Search results

Filters

  • Journals
  • Authors
  • Keywords
  • Date
  • Type

Search results

Number of results: 7
items per page: 25 50 75
Sort by:
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

This paper presents the design method and the construction details of a subsonic low-speed wind tunnel, which has been designed to achieve the flow velocity of 35 m/s in the measurement section with expected uniform velocity field at its inlet. To achieve such objectives a very detailed design was performed using a theoretical 1D analysis and computational fluid dynamics simulations. This approach was applied to improve the flow quality along the wind tunnel sections. When the wind tunnel has been launched a direct comparison of the experimentally measured flow field in the test section and numerical simulation results was conducted. Such comparison of the simulation results with the experimental one is presented in this paper. The obtained results confirm that assumed wind tunnel design method was correct, i.e. the pressure drop in the wind tunnel has been predicted very well and drive system is effective and sufficient to accelerate the airflow to required values.
Go to article

Bibliography

[1] Barlow J.B., Rae Jr W.H., Pope A.: Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing. John Wiley and Sons; New York 1999.
[2] Bradshaw P., Pankhurst R.C.: The design of low-speed wind tunnels. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 5(1964), 1–69.
[3] Anderson J.D. Jr.: Fundamentals of Aerodynamics (5th Edn.). McGraw-Hill; 2011.
[4] Kneba Z.: Modeling of the internal combustion engine cooling system. Arch. Thermodyn. 40(2019), 3, 109–121.
[5] Muszynski T., Andrzejczyk R., Park W.I., Dorao C.A.: Heat transfer and pressure drop characteristics of the silicone-based plate heat exchanger. Arch. Thermodyn. 40(2019), 1, 127–143.
[6] Mehta J., Bradshaw P.: Design rules for small low speed wind tunnels. Aeronaut. J. 83(1979), 827, 443–453.
[7] Stathopoulos T.: Design and fabrication of a wind tunnel for building aerodynamics. J. Wind Eng. Ind Aerod. 16(1984), 2–3, 361–376.
[8] Cattafesta L., Bahr C., Mathew J.: Fundamentals of wind-tunnel design. In: Encyclopedia of Aerospace Engineering. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken 2010.
[9] Bell J.H., Mehta R.D.: Boundary-layer predictions for small low-speed contractions. AIAA J. 27(1989), 3, 372–374.
[10] Noor A., Ed.: Wind Tunnel Designs and their Diverse Engineering Applications. IntechOpen, 2013.
[11] Discetti S., Ianiro A., Aref H.: Experimental Aerodynamics. CRC Press – Taylor & Francis Group; Boca Raton 2017.
[12] Idelchik I.E.: Handbook of Hydraulic Resistance. Coefficients of Local Resistance and of Friction. US Atomic Energy Commission and the National Science Foundation. Washington DC 1966.
[13] Ansys Fluent Fluid Simulation Software https://www.ansys.com/products/fluids/ ansys-fluent (access: 5 Jan. 2020).
[14] Ansys Meshing https://www.ansys.com/products/platform/ansys-meshing (access: 5 Jan. 2020).
[15] Ochrymiuk T.: Numerical analysis of microholes film/effusion cooling effectiveness. J. Therm. Sci. 26(2017), 5, 459–464.
[16] Szwaba R., Ochrymiuk T., Lewandowski T., Czerwinska J.: Experimental investigation of microscale effects in perforated plate aerodynamics. J. Fluids Eng. 135(2013), 12, 121104-1-10
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Ryszard Szwaba
1
Krzysztof Hinc
1
Tomasz Ochrymiuk
1
Zbigniew Krzemianowski
1
Piotr Doerffer
1
Marcin Kurowski
1

