Uncertainty quantification for planar PIV remains a challenging task. In the present study, we assess three methods that were recently described in the literature: primary peak ratio (PPR), mutual information (MI), and image matching (IM). Each method was used to calculate the uncertainty in a synthetic turbulent boundary layer flow and an experimental jet flow. In the experimental case, two PIV systems with common fields of view were used — one with a high dynamic range (which was considered as the true solution) and another with a magnification ratio of about four times less (which was considered the measurand). The high resolution PIV system was verified by comparing velocity records at a point with an LDV measurement system. PIV processing was performed with PRANA and Insight4G. In regards to the experimental flow, the PPR method performed best, followed by mutual information, and lastly image matching. This was due to better responses by PPR and MI of uncertainty to the spatially varying error distribution. Similar conclusions were made with respect to the synthetic test case.
Skip Nav Destination
ASME 2016 Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting collocated with the ASME 2016 Heat Transfer Summer Conference and the ASME 2016 14th International Conference on Nanochannels, Microchannels, and Minichannels
July 10–14, 2016
Washington, DC, USA
Conference Sponsors:
- Fluids Engineering Division
ISBN:
978-0-7918-5031-2
PROCEEDINGS PAPER
PIV Uncertainty: Computational and Experimental Evaluation of the Peak Ratio Method
Stamatios Pothos,
Stamatios Pothos
TSI Inc., Shoreview, MN
Search for other works by this author on:
Sayantan Bhattacharya,
Sayantan Bhattacharya
Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN
Search for other works by this author on:
Pavlos Vlachos
Pavlos Vlachos
Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN
Search for other works by this author on:
Stamatios Pothos
TSI Inc., Shoreview, MN
Aaron Boomsma
TSI Inc., Shoreview, MN
Dan Troolin
TSI Inc., Shoreview, MN
Sayantan Bhattacharya
Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN
Pavlos Vlachos
Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN
Paper No:
FEDSM2016-7926, V002T10A005; 9 pages
Published Online:
December 2, 2016
Citation
Pothos, S, Boomsma, A, Troolin, D, Bhattacharya, S, & Vlachos, P. "PIV Uncertainty: Computational and Experimental Evaluation of the Peak Ratio Method." Proceedings of the ASME 2016 Fluids Engineering Division Summer Meeting collocated with the ASME 2016 Heat Transfer Summer Conference and the ASME 2016 14th International Conference on Nanochannels, Microchannels, and Minichannels. Volume 2, Fora: Advances in Fluids Engineering Education; Cavitation and Multiphase Flow; Fluid Measurements and Instrumentation. Washington, DC, USA. July 10–14, 2016. V002T10A005. ASME. https://doi.org/10.1115/FEDSM2016-7926
Download citation file:
21
Views
Related Proceedings Papers
Related Articles
Measurement Errors and Uncertainty Quantification of a Two-Dimensional-Particle Image Velocimetry Experimental Setup for Jet Flow Characterization
ASME J. Risk Uncertainty Part B (December,2020)
Reducing Geometric Uncertainty in Computational Hemodynamics by Deep Learning-Assisted Parallel-Chain MCMC
J Biomech Eng (December,2022)
Evidence-Theory-Based Kinematic Uncertainty Analysis of a Dual Crane System With Epistemic Uncertainty
J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng (April,2022)
Related Chapters
Antenna and Antenna Arrays
Basic Principles and Potential Applications of Holographic Microwave Imaging
Image Matching Based on Partial Differential Equations Methods
International Conference on Computer Technology and Development, 3rd (ICCTD 2011)
Advances in the Stochastic Modeling of Constitutive Laws at Small and Finite Strains
Advances in Computers and Information in Engineering Research, Volume 2