The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Comparative assessment of pressure field reconstructions from particle image velocimetry measurements and Lagrangian particle tracking

Comparative assessment of pressure field reconstructions from particle image velocimetry measurements and Lagrangian particle tracking
Comparative assessment of pressure field reconstructions from particle image velocimetry measurements and Lagrangian particle tracking
A test case for pressure field reconstruction from particle image velocimetry (PIV) and Lagrangian particle tracking (LPT) has been developed by constructing a simulated experiment from a zonal detached eddy simulation for an axisymmetric base flow at Mach 0.7. The test case comprises sequences of four subsequent particle images (representing multi-pulse data) as well as continuous time-resolved data which can realistically only be obtained for low-speed flows. Particle images were processed using tomographic PIV processing as well as the LPT algorithm ‘Shake-The-Box’ (STB). Multiple pressure field reconstruction techniques have subsequently been applied to the PIV results (Eulerian approach, iterative least-square pseudo-tracking, Taylor’s hypothesis approach, and instantaneous Vortex-in-Cell) and LPT results (FlowFit, Vortex-in-Cell-plus, Voronoi-based pressure evaluation, and iterative least-square pseudo-tracking). All methods were able to reconstruct the main features of the instantaneous pressure fields, including methods that reconstruct pressure from a single PIV velocity snapshot. Highly accurate reconstructed pressure fields could be obtained using LPT approaches in combination with more advanced techniques. In general, the use of longer series of time-resolved input data, when available, allows more accurate pressure field reconstruction. Noise in the input data typically reduces the accuracy of the reconstructed pressure fields, but none of the techniques proved to be critically sensitive to the amount of noise added in the present test case.
0723-4864
van Gent, P.L.
0d8331ae-ea75-4ae3-81d3-242129278b57
Michaelis, D.
b3ec99b9-4132-498d-8159-8ea4b0c8a09a
van Oudheusden, B.W.
2e0bdc67-1e33-4654-964f-3820342f4afd
Weiss, P.-E.
ee148952-d987-481c-b9a0-976fbd1e6dd6
De Kat, R.
d46a99a4-8653-4698-9ef4-46dd0c77ba5d
Laskari, A.
15fd6017-4699-4cb5-bbf1-a158e8dcd70f
Jeon, Y.J.
96ece058-2ca5-45de-a478-0f934317e30d
David, L.
cf3b9907-6acc-437b-a56a-ea884ec307dc
Schanz, D.
9f0ca305-ab3e-4f91-b8f5-6f4405a1614a
Huhn, F.
d3925116-5b36-49bf-9c2a-7d823559b170
Gesemann, S.
9981dbee-c243-4e4e-9b95-5f15ae31239f
Novara, M.
1b43f229-7ada-4de0-8388-4895e9e8f339
McPhaden, C.
6c1bfb09-8bff-4c24-9a71-e31cddb41a55
Neeteson, N.J.
0e03bafa-f406-4ed5-9044-6099e82a5c11
Rival, D.E.
a980e509-63ac-4f63-abcc-db6df4010df0
Schneiders, J.F.G.
f0384ae2-898c-49e8-aba3-8373089d3ed8
Schrijer, F.F.J.
9262df3f-f518-4733-b9ab-78c32b0cc8a5
van Gent, P.L.
0d8331ae-ea75-4ae3-81d3-242129278b57
Michaelis, D.
b3ec99b9-4132-498d-8159-8ea4b0c8a09a
van Oudheusden, B.W.
2e0bdc67-1e33-4654-964f-3820342f4afd
Weiss, P.-E.
ee148952-d987-481c-b9a0-976fbd1e6dd6
De Kat, R.
d46a99a4-8653-4698-9ef4-46dd0c77ba5d
Laskari, A.
15fd6017-4699-4cb5-bbf1-a158e8dcd70f
Jeon, Y.J.
96ece058-2ca5-45de-a478-0f934317e30d
David, L.
cf3b9907-6acc-437b-a56a-ea884ec307dc
Schanz, D.
9f0ca305-ab3e-4f91-b8f5-6f4405a1614a
Huhn, F.
d3925116-5b36-49bf-9c2a-7d823559b170
Gesemann, S.
9981dbee-c243-4e4e-9b95-5f15ae31239f
Novara, M.
1b43f229-7ada-4de0-8388-4895e9e8f339
McPhaden, C.
6c1bfb09-8bff-4c24-9a71-e31cddb41a55
Neeteson, N.J.
0e03bafa-f406-4ed5-9044-6099e82a5c11
Rival, D.E.
a980e509-63ac-4f63-abcc-db6df4010df0
Schneiders, J.F.G.
f0384ae2-898c-49e8-aba3-8373089d3ed8
Schrijer, F.F.J.
9262df3f-f518-4733-b9ab-78c32b0cc8a5

