applied

sciences
Article
Simplified Calibration Method for
Constant-Temperature Hot-Wire Anemometry
Hidemi Takahashi 1, * , Mitsuru Kurita 2 , Hidetoshi Iijima 2 and Seigo Koga 2
1 Research and Development Directorate, Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency,
Kakuda, Miyagi 981-1525, Japan
2 Aeronautical Technology Directorate, Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Chofu,
Tokyo 182-8522, Japan; [email protected] (M.K.); [email protected] (H.I.);
[email protected] (S.K.)
* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +81-50-3362-7833




Received: 19 November 2020; Accepted: 15 December 2020; Published: 18 December 2020


Abstract: This study proposes a unique approach to convert a voltage signal obtained from a hot-wire
anemometry to flow velocity data by making a slight modification to existing temperature-correction
methods. The approach was a simplified calibration method for the constant-temperature mode of
hot-wire anemometry without knowing exact wire temperature. The necessary data are the freestream
temperature and a set of known velocity data which gives reference velocities in addition to the
hot-wire signal. The proposed method was applied to various boundary layer velocity profiles with
large temperature variations while the wire temperature was unknown. The target flow velocity was
ranged between 20 and 80 m/s. By using a best-fit approach between the velocities in the boundary
layer obtained by hot-wire anemometry and by the pitot-tube measurement, which provides reference
data, the unknown wire temperature was sought. Results showed that the proposed simplified
calibration approach was applicable to a velocity range between 20 and 80 m/s and with temperature
variations up to 15 ◦ C with an uncertainty level of 2.6% at most for the current datasets.

Keywords: hot-wire anemometry; temperature correction; boundary layer

1. Introduction
Hot-wire anemometry for flow velocimetry has been widely used in wind tunnel experiments in
various flow applications [1]. Using its high-resolution measuring capability with both a temporally
and spatially high frequency response, statistical turbulent features in the unsteady flow process can
be extracted. In addition to past studies, recent progress of the measurement technique facilitates
wider applications such as supersonic unsteady flow measurements for a mixing study [2], superfluid
measurements [3], subsonic compressible turbulent flow measurements with analytical approach [4],
and unsteady wake measurements behind a wind turbine [5].
Briefly describing the principle of measurement by hot-wire anemometry, it uses a small, electrically
heated wire exposed to a flow for the purpose of measuring a flow property. The flow property to
be measured is usually the flow velocity. The hot-wire probe consists of a thin wire with prongs to
support the wire. While measurement, the wire is heated by a current that passes through it. The heat
transfer coefficient between the thin heated wire and the surrounding fluid medium changes as the
change of the properties of moving fluid. Thus, the flow property is obtained from the change of heat
transfer coefficient of the wire.
There are two basic operating modes on hot-wire anemometry: the constant temperature mode
and the constant current mode. The former maintains the wire temperature (Tw ) at a constant value
throughout the operation by means of an electrically controlled feedback signal by a Wheatstone bridge

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 9058; doi:10.3390/app10249058 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 9058 2 of 10

circuit and the latter maintains the current at a constant value. This paper focuses on the constant
temperature operating mode.
In the constant temperature operating mode, the resistance of the probe’s sensor material changes
with changing temperature of the environmental fluid medium. The output electric signal from the
hot-wire sensor also changes according to both freestream velocity and freestream temperature since
the wire element is sensitive to environmental temperature and flow compositions such as velocity.
Therefore, it is necessary to convert the measured output voltage signal to a flow velocity by a proper
temperature correction method for quantitative velocimetry.
In case, the flow temperature variation throughout the experimental operation duration (e.g., wind
tunnel running duration) is negligibly small, the output voltage signal can be simply considered as
a function of only flow velocity. In this case, King’s law [1,6,7], which is expressed as Equation (1),
is employed to convert the voltage signal to the flow velocity.

E2 = a + bUn ; n = 0.45 (1)

Here, constants a and b are determined by a number of known flow velocities with an ordinary
least squares fit for a and b.
Differently, in case the temperature variation in the flow throughout the running operation
duration is relatively large, the temperature dependence can no longer be ignored and the measured
voltage signal becomes a function of both flow velocity and temperature. In this case, a temperature
correction method suggested by Hultmark et al. [8], which is expressed in Equation (2), is useful.

