1、_ SAE Technical Standards Board Rules provide that: “This report is published by SAE to advance the state of technical and engineering sciences. The use of this report is entirely voluntary, and its applicability and suitability for any particular use, including any patent infringement arising there
2、from, is the sole responsibility of the user.” SAE reviews each technical report at least every five years at which time it may be revised, reaffirmed, stabilized, or cancelled. SAE invites your written comments and suggestions. Copyright 2012 SAE International All rights reserved. No part of this p
3、ublication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE. TO PLACE A DOCUMENT ORDER: Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada) Tel: +1 724-776-497
4、0 (outside USA) Fax: 724-776-0790 Email: CustomerServicesae.org SAE WEB ADDRESS: http:/www.sae.org SAE values your input. To provide feedback on this Technical Report, please visit http:/www.sae.org/technical/standards/AIR5666AEROSPACEINFORMATIONREPORTAIR5666 Issued 2012-10 Icing Wind Tunnel Interfa
5、cility Comparison Tests RATIONALE With all the complexities of icing tunnels there are variation in results at specified environmental conditions. To be able to compare results between different tunnels, the icing community desires that the results be as standard as possible. As a first step towards
6、 a standard, a comparison of ice shapes produced at a number of icing tunnels is needed to determine the magnitude of the differences that exist between icing test facilities. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. SCOPE 31.1 Purpose . 32. REFERENCES 32.1 Applicable Documents 32.1.1 SAE Publications . 32.1.2 U.S. Dep
7、artment of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Publications 32.1.3 NATO Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development (AGARD) Publications 32.1.4 Other Applicable Documents 42.2 Related Publications . 42.3 Abbreviations and Symbols 53. INTRODUCTION . 64. BACKGROUND 65. PROC
8、ESSING AND PRESENTATION OF RESULTS . 96. DISCUSSION 146.1 Comments on the Results . 146.2 Identification of Probable Problem Areas 226.3 Potential Accuracy and Repeatability Problems with LWC . 266.4 Potential Accuracy and Repeatability Problems With MVD 276.5 Potential Problem Areas of Secondary Im
9、portance 287. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 308. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 309. NOTES 30SAE AIR5666 Page 2 of 107 APPENDIX A TEST PLAN . 31APPENDIX B THICK PROCESSING OF FACILITIES STANDARDIZATION CYLINDER DATA . 45APPENDIX C 61APPENDIX D ANALYSIS REPORT . 78FIGURE 1 SAMPLE PLOT OF ALL TRACINGS OBTAINED BY
10、ONE OF THE PARTICIPATING FACILITIES FOR THE 12 IN NACA 0012 AIRFOIL, TEST CONDITION 6 OF TABLE 2 11FIGURE 2 CENTERLINE TRACINGS FROM ALL PARTICIPATING FACILITIES FOR THE 12 IN NACA 0012 AIRFOIL, TEST CONDITION 6 OF TABLE 2 . 11FIGURE 3 DEFINITION OF HORN PARAMETERS GIVEN BY THICK 12FIGURE 4 ILLUSTRA
11、TION OF TYPICAL REPEATABILITY - FACILITY F CENTERLINE TRACINGS FOR CASE N12-06 14FIGURE 5 ILLUSTRATION OF TYPICAL REPEATABILITY - FACILITY F CENTERLINE TRACINGS FOR CASE N12-02 15FIGURE 6 ILLUSTRATION OF TYPICAL REPEATABILITY - FACILITY A CENTERLINE TRACINGS FOR CASE N12-06 15FIGURE 7 ILLUSTRATION O
12、F TYPICAL REPEATABILITY - FACILITY A CENTERLINE TRACINGS FOR CASE N12-02 16FIGURE 8 ILLUSTRATION OF TYPICAL REPEATABILITY - FACILITY M CENTERLINE TRACINGS FOR CASE C15-02 16FIGURE 9 CENTERLINE TRACINGS FROM ALL PARTICIPATING FACILITIES FOR THE 12 IN NACA 0012 AIRFOIL FOR TEST CONDITION 2 OF TABLE 2
13、. 17FIGURE 10 TOTAL ICE AREA VALUES EVALUATED USING THE THICK CODE FOR THE CENTERLINE TRACINGS SUBMITTED BY PARTICIPATING FACILITIES FOR THE 12 IN NACA 0012 AND 1.5 IN CYLINDER MODELS . 19FIGURE 11 CENTERLINE TRACINGS FROM ALL PARTICIPATING FACILITIES FOR THE 12 IN NACA 0012 AIRFOIL FOR TEST CONDITI
