ABSTRACT

Airflow instruments are widely used in aviation, automotive and related industries for the purpose of velocity
measurements in fluid flows, Understand the flow patterns and calibrations. Pitot static tubs and the yaw probes
are prominent among them. Pitot static tubes are used in aviation and flight instrument applications for the
velocity measurement other than the wind tunnel experiments. Yaw probes are the most accepted method for
the measurement of flow angularity, measuring trajectory and commonly used in industrial applications such
as velocity and flow calibration rigs and particulate samplers. Measurement of the sensitivity of a pitot -static
tube to misalignment is essential for the compensate for the errors in the experimental measurements and use
if for the commercial applications in the industry. Calibration of the yaw probes are important in the
experimental applications in order to Get the desired angularity of the flow and obtain a correct measure for
the experimental purposes. In the experiment the dynamic pressures calculated from the pitot measurements
are plotted against the angle of attack and the for the erect and inverted position of the angle of attack yaw
head was plotted. Maximum angular displacement for a pitot to maintain the reading below the error of 5%,
Instrument error for the yaw head, airstream inclination and yaw head calibration factor was calculated .In
the experiment it was found out that after a value of angular displacement pitot static tube gives a error reading
above 5% and values for the instrument error, airstream inclination angle and calibration factors can be
calculated using graphical methods and that can be used to calibrate the yaw heads in wind tunnel experiments.

i
 TABLE OF CONTENT
ABSTRACT......................................................................................................................................................... i

TABLE OF CONTENT ...................................................................................................................................... ii

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................... iv

LIST OF TABLES ...............................................................................................................................................v

ACRONYMS ..................................................................................................................................................... vi

NOMENCLATURE ......................................................................................................................................... vii

1. INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................................1

1.2 Aim ............................................................................................................................................................2

1.3 Objectives ..................................................................................................................................................2

2. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP ..............................................................................................................................3

3. THEORY .........................................................................................................................................................5

3.1 Measurement of Dynamic Pressure Practically .........................................................................................5

3.2 Measurement of Dynamic Pressure Theoretically .....................................................................................5

3.3 Instrument Error .........................................................................................................................................5

3.4 Airstream Inclination .................................................................................................................................5

3.5 Calibration Factor ......................................................................................................................................5

4. PROCEDURE ..................................................................................................................................................6

4.1 Experiment 1.1 ...........................................................................................................................................6

4.2 Experiment 1.2 ...........................................................................................................................................6

5. OBSERVATIONS ...........................................................................................................................................7

5.1 Observation of Experiment 1.1 ..................................................................................................................7

5.2 Observation of Experiment 1.2 ..................................................................................................................8

6. CALCULATIONS ...........................................................................................................................................9

6.1 Practical Dynamic Pressure Calculation for Pitot ......................................................................................9

ii
 6.2 Theoretical Dynamic Pressure Calculation for Pitot ..................................................................................9

6.2 Graphical Representation of Dynamic Pressure Vs AOA for Pitot .........................................................10

6.3 Graphical Representation of Error Percentage Vs Angular Displacement for Pitot ................................10

6.3 Pressure Difference Calculation for Yaw Probe ......................................................................................11

6.4 Dynamic pressure calculation ..................................................................................................................11

6.5 Graphical representation and Instrument Error ........................................................................................11

6.6 Graphical Representation and Airstream Inclination ...............................................................................12

6.7 Calibration Factor Calculation .................................................................................................................12

7. DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................................................13

7.2 Effect of the Angle Between the Pitot- static Tube and the Direction of Airflow. ..................................13

7.2 Advantages and disadvantages of having permanently mounted pitot -static probes in small scale wind
tunnels ............................................................................................................................................................14

7.3 Use of Yaw probes in flow instrumentation ............................................................................................14

7.4 Airstream Error and accuracy of the Experimental data. .........................................................................14

8. CONCLUSION ..............................................................................................................................................15

9. REFERENCE.................................................................................................................................................16

10. APPENDIX ..................................................................................................................................................17

