Study of Subsonic Wind Tunnel, its Calibration and

Sensitivity of Pitot-Static Tube with Angle of Attack

Aalokeparno Dhar∗ Aayushi Deohans† Abhijith Prakash‡ Akash Kasina§ Varshith Reddy¶
Aerodynamics Lab, Department of Aerospace Engineering, Indian Institute of Space Science and Technology

Wind tunnels are the most effective method of studying and establishing flow parameters
over different bodies and their behavior to a variety of flows by using the concept of
flow similarity and dynamic similarity. This is done with the help of scaling down and
carrying out the experiments and then scaling back to get an estimate. Wind tunnel is an
important device for any aerodynamic analysis. These wind tunnels have to be calibrated
and benchmarked for out carrying any further analysis. This experiment was carried out
to calibrate the different static pressure probes and also to study the dependence of their
sensitivity for various positions and orientation of the pressure probes. Mean flow speed in
the test section was measured with the variation of the fan speed. The test section velocity
profile was measured and observed to be almost constant.

Nomenclature
P0 Stagnation pressure
Ps Static pressure
Re Reynolds number
ρe Density of ethanol
ρa Density of air
v Velocity of flow determined from pitot-static tube
µ Coefficient of viscosity

I. Introduction
A wind tunnel is a tool used in aerodynamic research to study the effects of air moving past solid objects.
A wind tunnel consists of a tubular passage with the object under test mounted in the middle. Air is made
to move past the object by a powerful fan system or other means. The test object, often called a wind tunnel
model is instrumented with suitable sensors to measure aerodynamic forces, pressure distribution, or other
aerodynamic-related characteristics.1
Air is blown or sucked through a duct equipped with a viewing port and instrumentation where models
or geometrical shapes are mounted for study. Typically the air is moved through the tunnel using a series
of fans. For very large wind tunnels several meters in diameter, a single large fan is not practical, and so
instead an array of multiple fans are used in parallel to provide sufficient airflow. Due to the sheer volume
and speed of air movement required, the fans may be powered by stationary turbofan engines rather than
electric motors.
The airflow created by the fans that is entering the tunnel is itself highly turbulent due to the fan
blade motion (when the fan is blowing air into the test section when it is sucking air out of the test
section downstream, the fan-blade turbulence is not a factor), and so is not directly useful for accurate
∗ Student, BTech, 5th Semester Aerospace,SC16B001
† Student, BTech, 5th Semester Aerospace,SC16B002
‡ Student, BTech, 5th Semester Aerospace,SC16B003
§ Student, BTech, 5th Semester Aerospace,SC16B004
¶ Student, BTech, 5th Semester Aerospace,SC16B005

1 of 17

Aerodynamics Lab Report, IIST

measurements. The air moving through the tunnel needs to be relatively turbulence-free and laminar. To
correct this problem, closely spaced vertical and horizontal air vanes are used to smooth out the turbulent
airflow before reaching the subject of the testing.
Due to the effects of viscosity, the cross-section of a wind tunnel is typically circular rather than square,
because there will be greater flow constriction in the corners of a square tunnel that can make the flow
turbulent. A circular tunnel provides a smoother flow.
The inside facing of the tunnel is typically as smooth as possible, to reduce surface drag and turbulence
that could impact the accuracy of the testing. Even smooth walls induce some drag into the airflow, and
so the object being tested is usually kept near the center of the tunnel, with an empty buffer zone between
the object and the tunnel walls. There are correction factors to relate wind tunnel test results to open-air
results.
Different types of wind tunnels
• Suction type wind tunnels
• Blower type wind tunnels

Figure 1. Sketch of the wind tunnel and its components2

The major components of a wind tunnel are:

