A comparative study of five different PIV interrogation algorithms

Five different particle image velocimetry (PIV) interrogation algorithms are tested with numerically generated particle images and two real data sets measured in turbulent flows with relatively small particle images of size 1.0–2.5 pixels. The size distribution of the particle images is analyzed for both the synthetic and the real data in order to evaluate the tendency for peak-locking occurrence. First, the accuracy of the algorithms in terms of mean bias and rms error is compared to simulated data. Then, the algorithms’ ability to handle the peak-locking effect in an accelerating flow through a 2:1 contraction is compared, and their ability to estimate the rms and Reynolds shear stress profiles in a near-wall region of a turbulent boundary layer (TBL) at Reτ=510 is analyzed. The results of the latter case are compared to direct numerical simulation (DNS) data of a TBL. The algorithms are: standard fast Fourier transform cross-correlation (FFT-CC), direct normalized cross-correlation (DNCC), iterative FFT-CC with discrete window shift (DWS), iterative FFT-CC with continuous window shift (CWS), and iterative FFT-CC CWS with image deformation (CWD). Gaussian three-point peak fitting for sub-pixel estimation is used in all the algorithms. According to the tests with the non-deformation algorithms, DNCC seems to give the best rms estimation by the wall, and the CWS methods give slightly smaller peak-locking observations than the other methods. With the CWS methods, a bias error compensation method for the bilinear image interpolation, based on the particle image size analysis, is developed and tested, giving the same performance as the image interpolation based on the cardinal function. With the CWD algorithms, the effect of the spatial filter size between the iteration loops is analyzed, and it is found to have a strong effect on the results. In the near-wall region, the turbulence intensity varies by up to 4%, depending on the chosen interrogation algorithm. In addition, the algorithms’ computational performance is tested.

[1]  Julio Soria,et al.  Accuracy of out-of-plane vorticity measurements derived from in-plane velocity field data , 1998 .

[2]  A. Fincham,et al.  Advanced optimization of correlation imaging velocimetry algorithms , 2000 .

[3]  Richard D. Keane,et al.  Theory of cross-correlation analysis of PIV images , 1992 .

[4]  Jürgen Kompenhans,et al.  Advanced evaluation algorithms for standard and dual plane particle image velocimetry. , 1998 .

[5]  R. Adrian.  Particle-Imaging Techniques for Experimental Fluid Mechanics , 1991 .

[6]  J. Westerweel,et al.  The effect of a discrete window offset on the accuracy of cross-correlation analysis of digital PIV recordings , 1997 .

[7]  J. Westerweel.  Theoretical analysis of the measurement precision in particle image velocimetry , 2000 .

[8]  F. Scarano.  Iterative image deformation methods in PIV , 2002 .

[9]  T. Roesgen,et al.  Optimal subpixel interpolation in particle image velocimetry , 2003 .

[10]  L. Lourenco,et al.  On the accuracy of velocity and vorticity measurements with PIV , 1995 .

[11]  S. P. McKenna,et al.  Performance of digital image velocimetry processing techniques , 2002 .

[12]  John Kim,et al.  DIRECT NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF TURBULENT CHANNEL FLOWS UP TO RE=590 , 1999 .

[13]  J. Nogueira,et al.  Identification of a new source of peak locking, analysis and its removal in conventional and super-resolution PIV techniques , 2001 .

[14]  M. Piirto,et al.  Turbulence Control With Particle Image Velocimetry in a Backward-Facing Step , 2002 .

[15]  A. M. Fincham,et al.  Low cost, high resolution DPIV for measurement of turbulent fluid flow , 1997 .

[16]  H. E. Fiedler,et al.  Limitation and improvement of PIV , 1993 .

[17]  Fulvio Scarano,et al.  Iterative multigrid approach in PIV image processing with discrete window offset , 1999 .

[18]  M. Piirto,et al.  2D spectral and turbulence length scale estimation with PIV , 2001 .

[19]  Paul J Strykowski,et al.  Bias and precision errors of digital particle image velocimetry , 2000 .

[20]  Fulvio Scarano,et al.  Advances in iterative multigrid PIV image processing , 2000 .

[21]  D. Spalding.  A Single Formula for the “Law of the Wall” , 1961 .

[22]  J. Westerweel,et al.  Efficient detection of spurious vectors in particle image velocimetry data , 1994 .

[23]  J. J. Wang,et al.  Limitation and improvement of PIV: Part I: Limitation of conventional techniques due to deformation of particle image patterns , 1993 .

[24]  Reijo Karvinen,et al.  Measuring turbulence energy with PIV in a backward-facing step flow , 2003 .

[25]  Steven T. Wereley,et al.  A correlation-based continuous window-shift technique to reduce the peak-locking effect in digital PIV image evaluation , 2002 .