A – Dynamic pressure calculations ................................................................................................................17

B – ΔP/q Calculations for Erect and Invert AOA ..........................................................................................18

C - RPM vs Velocity Chart ............................................................................................................................19

D - MATLAB® Codes for Plotting and Area Calculation ..............................................................................20

iii
 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 AEROLAB Educational Wind Tunnel ..................................................................................................3

Figure 2 AEROLAB Pitot-Static Probe ...............................................................................................................4

Figure 3 AEROLAB Cylindrical Yaw probe .......................................................................................................4

Figure 4 Dynamic pressure Vs AoA ..................................................................................................................10

Figure 5 Error percentage vs angular displacement ...........................................................................................10

Figure 6 Instrument error Graphical representation ...........................................................................................11

Figure 7 Airstream Inclination graphical representation ...................................................................................12

Figure 8 RPM vs Velocity graph .......................................................................................................................19

iv
 LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Observations for experiment 1.1 ............................................................................................................7

Table 2 Observation for experiment 1.2 .............................................................................................................8

Table 3 Dynamic pressure calculations for another AOA .................................................................................17

Table 4 ΔP/q Calculations for Erect and Invert AOA.......................................................................................18

v
 ACRONYMS

AOA Angle of attack

RPM Revolutions per minute

OD Outside Diameter

vi
 NOMENCLATURE

g Acceleration due to gravity

Cd Coefficient of drag

ρ∞ density of freestream air

ρ density of manometer liquid

q∞ freestream dynamic pressure

P∞ freestream pressure

V∞ freestream velocity

V Local velocity

µ Dynamic viscosity

Δh manometer liquid rise

P0 room pressure

P static pressure

vii
1. INTRODUCTION
Pitot static tube is an integration of a pitot tube and static tube. Pitot tube senses the total pressure while the
static probe measures the static pressure. Using the values, it gets a reading for dynamic pressure which leaded
to measure the flow velocity. The main reason for the errors in a pitot probe is misalignments and turbulences.
The main problem in the part one of the experiment is to identify the amount that the pitot static tube is allowed
to misalign from the correct reading position to maintain an error value below the 5%. However, the pitot static
tubes are not designed for the turbulence conditions therefore a slight change in the steady nature gets a
reasonable accuracy error in the actual measurement. (Conner,1937)

Yaw probes are commonly used in Wind tunnel experiments. Flow angularity and the trajectory measurements
are measured by yaw probes. Before the measurements they need to calibrate according to the references. Yaw
probe calibration is done for pitch angle and yaw angle which can be set to zero reference to the flow direction.
If the calibration is done inside a large wind tunnel it is possible to have an increment od 5 degrees. For small
tunnels it varies from 2 degrees to 10 degrees. And most of the yaw probes are 2 and 3 dimensional and typical
yaw probe calibrations are done for zero yaw with pith calibration varies. (Unitedsensorcorp.com, 2018)

Wind tunnel analytical calculations are considered as the most accurate method for obtaining aerodynamic data
for a geometry. The purpose of a wind tunnel is to test aerodynamic concepts in a controlled environment using
visualization and /or measurement techniques. Aerodynamic properties on a geometry is calculated typically
by obtaining the pressure values using pressure measurement instruments at critical tapping positions. But in
practice except for educational simple experiments it uses other sensing devices commercially used rather than
using large amount of pressure taps and accuracy matters. (Grc.nasa.gov, 2018).

The main purpose of this experiment is to get an idea about the measurement errors with the angular
displacement in the Pitot static probes, yaw probe calibration and error parameters such as instrument error,
airstream inclination and calibration factor Understand the possibility of application of the above parameters to
get an accurate result using the calibrated instruments in the wind tunnel experiments.