  1. Institute of Fluid Flow Machinery, Polish Academy of Sciences, Fiszera 14, 80-231 Gdansk, Poland
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The paper presents numerical simulations related to the problem of how to obtain correct results in transonic wind tunnel during tests at high airfoil angles of attack. At this flow conditions, significant pressure losses appear in the test section, what leads to significant errors in measured data. Regarding the possible ways of tunnel reconstruction, we examined three different possibilities of changing the test section configurations: an increase of the test section height, displacement of the airfoil below the tunnel centreline and, finally, introduction of divergent test section walls. It was shown that neither the use of higher test section, nor the change of the airfoil location, gives any significant improvement in reference to the existing tunnel configuration. Only after divergent test section walls were introduced, the distributions of pressure coefficient became well consistent with their expected values.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Witold Selerowicz
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The following paper presents wind tunnel investigation of aerodynamic characteristics of hovering propellers. This propulsion system may be applied on a lightweight Quad Plane VTOL (Vertical Take-Off and Landing) UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle). A Quad Plane is a configuration consisting of a quadcopter design combined with a conventional twin-boom airplane. This kind of design should therefore incorporate the advantages of both types of vehicles in terms of agility and long endurance. However, those benefits may come with a cost of worse performance and higher energy consumption. The characteristics of a fixed-wing aircraft and propellers in axial inflow are well documented, less attention is put to non-axial flow cases. VTOL propellers of a hybrid UAV are subject to a multitude of conditions – various inflow speeds and angles, changing RPMs, interference between propellers and between nearby aerodynamic structures. The tested system presented in this article consists of four electric motors with two coaxial pairs of propellers mounted on one of the fuselage beams. Such a configuration is often chosen by designers of small and medium hybrid UAVs. There is a need for studies of clean, efficient ways of transporting, and this article can aid future designers of a new type of electric UAVs.
Go to article

