Measurement of an Oscillating Shock Wave in a Transonic Flow Using Two Different Pressure Sensitive Paints* (*Ru-based on anodized aluminum vs. Pt-based with screen layer)
W. Beck, C. Klein, U. Henne, M. Merienne, Y. Le Sant, P. Molton
{"title":"Measurement of an Oscillating Shock Wave in a Transonic Flow Using Two Different Pressure Sensitive Paints* (*Ru-based on anodized aluminum vs. Pt-based with screen layer)","authors":"W. Beck, C. Klein, U. Henne, M. Merienne, Y. Le Sant, P. Molton","doi":"10.2514/6.2018-3316","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The performance of two different PSP used at DLR and ONERA is compared by carrying out bench mark testing using the oft-studied configuration of an oscillating shock wave (up to 100 Hz) on a bump in the Mach 1.4 flow of the ONERA S8Ch wind tunnel. The shock is made to oscillate by rotating a cam with elliptical cross section, placed at a further downstream position, at frequencies of 15, 30 and 50 Hz. Both paint types are well known and much has been published on their use: the ONERA PSP is a Ruthenium complex Ru(dpp)_3Cl_2 placed as a thin layer on an anodized aluminum substrate, while the DLR PSP is a Platinum complex PtTFPP on a base coating containing TiO_2 particles. S8 run conditions were held constant, and separate test run series were carried out with each paint. Instationary calibration was also carried out using a special test rig. Fourier analyses of the PSP results in S8 enabled a semi-quantitative comparison of the time response of both paints. This is the first published attempt (to the authors’ knowledge) of carrying out a side-by-side comparison of the characteristics of these two paints on such a flow configuration in a wind tunnel. Particular emphasis is placed on their handling properties and, above all, their time responses.","PeriodicalId":373890,"journal":{"name":"2018 Aerodynamic Measurement Technology and Ground Testing Conference","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2018 Aerodynamic Measurement Technology and Ground Testing Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2018-3316","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The performance of two different PSP used at DLR and ONERA is compared by carrying out bench mark testing using the oft-studied configuration of an oscillating shock wave (up to 100 Hz) on a bump in the Mach 1.4 flow of the ONERA S8Ch wind tunnel. The shock is made to oscillate by rotating a cam with elliptical cross section, placed at a further downstream position, at frequencies of 15, 30 and 50 Hz. Both paint types are well known and much has been published on their use: the ONERA PSP is a Ruthenium complex Ru(dpp)_3Cl_2 placed as a thin layer on an anodized aluminum substrate, while the DLR PSP is a Platinum complex PtTFPP on a base coating containing TiO_2 particles. S8 run conditions were held constant, and separate test run series were carried out with each paint. Instationary calibration was also carried out using a special test rig. Fourier analyses of the PSP results in S8 enabled a semi-quantitative comparison of the time response of both paints. This is the first published attempt (to the authors’ knowledge) of carrying out a side-by-side comparison of the characteristics of these two paints on such a flow configuration in a wind tunnel. Particular emphasis is placed on their handling properties and, above all, their time responses.