last two items are

usually lumped together under the term “interference” and their existence should make

clear the impossibility of evaluation the total drag of the struts with the model out. This

procedure will primarily expose parts of the model support not ordinarily in the air stream

(although the extra length may be made removable) and will fail to record the

interference drag and will record only the tare drag.

The tare drag can be reduced by shielding a large part of the strut by fairings not attached

to the balance; only a minimum of strut bayonet is exposed to the air stream.

Theoretically the tare drag can be eliminated entirely by shielding the supports all the

way into the model (with adequate clearances inside), however the added size of shield

(and the presence of shield so close to model) will probably increase the interference drag

so much that no net gain will be achieved.

Page 81: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

81

The tare and interference drag can be evaluated separately or jointly using the ‘mirror’ or

‘image’ technique. The separate evaluation of drag items is long and also unnecessary.

This separate evaluation approach is therefore rarely used. However, both the methods

are outlined below.

6.4.1 Evaluation of tare and Interference Drag Separately :

The model is first tested in the normal manner. Symbolically,

Dmeasured = DN = IUB/M + IM/UB + IUSW + TU (13.1)

where DN = drag of model in normal position.

IUB/M = interference of upper surface bayonets on model.

IM/UB = interference of on model on upper surface bayonets.

IUSW = Interference of upper support windshield.

TU = free air tare drag of upper bayonet.

Next, the model is supported from the tunnel floor by the ‘image’ or ‘mirror’ system. The

supports extend into the model but a small clearance is provided (Fig. 6.7) so that the

balance record only the drag of the exposed portion of the support (in the presence of the

model).

Figure 6.7 Arrangement for determining tare and interference drag separately

Page 82: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

82

That is,

Dmeasured = IM/UB + TU (6.1)

For the interference run, the model is inverted and run with the mirror supports just

clearing the attachment points. This gives

Dmeasured = Dinverted + ILB/M + IUB/M + IM/UB + IUSW + ILSW + TL (6.2)

where Dinverted = drag of the model inverted (should equal that the drag of the model

normal, except for misalignment).

The upper supports are removed and a second inverted run is made giving

Dmeasured = Dinverted + ILB/M + IM/LB + ILSW + T1 (6.3)

The difference between the two inverted runs is the interference of the supports of the

upper surface. That is eq. (6.2) minus eq. (6.3) yields

IUB/M + IUSW (6.4)

By subtracting eq. (6.1) and (6.4) from the first run, the actual model drag is determined

if the balance is aligned.

6.4.2 Evaluation of the Sum of Tare and Interference Drag :

In this procedure, the sum of tare and interference drag can be found in three runs instead

of four in the previous method. In this case, the normal run is made, yielding

Dmeasured = DN + IU + TU (6.5)

where IU = IUB/M + IM/UB + IUSW

Next model is inverted and this gives

Dmeasured = Dinverted + IL + TL (6.6)

Then the dummy supports are installed. Instead of clearance being between the dummy

supports and the model, the exposed length of the support strut is attached to the model

and the clearance is in the dummy supports. This configuration yields (Fig. 6.8).

Dmeasured = Dinverted + IL + IU + TL + TU (6.7)

Page 83: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

83

Figure 6.8 Arrangement for determining the sum of tare and interference drag

The differenc between eq. (6.7) and eq. (6.6) yields the sum of tare and interference TL

and IL .

A third method which is crude but simple is to minimize the interference drag by using

strut of aerofoil shape (and not using the windshield). The drag of the supports is than

essentially the tare drag which can be measured easily by the balance with the model out.

The drag of the suspension system can be measured this way and subtracted from the

drag measured of the two dimensional wing.

Page 84: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

84

Chapter 7

PRESSURE MEASUREMENT BY TRANSDUCER

7.1 Introduction :

Pressure measurement in wind tunnel is of interest not only for determining pressure

distribution on aerodynamic shapes but also for determining test conditions in the wind

tunnel test sections. Up to about 15 to 20 years ago, the majority of wind tunnel pressures

were measured with liquid manometers and readings were taken manually. These

manometers , however, are not suitable for measuring very high or very low values of

pressure or for measurement of pressure in unsteady or short duration tunnel.

To overcome this limitations, these manometers have been replaced to a large extent by

pressure transducers in a scanning system with automated data recording system.

Pressures from 2 10-7

psia to approximately 1000,000 psia are successfully measured in

wind-tunnel with the aid of transducers whose electric output signal emanates from a

deflection or deformation caused by a pressure activated elastic sensing element. The

most common type of elastic sensing elements are the diaphragms. In order to produce an

electric signal, the elastic elements operates in conjunction with electrical sensing

element which provides an electrical change in response to the deflection or deformation

of the sensing element. The most frequently used electrical sensing elements include

metallic or semi-conductor strain gauges, variable capacitance device, variable reluctance

device and piezoelectric elements.

A summary of general performance of different pressure transducers as given in Table

7.1.

Page 85: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

85

Table 7.1. Summary of performance of pressure transducers :

Type of transducers Range of pressure

measurement (psi)

Operating temperature

( 0F)

Resonant

frequency (KHz)

Variable resistance 10-4

to 100,000 - 430 to 300 0F Upto 1

Variable

capacitance

2 10-7

to 10,000 - 55 to 225 0F

Upto 200

Variable reluctance 3 10-5

to 10,000 - 63 to 250 0F Upto 25

Piezoelectric 5 10-4

to 100,000 - 400 to 500 0F Upto 500

In variable resistance transducer, a pressure change is converted into a change in

resistance caused by the strain in a strain gauge or gauges. Most strain gauge pressure

transducer incorporate four active strain gauge elements in a Wheatstone bridge circuit.

Variable reluctance transducer employs diaphragm as the sensing element. This

diaphragm is supported between two inductance core assemblies. A magnetic circuit with

core is completed. As the pressure is applied, reluctance changes.

In variable capacitance transducer pressure is applied on one plate of the capacitor. Since

the capacitance varies inversely proportional to the plate distance capacitance changes

due to applied pressure.

In piezoelectric transducer, voltage is generated when pressure is applied due to the

squeezing effect of the crystal. This type of transducer is self generating and does not

require any external power supply.

Variable resistance transducers are most widely used. In such transducers strain gauges

are bonded directly on diaphragm (Fig. 7.1). A diaphragm is essentially a thin circular

plate fastened around its periphery to a support shell. Stainless steel or beryllium copper

is generally used as the diaphragm material.

If the strain gauges are located as shown in Fig. 7.1, elements 1 and 2 will be in tension

and 3 and 4 will be compression. By electrically connecting these gauges a fully active

Wheatstone bridge is realized. Recent advances in the semi-conductor field have led to

the development of an integrated Wheatstone bridge consisting of four strain sensitive

resistive arms formed directly on the diaphragm.

Page 86: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

86

Figure 7.1 Variable resistance pressure transducer

7.2 Time Response :

Response time of a transducer is not critical for a continuously running tunnel. When

measurements are required in short duration facility or when unsteady or transient data

are required, time response becomes primary in importance. In such cases transducer

must be flush mounted or be connected by very short tube lengths.

The response time, t, for a flush mounted transducer is

212

1

hft

where

f = transducer resonant frequency

h = damping ratio

7.3 Pressure Scanning :

Pressure distribution on models described in chapter 5 can also be obtained by use of

pressure transducer. However, measuring pressure at multiple numbers of ports on a body

poses a problem. Either it will require an equal number of pressure transducers, signal

Page 87: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

87

conditioner and readout systems ( which will be expensive) or a single transducer will be

connected to all pressure holes one by one (which will be time consuming). This problem

can be overcome by a pressure scanning system. A number of tubes from various

pressure ports are routed to a common point and then applied individually to a single

transducer and readout system as shown on Fig. 7.2.

Figure 7.2 Pressure scanning system

The most important part of the pressure scanning system is the scanivalve (Fig 7.3). in a

scanivalve, the transducer is sequentially connected to the various pressure ports via a

radial hole in the rotor which terminates at the collector hole. As the rotor rotates, this

collector hole passes under the ports in the stator. Referring to the cutaway drawing (Fig.

7.3) the rotor is seen to be rigidly supported by a ball thrust bearing. The stator is

elastically connected to the block in a manner which allows the stator to follow the

surface of the rotor. Thus the pneumatic forces (pressure area) at each port which tends

Page 88: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

88

to blow the rotor away from the stator are withstood by the ball thrust bearing. The stator

is epoxied into the block to prevent rotating.

Figure 7.3 Scanivalve

A scanivalve may be hand driven or solenoid driven. For a solenoid driven scanivalve,

further instruments are required. A solenoid controller is necessary for controlling the

stepping speed of the scanivalve. Also, interface controller is necessary for controlling

scanivalve port location.

Page 89: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

89

7.4 Measurement of Cp :

The excitation voltage applied to a pressure transducer is generally 12 volts. A typical

value of full scale output of a PDCR23 transducer at this excitation is 17.5 mV for 1 psi

of pressures. If the reference side of diaphragm is connected to wall of test section (i.e.

datum pressure is free stream static pressure p ), the pressure coefficient at any

measurement location can be calculated from the output in two ways depending on

whether the tunnel is pre-calibrated or not.

7.4.1 With Pre-calibration of tunnel :

By definition, pressure coefficient Cp is given by

2

2

1

U

ppC p

If the tunnel is pre-calibrated, i.e., the free-stream speed U is known, Cp can be derived

in terms of U.

2

2

1

5.17/6.6894...

U

mVinreadoutC p

(1 psi = 6894.6 N/m2)

Since the transducer output is usually small, an amplifier is usually used. Taking the

amplifier gain into account Cp can be written as

5.17..225.12

1

6.6894....

2

gainamplifierU

mVinreadoutC p

)..(

)....(228.643

2 gainamplifierU

mVinreadout

(7.1)

7.4.2 Without pre-calibration of tunnel :

Cp can be derived in an alternative way if the tunnel is not pre-calibrated to give U. Cp

can be expressed as

2

2

1

U

ppC p

Page 90: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

90

pP

pp

0

pP

pp

S

(PS = settling chamber pressure)

There are uaually 48 pressure port locations in a scanivalve. If the reference side is

connected to wall of test section to sense p and 48th

port location is connected to wall of

settling chamber then for pressure upto 47 points can be measured one by one by a

scanivalve as a simple ratio of digital outputs, given by equation (7.2).

Page 91: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

91

Chapter 8

FORCE AND MOMENT MEASUREMENT BY ELECTRONIC

INTERNAL (STING) BALANCE

8.1 Introduction :

Aerodynamic forces and moments acting on a model in wind tunnel can be accurately

measured by variable resistance strain gauges. Usually a sting balance, also known as

internal balance or strain gauge balance, is used where strain gauges are bonded on the

sting (Fig. 2.2). These strain gauges are connected in Wheatstone bridge arrangement

(differencing circuits for forces and summing circuits for moments). When the tunnel is

started, the forces acting on the model change the resistance of strain gauges. The voltage

of the ‘unbalanced’ Wheatstone bridge is then a measure of the forces acting on the

model.

An aircraft model is subjected to three aerodynamic forces along three axes (lift, drag and

side force) and three moments (yawing, rolling and pitching) about the three axes. In

general, Wheatstone bridge circuit needs to be constructed for each of the forces and

moments. A general six component balance will then require six Wheatstone bridge

circuits (consisting of 24 strain gauges), a six channel signal conditioner, separate power

supply for each channel and appropriate data acquisition system. Philosophy underlying

bonding of strain gauges and Wheatstone bridge circuits needs to be studied for each

component separately.

It is worth nothing here that six components of forces and moments are measured in a

sting balance about the body axes (since the sting is attached to the body and moves with

the body) and not about wind axes. Hence body axes need to be converted to wind axes

which are more familiar.

Page 92: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

92

8.2 Measurement of lift :

Generally, the symmetrically placed aircraft model will experience a lift L, drag force D

and pitching moment M at the aerodynamic center. The sting is like a cantilever beam on

which lift and pitching moment act. The sting is also subjected to axial stress due to drag

in addition to the bending stress due to lift (Fig. 8.1). it can be shown easily that the

output voltage will be proportional to lift force only if the ‘differencing’ circuit is used.

Figure 8.1 Differencing and summing circuits

The output voltage of the Wheatstone bridge circuit, from equation (2.16), is

R

RR

V

V

2

''' (8.1)

where

ab

ab

RRR

RRR

''

'

''

'

''' , bb RR = changes in resistance due to bending stress.

aR = changes in resistance due to axial stress.

Therefore,

R

RRRR

V

V abab

2

'''

R

RR bb

2

''' (8.2)

Page 93: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

93

The above expression shows that the output voltage is independent of axial stress (i.e.,

drag forces).

Now the gauge factor G is defined as

RR

LL

RRG

and the change in resistance is expressed in terms of change in strain as

R = R G (8.3)

The longitudinal strains on the four strain gauges can be written as

2

23

22

11

hEI

ZZL

hEI

ZZL

hEI

ZZL

(8.4)

11

4

hEI

ZZL

The changed resistance value of four strain gauges will be

R1 = R + RG 1

R2 = R + RG 2 (8.5)

R3 = R + RG 3

R4 = R + RG 4

The output voltage is then

4321

3142

RRRR

RRRR

V

V

4331

3142

RGRGRGRG

RGRRGRRGRRGR

4321

3142

22

1111

GGGG

GGGG

21

2

2

2

1

2

12

24

2

G

G (since 3 = - 2 & 4 = - 1 )

122

G

(Neglecting higher order term)

Page 94: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

94

hLEI

ZZG 12

2

LK1 (8.6)

where EI

ZZGhK

2

)( 121

= Constant

The output voltage is seen to be linearly proportional to lift force, L. It is to be noted that

the circuit can be made more sensitive by increasing the distance (Z2 – Z1) between the

strain gauges. It is worth noting here that the relationship will not remain linear except for

a fully active bridge.

The calibration constant K1 can be obtained by putting appropriate values of G, h, E, I

and (Z2 – Z1) in the expression K1 = Gh (Z2 – Z1)2EI. Alternatively, it can be obtained

by a calibration procedure as shown in Fig. 8.2. In this procedure, K1 is obtained by

putting known weight (W) at position (AA) on the string through a pulley and noting the

voltmeter readings. For an excitation voltage of 4.0 volts and amplifier gain 1000, typical

value of the constant K1 is of order of 0.028 mV/gm.

Sting

1 2 A

3 4 A

W

Figure 8.2 Calibration procedure for obtaining K1

The lift coefficient CL in any subsequent experiment can be directly related to the

millivolt output as

cos81.9

10002

1cos

2

1

SUK

VCC NL (8.7)

Page 95: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

95

8.3 Measurement of pitching moment :

The pitching moment can be obtained from four strain gauges by constructing the

‘summing’ circuit (Fig. 8.1), which is constructed simply by interchanging R2 and R3 of

‘differencing’ circuit.

The output of the summing circuit can be shown to be independent of the drag force. The

output voltage can be written as

4231

2143

RRRR

RRRR

V

V

The changed values of the resistances may be written as

ab

ab

ab

ab

RRRR

RRRR

RRRR

RRRR

'

4

''

3

''

2

'

1

Substituting in previous equation yields

abbabb

abbabab

RRRRRRRR

RRRRRRRRRRR

V

V

2222

2222

2

bba

bababb

RRRR

RRRRRRRR

24

2

R

RRRR bb

(neglecting higher order term)

R

RR bb

2

(8.8)

Equation 8.8, analogous to equation (2.11), shows the output voltage V to be

independent of the axial stress due to the drag force.

The output of the summing circuit can now be shown to be proportional to pitching

moment. The output voltage is

2431

2134

RRRR

RRRR

V

V

Page 96: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

96

Using equation (8.5),

2431

2134

22

RGRGRRGRGR

RGRRGRRGRRGR

V

V

21

2

2

22

1

2

21

24

22

GGG

GG

(since 3 = - 2 & 4 = - 1 )

2

21

G (neglecting higher order term)

11

112

2

2

ZZLEI

GhLK

GG

MKLK 21 (8.9)

where K2 = Gh / 2EI is a constant, M is the moment L (Z – Z1) due to L and K1 is the

constant defined earlier for lift.

The output voltage from equation (8.9) is seen to be dependent on both lift L and pitching

moment M. However, it is to be noted that K1, for this summing circuit, is made very

small to be negligible. This is because (Z2 – Z1) is made very small in summing circuit in

comparison to differencing circuit by fixing strain gauges very close to each other.

Equation (8.9) can be written as

MKV

V2

(8.10)

This equation shows that the output voltage in ‘summing’ circuit is proportional to

pitching moment only.

The value of the constant K2 can, in principle, be obtained theoretically by putting

appropriate values of G, h, E, I and (Z2 – Z1). However, it is desirable to determine its

value through static calibration. This can easily be done by using dummy weight (W) at

position AA, as before, to simulate lift and noting the change in output with increasing

load (Fig. 8.3).

Page 97: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

97

1 2 A

A

3 4

W

Figure 8.3 Calibration procedure for obtaining K2

However, if an accurate estimate of both K1 and K2 are needed weights can be placed at

two positions, first at AA and then at BB, as shown in (Fig. 8.4) and the two values of

voltages are to be noted.

f

1 2 B A

3 4 B A

Figure 8.4 Calibration procedure for obtaining K1 and K2

From equation (8.9) the output voltages will be

MKLKV

V

BB

21

(8.11)

LfMKLKV

V

AA

21

(8.12)

From equations (8.11) and (8.12) K2 is obtained as

Page 98: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

98

Lf

V

V

V

V

K BBAA

2 (8.13)

Once K2 is obtained from equation (8.11), K1 can be calculated from equation (8.11) or

(8.12).

The pitching moment M can be easily obtained from

LKV

VMK 12

or, 21 KLKV

VM

(8.14)

8.4 Simultaneous Measurement of Lift and Pitching Moment :

Lift and pitching moment cam be measured simultaneously by using eight strain gauges

to form two Wheatstone bridge circuits (both circuits as summing circuit) as shown in

Fig. 8.5. The output voltages of the two circuits will vary because of the variation in

moment with the distance f. the output voltages can be written from equation (8.9), as

121 MKLKV

V

AA

(8.15)

243 MKLKV

V

BB

(8.16)

A B

1 2 6 5

3 4 7 8

A B W

Figure 8.5 Calibration procedure for obtaining K2

Now, M2 = M1 + Lf (8.17)

Page 99: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

99

Using equations (8.15), (8.16) and (8.17)

AAV

VMKLK

121 (8.18)

BBV

VMKLKfK

1434 (8.19)

In matrix form,

K1 K2 L AAV

V

=

K3 + fK4 K4 M BBV

V

On inverting,

L K1 K2 -1 AAV

V

= (8.20)

M K3 + fK4 K4 BBV

V

Equation (8.20) gives lift and pitching moment directly from the outputs of Wheatstone

bridge circuits provided, of course, four coefficient are measured from calibration.

It is however, to be noted that K1 and K3 are very small to be almost negligible. This is

because both Wheatstone bridge circuits are summing circuits where strain gauges are

pasted very near to each other. If K1 and K3 are assumed to be negligible, lift and

moment can be readily obtained as

Page 100: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

100

4

2

2

1

K

V

V

M

K

V

V

M

BB

AA

and f

MML 12 (8.21)

8.5 Other Forces and Moments :

The mathematics underlying strain gauge instrumentation is described in details for lift

and pitching moment measurement in the previous sections. The same principles are

easily extended to measuring other forces and moments. In general, differencing circuit

(for forces) and summing circuits (for moments) are to be used. However, to measure

other components, cantilever or the sting needs to be specially machined for suitable

positioning of strain gauges for particular component.

Arrangement for measuring drag in a 3 component balance is shown in Fig. 8.6.

Figure 8.6 Three component balance

Page 101: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

101

The normal forces (CN ) and axial force (CX ) obtained by the sting balance are converted

to lift (CL ) and drag (CD ) force by a simple conversion of axes (Fig. 8.7).

Figure 8.7 Axes system

CL = CN cos - CX sin (8.22)

CD = CN sin + CX cos (8.23)

The side force and yawing moment can be obtained using the same principle for

measuring lift and pitching moment. However, unlike in the previous case, the strain

gauges are to be bonded on the side surface of the sting as shown in Fig. 8.8.

To measure rolling moment, the sting to be machined such that the cross section is as

shown in Fig. 8.9 and strain gauges bonded are connected as a ‘summing’ circuit.

Page 102: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

102

Figure 8.8 Measurement of side force and yawing moment

Figure 8.9 Measurement of rolling moment

Page 103: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

103

8.6 Interactions Effect :

While it is desirable to design a strain gauge balance to make each bridge sensitive to

only one load component, it is not truly possible to eliminate completely interactions due

to other components. It may be therefore be necessary to take into account the presence

of non-linear interactions as well as the linear interactions.

As the most general case, a six-component strain gauge balance is considered. Such a

balance would measure six load components, i.e., three pure forces components (L, D, Y)

and three moments (M, R, N).

Each bridge indicator reading, as a consequences of interactions, is function of all six

components. If only linear interactions assumed it can be written in general case

NKRKMKYKDKLKR NRMYDL (8.24)

Where R is the indicator reading corresponding to , being any one of L, D, Y, M, R,

N.

There will be six equations of this type, one for each reading where KL ,KD, etc. are

constant coefficients ( the so-called calibration coefficients). A total of 36 coefficient (

first order coefficients) are to be calculated.

All these coefficients can be calculated by loading the balance with each component

independently. Repeating this procedure 36 time will give the 36 balance coefficients.

If single load component is applied to the balance, where , like , is one of the

component is present, from Eq. (8.24), R is given by

KR (8.25)

By plotting R against for several values of , K can be obtained as the slope of the

curve. If the plot is linear, the slope at once gives K = R . If plot is non-linear, the

effect of non-linear interactions is also to be taken into account.

If non-linear interaction takes place, equation can be written in a polynomial form as

LDKNKRKMKYKDKLKR LDNRMYDL )(

RNKLYK RNLY )()( .... (8.26)

Page 104: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

104

To obtain the second order calibration coefficients, it will be necessary to load the

balance in combination of various pairs of components.

If two load components, and (say) are applied to the balance simultaneously, then the

six readings are determined by relations, each of the form

)(KKKR (8.27)

If one of the applied loads, , is maintained constant and the other, i.e., is varied then a

plot may be made of R against . Measurement of the slope at = 0 gives

)(

0

KKR

(8.28)

Comparing this with the values of (R ) = 0 when = 0 will show whether or not

K( ) is negligible. If K( ) is not negligible, then R should be determined for a

few different values of . The slope of a graph of R against gives K( ).

In this way, all the calibration coefficients in the six equations (8.24) may be determined.

8.7 Factors Affecting the Accuracy of Measurement :

To obtain high accuracy in strain gauge instrumentation, careful attention must be made

on different aspects, in general, these include :

i) Surface preparation and bonding of strain gauges.

ii) Noise suppression.

iii) Thermal effect.

iv) Optimizing excitation level.

8.7.1 Surface Preparation and Bonding of Strain Gauges :

Strain gauges can be bonded satisfactorily to almost any solid material if the material

surface is prepared properly. Concept of surface preparation is based on the

understanding of cleanliness and contamination. Negligence to surface preparation may

yield most unsatisfactorily gauge installation and hence erroneous result.

The system of surface preparation includes five basic operations :

Page 105: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

105

- Solvent degreasing

- Abrading

- Application of gauge layout lines

- Conditioning

- Neutralising

Degreasing is performed to remove oils, greasing, organic contaminations and soluble

chemical residues. Degreasing is done to avoid having subsequent abrading operation

drive surface contaminants into the surface material.

Degreasing can be accomplished using a hot vapour degreaser or aerosol spray cans of

chlorothene SM or Freon. Spray applicators of cleaning solvent are always preferable

because dissolved contaminants can not be carried back to the parent solvent. If possible,

entire test piece should be degreased. Otherwise, for large objects, area sufficiently larger

than the gauge area should be cleaned.

Surface abrading is done to remove any loosely bonded adherents (rust, paint etc.) and to

develop a surface texture suitable for bonding. The abrading operation can be performed

in a variety of ways, depending upon the initial condition of the surface and the desired

finish for gauge installation. For rough surface it may be necessary to start with a file. For

moderately smooth surface, abrading can be done by silicon-carbide paper of appropriate

grit.

The normal method of accurately locating and orienting a strain gauge on the test surface

is to first mark the surface with a pair of crossed reference line at the point where the

strain measurement is to be made. The reference or layout lines should be made with a

tool which burnishes rather than scribes. A scribed line usually raises a burr or creates a

stress concentration. On aluminium and most other alloys a 4H drafting pencil is a

satisfactory and convenient burnishing tool.

After the gauge layout lines are marked, final surface preparation is accomplished by

water based cleaners. To dislodge and remove oxides and mechanically bound

contaminants, a mild phosphoric acid compound is used for conditioning the surface.

This is immediately followed by the neutralizing any chemical reaction introduced by the

acidic conditioner to produce optimum surface conditions for strain gauge bonding.

Page 106: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

106

Once the surface material is prepared, strain gauges are to be bonded on the surface

properly. Because a strain gauge can perform no better than the adhesive with which it is

bonded to the test piece, the adhesive is a vitally important component in every strain

gauge installation. Ideally, the adhesive would cause the strain gauge to act as an integral

and inseparable part of the surface material – without adding influence of its own.

One adhesive which is widely used for routine measurement in stress applications under

environmental conditions the cyanoacrylate adhesive. This adhesive transforms from a

liquid to solid when pressed into a thin film between the gauge and the mounting surface.

This adhesive is very easy to handle and cures almost instantly to produce an essentially

creep-free, fatigue-resistant bond.

Other types of adhesive include mainly the epoxy adhesives. The epoxies form a large

class of adhesives used for strain gauge bonding because of the wide range of

characteristics available. Some of the epoxies are single-component and others are two-

component. Epoxy-phenolic adhesive are used for higher operating temperature.

8.7.2 Noise Suppression :

Strain measurements are often made in the presence of electric and/ or magnetic field

which can superimpose electrical noise on the measurement signals. If not controlled, the

noise can lead to inaccurate results and incorrect interpretation of the strain signals

altogether. It is therefore necessary to apply noise-reduction measures top any strain

gauge experimentation.

Virtually every electrical device which generates, consumes or transmits power is

potential source for causing noise in strain gauge circuits. In general, the higher the

voltage or current level, and the closer the strain gauge circuit to the electrical device the

greater will be the electrical noise. The common sources of electrical noise include : AC

power lines, motor starters, transformers, relays, generators, rotating and reciprocating

machinery, are welders, vibrators, fluorescent lamps, radio transmitters etc.

