Advertisement

Experiments in Fluids

, 61:5 | Cite as

Pressure–velocity coupling algorithm-based pressure reconstruction from PIV for laminar flows

  • Erkan GunaydinogluEmail author
  • D. Funda Kurtulus
Research Article
  • 86 Downloads

Abstract

In this study, we propose a method to reconstruct pressure fields from planar particle image velocimetry measurements for laminar flows by employing semi-implicit method for pressure-linked equations algorithm to solve governing equations where measured velocities are inherently used as boundary conditions. The method starts with interpolating the measured velocity field on a staggered computational grid. The continuity equation, in the form of pressure equation for incompressible flows, is solved with this velocity data to reach an initial pressure field. Momentum equations are solved with calculated pressure field and then pressure correction equation is solved for calculating the mass imbalance in continuity equation. Using this mass imbalance, the current velocity field is corrected. Repeating this procedure until convergence provides not only the pressure field that satisfies governing equations, but also error reduction on the measured velocity. The method is validated with theoretical flows and its sensitivity to the velocity field error is assessed. This method reconstructs the pressure fields exactly for error-free velocity fields and can correct the flow-fields to accurate values even with extremely high experimental errors. Application on a flapping airfoil experiment showed that the method can successfully reconstruct pressure field by slightly altering the measured velocity field. The proposed method offers a non-intrusive, global pressure measurement for laminar flows with minimum end user input.

