Contents

LITERATURE SURVEY -1.............................................................................................................................................. 2

Flow Visualizations Techniques in Wind Tunnels ........................................................................................................ 2
LITERATURE SURVEY -2.............................................................................................................................................. 7
Experimental Flow Visualization over a Two-Dimensional Airfoil at Low Reynolds Number................................... 7
EXPERIMENT 1 ............................................................................................................................................................ 12
Smoke flow visualization on a wing model at different angles of incidence at low speeds ....................................... 12
LITREATURE SURVEY-1 ............................................................................................................................................ 14
Characteristic of Wind Load on a Hemispherical Dome in Smooth Flow and Turbulent Boundary Layer Flow ...... 14
LITERATURE SURVEY -2 ........................................................................................................................................... 19
HEMISPHERE-CYLINDER PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS .................................................................................. 19
EXPERIMENT 2 ............................................................................................................................................................ 22
Surface Pressure distribution on hemispherical surface at subsonic speed ................................................................. 22

AERODYNAMICS LAB

LITERATURE SURVEY -1
Flow Visualizations Techniques in Wind Tunnels
Slavica Ristic, (PhD)
Scientific technical review, vol.L VII, No1, 2007
UDK: 533.6.07:532.529
COSATI: 01-01

1. ABSTRACT
In this article, an attempt is made to describe and review the most widely used methods for flow
visualization. The first part describes the basis and applications of different visualization methods (non
optical) for subsonic and supersonic flow in wind and water tunnels: direct injection methods, (smoke,
dye, fog and different small particles) visualization methods by electrolytic and photochemical dye
production, gas and hydrogen bubbles, special techniques, flow visualization by tufts, oil, liquid crystals,
pressure and temperature sensitive paints.
A considerable attention is paid to flow visualization techniques performed in VTI wind and water
tunnels and almost all presented photos have been recorded during tests in laboratories of VTI. Optical
methods and their application for compressible flow visualization will be given in the second part of the
article.

2. Introduction

For centuries, fluid flow has been studied in various ways and today, fluid flow is still an important
field of research. The areas in which fluid flow plays a role are numerous. Gaseous flows are studied
for the development of cars, aircraft and spacecraft, and also for the design of machines such as
turbines and combustion engines. Liquid flow research is necessary for naval applications, such as ship
design and is widely used in civil engineering projects, chemistry, and medicine and so on.
In all kinds of fluid flow research, the visualization is an important tool in experimental fluid mechanics,
which can provide the overall picture of the flow field. Flow visualization has probably existed for as
long as fluid flow researches itself. Experimental flow visualization techniques are applied for several
reasons:
To get a picture of fluid flow around a scaled model of a real object, without any calculations;
To develop or verify new and better theories of fluid flow or models.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 2

AERODYNAMICS LAB
If the flow could be made visible by some kind of flow visualization technique, it would be possible to
observe flow phenomena which are essentially inviscid (e.g., vortex flows, flows distant from surfaces)
as well as those phenomena which are dominated by the effects of viscosity (e.g., boundary layer flows,
separation). In addition to qualitative observations, under certain conditions it would be possible to make
quantitative measurements from flow visualization data as well.
Flow visualization may be divided into surface flow visualization and off-the-surface visualization.
Surface flow visualization involves tufts, fluorescent dye, oil or special clay mixtures, which are applied
to the surface of a model. Visual inspection of such tufts and coatings as a function of time or after some
time, will give valuable information on such things as the state of the boundary layer (laminar or
turbulent), transition, regions of separated flow and the like. It must be remembered in such visualization
that what is observed on the surface is not always indicative of what is happening in the free streams.
The second type of visualization involves the use of such tracers as smoke particles, oil droplets or
helium-filled soap bubbles. Each of these methods requires appropriate lighting and some device for
recording the image such as a still or video camera. If the flow field is illuminated in a plane by
appropriate masking of the light source it is possible to examine discrete sections or slices of the flow.
The optical methods can be used to visualize compressible flows. The three principal optical methods
for flow visualization are: shadow, schlieren and interferometry. These methods will be the subject of the
second part of the article.
The advent of computer technique and digital image processing make it possible to automatically
analyze flow visualization effects and extract qualitative and quantitative information, which may not be
readily available from conventional flow measurements.Recently, a new type of visualization has
emerged: computer-aided visualization. Experimental flow visualization is a starting point for flow
visualization of numerical simulations using computer graphics. In the area of fluid dynamics, computers
are extensively used to calculate velocity fields and other flow quantities, using numerical techniques to
solve the Navier-Stokes equations. To analyze the results of the complex calculations, computer
visualization techniques are necessary and very often used. One possible classification of the flow
visualization techniques is the following.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 3