Electrical noise from these sources can be categorized into two basic types: electrostatic

and electromagnetic. The two types of noise are fundamentally different and thus require

different noise-reduction measures. Unfortunately, most of the common noise sources

Page 107: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

107

listed above produce combinations of the two noise types, which can complicate the

noise-reduction problem.

Electrostatic fields are generated by the presence of voltage – with or without current

flow. Alternating electrical fields inject noise into strain gauge systems through the

phenomenon of capacitive coupling. Fluorescent lighting is one of the more common

sources of electrostatic noise.

The simplest and most effective barrier against electrostatic noise is conductive shield. It

functions by capturing the charges that would otherwise reach the signal wiring. Once

collected, these charges must be drained off to a satisfactory ground (Fig. 8.10). If not

provided with a low resistance drainage path, the charges can be coupled into signal

conductors through the shield-to-cable capacitance.

Figure 8.10 Electrostatic shielding

Another source of electrostatic noise is leakage to ground through the strain gauges. This

leakage, if excessive, can cause noise transfer from the test piece to the gauge circuit.

Any strain gauge installation on a conductive specimen forms a classic capacitor which

can couple noise from the test piece to the gauge. It is therefore essential to make certain

that the test piece is properly grounded and the leakage between gauge circuit and test

piece is well within bounds.

Electromagnetic fields are ordinarily created either by the flow of electric current or by

the presence of permanent magnet. In order for noise voltage to be developed in a

conductor, magnetic lines of flux must be ‘cut’ by the conductor. Signal conductors in the

vicinity of moving or rotating machinery are generally subjected to noise voltages from

Page 108: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

108

this source since moving machine member (made of iron and steel which are

ferromagnetic) redirect existing lines of flux.

The most effective approach to minimizing electromagnetic noise is not to attempt

magnetic shielding of the sensitive conductors but to ensure that noise voltages are

induced equally in both side of the amplifier input. Achievement of noise cancellation

by this approach is discussed in section 2.3.1.4 (Fig. 2.11).

The noise, electrostatic or electromagnetic, can be effectively assessed by the signal

conditioner by a simple but significant feature- a control for removing excitation from the

Wheatstone bridge. With such a control, the instrument output can be easily checked for

noise, independently of any strain signal.

A simple but effective way of reducing noise is to reduce amplifier gain and compensate

by increasing bridge excitation voltage.

8.7.3 Thermal Effect :

Ideally, a strain gauge bonded to a test piece would respond only to the applied strain in

the material and be unaffected by other variable in the environment. Unfortunately, the

resistance strain gauge is somewhat less than perfect. The electrical resistance of the

strain gauge varies not only with strain but with temperature as well. In addition, the

relationship between strain and resistance change (i.e., the gauge factor C) itself varies

with temperature. These deviations from ideal behavior can be important under certain

circumstances and can cause significant error if not properly accounted for.

Once an installed strain gauge is connected to a strain indicator and the instrument

balanced, a subsequent change in the temperature of the gauge installation will generally

produce a resistance change in the gauge.

However, because this change in resistance due to the thermal effect will be registered by

the strain indicator as strain, the indication is usually referred to as ‘temperature-induced

apparent strain’ or ‘apparent strain’ in the test material.

The net apparent strain is caused by two concurrent algebraically additive effects in the

strain gauge installation. First, the electrical resistivity of the strain gauge is temperature

dependent and any resistance change due to this effect appears as strain to a strain

indicator. The second contribution to apparent strain is caused by the differential thermal

Page 109: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

109

expansion between the strain gauge and the test material to which it is bonded. With

temperature change, the test piece expands or contacts, and since the strain gauge is

firmly bonded to the test material, the gauge grid is forced to undergo the same expansion

or contraction. To the extent that the thermal expansion coefficient of the grid differs

from that of the test material, the grid is mechanically strained in conforming to the free

expansion or contraction of the test material. Since the grid is, be design, strain sensitive,

the resultant resistance change appears to the strain indicator as strain in test material.

The net ‘apparent strain’ can be expressed as the sum of resistivity and differential

expansions effects:

TG

GT

G

(8.29)

where

BG = Thermal coefficient of resistance of grid material.

G = Gauge factor.

T - G = Difference in thermal expansion coefficients between test

piece and grid respectively.

T = Temperature change.

It should not be assumed from the form of equation (8.27) that the apparent strain is

linear with temperature because the coefficient within the bracket are themselves

functions of temperature. The equation clearly demonstrates, however, that the apparent

strain exhibited with temperature change depends not only upon the strain gauge but also

on the material on which the gauge is bonded.

The first part of apparent strain, i.e., the strain due to thermal expansion of grid can be

eliminated by compensating gauges. For an quarter-arm bridge, an identical

compensating or ‘dummy’ gauge connected on an adjacent arm of the Wheatstone bridge

is mounted on an unstrained specimen for the identical material as the test piece and

subjected always to the same temperature as the active gauge.

Under these hypothetical conditions, the apparent strains in the active and dummy strain

gauges should be identical. Since identical resistance change in adjacent arms of the

Wheatstone bridge does not unbalance the circuit, the apparent strains in the active and

dummy gauges should cancel exactly. This part of the apparent strain can be cancelled by

Page 110: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

110

same philosophy by using half-bridge (for example, two active gauges on the two sides of

a thin bending beam will have same temperature and cancel the apparent strain if

connected in adjacent arms of the Wheatstone bridge) and full bridge.

The second part of apparent strain which is due to difference in thermal expansion of

strain gauge and test material can be eliminated by the concept of self-temperature-

compensation. The metallurgical properties of certain gauge alloys – in particular,

constantan and modified Karma – are such that these alloys can be processed to minimize

the apparent strain over a wide temperature range when bonded to test materials with

thermal expansion coefficients for which they are intended. Strain gauges employing

these specially processed alloys are referred to as ‘self-temperature-compensated’.

Fig. 8.11 illustrates the apparent strain characteristics of the self-temperature-

compensated by this figure, the gauges are designed to minimize the apparent strain over

the temperature range from about 00 F to 400

0 F. When the self-temperature-compensated

gauge is bonded to a test material having the thermal expansion coefficient for which the

gauge is intended and when operated within the temperature range of effective

compensation, strain measurements can usually be made without the necessity of

correcting for apparent strain.

Table 1 shows a number of common materials and gives the thermal expansion

coefficients for each, along with the recommended S-T-C number. For apparent strain

cancellation, strain gauges of appropriate S-T-C number should be bonded to the test

material.

Page 111: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

111

Figure 8.11 Variation of apparent strain with temperature

Table 8.1 : S-T-C number of different materials

Test material Thermal expansion coefficient

per degree Fahrenheit

Recommended S-T-C

number

Aluminium 12.9 13

Brass 11.1 13

Bronze phosphor 10.2 09

Copper 9.3 09

Molybdenum 2.2 03

Steel 6.0 (average) 06

Stainless steel 9.0 (average) 09

Tilonium 4.9 05

8.7.4 Optimising Excitation Level :

The excitation voltage applied to a strain gauge bridge creates a power loss in each arm,

all of which must be dissipated in the form of heat. Only a negligible fraction of the

power input is available in the output circuit. This causes the sensing grid of every strain

gauge to operate at a higher temperature than the test material to which it is bonded. It

can be considered that heat generated within a strain gauge must be transferred by

Page 112: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

112

conduction to the mounting surface. The heat flow through the specimen causes a

temperature rise in the test material, which is a function of its heat-sink capacity and

gauge power level.

Consequently, both sensing grid and test material operate at temperatures higher than

ambient. When the temperature rise is excessive, gauge performance will be affected in a

number of ways. Firstly, a loss of self-temperature-compensation (S-T-C) occurs when

the grid temperature is considerably above the specimen temperature. Secondly,

hysteresis and creep effects are magnified since these are dependent on backing and glue-

line temperature. Thirdly, zero (no-load) stability is strongly affected by excessive

excitation.

One of the simple but effective way of determining the optimum excitation level is to

gradually increase the bridge excitation under zero-load condition until a definite zero

instability is observed. The excitation should then be reduced until the zero reading

becomes stable again without a significant offset from the low-excitation zero reading.

For most applications, this value of bridge voltage is the highest that can be safely used

without significant performance degradation.

Optimum strain gauge excitation level can also be determined on the basis of heat sink

property of test material and gauge size and resistance. Heavy sections of high thermal

conductivity metals such as copper or aluminium are excellent heat sinks. Thin section of

low-thermal-conductivity metals such as stainless steel or titanium are poor heat sinks.

Higher excitation level is permissible for test material having good heat-sink properties.

Similarly, higher strain gauge resistances permit higher excitation level.

Power dissipated in grid (watts) may be given by

R

VPG

4

2

(8.30)

while power density in grid (watts / m2) may be given by

APP GG / (8.31)

Page 113: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

113

where

R = Gauge resistance in ohms

A = Grid area (Active gauges length gauge area)

V = Bridge excitation in volts

When grid area (A), gauge resistance ( R ) and grid power density ( PG ) are known :

APRV G 2 (8.32)

Table 2 provides the values of power density of various metals.

Table 8.2 : Heat sink conditions

Accuracy

requirement

Excellent

Aluminium or Copper

Good

Thick Steel

Fair

Thin Steel

Poor

Plastic

High 2 – 5

3.1 – 7.8

1 – 2

1.6 – 3.1

0.5 – 1

0.78 – 1.6

0.1 - 0.2

0.16 - 0.31

Moderate 5 -10

7.8 - 16

2 – 5

3.1 – 7.8

1 – 2

1.6 – 3.1

0.2 – 0.5

0.31 – 0.78

Low

10 – 20

16 - 31

5 – 10

7.8 - 16

2 – 5

3.1 – 7.8

0.5 – 1

0.78 – 1.6

Page 114: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

114

Chapter 9

FORCE AND MOMENT MEASUREMENT BY

ELECTRONIC EXTERNAL BALANCE

9.1 Introduction :

Measurements of forces and moments on a model in wind tunnel are made either

mechanically or electronically. The basic advantages of electronic measuring system, i.e.,

fast response, high and low values capability and amenability to automation are outlined

in Chapter 2. In an electronic system pick up or transducer converts the physical quantity

under measurement into electrical signal.

Internal electronic balance or sting balance (where strain gauge is used as pick-up or

transducer) for measurement of forces and moments are discussed in details in Chapter 8.

in this chapter an external electronic balance (3-component) is described. The advantage

of this system is that, unlike in sting balance, it is kept outside the tunnel and hence flow

is not disturbed by it.

In this balance, aft lift, fore lift and drag are measured by three load cells are obtained

from three digital voltmeters. Pitching moment is obtained by simple manipulation.

9.2 General description :

The general arrangement of the external balance is shown in Fig. 9.1. it is mounted on the

side wall of the working section outside the tunnel and is designed for airflows from right

to left when balance is viewed from front.

Page 115: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

115

Figure 9.1 Three component external balance

The balance is constructed mainly of aluminium alloy and its main frame work comprises

a mounting plate which is secured to the tunnel test section and carries a triangular force

Page 116: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

116

plate. The force plate and mounting plate are connected by three supporting legs,

disposed at the corners of the force plate. Each leg is attached to the force plate and

mounting plate by spherical universal joints. The effect of this is to constrain the force

plate to move in a plane parallel to the mounting plate, while leaving it free to rotate

about a horizontal axis. The necessary three degrees of freedom are thus provided.

Models for use with the balance are provided with a 12 mm diameter mounting stem and

this is inserted in the bore of model support and secured by a collet tightened by model

clamp. The model support is graduated on the periphery and is free to rotate in the force

plate for adjustment of the angle of attack of the model, while its position may be locked

by an incidence clamp.

The force plate may be locked in position by two centering clamps. It is to be noted that

“ this plate should always be tightened when balance is not in use or when changing

models”.

The forces acting on the force plate are transmitted by way of flexible cables to strain

gauge load cells which measure respectively the fore and aft lift forces and the drag force.

The drag cable which lies horizontally, acts on a line through the center of model support

while the two lift cables act vertically through points disposed equidistantly from the

center of the model support and in the same horizontal plane as the support. The distance

between the fore and aft lift tapes is 0.127 m (5.0 inch) and sum of the force in these

tapes thus gives the lift on the model while the difference when multiplied by 0.127 gives

the pitching moment in Newton meters. A drag balance spring acts on the force plate to

apply preload to the drag load cell.

The output from each load cell is taken to a strain gauge amplifier carried on the

mounting plate and then via a flexible cable to a display unit comprising a set of three

voltmeters shoeing the output from the respective load cell circuits. Lift and drag forces

are then calculated directly from the load cell outputs by using the calibration factors.

When calibrating the balance there is possibility of slight friction in the force plate

supports. To overcome this, small vibration is provided. The motor which requires a 12

volt DC supply is carried on the mounting plate and controlled by the vibrator push

button. It is not usually necessary to use the vibrator when using the balance for force

Page 117: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

117

measurements on the model as their usually sufficient vibration present to overcome any

friction in the mechanism.

9.3 Operation :

To fit a model, centering clamps are tightened, model is set at zero incidence and

incidence clamp is tightened. Model supporting stem is slided into model support and

model clamp is tightened. Centering clamps are released to ensure that model moves

freely without touching tunnel walls. It is to be noted that under “ no circumstances

model clamp is tightened in the absence of model otherwise the collet will be damaged”.

After switching on the supply it is desirable to allow a warm up time of 15 minutes for

the load cells before taking any readings. Once centering clamps are released the display

unit will indicate values corresponding to the zero readings of lift and drag. Vibrator is to

be separated before recording the zero reading of fore and aft lift and drag.

It will generally be found most convenient to set the incidence of the aerofoil models to

give a lift force acting downwards, thus giving positive values of lift load cell read-out.

To measure the aerodynamic forces tunnel speed is set to a desired value and hold display

button is pressed on the display unit. Reading of digital voltmeter are then recorded.

When it is desired to make a series of measurement of lift and drag over the range of

model angles of incidence this angle may be set by releasing the incidence clamp,

rotating the model support to the desired angle and retightening the clamp. “the centering

clamps must be locked before releasing the incidence clamp or handling the force plate

in any way. Otherwise there is risk of damaging the load cells”.

At the end o the test sequence, zero readings of load cells are taken for recheck.

Range of loading as per manufacturer’s specifications are as follows :

Lift Force 0 – 100 N

Drag Force 0 – 50 N

Pitching Moment 0 – 2.5 Nm

Page 118: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

118

Initial calibration factors given by manufacturer are :

Fore Lift 7.570 N/volt

Aft Lift 7.418 N/volt

Drag 7.496 N/Volt

If is model angle of incidence, a, f and d are aft load cell, fore load cell and drag load

cell read out respectively, a0, f0 and d0 being the zero readings then

Aft lift (A) : A = a1(a – a0)

Fore lift (F) : F = f1 (f – f0 )

Drag (D) : D = d1 (d – d0 )

Total Lift (L) : L = A + F

Moment (M) : M = 0.127 (F – A)

Where a1 , f1 and d1 are the aft lift, fore lift and drag calibration factors respectively.

9.3.1 Setting up load cells :

At times it may be necessary to readjust the cables connecting the force plate to the load

cells. It is essential that this is done correctly otherwise there is possibility of overloading

the cells.

To readjust, the centering clamps are first tightened. Forces are transmitted from lift and

drag cables to the load cells by way of a conical nipple brazed to the cable and an

adjusting screw secured by locknut which contacts the nipple and transmits the load to

the cell. To adjust, locknut is loosened and adjusting screw is turned anti-clockwise until

the cable is just tight. After that it is turned clockwise by one half of a revolution and

locknut is tightened. There will then be a play of approximately 0.25 mm between cable

and load cell when centering clamps are locked.

9.4 Calibration :

It is desirable to calibrate the balance periodically. Essentially the calibration procedure

involves the application of known lift and drag forces using dead weights. Fig 9.2 shows

Page 119: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

119

the set up for calibrating in the open circuit. The balance is usually mounted on a frame

attached to the wind tunnel. However, a separate fixture also can be prepared for

calibration where balance can be mounted.

Figure 9.2 Schematic arrangement off calibration rig

The balance is supplied with calibrating arm having a 12 mm diameter stem which could

be secured in the model clamp. A pivoted link is fitted to the arm in one of the three

positions, either on the axis of the arm or at the points displaced 63.5 mm on either side

of the axis.

The calibrating arm is locked in the model clamp with the arm cross member lying

horizontally and the projection of the arm from the balance set so that arm loading point

lies approximately on the axis of the wind tunnel.

To calibrate lift load cells the pivoted link is fitted at the location point on axis of the

calibrating arm and dead weights are applied to the loading link using a suitable hook.

Page 120: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

120

Since the lift load cells are disposed symmetrically on each side of the balance axis, it

may be assumed that dead loads so applied are divided equally between the two cells.

To calibrate the drag load cell, a horizontal force is applied to the calibrating arm by way

of loading link using dead weights, a nylon chord and a pulley (Fig. 9.2).

If desired, the individual fore and aft lift load cells may be calibrated by applying dead

weights using the loading link, at the locating points at each end of the transverse

member of the calibrating arm.

The calibrating procedure is as follows :

(a) The power supply to the balance is switched on and left for twenty minutes for

warm up.

(b) The centering clamps are released and the zero readings of load cells are

recorded.

(c) The dead weights are applied and the load cell outputs are recorded.

(d) The dead weights are removed and the zero readings are noted again.

(e) The procedure is repeated ten times thus collecting ten set of readings.

(f) Average values of load cell outputs are calculated.

Suitable loads for calibration are 100 N and 50 N for lift load cell calibration and 50 N

and 25 N for drag cell. It is usually desirable to carry out calibration at two set of weights

: one at rated load and the other at half rated load to confirm linearity of the relationship

between load cell output and the load.

It will be observed that in amplifier box there are three holes labeled ‘set zero’ and three

labeled ‘set bridge volts’. In each case the hole gives access to an adjusting screw that

may be reached by a small screwdriver.

It should not normally be necessary to make any adjustment to these settings, if they are

changed they will need recalibration.

The set zero adjustment is made with the force plate clamped in which condition none of

the load cells is subjected to any loading. The output from each cell as shown on the

display unit should then be approximately zero, although this setting is not critical.

Page 121: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

121

To check the bridge voltage use is made of the calibration cable provided with the

balance. The cable has a male and female termination and may be inserted between each

load cell in turn and the input plug to the amplifier. The calibration cable has two free

leads which can be connected to a high grade digital voltmeter.

After warming up the bridge supply voltage should be set to 10.000 volts 0.005 volts on

all three circuits.

Table 9.1 : Calibration of drag cell

(a) Weight = 0.5 kg

Serial No. Reading with load

(x)

Reading with no load

(y)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

2.060

2.081

2.078

2.078

2.074

2.081

2.067

2.081

2.076

2.066

1.416

1.430

1.456

1.443

1.445

1.453

1.460

1.459

1.455

1.460

Mean 2.0741 1.4511

d = 2.0741 d0 = 1.4511

Calibration factor = (0.5 9.81) (2.0741 – 1.4511) = 7.865 Nv

Page 122: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

122

Table 9.2 : Calibration of lift load cells

(a) Weight = 1000gms

Serial

No.

Fore lift reading

With load Without load

Aft lift reading

With load Without load

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

3.777 3.123

3.802 3.132

3.804 3.140

3.805 3.142

3.800 3.140

3.816 3.135

3.806 3.139

3.814 3.146

3.813 3.142

3.814 3.144

3.201 2.703

3.279 2.701

3.283 2.704

3.287 2.710

3.283 2.708

3.207 2.713

3.292 2.711

3.290 2.706

3.288 2.715

3.289 2.712

Mean 3.8051 3.1383 3.2859 2.7083

Calibration factor: 7.349 N/v 8.483 N/v

(b) Weight = 2035 gms

Serial

No.

Fore lift reading

With load Without load

Aft lift reading

With load Without load

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

4.473 3.124

4.493 3.131

4.522 3.126

4.495 3.116

4.494 3.104

4.466 3.105

4.475 3.112

4.486 3.104

4.473 3.102

4.498 3.094

3.937 2.692

3.920 2.692

3.924 2.697

3.933 2.699

3.925 2.706

3.925 2.702

3.914 2.706

3.936 2.697

3.920 2.701

3.946 2.713

Mean 4.4875 3.1118 3.928 2.7005

Calibration Factor: 7.248 N/v 8.123 N/v

Page 123: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

123

9.5 Wind Tunnel Testing :

Wind tunnel testing is carried out on two-dimensional wings : one with NACA 0012

section and the other a supercritical aerofoil. Both the models are 30.48 cm (1ft) in chord

and 61 cm (2 ft) in span.

After the models are installed in tunnel zero reading are recorded before starting the

tunnel. After the tunnel is started readings may be taken from the three digital voltmeters

(if necessary, by pressing the push button to hold the display).

Fore and aft lift and drag may now be determined by subtracting the respective zero

readings and using the calibration charts. Total lift is obtained by summing the fore and

aft lift and pitching moment at the holding point can be determined by multiplying 0.127

with the difference of the two lifts. Pitching at any other point (e.g. leading edge or ¼ c)

can be derived by moment transfer theorem.

Page 124: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

124

Chapter 10

WIND TUNNEL BOUNDARY CORRECTIONS (2D FLOW)

10.1 Introduction :

The conditions under which a model is tested in a wind tunnel are not the same as those

in free air. The closed (or open) boundaries of test section in most cases produce

extraneous forces. This must be subtracted out in order for the results to be comparable

with those in free air.

The presence of test section boundary walls produces :

i) A variation in static pressure along the test section due to formation and

subsequent thickening of boundary layer downstream. The effective area is

reduced progressively downstream resulting in an increase of velocity and

decrease of pressure downstream. The change in pressure upstream and

downstream of the model produce a drag force known as ‘horizontal buoyancy’.

ii) A lateral constraint to the flow pattern about a body, known as ‘solid blocking’.

In a closed wind tunnel, solid blocking is the same as an increase of speed,

increasing all forces and moments at a given angle of attack. It is usually

negligible with an open test section, since the airstream is then free to expand in

a normal manner.

iii) A lateral constraint to the flow pattern about the wake known as ‘wake

blocking’. The effect increases with an increase of wake size and in a closed test

section increases the drag of the model. Wake blocking is usually negligible

with an open test section since the airstream is then free to expand in normal

manner.

iv) An alternation to the local angle of attack along the span. In a closed test section

the angle of attack near the wingtip of a model with large span is increased

excessively, making the tip stall early. The effect of an open jet is just the

opposite (tips unstalled). In both cases the effect is diminished to the point of

negligibility by keeping model span less than 0.8 times the tunnel test section

span.

Page 125: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

125

v) An alternation to the normal curvature of the flow about a wing. The wing

moment coefficient, wing lift and angle of attack are increased in a closed wind

tunnel and are decreased with an open jet.

vi) An alternation to the normal downwash so that the measured lift and drag are in

error. The closed jet makes the lift too large and the drag too small. An open jet

has just the opposite effect.

It is to be noted that the additional effects resulting from the customary failings of wind

tunnels – local variations in velocity, angularity of flow, tare and interference etc. – are

extraneous to the basic wall corrections and it is assumed that the errors due to these

effects have already been removed before wall effects are considered. Methods governing

their removal are discussed in Chapter 6.

Since the manner in which the two and three dimensional walls affect the model and are

simulated is quite different they will be considered individually. Wall corrections for

two-dimensional testing are given here. Wall corrections for three-dimensional testing are

discussed in next chapter, Chapter 11.

In order to study effects primarily concerned with two dimensional flow, it is customary

to build models of constant chord which completely span the test section from wall to

wall. The trailing vortices are then practically eliminated. Consequently, corrections due

to downwash and spanwise variation of local angle of attack are not needed. These

corrections, needed for three dimensional testing, are given in Chapter 11.

Corrections for tests under two-dimensional flow conditions include :

i) horizontal buoyancy.

ii) Solid Blocking

iii) Wake blocking

iv) Streamline curvature effect

10.2 Horizontal Buoyancy :

Almost all wind tunnels with closed throats have a variation in static pressure along the

axis of the test section resulting from the thickening of the boundary layer as it progresses

toward the exit and to the resultant effective decrease of the jet area. It follows that the

pressure is usually progressively reduced as the exit is approached and there is a tendency

Page 126: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

126

of the model to be ‘drawn’ downstream. The static pressure variation along a jet is

usually as shown in Fig, 10.1.

Static pressure

(N/m2 )

distance along tunnel center line

Figure 10.1 Variation of static pressure along tunnel center line

The variation of cross-sectional area of the model (NACA 0012 model of Chapter 9) is

shown in Fig. 10.2. it is seen that the variation of static pressure from, say station 2 to

station 3, is (p2 - p3). This pressure difference acts on the average area (S2 + S3)/2. The

resulting force for that segment of the model is therefore

2

32

32

SSppDB

Figure 10.2 Variation of cross-sectional area of aerofoil model

This equation is simply solved by plotting local static pressure against body section area,

the buoyancy then becoming the area under the curve. However, for the case where the

Page 127: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

127

longitudinal static pressure gradient is a straight line (as shown in Fig. 10.1), the equation

gives horizontal buoyancy as

dsdsdpSD XB

where SX = model cross-section area at station x

S = distance from model nose

dp/ds = slope of longitudinal static pressure gradient

Now, SXds = body volume, horizontal buoyancy can be obtained as

DB = -(dp/ds) (body volume) (10.1)

Aerofoil body volume can be obtained approximately by the expression

Model volume = 0.7 model thickness model span.

In deriving eq.(10.1) only the pressure gradient effect is taken into account. But the

existence of failing static pressure gradient not only implies that the test section is getting

effectively smaller but also that the streamlines are getting squeezed. This squeezing

effect should also be incorporated in the calculation of horizontal buoyancy. More

accurate formulae incorporating this squeezing effect have been derived by Glauert and

also by Allen and Vincenti.

The expression for horizontal buoyancy by Glauert is

dsdptDB

2

12

(10.2)

where t = body thickness

1 = body-shape factor (about 4.2 for NACA 0012 aerofoil)

The expression for horizontal buoyancy derived by Allen and Vincenti is

dsdph

dsdpcDB

2

22

2 68

(10.3)

where h = tunnel height

c = model chord

22

48

h

c (10.4)

cxddxdzpcz2

11

0

2 1116

(10.5)

Page 128: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

128

= 0.24 for NACA 0012 aerofoil (x, z are the aerofoil coordinates), c its

chord and p its no chamber (basic) pressure distribution.

