工程与试验2024,Vol.64Issue(1) :6-9.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1674-3407.2024.01.003

壁面静压和流道静压测量方法的差异性分析与准确性评估

Difference Analysis and Accuracy Evaluation of Measurement Methods for Wall Static Pressure and Flow Static Pressure

郭佳男 李相政
工程与试验2024,Vol.64Issue(1) :6-9.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1674-3407.2024.01.003

壁面静压和流道静压测量方法的差异性分析与准确性评估

Difference Analysis and Accuracy Evaluation of Measurement Methods for Wall Static Pressure and Flow Static Pressure

郭佳男 1李相政1
扫码查看

作者信息

  • 1. 中国飞行试验研究院,陕西 西安 710089
  • 折叠

摘要

基于某型飞机进气道飞行试验,研制加装了集稳态总压、稳态静压于一体的复合式进气道流场测量耙,并获取了不同飞行状态下流场数据.通过两种静压测量方法分析对比,研究进气道流场静压分布特性,探索两种静压测量方法的合理性,并在此基础上开展静压测量和流量计算方法研究.结果表明,采用壁面静压直接计算流量偏差较大,皮托管静压直接计算次之,对壁面静压测量结果进行面积修正计算效果较好.

Abstract

Based on the flight test of a certain type of aircraft inlet,a compound inlet flow field measurement rake integrating total steady pressure and static pressure is developed and installed in the paper,and the flow field data under different flight conditions is obtained.The static pressure distribution characteristics of inlet flow field are analyzed and compared by two static pressure measurement methods,and the rationality of the two static pressure measurement methods is explored.On this basis,the methods of static pressure measurement and flow calculation are studied.The results show that the deviation of flow calculation using the wall static pressure is larger,followed by the direct static pressure calculation of the pitot tube,and the area correction calculation of the measured results of the wall static pressure is better.

关键词

飞行试验/测量耙/进气道与发动机相容性/流量测量

Key words

flight test/measurement rake/inlet/engine compatibility/flow measurement

引用本文复制引用

出版年

2024
工程与试验
长春试验机研究所有限公司 中国仪器仪表学会试验机分会

工程与试验

影响因子:0.198
ISSN:1674-3407
参考文献量8
段落导航相关论文