Among the notable text conditions and underlying assumptions, this experiment is done in an educational wind
tunnel in the standard room temperature assuming that there is no temperature change and precision is not much
accurate like a commercial wind tunnel and there are power stability problems which can affect the rpm and
flow speed of the wind tunnel. And, this experiment is one of the most basic type in the educational wind
tunnels. Instructor gave us a good guide for the success and make us knowledgeable about the experiment.
(Rae,1984)

1
1.2 Aim

The main aim of the experiment is to measure the sensitivity of a pitot-static tube to misalignment and to
calibrate the cylindrical yaw probe mounted in the wind tunnel test section.

1.3 Objectives

The objective of the experiment is to plot the dynamic pressure read by the pitot-static tube as a function of
angle of attack, plot the yaw head angle of attack for the erect and the inverted position. And determine the
maximum angular displacement for a pitot static tube to maintain the dynamic pressure reading within 0.5% of
its value when aligned with the flow, Instrument error of the yaw head, Airstream inclination and the calibration
factor of the yaw head.

2
2. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
The main apparatus used in this experiment is the AEROLAB ® educational wind tunnel. This is an open loop
wind tunnel with text section dimensions of 30.5cm x 30.5cm x 61cm. made of Anodized aluminum structure
integrated with a yaw table. The powerplant of this wind tunnel is a 10 HP 3 phase electric motor which can
generate an airflow range of 4.5 ms-1 to 65 ms-1 upwards and turbulence level of 0.2%. When consider about
the data acquisition system, it is integrated with a computer which can analyze the pressures, angle of attack
and force/ momentum balance data. It also has a manual system to measure the pressure using a liquid multitube
manometer. (ARROLAB ,2018)

Figure 1 AEROLAB Educational Wind Tunnel

When consider about the wind tunnel there are five basic components in this type of open loop educational
wind tunnel they are settling chamber, contraction cone, test section, Diffuser And drive section. Settling
chamber is a honey combed shaped mesh which straightens the inlet airflow and reduce the turbulence. The
contraction cone delivers large amount of airflow and increase the wind speed. The test section is the place the
model is mounted for experimenting. The diffuser is at the end and it maintains the airflow smoothly and
slowdowns the air until it exits. In the drive section the fan is mounted, and it gives the power to flow the air it
blows air out and this configuration provides an efficient and less turbulence flow relative to the air blow in.
(Science Buddies, 2018).

The main instrument used in the experiment is AEROLAB® pitot static probe. It has one round tip total pressure
tap and 6 static ports it goes to a distance of 6.6 cm forward from the bend and has an extension of 33 cm to the
bend. It also has an OD of 3.175 mm. this is specially designed for the AEROLAB® educational wind tunnel
with necessary tubing to connect the manometer. (AROLAB ,2018)

3
 Figure 2 AEROLAB Pitot-Static Probe

The main instrument for the second part of the experiment is the AEROLAB® Yaw probe. It has an overall
®
length of 26.7 cm with a outside diameter of 3.175 mm and it can be easily mounted with AEROLAB
Educational wind tunnel test section. The tapping ports are located in a triangle and they can be adjusted after
its calibrated. Its supplied with necessary tubing to connect it with manometer the machined aluminum triangle
can be seen the port orientation from the outside of the text section. It leads to a quick and accurate angular
changes.

Figure 3 AEROLAB Cylindrical Yaw probe

4
3. THEORY
3.1 Measurement of Dynamic Pressure Practically

Pitot static probes measure the total pressure of the tapping point relative to airflow static pressure. By using
the static ports in the pitot static tube, it can obtain a value for the dynamic pressure

Dynamic pressure = Total pressure − static pressure (1)

3.2 Measurement of Dynamic Pressure Theoretically

Dynamic pressure can be calculated using the below equation

1 (2)
𝑞 = 𝜌𝑣 2
2

3.3 Instrument Error

Instrument error of the yaw head is defined as the accuracy and the precision of a measuring instrument when
taken as a combination. If a measuring instrument gives a reading value which has a deviation from the actual
value of the situation it is considered as an instrument error.

3.4 Airstream Inclination

Airstream inclination is the deviation of the airflow (streamline direction) from the reference axis of the wind
tunnel test section. In complex wind tunnels it can be adjusted using the rotation axis of the fan and other
techniques. Anemometer measurements are used to properly calibrate the airstream Inclination. (Roy, Herald
and Ballif, 1937).

