Experiment 1

Wind Tunnel Calibration

Thomas Santee
Aerospace 305
Aerospace Technology Laboratory
Penn State College of Engineer: Department of Aerospace Engineering
008 Hammond Building
Section A-08
Partners: Oron Rosenberg, Kyle Meyer, Steven Ren, Brandon Olsen, Nick Smith
Conducted on: 25 Jan 2017 and 1 February 2017
TA: Pranjali Padgman
Instructor: Dr. Richard Auhl
Abstract

Set out to find relations between pressure, temperature, voltage, wind speed, tunnel RPM, and

other derived ratios. Completed this process by calibrating pressure transducers and hot wire

devices to measure various pressures within the tunnel, from which all other needed variables

could be calculated. As it turns out, dynamic pressure and static pressure have a linear

relationship, as does velocity with tunnel rpm, regardless of blockage in the tunnel. The drag

incurred by a blockage in the wind tunnel was higher than experimentally predicted, as were the

data points for Strouhals number vs. Reynolds number. As velocity increased in the wind

tunnel, turbulence intensity seemed to decrease. With these relationships known, more

calibration can be done to enhance future experiments.

Introduction

The purpose of this experiment was to calibrate a low speed wind tunnel at Penn State. In order

to calibrate the wind tunnel in its entirety, all the relationships formed between pressure,

temperature, velocity, and other main characteristics of the particular wind tunnel were first

found.

To start, the group had to make sure all testing equipment was properly calibrated. Working

with pressure transducers and manometers, the group set out to find the difference in static and

dynamic pressure at various points in the wind tunnel. As velocity can be found through these

pressure drops, a more thorough understanding of the flow can be achieved. Starting with an

empty test section, then with blockage to find blockage effects in the wind tunnel, the group

measured the voltage drop in the transducer and the voltage produced by the pitot static tube to

gauge how pressure changed within the wind tunnel.

After measuring the pressure, the group utilized a hot wire anemometer to generate a velocity

profile of the wind tunnel. The anemometer functions by heating a wire then measuring the

voltage required to keep the wire heated when convective cooling occurs in the tunnel. Because

it is focused on the temperature, it can also measure the voltage in the tunnel to analyze if there

are any points at which the air is warmer or cooler when finding a profile. This can be used to

explain potential discrepancies in data, where a potential increase in density from a change in

temperature can change the Reynolds number in one area, altering the flow in the region.
Experimental Procedure

Pressure Transducer

At the start of each experiment, the ambient pressure and temperature of the testing

environment was recorded for future use.

To ensure accurate measurements, the pressure transducer had to be calibrated outside of the

wind tunnel. Positive end of the transducer was connected to the slant tube manometer while

the negative was left open to the atmosphere. The group collected data on the pressure on the

manometer versus the voltage output by the transducer. Using this data, the relationship

between voltage and pressure was found.

30.00

25.00 - 0.01
f(x) = 3.09x + 0.05

20.00

Pump Pressure (PSF) 15.00

10.00

5.00

0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Volts

" Linear (") Linear (") "

Linear (") Linear (") Linear (")

Figure 1: Pressure Transducer Calibration

To calibrate the venturi, the group first tested the wind tunnel while it was completely free of

any blockages. Starting at zero and measuring at increments of one additional revolution, which
are roughly equal to 10% on the dial, the speed of the tunnel was pushed to its maximum speed.

At each measuring point, a pitot-static tube was used to measure dynamic pressure at the front,

middle, and rear of the test section. Additionally, the calibrated pressure transducer was located

in the front of the test section to take additional readings. A tachometer was hooked up to the

system, and voltage was recorded at each increment.

From maximum, the speed of the wind tunnel was reduced to 75%, where the measurements

taken in the above paragraph were taken. In addition, the boundary layer thickness at the front,

middle, and back of the test section was measured with a hand held pitot static probe. To find

this distance, the approximate drop of 1% from normal dynamic pressure was deemed to be the

start of the boundary layer.

The venturi calibration paragraph above was repeated, this time with a six inch square disk,

mounted to a load tower with a load cell to measure force on the disk, placed in the center of the

test section. Measurements of drag force were added to other measurements recorded at

increments of 10%.