AERODYNAMICS LAB
3. Smoke visualization of the Flow
Recent developments indicate that smoke visualization in wind tunnels, one of the oldest flow
visualization techniques, will continue as an important experimental tool in the study of complex flow
dynamic phenomena. Improvements in generation and injection of smoke as well as in lighting (laser as
a light source), in techniques of acquisition and computation have continued to increase the scientific
value of this method. Similar results are obtained by flow visualizations with fog and vapour.
The smoke can be very useful in a wind tunnel with low turbulence. There exists no upper limit of
speed for smoke line visualization (it was possible to extend the range of smoke line visualization even
to supersonic flow velocities).
Smoke line can be generated in a wind tunnel (smoke tunnel) by introducing smoke (produced by
smoke generated devices) through small pipes placed in front of

a test model through holes on the

surface.

(a)

(b)

(c)

Figure 1. Flow visualization in the VTI smoke wind tunnel (a and b) and in Onera smoke tunnel (c)
There are three basic types of smoke suitable for wind tunnel experiments: smoke generated by the
vaporization of a mineral oil (paraffin, kerosene) mist resulting from the vaporization of certain
substances containing bromide or chloride and smoke from burning or smouldering wood, paper or
tobacco. The burning or vaporization is done in a smoke generator.
Fig.1 shows the smoke line in the VTI small smoke tunnel (1a and 1b) and in Onera smoke tunnel
(1c). Fig.2 shows the visualized effect obtained with smoke introduced in the flow trough the ship
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 4

AERODYNAMICS LAB
chimney.
The flow visualization without smoke generator is possible if a drop of TiCl4 (titanium tetrachloride)
or C10H7Br (bromnaph-thalin) is deposited onto the surface of test model in a wind tunnel; a white
stream of smoke will originate from this drop. Liquid TiCl4 in contact with the moist air develops
powder TiO2 and HCl. TiCl4 liquid and vapour are corrosive and toxic because of HCl. For this method,
the smoke generator is not necessary. TiCl4 has also been used in open-air tunnel, in a large number of
experiments. Protection must be employed . This method can be applied for flow visualization in the
whole test section as well as for local parts of the model. The following pictures show the effect of
smoke flow visualization with TiCl4. Fig.3 shows the flow around airplane model and sphere visualized
by TiCl4 drops in the small VTI wind tunnel T-32.
One of the significant improvements in the filed of smoke visualization over the past several years
has been the introduction of laser light illumination. The laser beam passing through either cylindrical
lens or glass rod usually produces the sheet of laser light. By using a light sheet, cross section of the
wake can be illuminated and the position of the vortices can be located. Unsteady flow can be tested by
pulsed ruby laser. Recording of the flow visualized effects can be affected by still or moving camera.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 5

AERODYNAMICS LAB
4. Conclusion
This paper presents an overview of techniques for flow visualization in different velocity regimes.
Flow visualization is an important topic in experimental aerodynamics and has been the subject of active
research for many years in wind tunnels of VTI.A brief introduction to experimental smoke flow
visualization methods is given. Every method is illustrated by photos of flow visualization effects. The
advent of computer technique, new technology for illumination, modern and very powerful device for
digital image recording and processing makes automatical analysis of the flow visualization effects and
extracting qualitative and quantitative information possible which may not be readily available from
conventional flow measurements. Experimental flow visualization is a starting point for numerical flow
visualization of simulations using computer graphics.

5. References
[1] MARZKIRICH,W.: Flow visualization, Academic Press, New York, 1977.
[2] ASANUMA,T.: Flow visualization, Hemishere Publishing co., Tokyo, 1977
[3] STEDMAN,D.H., CARIGNAN,G.R.: Flow Visualization III, 1983.
[4] YANG,W.J.: Flow visualization III proc. of 3. International Symposium, An Arbor MI, 1983,
Hemisphere, New York, 1985.
[5] SETTLES,G.S.: Modern Developments in Flow Visualization, AIAA JournaL, 1986, Vol.24, No.8,
pp.1313-1323.
[6] RISTIC,S.: Vizualizacija strujanja u aerodinamikim tunelima, Glasnik RV i PVO,1990, No.1, pp.1624.
[7] CORLETT,W.A.: Operational Flow Visualization Technique in the Langley Unitary Plan Wind Tunnel,
NASA Conf. Public. 2243, 1993.
[8] Monografija VTI, 1996, Beograd
[9] RISTI,S.: Vizualizacija strujanja, pogled u nevidljivo, Aeromagazin, maj-juni 1998, st. 56-58,
septembar 1998, st.52-54, januar 1999, st.
47-49.
[10] RISTI,S.: Pregled metoda za vizualizaciju strujanja u aerodinamikim tunelima, KumNTI, VTI
Beograd, 1999, No.3.
[11] RISTI,S., ISAKOVI,J., ILI,B., OCOKOLJI,G.: Pregled metoda
ispitivanja kvaliteta strujanja u aerodinamikim tunelima, KumNTI, VTI, 2004,Vol.38, Br.3.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 6

