Abstract
Background-oriented schlieren (BOS) technique is a density-based optical measurement technique. BOS measurement is similar to particle image velocimetry (PIV) ones in terms of experiments design and the computation of the displacements. However, in the BOS technique, the reconstruction of the refractive index field involves further mathematical calculations, which depend on the flow geometry, such as Poisson solver, Abel inversion, algebraic reconstruction technique, and filtered back-projection. This lengthy combination of experimental measurements, cross-correlation evaluation, and mathematical computation complicates the uncertainty quantification of the reconstructed field. In this study, we present a detailed approach for an a posteriori estimation of uncertainty when using BOS measurements to reconstruct the refractive index/density field. The proposed framework is based on the Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) method and can consider all kinds of sources of error, ranging from experimental measurements to those arising from image processing. The key features of this methodology are its capacity to handle different mathematical reconstruction procedures and the ease with which it can integrate additional sources of error. We demonstrate this method first by using synthetic images and a Poisson solver with mixed boundary conditions in a 2D domain. The accuracy of the proposed approach is assessed by comparing analytical and MCS results. Then, the modular nature of the proposed framework is experimentally demonstrated using a combination of Abel inversion and inverse gradient techniques to reconstruct a 3D axisymmetric density field around a transonic projectile in free-flight. The results are compared with computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and show high levels of agreement with only limited discrepancies, which are attributed to the space-filtering effect within cross-correlation resulting from shock waves.
Graphic abstract
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- A, B :
-
Uncertainty evaluation type
- \(c_{50}\) :
-
Covariance factor (overlap = \(50\%\))
- \(e_{ruler}\) :
-
Ruler fabrication error (mm)
- \(e_{\varDelta y}\) :
-
Total error in \(\varDelta y\) computation (pixel)
- F :
-
Refractive index reconstruction function
- f :
-
Lens focal length (mm)
- G :
-
Gladstone–Dale constant (\(m^3\)/kg)
- h :
-
Ambient humidity (%)
- k :
-
Coverage factor (%)
- L :
-
Length read on the ruler image (mm)
- M :
-
Background image magnification (mm/pixel)
- \(\mathrm{Ma}\) :
-
Mach number
- \(M_\mathrm{obj}\) :
-
Image magnification factor in the object plane (mm/pixel)
- \(N_\mathrm{eff}\) :
-
Effective number of pixels (pixels)
- \(N_\mathrm{s}\) :
-
Number of samples
- \(N_\mathrm{T}\) :
-
Total number of matrix elements
- n :
-
Refractive index
- \(n_0\) :
-
Reference refractive index
- \(n_n\) :
-
Normalized refractive index difference.
- p :
-
Ambient pressure (kPa)
- pix :
-
Number of pixels that corresponds to L (pixel)
- r :
-
Radial coordinate (pixel)
- s :
-
Grid size (pixel)
- S :
-
Poisson equation source term
- \(\sigma\) :
-
Distribution standard deviation
- T :
-
Ambient temperature (C)
- u :
-
Standard uncertainty
- \(u_\mathrm{c}\) :
-
Combined uncertainty
- \(U_\%\) :
-
Extended uncertainty
- \(\chi _\bot\) :
-
Component \(\in (x,y)\) normal to the boundary
- v :
-
True assigned displacement in y-direction (pixel)
- \(Z_\mathrm{B}\) :
-
Distance object-background (m)
- \(Z_\mathrm{T}\) :
-
Distance camera-background (m)
- \(Z_\mathrm{W}\) :
-
Flow thickness (m)
- \(\varDelta x,y\) :
-
Displacements in the image plane (pixel)
- \(\varDelta x',y'\) :
-
Displacements in the background plane (pixel)
- \(\delta\) :
-
Elemental error
- \(\epsilon _{x,y}\) :
-
Light deflection angle in x,y-direction (rad)
- \(\lambda\) :
-
Wavelength of light (m)
- \(\rho\) :
-
Density (kg/\(m^3\))
- \(\tau\) :
-
Background element particle image size (pixel)
- \({\mathcal {V}}\) :
-
Extended vector
- \(\varOmega\) :
-
Real but unknown quantity value
- \(\omega\) :
-
Elemental measurement
References
Azijli I, Sciacchitano A, Ragni D, Palha A, Dwight RP (2016) A posteriori uncertainty quantification of PIV-based pressure data. Exp Fluids 57(5):72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-016-2159-z
Bhattacharya S, Charonko JJ, Vlachos PP (2018) Particle image velocimetry (PIV) uncertainty quantification using moment of correlation (MC) plane. Meas Sci Technol 29(11):115301. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6501/aadfb4
Boomsma A, Bhattacharya S, Troolin D, Pothos S, Vlachos P (2016) A comparative experimental evaluation of uncertainty estimation methods for two-component PIV. Meas Sci Technol 27(9):094006. https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-0233/27/9/094006
Celik IB, Ghia U, Roache PJ, Freitas CJ (2008) Procedure for estimation and reporting of uncertainty due to discretization in cfd applications. J Fluids Eng-Trans ASME 130(7):81
Coleman HW, Steele WG (2009) Experimentation, validation, and uncertainty analysis for engineers, 3rd edn. Wiley, Hoboken
de Briey V (2021) Small-caliber exterior ballistics: aerodynamic coefficients determination by CFD. http://hdl.handle.net/2268/260317
Fomin NA (1998) Speckle photography for fluid mechanics measurements. experimental fluid mechanics. Springer, Berlin
Gerasimov A (2014) Guidelines for setting up laminar-turbulent transition cases in ansys cfd. Int J Mech Sci 152:384