The amount of ‘horizontal buoyancy’ (DB) is then subtracted from the observed values of

drag in order for the result to be comparable with free air condition. This is usually small

for wings, but large for fuselages and nacelles.

10.3 Solid Blocking :

The presence of a model in the test section reduces the area through which air must flow,

and hence by Bernoulli’s principle increases the velocity of air as it flows over the model.

The increase of velocity, which may be considered constant over the model for

customary model sizes, is called ‘solid blocking’ (Fig. 10.3). its effect is a function of

model thickness, thickness distribution, and model size, and is independent of the

camber. The velocity increment at the model due to solid blocking can not simply be

obtained by direct area reduction. It is much less than the increment one obtains from the

direct area reduction since it is the streamlines far away from the model that are most

displaced.

To understand the mathematical approach, solid blockage for a circular cylinder in a two-

dimensional tunnel is considered. The cylinder in an open free stream may be

mathematically simulated by placing a doublet of strength = 2a2U in a uniform

stream where ‘a’ is the radius of the cylinder and U is the free stream speed.

Next, the presence of tunnel roof and floor is to be mathematically simulated. It is well

known that any boundary wall near a source, sink, doublet or vortex can be simulated

easily by the addition of a second source, sink, doublet or vortex above the boundary

wall. A solid boundary is formed by the addition of such an image system which

produces a zero streamline matching the solid boundary. An open boundary, on the other

hand, requires an image system that produces a zero velocity potential line which

matches the open boundary. After the image system, as shown in Fig. 10.3, is established,

its effect on the model is the same as that of boundary it represents.

The image system is developed in the following way. A single doublet of strength at A

is considered, which is to be contained within the solid walls 1 and 2. To simulate wall 1,

a doublet is needed at B and for wall 2,another doublet is needed at C. Now, doublet B

Page 129: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

129

needs a doublet B’ to balance it from wall 2 and doublet C needs a doublet C’ to balance

it from wall 1 and so on out to infinity. The image system for a closed rectangular test

section thus becomes a doubly infinite system of doublets.

Figure 10.3 Mathematical simulation of solid body between tunnel roof and floor

The axial velocity in the tunnel centerline due to first doublet at B is ,

222 222 hUahU

or, 2

2

h

a

U

U

Since velocity by a doublet varies inversely with the square of the distance from the

doublet, the doubly infinite doublet series may be summed as

Page 130: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

130

2

2

12

12

h

a

nU

U

total

Sb

2

22

3 h

a (10.6)

It is seen that a 0.25 m radius cylinder in a tunnel 2.5 m high act as though the clear jet

speed (U) were increased by 3.3 percent.

Now, the blockage due to a given aerofoil of thickness t may be represented on that due

to “ equivalent ” cylinder of diameter t(1)1/2

. with this approach the solid blocking for a

two-dimensional aerofoil may be found from simple doublet summation. Glauert wrote

this solid blocking velocity increment as

2

2

12

2

1

2

822.043 h

t

h

tSb

(10.7)

where 1 = 4.2 for NACA 0012 aerofoil.

Allen and Vincenti obtained their expression by rewriting eq.(10.7). introducing as in

eq.(10.4) and using 2 = 4 1 t2/ c

2, solid blocking correction is obtained as

Sb = 2 (2 = .24 for NACA 0012 aerofoil) (10.8)

A simple form of solid blocking correction is given by Thom as

23

1 )..(mod

C

volumeelKSb (10.9)

where K1 = 0.74 for a wing spanning the tunnel breadth

C = tunnel test section area

10.4 Wake Blocking :

Any real body without suction-type boundary layer control will have a wake behind it ,

and this wake will have a mean velocity lower than the free stream (Fig. 10.4). According

to the law of continuity, the velocity outside the wake in a closed tunnel must be higher

than free stream in order that a constant volume of fluid may pass through the test

section. The higher velocity in the mainstream has, by Bernoulli’s principle, a lowered

pressure and this lowered pressure, arising on the boundary layer (which later becomes

the wake) grows on the model and puts the model in a pressure gradient resulting in a

velocity increment at the model.

Page 131: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

131

Figure 10.4 Velocity characteristics of wake

To compute this wake effect, the wake and tunnel boundaries are to be mathematically

simulated. The wake simulation is fairly simple. In the two-dimensional case a line

source at the wing trailing edge emitting, say ‘blue’, fluid will result in a ‘blue’ region

simulating the wake. In order to preserve continuity a sink of same strength should be

added far downstream.

The simulated wake may be ‘contained’ within the floor and ceiling by an infinite vertical

row of source sink combination (Fig. 10.5).

Page 132: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

132

Figure 10.5 Mathematical simulation of wake of a body contained between tunnel roof

and floor.

The axial velocity induced at the model is

2

hU

(10.10)

where = strength of source-sink.

h = tunnel height.

The increment in horizontal velocity due to wake blocking can be written as

Dwb Chc

U

U

4

(10.11)

Maskell suggests that the correction be

Dwb Chc

U

U

2

(10.12)

Page 133: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

133

10.5 Streamline Curvature Effect :

The presence of ceiling and floor prevents the normal curvature of the free air that occurs

about any lifting body and – relative to the straightened flow – the body appears to have

more camber (around 1% for customary sizes) than it actually has. Accordingly, the

aerofoil in a closed wind tunnel has too much lift (and moment about quarter-chord) at a

given angle of attack and, indeed, the angle of attack is too large as well. This effect is

not limited to cambered aerofoils only, since, using the vortex analogy, any lifting body

produces curvature in the airstream.

Streamline curvature effect may be estimated by assuming that the aerofoil in question is

small and may be approximated by a single vortex at its quarter-chord point. The image

system necessary to contain this vortex between floor and ceiling consists of vertical row

of vortices above and below the real vortex (Fig. 10.6). the image system extends to

infinity both above and below and has alternating signs.

Figure 10.6 Mathematical simulation of streamline curvature

Page 134: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

134

The first image pair may be considered first. It is apparent they induce no horizontal

velocity since the horizontal components cancel, but as will be seen, the vertical

components add.

From simple vortex theory, the vertical velocity at a distance x from the lifting line will

be

222 xh

xw

(10.13)

Substitution of reasonable values for x and h in the above equation reveals that the

boundary induced upwash angle varies almost linearly along the chord, and hence the

stream curvature is essentially circular.

The chordwise load for an aerofoil with circular camber may be considered to be a flat

plate loading plus an elliptically shaped loading.

Considering the flat plate loading first, the upwash induced at half chord by the two

images closest to the aerofoil, by eq. (10.13), may be given by

22 4

4

22

ch

cw

Since UcCL2

1 the angular correction needed for the nearest image becomes

LCch

c

U

w22

2

48

1

Assuming that (c/4)2 is smaller to h

2 and again using

22

48

h

c

the angular correction is obtained as

LC

3

6

The second pair of vortices induces a upwash velocity

22

42

4

22

ch

cw

and an angular correction , LC3

6

4

1

Page 135: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

135

Adding for all the infinite pairs of images, angular correction may be obtained as

LSC C

........

16

1

9

1

4

11

63

radianC

C

L

L

.......2

1

.12

6 2

3

LC.2

3.57 degrees (10.14)

The additive lift correction is

scLscC ..2

LC..2

1.2

LC. (10.15)

and the additive moment correction is

LsccM

CC

4

4

1 (10.16)

10.6 Summary of Two-dimensional Boundary Correction :

The data concerned for the NACA 0012 aerofoil model in Chapter 9 are the following :

Free stream speed = U m/s

Free stream dynamic pressure = q N/m2

Reynolds number = Re

Angle of incidence =

Drag = D

Lift = L

Applying the wind tunnel boundary corrections the corrected values can be obtained as

summarized below.

Sb is given by eq.(10.6) or (10.8). To get wb from eq.(10.11) or (10.12), CD needs to be

corrected first.

Considering horizontal buoyancy into account, CD may be corrected by using

Page 136: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

136

SU

DDC B

D2

2

1

where DB is given by eq.(10.1), (10.2) or (10.3). wb can then be obtained from eq. (10.11)

or (10.12).

Corrected value of free stream speed U may be obtained from

)1()1( UUU wbSbC

Corrected value of dynamic pressure q may be obtained from

2112

qqq C

and the Reynolds number from

1RRC

Lift coefficient CL is found from

SU

LCL

2

2

1

The corrected lift coefficient taking blockage effect can be obtained from

SU

LCLc

22 12

1

or, 21 LLc CC

Taking both blockage effect and streamline curvature effect into account

21LLc CC [from eq.(10.15)]

Where can be obtained from eq.(10.4).

Corrected value for incidence is

LC C.2

3.57 [from eq. (10.14)]

Corrected drag coefficient CD (taking both solid and wake blocking into account) may be

obtained as

wbSbDDC CC 231

Page 137: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

137

Corrected moment coefficient CM(1/4)C may be given as

4

.21

4

1

4

1L

CMCM

CCC

Both the uncorrected and corrected values can be put tabular form as shown in Table

10.1.

Table 10.1 : Uncorrected and corrected values of different parameters

Uncorrected Corrected

U R CL CD CM(1/4)C U R CL CD CM(1/4)C

Page 138: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

138

Chapter 11

WIND TUNNEL BOUNDARY CORRECTIONS (3D FLOW)

11.1 Introduction :

Wind tunnel boundary corrections for three dimensional testing follow the same

reasoning used for two dimensional testing (Chapter 10). The correction factors are,

however, different since both vertical and horizontal wall effects are now taken into

account. Also, an additional correction is needed for the wall effects on downwash by the

trailing vortices issuing from the trailing edges of the wing models.

The corrections for three dimensional testing include :

i) horizontal buoyancy

ii) solid blocking

iii) wake blocking

iv) streamline curvature effect

v) downwash effect

11.2 Horizontal Buoyancy :

The philosophy behind the buoyancy correction has been described in Chapter 10. for the

three dimensional case, the correction for pressure gradient effect only may be written, as

before, as

ds

dpDB (body volume) (11.1)

The total correction for both pressure gradient and streamline squeezing effect has been

given by Glauert as

ds

dptDB

3

34

(11.2)

where 3 = body shape factor for three-dimensional bodies

= 4.2 for NACA 0012 wing

and t = maximum body thickness

= .05856m for the case of 1.6 aspect ratio rectangular wing

Page 139: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

139

11.3 Solid Blocking :

The solid blocking correction for three dimensional flow follows the same philosophy

described earlier for two dimensions. The body can be represented by a source-sink

distribution is now contained by the walls of the tunnel. The simulation of the tunnel

walls for the three-dimensional case requires image system for horizontal boundary walls

(floor and ceiling ) as well as for side vertical walls as shown in Fig. 11.1. The image

system as before extends to infinity on all sides.

Figure 11.1 Mathematical simulation of solid body between horizontal as well as lateral

boundaries of the tunnel.

Summing the effect of images, velocity increment due to solid blocking for a wing may

be given by

23

)...(11

C

volumewingK

U

USb

(11.3)

where,

K1 = body shape factor (1.008 for NACA 0012 wing)

1 = factor depending on the tunnel test section shape and model span to tunnel

width ratio

C = tunnel test section area (61 cm 61 cm for low speed tunnel)

Thom’s short-form equation for solid blocking for a three dimensional body is

23

)...(mod

C

volumeelK

U

USb

(11.4)

where K = 0.9 for a three-dimensional wing.

Page 140: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

140

11.4 Wake Blocking :

The correction for wake blocking follows the logic of the two dimensional case in that

the wake is simulated by a source of strength Q at the trailing edge which is matched for

continuity by adding a downstream sink of same strength Q. The image system consists

of a doubly infinite source-sink system spaced at a tunnel height (h) apart vertically and a

tunnel width (B) apart horizontally as shown in Fig. 11.1.

The axial velocity induced by the image system is

BHQU 2

The incremental velocity is

Dwb CC

S

U

U

4

(11.5)

where,

S = model wing area

C = tunnel test section

CD = drag coefficient of the wing

The increase of drag due to pressure gradient may be subtracted by removing the wing

wake pressure drag

DD CC

volumewingKC

23

11 )...( (11.6)

where K1, C and 1 are as defined for eq. (11.3).

11.5 Streamline Curvature Effect :

The correction for streamline curvature for three dimensional testing follow the same

philosophy as those for the two dimensional case in that they are concerned with the

variation of the boundary induced upwash along the chord. But for the three dimensional

system is shown in Fig. 11.2. Basically it consists of the real wing with its bound vortex

CD and trailing vortices C and D. The vertical boundaries are simulated by the infinite

system of horse-shoe vortices and the horizontal boundaries are simulated by the infinite

lateral system . Linking the two systems is the infinite diagonal system.

Page 141: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

141

Figure 11.2 Mathematical simulation of streamline curvature effect

The effect of the image system can be summed up and without going into the details of

the formulation the correction factors can be written as

3.57..12 LSC CCS (11.7)

where,

2 = factor representing the increase of boundary induced upwash at a point p

behind the wing quarter-chord in terms of the amount at the quarter-chord.

= 0.195 for the present model and tunnel.

= a factor which is function of the span load distribution, ratio of model

span to tunnel width, the shape of the test section and whether or not the

model is on the tunnel centerline.

= 0.137 for the present case.

S = model surface area.

C = tunnel test section area.

The additive lift correction is

Page 142: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

142

aC SCLS (11.8)

where a = wing lift-curve slope

= 0.088 per degree for a 3D wing

The additive correction for the moment coefficient is

LSCMSC CC .25.0 (11.9)

11.6 Downwash Effect :

The downwash induced by the trailing vortex system needs to be corrected for the tunnel

wall effects. Through elementary vortex theory the correction factor for the tunnel

boundary induced downwash can be developed. The only mathematical tools needed are

the expression for the induced velocity w due to a vortex of strength at a distance r

r

w4

(11.10)

and the relation between lift and circulation for a uniformly loaded wing of span b

LCbSU 2 (11.11)

combining the two gives

LCrb

SUw

8 (11.12)

Now r represents the vortex spacing in the image system which may be expressed as

some constant times a tunnel dimension, e.g. the tunnel height h and the model wing span

may be expressed in terms of the tunnel width B.

The induced angle at the centerline of the test section is then

LC

hbBbK

s

U

w

81

for any one image.

Summing the whole field and setting B/8Kb = and noting that hB is the test section

area C, for the complete system is obtained as

)3.57./1 Li CCS (11.13)

Now, the induced drag coefficient may be written as

LiDi CC where i = induced angle

Page 143: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

143

Therefore, the change in induced drag caused by the boundary induced downwash

becomes

2

1 LLiDi CCSCC (11.14)

11.7 Summary of Three-Dimensional Boundary Corrections :

Data (, CL, CD, U) obtained from testing of a wing model in a closed three dimensional

tunnel may be corrected to free air conditions according to the following relations :

The corrected value of wind speed is

21 UU C (11.15)

where wbSb (11.16)

The dynamic pressure is

22 12

1 Uq C

212

1 2 U

21 q (11.17)

The Reynolds number is

1RRC (11.18)

The lift coefficient is (from eq.{(11.7) & (11.8))

aCSCC LLC ).3.57).((21 12 (11.19)

The angle of attack is (from eq. (11.7) & (11.3))

21 13.57 LC CCS (11.20)

The drag coefficient is (from eq.(11.6) & (11.14))

2

1. .21 LDCD CCSCC (11.21)

Page 144: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

144

Chapter 12

DRAG MEASUREMENT ON CYLINDRICAL BODY

12.1 Introduction :

The resistance experienced by a body as it moves through a fluid is what is commonly

known as drag. Total drag of a body may be separated into a number of items each

contributing to the total. As a first step it may be divided into “pressure drag” and

“friction drag”. The pressure drag may itself be considered as the sum of three items :

1) boundary layer pressure drag

2) trailing vortex drag or induced drag

3) wave drag.

Some of these items depend on viscosity, others may exist in inviscid fluid.

Schematically,

Total drag

Friction drag Pressure drag

(depends on viscosity)

Boundary layer normal Trailing vortex drag Wave drag

pressure drag (does not depend (does not depend

(depends on viscosity) on viscosity) on viscosity)

Trailing vortex drag can exist only in the case of flow about a three dimensional lifting

body and depends on the lift generated. The wave drag is associated with the formation

of shock waves in high speed flight. For the particular case of low speed two-dimensional

flow about a circular cylinder, both the items can be eliminated. The drag components

acting on the body are the friction drag and boundary layer normal pressure drag. The

summation of these two components is the profile drag.

Flow around a circular cylinder (Fig. 12.1) is considered. To analyze the drag force it is

convenient to assume the cylinder t be moving in a stationary fluid. To an observer

moving with the cylinder the fluid will appear to be approaching as a uniform stream. At

Page 145: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

145

any point A on the surface of the cylinder, the effect of fluid may conveniently be

resolved into two components, pressure (p) normal to the surface and shear stress(

)along the surface. The combined effect of pressure and shear stress (skin friction) in the

direction of oncoming fluid gives rise to the drag force (profile drag).

Figure 12.1 Uniform flow past a circular cylinder

It is worth noting that in the case of ‘ideal’ fluid, shear stress is zero and the pressure

distribution (given by cp = 1 – 4sin2 ) is symmetrical over the forward and backward

face of the cylinder which cancel out exactly giving zero drag force. For a real fluid shear

stress exists and the pressure distribution is no longer symmetrical resulting in an overall

rearward force. This force is so called boundary layer normal pressure drag.

There are three methods of measuring the drag force :

1) by measuring pressure distribution on the surface on the cylinder,

2) by measuring pressure distribution in the wake of the cylinder,

3) by direct weighing.

12.2 Drag by Measuring Pressure Distribution on the Cylinder Surface :

Consider an element s on the surface of the cylinder at a point where the normal is

inclined at an angle to the direction of U as shown in Fig. 11.2.

The element of drag d per unit cylinder length due to p and is

dspD .sincos

Page 146: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

146

and integrating round the whole parameter yields

dspD .sincos

Figure 12.2 Elemental drag due to p and

Drag may be expressed in non-dimension form as

SU

DCD

2

2

1

where S is the area. For a bluff body like circular cylinder S represents the frontal

projected area normal to U. For a cylinder of diameter d and length unity S becomes

(d x l) d. the characteristics dimension is the diameter d i.e. the width measured across the

cylinder normal to the flow. This is in contrast to the concept of wetted surface area used

for streamlined body like aerofoil section where the characteristics dimension used is the

length of the body along the direction of flow or the ‘chord’ of the aerofoil.

ds

UU

p

ddU

DCD .sin

2

1cos

2

1

1

2

1 222

or, dsCCd

C fpD .sincos1 (12.1)

where,

Cf = skin friction coefficient

CD = drag coefficient

Page 147: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

147

Cp = pressure coefficient

This equation shows that the drag of cylinder may be found by measuring p and over

the surface. Now it is easy to measure the distribution of p over a cylinder merely by

drilling fine holes into its surface, but measurement of is a much more difficult task. For

the case of a circular cylinder, however, the contribution on drag from shear stress (the

skin friction drag) is found to be very much smaller than from pressure (boundary layer

pressure drag) and may safely be neglected.

Making this assumption and writing

ddRs .2/.. simplifies equation (12.1) to

ddCd

C pD .2cos1

2

0

2

0

.cos2

1dC p (12.2)

Using equation (12.2) CD can be calculated from the measured distribution over the

cylinder surface.

The circular cylinder model is provided with a fine pressure tapping at one point on its

surface. A protractor is attached to the cylinder and the pressure taping is connected to

the manometer. By rotating the cylinder about its axis to successive angular positions (00

, 50, 10

0, …, 360

0 ) the complete pressure distribution round the whole surface may be

recorded.

Pressure taping at three points are connected to the manometer for measuring inlet total

pressure Po(i.e. the pressure in the settling chamber), inlet static pressure p and static

pressure on the cylinder P (Fig. 12.3). The dynamic pressure of the oncoming flow q is

pPUq O

2

2

1 (12.3)

Manometer reads directly in terms of millibar, written mbar (1 mbar =10-3

bar = 100

N/m2 ). A table may now be prepared.

Page 148: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

148

Figure 12.3: Pressure distribution on the surface of the cylinder

Table 12.1 : Pressure distribution on the surface of the cylinder

degrees

h0 h h (P0 - p)

= h0 - h

p - p

= h - h

Cp Cp Cos

0

5

10

-

360

Cp can be obtained simply as the ratio of (h - h ) and (h0 - h). Two graphs of Cp and

Cp cos as function of can now be plotted [Fig. 12.4(a), 12.4(b)]. CD May be obtained

from Fig. 12.4(b) by use of planimeter to measure the area beneath the curve. Usually

2

0

02.2cospc

Page 149: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

149

From equation (12.2),

2

0

01.1.cos.2

1dcC pD

Figure 12.4 Variation of Cp and Cp cos with

To obtain Reynolds number of the flow, value of U is needed. This can be obtained

from equation (12.3) written in the form

pPU 02

Reynolds number is obtained from

dUR

12.3 Drag by Measuring Distribution in the Wake of the Cylinder :

The second method of determining the drag is based on the application of momentum

equation to the air flow. The flow of a fluid along a duct of width 2h past a cylindrical

body (Fig. 12.5) is considered. The velocity is U and the pressure is p at upstream.

Downstream of the cylinder the velocity the velocity is no longer uniform; let the velocity

be u at distance y from the duct center line. The pressure across the downstream section

is assumed to be uniform and has the value pe. It is convenient to refer to the space

bounded by the upstream section, downstream section and duct walls as the control

volume and the surface formed by these boundaries as the control surface.

Page 150: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

150

Figure 12.5 Application of the Momentum equation

The forces in the direction acting on the fluid in the control, volume are, per unit length

of cylinder :-

at the upstream section 2h p

at the downstream section -2h pe

at the cylinder -D

It is to be noted that the force exerted by the cylinder on the fluid (which has a minus

sign) is equal and opposite to the force exerted by the fluid on the cylinder. Forces due to

shear stress on the walls of the duct and due to the fluid weight are neglected.

The momentum flux per unit width over the downstream section =

h

h

dyu 2.

The momentum flux per unit width over the upstream section = dyU

h

h

2.

Equating the net force in the x-direction to the momentum flux out of the control volume

h

h

h

h

e dyUdyuDhphp 22.22

Page 151: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

151

Rearranging and making non-dimensional gives the result

dyU

u

dU

pp

d

h

dU

DC

h

h

e

D

2

2

22

12

2

1

2

2

1

The integral may also be made non-dimensional by the substitution y = h

So that dU

uhdy

U

uh

h

.1.1

1

1

2

2

2

2

And then final result is

dU

u

d

h

U

pp

d

hC e

D .12

2

1

21

1

2

2

2

(12.4)

Equation (12.4) provides a means to calculate CD from the pressure drop along the duct

and the velocity distribution in the wake. It is to be noted that the derivation does not

restrict the result to pressure drag only; the contributions of both pressure and skin

friction forces are contained in the force which comes into the momentum equation. The

ski friction drag on the wall also contributes to the momentum change and is therefore

included in D. it is also worth mentioning that equation (12.4) applies only to the case of

flow along a duct where the flow is confined between parallel walls.

diameter of the cylinder d = 48 mm = .048 m

half width of working section h = 50 mm = .05 m

Page 152: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

152

Table 12.2 : Velocity traverse in wake.

y

(mm)

(= y/h)

P0 - p

2

2

1 U

N/m2

U

m/s

Pe - pe

2.2

1u

N/m2

u

m/s

u / U 221 Uu

0 0.0

2 0.04

4 0.08

50 1.0

0 0.0

-2 -0.04

-4 -0.08

-50 -1.0

Readings are recorded at successive values of the distance y from the center line, made

dimensionless by dividing by h in the next column. The third column indicates the Pitot

pressure Pe ( pe =0, atmospheric datum) and hence represents the local dynamic pressure

2.2

1u at a point in the exit section. This is also made dimensionless by dividing by

2

2

1U . Next two columns show u / U and 221 Uu which can be plotted as shown

in Fig. 12.6.

In stead of determining u and U individually to calculate 221 Uu ,an alternative

approach is to obtain u / U directly from the formula

pPpPUu ee 0

The drag coefficient may now be obtained by use of the curve 221 Uu in Fig. 12.6.

The area beneath the curve is usually found to be –0.074. CD may now be calculated from

equation (12.4).

Page 153: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

153

Figure 12.6 Velocity traverse in the wake of the cylinder

12.4 Drag by Direct Weighing

Fig. 12.7 shows the essential components of the working section in which drag may be

measured by direct weighing. The body is mounted on an arm which extends through a

hole in one wall of the working section and which is supported on a flexible link so as to

form a balance. Now the drag experienced by the body in the air flow may be directly

measured by balancing the setup with weights in the scale pan. It is recommended that

exact balance is found by suitably trimming the wind speed rather than making small

adjustments to weights in the scale pan. At each wind speed the total pressure P0 and

static pressure p at inlet are recorded.

Diameter of the cylinder d = 12.5 mm = .0125 m

Frontal projected area of the cylinder S = .0125 .048 sq. m

Page 154: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

154

Figure 12.7 Drag measurement by a mechanical balance

Table 12.3 : Drag by direct weighing

No. of

runs

P0

p

P0 - p

2?.2

1 U

N/ m2

D

gm

D N CD

SUD 2.2

1

1.

Three methods of drag measurement should yield almost identical values of CD.

However, it is to be noted that both wake traverse and direct weighing include pressure as

Page 155: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

155

well as skin friction component whereas surface pressure measurement method takes

only pressure drag into account.

This particular procedure can be repeated for

1) flat plate

2) aerofoil section

3) square cylinder section.

Page 156: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

156

Chapter 13

FLOW ABOUT AN AEROFOIL SECTION

13.1 Introduction :

The problem is to obtain pressure distribution on the surface of an aerofoil in two-

dimensional steady incompressible flow and derive the overall aerodynamic

characteristics of the aerofoil by integrating the pressure distribution.

Cartesian coordinates Oxz are taken with the origin coinciding the leading edge of the

aerofoil. The free stream velocity U is inclined at the angle of incidence to the Ox axis

as shown in Fig. 13.1.