Graphic abstract

Notes

References

  1. ANSYS™ (2012) Fluent User’s Guide, Release 14.5Google Scholar
  2. Azijli I, Sciacchitano A, Ragni D, Palha A, Dwight RP (2016) A posteriori uncertainty quantification of PIV-based pressure data. Exp Fluids 57(5):72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baur T, Köngeter J (1999) PIV with high temporal resolution for the determination of local pressure reductions from coherent turbulence phenomena. In: Proceedings of the third international workshop on PIV. Hosted by the University of California, Santa-BarbaraGoogle Scholar
  4. Charonko JJ, King CV, Smith BL, Vlachos PP (2010) Assessment of pressure field calculations from particle image velocimetry measurements. Meas Sci Technol 21(10):105401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. de Kat R, Ganapathisubramani B (2013) Pressure from particle image velocimetry for convective flows: a Taylor’s hypothesis approach. Meas Sci Technol 24(2):024002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gomit G, Acher G, Chatellier L, David L (2018) Uncertainty analysis of an optical method for pressure estimation in fluid flows. Meas Sci Technol 29(2):024004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gunaydinoglu E (2018) Pressure field estimation from particle image velocimetry data, Ph.D. thesis METU (Ankara-Turkey)Google Scholar
  8. Gurka R, Liberzon A, Hefetz D, Rubinstein D, Shavit U (1999) Computation of pressure distribution using PIV velocity data. In: Workshop on particle image velocimetry, vol 2Google Scholar
  9. Harlow FH, Welch JE (1965) Numerical calculation of time-dependent viscous incompressible flow of fluid with free surface. Phys Fluids 8(12):2182MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hosokawa S, Moriyama S, Tomiyama A, Takada N (2003) PIV measurement of pressure distributions about single bubbles. J Nucl Sci Technol 40(10):754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Huhn F, Schanz D, Gesemann S, Schröder A (2016) FFT integration of instantaneous 3D pressure gradient fields measured by Lagrangian particle tracking in turbulent flows. Exp Fluids 57:9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hunt JC, Wray AA, Moin P (1988) Eddies, streams, and convergence zones in turbulent flows. In: Center for Turbulence Research Proceedings of the Summer Program, p 193Google Scholar
  13. Jaw SY, Chen JH, Wu PC (2009) Measurement of pressure distribution from PIV experiments. J Visual 12(1):27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jeon YJ, Gomit G, Earl T, Chatellier L, David L (2018) Sequential least-square reconstruction of instantaneous pressure field around a body from TR-PIV. Exp Fluids 59:27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kurtulus DF (2005) Numerical and experimental analysis of flapping motion in hover, application to micro air vehicles. Ph.D. thesis, Joint Ph.D thesis Poitiers University/ENSMA (Poitiers France) and METU (Ankara-Turkey)Google Scholar
  16. Kurtulus DF (2015) On the unsteady behavior of the flow around NACA 0012 airfoil with steady external conditions at Re=1000. Int J Micro Air Veh 7(3):301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kurtulus DF, David L, Farcy A, Alemdaroglu N (2008) Aerodynamic characteristics of flapping motion in hover. Exp Fluids 44(1):23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liu X, Katz J (2006) Instantaneous pressure and material acceleration measurements using a four-exposure PIV system. Exp Fluids 41(2):227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liu X, Katz J (2008) Cavitation phenomena occurring due to interaction of shear layer vortices with the trailing corner of a two-dimensional open cavity. Phys Fluids 20(4):041702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Liu X, Katz J (2018) Pressure-Rate-of-strain, pressure diffusion, and velocity-pressure-gradient tensor measurements in a cavity flow. AIAA J 56(10):3897–3914CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Liu X, Moreto JR (2019) Error propagation from the PIV-based pressure gradient to the integrated pressure by the omni-directional integration method. In: Proceedings of the 13th international symposium on particle image velocimetryGoogle Scholar
  22. Liu X, Moreto JR, Siddle-Mitchell S (2016) Instantaneous pressure reconstruction from measured pressure gradient using rotating parallel ray method. In: 54th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics), p 1049Google Scholar
  23. Pan Z, Whitehead J, Thomson S, Truscott T (2016) Error propagation dynamics of PIV-based pressure field calculations: how well does the pressure Poisson solver perform inherently? Meas Sci Technol 27(8):084012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Patankar SV (1980) Numerical heat transfer and fluid flow. Series on Computational Methods in Mechanics and Thermal Science (Hemisphere Publishing Corporation (CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group))Google Scholar
  25. Patankar SV (1981) A calculation procedure for two-dimensional elliptic situations. Numer Heat Transfer 4(4):409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Patankar S, Spalding D (1972) A calculation procedure for heat, mass and momentum transfer in three-dimensional parabolic flows. Int J Heat Mass Transfer 15(10):1787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pröbsting S, Scarano F, Bernardini M, Pirozzoli S (2013) On the estimation of wall pressure coherence using time-resolved tomographic PIV. Exp Fluids 54(7):1567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Schneiders JFG, Scarano F (2016) Dense velocity reconstruction from tomographic PTV with material derivatives. Exp Fluids 57(9):57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Suzuki T, Chatellier L, Jeon YL, David L (2018) Unsteady pressure estimation and compensation capabilities of the hybrid simulation combining PIV and DNS. Meas Sci Technol 29(12):125305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sweby PK (1984) High resolution schemes using flux limiters for hyperbolic conservation laws. SIAM J Numer Anal 21(5):995MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. van der Kindere JW, Laskari A, Ganapathisubramani B, de Kat R (2019) Pressure from 2D snapshot PIV. Exp Fluids 60(2):32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. van Gent PL, Michaelis D, van Oudheusden BW, Weiss PÉ, de Kat R, Laskari A, Jeon YJ, David L, Schanz D, Huhn F, Gesemann S, Novara M, McPhaden C, Neeteson NJ, Rival DE, Schneiders JFG, Schrijer FFJ (2017) Comparative assessment of pressure field reconstructions from particle image velocimetry measurements and Lagrangian particle tracking. Exp Fluids 58(4):33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. van Gent PL, Schrijer FFJ, van Oudheusden BW (2018) Assessment of the pseudo-tracking approach for the calculation of material acceleration and pressure fields from time-resolved PIV: part I. Error propagation. Meas Sci Technol 29(4):045204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. van Oudheusden B (2008) Principles and application of velocimetry based planar pressure imaging in compressible flows with shocks. Exp Fluids 45(4):657–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. van Oudheusden BW (2013) PIV-based pressure measurement. Meas Sci Technol 24(3):032001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Versteeg HK, Malalasekera W (2007) An introduction to computational fluid dynamics: the finite volume method. Pearson Education Ltd, Harlow, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  37. Violato D, Moore P, Scarano F (2011) Lagrangian and Eulerian pressure field evaluation of rod-airfoil flow from time-resolved tomographic PIV. Exp Fluids 50(4):1057–1070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wang Z, Gao Q, Wang C, Wei R, Wang J (2016) An irrotation correction on pressure gradient and orthogonal-path integration for PIV-based pressure reconstruction. Exp Fluids 57(6):104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wang Z, Gao Q, Wei R, Wang J (2017) Error propagation in the procedure of pressure reconstruction based on PIV data. J Phys Conf Ser 822(1):012055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wang J, Zhang C, Katz J (2019) GPU-based, parallel-line, omni-directional integration of measured pressure gradient field to obtain the 3D pressure distribution. Exp Fluids 60:4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Westerweel J (2008) On velocity gradients in PIV interrogation. Exp Fluids 44(5):831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zachos PK, Frascella M, MacManus DG, Gil-Prieto D (2017) Pressure flowfield and inlet flow distortion metrics reconstruction from velocity data. AIAA J 55(9):2929–2941CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Turkish Aerospace Industries Inc.AnkaraTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Aerospace EngineeringMiddle East Technical UniversityAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations