converging nozzle design in an anechoic wind tunnel

Converging Nozzle Design in an

Anechoic Wind Tunnel

Levenhagen, John

19 April 2017

Advisor: Dr. Lawrence Ukeiley

Levenhagen

2

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 3

Index Terms .................................................................................................................................... 3

I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 3

II. Procedure ................................................................................................................................. 5

III. Results ................................................................................................................................ 10

IV. Discussion And Conclusion ............................................................................................... 20

Acknowledgment .......................................................................................................................... 21

References ..................................................................................................................................... 22

Appendix A ................................................................................................................................... 23

Appendix B ................................................................................................................................... 24

Appendix C ................................................................................................................................... 25

Appendix D—Drawings ............................................................................................................... 26

Levenhagen

3

3

Abstract

This paper describes a method for designing a converging nozzle for a free jet to be put into the

anechoic wind tunnel at the University of Florida using an existing compressor and installing piping

to the nozzle. This process involved confirming the compressor could generate enough of a mass flow

rate to reach a desired Mach number, which was 0.9 for this paper. Once that had been confirmed,

the nozzle shape had to be determined. After looking at previous research, a nozzle shape with a

third-order polynomial in the first half of the nozzle and a fifth-order polynomial in the second half

of the nozzle was chosen. Then, CFD flow testing and FEA stress testing was done in order to ensure

that a 3D printed material would not break under the given conditions of flow. Piping was then found

that would connect to the nozzle. However, the nozzle had to be slightly manipulated to connect to

the piping. This design has yet to be built, however it has undergone a final design process and the

final product can be realized through the printing and assembling of the necessary materials.

Index Terms—Compressor, Converging Nozzle, Isentropic Flow, Piping

I. INTRODUCTION

HIS thesis aims to design a converging nozzle for the anechoic wind tunnel at the University

of Florida. This wind tunnel is shown in Fig. 1. The goal of this project is to utilize the

Sullair LS20TS-800 325 psig compressor, shown in Fig. 2, in order to achieve a flow of Mach 0.9

exiting from the nozzle. This involves designing a converging nozzle, a stagnation chamber,

piping, and a control valve. The university already has most of the piping and the control valve in

place, so the primary focus of this report is the nozzle, the chamber upstream from the nozzle to

stagnate the flow, and the piping needed to be purchased to connect the nozzle to the piping that

already exists in the wind tunnel.

T

Levenhagen

4

4

Fig. 1. The anechoic wind tunnel at the University of Florida

Fig. 2. A photo of the compressor that will be used

There are many considerations and assumptions that need to be made when designing a nozzle.

For this nozzle, the air flow will be assumed to be isentropic and steady. The stagnation chamber

should make these assumptions reasonable as the disrupted flow coming in from the piping will

be slowed down significantly and streamlined through a filter in the chamber. For the initial

Levenhagen

5

5

analysis, the mass flow rate will be assumed to be conserved through the piping.

The Sullair compressor has a full load pressure of 325 psig, and its capacity at full load pressure

is 800 acfm (actual cubic feet per minute) [1]. The piping is galvanized steel, and the diameter on

the piping was measured as 3 ± 0.1 inches, confirming that this is size 3 schedule 40 piping. A

basic schematic of the entire system is shown in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3. Schematic showing the basic elements to this system (not to scale)

II. PROCEDURE

The procedure explains how the isentropic flow and mass flow rates were calculated, discusses

the various nozzles that were researched, shows the nozzle selection, and discusses the necessary

measurements and components for nozzle and piping to be integrated into the wind tunnel.

Initial Calculations

To begin this project, a compressible flow analysis of the system was calculated, taking the

ambient conditions for the process into consideration. For isentropic flow, back pressure, Pb,

ambient temperature, Tamb, Mach number, Me, the gas constant, Rair, and the ratio of specific heats,

γ, are all needed to calculate the stagnation pressure, P0, stagnation temperature, T0, and the

required mass flow, ṁ, for a given exit area. This progression of calculation is shown in (1) and

(2) and is crucial when considering the maximum possible mass flow rate from the compressor of

Levenhagen

6

6

the system. This calculation is shown in (3) with a given volumetric flow rate from the compressor,

V. It is important that (2) can be rearranged given the mass flow rate found in (3) to design the

area of the nozzle, or a given area can be used to find an unknown mass flow rate.