Figure 13.1 Cartesian coordinate system

The equation of the aerofoil profile relative to the axis system is denoted by

z = fu(x) on upper surface

= f 1(x) on lower surface (13.1)

In the case of symmetrical profile fu(x) = - f 1(x) (13.2)

The perturbation velocity induced due to the presence of the body in the flow may be

assumed to be u and w in x and z directions respectively.

The total velocity components at any point on the surface of the aerofoil are

Page 157: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

157

wUW

uUU

sin

cos

and the total velocity and pressure are

22 WUqt (13.3)

21 tp qC

13.2 Formulation of the Problem :

In theoretical analysis, the unknowns that are to be computed are the two components of

perturbation velocity (u, w) and pressure (p). These unknowns can, in principle, be

calculated from principles of conservation of mass and momentum.

For steady inviscid, incompressible flow, these equations are :

Eq. of continuity : 0z

W

x

U

(13.4)

Euler’s eq. of momentum : x

p

z

UW

x

UU

.

1

: z

p

z

WW

x

UU

1 (13.5)

The situation is simplified if the flow is considered to be potential (irrotational).

Condition of irrotationality is

0x

W

z

U

(13.6)

The velocity field, under the assumption of irrotational flow, can now be expressed as the

gradient of a scalar potential such that

z

Wx

U

,..... (13.7)

Using (13.4) and (13.70, Laplace’s equation is obtained.

02 (13.8)

The simplicity of potential flow derives from the fact that the velocity field is determined

from Laplace’s equation, eq. (13.8), which contains equation of continuity, eq. (13.4),

and condition of irrotationality, eq. (13.6). The equation of momentum, eq. (13.5), is not

used and the velocity is determined independent of pressure. Once the velocity field is

Page 158: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

158

obtained, pressure can be known by integrating equation (13.5). Equation (13.5) can be

integrated to give one of the forms of Bernoulli’s equation. For steady incompressible

flow, Bernoulli’s equation becomes (in the simplest form)

2.2

1tqp Constant

Using this expression, pressure distribution Cp can be obtained as

2

2

1

2

1

U

q

U

ppC t

p

(13.9)

where p and U are the pressure and velocity at infinity.

Since onset flow U always satisfies the Laplace’s equation, eq. (13.8) can be further

simplified by assuming

where = total potential

= perturbation potential

= potential due to onset flow U

Since 02 , equation (13.8) can be written as

02 (13.10)

Laplace’s equation in perturbation potential is a second order linear differential equation

and requires two boundary conditions for solution, one on the body surface and other at

infinity.

The boundary conditions are :

i) flow at the body surface must be tangential, i.e., the normal component must

be zero,

qn = 0 on body surface (13.11)

ii) the perturbation velocities must tend to zero at infinity i.e,

u, w 0 at infinity (13.12)

The problem of calculating inviscid, incompressible, irrotational flow about a body

finally reduces to solving equation (13.10) subject to the boundary conditions, equations

(13.11) and (13.12).

Page 159: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

159

13.3 Solutions :

Several methods have been developed for solution of the problem formulated above.

These methods may broadly be classified as

Solution of Laplace’s equation

Approximate solution Exact solution

Analytic Numerical

13.3.1 Exact Analytic Solution :

Exact analytic solution of Laplace’s equation can be obtained only for an extremely

limited class of simple body surface (e.g. flow past a half-body, Rankine oval, circular

body etc.). However, in two-dimensional flow problems, advantage can be taken of the

fact that in two dimensions the problem of solving Laplace’s equation can be replaced by

the problem of finding a suitable conformal transformation of the boundary. The use of

this technique has resulted in a number of useful potential flow solutions. For example,

using Joukowski’s transformation flow past a circular section can be mapped onto flow

past a flat plate, elliptical section or Joukowski aerofoil. Nevertheless, these solutions

comprise a restricted class.

13.3.2 Approximate Solution :

The solution of Laplace’s equation presents difficulty because of the nonlinear boundary

condition, equation (13.11). The governing equation, the Laplace’s equation is linear and

requires no simplification. The non-linearity enters in the problem through the boundary

condition. Because exact analytic solutions are limited and because exact numerical

methods are beyond the capability of hand calculation, approximate methods were

developed in the past. The earliest theory developed for solving this problem, the so-

called linearised theory, is based on a through –going linearisation of the boundary

condition. The boundary condition is linearised under the assumption of small

Page 160: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

160

perturbations. These simplifying assumptions obviously place a limit on the accuracy of

the solution. Usual assumption are :

a) the body is slender with small local surface slope

b) the perturbation velocity components due to body are small with respect to onset

flow.

13.3.3 Exact Numerical Solution :

With the advent of high speed digital computer, exact numerical methods have become

feasible. These methods do not use any simplifying assumptions in the formulation and

are applicable to a variety of body surfaces. However, since the solution is achieved

numerically, numerical inaccuracies enter into the solution.

A distinction must be made between approximate solution and numerically exact

solution. In the later, the analytic formulation, including all equations, is exact and

numerical approximations are introduced for the purpose of numerical calculation. Exact

numerical methods have the property that the errors in the calculated solutions can be

made as small as desired, by sufficiently refining the numerical calculations. In contrast,

approximate solutions introduce analytic approximations into the formulation itself and

thus place a limit on the accuracy that can be obtained in a given case regardless of the

numerical procedure used.

13.4 Linearised Theory :

Boundary condition of flow tangency, eq. (13.11) can be written as

uU

wU

dx

dz

cos

sin (13.13)

In linearised theory (or thin aerofoil theory) the perturbation velocities u, w and angle of

incidence are assumed to be small, so that

cos = 1 , sin =

u,w << U

Equation (13.13) is then reduced to

U

w

U

wU

dx

dz

(13.14)

Page 161: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

161

The equation (13.14) can now be split in two parts, for thickness and camber distribution.

Taking tC zzz

and tC www

Equation (13.14) becomes

dx

dz

U

w tt

thickness effect (13.15)

dx

dz

U

w CC

camber effect (13.16)

13.4.1 Thickness effect : Symmetrical aerofoil at zero incidence

This problem is solved by distributing source distribution on the chord of the aerofoil and

satisfying the boundary condition, equation (13.15) on the chord of the aerofoil.

dx

dzUx t

2)( (13.17)

and the perturbation velocity due to the source distribution placed along the chord is

C

t

t dx

ddzUxu

0

)0,(

(13.18)

Total velocity induced at any point qt is

tt uUq

C

t dx

ddzU

0

11

(13.19)

13.4.2 Camber (and incidence) effect : Cambered aerofoil at incidence

Effects due to camber is simulated by placing a vorticity distribution of strength (x) o the

chord of the aerofoil. The velocity induced wC at any point due to the distribution of

vorticity is

C

Cx

dw

02

.

From equation (13.16)

Page 162: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

162

dx

dzU

x

d C

C

02

.

the solution of which can be expressed as

1

0 sin2

1cot2 nAAU n (13.20)

where cos12 cx

The first term 2

1cot0A represents the vorticity which occurs with a straight line flat

plate aerofoil. The coefficient of sine series An depends on the shape of the aerofoil.

The lift and pitching moment coefficient for the wing of span can now be obtained as

cU

dxU

cU

U

cU

LCL

222

2

1

.

2

1

2

1

22 1

0

AA (13.21)

2222

..

..

2

1

.

2

1cU

xdxU

cU

MC EL

ELM

22

210 AAA

(13.22)

where

0

0

1d

dx

dzA C

and

dndx

dzA C

n .cos2

0

(13.23)

The coefficient A0, An can be obtained by integration if the aerofoil surface is expressed

by the equation (13.1). For arbitrary aerofoil section, body surface is, however, described

by a set of points and hence these coefficients are to be obtained numerically.

The aerofoil section chosen for present study is NACA 0012 aerofoil. The equation of

this aerofoil contour is given by

4

5

3

4

2

3215 xaxaxaxaxatz

Page 163: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

163

where t = 0.12, a1 = 0.2969, a2 = -0.126, a3 = -0.3516, a4 = 0.2843, a5 = -0.1015

The velocity distribution on this aerofoil of chord unity at zero incidence may be obtained

from equation (13.19) as

U

uUq t

t 1

where

2

5434451 43243

2

1

3

4{

1

1ln

2[

5xaxaaxaaa

x

x

x

at

U

ut

}]1

ln432 3

5

2

432x

xxaxaxaa

(13.24)

and the pressure distribution

2

1

U

qC t

p (13.25)

Lift and pitching moment coefficient can be obtained from equations (13.21), (13.22)

and (13.23) as

2LC (13.26)

2... ELMC (13.27)

13.5 Exact Numerical Method (Panel method) :

Panel method involves singularity distribution on the surface of the configuration and

unknown strength of the singularity distribution is obtained numerically by satisfying the

boundary condition of zero normal flow on the surface of the configuration. Singularities

used are sources, doubles, vortices, dipoles etc. These singularities are well known

solutions of Laplace’s equation, eq. (13.10). Since Laplace’s equation is linear, any

combination of the singularities can be added to provide new solutions. Also, all these

singularities automatically satisfy the condition at infinity, equation (13.12). So the whole

problem is reduced to obtaining the strength of the singularity distribution by satisfying

the boundary condition of zero normal flow, equation (13.11), on the boundary surface.

Satisfaction of boundary condition on boundary surface results in an integral equation

over the surface.

Page 164: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

164

For bodies of arbitrary shapes, this integral equation can not be solved numerically. The

numerical solution is the central problem of all panel methods. To solve this integral

equation numerically, the body must first be approximated by a number of flat panels.

The body is specified to the computer by a set of point which lie exactly on the body

surface. The input order is such that the body surface is approximated by a number of

straight line panels (Fig. 13.2). On each panel, one point (normally taken to be the mid-

point) is selected where the boundary condition (this integral equation) is satisfied.

Satisfying this integral equation at all mid-points results in a set of linear algebraic

equations for the values of source density on the panels. Once these are solved, flow

velocities can be computed at the mid-points.

Figure 13.2 Approximation of the body surface into number of panels

Numerous versions of panel methods have been developed using various combinations of

singularities distributed inside and/or on the surface of the body. Some of the versions for

two-dimensional flow are :

a) Source-only singularity model

b) Vorticity-only singularity model

c) Composite singularity model

d) Internal singularity model

In what follows a brief description of the source-only singularity model developed by A.

M. O. Smith and J. L. Hess is described.

In this method the aerofoil surface is discretised into N number of flat panels (Fig. 13.3)

on each of which are placed uniform source and uniform vorticity distribution. The

Page 165: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

165

strength of the source distribution is assumed to be constant for each panel but varying

from panel to panel. The strength of the vorticity distribution is assumed to be constant

for all panels. The strength of the singularity distribution is obtained by satisfying the

boundary condition of zero normal flow at the mid-point of all N panels resulting in n

number of linear algebraic equations.

Figure 13.3 Discretised model

Boundary condition of flow tangency can be written, as before, as

xfuU

wU

dx

dz

cos

sin (13.13)

or, sincos UUxfxfuw

Normalising with respect to c and U gives

sincos xfxfuw

where j = 1, 2, ……….,N (13.28)

On each panel is placed a uniform source distribution i, i = 1,….,N which varies from

panel and a uniform vorticity distribution which is the same for all panels. Thus, there are

(N+1) unknown singularity strengths. There are n linear equations arising from satisfying

equation (13.14) at N panel mid-points together with the Kutta condition, Usually taken

to be equal velocity (pressure) at the mid-point of trailing edge panels 1 and N.

Page 166: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

166

Normalised perturbation velocities due to distribution of sources and vorticity can be

expressed as

N

i

ji

N

i

ijij BAu11

.

(13.29)

N

i

N

i

jiijij DCw1 1

.

where uj, wj are the normalized perturbation velocity components at the mid-point of j-th

panel induced by the distribution of sources and vorticity on the aerofoil surface and Aji

, B ji are the appropriate influence coefficients. These coefficients Aji , B ji depend only on

the coordinates of the i-th and j-th panel.

Using equations (13.14) and (13.15), the boundary condition of zero normal flow can be

expressed as

sincos11

xfBxfDAxfC j

N

i

jijjii

N

i

jijji

where j = 1, 2,…….., N (13.30)

The solution for the unknown variable i and is obtained from the n linear equations,

equation (13.16) together the Kutta condition of equal pressure at the mid-points of panel

1 and N. once the solution is obtained, the perturbation velocity components are obtained

from equation (13.15).

The total velocity is given by

22sincos jjj wuq (13.31)

and the pressure coefficient

21 jpj qC (13.32)

Pressure distribution, obtained by this method, is given in the tables for comparison with

experimental values for NACA 0012 aerofoil model.

13.6 Overall Aerodynamic Characteristics :

Once the pressure distribution are obtained, following quantities can be calculated :

1) Lift, drag and pitching moment coefficients

Page 167: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

167

2) Location of aerodynamic center

3) Location of center of pressure.

13.6.1 Lift, Drag and Pitching Moment Coefficients :

Fig. 13.4 represents an aerofoil section at an incidence to the fluid stream, which is

assumed to be moving from left to right at a speed of U. Through the nose of the

aerofoil are drawn axes Ox and Oz parallel and perpendicular to the chord line

respectively. The chord of the aerofoil denoted by c. the ordinates of the highest and

lowest points of the section are z2 and z1 respectively.

Figure 13.4 Aerofoil section at incidence

Taking a slice of the aerofoil of unit spanwise length, the forces acting on a small element

of length s, of the surface may be considered. The normal forces on the element is

composed of ps inwards and artificial ps outward leaving a net inwards force (p -

p)s. This force may be resolved into components z and x acting parallel to the Oz

and Ox axis respectively. Then

cossppz

xpp per unit span (since xs cos )

for an element on upper surface. For an element on lower surface it becomes

xppz per unit span.

Page 168: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

168

If this is low integrated with respect to x between the limits x = 0 and x = c, the total

force Z is obtained as

dxppdxppZ

CC

00

upper surface lower surface

Using subscripts u and 1 for the upper and lower surface respectively

C

udxppppZ

0

1 (13.33)

Thus, given the variation of pressure p along the chord of the aerofoil it is possible to

calculate the lift. It is to be noted that a fictitious value of pressure inside the aerofoil is

assumed (p). It is assumed to be p for the purpose of non-dimensionalising. The actual

value is quite immaterial.

Equation (13.33) is easily put into coefficient form as follows.

Defining CZ by CZ =

SU

Z

..2

1 2

Considering unit span, the area S is equal to c and therefore

CZ =

cU

Z

..2

1 2

= dxpppp

cU

c

u.

..2

1

1

0

12

Now 1/ c(dx) = d(x/ c). This gives

CZ =

1

0

1 )/(. cxdCC ppu

( Since

pC

U

pp

2..2

1

by definition )

=

1

0

)/(. cxdC p (13.34)

A similar argument may be used to give the following relations

Page 169: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

169

δX = sin..)( spp

zs .sin..

leading finally to CX = cZ

cZ

p czdC

/

/

2

1

)/(. (13.35)

The pitching moment may also be calculated from the pressure distribution. For

simplicity, it will be found about the origin of Ox and Oz axes.

δZ = xpppp u ..)(1 per unit span and therefore the contribution to the

pitching moment due to this element of Z-force is

xdppppMuEL 1..

when the total pitching moment due to z-force is

cxdcxCCC ppuELMZ

1

0

1..

1

0

cxdcxC p (13.36)

since, 222

2

1

2

1cU

M

cU

MCM

and S = c.

Similarly, the contribution to CM due to the X-force may be obtained as

czdczCC

CZ

CZ

pELMX 2

1

... (13.37)

Four graphs can now be plotted giving Cp Vs x/c, Cp vs z/c, Cp.(x/c) vs x/c and

Cp.(z/c) vs z/c and the integrals given by eqs. (13.20), (13.21), (13.22) and (13.23) may

be graphically evaluated.

The force coefficients CX and CZ are parallel and perpendicular to the chord line, whereas

the more usual coefficients CL and CD are referred to the air direction. The conversion

from one pair to the other may performed by reference to Fig. 13.5, in which CR, the

coefficient of resultant aerodynamic force, acts at an angle to CZ. CR is resultant to both

of CX and CZ , and of CL and CD, and therefore from Fig. 13.5.

Page 170: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

170

Figure 13.5 Conversion of axes

sinsincoscos)cos( RRRL CCCC

Now, ZR CC cos and XR CC sin

Therefore,

sincos XZL CCC (13.38)

Similarly,

)sin( RD CC

cossin XZ CC (13.39)

The total pitching moment coefficient is

........ ELMXELMZELM CCC (13.40)

The experimental values of CL and CM L.E. can be compared with the solutions of

linearised theory, e.g., equations (13. ) and (13. ). The agreement between two results

is expected to be good despite the approximations of linearised theory. This is because in

deriving equations (13. ) and (13. ), both the effects due thickness and viscosity are

neglected and these effects tend to cancel each other. The thickness effect tends to

increase the CL while the effects due to viscosity tends to decrease the CL. In wind tunnel

testing, both the effects are present and they cancel each other. Lastly, it is to be noted

that CD can not be obtained by potential flow theory.

Page 171: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

171

13.6.2 Location of Aerodynamic centre :

Aerodynamic centre is, by definition, the point on the chord of an aerofoil for which CM

is virtually constant, independent of the lift coefficient, i.e.,

0... caM

L

CdC

d (13.41)

Taking moment about the leading edge gives

accaEL xDLMM sincos..

or, sincos.... DLaccMaEML CCcxCC

Since CD is usually much less than CL

cxCCC acLcaMEML .... (assuming cos = 1)

Differentiating with respect to CL gives

c

xC

dC

dC

dC

d ac

caM

L

ELM

L

....

By definition of aerodynamic center, ,0... L

caM

dC

dC

Therefore, ... ELm

L

ac CdC

d

c

x (13.42)

Aerodynamic center can now be calculated from equation (13.28) as the slope of CM L.E.

vs CL curve.

13.6.3 Location of Centre of Pressure :

The center of pressure is, by definition, the point on the aerofoil section where pitching

moment is zero, i.e., the aerodynamic forces acting on the aerofoil section may be

represented by the lift and drag alone acting on the point.

Unlike aerodynamic center (which is a fixed point lying within the profile), the center of

pressure moves with change of lift coefficient and is not necessarily within the aerofoil

profile.

From Fig. 13.6 ML.E can be written as

cpEL xDLM sincos..

Page 172: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

172

Figure 13.6 Location of center of pressure

Dividing by 22

2

1cU gives

cxCCC cpDLELM sincos...

Assuming CD << CL and cos = 1,

cxCC cpLELM ...

or, L

ELMcp

C

C

c

x... (13.43)

13.7 Wind Tunnel Testing :

The model is of span 61 cm and it extends from wall to wall (so that the flow is two-

dimensional). At the center section, pressure holes are made at 29 Points (Fig. 13.7)

round the aerofoil contour. These are connected to the multi-tube manometer.

Page 173: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

173

Figure 13.7 Experimental model

Tables can now be made for Cp distribution for multiple number of angles of incidences,

50, 10

0, 15

0 and 20

0. This range will cover the stall. Tables, for 0

0 and 10

0 incidences,

giving results of exact numerical method, are shown

Page 174: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

174

Table 13.1 : Flow at 00 incidence

Tapping

points

x/c z/c hLS

cm

U

m/s

h

Cp

Experime-

ntal

Cp

Linearised

theory

Cp

Exact

theory

1 0.0 1.0

2,27 .015 -.054

3,28 .03 -.271

4,27 6 -.375

5,26 .09 -.406

6,25 .15 -.41

7,24 .2 -.383

8,23 .3 -.340

9,22 .4 -.291

10,21 .6 -.160

11,20 .8 -.049

12,19 .9 +.031

13,18 .95 +.101

14,17 .975 .161

15,16 .99 .28

Page 175: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

175

Table 13.2 : Flow at 100 incidence :

Tapping

points

x/c z/c hLS

cm

U

m/s

h

Cp

Experime-ntal

Cp-Linearised

theory

Cp Exact

theory

1 .0 -5.05

2 .015 -3.65

3 .03 -2.70

4 .06 -2.21

5 .09 -1.74

6 .15 -1.63

7 .2 -1.09

8 .3 -.75

9 .4 -.48

10 .6 -.182

11 .8 -.005

12 .9 +.007

13 .95 +.152

14 .975 +.652

15 .99 +.68

16 .99 +.22

17 .975 +.19

18 .95 +.153

19 .9 +.142

20 .8 +.16

21 .6 +.22

22 .4 +.305

23 .3 +.402

24 .2 +.504

25 .15 +.722

26 .09 +.86

27 .06 +.93

28 .03 +.810

29 .015 +.810

Page 176: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

176

Graphs can now be plotted for Cp vs x/c for all values of angles of incidence showing

comparison of numerical solution by panel method with experimental results. Difference

is again due to effects of viscosity.

Overall aerodynamic characteristics can now be calculated using linearised theory and

experimental values and shown as in Table 13.3.

Table 13.3 : Overall aerodynamic characteristics

Linearised Theory Experimental Values

CL CM1/4 C xac xcp CL CM1/4 C CD xac xcp

00

50

100

150

200

Page 177: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

177

Chapter 14

MEASUREMENT OF LAMINAR BOUNDARY LAYER

14.1 Introduction :

It is well established by experiment that when a fluid moves over a solid surface there is

no slip at the surface. The fluid in immediate contact with the surface is at rest relative to

the surface. The relative velocity increases from zero at the surface to the velocity in the

free stream through a layer of fluid which is called the boundary layer.

Figure 14.1 General characteristics of boundary layer over a flat plate

Steady flow over a smooth flat plate is shown in Fig. 14.1 where the streaming velocity

U is constant over the length of plate. It is found that the thickness of the boundary layer

grows along the length of the plate as indicated on the figure. The motion in the boundary

layer is laminar at the start, but if the plate is sufficiently long, a transition to turbulence

is observed. This transition is produced by small disturbances which, beyond a certain

distance grow rapidly and merge to produce the apparently random fluctuations of

Page 178: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

178

velocity which are characteristics of turbulent motions. The parameter which

characterizes the position of transition is the Reynolds number Rx based on distance x

from the leading edge:

xURX

(14.1)

The nature of the process of transition depends on factors such as turbulence in the free

stream and surface roughness of the boundary. It is not possible to give a single value of

Rx at which transition will occur, but is usually found in the range 1 105 to 5 10

5.

The concept of boundary layer is a mathematical one, which divides the flow region in

two parts – one outside the boundary layer and other inside the boundary layer. The rate

of change of velocity with distance from the surface ( u/y ) is large in the boundary

layer, outside it is small. The viscous stress which is related to the velocity gradient

( = u/y ) is therefore large only in the boundary layer, elsewhere it is small.

Consequently, flow inside the boundary layer is highly viscous whereas the flow outside

it can be treated as inviscid. The governing equation of flow outside the boundary layer is

therefore Laplace’s equation while that for inside the boundary layer is the Navier- stokes

equation.

However in studying the boundary layer flow, Navier Stokes equation is not solved.

Using an ‘order of magnitude’ study Prandtl has simplified the equation to what is known

as ‘Boundary Layer Equation’. Either the boundary layer equation or an integrated form

of this equation, known as von karman’s Momentum integral equation is used for

obtaining boundary layer characteristics.

In boundary layer calculation interest is rarely in the calculation of velocity profiles or the

thickness of boundary layer. The interest is often limited to calculating certain boundary

layer parameters e.g., displacements thickness , momentum thickness , shape factor H,

local and overall skin friction coefficients ( Cf and CF ).

14.2 Boundary Layer Parameters :

14.2.1 Displacement thickness () :

Page 179: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

179

A little consideration will show that the boundary layer thickness , shown in Fig. 14.1 as

the thickness where the velocity reaches the free stream value is not a entirely satisfactory

concept. The velocity in the boundary layer increases towards U in an asymptotic

manner, so that distance y at which the velocity may be considered to have reached U

will depend upon the accuracy of the measurement. A much more useful concept of

thickness is the so called displacement thickness . This is defined as the thickness by

which fluid outside the layer is displaced away from the boundary by the existence of the

layer, as indicated schematically in Fig. 14.2, by the stream line approaching B. In Fig.

14.2 the distribution of velocity u within the layer is shown as a function of distance y

from the boundary as the curve OA. If there were no boundary layer the free stream

velocity U would persist right down to the boundary as shown by the line CA. The

reduction volume flow rate (per unit width normal to the diagram) due to reduction of

velocity in the boundary layer is therefore

h

dyuUQ0

(14.2)

Figure 14.2 Velocity distribution and displacement thickness of boundary layer

Which is the shaded area OAC in the figure, the dimension h being chosen so that u = U

for any value of y greater than h. if the volume flow rate is now considered to be restored

by displacement of the streamline at AA away from the surface to a position BB through

a distance , the volume flow rate between AA and BB is also Q and this is seen to be

Page 180: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

180

Q = U (14.3)

In the other words, flow over a solid surface having a boundary layer of thickness , is

equivalent to flow with no boundary layer over a solid surface of thickness (Fig. 14.3).

Equating the results of equation (14.2) and (14.3) gives

hh

dyU

udyuU

U00

11

Figure 14.3 Mass defects due to boundary layer

Now h is any arbitrary value which satisfies the condition

u = U

or, 1 – u/U = 0

for all values of y greater than h. the value of h may therefore be increased indefinitely

without affecting the value of integral. So h may be allowed to increase towards infinity,

viz h and the result obtained is

dyUu

0

1 (14.4)

in he practical measurement of from a measured velocity distribution the infinite upper

limit presents no difficulty.

14.2.2 Other parameters :

Page 181: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

181

Other parameters are developed by considering momentum effects within the boundary

layer. A control volume of length x, height h (greater than boundary layer thickness )

and unit thickness normal to the plane of diagrams as shown in Fig. 14.4 is considered.

Figure 14.4 Mass and momentum flux in boundary layer

The rate of mass inflow is m at the left hand and the rate of mass outflow at the right

hand end is xdxmdm . Consideration of continuity then shows the outflow through

the upper surface to be - xdxmd . The momentum equation may now be written.

