Sei sulla pagina 1di 289

,

NASA
CR
2920

C.1
,.

I7

NASA Contractor Report 2920

LOAN C 9 - V : RETI..lF,
AFWL TFr! '?'fCfi1.. LIBRARf ._
KIRTLAND AFB, N. M. -

Calibration of Transonic
and Supersonic Wind Tunnels

T. D. Reed, T. C. Pope, and J. M. Cooksey

CONTRACT NAS2-8606
NOVEMBER 1977

NASA

*.?

~-

TECH LIBRARY KAFB, NM

NASA Contractor Report 2920

Calibration of Transonic
andSupersonic Wind Tunnels

T. D. Reed, T. C. Pope, and J. M. Cooksey


Vought Corporation
Dallas, Texas

Prepared for
AmesResearch Center
under Contract NAS2-8606

National AeroMubics
and Space Administration

Scientific andT e c h i d
Information Office
1977

"

..

FOREWORD
In April,

1970 a r e p o r t

s o n i cs c a l ee f f e c t s

was issuedbyan

ad hoc NASA-USAF groupontran-

and t e s t i n gt e c h n i q u e s .T h i sr e p o r ta s s e s s e dt r a n s o n i c

t e s t i n gt e c h n i q u e s

and recommended, among o t h e rt h i n g s ,t h a tat r a n s o n i cw i n d -

t u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o n

manualbe

w r i t t e nw h i c hr e v i e w e dt h es t a t e - o f - t h e - a r t .T h i s

was viewedasanecessarysteptowardthedevelopment

o f more a c c u r a t e and

s t a n d a r d i z e dt u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o np r o c e d u r e s .
For t h i s purpose,thepresent

manual was j o i n t l y fundedby:

U. S. Navy throughtheOfficeofNavalResearch,

(1) t h e

(2) t h e U. S. A i r Forcethrough

t h e Air Force F l i g h t Dynamics L a b o r a t o r y and A r n o l d Research O r g a n i z a t i o n ,


NASA throughtheWashingtonHeadquarters

and theLewis,Langley

The c o n t r a c t was administered by NASA Ames.

Centers.

(3)

and Ames Research

Mr. F. W.

S t e i n l es e r v e d

as t e c h n i c a lm o n i t o r .

A rough d r a f t o f t h i s
ResearchCenter

and ArnoldResearchOrganization.

reviewerswerecompiledby
Themanual

manual was reviewed by personnel o f NASA Ames

Mr.

F. W.

Steinleat

The comments o ft h ev a r i o u s
Ames and M r .

was improvedconsiderablybytheconstructive

F.

comments t h a t were

received, and we w i s h t o t h a n k a l l t h o s e i n v o l v e d f o r t h e i r t i m e
Our thanks go t o M r .
d i s c u s s i o no fh o tw i r e s
w i s ht o

C.

M. Jackson a t
and e f f o r t s .

J. Stalmach o f t h e Vought C o r p o r a t i o n f o r t h e

and f i l m sw h i c hi sg i v e ni n

acknowledgethesuperiortyping

Appendix 1 .

F i n a l l y , we

and s e c r e t a r i a la s s i s t a n c ep r o v i d e d

by Ms. F. H. Deason.

...
I l l

ARO.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Sect

ion

......................

INTRODUCTION

...................
. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
TUNNEL VARIABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A . Types o f Tunnels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
B . OperationalParameters
............
1 . PressureControl . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2 . C a l i b r a t i o n Accuracy. Flow U n i f o r m i t y and
R e l a t i o n s h i p t o Model T e s t i n g . . . . . . .
References
C . Flow Parameters and U n c e r t a i n t yR e l a t i o n s h i p s .
1 . Pressures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A

.
c.
B

It

Gackground

H i s t o r i c a lS k e t c h
Calibration Procedures
References

.
.
..
6.
7.
8.
2

3
4
5

111

................
................
.......
..............
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. ..

Temperature
Mach
Number
Flow A n g u l a r i t y and Curvature
Reynolds Number
Unsteadiness.Turbulence.
and Noise
Humidity
T e s t Mediums
References

...............

.......
A . S e t t l i n g Chamber Pressure . . . . . . . . . . .

CALIBRATION PROCEDURES AND INSTRUMENTATION

.
C.
B

References
T o t a l Temperature
References
P i t o tP r e s s u r e s
References
T e s tS e c t i o nS t a t i cP r e s s u r e s
1
TransonicSurveyPipes
2
TransonicStaticPressure
Probes
3
SupersonicStaticPressure
Probes
4
Orifice-InducedStaticPressureErrors
5 GeneralPurpose StaticPressureProbe
References
Measurement o f Flow A n g u l a r i t y
1
D i f f e r e n t i aP
l r e s s u r eY a w e t e r s :
2-D
2
DifferentiaP
l ressure
Yawmeters:
3-0
3 Hot W i r e / F i l m Yawmeters
4
ForceBalance Yawmeters
References

...............
................

. .
..
.
.
E.
..
.
.
D

. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
......
.....

...
...
.........
.. .. ..
..........
..........

8
8
12
22
22

34
36
40
42

47
52

56
59
59

63
68

78
79
86
105
110
116
124
124
128
134
137

Page

Sect ion
."

....

. . . . .. .. .. ..
.
. . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
..
. . . . . . . . . . .. ..
.
H.
. . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ......
..
.......
.
.......
1.
. . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
..
.
. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..............
ERROR AND UNCERTAINTY
CALIBRATION MEASUREMENTS . . . .
A . Random E r r o r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. F i x eEd r r o r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C . Uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
D . ErrorPropagation
................
References

.;r

"

IV

Measurement o f UnsteadyFlowDisturbances
1
DynamIc Pressure
Measurements
References
TransonicTunnelBoundaryConditionsand
W aI n
l lt e r f e r e n c e
1
C o n v e n t i o n aVl e n t i l a t e d
Walls
2
Adaptive
Wall
Studies
3
Boundary
Layers
and
Wall
Generated
Noise
Standard
Models
1
AGARD Force
Models
2-0
2
TransonicPressureModels:
3
TransonicPressureModels:
3-0
References
O p t i c a l Methods
1
Supersonic
Tunnels
2
Transonic
Tunnels
3 Newer Methods
References
Humidity Measurements
References

IN

..

....

v.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

B
C

.
.

.............

Summary o f S t a t e - o f - t h e - A r t
o f Transonic and
Supersonic Wind Tunnel C a l i b r a t i o n
Transonic
Tunnel s
Supersonic
Tunnels

. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

144
147

162
162

165
169
174

174
175
175
182
182
182

183
185
189
189
190

191
192

195
195
198
202

APPENDICES
..

I1

Ill

IV

. .

. . . ..... .. .. .. .. ..... .. .. .. .. .. .... . .


LASER
DOPPLER
VELOCIMETERS
................
Nomenclature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References
EFFECTS OF VIBRATION OF A CIRCULAR
CYLINDER
ON STATIC
PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

255

. . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. ..

260
267

AND HOT WIRES


HOT FILMS
Nomenclature
References

FACILITIES WHICH RESPONDED TO QUESTIONNAIRE


A
Table 1 :
Facilities
B
Table I I : T e sSt e c t i o n
CharacteristIcs

.
.

vi

203
217

222
249

"

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Fiqure

-.
Page

Title

..........
1 ....................
Diagram,
Ref.

Data
and

2. B. 1

Jackson's Flow Quality Criteria for Transonic


Tunnels,
Ref.

14

A l l o w a b l e L i n e a r MachNumber Gradient Over


Model L e n g t hf o r BouyancyDrag C o e f f i c i e n t
C o n t r i b u t i oonf
0.0001,

17

2. B. 2

E r r oFrl o w

1.c.1

..................

2. B.

2. B.

2.

Effects of Reynolds
Number o n C a l i b r a t i o n o f t h e
PWT-16T Tunnel a t Mm = 0 . 6 and 0 . 8 f o r ew = 0 and

c. 1

2.c.2

2.c.3

2.C.4

2.c.5

2.C.6
2.C.7
2.C.8

2.C.9
2.c. 10

~ = 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

18

MachNumber
Gradient OverModel LengthasPercent
o f Average MachNumber f o r Bouyancy D r a g . C o e f f f c I e n t
o f 0.0001

19

.......................
Afterbody DragData a t anAverage MachNumber of
0.95.... ......................
AfterbodyDragDataWithTunnel
MachNumber Given
t o ThreeDecimals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The U n c e r t a i n t y o f P i t o t - t o - S t a t i c P r e s s u r e
F u n cot ifo n
Number
Mach
. . . . . . as. .a . . . .
The S e n s i t i v i t y o f Dynamic P r e s s u r e t o S t a g n a t i o n
PressureError,TransonicOperation
..........
The S e n s i t i v i t y o f Dynamic P r e s s u r e t o S t a t i c P r e s s u r e
Error,TransonicOperation.
..............
The S e n s i t i v i t y o f Dynamic Pressure t o MachNumber
Error,
Supersonic
Operation
..............
The R e l a t i o n o f S t a g n a t i o n t o S t a t i c T e m p e r a t u r e a s
a Function o f MachNumber
...............
The S e n s i t i v i t y o f MachNumber
and Stagnation
Pressure
Error
.t o.S.t a.t i c.P.r e.s s.u r.e . . . .
The S e n s i t i v i t y o f MachNumber t o S t a t i c P r e s s u r e
...............
and StagnationPressures.
Change i n F l o w D i r e c t i o n W i t h
Number, Ref. 3

24

27.
29

31
32

35
38

39

Increment o f Mach

.....................

vii

23

41

'

2.c. 1 1
2.c.12
2.C. I3
2.C.14

Page

Title

Flgure

....................
The Sensitivity of Unit Reyno1,ds Number to Stagnation
Pressure Error. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The Sensitivity of Unit Reynolds Number to Stagnation
Temperature Error . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The'Sensitlvity of Unit .Reynolds Number to Statfc
Pressure Error.

46
49

Flow Disturbances in Supersonic and Hypersonic


Tunnels, Ref. 5

...................

50

The Ratio of Relative Humidity in the Stream to


Reservoir as a Function of Mach Number.

53

Reservoir TemperatureRequired to Avoid


Condensation, Ref. 1 0

54

Flow Disturbances in Transonic Tunnels, Ref. 5

2.C. 16

2.C. I8
3.8.1

3.C. 1
3.C.2

3.c.3

........

. .... . . . . .. ......
Total Temperature Probes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Isentropic Stagnation Pressure Probe, Ref. 8. . . . . .
AEDC Supersonic Mach Number Probes. . . . . . . . . . .
Mach Number Probe forSmall Pilot LEHRT Facilities,
Ref.9....

.....................
Subsonic Static-Pressure Probe . . . . . . . . .

3.0.1

R.A.E.

3. D. 2

Typical Pressure Distributions Along Probe


at Two
Locations on Tune1 Center1 ine,M = 0.74 (choked),
R/L = 19.7 x 10 per meter.

..............

3.0.3

Variation of Static-Pressure ReadingWith Position


of Static Holes and Nose Shape at I4 = 1.6, Ref. 8 .

3.D.4

3. D. 5
3.D.6
3-0.7

3.D.8

45

....

2.C.15

17

44

The Sensltlvity of Unlt Reynolds Number to Mach Number

Error.........................

2.C.

43

64
70
72

73
83

84

..

87

Transonic Pressure Distributions on


a 20 deg ConeCylinder Wtth 0.008% Blockage, Ref. 12

........

90

Transonic Pressure Distributionson a 20 deg ConeCy1 inder , Ref. 20

93

...................
Dimensions of the R.A.E. Static Pressure Probes . . . .
Transonic Characteristics of the Two
R.A.E. Probes. . .
Effect of Orifice Location Utilizinga Double Wedge
Support Strut, Ref. 32. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
viii

96

97
103

3.D.9
3.D.10
3.0.11

3.E. 1

3. E. 2
3.E-3
3.E.4

3.E.5
3.E.6

3. F. 1
3. F. 2

Paqa

Title

F I qure

...
O r i f i c e - I n d u c e dS t a t i cP r e s s u r eE r r o r s ,
Ref. 50 . . . '.
Transonic/SupersonicStaticPressure
Probe. . . . . . .
Two DimensionalYameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PyramidYameter.
...................
S e n s i t i v i t y o f 60 degConical Yawmeter. . . . . . . . .
S p l i t Hot Film, 20 Wedge Probe C a l l b r a t i o n B r . i d g e
F l o w Angle,Ref.
23 . . . . . . .
V o l t a g eD l f f e r e n c ev s
Geometry o f AEDC ForceBalance Yawmeter . . . . . . . .
S e n s i t i v i t y o f t h e AEDC ForceBalanceYameter.
....
FrequencySpectra o f Noise from a Turbulent Boundary
Layeron a S o l i dW a l l ,
Ref. 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Noise FrequencySpectra for Some E x i s t i n g C o n t i n u o u s
Windtunnels a t
= 0 . 8 0 , Ref. 3. . . . . . . . . . . .
Small P i e z o e l e c t r i c Dynamic Pressure Probe,Ref.
14 . .
General C r i t e r i a for ProbeSurvey

Rakes, Ref.

33.

M-

104
113
117
126
129
131

136
138
139

145
145
154

APPENDIX I
A.l.l
A. 1.2

CorrelationofConvective
Heat T r a n s f e r f r o m
Transverse Cy1 inders, Ref. 3.

206

F l u c t u a t i o n Diagram f o r 1 Percent Mass Flow


F l u c t u a t i o n s w i t h V a r y i n q Degrees o f C o r r e l a t i o n ,
Ref.7..

206

F l u c t u a t i o n Diagrams f o r 1 PercentTurbulent
V e l o c l t yF l u c t u a t i o n s( V o r t i c i t y
Made),Ref.

209

.............

.......................

A. 1.3
A. 1.4
A. 1.5

A.1.6

7.

F l u c t u a t i o nD i a g r a mf o r
1 PercentTemperature
S p o t t i n e s s( E n t r o p y Mode), Ref. 7

...........

F l u c t u a t i o n Diagram f o r SoundWaves
thatareAlmost
Mach
Waves
Having I % P r e s s u r eF l u c t u a t i o n s ,
Ref. 7.
F l u c t u a t i o n Diagram f o r U n c o r r e l a t e d Modes a t
0.1 PerCent:
TurbulentVelocityFluctuationsof
0.2 Percent;
SoundWaves
(Detectable) 0.1 P e r c e n t o f Mass Flow
F l u c t u a t i o n s .( D o t t e dL i n e s
Show S e p a r a t eC o n t r i butions.)Ref.
7.

..

209
21 0

M11.75; TemperatureSpottinessof

....................
fx

21 0

Fiqutc

Title

Page

Comparison of Pitot Probe and Hot-wire


.Measurements of Free-Stream Pressure
Fluctuations in a Conventional, Mach 5
Nozzle, Ref. 14
1

214

A.1.7

... ..............
APPENDIX I I

A.II.l
A. 11.2
A. 11.3
A.

11.4

A. 11.5
A.

11.6

Dual Beam Laser Doppler Velocimeter, with


Optional Forward and Backscatter Modes.

......
Generation of Interference Fringesin Measuring Volume of Dual Beam Laser Doppler Velocimeter. .
Light Scattered by a Small Particle . . . . . . . . .
Laser Anemometer Signal From Photodetector. . . . . .
Effect of Particle Diameteron Frequency Response . . .

A. 11.9

226
226
238

240

Maximum Frequency ForNo More Than 5% Attenuation


of Sinusoidal Velocity Variations, Particle
Density- 1 gm/cc.

240

Effect of Velocity Biasing on Mean Velocity


Measurements in Turbulent Flow

243

Sensitivity CoefficlentrFor Determination of


Mach Number From Velocityand Stagnation
Temperature Measurements.

248

.................

A. 11.8

225

Time Constant Asa Function of Particle Diameter


For Various Mach Numbers, Particle Density
=
1 gm/cc

.......................

A.11.7

224

...........

..............

APPENDIX I l l

A.lll.1

Pressure Distribution ona Circular Cylinder


in Crossf low,Ref. 1

................

258

. .. ..

NOMENCLATURE*

a m p l i t u d eo fs i n u s o i d a lo s c i l l a t i o n ,
f u n c t i o ni n t r o d u c e di n
Eq. (3.0.1)

f u n c t i o ni n t r o d u c e di n
c r o s s f l o wi n t e r f e r e n c e
fixederror

*M

Eq.

(3.D.l)

or p r o b ei n t e r f e r e n c e
as a measure o f probe-

1 imit f o r Mach number, Eq. (4.0.2)

BY

Chapman-Rubesin v i s c o s i t y parameter

AC
DG

by a l i n e a rp r e s s u r e .

dragcoefficientincrementproduced
g r a d i e n ti nt h et e s ts e c t i o n

RMS v a l u e o f f l u c t u a t i n g s t a t i c p r e s s u r e c o e f f i c i e n t
RMS f l u c t u a t i n g s t a t i c p r e s s u r e c o e f f i c i e n t p e r u n i t
widthatfrequency
n.

d i a m e t e ro f

DS

d i s t a n c e between c e n t e r so fs l o t si nt u n n e lw a l l

diameterofstaticpressureprobe

dl

d i a m e t e ro fP i t o tp r o b e

band

a t r a n s v e r s e ,c y l i n d r i c a l ,p r o b es u p p o r t

orifice diameter

F (n)

n o n d i m e n s i o n a ls p e c t r a lf u n c t i o nw h i c hi s
ameasure o f t h e
i n t e n s i t y o f s t a t i cp r e s s u r ef l u c t u a t i o n sp e ru n i t
band w i d t h
a tt h ef r e q u e n c y
n,
ACp =

f
fP

1;

F(n)dn

o s c i lf lraeotqfi oune n c y
frequencyofstaticpressurefluctuations

fr

f i n e n erpa
so
rstofi ob e

t o t a l head or s t a g n a t p
i or n
e s tsseu
ies
nrctet i o n

*Separate

lists of

symbolsappear

nose
(2Ln/d)

i n Appendices I and I I .
xi

t o t a l head i n s e t t l i n g chamber
Pitot pressure at
time-averaged,

a = 0 (eithersubsonicorsupersonic)

t o t a lp r e s s u r eb e h i n d

a normalshock

RMS o f f l u c t u a t i n g t o t a l p r e s s u r e b e h i n d
s l o t parameter, Eq.

a normalshock

(3.6.7)

model l e n g t h
nose 1 eng t h
d i s t a n c e from c o n e - c y l i n d e r j u n c t u r e t o n e a r e s t s t a t i c
pressure orifice

d i s t a n c ef r o m a s t a t i c p r e s s u r e o r i f i c e t o b e g i n n i n g o f
probeenlargement,e.g.,
f l a r e or support
Mach number based on s t a t i c p r e s s u r e i n
Machnumber

plenum chamber

i nt e s ts e c t i o n

mass f l o w p e r u n i t a r e a t h r o u g h v e n t i l a t e d w a l l
mass f l o w p e r u n i t a r e a i n f r e e s t r e a m o f t e s t s e c t i o n
n

r e d u c e df r e q u e n c yo fs t a t i cp r e s s u r ef l u c t u a t i o n s ,

"d

g e n e r a ld e s i g n a t i o nf o rd i r e c t i o nn o r m a l

s t a t i cp r e s s u r ei nf r e e s t r e a mo ft e s ts e c t i o n

<P' >

RMS o f f l u c t u a t i n g s t a t i c p r e s s u r e

fpwT/u,

to a w a l l

measured, unsteady s t a t i c p r e s s u r e
s t a t i cp r e s s u r ei ns e t t l i n g

chamber

t r u e ,u n s t e a d ys t a t i cp r e s s u r eo fu n d i s t u r b e df r e e s t r e a m
time-averaged,
s t a t i cP r e s s u r e

t r u es t a t i cp r e s s u r e
measuredona

i n d i c a t e d dynamicpressure,

probe o r t u n n e l s i d e w a l l

HI-P

incompressible definition of

dynamicpressure,

dynamic p r e s s u r e i n s e t t l i n g

chamber

dynamic p r e s s u r e o f f r e e s t r e a m i n t e s t s e c t i o n
porosityparameter,

Eq.
xi i

(3.G.5)

H-P

RS

viscous parameter for flow through slots

number
ReynoldsRe
Rex

Reynolds number based on wetted length

wingreferencearea,orwidthof

SY

compressible yameter sensitivity. Eq. (3.E.2)

sy*

incompressible yameter sensiflvity, (3.E.l)


Eq.

period o f sinusoidal
oscillation

time

u(t1

total,
unsteady
velocity
along

ut4

toea1
uncertainty
Interval

"m

velocity of freestream in test


section
veloclty of sound source

turbulent
friction
velocity,

Eq. ( 4 . 0 . 3 )

112
(T~IP)

mode 1 vo 1 ume

Vn(t)

total,unsteadyvelocitynormal

vn

average velocity normal to a ventilated wall

WS

width of slots

WT

square root of
cross-sectional
area

Cartesian
coordinate
measured

along
the
tunnel
axis

Cartesian
coordinate
measured

normal to
the
tunnel
sidewalls

Carteslan
coordinaee
measured
normal
to
the
top
and
bottom
walls of tunnel

to

a probeaxis

o f test
section

Greek Letters

angle of attack

(I"

ratio of specific
heats

angle
between

ll

azmuthal
angle
polar
orcoordinate
angle

2 1 112

orifice planes
of

xiii

a probe

a probe
axis
for Mach
number,

us
T

a strutsupportfor

a yameter

semi-vertex angle of a cone

9w

tunnel wall angle (positive for divergent walls)

e'
W'

viscosity coefficient at edgeof boundary layer


viscosity coefficient at wall temperature

density of gas

standard deviation in Mach number along tunnel centerline

wall porosity

TW

shear stress ata solid wall

perturbation velocity potential, Eq. (3.6.1)

rlr

yaw

angular velocity, rad/sec

angle

xiv

I1.

INTRODUCTION

1 .A.

Background

The use of a wind tunnel for aerodynamic measurements requiresa knowledge


of the test environment. Furthermore, a definite relationship obviously exists
between the accuracy with which the test conditions are known and the uncertainty

in the final results. The demand for increased wind tunnel data accuracy follows naturally from the demand for improved full scale vehicle performance and
accuracy of performance prediction. A sustained effort has been directed toward
improving the accuracyof test data from existing wind tunnel facilitfcs. In
addition, requirements have been established for new wind tunnel facilities with
more complete simulation capabilities.
The results of one of the first comprehensivetest programs to study the
correlation of wind tunnel data from several transonic facilitieswere reported
by Treon et al. in Ref. ( I ) .

Since the same model, instrumentation and support

sting were used in each of the three tunnels, this unique series of tests allowed
a comparative evaluation of the effects of facility flow environment
and calibration upon data agreement. The results of this series of tests, using state-of-

but deficient
the-art techniques and instrumentation, were considered good
relative to current goals.
The purpose of this reportis to review the current state-of-the-art
of

wind tunnel calibration techniques and instrumentation, evaluate the expected


results and, where possible, recommend improvements. This program was carried
out by ( 1 ) acquiring information from eighty-eight wind tunnel facilitiesby
means of a c.omprehensive questionnaire,(2) a detailed literature search, (3)
personal visits and telephone conversations,and (4) independent analyses.
This report documents the results of these investigations. In addition
to the above background information, SectionI also presents ( I ) a brief
historical sketch of attemptsto improve wind tunnel flow quality and calibration procedures and (2) a sumnary of tunnel cal ibrat ion tasks.Section I I
discusses tunnel variables and how uncertaintyin the measurementsof various
flow quantities affect test results.

The details of measuring staticand total

pressures, temperature, flow angularity, flow unsteadiness, and humidity are


all discussed in Section 1 1 1 .

This section also includesa review of the

t r a n s o n i c - w a l l - i n t e r f e r e n c ep r o b l e m ,t h eu s eo fs t a n d a r dm o d e l s ,
w h i c ho p t i c a l

methodscanhave

IV discusses

d u r i n gt u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o n s .S e c t i o n

o f e r r o r s i n c a l i b r a t i o n measurements and t h e i r e f f e c t s on

thevarioustypes

In a d d i t i o nt op r e s e n t i n gc o n c l u s i o n s

f i n a lr e s u l t s .

and r e c m e n d a t l o n s , a

summary o f t h eq u e s t i o n n a i r er e s u l t si sg i v e ni nS e c t i o n

w i t h four appendfces.Appendices

V.

Themanual

concludes

I and t i r e v i e w ,r e s p e c t i v e l y ,t h eu s eo fh o t - ,
1 1 1 d i s c u s s e st h ee f f e c t s

w i r t s / f i l m s and laserDopplervelocimeters.Appendix

o f v i b r a t i o no n

and t h e r o l e

a c y l i n d r i c a l ,s t a t i cp r e s s u r e

F i n a l l y , Appendix IV

probe.

sumnarizesthecharacteristicsoftunnelsforwhichquestionnaireswerereceived.

1 .B.

H i s t o r i c aS
l ketch

The need f o r good f l o w q u a l i t y i n w i n d t u n n e l


e a r l i e s ti n v e s t i g a t o r s .

was recognizedbythe

As r e p o r t e db yP r i t c h a r di n

theRoyalAeronauticalSocietyagreed

i n 1870 t o p r o v i d e f u n d s f o r t h e c o n s t r u c -

t i o n o f 'la s u i t a b l e and w e l l - f i n i s h e d i n s t r u m e n t h a v i n g t h e
settingvariousplanesurfacesat
b o t hh o r i z o n t a l
tion.

any desired angle

seriesoftests

A laterreport

on f l a t p l a t e s

wereundertaken.

ontheresultsnotedthat"theseexperimentswould
steady and c o n t i n u o u s c u r r e n t

f l u c t u a t i o n sc a r r i e db y

each arm ofthefan,as

i n f l u e n c eo nt h er e s u l t , "
by l a t e re x p e r i m e n t o r s ,

Theneed
e.g.,see

with a test section of

an a p p r e c i a b l e

was a l s or e c o g n i z e d

(3).

Mach) c o n s t r u c t e d a t u n n e la tV i e n n ai n

1893

a w i r es c r e e no v e rt h ei n l e tt os t r a i g h t e n

1896, Sir Hiram Maxim c o n s t r u c t e d a 91 x 91-cm tunnel and used a

form o f honeycomb t o remove f a n - i n d u c e d s w i r l


o ft h et e s ts e c t i o n .
anda

and s t r a i g h t e nt h ef l o wu p s t r e a m

The W r i g h tb r o t h e r s t' u n n e l ,c o n s t r u c t e di n
honeycomb.

A t u n n e lc o n s t r u c t e d

i n 1901 i n c l u d e ds c r e e n so fc h e e s ec l o t h

it revolved,exerted

I 8 x 25-cm which was used f o r flow o b s e r v a t i o n and

photography.Thisapparatusused

bothscreens

have been

been o b t a i n e d , b u t t h e

f o r improved f l o w q u a l i t y
Ref.

Ludwig Mach (son o f E r n s t

t h ef l a w .I n

As a

was c o n s t r u c t e d by Wenharn and Browning,

more s a t i s f a c t o r y hada

Dr.

degrees o f i n c l i n a -

b ep u b l i s h e df o rt h eb e n e f i to ft h eS o c i e t y . ' '

result of this action,the first wind tunnel


anda

means o f i n s t a n t l y

and capable o f r e g i s t e r i n g

and v e r t i c a l f o r c e s s i m u l t a n e o u s l y f o r a l l

The r e s u l t s t o

t h e Counci 1 o f

Ref.(21,

and w i r e t o

by D r . A .

1901, included

F. Zahm a t Washington

smooth t h e i n l e t f l o w .

Dr. Zahm also was concerned with flow uniformity


and the accuracy o f
calibration of thetunnel velocity. He developed an extremely sensitive
manometer for measuring the pressures generatedbv a.Pitot-statlc tube which
was used for velocity measurements.

In describing this instrument, he used


the term "wind tunnel" for the first time in the literature. Zahm also used
a toy balloon moving with the flowto obtain a time-of-flight measurement o f
the velocity.
Another calibration procedureused by Zahm involved measurement of the

force on a llpressure plate" or drag plateat the same time the flow velocity
during
was measured. This method allowed determination of the flow velocity
.later testsby observing the forceon the pressure plate,Ref. 4.
is
Add i t iona 1 discussion of early wind tunnels and measurement techniques
also given in an article by Goin -(Ref. 5).
From the beginning, the development of wind tunnel facilities has usually
been a precursor of improved flight vehicles as outlined by Goethert in Ref. 6.
The development of new and improved wind tunnels has, in turn, required new
calibration procedures, techniques and instrumentation in the struggle to
provide experimental data with the accuracy requiredby vehicle designers.

I.C.

of, t h e w i n d t u n n e l f l o w e n v i r o n m e n t

Both the quality

whichthisenvironmentis
measurements.

CalibratioP
n rocedures
and t h e a c c u r a c y w i t h

known c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e a c c u r a c y o f a e r o d y n a m i c

The t o t a l u n c e r t a i n t y i n

aerodynamicdata

i st h er e s u l t

11.8.2 and I V .

l a r g e number o f e r r o r sources, as i s discussed i n S e c t i o n s

(71, i l l u s t r a t e s t h e many sources o f e r r o r and

F i g u r e I . C . 1 , from Ref.

t h e manner i n w h i c he r r o r sp r o p a g a t e
c o e f f i c i e n t .C o n s i d e r i n gt h et o t a l
minimizethose
h e l p f u ls i n c e

of a

to a t y p i c a l t e s t r e s u l t
number o f e r r o r

suchasdrag

s o u r c e s ,t h en e c e s s i t yt o

due t ot u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o ni so b v i o u s .T h i sf l o wd i a g r a mi s
i t i s o l a t e st h ef a c i l i t yf l o we n v i r o n m e n t

and c a l i b r a t i o n elements

whicharediscussedherein.
Boththequalityoftheflow
conditionsare

and t h e a c c u r a c y w i t h w h i c h t h e f l o w

known a r e c o n s i d e r e d

as p a r t o f t h e c a l i b r a t i o n c o n t r i b u t i o n .

I t i s s u g g e s t e dt h a tt h ec a l i b r a t i o ne f f o r ti n c l u d et h ef o l l o w i n ge l e m e n t s :

1.

Initial evaluation

of performancecharacteristics

and f l o w q u a l i t y ,

and d e t e r m i n a t i o n as t o need f o r c o r r e c t i v e a c t i o n .

2.

D e t e r m i n a t i o n o f optimum tunneloperationalparameterssuchas
w a l la n g l e

3.

and p o r o s i t y ,c o n t r o l

systemperformance,etc.

D i a g n o s t i c measurements t o i n v e s t i g a t e

or

a specificflowproblem

deficiency.

4.

Measurement o f mean, unsteady and s p a t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f t e s t


s e c t i o nf l o wc o n d i t i o n sf o rt h es e l e c t e dt u n n e lc o n f i g u r a t i o n

and

v a r i o u so p e r a t i n gc o n d i t i o n s .

5.

Standard model t e s t s f o r i n t e r - f a c i l i t y

6.

P e r i o d i cr e - e v a l u a t i o no fb a s i ct u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o nf o rc o n t r o l

comparisons.

or

may be accomplished i n p a r tb yt e s t so n

monitoringpurposes.This
a s t a n d a r d f a c i 1 it y model.
Consideringthe

above t a s kd e s c r i p t i o n s ,

q u a l i t y improvements, v e r i f i c a t i o n t e s t s
i n t i m a t e l yr e l a t e d .

The accuracyrequirements

typeofcalibrationtask

and theprimarypurpose

most s t r i n g e n t f o r i t e m s

directly to the

and

i t can be observedthatflow

and b a s i ct u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o n sa r e
may vary,depending

upon t h e

of the facility, but are

6 s i n c ee r r o r si nt h e

random or f i x e d e r r o r i n t h e f i n a l d a t a .

measurements can c o n t r i b u t e

0
FACILITY

FORCE

I'

PRESSURE &
TEMPERATITRF: TRANSIENTS
I

Figure l . C . 1 .

DATA
AND

ERROR FLOW DIAGRAM, Ref. 7

R . J.:

" F u r t h e rC o r r e l a t i o no f

Data From I n v e s t i g a t i o n so f

Subsonic-Speed T r a n s p o r t A i r c r a f t

Model i n ThreeMajor

a H i gh

Wind Tunne 1

A l A A Paper 71-291, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 1971-

2.

Dawn o f Aerodynamics,''Journal

P r i t c h a r d , J. L.:
"The

V . 61, March 1957.

A e r o n a u t i c aS
l ociety,

3.

Randers-Pehrson,

H.

o f theRoyal

H. :

"PioneerblindTunnels,"

93, No. 4, Smithsonian

V.

M i s c e l l a n e o u s C o l l e c t ions.

4.

B i r d , K. D.:

"Old Tyme Wind Tunnels,"Perspective

1957,

Sept.-OCt.,

Cornel1AeronauticalLaboratories,Inc.

5.

Goin, K.

L.:

"The H i s t o r y ,E v o l u t i o n ,
Feb. 1971.

A l A A StudentJour.,

6.

Goethert, B. H . :
New York,

7.

and Use o f Wind TunneIs,"

Transonic Wind TunnelTesting,

pp 2-31,

Perrnagon P r e s s ,

1961.

P i c k l e s i m e r , J. R . ,

Lowe, W.

H.,

and Cumrning, D . P. :

''A Study o f

Expected Data P r e c i s i o n i n The Proposed AEDC H l R T F a c i l i t y , "

75-61, August, 1975.

AEDC-TR-

I I.

II.A.l

TUNNEL VARIABLES
Types of Tunnels

The m a t e r i a l p r e s e n t e d h e r e i n i s d i r e c t e d t o w a r d w i n d t u n n e l s o p e r a t i n g
range from 0.4 t o 3.5.

i n t h e Machnumber

Themodes

o f o p e r a t i o n of t h e

(1) continuousflow,

v a r i o u sf a c i l i t i e ss u r v e y e di n c l u d e :

(2) blowdown, and

(3) i n t e r m i t t e n t .
I n thecase

of i n t e r m i t t e n t t u n n e l s ,

s h o r tr u nt i m e sr e q u i r es p e c i a lp r o v i s i o n sf o r
systems.

e.g.,

a Ludwiegtube,thevery
measurement and r e c o r d i n g

Pressure measurementscanbeaccomplishedusing

p r e s s u r et r a n s d u c e r so r

a capture system which permits

p r e s s u r ea f t e rt h er u n .

However,

i n o r d e rt oc a l i b r a t et h ef a c i l i t y

e i t h e rh i g h - r e s p o n s e
measurements o f

t h e same basicproceduresmustbefollowed
as f o r a l o n g - r u n - t i m ef a c i l i t y .

Thus, t h e

s p e c i a lp r o b l e m sa s s o c i a t e dw i t ht h es h o r tr u nt i m e so fi n t e r m i t t e n tt u n n e l s
a r en o td i s c u s s e d ,b u tt h eg e n e r a ld i s c u s s i o n so fc a l i b r a t i o np r o c e d u r e sa r e
applicable.
A l t h o u g ht r a n s o n i ct u n n e l sw i t hh i g h - a s p e c t - r a t i o
a r eg e n e r a l l yo p e r a t e da th i g h e r
d i s c u s s e ds e p a r a t e l y

(2-D) t e s t s e c t i o n s

Reynolds numbers, t h i st y p eo ft u n n e li sn o t

becausetheysharethe

same c a l i b r a t i o n problemsas

sym-

m e t r i c atl u n n e l s .
Discussionsofthevarioustopicsare
S u b d i v i s i o n si n t ot r a n s o n i c

o f a generalnaturewherepossible.

and supersonicareasare

t h ep e c u l i a r i t i e so ft h e s er e g i o n s .F u r t h e rs u b d i v i s i o n sa r e
a p p r o p r i a t e ,i nd i s c u s s i o n s

made where d i c t a t e d b y
made, as

o f details.

1I.B.

OPERATIONAL PARAMETERS

II.B.l

Pressure Control

Pressure controls are incorporatedin some form in all wind tunnels (with
the possible exception of supersonic,indraft tunnels).

The methods of control

are obviously different for transonic and supersonic wind tunnels and for
intermittent, blowdown and continuous wind tunnels. This section is limited

to discussions of pressure control systems as they influence tunnel calibraby these systems on
tion programs and the effects of variations introduced
tunnel flow quality and measurement accuracy.
Continuous Wind Tunnels
Continuous wind tunnels m a y be either pressure tunnelsor atmosphericvented tunnels. For the pressure or variable density wind

tunnel, the stagnation

pressure is determined by the static or wind-off pressure and the pressure


added by the fan or compressor drive system. The drive system pressure ratio
may be controlled by v a r y i n g compressor speed, blade angle,
or auide-vane
ang 1 e.

Vented tunnels usually operate at atmospheric stagnation pressure,but


some facilities of t h i s type operate at atmospheric test section static pressure or theatmospheric vent may be located at some other part of the tunnel
circuit so that neither the stagnation nor the static pressureis atmospheric.
The drive system is controlled by the same techniquesa s for the pressure
tunnel to achieve the desired pressure ratio across the nozzle
and test section.
For supersonic tunnels the Mach number(and all Mach dependent test
b y the nozzle geometry and stagnation consection conditions) are determined

ditions.

The supersonic nozzle is not normally considered a static pressure

control (although it does perform that function). Several tunnels include


automatic control o f nozzle geometry.

The pressure control is simplest for

the atmospheric-stagnation-pressure, supersonictunnel since the prime function


of the drive systemis to create the pressure ratio necessary to start
and
maintain nozzle flow. For pressure tunnels, both the tunnel pressurization and
main drive system control the stagnation pressure.

T r a n s o n i ct u n n e lo p e r a t i o nr e q u i r e sa d d i t i o n a lc o n t r o lo ft h et e s ts e c t i o n
s t a t i cp r e s s u r e .I na d d i t i o nt oc o n t r o lo f
p r e s s u r ei sc o n t r o l l e d

by some t y p eo f

plenum evacuation system.

A t supersonic

Also, a s p e c i f i e d Yach number can be a t t a i n e do v e r

t u n n e lp r e s s u r er a t i o s
t h e r e f o r e beone

a range o f

b yo t h e rc o n t r o lv a r i a b l e s .T u n n e l. p r e s s u r er a t i o

may

o ft h ev a r i a b l e si n v e s t i g a t e df o rt u n n e lf l o wo p t i m i z a t i o n ,i n

terms o f b o t h f l o w u n i f o r m i t y
shedby

canbeaccompli

r a t i o ,t h es t a t i c

1.4 a v a r i a b l e geometry,convergent-divergentnozzle

Mach numbers aboveabout


i s u s u a l l y used.

compressorpressure

and minimum power consumption.

ejectorflapswhich

plenum, o r a u x i 1 i a r y pumping systemscan

Plenum evacuation

usethemainstreamflowto

pump t h e

beused.

Almost a l l o ft h ec o n t i n u o u st u n n e l sr e s p o n d i n gt ot h eq u e s t i o n n a
ma nua 1 con t r o 1 o f t o t a l

haveava i l a b l e

and s t a t i cp r e s s u r e ,a l t h o u g hs e v e r a l

automatic systems t o i n d i c a t e t h e

measured t e s t c o n d i t i o n s t o t h e o p e r a t o r s ,

a f e wi n c l u d ec l o s e d - l o o p ,a u t o m a t i cc o n t r o l .

a l a r g e one, t oc o n t r o li n p u t si si n f l u e n c e d

constantsinvolved.

These t i m ec o n s t a n t sa r e

A b e n e f i c i a le f f e c t

systems.

system

andsmoothed.

mentsover

a l o n g e rp e r i o dt h a nf o rs m a l l

F l u c t u a t i o n si nt h ec o n t r o l l e dp r e s s u r et e n dt oo c c u r

i s t h ei n v e r s e

naturalfrequency,which

can be verylong

a measurement o f t h e

atleast

Precise, smooth c o n t r o li sp o s s i b l e

changes i n l e v e l r e q u i r e

The p e r i o d o f t h e s ef l u c t u a t i o n s
ordertoobtain

and a r eg e n e r a l l yl a r g e .

o f t h el a r g et i m ec o n s t a n t si st h a ts h o r t - t e r md i s t u r b a n c e s

by manual c o n t r o l ,b u t

a tt h e

by thetime

a f u n c t i o no ft h ec i r c u l a t i n ga i r

o f t h em a i nd r i v e ,e t c . ,

tend t o be h e a v i l ya t t e n u a t e d

timeconstant

and

The response o f a continuous

t u n n e l ,p a r t i c u l a r l y

mass, t h e r o t a t i o n a l i n e r t i a

i r e use

o f thetimeconstant.

- up

t o 10-15 seconds.

mean v a l u e o f t u n n e l f l o w c o n d i t i o n s ,

In
measure-

one p e r i o da r er e q u i r e d .

Blowdown Wind Tunnels


The c o n t r o l systems f o r blowdown windtunnelscanhave

a significanteffect

o nt u n n e lf l o wq u a l i t y .I na d d i t i o nt ot h ea u t o m a t i cs t a g n a t i o np r e s s u r ec o n t r o l system, a u t o m a t i cc o n t r o l
blowdown w i n dt u n n e l sf o r

systems a r e used i n a m a j o r i t y o f t h e t r a n s o n i c ,

Mach number c o n t r o l a l s o .

The s t a g n a t i o n p r e s s u r e c o n t r o l f o r
v a l v e between t h es t o r a g er e s e r v o i r
i nt h e

chamber.

ablowdown

and t h e s t i l l i n g

Constantstagnationpressureisthenormal

windtunnel

uses a c o n t r o l

chamber t o c o n t r o l p r e s s u r e
mode o fo p e r a t i o n ,

be computer or program c o n t r o l l e d t o m a i n t a i n c o n s t a n t

but the system can also

or t h e

Reynolds number a s t h e s t a g n a t i o n t e m p e r a t u r e d r o p s d u r i n g t h e r u n ,
pressure may be i n c r e a s e d l i n e a r l y w i t h t i m e t o i n v e s t i g a t e R e y n o l d s

number

e f f e c t s ,e x p l o r ef l u t t e rb o u n d a r i e s ,e t c .I ng e n e r a l ,t h ef u n c t i o n a lc a p a b i l i t y
ofthestagnationpressure
duction of digital

computer c o n t r o l .

From t h e f l o w q u a l i t y s t a n d p o i n t , t h e
ofthe

mostimportantperformanceparameter

system i s t h e a c c u r a c y o f p r e s s u r e c o n t r o l o r , i n

t h ev a r i a n c eo ft h es t a g n a t i o np r e s s u r ea b o u tt h e

more s p e c i f i ct e r m s ,

mean l e v e l .

about 1 secondand

thisvariationistypically

up t o 1/2%, can e a s i l y r e s u l t
misadjustment o ft h ec o n t r o l
must o p e r a t e c o n t i n u o u s l y
Thusa

much l a r g e r p e r t u r b a t i o n s ,

or

due t o e l e c t r i c a l n o i s e , m e c h a n i c a l f r i c t i o n
computer.

The s t a g n a t i o np r e s s u r ec o n t r o ls y s t e m

t o overcome the disturbance created by the decreasir

used for a

c o n t r o l l e ro fh i g h e ro r d e rt h a nt h a t

t o a c h i e v et h ed e s i r e d

c o n t i n u o u st u n n e lp r e s s u r ec o n t r o li su s u a l l yr e q u i r e d
accuracy.

The p e r i o d o f

t h ec u r r e n ts t a t e - o f - t h e - a r t

appears t o be about a 0.1 percentstandarddeviation;

r e s e r v o i rp r e s s u r e .

A simpleregulatorisnormallyinadequate.

The shocksystemgenerateddownstream

oftheblowdown-wind-tunnelControl

v a l v e may i n t r o d u c ee x c e s s i v ef l o wu n s t e a d i n e s s .T e s t - s e c t i o nf l o wa n g u l a r i t y
may a l s o v a r y w i t h v a l v e p o s i t i o n

(and t h e r e f o r e ,t i m e ) .

channel,fromthestoragereservoirtothestilling
when d e s i g n i n gt h es t a g n a t i o np r e s s u r ec o n t r o l
been accomplished i n r e c e n t y e a r s t o i d e n t i f y
b yt h es t a g n a t i o np r e s s u r ec o n t r o l
choked-flowdevices
a c o u s t i cs i l e n c e r s

system.

Considerablework

has

and c o r r e c t flow problemscaused


C o r r e c t i v e measureshave

included

chamber.

used i nt r a n s o n i ct u n n e l s ,t h e

Mach

a d e s i r e d Mach number by c o n t r o l l i n g
blowdown,

a choked t h r o a t downstream o f t h e t e s t s e c t i o n t o c o n t r o l

subsonic Mach numbers.The

10

system.

as a f u n c t i o no fs t a g n a t i o np r e s s u r e .A l m o s ta l l

t r a n s o n i ct u n n e l su s e

o fa t t a c k )

chamber, mustbeconsidered

and honeycombs i n t h e s t i l l i n g

number c o n t r o l , f u n c t i o n s t o m a i n t a i n

Machnumber

Thus, t h e e n t i r e f l o w

i n s e r i e s downstream o f t h e v a l v e , s p e c i a l i z e d v a l v e s ,

A second pressurecontrolsystem

s t a t i cp r e s s u r e

system has become more s o p h i s t i c a t e d w i t h t h e i n t r o

primaryadvantage

ofthiscontrol

i s determinedbythetestsectiongeometry(at
and i s t h e r e f o r e

mode i s t h a t t h e

a f i x e d model a n g l e

independent o f f l u c t u a t i o n si ns t a g n a t i o np r e s s u r e .

A u t o m a t i cc o n t r o l

of t h e downstream t h r o a t a r e a i s

used i n anumber

of facili-

t i e s .A u t o m a t i cc o n t r o li sh i g h l yd e s i r a b l ei no r d e rt om a i n t a i nc o n s t a n t
number d u r i n g model a t t i t u d e v a r i a t i o n s and simultaneouslymaintain
plenumevacuation.Moresophisticatedoperational
computer c o n t r o l , suchas

Machnumber

possibleatsubsonic

under

The performance o f t h i s

of the test section

t o be 'about 0.001.

Currentbestperformanceappears

optimum

modes a r e a v a i l a b l e

sweeps, e t c .

system a l s o d i r e c t l y i n f l u e n c e s t h e v a r i a t i o n

Mach

Machnumber.

butlargervariationsare

speeds, p a r t i c u l a r l y a t h i g h m o d e l - p i t c h r a t e s .

I n t h e absence o f p e r t u r b a t i o n s i n t r o d u c e d

by t h e Mach o r s t a t i c p r e s s u r e

c o n t r o ll o o p ,s m a l lv a r i a t i o n si ns t a g n a t i o np r e s s u r ec a n n o tn e c e s s a r i l y
takenintoaccountbysimultaneous

be

measurement of t h e twopressuresbecause

of

phase l a g and a t t e n u a t i o n e r r o r s .
An i m p o r t a n tp r o c e d u r a ld i f f e r e n c ei nm a k i n gc a l i b r a t i o n
a blowdown tunnel i s thatrunsshould

be made a t each c a l i b r a t e d Machnumber

where a l l t u n n e l v a r i a b l e s a r e h e l d c o n s t a n t d u r i n g
o r d e rt od e t e c tt i m eo rv a l v ep o s i t i o n
a n g u l a r i t yp r o b ei s

measurements i n

an e n t i r e blowdown,

dependent e f f e c t s .

If a traversing

moved a l o n g t h e t u n n e l c e n t e r l i n e d u r i n g t h e r u n , f o r

time-dependent e f f e c t s will be o b s c u r e d b y t h e s p a t i a l v a r i a t i o n s
I n t e r m i t t e n t( I m p u l s e )

b a s i c blowdown mode, b u t w i t h

canbeapplied

a r u nt i m eo fa b o u t

a t y p i c a lf a c i l i t yo ft h i sc l a s s .

to e i t h e r a supersonicor

t i o np r e s s u r e

b et h o s et h a to p e r a t ei n

t o 5 seconds or less.

The

The Ludwieg p r i n c i p l e

and i st h e r e f o r er e l a -

An advantage o f theLudwiegtunnel

i st h a tt h es t a g n a -

downstream o ft h ei n i t i a le x p a n s i o nt u b ei sc o n s t a n t( n e g l e c t i n g

v i s c o u se f f e c t s ) .
withthe

and v i c ev e r s a .

a transonicwindtunnel.Pressure

c o n t r o li sl i m i t e dt ot h ei n i t i a lc h a r g et u b ep r e s s u r e
t i v e l ys t r a i g h t f o r w a r d .

example,

Wind Tunnels

I n t e r m i t t e n tw i n dt u n n e l sa r ec o n s i d e r e dt o

Ludwieg t u n n e li s

in

The p r i m a r yc a l i b r a t i o n

L u d w i e gt u n n e lo b v i o u s l ya r i s e

measurement problemsassociated

from t h e s h o r t t e s t d u r a t i o n .

11

ll.B.2

Flow U n i f o r m i t y and R e l a t i o n s h i pt o

C a l i b r a t i o nA c c u r a c y ,

The c a l i b r a t i o n o f a t r a n s o n i c w i n d t u n n e l i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y
than calibration of
s e c t i o nw a l l s .

a supersonictunnel

The v e n t i l a t e d w a l l s

as i s t h ec a s ew i t h

from t u n n e l o r n o z z l e

a c a l i b r a t e ds u p e r s o n i ct u n n e ln o z z l e .

i sr e q u i r e dd u r i n gc a l i b r a t i o n
geometry,the

ence t h e Mach number.

flow

and t h e b a s i c n a t u r e o f t r a n s o n i c

and r o u t i n et e s to p e r a t i o n s .F u r t h e r ,f o rf i x e d

model o r o t h e r a p p a r a t u s i n t h e t e s t s e c t i o n

can i n f l u -

These f a c t o r sr e q u i r et h a tt h et u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o np r o v i d e

a r e l a t i o n between t h e s t a t i c p r e s s u r e d i s t r i b u t i o n i n t h e t e s t s e c t i o n
r e f e r e n c ep r e s s u r e

measured i n t h e

a ventilatedwall,

i.e.,

by t h ea d d i t i o n a ld e g r e e s

a t each Mach number, t h e optimum

w a l la n g l e ,w a l lp o r o s i t y( f o ra d j u s t a b l ep o r o s i t yw a l l s ) ,
r a t e ,t u n n e lp r e s s u r er a t i o ,
Criteria for

plenum e v a c u a t i o nf l o w

and choke c o n t r o l p o s i t i o n

optimum a d j u s t m e n t i n c l u d e u n i f o r m i t y o f

sonic speeds,

anda

plenum chamber o r o n t h e v e n t i l a t e d w a l l .

T r a n s o n i ct u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o ni sf u r t h e rc o m p l i c a t e d
of freedom providedby

geom-

t o s t a g n a t i o np r e s s u r e ,

measurement o f t e s t s e c t i o n s t a t i c p r e s s u r e , i n a d d i t i o n

t e s ts e c t i o n

more d i f f i c u l t

due p r i m a r i l y t o t h e v e n t i l a t e d t e s t

p r e v e n tt h ed e t e r m i n a t i o no ft e s ts e c t i o nc o n d i t i o n s
e t r ya l o n e ,

Model T e s t i n g

must a l l be determined.

Mach number and, a t super-

shock and expansion-wave c a n c e l l a t i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w h i c h a r e

u s u a l l ye v a l u a t e d

based on t e s t so fc o n e - c y l i n d e r

additiontominimizingvariationsin

A t subsonic speeds,

and f o r c e s ona

standardmodel.

A recent

I ) p r o v i d e s a comprehensivediscussionoftheprocedures

employed i ns e l e c t i n at r a n s o n i ct u n n e lp a r a m e t e r st om i n i m i z e

Machnumber

varia-

tions.
Many o ft h et r a n s o n i ct u n n e l ss u r v e y e dd e t e r m i n et h ew a l la n g l e
shock and expansion wave c a n c e l l a t i o n a t s u p e r s o n i c

basedon

speeds, and t h i s a n g l e i s

oftenmaintainedconstantatall

Mach numbers, w h i l e o t h e r s a d j u s t t h e w a l l

a n g l ea c c o r d i n gt o

schedule.

w i t h Machnumber

a Machnumber

will p r o v i d e amore

plenum evacuation and chokeareafor

c o m b i n a t i o n so f

Mach numbers i s b a l a n c i n g o f

a c h o k e - c o n t r o l l e d blowdown tunnel.

The

Mach number can be a t t a i n e d w i t h an i n f i n i t e number of

plenum pumpingand

u s u a l l y chosen i s t o m i n i m i z e

12

I ng e n e r a l ,a d j u s t m e n to fw a l la n g l e

uniformflow.

A t y p i c a lo p t i m i z a t i o np r o b l e ma ts u b s o n i c

a v e r a g et e s ts e c t i o n

in

Mach number d i s t r i b u t i o n , o t h e r c r i t e r i a f o r

o p t i m i z a t i o na r et u n n e ln o i s el e v e l
r e p o r t byJackson(Ref.

models.

chokearea.Forexample,the

criterion

downstream Mach number increasesordecreasesfrom

theupstreamvalue.

Downstream d i s t u r b a n c e si n

Machnumber

becausetheycancreatebouyancyeffectsfurther
ancemagnitude

i se x t r e m e l ys e n s i t i v et o

Mach numbers belowabout

upstream.Sincethedisturbchanges i n plenumpumping

0 . 8 5 , t h e optimumpumping

and m a i n t a i n e dc o n s t a n tf o rr o u t i n et e s t i n g .
c o n t r o l l e d by v a r y i n g t h e

a r eu n d e s i r a b l e

a t subsonic

i s d e t e r m i n e dd u r i n gc a l i b r a t i o n

The t e s ts e c t i o n

chokeareawhichdoesnot

alter the

Machnumber

is

downstream d i s t u r b -

ance.

A s i m i l a ru p s t r e a md i s t u r b a n c eo c c u r sa t
one o f thepurposes

+O.OOl,

v a r i o u sl i m i t ss u c ha s

beadopted

20.002,

Machnumber

etc.Jackson(Ref.

as a ni n d u s t r ys t a n d a r df o r

I ) hassuggested

shouldbelessthan

0.01

minimum Machnumber

and t h e r e f o r e f l o w q u a l i t y f o r

i nt h e

Machnumber.

TransonicTunnel

variations in ( I )
M = 1.4,

2.8.1

as a

16T

from t h e AEDC-PWT

comparison.

havesuggestedevenmore

s t r i n g e n tr e q u i r e m e n t s

These i n v e s t i g a t o r s havesuggestedthe

f l o w a n g u l a r i t y be+0.1
-

degand

maximum a l l o w e d

(2) Machnumber

be 20.003 a t

+0.005 a t M = 2, +0.01 a t !
I= 3 .

I t should be n o t i c e d t h a t c r i t e r i a

based o nt h es t a n d a r dd e v i a t i o n

d i s t i n g u i s h between random o r p e r i o d i c v a r i a t i o n s

t u n n e ls t a t i cp r e s s u r eg r a d i e n t s .
t e s ts e c t i o n

mustbe

bouyancy c o r r e c t i o n s c a n b e
o f model drag.

Thus,
empty-

The s t a t i c p r e s s u r e d i s t r i b u t i o n a l o n g t h e

a sufficiently high degree

any g r a d i e n t

o f accuracy so t h a t

made t o a t t a i n t h e r e q u i r e d a c c u r a c y i n

I t i st h e r e f o r eo fi n t e r e s tt oi n v e s t i g a t e ,i n

manner, t h e e f f e c t s

must be g i v e n t o

e i t h e rc o n s t a n t( w i t h i na c c e p t a b l el i m i t s )o r

known a n d r e p e a t a b l e t o

do n o t

and mean f l o w g r a d i e n t s .

i n a d d i t i o n to s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n c r i t e r i a , c o n s i d e r a t i o n

mustbe

Of

and s e t o f t u n n e l

shown i nF i g .

Recent c a l i b r a t i o nd a t a

i sa l s oi n c l u d e df o r

for supersonictunnels.

case o f supersonicflows.

a g i v e nt e s ts e c t i o nl e n g t h

M o r r i s and Winter(Ref.2)

Mach
number

deviationisindicativeofthebestdistribution

c o n d i t i o n s .J a c k s o n ' sf l o wq u a l i t yc r i t e r i aa r e
f u n c t i o no f

the

"good f l o w q u a l i t y " i n

2a d e v i a t i o n si nc e n t e r l i n e

0.005 and lessthan

flow

d e v i a t i o n does n o t exceed

transonictunnels.Forsubsonicflows,

course,the

Therefore,

1.0.

o f a c a l i b r a t i o n program i s t o d e t e r m i n e t h e r e g i o n o f

alongthetestsectionwithinwhichthe

followingcriteria

Mach numbers near

of testsectionpressuregradientondrag

and how t h i s r e l a t e s t o f l o w q u a l i t y r e q u i r e m e n t s .

measurements

a systematic
measurement accuracy

0.024

l-

0.020

0.01 6

-0

I-

"JACKSON

->
:0 . 0 12
a

"

16T DATA

AEDC-PWT

,/

S CR I T E R I A FOR "GOOD"

FLON QUAL 1 T Y

t
.
'3

0.008

-"
"

I:

0.004

0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

1 .o

0.8

TESTSECTIONMACHNUMBER,

F i g u r e 2.8.1

JACKSON'S FLOW Q U A L I T YC R I T E R I A

1.2

1.4

1.6

Mm

FORTRANSONICTUNNELS,Ref.

1.

1.8

The bouyancy d r a g c o e f f i c i e n t r e s u l t i n g

from a l i n e a r s t a t i c p r e s s u r e

3) can be s t a t e d as

g r a d i e n t (Ref.

AC

DG

dP/dx

(2.8.1)

qw

where V i s t h e model volume, S i s wingreferencearea,


s e c t i o n dynamicpressure,

bouyancyon

Based onmodel

0.208 meter (0.23


an a c c u r a c yo f
to know AC

above equation,lsaacs

DG

t o an a c c u r a c yo f

g r a d i e n tf o r

0.0001,

, one

-qd,x -dP

should be

known t o

t o 0.00043 per f t ) i n o r d e r

dragcount.

2) d e t e r m i n e dt h ea l l o w a b l ep r e s s u r e

andWinter(Ref.

r e c t a n g u l a r - w i n g ,a i r c r a f t
g r a d i e n ti nt e r m so f

o f 1% o f t h e
modeland

AP/H overthe

1.4 t o 0.0005 a t M = 3.0.The

model drag.

Eq. 2.8.1,

t h ea l l o w a b l ep r e s s u r e

corresponding Machnumber

a t ?l= 3.0.

number g r a d i e n t , i n p e r c e n t

0.002 a t

g r a d i e n to v e rt h e

Mach number.

o f t h ec o n f i g u r a t i o nc o n s i d e r e di n d i c a t e d

a t M = 1.4 and0.00013

Based on an assumed,

model l e n g t h was foundtorangefrom

model l e n g t h was approximately 0.4% o ft h ea v e r a g e

and 0.31% a t M

ranging from 0.069 t o

bouyancy e f f e c t s on drag measurement accuracy i n supersonic

a bouyancydrag

dragcoefficient

V/S

(0.00014

i .e.

of

models i n a 2.44-111 ( 8 - f t )

valuesoftheparameter

0.00047 t o 0.0014 permeter

w i n dt u n n e l s ,M o r r i s

4) i n v e s t i g a t e dt h ee f f e c t s

t o 0.68 f t ) , lsaacs determined that

I n a studyof

(Ref.

i st h e

DG

by t h ep r e s s u r eg r a d i e n t .

thedragoftypical,transportaircraft

windtunnel.

i st h ea v e r a g et e s t

and AC

dP/dx i st h ep r e s s u r eg r a d i e n t

d r a gc o e f f i c i e n ti n c r e m e n tp r o d u c e d
U t i l i z i n gt h e

qm

The estimated

1% o f ACD was 0.00023

On a p e r - d r a g - c o u n tb a s i s ,t h ea l l o w a b l e

Mach

of average Mach number, was then 0.17% a t M = 1.4

-- 3.0.

Bouyancy e f f e c t s may be e v a l u a t e d i n a g e n e r a l i z e d way by t a k i n g i n t o


accountboth

model c o n f i g u r a t i o nv a r i a b l e s

specificheatratioof

1.4,

P
H

M 2) -3.5

- x

qW
H

- D

(1

0.2

0.7 M 2 ( 1

and Mach number e f f e c t s .

Assuminga

t h er e l a t i o n s

+ 0.2

(2.B.2)

M2 -3.5

(2.B.3)

15

may beused

t o w r i t e Eq.

(2.6.1)as

#-

(2. e.4)

M (1+0.2 Hz)

Where H and qm areconsideredconstantattheiraveragevalues.


I f t h e Mach numdM
bergradientis
assumed t o be 1 inear, =may
be w r i t t e n as AM/Ax w i t h Ax takenas
AM i s thenthe

the model length, .L,

Eq.

Mach
number

v a r i a t i o np e r

model length.

(2.6.4) becomes
AC

"[

DG

2
M(I+O.Z )
'M

SLm

AM

(2.6.5)

and i s t h e r e -

The parameter V/SLm i s a nondimensionalconfigurationparameter


foreindependent

o f model scale.Figure

gradient,overthe

model l e n g t h ,f o r

2.8.2 shows t h ea l l o w a b l e

a b o u y a n c y - i n d u c e d ,d r a gc o e f f i c i e n te r r o r

o f 0.0001 as a f u n c t i o no ft h ec o n f i a u r a t i o np a r a m e t e r

Owing t o t h i s
m'
measurements a c c u r a t e t o w i t h i n one c o u n t , t h e r e

extreme s e n s i t i v i t y o f d r a g
a r e anumber

s h o r tw a v e l e n g t hv a r i a t i o n si n

Machnumber

may be obscured and d i f f i c u l t t o

length.

V/SL

o f problems i na c h i e v i n gt h i sg o a l .F o r

p r e s s u r ed i s t r i b u t i o n s ,

def.ine.

i f t h e random,

example,

a r et o ol a r g e ,t h e

mean g r a d i e n t

One approach i s t o useempty-tunnel

measured d u r i n g c a l i b r a t i o n s , t o i n t e g r a t e

However, t h i s procedurecanbe

r e p e a t a b i l i t yo ft u n n e lf l o wc o n d i t i o n s .

i ne r r o r

lrt thecase

1 ) has foundthat

Jackson(Ref.

o ft r a n s o n i ct u n n e l s ,t h e
e.g.,

Parker(Ref.

o f 0.003

i nt u n n e l

T h i s i s an e f f e c tt h a ti sf r e q u e n t l yi g n o r e d

d u r i n gt r a n s o n i ct u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o n s .
The d a t a o f F i g .

2.6.2

a r ea l s o

shown i n F i g .

gradientexpressedinpercentoftheaveraae
the criteria
shown onFig.

suggestedby
2.8.4

2.B.4

withthe

Mach
number.

M o r r i s and Winter'(Ref.

Machnumber

P o i n t sd e r i v e df r o m

2) f o r s u p e r s o n i c

f o r comparison.Thiscomparisonindicatesthe

flow are

model

c o n f i g u r a t i o n used by M o r r i s and W i n t e r t o e s t a b l i s h f l o w u n i f o r m i t y c r i t e r i a
hada

16

value o f approximately 0.05 f o r V/SLm.

5)

a chanqe i n u n i t Reynolds number

6
6
from 4.1 x 10 t o 15.8 x 10 (permeter)cancauseanincrease
Mach number, see F i g . 2.6.3.

Over t h e model

because o fl a c ko fe x a c t

model may inducedeparturesfromempty-tunnelcalibrations,


I na d d i t i o n ,

Mach
number

"

sLm

L/

2
3
T E S TS E C T I O N

~ l ~ u 2r . 8e. 2

MACH NUHEER

ALLOWABLE
LINEAR
MACH
NUMBER
GRADIENT
OVER MODELLENGTH
FOR BOUYANCYDRAG
C O E F F I C I E N TC Q N T R I B U T I O N OF 0.0001

17

0.020

0.016

0.012

Hm

Mc

0.008

0.004

0
0

1 .o

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

Re x 10-6/ft
I~

12

16

20

Re x 10'6/m

Flgure 2.8.3

18

EFFECTS OF REYNOLDS
NUMBER
ON C A L I B R A T I O N OF THE PWf-16T
TUNNELAT
M _ = 0.6 AND 0.8 FOR Ow = 0 AND T = 6%

.5

1.0

1.5
TESTSECTIONMACHNUMBER,

F i g u r e 2.8.4.

2.5

2.0

3.0

MACH
NUHHER
GRADIENT
O V E R NOOELLENGTHASPERCENT
NUMBER FOR RQUYANCY DRAG C O E F F I C I E N TO F
0.0001

OF AVERAGE
MACH

3.5

The v a l u eo ft h ep a r a m e t e r

V/SLm f o r s e v e r a l a i r c 2r. a f t t y p i c a l

a t t a c k and t r a n s p o r t c o n f i g u r a t i o n s a r e l i s t e d

-m

F-1 5

0.054

F-16

0.048

YF-17

0.043

A-7

0.071

oc-8

0.061

DC-9

0.088

DC-IO

0.083

8-741

0.065

8-727-100

0.076

8-727-200

0.056

C-141A

0.055

C -5A

0.078

The above d a t a d e m o n s t r a t e s t h e v a r i a t i o n

i n V/SLm w i t h a i r c r a f t t y p e

i s n o tl a r g e ,a tl e a s t

F o rc o n v e n t i o n a lc o n f i g u r a t i o n s ,

c o n f i g u r a t i o ns e l e c t e d

by H o r r i s and Winter (Ref.2)

s u p e r s o n i cf i g h t e ra i r c r a f t .

I t i s a n t i c i p a t e dt h a t

V/SL,

t h e r e f o r e be more s e n s i t i v e t o

and t h a tt h e

model

i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v eo f

V/STOL c o n f i g u r a t i o n s

t h a nt h ea i r c r a f tl i s t e d

above

and would

Hach number q r a d i e n t e f f e c t s .

Due totheapproximatevalues
used f o r some o f t h e a i r c r a f t
valuesof W/SL,
shouldberegarded
as approximate.

20

fighter,

W/SL

Aircraft

would have a l a r g e rv a l u eo f

OF

below.

volumes, the

I I .D.
1.

Jackson, F. M.:

2.

" C a l i b r a t i o no ft h e

\,la11 P o r o s i t i e s o f

TestSection
Jan.

M o r r i s , 0.

E. and & l i n t e r ,

Glauert, H.:
A.R.C.

4.

AEDC-PWT

1 6 - F t TransonicTunnel

Two. Four, and SixPercent."

at

AEDC-TR-76-13,

1976.

K. G . :

i n Supersonic \,!ind Tunnels,"

3.

P.eferences

R&M

Isaacs, 0 . :

"Requirements f o rU n i f o r m i t yo f

Flow

RAE Tech Note A E R O 2340 ( l ? 5 4 ) .

"Wind Tunnel I n t e r f e r e n c e on
Vinqs,
Yodies

and A i l e r o n s , "

1566 (1933).
" C a l i b r a t i o no ft h e

R.A.E.

Bedford 8 - f t .

x 3 - f t . Wind Tunnel

a t Subsonic Speeds, I n c l u d i n o a Discussion of t h eC o r r e c t i o n sA p p l i e d


the Measured P r e s s u r e D i s t r i b u t i o n t o
E f f e c t s due t ot h eC a l i b r a t i o n

5.

Parker,

P..

L.:

Allow f o r t h e D i r e c t

Probe Shape,': A.R.C.

"Flow G e n e r a t i o nP r o p e r t i e s

TestSectionWallConfiaurations,"

and Crlockaae

R&M 3583 (1569).

o f FiveTransonic

AEOC-TR-75-73,

to

Aug.

1975.

Wind Tunnel

1I.C.

FLOW PARAMETERS AND UtKERTAlNTY RELATIONSHIPS

The proper measurement o f stream properties to allow the accurate


determination of the various flow parameters is necessary for the meaningful
interpretation o f wind tunnel test results.

For example, the desirability o f

a Mach number accuracy of 0.001 has been suggested (i.e., Ref. I).

The neces-

sity of such a requirement may be illustrated


by the afterbody dataof Fig. 2.C.I.
This data appearsto have substantial scatter but may be correlated using Mach
number measurements with a precision of 0.001 as shown in Fig. 2.c.2.*

It

also may be noted that for a typical fighter aircraft configuration the trano f 0.001 is "equivalent"
sonic drag riseis such that a Mach numt.er uncertainty

to 0,0002 (2 counts) in drao coefficient. Similarly. other parameters must be

computed to high degrees o f accuracy.

The sensitivities o f the several flow

to illusparameters to the various measurements are presented in this section

trate the consequencesof measurement uncertainty on accuracy.


II.C.1.
Pressures
The pressure o f a fluid is one of its most significant properties, The
knowledge o f static and stagnation pressuresin a wind tunnel is necessary
to define characteristic flow conditions such as Mach number and Reynolds number
and to properly normalize the various data coefficients.The following discussion concerns the measurement
of these two pressures.
Static Pressure: During transonic operation static pressure is obtained from a
reference pressure (wall or plenum) and a predetermined relation (calibration)
of this pressure to the test section static pressure. During supersonic operation static pressure is usually obtained from stagnation pressure and the Mach
o f the facility w i t h the particular
number previously obtained during calibration

nozzle setting.
Figures 2.C.l and 2 were obtained through private communication with Mr.
Jack
Runkel. NASA Langley Research Center. This requirement for a Mach number accuracy
O f at least 0.001
i s also substantiated by the recent nozzle-afterbody tests
reported by Spratley and Thompson (Ref. 1 7 ) .

22

NASALANGLEY
TAILINTERFERENCE

MODEL

M = .95

.28

cD

.24

"jdP

Figure 2.C.l
h)

AFTERBODY DRAG DATA A T AN


AVERAGE

MACH
NUMBER

OF 0.95

NASA LANGLEY

T A I LI N T E R F E R E N C E

MODEL

.2a

.24

%
.20

.16

Figure 2 . C . 2

AFTERBODYDRAGDATA

WITHTUNNEL

MACH
NUMBER

GIVEN TOTHREEDECIMALS

Inthetransonicregion
may beused

a staticpressureprobe,orarray

t or e l a t et h er e f e r e n c e

regard t o t h eh i g h e r
uncertaintyin

o f probes

and t e s ts e c t i o ns t a t i cp r e s s u r e s .W i t h

Mach numbers it has been i l l u s t r a t e d ( R e f .2 ) ,t h a tt h e

Mach number may be r e l a t e d t o u n c e r t a i n t i e s i n s t a t i c

i s e n t r o p i ct o t a l ,

Hs,

and P i t o t , H2,

p r e s s u r e sb yt h ef o l l o w i n gr e l a t i o n s

1.4):

(assuming t h e r a t i o o f s p e c i f i c h e a t s i s

" - a H2
aHS

aM[

H2

HS

P-,

35 (M2
112
(M2 + 5) (7M2
1)

I f it i s assumed t h a tt h et o t a lp r e s s u r ei s

(2.c.1)

measured i n t h e s t i l l i n g

(2.c.2)
a nd

S o l v i n g for

i nt h ef i r s te q u a t i o n

and s u b s t i t u t i n gi n t ot h el a t t e r ,

t h ef o l l o w i n ge x p r e s s i o ni so b t a i n e d .

aH2

"

H2

5 (M2-1)2
M2 ( 7M2- 1 )

'Pm
= o

Po0

(2.C.4)

which yields

aH2
-

a pm

"2

Since

2.

H2

(2.C.5)

M2(7M2-l)

3.5

[F]
2

'

[4"]

2.5
,then

7H - 1

pm
canbe

5 (M - 1 )

(2.C.6)

aH2
a pm

s i m p l i f i e d to:

Hence t h e r a t i o o f u n c e r t a i n t y o f P i t o t - t o - s t a t i c p r e s s u r e
f u n c t i o no f

Mach number and i s shown i nF i g .

r a t i o becomes 1 near M
M

1.6,

occursbecausethe

e r r o r si nc a l c u l a t e d

Mach number a t an

may be g r e a t e rt h a n, . t h ee r r o ri n

Mach numbers g r e a t e rt h a n
staticpressure

andsmallabsoluteerrors

It may benotedthatthe

Thus, f o r a s p e c i f i e de r r o ri n

t h ee r r o ri ns t a t i cp r e s s u r e

P i t o tp r e s s u r e .F o r

Mach

1.6.

2.C.3.

becomes a simple

1.6 t h er e v e r s ei st r u e .T h i s

becomes v e r y s m a l l a t h i g h

Mach numbers,

i n t h e .measurement of Pm produce r e l a t i v e l y l a r g e

Mach number.

For example, Fig. 2.C.3

3 theabsoluteerrorinPitotpressure

t h es t a t i cp r e s s u r ee r r o rf o rt h e

canbe

approximately seven times

same e r r o r i n c a l c u l a t e d

the use o f s t a t i c p r e s s u r e f o r t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n

shows t h a t a t

Mach number.

o f Mach number i s g e n e r a l l y

r e s t r i c t e d to Mach numbers l e s s t h a n

1.6; w h i l e P i t o t p r e s s u r e

(withstagnationpressure)athigher

Mach numbers.

*Also
26

see Fig. 2.C.9,p.39.

Thus

i s employed

The pressure o f t h e t e s t

StagnationPressure:

fluld at rest either in the settling

medium i s measured w i t h t h e

chamber o r by means of a t o t a l headtube.

The s e t t l i n g chamber ( i s e n t r o p i cs t a g n a t i o n )p r e s s u r e ,
used for b o t h t r a n s o n i c

and supersonicoperation.

Hs, i s g e n e r a l l y

Because o f t h e a f o r e -

mentioned s e n s i t i v i t y o f Mach number t o s t a t i c p r e s s u r e , a f t e r - s h o c k t o t a l

H2,

( p i t o t )p r e s s u r e ,
Dynamic P r e s s u r e :

i s employedaboveanominal

Dynamic pressure, q,

flow parameterused

1.6 Mach number.

i s perhapsthe

tonormalizewindtunneldata.

most f r e q u e n t l y employed

d i r e c t l yr e f l e c t e di nt h ea c c u r a c yo fc o e f f i c i e n td a t a .I n
afterstaticpressure

hasbeen

M2Pm

I nt h et r a n s o n i c
Mach number.

mostinstances,

obtained bymeasurement

(transonic)or

by

it i s used w i t h Mach number t o compute q from

inference(supersonic)
q =

q is

Thus t h ea c c u r a c yo f

(2.c.8)

Pm and !i
a r e measured.
S

range,both
F i g . 2.C.4
shows

t h es e n s i t i v i t yo f

E r r o r si ne i t h e ra f f e c t

q t o HS w h i c hr e s u l t ss o l e l y

from Mach number e r r o r a s d e t e r m i n e d f r o m t h e f o l l o w i n g .


Since

q+pm

aM

= YMP-

(2.C.9)

a HS

aHS

and ( aq/q )/(aHS/Hs)

-5
q

I t will subsequently be i l l u s t r a t e d (seeSection


aM/(aHS/Hs)

31

7~5

(aM/M)/(aHS/Hs)
= 2

aHs

(1 + .2M

Il.C.3)

that

(2.C. IO)

28

-5
Figure 2.C.4

1.0
Mach Number

1.5

2 .o

THE SENSITIVITY OF DYNAbEC PRESSURE To STAGNATION


PRESSURE ERROR, TRANSONIC OPERATION

Equation 2.C.10may

b es u b s t i t u t e di n t ot h ep r e c e d i n ge q u a t i o n

to o b t a i n
(2.c.11)

Errors i n Pm a f f e c t

q by means o f t h e Pm term and theerroneous

as i l l u s t r a t e d i n F i g .

= yMPm

From q =

2.C.5.

7
Y

Mach number

M 2 Pm :

aM
+ -$ M 2
a

(2.c.12)

(2.C.13)

It will beshown

(aM/(aPm/Pm))

i nS e c t i o n

aM/ (aPJP,)

+ I

(2.C. 14)

Il.C.3 t h a t

- 7M

( 1 +.2M )

(2.C.15)

which upon s u b s t i t u t i o n y i e l d s
(aq/q)/(aPm/Pm)

7 ~ z(M2+5)

D u r i n gS u p e r s o n i co p e r a t i o n ,c a l i b r a t e d

(2.C.16)

Mach numbers a r e known f o r t h e

f a c i l i t y geometry s e t t i n g and a r e employed w i t h HS f o rqd e t e r m i n a t i o n .


However, an e r r o r i n d e f i n i n g t h e c a l i b r a t e d
shown i nF i g .
as f o l l o w s :

30

2.C.6.

