Recent content by MUfluids

Mainly camera's speed at capturing two frame fast enough. Water channel maximum flow speed is around 0.5m/s, in comparison, wind tunnel testing speed is at 30m/s. The cost of setting up PIV in the wind tunnel is the main hinderance really.

Unfortunately, our equipment isn't quite capable of resolving the particles moving at higher speed in the wind tunnel.

Yea, most likely I will be performing PIV in the near future. That Omniprobe you suggested looks interesting, I will look into that, thanks. I guess it really comes down to a compromise between do I want higher Reynolds number and test with a probe and suffer some blockage, or do I want to do...

Thanks a lot tho, appreciate it.

Yea, that is still a bit big. I should clarify, the cross section of the model is like 171mm by 438mm, so it's really small. The probe I was using before looks like this. which has really good spatial resolution, except it doesn't pick up flow beyond 45degree acceptance angle.

Hi, thank you for your response. Yes, that is a possible option, although the main concern with that is the reduced spatial resolution. As testing is conducted on a 1/15th sized train wagon model, I'm hoping not to sacrifice too much spatial resolution. But I will still look into this idea...

Hi, I'm trying to measure the steady state velocity field behind the wake of a bluff body in the wind tunnel. My uni is equipped with 4-hole cobra probes which is capable of receiving flow within a 45 degree cone of acceptance. As the base of a bluff body dominated with re-circulating flow...