𝑃0

𝑃𝑏= {

𝑇0

𝑇𝑎𝑚𝑏}

𝛾𝛾−1

= {1 +𝛾 − 1

2𝑀𝑒

2}

𝛾𝛾−1

(1)

�� = √𝛾

𝑅𝑎𝑖𝑟

𝑃0

√𝑇0

𝐴𝑒𝑀𝑒

{1 +𝛾 − 1

2 𝑀𝑒2}

(𝛾+1)2(𝛾−1)

(2)

��𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝜌0�� =𝑃0

𝑅𝑎𝑖𝑟𝑇0�� (3)

One aspect to keep in mind is that making the exit area of the nozzle too large will result in a

flow that does not meet the velocity requirements for the project. On the other hand, a nozzle that

has a small area will choke the flow. However, with the control valve able to limit the amount of

flow going through the piping, this nozzle will be designed to have an area small enough to choke

the flow, and the control valve will ensure that the flow does not choke during testing.

Nozzle Selection

There are many factors that come into play when designing a converging nozzle. Once an exit

area has been decided, factors like the shape of the exit area, shape and size of the initial area,

length of the nozzle, and how to construct the length of the nozzle must all be considered.

Fortunately, there has been a great deal of research done on nozzle design, and it comes down to

analyzing and selecting the best design pattern for the tasks that this nozzle will have to

Levenhagen

7

7

accomplish. Some of the designs considered for this project have been the works of Vitoshinski

[2], Mikhail [3], Arslanian [4], and Bell and Mehta [5]. All of the nozzles have their own benefits

and weaknesses, and a few of them will be discussed here. Vitoshinski’s nozzle theory is fairly

simple and is shown in (4) and Fig. 4 where Re is the exit radius, Ri is the initial radius, and L is

the total length of the nozzle. This simple design can be applied to many lengths for many nozzles.

However, the sharp curve at the beginning of the entrance of the nozzle and the slow curve at the

end could cause a lot of problems in the steadiness of the flow exiting the nozzle.

𝑅 =𝑅𝑒

√1 − [1 − (𝑅𝑒

𝑅𝑖)

2

](1 −

𝑥2

𝐿2 )2

(1 +𝑥2

3𝐿2)3

; 𝐿 ≥ 2𝑅𝑒

(4)

Fig. 4. Vitoshinski’s nozzle with a normalized length and an arbitrary initial and exit radius

Levenhagen

8

8

Mikhail’s design does not have the sharp curve toward the beginning of the graph, and the

inflection point is closer to half the length of the nozzle. However, Mikhail’s nozzle is generally

used for test sections of wind tunnels of large areas and of a square cross-sectional area. After

discussing the possibilities with Dr. Ukeiley, the Bell and Mehta theory seems most reasonable

using their third-order equation (5) to the inflection point and their fifth-order equation (6) to the

exit of the nozzle. The elements of the equations are the same as the elements used in Vitoshinski’s

equation. The normalized nozzle choice is demonstrated in Fig. 5.

𝑅 = 𝑅𝑖 − (𝑅𝑖 − 𝑅𝑒)(−2𝑥3 + 3𝑥2) (5)

𝑅 = 𝑅𝑖 − (𝑅𝑖 − 𝑅𝑒)(6𝑥5 − 15𝑥4 + 10𝑥3) (6)

Fig. 5. The third-order to fifth-order equation for the chosen nozzle design.

Levenhagen

9

9

However, to make the nozzle differentiable at the inflection point, Arslanian’s method of

splining the nozzle was utilized. This is helpful for actually implementing the design into a CAD

(computer aided design) program like SolidWorks.