AERODYNAMICS LAB

LITERATURE SURVEY -2
Experimental Flow Visualization over a Two-Dimensional Airfoil at Low Reynolds
Number
CONFERENCE PAPER SEPTEMBER 2014
Haseeb Shah
Sathyajit Matthew
Universiti Brunei Darussalam

1. Abstract

This paper presents a set of fluid flow patterns obtained by oil flow visualization method over a low
Reynolds number airfoil at angle of attack = 4, 8, 12 and 15. The experiments were conducted in a low
speed wind tunnel at Reynolds number = 60,000 and 100,000. The aerodynamic performance of the airfoil
is also shown for direct comparison with the flow features. The experimental results showed that with
increase in both the Reynolds number and the angle of attack, the extent of the laminar separation bubble
diminish and at the same time progress towards the leading edge. At angle of attack 12 shorter bubble at
the leading edge was found to burst and reform into a rather longer bubble causing major increase in drag
values.

2. Introduction
In experimental fluid-mechanical research the behavior of the flow field above or around a solid body is
generally investigated by flow visualization methods. These methods can be either on-surface or offsurface. In on-surface methods visualization medium such as tufts or pigmented oil is applied to the surface
under investigation. Whereas, in off-surface methods certain pigment, dye or smoke is suspended in to the
flow in the area of study.
At low Reynolds number (Re), i.e. Re500,000, the behavior of the fluid is fundamentally different and
more complex. A key characteristic associated with such low Re flows is found to be the occurrence of the
laminar separation bubble (LSB) due to adverse pressure gradients (APG). In airfoils, LSB appears on the
upper surface at relatively higher angle of attacks (AOAs). LSB, depending on its size and behaviour,
deteriorate the aerodynamic performance of the airfoil. Therefore, it is important to investigate and
understand the dynamics of LSB in order to design a control system which can eliminate LSB or to design
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 7

AERODYNAMICS LAB
new airfoils without the mechanism of LSB. LSB plays a significant role in defining the behaviour of the
boundary layer and the stalling characteristics of the airfoil . The size and effects of the LSB are the
function of Re, airfoil design and the environmental interruptions such as dust and sand particles etc . Tani
from his work showed that the short bubble may burst at higher AOAs causing separated flow or converting
to a rather longer LSB downstream. McGranahan and Selig performed oil flow visualization experiments
on seven different airfoils at Re = 200,000 , 300,000 and 500,000. These airfoils included E387, FX 63-137,
NASA NLF(1)-0414F, S822, S8306, SD7003, SD7307. At lowest range of Re, they found LSB to cover up
to 20% to 30% of the airfoil mid-span. On some airfoils they observed the presence of a very small leading
edge bubble which vanishes and re-appears at certain AOAs and cover less than 0.8% of the total airfoils
chord length. Tan and Auld from their experimental work on Wortmann FX-67-150K airfoil found that the
increase in turbulence intensity of the free stream flow can lead to reduction in size of the bubble. Yang et
al, in their study over GA(W)-1 airfoil found the height of the LSB to be 1% of the chord length and
maximum length of the LSB to be 20% of the airfoils chord length. Sharma and padar in their experimental
investigation on NACA0015 airfoil reported the occurrence of abrupt stall due to the bursting of the bubble
after reaching certain AOA. Rinioe and Takemura in their experiments on NACA0012 airfoil at
Re=135,000 found longer bubbles atAOA

11.5 and

short

bubbles

at

AOA11.5.Investigations on the height and length of LSB were also done by Diwan and Ramesh on a flat
plate at various Re range. They concluded that with increasing Re both the height and the Length of LSB
reduces. However the length of LSB was found to be more effect by Re then the height.This study is an
attempt to investigate the aerodynamic performance and the flow behaviour past upper surface of the UBD5494 airfoil at Re 60,000 and 100,000. The flow behaviours are studied by on-surface oil flow visualization
method. As the flow regime is Low Re, much attention has been paid to the understanding of the LSB,
transition and reattachment and their effects on the aerodynamic performance.