E2 E2
! !
U = ν· f = ν· f (2)
k∆T k(Tw − Ta )

where f denotes a functional dependence, ν is the kinematic viscosity, and k is the thermal conductivity
of air. Since both variables are dependent on the freestream temperature Ta , ν can be found by using
Sutherland’s law and air density, and k can be obtained from an empirical model [9]. Note that this
method was proposed for the subsonic flow regime [8]. This technique is useful when only a single
velocity calibration with a known ∆T is sufficient, but it needs to know the wire temperature Tw .
A slight modification of the method is needed when the wire temperature is unknown.
Although hot-wire anemometry is beneficial in measuring unsteady flow feature such as boundary
layer turbulence by utilizing its fast response over the pitot-tube measurement, which can obtain
quantitative velocity data but may involve difficulty to detect temporally-resolved datasets due to
the pneumatic system, a proper calibration is needed for a quantitative velocimetry as mentioned
above. In this study, a calibration technique was focused. The primary motivation was to enable a
temperature correction for a constant-temperature mode of the hot-wire anemometer that calibrates an
output signal to flow velocity in large temperature variation without knowing the wire temperature.
Another motivation was to identify minimal required datasets of reference velocities for this method.
By modifying existing calibration techniques, this study proposes a simplified approach to translate the
hot-wire signal into a flow velocity without knowing the exact wire temperature when the temperature
variation in the flow is large.
The objective is to evaluate the proposed method in its accuracy and applicability. The boundary
layer flow in a velocity range between 20 and 80 m/s was focused. Note that the primary datasets
mainly used were obtained in unsteady turbulence study to evaluate the skin friction reduction by
riblets [10]. Pitot-tube measurement data obtained separately was used to provide reference data
to calibrate the hot-wire signal and was also used to evaluate the calibrated hot-wire anemometry
data. The reference velocity can be obtained from freestream velocity measurement by the pitot tube.
When comparing the hot-wire signal and reference data by the pitot-tube measurement for temperature
correction, an iterative method, which is a similar but simpler method than an output error method,
which is widely used in aerospace and mobile robotics applications, was used [11–13].
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 9058 3 of 10

2. Measuring Technique, Equipment, and Data Reduction

This section describes the measuring techniques, equipment used in this study, and data reduction
including the proposed temperature correction method for hot-wire anemometry.

2.1. Wind Tunnel Facility, Reference Velocity Measurement, and Test Conditions
A schematic illustration of a flat-plate test model and wind tunnel facility is shown in Figure 1.
The wind tunnel facility is a closed-circuit low-turbulence wind tunnel facility at the JAXA Chofu
aerospace center in Tokyo. The flat-plate test model was placed at the center of the test section in the
wind tunnel duct. The test section of the wind tunnel facility had a rectangular cross section that had a
height of 0.65 m, a width of 0.55 m, and a length of 1.5 m. The freestream speed can be varied in the
range of 30–80 m/s during wind tunnel operation. The turbulence intensity, which was measured at
the wind tunnel nozzle exit at 30 m/s of the freestream velocity, was 0.05%. The coordinates and the
origin are also shown in Figure 1. The flat-plate model had an effective span length of 650 mm, a chord
length of 900 mm, and a thickness of 10.8 mm.

Figure 1. Schematic illustration of flat-plate test model (left), which was installed at the center of the
wind tunnel duct and pitot-rake assembly (right).

Pitot-tube measurement was done to provide reference velocities that will be used to calibrate the
hot-wire signal. The reference velocities were measured for a boundary layer profile on a flat plate [10].
It should be noted that reference velocities could be measured with different ways. For example,
measuring freestream velocity and relating it with hot-wire signal placed in the freestream can be
used as mentioned in the Introduction. Figure 1 also illustrates a schematic of the pitot-rake assembly,
which was attached to the surface of the flat-plate test model. The pitot-rake consisted of 30 probes
as shown in the right figure in Figure 1. Each pitot-probe had an outer diameter of 0.5 mm, an inner
diameter of 0.3 mm, and a length of 30 mm. The outside probe, which appears outside of the 30th
pitot-probe, was a static pressure probe.
Totally, eight individual cases with different temperature variations were measured with respect to
the velocity profile of the boundary layer by the hot-wire anemometry and the pitot-tube measurement,
separately. Those datasets included a case with large temperature variation (i.e., greater than 10 ◦ C
throughout the operation duration) and a case with negligibly small temperature variation (i.e., less than
1 ◦ C throughout the operation). Note that datasets for those eight cases were obtained as part of wind
tunnel experiments for other riblet study [10]. Therefore, the aim of including those cases was to enrich
datasets with various temperature variations to evaluate the applicability of the proposed method
rather than considering optimized design experiment method. More details of the experiment are
described in Takahashi et al. [10].
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 9058 4 of 10