Nozzle Design

SolidWorks can be used to design this nozzle. The parameters for the design include: the exit

radius, Re, the initial radius, Ri, and the length of the nozzle, L. Bell and Mehta [5] tested many

different designs for these parameters. By their suggestion, an area ratio of around 8 and a length

to initial radius ratio of about 2 will be used in this design. The final aspect to consider is the

material of the nozzle. By conducting a FE (finite element) analysis, it is possible to model the

pressures the nozzle will experience under these conditions. Ideally, a 3D printed prototype could

be developed for testing, but the nozzle design inside the nozzle must be analyzed to confirm that

the material is strong enough to withstand the pressure from the flow.

Piping and Connections

Measurements in the wind tunnel were taken to analyze the necessary dimensions for any piping

that is to be installed in order to avoid interfering with other components in the wind tunnel. Then,

these piping components can be modeled in SolidWorks, and the components necessary to attach

the nozzle to the piping should be created. The rest of the piping can be purchased and cut to meet

the specifications for the wind tunnel.

Levenhagen

10

10

III. RESULTS

The results section covers the isentropic flow and mass flow calculations, nozzle design, and

piping configuration. However, this section gives the values calculated and the data collected

during the designing and testing part of the process.

Initial Calculations

In order to run the isentropic calculations, the ambient pressure and temperature must be

measured. These may change on different days, so there has to be some room for error in designing

the nozzle. Table I shows the values used at average room temperature and at the elevation of

Gainesville, FL, where this tunnel is located. The MATLAB code for these calculations is shown

in Appendix C. Back pressure and air density will vary at different locations and different altitudes.

The volumetric flow rate was found in the technical data for the compressor [1]. The maximum

mass flow rate was calculated using (3), with the exit Mach number being the desired result. The

gas constant and ratio of specific heats are assumed numbers for isentropic flow of a perfect gas.

TABLE I

VALUES FOR ISENTROPIC CALCULATIONS

Parameter Symbol Value

Back Pressure Pb 14.62 psia

Ambient Temperature Tamb 535 ºR

Gas Constant for Air Rair 1716 ft-lb/slugs-ºR

Ambient Air Density ρb 0.0023 slugs/ft3

Volumetric Flow Rate V 800 ft3/min

Maximum Mass Flow Rate ṁmax 0.00031 slugs/sec

Exit Mach Number Me 0.9

Ratio of Specific Heats γ 1.4

Levenhagen

11

11

These numbers were used in the isentropic relations shown in (1) at the nozzle exit. The results

of the stagnation values for pressure and temperature are shown in Table II. Using (2) and (3) and

given the parameters of the situation, the mass flow rate values must match as to not exceed the

capacity of the compressor and still obtain the Mach 0.9 flow. So, using the maximum mass flow

rate for this situation as shown in (3), the exit area, Ae, in (2) was found. The resulting diameter at

the exit, De, is shown in Table II. The code for these calculations is in Appendix A.

TABLE II

ISENTROPIC CALCULATIONS AT NOZZLE EXIT


Stagnation Pressure P0 24.7269 psia

Stagnation Temperature T0 621.6700 ºR

Diameter for Maximum Mass Flow Rate De 1.8674 in

Table III shows some values of mass flow rate required as a function of the nozzle exit as shown

in (2) in order to achieve a Mach number of 0.9. This gives a better idea as to how much the nozzle

exit diameter affects the mass flow rate required for a certain nozzle, and it is crucial to keep in

mind when changing the diameter in a design.

TABLE III

MASS FLOW RATE CALCULATIONS

Nozzle Exit Diameter, De Required Mass Flow Rate, m

2 in 0.00036 slugs/sec

1.95 in 0.00034 slugs/sec





Levenhagen

12

12

Nozzle Design

Once it was confirmed that the mass flow rate was attainable, the actual designing of the nozzle

began. The nozzle was made smaller than necessary in order to assure that a Mach number of 0.9

could be reached in any conditions that the nozzle could face. The control valve will be able to

control the flow rate if the flow rate is too high. Table IV shows the final design parameters chosen

for the nozzle based on the recommendations in [5] and discussions with Dr. Ukeiley. The area

ratio is larger than the recommended area ratio in [5], but in order to stagnate the flow, it was

decided that it was more important to make the stagnation chamber with a diameter of 6 inches,

which results in a significantly larger area ratio than the recommended area ratio of 8.