1. Settling Chamber : The primary function of the settling chamber is to make the air flow unidirec-
tional and uniform as it enters the wind tunnel and passes to the next section. A honeycomb-shaped
structure and wire mesh screens remove turbulence and reduces the speed of air to approximately zero,
so that for theoretical purpose pressure P measured in this chamber is taken to be stagnation pressure
Po . The settling chamber reduces fluctuations in velocity.
2. Contraction Cone : The function of contraction cone is to increase the velocity of flow with decrease
in static pressure i.e. to transform pressure energy of flow to its kinetic energy with minimum saturation
pressure losses. It is basically used to accelerate the flow, which is usually done with a fan which
consumes more power for same flow speed to be obtained in the test section.
3. Test Section : The test section houses the test object, along with sensors that measure its response
to wind forces. One force measured in the test section is lift, which causes objects to rise. Another is
drag, which is a measure of an object’s resistance to air as it moves through the atmosphere.
4. Diffuser : The diffuser slows the high velocity of air in the wind tunnel before it exits the system and
increases the static pressure P. The recovery of pressure from kinetic energy reduces the power needed
to drive the tunnel.

2 of 17

Aerodynamics Lab Report, IIST

 5. Drive Section : The drive section is responsible for pulling air through the entire tunnel. Normally,
large exhaust fans draw air through the tunnel.
To ascertain that results obtained from the wind tunnel testing are applicable to real-life situations, dynamic
similarity has to be satisfied. The criteria to ensure that two flows are dynamic similar is as follows:

• Bodies and any other boundaries are geometrically similar for both flows.
• Similarity parameters (usually Re, M and a for given body) are same for both flows.
Pitot-Static tubes, which are also called Prandtl tubes, are used on aircraft as speedometers. Several
small holes are drilled around the outside of the tube and a centre hole is drilled down the axis of the tube.
Both the centre hole and outside hole are connected to a manometer, which gives the difference in static and
stagnation P (dynamic P) as difference in levels of the manometric fluid.

Figure 2. Sketch of the pitot tube3

The Bernoullis equation is applicable only for incompressible, inviscid and steady flows, which is true in
our case since the maximum velocity achievable in the wind tunnel is 40 m/s, which is smaller than Mach
0.3 and flow through the settling chamber is uniform and unidirectional and effects of viscosity is neglected.

II. Procedure
The characterization was carried out to check the variation of velocity along the height of the tunnel and
also to check the uniformity of the flow by comparing the obtained velocity values for different operating
speeds of the motor .
The pitot tube was placed at different heights along the vertical axis and the readings on the inclined
manometer was taken. These readings were then taken for different RPM of the fan in order to generalize it
for the range of possible flow regimes in the wind tunnel.
In order to determine the sensitivity of the pitot tube with the variation of angle and variation in the
orientation of the static pressure taps was changed. This was done for a constant RPM and only varying
the angle of the pitot probe from -30 degrees to +30 degrees.

3 of 17

Aerodynamics Lab Report, IIST

 III. Model
The characterization was carried out on an suction type wind tunnel present in the aerodynamics lab-
oratory at IIST.The setup mainly consists of a wind tunnel which operates for speeds from 0-40 m/s. The
calibration was done on the static pressure probes placed and also the sensitivity of a pitot tube at different
angles was verified by taking multiple readings at different angles and even the orientation of the holes in
the static probes was aligned in vertical and horizontal plane. The set up mainly consists of an axial flow
fan, converging duct, 300 x 400 x 600 test section. The bell mouth section is fitted with honeycomb mesh
to reduce the turbulence and impurities with incoming air. The fan was driven by a three phase motor with
5 HP capacities. Multi-tube manometer with variable inclination is used to measure the pressure at various
cross section of the wind tunnel. The manometric fluid used is ethyl alcohol in order to measure even small
changes in pressure. The test section houses two Pitot - static tubes in order to measure the static and total
P at different locations and different orientations in the test section.

IV. Results

Velocity

Linear Fit of Velocity

16

14

12
Velocity (m/s)

10

2
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100
RPM

Figure 3. Mean Velocity vs RPM

• From the least square fitting of the mean velocity data given in Fig. 3 the relationship between mean
velocity and rpm of fan has been found as: y = 0.0175x − 1.5797. Thus the relationship between mean
velocity at the center of the test section of the wind tunnel and the RPM of the fan is linear.
• Since the variation of velocity with changing RPM is linear it can also be expected that the unit
Reynolds number determined in the test section also varies linearly with RPM of the motor. It is seen
from Fig. 5 that this holds true and the Reynolds number can be described as a linear function of
RPM of the motor.
• From Fig.4 it can be seen that the velocity calculated from the pitot-static tube and from the static
pressures measured in the wind tunnel are in close agreement with each other.
• From the calculation in APPENDIX 2 and from Fig.7, we can find that the power required is not
linear with flow velocity, rather it best fits with polynomial of order 3. It is justified as power re-
quired is multiplication of pressure difference and volume flow rate (Ẇ = ∆P Av). Volume flow rate