Mach number will a f f e c t q as

The f u n c t i o ni l l u s t r a t e di nt h i sf i g u r e

was obtained

05

I
I

1.0
Mach

er

-2

-3

-4

Figure 2.C.5

THE Sli3KLTIVITY OF DYNAMIC PRESSURE


PRESSURE ERROR, TRANSONIC OPERATION

'K)

STATIC

31

Mach Number

-1

-2

-3

-4
Figure 2.c.6

THE SENSITIVITY OF DYNAMIC PRESSURE To MACH NUMBER


ERROR, SUPERSONIC OPERATION

(2.C.'17)

(2.C. 18)

= 2
As shown i nS e c t i o n

(2.C. 19)

( a P /P ) / , ( ~ M / M )
W O D

ll.C.3,

aM/(aPw/Pw)

5
- 7M ( 1

2
.2M )

(2.C.20)

hence
(aM/M)/(aP

/P w 1 =

- -

( I + .2M ) -

(2.C.21)

7M2

Then
(2.C.22)

or

(2.C.23)
I n a s i m i l a r manner, e r r o r s i n

HS canbe

shown t o havea

o n e - t o - o n er e l a t i o n s h i p

w i t h errors i n q.

A t lowsubsonic

Mach numbers, t h e p r e s s u r e r a t i o

s o that determination of the

Mach number anddynamic

ments o ft h ei n d i v i d u a lp r e s s u r e s

low Mach numbers (belowabout


d i f f e r e n t i a l (Hs

- )P,

Pw/HS approaches u n i t y ,
pressure from

becomes increasinglyInaccurate.
0.4)a

directlywith

p r e f e r r e dp r o c e d u r e

measure-

A t these

i s t o measure t h e

a o
lw rangetransducer

and t o compute the

dynamicpressurefrom:

(2.C.24)

33

A t low Mach numbers, o n l y t h e f i r s t t e r m

0.14 percent a t M = 0 . 5 u s i n g o n l y t h e f i r s t

For example, t h e e r r o r i s o n l y
term.

A t M = 1.0,the

of t h e ' s e r i e s i s u s u a l l y r e q u i r e d .

firstthree

terms y i e l d r e s u l t s a c c u r a t e t o

0.1 per-

cent.

I I .C.2

Temperature

As a fundamental s t a t ep r o p e r t y ,s t r e a m( s t a t i c )t e m p e r a t u r ei so f

o f t h ef l u i df l o w .

s u b s t a n t i a li m p o r t a n c ei ne s t a b l i s h i n gt h ec h a r a c t e r

Thus a na c c u r a t ev a l u eo ft e m p e r a t u r ei sr e q u i r e di nw i n dt u n n e lt e s t i n gt o
d e t e r m i n es e v e r a lc o r r e l a t i o np a r a m e t e r sw h i c hd e f i n et h en a t u r eo ft h ef l o w .
The d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f s t a t i c t e m p e r a t u r e i n
i n v o l v e sa ni n d i r e c t

measurement.

a gasstreamconventionally

Stagnationtemperature

i s a convenient

measurement t o make s i n c e i t i s r e l a t i v e l y easy t o o b t a i n , and t h e r e a r e

from t h es t a g n a t i o n

e s t a b l i s h e dp r o c e d u r e sf o rc o m p u t i n gs t a t i ct e m p e r a t u r e
value and f l o w Mach number.

F i g u r e 2.C.7

i l l u s t r a t e st h er e l a t i o no f

a p e r f e c t gas ( y = 1.4)

s t a g n a t i o n - t o - s t a t i ct e m p e r a t u r ef o r

i n an a d i a b a t i c

2y-1 M 2) i s used i n wind tunnels which

process. This relation'(To/T

= 1

operateatmoderatepressures

and temperatures and where r e a l gas e f f e c t s

a r en e g l i g i b l e .

I t can beseen

t i o n temperature, To,

34

t h a t an e r r o r i n t h e

measurement o f stagna-

isdirectlyreflectedinthestatic

temperature.

Mach Number

I I . C.

3 t,iach Number

As p r e v i o u s l y d i s c u s s e d Mach number i s computedusi.ng


pressure and e i t h e r s t a t i c p r e s s u r e o r a f t e r - s h o c k
sure.

s e t t l i n g chamber

( P i t o t ) s t a g n a t i o np r e s -

Mach number i s computedfrom

I nt h et r a n s o n i cr e g i o n ,

(2.C.25)

The sens it i v i t y o f Mach number t o s e t t l i n g chamber pressure measurementcan


be d e r i v e d b y o b t a i n i n g t h e p a r t i a l
respectto

de r i v a t i v e o f t h e above e x p r e s s i o n w i t h

HS, i.e.,

(2. C .27)

T h i se x p r e s s i o n

may be n o n - d i m e n s i o n a l i t e d t o o b t a i n

7M

aM/(aHS/Hs) =

( -"45

(2.C.28)

pW

or

of Mach number t o Poo i s found t o

Similarly,thenon-dimensionalsensitivity
be
aH/(aPw/Pw)=

- 7M

( 1 + .2M )

(2.C.30)

which i 1 l u s t r a t e s t h a t
":$,;.
. . ..

aM/(aPw/Pw) =

aM/(aHS/Hs)

(2.C.31)

The r e l a t i o n o f s t a g n a t i o n p r e s s u r e b e h i n d
as aMach

a normalshock,

H2,

t o HS

number f u n c t i o n i s :

(2.C.32)

Thisrelation

will n o t y i e l d

therefore,thesensitivityof
numer i c a l ,f i n i t ei n t e r v a l

an e x p l i c i t e x p r e s s i o n f o r

Machnumber
approach.

Mach number,

t o H2 was evaluatedusing

A s p r e v i o u s l y shown

(2.C.33)
These s e n s i t i v i t i e s a r e i l l u s t r a t e d i n
Thisfigureconsistently
e r r o ri n

showsa

Fig.

l a r g e r Machnumber

Hs and H2 t h a np e rp e r c e n te r r o ri n

nominalvalues

o f HS, PW and H

magnitude o f Machnumber
thesuperiorityof

2.C.8.

H S and Pa

e r r o rp e rp e r c e n t

However, when

2 a r es u b s t i t u t e da p p r o p r i a t e l y ,t h er e l a t i v e

errorper

N/m2

errorinthe

measurement i l l u s t r a t e s

H2 over PIP a t supersonic speeds (seeFig.

2.C.9).

37

2.4

2 .o

1.6

1.2

0.8

0.4
f o r M = f ( H S , P,)

Mach Number

Figure 2.C

E. l

THE SENSITIVIm OF h4ZH NUMBER TO STATIC


PRESSURE ANI) STAGNATION PRESSURE ERROR

Hs = 2.75 x 105 N/m2

-1600

-1300

"200

-1OOO
x

-800

-600

-400

-2oc

C
1

Mach Number
Figure 2 .c. 9

THE SENSITMTY OF MACH NUMBER "0 STATIC


PRESSW AND STAGNATION PRESSURES

lo6

N/m2

I 1 .C.4

F l o wA n g u l a r i t y

and C u r v a t u r e

F low angu l a r i t y and c u r v a t u r e c a n r e s u l t

from n o z z l e c o n t o u r e r r o r s ,

ir r e g u l a r i t i e s o r d i s c o n t i n u i t i e s i n t h e i n t e r n a l s u r f a c e s o f

due t o leakage, and s w i r l or curvaturepropagated

in-floworout-flow

upstream o f t h en o z z l eo rc o n t r a c t i o n .

pressure

t i o n si nf l o wp r o p e r t i e si n c l u d i n gs t a t i c

ancesby

2.C. 10).

Thus s t e p sa r e

means a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e p a r t i c u

p l a t e si nr e g i o n s

wherean

t a k e nt o
l a rt u n n e l

Machnumber

suchas

40

configuration.

These
of

shockdown would

4).

o f c e r t a i n model c o n f i g u r a t i o n s t o

l o c a lf l o wd i r e c t i o n

i s necessary t o d e f i n e v i a c a l i b r a t i o n

Section I I1.E.

dissipatethesedisturb-

u n c o n t r o l l e d ,h i g h - p r e s s u r e - r a t i o

Because o f t h e a c u t e s e n s i t i v i t y

i nt h et e s ts e c t i o n .

and t h e r e f o r e , Mach

f l o w , and more r e c e n t l y , p e r f o r a t e d

g e n e r a t ea d d i t i o n a lu n d e s i r a b l ep e r t u r b a t i o n s( R e f .

n o n - u n i f o r m i t yo ff l o w

in gradients or varia-

c o r r e c t i o n s ,i n s t a l l a t i o n

c o r r e c t i v ea c t i o n si n c l u d en o z z l ec o n t o u r
honeycombs i n r e g i o n s o f l o w

from

The r e s u l t i n gn o n - u n i f o r m i t yp r o -

duces l o c a lp e r t u r b a t i o n si nt h ef l o ww h i c hr e s u l t

number (seeFig.

a tunnel,

and Mach number, i t

any flowanomaliesthat

may e x i s t

Probes f o r m e a s u r i n gf l o wa n g u l a r i t ya r ed i s c u s s e di n

0.6

0.5

cu

0,

2
Ed

0.2

0.1

&

Mach Number

Figure 2.C .10 CHANGE IN F L O W D I I E C T I O N WIT)i INCRplENT OF MACH


B E R , Ref. 3

41

I I .C.5

Reynolds Number

The r a t i o o f i n e r t i a l t o v i s c o u s f o r c e s i n t h e t e s t
o b t a i n e d from wind-tunnel

medium i s

measurements asadimensionalunitReynolds

number g i v e n by
PU
lJ

R/E =

Thiscan

(2.C.34)

be expressed i n u n i t s o f m-l

R/I1 =

P,,H

-( 1

2.29 x 10

To2

Since P,/Q

TZ ( 1

i s al i n e a rf u n c t i o n

parameters i s one-to-one;that
be r e f l e c t e di nt h e
range poo and H

.2M )

2, 2,

of

Pa

i s , ag i v e n

error i n e i t h e r o f , t h e s e

a r e used t o o b t a i n Mach number which i s a l s o a v a r i a b l e i n

P,,

Thus e r r o r s i n

and Hs can be r e f l e c t e d i n

f o rs e l e c t e du n i t

Reynolds numbers (5, 25,50

stagnationtemperature

F i g u r e s 2.C.11

and 2.C.12

o f 311 OK (100

OF).

t o measurements o f stagnationtemperature

subsequentoperationwiththe

Machnumber

C 100 x 10 /meter)

The s e n s i t i v i t y

Df

a t anominal

.?eynolds number

i s shown i n F i g . 2.C.13.
andconsidered

same f a c i l i t y c o n f i g u r a t i o n s ,

due t o c a l i b r a t i o n or a d i s s i m i l a r c o n f i g u r a t i o n

R/Q

T h i se f f e c t

R/%

i l l u s t r a t e these s e n s i t i v i t i e s

where c a l i b r a t e d Mach numbers a r e o b t a i n e d

t r i b u t et oe r r o r si n

42

will

However, i nt h et r a n s o n i c

R/R.

M.

errors in

(2.C.35)

and H S , t h es e n s i t i v i t yt ot h e s e

t h r o u g he r r o r si n

constantfor

I,
1,.:

.2H 2 ) 1.5

same p e r c e n te r r o ri n

theaboveexpressions.

Intunnels

M and Pm as f o l lows:

HSM

2 . 2 9 x 10

R/E =

i n terms o f To,

i s shown i nF i g .

2.C.14.

any

will con-

SENSITiVI!iT OF UNIT REYNOLDS NUMBER TO


STATIC PRESSURE EHROR

Figure 2. C .11 TI&

43

100

60

40

20

h c h ,Jwnber

Figure 2 .C .12 THE SENSITIVITY OF UNIT REYPIOLDS F W E R TO


STAGNATiON PRESSURE ERRCR

44

To = 3UoK
-160
2-

\ \

\
-40

Mach Number

45

Mach Number
Figure 2 .C

.14 THE SENSITIVITY OF


MACH NUMBER ERROR

46

UNIT REYNOLDS NUMBER To

Unsteadiness,Turbulence

ll.C.6.

and Noise

Large,continuousflowtunnelsoftenhavesmall-amplitude,low-frequency
o s c i l l a t i o n si nt h e

mean f l o wc o n d i t i o n s .F o r

example, the11-FtTransonic

Tunnel a t NASA Ames has a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c p e r i o d o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y


O f course,

thistypeofvariationshould

10 seconds.

be c a l i b r a t e d and used t o e s t a b l i s h

r o u t i n et e s t i n gp r o c e d u r e s .

5), measurements i n AEDC, Langley, and Modane

AccordingtoJestley(Ref.
w i n dt u n n e l si n d i c a t et h e
areapproximately

maximum a x i a l and t r a n s v e r s et u r b u l e n c ei n t e n s i t i e s

1.0% and 0.4% f o r Mach numbers near one.

Ref. 6 , i t i s notedthatwindtunnelturbulence
and ONERA (France) t o e x c i t e

hasbeen

model f l u t t e r modes.

c a u t i o n s ,t h a tt u r b u l e n c en o to n l y

11.2 o f

used a t MLR (Netherlands)

However, T i m e (Ref. 7 )

can mask t h e i n i t i a t i o n

also e x c i t e response modes w h i c ha r en o tt r u ef l u t t e r


p o i n t so u tt h a t

I nP a r t

of f l u t t e r , b u t

modes.

may

A l s o ,T i m e

Mabey (RAE) f o u n dt h et r a n s o n i cb u f f e tb o u n d a r yt o

be v e r y sen-

s i t i v et of l o wu n s t e a d i n e s s ,I na d d i t i o n ,f r e e s t r e a mt u r b u l e n c ei n t r o d u c e s
e r r o r si ns t a t i cp r e s s u r e

1 I I . D ) and a f f e c t s bounda r y

measurements (seeSection

l a y e rt r a n s i t i o n ,s e p a r a t i o n

phenomena a tl e a d i n g

and t r a i l i n g edges, and shock-

b o u n d a r yl a y e ri n t e r a c t i o n s .
The f o l l o w i n g a r e

known t o be sources o fn o i s ei nt r a n s o n

1. porous wa 11s which can g e n e r a t e d i s t i n c t f r e q u e n c

i cw i n dt u n n e l s :
i e s known as

edgetones and/ororgantones,

2. slottedwallswhichgeneratebroad-banddisturbances
s h e a r i n gi nt h es l o t s

between themovino

s e c t i o n and t h e a i r i n t h e s u r r o u n d i n g

due t o

airinthetest
plenum chamber,

*A

preferred procedure would appear to be


a c o n t r o l l e d e x c i t a t i o n o f t h e model
v i a e i t h e r a m e c h a n i c a le x c i t o r ,p r e s s u r ep u l s eg e n e r a t o r ,
or loudspeakers.

47

3.

r e v e r b e r a t i o n o f t u n n e lw a l l s ,

4.

plenum chamber surges,

5.

t u r b u l e n t boundary l a y e r s a l o n g t h e t u n n e l w a l l s ,

6.

d i f f u s e rf l o wi n s t a b i l i t y ,

7.

compressors i nc o n t i n u o u sw i n dt u n n e l s ,

8.

c o n t r o lv a l v e si n

9.

v i b r a t i o no ft u n n e ls i d e w a l l s ,

blowdown windtunnels,

10.

w o r k i n gs e c t i o nc u t o u t s ,

and

11.

model supports and s t r u t s .

,The n o i s es o u r c e s ,w h i c hu s u a l l yd o m i n a t ea tv a r i o u s

Mach numbers, a r e i n d i c a t e d

and 16.

i n Figs. 2.C.15

I t i s noted i nt h er e v i e w

5) t h a t CL

paper
by
b!estiey
(Ref.

max

buffet

and separati.on, sk n.

onset, t r a n s o n i cd r a gr i s e ,

b o u n d a r yl a y e rt r a n s i t i o n

f r i c t i on drag, shock shapes

and locat.ions, etc.,, m.a y a l i be.affected by


. I

t u n n e l -generatednoise.

knowledge does n o t a l l o w

i n caseswherethis,

i st r u e .

o f c u r r e n tr e s e a r c hi nt h i s a r e ai st oo b t a i n

(Ref. 5).

(1)decisionswhich

a
b e t t e ru n d e r .

paDer by Westley

m a i n l yc o n s i s to f :

need t o be made t os t a n d a r d i z ei n s t r u m e n t a t

and t e s tp r o c e d u r e s ,
(2)

The funda-

programwhichusesstandardized

P. l i s t o f 25 recommendationsconcludesthe

Theserecommendations

of

complex i n t e r a c t i o n s

and aerodynamic t e s t i n gi nw i n dt u n n e l s .

s t a n d i n g o f t h i s phenomena v i a a s y s t e m a t i c t e s t i n g
instrumentation.

Our p r e s e n ts t a t e

a quantitative definition of the

between t u r b u l e n c e ,n o i s e ,
m e n t a lo b j e c t i v e

will n o t be r e p r e s e n t a t ve

Hence, windtunneldata

of f r e e - f l i g h tc o n d i t i o n s

and

new experimental
programs.

ion

TRANSONIC

M,<

TUR.BULENCE
u
(valves. compressor 1

0.3

DIFFUSER

0.3 < M<,

WALL HOLE
RESONANCE

1
Figure 2.C.15

JET No'SE

C Dominant

Souta

4-

IIC+

"

"
II

F I x l W DISTURBANCES IN TRANSONIC TUNNELS, R e f . 5

SUPERSONIC

M,.

M,

M,

I -3

- HYPERSONIC

= 3 IO
RADIATED NOISE
20 (cold flow)
> IO

.(

Usually
Dominant

c Usuolly

""Dominant
-

ENTROPY

Arc tunnels
Shock 9
MHD

Pigure 2.c.16

i!TQW

DISTURBANCES IN SUPERSOKIC

AND HYPERSO1:IC TUNNELS, Ref. 5

One o f t h e p r i m a r y
to

recamnondations i s thatstandardInstrtnnentation

measure free-streamdisturbances.This

transonictunnels

i s discussedInSection

beadopted

p r o b i m o f noise measurements i n

1II.F.

51

I I. C , 7

Humidity

The a c c e l e r a t i o n o f a i r f r o m r e s t i n v o l v e s t h e r e d u c t i o n o f s t a t i c
pressure and temperature.
i nt h er a p i da p p r o a c h
this condltion in

to water-vaporsaturation.Figure

speeds r e s u l t s
2.C.17

illustrates

terms o f t h e r a t i o o f t h e r e l a t i v e h u m i d i t y o f t h e s t r e a m

tothatofairatrest
sationon

Such expanslon t o evenmoderate

as i n a r e s e r v o i r .

aerodynamic t e s t d a t a ,

The e x t e n t o f t h e e f f e c t o f

and thusthe

amount ofcondensationwhich

8).

can be t o l e r a t e d , has n o t been f i r m l ye s t a b li s h e d( R e f .


i n v e s t i g a t i o nr e p o r t e d

d i f f e r e n c ei nd a t ao b t a i n e d

Forexample,

(Ref. 9) i n d i c a t e sv e r y

by N o r t o n ,e ta l .

conden-

on t h e same model i n m o i s t a i r

the

little

ascompared

with

thatobtainedindryair.
Inthe

absence o f a w a t e r s u r f a c e o r

f o r e i g nn u c l e i ) ,

a precipitant(such

humid a i r can be c o o l e dw e l l

as a d r o p l e t o r

beyond t h et h e o r e t i c a ls a t u r a -

t i o np o i n tb e f o r ec o n d e n s a t i o no c c u r s .T h i si s

because theprocess

i st i m e

dependent and t h e r a t e o f e x p a n s i o n ( w h i c h d e f i n e s t h e t e m p e r a t u r e h i s t o r y o f
t h ef l o w

and i s u s u a l l y r e l a t e d t o t h e t u n n e l s i z e ) d e f i n e s t h e

s u p e r c o o l i n gt h a t

can be a t t a i n e d .S u p e r c o o l i n go fa s

amount o f
much as 100

C hasbeen
0

e x p e r i m e n t a l l y measured usingsubstantialtemperaturegradients(100
e.g.,

Ref. 10;and

t h es a t u r a t i o n
hasbeen

t h e o r e t i c a l work hasbeen

vaporpressure

n e g l i g i b l el i k e l i h o o do fc o n d e n s a t i o n ,
tolerance,
of 2

OC

a c c o m p l i s h e dw h i c hi n d i c a t e st h a t

may beexceeded

demonstratedthatsupercooling

i t may be seen i n F i g u r e

air dryers are usually


a l t h o u g ht h i s

4, Ref. 1 1 .

It

can be accomplished w i t h
However, even w i t ht h i s

thatfor

an a r b i t r a r y dew p o i n t

be r e q u i r e d t o a v o i d

condensat i o n

Therefore, i t i sg e n e r a l l yn o tp r a c t i c a l

(because o f a i r s t r e a m s t a g n a t i o n t e m p e r a t u r e
t o employ r e s e r v o i rh e a t i n g

OC

Ref. 12.

extremereservoirtemperatureswould

lw supersonlc Mach numbers.


at o

by a f a c t o r o f

o f 30

2.C.18

C/cm),

1 i m i t s , suchasthose

o f Ref. 8)

as a means f o ra v o i d i n gc o n d e n s a t i o n .I np r a c t i c e ,

used t o reduce dew p o i n t s t o

as lowas

practical ;

may be above t h es t r e a mt e m p e r a t u r e ,t h et o t a lw a t e rc o n t e n ti s

small, and c o n d e n s a t i o n e f f e c t s a r e n e g l i g i b l e .
As noted by Pope and Goin(Ref.12),theeffectwhichhumidity

tunnel Mach
number

depends onwhethertheflowissubsonicorsupersonic.In

t h e case o f subsonicflow,watervaportends

52

has on

toincreasethe

Mach number and

100

10

Mach Number
Figure 2 .C .17 THE RATIO OF RELATIVE H
U
M
D
IT
IY I N THE STREAM TO
RESERVDIR AS A FUNCTION OF MACH NUMBER

53

Assumptions:
Dew Point Temperature = 2 c
Allowable Supercooling = 30 C
Allowable Stream Temperature = -29

Mach Number

Figure

2 .c .l8

RESERVOIR TEMPERATLTRE: REQUIRED TO AVOID

CONDEXSATION, Ref. IO

54

reduce s t a t i cp r e s s u r e ;

whereas, t h eo p p o s i t eo c c u r si ns u p e r s o n i cf l o w .T h i s

e f f e c t has a l s o been s u b s t a n t i a t e db ya n a l y s e sa t
a n e g a t i v e Machnumber

g r a d i e n to c c u r s

AEDC.*

These r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e

when m o i s t u r e condenses i n supersonic

flow.

(i.e.,empty

The absence o f c o n d e n s a t i o n d u r i n g t u n n e l c a l i b r a t i o n

tunnel)

- d o e sn o tp r e c l u d et h ep o s s i b i l i t yo fl o c a lc o n d e n s a t i o ni np r o x i m i t yo fa

It has been observed i n t h e AEDC Aerodynamic Wind

d u r i n gp r o d u c t i o nt e s t i n g .

Tunnel 4T (Transonic 4T) t h a tt r a n s o n i c . f o r c ed a t ai su n a f f e c t e d


c o n t e n tu n t i lc o n d e n s a t i o nc a nb e
gm/gm o f a i r ) .

s e n s i t i v e , and e x p e r i e n c ea t

bymoisture

seen (anominalwater-vaporcontent

However, t e s t si n v o l v i n gs u r f a c ep r e s s u r e

shouldbeconducted

model

o f 0.002

measurements a r e more

AEDC i n d i c a t e s t h i s t y p e o f t r a n s o n i c t e s t i n g
< 0.0015
-

w i t hh u m i d i t y

gm H20/gm a i r .

**

An a d d i t i o n a l

procedure f o r r e d u c i n g t h e e f f e c t o f h u m i d i t y i n t r a n s o n i c t u n n e l s i s t o a d j u s t
w a l la n g l ea c c o r d i n gt ot h et e s t

medium dew p o i n t , e.g.,Ref.

8.

I nt h es u p e r -

sonicregime,experience

a t NASA Ames has shown t h a t 0.0004 gm H20/gm o f a i r i s

a good r u l e - o f - t h u m bf o r

model t e s t sw i t h

through an i n l e t model i s found t ov a r ya b o u t


c o n t e n tv a r i e sf r o m

0.0002 t o 0,001.

a f f e c tt h ea l l o w a b l em o i s t u r ec o n t e n t ,
whichcan

3.5.'

Forexample,

1% a t M = 3.0 when t h em o i s t u r e

Because o f t h e f a c i l i t y v a r i a b l e s w h i c h
it i s d e s i r a b l e t o e s t a b l i s h t h e l e v e l

be t o l e r a t e d i n a p a r t i c u l a r f a c l l i t y

by c o n d u c t i n g t e s t s

s e n t a t i v ec o n f i g u r a t i o n and v a r y i n go n l yh u m i d i t y .T h i st y p eo ft e s t
i nt h e

*
ff

'

mass f l o w

on areprewas included

8).

workreportedbyCorson,etal.(Ref.

J. D. Gray, AEDC.

Privatecommunication,

Mr.

Privatecommunication,

Mr. J. Gunn, AEDC.

Privatecommunication,

Mr.

F. W.

S t e i n l e , NASA Ames.

55

I I .C.8

Test Mediums

Air i s a l m o s t , u n i v e r s a l l y usedas

thetest

medium i n t r a n s o n i c

and

s u p e r s o n i cw i n dt u n n e l s .A l t h o u g ht h e s ef a c i l i t i e sh a v ed i f f e r e n to p e r a t i n g
characteristicswiththeairbeingsubjectedtodifferentpressure

and tempera-

t u r el e v e l sd u r i n gt h ev a r i o u sc y c l e s ,

i t i sg e n e r a l l ya l l o w a b l et oc o n s i d e r

t h e gas t o beideal.Realgaseffects

may become r e l e v a n t a t

f a c i l i t y (Ref. 6).

such as i n a Ludwiegtube

r e l a t i o n s may occur when o t h e r t e s t

e x t r e m ec o n d i t i o n s

Departures from t h ei d e a l

mediums a r e employed.However,

gas

i t has been

found t h a t t h e i d e a l r e l a t i o n s a r e s u i t a b l e f o r t h e v e r y l o w t e m p e r a t u r e

14).

n i t r o g e n used intheLangleyIO-MeterTransonicCryogentcTunnel(Ref.
R e c e n tt r a n s o n i cw i n dt u n n e lt e s t so fa i r f o i l s
varying y

, Refs.

15 and 16.

A l t h o u g hn oe f f e c t

f l o w s , a s y s t e m a t i cr e d u c t i o ni nl o c a l
s u p e r c r i t i c a lf l o w s .T u t l a ,e ta l .
w i t ht h ee f f e c t so f

s t a t i c - p r e s s u r ep r o b ei s

ona

peak Mach numbers was observedfor


(Ref.

empty,

16) suggest t h i st r e n di sa s s o c l a t e d

t r a n s o n i ct u n n e l s

As discussed i nS e c t i o n

pressure distributions, this

lll.D.2,

56

i f a conventional,

a t r a n s o n i c shock alwaysforms

I f v a r i a t i o n si n

y can a f f e c t super-

may a l s o change t h e l o c a t i o n o n

a tw h i c hf r e e s t r e a mp r e s s u r ee x i s t s .R e s e a r c ho nt h i s
a t NASA Ames.

i n t e r a c t i o n s .T h i si s

used t o measure freestream Mach number i n d i f f e r e n t

conventionalstatic-pressureprobe.

. .cr,itical

was d e t e c t e d for s u b c r i t i c a l

y on transonic-shock/boundary-layer

relevanttothecalibrationof

t e s t gases,

have i n d i c a t e da ne f f e c to f

a probe

phenomena i sc o n t i n u i n g

1 I .C.
1.

H i 1 1, Jacques A. F. e t a l ,
Tunnels,"

References

"MachNumber

Measurements i n High SpeedWind

145,

MIT, NavalSupersonicLaboratoryTechnicalReport

Februaty 1956.
2.

Thompson, J.. S. and Holder, D. Y.,

"Noteson

Measurements from t h e O p e r a t o r ' s P o i n t o f

Wind TunnelPressure
View,"

RAE TN Aero.2547,

February 1958.

3.

Raney, D. J.,

"Flow D i r e c t i o n Measurements i n Supersonic Wind Tunnels,"

Her M a j e s t y ' s S t a t i o n e r y O f f i c e ,

4.

Cooksey, J. M. and Arnold,J.


Wind TunnelUsinga
Vol.

6.

W.,

London 1956.
"Flow q u a l i t y Improvements i n a Blowdown

10, No. 9, September 1973.

MiniLaWsWorking

Group, "A F u r t h e r Review o f C u r r e n t

Design and FunctionofLargeWindtunnels,"

7.

T i m e , A.,

" E f f e c t so fT u r b u l e n c e

Corson, Blake, W.,

Norton,Harry

T. Jr.,

sonicPerformance
f o rC o r r e c t e d

IO.

1975.

Sept.

Apr i 1 1973.

Air Removal,"

Runckel,Jack

F.,

NASA TR R-423, August 1974.

and Pendergraft,Odis

C.

Jr.,

"Tran-

o f Two Convergent-DivergentEjectorNozzlesDesigned

SecondaryFlows

Lundquist, G. A.,

AGARD-AR-83,

e ta l ." C a l i b r a t i o n so ft h eL a n g l e y1 6 - f o o tT r a n s o n i c

Tunnel w i t h T e s t S e c t i o n

9.

Research Aimed a t t h e

and Noise onWind-TunnelMeasurements

A t Transonic Speeds , I ' AGARD-R-602,

8.

A l A A Journal,

M u l t i p l e Shock Entrance Diffuser,''

o f 3 and 9.4 Percent,"

NASA TM X-909,

1964.

"Recent Experimental Work a t NOL on Condensation

i n Compressible Flows,"GeophysicalResearchPaper

No.

37, ARDL, J u l y 1955.

57

14.

Adcock, J e r r y B . ,
asaTransonic

IS.

Gross, A.

Kilgore,Robert

Wind TunnelTest

R. and S t e i n l e ,

F.

W.:

A. an'd
Ray,
Gas,"

Edward J.,

AlAA Paper 75-143,

"PressureDatafrom

16.

Tuzla,

,'I

NASA TH X-62468, Aug.


K.;

Wai,
J.

C.;

Aerodynamics,"Proc.

17.

S p r a t l e y , A.

B.,

58

Heatsfrom

and Russell, 3. A.:

"y-Effectson2-DimensionalTransonic

A I M 9 t h Aerodynamic TestingConference,

Thompson, E.

1.67 t o

1975.

R.,

and Kennedy, T. L.:

and N o z z l e A f t e r b o d y C o n f i g u r a t i o n E f f e c t s

A I A A Paper77-103,

January 1975.

a 64010 A i r f o i l a t

Transonic Speeds i n Heavy Gas Media o f R a t i o o f S p e c i f i c


1.12

"CryogenicNitrogen

January 1977.

June 1976.

l'Reynolds Number and

on Model Forebody and Afterbody Drag,"

111.

CALIBRATION PROCEDURES AND lNSTRUMENTATlON

A.

S e t t l i n g Chamber Pressure

variablewhichisusually

the re'servoi r t o t a l p r e s s u r e i s

11 .A.,

As discussed i n S e c t i o n

a fundamental

measured d i r e c t l y i n t h e s e t t l i n $ c h a m b e r s o f b o t h

t r a n s o n i c and supersonictunnels.

The Machnumber

s e t t l i n g chamber aredetermined

and dynamic pressure i n t h e

Ao/A

by t h e c o n t r a c t i o n r a t i o ,
chamber and A*

t h ec r o s ss e c t i o n a la r e aa tt h es e t t l i n g
c o r r e s p o n d i n gt ot h et e s ts e c t i o n

Mach number.

* , where

A.

i s t h e choked t h r o a t a r e a

The maximum s t i l l i n g chamber

Mach number n o r m a l l yo c c u r sa t

Mach 1.0 i n a transonic-supersonictunnel.

a contraction ratio of IO,.for

example, t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g s t i l l i n g

number i s 0.058.

The f l o w may be consideredincompressible

HS

"5

= 1

ps

HS

where (PS/Hs)
ratio of

i sd e f i n e d

s t a g n a t i o np r e s s u r e .

chamber Mach number.

chamber dynamic p r e s s u r e i s

Thus,

t h ee r r o ri n

0.002.

Therefore,

used t o measure s e t t l i n g

must be e l i m i n a t e d v i a c a l i b r a t i o n w i t h P i t o t

be l o c a t e d downstream o f anyscreens,

crosssectlonshould

s i g n i f i c a n tp r e s s u r e

i s t o be used(as

t o Machnumber

error is to

be l e s st h a n

honeycombs, e t c . , s i n c e

losses, Ref. 1.

Also,the

t o t a lp r e s s u r e

must be lessthan

i s comnonlydone)and
0.001,

0.05 percent

probes.

a s e t t l i n g chamber,

chamber

If a single

be surveyed for v a r i a t i o n si nt o t a lp r e s s u r e .

v a l u eo ft o t a lp r e s s u r e

i f a Mach number accuracy

When u s i n g a P i t o t probe t o c a l i b r a t e t o t a l p r e s s u r e i n

theseitemscancause

inducedbyusing

0.235 percent.Thiswould

o f 0.001 i s t o be achieved and s t a t i c o r i f i c e s a r e


chamber p r e s s u r e , t h e e r r o r

A t a contraction

0.235 p e r c e n t o f t h e

measured t o t a l head,

a P i t o t probe,wouldbe

c o n t r i b u t e a Mach number e r r o r o f

itscontribution

then 2a o f s p a t i a l v a r i a t i o n s i n

(EAM =

fortunately,thisisnotonlynearthestate-of-the-art

0.0005 a t M = 0 . 8 0 ) .

Un-

o f pressure measurement

it i s a l s o v e r y d i f f i c u l t t o a c h i e v e t h i s u n i f o r m i t y i n p r a c t i c e .

Thus, t h e d e c i s i o n a s t o

what i s an acceptable amount o f n o n u n i f o r m i t y

s e t t l i n g chamber pressure mustbe

and t h e r a t i o o f

(-+,p S

by t h e s e t t l i n g

static orifice in place of

accuracy,

chamber Mach

10, t h e s t i l l i n g

theprobemust

At

frbm

dynamic t o s t a g n a t i o n p r e s s u r e d e t e r m i n e d

qS

is

The t e r m s " S e t t l i n g

chamber"and

l e f tt oi n d i v i d u a l

judgment.

in

T h i sd e c i s i o n

" s t i l l i n g chamber" a r e usedinterchangeably.

59

should be based on t h e p a r t i c u l a r f a c i l i t y c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s *

and t h e t y p e o f

t e s t sw h i c ha r ec o n d u c t e di nt h a tf a c i l i , t y .
Once t h e s p a t i a l v a r i a t i o n s i n s e t t l i n g

chamber p r e s s u r e a r e j u d g e d t o

acceptable, i t i s suggested t h a t an a p p r o p r i a t ea v e r a g e
measurements i nt h ec e n t r a lp o r t i o no ft h ef l o w .F o r
TransonicTunnelat

c e n t r a lp o r t i o no ft h ef l o wt od e f i n e

be d e f i n e d basedon

example,

NASA L a n g l e y ,f o u rP i t o tp r o b e s

i nt h e

have beenmounted

2).

anaverage(Ref.

be

16 f t .
inthe

I ng e n e r a l ,i n - i t i a l

c a l i b r a t i o n s r e q u i r e more measurements i n o r d e r t o e s t a b l i s h

a s u i t a b l e average.

However, o n c et h ea v e r a g et o t a lp r e s s u r ei sd e t e r m i n e df o rt h er a n g eo fo p e r a t i n g
c o n d i t i o n s , a s i m p l ew a l l
torelateits
test,ingcan

mounted tube (or a s t a t i c o r i f i c e )

measurements t o t h e

average.

can be c a l i b r a t e d

By f o l l o w i n gt h i sp r o c e d u r e ,r o u t i n e

be accomplishedwithoutanyunnecessaryobstructions

in the central

portionoftheflow.
Although a w i d e v a r i e t y o f P i t o t p r o b e

nosegeometrieshave

o
w
l
speed f l o w s ,s i m p l es t e e lt u b i n gw i t h
ratio

-B

0 . 5 and a square-cut nose

chamber w i t hn e g l i g i b l ee r r o r .
unaffectedbyflowanglesof

**

been used i n

an i n t e r n a lt oe x t e r n a ld i a m e t e r

will measure t o t a l p r e s s u r e i n t h e s e t t l i n g

A P i t o t probe w i t ht h i sd i a m e t e rr a t i oi s

10 degrees or less, Ref.

3.

Assumina t h a t

reasonablecareistakentoaligntheprobewiththeflow,thistypeofprobe

will provideadequateaccuracyeven
s e t t l i n g chamber.

i f c o n s i d e r a b l et u r b u l e n c ee x i s t si nt h e

T h i sc o n c l u s i o ni ss u b s t a n t i a t e d

b yt h ef o l l o w i n gd i s c u s s i o n .

The problem o f P i t o t probe measurements i n an i n c o m p r e s s i b l e ,t u r b u l e n t


f l o w hasbeen

examined by Becker and Brown (Ref. 4).

( 1 ) spherical-nosed

a n a l y z e dd a t af o rf o u rd i f f e r e n tp r o b eg e o m e t r i e s :
probe(asphere

ona

square-nosedtube,
e x t e r i o ro f

a tube.

t u b u l a rs u p p o r t ) ,
and

(4)

These authors have

(2) a hemispherical-nosedtube,

sharp-1ippedprobes

(3) a

made by c o n i c a l l y t a p e r i n g t h e

The r e s u l t so ft h e i rs e m i - e m p i r i c a la n a l y s i sf o rs q u a r e -

nosed p r o b e si n d i c a t e st h ef o l l o w i n g .I n
a turbulenceintensityof

an i s o t r o p i c ,t u r b u l e n tf l o ww i t h

percent, a square-nosedprobe

w i t h a diameterratio

*A

number o f s u p e r s o n i c t u n n e l s
have f i x e d - c o n t o u r , s l i d i n g b l o c k n o z z l e s w h i c h
a r er o u t i n e l yo p e r a t e do f fd e s i g n .
These n o z z l e sc a nh a v es i g n i f i c a n tt o t a l
pressurelosseswhichcanonly
be determined by P i t o t surveys w i t h i n t h e t e s t
section.
However, t h ea v e r a g et e s ts e c t i o nt o t a lp r e s s u r ec o u l d
be r e l a t e d
t o s t i l l i n g chamber p r e s s u r e v i a c a l i b r a t i o n t e s t s .

A*

T h i s assumes the nose i s f r e e o f b u r r s . F i n i s h i n g o f o r i f i c e s i s b r i e f l y


discussed i n S e c t i o n I 11.0.4.

60

-4

0.56 x 10 q.

of 0 . 5 will c a p t u r e t h e t o t a l p r e s s u r e w i t h a n e r r o r o f

For a

given amount o f t u r b u l e n c e , t h e e r r o r d e c r e a s e s w i t h i n c r e a s i n g d i a m e t e r r a t i o .
Thisaccuracy

i s more than ample f o r most t u n n e l s s i n c e h o t - w i r e

a t AEDC i n t h e s e t t l i n g

chamber o ft h e

indicatethelongitudinal

o f one p e r c e nf o
t r

0.3

measurements

Aerodynamic Wind Tunnel (4T),

1.2.

Assuming i s o t r o p itcu r b u l e n c et ,h i s

1.73 percent.

t h et o t a lt u r b u l e n c ei n t e n s i t yi sa p p r o x i m a t e l y
suggestedsquare-nosedprobecan

5,

3.

of theorder,

component o f t h e t u r b u l e n c e i n t e n s i t y i s
M

Ref.

means

Thus, t h e

be used i n most s e t t l i n g chambers w i t hc o n f i -

dence.
The above d e s c r i b e d a c c u r a c y a n a l y s i s i g n o r e s
sources o fe r r o r .

I t i s assumed theprobenose

it from any e f f e c t s o f

a number o f o t h e r p o s s i b l e '
i sl o n g

downstreamgeometry.Becker

enough t oi s o l a t e

and Brown (Ref. 4) suggests

t h e nose l e n g t h be g r e a t e rt h a ns i xp r o b ed i a m e t e r s .A l s o ,t h ee f f e c to f
;i.

changes i nt h ei n t e r n a d
l i a m e t e ri si g n o r e d I. no r d e rt oe l i m i n a t ei n t e r n a l
geometry asa
s t a n tf o r

v a r i a b l e , Becker and Brown suggesttheinternaldiameter

be con-

a d i s t a n c eo ft h r e ep r o b ed i a m e t e r s .I na d d i t i o n ,t h ep r o b es h o u l d

be l o c a t e d more t h a nt w od i a m e t e r sf r o mt h en e a r e s tw a l li no r d e rt oa v o i d
r e d u c t i o ni n

3 , p. 12).

measured pressure (e.g.,Ref.

Finally,theprobeshould
W i n t e r n i t z( R e f .

be designed and mounted t o m i n i m i z e v i b r a t i o n .

6) has presented a s i m p l i f i e dp r o c e d u r ef o rd e s i g n i n gc a n t i -

l e v e r e d ,c i r c u l a rc y l i n d e r st oa v o i do s c i l l a t i o n si n d u c e d
Ower and Pankhurst(Ref.

7, p. 54) o b s e r v et h a tf o r

o f 0 . 8 cm ( 9 1 6 i n . )t h ev o r t e xs h e d d i n gf r e q u e n c yi n
and 160 Hz a t 6 m/sec.
and t h en a t u r a lf r e q u e n c y
tions.

o f theprobe

chambers.

Thus,probes

chamber should be designed t o a v o i d t h i s

f:

by vortexshedding.
a c y l i n d e rw i t h

a diameter

a i r i s 40 Hz a t 1.5 m/sec

Hence, theyconcluderesonancebetweenvortexfrequency
isunlikelyin

However, i n some cases t h i sc o u l d

isticofstilling

most w i n dt u n n e la p p l i c a -

be a problem a t t h e

low speeds c h a r a c t e r -

f o r measurements i n t h e s t i l l i n g
phenomenon.

The problem o f i n t e r n a l geometry changes c a u s i n g b i a s i n g o f


p r e s s u r e si nf l u c t u a t i n gf l o w si sb r i e f l yd i s c u s s e di nR e f .

measured mean
3 , p.105.

1II.A.

1.

Loehrke, R.

1 . and Nagib, H. M.:

Corson,

B.

W.,

"Experimentson

AGARD-R-598,

Free-StreamTurbulence,"
2.

References

Sept.

Management o f

1972.

Jr. ; Runckel, J. F. ; and Igoe, #.

B.

" C a l i b r a t i o n of

the Langley l6-Foot Transonic Tunnel with Test Section

1974.

NASA TR-R-423,
Aug.

3.

Bryer, D. W.

and Pankhurst, R. C . :

WindSpeedand

Credle, 0. P.:

A.

P. G.:

F l u i d Mech.,

Her M a j e s t y ' s

"Response o f P i t o t Probes i nT u r b u l e n t

Vol. 62, P a r t 1 , 8 Jan.

1974.

"An EvaluationoftheFluctuatingAirborneEnvironment

i n t h e AEDC-PWT

6.

f o rD e t e r m i n i n g

London, 1971.

Becker, H. A. and
Brown,
Strearns,l'Jour.

5.

Pressure-Probe
Methods

F l o wD i r e c t i o n ,N a t i o n a lP h y s i c a lL a b o r a t o r y ,

S t a t i o n e r yO f f i c e ,

4.

Air Removal , ' I

W i n t e r n i t z , F. A.

16-Ft TransonicTunnel
L.:

,I1

AEDC-TR-69-236,

" E f f e c t so fV i b r a t i o no nP i t o t

The Engineer, 1/01. 201, 30Mar.

1956, pp. 273-275and

NOV. 1969.

Probe
Readings,"

6 A p r i l 1956,

pp. 228-290,London.

7.

Ower, E. and Pankhurst, R.


Press, London, 1966.

62

C.:

The Measurement o f Air Flow, Pergamon

III

. B.

TOTAL TEMPERATURE

The t o t a l t e m p e r a t u r e i s n o r m a l l y m o n i t o r e d . i n t h e s t i l l i n g

chamber d u r i n g

r o u t i n et u n n e lo p e r a t i o n .S i n c et h ed i f f e r e n c eb e t w e e nt o t a l
t u r e i s s m a l la t

low v e l o c i t i e s , a shielded,high-recoverythermocoupleprobe

i sn o tu s u a l l yn e c e s s a r y .I nf a c t ,d a t ao b t a i n e d
twotypes

1) f o rt h e s e

by Stickney(Ref.

("0.999)

o f probes show t h a tt h er e c o v e r yf a c t o r sa r en e a r l yi d e n t i c a l
and M < 0.2.

f o r temperaturesnearambient
thatin

and s t a t i c tempera-

many cases t h et o t a lt e m p e r a t u r e

w i t hs a t i s f a c t o r ya c c u r a c y ,

can bemeasured

Measurements
by

temperatureprobeshave

i s shown i n t h e

shorterresponsetime

s h i e l d e dp r o b e s .I nt h ec a s eo f

i f t e s t sa r e

numbers, t h et o t a lt e m p e r a t u r e

c o n t i n u o u s l y s o t h a tt o t a lp r e s s u r e

canbe

mustbe

example, a 0.13 mm (0.005

0.53 mm (0.021")diameterwire

Whereas, f o r t h e

t h em a j o r it y

use thebare-wirethermocouple

E s t i m a t e da c c u r a c i e sv a r i e df r o m
t h er e l a t i o n sp r e s e n t e di nS e c t i o n

i n . )d i a m e t e rw i r e

of

33 m i l l i o n .F o r

same c o n d i t i o n s , a

4.

i ca ted

f o r t o t a l temperature measurements.

+0.56"C t o 2 1 . 1 " C

(21F t o2 2 F ) .

Based on

l l . C . 2 , an u n c e r t a i n t yi nt o t a lt e m p e r a t u r e
0.5 p e r c e n t a t

a Reynolds num-

most t e s t i n g purposes t h i s i s acceptable.

f e wt u n n e l s( t r a n s o n i co rs u p e r s o n i c )a p p e a rt o
t u r eg r a d i e n t sw h i c h

and pressure and

o f t u n n e lo p e r a t o r si n d

o f 1 C will cause, a t M = 1 , a maximum u n c e r t a i n t y o f


berpermeter

has a

has a 1.0sectimeconstant,e.g.,Ref.

I n response t ot h eq u e s t i o n n a i r e
they do i n f a c t

Also,

0.1 sec. a r e

ambienttemperature

19.8 m/sec (65 f t / s e c ) .

con-

monitored

c o n t r o l l e da u t o m a t i c a l l y .

s m a l lw i r et h e r m o c o u p l e sw i t ht i m ec o n s t a n t so ft h eo r d e ro f

a v e l o c i t yo f

upper p a r t o f

blowdown tunnelswheretotaltemperaturecan

ductedatconstantReynolds

*>*:
t i m ec o n s t a n ot 0f . 1s e c i.na i a
rt

compared t o more e l a b o r a t e ,

an essentialadvantage.Forexample,

t y p i c a l l yr e q u i r e d .F o r

chamber,

Stickney(Ref.1)indicatethatsuchunshielded

amuch

v a r yr a p i d l y ,t h i si s

in the stilling

by u s i n g a simplebare-wirethermocouplejunction.

A schematic o f t h i s t y p e o f t e m p e r a t u r e p r o b e

F i g u r e 3.8.1.

2) note

Thus, Pope and Goin(Ref.

may e x i s t a c r o s s

havebeen

calibratedfor

However,

tempera-

and a l o n gt h ef l o w .

*A

c o m p r e h e n s i v ed i s c u s s i o no ft h e r m o c o u p l ep r i n c i p l e s ,c i r c u i t s ,e l e c t r o m o t i v e
f o r c et a b l e s ,s t a b i l i t y
and c o m p a t i b i l i t yd a t a ,i n s t a l l a t i o nt e c h n i q u e s ,e t c .
may be found i n Ref. 3.

I
A

r.

I
.

The timeconstant
i s h e r ed e f i n e d as t h et i m er e q u i r e dt or e a c h
instantaneoustemperature change.

63.2% of an

63

Typical Bare-Wire Probe

/Two-hole

.229 O.D. x .033 W a l l

ceramic
holder

A l l Dimensions In Centimeters

AEDC-IWT 1 6 ~
Probe (Ref. 5

.635 O.D. x .089

Wall

1.12 R

-.+ 1.27

30.48

L 4equally
Vent holes(0.17)
spaced

.478 O.D.

x .081 W a l l

Figure 3 .B. 1 TOTAL !E!&PEMTUFU3 PROBES

One o f t h e

most complete and e x t e n s i v e c a l i b r a t i . o n o f t e m p e r a t u r e g r a d i e n t s

i n a t r a n s o n i ct u n n e l
Ref. 5.

has beendone

i nt h e

AEDC P r o p u l s i o n Wind Tunnel (16T),

The t e m p e r a t u r ec a l i b r a t i o n was done t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e e f f e c t s o f a

special-purpose,cryogeniccoolingsystemwhichconsists
tem t o c h i l l t h e c o o l a n t

section.

and a l i q u i d a i r system for d i r e c t

i n t h et u n n e lc o o l e r

A rectangulararrayofshieldedtempera-

i n j e c t i o ni n t ot h et u n n e la i r s t r e a m .
tureprobes

was l o c a t e di nt h en o z z l ec o n t r a c t i o nr e g i o n
A schematic o f a t y p i c a lp r o b e

and Reynolds number e f f e c t s (Ref.

and i n t h e t e s t

i s shown i nF i g u r e

t h er e c o v e r yf a c t o ro fa l lt h e r m o c o u p l ep r o b e s

3.8.1.*Since

need t o be c a l i b r a t e d f o r

l ) , t h e raw temperaturedatawere

by Robson (Ref. 5 ) .

c o r r e c t e df o rt h e s ee f f e c t s

o f a l i q u i d n i t r o g e n sys-

first

Subsequently,thetemperature

o ft h ef l o wt h r o u g ht h ec e n t r a lp o r t i o no ft h en o z z l ee n t r a n c es e c t i o n
byanaverage

o ft h i r t e e nt e m p e r a t u r e s

r e c t a n g u l a rr e g i o n .

was d e f i n e d

measured over a 2 x 3.5 m (6 x 1 1 f t )

The t e m p e r a t u r eo ft h et e s ts e c t i o nf l o w

an average o f 17 temperaturesobtainedover
thecore.

Mach

a2

was d e f i n e d by

x 2 m (6 x 6 f t ) p o r t i o n o f

The d i f f e r e n c e betweenthesetwotemperatures

was used t od e f i n e

a t e m p e r a t u r ec a l i b r a t i o np a r a m e t e rw h i c hr e l a t e st e m p e r a t u r ea tt h en o z z l e
e n t r a n c et ot e s ts e c t i o nt e m p e r a t u r e .I nt h i s
found t o be approximately 1 . 1 " C

was

(2F)lowerthanthenozzleflow.Deviations

of 28F wereobtainedacrossboththenozzle
number range0.2

case, t h et e s ts e c t i o nf l o w

and t h e t e s t s e c t i o n o v e r

t o 0.8 and -22C < To < 21C.

a Mach

These d e t a i l e dt e m p e r a t u r e

measurements were made because o f t h e a n t i c i p a t e d n o n u n i f o r m i t i e s p r o d u c e d

by

,. temperaturegradientsusually
the
special
cooling
system.
Although
smaller
-1. .L
I\

e x i s ti nt u n n e l sw i t h o u ts p e c i a lc o o l i n g

o r heatingsystems,this

i l l u s t r a t e st h ep r o c e d u r er e q u i r e dt oa c c u r a t e l yc a l i b r a t ew i n dt u n n e l
tures.

For r o u t i n et e s t i n g ,

a singletemperatureprobecan

example
tempera-

be r e l a t e dt ot h e

average s t i l l i n g chamber t e m p e r a t u r e v i a c a l i b r a t i o n i n o r d e r t o e l i m i n a t e t h e
disturbingeffectsof

anunnecessarythermocouplegrid.

.L

"Robson (Ref. 5) statesthatthecopper-constantanthermocouples


used i n
t h i s p r o b ea r eg e n e r a l l yc o n s i d e r e dt o
have a s y s t e m a t i c e r r o r o f
+2.2"C
(24F).
-8. I
I
.I
.

Temperatures i n t h e 1/3-MeterTransonicCryogenicTunnel
a t NASA Langley
a g r i d o f thermocoupleprobes,Ref.
6.
havealso,beensurveyedusing

65

Additionalinformation
probescanbefound
problem o f e r r o r s i n
windtunnels

66

on thedesign

i n Refs.7-10.Also,Bate(Ref.

and c a l i b r a t i o no ft o t a lt e m p e r a t u r e

1 1 ) has reviewedthe

thermocouple measurements basedon

i n WestGermany.

e x p e r i e n c ei nt h e

DFVLR

I
I I I . 6.

1.

Stickney, T. M.:

References

"Recovery and Time-Response C h a r a c t e r i s t i c so fS i x

ThermocoupleProbes

NACA TN 3455,

i n SubsonicandSupersonicFlow,"

J u l y 1955.
2.

Pope, A. and Goin, K. L.:High-speed

Wind TunnelTesting,Wiley,

New York,

1965.
3.

onthe

Manual

No. 470, P h i l a d e l p h i a , Pa.,

1974.

The Omega Temperature Measurement Handbook, Omega Engineering,Inc.,Stamford,


Conn.,

5.

Committee E20:

Use o f Thermocouples i n Temperature Measurement, ASTM Special

T e c h n i c a lP u b l i c a t i o n

4.

and M a t e r i a l s (ASTM),

A m e r i c a nS o c i e t yf o rT e s t i n g

1975.

Robson, G.

"TestSectionTemperatureCalibratlonofthe

D.:

TransonicTunnel

a tS t a g n a t i o n

Temperaturesfrom-30

AEDC PWT 16-Ft

t o 3OoF,"

AEDC-TR-69-2,

Feb. 1969.

6.

Polhamus, E. C . ; K i l g o r e , R . A. ; Adcock,J.
HighReynolds

7.

Number Wind-Tunnel Program,"

Baker, H . D.;

V o l l u z , R. J.:

Dean, R. C.,

Bate, J.:

and Flow Measurements,

Temperature Measurement i n

1961.

"Handbook o f SupersonicAerodynamics,Section
and Design,"

Jr.:Aerodynamic

E n t e r p r i s e s , New York,

11.

1974.

and Baker, FI. H.:

I I , Wiley, New York,

TunnelInstrumentation

10.

A s t r o . 5 Aero.,Oct.

1969.

Ryder, E.A.;

Engineering,Vol.

9.

"The Langley

Benedict, R. P . : Fundamentals of Temperature,Pressure,


Wiley, New York,

8.

6. ; and Ray, E. J. :

20, Wind

NAVORD Rept. 1488 ( V o l .6 ) ,

Measurements,
MIT

Gas Turbine Lab.,

1961.
Eagle

1953.

"Temperature Measurements i n Wind Tunnels,"

1736, AD 922 120, Farnborough,Hants,England,June

RAE L i b T
. ransl.

No.

1974.

67

1II.C.

PITOT PRESSURES

Use o f P i t o t Pressures f o r C a l i b r a t i o n

II.C.l, when M > 1.6 t h e u n c e r t a i n t y i n c a l c u l a t e d

As d e s c r i b e d i n S e c t i o n
t e s ts e c t i o n

Mach number i s l e s s

i f t h ec a l c u l a t i o ni s

r a t h e rt h a nf r e e s t r e a ms t a t i cp r e s s u r e .
c a l i b r a t e dv i aP i t o tp r o b es u r v e y s
t h es t i l l i n g
e ta l .

chamber.

(Ref.2)have

Thus, mostsupersonictunnelshave
and assumingan

been

i s e n t r o p i ce x p a n s i o nf r o m
such as Hill (Ref.

I nt h ep a s t ,i n v e s t i g a t o r s
r e p o r t e dt h a t

based on P i t o t p r e s s u r e

1) and Hill,

measurements i ns m a l l ,s u p e r s o n i ct u n n e l s

(<0.5 m) o f t h e r a t i o o f t o t a l p r e s s u r e i n t h e t e s t s e c t i o n t o r e s e r v o i r p r e s sure exhibit

0.998 + 0.003.

a range o f

This type of resul

leads t o t h e con-

elusion t h a t n o n i s e n t r o p i c e x p a n s i o n e f f e c t s a r e n e g l i g i b l e a t
temperatures and p r e s s u r e si n
i n whichthe

normaloperating

a properlydesignedsupersonictunnel,i.e.,

empty t u n n e li sf r e eo f

shocks.

one

However, l a r g ec o n t i n u o u st u n n e l s

a r eo f t e no p e r a t e da tr e l a t i v e l yh i g hh u m i d i t yl e v e l si no r d e rt oi n c r e a s et h e

For example,Maxwell

o p e r a t i n gt i m ep r i o rt od r y e rs a t u r a t i o n .
(Ref.

3)

found i n t h e AEDC-PWT 165 Tunnel t h a t when t h eh u m i d i t y

H20/gm o f d r y a i r , t h e

average t o t a l p r e s s u r e o f t h e t e s t s e c t i o n

lowerthanthereservoirpressure.Thisloss
t u n n e lh u m i d i t yt o

0.001.

e f f e c t s cancause

Ref.

was reduced 50%by

decreasing

and r e a l gas

causedbyincompletemixing

and smalltunnelscanhavelossescaused

4).

was 2 t o 6%

a l o s si nt o t a lp r e s s u r e .A l s o ,l a r g et u n n e l sc a n

u n i f o r m i t i e si nt o t a lp r e s s u r e

**
chamber,

was 0.002 gm

Inadditiontowatervaporcondensation,obliqueshocks

(e.g.,

and H a r t l e y

W i t ht h i s

number o fp o s s i b l e

it i s recommended t h a to p e r a t o r s

havenoninthestilling

by a x i a lv e l o c i t yg r a d i e n t s
causes o ft o t a lp r e s s u r ev a r i a t i o n ,

o f b o t ht r a n s o n i c

and supersonictunnels

make

c a l i b r a t i o n measurements t o v a l i d a t e t h e a s s u m p t i o n o f u n i f o r m t o t a l p r e s s u r e .
T h i s can be accomplished i n s u b s o n i cf l o wv i a
used d i r e c t l y t o

a P i t o t probe,since

compare t e s t s e c t i o n t o t a l p r e s s u r e w i t h r e s e r v o i r p r e s s u r e .

Insupersonicflow,anotherindependentpressure

?t

A*

Once a c h o i c ei s

an

made, t h e two pressures and t h e r a t i o o f s p e c i f i c

These r e s u l t s w e r e o b t a i n e d w i t h
55 OC < To < 78 OC.
T h i s can be d e t e r m i n e d d u r i n g s e t t

68

must be measured suchasfree-

cone o r wedge, or P i t o t p r e s s u r e b e h i n d

s t r e a ms t a t i c ,s u r f a c ep r e s s u r eo n , a
o b l i q u e shock.

it can be

2 .o < M < 4.75,

3 .1 Wcm2 <

Hs < 9.1

l i n g chamber c a l i b r e t i o n ,S e c t i o n

N/cm

1II.A.

heatscanbeused

tocalculatethetest-section

Machnumber

and t o t a

pressure.
Barry(Ref.
Mach numberwhen
wedge probes.
and Holder(Ref.

5 ) has d i s c u s s e di nd e t a i lt h e
usingpressures

e r r o r s t h a to c c u ri n

6 ) , i s t h a tt h e

measured w i t h t o t a l , s t a t i c , c o n i c a

A s i g n i f i c a n tc o n c l u s i o n ,o b t a i n e d

5) and Thompson

by Barry(Ref.

i s l e s ss e n s i t i v et o

measurement

For t h i s reason,anisentropicstagnationpressureprobe

designed and t e s t e d by Goodyer (Ref. 7 ) .


mountedon

t h es u r f a c eo f

speedby

c u r v e dc y l i n d e r .

has been

The p r o b ec o n s i s t so f

a P i t o tt u b e

a c u r v e dc y l i n d e ro fc i r c u l a rc r o s ss e c t i o n .

P i t o t tubesensestheimpactpressureof

t os u b s o n i c

and

Mach number computed from a p r e s s u r e r a t i o

i n v o l v i n gt h ei s e n t r o p i cs t a g n a t i o np r e s s u r e
errors.

computed

a streamtubewhich

has beenslowed

isentropiccompressionalongtheleading

A s k e t c ho tf h ep r o b e

i s shown I nF i g u r e

The

edge o f t h e

3.C.l.

The independent

8) i n d i c a t et h a tt h i st y p eo fp r o b ep e r m i t s
measurements o f a b s o l u t e s t a g n a t i o n p r e s s u r e s w i t h a n a c c u r a c y o f
99.8 percent
e x p e r i m e n t a lr e s u l t so f
in a
Mach
number
recoverydecays
probe.
canbe

Couch (Ref.

range of 1.4 t o 2.2.


and theprobe

Beyond
a
Mach
number

ceases t o o f f e r

However, f o r Mach numbers lessthan


used f o r d i r e c t

any a d v a r , t q eo v e r

2.2

t h ep r e s s u r e

a conventional

thestagnationpressureprobe

measurement of t o t a lp r e s s u r el o s s .A l s o ,f o rt h e

o f e q u a lu n c e r t a i n t yi n
Barry(Ref.

o f 2.2,

measured pressures and 1.6

5) i n d i c a t e st h e

M < 2.2,

most a c c u r a t e c a l i b r a t i o n o f

o b t a i n e d by u s i n gt h ei s e n t r o p i cp r o b ei nc o n j u n c t i o nw i t h

case

t h ea n a l y s i so f

Mach number would be


a c o n v e n t i o n a lp i t o t

probe.
I f a s u p e r s o n i ct u n n e le n g i n e e re l e c t sn o tt o
o f i t s l i m i t e d Mach number range,thenext

use a Goodyer probebecause

most a c c u r a t et u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o n

procedure i s t o measure P i t o tp r e s s u r e si nt h ef r e e s t r e a m
Ref. 5.

Thisprocedure

has beenused

a t anumber

and on awedge,

offacilitieswith

success.

Perhaps t h e most s o p h i s t i c a t e d use of t h i s method has been developed a t t h e


AEDC P r o p u l s i o n Wind Tunnel,Ref.

i s t oo p t i m i z et h e

u n c e r t a i n t yi ne f f e c t i v ea n g l e
I ne f f e c t ,t h i sf e a t u r ee l i m i n a t e s
o f Mach number.

A v a r i a b l ea n g l e

i s used i n t h e

p i t o t tubeneareachsurface
v a r i a b l ea n g l ef e a t u r e

3.

wedge w i t h a movable

16s f a c i l i t y .

The purpose o ft h e

wedge angle and t h e r e b ye l i m i n a t e

caused by changes i n boundary l a y e rg r o w t h .


wedge a n g l eu n c e r t a i n t yi nt h ec a l c u l a t i o n

The complete Mach number probeincludestwoconventionalPitot

Dimensions In Centimeters

Straight Section

Dia

Figure 3 .C .l. ISENTROPIC STAGNATION PRESSURE PROBE, Ref. 8

probeslocatedoutboard
planview

edge o f t h e

wedge.

o f t h i s Mach number probe i s shown on t h e r i g h t i n F i g .

o f theseprobeshas
of 165.

and a l i g n e dw i t ht h el e a d i n g

been usedon

a sting to calibrate the

These same data have beenused

theprobewhich

t oc a l i b r a t e

3.C.2.

a r e t r a c t a b l ev e r s i o no f
When f u l l y

58.4 cm (23 in.) from t h e c e i l i n g . T h i s

wedge c e n t e r 1 i n e i s

permitsroutine

Mach number measurements w i t h o u t t h e u n c e r t a i n t y o f

expansionassumption.

One

empty t e s t s e c t i o n

i s mounted i n t h e c e i l i n g o f t h e t e s t s e c t i o n .

extended,the

The i n t e r e s t e dr e a d e r

may r e f e r t o

an i s e n t r o p i c

Reference

3 f o ra d d i -

t i o n a ld e t a i l s .

A second t y p e o f Mach number probehas


AEDC Von Karman F a c i l i t y . T h i s p r o b e

been employed i n Tunnel A a t t h e

measures s t a t i c p r e s s u r e

onthesurface

of a r e t r a c t a b l e d i s k .

The s u p p o r t i n g arm 1s a 15 deg included-angle wedge and

hasa

mounted belowthedisk.

s m a l lP i t o tp r o b e

shown onthe
edgeand

l e f ti nF i g u r e

i t may be c a l i b r a t e d by c o n v e n t i o n a l , s t i n g
3:

mounted probes and has t h ei m p o r t a n tf e a t u r eo fs i m p l i c i t y .


I nt h e

case o f i n t e r m i t t e n t t u n n e l s ,

o f Machnumber

probe i s r e q u i r e d

bilityofrapid

a Ludwieg Tube, a d i f f e r e n t t y p e

because o ft h es h o r tr u n - t i m e

The AGARD TechnicalWorking

(LEHRT), has recommended theprobe

frequency-responsepressuretransducersfor

i s tomonitortemporal

has p o i n t e do u tt ot h ep r e s e n ta u t h o r st h a t

pressurefluctuationswiththisprobe
thusshouldnot

shown i nF i g .

measurement o f b o t h P i t o t

pressures and i s designed t o be used i n t h e s m a l l - s c a l e p i l o t


The primarypurposeofthisprobe

Group,

3.C.3.

g ) , t h i sm i n i a t u r ep r o b eu t i l i z e sh i g h -

ROSS and Hartzuiker(Ref.

Dougherty (AEDC)

and t h ep o s s i -

and design o f theLargeEuropeanHigh-Reynolds-

which i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r s e l e c t i o n

As reportedby

e.g.,

changes i nt e s t - s e c t i o nf l o w .

Number TransonicWindtunnel

probe i s

A l t h o u g ht h i sp r o b ei ss u s c e p t i b l et ol e a d i n g

3.C.2.

angleofattackerrors,

A schematic o f t h i s

and s t a t i c

LEHRT f a c i l i t i e s .

changes i n mean Mach number.


measurements o f s t a t i c

will have a limitedfrequencyresponse

and

be used t o c a l i b r a t e s t a t i c p r e s s u r e f l u c t u a t i o n s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h

noiseand/orturbulence.

However, t h ef l u c t u a t i n gP i t o tp r e s s u r e s

t h i s purpose; see Section 1 I I . F .

f o rf u r t h e rd i s c u s s i o no f

can be used f o r

measurements o f un-

steady f 1 ow d is turbances.
P i t o t ProbesforFreestreamCalibration
Although a w i d e v a r i e t y

of P i t o t nosegeometrieshave

cylindricaltubewithsquare-cut

been used, t h e s i m p l e

nose i s adequate f o r f r e e s t r e a m c a l i b r a t i o n s .

For an i n t e r n a l t o e x t e r n a ld i a m e t e rr a t i o

of 0.125,

t h et e s t so f

Gracey(Ref.

IO)

Compared t o t h e o t h e r
two Machnumber probes, t h i s t y p e o f p r o b e
hasan a d d i t i o n a l
disadvantage.
Barrys
analysis
(Ref.
5) shows t h e u n c e r t a i n t y i n c a l c u l a t e d
Mach
number i s g r e a t e r when t h e r e i s equal u n c e r t a i n t y i n measured pressures.

71

Tunnel 16 S

Tunnel A

.051 o r i f i c e

7-A
10
'

II.'
P itot

31 75

1.

D i s kn o tp r e s e n t l yC a l i bra ted w i t h C, probe d a t a .

1.

Variableangle
(10'-26')
p i t o t wedge probe
mounted on c e i l i n g ; e x t e n d s c e n t e r
of wedge

58.4 cm from ceiling.


2.

C a l i b r a t e dw i t hi d e n t i c a l
tunnel G,

Dimensions In Centimeters

Figure 3.C .2.

AEDC SUPERSON I C MACH NUMBER PROBES

wedge located a t

Scale 4:l

Pitot and Static Measuring Transducers are K u l l t e CQL-062-50.


Type, Mounted in Silastimer Compound i n Probe.

.!,

Static Holes 0.5 dia

d
r

Scale 1:l

-1

8 d

U
W

1-

f-

t?-"3
"

d e m o n s t r a t e dt h a tt o t a lp r e s s u r e
e r r o r by 0.01q'

a t anangle

measurements w i t h t h i s p r o b e

by i n c r e a s i n g t h e d i a m e t e r r a t i o t o
increasedeven
ratioto

moreby

near one.

seldomexceeds

2230 , M =

0;96.

0.26 and a = +29O, M = 1.62

The a n g l e o f a t t a c k r a n g e

was

usinginternal.bevellingtoincreasethediameter

However, s i n c ef l o wa n g u l a r i t yi n

1 or 2 degrees, a t u b e w i t h

empty t e s ts e c t i o n s

a s t r a i g h t impactopening

and a

0.5, o r more, will p r o v i d e i m p a c t p r e s s u r e s w i t h n e g l i g i b l e

diameterratioof
error.

1 1 degrees and M , = 0.26 and1.62.

of attack of

T h i s same accuracy was a t t a i n e d a t a =

will be i n

(Of course, t h i s assumes theprobe

E f f e c t so fV a r i o u sP a r a m e t e r s

i sf r e eo fb u r r s . )

on P i t o t Probes

Size:
E a r l ye x p e r i m e n t sw i t hP i t o tp r o b e s
independent o f probesize,
by the size of facility

e.g.,

Ref.

showed measuredpressures

11.

and Machnumber

pressurecorresponding
Thiseffect

a tt h e

opening,

a P i t o t probesenses

13) foundthat

isbestfor

made w i t h P i t o t

an impact

a c o n i c a l nose P i t o t , w i t h

a sharp edge

use i n a t r a n s v e r s ep r e s s u r eg r a d i e n ts i n c e
Butsinceconescannot

two dimensionalboundarylayer

e.g.,

Refs.

it

be used

measurements a r e u s u a l l y

probeshavingverysmall,flattened-ovalopenings

square-cutnose,

12.

and w i t h i n c r e a s i n a w a l l t h i c k n e s s .

e x h i b i t s a n e g l i g i b l ed i s p l a c e m e n te r r o r .
veryclosetowalls,

be used.

t o a displacementtowardsthehigherpressure,Ref.

decreases w i t h p r o b es i z e

However, Livesey(Ref.

Thus, s i z i n gi su s u a l l yg u i d e d

atwhichtheprobeisto

When t o t a lp r e s s u r eg r a d i e n t sa r ep r e s e n t ,

t o be

anda

1 1 and 12.

A n a l y s i so fd a t af o rt h es i m p l e ,c i r c u l a rP i t o tt u b ei n d i c a t e st h e
measured pressure i s independent o f Reynolds number (based on i n s i d e r a d ius
o f theopening)

when i t i s g r e a t e rt h a n

100, Ref.

12.

Mach number:
In dry air, the
Machnumber

Pitottube

has a e n e r a l l y been found t o be i n s e n s i t i v e t o

and w i l 1 r e l i a b l yp r o v i d e t h e f r e e s t r e a m s t a g n a t i o n p r e s s u r e a t

subsonic speedsand

t h es t a g n a t i o n

pressurebehind

a normalshock

a t super-

son ic speeds.
Tu r b u 1ence :
The i n c o m p r e s s i b l ea n a l y s i so f
a circulartubePitotwithsquare-cut
lence.

74

Becker and Brown (Ref.

14) i n d i c a t e st h a t

nose i s r e l a t i v e l y i n s e n s i t i v e t o t u r b u -

However, theseauthorssuggestthatthelengthoftheconstantdiameter

The i n t e n t i s t o e l i m i n a t e s u r g i n g o f t h e

opening be a tl e a s tt h r e ed i a m e t e r s .
flow, in

response t o t u r b u l e n c e ,

c o n d i t i o n sp r i o rt o

and t h u s a s s u r e t h e e x i s t e n c e

changes i n i n t e r n a l

geometry.

Brown a r e viewed i n l i g h t o f t h e d a t a o b t a i n e d

When. t h e r e s u l t s o f

Becker and

which demon-

probes w i t h i n c r e a s i n g

Mach
by o
w
l

P i t o t probesareunaffected

number, one may c o n c l u d e t h a t c i r c u l a r t u b e

most empty t u n n e l s i s

l e v e l so ft u r b u l e n c e .S i n c et h et u r b u l e n c ei n t e n s i t yi n
two p e r c e n t ,t h e

lo),

byGracey(Ref.

strates decreasing flow angle sensitivity of Pitot

lessthan

of stagnation

recommended P i t o t p r o b e s( i . e . ,c i r c u l a rt u b e sw i t h

> 0.5) can be used w i t h c o n f i d e n c e t o c a l i b r a t e

i n t e r n a l j e x t e r n a ld i a m e t e rr a t i o s

t r a n s o n i c and supersonicwindtunnels.
Rakes, Arrays and Supports,:
Insubsonicflows,impactpressure
orificein

a c i r c u l a rc y l i n d e r

can be s u c c e s s f u l l y measured w i t h an

P i t o t p r o b e sa r eg e n e r a l l yc o n s i d e r e dt o

i n t e r a c t i o n sw o u l d
attransonic

shock.

Thus,

measuredbehindtheshock

from thenormalshockpressure.

speeds t h e nose o f t h e P i t o t

probeshouldextendfar

A t u b el e n g t ha tl e a s t

t oa v o i dt h i s

problem.

recommended.

A t subsonicspeeds,Dudtiniski

negligible i f the strut is

12.

a support could conceivably

The r e s u l t i n gp r e s s u r e

be expected t o d i f f e r

thattheeffectofproximityof

Ref.

be i n s e n s i t i v et os u p p o r ta r r a n g e m e n t s .

However, near Mach one t h e bow shockgeneratedby


i n t e r f e r ew i t ht h ep r o b e

flow, e.g.,

mounted normal t o t h e

Thus,

enough forward

12 t i m e st h es u p p o r tt h i c k n e s si s

15) haveobserved

and Krause(Ref.

a transversecylindricalsupportingstrutis
two o r more s t r u t d i a m e t e r s

t u b et i p .F o rs u p e r s o n i ca p p l i c a t i o n s ,

downstream from t h e P i t o t

Pope and Goin(Ref.

16, p. 353) n o t et h a t

I 5 t o 20 tubediameters.

thePitottubelengthisusually
When s e v e r a l P i t o t p r o b e s a r e

used i n a r a k e o r

an a r r a y , t h e

measured

pressures may be a f f e c t e d by i n t e r a c t i o n s between t h e bow waves on adjacenttubes.


Bryer andPankhurst(Ref.12)notethatexperiments

a t H = 1.6

i n d i c a t et h e

gap

between P i t o t probes may be assmallas

one d i a m e t e r w i t h o u t c a u s i n g s i g n i f i c a n t

error.

one, theseparationdistancemust

AsMach

increased.

number decreasestoward

be

I n s u b s o n i cf l o w ,t h es p a c i n go fP i t o tp r o b e si sg e n e r a l l yn o tc o n -

s i d e r e d t o be c r i t i c a l , e.g.,

Ref.

17.

75

I I .C.
1.

Hill, J. A.
Aero.

2.

Sci

F.:

"On t h e Cal

., Vol . 22,
F.;

Hill, J. A.

References

No. 6,
Schindel', L. H.:

Baron, J. R.

"Mach
Number

Measurements

i n High-speed Wind Tunnels,"HITNavalSupersonicLaboratory


145, Jan.

3.

Maxwell,

1956 ( A l s o a v a i l a b l e

H.

and H a r t l e y , M.

as AGARDograph 22,Oct.

Tech. Rept.

1956).

S. : "Aerodynamic C a l i b r a t i o nR e s u l t sf o rt h e

AEDC-PWT 16-Ft.SupersonicTunnel

a t MachNumbers

from 1.50 t o 4.75

,I'

AEDC-TR-69- 102, May 1969.

4.

Murphy, J. S . :

"Evidences o f an I n h e r e n tE r r o ri n

Pressure a t Supersonic Speeds,"

5.

Barry, F. W.:

"Determination o f Mach
Number

Trans. ASME,

6.

Aero.Engr.

Measurement o f Total-Head

Rev.,Nov.

1953.

From Pressure Measurements,''

A p r i l 1956.

Thompson, J. S. and Holder, D. W. :


mentsfromtheOperator'sPointof

"Notes on Wind TunnelPressure

Measure-

View,"

2547,

R.A.E.

Tech. NoteAero.

Feb. 1958.

7.

Goodyer, M. J.:

"A New Probe f o rt h eD i r e c t

Pressure i n Supersonic Flow,"

8.

H.:

Couch,L.

Measurement o f Stagnation

Tech. Rept. 73122, March 1974.

R.A.E.

" E f f e c t so fG e o m e t r i cV a r i a b l e s

on thePerformance

Probe f o r D i r e c t Measurement o f Free-StreamStagnationPressure


sonic Flow,"

9.

