Conversion Of Purdue’s Mach-4 Ludwieg Tube To A Transonic .

2y ago
33 Views
2 Downloads
353.76 KB
23 Pages
Last View : 1m ago
Last Download : 5m ago
Upload by : Vicente Bone
Transcription

Note: See Prof. Schneider before doing experiments based on this report. While generally good, it contains a few errors.Conversion of Purdue’s Mach-4 Ludwieg Tubeto a Transonic Educational FacilityAAE 490 Final Report – 12/12/2004Tyler Wilhelm, School of Aeronautics and AstronauticsPurdue University - West Lafayette, INABSTRACTThe Purdue University Mach 4 Quiet Flow Ludwieg Tube has been converted to thePurdue Transonic Educational Facility. The conversion involved removing the Mach 4converging-diverging nozzle and replacing it with a new contraction, flange, and contouredinsert section. The new transonic section was prepared during summer 2004, and milled in theAerospace Sciences Laboratory in August 2004. Assembly and initial testing of the TransonicEducational Facility was performed during the fall semester 2004.INTRODUCTIONFigure 1 – Previous Configuration of Purdue Mach 4 Ludwieg TubeWith the retirement of the Concorde Supersonic Transport, nearly every commercialflight takes place within the range of transonic flight. Purdue University is a leader in Aerospaceeducation, and yet, there has been no facility for examining the properties of transonic flight.Purdue University owned a Mach 4 Quiet Flow Ludwieg Tube at the Aerospace SciencesLaboratory, at the Purdue University Airport, which has set largely unused. The Mach 4configuration can be seen in Figure 1.This facility has been replaced by a new Mach 6 Ludwieg Tube with a larger test sectionand longer test time. In order to utilize the existing resources, the Mach 4 Quiet Flow LudwiegTube has been converted to the Purdue Transonic Educational Facility (PTEF). The PTEF isintended to test airfoils at transonic speeds, and will be used primarily as a teaching apparatus for

AAE 520 and for possible demonstrations in AAE 334 Lab. For this conversion, a newcontraction, flange, and contoured insert section has been designed and manufactured in theAerospace Sciences Laboratory machine shop. The new transonic section has been designed sothat it is possible for the tunnel to be converted back to Mach 4 operation at a later date.LUDWIEG TUBE OVERVIEWIn 1955, German scientist, Hubert Ludwieg proposed a new design for an inexpensivewind tunnel. The design, which became known as a Ludwieg Tube, allows for operation atsupersonic, and even hypersonic, velocities, while maintaining relatively quiet flow. This meansthe data from a Ludwieg Tube more accurately depict flight conditions, when compared toconventional blown-down wind tunnels. Some benefits of the Ludwieg Tube design, adaptedfrom [6] are Superior flow quality (shockless inlet design, inherently constant stagnation condtions);flow conditioning and settling chamber not required. Pressure regulator not required The simple design allows operation by a single researcher. Also, a large compressor isnot required, and therefore the cost is kept relatively low.In order to run a Ludwieg Tube, a burst diaphragm is placed downstream of the drivertube. This diaphragm separates a downstream vacuum from the pressurized air in the driver tube.When the diaphragm is suddenly ruptured, a shockwave is sent downstream, and an expansionwave is sent upstream. The expansion wave reflects off the closed end of the driver tube, andtypically continues reflecting until the pressure nears equilibrium. Between passes of theexpansion wave, the flow in the test section is quasi-static, allowing data to be obtained.DESIGN FOR TRANSONIC CONVERSIONCONTRACTIONThe Mach 4 Ludwieg Tube had a converging-diverging nozzle, which is required forsupersonic flow. The PTEF is not intended to reach supersonic freestream conditions, andtherefore needs only a contraction. The contoured insert section, which is discussed later, takesthe place of the Mach 4 diverging nozzle. The transonic contraction was designed in 1998 byShin Matsumura, who was an undergraduate student at Purdue University. The contraction usesa superellipse function to transition from a circular driver tube, with an inner radius of 6.033inches, to the contoured insert section with an inner width of 3.804”, and an inner height of4.325”. The general form of a superellipse is given asaa y x 1 y0 x0 In this equation, x0 and y0 are respectively the semi-major and semi-minor axisparameters. The parameter ‘a’ controls the shape of the cross section. This equation reduces tothe formula for a circle with radius x0 when x0 and y0 are equal, and ‘a’ is 2. As ‘a’ increases,the cross section becomes more rectangular. More details of how the contraction contour wasdesigned can be found in reference [1]. The contraction section must also be designed so that it