The net rate of flux of x-component of momentum M from the control volume is the

sum of

xdxMdM at the right hand end

- M at the left hand end

and xdxmdU at the upper surface

if the surface shear stress is w acting in the direction shown in the diagram, the

momentum equation is then

xdxMdUMxdxMdMxw

This may be simplified to give

Page 182: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

182

dxMddxmdUw

or, MmUdx

dw

(14.5)

Now

h

udym0

and

h

dyuM0

2

Substituting in Eq. (14.5) gives

h

w dyuuUdx

d

0

2

or,

h

w dyU

u

U

u

dx

dU

0

2 1

Since u = U for all values of y greater than h, the arbitrary upper limit may be replaced

by infinity, giving

0

2 1 dyU

u

U

u

dx

dUw (14.6)

It is convenient to express w in dimensions form of local skin friction coefficient Cf as

2

2

1

U

C wf

(14.7)

Eq. (14.6) then becomes

0

12 dyU

u

U

u

dx

dC f (14.8)

The momentum thickness of he boundary layer, , may be defined, based on the

momentum defect in the boundary layer as

dyU

u

U

u

0

1 (14.9)

Equation (14.8) then gives local skin friction coefficient as

dxdc f 2 (14.10)

The total skin friction force per unit width of a plate of length L is

Page 183: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

183

L

wf dxD0

L

f dxcU0

2

2

1 [from eq. (14.7) ]

dxdx

dU

L

0

2 22

1

Taking = 0 at x = 0 and writing L as the momentum thickness at distance L from the

leading edge Df can be obtained as

Lf UD 22

1 2

(14.11)

The skin friction force Df is now written in terms of dimensionless overall skin friction

coefficient CF where

LU

DC

f

F2

2

1

L

L2 (14.12)

This equation gives the overall skin friction coefficient on a flat plate very simply in

terms of the momentum thickness at the trailing edge and the length of the plate.

It is frequently useful to refer to the ratio of displacement thickness to momentum

thickness and this is called the shape factor H :

H = / (14.13)

All the boundary layer parameters described above are to be measured and compared

with the theoretical solutions for three cases :

a) Laminar boundary layer in zero pressure gradient

b) Laminar boundary layer in favourable pressure gradient

c) Laminar boundary layer in adverse pressure gradient

14.3 Laminar Boundary Layer in Zero Pressure Gradient

14.3.1 Theoretical calculation

Page 184: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

184

All the boundary layer parameters can be obtained from the solution of momentum

Integral equation which is given as

2

21

U

Hdx

dU

Udx

d w

(14.14)

For the case of a flat plate at zero incidence 0 dxUd and the momentum integral

equation is simply

2

udx

d w

(14.15)

An approximate calculation of boundary layer equations is now possible by assuming any

velocity profile (linear, cubic etc.) in the boundary layer. Exact solution for this problem

using the condition of similarity has been obtained by Blasius. The different solutions are

given below in tabular form :

Table 14.1 : Solutions of boundary layer characteristics

Form of

u / U

/ x / x / x Cf / x CF / 2 H

Linear

y / XR

464.3

XR

732.1

XR

577.0

XR

577.0

R

155.1

3.00

Cubic

3

2

1

2

3

yy

XR

64.4

XR

740.1

XR

646.0

XR

646.0

R

292.1

2.70

Exact

Blasius

solution

-- XR

721.1

XR

664.0

XR

644.0

R

328.1

2.59

14.3.2 Wind Tunnel Testing :

Fig. 14.5 shows the arrangement of test section attached to the outlet of the contraction of

the air flow bench. A flat plate is placed at mid height in the section with a sharpened

edge facing the oncoming flow. One side of the plate is smooth and other is rough so that

by turning plate over, results may be obtained on both types of surface. The length of the

flat plate is 0.265 m and boundary layer can be studied at four stations.

Page 185: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

185

A fine pitot tube may be traversed through the boundary layer at a particular station (x) of

the plate. The end of the tube is flattened to that it presents a narrow slit opening to the

flow. The traversing mechanism is spring loaded to prevent backlash and a micrometer

reading is used to indicate the displacement of the pitot tube. The thickness of tube (2t) is

0.40 mm. The setting of micrometer can be adjusted by assuming displacement tube 0.20

mm when it touches the surface.

Figure 14.5 Arrangement of test section

An experimental study can now be undertaken to obtain the edge of the boundary layer

on a flat plate and measure the boundary layer parameters experimentally.

To obtain the edge of boundary layer, the pitot tube is set at about 10 mm distance from

the surface. The difference in total pressure P0 and the static pressure p should be of the

order of 61 N/m2, which will give a uniform speed ( U ) of about 10 m/s. At this speed,

the boundary layer will (possibly) remain laminar throughout. Reading of the total

pressure P measured by the Pitot tube are then observed over a range of setting of

micrometer as the tube is traversed towards the plate. At first the reading will be

substantially constant (P0), indicating that the traverse has started in the free stream; if

Page 186: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

186

this is not the case, measurement may be started with an initial setting further from the

plate. As the pitot tube readings begins to fall ( P< P0 ) indicating that the pitot tube has

entered the boundary layer, the micrometer setting is recorded. This setting indicates of

the boundary. A table can now be set for boundary layer thickness at four stations.

Table 14.2: Boundary layer thickness

No. Station

(x) m

P0

N/m2

p

N/m2

2

2

1U

N/m2

U

m/s

RX Micrometer

Reading

mm

1.

2.

3.

4. .265

Figure 14.6 Development of boundary layer in downstream direction

Edge of the boundary layer can now be obtained by plotting x vs (Fig. 14.6). To

measure the boundary layer parameters, attempt may now be made to find out the

velocity profile, u(y) within the boundary layer at each of these four stations. This can be

found by traversing the pitot tube through the boundary layer till it touches the surface.

Page 187: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

187

Since the pitot-tube has certain thickness (2t = 0.40 mm), it can not measure pressure (P)

exactly at the surface but at 0.2 mm away from the surface.

Values of u / U are found from

pP

pP

U

u

0

where P = total pressure measured by the pitot-tube

P0 = total pressure in the air – box

p = static pressure in the air – box

Table 14.3 : Velocity profile (Stations : 1, 2, 3, 4 )

Station

(x) m

P0 p U

pP

pP

0

Micrometer

reading mm

(y)

mm

u / U 1- u / U

Graphs can now be plotted for u / U vs y and u / U (1- u / U ) vs y as shown in Fig.

14.7.

Page 188: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

188

Figure 14.7 Velocity profile in boundary layer

The appropriate areas under the curves can be measured by planimeter, which will give

and and in turn H (

/ ) and Cf . These experimental results (,

, , H, Cf) can

now be compared (as shown in Table 14.4) with the theoretical solutions given in the

Table 14.1. This procedure will be repeated for other stations. Measurement of at the

last station (x = .265 m) will yield overall skin friction CF (= 2L / L).

Table 14.4 : Comparison of boundary layer parameters (Stations : 1, 2, 3, 4)

Cf CF /2 H

Linear

Cubic

Experimental

The entire procedure can now be repeated for the rough surface (by turning over the

smooth surface) and effect of roughness on boundary layer growth may be studied.

Roughness of plate serves to increase the rate of growth of boundary layer.

14.4 Laminar Boundary Layer in Favourable Pressure Gradient :

14.4.1 Theoretical Calculations :

Page 189: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

189

The preceding section is related to boundary layer development along a smooth flat plate

with uniform flow in the free stream, i.e., in conditions of zero pressure gradient along

the plate. If the free stream is accelerating, substantial changes takes place in the

boundary layer development.

If the flow accelerates, by Bernoulli’s theory, pressure falls in the direction of flow. From

Bernoulli’s theory

2

02

1 UpP

Differentiating with respect to x gives

020

dx

dUU

dx

dp

dx

dP

or, dx

dUU

dx

dP

2 (14.16)

The failing pressure in the direction of flow is considered to be favourable since it does

not try to obstruct the motion (and the flow never separates). However, the boundary

layer under this favourable (negative) pressure gradient grows less rapidly than in zero

pressure gradient and transition to turbulence is inhibited.

The governing equation of boundary layer flow is the so-called momentum integral

equation expressed in the form

2

1

1

1

21

UH

dx

dU

Udx

d w

(14.17)

In stead of U, U1 is used to show that free stream velocity changes with x.

For the case of zero pressure gradient the second term vanishes (since d U1/dx is zero).

For this case exact solution (Blasius solution) is available. However no exact solution

exists for the case of non-zero pressure gradient. This has led to the development of

approximate methods. Usually such approximate methods have been developed with the

limited objective of predicting reliable over-all characteristics of the boundary layer, e.g.

momentum thickness, displacement thickness etc., rather than details of boundary layer

flow (i.e. velocity profile in the boundary layer). The momentum integral equation,

equation (14.17) provides the basis for such methods. However, assumptions are made in

solving this equation. All these methods (i.e., Pohlhausen’s method, Thwaite’s method,

Page 190: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

190

Young’s method) are based on the simplifying assumption that laminar boundary layer

velocity profiles can be regarded as a uni-parametric family. The assumption is

reasonably valid when external pressure gradient is favourable or weakly adverse but

when the gradient is strongly adverse this assumption losses validity and these methods

fail.

For favourable or a weak adverse pressure gradient, Thwaites method predicts the

momentum thickness as

dxUU

X

X

X

1

0

5

1

1

6

1

1

2 45.0 (14.18)

The suffix x1 indicates that the quantities are evaluated at x = x1.

14.4.2 Wind Tunnel Testing :

In the experimental set-up, liners can be placed on the walls of the working section to

produce the accelerating flow (Fig. 14.8) along the length of the plate. The thickness of

the liners is 2.5 mm at the beginning and 15 mm at the end and the length is about 22 cm.

The experimental determination of the boundary layer parameters can now be made with

the liners fitted to get the characteristics of accelerating flow. The procedure is the same

as described before and is not presented here.

Page 191: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

191

Figure 14.8 Accelerating flow by use of liners

The boundary layer parameters determined experimentally can be compared with the

solutions obtained by Thwaites method. To obtain the parameters by Thwaits method it is

necessary to calculate U1. This can be done in the following way.

If the thickness of linear is assumed to linearly increasing, at any station x, the thickness

is

xt

220

5.2155.2

The liners reduce the effective span by 2t.

The area of the clear jet is 58 mm 100 mm and the area of effective jet with liners

attached is

58 mm

x

220

5.2155.22100

From equation of continuity, the free stream speed U1 then can be obtained as

U1 =

xU

1136.095

100 (14.19)

Where x is in mm.

Page 192: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

192

Inserting equation (14.19) in equation (14.18), the momentum thickness can now be

obtained by Thwaites method at any station x1 for the accelerating fluid.

14.5 Laminar Boundary Layer in Adverse Pressure Gradient :

For a decelerating free stream the reverse effects are observed. The boundary layer grows

more rapidly and the shape factor (H) increases in the downstream direction. The

pressure rises in the direction of flow and this pressure rise tends to retard the fluid in the

boundary layer more severely than in the main stream since it (boundary layer) is moving

less quickly and the flow separates. Due to the same reason (i.e. for having less energy)

laminar boundary layer separates earlier than the turbulent boundary layer. In turbulent

boundary layer there is mixing of flow (and energy) between the boundary layer and the

free stream. Energy diffuses from the free stream through the outer part of the boundary

layer down towards the surface to maintain the forward movement against the rising

pressure. However, if the pressure gradients are sufficiently steep, the diffusion is

insufficient to sustain the forward movement and the flow along the surface reverses

forcing the main stream to separate. It is this separation, or stall as it is sometimes called

which leads to the main component of drag on bluff bodies and to the collapse of lift

force on an aerofoil when the angle of incidence is very high.

In the experimental set-up, decelerating flow can be produced by simply reversing the

liners. The procedure of measuring the boundary layer parameters is the same as

described before for zero pressure gradient case and is not presented here.

Finally, the entire experimental results can be presented for various cases as shown in

Table 14.5.

Page 193: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

193

Table 14.5 : Boundary layer Characteristics

Smooth Plate Rough Plate

Zero

pressure

gradient

Favourable

pressure

gradient

Adverse

pressure

gradient

Zero

pressure

gradient

Favourable

pressure

gradient

Adverse

pressure

gradient

H

Page 194: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

194

Chapter 15

MEASUREMENT OF TURBULENT BOUNDARY LAYER

15.1 Introduction :

It is stated earlier that the case with which the laminar flow in a boundary layer changes

to turbulence is dependent on Reynolds number. However, proper understanding of the

physical mechanism of transition to turbulent flow is not yet achieved despite much

efforts devoted to this problem. It would be seen from experimental evidence that the

onset of turbulence requires (firstly) the presence of disturbances of some definite size

and (secondly) the Reynolds number must be sufficiently high. In the absence of

extraneous sources of such disturbances, e.g. external turbulence or surface imperfections

which shed eddies into the flow, they may be the result of amplification of small

disturbances in conditions of instability in the laminar boundary layer. Where conditions

are such as to favour instability e.g. adverse pressure gradient, surface imperfections,

external turbulence, high Reynolds number etc., transition take place earlier and

transition region is also short. Likewise, in favourable pressure e gradient etc., either

transition will not take place at all or else will take place gradually.

15.2 Structure of Turbulent Boundary Layer :

The structure of turbulent boundary layer is as shown in Fig. 15.1. The turbulent

boundary layer can be divided into three regions : outer region, inner region and the

laminar sub-layer. Over the outer part of the layer there is a region predominantly large

scale eddies. In this region, the turbulence is not continuous but intermittent. This region

extends from 1.2 down to 0.46, where is the boundary layer thickness. The

intermittent nature of eddy formation in this region and the large size of eddies, which are

of the order of , result in the instantaneous edge of the boundary layer.

Page 195: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

195

Figure 15.1 Structure of turbulence boundary layer

This region, referred to as outer region is one of the relatively uniform mean velocity. It

is also a region of relatively low shear stress.

Below this region of large scale intermittent eddies is the fully turbulent region (the inner

region) extending from about 0.4 down to the laminar sublayer. In this region the shear

stress is dominated by the turbulent contribution (Reynolds stress or shear stress

vu ), which is much greater than the viscous stress (u /y).

Below this inner region is the laminar sub-layer. This laminar sub-layer is a very narrow

region of flow adjacent to the wall. Turbulent fluctuations and hence Reynolds stress

become small in this region. The dominant shear stress is purely viscous one, (u /y),

which is constant in the sub-layer.

The governing equation of turbulent boundary layer flow is the momentum integral

equation and for the case of flow over a flat plate at zero incidence (i.e. zero pressure

gradient) this equation can be written as

2

Udx

d W

(15.1)

for the case of laminar boundary layer flow, this equation was solved by assuming a

velocity profile (linear, cubic etc.) in the boundary layer. For the case of turbulent

Page 196: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

196

boundary layer, two types of velocity profiles are usually assumed, the so-called ‘Log’

law relations and ‘power’ law relations.

15.3 Log Law Relations :

According to this law, the velocity profile in the boundary layer is described by a

logarithmic expression. Three expressions are used for the three regions of the boundary

layer structure.

The velocity profile in the laminar sub-layer is given by

yu

u

u (15.2)

It is suggested that the laminar sub-layer is in the region defined by

8.71 yu (the edge of the laminar sub-layer is at y = y1)

For inner region, the inner velocity law has been developed by Prandtl based on mixing

length theory. The inner velocity law can be written as

Byu

Au

u

ln (15.3)

where A and B are constants given by A = 2.5 and B = 5.5 and u is the friction velocity

defined as

Wu

The above equation (15.3) is found to be reasonably valid for the outer region also. In

such case, to avoid any difficulty that may arise from u tending to minus infinity as y

tends to zero, a slightly modified form is used for the outer region

yuCA

u

u1ln (15.4)

where C is a constant (C 9.0).

However, in view of the wide applicability of equation (15.3) von Karman has suggested

that full boundary layer profile (except for laminar sub-layer) be given as

yyu

Au

u

10log

Page 197: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

197

A simplified form of the above expression is obtained by simply assuming a turbulent

boundary layer profile of the logarithmic type

Byu

Au

u

10log (15.5)

where A and B are constants (A = 2.5ln10, B = 5.5).

For purpose of comparison with experimental data, the velocity distribution in the

turbulent boundary layer may be assumed as

By

Au

u

10log (15.6)

15.4 Power Law Relations :

It is experimentally found that the velocity distribution measured in pipes can be given by

nayU

u 1

1

(15.7)

where U1 is velocity on the pipe axis, y is the distance from the wall, a is the radius and n

is the number which depends on Reynolds number.

For turbulent boundary layer over a flat plate, a power law of the type represented by eq.

(15.7) can be made consistent with the inner region velocity law, eq. (15.2) by writing

nyu

Cu

u1

1

(15.8)

where C1 is a constant, whose value, like that of n, depends on the Reynolds number. The

following table lists the values of C1 and n for various values of Reynolds number for

flow in pipes (also valid for flow over a flat plate) :

n C1 Re

7 8.74 5.5 104

8 9.71 2.4 105

9 10.60 6.3 105

10 11.50 1.6 105

Page 198: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

198

It may be easily verified that for a power law with index 1/n the displacement and

momentum thickness of the boundary layer on a flat plate are given by

n

nH

nn

n

n

2

21

1

1

(15.9)

Like the velocity distribution law, eq. (15.3), these power laws do not fit the laminar sub-

layer nor do they satisfy the condition that u/y = 0 at the outer edge of boundary layer.

Using eq. (15.8), velocity at the edge can be obtained as

nU

Cu

U1

1

(15.10)

Eqs. (15.8) and (15.10) gives

1

1

11

n

n

n UC

u

U

(15.11)

The momentum integral equation, eq. (15.1) can now be solved using the above velocity

distribution.

The momentum integral equation is

2

2

2

U

u

Udx

d W

Substituting for from eq. (15.9) and U u from eq. (15.10) in the momentum integral

equation gives an equation in .

1

2

1

2

121

n

n

n UC

dx

d

nn

n

On integration (taking = 0 at x = 0)

32

2

n

XRCx

(15.12)

Page 199: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

199

where 3

1

12

12

32

n

n

nnC

n

nnC

The local skin friction coefficient is

)3(2

322

22

n

X

w

f RCU

u

Uc

(15.13)

where )1(2

2

)1(2

13 2

nnn

CCC

3222 nnnC

The momentum thickness is given by

)3(2

4

n

XRCx

(15.14)

where 24

21C

nn

nC

The displacement thickness is given by

)3(2

4

2

n

XRCn

n

xH

(15.15)

The overall skin friction coefficient for both sides of the flat is

c

n

fF RCn

ndxCcC

0

32

31

312

3

2

42

nRC (15.16)

where

cUR

For n = 7 and C1 = 8.74 this gives

5/1

5/1

51

0722.0

0576.0

37.0

RC

RC

Rx

F

Xf

X

(15.17)

15.5 Wind Tunnel Testing :

The first apart of the experiment is to check whether the experimental observation fits the

expression for velocity profile, eq. (15.6) and then to obtain values of A and B. This work

should be carried at a uniform speed (U) of about 30 m/s. Velocity profile at any station

Page 200: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

200

(except possibly the first station where the flow may be laminar) by simply traversing the

pitot-tube. The details of the procedure is outlined in Experiment. No. 14 and are not

repeated here. A table can be made giving u/ U against y. is, as before, taken as that

value of y for which pitot pressure P equals P0 .

A graph may be plotted for u / U vs log10(y/) and values of the constants A and B can

be obtained. This experiment can be repeated for other stations also.

Table 15.1 : Velocity profile (Stations : 1, 2, 3, 4)

Station P0

N/m2

p

N/m2

Pitot

pressure

pP

pP

U

u

0

Micrometer

reading

y / log10(y/)

The second part of the experimental work is to obtain the different boundary layer

characteristics experimentally by procedure outlined in Experiment No. 14. u/U and

u/U (1- u/ U) may be plotted against y /. On the first graph 1/7 th power law profile

may also be plotted corresponding to

7

1

y

U

uto check the validity of the power law relations.

The appropriate areas under these curves will give and and hence H. The

experimental boundary layer parameters can be compared with theoretical results

obtained with power law relations using n = 7 as shown in Table 15.2.

Table 15.2 : Comparison of boundary layer parameters

Station Experimental Theoretical(1/7–th power law)

H Cf CF

H Cf CF

1

2

3

4

Page 201: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

201

The values of and using 1/7 power law are usually noticeably higher than the

experimental values. This indicates that over initial part of the length of the surface the

boundary layer is laminar.

The third part of the experimental work is to observe the effect of pressure gradient on

the growth of the boundary layer. This can be done by using the liners to provide

accelerating and decelerating flow. The boundary layer is supposed to grow appreciably

thicker in the rising pressure gradient.

The fourth and final part of the work is to study the effects of roughness by using the

rough side of the plate. The roughness of surface serves to increase the rate of growth of

boundary layer.

All the experimental results can be presented and can be shown in tabular form for the

last station (L = 0.265m) :

Table : U = ; Re = U c/ =

Station Smooth surface Rough surface

L=0.265 m Zero

pressure

gradient

Favourable

pressure

gradient

Adverse

pressure

gradient

Zero

pressure

gradient

Favourable

pressure

gradient

Adverse

pressure

gradient

H

Cf

CF

Page 202: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

202

Chapter 16

FLOW ABOUT RECTANGULAR AND SWEPT WINGS

16.1 Introduction :

The characteristics of flow about a three-dimensional wing of finite span effects from

that about a wing of infinite span in a number of ways. For the flow about a wing of

infinite span, the flow characteristics do not change in spanwise direction and hence the

flow is essentially two-dimensional. However, this is not the case for a wing of finite

span.

Let the lift or more precisely, circulation at the center section of wing (station 1) be 1 .

now, the air can not sustain any load and therefore load and the circulation at the wing

tips, must be zero. Therefore, there must be a variation of circulation (from 1 at center

section to zero at the tip) along the span, whatever may be the form of variation. If

therefore, 1 be the circulation at station 1, then the circulation at any other station 2 will

be 2 which is different from 1 . This difference in circulation ( 2 -1) must therefore

appear as vorticity shed in wake (Fig. 16.1).

This shedding of vorticity in the wake is the most important characteristics of three

dimensional flow. It may be worth noting that shedding of vorticity does not take place in

two dimensional flow except for unsteady cases. In general, the shedding is continuous as

spanwise circulation varies continuously from center section to tips. However, intensity

of shed vorticity become more at the neighborhood of tips. Also, these shed vortices roll

up at the tips. This is why shed vorticity along the trailing edge is so often referred to as

the ‘tip vortices’.

Page 203: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

203

Figure 16.1 Two and three dimensional flow characteristics

The flow at any section of a three-dimensional wing differs from the flow which would

occur round the section of a two-dimensional wing owing to the influence of the trailing

vortex system. The velocity induced by this vortex system is normal to the span of the

wing and to the direction of motion and is directed downwards is general. The normal

induced velocity at a point on the wing will be denoted w (downwash). It has two very

important consequences which alter the aerodynamic characteristics of three dimensional

wings.

Firstly, the induced velocity w effectively reduces the angle of incidence by a small angle

w/ U (Fig. 16.2). If is the geometric angle of incidence of the wing, the effective

angle of incidence will be

U

we (16.1)

In other words, the wing center section then behaves the same as if it is part of an wing of

infinite span at an angle of incidence e and gives the lift coefficient at this angle of

incidence.

Page 204: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

204

Figure 16.2 Effects of downwash

Secondly, the lift force is, however, inclined backwards at an angle w/ U and therefore

gives a component in the direction of drag force. This component is called induced drag

since it is caused by the induced velocity of the trailing vortices. The induced drag is

LU

wDi

(16.2)

The total drag of the wing is obtained by adding the profile drag (boundary layer normal

pressure drag and skin fraction drag) and the induced drag. If the profile drag coefficient

is now written as CD0 and the induced drag coefficient as CDi, total drag coefficient of a

three-dimensional wing can be written as

DiDD CCC 0

LD CUwC 0 (16.3)

The governing equation of steady, incompressible, inviscid, irrotational flow about a

three-dimensional wing is the Laplace’s equation :

02

2

2

2

2

22

zyx

(16.4)

where is perturbation potential.

The boundary conditions are the same as for the two dimensional case :

i) flow at the wing surface must be tangential,

qn = 0 on wing surface (16.5)

iii) the perturbation velocities must tend to zero at infinity,

Page 205: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

205

u, v, w 0 at infinity (16.6)

16.2 Theory :

Various solutions of Laplace equation, equation (16.4), have been developed, which can

be broadly classified as

Solutions of Laplace’s equation

Approximate solution Exact solution

Linearised Theory

Analytic Numerical

(flow past a sphere)

Panel Method

The two-dimensional linearised theory have been extended to the three-dimensional flow.

Effects of thickness and camber are separated in exactly the same manner using small

perturbation assumption. The thickness effect gives the pressure distribution at zero lift

and camber effect (which includes incidence ) gives the lifting characteristics.

Weber, Holme and Hjelte developed approximate methods for the thickness problem

using the linearised boundary condition.

The classical theories which deal with camber and incidence effects are :

i) Prandtl’s lifting line theory (applicable for large aspect ratio rectangular wings)

ii) Jone’s slender wing theory (applicable for low aspect ratio delta wing)

iii) Multhopp’s lifting surface theory (applicable for wings of arbitrary planform).

iv) Faulkner’s vortex lattice theory (applicable for wings of arbitrary planform).

However, all these methods (apart from restriction with regards to planform size and

shape) suffer from the fact that they can predict only the overall forces and moments and

not the details of pressure (or velocity) distribution on the wing surface.

Numerically-exact numerical solutions were obtained later with the development of

‘Panel Methods’. These methods are capable of predicting pressure distribution also.

Page 206: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

206

In the present context, lifting line theory and lattice theory are presented for comparison

with experimental work involving measurement of overall forces and moments. Also,

pressure distribution obtained by a version of panel technique is quoted in the tables for

comparison with experimental pressure distribution.

16.3 Prandtl’s Lifting Line Theory :

In Prandtl’s lifting line theory the wing is replaced by a single line. The procedure is to

find normal induced velocity w and the effective angle of incidence e at each point of

the span to calculate the corresponding elementary lift and drag forces and finally to

integrate across the span of the wing. The first stage is therefore the determination pf the

normal induced velocity at a point on the span in terms of the strength of the trailing

vortices.

The circulation round the aerofoil varies across the span, being symmetrical about the

center and failing to zero at the tips. Between the points y and (y+dy) of the span of

aerofoil the circulation falls by –(d/dy) dy and hence a trailing vortex of this strength

springs from element dy of the span as shown in Fig. 16.3. There is therefore a sheet of

trailing vortices extending across the span of the wing and the normal induced velocity at

any point of the span must be obtained as the sum of the effects of all the trailing vortices

of this sheet. The normal velocity induced at any point (y1 ) of the wing is

S

Syy

dydy

d

yw1

14

1

(16.7)

Figure 16.3 Trailing vortex sheet

Page 207: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

207

Another equation is required connecting the circulation and the normal induced

velocity w.