3.5 Calibration Factor

Calibration Factor is defined as the amount needed to multiply the measured value of a measuring instrument
in order to obtain the actual value of the phenomena. It is also called response factor. It can be obtained from a
graph by

CF = (Standard peak area / Standard concentration)

5
4. PROCEDURE

4.1 Experiment 1.1

Pitot static tube is mounted into the aluminum threaded test section window insert. And the probe’s intersection
depth and pith angle with the outer portion of the brass fitting is adjusted while ensuring that the pitot static
tube is at zero angle of attack using an inclinometer.

Leads are connected to two ports on the 24-tube multi manometer and run the tunnel for 900RPM to measure
and record the static pressures at the pitot static tube. Angle of attack is incremented by 2.5 degrees until 20
degrees and recorded the results.

4.2 Experiment 1.2

In the same manner as the pitot static tube described earlier in the experiment 1.1, yaw head is mounted and run
the wind tunnel at 900RPM and recorded the pressure at the two ports. Angle of attack is increased with angle
of attack of 2 degrees increments until 20 degrees and results are recorded.

The yaw head is inserted through the opening of the other side of the test section and invert results are obtained
and repeated the above procedure.

6
5. OBSERVATIONS
5.1 Observation of Experiment 1.1
Table 1 Observations for experiment 1.1

Angle of Attack P0 P1

-20 0.15 1.7

-17.5 0.11 1.65
-15 0.11 1.64
-12.5 0.11 1.71
-10 0.11 1.64
-7.5 0.11 1.64
-5 0.05 1.64
-2.5 0.05 1.64
0 0.1 1.64
2.5 0.1 1.7
5 0.1 1.65
7.5 0.11 1.65
10 0.15 1.66
12.5 0.15 1.7
15 0.15 1.71
17.5 0.16 1.61
20 0.4 1.75

P0- Total pressure manometer water height

P1- Static pressure manometer water height

7
5.2 Observation of Experiment 1.2
Table 2 Observation for experiment 1.2

Angle of Attack P1 P2 Po

-20 2.35 0.22 2.44

-17.5 2.25 0.22 2.51
-15 2.15 0.31 2.43
-12.5 1.92 0.35 2.43
-10 1.65 0.45 2.5
-7.5 1.45 0.55 2.5
-5 1.17 0.71 2.5
-2.5 1 0.75 2.5
Erect
0 0.65 1.25 2.44
Side
2.5 1.25 0.85 2.4
5 1.2 0.95 2.3
7.5 0.85 1.15 2.3
10 0.72 1.33 2.3
12.5 0.61 1.42 2.3
15 0.43 1.65 2.4
17.5 0.34 1.75 2.4
20 0.32 1.95 2.4
-20 2.92 0.12 2.63
-17.5 2.9 0.13 2.7
-15 2.84 0.1 2.75
-12.5 2.73 0.13 2.9
-10 2.62 0.12 2.9
-7.5 2.55 0.1 2.94
-5 2.5 0.14 2.95
-2.5 2.15 0.25 2.85
Inverted
0 1.95 0.32 2.75
Side
2.5 1.24 0.72 2.61
5 1.12 0.82 2.61
7.5 0.95 1 2.61
10 0.65 1.3 2.61
12.5 0.52 1.65 2.6
15 0.41 1.73 2.6
17.5 0.31 0 2.55
20 0 0 0

P1 - Pressure probe 1 (left probe) manometer water height in inches

P2 – Pressure probe 2 (right probe) manometer water height in inches

P0 – Center probe manometer water height in inches

8
6. CALCULATIONS
6.1 Practical Dynamic Pressure Calculation for Pitot

For the angle of attack 2.5degrees,

P1 = Static pressure manometer water height in meters(Patm-P1) = 1.7×0.0254 = 0.04318 m

P0 = Total pressure manometer water height in meters (Patm-P0) = 0.1×0.0254 = 0.00254m

Dynamic pressure height (P1-P0) = 0.04064m

Gravitational acceleration(g) = 9.81ms-

Density of the manometer liquid = 1000kgm-3

Experimental dynamic pressure (qe),

𝑞𝑒 = (𝑃1 − 𝑃0) × 1000 × 9.81

=398.6784pa.