NASA TN 0-7887,

A c t i o n 61, June 2,
10.

Gracey, W.:

a t High Angles of Attack,"


Folson, R. G.:

12.

Bryer,

Group AC/243 (PG.7/WG. 1)

I n v e s t i g a t i o n o f a Number o f T o t a l - P r e s s u r e Tubes

NACA Rept.

"Review o ft h eP i t o t

1303, Jan.

Tube,"

1956.

Trans ASME, Oct.

London, 1971.

1956.

Pressure-Probe Methods f o rD e t e r m i n i n g

and F l o wD i r e c t i o n ,N a t i o n a lP h y s i c a lL a b o r a t o r y ,

S t a t i o n e r yO f f i c e ,

76

AGARD TechnicalWorking

D. W. and Pankhurst, R. C.:

WindSpeed

"Recommended Flow Q u a l i t y Measurements i n

1975.

"Wind-Tunnel

11.

i n Super-

May 1975.

Ross, R. and H a r t z u i k e r , J. P.:


LEHRT P i l o t F a c i l i t i e s , "

of a

Her M a j e s t y ' s

13.

Livesey, J. L.:

"The Behavior o f Transverse Cy1 i n d r i c a l and ForwardFacing

TotalPressureProbes
Sci.,

14.

Vol.

Becker, H. A.
Streams,''

15.

23, p.

949,

i n TransverseTotalPressureGradients,"Jour.Aero.
Oct.

1956.

and Brown, A. P. G . :

Jour. F l u i d Mech.,

"Response o f P i t o t Probes i n T u r b u l e n t

Vol. 62, P a r t 1,

D u d z i n i s k i , T. J. and Krause, L; N.:

8 Jan.. 1974.

" E f f e c t o f I n l e t Geometry.onFlow-Angle

C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f MiniatureTotal-Pressure

Tubes,"

NASA TN 0-6406,

July

1971.
16.

Pope, A. and Goin, R . L . :

17.

Chew, W.

L . , Jr.:

High-speed Wind TunnelTesting,Wiley,

" C a l i b r a t i o n of FiveTotalPressure

Survey Rakes a t Speeds from M = 0.2 t o 1.0,"

1965.

and Temperature

AEDC TN-59-37,

May 1959.

77

I I I.D.

TEST
SECTION
STATIC

PRESSURES

As discussed i n S e c t i o n I I . C . l , measurement o f s t a t i c p r e s s u r e i s
I t i sc u r r e n t l ys t a n d a r d

fundamental t ot r a n s o n i cw i n dt u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o n .

p r a c t i c e t o measure s e t t l i n g chamber pressure and empty-tunnel


c a l i b r a t es u b s o n i c

when M < 1.6.

and t r a n s o n i ct u n n e l s

o fs t a t i cp r e s s u r ed a t a ,

measure t h i s r e f e r e n c e p r e s s u r e w i t h

permanently mounted i nt h et e s ts e c t i o n .
u s u a l l y measured e i t h e r i n t h e

The b e s t l o c a t i o n t o

plenum chamber or a t s i d e w a l l o r i f i c e s l o c a t e d

Machnumber

Once c a l i b r a t e d ,t h er e f e r e n c e
d u r i n gr o u t i n eo p e r a t i o n .

measure t h e r e f e r e n c e s t a t i c p r e s s u r e

t ot h eq u e s t i o n n a i r e ,u s e

plenum chamber measurements.The

s m a l l e rt u n n e l su s ee i t h e ru p s t r e a mo r i f i c e so r

A totalofthe

responsesindicated

appears t o

( > 2.4 m ) , whichresponded

All o f t h el a r g e rt u n n e l s

be a m a t t e ro fo p i n i o n .

a probe

Thus, t h er e f e r e n c ep r e s s u r ei s

i nt h ef o r w a r dp o r t i o no ft h et e s ts e c t i o n .
used t o c o n t r o l

used t o c a l i b r a t e
it i s g e n e r a l l y

a r e f e r e n c ep r e s s u r e .i no r d e rt oa v o i di n t e r f e r e n c e ,

p r e s s u r ei s

T y p i c a l l y , anaverage

measured a l o n g t h e c e n t e r l i n e , i s

considered good p r a c t i c e n o t t o

s t a t i c to

s u r v e yi n d i c a t e d

plenum chamber measurements.

a m a j o r i t yo fa p p r o x i m a t e l y

2:l p r e f e r r e d

t o use plenum chamber measurements.


Advantages o fu s i n q

(I)

plenum chamber d a t aa r e :

i n s e n s i t i v et ol o c a t i o na tw h i c ht h ep r e s s u r ei s

i t i sr e l a t i v e l y

measured, and (2) i t a v o i d s

h a v i n gt oc o n t e n dw i t he r o s i o na n d / o rc o n t a m i n a t i o no fo r i f i c e s .
e x p e r i e n c ew i t ht u n n e lw a l lp i e z o m e t e rr i n g si n
o r i f i c ed e t e r i o r a t i o ni sn o t

a number o ft u n n e l s

a s i g n i f i c a n t problem.

However,
has proven

A t supersonic Mach numbers,

t h e plenum chamber pressure i s g e n e r a l l yl o w e rt h a nf r e e s t r e a ms t a t i cp r e s s u r e ,


and t h ed i f f e r e n c ei n c r e a s e sw i t hi n c r e a s i n gt l a c h
more s i g n i f i c a n ta t

78

Mach numbers exceeding 1.4.

number,becoming

increasingly

I nc o n t r a s t ,t e s t - s e c t i o n - w a l l

pressuresaregenerallyhigherthanfreestreamstaticpressureatsupersonic
numbers.

I nt h e

VoughtHigh

Speed Wind Tunnel ( w i t hw a l l ss l i g h t l yc o n v e r g e d ) ,

tunnel-wallpressureIsclosertofreestreamstaticthan

1 < M < 1.6.

Mach

plenum pressure when

Thus, t h i st u n n e li sc a l i b r a t e du s i n gt u n n e l - w a l lp r e s s u r e s

because

from f r e e s t r e a m s t a t i c o f f e r t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f g r e a t e r

smaller departures

accuracy I n Machnumber
t i o n may beexpected

c a l i b r a t ion.

In general,

a more a c c u r a t e t u n n e l c a l

ibra-

when t h e r e f e r e n c e p r e s s u r e i s c l o s e r t o f r e e s t r e a m s t a t i c

pressure.
I nt h ec a s eo fs u b s o n i c

Mach numbers, t e s t - s e c t i o n - w a l l and plenum pres-

s u r e sg e n e r a l l ya g r e ev e r yc l o s e l y .
c l u s i o ni st h a t

A p o s s i b l ee x c e p t i o nt ot h i sg e n e r a l

models, w i t hl a r g eb l o c k a g er a t i o s( i . e . ,

con-

> 2 % ) , may reduce

plenum chamber p r e s s u r eb e l o wt h ec a l i b r a t e d ,e m p t y - t u n n e lv a l u e sa th i g h
subsonic Mach number, e.g.,
holes, suchasused
e x c e s s i v ei n f l o w
with slots or

Parker(Ref.

57).

from t h e plenum t o t h e t e s t s e c t i o n , b u t v e n t i l a t e d t u n n e l s
more v u l n e r a b l e t o t h i s t y p e o f d e p a r t u r e f r o m

e m p t y - t u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o n .I na d d i t i o n ,t h e
f r e e s t r e a mp r e s s u r ed u r i n gr a p i d
III.D.l.

plenum chamber pressure may l a g

changes i n model o r i e n t a t i o n .
Transonic
Survey
Pipes

Responses t o t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e i n d i c a t e t h a t

31 o u t o f

t os u r v e yc e n t e r l i n es t a t i cp r e s s u r e .

centerlinestaticpressuresurveyareusuallyaveragedover
o ft h et e s ts e c t i o n

and used t o c a l i b r a t e

a p a r t i c u l a r model.

53 t r a n s o n i ct u n n e l s
The r e s u l t s o f t h e
one o r more l e n g t h s

a r e f e r e n c ep r e s s u r e .I nr o u t i n e

t e s t s , a c a l i b r a t e dl e n g t hi ss e l e c t e dw h i c h
and l e n g t h o f

known, i n c l i n e d

i n t h e AEDC t r a n s o n i c t u n n e l s , a r e d e s i g n e d t o i n h i b i t

normalholesare

haveusedlongpipes

As i sw e l l

most c l o s e l y matches t h e l o c a t i o n

An a l t e r n a t ep r o c e d u r ei st oc o n s t r u c t

number o f c a l i b r a t i o n c u r v e s t o r e l a t e t h e r e f e r e n c e p r e s s u r e t o s e v e r a l s t a t i o n sa l o n gt h ec e n t e r l i n e .

By l o c a t i n g t h e

aerodynamiccenter

o f a model a t

79

I 1 I

a station which has been calibrated, the local Mach number at that station
A

can be used in data reduction. This method


NASA Ames

f*

is used in transonic tests at

And is considered to be important for measurements o f Mach num-

ber at which a model encounters transonic drag rise.

In low supersonic

tests (M < l . 6 ) , the nose o f the model is usually located at one o f the
calibrated stations for more accurate wavedrag measurements.

In either case

a n averaae along
(i.e., calibrations of the reference static pressure with

the centerlineor with pressures measured at particular locations), buoyancy


corrections are usually appliedby using centerline pressure measurements
obtained in the empty tunnel.
Guidelines for the installation of a long survey pipe are presentedin
Reference 1.
1.

Some rules o f thumb are:

The nose of the pipe shouldbe a sma.11 angle cone or ogive and
should be located well upstream in t,he subsonic portion of the
tunnel nozzle, e.g., in the 11-ft. Transonic Tunnel at NASA Ames
the nose o f the pipe extends into the settling chamberand is
supported under tension.

2.

In order to minimize pipe sway, the pipe should be loaded with a

large tensile force, and if appropriate, an upward moment should


be applied a t the downstream support.

In cases where a measured-average is used to calibrate a tunnel, a


variation on this procedure would be to account for- local departures
from the average.

.. Private

.L .
J

80

communication, Mr. F. .!b

Steinle, NASA Ames.

3.

I nt h ec a s eo fv e r yl o n gp i p e s ,t h r e eo rf o u rc a b l e ss h o u l db e
attachedtofurthercontrolpipe

4.

sagand

vibration.

A l l s u p p o r tc a b l e ss h o u l db ef r e eo fo b s t r u c t i o n s ,

and a l l t u r n -

buckles and c a b l ea t t a c h m e n tf i x t u r e ss h o u l db el o c a t e db e h i n dt h e
t u n n e lw a l l s .

5.

Cablesnearor

w i t h i nt h et e s ts e c t i o ns h o u l d

an angle of approximately

be sweptback

at

30 deg t o t h e c e n t e r l i n e .

Although a number o f t u n n e l c a l i b r a t i o n s

have been conducted w i t h t h e

nose

ofthepipelocated,inthetestsectionnearthebeginningofuniformventila-

1 and 2 ) , t h ep r e f e r r e d

t i o n (e.g.,Refs.

arrangement i s w i t h t h e

upstream so t h a t i t i s always i n subsonicflow,Ref.


minimizesdisturbances

caused by t h e nose (e.g.,

t h a t no t r a n s o n i c shockpassesover

3.

Thisarrangement

no bow shock) and assures

theorifices.

A properly-designed,static-pressuresurveypiperequires
c a l i b r a t i o nc u r v e

nose w e l l

no t r a n s o n i c

and s u p p l i e ss i m u l t a n e o u sd a t at h r o u g h o u tt h el e n g t ho f

t h et e s ts e c t i o n .I nt r a n s o n i ct u n n e l s ,b o u n d a r yl a y e rg r o w t ho nt h ep i p e
does n o tu s u a l l yi n d u c e

any l o n g i t u d i n a l Mach-number g r a d i e n t s because o f

**

t h ev e n t i l a t e dw a l l sf e a t u r e .I nc o n t r a s t ,t h ed i s a d v a n t a g e so ft h el o n g
pipe are:

1.

sag c a nc a u s et h ep i p et o
i n t u r n cancauseerroneous

2.

be i n c l i n e dt ot h ef l o ww h i c h
staticpressuredata,

v i b r a t i o n caninduceerrors,seeAppendix

Ill,

T h i sc o n c l u s i o ni so f t e ns u s t a i n e d
bydemonstrationthat
a plotofpipe
measured s t a t i c p r e s s u r e v e r s u s
plenum chamber pressure i s smooth through
t r a n s o n i c Mach numbers.

**However,

l e s st h a n

as a r u l e o f thumb, t h e b l o c k a g e r a t i o o f t h e p i p e s h o u l d
0 . 5 % , Ref. 6.

be kept

81

3.

disturbancesgeneratedbysupports

4.

i t sb u l k

Orificesare
l o n gf i x e dp i p e .

a source o f e r r o r , w h i c h i s o f t e n o v e r l o o k e d

5).

T h i st u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o np r o b ei s

shown i n

as 0.3% o f t h e

The f a c t t h a t t h e e r r o r s

wereindeed

dynamicpresorificeerrors

A repeatable

was ascertainedbymovingtheprobealongthetunnelcenterline.

3.D.2

and were

t o preventchamferoftheopening.

However, s t a t i c p r e s s u r e v a r i a t i o n s a s l a r g e

p a t t e r ni nt h ev a r i a t i o no f

hasbeen

diameter of 0.076 cm (0.030 i n . )

ground and deburred w i t h p a r t i c u l a r c a r e

when us i n g a

An example o fs i g n i f i c a n to r i f i c e - i n d u c e de r r o r

The o r i f i c e s havea

surewereobserved.

and

makes i t d i f f i c u l t t o use f o r surveys o f f c e n t e r l i n e

discussedbylsaacs(Ref.
Fig. 3.D.l.

may i n t r o d u c ee r r o r s ,

measured s t a t i cp r e s s u r e

shows a comparison o f d a t a o b t a i n e d a t

was observed.Figure

two d i f f e r e n t t u n n e l l o c a t i o n s

w i t h M = 0.74.
T h i s example i l l u s t r a t e s t h e
Pressuresurveypipe;particularly
s t a t i o ni so b t a i n e d

when t h e p r e s s u r e a t

w i t h o n l y one o r i f i c e .

o p e r a t o r s , who usesuch
p i p ef o ra tl e a s t

need f o r c a u t i o n when u s i n g a f i x e d , s t a t i c
a g i v e nt u n n e l

It i s suggested t h a tt u n n e l

p i p e s ,c h e c kt h eo r i f i c ep r o b l e mb yt r a n s l a t i n gt h e

one highsubsonic

andone

problem i s d e t e c t e d , t h i s s o u r c e o f e r r o r
o r more o r i f i c e s t o g e t h e r a t

supersonic Mach number.

may be reducedbymanifoldingfour

a g i v e ns t a t i o n .

totranslatethepipeeitherforward

If a

A second a l t e r n a t i v e i s

or rearward and t a k e s e v e r a l

measure-

ments a t a g i v e n s t a t i o n w i t h d i f f e r e n t o r i f i c e s . E i t h e r o f t h e s e p r o c e d u r e s
wouldimprovetheaccuracy

*A

o fs t a t i cp r e s s u r ec a l i b r a t i o n s .

A l s o , it i s

second pipe, mountedon t h e f l o o r ,


hasbeen
used f o r s u b s o n i cC a l i b r a t i o n
measurements i n t h e 11-FootTransonic Wind Tunnel a t NASA Ames,

82

Dimensions In Centimeters

QUADRANT
S T I N GF A I R I N G

25 STATICPRESSURE

HOLES AT :Oa.'076'ID,
5.1 CM SPACING

STATICPRESSUREPROBE
MOUNTED
ON CALIBRATION GEAR S T I N G
(FAC I L I T Y FOR TRANSLATI ON ALONG
TUNNELCENTERLINEOVER
-229 CM)

Figure 3.D.1.

Q)

R.A.E.
SUBSONIC
STATIC-PRESSURE
PROBE

Hole No. 2

P-Pw

Hs-Pn
-0.005

Hole N o . 2

t
L

-0.010
-127

-102

-76

-51

-25

25

cm, distance downstreamfrom tunnel datum

CM UPSTREAM OF TUNNELDATUM

(a) PROBEDATUM53

P -Pw

Hs-Pw
I

-0.010

-178
x

-152

-127

-102

-76

-51

-25

cm, distance downstream from


tunnel datum

(b) PROBEDATUM

Figure 3.D.2.

104m UPSTREAM OF TUNNELDATUM

T Y P I C A LP R E S S U R ED I S T R I B U T I O N S
ALONGPROBE
ON TUNNELCENTERLINE,
M = 0.74 (choked), R/R

A T TWO LOATIONS
los PERMETER

=19-7 x

g e n e r a l l yc o n s i d e r e d
w i t h each o t h e r , s i n c e
downstreamand
As notedby

good p r a c t i c e n o t t o p l a c e o r i f i c e s d i r e c t l y i n l i n e
a disturbance at an upstream orifice

induceerrorsat

adownstream

Pope and Goin(Ref.

canpropagate

orifice.

6 ) , t h es t a t i cp i p ei s

seldom

used t oc a l i b r a t ec l o s e d - w a l ls u p e r s o n i ct u n n e l s .

The p i p en o to n l y

altersthe

ratiobutalsointer-

Machnumber

because o f t h e

reducedarea

fereswiththeexpansionpatternwhichisrequired

for u n i f o r m f l o w .

However,a
s t a t i c p i p e hasbeenused
quitesuccessfullyfor
Mach numbers up
t o two a t AEDC i nt h e Aerodynamic Wind Tunnel(4T),Ref.
7. Forexample, a t
M = 1.6 t h e 2 (I v a r i a t i o n i n measured c e n t e r l i n e Mach numbers was o n l y .007
and a t M = 1.99 was 0.008.
Thisapplicationof
a s t a t i c p i p e was made poss i b l eb yt h eu n i q u ef e a t u r e so ft h i st u n n e l ,v i z . ,a d j u s t a b l ep o r o s i t y
(0-10%),
w a l la n g l e ,
andplenumpumping.

85

lll.D.2.
I n caseswhere

T r a n s o n i cS t a t i cP r e s s u r eP r o b e s

v a r i a t i o n s o f Mach number t r a n s v e r s e t o t h e f l o w

c a l i b r a t e d ,r e s p o n d e n t st ot h eq u e s t i o n n a i r ei n d i c a t e dt h a t

hadbeen

such v a r i a t i o n s

a r eo f t e nl a r g e rt h a nl o n g i t u d i n a lv a r i a t i o n sa l o n gt h ec e n t e r l i n e .

These

data were o b t a i n e dw i t hc o n v e n t i o n a lp r o b e sw h i c h ,a sd i s c u s s e dl a t e r ,a r e
s u b j e c tt oa s y m m e t r i c a lw a l li n t e r f e r e n c e

M exceeds 0.85.

when moved o f f c e n t e r l i n e and

A l t h o u g ht h e s et r a n s v e r s ev a r i a t i o n s

may be p a r t l y t h e r e s u l t

oftransonicwall-probeinterference,thecalibrationof
o b v i o u s l yi m p o r t a n t ,p a r t i c u l a r l yf o rt e s t i n g
t r a n s o n i ct u n n e lo p e r a t o r s

gradients.
mentsas

i f (1) t h et u n n e l

Mach number v a r i a t i o n s a l o n g t h e c e n t e r l i n e

M < 1 1 , t h e nt h et r a n s v e r s ev a r i a t i o n si n

a r en e g l i g i b l e .T h i sc o n c l u s i o ni s
i ng e n e r a l ,

I nt h ep a s t ,

ofthecenterlinepressuresagreescloselywiththe

chamber p r e s s u r e( f o r

and,

wingedmodels.

have t r a d i t i o n a l l y concludedthat

w a l lp a r a m e t e r sa r es e tt om i n i m i z e
and ( 2 ) theaverage

such v a r i a t i o n s i s

basedon

plenam

Yach number

thecomparisonbetweentwoaverages,

does n o t j u s t i f y t h e a s s u m p t i o n o f n e g l i g i b l e t r a n s v e r s e

Thus, w i n dt u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o ns h o u l di n c l u d eo f f - c e n t e r l i n e

measure-

a s t a n d a r dp a r to ft h ec a l i b r a t i o np r o c e d u r e .F o rt h i sr e a s o n ,
o f c o n v e n t i o n a ls t a t i cp r e s s u r ep r o b e s

theprimaryadvantages

one o f

i s m o b i l i t y as

c o n t r a s t e dt ot h el o n g , s t a t i cp r e s s u r e , s u r v e yp i p e .
Q u e s t i o n n a i r er e s u l t sa l s or e v e a lt h a tt h e
pressureprobe

i s a 10 deg a p e x - a n g l ec o n e - c y l i n d e rw i t ho r i f i c e sl o c a t e dt e n

o r more c y l i n d e rd i a m e t e r s( c a l i b r e s )
for orifice location

8).

These i n v e s t i g a t o r sc o n d u c t e d

o f nosegeometries

oftheeffects

pressure measurement a t !I= 1.6.


The c o n c l u s i o n i s t h a t t h e
ence pressure when 1

a s y s t e m a t i ce
, xperi-

and o r i f i c e l o c a t i o n

on s t a t i c

A summary o ft h e s ed a t ai sp r e s e n t e di nF i g .

measured s t a t i c p r e s s u r e

> 10d.

0 -

36

downstream o ft h es h o u l d e r .T h i sc r i t e r i o n

appears t o have o r i g i n a t e d w i t h t h e t e s t s c o n d u c t e d b y

Holdere
,a
t l (. R e f .
mentalstudy

most p o p u l a r t r a n s o n i c s t a t i c

i s w i t h i n 0.5% o f t h e r e f e r -

A s n o t e di nt h ef i g u r e ,t h er e f e r e n c ep r e s s u r e ,

3.D.3.

External

Diameter d = O . Z O ~ C M

Four 0.0LSCI)I Diameter


a t 90' Intervals

(a) Long Ogive

(b) Short

(c) Cone

(b) Hemisphere

Collar

Static

Soldered
Tuk

Oglve

(e) Square

General arrangement of the static tubes and the nose shapes tested.

P
p
po

1-

dl

Messured static Prusure


= Static prusure mlssured

by

'40 k
b
c

H = Total Head o f Prcr Sirearn


L,.
Distance of stscic holes Dshind smulder
d = Diameter of static tuoe

10

b*

Figure 3.D.3

I5

VARIATION OF STATIC-PRESSURE READING WITH POSITION OF STATIC


HOLES AND NOSE SHAPEA T H
1.6, Ref. 8

eo

which wasassumed
o g i v a ln o s e

t o be t r u e f r e e s t r e a m s t a t i c , was o b t a i n e d w i t h t h e l o n g

and o r i f i c e s l o c a t e d

Highsubsonic

40 c a l i b r e s downstream.

(H = 0 . 6 t o 0 . 9 ) d a t ai n d i c a t e p r o b e p r e s s u r e g e n e r a l l y

r e t u r n s t o f r e e s t r e a ml e v e l s( w i t h i n

9.

c a l i b r e s , Ref.

0.5% o f q) a t l o / d v a l u e s

The e x a c tl o c a t i o ni s

a nosecorresponding

For

dependentonnosegeometry.

example, t r a n s o n i cd a t ap r e s e n t e db yR i t c h i e
s u r ep r o b e ,w i t h

of 4 to 6

(Ref.

IO) f o r a s t a t i cp r e s shown i n Fig. 3.0.3,

t ot h el o n go g i v e

i n d i c a t e n e g l i g i b l e measurement e r r o r when o r i f i c e s a r e l o c a t e d o n l y

two

c a l i b r e s downstream o f t h e n o s e - c y l i n d e r j u n c t u r e .
However, s i n c et h eo v e r e x p a n s i o na tt h es h o u l d e re x t e n d sf a r t h e r
downstream i nt h es u p e r s o n i c

case,Gracey

(kef.

9)

c o n c l u d e do r i f i c e s

l o c a t e d 10 or more diametersdownstreamwouldsensefreestreampressurewith
"small-error"

a t bothsubsonic

t r a n s o n i ct u n n e lo p e r a t o r s

and low supersonic speeds.Theconsensus

seems t o a g r e e w i t h

As noted by Davis and Graham (Ref.


byEstabrooks(Ref.

of

Gracey.

1 1 1 , i nt h ep a s tt h ed a t ao b t a i n e d

12) f o r a cone-cy1 i n d e r hasbeen

used,almostuniversally,

as a s t a n d a r df o rt r a n s o n i ci n t e r f e r e n c e - f r e ed a t a .A l t h o u g ht h ep u r p o s eo f
these measurements was t o i n v e s t i g a t e
p e r t i n e n tt op r o b ed e s i g n

a 20

and performance.Estabrooksobtaineddataon

apex a n g l ec o n e - c y l i n d e ri nt h e
o f 0.008% and M = 0.7 t o 1.4.
orificeslocated

w a l l effects,theresultsarealso

AEDC-PWT

16T t u n n e l w i t h

a model blockage r a t i o

A c u r s o r ye x a m i n a t i o no ft h e s ed a t ai n d i c a t e s
will

seven c a l i b r e s downstream o f t h e c o n e - c y l i n d e r j u n c t u r e ,

a l l o w a c c u r a t e measurements o f f r e e s t r e a m s t a t i c p r e s s u r e t h r o u g h o u t t h e
t r a n s o n i c speed regime.
number permeter

The datawereunaffectedbyvaryingfreestreamReynolds

from 4.5 t o 12.7 mill i o n (1.36 x IO 6 < Re/ft < 3.87

The f a c t t h a t f r e e s t r e a m s t a t i c p r e s s u r e c a n n o t

bemeasured

as M + 1.0, will b e e s t a b l i s h e d i n t h e f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n .

88

a t anyone

106 ).
location,

When t h e same c o n e - c y l i n d e r model was t e s t e d i n t h e

I nt h e

Machnumber

range o f 0.95 t o 1 .OS,

c o n c l u d e dt h ed o m i n a n tw a l li n t e r f e r e n c ee f f e c t
sonicexpansion

waves ( o r i g i n a t i n g a t t h e s h o u l d e r )

back t o t h e model as

In o r d e r t o e x p l a i n t h i s

g i v e nc o n c e r n i n gt o o

o
w
l a resistancetoinflowfromthe

testsecti,on.Unfortunately,Estrabrooksappeared
transonicshockwhichformsneartheshoulder
moves.rearward w i t hi n c r e a s i n g
(generatedbyinflow)

phenomena, a d i s c u s s i o n was
plenum t o t h e

t o be unaware o f t h e

of this type of

Mach number.

body and

Althoughcompression

waves

may have been p r e s e n t ,i n t e r p r e t a t i o no ft h i sd a t a

shock
f o r passage o f a transonic

the effects of this

shockonthe

when 0.90

1.05.

measured p r e s s u r e d i s t r i b u t i o n s

i n t e r p r e t e d as s o l e l yw a l li n t e r f e r e n c e .F o r
shockimnediately

Estabrboks

was r e f l e c t i o n s o f s u p e r -

compression waves.

must
account

1T

was 28, and i n t h i s c a s ec o n s i d e r a b l ew a l li n t e r f e r e n c e

tunnel,blockage
was observed.

AEDC-PWT

weremis-

example, t h ee x i s t e n c eo f

a f to ft h es h o u l d e ri sc l e a r l yi n d i c a t e d( F i g .

t h e 20 deg c o n e - c y l i n d e ra t

0.95.

M = 0.975 a r e l e s s d e f i n i t i v e p o s s i b l y

Thus,

3.D.4)

for

Data f o r t h i s c o n f i g u r a t i o n a t
because o f a b i f u r c a t e d shock o r

boundarylayerseparation,eitherofwhichreducesthepressuregradient
f:

produced by t h e shock.

As t h e Mach number i s increased t o one, t h e shock

moves rearward and o f ft h ei n s t r u m e n t e dp o r t i o no ft h ec y l i n d e r .T h i st y p e

*AlthoughtheReynolds

number based o n w e t t e d l e n g t h i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y

2.55 x

6
10 nearx/d

= 4, it i sn o tc l e a rt h a tt h e
boundary l a y e r i s t u r b u l e n t
because o f t h e s h o u l d e r e x p a n s i o n w h i c h t h i n s
and s t a b i l i z e s t h e boundary
layer.
However, even i f theboundarylayer
i st u r b u l e n t ,t h et r a n s o n i c
F
shockcancauseseparation
i f t h e l o c a l Mach number exceeds 1.3 (e.g.,
The measured p r e s s u r er a t i oa tt h es h o u l d e r
doesindeed
Refs. 13 and 14).
i n d i c a t e a l o c a l Machnumber
near 1.3.
It i s a l s or e l e v a n tt oh e r en o t e
15) foundthe.laminarboundaryona.hemisphere-cylinder
thatHsieh(Ref.
separatednear M = 0.80.

89

H,

0.950

- 0.0

0.975

1 .ooo

- 0.0

0.0

.I

.2

*3

.4

.5

.6

x/d,

Figure 3.0.4
90

Distance from Nose i nC a l i b e r s

TRANSONIC PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS ON A 20 DEG


CONE-CYLINDER WITH 0.008% BLOCKAGE, Ref. 12

10

of phenomena may be c l e a r l y seen i n t h e s c t i l l e r e n p h o t o g r a p h s p r e s e n t e d


by Page (Ref.

16) f o r a 14 deg apex cone-cy1 inder with

a blockage rat lo
shock will

A r a t h e rg e n e r a lc o n c l u s i o ni st h a tt h et r a n s o n i c

o f 0.005%.

move o f f a c y l i n d r i c a l probeas
p o r t shocks,providedthere

M +l,and merge w i t h t h e s t i n g

i s no w a l li n t e r f e r e n c e .

Movement o f a transonicshockonaxisymmetrlcbodiescan
c u l a t e dv i at h e

computerprogram

a solutiontothecompletepotentialequatlons

t r a n s o n l cf l o w .

Thus,

i no r d e r

now be c a l -

o f South and Jameson (Ref.17).This

programprovides

r e a lb o d i e st h e r e

and/orsup-

f o r t h e s es o l u t i o n s

t o be a p p l i c a b l e to

must be noboundarylayerseparation

and i n t h e case o f windtunnelprobes,the

for steady

(e.g.,

Ref.

15).

body must be f r e e o f w a l l

interference.
The e x i s t e n c e o f b o u n d a r yl a y e rs e p a r a t i o no nc o n e - c y l i n d e r si n
transonicflow

has been investigatedbyRobertson

Cone-cylinder mode 1s w i t h a b l o c k a g e r a t i o o f
w i t h M = 0 . 5 t o 1. 17 i nt h e

AEDC-PWT

0 . 5 % and 1.2% weretested

1T tunnel.

These i n v e s t i g a t o r s

foundthattheboundarylayerseparatedatthecone-cy1inderjuncture
t h e cone apex angle was 40 deg or more and tl < 0.85.
apex angleincreased,the

I ng e n e r a l ,a s

w i t h i nl e s st h a nf o u rc a l i b r e s .T h i s
models w i t h apex angles ranging from

The p r i m a r ye x c e p t i o n
shock locatesnear

cone

measured a d i s t a n c e o f f o u r c a l i b r e s

downstream o f t h e s h o u l d e r , t h e f r e e s t r e a m s t a t i c p r e s s u r e

both sizes of

when

Mach number f o r boundarylayerattachmentincreased

Although surface pressures were only

mostcases

18).

and Chevalier(Ref.

was found t o be t r u e for

20 t o 60 deg.

t o t h i so b s e r v a t i o no c c u r s

an o r i f i c e .

was a t t a i n e d i n

when

a transonic

I f t h e shock i s f o r w a r d o f t h e o r i f i c e ,

91

t h e measured s t a t i cp r e s s u r e
exact amountdepends

will t e n dt o

on s t r e n g t h o f t h e

be higherthanfreestream.

The

shock and d i s t a n c e from o r i f i c e .

will be low i f t h e shock i sl o c a t e dn e a r ,b u t

Correspondingly,thepressure

moves rearward w i t h

downstream o f ,t h eo r i f i c e .S i n c et h et r a n s o n i cs h o c k
i n c r e a s i n g Mach number, a l l s t a t i o n s a l o n g

a probe's stem a r e a f f e c t e d .

For example, schlierenphotographsobtained

by RobertsonandChevalier

show thetra'nsonicshock

M = 0.8,

near t h es h o u l d e ra t
as Machnumber
bymodel

ona20deg

increases.

cone-cy1inder model i n i t i a l l y forms

and i n c r e a s e s i n s t r e n g t h

The r a t e o f

blockage and t h e e x t e n t o f t h e s u p e r s o n i c

The e f f e c t o f windtunnelblockage
may be seen i n t h e

4%,

moved forwardfromx/d

T h i se f f e c to fb l o c k a g e

o f Page (Ref.

zone ona

g i v e n model.

may a l s o beseen

d a t ao f

Furtherevidence

case,the

on t h e same

10.5 a t M = 1.025.
i n d i c a t e dt h e

92

1.10.

20).

0.198%.

For

of Capone and Coatesprovideanexcellent

andhada

A sample o ft h i sd a t ai sr e p r o d u c e di nF i g .
move fromx/d

3.0.5.

= 3.25 a t M = 0.90 back t o x / d

Measurements a tt h en e x th i g h e r

Mach number, M

1.04,

shock had moved p a s t t h e i n s t r u m e n t e d p o r t i o n o f t h e c y l i n d e r .

*R e f l e c t i o n o f t h e
2

19) and Couch and Brooks(Ref.

shock movement on a 20 deg c o n e - c y l i n d e r .I nt h i s

Here we see the transonic shock

of 0.25%

model was testedintheLangley16-FootTransonicTunnel

b l o c k a g er a t i oo f

at

o f t h i s phenomena may a l s o be found i nt h e

t h es u r f a c ep r e s s u r ed a t a

i l l u s t r a t i o no ft r a n s o n i c

i nt h es c h l i e r e np i c t u r e s

16) which compare t h et r a n s o n i cs h o c kl o c a t i o n s

Capone and Coates(Ref.

example,

from 0.5%

= 5 t ol e s st h a n

model i n two d i f f e r e n t s l o t t e d - w a l l t u n n e l s w i t h b l o c k a g e r a t i o s
and 0.005%.

shock

By v a r y i n gt h e

models t o o b t a i n w i n d t u n n e l b l o c k a g e r a t i o s

thetransonicshock

M =i 1.

shock i s a f f e c t e d

on movement o f t h e t r a n s o n i c

M = 1 dataofEstabrooks(Ref.12).

sizeofcone-cylinder
to

movement o f t h i s

and moves rearward

bow shockbackontothecylinder

was notobserved

until

M = 0.90

M = 0.95 0

M = 1.00 0

M = 1.0250

x/d

Figure 3.0.5

TRANSONICPRESSUREDISTRIBUTIONS
CONE-CYLINDER,
REF.
20.

ON A 20 DEG

93

...

S i m i l a r measurements f o r a 40 degcone-cy1inder,
showed theshock

was a t x/d

atthecone-cylinderjuncture
sonicflowresultedin

10.5 when M

=I

with the

1 .Ob.

Thus,

t h el a r g e re x p a n s i o n

i n c r e a s i n g Mach number.

even smallersizeswould

0.01% o ft h et u n n e la r e a

movement o f a t r a n s o n i c s h o c k w i t h

T h i sc o n c l u s i o ni s

When theprobe

a 20 degapexcone-

i t appearsthat

inordertoavoidretardingtherearward

based on measurements made o n l y a t

i s moved o f fc e n t e r l i n e ,c l o s e rt o

be necessary t oa v o i dw a l li n t e r f e r e n c e .A l s o ,

shock may be expected.

menttechnique,such

same blockage,

a r e t a r d e d movement ofthetransonicshock.

c y l i n d e r must have a c r o s s - s e c t i o n a la r e al e s st h a n

asymmetry o f t h e

asa

Thus,a

Recently,Neman

and Klunker(Ref.

a wall,

some

n o n - p e r t u r b i n gf l o w

laserDopplervelocimeter,appearsto

measure-

be v e r y

0.95 < M < 1.05.

d e s i r a b l ef o rt u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o n si nt h er a n g e

2 1 ) and South and K e l l e r (Ref. 22)

h a v ep e r f o r m e dc a l c u l a t i o n sf o rt r a n s o n i cf l o w sa b o u ta i r f o i l s

and axisym-

m e t r i cb o d i e sw h i c hi n c l u d ew i n dt u n n e lw a l l si nt h eb o u n d a r yc o n d i t i o n s .
c a l c u l a t i o n s show theshock
isapplied,i.e.,

Pw

tothefree-airsolution,

Poo

These

moves forward when t h e o p e n - j e t b o u n d a r y c o n d i t i o n

Similarly,the

shock moves rearward, compared

when t h e s o l i d w a l l

boundary c o n d i t i o n i s a p p l i e d .

I nl i g h to ft h ef o r e g o i n gd i s c u s s i o n ,t h i si m p l i e st h a te i t h e rs l o t t e do r
p e r f o r a t e dw a l l sa c t
increased.This

more l i k e o p e n - j e t s

phenomenon i sa p p a r e n t l y

as t h e s i z e o f t r a n s o n i c

more a i r fromtheplenum

models i s

a r e s u l to fl a r g e rp o c k e t so fs u p e r -

s o n i cf l o ww h i c hi m p r e s sl o w e rp r e s s u r e sa tt h ew a l l s .T h i si nt u r n
chamber and a p p a r e n t l y s h i f t s t h e

draws i n
model f l o w p a t t e r n

towardtheopen-jetboundarycondition.

T h i s may p a r t i a l l y e x p l a i n t h e t r a n s v e r s e
some o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e r e s p o n d e n t s .

94

and t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y l a r g e r p o c k e t o f s u p e r -

Based o n t h e s e v a r i o u s r e s u l t s ,

t u n n e lc e n t e r l i n e s .

. .. .
...." ..
.. ... .

Mach number g r a d i e n t s r e p o r t e d

by

A s r e g a r d ss t a t i cp r e s s u r ep r o b ed e s i g n ,s m a l la n g l e
t om i n i m i z es t r e n g t ho ft h et r a n s o n i c
pansionangle

shock.

conescan

be used

I na d d i t i o n ,t h es m a l l e re x -

will g e n e r a t e l e s s w a l l i n t e r f e r e n c e f o r

a givenprobediameter

and t h e boundary l a y e r will r e m a i na t t a c h e da tt h ec o n e - c y l i n d e rj u n c t u r e .

A separatedboundarylayer

i su n d e s i r a b l e

whichareconvecteddownstream

a-nd cancause
p. 9 8 ) .

sure measurements (see Eq. 3.D.1,


anglecone-cylinderprobehasservedas
transonic performance

because it i n t r o d u c e sd i s t u r b a n c e s
additionalerrorsinstaticpresThus,

i nt h ep a s tt h e

IO deg apex

a convenientcompromisebetweenoptimum

and ease o f c o n s t r u c t ion.;:

The problem o f o r i f i c e - t r a n s o n i c shock interference,which


isticofcone-cylinder
small-angle cones.

probes, may be a v o i d e d b y l o c a t i n g o r i f i c e s

T h i s was demonstrated by Sutton(Ref.

t h et r a n s o n i cs u r f a c ep r e s s u r e s

3.D.6.

f o r 0.9 c M < 1.02.


"

caused bypassage

AM = 0.02)

range(e.g.,

at

0.021% tunnelblockage.

These probes a r e
shown i n F i g . 3.D.7.

The o s c i l l a t i o n i n c a l c u l a t e d Mach number,based

i t isrelevanttonotethattransonic

c y l i n d e rp r o b e

24) who compared

The correspond i n g s u r f a c e p r e s s u r e s a r e

c y l i n d e rs u r f a c ep r e s s u r e ,i s

Machnumber

on v e r y

on a 3 deg included-angle cone w i t h a conven-

t i o n a l IO deg c o n e - c y l i n d e rh a v i n g
shown i nF i g .

i s character-

o ft h et r a n s o n i c

However ,

shock.

shock e f f e c t s can be c o n f i n e d t o
when u s i n g a c a r e f u l l yd e s i g n e d

a srna 1 1

10 deg cone-

3 deg cone p r o v i d e s

t u n n e lc e n t e r l i n e .I nc o n t r a s t ,t h e

a m o n o t o n i c a l l yi n c r e a s i n gp r e s s u r e

on t h e

and decreasing Mach number throughoutthe

transonicrange.
U n f o r t u n a t e l y ,t h e

3 deg cone i sr e p o r t e d by Gracey(Ref.

sensitive to flow misalignment. For angles of attack

9) t o be

between + I deg, pressure

The AGARD needleprobedescribedinReference


23 hasa
approximately 12 degand
f o u r 0.3 mm o r i f i c e s l o c a t e d
stream o f t h e s h o u l d e r .

cone apex a n g l e o f

11.3 c a l i b r e s down95

4 HOLES, 0.061 DIAMETER

d = 0.305
(a)

CONE-CYLINDER
STATIC

3 HOLES 0.036 DIA.

3"
T I P DIAMETER

HEAD

1.3'

0g015

DIMENSIONS
ARE tN (XN'TmERS

(b)

Figure 3.0.6.

3" CONE STAT1 C HEAD

DIMENSIONS OF THER.A.E.STATIC

PRESSURE
PROBES

+o .02 AM

'

0'.90 0.b2

0-

= M -M

0.44

'01

155 cm FROM
I

0.96

STATIC HEAD

CONE-CYLINDER

0.90 0.92 0.94

0.98 1.00

MH
I

1.02

An
= fl -M
H C

R e = 10.6 x 10

-0.02

(b)

Figure 3.D.7.

per meter
I

3"

CONE S T A T I C HEAD

TRANSONICCHARACTERISTICS

= MACH NUMBER
DEDUCED FROM
PLENUM CHAMBER
STAT I C PRESSURE
THROAT.

''

per meter
I

(a)

+o .02

MR

"

0.'98 1.60
1.b2

R e = 15.7 x 10

-0.02

0.96

OF
THE

TWO R.A.E.

PROBES

= MACHNUMBER
DEDUCED FROM
S T A T I C HEAD
PRESSURE

measurementson

v a r i a t i o n so fa p p r o x i m a t e l y

for a 0.033 cm (0.013


f r o mt h et i p .

8 - f t . TransonicTunnelindicate

deg cone I n t h e L a n g l e y

Thus,a

0.02 qinear

M = 1.

These r e s u l t s were t h e same

i n . )o r i f i c el o c a t e de i t h e r
small-angle conecan

12.7 o r

17.8 cm (5 o r 7 in.)

be used t o c a l i b r a t e w i n d t u n n e l s

near M = 1 , b u t i t s s e n s i t i v i t y t o f l o w a n g u l a r i t y
t o r e s o l v e Mach number v a r i a t i o n s a s s m a l l a s

can make i t d i f f i c u l t
0.001.n

Effects of Various Parameters on Static Pressure Probes

Size:
As foundby

Couch and Brooks(Ref.

blockage ratio of only

0.03% canhave

tunnelcalibrationsalongthecenterline

f r e ep e r f o r m a n c eo f
computerprogram(Ref.

17).

c e n t e r l i n eb l o c k a g ee f f e c t s
Refs. 21,22

and 26.

T h e r e f o r e ,f o ra c c u r a t e

and near M = 1, s t a t i c p r e s s u r e p r o b e s
recommended.

be c a l u c l a t e d u s i n g t h e S o u t h

from t h e nose.

and checking monotonicity


Pope and Goin(Ref.

by having

of the data with

6) suggestmovingthe

a s c h l i e r e n system.

d i a m e t e v o f 0.051 cm (.02 in.)shouldbelocated

o f t h en o s e - c y l i n d e rj u n c t u r e .F i n a l l y ,e r r o r si n d u c e d

w i th a

IO o r more c a l i b r e s downstream
by o r i f i c e s i z e a r e

lll.D.4.

A d d i t i o n a l t r a n s o n i c measurements o f f l o w a n g u l a r i t y w i t h
probearereported
by W r i g h t ,e ta l .( R e f .
25).

98

e.g.,

W a l lr e f l e c t e dd i s t u r b a n c e sc a na l s ob ed e t e c t e d

Once t h e p r o b e d i a m e t e r i s s e l e c t e d , a t l e a s t f o u r o r i f i c e s

and Jameson

can be estimated by t h e o r e t i c a l a n a l y s i s ,

model o f f c e n t e r l i n e and/orusing

discussed i nS e c t i o n

The w a l l - i n t e r f e r e n c e -

I f f o r some reason a l a r g e rp r o b ei sr e q u i r e d ,

o r i f i c e s a t more t h a n o n e s t a t i o n
i n c r e a s i n gd i s t a n c e

M = 1.

0.01% a r en o t

suchprobescan

a tunnel

cylindersurfacepressureswhichdepart

s i g n i f i c a n t l yf r o mf r e e s t r e a ms t a t i cn e a r

w i t h b l o c k a g er a t i o sl a r g e rt h a n

2 0 ) , cone-cy1inderbodieswith

3 deg c o n i c a l

Reynolds .Number:
Re/m >

' A t Reynolds numbers c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f t r a n s o n i c t u n n e l s ( i . e . ,


million),staticpressureprobesareusuallyunaffected

by t h i s v a r i a b l e ,

p r o v i d e dt h ep r o b eb o u n d a r yl a y e ri sa t t a c h e d .

:
Tu r b u 1 ence
In contrast to the Pitot
a f f e c t e db yt u r b u l e n c e .
c i a t e dw i t ht h e

probe, s t a t i c p r e s s u r e

The d e s i r e dq u a n t i t y

mean f l o w .B r y e r

turbulencescaleislarge,

and Pankhurst(Ref.

measured s t a t i cp r e s s u r e

Pm

If t h e o r i f i c e s a r e l o c a t e d
e r r o r s ,t h e n

A = 0.

Eq. (3.0.1)

may
be

Pm

The f o l l o w i n ge q u a t i o n
measured,mean

a turbulentflow.

(ut)')+

(3.D. 1)

so t h e r e a r e no noseand/or

B i s ameasure

supportstem-induced

o ft h ec r o s s f l o w - i n d u c e de r r o ri n

measured

an angle a i n a steadyflow,

w r i t t e n as

Pt = 2q(Acos

Thistypeof

t o t h e dynamic

will be high.

When a probe i s i n c l i n e d a t

s t a t i cp r e s s u r e .

measured

I f t h et u r b u l e n c es c a l ei s

dynamic pressuregeneratedby

Pt = A p ( U

when t h e

an o r i f i c e .

28) t o r e l a t e t h e e r r o r i n

has been d e r i v e d by Siddon(Ref.


staticpressuretothe

27) n o t et h a t

be low and i s p r o p o r t i o n a l

p r e s s u r eo ft h et u r b u l e n c en o r m a lt o

be

1s t h e s t a t i c p r e s s u r e a s s o -

compared t o t h e p r o b e d i m e n s i o n s , t h e

s t a t i c p r e s s u r e will t e n d t o

s m a l l ,t h e

probedatacan

a + B s i n a)

measurement was performed i n subsonic flow by Siddon w i t h

a standard,classicalprobe.
a diameter o f 0.305 cm (0.12

The probe had:


in.),

e t e r s downstream from t h e nose.

(1) a ne l l i p s o i d a l

and (3) s i x o r i f i c e s l o c a t e d

nose,

(2)

8 1/2diam-

For t h i s probe, B was found t o be - 0 . 5 5 .

99

A specialprobe,designedto
s t a t i cp r e s s u r e ,

measure unsteadycrossflow

was a l s ot e s t e db y

Siddon.

f e r e n t i a l s l i t forsensingstaticpressure,

-0.23.

i n c l f n e dn o z z l e ,

T h i s probe,which

arrangement.Additional

-0.46

t o -0.35.

inducederrorsvarieswithprobedesign
Bryer and Pankhurst(Ref.

anda

27, p.

43)

anareawhich

causedby

measurements i n a r o t a t i n g r o u n dt u r b u l e n tj e ti n d i c a t e d

Thus, t h em a g n i t u d eo fc r o s s f l o w and t u r b u l e n c e s c a l e

suggestthatprobes

and i n t e n s i t y .

be c a l i b r a t e d i n

will beused.

flowswithturbulencecloselymatchingthoseinwhichtheprobe
Thisisobviously

circum-

B v a l u eo f

B values i s p r i m a r i l y

a t u r b u l e n tc h a n n e lf l o w ,

variedovertherange

hada

was found . t o havea

A c c o r d i n gt oS i d d o n ,t h ed i f f e r e n c ei n

t h ed i f f e r e n c ei no r i f i c e

and f l u c t u a t i n g

needs f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h .

Yaw:
When s e v e r a l o r i f i c e s

(4 o r

more) arelocatedaroundtheprobeclrcum-

ference, flow a n g u l a r i t y causes t h e measured s t a t i c p r e s s u r e t o


can be r e a d i l y seen from t h e p r e s s u r e d i s t r i b u t i o n a b o u t
normal t o a f l o w (e.g.,see

Appendix I I I ) .

below.

This

a circularcylinder

Bryer and Pankhurst(Ref.

27)

notethattheyaw-inducedstaticpressureerrorofthistypeofprobeis
t y p i c a l l y 0.01 PaDwhenyawed

dependentonnosegeometryand

deg.

The e r r o r , i n

o r i f i c el o c a t i o n .R i t c h i e( k e f .

yaw-induced e r r o r sg e n e r a l l yi n c r e a s ew i t h
allowederrorin

a p a r t i c u l a r case,

Mach number.Thus,

91,

R i t c h i e (Ref.

f o r a given

101, and Rittenhouse

(Ref. 29) have r e p o r t e d on s t a t i cp r e s s u r ep r o b e sd e s i g n e d


These probes u t i 1 i z e o n l y

two orificeslocated

from thewindward-meridian.Althoughtheseprobes
t r a n s o n i c speedsand

yaw angles up t o

s t r e a md i r e c t i o n .S i n c et h i si sn o tu s u a l l y
t i o n s ,t h i st y p eo fp r o b ec a n n o t

100

10) r e p o r t e d

measured s t a t i c p r e s s u r e , t h e p e r m i s s i b l e v a r i a t i o n i n f l o w

misalignmentdecreases.Gracey(Ref.

sensitivity.

is

28

t o minimize yaw

30 to 40 degrees

h a v es m a l le r r o r sa t

deg, t h e y r e q u i r e

knowledge o f t h e

known d u r i n gw i n dt u n n e lc a l i b r a -

be recommended.

Hence, theconventional

probe with four or more orificesis preferred. Particularly since the flow
angularity in the central core ofmany contemporary transonic and supersonic
tunnels is less than one degree, the conventional probe will usually have
negligible error due to yaw.* For

example, Ritchie (Ref. IO) found a two

degree angle o f attack caused less than 0.2% error in measured static pressure
through-out the transonic Mach number range.

(These results were obtained

with a probe having an ogival nose (f

r = 12) and orifices located 12 1/2 calibres


from the nose.) However, this is another reason for minimizing flow angularity
in the empty tunnel, i.e., not only will model testing results be more representative of free-flight phenomena, but the tunnel calibration will be more accurate.
Lakes and Support Interference:
The effects of a support flare on base pressures have been investigated
by Chevalier (Ref. 30) over a Mach number range of 0.70 to 1.60.

Based on

the experimental resultsat M = 1 , a flare located approximately I 5 flare


diameters downstream of the orifices will not interfere with static pressure
probe readings.

A n I I deg flare (semiangle) located at t h i s distance from the

orifices will have negligible effect on the flow at the orifices throughout
the transonic speed regime. The required distance for no interference deand increasing Mach number.
creases with smaller flare angles

Interference caused by a cylindrical strut normal to the probe axishas


been investigated by Krause and Gettelman (Ref. 31) for M = 0.3 to 0.9.
These authors foundthat a distance of 14 strut d iameters between static
liqible interference at
probe orifices and the strut was required for neg
these

speeds

* It

is conceivable that a static pressure probe couldbe calibrated for yaw


errors. Static pressure readings could then be corrected for measured flow
angles. However, most tunnels do not have sufficient flow angularity to
would consider i t practical.
warrant this procedure, and few operators
101

Perhaps t h e most s t r i n g e n t r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r d i s t a n c e
anda

32).

s t r u t have been reportedbyNichols(Ref.

staticpressureprobe

mountedon

These d a t aa r e

33)

31).

adjacentprobes
sureprobe

The o b j e c t i v e is

oftheorifices.

inter-

measured a t t h e o r i f i c e s . S i n c e t h e

c r i t e r i o n becomes i m p r a c t i c a l when M

2, Gray reconmends t h ef l o wd e f l e c t i o n

3 deg a t i t s i n t e r s e c t i o n w i t h t h e

shock be k e p tl e s st h a n

s t a t i c probe, and furthermore,theprobesshould


section is

Gray reconmends spacing

caused by shock-wave/laminar-boundary-layer

a c t i o nf r o ma f f e c t i n gt h ep r e s s u r e

a c r o s st h eP i t o t

i s based o nt h ed a t ao f

bow shock i n t e r s e c t s a s t a t i c p r e s -

15 probediametersdownstream

t op r e v e n td i s t u r b a n c e s

strutdlameters

The s e p a r a t i o nc r i t e r i o nf o r

Insupersonicflows,

so t h a t t h e n e i g h b o r i n g

32

3.0.8.

and p i t o t probes i n s u b s o n i c f l o w

Krause and Gettelman(Ref.

of a

have been suggestedbyGray

3.D.9.

and a r ep r e s e n t e di nF i g .

a d j a c e n ts t a t i c

belocated

shown i nF i g .

General c r i t e r i a f o r p r o b e s u r v e y r a k e s
(Ref.

Forthecase

a double wedge s t r u t s u p p o r t , t h e t r a n s o n i c

measurements o f N i c h o l s i n d i c a t e o r i f i c e s s h o u l d
ahead o f t h e s t r u t .

between o r i f l c e s

be spaced so t h e l n t e r -

5 o r more s t a t i c probediametersdownstream

of the orifices.

il
For Mach numbers between 0.9 and 1.2,
because o fi n c r e a s e db l o c k a g e

rakesmust

and near-normalshock

be used w i t h c a u t i o n
waves.

Also,rakesare

notoriousforinducingcrossflowintheplaneoftherakeathighsubsonic
Mach numbers, see Section I I 1 . E .
a l t e r n a t i v ei s

recommended:

(x

5 deg)nose

suggestedby
.L

a s l e n d e ro g i v a l
anda

Mach number r a n g et h ef o l l o w i n g

employ a s i n g l e ,s t a t i cp r e s s u r ep r o b e( o r

c o m b i n a t i o nP i t o t - s t a t i cp r o b e *
assumption)with

I nt h i s

f o r v a l i d a t i n gt h ei s e n t r o p i ce x p a n s i o n

(L

= ad) or v e r ys m a l la n g l ec o n i c a l

stingtypesupportwhichsatisfiesthecriteria

Gray.

Here i t i s r e l e v a n t t o n o t e B r y e r
and Pankhurst (Ref. 27, p. 41) a r e o f t h e
o p i n i o nt h a tc o m b i n a t i o np r o b e sa r ei ng e n e r a ll e s sa c c u r a t et h a ns i n g l e purposeinstruments.

102

0.4

0.3

-P

w -

H
0- m
a - 0.90

0.2

1.00

0.1

-0.1

12

16

20

24

28

I /S, DISTANCE FROM O R I F I C E To STRUT SHOULDER


d

0
W

Figure 3.D.8

EFFECT OF ORIFICELOCATION U T Z I Z I U G
DOUBLE- WEDGE SUPFORT STRUT, REF. 32

32

36

.. ,. ..-

I
.
.
.
_
.
.
.
.

_,, , ,

. . .
.
I

lo

.I,.

11
16 d for
for M > l1.6
e6

Cylindrical
support

For negligible support interference:


l/D > 14, all valuesof M
For negligible adjacent probe interference:
M < 0.9: dd1> 6

M> 1.2:
Determined by the
intersection of bow
wave with static probe

Figure 3. D. 9

104

GENERAL CRITERIA FORPROBE


RAKES, Ref. 33

SURVEY

lll.D.3.
AlthoughBarry
t i o n s basedon

SupersonicStaticPressureProbes

(Ref.34)

has shown t h a ts u p e r s o n i c

Mach number c a l c u l a -

P i t o t and f r e e s t r e a m s t a t i c p r e s s u r e a r e n o t

t h e Mach probesdescribed

i nS e c t i o n

because of i t s f a m i l i a r
In addition,

I I I . C , t h i s approach i s o f t e n used

use i n subsonic flows and i t s ease o f c o n s t r u c t i o n .

i t does p r o v i d e amethod

on theassumption

as accurateas

for calculating

o f an i s e n t r o p i c e x p a n s i o n

H wh i c h does n o t depend

from s t i l l i n g chamber t o t e s t

section.
Walter and Redman (Ref. 35) measured p r e s s u r e d i s t r i b u t i o n s
Mach numbers 1.55 and 2.87."

includedanglecone-cy1inderat

on a

deg

These data

indicatethesurfacepressureonthecylinderreturnstofreestreamstatic
beyond IO c a l i b r e sf r o mt h es h o u l d e r .I ng e n e r a l ,
theoverexpansionincreases
q u i r e d .I n c r e a s i n g

and longerdistancesfromtheshoulderarere-

cone angle hasa

Pressuredistributiondata
speeds up t o

as Mach numher increases

s i m i l a re f f e c t .

on c o n e - c y l i n d e r - f l a r e c o n f i g u r a t i o n s a t

M = 4.5 have been r e p o r t e d by Washington and Humphrey (Ref.36).

Data o b t a i n e d on a b l u n t nosed,

10.3 deg c o n e - c y l i n d e r a t

yaw i n d i c a t e t h e s u r f a c e p r e s s u r e r e t u r n s t o w i t h i n
static at nine calibres
Inthecaseof
averagedpressure

sensitivity.

4.5 and zero

two percent o f freestream

downstream o f t h e s h o u l d e r .

yaw, t h e d a t a o f

Reference 36 show t h e c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l l y

i s b e l o wf r e e s t r e a ms t a t i c .F o r

averagepressuredecreasesfurther
increasingthe

M =

as Machnumber

a g i v e n yaw a n g l e ,t h e
i n c r e a s e s .I ng e n e r a l ,

number o f o r i f i c e s about the circumference

will decrease yaw

However, Gray (P.ef. 37) and o t h e r s have n o t e dt h a ts u r f a c e

T h i sd a t ai sa l s op r e s e n t e di nR e f e r e n c e

6.
105

240

pressure on long cy1 inders, measured approximately

from t h e windwardlocation,provides
s t a t i c for M lessthan

4.0.

deg c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l l y

a c l o s ea p p r o x i m a t f o nt of r e e s t r e a m

Thus, t h i s t y p e o f p r o b e

to e l i m i n a t e

canbeused

yaw-induced e r r o r s i n s t a t i c p r e s s u r e .
As discussedpreviously,sincemosttunnelshavesmallflowangularity
inthe

empty t e s t s e c t i o n ,

significant.

yaw induced e r r o r s will be

it isunlikelythat

i s b e i n g used t o c a l i b r a t e Mach number andan


thensmallyaw-inducederrors

accurate measurement.

t ol o c a t et h e

may be important.Inwhichcase,

70

a static

80 deg a p a r t canprovide

Thiscanbeaccomplishedbyrotatingtheprobe

windwardgenerator(highestpressure)andthenrotatingthe

probe u n t i l t h e

two o r i f i c e s agree."

37)

Inordertoavoidsupport-interference,Gray(Ref.
cylinderdiameter
orifices.

0.1% i s d e s i r e d ,

accuracyof

probe w i t h two o r i f i c e s l o c a t e d c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l l y
amore

I f s t a t i cp r e s s u r e

But t h i s must be determinedbytheuser.,

be c o n s t a n t f o r a t l e a s t

Any subsequentenlargement

recomendsthe

8 diametersdownstream

i nd i a m e t e rs h o u l d

of the

be r e s t r i c t e d t o

no more than a 10 deg f l a r e ( s e m i a n g l e ) .A d d i t i o n a lc r i t e r i af o rr a k e


arrangementsaregiven

i nF i g .

I nt h ep a s t ,P i t o tp r e s s u r e s

3.D.9.
and surfacepressures

have f r e q u e n t l y been used i n s u p e r s o n i c f l o w s t o c a l c u l a t e


e.g.,

Refs.

38 and 39.

has a s h o r t (1.78 cm) 8 deg c o n i c a lt i pf o l l o w e d


i n c l u d e d - a n g l ec o n e .O r i f i c e se n c i r c l et h e

106

Mach number,

A l s o , an e x t r e m e l ya c c u r a t ec o n i c a ls t a t i cp r e s s u r e

probe i s briefly discussed by Pope and Goin(Ref.

"T h i s

on conicalprobes

assumes no o r i f i c e - i n d u c e d e r r o r s .

6).

Thisprobedesign

by a long(16.26

cm) 1 deg

1 deg cone a t t h r e el o c a t i o n s .

The e r r o r i n

measured s t a t i c p r e s s u r e i s r e p o r t e d t o

o ft r u ef r e e s t r e a mp r e s s u r e

when

M = 1.8 t o 3.5.

some o f t h e m o s t a c c u r a t e s t a t i c - p r e s s u r e
However,Gray

(Ref.

37)

o fs u p e r s o n i cs t a t i c - p r e s s u r e
probeswereconsidered.

be o f t h e o r d e r o f

0.1%

Thus, thesedatarepresent

measurements i n supersonic flow.

has r e c e n t l yr e v i e w e dt h em e r i t s
probes.Cone-cy1

inder,sharp

and l i m i t a t i o n s
cone,and

planar

of Mach number, a n g l e o f a t t a c k ,

Based on t h e e f f e c t s

and Reynolds number, G r a yc o n c l u d e dt h a tt h ec o n e - c y l i n d e rp r o b ei s ,i ng e n e r a l ,


s u p e r i o r for use a t Mach numbers below 4.
I n t h i s Mach number range, t h e Reynolds numbers o f most supersonictunnels
a r el a r g e

enough f o rv i s c o u sc o r r e c t i o n st o

be n e g l i g i b l e .T h i se f f e c t

e s t i m a t e db yc a l c u l a t i n gt h ee q u i v a l e n ti n v i s c i dp r e s s u r e

37) for cone-cyl

suggestedbyGray(Ref.
lessthan

indersprobes

canbe

from anexpression
i n flowswith

Mach number

5.

(wmeas

0.25

(3.0.3)

(w) i n v i s c i d
where

-x

E M
3

/ (Rel /C) 1 /2
0

C Z ( p /p ) (T /T ) , Chapman-Rubesin v i s c o s i t yp a r a m e t e r .
w e w

For a g i v e n c o n f i g u r a t i o n , t h e v i s c o u s i n t e r a c t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t d e c r e a s e s w i t h
i n c r e a s i n g Mach number.

*
andGeorge(Ref.

For example, thehypersonicexperiments

40) i n d i c a t e a c o e f f i c i e n t o f

20 deg cone-cylinder probe at

*These

o f Peterson

0.08 i sa p p r o p r i a t ef o r

M = 7.2 and 14.0.

i n v e s t i g a t o r s , among o t h e r s , ,havenotedthatstatic-pressureprobes
s h o u l dn o t beused
inflowswithlargeaxial
or transversepressuregradients.

I no r d e r

t o s i m u l t a n e o u s l ym i n i m i z et h ee f f e c t so fv i s c o u si n t e r a c t i o n

and noseoverexpansion

a t supersonic speeds,

it i s recommended t h a t o r i f i c e s

16 c a l i b r e s downstream o f theshoulder.Incases

be l o c a t e da tl e a s t

c o r r e c t i o n i s judged t o be n e c e s s a r y , t h e i n t e r e s t e d r e a d e r
G r a y ' s d i s c u s s i on(Ref.

where

may r e f e r , t o

37) o f a procedure for c o r r e c t i n gt h e

measured

p r e s s u r e f o r v i scous i n t e r a c t i o n and o b t a i n i n g a b e t t e r e s t i m a t e o f t h e
i n v i s c i d ,s t a t i

c pressure.

S i n c ec o n e - c y l i n d e rp r o b e sa r er e l a t i v e l yl o n g ,t h e yn o to n l y
r i g i d i t yb u ta l s o
a r es e n s i t i v e

cannotbeused

t o yaw.

i np r e s s u r eg r a d i e n t s .I na d d i t i o n ,t h e y

F o rt h i sr e a s o n ,s h o r t e rs u p e r s o n i cs t a t i cp r e s s u r e

probeshavebeeninvestigated,

Refs. 41, 42, and 43.

e.g.,

focused on t h e i d e a o f d e s i g n i n g

a probe t o have a t l e a s t

t h ec i r c u m f e r e n t i a l l ya v e r a g e ds u r f a c ep r e s s u r er e m a i n s

of freestreamstaticregardlessof

Machnumber

The probesdesignedbyDonaldson
(Ref.

+6

s e p a r a t i o n becomes
a

deg.Beyond

one s t a t i o n where

or a n g l e o f i n c i d e n c e .

41) and Pinckney

whereas theprobesofSmith
Measurements a t M = 0.2

and 3auer a r e c o m p l e t e l y i n s e n s i t i v e

this angle of attack

ranqe,boundary

f a c t o r , a n de r r o r si n c r e a s er a p i d l y .S i n c et h e

tivityofconventional,circularprobesincreasewith
may or may n o t o f f e r

anadvantage

reportsfreestreamstaticpressure

yaw sensi-

!lath number, theseprobes

c a nb ed e t e r m i n e dw i t hh i sc a l i b r a t e dp r o b e

27 deg

and M = 2.5 and 4.0.

r e s u l t s have been r e p o r t e d by Dona ldson and Richardson.Using

108

layer

f o rs u p e r s o n i ca p p l i c a t i o n s .P i n c k n e y

t o w i t h i n 2 p e r c e n tf o ri n c i d e n c ea n g l e so f

cluded angle cone-cylinder probe

has

a constantfraction

43) have n o n c i r c u l a rc r o s s - s e c t i o n s .

i n d i c a t et h en o n c i r c u l a rp r o b e so fS m i t h
to flow angles of

Thiswork

and Richardson(Ref.

42) a r ec o n v e n t i o n a , lb o d i e so fr e v o l u t i o n ,

andBauer(Ref.

havesmall

w' 4 t h 24 or i f i c e s l o c a t e d

Better

a 50 deg i n -

0.88 diameters

downstream o f theshoulder,theseinvestigatorsfoundtheprobe
0.793 POD,and t h e f r e e s t r e a m s t a t i c p r e s s u r e c o u l d

1.2 p e r c e n to v e rt h e

Machnumber

By
o b t a i n e d f o r z e r o yaw.

measured

be determined to w i t h i n

range 1 . 1 t o 2.5.

These r e s u l t s were

0.763, f r e e -

a d j u s t i n gt h e i rc a l i b r a t i o nf a c t o rt o

be c a l c u l a t e d t o w i t h i n 3 p e r c e n t f o r incidenceangles

s t r e a ms t a t i cc o u l d

up t o 18 deg i n anyplane.Thisrepresentsthesmallest
a n ys u p e r s o n i cs t a t i cp r e s s u r ep r o b e

yaw s e n s i t i v i t y o f

known t o t h e a u t h o r s . *

As i s w e l l known, t h e o r e t i c a ls o l u t i o n sf o rs u r f a c ep r e s s u r ed i s t r i b u t o measure f r e e s t r e a m

tionsonprobescanassisttheplacementoforifices
s t a t i cp r e s s u r e .
pressureson

Based oncomparisons

o f measuredand

a hemisphere-cylinderprobe,Hsieh(Ref.

South and Jameson program(Ref.17)

canbe

p r e d i c t e ds u r f a c e

44)

concludedthe

used s u c c e s s f u l l y up t o M = 1.3.

Beyond t h i s Mach number, a method o f c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a l g o r i t h m i s


foraxisymmetricprobes.

A r a t h e rl a r g e

available.

t h ei n t e r e s t e dr e a d e r

byHsieh(Ref.

For examples,

44).

number o f suchprograms

Fornon-axisymmetricprobes,

recommended
a r ec u r r e n t l y

may r e f e rt ot h ep a p e r
a
number

offinitedif-

f e r e n c es o l u t i o n sf o rt h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l ,s u p e r s o n i c ,i n v i s c i df l o w sa r e
a v a i l a b l e , e.g.,
Marconi,
F i n a l l y ,t h e

e ta l .

(Ref. 4 5 ) .

use o fm u l t i p l ep r o b e si nr a k e

s u p e r s o n i ct u n n e l si sw e l l
c a l i b r a t es u p e r s o n i ct u n n e l s

known.
Rakes

arrangements f o rs u r v e y i n g

can be s u c c e s s f u l l y employed

by a p p l y i n g t h e d e s i g n c r i t e r i a o f

to

Gray, F i g .

3 . 0 . 9 , and a v o i d i n g r e f l e c t i o n s o f how shock waves o f f t h e t u n n e l w a l l s .

DonaldsonandRichardsonalsofound
a c o n v e n t i o n a l ,s i n g l eb o r e ,i n t e r n a l
plenum p r o v i d e d less yaw s e n s i t i v i t y t h a n an a n n u l a r plenum.

109

lll.D.4.

O r i f i c e - I n d u c e dS t a t i cP r e s s u r eE r r o r s

E r r o r si ns t a t i cp r e s s u r e
geometry,have

measurements,causedby

been i n v e s t i g a t e di n

(4)

hole,

Refs. 46-52.

a number o fs t u d i e s ,

(1)

r e l e v a n tg e o m e t r i cv a r i a b l e sa r e :
t od i a m e t e r ,

variationsinorifice
The

(2) r a t i oo fh o l ed e p t h

h o l ed i a m e t e r ,

(3) therelativesizeofthecavityortubeconnectingtothe
(5) t h e

i n c l i n a t i o no fh o l ea x i sr e l a t i v et ot h es u r f a c en o r m a l ,

conditionoftheholeentry,

i.e.,whethertheedgesaresquare,rounded,

chamfered, o r have b u r r s .
I d e a l l y ,t h em e a s u r i n gh o l es h o u l d

be i n f i n i t e s i m a l l y s m a l l

so as t o

Shaw (Ref. 47) n o t e dt h a tt h eb a s i ce r r o r

n o td i s t u r bt h ea d j a c e n tf l o w .

caused by f i n i t e - s i z e do r i f i c e sc o n s i s t e do ft h r e ec o n t r i b u t i o n s .F i r s t l y ,
dippingofthestreamlinesintotheorifice
l i n e sw h i c hr e s u l t si n
eddy (orsystem

a higherpressureinsubsonicflow.Secondly,an

o fe d d i e s )i sg e n e r a t e dw i t h i nt h eh o l e .

a n a l y s i s by N e s t l e r( R e f .

51)has

downstream edge o ft h eh o l e .

0.038 cm (.015in.)are

such aneddy

And f i n a l l y , a P i t o te f f e c to c c u r sa tt h e
These t h r e e phenomena causethe

be t o oh i g h .A l t h o u g ht h es e v e r i t yo ft h e s e

h o l es i z e ,R a i n b i r d( R e f .

(An approximate

shown how t h e t u r n i n g o f

cangenerateincreasedpressures.)

s u r et o

causes a d i v e r g e n c e o f s t r e a m -

measured pres-

phenomena decrease w i t h

49) o b s e r v e dt h a th o l e sw i t hd i a m e t e r sl e s st h a n
difficult to

produce w i t h sharp edgesand

negligible

b u r r s .A l s oi ns h o r td u r a t i o nt u n n e l s ,t h et i m er e q u i r e df o rp r e s s u r e
e q u i l i z a t i o ni nt y p i c a l
Based ona

measurement systems becomes excessive.

s t u d yo fo r i f i c ee r r o r si nt u r b u l e n tp i p ef l o w ,

and F r a n k l i n and Wallace(Ref.


s c a l e sw i t ht h el o c a lw a l l
c o s i t y (p), v i z . ,

110

Shaw (Ref. 47)

50) have v e r i f i e d t h a t t h e e f f e c t o f h o l e s i z e

shear s t r e s s ( T ~ )and f l u i d d e n s i t y

(p)

and v i s -

- 'true

'meas

do

,?w
)

(3.0.4)

T
W

In add i t i o n , t h e a c t u a l m a g n i t u d e o f e r r o r s a r e
otherparameters.

For example, Shaw (Ref.

a f u n c t i o n o f anumber

47) and Livesey, e t a l .

f o u n dt h er e l a t i v ed e p t ho ft h e ,h o l et oa l s o
general,the

be a s i g n i f i c a n tp a r a m e t e r .I n

t o diameterdecreases.

However, as holelength/diameter

decreasesbelow

2 , L i v e s e y ,e ta l .n o t e d

b e h i n dt h eh o l e

caused a n e g a t i v ee r r o ri n

t r a s t ,R a i n b i r d

(Ref.

49) and Shaw b o t h used

d i a m e t e ro fo n l y

2d0.

W i t ht h i sa r r a n g e m e n t ,

statlcpressureerror

**

0 . 5 do.
Shaw

measured s t a t i cp r e s s u r e .

Rayle(Ref.

Shawls d a t ai n d i c a t e

of do/127cancause

t h e oncoming f l o wi n c r e a s e st h e
downstream, a reducedpressure

and d i s as o c c u r
3.0.10.

i n c l i n i n gt h ea x l so fh o l e st o w a r d

measured pressure.
i s measured.

By i n c l i n i n gt h eh o l e

R a y l ea l s os t u d i e dt h ee f f e c t s
edges r e s u l t e d

whereas,chamferingproducedsmallnegativeerrors.

observedbyBenedict(Ref.

53),

i m e d l a t e l ys e p a r a t eb u ti n s t e a d

t h ef l o wo v e r

countersunkhole,theflow

I nt h ec a s e

R a i n b i r d used a f i x e d r a t i o o f h o l e l e n g t h

not

a resulting

o f a chamfered or

will separateattheupstreamsharp

S i m i l a r l y ,L i v e s e y ,e ta l .a l s on o t et h a t
(e do) will cause a higherpressure.

As

a roundededgedoes

i s g u i d e di n t ot h eh o l ew i t h

recovery o f p a r t o f t h e dynamicpressure.

a decreasing

errorsaslarge

o f v a r y i n g edges o f an o r i f i c e .I ng e n e r a l ,r o u n d i n go ft h e
i nh i g h e rp r e s s u r e ;

I n con-

from 1 . 5 do t o

smooth h o l es i z e ,i . e . ,t h es o l i dc u r v ei nF i g .

46) found,asexpected,

a c a v i t yb e h i n dt h eh o l ew i t h

a l s os y s t e m a t i c a l l ys t u d i e dt h ee f f e c t so fb u r r s

w i t hv a r i a t l o n si n

(14 do)

a relativelylargeCavity

as t h e l e n g t h o f t h e h o l e d e c r e a s e s

coveredthatburrsoftheorder

**

48)

(Ref.

measured p r e s s u r e d e c r e a s e s t o w a r d s t h e t r u e v a l u e a s t h e r a t i o

o f h o l el e n g t h

of

edge, b u t

a c o n t r a c t i o ni nt u b i n gd i a m e t e r
to o r i f i c e d i a m e t e r

o f 3.

111

it a l s o a c c e l e r a t e s a l o n g t h e s l o p i n g

reduced pressure.Rayleconcluded
(0.015
va 1ue.

in.)deep

downstreamedge
cm (0.030

a0.076

c o u n t e r s i n ks h o u l dp r o v i d e

range o f 0 t o 0.8.

errorsincreasewith

Machnumber.

i s p r e s e n t e di nF i g .

3.0.10.

on a 25'

displacementthickness.

o f holediameter

theeffects

byCassanto(Ref.52).

(60) o r i f ices on

of square-edgedandchamfered

v a r i e d , r e s p e c t i v e l y ,f r o m

0.25

of hole

The problem i s compounded

w ind tunneldatadiscussed

0 . 6 3 5 cm (0.06

( d e c r e a s i n gs l i g h t l y

51)

be c o r r e l a t e d by t h e r a t i o

momentum t h i c k n e s s .

case,thediameters

= 6.37),the

and Wallace

any e f f e c to ft h i sr a t i o .F u r t h e r m o r e ,N e s t l e r( R e f .

f u r t h e r by thehypersonic

('local

t o boundary l a y e r

However, t h es u b s o n i cd a t ao fF r a n k l i n

diametertoboundarylayer

49)

apex-angleconebyRainbird(Ref.

d e m o n s t r a t e do r i f i c e - i n d u c e de r r o r sc o u l dn o t

and 0.152

50)

and Wa lace(Ref.