slides into the end of the driver tube. A Matlab script was written that produced the Cartesiancoordinates (X,Y,Z) for the contraction contour. These coordinates were used to create a nurbsurface in SURFCAM, which was then used to create the CNC code for the milling machines.The contraction was milled from an aluminum cylinder with an initial diameter of 13 inches, andheight of 13 inches. To begin fabrication of the contraction section, a majority of the materialwas removed using a lathe. The cylinder was then cut to a height of 12.315 inches, and then cutdown the center, creating two identical halves. The final contraction contour was then milledwith a 3-axis CNC milling machine. When the contour was finished, the halves were boltedback together to form the contraction insert. The contraction insert has an outer diameter of12.290 inches, and a height of 12.315 inches. This contraction will then slide into the end of thedriver tube. This contraction insert is the same size as the current Mach 4 contraction insert,which allows conversion back to Mach 4 capabilities at a later date.FLANGEBetween the contraction insert and the contoured insert section is a blind flange modifiedfor this Ludwieg Tube. The contraction contour continues from the contraction section throughthe modified blind flange. The modifications include milling the final portion of the contractionfrom the center of the flange, holes for attaching the contoured insert section, and alignmentholes. The flange was machined to a final thickness of 1.185”. This gives a completecontraction length of 13.50 inches.CONTOURED INSERT SECTIONFigure 2 – New Configuration of Purdue Transonic Educational FacilityThe goal of the Purdue Transonic Educational Facility is to test airfoil sections attransonic speeds. Preliminary design of the contoured insert section (CIS) was also done by ShinMatsumura. The CIS was initially envisioned to achieve a Mach number of 0.722 with a modelchord length of 3 inches. More details can be found in reference [2]. Figure 2 shows thecomplete configuration of the PTEF. The CIS is designed as an adaptable wall test section. Anadaptive wall test section allows the flow streamlines to adapt to the body. The streamlines areable to move away from the body, which prevents the flow from choking around the model.Instead of utilizing flexible walls, like many other tunnels, the CIS was designed with contouredwall inserts. Both the wind tunnels presented later in this section use flexible adaptive walls.

The advantage of contoured inserts is the relatively low cost of initial design and fabrication. Anadditional advantage with the CIS, is that the top and bottom are designed so that the contouredinsert can be in as many as 3 pieces, which has the potential to cut down material cost. Thedisadvantage of contoured inserts lies in the requirement for a different insert for each individualtest. It is important that the height of the contour be maximized to allow for the maximumstreamline deflection.The size of the contoured inserts was determined by studying various wind tunnels withadaptive wall test sections. The Cryogenic Ludwieg Tube at DLR in Göttingen, Germany has a2.0 m x 0.4 m x 0.35 m test section. (reference [5]) The maximum wall deflection is 0.045meters. This gives a maximum deflection to test section height ratio of 12.86%. The TransonicCryogenic Tunnel at NASA Langley Research Center has a test section height of 13 inches, witha maximum wall deflection of 3 inches. (reference [4]) That gives a maximum deflection toheight ratio of 23.08%.The CIS has an inner width of 3.804” and an inner height of 4.325” for testing of a modelwith a 3 inch chord (from reference [2]). In order to meet the existing test section, it wasdetermined that the maximum thickness for the inserts would be 1 inch. With a test sectionheight of 4.325 inches, this gives an insert to test section height ratio of 23.12%. This is greaterthan the German tunnel, and has almost the exact same ratio as the NASA tunnel. In subsonicflow, unlike supersonic flow, disturbances can propagate upstream. This means the flow willstart to diverge before actually reaching the body. This makes the distance from the beginning ofthe adaptation to the leading edge of the model an important design criterion for a transonic windtunnel. For the NASA tunnel, the flexible section starts 23.25 inches in front of a 13 inch model.The ratio between model chord and distance is 55.91%. In the CIS, the insert starts 5.565 inchesin front of the leading edge. Based on a model chord of 3 inches; this gives a ratio of 53.91%.This allows maximum adaptation of the flow, while meeting all design conditions.One design condition that needed to be met was the windows in the CIS. The twoupstream windows, and the middle set of windows were designed to be in the same positionrelative to the flange as the windows in the Mach 4 nozzle. The middle set of windows, as wellas the two downstream windows, are designed to be in the same position relative to the testsection as the windows in the Mach 4 nozzle. Figure 3 show the window openings in the CIS,covered by solid aluminum blanks. The upstream direction is to the right. The glass windowsare mounted in aluminum frames using Cerrotru, and are interchangeable with the test section, aswell as the Mach 4 nozzle.Figure 3 – Window openings (covered) in CIS