2.2. Hot-Wire Anemometry

A standard single hot-wire probe, which was made of Tungsten (KANOMAX Inc., Suita city,
Osaka, Japan, 0251R-T5), was employed for the wind tunnel experiment. The probe consists of a wire,
which was 2 mm long with a diameter of 5 µm and two prongs, which were 7 mm long.
The output signal from the hot-wire probe was converted to a voltage by an A/D converter
(KANOMAX Inc., constant temperature hot-wire anemometer: CTA). The voltage data was recorded
by a data recorder (A&D Inc., Tokyo, Japan, RM-1100) at a sampling rate of 20 kHz. At each probe
position, the output voltage data was recorded for a duration of 5 s.
Figure 2 presents a schematic diagram of the measurement system with hot-wire equipment and
the measurement locations on the flat-plate test model. The measurement locations were changed
by changing the probe position. The vertical probe position (i.e., z-position) from the wall surface
was varied from 1 to 20 mm by an electrically controlled traversing system. The x and y positions
were fixed: x = 600 mm (x/xchord = 2/3) and y = −20 mm (y/ywidth = −0.031). A total of 25 measurement
locations in the vertical direction was realized by changing the z position of the probe. The vertical
position of the probe was changed starting from z = 1.0 to 10 mm, which corresponds to the periphery
of the upper edge of the boundary layer, with an increment of 0.5 mm. Then, the vertical probe position
was increased with increments of 2 mm or 4 mm until it reached z = 20 mm, expecting that the change
in the velocity profile in the vertical direction at those heights would be small since the flow in this
area is freestream. When reached at z = 20 mm, the probe position was changed in the opposite
direction (i.e., in the order of decreasing height) in order to check for hysteresis of the detected signal
and temperature dependence of the signal.

Figure 2. Schematic diagram of hot-wire anemometry setup and measurement locations.

The probe’s soundness was confirmed at each measurement by measuring the resistance of the
probe. The resistances measured before and after the testing were both around 4.0 Ω, and therefore no
damage to the probe was seen. In general, an output signal detected by a tungsten-made hot-wire
probe may involve a time decay under a long-duration measurement that involves a large temperature
variation in the flow. It should be noted that slight time decays with temperature dependence in
the output signal, which will be described in Section 2.3, were obtained during the wind tunnel
experiments. However, the time decay of the output signal will also be converted to the flow velocity
properly by the calibration method with the temperature correction, which will be described in detail
in Section 3. The probe was also varied at each measurement.
The wire of the hot-wire probe was placed perpendicular to the flow and the probe orientation to
the flow was fixed. The probe stem was also normal to the wall surface. With this configuration, the
streamwise component of the flow was considered to be detected. Therefore, the measured velocity
was considered as the U velocity. More details of the hot-wire anemometry applied to the same
flowfield is available in Takahashi et al. [10].
established by measuring velocities by the pitot-tube measurement. Freestream temperatures were
also measured upon changing the probe height in the z-direction. The wire temperature (Tw) in
Equation (2), which was unknown, was parametrically changed from 70 to 200 C with an increment
of 1 C, the range of those temperatures were considered to find a possible wire temperature. Then,
Appl.
its Sci. 2020,
value that10, 9058 the difference of the U velocity profiles obtained by the hot-wire anemometry
makes 5 of 10