TABLE IV

FINAL NOZZLE PARAMETERS


Entry Radius Ri 3.0 in

Exit Radius Re 0.75 in

Length of Nozzle L 6 in

Area Ratio (Ri/ Re)2 16

L to Ri Ratio L/Ri 2

The MATLAB code for the final nozzle design is located in Appendix B, and Fig. 6 shows the

final nozzle design. There was a point that was not differentiable due to the change from a third

order polynomial to a fifth order polynomial, so the spline shown in Fig. 6 was fit in order to

smooth that point. Fig. 7 shows the derivative of this spline curve to show that it is differentiable

at all points and to show that the slop is always negative.

Levenhagen

13

13

Fig. 6. A smooth spline with dimensions for the chosen nozzle

Fig. 7. The derivative of the smooth spline in Fig. 6.

Levenhagen

14

14

This smoothed spline was then put in SolidWorks to model the nozzle design in three

dimensions. The original model for this nozzle is shown in Fig. 8. SolidWorks is also able to do

CFD (computational fluid dynamics) simulations. Fig. 9 shows a simple study done to ensure the

mathematical results that were calculated are accurate. SolidWorks also has the capability to model

more complex systems and account for many more variables than an isentropic model. Fig. 9 also

shows that the nozzle comes close to choking the flow. This is at full capacity for the compressor.

As the control valve scales the flow back, slower Mach numbers can be achieved, including the

goal Mach number of 0.9.

Fig. 8. A SolidWorks model of the initial nozzle design

Levenhagen

15

15

Fig. 9. A SolidWorks flow simulation of the nozzle

After this, a pressure test based on the pressure from the air in the nozzle was run to see the

deformation that a 3D printed nozzle of ABS material would experience. This pressure test is

shown in Fig. 10.

Levenhagen

16

16

Fig. 10. A SolidWorks pressure test of the initial ABS nozzle

The UTS (ultimate tensile strength) of ABS can vary significantly, but on the low end, it is

around 4500 psi [6]. According to SolidWorks, the material will never reach that pressure.

However, after discussing the nozzle design with Dr. Ukeiley, it was decided that the nozzle lip

should come to a point as thick nozzle lips tend to adversely affect the flow. In order to resolve

this issue, the final nozzle design comes to a point at the end. In order to ensure adequate material

to handle the pressure, some parts of the nozzle were made thicker. These changes are reflected in

Fig. 11, which is the final nozzle design. The results from the pressure tests on this nozzle are

shown in Fig. 12 alongside the expected deformation due to the stress. This final drawing of the

nozzle is called Part 001 and is located in Appendix D.

Levenhagen

17

17

Fig. 11. A SolidWorks model of the final nozzle design

a.) b.)

Fig. 12. a.) A SolidWorks pressure test of the final ABS nozzle b.) A SolidWorks deformation test

Levenhagen

18

18

Piping and Connections

Piping design was decided upon after taking measurements in the wind tunnel and discussing

the positioning that Dr. Ukeiley wanted for the nozzle. The nozzle will be configured to be located

in the middle of the test section. This will require a significant amount of size 3 galvanized steel

pipe to get the correct length and height. It will need to be connected under the tunnel to the piping

that currently exists and extend another 72 inches. Then, the piping must be turned towards the

ceiling to reach the middle of the test section which is approximately 80 inches above the current

piping. Finally, it can be turned again in the direction of the original piping, and the stagnation

chamber and nozzle can be attached. Table V shows the piping components needed for this design,

and Fig. 13 shows the schematic for the organizing of the components to connect the nozzle. Part

002 can be found in Appendix D, and it is used to connect the 3 inch piping to the 6 inch piping

used as the stagnation chamber. This is a part that will need to be manufactured as it is a unique

part for this particular use.