The cut-out in the top wall of the CIS is due to the traversing mechanism in the testsection. The traverse cover plate extends up to 4.5 inches into the area above the contouredinsert section prompting the 5 inch long cut-out. Due to the cutout in the top wall, the CIS is 5inches longer than the Mach 4 nozzle. An identical cut out is present in the bottom wall of theCIS, so that if the need should ever arise, it is possible to rotate the CIS 180o, while onlychanging the downstream flange. Figure 4 is a photograph of the assembled TransonicEducational Facility.Figure 4: Assembled Transonic Educational FacilityTHE PURDUE TRANSONIC EDUCATIONAL FACILITYThe Purdue Transonic Educational Facility was originally constructed between 1992 and1994 as the Purdue Mach 4 Quiet Flow Ludwieg Tube. The PTEF was designed to utilize asmany of the same parts of the Mach 4 Ludwieg Tube as possible, in order to reduce fabricationcost and to allow conversion back to the Mach 4 capability at a later date. The 68 foot longdriver tube section of the Ludwieg Tube is standard weight (150 psi class) carbon steel pipe withan inner diameter of 12 inches. The driver tube extends into the laboratory area, where it is held8 feet overhead by I-beam columns. Before assembly, the pipe was sand-blasted and painted toeliminate interior rusting and particle formation. For a run, the driver tube can be set at anydesired pressure. The pressure must be kept below 30 psia to prevent damage to electronicequipment. The driver tube is connected to the vacuum section through a small pipe, which,when opened, allows the initial pressure of the driver tube to be set below atmospheric pressure.The driver tube is also attached to an Ingersoll Rand PA50 215 SCFM 120 psig 50 HPcompressor, which allows the driver tube initial pressure to be set above atmospheric pressure.The compressor is also used to pump the Ludwieg Tube back to atmospheric pressure after a runhas been completed.

The transonic contraction is 13.5 inches long, and matches to the contoured insert sectionwhich has an inner width of 3.804 inches, and an inner height of 4.325 inches. The design of theCIS was discussed previously. The CIS then mates to the test section. The test section wasdeveloped for the Mach 4 Ludwieg Tube, and is also used for the Purdue Transonic EducationalFacility. The test section currently houses a double wedge, which is 1 inch wide at its widestpart and acts as the downstream throat. The double wedge also incorporates a sting support fortesting various models.The vacuum system of the Ludwieg Tube uses two vacuum pumps to evacuate thedownstream section of the Ludwieg Tube, as well as a 535 cubic foot vacuum tank. The pumpsuse vacuum lines made from standard 12 inch pipe. The two pumps can pump-down the vacuumsection to less than 1 torr, though the Ludwieg Tube is normally run at a vacuum pressure ofabout 4 torr. When the pressure rises above atmospheric pressure, the vacuum lines areevacuated using a check valve made from a flapping blind flange hinged to a tee, sealed with ano-ring. With a combined pumping rate of 270 cfm, the vacuum section can be pumped down to4 torr in about 15 minutes.Between the vacuum section and the test section is the diaphragm section. Easyplacement and removal of the diaphragm apparatus is facilitated by a quick-opening yokecoupling, manufactured by Tube-Turns Inc. The diaphragm section is opened and closed using ahand-operated hydraulic pump. Mylar burst diaphragms are used to separate the downstreamvacuum from the pressurized air upstream. Typically for driver tube initial pressures up to 10psia, 0.004 inch thick Mylar is used for the burst diaphragm. Driver tube pressures between 10and 18 psia typically uses 0.007 inch thick diaphragms, while higher pressures use a 0.010 inchthick diaphragm. Nichrome wires are taped to the diaphragm in an “X” pattern. In order tobreak the diaphragm, the nichrome wires are attached to “a pulsed heating apparatus consistingof 0.76F of 40V capacitors that are discharged through a high power SCR (International RectifierST230S16P0)”[8]. When the 20A of current is passed through the nichrome wires, the wiresbecome very hot, melting the Mylar and causing it to burst, initiating the run. A typical run lastbetween 3 and 5 seconds, with each reflection of the expansion wave taking about 0.08 seconds.This means that in a typical run, there are over 30 quasi-static run segments from which data canbe obtained.Data is recorded in the Purdue Transonic Educational Facility with a Kulite pitot probeplaced into the flow, near the middle window of the contoured insert section. A static pressuretransducer on the side wall of the test section is also utilized. Data from these pressure probes iscollected by a LeCroy 9104 digital oscilloscope, and transferred to a computer using the ScopeExplorer program. Fluctuations in pressure during the quasi-static run segments are typically nomore than 0.3%. These two pressure readings are used to calculate the Mach number usingequation 1.(γ 1) / γ ) 2 p 0,1 2 1 M1 (1)γ 1 p1 Velocity can be calculated from Mach number by determining the speed of sound. Thespeed of sound is given by the following equationa γRT (2)Where γ is 1.4, R is the ideal gas constant, and T is the freestream temperature. Thefreestream temperature can be determined by the isentropic relation