Guillaume G, Beaulieu C, Braud P, David L (2018) Démarche d’estimation des incertitudes en PIV basée sur la méthode GUM. In: CFTL-16, CNRS,IRSN, Sep 2018, Dourdan, France, p 10
Hargather MJ, Settles GS (2010) Natural-background-oriented schlieren imaging. Exp Fluids 48(1):59–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-009-0709-3
Hartmann U, Seume JR (2016) Combining ART and FBP for improved fidelity of tomographic BOS. Meas Sci Technol 27(9):097001. https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-0233/27/9/097001
International Organization for Standardization (1989) ISO 2768–1, General tolerances Part 1: Tolerances for linear and angular dimensions without individual tolerance indications. Tech. rep, ISO
JCGM (2008) BIPM - guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement (GUM). Tech. rep, JCGM
JCGM J, (2008) 101: 2008 evaluation of measurement data-supplement 1 to the “guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement”-propagation of distributions using a monte carlo method. International Organisation for Standardisation, Geneva
Kolhe PS, Agrawal AK (2009) Abel inversion of deflectometric data: comparison of accuracy and noise propagation of existing techniques. Appl Opt 48(20):3894. https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.48.003894
Meier GEA (1998) New optical tools for fluid mechanics. Sadhana 23(5–6):557–567. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02744579
Menter FR, Langtry RB, Likki SR, Suzen YB, Huang PG, Völker S (2004) A correlation-based transition model using local variables-part i: model formulation. J Turbomach 128(3):413–422. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2184352
Moisy F, Rabaud M, Salsac K (2009) A synthetic Schlieren method for the measurement of the topography of a liquid interface. Exp Fluids 46(6):1021–1036. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-008-0608-z
Moumen A, Grossen J, Ndindabahizi I, Gallant J, Hendrick P (2020) Visualization and analysis of muzzle flow fields using the background-oriented Schlieren technique. J Vis 25:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12650-020-00639-w
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):084012. https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-0233/27/8/084012
Pretzier G (1991) A new method for numerical abel-inversion. Zeitschrift für Naturforschung A 46(7):639–641. https://doi.org/10.1515/zna-1991-0715
Raffel M (2015) Background-oriented schlieren (BOS) techniques. Exp Fluids 56(3):60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-015-1927-5
Raffel M, Willert CE, Scarano F, Kähler CJ, Wereley ST, Kompenhans J (2018) Particle image velocimetry: a practical guide, third, edition. Springer, Cham
Rajendran LK, Zhang J, Bhattacharya S, Bane SPM, Vlachos PP (2019) Uncertainty quantification in density estimation from background oriented Schlieren (BOS) measurements. Meas Sci Technol 1:25. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6501/ab60c8
Sciacchitano A (2019) Uncertainty quantification in particle image velocimetry. Meas Sci Technol 30(9):092001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6501/ab1db8
Sciacchitano A, Wieneke B (2016) PIV uncertainty propagation. Meas Sci Technol 27(8):084006. https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-0233/27/8/084006
Sciacchitano A, Wieneke B, Scarano F (2013) PIV uncertainty quantification by image matching. Meas Sci Technol 24(4):045302. https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-0233/24/4/045302
Sciacchitano A, Neal DR, Smith BL, Warner SO, Vlachos PP, Wieneke B, Scarano F (2015) Collaborative framework for PIV uncertainty quantification: comparative assessment of methods. Meas Sci Technol 26(7):074004. https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-0233/26/7/074004
Stein M (1987) Large sample properties of simulations using latin hypercube sampling. Technometrics 29(2):143–151. https://doi.org/10.2307/1269769
Stone JA, Zimmerman JH (2011) Engineering metrology toolbox. URL http://emtoolbox nistgov/Wavelength/Edlen asp 20:24
Thielicke W, Stamhuis E (2014) PIVlab – towards user-friendly, affordable and accurate digital particle image velocimetry in MATLAB. J Open Res Softw 2(1):e30. https://doi.org/10.5334/jors.bl
Timmins BH, Wilson BW, Smith BL, Vlachos PP (2012) A method for automatic estimation of instantaneous local uncertainty in particle image velocimetry measurements. Exp Fluids 53(4):1133–1147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-012-1341-1
Vinnichenko NA, Uvarov AV, Plaksina YY (2012) Accuracy of background oriented schlieren for different background patterns and means of refraction index reconstruction. In: ISFV-15, Minsk, Belarus, p 15
Walters DK, Cokljat D (2008) A three-equation eddy-viscosity model for reynolds-averaged navier-stokes simulations of transitional flow. J Fluids Eng 130(12):41
Xue Z, Charonko JJ, Vlachos PP (2015) Particle image pattern mutual information and uncertainty estimation for particle image velocimetry. Meas Sci Technol 26(7):074001. https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-0233/26/7/074001
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Moumen, A., de Briey, V., Atoui, O. et al. Monte Carlo-based a posteriori uncertainty quantification for background-oriented schlieren measurements. J Vis 25, 945–965 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12650-022-00838-7
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12650-022-00838-7