6.2 Theoretical Dynamic Pressure Calculation for Pitot

Theoretical dynamic pressure (qt)

1
𝑞 = 𝜌𝑣 2
2

Density of the air (ρ∞) = 1.2174kg/m3

Free stream velocity = 24.ms-1 (Appendix C)

=365.3721Pa

Difference in experimental and theoretical values. (qe-qt)

33.3062pa

(33.3062/365.3721) ×100 = 9.1156%

Dynamic pressure calculation for another AOA (Appendix A)

9
6.2 Graphical Representation of Dynamic Pressure Vs AOA for Pitot

Figure 4 Dynamic pressure Vs AoA

6.3 Graphical Representation of Error Percentage Vs Angular Displacement for

Pitot

Figure 5 Error percentage vs angular displacement

aximum angular Displacement = (17.5+12.5)/2 = 15 degrees approximately

10
6.3 Pressure Difference Calculation for Yaw Probe

For erect side AoA of 2.5 degrees,

P1 = Left probe manometer water height in meters (P1) = 1.25 × 0.0254 = 0.03175m

P2 = Right probe manometer water height in meters (P2) = 0.85 × 0.0254 = 0.02159m

Height difference in meters (P1-P2) = 0.03175m-0.02159m = 0.01016m

Pressure Difference in left and right probes = (P1-P2) ×ρ×g = 0.01016×1000×9.81 = 99.6696 Pa

6.4 Dynamic pressure calculation

1
𝑞 = 𝜌𝑣 2
2

= 365.3721 pa

Pressure difference/Dynamic pressure = 0.2727

Calculations for other AoA given in appendix B

6.5 Graphical representation and Instrument Error

Figure 6 Instrument error Graphical representation

11
Intersects at AOA = 9.498 degrees

6.6 Graphical Representation and Airstream Inclination

Figure 7 Airstream Inclination graphical representation

Pressure difference/Dynamic pressure = 0 angle of attacks

For erect

-1.856, 1.544, 6.09 degree angles

For inverted

7.296, 17 degree angles are giving inclination values.

6.7 Calibration Factor Calculation

Calibration factor is calculated bay taking the gradient for the graph near zero yaw angle.

For erect graph gradient = 0.0511

For Invert graph gradient = – 0.4706

(appendix D)

12
7. DISCUSSION
7.2 Effect of the Angle Between the Pitot- static Tube and the Direction of
Airflow.

According to the graph It is difficult to see any relationship between the parameters. However, the expected
behavior is closer to the AOA zero values the error percentage should be less and when it moves outward from
the zero-error percentage tends to increase creating a more error in the reading. Addition of this errors show
that at higher AOA values are not accurate and reliable.

When consider about the experimental dynamic pressure Values in the appendix A we can see a slight variation
of higher to the low. This shows that increasing the angle fluid particle impact pressure tends to reduce from
where it obtains the highest value in the zero. That means the reference angle between the AOA and the airflow
direction increases. Main reason for this is only an angular component is affected for the generation of the
momentum change in the impacting fluid particle by deviating from the airflow direction.

It is also important to discuss about the effect of different head shapes where it decides the ability to measure
in range of an angles. The AEROLAB probe is a rounded tip axisymmetric has less ability to give correct
readings at higher AOA However based on errors such as parallax error, high turbulence and measuring before
the flow stabilize is the reason for the bad experimental representation.

13
7.2 Advantages and disadvantages of having permanently mounted pitot -static
probes in small scale wind tunnels

When consider about the advantages of permanent pitot – static probes It is easy to use and time efficient.
Permanently installed probes are pre-calibrated to the optimum flow condition and the inclination of the flow
direction. therefore, it’s not needed to calibrate the probe according to the direction of the airflow and
compensate according to the flow direction.