data (Equation (2)) and the pitot-tube measurement data was sought to become zero or minimum.
This iteration method
2.3. Alternative MethodisofaTemperature
similar but Correction
simpler method than an output error method, which has been
widely applied and validated in flight control study [11–13], for obtaining the best fit (Equation (3)).
Figure 3 of
An increment 1 C the
shows for Tfreestream
w search was temperature
used in thischange
study. due to wind
It should tunnelthat
be noted operation as the
the current probe
method
depends on the initial guess (e.g., 70 C in this study) as well as the temperature increment. Iftime.
position (z) changes. The horizontal axis is the measuring number, or nondimensional operation the
The higher
initial guessthe formeasuring number, the longer
the wire temperature the windlow
is sufficiently tunnel
withoperation is. Temperature
small temperature variations
increment, the
seen in four representative wind tunnel runs are presented. Obviously,
optimal wire temperate can be found with better accuracy by Equation (3) but computation load the freestream temperature
increased
may gradually as the wind-tunnel operation time increased. This observation is commonly
increase.
applied to all other runs. Additionally, 𝑁 𝑁
included are cases with relatively small temperature variations
◦
(i.e., less than 1 C throughout 𝛿𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 the
=∑ 𝛿𝑖 = ∑|𝑈𝑝𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡
experiment), such − 𝑈𝐻𝑊𝑖 | 2=in
𝑖 as Run
𝑓(𝑇𝑤)
Figure 3. The temperature variation (3)
for other cases ranged from 6 to 15 𝑖=1 ◦ C. Thus, a variety of temperature variation ranges were considered
𝑖=1

in this study.
Thus, thisSince the resistance
method searches Tof w the hot-wire
values to findprobe is a function
the minimum total
of to
both freestream
facilitate velocity and
the temperature
temperature,
correction an appropriate
of the voltage signaltemperature
obtained fromcorrection must be anemometry
the hot-wire made to thosewithout
wide variety of temperature
knowing the actual
Tvariation
w value. data for quantitative analysis.

Figure 3. Freestream temperature variation plotted against measuring number at different heights
Figure 3. Freestream temperature variation plotted against measuring number at different heights
from the wall during wind tunnel operation for four different runs.
from the wall during wind tunnel operation for four different runs.
As described in the Introduction, it is necessary to know the wire temperature Tw to find the
3. Results
velocity by solving Equation (2), and this wire temperature is key to temperature correction for
Figurethe
obtaining 4a quantitative
presents an example
velocity.result
When forthe
Run 1 of
true measured
wire boundary
temperature layer profiles
is unknown, made by
an alternative
raw hot-wirecorrection
temperature anemometrywithdata (HW(Raw
a slight Signal)),
modification temperature-corrected
of the original temperaturehot-wire anemometry
correction method [8]
data
can be(HW(Corrected)), and reference
used using the best-fit approachpitot-tube-measured data (Pitot).
to quantitatively calibrate Calibrated
the velocity withoutdata based the
knowing on
Equation (1) is also plotted for comparison denoted as HW(By Equation(1)). The nondimensional
wire temperature.
The functional dependence of velocity on the voltage signal (found in Equation (2)) was established
by measuring velocities by the pitot-tube measurement. Freestream temperatures were also measured
upon changing the probe height in the z-direction. The wire temperature (Tw ) in Equation (2), which was
unknown, was parametrically changed from 70 to 200 ◦ C with an increment of 1 ◦ C, the range of those
temperatures were considered to find a possible wire temperature. Then, its value that makes the
difference of the U velocity profiles obtained by the hot-wire anemometry data (Equation (2)) and
the pitot-tube measurement data was sought to become zero or minimum. This iteration method
is a similar but simpler method than an output error method, which has been widely applied and
validated in flight control study [11–13], for obtaining the best fit (Equation (3)). An increment of 1 ◦ C
for Tw search was used in this study. It should be noted that the current method depends on the initial
guess (e.g., 70 ◦ C in this study) as well as the temperature increment. If the initial guess for the wire
 Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 9058 6 of 10

temperature is sufficiently low with small temperature increment, the optimal wire temperate can be
found with better accuracy by Equation (3) but computation load may increase.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 10
XN XN  
δtotal = velocity
velocity normalized by the freestream δi = (inUhorizontal
pitoti − UHWaxis) f (plotted
 = is Tw ) against the height from
(3)