4 of 17

Aerodynamics Lab Report, IIST

 Velocity

Velocity from static pressure

Linear Fit of Velocity from Pitot-Static tube

Linear Fit of Velocity from static pressure

16

14

12
Velocity (m/s)

10

2
300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100
RPM

Figure 4. Comparison of velocity calculated from pitot-static tube and from static pressure measurements in
wind tunnel

Reynolds Number

Linear Fit of Reynolds Number

1000000

900000

800000
Reynolds Number

700000

600000

500000

400000

300000

200000

300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100

RPM

Figure 5. Unit Reynolds Number vs RPM

5 of 17

Aerodynamics Lab Report, IIST

 Figure 6. Mean Velocity vs height

Figure 7. Power required to flow through different parts of the wind tunnel

6 of 17

Aerodynamics Lab Report, IIST

 Figure 8. Total power required vs RPM

is proportional to velocity, and pressure difference can be treated as proportional to square of velocity
(∆P ∝ v 2 ). As flow velocity is linear with fan speed, same relation is applicable for fan speed and power.

• In Fig.8 power required is calculated with static pressure difference. If it is calculated with total
pressure drop, then it can be found same as before across wire mesh and total wind tunnel. This
is because across wire mesh and wind tunnel, total pressures are near to static pressure. For same
reason, rate of energy lost across contraction part will also be negligible, as pitot stagnation and settling
chamber static pressure is almost same. So apart from loss across the wire mesh, the remaining part
which creates significant loss is the diffuser. And the total rate of loss of energy is the calculated power
required. The maximum power required is found out to be about 200 W.
• From Fig.6, we can find that the velocity is almost constant throughout the test section. It implies
that the the test section is the perfect substitution of free stream in the atmosphere. The velocity
change is only possible very near to the wall where boundary layer is generated.

• Fluid stream being not parallel to the probe head, errors occur in both total and static readings. Graph
showing Variation of Static Pressure with Pitching Angle and Variation of Stagnation/Total Pressure
with Pitching angle are shown respectively in Fig.9 and Fig.10. Flow velocity has been calculated using
these pressure values and plotted in Fig.12.

7 of 17

Aerodynamics Lab Report, IIST

 Figure 9. Error in Static Pressure for various Pitch angles at 1000 rpm

Figure 10. Error in Stagnation Pressure for various Pitch angles at 1000 rpm

8 of 17

Aerodynamics Lab Report, IIST

 Figure 11. Pitch Angle Error in Static and Total Pressure

Figure 12. Velocity as measured by Pitot-Static Tube at various AoA’s

9 of 17

Aerodynamics Lab Report, IIST

 V. Conclusion
Pressure loss in the tunnel can be attributed to friction since the friction effects cannot be completely
eliminated.The wind tunnel test section being a constant area duct also shows a pressure drop across it
owing to friction which continuously increases with flow velocity.
The static pressure measured by the tube varies by large amounts with the increase in its inclination because
the duration in which measurements are made, static probe remains no longer perpendicular to the flow but
takes into account the dynamic pressure as flow would take some time to change according to wall condition.
The errors in total and static pressure increase quite rapidly for angles of attack higher than 5◦ , but they
tend to compensate each other so the probe yields velocity readings accurate to 2% up to angles of attack
of 30◦ . The velocity variations with angle are very minimal with the variations lying same as in the range
of the error band. This is the chief advantage of the Prandtl design over other types.

