CFD in wind tunnel

 User Name Remember Me Password
 Register Blogs Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 May 14, 2004, 09:35 CFD in wind tunnel #1 Anders Hagberg Guest   Posts: n/a I will make CFD calculations of a ongoing wind tunnel test. The Machnumber is 0.7 - 1.4 and the wind tunnel nozzle is perforated (transonic nozzle). Normally one have to build a very large grid around the free flying object, but how do I do in a wind tunnel. Must I have the nozzle walls in the model? Anyone got experience?

 May 14, 2004, 11:22 Re: CFD in wind tunnel #2 Jarmo Monttinen Guest   Posts: n/a I've done few simulation for models in a supersonic and subsonic tunnel. Depending on the exact conditions and the location of the model in the tunnel, the presence of the tunnel walls may cause a slight change in the free stream direction. We noticed this both during the wind tunnel tests and in CFD. What helped me though was that I was only modeling the centerline of the model and tunnel (ie one z-plane). Fully 3-D computation with reasonable accuracy would have taken way too long... -- Jarmo

 May 17, 2004, 15:15 Re: CFD in wind tunnel #3 Larry Clark Guest   Posts: n/a I would recommend doing the problem both ways and comparing the results with experiment. I have done holographic interferograms in both a supersonic tunnel and in a transonic tunnel and found wall effects in both( ei, in the Mach region around one). Our CFD results agreed with the wind tunnel when the wall was included but did not when the wall was not included. A lot depends upon the size of the model relative to the tunnel cross section.

 May 17, 2004, 16:37 Re: CFD in wind tunnel #4 Anders Hagberg Guest   Posts: n/a Thanks Yes I think I have to model the walls, perhaps it is easier, as I can have a smaller mesh.

 May 18, 2004, 11:30 Re: CFD in wind tunnel #5 Jarmo Monttinen Guest   Posts: n/a I'm not sure if about the savings in gridding.. the domain will be smaller, but you need a good boundary layer grid on the walls. If I remember correctly the total number of cells in the computation with walls ended up being larger than in the no-walls case. -- Jarmo

 May 20, 2004, 09:01 Re: CFD in wind tunnel #6 Anders Hagberg Guest   Posts: n/a Yes your right. The problem may be what I have to do with the holes as the transonic nozzle is perorated. Do I have to model the holes on the walls?

 May 20, 2004, 11:35 Re: CFD in wind tunnel #7 Jarmo Monttinen Guest   Posts: n/a Good question... at first I would say yes. But I probably would try to run a case with holes and without holes to see whether that changes anything. It will naturally change something, but will it change the temperature distribution etc. on the model? The holes will be difficult to include not only because of the grid generation issues, but you may have trouble implementing boundary conditions for those. So your life would be much easier if you did not need to model those. Question remains, how to convince the audience that you are really modeling the experiment if you do not model the holes... -- Jarmo

 May 20, 2004, 13:29 Re: CFD in wind tunnel #8 Anders Hagberg Guest   Posts: n/a I will test without holes. In the end of June I have the results from the Wind tunnel test, and the calculations will be done during this summer, then I know.

 May 20, 2004, 18:50 Re: CFD in wind tunnel #9 Jarmo Monttinen Guest   Posts: n/a Good luck. Keep us posted! -- Jarmo

 June 1, 2004, 17:42 Re: CFD in wind tunnel #10 Mark Guest   Posts: n/a You need to model the tunnel walls and make provision for the holes or slots via boundary conditions. The effect of the holes or slots is two-fold: 1) Reduces the growth of the boundary layer on the test section walls thereby keeping the test section area roughly constant as a function of model station. 2) Allows shocks to pass through into the plenum thereby avoiding reflected shocks onto the model. Both effects have an effect on the results so to accurately model the wind tunnel you need to include these effects. I don't have the references, but work was done in the 70s and 80s to numerically quantify and model these effects. You might try looking for papers by Jacocks or Erickson. Their work specifically related to perforated tunnel walls. An alternate suggestion is to compute increments via CFD and compare these to increments measured in the tunnel. The idea is that biases introduced by the experimental setup or by the CFD modeling technique cancel when differencing "similar" solutions giving you an accurate increment. This is exactly how most people use experimental wind tunnel data anyway. Rarely are absolute values used, but rather, absolutes are built up out of a series of increments. This approach would make your far-field approach less important and I would lean toward the free-air technique if you go this way. Let us know how this turns out.

 Thread Tools Search this Thread Search this Thread: Advanced Search Display Modes Linear Mode

 Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is OffTrackbacks are Off Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On Forum Rules

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Ken (Wind Turbine CFD Super Rookie) Main CFD Forum 45 February 9, 2016 14:07 John C. Chien Main CFD Forum 20 November 19, 2015 23:40 josh_k Siemens 1 April 18, 2011 16:21 wilson CFX 5 July 4, 2005 19:16 Md. Shahiduzzaman Khan Main CFD Forum 6 February 18, 1999 13:15

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:08.

 Contact Us - CFD Online - Privacy Statement - Top