EXP 1-2 Measurement Quantities and Techniques: Difference between revisions
Stepan.Nosek (talk | contribs) |
Stepan.Nosek (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
To account for the influence of the LDA seed particles (with a diameter of about 1 μm) on the FFID concentration measurements, a correction was applied during the FFID calibration process. The measurements of the background concentration of the LDA seed particles were performed separately and subtracted from the measured calibration gas without activating the line source. | To account for the influence of the LDA seed particles (with a diameter of about 1 μm) on the FFID concentration measurements, a correction was applied during the FFID calibration process. The measurements of the background concentration of the LDA seed particles were performed separately and subtracted from the measured calibration gas without activating the line source. | ||
The descirption of the points measured in the street canyons can be found [Description of Study Test Case| | The descirption of the points measured in the street canyons can be found [[Description of Study Test Case|Description of Study Test Case]]. | ||
[[Image:Measurement Technique LDAadnFFID.jpg|540px|thumb|center|Figure 3: Snapshot of the experimental setup for the point measurement of turbulent vertical pollution fluxes in the case of the oblique wind direction.]] | [[Image:Measurement Technique LDAadnFFID.jpg|540px|thumb|center|Figure 3: Snapshot of the experimental setup for the point measurement of turbulent vertical pollution fluxes in the case of the oblique wind direction.]] |
Revision as of 12:05, 10 May 2023
Lib:Create_Ercoftac_Article_Form
Measurement techniques
When measuring the turbulent pollution fluxes at the openings of the street canyons, two velocity components were measured simultaneously and point by point. For the upper openings, the longitudinal and vertical components were measured, and for the lateral openings, the longitudinal and lateral components were measured. This measurement was made with a combination of LDA (Laser Doppler Anemometry) and FFID (Fast-Response Flame Ionisation Detector, HFR400, Cambustion Ltd.).
To ensure proximity between the LDA measurement volume and the inlet of the FFID sampling tube, the LDA and FFID probes were mounted together on a 3D traverse system. The position of the inlet of the FFID sampling tube was carefully adjusted to be 1 mm above, 1 mm behind and 1 mm beside the centre of the LDA measuring volume (Fig. 3). Through various test measurements with different probe positions, we confirmed that the influence of the FFID sampling tube on the LDA measurement was negligible.
During the measurement campaign, the LDA sampling frequency was kept between 0.5 and 1 kHz, depending on the flow range investigated. The FFID sampling frequency was set to 0.5 kHz to achieve the desired response time of 2 ms. However, due to the physical characteristics of the FFID sampling tube (length of 200 mm and diameter of 1.2 mm), an average time delay of about 12 ms was obtained in contrast to the LDA. This time delay varied depending on the air density and the dynamic pressure at the sampling point. To obtain a more accurate individual FFID time delay, we used the maximum correlation coefficient between the time series of the velocity component and the concentration. This resulted in an adjusted time delay between 10 and 13 ms.
To account for the influence of the LDA seed particles (with a diameter of about 1 μm) on the FFID concentration measurements, a correction was applied during the FFID calibration process. The measurements of the background concentration of the LDA seed particles were performed separately and subtracted from the measured calibration gas without activating the line source.
The descirption of the points measured in the street canyons can be found Description of Study Test Case.
Contributed by: Štěpán Nosek — Institute of Thermomechanics of the CAS, v. v. i.
© copyright ERCOFTAC 2024