TABLE V

PIPING MATERIAL NEEDED

Number in

Fig. 12 Piping Component Length Quantity Needed

1 Standard-Wall Galvanized Steel Threaded Pipe – Size 3 72 in 1



4 Standard-Wall Galvanized Steel Unthreaded Pipe – Size 6 12 in 1

5 Low-Pressure Galvanized Steel 90º Elbow – Size 3 N/A 2

6 Low-Pressure Steel Unthreaded Pipe Flange – Size 6 N/A 2

7 Low-Pressure Steel Straight Connector – Size 3 N/A 2

8 Modified Threaded Pipe Flange (Size 3 to 6) – Part 002 N/A 1

N/A ¾” Bolts and Nuts for Flanges 6 in 16 each

Levenhagen

19

19

Fig. 13. The piping necessary to install the nozzle

After the modified threaded pipe flange has been secured, the 6 inch flange connects to the size

6 piping by welding them together, one flange on each end of the piping. Then, the first 6 inch

flange can be connected to the modified flange with ¾” bolts, and the second 6 inch flange can be

connected to the nozzle with the same size bolts. This drawing is perhaps too small to get a good

idea of all of the components necessary for the piping schematic. An exploded view of this

configuration and how they fit together is located in Appendix D as Assembly 001.

7

2

5 1

2

5 3

8

6 4

1

6 NOZZLE

7

Levenhagen

20

20

IV. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

There are a number of important factors to consider when designing a converging nozzle. One

of the most important aspects to consider is the factor of safety of the design. According to the

SolidWorks pressure tests, the ABS material from a 3D printer will not fail under the high pressure

environment experienced at the entrance of the nozzle. There will also be very little deformation

(on the scale of 0.01 inches). However, no tests have been run in terms of assessing the longevity

of the nozzle. It may be more advantageous to use a more durable material for long term use.

Nevertheless, as a prototype to test the nozzle’s usefulness, the 3D printed material should be able

to handle the pressures on the nozzle. It would be safest to start the compressor without the control

valve being completely open, and slowly bringing the flow up to speed using the control valve.

This will act as a safeguard in case there are any deformities or weaknesses in the material that

may cause it to fail.

It is also important to note that there are a number of ways to go about this problem, and a

number of nozzle designs may work in the place of this one. However, this nozzle design was

chosen due to proven research that it is a good design. The SolidWorks tests seem to support this

research. Once the piping is purchased and put in place, experiments on different nozzle designs

will become an easier feat. Some of the other nozzle theories may cause less flow disturbance or

less pressure on critical parts of the nozzle.

This paper’s ending point becomes an excellent starting point for experimentation. Different

designs and configurations can be tested as there is much more to be learned on this particular

project. Perhaps a longer stagnation chamber or a different material for the nozzle produces better

results. However, this design should effectively yield the desired results.

Levenhagen

21

21

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

A special thanks to Dr. Lawrence Ukeiley for his direction and help on this paper. Without his

insight, this research would not have been possible. Also, a thanks for his inspiration in the two

classes I took with him. My passion for aerodynamics and aircraft design is in large part due to his

teaching and passion in class.

Levenhagen

22

22

REFERENCES

[1] Sullair Corporation, “Sullair industrial products tech data,” in Sullair Industrial Products

Specifications, 2006, p. 2.

[2] Skorpik, Jiri, “Flow of gases and steam through nozzles,” Transformacni Technologie,

http://www.transformacni-technologie.cz/en_40.html, 2016, pp. 1-4.

[3] Heydari, M.R., Nazari, A.M., “Analysis of flow characteristics in a test section subsonic wind tunnel

by changing the geometry of the nozzle,” Indian J. Sci. Res. 3, 2014, pp. 95-109.

