Abstract
This paper is the forth investigation on the evaluation methods of flow characteristics in a steady flow bench. In the previous works, it was concluded that the assumption of the solid rotation might cause serious problems and both of the eccentricity and the velocity profile distort the flow characteristics when using the ISM at 1.75B plane. Also particle image velocimetry (PIV) measurement at this position showed that the real velocity profile was far from the assumption of ISM evaluation. In this paper, the planar velocity profiles were measure from 1.75B to 6.00B position by PIV and the characteristics were examined according to the valve angles and lifts for further investigations about the effect of the position on the velocity profile. The results show that $26^{\circ}$ valve angle is always an unique exceptional case in all aspects. If the valve angle is $21^{\circ}$ and below, the planar velocity profiles according to the lift and the position are similar to each other, however, the tangential velocity curves along with the radial direction have common tendencies up to $16^{\circ}$ angle. Also the well arranged swirl behaviors are generally observed at the position above 3.00B and the velocity contour lines come closer to the concentric circle as the valve lift increases. In addition, the gradient of tangential velocity along with the radial direction from the swirl center becomes stable and constant as the position goes downstream. Concurrently the velocity gradient is larger to the eccentric direction of the center. In the meantime the tangential velocity curves along with the radial direction are irregular and various at 1.75B, however, they become regular and reach higher level as the evaluation position goes downstream. At this time the curves of 4.50B are the best fitted to the ideal one. On the other hand in an exceptional case, $26^{\circ}$, the velocity contours are very complicated over 6mm valve lift regardless the position and the gradient increases to the opposite direction of the eccentric center. Also, 6.00B is a best fitting position in the geometrical cylinder center base. With respect to the swirl center, the distribution range of centers for 1.75B is different to that for the other positions and the eccentricities of this plane are larger regardless the valve angle. After 1.75B, there is no certain tendency in the center position change according to the valve angle and lift. Additionally, the eccentricities are not sufficiently small to neglecting the effect on ISM measurement.