Bibliography

  1.  A.M. Kamal and A. Ramirez-Serrano, “A. Design methodology for hybrid (VTOL + Fixed Wing) unmanned aerial vehicles,” Aeronaut. Aerosp Open Access J., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 165–176, 2018, doi: 10.15406/aaoaj.2018.02.00047.
  2.  A.S. Saeed, A.B. Younes, C. Cai, and G. Cai, “A survey of hybrid unmanned aerial vehicles,” Prog. Aerosp. Sci., vol. 98, pp. 91–105, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.paerosci.2018.03.007.
  3.  A. Bacchini and E. Cestino, “Electric vtol configurations comparison,” Aerospace, vol. 6, no. 3, 2019, doi: 10.3390/aerospace6030026.
  4.  T. Goetzendorf-Grabowski, A. Tarnowski, M. Figat, J. Mieloszyk, and B. Hernik, “Lightweight unmanned aerial vehicle for emergency medical service – Synthesis of the layout,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part G: J. Aerosp. Eng., vol. 235, pp. 5–21, 2020, doi: 10.1177/0954410020910584.
  5.  S.D. Prior, Optimizing Small Multi-Rotor Unmanned Aircraft. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, 2018.
  6.  G. Avanzini, E.L. de Angelis, and F. Giulietti, “Optimal performance and sizing of a battery-powered aircraft,” Aerosp. Sci. Technol., vol. 59, pp. 132–144, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.ast. 2016.10.015.
  7.  Z. Goraj, A. Frydrychewicz, R. Świtkiewicz, B. Hernik, J. Gadomski, T. Goetzendorf-Grabowski, M. Figat, S. Suchodolski, and W. Chajec, “High altitude long endurance unmanned aerial vehicle of a new generation – A design challenge for a low cost, reliable and high performance aircraft,” Bull. Pol. Acad. Sci. Tech. Sci., vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 173–194, 2004.
  8.  D. Serrano, M. Ren, A.J. Qureshi, and S. Ghaemi, “Effect of disk angle-of-attack on aerodynamic performance of small propellers,” Aerosp.  Sci. Technol., vol. 92, pp. 901–914, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2019.07.022.
  9.  D.G. Koenig, “V/STOL Wind Tunnel Testing,” NASA Ames Research Center, Tech. Rep. TM-85936, 1984.
  10.  S. Xiang, Y.-qiang Liu, G. Tong, W.-ping Zhao, S.-xi Tong, and Y.-dong Li, “An improved propeller design method for the electric aircraft,” Aerosp. Sci. Technol., vol. 78, pp.  488–493, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2018.05.008.
  11.  M. Rostami and A. hamzeh Farajollahi, “Aerodynamic performance of mutual interaction tandem propellers with ducted uav,” Aerosp.  Sci. Technol., vol. 108, p. 106399, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2020.106399.
  12.  A. Bacchini, E. Cestino, B. Van Magill, and D. Verstraete, “Impact of lift propeller drag on the performance of evtol lift + cruise aircraft,” Aerosp. Sci. Technol., vol. 109, p.  106429, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2020.106429.
  13.  M. Cerny and C. Breitsamter, “Investigation of small-scale propellers under non-axial inflow conditions,” Aerosp. Sci. Technol., vol. 106, p. 106048, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2020.106048.
  14.  C.E. Hughes and J.A. Gazzaniga, “Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Performance of High-speed Counterrotation Propellers at Angleof- Attack,” NASA, Tech. Rep. TM-102292, 1989.
  15.  R.E. Kuhn and J.W. Draper, “Investigation of The Aerodynamic Characteristics Of A Model Wing-Propeller Combination And Of The Wing And Propeller Separately At Angles Of Attack Up To 90,” NACA, Tech. Rep. 1263, 1956.
  16.  H.C. McLemore and M.D. Cannon, “Aerodynamic Investigation Of A Four-Blade Propeller Operating Through An Angle-Of-Attack Range From 0 To 180,” NACA, Tech. Rep. 3228, 1954.
  17.  C. Russell, J. Jung, G.C. Willink, and B. Glasner, “Wind Tunnel and Hover Performance Test Results for Multicopter UAS Vehicles,” NASA, Tech. Rep. TM-2018-219758, 2016.
  18.  M.A.J. Kuitche, R.M. Botez, R. Viso, J.C. Maunand, and O.C. Moyao, “Blade element momentum new methodology and wind tunnel test performance evaluation for the UAS-S45 Bàlaam propeller,” CEAS Aeronaut. J., vol. 11, pp. 937–953, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s13272- 020-00462-x.
  19.  J.G. Leishman, Principles of Helicopter Aerodynamics, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, 2006.
  20.  S. Drzewiecki, Theorie Generale de l’Helice. Paris, 1920.
  21.  J.V. Foster and D. Hartman, “High-fidelity multi-rotor unmanned aircraft system (uas) simulation development for trajectory prediction under off-nominal flight dynamics,” in 17th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference. AIAA, 2017, doi: 10.2514/6.2017-3271.
  22.  K. Pobikrowska, “Wind tunnel testing of electric propulsion system for an unmanned vtol aircraft,” Master’s thesis,Warsaw University of Technology, 2019.
  23.  R. Zawiski and M. Błachuta, “Modelling and optimal control system design for quadrotor platform – an extended approach,” Bull. Pol. Acad. Sci. Tech. Sci., vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 535–550, 2014, doi: 10.2478/bpasts-2014-0058.
  24.  M. Tyan, N.V. Nguyen, S. Kim, and J.-W. Lee, “Comprehensive preliminary sizing/resizing method for a fixed wing – vtol electric uav,” Aerosp. Sci. Technol., vol. 71, pp. 30–41, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2017.09.008.
  25.  J.S. Vanderover and K.D. Visser, “Analysis of a contrarotating propeller driven transport aircraft,” 2006, AIAA Student Paper Competition, Syracuse, New York, USA. 31 March–1 April.
  26.  V. Štorch, M. Brada, and J. Nozicka, “Experimental setup for measurement of contra-rotating propellers,” in Proceedings Topical Problems of Fluid Mechanics 2017, D. Šimurda and T. Bodnár, Eds., 2017, pp. 285–294, doi: 10.14311/TPFM.2017.036.
  27.  C.P. Coleman, “A Survey of Theoretical and Experimental Coaxial Rotor Aerodynamic Research,” NASA, Tech. Rep. TP-3675, 1997.
  28.  B. Theys, G. Dimitriadis, P. Hendrick, and J. De Schutter, “Influence of propeller configuration on propulsion system efficiency of multi- rotor unmanned aerial vehicles,” in 2016 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS), 2016, pp.  195–201, doi: 10.1109/ICUAS.2016.7502520.
  29.  J. Roskam, Airplane Aerodynamics and Performance. DARcorporation, 2016.
  30.  J.C. Bell et al., “Development of a test-rig for exploring optimal conditions of small unmanned aerial vehicle co-axial rotor systems,” in International Conference on Manufacturing Engineering Systems, 2010, pp. 439–444.
  31.  W. Zhou, Z. Ning, H. Li, and H. Hu, “An experimental investigation on rotor-to-rotor interactions of small uav propellers,” in 35th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference. AIAA, 2017, doi: 10.2514/6.2017-3744.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Katarzyna Pobikrowska
1
ORCID: ORCID
Tomasz Goetzendorf-Grabowski
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Institute of Aeronautics and Applied Mechanics, Warsaw University of Technology, ul. Nowowiejska 24, 00-665 Warsaw, Poland
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