3 Experimental Setup and Apparatus

Wind Tunnel Facility

The experiments were carried out at Universiti Brunei Darussalam - low speed open circuit wind tunnel
facility (UBD-LSWT). A 3D view of the wind tunnel is shown in Fig.2. The wind tunnel has a test section
of 1000 mm x 1000 mm made of plexiglass. The width of the working area of test section was reduced to
0.45m by placing plexiglass splitter plates. The tunnel consists of the settling chamber, contraction and
honey comb which act as flow conditioning tools and assists in attaining flow uniformity. Cone contraction
ratio is 9:1 and diffuser has an angle of 5.1. A 45 kW electric fan is controlled with a frequency controller

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 8

AERODYNAMICS LAB
that allows change in the rotational speed and consequently the wind speed. The maximum wind speed
attainable is up to 25 m/s correspondent to Re =100,000 (for 1 meter chord length of airfoil) at 40Hz.

Airfoil Model

The airfoil UBD-5494 was designed to be employed over entire blade section of small horizontal axis wind
turbine with power output 1 kW in [16]. It has maximum thickness of 4.81% at 22.8 % and camber of
5.4% at 49.1 % of the airfoils total chord length. Based on the reduced working area and the Re range of the
tunnel, the airfoil was scaled to 0.25m chord length and 0.45m span. Initial 3D model was prepared in
solid-works and the final model was fabricated in a 3D printer using ABS-Plastic material. Due to the
limited fabrication area of the 3D printer, the model was fabricated in three different parts with clip-on for
easy assembly (Fig.1). Epoxy glue was also used on the connections between the models to prevent any
flow leakage. The final airfoil model was placed inside the test section horizontally between the splitter
plates. Load-cells and the attack adjustor are fixed on each side of the test section and connected to the
airfoil..

Figure 1. Layout of Universiti Brunie Darussalam - Low Speed Wind Tunnel (UBD-LSWT).

4 RESULTS

Figure 2 (a). Flow pattern at AOA= 4 at Re=60,000.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 9

AERODYNAMICS LAB

Figure 2(b). Flow pattern at AOA=4 at Re=100,000.

Figure 2(d). Flow pattern at AOA=8 at Re=100,000.

Figure 2(c). Flow pattern at AOA=8 at Re=60,000.

Figure 2(e). Flow pattern at AOA=12 at Re=60,000.

4 Conclusions
In this study, the aerodynamic performance and flow behavior over UBD-5494 airfoil was experimentally
investigated in a wind tunnel. The smoke flow visualization was observed and different angle of attack for different
reynold numbers.

5 References
1. W.Merzkirch,Techniques of flow visualization,
AGARDograph, No. 302 ,1987
2. R.L.Matlby,Flow Visualization in Wind Tunnels using indicators, AGARDograph70, 1962
3. D.F. Perrens,Flow visualization in low speed wind tunnels, IOP Science, Vol. 5, pp. 262-265,
1970
4. F.K. LU,Surface oil flow visualization, The European Physics Journal .Special Issue, Vol. 182,
pp. 51-63, 2010
5. P. B.S. Lissaman. Low-Reynolds-number-airfoils,
Annual review Fluid mechanics ,Vol. 15,1983
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 10

AERODYNAMICS LAB
6. B. H. Carmichael. Low Reynolds Number Airfoil Survey , NASA CR-165803, Vol. 1, 1981
7. I.Tani. Low speed flows involving bubble separations, Progress in Aerospace Sciences,
Vol. 5, pp. 70-103, 1964.
8. B D. McGranahan . M. S, Selig , Surface oil flow measurements on several airfoils at low
Reynolds number, 21st AIAA Applied Conference, Orlando, Florida, 2003
9. A. C. N. Tan, J. D. Auld, Study of Laminar
Separation Bubbles at Low Reynolds Number
Under Various Conditions, 11th Australasian Fluids Mechanics Conference, Australia, 1992
10. Z. Yang, L.F. Haan, H. Hu. An experimental investigation on the flow separation on a lowReynolds number airfoil, 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno Nevada, 2007

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 11

AERODYNAMICS LAB

EXPERIMENT 1
Smoke flow visualization on a wing model at different angles of incidence at
low speeds
AIM: To carry out the smoke flow visualization on a wing model and to observe the flow
pattern at different angle of incidence.
EQUIPMENT:
Subsonic wind tunnel, two dimensional wing model with support mount, Smoke generation
apparatus, liquid paraffin, manometer.
THEORY:
In general, flow visualization is an experimental means of examining the flow pattern around
a body or over its surface. The flow is "visualized" by introducing dye, smoke or pigment to
the flow in the area under investigation. The primary advantage of such a method is the
ability to provide a description of a flow over a model without complicated data reduction
and analysis.
Smoke flow visualization involves the injection of streams of vapor into the flow. The vapor
follows filament lines (lines made up of all the fluid particles passing through the injection
point). In steady flow the filament lines are identical to streamlines (lines everywhere tangent
to the velocity vector). Smoke-flow visualization can thus reveal the entire flow pattern
around a body.