Hotwire

Similar to the venturi calibration, the ambient pressure and temperature of the testing

environment was recorded at the start of and during each experiment. As pressure transducer A

was calibrated in the previous lab, it was used as an additional pressure measurement in the

wind tunnel.

To accurately measure conditions inside the wind tunnel, the hot wire had to be calibrated. For

accurate testing, a caliper was used to find the actual diameter of the wire, rather than the

manufacturers label. Then, the hotwire was placed inside the wind tunnel at zero wind speed

and 18 inch elevation from the floor to establish zero conditions. From there, the wind tunnel

was increased to five percent motor speed, then increased in increments of five percent until
reaching 30 percent wind speed, from which increments of ten percent until max speed were

used. At each point, the mean and time trace output voltages from transducer A, and the hot-

wire anemometer were recorded.

180
160
140 f(x) = 0.08x^4 - 0.26x^3 + 9.54x^2 - 10.06x + 0.03

120
100
ft/s 80
60
40
20
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

Votls

Figure 2: Hotwire Voltage vs Velocity

With the hotwire calibrated, it was used to analyze Karman Vortex Street frequencies. The probe

was 2 cylinder diameters below the center and 5 diameters downstream of a wire strung across

the test section near where the hotwire probe was originally placed. Using a spectrum analyzer,

the time average of the output of the hot wire anemometer was placed on a graph of frequency

vs voltage output. From this graph, the dominant frequency was measured in the wake of the

cylinder in flow speeds, increasing in increments of one percent from 5 to 10 percent, then

increments of ten up to 90 percent.

Finally, the hotwire was used to take two velocity profiles of the wind tunnel. Using previous

calibration data and transducer A, the wind tunnel reached a velocity of approximately 100

ft/sec. Then the hotwire was lowered from the top of the wind tunnel to the bottom, in

increments of 0.1 inches, taking 2000 samples per second at each point to find the mean velocity
and turbulence level. This process was repeated from the bottom of the tunnel to the top to be

able to eliminate pressure and temperature effects from future equations.

Results and Discussion

As total pressure in the wind tunnel increased, the dynamic pressure increased in a linear

relationship, as expected. While pressures between the front, middle, and rear test sections were

similar, as expected for a relatively short test section, the rear of the test section always had a

larger dynamic pressure.

25.00 20.00
18.00
f(x)
f(x) =
=0.91x
0.9x ++ 0.29
+0.19
20.00 16.00 f(x) = 1.08x 0.21
f(x) = 0.93x
0.83x + 0.24
0.87x 0.21
0.22
14.00
15.00 12.00

Venturi P (PSF) Venturi P (PSF) 10.00

10.00 8.00
6.00
5.00 4.00
2.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 10.0020.0030.00 0.00 10.0020.0030.00

Dynamic Pressure q (PSF) Dynamic Pressure q (PSF)

qF Linear (qF) qF Linear (qF)

qM Linear (qM) qM Linear (qM)
qR Linear (qR) qR Linear (qR)

Figure 3: Empty Test Chamber (A Volts) Figure 4: Test Chamber w/ Plate (A Volts)

With the introduction of a blockage, the ratio of change in pressure to dynamic pressure

changed to favor change in pressure more heavily. In addition, the overall pressures measured

with a blockage dropped, which makes sense, as the blockage should reduce wind tunnel velocity

in the test section and therefore total pressure.

While the pressures seemed to follow the same trend, regardless of a blockage, the velocity vs.

rpm graphs tell a different story. In the graph below, velocity in the rear is slightly higher than

the other test sections, which agrees with the previous pressure graphs and common sense, as it

is closer to the source of wind tunnel velocity generation. The velocity decreases as the flow

advances through the section, and increased RPM results in a linear increase of velocity.