[4] Arslanian, P.J., Matin, P., “Undergraduate research on conceptual design of a wind tunnel for

instructional purposes,” American Society for Engineering Education, 2012.

[5] Bell, J.H., Mehta, R.D., “Contraction design for small low-speed wind tunnels,” Joint Institute for

Aeronautics and Acoustics, Stanford University, 1988.

[6] MatWeb, “Tensile property testing of plastics, ultimate tensile strength,” Material Property Data,

http://www.matweb.com/reference/tensilestrength.aspx, 2017.

Levenhagen

23

23

APPENDIX A

%%%%This file runs the necessary calculations for maximum nozzle area%%%%

clear all

close all clc

Pb=14.62; %psia ambient pressure Tb=535; %deg rankine ambient temperature (75 F) Rair=1716; %ft*lb/slugs*R R constant for air rho=Pb*144/(Tb*Rair); %slugs/ft^3 initial density Mexit=0.9; gamma=1.4; Dexit=1.8674/12; %ft Aexit=pi/4*Dexit^2; %ft^2 P0=Pb*(1+(gamma-1)/2*Mexit^2)^(gamma/(gamma-1)); %psia T0=Tb*(1+(gamma-1)/2*Mexit^2); %deg rankine m_dot_e=sqrt(gamma/Rair)*P0/sqrt(T0)*Aexit*Mexit... %slugs/sec exit mass flow

rate /(1+(gamma-1)/2*Mexit^2)^((gamma+1)/(2*(gamma-1)));

m_dot_max=P0/Rair/T0*800/60; %slugs/sec max mass flow rate

Levenhagen

24

24

APPENDIX B

%%%%This file runs the function for the final nozzle design%%%%

clear all

close all clc

Re=1.5/2; %exit radius Ri=6/2; %initial radius A_ratio=(Ri/Re)^2; %area ratio L=Ri*2; %total length x=[0:0.01*L:L]'; %length for plotting y=[0:0.01:1]; %normalized for polynomials

for i=1:50 R(i)=(Ri-(Ri-Re)*(-2*y(i)^3+3*y(i)^2)); %third order polynomial end for i=50+1:101 R(i)=(Ri-(Ri-Re)*(6*y(i)^5-15*y(i)^4+10*y(i)^3)); %fifth order polynomial end

R=R'; f=fit(x,R,'poly9'); %curvefit of data plot(f,x,R) xlim([0 L]); ylim([0 Ri]); xlabel('x (in)'); ylabel('R (in)');

Levenhagen

25

25

APPENDIX C

%%%isentropic relations for thesis%%% clear all close all clc

%needed equations% %isentropicrel.m

%can also use flowisentropic from matlab%

%%%%%%%%assumptions%%%%%%%% %isentropic flow %ideal gas %uniform flow %no friction or heat loss

%%%%%%initial constants%%%%%% gamma=1.4; P0_novalve=339.7; %psia from compressor P0=24.860477; %psia after valve T0=535; %deg rankine (75 F outside) Dt=3/12; %ft tube diameter Dc=6/12; %ft chamber diameter Dn=1.9055/12; %ft nozzle diameter for M3=0.9 Pb=14.62; %Gainesville is 151' above sea level so Patm=14.62 psia Tb=535; %deg rankine ambient temperature Rair=1716; %ft*lb/slugs*R R constant for air ACFM=800; %ft^3/min volumetric flow rate mu=3.88*10^-7; %lb*s/ft^2 viscosity rho0=P0*144/(T0*Rair); %slugs/ft^3 initial density mdot0=rho0*ACFM/60; %slugs/sec mass flow rate

%%%%flow in pipe%%%% V1=mdot0/(rho0*pi/4*Dt^2); %ft/sec velocity in pipe M1=V1/sqrt(gamma*Rair*T0); [M1, P0_P1, rho0_rho1, T0_T1, A1_Ax] = isentropicrel(M1, gamma, 'M');