(a) Low Incidence (b) High Incidence

Fig.1.1 Smoke flow past a 2-D wing at different incidences

Note- the separated flow at higher angles of attack on the wing.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 12

AERODYNAMICS LAB

PROCEDURE:
1. Mount the wing model with its support in the tunnel test section securely.
2. Ensure that the tunnel is not having any loose components.
3. Generate the smoke for the flow visualization through smoke generator.
4. Adjust the amount of smoke generated by adjusting heater control provided with smoke
generator.
5. Observe the flow pattern around the wing and infer the location of stagnation point, flow
separation, formation of eddies and vortex shedding.
6. Observe flow pattern at different Reynolds Number with a neat sketch with inference.
7. Gradually shutdown the tunnel.

RESULT
Thus the flow visualization is carried out and the flow pattern around the wing at
different Reynolds number and velocity is observed in a very Low Speed for Flow
Visualization

Fig 1.2. Smoke flow visualization of NACA 4418 aerofoil

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 13

AERODYNAMICS LAB

LITREATURE SURVEY-1
Characteristic of Wind Load on a Hemispherical Dome in Smooth Flow
and Turbulent Boundary Layer Flow
BBAA VI International Colloquium
on: Bluff Bodies Aerodynamics &
Applications Milano, Italy,
July, 20-24 2008

1 INTRODUCTION
Due to the structural efficiency and economic benefit, the hemispherical dome is a common
structural geometry shape for large span sports stadium or for storage purposes. The curve
shape makes the accurate estimation of the wind pressure fluctuations on a hemispherical
dome a difficult task due to the Reynolds number effects. In the past years, there have been
reports of collapse of curve shaped storage domes during strong wind. The wind induced
structural failure could be attributed to inadequate wind resistant design and/or poor quality
construction. In the past two decades, several innovative procedures were proposed by
Kasperski and Niemann Holmes, Katsumura et al. [3] to incorporate the structural responses
into the formation of design wind loads. On the other hand, there exist only few works on the
aerodynamics of hemispherical dome in either smooth or turbulent flows. Among them,
Maher[4] presented mean pressure distribution of hemispherical dome at Reynolds number of
0.92106 ~1.84 106 ; the drag coefficient becomes invariant when Reynolds number
exceeds 1.4106 . Taylor [5] took measurements of both mean and fluctuating pressure of
domes in turbulent boundary layer flows; his work confirmed the earlier finding that when
Reynolds numbers exceeds 2.0 105 and turbulence intensity exceeds 4%, the pressure
distribution becomes Reynolds number independent. Ogawa et al. [6] study the mean, RMS
and spectral characteristics of wind pressure on domes; and indicates that for Reynolds
numbers ranging from 1.2105 ~2.1105 , the level of turbulence in turbulent boundary layer
has little effect upon the mean pressure distribution. Toy et al. [7] showed that with increase
of turbulence intensity, separation region and reattachment point move downstream.
Letchford and Sarkar [8] investigated the effect of surface roughness to the pressure
distribution of dome. In light of the past works on this issue, it is believed worthy to
accumulate more detailed data on the aerodynamics of hemispherical domes. This article is
the first of a series of a systematic investigation on the wind load characteristics of curve
shaped domes in turbulent boundary layer flow and smooth flow. The present investigation
focuses on the Reynolds number effects on pressure distribution and the wind load pattern of
hemisphere dome in smooth flow and turbulent boundary layer flows. Besides to study the
difference of wind load characteristics of hemispherical dome in different flow conditions,
one important aim of this study is to find the load pattern under the Reynolds number
independent flow condition to be used as the reference of future investigations.
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 14

