Advertisement

Experiments in Fluids

, 59:153 | Cite as

A priori analysis of the performance of cross hot-wire probes in a rough wall boundary layer based on stereoscopic PIV

  • Laurent Perret
  • Cédric Rivet
Research Article
  • 80 Downloads

Abstract

Error in measuring Reynolds shear-stress in turbulent boundary layer flows over a rough surface with a cross hot-wire has been reported in the literature and attributed to the existence of strong ejection and sweep motions that cause rectification, e.g. deviation of the velocity vector angle outside the acceptance cone of these probes. Using stereoscopic particle image velocimetry measurements and the concept of effective cooling velocities, the objective of the present study is to perform an a priori analysis of the cause of errors occurring when employing cross hot-wire anemometers. Besides the above-mentioned rectification effect, the role of the non-measured component is investigated. It is shown to be responsible for a non-negligible underestimation of the measured velocity variances and Reynolds shear-stress. This often overlooked source of error is intrinsic to turbulent flows and not limited to flow over rough walls.

Graphical abstract

Error analysis on the instantaneous shear-stress in the roughness sublayer of a rough boundary-layer measured by a (a) generic XHWA modeled using SPIV data : (c) influence of the non-measured component v, and relationships with Q-events (b) without and (d) with the non-measured component influence.

Notes

References

  1. Antonia RA, Djenidi L (2010) On the outer layer controversy for a turbulent boundary layer over a rough wall. In: Nickels TB (ed) IUTAM symposium on the physics of wall-bounded turbulent flows on rough walls. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 77–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Basley J, Perret L, Mathis R (2018) Spatial modulations of kinetic energy in the roughness sublayer. J Fluid Mech 850:584–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blackman K, Perret L, Calmet I, Rivet C (2017) Turbulent kinetic energy budget in the boundary layer developing over an urban-like rough wall using PIV. Phys Fluids 29(085):113Google Scholar
  4. Blackman K, Perret L, Savory E (2018) Effect of upstream flow regime and canyon aspect ratio on non-linear interactions between a street canyon flow and the overlying boundary layer. Bound Layer Meteorol.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10546-018-0378-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bruun HH (1995) Hot-wire anemometry, principles and signal analysis. Oxford Science Publications, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  6. Castro IP, Cheng H, Reynolds R (2006) Turbulence over urban-type roughness: deductions from wind-tunnel measurements. Bound Layer Meteorol 118:109–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cheng H, Castro IP (2002) Near wall flow over urban like roughness. Bound Layer Meteorol 104:229–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Coceal O, Dobre A, Thomas TG, Belcher SE (2007) Structure of turbulent flow over regular arrays of cubical roughness. J Fluid Mech 589:375–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Djenidi L, Antonia RA, Amielh M, Anselmet F (2014) Use of PIV to highlight possible errors in hot-wire Reynolds stress data over a 2D rough wall. Exp Fluids 55(10):1830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Herpin S, Perret L, Mathis R, Tanguy C, Lasserre J (2018) Investigation of the flow inside an urban canopy immersed into an atmospheric boundary layer using laser doppler anemometry. Exp Fluids 59(5):80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Müller UR (1992) Comparison of turbulence measurements with single, X and triple hot-wire probes. Exp Fluids 13(2):208–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Perret L, Ruiz T (2013) Spiv analysis of coherent structures in a vegetation canopy model flow. In: Venditti JG, Best J, Church M, Hardy RJ (eds) Coherent flow structures at Earth’s surface, chapter 11. Wiley-Blackwell, New York, pp 161–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Perret L, Basley J, Mathis R, Piquet T (2018) Atmospheric boundary layers over urban-like terrains: influence of the plan density on the roughness sublayer dynamics. Bound Layer Meteorol (Accepted)Google Scholar
  14. Perret L, Piquet T, Basley J, Mathis R (2017) Effects of plan area densities of cubical roughness elements on turbulent boundary layers. In: Congrès Français de Mécanique, pp 1–12. https://cfm2017.sciencesconf.org/130816. Accessed 28 Aug 2017
  15. Reynolds RT, Castro IP (2008) Measurements in an urban-type boundary layer. Exp Fluids 45:141–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rivet C (2014) Etude en soufflerie atmosphérique des interactions entre canopée urbaine et basse atmosphère par PIV stéréoscopique. Ph.D. thesis, Ecole Centrale de NantesGoogle Scholar
  17. Tagawa M, Tsuji T, Nagano Y (1992) Evaluation of X-probe response to wire separation for wall turbulence measurements. Exp Fluids 12(6):413–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Tutu NK, Chevray R (1975) Cross-wire anemometry in high intensity turbulence. J Fluid Mech 71(4):785–800CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LHEEA, UMR CNRS 6598, Centrale NantesNantes Cedex 3France

Personalised recommendations