Static probes are high in cost and safety factor is essential when handling. For a built-in probe avoids the risk
of damage by physical handling and human mistakes. As it is a high sensitive device its essential to keep safe
without external factors such as dust and small particles to maintain a high precision in measuring. Therefore,
it avoids the risk of damage by external substances.

When consider about the possible disadvantages, in a case pf part replacement entire section has to be removes
and it takes high cost and technical skills.

7.3 Use of Yaw probes in flow instrumentation

Main purpose of the yaw probe is measuring the flow angularity and the measurement of trajectory. Due to
flow inclination of the wind tunnels the angle of the moving flow direction tends to deviate from the reference
values. (Sensing Precision, 2018)

Due to various reasons such as Wall effects, eddies and the misalignment in fans wind tunnels give airflow
streamlines that are not along with the test section boundaries. In this scenario yaw probes are used to calibrate
the flow angularity and obtain the correct readings from the sensing devices. It is also used on behalf of the
anemometer. To get a correct airflow axis.

7.4 Airstream Error and accuracy of the Experimental data.

14
According to the values obtained It can be seen that there are many points of intersection for the erect and
inverted curves. This can be purely happened because of the practical error. It can be considerable if it has a
single value for each curve However, by obtaining several values it shows a large error in the experiment
measurements.

Airstream error occurred due to the inclination of the airstream. Taping poison of the test section doesn’t change
with the side it attaches to the test section therefore it should have the same value for the erect and invert sides.
Airstreams are common to the test section from the erect and the invert sides.

However, it shows that it doesn’t match the same value this happened due to the error in the observation, errors
in the measurement such as parallax error and turbulences in the flow, wall effects and taking measurements
before the wind tunnel become steady can be the possible reasons for the above errors.

In the graphical representation there can be seen more inclination points this shows that the accuracy of the
obtained readings is not trustworthy and reading errors can be happened. Also, in the pitot tube experiment the
error percentages are much higher than the expected.

8. CONCLUSION
Pitot static probes are the most common method for measuring the flow velocity. Due to the angle changes there
can be deviations from the actual reading when calculating the velocity. Pitot static head shape decides the
range that can capture the value with a reasonable accuracy with the inherent change in the angle of attack. Yaw
probes are the most prominent method used in the measurement of flow angularity. Instrument errors can be
calculated using the graphical method for yaw head and the airstream inclination also can be captured by using
the Yaw head. Near the zero degree angles the dynamic pressure gets a higher values because it impacts with
the full velocity of the airflow than any inclination.

15
9. REFERENCE
1. Anderson Jr, John David. Fundamentals of aerodynamics, Tata McGraw-Hill Education, 1985.
2. Conner, N. W., Construction and Calibration of the V.P.I. Wind Tunnel, Bulletin of the Virginia
Polytechnic Institute, vol. 30, no. 9, July 1937, pp. 1-32.
3. Grc.nasa.gov. (2018). The Lift Coefficient. [online] Available at: https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-
12/airplane/liftco.html [Accessed 29 April 2018].
4. Rae, William H. Jr., Pope, Alan. Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing. John Wiley & Sons, 1984.
5. Yaw probe - Aerolab. [online] Aerolab. Available at: https://www.aerolab.com/products/flat-plate-
and-mouse/ [Accessed 29 Apr. 2018].
6. Science Buddies. (2018). Science Buddies: How to Build and Use a Subsonic Wind Tunnel. [online]
Available at: https://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/references/how-to-build-a-wind-
tunnel [Accessed 29 Apr. 2018].
7. http://www.unitedsensorcorp.com/calibration.html [Accessed 8 May 2018].
8. Roy, H., Herald and Ballif, S. (1937). EFFECT OF YAW ON VANE ANEMOMETERS. Journal of
Research of the national Bureau of Standards, Volume 19(RESEARCH PAPER RP1056).
9. Sensing Precision. (2018). Yaw Probes - Sensing Precision. [online] Available at: https://sensing-
precision.com/product/yaw-probes/ [Accessed 8 May 2018].