The second equation is

UcCL2

1

Uac e02

1 (where a0 is the two-dimensional lift curve slope)

U

U

wca 0

2

1

wUca 02

1 (16.8)

For solution of circulation , Prandtl chooses the variation of across the span as

1

sin4 nAsU n (16.9)

Substitution of this form of in eqs. (16.7) and (16.8) gives

sinsinsin nnAn (where = a0c/8s) (16.10)

The solution of the fundamental equation, eq. (16.10), is obtained numerically. Once the

solution is obtained, the lift and induced drag are determined very simply in terms of

coefficients An of the series for the circulation.

The lift and induced drag coefficients are given by

1AACL (16.11)

21

LDi CA

C

(16.12)

where A is aspect ratio. is a small positive number given by .12

1

2

A

nAn

The total drag coefficient is given by (Fig. 16.4)

2

0

1LDD C

ACC

(16.13)

Page 208: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

208

Figure 16.4 Total drag coefficient

The lift curve slope for three dimensional wings can be given in terms of the slope for

two-dimensional wings as

Ad

dC

d

dC

d

dC

D

L

D

L

D

L

2

2

31

(16.14)

16.4 Vortex Lattice Method :

In vortex lattice method, wing chordal surface plane (z = 0) is divided into a large

number of quadrilateral panels as shown in Fig. 16.5. On each panel is placed a horse-

shoe vortex consisting of a bound vortex and two trailing vortices extending to infinity

downstream. The strength of horse-shoe vortex is assumed to be constant for a particular

panel but varies from panel to panel. The unknown horse-shoe vortex strength can be

obtained by satisfying the boundary condition of zero normal flow at collocation points.

Page 209: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

209

The collocation points are taken to be ¾ panel chordwise portion mid-way between

chordal lines.

The problem is to determine the strength of horse-shoe vortices i, i=1,….,NM. This is

done by satisfying boundary condition of zero normal flow at NM panel collocation

points. This results in a system of NM linear algebraic equations. In matrix form

UA iji (16.15)

where Aji is the influence coefficient matrix, i is the strength of the horse shoe vortex

strength on i – th panel and is the angle of incidence.

Figure 16.5 Vortex lattice model

The bound vortices only carry lift. Loading on each bound vortex is given by

12 yyUF iZ

Total lift can be obtained by summation of load carried by all panel as

MN

i

MN

i

iZL yyU

SU

F

SU

C1 1

1222

2

1

1

2

1

1

12

2yy

SUi (16.16)

Page 210: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

210

The pitching moment coefficient about any axis xm is given by

miimiZM xxyyScU

xxF

ScU

C 122

2

2

1

1

(16.17)

Sectional lift coefficient and spanwise loading can be obtained by similar numerical

integration.

16.5 Wind Tunnel Testing :

16.5.1 Measurement of pressure distribution :

The experimental work is conducted on a rectangular model of aspect ratio 2.4 having

NACA 0012 aerofoil section. 45 pressure holes are drilled on the wing surface (Fig. 16.6)

round the section at two spanwise stations (at 10% semi-span and at 90% semi-span).

Figure 16.6 NACA 0012 wing model

Page 211: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

211

Results can be obtained for angles of incidence of 00, 6

0, 15

0 and 20

0 . Exact numerical

solutions for two cases of = 00 and = 6

0 are given in the following tables for

comparison.

Table 16.1 : Pressure distribution at = 00 (10% semi-span)

Tapping

points

x/c z/c hLS

(cm)

U

m/s

h

(cm)

Cp (experimental) Cp (panel

method)

1

2,29

3,28

4,27

5,26

6,25

7,24

8,23

9,22

10,21

11,20

12,19

13,18

14,17

15,16

0

0.015

0.03

0.06

.09

.15

.2

.3

.4

.6

.8

.9

.95

.975

.99

1.0

-.044

-.25

-.35

-.312

-.262

-.150

-.035

+.03

+.09

+.148

+.26

1.0

-.01

-.219

Page 212: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

212

Table 16.2 : Pressure distribution at = 00 (90% semi-span)

Tapping

points

x/c z/c hLS

(cm)

U

m/s

h

(cm)

Cp

(experimental)

Cp (panel

method)

30

31,58

32,57

33,56

34,55

35,54

36,53

37,52

38,51

39,50

40,49

42,47

43,46

44,45

0

.015

.03

.06

.09

.15

.2

.3

.4

.6

.0

.95

.975

.99

1.0

-.01

-.219

-.314

-.334

-.322

-.288

-.23

-.19

-.11

-.028

+.072

+.11

+.24

Page 213: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

213

Table 16.3 : Pressure distribution at = 60

(10% semi-span)

Mapping points x/c z/c hLS U h Cp (experimental) Cp (exact theory)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

0

.015

.03

.06

.09

.15

.2

.3

.4

.6

.8

.9

.95

.975

.99

.99

.975

.95

.9

.8

.6

.4

.3

.2

.15

.09

.06

.03

.015

-

-1.396

-1.268

-1.1

-.932

-.782

-.685

-.535

-.42

-.223

-.074

+.016

+.098

+.166

.25

.27

+.19

+.13

+.065

+.01

-.056

-1.65

-1.08

-.078

-.029

.095

.21

.48

0.76

Page 214: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

214

Table 16.4 : Pressure distribution at = 60

(90% semi-span)

Mapping points x/c z/c hLS U h Cp (experimental) Cp (exact theory)

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

0

.015

.03

.06

.09

.5

.2

.3

.4

.6

.8

.9

.95

.975

.99

.99

.975

.95

.9

.8

.6

.4

.3

.2

.15

.09

.06

.03

.015

-

-.918

-.88

-.755

-.67

-.529

-.45

-.338

-.255

-.126

-.032

+.03

+.09

+.153

+.258

+.26

+.159

+.061

+.042

-.011

-.073

-.125

-.141

-.138

-.108

-.03

+.08

+.28

+.588

Page 215: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

215

Experimental pressure distribution may now be graphically plotted and compared with

the exact numerical solution given in the tables.

Sectional lift, drag and pitching moment coefficients can also be obtained at these two

spanwise stations (10% and 90%) by numerical or graphical integration of the pressure

distribution using the procedure outlined for two-dimensional case in Chapter 13. These

results can be presented in tabular form as shown below.

Table 16.5 : Sectional characteristics

Station Sectional CL Sectional CD Sectional pitching moment

CM L.E.

10% semi-span

90% semi-span

16.5.2 Measurement of overall forces and moments using balance :

The model chosen for this work is a rectangular one of aspect ratio 1.6 having the same

NACA 0012 aerofoil section. The procedure for measurement of forces and moments is

outlined in Chapter 9 and is not repeated here. It is advised that the 3-component balance

should be calibrated again since balance characteristics change from time to time.

The value of CL, CD, CM(1/4)C can be obtained over a range of incidence ( = 00, 5

0, 10

0,

150 and 20

0 ) to cover the stall. dCL /d and CLmax can be obtained from the above values.

CD can be plotted against C2

L (Fig. 16.4). CD0 is the value of drag coefficient obtained at

= 00. These results can then be compared with the two-dimensional results to observe

the difference between three dimensional and two dimensional cases (Table 16.6).

Table 16.6 : Comparison of 2D and 3D cases

2D 3D

CD CD CM(1/4)C

d

dCL CL CD CM.15c

d

dCL

Page 216: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

216

These experimental results can be compared with the solution obtained either by the

lifting line theory or the vortex lattice theory as shown in Table 16.7.

Table 16.7 : Comparison of experimental and numerical values :

Experimental Linearised/Vortex lattice theory

CD CD CM(1/4)C

d

dCL CL CD CM.15c

d

dCL

The whole experimental procedure can be repeated for a swept wing of aspect ratio

having 450 leading and trailing sweep. However, for this wing, linearised theory will fail

and comparison of experimental results can be made with vortex lattice theory.

Page 217: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

217

Chapter 17

FLOW ABOUT A SLENDER DELTA WING

17.1 Introduction :

The flow about a slender delta wing with sharp leading edge differs vastly from that

about a rectangular wing. Primarily, expressions for lift coefficient, drag coefficient,

wing lift-curve slope etc., are different for slender delta wings indicating different values

of lift and drag. Secondly, flow over slender delta wing begins to separate quite early at

small angle of incidence (as low as 30 as compared to 14

0 - 18

0 for rectangular wings).

The character of this flow separation is also entirely different from that on a rectangular

wing which causes stall. Because of the adverse pressure gradient, flow over a delta wing

of large sweep angle separates along the leading edges. This leading edge flow separation

results in an increase of lift rather than a decrease of lift as is the case for rectangular

wing at high angle of incidence.

Theories of slender wings with or without leading edge separation are described in the

following sections.

17.2 Slender Wings in Attached Flow :

For this case. The theoretical method was developed by Munk and later extended by

Jones. The basic idea of this theory (slender wing theory ) is that for a elongated wing at

a small angle of attack the flow pattern in any transverse plane, i.e. a plane substantially

normal to the main stream direction, approximate near the wing to that of two-

dimensional flow.

The governing equation of incompressible potential flow is the Laplace’s equation,

02

2

2

2

2

22

zyx

(17.1)

The slender wing theory, in its classical presentation, begins by neglecting the term

22 x in eq. (17.1) leaving the approximate equation

02

2

2

2

zy

(17.2)

Page 218: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

218

The justification for this approximation is, at least, intuitively the slender elongated form

of the wing under consideration. It seems clear that since the geometrical properties of

the wing vary only slowly in the x-direction, the derivative 22 x ,which is the rate of

change of the perturbation velocity in the same direction must also be small, at least in

the neighbourhood of wing.

Eq. (17.2) is exactly the equation for the perturbation potential in two-dimensional

incompressible flow, i.e., the flow pattern in any transverse plane normal to the

mainstream, is two-dimensional. Hence transformation techniques which are used for

solution of two-dimensional cases can be employed here.

Using a transformation of the type

xsZZ 222 (17.3)

where s(x) is the local semispan, (Fig. 17.1).

The solution is obtained as

21

22 yxsU (17.4)

Figure 17.1 Flow past slender delta wing

The loading or the pressure difference between upper and lower surface is given by

1PPup CCC

Page 219: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

219

dx

xds

yxs

xs )(

)(

4

2

122

(17.5)

For the case of a wing of triangular planform it follows from eq.(17.5) that the loading is

constant along any straight line (for example, along OA in Fig. 17.10 through the vertex.

This is because ds(x)/dx is constant for triangular planform and 22 )()( yxsxs is

constant for such a line. This is the essence of conical flow. The spanwise loading for

such low aspect ratio delta wings is always elliptic.

The lift coefficient of the wing of aspect ratio A is given by

2ACL (17.6)

Hence 2AddCL (17.7)

The induced drag coefficient is given by

21

LDi CA

C

(from eq. (16.12))

21LC

A ( = 0 since spanwise loading is elliptic)

2LC (17.8)

17.3 Slender Wings in Separated Flow :

At small angle of incidence the flow begins to separate and the equations (17.6), (17.7)

and (17.8) for lift, drag etc. remain no longer valid. The separation takes the form of a

vortex sheet which springs from each leading edge. Each sheet then rolls up into a

streamwise vortex some distance above the wing surface (Fig. 17.2) and the flow beneath

these vortices retains the full stream total head. Indeed, the vortices tend to increase the

flow velocity on the upper surface and in consequence they increase the lift above the

value to be expected without leading edge separation.

Page 220: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

220

Figure 17.2 Flow separation along leading edges

The problem of flow separation is essentially non-linear in which strength of the

separated vortices as well as their positions are unknown. The calculation procedure

should therefore be an iterative one. However, early workers have developed non-

iterative schemes by assuming positions of separation vortices.

Lift of a slender delta wing is given by Mangler as

2

22

ACL (17.9)

while the expression given by Weber is

2

3

22

ACL (17.10)

Later, attempt has been made to develop mathematical models incorporating the leading

edge separation by Brown and Michael, Mangler, Smith etc. They developed simplified

models in which the rolled up vortices are represented by a single pair of concentrated

vortices as shown in Fig. 17.3.

More accurate methods for this non-linear leading edge separation problem have been

developed later within the framework of vortex lattice theory as well as panel method by

a number of workers. These methods essentially make use of electronic computer for

computation.

Page 221: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

221

Figure 17.3 Simplified flow model

In recent years, attempts have been made to obtain the details of flow separation using

Euler and Navier-Stokes codes.

17.4 Wind Tunnel Testing :

17.4.1 Measurement of pressure distribution :

To obtain spanwise loading, 23 pressure holes are drilled on a delta wing model of aspect

ratio 1.0 at five chordwise station (Fig. 17.40 given by

RCx / .73, .786, .841, .90, .956

Page 222: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

222

Figure 17.4 Slender delta wing model

Loading at all these points can be measured and compared with theoretical solution given

by eq.(17.5). Theoretical and experimental load distribution can be given in tabular form

as shown in Table 17.1.

Also, for all chordwise stations, spanwise load variation can be obtained by plotting Cp vs

y/s(x).

Table 17.1 : Load distribution at = 20 (unseparated flow)

U =

Tapping

point

x/CR y/s(x) hLS h Cpu Cp1 Cp1

experimental

Cp

theoretical

(eq. 17.5)

1

2

-

23

Page 223: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

223

Experimental work for separated flow case is carried out on the same model having

aspect ratio 1.0 at moderate to large incidence. Loading distribution can be obtained at

these points and plotted against y/s(x) as shown in Fig. 17.5. This pressure distribution

shows peak around 90% semi-span because of the separated flow along the leading edge.

Figure 17.5 Spanwise load distribution

17.4.2 Measurement of overall forces and moments :

Using the 3-component balance, lift, drag and pitching moment can be obtained for the

same delta wing model of aspect ratio 1.0 covering a wide range of incidence upto 400 in

steps of 40. the experimental results can be plotted as CL, CD, CM vs. .

Experimental results can be compared with the empirical relations given by equations

(17.9) and (19.10). The liner lift given by equation (17.2) should also be superimposed on

this graph to indicate the additional non-linear lift due to leading edge flow separation at

moderate to high incidence.

Page 224: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

224

Chapter 18

FLOW ABOUT COMPOSITE WINGS

18.1 Introduction :

Aerodynamic characteristics of a wings of rectangular and slender delta planform have

been studied in the preceding experiments. Both the planforms have their advantages as

well as disadvantages. Rectangular wings show a high lift-curve slope (little less than

2) but suffer from a increase of drag and decrease of lift (stall) at high angle of attack

(around 180) due to separation of flow on the upper surface of the wing. Slender delta

wings, on the other hand, show a low lift –curve slope together with high lift-dependent

drag. However, such wings exhibit a leading edge separation even at moderate angle of

attack, a phenomenon, which helps in increasing the lift rather than decreasing it.

It is then immediately realized that considerable benefit may therefore be gained by a

composite planform. In such composite planforms, a vortex generating surface (i.e. a

slender wing with sharp leading edge) is placed ahead of a wing. Lifting capability is

significantly enhanced, particularly at moderate to high angles of attack. This is due to

favourable interaction between the leading edge separated flow on the front wing with the

flow on the mainwing. Because of this favourable interaction, separation from the main

wing surface is also delayed resulting in reduction of drag at a given angle of attack.

The surface used to generate the interacting vortex may take any of the several forms :

the most commonly used are the strake and the canard. The canard has the additional

advantage of providing an additional control surface. The aerodynamic characteristics of

such composite configurations are essentially chracterised by the combination of vortex

flows and the classical attached aerofoil flow on the same wing (rear wing). The main

advantage of the combined flow is observed in a dramatic extension of the lift curve

through the stall. The main disadvantage is the existence of the ‘free’ vortices quite close

to the main wing surface.

Page 225: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

225

18.2 Straked Configuration :

A strake is a thin sharp edged highly swept delta wing which is added at the leading edge

of the basic wing. Usually it is added to the inboard portion of a rounded edged delta (or

swept) wing (Fig. 18.1). It may be worth noting here that the configuration is called

cranked wing if the leading edge of the entire planform is rounded. On the other hand, if

the leading edge of the entire planform is sharp, it is called a double delta configuration.

Figure 18.1 Strake wing configuration

The remarkable feature of the straked wing is the dramatic extension of the lift curve

through the stall (Fig. 18.2) and indeed often the stall does no occur at all in the wind-

tunnel investigation. There is a little change in the lift-curve slope upto about 12 – 140

for wings with and without strakes. However, lift coefficient increases significantly

above this angle for the straked wing. This increase is not that simply obtained by adding

the nonlinear lift from the additional slender wing of the strake surface; there is obviously

considerable interaction taking place between the two lifting surfaces.

Page 226: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

226

Figure 18.2 Variation of lift with incidence

However, this benefit of increased lift coefficient of a straked wing is to be counter-

balanced against two adverse features. Firstly, the drag at low incidence is quite high.

Secondly, the increase of lift coefficient is usually accompanied by a decrease in static

longitudinal stability.

The theoretical solution of this problem involves calculation of separated flow along the

leading edge of the strake, calculation of attached flow on main wing surface and suitable

way of effecting the influence of separated flow on basic wing. While a number of

methods are available for calculating either the separated flow (on the stake) or attached

flow (on the basic wing), the main difficulty is to evaluate the effect of the vortex field

from the strake as it passes over the main wing. Simple approximate methods have been

developed based on the assumption that the separated vortices pass over the main wing

parallel to the basic wing planform. A more exact method for this non-linear flow

problem has been developed based on panel method by Rubbert.

Page 227: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

227

Th emodel chosen for experimental work is a double-delta wing planform of aspect ratio

1.34. The sweep angle of the strake is 770 (Fig. 18.3)

Figure 18.3 Strake wing model

To obtain spanwise pressure distribution at different chordwise stations, wing surface is

grooved in the spanwise direction. Thirty-four pressure holes are distributed on nine

chordwise positions given by

x/CR =0.19, 0.26, 0.33, 0.40, 0.473, 0.544, 0.61, 0.78, 0.88

where CR is the root-chord.

Load distribution (Cp) can be obtained at these points experimentally for various

incidence and plotted against y/s(x) where s(x) is the local semi-span (Fig. 18.4).

Page 228: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

228

To obtain the overall lift, drag and pitching moment coefficients, the three-component

balance can be used for the same model and can be plotted against angle of attack

.dCL/d can be obtained from the graph.

Figure 18.4 Spanwise load distribution

18.3 Canard Configuration :

Unlike in strake configuration, there is a horizontal gap between the front vortex

generating surface and the rear main wing, i.e. it is a two wing configuration. It is often

described as a tail-first configuration (Fig. 18.5).

Page 229: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

229

Figure 18.5 Canard wing model

The main advantages of canard configurations are observed in an enhancement of lifting

capability, particularly at high angles of attack, and in an extension of the lift curve

through the small compared to the canard-off case. This extension of the linear

characteristics is due to a delay of the bubble-type separation from the wing surface. This

results in a reduction of separation drag and an improved effectiveness of the aft located

control surface.

A significant disadvantage for canard configurations is associated with problem arising

from the presence of free vortices quite close to the configuration surface. This may pose

considerable difficulties particularly for the sideslipping motion due to the problem of

vortex breakdown at high angle of attack, which effectively puts an operational limit on

such configurations.

Theoretical models for canard configurations are not so common. The difficulty seems to

get the canard induced vortex field represented properly as it passes over the rear wing

since the strength, shape and position of separation vortices are all unknowns. However,

flow models using iterative scheme have been developed within the framework of vortex-

Page 230: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

230

lattice theory as well as panel method. Also, Euler and Navier-Stokes code have been

developed in recent years for this problems.

For wind tunnel testing of canard configuration, a model is chosen in which the basic

wing is a swept wing of aspect ratio 3.2 having a leading edge sweep of 29.30. The canard

is a delta wing of aspect ratio 1.0 (Fig. 18.5).

For pressure measurement 48 pressure holes are set on surface of the basic wing. These

holes are set along the 58% chord line of t he basic wing, being distributed along the

upper surface of the starboard wing and along the lower surface of the port wing.

Pressure can be measured by a single pressure transducer using a scanivalve system.

The overall forces and moments can be measured on the same canard model using either

the sting balance or the three component external balance.

Page 231: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

231

Chapter 19

DRAG MEASUREMENT OF SPHERE

19.1 Introduction :

Study of drag of a spherical body is interesting because it depicts the characteristics of

boundary layer. First, its drag is related to Reynolds number. Second, laminar flow

having less energy with which to surmount roughness or corners separates from a surface

more easily than does turbulent flow. Third, the maintenance of a laminar boundary layer

becomes more difficult as the Reynolds number (the speed or length) increases. Fourth,

laminar flow is encouraged by a pressure gradient falling in the direction of flow and

separation easily by a pressure gradient rising in the direction of flow.

In the light of the above discussion drag characteristics under conditions of changing

Reynolds number may be analysed. For simplicity flow about an aerofoil (Fig. 19.1) may

be considered first.

In Fig. 19.1(a) the flow is a predominantly laminar and hence drag should have been

lower. However, as mentioned earlier, laminar boundary layer has less energy and fails to

negotiate the downstream curve (after maximum thickness point) of the aerofoil and the

flow separates. Hence the drag becomes high because of excessive separation (point A in

Fig. 19.2).

As the flow speed increases, transition point moves ahead (fig. 19.1b) according to the

third feature mentioned earlier. Since the turbulent flow is more robust the flow sticks to

the surface of the aerofoil and does not separate. This results in a net decrease of drag

coefficient (point B Fig. 19.2).

Still higher Reynolds number results in a increase of drag (Point C in Fig. 19.2) and the

transition point has moved t0 the furthest point (the minimum pressure). Its further

motion is resisted by the favourable pressure gradient from the leading edge to that point.

Page 232: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

232

Figure 19.1 Characteristics of flow about an aerofoil

Figure 19.2 Variation of CD with Reynolds number

The above flow pattern is perfectly valid for a spherical body also. The added feature is

that the decrease in CD in the region A to B is so rapid that even the total drag

D (= DSCU 2

2

1 ) decreases despite the increase in free stream velocity U .

Page 233: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

233

The above characteristics can be studied experimentally by measuring the drag of a

sphere using the three-component wind-tunnel balance. A sphere (of radius 15 cm) is

attached to the balance and the drag of the sphere is measured.

The drag coefficient based on the projected frontal area S (= 42d ), where d is the

diameter of the sphere and is given as

SU

DCD

2

2

1

the Reynolds number is determined with the diameter of the sphere as the characteristics

dimension,

dURe

The tunnel can be run at various speed setting and the drag of the sphere may be

recorded. The results can be presented in Table 19.1.

Table 19.1 : Drag of sphere

No. of Runs hLS Drag of sphere (D) U CD Re

1

2

3

4

-

-

10

The variation of both drag and drag coefficient may be plotted against the Reynolds

number. This experiment highlights the effects of Reynolds number (i.e. scale effect) on

drag.

It may be noted here that Reynolds number affects the lift also. The variations in lift

curve slope of an aerofoil caused by increasing the Reynolds number are very small, but

Page 234: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

234

in general the lift curve will be straightened up, the slope will increase slightly and the

stall will become more abrupt (Fig. 19.3). It follow that CLmax and the angle at which it

occurs are increased.

Figure 19.3 Variation of lift coefficient with incidence

Page 235: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

235

Chapter 20

EVALUATION OF A SUPERSONIC WIND TUNNEL

20.1 Introduction :

The supersonic wind tunnel system is usually developed as a blow down facility where

stored high pressure dry air is discharged through the working section. It consists of two

basic units, the compressor system with reservoir storage and the wind tunnel section

with its associated ducting system.

The compressor system is a reciprocating compressor providing air at a final pressure of

5-6 bar. The air is stored in a reservoir system of total volume sixteen cubic meter. The

wind tunnel system is connected to the reservoir system by means of a manually

controlled valve. The valve is used to control the pressure in the settling chamber

upstream of the working section.

Such supersonic tunnels are short-duration tunnels and usually require special measuring

devices for measurements. Different experiments that are conducted in the supersonic

tunnel are :

1. Shock visualisation

2. Determination of Run time of a tunnel

3. Determination of Mach Number in the Test Section

4. Variation of Mach number along the axis of divergent section of C-D

nozzle

5. Variation of Mach number along diffuser axis

6. Determination of the exit velocity

Page 236: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

236

Page 237: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

237

20.2 Shock Visualisation :

In order for shock pattern to be visualized, various types of optical systems are available.

These systems are :

a) Shadowgraph technique

b) Interferometer technique

c) Schlieren technique

In the present facility a Schlieren system has been used. The basic philosophy of the

Schlieren system is as follows.

With the flow disturbances around a model, localized changes in pressure and hence

density occur. If parallel light is shone into the working section, then the light emitted

from the section will not be wholly parallel but will have zones of increased and

decreased intensity due to the diffractive effects of the density changes. By using an edge

and other lenses and mirrors it is then possible to produce a sharp image of the flow

disturbances.

Fig. 20.1 shows schematically the Schlieren system. Light from a source is focused by

means of a lens onto a variable aperture unit which is used to vary the total illumination

through the remaining optical path. This aperture is placed at the focus of lens 3 such that

parallel light passes into the wind tunnel working section.

Te light issuing from the working section is focused onto a Schlieren edge. The edge can

take two distinct forms. For black and white Schlieren patterns, the edge is basically a

glass slide with 50% of the area blacked out giving a sharp straight dividing line between

the clear and obscured areas.

For colour Schileren, a three colour edge is used with the central colour as a narrow

straight edged band.

Page 238: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

238

After the Schlieren edge, the light is focusssed onto a screen where an image is formed.

When the system is set up, the Schlieren edge position is adjusted so that the illumination

on the screen is about 50% of that without the edge interrupting the optical path (for

black and white Schlieren only). With the tunnel operating, the flow disturbances cause

the focused image of the working section to be changed as mentioned previously. The

Schlieren edge effect is to chop off those optical path deflections which pass into the

obscured area on the edge. This produces an image of the model complete with the flow

pattern shown as lighter and darker zones.

20.3 Run Time of Tunnel :

For a single run of the tunnel, air is prescribed and stored in reservoir. By running the

compressor for about 20-30 minutes, air can be stored in the reservoir at about 5 kg/cm2

(about 70 psi). by opening the valve continuously air can then be released from the

reservoir at a fixed settling chamber pressure (say 1.2 kg/ cm2 , about 20 psi).