R a i n b i r d s u g g e s t e dt h es c a t t e ri nh i sd a t ac o u l d

be attributed to variations in the ratio

an 18 degconewere

o r i f ce-induced

Thisdatademonstrates

and thesupersonicdataobtained

Inthis

h o l e w i t h a 0.038 cm

in.)

and a i r f l o w s c o v e r e d

A summary o f subsonic data obtained hy Frank1 in

f a i l e dt oi n d i c a t e

a staticpressurenearthetrue

Finally,Rayle'sexperiments.withwater

Machnumber

whichresultsin

i n . )F
. or

0.076

0.635 crn ( 0 . 0 3

a freestream

Mach
number

0.25 in.)

of 8

measured p r e s s u r e was i n s e n s i t i v e t o o r i f i c e d i a m e t e r

lessthan

o f Machnumber

3 percent

w i t hi n c r e a s i n gd i a m e t e r ) .

Thus,

on o r i f i c e - i n d u c e d e r r o r s i n s t a t i c p r e s s u r e

needs

a d d i t i o n arl e s e a r c h .
Q u e s t i o n n a i r er e s u l t si n d i c a t es t a t i co r i f i c ed i a m e t e r st y p i c a l l yr a n g e

from 0.025 cm (0.01

in.)

onsmall-anglecones

t u n n e lw a l l s .I no r d e rt om i n i m i z es t a t i ch o l ee r r o r s * ,
t

O f course, a flush-mountedpressuretransducer

112

t o 0.228 cm (0.09

in.)onwind

i t i s recommended

i s p r e f e r a b l e whenever p o s s i b l e .

0
I

0. 0

0
0

Franklin : M < @ 5

8s

Wallace

W / V

M of Rainbird ' 8 Cone Data

t h a t a square-edge o r i f i c e w i t h a diameter o f 0.051 cm (0.020

S inceRainbird(Ref.

asanindustrystandard.

o f o r i f i c e canbeused

t h i nw a l lo r i f i c e sa r ef r a g i l e

theorderof

thissize

tunnel,

it

I d e a l l y ,t h el e n g t ho ft h eh o l es h o u l d

and, t h u s ,s u b j e c tt o

recomnends t h e h o l e l e n g t h

The diameterof

ablow-down

Ref. 47.

/2 o f an o r i f i c ed i a m e t e r ,

restricted to the order of

33)

hasdemonstrated

with s a t i s f a c t o r y r e s u l t s i n

can be used.- i n most f a c i l i t es.

(Ref.

49)

in.)beadopted

damage.

However, such

Hence, Gray

be g r e a t e r t h a n t w o o r i f i c e d i a m e t e r s .

a c o n n e c t i n gl i n e ,b e h i n dt h eh o l e ,s h o u l d

two o r i f i c e d i a m e t e r s ,

be

be r e s t r i c t e d t o

Refs. 47, 49, 50 and

33.

O f c o u r s e ,t h e s el a s tt w oc r i t e r i ap r e s u p p o s ea ni n s t a l l a t i o nw h i c hi s
a c c e s s i b l e from thebackside,

e.g.,

a t u n n e lw a i l .I nt h ec a s eo f

swaged or

staticpressuresurveypipe,tubingoftheappropriatesizeis
sweat s o l d e r e d i n

a r e c e i v i n gh o l e

w i t ht h eo u t s i d es u r f a c eo ft h ep i p e .

0.051 cm (0.020

in.)can

a long,

or machined down f l u s h

and thenground
Hereagainan

orificediameterof

be used, and l a r g e rd i a m e t e rc o n n e c t i n gl i n e s

may

be used to reduceresponsetime.
Inthecaseof

a conventionalstatic-pressureprobe,

d e p t ht oo r i f i c ed i a m e t e ro fl e s st h a n
t h e case.

one i s n o t o n l y p o s s i b l e b u t

For example, a p r o b ew a l lt h i c k n e s so f

f o r 0.318 cm (1/8

in.)

a ratio of hole

0.033 cm (0.013

OD s t a i n l e s ss t e e lt u b i n g .T h e r e f o r e ,t h e

o r i f i c e s i z e wouldprovide

staticpressureerrorsofprobes

may be reducedbydesigning

i n . )i st y p i c a l
recommended

0.65.

a h o l el e n g t ht od i a m e t e rr a t i oo f

i s frequently

Also,

them t o have

laminarflowattheorifices.Althoughtheexistingcorrelationsoforifice
errorsare

f o r t u r b u l e n tf l o w s ,

i t appearsprobablethat

O f course, a flush-mountedpressuretransducer
sible.

a l a m i n a rf l o w

will

i s p r e f e r a b l e whenever pos-

d i p into an orifice less than a turbulent flow.

A laminar flow probe can

be obtained by properly sizing the probeand polishing the external surface to 0.25 microns (1011 in.).

For example, a 0.318 cm (1/8 in.)

diameter

probe, with orifices located 10 calibres downstream, would have


a local
Reynolds number of 1.25 million for a freestream unit Reynolds number of

39.4 million per meter.

In general, if noise data is available for a given

facility, the correlation of


Benek.and High (Ref. 54) can be used to
estimate Reynolds numbers at which boundary layer transition occurs
in
order to judge whether a laminar flow probe is feas ible.
Since the data of Shaw (Ref. 47) indicate static pressure measurements
are very sensitive to burrs, considerable care must
be taken to assure a
smooth, sharp-edged orifice. This may be done by beginning the hole with

drill bits several sizes smaller than the desired final hole size and
progressively increasing the hole size. Also, short flute drill bits should
be used to minimize flexing and a drill guide (of the same metal) clamped
over the orifice location can be of considerable help.

Finally, slower rates

of dri 1 1 feed will produce smaller burrs,and pressurizing the hole, during

final drilling, with compressedair will aid the removal o f burrs.

Finishing

o f the orifice can be done with a d r i l l shank and an appropriate polish.

The finished orifice should be inspected for burrs with a microscope, and
when possible, measured objectively,e.g., a Talysurf instrument.
Consideration should be given to the possibility using
of
an electrical
discharge machine or a laser to manufacture smooth orifices. To the authors'

for production of
knowledge, no comparative study of different processes
orifices has been made.

115

lll.D.5.

A GeneralPurpose

As d i s c u s s e d i n S e c t i o n

III.D.l,

w i t h nose l o c a t e d i n t h e s e t t l i n g

S t a t i cP r e s s u r eP r o b e
thelong,staticpressuresurveypipe,

chamber, i s p r e f e r r e d

for c e n t e r l i n e c a l i b r a -

t i o n so ft r a n s o n i ct u n n e l s .T h i sa r r a n g e m e n tn o to n l yp r o v i d e sal a r g e

o f simultaneousdatabutalsopreventsthe
t h eo r i f i c e s .

amount

passage o f a t r a n s o n i c

shock over

However, t h eq u e s t i o n n a i r er e s u l t si n d i c a t eal a r g e

number o f

t r a n s o n i ct u n n e lo p e r a t o r s( p r i m a r i l ys m a l l e rf a c i l i t i e s )c o n t i n u et o
conventionalprobes.

As m e n t i o n e dp r e v i o u s l yi nS e c t i o n

o f i n e x p e n s i v e ,c l a s s i c a lp r o b e si st h e i rm o b i l i t y
o f performingflowsurveys

o f f centerline.

use

111.0.2,an

advantage

and theconsequentease

For t h eb e n e f i to ft u n n e lo p e r a t o r s

who w i s h t o c o n t i n u e u s i n g t h i s t y p e o f p r o b e , t h e f o l l o w i n g p r o b e d e s i g n i s
suggested for c a l i b r a t i n g t r a n s o n i c and supersonictunnels.
The basicprobedesign

i s presented i nF i g .

a ne f f e c t i v ef i n e n e s sr a t i oo f
expansion a t t h e

nose i s m i n i m a l

i n t e r f e r e n c e , (2) a ts u p e r s o n i c
(e.g.,Ref.

An o g i v e nose w i t h

12 i s suggested f o r tworeasons:(1)over(e.g.,see

Fig. 3.0.3)

theextentofthesupersonicpocketatsupercritical

noseshape

3.0.11.

w h i c ha l s om i n i m i z e s

speedsand

t h u sw a l l

speeds, the bow shock i s a t t e n u a t e d byan

ogive

1 9 ) ;t h u s ,t h i sd e s i g na l s or e d u c e sw a l li n t e r f e r e n c ea t

supersonic speeds.

It s h o u l d a l s o

be n o t e d t h a t t h e

roughness f o r b o u n d a r yl a y e rt r i p p i n g .

n o s ed e s i g ns p e c i f i e sad i s t r i b u t e d
The o b j e c t i v e o f t h i s f e a t u r e i s t o

preventshock-induced,boundarylayerseparation
b e n e f i ti sr e d u c e ds e n s i t i v i t yt oR e y n o l d s
t r a n s i t i o n s t r i p on t h i s t y p e o f p r o b e
(Ref.
10).

116

number.Examples

An a d d i t i o n a l

o f aboundarylayer

may be found i n t h e r e p o r t

by R i t c h i e

The s i ze o f g r i t and l e n g t h o f s t r i p r e q u i r e d f o r a p a r t i c u l a r

a p p l i c a t i o n canbe
and

a t a l l speeds.

designed v i a t h e c r i t e r

Braslow, e t a 1.

(Ref.

56).

i a o f Braslow and Knox (Ref.

55)

PROBE DIAHETER SHOULO BESELECTEDTOOBTAINATUNNEL


BLOCKAGE < 0.005% FOR TRANSONICAPPLICATIONS

RECOPAENOEO O R I F I C ES I Z E

0.051 CPl (0.020 IN.)

D l STR I BUTED ROUGHNESS

LC/+

PATTER&WE3VIWUEDBACKTO
30d
FROM OGIVE-CYLINDERJUNCTURE

A
3
0
'
30'
VIEW VIEW
8-14

B-B

O R I FSI6CI NEOGRLI E
FICES

60'

APART

F i g u r e 3.0.11

VIEW

C-C
O R I F6
SI C
IN
OEG
R LI FEI C E S
ROTATED 3
0
' FROM VIEWA-A

VRAWSONIC/SUPERSONlC S T A T I C PRESSURE PROBE

VIEW 0-0
ROTATED 30'
FROM VIEW 8-8

An orifice diameter of 0.051 cm

(0.020 cm) is recomnended for static pres-

sure ports along the cylinder.* The probe is designed to obtain primary static
pressure data at stations having six orificesin order to average out the
effects of any probe asymmetries,orifice errors, and small flow inclinations.
The purpose of the single orifices is to assist in locating the position of
either a transonic shock and/or the reflection
of a bow shock (or any other
disturbances) back onto the probe. The additional data will aid determination

of where surface pressure equals freestream static. This feature will allow
the probe to be used off centerline where wall interference increases.
Finally, the flare angle should be 10 deg or less in order to minimize
interference near Mach one. The effectsof this flare, as we11 as the wallinterference-free transonic performance of this probe, can be calculated
via the South-Jameson computer code (Ref.17).

I n the Mach number range of

0.95 to 1.00, it is necessary to keep probe blockage <O.Ol%

in order to

realize wall-interference-free performance ata tunnel centerline.

I f the

probe is used with higher blockage and/oroff centerline, wall proximity


effects on shock locationand surface pressure distribution canbe estimated
using the computer program of South and Keller (Ref. 2 2 ) .

In the case o f

supersonic applications (H > 1 . 3 ) . probe blockage can be two orders


o f magnitude larger without any deleteriouseffects.

It is only necessary to apply

the criteria of Gray (Fig.3 . 0 . 3 ) and avoid wall reflections o f bow shocks.
The interference-free performance canbe computed w i t h a number of existing
asisymmetric method

of characteristics codes.

ij

A hardened, stainless steel is recommended for durability and corrosion

resistance in order to maintain orifice integrityand minimize long-term


abrasion by particles in the flow.

1II.D.
1.

Dlck, R . 5 . :

References

"The I n f l u e n c e o f SeveralCable-TypeSupports

PressuresAlongtheCenterline

Upon t h eS t a t i c

Tube i n a Transonic Wind Tunnel,"AEDC-TN-54-26,

Feb. 1955.

2.

Jackson,

F. M . :

Wind Tunnel (16T)

3.

Jacocks, J.

L.

," AEDC-TR-70-163,Aug.

and H a r t l e y , M. 5 . :

Jackson, F. M.:

Isaacs. 0.:

June 1969.

AEDC-PIJT 16-FtTransonicTunnel

2 , 4, and 68." AEDC TR-76-13,

" C a l i b r a t i o no ft h e

a t Subsonic Speeds,

AEDC-PWT 4-Ft.

AEDC-TR-69-134,

" C a l i b r a t i o no ft h e

TestSectionUallPorositiesof

5.

1970.

" C a l i b r a t i o no ft h e

TransonicTunnelwithModifiedWails,"

4.

AEDC P r o p u l s i o n

"Supplemental C a l i b r a t i o nR e s u l t sf o rt h e

6.

Pope, A.

7.

Gunn, J. A. and Maxwell, H.:

Sept.

8.

1976.

I n c l u d i n g a D i s c u s s i o n of t h e C o r r e c t i o n s A p p l i e d

E f f e c t s Due t o t h e C a l i b r a t i o n

Tunnel(4T)

Jan.

R. A. E. Bedford 8 ft. x 8 f t . Wind Tunnel

t h e Measured P r e s s u r e D i s t r i b u t i o n t o A l l o w f o r t h e D i r e c t

and Goin,

at

K. L . :

MachNumbers

to

andBlockage

ARC R. t M. No. 3583, Feb.1968.

Probe Shape."

High-speed Wind TunnelTesting,Wiley,


" C a l i b r a t i o no ft h e

1965.

AEOC-PWT Aerodynamic Wlnd

1.6 and 2 . 0 NozzleBlocks."

AEDC-TR-72-Ii1,

1972.
North, R . J.;

Holder, 0. W . ;

A.:

andChinneck,

Tubes i n a SupersonicAirstream,Parts

"Experiments w i t hS t a t i c

i and 1 1 , " A.R.C.

R. t

M.

No. 2782,

J u l y 1950.

9.

Gracey, W . :
Nov.

10.

"Measurement o f S t a t i cP r e s s u r e

on A i r c r a f t , "

1957, and NACA Report 1364, 1958.

R i t c h i e , V.

5.:

"Several Methods f o r AerodynamicReductionofStatic-

P r e s s u r eS e n s i n gE r r o r sf o rA i r c r a f ta tS u b s o n i c ,N e a r - S o n i c
Supersonic Speeds,"

11.

Davis, J . W.

2
0
'
12.

NACA TN 4184,

NASA TR R-18,

and Graham,

Cone-Cylinders,"

Estabrooks. B. B.:

R. F.:

and Low

Feb. 1959.

"blind-Tunnel b l a l i I n t e r f e r e n c eE f f e c t s

A l A A Jour.Spacecraft
" W a l l - I n t e r f e r e n c eE f f e c t s

and Rockets,Oct.

1973.

on AxisymmetricBodies

Transonic Wlnd Tunnels w i t h P e r f o r a t e d W a l l T e s t S e c t i o n s , "

for

in

AEDC-TR-59-12,

June 1959.

1I9

13. Gadd, G. E.:

"Interactions Between Normal Shock Llaves and Turbulent

Boundary Layers,'' ARC R & t4 No. 3262, Feb. 1961.

14. Albers, E. E . ; Bacon, J.

W.;

and Nason, B . 5 . :

"An Experimental Inesti-

gation o f Turbulent Viscous-Inviscid Interactions," AIAA Paper


No. 71-565,
June 1971.

15. Hsieh, T.: "Hemisphere-Cylinder in Transonic, M_


Oct. 1975.
16. Page,

W. A . :

0.7-1.0," AlAA Jour.,

"Experimental Study of the Equivalence of Transonic Flow

about Slender Cone-Cylindersof Circular and Elliptic Cross Section,"


NACA TN 4233, Apri 1 1958.

17. South, J. C., Jr. and Jameson, A.:

"Relaxation Solutions for Inviscid

Axisymmetric Transonic Flow Over Elunt


or Pointed Bodies," Proc. AlAA
Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference, J u l y 1973.
18.

Robertson, J. E. and Chevalier, H. L.:

"Characteristics of Steady-State

Pressures on the Cylindrical Portlon of Cone-Cylinder Bodies


at Transonic
Speeds," AEDC-TDR-63-104, Aug. 1963.

19. Capone, F. J. and Coates, E .

M.,

Jr.:

"Determination of Boundary-Reflected-

Disturbance Lengths in the Langley 16-Foot Transonic Tunnel," NASA


TN
0-4153, Sept. 1967.
20.

Couch, L. M. and Brooks, C. W., Jr.:

"Effect of Blockage Ratio on Drag and

Pressure Distributions for Bodies


of Revolution at Transonic Speeds,"
NASA TN 0-7331, NOV. 1973.

21. Nebman, P. A. and Klunker. E. E.: "Numerical Modelina of Tunnel-\.la11 and BodyShape Effects on Transonic Flow Over Finite Lifting Wings," Aerodynamic
Analyses Requiring Advanced Computers, Part1 1 , NASA SP-347, Mar. 1975.

22.

South, J. C . , Jr. and Keller. J. D.:

"Axisymmetric Transonic Flow Including

Wind-Tunnel Wall Effects,'' AerodynamicRnalyses Requiring Advanced Computers,


Part 1 1 , NASA SP-347, Mar. 1975.

23.

Sieverdling, C.;

Maretto, L.;

Lehthaus, F . ; and Lawaczeck: "Design

and

Calibration of Four Probes for Use


in the TransonicTurbine Cascade Testlng,"
Von Karman Institute for Fluid Dynamics, Tech. Note 100, May1974.

120

I
24.

Sutton, E. P.:

"The Development of Slotted Working-Section Liners for


Bedford 3-Ft. Wind Tunnel," A.R.C.

Transonic Operation of theR.A.E.

R.
25.

E;

M. No. 3085, Mar. 1955.

Wright, R. H.; Ritchie, V. S.; and Pearson, A. 0.: "Characteristics of


the Langley 8-Ft. Transonic Tunnel with Slotted Test Section,''NACA
Report 1389, July 1958.

26. Keller, J. D. and Wright, R. H.:


"A Numerical Method o f Calculating the
Boundary-Induced Interference in Slotted or Perforated Wind Tunnels o f
Rectangular Cross Section,'' NASA TR R-379, Nov. 1971.
27.

Bryer, D. W. and Pankhurst, R. C.:


Pressure-Probe Methods for Determining
Wind Speed and Flow Direction, National Physical Laboratory, Her Majesty's
Stationery Office, London, 1971.

28.

"On the Response of Pressure Measuring Instrumentation in

Siddon, T. E . :

Unsteady Flow," UTIAS Report No. 136 (AD-682 2961, Jan. 1969.
29.

Rittenhouse, L. E.:

"Transonic Wind Tunnel Results for Five Pressure

Probes Designed to Minimize Static-PressureSensing Errors," AEDC-TDR-62-48,


March 1962.
30.

Chevalier, H. L.:

"Calibration of the PWT 16-Ft. Transonic Circuit with a

Modified Model Support Systemand Test Section," AEDC TN-60-164,

Aug. 1960.

31.

Krause, L. N. and Gettelman, C. C.:

"Effect o f Interaction Among Probes,

in Ducts
Supports, Duct Walls and Jet Boundaries on Pressure Measurements

and Jets , ' I


32.

I . S.A.

Nichols, J. H . :

Jour., Vol

. 9, Sept.

1953.

"Rake Interference Studies at Transonic Speeds,'' AEDC-TH-

56-1, Feb. 1956.

33.

Gray, J. D.:

"A Compendium of Flow Measurement Methods and Techniques,"

AEDC von Karman Gas Dynamics Facility, Notes prepared


for a short course
at the University of Tennessee Space Institute, Tullhaoma,
Tenn., Nov. 1973.

34. Barry, F.
ASME

35. Walter,

W.:

88Determinationof Mach Number from Pressure Measurements,"

Trans., A p r i i 1956.
L. W. and Redman, E. J.:

"Needle Static-Pressure Probes Insensitive

to Flow Inclination in a Supersonic Stream,'' NAVORD Report 3694, March 1954.


121

36.

D.

Washington, W.

and Humphrey, J. A.:

"Pressure Measurements onFour

Cone-Cy1 i n d e r F l a r e C o n f i g u r a t i o n s a t S u p e r s o n i c

(AD 699 3591,


37.

D.:

Gray, J.

Oct.

1969.

"Eva1uation.of Probes f o r M e a s u r i n gS t a t i c . P r e s s u r ei n

Supersonic and Hypersonic Flow,"

38.

D.:

N o r r i s , J.

Speeds,"RD-TM-69-11

AEDC-TR-71-265,

Jan.

" C a l f b r a t i o no fC o n i c a P
l ressure

o f Local Flow Conditions

a t MachNumbers

1972.

Probes f o rD e t e r m i n a t i o n

from 3 t o 6," NASA TN 0-3076,

Nov. 1965.

39.

A. and Weirich, R. L . :

Vahl, W.

" C a l i b r a t i o no f

forDeterminingLocalFlowConditions

NASA TN 0-4679,

3.51.,"

40.

Peterson, C . W.

Included-Angle Cone

of 1.51 t o

i n MachNumberRange

1968.

0 . L.:

and
George,

Calibrations for

"Wind
Tunnel
Pressure
Probes:

New Geometries and FlowEnvironments,"

New

A I A A Jour.,

13, No. 10, Oct. 1975.

Vol.
41.

Aug.

30

"A S h o r tS t a t i cP r o b ew i t h

S. and Richardson, D. J.:

1.

Donaldson,

I n c i d e n c eC h a r a c t e r i s t i c s

A.R.C.

a t Supersonic Speed,''

Good

Current Paper

No. 1099, 1970.


42.

Pinckney,
Flow,"

43.

S. Z.:

NASA TU

0-7978, J u l y

Smith, A. H. 0 . and Bauer, A.

1975.

D.:

"Static-Pressure

TheoreticallyInsensitivetoPitch,
Mech.,

44.

Vol. 44, P a r t

Hsieh, T.:

for Supersonic

"A ShortStatic-PressureProbeDesign

3,

Probes t h a ta r e

Yaw and MachNumber,"

pp. 513-528,

"Hemisphere-Cy1 i n d e ri n

J o u r .F l u i d

1970.

Low Supersonic Flow,"

A l A A Jour.,

Dec. 1975.

45.

Marconi, F.;

Yaeger, L. and Hamilton, H.:


H.

Speed I n v i s c i d FlowsAboutReal

46.

Rayle, R.
ments,"

47.

Shaw,

R.:

ments,"

122

E.:

"The I n f l u e n c eo fH o l e
Jour.

Configurations,"

" I n f l u e n c eo fO r i f i c e

ASME Paper No. 59-A-234,

F l u i d Hech.,

Vol.

"Computation o f High-

NASA SP-347,Mar.1975.

Geometry on S t a t i cP r e s s u r e
Dec.

Measure-

1959.

Dimensionson

S t a t i cP r e s s u r e

7, P t . 4, A p r i l 1960.

Measure-

48.

Jackson, J. D.;

Livesey, J. L.;
E r r o r Problem:

49.

Rainbird, W.

andDepths,''

" E r r o r si n

J.:

A i r c r a f t Engr.,

, Nat ' 1 .

50

, F r a n k l i n , R.

Holes
Yo1 34, Feb. 1962.

Measurement o f Mean S t a t i c P r e s s u r e o f

Res.Counc.Canada,

E. and Wallace, J. M.:

DME/NAE Q u a r t e r l y B u l l e t l n

Moving F l u i d Due t o Pressure Holes,"


No. 1967 (3)

"The S t a t i cH o l e

o f E r r o r sf o r

An E x p e r i m e n t a lI n v e s t l g a t i o n

o f VaryingDiameters

J.:

and Southern, C.

Oct.

1967.

"Absolute Measurements o f Static-'Hole

Error UsingFlushTransducers,"Jour.Fluid

Mech.,

Vol 42, P t .

1,

June 1970.
N e s t l e r , D. E.:
Flow,"

" S t a t i cP r e s s u r eP o r tE r r o r si nH y p e r s o n f cT u r b u l e n t

A l A A Paper No. 71-270,

"An Assessment ofPressurePortErosionEffects,"

Cassanto, J. M . :
Paper No. 75-150,
Benedict, R. P . :
Measurements,
Benek, J. A.

Mar.1971.

Jan.

1975.

Fundamentals o f Temperature,Pressure,
Wiley, New York,

"A Method F o rt h eP r e d i c t i o no ft h eE f f e c t s

and High, M. D . :

Oct. 1973, a l s o A l A A Jour.,

Braslow, A .

L.;

1425,Oct.

T r a n s i t i o n,I' AEDC-TR-73-158,

1974.

"Simp1 i f i e d Method f o rD e t e r m i n a t i o no f

o f D i s t r i b u t e d Roughness P a r t i c l e s f o r

T r a n s i t i o n a t MachNumbers

56.

P.

Braslow, A. L. and Knox, E. C.:


CriticalHeight

and Flow

1969.

o f Free-Stream D i sturbances on Boundary-Layer

55.

AlAA

from 0 t o 5,"

Boundary-Layer

NACA TN 4363,

Hicks, R. M . and H a r r i s , R. V.,

Boundary-Layer-Trans it i o n T r i p s on Wind-Tunnel

Jr.:

1958.

"Use ofGrit-Type

Model s ,I1 NASA TN 0-3579,

1966.

57

Parker, R. L.,

Jr.:

funnelTestSection

l t F l 0 w GeneratipnPropertiesofFiveTransonic

Mal 1 Configurations,'' AEOC-TR-75-73,

Wind

Aug- 1975.

I l l . E.

MEASUREMENT OF FLOW
ANGULARITY

The term yawmeter w i 1 1. beused


f l o wa n g u l a r i t yi ne i t h e r

herein' to denote probes designed to

A w i d ev a r i e t yo f

two o rt h r e ed i m e n s i o n a lf l o w s .

yawmetershavebeenused

o v e rt h ey e a r sf o rd i f f e r e n ta p p l i c a t i o n s .

r'

whishhavebeenused

i nt r a n s o n i ct u n n e l s

The ones

may be d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e g e n e r a l

(2) h o tw i r eo r

types:(1)pressureprobes,

measure

film probes,(3)force

models

i n s t r u m e n t e dw i t h

A d i s c u s s i o no fp r e s s u r e

a v e r ys e n s i t i v ef o r c eb a l a n c e . "

probes i s g i v e n f i r s t

and i s f o l l o w e d b y

of thelattertypesof

a brief description of

yawmeter.

A r e c e n tr e v i e wo ft h ev a r i o u st y p e so fp r e s s u r ep r o b e s
o ft h ep r o s

andcons

o f each a r eg i v e n

a u t h o r sc l a s s i f yp r e s s u r ep r o b e
c o n s i s t i n go f

F o rf l o wd i r e c t i o n

D i f f e r e n t i aP
l ressure

Yawmeters: 2-D

measurements i n oneplane,threetypesof

o r a c i r c u l a rc y l i n d e r

twopressuretapsonthesurfacesofeither

and twotubes

yawmeters a r en o t

B o t ht h ec y l i n d e r

i n thepresence

and
wedge

of velocitygradients

Machnumber

wedge-shapedyawmeter

range 0.8

m e t e r ,g e n e r a l l yr e f e r r e d

t o 2.2.

124

because o f t h e

3 ) havefound

In c o n t r a s t ,t h et w o - t u b et y p eo f
provides:

d i s t u r b a n c e ,( 2 )a d e q u a t es e n s i t i v i t yw h i c hi sr e l a t i v e l yf r e e

togetherfornearlypoint

have,greater

i s Reynolds number dependent

to as a Conradprobe,

and Reynolds number e f f e c t s (Refs.

and

5).

because

and c o n s i d e r a b l e

l a r g e rs e p a r a t i o no fo r i f i c e s .A l s o ,S i e v e r d i n g ,e ta l .( R e f .
( t o t a la n g l e )

The

recommended f o r t r a n s o n i c f l o w s

Mach number, Ref. 2.

susceptibilitytoerror

i nt h e

A large

w i t hs l a n t e di n l e t s .

o ft h e i rc o m p a r a t i v e l yl a r g ei n t e r f e r e n c ew i t ht h ef l o w

t h a t a 30

yawmeter

suchprobesareavailablefromcommercialmanufacturers.

s e n s i t i v i t yt o

a body

These may be subdividedintoprobesdesigned

most common, v i z . ,

circularcylinder

These

one plane (2-D) o r two(3-D).

III.E.l.

v a r i e t yo f

2).

by Bryer and Pankhurst(Ref.

an arrangement o f open-ended tubes, and ( 2 ) thosehaving

t o measure f l o wa n g l e si n

awedge

and a d i s c u s s i o n

yawmeters i n t o two categories:(1)those

w i t hp r e s s u r es e n s i n go r i f i c e s .

geometriesare

twoexamples

and

yaw-

( 1 ) minimum f l o w
o f Machnumber

( 3 ) o r i f i c e sw h i c ha r ec l o s e

measurement o f f l o w a n g u l a r i t y .

References

3 and 5 c o n t a i n c a l i b r a t i o n r e s u l t s f o r s m a l l t u b e t y p e

yawmeterswhichweredesigned

to investigate the flow out of transonic

t u r b i n e cascades and compressors.


(Ref.

The o b j e c t i v e o f S i e v e r d i n g , e t a l .
k.

3) was t oi n v e s t i g a t es e v e r a lp r o b eg e o m e t r i e s

couldbe

used t o s i m u l t a n e o u s l y

pressures.

measure t o t a l , s t a t i c ,

The two-tube yawmeter,

The yawmeter was a r r a n g e d t o

t o t a l apex-angleconeprobe

was a l s o mountedon

22 mm ahead of therake.

ment,were

2.2.

t o f l o w and 6.0 m

(1.7 mm), truncated,2S0'.'


The s e p a r a t i o n

was 16 mm and bothnose

The probes, w i t ht h i sa r r a n g e -

DFVLR/AVA Transonic Wind Tunnel ( I m x l m ) .

calibratedinthe

yawmeter i s presented i n F i g .

The r e s u l t i n g s e n s i t i v i t y o f t h e

0.8

..
was mounted on a r a k e

therake.

d i s t a n c e between t h e yawmeter and theconicalprobe


t i p s werelocated

measure f l o w a n g u l a r i t y

A smalldiameter

normal t ot h ep l a n eo ft h er a k e .

and d i r e c t i o n a l

3.E.1,

shown i nF i g .

(2.3 mn thicknessnormal

ofrectangularcrosssection
p a r a 1l e 1t of l o w ) .

and arrangementswhich

3.E.l.

"

A combinationPitotprobe

andyawmeter

s i m i l a r arrangement,buttwodifferent
one case,thecompanionprobe
measuring s t a t i c p r e s s u r e ,
probe (1.5

mm OD).

was a l s o c a l i b r a t e d w i t h

companion probeswere
0

was a 15

coneneedleprobe(1.5

and t h e secondcompanion

shown i nF i g .

sensitivityofthetwo-tube

3.E.1.

yawmeterand

cone

was found t o be

yaw (%loo).

l i n e a ro v e rt h el a r g e s tr a n g eo fa n g l e so f

In

mm OD) f o r

probe was a 30'

The s e n s i t i v i t yo ft h en e e d l ep r o b e

s e n s i t i v i t yd a t aa r ea l s o

used.

The corresponding

The d i f f e r e n c ei nt h ea n g l e

thecombinationprobe

may be

a t t r i b u t e dt ot h ed i f f e r e n c ei nt h ei n l e ta n g l e .
S i e v e r d l n g ,e ta l .( R e f .3 )a l s ot e s t e dt h ey a m e t e r
c o m b i n a t i o ni nt h es m a l l
Staticpressure

(135 rnm x 50 mm) V K I High Speed Cascade Tunnel C-2.

measurements a l o n g t h e w a l l

o u tt h ep r o b e s ,i n d i c a t e ds i g n i f i c a n tb l o c k a g e
whereas,a

s i n g l e AGARD needleprobe

elbowtypesupport
n e g l i g i b l eb l o c k a g e .
o t h e rp r o b e s )a r et o

and needleprobe

(12.3O

of t h i s f a c i l i t y , w i t h
whenMachnumber

and w i t h -

exceeded 0.30;

cone and 1.5 mm OD) w i t h a standard

(3 mn OD) l o c a t e d 48 probediametersdownstream
Hence, theseauthorsconclude:

i f yawmeter
a

be used i nt r a n s o n i ct u n n e l s ,t h ep r o b e s

showed
(and/or

and support

A l t h o u g ht h e s ea u t h o r sd i dn o ts t a t et h ei n s i d ed i a m e t e r
o f t h et u b i n g ,. t h e
0.6 i n o r d e r t o m i n i m i z e
r a t i o o f I . D . t o 0 . 0 . should be keptgreaterthan
loss o r change o f s e n s i t i v i t y w i t h i n c r e a s i n g f l o w a n g u l a r i t y ,
e.g.,
p. 19
o f Ref. 2.

125

0.06

0.05

1J

0.04

1-

Probe,Ref.3
Combination

S :t
Y

.
a
,
.
\
J

0.03

3 Tubes 0.8

mm OD

0.02

\
0.01

- Tubing

Two Tube Probe, Ref. 3

Lp=j

1.575 mrn OD x 0.254 rnm Wall

6 = 80"

2 Tubes 1 .O mm OD
I

0
0.8

0.6

0.4

1 .o

1.2

1.4

1.6

M
Figure

3 . E. 1

TWO D I MENS I ONAL YA\JMETERS

1.8

2.0

2.2

mechanism_sh.oy.jd
.~ .
... .
.be.c,a!ib_r_ated i n a t u n n e l o f s i z e s i m i l a r t o w h i c h i t i s

to

be used.

And most i m p o r t a n t l yf o rt u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o n s ,e x t r e m ec a r e

mustbe

taken
.
. ...~
, i n d e s i g n i n g ya.wmeter s u p p o r t s i n o r d e r t o a v o i d i n d u c i n g e x t r a n e o u s
"

flowangularity.

5 ) , o b t a i n e dw i t h a combiand yawmeter, i s a l s o shown i n F i g . 3.E.1 f o r M = 0.4, 0.6,

The f l o wa n g l es e n s i t i v i t yd a t ao fB u z z e l l( R e f .
n a t i o nP i t o tp r o b e
and 0.8.
tion

These d a t aw e r eo b t a i n e dw i t h

a c o b r a - s t y l e dr a k ew i t ht h r e e

cornbina-

*
p r o b e sa l t e r n a t i n gw i t hf o u rs i n g l eP i t o t u b e s .A g a i n ,t h i si n v e s t i g a t o r

f o l l o w e dt h ea c c e p t e dp r a c t i c eo fl o c a t i n gt h ep r o b et o
t h ep l a n eo ft h er a k e .

Mach number s e n s i t i v i t y checks i n d i c a t e dn e g l i g i b l e

i n yawmeter s e n s i t i v i t y f o r 0 . 4 1

5 M 5 0.81.

rakesweretested

a t a mean
Mach

number of0.6.

a r e shown i nF i g .

3.E.1.

V i d a l ,e ta l .

measure anglesnormal
Afterthis

o b j e c t i v eo ft h e s et e s t s

asmal

change

was a s c e r t a i n e d ,e i g h t

The r e s u l t i n gs p r e a di nd a t a

(Ref.6)haverecentlyreportedusing

t o measure f l o wa n g u l a r i t yi n

to

a two-tube yawmeter

1 (30.5 cm) t r a n s o n i cw i n dt u n n e l .

The

i s t o compare measurements o f f l o w a n g u l a r i t y

and

s t a t i cp r e s s u r ew i t hc a l c u l a t e di n t e r f e r e n c e - f r e et r a n s o n i cf l o ws o l u t i o n sf o r
givenmodel,

and t h e r e b yp r o v i d e

a c r i t e r i o nf o ra d j u s t i n gt u n n e lw a l lp o r o s i t y
A p l a n a r yawmeter was usedbecause

t oa t t a i nw a l l - i n t e r f e r e n c e - f r e ef l o w .
a i r f o i l , which spans t h et u n n e l ,
yawmeter i s s i m i l a rt ot h e
was c o n s t r u c t e do f
a t 45".

an

i s being used f o r developmentaltesting.

The

one shown i nt h el o w e rr i g h tp o r t i o no fF i g .3 . E . l . a n d

0.0635 cm (0.025 i n . ) O D t u b i n gw i t h

each i n l e t chamfered

These a u t h o r sc l a i mt h a tt h e i rf l o wa n g l es e n s i t i v i t y

a p r e s s u r er e s o l u t i o no f

0.0007 N/cm2 (0.001 p s i )t h e y

r e s o l v ea n g l e st ow i t h i n0 . 0 3 "i nt h e

i s such t h a t w i t h

can " i n p r i n c i p l e "

Mach number range 0.55 t o 0.725.

As noted by Bryer and Pankhurst(Ref.2),

yawmeter s e n s i t i v i t y i n

*+
low

speed f l o w s has t r a d i t i o n a l l y been d e f i n e d as


A

S"
Y

a(AP/q)/a$

(3.E.1)

where AP i st h ep r e s s u r ed i f f e r e n c ea c r o s st h e

+These rakesweredesigned
s t a t o rd i s c h a r g ep l a n eo f

**S i n c e t h e o r i g i n a l w r i t i n g

yawmeter.

toplacesixof
a compressor.

However, these

them C i r C U m f e r e n t i a l l Yi nt h e

of this section, the calibration


anduse o f a new
yawmeter design has come t oo u ra t t e n t i o n ,L i n d
(Ref. 28). T h i s 2-D y a m e t e r
c o n s i s t s o f a two-hole, d i f f e r e n t i a l p r e s s u r e p r o b e p l a c e d a t t h e v e r t e x
of
a forward-sweptwing.
A y a m e t e r s e n s i t i v i t y o f 0.163 and anaccuracy o f 0.01
deg i s claimed f o r low-speedflows
(M, < 0.17).

127

a u t h o r sn o t et h a t ,f o rc o m p r e s s i b l ef l o w s ,l e s sv a r i a t i o ni ns e n s i t i v i t yw i t h
Mach number i s o b t a i n e db yu s i n gt h ef o l l o w i n gd e f i n i t i o n .

An example o f t h i s may befound


t h e i re x p e r i m e n t sw i t h

i nt h e

paper by Spaid, e t a l .

a m i n i a t u r e ( 1 mm t o t a l span)combination
Eq.

and yawmeter, s e n s i t i v i t y , as d e f i n e d i n
1.0 and -30" 5

3,

(3.E.21,

Mach
number
when

yawmeter s e n s i t i v i t y , Eq.

7).

In

P i t o t probe

0.8 5 M s

d i dn o tv a r yw i t h

3.E.1

I na d d i t i o n ,t h es u p e r s o n i cd a t ai nF i g .

5 30".

much l e s sv a r i a t i o nw i t h
d e f i n i t i o no f

(Ref.

show

i s used.
Thus,
thecompressible
Y
i s p r e f e r r e df o rt r a n s o n i c
and
(3.E.2),
S

supersonicapplications.

!ll..2.

D i f f e r e n t i aPl r e s s u r e

Forthegeneralcase

of f l o w a n g u l a r i t y c a l i b r a t i o n i n

has two primaryadvantages

The pyramidgeometry
~ i r s t l ~ ,

i s l e s ss e n s i t i v et op o s i t i o n i n go ft h eo r i f i c e s .

i t i s r e l a t i v e l yf r e eo fi n t e r f e r e n c e

and yaw.

t u n n e l( t r a n -

compared t o a c o n i c a l or hemispherical yawmeter.

thepyramidprobeperformance

ments o f p i t c h

anempty

a pyramid yawmeter i s recommended.

sonicand/orsupersonic),

Secondly,

3-D

Yawmeters:

betweensimultaneousmeasure-

I na d d i t i o n ,t h ei n c o m p r e s s i b l ef l o w

measurements o f

d.

i s comparativelyinsen(Ref. 8) i n d i c a t e S" f o r a pyramidprobe


Y
Reynolds number and i n c r e a s e ss l i g h t l y( " 6 % )w i t hi n c r e a s e dt u r b u -

B r y e r ,e ta l .
sitiveto

1 ence.
A typicap
l yramid

yawmeter i s shown i nF i g .

diametertoprobestemdiameter
t h i sr a t i o

be keptlessthan

t h a tt h ed i a m e t e ro ft h eo r i f i c e s

i s 0.16.

0.20.

3.E.2.Here,

I ng e n e r a l

t h er a t i oo fo r i f i c e

i t i s recommended t h a t

An a d d i t i o n a l ,s u g g e s t e dc o n s t r a i n t
be no smallerthan

is

0.508-mm ( 0 . 0 2i n . )i n
.9-

o r d e rt oa v o i dc l o g g i n g

and excessivetimelagproblems.

was chosen t o conformwiththerecommendation


These authorssuggestthat
remainsdetached

o fB r y e r

bemade.

f o rt r a n s o n i c

andPankhurst(Ref.

designed s o t h a t t h e

o ra t t a c h e dt h r o u g h o u tt h er a n g eo f

measurements a r e t o
detachedshock

a yawmeterbe

The apex angle

Thus, an apexangle

2).

bow shock wave

Mach numbers w i t h i n w h i c h
o f 66" will m a i n t a i n a

Mach numbers up t o 1.6.

( A Mach number o f 1.6

* S m a l l e ro r i f i c e s
(0.25 mm) have been used a t low speeds (Ref. 9) andsuperHowever, no s i g n i f i c a n t improvement i np e r f o r s o n i c speeds (Ref. 2, P. 57).
mance i s gained, and c l o g g i n g and decreasedresponsetime
can make theprobe
more e x p e n s i v et o use.
128

D = 0.3175crn

0.16 D

,/

330

&

/
/

Figure 3.E.2.

"

P Y R A M I D YAWMETER

I s chosenbecause

t h i sr e p r e s e n t st h eu p p e r

o ft r a n s o n i ct u n n e l s . )
and theprobecan

limit o f o p e r a t i o n f o r t h e m a J o r l t y

be used i ns u p e r s o n i cf l o w s .

f e a t u r ei st oa v o i dt h e

The p u r p o s eo ft h i sd e s i g n

sudden changes t h a t canoccur

o f sharp-nosedprobesneartheshockattachment

maximum s e n s i t i v i t y o f

F l n a l l y ,f o ru s ei nt r a n s o n i cf l o w st h ep r o b e

most p o i n t e d

a IO

be enlargedby

ableprobesupport.Provided

stemshouldextend

16 diameters.

a d i s t a n c eo fa tl e a s t

down-

Downstream of t h i s s t a t i o n ,

c o n i c a lf l a r et o

mate w i t h t h e a v a i l -

i s n o t used,

a massive,transverseprobesupport

wlll a v o i di n t e r f e r e n c e

t h i sd e s i g n

Furthermore,

an apex a n g l e between 60 and 70 degrees.

ymeters is obtained with

thestemcansafely

i nt h ep r e s s u r er e s p o n s e

Mach number.

Bryer and Pankhursthavenotedthatthe

streamfor

bow shock will be a t t a c h e d ,

Beyond t h i s speed regime,the

betweenprobe

and support a t t r a n s o n i c

speeds.
The o
f
l w a n g l es e n s i t i v i t y ,
probeshave
0.025 a t M

a(AP/HS)/aY,

been found t o i n c r e a s e w i t h

1.5 (e.9..Ref.

and hemispherical-nose

Mach number and reach a maximum ofabout

IO andRef.

r e s u l ti nd e c r e a s i n gs e n s l t i v i t y .F o r

o fc o n i c a l

2 ) .F u r t h e ri n c r e a s e si n

Mach number

a hemispherical yaw-

example, d a t af o r

a 50% loss i n s e n s i t i v i t y

meter w i t h o r i f i c e s l o c a t e d

45'

from thenoseindicate

a t H = 2.7,

2.

S i m i l a r l y ,t h e o r e t i c a lc a l c u l a t i o n sf o r

Fig. 35 o f Ref.

a 70% loss a t M = 3.5,

c o n i c a ly a m e t e ri n d i c a t e
s i m i l a rb e h a v i o r

for thepyramidprobe

F i g . 3.E.3.

a 6
0'

I f we assume

and a maximum s e n s i t i v i t y o f

0.025,

s m a l l e s t change inflowanglewhichcan

be detected by a pressuremeasuring

system w i t h a r e s o l u t i o n
of

N/cmZ

I nt h e

3.45 x

case o f a t r a n s o n i ct u n n e lw i t h

= 1.0,

t h es e t t l i n g

t h i sv a l u ef o r

(0.005 p s i ) i s

6,

= 37.8OC. Re/m = 19.7 x 10

chamber pressure i s 13.79 N/cm

H S i n Eq.

(3). we f i n d t h a t

the

and

(20 p s i a ) .S u b s t i t u t i n g

a f l o wa n g l eo f

0.01 degreecan

t h e o r e t i c a l l y be r e s o l v e d .I np r a c t i c e ,t h ee f f e c t so fp r o b ea n d f o rs u p p o r t
d e f l e c t i o n s ,n o n i d e n t i c a li n t e r n a l

* For

geometry o f t h e t u b i n g

and passageswhich

t h i s reason,Barry(Ref.
11) and Zumwalt (Ref. 12) exploredtheuseof
P i t o t probeslocatednearthesurfaceof
wedges and cones t op r o v i d ei n c r e a s e d
s e n s i t i v i t ya th i g hs u p e r s o n i c
Mach numbers.However,
f o r most a p p l i c a t i o n s ,
t h ec o n v e n t i o n a ls u r f a c ep r e s s u r ey a m e t e r sp r o v i d ea d e q u a t es e n s i t i v i t y
up t o
H = 3.5.

I30

.030

.025

/
,020

-I

EXPERIMENTALDATA

(Ref. 25

- CURVE FROM R e f . 10

-I

.005

0
0

I .o

2.0

3.0

4.0

MACH
NUMBER
Figure

3.E.3.

S E N S I T I V I T Y OF 60" CONICAL
YAWMETER

5.0

connect two o r i f i c e s t o a d i f f e r e n t i a lp r e s s u r et r a n s d u c e r ,v i b r a t i o n ,t u r b u l e n c e ,
etc.,

may p r e v e n tt h ea t t a i n m e n t

o f suchaccuracy.

However, thepyramidprobe

can p r o v i d e a d e q u a t e a n y l e r e s o l u t i o n f o r c a l i b r a t i o n

of mostwindtunnels.

E s p e c i a l l yi nl i g h to ft h ef a c tt h a tt h em a j o r i t yo ft u n n e lo p e r a t o r sa r e
s a t i s f i e d with a c a l i b r a t i o n o f ( t u n n e l - e m p t y ) f l o w a n g l e s a c c u r a t e t o w i t h i n
0.1
degree.
If l e s s - a c c u r a t e , f l o w a n g u l a r i t y

measurements a r e s a t i s f a c t o r y

nose o f the

simultaneous measurement o f P i t o tp r e s s u r ei sd e s i r e d ,t h e

pyramid yawmeter may be t r u n c a t e d a n d a n o r i f i c e p l a c e d i n t h e c e n t e r


nose,;:

9.

e.g.,Ref.

convenientcheck

1 4 and 15.

Mach
number

t o be determinedsimultaneously,e.g.,Refs.

Mach number a tw h i c hf l o wa n g l e sa r e

I.

measured.

a probewhich:

has a flow a n g l es e n s i t i v i t yw h i c hi sr e l a t i v e l yi n s e n s i t l v et o
extraneous flow v a r i a b l e ss u c h

2.

also eliminates

c r i t e r i a for a pyramid yawmeter

I n summary, thesuggesteddimensional
s h o u l dr e s u l ti n

I n the case o fs u p e r s o n i c

Such a p r o b en o to n l ym i n i m i z e sc a l i b r a t i o nt i m eb u t

any u n c e r t a i n t y i n l o c a l

of the

I nt h ec a s eo fs u b s o n i ct u n n e l s ,t h i sw o u l dp r o v i d e

on the u n i f o r m i t yo ft o t a lp r e s s u r e .

t u n n e l s ,t h i sp e r m i t s

and a

as Reynolds number and turbulence,

i s small enough t o map f l o w a n g u l a r i t yi n

most t u n n e l sw i t hh i g h

r e s o l u t i o n and minimum i n t e r f e r e n c e , " "

3.

has f a s t enough pressureresponse

4.

has
adequate

5.

can be used t o c a l i b r a t eb o t ht r a n s o n i c

s t r u c t u r a sl t i f f n e s s ,

for m o s t a p p l i c a t i o n s ,

and
and supersonictunnels.

* I t i s recommended t h a tt h el i pt h i c k n e s s
be k e p tt h i n
( 0.005 cm) andthe
1 5 " or more i n o r d e r t o m i n i m i z e s e n s i t i v i t y
o r i f i c e be beveled a t an angleof
of t h e P i t o t probe t o f l o w a n g u l a r i t y .

;::In

&3 f t ) where h i g hr e s o l u t i o n o f t h e f l o w a n g u l a r i t y f i e l d
l a r g et u n n e l s
i sn o tr e q u i r e d ,t h e
recommended pyramidprobe may be scaled up t o l a r g e r
0.1 p e r c e n tf o r
s i z e s .I n
any event,probeblockageshould
be lessthan
g e n e r a lc a l i b r a t i o n so ft r a n s o n i ct u n n e l s .
However, near M = I values an
orderofmagnitudesmaller
may be necessary i n o r d e r t o a v o i dp r o b e - w a l l
i n t e r f e r e n c e , seeRef.
13.

YaKmgJer
C a l i b r a t i o n , Rake
Interfer-ence, and Blockage
. .
.
.
"
"
"

As notedby
asymmetriesand
AP a t $ = 0 .

10, P.

Pope and Goin(Ref.


i m p e r f e c t i o n sw h i c h

134), a1 1 r e a l yawmetershave

cause t h ep r o b et oi n d i c a t e

Thus, a yawmeter s h o u l da l w a y sb ec a l i b r a t e di n

s i m i l a rt ot h o s ei nw h i c h
d i f f e r e n t i a lp r e s s u r e
not berepeatedhere.

it is to

be used.

flow c o n d i t i o n s

The c a l i b r a t i o np r o c e d u r ef o r
10, 14, and 15 and will

yawmeters i s d e s c r i b e di nR e f s .
However,

a nonzero

i t i sr e l e v a n t

t o sound a n o t e o f c a u t i o nh e r e .

When c a l i b r a t i n g a yawmeter, t h e c e n t e r o f r o t a t i o n s h o u l d b e a t t h e n o s e t i p .
A l s o ,c a r e f u l

measurements o ft h ea n g l e sb e t

a r ee s s e n t i a ls i n c et h e s em u s t
theprobe

W eenyawmeter

a x i s and t u n n e la x i s

be s u b t r a c t e d f r o m t h e f l o w a n g l e s r e l a t i v e t o

i no r d e rt od e t e r m i n ef l o wa n g u l a r

i t yw i t hr e s p e c tt ot h et u n n e l

center1 ine.
t I me, most o p e r a t o r sp r e f e rt o

I no r d e rt or e d u c et u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o n
useprobes

i n rakes o ra r r a y s .

However, H a r t l e y and Nichols(Ref.

A E D C 16T Tunnel w i t h f i v e

c o n d u c t e dt e s t si nt h e

c o n s i s t e do f

a 22" ( t o t a l - a n g l e )

7.62 cm (3 i n . )d i a m e t e r

a 2.44 m . ( 8 f t ) widerake.

hemispherical yawmetersmountedon

a s t i n gs u p p o r t .

(2 f t ) a p a r t w i t h t h e

nose locatedapproximatelyfourdiameters

approximately 1%.

wedge.

The rake

wedge w i t h a 7.62 cm ( 3 i n . )w i d e

was c e n t e r mountedon

l e a d i n g edge o f t h e

16)

base and

The yawmetersweremounted0.61

ahead o f t h e

The t o t a lw i n d - t u n n e lb l o c k a g eo ft h er a k e

was

These i n v e s t i g a t o r sf o u n dt h a t h er a k ei n d u c e ds i g n i f i c a n t

o u t f l o wt o w a r dt h et i p so ft h er a k e .

The i n d u c e df l o wa n g u l a r i t y ,a tt h et i p s
0 . 5 " a t M = 0.6 t o over 1 " a t M = 1 . 1 .

o ft h er a k e ,i n c r e a s e df r o ma b o u t

As

Mach number increased f r o m 1 . 1 t o 1.2,theinducedflowangularitydecreased


s h a r p l y and e x h i b i t e d n e a r - i n t e r f e r e n c e - f r e e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s f o r

A w a l l - m o u n t e ds t r u ts u p p o r t ,w i t ht h e

same wedge a n g l e o f

In bothcases,thesupport-inducedflowangularity
a d i a m e t e ro f
diameters.

a l o n gs t i n g .

5.715 cm (2.25in.)

5 1.5.

22", was a l s o t e s t e d

w a l l t o w a r dt h et i p .

and found t o induceevenlargeroutflowfromthe

mounting a s i n g l ep r o b eo n

1.2 5 M

was ascertainedby

The f i r s t s e c t i o n o f t h e s t i n g

and a l e n g t ho fa p p r o x i m a t e l y

had

16 probe

The second s e c t i o n o f s t i n g had a diameter o f 7.62 cm (3.0in.)

and a l e n g t h o f o v e r

20 probediameterswhichsubsequentlyjoined

f l a r e and t h e r e s t o f t h e s t

i n gs u p p o r t

mechanism.

The s t i n gs u p p o r ts y s t e m

e n a b l e dv e r t i c a lt r a v e r s e s

w i t h t h es t i n ga tz e r oa n g l e

t h eb l o c k a g e

p robe was o n l y 0.013%.

o f t h es i n g l e

a conical

of a t t a c k .I na d d i t i o n ,

Thus, t h e arrangementassured

133

as near-interference-free,flow

a n g u l a r i t y measurementsascan

be expected i n

a windtunnel.
An a d d i t i o n a lc o n c l u s i o nr e a c h e db yH a r t l e y
t h er a k e
(;.e.,

had n e g l i g i b l e e f f e c t

on flowanglesnormal

withtherakevertical,the
wereVal

results,

useyawmeters

i t i s p o s s i b l et o

ment t o make twodimenslonal


a s i n g l ep r o b ej o i n e dt o
t h et u n n e lc e n t e r l i n e

totheplaneoftherake
i d and w i t h t h e r a k e

yaw datawereVal

h o r i z o n t a l ,t h ep i t c hd a t a

id).

Thus,basedontheseandothersimilar
i n a c a r e f u l l yd e s i g n e dr a k ea r r a n g e -

measurements."However,

f o rg r e a t e s ta c c u r a c y ,

w i t h a supportwhichissymmetricalabout

a l o n gs t i n g
i s recommended.""

Mach numbers near 1 .O,

F i n a l l y ,w i t hr e g a r dt ow i n dt u n n e lb l o c k a g ea t
t h ed a t ao f

13) i n d i c a t et h a t

Couch and Brooks(Ref.

smallvalues

o f model blockage (<0.0003)

f o r anysudden

and l o n gs t i n g s ,

Two h o t - w i r e s i n c l i n e d a t
mean f l o w havelong

Thus,

be d e s i g n e dw i t ht h eu t m o s tc a r e ,

and t h er e s u l t i n gd a t as h o u l d

be s c r u t i n i z e d

M = 1.0.

o r unexpectedvariationsaround

III.E.3.

even w i t he x t r e m e l y

w a l il n t e r f e r e n c eo c c u r s .

yawmeters f o r measurements near Mach onemust


viz.,smallprobes

16) i s t h a t

and N i c h o l s (Ref.

Hot-Wire/Film
Yameters
a na n g l ew i t hr e s p e c tt oe a c ho t h e r

and t h e

been used i n low speed flows t o measure f l o w a n g u l a r i t y


t o simultaneously

(Ref.17).Three-wireprobeshavealsobeenusedextensively
measure p i t c h and yaw i nt h r e ed i m e n s i o n a lf l o w s .I nt h ep a s t ,h o t - w i r e s
n o t been used i nt r a n s o n i cf l o w s

becausetheyare

have

so e a s i l yb r o k e n .

However,

Hortsman and Rose (Ref. 18) have r e c e n t l yd e m o n s t r a t e dt h a tl o wa s p e c tr a t i o


(,f/d-lOO)

tungstenwireprobes

can be used i nt r a n s o n i cf l o w sw i t h o u t

p r o h i b i t i v e breakageproblem.Alsorecently,
r e p o r t e du s i n g

an X - a r r a yh o t - w i r et o

Johnson
and

measureReynolds

boundary l a y e r and i n a shock-wave/boundary-layer


Thus, a l t h o u g h m a t c h i n g t h e s e n s i t i v i t i e s o f

Rose (Ref. 19) have


s t r e s si n

a supersonic

i n t e r a c t i o n (Ref.

20).

two o r more w i r e s f o r a c c u r a t e

4 ) p o i n to u tt h a t
a r a k ew i t hc i r c u l a r
arms i s
;bDudzinskiand
Krause(Ref.
u n a f f e c t e d by a n g l e so fa t t a c k .
Whereas
when
nonzero yaw a n g l e se x i s ti n
s u b s o n i ca n d / o rt r a n s o n i cf l o w s ,n o n c i r c u l a r
arms c a ni n d u c el a r g e rf l o w
angularityatthe
nose o f t h e yawmeter and a l s o c r e a t e u n d e s i r a b l e s i d e
f o r c e s on therake.
**Another a l t e r n a t i v e wouldbe
Ref. 16.

t o c a l i b r a t e a rakefollowingthe

procedure of

m a n flow measurements canbe

a problem,

thereappears

reason why two and three-wireprobescannot

t o avoid the problem


(Ref.22)has

t o be no p r o h i b i t i v e

be used asyawmeters.

o f matching sensitivities of

more than one w i r e , Rosenberg

s u c c e s s f u l l y used a s i n g l e w i r e p r o b e

mounted i n a r o t a t a b l e h o l d e r .

By r o t a t l n g an i n c l i n e d - w i r e a b o u t t h e a x i s o f t h e p r o b e s
a t two d i s t i n c t o r i e n t a t i o n s , t h e t h r e e
canbe

I no r d e r

stem and t a k i n g d a t a

components o f v e l o c i t y and mass f l u x

determined a t a p o i n t i n a generalthree-dimensionalflow.
In a studyoftheeffectsofcontouringslottedwallstoreducetransonica h o t - f il m p r o b e f o r a c c u r a t e

w a l l - I n t e r f e r e n c e , Weeks (Ref.23)hasused

surement o f f l o w a n g u l a r i t y . T h i s w o r k i n v o l v e d t h e u s e o f a i r f o i l
spanned t h e t e s t s e c t i o n o f t h e
required planar

modelswhich

AFFDL T r i s o n i c Gasdynamics F a c i l i t y .

measurements o f f l o w a n g u l a r i t y

wereobtainedwlth

22O t o t a l - a n g l e wedge which was manufactured by Thermo Systems,


to an AFFDL design.Thisprobeconsists
d i a m e t e rw i t ht h et i p

o f a q u a r t zr o d

ground t o a symmetrical wedge.


1.27 cm (0.5

therodextendsforward

in.)from

on each s i d e o f t h e

apex o f t h e

wedge.

anemometer b r i d g e c i r c u i t s .

of this probe is

shown i n F i g . 3.E.4

a0.3175

primarylimitationisstatedto

f o r 0.85 < M < 0.95.

be p r o b ev i b r a t i o nw h i c h

(1)

in.)diameter

in.)long,aredeposited
used t o complete

Weeks c l a i m s t h a t
The

was d e t e r m i n e de x p e r i -

and

( 3 ) canhave

yawmeters a r es u p e r i o rt oh o t - w i r e

be considered a d i s a d v a n t a g eb yp o t e n t i a lu s e r s .
Weeks, h o t - f i l m yawmetersappear

corrosion

yawmeters.Both
equipmentwhich

However,based

may

on t h e r e s u l t s

to offer a viable alternative to

yawmeters.

The uses o f h o t - w i r e s

3.E.4,

less d e l i c a t e , (2) lesssuscep-

h o t - w i r e s and h o t - f i l m s r e q u i r e s p e c i a l i z e d d a t a p r o c e s s i n g

d i f f e r e n t i a lp r e s s u r e

cm (0.125

42 minutes o f a r c (0.03O).

t i b l e t o contamination because o f t h e i r l a r g e r s i z e ,

obtained by

i n . )i n

0.5 minutes o f arc.

I n summary, s i n c eh o t - f i l mp r o b e sa r e

r e s i s t a n tc o a t i n g s ,h o t - f i l m

Inc.,according

The c a l i b r a t e d yaw s e n s i t i v i t y

t h i s probe will r e s o l v ef l o wa n g l e st ow i t h i n
mentally to induce errors

a split-film,

0.152 cm (0.06

Four g o l d - f i l m l e a d s a r e

t h e twoseparate

The

As i n d i c a t e di nF i g .

A p a i r o f p l a t i n u m f i l m s , 0.102 cm (0.04

supporttube.

mea-

and h o t - f i l m s a r e d i s c u s s e d f u r t h e r i n

Appendix 1 .

Reference 21 a l s o d i s c u s s e s t h e f a c t t h a t t h e c a l i b r a t i o n
of a h o t - w i r e i s
s u s c e p t i b l e t o change w i t h t i m e because o f c o n t a m i n a t i o n and c o r r o s i o n . T h i s
may r e q u i r e f r e q u e n t c a l i b r a t i o n
checks.

** A l t h o u g h t h e a u t h o r s a r e n o t

aware o f any t r a n s i e n t measurements o f f l o w a n g l e s


why t h i s t y p e o f
yawmeter can
n o t be used i n a c o n t i n u o u s - t r a v e r s e mode. Thiswouldprovidetheadvantage
of
r e d u c e dt u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o nt i m e ,
e.g.,see
d i s c u s s i o n o f f o r c eb a l a n c e yawmeters.

w i t h a h o t - w i r e / f i l m ,t h e r ei sn oi n h e r e n tr e a s o n

135

D I MENS IONS I N CENT IMETERS

Figure 3 . E . 4S. P L I T

136

To Separate Anemometer
Bridge C i r c u i t s

HOT F I L M , 20" WEDGE PROBE CALIBRATION


BRIDGE
VOLTAGE DIFFERENCE vs FLOW ANGLE, REF. 23

ForceBalanceYaweters
The basicprocedure

o fr u n n i n g

a windtunnelforce

model u p r i g h t and

invertedtodeterminetheaveragepitchangleiswell
p r a c t i c ei np r o f e s s i o n a lw i n dt u n n e lt e s t i n g .

known and i s standard


However, theuse

wedge mounted on a s e n s i t i v e f o r c e b a l a n c e t o o b t a i n
f l o wa n g l e si s

new.
Maxwe1.1

a 20'

a measure o f tunnel-empty

and Luchuk(Ref.25)have

r e s u l t s o f t r a n s o n i ct e s t sw i t ht h i st y p eo f

r e c e n t l yr e p o r t e dt h e

yawmeter.The

included-angle wedge, w i t h a 14.73 cm (5.80

specially-designed,

t h i n ,s t r a i n - g a u g e ds e c t i o n sf o r
The probe was t e s t e d i n t h e
Machnumber

based on v a r i a t i o n s o f

p r o b ec o n s i s t so f

span,mounted

3.E.5.

on a

The f o r c e

f o r c e and p i t c h i n g moment w i t h v e r y

maximum s e n s i t i v i t y .
AEDC Aerodynamic Wind Tunnel (4T) o v e rt h e

range o f 0.6 t o 1.3.

Althoughthe

in.)

two-component forcebalance,Fig.

balance was designed t o measurenormal

o f a small

The c a l i b r a t e d f l o w a n g l e s e n s i t i v i t i e s ,

3.E.6.

normal f o r c e and p i t c h i n g moment, a r e shown i n F i g .

yaw s e n s i t i v i t y o f thepitching-moment

l a r g e r , Maxwell and Luchukfound

t h a tf l o wa n g l e

mode i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 50%

measurements obtained from

e i t h e r mode were o f equalaccuracy.


The wedge was supported by t h e 4T s i x - d e g r e e - o f - f r e e d o m , c a p t i v e t r a j e c t o r y
system.

T h i sp e r m i t t e dt h ep r o b et o

movements.

be moved c o n t i n u o u s l y w i t h a v a r i e t y o f

Maxwell and L u c h u kc o n c l u d et h a tf l o wd i r e c t i o nd a t ac a n

o b t a i n e d" w i t h

obtainedwiththeprobeatrest

based oncomparisons

and i n m o t i o n , r e l i a b l e

can be made w i t h t h e p r o b e m o v i n g c o n t i n u o u s l y w i t h
motion.

from theaccuracy

an a b s o l u t e a c c u r a c y t h a t i s l i t t l e d i f f e r e n t

w i t hw h i c ht h ep r o b ei sa l i g n e d . "F u r t h e r m o r e ,

The estimated rms d e v i a t i o n s f r o m

0.023O a t a l l measured p o i n t s .

larger variations, viz.,


obtainedwithpitch

+O.O8O

However,
and +0.25',

be

and r a p i d measurements

combined l i n e a r and r o l l i n g

a mean v a l u e o f

2
4
'

o fd a t a

flow a n g l e was

sweeps i n p i t c h and yaw produced

respectively.

and yaw r a t e s w h i c h v a r i e d , r e s p e c t i v e l y ,

These data were

from 1.16 t o 1.28

and 1.01 t o 1.36 deg/sec.

137

t
L

DIMENSIONSINCENTIMETERS

\I'

14.73

1.67 D i a .

7
I

"
"
"
"
"
"
"

"

-L

"_

- "

""_

2-COMPONENTBALANCEINSTALLEDHERE

LOCATION OF GAGE SECTIONS

I
I

20

Figure 3 . E . 5 .

GEOMETRY OF AEDC
FORCE
BALANCE

YAWMETER

"_

\J

0.5

0.14

I
CJ
W

n
-0.12
zU
V

.
I

irr

n.

0.3

i0:lO

LL

LL

CNa

~0.08
V

rr

0
LL

z- 0.1
I
0

0.04

L 5

0.6

0.7

0.8
FREESTREAM

Figure 3 . E . 6 .

0.9

1 .o

MACH NUMBER,

1,1

S E N S I T I V I T Y OF THE AEDC
FORCE
BALANCE

YAmETER

1.2

1.3

Unfortunately,theReynolds
investigated.

number dependence o f t h i s

wedge shapedyawmeter

use.

number.Hence,

yawmeter will bemore

wedge f o r c eb a l a n c e

initialcosts

and p i t c h and yaw mustbemeasured

f o r c eb a l a n c e

canbe

t e d i o u st o

However, a
modeland

a d i s t i n c t advantageover

and h o t - w i r e / f i l m yawmeters.

balanceyawmeter'sadvantageofrapid,continuous

Machnumber

yawmeter i s h i g h e r

separately.**

c a l i b r a t e dt or e l a t ea n g u l a rd e f l e c t i o no f

changes i nl o a d i n g .T h i sp r o v i d e s

d i f f e r e n t i a lp r e s s u r e

T h i si m p l i e s

be c a l i b r a t e d as a f u n c t i o n o f

t h i st y p eo f

A d d i t i o n a ld i s a d v a n t a g e so ft h e

s u p p o r tt o

3 ) a l s or e p o r t e dt h e i r

e x h i b i t e d a Reynolds numberdependence.*

t h a t wedge shapedyawmetersshould

A t t h i sp o i n t ,

Reynolds number.

may r e c a l lt h a tS i e v e r d i n g ,e ta l .( R e f .

andReynolds

M = 0.6 i n d i c a t e d

However,.some v a r i a t i o no ft o t a lp r e s s u r ea t

a d e c r e a s i n gs e n s i t i v i t yw i t hi n c r e a s i n gu n i t
there'ader

yawmeter was n o t

I nc o n c l u s i o n ,t h ef o r c e
measurements o f f l o w a n g u l a r i t y

appears tooutweighthedisadvantages.

N e i t h e r o f these yawmeters hada


b o u n d a r yl a y e rt r a n s i t i o ns t r i p .
Thus,
dependence o f wedge-yawmeter s e n s i t i v i t y on Reynolds number c o u l d c o n c e i v a b l y
bereducedby
u t i l i z i n g a g r i t - t y p e , b o u n d a r yl a y e rt r i p .

**A

d o u b l e ,i n t e r s e c t i n g
wedge probe w i t h four component f o r c eb a l a n c e has
more r e c e n t l y been c o n s t r u c t e d and t e s t e da t AEDC (Summers, Ref. 26). T h i s
y a m e t e re n a b l e sp i t c h
and yaw d a t a t o be o b t a i n e d s i m u l t a n e o u s l y i n
even
less time. An improveddesign,which
i sl e s ss e n s i t i v e
t o unsteadytransonic
f l o w , s p e c i f i e s a small,symmetricalcenterbodywith
f l a t p l a t e wingsattached
yawmeter
i no r t h o g o n a lp l a n e s ,
Ref. 27. R e c e n te x p e r i e n c ew i t ht h i st y p eo f
i n t h e AEDC 4T Tunnel indicatessimultaneous measurements o f p i t c h and yaw
225 p o i n t s i n l e s s t h a n s i x m i n u t e s
and w i t h anaccuracy
c a nb eo b t a i n e da t
of 0.01 degree.

140

I l l . E.
1.

Lennert, A.

References

Hornkohl, J. 0. and Kalb, H. T.:

E.;

V e l o c i m e t e r sf o r

Flow Measurements,"

" A p p l i c a t i o n o f Laser

I n s t r u m e n t a t i o nf o r

A i r b r e a t h i n gP r o p u l s i o n ,P r o g r e s si nA s t r o n a u t i c s

and Aeronautics,

A I M Vol. 34, M I T Press, 1972.


2.

and Pankhurst, R.

Bryer, D. W.

Pressure-Probes Methods f o rD e t e r m i n i n g

C.:

Wind Speed and Flow D i r e c t i o n , Her M a j e s t y ' s S t a t i o n e r y O f f i c e ,


London, 1971.

3.

Sieverding, C.;

Maretto,L;Lehthaus,

Calibrationfor

F. and Lawaczeck, 0.:

FourProbes

f o r Use i n t h e T r a n s o n i c T u r b i n e

Cascade T e s t i n g , I ' VKI TN 100 (AD 922 286)

4.

Dudzlnski, T. J. and Krause,


L.

N.:

F i x e d - P o s i t i o n Probes,"

5.

B u z z e l l , W. A . :

"Design and

May 1974.

" F l o w - D i r e c t i o n Measurement w i t h

NASA TM X-1904,

Oct. 1969.

" C a l i b r a t i o nR e s u l t sf o S
r t a t i o n a r yP r e s s u r e

Rakes Sensing

Yaw Angle Downstream o f an A x i a l Compressor Stage,"

ARL TR 75-0104,

A p r i 1 1975.

6.

V i d a l , R. J.;

Erickson, J. C . and C a t l i n , P . A . :

C o r r e c t i n g Wind Tunnel," Windtunnel


."
.
"

"Experiments w i t h a S e l f -

Deslgn and Testing Techniques,


~~

AGARD-CP-

7.

Spaid, F. W.;

174, Oct. 1975.

Hurley, F. X . and Hellman, T.

H.:

" M i n i a t u r eP r o b ef o r

Measurements," A l A A Jour.Vol.

T r a n s o n i cF l o wD i r e c t i o n

13, No. 2,

Feb. 1975, P . 253.

8.

Bryer, D. W . ;

Walshe, D . E . ;

and Garner, H. C . :

f o r Three-DimensionalFlow

9.

Schulze, W.

M.;

Ashby, J r . ,

G.

Measurement,"
C.;

Probes f o r S u r v e y i n g S t a t i c

"Pressure
Probes
Selected
R.&M.

No. 3037, 1958.

and Erwin, J. R . :

"Several
Combination

and T o t a lP r e s s u r e

and F l o wD i r e c t i o n , "

NACA TN 2830, Nov. 1952.

10. Pope,

11.

A.;

and Goin, K. L:

Barry, F. W.:

High-speed
Wind Tunnel Testing, Wiley,

."

"

"Comparison o F
f low-Direction

J. Aero. S c i . ,

Sept.

1965.

Probes a t Supersonic Speeds,"

1961, P. 750-752.
141

12.

Zumwalt, G. W.:

"ConicalProbes

f o rD e t e r m i n a t i o n

and Flow D i r e c t i o n i n S u p e r s o n i c
SandlaCorp.,

14.

Vahl, W.

Wing Tunnels,"

A. and Weirich, R.

1.51 t o 3.51,"
N o r r i s J, .

SCTM 355-60(71),

Nov. 1960.

L . :" C a l i b r a t i o no f

30"Included-Angle

f o rD e t e r m i n i n gL o c a lF l o wC o n d i t i o n sI n

15.

of Local Mach
Numbers

NASA TN

MachNumberRange

Cone
of

D-4679, August 1968.

" C a l i b r a t i o noC
f o n i c aP
l r e s s u r eP r o b e sf o D
r etermlnation

D.:

o f LocalFlow

Cond i t i o n s a t

MachNumbers

from 3 t o 6,"

NASA TN

D-3076,

Nov. 1965.

16.

H a r t l e y , M.

and N i c h o l s , J. H.:

S.;

" E f f e c t so f

A n g u l a r i t y Measurements a t T r a n s o n i c

Rake BlockageonFlow

MachNumbers

i n t h e AEDC-PWT

16-FootTransonicTunnel,"Twenty-FifthSupersonicTunnel

Assoc.

May 1966 (referenced w i t h ,

Meeting, NASA LangleyResearchCenter,


a u t h o r ' sp e r m i s s i o n ) .

19.

Johnson, D. A. and Rose, W.

C.:

"LaserVelocimeter

Comparison I n a SupersonicBoundaryLayer,"
Vol.
20.

Rose, W.

C.

and Johnson, D. A . :

HotWire-HotFilm-Ion
inc.,

22.

"Turbulence

Rosenberg, R.

Weeks, T. M.:

Boundary-Layer

CAT/FORM 6560375,
Thermo-Systems

1975.
E.:

"A Three
DimensionalHot-wire

Probe,"

Anemometry Technique

ARL 71-0039,

March 1971.

"Reduction o T
f r a n s o n i cS l o t t e dW a l il n t e r f e r e n c e

o f S l a tC o n t o u r i n g , "

142

i n Shock-Wave
a

13, No. 7, J u l y 195

Anemometer Systems,

Employing a S i n g l eW i r e
23.

A i A A Jour.(Tech.Notes),

13, No. 4, A p r i l 1975.

I n t e r a c t i o n , " A i A A Jour.,Vol.
21.

and Hot-wire Anemometer

AFFDL-TR-74-139,

March 1975.

by Means

24.

Maxwell, H. andLuchuk,
as aFlowAngle

25.
Raney,

D. J . :

Summers, W.

27.

Luchuk, W.:

28.

Probe,"

AEDC-TR-74-110,Feb.

Lond.

1975.

Current Papers No. 262,

E.; personalcomnunication,

AEDC,

1956.

Feb. 1976.

"Flow Angle Measurements Using a 2-Inch Span Cruciform-Wing

Force Model,"
N.M.,

"Evaluation o f a Wedge on a ForceBalance

"Flow D i r e c t i o n Measurements i n Supersonic Wind Tunnels,"

Aero. Res.
Coun.

26.

W.:

presented at 45th

Semi-Annual STA meeting,Albuquerque,

A p r i l 1976 ( r e f e r e n c e dw i t ha u t h o r ' sp e r m i s s i o n ) .

Lind, I . A. : "A S e n s i t i v eF l o wT r a n s i t i o n
TRITA-FPT-019,
J u l y 1975.

Probe,"

l n s t i t u t l o n e nf o rF l y g t e k n i k

KTH Aero Memo

FI 175,

Stockholm, Sweden,

MEASUREMENT OF UNSTEADY FLOW DISTURBANCES

1II.F.

f o r measurements o f f l o w u n s t e a d i n e s s was b r i e f l y reviewed i n

Theneed
S e c t i o n ll.C.6.

o f a windtunnel

The p r i m a r y o b j e c t i v e o f n o i s e c a l i b r a t i o n

in s t a t i c p r e s s u r e and flow angu-

i s t o o b t a i n a measure o f t h e f l u c t u a t i o n s
laritythatexistinthe

Here a r e v i e w will be g i v e n

empty t e s ts e c t i o n .

o ft h ei n s t r u m e n t a t i o nt h a t

to obtainthistypeofdata.

hasbeenused

ever,beforediscussingsensors,

is germain t on o t et h ea m p l i t u d e s

it

Howand

frequencies o f unsteadystaticpressurewhichcharacterizetransonictunnels.
Inthecenteroftransonictestsectionsthefluctuatingpressurecoeff i c i e n t ,d e f i n e d

AC

as

- <PI>
= - x 100

percent,

may range from 0.5% t o 5% dependingonthetunnelconfiguration,


and Reynolds number.

Dougherty, e t a l .

(Ref.