AERODYNAMICS LAB

2 EXPERIMENT DESIGN
The majority of the wind tunnel tests of this project were conducted in a boundary layer wind
tunnel with a 24m(length)4m(width)2.6m(height) test section; Both smooth flow and
turbulent boundary layer were used. Base plate elevated from floor was used in the case of
smooth flow to minimize the boundary layer developed over base floor. The turbulent
boundary layer has the characteristics of suburban flow field with power law index =0.27
and turbulence intensity varies from 25% to 18% in the region of the model heights. Three
acrylic hemispherical pressure models with diameters of 120 cm, 50 cm, and 20 cm, namely
Dome L, M, and S, were used in this investigation; the corresponding Reynolds number
varies from 5.3 104 to 2.0 106 . Pressure taps were installed along the meridian and full
circular of the latitude on the 120cm and 50 cm models; whereas over 200 pressure taps
distributed on 8 levels of concentric circles were installed on the 20 cm model to investigate
the pressure pattern in different testing conditions. Shown in Figure 1 is the coordinate
system of the pressure taps on hemisphere dome surface, in which, denotes the angle of
longitude and is the angle of center meridian ; for contours of pressure coefficients , define
as the angle of latitude. Instantaneous wind pressures were sampled simultaneously at
sampling frequency of 300 Hz, through ZOC pressure scanner system. The blockage ratios of
the tests were 0.0015 for Dome S to 0.054 for Dome L.
Results shown in this paper are not corrected for the blockage effect.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 15

AERODYNAMICS LAB
3 PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION IN SMOOTH FLOW
3.1 Mean and RMS pressure coefficients in smooth flow
For validating the consistency of different model at the same Reynolds number, the
comparison of the distributions of mean pressure coefficients along the center meridian of
different model at the same Reynolds number in smooth flow condition is shown in Figure 4.
As shown in Figure 2(a), the pressure distributions of Dome S and Dome M agree very well.
The pressure distributions of Dome L and Dome M in Figure 2(b) show slight differences.
Since Dome L is significantly larger than Dome S & M, in order to have a better blockage
ratio, the base plate was descended 5 cm into the upper part of the boundary layer developed
over the tunnel floor. The discrepancy of pressure distribution is probably due to the
combined effects of the boundary layer effects and the higher blockage ratio for the Dome L.
The distributions of mean and RMS pressure coefficients along the center meridian at various
Reynolds number in smooth flow condition is shown in Figure 2 and 3. As shown in Figure
3(a), the maximum mean pressure occurs at 10~20 and the minimum mean pressure locates
at 70~90. For Reynolds number between 6.6 104 ~3.1 10^5 , the negative pressure at
dome apex increases with Reynolds number, whereas the negative pressure in the wake
region decreases. At Re=3.1 10^5 , separation of surface shear layer occurs around 130.
However, for Reynolds number between 3.010^5 ~2.0106 as shown in Figure3(b) and 3(c)
, the wake suction increases slightly with Reynolds number whereas the suction near apex
remains nearly invariant; the point of separation moves up about 10 upstream, from 130 to
120. For validating the consistency of different model at the same Reynolds number, the
comparison of the distributions of mean pressure coefficients along the center meridian of
different model at the same Reynolds number in smooth flow condition is shown in Figure 2.
As shown in Figure 2(a), the pressure distributions of Dome S and Dome M agree very well.
The pressure distributions of Dome L and Dome M in Figure 2(b) show slight differences.
Since Dome L is significantly larger than Dome S & M, in order to have a better blockage
ratio, the base plate was descended 5 cm into the upper part of the boundary layer developed
over the
tunnel floor.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 16

AERODYNAMICS LAB
The discrepancy of pressure distribution is probably due to the combined effects of the
boundary layer effects and the higher blockage ratio for the Dome L
The distributions of mean and RMS pressure coefficients along the center meridian at various
Reynolds number in smooth flow condition is shown in Figure 5 and 6. As shown in Figure
3(a), the maximum mean pressure occurs at 10~20 and the minimum mean pressure locates
at 70~90. For Reynolds number between 6.6 104 ~3.1 10^5 , the negative pressure at
dome apex increases with Reynolds number, whereas the negative pressure in the wake
region decreases. At Re=3.1 105 , separation of surface shear layer occurs around 130.
However, for Reynolds number between 3.0105 ~2.0106 as shown in Figure3(b) and3(c) ,
the wake suction increases slightly with Reynolds number whereas the suction near apex
remains nearly invariant; the point of separation moves up about 10 upstream, from 130 to
120.

Shown in Figure 2(a) to2(c) are the distributions of RMS pressure coefficients along the
center meridian at various Reynolds number in smooth flow condition. The significant
discrepancy of RMS pressure in the front stagnation zone shown in Figure 2(b) and 2(c) is
most likely due to the effect of thin boundary layer flow developed over base plate onto
different size models. This effect of model dimension diminished when > 45. The
experimental data indicate that Reynolds number casts significant influence on the
distribution of RMS pressure coefficients in the negative pressure zone: for Re<1.810^5 ,
there is one distinct and narrow peak of CP locate at 80~90 and a broader lump around
140, suggesting the separation and reattachment. When Reynolds number increases to
1.8105 ~ 3.010^5, a second distinct and narrow peak appears at 110~120. The second
peak value enhances with Reynolds number while the first peak value gradually diminishes
with Re. when Reynolds number greater than 3.0105 , there remains only one peak of CP
in the separation zone, near 120 and another one at very down-stream. As Reynolds number
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 17

AERODYNAMICS LAB
increases from 3.0105 ~2.0106 this separation related CP peak moves back and forth
between 110~120.