T T0 γ 1 γ (3) P0 P With the universal gas constant R taken to be 1716 ft*lb/slug*oR, the freestream velocityis given byU M 1 * a (4)Assuming the flow in the Ludwieg Tube will choke at the downstream throat during therun, the theoretical Mach number can be calculated from the ratio between the cross sectionalarea in the CIS, and the cross sectional area of the throat. If the cross sectional areas are known,Mach number can be calculated from21 2 γ 1 2 A M 1 * 2 2M γ 1 A ( γ 1) /( γ 1)(5)As mentioned previously, the CIS was initially designed to operate at a Mach number of0.722. For the PTEF, the CIS cross sectional area is 0.1143 ft2, and the cross sectional area at thethroat is 0.0842. This gives a ratio of 1.3575, which corresponds to a Mach number of 0.4917,when γ is considered to be 1.4. With the current downstream throat, the Mach number in the CISwill not reach the design condition. The Mach number could be increased with a smaller doublewedge. However this poses two problems. This first is that any changes in the sections whichare used by both the Mach 4 Ludwieg Tube and the PTEF would need to be restored beforeconversion back to Mach 4 operation, which complicates the conversion process.The second problem is that by choosing a Mach number of 0.722 and solving equation (5)for the cross sectional area of the throat, the maximum width of the double wedge is 0.2794inches. As mentioned before, the double wedge also incorporates the sting support for testmodels. The current support is threaded for a ½-13 sting. With the width of a new doublewedge being 0.2794 inches, this means the existing sting supports will have to be modified, or anew method for holding the models will have to be found.TESTING PROCEDUREA typical run should take between 25 and 35 minutes, depending on the desired pressures.1. Turn on Oscilloscope, Kulite boxes, capacitor, and computer. Capacitor takes some timeto build up charge, best to have on while pumping down tunnel. Make sure oscilloscopeis turned on before the computer.2. Make sure red handled valve which isolates the Ludwieg Tube from the supersonictunnel is set for Ludwieg Tube operation.3. On computer, Open Scope Explorer program, choose Scope Scope Finder, and choose“Find” to verify the connection between the computer and oscilloscope.4. Prepare diaphragm, as described in next section5. Open Tube-Turns, fit diaphragm ring in tunnel, Close Tube-Turns to seal tunnel.6. Turn on cooling water; keep water approximately at the midpoint of the glass.