160.00
140.00
120.00
100.00

Velocity (ft/s) 80.00

60.00
40.00
20.00
0.00
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800

RPM

Velocity F Linear (Velocity F) Velocity M

Linear (Velocity M) Velocity R Linear (Velocity R)

Figure 5: Velocity vs. RPM (empty)

With the introduction of a blockage into the wind tunnel, the results become slightly different

from previous readings, but fall in line with assumptions. Logically, there is slightly less fitting

to the trend line for data points taken in the middle section, as the blockage was placed in the

middle of the test section. Since the flow is returning to normal speed, after passing the

blockage, the front section should have a similar velocity to the rear section, where the flow

originates.
 140.00

120.00

100.00

80.00
Velocity (ft/s)
60.00

40.00

20.00

0.00
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800

RPM

Velocity F Linear (Velocity F) Velocity M

Linear (Velocity M) Velocity R Linear (Velocity R)

Figure 6: Velocity vs. RPM (w/ Disk)

Only three points were taken for measuring the boundary layer thickness and displacement

thickness. Experimentally, it is difficult to find the exact point where the flow velocity at the wall

is .99 of the overall velocity. Therefore, the points taken are not necessarily in line with

boundary layer theory, though they do have a similar trend line solution.
 3.5 0.8
3 0.7
2.5 0.6
0.5
2
Boundary Layer Thickness (in) 0.4 Displacement Thickness (in)
1.5
0.3
1 0.2
0.5 0.1
0 0
0 100 200300

Length Along Test Section (in)

BL Measured Laminar BL Theory

Turbulent BL Theory BL* Measured
Laminar BL* Theory Turbulent BL* Theory

Figure 7: Boundary Layer Thickness vs. Distance Down Test Section

As expected, drag increased exponentially with an increase in velocity. However, the drag

measured was higher than the theoretical value, which most likely stems from the fact that the

wind tunnel does not always have completely consistent speeds, overshooting expected velocity.
 8

Drag (lbs) 4

0
0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 120.00 140.00 160.00

Velocity (ft/s)

Experimental Drag Polynomial (Experimental Drag)

Theoretical Drag Logarithmic (Theoretical Drag)

Figure 8: Drag vs. Velocity

As velocity increased, the turbulence intensity decreased then relatively levels out around 0.003.

This is indicative of the flow reaching a steady state regardless of velocity increases.

0.009
0.008
0.007
0.006
0.005
Turbulence Intensity 0.004
0.003
0.002
0.001
0.000
-40.000 10.000 60.000 110.000 160.000

Velocity (ft/s)

Figure 9: Ti vs. Velocity

The data collected for Strouhal vs. Reynolds number indicates a sharp increase around a

Reynolds number of 75, followed by a plateau of a Strouhal number of 0.2. This relatively fit
theoretical expectations, with extraneous points most likely being the result of changing

temperature as the experiment progressed.

0.25

0.2

0.15

Strouhal Number
0.1

0.05

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Reynolds Number

Measured Theoretical

Figure 10: Reynold's Number vs. Strouhal

As the graph shows, as temperature inside the wind tunnel increases the velocity measured

decreases. Therefore, as the hotwire moves through the wind tunnel to warmer areas, the

velocity measured decreases in a linear fashion. However, velocity only varies by two feet per

second at its greatest disparity, which is relatively small compared to the overall velocity.
 30

25

20

15
Position (in)

10

0
95 95.5 96 96.5 97 97.5 98

Velocity (ft/s)

Up Linear (Up)
Down Linear (Down)

Figure 11: Velocity vs Position

Turbulence intensity is almost static in value until the anemometer gets close to the wall, which

can be considered the boundary layer. It is understandable that the further a flow gets from

being unrestricted, the greater the intensity of the turbulence at the location.
 30

25

20

Position (in) 15
Down
10 Up

0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.01

Ti

Figure 12: Turbulence Intensity vs Position

Below is a time trace of the velocity measured over one quarter second interval. The velocity

measured moves in a wave function, where the average velocity is roughly 135.5 ft/s and

turbulence varied up to 1 ft/s away from the average.

155

154.5

154

153.5

153
Velocity (ft/s)
152.5

152

151.5

151

150.5
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25

Time (s)

Figure 13: Time Trace

Conclusions

It was determined that the introduction of a disk into the wind tunnel causes pressure to drop in

the middle section of the wind tunnel versus the front and rear, which is to be expected when

introducing an object into the flow. Drag force exerted on the disk increases exponentially with

velocity, which makes sense as the two are connected in a similar way theoretically. Turbulence

intensity increases at a decaying exponential rate in the wind tunnel, which fits initial

expectations. Strouhals number vs. Reynolds number matched the shape of the expected curve,

but did not have the same slope at the beginning. At higher speeds, it matched the leveling off at

0.2 determined from other experiments. However, at low speeds, the ratio did spiked higher

than the expected amounts.