5 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

A series of wind tunnel pressure measurements were performed on hemispherical domes to
study the Reynolds number effects on characteristics of wind loads. Following summaries
can be made from the tests in the smooth flow condition. In smooth flow, the transition of
separation flow occurs near Re=3.010^5.The mean meridian drag coefficient decreases with
Reynolds number for Re<3.010^5 and then increase monotonically up to Re=2.010^6 ;
RMS meridian drag coefficient shows maximum and minimum values at Re1.510^5 and
Re3.0 10^5 , respectively. The correlation coefficients of mean and RMS pressure
contours indicate that, the pressure distributions become relatively stable at
Re=2.0~3.010^5.

6 REFERENCES
[1] M. Kasperski, and H.-J., Niemann, The L.R.C.(load-response-correlation) method: a
general method of estimating unfavorable wind load distributions for linear and non-linear
structural behavior, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 41-44 (1992) 1753-1763
[2] J.D., Holmes, Effective static load distributions in wind engineering, J. Wind Eng. Ind.
Aerodyn. 90 (2002) 91109.
[3] A. Katsumura, Y. Tamura, O. Nakamura, Universal wind load distribution
simultaneously reproducing largest load effects in all subject members on large-span
cantilevered roof , J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 95 (2007) 11451165.
[4] F.J. Maher, Wind loads on basic dome shapes, J. Struct. Div. ASCE ST3 (1965) 219-228.
[5] T.J. Taylor, Wind pressures on a hemispherical dome, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 40
(1991) 199-213. [6] T. Ogawa, M. Nakayama, S. Murayama, Y. Sasaki, Characteristics of
wind pressures on basic structures with curved surfaces and their response in turbulent flow,
J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 38 (1991) 427-438.
[7] N. Toy, W.D. Moss, E. Savory, Wind tunnel studies on a dome in turbulent boundary
layers, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 1 (1983) 201-212. C. M. Cheng, C. L. Fu, Y.Y. Lin 16
[8] C.W. Letchford, P.P. Sarkar, Mean and fluctuating wind loads on rough and smooth
parabolic domes, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 88 (2000) 101117

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 18

AERODYNAMICS LAB

LITERATURE SURVEY -2
HEMISPHERE-CYLINDER PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS
ARO, Inc
(asubsidiary of Sverdrup
& Parcel and Associates, Inc.),
AFSC, Arnold Air Force Station,
Tennessee,

1 INTRODUCTION
The hemisphere-cylinder is a configuration which has been of practicalconcern since the
early development stages of re-entry vehicles. There have been many theoretical and
experimental studies of the hemisphere cylinder at zero angle of attack, and Ref. 22 presents
a summary of several of these studies. However, there have been very few investigations of
the
flow over a hemisphere-cylinder.
The purpose of the present investigation was to complement the results of the earlier
experimental studies on hemispheres and hemisphere-cylinders by testing these bodies at a
higher Mach number and, in the case of the hemisphere-cylinder.

2 APPARATUS
2.1 TEST FACILITY
Tunnel C is an axisymmetric, continuous flow, variable-density wind tunnel with a 50-in.
dia test section. The contoured nozzle produces a nominal test section Mach number of 10 at
stagnation pressures from 200 to 2000 psi and stagnation temperatures up to 1900R.
Two hemisphere-cylinder models were utilized in the test program.

2.2 MODELS
A large model having a diameter of 5.80 in. and a length of 38 in. was used to obtain the
hemisphere data. The cylindrical portion of this model was used to obtain cylinder data for
length-to-diameter ratios of 0. 5 to 6. Pressure orifices were located around the hemisphere in
10-deg increments and along the cylinder in approximately 2-in. intervals. The orifices were
0. 06in. in diameter and were located within a tolerance of 0. 2 deg on the hemisphere. A
small model having a diameter of 1.38 in. and a length of 3 9 in. was used to obtain cylinder
data for length-to diameter ratios of 1 to 28. With the exception of an orifice at the
geometrical stagnation point, this model had no orifices on the hemisphere.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 19