1) havenoted

Mach number,
a v a l u e o f 0.45%

corresponds t o a l e v e l o f sound which i st y p . i c a I l yr a d i a t e df r o mt u r b u l e n t


b o u n d a r yl a y e r so ns o l i dt e s ts e c t i o nw a l l s .
have p o i n t e do u tt h a t
rangesfrom

AC

0.5% a t Re

see F i g . 3.F. I .

a c t u a l l yd e c r e a s e sw i t hi n c r e a s i n gR e y n o l d s

= 5.7 x IO

t o anestimated
(Ref.

numberand

0.2% a t Rex = 1.1

3) havereviewednoise

and s l o t t e dt e s ts e c t i o n s .

8
1.7 x IO ,

measurements

These a u t h o r sn o t et h a ti n

measurements o f AC

p e r f o r a t e d - w a l lt u n n e l sc e n t e r 1i n e
t h a nw a l l

McCanless and
Boone

made i nb o t hp e r f o r a t e d

(Ref. 2)

However, H a r t z u i k e r ,e ta l .

measurements;whereas,

tend t o be lower (40-609;)


P
i s found i n s l o t t e d - w a l l t u n -

t h eo p p o s i t et r e n d

nels.Generally,theedgetonesgeneratedbyperforated-walltunnelstendto

these
tunnels
n o i s i etrh a n
s l o t t e d - w a ltlu n n e l sF. o r

from 1% t o 7.4%;

twelveperforated-walltunnelsrange
s l o t t e d - w a l lt u n n e l s

show
a

u s u a l l y measuredbetween
tunnels.

range of 0.5% t o 2%) Ref.

= 0.70and

f o rn i n ed i f f e r e n t ,c o n t i n u o u st u n n e l s ,
o fs o l i d ,p e r f o r a t e d ,

*Recentresearchindicatesthereare
noiseqeneratedbyedgetones,Refs.

1 44

= 0.80

Ref:2.

and s l o t t e d - w a l lt u n n e l s

Mabey spectrumparameterwhich

example, AC

d a t af o r
P
whereas, d a t a f o r f i v e

3.

A peak i n AC

0.80 f o rb o t hp e r f o r a t e d

The f r e q u e n c ys p e c t r ao fn o i s ea t

make

is
P
and s l o t t e d - w a l l

i s presented i nF i g .

3.F.2

These d a t aa r er e p r e s e n t a t i v e
and arepresentedinterms

i s discussednext.

anumber
o f ways t o r e d u c et h el e v e lo f
1 and 4..

of t h e

6
.OM

.m

F i g . 3.F.1
FREQUENCY
SPECTRA
BOUNDARYLAYER

OF N O I S E FROM
TURBULENT
A
ON A S O L I DW A L L R
, ef.
2

,014

,010

.w1
.ffl

F i g . 3.F.2

NOISE
FREQUENCY
SPECTRA
FOR
CONTINUOUSWINDTUNNELSAT

SOME E X I S T I N G
HaD= 0.80, R e f . 2

As n o t e d b y H a r t t u i k e r , e t a l .
r e s u l t s o f t e s t s on:

(3)

b u f f e t , and

(1)dynamic

*, flowqual

stability,

it y can a f . f e c t t h e

(2) s t a t i cf o r c e s

and moments,

I n t h eo r d e rl i s t e d .A p p a r e n t l y ,l i t t l e

t o measure f l u c t u a t i o n s i n f l o w a n g u l a r i t y

t h e s ew i t hp r e s s u r ef l u c t u a t i o n s .
etal.

2)

(4) f l u t t e r .T e s t so ft h e s eq u a n t i t i e sg e n e r a l l yi n v o l v e

i n c r e a s i n g l yh i g h e rf r e q u e n c i e s
work hasbeendone

(Ref.

However, Mabey (Refs.

(Ref.2)havefoundthe

e f f e c t so n

incidencefluctuationscan

and c o r r e l a t e

5-7) and H a r t t u i k e r ,

model t e s t so fb o t hp r e s s u r e

and

be c o r r e l a t e d by u s i n g a s p e c t r u m f u n c t i o n d e f i n e d

as f o l l o w s :

i s t h e mean-squared v a l u e o f t h e f l u c t u a t i n g s t a t l c p r e s s u r e c o e f 2
f i c i e n t , and F(n) i s t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n t o
AC p e ru n i tb a n d w i d t ha tt h er e d u c e d

Here AC2

frequency n.
Mabey

canbeused

hassuggested

i s chosen t o c o r r e s p o n d t o
wingbending

i f t h e reducedfrequency

t o measure windtunnelflowunsteadiness
a naturalfrequencyofthe

mode, t o r s i o n mode, etc.

model, e.g.,

A varietyoftests

canbe

have shown t h e t

Thus, c r i t e r i a for

g r e a t e r model e x c i t a t i o nf o l l o w si n c r e a s e si nn F ( n ) .
acceptableflowquality

fundamental

establishedforvarioustypesoftests

c e s s i v e l yr e d u c i n gn F ( n )u n t i lt h er e s u l t sa p p r o a c h

bysuc-

v a r ys i g n i f i c a n t l yw i t ht u n n e lf l o wq u a l i t y .F o r

example, a n a l y s e so fb u f f e t

measurements on a i r c r a f t models w i t h d i f f e r e n t n a t u r a l f r e q u e n c i e s l e d
(Ref.

7) t o c o n c l u d et h a t

e 0.002.

have confirmed the usefulness of

a preciseboundarycannot

t e s t s , e.g.,
bedrawn

T e s taostt h ef a
r cilities

Mabey'sspectrumparameter
H a r t z u i k e r ,e ta l .

toseparateacceptable

l e v e l so ff l o wu n s t e a d i n e s s .R a t h e r ,t h e r ei s
qualitiesthatareeitheracceptableornotfor

*Reference 2

for correlating a
(Ref. 2 ) .

Unfortunately,

from unacceptable

a " g r a yr e g i o n "s e p a r a t i n gf l o w
a giventypeoftest.

i s mainlyconcernedwithestimatingtheflowqualitythat
necessary t o make t h e LEHRT c o s t - e f f e c t i v e i n l i g h t o f t h e p l a n n e d
t ime.
146

Mabey

an a c c e p t a b l e l e v e l o f f l o w u n s t e a d i n e s s f o r t h e

d e t e c t i oolnifg hbtu f f e t i nigs

v a r i e t y o f dynamicmodel

to

anasymptoteandcease

will be
10 sec r u n

However, the utility of including fluctuating pressure measurements


in tunnel
calibration i s now well established.

IO deg transition cone,in


Condenser microphone measurements on the AEDC
six different transonic tunnels, indicate
98 percent of the energy
of background pressure fluctuations are contained within0-20 KHz, Ref. 8.

However,

on frequency beyond
since there i s presently no criterion for an upper limit
which boundary layer transition is unaffected, Westley (Ref. 9) recommends
that the frequency range
of noise measurements extendat least up to 30 KHz.
Thus, acoustic calibration of transonic tunnels requires instrumentation
that can measure dynamic pressures with these ranges of amplitudes and frequencies.

The sensors employed should also be relatively insensitive to vibrations

not to be easily damagedby either


of the mounting surface and durable enough

particles in the ,flow or overloading.

III.F.1.

Dynamic Pressure Measurements

A rather wide variety of instrumentation has been used to measure unsteady


flow disturbances in wind tunnels. Condenser

microphones, strain gage,and

piezoelectric dynamic pressure transducers have been employed for noise measurements in stilling and plenum chambers, dlffusers, and on test section walls, and
models and probes located on the centerline, Refs. 10-15.

In addition, hot-wire

anemometers have beenused to measure flow disturbancesin stilling chambers

13) and in the test section of transonic tunnels(e.g., Refs. 9 and


16) and supersonic tunnels (e.g., Ref. 17). Also, laser Doppler velocimeters
(e.g., Ref.

(LDV) are being used to measure turbulence by an ever increasing number of tunnel
operators, Ref. 9.
Unfortunately, this lack of standardization makesit difficult to compare
measured levels of flow disturbances. For example, Lewis andDods (Ref. 18)
noted significant variations in the frequency responseof 12 different microphones and dynamic pressure transducers. In general, Lewis and Dods found

small diameter transducers (0.1 to 0.3 cm) gave higher power-spectral-density


values, at all frequencies, than larger diameter transducers (0.5 to 1 cm).
of pressure fluctuations varles
Also, the high frequency portion of the spectrum
with the particular sensor,and as is well known, the rms valueswill be underestimated when a significant portion of thehigh frequencies are attenuated.

In

1 47

an LDV, the

a d d i t i o n , when measuring v o r t i c i t y w i t h h o t - w i r e s , h o t - f i l m s , o r
data may a l s o v a r y

because o f d i f f e r e n c e s i n f r e q u e n c y

The comparisonproblem
mounting.

i s compounded f u r t h e r b y t h e c h o i c e o f s e n s o r

Ideally,acousticpressuresshould

motion between sensor and t h et e s t

be measured w i t h no r e l a t i v e

medium, Ref.

n e i t h e rp r a c t i c a ln o rr e l e v a n tt o
tivelocation

windtunnel

19.

is

However, s i n c et h i s

model t e s t i n g , some representa-

model or t u n n e lw a l l

on aprobe,

response.

must be selected.

The f i r s t measurements o f w a l l p r e s s u r e f l u c t u a t i o n s b e n e a t h t u r b u l e n t
boundary l a y e r s i n

awindtunnel

W i l l m a r t h (Ref.21)

were reported by W i l l m a r t hi n

has recentlyreviewedtheproblemsof

measurements a t t u n n e l w a l l s

and n o t e s t h a t

dynamic pressure

most o f t h e s e

measurementshave

been made withflush-mountedtransducers.Hanly(Ref.22)


the effect of
M = 1.68,

has r e c e n t l ys t u d i e d

sensor flushness on fluctuating-surface-pressure

2.0,

and 2.5.

1956 (Ref.20).

These t e s t s show spectralpressure

measurements a t
measurements a r e

extremelysensitivetoflushnesswithprotrusioncausinggreatererrorthan
submergence.

Hanlyconcludesthat

more repeatabledata

canbe

o b t a i n e dw i t h

transducers mounted approximately 0.0254 cm (0.0l"in.).beneathasurface


Thus,

it

is r e c m e n d e dt h a ta c o u s t i c

orifice.

measurements a tt u n n e lw a l l sc o n f o r mt o

this criterion.
Also,
canbeused
e x i s ti n
(Ref.

it i s r e l e v a n t t o n o t e h e r e t h a t

two or more wall-mountedtransducers

t od e t e r m i n eu s e f u lc o r r e l a t i o n s
atunnel,

e.g.,

Refs.

1 1 and 25.

1 I ) have n o t e d t h a t w a l l d a t a

between disturbanceswhich
I na d d i t i o n ,

canbeused

measurements o b t a i n e d a t t h e c e n t e r l i n e w i t h
subjecttooscillating
one.

shocksand/or

However, experience(Ref.

indicates ( 1 )

thisisnot

sensor i s t h a t
usedasapermanent

Boone andMcCanless

t oe x t r a p o l a t e ,t h r o u g h
probes o r modelswhich

M = 1,

may be

othermodel-inducedunsteadinessnear

8 ) w i t h microphone measurementson

aproblem

may

and ( 2 )t h er e a la d v a n t a g eo f

i t can be c a l i b r a t e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o c e n t e r l i n e
m o n i t o rf o ra s s e s s i n g

anysubsequent

Mach

a 10 degcone
awall-mounted

measurementsand

changes i n t u n n e lf l o w

unsteadiness.
Concerninginstallationof
(Ref.24)

mounted a 0.635 cm (1/4

o f anareawhich

148

sensors i n p e r f o r a t e d w a l l s , C r e d l e
i n . )p i e z o e l e c t r i c

was f i l l e d andsandedsmooth.The

and Shadow

microphone i n t h e c e n t e r
r a d i u so ft h ea r e a

was

approximately 40 microphonediameters.

These i n v e s t i g a t o r ss t a t e d :

"Thisinstallationtechniqueprecludedthe
measurement o f p u r e l y n e a r field influence of the
mostadjacentupstreamholes
and a l l o w e d f o r t h e
measurement o f what m i g h t be c o n s i d e r e d a s t h e r a d i a l l y i n t e g r a t e d
averagevalue o f p r e s s u r e f l u c t u a t i o n s a t t h e w a l l s u r f a c e . "
Credle and Shadow a l s o i n s t a l l e d

an i d e n t i c a l ,b u ts h i e l d e d ,m i c r o p h o n ei nt h e

w a l li no r d e rt om o n i t o rm i c r o p h o n er e s p o n s et ow a l lv i b r a t i o n .I ng e n e r a l ,
it i s c o n s i d e r e d good t e s t i n g p r a c t l c e t o a s c e r t a i n t h e

phone'soutputwhich

component o f a m i c r o -

i s due t ov i b r a t i o n .F i n a l l y ,q u e s t i o n n a i r er e s u l t s

i n d i c a t e dt h a ts t r a i n - g a g et r a n s d u c e r sa r e

most o f t e n used f o r a c o u s t i c

ments a t w i n dt u n n e lw a l l s .P r e s u m a b l y ,t h i si s
r e q u i r e dt op r o c e s st h es i g n a lf r o m

measure-

because t h ei n s t r u m e n t a t i o n

a s t r a i n gage i s r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e a t

most

wind tunnel s.
I na d d i t i o nt ot u n n e lw a l l

measurements, t u n n e ln o i s ec a l i b r a t i o n sr e q u i r e

dynamic p r e s s u r ed a t an e a rt h ec e n t e ro ft h et e s ts e c t i o n .

Some o f t h e f i r s t

such measurements i n a transonictunnelwerereported


(Ref.
25).
ona

I nt h e s ei n i t i a lt e s t s ,

wedge, a wingprobe,

by C h e v a l i e r and Todd

dynamic pressuretransducers

and an o g i v e - c y l i n d e r .L a t e ra c o u s t i c

i n t h e AEDC-PWT 16T and 165 t u n n e l s wereperformed

were mounted
measurements

w i t h condensermicrophones

and s t r a i n gage transducers mounted on a 10 deg included-anglecone,Ref.


A v a r i e t yo fo t h e rp r o b eg e o m e t r i e s

an o g i v e - c y l i n d e r anda
tunnels,Ref.

23.

flat plate

have a l s o been used.Forexample,


have been used i n some o f t h e

A 10 deg cone-cylinderprobe

Supersonic Wind Tunnel a t NASA Lewis,Ref.


f o ra c o u s t i cc a l i b r a t i o n ,
wedges, f l a t p l a t e s ,
ders.

10.

26.

hasbeen
As p a r t o f

NASA Ames

used i nt h e

8 x 6-ft.

a r e v i e wo fp r o b e s

Boone and McCanless (Ref. 1 1 ) consideredslendercones,

hemispheres, and s h a r p - t i p p e d ,f l o w - t h r u ,c i r c u l a rc y l i n -

These a u t h o r s recommended a 10 deg apex-angleconicalprobeforwind

t u n n e la c o u s t i c

1.

measurements because:
cones a r e n o t

as s e n s i t i v e t o t i p f l o w

as wedges and f l a t

plates,
2.

t h et r a n s o n i c
occur,

Machnumber

i ss m a l l e rf o rs l e n d e r

range,whereunstableshock

waves

cones t h a n f o r f l a t p l a t e s , f l o w -

t h r u c y 1 inders , and hemi spheres,

3.

a s l e n d e rc o n ei n t r o d u c e sm i n i m a ld i s t u r b a n c et ot h ef l o w .

As noted by Credle and Shadow (Ref.


b u t a 10deg

cone i s aboutthe

24), a s m a l l e ra n g l e

cone i s p r e f e r r e d ,

minimum anglewhich will a l l o w i n s t a l l a t i o n of

instrumentationunder
portedthat

a laminarboundarylayer.These

by 1970 t h e

same a u t h o r sa l s or e -

IO deg cone had become a s t a n d a r d d e v i c e a t

AEDC f o r

c a l i b r a t i n gw i n dt u n n e lf l o wd i s t u r b a n c e s .
Up t o t h i s t i m e t h e

AEDC a c o u s t i c c a l i b r a t i o n

180 deg a p a r t ,f o rf l u s hm o u n t i n go fs e n s o r s .
indicatedsatisfactorynoise
symmetricalcone

27.

Thissubsequently

The work o f Dougherty w i t h t h e

3 microns

anda

cone f o r boundarylayer

became
known

asthe

AEDC t r a n s i -

f l o w qua 1 it y i n over I8

AEDC t r a n s i t i o n cone and t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s

31) have e s t a b li s h e d

30) and Benek and High(Ref.

and b o u n d a r yl a y e rt r a n s i t i o n .I na d d i t i o n
P
a common measure o f dynamic f l o w q u a l i t y , Treon, e t a l .
(Ref.32)

a d i r e c tr e l a t i o n s h i p

between AC

AEDC t r a n s i t i o n coneenabledbetteragreement

reporteddatafromthe
o b t a i n e di n

be made w i t h a c o m p l e t e l y

Refs. 8, 28 and 29.

domestic and f o r e i g nt u n n e l s ,

toproviding

an rms f i n i s h o f

now been used t o measuredynamic

o f Pate and Schueler (Ref.

cone

in.)condensermicrophones.Furthermore,

mechanism was mounted a f t o f t h e

t r a n s i t i o ns t u d i e s ,R e f .
t i o n cone andhas

(1/4

cone was p o l i s h e dt o

traversingPitotprobe

By 1970 e x p e r i e n c ew i t ht h i s

measurements could probably

and two 0.635 cm

t h es u r f a c eo ft h e

cone had two f l a t s , l o c a t e d

on a t r a n s p o r t a i r c r a f t

a s e r i e so ft e s t s

t h e same model was t e s t e d i n t h e


Wind Tunnel, and theCalspan

AEDC-PWT

model.

8 - f t . TransonicTunnel,

number e f f e c t s

hasbeen

c a l i b r a t i o n ,t h i sd e v i c e

and Ames

AEDC 16T t u n n e l , was d e f i n e d on t h e b a s i s o f

b o u n d a r y - l a y e r - t r a n s i t i o nl e n g t h .
c a l i b r a t i o nd e v i c e

be l e s s when a

An e f f e c t i v e Reynolds number f o rt h eC a l s p a n

tunnels,relativetothe

Transonic

and d i f f e r e n c e s i n d r a g

was used t o a c c o u n tf o rr e l a t i v eR e y n o l d s

between f a c i l i t i e s .

I nt h e s et e s t s ,

16T, t h e NASA Ames 1 1 - f t .

c o e f f i c i e n t s , measured atzero-normal-force,werefoundto
correctionfactor

t o be

Thus, t h e u t i l i t y o f

demonstrated.Subsequent

a common,

a standardacoustic
t o a planned f l i g h t

will a l s o be u s e f u l i n c o r r e l a t i n g t u n n e l

and f r e e - f l i g h t

conditions.
Because ofthedemonstrated
pastuse

utility of the

AEDC t r a n s i t i o n cone and i t s

i n a number o fm a j o rf a c i l i t i e s ,W e s t l e y( R e f .

t u r b u l e n c el e v e l si nt r a n s o n i ct u n n e l s

bemeasured

9) recommends n o i s e and
w i t h two 10 deg cones f i t t e d ,

r e s p e c t i v e l y ,w i t h :

*A p p a r e n t l y ,t h es u r f a c ef i n i s h
I50

was l a t e r improved t o 0.25 microns,Ref.

8.

1.

s k i n - f r i c t i o n gages t od e t e r m i n et r a n s i t i o nR e y n o l d s
and flush-mountedmicrophones

numbers

t o measure n o i s e l e v e l s

onthe

test section centerline,

2.

a c r o s s e dh o t - w i r e
design)

anemometer mountedon

The p r o p o s a l t o e l i m i n a t e t h e t r a v e r s i n g p r o b e
inducednoise

n o ts p e c i f i c ,

mechanism will reduceprobe

and windtunnelblockage.AlthoughWestley'srecommendation
it i s assumed t h a t he i s n o t

couples for t r a n s i t i o nd e t e c t i o n ,

h o t - w i r e measurements,Westleyexpresses

34

1.

AlternateAcousticCalibration

Probes

=
-.

it a r e s u s c e p t i b l e t o

Credle and Shadow (Ref.

161, t h e ya r e

24)

a number o f probe-inducederrors.

o b s e r v e dt h a tp r e s s u r eg r a d i e n t se x i s to n

a t subsonic and t r a n s o n i c speeds, andhence

A laminarboundarylayer

e r r o r si n

passthrough

measurements o f AC

may

i t t o an underlyingsensor,

36) has shown t h a tb o t ha x i a l

9. Also,Siddon(Ref.

a cone

a c o u s t i c measurements a r e i n f l u -

and t o t a lp r e s s u r eg r a d i e n t s .

modulateacousticdisturbanceswhich
t i o n s cancause

Because

AEDC t r a n s i t i o n cone be expensivetoreproduce,but

n o i s e measurementson

enced b yb o t hs t a t i c

W i t hr e g a r dt o

has demonstratedhot-wires

some t r a n s o n i ct e s ts e c t i o n s( R e f .

discussedseparatelyinAppendix

Not o n l y w o u l d t h e

and 35.

a w i n dt u n n e lt e s ts e c t i o n .

importance and t h e f a c t t h a t r e c e n t r e s e a r c h

can be used e f f e c t i v e l y i n

t h i n - f i l m s or thermo-

a concensus t h a tt h e s ei n s t r u m e n t s

a r ei d e a lf o rm e a s u r i n gd i s t u r b a n c e si n

Ref.

suchas

Refs. 11,

e.g.,

is

recommending f l o a t i n g - e l e m e n ts k i n -

f r i c t i o n b a l a n c e sb u tr a t h e rh e a tt r a n s f e rd e v i c e s

ofthis

(an ONERA

t h et i p

and l a t e r a lf l u c t u a -

w i t h probes.

Hence, otherprobe

a l t e r n a t i v e s may o f f e r some advantages f o r a c o u s t i c c a l i b r a t i o n o f w i n d t u n n e l s .


The f o l l o w i n gc o n c i s e
Willmarth'sarticle

summary ofSiddon'swork(Ref.

(Ref.21).

---" Siddon

e x c e l l e n tp r o b ef o ru n s t e a d ys t a t i c - p r e s s u r e

36) i s e x t r a c t e d from

has r e p o r t e dc o n s t r u c t i o no fa n
measurements, and hehas

ted i t i n v a r i o u s c o n t r i v e d f l o w s t o r e m w e t h e e r r o r s

causedby

calibra-

t h ei n t e r a c t i o n

*Credle(Ref.

33) n o t e de a r l i e rt h a tt h et r a v e r s i n gp r o b es u p p o r ts t r u c t u r e
appeared t o g e n e r a t e a d d i t i o n a l n o i s e ,
basedon comparisons w i t h a c o u s t i c
data obtained on an ogive-cylinder
and t h e AEDC 10 deg cone w i t h f l a t s .
151

o f t h e body o f t h e p r o b e

with streanwiseandcross-flowvelocityfluctuations.
t o thediaphragm

The p r e s s u r e i s t r a n s m i t t e d
phone(0.25

dm diam.)

i n s i d et h ep r o b e

o f a miniaturecondensormicro-

(0.305 cm diam.)

s l i t a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2 diametersdownstreamfromthe

A 0.318 cm (1/8

venose.

throughanannular

t i p o f thebalsa

downstream o f t h e

i n . )c o l l a ra r o u n dt h ep r o b e ,

s l t, was c a r e f u l l y p o s i t i o n e d

wood,

t o make t h e s t e a d y p r e s s u r e a t t h e s l i t e q u a l
when t h e r e i s n oc r o s sf l o w .

t o t h ef r e e - s t r e a ms t a t i cp r e s s u r e

co l a r compensation was checked a t z e r o a n g l e o f a t t a c k i n


so d a l a x i a l v e l o c i t y f l u c t u a t i o n s

The probe-

a flowwithsinu-

and was foundadequate.

"Siddon'suniqueachievement

isthe

development o f a compensation scheme

His

t o c a n c e lt h ep r e s s u r ef l u c t u a t i o n sp r o d u c e db yc r o s s - f l o wf l u c t u a t i o n s .
scheme i s based uponan
elementswereused

e a r l i e rt r a n s d u c e ri nw h i c hp i e z o e l e c t r i cf o r c e - s e n s i n g

t o measure l i f t f l u c t u a t i o n s o f

p r o p o r t i o n a lt ov e l o c i t yf l u c t u a t i o n s

normal t o t h e a i r f o i l

a t t a c kf l u c t u a t i o n sa r es m a l l .I nt h ep r e s e n t

o f f o u rp i e z o e l e c t r i c

will be p r o p o r t i o n a lt ot h ei n s t a n -

t a n e o u st r a n s v e r s ev e l o c i t ya tt h en o s e .

measuredby

The two e l e c t r i c a ls i g n a l sr e p r e s e n t i n g

components o f t r a n s v e r s e v e l o c i t y

t h et r a n s v e r s ev e l o c i t y .

A f r a c t i o no ft h i ss i g n a l

p r e s s u r ef l u c t u a t i o n st h a tw o u l d

through a r o t a t i n g i n c l i n e d n o z z l e .
where t h e s t a t i c p r e s s u r e i s c o n s t a n t

theprobe.

A t t h a tp o i n t

summed

t o thesquare

was added t ot h ep r e s s u r e

a flow produced

absence o f t h e p r o b e .
by a j e t o f a i r passed

The probe s l i t was p l a c e d a t t h e p o i n t


(theintersectionofthenozzleaxis
any f l u c t u a t i n g p r e s s u r e s i g n a l s f r o m t h e

assumed t o b e p r o d u c e d b y c r o s s - f l o w i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h

These s i g n a l s werecancelled

thesquareofthetransversevelocity.

of

t og i v e( a p p r o x i m a t e l y )t h et r u es t a t i c -

have e x i s t e d i n t h e

"Siddon c a l i b r a t e dt h ep r o b ei n

condensormicrophonewere

wereeachsquaredand

t o o b t a i n a s i g n a lp r o p o r t i o n a l

thecondensormicrophone

t h ea x i so fr o t a t i o n ) .

configurationto

I f quasi-steady,slender-body,aerodynamic

t h e o r yi sa p p l i c a b l e ,t h et r a n s v e r s ef o r c e

withanalog-computerelements

anI-beam

moments producedbycross-flow-inducedtransverse

f o r c e s on t h e nose o f theprobe.

theorthogonal

when t h ea n g l e - o f -

caseSiddonusedanarrangement

Bimorph p l a t e e l e m e n t s i n

measure theorthogonalbending

a smallairfoil,whichare

by a d d i t i o n o f t h e p r o p e r f r a c t i o n o f

and

" S i d d o nc o n c l u d e dt h a tt h ee r r o ri nt h ep r e s s u r ep r o d u c e d
i n t e r a c t i o ni nt u r b u l e n c e

20 p e r c e n t .

was lessthan

measurements o f f l u c t u a t i n g p r e s s u r e c o u l d
quasi-steadyflow

was n o t v i o l a t e d

signalfromtheprobe

noseand

by c r o s s - f l o w
Thus, reasonablyaccurate

be made as l o n g as theassumption

and t h et i m el a g

thepressure

of

between t h et r a n s v e r s e - f o r c e

measured a t t h e a n n u l a r s l i t

was

n o ti m p o r t a n t .g e n e r a l l y ,t h . i sr e q u : i r e st h a tt h es p a t i a ls c a l eo ft h ep r e s s u r e
f l u c t - u a t i o n s be much larger than the probe dimensions.*

As a r e s u l t o f h i s

"

workSiddon

was a b l e t o c o n c l u d e t h a t i n

many p r a c t i c a lc i r c u m s t a n c e s

o n l y root-mean-squarepressurefluctuationswere

be s m a l l .
mustuse

Owing t od i f f e r e n c e si nt h ec o r r e c t e d
thecorrectedpressure

when t h ec o r r e c t e d

and uncorrected wave forms, one

when instantaneous values are desi red

o f aerodynamics and acousticreasons,

s i m p l i c i t y and economy, Westley(Ref.

even

9) n o t e st h a t

anumber

He recommends thatthesetypesofacousticprobes
Dynamic s t a t i cp r e s s u r ep r o b e ss h o u l d

same."

as w e l l as
o f opera o r s o f

t r a n s o n i c and s u p e r s o n i c t u n n e l s a r e m e a s u r i n g f l u c t u a t i n g s t a t i c

standardized.

1 kelyto

and uncorrectedroot-mean-squarepressuresarethe

Thus, f o r anumber

pressures.

1i k e

measured w i t h p r o b e s

37), t h e . c o r r e c t i o n f o r c r o s s - f l o w i n t e r a c t i o n i s

Strasberg's(Ref.

where

and p i
bedeve

tot

opedand

be developed f o r h i g h

speed f l o w s and probablyshouldfollowtheSiddontypedesign.


Inthe

case o f dynamic P i t o t probes, a s e r i e s o f d e s i g n s t u d i e s a t

Langley has culminated i n a designwhichappears


a c o u s t i cc a l i b r a t i o no fw i n dt u n n e l s ,
p r o b er e p o r t e di nR e f .
two0.318

Refs.38,

14 i s shown i nF i g .

3.F.3.

t o be s a t i s f a c t o r y f o r

35 and 14.

A schematic o f t h e

B r i e f l y , i t c o n s i s t so f

cm ( 1 / 8i n . )d i a m e t e rp i e z o e l e c t r i ct r a n s d u c e r s

The probediameterof

NASA

mounted i n tandem.

0.635 cm (1/4 i n . ) was s e l e c t e d because mean pressure

measurements i n d i c a t et h ep r e s s u r ei sn e a r l yc o n s t a n ta c r o s st h ec e n t e ro f
f l a t - f a c e dd i s ki ns u p e r s o n i cf l o w .
c o v e r e dw i t h

a thin coating of

p a r t i c l e si nt h ef l o w .

The diaphragm o f t h e

exposedtransducer

RTV rubber t o reduce v u l n e r a b i l i t y t o

is

damage by

The purpose o ft h es h i e l d e dr e a rt r a n s d u c e ri st o

serve as an a c c e l e r a t i o n( o rv i b r a t i o n )m o n i t o r .
i ss u b t r a c t e df r o mt h e

exposedtransducer

The s i g n a lf r o mt h i st r a n s d u c e r

inordertoaccountfortheeffects

nThe u n d e r l i n i n g was i n s e r t e d by t h e p r e s e n t a u t h o r s t o p o i n t o u t t h a t t h e s i z e
o f t h e AEDC t r a n s i t i o n cone may i n d u c e e r r o r s i n n o i s e
measurements.

153

A U Dimensions in Centimeters

r E m s e d tnnrduccr

Figure

3 .F. 3 .

SMALL PIEZOF&EC!i'RIC DYNAMIC

PRESSURE PROBE, Ref. 14

o f p r o b ev i b r a t i o n . *I no r d e rf o rt h i st e c h n i q u et o
(Ref.14)notedthatthetwotransducers

mustbe

be v a l i d , Anders, e t a l .
matched t o g i v e i d e n t i c a l

outputsforgivenaccelerationlevels.
Inconjunctionwiththeprobe,
chamber and t e s t s e c t i o n o f

a h o t w i r e was a l s o used i n t h e s t i l l i n g

a small Mach 5 w i n d t u n n e l a t

NASA Langley.

Assuming p u r e l y a c o u s t i c a l d i s t u r b a n c e s , t h e f o l l o w i n g r e l a t i o n

was used t o

relatethefluctuatingstaticpressuresobtainedfromthehotwiretofluctuatingPitotpressures.

Here < H I 2 > i s t h e

rms f l u c t u a t i n gt o t a lp r e s s u r eb e h i n d

a normalshock,

<PIoD> i s the rms f l u c t u a t i n g ,f r e e s t r e a ms t a t i cp r e s s u r e ,

sound-source v e l o c i t yd e t e c t e d

by t h eh o tw i r e .

and
u

i st h e

The r e s u l t sf r o mt h i s

t i o n gave e x c e l l e n t agreement w i t h t h e f l u c t u a t i n g P i t o t p r o b e d a t a ,
Appendix I , Fig.
Anders, e ta l .

7.

It i sr e l e v a n t

equae.g.,

see

t o noteheretheconclusionreachedby

(Ref.14).

"The h o t w i r e and P i t o t p r o b e g e n e r a l l y i n d i c a t e t h e
same t r e n d and
l e v e lw i t hr e s p e c tt ot h e
Reynolds number. T h i s agreement i s o f g r e a t
p r a c t i c a li m p o r t a n c es i n c et h ep i e z o e l e c t r i cP i t o tp r o b ei s
a much more
ruggedinstrumentwithsimplerdatareductionproceduresthanthehotw i r ep r o b e .F o rd i a g n o s t i cs t u d i e s ,t h eP i t o tp r o b e
ca,n provideessent i a l l y t h e same i n f o r m a t i o n as t h eh o t - w i r ep r o b e. w i t h
much l e s s e f f o r t .
However, t h eh o tw i r e
does have one p a r t i c u l a r advantage i n t h e p r e s e n t
i n v e s t i g a t i o n .T h a ti s ,i n
a pure sound f i e l d t h e h o t w i r e
can d i s t i n g u i s h
betweenmovingsources
and f i x e d sources."

A s i m i l a r comparison o f h o t w i r e d a t a w i t h f l u c t u a t i n g P i t o t p r o b e d a t a
hasbeen

r e p o r t e d byGrandeand

diameterstrain

1.1 <

< 2.25.

Oates(Ref.

39).

However,a

1.78 rnm (0.070 i n . )

gage transducer was employed and d a t a w e r e o b t a i n e d f o r


Nondimensionalized power s p e c t r a ld e n s i t i e so b t a i n e di n

t u r b u l e n t boundary l a y e r and inthefreestreamwerefoundtoagreeremarkably


*Dougherty and S t e i n l e( R e f .
8) r e p o r tt h a tt h ea c c e l e r o m e t e r
used i n t h e AEDC
t r a n s i t i o n cone has n o td e t e c t e d any s i g n i f i c a n t v i b r a t i o n e f f e c t s d u r i n g
35) d i dr e p o r t
t e s t s i n a number o ft u n n e l s .
However, S t a i n b a c k ,e ta l .( R e f .
significant probe vibration effects.

155

we1 1.

These a u t h o r sc o n c l u d et h a t" t h ef r e q u e n c yr e s p o n s ec h a r a c t e r i s t i c s

t h es t a g n a t i o np r e s s u r es e n s o ra r ei d e n t i c a lt ot h o s e

of

of t h eh o tw i r e ,i . e . ,

it c a nb ec o n s i d e r e da ni d e a lp o i n ts e n s o rf o rf l u c t u a t i o n sw i t hs p a t i a ls c a l e s

somewhat largerthantheprobediameter.''

To summarize theadvantages

and disadvantages o f f l u c t u a t i n g P i t o t

probes,

thefollowingpointsarenoted.

D isadvan tages :
1.

c a n n o ts e p a r a t et h et h r e ep o s s i b l ef l o wd i s t u r b a n c e
entropy,vorticity

2.

modes o f

and p r e s s u r e .

cannot deduce w h e t h e rd i s t u r b a n c es o u r c e sa r es t a t i o n a r yo r
movi ng.

3.

may be unknown i n some cases

s h o c km o d u l a t i o no fd i s t u r b a n c e s
(e.g.,see

Ref.

39 ) .

Advantages :

1.

r e l a t i v e l yi n e x p e n s i v e

and o f f - t h e - s h e l f ,

commercialtransducers

are readi ly available.

2.

speedandease

3.

s i m p l e rd a t ar e d u c t i o n .

4.

durable,;.e.,

o f measurement.

f a rl e s ss u s c e p t i b l et op a r t i c l e

damage compared

to hot wires.

5.

h i g hs i g n a lt on o i s er a t i o .

6.

reduced i n f l u e n c e o f f l o w p e r t u r b a t i o n s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h f i n i t e
p r o b es i z e

(compared w i t h t h e

AEDC t r a n s i t i o nc o n e ) .

7.

minimum w a l l - p r o b e i n t e r f e r e n c e .

8.

e a s i l y moved about t o s u r v e y e n t i r e t e s t s e c t i o n .

I nc o n c l u s i o n ,r e c e n tr e s e a r c hw i t hf l u c t u a t i n gP i t o tp r o b e si n d i c a t e s
theseinstruments
i nt r a n s o n i c

may be adequate f o r i n i t i a l c a l i b r a t i o n o f f l o w d i s t u r b a n c e s

and s u p e r s o n i ct u n n e l s .T h i st y p eo f

measurement couldserve

as

aconvenient

and inexpensivestandardto

a l s or e l e v a n tt on o t et h a t
AEDC plansto

Doughertyof

compare tunnelnoiselevels.
thePropulsion

Wind Tunnelgroup

I t 1s
at

use af l u c t u a t i n gP i t o tp r o b et om o n i t o rf r e e s t r e a md i s t u r b a n c e

l e v e l sd u r i n gf l i g h tt e s t sw i t ht h e

AEDC t r a n s i t i o n cone.

1 57

1II.F.
References

1.

Dougherty, N. S. ; Anderson, C.

L. : "An Experimental

F.; and Parker, R.

I n v e s t i g a t i o n o f Techniques t o SuppressEdgetonesfromPerforated
Tunnel Wa 1 1 s , I ' AEDC-TR-75-88,

2.

TransonicWindtunnel

Tunnels

4.

G.

McCanless,
,I1

. 1975.

J. P. ; Pugh, P. G . ; Lorenz-Meyer, W. ; and Fasso, G . E. : "On

Hartzuiker,

for theLargeEuropeanHigh-Reynolds-Number

theFlowQualityNecessary

3.

Aug

F. and Boone, J. R.:

J. Acoust.

Schutzenhofer, L. A.

SOC.

March 1976.

AGARD-R-644,

LEHRT,"

Am.,

"NoiseReduction

Vol

andHoward,

. 56,

P. W. :

Mabey, D.

G.:

"FlowUnsteadiness

Subsonic and Transonic Speeds,"

6.

Habey, D. G . :

"Suppression o f BackgroundNoise

A l A A Jour.,

andModel

7.

V i b r a t i o ni n

Wind Tunnels a t

1971.
of

' # A nH y p o t h e s i sf o rt h eP r e d i c t i o no fF l i g h tP e n e t r a t i o n

RAE TR 70189,

Wind TunnelModels,"

1970.

Mabey, D. G . :

"The I n f l u e n c e o f FlowUnsteadiness

ments a tT r a n s o n i c

8.

Nov. 1975.

No. 1155, Aero. Res.Coun.,

C.P.

Wing B u f f e t i n g from Dynamic Testson


Oct.

i n Transonic Wind

No. 5, Nov. 1974.

i n aTransonicWind-TunnelTestSection,''

5.

Wind

Speeds,"

RAE Tech. Memo. Aero.

Dougherty, N. S . and S t e i n l e , F.

W.:

on WindtunnelMeasure-

1473, 1973.

" T r a n s i t i o nR e y n o l d s

Comparisons i n SeveralMajorTransonicTunnels,"

Number

A I A A Paper No. 74-627,

J u l y 1974.

9.

Westley,

"Problems o f Noise Measurement i n Ground-Based F a c i l i t i e s

R.:

w i t h Forward-Speed Simulation(High-speed
o f AGARD-AR-83,

IO.

R i d d l e , C.

16-Ft.
Aug.

11.

D.:

Sept.

Wind TunnelNoise)

,I1

Appendix

1975.

" I n v e s t i g a t i o no f

Tunnels o f t h e P r o p u l s i o n

F r e e - S t r e a mF l u c t u a t i n gP r e s s u r e si nt h e
Wind Tunnel F a c i l i t y , "

AEDC-TR-67-167,

1967.

Boone, J. R.

and McCanless, G . F.:

BackgroundNoise

" E v a l u a t i o no ft h eA c o u s t i cS o u r c e so f

i n Wind Tunnel F a c i l i t i e s , ' # NASA CR-98155.

12.

Boone, J. R. andMcCanless,

Sources o f Background Noise i n Wind Tunnel

E v a l u a t i n gt h eA c o u s t i c
Facilities,"
Mar.

13.

Tech. Rept. HSM-R05-69,

C h r y s l e rH u n t s v i l l eO p e r a t i o n s ,

1969.

Credle, 0 . P . :

"An E v a l u a t i o no ft h eF l u c t u a t i n gA i r b o r n eE n v i r o n m e n t si n

t h e AEDC-PWT 4-Ft.Transonic

14.

" A p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e Techniques for

G . F.:

Anders, J. R. ; Stainback,

Tunnel,"

P. C. ; Keefe,

L.

R. ; and Beckwith,

and F l u c t u a t i n g D i s t u r b a n c e Measurements i n t h e S e t t l i n g
Section o f a Small, Mach

ICIASF '75,

Wind Tunnel,"

I n s t r u m e n t a t i o n i n Aerospace S i m u l a t i o n F a c i l i t i e s ,

15.

Sept. 22-24,

1975, publishedby

Anders, J. B.;

Stainback, P. C.;

"FluctuatingOisturbancesin

Horstman, C. C.

Keefe, L. R.;

a Mach

and Rose, bl. C.:

NASA TM X-62495,Dec.

17.

Donaldson, J. C.
MachNumber

18.

Lewis, T. L . and
Dods,
F l u c t u a t i o n sa t
Transducers,"

19.

Fuchs, H. V . :

W
i 1 Imarth, W.
W.

AnnualReview
Cal if.,
21.

5 Wind Tunnel,"Proc.

AIAA 9th

Flow,"

"Flow F l u c t u a t i o n Measurements a t

o f the12-InchSupersonicTunnel

J. B.:

NASA TN D-7087,

"Wind-Tunnel
Measurements
o f 1.6,

2.0,

(D)

,I'

o f Surface-Pressure

and 2.5 Using 12 D i f f e r e n t

Oct. 1972.

"Measurement o f PressureFluctuationsWithinSubsonic
J . Sound & Vib.,
:

Vol. 22, No. 3, 8 June 1972.

"Pressure Fluctuations

o f F l u i d Mechanics,Vol.

Beneath Turbulent BoundaryLayers,"

7, Annual Review Inc.,Palo

Alto,

1975.

W
i 1 Imarth, GI. W. :

"Unsteady Force and Pressure Measurements , I ' Annual Review

Hanly, R. D.:

3 , AnnualReviewInc.,

Dods, J. B. and Hanly, R. D . :


TunnelBackgroundNoise
Measurements,"

P a l oA l t o ,C a l i f . ,

1971.

"EffectsofTransducerFlushnessonFluctuatingSurface

Pressure Measurements, A I A A Paper No. 75-534,


23.

and Beckwith, 1 . E . :

1971.

o f F l u i d Mechanics, Vol.
22.

Ottawa, Canada,

1975.

MachNumbers

TurbulentJets,"
20.

I n t ' l Congress on

June 1976.

and Wallace, J. P.:


Aug.

Chamber and Test

"Hot Wire Anemometry i nT r a n s o n i c

4 i nt h eT e s tS e c t i o n

AEDC TR-71-143,

I . E. : "Sound

IEEE, 345 E. 47th S t r e e t , New York.

Aerodynamics TestingConference,

16.

1969.

AEDC-TR-69-236,Nov.

Mar.

1975.

"Evaluation o f Transonic and Supersonic Wind-

and E f f e c t s o f S u r f a c e P r e s s u r e F l u c t u a t i o n

A l A A Paper No. 72-1004,

Sept.

1972.

159

Credle, 0. P. and Shadow,


T.

24.

0.:

"Evaluation of t h eO v e r a l l

Root-Mean-

AEDC PWT 16-Ft.TransonicTunnel

Square F l u c t u a t i n g P r e s s u r e L e v e l s i n t h e

,I'

AEDC-TR-70-7,
Feb.
1970.
Chevalier, H. L. andTodd,

25

H. E.:

intheTestSectionofthe
from 5 t o 1000 cps,"

16-FootTransonicCircuitintheFrequency

AEDC-TN-61-51

i n 8-by6-FootSupersonic

Number i n t h e T r a n s o n i c
Dougherty, N. S . ,

28.
1

E.:

"Determination o f T r a n s i t i o n Reynolds

MachNumberRange,"AEDC-TR-70-218,

Jr.:

W h i t f i e l d , J. and Dougherty, N. S . ,

Jr.:

t o be p r e s e n t e d a t

Pate, S . R. and Schueler, C. J.:

AGARD F l u i d Dynamics Panel


Copenhagen, Denmark, May 1977.

and HypersonicMindTunnels

Benek, J. A. and High, M.

D.:

"A Method f o rt h eP r e d i c t i o n

1973, a l s o A l A A Jour.,

Treon, S. L.;

S t e i n l e , F.

P.

1425, Oct.

M.; Hagerman,J.

R. J . :" F u r t h e rC o r r e l a t i o no f
Speed T r a n s p o r t A i r c r a f t
PaperNo.71-291,
Credle, 0. P.:

33

AEDC-TR-73-158,

Mar.

Black, J. A.,

and B u f f i n g t o n ,
aHigh-Subsonic-

Wind Tunnels,"

AlAA

1971.

H e l l e r , H. H. andClemente,
C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s onSlender

160

R.;

Model i n ThreeMajorTransonic

"PerforatedWallNoise

Mach-Number Flow,"

1974.

Data f r o mI n v e s t i g a t i o n so f

i nt h e

Transonic Tunnel s , ' I AEDC-TR-7 1-21 6, Oct

34.

,'I

o f t h eE f f e c t s

o f Free-Stream Disturbances on Boundary-Layer Transit ion,"

32

on

7, No. 7, Mar. 1969.

A l A A Jour.,Vol.

Oct.

Reynolds

"RadiatedAerodynamicNoiseEffects

Boundary L a y e r T r a n s i t i o n i n S u p e r s o n i c

31

June 1975.

"A Survey o fT r a n s i t i o n

Symposium onLaminar-TurbulentTransition,

30

Oct. 1970.

'IPrepared Comment on Cone T r a n s i t i o n Reynolds

Number Data C o r r e l a t i o n Study,'l AGARD-CP-187,

Number Work a t AEDC,"

o f 0.56 t o

May 1970.

Credle, 0. P. and Carleton, W.

27

"Measurements o fF l u c t u a t i n gP r e s s u r e s

Wind Tunnel f o r MachNumberRange

2.07,'' NASA TM X-2009,

Range

(AD 255 7631, May 1961.

b r a b i n u s , R. J. and Sanders, B. W. :

26.

29.

"Measurement o f t h eP r e s s u r eF l u c t u a t i o n s

A . R.:

AEDC-PWT

. 197 1 .

16-Ft.

" F l u c t u a t i n gS u r f a c e

Cones i n Subsonic,Supersonic,

NASA CR-2449, Oct.

1974.

and 4-Ft.

Pressure
and Hypersonic

35.

Stainback, P.

C. ; Wagner, R.

"ExperimentalStudies

D. ; Owen,

o f HypersonicBoundary-Layer

E f f e c t s o f Wind-Tunnel Disturbances,"

36.

Siddon, T.

E.:

C. :

T r a n s i t i o n and

D-7453, Mar.1974.

UTlAS Rept. No. 136, I n s t i t u t e for AerospaceStudies,

Univ. of Toronto, Jan.


Strasberg, M.:

NASA TN

C.

"On t h e Response o f PressureMeasuringInstrumentation

i n Unsteady Flow,"

37.

F. K. ; andHorstman,

1969.

"Measurements o ft h eF l u c t u a t i n gS t a t i c

Pressures i n a Turbulent Wake,"

DavidTaylor

and Total-Head

Model Basin Rept.

1779,

(AD 428 7001, Dec. 1963 (a1 so AGARD Rept.464).

38.

Stainback, P. C.

and Wagner, R. D.:

"A Comparison ofDisturbanceLevels

Measured i n HypersonicTunnelsUsingaHot-wire
Pressure Probe,'' A l A A Paper No. 72-1003,Sept.

39.

Grande, E. and Oates, G.

C.:

t oF l u c t u a t i o n si nS u p e r s o n i c

' ".P r o p u l s i o n
MIT Press,

Progress
1972.

in

Anemometer anda

Pitot

1972.

I'Response o fM i n i a t u r eP r e s s u r eT r a n s d u c e r s
Flow,"

I n s t r u m e n t a t i o nf o rA i r b r e a t h i n g

A s t r o n a u t iand
c s Aeronautics, A l A A Vol. 34,

161.

.
I
.

111.6.

....

. . ..

.. ... - .. . .. _.
. .._

TRANSONIC TUNNEL BOUNDARY CONDITIONS AND WALL INTERFERENCE


I I I.G.l.

Conventional Ventilated Walls

The history of development of ventilated walls for transonic tunnels


has been reviewed by Goethert (Ref. 1).

The three primary milestones in

this development wereas follows:

1.

Theoretical analyses in Germany, Italy, and Japan during the

1930's indicated tunnel walls with proper arrangement of longitudinal slots would provide wall-interference-freeflow simulation.
This work wasinterrupted by World War 1 1 .
2. During 1946, Wright and Ward (Ref. 2) developed a "subsonic theory
for solid-blockage interference in circular wind tunnels with
walls slotted in the direction of flow." Subsequently, a 12-in.
diameter tunnel was designed with ten evenly spaced slots providing
a total openness ratio of one-eighth. The tunnel was put into
operation in 1947. This design d i d indeed prevent choking and
enabled testing t h r u Mach one of a model with 8.5% blockage.
3. Unfortunately, the solid slats in slotted tunnels were found to
and expansion waves at
cause significant reflecticns of bow shocks
supersonic speeds. Thus, around 1950 theoretical analyses at Cornel1
Aeronautical Laboratory* indicated better shock wave cancel lation
could be achieved with small-grain porous walls, Goodman (Ref. 3).
Unfortunately, exploratory testsshowed such walls clog easily, and
even worse, the porosity needed to vary with each change in Mach
number and/or shock strength. As an outgrowth of thiswork, the
now familiar perforated wall was selected
as a convenient compromise.
The early mathematical models of tunnel-wall-interference were
based on
the governing differential equation for perturbation velocity potential in subsonic,
compressible flow, e.g. ,'Baldwin, et

el. (Ref. 4).

The current name of this facilityis Calspan.

162

I f the wa 1 1 is solid, the boundary conditionfor no flow through the wall is

wall.

-a4
=

0 at solid

an

(3-6.2)

In the case of an open-jet, there canbe no pressure difference across the


boundary; thus
-a4
=
ax

0 at open boundary.

(3.G.3)

The corrections to measured valueso f model lift and pitching moment, which
result when solving Eq. (3.6.1) with either solid or open-wall boundary conditions,
are discussed in detail by Garner, et al. (Ref. 5).

The theoretical results

generally agree with experiments. In order to facilitate applications ofthls


type of boundary-induced corrections, Heyson (Ref.
6) has compiled solutions in
the form of curves
and charts.
In the case of ventilated walls, the boundary conditions become more complex.

In fact, the centralproblem of theoretical analysis of transonic-wall-interference


is selection of the appropriate boundary conditions to use with
Eq. (3.G.l).
This
is still an area of active research,and only a brief review of boundaryconditions
for ventilated tunnels wi 1 1 be given here.

A n approximate boundary condition for porous walls was derived


by Goodman
(Ref. 3, Part I I ) , viz.,

-1
R

at ideal, porous wall.

This boundary condition was derivedby assuming the average velocity normal to

(a linearized
the wall is proportional to the pressure drop through the wall
approximation to viscous flow through the wall),
and that the pressure outslde
the wall is equal to freestream static. The value of R, for a given wall, i s
usually determined experimentally by measuring pressure drop and the associated
mass flow througha wall sample (e.g. Ref. 71, i.e.

An a p p r o x i m a t e , u n i f o r m b o u n d a r y c o n d i t i o n f o r s l o t t e d w a l l s
byBaldwin,

(Ref. 4).

etal.

a 4
ax

+ K - a20
axan

= 0

where K i s r e l a t e d t o s l o t

K =

was d e r i v e d

DS
lr

In

aitd e a ls, l o t t e dw a l l

(3. G.6)

geometry by

{CSC

(E

-wS1 1
DS

and

Ds =
=

Ws
I n anattempt

d i s t a n c e between s l o c
t enters,

w i d t ho sf l o t s .

t o account f o rv i s c o u se f f e c t s ,B a l d w i n ,e ta l .s u g g e s t e d

a d d i n gt h ep o r o u sb o u n d a r yc o n d i t i o nt o

Eq.

(3.6.6)and

measuring R f o r t h e

slotofinterest.

a+
ax
K e l l e r (Ref.

8)

&
axan

-1 a4
Rs

0 at viscous, slotted wall

has r e c e n t l ys u g g e s t e dt h i sb o u n d a r yc o n d i t i o n

includevaryingslotwidth

by r e p l a c i n g l / R S w i t h l / R s

A f t e r more thantwodecadesoftesting
e x p e r i m e n t a lr e s u l t s ,

(3.6.8)

an

be extended t o

aK/ax.

and comparisons o f t h e o r y w i t h

i t i s now g e n e r a l l yr e c o g n i z e dt h a ta p p l i c a t i o no ft h e

l i n e a r b o u n d a r yc o n d i t i o n s ,w i t hc o n s t a n t

As an example o f t h i s d i s c r e p a n c y ,

va l u e so f

K and/or

R, i s inadequate.

a b r i e f summary o f a t y p i c a l case i s

presentedhere.
Lowe (Ref.

9)

measured t h ew a l lp o r o s i

p o r o s i t y and normalholes.

t y parameter f o r a w a l l w i t h

The standardporosityparameter,

e x p e r i m e n t a l l y by m e a s u r i n g t h e s t a t i c p r e s s u r e d r o p

164

22.5%

R , was determined

and mass f l o w a c r o s s

a s i d e w a l l o f theGeneral

9 - i n c hb y2 1 - i n c hs e c t i o no f

Speed Wind Tunnel.Datawereobtained


anda

corresponding unit Reynolds

meter),Usingthe
t h e o r yo b t a i n e d

for Mach numbers o f 0.5, 0.7, and 0.9


number range o f 19.7 t o 37.7 mill ion (per

measured v a l u e s o f
byLo

R and t h e r e s u l t s o f

and O l i v e r( R e f .

turecorrectionsindicatedthewalldidnot

w i t ht h e

correctedfor

have t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f

Thus, t h e r e s u l t s o f

an

an a i r c r a f t f o r c e

open-boundaryinterference,agreed

same model i nt h eL a n g l e y

1 i n e a rp e r t u r b a t i o n

IO), t h e upwash and stream1inecurva-

open j e t . T h i s c o n t r a d i c t e d t h e r e s u l t s o f t e s t s w i t h
which,when

Dynamics 4-footHigh

withdataobtained

8 ' TransonicPressureTunnel(Ref.

Lowe, as w e l l a so t h e r s ,i n d i c a t et h e

model
I

ll)*.

measurement o f R and
I

use o f t h e c l a s s i c a l , l i n e a r p e r t u r b a t i o n t h e o r y i s n o t v e r y u s e f u l f o r c a l i b r a t i n gt h ee f f e c t so ft r a n s o n i cw i n dt u n n e lw a l l s .I f , i ng e n e r a 1 , t h i sa p p r o a c ht o
measurements o f R f o r

c o r r e c t i n gf o rw a l li n t e r f e r e n c e

had provensuccessful,

porous and s l o t t e dt u n n e l sw o u l d

have become a s t a n d a r dp a r to ft r a n s o n i ct u n n e l

calibration.
The c u r r e n t consensus i s :t h et r u e ,t r a n s o n i c - t u n n e lb o u n d a r yc o n d i t i o n s
a r e dependent on t h el o c a lf l o wc o n d i t i o n sn e a rt h ew a l l .T h i s ,i nt u r n ,
adependence

means

onbothtunneloperatingconditions@theparticular
Newman and Klunker (Ref.

configuration, e.g.,

14).

model

Recent e f f o r t st oo b t a i n

improvedboundaryconditionsforfixed(passive)wallconditionsincludethe
s t u d yo fv a r i a t i o n si n

R between top and b o t t o mp e r f o r a t e dw a l l s ,

n o n l i n e a rb o u n d a r yc o n d i t i o n sf o rw a l l sw i t hn o r m a lh o l e s ,

walls, e.g.,Refs.

17 and 18.

Of

Ref.

Ref.

15, and

16, and s l o t t e d

c o u r s e ,t h eb a s i co b j e c t i v eo ft h e s es t u d i e s

t oa t t a i nd a t ac o r r e c t i o np r o c e d u r e sw h i c h

is

can r e l i a b l y account f o r t h e e f f e c t s o f

real,ventilatedwalls.

111.6.2.

Adaptive
Wall
Studies

The d i f f i c u l t i e s i n a p p l y i n g t r a n s o n i c w a l l c o r r e c t i o n s , w h i c h
reduce to s i m p l e m o d i f i c a t i o n s o f

do n o t

speed and angle o f a t t a c k , a r e w e l l

known.

of

A l s o , one o f t h e c o n c l u s i o n s o b t a i n e d w i t h t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l , l i n e a r t h e o r y

walleffectsistheimpossibilityofusinguniformporositytosimultaneously

The r e c e n t , s u p e r c r i t i c a l a i r f o i l t e s t s o f E l a c k w e l l
and Pounds (Ref. 12)
i n d i c a t et h ea c t u a l
boundary c o n d i t i o n s h i f t s t o w a r dt h ef r e e - j e ta sp o r o s i t y
increases,i.e.,thetransonicshock
moves f o r w a r d f o r a g i v e n Mach number.
T h i s same t r e n d was alsoobserved asa
r e s u l to fi n c r e a s e db l o c k a g ei nt h e
s u p e r c r i t i c a lc o n e - c y l i n d e rt e s t so f
Page (Ref. 1 3 ) .
165

eliminatetheeffectsofwallinterferenceonbothnormalforce
moment, Ref.

16.

Forthesereasons,otherprocedureshave
b e i n gi n v e s t i g a t e d .

been suggested and a r e c u r r e n t l y

The theorydeveloped

suggestedthatthepressuredistribution

more c o r r e c t .

These a u t h o r s

c o r r e s p o n d i n gt ot h e
t h e measuredand
a r et h e n

amodel

in

( I ) t h ef l o w - d e f l e c t i o na n g l e s

The scheme t h e ni n v o l v e sc a l c u l a t i o no f

w h i c hc o r r e s p o n dt ot h e

be

and t h e s t r e a m l i n e d e f l e c t i o n a n g l e

measured a l o n gt h et u n n e lw a l l s( o u t s i d et h eb o u n d a r yl a y e r )w i t h
place.

19) and

by F e r r i and Baronti(Ref.

20) seems t o o f f e rt h ep r o m i s eo fb e i n g

Sears(Ref.

and p i t c h i n g

measured pressuredata

and (2) t h e p r e s s u r e d i s t r i b u t i o n

measured flow d e f l e c t i o na n g l e s .

calculatedpressuredistributions

The d i f f e r e n c e between

andstreamlinedeflections

used t o accomplish one o f t h e f o l l o w i n g :

1.

d e t e r m i n et h ew a l lp o r o s i t yw h i c he l i m i n a t e sw a l l
i n t e r f e r e n c ef o r

2.

a g i v e ne x t e r n a lp r e s s u r ed i s t r i b u t i o n ,

p r o v i d et h ec o r r e c tp r e s s u r ed i s t r i b u t i o no u t s i d e
oftheporouswallfor

3.

a givenporositydistribution,

d e t e r m i n ew a l lc o n t o u r st oc o n f o r mw i t hf r e e - a i r
stream1 ines, o r

4.

c a l c u l a t et h ew a l lc o r r e c t i o n st o

be a p p l i e dt ot h e

e x p e r i m e n t a rl e s u l t s .
One o f t h e

it o n l y r e q u i r e s t h e

advantages o f t h i s p r o c e d u r e i s t h a t

l i n e a r i z e dp e r t u r b a t i o ne q u a t i o n st o

be v a l i d n e a rt h ew a l l .T h i s

procedure may be v a l i d as long as supersonicpockets


t u n n e lw a l l s .

The primaryadvantage

t oe s t a b l i s ht h ea p p r o p r i a t e

means t h e

do n o t e x t e n d t o t h e

o ft h i sp r o c e d u r ei st h a t

boundaryconditions.

i t uses d a t a

However, asnoted

by F e r r i

and B a r o n t i ,t h ep r i m a r yd i s a d v a n t a g e sa r et h er e q u i r e m e n t sf o r" a c c u r a t e
measurements o f f l o w d e f l e c t i o n s

and p r e s s u r e v a r i a t i o n s a t s e v e r a l a n g u l a r

p o s i t i o n s and a t many s t a t i o n s a l o n g t h e t e s t s e c t i o n . "


I nc o n j u n c t i o nw i t ht h et h e o r yo fF e r r i
gram was begun i n t h e

15" T r i s o n i c Gasdynamics F a c i l i t y a t t h e

Dynamics Laboratory.SinceStreamlineanglescan
away from t h e w a l l , t h e t h e o r y
s t a t i cp r e s s u r e s
modeland

166

and Baronti,anexperimentalpro-

bemeasuredmore

accurately

was s u b s e q u e n t l y m o d i f i e d t o u s e f l o w a n g l e s

measured a t an i n t e r m e d i a t e" m i d f i e l d 1 'l o c a t i o n

w a l l .F o ra n g u l a r i t y

Air F o r c e F l i g h t

measurements, a new h o t - f i l m ,

and

between t h e

20 deg-wedge probe

was designed and f a b r i c a t e d .C a l i b r a t i o nt e s t s


resolving flow angles to within
togetherwith

+2
-

show it t o be capableof

minutes o f a r c

(Ref.21).Thisprobe,

a c o n v e n t i o n a l , cone-cylinder,static-pressure probe,provides

t h ei n p u tr e q u i r e d

b yt h eF e r r i

Results of this

and Barontitheory.

workhavedemonstratedthe

f e a s i b i l i t y o f changing

slotted-wallcontourtominimizetransonic-wall-interferencewiththeflow
o v e r 6% t h i c k b i c o n v e x a i r f o i l s a t z e r o a n g l e - o f - a t t a c k .

As expected,the

will need t o be

r e s u l t sf o rn o n z e r oa n g l e s - o f - a t t a c ki n d i c a t et h ew a l lc o n t o u r
changed as changes i n l i f t and/or model c o n f i g u r a t i o na r e
l i f t i n g a i r f o i l models i sc o n t i n u i n g .

However,enough

abletoconcludethatthisapproachoffers
viousapproach

The s t u d yo f

r e s u l t sa r e

now a v a i l -

a decidedadvantageoverthepre-

o f measuringpressuredrop

and t h e n t r y i n g t o

made.

and mass flow through a w a l l sample

use l i n e a r boundaryconditions

t o e s t i m a t e wa1l-model

interferencefactors.
Work i s a l s o underway a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f
and ONERA (France),Ref.

Southampton(England),Ref.

22,

23, on u s i n g a d j u s t a b l e , s o l i d w a l l s t o c o n f o r m w i t h

f r e e - a i rs t r e a m l i n e s .

24) have reportedonrecentprogresswiththeCalspan

V i d a l ,e ta l .( R e f .

o n e - f o o t ,s e l f - c o r r e c t i n gt u n n e l .

The c o n c l u s i o n sr e g a r d i n gt r a n s o n i cc r o s s -

f l o wc h a r a c t e r i s t i c so fp e r f o r a t e dw a l l sa r eq u i t eI n t e r e s t i n g .

The f o l l o w i n g

i s quotedfromtheirpaper.
"The u s u a lt h e o r e t i c a la p p r o a c h

i s t o assume t h a tt h e

normal v e l o c i t y

component i nt h ei n v i s c i ds t r e a mi sl i n e a r l yr e l a t e dt ot h ev e l o c i t y
t h r o u g ht h ew a l l ,w h i c hi sl i n e a r l yr e l a t e dt ot h ep r e s s u r ed r o pa c r o s s
t h ew a l l .

Our r e s u l t s show t h a tn e i t h e rl i n e a rr e l a t i o ni sa p p l i c a b l e

and t h a tt h ew a l l
i n v i s c i ds t r e a mb y

b o u n d a r yl a y e ra m p l i f i e st h en o r m a lv e l o c i t yi nt h e

1.15 t o 6.

a f a c t o rr a n g i n ga tl e a s tf r o m

n o t appear t o be f e a s i b l e t o c a l i b r a t e t h i s
t i o n because t h e l a t t e r

will depend,

o ft h e

The mainadvantage

boundarylayer.

t h a t it i s n o n i n t r u s i v e anddoes

I t does

boundary l a y e r a m p l i f i c a -

inpart,

on t h eu p s t r e a mh i s t o r y

t ot h ef l o w m e t e rt e c h n i q u ei s

n o tp r o d u c ed i s t u r b a n c e si nt h ef l o w f i e l d .

T h i s one advantage i s outweighed by t h e d i s a d v a n t a g e s c i t e d

above.

C o n s e q u e n t l y ,t h ef l o w m e t e rt e c h n i q u ef o ri n f e r r i n gt h en o r m a lv e l o c i t y
componenthasbeen

discarded, and we a r e now u s i n g c o n v e n t i o n a l p i t c h

probes f o r t h i s d e t e r m i n a t i o n . "

Thus, this i s another case which shows the linear boundary condition at ventilated, transonic walls is basically incorrect.
The basic technique used to correct wall porosity is as follows. First,
theoretical estimates of the unconfined, longitudinal, disturbance-velocities,
are made at a chosen distance f r o m the tunnel wall. The wall porosities are
initially set to provide these distributions
by monitoring the local static
pressures with a long survey pipe.

Second, the normal velocity components, at

this same distance, are measured with small pitch probes


and used as input for
solutions of thc transonic, small-disturbance equation which assume unconfined
flow.

The resulting solutions provide new approximations for the longitudinal

velocity distributions. The wall porosities and/or plenum pressures are then
adjusted to provide this new velocity distribution. Next, the normal components are again measured,and the process continuesuntil the differences
between all the normal velocity components, measuredat successive iterations,
are less than 0.0005 Vm. At this point, unconfined flow conditions are assumed
to be achieved.
Experience with this iterative procedure
has shown that the convergence
criterion is unnecessarily stringent, and a better criterion is being considered. However, for the case of an NACA 0012 airfoil at M = 0.55, a =
and

6O,

4O

and M = 0.725, a = 2O convergence was obtainedin five to seven

iterations. The significant result was the measured airfoil pressure distribution, obtained in the one-foot tunnel with wall control, agreed very well with
data obtained with the same airfoil
in the 8-foot tunnel.
still a large
Although the Calspan results are encouraging, there are
number of problems to overcome before three dimensional models be
cansimilarly
tested, i.e., adequate theoretical modelso f 30 transonic flows and porosity
adjustment of all four walls.

*The

perforated walls are divided


into ten segments on the top and eight on the
bottom. The four central segments in the top wall and the two central segments
in the bottom wall are designed to provide a n adjustable porosity with linear
variation in the streamwise direction. Each segment has a separate plenum for
individual control of suction or blowing.

168

Recently, Kemp (Ref. 25) has suggested a h y b r i d scheme.

He hasproposed

u s i n gl i m i t e da d a p t i v e - w a l lc o n t r o lt or e d u c ei n t e r f e r e n c et oa n a l y t i c a l l y
,

c o r r e c t a b l el e v e l s .I n

sumnary, r e d u c t i o no tf r a n s o n i c - w a l l - i n t e r f e r e n c e

improveddata-correction
and Europe.

methods a r e a r e a s o f a c t i v e r e s e a r c h i n t h e

Considerableprogress

111.6.3.

noisethan

etal.

do p e r f o r a t e dw a l l s .

phenomena hasbeen

and WallGeneratedNoise

(Ref.

161, s l o t t e d - w a l lt u n n e l sg e n e r a t el e s s

An i l l u s t r a t i o n o f t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h i s

g i v e n by Cumning and Lowe (Ref.

a i r c r a f t model was t e s t e d i n t h e
Near-interference-free data

USA, Canada,

i sa n t i c i p a t e di nt h en e a rf u t u r e .

BoundaryLayers

As notedbyPindzola,

and

11).

I nt h e i rt e s t s ,

same tunnel w i t h bothporous

anF-111

and s l o t t e d w a l l s .

and minimum drag were obtained over

a Machnumber

o f 0.60 t o 0.80 w i t ht h es l o t t e dw a l l s .W i t ht r a n s i t i o nf r e e ,t h i sc o r r e s p o n d e d
t o anobservedrearward
p o r o u sw a l lt e s t s .

movement of boundary l a y e r t r a n s i t i o n

Thus,

t h i sp r o v i d e s

compared t o t h e

a s p e c i f i c case o fw a l l - g e n e r a t e dn o i s e
f

a f f e c t i n g b o u n d a r yl a y e rt r a n s i t i o n

I n thesupersonic
(Ref.28)havedeveloped

onan

a i r c r a f t model.

c o r r e l a t i o n st or e l a t et u n n e lw a l l

p r o p e r t i e st or a d i a t e dn o i s e . " "

boundarylayer

And i nt h et r a n s o n i cr a n g e ,t h er e c e n tt e s t s

(Ref. 24) and S t a r r (Ref.29)

o fV i d a l ,e ta l .

27) and Dougherty

and hypersonic speed regimesPate(Ref.

r e a f f i r mt h ee s s e n t i a lr o l et h e

boundary l a y e rp l a y si nd e t e r m i n i n gw a l lc r o s s f l o wc h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

These t e s t s ,

among others,havealsodemonstratedthatmodel-inducedpressuregradientscan
s i g n i f i c a n t l ya l t e rw a l l - b o u n d a r y - l a y e r si nt r a n s o n i ct u n n e l s .T h i s
empty-tunnelboundary-layersurveysmust
surveyswithmodels

i np l a c e( p a r t i c u l a r l y

summary, w a l l boundarylayersurveysare

means

be supplemented by t a k i n g a d d i t i o n a l

for h i g h l i f t c o n f i g u r a t i o n s ) .I n
a n e c e s s a r yp a r to fc a l i b r a t i n gb o t h

t r a n s o n i c and supersonictunnels.

The new N a t i o n a l T r a n s o n i c F a c i l i t y a t
NASA Langley will have s l o t t e d w a l l s
26.
becausetheygeneratelessnoise
and i n t e r f e r e n c e a t s u b s o n i c
speeds,Ref.
Parker(Ref.
30) a l s o found s l o t t e d w a l l s , asopposed
t op e r f o r a t e dw a l l s ,
p r o v i d e d amore u n i f o r m c e n t e r l i n e Machnumber d i s t r i b u t i o n up t o M
1.1.

**Tunnelnoise

measurements a r ed i s c u s s e di ng r e a t e rd e t a i li nS e c t i o n

I1I.F.

169

A review of various

means f o r measuring boundary layer profiles has

31).

g i v e n byKennerandHopkins(Ref.
l a y e r measurementsona

been

These investigatorsobtainedboundary

supersonictunnelwail

(2.4 < HOD,<3.4)

with a s i n g l e

t r a v e r s i n g p r o b e ,t h r e ed i f f e r e n tr a k e s ,

and a 12 deg.wedge

theleading

may c o n s u l t t h i s r e f e r e n c e f o r d e t a i l s

edge.

The i n t e r e s t e dr e a d e r

o f boundary layerprobedesigns
expected.Also,Allen(Ref.
o f Machnumber

anda
32)has

with orifices in

discussionoftheresultsthat

can be

g i v e na g e n e r a ld i s c u s s i o no ft h ee f f e c t s

on P i t o t probe measurement e r r o r s i n t u r b u l e n t

boundarylayers.

111.6.

References

1.

Goethert, E. H. : Transonic Wind Tunnel Testing, Pergamon Press, 1961.

2.

Wright, R. H. and Ward, V. G.:

"NACA Transonic Wind-Tunnel Test Sections,"

NACA Report 1231 , June 1955 (supercedesNACA RH L8J06, 1948).

3.

Goadman, T.. R.:

"The Porous Wall Wind Tunnel: Part I1

Interference Effect

on a Cylindrical Body in a Two;Dimensional Tunnel at Subsonic Speed,"

- Reflection and Absorption of Shock


No. AD-706-A-l , Nov. 1950, "Part IV -

Rept. No. AD-594-A-3, 1950, "Part 1 1 1


Waves at Supersonic Speeds,I' Rept.

Subsonic interference Problems in a Circular Tunnel," Rept. No. AD-706-A-2,


Aug. 1951, Cornel1 Aero. Lab.,

4.

inc.

Baldwin, B. S . ; Turner, J. 8.; and Knechtel, E. D.:

"Wall Interference in

Wind Tunnels with Slottedand Porous Boundaries at Subsonic Speeds,"


NACA TN 3176, May 1954.

5. Garner,

C. ; Rogers, E. W. E. ; Acum, W. E. A. ; and Maskel 1 , E. C. : "Subsonic Wind Tunnel Wall Corrections," AGARDograph 109,Oct. 1966.
H.

6. Heyson, H.

H.:

"Rapid Estimation of Wind-Tunnel Corrections with Application

to Wind-Tunnel and Model Design," NASA TN 0-6416, Sept. 1971.

7. Pindzola,

W. L.:
"A Summary of Perforated Wall Wind Tunnel
Studies at the Arnold Engineering Development Center,'' AEDC-TR-60-9,
August 1960.

8.

M. and Chew,

Keller, J. D.:

"Numerical Calculation of Boundary-induced Interference

in

Slotted or Perforated Wind Tunnels Including Viscous Effects in Slots,"

NASA TN 0-687 1 , Aug. 1 972.

9. Lowe, W.

H.:

"Subsonic Crossflow Calibration of a 22.5 Percent Perforated

Wall," HST-TR-355-3, General Dynamics, presented at39th STA Meeting, Mar.

1973.
10.

Lo, C. F. and Oliver, R. H.: "Boundary Interference in a Rectangular Wind


Tunnel with Perforated \Jal 1s
,I@AEDC-TR-70-67, Apr 1 1
1970.

11.

Cumming, D. P. and Lowe, W. H.:

"Experimental Wall Interference Studies

in a Transonic Wind Tunnel," AlAA Paper No. 71-292, Mar. 1971.

171

12.

Blackwell, J. A.,
Effects ona

G . A.:

Jr. andPounds,

"Wind TunnelWallInterference

SupercriticalAirfoilatTransonic

Speeds,''

1976.

Proc. A I M 9 t h Aerodynamic TestingConference,June

13.

Page, W. A.:

"ExperimentalStudy

aboutSlenderCone-Cylinders

Paper No.1,

o ft h eE q u i v a l e n c eo fT r a n s o n i cF l o w

of Circular

and E l l i p t i c CrossSection,"

NACA TN 4233, A p r i 1 1958.

14.

Newman, P. A.

and Klunker, E. B.:

andBody-Shape

"NumericalModeling

E f f e c t s on TransonicFlow

P a r t 1 1 of Aerodynamic A n a l y s i s R e q u i r i n g

o f Tunnel-Wall

Over F i n i t e L i f t i n g Wings,"

NASA SP-

AdvancedComputers,

347, Mar. 1975.


15.

Mokry,

M.; Peake, 0. J.; andBowker,

A.

J. : "Wall

D i m e n s i o n a lS u p e r c r i t i c a lA i r f o i l s ,U s i n gW a l lP r e s s u r e
D e t e r m i n et h eP o r o s i t yF a c t o r sf o r
Nat'l.

16.

Aero.Estab.,Ottawa,

WorkingSections,"

18.

Berndt, S . B. andSorensen,

NRC-13894,

1974.

and C h e v a l li e r ,

J. P.:

"Design o fT r a n s o n i c

8 o f A F u r t h e r Review o f Current"Research Aimed a t

and Operation o f Large WindTunnel-s.,

theDesign

17.

App.

Measurements t o

Tunnel F l o o r and Ceiling,"

Canada,
Feb.

Pindzola, M. ; Binion, T. W.;

I n t e r f e r e n c e on Two-

H.:

AGARD-AR-83,

Sept.

"Flow P r o p e r t i e s o f S l o t t e dW a l l sf o r

TransonicTestSections,"

Paper No. 17, WindtunnelDesignandTesting

Techniques, AGARD-CP-174,

Mar. 1976.

Barnwell, R. W. :

1975.

"Improvements i nt h eS l o t t e d - W a l l

Boundary Conditions,''

Paper No. 3, Proc. A l A A 9 t h Aerodynamic Test-ing-Conference, June 1976.

19.

F e r r i , A.

and B a r o n t i , P.:

AIM Jour.,

20.

Sears, W.

T. M. :

Goodyer, M.

AeronauticalJour.,Vol.

78,

1974.
"Re du c t i o n o f T r a n s o n i cS l o t t e dW a l lI n t e r f e r e n c e

o f SlatContouring,''
22.

Wind-Tunnel Corrections,''

973.

R. : "Se f C o r r e c t i n g Wind Tunnels,"

Feb.-Mar.
21.
Weeks,

Jan.

"A Method f o rT r a n s o n i c

J.:

AFFDL-TR-74-139,

"The Low
Speed

13, WindtunnelDesign

by Means

Mar. 1975.