i
the wall surface (in vertical axis). Eachi=hot-wire
1 i=1data point was averaged over 5 s and the error bar
shows 1 over the averaging duration. Run 1 had the largest temperature variation (i.e., 15.1 C) in
Thus, this method searches Tw values to find the minimum δtotal to facilitate the temperature
this study. A large temperature variation during the wind tunnel operation is seen from the raw
correction of the voltage signal obtained from the hot-wire anemometry without knowing the actual
hot-wire anemometry data (HW(Raw Signal)). The temperature variance in freestream temperature,
Tw value.
which was seen in Figure 3, became longer for longer wind tunnel operation duration. The profile
calibrated
3. Resultsby Equation (1): HW(By Equation (1)) shows large discrepancy between it and that by
reference (Pitot). In this case, which had the large temperature variation, a proposed method was
Figure 4a presents an example result for Run 1 of measured boundary layer profiles made by
used instead of Equation (1). By searching for a Tw value that meets Equation (3), the hot-wire data
raw hot-wire anemometry data (HW(Raw Signal)), temperature-corrected hot-wire anemometry
will be corrected with regard to the temperature variance. The increment for Tw search was 1 C as
data (HW(Corrected)), and reference pitot-tube-measured data (Pitot). Calibrated data based on
mentioned in Section 2.3. From Figure 4a, the corrected distribution (HW(Corrected)) agreed well
Equation (1) is also plotted for comparison denoted as HW(By Equation(1)). The nondimensional
with that obtained from the pitot-tube measurement (Pitot). The Tw for this case was found to be 111
velocity normalized by the freestream velocity (in horizontal axis) is plotted against the height from
C with a maximum error of 1.8%.
the wall surface (in vertical axis). Each hot-wire data point was averaged over 5 s and the error bar
Figure 4b presents an example result for Run 2 shown as Figure 4a. The temperature variation
shows 1σ over the averaging duration. Run 1 had the largest temperature variation (i.e., 15.1 ◦ C)
in this case was negligibly small (less than 1 C) as seen in Figure 3. Differently from Run 1 (Figure
in this study. A large temperature variation during the wind tunnel operation is seen from the raw
4a), almost no temperature variation or temperature dependence in the raw signal profile (HW (Raw
hot-wire anemometry data (HW(Raw Signal)). The temperature variance in freestream temperature,
Signal)) is seen. The profile calibrated by Equation (1) denoted as HW (By Equation (1)) shows better
which was seen in Figure 3, became longer for longer wind tunnel operation duration. The profile
agreement with the reference profile than that of Run 1. The proposed method further improved the
calibrated by Equation (1): HW(By Equation (1)) shows large discrepancy between it and that by
agreement between the temperature-corrected hot-wire data (HW (Corrected)) and reference data
reference (Pitot). In this case, which had the large temperature variation, a proposed method was
(Pitot). The Tw for this case was found to be 86 C with a maximum error of 2.2%. The Tw values for
used instead of Equation (1). By searching for a Tw value that meets Equation (3), the hot-wire data
other cases are also found in an appropriate range of 75 to 111 C [8,14].
will be corrected with regard to the temperature variance. The increment for Tw search was 1 ◦ C as
Thus, the proposed method improves the accuracy of calibration of hot-wire signal with
mentioned in Section 2.3. From Figure 4a, the corrected distribution (HW(Corrected)) agreed well with
temperature correction in case a large temperature variation exists.
that obtained from the pitot-tube measurement (Pitot). The Tw for this case was found to be 111 ◦ C
with a maximum error of 1.8%.

(a) Run 1 (b) Run 2

Figure
Figure4.4.Representative comparisonfor
Representative comparison for velocity
velocity profiles
profiles obtained
obtained by hot-wire
by hot-wire anemometry
anemometry (raw,
(raw, calibrated
calibrated by and
by King’s law, King’s law, and temperature-corrected
temperature-corrected by current method)by andcurrent
pitot-tubemethod) and pitot-tube
measurement.
measurement.
Figure 4b presents an example result for Run 2 shown as Figure 4a. The temperature variation in
thisFigure
case was negligibly
5 shows small (less
the influence of than 1 ◦ C)numbers
the total as seen in
of Figure 3. Differently
measurement pointsfrom Run 1 (Figure
for deriving 4a),
the wire
almost no temperature
temperature. The samevariation
case asorthat
temperature
used in dependence
Figure 4a for in the raw1signal
Run profile (HW
is presented. At(Raw
leastSignal))
two
is seen. The profile
measurement pointscalibrated by Equation
are needed for this (1) denoted asEach
evaluation. HW (By Equation
point (1))different
contains shows better agreement
velocity and
temperature values. All 300 combinations of 25 measurement points were compared. Obviously, the
wire temperature asymptotically approached 111 C with increasing combination number. With
fewer combinations, the derived wire temperature values were dispersed.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 9058 7 of 10

with the reference profile than that of Run 1. The proposed method further improved the agreement
between the temperature-corrected hot-wire data (HW (Corrected)) and reference data (Pitot). The Tw
for this case was found to be 86 ◦ C with a maximum error of 2.2%. The Tw values for other cases are
also found in an appropriate range of 75 to 111 ◦ C [8,14].
Thus, the proposed method improves the accuracy of calibration of hot-wire signal with
temperature correction in case a large temperature variation exists.
Figure 5 shows the influence of the total numbers of measurement points for deriving the wire
temperature. The same case as that used in Figure 4a for Run 1 is presented. At least two measurement
points are needed for this evaluation. Each point contains different velocity and temperature values.
All 300 combinations of 25 measurement points were compared. Obviously, the wire temperature
Appl. Sci. 2020, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 10
asymptotically approached 111 ◦ C with increasing combination number. With fewer combinations,
the derived wire temperature values were dispersed.