%%%%flow in chamber%%%% A2_Ax=(Dc/Dt)^2*A1_Ax; %A2/A*=(A2/A1)*(A1/A*) [M2, P0_P2, rho0_rho2, T0_T2, A2_Ax] = isentropicrel(A2_Ax, gamma, 'AB');

%%%%flow in nozzle%%%% A3_Ax=(Dn/Dt)^2*A1_Ax; %A3/A*=(A3/A1)*(A1/A*) [M3, P0_P3, rho0_rho3, T0_T3, A3_Ax] = isentropicrel(A3_Ax, gamma, 'AB');

Levenhagen

26

26

APPENDIX D—DRAWINGS

A

A

INSIDE VIEW OF NOZZLE

Final Nozzle

SHEET 1 OF 20.5

DWG. NO.

TITLE:

5 4 3 2 1

REV

ASIZE

A Part 001

DRAWN

DESIGNED

JOHN LEVENHAGENJOHN LEVENHAGEN

PLACES IN DIMENSION0.0000.000.0

250.1 0.060

0.0600.1

0.050 0.020 0.005

ANGULAR DIMSWELDING

CUT OFF (SAW, BURN, SHEAR)

MACHINING

TOLERANCE UNLESS NOTED

OPERATION

SCALE: 1:2

QUANTITY: 1 ALL DIMS IN INCHES

NOTES:1.2.3. MATERIAL: ABS

1.0

2.00

6.00

Third-To-Fifth NozzleEquation From Report

1.50

8.00

FRONT

8.50

9.50

11.00

6.00

0.75 x8Circular Pattern

BACK

0.0625 DEEP

Final Nozzle

SHEET 2 OF 20.5

DWG. NO.

TITLE:

5 4 3 2 1

REV

ASIZE

A Part 001

DRAWN

DESIGNED



250.1 0.060

0.0600.1

0.050 0.020 0.005

ANGULAR DIMSWELDING


MACHINING


OPERATION

SCALE: 1:4


NOTES:1.2.3. MATERIAL: ABS

0.06

0.94

0.50 4.50

3.63

11.94

8.50

9.50

0.75 x8For 3/4" Bolt

3 NPT Pipe Size, 8 Threads Per Inch1.20" Thread Engagement

MODIFIED 6" FLANGE

SHEET 1 OF 10.5

DWG. NO.

TITLE:

5 4 3 2 1

REV

ASIZE

A Part 002

DRAWN

DESIGNED



250.1 0.060

0.0600.1

0.050 0.020 0.005

ANGULAR DIMSWELDING


MACHINING


OPERATION

SCALE: 1:4


NOTES:1.2.3. MATERIAL:

GALVANIZED STEEL

75.0 27.1

83.

0

Piping Configuration

SHEET 1 OF 20.5

DWG. NO.

TITLE:

5 4 3 2 1

REV

ASIZE

A Assembly 001

DRAWN

DESIGNED


0.0000.000.00.050 0.020 0.005

ANGULARLOCATIONAL


DIMENSIONTYPE

SCALE: 1:245 2

PLACES IN DIMENSION

QUANTITY: 1NOTES:1. 2. ALL DIMS IN INCHES

3 84

9

6

5

2

17

6

5

7

2

ITEM NO. PART NAME QTY.

1 Size 3 Pipe - 72 inch 1




5 90 Degree Elbow 2

6 Size 6 Flange 2

7 Size 3 Straight Connector 2

8 Modified 3 to 6 Flange 1

9 Final Nozzle 1

Piping Configuration

SHEET 2 OF 20.5

DWG. NO.

TITLE:

5 4 3 2 1

REV

ASIZE

A Assembly 001

DRAWN

DESIGNED


0.0000.000.00.050 0.020 0.005

ANGULARLOCATIONAL


DIMENSIONTYPE

SCALE: 1:245 2

PLACES IN DIMENSION

QUANTITY: 1NOTES:1. 2. ALL DIMS IN INCHES

converging nozzle design in an anechoic wind tunnel

Documents