SelfStreamliningWindtunnel,"

and TestingTechniques,

AGARD-CP-174,

Paper No.
Mar. 1976-

C h e v a l li e r ,

23

J. P. :

" S o u f f l e r i eT r a n s s o n i q u e

A ParoisAuto-Adaptable,"

AGARD-CP-174,

Paper No, 12, \ J i n d t~u n n e l ~ D e s i g nand TestingTechniques,


~

Mar.

1976.

24.

25

B., Jr.:

Kemp, W.

"Toward t h eC o r r e c t a b l eI n t e r f e r e n c eT r a n s o n i c

Wind

Tunnel , ' I Proc. A l A A 9 t h AerodynamicTesting Conference, June 1976.


~~

26.

HcKinney, L. W.

"
"

R. R . :

andHowell,

"The C h a r a c t e r i s t i c so ft h eP l a n n e d

Proc. -A
" l A A 9 t h Aerodynamic TestingConference,

N a t i o n a lT r a n s o n i cF a c i l i t y , ' '
June 1976.
27.

Pate, S. R.:

"Measurementsand

onSharpSlender
28.

Dougherty, N.

Cones a t H i g h

S.:

29.

Starr,

Dec. 1975.

R. F.:

Speeds,"

A l A A Jour.,Sept.

" C o r r e l a t i o n of T r a n s i t i o nR e y n o l d s

dynamicNoiseLevels
Jour.,

C o r r e l a t i o n s o f T r a n s i t i o n Reynolds Numbers

i n a Wind Tunnel a t MachNumbers

1971.

Number w i t h Aero-

2.0

3.0,"

"Experiments t o Assess t h eI n f l u e n c e

o f Changes i n t h e

WallBoundaryLayeronTransonicWallCrossflowCharacteristics,''
TunnelDesignandTestingTechniques,

30

Parker, R. L.,

Jr.:

AGARD-CP-174,

"Fiow G e n e r a t i o nP r o p e r t i e s

E. J.:"Accuracy

Keener, E . R. and Hopkins,


TurbulentBoundary-Layer

Mar;

Tunnel

1976-

o f F i v eT r a n s o n i c

AEDC-TR-75-88,

TunnelTestSectionWallConfigurations,''

31.

AlAA

Aug.

Wind

1975.

o f P i t o t - P r e s s u r e Rakes f o r

Measurements i n SupersonicFlow,"

NASA TN D-6229,

Mar. 1971.
32.

A l l e n , J.

M.:

" E f f e c t so f

T u r b u l e n t BoundaryLayer
PP. 949-590,

Mach
Number
,I'

on Pitot-ProbeDisplacement

NASA TN D-7466,

in a

June 1974 ( a l s o see A l A A Jour.,

J u l y 1975).

173

1II.H.

STANDARD
MODELS

III.H.l.
Theneed
andModel

1.

Ref.

f o r standardmodels

T e s t i n gP a n e l .I n

thepurpose

AGARD Force
Models

AGARD Wind Tunnel

was r e c o g n i z e d e a r l y b y t h e

1952, t h i sp a n e la d o p t e d

AGARD Models A and B for

o f b u i l d i n g and t e s t i n g c a l i b r a t i o n models i n supersonictunnels,

I t was t h o u g h tt h a tt h i sw o u l d

b e" e x t r e m e l yu s e f u li ne s t a b l i s h i n g

standards o f comparisonbetweenwindtunnels."

It w o u l da l s o

be u s e f u l i n

o f changes i n Reynolds number, t u r b u l e n c e , model s i z e and

s t u d y i n gt h ee f f e c t s

model f a b r i c a t i o nt o l e r a n c e s .

AGARD Model A was an e x i s t i n g r o c k e t


by NACA and had t h ep r i o rd e s i g n a t i o n
c o m b i n a t i o nw h i c hc o n s i s t so f

o f RH-IO.

deltawingwitha

and h o r i z o n t a lt a i ls u r f a c e s .T h i sc o n f i g u r a t i o n

wouldbe

speedrange.''

sym-

1954, t h e AGARD Model B was m o d i f i e d

nated AGARD Model C and was d e s i g n e d " p r i m a r i l y f o r t e s t i n g


t h et r a n s o n i c

had been designed

AGARD Model B i s awing-body

an o g i v e - c y l i n d e r anda

m e t r i c a l , 4% c i r c u l a r - a r c a i r f o i l . I n

t o i n c l u d ev e r t i c a l

body w i t h f i n s w h i c h

The purpose o f t h e t a i l

was desig-

and c a l i b r a t i o n i n

was t o have a model which

more s e n s i t i v e t o flow c u r v a t u r e and wall r e f l e c t i o n s o f shockand/or

expansion waves.

AGARD models a r e g i v e n i n

The g e o m e t r i c a l s p e c i f i c a t i o n s f o r t h e v a r i o u s
References 1 , 2 and

4.

Goethert(Ref.

3.

5) a l s od i s c u s s e s

AGARD Models B and C.


tests.
inthe

The associatedwindtunneldata

The f o l l o w i n gc o n c l u s i o n

Based oncomparisons

o f d a t af o r

PWT 16T TransonicTunnel,

c o u l d beachieved

1% b l o c k a g er a t i o .

AEDC d a t ao b t a i n e df o r

was d e r i v e df r o mt h e s ee a r l y

models h a v i n g 1.15% and 0.01% blockage

i t was c o n c l u d e d t h a t s a t i s f a c t o r y r e s u l t s

i f a i r c r a f t models d i d n o t

i nt r a n s o n i ct u n n e l s

exceedabout

o f thumb

Responses t o t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e i n d i c a t e t h i s r u l e

has been a d o p t e da l m o s tu n i v e r s a l l y .
(Ref.

some o f t h e e a r l y

i s presented i n Reference

However, f o rp r e c i s i o nt e s t i n g ,G o e t h e r t

5) recommended b l o c k a g er a t i o s

be keptassmallas

0.5% and w i t h awing

span n o te x c e e d i n gh a l ft h et u n n e lw i d t h .
These e a r l y c o n c l u s i o n s werebasedon
The more r e c e n t t e s t i n g o f t h e p a s t
measure p r e s s u r ed i s t r i b u t i o n s .

the results of testing force

Few years hasemployedmodels


I t i s now known t h a t a i r c r a f t

designed t o
models w i t h 1%

t u n n e lb l o c k a g ec a ne x p e r i e n c ec o n s i d e r a b l ew a l li n t e r f e r e n c e ,e s p e c i a l l yn e a r

174

models.

even i n t h eb e s tv e n t i l a t e dt u n n e l s .

Mach
one,

of pressuremodels

sonicwallinterferencerequiretheuse

of tran-

Thus, c u r r e n ts t u d i e s

to providethe

necessary data.

lll.H.2.
Inthepast,

Transonic
Pressure
Models:

o f a i r f o i l s have been used i n s t u d i e s o f t r a n s o n i c

anumber

w a l li n t e r f e r e n c e .

2-D

What f o l l o w s i s

a brieflistofairfoils

whichhavebeen

employed r e c e n t l y .
Weeks (Ref.
w a l li n t e r f e r e n c e

64 A010

*
airfoil

6) hasused

a s y m n e t r i c a l , 6% c i r c u l a r - a r c a i r f o i l

a t ONERA (Ref. 7) f o rt w o - d i m e n s i o n a ls t u d i e s

has beenused

w i t ha d j u s t a b l ep o r o s i t y
p r o v i d eb a s e l i n ef o r c e

flow q u a l i t y .

hasbeen

NACA 0012 a i r f o i l , Ref.

t e s t e di nt h eC a l s p a n

9.

8 - f t Tunnel t o

and p r e s s u r ed a t aw h i c ha r ew a l l - i n t e r f e r e n c e - f r e e .A l s o ,
found t o be l e s s s e n s i t i v e t o

Thus, P i n d z o l a ,e ta l .

a i r f o i l beadoptedas

of

Whereas, C a l s p a ns t u d i e so fw a l l s

have u t i l i z e d t h e s y m m e t r i c a l

(6 in.) chord modelhasbeen

this airfoil

NACA

i n a c o n t o u r e d ,s l o t t e d - w a l tl u n n e l .I nF r a n c e ,a n

s o l i d ,a d j u s t a b l ew a l l si nt r a n s o n i ct u n n e l s .
A 15.2 cm

t o study

(Ref.

Reynolds number and tunnel

10) have recommended t h e NACA 0012

a standard 2-D model i n o r d e r t h a t t r a n s o n i c w a l l d e v e l o p -

ment work have a c m o n basis.

I I l.H.3.
A 20deg

TransonicPressureModels:

c o n e - c y l i n d e r hasbeenused

3-0

i n anumber

of transonic facilities

( p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r M > 1) t o s e l e c t o p e r a t i o n a l v a l u e s o f w a l l p o r o s i t y , w a l l
a n g l e and plenumpumping.

Davis and Graham (Ref.

c a s ew h i c hi l l u s t r a t e st h i sp r o c e d u r e .

1 1 ) havedescribed

They have a l s or e v i e w e dt h ew a l l -

i n t e r f e r e n c e - f r e e ,t r a n s o n i cd a t aw h i c hi sa v a i l a b l ef o rt h i s

A t onetime,

i t was t h o u g h tt h a t

model geometry.

if thewallparameterswereselected

g i v e minimum i n t e r f e r e n c e on t h i s model,through
models.However,

t e s t s have shown t h i si sn o tt h e

case.Forexample,Davis'(Ref.12)transonic

AGARD Model B

i n d i c a t e db e t t e r

datacouldbeobtainedwithdifferentwallsettings.

to

Mach one, t h i s w o u l d b e s a t i s -

f a c t o r y for t e s t i n g a l l t y p e s o f
t e s t sw i t ha n

a typical

anumber

ofaircraft

agreement w i t h t h e

model

AGARD r e f e r e n c e

Thus, c a r e must b ee x e r c i s e di ns e l e c t i n g
it i s now r e c o g n i z e dt h a t

ular,

w h i c ha r et o
n o ty e t

a c a l i b r a t i o n model.

a c a l i b r a t i o n model mustbe

' % i m i l a r l l t o models

be t e s t e d .U n f o r t u n a t e l y ,p r e c i s ec r i t e r i af o r

how s i m i l a r have

A l l t h a t may be s a i d a t t h i s t i m e i s :

been defined.

o fs t a n d a r dc a l i b r a t i o n

I np a r t i c -

more than one type

model i s necessary f o r v a l i d t e s t i n g o f m i s s i l e , a i r f o i l ,

and a i r c r a f t models i n e x i s t i n g t r a n s o n i c t u n n e l s .
The t e s t s o f

Treon, e t a l .

(Refs.

13 and 14) e s t a b l i s h e dt h e

need f o r

i d e n t i c a l models and i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n when comparing r e s u l t s f r o m d i f f e r e n t t u n n e l s .I nt h i ss t u d y ,

a 0.0226-scale

8-ft.,

theCalspan

Lockheed C-5A was t e s t e di n

and t h e AEDC 1 6 - f t .

t h e NASA Ames 11-by 1 1 - f t . ,

sonicwindtunnels.
forcebalance

model o ft h e

The same c o m b i n a t i o no fm d e l - s u p p o r ts t i n g

(16T) t r a n -

and i n t e r n a l

was used i n each o f t h et u n n e l s .T h i sa l l o w e da n a l y s e s

ferences i n blockage,buoyancy

of s m a l l d i f -

and Reynolds number e f f e c t s w h i c h w o u l d n o t

have

been p o s s i b l e i f d i f f e r e n t models hadbeenused.

I na d d i t i o nt of o r c e s

moments, seven o r i f i c e s onthefuselagewereused

t o measure l o c a l s t a t i c p r e s -

sure.Thisenabledcomparisons
e f f e c t i v ef r e e s t r e a m

o f buoyancyandmodel-induced

Mach number.

and e f f e c t i v eR e y n o l d s

and

changes i n

The r e s u l t i n g c o r r e c t i o n s f o r r e l a t i v e

numberk reducedthespread

inaxialforce

by

buoyancy

75 percent

f o r Mach number b e l o w t h e d r a g r i s e v a l u e ? F i n a l l y , t h e s e t e s t s p e r m i t t e d
estimatesofthe"bestexpectancyagreement"betweendataobtained

inthethree

facilities.
The u t i l i t y o f t h e
i nS e c t i o n

AEDC t r a n s i t i o n cone(Refs.

1 I I . F . and will n o t be repeatedhere.

t h a tt h i ss t u d yo ft h ee f f e c t so ft u n n e le n v i r o n m e n t
was a l s o basedon
the same model,

thefundamentalpremiseemployed

15-17) has been discussed


However, it should be noted
o nb o u n d a r yl a y e rt r a n s i t i o n
by Treon, e t a l .

Namely,

i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n , and support mechanism a r e e s s e n t i a l f o r m e a n i n g f u l

results.

A s i m p l i f i e d ,b u tv e r s a t i l e ,a i r c r a f t
and 4T t r a n s o n i ct u n n e l s

by Binion(Ref.

modelhasbeen

8).

Themodel

c o n s i s t so f

m e t r i c a l l ys i m i l a r ,c e n t e r b o d i e sw i t hr e c t a n g u l a r - p l a n f o r m
bodieshavepointed,ogive-typenoses
p r o f ile.

*
A*

See
p.

The smal l e r body servedas

AEDC 16T
twogeo-

t e s t e di nt h e

and thewingshavethe

wings.

The c e n t e r -

NACA 63 A006 a i r f o i l

a t a i 1 and was mountedona

separateforce

150.

Subsequent t o t h i s work,Binion
and Lo (Ref. 15) showed, i n some cases,wall
i n t e r f e r e n c e canovershadow t h e e f f e c t s o f R e y n o l d s
number v a r i a t i o n s .

balance and sting.

Four different model arrangementswere tested in both tunnels,

viz., the wing by itself, the tall by itself, and the wing with tail mounted close
behind and at a more aft position.

and pressure distributions


After the force tests, the tests were repeated
were measured on the centerbodies
and the wings.

Angles of attack were

repeated by duplicating the pressure difference across the model forebody which
was initially calibrated as a functlon of a in the 16T.
The conclusions reached by Binion include the following.

1.

Flow angulari.tY can be induced into the tunnel flaw which is a function

of model configuration, model attitude, and tunnel configuration. This


flow angularity i s distinct from theusual upwash correctionand varies
nonlinearly with Mach numberand model incldence. No existing theoretical corrections can account for
this phenomena.

2.

The movable tail feature confirmed the expected dependence of wall


interference on model configuration in the transonic regime. Also,
the more-aft tail position encountered wall-reflected disturbances
at supersonic Mach numbers.

3. The attainment of an interference-free value oflift does not ensure


an interference-free flow field.

4. There i s no value of porosity, with the present


AEDC 4T walls, which
this aircraft
will yield interference-free pressure distributions for
model (0.9% blockage) when extensive regionso f supercritical flaw
exists.

The magnitude o f wall interference appears tobe a function

of size and extent of supersonic pockets


and the model-induced
pressure gradient at the wall.
A transonic transport model has been designed and developed at ONERA and

has been offered as a standard for transonic tunnel calibrations. A family

of five different sizeshas been fabricated so that an appropriate s i z e i s


available for even small tunnels. However, only the largest model provides
for measurements of wing pressure distributlons. An equivalent body of
revolution i s also available for thelarge model. A description of the model
geometry may be foundin Reference 19.

177
- .

model ( l a r g e M 5 and 1/4 s c a l es m a l l e r

Two s i z e s o f t h i s

H3) have r e c e n t l y

AEDC 16T and 4T t u n n e l s and t h e NASA Ames 1 1 - f t t u n n e l as

been t e s t e d i n t h e

p a r t o f a c o o p e r a t i v ep r o g r a mw i t h

ONERA.

The statedpurposes

of thisstudy

for (1) t h e e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e o r e t i c a l

were ' ' t o p r o v i d e an experimentaldatabase

or e m p i r i c a l w a l l - i n t e r f e r e n c e c o r r e c t i o n f a c t o r s

and ( 2 ) t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f

guidelinestoallowreasonableselectionofwind-tunnel-to-modelsizeratios
i nt h et r a n s o n i c

speed regime.''

The t e s tr e s u l t s

and e v a l u a t i o na r er e p o r t e d

by B i n i o n (Ref.19).
An unexpected r e s u l t o f t h e s e t e s t s
number.

I nf a c t ,t h e

was t h e o b s e r v e d s e n s i t i v i t y t o R e y n o l d s

modelswerefound

when boundary l a y e r t r a n s i t i o n

t o bemore

s e n s i t i v et o

Reynolds number

was f i x e dt h a nw i t hf r e et r a n s i t i o n .A l s o ,

greatervariationofthedatafromtunnel-to-tunneloccurredwithfixedtransition.

from t h e l a r g e r

Wing pressuredata

causedby

d i f f e r e n c e si n

s e p a r a t i o n .F i n a l l y ,
wereused

model showed t h e s ed i f f e r e n c e sw e r e

shock-boundarylayerinteractions

even t h o u g hs t a t e - o f - t h e - a r tm a n u f a c t u r i n gt o l e r a n c e s

t of a b r i c a t e ,t h em o d e l s ,t h e r ea p p e a r st o

incidence between t h e twomodels.


sons o f p i t c h i n g

and t r a i l i n g edge

be s m a l l d i f f e r e n c e s i n t a i l

Thisprecludedusefulmodel-to-modelcompari-

I n summary, t h e ONERA modelswerefound

moment.

t o be o v e r l y

s e n s i t i v e t o Reynolds number and t u n n e l f l o w q u a l i t y

and e x h i b i t e d i n s u f f i c i e n t

model s i m i l a r i t yf o ra c c u r a t es t u d i e so fw a l li n t e r f e r e n c e .

Thus, t h e

objectivesofthesetests

were notachieved.

Based o n e x p e r i e n c e w i t h t h e
models, t h e f o l l o w i n g c r i t e r i a

AEDC s i m p l i f i e d a i r c r a f t
haveevolved

f o r amodel

modeland

t h e ONERA

tostudytransonicwall-

interferenceproblems.*

1.

The a i r c r a f t model shouldhave

a s m a l lc y l i n d r i c a lc e n t e r b o d yw i t h

an o g i v e nose ( t h e c e n t e r b o d y musthouse
a passage f o r s u r f a c e p r e s s u r e
2.

Surfacepressures

a forcebalance

and p r o v i d e

1 ines).

on thecenterbodyshouldbeselected

and c a l i b r a t e d

t o d i r e c t l y measure Mach number and a n g l e o f a t t a c k .

3.

The wingshouldhave

an NACA 0012 a i r f o i l , z e r o t a p e r ,

a l i g n e dw i t ht h ec e n t e r b o d ya x i s .