14、ON 9 OF TABLE 2 . 20FIGURE 12 CENTERLINE TRACINGS FROM ALL PARTICIPATING FACILITIES FOR THE 36 IN NACA 0012 AIRFOIL FOR TEST CONDITION 5 OF TABLE 2 . 20FIGURE 13 CENTERLINE TRACINGS FROM ALL PARTICIPATING FACILITIES FOR THE 1.5 IN CYLINDER-FOR TEST CONDITION 6 OF TABLE 2 . 21FIGURE 14 CENTERLINE TRA
15、CINGS FROM ALL PARTICIPATING FACILITIES FOR THE 1.5 IN CYLINDER-FOR TEST CONDITION 11 OF TABLE 2 (MVD OF R1F, R2F AND R3F = 24 M) . 21FIGURE 15 CENTERLINE TRACINGS FROM ALL PARTICIPATING FACILITIES FOR THE 1.5 IN CYLINDER-FOR TEST CONDITION 9 OF TABLE 2 . 22FIGURE 16 ESTIMATED WALL INTERFERENCE EFFE
16、CTS FOR THE THREE MODELS AS A FUNCTION OF TEST SECTION HEIGHT; THE ORDINATE GIVES THE ERROR IN THENON-DIMENSIONAL AIR VELOCITY AT THE SUCTION PEAK OF THE CLEAN MODELS . 23FIGURE 17 DROP BEHAVIOR ALONG TUNNEL CENTERLINE, RELATIVE HUMIDITY OF TUNNEL AIR = 70% . 24FIGURE 18 LEWICE 2.0 COMPUTED COLLECTI
17、ON EFFICIENCIES AND ICE SHAPES FOR MVD = 13, 20 AND 27 MICROMETERS FOR 12 IN NACA 0012 AT 3 DEGREES INCIDENCE, - 30 C, V = 67 M/S, LWC = 0.5 G/M3, 20 MINUTE EXPOSURE . 29TABLE 1 PARTICIPATING FACILITIES DATA 7TABLE 2 SPECIFIED TEST MATRIX 8TABLE 3 LEFT/RIGHT MAPPINGS . 9TABLE 4 OVERVIEW OF AVAILABLE
18、 TEST RESULTS 10TABLE 5 PARAMETER TOLERANCE LIMITS 10TABLE 6 SAMPLE OF RESULTS PROVIDED BY THICK (FOR CENTERLINE TRACINGS, ALL FACILITIES, CASES N12-06) (FROM FILE THICKSMRY-RUNID-12IN.XLS OF CD) 13TABLE 7 SAMPLE OF RESULTS PROVIDED BY THICK (FOR CENTERLINE TRACINGS, ALL FACILITIES, CASES C15-06) (F
19、ROM FILE THICKSMRY-RUNID-CYLINDER.XLS OF CD) 13SAE AIR5666 Page 3 of 107 1. SCOPE This SAE Aerospace Information Report (AIR) presents and discusses the results of tests of three models in six icing wind tunnels in North America and Europe. This testing activity was initiated by the Facility Standar
20、dization Panel of the SAE AC-9C Aircraft Icing Technology Subcommittee. The objective of the testing activity was to establish a benchmark that compared ice shapes produced by icing wind tunnels available for use by the aviation industry and to use that benchmark as a basis for dialogue between faci
21、lity owners to improve the state-of-the-art of icing wind tunnel technology. 1.1 Purpose The purpose of this AIR is to discuss the results of these tests. It documents that for any particular test-condition specifications the ice accretions produced in all of the participating facilities bore a broa
22、d resemblance to one another, but there were substantial facility-to-facility differences in ice shape and volume of accreted ice. Possible causes of the differences are discussed. 2. REFERENCES 2.1 Applicable Documents The following publications form a part of this document to the extent specified
23、herein. The latest issue of SAE publications shall apply. The applicable issue of other publications shall be the issue in effect on the date of the purchase order. In the event of conflict between the text of this document and references cited herein, the text of this document takes precedence. Not
24、hing in this document, however, supersedes applicable laws and regulations unless a specific exemption has been obtained. 2.1.1 SAE Publications Available from SAE International, 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001, Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada) or 724-776-4970 (outside USA
25、), www.sae.org.AIR4906 Droplet Sizing Instrumentation Used in Icing Facilities AIR5320 Summary of Icing Simulation Test Facilities ARP5624 Aircraft Inflight Icing Terminology ARP5905 Calibration and Acceptance of Icing Wind Tunnels 2.1.2 U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administra