There is an airflow velocity boundary layer near tunnel wall when the air is flowing in the underground coal mine. The thickness and distribution of the airflow velocity boundary layer could influence the discharge of harmful and toxic gases that enter the ventilating airflow through this flow interface. It may also have a major impact in coal mine gas explosion. The results of field measurements and simulation experimental data are used to research airflow velocity boundary layer in a flat walled mine roadway, which is considered in turn: as unsupported, I-steel sectioned arch or bolted and shot create supported cross section. By referenced to other literature studies that consider boundary layer characteristics and the analysis of on-site and experimental data sets we obtain the corresponding airflow velocity boundary layer characteristics for each of the supported roadway sections. The airflow velocity within the boundary layer increase is assumed to follow a logarithmic law given by the expression: u = a Ln(x) + b. It is concluded that the thickness of the airflow velocity boundary layer is observed to significantly decrease with the airflow center velocity and to increase with roadway wall roughness. The airflow velocity distribution is found to be described by the equation: u = (m1v + n1)Ln(d) + m2v + n2, for the three types coal mine tunnel taking into account the influence of center airflow velocity.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Yonghao Luo
Yangsheng Zhao
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The microphone data collected in aeroacoustic wind tunnel test contains not only desired aeroacoustic signal but also background noise generated by the jet or the valve of the wind tunnel, so the desired aeroacoustic characteristics is difficult to be highlighted due to the low Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR). Classical cross spectral matrix removal can only reduce the microphone self-noise, but its effect is limited for jet noise. Therefore, an Airflow Background Noise Suppression method based on the Ensemble Empirical Mode Decomposition (ABNSEEMD) is proposed to eliminate the influence of background noise on aeroacoustic field reconstruction. The new method uses EEMD to adaptively separate the background noise in microphone data, which has good practicability for increasing SNR of aeroacoustic signal. A localization experiment was conducted by using two loudspeakers in wind tunnel with 80 m/s velocity. Results show that proposed method can filter out the background noise more effectively and improve the SNR of the loudspeakers signal compared with spectral subtraction and cepstrum methods. Moreover, the aeroacoustic field produced by a NACA EPPLER 862 STRUT airfoil model was also measured and reconstructed. Delay-and-sum beamforming maps of aeroacoustic source were displayed after the background noise was suppressed, which further demonstrates the proposed method’s advantage.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Yuanwen Li
1
Min Li
2 3
Daofang Feng
2
Debin Yang
1
Long Wei
4

  1. School of Mechanical Engineering, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, China
  2. Collaborative Innovation Center of Steel Technology, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, China
  3. Key Laboratory of Fluid Interaction with Material, Ministry of Education, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, China
  4. Science and Technology on Reliability and Environment Engineering Laboratory, Beijing Institute of Structure and Environment Engineering, Beijing 100076, China
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The analyses aim to determine aerodynamic force coefficients in the case of airflow around two smooth or rough cylinders positioned at different angles to the direction of wind velocity. Such systems, for instance, may be part of a tubular water slide. The results were compared with the values of the interference coefficient of the cylinders arranged in a row included in Eurocode EN 1991 part 4. The aerodynamic forces of the cylinder systems were determined on the basis of experimental tests conducted in a wind tunnel. To verify the above results, CFD (computational fluid dynamics) simulations were prepared. An important observation is that for the angle of yaw β = 0◦, the negative component of the lift force (lateral) fy is shown, while for the other cases, the situation is opposite and the lateral force points outside the gap (upward). The second is that the results of aerodynamic drag for rough cylinders arranged in a row and calculated according to EN 1991 part 4 may be underestimated. The flow around the pair of smooth cylinders is quite different from that of the rough ones, because during the experiment the first falls into the critical flow regime, while the second has supercritical characteristics.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Agnieszka Padewska-Jurczak
1
ORCID: ORCID
Piotr Szczepaniak
1
ORCID: ORCID
Ryszard Walentyński
1

  1. Faculty of Civil Engineering, Department of Mechanics and Bridges, ul. Akademicka 5, 44-100 Gliwice, Poland

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more