16
10. APPENDIX
A – Dynamic pressure calculations
Table 3 Dynamic pressure calculations for another AOA

Angle of Attack P1 P1 (meters) P0 P0(meters) P1-P0(m) qe qt qe-qt percentage

-20 1.7 0.04318 0.15 0.00381 0.03937 386.2197 365.372175 20.847525 5.70583269
-17.5 1.65 0.04191 0.11 0.002794 0.039116 383.72796 365.372175 18.355785 5.023859576
-15 1.64 0.041656 0.11 0.002794 0.038862 381.23622 365.372175 15.864045 4.341886461
-12.5 1.71 0.043434 0.11 0.002794 0.04064 398.6784 365.372175 33.306225 9.11569826
-10 1.64 0.041656 0.11 0.002794 0.038862 381.23622 365.372175 15.864045 4.341886461
-7.5 1.64 0.041656 0.11 0.002794 0.038862 381.23622 365.372175 15.864045 4.341886461
-5 1.64 0.041656 0.05 0.00127 0.040386 396.18666 365.372175 30.814485 8.433725146
-2.5 1.64 0.041656 0.05 0.00127 0.040386 396.18666 365.372175 30.814485 8.433725146
0 1.64 0.041656 0.1 0.00254 0.039116 383.72796 365.372175 18.355785 5.023859576
2.5 1.7 0.04318 0.1 0.00254 0.04064 398.6784 365.372175 33.306225 9.11569826
5 1.65 0.04191 0.1 0.00254 0.03937 386.2197 365.372175 20.847525 5.70583269
7.5 1.65 0.04191 0.11 0.002794 0.039116 383.72796 365.372175 18.355785 5.023859576
10 1.66 0.042164 0.15 0.00381 0.038354 376.25274 365.372175 10.880565 2.977940233
12.5 1.7 0.04318 0.15 0.00381 0.03937 386.2197 365.372175 20.847525 5.70583269
15 1.71 0.043434 0.15 0.00381 0.039624 388.71144 365.372175 23.339265 6.387805804
17.5 1.61 0.040894 0.16 0.004064 0.03683 361.3023 365.372175 -4.069875 -1.113898452
20 1.75 0.04445 0.4 0.01016 0.03429 336.3849 365.372175 -28.987275 -7.933629593

17
 P1 probe P1 probe P2 probe P2 probe P0 (center) Probe P0 (center)probe pressure difference
pressure
Angle of Attack manometer manoeter Manometer manometer height manometer height manometer height P1-P2 Dynamic pressure /Dynamic
difference
height inches height meters Height inches meters inches Meters pressure
-20 2.35 0.05969 0.22 0.005588 2.44 0.061976 0.054102 530.74062 365.372175 1.452602733
-17.5 2.25 0.05715 0.22 0.005588 2.51 0.063754 0.051562 505.82322 365.372175 1.384405422
-15 2.15 0.05461 0.31 0.007874 2.43 0.061722 0.046736 458.48016 365.372175 1.25483053
-12.5 1.92 0.048768 0.35 0.00889 2.43 0.061722 0.039878 391.20318 365.372175 1.070697789
-10 1.65 0.04191 0.45 0.01143 2.5 0.0635 0.03048 299.0088 365.372175 0.818367737
-7.5 1.45 0.03683 0.55 0.01397 2.5 0.0635 0.02286 224.2566 365.372175 0.613775803
-5 1.17 0.029718 0.71 0.018034 2.5 0.0635 0.011684 114.62004 365.372175 0.313707632
Errect -2.5 1 0.0254 0.75 0.01905 2.5 0.0635 0.00635 62.2935 365.372175 0.170493279
side 0 0.65 0.01651 1.25 0.03175 2.44 0.061976 -0.01524 -149.5044 365.372175 -0.409183868
(Red) 2.5 1.25 0.03175 0.85 0.02159 2.4 0.06096 0.01016 99.6696 365.372175 0.272789246
5 1.2 0.03048 0.95 0.02413 2.3 0.05842 0.00635 62.2935 365.372175 0.170493279
7.5 0.85 0.02159 1.15 0.02921 2.3 0.05842 -0.00762 -74.7522 365.372175 -0.204591934
10 0.72 0.018288 1.33 0.033782 2.3 0.05842 -0.015494 -151.99614 365.372175 -0.4160036
12.5 0.61 0.015494 1.42 0.036068 2.3 0.05842 -0.020574 -201.83094 365.372175 -0.552398222
15 0.43 0.010922 1.65 0.04191 2.4 0.06096 -0.030988 -303.99228 365.372175 -0.832007199
17.5 0.34 0.008636 1.75 0.04445 2.4 0.06096 -0.035814 -351.33534 365.372175 -0.961582091