10 of 17

Aerodynamics Lab Report, IIST

 Appendix I: Observation Tables

Table 1. Flow velocity for different fan speeds

Port 30 Port 29 Port 27 Port 26 Velocity Velocity Reynolds

S.No. RPM Reference in cm in cm in cm in cm (tunnel)m/s (pitot tube)m/s Number

1 307 4.6 4.9 5.2 4.9 5.1 4.466395 3.646796 222493.8

2 417 4.6 5 5.6 5 5.5 6.316437 5.766091 351793.6
3 507 4.6 5.2 6 5.1 5.9 7.293593 7.293593 444987.6
4 614 4.6 5.3 6.6 5.2 6.5 9.297543 9.297543 567250.1
5 710 4.5 5.4 7.3 5.4 7.2 11.24018 10.94039 667481.4
6 814 4.5 5.6 8 5.6 8 12.63287 12.63287 770741.1
7 904 4.4 5.8 8.8 5.8 8.8 14.12398 14.12398 861714.7
8 1000 4.4 6 9.8 6 9.8 15.89602 15.89602 969828

Table 2. Error Analysis of Mean Velocity

Mean Velocity
S.No. in m/s
Error

1 3.646796 0.911699
2 5.766091 0.576609
3 7.293593 0.45585
4 9.297543 0.357598
5 10.94039 0.3039
6 12.63287 0.263186
7 14.12398 0.235401
8 15.89602 0.20916

11 of 17

Aerodynamics Lab Report, IIST

 Table 3. Error Analysis of Reynold’s Number

S.No. Reynold’s Number Error

1 222493.8 5706.16
2 351793.6 3611.177
3 444987.6 2858.237
4 567250.1 2249.248
5 667481.4 1920.319
6 770741.1 1675.398
7 861714.7 1512.61
8 969828 1364.749

Table 4. Velocity Variation with height in the test section

Sl no Height distance from Static pressure Stagnation pressure difference in dynamic Velocity
(cm) centre(cm) reading(cm) reading(cm) reading(cm) pressure (Pa) (m/s)
p
H H0 h1 h0 h = h1 − h0 Pd ρe gh 2Pd /ρa
1 3.5 0 9.8 6 3.8 147.0617 15.896
2 8.5 5 9.8 6 3.8 147.0617 15.896
3 13.5 10 9.7 5.9 3.8 147.0617 15.896
4 18.5 15 9.7 5.9 3.8 147.0617 15.896
5 23.5 20 9.7 5.9 3.8 147.0617 15.896
6 25 21.5 9.7 5.9 3.8 147.0617 15.896
7 27 23.5 9.7 5.9 3.8 147.0617 15.896

Table 5. Power required for different fan speed

Fan Speed Flow Velocity Power Power Power Power Error

(RPM) (m/s) (wire mesh) (contraction) (diffuser) (total)(W) (W)
307.000 3.647 3.811 3.811 4.212 11.833 3.461
417.000 5.766 8.033 12.050 0.759 20.843 3.523
507.000 7.294 15.242 20.323 -1.865 33.701 4.165
614.000 9.298 22.669 42.099 -7.549 57.219 5.081
710.000 10.940 34.295 72.401 -20.722 85.974 5.894
814.000 12.633 48.401 105.602 -34.171 119.832 6.705
904.000 14.124 68.872 147.583 -55.565 160.890 7.456
1000.000 15.896 88.586 210.393 -91.825 207.154 8.291

12 of 17

Aerodynamics Lab Report, IIST

 SNo. α hstatic hstag x(Pa) y(Pa) Ci Ci
in ◦ cm cm Pstatic = Patm -x Pstag = Patm -y static stag
1 -30 10.2 6.4 224.234 77.322 -0.189 -0.162
2 -25 10 6.1 216.502 65.7237 -0.135 -0.081
3 -20 9.9 6 212.636 61.8576 -108 -0.054
4 -15 9.7 5.8 204.903 54.1254 -0.054 0
5 -10 9.6 5.8 201.037 54.1254 -0.027 0
6 -5 9.5 5.8 197.171 54.1254 0 0
7 0 9.5 5.8 197.171 54.1254 0 0
8 5 9.5 5.8 197.171 54.1254 0 0
9 10 9.6 5.8 201.037 54.1254 -0.027 0
10 15 9.7 5.9 204.903 57.9915 -0.054 -0.027
11 20 9.9 6 212.636 61.8576 -0.108 -0.054
12 25 10 6.1 216.502 65.7327 -0.135 -0.081
13 30 10.2 6.3 224.234 73.455 -0.054 -0.135