AERODYNAMICS LAB
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The experimental surface pressure distribution on a hemisphere at Mach numbers from 1.9
through 21 are shown in Fig. 1. Twelve sourcesof data were used in obtaining the data
fairings shown. For the sake ofclarity, individual data points are not presented since the
curves arebased on a total of 275 points. Data scatter was small, and approximately90 percent
of the data points are within 0.02 of the Cp/Cpmaxvalues given by the faired curves. From
the stagnation point toabout 55 deg, there is no effect of Mach number on the
distribution,which is lower than that predicted by the modified Newtonian theory.For values
of 9 greater than 55 deg, Mach number effects are apparentwith the largest effect at the
shoulder, 0 = 90 deg. The variation of theshoulder pressure coefficient with Mach number is
presented in Fig. 5.An empirical relation for this pressure coefficient as determined from

For comparison, the results of two theoretical inviscid calculations and the result of a
calculation (Van Dyke solution with method of characteristics) at Ma = 18 including a viscous
boundary layer (Ref. 10) are included . The inviscid solutions are consistently below the
experimental data, and it may be seen that the effect of viscosity on the shoulder pressure is
slight for the indicated conditions.

CONCLUSION
Surface pressure distributions were measured on a hemisphere surface at a Mach number of
10.05.These pressure distributions were compared with theoretical calculations and
experimental results were obtained. The following results were obtained:
The pressure distribution on a hemisphere is independent of free-stream Mach number (M =
1. 9 to 21) when presented as Cp/Cpmax. An empirical equation for the shoulder (0 = 90 deg)
pressure was derived from the experimental data.

Fig 1. Geometry of hemisphere

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 20

AERODYNAMICS LAB

REFERENCES
1. Van Dyke, Milton D. "The Supersonic Blunt-Body Problem -Review and Extension. "
Journal of the Aero/Space Sciences,Vol. 25, No. 8, August 1958, pp. 485-496.
2. Van Dyke, Milton D. and Gordon, Helen D. "Supersonic Flow Past a Family of Blunt
Axisymmetric Bodies. " NASA Technical Report R-l, 1959,,
3. Lees, Lester. "Hypersonic Flow Proc. 5th International Aeronautical Conference, Los
Angeles, Institute of the Aeronautical Sciences, June 20-24, 1955.
4. Lees, Lester and Kubota, Toshi. "inviscid Hypersonic Flow over Blunt-Nosed Slender
Bodies. " Journal of the Aeronautical Sciences, Vol. 24, No. 3, March 1957, pp. 195-202^
5. Baer, A. L. "Pressure Distributions on a Hemisphere Cylinder at Supersonic and
Hypersonic Mach Numbers. " AEDC-TN-61-96 (AD261501), August 1961.
6. Beckwith, Ivan E. and Gallagher, James J. "He at-Transfer and Recovery Temperatures on
a Sphere with Laminar, Transitional, and Turbulent Boundary Layers at Mach Numbers of
2. 00 and 4. 15. " NACA TN 4125, December 1957.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 21

AERODYNAMICS LAB

EXPERIMENT 2
Surface Pressure distribution on hemispherical surface at subsonic speed
AIM: To determine the surface pressure distribution on a hemispherical surface.

EQUIPMENT: Low speed wind tunnel, Multitubemanometer, Cylinder model with

pressure tapings and support mould, Pitot static tube.

THEORY:
Hemisphere is considered to be bluff body. The pressure distribution over the hemisphere is
measured which comes from the pressure force created by the stream flow over the cylinder

PROCEDURE:
1. Assemble the hemisphere with pressure tapings in test section.
2. Ensure the tunnel for any loads component and start the tunnel.
3. Run the tunnel at various desired speeds and note down the manometer reading.
4. Also note down Pitot static tube measurement reading.
5. Pressure on both inner and outer surface of the hemisphere are noted down.
6. Gradually shut down the tunnel.

FORMULAE USED:
Pressure coefficient

.1

P-Static pressure (Measured on the hemisphere)

P- Free stream pressure

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 22

AERODYNAMICS LAB
V-Free stream velocity
Density of air (1.225kg/m^3)

Pressure Difference:

Where
w- density of water (1000kg/m^3)
h=h-h
...

Velocity V=

TABULAR COLUMN:
Sl no.

V (m/s)

h(mm)

h1(mm)

(mm)

(outer surface)

h2 (mm)
(inner surface)

Outer

Inner

surface

surface

8.94

77

72

82

94

2.3588

8.0199

10.94

78

73

89

108

5.18

14.15

CONCLUSION:
From the calculations it can be observed that the Cp distribution over the hemisphere is
greater than 1. The inner surface pressure is greater than outer surface pressure. Since
hemisphere is a bluff body the pressure drag is more due to massive regions of flow
separation.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING (PG) AERO

Page 23