The aim of the experiment is to determine duration of the flow in the tunnel at a constant

settling chamber pressure. It is usually of the order of 30 seconds. The run-time can be

calculated theoretically in the following manner.

Let, t = run time

V = volume of the reservoir

i = initial density of air in reservoir

f = final density of air in reservoir

Pi = initial pressure of air in reservoir

Pf = final pressure of air in reservoir

Total mass flow from reservoir in time t is

fif VM

ifiV 1

Now, nifif PP

1

For polytropic expansion, n = polytropic index (1 for isothermal expansion)

Then, ifif PPVM 1

Page 239: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

239

ifii PPTRV 1 (20.1)

Now, total mass flow through the test section in time t can be written as

UAtM f (20.2)

where A = area of the test section

= density of air in the test section

U = velocity of air in the test section

For isentropic flow,

1

1

2

02

11

M

where 0 is the total density and M is the Mach number.

Assuming, = 1.4

2

52

0 2.01

M

2

52

00 2.01

MRTP (since P = RT) (20.3)

Now, velocity U in the test section can be written as

U = M a where a is speed of sound

Or, U = M RT

2

0

2

11 M

RTM

(since 2

02

11 MTT

)

2

0 2.014.1 MTRM (20.4)

Using equations (2), (3) and (4)

tAM

RTMM

RT

PM f ..

2.01

4.12.01

2

02

52

0

0

(20.5)

For convenience, flow at the throat may be considered. In that case M = 1, A = A. Then

Eq. (5) is reduced to

tT

APM f .

0165.0

0

0

(20.6)

Equating equations (20.1) and (20.6)

Page 240: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

240

VP

P

RT

Pt

T

AP

i

f

i

i

1.0165.0

0

0

or,

00

01053.0

P

P

P

P

T

T

A

Vt

fi

i

(20.7)

Pi, Pf, P0 are to be observed from the dial gages and then to be converted to absolute

pressure by adding the atmospheric pressure.

The dimensions of the tank and tunnel are as follows :

Tank diameter (d) = 6 ft = 1.8288 m

Tanks height (h) = 20 ft = 6.096 m

Tank volume = .4 d2 .h = 16.0127 m

3

Throat area = A = 4 sq. inch =.00258 m

2

T0 = Ti = Tatm = 220C = 532.5

0 K.

With all these data, it is now possible to calculate the run-time theoretically for a

particular settling chamber pressure P0 using equation (20.7). Run time can be obtained

experimentally by a stop watch. For various settling chamber pressures (P0 ) different

run-time will be obtained theoretically and experimentally. Calculated and experimental

values can be put in tabular and graphical forms as shown below.

Table 20.1 : Run-time calculation

No. Pi

(absolute)

Pf

(absolute)

P0

(absolute)

Run-time

(theoretical)

Run-time

(experimental)

1

2

3

Page 241: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

241

t (sec)

Gauge pressure (P0 )

Figure 20.2 Variation of Run-time with settling chamber pressure

20.4 Determination of Mach Number :

Mach number in the test section can be determined by four techniques. These are done as

follows:

20.4.1 By using Area-Local Mach Number Relation :

There is a relation between area at any cross section and the Mach number given as,

)1(2

1

2

2

11

1

21

M

MA

A (20.8)

where is the adiabatic index of air (=1.4) and A is the area of the throat. At the test

section, one can calculate the area of cross-section (A) and also the throat area (A).

Using eq. (20.8), one can determine the value of M.

A A

………………..

M =1

M

Figure 20.3 Convergent -Divergent Nozzle

Page 242: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

242

Example: 947.28.3

2.11

A

A

Using this value in the eq. (20.8), M = 2.6334.

20.4.2 By Static Pressure Measurement on the Wall of the Test Section :

Relation between static (p) and stagnant pressure (P0) is given as,

1

20

2

11

M

p

P

11

21

02

p

PM (20.9)

Now, observed valve pressure is 24.7 psi and hence,

P0 = 24.7 psi + 1 atm = 38.7 psi = 266836.5 N/m2

A mercury tube is used. A height difference of 1 cm in the tube will mean a pressure

difference of 1.3366 103 N/ m

2. Now, static pressure can be written as,

P = Patm + 1.3366 103 (h)

From the mercury tube h = -26.1 and therefore P = 66439.74 N/ m2

Putting these values in the eq. (20.9), M = 1.5615.

20.4.3 By using Rayleigh-Pitot Formula :

Rayleigh-Pitot formula is given as

121

124

1 21

2

22

1

02

M

M

M

P

P (20.10)

where P02 is the total pressure at station 2 and P1 is static pressure at station 1.

Page 243: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

243

P1, M1 M2

P02

Pitot-tube

P02 : Total pressure at

P1 : Static pressure at

Figure. 20. 4 Rayleigh-Pitot Formula

Same mercury tube is used here also.

P02 = Patm + 1.3366 103 (h1)

P1 = Patm + 1.3366 103 (h2)

Example : From the mercury tube h1 = 71.2 and h2 = -57.7

Putting these values in the eq. (20.10), M = 2.4342.

20.4.4 By using M Relation (Shock Wave over a Wedge) :

A shock wave is formed when supersonic flow passes over a wedge. This strategy can be

used to determine the Mach number of the flow

shock

wedge

M

Figure 20.5 Shock wave over the wedge

2 1

1

2

Page 244: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

244

There is a relation between a and b, shown in the Fig.20. 5.

2)2cos(

1)(sin).cot(2)tan(

2

22

M

M (20.11)

where is the adiabatic index of air (= 1.4). so if one finds out the value of a and b

experimentally, M can be easily determined from the eq. (20.11).

From one experiment = 12.50 and = 40

0. Then putting these values in the eq. (20.11)

will give value of M = 2.108.

20.5 Variation of Mach number along the axis of divergent section of C-D nozzle

Variation of Mach number ahead of the test section due to liners can be obtained from

measurement of pressure at different points as shown in Fig 20.6.

Figure 20.6 Pressure ports along liners

If P0 and p be the absolute total and static pressure at any point and M be the Mach

number of flow then,

1

20

2

11

M

p

P

2

722.01 M (assuming = 1.4)

or,

15.0

7

2

0

p

PM (20.12)

The total pressure (P0 ) is constant throughout the test section in the absence of shocks in

the flow and is known from dial gauge of settling chamber. The dial gauge pressure

should again be converted into absolute pressure by adding the atmospheric pressure. The

static pressure at different points can obtained from mercury manometer readings

connected to several static pressure holes. Results can be given in tabular and graphical

forms.

Page 245: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

245

Table 20.2 : Variation of Mach Number

P0 =

Stations Distance from settling

chamber

Manometer height

(h)

Static pressure

(p) absolute

M

1

2

.

.

8

9

10

2.4

2.0

Mach no. 1.6

1.2

0.4

0

0 4 8 12 16 20 24

Distance along nozzle axis from throat

Figure 20.7 Variation of Mach number along nozzle axis

20.6 Variation of Mach number along diffuser axis

This is done in the same manner as in the preceding section.

Page 246: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

246

20.7 Determination of the exit velocity :

The manometer used to calculate the total and static pressure at the exit has pressure

difference of 0.2 mPa for 1 small division. Difference between the total and static

pressure at the exit is given as,

50 exitexit PP small divisions

= 5 0.2 100 = 100 N/m2

Therefore, uexit

= 12.65 m/s.

Page 247: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

247

Appendix – 1

NOTATIONS

a = speed of sound

A = cross-sectional area at any section

A = throat area

b = wing span

CD = drag coefficient

CL = lift coefficient

CF = overall skin friction coefficient

CM = pitching moment

Cp = pressure coefficient

Cf = local skin friction coefficient

c = wing chord

D = drag

d = diameter

h = height of water column

L = lift

M = Mach number

Mf = Mass flow

P0 = total pressure

P = static pressure

p = static pressure at infinity

qt = tangential velocity

qn = radial velocity

q = free stream dynamic pressure

Page 248: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

248

Appendix – 2

NOTE ON UNITS

Throughout this book the International System of Units (SI) is used. In SI units, the units

of mass, length and time are

Kilogram kg

Meter m

Second s

In this system the unit of force, defined as that force which when applied to a unit mass

of 1 kg produces an acceleration of 1m/s2 is the

Newton N

The Newton may be expressed in term of units of mass, length and time by the equation

1 N = 1 kg m/ s2

Pressure p at a joint in a fluid is determined in terms of normal force acting on an element

of a plane surface through the point the pressure is the ratio of force to area. The units are

therefore

Pressure p N/m2 or kg/ms

2

The SI units provides for the use of particular names for certain derived units and the

Pascal, represented by the symbol Pa, is used to represent a pressure of 1 N/m2 , viz.

1 Pa = 1 N/m2

For many purposes this unit is rather small, and another unit, the bar is used. This is

defined by

Page 249: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

249

1 bar = 105 Pa = 10

5 N/m

2

The millibar, written mbar (or simply mb) is a further convenient unit.

1 mb = 10-3

bar = 100 Pa = 100 N/m2

In British system of units the fundamental units of mass, length and time are

Pound lb

Foot ft

Second s

These are related to SI units by the conversion factors

1 lb = 0.45359237

1 ft = 0.3048 m

Properties of Air : Sea-level conditions

Temperature T = 150 = 288.16 k

Pressure p0 = 101325 n/m2

Density = 1.2256 kg/m3

Absolute coefficient of viscosity = 1.783 10-5

kg/ms

Kinematic coefficient of viscosity = 1.455 10-5

m2 /s

Speed of sound in air a (= RT) = 340 m/s

Ratio of specific heat =1.4

Gas constant R =287.2 J/kg K

Page 250: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

250

Appendix – 3

List of Facilities

Serial

No.

Tunnel Test section

dimension

Maximum

speed

Type of Tunnel Maximum

power

1. Low speed

Tunnel

61cm 61cm 34 m/sec Suction type 15 HP

2. Smoke

Tunnel

39cm 5cm 5-8 m/sec Blow down

type

Small fan

3. Air Flow

Bench

10cm 5cm 33 m/sec Blow down

type

0.75 HP

4. Gust Tunnel 61cm 91cm 35 m/sec Blow down

type

50 HP

5. Industrial

Wind Tunnel

226cm 145cm 16 m/sec Blow down

type

75 HP

6. Calibration

Tunnel

21cm 21cm 30 m/sec Blow down

type

10 HP

7. Cascade

Tunnel

48cm 10cm Mach No.

= 0.5

Blow down

type

75 HP

8. Supersonic

Tunnel

5cm 10cm Mach No.

= 2.2

Blow down

type

75 HP

Page 251: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

251

Appendix – 4

2100 System : Strain Gage Conditioner and Amplifier System

1. DESCRIPTION

1.1 General

The series 2100 modules comprise a multi-channel system for generating conditioned

high-level signals from strain gage inputs for display or recording on external equipment.

A system would be comprised of :

(a) One or more two-channel 2120B Strain Gage Conditioners.

(b) One or more 2110B Power Supplies (each Power Supply will handle up to ten

channels; i.e., five 2120B Conditioner / Amplifiers).

Optionally, one or more 2111 DC- Operated Power Supplies (each 2111 module

is capable of powering up to eight channels; i.e., four 2120B Conditioners/

Amplifiers; or up to ten channels when maximum bridge voltage and output

current are not required).

(c) One or more rack adapters or cabinets, complete with wiring, to accept the above

modules.

1.2 Significant Features

The principal features of the system include :

Independently variable and regulated for each channel (0.5 to 12 Vdc).

Fully adjustable calibrated gain from 1 to 2100.

Bridge-completion components to accept quarter – (120Ω, 350Ω and 1000Ω),

half-and full-bridge inputs to each channel.

LED null indicators on each channel – always active.

100 mA output.

All supplies and outputs short-circuit proof with current limiting.

Compact packaging – ten channels in 5.25 ×19 in (133 × 483 mm) rack space.

Page 252: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

252

2. SPECIFICATION

All specifications are nominal or typical at +230C unless noted. Performance may be

degraded in the presence of high-level electromagnetic fields.

Operational Environment : Temperature : 140 to 122

0F (10

0 to 50

0C). Humidity : Up to

90% RH, non-condensing.

2.1 Model 2120B Strain Gage Conditioner

Note : These specifications apply for each of two independent channels per module.

Inputs :

Inputs Impedence : > 100 MΩ (balance limit resistor disconnected).

Source Current : ±10 nA typical; ±40 nA max.

Configuration : Two- to seven-wire to accept quarter-, half-, or full –bridge strain

gage or transducer inputs. Internal half bridge, dummy 350Ω and dummy120Ω

completion gages and three-wire calibration capability provided. Sec 4.3c for

dummy1000Ω provision.

Protection : Input is protected from damage of inputs up to ±50V differential or ±25V

common mode.

Amplifier :

Gain : 1 to 2100; continuously adjustable; direct reading.

Gain steps X2, X20, X200; with ten-turn counting knob, X0.5 to X10.50 ±1% typical.

Frequency Response (min) :

Normal Range : dc to 15 kHz: - 3 dB at all gain settings and full output.

dc to 5 kHz: - 0.5 dB at all gain settings and full output.

Extended Range : (Configured by internal jumper – see 6.1 c ).

dc to 50 kHz: -3 dB at all gain settings and full output.

Dc to 17 kHz: -0.5 dB at all gain settings and full output.

Noise RTI * : (350 Ω source impedance) 1 μV p-p at 0.1 Hz to 10 Hz; 2 μVrms at 0.1

Hz to 50 kHz.

Noise RTO**

: 50 μV p-p at 0.1 Hz to 10 Hz; 80 μV p-p at 0.1 Hz to 100 Hz; 100

μVrms at 0.1 Hz to 15 kHz; 200 μVrms at 0.1 Hz to 50 kHz.

* Referred to input

** Referred to output.

Page 253: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

253

Temperature Coefficient of Zero : ±1 μV/ 0C RTI, ±210 μV/

0C RTO; -10

0 to +60

0C

(after 30 minute warm-up).

Common-Mode Voltage : ±10V

Common-Mode Rejection : (dc to 60 Hz)

Gain Multiplier CMR (dB)

X2 67

X20 87

X200 100

Output Range : ±10V (min) at ±100mA; current limited at ≤140 mA.

Capacitive Loading : Up to 0.15 μF.

Excitation :

Type : Constant voltage.

Range : 0.5 to 12 Vdc (continuously adjustable for each channel) with 120 Ω full-

bridge load.

Short-Circuit Current : Less than 40 mA max.

Noise : 2 mV p-p dc to 20 kHz.

Load Regulation : ±0.2 % no-load to 120 Ω load (±10% line change).

Balance :

Method : Potentiometric.

Range : ±2000 με, ±4000 με or ±6000 με (quarter, half or 350 Ω full bridge) ranges

selected or disabled by internal jumpers.

Calibration :

Controls : Two-position (center off) toggle switch.

Standard Factory-Installed Resistors : (174.8 KΩ ±0.1%) simulate ±1000 με at GF

= 2.

Optional Calibration Relays : Provides remote operation of excitation (off/ on) and

shunt calibration.

Relays are powered by user-supplied voltage source, and must be specified when

ordering rack adapters or cabinets.

Size : 5.25 H × 2.94 W × 10.97 D in (133 × 75 × 279 mm).

Weight : 2.2 lb (1.0 kg).

Page 254: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

254

2.2 Model 2110B Power Supply (AC – Operated)

Outputs : ±15 Vdc and + 17.5 Vdc; protected against continuous circuits.

Input : 107, 115, 214, 230 Vac ±10% (selected internally); 50 – 60 Hz.

Power : 40 W typical, 100 W max.

Meter : 0 to 12 Vdc (with switch) to read bridge excitation.

Also ac input and dc output go/no-go monitor.

Size : 5.25 H × 2.44 W × 12.34 D in (133 × 62 × 313 mm).

Weight : 6.7 lb (3.1 Kg).

2.3 Model 2111 DC-Operated Power Supply

Outputs : : ±15 Vdc and + 17.5 Vdc; protected against continuous circuits.

Input : 12 Vdc nominal (9 to 18 Vdc range). Power 60 W max; 78 % efficiency at full

load.

Reverse Polarity Protection : Internal shunt diode.

Meter : 0 to 12 Vdc (with switch) to read bridge excitation. Dc output go/no-go monitor.

Size : 5.25 H × 2.44 W × 12.34 D in (133 × 62 × 313 mm).

Weight : 3.0 lb (1.4 kg ).

2.4 Model 2150 Rack Adapter

Application : Fits standard 19-in (483 – mm) electronic equipment rack.

Accepts one Power Supply and one to five Strain Gage Conditioners.

Completely wired.

Power : 2-ft (0.6 – m) three-wire line cord; 10-ft (3-m) extension available.

Size : 5.25 H × 19 W × 14.17 D in overall (133 × 483 × 360 mm).

Weight : 6.6 lb (3.0 kg ).

2.5 Model 2160 Portable Enclosure

Description : Completely self-contained adapter and cabinet with all wiring for two or

four channels.

Accepts one power supply and one or two Strain Gage Conditioners.

Power : 8-ft (2.4 – m) detachable three-wire cord.

Page 255: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

255

Size : 5.55 H × 8.75 W × 13.80 D in (141 × 222 × 350 mm).

Weight : 5.2 lb (2.4 kg ).

3. CONTROLS

3.1 Model 2110B/2111 Power Supplies

Bridge Volts Meter : Displays the voltage on each input bridge (as selected by

CHANNEL selector). Also used to monitor ac line and dc outputs of Power Supply .

Channel Selector : Positions 1 to 10 select channel to display bridge excitation on Meter

(“1” is Channel farthest to left in cabinet, etc).

The Dc position monitors a mixed output from the +15, -15, and +17.5V power supplies

and should always read on the “DC” line at “10” on the Meter. The AC position (2110 B

only) monitors the peak-to-peak ac line input (at a fixed transformer tap). A reading

anywhere in the band from 9 to 11 on the Meter indicates that the input voltage is proper

for the selected transformer tap (see 4.1e). No reading indicates the equipment is

ungrounded.

External Meter Jacks : Supplies Meter voltage to an external meter if desired for more

precise adjustment of bridge supply voltages.

Power Switch: The central power switch for this supply and all Conditioners connected to

it. (The pilot lamp may take several seconds to extinguish when the power is turned off).

3.2 Model 2120B Strain Gage Conditioner

(one channel described; both identical and independent)

Output Lamps : LED indicators always monitoring amplifier output. Primarily used to

adjust AMP ZERO and Bridge BALANCE. (Fully lit with 0.07V output).

Balance Control : A ten-turn potentiometer to adjust bridge balance. Normal range

±2000 με. (See 4.12 a to extend range) EXCIT must be ON to set bridge balance.

Gain Controls :

Multiplier Switch : Provides gain steps of X2, X20 And X200.

Potentiometer : Ten-turn with counting knob provides multiplier of 0.50 to 10.50.

Total amplifier gain is the product of the multiplier switch and potentiometer

settings.

Page 256: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

256

Bridge Excit Control : A 25-turn trimmer to adjust bridge excitation from 0.50 to 12

Vdc. The actual setting is monitored on the Meter and the External Meter Jacks on the

Power Supply (the proper channel must be selected).

AMP ZERO Control : A 25-turn trimmer used to set the electrical “Null” of the input

amplifier zero. (EXCIT should be OFF and the input circuit connected when this is done).

EXCIT Switch : A toggle switch controlling the excitation to the input bridge. (Any

amplifier output with EXCIT at OFF is dc amplifier offset, thermal EMF from the bridge

or ac pickup in the wiring).

CAL Switch : A two-position (with center off) toggle switch to shunt-calibrate the input

bridge. As delivered, “A” simulates ±1000 με, and “B” simulates -1000 με by shunting

the internal 350Ω half bridge. Other shunt calibration configurations are possible by

internal resistor and jumper changes (see 5.0 Shunt Calibration).

INPUT Receptacle (Rear Panel) : A ten-pin quarter-turn connector to connect input

gage(s). (Quarter, half and full bridges can be accepted simply by using the appropriate

pins. Sec 4.3c for details.) Mating connector supplied.

OUTPUT Receptacle : A standard BNC connector delivers the amplifier output (±10V

at ±100 mA).

Page 257: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

257

4. OPERATING PROCEDURE

4.1 SETUP and AC Power

4.1a: the individual Conditioner and Power Supply modules are not stand-alone

instruments. They are designed to plug into a prewired cabinet or rack adapter which (1)

supplies ac line power (fused) to the Power Supply, (2) distributes dc regulated voltages

to all Conditioners and (3) connects the bridge voltage monitoring meter in the Power

Supply to the various channels.

If one or more 2150 ten-channel Rack Adapters are used, these should be mounted in a

standard 19-in (483-mm) equipment rack; 5.25 in (133 mm) vertical height is required for

each ten channels.

4.1b : Before installing a 2110B Power Supply module in each cabinet or rack adapter,

check that each 2110B module is set for the proper ac line voltage:

Slide the right-hand side cover almost all the way back to expose the two toggle

switches on the printed-circuit board. One switch, as marked, sets for nominal 115 or

230V; the other sets for NORM line (115/230V ±10%) or LOW line (107/214V

±10%). Replace side cover.

The POWER switch on the front panel should be at OFF. Install the Power Supply in the

right-hand position of the cabinet; push in to engage the input/output plug, and secure the

retaining screws.

4.1c : Install 2120B Conditioners in the remaining positions in the cabinet. Push the

modules in to engage the power-input plugs, and secure the thumb screws. (Blank covers

are available for unused positions).

4.1d : Plug the line cord into an ac receptacle, making certain that the third pin goes to a

good ground. The equipment must be grounded for safety and best performance.

Note : If the line plug must be replaced with a different type, observe this color code

when wiring the new plug :

Brown : High line voltage.

Blue : Low Line voltage (i.e., “neutral” or common)

Green/ Yellow : Ground.

Page 258: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

258

4.1e : Check ac power. On each Power Supply, turn the CHANNEL selector to “AC”.

Turn the POWER switch on (up). The red pilot lamp should light and the meter should

read between 9 and 11. if not, observe meter reading:

Pegs at full scale. Turn power off immediately. This indicates that the input voltage is

much too high for the internal switch settings (probably a 230V input with switches set

for 115V; see 4.1b).

Reads low (between 8 and 9-1/4). The ac line voltage is significantly below 115V (or

230V). Remove Power Supply and reset internal switch for LOW line.

Reads around 5. This indicates that the internal switches are probably set for 230V

input, whereas the voltage is actually 115V. Turn POWER OFF, remove module, and set

switches (see 4.1b).

Reads 0 (no reading). Red pilot lamp not lit: The ac receptacle has no power or the fuse

(at the rear of the instrument) is open. Pilot lamp lit: Equipment is not properly grounded.

Either the third pin was not used, or the receptacle used is not properly grounded.

4.1f : Check dc power. On the Power Supply, turn the CHANNEL selector to “DC”. The

meter should read very near the line at 10. if not, this indicates that either (1) there is an

internal short in one of the Conditioner modules (remove them one at a time), or (21) one

or more of the regulated power supply circuits is defective (see 6.4 Internal

Adjustments).

4.1g : Check bridge excitation regulators. Scan the CHANNEL switch through positions

1 to 10; all positions should read some voltage between 0.5 and 12V. (However, switch

positions corresponding to channels not installed will, of course, read zero.)

4.1h : The system is now ready for ruse. If it is planned to use the system immediately, it

is suggested that the POWER be left on (for warm-up); otherwise turn all POWER

switches to OFF.

Caution : Prior to removing or installing the 2110B Power Supply into a rack adapter or

cabinet, the ac power cord must first be unplugged. Refer all servicing to qualified

technicians.

4.2 DC Power

Page 259: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

259

4.2a : The 2111 module is capable of powering up to eight channels (four Model 2120B

modules) at maximum rated bridge voltage and output current or up to ten channels when

maximum bridge voltage and output current are not required. The 2111 functions

similarly to the 2110B Power Supply, with the exception of the 12 Vdc nominal input,

which supports battery operation only.

4.2b : Remove the line cord, which is not used when a 2111 module is installed, from the

ac receptacle of the cabinet.

Set POWER switch on the front panel to OFF. Install the 2111 module in the right-hand

position of the cabinet; push to engage the input/output plug, and secure with thumb

screws.

4.2c : 12 Vdc power is supplied through the four-conductor recessed male connector on

the 2111 rear panel. Connections are made to the mating female connector (TRW/Cinch-

Jones S2404-CCT; Vishay Micro-Measurements P/N 12X300606) with #16 AWG (1.3 –

mm dia.), or larger, wire. Assure that the operating voltage at the input connector will be

maintained within 9 to 18 Vdc. Make connections as above.

4.2d : Turn POWER on and check for proper operation as described in 4.1f through 4.1h

for the 2110B.

4.3 INPUT Connections

4.3a : It is suggested that the system be turned on and allowed to stabilize while

preparing the input connectors; Power consumptions is negligible. To prevent powering

any input circuits at this time, turn the EXCIT toggle switches OFF on all channels.

4.3b : each channel uses a separate (and interchangeable) input plug. Two loose plugs are

supplied with each 2120B Conditioner (one per channel). If additional plugs are desired,

they are available from Vishay Micro-Measurements or through electronic parts

distributors.

Vishay Micro-Measurements 12X300515

ITT/Cannon KPT06B12-10P

Bendix PT06A-12-10P(SR)

4.3c : Connect the input to each channel, using the connectors supplied, in accordance

with Figs. 1a and 1b.

Page 260: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

260

Note : Except when using an external full bridge, there must be a jumper in the plug

connecting pins D and E; this connects the midpoint of the internal 350Ω half bridge

to the S+ amplifier input, thus completing the necessary full bridge for proper

amplifier operation.

Generally, no modifications or jumpers are required inside the 2120B Conditioner

regardless of the external bridge configuration used. (However, there are provisions for

accepting 1000Ω quarter-bridge inputs and for changing the shunt calibration circuit –

see Note on the following page and 5.0 Shunt Calibration, respectively.)

Note : 2120A/B Strain Gage Conditioners, with serial numbers above 85000, provide

the capability for 1000Ω quarter-bridge operation. For this mode, the 120Ω dummy

terminal (pin H of input plug) is converted to a 1000Ω dummy terminal by removing

a shunt from a factory installed Vishay 880Ω precision resistor in series with the

internal 120Ω dummy gage. To make this conversion, the user must desolder a solder

pad located on the circuit side of the PC board. Figure 2 shows the location of the

880Ω resistor (component side) and the solder pad.

