0
Research Papers: Flows in Complex Systems

Instantaneous Wind-Tunnel Model Vibration Measurements Using a Kalman Filtering Approach

[+] Author and Article Information
Robert R. Long

Department of Aerospace Engineering,
Texas A&M University,
College Station, TX 77840
e-mail: robertlong13@tamu.edu

Edward B. White

Department of Aerospace Engineering,
Texas A&M University,
College Station, TX 77840

Nathan R. Tichenor, Kevin Kremeyer

PM & AM Research, LLC,
Bryan, TX 77802

Contributed by the Fluids Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF FLUIDS ENGINEERING. Manuscript received September 15, 2015; final manuscript received March 13, 2017; published online April 28, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Peter Vorobieff.

J. Fluids Eng 139(7), 071106 (Apr 28, 2017) (7 pages) Paper No: FE-15-1669; doi: 10.1115/1.4036270 History: Received September 15, 2015; Revised March 13, 2017

Experiments in ground-test facilities are required to develop and mature aero-optic platforms. However, structural vibrations of the facility can introduce significant error in optical experiments, making it difficult to separate wind-tunnel dynamics from the aero-optic measurements of interest. As a means of performing this separation, a Kalman filtering scheme, tuned using the autocovariance least-squares method, is implemented to measure the dynamic motion of a generalized aero-optic model geometry. An example is presented for the case of a laser diode mounted on a flexible post undergoing vibration. Using a single three-axis accelerometer, combined with a priori knowledge of the system's structural dynamics, pitch angle fluctuations on the order of 0.01 deg were successfully estimated within 0.002 deg uncertainty.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Finley, T. D. , and Tcheng, P. , 1992, “ Model Attitude Measurements at NASA Langley Research Center,” AIAA Paper No. 92-0763.
Ruyten, W. , 2000, “ Model Attitude Determination in Wind Tunnel With a Luminescent Paint Data System,” AIAA J., 38(9), pp. 1692–1697. [CrossRef]
Kawamura, Y. , and Mizota, T. , 2013, “ Wind Tunnel Experiment of Bluff Body Aerodynamic Models Using a New Type of Magnetic Suspension and Balance System,” ASME J. Fluids Eng., 135(10), p. 101401. [CrossRef]
Watzlavick, R. L. , Crowder, J. P. , and Wright, F. L. , 1996, “ Comparison of Model Attitude Systems—Active Target Photogrammetry, Precision Accelerometer, and Laser Interferometer,” AIAA Paper No. 96-2252.
Barlow, J. B. , Rae, W. H. , and Pope, A. , 1999, Low-Speed Wind Tunnel Testing, Wiley, New York.
Pruski, B. J. , and Bowersox, R. D. W. , 2013, “ Leading-Edge Flow Structure of a Dynamically Pitching NACA 0012 Airfoil,” AIAA J., 51(5), pp. 1042–1053. [CrossRef]
Sahoo, D. , Bowersox, R. D. W. , and Goss, L. , 2008, “ Experimental Investigation of the Leading-Edge Flow of a Dynamically Pitching Airfoil,” AIAA Paper No. 2008-0651.
Barrows, D. A. , 2007, “ Videogrammetric Model Deformation Measurement Technique for Wind Tunnel Applications,” AIAA Paper No. 2007-1163.
Kalman, R. E. , 1960, “ A New Approach to Linear Filtering and Prediction Problems,” ASME. J. Basic Eng., 82(1), pp. 35–45. [CrossRef]
Crassidis, J. L. , and Junkins, J. L. , 2011, Optimal Estimation of Dynamic Systems, 2nd ed., Taylor and Francis, New York.
Rajamani, M. R. , and Rawlings, J. B. , 2009, “ Estimation of the Disturbance Structure From Data Using Semidefinite Programming and Optimal Weighting,” Automatica, 45(1), pp. 142–148. [CrossRef]
Achenbach, E. , 1974, “ Vortex Shedding From Spheres,” J. Fluid Mech., 62(2), pp. 209–221. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Experimental configuration

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Test section arrangement

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Wind-fixed coordinate system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Diagram of electronics setup

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

A three-axis accelerometer chip assembled on a breakout board

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Calibration x-direction impulse response

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Calibration 45 deg impulse response

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Calibration y-direction impulse response

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Kalman filter output for U = 27 m/s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Kalman filter output for U = 39 m/s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Kalman filter output for U = 55 m/s

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Kalman filter error for U = 27 m/s. The dashed lines compare the measured error bounds to the error estimated by the Kalman filter.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Kalman filter error for U = 39 m/s. The dashed lines compare the measured error bounds to the error estimated by the Kalman filter.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Kalman filter error for U = 55 m/s. The dashed lines compare the measured error bounds to the error estimated by the Kalman filter.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In