In-plane permeability measurements: a nordic round-robin study

An evaluation of the reproducibility of capacitive sensor based in-plane permeability measurements: A benchmarking study

“…In addition the deviation of the used textile properties, the batch quality, the deviance in fibre orientation, the distance between the rovings and the differences in areal weight had an influence on the permeability calculation results. The influence of material in homogeneities are higher to assess than the experimental errors [13,41].…”

“…Diverse references [13][14][15][16][17][18] are describing 1D and 2D measurement approaches which are able to sense the flow front as a function of time for in-plane permeability calculation. The fact that there are no standardized requirements for permeability measurement systems and no uniform calculation algorithms, permeability values measured in different research labs are differing.…”

“…These sensors are embedded in metal mould halves [6,17,24,29]. On the other side there are systems with a visual aid -a camera systemand a transparent upper mould half tool for flow front tracking exist [13,38,39]. Both show specific advantages and disadvantages.…”

“…In order to investigate the comparability of permeability measurements on different systems Lundström et al [13] executed permeability measurements at three different institutes with the same magnitude of materials. In this round robin study saturated and unsaturated 1D permeability tests, as well as 2D permeability tests were performed.…”

“…[Pa·s] the fluid viscosity of the injected fluid and the term "p/"x [Pa/m] expresses the pressure drop to a specific flow length. Three different kinds of experimental methods of permeability measurements are wellknown: 1D flow [13][14][15][16], 2D flow [13,17,18] and 3D flow [19][20][21][22]. Nowadays no defined standard requirements for permeability measurements and calculation procedures are available [23][24][25].…”