Figure 5. Influence of total numbers of measurement points for searching the wire temperature.
Figure 5. Influence of total numbers of measurement points for searching the wire temperature.
To evaluate the effect of deviation of temperature, Figure 6a presents the influence of wire
To evaluate the effect of deviation of temperature, Figure 6a presents the influence of wire
temperature on temperature correction. Data of Run 1 is plotted. This plot is equivalent to the
temperature on temperature correction. Data of Run 1 is plotted. This plot is equivalent to the
calibration method using Equation (1). Various wire temperature cases are shown with their R2 factor
calibration method using Equation (1). Various wire temperature cases are shown with their R2
for a linear fit. Accounting for the optimal or true wire temperature for this case (Run 1) was 111 ◦ C,
factor for a linear fit. Accounting for the optimal or true wire temperature for this case (Run 1) was
±2 ◦ C of deviation improved the R2 factor over 0.997. Note that applying a Tw of, for example, 108 ◦ C
111 C, 2 C of deviation improved the R2 factor over 0.997. Note that applying a Tw of, for example,
to the total of 25 measurement points, the maximum error became 3.0%; and applying a Tw value
108 C to the total of 25 measurement points, the maximum error became 3.0%; and applying a Tw
of 91 ◦ C showed an error above 10%. By allowing this temperature variation, the fewest required
value of 91 C showed an error above 10%. By allowing this temperature variation, the fewest
measurement points were found to be 7 from Figure 5. Applying ±2 ◦ C of deviation ranges determined
required measurement points were found to be 7 from Figure 5. Applying 2 C of deviation ranges
the error range for other cases up to 2.6%.
determined the error range for other cases up to 2.6%.
The R2 factor for various cases was plotted against Tw in Figure 6b; the other three cases were
The R2 factor for various cases was plotted against Tw in Figure 6b; the other three cases were
plotted as well for comparison. Similar to Run 1, Tw can be found for Run 3 and Run 4, where a large
plotted as well for comparison. Similar to Run 1, Tw can be found for Run 3 and Run 4, where a large
temperature variation throughout the wind tunnel operation exists as seen in Figure 3, as well. For Run
temperature variation throughout the wind tunnel operation exists as seen in Figure 3, as well. For
2, where a temperature variation during wind tunnel operation was small as seen in Figure 3, Tw can
Run 2, where a temperature variation during wind tunnel operation was small as seen in Figure 3, Tw
be found but much finer Tw search, for example, with an increment of 0.1 ◦ C instead of 1 ◦ C applied to
can be found but much finer Tw search, for example, with an increment of 0.1 C instead of 1 C
other cases, was needed since the variation of R2 factor over the temperature range in search (e.g., from
applied to other cases, was needed since the variation of R2 factor over the temperature range in
70 to 170 ◦ C in this case) was subtle.
search (e.g., from 70 to 170 C in this case) was subtle.
temperature variation throughout the wind tunnel operation exists as seen in Figure 3, as well. For
Run 2, where a temperature variation during wind tunnel operation was small as seen in Figure 3, Tw
can be found but much finer Tw search, for example, with an increment of 0.1 C instead of 1 C
applied to other cases, was needed since the variation of R2 factor over the temperature range in
search (e.g.,
Appl. Sci. 2020,from 70 to 170 C in this case) was subtle.
10, 9058 8 of 10