A v a r i a b l e sweep f e a t u r ew o u l d

desirableinordertostudytheeffectof

*Binion,
~~

~~~

178

T. W.,

Jr.,

personalcommunication,

be

l i f t o na x i a 1 , i n t e r f e r e n c e

gradients.
~

and should be

AEDC, March 1977.

4. The horizontal tail should be separately ins.trumcnted andgeometrically


similar to the wing.

5. Standardization of instrunentationand sting configuration i s essential.


6. Both model forces and pressure distributionson wings and centerbody
should be measured.
Work is continuing at AEDC to develop a model with these features.

In sunwnary, a satlsfactory aircraftmodel for calibrating transonicwind


Until wall interference effects are clearly defined
tunnels does not yet exist.
a simplified aircraft
and separable from Reynolds number and flow quality effects,

model is required.
models, e.g.,

Once this objective i s realized, more realistic aircraft

the ONERA transport models, canbe utilfzed much more effectively

for tunnel-to-tunnel comparisons.

179

1II.H.
1.

References

"AGARD Wind Tunnel C a l i b r a t i o n Models,!' AGARD S p e c i f i c a t i o n 2, Sept.

1958.

. .

2.

" C a l i b r a t t o n Models f o r Dynamic Stabi 1 i t y Tests ,I'

F a i l , R. and Garner, H. C.:

AGARD Report 563,: 1968.

3.

Curry, W.

H . , ed.:

"The F i r s t F i f t e e n ' Years o f t h e

1969.

Association,''SandiaLaboratories,Sept.

4.

H i l l s , R.,

ed.:

Supersoni c Tunnel

AGARD C a l i b r a t i on Model s ,'I

"A.Review o f Measurements
on

AGARDograph 64, Nov. 1961.

5.

Goethert, B. H.:

6.

Weeks, T. M.:

Transonic Wind
Tunne.1

"Reduction o f TransonicSlottedWallInterference

o fS l a tC o n t o u r i n g , "

7.

AFFDL-TR-74-139,

Binion, T. W . ,

Jr.:

9.

V i d a l , R.

J.;

a' ParoisAuto-Adaptables,"

March 1976.

and T e s t i n g ~Techniques, AGARD-CP-174,


"An I n v e s t i g a t i o no f

i n a VariablePorosityTransonic
Erickson, J. C.,

a S e l f - C o r r e c t i n g Wind Tunnel,''

Three-DimensionalWall

Wind Tunnel

Jr.;

by Means

March 1975.

J. P. : "SoufflerieTranssonique

C h e v a l li e r ,

Wind TunnelDesign

8.

Testing, Pergamon, 1961.

,'I

Interference
Oct. 1974.

AEDC-TR-74-74,

and C a t l i n , P. A.:

Wind TunnelDesign

"Experiments w i t h

and TestingTechniques,

AGARD-CP- 174, March 1976.


10.

Pindzola,

M.; Binion, T. W . , J r . ; and C h e v a l li e r , J. P.

sonicWorkingSections,"
theDesign

11.

Davis,J.

A F u r t h e r Review o f C u r r e n t

"Design o f Tran-

Research Aimed a t

and Operation o f Large Wind Tunnels, AGARD-AR-83,


W.

and
Graham,

R. F.:

f o r 20 Cone-Cylinders,"

"Wind-TunnelWall

A l A A Jour.Spacecraft

1975

Sept.

I n t e r f e r e n c eE f f e c t s
5 Rockets, Oct.

1973

(a 1 so see NASA TN 0-7432).

12.

Davis, J. W.:

"AGARD Model B TransonicBlockageInvestigation,"

Marchall Space F l i g h tC e n t e r ,H u n t s v i l l e ,A l a . ,p r e s e n t e da t3 9 t h
Annual STA Meeting, Mar.
13.

Treon, S.

L.;

Steinle,

180

Semi-

1973 ( r e f e r e n c e dw i t ha u t h o r ' sp e r m i s s i o n ) .

F. W.; H o f s t e t t e r ,

W.

R.; and Hagerman, J. R . :

"Data C o r r e l a t i o n f r o m I n v e s t i g a t i o n s o f

aHigh-Subsonic

A i r c r a f t Model i n ThreeMajorTransonic

Wind Tunnels,"

69-794, J u l y 1969.

NASA

Speed Transport
A l A A Paper No.

14. Treon, S. L. ; Steinle, F. W. ; Hagerman, J. R. ; Black, J. A. ; and Buffington,


R. J.:
"Further Correlation of Data From Investigations of a High-SubsonicSpeed Transport AircraftModel in Three Major Transonic Wind Tunnels,"

A I M Paper No. 71-291, March 1971.

15.

Binion, T. W., J r . and Lo, C. F.:

"Appl fcation of Wall Corrections to

Transonic Wind Tunnel Data," AlAA Paper No. 72-1009, Sept. 1972.

16. Dougherty, N. S., Jr. and Steinle, F.

W.:

Ccnnpari sons in Several Ma Jor Transonic


July 1974.

17.

Dougherty, N. S., Jr.:

"Transition Reynolds Number


Tunnels
,I' AlAA Paper No. 74-627,

"Prepared Comment on Cone Transition Reynolds

Number Data Correlation Study,'' AGARD-CP-187, June 1975.

18. Whitfield, J. and Dougherty, N. S., J r . :

"A Survey of Transition Reynolds


Number Work at AEDC," to be presented as Paper No. 25 at AGARD Fluid
Dynamics Panel Symposium on Laminar-Turbulent Transition, Copenhagen,
Denmark, May 2-4, 1977.

19. Binion, T.

Jr.:
"Tests o f the ONERA Calibration Models in Three
Transonic Wind Tunnels," AEDC-TR-76-133, Novo 1976W.,

181

111.1.
111.1.1.

OPTICAL METHODS
Supersonic
Tunnels

The use of s c h l i e r e n and shadowgraph flow-visualization-methods t o d e t e c t


unwantedshocks

i n a n empty t e s t - s e c t i o n i s w e l l

may be designated a c l a s s i c a lt e c h n i q u e
i nt h e

*.

1 ) and, i n f a c t ,

known (Ref.

Obviously,theobservanceof

e m p t y - t u n n e li n d i c a t e sc o r r e c t i v ea c t i o ni sn e c e s s a r y .

These means o f

af probesand

flowvisualizationarealsohelpfulinassessingtheperformance
rakesand

a shock

t h e i ri n t e r a c t i o nw i t hn e a r b yb o u n d a r i e s .H i g hq u a l i t yp i c t u r e sa l s o

enable flow separation on probes to be observed

and t h e r e b y p r o v i d e a d d i t i o n a l

datatoguideimproveddesigns.

A third,classical
interferometer.

method f o r f l o w v i s u a l i z a t i o n i s t h e

However, theseinstrumentsareseldom

c a l i b r a t i o n because o f t h e i r c o s t

Mach-Zehnder

used f o rw i n dt u n n e l

and h y p e r s e n s i t i v i t y t o v i b r a t i o n

and a l i g n -

ment e r r o r s .
D e t a i l e dd i s c u s s i o n so ft h e s e

methods may befound

2 thru

number ofreferences.References

i n a r a t h e rl a r g e

a r er e p r e s e n t a t i v eo fb o t ho l d e r

and newer l i t e r a t u r e w h i c h d e a l s w i t h t h e s e t h r e e

methods o f f l o w v i s u a l i z a -

tion.

111.1.2.

Transonic
Tunnels

A s p r e v i o u s l yd i s u c s s e di nS e c t i o n
ona

III.D.,

staticpressureprobeisstronglyaffected

istics.

byblockage

For example, t h es c h l i e r e np h o t o g r a p h so f

i n s t r u c t i v e as t o t h e e f f e c t s

ona

movement o f a transonicshock

probecaused

and w a l lc h a r a c t e r -

5)

Page (Ref.

a r eq u i t e

by v a r y i n gt u n n e lb l o c k a g ef r o m

0.25% t o 0.005%.

In thecase of s u p e r c r i t i c a l f l o w a b o u t
shadowgraphs o f Hsieh(Ref.

6 ) w e r ev e r yh e l p f u li nd e t e c t i n g

s e p a r a t i o n and i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e

*Most

a hemisphere-cylinderprobe,the

measuredpressure

boundarylayer

distributions.

o ft h er e s p o n d e n t st ot h eq u e s t i o n n a i r ei n d i c a t e dt h e yr o u t i n e l y
one or b o t h o f thesetechniques.

182

used

A t lowsupersonicspeeds,schlierens

andshadowgraphs

a r ev e r yu s e f u l

in studiesoftheshock-cancellationpropertiesofventilatedwalls,

Ref.

7.

Also,Dougherty,

e ta l .

photographs t o s t u d y t h e

(Ref.

e.g.,

8) h a v ev e r ye f f e c t i v e l y

used s c h l i e r e n

sound f i e l d g e n e r a t e d by p e r f o r a t e d w a l l s

when ex-

posed t oh i g h - s u b s o n i cf l o w s .

111.1.3.

Newer Methods

Newer o p t i c a l methods f o r f l o w v i s u a l i z a t i o n i n c l u d e l a s e r D o p p l e r
v e l o c i m e t e r s (LDV)

( H I ) f o rd e n s i t y

, h o l o g r a p h i cv e l o c i m e t e r s

measurements.

(HV)

, and

The primaryadvantage

h o l o g r a p h i ci n t e r f e r o m e t r y
o f LDV'sandHV's

istheir

flow.

p o t e n t i a l t o m e a s u r et h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a lf l o wf i e l d sw i t h o u td i s t u r b i n gt h e
As
we

have seen, t h i s i s p a r t i c u l a r l y i m p o r t a n t i n t r a n s o n i c t u n n e l s

near Mach

one.
The c u r r e n t s t a t e - o f - t h e - a r t o f

LDV'sand

reviewed i n Appendix I I .

c a l i b r a t i o ni s

tems i s a p p r o x i m a t e l y 0.4

theirapplicationtotunnel

Sincetheaccuracyofcurrent

LDV s y s -

0.5%, t h e ya r en o ty e ts u p e r i o rt oc o n v e n t i o n a l

probeswhichprovidecomparableaccuraciesof

0.1%.

The fundamentals o f h o l o g r a p h i c v e l o c i m e t r y a r e r e v i e w e d b y S h o f n e r , e t a l .

9).

(Ref.

A verycomprehensivereview

t e s t i n g hasbeen

compiledby

mating H I d a t ar e d u c t i o n
this is still

ofthe

use o f holography i n windtunnel

Havener (Ref. IO).

i s reportedby

Progress(up

Hannah and
Havener

t o 1975) i na u t o (Ref.11).Since

a developingtechnology,applicationsofholographytoempty-tunnel

c a l i b r a t i o n appears t o be i n t h e f u t u r e .
12) have r e c e n t l yd e m o n s t r a t e dt h eu s e f u l n e s so f

SparksandEzekiel(Ref.
LaserStreakVelocimetry

(LSV) f o r q u a n t i t a t i v e measurements o f low-speed v e l o c i t y

f i e l d s nearmodels.Thistechnique
v e l o c i t i e s on a planeas

LDV's.

has theadvantage

o fp r o v i d i n g ,s i m u l t a n e o u s l y ,

opposed t o t h e p o i n t - b y - p o i n t

measurements r e q u i r e d w i t h

However, theaccuracy

c a l i b r a t i o n s .F i n a l l y ,
certechniques

o f LSV's i sc u r r e n t l yi n s u f f i c i e n tf o re m p t y - t u n n e l

Sedney, e ta l .

(Ref.

13) have g i v e n a r e v i e wo ff l o wt r a -

and t h e i r a p p l i c a t i o n s i n s u p e r s o n i c - f l o w f i e l d d i a g n o s t i c s .

183

111.1.
1.

pope,A.and

2.

Ladenburg,

Goin, K. L.:

R.

W.;

Lewis,

References

High-speed Wind TunnelTesting.,Wiley,

B.;

P h y s i c a l Measurements i n Gas Dynamicand

3.

Press,

1954.

Vasil'er,

A.

L.:

Merzkirch, \J.:

5.

Page, W. A.:

NACA TN 4233,Apr

i 1 1958.

8.

Dougherty, N. S . ,

Jr.;

F.;

Anderson, C.

P e r f o r a t e d Wind Tunnel Mal Is,"


Shofner, F. M . ;
Velocimetry,"
Havener, A.

Menzel, R . ;

"A UsersGuild

and Havener, A.

I n t e r f e r o m e t r y , "I n t ' l
Faci 1 i ties,
12.

Sparks, G.

I EEE Pub.

W.,

13.

Sedney, R.;

AEDC-TR-75-88,

Aug.

From

"Fundamentals o f Holographic

f o r Wind Tunnel

1975.
" A p p l i c a t i o n so f

G.:

Automated Holographic

Congress on I n s t r u m e n t a t i o ni n

AerospaceSimulation

75 CHO 993-6 AES , Sept. 1975.

i n Gases,"

Kitchens, C. W . ,

"LaserStreakVelocimeterfor

A l A A Jour.,Vol.
Jr.;

and Bush, C.:


C.

USA B a l l i s t i c ResearchLaboratories,

Two-

15, No. 1, Jan. 1977.


"The Marriage o f O p t i c a l ,

Tracer and S u r f a c eI n d i c a t o rT e c h n i q u e si nF l o wV i s u a l i z a t i o n , "

184

"An

1975.

on PulseLaserHolography

J r . and E z e k i e l , S . :

DimensionalFlows

Jr.:

Nov. 1968.

ARL TR 75-0213,June

W.

L.,

to SuppressEdgetones

and R u s s e l l , T. G.:

AFFDL-TR-68-140,

G.:

Pergamon, 1961.

and Parker, R.

E x p e r i m e n t a lI n v e s t i g a t i o no fT e c h n i q u e s

Hannah, B.

AlAA

1975 ( a l s o A l A A Paper No. 75-83, Jan. 1975).


Transonic Wind TunnelTesting,

11.

Mm = 0.7
1.0,"

i n TransonicFlow,

Goethert, B. H.:

Testing,"

1971.

o f theEquivalenceofTransonicFlow

7.

10.

Baruch, I s r a e l Program

o f C i r c u l a r and E l l i p t i c CrossSection,''

"Hemisphere-Cylinder

Jour.,Oct.

9.

A.

F l o w V i s u a l i z a t i o n , Academic Press, 1974.


"ExperimentalStudy

Hsieh, T.:

(editors):

Jerusalem, New York andLondon,

AboutSlenderCone-Cylinders

6.

S.

Combustion, P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y

S c h l i e r e n Methods, Transl.by

forScientificTranslations,

4.

and T a y l o r , H.

Pease, R. N.;

1965.

Feb. 1975.

BRL R-1763,

1II.J.

Humidity Measurements

The e f f e c t s of moisture condensation and t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r


have been discussed i nS e c t i o n

Il.C.7.

air drying

Measurement and m o n i t o r i n g o f t h e

1s t h e r e f o r e an e s s e n t i a l pa r t o f t u n n e l

m o i s t u r ec o n t e n to ft h et u n n e lf l o w
c a l i b r a t i o n and operation.

a gas i s expressed i n a number o f ways; r e l a t i v e

The m o i s t u r e c o n t e n t o f

humidity(ratioofmoisturepartialpressuretosaturationpressure),

dew

p o i n t (or f r o s tp o i n t )t e m p e r a t u r ea ta t m o s p h e r i cp r e s s u r e ,s p e c i f i ch u m i d i t y
(MSS

o f water per

mass o f d r y g a s ) ,

permillionpartsofair).

and volume r a t i o ( p a r t s o f w a t e r

vapor

The dew p o i n to ri c e - p o i n ta ta t m o s p h e r i cp r e s s u r e

i s t h e most commonly usedform

o fe x p r e s s i o nf o rw i n dt u n n e lo p e r a t i o n s .

A number o f measurement systems a r e u t i l i z e d by f a c i l i t i e s r e s p o n d i n g


t ot h eq u e s t i o n n a i r e ,e x t e n d i n gf r o mt h ev i s u a lo b s e r v a t i o no ff o gi nt h e
t u n n e lf l o w

t o completelyautomatic,continuouslyrecording

dew p o i n t system5 .

All dew p o i n t measurement instruments can be c a l s s i f i e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e

bas i c

p r i n c i p l e s used.
One o f t h e

more basicnon-continuous

operatesontheprincipleofallowing
a t known pressure and temperature,

a hand-pump p r e s s u r i z e d sample o f gas,


t o expand t o room temperature(Ref.

theexpansionreducesthesampletemperature
tures,fogiscreatedwhich

dew p o i n t measurement instruments

may beobserved

t o or belowthe
visuallythrough

A t r i a l and e r r o r p r o c e d u r e i s r e q u i r e d t o d e t e r m i n e t h e i n i t i a l
surewhich

will expand t o c r e a t e a j u s t - v i s i b l e f o g - S i n c e

s h i p e x i s t s between pressure and t e m p e r a t u r e r a t i o s , t h e


d e t e r m i n e du s i n ga m b i e n ta st h ef i n a lp r e s s u r e .
cost, reasonably accurate

1).

If

dew p o i n t temperaa viewing window.


samplepresa known r e l a t i o n -

dew p o i n t canbe

These i n s t r u m e n t sa r el o wi n

and a r e w i d e l y used b o t h as p r i m a r y dew p o i n t m o n i t o r s

185

o f l e s sb a s i ci n s t r u m e n t s .

and for m o n i t o r i n gt h ea c c u r a c y

They p r o v i d e o n l y

for f a c i l i t i e s

p e r i o d i c or spot checks and are therefore not satlsfactory

A 1 1 readings must

where r e l a t i v e l y sudd,en changes i n dew p o i n t canoccur.

-4OC a r e d i f f i c u l t t o make.

be manuallyrecorded.Heasurementsbelowabout
C o n t i n u o u si n d i c a t i n g
typewhich

and r e c o r d i n gh u m i d i t ys e n s o r si n c l u d et h eD u n m r e

changes r e s i s t a n c e i n a n o n - l i n e a r f a s h i o n w i t h r e l a t i v e h u m i d i t y .

A modifiedformrespdndsto
range,

2).

dew po'int(Ref.'

so t h a ts e v e r a la r er e q u i r e d

extends downward t o about-40

Each sensor has a1i m i t e d

i f thehumidltyrange

i s large.

C.

An e l e c t r o l y t i c h u m i d i t y s e n s o r i s a l s o a v a i l a b l e .
an element which electrolyzes water into hydrogen
e l e c t r o l y s i sc u r r e n tt o
inpartspermillion,

flow.

The range

These sensors u t i l i z e
andoxygen,causingan

The e l e c t r o l y t i ci n s t r u m e n ti su s u a l l yc a l i b r a t e d

with fullscaleranges

T h i si n s t r u m e n t ,l i k et h er e s i s t a n c ed e v i c e ,
h u m i d i t y and p r o v i d e an e l e c t r i c a l s i g n a l f o r

aslowas
canbe

0 to 100 p a r t s p e r m i l l i o n .
c o n f i g u r e dt ob o t hi n d i c a t e

an e x t e r n a lr e c o r d i n gd e v i c e .

Dew point t e m p e r a t u r e s c a n b e d e t e r m i n e d b y c o n t r o l l i n g a u t o m a t i c a l l y

film o f

thetemperatureofapolishedmetalmirrortothepointthatatrace
c o n d e n s a t i o n( o rf r o s t )i sm a i n t a i n e d .S e v e r a il n s t r u m e n t s
p r i n c i p l e have been developed.
therm-electriccoolingeffect
r e f r i g e r a t i o n If necessary).
byfeedbackcontrol

186

More r e c e n tt y p e sa r es i m p l i f i e di nt h a tt h e

i s used t o c h i l l t h e

mirror ( w i t h a u x i l i a r y

The condensation film i sa u t o m a t i c a l l ym a i n t a i n e d

ofthemirrortemperature,utilizinganopticalsource

reflectrylightfromthecooled
bridge circuit.

based on t h i s

mirror t o a p a i r o f p h o t o - d e t e c t o r s f o r m i n g a

The dew pointtemperature

i s measuredby

athermocoupleor

r e s i s t a n c e - t e m p e r a t u r ed e t e c t o ra t t a c h e dd i r e c t l yt ot h em i r r o r .
pointisindicated

byameter

o ro t h e rI n d i c a t o r ,

The dew

and thetemperaturesensor

o u t p u t may a l s o berecorded,suppliedtothewindtunneldatasystem,etc.
The rangecanextend

t o aslow

as 200

OK

(-100 OF).

A continuous-recording, dew p o i n t m o n i t o r has obviousadvantagesboth


w i t hr e g a r dt om o n i t o r i n g

and c o n t r o l o f - t u n n e l

p r o v i d e Information ontheperformance

ineasurements.Theycan

also

of dryersand.othertunnelequipment.

I I I . J. References
1.

Pope, A. ; and Goin, K. L.:

High Speed
Wind

TunnelTesTing.,

pp. 223-226,

John Wiley and Sons, New York.

2.

Doeblin, E. 0 . :

Measurement
Systems;

A p p l i c a t i o n and Design, pp. 596-'598,

McGraw-Hi 1 1 , New York.

3.

Fraade,

I). J.:

"Measuring M o i s t u r ei n

Systems, Apri 1 1963.

188

Gases,"

Instruments and Control

IV.

ERROR AND UNCERTAINTY I N CALIBRATION MEASUREMENTS

Treatment o f accuracyandsources
p r i n c i p l e so fs t a t i s t i c s
sciencetends

oferrorinexperimentaldatainvolves

and p r o b a b i l i t y .U n f o r t u n a t e l y ,

t o d e v e l o ps p e c i a l i z e dt e r m i n o l o g y ,w h i c h

and communication i n comparing measurement r e s u l t s .

eachbranch

impedes understanding
An attempt will there-

f o r e be made t o d e f i n e and r e c m e n d b a s i c t e r m i n o l o g y w h i c h
advantage i n e v a l u a t i n g , d e f i n i n g
As a f i r s t s t e p , a d e f i n i t i o n

of

may be used t o

and c o m n u n i c a t i n gc a l i b r a t i o na c c u r a c y .

and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f v a r i o u s t y p e s o f e r r o r s

will be stated.

1V.A.
E r r o r s may be c l a s s i f i e d i n

Random E r r o r
two generalcategories:

Random e r r o r i s f r e q u e n t l y r e f e r r e d t o
as"scatter,""noise,"etc.,
y i e l dt h e

random and f i x e d .

by t h ee n g i n e e ri nl e s sp r e c i s et e r m s

a l li m p l y i n gt h a tr e p e a t e d

measurements do n o t

i f a s u f f i c i e n t l yl a r q e

same value.Mostprocessesaresuchthat

number o f measurements a r e made and the frequency with which


measured i s p l o t t e d a g a i n s t t h e
bilitydensityfunction)

each v a l u e i s

measured v a l u e ,t h er e s u l t i n gp l o t( t h ep r o b a -

will a p p r o a c ht h ef a m i l i a rb e l l - s h a p e dn o r m a ld i s t r i -

b u t i o nc u r v e .I nt h i sc a s e ,t h ea r i t h m e t i c

mean v a l u e ,o r

average,

N
i=l
o c c u r sa tt h e
underthecurve

xi
N

(4.A .1)

peak o ft h ec u r v e .
i su n i t y .

o r random e r r o r , i s s p e c i f i e d

When p l o t t e di nn o r m a l i z e df o r m ,t h ea r e a

The p r e c i s i o n ,w h i c hi sa

measure o f t h e s c a t t e r

bythestandarddeviation,

(4.A.2)

a =
i=l

N-1
189

if,the distribution is

68 p e r c e n t o f t h e

w i t h i n +2

based on a s u f f i c i e n t l y l a r g e

measurements will l i e w i t h i n t h e

u and 99.7 p e r c e n t w i t h i n 23 u

f o r ec o r r e s p o n d st o

number o f measurements,

range +1 u

, 95.4

A wide!. f l a t d i s t r i b u t i o n t h e r e -

measurements w i t h a l a r g e s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n ,

a large

amount o f s c a t t e r ,

a l a r g e random e r r o r , or a l a c k o f p r e c i s i o n , a l l o f

w h i c hr e f e rt ot h e

same c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e

isquantativelystatedin

1V.B.

A second f o r m o f
e r r o r or b i a s .T h i s
measurements.
thesecan

measurement.The

terms o f t h e s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n

be s p e c i f i e d as 1 u

shouldalways

,2

random e r r o r

and e r r o rs t a t e m e n t s

, etc.

Fixed Error

measurement e r r o r i s r e f e r r e d t o
component o f e r r o r

a ss y s t e m a t i ce r r o r ,f i x e d

will be t h e same i n each o f many repeated

The magnitude and s i g n o f t h e b i a s

be determinedonly

percent

may n o t be known a p r i o r i s i n c e

by comparison w i t h t h e t r u e v a l u e o f t h e

measured

A s one example, an undetected change i n t h e c a l i b r a t i o n o f

quantity.
ment suchas

a pressuretransducer

tude and sign.

will i n t r o d u c e a f i x e d b i a s o f

Upon d e t e c t i o n ,t h i sb i a s

r e c a l i b r a t i o n .S i n c e
t h e i rm i n i m i z a t i o n

or f i x e de r r o r

can beremoved

depends (1) upon c a r e f u l mon t o r i n go fr e s u l t s ,


o f instruments,

t i o n s o f i n s t r u m e n t sp r i o rt o

and d u r i n g t e s t s ,

a basicinstrument

f l o wc a l i b r a t i o n .

unknown magniby

unknown f i x e de r r o r sa r en o tc o r r e c t a b l e ,u n l e s sd e t e c t e d ,

p r e - a n dp o s t - t e s tc a l i b r a t i o n s

be a p p l i e d t o

an i n s t r u -

suchas

The o b j e c t i v es h o u l d

n place,

(2) r o u t i n e

(3) end-to-end c a l i b r a -

etcT
. his

same philosophycan

a pres S u r e t r a n s d u c e r

or t o t h e t u n n e l -

be t oe l i m i n a t ea l ll a r g e ,

unknown

f i x e de r r o r s .
Some t y p e s o f
c a l ib r a t i o n .
v a l u ei s

unknown f i x e d errors cannot be r e a d i l y e l i m i n a t e d

An example m i g h t be t h e d r a g o f

known.

a standardmodel,where

F a c i l i t y - t o - f a c i l i t y comparisonsallowonly

by
no " t r u e "

an e s t i m a t eo ft h e

probable maximum magnitude o f t h e b i a s . C o r r e c t i o n

may b e p o s s i b l e o n l y t o t h e

extentthatthecomparisontestsallowdeterminationof
cause(orcauses)ofthebias(or
The f i x e d e r r o r

a p o r t i o nt h e r e o f ) .

limit, whichnormallymust

limit o n t h e f i x e d e r r o r o r b i a s ,
i.e.,

i t may be 0,

and c o r r e c t i o n f o r t h e

o r 0,

be e s t i m a t e d ,i st h eu p p e r

and may be symmetrical o r non-symmetrical,

rather than

1V.C.

+.

Uncertainty

The t o t a l u n c e r t a i n t y i n t e r v a l f o r

ameasurement

r e p r e s e n t st h el a r g e s t ,

r e a s o n a b l y - e x p e c t e de r r o r( i . e . ,t h et r u ev a l u es h o u l df a l li nt h eu n c e r t a i n t y
i n t e r v a l ) and i s a combination o ft h ep r e c i s i o n( s t a n d a r dd e v i a t i o n )

and t h e

estimatedbias.

A method described by Abernathy, e t a l .

(Ref.

1) and recornendedbythe

N a t i o n a l Bureau o f Standardsexpressestheuncertaintyastherangecentered
aboutthe

mean value and d e f i n e d as

(4.C.l)

U p + (B+tg5u)

Where U i st h eu n c e r t a i n t y ,

B t h eb i a s

"t" d i s t r i b u t i o n .

9 5 t hp e r c e n t i l ep o i n tf o rt h eS t u d e n t
depends onthe

number o fv a l u e s

measurements theStudent
tion.

The use o ft h e

1 imit, and t

or f i x e de r r o r

The v a l u eo f

f a c t o ri n c r e a s e st h eu n c e r t a i n t y

limit when small

more a c c u r a t e l y ,t oe s t i m a t e )

e ta l .

2.0 be used f o r t

recommended t h a t a v a l u eo f

(compared t o 1.96 f o r an i n f i n i t e number).Reference


Ref.

2 ) c o n t a i nt a b l e so fS t u d e n t ' s

t g 5 can be o b t a i n e df o rl e s st h a n

normal d i s t r i b u -

samples a r e used t oc a l c u l a t e( o r ,

t e x t s (e.g.,

i st h e

used i n computing u ; f o r a l a r g e number o f

t d i s t r i b u t i o ni si d e n t i c a lt ot h e

95

95

30 samples.

95

Abernathy,

f o r 3 1 o r moresamples

( 1 ) and most s t a t i s t i c s

t d i s t r i b u t i o n sf r o mw h i c h

S t a t i s t i c a l methods employing

the t distribution are frequently called small-sample

methods f o r o b v i o u s

191

r e a s o n s .A l t h o u g ht h i s
othererror

example I ss i m p l i f i e d ,

it canbeextended

t oI n c l u d e

terms.

An a d d i t i o n a l p r o b l e m i n a c c u r a t e d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f
not discussedabove,

isthatthe

measurement e r r o r ,

measured p r o p e r t i e s n o r m a l l y

a m p l i t u d ev a r i a t i o n sw i t ht i m e .I na d d i t i o nt oo b t a i n i n g

have small-

a statistically

adequate number o f samples, t h e sample i n t e r v a l must span a t l e a s t


p l e t e c y c l e o f thelowest-frequency

component o f tunnelunsteadiness,as

discussed by H u h l s t e i n and Coe, (Ref.

1V.D.
In essentially all

3).

E r r oPr r o p o g a t i o n

cases, c a l i b r a t i o np a r a m e t e r sa r ed e t e r m i n e df r o m

b a s i cp r o p e r t i e sw h i c ha r e

measured and a known f u n c t i o n r e l a t i n g t h e

q u a n t i t i e s and thedesiredparameter.
t i o n o f Machnumber

one com-

An obviousexamplewould

i nt h et e s ts e c t i o nf r o m

measured

be thedeterminaRandom error

measured pressures.

s o u r c e sw o u l di n c l u d et h ep r e c i s i o n( s t a n d a r dd e v i a t i o n s )o ft h ep r e s s u r e
measurements.

S t a t i cp r e s s u r ep r o b eu n c e r t a i n t yl i m i t s

a f i x e db i a si nt h e

may be estimated as

absence o f a c a l i b r a t i o n .A n o t h e rf i x e db i a sc o u l d

in y

t h ee s t i m a t e du n c e r t a i n t y

be

As an i l l u s t r a t i v e example, t h e random error

i n Mach number can be c a l c u l a t e d f r o m

(4.D.1)

where t h ev a r i a t i o n si n

and

P a r et a k e nt o

be u n c o r r e l a t e d .

The f i x e d

e r r o r or b i a s limit can s i m i l a r l y be c a l c u l a t e d from

(4.D .2)
192

and Bp a r et h ee s t f m a t e du n c e r t a i n t y
1 i m i t sf o rt h er a t i o
Y
s p e c i f i c h e a t s and f o r t h e s t a t i c p r o b e e r r o r , r e s p e c t i v e l y .

where

The r e s u l t s can be combined a c c o r d i n gt o


t o t a lu n c e r t a i n t yi n t e r v a lf o r

Eq. (4.C.1)

a s p e c i f i c( p o i n t )

of

t od e t e r m i n et h e

Mach number measurement.

(4.D.3).

The u n c e r t a i n t y i n t e r v a l

o f an i n d i v i d u a lp r o p e r t y
,

a pressure,canalso

measurement, suchas

be estimated as above;where

i n d i v i d u a le r r o rs o u r c e ss u c h

as t h e s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n

o f t h et r a n s d u c e r ,t h ee x c i t a t i o n

i n s t r u m e n t a t i o na m p l i f i e r

and t h e a n a l o g - t o - d i g i t a l c o n v e r t e r a r e a l l t a k e n

power supply,the

i n t o account.Normally,however,thecalibrationisperformedend-to-end
u t i l i z i n g a l l components so t h a t a l l o f t h e above f a c t o r s a r e t a k e n i n t o
accountand

a t t r i b u t e dt ot h ep r e s s u r et r a n s d u c e r .

193

IV.

1.

Abernathy, R.

B.,

e ta l

Ref erences

and Thompson, J. W.,

i n Gas Turbine Heasuremcnts," AEDC-TR-73-5,


b e l , P. G . :

2.

Inc.,

H u h l s t e i n , L. Jr.,
AccurateStatic
Paper 75-142,

194

"Handbook;

February

I n t r o d u c t i o nt oH a t h e m a t i c a lS t a t i s t i c s ,

Wiley and Sons,

3.

Jr.:

Uncertainty

1973 (also C P l A No. 180).


pp402-403,John

New York, 1966.

and Coe, C.

F.:

" I n t e g r a t i o n TimeRequired

tG

and Dynamic Data From Transonic Wind TunnelTests,"


Pasadena, Cal i f . , Jan.

1975.

Extract

AlAA

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

V.
V.A.

Summary o fS t a t e - o f - t h e - A r to fT r a n s o n i c
Supersonic Wind Tunnel C a l i b r a t i o n

Reference hasbeen

and

made t h r o u g h o u t t h e p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n s o f t h i s r e p o r t

toinformation,obtained

from t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s u r v e y , l i t e r a t u r e s e a r c h

A condensat.ion o f t h i si n f o r m a t i o n

personalcontacts.

where a p p r o p r i a t e .P r i m a r i l y ,i n f o r m a t i o n

has
been

hasbeensummarized

to define "best state-of-the-art" calibration accuracy.

focusedontheprimaryproblemswhichwereconsideredto
s t a g n a t i o n and s t a t i c p r e s s u r e

t h eb e s t ,c u r r e n t ,
d e v i a t i o n )r a n g e s
f o rb o t h

of

A concluding

and c a i c u l a t i o n o f Mach number.

for convenience.

evaluationofdatareportedinthequestionnaires,

from 0.025 t o 0.10 percent.

These accuracies were r e p o r t e d

continuoustunnels.

The survey showed t h a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y t w i c e


p r e s s u r ef o r

t e s t - s e c t i o n w a l l pressure.
b o t hr e q u i r e

i n anattempt

A t t e n t i o n has been

pressure-measurementaccuracy(onthebasisofstandard

blowdownand

plenumchamber

presented

bemeasurements

sumnary o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e r e s u l t s i s p r e s e n t e d h e r e
Based onajudgment

and,

as many transonictunnelsuse

a r e f e r e n c et om o n i t o r
However, b o t ht y p e so f

Mach number, asopposed

to

measurements a r e used and

a calibration(s)torelatetheassociateddatatostaticpressure

measurements a l o n g t h e c e n t e r l i n e .
The most p o p u l a r s t a t i c - p r e s s u r e - p r o b e i s

or more c y l i n d e r d i a m e t e r s

static orifices located ten


The ten-deg-coneappears
disturbanceoftheflow
enough t o beused

t o bea

downstream o f t h e s h o u l d e r .

t r a d e - o f f between t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s t o m i n i m i z e

and, simultaneously,

be e a s i l y f a b r i c a t e d

r e p e a t e d l y i n a windtunnelenvironment.Although

subsonic speedsashockforms

on t h e c y l i n d e r

staticpressurerequiresorifices

lower,shock-attachment

and durable
athigh

and accurate measurement o f t h e

a t severalstations,only

d e s i g n ss u b m i t t e dw i t ht h eq u e s t i o n n a i r e s
cone not o n l y hasa

a 10 deg c o n e - c y l i n d e r w i t h

have t h i sf e a t u r e .

afew

o f theprobe

A smaller-angle

Mach number b u t i t a l s o g e n e r a t e s

195

weaker t r a n s o n i c s h o c k o n t h e c y l i n d e r
streamconditions.

and t h u s s m a l l e r d e v i a t i o n s f r o m f r e e -

O f t h ev a r i o u ss t a t i cp r o b ed e s i g n sd e s c r i b e di nr e s p o n s e

tothequestionnaire,

a two-degree

( t o t a l - i n c l u d e da n g l e )c o n e

was t h e s m a l l e s t .

is t h e

An a d d i t i o n a l s o u r c e o f e r r o r i n c a l i b r a t i n g t r a n s o n i c t u n n e l s
n e g l e c to fv a r i a t i o n st r a n s v e r s et ot h ef l o w .A l m o s tw i t h o u te x c e p t i o n ,i n
caseswheremeasurements

had been made, t,he q u e s t i o n n a i r e s i n d i c a t e d g r e a t e r

Mach number g r a d i e n t so c c u ra c r o s st h ef l o wt h a na l o n gt h et u n n e lc e n t e r l i n e .
T h i s may be most s i g n i f i c a n t . i . n t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f d r a g d i v e r g e n c e a n d / o r
b u f f e to n s e tf o rt r a n s o n i ca i r c r a f t
a r t o f wind'-tunneltesting

models.

However, t h ep r e s e n ts t a t e - o f - t h e -

i s t o use o f f - c e n t e r l i n e d a t a e x c l u s i v e l y a s

a diag-

n o s t i ct o o lt od e t e c tu n a c c e p t a b l yl a r g ev a r i a t i o n s .I nw h i c hc a s en o z z l ea n d / o r
test section configurations are altered.
Themost

p o p u l a rf l o w - a n g u l a r i t y - p r o b e sa p p e a rt o

simultaneousmeasurements

o f p i t c h and yaw.Wedges

used for p l a n a r measurements.

be t h e 30-deg-cone f o r
o fv a r i o u sa n g l e sa r eo f t e n

I t a p p e a r sf e a s i b l et od e s i g np r o b e so ft h i s

flow angles t o +0.01 degree.

type (i.e., differential-pressure) which can resolve


( T h i s o b j e c t i v e was proposed i n 1970 bythe
TransonicTestingTechniques.)

ad hoc A i r Force-NASA Committeeon

The quotedaccuracy

ranged from 0.01 deg t o 0.04 deg.

for f l o w a n g l e measurements

A spatialvariation

o f +1/4

deg was f r e q u e n t l y

mentioned.
Quoted stagnat ion-temperature accuracy usual
The m a j o r i t y o f r e p o r t i n g f a c i l i t i e s
Inordertoachieve

a Machnumber

l y ranged from 1 t o 2

OC.

do n o t c o n t i n u o u s l y m o n i t o r h u m i d i t y .

accuracyof

0.001,

h u m i d i t y must be monitored

continuously.
Nearly 50% o f t h e t u n n e l s

have made n o i s e measurements i n e i t h e r t h e

s t i l l i n g chamber, t h et e ss e c t i o na n d / o rt h e
either miniature strain
t o measure thenoisedata.

plenum chamber.

I n mostcases,

gauge transducers or condensermicrophoneswereused


The f o l l o w i n gt e c h n i q u e s

have beenemployed

to

measure f r e e s t r e a m d i s t u r b a n c e s i n t r a n s o n i c a n d / o r s u p e r s o n l c w i n d t u n n e l s .

1.

High-frequency-responsepressuretransducers
the tip of

mounted near

cones t o measure f l u c t u a t i n g s t a t i c p r e s s u r e s

beneath a laminarboundarylayer.

I I

II

2.

Pressuretransducers

mounted on wedges w i t h t h e

surfacealignedwiththe

3.

Pressuretransducers

measurement

flow.
of

mounted o nt h ec y l i n d r i c a lp o r t i o n

ogive-cylinders.

4.

Pressuretransducers

5.

Hot-wire and h o t - f i l m measurements.

mounted i n P i t o t

probes t o measure

f l u c t u a t i o n si nP i t o tp r e s s u r e .

Approximately 25% o f t h e t u n n e l s r e p o r t e d h a v i n g

film measurements o ft u r b u l e n c e .

However, i n t h e m a j o r i t y o f

l i m i t e d c e n t e r l i n e and/or w a l l boundarylayer
Only afew'

t u n n e l sr e p o r t e d

made h o t - w i r e o r h o t -

measurements have been made.

measurements o f f l u c t u a t i n g P i t o t p r e s s u r e .

The m a j o r i t y o f t h e t u n n e l s r e p o r t e d t h a t S c h l i e r e n
v a l u ei nd e t e c t i n g
withhigh

cases o n l yv e r y

systemswere

unwanted d i s t u r b a n c e si nt h et e s ts e c t i o n .

of

When combined

speed photography, t h i s method a l s op r o v i d e sd a t a

on f l o wu n s t e a d i -

ness.
Most o f t h e r e s p o n d i n g f a c i l i t i e s
models d u r i n gc a l i b r a t i o n .
usuallyonlyqualitative

have used one or more s t a n d a r df o r c e

However, comparisons w i t hr e f e r e n c ed a t aa r e
and a r e o f l i m i t e d

use i n p i n p o i n t i n g u n d e s i r a b l e f l o w

characteristics.
The w e l l known r u l e o f

thumb t h a t t h e

model c r o s ss e c t i o ns h o u l dn o t

exceed 1% o ft h et u n n e la r e af o rt r a n s o n i ct e s t i n ga p p e a r st o
accepted.

A consequence o f t h i s c r i t e r i o n i s t h a t v e r y

be u n i v e r s a l l y
fewtunneloperators

a t t e m p tt oc o r r e c tf o rw a l li n t e r f e r e n c e .T h i sa l s or e f l e c t st h el a c ko f

an

a c c e p t e dt h e o r yf o rc o r r e c t i n gf o rt r a n s o n i cw a l li n t e r f e r e n c e .
F i n a l l y ,t h e
tunnelshould

consensusonfrequency

o f w i n dt u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o ni st h a t

be r e c a l i b r a t e d o r a t l e a s t s p o t

checkedwhenever:

1.

t u n n ecl o n f i g u r a t i o n

2.

s i g n i f i c a n ti n s t r u m e n t a t i o nm o d i f i c a t i o n sa r e

3.

erroneousdata

4.

i nt h e

changes
occur,
made,

i s b e i n go b t a i n e d ,o r

absence o f any o f t h e

S t a t i c - p r e s s u r eo r i f i c e ss h o u l da l s o

above,onceeachyear.
be i n s p e c t e db e f o r er e c a l i b r a t i n g .

197

TRANSONIC

V.B.

0.75
. - < M < 1.0.

o f +O.OOl,
Foran

"

particularlyinthetransonicdragriseregime:

airtest

medium, t h i s r e q u i r e s t h e f o l l o w i n g c o n s t r a i n t

i n t o t a l and s t a t i c p r e s s u r e measurements.

o nt o t a le r r o r s

"
AH
"
AP < L

P -

23
5 + M

i n Reynolds number ( S e c t i o n 1 1 . 8 . 2 ) or h u m i d i t yl e v e l( S e c t i o n

However,changes

Il.C.7)

can e a s i l y cause Machnumber

v a r i a t i o n ss e v e r a lt i m e sl a r g e rt h a n

For t h i s reason,considerablecareshould
o v e rt h ee n t i r er a n g eo f

h u m i d i t yl e v e l s ,

h u m i d i t yl e v e l sn o r m a l l ye n c o u n t e r e d

f o r t y p i c a l ,o p e r a t i n g

a c o n t i n u o u sm o n i t o r i n go fh u m i d i t yi sp r e f e r r e d ,

( i.e.

c o r r e c t i v ea c t i o n ,

, AHS/HS

e.g.,

e.g.,a

strip
of

I na d d i t i o n ,e x c e s s i v es p a t i a lv a r i a t i o n s

> 0.001) a c r o s s t h e s t i

a d d i t i o n a sl c r e e n s ,

1 1 i n g chamber may r e q u i r e

honeycombs, e t c .F i n a l l y ,t h e

assumption o f an i s e n t r o p i c e x p a n s i o n f r o m t h e s t i l l i n g
sectionshouldbeevaluated

0.001.

to c a l i b r a t ea ne m p t y - t u n n e l

Once t h et u n n e li sc a l i b r a t e d

subsequentreference.

total pressure

betaken

Reynolds numberand

d u r i n gr o u t i n eo p e r a t i o n s .

r e c o r d e rf o r

to

c a l i b r a t i o n s i n t r a n s o n i ct u n n e l ss h o u l db e

The goal o f Machnumber


achieveanaccuracy

TUNNELS

chamber t o t h e t e s t

by d i r e c t measurements i n t h e t e s t s e c t i o n , b o t h

on

and o f f - c e n t e r 1 i n e .
The long,static-pressure,surveypipe
f o ro b t a i n i n gc e n t e r l i n e

measurements.

i sw e l le s t a b l i s h e d

B e s tr e s u l t sa r ea c h i e v e dw i t ht h e

o ft h ep i p el o c a t e dw e l lu p s t r e a mi nt h es e t t l i n g
o r d e rt op r e v e n t

chamber; t h i s i s

nose

necessary i n

passage o f a t r a n s o n i c s h o c ko v e rt h el e n g t ho ft h ep i p e .I n

a l l c a s e s ,t h er e s u l t i n gd a t as h o u l d
errors.

as thestandard

Once t h ec e n t e r l i n ed a t a

be c a r e f u l l y i n s p e c t e d f o r o r i f i c e - i n d u c e d
i'sdetermined

t o befreeoforificeerrors

( S e c t i o nI I I . D . l . ) ,s t a n d a r dp r o c e d u r ei st ou s et h es t a t i cp r e s s u r ed a t at o
c a l i b r a t ee i t h e r

plenum chamber p r e s s u r e or w a l ls t a t i ct a p s .

sure i s used f o r Machnumber


t u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o n ss h o u l d

control, the possibi

speeds and ( 2 ) r a p i d l y v a r y i n g

c o n d i t i o n s suchasoccurduringrapid

198

1 it y o f d e p a r t u r e s fromempty-

be c a r e f u l l y examined i n cases o f (1)

l i f t i n g models a th i g h - s u b s o n i c

statictapsare

I f plenumpres-

used f o r Machnumber

l a r g e (> 1%)

Machnumber

changes i n model o r i e n t a t i o n .
control,atleast

oneshould

If wall

be l o c a t e d on

each w a l l , ahead o ft h e

model l o c a t i o n , and averaged with a "piezometerring";

t h i s average i s p r e f e r a b l e t o u s i n g o n l y
Since a l o n g p i p e i s d i f f i c u l t t o

a singlewallstaticpressure.
move a b o u t t h e t e s t s e c t i o n

i t is recommended

c e n t e r l i n ed a t ai si m p o r t a n tf o ra i r c r a f t - m o d e lt e s t i n g ,
t h a ts u p p l e m e n t a r y ,o f f - c e n t e r l i n ed a t a

be o b t a i n e d w i t h a c o n v e n t i o n a l s t a t i c

pressure probe

or r a k e o f suchprobes,

Sincethewing

span o f m o s t t r a n s o n i c a i r c r a f t

when

c e n t ,o rl e s s ,o ft h et u n n e lw i d t h ,b o t h
s h o u l db eo b t a i n e do v e rt h i s
Off-centerline
o fe r r o r s

M is

not near

I I I .D. 2 ) .

one (Sec.

60 per-

models i s r e s t r i c t e d t o

Mach number and f l o w a n g u l a r i t y d a t a

span i n t h e v e r t i c a l

and h o r i z o n t a lp l a n e s .

measurements o f f l o w a n g u l a r i t y a r e s e n s i t i v e i n d i c a t o r s

causedby

n o z z l ec o n t o u r ,w a l ls e t t i n g s ,s e a l e a k s ,e t c .

a c c u r a t e measurements o f f l o w a n g u l a r i t y
timewith

and o f f -

a p r o b ec o n s i s t i n go f

The most

can be o b t a i n e d i n t h e l e a s t

two,orthogonal,symmetricalwings

amount o f
and a f o r c e

balance housed i n a smallcenterbody."


In addition to
datashould

measurinq Machnumber

and f l o w a n g u l a r i t y o f f - c e n t e r l i n e ,

be taken a tr e p r e s e n t a t i v ef o r w a r d ,c e n t e r ,

t h eu s e a b l et e s ts e c t i o n .

and a f t s t a t i o n s i n

I t i s suggested t h a tt h er e s u l t i n gd a t a ,a t

g i v e ns t a t i o n ,

be expressed i n terms o fs t a n d a r dd e v i a t i o nf r o mt h e

t h ec e n t e r l i n e

measurements.

informationonflowquality
sity,wallangleor

T h i st y p eo fd a t a

a
mean o f

will p r o v i d e more complete

and should be considered when s e l e c t i n g w a l l p o r o -

amount o f plenumevacuation.

U n f o r t u n a t e l y , no g e n e r a l c o n s t r a i n t s e x i s t
o f f - c e n t e r l i n ev a r i a t i o n s .

as t o what a r ea c c e p t a b l e

Jackson ( A E D C ) has s u g g e s t e dt h ef o l l o w i n gc r i t e r i a

f o r ''good" un i f o r m i t y i n c e n t e r 1 i n e Machnumber :
2 aM 5 0.005

2
Inthepast,

UM

for M < 1

2 0 . 0 1 for M > 1

a criterionforacceptableflowangularityalongthecenterline

has n o t beenneeded

because a g i v e n model i s u s u a l l y r u n u p r i g h t

i no r d e rt oe s t a b l i s ht h ee f f e c t i v ea n g l eo fi n c i d e n c e .T h i si s

*Acceptableaccuracycanalso
pressureprobes,seeSection

and i n v e r t e d
a v a l i d and

be o b t a i n e d w i t h c o n v e n t i o n a l , d i f f e r e n t i a l 1II.E.

199

w e l l - e s t a b l i s h e dt e s t i n gp r a c t i c e ;

i n t h e yaw p l a n e

however, f l o w a n g u l a r i t y

To summarize, standard c r i t e r i a f o r f l o w u n i f o r m i t y

i sf r e q u e n t l yi g n o r e d .

need t o be developed f o r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e( p r e f e r a b l ys t a n d a r d )m o d e l s

o f t e s t s , =.g.,

v a r i o u sk i n d s

f o r c e ,b u f f e t ,f l u t t e r ,e t c .

Unsteadydisturbance

Recentuse

u n s t e a d y - f l o wc a l i b r a t i o ni na tl e a s t

be a

o fh o t - w i r e si nt h et e s t

NASA Ames i n d i c a t e st h e s e

s e c t i o n o f a t r a n s o n i ct u n n e la t

some t u n n e l s .

may be u s e f u l f o r

However, asdynamicpres-

become more v u l n e r a b l e t o breakage and p r o b a b l y will

sureincreaseshot-wires

be i m p r a c t i c a l f o r u s e i n t h e
chamber).

new high-Reynolds-number

f a c i 1ities(except

Based on e x t e n s i v ee x p e r i e n c ew i t ht h e

cone i n twenty-onemajorwindtunnels
t h i sd e v i c e

and flow

measurements i n t r a n s o n i c t u n n e l s s h o u l d

o f t u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o n .

t h es e t t l i n g

Machnumber

on and o f f - c e n t e r l i n e .

angularity,both

s t a n d a r dp a r t

These c r i t e r i a

for a c c e p t a b l e v a r i a t i o n s i n

shouldincludestandards

in

oftheUnitedStates

AEDC t r a n s i t i o n

andWesternEurope,

has become an " u n o f f i c i a l " t u n n e l a c o u s t i c c a l i b r a t i o n

c u r r e n t l yc o n s i d e r e dt o

modeland

a d e f i n i t e need f o r a lessexpensiveinstrumentwhich

e a s i l yr e p r o d u c e d

and used i n a l l s i z e s o f f a c i l i t i e s .

a t i n gP i t o tp r o b e sa p p e a r st o

manent m o n i t o ro ft u n n e ln o i s e .
m a t e l y 0.025 cm (0.01

A w a l lt r a n s d u c e r ( s )c a nt h e n

of

T h i st y p e

i n . )b e l o wt h ep l a n eo ft h et u n n e l

a frequencyresponseoutto

A l t h o u g ht h e r ea r e
steadiness, Mabey (RAE)

beusedas

The w a l lt r a n s d u c e r ( s )s h o u l d

30 kHz.

a per-

bemounted

approxi-

w a l l and, p r e f e r a b l y ,
By u s i n g two o r more w a l l o f disturbancescan

f r e ef l u t t e r

The development o f f l u c t u -

meet t h i s need ( S e c t i o n I 1 I . F ) .

mounted t r a n s d u c e r s , t h e d i r e c t i o n o f p r o p a g a t i o n
t a ined

canbe

be used t o measure c e n t e r l i n e n o i s e and t o c a l i b r a t e w a l l - m o u n t e d ,

dynamic pressuretransducers.

shouldhave

is

be t h eb e s ta v a i l a b l ed i s t u r b a n c ec a l i b r a t i o ni n s t r u m e n t

However, t h e r e i s

instrumentcan

in

be a s c e r -

no g e n e r a l c r i t e r i a f o r a c c e p t a b l e l e v e l s o f f l o w

un-

has developed some n o i s eg u i d e l i n e sf o ri n t e r f e r e n c e -

and b u f f e tt e s t s( S e c t i o n

I I1.F.).

The g o a lo ft r a n s o n i ct u n n e l ,

n o i s e - r e d u c t i o nr e s e a r c hi st or e d u c eu n s t e a d i n e s st ol e v e l sc h a r a c t e r i s t i c
t u r b u l e n t boundarylayersonsolidwalls,i.e.,

of

< 0.005.
P
An accepted measure o f w a v e - c a n c e l l a t i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f v e n t i l a t e d

wallsistoobtainpressuredistributiondata
p a r et h er e s u l t sw i t hw a l l - i n t e r f e r e n c e - f r e ed a t a .

200

AC

on a 20 deg c o n e - c y l i n d e r and comIt i s now a p p a r e n tt h a tt h e

t r a d i t i o n a la s s u m p t i o n
w a l l si s

erroneous.

o f a l i n e a r boundary c o n d i t i o n a t v e n t i l a t e d , t r a n s o n i c

o f p a s ta t t e m p t s

Thus, t h i se x p l a i n st h ef a i l u r e

r e t i c a l l yc a l c u l a t et h ee f f e c t s
ments o f t e s t - s e c t i o n - w a l l

o f w a l li n t e r f e r e n c e

on madel t e s t i n g .

of ventilated walls
on t r a n s o n i cw a l li n t e r -

and t h e i rc r o s s - f l o wc h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .C u r r e n tr e s e a r c h

( I ) t h e d e r i v a t i o n o f more exactboundary

f e r e n c ei sf o c u s i n go nt h r e ea r e a s :
conditions,

(2) t h e development o f a s e l f - c o r r e c t i n g w i n d t u n n e l w l t h a u t o m a t i c

c o n t r o l of l o n g i t u d i n a l l yv a r y i n gv e n t i l a t i o n ,
to attain wall-interference-free

(3) v a r y i n gw a l lc o n t o u r s

usedas

The ONERA t r a n s p o r t a i r c r a f t

i n two-dimensionaltests.

oftransonictunnels

t o f l o wq u a l i t y .

and

f l o w aboutmodels.

The NACA 0012 a i r f o i l i s c u r r e n t l y b e i n g


i n anumber

Measure-

and w i t h o u t models i n s i t u ,

b o u n d a r yl a y e r s ,b o t hw i t h

made i n e f f o r t s t o g a i n a b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g

a r eb e i n g

t o theo-

a standardpressure
modelshave

model

been t e s t e d

and have been found t o be e x t r e m e l y s e n s i t i v e

AGARD has n o ty e t

adopted a s t a n d a r d ,t r a n s p o r t - a i r c r a f t

There i s c u r r e n t l y a genuine need f o r a s t a n d a r d ,a i r c r a f t ,p r e s s u r e


models) t oa i dt r a n s o n i cw i n dt u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o n

model.

model ( o r

and datacomparisons

between

tunnel s.
LaserDopplerVelocimetersare
f o rw i n dt u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o n .
p e r t u r bt h e

flow.

addition,an
a l s oc a n
one.

The obviousadvantageofan

A t Mach numbers nearone,

LDV canbeused

notonlyfor

LDV i s it does n o t

t h i s i s an importantadvantage.

measure f l o w a n g u l a r i t y and t u r b u l e n c e i n t e n s i t i e s g r e a t e r t h a n a b o u t

1/4 t o

LDV measurements o f v e l o c i t y and f l o w a n g u l a r i t y a r e c u r r e n t l y o n l y

s o n i c speeds.

However, near Mach onean

A t t h i st i m e ,t h e

tunnels.

In

mean-flow v e l o c i t y measurements b u t

115 as a c c u r a t e a s thebestconventionalprobesathighsubsonic
data.

le

an i m p o r t a n t a d d i t i o n t o t h e t o o l s a v a i l a b

LDV i sn o tb e i n g

However, we a n t i c i p a t e suchuse

and low super-

LDV i s expected t op r o v i d es u p e r i o r
used t o r o u t i n e l y c a l i b r a t e

empty-

i nt h ef u t u r e .

201

SUPERSONIC TUNNELS

V . C.

Mach number i n s u p e r s o n i c t u n n e l s s h o u l d
independentpressures
bymeasuring
wedge.

i nt h et e s ts e c t i o n .A c c u r a t er e s u l t s

Pitot pressures in the freestream

However, f r e e s t r e a mP i t o t

Pitot data

and theassumption

andbehindthe

neartheforward,center

chamber.

Mach number a r e t y p i c a l l y l a r g e r t h a n a x i a l
Mach number and f l o w

A t l e a s tt h r e ec r o s s - s e c t i o n ss h o u l d

be surveyed

and a f t p o r t i o n s o f t h e u s e a b l e t e s t s e c t i o n . T h i s

can be o b t a i n e d m o s t e a s i l y w i t h P i t o t

and s t a t i c proberakes

a r r a y s mounted on a t r a v e r s i n gs t i n g .T h i sd a t as h o u l d
a permanent Machnumber
f o rf r e q u e n t ,r o u t i n e

probewhichshould

checks on c a l i b r a t i o n .

be used t o c a l i b r a t e

:ngeneral,

good.

be developed which define acceptable flow qual

a c a l i b r a t e d Mach

Industrystandards

need t o

ity for particular kinds

of

o f m i s s i l e s and a i r c r a f t models.

f o r c e and p r e s s u r e t e s t s

As i n t r a n s o n i c t u n n e l s , c e n t e r l i n e n o i s e
and used t o c a l i b r a t e

or

be i n s t a l l e d i n s u p e r s o n i c t u n n e l s

number accuracy o f 0.5 t o 1% i sc o n s i d e r e d


t e s t i n g , e.g.,

bow shock o f a

and s t a t i c p r e s s u r e s a r e p r e f e r a b l e t o o n l y

it i s c o n s i d e r e d e s s e n t i a l t o c a l i b r a t e b o t h

a n g u l a r i t yo f f - c e n t e r l i n e .

type of data

can be o b t a i n e d

of isentropic flow from the settling

S i n c et r a n s v e r s eg r a d i e n t si n
variations,

be c a l i b r a t e d bymeasuringtwo

measurements shouldbeobtained

one or more, wail-mounted,dynamic-pressuretransducers.

The AEDC t r a n s i t i o n cone i s c u r r e n t l y t h e o n l y f l o w d i s t u r b a n c e c a l i b r a t i o n


devicewhich

has been t e s t e d i n

e x p e n s i v en o i s ec a l i b r a t i o nd e v i c ei s

needed t os e r v e

asa

designed to measure f l u c t u a t i n g P i t o t p r e s s u r e s s h o u l d
purpose.

TraditionaP
l i t o ts u r v e y so ft u n n e l - w a l

establishthesize

A smaller and l e s s

a l a r g e number o ft u n n e l s .

and geometry o f t h e i n v i s c i d

standard.Probes

be c o n s i d e r e d f o r t h i s

1 b o u n d a r yl a y e r sn o to n l y

f lowbutalsoaidcorrelations

o f f a c i 1 it y n o i s e .
I na d d i t i o nt ok e e p i n gt h et o t a lt e m p e r a t u r eh i g h
factionofthetest
t e s t gasshould

enough t o a v o i d l i q u e -

gas, t h e e f f e c t s o f t y p i c a l l e v e l s o f w a t e r v a p o r i n t h e

be c a r e f u l l y c a l i b r a t e d .

o f watercondensation

Also, v a r i o u s o p e r a t o r s

As i s w e l l

i s a loss o f t o t a l p r e s s u r e
haveobserved

known, t h ep r i m a r ye f f e c t

anda

riseinstaticpressure.

thatpressuretestsare

more s e n s i t i v e t o

h u m i d i t yl e v e l st h a nf o r c et e s t s .
The number o f surveys o f s u p e r s o n i c f l o w f i e l d s w i t h
c i m e t e ri si n c r e a s i n g

as some e a r l i e r problemshave

t h i s new t o o l may enabie more a c c u r a t e c a l i b r a t i o n s

202

a iaser Doppler veio-

been r e s o l v e d .I nt h ef u t u r e
of supersonictunnels.

APPENDIX I

Hot Wires and Hot Films

Introduction

'

A hot-wire anemometer is a means of measuring fluctuationsin localized

areas of the flow at frequencies up to 200 KHz.

The sensor may be a small-

thin metallic film


diameter wire suspended between needle-like prongs a or

on an insulative substrate that may be shaped in various geometries. It


responds to cooling effectsand thus measures both kinematicand thermodynamic
fluctuations of the flow.
The hot-wire has been a generally accepted standard for measuring fluctuations in wind tunnel flow since the work of Drydenand Kuethe in 1929 (Ref. l),
Its use can be very tedious and thus has often been avoided. However, it has
not been replaced because of its advantages that include: small sensor size,

high frequency response and sensitivity to pressure, vorticity, and entropy


fluctuations. Dr. Kovasznay (Ref. 2) opinioned in 1968 that the hot-wire
has not been replaced by other methods becauseof its unique characteristics.
Furthermore, significant developmentsin hot-wire methodology in the 1970's
indicate continued use of this instrumentin both specialized experiments and
in wind tunnel calibrations.
Reference 3 is a recent textbook on hot-wire technology. References 4
and 5 provide further background and extended lists of references relative to
measurements of fluctuating propertiesin wind tunnels. Reference

2 provides

summaries o f the early history and the technologyup to 1968.


Useful application of hot-wires to incompressible flow is commonly dated
as 1929 (Ref. 1).
mid 1940's.

Experiments with hot wires in supersonic flows began in the

However, equipment and analysis techniques were not considered

adequate until the mid 1950's (Refs.

6, 7, and 8 ) .

Applications to transonic

in separating the components of the


flows encountered particular difficulty
output signal (Refs. 3 and 8). Recent reports of progress (Refs. 9 and 10)
have outlined approaches for practical applications
in the high-subsonic and
transonic test regime.

*This

section has been contributed by C . J. Stalmach, Jr., Vought Corporation.

Equ ipment Descr ip t i o nand Operat-ion


The sensor i s e l e c t r i c a l l y h e a t e d t o m a i n t a i n e i t h e r

a constantcurrent

o f c o n s t a n tc u r r e n t ,

or c o n s t a n tt e m p e r a t u r e( r e s i s t a n c e ) .I nt h ec a s e

of thewireisobtainedbyanoutputamplifier

s a t i o nf o rt h et h e r m a ll a g

whose g a i n w i t h f r e q u e n c y i s a d j u s t e d ( d u r i n g
> 150) t h e w i r e e x h i b i t s
ratios (Ud -

Inthecaseof

For l a r g ea s p e c t

a f i r s t o r d e r response that is simple to

compensate e l e c t r o n i c a l l y .A d j u s t m e n to ft h en o n - l i n e a r ,
eachchange

to

a square wave h e a t i n gi n p u t )

compensate f o r decay o ft h eo u t p u tw i t hi n c r e a s i n gf r e q u e n c y .

isrequiredfor

compen-

compensating a m p l i f i e r

i n mean f l o w c o n d i t i o n o r

a constanttemperature

sensor.

anemometer, a high-gainfeedback
to f l u c t u a t i o n s i n c o o l i n g

system p r o v i d e s power t o t h e w i r e i n r e s p o n s e

c a u s e db yt h ef l o ws u c ht h a tt h ew i r er e s i s t a n c e( t e m p e r a t u r e )r e m a i n se s s e n t i a l l yc o n s t a n t .

The square o ft h ev o l t a g er e q u i r e dt om a i n t a i nc o n s t a n tw i r e

r e s i s t a n c e i s a d i r e c t measure o f t h e h e a t t r a n s f e r
environment.

The constanttemperature

between thesensor

and i t s

anemometer has severaladvantages

compared

t o a c o n s t a n tc u r r e n ts y s t e mi n c l u d i n g :

1.'

thermallagnot

2.

a u t o m a t i ca d j u s t m e n tt ol a r g e

a problemsincesensortemperature

i sc o n s t a n t ,

changes i n mean f l o wc o n d i t i o n s

whichreducesaccidentalburnouts

and c o n t i n u e s d a t a a c q u i s i t i o n

d u r i n g mean f l o w changes,

3.
4.

d i r e c t DC outputas
c o m p a t i b l ew i t h

a f u n c t i o no f

mean v e l o c i t y ,

film and low R/d w i r es e n s o r st h a t

complexfrequencyresponsecharacteristics,

5.

have

and

o u t p u t may be l i n e a r i z e d and temperature compensated.

The constantcurrentapproach

was i n i t i a l l y p r e f e r r e d

because i t p r o v i d e d

higher-frequency-response and s i g n a l - t o - e l e c t r o n i c - n o i s er a t i o .S o l i ds t a t e
e l e c t r o n i c s , however,have
comparableperformance

systems t o have

p e r m i t t e dt h ec o n s t a n tt e m p e r a t u r e

and a r et h e

systems now g e n e r a l l yp r e f e r r e d .

t i o n i s measurement o f t e m p e r a t u r e f l u c t u a t i o n s i n d e p e n d e n t o f v e l o c i t y
d e n s i t ye f f e c t s .
a c h i e v e dw i t h

Here a minimum w i r et e m p e r a t u r ei sr e q u i r e dt h a t

a c o n s t a n tc u r r e n to p e r a t i o n .

i n c o r p o r a t eb o t hc i r c u i t s .R e f e r e n c e
ment s u p p l i e r s p r o v i d e f u r t h e r d e t a i l s
sensor s t y 1 es.

204

Moderncommercial

3 and l i t e r a t u r ef r o m

An excepand

i s best
u n i t sg e n e r a l l y

commercialequip-

on t h e power systems and commonly used

Response t o Mean Flow

A wire or

film sensorresponds

t o changes i n f l o w c o n d i t i o n s t h a t a f f e c t s

t h eh e a tt r a n s f e ro ft h es e n s o rt oi t se n v i r o n m e n t .F o rs t e a d yf l o wt h es e n s o r
response may be expressed a s

&

Nu -A+B
or
E2

where x=0.5

( P U ) ~ ] (Tw

[C+D

(1.2)

Te)

f o rc l a s s i c a la n a l y s i s( K i n g ' sl a w )o ff l o wa r o u n dh e a t e dc y l i n d e r s .

F i g u r e A.I.l
flow,

(1.1)

shows theresponse

o f a h o tw i r et ot h e

mean flow.Forsupersonic

theNussel t number i s evaluatedbehindthenormal

Response t o F l u c t u a t i o n s i n t h e

shock(Ref.

6).

Flow

The s i m u l t a n e o u s r e a c t i o n o f t h e h e a t e d s e n s o r t o d e n s i t y , v e l o c i t y
temperature i s thekeybothtotheadvantages

and d i f f i c u l t i e s o f t h e h o t - w i r e

anemometer approach t o m e a s u r i n gf l o wf l u c t u a t i o n s .
haveonesensormeasure

bothkinematic

comparison, a l a s e rD o p p l e rv e l o c i m e t e r

I t i s an advantage t o

and thermodynamic f l u c t u a t i o n s .I n
can o n l y measure t h e f l u c t u a t i n g v e l o c i -

t i e s and a microphone o rp r e s s u r es e n s o rr e s p o n d so n l yt ot h en e t
p r e s s u r ef l u c t u a t i o n s .S e p a r a t i o no ft h e
heatedsensor

i sn o ts i m p l e

f l o wc h a r a c t e r i s t i c sb e i n g

t h et e s t .

and, i ng e n e r a l ,r e q u i r e s

The sensoroutput,

w i r er e s p o n s et o

case.Forisothermal,

a h o t - w i r er e s p o n d so n l yt ov e l o c i t y

thesetwobounds

and Reynolds number o f

summary curve of Fig. A . I . l ,

put i s w e l l behaved f o rs u p e r s o n i c
F i g . A.I.1.

modes of a f l u c t u a t i n g h o t -

somewhat dependent on t h e Machnumber

mean f l o wi sw e l ld e f i n e df o rt h ei n c o m p r e s s i b l e

Of

a p r i o r i knowledge o f t h e

sampled.

A S i n d i c a t e di nt h e

p r e s s i b l ef l o w ,

sound o r

modes composing t h eo u t p u to ft h e

The c h o i c eo ft e c h n i q u e sf o rs e p a r a t i n gt h e
w i r es i g n a li s

and

changes.

incorn-

The sensorOut-

Mach numbers asindicatedbythelowercurve


however i s Mach
number

f o rt h el o w e rr a n g eo fw i r eR e y n o l d s

dependentbetween

number.

Testequipmentanddataanalysistechniquesaresufficientlydeveloped
p e r m i tu s e f u la p p l i c a t i o n sf o rt u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o n so v e rt h e
i n t e r e s ti nt h i sr e p o r t

(0.4

5 3.5).

t h ea r e a so ft r a n s o n i cf l o wa p p l i c a t i o n s

Mach range o f

Research t o improveequipment

s h o u l dc o n t i n u eh o w e v e r .I np a r t i c u l a r ,a d d i t i o n a lw o r k

to
and a n a l y s i s

needs t o bedone

in

and s e p a r a t i o n o f t h e s i g n a l i n t o i t s

component modes.

205

(Ref.
2.0

1.8
1.6

1.4
1.2
I

1 .o
t

.8
.6
.4
.2

0
0

F i g u r e A. 1.2

206

.2

.4

.6

.8

1 .O

FLUCTUATIONDIAGRAM FOR 1 PER


CENT
MASS
FLOW FLUCTUATIONS AND 1 PER CENT
STAGNATION TEMPERATURE FLUCTUATIONSWITHVARYING
DEGREES OF CORRELATION.
(Ref. 7)

3)

Separation ofModes in Fluctuating Flow

In supersonic flow the fluctuating voltage aofheatedI wi re placed normal


to the flaw canbe expressed in terms of the fluctuating ve
locity, density and
total temperature (Refs. 3, 7, 8, and

lo),

(using the notation o f Ref. 10):

The sensitivity coefficients for constant temperature sensor operation are:

Rn Nu

1
T

wr

Rn Ret

Rn N u t

(I .5)

Tt

=-

2 Asw

1
+2

(K

wr

a R n ~

1 - nt) + rn

1 (sU
s +2

t P

sP)

( I .6j

For supersonic flow (M > 1.2), the heat loss is insensitive to Mach number,
and sensitivity to velocity and density are essentially equal (Refs.3, 6, 8).

:. su =

PU

Thus for supersonic flow, Eq.(1.3)

may be simplified to (Ref.

7):

The root-mean-square of the sensor outputm a y be expressed as:

where the correlation coefficiento f mass flux and temperature is defined by:

Sensor o u t p u t , o b t a i n e d a t t h r e e d i f f e r e n t s e n s o r t e m p e r a t u r e s ,
s e n s i t i v i t y ,o b t a i n e df r o mc a l i b r a t i o n ,c a np r o v i d es o l u t i o n s
unknowns <(pu)*>,<Ttc>

and RpuT

7) and Morkovin(Ref.

modal diagramsasdevelopedby

8).

degrees o f c o r r e l a t i o n i s g i v e n i n F i g .

A f l u c t u a t i o nd i a g r a mf o rv a r y i n g

A.1.2.The

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c modal diagrams

o f Kovasznay f o rf l u c t u a t i o n si nv e l o c i t y ,t e m p e r a t u r e ,
Figs. A.1.3,

A.1.4,

f o r t h et h r e e

The normal p r a c t i c e i s t o p l o t d a t a ,

o b t a i n e da ts e v e r a lw i r eo v e r h e a tr a t i o s ,i n
Kovasznay(Ref.

and sensor

and sound a r e shown i n

and A.1.5.

Independent f l u c t u a t i o n s w h i c h c h a r a c t e r i z e t h e f l o w f i e l d a r e t h e v o r t i c i t y
( t u r b u l e n c e ) ,e n t r o p y( t e m p e r a t u r es p o t t i n e s s ) ,
modes.
The

v o r t i c i t y ,e n t r o p y ,

l a t e dt ot h e

sound)

and p r e s s u r es e n s i t i v i t yc o e f f i c i e n t sa r er e -

measured d e n s i t y , v e l o c i t y ,

c o e f f i c i e n t s as f o l l o w s( R e f .

and p r e s s u r e( n o i s eo r

and t o t a l t e m p e r a t u r e s e n s i t i v i t y

8):
(1.10)

Su + 8 ST
t

sU = s P

(1.11)

+ U S T
t

X Su
M

(I.12)

+ a (y-1) (l+nxM) ST
t

Where nx i s t h e d i r e c t i o n c o s i n e o f t h e n o r m a l t o

a p l a n e sound wave f r o n t

r e l a t i v et ot h ef l o wd i r e c t i o n .

I f two o r more measureable sound s o u r c e sw i t h

d i s t i n c to r i e n t a t i o ne x i s t ,t h e n

asound

quiredfor

s e n s i t i v i t yc o e f f i c i e n t

each sound wave d i r e c t i o n .

Themodal

diagramtechnique

i s an accepted means o f d i s t i n g u i s h i n g t h e

mary c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e s e n s o r s i g n a l i n s u p e r s o n i c
flows.

would be r e -

An i m p o r t a n ta p p l i c a t i o no ft h e

tionistodistinguish
o rh o l e si nt h ew a l l )

and c e r t a i nh y p e r s o n i c

modal diagram t o w i n dt u n n e lc a l i b r a -

sound from a fixedsource(suchas


asopposed

causedbyroughness

t o a moving sound source(suchaseminating

from a t u r b u l e n t boundarylayeronthetunnelwall).Thistechnique
effectiveonly

for f l o w s where thetemperaturespottedness

The diagram f o r a f i x e d s o u r c e o f
and t h ed i a g r a mf o r

a movingsource

soundhasan

See Refs.

208

11,

A.1.4.

12, 13, and 14 f o r examples.

is
isnegligible.

origin-intercept(seeFig.

o f soundhas

s i m i l a r to thetemperaturediagramofFig.

Pri-

A. 1.5)

a positiveordinate-intercept

//
<E' >
-

STt

-1
F i g u r e A. I . 3

'Tt

FLUCTUATION
DIAGRAM
FOR 1 PERCENT TURBULENT
VELOCITYFLUCTUATIONS(VORTICITY
MODE). (Ref.

Figure A.1.4

FLUCTUATION
DIAGRAH
FOR I PER CENT
TEMPERATURE
(Ref. 7)
SPOTTINESS (ENTROPY M O D E ) .

7)

-I

~l~~~~
A . I . ~ FLUCTUATIONDIAGRAM
WhVES HAVING
1

FOR
SOUND
WAVES
THAT ARE
ALMOST
MACH
PER
CENT
PRESSURE
FLUCTUATIONS
( R e f . 7)

.3

.2

-1

-.5

.5

sPusT

F i g u r e A.1.6

21 0

FLUCTUATIONDIAGRAM
FOR UNCORRELATED MODES AT M = 1 . 7 5 ;
TEMPERATURE SPOTTINESS 0.1 PER CENT;TURBULENTVELOCITY
WAVES
(DETECTABLE) 0.1
FLUCTUATIONS 0.2 PER CENT; SOUND
PER CENT OF MASS FLOW FLllCTllATIONS.
(DOTTED
LINES
SHOW
SEPARATE
CONTRIBUTIONS.)
( R e f . 7)

When thedominate

mode i s sound, t h e f o i l c w i n g l s e n t r o p l c r e l a t i o n s

betweenpressure,density

and t e m p e r a t u r ea r ea p p r o p r i a t e

(Ref.

11):

(1.14)

The r e s u l t a n t h o t - w i r e e q u a t i o n
i nt h ef r e e s t r e a ma r eg i v e ni n

and c a l c u l a t i o n o f t h e f l u c t u a t i o n q u a n t i t i e s
References 11 and 12.

I n Reference 15. an a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e d i a g r a m a p p r o a c h i s
i d e n t i f i e st e m p e r a t u r ef l u c t u a t i o n si nt h e

wake of a wedge i n h y p e r s o n i cf l o w

where t h ea d j o i n i n gf r e e s t r e a ms i g n a l e v e li s

I f bothtemperature

low.

f l u c t u a t i o n s and moving sound s o u r c e sa r el i k e l yp r e s e n t


r e t a t i o n o f thedlagrams
o u t p u t , i n a casewhere

component modes canbe

a l l t h r e e modes,are p r e s e n t i s
absence o f onedominant

161, t h eI n t e r p -

shown I n F i g u r e A . 1 . 6 .
mode, s e p a r a t i o n o f t h e

7. 8, and 12 may be consulted

a problem.References

f o r more d e t a i l s c o n c e r n i n g t h e

(Ref.

An example of a h o t - w i r e

becomes more d i f f i c u l t .

I t i s r e a d i l y seen t h a t i n t h e

shown which

modal diagramtechnique.

TransonicFlows
The m d a l diagramapproachcannotbegenerallyappliedforcompressible

A.l.1)

subsonicandtransonicflows(seeFig.

where t h e d e r i v a t i v e s o f t h e

Nusselt number and r e c o v e r y f a c t o r w i t h r e s p e c t t o


and su

# s

tion at high

forail

o v e r h e a tr a t i o s

(Refs.

3 , 8,

Mach number a r e n o t z e r o ,
and IO).

Transonicopera-

dynamicpressuresalsoincreasesproblemswithwirebreakage.

The aboveproblems

helpexplainthelimited

usage o f h o t - w i r e

systems i n

transonicwlndtunnels.Recentdevelopments,however,provideexamplesfor
overcomingthese

difficulties.

The sensor f a i l u r e problem may be a l l e v i a t e d

withtheuseofshorterwires(Ud
film sensors(Ref.

IO, 17, and 18).

IOO),

wireswithinsulativebackingor

Heat l o s s e st o

and p o s s i b l e i n t e r f e r e n c e e f f e c t s n e c e s s i t a t e t h a t

i n a representativeflowenvironment.

end s u p p o r t so rs u b s t r a t e
eachsensorbe

The s e n s i t i v i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s

calibrated
Sp and Su

21 1

havebeen

s y s t e m a t i c a l l y measured i nt r a n s o n i cf l o wb yi n d e p e n d e n t l yv a r y i n g

d e n s i t y and v e l o c i t y ( R e f s . 9 and I O ) .
Su a r ea p p r o x i m a t e l ye q u a lf o ra l l

These r e s u l t se s t a b l i s ht h a t

Mach numbers (includingthetroublesome

0.5 and t h e w i r e

i f t h ew i r eo v e r h e a tr a t i oi sg r e a t e rt h a n

transonicrange)

Sp and

Reynolds number i sg r e a t e rt h a n

O p e r a t i o nw i t h i nt h e s er e s t r i c t i o n sa g a i n

20.

o f Eq. (1.7).For

p e r m i t st h eu s eo ft h es i m p l i f i e de x p r e s s i o n

many t r a n s o n i c

w i n dt u n n e l st h et o t a lt e m p e r a t u r ef l u c t u a t i o n sa r ex g i i g i b l er e l a t i v e
themass-flux

term.

In t h i s c a s et h eh o t - w i r ed i r e c t l y

a f a c i l i t y (such as a
new

c r y o o e n i ct u n n e l )t h el e v e l

a tc o n s t a n tc u r r e n t

R e d u c t i o no fm a s s - f l u x

Is unknown I n

may b ea s c e r t a i n e dw i t h

and neartherecoverytemperature.

measurements i n a t r a n s o n i c f l o w i n t o i t s e l e m e n t s

requiresfurtherassumptions,
o r anindependent

senses t h ef l u c t u a -

I f t h el e v e lo ft e m p e r a t u r ef l u c t u a t i o n

t i o n s o f themass-flux.

sensoroperated

to

e.g.,

possibleapplicationofthe

modal diagrams

or

measurement w i t h a l a s e rv e l o c i m e t e r ,p r e s s u r et r a n s d u c e r

a s p e c i a l h o t - f i l m geometry.Forboundary-layerflow.thepressurefluctuations
c a ng e n e r a l l yb en e g l e c t e dr e l a t i v e

t o v o r t i c i t y .O p e r a t i n gw i t h i nt h e

d e s c r i b e d w i r e and f l o w domain,boundary
and Reynoldsshear

layerprofiles

of v e l o c i t y . d e n s i t y

s t r e s s weresuccessfullyobtainedinRef.10

Hach number of 0.8.

for a nominal

For o p e r a t i o ni nt h et r a n s o n i cf r e e s t r e a m ,

t h e p r i n c i p l e of modal diagramscanbe

i t a p p e a r st h a t

a p p l i e d t o high-Reynolds-number

OF t h ed a t a ,e x t r a p o l a t e d

provideinformationonthedominate

t o theordinate,wouldthen

mode a si nt h es u p e r s o n i c

approach for s e p a r a t i o n o f t h e f l u c t u a t i o n

case.

m e t r i c a l l ys h i e l d e d

t h a t one

and a second f i l m responds t o pressure (geo-

from velocity).

fordirectcorrelation

Another

modes i s t o employ a yet-to-be

defined f i I m sensor t h a t has two (or more) f i l m s and a geometrysuch


film responds t o themass-flux

flow

0.5.

b yo b t a i n i n gd a t aa ts e v e r a lo v e r - h e a tr a t i o s ,a l lb e i n gg r e a t e rt h a n
Straightlinefairings

above

An a p p l i c a t i o n o f specialsensorgeometry,

measurements,hasbeen

r e p o r t e d for hypersonic,boundary-

17).

l a y e r flow (Ref.

Comparison o f Hot Wire t o Other Systems


Hot-wiredata
otherdevices.

have, i ng e n e r a l ,

compared w e l l w i t h

measurementsfrom

Agreement o f v e l o c i t y p r o f i l e s o b t a i n e d w i t h

hot w i r e and

l a s e r systems w i t h i n a shock-wave/boundary-layer i n t e r a c t i o n( R e f .
credence t o b o t h systems and tends t o v a l i d a t et h ea s s u m p t i o n s

21 2

19) g i v e s

employed i n

d a t ar e d u c t i o n .I nt h ef r e e s t r e a mo f
t u n n e l st h e

many t r a n s o n i c and supersonicwind

sound mode generallydominates,

menthasbeen

and i n suchcases

o b t a i n e d between h o t - w i r e and pressuretransducer

ments(Refs.

14and

20).

An examplecomparison

measurements a t M = 5 i s shown i n F i g .

A.1.7.

o f f l o w sw i t hn o i s ed n m i n a t e dd i s t u r b a n c e s ,
may sensesuch

requirements.Anotherwidely

F o rd i a g n o s t i c

a dynamic pressuretransducer

(See S e c t i o n 1 I I . F . 1

I n summary, t h eh o t - w i r ec a np r o v i d e

AEDC developed,

more i n f o r m a t i o nt h a n

The w i r e a l s o p r o v i d e s

a dynamic

and f i x e ds o u r c e s

a higherfrequencyre-

has a more omnidirectionalresponsetonoisesources.

a h o t - w i r e system i s i m p o r t a n t ( i n a d d i t i o n t o t h e

The smallersensorof
frequencyaspect)

.).

it can d i s t i n g u i s h betweenmoving

o f sound w i t h a s i n g l e sensor.
i ng e n e r a l ,

a h o t - w i r e system.

used C a l i b r a t i o n model i s t h e

e.g.,

measurements

may s a t i s f y many w i n d t u n n - 1 c a l i b r a t i o n

pressure-instrumented IOo cone.

pressuretransducer,

measure-

o f P i t o t and h o t - w i r e

f l u c t u a t i o n s w i t h much l e s s e f f o r t t h a n

A dynamic P i t o t p r e s s u r e s u r v e y

sponseand,

good agree-

i f l o c a lf l u c t u a t i n g

measurements i n a shock o r boundary

l a y e ra r er e q u i r e d .F u r t h e r ,t h ew i r e / f i l m
hidden from t h e v i e w o f

sensor may be l o c a t e di na r e a s

a laserDopplervelocimeter.

OtherDataAnalysisTechniques
O t h e rd a t a - r e d u c t i o nt e c h n i q u e sf o rt h ef l u c t u a t i n qs i g n a li n c l u d et i m e
( a u t o c o r r e l a t i o n ) and s p a t i a l( l o c a t i o n

and d i r e c t i o n ) c o r r e l a t i o n s o f t h e

s i g n a l .S p e c t r a la n a l y s i sp r o v i d e st h ee n e r g yc o n t e n ta t
These techniques and a s s o c i a t e d e l e c t r o n i c
described i nt h el i t e r a t u r e .

eachfrequency.

equipment a r e f a i r l y common and a r e

(Suggested r e f e r e n c e si n c l u d e

3 , 12, 14, and 21).

Sensor Choice and C a l i b r a t i o n Reouirements


Inthepast,thewire-breakageproblem
t i o n time.

Minimum c a l i b r a t i o n r e q u i r e s

ingcalibrationdata
w i r e (Refs. 8,

12,
22,

and 23).

A ruggedsensor

a w i r e backedbyan

18 and24).

maximum use o f c o r r e l a t i o n s o f e x i s t -

and e n d - l o s s c o r r e c t i o n s t o p r e d i c t t h e p e r f o r m a n c e o f

datagatheringefficiency
sensors.

had encouraged m i n i m i z i n g c a l i b r a -

and dataaccuracy,

i s t h e use o f more durable,rugged

may i n c l u d e a f i n e - d i a m e t e rs h o r tw i r e

i n s u l a t o r ,o r

The complexheatloss

A more recentapproach,thatpromisesimproved

a l a r g e rd i a m e t e r

(E/d

f i l m sensor(Refs.

and p o s s i b l es u p p o r ti n t e r f e r e n c e s

sensors r e q u i r e i n d i v i d u a l s e n s o r c a l i b r a t i o n s

and theuse

loo),

IO, 17,
w i t h such

o f a c o n s t a n t tem-

p e r a t u r e system.
213

Fully turbulent
nozzle wall
baundary layer

-+

aTa*nce
smt Oi

-turbulen
-First

Figure A. I

.7

COMPARISON OF PITOT PROBE AM, HOT-WIRE


WSUREMENTS OF FREE-STREAM PRESSURE
FLUCTUATIONS IN A CONVENTIONAL, MACH 5

NOZZLE, Ref. 14.


214

C a l i b r a t i o n o f a heatedsensor
m a i n t a i n i n g a constant Machnumber

may, i n general, be o b t a i n e d i n s i t u b y
and temperature and v a r y i n g t h e t o t a l

pressure (and therebyReynoldsnumber).Forsupersonicflow


i nt r a n s o n i cf l o w ,

= Su = S

PU

and f o r R > 20

Furtherdiscussionsonsuch

mean f l o w

approaches t o c a l i b r a t i o n and more-refined dynamic c a l i b r a t i o n s a r e g i v e n

i n References 3 , 8,

9, 14, 18, 25, and 26.

Rose andHorstmanhave
h o t - w i r e si n

s u c c e s s f u l l y used t h er u g g e dc l a s so ft u n g s t e n

a t r a n s o n i cf l o wf o ro v e r

a v a i l a b l e f i l m sensors(suchas

Yk

16 hourswithoutbreakage.Commercially

0.002 t o 0.006-inchdiametercylinders)should

a l s or e c e i v ec o n s i d e r a t i o nf o rw i n dt u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o n

because o f t h e f o l l o w i n g

advantages :

.
.
.

s u p e r i o rr e s i s t a n c et op a r t i c l e

damage,

s u p e r i o rr e s i s t a n c et os u r f a c ec o n t a m i n a t i o n
highersensorReynolds

and s t r a i ng a g i n g ,

numbers ( p a r t i c u l a r l yi m p o r t a n ti nt r a n s o n i c

flow).
Compared to t h e rugged c l a s so ft u n g s t e nw i r es e n s o r ,t h eP l a t i n u m - f i l m
Sensor has comparable c a p a b i l i t i e s i n
frequency response

*Privatecommunication

150K Hz).

maximum o v e r h e a tr a t i o

(-one)

and

o f HotWire

Summary o f AdvantagesandDisadvantages
The advantagesanddisadvantages

System

o f u s i n g a hot-wiresystem

thefluctuatingflowpropertiesduring

t o measure

a w i n dt u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o na r e

sum-

marized as f o l l o w s .
Advantages

1.

Small
sensor
size

2.

High
frequency
response

3.

Higs
he n s i t i v i t y

4.

S e n s i t i v et ob o t hk i n e m a t i c

5.

D i s t i n g u i s h betweenmovingand
s t a t i o n a r yn o i s es o u r c e sw i t h
a
s i n g l es e n s o r( i nf l o w s
where temperaturespottedness
i sn e g l i g i b l e )

6.

Re1 i a b l e systemsandsensorscommerciallyavailable

7.

Rugged s e n s o r sa v a i l a b l e ,p a r t i c u l a r l y

and thermodynamic f l u c t u a t i o n s

film type

D i sadvan tages"

f:

1.

P o s s i b l ef r e q u e n tb r e a k a g eo ff i n e - w i r es e n s o r( d u et oa i rl o a d s ,
v i b r a t i o n s ,p a r t i c l e
impingement, b u r n o u t o
, x i d a t i o na
, c c i d e n t se
, tc.)

2.

P o s s i b l ef a l s es i g n a (l u s u a l l ya p p a r e n t l d u et os t r a i ng u a g i n g ,c o n t a m i n a t i o n ,o rv i b r a t i o no fp r o b e .

3.

C a l i b r a t i o n may be r e q u i r e di ns i t u( f a c i l i t yt i m e

4.

Separation o f s i g n ailn t oi n d e p e n d e n t
modes requiresassumptions
c o n c e r n i n gf l o wc h a r a c t e r i s t i c so ri n d e p e n d e n t
measurements

5.

Analyses o fs i g n a lp a r t i c u l a r l yd i f f i c u l tf o rc o m p r e s s i b l es u b s o n i c
o rt r a n s o n i cf l o w ,u n l e s sr e s t r i c t e dt oh i g h e rR e v n o l d s
numbers and
w i r et e m p e r a t u r e s .

Sincetheoriginalwritingofthissection,
by Comte-Bellot has been published(Ref.
a d d i t i o n a ld i s c u s s i o no fp r o b l e ma r e a s .

216

may be expensive).

a r e v i e w o f h o t - w i r e anemometry
27).
T h i sr e f e r e n c ep r o v i d e s

NOMENCLATURE

constants
overheat
parameters,

1/2

a
a

En
En

R~

w i r e d iameter

wire voltage

K2

time-averaged,

heat-transfer coefficient

wire current

d i n Rw/d En
Tw

Kn

Knudsen number, n/d

w i r el e n g t h

d Rn p/d Rn Tw

Mach number

d En k/d Rn Tw

"X

d i r e c t i o nc o s i n eo f
normal t o sound plane
wave f r o n t r e l a t i v e t o f l o w d i r e c t i o n

Nu

Nusselt number,

t o t a lp r e s s u r eb e h i n d

a normalshock

hd
k

staticpressure
resistance
Reynolds number, p u d h
correlation coefficient
fluctuations,

of mass-flux and t o t a l temperature

sensor s e n s i t i v i t y c o e f f i c i e n t
temperature
a x i a lv e l o c i t y
exponent i n e q u a t i o n 2

217

ratio of specific heats,1.40 used for air

recovery factor,

molecular mean freepath

vi scos i ty

dens i ty

'w r

r'T t

temperature overheat, CTW

- Tr)

Tr

root mean square


Superscripts
(

1'

( 7

fluctuating value
time

averaged

Subscripts
e

environment

recovery o f adiabatic wall

total or stagnation conditions

t2

stagnation correction behind normal shock

temperature

velocity

wire

sound

dens i ty

PU

mass flux

entropy

vorticity

218

A. REFERENCES
1.
1.

H. L. Dryden and A. M. Kuethe:


Measurements,"

2.

" E f f e c to fT u r b u l e n c ei n

Wind Tunnel

NACA Tech, Rep. 342, 1930.

"Advances i n HotWire

Anemometry, Proceedings o f t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l

Symposium onHotWire

Anemometry,"

L. M e l n i k and J. R.

E d i t e d by W.

68

Weske, U n i v e r s i t y o f Maryland, AFOSR


No.

1492, USAF O f f i c e o f

S c i e n t i f i c Research, J u l y , 1968.

3.

V. A.

Resistance Temperature'fransducers, MetropologyPress,

Sandborn:

Fort Call ins, Colorado,

4.

V. A.

R. Westley:"Problems

March 1974.

NASA TH X-62,337,

Measurements I n Ground-Based F a c i l i t i e s

o fN o i s e

5 o f "A F u r t h e r Review o f Current

w i t h Forward-SpeedSimulation,"Appendlx
Research Aimed a t t h e D e s i g n
Report o f t h e M i n i l a w s

6.

L. S. G . Kovasznay:
Aero.

7.

Sci.,

L. S. G.

Vol.

M.

V.

W.

C.

C.

C.

Kovasznay:

"Turbulence

Horstman and W.

Sci.,Vol.
12.

i n Supersonic

andHot

Wire Anemometry i n Compressible

"Turbulence Measurement i n Transonic Flow,"

C.

Rose:

"HotWire

June 1976.

Anemometry i n Transonic Flow,"

December 1975.

"Aerodynamic NoiseinSupersonic
28, No.

AEDC-TR-71-143,
13.

Flow," Jour.Aero.Sci.,

9,

Wind Tunnels,"Jour.Aero.

September 1961.

J. C. Donaldson and J. P. Wallace:"FlowFluctuations


Machnumber

M. C.

Jour.

1953.

Rose and E. P. McDaid:

J. Laufer:

1975.

November, 1956.

AGARDograph,
24,

NASA TM X-62,495,

11.

Sept.

Second

17, No. 9, September, 1950.

Proc. A l A A 9 t h Aerodynamic TestingConference,


10.

Wind Tunnels,''

"The Hot Wire Anemometer i n Supersonic Flow,"

Morkovin:"Fluctuations

Flows,''

9.

and Operation of Large

Working Group,'AGARD-AR-83,

Vol. 20, No. 10, October,

8.

"A Review o f Turbulence Measurements i n Compressible

Sandborn:

Flow,"

5.

1972.

intheTestSectionofthe

Measurements a t

12 InchSupersonicTunnel

(D)

,'I

August 1971.

F i s c h e r and R. D. Wagner:

Hypersonic He1 ium Flow,"

" T r a n s i t i o n andHot

A l A A Journal,Vol.

H i r e Measuremen.ts i n

10, No. 10, October 1972.

14.

J. B. Anders, P. C.

Stainback, L. R.

and F l u c t u a t i n g D i s t u r b a n c e

1.

Keefe;
and

E. Beckwith:

Mea'surements i n t h e S e t t l i n g

"Sound

Chamber and

'75 Record, I n t ' l Congress,onInstrumentation


Aerospace Simulation Faci 1 i t i e s , Ottawa, Canada Sept.22-24,:
1975,
published by IEE, 345 E. 4 7 t hS t r e e t , New York.
TestSection,"

15.

R.

ICIASF

D. Wagner and L. M. Weinstein:

16.

P. C.

Stainback, e t a l :

Layer Transition

1974.

"ExperimentalStudiesofHypersonic

V.

Boundary

and E f f e c t s o f Wind TunnelDisturbances,"

NASA LangleyResearchCenter,March

17.

M i k u l l a and C . C.

adiabaticHypersonic

Horstman:

"Hot Wire Anemometry i n Hypersonic

NASA TN 0-7465,June

He1 iumFlow,"

in

NASA TN D-7453,

1974.
"TurbulenceStress

BoundaryLayer,"

Measurements i n a Non-

13, No. 12,

A l A A Journal,Vol.

December 1975.

18.

W.

C.

Rose:
"The

Behavior o f a CompressibleTurbulent

aShock-Wave-Induced

w.

C.

Rose and D. A.

1974.

20.

E.

Grandeand

Johnson:

"Turbulence i n a Shock-Wave Boundary-Layer

A l A A Journal,Vol.

Interaction,"

G.

C.

Oates:

13, No. 7, J u l y 1975.

"Response o fM i n i a t u r eP r e s s u r eT r a n s d u c e r s

t oF l u c t u a t i o n si nS u p e r s o n i c

Flow,"

Propulsion, A I A A Series onProgress


Vol. 34,
21.

R.

in

NASA TN D-7092, NASA

AdversePressureGradient,''

Ames ResearchCenter,March

19.

BoundaryLayer

Instrumentation for A i r b r e a t h i n g
i n A s t r o n a u t i c s and Aeronautics,

1972.

K. Otnes and L. Enochson:

D i g i t a l Time SeriesAnalysis,Wiley,

New York,

197222.

W.

Behrens:

"TotalTemperatureThermocoupleProbe

Temperature o f C i r c u l a rC y l i n d e r , "I n t .
Vol.
23.

C.

F. Dewey, J r . :

Mass Transfer,

"Hot Wire Measurements i n Low Reynolds Number Hypersonic

ARS Journal,Vol.

E. L. Doughman:

August 1972.

28, No. 12,December

"Development o f aHotWire

Turbulent Flows,"TheReview

220

J.Heatand

14, 1971.

Flows,"
24.

Based onRecovery

1961.

Anemometer forHypersonic

o f S c i e n t i f i cI n s t r u m e n t s ,V o l .

43, No. 8,

25.

R. F. Rosenberg:

SpecialCalibration

Method f o r HotWire

AerospaceResearchLaboratories,March
26.

R. H. K l r c h h o f f and R. R.
Anemometer,"

27.

Comte-Bellot,
Mechanics,Vol.

Probes,"

ARL 71-0038,

12, No.

"Hot-Wire Anemometry,"

USAF

1971.

S a f a r i k ," T u r b u l e n c ec a l i b r a t i o no f

A l A A Journal,Vol.
G.:

Anemometry Leading t o a

"Some AspectsonHotWire

5,

a Hot Wire

May 1974.

Annual Reviews o fF l u i d

8 , Palo Alto, C a l i f . 1976.

22 1

APPEND I X I I
LASER
DOPPLER
VELOCIMETER
MEASUREMENTS

Thedevelopment

ofthelaser

was q u i c k l y f o l l o y e d b y i t s a p p l i c a t i o n

t h e measurement o f t h e v e l o c i t y o f
s h i f t i n thefrequency
weremeasuredby

a moving o b j e c t b y o b s e r v i n g t h e D o p p l e r

o f t h ei n c i d e n tl a s e rl i g h t .L i q u i d

1965, t h et e c h n i q u e

f r o ms m a l lp a r t i c l e se n t r a i n e di nt h ef l o w .I n

(Ref.2).Since

made i n seededgas

flowby

t h a tt i m ev e r ys i g n i f i c a n t

been a p p l i e d t o

Foreman,George

advanceshavebeen

t h et h e o r e t i c a lu n d e r s t a n d i n go ft h et e c h n i q u e ,
ments and signalprocessors.

flow v e l o c i t i e s

1) i n 1964, u t i l i z i n g D o p p l e rr a d i a t i o n

Yeh and Cummins (Ref.

andmeasurementswere

andLewis
made b o t h i n

(LDV) technique has


and f l o w

measurements o f mean v e l o c i t y , t u r b u l e n t i n t e n s i t y

d i r e c t i o n i n a v a r i e t y o f f l o wf i e l d s

and i n b o t h l i q u i d s

3).

L i t e r a t u r e on t h e s u b j e c t i s

andgases.

By 1970

made extended from 10 4

measurementshadbeen

cm/sec t o 1000 m/sec (Ref.

was r e f i n e d

and i n improved o p t i c a la r r a n g e -

The LaserDopplerVelocimeter

t h ev e l o c i t yr a n g eo v e rw h i c h

to

T h i sr a p i dr a t eo f

developmentcontinues.

now e x t e n s i v e ; a b i b l i o g r a p h y (Ref.

4) p u b l i s h e d

i n 1972 c o n t a i n s 190 r e f e r e n c e s .
Laservelocimeter
e.g.,

Refs.

systemshave

been operated i ns e v e r a lw i n dt u n n e l s ,

3 , 5, 6, 7, 8, and t h e i ru n i q u ec a p a b i l i t i e s ,e s p e c i a l l y

non-intrusivevelocity

and turbulencesurveysaroundmodels

shouldinsuretheircontinueddevelopment
present,the

for

i n t h et u n n e l ,

and a p p l i c a t i o n .A l t h o u g h

to the

LDV has n o t been w i d e l y a p p l i e d t o b a s i c t u n n e l c a l i b r a t i o n

measurements, t h i s c a p a b i l i t y

hasbeen

demonstrated and t h e i r a v a i l a b i l i t y t o

will probablylead

thewindtunneloperator

t o t h i s use.The

i n will be r e s t r i c t e d p r i m a r i l y t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n
application to basic facility flow calibration

discussionhere-

o f t h e LDV t e c h n i q u e f o r
measurementssuchas

v e l o c i t y (Mach number) d i s t r i b u t i o n , t u r b u l e n c e i n t e n s i t y

mean

and f l o w a n g u l a r i t y .

B a s i cP r i n c i p l e s
C o n s i d e r a t i o n o f theadvantages
t e c h n i q u e sr e q u i r e

some d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s o f t h e

The p r i n c i p l e o f t h e
b ya ni n t e r f e r e n c e - f r i n g e
equationsdiscussed

and disadvantages o f l a s e r v e l o c i m e t e r
system.

LDV can be descr,ibedbyboththeDopplereffect


model.Sincebothapproaches

i nt h i sr e p o r t ,t h ef r i n g e

y i e l dt h e

model will beused

same b a s i c
s i n c e it

a i d sv i s u a l i z a t i o no ft h ep h y s i c a lp r i n c i p l e si n v o l v e d .S e v e r a lo p t i c a l
arrangements a r ep o s s i b l e ,b u tc o n s i d e r a t i o n s
222

and

will be l i m i t e d t o t h e d u a l -

