Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 30127
Implementation of a Low-Cost Instrumentation for an Open Cycle Wind Tunnel to Evaluate Pressure Coefficient

Authors: Cristian P. Topa, Esteban A. Valencia, Victor H. Hidalgo, Marco A. Martinez

Abstract:

Wind tunnel experiments for aerodynamic profiles display numerous advantages, such as: clean steady laminar flow, controlled environmental conditions, streamlines visualization, and real data acquisition. However, the experiment instrumentation usually is expensive, and hence, each test implies a incremented in design cost. The aim of this work is to select and implement a low-cost static pressure data acquisition system for a NACA 2412 airfoil in an open cycle wind tunnel. This work compares wind tunnel experiment with Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulation and parametric analysis. The experiment was evaluated at Reynolds of 1.65 e5, with increasing angles from -5° to 15°. The comparison between the approaches show good enough accuracy, between the experiment and CFD, additional parametric analysis results differ widely from the other methods, which complies with the lack of accuracy of the lateral approach due its simplicity.

Keywords: Wind tunnel, low cost instrumentation, experimental testing, CFD simulation.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1474729

Procedia APA BibTeX Chicago EndNote Harvard JSON MLA RIS XML ISO 690 PDF Downloads 314

References:


[1] B. Chanetz, “A century of wind tunnels since Eiffel,” Comptes Rendus Mécanique, vol. 345, no. 8, pp. 581–594, Aug. 2017.
[2] W. D. Janssen, B. Blocken, and H. J. van Wijhe, “CFD simulations of wind loads on a container ship: Validation and impact of geometrical simplifications,” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn., vol. 166, no. Supplement C, pp. 106–116, Jul. 2017.
[3] M. Tahani, G. Kavari, M. Masdari, and M. Mirhosseini, “Aerodynamic design of horizontal axis wind turbine with innovative local linearization of chord and twist distributions,” Energy, vol. 131, no. Supplement C, pp. 78–91, Jul. 2017.
[4] J. Morgado, R. Vizinho, M. A. R. Silvestre, and J. C. Páscoa, “XFOIL vs CFD performance predictions for high lift low Reynolds number airfoils,” Aerosp. Sci. Technol., vol. 52, no. Supplement C, pp. 207–214, May 2016.
[5] Q. Li, Y. Kamada, T. Maeda, J. Murata, and N. Yusuke, “Effect of turbulence on power performance of a Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine in yawed and no-yawed flow conditions,” Energy, vol. 109, no. Supplement C, pp. 703–711, Aug. 2016.
[6] S. G. Pouryoussefi, M. Mirzaei, M.-M. Nazemi, M. Fouladi, and A. Doostmahmoudi, “Experimental study of ice accretion effects on aerodynamic performance of an NACA 23012 airfoil,” Chin. J. Aeronaut., vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 585–595, Jun. 2016.
[7] Honeywell, “TruStability Board Mount Pressure Sensors SSC Series’Standard Accuracy, Compensated/Amplified.” Honeywell, 2016.
[8] E. Valencia and V. Hidalgo, “Innovative Propulsion Systems and CFD Simulation for Fixed Wings UAVs,” 2017.