Appl. Sci. 2020, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 10

This method can be applied to other cases as well. Figure 7 is a histogram showing uncertainties
calculated as a velocity difference between the pitot-tube measurement data and the
temperature-corrected hot-wire anemometry data measured at the same distance from the wall. The
(a) Influence offor
wire temperature Tw each case was the optimal temperature (b) R2 factor for various
found bycases
the best-fit approach
proposed in this study.
Figure
Figure This uncertainty
6.6.Accuracy
Accuracy was defined
ofoftemperature
temperature correction
correctionbybyEquation
by various (4).
wireA
variouswire total of 200 data points were
temperatures.
temperatures.
obtained from eight wind tunnel runs with 25 probing at each case and were plotted. The mean and
1 values for those
This method canerror valuestowere
be applied plotted
other cases as as well.
well. Figure
As seen inaFigure
7 is histogram7, theshowing
mean error level was
uncertainties
0.48 and as
calculated with 95% certainty
a velocity forbetween
difference the error level
the stayedmeasurement
pitot-tube below 1.34%.data and the temperature-corrected
hot-wire anemometry data measured at the same |𝑈𝑝𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡 −
distance
𝑖
𝑈𝐻𝑊 from
𝑖
| the wall. The wire temperature for each
𝛿𝐻𝑖 = (4)
case was the optimal temperature found by the best-fit
𝑈𝑝𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑖approach proposed in this study. This uncertainty
was defined by Equation (4). A total of 200 data points were obtained from eight wind tunnel runs with
Those results indicate that the current temperature correction method that is a slight modified
25 probing at each case and were plotted. The mean and 1σ values for those error values were plotted as
form of Equation (2) could be applied when reference velocities with temperatures are known
well. As seen in Figure 7, the mean error level was 0.48 and with 95% certainty for the error level stayed
regardless of the data points used for the hot-wire anemometry. Though the uncertainty level of the
below 1.34%.
velocity range was found to be between 20 and Upitot80 m/s, the  proposed method on the temperature
 
i
− U HW i
correction was validated. These results δHalso
i
= indicate that the proposed approach could be applied (4)
Upitoti
regardless of velocity values and individual differences in hot-wire probes.

Figure 7. Uncertainties inherent in the proposed calibration method plotted against the error of
Figure 7. Uncertainties inherent in the proposed calibration method plotted against the error of
velocity calibration.
velocity calibration.
Those results indicate that the current temperature correction method that is a slight modified form
4. Conclusions
of Equation (2) could be applied when reference velocities with temperatures are known regardless
of theThis
datastudy
pointsproposed
used for the hot-wire
a unique anemometry.
approach Though
to convert the uncertainty
a voltage level from
signal obtained of thea velocity
hot-wire
range was foundtoto be
anemometry between
flow 20 anddata
velocity 80 m/s,bythe making
proposed amethod
slighton the temperaturetocorrection
modification existing
was
temperature-correction methods. The proposed approach is a simplified calibration method of
validated. These results also indicate that the proposed approach could be applied regardless for
velocity values and individual
constant-temperature hot-wiredifferences
anemometryin hot-wire
withoutprobes.
knowing exact wire temperature. Other than
the hot-wire signals, the necessary data are the freestream temperature and a set of known velocities
that gives reference velocities obtained from the pitot-tube measurement. The proposed approach
was applied to various boundary layer profiles with large temperature variations while the wire
temperature was unknown. By using a best-fit approach between the velocities in the boundary
layer obtained by hot-wire anemometry and by the pitot-tube measurement, which provides
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 9058 9 of 10

4. Conclusions
This study proposed a unique approach to convert a voltage signal obtained from a hot-wire
anemometry to flow velocity data by making a slight modification to existing temperature-correction
methods. The proposed approach is a simplified calibration method for constant-temperature hot-wire
anemometry without knowing exact wire temperature. Other than the hot-wire signals, the necessary
data are the freestream temperature and a set of known velocities that gives reference velocities
obtained from the pitot-tube measurement. The proposed approach was applied to various boundary
layer profiles with large temperature variations while the wire temperature was unknown. By using a
best-fit approach between the velocities in the boundary layer obtained by hot-wire anemometry and
by the pitot-tube measurement, which provides reference data, the unknown wire temperature was
sought. The proposed approach was confirmed to be applicable to a velocity range between 20 and
80 m/s and with temperature variations up to 15 ◦ C with an uncertainty level of 2.6% at most for the
current datasets. Thus, the proposed approach could be used as a simplified calibration method for
the constant-temperature hot-wire anemometry without knowing the wire temperature in case large
temperature variations exist.