26、tion (FAA) Publications Available from FAA, 800 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20591, Tel: 866-835-5322, www.faa.gov. The FAA Icing Handbook is available through National Technical Information Service Springfield, Virginia 22161 (800)-553-6847 or (703)-605-6000. Title 14 of the US Code of F
27、ederal Regulations, Federal Aviation Regulation Part 25 Airworthiness Standards: Transport Category Airplanes (14 CFR Part 25) Title 14 of the US Code of Federal Regulations, Federal Aviation Regulation Part 29 Airworthiness Standards: Transport Category Rotorcraft (14 CFR Part 29) DOT/FAA/CT-88/8-l
28、, “Aircraft Icing Handbook, Volume 1 of 3“ March 1991 2.1.3 NATO Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development (AGARD) Publications Available from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) office, at 7 Rue Ancelle, Neuilly-sur-Seine, France. AGARD Advisory Report AR-304, Quality Assessme
29、nt for Wind Tunnel Testing SAE AIR5666 Page 4 of 107 2.1.4 Other Applicable Documents Bragg, M. B., “A Similarity Analysis of the Droplet Trajectory Equation,” AIAA Journal, Vol. 20, no. 12, pp. 1681-1686, Dec. 1982. Chigier, N., “Spray Science and Technology,” FED-Vol.178/HTD-Vol. 270, Fluid Mechan
30、ics and Heat Transfer in Sprays, ASME, 1993. Chintamani, S., Delcarpio, D., and Langmeyer, G., “Development of Boeing Research Aerodynamic Icing Tunnel Circuit,” proc. AGARD Symposium on Aerodynamics of Wind Tunnel Circuits and Their Components, Moscow, Oct. 1996, AGARD CP-585, pp. 8.1- 8.27. Gonsal
31、ez, J.C., Arrington, E.A., and Curry, R.M., “Aero-Thermal Calibration of the NASA Glenn Icing Research Tunnel (2000 Tests),” AIAA-2001-0233, Reno NV, Jan. 2001. Ide, R. F. and Oldenburg, J. R., “Icing Cloud Calibration of the NASA Glenn Icing Research Tunnel,“ AIAA-2001-0234, Reno NV, Jan. 2001. Kin
32、d, R.J., Potapczuk, M.G., Feo, A., Golia, C., and Shah, A.D., “Experimental and Computational Simulation of In-Flight Icing Phenomena,” Progress in Aerospace Sciences, Vol. 34, pp. 257-345, 1998. Knezevici, D., Kind, R.J., and Oleskiw, M.M., “Determination of Median Volume Diameter (MVD) and Liquid
33、Water Content (LWC) by Multiple Rotating Cylinders,” AIAA Paper 2005-0861, Reno NV, Jan. 2005. Kreith, F., Principles of Heat Transfer, 2nd ed., International Textbook Co., Scranton, PA, 1965, ch. 9, 13. Marek, C. J. and Bartlett, C. S.; “Stability Relationship for Water Droplet Crystallization with
34、 the NASA Lewis Icing Spray Nozzle,” AIAA-88-289, Reno, NV, Jan. 1988. Miller, D.R., Potapczuk, M.P. and Langhals, T.J., “Preliminary Investigation of Ice Shape Sensitivity to Parameter Variations,” AIAA-2005-0073, Reno, NV, Jan. 2005. Oleskiw, M.M., Hyde, F.H., and Penna, P.J., “In-Flight Icing Sim
35、ulation Capabilities of NRCs Altitude Icing Wind Tunnel,” AIAA-2001-0094, Reno NV, Jan. 2001. Olsen, W., Takeuchi, D., and Adams, K., “Experimental Comparison of Icing Cloud Instruments,” AIAA Paper 83-0026, Reno NV, Jan. 1983. White, F.M., Viscous Fluid Flow, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill Inc., 1991. Schick
36、, R.J., “An Engineers Practical Guide to Drop Size,” Spraying Systems Co. ( Smolik, J., Dzumbovia, L., Schwartz, J., and Kulmala, M., “Evaporation of Ventilated Water Droplet: Connection Between Heat and Mass Transfer,” Journal of Aerosol Science, Vol. 32, pp. 739-748, 2001. Strapp, J.W., Oldenburg,
37、 J., Ide, R., Lilie, L., Bacic, S., Vokovic, Z., Oleskiw, M., Miller, D., Emery, E. and Leone, G., “Wind Tunnel Measurements of the Response of Hot-Wire Liquid Water Content Instruments to Large Droplets,” Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, Vol. 20., No. 6, pp. 791-806, 2003. 2.2 Related