beam or d i f f e r e n t i a l - D o p p l e r systemmost

commonly used for wind tunnel

measure-

ments.

A.II.l, a l a s e r beam i s

For a single-component,dual-beamsystem,Fig.

two p a r a l l e l beams o f e q u a li n t e n s i t ys e p a r a t e db y

s e p a r a t e di n t o

A.

These beams e n t e r a lenswhichcauses

t h el e n s

wavefrontsinterfereconstructively
a l t e r n a t ed a r k

and b r i g h tr e g i o n s

them t o c r o s s a t t h e f o c a l p o i n t o f

volume i s formed.

where themeasuringorprobe

second l e n so n t o

I nt h i sr e g i o n ,t h e

and d e s t r u c t i v e l y to form s t a t i o n a r y ,
or f r i n g e s ,F i g .

throughthemeasuringvolumecausesvariations
s c a t t e r e db yt h ep a r t i c l e .

a distance

A p a r t i c l e moving

A.11.2.

intheintensityofthelight

The s c a t t e r e dl i g h ti sc o l l e c t e d

a p h o t o d e t e c t o r ,u s u a l l y

and focusedby

a p h o t o m u l t i p l i e rt u b e .
r

The r e c e i v i n g o p t i c s

and p h o t o d e t e c t o r may be l o c a t e d on t h e same s i d e o f

themeasurinqvolumeasthelaser

If l o c a t e do nt h e

t h eo p p o s i t es i d e .
s c a t t e r e di nt h e

and t r a n s m i t t i n g o p t i c s o r
same s i d e ,t h e

may be l o c a t e d on

svstem u t i l i z e s l i g h t

backward d i r e c t i o n by p a r t i c l e s i n t h e f l o w ( b a c k s c a t t e r

I f l a s e r and r e c e i v i n g o p t i c s a r e

on o p p o s i t es i d e so ft h em e a s u r i n g

mode).
volume, t h e

system u t i l i z e s 1 i g h t s c a t t e r e d i n t h e f o r w a r d d i r e c t i o n ( f o r w a r d - s c a t t e r
Obviousoperationaladvantagesareassociatedwiththebackscatter
u l a r l yf o rw i n dt u n n e la p p l i c a t i o n .

h i g h e rw i t ht h ef o r w a r d - s c a t t e r

t h es i g n a l - t o - n o i s er a t i o

d i r e c t l yp r o p o r t i o n a lt ot h ev e l o c i t y

A.11.4,

i s significantly

system.

The p h o t o m u l t i p l i e rt u b eg e n e r a t e s

spacing,Fig.

mode, p a r t i c -

However, s i n c e much more l i g h t i s s c a t t e r e d

A.11.3,

i nt h ef o r w a r dd i r e c t i o n ,F i g .

mode).

an e l e c t r i c a l s i g n a l a t

a frequency

and i n v e r s e l y p r o p o r t i o n a l t o t h e f r i n g e

a c c o r d i n qt ot h er e l a t i o n

where f di st h eD o p p l e rf r e q u e n c y ,

U t h ev e l o c i t y

f r i n g e s and p e r p e n d i c u l a r t o t h e b i s e c t o r

component normal t o t h e

o f t h e beam angle, and 8 f

is the

f r i n g es p a c i n g .
The f r i n g e s p a c i n g
wavelength o ft h el a s e ra s

can be determined from t h e systemgeometryand


shown i n F i g s .

A.II.l and 2,

the

i.e.,

( I I .2)

&

Ream

Collecting

/ i\

L
I

Processor

imatomutiplier
Tube (Backscatter Mode)
Figure A . I 1 . 1 .

DUAL BEAM LASERDOPPLER


VELOCIMETER, WITH
CPPIOPIAL FORWARD AND MCKSCA!M!ER MODES

A-

Figure A. I I . 2

GENERATION OF INTERFERENCE FRINGES IN


MEASURING VOLUME OF DUAL BEAM LASER
DOPPLER VELOCIMETER

Forward
Scatter Scatter

Electrical

signal

Incident

Light

_c

Time

Figure A I I 3

LIGHT SCATTERED BY
A SMALL PARTICLE

Figure A. I I . 4

LASER ANEMOMETER SIGNAL


FROEl PHGT0DE;TECTOR

where X i s t h e w a v e l e n g t h o f t h e l a s e r
s e c t i n g beams.
From

and 0 i s t h e a n g l e

between t h e i n t e r -

t h e above r e l a t i o n s :

The measured v e l o c i t y i s t h e a b s o l u t e v a l u e o f t h e v e l o c i t y o f t h e p a r t i c l e
o f t h ef l u i d .

which i sn o tn e c e s s a r i l ye q u a lt ot h a t
l a g will be d i s c u s s e di n

The problems o f p a r t i c ' l e

more d e t a i ll a t e ri nt h i ss e c t i o n .

w i t hr e g a r dt of l o wd i r e c t i o n

The ambiguity

becomes a problem i n t u r b u l e n t f l o w s a t l o w ,

mean-component v e l o c i t y where f l o wr e v e r s a l

may be encountered,butcan

be
one of

overcome by i n t r o d u c i n g an a c o u s t o - o p t i cm o d u l a t o r( B r a g gc e l l )i n t o
t h et w op a r a l l e l a s e r

beams.

The Bragg c e l li n t r o d u c e s

frequencyshiftinto

one o f t h e

a s t a t i o n a r yf r i n g e

system.Zero

an a c c u r a t e l y known

i n a moving r a t h e rt h a n

beams, w h i c hr e s u l t s

p a r t i c l ev e l o c i t yt h e nc o r r e s p o n d st ot h e

f r e q u e n c ys h i f t ;h i g h e ro rl o w e rv e l o c i t i e sg e n e r a t eh i g h e ro rl o w e ro u t p u t
s i g n a lf r e q u e n c i e s .I nt h i s
and r e v e r s i n gf l o w s

manner t h ed i r e c t i o n a la m b i g u i t y

can be measured.

Formain-stream,empty-test-section
will n o tn o r m a l l y

measurements i n a w i n dt u n n e lt h ed i r e c t i o n a la m b i g u i t y
a problem,buttheBraggcell

can be e l i m i n a t e d

be

may s t i l l be u s e f u la th i g hf l o wv e l o c i t i e st o

d o w n - s h i f tt h es i g n a lf r e q u e n c yt o

'

a range t h a t can be more r e a d i l y measured

by t h ee l e c t r o n i cs i g n a lp r o c e s s o r .

The measuring o r p r o b e
t h ec o n t o u r

volume is an e l l i p s o i d w h i c h may be defined by

where t h e l i g h t i n t e n s i t y

i n t e n s i t ya tt h ec e n t e r
t h e volume Fig. A.11.2

decreases t o l / e t i m e s t h e

o f theprobevolume,

Ref. 9.

maximum

The w i d t h and l e n g t h o f

may be d e f i n e d by

where do i s t h e d i a m e t e r o f t h e i n t e r s e c t i n g l a s e r
p o i n t o f t h et r a n s m i t t i n gl e n s .
initiallaser

beams a t t h e f o c a l

The focuseddiameter,do,isrelated

t ot h e

beam diameter, Do, by

227

(I 1.6)
where F i st h et r a n s m i t t i n gl e n sf o c a ll e n g t h .O t h e rr e l a t i o n s
f o rt h ed i m e n s i o n so ft h ep r o b e

volume,dependinq

3 , 10, 1 1 ) .

geometricboundariesaredefined(Refs.
s t r a t e st h a t

a l a r g e ,o r i g i n a l( o r

f o c a l - l e n g t hl e n sy i e l dt h e

u s u a l l yd e t e r m i n e d

short-

or probe volume.The

focal

measuringvolume

i s a designproblemduringwhich

must be balanced.

The i n i t i a lr e s t r i c t i o n sa r e

by t h e minimum number o f f r i n g e s r e q u i r e d f o r t h e s i g n a l

measure thefrequencywithadequateaccuracy.Also,theDoppler

signalfrequency

must n o t exceed t h e maximum whichcan

p r o c e s s o r :t h i sf r e q u e n t l yi s

number of u s a b l e f r i n g e s

canbeas

Eq. (11.1).

determined from the width of the measuring

8F s i n
TI

Eqs.

the

and t h e m x i -

The r e q u i r e d minimum

o
lw as e i g h t w i t h a countersystem,but

somewhat l a r g e r number i sn o r m a l l yp r e f e r r e d ,

as definedby

be measuredby

a f u n c t i o no ft h ef r i n g es p a c i n g

mum v e l o c i t y t o be measured, asdefinedby

(I1 . 2 ) ,

The number o f fringescan


volume, wv,

a
be

d i v i d e d by t h e f r i n g e

( I 1.4) and (i1.6),

0
(F)

i.e.,

(I 1.8)

Do

From t h e o p t i c a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n , F i g .
angle (8/2)

anda

where measurements a r e d e s i r e d .

c o n f l i c t i n gr e q u i r e m e n t s

spacing,bf,

The above e q u a t i o n demon

from t h e t r a n s m i t t i n g l e n s t o t h e

by t h e d i s t a n c e

The s e l e c t i o n o f t h e

p r o c e s s o rt o

upon how t h e " e f f e c t i v e "

laser-beamdiameter

minimum sizemeasuring

l e n g t hi sa l s od e t e r m i n e d
point of the flow

expanded)

may be d e r i v e d

A.II.1,

i t may be n o t e dt h a tt h e

i s n o r m a l l y smal 1.

A i s t h e beam s e p a r a t i o nd i s t a n c ea tt h et r a n s m i t t i n gl e n s .
From
Eqs. (II.8) and (II . 9 ) . the number o f f r i n g e s can be expressed i n terms o f

Here

o n l yt h e

beam s e p a r a t i o nd i s t a n c e

Nfr

4
A
TI

228

Do

and t h e i n i t i a l

laser-beamdiameter.

(11.10)

A g a i nn o t et h a tt h e

number o f f r i n g e s

unfocused beam diameter, Do,


I n c r e a s i n gt h e
length,

can be increased by r e d u c i n gt h e

b u tt h i si nt u r ni n c r e a s e st h ep r o b ed i a m e t e r .

beam separation, A , f o r a f i x e d t r a n s m i t t i n g l e n s f o c a l

i s aneffective

number of f r i n g e s .

means o fi n c r e a s i n gt h e

Based on thepreceedingequations,
dimensions o f t h e measuringvolume

and o t h e r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f

maximum w i d t h o f t h e p r o b e

volume i s , from Eq. (11.5)

The l e n g t ho ft h ep r o b e
i s 7.7

1.5 m and
From Eq.' (11.6) t h e

3.818".

focused beam diameter i s 0.65 mm which i s a l s o t h e


f r i n g es p a c i n g

input

I f t h et r a n s m i t t i n gl e n sf o c a ll e n g t hi s

t h e beam spacing i s 100 mm, t h e beam a n g l ei s

volume.

a velocimeter

a wavelength o f 514.5 nm andan

system.ConsideranArgonlaserwith
beam diameter o f 1.5 mm.

i t i so fi n t e r e s tt oc a l c u l a t et h e

19.7 mm.

i s 84.

and t h e maximum number o f r i n g e s

The

At a

v e l o c i t y o f 300m/sec.,
theDopplerfrequency
(Eq. ( 1 1 . 1 ) w i l l be 38.96 MHz.
Thissystem i s n o t n e c e s s a r i l y t y p i c a l , b u t
i t i l l u s t r a t e sa p p l i c a t i o no ft h e
system r e l a t i o n s h i p sd i s c u s s e dp r e v i o u s l y .
To t h i s p o i n t t h e

t h ef r i n g ep a t t e r n )

measurement of a s i n g l e v e l o c i t y
has been described.

component (normal t o
o f a single-

The f r i n g ep a t t e r n

component LDV can be r o t a t e db yr o t a t i n gt h et r a n s m i t t i n go p t i c s .T h i sp e r m i t s t h e measurement o f v e l o c i t y components a t two or more anglessuchas

+45

degrees t o t h e n o m i n a l t u n n e l c e n t e r l i n e .

From t h e t w o v e l o c i t y

measurements, t h ev e l o c i t yv e c t o ri nt h et u n n e lp l a n e
o ft h ei n t e r s e c t i n g

normal t o t h e b i s e c t o r

beams canbedetermined.Thus,

measured i n a d d i t i o n t o v e l o c i t y

flow a n g u l a r i t yc a n

be r e a l i z e d by u s i n g two p a i r s o f i n t e r s e c t i n g

two-componentmeasurements

beams normal t ot h a td e f i n e d

beam p a i r .S e p a r a t i o no ft h e

two measurementscan

a l a s e r beam i n t o two p a i r s o f

P o l a r i z e d f i l t e r s on t h e two p h o t o d e t e c t o r sa l l o w

v e n i e n tf o rt h i s

formed by two o ft h ef o u r

so eachphotodetector

beams a t t h e

i s p a r t i c u l a r l y con-

hands, 488 nm ( b l u e ) and

514.5 nm ( g r e e n )a r ea v a i l a b l e .O p t i c a lf i l t e r sa l l o ws e p a r a t i o n
s c a t t e r e dl i g h t

see o n l y

can a l s o be used f o r two

The use o f an Argon i o nl a s e r


t w o s t r o n gc o l o r

first

90" t o t h e o t h e r .

each d e t e c t o r t o

Two wavelengths o f l a s e r l i g h t

purposesince

bythe

be achieved by s p l i t t i n g

beams, each p a i r p o l a r i z e d

t h el i g h ts c a t t e r e df r o mt h ef r i n g e s

can

beams, u s u a l l yw i t ht h ep l a n e

d e f i n e d by t h e second p a i r o f

componentmeasurements.

be

and t u r b u l e n c ei n t e n s i t y .

O p t i c a la r r a n g e m e n t st oy i e l ds i m u l t a n e o u s

i n t e r s e c t i o np o i n t .

component

sees o n l y t h e l i g h t

o f the
of interest.

A t h i r d v e l o c i t y component, p a r a l l e l t o t h e b i s e c t o r o f t h e i n t e r s e c t i n g
beams, can a l s ob e
(Ref.

measured simultaneously.Forexample,Orloffand

12) havedescribedan

Logan

LDV system f o r measuring a l l t h r e e v e l o c i t y

components which employs backscattering

and a reference-beam method.

SignalProcessors
shown on F i g . A.11.4,

The o u t p u ts i g n a lf r o mt h ep h o t o m u l t i p l i e rt u b e ,

i s a f r e q u e n c y ' b u r s ta tt h eD o p p l e rf r e q u e n c yw i t ha m p l i t u d em o d u l a t e da c c o r d i n gt ot h ei n t e n s i t yd i s t r i b u t i o na c r o s st h ef r i n g e s .T h i sa m p l i t u d e - m o d u l a t e d
envelope i s commonly r e f e r r e d t o asthe"pedestal"

and must be removed b yh i g h -

pass f i l t e r i n g o r o p t i c a l means beforeprocessing.


t h ed o p p l e rs i g n a l

The number o f c y c l e s

of

and themodulationintensityaboutthepedestalenvelope

will v a r ya c c o r d i n gt ot h el o c a t i o na tw h i c ht h ep a r t i c l ec r o s s e st h ep r o b e

volume, t h e s i z e o f t h e p a r t i c l e

and t h e number o f p a r t i c l e s p r e s e n t a t

timewithintheprobevolume.Signalburstsofmeasurableamplitude
minimum r e q u i r e d number o f c y c l e s o c c u r a t
r e v e r s a l sd u r i n g

a s i n g l es i g n a lb u r s t

one
and t h e

random t i m ei n t e r v a l s ,

and phase

will occur when m u l t i p l e p a r t i c l e s a r e

present .
Several methods f o rp r o c e s s i n gt h ed a t af r o mt h ep h o t o m u l t i p l i e r
used.
These

have been

include:
spectrumanalyzers
p h o t o nc o r r e l a t o r s
f i l t e r banks

O n l yt h el a s t

f r e q u e n c yt r a c k e r s

counters
twotypes

o f p r o c e s s o r sp r o d u c ee s s e n t i a l l yr e a l - t i m ev e l o c i t y

i n f o r m a t i o n d i r e c t l y and a r e c u r r e n t l y
The f r e q u e n c yt r a c k e r ,

used f o r m o s tw i n dt u n n e la p p l i c a t i o n s .

as t h e name implies,convertstheDoppler

f r e q u e n c yr e c e i v e df r o mt h ep h o t o d e t e c t o ri n t o

a p r o p o r t i o n a l ,a n a l o gv o l t a g e .

The t r a c k e r c i r c u i t i s

o rf r e q u e n c yl o c k e dl o o p s ,o r

a combination o ft h e

implementedusingphase
two.Bothtypes

o fl o o p sf u n c t i o n

outputfrequencyof

a voltage-controlledoscillator

frequencyconverter

(V/F)

t ot h ei n p u ts i g n a lf r e q u e n c y ,

by comparingthe
( V C O ) o r a v o lt a g e - t o -

and b o t h u t i l i z e t h e

differenceinfrequencytomodifyoradjusttheacinputvoltagetotheint e r n a lf r e q u e n c yg e n e r a t o r .

The dc v o l t a g e i s t h e np r o p o r t i o n a lt ot h ei n p u t

f r e q u e n c y .A l t e r n a t i v e l y ,t h ei n t e r n a l l y - g e n e r a t e df r e q u e n c yc a nb ec o n v e r t e d
to a digital signal

by means o f a counter.

Trackerprocessorsarecharacterizedbythe
capturebandwidth,dynamicrange

exceeds thecapturebandwidthorcapture

will l o s el o c k

and n o t t r a c k t h e p a r t i c l e o r o t h e r

particles which are outside the capture


Where D o p p l e rs i g n a lt r a c k i n g

range.

i s i n t e r r u p t e d bya

o u t p u tv o l t a g el e v e li sn o r m a l l yp l a c e di n
d u r i n gt h eh o l dp e r i o d ,t r a c k i n gi s

13.

I f t h es i g n a li sn o tr e c a p -

resumed.

sweepmode

t h es i g n a li sr e - a c q u i r e d .S i g n a l sc a n

d r o p - o u t ,t h el a s t

I f t h es i g n a lr e t u r n s

"hold".

t u r e dd u r i n gt h eh o l dp e r i o d ,t h es e a r c ho r

torecord

If t h e change i n v e l o c i t y

and s l e wr a t e .

from one p a r t i c l e t o t h e n e x t
range,thetracker

maximum frequencyrange,

isactivateduntil

be p r o v i d e dt oe x t e r n a ld a t a

mean v e l o c i t y and ac o r t u r b u l e n t f l u c t u a t i o n s i g n a l s ,

Dopplerfrequenciescan

bemeasured

changes over a 200: 1 rangecan

from 2kHz t o 50 MHz.

be f o l l o w e d , and i n t h e s e a r c h

be as h i g h as 400 MHz/ms.

frequencyslewratecan

systems
e.g.,Ref.

Velocity
mode t h e

D a t a - v a l i d a t i o nf e a t u r e s

a r ea l s on o r m a l l yi n c o r p o r a t e d .F o r

example, one s y s t e mr e q u i r e st r a c k i n g

f o r 8 Dopplercycles

2 a d d i t i o n a lc y c l e sw i t h o u td r o p - o u ti n

o r d e rt o

and h o l d i n g f o r

be considered a v a l i dd a t ap o i n t .

d a t ar a t e s

Thus, f o rh e a v i l y

seeded f l o w s ,

up t o 1 x 106 per second can be processed.

The c o u n t e r o r b u r s t p r o c e s s o r f o r

laser-anemometer s i g n a l s a c c u r a t e l y

flow t o t r a v e l a c r o s s

measures t h et i m er e q u i r e df o r

a particleinthe

f i x e d number o f f r i n g e s i n t h e

measuringvolume,i.e.,

a known distance.

From these two q u a n t i t i e s , a counterdeterminestheDopplerfrequency


t h e r e b yt h ep a r t i c l ev e l o c i t y .

The counter may be i n h e r e n t l y a d i g i t a l i n -

strument, so d r i f t and c a l i b r a t i o n problemswhich


analogprocessors,such

o l dl e v e ld e t e c t o rw h i c h ,

a directdigitaloutput.
by passing a l a s e rs i g n a lb u r s tt h r o u g h

a thresh-

when t h ea d j u s t a b l ea m p l i t u d e - t h r e s h o l di se x -

ceeded, enables a z e r o - c r o s s i n gd e t e c t o r
D o p p l e rs i g n a l s

may be a s s o c i a t e d w i t h

as trackers,areavoided.Counterprocessorsare

n o r m a l l yc o n f i g u r e dt oy i e l d

A c o u n t e rf u n c t i o n s

and

suchas

a Schmidt t r i g g e r .

Those

above t h ea m p l i t u d e - t h r e s h o l dl e v e la r et h e nc o n v e r t e di n t o

a t r a i n o f square waves, w i t h a f r e q u e n c ye q u a lt ot h eo r i g i a n ls i g n a l
frequency.
Many e l e c t r o n i c f r e q u e n c y - c o u n t e r s f u n c t i o n
ofthe

unknown s i g n a l f o r

1.0 or IO seconds.The

by c o u n t i n g each c y c l e

an a c c u r a t e l y - f i x e dt i m ep e r i o d ,

suchas

0.1,

r e a d i n g sa r et h e nc o n v e r t e dt ot h es i g n a lf r e q u e n c y

23 1

i nh e r t z .S i n c et h e

from t h e passage o f

maximum number o f c y c l e s a v a i l a b l e

volume o f a LDV i s e x t r e m e l y s m a l l , t h e a c c u -

a particleacrossthemeasuring

r a c yo ft h ed i r e c tc o u n t i n gp r o c e d u r ew o u l d

be t o t a l l y inadequate.

t h i s problemcounterprocessorsareperiod

To a v o i d

measurement devices,i.e.,pulses

from an a c c u r a t e , h i g h - f r e q u e n c y o s c i l l a t o r o r c l o c k a r e a c c u m u l a t e d i n
r e g i s t e rd u r i n gt h et i m ei n t e r v a lc o r r e s p o n d i n gt o

a f i x e d number o f p u l s e s

from t h eS c h m i d tt r i g g e r .A l t e r n a t i v e l y ,t h et i m ei n t e r v a l s
t ov o l t a g ea m p l i t u d e sw h i c hc a n
f o rt h e

bemeasured

frequency,

e.g.,

canbe

digitally.

converted

The t i m er e s o l u t i o n

2 t o IO x 10-9 seconds,depending

n periodrangesfrom

upon t h e c l o c k

500 MHz corresponds t o 2 x 10-9 seconds r e s o l u t i o n .

The

c o u n t e rp r o c e s s o ra l s on o r m a l l yi n c l u d e sc o m p u t a t i o n a lc a p a b i l i t i e st oc o n v e r t
theperiodinformationintoeitherfrequencyorvelocityunitsfordigital
display.

The computationtime

athighvelocities

about 1 x I O m 6 sec so t h a t , even

i st y p i c a l l y

where theDopplerfrequency

a c q u i s i t i o n and c o m p u t a t i o nt i m ef o r

-6 sec.
Data
as 2 t o 3 x 10

one i n d i v i d u a l measurement can be asshort

a c q u i s i t i o nr a t e so f

t h e r e f o r et h e o r e t i c a l l yp o s s i b l e( b u tf a rf r o m
t i o no fp a r t i c l e s ,

Ref.

i s IO t o 20 MHz, t h e t o t a l

100,000 readings/secare
common) w i t h moderateconcentra-

14.

Counterprocessorsincludeseveraldata-validationfeaturestoallowthe

loss o f a b i t o r c y c l e d u r i n g

rejectionofnoisebursts,detectthe

i n gc y c l e ,r e j e c ts i g n a l sf r o ml a r g ep a r t i c l e s ,e t c .
u t i l i z e d t o rejectdata

c l o c kp u l s e sa r eg a t e di n t ob o t h

h i g hr e g i s t e ra c c u m u l a t e s

o f u s i n g two o r m r e r e g i s t e r s .

The

lw r e g i s t e r on t h e f i r s t c y c l e .
a h i g h and o

low r e g i s t e r a r e g a t e d o f f a f t e r

NL c y c l e s , w h i l e t h e

A comparaterthen

computes t h e r a t i o o f

NH c y c l e s .

t h e twotimeintervals,whichshould
e r r o ri sw i t h i np r e - s e tl i m i t s ,t h e
Asher(Ref.

The primarytechnique

sequences i n which one o r more c y c l e s may be m i s s i n g

( c y c l ea m p l i t u d eb e l o wt h r e s h o l d )c o n s i s t s

The c l o c k p u l s e s t o t h e

a process-

be e q u a l ,t ot h er a t i o

If the

measurement i s v a l i d a t e d .

14) demonstratestheadvantage

as 5/8 or 10/16 o v e re v e nr a t i o s .

NH/NL.

o f an odd r a t i o , NL/NH,

Odd r a t i o s suchas

A c o u n t e rp r o c e s s o ru s i n gt h r e ed i f f e r e n tr e g i s t e r s

such

5/8 a r e commonlyused.
hasbeen

used a t AEDC.

None o f thesesystemscompletelyrejectspurioussignals,buttheydogreatly
r e d u c et h ep r o b a b i l i t yo f

such d a t ab e i n gc o n s i d e r e dv a l i d .L a r g ep a r t i c l e s ,

which may be l a g g i n g t h e f l u i d f l o w t o

anexcessivedegree,can

i f t h et o t a li n p u ts i g n a la m p l i t u d e( p e d e s t a lp l u sD o p p l e rf r e q u e n c y )

be detected
exceeds

a p r e - s e t limit.

The a d j u s t a b l et h r e s h o l dl e v e l( r e q u i r e d

c r o s s i n gd e t e c t o r )c a nb e

to enable a zero-

used to r e j e c t s i g n a l s w i t h inadequate ~ i g n a 1 - t ~ -

n o i s er a t i o .S e t t i n gt h et h r e s h o l dl e v e lh i g h ,o nt h eo t h e r
t h ed a t aa c q u i r e d

to l a r g ep a r t i c l e s

hand, c a nb i a s

by r e j e c t i n gl o w - l e v e ls i g n a l s

fromsmall

particles.
Mostcounterprocessorsalsoincludefunctions

suchas

o fe i t h e rt h ed a t ar a t e( v a l i d a t e dd a t ap o i n t sp e r

outputcan

second) o r p e r c e n t o f t o t a l
An o u t p u t i s n o r m a l l yp r o v i d e dt o

d a t as i g n a l sp r o c e s s e dt h aat r ev a l i d a t e d .
i n d i c a t e eachtime

a d i g i t a li n d i c a t i o n

a new d a t ap o i n ti sv a l i d a t e d

A digital

andprocessed.

be made a v a i l a b l e t o a l l o w i n t r o d u c t i o n o f t h e d a t a d i r e c t l y i n t o

a computer o ro t h e rd i g i t a lr e c o r d i n g

system.

i s also

An a n a l o gv o l t a g eo u t p u t

normally available.
Due t ot h ed i f f e r e n c ei no p e r a t i n gp r i n c i p l e s ,t h ec o u n t e r
byslew
band

r a t eo rt r a c k i n gr a t ep e r f o r m a n c e .

noisepresent

i s b r o a d b a n d ,t h en o i s er e j e c t i o nc h a r a c t e r i s t i c s

i s s u p e r i o rt ot h a to ft h ec o u n t e r .

thefrequency

The counter i s an extremelywide-

i s i n h e r e n t l y narrow-band.

i n s t r u m e n tw
, h i l et h et r a c k e r

domain,

i s n o tl i m i t e d

Assuming t h e
of t h et r a c k e r

However, s i n c et h et r a c k e ro p e r a t e si n

i t i s responsivetoDopplerfrequencyspectrumbroadening

r e s u l t i n gf r o mt h ef i n i t ed u r a t i o no ft h es i g n a lb u r s t .T h i sb r o a d e n i n gi s
s i m i l a rt ot h em o d u l a t i o ns i d e b a n d sg e n e r a t e d
amplitudemodulated.
a l s og e n e r a t e s

when a c a r r i e r f r e q u e n c y

The presence o f m u l t i p l ep a r t i c l e si nt h ep r o b e

is

volume

phase reversalswhichcausespectrumbroadening.Sincethe

s t a n d a r dd e v i a t i o na b o u tt h e

mean v e l o c i t y i s a measure o f turbulence and i s

r e l a t e dt ot h ec o r r e s p o n d i n gD o p p l e rf r e q u e n c yd e v i a t i o nt h r o u g h
s p e c t r a lb r o a d e n i n gc a ni n t e r f e r ew i t ht u r b u l e n c e

Eq.

(ll.l),

measurements.

P a r t i c l e S i z e and D i s t r i b u t i o n E f f e c t s
The s i z e ,s i z ed i s t r i b u t i o n ,c o n c e n t r a t i o n ,
ofthe'particlesin

and p h y s i c a lc h a r a c t e r i s t i c s

a t r a n s o n i co rs u p e r s o n i ct u n n e lf l o wf i e l da r eo fg r e a t

i m p o r t a n c e ,w h e t h e rt h ep a r t i c l e sa r en a t u r a l l yp r e s e n ti nt h ef l o wo rt h e
f l o wi s

seeded.

cantvelocitylag
Lag e f f e c t s a r e

I nt h ep r e s e n c eo fv e l o c i t yg r a d i e n t so rt u r b u l e n c e ,
may e x i s t between t h e f l u i d m o t i o n
most s i g n i f i c a n t a t h i g hf r e q u e n c i e s

fluid acceleration or deceleration,


along a streamlineapproaching

a signifi-

and t h e p a r t i c l e m o t i o n .
and i n r e g i o n s o f r a p i d

as across a shock o r expansion wave o r

a s t a g n a t i o np o i n t .

i n t e r e s ti nf l o wf i e l ds u r v e y s ,w o u l dn o tn o r m a l l y

These environments,of
be encountered i n empty t e s t

o f t h e p a r t i c l e s to f o l l o w
s e c t i o n c a l i b r a t i o n measurements, b u t t h e a b i l i t y
r e l a t i v e l y s m a l l mean v e l o c i t y p e r t u r b a t i o n s and respond t o low-to-moderate

l e v e l so ft u r b u l e n c ea r eo fi n t e r e s t .

233

'

The upper limit on p a r t i c l e s i z e i s d e t e r m i n e d


limit, forhighspeed:flows,

and thelower

by i n e r t i a o r l a g e f f e c t s .

may be determinedbythereduced

amount o f 1 i g h t s c a t t e r e d b y t h e p a r t i c l e w h i c h r e s u l t s i n

an unacceptably

lowsignal-to-noiseratio.
Flowseeding

may be r e q u i r e d t o o b t a i n

'anadequate

i f a t r a c k e rp r o c e s s o ri s

c o n t r o l l e ds i z e ,e s p e c i a l l y

number o f p a r t i c l e s o f

used.For

measurements

w i t h a counterprocessor,naturallyoccuringparticlesintheflow
u t i l i z e d , Refs- 6 and

7.

and r e s u l t i n

than one p a r t i c l e i n t h e m e a s u r i n g

time.

nomore

may be

These p a r t i c l e sa r en o r m a l l ys p a r s e l yc o n c e n t r a t e d
volume a t t h e

same

However, seeding may be employed w i t h a c o u n t e rp r o c e s s o rt oc o n t r o l

p a r t i c l es i z e
t u n n e la t

and i n c r e a s et h ed a t ar a t e .

Measurements i nt h e1 6 - f o o tt r a n s o n i c

NASA LangleyResearchCenterhave

seed theflow,

Ref.

5.

been made usingatomized

Seeding i n a continuouswindtunnel

inationproblemswhichencouragetheuse

o i l to

can c r e a t e contam-

o f measurement p r o c e d u r e s a p p l i c a b l e

t o unseeded flows.

The m o t i o n o f a s p h e r i c a l p a r t i c l e i n
Hinze (Ref.

IS).

16) alsoreviewed

So0 (Ref.

d e s c r i b i n gp a r t i c l em o t i o n .

a fluid flow

and
summarized

The completeequation,

dp2VT&

hasbeen

l t d t '

reviewedby

t h ee q u a t i o n s

as givenbyHinzeis:

%I+

[%d r-7 '

Fe

t0

The s u b s c r i p t g r e f e r s t o t h e

formthetermonthe

dp i s t h e d i a m e t e r

left of the equality sign is the force re-

q u i r e dt oa c c e l e r a t et h ep a r t i c l e .
f o r c e basedon

totheparticle;

(assumed t o be s p h e r i c a l ) , and t ' i s a dummy v a r i a b l e .

oftheparticle
In this

gas andp

Stokes' law.

dient in the fluid

The f i r s t t e r mo nt h er i g h ti st h ed r a g

The second termaccounts

aroundtheparticle

causedby

for t h ep r e s s u r eg r a -

accelerationofthefluid.

The t h i r d term i s t h e f o r c e r e q u i r e d t o a c c e l e r a t e t h e a p p a r e n t
particlerelativetotheambientfluid.

234

mass o f t h e

The f o u r t ht e r m( d e s i g n a t e dt h e
t h ef l o wp a t t e r n

"Basset"term)accounts

from steadystate.

f o r c e s due t o g r a v i t y , L o r e n t z f o r c e

The Vastterm,

on a charged p a r t i c l e i n an e l e c t r i c

e q u a t i o n as g i v e n byHinzeabovebutemploys

a morecomplex

t o accommodate h i g h e rr e l a t i v eR e y n o l d s

According t o Hinze,the
Eq. (11.11)

Fe, represents body

Base (Ref. 17) reviewsthecomplete

f i e l d ,l a s e rp h o t o np r e s s u r e ,e t c .
drag(Oseen'slaw)

forthedeviationof

may beneglected

expressionfor
numbers*

second, t h i r d and f o u r t ht e r m s

if t h e d e n s i t y o f t h e f l u i d

on t h e r i g h t o f

i s significantly

l e s st h a nt h ed e n s i t yo ft h ep a r t i c l e ,w h i c hi sn o r m a l l yt r u e .I nt h er a n g e
o f speeds encountered i n t r a n s o n i c
a r en e g l i g i b l e

and s u p e r s o n i c t u n n e l s , g r a v i t y e f f e c t s

compared t ot h ed r a gf o r c e .R e t a i n i n go n l yt h eS t o k e s 'l a wd r a g

term on t h e r i g h t s i d e ,

Eq.

(11.11)

may be w r i t t e n

( I 1.12)

by So0 (Ref.

T h i sd i f f e r e n t i a le q u a t i o n ,w h i c ha g r e e sw i t ht h a tg i v e n

16), may b et r a n s f o r m e di n t ot h es t a n d a r dt r a n s f e rf u n c t i o n

where S i st h eL a p l a c eo p e r a t o r , a n d

form

i st h et i m ec o n s t a n td e f i n e d

by
(11.14)

The s t e a d ys t a t es i n u s o i d a la m p l i t u d e
r e s p e c t t o t h e gas may beexpressed
j w f o r S, where j =

and phaseresponse
i n thefrequency

of the particle with

domainby

substituting

6.

Herew i st h ef r e q u e n c yo f

gas m o t i o ni nr a d i a n sp e r

second.

The phaseangle,

4, bywhichtheparticlelagsthefluidmotionis
(11.16)

235

The aboveequations

18) and o t h e r s .

and Meyers(Ref.

19) and

Mazumder, Hoyle and K i r s c h (Ref.

(II. 14)

t o Eq.

20) use a t i m e c o n s t a n t e x p r e s s i o n s i m i l a r

YantaandGates(Ref.
e x c e p tt h a t

based o n S t o k e s ' l a w a g r e e w i t h t h o s e g i v e n b y F e l l e r

a c o r r e c t i o nt e r mi sa p p l i e dt ot h eS t o k e s 'd r a gc o e f f i c i e n tt o
range o f f l o w c o n d i t i o n s where t h e Knudsen

extend i t s a p p l i c a b i l i t y t o t h e

a.
number (Kn = - ) becomes appreciable.Epstein(Ref.

21) d e r i v e d a c o r r e c t i o n
dP
t e r mt oS t o k e s 'l a wf r o mt h ek i n e t i ct h e o r yv i e w p o i n t ,a si sd i s c u s s e db y

HappelandBrenner(Ref.
evolved.

22), butvariousforms

One o ft h es i m p l e rf o r m s ,

i n a timeconstantexpressed

and e m p i r i c a lc o n s t a n t sh a v e

usedbyYanta

and Gates(Ref.

as

where k i s t h e Cunningham c o n s t a n t (1.8 f o r a i r ) ,


From Eq.

201, results

and .9 i s t h e mean f r e e p a t h .

Knudsen number i s t o i n c r e a s et h e

( l l . l 7 ) ,t h ee f f e c to fi n c r e a s i n g

The e f f e c t becomes s i g n i f i c a n t (18%) f o r a r a t i o o f mean f r e e

timeconstant.

p a t ht op a r t i c l ed i a m e t e ro f
s i g n i f i c a n tf o r

0.1.

Sincethetimeconstantincreasecan

low d e n s i t yf l o w s ,

Eq.

g a t i n gp a r t i c l er e s p o n s ei nt h e s e
law t o be v a l i d .
thelimitations

(11.17)

cases.

i s more a c c u r a t ef o ri n v e s t i -

T h i s , o f course, assumes Stokes'

it i sa p p r o p r i a t e

Thus, a t t h i s p o i n t ,

be

t o d i s c u s s some o f

on t h e u s e o f S t o k e s ' l a w f o r p a r t i c l e d r a g i n c o m p r e s s i b l e

flows.
A more d e t a i l e d d r a g c o e f f i c i e n t e x p r e s s i o n f o r l a r g e - d i f f e r e n t i a l

and Reynolds Number i s g i v e n byWalsh(Ref.


data.

Walsh(Ref.

24) has
compared

ficient equation with

normalshocks

i ns u p e r s o n i cf l o w

He concludesthattheuse
r e s u l t s compared t o t h e

r e s u l t so b t a i n e du s i n gS t o k e s d
' r a gc o e f -

numbers.

Flow f i e l ds t u d i e si n c l u d e d

365 sec".

o f S t o k e s 'l a wg e n e r a l l yy i e l d sc o n s e r v a t i v e
more a c c u r a t e d r a g c o e f f i c i e n t e x p r e s s i o n s ,

microns and v e l o c i t yg r a d i e n t s

decreasesasthe

f o r a widerange

and v e l o c i t y g r a d i e n t s u p t o

and i t

10% for p a r t i c l ed i a m e t e r sl e s s

o v e r p r e d i c t st h ev e l o c i t yl a gb yl e s st h a n
than

23) and i s based onexperimental

morecomplexexpressionswhichaccount

o f d i f f e r e n t i a l Reynolds and
Mach

Mach

up t o

333 sec'l.

T h i so v e r p r e d i c t i o n

i n i t i a l gas v e l o c i t yi n c r e a s e s ,t h ev e l o c i t yg r a d i e n t

creases, and t h e p a r t i c l e s i z e

decreases.Consideringotheruncertainties,

de-

suchasthe

shape o f t h e p a r t i c l e , t h e

considered t o beadequate

use o f S t o k e s ' d r a g c o e f f i c i e n t i s

for t h e p u r p o s e o f t h i s s t u d y ; t h e e x c e p t i o n b e i n g

f o r which Eq. (11.17)

l o wd e n s i t yf l o w s

The t i m ec o n s t a n td e f i n e db y

Eq.

i s recommended.

(11.14)

f o r s t u d y i n gt h ep a r t i c l el a gp r o b l e m .
definethefrequencyresponse

i s an e x t r e m e l yu s e f u lq u a n t i t y

to

it canbeused
domain, t h e

o f t h ep a r t i c l e .I nt h et i m e

a measure o f p a r t i c l e t r a n s i e n t

timeconstantis

(I1.151,

A s i n Eq.

response.

A s t e p change i n

v a l u e i n onetime
f o r example, i s reduced t o I / e o f i t s i n i t i a l
2
be
c o n s t a n t ,I / ei nt w ot i m ec o n s t a n t s ,e t c .
The r e l a x a t i o n 1 ength can also
v e l o c i t yl a g ,

d e t e r m i n e db yt h ep r o d u c to ft h et i m ec o n s t a n t

and t h e gas v e l o c i t y

As before,

will reduce t o l / e o f i t s i n i t i a l

i n onerelaxationlengththeparticlelag
v e l o c i t y ,e t c .
A c c o r d i n gt o

Eq.

s e n t sf l u i dm o t i o ni n

( I l . l h ) ,t h ef i d e l i t yw i t hw h i c hp a r t i c l em o t i o nr e p r e a specificflowcondition(test

beimprovedbyreducingtheparticlediameter

gas v i s c o s i t y known) can

and density.Diameterreduction

i sp a r t i c u l a r l ye f f e c t i v es i n c et h et i m ec o n s t a n ti n c r e a s e sa c c o r d i n gt o
t e r squared.
is limited

As d i s c u s s e dp r e v i o u s l y ,

bythe

however, t h e minimum p a r t i c l ed i a m e t e r

minimum a c c e p t a b l e s i g n a l - t o - n o i s e r a t i o .

1 gm/cm3 i s commonly used f o r f l o w s e e d i n g a t

An average p a r t i c l e d e n s i t y t o

c o n d i t i o n st y p i c a lo ft h o s ee n c o u n t e r e di nt r a n s o n i c
S e e d i n ga g e n t si n c l u d ed i o c t y lp h t h a l a t e
l a t e x (Ref.

diame-

19).

(DOP),

and supersonicwindtunnels.
siliconeoil,

and p o l y s t y r e n e

A r e v i e wo ft h es e v e r a lt y p e so fg e n e r a t o r sf o ri n t r o d u c i n g

s e e d i n gp a r t i c l e so fc o n t r o l l e ds i z ei sg i v e n

by Mazumder, B l e v i n s and K i r s c h

(Ref.25).Forseedinghightemperature

gas f l o w s ,p a r t i c l e sw i t hh l a h e rm e l t i n g

p o i n t sa r en e c e s s a r y .Z i r c o n i u md i o x i d e

( Z r Oz), which has a m e l t i n gp o i n t

above 3000 K and a d e n s i t v o f


used forseedinghightemperature

5.9 gm/cm, and aluminum o x i d e (A12 03)have


gas f l o w s , e.g.,

Ref. 26.

To d e m o n s t r a t e t h e e f f e c t s o f p a r t i c l e d i a m e t e r s , t h e f r e q u e n c y
of p a r t i c l e s w i t h

Io

a d e n s i t y o f 1 gm/cm3 and diametersrangingfrom

pm i s shown i n F i g .

40 C e l s i u s( I 0 4
ofusing

OF).

A.11.5

been

response

0.5 pm t o

f o r Mach one f l o w and a stagnationtemperatureof

Theseresponsedata

c l e a r l yd e m o n s t r a t et h ed e s i r a b i l i t y

p a r t i c l e s w i t h a diameter of approximately

0 . 5 urn.

for p a r t f c l e s w i t h a dens it y o f 1 gm/cm3 a r e shown i n F i g .

The timeconstants

A.11.6

as a f u n c t i o n

237

N.

Mach No. 1.0


T, = 40 Celsius
Pp = 1 g/cc

1.0

0.5

0.1

Figure A . 1 1 . 5

EFFECT OF FARTICLE
DIAMETER

ON FREQUENCY
PXSXINSE

and w i t h Mach numbers r a n g i n g from 0.5

of p a r t i c l ed i a m e t e r

thisFigure

does n o t change s i g n i f i c a n t l y w i t h

tempera-

Machnumber.

a t Mach 2.0 and 3.0 f o r l o w d e n s i t y

effectwouldbeapparent

flow,

More

i n accord-

(11.17).

ance w i t h Eq.

Various criteria

may bechosen

todefinetherequireddegree

made when t h e p a r t i c l e l a g s t h e f l u i d m o t i o n b y

e -

f0.95

0.0523
T

no more than

5%, i.e.,

I nF i g s .

andMach

A.11.6

and 7,

it

o rl e s sa r er e q u i r e df o r

Urn

measurements up t o a p p r o x i m a t e l y

10kHz,

arenecessarytoextendaccurate

measurements t o 100 kHz.

0.5 pm

and t h a td i a m e t e r sl e s st h a n

These g u i d e l i n e s

f l o w c o n d i t i o n s and t h e d e f i n i t i o n of anaccept-

a b l e amount o f p a r t i c l e l a g , b u t t h e y a r e i n g e n e r a l
c l u s i o n so fs e v e r a li n v e s t i g a t i o n s ,

basedupon

agreement w i t h t h e
bothexperimental

27) s t a t et h a tf o r

and Stevenson(Ref.

con-

and a n a l y t i c a l

a p a r t i c l et of o l l o w

transonicflowswithreasonableaccuracy,thediametershould
Asher(Ref.

A.11.7

m
o
t i o nI.n
Fig.

1 gm/cm3.

a p a r t i c l ed e n s i t yo f

i s d e m o n s t r a t e dt h a td i a m e t e r so ft h eo r d e ro f

r e s u l t s .P e d i g o

more than 5%

limit w i t h o u t r e a l i z i n g

limit i s shown as a f u n c t i o n o f p a r t i c l e d i a m e t e r

a r e o b v i o u s l y dependenton

(11.18)

attenuat ion of the particle velocity response to fluid


number, a g a i nf o r

/V

'

95 i s t h e upperfrequency

t h i sf r e q u e n c y

of f l d e l i t y

I f it i s assumed t h a t adequatemeasurementscanbe

offrequencyresponse.

1 vm.

From

it may be seen t h a t , for t h e assumed c o n s t a n ts t a g n a t i o n

t u r e ,t h et i m ec o n s t a n t

where f o

t o 3.0,.

be lessthan

1 4 ) , Mazumder, Hoyle and Kirsch(Ref.

19)
and

Seasholtz

(Ref. 29) r e a c h s i m i l a r c o n c l u s i o n s f o r r a t h e r w i d e l y v a r y i n g f l o w c o n d i t i o n s .
With r e g a r d to t u r b u l e n c e measurements i n boundarylayers,Yanta(Ref.
f o u n dt h a t

mean v e l o c i t y and t u r b u l e n c e i n t e n s i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n

w i t h b o t h 1 pm and 5 pm d i o c t y l p h t h a l a t e p a r t i c l e s
ment.Thesemeasurementswere

made i n aMach

v o r t i c e s andmustrespond

3 f l o wc h a n n e lo p e r a t i n ga to n e

w i t hr e s p e c t

A h o t ' w i r e mustrespond

t o a f i x e d( E u l e r i a n )

p a r t i c l e s canbeused

i nt u r b u l e n t

v o r t e xm o t i o n ,t h ep a r t i c l e sa r e
t o changes i n v e l o c i t y i n

w i t h theflow(Lagrangian).

boundary

moving w i t h t h e

a frame o f r e f e r e n c e

moving

t o changes i n v e l o c i t y

frame o f reference.

forturbulence

measurements

were i n v e r y c l o s e a g r e e -

atmospherestagnationpressure.Yantapointsoutthat
l a y e r flow, dominatedby

30)

As
a

consequence,

larger

measurements w i t h o u t p a r t i c l e l a g e f f e c t s .
239

h)

&

l x

l x

l x

lx

30
Parkj.de Diameter, p m
Figure A . 11.6

TIMECONSTANTAS
A FUNCTION
OF PARTICLEDIAMETER FOR
VARIOUS MACH NUMBERS,PARTICLE
D E N S I T Y = 1 gm/cc

0.1

10

1.0
P a r t i c l e Diameter,

Pm

F i g u r e A. I I .7 MAXIMUMFREQUENCYFOR
NO
MORE THAN 5% ATTENUATION
OF S I N U S O I D A LV E L O C I T Y
V A R I A T I O N SP, A R T I C L E
D E N S I T Y = 1 gm/cc

--

DataAnalysis

and Accuracy

The d a t a n o r m a l l y o b t a i n e d w i t h

a l a s e rv e l o c i m e t e ri n c l u d et h e

v e l o c i t y and t h et u r b u l e n c ei n t e n s i t yi n

By
be

o f t h et u r b u l e n c ec a na l s o

s p e c i a la n a l y t i c a lt e c h n i q u e s ,t h es p e c t r u m
derived

mean

one, two or t h r e e components.

An i n d i v i d u a l measurement o b t a i n e df r o mt h ev e l o c i m e t e r ,
r e p r e s e n tt h e

Ui,

i s taken t o

passage o f an i n d i v i d u a l p a r t i c l e t h r o u g h t h e m e a s u r i n g

( i n d i v i d u a lr e a l i z a t i o n )s i n c et h i s
counter-typeprocessors.

occu'rence i s t y p i c a l o f

volume

high-speedflows

and

The i n d i v i d u a l measurement can d e v i a t ef r o mt h et r u e

mean v e l o c i t y due t o t u r b u l e n c e ,n o i s e

andsystem

resolution.

The a c q u i s i t i o n

o f a l a r g e number o f measurements a r e t h e r e f o r e n e c e s s a r y t o i m p r o v e t h e

accuracy o f b o t h t h e

mean v e l o c i t y and t u r b u l e n c e measurements.

The mean velocityasdeterminedfrom

a l a r g e number o f i n d i v i d u a l

measure-

ments i s

c ui
-

i= 1
N

(11.19)
9

where ti i s t h e number o f v a l u e s measured f o r a s i n g l et e s tc o n d i t i o n , a n d

U. i s
I

a s i n g l e v e l o c i t y measurement.
The s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n o f t h e v e l o c i t y p r o b a b i l i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n f u n c t i o n
is

( 1 I. 20)

If t h e e f f e c t s o f broadening o f theDopplerfrequencyspectrum

due t o

o r , i n general,

f i n i t e sample l e n g t h andphase

r e v e r s a l s( t r a c k e rp r o c e s s o r )

apparentvelocityfluctuations

due: t o n o i s e , e t c . , a r e n e g l i g i b l y s m a l l ,

thestandardvelocitydeviationisequaltothe

root-mean-squareturbulence

velocity

cu = u '
where U

= U

u ' , a n dt h et u r b u l e n c ei n t e n s i t yi s

( I 1.21)
U'

24 1

Correction of the measured turbulence velocity for the effects of Doppler


spectral broadening (as occurs witha tracker processor) is discussed, for
example, by George in (Ref. 31)- The correction techniques for this type
of bias are based on the white noise or broad-band characteristics of the
intensity modulation of the Doppler frequency; whereas, the turbulence
is
band-limited.
Flack and Thompson(Ref. 32) have identified ten different biases which
influence individual-realization, velocimetry measurements
of mean velocity
and turbulence. Magnitudes of the individual biases range from less than
0.1% to

31% for the turbulence componentand from 0.1% to about 12% for the

mean velocity component. The larger errors are associated withhigh turbulence
intensities. The largest bias

is due to the probability, in a turbulent flow,

that more high velocity particles will be measured than low velocity particles.
This bias occurs because the individual measurements are not randomly
distributed.

I f the scattering particles are uniformly distributed in the

flow, the rate at which particles pass through the measuring volumeis weighted
T h i s form o f statistical bias is discussed
linearly with velocity, Fig. A . 1 1 . 8 .
by Barnett and Bentley (Ref. 33) and by HcLaughl in and Tiederman (Ref. 34).

1
ui

( I I .22)

i=l
Barnett and Bentley derive the correction to the biased (arithmetic] meanin
terms of the turbulence intensity as

N
( I 1.23)

The correction to the arithmetic mean velocity


for velocity bias i s therefore
significant only when the turbulent intensity
is large; a turbulent intensity
of 10% would result in a 1% correction to the mean velocity. It should be
emphasized that Eqs. 11.22 and 11.23 are based on a one dimensional analysis
and may not be generally applicable to
all flows.

242

Biased Average of Individual Measurements

Individual Measurements

or v e l o c i t y b i a s i n g has a l s o

The work t o d a t e o n i n d i v i d u a l r e a l i z a t i o n

been r e s t r i c t e d t o c o n s t a n t - d e n s i t y , v e l o c i t y - f l u c t u a t i o n f l o w s
l e n t boundarylayers.Thiswork
Furtherstudyis

suchasturbu-

assumes u n i f o r md e n s i t yo fs c a t t e r i n gp a r t i c l e s .

needed o f o t h e r f l o w f i e l d s

where theunsteadinessisdominated

byunsteadyshocks,acousticsources,etc.Insuchcases,significantdensity
v a r i a t i o n so c c u r ,

and d e n s i t y and v e l o c i t y f l u c t u a t i o n s

e m p t y - t e s t - s e c t i o ns u r v e y so f

mean v e l o c i t y i n

may be c o r r e l a t e d .F o r

w i n dt u n n e l s ,t u r b u l e n c ei ss u f -

f i c i e n t l y low t h a t t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n o f v e l o c i t y b i a s i n g t o t h e t o t a l
ment e r r o r wouldappear
Yanta(Ref.
d e t e r m i n i n gt h e

measure-

t o be minor.

9) and Yanta and Smith,(Ref.


35) d i s c u s st h ep r o b l e mo f
sample s i z e , N, r e q u i r e d t o e s t a b l i s h t h e u n c e r t a i n t y i n

measured value, such as mean v e l o c i t y , asa

f u n c t i o no ft h et u r b u l e n c ei n t e n -

For example,

sity.

(11.24)

When Z i s t h e

number o f s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o

dence l e v e l (1.645,

1.96 and2.58

a d e s i r e dc o n f i -

f o r 90, 95 and 93-percentconfidence

1imits,

"

r e s p e c t i v e l y ) , AU/U

istheerrorinthe

mean value, and u l / r t h e t u r b u l e n c e

intensity.
The c o n f i d e n c e l i m i t s f o r t h e s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n o f t h e v e l o c i t y p r o b abilitydistribution(the

rms t u r b u l e n c e ,u l )i sg i v e n

by

22

N =

(11.25)

~(Au'/u')~
WhereAu'

istheerrorinmagnitudeoftheturbulence,

and Z and N a r e a s

previously defined.
I nt h e

case o f w i n d t u n n e l c a l i b r a t i o n s , t h e

be s u f f i c i e n t l y l o n g t o

averagethelowestfrequency

unsteadiness.Therefore,therequired
t o morethan

10 seconds,which

component o f t u n n e l f l o w

measurement p e r i o d will extendfrom

may be o f t h e

t i m er e q u i r e dt oo b t a i nt h en e c e s s a r y

244

measurement periodshould

one

same o r d e r o f m a g n i t u d e a s t h e

number o f l a s e r v e l o c i m e t e r

measurements,

dependingonthedatarate.

Some measurements i n t h e

AEDC Tunnel 1-T r e q u i r e d

s e v e r a lm i n u t e sp e rs t a t i o n .

An e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e

agreementbetween

laservelocimeter

and c o n v e n t i o n a l ,

w i n d - t u n n e l - c a l i b r a t i o n measurements can be made from t e s t s i n s e v e r a l w i n d

(5) f o u n dt h a tf r e e s t r e a mv e l o c i t i e s

tunnels.Meyers,et.al.,inRef.

4.9

ured i n t h e

m (16-foot)LangleyTransonicTunnel

meas-

'

compared t o t h e t u n n e l

c a l i b r a t i o n measurements w i t h i n 22%;where

t h e u n c e r t a i n t y of t h e v e l o c i t y
be +I%.

based o nt h et u n n e lc a l i b r a t i o ni ss t a t e dt o

from 10 t o 15 m i c r o n s ,t h ea u t h o r sd i d

used t o seed t h e f l o w r a n g e d i n s i z e
notconsiderparticlelagto
ficantlag

be a problem i n t h e t e s t s e c t i o n ; a l t h o u g h s i g n i -

was p r e s e n t i n t h e f l o w a c c e l e r a t i n g s e c t i o n o f t h e t u n n e l .

0.3 m ( I - f o o t ) AEDC Tunnel 1T i n t h e Machnumber

Measurements i n t h e

0.6 t o 1.5 a r er e p o r t e d

rangefrom

by Smith e t a l . i n

e s t i m a t ef o rt h ec o n v e n t i o n a lc a l i b r a t i o nd a t a
p e r c e n ta t

Mach0.6

t o 0.5

Mach numbers 0.6 and 0.8,

v e l o c i t y measurement ( a t t h e

2.7 percent.Comparison
at

basedon

(8).

Ref.

The e r r o r

rangesfromapproximatelytwo

Mach 1.5.

p e r c e n ta t

ofcenterlinecalibrationdata,
only at

A l t h o u g ht h ep a r t i c l e s

f l u l t i p l e - p o i n ta x i a ls u r v e y s

pressuremeasurements,wereobtained

w i t h a single-point,pressure-calibration,

same p o i n t o nt h et u n n e lc e n t e r l i n e )o f

o ft h ea x i a ld i s t r i b u t i o n so b t a i n e d

2.5 t o

bybothtechniques

M = 0.6 showed t h e b e s t agreement w i t h an a v e r a g e d i f f e r e n c e o f a b o u t

percent for a mean v e l o c i t y o f

A t Mach 0.8,

t h ed i f f e r e n c e s

216rnps,

and t h e u n c e r t a i n t y

bands overlapped.

ranged from about 0.3 t o 2.0 p e r c e n t a t

v e l o c i t y o f approximately 280 mps.

I n t e r e s t i n g l y ,a l l

1.4

a mean

o f t h ev e l o c i t i e s

meas-

from

u r e dw i t ht h el a s e rv e l o c i m e t e rw e r eh i g h e rt h a nt h ev e l o c i t i e sd e t e r m i n e d
pressure and temperature measurements.
d i f f e r e n c e ,b u to b v i o u s l yp a r t i c l el a g

No e x p l a n a t i o n was o f f e r e df o rt h e

was n o t a f a c t o r .

All measurements were

made w i t h n a t u r a l l y - p r e s e n t , l i g h t - s c a t t e r i n g p a r t i c l e s i n t h e f l o w .
F l o w a n g u l a r i t y measurements were a l s o made w i t h t h e

velocimeter,whichdemonstratedtheabilityto
w i t hd e v i a t i o n sr a n g i n gf r o m
a f u n c t i o no ft h e
angularity data

2.015degree

rms d e v i a t i o n s o f t h e

2-component l a s e r

make a n g u l a r i t y measurements
t o 2.25 degrees.

The d e v i a t i o n s a r e

component v e l o c i t i e s .

werepresentedforcomparison.

No conventional

This test demonstrated the capability for measuring the flaw angularity
andan

average o f t h e f l o w f l u c t u a t i o n s i n b o t h m a g n i t u d e
The two t e s t sd e s c r i b e ds h o u l d

demonstrationsonly

and s h o u l d n o t

and d i r e c t i o n .

be regarded as o p e r a t i o n a l f e a s i b i l i t y
be regardedasthebestaccuracycurrently

a v a i l a b l e .F u r t h e r ,s i n c et h el a s e rv e l o c i m e t e rd a t aa r e

compared t o conven-

t i o n a l c a l i b r a t i o n d a t a w i t h a s t a t e d a c c u r a c y o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 50.5 t o +2.0
percent, an a b s o l u t e e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e l a s e r v e l o c i m e t e r a c c u r a c y c a n n o t

be

made f r o m t h e s e r e s u l t s .

3 6 ) , Johnson and Rose (Ref. 371, Yanta and


Lee (Ref. 38) and B o u t i e r and Lefevre(Ref.
391, p r o v i d ea d d i t i o n a le v a l u a t i o n s
Measurementsby

ofthe

Johnson(Ref.

agreementbetween

and by c o n v e n t i o n a lP i t o t

flow v e l o c i t y measurements b yt h el a s e rv e l o c i m e t e r
and s t a t i c probes.

ments a r e somewhat l i m i t e d i n

These f r e e s t r e a mv e l o c i t y

measure-

from boundarylayer

scope s i n c et h e ya r eo b t a i n e d

v e l o c i t y p r o f i l e measurements; nevertheless,agreementwithin

0.5% i s demonstra-

ted.
The l a s e r v e l o c i m e t e r y i e l d s

a d i r e c t measurement o f f l o w v e l o c i t y , w h i l e

t h e Mach number i s r e q u i r e d f o r c a l i b r a t i o n
ment, thestagnationtemperature,
t i o n ,t h el o c a ls t a t i ct e m p e r a t u r e

A second measure-

o f windtunnels.

i s thereforerequired.Usingtheenergy
canthen

equa-

.be determinedfromthemeasured

velocity

Where Tw i st h et e s ts e c t i o nt e m p e r a t u r ec o r r e s p o n d i n gt o

Vm,

To i st h es t a g -

i st h es p e c i f i ch e a ta tc o n s t a n tp r e s s u r e ,
R i st h e
P
heats.
The l o c a l Mach number
gas c o n s t a n t , and y i s t h e r a t i o o f s p e c i f i c
nationtemperature,

can then be determined from


VW

am

"W

"m

( I I .28)

246

Sensitivity coefficients for


temperatureare

A.II.9

shown i n F i g .

From thesedata,

measurements o f b o t h v e l o c i t y

measurement o f Mach numbers t o anaccuracy

i sn o tb e l i e v e dt o

40 Celsius.

f o r a s t a g n a t i o nt e m p e r a t u r eo f

a v e l o c i t y measurement accuracyofabout
Thisaccuracy

and s t a g n a t i o n

o f +_O.OOl

0.1% i n t h e t r a n s o n i c

requires

speed range.

be w i t h i nt h es t a t e - o f - t h e - a r ta tp r e s e n t .

Conclusions
The advantages and disadvantages of t h e l a s e r v e l o c i m e t e r

may besummarized

as f o l l o w s :
Advantages

1.

flow,

No p r o b eo ro t h e rd e v i c ei n t r o d u c e di n t ot h e

i .e

., non-

pertubing.

2.

measurement o fv e l o c it y and ve l o c i t y f l u c t u a -

P r o v i d e sd i r e c t ,l i n e a r
ti ns;no

calibrationrequired.

3.

Ab l i t y t o measure r e v e r s i n g f l o w s .

4.

Ab l i t y t o separate mean and f l u c t u a t i n g v e l o c i t i e s i n t o

5.

Po n t measurements can be approached by p r o p e r c o n t r o l o f m e a s u r i n g

components.

vo ume.

6.

Ca

be r e a l i z e d as an i n h e r e n t l yd i g i t a li n s t r u m e n t .

D isadvantages
1.

Complex, expensiveequipmentrequired

2.

Measurement o f h i g h - v e l o c i t y f l o w s i n l a r g e t u n n e l s w i t h

an a i r t e s t

medium p r e s e n t ss p e c i a lp r o b l e m sw i t hr e g a r dt os i n g l e - t o - n o i s er a t i o ,
frequencyresponse,

and s e n s i t i v i t y o f equipment t o t u n n e l v i b r a t i o n ,

temperature,etc.

3.

Furtherdevelopment

needed t o i m p r o v es i g n a lp r o c e s s o r ,p a r t i c u l a r l y

withregardtodatavalidationfeatures,rejection

of l a r g e p a r t i c l e s ,

etc.

4.

needed for good s i g n a l may n o t

Light-scattering particles of size


followflowinregionsofrapidvelocity

5.

Signal-to-noise ratio

may p r e c l u d e a c c u r a t e t u r b u l e n c e i n t e n s i t y

measurements a t lowlevels,i.e.,

6.

change.

Current accuracy attainable is not as

0.1 t o 1.0 percent.


good as w i t h c o n v e n t i o n a l

techniques.

7.

Takes e x c e s s i v e t i m e t o

make t h e s u r v e y s r e q u i r e d f o r w i n d t u n n e l

calibration.

247

.WO

.018

,016

To = 3UK

.014

.012

-"
aTo

.010
1/OK

0.08
.006

0.04
.002

0
0

Mach No.
Figure A. I I -9

248

SENSITIVITY COEFFICIENTS FOR


DETERMINATION OF MACH NUMBER
FROM VELOCITY AND STAGNATION
TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENTS

Nomenclature

aaD

=P
DO

sf trreaeecaomuvsetliocc i t y
specificheatatconstantpressure
i n i t i a l diameter o f l a s e r

beam

d0

diameter o f l a s e r beams a t t h e f o c a l p o i n t o f t h e t r a n s m i t t i n g l e n s

particle. diameter

Fe
fd

fo. 95

f o c a ll e n g t ho ft k a n s m i t t i n gl e n s
(Eq.

body f o r c e so np a r t i c l e
Dopp 1 er frequency

11.11)

, Hz

frequency a t which p a r t i c l e m o t i o n i s a t t e n u a t e d
s t a t es i n u s o i d a lf l u i dm o t i o n

5% r e l a t i v e t o s t e a d y

m
Knudsen number

Cunningham c o n s t a n t (Eq.

mean f r e e p a t h

llV

l e n g t h o f measuringvolume

Machnumber

sample s i z e

Nf
r

number o f f r i n g e s i n

NH
NL
R

S
TO

I I . 17)

measu'r i n g volume

number o f p u l s e s c o u n t e d i n t h e h i g h . r e g i s t e r
number o f pulsescounted

inthe

o f a counterprocessor

low r e g i s t e r o f a counterprocessor

constant
gas
Lap1
opera
ace

tor

stagnationtemperature

249

TP

t i m e c o n s t a n t d e f i n l n g p a r t i c l e response to v a r i a t i o n s i n f l u i d o
l
fw
v e l o c i t y , seconds

To3

freestream
temperature

time,seconds

t'

dumny v a r i a b l e (Eq.

v e l o c i t y component n o m 1 to f r i n g e p a t t e r n and t o b i s e c t o r o f
theangleformedby
two I n t e r s e c t i n g l a s e r beams

-U
uC

11.11)

mean v e l o c i t y
mean v e l o c i t y , c o r r e c t e d

for v e l o c i t y b i a s

U'

rms t u r b u l e n c e v e l o c i t y

Au I

error i n magnitude o f t u r b u l e n c e v e l o c i t y

f
lw v e l o c i t y
gas o
9

""

particle velocity

f fees t ream ve 1oc it y

width of measuring velocity

number o f s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n s c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o a d e s i r e d c o n f i d e n c e
l e v e l (Eq. I I .24).

Greek
Y

r a t i o of s p e c i f f c h e a t s

beam s e p a r a t i o n d i s t a n c e a t t h e t r a n s m i t t i n g o p t i c s

bf

f r i n g es p a c i n gi nm e a s u r i n g

volume

angle between l a s e r beams a t the.ir


measuringvolume

wavelength o f l a s e r l i g h t

intersectionto

formthe

v i s c o s i t y o f gas
density of

pP
a

250

gas

density of particle
standard deviation of v e l o c i t y p r o b a b i l i t y - d i s t r i b u t i o n - f u n c t i o n

.-;
.

phase angle, degrees ..

angular velocity, radians per second

.. .
I

25 1

REFERENCES

1.
2.

Yeh, Y. and Cummins, H.


Z.:
He-Ne Laser
Spectrometer,''

" L o c a l i z e dF l u i dF l o w
Measurements w i t h .an
Vo1. 4 pp 176-178, 1964.
. .

Foreman, J., W. ; George, W. W. and'Lewis,


R. 0.: "Measurement o f L o c a l i z e d
f l o w V e l o c i t i e s i n Gases With a Laser-DopplerFlowmeter,"AppliedPhysics
V, o
L le. t t e r s ,
7, pp 77-80, 1965.
.
.

3.

Lennert, A. E.; Bragton, D. B.; Crosswy, F. L., e t a l : "Summary Report


o f t h e Development o f a LaserVelocimeter t o be Used i n AEDC Wind Tunnels",
AEDC-TR-70-101, J u l y 1970.

4.

Stevenson, W. H.; Pedigo, M. K. and Zamit, R. E.:


DopplerVelocimeters:Theory,DesignandApplications,"
Report No. RD-TR-72-8, 1972.

5.

F.; Crouch, L. M.; F e l l e r , W


. V . and Walsh, M. J . : "Laser
Meyers,J.
Velocimeter Measurements i n a LargeTransonic Wind Tunnel,"Proceedings
o ft h eM i n n e s o t a
Symposium on Laser Anemometry, U n i v e r s i t y o f M i n n e s o t a ,

"BibliographyonLaser
U. S . Army

1975.
6.

Johnson, D. A.; Bochalo, W. D. and Modarress, D.:


"LaserVelocimeter
Supersonic and Transonic Wind TunnelStudies,"Proceedings
o ft h e
Minnesota Symposium on Laser Anemometry, U n i v e r s i t y o f Minnesota, 1975.

7.

Lo, C . F: "TransonicFlowField
Measurements Using a LaserVelocimeter,"
Proceedings o f t h e M i n n e s o t a
Symposium onLaser Anemometry, U n i v e r s i t y
o f Minnesota, 1975.

a.
A E D C - ~ ~ - 7 -11 65,
,

9.
10.

Yanta, W.
TR 73-94,

J.

Turbulence Measurements w i t h a LaserDopplerVelocimeter,"


Md.,
1973.
Naval Ordnance Laboratory,White Oak,
:

I'

T r o l i n g e r ,J .
D .: " L a s e rI n s t r u m e n t a t i o nf o rF l o wF i e l dD i a g n o s t i c s , "
AGARDograph No. 186, 1974.

11.

" I n v e s t i g a t i o n on C a l i b r a t i o n so fB a s i cP a r a m e t e r sf o r
Meyers,J.
F.:
NASA TN 0-6125, 1971.
t h e A p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e LaserDopplerVelocimeter,

12.

Orloff,Ki
and
Logan,
S. E.: llCofocal
Backscatter
Laser
Velocimeter
w i t h On-Axis S e n s i t i v i t y , ' 'A p p l i e dO p t i c s ,
\ I . 12, No. 10, 1973.

13.

Fridman,
J.
D.
Young, R. M.; Seavey, R. E. and O r l o f f , K. L.:
"Modular
HighAccuracyTrackers
f o r DualChannel
LaserDopplerVelocimeter,''Pro-.
ceedings o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f
Minnesota Symposium onLaser Anemometry,

14.

1975.

Asher,J.
A.:
"LaserVelocimeter
SystemDevelopmentand
Testinq."
Progress i nA s t r o n a u t i c s and Aeronautics, V.34 pp 141-166, Massachusetts
I n s t i t u t e o f Technology, 1974.

1516.

T_u_rbglence,- A n . - I n t r o d u c t i o n t o i t s
Hfnze, J. D.:
pp. 354-355, McGraw H i 1 1, New York, 1959.

Soo, S. L.:
Co.,

17.

F l u i d Dynamics o M
f ultiphase
Walthan, Mass., 1967.

Mechanismand

Systems,

Theory,

B l i a s d e lP
l ublishing

Base, T. E.:
"The M o t i o no fA e r o s o lP a r t i c l e si n
a Computed Turbulent
F ~ O Model
W
t o DeterminetheAccuracyof
a L.D.V.
System,"
Proceedings
of the Minnesota Symposium on Laser Anemometry, U n i v e r s i t y o f Minnesota,

1975.
18.

F e l l e r , W.
W.
andMeyers,
J. F.:
"Development of a C o n t r o l l a b l e P a r t i c l e
Generator f o r LV Seeding i n Hypersonic Wind Tunnels,"Proceedingsof
Minnesota Symposium onLaser Anemometry, U n I v e r s i t y o f Mfnnesota, 1975.

19.

Mazumder, M. K.; Hoyle, B. D. and Kirsch, K. J.:


"Generation and F l u i d
DynamIcs o f S c a t t e r i n g A e r o s o l i n
LaserDopplerVelocimetry,"Proceedings
I t , Purdue
o f t h e Second I n t e r n a t i o n a l Workshop onLaserVelocimetry,Vol.
U n l v e r s i t y , March 1974.

20.

Yanta, W. J. and Gates, D. F.: "TheUse


I n Supersonic Flows," A l A A Paper71-287,

21.

Epstein, P. S.:

22.

Hoppel, T. and Brenner, H:


Low Reynolds tJumber Hydrodynamics w i t h
S p e c i a lA p p l i c a t i o n st oP a r t i c u l a t e
Media, pp 50-51, P r e n t i c e - H a l l ,
J., 1965.
EnciewiSod C l i f f s ,

Physical Review,V.23

o f a LaserDopplerVelocimeter
Albuquerque, N.M.,
1971.
(1324) p. 710.

N.

23

Walsh, M. J.,
Speed Flows,"

"Drag C o e f f I c i e n tE q u a t i o n s for Small P a r t i c l e si nH i g h


A I A A Journal, V 13, No. 11, Flov., 1575.

24.

Walsh, M. J . :" I n f l u e n c eo f
Drag C o e f f i c i e n tE q u a t i o n s on P a r t i c l e
Motion Calculations," Proceedings of the tlinnesota
Symposium on Laser
Anemometry, U n i v e r s i t y o f Minnesota, 1975.

25.

Mazumder, M. K.; B l e v i n s , C. W
. and Kirsch, K. J . : I'Wind TunnelFlow
Seeding f o r LaserVelocImeterApplications,"ProceedingsoftheMinnesota
Symposium asLaserAnemmetry,UniversityofMinnesota,
1975.

26.

S e l f , S. A . , "Boundary Layer Measurements i n H i g h V e l o c i t y H i g h


Temperat u r e MHD ChannelFlows,"
Proceedings o f t h e Second I n t e r n a t i o n a l Workshop
on LaserDopplerVelocimetry,
Purdue U n I v e r s i t y , 1974.

27

Pedfgo, M. K. and Stevenson, W. H . , "The Design o f a LaserDopplerVelocimeter for TransonicFlows,''PurdueUniversity,Prepared


f o r Army M i s s i l e
C m a n d , AD-774 302, October 1373.

28.

H a e r t i g , J . , InformalPresentation,Proceedingsofthe
Workshop onLaserDopplerVelocimetry,PurdueUniversity,

Second I n t e r n a t i o n a l

1974.

253

29

Seasholtz, R. G., "Laser Doppler Velocimeter Measurementsin a Turbine


Stator Cascade Facility," Proceedings of the Second International Work1974.
shop on Laser Doppler Velocimetry, Purdue University,

30

Yanta, W. J . , "Laser Doppler Velocimeter Measurementso f Turbulence


Properties of a Mach 3 Turbulent Boundary Layer,'' Proceedings of the
Second International Workshop on Laser Velocimetry, Purdue University,

1974.
31.

George, W
. K., "The Measurement of Turbulence Intensities Using Real-Time
Laser Doppler Velocimetry," Proceedingsof the Second International Workshop on Laser Velocimetry, Purdue University,1974.

32.

Flack, R.D.
and Thompson, H. D., "The LVD's Potential in Understanding
Turbulent Structure,'' Proceedings of the Minnesota Symposium
on Laser
Anemometry, University of Minnesota, 1975.

33.

Barnett, D. 0. and Bent ley, H. T., "Statistical Bias o f Individual


Realization Laser Velocimeters," Proceedings of the Second International
Workshop on Laser Velocimetry, Purdue University, 1974.

34. McLaughlin, D.

K. and T iederman, W. G., "Biasing Correction for Individual


Realization of Laser Anemometer Measurementsin Turbulent Flows,ll The physics
of Fluids, Vol. 16, 1973.

35

Yanta, W. J. and Smith, R . A., "Measurement of Turbulence Transport Properties with a Laser Doppler Velocimeter,''AlAA Paper No. 73-169, Jan. 1973.

36.

Johnson, D. A . , "Turbulence Measurements in a Mach 2.9 Boundary Layer


Using Laser Velocimetry," AIAA Journal V 12 No. 5, p p 711-714, M a y 1974.

37. Johnson, D. A. and Rose,

GI. C., "Turbulence Measurements in a Transonic


Boundary Layer and Free-Shear Flow Using Laser Velocimetry and Hot-wire
Anemometry Techniques," AIAA 9 t h Fluid and Plasma Dynamics Conference,
Paper No. 76-399, J u l y 1976.

38.

Yanta, W. J. and Lee, R. E., "Measurements of Mach 3 Turbulence Transport


Properties on a Nozzle Wall , I i AlAA Journal, V.14, No. 6, pp 725-729,
June 1976.

39.

Boutier. H. and Lefevre, J.:


"Some Applications of Laser Anemometry in
Wind-Tunnels," The Accuracy of Flow Measurements
By Laser Doppler Methods,
Proceedings o f
LDA Symposium - Copenhagen, 1975.
"

254

APPENDIX 1 1 1
EFFECTS OF VIBRATION OF A CYLINDRICAL PROBE

ON STATIC PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS

Intheprocessofcollectingmaterialforwritingabout

pressure measurements, t h eq u e s t i o na r o s e
a f f e c t e db yv i b r a t i o no f

a probe.

causedbyunsteadycross-flow

1).

(Ref.

mean s t a t i c

as t o how measured datawouldbe

The problem o f e r r o r i n

measured pressure

has been previouslyconsideredbySiddon

The f o l l o w i n gd i s c u s s i o ni st a k e nf r o mt h i sr e f e r e n c e .

Some i n s i g h t i n t o t h e p r o b l e m o f

a probe i n an unsteadycross-flow

can be o b t a i n e d by use o f an i d e a l i z e d f l o w

model t h a ti g n o r e sv i s c o s i t y .

Consider a c y l i n d r i c a l p r e s s u r e p r o b e o f d i a m e t e r d , s u b j e c t e d t o
see Fig. A.III.1.

u n s t e a d yc r o s s - v e l o c i t yV n ( t ) ,
a x i a lv e l o c i t yU ( t )

i s neglected.

a uniform,

Any c o u p l i n ge f f e c to ft h e

Assuming t h ef l o wt o

be i r r o t a t i o n a l ,t h e

a p p r o p r i a t ep o t e n t i a lf u n c t i o ni s :

(r +

= Vn

The unsteadyform

p (r,

d2
r)

COS

of the

n, t )

n.

Bernou l l i equat i o n g i v e s :

p (vn2
Pt(t) = "
2

- v 2, +
n

a4
at

where,

P ( t )i st h ep r e s s u r ew h i c hw o u l d

have o c c u r r e da t

theprobe

P (Tl,t)

absence o f

A t t h es u r f a c eo ft h ep r o b e

( i . e . ,t h e' t r u e 'p r e s s u r e ) .

t h ep r e s s u r ee q u a t i o n

r = 0 i nt h e

( r = d/2)

becomes:
Pt(d = 1
2 P 'n

The f i r s t t e r mo nt h er i g h t
t i o nf o rs t e a d yp o t e n t i a lf l o w .

(1

4 Sin2n ) + p t n d Cos n

hand s i d ei sr e c o g n i z e d

as t h ep r e s s u r ed i s t r i b u -

The second t e r ma r i s e sf r o mu n s t e a d i n e s s .

For a p r e s s u r ep r o b ew h i c hr e g i s t e r st h ee x a c tc i r c u m f e r e n t i a la v e r a g e

P(n,t),

(e.g.,by

(111.1)

means o f a c i r c u m f e r e n t i a l s l i t ) t h e e r r o r

will be:

of

P,(t)

Pt(t)

.where P,(t)

$P

vn 2

= measured unsteady s t a t i c p r e s s u r e .

I nt h i si d e a ls i t u a t i o nt h ep a r to ft h ep r e s s u r ed i s t r i b u t i o na s s o c i a t e d

Vn does n o t c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e e r r o r .

withtheaccelerationterm

A realprobe

will n o tt a k e

Pt(t) =

1 p Vn2

P(n).

K p ind

(in

cm ( 1 / 8i n . )d i a m e t e rp r o b ew i t h

wVn).

a s i n g l e row o f o r i f i c e s
c a l i b r a t i o n s . B yu s i n g

on e i t h e r t h e t o p

(Ill-I)

Eq.

o f 5% and V

5% of t h e V n e r r o r a t

t ot h eq u e s t i o n n a i r e ,

e r r o r becomes

N e v e r t h e l e s s ,f o r

an averaginginaccuracy

K p i n d i s lessthan

Based onresponses

\in

I f we regard Vn as s i n u s o i d a l ,t h e

i n c r e a s i n g l yi m p o r t a n w
t i t hf r e q u e n c y

m/sec (10 f t / s e c ) ,

an

K ( < 1 )r e p r e s e n t st h ef r a c t i o n a li n a c c u r a c y

R o u g h l ys p e a k i n g ,t h ec o e f f i c i e n t
o ft h ea v e r a g eo v e r

therefore,

in
may a r i s e .

a d d i t i o n a le r r o rp r o p o r t i o n a lt o

P,(t)

P(rl);

an exactaverageover

a 0.318

n
100 Hz.

3.05

many i n v e s t i g a t o r s havelocated
or sideof

a l o n gp i p ef o rt u n n e l

w i t h 11 = 0 ( o r i f i c e s on e i t h e r t o p

a n da s s u m i n gt h ep i p eo s c i l l a t e ss i n u s o i d a l l y ,

o r bottom)

one can e s t i m a t e t h e e r r o r i n

measured, mean s t a t i cp r e s s u r e ,i . e . ,

P(0, t )

P (t) =
t

T1

Taking a timeaverageover

P,(O)

p Vn

(t)

( I 11.2)

one c y c l e r e s u l t s i n

2 T

p \ip(t)d.

V 2(t) dt +
O n

T
0

i n ( t d) t ,

( I 11.3)

where T = p e r i o d o f o s c i l l a t i o n .
Before we canproceed
must be assumed.

256

any f u r t h e r , a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c f r e q u e n c y

For c a l c u l a t i o np u r p o s e s

we here assumea

and amplitude
frequency o f 100Hz.

Since we have previously established thatit i s desirable to measure mean


static pressure to within 6.89 N/m2 (0.001 psi), the amplitude of pipe
oscillation wi 1 1 be calculated for the case
Pm - Pt = 6.89 N/m 2

Hence, if the pipe oscillation is represented by


Displacemetjt E D = A sin wt;
then

'8

Vn

' .

in =

= Aw coswt

D =

-AU

2 srnwt.

Substituting into Eq. ( 1 1 1 . 3 ) , we have

a*.

6.89 = -

2 2
2wt) d t - P A w

(111.4)

It may be noted from Eq. ( 1 11-41 that the required amplitude increases as

frequency decreases. For the particular case ofw = 21rf = 2 0 0 ~and


5
2
2
4
p = 1.71 N sec2/m4 (0.00332 lbf sec /ft ) [Po = 2.41 x 10 N/m
(35 psia),
T = 311K (560"R), M = 11, the amplitude required for significant pressure
0

error is

Therefore, a static pressure survey pipe with


a single row of orifices,
located on either the top or bottom, would have tooscillate at a frequency
of 100 Hz and an amplitude of 0.639 cm in order to cause the measured pressure
2
to be 6.89 N/m (0.001 psi) too high.

Figure A. I I I . 1

PFESSURE DISTRIBWION ON A CIRCULAR


CYLINDER IN CRoSSFIX)W, Ref. 1

I Goingthroughthe
an a m p l i t u d e o f
s t a t i cp r e s s u r et o

same p r o c e d u r e w i t h

cm (0.145 i n . ) i s p r e d i c t e d t o
cause t h e measured,
2
(0.001 p s i ) .S i n c el a r g et e n s i o n
or
be low by 6.89 N/m
on s t a t i c p r e s s u r e s u r v e y p i p e s t o m i n i -

it appears u n l i k e l y t h a t p i p e v i b r a t i o n i s

e r r o r .A l t h o u g ht h i sc o n c l u s i o ni s
analysis,

90" ( o r i f i c e s o n s i d e o f p i p e ) ,

0.368

compressionloadsareusuallyplaced
mize sag,

n =

it i sc o n s i d e r e dt o

estimateof

based on
an

a s i g n i f i c a n ts o u r c eo f

i n v i s c i d ,i n c o m p r e s s i b l e

be c o n s e r v a t i v e( i . e . ,g i v e s

A) because o f t h e n e g l e c t o f

a lower bound

pneumatic damping i n t u b i n g w h i c h

connect o r i f i c e s w i t h p r e s s u r e t r a n s d u c e r s .

A.III
1.

REFERENCES

Siddon, T. E., "On t h e Response o f PressureMeasuringInstrumentation


i n Unsteady Flow," U T l A S Report No. 136, AD 682296, January 1969.

FACILITIES RESPONDING TO OUESTIONNAIRE

APPENOIX I V :

TABLE I

Faci 1i t y

Organlratlon
& ion
Locat

Re/m x
@ H
1.0

4' T r i s o n l c
26" Transonic
16-Inch
.Supersonic W
High Speed WT
Continuous
Supersonic WT

Pilot

WT

Supersonic WT
Supersonlc
Tunnel No. 1
T r l s o n l c G.F.
Mach

3 Hi-Re

12" T r ison i c

8' x 6' SwT


IO' x 10' SWT
18- Inch

24.6

B 1owdown

31

Farm1nadale.N.Y.
ETH Zurich,
Swltz.
NLR Amsterdam,
Hol land
II

- 0.95

I . 2-2 (2.5)

II

1.2

II

Aero. Res. U n i t
Pretoria, S.Afr.

Cont

Cont.

10.40 m s q .
1.6 x 2.0 m2

I
I

1935

( F i r s t . Cont. S.W.1

1959

Bd

2
10.27 x 0.27 m

1.0

14.1

Cont.

10.55 x 0.42 m21

1956

21

Bd

v m uIe
2
1.2 x 1.2 m
n . s Y 1 . 7 nl2

1963

2
0.38 x 0.33 m

1956

0.38 x 0.38 m:
0.61 x 0.61 m

N.A.

4.0

5.0

- 1.2
- 4.76
2.97 - 3.0:
-

2.5

2.1

- 3.5
o*6 - 4*2

2.0

- 7.5
3.5 - 19
7

Run Tlme

1.5

o.36

1957

0.66 m Octagon

92

(H = 1.2)
50
30

1.25

0.5

60.7

nsert.5-1.2
1.2
5.8

II

U.S. Army
Aberdeen, Md.
USAF-FDL
10.3
WPAB, Ohio
USAF
ARL
WPAFB , Ohio
Sandia Albuquerque, N.M.
NASA Lewis R.C.
Cleveland,Ohio

.37

Productlon Testlng
Began

54

(M = 1.25)
h

3.3

33

Cont

71

Cont.

27

359

Bd

16.4

Bd

15
(M = 2.0)

- 11
12 - 30

.. . ....

1960

1970
0.305 x2
0.305 m

1956

FACILITIES RESPONDING TO
OUESTIONNAIRE

APPENDIX I V :

TABLE I
Organlzatlon
Location

Faci I i t v

BAC
Preston, Eng.

I .2 m HSWT

NAE
S u c t l a n W . T . d a
Tr i sonic
II
t3lowdown Wf

30" x 16"

0.4

0.1

0.4

4.0

4.4

0.15

0.95

NASA Langley Res


l / 3 m Trans.
0.05
Cryoqenic Tun. Ctr.Hampton, Va.
High Speed
II
On2
7 ' x IO' Tun.

1.2

II

HRN-PDT

,.

Cross-Sect ion

1960

Suction

1.22 x 1.22 m
2
0.76 x 0.41 m
1.52 x 1.52 m

Bd

1964

Bd

2
0.38 x 1.52 m

1969

341

Cont.

0.34 m Octagon

1974

( M = 0.9)
11.8 - 16.1

Cont.

2
2.0 x 2.92 m

1946

74

15.1

13.45

Production Testlng
Began

Tvne

21

2.0

Re/m x
@ M = 1.0

1.37 x 1.37 m

6" x 28"

II

Unitary
Plan Wl
I 6 l Transonic
T
I

11

0.2
I

II

Pressure Tun.

0.2

Northrop
0.20
Hawthorne, Ca. 11.5
P i c a t i n n y Arsen0.2
a l , Dover, N.J.

1.20

1.2

1.47

II

8 ' Transonic
2 ' Trisonic
High Speed
Subsonlc WT

0.3

I'

Transonic Wl
Transon ic
DynamicsTun.

1.3

1.3

1.3
3.0
0.76

I2

1.3

0.28

13.8

15.3

49

(M = 0.6)
11.12
12.96. .
".

15.2 x 72.4cm

Bd

98.4

,
'4.88 m x 4.88m

(1.05-2.53)
air
(8.04-19.7)Freon
2.86 2.6 - 28 (k1.5)
4.63 1.6
20("2.3)2.29

32.8

Cont.
Conto

0.61 m corner
f i1 l e t s
1.22 x 1.22In2

1952

1948
1974
1960
1955

Cont.

A.72 m Oct.

1950

Cont.

2
'2.16 x 2.16 rn

1952

Bd

0.61 m

sq.

Induct ion '0.61 m. Diarn.


..

1962

N.A.

APPENDIX I V :

F A C I L I T I E S RESPONDING TO OUESTIONNAIRE

TABLE I

TY Pe

Productlon Testing
Began

Cross-Section
2

Bd

0.42 x 0.41 m

Bd

2
0.71 x 0.51 m

lndraft

10.2 x 12.7 cm"

1956

N.A.

1973
7

Polysonic \-IT
Tunnel A

ryz;

kcDonnel1-Doug 1as
U I S . Mo.
,G;:z

Bd

10.66

m sq.

1965

Cont.

11.02 m sq.

1958

ac.AEDC/ARO

II

Tunnel D

Ludwi eg
be
Tu

P i l o t HlRT
echn ion

Transon i c

2
!18*6x23*2 cm 1N.A.

Induction

0.8 x 0.6 m2

1968

i
I Bd

0 . 3 0 m Sa.

1960

40 x 50 cm S W l

2
0.4 x 0.5 m

1968

ockwel I I n t .
1 Sequndo. Ca.

? 3 k n ic
Transonic W
24' x 23'

SWr

1
2.13

I Bd

1958

m SQ.

bedford, Eng.

II

Cont.

0.69x0.76
"

. ,.. .

1959

m2
"

.. .

~~

(Research Only)

WT

30 cm

~~

APPENnlX I V :

FACILITIES RESPONDING TO
OUESTIONNAIRE
TABLE I
Re/m x

Organization
& Location

Faci 1 it y

@ M = 1.0

Cross-Section

Type

Bd

0.305x0.406m2

Production Testing
Began
1964

1956
WRE Salisbury,
s. Aust.

15-lnch SWT

Transon
wT
ic

WT

WT9

ARLMe1 bourne,

V o l v oT r o l l h a t t e n
Sweden
Aust.
II

1.4

I1

s3 Bd W l

0.4
2.8

Boe ing
Tranyznlc WT
Lockheed
Triqn,nic
HS

- TWT

6.56

1.5
1.4

23

1.4

3.2

4*0

(M = 1.5)
29
55
(M = 1.2)
19.7 - 45.9

II

0.

B u f f a l o , N.Y.

(M = 2.8)
16.4 - 65.6

--

0.2

8' Transonic Calspan

w-r

5.0

o,5
0.4

I1

Lockheed
Saugus, C a l i f .
Hawker-Siddeley
Hatfield.Enaland

3.3

3.28

Boe ing
Boe ing
Supersonic WF. Seattle, Wash.
2D-TWT

- o.38

1.0
2.8

0.2

0.5

1.25

b9

26.25

77.1

5.0

1.1

1-34

Cont.

0.38x0.38

1957

Bd

17.8x15.2

2
cm

1966

Cont.

0.81x0.53

Bd

0.5x0.5

Bd

0.5 x0.5

Bd

1.22x1.22

rn

14.8

10.2

1.3
28

67.9

11.5
18

42

2
2
2

2
m

0.305x0.91

Bd

2.44 m x 3.668
0.61 m corner
tr I l e t
2
1.22x1.22 m

Cont.

1.11

Bd

0.76x0.61
Cont.
Cont. 6' low
Re; Interm. 2.44 m Sq.

2
m

V a r i a b l e Dia,
0.81m-l.52m
.

1952
1962

1957

1965
1944

1
9
h
0
1954
1956

zg'"
Tube,

1957

1966

APPENDIX

IV:

RESPONDING TO OUESTIONNAIRE

FACILITIES

TABLE I
Re/rn x
@ M = 1.0

Organization
Faci 1 i ty

(M = 1.5)
0.47
23.6
Cont.
3.51x0.46

20'' SGrr
VoughtCorp.
10.5
High Speed W
l Dal las. Texas
Pro ulsion LIT Fac
Aerodyn. WT
AED!/ARO
Tulla- 10.2
1T
,ho-.
Aerodyn. WT
II
0.1
4T
1.6
Propu 1 s ion Vf
It
0.2
-16T
Propulsion W
l
II

16s
14" Trisonic

1.5

1.5

17

1.3,

1.3

7.0

&

1.6
4.75

1 1 I Transonic
LIT
2' Transonic

22.5

II

Injector-Driw In
II
Transonic W
l
9' x 7' Super
II
sonic WT
8 ' x 7' Super
I1
sonic WT

0.2

0.98

- 23
(M = 2.0)
1.3 - 8.4
1.3

2.1
12

- 1.4
- 1.4

2.45

2.5

3.5

10.305 m Sq.

Cont.

1.22 rn Sq.

1968

Cont.

4.88

1957

Cont.

5.4

1953

6.7
12

16.7

1946

4.11x4.18 m

32

Cont.

3.35 m

Sq.

1956

23.5

Cont.

0.61 rn Sq.

1951

Con t

15.24 crn Dia.

Cont.

2.74 x 2.13 rn2

167

71.7

- . 17.
.

3.44 m Sq.

Cont.

(M = 2.5)

1956

16.5

(M = 2.0)
7

I961

0.356 rn Sq.

Cont.
I

rn sq.

4-tuLa3.q-

Bd

0 - 1.0,
1.2. 1.4

1.55

1950

1
0.4

Cont.

NASA Marshall SFC

Huntsvi 1 le,Ala.
12' Pressure NASA Ames RC
0.wr
Moffett Field,Ca.
14' Transonic

w-r

rn

Production

5.0

W
T

w-r

Testing
Cross-Section
Began

Type

, .. .

Con t .

1956

Pilot Model

2.44 x 2.13 rn2


-

.. ..

1956

1956

APPENDIX

IV: FACILITIES

RESPONDING

TABLE I

Faci 1 i t y

61 x

61

sonic WT

Organitat ion
& Locat ion

Super-NASA
Ames
f eFt ti e l d ,

1 ' x 3 ' Super-

RC MofCa.

II

CWT

Supersonic
Tunnel No. 1
Supersonic
Tunnel No. 2
Boundary Layer
1
NSWC Hypersonic Tunnel

Uaval Surf.Weapon
Zntr.,Silver Spg.
II

II

II

Aero.Res.lnst.
Tunnel FFA-Sb (FFA)Stockholrn,Sb
Transon ic TunII
n e l FFA-HT
I
I

Tr isonic Tonne;
=FA-TVM 500

II

Tunnel FFA-S5

II

II

6-Ft TWT

x 4-Ft*

'*
TWT

Royal Airc.Est.
Bedford.Enqland

DFVLR
Gottingen,W.Ger.

TO OUESTIONNAIRE

APPENDIX IV:

FACILITIS RESPONDING TO OUESTIONNAIRE


TABLE I
Production Testing
Began
:ross-Section

I
I

0 . 6 rn Sq.

1966

0.5 rn Sq.(M>I
0.6x0.34 rn2

0.25-0.50 m
0.81 m D l a .

1970

APPENO I X IV
TABLE I I :

Facllf t y

TEST
SECTION
CHARACTERISTICS

Cross-Section

90 SW
1.27cm,
300 Top & Bot.

Perforated

NAL (India)

1.22 m Sq.

GAC (NY)

0.66 m Octagon

Slotted
~

ETH (Swi t z )

(Cont Id)

Porosltv
20% sw

lot o -2O

EJector Flaps

12% & 6%

0. oso

-Ejector Flaps

12% T E B

0.13'

Fixed Ejector Slots

l O % T &B

0.22O

Flxed Ejector Slots

6%TsB

Venting of Plenum
Chamber

WallAnqle

~~

Sol i d

0.4 m Sq.

NLR (HST
.Hal land)

1.6 x2

NLR (CSST)

0.27 x.27

NLR (PT)

2
0.55 x 0.42 m

NLR (SST)

2
1.2 x 1.2 m

U . S . Army
(SSTl)

0.38x0.33

WPAFB (TGF)

0.38 x 0.38 mL

2
m

Slotted
(T & B)
Solid

5 cm,40cm

I
I

2
m

Slotted

0.525 cm, 5.25 cm

(T & B)

'

Sol i d
~

t-

WPAFB (M3HR)

20.3 x 20.3cm2

Sand i a (TWT)

0.305 x 0.305 m2

Solid

12%

O0

'EJectorFlaps

I
I
2.44 x

1.83 m2

3.05 x 3.05 m2

ARU (SWT)

0.45x0.'45

Perforated

0.318 cm,
30'

-"-Perforated 2.54 cm,


30'
Sol i d

'

6%

lo

EJectorFlaps

6%

O0

Aux i 1 i a r y Pumps

I
~

Perforated

0'.'6O T E B

l A u x i l i a r y Pumps

APPENDIX IV

TABLE I I :

(Cont'd)

TEST SECTION CHARACTERISTICS

Wall Anqle

Fac i

BAC (HSWT)

lJAE (Su

WT)

1.22 x 1.22 m

Perforated

0.76 x 0.41 m

Slotted

1.6 cm,
90'
0.58 cm,

19%

4.7 cm

O0

Perforated
(T
B)

0.38

9RA (TWT)

2.44 x 2.74 m2

1.27
P e r f o r a t e d cm,

4 f M (SWT)

0.305 x 0.406 m2

Solid

1-52 m

20.3 x 22.9 cm2

1.27cm,

Perforated

E j e c t o rF l a p s

lo

-0.5'
NAE (2DT)

Venting o f Plenum
Chamber

to-.25'

E j e c t o r F 1 aps

90'

20.5%
T E B

O0

Vent Inq to Atm.

'
0
9

22.5%

O0

9ux i 1 i a r y Pumps

22%

O0

E j e c t o rF l a p s

O0

E j e c t o r F 1 aps

0.185 cm,
90'

0.5'

Volvo (WTl)
Volvo (Wr9)
Boeing (SWT)
Boe 1 ng
(2D-TWT)

2
0.5 x 0.5 m

1 0.5
1

x 0.5 m2

1.22 x 1.22 m2

0.305

2
0.91 m

I
1

Slotted
(T G B)

?
I

4%T&B

0.21O

E l e c t o rF l a p s

Sol i d

Sol i d
Perforated
(T & B)

1.03 cm, 90

34.1% T&B

O0

E j e c t o rF l a p s

APPENDIX IV

TABLE I I :

Faci 1 it y

Cross-Section

2.44
(TWT)
Lockheed (TWT)

x 3*66

p;fleTscorner
1.22x1.22

m2

Hawker

(Cont'd)

TEST
SECTION
CHARACTERISTICS

HoleSize/Angle o r
Wall Type Slot Width/Soaciu PorQsjtv
Slotted
7.45 cm,70.41 cm 11% 3.5%
tJithinsertsTdB
47.31 cm SW

'*''

cm* 'O0
Perforated
S l o t t e d T&B 2.54 cm, 10.80 cm
Perf. InsertsO.10 cm, goo

3.9%

1.22 x 1.22 m

LRC (16' TT)

4.72 m Octagon

Slotted

LRC ( 8 ' TPT)

2.16 x 2.16 mz

Slotted

3.18 cm, 43.20 cm

LRC(1/3mTCT)

0.34 m Octagon

Slotted

to 1.727 cm 14 cm

LRC
(HST)

2.0 x 2 . 9 2 m

Slotted

4.60 cm, 73.03 cm

LRC (4' SPT)

I . 37 x 1.37 m

Solid

LRC (6" TWT)

15.2 x 72.4 cm2

Slotted

NC ( 2 l TWT)

0.61 m Sq.

(''I'

Tbn)

-0.17'

Ejector Flaps
Ejector Flaps

Sol i d

.62 cm, 1.95 rn

'0

3-6% T&E

4.8%

12.5%
TL R

Slotted
Holes

10.61 m Dia.

0.42 x 0.41 m

Solid
Perforated

3.318 x 2.54 cm,


1.91 cm

I
0.48 cm,
30'

O0

A u x i l i a r y Pumps &
Ejector Flaps

O0

F i x e dS l o t s
t o +lo E j e c t o r F l a p s

-2/3'

10%

'

IO0 10'
0.25

SW

o-,,h~TFR F i x e d E j e c t o r S l o t s
Ejector Flaps or
0.083'
Vent Ins t o Atm.

0-125;

3.476 cm, 3.81 cm

Auxi I i a r y Pumps

0.75'

0,083'

no

TF.R

PA

A u x i l i a r y Pumps

0.067' SW
0.167OT~B

Tapered fromzero

PA(HSSWT)

Ejector Flaps

'-0.75'

3%
4.4%

LRC (UPWT)

O0

22%

6.35 cm, 148.6 cm

Venting o f Plenum
Chamber

WallAnqle

8%

NA

I
Va 1ve Cont r o 1 s
Diffuser Pumping

h,

4
0

APPENDIX I V
TABLE I I :

Faci 1 i t y

Cross-Section
0.71 x 0.51 m

L-G (CFF)

(Cont I d )

TEST SECTION CHARACTERISTICS

Perforated

0.635 cm, 30'

1
UM (4" x 5"

10.2 x 12.7 cm

MD (PSWT)

Venting of Plenum
C harnber

Mal 1 Anqle

Wall Type
0- 10%

0.25'

T&B

E j e c t o rF l a p s

+.3O

EjectorFlaps

Sol i d

1.22 m Sq.

Perforated

0.635 cm, 90

23

oo

Perforated

0.953 cm, 90'

25

-0.75'

Perforated

.305 cm, 3
0'

0- 10%

Perforated

.635 cm, YOo

to

to

Auxi 1 i a r y Pumps

Oo

Sol i d

AEDC (Tunnel

0.305
o
l

AEDC ( P i l o t

Sol i d

m Sq.
2

H I RT)

18.6 x 23.2 cm

Techn i o n
(TIWT)

0.8 x 0.6 rn

Techn ion

n0.3 m

Techn ion

0.4 x 0.5 m

RI ( T U )

2.13 m Sq.

+0.5'

E j e cF
t ol a
r ps

Sol i d
Perforated

0.635 cm, 90

19.7%

Perforated

1.27 cm, 90

22.7%

Perforated

JPL (SWT)

21% TbB

E j e c t o r F l a p s and/
o r Exhaust t o A t m .

Sol i d

Sq.

&haAm"

O0

0.51 x 0.46 m

Sol i d

O0

O0 to 0*670

E j e c t o r F I.aps
A u x i l i a r y Pumps E
V e n t i n g t o Atm.

APPENDIX IV
TABLE I t :

Facl 1 i t y
VC

(HSWT)

TEST
SECTION
CHARACTERISTICS

HoleSize/Angle 01
Wall Type S l o t Width/SDacint

Cross-Section
1.22 m S q .

Perforated

AEDC (AWT- 1T)

3.305 m , Sq.

Perforated

AEDC (Am-4T)

1.22 m Sq.

Perforated

Perforated

AEDC (PWT- 16T) 4.88 m Sq.


AEDC (PWT-16s) 4.88 rn S q .

(Cont'd)

1.04
cm,

I
I

90'

0.318 cm,
30'
1.27
cm,
30'
1.905
cm,
30'

0.356 m Sq.

ARC (12' PWT)

3.44 m

T&B

Q-h'

cw

Ejector Flaps

6% and

-0.67'

t o 0.5'

Ejector Flaps

0 -10%

TEB Steam Eiector SYS.

10%

1 t o 0.55'

T&B

-1'

6%

&

EjectorFlaps &
Aux I l l a r y Pumps

Ejector Flaps E
t o O.jOT&B Auxi 1 i a r y Pumps

ARC (14' TWT)

4.11 x 4.18 m

Auxi 1 i a r y Pumps

Sol i d

Sq.

ARC ( 1 I ' TWT)

3.35 m Sq.

ARC (2' TWT)

0.61 m S q .

ARC ( I -D TWT)

0.152 m Dia.

4RC (7 'x7 ' S W )

2.74 x 2.13 m2

ARC (6'x6' SWT 1.83 m Sq.

80.33:

22.5%

03.4%

'lottedb l . 7 4 cm,
26.4
cm

w i t hi n s e r t

v,

Venting of Plenum
Chamber

Sol i d

NASA Marshall
(14'' TWT)

ARC(8Ix7' SWT) 2.44 x2.13

WallAnqle

Porositv

5.6%

).18O

5.8%

1.19O

22% w i t h
Throttle
-Bars

- bo

Sol i d

T&B

sw

t o 0.35'

EjectorFlaps
Ejector Flaps &
A u x i l i a r y Pumps
Ejector Flaps

Sol i d

'lotted
T&B11.03 cm,
28
cm
with insert

5.1%

O0

Auxi 1 i a r y Pumps

4
N

APPEND I X I V

TABLE I I :

TEST
SECT

(Cont I d )
ION CHARACTERISTICs

Venting o f Plenum
Faci 1 1 t y

I NSWC

(ST # I )

NSWC(ST #2)

Cross-Section

I 0.4

m Sq.

TransonicJozzle

0.4 m Sq.

used i n ST.I#l

1
I

Solid
Sol i d

0.86'

NSWC (HyT)

0.41 x 0.41 m

FFA-Sb

0.92 x 0.90 m

FFA-HT

0.89 x 0.89 mL
Octaaona 1

Slotted

3.4 cm, 37 cm

FFA-TVM 500

0.5 m Sq.

Perforated

0.5 cm,
30'

FFA-SS

0.46 x 0.48 m2

Slotted

0.21 cm, 5.3 cm

isavail

I 2.5

Slotted

cm, 30 cm

6% TES

F
Eljaepcst o r

0.15'

O0

9.2%

'

E j e c t o rF l a p s

6%
4% T&B

RAE(8Ix6' TWT) 2.44 x 1.83 m2


RAE(3Ix4' SWr)l 0.91 x 1.22 m2

Sol i d

-6'

t o 00

0
'
Perforatedl 1 cm, 3

9.75%

6%

DFVLR (TT
W

Flaps

-0.2'

t o 0.45'

A u x i l i a r y Pumps

-0.4'

t o 0.9

Ejector

0.99 cm, 8.9 cm

Ejector

0.15'

Slotted

Auxi 1 i a r y Pumps

0'

t o 0.5'

Flaps

Auxi 1 i a r y Pumps
Exhausted t o

0.6

m Sq.

- P e r f o r a t e d 0.6

cm, 30'

6%

APPENDIX IV

(Cont'd)

TABLE I I : TEST
SECTION
CHARACTER

Facll I t y

Cross-section
0.5 m sq. (M > 1 )
DFVLR (T-s WT) 0.6 x 0.34 rn2

HoleSite/Angle
Wail Type Slot Width/-

Slotted

DFVLR
(HGK)

0.25
0.50 m
x 0.30 .m

so, id

NASA Marshal 1
(HRNTT)

0.81 m D i a .

Perf.

0.8 cm, 6.8 cm

1.27 cm, 30'

ISTICS

or
Porosftv

10%

Varies 1-1 0::


along a x i s

Wall Anqlc
0.05'

t o 0.1'

00

Venting o f Plenum
Chamber
Exhausted t o Atm.

Ejector Flaps

2. Gobwnmmr Accr*on

1. Rmort No.

No.

3. Rripient's cltabg No.

NASA CR-2920
4. Title rd Subtitle

5. Rem13 Date

"Calibration of Transonic and Supersonic Wind

November 197 7

Tunnels"

6. F'erformingOrgmnization Coda

T.D. Reed, T.C. Pope and J.M. Cooksey


9. M a m i n QOrp.nilrtion Narm ud

. 10. Work Unit

Ad&-

Vought Corporation
Dallas, Texas

"11.

No.

Contract or Grant

No.

NAS 2-8606
13. Type of Repon and Period Covered

12. Spotnoring A p n c v

Nlnu md

Address

Contractor Report

National Aeronautics E Space Administration


Washington, D.C. 20546
1

14. Smmroring Agmcy code

15. Supplemntarv Notes

16. Abstraa

State-of-the art instrumentation and procedures for calibrating transonic (0.6 C M < 1.4) and
supersonic (M 5 3.5) wind tunnels are reviewed and evaluated. Major emphasis is given to
transonic tunnels. Background information was obtained via a literature search, personal contacts
and a questionnaire which was sent to 106 domestic and foreign facilities. Completed questionnaires were received for 88 tunnels dnd included government, industry and university-owned
facilities.
Continuous, blowdown and intermittent tunnels are considered. The required measurements of
pressure, temperature, flow angularity, noise and humidity are discussed, and the effects of
measurement uncertainties are summarized. Included is a comprehensive review of instrumentation
currently used to calibrate empty-tunnel flow conditions. The recent results of relevant research
are noted and reconmendations for achieving improved data accuracy are made where appropriate. lt
is concluded, for general testing purposes, that satisfactory calibration measurements can be
achieved in both transonic and supersonic tunnels. The goal of calibrating transonic tunnels to
within 0.001 in centerline Mach number appears to be feasible with existing instrumentation.
provided correct calibration procedures are carefully followed. A comparable accuracy can be
achieved off-centerline with carefully designed, conventional probes, except near Mach 1. In the
range 0.95
M < 1.05, the laser Doppler velocimeter appears to offer the most promise for improved
calibration accuracy off-centerline.
With regard to procedures. tunnel operators are cautioned to: (1) verify by measurements that
expansions from a settling chamber to a test section are indeed isentropic, and (2) obtain calibrations over the entire range of reynolds number and humidity levels. Also, it is suggested that
calibration data should include off-centerline measurements of Mach number and flow angularity.
Finally, three problem areas for transonic tunnels are identified and discussed, viz. (1) the
lack of standard criteria for flow uniformity and unsteadiness, (2) the undesirable noise
generated by ventilated walls, and (3) wall interference.

Wind tunnels, Calibration, Testing

UNCLASSIFIED-UNLIMITED

I
19. Scurity Clrit. (of this v t t

UNCLASSIFIED

20. S M i w a a i f . (of chis p e t


UNCLASSIFIED

STAR Category 09
21. NO. of p.pa

287

22. Rice'

$9.25

'For ule bv thc N n i w l Tuhniul InfarmtionSmvii. Spriqtidd, Virginia 22161

*U.S.

GOVEKtB.!ENT

PRINTIKG OFFICE: 1977

- 735-078143

Potrebbero piacerti anche