Appendix II: Sample Calculations

Density of Ethanol ρe 789 kg/m3
Density of air ρa 1.348 kg/m3
Acceleration due to gravity g 9.81 m/s2
Inclination of manometer θ 30◦
Dynamic viscosity of air µ 18.6·10−6 P as

Calculation of velocity from Pitot-Static tube :

Dynamic pressure = 21 ρa v 2
Dynamic Pressure from Pitot-Static Tube = ρe g∆Hsinθ
∆H =qReading of Port 26 - Reading of Port 27
2gρe ∆Hsinθ
Velocity calculated from pitot-static tube v = ρa
q
2·9.81·(7.2−5.4)·10−2 ·sin(30)
= 1.164
= 10.94039 m/s
Unit Reynolds Number Re = ρv
µ
1.1348·10.94039
= 18.6e−6 = 770741.1

13 of 17

Aerodynamics Lab Report, IIST

 Calculation of Pressure loss and Power required :
Fan speed = 1000 RP M
flow velocity at test section v = 15.896 m/s
Static pressure reading of atmosphere h0 = 4.4 cm
Static pressure reading of settling chamber h1 = 6 cm
Static pressure reading of test section h2 = 9.8 cm
Static pressure reading of diffuser h3 = 8.142 cm
Static pressure difference across the inlet ∆P1 = ρeth g(h1 − h0 ) sin θ
= 789 × 9.81 × (6 − 4.4) × 10−2 × 0.5 N/m2
= 61.921 N/m2
Static pressure difference across contraction ∆P2 = ρeth g(h2 − h1 ) sin θ
= 789 × 9.81 × (9.8 − 6) × 10−2 × 0.5 N/m2
= 147.062 N/m2
Static pressure difference across diffuser ∆P3 = ρeth g(h3 − h2 ) sin θ
= 789 × 9.81 × (8.142 − 9.8) × 10−2 × 0.5 N/m2
= −64.185 N/m2
Total Static pressure difference ∆P = ∆P1 + ∆P2 + ∆P3
= ρeth g(h3 − h0 ) sin θ
= 789 × 9.81 × (8.142 − 4.4) × 10−2 × 0.5 N/m2
= 144.798 N/m2
Cross section area of test section A = 0.3 × 0.3 m2 = 0.09 m2
Power required Ẇ = F v = ∆P Av
= 144.798 × 0.09 × 15.896 = 210.393 W

Appendix III: Error Analysis

Least Count of Manometer δm = 1 mm
Least Count of Barometer δb = 1 mm
Least Count of Thermometer δt = 1◦ C
Uncertainity in Measurement of Manometer h = 10−3 m
Uncertainity in Measurement of Thermometer t = 1◦ C
Error in Velocity:
p
v= 2g∆H
q
gρe sinθ
Uncertainity in calculated velocity from pitot tube due to manometer (v1 ) = 2∆Hρa h
s
9.81 · 789 · 0.5
v1 = · 10−3
2 · 1.164 · (7.2 − 5.4) · 10−2
⇒ v1 = 0.303m/s
Total error in velocity (v ) = v1

⇒ v = 0.303 m/s

Error in Reynolds Number:

ρa
Uncertainity in calculated Reynolds Number due to v (Re1 ) = µ ρa

⇒ Re1 = 1901.826

14 of 17

Aerodynamics Lab Report, IIST

Total error in Reynolds Number (Re ) = Re1

⇒ Re = 1920.319

Error in Power required:

Ẇ = F v = ∆P Av = ρeth g(h3 − h0 ) sin θAv

Uncertainty due to measurement in hi , hi = ρeth g sin θAvδh

⇒ hi = 789 × 9.81 × 0.5 × .09 × 15.896 = 5.537 × 10−3 W

error in Measurement of velocity δv = 0.209 m/s (from table V S. No 8)

Uncertainty due to measurement in v, v = ρeth g(h3 − h0 ) sin θAδv

⇒ v1 = 789 × 9.81 × (8.142 − 4.4)/1000 × 0.5 × .09 × 0.209 = 2.724 W

q
Uncertainty in in calculation of power Ẇ = 2h0 + 2h3 + 2v1
p
⇒ Ẇ = 2.7242 + 2.7242 + 1.1652 = 8.291 W