7. Start the Stokes pump (on the left facing the pumps), open the red handled valve. Whilepumping, observe pump temperature, and keep below 140oF. If temperature gets to high,check that cooling water is running.8. Start the other pump (on the right), and open blue handled valve.9. Set desired driver tube pressure, either by opening green valve (raising pressure), or byopening yellow valve (lowering pressure), or by running at atmospheric pressure.10. Prepare next diaphragm while waiting for tunnel to pump down the vacuum section.11. Turn off pumps when desired vacuum reached12. Turn on trigger switch on diaphragm breaker box, set oscilloscope to “single”, and onScope Explorer on the computer, choose terminal remote13. Fire tunnel, by touching red wire to opposite post, closing the circuit.14. Turn off trigger switch on the diaphragm breaker box15. Open green valve to return tunnel to atmospheric pressure16. While tunnel is re-pressurizing, on the computer, in Scope Explorer, choose “Traces”,and select desired channels, and obtain traces in ASCII form. Save for analysis, thenchoose terminal local.17. Remove used diaphragm, and insert new diaphragm, repeat steps 5 thru 16DIAPHRAGM PREPARATIONTo begin a run of the Ludwieg Tube, a Mylar burst diaphragm must be prepared. If adiaphragm is not available, one must be traced and cut out of Mylar. For these tests, thediaphragms were prepared in June 2004. The first step is to insert the Mylar diaphragm into thediaphragm ring. The ring is then bolted together using two small dowel pins to align the ring.Once the diaphragm has been secured in the ring, nichrome wires are taped to the upstream sideof the diaphragm in an “X” pattern. The top wire is made to loop over the bottom wire so thewires will not short each other out. Figure 5 shows how the diaphragm is set upFigure 5 – Burst Diaphragm Setup (from reference [8])

CALIBRATIONIn order to get accurate measurements from both the pitot and static pressure probes, thetunnel was pressurized to a known pressure, read with a Paroscientific 740-30A pressure gauge,and the corresponding voltages were read with an HP 34401A digital multimeter. Thecalibration for each probe was performed over a range from about 0.2 psia to atmosphericpressure, and then a linear fit was applied to the results. The linear fit allows a conversionbetween voltage and psia.Figure 6 – Pitot Pressure CalibrationFigure 7 – Static Pressure CalibrationFigure 6 shows the calibration for the Kulite pitot probe. Two calibrations werecompleted, and both data sets matched quite well. A linear fit was applied to the secondcalibration data, to give a conversion from voltage to pressure ofp 0,1 1.0744 V 1.4414(6)This formula compares favorably to the calibration of the same pitot probe by Borg andSmith [7] which gave a conversion ofp 0,1 1.0736 V 1.7651Figure 7 shows the static pressure calibration. Three calibrations were performed for thisprobe. The third calibration was run because of the divergence between calibration 1 andcalibration 2 below 4 psia. The second and third calibrations matched reasonably well. A linearfit was applied to the third calibration, which gives a conversion from voltage to pressure ofp1 2.9586 V 0.039582(7)INITIAL TROUBLESHOOTINGInitial testing of the Transonic Educational Facility focused on verifying the testingprocedure, troubleshooting, and examining the effects of initial driver tube pressure on Machnumber. The testing procedure was detailed in the previous section. Troubleshooting became amajor factor in this project.Upon the first run of the Transonic Educational Facility, it was determined that the Kulitebox was not sending the proper voltage signal to the oscilloscope. At first it was thought to be a

problem with the Kulite box, so another box was obtained. However, the problem was notresolved. Further investigation showed that the 15 V wire was not providing any power to theKulite box. The wire had been broken near the connector end, so the broken part was removed,and the connector was soldered back in place.With the power issue resolved, an attempt was made to begin testing the tunnel. Whenthe data collected by the computer was analyzed, the static pressure, calculated with equation (7)was found to be about 2 psia less than expected. After reviewing the recorded voltage data, itwas found that the data did not match the voltage recorded by a multimeter attached to the Kulitebox. The problem was resolved by changing the volts/div setting on the oscilloscope from 5volts/div to 2 volts/div.It was also noticed during this time, that the tunnel was leaking around the downstreamend of the contoured insert section. Additional RTV sealant was added, which slowed the leak,but the tunnel still seems to be leaking. However, this leak did not seem to have a major impacton the results of the initial tests.INITIAL RESULTSTo examine the effects of various initial driver tube pressures on Mach number, threetests at each of four different driver tube initial pressures were performed. Tests were performedat driver tube pressures of approximately 10.60, 12.55, 14.45, and 16.40 psia. All tests wereperformed with a vacuum pressure of approximately 4 torr (0.0773 psia).The lowest initial pressure tested for this experiment was approximately 10.60 psia.Figure 8 shows the pitot and static pressure, averaged over the 3 separate runs.Figure 8 – Pitot and Static Pressures for initial pressure of 10.60The average pitot pressure, calculated from equation (6), for the first pressure step afterstartup was calculated to be 9.9257 psia, and the average static pressure, calculated from equation(7), for the first step was calculated to be 8.1281 psia. Equation (1) produces an average Machnumber of 0.5420. This is slightly higher than the expected Mach number. This is because aspressure decreases, so does the speed of sound. This means that for the same velocity, the Mach

