Abstract

Abstract Current total pressure measurement techniques in RDCs are based on different assumptions and therefore show different applicability for specific RDC operating conditions, and few studies have directly compared these techniques. Therefore, this study comprehensively tested three total pressure measurement techniques: the direct Kiel probe method, the Mach-corrected CTAP method, and the equivalent available pressure (EAP) method under different RDC geometries and mass flow rates, and compared them with their corresponding uncertainties considered. The results show that for all tests in this study, the EAP method shows the largest uncertainty range up to 24%, which is mainly contributed by the load cell calibration process, while the direct Kiel probe method has the lowest uncertainty range, which is consistently below 7%. These uncertainties were incorporated into the comparison between the three techniques via Gaussian process regression, showing that the direct Kiel probe method and the Mach-corrected CTAP method can present EAP-like total pressure. In particular, the total pressure of the SWCC and L modes measured by the three techniques is very comparable. This work shows that the comparability of total pressure techniques depends on the specific RDC environment, and provides the possibility to evaluate the RDC performance with the simplest implementation.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.