Appendix 4
Error analysis in finding Ci :
For the Observation 1 in Table , Analysing error percentage in Values of Ci for Static Pressure:

[hstatic (α) − hstatic (0)]

Ci =
[hstag (0) − hstatic (0)]
q
(δa 2 (δa 2
(For a Quantity z = ab , error analysis says that δzz = a ) + a ) . So,
s
δh δh
δCi = Ci × [( )2 + ( )2 ]
hstatic (α) − hstatic (0) hstag (0) − hstatic (0)

Hence for hstatic (α) = 10.2cm, hstatic (0) = 9.5cm, hstag (0) = 5.8cm, href rence = 4.4cm, Ci = −0.189
r
0.001 0.001 2
δCi = −0.189 × [( )2 + ( ) ]
10.2 − 9.5 5.8 − 9.5
δCi = ±2.75 × 10−4
Error in finding value of Static Pressure = ±2.75 × 10−4
Analysing error percentage in Values of Ci for Stagnation Pressure:
[hstag (α) − hstag (0)]
Ci =
[hstag (0) − hstatic (0)]
s
δh δh
δCi = Ci × [( )2 + ( )2 ]
hstag (α) − hstag (0) hstag (0) − hstatic (0)
Hence for hstag (α) = 6.4cm, hstag (0) = 5.8cm, hstatic (0) = 9.5cm, href rence = 4.4cm, Ci = −0.162
r
0.001 2 0.001 2
δCi = −0.162 × [( ) +( ) ]
6.4 − 9.5 5.8 − 9.5
δCi = ±2.735 × 10−4
Error in finding value of Stagnation/Total Pressure = ±2.735 × 10−4

15 of 17

Aerodynamics Lab Report, IIST

 Appendix 5
Measuring the Static head, Stagnation head along with reference height can give value of measured Free-
stream velocity via pitot-static tube.
By Bernoulli Equation:

ρv 2
Pstatic + = PStagnation
2
s
2(PStagnation − PStatic )
v=
ρ
where,
PStagnation = Patm - ρ × g × (hstag − href erence )
PStatic = Patm - ρ × g × (hstatic − href erence )
Taking ρ = Density off Ethnaol (789kg/m3 )

Calibration factor Ci could be simplified as :

ρ × g × [hstag (α) − hstag (0)]

Ci =
ρ × g × [hstag (0) − hstag (0)]
For reading 1 in table, Ci for Static Pressure:

[10.2 − 9.5]
Ci =
[5.8 − 9.5]

Ci = −0.189
Ci for Stagnation Pressure:
[6.4 − 5.8]
Ci =
[5.8 − 9.5]
Ci = −0.162

Appendix 6
Wind tunnel specifications :

Test Section Size Cross Section 300 mm x 300 mm

Length 600 mm
Maximum Speed 40 m/sec
Axial Flow fan Diameter 900 mm
Maximum rpm 1400
Number of Blades 12
Hub Diameter 500 mm(spinner is provided )
Contraction Ratio 6:1
Contraction length 750 mm
Settling chamber 740 mm x 740 mm
Entry section Bell mouthed entry
Honey Comb Size 12 mm x 12 mm x 96 mm
Screens 2 screens 8 mesh and 16 mesh stainless steel
Power 5 HP AC motor, with speed control drive

16 of 17

Aerodynamics Lab Report, IIST

 Acknowledgments
We greatly appreciate the lab technicians for their cooperation while carrying out the experiment and
giving the outline of applications. We would like to thank Dr.Pradeep Kumar and Dr. Manoj T Nair for
helping us to gain good knowledge about the working of subsonic wind tunnel and pitot-tube.

References
1 https://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/shortt.html[accessed on 7th Aug, 2018]
2 https://www.instructables.com/id/DIY-Wind-Tunnel-20-Project-Paperclip/
[accessed on 7th Aug, 2018]
3 http://www.performanceforums.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-67304591.html [accessed on 7th Aug, 2018]

17 of 17

Aerodynamics Lab Report, IIST