Calculating Reynolds number in wind tunnel

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the Reynolds number (Re) for a square cylinder in a wind tunnel, using the formula Re = air density * air velocity * D / dynamic viscosity. The characteristic length (D) can be the frontal length or an effective diameter, depending on the specific study. The user is verifying a model using COMSOL Multiphysics to calculate drag (Cd) and lift (Cl) coefficients at various angles of attack, particularly seeking literature beyond the common 0 and 45-degree angles. Recommendations include searching the Journal of Fluid Mechanics (JFM) for relevant articles.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Reynolds number calculation
  • Familiarity with wind tunnel testing principles
  • Knowledge of COMSOL Multiphysics for simulation
  • Basic fluid dynamics concepts, including drag and lift coefficients
NEXT STEPS
  • Research "Reynolds number calculation for square cylinders" in the Journal of Fluid Mechanics
  • Explore "COMSOL Multiphysics tutorials for fluid dynamics simulations"
  • Investigate "Effects of angle of attack on drag and lift coefficients" in fluid mechanics literature
  • Study "Hydraulic diameter calculations for non-circular cross-sections"
USEFUL FOR

Aerospace engineers, fluid dynamics researchers, and students involved in wind tunnel testing and simulation of aerodynamic properties.

mostafagemy
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
when calculating a Reynolds number for an obstacle in wind tunnel
Re = air density * air velocity * D / Dynamic viscosity
D here is the characteristic length of the immersed body ( frontal length ) 2 dimensional problem
Or the Hydraulic diameter which relates the tunnel dimensions to the characteristic length of the immersed body ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It depends entirely on for what reason what you are calculating the Reynolds number. In general, you won't be using any tunnel dimensions, as almost all interesting quantities are going to be related to the model you are using. Usually the idea is to use the most relevant characteristic length for what you are studying, be it the diameter of your object, the chord of your object, the boundary layer thickness, roughness height or any other number of things.
 
really , I need to verify a model on a program ( flow over a square cylinder with different angles of attack to calc the drag and lift coefficients on it ) . I looked a lot for others work about this problem but what I found was only about 0 and 45 angle of attack , so if u can support me with other web sites , plots or books name , it will be a great help. And thanks for your reply.
 
That would be hard to do without any background on what you a trying to do (and saying you are just verifying a model doesn't really tell me much). For your purpose, the relevant Reynolds number is most likely going to be based on the length of one side of your cross section. I suppose the other option would be finding an effective diameter (similar to the hydraulic diameter of a square tube). I would look into the literature on the subject to figure out what the normal convention is in this case.

For example, perform a search over at JFM:
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=FLM
 
hi boneh3ah ,
I had a network connection problem yesterday

the attached photo is about the model I calculate the Cd & Cl for it.

I'm testing the variation of many parameters on Cd & Cl ( Air speed, square side dimension , tunnel height) also, the shape ( square , triangle)

the fixation points are in the middle of each side ( four fixation points ) & they are also the points which I measure the reaction forces on them.

I'm using Comsol multiphysics program for simulation problem.
thanks a lot
 

Attachments

  • Untitled.png
    Untitled.png
    19.8 KB · Views: 1,104
Like I said, do a search through the literature. I remember seeing a JFM article about calculating lift and drag on a square cylinder, but I personally am not all that familiar with this particular flow problem so I can't tell you all that much.

What I can tell you is that your simulation appears to be steady and laminar based on the wake and this is a highly unsteady phenomenon.
 
thanks a lot for your help boneh3ad
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
42K
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
6K