van Gent, P.L., Michaelis, D., van Oudheusden, B.W., Weiss, P.-E., De Kat, R., Laskari, A., Jeon, Y.J., David, L., Schanz, D., Huhn, F., Gesemann, S., Novara, M., McPhaden, C., Neeteson, N.J., Rival, D.E., Schneiders, J.F.G. and Schrijer, F.F.J. (2017) Comparative assessment of pressure field reconstructions from particle image velocimetry measurements and Lagrangian particle tracking. Experiments in Fluids, 58 (4), [33]. (doi:10.1007/s00348-017-2324-z).

Record type: Article

Abstract

A test case for pressure field reconstruction from particle image velocimetry (PIV) and Lagrangian particle tracking (LPT) has been developed by constructing a simulated experiment from a zonal detached eddy simulation for an axisymmetric base flow at Mach 0.7. The test case comprises sequences of four subsequent particle images (representing multi-pulse data) as well as continuous time-resolved data which can realistically only be obtained for low-speed flows. Particle images were processed using tomographic PIV processing as well as the LPT algorithm ‘Shake-The-Box’ (STB). Multiple pressure field reconstruction techniques have subsequently been applied to the PIV results (Eulerian approach, iterative least-square pseudo-tracking, Taylor’s hypothesis approach, and instantaneous Vortex-in-Cell) and LPT results (FlowFit, Vortex-in-Cell-plus, Voronoi-based pressure evaluation, and iterative least-square pseudo-tracking). All methods were able to reconstruct the main features of the instantaneous pressure fields, including methods that reconstruct pressure from a single PIV velocity snapshot. Highly accurate reconstructed pressure fields could be obtained using LPT approaches in combination with more advanced techniques. In general, the use of longer series of time-resolved input data, when available, allows more accurate pressure field reconstruction. Noise in the input data typically reduces the accuracy of the reconstructed pressure fields, but none of the techniques proved to be critically sensitive to the amount of noise added in the present test case.

Text
NIOPLEX_Comparative assessment of pressure field reconstructions from PIV measurements and LPT_AcceptedForPublication - Accepted Manuscript
Download (3MB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 28 February 2017
e-pub ahead of print date: 27 March 2017
Published date: April 2017
Organisations: Education Hub, Aerodynamics & Flight Mechanics Group

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 406185
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/406185
ISSN: 0723-4864
PURE UUID: 3c2b44b4-b61e-4431-8b37-c11c4c6714ff
ORCID for R. De Kat: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-6851-4409

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 10 Mar 2017 10:41
Last modified: 16 Mar 2024 05:06

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: P.L. van Gent
Author: D. Michaelis
Author: B.W. van Oudheusden
Author: P.-E. Weiss
Author: R. De Kat ORCID iD
Author: A. Laskari
Author: Y.J. Jeon
Author: L. David
Author: D. Schanz
Author: F. Huhn
Author: S. Gesemann
Author: M. Novara
Author: C. McPhaden
Author: N.J. Neeteson
Author: D.E. Rival
Author: J.F.G. Schneiders
Author: F.F.J. Schrijer

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×