38、 Publications The following publications are provided for information purposes only and are not a required part of this SAE Aerospace Technical Report. Wright, W.B., “User Manual for the NASA Glenn Ice Accretion Code LEWICE (Version 2.2),” Ch. 13. SAE AIR5666 Page 5 of 107 2.3 Abbreviations and Symb
39、ols AcAccumulation parameter ASSP Axial scattering spectrometer probe CIRA Centro Italiano Ricerche Aerospaziali CD Compact Disc containing a complete set of all test data (see Section 5) CR Contraction ratio FAA Federal Aviation Administration FSSP Forward scattering spectrometer probe FSTL Approxi
40、mate freestream turbulence intensity in test section with atomizing air on H Test section dimension in the direction perpendicular to the model span L Approximate distance from spray nozzles to model mid-chord LWC Liquid water content MPSA Malvern particle size analyzer MVD Median volumetric diamete
41、r PDPA Phase Doppler particle analyser S1 Upper horn height (in) S2 Upper horn angle (deg) S3 Lower horn height (in) S4 Lower horn angle (deg) S5 Ice area (sq. in) S6 Leading edge minimum thickness (in) S7 Upper icing limit (in) S8 Lower icing limit (in) . Angle of attack Collection efficiency Test-
42、run duration SAE AIR5666 Page 6 of 107 3. INTRODUCTION Partly in response to the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Inflight Aircraft Icing Plan, the Facility Standardization Panel of the SAE AC-9C Aircraft Icing Technology Subcommittee initiated an activity involving tests of three
43、 models in various icing wind tunnels and comparison of the ice shapes produced on the models. The test results were discussed by test participants at a workshop held in August 2003 at Galaxy Scientific Corp. in New Jersey and again at a meeting of the Facility Standardization Panel held at the Ital
44、ian Aerospace Research Center (CIRA) in Capua, Italy, in October 2003. This report presents an outline of the test results and a discussion of possible reasons for some features of the results. Included in Appendix C and Appendix D are reports which were prepared for that workshop and meeting, and w
45、hich support the discussion contained in the main body of this AIR. 4. BACKGROUND Each of the major icing wind tunnel facilities in North America and Western Europe were invited to participate in the Facility Standardization activity, with a deadline of March 31, 2003, for submission of initial test
46、 results. It was agreed atearly meetings of the Facility Standardization Panel that test results would be kept anonymous so that the facility that produced any particular set of results could not be identified. Each participating facility would be identified only by a randomly assigned letter. Howev
47、er, once testing was completed and an initial review conducted, it was agreed that the facilities could be identified in the final report and the identifying letters are included in Table 1. Six facilities (designated by the randomly assigned letters A, E, F, H, M, and P) performed tests. Table 1 li
48、sts these facilities and includes icing wind tunnel parameters and information regarding instrumentation used for the tests. Three models were tested: a 36 in chord NACA 0012 airfoil at angle of attack . = 3 degrees, a 12 in chord NACA 0012 airfoil at = 3 degrees, and a 1.5 in diameter circular cyli
49、nder. The same three models were shipped from facility to facility for use in each test. Nominal test condition parameters were specified as follows: freestream air static temperature: -7, -23 and -30 C liquid water content (LWC): 0.5 and 1.0 g/m3 drop diameter (MVD): 20 and 40 m freestream airspeed: 67 and 90 m/s SAE AIR5666 Page 7 of 107 TABLE 1 - PARTICIPATING FACILITIES DATA Tu
