Repeating Water Tunnel Studies in Wind Tunnel

AI Thread Summary
Repeating a water tunnel study in a wind tunnel has limited significance if both flows are incompressible and at the same Reynolds number, as it primarily confirms the incompressibility of air. The main advantage of using a water tunnel lies in achieving specific flow regimes or facilitating easier flow visualization techniques, such as dye injection, which are not feasible in air. While both mediums can be interchangeable in many cases, the choice should depend on the specific measurement needs of the study. Techniques like smoke visualization have limitations in water, while some methods, like naphthalene sublimation, are exclusive to air. Ultimately, the decision to use either medium should be based on which one best meets the experimental requirements.
doubled
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Is there any significance in repeating a water tunnel study in a wind tunnel?
If so, would the results be publishable or would it just be considered repetition of a previously published water tunnel study?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
There really is no significance if both flows are incompressible and at the same Reynolds number. All it really means is that the air really was incompressible. The main reason you would want to use a water tunnel would be if you need to reach a flow regime that you were simply unable to achieve for one reason or another in air or if you for some reason needed it to be incredibly easy to do PIV or various flow visualization techniques or something along those lines. Otherwise they are essentially interchangeable in most cases where they can both be used.
 
Last edited:
boneh3ad said:
There really is no significance if both flows are incompressible and at the same Reynolds number. All it really means is that the air really was incompressible. The main reason you would want to use a water tunnel would be if you need to reach a flow regime that you were simply unable to achieve for one reason or another in air or if you for some reason needed it to be incredibly easy to do PIV or various flow visualization techniques or something along those lines. Otherwise they are essentially interchangeable in most cases where they can both be used.

Btw, why are flow visualization techniques easier in water tunnels?
 
Do you watch Mythbusters? Have you seen them inject neutrally buoyant dye into the water tunnel and watch it flow over their models? You can't really do that with air. Nothing visible is neutrally buoyant in air like that.
 
boneh3ad said:
Do you watch Mythbusters? Have you seen them inject neutrally buoyant dye into the water tunnel and watch it flow over their models? You can't really do that with air. Nothing visible is neutrally buoyant in air like that.
I don't watch Mythbusters.
Oh I see. I've never tried dye visualization. Have you tried smoke visualization using the smoke-wire technique in Lex Smits' Flow Visualization book? I presume that can only be done in wind tunnels?
 
Sure I've used a smoke wire, which is all well and good, but it isn't truly neutrally buoyant so it doesn't work below a certain speed. The smoke particles will just settle.

Of course on the contrary, things like naphthalene sublimation only work in air flow. I'd imagine that temperature- and pressure-sensitive paints work in water, but I've never seen or heard of it being done.

Really, the reason to use water is if you need the match conditions that water can give you. Same goes for air. If you application would work in either, use the one that gives you the best chance of making the measurements you want.
 
Thread 'Turbocharging carbureted petrol 2 stroke engines'
Hi everyone, online I ve seen some images about 2 stroke carbureted turbo (motorcycle derivation engine). Now.. In the past in this forum some members spoke about turbocharging 2 stroke but not in sufficient detail. The intake and the exhaust are open at the same time and there are no valves like a 4 stroke. But if you search online you can find carbureted 2stroke turbo sled or the Am6 turbo. The question is: Is really possible turbocharge a 2 stroke carburated(NOT EFI)petrol engine and...
I need some assistance with calculating hp requirements for moving a load. - The 4000lb load is resting on ball bearing rails so friction is effectively zero and will be covered by my added power contingencies. Load: 4000lbs Distance to travel: 10 meters. Time to Travel: 7.5 seconds Need to accelerate the load from a stop to a nominal speed then decelerate coming to a stop. My power delivery method will be a gearmotor driving a gear rack. - I suspect the pinion gear to be about 3-4in in...
Back
Top