4.4 Wiring Considerations

The precautions given below provide important considerations for correct wiring

technique. Both precautions may be applicable if you are testing to measure both static or

dynamic data. For additional information on electrical noise, please consult Vishay

Micro-Measurements Tech Note TN-501, Noise Control in Strain Gage Measurements.

Note : The system or the signal input wiring could be subjected to high-level EMI

(electromagnetic interference) or ESD (electrostatic discharge); therefore, shielded

cabling should be used to preserve data integrity as well as prevent permanent

damage to the instrument. External bridge sensor(s) should also be shielded. The

shield should be connected to the hood of the INPUT connector. The system chassis

should be connected to a good “earth grounded”, generally through the line cord.

Dynamic Data: It is extremely important to minimize the electrical noise that the gages

and lead wires pick up from the test environment; this noise is usually related to the 50 or

60 Hz line power in the area:

Page 261: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

261

a) Always use twisted multi-conductor wire (never parallel conductor wire);

shielded wire is greatly preferred, although it may prove unnecessary in some

cases using short leads.

b) Shields should be grounded at one (and only one) end; normally the shield is

grounded to the INPUT connector hood and left disconnected (and insulated

against accidental grounding) at the gage end. Do not use the shield as a

conductor (that is, do not use coaxial cable as a two-conductor wire).

c) The specimen or test structure (if metal) should be electrically connected to a

good ground.

d) Keep all wiring well clear of magnetic fields (shields do not protect against

them) such as transformers, motors, relays and heavy power wiring.

e) With long leadwires, a completely symmetrical circuit will yield less noise (e.g,

a half bridge on or near the specimen will usually show less noise then a true

quarter-bridge connection).

Static Data : Precise symmetry in leadwire resistance is highly desirable to minimize the

effects of changes in ambient temperature on leadwires.

a) In the quarter-bridge circuit,. Always use the three-lead-wire circuit shown in

Fig. 1a, rather than the more obvious two-wire circuit.

b) If possible, group all leadwires to the same channel in a bundle to minimize

temperature differentials between leads.

c) If long leads are involved, calculate the leadwire desensitization caused by the

lead resistance. If excessive in view of data accuracy required, adjust effective

gage factor, increase wire size, or increase gage resistance – or all three, as best

suits the situation.

4.5 MILLIVOLT Inputs

The 2120B Conditioner can accept low-level dc inputs, (using pins A and D), provided

two requirements are observed:

a) The common-mode voltage should not exceed ±10V in normal operation, and

must never exceed a peak voltage of ±25V.

Page 262: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

262

b) The input cannot be completely floating: there must be a ground return

(generally less than 10MΩ ), either external or within the 2120B. In the case of

thermocouples welded to a nominally grounded structure, this return is adequate.

A ground return exists within the standard 2120B due to the presence of the

bridge-balance circuit. However, if the external signal is adequately grounded,

this resistance can be removed (remove jumpers P and N – see 4.12a)

The user is also cautioned regarding two sources of possibly significant error:

a) Bias Current : Each input (pins A and D) requires an input current of

approximately 10 nA; this current will flow through the input wiring to the

ground return, which must exist. With a floating input (in which case the

balance resistor must remain installed), the bias required at pin D will flow

directly from the balance resistor, but the bias for pin A will flow through the

entire input circuit; with low source impedances that is insignificant and can be

offset with the AMPZERO control. High source impedances can result in

measurable offsets (with a 5000Ω source impedance the offset may approach

0.2 mV RTI).

b) Any nonsymmetry in the ground returns of the inputs will reduce the CMR of

the amplifier to some degree.

4.6 OUTPUT Connections

Cautions : If it is possible in way to damage the indicator or recorder connected to the

OUTPUT with inputs of 15V or 140 mA, the OUTPUT should not be connected until the

channels have been balanced (see 4.11 and 4.12).

4.6a : The model 2120B (Serial Numbers above 134733) uses a standard BNC connector

for each output. The shells are connected directly to the chassis which is tied to earth

ground. For protection against high-level EMI (Electromagnetic Interference), ESD

(Electrostatic discharge), and permanent damage, it is highly recommended that standard

shielded BNC cables be used. The Shield should be connected directly to the body of the

connector. Assembled cables with a BNC connector on each end are available from local

electronic parts distributors and from the Vishay Micro-Measurements using the part

numbers listed below:

Page 263: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

263

BNC Cable Length MG Accessory No.

2 ft (0.6 m) 2100-A62

4 ft (1.2 m) 2100-A81

10 ft (3.0 m) 2100-A49

4.6b : It should be noted that the OUTPUT indicator lamps on the front of the 2120B at

all times monitor the voltage on the OUTPUT connector. If both lamps are extinguished,

the output voltage is zero (typically within 2 mV maximum circuit offset). Full brilliance

of either lamp indicates a voltage in excess of 70 mV (possibly as high as 15 V).

4.7 OUTPUT Current Limits

The output is capable of ±10V into a load of 100Ω or higher. With a load of 100Ω or

lower, the output will deliver up to ±100 mA, but in no case greater than 140 mA.

The maximum output can readily be limited to less than 140 mA by increasing the value

of two resistors per channel (R34 and R37, normally 6.2Ω ±5%).

The desired value of R34 and R37 can be calculated with the following formula :

MAX

CI

R870

1 (Eq. 1)

where, RC1 = current limit resistor in ohms (R34, R37).

IMAX = maximum current output in mA.

4.8 OUTPUT Voltage Limits

The open circuit output voltage can exceed ± 13.5V which can cause problems with

certain sensitive recording devices. The printed circuit board has provisions on each

channel for a voltage divider to reduce the output voltage. A series and a shunt resistor

(R38 and R39, respectively) can be added for this purpose. In the standard unit, r38 is

shunted by a closed “Z” solder pad and R39 is open.

To limit the output voltage, calculate the desired resistor values using Ohm’s law. Then,

install the appropriate resistors and open the “Z” shunt (by cutting the small shorting

trace). For noise reduction, it is desirable to keep the total amplifier load resistance low

but it should be above 100 ohms to avoid current limiting. If additional assistance is

Page 264: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

264

needed, contact assistance is needed, contact the Vishay Micro-Measurements

Applications Engineering Department.

4.9 Operation

4.9a : On each channel make certain that the EXCIT switches are OFF (thus removing

excitation to all gage circuits) and the CAL switches are in the center (OFF) position.

4.9b : If it is possible to damage or overload the indicators or recorders connected to the

OUTPUTS with 15 Vdc (or 140 mA for low-resistance devices), the OUTPUT plugs

should not be connected at this time.

4.9c : On the Power Supply module, turn the POWER switch on. The red pilot lamp

should light.

4.9d : On the Power Supply (2110B only) module, set the CHANNEL selector at AC;

the meter should read within the AC band.

4.9e : Turn the CHANNEL selector to DC; the meter should read on the DC check line.

4.10 EXCITATION

4.10a : Set desired excitation on each channel; turn the CHANNEL selector to channel 1;

adjust BRIDGE EXCIT (using a small screwdriver) to read the desired BRIDGE Volts on

the Power Supply Meter.

Note : If greater accuracy is desired than can be achieved with the built-in meter.

Connect an external meter to the EXTERNAL METER banana jacks on the Power

Supply (the minus jack is nominally chassis-ground).

Turn CHANNEL selector to channel 2 and repeat the above procedure adjusting

BRIDGE EXCIT on the next channel; continue until all installed channels are

satisfactorily adjusted.

Note : To achieve best stability and lowest noise at the out-put, it is desirable to

use the maximum excitation that the input to each channel can accept. Small or low-

resistance gages or gages bonded to a poor thermal conductor (such as most plastics

or composites) must necessarily use low excitation. For additional information on

excitation selection, please consult Vishay Micro-Measurements Tech Note TN-

502, Optimizing Strain Gage Excitation Levels.

Page 265: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

265

4.10b : Connect gage INPUT plugs (if not already connected).

4.11 Amplifier Zero

Adjust the AMP ZERO for each Channel. (To some extent the amplifier balance is

affected by symmetry of the source impedances seen by the amplifier inputs).

Using a small screwdriver, adjust each AMP ZERO until both OUTPUT lamps are off.

(If the “+” lamp is lit, turn the adjustment counterclockwise, etc.)

If, at best null, both lamps are lit, this is an indication of excessive noise (probably 50 or

60 Hz) at the input. Check wire shielding, etc. Refer to 4.4 Wiring Considerations for

further discussion.

4.12 Bridge Balance

4.12a : Adjust balance. For each channel, turn the EXCIT switch to ON; then turn the

BALANCE control to extinguish the OUTPUT lamps.

Note : As delivered, the BALANCE controls can correct for approximately ±2000

με unbalance in a quarter, half or 350Ω full bridge. With full-bridge inputs other

than 350Ω , the balance range will be reduced for lower bridge resistance and

increased for higher resistance. For example, with a 120Ω full bridge, the balance

range is reduced to under ±700 με. If the balance range proves inadequate for the

gages or transducers in use, the “balance limit resistor” can be changed from

75000Ω to 37000Ω by moving the jumper from area P to area N, thus doubling the

balance range. Also, jumpers can be located at both area P and N, thus tripling the

original balance range. An Extension of the balance range will produce a reduction

in the setability of the balance control. This is especially noticeable for strain gages

with resistance of 350Ω and higher. Bridge balance may be disabled by removing

both P and N jumpers. Spare or unused jumpers can be stored on the pins next to

the right channel gain switch.

4.12b : Connect OUTPUT plugs for each channel (unless already connected).

4.13 GAIN

4.13a : Adjust GAIN for each channel. There are two general methods of settings the

GAIN control:

Page 266: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

266

a) Mathematical : In many cases it is possible to predict and preset the amplifier gain

required. For example, assume the input is one active gage with GF = 2 (this will

produce 0.5 μV per με per volt of excitation) and bridge excitation has been set at 5

Vdc. Further assume that the desired output from the 2120B is 2V for 500 με. At

500 με the bridge will deliver 1.25 mV (500 με × 5 V × 0.5 μV/V/ με = 1.25 mV).

To achieve 2 V output from the amplifier will require a gain of 1600 (2V/1.25 mV

= 1600 ). Set the GAIN control at 8.00, and the multiplier switch at X200.

b) Empirical : Without regard to bridge excitation or amplifier output voltage,

assume that the desired output is 25-mm deflection on a recorder for a 500 με input.

Using shunt calibration (such as the 1000 με built into the 2120B Conditioner),

adjust the GAIN as required to achieve the desired deflection – for example, a 50-

mm deflection should occur when the 1000 με shunt calibration resistor in the

2120B is selected (assuming GF=2, for which the calibration resistors are

calculated).

In practice, even though the mathematical approach is possible in many situations,

the shunt-calibration method should also be used as the final exact adjustment.

The user is cautioned to consider the effects of leadwire resistance and the

calibration circuit actually in use when calculating the strain simulated by shunt

calibration. See 5.0 hunt Calibration.

4.13b : All controls are now set. However, just before taking data, it is advisable to check

balance on each channel:

a) Briefly turn EXCIT to OFF; if the OUTPUT lamps are not at null (both

extinguished) adjust AMP ZERO as necessary. This can be done at any time during

a test – and should be done occasionally on an extended test.

b) Under no-load conditions (and with CAL at OFF and EXCIT at ON) the

OUTPUT lamps should indicate null; if not, adjust the BALANCE control.

Note : In both steps above, it may be desirable to observe the output recorder rather

than the OUTPUT lamps. First, there may be a very small offset (5 to 10 mV)

between true zero output and the zero indicated by the lamps and, second, it may be

necessary to compensate for a small mechanical or electrical zero offset in the

recording device.

Page 267: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

267

4.13c : Once the GAIN and BALANCE control settings have been finalized, it is

recommended that the knobs be locked in position to prevent accidental rotation.

Counting knobs utilize a lever which must first be pulled away from the panel and then

rotated clockwise (towards the bottom of the panel). The knob can be unlocked simply by

rotating the lever back to the counterclockwise stop.

4.14 NOISE

Before taking dynamic data, it is highly desirable to document the output noise

attributable to wiring and other sources vs. the total dynamic output which includes this

noise plus the dynamic strain signals:

Momentarily turn EXCIT to OFF. Any output observed now is NOT caused by strain

(whether a dynamic strain is being generated or not). “White” noise (full spectrum) is due

to the amplifier and cannot be reduced except by reducing GAIN – it should not exceed

several microvolts rms referred to the input (that is, the observed signal divided by

amplifier gain). A recurrent waveform (usually 50 or 60 Hz or multiplies of this

frequency) indicates electrical pickup at he gages or in the wiring to the gages; if

excessive, the source should be located and corrective measures taken. For additional

information on electrical noise, please consult Vishay Micro-Measurements Tech Note

TN-501, Noise Control in Strain Gage Measurements.

5. SHUNT CALIBRATION

Note : It should be emphasized that the purpose of shunt calibration is to determine the

performance of the circuit into which the gage(s) is wired, and in no way does it verify

the ability of the gage itself to measure strain or the characteristics of its performance.

5.1 Equations

Shunt calibration can be achieved by shunting any one of the four arms of the input

bridge [which includes an active gage(s) and the bridge completion resistors within the

2120B Conditioner]. The 2120B provides for shunting any of these arms. No matter

which arm is shunted, the same equation applies:

Page 268: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

268

610

ACAL

ACAL

RRK

R (Eq. 2)

where, CAL = Strain simulated (microstrain).

AR = precise effective resistance of arm shunted (ohms).

K = effective gage factor of strain gage.

CALR = resistance of calibration resistor (ohms).

K may be the actual package gage factor of the strain gage in use, or it may be adjusted

for leadwire desensitization:

LG

G

RR

RKK

(Eq. 3)

where, K = package gage factor of active gage.

GR = resistance of strain gage (ohms).

LR = resistance of leadwire (s) in series with active gage (usually the

resistance of one leadwire) (ohms)

When shunting either bridge arm to which the balance limit resistor is connected, I is

theoretically necessary to correct for this shunting effect in determining AR . While the

exact value depends on the position of the balance potentiometer, a good approximation

(which assumes the pot is at mid position) is:

BLPA

BLPAA

RRR

RRRR

42

4

(Eq. 8)

where, AR = resistance of resistor or gage in arm.

PR = resistance of balance potentiometer.

BLR = resistance of balance limit resistor.

It should be noted that, for the 2120B Conditioner as shipped (where shunt calibration is

across the 350Ω dummy half bridge), this correction is only 0.2%.

5.2 Shunting Internal Half Bridge (350Ω) :

Use : Quarter and half bridge (full bridge with reduced accuracy).

Advantages : Same resistors regardless of active gage resistance. No special wiring

required. Can simulate tension and/or compression.

Page 269: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

269

Disadvantage : Leadwire desensitization may be significant (use Eq. 7 in Eq. 6).

Location of resistors and jumpers on the printed circuit board is shown in Figs. 3, 4 and 5.

(Note that separate resistors are used for CAL A and CAL B, so that these may be

different values; to calculate strain use AR = 349.3Ω).

5.3 Shunting Internal Dummy Gage (120 or 350Ω) :

Use : Quarter bridge only.

Advantage : Automatically corrects for leadwire desensitization (using three-wire

circuit). No special wiring. Accuracy independent of precise gage resistance.

Disadvantage : Only usable if internal dummy gages are in use. Simulates tension only.

Location of resistors and jumpers on the printed circuit board is shown in Fig. 6. AR is

resistance of dummy resistor. K = K.

5.4 Shunting Active Gages

While there is no electrical problem in shunting active gages at the specimen (they must

be accessible), accomplishing this at the Conditioner with only the usual three-lead

connection will introduce serious errors if the leadwires have measurable resistance. The

reason is that one signal lead, which is supposed to be only a remote voltage-sensing

lead, now carries current (to the calibration resistor); the error thus introduced is

approximately four times that which would be expected by normal “leadwire

desensitization” equations.

The above problem applies equally to active (or compensating) gages in stress analysis

and to all transducer applications.

As rough guide, 1% error will be introduced if the resistance of each lead is :

For 120Ω gages : 0.3Ω (7 ft AWG 26, 30 ft AWG 20)

(2.1 m × 0.4 mm dia; 9 m, 0.8 mm dia)

For 350Ω gages : 0.9Ω (20 ft AWG 26, 85 ft AWG 20)

(6 m, 0.4 mm dia; 25 m, 0.8 mm dia)

5.4a : To properly shunt-calibrate active gages or transducers, the accepted technique is

to provide two additional leads dedicated to the calibration circuit; for quarter-bridge

operation this is customarily called the “five-leadwire circuit”.

Page 270: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

270

Pins J and K on the input connector are used for this application. Figures 7 & 8 show a

half bridge, but the calibration wiring also applies to full bridges and transducers; for true

quarter bridges, Fig.7, compression only, applies.

The added external leads should be connected directly to the strain gage terminals. AR =

actual gage resistance. K = K. (In a transducer, the connection should be made at the

connector on the transducer. AR would be the effective resistance of the shunted

transducer arm.)

MODEL 2130 DIGITAL READOUT

AND

MODEL 2131 PEAK READING DIGITAL READOUT

GENERAL

The 2130 module provides an LED digital display plus a channel selector in a 2100

System-compatible package. The 2131 also includes peak reading capability. These units

simply slide into either the 2150 Rack Adapter or the 2160 Enclosure. An additional line

connection is not required as power is derived from the 2110B or 2111 Power Supply

through the rack adapter or enclosure. Standard cables (two supplied) make the necessary

signal connection between the 2130/2131 and each of the 2120B Strain Gage Conditioner

channels to be used in the display mode. The 2130/2131 will accept and switch up to ten

inputs. Additionally, front-panel jacks are provided for utility inputs such as measuring

bridge excitation via the 2110B or 2111 EXERNAL METER jacks. An external

monitoring device, such as an oscilloscope, can also be connected to the rear-panel output

connector to give simultaneous indications for a given selected input. All input and

output connections are single-ended.

SPECIFICATIONS

All specifications nominal or typical at +230C unless noted. Performance may be

degraded in the presence of high-level electromagnetic fields.

Page 271: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

271

2130/2131 Common Specifications

Input Capacity : 10 channels, BNC (rear panel); 1 Channel, banana jacks (front panel).

Switched Output : Not attenuated, BNC (rear panel)

Attenuator Accuracy : ±0.1 % or better.

Update Rate : 3 readings/second, nominal.

Digital Display : 3-1/2 digit LED, ±1999 counts.

Display Height : 0.3 in (7.6 mm).

Operational Environment :

Temperature : 140 to 122

0F (-10

0 to 50

0C).

Humidity : Up to 90 % RH, non-condensing.

Power : 2110B/2111 Power Supply.

Size : 5.25 H 2.94 W ×10.97 D in (133 ×75 × 279 mm)

Weight : 2 lb (0.8 kg)

2130 Specifications

Input Voltage Range : ± 1999 mV (X1 range);

± 19 990 mV (X10 range)

Input Impedance : 100 KΩ.

Accuracy : ± 0.05% ± 1 count

2131 Specifications

Input Voltage Range : ± 1999 mV (X1 range); ± 10 V (X10 range);

Input Impedance : Greater than 1 MΩ.

Accuracy :

Step Input : ± 0.1 % ± 5 counts for repetitive step inputs of greater than 10 milliseconds

duration.

Repetitive Step Input : ± 0.2 % ± 5 counts for repetitive step inputs of greater than 500

μsec duration. Number of steps

required ≥ DurationPulse

ondsmilli

.

sec.10

Page 272: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

272

Repetitive sine Wave Input : ± 5.0 % ± 5 counts for repetitive sine wave of frequency

less than 1000 Hz.

± 1.0% ± 5 counts for repetitive sine wave input of frequency less than 200 Hz.

Storage Stability : ± 3 counts/ minute maximum at +750F (+23C).

Peak Modes : MAX (usually positive) excursion and MIN (usually negative) excursion.

Peak Reset : Manual or Automatic.

CONTROLS

OUTPUT Display : Provides a digital reading of the input as selected by CHANNEL

selector. Typically used to monitor strain or bridge voltage.

CHANNEL Selector : Positions 1 to 10 select the input channel for display. (Generally,

position 1 is channel farthest to the left in rack, etc.)

The EXTERNAL position selects the input that is connected to the adjacent front-panel

jacks.

EXTERNAL Jacks : provides ability to accept a front-panel input, typically bridge

voltage from 2110B/2111 EXTERNAL METER jacks.

ATTEN Switch : X1 position gives ±2 volt range.

X10 position gives ±20 volt range (±10V for 2131).

POWER Switch : This switches the 17.5 Vdc power supply. The pilot lamp LED

indicates when power is on.

SIG OUT (Rear Panel) : BNC receptacle used to monitor the input signal on an external

indicating instrument such as an oscilloscope. The desired channel is selected with the

front-panel CHANNEL selector switch.

Input Connectors (Rear Panel) : 10 BNC receptacles (typ. Connected to 2120A

OUTPUT receptacles).

RESET Switches (2131) : AUTO (Toggle Switch) – When set to AUTO, the stored peak

reading is periodically reset to the existing input level. Automatic reset will occur

approximately every 5 to 10 seconds.

MAN (push-button Switch)- When pressed, resets peak reading to the existing input

level; the button should be held 1 second or more for complete reset.

Page 273: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

273

PEAK MODE Switches (2131) : ON – Display reads the stored peak reading. When off

(down), display reads the existing input level.

MAX – The most positive (algebraic) input is stored.

MIN – The most negative (algebraic) input is stored.

SETUP

Install the 2130/2131 into the rack or enclosure as discussed in 4.0 Operating Procedures;

the 2130/2131 is installed in exactly the same manner as the 2120B Conditioners, filling

one of the rack or enclosure slots.

INPUT CONNECTIONS

Connect the OUTPUT connector of each 2120B channel to be displayed to the

appropriate 2130/2131 input, preferably using standard BNC cables. These can be

purchased locally or from Vishay Micro-Measurements. See Section 4.6a for a listing.

If desired, bridge voltage can be displayed by connecting banana plug jumpers between

the 2110B/2111 EXTERNAL METER jacks and the 2130/2131 EXTERNAL jacks

(connect red to red and black to black).

Page 274: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

274

OPERATION

To prevent damage to small gages or sensitive galvanometers, before turning on power to

the 2110B/2111 and 2130/2131, complete all steps in 4.0 Operating Procedures through

4.9e.

Turn POWER on to both the 2110B/2111 and 2130/2131. SET the 2131 PEAK MODE

and RESET-AUTO switches to off. Continue on 4.10 utilizing the CHANNEL selector to

choose the desired channel for display. Observe the OUTPUT DISPLAY when adjusting

the 2120B balance and gain controls as well as when taking data. For convenience, the

OUTPUT DISPLAY may be set up to read directly in engineering units.

The ATTEN switch is normally used in the X1 position but the X10 psition is required

when the reading goes over 1999 counts and the display flashes (indicating overrange). In

the X1 mode, the 2130/2131 reads directly in millivolts (tens of millivolts in the X10

mode).

To use the 2131 without utilizing the peak reading feature, keep the PEAK MODE and

RESET toggle switches set to the off (down) position. To take peak readings using the

2131, achieve desired calibration as discussed in the above paragraphs and proceed as

follows depending upon type of input signal:

Non-Recurring Peaks

Set RESET-AUTO to off (down position).

Set PEAK MODE rotary switch to MAX and the toggle switch to ON.

Press RESET-MAN firmly (approximately 1 second).

Load specimen or structure through the peak value of interest.

Read OUTPUT DISPLAY.

If the MIN peak is of interest, turn PEAK MODE to MIN and press RESET-MAN again.

Notes

In both MAX and MIN modes, a peak reading can have either a positive or negative sign.

For example, if RESET results in a 1500 count reading (Static load offset), a – 440 count

input excursion from the offset level will result in a reading of 1060 in the MIN mode or

an unchanged reading of 1500 in the MAX mode. If, instead, the excursion were 200, the

reading would have been an unchanged 1500 in the MIN mode or 1700 in the MAX

mode.

Page 275: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

275

A very slow display change can be due to peak storage drift that is not necessarily due to

change in the strain amplitude. Typically, the MAX peak storage can drift in either

direction, whereas MIN peak storage tends to drift in the positive direction.

In the presence of 50/60 Hz pickup, the display will read slightly higher in peak reading

mode because the pickup appears to the 2131 as a normal (although small) dynamic

signal. Therefore, this pickup should be minimized by using twisted and shielded strain

gage input wiring.

Recurring Peaks

Set PEAK MODE toggle switch to off (down position).

Establish static load (if required) and cyclic load.

Set PEAK MODE to ON.

Switch RESET to AUTO.

Press RESET-MAN firmly (approximately 1 second) or wait for automatic reset

to reset display.

MAX or MIN should now be displayed according to the position of the PEAK

MODE control.

To read the opposite peak, set PEAK MODE rotary switch accordingly and

repeat prior two steps.

To determine the peak-to-peak amplitude, algebraically subtract the MIN

reading from the MAX reading.

A decreased cyclic strain amplitude will be reflected in the display after reset

occurs.

SERVICE

A schematic of the 2130 and the 2131 can be found on the next page. Replacement parts

can be obtained from the factory.

There is an internal adjustment in the 2130/2131 for span sensitivity. This can be

trimmed by applying exactly ±1.900V to the input and adjusting the potentiometer at rear

of meter until readout displays ±1.900. A five minute warm-up is recommended.

Page 276: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

276

REFERENCES

1. Alan Pope & Low Speed Wind Tunnel Testing.

J. J. Harper John Wiley and Sons, 1966.

2. E. Markland A First Course in Air Flow, Techquipment Limited, 1976.

3. R. C. Pankhurst & Wind Tunnel Techniques, Pitman Publishers, 1968.

D. W. Holder

4. E. L. Houghton & Aerodymics for Engineering Students.

A. E. Brock Edward Arnold Ltd.

5. L. Bernstein Force Measurement in Short-duration Hypersonic

Facilities.

AGARD – AG214, November 1975.

6. L. Bernstein Lecture notes on Experimental Methods in Mechanics of

Fluid.

7. Strain Gauges and Instrumentation. Technical Training

Programme, C –25. Measurement Group, U.S.A.

8. Modern Strain Gauge Transducers : Their Design and

Construction. Part I – IX, October 1984.

9. T. A. Cook A Notebook on the Calibration of Strain Gauge Balance

for Wind Tunnel Models. RAE Technical Note. No. Aero

2631, December 1959.

Page 277: Lecture Notes on Wind Tunnel Testing

277