Advertisement

Experiments in Fluids

, 60:4 | Cite as

On the calculation of force from PIV data using the generalized added-mass and circulatory force decomposition

  • Eric LimacherEmail author
  • Chris Morton
  • David Wood
Research Article
  • 196 Downloads

Abstract

To understand the forces generated on an accelerating body in a fluid flow, it is useful to have the same framework for theory and experiment. A candidate for this purpose is the decomposition of fluid-dynamic force into added-mass and circulatory components. In its generalized form applicable to viscous incompressible flows, this formulation, referred to as the GAMC formulation, is applied to planar particle image velocimetry data to calculate instantaneous forces in the present study. These estimates are compared to direct force measurements and to an alternative force formulation from impulse theory, referred to as the standard impulse formulation (SIF). The chosen test case is a nominally two-dimensional circular cylinder towed through quiescent water under three acceleration profiles with peak Reynolds numbers between 5100 and 5150. For all three motion profiles, the measured and filtered drag force is consistently greater than the calculated forces with a bias of 10–20%, but the trends are in close agreement. Inspection of the presented equations reveals that the GAMC is less sensitive to near-body vorticity data than the SIF, which has the following consequences. First, forces calculated using the GAMC formulation are less sensitive to random error in the velocity than the SIF. This benefit comes at the cost of increased sensitivity to errors in cylinder position, but the associated uncertainty is negligible in the present study. Second, the GAMC is much more tolerant to the omission of near-body vorticity data, which is an attractive feature for PIV investigations. Finally, when no data are omitted, the SIF is more sensitive to the force components induced by uncharacterized high-frequency vibrations.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) for funding this research.

Supplementary material

348_2018_2648_MOESM1_ESM.gif (3.2 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (gif 3271 KB)
348_2018_2648_MOESM2_ESM.gif (2.9 mb)
Supplementary material 2 (gif 2925 KB)
348_2018_2648_MOESM3_ESM.gif (2.7 mb)
Supplementary material 3 (gif 2776 KB)

References

  1. Achenbach E (1968) Distribution of local pressure and skin friction around a circular cylinder in cross-flow up to \(\text{ Re }= 5\times 10^6\). J Fluid Mech 34(4):625–639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Albrecht T, del Campo V, Weier T, Metzkes H, Stiller J (2013) Deriving forces from 2D velocity field measurements. Eur Phys J Spec Top 220(1):91–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. DeVoria AC, Carr ZR, Ringuette MJ (2014) On calculating forces from the flow field with application to experimental volume data. J Fluid Mech 749:297–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Driscoll TA, Trefethen LN (2002) Schwarz–Christoffel mapping, vol 8. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Eldredge JD (2007) Numerical simulation of the fluid dynamics of 2D rigid body motion with the vortex particle method. J Comput Phys 221(2):626–648MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fackrell S (2011) Study of the added mass of cylinders and spheres. Ph.D. thesis, University of WindsorGoogle Scholar
  7. Graham W, Pitt Ford C, Babinsky H (2017) An impulse-based approach to estimating forces in unsteady flow. J. Fluid Mech. 815:60–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kriegseis J, Rival DE (2014) Vortex force decomposition in the tip region of impulsively-started flat plates. J. Fluid Mech. 756:758–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kurtulus DF, Scarano F, David L (2007) Unsteady aerodynamic forces estimation on a square cylinder by TR-PIV. Exp. Fluids 42(2):185–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Laschka B (1985) Unsteady flows—fundamentals and application. In: AGARD conference Proceedings No. 386, North Atlantic Treaty OrganizationGoogle Scholar
  11. Limacher E, Morton C, Wood D (2018) Generalized derivation of the added-mass and circulatory forces for viscous flows. Physical Review Fluids 03:014701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Milne-Thompson LM (1960) Theoretical hydrodynamics, 4th edn. MacMillan, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Moffat RJ (1988) Describing the uncertainties in experimental results. Exp Therm Fluid Sci 1:3–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mohebbian A, Rival DE (2012) Assessment of the derivative-moment transformation method for unsteady-load estimation. Exp Fluids 53(2):319–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Noca F (1997) On the evaluation of time-dependent fluid-dynamic forces on bluff bodies. Ph.D. thesis, California Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  16. Noca F, Shiels D, Jeon D (1999) A comparison of methods for evaluating time-dependent fluid dynamic forces on bodies, using only velocity fields and their derivatives. J Fluids Struct 13:551–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Polet DT, Rival DE, Weymouth GD (2015) Unsteady dynamics of rapid perching manoeuvres. J Fluid Mech 767:323–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rival DE, van Oudheusden B (2017) Load-estimation techniques for unsteady incompressible flows. Exp Fluids 58(3):20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Saffman PG (1992) Vortex dynamics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Scarano F, Riethmuller ML (2000) Advances in iterative multigrid PIV image processing. Exp Fluids 29(Suppl 1):S051–S060Google Scholar
  21. Thom A (1929) An investigation of fluid flow in two dimensions. HM Stationery Office, RichmondGoogle Scholar
  22. Thom A (1933) The flow past circular cylinders at low speeds. Proc R Soc Lond Ser A Contain Pap Math Phys Character 141(845):651–669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Van Oudheusden BW, Scarano F, Casimiri EWF (2006) Non-intrusive load characterization of an airfoil using PIV. Exp Fluids 40(6):988–992.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00348-006-0149-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wang C, Eldredge JD (2013) Low-order phenomenological modeling of leading-edge vortex formation. Theor Comput Fluid Dyn 27:577–598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Westerweel J, Scarano F (2005) Universal outlier detection for PIV data. Exp Fluids 39(6):1096–1100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wieneke B (2015) PIV uncertainty quantification from correlation statistics. Meas Sci Technol 26:074002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wu JC (1981) Theory for aerodynamic force and moment in viscous flows. AIAA J 19(4):432–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wu JZ, Ma HY, Zhou MD (2015) Vortical flows. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Xia X, Mohseni K (2013) Lift evaluation of a two-dimensional pitching flat plate. Phys Fluids 25(9):091901CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing EngineeringUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada

Personalised recommendations