number will be higher. Using equations (2), (3), and (4), the average velocity for the firstpressure step was calculated to be 592.6703 ft/s.The next initial pressure which was used was approximately 12.55 psia. The averagepitot and static pressures can be seen in Figure 9.Figure 9 – Pitot and Static Pressures for initial pressure of 12.55 psiaUsing equation (6), the average pitot pressure for the first pressure step after startup wascalculated to be 11.7746 psia, and the average static pressure, from equation (7), for the first stepwas 9.6934 psia. Using equation (1), the average Mach number is calculated to be 0.5345.Again this is higher than the theoretical Mach number, but it is also slightly lower than the Machnumber calculated with an initial pressure of 10.60. With a higher pressure than the previous test,the speed of sound is greater, which lowers the Mach number. Using equations (2), (3), and (4),the average velocity for the first pressure step was calculated to be 591.3575 ft/s. This velocityis very close to the velocity calculated for the first pressure case. The slight difference could bedue to the averaging of the 3 separate runs. This demonstrates how initial pressure affects Machnumber, though not necessarily velocity.The third initial pressure tested was approximately 14.45 psia. Figure 10 shows the pitotand static pressure traces, averaged over 3 separate runs.

Figure 10 – Pitot and Static Pressures for initial pressure of 14.45 psiaThe average pitot pressure, calculated from equation (6), for the first pressure step afterstartup was calculated to be 13.4932 psia, and the average static pressure, calculated fromequation (7), for the first step was 11.1834 psia. Using equation (1), the average Mach numberwas calculated to be 0.5249. Following the same trend, the Mach number is lower than previoustests, but still higher than the theoretical Mach number. Using equations (2), (3), and (4), theaverage velocity for the first pressure step was calculated to be 578.1155 ft/s. This is lower thanthe previous two cases, though not by a large amount.The final test conditions are an initial pressure of approximately 16.40 psia. The averagepitot and static pressure traces can be seen in Figure 11.Figure 11 – Pitot and Static Pressures for initial pressure of 16.40 psia

An anomaly can be seen in the average pitot pressure trace in Figure 11. The Kuliteprobe has an electronically set maximum voltage, to prevent damage to the electronics. Themaximum voltage was expected to be between 13 and 15 volts. However, the maximum voltagerecorded in each of the 3 runs was 12.3875 V. This corresponds to a maximum pressure readingof 14.75 psia. This clipping effect causes the calculation of average Mach number for the firstpressure step to be incorrect. To perform a proper comparison, the first pressure step afterstartup should be used. However, since this pressure step is incorrect, the second pressure step ischosen for analysis. Direct comparison will not be very useful, but the pressures and Machnumber should follow the same trend as the other cases. The average pitot pressure for thesecond pressure step is 13.1077, and the average static pressure for the second step is 10.8181.The average Mach number for the second pressure step is 0.5310. Because these values aretaken from the second pressure step, the pressures are lower, and fall between the valuesobtained from the runs with an initial pressure of 14.45 psia, and the runs at 12.55 psia. Thevelocity calculated for this pressure step by equations (2), (3), and (4), is 500.8962 ft/s. This issignificantly lower than the velocities obtained from the previous 3 cases. However, this is to beexpected because the data was taken from the second pressure step.SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONSThe Purdue University Mach 4 Quiet Flow Ludwieg Tube has been converted to thePurdue Transonic Educational Facility. The PTEF has been prepared for use in AAE 520 duringthe spring 2005 semester. The PTEF was designed for a freestream Mach number of 0.722.However, with the current downstream throat, the Ludwieg Tube theoretically chokes around aMach number of 0.4917.Results of the initial testing show that as the driver tube initial pressure increases, theMach number decreases. This is because as pressure increases, so does the speed of sound. Thespeed of sound is then inversely proportional to the Mach number. So for the same velocity,Mach number will be higher at lower initial pressures.RECOMENDATIONSBefore embarking on any scientific research with the PTEF, the leaks near the connectionbetween the CIS and the test section need to be isolated, and repaired. The solution could be assimple as adding more RTV sealant in the correct place, or the problem could lie with the o-ringnot sealing properly.One issue for future consideration is to examine changing the double wedge in the testsection to achieve a higher freestream Mach number. The pros and cons of changing the throatshould be weighed with consideration to future plans with the Mach 4 nozzle.Another consideration for future use is to examine reference [2], and refine the processfor calculating the contours which will need to be made for a model to be tested in the PTEF.