Author Contributions: H.T. is responsible for the entire work from data acquisition at wind tunnel experiments,
conceptualization, establishing methodology, data analysis, and writing the original manuscript entirely;
M.K. managed the overall project and reviewed; H.I. and S.K. worked on data acquisition at wind tunnel
experiments. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Acknowledgments: This study was conducted as part of the Flight Investigation of Skin-Friction Reduction
Eco-Coating (FINE) project led by JAXA Aeronautical Technology Directorate. The authors wish to thank the
aerodynamics research unit and Tomonari Hirotani at the JAXA Aeronautical Technology Directorate for assistance
with the wind tunnel experiment, and Akira Nishizawa for help with the hot-wire anemometry. The authors
also acknowledge Masato Asai and Ayumi Inazawa at Tokyo Metropolitan University, Shihoko Endo and
Kaoru Iwamoto at the Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology, and Ryoko Shinohara at O-WELL
corporation for their support regarding riblet design and its fabrication.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclature
a, b constant coefficient
E voltage, V
H probe height, mm
k thermal conductivity, W/(m·K)
T temperature, ◦ C
U streamwise velocity component (U velocity), m/s
x streamwise coordinate
y spanwise coordinate
z vertical coordinate
δ difference
ν kinematic viscosity, m2 /s
σ standard deviation
Subscripts
a freestream (air)
HW hot-wire
i index number
pitot pitot-tube measurement
total total value
w wire
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 9058 10 of 10

References
1. Stainback, P.C.; Nagabushana, K.A. Review of Hot-Wire Anemometry Techniques and the Range of Their
Applicability for Various Flows. Electron. J. Fluids Eng. Trans. Am. Soc. Mech. Eng. 1997, 119, 1–54.
2. Sakaue, S.; Kamata, M.; Arai, T. Turbulent Intensity in Supersonic Mixing Transition by Streamwise Vortices
-Fluctuation Measurements by Hot-Wire Anemometer and PIV-. Trans. JSASS Aerosp. Technol. 2020, 18,
258–265.
3. Duri, D.; Baudet, C.; Moro, J.-P.; Roche, P.E.; Diribarne, P. Hot-Wire Anemometry for Superfluid Turbulent
Coflows. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 2015, 86, 025007. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Souza, F.; Tavoularis, S. Hot-Wire Responses in Compressible Subsonic Flow. AIAA J. 2020, 58, 3332–3338.
[CrossRef]
5. Massouh, F.; Dobrev, I. Exploration of the Vortex Wake behind of Wind Turbine Rotor. J. Phys. Conf. Ser.
2007, 75, 012036. [CrossRef]
6. King, L.B. On the Convection of Heat From Small Cylinders in a Stream of Fluid: Determination of the
Convection Constants of Small Platinum Wires, with Applications to Hot-Wire Anemometry. Philos. Trans.
R. Soc. Lond. 1914, 214, 373–432.
7. Bourget, P.-L. Calibration Method for A Hot Wire Anemometer. J. Phys. E Instrum. 1976, 9, 353–358.
[CrossRef]
8. Hultmark, M.; Smits, A.J. Temperature Corrections for Constant Temperature and Constant Current Hot-Wire
Anemometers. Meas. Sci. Technol. 2010, 21, 105404. [CrossRef]
9. Kannuluik, W.G.; Carman, E.H. The Temperature Dependence of the Thermal Conductivity of Air. Aust. J.
Sci. Res. Ser. A Phys. Sci. 1951, 4, 305–314.
10. Takahashi, H.; Iijima, H.; Kurita, M.; Koga, S. Evaluation of Skin Friction Drag Reduction in the Turbulent
Boundary Layer Using Riblets. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 5199. [CrossRef]
11. Lichota, P. Inclusion of the D-optimality in multisine manoeuvre design for aircraft parameter estimation.
J. Theor. Appl. Mech. 2016, 54, 87–98. [CrossRef]
12. Dul, F.; Lichota, P.; Rusowicz, A. Generalized Linear Quadratic Control for a Full Tracking Problem in
Aviation. Sensors 2020, 20, 2955. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
13. Gautier, M.; Janot, A.; Vandanjon, P. A New Closed-Loop Output Error Method for Parameter Identification
of Robot Dynamics. IEEE Trans. Control. Syst. Technol. 2013, 21, 428–444. [CrossRef]
14. Abdel-Rahman, A.A.; Tropea, C.; Slawson, P.; Strong, A. On Temperature Compensation in Hot-Wire
Anemometry. J. Phys. E Sci. Instrum. 2000, 20, 315–319. [CrossRef]

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional
affiliations.

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).