18
20 0.32 0.008128 1.95 0.04953 2.4 0.06096 -0.041402 -406.15362 365.372175 -1.111616176
-20 2.92 0.074168 0.12 0.003048 2.63 0.066802 0.07112 697.6872 365.372175 1.90952472
-17.5 2.9 0.07366 0.13 0.003302 2.7 0.06858 0.070358 690.21198 365.372175 1.889065526
-15 2.84 0.072136 0.1 0.00254 2.75 0.06985 0.069596 682.73676 365.372175 1.868606333
B – ΔP/q Calculations for Erect and Invert AOA

-12.5 2.73 0.069342 0.13 0.003302 2.9 0.07366 0.06604 647.8524 365.372175 1.773130097
-10 2.62 0.066548 0.12 0.003048 2.9 0.07366 0.0635 622.935 365.372175 1.704932785
-7.5 2.55 0.06477 0.1 0.00254 2.94 0.074676 0.06223 610.4763 365.372175 1.67083413
-5 2.5 0.0635 0.14 0.003556 2.95 0.07493 0.059944 588.05064 365.372175 1.609456549
Inverted -2.5 2.15 0.05461 0.25 0.00635 2.85 0.07239 0.04826 473.4306 365.372175 1.295748917
Table 4 ΔP/q Calculations for Erect and Invert AOA

side 0 1.95 0.04953 0.32 0.008128 2.75 0.06985 0.041402 406.15362 365.372175 1.111616176
(Blue) 2.5 1.24 0.031496 0.72 0.018288 2.61 0.066294 0.013208 129.57048 365.372175 0.354626019
5 1.12 0.028448 0.82 0.020828 2.61 0.066294 0.00762 74.7522 365.372175 0.204591934
7.5 0.95 0.02413 1 0.0254 2.61 0.066294 -0.00127 -12.4587 365.372175 -0.034098656
10 0.65 0.01651 1.3 0.03302 2.61 0.066294 -0.01651 -161.9631 365.372175 -0.443282524
12.5 0.52 0.013208 1.65 0.04191 2.6 0.06604 -0.028702 -281.56662 365.372175 -0.770629619
15 0.41 0.010414 1.73 0.043942 2.6 0.06604 -0.033528 -328.90968 365.372175 -0.900204511
17.5 0.31 0.007874 0 0 2.55 0.06477 0.007874 77.24394 365.372175 0.211411665
20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 365.372175 0
C - RPM vs Velocity Chart

Figure 8 RPM vs Velocity graph

19
D - MATLAB® Codes for Plotting and Area Calculation

MATLAB® codes

Graph 1

x = a;

//a = Angle of attack value

y = b;

//b = Dynamic pressure values

plot (x, y)

Graph 2

a = c = Angle of attack values

b = Erect side values Δp/q

d = Invert side values Δp/q

x1=a;

x2=c;

y1=b;

y2=d;

plot (x1, y1)

hold on

plot (x2, y2)

plot (x1, y1,'r')

hold on

plot (x2, y2,'b')

legend Erect Inverted

g = gradient (y1)

g2 = gradient (y2)

20