References[1]Matsumura, Shin. “AAE490 – Design of a Contraction for a Transonic LudwiegTube: Report 3.” Purdue University. 11/30/1998.[2]Matsumura, Shin. “AAE415 – Design of a Test Section for a Transonic LudwiegTube: Report 4.” Purdue University. 12/17/1998.[3]Meyer, O., and W. Nitsche “Update on progress in adaptive wind tunnel walltechnology.” Progress in Aerospace Sciences 40 (2004) 119-141.Technical University of Berlin. 2004.[4]Allison, Dennis O., and Raymond E. Mineck. “Assessment of Dual-Point DragReduction for an Executive-Jet Modified Airfoil Section.” NASATechnical Paper 3579. NASA Langley Research Center. July 1996[5]Rosemann, H., and E. Stanewsky and G. Hefer. “The Cryogenic Ludwieg Tubeof D

Purdue University - West Lafayette, IN ABSTRACT The Purdue University Mach 4 Quiet Flow Ludwieg Tube has been converted to the Purdue Transonic Educational Facility. The conversion involved removing the Mach 4 converging-diverging nozzle and replacing it with

Related Documents:

Rosman, Michael ASA ST CJ Stumpf, Karl ASA ST CJ SR DR AO CO TO ST-N3 CJ-N2 SR-N2 DR-N2 . Lisa MACH ST Gordon, Stewart MACH ST CJ SR DR MR AO CO TO Henrikson, Kristin MACH ST . Kuhlkin, Ann MACH ST CJ ST-N3 CJ-N2 Lasut, Michael MACH ST CJ SR Meilus, Al MACH ST CJ SR DR MR AR CO TO ST-N3 CJ-N2 SR-N3

and welding per aws d1.1-2010 mach fab /- 1/16 /- 0.5 /- 0.1 /- 0.06 n/a m. barrington n/a 2015-p01 biologically applied engineering. d f 1 2 3 7 4 37 6 mach. mach. ref mach. mach biologically applied engineering. mach biologically applied engineering. ma

Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) CPLDs: Mach family (Mach 1 to Mach 5) all EEPROM-based technology Mach 1, 2: Multiple 22V16 PALs Mach 3, 4, 5: Several optimized 34V16 PALs Mach 4: Consists of: 6 to 16 PAL (2K-5K gates) Central switch matrix In-circuit programmable 3 4 V 1 6 3 4 V 1 6 3 4 V 1 6 3 4 V 1 6 3 4 V 1 6 3 4 V 1 6

NX14110 NX Mach 4 Ship Design NX14400 NX Mach 4 - Advanced Mold Manufacturing NX14410 NX Mach 4 - Advanced Die Manufacturing MACH-Bundles, die Freeform Shape (studio_free_form) enthalten: NX13100 NX Mach 3 Product Design NX13300 NX

Purdue Printing Services The School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences Purdue University Heine Pharmacy Building, Room 104 575 Stadium Mall Drive West Lafayette, IN 47904-2091 (765) 494-1361 (765) 494-7800 Fax www.pharmacy.purdue.edu The Purdue Pharmacist is published three times a year for alumni

Mac OS X kernel (xnu) is a hybrid between Mach 3.0 and FreeBSD FreeBSD kernel top‐half runs on Mach kernel boom‐half Mulple system call interfaces: BSD (posive numbers), Mach (negave) BSD sysctls, ioctls Mach in‐kernel RPC servers, IOKit

T-MACH-105211 Werkstoffe für den Leichtbau 4 LP Elsner, Liebig T-MACH-102137 Polymerengineering I 4 LP Elsner, Liebig T-MACH-110954 Leichtbau mit Faser-Verbund-Kunststoffen –Theorie und Praxis 4 LP Liebig, Kärger T-MACH-110937 Werkstoffrecyc

In recent years, there has been an increasing amount of literature on . A large and growing body of literature has investigated . In recent years, several studies have focused on